Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

Neoconservatism Bulletin, 2020

Home 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

Top Visited
 Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Nov 03, 2020] For Russia, it doesn t matter if Trump or Biden wins, as neither is interested in being Moscow s friend by Jonny Tickle

Notable quotes:
"... "As for Russia, we are, of course, interested in a broader dialogue and in the development of equal relations and cooperation between our two countries," Naryshkin said. "But, unfortunately, we do not see any signs of such an approach being found in American politics." ..."
"... "If Biden is elected, a disarmament deal would be much more difficult to achieve," Kiewiet said. "I don't think they [the Democratic Party] are capable of a foreign policy that treats Russia fairly." ..."
"... Regrettably, Mr. Naryshkin is correct. The US foreign policies have not been able to "make any adjustments" in attitude since the time of churchill's speech about the "iron curtin," and the military industrial complex, as well as the deep state, continue to dictate foreign policies to the White House. ..."
"... America is on the downslope, so poor relations will continue for quite a while. It is therefore up to Russia, China and others to build a new economic order that isn't US-centric. ..."
Nov 03, 2020 | www.rt.com

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want better relations with Moscow after the US election. That's according to the head of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service, who is pessimistic about rapprochement between the nations.

Speaking to Dmitry Kiselev, the boss of media holding Rossiya Segodnya, Sergey Naryshkin explained that neither of the main US political parties have any desire to improve the relationship between Moscow and Washington, as things stand.

"As for Russia, we are, of course, interested in a broader dialogue and in the development of equal relations and cooperation between our two countries," Naryshkin said. "But, unfortunately, we do not see any signs of such an approach being found in American politics."

The top spy's comments came on the eve of the 2020 US presidential election, in which Democratic candidate Joe Biden faces off against the incumbent President Donald Trump. Throughout his entire leadership Trump has been accused of being a lackey of Russian President Vladimir Putin, with some claiming he is compromised by the Kremlin.

However, Trump has shown little willingness to make friends with Moscow by increasing sanctions, pulling out of arms control treaties, and putting pressure on the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline connecting Russia to Germany. His opponent, Biden, has also shown no love for Russia. While campaigning, the former vice president promised to be tough on the Kremlin, and there is little chance of him removing any of Trump's sanctions, given his rhetoric.

On Tuesday, Professor Roderick Kiewiet from the California Institute of Technology told Russian news agency TASS that extending arms control treaties could be even harder under Biden.

"If Biden is elected, a disarmament deal would be much more difficult to achieve," Kiewiet said. "I don't think they [the Democratic Party] are capable of a foreign policy that treats Russia fairly."

peter R 52 minutes ago

Regrettably, Mr. Naryshkin is correct. The US foreign policies have not been able to "make any adjustments" in attitude since the time of churchill's speech about the "iron curtin," and the military industrial complex, as well as the deep state, continue to dictate foreign policies to the White House.

Lacus_Magnus -> peter R 5 minutes ago

Following WWI we invaded Russia from the east, while the UK, leading a coalition of pro-imperialists invaded from the west, our oligarchs hated the socialist state then as much as now. They were only ok with the Russians from 1942 to '45, then it went back to business as usual.

Anastasia Deko 44 minutes ago

America is on the downslope, so poor relations will continue for quite a while. It is therefore up to Russia, China and others to build a new economic order that isn't US-centric.

BluDiva 7 minutes ago

Although a friendship with Russia could be immensely rewarding for the American people, there are a few, just a few, key players in US foreign policy, who hold tremendous sway over anything good to happen. We all know why.

Shahriar Chaz -> Dadkhah 23 minutes ago

Finally someone speaking sense in Moscow...none of them are your friends and that includes the Trump supporters here.

billy brown --> CrazyJoe2 16 minutes ago

What about israel?

Naughtylus 52 minutes ago

I support Trump, and one of the reasons is because he bullies the EU OVERTLY. Those before him, bullied it too, but covertly, allowing spineless EU politicians to pretend everything was fine to Europeans, and not having to enter in conflict with the USA. But with overt bullying, EU politicians cannot pretend anymore, and are slowly forced to defend the EU against the USA. More of Trump, and the EU could grow balls and pursue its own geopolitical interests, instead of serving the US Interests. That would also be useful to Russia, because intrinsic European interests imply a rapprochement with Russia. But I will not hold my breath about EU politicians growing balls..

See also

[Nov 02, 2020] Sacha Baron Cohen, Propagandist - The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... Borat Subsequent Moviefilm ..."
"... Plenty has been said about the cheapness of Borat's humor, and the tiredness of the shtick. Likewise, many have observed that Cohen's comedy -- always heavily political -- has crossed the line into blatant politicking, especially with respect to the Giuliani interview. But there is more than enough here to suggest that the politics run much deeper than might be evident at first glance. ..."
Nov 02, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

CIA contacts, a web of lies, and a robust propaganda operation. It's time to start asking questions about Borat's methods -- and his goals. (Screenshot, Borat Subsequent Moviefilm trailer.)

NOVEMBER 2, 2020

|

12:01 AM

DECLAN LEARY

Ayman Abu Aita is a family man. For years, he was a grocer by trade, running his shop in Bethlehem while serving on the board of the Holy Land Trust, a nonprofit group working for peaceful reconciliation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Like many Palestinians, he is a Christian, a practicing member of the Greek Orthodox Church.

He must have been as shocked as everybody else to see his face broadcast across the world above the identifier: "ayman abu aita, terrorist group leader, al-aqsa martyrs brigade."

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=www.theamericanconservative.com&width=838

The interview in question -- conducted in character by Sacha Baron Cohen and featured in his movie Bruno -- had been held under false pretenses, and deceptively edited to boot. Abu Aita pursued legal action and, in a rare (albeit measured) victory for one of Cohen's victims, managed to settle out of court. The lawsuit ended in 2012, and the interview had been conducted in 2009, so this all may seem like ancient history. But a few of the episode's more bizarre details have never been adequately explained, and Borat's carefully timed return ought to revive our interest.

In addition to his long record of peaceful activism -- which had earned Abu Aita two years in an Israeli jail on unsubstantiated charges -- Baron Cohen's fake terrorist just happens to have been a parliamentary candidate in Palestine at the time of the Bruno debacle. Thanks to Cohen's actions, Abu Aita received death threats and sustained serious damage to his reputation, his business, and his campaign.

While it remains possible that Abu Aita was a random victim, it practically defies belief: why travel halfway across the world to interview a random person who is manifestly not a terrorist? Had the goal here solely been the bit, the same scene could have been shot for a fraction of the cost in a cheap LA motel, with an unknown actor of a reasonably believable ethnic extraction. It is immensely difficult to consider the great lengths to which Cohen went in painting Abu Aita as a terrorist to be somehow independent of who he was, of his years of political activity, and of the damage done to him by the stunt. It is hard to see any of this as accidental.

In Abu Aita's account , the interview "was set up via Awni Jubran, a journalist for the Palestinian news agency, PNN," with the supposed purpose of discussing peace efforts and life in Palestine. Cohen, in an interview with David Letterman the week after Bruno 's premiere, offered a somewhat different account of how he first became interested in Abu Aita. Out of character, clean-shaven, sporting a t-shirt, a blazer, and the Queen's English, Cohen provided a sometimes-necessary reminder that he is neither a poor Kazakh reporter nor a gay Austrian fashionista, but an obscenely wealthy, Cambridge-educated Brit. This rarely seen, authentic Cohen informed Letterman that he had sought a list of names from a contact at the CIA, and from there did some asking around in the Middle East until he located the "terrorist" he wound up interviewing. The million questions that ought to arise from this admission -- Who does Cohen know at the CIA, and why? Why did this CIA contact share any information with him? What was the CIA's interest in Abu Aita? and countless others -- were simply brushed aside, and the conversation continued.

me title=

00:13 / 00:59

In his answer to Abu Aita's complaints, Cohen swore, through his lawyers, that the statements in question were "substantially true." Likewise, Letterman's answer attested to the substantial truth of the interview while also "admit[ting] Cohen stated that he received information from a contact at the 'C.I.A.'" While substantial truth in libel and slander law allows for "slight inaccuracies of expression," any conceivable definition of the term still includes Cohen's insistence on the sincerity of the CIA claim.

* * *

Fast forward eight years, and Cohen once again has his sights set on a candidate for office. This time it's the vice president of the United States, in the midst of a heated reelection campaign. (Cohen has never been shy about his Trump/Pence hatred, and has often stated publicly that his sole reason for returning to his trademark brand of activist comedy was to help bring an end to the present administration.)

On Thursday, February 27th, a man dressed as Donald Trump burst into the Potomac Ballroom at the Gaylord in National Harbor, MD, where Vice President Pence was addressing the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). With a woman in a green dress and ripped tights slung over his shoulder, the man shouted something at the vice president in labored and heavily accented English. Ian Walters, communications director of the American Conservative Union which runs CPAC, said that it sounded vaguely obscene (suffice it to say the impersonator bungled the VP's surname) but he could not make out clearly what the man was saying. Video footage of the incident shows the crowd clearly appalled, and the pair were quickly escorted out by CPAC security, Secret Service agents, and officers of the Prince George's County Police Department.

Though no charges were pursued, the police report from the incident identifies the man as Sacha Noem Cohen, while the woman identified is a stunt double who has worked extensively in Hollywood. ( TAC has been in touch with the woman in question, but she had not responded to our inquiries as of press time.) The PGPD report claims that all information was shared with CPAC security, who then confiscated the pair's access passes. But CPAC personnel maintain that they were never informed of Cohen's identity, and did not confiscate any pass that would have tipped them off.

The police department's claim is hard to square with CPAC personnel's obvious confusion about the events that followed. Over the next two days, two more Trump impersonators appeared at the convention, both in professional-grade costumes. The third and final Trump impersonator was detained by the Secret Service. His prosthetics were so elaborate that he had to call an associate -- a professional makeup artist -- to assist in their removal so that the Secret Service could confirm his identity. That wasn't the only person who came to help him, though: Brian Stolarz, an attorney specializing in white-collar criminal defense, was at the ready.

From there, an hour and a half passed before the big event: somebody ran through a highly trafficked area of the hotel in full Klan robes, while numerous CPAC attendees looked on in horror. Security arrived quickly, and the Klan impersonator was detained as well. Stolarz -- the lawyer who had shown up for the Trump impersonator that same day -- was on the scene here too, further confirming the link between what otherwise might have passed for unrelated episodes.

Given everything that has occurred in the interim -- COVID became the big news just a few days after CPAC -- most people seem to have forgotten that the Klansman story took on a life of its own at the time. Because Cohen's presence was not made public at the time, despite the discovery of his identity on Thursday, speculation ran wild. Clips of a man in Klan robes running through CPAC made the rounds on the internet -- often, according to Walters, via accounts that seemed obviously bogus. In addition to the social media buzz, the CPAC incidents were given a good bit of airtime in major news outlets. The ACU fielded calls from, among others, leaders of D.C.'s Black Lives Matter, outraged that one of the largest gatherings of mainstream conservatives in the country would tolerate a Klansman strolling through. (The initial clips that surfaced did not show the horrified reactions of actual CPAC attendees, nor the actor's detainment by security.) Just as with the Abu Aita interview, what was ostensibly a comedy act apparently doubled as a very real political influence operation.

It was more than six months before what actually happened at CPAC became apparent to the public. With Borat Subsequent Moviefilm 's hurried release (a week and a half before Election Day), the Trump impersonators and the Klansman were all shown to be part of a massive Cohen stunt -- perhaps his biggest to date. But it is worth considering how carefully the film itself glosses over the complexity of this production. Walters estimates that a team of a dozen unauthorized security personnel were operating at CPAC, accompanying a slightly larger, undercover film crew. It came to the attention of CPAC personnel that this group had rented, and were operating out of, a block of rooms at the nearby Westin. All of these personnel had purchased access passes to CPAC (which aren't cheap) and security also suspected that some registration credentials may have been forged -- with top-notch equipment and skill, at that. Walters estimated the cost of the operation to be somewhere around a quarter of a million dollars, if not more.

To an impartial observer, this all would seem to be not a goofy comedy sketch, but a serious information op at a major political event in the midst of an important election year. In a way, it was: all these scenes existed independently, floating around the internet -- forming opinions and sparking controversies and stoking hatred -- for months before they were folded into the context of the film. First as tragedy and then as farce, right?

* * *

Between the CPAC saga and the movie's release, another major operation -- in some ways more complex than that in February -- had been carried out at the end of June. The third annual March for Our Rights rally was set to be a small affair, operated out of one organizer's flatbed truck, run by a local crew with hardly any budget to speak of.

A few months before the event, though, the rally's three organizers -- Allen Acosta, Matt Marshall, and Tessa Ashley -- were contacted by a production company who asked to film at the event for a documentary. Something seemed off, and the organizers declined. Then, just a few weeks out from the rally, they were contacted by a group representing themselves as a PAC based in Southern California. The name they used was "Back-to-Work USA," and beside a cell phone number -- which now goes to voicemail -- and one press release, there was little out there to attest to their existence. Again, the organizers were skeptical, but the group seemed eager to offer financial support.

Acosta, who has been the event's lead organizer in each of the three years it's occurred, started out slow. He asked the two women from "Back-to-Work" -- the names they gave were Tamara Young and Mary Harris -- if their group would pay to rent out porta-potties for the event. When they followed through, he took it as a sign that they were legitimate, and that their offer of support was sincere. At breakneck pace, the supposed PAC contracted a professional stage and other equipment, an army of security, and a number of legitimate musical acts, including Larry Gatlin. In all, the expenses -- the group virtually paid for the whole event -- amounted to tens of thousands of dollars.

The morning of June 27th, Acosta kept close watch over the setup. He directed participants, including Young and Harris, exactly where to park their cars. He gave a security briefing to the team that Back-to-Work USA had hired -- about 40 locals hired for the day. Once the event began, he immersed himself in the crowd, making conversation with attendees and making sure everything went smoothly audience-side.

Meanwhile, the Back-to-Work crew claimed they were rushing to get one more act to warm the crowd up for Gatlin. They told Marshall that they had found one at the last minute, and in the middle of the action neither he nor any of the other event organizers had much time to vet the new find.

The first portion of the event, which featured stump speeches from conservative political candidates, was wrapping up, and they were ready to pivot to the entertainment segment, with Gatlin headlining. At this point, organizers noticed a substantial swell in the crowd. Acosta didn't think anything of it at the time, as he had encouraged people who might not be interested in the political rally to come enjoy the music nonetheless. In retrospect, a number of the new arrivals seem suspect. Notably, a group with Gadsden and Confederate flags were standing off in the back, hesitant to join the main body of people even at Acosta's urging. Looking back on the moment months later, he said it was "like they were waiting for a cue."

It was then that Acosta got a call from the police. One woman, upset by some Trump flags at the rally, was causing a scene across the street. A few attendees were engaging with her verbally. Acosta went over to help get a handle on the situation. The lone protestor continued for about 15 minutes, and her outburst escalated until she was eventually arrested. At that point, Acosta crossed back over to rejoin the event.

As soon as he returned, he was met with complaints from worried parents: somebody was walking through the crowd with a backward-facing camera in his backpack, which the parents thought was pointed down to the level of their children. Acosta actually found the man, and was questioning him when a commotion broke out in the area of the stage. Acosta turned in that direction, and in the blink of an eye the man had bolted for the parking lot.

The ruckus that caught Acosta's attention has been widely publicized, though very little of what actually happened has broken into the mainstream narrative. The second act which "Back-to-Work" had supposedly booked last minute was actually Sacha Baron Cohen, in character as Borat who was in character as "Country Steve." Country Steve sang a song about injecting various liberals with the Wuhan flu, as well as chopping up journalists "like the Saudis do." Parts of the song also featured anti-Semitic undertones.

This was hardly met without resistance: one video -- distinctly absent from most reporting of the event -- shows a young attendee, draped in an Israeli flag, grabbing a bullhorn and rushing to the front of the crowd to confront Cohen. At the same time, Marshall and one other rally participant (who happens to be the son of a Holocaust survivor) managed to get past Cohen's security -- with a good bit of effort -- and chase him off the stage. In a late-October interview with Steven Colbert, Cohen claimed that one of the two men reached for his gun while rushing the stage. Marshall, who was carrying an unloaded pistol at the event, denies that this ever happened. Cohen seems to relish the idea that he has placed himself in danger for these stunts: he claimed to Letterman that his interview with Abu Aita was conducted at a secret location, with two hulking bodyguards accompanying the "terrorist," while in reality it was conducted at a popular hotel under Israeli jurisdiction, with Abu Aita accompanied by a journalist friend and the peace activist who runs the Holy Land Trust.

Country Steve, clearly unwelcome, ran into a staged ambulance that rushed away with the lights on. Acosta hurried to the parking lot and saw that the cars of the Back-to-Work crew had all disappeared as well. In a matter of seconds the scam became apparent. But the spin was quickly applied online: clips of the violent and anti-Semitic song started to pop up on social media, with the confrontation by the young Jewish activist and the moment where Marshall chased Cohen offstage conveniently left out. Special attention was given to the members of the crowd who enthusiastically sang along. But, by and large, these do not seem to be actual attendees of the March for Our Rights. For the most part, they seem to have come from the group of bystanders that Acosta suggests were "waiting for a cue." Marshall -- who is convinced that these were hired extras -- points out that these people are dressed in over-the-top, stereotypical MAGA get-ups, complete with straw hats and Rebel flags. He also notes that, given Washington's history and location, Confederate flags simply aren't a part of the culture, even in more provocative corners of the right.

Nevertheless, the episode was cast as a classic Borat sting: Cohen, it was assumed, had shown up at this rally, hopped on stage, and easily gotten the right-wingers to show their racist side. Nobody looked into the immense effort that had gone into the scene. That somebody had spent tens of thousands of dollars even to get him there, and apparently planted willing collaborators in the crowd, was hardly considered at all.

Once again, the stunt took on a substantial political character. Reports that right-wing rally-goers had gleefully participated in Country Steve's act cropped up all over the internet, bolstered by social media buzz -- supposedly showing the dark underbelly of MAGA-world right before the election. And once again -- as with CPAC, and Abu Aita, and any number of Cohen's marks -- great pains were taken to hide just how orchestrated the whole thing was.

* * *

It's interesting how Borat -- within the plot of the movie -- is supposed to have wound up at the rally in Washington. While quarantining with two new friends -- Jim Russell and Jerry Holleman, two supposed QAnoners with virtually no online presence -- Borat stumbles upon a video of his daughter, Tutar (played by newcomer Maria Bakalova) pretending to be a journalist named Grace. In the clip, Tutar/Grace/Bakalova is interviewing two anti-lockdown activists about the risk COVID emergency measures pose for a long-term slide into authoritarianism.

What's really interesting here is that this interview actually happened. The two interviewees, Ashley and Adam Smith, are leaders of ReopenNC, a grassroots movement with over 80,000 members in their Facebook group. On April 22nd -- long before the March for Our Rights rally in late June -- Ashley received an email from someone using the name Charlotte Richardson, claiming to be "a producer for More Than Sports TV, a production company working together with One America News Network on a documentary that explores the horrors of socialism and its corrosive impact on creativity, success and innovation here in America." More Than Sports TV had a website, registered in November of 2019. Likewise, Held Back, the supposed documentary project in the works, had a website that was just registered on March 9th of this year. (Neither website remains active today.) Given the apparently legitimate websites and the purported connection to OAN, Smith agreed to the interview.

She conducted a 40-minute interview over Zoom with "Grace," in which the two talked seriously about the subject matter; Bakalova did not break character once, and Smith never suspected a thing. Charlotte even reached out to set up another interview, this time with Ashley's husband, Adam, participating. It was from this second interview that a brief clip was pulled and posted to The Patriots Report, ostensibly a news site. It is this posting that Borat stumbles upon in the film.

The Patriots Report domain was registered in September of 2019. Like all the other sites in play here, it was registered using an anonymous proxy service, making it impossible to determine who purchased the domain. The bulk of its content is plagiarized from popular sites like The Gateway Pundit -- though some portion, notably the Bakalova/Smith interview, is original, fabricated content. As of October 31st, The Patriots Report is still active, still masquerading as a news site, and still posting new content. In these last days before the election, there seems to be a focus on just that. One story , pulled from Politico without attribution, warns that "Most social media users in three key states have seen ads questioning the election." Another story , ripped straight from Daily Kos , has been pinned to the site's homepage for days: "It's not just social media: Election disinformation now spreading through text, emails." If the site was meant solely as a prop for a comedy film, it's hard to imagine why it's being used to spread fears over "election disinformation" a week after the movie opened and mere days before the election itself.

This is particularly interesting given Cohen's public activism calling for stricter censorship of speech by tech platforms, with a special focus on Facebook, in close association with the Anti-Defamation League. Cohen is fond of talking about "fake news" on the talk show circuit, but he has not offered any explanation as to why he is apparently running a fake news outlet himself.

* * *

Besides the Smith interview and the widely discussed Rudy Giuliani interview, Borat revealed in a tweet on October 24th that Bakalova, posing as an aspiring journalist for The Patriots Report, had been given a brief tour of the White House press room by One America News Network's chief White House correspondent, Chanel Rion. (That a White House correspondent generously offered advice and a tour to a hopeful fellow journalist is somehow meant to be taken as a prank.) On the surface level, he seems to just be suggesting that the current White House is unserious because this actor -- who passed a Secret Service background check two days before the tour -- was allowed into the press room and onto the north lawn.

But another interesting (and deeply concerning) dimension to Sacha Baron Cohen's operation -- on top of CIA sources connecting with Palestinian activists, small fortunes spent crafting political scenes that spread through the internet like a virus, and online disinformation campaigns undertaken in earnest while publicly pushing for tech censorship -- is added by a detail that Rion observed.

The camera crew Bakalova used in her White House stunt were neither amateur pranksters nor Hollywood professionals: they were credentialed members of the press corp. When Rion inquired about this, Bakalova's producer "shrugged and told [her] he has friends at CBS." According to Rion, all three members of the crew had congressional press badges, and at least two of the three had White House hard passes. Hard passes are issued to those who have been on the White House grounds at least 180 times within a six month period -- suggesting that Bakalova's accomplices were full-time, long-term members of the White House press.

Plenty has been said about the cheapness of Borat's humor, and the tiredness of the shtick. Likewise, many have observed that Cohen's comedy -- always heavily political -- has crossed the line into blatant politicking, especially with respect to the Giuliani interview. But there is more than enough here to suggest that the politics run much deeper than might be evident at first glance.

If we're supposed to be so worried about "election disinformation" and foreign election meddling, shouldn't we be concerned about a British multimillionaire -- with unexplained connections to the CIA and the White House press corps, and public affiliation with other institutions clearly hostile to Trump like the ADL -- carrying out massive information ops in the lead-up to an election that he has publicly expressed an interest in influencing? Or should we just pretend it's all okay because the press told us we're supposed to be laughing?

M Orban • 14 hours ago

I thought Borat was Mossad, not CIA - but you always learn something new here.

...with respect to the Giuliani interview
It was my impression that the President's personal lawyer was conducting a counterintelligence operation to catch the deep state in the act. As you can see in the movie, he caught them red handed. They infiltrated much closer than anybody thought.

Megan S • 9 hours ago

It seems just like Project Veritas, but for comedy instead of political gain.

bumbershoot Megan S • 8 hours ago • edited

Except that Project Veritas claims that its scams are true.

(Also Project Veritas is comedy -- just not intentionally)

Andrew Megan S • 5 hours ago

Then you should object to it in the same way you would Project Veritas. If a tactic is wrong, it's wrong.

GraniteLiberty303 Megan S • an hour ago

If Cohen's stated purpose is the defeat of President Trump this election cycle, how is it not for political gain?

kirthigdon • 9 hours ago

Great expose! It's always interesting to find out that what appears to be random leftist filthy-minded comedy is in fact well planned deep state conspiracy. The matrix is far more complex and evil than we suspected.

Kirt Higdon

Tom Riddle kirthigdon • 8 hours ago

My sources in the Deep State have confirmed to me that Dave Chappelle ran COINTELPRO

1701 Tom Riddle • 4 hours ago • edited

Mmmm... Our Lord and Saviour told me not to believe anonymous sources
twitter.com/realDonaldTrump...

Slenderman2008 kirthigdon • 39 minutes ago

It all goes back to the deep state. Even comedy.

bumbershoot • 8 hours ago

Well this certainly is a detailed analysis of a minor comedian.

I'm looking forward to future hard-hitting installments where we learn that Sarah Cooper is a big meanie or that Dennis Miller isn't actually funny!

Blood Alcohol bumbershoot • 5 hours ago

Dennis Miller was never actually funny. He sounded funny and witty because of the good writers on his team. Good thing he got flushed.

ZizaNiam Blood Alcohol • 3 hours ago

Reminds of a Simpsons dialogue:

*Lisa reads Comic Book Guy's Shirt*
Lisa: C:, C:\Dos, C:\Dos\Run. Ha! Only one person in a million would find that funny.
Prof. Frink: Yes, we call that the Dennis Miller Ratio

Benjamin Wood bumbershoot • 5 hours ago

This film is being plastered over one of the largest streaming services on earth. Stop gaslighting people.

bumbershoot Benjamin Wood • 4 hours ago

Don't like it? Don't watch.

Benjamin Wood bumbershoot • 3 hours ago

Misdirection. Your point was that this was an overly detailed analysis of a minor comedian, and then mocked the sincerity of the article's concern. When confronted with the reality that this is in no way minor, but in fact a widely promoted film, you insist I'm free not to watch it, which is completely irrelevant.

Gaslighting & disingenuous.

bumbershoot Benjamin Wood • 3 hours ago

Misdirection. Your point was that some random comedian has a movie on Amazon, and somehow this is upsetting (?) to conservatives. When confronted with the reality that it's just a silly film, you insist that it is "plastered" all over a streaming service, which is completely irrelevant.

Gaslighting & disingenuous.

stephen pickard • 8 hours ago

Oh my. A lot of hang wringing over a cheap, silly, no account, failed movie. No one with any sense would take Cohen seriously. He is a known provocateur. His movies aren't funny any more. And , while a Democrat, he has me feeling some sympathy for the targets he exploits.

Except for Giuliani. He gets what he sows. He the king of disinformation. But one thing which I have noticed. The successful parodies are by left leaning protagonists. Mostly showing the stupidity of Trump supporters at his rallies. The Daily Show has made a staple of humiliating boring Trump supporters.

Surely there are Biden supporters who are just as wacky. If not, that is interesting. It does seem that right leaning Trump supporters are subject to believing the right's disinformation. Now that is a problem which our author should investigate. And that is actually important. Cohen's movies, not so much.

Update. It was just revealed that a Republican ad doctored a video of Biden being confused about whether he was in Minnesota or Florida. While actually in Florida, the ad doctored the clip to make it seem like he was in Minneapolis. Big difference. One has to pay to be deceived by a liberal. It is free to be deceived by a conservative.

Bugg • 7 hours ago • edited

Cohen's pro-Israel turn in "The Spy" could have been produced by the Mossad. While the story is in broad strokes true, every Arab and Syrian is depicted as drunk, incompetent, corrupt, or a cuckold. Would appear being used by or in cahoots intelligence services is nothing new for him.

marqueemoons • 7 hours ago

'Carrying out massive information ops' oh get over yourself petal. It's called satire and you're just upset because Republicans are the joke.

Andrew marqueemoons • 5 hours ago • edited

Did you actually read the article or just scan it for something to complain about? Take your own advice and get over yourself "petal".

If you read the actual reviews of the movie, or bother to watch it for yourself, people are interpreting the actual events in the film, other than Cohen's actual actions, as real. If the entire thing is a hoax, guess what? It IS a big deal.

marqueemoons Andrew • 3 hours ago

Read the article, watched the film. Again - it's called satire, and it couldn't have been made without interrupting things like CPAC; that a lot of work went in to getting it right isn't a surprise. If it's a big deal, I imagine that's just how Cohen wanted it.

Andrew marqueemoons • an hour ago

No, not all of it is satire. Don't just reflexively defend Cohen because he went after Republicans. Now, if all you are going to talk about is CPAC and you ignore everything else in the article, it's just a complex and expensive prank. However that's not all there is in the article. Portraying a Palestinian politicians who isn't even Muslim as an Islamist terrorist is NOT satire. It's slander. Don't pretend you don't understand that. If they brought in fake protesters to perform as right wing fanatics at the March for Our Rights, that's not satire. The film has two kids of jokes. Borat is a fictional character. The viewer is aware of that. So there are the jokes which are based on his misunderstandings and stranger from a strange land persona. The other jokes depend on his character evoking legitimate reactions from unsuspecting people he is pranking. Either way the audience is in on what's real and what isn't. In the Country Steve sequence the flag waving protesters joining in to sing about killing and torturing their political enemies are being depicted as authentic to the audience. If they aren't real that's not satire, it's slander against the actual participants and it's fraud at the expense of the audience. I am sure on an intellectual level you can understand this even if you really want to disagree with me for the sake of not conceding the argument and defending a person who is theoretically on your side.

GGinPG marqueemoons • an hour ago

Right. And I suppose if Cohen were a right-winger interrupting the sacred ritual of baby dismemberment at Planned Parenthood, this would be acceptable to you in the name of satire?

JS • 7 hours ago

I thought it interesting the Borat character is jailed in a gulag at the start. So he's aware of their awfulness.

Did SBC not make the connection that gulags exist in nations with totalitarian governments? It seems unlikely, since he regularly flatters the party of more government at the expense of the liberty-loving conservatives.

sonicfilter • 6 hours ago

Only a conservative would think this is a topic for discussion.

M Orban • 6 hours ago

While we are at propaganda, organizations and finances,...
... can someone in the know explain what "Collegiate Network" is and how it is financed?

fondatorey • 5 hours ago

Great article. Basically a member of the richest class making sport of his perceived racial enemies by slandering us.

Tyro • 5 hours ago

The pearl clutching over the fact that an extremely elaborate and well-organized stunt at CPAC required high levels of coordination to pull off is extremely funny to me.

For some reason we need to believe that entertainers and pranksters are dumb people getting by on luck and audaciousness, so we are somehow offended when it turns out they're professionals who make things that are extraordinarily complex look easy.

LFM Tyro • 4 hours ago

Outrage isn't pearl-clutching and it is not in this case concerned merely with the fact that this stunt took time and money, or that a political leader or his supporters were mocked. It is concerned with the fact that something that was initially portrayed as a spontaneous event, and latterly as a mere humorous 'stunt' - and that is where the scale and above all the expense of the thing becomes relevant - genuinely reflects the nature of one political party and its supporters. In the case of the 'stunt' in Israel, it seems at face value - I'm not familiar with the story so I can't say - that the detestable Mr Baron Cohen deliberately tried to influence an election and ruin a man's reputation. So much the worse for him if he did it all in good fun.

Constantinople Tyro • 3 hours ago

It's almost as if the writer has no idea how movies are made; that movies just spontaneously appear on the screen; that the credits which list the names of scores of specialists, are some kind of inside Hollywood joke; and that movie making, unlike every other business, doesn't requires financing.

Bob Cottle • 5 hours ago

Anyone making light of Dear Leader's inner circle is clearly deep-state and Enemy of the People.

Borat is no James Woods or even a Ted Nugent.

DaJuan Hayes • 5 hours ago

I think you're taking Sacha Cohen WAY too seriously.

Andrew • 5 hours ago • edited

Okay for a lot of you this is going to fall on deaf ears because you just come to The American Conservative to whine about the existence of American Conservatives and whine further if any actual American conservative objects. I suppose some of you will whine about me pointing this out too. It just proves my point, so spare me the snark.

Okay that said.

The reason this article matters is that Sacha Baron Cohen's whole angle is that the absurd characters he portrays lure the unsuspecting into revealing the unpleasantness of their true selves. If you've actually taken the time to watch the movie you know that the sing along at the March for Our Rights really is treated as actually documentary footage, Cohen's charterer is supposed to be fake, but we are supposed to believe that that crowd singing enthusiastically about murdering and torturing their political opponents is completely real. If all of that was staged then what Cohen is doing is extremely deceptive and probably grounds for a civil suit by the event's original organizers.

If you read the actual reviews, both professional reviews and user reviews, (the professional reviews are overwhelmingly positive BTW) all of that is taken at face value and many people are commenting on how Cohen had once again "hilariously" uncovered the dark nature of American culture.

If he's fabricating large parts of this movie, which Amazon Prime is both giving away and heavily promoting, that's a big deal. If partisanship is just going to lead you to respond to this by blowing the whole thing off as Republicans not being able to take being the butt of the joke Cohen has uncovered a dark aspect of our culture, not racism, sexism and violence, but gullibility, apathy and partisanship.

Mccormick47 • 4 hours ago • edited

Grow up! Comedians have been ridiculing politicians since mass media was invented. Cohen is very successful, and he's not on your side. So you hint at some sort of Jewish conspiracy and demand an investigation. Paranoid thinking at its finest.

Hoffnungslos • 4 hours ago

The worst part about Cohen is that he thinks he's funny.
But that also applies to people like Woody Allen, Seinfeld etc.

M Orban Hoffnungslos • 3 hours ago

That's why nobody watches them... oh, wait!

eddie parolini • 4 hours ago • edited

The President of these United States tweets that the killing OBL was fake, and that the then VP of the United States ordered the murders of the SEALS who killed the stand-in OBL, and you want to talk about how a comedian is unfairly going after Trump?

Andrew eddie parolini • 3 hours ago

Who do you think is talking about that?

Chris in Appalachia • 4 hours ago

Aww, now, how bad can Cohen be? After all, he was the keynote speaker at the ADL's 2019 Summit, and even received their International Leadership Award. Those are some pretty high honors.

AX2_USN • 2 hours ago • edited

Cohen is a sick freak. I told him so in my one-star review of his latest freak show "movie." If he violates US law against foreign meddling in elections, he should be deported or arrested.

Philip Giraldi • 2 hours ago

I would observe that even though Cohen insisted "on the sincerity of the CIA claim" in court the assertion might not be true as there is no way to check or verify it. If Cohen has an intelligence relationship it is far more likely to be with an agency from where he was born (Israel) or where he lives (UK). Neither Mossad nor SIS would be likely to confirm any such relationship if it does exist, so Cohen is quite free to make something up that enhances his story without any fear of being exposed.

Wydra • an hour ago

And before there was Borat, there was Da Ali G Show another Cohen creation.
From 2009 episode featuring TAC's own Patrick Buchanan.

https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FJtcFxg4yT0s%3Ffeature%3Doembed&display_name=YouTube&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DJtcFxg4yT0s&image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FJtcFxg4yT0s%2Fhqdefault.jpg&key=21d07d84db7f4d66a55297735025d6d1&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=youtube

Seek • an hour ago

Could never figure this man out. This article puts things in clearer focus.

[Nov 02, 2020] What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change-

Nov 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change? worldblee , Oct 31 2020 17:02 utc | 1

Pepe Escobar is as pessimistic about a Harris (Biden) administration as I am. The incoming foreign policy team would be the return of the blob that waged seven wars during the Obama/Biden administration:

Taking a cue from [the Transition Integrity Project], let's game a Dem return to the White House – with the prospect of a President Kamala taking over sooner rather than later. That means, essentially, The Return of the Blob.

President Trump calls it "the swamp". Former Obama Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes – a mediocre hack – at least coined the funkier "Blob", applied to the incestuous Washington, DC foreign policy gang, think tanks, academia, newspapers (from the Washington Post to the New York Times), and that unofficial Bible, Foreign Affairs magazine.

A Dem presidency, right away, will need to confront the implications of two wars: Cold War 2.0 against China, and the interminable, trillion-dollar GWOT (Global War on Terror), renamed OCO (Overseas Contingency Operations) by the Obama-Biden administration.

The Democratic White House team Escobar describes (Clinton, Blinken, Rice, Flournoy) would be an assembly of well known war mongers who all argue for hawkish policies. The main 'enemies', Russia and China, would be the same as under Trump. Syria, Venezuela, Iran and others would stay on the U.S. target list. U.S. foreign policy would thereby hardly change from Trump's version but would probably be handled with more deadly competence.

But Escobar sees two potential positive developments:

In contrast, two near-certain redeeming features would be the return of the US to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, which was Obama-Biden's only foreign policy achievement, and re-starting nuclear disarmament negotiations with Russia. That would imply containment of Russia, not a new all-out Cold War, even as Biden has recently stressed, on the record, that Russia is the "biggest threat" to the US.

I believe that Harris (Biden) will disappoint on both of those issues. The neoconservatives have already infested the Harris (Biden) camp. They will make sure that JCPOA does not come back :

Last night on an official Biden campaign webinar led by "Jewish Americans for Biden", and moderated by Ann Lewis of Democratic Majority for Israel, two prominent neocon Republicans endorsed Biden, primarily because of Trump's character posing a danger to democracy. But both neocons emphasized that Biden would be more willing to use force in the Middle East and reassured Jewish viewers that Biden will seek to depoliticize Israel support, won't necessarily return to the Iran deal and will surround himself with advisers who support Israel and believe in American military intervention.

Eric Edelman, a former diplomat and adviser to Dick Cheney, said Trump's peace plan has fostered an open political divide in the U.S. over Israel, ...

Eliot Cohen, a Bush aide and academic, echoed the fear that Israel is being politicized. ...
...
Cohen and Edelman opposed Obama's Iran deal, and both predicted that Biden will be hawkish on Iran.
...
"There will be voices" in the Biden administration that seek a return to the Iran deal, but the clock has been running for four years, and we're in a different place, he said. And "it will be hard [for Biden] not to use the leverage that the sanctions provide in part because Iran is not abiding by a lot of the limits of the nuclear agreement They're about three, maybe four months away from having enough fissile material to actually develop a nuclear weapon."

For lifting the sanctions against Iran the Harris (Biden) administration will demand much more than Iran's return to the limits of the JCPOA. Iran will reject all new demands, be they about restricting its missile force or limiting its support for Syria. The conflict will thereby continue to fester.

The other issue is arms control. While a Harris (Biden) administration may take up Putin's offer to unconditionally prolong the New-START agreement for a year it will certainly want more concessions from Russia than that country is willing to give. Currently it is Russia that has the upper hand in strategic weapons with already deployed hypersonic missiles and other new platforms. The U.S. will want to fill the new 'missile gap' and the military-industrial complex stands ready to profit from that. The New-START prolongation will eventually run out and I do not see the U.S. agreeing to new terms while Russia has a technological superiority.

Domestic policies under a democratic president will likewise see no substantial difference. As Krystal Ball remarked, here summarized from a Rolling Stone podcast:

But even with a Biden win, Ball doesn't think it will mean much for policy.

"My prediction for the Biden era is that very little actually happens," says Ball. "Democrats are very good at feigning impotence. We saw this in the SCOTUS hearings as well. They're very good for coming up with reasons why, 'oh those mean Republicans, like we want to do better healthcare and we want left wages, but oh gosh, Mitch McConnell, he's so wiley, we can't get it done.'"

'Change' was an Obama marketing slogan to sell his Republican light policies. A real change never came. The Harris (Biden) administration must be seen in similar light.

I therefore agree with the sentiment with which Escobar closes his piece :

In a nutshell, Biden-Harris would mean The Return of the Blob with a vengeance. Biden-Harris would be Obama-Biden 3.0. Remember those seven wars. Remember the surges. Remember the kill lists. Remember Libya. Remember Syria. Remember "soft coup" Brazil. Remember Maidan. You have all been warned.
Posted by b at 16:45 UTC | Comments (183) I have been trying to set the expectations for my deluded Democratic, pro-tech industry, pro-security state friends and colleagues who think they are forward-thinking progressives but actually just hate Trump as emblematic of non-college educated blue collar types they prefer not to associate with. Biden himself said it, "Nothing will change," and Obama deported many more people in his first term than Trump has to pick but one issue. There will be no M4A, little change in foreign policy, no major stimulus for workers, etc. But since the face in the White House will have changed, they will convince themselves that America has changed and it was all thanks to them...

One major change I expect to see is that BLM protests will fade into the background if Harris/Biden is elected. Without the need to pressure an administration the elites want to get rid of, there won't be the funding and energy to sustain it. But America will continue on the same downward trajectory and the same divisions will still exist with no remediation in sight.

Michael , Oct 31 2020 17:18 utc | 2

Great and accurate summary! Thank you.

Given our future circumstance I've been pondering bumper stickers that will help me get pulled over by the Stasi. Two come to mind immediately:

Wars R US! Biden 2020!
and from a photo on some recent web page

Defund the Elite!

Laguerre , Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 3
Really, so what? You have a choice between chaotic anarchic corruption, and organised professional corruption. Is it not better to have the calm, predictable, version - at least you know what you're getting. In any case I am not sure Biden would be able to go back to launching new wars so easily. The US gives the impression of being over-stretched as it is.
ToivoS , Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 4
It seems clear that Biden will win. This means that the possibility of a serious military confrontation with Russia is more likely than it would be with a Trump win. In any Biden cabinet Michelle Flournoy will have a major voice. She would have likely become Hillary's Secretary of Defense. In August of 2016 Flournoy wrote a major foreign policy article advocating a 'no fly' zone over Syria. That would have meant that the US military would have been obliged to prevent the Russia airforce from operating in Syrian skies (even though, the Syrian government had invited the Russians to be there). No one really knows if Flournoy would have been given authority to carry out such insanity had Hillary won, but the consequences of such insane policy are easy to imagine.

But without much doubt, a Biden administration will have Susan Rice and Michelle Flournoy in very high policy positions. Given that Biden is rapidly descending into dementia and Kamala Harris seems utterly clueless, US government foreign policy will very likely be led by a Rice/Flournoy collaboration in the coming years. Of course, China has become a much bigger player in the last four years. Maybe those fools around Biden will be distracted by China and they avoid war with with Russia. In either case it looks like very dangerous times ahead.

NemesisCalling , Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 5
Trump was always for me about controlled demolition of the empire.

Putin will not tolerate another ramping up of hostilities in the MENA.

I believe, just as in 2016, open military confrontation with Russia hangs in the balance.

It is believed here and elsewhere that Russia and China are working hand in hand and lockstep to thwart the empire.

They may be trade allies but they are not bed fellows.

Russia will always do what is in its own interest and will be beyond reproach from China come a last-minute attempt for it to talk down hostilities btw Ru and U.S.A.

I hope those peddling the narrative that all is theater and a mere globalist game to keep the peons entertained are correct.

But I fear the stupidity and egoism of man far more than I do their love of money and life of luxury.

steven t johnson , Oct 31 2020 17:31 utc | 6
The JCPOA's "snap back" provisions etc. prove that Obama never intended JCPOA as a long term agreement in the first place. The issue was always how long it would suit, not how long it would take for the US to. Nor is the US going to forego it's support for a colonial assault on the Middle East, aka Israel, any more than England will give up Gibraltar.

That said, there really is a policy debate between attacking Russia first or attacking China first or simultaneously attacking both. The thing is, the conflict will continue after any election. Since the Democratic Party isn't a programmatic party but a franchise operation of Outs, there will be zero unanimity within the Democratic Party and not even a clean sweep of the national government will resolve the dispute, which will be waged with exactly the same panic-mongering, paranoid cries of treason, barely subdued hysteria at the prospect of the lower races overtaking the God-given rights of the US government to exercise imperium (right to punish, particularly with death, originally) over humanity, and so on. The same ignorant vicious halfwits who were convinced Clinton Foundation was worse than the Comintern infiltrating innocent America made assholes of themselves. They'll just do it again over Biden, but with different made up excuses.

Domestically, there will be real differences, albeit some will still consider them entirely minor. There will be less emphasis on military officers masquerading as civilian officials; more emphasis on actually having competent officials who are even confirmed by the Senate; somewhat larger infrastructure investment; somewhat less deliberate destruction of government capacity to deliver services; slightly greater emphasis on keeping money valuable by limiting government spending, with smaller increases in military spending, slightly greater taxes, and only limited support to state governments going bankrupt, bankrupt unemployment and pension funds; a few restrictions on mass evictions; no separation of families in ICE prisons; open appeals to racism will cease. There will not however be any Medicare expansion, nor will there be a radically progressive federal income tax, not even a new bankruptcy law, nor will there be even political reforms like direct popular election of the president or even reform of the judiciary. There may be a minimum wage increase to $15 per hour.

One note: The idea that any president will honor any deal to step down or that a president can be forced down is refuted by history thus far. All theories that Biden is scheduled to be terminated are silly. Or worse, attempts to race bait Harris (note the ones who like to call her by her first name.) The influence exercised by Obama in getting Biden the nomination shows that if Biden is in any sense a puppet, he's Obama's puppet. Fixating on Harris instead is foolish even as some sort of amateur conspiracy mongering. No matter what Obama thinks, the inauguration will sever all puppet strings.

Laguerre , Oct 31 2020 17:36 utc | 7
Posted by: ToivoS | Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 4

Can't say I'm convinced by all these threats of wars. They didn't do a No-Fly Zone in Syria when they could, e.g. 2013. The reason it was not done is that it was too difficult to do, and required too vast a military investment. Situation remains true today. You'll find most of Biden's prospective wars fall in the same category.

Kiza , Oct 31 2020 17:40 utc | 8
The US self-declared "progressives" are horribly dumb people, no matter their degrees and "intellectual" professions. Stupidity is the illness (weakness) of the societal immunity system. The Blob of the parasitic class is the pestilence that thrives on the immune weakness of the US society. Not happy with mine, then find a better metaphor.

I repeat myself from before, US presidents change, US policy (Mayhem Inc.) does not. Nether on Russia, Syria, Iran, Venezuela ..., nor on China. If Trump loses, I will miss only the potential duel at the OK Corral between Trump and the Blob/Swamp. If Trmp wins, I am buying popcorn.

erik , Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 9
Just, oh my goodness to #6. What a turgid, contradiction filled ramble
c1ue , Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 10
@Laguerre #7
I would argue the failure of a "no-fly" zone in Syria was more due to united UN (Russia and China) opposition plus the Russia airbase in Tartus rather than any policy changes in the US.
Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 17:55 utc | 11
More pearl-clutching for Trump .

It's everywhere. And matched by Democratic Party ineptitude, fake "resistance", and generally lax attitude (spurred by a false sense of security due to polling numbers that can't be relied upon).

That's why I'm predicting a Trump landslide - including winning the popular vote.

The Deep State wants a 'Glorious Leader' type that can lead the country against Russia and China.

God help us.

!!

Laguerre , Oct 31 2020 17:56 utc | 12
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 10

Not a policy change, more that the military will have advised against it, the same problem that has always prevented an attack on Iran.

jo6pac , Oct 31 2020 17:59 utc | 13
KB has it right the demodogs will have better PR but nothing will change. The only thing I hope they do is fully throw the u.s. govt behind stopping the virus and even that will be hard do to many stupid people.

Trumpster and the swamp all he did was change the cruel animals in it and biden will change it back to the other cruel animals that were there before.

Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:00 utc | 14
It is hard to tell what will change if the Democrats win because they have flip flopped on policies so many times that you don't know what they really stand for.

Are they going to ban fracking or not?
Are they going to end the oil industry or not?
Are they going to pack the Supreme Court or not ?
Are they going to implement the Green New Deal or not ?
Are they going to encourage immigration or not ?
Are they going to tear down the Wall?
Are they going to defund the police or not?

Other than #OrangeManBad what do they actually stand for ?
Jonathan Pie lays it out quite nicely
https://youtu.be/IdnHfYbr1cQ

The one issue that is critical is that it is clear than Biden will not make it full term. His mental faculties are deteriorating rapidly. He might just make it over the goal post line but just barely.

Therefore the real question is what will Kamala Harris do?

Russia has a lead in strategic weapons that the US will not be able to catch up with. Hence the US emphasis on nuclear weapons to bridge the gap. Russia has successfully thwarted the empire on several occasions. How will the empire struck back ? (So as not to lose credibility with allies and vassals alike)

There are too many unknowns.

Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:06 utc | 15
Another look at what a Biden win may mean by Philip Giraldi.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/10/29/disappearing-america-progressives-want-a-revolution-not-just-change/

Malchik Ralf , Oct 31 2020 18:08 utc | 16
They are going to reduce government subsidies for fracking
And encourage the oil industry's ongoing retooling to other energies
They are going to expand the SCOTUS to 13 seats in keeping with the number of Circuit Courts
They are going to implement environmental legislation and policies
They will hopefully try to adopt a comprehensive policy on immigration and naturalization
They will abandon The Wall project as pointless
They will review the role of the police in dealing with situations where a social worker or a psychologist (with police escort) might better be able to handle the situation

Kamala Harris will keep an active and high profile as she is being groomed to run in 2024


ptb , Oct 31 2020 18:20 utc | 17
I agree that trajectory in foreign policy will be the same. I think a Trump administration would tend to entrench into the bureaucracy the xenophobic nationalists. This is in contrast to the neoliberal nationalists that make up the Democrat side of the foreign policy clique. In practice the latter ends up carrying water for the neocons, so the difference from the global perspective, the perspective of those on whom the bombs fall, is academic.

Domestically, however, I don't think we can say there's no significant difference. At some point far down the road, there will be a more meaningful internal political struggle in the US. Talking about when the $$ printing power runs out, so several presidential cycles from now at the very earliest, maybe many decades away.

The out-groups targeted by xenophobic nationalism will shift by then - either black or hispanic people will necessarily be included into the Republican party, and the divide may be more a matter of religion or nationality than race, but the overall idea will be the same.

No matter the details, it would be better to go into that conflict without giving the right-wingers a big head start. I think we should admit that Trump does accelerate the process. Maybe readers outside the US take some pleasure in the chaos produced by this, but for anyone actually planning to live within the US, who also objects to unrestrained nationalism, there actually is a pretty high price to pay for peeling off the mask of phony benevolence off of the de-facto imperialist foreign policy.

Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:25 utc | 18
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-30/biden-aides-see-warning-signs-in-black-latino-turnout-so-far
Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 18:29 utc | 19
'b' half the truth isn't the truth, no doubt you'l get round to the other half. It's conspicuous !
In these times focusing on what might happen if we get Biden, is biased.
What in your view might happen if we get trump ?
Given his track record.
Much more relevant I feel.
c1ue , Oct 31 2020 18:30 utc | 20
@Malchik #16
Well, kid, I will guarantee that 2/3rds of what you say will happen with a Biden win, won't happen.
I am particularly struck by your assertion that "super predator" Biden and "Lock 'em up" Harris will do anything to rein in police misbehavior. That is pure fantasy.
As for fracking: the subsidies were primarily by banksters in the form of loans and have long since ended. Nobody believes fracking is going to be a profitable business for at least a decade.
vk , Oct 31 2020 18:32 utc | 21
The only objection I have with supporting Trump's reelection from a non far-right viewpoint is that you would essentially be supporting an anti-democratic process: Trump is certainly going to lose the popular vote. Deserving or not, Biden does represent the absolute majority of adult America. By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.

In my opinion, it's time for the non far-right of the USA to start thinking seriously (specially if you're one of the twelve socialists in the country) in Third Party vote. Yes, you won't pick up the fruits immediately, but at least you're build up a legacy for the generations to come to try to change the landscape.

Now, of course, very little will change with Biden-Harris. But this has a good side, too: it shows the American Empire has clearly reached an exhaustion point, where the POTUS is impotent to the obstacle posed by China-Russia. Putin has already publicly stated he doesn't care who's next POTUS; China has already stated what the USA does or decides won't mean shit. Maybe the rising irrelevance of the POTUS is good in the greater scheme of things - or, at least, it gives us new, very precious, information about the core of the Empire.

Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 18:35 utc | 22
Is b really suggesting Trump is more peaceful than Biden?

The notion that Trump is fundamentally different than Biden or Hillary or Obama or Bush is specious. They are all on Team Deep State, which serves the monied class.

And the pretense that the Deep State is divided or partisan is equally laughable.

Strange that so many smart people fall for the shell game behind the 'Illusion of Democracy'. Is it so difficult to see the reshuffling of deck chairs and entertaining diversions that pass for "US politics"?

!!

Bemildred , Oct 31 2020 18:35 utc | 23
Biden will bring fresh blood to the Presidency, just you watch.

But seriously, things have been changing very rapidly all of my life, and accelerating as we go. I don't see that the political/managerial classes here are up to the job of managing that change, have shown any aptitude for it or understanding of it in the past either. They remain focussed on their depraved personal ambitions and demented interpersonal disputes. So no change in the midst of lots of change is what I expect, time to keep an eye out and consider ones options.

dh , Oct 31 2020 18:37 utc | 24
@14 Will they fund a task force to deliver a preliminary report on reparations?
Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:47 utc | 25
vk @ 21
By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.

Jesus but that is an ignorant comment. Michael Moore explained 4 years ago why Trump will win the election (2016)
https://youtu.be/vMm5HfxNXY4
div> @vk #21
You said:
The only objection I have with supporting Trump's reelection from a non far-right viewpoint is that you would essentially be supporting an anti-democratic process: Trump is certainly going to lose the popular vote.

The United States has a Constitution and was designed as a Republic.
"Democracy" as in majoritarian rule was explicitly designed against by the Founding Fathers.
Thus your criticism is utterly irrelevant. Until the Electoral College system is changed by Constitutional Amendment, or the United States of America is overthrown by a revolution, all this talk about "majoritarian demos rule" is purely partisan nonsense.
Note also that the 48 states which are "first past the post" are all disenfranchising the minority views. I 100% guarantee that a European style ranked vote system would see far more minority votes be submitted than the present systems.
Deserving or not, Biden does represent the absolute majority of adult America. By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.
Wow, thanks for showing your "deplorables" views. Anyone against the "right" and "proper" Democrat sellouts to pharma, tech and enviro must be rednecks. It is precisely this view that galvanized the vote against HRC in 2016.

Posted by: c1ue , Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26

@vk #21
You said:
The only objection I have with supporting Trump's reelection from a non far-right viewpoint is that you would essentially be supporting an anti-democratic process: Trump is certainly going to lose the popular vote.

The United States has a Constitution and was designed as a Republic.
"Democracy" as in majoritarian rule was explicitly designed against by the Founding Fathers.
Thus your criticism is utterly irrelevant. Until the Electoral College system is changed by Constitutional Amendment, or the United States of America is overthrown by a revolution, all this talk about "majoritarian demos rule" is purely partisan nonsense.
Note also that the 48 states which are "first past the post" are all disenfranchising the minority views. I 100% guarantee that a European style ranked vote system would see far more minority votes be submitted than the present systems.
Deserving or not, Biden does represent the absolute majority of adult America. By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.
Wow, thanks for showing your "deplorables" views. Anyone against the "right" and "proper" Democrat sellouts to pharma, tech and enviro must be rednecks. It is precisely this view that galvanized the vote against HRC in 2016.

Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26

c1ue , Oct 31 2020 18:55 utc | 27
@JackRabbit #22
You said
The notion that Trump is fundamentally different than Biden or Hillary or Obama or Bush is specious.

That's not actually true.
Biden has 47 years of track record to rely on.
HRC, ditto.
Bush is umpteenth generation Bush in government (100 years plus).
Obama was groomed through Harvard, community organization and Senate position as a servant of the oligarchy.
Trump is a billionaire and 2nd generation wealthy, but he neither shares the views of the oligarch classes - his historical behavior is clear proof of that - nor is he predictable as the other 4 are.
If presented with a neocon view - all 4 of the above would 100% agree.
Trump? 85%.
That is a difference albeit absolutely not world changing.
Hoyeru , Oct 31 2020 18:56 utc | 28
Pure BS.
Giving health care to 20 million poor Americans ain't nothing to sneeze at. Adding pre existing conditions save millions of lives. That's why the right despises Obama so much. How dare he give money to those free loaders!

lets show what the republicans have done for poor Americans besides taking more needex money from them and giving it to their rich buddies.
and No, Democrats cannot do anything if they don't control the Congress. They should have done it 2 years ago but since all they were doing was scream RUSSIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! at the top of their lungs,the people turned their backs on them.
Bullshit article.

David , Oct 31 2020 18:57 utc | 29

The Democrats are not going to end fracking. It is doomed to collapse without their help. A Wall Street Journal study revealed a remarkable fact that few Americans know; From 2000-2017 fracking companies spent $280 billion more to extract fracked oil and gas than they received in revenue. Fracking is nothing more than a massive Ponzi scheme predicated on the constant issuing of debt and stock. Fracking wells deplete quickly. There is a constant need for more expensive drilling. The remaining areas that will be fracked have less productive wells. Much of the debt fracking companies have issued is back loaded while the well's production is front loaded. There simply isn't going to be enough revenue generated to meet debt obligations. What made the scheme possible was the artificially low interest rates created by the Federal Reserve. There was a demand for yield that drove investment into debt of dubious quality. A crash is inevitable.
c1ue , Oct 31 2020 19:03 utc | 30
@Bemildred #23
You said:
Biden will bring fresh blood to the Presidency, just you watch.

I am curious why you think so.
Biden is nothing, if not a creature of habit (of obedience to his corporate masters).
Biden likely NSC: Tony Blinken. Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy NSC under Obama.
Susan "Bomber" Rice?
John Kerry?
Sally Yates? The one who signed the FISA warrants based on the Steele Dossier (based on 2 drunkard Russians in Malta mad at being fired)
Michael Bloomberg?
Jamie Dimon?
The only "fresh blood" in this group is the teenage blood they inject to try and remain young.
Elizabeth Warren, were Biden to appoint her as Treasury Secretary, *would* constitute fresh blood.
The likelihood of the Senator from MBNA appointing her to that position is zero.
I would love to be wrong in that instance, but it ain't gonna happen.
Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 19:06 utc | 31
What is trumps legacy so far ?
Let's call that -- - 'The Crimes Of Donald Trump'
Well he has legitimised cold blooded murder.
Ditto racism.
Run roughshod over national laws and conventions. -- Invading an embassy. Assange, koshogie murder, white helmit chlorine attack false flag. Funding and arming by US of Isis.
Corporate mansloughter by virus.
Interference in numerous country's internal politics.
Allowing Israel to interfer take over US politics.
The above are a few that comes to mind.

Have we done away with law and order ?

Feel free to add to my 'Crimes of Donald Trump' list.
In a word normalisation.

ToivoS , Oct 31 2020 19:08 utc | 32
Laguerre | Oct 31 2020 17:36 utc | 7

I hope you are right that the US will avoid war in Syria because they would lose. I was, on the other hand, very impressed that Flournoy was advocating that no fly zone in August of 2016. It was on the basis of her article at that time I fled the US Democratic Party. I knew it was bad before, but it suddenly became clear how Hillary would lead us int WWIII.

Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 19:10 utc | 33
c1ue @Oct31 18:55 #27

We've talked at moa about how policy doesn't change much between Democrat and Republican Administrations. And we've talked about the Illusion of Democracy.

That each President has a different personality as well as different priorities and challenges during their time in office doesn't indicate any fundamental difference in how we are governed.

!!

Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 19:13 utc | 34
Mark2 @Oct31 19:06 #31

Yes, Trump is normalizing the 'Rules Based Order' in which financial and military power dictates what should be.

!!

circumspect , Oct 31 2020 19:16 utc | 35
And Hillary Clinton wants to be Secretary of Defense in a Biden administration. Not only would the world be in trouble I could see her using the DOD internal hit teams to go after her domestic enemies. They will make 8 years of Bush junior look like a Disneyland vacation. It will be similar to the many unsolved murders of Weimar Germany.
Bemildred , Oct 31 2020 19:17 utc | 36
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 19:03 utc | 30

That was sarcasm, I knew it was going to cause trouble, sarcasm never works on the web unless you add a /sarc tag or something, I guess I feel a bit perverse today.

But to be serious, any attempt to predict what comes next here must rely on the idea that the future will be like the past, we extrapolate in other words, from various trends that we pick out. We can expect Biden to remain who he has been in the past, politicfally he's a hack, what we know of Harris does not suggest any principles to speak of either, so I feel more like I want to pay attention to what's coming than trying to predict what they is going to do or not do. That likely depends on "contingencies" just as in the past.

jayc , Oct 31 2020 19:18 utc | 37
#23 - "I don't see that the political/managerial classes here are up to the job of managing that change, have shown any aptitude for it or understanding of it in the past either."

This is a highly relevant observation. For some time the character and intellectual scope of the political/managerial sectors in the West have been noticeably mediocre, and will likely continue as such for the foreseeable future. The necessary reforms of capitalism were vetoed decades ago, ensuring that productive energies would gradually dissipate. For the last decade all the West has had to offer the rest of humanity is neoliberal austerity, colour revolutions, and armament contracts. This is a journey towards an eventual hollowed-out self-imposed isolation, a process the political/managerial sectors are actively encouraging and supporting without realizing it at all.

Piero Colombo , Oct 31 2020 19:18 utc | 38
Interesting to see how the kayfabe vocabulary of Dim propaganda infects everyone's thought and speech. Including b's:

"'Change' was an Obama marketing slogan to sell his Republican light policies."
Republican my eye. Democrat policies, period. A party founded, maintained and run to implement the ruling class empire and war agenda, just like the Repucrats.
As if Obama was some kind of exception. Ditch this language.

Piero Colombo , Oct 31 2020 19:20 utc | 39
Hoyeru @28

"Giving health care to 20 million poor Americans ain't nothing to sneeze at".

On the contrary, it would be a very good thing, to be applauded.
But when, o when, is it ever gonna happen? We've been waiting for it too long.

dfnslblty , Oct 31 2020 19:27 utc | 40
usa is the major unknown;
China and Russia don't need to physically war - they are winning at PR around the globe.
Even tiny Cuba has greatly better creds!
usa needs to be a people who truly and consistently respect their allies.
Which comes back to usa being the major unknown.
'Cept for warmongering.
Don Bacon , Oct 31 2020 19:30 utc | 41
The blob from the swamp wants to be heard with Why Those 780 Top National Security Leaders Support Biden . .think 'Get Russia.'
"All of us who spent careers in the military were raised on the notion that you lead by example, and President Trump has been the antithesis of that in dealing with this pandemic," said Charles "Steve" Abbot, former commander of the U.S. Sixth Fleet and deputy Homeland Security Adviser. "Instead of taking steps that I would call 'Crisis Management 101,' President Trump shirked his duty to the nation by failing to provide the central leadership necessary to get our arms around the problem, and he continues to mislead the entire nation about this terrible threat. The result of that failure of leadership was that his administration committed an unrelenting string of missteps, and the American public has lost trust in what the president tells them."

The sixth Fleet is Europe, so "this terrible threat" must be Russia, which is the natural enemy of the DNC/AtlanticCouncil/NATO unlike Trump the 'Putin-lover.'
And more on anti-Russia, from the article:
President Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton said earlier this year that Trump had repeatedly raised the issue of withdrawing the United States from NATO, and warned of "a very real risk" that Trump would actually follow through in a second term.

Nicholas Burns, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO and the number three official at the State Department, put it this way: "Every modern president since Harry Truman has viewed our commitment to democratic allies around the world as sacrosanct, because for half a century those alliances have been a key source of American power." He noted that a dissolution of NATO is at the top of Russian President Vladimir Putin's wish list. "Under President Trump we have walked away from that global leadership, and, as a result, trust in the United States has plummeted even among our closest friends. That's done enormous damage."

Bemildred , Oct 31 2020 19:35 utc | 42
This is a journey towards an eventual hollowed-out self-imposed isolation, a process the political/managerial sectors are actively encouraging and supporting without realizing it at all.

Posted by: jayc | Oct 31 2020 19:18 utc | 37

I've been sort of fascinated by that for some time, back when I was young we were still smart enough to know we had to compete with the USSR, and that we therefore had to develop our human capital. And we did pretty well for a couple decades, but then after VietNam they stopped doing that and choose the present "system" instead. Thus abandoning their long-term ability to compete, the source of their power in the first place. Banana republics do not compete well. Decadent.

But you have to give credit to the Russians and the Chinese too, their achievements are impressive by any standard. Our enemies, the ones who have survived, have all proved their mettle.

pnyx , Oct 31 2020 19:50 utc | 43
Can be, can be, no expectations in Biden / Harris. Nevertheless, Tronald is definitely not the lesser evil. His foreign policy is also heading for a clash with China, and things are not going well with Russia either. The warmongering anti-Iran axis has his support, the war in Yemen continues, he won't leave Syria alone, his extremely Israel-friendly attitude increases the danger of war. Everything that is suspected of being left-wing in South America is strangled.

In addition, he has an encouraging effect on all the fascists of the world, his disastrous ecological policy, his negative influence on the treatment of the Corona crisis, his general dislike of multilateral organizations and treaties on which the weaker states of the world are compulsorily dependent. Overall, he exerts an extremely negative influence on the entire globe. He should be disposed of.

He will lose the elections, but what happens then is open.

Maureen O , Oct 31 2020 19:57 utc | 44
In 2009, Biden tried very hard to convince Obama not to surge 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan. Obama listened to the generals not his VP.
steven t johnson , Oct 31 2020 20:11 utc | 45
The claim that support for minority rule isn't purely partisan BS is yet another lie. The moral principle in countermajoritarianism like the Founders' is that democracy cannot be allowed to threaten property. Except of course property before democracy, before liberty, before humanity is a vile and disgusting tenet that shames everyone so lost to common decency. The defense that a piece of parchment, a law, makes things moral and righteous and that even opposition is somehow wrong is an offense against common sense. By that standard, the Thirteen, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were the end of freedom in America!

It's one thing to have a mind deranged by rabid hate of your perceived social superiors, but to openly uphold vulgarity is merely snobbery inverted. It is a mean and small minded vice, always, and never a virtue. The Access: Hollywood tape was proof of vulgarity but to defend it as not being proof of a crime but as a positive good is vicious. Vicious is not a synonym for "bad ass." Or if it news, then "bad ass" is a horrible insult.

And, speaking of deranged minds, Wilson was felled by a stroke and Reagan was felled by Alzheimer's, yet they did not fall from power. Quite aside from the question of how anyone could decide who is battier, Trump or Biden, Biden will never be replaced by Harris for incapacity short of a coma.

Linda Amick , Oct 31 2020 20:20 utc | 46
I agree wholeheartedly with the concluding paragraph
Oriental Voice , Oct 31 2020 20:31 utc | 47
A very cogent analysis by b. But I believe the return of the Blob may not be as ominous as feared.

The dangerous component of the Blob's collective fantasy is the confrontation against China and Russia. As late as 4, 5 years ago the prevailing sentiment among Americans, the masses and the elites alike, was one in which The Empire's might was still considered unquestionably dominant and unchallenged. There was penchant for dressing down both China and Russia, and the clumsy maneuvers of the Blob's operators (Obama/Clinton/Bolton/Rice et al) were wholeheartedly supported even if contemptuously regarded for their clumsiness. That sentiment has evaporated, especially after Chinese and Russian military parades as well as American's numerous own infrastructure project failures along with abject performances of Boeing jets and Zumwalt class destroyers. The COVID19 pandemic adds salt to injury.
There is an issue with self confidence now, up and down the hierarchy within the American society, perhaps with the lone exception of Trump's rednecks.

So, the Blob may return with a vengeance but their political capital may be rather meager. They will be all mouth and little substance, as would Trump's prospective second term.

Steve , Oct 31 2020 20:33 utc | 48
I've tuned out of thesilly circus of the US election since the day Biden became the Democratic Party flag bearer.
alaff , Oct 31 2020 20:48 utc | 49
I do not always agree with the opinion of the Saker, but in this matter I tend to support him and can only quote from one of his recent articles :

And, in truth, the biggest difference between Obama and Trump, is that Trump did not start any real wars. Yes, he did threaten a lot of countries with military attacks (itself a crime under international law), but he never actually gave the go ahead to meaningfully attack (he only tried some highly symbolic and totally ineffective strikes in Syria). I repeat – the man was one of the very few US Presidents who did not commit the crime of aggression, the highest possible crime under international law, above crimes against humanity or even genocide, because the crime of aggression "contains within itself the accumulated evil", to use the words of the chief US prosecutor at Nuremberg and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Robert H. Jackson. I submit that just for this reason alone any decent person should choose him over Biden (who himself is just a front for "President" Harris and a puppet of the Clinton gang). Either that, or don't vote at all if your conscience does not allow you to vote for Trump. But voting Biden is unthinkable for any honest person , at least in my humble opinion.

I am surprised by people who are of the opinion that half-dead Biden, suffering from obvious dementia, is better. If only not Trump.
In 2016, Hilary, in fact, openly stated that she was going to use the so-called 'nuclear blackmail' against the Russian Federation. And there was no guarantee that this crazy old witch, having become president, would not have pressed the very button that launched nuclear missiles at Russia. Four years ago, the choice was between an insane sadistic misanthropist who could actually start a nuclear war, and a "dark horse" businessman with the illusory prospect of some improvement in relations between the two strongest nuclear powers. I do not want to drag in religion and the intervention of higher powers here, but it may not be at all accidental that Trump snatched victory from the witch. Maybe we avoided a nuclear war.

Yes, now both options are bad. But of the two evils, it is better to choose the lesser, which, of course, Trump is.


two near-certain redeeming features would be the return of the US to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, which was Obama-Biden's only foreign policy achievement, and re-starting nuclear disarmament negotiations with Russia. That would imply containment of Russia, not a new all-out Cold War , even as Biden has recently stressed, on the record, that Russia is the "biggest threat" to the US.

What? Funny. I thought it was Obama (read Democrats) who started this new Cold War. Just to remind - It was Obama who made the decision to deploy missiles in Poland and Romania, which are a direct threat to Russia. It is Obama & Co who are responsible for the Ukrainian coup, which, in fact, became a trigger for the total deterioration of relations between Russia and the West. It was Obama who began the unprecedented expropriation of Russian diplomatic property in the U.S. and the expulsion of russian diplomats. It was under Obama that "the doping scandal" was organized against Russia. And so on and so on...
Trump just continued what Obama had started. It is strange that Pepe Escobar does not understand this.

Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 20:50 utc | 50
Off topic
Boris Johnson announces Britain will be going into its second fake total lockdown this coming Thursday.
Mark Thomason , Oct 31 2020 20:52 utc | 51
If Iran and/or Venezuela get their oil back on the market, that will cause an oil price crash that would "end fracking." It can't survive oil much under $50/barrel over a long term.

An oil price crash would also effect the larger energy market, making solar and wind less competitive, even though their direct competition is really coal rather than oil.

Huge and powerful constituencies don't care about Iran or Venezuela, but care very much about oil prices staying high. They make common cause now, and will under Biden too.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 20:53 utc | 52
Well, having given deep consideration to the question and the current advanced state of malady in the USA - I will leave it to Vic as he has summarised the position with minimum fuss - here.

Enjoy this sharp witted, all encompassing 4 minute rant from inside the asylum. I would shout the bar for all with this one.

JohnH , Oct 31 2020 20:58 utc | 53
Biden is an old man. He is a tired man, if not now, then in six months. He has already told wealthy donors that nothing will change. He has no record of leadership. He has no record of achievement, unless you count floating to the top. He will be the establishment's model 'status quo, do-nothing Democrat.

Biden will preside as a figurehead legitimizing the shenanigans of the blob, Wall Street, and the US Chamber of Commerce, and Big Oil. Heck, I doubt that he will even override many of Trump's executive orders, except for the token bone thrown to his delusional supporters.

Harris will be as much a figurehead as Biden. She is utterly unprepared. While she is likable enough, she lacks gravitas and "credibility," which, she will be convinced, can be established only by bombing a few wogs back to the Stone Age.

Both will serve as placeholders until Trump 2.0 arrives in 2024. Elites will sufficiently sabotage the economy until then to assure that Trump 2.0 with neocon values is elected in 2024.

james , Oct 31 2020 21:11 utc | 54
thanks b... i appreciate you highlighting pepe's article... i enjoyed it.. terms like "Kaganate of Nulandistan", " The Three Harpies" and etc...

i still like the dynamic between joe rogan and glenn greenwald discussion on this same topic from the link debs left yesterday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0rcLsoIKgA&feature=youtu.be

the usa is an approaching train wreck and no amount of persuading one side or the other is going to change any of this... the world is moving on and rightfully so... no one wants to get down into this... the swamp and fake news is permanent at this point...until the whole system implodes - this is what we have in store.. vote for trump or biden - it matters not... one is a slower motion move then the other - but the end result is the same... there is no way out... sorry... on the other hand it is beautiful and sunny here where i live... life goes on outside this political circus called the usa presidential election..

lysias , Oct 31 2020 21:17 utc | 55
77,000 voters may have decided the outcome of the 2016 election, but they were not the only ones who voted for Trump. 63 million voters did.
Per/Norway , Oct 31 2020 21:20 utc | 56
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26
I do not agree with you on 99.8% of wordly affairs BUT this comment you wrote is pure gold!!
Even on the other side of the Atlantic ocean @ the western edge of Europe us reading types know the difference.
And it annoys me just as much as it seems to annoy you how few people know that the US of terror is a republic and NOT a democracy😂🥴
steven t johnson , Oct 31 2020 21:27 utc | 57
By the way, people who are truly interested in seeing the Democratic Party removed as an obstacle to a true people's party (no one else here wants a workers' party) the very best way to split the national party would be a clean sweep of House, Senate and Presidency followed by enough treasonous shenanigans by Trump to arouse mass resistance. (Genuinely treasonous as in subverting the republic by force, fraud and violence, not in the half witted definition of dealings with foreigners so popular around here.) Biden et al. would split the Democrats rather than enact a popular program---which would be left because the when the masses begin to move they always march left.

Also by the way, Bloomberg is continuing his bid for a hostile takeover of the Democratic Party, aping the media version of Trump's hostile takeover of the Republic (NOT A DEMOCRACY!) Party.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 31 2020 21:27 utc | 58
"Change' was an Obama marketing slogan to sell his Republican light policies. A real change never came."

I was calling Obama "Bush Lite" during his first campaign. Anyone who read his foreign policy platform would have to agree. And the *only* reason he negotiated the JCPOA was because he needed at least one foreign policy win for his eight years - and he knew it would be torn up by whoever came after him, either Clinton or Trump. But he needed it for his own narcissistic view of his "legacy".

People forget that Obama wrote the leaders of Brazil and Turkey in 2010 prior to their negotiation with Iran for a deal, listing the points of a deal he would accept. Clinton pooh-poohed the idea that those leaders could get a deal. After a marathon negotiation session, they got it. The US then dismissed the deal 24 hours later, prompting Brazil's leader to release the Obama letter to establish that Obama was a liar.

"Change You Can Believe In" - "Make America Great" - only morons believe in campaign slogans - or the people who utter them.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 21:28 utc | 59
Pardon me b !
"The other issue is arms control. While a Harris (Biden) administration may take up Putin's offer to unconditionally prolong the New-START agreement for a year it will certainly want more concessions from Russia than that country is willing to give."

Russia has made it abundantly and repetitively clear that they are not doing INCREMENTAL DEFEAT any more - there are no concessions to make - they no longer do supine acceptance of UKUSAi rights to dominate, subvert or belligerently mass arms at their advancing borders.

Why would any country concede to the incessant belligerence of the west? They must have lead in their drinking water to be that dumb!

The concession must come from the aggressor, the colour revolution fomenter, the incessant smearer and hate propagandist - the west.

A Harris/Biden Presidency lacks those attributes (perhaps lacks any attributes of goodwill) and a Trump Presidency is no different.

The narcissistic personality disorders run the USA - the asylum inmates are in charge, not the elected leaders. And the elected leaders are morons or wholly captive klutzes.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 31 2020 21:34 utc | 60
Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 31 2020 17:36 utc | 7 They didn't do a No-Fly Zone in Syria when they could, e.g. 2013. The reason it was not done is that it was too difficult to do

Obama tried *six times* to start a war with Syria. First he submitted *three* UNSC Resolutions with Chapter 7 language in them. Russia and China - burned by the US over Libya - vetoed those. Then Obama was within hours of launching an attack on Syria in August, 2013. He only stopped when he got push-back from Congress and then Putin outmaneuvered him by getting Assad to give up his chemical weapons. Then in fall, 2015, Obama was talking no-fly zone yet again. Putin again outmaneuvered him by committing Russian forces to Syria. Then sometime in 2016 - I forget the exact month - there was a news article saying Obama was having a meeting on that Friday to discuss no-fly zone yet *again*. That Tuesday or Wednesday, the Russia Ministry of Defense issued a statement that anyone attacking Syrian military assets would be shot down by Russia. On Friday, Obama pulled back and said there wouldn't be a no-fly zone.

So it was Russia, primarily, that was the reason Obama didn't not succeed *six times* trying to start a war with Syria.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 31 2020 21:36 utc | 61
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 10

Correct (for once).

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 21:41 utc | 62
Bemildred #23

"Biden will bring fresh blood to the Presidency, just you watch."

YES. thank you for the clarifying statement, as that is exactly what I expect too. Harris /Biden blood spattered globe again. Or a Trump spattered equivalent. No socialism for the USA.

gottlieb , Oct 31 2020 21:42 utc | 63
We went from snarling Cheney Wars to shiny happy Obama wars to snarling Trump wars now back to shiny happy Biden wars to... Forever War is obviously bi-partisan.

But perhaps with Great Depression 2.0 coming this Dark Winter in order to stave off civil war and/or revolution they'll throw resources to much needed infrastructure projects, diminish to a slight degree the supremacy of the for-profit healthcare industry through a laughable but better than nothing 'public option' and make some baby steps toward avoiding climate catastrophic.

The change is marginal. And probably meaningless. Hope is just another word for nothing left to lose.

vk , Oct 31 2020 21:53 utc | 64
@ Posted by: lysias | Oct 31 2020 21:17 utc | 56

Those 77,000 - purely because of location - overcame 3 million+ votes. That's the equivalent of giving those 77 thousands the right to vote 40 times each.

Are you in favor of censitary vote?

--//--

@ Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26

Yes, but at the end of the day, Hilary Clinton got 3.6 million votes more than Donald Trump.

You're telling everybody you're in favor of censitary vote in opposition to one person, one vote, just because you don't want an ideological enemy of yours to win. This is still liberal - but you would have to dig to the early liberal thinkers (Locke, Tocqueville etc.) to find such reactionary and elitist opinion.

Even by liberal standards today censitary vote is already considered outdated/reactionary. Concretely, you're defending the interests of a blue collar elite of the north-midwest, who number on the dozens of thousands, in detriment to more than half the voting population. It is what it is: you can't fight against mathematics.

--//--

@ Posted by: Down South | Oct 31 2020 18:47 utc | 25

So what? Fuck Michael Moore. If Michael Moore told you to jump off a cliff, would you do it? He's not the guardian of the absolute truth, he's just a random guy with an opinion.

Michael Moore can defend a mythical blue collar America how much he wants to - it doesn't change the fact this America doesn't exist anymore. America is, nowadays, the land of the petit-bourgeois, the land of the small-medium business-owners (a.k.a. zombie business-owners) , of the New York financial assets owning middle class "coastal elites", of the influencers, of Kim and Chloe Kardashian, of Starbucks, Amazon and Apple, of the billionaire tied to Wall Street. That's the true America, want it.

America will never be blue collar again. The insistence of turning America blue collar again will destroy the American Empire. They will be the Gorbachevs of the USA.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 22:11 utc | 65
Richard Steven Hack #61


Obama tried *six times* to start a war with Syria. First he submitted *three* UNSC Resolutions with Chapter 7 language in them. Russia and China - burned by the US over Libya - vetoed those. Then Obama was within hours of launching an attack on Syria in August, 2013. He only stopped when he got push-back from Congress and then Putin outmaneuvered him by getting Assad to give up his chemical weapons. Then in fall, 2015, Obama was talking no-fly zone yet again. Putin again outmaneuvered him by committing Russian forces to Syria. Then sometime in 2016 - I forget the exact month - there was a news article saying Obama was having a meeting on that Friday to discuss no-fly zone yet *again*. That Tuesday or Wednesday, the Russia Ministry of Defense issued a statement that anyone attacking Syrian military assets would be shot down by Russia. On Friday, Obama pulled back and said there wouldn't be a no-fly zone.

So it was Russia, primarily, that was the reason Obama didn't not succeed *six times* trying to start a war with Syria.

Thank you, it seems that your succinct statement should be included as an auto response macro to every laguerre post. They never stop their blathering those AI CPU's. My take is that they are a retro definition of the term interrupt .

MarkU , Oct 31 2020 22:16 utc | 66
@ Jackrabbit

I remember you as being a reasonably sane contributor but atm you have a serious case of TDS. Are you seriously trying to tell us that the last 4 years of US media foaming at the mouth about Trump (Russia-gate, Trump supporters being 'white supremacists' and egging on a race war) were all a plot to get him re-elected? I mean seriously? WTF? What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?


Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 22:19 utc | 67
Now I know I have been very very harsh on trump and his supporters of late. Please forgive me ! It's what we call 'tough love' I do have a heart, dispite all of America's crimes against the rest of the world. I did hope that the US at the last moment would come to it's senses and turn it's back on trump. Alas ! I fear not. Really sad, I'm sorry.
But for the rest of the world including myself, we can only watch with fascination and relief as America destroys itself from within. My heart goes out to the inocent.
I fear trump supporters are in for a -- --
Pyrrhic victory (spelt correctly) I recommend googling the word.

Adolph Hitler rose to power with similar glory and power unbridled. Just as trump now !! Then what ?
Dresden!!
Think on.

_K_C_ , Oct 31 2020 22:29 utc | 68
Posted by: MarkU | Oct 31 2020 22:16 utc | 67

Why is it so hard to believe? The media needs a heel and they actually prefer Trump to remain in office. Maybe on the ground level you have a lot of regular old liberals, but the upper echelons of the media (and holding companies) are all about keeping the ratings bonanza going. Another Trump term but with Democrat control of Congress would be like manna from heaven to them. Matt Taibbi is one writer who has chronicled the phenomenon since before Trump ever got elected. Here's a more recent piece. Let me know if it's paywalled and I can copy/paste.
CNN chief has an ethical problem.

Schmoe , Oct 31 2020 22:39 utc | 69
On JCPOA, The Nation had a quote from one of Biden's foreign policy advisers to a group of Jewish campaing donors saying all sanctions on Iran will remain intact unless they return to full compliance. I agree that it will not be as simple as that given political reality, but Biden was closely involved in its negotiation and likely has some ownership of it.

I expect there to be a false flag attack by "Iran" to throw sand in the gears if re-implementation looks likely, or perhaps an Israeli attack on Lebanon. Best plausible outcome is Iran keeps its current level of cooperation, and a Biden admin looks the other way on sanctions violationsw.

jinn , Oct 31 2020 22:40 utc | 70
Are you seriously trying to tell us that the last 4 years of US media foaming at the mouth about Trump (Russia-gate, Trump supporters being 'white supremacists' and egging on a race war) were all a plot to get him re-elected? I mean seriously? What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?
_____________________________________________
Of course it was all phony and designed to not ring true, which benefits Trump by giving him credibility with the voters.
The whole idea behind trump is the same as with Reagan he is portrayed as the outsider doing battle against the corrupt and powerful Washington swamp. Trump is Reagan on steroids. But it is all phony both Reagan and Trump are one of the powerful elites and their opposition by the left wing media is designed to give them credibility with voters.

Remember that half of the corporate controlled media loves Trump and sings his praises daily. It is only half the corporate media that is attacking Trump the other half is showing its viewers blacks that strongly support Trump and solid evidence that Russiagate is pure bullshit.

As for what the media would do if they really wanted to bring Trump down. They would attack him on real issues instead of phony ones that actually strengthen trump's credibility.

Josh , Oct 31 2020 22:45 utc | 71
What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change?
This,
https://sputniknews.com/viral/202010311080939179-ukrainian-code-biden-has-netizens-in-stitches-as-he-pledges-to-mobilise-trunalimunumaprzure/
Nice,
dave , Oct 31 2020 22:59 utc | 72
"What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change?"

The same thing it always changes, absolutely nothing except who accepts the bribes from the elite.

As long as the American people stay asleep they will continue with the "American DREAM" until they suddenly wake up inside their newly constructed corporate industrial zone. The prison industrial complex is the model society if you're an elite.

Have a wonderful weekend everyone, don't get so caught up in this sham (s)election that you ruin what little freedom you have left.

S , Oct 31 2020 22:59 utc | 73
Berlin's Madame Tussauds has put Donald Trump's wax figure into a dumpster . Is this normal behavior by a museum? Is this not "an interference in the democratic processes of the United States"? Or is it okay because the Germans are doing it? (But God forbid if a Russian or an Iranian criticizes a U.S. presidential candidate publicly ahead of the election.) Have similar performances been staged against Bush, under whom the U.S. intelligence agencies manufactured claims of Saddam Hussein preparing to use weapons of mass destruction, which the U.S. "free" media printed almost in unison without any criticism, leading to an invasion that killed 650,000 Iraqis ? When a visitor beheaded Adolf Hitler's figure in 2008, the same museum had this to say :
Madame Tussauds is non-political and makes no comment or value-judgement either on the persons who are exhibited in the Museum or on what they have done during their lifetime.

I guess starting a war that resulted in deaths of 26,000,000 million Soviets -- most of them Russians -- is not nearly as bad as being a rude person who has once recommended in private grabbing women by their genitals.

S , Oct 31 2020 23:01 utc | 74
*26,000,000 Soviets
MarkU , Oct 31 2020 23:18 utc | 75
@ jinn (71) and _K_C (69)

You are clearly over-thinking this, clutching at straws to justify supporting the other side. Remember the saying "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". Whoever wins the election is going to be faced with major unrest, the worms are clearly not going back in the can. There are easier ways to get someone re-elected.

Trump is clearly at least as toxic as any of them wrt foreign policy, however he is not a globalist and that is his major sin in their eyes.

Don Bacon , Oct 31 2020 23:19 utc | 76
@ Maureen O # 45
In 2009, Biden tried very hard to convince Obama not to surge 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan.
Perhaps he was successful? . . . Obama actually surged 70,000 troops into Afghanistan, raising Bush's 30K to 100K+. That got Mr Hope & Change the Nobel Peace Prize.
arata , Oct 31 2020 23:21 utc | 77
Posted by: alaff | Oct 31 2020 20:48 utc | 50

What is JCPOA, in reality?

We should remember there were 6 UNSC against Iran, and one of them under Chapter 7 ( the most dangerous), before JCPOA. We should keep in mind there are gang of 5 + 1( 5 in UNSC + Germany) coalition behind 6 resolutions.

From Iran's eye, Imperialism was, combination of these 5 in the club, and their collateral and vassals ( Germany, Japan, etc). The master of JCPOA, caught the opportunity to put a wedge into the body of the club, and it worked perfectly. America is mad cutting her own arteries, out side the club. Trump or Biden are not different in this regard, America needs some one to understand the depth of the wound and retreat immediately, before too much hemorrhage. And such person ( or group ) is not in horizon. Let it die by her own wounding.

Going back to JCPOA is not so simple.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 23:34 utc | 78
Down South #15

Thank you for that Philip Giraldi report. The descent into madness from the raucus sounds of the echo chamber. Where does a revolution start?

First they need to dismantle their media concentration across the spectrum of "news" including all media forms.

Second they need to send their journalists through the same cultural revolution cycle as was done in the China and other countries where people go to different work supporting the growth of their communities for a five to ten year separation from the craft of journalism. Listen to the people and sweat alongside them in their labour to survive.

Sure there is much more but the echo chamber must surely be demolished at commencement.

Jen , Oct 31 2020 23:39 utc | 79
RSH @ 61:

I believe back in August 2013 after a CW attack in East Ghouta, east of Damascus, wrongly blamed on the Syrian govt that Obama was preparing to enforce his no-fly zone threat. Then the UK parliament voted not to support such a threat, Obama hesitated and then Putin saw his opportunity and posted an opinion in the New York Times. That ultimately stopped the US from going ahead with the attack.

I'm sure British MPs have since been forced to "come to their senses".

karlof1 , Oct 31 2020 23:43 utc | 80
I linked to and commented upon Pepe's article when it was published by Asia Times a few days ago, and I don't see any reason to add to it as b echoes much of my sentiment. What I will do is link to a brief item by Chinese scholar Zhang Weiwei, professor of International Relations at Fudan University, "How China elects their political leaders" , which seems very appropriate at this moment in time:

"China has established a system of meritocracy or what can be described as 'selection plus election'. Competent leaders are selected on the basis of performance and broad support, through a vigorous process of screening, opinion surveys, internal evaluations and various types of elections. This is much in line with the Confucian tradition of meritocracy. After all, China is the first country that invented civil service examination system or the 'Keju' system....

"Indeed, the Chinese system of meritocracy today, makes it inconceivable that anyone as weak as George W. Bush or Donald Trump could ever come close to the position of the top leadership. It's not far-fetched to claim that the China model is more about leadership rather than the showmanship as it is in the West. China's meritocratic governance challenges the stereotypical dichotomy of democracy versus autocracy. From Chinese point of view, the nature of the state including its legitimacy, has to be defined by its substance, that is, good governance, competent leadership and success in meeting the people's needs."

Zhang Weiwei is the author of a very important book some may have heard about and even read, The China Wave: Rise Of A Civilizational State , of which an open preview can be read here . Also, the professor gave a talk at the German Schiller Institute related to the above book and the BRI project, which can be read here .

I've commented several times that China's political-economic system is far superior to the Parasitic Neoliberalism that's destroying the West. China's success suggests very strongly that we listen and closely observe while not taking heed of what any Western source has to say about China.

Jen , Oct 31 2020 23:43 utc | 81
Uncle T @ 79:

I'm all for sending the entire Australian news media into a cave for 5 - 10 years. Maybe in 10,000 years archaeologists investigating the cave will be wondering whether fossil remains there denote a species of human more primitive than those found in Liang Bua cave on Flores Island in Indonesia. :-)

Hagbard Celine , Oct 31 2020 23:51 utc | 82
@worldblee #1

Can you elaborate on this funding you referred to for BLM protests? What is your evidence that it was actually funding street protests? Are you referring to the national corporate BLM? If so, what does that have to do with leaderless protests in the streets?

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 0:09 utc | 83
Mark2 #68

Adolph Hitler rose to power with similar glory and power unbridled. Just as trump now !! Then what ?
Dresden!!
Think on.

Ahem, Think about this :

From February 13 to February 15, 1945, during the final months of World War II (1939-45), Allied forces bombed the historic city of Dresden, located in eastern Germany. The bombing was controversial because Dresden was neither important to German wartime production nor a major industrial center, and before the massive air raid of February 1945 it had not suffered a major Allied attack. By February 15, the city was a smoldering ruin and an unknown number of civilians -- estimated between 22,700 to 25,000–were dead.

Dresden and other cities held magnificent collections of human posterity. Cities of science - of intellectual excellence and endeavour within europe. Cities of humans associated with brilliant minds doing the work of human understanding and progress.

Sure Hitler's imbecile adventures ably funded by global private finance capitalism and a hatred of communism led to war that ultimately led to the vengeful destruction of great cities and great store houses and museums of this earth of mankind.

Hitler did not bomb Dresden.

Germans were proud of their science and their knowledge and storehouses and museums.

Europe shared in that pride in excellence as did many throughout the world.

The UKUSA bombed Dresden in mid February 1945. They had no need to do so as Germany was crippled, Berlin was surrounded and doomed. On April 20, Hitler's birthday, the first Russian shells fell on Berlin. What followed was a brief but brutal fight.

Those first shells falling on Berlin TWO months after the demolition of cities of science and archeology and human history. NOT cities of military significance.

I think of Vietnam

I think of Iraq

I think of Korea

I think of China

I think of Japan

Bombed by UKUSA. So lets not obsess with a dead nazi comrade, lets open our eyes to the live nazis.

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 0:12 utc | 84
Jen #82

++ :))

little hairy pens preserved in paperbark and beeswax perhaps

[email protected] , Nov 1 2020 0:34 utc | 85
I think Biden will win this presidency, and win it fairly easily. It will become apparent early on that the Biden Administration intends not only to turn the heat up on Russia, but will continue Trump's aggression towards China. There may be a feint towards renewing JCPOA, but it will not be fulfilled, and aggression towards Iran will not abate either.

The Mighty Wurlitzer of pro-war propaganda is again spinning up in anticipation. The Atlantic and the Economist have been busy comparing Chinese Policy towards it's Muslim citizens with the Holocaust...Russia, Russia, Russia!!! which never went away is again being amped up.

But, this isn't 2016. Four years has given China and Russia time to further modernize their militaries. Iran has developed its missile and drone programs to the point that a conflict with Israel will result in mutual destruction. In 2016 USA/NATO had the military advantage, but that is now gone, and the balance shifts further by the day. I almost feel sorry for Biden, as he will be the one taking the blame when the economy collapses and America gets their asses handed to them. Hopefully it doesn't go nuclear, but I am not very optimistic.

With the NeoCon infestation capturing the Democratic Party, the media, and a big chunk of the Republican, it is only a matter of time before they get their way. Short-sided parasites as they are, this time they will kill their host. If humanity survives, a new multi-polar era may emerge.

Mark2 , Nov 1 2020 0:56 utc | 86
Uncle tungsten @ 84
Please re-read my heart felt comment. It was sincerely ment. To many here think this is just fun and speculation.
But this is real, the USA have the same misguided sense of infalalabilty now, that the German public hand then.
Did we learn nothing from world war 2 ?
Please don't belittle my urgent warning.
This is not a game. Perhaps re read my comment. Respect
_K_C_ , Nov 1 2020 1:12 utc | 87
Posted by: MarkU | Oct 31 2020 23:18 utc | 76

Naw, you're not reading me right. Did you check out the Taibbi piece? He has numerous others over the past 4 years. Also see Les Moonves and other corporate media executives' statements on Trump during that same time period. I acknowledged that the rank and file among the media class is largely woke, liberal and pro-Biden (and very anti-Trump), but they don't call the shots and you're not looking at the situation with enough attention to details. It's the little things that give it away.

Ever heard the saying "there's no such thing as bad publicity"? A brand like Trump's has been clearly demonstrated to benefit immensely from the negative coverage. The media are hated by Trump's followers and the people who watch the media hate Trump. So what does that tell you? Compare CNN and MSNBC ratings during Trump's term to Obama's. They know that hate sells and they never call Trump out for his ACTUAL bad behaviors (other than COVID and ACB, I guess) while they focus on meaningless nonsense, thus distracting the public from the bi-partisan corporate dominated graft going on and the Empire's ongoing wars and sanctions programs abroad. Very rarely if ever will you read or hear about the hundreds of thousands of people who have died due to American sanctions on Iran or Venezuela. Why is that? Because top brass at the corporate media outlets support it. They cheered when he launched the missiles at Syria.

Someone did a study or analysis on the amount of air time given to Trump versus the Democrat primary and it wasn't even close. He plays them and his supporters like a fiddle, too. SNL had him on NBC when he was running against Hillary. Some argue that this might have been due to the same mindset that Hillary's team was alleged to have had. Namely, that Trump would be the EASIEST candidate for her to beat and he had no chance, so he was harmless as a threat. I don't think it's that complicated. They know what gets ratings.

Yeah, occasionally they'll make a peep about the environment or jobs, but like the Democrats in Congress and "Intelligence" Community's Russia and Ukraine witch hunts/impeachment they intentionally ignore the types of actions that DO justify investigations and impeachments. Do you honestly think that the Democrats thought Trump would be removed from office for the bogus "whistle blower" charges they ginned up? Of course not - the Senate was never going to go along with it and it wasn't exactly secret, even over here across the pond it was obvious.

As far as him not being a globalist - he's not exactly anti-globalist when it comes to policy, but why would that matter to the corporate media? Again, it's the corporate big wigs and majority shareholders who make the calls and the reporters, editors and personalities on TV know how to toe the line without being told explicitly. Now, if you want to talk Silicon Valley and the social media giants, I'm with you - they are actively trying to help Joe Biden. But take another example - the Hunter Biden laptop story. Social media giants censored it, but it isn't like it's not being talked about non-stop by the MSM and newspapers. They just don't talk about what was IN the emails or photos, leaving some of their viewers/readers curious to go find out for themselves.

I didn't read jinn's comment in detail, but I'm definitely not trying to make points that justify voting for Biden; but I stand by my points - I'm just pointing out what's REALLY going on with all of the "negative" coverage of Donald Trump in the corporate mainstream media. At the end of the day, the corporate MSM upper brass doesn't really care who gets elected, but they also understand that having a "heel" (from the pro wrestling world) and "bad guy" to always go after on crap that's ultimately meaningless, makes it easier to sell the hate and drive ratings and subscriptions.

David , Nov 1 2020 1:12 utc | 88

You summed it up beautifully tribolij. I believe it will play out just as you described. There is no basis for optimism.
uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 1:19 utc | 89
Mark2 #87
Uncle tungsten @ 84
Please re-read my heart felt comment. It was sincerely ment. To many here think this is just fun and speculation.
But this is real, the USA have the same misguided sense of infalalabilty now, that the German public hand then.
Did we learn nothing from world war 2 ?
Please don't belittle my urgent warning.
This is not a game. Perhaps re read my comment. Respect

Respect and apology in return Mark2. I jumped the gun.

Yes, the sense of infallibility infuses the bloodlust of the UKUSAi.

With any luck humanity will be spared their obscene and lunatic 'reprisal mania' that has rotted their minds. I somehow doubt that.

And I share your fear.

That said though - I am ever the optimist. There are many warrior clans of past decades that have made delightful blunders and ended up on the block instead of on the grog in the opponents bars. Time will tell.

I believe it is time for the great people of South America to shake off these barnacles on the arse of humanity once and for all.

_K_C_ , Nov 1 2020 1:30 utc | 90
@MarkU, #67 -

Sorry I got a little long winded in my last reply. I think this response will make my position easier to interpret.

You asked: " What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?"

The answer to that question is the same as the answer would be if you asked what the Democrats in Congress would (have) do(ne) if they really wanted to remove him from office. They would actually investigate and attempt to prosecute a litany of possible crimes rather than silly, simplistic accusations from a "whistleblower" that anyone with a IQ over 100 could see was not going to work.

Maybe you're right and I'm wrong, and Americans really are that stupid. It wouldn't necessarily conflict with what I've seen and heard from Democrat supporting relatives and social media contacts. A lot, if not most of them STILL believe that there was collusion between Trump and Russia. It was like my conservative friends and relatives for about a decade after the Iraq war - they were CONVINCED that we DID find WMDs and that the US media had somehow hidden it.

c1ue , Nov 1 2020 1:42 utc | 91
@vk #65
It is striking how you still refuse to acknowledge the reality of the law.
The United States is not a majoritarian democracy.
In fact, there is not one single country in the entire world that is a majoritarian democracy.
If the law were changed via the methods already written, tried and true, then I guarantee that there would be a lot more voters in the minorities of both red and blue states.
As it is, the only partisan here is your and the Democratic party's whining about how they have more popular votes, much as the talk about packing the Supreme Court, etc etc.
If ultimately the existing laws of the land are merely an impediments to anyone doing whatever they have the power to do, then there is no law.
Mark2 , Nov 1 2020 2:01 utc | 92
Uncle @ 90
Thanks for that. I feel we are in full agreement !
To perhaps clarify to those less astute than you.
My comment @ 68 points out the law of unintended consequence. The majority of Americans don't want war, riots, poverty and distruction. They want to keep there families safe.
The comparison being the same can be said for Germans prior to the war, they weren't evil as portrayed in history they simply made the same mistake the US is about to make. With the consequence of there country devistated. A dreadful mistake voting for the wrong man, whipped up by a false sense of superiority !
Don't do it.
Half of America won't tolerate it.
Free quarters of the rest of the world won't. By voting trump you vote for your own distruction.
I would rather vote for a donkey, never mind Biden.
jinn , Nov 1 2020 2:19 utc | 93
the moron wrote:

You are clearly over-thinking this, clutching at straws to justify supporting the other side.
__________________________________________
What other side???
I'm guessing you are accusing me of supporting trump but who knows maybe you think I'm supporting Biden. Either way it is stupid of you to project your "side" based logic onto others. Do you really think it is impossible to analyze without first taking a side?

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 2:25 utc | 94
c1ue #92
response to vk #65
As it is, the only partisan here is your and the Democratic party's whining about how they have more popular votes, much as the talk about packing the Supreme Court, etc etc.


Thank you, I liked that retort to vk. Can I distort your point that while the Demonazis delude themselves in more popular votes - the Repugnents have more of the un-popular votes. The deeply corrosive nonsense being shouted into the demonazi echo chamber is truly dangerous to the point that they will generate a standing wave resonance and collapse the entire building. Trouble is we will then have to endure an 11/11 to compete with their absurd 9/11 and - we'll never hear the end of it. :))

james , Nov 1 2020 2:26 utc | 95
mark - serious question...have you been drinking?? cheers james who thinks you need to step away from the computer keyboard!
Mark2 , Nov 1 2020 2:39 utc | 96
James
I share one bottle of wine a month. I don't do drugs, but thanks for asking.
I note you don't ask the 'right wing' to step a way'
But if the truth is hurting you. Perhaps you ought ?
Have a peaceful night.
Jackrabbit , Nov 1 2020 2:41 utc | 97
MarkU @Oct31 22:16 #67

I remember you as being a reasonably sane contributor ...

Thanks!

=
... but atm you have a serious case of TDS.

No. I'm neither for nor against Trump. I see him as a symptom of the system who has joined (possibly long ago) Team Deep State (the managers of the Empire). If it wasn't Trump, it would be some other media-savvy guy that can con the people.

=
Are you seriously trying to tell us that the last 4 years of US media foaming at the mouth about Trump (Russia-gate, Trump supporters being 'white supremacists' and egging on a race war) were all a plot to get him re-elected?

IMO Trump's economic nationalism and zenophobia were very much planned. As was the failure of the Democrats to mount any effective resistance. They pretend to hate Trump so so much but shoot themselves in the foot all the time.

Russiagate was nothing more than a new McCarthyism. That works well for the Deep State both internationally and domestically. Any dissenter is called a "knowing or unknowing" Russian asset.

Background: I've written that Trump was meant to beat Hillary. The 2016 election was a farce. Sanders and Trump were friendly with the Clintons for a very long time. Sanders was a sheepdog (not a real candidate) and Hillary threw the race to Trump. Trump is much more capable at what he does than Hillary would've been.

I mean seriously? WTF? What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?

If the Deep State wanted him removed (but they don't) they would find a reason to invoke the 25th Amendment. They have positioned people to do this, if necessary. For example: VP Pence was a friend of McCain (who was a 'NEVER TRUMP'-er); Atty General Barr is close to the Bushes and Mueller ('NEVER TRUMP'-ers); CIA Dir. Gina Haspel is an acolyte of John Brennan (you guessed it, a 'NEVER TRUMP'-er).

=

MarkU @Oct31 23:18 #76

...he is not a globalist and that is his major sin in their eyes.

He's not anti-globalist as you seem to suggest. He's even bragged about his business dealings with Chinese, Arabs, Russians - pretty much any group with money.

Trump and the Deep State - the true Deep State, not the pretended partisan off-shoot - are EMPIRE-FIRST (and have been for decades). You can see this in what Trump has done globally. USA just wants a bigger cut of the action because they have to do the 'heavy lifting' of taking on China and Russia.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

I know that my cynical perspective must generate a lot of cognitive dissonance in many readers. But I don't see any other way to rationally explain Deep State actions and the history that has brought us to where are today.

!!

Jackrabbit , Nov 1 2020 2:59 utc | 98
MarkU

You might be interested in my comment on the Greenwald thread .

!!

vk , Nov 1 2020 3:04 utc | 99
@ Posted by: c1ue | Nov 1 2020 1:42 utc | 92

The numbers are there for everybody to see: Trump won with 3 million + votes below Hilary Clinton. That is not democracy in any sense of the word unless you go back to the more traditional forms of liberalism of the 16th-19th centuries. Those are the numbers, not my opinion.

Besides, I think you're not getting the irony of your position: the situation in the USA has gotten so degenerated that you're hanging by a thread - a thread you put on a golden pedestal and claim is the salvation of the Empire (the electoral college). Where did I see this? Oh, yes - the War of Secession of 1861-1865, when the slave states were already outnumbered 6 to 1 by the northern states. They kept their parity artificially for decades, until the whole thing suddenly burst up in the war (a war where they were crushed; no chance of victory at all).

So, the problem isn't in the system per se, but the pressure the ossification of the system is building up. When they seceded, the confederates genuinely thought they were the true inheritors of the liberal thought, the slave states being the most perfect manifestation of freedom; the same situation is building up today, albeit, obviously, on a much milder scale (there's no California gold this time, just the good ol' race to the bottom).


--//--

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Nov 1 2020 2:25 utc | 95

I agree with you: the end of the electoral college (with it, any form of district vote) will give a chance for the conservatives (Republicans) to win back, for example, California (which has 40-46% of the popular vote). But it will also give the Democrats Texas (Dallas + Houston regions already make almost 50% of the population of the state and are Democratic bastions). It will also open the gates for third parties to flourish (avoiding a situation like Bernie Sanders, who had to affiliate to the Democrats).

Either way, it will give the American people and government a more honest, precise picture of the state of the nation. Or are you willing to live a perpetual illusion of "coastal elites vs heartland deplorables" forever (which, by the way, only fuels up secession as the only solution)?

denk , Nov 1 2020 3:34 utc | 100
The myth of HIQ whitemen....
--------------------------------------

Caitlin[for prez]johnston

Russia gate morphes seamlessly into China gate without missing a beat.

One hiq white man opines, oh so innocently

IN Russia gate, they were quoting only anon, nameless witness.
This time its different, we've real witness testifying on teevee , in Tucker [fuck China] Carlson show, no less !

The poor dear was referring to an 'ex CIA' [see, an insider, wink wink ] telling Tucker [fuck CHINA] Carlson ....

Psssst, many dem were CCP trojans !

ROFLAMO

oR that HUnter BIden buddy whatshisname again, who told Tucker [fuck China] Carlson oh so solemnly,

'Yes , I think the BIdens were compromised by the chicoms'

OMFG !
BIden is CCP'S man !

What happen if Biden get into the WH and immediately bomb Shanghai.?

Well half of gringos , the Trumpsters, would scream,

'Why isnt BIden bombing Beijing already, well BCOS we all know he's Xi's man in Washington' !

The dems, eager to clear their potus name, would implore earnestly,

'Hey BIden, you should invade Beijing RIGHT now, show them repuc we are just as tough, no, even better in showing the chicoms who's the boss around here.

What a devious brilliant way to get a bi partisan support for more wars.

BI partisan ?
That practically cover 99% of HIQ gringos.
hehehhehehhe


Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me hundreds of times.........

[Nov 02, 2020] Jackrabbit

Nov 02, 2020 | jackrabbit.blog

| Nov 1 2020 16:17 utc | 5

[Nov 02, 2020] Do Something, regardless of how dumb, damaging and even making the situation much worse for those who they supposedly are claiming to help. DO SOMETHING! My response is 'WTF don't YOU do something youselves? Put your body, blood and mind on the line if you really care so much rather than typing on a keyboard thousands of miles away in great comfort. Keyboard warrior wankers!

Nov 02, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL November 2, 2020 at 2:14 am

I agree with all you points PO, rather those complaining about Russia are throwing a bunch of contradictory self-serving and ultimately emotional accusations and complaints that very much echo western foreign policy after the Cold War of Do Something, regardless of how dumb, damaging and even making the situation much worse for those who they supposedly are claiming to help. DO SOMETHING! My response is 'WTF don't YOU do something youselves ? Put your body, blood and mind on the line if you really care so much rather than typing on a keyboard thousands of miles away in great comfort. Keyboard warrior wankers!

Those actually running the west aren't much different which is why they go for the easy option of flying above 20,000ft and dropping bombs rather than sending very large numbers of troops to hold ground and have a quick result. Why? Because they are afraid of bodybags and how they might look. That is the crux. They're more afraid being turned against by the electorate so 'easy solutions' that look good but don't deliver are the order of the day. They just can't stand the real cost or be courageous enough to spell it out to the public that their words if taken at face value means quite a lot of death. It doesn't sell.


[Nov 02, 2020] The Near-Global Collapse of Critical Thinking The New Kremlin Stooge

Nov 02, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

PATIENT OBSERVER October 31, 2020 at 5:35 am

I don't understand the current situation in full context but it seems that Armenian leadership has whored themselves to Western interest. And the whore-wanabe's pictured above are eager to sell their souls as well.

Russia's take may be to let Armenia face consequences of that decision to align with the Western empire. And, it will be up to the Armenian population to remove the leadership that chose Western allegiance if they so chose.

Russian leadership (showing great wisdom in my opinion) shuns imposition of the-right-thing-to-do on a population that is too lazy or too fearful or too accommodating of a whoring leadership. Russia has learned its lesson about helping other nations at great expense to itself and then expecting gratitude or loyalty. As noted by others, the only nation to do such has been Serbia.

The above Russian strategy is likely predicated on the belief that the Western empire is wobbly and nearing the tipping point. Russian leadership appears to have concluded that it now time to disconnect Russia from the Western economic system to escape the coming calamity.

MOSCOW EXILE October 31, 2020 at 9:20 am

Moscow to provide assistance to Yerevan if hostilities spill over to Armenia

MOSCOW, October 31. /TASS/. Moscow will provide all necessary assistance to Yerevan in accordance with the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance between the two countries, if hostilities spill over to Armenia's territory, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Friday.

I am sure word will soon arrive here from Finland about this matter, namely about what Russia should do but, as a result of its inherent weakness, most certainly will not do.

MARK CHAPMAN October 31, 2020 at 11:30 am

You may find things different by mid-November, as Armenia has – allegedly – formally asked for Russian help. Here's a particularly pithy and realistic quote;

"In the modern world, you must either have your own heavily armed army combined with a strong economy that can support it, or you must be friends with those who have it (here's a hint, either Russia or China, because we see the results of Pashinyan and Lukashenko's friendship with Europe and the US online today). The usual liberal mantras of "Russia-Armenia-Belarus have no enemies" are good exactly as long as you are not attacked in reality, and not on the Internet or in the media. And no assurances of American and European friendship will save you. You'll be lucky if they don't take you apart themselves."

https://www.stalkerzone.org/pashinyan-started-to-understand-the-modern-world-order/

Remember when Pashinyan was elected, and the protests which swept him to power? Remind you of anybody? Poroshenko, maybe? Not to suggest Pashinyan is a powerful oligarch – to all appearances he is not. But he came to power by the same mechanisms – playing public naivety like a violin, quoting hopeful citizens who really believe a different face is the magic bullet which will blow away corruption, and receiving the benevolent blessing of the west that the election was just as fair as fair could be. It always is, so long as the western-preferred candidate gets 'elected'.

"Historically, Armenia's elections have been marred by fraud and vote-buying.

However, international observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe said the elections had respected fundamental freedoms and were characterised by genuine competition."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46502681

You'd think that kind of boilerplate would have lost its power to make me laugh, but by God, it still tickles me; "characterised by genuine competition" – oh, 'pon my word, yes! You, like others, may have noticed by now that all it takes in certain countries to eliminate any possibility of 'genuine competition' is advance polls which indicate the western-disliked incumbent will win easily. That's how the people plan to vote, but that counts for nothing – it's only 'genuine competition' if there is a realistic possibility the west's man (or woman) will get in, and the more likely that looks to happen, damned if the competition does not get more genuine. Nobody seems to notice that the 'competition' reaches the very zenith of 'genuineness' just about the time nobody has a chance of holding off a landslide win by the preferred candidate.

I think by now everybody who reads here knows how I feel about it; you can't really blame the west and its media outlets for behaving the way they do. The western countries are mostly run by wealthy venture capitalists, and what wealthy venture capitalists like best is acquiring and controlling more wealth. This should not be a surprise to anyone. Even when western venture capitalists are dead altruistic and benevolent, what they want is for more wealth and capital to be acquired and controlled by the country to whom they feel the most sentimental attachment, so that a few of their countrymen might do all right out of their maneuvering as well – these are the people who come to be regarded as 'philanthropists', like George Soros. But generally they are mostly in it for themselves.

No, what I find the most objectionable is the veneer of holier-than-though goodness which always covers western exploitation ops. They always have to pretend like a smash-and-grab crime is some kind of fucking religious moment just because it is they who are doing it, as if they bring rectitude to even the most blatant self-interest. When the truth of the matter is that what the powerful do not give even the tiniest trace of a fuck about – Locard himself could not detect it – is what life is going to be like afterward for the average citizen in the country targeted for exploitation by changing its leadership. You know, the ones jumping up and down in Independence Square (there's always an Independence Square), or walking around with big dumb grins on their faces as if they have just felt the planet shift under their feet.

It's worth mentioning here that the period during which the west – led, of course, by the United States and its government/venture-capital institutions – was the most optimistic about Russia was the moment when it looked like a class of wealthy venture capitalists was going to take over the running of what was left of the Soviet Union; the Khodorkovskys and the Berzovskys and the Abramovitches. The wealthy Boyars who, albeit they spoke a different language, really spoke the same language to the letter as their western counterparts.

And the official western perspective on Russia made an abrupt turn to the South, and grew progressively grimmer, the more evident it became that that was not going to happen.

PATIENT OBSERVER October 31, 2020 at 7:06 pm

"Venture capitalists" may not be the most accurate terminology for those who run the West. There are a lot of old power blocks including the Vatican, the British royals, Zionists and other groups who get along well enough not to openly attack each other but will protect their particular areas of dominance. Their glue are narcissistic/messianic beliefs of their right to rule humanity. There may be deeper and murkier layers in the ruling hierarchy. I say "ruling" but their rule is only to the degree that we do not care enough to resist.

The interesting thing is that these demonic forces are nearly entirely of a Western origin. Is there a genetic factor that has become concentrated in the ruling elites? Some other self-propagating driver of their beliefs?

I do believe that Russia and China are sorting and identifying the real actors in the Western ruling elites.

MARK CHAPMAN November 1, 2020 at 11:50 am

A very interesting and thought-provoking reply. I think we must be careful to not just 'study it, judiciously as you will', while 'history's actors' reshape reality around us.

ET AL November 1, 2020 at 2:28 am

It seems to me that whatever the behavior of Armenia, Russia is still expected to protect/save christians in the region regardless of all the s/t that is thrown at them and particularly knowing the blood thirsty history of Az/turcoman/whatever behavior against Armenians.

There is a point here as Russia presents itself as the leader of the Orthodox Christian world it is its actual duty to rise above (pthe etty nasty s/t) and protect christendom in the hood regardless

But, and as we all know, the having the cake and eat it crowd has only but expanded, most notably those who are pro-west. They are owed it and thus they demand it as they are considered and have been told that they are a cut above the rest. It's the same western 'benefit of the doubt' that allows its intellectuals to support successive foreign policy adventures that have ended in catastrophic failure but even worse left those that they pledged to help in a much worse position.

I also think that in this case most people really do not know that Armenia is run by a pro-western government. It's not exactly hot news. And its still not widely reported let alone. After all, the western media is not exorciating Washington, Berlin, Paris and London for doing f/k all to help Armenia. They've been mostly silent. No need to point out yet again that the west picks and choses which countries/territories to carve up in contravention of long standing international law, and which others it strictly abides by, in this case Nagorno-Karabakh.

This may well be in part of being stung by the highly successful and bloodless return of the Crimea to Russia which was done in line with international law regardless of western protestations. It really put their carving off Kosovo by extreme violence in an very bad light by comparison and cannot be denied any longer as 'not a precedent' if they claim Russia took over Crimea illegally. The West has really tied itself in to a gordian knot at the international and state level despite doing its best to ignore it at home. The rest of the UN members don't buy it in the least.

So back to the beginning, who to blame? Russia is the easiest target. Surely not the west who is also selling weapons to Azerbaidjan, buys its gas and give the dictatorship a free pass. And even less so i-Sreal selling weapons, another people that has suffered the fate of genocide. No. Russia has to do something!

ET AL November 1, 2020 at 2:51 am

And, or, is it also their argument that despite 'Russia not respecting international law' that in this case it is an 'exception' (but not a 'precedent' (!)) and their failure to do so is inexcusable? It really is the most gigantic load of bollocks.

PATIENT OBSERVER November 1, 2020 at 7:54 am

Just a few points – Russia's defense of Christendom may be limited to Orthodoxy as the rest are spinoffs or spinoffs of spinoffs. Christian religious values in the west hardly resemble core Christian values so why should Russia give a damn about protecting such Christians? If the Armenia Orthodox church is comfortable with, if not endorsing, LGBT? life styles, then they would likely be considered as non-Christian. I do not know if the forgoing is the case; just discussing implications.

Russia will fulfill its obligations to defend Armenia from armed attack. However, once Azerbaijan has gotten what it wants, there will be no incentive for an attack on Armenia and especially so considering the dire consequences of a Russian military response.

MOSCOW EXILE November 1, 2020 at 9:16 am

I remember when my wife asked an old priest here after our youngest's christening into the ROC if we could get wed in said church. He told her we couldn't because I wasn't a Christian.

She begged to differ, but he insisted that I was a heretic and would have to baptized according to ROC rights and after having had ROC catechism lessons.

He was right too and twofold: (i) all "Christian" faiths are heresies, aberrations of the true, correct liturgy as passed on from the apostles and (ii) I am a heretic of a pagan nature.

PATIENT OBSERVER November 1, 2020 at 9:57 am

I have a soft spot for pagan beliefs as well. There are nonphysical entities that we interact, mostly without awareness, on a daily basis. No big deal, we just need to be mindful of such realities to better understand why things happen the way they do. The Woke folks could not possibly understand such, being isolated in their hall-of-mirrors tight little self-contained world of self-importance with the firm conviction that they are the be-all and end-all. A peasant toiling in the fields or a kid in the slums understand reality better the the Wokest of the Woke. Am I serious? I don't know.

ET AL November 1, 2020 at 12:56 pm

I like trees.

There's a report the other day that China's massive planting of trees is estimated to soak up to 35% of the carbon dioxide it produces industrially. The data comes from ground level station, satellite and other sources.

Which leads me to this question. If farmers (in u-Rope) are now being paid not to grow food, then wtf not just plant forests of trees that can also be farmed and managed? Is it because it is too easy and there's not much profit in it?

I'm looking forward to steam Woodpunk.

MOSCOW EXILE November 1, 2020 at 9:29 pm

Trees are central to Germanic paganism. How can one not respect a tree such as the mighty oak that is at least 500 years old when mature and may live for 1,000 years and more? Such living things interact with us -- of course, they do, if "only" in the maintainance of an ecological balance of the gas that is necessary for our existence.

That bastard Charles "the Great" of the Franks waged relentless war for over 30 years against the Saxons (not the "Anglo-Saxons, but my kinfolk in what is now Lower saxony in Germany) because of their refusal to accept Christianity.

Too right they didn't, for they knew full that if they had, the would have fallen under the thrall of the person who styled himself as emperor of the Western Roman Empire that had fallen into dissolution some 300 years earlier, which reborn "Roman Empire" had as its state religion Christianity -- Roman Christianity that is, and its emperor, much later styled as the "Holy Roman Emperor of the German Nation", was guess who? That's right, Charles the Great/Carolus Magnus/ Karl der Grosse/Charlemagne.

One of Charles' favourite tricks in subduing the Saxons was making public spectacles of hacking down their "holy" trees or " Irminsul . After one victory against rebellious Saxon pagans whose lands the Franks had invaded, Charles had them all baptised -- then had them beheaded, all 4,500 of them!

IN HOC SIGNO VINCES

That'd learn 'em!

See: Massacre of Verden

Einhard, Charlemagne's biographer, said on the closing of the conflict:

The war that had lasted so many years was at length ended by their acceding to the terms offered by the King; which were renunciation of their national religious customs and the worship of devils, acceptance of the sacraments of the Christian faith and religion, and union with the Franks to form one people.

Saxon Wars

So the Saxons started eating small pieces of bread that they were to believe was god, which is far more reasonable than believing that trees and rivers and forests and storms were worthy of their respect.

Right! I'm off to my holy grove in order to pay my respects to Woden.

Liked by 1 person

JULIUS SKOOLAFISH November 1, 2020 at 9:59 pm

Okay, you've baited me (love to spend more time here but I do appreciate the occasional glance and many great comments and discussions)

"But veneration is inherent in the human breast. Presently mankind, emerging from intellectual infancy, began to detect absurdity in creation without a Creator, in effects without causes. As yet, however, they did not dare to throw upon a Single Being the whole onus of the world of matter, creation, preservation, and destruction. Man, instinctively impressed by a sense of his own unworthiness, would hopelessly have attempted to conceive the idea of a purely Spiritual Being, omnipotent and omnipresent.

Awestruck by the admirable phenomena and the stupendous powers of Nature, filled with a sentiment of individual weakness, he abandoned himself to a flood of superstitious fears, and prostrated himself before natural objects, inanimate as well as animate. Thus comforted by the sun and fire, benefited by wind and rain, improved by hero and sage, destroyed by wild beasts, dispersed by convulsions of Nature, he fell into a rude, degrading, and *cowardly Fetissism*, the *faith of fear*, and *the transition state from utter savagery to barbarism*."

• "The Jew, The Gypsy and El Islam" by Richard Francis Burton

Like

MOSCOW EXILE November 1, 2020 at 10:57 pm

. . . Presently mankind, emerging from intellectual infancy, began to detect absurdity in creation without a Creator, in effects without causes

So what created the creator?


[Nov 01, 2020] The sad story about Obama Nobel peace price

It was a present from globalist neoliberal elite.
Nov 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Russ , Nov 1 2020 7:53 utc | 123
The globalist "Great Reset" wants to overcome the diverse rising obstacles to globalism's perpetuation, especially the intensifying centrifugal political and economic forces which directly oppose it or which hinder it. The global elites see politics as such, and any mode of economy other than that which is strictly regimented and controlled by the US government, the oligopoly MNCs and a handful of globalization entities, as antiquated obstructions to its power and profit. From the point of view of the Earth and especially humanity it's essential to obstruct the globalist-technocratic elite as much as possible.

So it follows that anything which sustains and multiplies the number of obstacles any globalist actor has to traverse is a good thing, while anything that streamlines, unifies, renders more "efficient" is bad. This includes the character of US foreign policy. Although it will remain aggressively imperialist for as long as this government exists, it makes a significant difference how disciplined and superficially "kinder and gentler" the facade is, as opposed to how wayward, openly brutish and gratuitously insulting to everyone in the world. Real anti-globalists always have known this, and the need never has been more critical than now. From this point of view Trump is vastly preferable. The across-the-board hatred of the elites for him is the best recommendation.

Trump's election was a monkey-wrench in the works, and although the elites were able to make lemonade by turning anti-Trumpism into an organizing principle among the bewildered masses, they certainly want to return to having a reliable, fully pliant figurehead in the White House. With Biden/Harris they'd get the best of both worlds - they either get the obedient Biden or the even more aggressively obedient Harris who would be all the more controllable since she has no political support of her own and wouldn't have been elected even if Biden became president and then had to be retired.

So it follows that gratuitous US imperial belligerence is in fact being "creatively destructive", to use one of capitalism's own religious terms, in spite of the US empire's own long-run goals and interests. The worst thing would be for US foreign policy to become less Kaiser and more Bismarck. The more chaos the better. It may seem more painful in the short run than running home to hide under adult mama's skirts the way almost all former anti-imperialists, anti-globalists, "radicals", "leftists" have done, since they all were frauds all along who can't take the slightest pain or hardship and would rather die than do any movement-building work, but for the long run good of the Earth including humanity there's no other option.

Norwegian , Nov 1 2020 8:09 utc | 124

@Don Bacon | Oct 31 2020 23:19 utc | 76
Obama actually surged 70,000 troops into Afghanistan, raising Bush's 30K to 100K+. That got Mr Hope & Change the Nobel Peace Prize.

Obama got the Nobel Prize in 2009, the year he became president. The deadline for nominations to the Nobel Committee is January 31 the same year. So either he did something extraordinarily good between his inauguration January ~20 and January 31, or the prize was awarded preemptively.

The Nobel Peace price committee resides in Oslo and consists of politically appointed members, that is from parties of the Norwegian parliament (Stortinget). The chairman at the time was Thorbjørn Jagland from the same Labour party as now chief NATO puppet Jens Stoltenberg. Stoltenberg and Jagland were supposed rivals to become Prime Minister in 1996 after Gro Harlem "We have other methods" Brundtland who became WHO director (Hmmm...?).

Jagland is famous for being an imbecile foreign minister. He was once interviewed and stated that Norway is a very important country in the world. His reasoning was that when flying around and meeting people, he always saw a large number of Norwegian flags. I kid you not.

Jagland is also famous for winning the battle against Jens Stoltenberg to become Prime Minister in 1996. He then resigned one year later after winning the election in 1997, because he had promised to resign if the labour party got fewer votes than 4 years earlier, i.e. 36.9%. So he is forever the idiot Thorbjørn "36.9" Jagland, who gave away the government position to the opposition after winning an election.

So this person was obviously qualified to become the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee, he had shown that he could be made to do anything, including awarding the Peace Prize preemptively to Obama and get his picture with Obama. Even Obama was embarrassed.

Russ , Nov 1 2020 8:23 utc | 125
Norwegian | Nov 1 2020 8:09 utc | 131

"Obama got the Nobel Prize in 2009" This was part of the propaganda to normalize permanent wars of imperial aggression as the new baseline for "peace". Just part of the totalitarian "New Normal" the globalists led by the US government have been working toward.

[Nov 01, 2020] What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change

The Blob will dominate the USA foreign policy, no matter who wins.
Notable quotes:
"... I've commented several times that China's political-economic system is far superior to the Parasitic Neoliberalism that's destroying the West. China's success suggests very strongly that we listen and closely observe while not taking heed of what any Western source has to say about China. ..."
"... The executives and majority shareholders of the CIA/NSA infiltrated corporate news media don't care whether Trump wins, and in fact often prefer it. ..."
"... Those guys are just part of the polarization narrative tearing the country apart. The hatred is real but there is acting involved, especially with Olbermann. These commentators feel that this polarization narrative is giving the country what it wants and it drives ratings. Schiff is just a first class liar ... ..."
"... Obama was just put in the pipeline as one of their possible future candidates for president. They have a stable of these people being mentored. Clinton was one as well. I bet Harris is one as well. ..."
"... I think they hate the Trumper so much because he he was in some else's stable. Possibly the controllers from campus in Tel Aviv. Different stable, same horse shit. ..."
"... Election of president = false flag iperation. The purpose is to fund the private media with advertising revenue paid for by consumer taxpayers. ..."
"... The rest of the world knows that the US is not agreement capable, it does not matter for Iran one bit what happens on November 3rd. ..."
"... I understand the rationale behind Trump's policies. But my conclusion is exactly the opposite: his attempt to stop the disintegration of the American Empire is accelerating the disintegration of the American Empire, not averting it. ..."
"... The key here is to understand that that's not how the American Empire should work. The USA continues to deindustrialize at an accelerated pace under Trump; Wall Street was never stronger than under Donald Trump; American debt was never higher. And now, unemployment is as high as during the 1929 era. ..."
"... The American Empire is the American Empire precisely because it doesn't need to produce anything it needs except defense. It prints money in order to siphon wealth from the rest of the world, enriching its economy while impoverishing the rest. That's the only way the Empire can function - any other way will result in its destruction. ..."
"... Obama ran on Hopey-Changey and on his projected charm, actually glib con-man gab. Worked wonderfully, imagine getting the Nobel Prize because you had a dead-beat Dad who was from Kenya and you scored B+ for public speaking? Argh. (The real reason: killing will continue, the status quo is preserved..) ..."
"... That Trump would win in 2016 was obvious as soon as he became a candidate. He was the cartoon contrast of Obomber - white, fat, orange, tall, R vs. D, outspoken, strident, clumsy (vs. the smooth-talking con), opinionated, stupid, and outrageous in a way. Click bait and viewer bait for the MSM - but not for no reason. ..."
"... To pretend that Trump is some special Peacemaker, trying oh so hard to overcome deep state resistance to rolling back empire, is Trumpism. Escobar is always there. Trump must be understood as a leading creature of the swamp himself. Trying so hard just as Obama was trying so hard. ..."
"... The relative scores settled terribly are more a matter of opportunity than ruthless efficiency. Though it is true that "success" requires dialing it back a bit, and having the likes of Bolton around is a way of ensuring either that nothing gets done, or we all end up ashes. Trump managed to axe Bolton on time, that time. ..."
Nov 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
MarkU , Nov 1 2020 4:22 utc | 103
@ Jackrabbit and _K_C

I do agree with you both that the anti-Trump hysteria has probably worked for him to some extent but I really don't believe that is a four year long plan, it is too much of a stretch to believe that the likes of Olbermannn and Schiff are consciously working for him. American politics really is that toxic, remember the stuff about Obama's birth certificate.

I also agree that Trump might actually have the support needed for a landslide win, not so much because of the vilification but because of the arson and looting imo. A lot of Trump supporters are keeping their heads down atm (and who can blame them) However, now it is my turn to make a prediction. I predict mass unrest on polling day. it is well accepted that the majority of the Democrat voters (fraudulent or not) are going to vote by post. Conversely most Trump supporters are likely to vote in person on the day (or try to at least)
I expect a concerted attempt to disrupt the polls by people who know that it will disproportionately affect the Trump vote. I expect violent clashes (with both sides trading blame) and a result that will please nobody. The worms are not going back into the can.

if I am wrong then I will be big enough to say so on the first appropriate thread on this site, fair enough?

OhOh , Nov 1 2020 4:36 utc | 104

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 31 2020 23:43 utc | 81

Zhang Weiwei is the author of a very important book some may have heard about and even read, The China Wave: Rise Of A Civilizational State, of which an open preview can be read here. Also, the professor gave a talk at the German Schiller Institute related to the above book and the BRI project, which can be read here.

I've commented several times that China's political-economic system is far superior to the Parasitic Neoliberalism that's destroying the West. China's success suggests very strongly that we listen and closely observe while not taking heed of what any Western source has to say about China.

More gems, thanks.

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 4:37 utc | 105
Well it wont change Wall Street on Parade or the tireless commentary by Pam Martens and Russ Martens. Legends.

I just paused by their tavern to see what elixirs of despair or mirth they have on offer today. Pour a strong drink comrades and scroll through the cellar. Always worth a visit.

Biswapriya Purkayast , Nov 1 2020 5:54 utc | 109
Trump has been preselected to win. The rest is just a circus.
m , Nov 1 2020 6:01 utc | 111
If Biden is not much different from Trump then why does "the blob" portray Trump as the Beelzebub?
_K_C_ , Nov 1 2020 6:10 utc | 112

If Biden is not much different from Trump then why does "the blob" portray Trump as the Beelzebub?
 Posted by: m | Nov 1 2020 6:01 utc | 112

Because he's the heel and none of the negative coverage they give him sticks, most often on purpose. Don't mistake their serious tones and somber pronouncements for genuineness. It's not. The executives and majority shareholders of the CIA/NSA infiltrated corporate news media don't care whether Trump wins, and in fact often prefer it.

Sorry for the long link, I'm on a tablet and formatting is really difficult here:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/with-cnn-flap-medias-trump-era-identity-crisis-continues-195072/

MarkU , Nov 1 2020 6:32 utc | 114
@_K_C (108)

I am aware of the fact that corruption is rife in both parties. I saw the link to the Biden bus incident, deplorable yes but hardly on the same scale as the massive rioting, looting and intimidation of the BLM movement, they didn't actually burn down half the neighborhood did they. Organized voting obstruction will largely be confined to swing states for obvious reasons. I made my predictions, we will see.

Just to be clear, I don't even live in the US, I am British. If I did live in the US I wouldn't vote for either party, I'm not a 'lesser of two evils' kind of guy. To be frank I am viewing events in the US with considerable trepidation, I regard what happens in the US as a window into the likely future of the UK and the rest of Europe. I fear that a nuclear war may well occur sometime in the near future, quite possibly by accident owing to the continual cutting of warning times, mainly by the US. A very powerful nuclear armed country convulsed by civil unrest is a very dangerous entity, I fear the worst and so should we all imo.

Anyway thank you for being polite and civilised and for including actual information with your replies.

chu teh , Nov 1 2020 6:50 utc | 117
OT..I just read this translation from a Russian link...most agreeable as a counterpoise to Exceptional Nation nuttiness:

"Construction of the industrial complex, where high-speed trains will be produced, began in the Urals. In five years, Russia will have a domestic rolling stock for the VSM - high-speed highways. Moreover, the level of localization of production is stated at 80%, which means additional orders for the Russian industry."

https://aftershock.news/ [Of course, cannot vouch for the datum]

circumspect , Nov 1 2020 6:51 utc | 118

I do agree with you both that the anti-Trump hysteria has probably worked for him to some extent but I really don't believe that is a four year long plan, it is too much of a stretch to believe that the likes of Olbermannn and Schiff are consciously working for him. American politics really is that toxic, remember the stuff about Obama's birth certificate.

Those guys are just part of the polarization narrative tearing the country apart. The hatred is real but there is acting involved, especially with Olbermann. These commentators feel that this polarization narrative is giving the country what it wants and it drives ratings. Schiff is just a first class liar ...

As far as Obama's birth certificate, since his mom was a CIA officer using the Ford Foundation as cover during the murder of millions of leftists in Indonesia, I am sure she took time out to make sure he was born on US soil. All that stuff about him growing up on embassy row in Indonesia while the left was being slaughtered is carefully taken out of the story. Not his fault but it was quite a slaughter of humans and we know her employer was deeply involved. Going into the Indonesian villages to do studies. Really, studies and observations. They used to call it SOG groups.

Obama was just put in the pipeline as one of their possible future candidates for president. They have a stable of these people being mentored. Clinton was one as well. I bet Harris is one as well.

I think they hate the Trumper so much because he he was in some else's stable. Possibly the controllers from campus in Tel Aviv. Different stable, same horse shit.

Norwegian , Nov 1 2020 9:11 utc | 129
@circumspect | Nov 1 2020 6:51 utc | 118
I think they hate the Trumper so much because he he was in some else's stable. Possibly the controllers from campus in Tel Aviv. Different stable, same horse shit.
That makes a lot of sense!
gm , Nov 1 2020 9:56 utc | 130
What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change?

Well for one thing you probably won't see any more of this sort of thing escape into the open media: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8901193/National-security-nightmare-Hunter-Bidens-laptop.html

Because the FBI's evidence cleaner/tamperer division's mandate will be greatly expanded, as will the powers of the Silicone Valley Tekkies to more comprehensively throttle public free speech on electronic media, that the deep state's Invisible Hand disapproves of.

snake , Nov 1 2020 11:50 utc | 132

Trump is about controlled demolition of the empire NemesisCalling @ 5.

B summarized the style differences very well. But failed to mention the greater problem. 3 votes at polls every four years is not democracy<= no American is in charge of any thing the USA does.

the layers in the global power stack (each nation state the same):

  1. layer 1: global franchisor sets rules of play; establishes goals <=local nation state franchisees must obtain to remain in power.
  2. Layer 2: oligarch <= national (wall street beneficiaries who use their wealth to conform national outcome consistent with global powers).
  3. Layer 3: copyright y patent monopoly power constitute 90% of corporate Assets.
  4. Layer 4: think tank and other private orgs
  5. public<= layer 5: 527 elected government <= a tool to regulate members of public
  6. Layer 6: Intergov Bureaucracies limit and direct elected power to global goals.
  7. public<= layer 7: the 340,000,000 members of the media regulated public
  8. layer 8: stop and go economic system control
  9. layer 9: media controls info environment & public narrative (many techniques)

all layers but 5 and 7 are contained within an envelop of privately owned control freaks.

Election of president = false flag iperation. The purpose is to fund the private media with advertising revenue paid for by consumer taxpayers.

Article II and amendment 12 clearly deny American people any say in who is to be the P and VP of the USA.

Agree with Nemesiscalling, since 1947, standing orders from Layer 1<= demo the American excellence; deny superior economic power to average Americans . standing orders <=homogenize the world and standardize its governance.

American lifestyle and quality of life is indifferent to who the media puts into the white house.

by c1ue @ 26 said it best "Anyone against the "right" and "proper" Democrat sellouts to pharma, tech and enviro must be rednecks. It is precisely this view that galvanized the vote against HRC in 2016." the method used by the public layers is reflected here, it is called divide and conquer.

B reviewed the elements and factors that maintain the division of the masses..

Norwegian , Nov 1 2020 11:53 utc | 133
@Circe | Nov 1 2020 11:22 utc | 131
Biden is set to restore the JCPOA and treaties and policies that Trump burned.
The rest of the world knows that the US is not agreement capable, it does not matter for Iran one bit what happens on November 3rd.
H.Schmatz , Nov 1 2020 12:49 utc | 137
On the absence of a real left in the US ( is all right and more right..)and of a real program which could include real changes that could make any difference in people´s lives, on that what matters is political technology and communication based on demonizing the other candidate which translates in deep polarizing of societies with unexpected unknown consequences..

"Whoever wins, it will take a long time"

" If Trump were re-elected for another four years, it would be a real calamity and armed conflicts could even break out by the most radical groups, so that the country could be paralyzed "

"The ideological profile and policy of the United States is that of the president and, each one, even if they are from the same party, has maintained quite different political lines throughout history", says Rafael García, professor of International Relations at the USC. For this reason, he affirms that, in North America, "there is no strong party structure, but rather that the party acts as an electoral structure and it is on the candidates of each moment that certain policies are formed."

DEMOCRATS VS. REPUBLICANS. So much so that, as the professor explains, "the ideological configuration of the parties in the 20th century changed radically". On the one hand, he alludes to the fact that the Democrat, "in historical terms, was the party of the southern states, when they faced each other in the Civil War; racist states, which lasted until the 1920s ". Precisely, the political scientist indicates that "it was shortly before when the change took place, with the Roosevelt presidency, that he decided to change the configuration of the Democratic party as a result of the crisis of 29".

On the other hand, the Republican party, he points out, "was that of the union, that of the northern states, championed by Lincoln; the abolitionist party and that of the blacks ". So how did these changes come about until today? Rafael García points to "a consequence of the political strategies that the presidents embodied at all times, not because there was an ideological line behind each party ."

TRY TO ASSIMILATE THE AMERICAN MODEL TO THE EUROPEAN. For Rafael García, the Spaniards, when speaking of US politics, "make a mistake in translating our political structures" to those there. In other words, "in Europe the duality between left and right is widely assumed and we unconsciously transfer it to US policy." "That is a complete error" , sentence.

And it is that there " there is neither right nor left, there is right and more right ", affirms the professor. Which means that there does not exist and did not exist a historical labor-union party as such. In fact, the transmutation that is usually made from the democratic party to 'social democratic' is not correct . For García, Biden embodies "a more moderate man than the crazy Trump, but that does not mean that he has some kind of relationship with a left-wing thought ."

RIGHT AND RIGHT. "A multimillionaire gentleman, absolute representative of the establishment" (referring to Biden), and "a traditional gentleman, more conservative" (referring to Trump) ". "Although Biden is a Democrat, who perhaps holds stronger principles and is hopeful, identifying him with the left is still a long way from reality," he says. Therefore, it is denied that the Democrats are the American left and the Republicans the right .

THE CAMPAIGN LACKS PROGRAMMATIC INTEREST. For the USC political scientist, the US electoral campaign lacks interest: "It is absurd, it seems like a disqualification competition in which a political or government program is not exposed ." And every time Spain is also getting closer to that model of disputes.

"We are Americanized, in the sense that the weight of the parties is also being diluted in Spain in favor of the candidatesThese advisers are responsible for the growing division that is taking place in Western society ," he says.

THE GOVERNMENT IN THE HANDS OF POLITICAL ADVISORS. In Rafael García's opinion, the decision margin "is shrinking", that is, "the autonomy capacity of governments to make decisions is smaller, and they are conditioned ". So, what is the difference, in practice, in management, between PP and PSOE? "Little thing, in the end, little thing," he asserts.

That is why " that little thing can not be said to the voter, but must be mobilized with a degree of identification, unconditional adherence, so that it can be recognized in a brand ." And what is this transformation of Spanish politics due to? The professor is clear about it: " It is a translation of commercial marketing techniques to politics." Thus, a marketing advisor must "build customer loyalty" and a political advisor should build voter loyalty .

Now, if there are no significant differences between the two options, how to achieve it? "Through a demonization of the opposite and the creation of a hostility that is dangerous, because the divisions to which society is returning are irreconcilable ." In this way, García believes that " it is the work of political advisers who, apart from the difficulties that exist in societies, which are many, polarize them when it comes to building and mobilizing a faithful electorate, to the point that they make no difference what the party says or what the leader says ".

In the United States, as evidenced by this expert, "it does not matter if Trump does the atrocities he does, or if he said in the previous campaign that he could murder a person on Fifth Avenue in New York without anything happening to him ." This, transferred to the Spanish sphere, "assumes that the party can do any outrage: fraud, embezzlement, illegal financing ...". "That is something we are seeing, whatever party it is, but for the faithful voter it does not matter, because their party will continue to be so and will continue to listen to the channel and read the newspaper that supports it," he says.

THE ELECTORAL RESULT WILL BE EXTENDED OVER TIME. "I have no idea nor do I want to make forecasts, but I consider that Trump is a calamity and that if he were there for four more years it would be an absolute calamity ", says Professor García. However, " there is a state of opinion that fears that the result of these elections will be complicated and that there will be challenges, so that the end result will be a diabolical process of recount, county-by-county challenges, repetitions in certain districts. .. a real madness that can last several months ", he warns, something that," with this polarization trail, it is not known how it could end. "

" I am referring to the outbreak of armed conflicts; These people have weapons, radical groups, some of them crazy and who can shoot themselves in a demonstration, doing outrages as part of the institutional paralysis in which the country can be plunged ", he asserts.

This is how people, like those at SST, who lied about the real difference amongst Democrats and Republicans in real effective changes of policy, shouting to the four winds that "the Communists are coming", when they are not, and this way spread hatred and division amongst the US society as if there was no tomorrow so that to conserve their "tax cut", could end witnessing the total destruction of the US, not only as "Empire" ( a process already in march before Corona-fear and 2020 electoral process, a construct of decades of lying the electorate for the greed of a minority...), but also as a nation state. All these people who, holding privileged insider knowledege of the funtioning of the state as former insiders, should be held accountable for their willing and conscious participation in the build up of the social and economic disastaer to come....

Forecast at the end of the article posted and quoted above:

The future: Institutional paralysis

··· An institutional paralysis like the one that can come after 3-N "could already occur in 2000, in the elections between George Bush Jr. and Al Gore, but the latter accepted the results even though they were open to challenge, and that it avoided institutional collapse".

··· However, "now it does not seem that either of the two candidates is going to have a gesture of these characteristics, with which, if doubts already appear, it will not only be in the State, but the final collapse may be extremely long and with unimaginable consequences ", indicates Professor García. "It seems to me that the United States has a terrible situation ahead ", he sentenced.

H.Schmatz , Nov 1 2020 13:06 utc | 138
A scene of Game of Thrones which could summarize 2020 US election campaign, that it was based on throwing dirty to each other....But who has the real "power", not the "government"?:

https://twitter.com/IvanRedondo__/status/1322190858427502594

Feral Finster , Nov 1 2020 14:09 utc | 139
The Blob, the Borg, the Deep State, or whatever you want to call it, never left, largely because Trump was unable to effectively fight it.

No, a second Trump term, if it were to happen, would be no better, because Trump will still be Trump. Weak, stupid and easily manipulated.

vk , Nov 1 2020 14:20 utc | 141
@ Posted by: Down South | Nov 1 2020 7:04 utc | 122

I understand the rationale behind Trump's policies. But my conclusion is exactly the opposite: his attempt to stop the disintegration of the American Empire is accelerating the disintegration of the American Empire, not averting it.

The key here is to understand that that's not how the American Empire should work. The USA continues to deindustrialize at an accelerated pace under Trump; Wall Street was never stronger than under Donald Trump; American debt was never higher. And now, unemployment is as high as during the 1929 era.

The American Empire is the American Empire precisely because it doesn't need to produce anything it needs except defense. It prints money in order to siphon wealth from the rest of the world, enriching its economy while impoverishing the rest. That's the only way the Empire can function - any other way will result in its destruction.

Trump's ideology will destroy the American Empire. It will collapse under a wave of hyperinflation, skyrocketing unemployment, shortage of goods and collapsing economic output.

JoeG , Nov 1 2020 14:52 utc | 144
Advance FL voting #s are SERIOUS BAD NEWS for the Blue team. Joe just might be done before it even starts. :) https://joeisdone.github.io/florida/
JoeG , Nov 1 2020 14:59 utc | 146
President Trump pulling over 15% Hispanic early votes in NC. :) https://joeisdone.github.io/northcarolina/
Down South , Nov 1 2020 15:11 utc | 151
vk @ 141
The manufacturing sector saw 17,000 jobs added after four months of flat activity. This followed a strong run of an average of 22,000 manufacturing jobs added every month in 2018 and 15,800 per month in 2017. Those gains followed two weak years that saw 7,000 manufacturing jobs lost in 2016 and only 5,800 per month added in 2015.

In the last 30 months of President Obama's term, manufacturing employment grew by 185,000 or 1.5%. In President Trump's first 30 months, manufacturers added 499,000 jobs, expanding by 4.0%. In the same 30-month time span during the mature, post-recovery phase of the business cycle, some 314,000 more manufacturing jobs were added under Trump than under Obama, a 170% advantage

https://www.google.co.za/amp/s/www.forbes.com/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/07/10/in-trumps-first-30-months-manufacturing-up-by-314000-jobs-over-obama-what-states-are-hot/amp/%3famp_js_v=0.1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%253D#ampf=
He's doing a really great job of de-industrialising the US.

I'm not including current figures because of the economic impact of COVID.

Noirette , Nov 1 2020 15:55 utc | 161
As Trump is going to win (provided the usual conditions pertain, fraud is not over the normal levels, and the whole sh*t-story doesn't end up in the courts or fought out on the streets, whereupon no reasoned predictions can be made), speculation about Biden as Prez. is a waste of time.

The last part of the Pepe piece in b's post, which gives reasons to not vote Biden, my take.:

Obama ran on Hopey-Changey and on his projected charm, actually glib con-man gab. Worked wonderfully, imagine getting the Nobel Prize because you had a dead-beat Dad who was from Kenya and you scored B+ for public speaking? Argh. (The real reason: killing will continue, the status quo is preserved..)

Anyway, the ACA was a damp squib, it didn't solve anything, and depending on pov was in effect a gift to Mega Insurance or was just 'lame' or as often, 'favored some over others' etc.

Then the Financial Crisis hit. The Obama admin. didn't prevent it (one might argue they couldn't not sure) and it didn't 'repair' as far as the ppl were concerned. Banks and Some Big Cos were bailed out - millions of homeowners were tossed to the curb by Banks. Child poverty, hunger, increased; wages weren't upped, health stats got worse No need to go on - this provoked tremendous anger. The 2010 elections saw big R gains, 2014 they took the Senate, iirc.

(Who cared about foreign parts like Ukraine, Syria? is what I'm saying.)

That Trump would win in 2016 was obvious as soon as he became a candidate. He was the cartoon contrast of Obomber - white, fat, orange, tall, R vs. D, outspoken, strident, clumsy (vs. the smooth-talking con), opinionated, stupid, and outrageous in a way. Click bait and viewer bait for the MSM - but not for no reason.

DT's electoral promises were both opportunistic and more profound: like fire-brand preachers of old, Build The Wall - MAGA - i.e. pledging a return to the past (see, again the opposite of Barry, who hoped for the future) -- Stop the wars, undo past mistakes (Dems don't run on anti-war..!), and, most important:

Drain the Swamp. The Deplorables are not ordinary ppl, but criminals in positions of power. By putting this forward, Trump became a mirror of the ppl, part of them.

Imho, Trump's record (null or abysmal or whatever depending on pov) is not enough for rejecting him in favor of loathed "failed" policies of the past - Clinton gang, Biden a part of it, Obama, etc. (By US voters I mean.)

but see Kiza 8, gottlieb 63, dave 72, Jack, others, >> no difference.

Down South , Nov 1 2020 15:59 utc | 162
...Bringing the supply chain back to the US and re-industrialising the US isn't going to happen overnight or even in a couple of quarters. Just like the process to de-industrialise didn't happen overnight. But that the process has started, it is undeniable, and will only pick up pace when he wins a second term.
c1ue , Nov 1 2020 16:01 utc | 163
Poll update: Nov 1 update Trafalgar vs. MSM vs. 2016

4 new Trafalgar polls came out for 10/29: Arizona, Nevada, Florida and Michigan. Trump expanded his lead on Biden in Florida and Michigan vs. Trafalgar's earlier October polls:
FL from +2.3% Trump to +2.7%
MI from +0.6% Trump to +2.5%

Trump did worse in Nevada and AZ: AZ from +4% Trump to +2.5%.

Nevada polled +2.3% Biden

Once again: the question is if Trump outperforms vs. MSM polls. If he repeats anywhere near his 2016 - he will win.

William Gruff , Nov 1 2020 16:06 utc | 164
Trump can only win again if the establishment/deep state is once again exceptionally overconfident and asleep in the control room. They have numerous ways of swinging the election at the last hour, from pre-hacked Diebold paperless voting machines to hanging chads to simply having their operatives scattered around the nation throw ballots away and fabricate the tallies. Oddly enough this extreme carelessness is still possible. The establishment/deep state have not yet come to terms with what caused their plans to blow up in 2016 and really do seriously believe that Russia had something to do with it, even though they have no idea what Russia might have actually done to wreck their expected electoral blowout by Clinton. They also think that part of the problem was that Trump wasn't vilified harshly enough (they wanted the election to at least appear competitive), and they think they have that covered this time around. It could be that the over-the-top hysteria from the TDS victims has them overestimating the anti-Trump sentiment, though.

Still, the establishment/deep state screwing up exactly the same way twice in a row doesn't seem likely. Even so, their profound incompetence continues to astonish, so maybe we will once again get treated to the delightful spectacle of crowds of middle class faux left dilettante snowflakes melting down.

Don Bacon , Nov 1 2020 16:14 utc | 165
@ Down South #159

It not hard to see why big pharma despises Trump. They stand to lose a lot of money. My health stock investment has almost doubled during Trump's tenure.

Anne , Nov 1 2020 16:24 utc | 167
vk @158 - Not acreage - but based (until Andrew Jackson, hardly any principled person's prez) on PROPERTY VALUE. JUST as in the good ol' UK. Yep - despite NPR folks believing otherwise (clealry never visited a history book) - the aristo controlled (in what way really different?) Britain was actually a "democracy":, and was so from Magna Carta on... Of course it was a, how to say, constrained, constricted "democracy," but then so was the original one in Athens. Those who count as THE Demos - always been a matter for property holder concern... So in GB - male, 21 and over and owning a property of a taxable (always this, huh) value of a certain sum. Ensured that the hoi polloi males over 21 couldn't vote - and for the exact same reasons, I do not doubt, as the intentions behind the Electoral College construct by those less than admirable FFs. Gotta prevent the vast masses of the population - the great unwashed, "the bewildered herd" in Hamilton's verbiage I do believe - from having the ability to grab (well, they knew all about blood-letting theft of land, after all, didn't they?) that sacred "property." (Sacred, surely 'cos owned by the equivalent of the Murican aristos.)

Little - no, Nothing has changed.

c1ue , Nov 1 2020 16:30 utc | 168
@Down South #159
It shouldn't be surprising. Actual doctors and nurses are, by and large, really great people. They don't want to turn away anyone.
The poorest in America can't afford health care - even the middle class can't really as testified to by the millions of bankruptcies caused by medical expenses. Hospitals thus were losing large sums of profit treating people who simply could not pay.

Obamacare threw many (not all) of those people onto health insurance company plans by having the government pay the health insurance premium and then having the existing health insurance customers pay via increased premiums - all this on top of the ongoing health care profiteering. That's why Obamacare should really have been called "No Health Insurance Company or Hospital Left Behind".

The existence of Obamacare also distracts people from the real problem: actual affordable health care - which every other nation in the world except the US has, entirely due to national health care.

I've posted this before - I will post it again.

In 2006, I left the semiconductor software industry on my own because I disagreed with management decisions to outsource all jobs to India rather than change their fundamentally flawed business model. Semiconductor software companies are the only part of the design chain that charges by software license rather than per part made - this was great in the early days of semiconductors but is a disaster when the industry consolidates to 5 large multinational but US based companies.

In 2007, I experienced a retinal detachment right after my COBRA ended. I paid $35,000 in cash to get that fixed - including a 5 hour total elapsed journey through a hospital which included a 1 hour surgical room occupancy and 1 hour of recovery time. In the door at 6:30 am and waiting for a taxi at 12:30 pm. The UCSF doctor that attended to me (and did a great job to be clear) said his fee out of all that was $1200.

The following year, some cells stirred loose by the corrective surgery landed on my now-attached retina and started reproducing. Instead of coughing up another $35K (or more), I chose to fly to Australia, consult with the best eye doctor recommended by the Royal Opthalmological Society of Australia and New Zealand.
That doctor's office was literally a light year more advanced than UCSF - supposedly one of the premier teaching hospitals in the US. I pay him AU$5000 - US$4000 at the time, plus another AU$800 for the hospital visit. The Sydney Eye Hospital gave me the choice of staying a 2nd night (I stayed 1 night because I was at the end of the queue for the day, as a foreigner), for free, including meals and medications administered on site.

I paid literally 1/7th the price in AU vs. the US - an Australia is not a 3rd world country. The doctor got paid 3.5x in absolute terms. The service I received was immensely better. Even including travel costs: flight plus 2 weeks in AU (which I was vacationing), the overall cost was still 1/5th of my US experience.

That opened my eyes (literally) to just how fucked up the US system is.

It has only gotten worse since.

c1ue , Nov 1 2020 16:36 utc | 169
@Don Bacon #165
Stock price doesn't bear any short term correlation with profits.
Just look at Tesla, Uber and what not.
Health care sector profits have increased disproportionately since Obamacare: CFR report on health insurance company profits
Since ACA implementation on January 1, 2014, health insurance stocks outperformed the S&P 500 by 106 percent.

106% = more than double the overall market.

Down South , Nov 1 2020 16:36 utc | 170
Don Bacon @ 165

Trump has not been able to repeal and replace Obamacare yet so the profits are still rolling in.

vk , Nov 1 2020 17:00 utc | 171
@ Posted by: Anne | Nov 1 2020 16:24 utc | 167

You're right. The early liberals - specially from the American South - loved to compare themselves with the Athenian Republic. The rationale is that the existence of slaves enabled them to enjoy unparalleled freedom. Black slaves were frequently compared with helots when the problem of slave revolts appeared (with the pro-abolitionists evoking the figure of Spartacus). The South considered itself freer than the North in the USA - it was only after their destruction in 1865 that the tide turned and the North became, retrospectively, the paragon of liberal freedom.

In Europe, England was considered the ultimate free nation. Even American liberals (including Benjamin Franklin) built up their legitimacy on being of English stock (Anglo-Saxon race). With time, liberals begun to legitimize their hegemony with a worldwide racial hierarchy - hence the definition of American democracy as Herrenvolk Democracy ("Master race democracy").

And yes, the original liberals considered the Glorious Revolution of 1688 as their birth date - not the French Revolution of 1789 (which they condemned as illiberal, or "radical"). The founders of neoliberalism (Hayek, Mises, etc. etc.) put 1870 as the apex of liberalism, which they tried to revive.

Wind Hippo , Nov 1 2020 17:06 utc | 172
Escobar writes: "In contrast, two near-certain redeeming features would be the return of the US to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, which was Obama-Biden's only foreign policy achievement"

Anyone who actually thinks this is either ignorant or moronic. Biden will absolutely require Iran to limit their ballistic missiles before "rejoining" that then-altered deal. Iran will never let this happen. Thus the deal is essentially dead [as far as US involvement goes, which the other parties should ignore]. MOA notes this as well.

I don't know why though MOA refers to Escobar at all here though. The ignorance demonstrated in the above quote should be enough to disqualify such a person from any discussion about Biden, Iran, etc. and to also ignore anything else such a person claims. You might as well quote a schizophrenic you meet down by the river for his take on Iran and the JCPOA. Might as well learn sign language and ask the chimps at your local zoo what they think about it.

Down South , Nov 1 2020 17:13 utc | 173
c1ue @ 168

You are not the only American who is doing it. They have even developed a term for it - medical tourism:

With rising healthcare costs in the US and the rise of health tourism destinations that offer quality and affordable healthcare perked up by a beautiful travel experience, Americans are scampering to book appointments with healthcare providers far away from home. Yearly, millions of patients travel from countries lacking healthcare infrastructure or less advanced in a particular area of medical care to countries that provide highly-specialized medical care.
https://www.magazine.medicaltourism.com/article/top-10-medical-tourism-destinations-world
William Gruff , Nov 1 2020 17:22 utc | 174
Noirette @161: " Drain the Swamp. The Deplorables are not ordinary ppl, but criminals in positions of power. By putting this forward, Trump became a mirror of the ppl, part of them."

True enough, and as even the bunny claims, this was part of the act. But those who think Trump's upset victory in 2016 was part of the plan need to offer up a better explanation for why those criminals in positions of power would want to kneecap themselves with public exposure. The rationale has to be extraordinarily critical and of huge value to the elites because that price of exposure has been monumentally damaging to them.

Keep in mind that one of the most important (if not the most important) aspects of US presidential elections is the "electoral mandate" . Far more important than specific campaign promises is the general tone of the campaign. If a winning candidate had campaigned on ending wars, bringing jobs back from abroad, and fighting corruption in government, this isn't just an indication that the public wants something done about these issues. First and foremost it forces an acknowledgement that these are indeed major issues that the public wants to be part of the national discourse that the capitalist mass media tries to control. Allowing these issues to become part of the national discourse is diametrically opposed to the interests of the power elites. They do not want these issues to even be discussed, much less addressed by the state.

So why would they intentionally force these issues into the forefront of national discourse? That is, after all, what Trump's victory did, despite the establishment's best efforts to distract with "Russia! Russia! Russia!" and "Racism, sexism and pussy-grabbing, oh my!" . These issues were already smoldering below the surface due to Sanders' campaign, so why would the elites want them fanned into flames?

Answer: They didn't. As much as the issues that the winner campaigns on getting elevated in priority by the "electoral mandate" , the loser's issues get diminished. Trump was supposed to lose, and lose bigly, and in the process the things he campaigned on were supposed to be crushed down to objects of ridicule by the corporate mass media. Trump's resounding defeat was supposed to signal that Americans rejected Trump's "conspiracy theories" about some fictitious "deep state" that only existed in Trump's imagination, burying the suspicions that the election fraud committed against Sanders aroused. Trump being ignominiously trounced was supposed to allow the mass media to say that Americans unequivocally voiced their opposition to ending war and their support for intervention in Syria, clearing the way for Clinton's "no fly zone" . Trump being utterly humiliated in the polls was supposed to decisively demoralize the "deplorables" , convincing them with finality that there will never again be good-paying blue collar jobs and that they are just disposable relics, while at the same time crippling their resistance to the social engineering of "identity politics" ; social engineering that I should point out is even more ill-conceived and incompetently executed than the 737MAX MCAS system.

Trump was supposed to lose and take those issues with him to the dustbin of history.

It is important to understand this point because it clarifies who our enemies really are and helps us to understand how they view the world.

lysias , Nov 1 2020 17:41 utc | 177
Ancient Athens excluded from power slaves and resident foreigners (metics). Also women in the families of male citizens, although one could argue that they had virtual representation through the male citizens in their families. So also for the children in citizens' families, although they would have full rights once they reached adulthood. The adult male citizens who had full political rights were about 20 percent of the population of Attica.

And even the poorest citizens had much more political power than average citizens of today's so-called democracies have today. They could attend and vote in the Assembly, they could be chosen by lot to serve in such bodies as the Council and juries, and to serve in most offices. And for doing all these things there was pay, so that poor citizens had particular motivation to participate, which they did. Just read Aristophanes. No wonder most rich Athenians hated the system.

NemesisCallimg , Nov 1 2020 18:20 utc | 179
@176 H schmatz

Again, you are mistaken. I am getting tired of correcting you.FoxNews drug their heels when it came to supporting DJT in 2015 until it was clear that the majority of conservatives actually wanted DJT as their candidate.

It was at that point that business-smartz kicked in and they had to acknowledge that they must throw their weight behind the Trump ticket lest they prove themselves the faux-conservative Rinos they actually were/are.

Business 101, my friend. You wanna keep the advert. revenue coming in, you produce content your audience actually agrees with.

TBH and AFAIK Tucker Carlson is still the only truly sane conservative on FOx news. The rest, including Hannity, don't neccessarily mind the endless wars so long as the public endorses them. They are chameleons without an ethical lodestar guiding their commentary.

jinn , Nov 1 2020 18:23 utc | 180

gruff wrote

Trump being utterly humiliated in the polls was supposed to decisively demoralize the "deplorables", convincing them with finality that there will never again be good-paying blue collar jobs and that they are just disposable relics,
_____________________________________________

The problem is you think the oligarchs are every bit as stupid as you are. It would be nice if they were, but unfortunately they're not.

First of all lets examine who are these deplorables who you imagine were set up by the oligarchs to be crushed and demoralized by running Trump as their candidate.

The deplorables are:
-The Americans that own the guns

-The Bible thumping American jihadist

-The Americans that sign up for the police and military and in those rolls operate the states weaponry

-The Americans who believe the tree of liberty needs to be watered with the blood of tyrants

I could go on but all you have to do is tune into the corporate mass media that caters to the deplorables to find out who they are and what they are being sold.

But Mr Gruff is just too stupid to figure out why in the world the oligarchs might want to not antagonize that segment of the population.

The oligarchs would have to have lost their frikken minds to hire trump for the purpose of giving the deplorables a big "fuck you" as you imagine. The oligarchs are well aware that they already gave a big fat finger to the deplorables when they engineered the election of Obama (not to mention the 40 preceding years of marginalizing that segment of the population) and just maybe it was time to pacify that segment of the population that was growing larger and a bit restless.

Charles Peterson , Nov 1 2020 19:26 utc | 183
William Gruff @ 174
But those who think Trump's upset victory in 2016 was part of the plan need to offer up a better explanation for why those criminals in positions of power would want to kneecap themselves with public exposure. The rationale has to be extraordinarily critical and of huge value to the elites because that price of exposure has been monumentally damaging to them.
Amen!!! I don't think that people who forward that narrative fully understand how damaging this exposure has been to them.

By being exposed they have been shown to exist . This is super critical! No more is talk of the deep state relegated to the lunatic fringe where they can be easily derided as "conspiracy theorists"

Whether Trump can drain the swamp or not is to be seen but what is not in dispute is that they exist.

Posted by: Down South | Nov 1 2020 18:31 utc | 181 How can the blob "return" when they never really left?

To pretend that Trump is some special Peacemaker, trying oh so hard to overcome deep state resistance to rolling back empire, is Trumpism. Escobar is always there. Trump must be understood as a leading creature of the swamp himself. Trying so hard just as Obama was trying so hard.

The relative scores settled terribly are more a matter of opportunity than ruthless efficiency. Though it is true that "success" requires dialing it back a bit, and having the likes of Bolton around is a way of ensuring either that nothing gets done, or we all end up ashes. Trump managed to axe Bolton on time, that time.

It's avoidance of those lower probability mega catastrophes that is the principle reason of voting trump out with regards to foreign policy. And there are other reasons.

[Oct 31, 2020] The ban against domestic propaganda that had been in place since shortly after WW2 was repealed in 2013

Et tu, Obama?
Oct 31, 2020 | greenwald.substack.com


Willow Oct 29

The ban against domestic propaganda that had been in place since shortly after WW2 was repealed in 2013. It was known as the Smith-Mundt Act. As part of the repeal, NDAA authorized a huge grant program for NGOs, think tanks, civil society and other experts outside government who are engaged in "counter-propaganda" related work. Sounds like doublespeak for censorship and support for "fake news." I hope Glenn will investigate and connect the dots some day.

Tru Oct 29

omg. I read the whole article...and I'm not really that smart.

Best line: " ...but in journalism, evidence is required before news outlets can validly start blaming some foreign government for the release of information. And none has ever been presented."

[Oct 30, 2020] Why Are These Anti-Russian And Anti-Chinese Narratives So Similar-

Notable quotes:
"... I hope you don't mind me opining that the story as written is most likely to be a complete fiction, designed to hide the real source of the fantasy story book that is the Steele dossier. The main mission here being to admit that the dossier was indeed a pack of lies but with the important corollary that J Steele did indeed do some sort of research to dig up the dirt on Trump. Heaven forbid that it ever was discovered that himself, Pablo Miller and Sergei Skripal made the whole thing up over a meal of Zizzi's garlic bread and risotto, washed down with white wine and a bottle of Vodka over at the Mill. ..."
Oct 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Caliman , Oct 29 2020 16:04 utc | 6

After more than four years of Russiagate we finally learn (paywalled original ) where the Steele dossier allegations about nefarious relations between Trump and Russia came from:

A Wall Street Journal investigation provides an answer: a 40-year-old Russian public-relations executive named Olga Galkina fed notes to a friend and former schoolmate who worked for Mr. Steele.​ The Journal relied on interviews, law-enforcement records, declassified documents and the identification of Ms. Galkina by a former top U.S. national security official.

In 2016, Ms. Galkina was working in Cyprus at an affiliate of XBT Holding SA, a web-services company best known for its Webzilla internet hosting unit. XBT is owned by Russian internet entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev.

That summer, she received a request from an employee of Mr. Steele to help unearth potentially compromising information on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump 's links to Russia, according to people familiar with the matter. Ms. Galkina was friends with the employee, Igor Danchenko, since their school days in Perm, a Russian provincial city near the Ural mountains.

Ms. Galkina often came drunk to work and eventually got fired by her company. She took revenge by alleging that the company and its owner Gubarev were involved in the alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee. A bunch of other false allegations in the dossier were equally based on Ms. Galkina's fantasies.

Mark Ames @MarkAmesExiled - 18:39 UTC · Oct 28, 2020

So the Steele Dossier that kicked off 4 years of Russiagate hysteria among the US ruling class was cooked up by two Russian alcoholics from Perm. "Gogolesque" does not begin to describe the grotesque credulity & stupidity of the American elites.

The tales in the dossier were real disinformation from Russians but not ' Russian disinformation ' of the American Newspeak variant.

The FBI, and others involved, knew very early on that the Steele dossier was a bunch of lies. But the issue was kept in the public eyes by continues leaks of additional nonsense. All this was to press Trump to take more and more anti-Russian measures which he did with unprecedented generosity . The accusations about a Trump-Russia connection were the 'Russia bad' narrative that pressed and allowed Trump to continue the anti-Russian policies of the Obama/Biden administration.

A similar string of continuous policies from the Obama/Biden administration's 'Pivot to Asia' and throughout the four years of Trump is the anti-China campaign.

We now hear a lot about Hunter and Joe Biden's corrupt deals with Chinese entities. These accusations come with more evidence and are far more plausible than the stupid Steele dossier claims. Their importance is again twofold. They will be used to press a potential President Joe Biden to act against China but they will primarily be used to intensify a public anti-China narrative that creates public support for such policies.

As Caitlin Johnstone points out :

I don't know how or at what level, but we are being played. A narrative is being aggressively rammed down our throats about China in exactly the same way it was being aggressively rammed down our throats about Russia four years ago; two unabsorbed nations the US government has long had plans to attack and undermine .
Russiagate was never really about Trump. It was never about his campaign staff meeting with Russians, it was never about a pee tape, it was never about an investigation into any kind of hidden loyalties to the Kremlin. Russiagate was about narrative managing the United States into a new cold war with Russia with the ultimate target being its far more powerful ally China, and ensuring that Trump played along with that agenda.
...
If Biden gets in we can expect the same thing: a president who advances escalations against both Russia and China while being accused of the other party of being soft on China. Both parties will have their foot on the gas toward brinkmanship with a nuclear-armed nation, with no one's foot anywhere near the brakes.

It is thus assured that the verbal attacks on China , the search for new anti-China allies like the Hindu-fascist India and the dangerous weaponizing of Taiwan will all continue under a Biden administration.

""Gogolesque" does not begin to describe the grotesque credulity & stupidity of the American elites."

Not at all. The "elites" know what's going on; it's being done for their benefit, after all. It's the "normals" who are being sheared of the little wool left on our backs. Just one more true grand larceny before the whole thing falls apart. And for this we need a real enemy. From the great Antiwar.com:

https://news.antiwar.com/2020/10/28/raytheon-ceo-the-idea-that-biden-would-cut-defense-spending-is-ridiculous/

Bemildred , Oct 29 2020 16:10 utc | 7

It's like living in a "B" movie. Probably many of the same sorts of people behind it too. The lack of imagination and knowledge in these propaganda narratives tells you a lot about the mediocrities behind them. In considering these US foreign policy excesses, real and imagined, I keep thinking at some point reality is going to raise its ugly head and Washington will collapse in a puddle of spite. I expect the next adminstration to be overwhelmed by its domestic problems, along with quite a few other countries. I look at what is going on in Western societies today and I think of the movie Brazil.

ptb , Oct 29 2020 16:17 utc | 8
I think this stuff will matter more if Trump wins than if Biden wins. (I'm thinking 3:2 odds in favor of Biden, by the way).

If Biden wins, Republicans will make a lot of noise, but that's about it. Without a huge majority of Congress, they can't do even what little token effects Democrats had to "stop Trump". Then, whenever Harris takes over, she can just distance herself from the whole thing.

If Trump wins, however, the flag humpers in the administration will have the ammunition they need in the fight over Russiagate. Not to shut it down, but to take control of it for their own political ends, and perhaps take down someone famous in the media and intimidate the rest - in a replay of the post-9/11 Bush era (not that it ever stopped). So you can thank Democrats for handing them the setup to do all that, not to mention for nominating Biden, if that is the path we take.

More realistically, Trump still loses, but Dems might fail to get an effective majority in the Senate (something like a 51-49 majority might not be enough in practice, because the most conservative Democrats in the Senate vote Republican half the time.). Again it makes no difference for foreign policy, but it could really change how the country responds to economic hardship, now baked in due to the virus.

Down South , Oct 29 2020 16:28 utc | 9
The MIC needs a Cold War to boost military expenditure. The bigger the boogeyman the more money will be spent the more profits will be generated.

They don't want a hot war as all those profits are meaningless if you are reduced to ashes.

The last thing the MIC can afford is for peace and goodwill amongst nations to break out. There is absolutely no profit in that.

Eisenhower warned against the rise of the MIC for this very reason. If war is profitable then to keep generating more profits you need to keep on generating more wars.

Noirette , Oct 29 2020 17:11 utc | 13

Trump proposed to ally with Russia against China. MAGA clearly implies the US was, is weakening, one way out (classical) is to ally (perhaps only lightly) with one of the other two strong powers. This was total anathema to part of the PTB, mostly represented (officially) by Dems. An all-out attack on Trump thus took place (before he was elected, because all was known) as a stooge for Russia, etc. Russia 3x, Russiagate, all of it clumsily made-up rubbish.

Surely now with Hunter's lap-top and the exposé of Biden-China ties (pay to play at the highest level, potentially billions, not minor corruption chicken-sh*t..) it is possible to grasp that one faction of what some call the Deep State is more pro-China i.e. the aspirations towards that type of society (I leave that aspect aside ..) and the opportunities for money extraction / deals - see tech etc. / also sales (MIC, etc.) favor China. The noise about Chinese incursions (Tibet, sea.. etc.), Chinese human-rights violations (Uighurs, etc.), and the OBOR initiative have always been somewhat glancing more pro-forma than anything else..

It was the 'Dem' faction of the duopoly, Obiman + Biden who 'did' Ukraine, an anti-Russian move (on the face of it. Perhaps it was just an extraction scheme, Mafia style. Of course they had the keen involvement of Germany and support from France.)

I have boiled down complex issues to just one "narrative arc", a simplification if you will, I am aware there is much more to it all

Question. There is a well-know board on which sit, amongst many others:

Mary T. Barra (CEO Gen. Mot.)
Carlos Ghosn (Renault etc.)
H. Kruger (BMW)
Elon Musk

Henry Paulson
Lloyd Blankfein
Laurence Fink (Blackrock)
M. L. Corbat (Citigroup)

Tim Cook
Michael Dell (Dell co.)
S. Nadella (Microsoft)

answer:

https://www.sem.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/aboutsem/advMem.html

Here is the Board of Trustees of Moscow University, Lavrov in first place:

https://english.mgimo.ru/basic-facts/board-of-trustees

I believe such minor examples are quite telling.

Yes the elites know what is going on. (Caliman 6)

karlof1 , Oct 29 2020 17:16 utc | 14
IMO, the current Imperial policy goals of the Outlaw US Empire will continue regardless who wins. IMO, the ultimate question is if the Empire has enough power to continue on its current track. As most know, I see a drowning empire trying to disrupt the rapid rise of two strategically bound nations and those allied with them. China just finished planning and publishing its 14th 5-year plan. This Global Times editorial is supremely confidant for good reason:

"The fifth plenary session of the 19th CPC Central Committee is leading the country forward. China has the capital and ability to do so. In this turbulent world, the meeting has provided a practical and significant guide for our direction, goal and tactics. Despite the many problems, China's political philosophy can constantly generate positive energy to solve the problems, instead of letting the problems crush positive energy.

"At the moment, China is facing the most problems and challenges. However, the country is also the most confident now. Other countries have posed many difficulties, but they provide reference and proof that we are doing better . As the world suffers from shrinking demand and negative growth, we are demanding real and comprehensive growth to realize new achievements in six areas. The country is self-driven ." [My Emphasis]

It's been announced that "The 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) will hold a press conference Friday to introduce the guiding principles of its fifth plenary session."

Here are two important articles related to China's next phase that demand reading, "China sets 'pragmatic' targets through 2035 ; and "CPC vows to grasp opportunities amid major strategic [development] period" . I intend to use these and other items in a follow up to the article I wrote in anticipation of China's new phase while recapping the one just concluded.

As for Russia's direction, that was very clearly mapped out by Putin and Lavrov's recent Valdai Club speeches and Q & A sessions and other interviews over the past ten days or so. Compared to the drowning Outlaw US Empire, China and Russia combine to offer the world two not so different examples that are clearly superior to Neoliberal Parasitism. And the longstanding Imperial edict of the Outlaw US Empire saying no threat of a better example can be allowed to exist forms the basis for the confrontation. However, it's no longer just China and Russia that provide such threats as a majority of the world's nations want to join Win-Win and scupper Zero-sum. So the already joined contest between two differing ideological blocs will escalate until the drowning Outlaw US Empire finds it no longer possess the power to dominate outside its borders, but will still have its domestic populace to exploit until they too revolt.

Ilya G Poimandres , Oct 29 2020 17:27 utc | 15
The similarities are there, except that Trump's investigation had not one document of compromat even after 3 years, whilst Biden's already has many from day 1.

Yes, the deepstate attacks Russia from the left, and China from the right, but this does not imply that members of the body politic are not subservient to either side, ever.

Only that Trump was never a Russian stooge, nor did they ever hold compromising documents over him, whilst Biden seems the Cleon of the modern age, that his business partners say he is. Is this compromat? Maybe, but at the very least this is graft. And that should be enough to send him into the gutter.

Babyl-on , Oct 29 2020 17:32 utc | 16
This is a good report as is usually the case here at MoA. Yet, there is nothing really new in this at all other than the details of how the Western empire goes about enforcing its will on the world.
Sense August 6, 1945 the Imperial policy has been "Global full spectrum domination." and to that end it was determined that Russia and China were to be considered one enemy and must be attacked simultaneously.
In the 75 years sense that date when the Western empire declared the world belonged to it and it alone to rule the Western empire has slaughtered innocent people across the globe tens of millions of them, additionally in the last 20 years alone the Western empire has displaced over 37 million people, kicked them out of their homes destroyed their towns and communities. For 75 years non stop slaughter of innocent people.
Western Liberal Democracy and indeed Western civilization itself is an utter and contemptible failure irredeemable in any form which we might recognize as "democracy'
wagelaborer , Oct 29 2020 18:22 utc | 24

Why do media corporations put out remake after remake of popular movies? Is it because they lack imagination, or is it that audiences prefer the familiar.
They use the same war propaganda time after time because the audience falls for it more easily if they've heard it before.
I agree with Michael, however, that we are in dire planetary straits at this point.
Apparently, our ruling overlords are putting in a Hail Mary plan to slow down the destruction of the ecosystem. I don't believe that it is the virus that made them screech the brakes on the global economy back in March. They have a plan to reset and scale back consumption.
We all knew it couldn't last forever, anyway, right?

Sunny Runny Burger , Oct 29 2020 18:23 utc | 25

I'm not so sure about the overall conclusions, instead I'm sidetracked by the attempt to whitewash Russiagate. I guess they finally figured out they had to come up with some kind of lame excuse to brush it off.

"It wasn't me! It was some crazy drunk Russian woman from Perm! She was angry!"

Well that explains everything. They must have been so scared :D

Because that's what people do when they get fired isn't it? Instead of getting a new job (or drinking a bit more, or sliding down the slippery slope of society) they make up and tell stories about politicians in other countries. Not to blackmail anyone, oh no, only to try to tarnish the reputation of the old boss to get revenge. Stuff like this is why watching soap operas (including "Friends") is bad for you :)

"We need a scapegoat but we don't have any good ones available right now, however someone we know has an aunt in Perm who will do anything for money"

It still doesn't make sense but now instead of a problem that doesn't make sense they have a solution that doesn't make sense. They probably threw a party to celebrate how smart they were.

Roger , Oct 29 2020 18:25 utc | 26

"A narrative is being aggressively rammed down our throats about China": I usually respect Caitlin's work a lot but how does this jive with the MSM and Techno-platforms desperate attempts to block all circulation of anything to do with the Biden corruption scandals? Digging deeper into these issues is toxic not just for Biden, but for a significant segment of the neoliberal elite.

The economic elites need time to decouple their profits from China before any real head-to-head battle commences, Biden (or Kamala) will bark a lot but bite much less given the probable wealth-vaporization of increased hostilities with China.

P.S. the number of COVID cases in Sweden is exploding, so to quote one of my favourite movie reviewers (The Critical Drinker) can the Sweden trolls please "just go away now".

Abe , Oct 29 2020 18:39 utc | 31

Jackrabbit @ 22

I don't argue popularity, but strength. Trump is a weakling, both as a person and as a president IMO.

US presidential system won't allow true leaders but puppets (or easily manipulated persons), it is all I'm saying. Do we need more than last 4 years of Trump's reign as a proof?

Christian J. Chuba , Oct 29 2020 18:48 utc | 34

Because the U.S. public is close to brain dead We can't detect obvious lies no matter how brazen.

Let's suppose I told you something was absolutely true and I literally started out by saying, 'Once upon a time there was an evil stepmother ...'. Or I told you about about a villainous neighbor while literally playing a sad song on a violin.

I do not consider myself a genius, in fact I was a neocon but good God, I could just tell I was being lied to just by the pattern of the stories. I didn't know what the truth was but I knew they were lying.

A doozy with FOX promoting genocide against Iran

FOX news does a story about the terrorist attack in France and in the very next segment without any commercial breaks they interview a Congressman about Iran. Now they did not say Iran was responsible but clearly this was a puppet show to make just that association. In addition to the standard blood libel, the Congressman talked about a tweet the Ayatollah made in 2014, so it was not as if there even was any newsworthy item to discuss about Iran. It was just to frame them for something they did not do.

donkeytale , Oct 29 2020 21:47 utc | 54

Correction: I outed the Bytedance board of directors. Bytedance is the parent company of tik tok.

Jen , Oct 29 2020 22:57 utc | 55

S Brennan @ 3, Bevin @ 17, James @ 38:

China and Russia signed a friendship treaty in 2001 pledging co-operation and assistance in diplomacy and across several areas including economic and military assistance and in environmental technology (green or environmental science) and energy issues as well. In Article 6 of the treaty, both nations agreed to respect one another's borders and to preserve the status quo where there were unresolved issues.

On top of the 2001 Sino-Russian Friendship Treaty, both nations also signed an agreement in 2008 officially ending all territorial disputes between the two countries. With no exceptions, the border between Russia and China is fixed.

In addition northeast China (or that area historically known as Manchuria) is now a rustbelt area and is deindustrialising. People especially young people are moving away from this part of the country and into the cities farther south to find more job opportunities. According to this Mercatornet.com article , fertility rates in this part of Northeast Asia across all ethnic groups are the lowest in the world and this part of China is heading for demographic collapse.

Probably the only people in China and Russia who still have fantasies about seizing one another's territories in Northeast China and the Russian Far East are gameboys who spend too much time playing computer games or nattering with one another on their blogsites and who would suffer cardiac arrest the moment they step away from the screen (or who would suffer cardiac arrest anyway from playing games two or three days straight).

oldhippie , Oct 29 2020 23:13 utc | 56

US economy and US life in general is wholly dependent on China. Face masks or pharmaceuticals, car parts or building materials, it comes from China. No, we cannot resume making these things in US, we do not know how. When 3M was told to get busy and make masks under Defence Procurement authority all they could do was refer to Chinese subsidiary. Clear enough it is the "subsidiary" that has the whip hand. What do we have for them? Treasury bonds? Or we can start handing over real estate. Maybe if we give them the West Coast they will supply us for a time.

One of the big stalls with the Foxconn-Racine plant has been there are no American engineers to hire. Just none. All Chinese staff would be easier. Or Chinese lords supervising American coolies.

US basically does not trade with Russia. They have unloaded US paper securities. All we get from them is service as a bogeyman. If we needed another bogey we could get that easy, make up some shit as always.

Russia and China are different.

donkeytale , Oct 29 2020 23:36 utc | 57

Old hippie

Mostly true but it's not because the US cant make these products it's because the shareholder class decided long ago their portfolios would be better enhanced by cheaper labor costs outside the US.

And just as important, the US consumer prefers a "bargain price" and wants cheap goods more than a living wage, especially those consumers who own some stocks (52% of Amerikkkans own at least some shares, usually in a 401k plan) and believe they too are participating in the global wealth machine.

BTW, nearly as much stuff is made in Mexico and exported into the US as is made in China and products from both countries are made by multinational corporations whose ownership consists largely Amerikkkan/western elites.

The problem isn't national-based, it is class based and international .

They are only trying to trick us into believing the problem is we are lazier than the Chinese.

uncle tungsten , Oct 29 2020 23:43 utc | 59

The Chinese authorities have been prosecuting corrupt officials for many years. The prospect of certain USAi officials like the Biden family carpetbaggers and their Chinese associates being prosecuted in public courts in China with no plea bargaining and all those other niceties would be a delight for eyes and ears.

Be careful with those threats USAi, it could come back to haunt you.

uncle tungsten , Oct 30 2020 0:59 utc | 63

Corkie # 49

I hope you don't mind me opining that the story as written is most likely to be a complete fiction, designed to hide the real source of the fantasy story book that is the Steele dossier. The main mission here being to admit that the dossier was indeed a pack of lies but with the important corollary that J Steele did indeed do some sort of research to dig up the dirt on Trump. Heaven forbid that it ever was discovered that himself, Pablo Miller and Sergei Skripal made the whole thing up over a meal of Zizzi's garlic bread and risotto, washed down with white wine and a bottle of Vodka over at the Mill.

I am with you Corkie. That is about the strength of it. The WSJ is BS from front page to last.

[Oct 28, 2020] Wall Street Banks, And Their Employees, Now Officially Lean Democrat

Highly recommended!
They understand who will serve them better... After all they are dependent on the continuation of neoliberal globalization.
Oct 28, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

You'd think that voting Republican would be an easy decision if you work on Wall Street, especially given the lower taxes and the removal of burdensome regulations. But Democrats have entangled themselves so deeply in the web of Wall Street, that the industry is now leaning to the left, according to a new report from Reuters .

The Center for Responsive Politics took a look at how the industry, and its employees, break down for the 2020 election cycle.

It has been obvious that Democratic candidate Joe Biden has been outpacing President Trump when it comes to fundraising, and this is also true of "winning cash from the banking industry," Reuters notes.

Biden's campaign has been the beneficiary of $3 million from commercial banks, compared to the $1.4 million Trump has raised. This is a far skew from 2012, where Mitt Romney was able to raise $5.5 million from commercial banks, while Barack Obama only raised $2 million. In 2012, Wall Street banks were among the top five contributors to Romney' campaign.

In 2020, campaign contributions to congressional races from Wall Street banks are about even. Republicans have raised $14 million while Democrats have brought in $13.6 million. About four years ago, Republicans pulled in $18.9 million, which was about twice as much as the Democrats raised. In 2012, Republicans raised about 61% of total bank donations.

Interestingly enough, when Biden and Trump are removed from the equation, the highest recipient from Wall Street is none other than Bernie Sanders, who has raised $831,096. Sanders often tops contributions in many industries due to his grassroots following.

When you remove the employees from the equation and only look at how the bank's political arms donate, the picture turns more Republican-friendly.

House of Representatives lawmaker Blaine Luetkemeyer of Missouri, one of the senior Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee, which is key for the banking industry, tops the list, hauling in $226,000. Next up is Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, the top Republican on that panel, with $185,500 in cash from bank political committees.

The top 20 recipients of bank political funds comprise 14 Republicans and six Democrats. Representative Gregory Meeks of New York, a senior member of the House banking panel, received the most among Democrats, with $140,000.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

The shift in data shows that while Wall Street's top brass may still understand the value of Republican leadership, bank employees themselves may overwhelmingly favor progressives.

ay_arrow

tonye , 3 hours ago

It's obvious. Wall Street is part of the Deep State...

Le SoJ16 , 3 hours ago

How can you hate capitalism and work for a Wall Street bank?

tonye , 3 hours ago

Because Wall Street is no longer capitalist.

Main Street is capitalist, they create the GNP.

Wall Street is a casino owned by globalists and bankers. They don't create much anymore.

Macho Latte , 2 hours ago

It has nothing to do with ideology. The Biden is FOR SALE!

Any questions?

Lord Raglan , 2 hours ago

It is because the majority of Wall Street are Jewish and **** overwhelmingly support Democrats.

David Horowitz has said that 80% of the donations to the Democrat Party come from ****.

KashNCarry , 2 hours ago

What a bunch of ****. Wall St. elites are in it up to their necks casting their lot with the globalists who want total control NOW. Trump is the only thing in their way....

artvandalai , 3 hours ago

Wall street people don't know much about the real economy. They also know little, nor do they care about, the real problems faced by business people who have to work everyday to overcome the policies put in place by liberals.

They do understand finance however. But all that requires is the ability to push paper around all day.

But let them vote for the Libotards and have them watch Elizabeth Warren take charge of the US Senate Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection Committee. They'll be jumping out of windows.

FauxReal , 3 hours ago

Wall Street favors free money?

sun tzu , 1 hour ago

Wall Street wants bailouts. 0bozo gave them a yuge bailout

American2 , 2 hours ago

Based on the massively coordinated MSM suppression of the Biden corruption scandal, now I know why these folks back Biden.

CosmoJoe , 2 hours ago

Democrats as the party of the big banks,

bgundr , 2 hours ago

Of course banksters favor policies that make the average person a slave with less agency

Homie , 2 hours ago

Especially if you like the endless bailouts, give-aways, and freedom from those pesky rules limiting the Squid's diet

You'd think that voting Republican would be an easy decision if you work on Wall Street, especially given the lower taxes and the removal of burdensome regulations.

mtl4 , 2 hours ago

The shift in data shows that while Wall Street's top brass may still understand the value of Republican leadership, bank employees themselves may overwhelmingly favor progressives.

The banks are big on corruption and that's one poll the Dems are definitely leading by a longshot.......thick as thieves.

tunetopper , 2 hours ago

Wall St youngsters dont realize their job is to whore themselves out as much as possible to the few remaining classes of folk they dont already have accounts with. The few Millennials and Gen Xers that have enough capital saved up are their target market. Ever since the take-down of Bear Stearns and Lehman, and the exit of many others from their Private Client Groups- the Whorewolves of Wall St are very busy pretending to be Progs and Libs.

And like this post says: " who really cares, they all live in NY, NJ and CT which are guaranteed Dem states anyway"

So in essence- they have nothing to lose while pretending to be a Prog/Lib. in order to ge the clients money.

radar99 , 36 minutes ago

I arrived to wall st in 2010. My female boss at a large investment bank hated me from the moment I criticized Obama. I was and still am absolutely amazed you can work on wall st and be a democrat

moneybots , 59 minutes ago

"The shift in data shows that while Wall Street's top brass may still understand the value of Republican leadership, bank employees themselves may overwhelmingly favor progressives."

So 50 Cent alone went Trump after finding out NYC's top tax rate would be 62% under Biden?

Flynt2142ahh , 1 hour ago

also known as MBNA Joe Biden friends, you mean the privatize profits but liberalize losses crowd that always looks for gubment money to bail out failures - Shocking !

invention13 , 1 hour ago

Wall St. just knows Biden is someone you can do business with.

Loser Face , 1 hour ago

Wall Street leans towards anyone who passes laws that benefit Wall Street.

Obamaroid Ointment , 1 hour ago

The Wally Street crowd has always been a bunch Globalist Mercedes Marxists and Limousine Liberals, this article is ancient history.

Sound of the Suburbs , 2 hours ago

US politicians haven't got a clue what's really going on and got duped by the banker's shell game.

When you don't know what real wealth creation is, or how banks work, you fall for the banker's shell game.

Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy towards a financial crisis.

On a BBC documentary, comparing 1929 to 2008, it said the last time US bankers made as much money as they did before 2008 was in the 1920s.

Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy into a financial crisis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAStZJCKmbU&list=PLmtuEaMvhDZZQLxg24CAiFgZYldtoCR-R&index=6

At 18 mins.

The bankers loaded the US economy up with their debt products until they got financial crises in 1929 and 2008.

As you head towards the financial crisis, the economy booms due to the money creation of bank loans.

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf

The financial crisis appears to come out of a clear blue sky when you use an economics that doesn't consider debt, like neoclassical economics.

That's what the banker's shell game does to your economy.

Bankers are playing a shell game, which you can't see if you don't know how banks actually work like today's policymakers.

The real estate shell game.

Watch this video of the S&L crisis to refresh your memory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwFXvc1rJDw

They were just cutting their teeth messing about transferring financial assets around in those days.

It's all pretty straight forward.

Bank loans create money out of nothing.

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf

Money and debt come into existence together and disappear together like matter and anti-matter.

It's a shell game; you have to keep your eye on the money and the debt.

The speculators pocket the money, and the debt builds up in the S&Ls until the ponzi scheme collapses.

US taxpayers then bail out the bust S&Ls.

The shell game only works when no when is looking at the debt building up in the financial system like the UK from 1980 – 2008.

https://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/uploads/monthly_2018_02/Screen-Shot-2017-04-21-at-13_53_09.png.e32e8fee4ffd68b566ed5235dc1266c2.png

Money and debt come into existence together and disappear together like matter and anti-matter.

The money flows into the economy making it boom.

The debt builds up in the financial system leading to a financial crisis.

Banks – What is the idea?

The idea is that banks lend into business and industry to increase the productive capacity of the economy.

Business and industry don't have to wait until they have the money to expand. They can borrow the money and use it to expand today, and then pay that money back in the future.

The economy can then grow more rapidly than it would without banks.

Debt grows with GDP and there are no problems.

The banks create money and use it to create real wealth.

Caliphate Connie and the Headbangers , 2 hours ago

https://youtu.be/U06jlgpMtQs Democrat President, Republican Senate, Democratic House equals Deflation

medium giraffe , 3 hours ago

The banks and corporations of America have been welfare queens since 2008. Regardless of who wins, they will be the beneficiaries of moar US-style corporate welfare socialism.

Victory_Rossi , 3 hours ago

Wall Street loves globalism and hates the entire ethos of "America First". They're people with dodgy loyalties and grand self-interests.

FreemonSandlewould , 3 hours ago

What a surprise. The Banking Cartel faction of the Jish Control Grid sent Trotsky and company to Russia to implement the Bolshevik revolution. Should I be surprised they lean left?

Well I guess not. But they are at base amoral - that is to say with out moral philosophy. Their real motto is "Whatever gets the job done".

I know you human fungus in Wall St banks read Zh.

[Oct 26, 2020] Erdogan Is Again Under Pressure And Therefore Likely To Escalate

Oct 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Moon of Alabama Brecht quote " The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-85 | Main October 26, 2020 Erdogan Is Again Under Pressure And Therefore Likely To Escalate

Over the last years the Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has managed to alienate so many of his countries international partners that it is hard to keep count. He at times did so on purpose to distract his voters from a sinking economy and other local calamities. But there are signs that he has now exceeded the patience of the adversaries he has created. He is now finally receiving the rebukes he has seemed to be seeking.

While Russia has emphasized friendly relations with Turkey, it is in conflict with it in Syria, Libya and most recently in the war over Nagorny-Karabakh.

Russia at times has a not-so-subtle way to communicate that its patience has run out. Last Thursday Russian ships in the eastern Mediterranean fired missiles on a oil smuggling center near Jarablus, Syria:

More than 15 militants from the Turkish-controlled Syrian armed opposition were killed and injured in a missile strike by an unknown military aircraft on a smuggling market for oil products in the city of Jerablus, bordering Turkey, in northern Syria, local sources reported.

It is noted that the rockets were also fired at two fuel tankers, which were moving along the highway near the village of Kus in the direction of the market. Eyewitnesses reported that at the time of the strikes, several powerful explosions occurred in the border area.

The oil was smuggled from eastern Syria and was on its way to Turkey.

Today a Russian air attack on a graduation ceremony of Turkish financed 'Syrian rebels' killed or wounded more than 200 of them.


bigger

bigger

Erdogan's fanboys took note:

Ömer Özkizilcik @OmerOzkizilcik - 9:31 UTC · Oct 26, 2020

Russia has attacked the HQ of Faylaq al-Sham, Turkey's favorite armed group in Idlib, and the leading faction of the NLF of the SNA.
Faylaq al-Sham is also present in the Astana process and the constitutional committee.
Claims that up to 50 Faylaq members died in the attack.

After the recent airstrike on the Jarablus oil refinery, this strike is just another demonstration of the growing rift between Russia and Turkey.
It seems that many in Moscow are angry about the humiliation of the Russian defense industry by Turkey.

Well, Russia has a real defense industry while the Turkish weapon 'producers' are just assembly lines for parts bought from abroad :

301 @301_AD - 10:19 UTC · Oct 26, 2020

The "indigenous" Turkish drone which Turks boast about day and night as the flagship of their military industry is a not so indigenous after all. It's assembled by top notch western components.


bigger

Turkey has successfully used the drones to destroy old Russian made air defenses in Nagorny-Karabakh. But as Canada and Austria have now stopped to supply the necessary components the availability of such drones will soon diminish.

The U.S.also increased the pressure on Turkish proxy forces in Syria:

The U.S. Army said Thursday it carried out a drone strike against Al-Qaeda leaders in northwestern Syria near the Turkish border, killing 17 jihadists, according to a war monitor.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said five civilians were also among those killed.

"U.S. Forces conducted a strike against a group of Al-Qaeda in Syria (AQ-S) senior leaders meeting near Idlib, Syria," said Maj. Beth Riordan, the spokeswoman for United States Central Command (CENTCOM).

It is now likely that Turkey will order its 'Syrian rebel' mercenaries to escalate the war in Idleb. Russia and Syria have been waiting for this and are well prepared.

Turkish relations with Greece have always been hostile but Turkey currently does its best to increase them :

Greece said Monday that Turkey plans to carry out a maritime military exercise on Oct. 28, a Greek national holiday, just hours after NATO's secretary general said both Greece and Turkey had called off wargames on each other's national holidays.

Erdogan has also been busy to add other EU countries to the list of Turkey's enemies:

France has recalled its ambassador to Turkey after the country's President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan questioned the mental health of French counterpart Emmanuel Macron.

Erdoğan questioned Macron's mental condition while criticising the French President's attitude toward Islam and Muslims.

His remarks at a local party congress were an apparent response to statements Macron made earlier this month about problems created by radical Muslims in France who practice what the French leader termed "Islamist separatism".

Macron's remarks had come after a Chechen terrorist with connections to militants in the Turkish occupied Idleb had beheaded a French teacher in Paris. Erdogan's remarks were followed by anti-French protests in Turkish occupied areas of Syria during which flags of the Islamic State were raised .

Despite Russian, French and U.S. attempts to set up a ceasefire in Nagarno-Karabakh Turkey is pressing Azerbaijan to continue the war :

[I]n the last year, Turkey has violated Israeli, Libyan, Iraqi, Syrian, and Greek sovereignty. The international community has condemned Turkey's territorial encroachments on numerous occasions. A similar scenario is playing out in Nagorno-Karabakh today.

On October 21, Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay pledged to provide full military support for Azerbaijan if necessary. Oktay has also denounced international efforts to quell the conflict's escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh. The OSCE Minsk Group, comprised of the United States, France, and Russia, formed to help mediate the conflict. Turkish officials, however, claim this group is actively supporting Armenia. In a rebuke of Turkey, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a statement highlighting Ankara's malign involvement in the conflict. He noted Turkish-backed fighters are "providing resources to Azerbaijan, increasing the risk and firepower" that is only fleshing out the fighting.

A new Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire, negotiated on Friday in Washington DC, was immediately breached by new attacks from Azerbaijani forces.

In Libya a new ceasefire agreement between the Turkish supported Muslim Brotherhood forces who hold the western part of the country and the eastern forces of General Hafter, supported by the UAE and Russia, stipulates that all foreign forces will have to leave the country within three months. The UN and every involved country but one welcomed the deal:

But President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, which backs the Tripoli government with military support, questioned the viability of the ceasefire.

"Today's ceasefire agreement was actually not made at the highest level, it was at a lower level. Time will tell whether it will last," Erdogan said. "So it seems to me that it lacks credibility."

Turkey had attempted to gain control of the eastern oil fields of Libya but failed to do so after Russia countered it. Oil production in Libya has been restarted without any of the profits flowing to Turkey. It will now have to leave the new bases it created or re-escalate that war.

Pissing off the U.S., the EU and Russia while waging wars against several countries has significant economic costs :

Since reaching a peak of $951 billion in 2013, Turkey's gross domestic product has reversed its growth trend, falling to $754 billion in 2019 in nominal terms -- a drop of $200 billion, nearly the size of the GDP of Greece, in six years. The lackluster performance of the economy has had a political impact on the AKP's popularity at home. According to the pollster Metropoll, support for the AKP had fallen to 31 percent in August 2020 -- a significant drop from the 43 percent of votes the party received in the 2018 parliamentary elections.
...
A foreign policy that gives priority to combative rhetoric, hard power, and maligning the West can be politically useful in the short term, but remains incompatible with the long-term requirement of stabilizing the economy. And yet it is the country's economic performance that will ultimately determine the fate of the next national political contest when the time comes.

A year ago 5.75 Turkish Lira were the equivalent of 1 U.S. dollar. Today one needs more than 8 Turkish Lira to buy a dollar.


bigger

Turkish companies have taken up lots of loans in foreign currencies. They will have to pay the loans back with 40% more Lira than they had planned to do. Many of them will not survive the drain.

Saudi Arabia and its allies have launched a boycott of Turkish products. Turkish made pots and pans and Turkish vegetables have been removed from Saudi supermarkets.

Over the years Turkey had managed to play off the U.S. against Russia and Russia against the EU. But now its relations with all of those parties deteriorate at the very same time. This while its economy has serious problems.

To better his position Erdogan could retreat from some of the many conflicts he created. But given his previous behavior under pressure he is more likely to go into the opposite direction. I expect him to soon escalate on one or more fronts with Syria being the most likely one.

Over the last year a lot of Turkish equipment and many Turkish soldiers have been moved to Idelb. But would they be able to withstand an onslaught of Russian air and missile attacks? Would Russia launch those provocative strikes on Turkish proxies forces if it thought so?

Turkey has in my view overextended itself. It will have to retreat on several of its current fronts and concentrate on its economy. It is otherwise likely to suffer a significant military defeat while its economy will further deteriorate. It would be the end of Erdogan's Neo-Ottoman dreams.

Posted by b on October 26, 2020 at 16:03 UTC | Permalink

ATH , Oct 26 2020 16:27 utc | 1

Looks to me like Turkey is a pawn, or to be more generous a knight, in the political battle Anglo-Americans are waging against part of continental Europe and Russia. Because of this I do not believe it will escalate into any full fledged hot war between Turkey, which no need to emphasize remains part of NATO Central Command structure, and any other opponents. It will remain the proxy war it has been since 10 years or so ago.
J Swift , Oct 26 2020 16:29 utc | 2
While everything b says is true, it is difficult to see how Erdogan will be able to reverse his course. That's the big problem with military adventurism. If he tries to quit some or all of those extra-territorial games, and return his troops and mercenaries home to Turkey, he will still have a bad economy, but will have a large contingent of unhappy military and terrorists to deal with, too. The odds of a new coup attempt, but this time a much more serious and widely supported one, would escalate greatly.

It's similar to the problem the US faces. Decades of screwing with every other country in the world are coming home to roost, and as much as Trump and a few others have at least talked about the wisdom of ceasing overseas meddling, the deep state knows that bringing all those highly trained and pissed-off soldiers home would be a powder keg, even more so that we're already seeing.

ATH , Oct 26 2020 16:33 utc | 3
The way I understand it here, Erdogan and Trump are big buddies.
Ken Garoo , Oct 26 2020 16:44 utc | 4
Poor old Turdogan has been left holding the bag of takfiris. The last thing he wants is them to be used against him, so he has been shipping them out to Libya and now Azerbaijan. However, his megalomania seems to have gained the upper hand, trying to exploit the opportunity for multiple purposes, possibly failing in all.

Armenia is just starting to produce so-called 'suicide' drones. They are looking to purchase others (Iranian?) The Azerjaibanis seem to be rather over-extended along the border with Iran, with a cauldron in the making, especially as their drone supply may be drying up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Klsg7DmiA4

AtaBrit , Oct 26 2020 16:44 utc | 5
Great piece 'b'.
When it is all set out so plainly you have to wonder what the hell Erdogan is thinking ... except about his own future and 2023.

One point though, there is no mention of the changing attitude of Arab countries towards Turkey. Egypt - supported by Russia - and the UAE especially seem to be taking forward roles in opposing Turkey.
I posted this article earlier today in the open thread, but here it is again. Far more relevant here.

UAE vs Turkey: the regional rivalries pitting MBZ against Erdogan FT really impresses at times, I have to say.

"Where you find Emirati activity you often find Turkish activity directly countering it in a way Iran doesn't," says Michael Stephens, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a think-tank. "They believe they are up against a Turkey that is very hostile in terms of its nationalism, its power projection and a determination to make sure the UAE doesn't get its own way."

Et Tu , Oct 26 2020 16:45 utc | 6
While no doubt directed at Turkey, that airstrike indirectly also gives the US forces 'guarding the oil' a pretty significant middle finger. Good on Russia on that count.

Let us hope that prick Erdogan gets the lesson he finally deserves and not too many of his countrymen have to pay with their lives for their stupidity in following his corrupt ambitions. Fingers crossed Putin holds his nerve and at the same time doesn't get trapped into a lose-lose scenario either.

No country that has shown such callous aggression deserves to get away with it. Turkey would be a good place to start on a long list.

Blue Dotterel , Oct 26 2020 17:15 utc | 7
Yes, Erdoğan really has never had any sense of foreign policy. Most of this, however, is not really neo-Ottomanism, but trying to deflect attention from his self inflicted economic woes.

As to France, it isn't just Erdoğan railing at France's gratuitous support of a cartoon slandering Islam, pretending it is "freedom of speech". Pakistan, Kuwait, Qatar and others have done the same, Pakistan even calling in the French ambassador for an explanation. Yes, there really is an Islamophobia promoted by Western politicians as a part of foreign policy.

So, try not tarring Erdoğan with every little "negative" news item. Sometimes he does take a justified position, even if he handles it poorly

gary , Oct 26 2020 17:16 utc | 8
Erdogan is a player and is being played. He attacked syria for the saudies en israeli interest, and defended LNA against the uae and israeli interest. He works well with iran and russia and the people defend him against the gulen/cia coup but only after the downing of the russian jet by gulen forces and the nato backing.
Playing both sides is very risky but he is a fighting for his survival. And he is breaking loose from the dark side, its take time and a lot of money. Give him some slack and watch your back.
As long as he is democratically elected he must be supported. Turkey doesn't deserve another fascist western dictator.
Blue Dotterel , Oct 26 2020 17:24 utc | 9
It should also be noted that it is France, Britain, the US and, well, the West, that have created and even financed most of these terrorist groups to begin with over the past 40 years. The Chechen's were financed by who, against who? why? Go back to the late 70s for your history lesson.
ATH , Oct 26 2020 17:36 utc | 10
One put together several big political events since 10-15 years ago and a trend emerge in the "Western Camp". The promotors of the plan being the Anglo-Americans and the passive-reactive followers being Continental Europe and proxies in the "middle-east". And it looks like we are in the tail-end of such a trend with some ups and down and likely the whole plan being in a shamble now:

(*) Anglo-Americans destroy the foundation of the "two-state plan" through their proxies, Israel and Saudi

(*) Continental Europe's main powers sensing trouble prefer having Turkey as an external buffer state and oppose her entry in the EU. They start putting huge administrative hurdles which signal the strategic partnership Turkey is seeking is not for the foreseeable future

(*) Turkey gradually opts for the burgeoning "Neo-Ottoman" strategic direction (mainly translated into the leadership of the Sunni Muslims) and turns it's ambitions towards East

(*) Anglo-Americans politically undermine EU, going as far for UK as leaving the strategic partnership

(*) Continental Europe digs into its "fundamental values" of "secularism" although in a plain hypocritical way

(*) Proxy powers, including Turkey fall into internal competitions between each other.

vk , Oct 26 2020 17:40 utc | 11
I interpret the fall of Turkey as a serious blow to the American Empire, as it is NATO'S second most prized possession (Germany being the first). What a sad end to the "Capitalist counterpart to Cuba" during the Cold War.

Turkey is suffering from a typical neoliberal crisis: rising debt to keep trade balance afloat, which devalues the currency, which worsens the trade balance again, which balloons the debt even more (from a greater base) and so on, in a vicious cycle that ends in default and "shock therapy" by the IMF. We've already seen this movie in Latin America during the 1990s, Greece in 2011 (against Germany, the EZ) and the Asian Tigers in 1997-1998 (those countries only escaped the fate of Latin America and Greece because China bailed them out of the crisis) and post-USSR in the 1992-1998. The most likely scenario is Erdogan to be murdered in another CIA-backed color revolution and the Turkish people to receive the "Haiti treatment" and put to its knees by an IMF shock doctrine.

Only this time it is Turkey, not some random shithole in Latin America. This makes all the difference, because Turkey really has an independent geopolitical project, and a long tradition of independence that the Latin American peoples simply don't have. Turkey may break out of the American sphere of influence as it disintegrates (although, in my opinion, the chances for that really happening are low).

The Americans must be careful with Turkey. Turkey is not Latin America: it really has an option, which is turning East.

BraveNewWorld , Oct 26 2020 17:59 utc | 12
Look at what happened whan Turkey shot down the Russian jet in Syria and one of Erdoguan's reptile pets shot the Russian Ambassador. Russia halted trade with Turkey, then the sultan climbed down almost instantly. Don't be surprised to see a repeat if Russia gets ticked of again.
pat , Oct 26 2020 18:20 utc | 13
NOAM CHOMSKY: "I've often myself just not bothered to vote when it didn't matter or voted for a third party if it didn't matter. This time is unusual. It matters. A lot. In fact, more than anything ever, literally. So, I therefore think it shouldn't take five seconds for people to recognize we have to vote against Trump. There's only one way to vote against Trump in our two-party system. That's to push the lever for the Democrats. That's voting against Trump. If you decide not to vote against Trump, you're helping him, you're helping him win. We can debate lots of things, but not arithmetic. If you withdraw a vote from Biden, that puts Trump one vote ahead. So, you have essentially two choices on November 3rd. Am I going to vote against Trump or am I going to help him win? I can't imagine how there can be a discussion about that among rational people."
R Rose , Oct 26 2020 18:25 utc | 14
b " Last Thursday Russian ships in the eastern Mediterranean fired missiles on a oil smuggling center near Jarablus, Syria:"

Yet your linked source says it was unidentified aircraft

" injured in a missile strike by an unknown military aircraft "

So why would you make the claim you have?

div> @VK
For someone who espouses being a Marxist, you sure accommodate reactionary language on the underdeveloped nations of Latin America. Who needs adversaries with 'comrades' such as yourself. One wonders what your thoughts are on the underdeveloped nations in Africa and South East Asia. Does 'shithole' come to mind as well?

Posted by: dimitrov , Oct 26 2020 18:43 utc | 15

@VK
For someone who espouses being a Marxist, you sure accommodate reactionary language on the underdeveloped nations of Latin America. Who needs adversaries with 'comrades' such as yourself. One wonders what your thoughts are on the underdeveloped nations in Africa and South East Asia. Does 'shithole' come to mind as well?

Posted by: dimitrov | Oct 26 2020 18:43 utc | 15

c1ue , Oct 26 2020 19:24 utc | 16
I don't disagree with b's analysis, except that, IMO, b still does not give sufficient credit to the reality that Turkey can con to nice to fan dance with all sides in order to promote its own interests.
In fact, it is not to Turkeys interest to side too far or permanently with any of the powers around it.
This certainly has reinforced Erdogan's behavior. Even as he installs S400, he hosts an enormous US base in Incirlik.
Even as Turkey supports Salafists in Syria, Turkey works with Russia to stranglehold the entry of natural gas from Centra Asia and the Middle East to Europe.
Chaos is to Erdogan's benefit. By not outright allying to anyone and sowing chaos everywhere, it allows him to hold down the Kurds inside Turkey without a peep of protest from anyone.
Kadath , Oct 26 2020 19:25 utc | 17
Re: Pat #13,

What Chomsky leaves out is how this vote matters? What is the meaningful difference between Trump v Biden. Trump's critics keep calling him a thief, a scam artist and a traitor, well where's the proof they've spent 4 years investigating Trump for everything under the sun, but they didn't find anything they could take to court (and i'm certain they would have leaked anything they found even if it didn't meet the burden to open an investigation). At the end of the day you got to put up or shut up, and Trump's critics never put up anything except a bunch of bland slogans. I perfectly understand why people can dislike or even hate Trump, but if you yourself cant honestly express why you hate Trump while also applying that same moral logic to your preferred candidate then your opinion is just an ideological slogan of no real intellectual value.

As someone who is well aware of both candidates huge flaws, let me express Biden's massive flaws - 1. he has a history of warmongering, in Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, all of which were illegal wars of aggression under international law. 2 Biden is unwaveringly corrupt, from his support of usurious Credit Card company interest rates, Bankruptcy "reform", to Ukraine, China and Russia, Biden has always cut side deals for himself using his sons, his brother and his friends as intermediaries to ensure he gets his cut. 3 Biden served as VP for the what he called the "most progressive" presidency of the post-WW 2 era, but what are his accomplishments that justify rewarding him with the Presidency - NOTHING! Trump was right when he called Biden out on all of his bland platitudes to the American people during the debate, Biden talks a big game - but at the end it's just empty platitudes, he's not going to fight for anything for the American people because he represents the establishment and the establishment is perfectly happy with the too big to fail status quo, hope and change was just more of the same!

Now many of these things could be said of Trump (just the details change), but that just proves the point, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE between Trump and Biden that justifies voting for Biden over Trump. Well Chomsky is too much of a old man and a coward to tell you the Truth, but I will. The difference is that Trump's election proves that the establishment has utterly utterly failed and has been delegitimatized by these failures to such a monumental level that the "best" and "brightest" that the establishment choses to offer are rejected by the people in favor of a TV game show host! Chomsky, for all of his criticism of the establishment is at the end of the day is, in essence, the "official" gadfly of the establishment, an acceptable outlet for criticism of the establishment but with no power to either change or threaten the establishment. Perhaps in 40 years some hypothetical political leader might cite Chomsky as a reason he cast a decisive vote against a policy. But that is it, Chomsky is not trying to change the establishment or the status quo people live with now, he has never seized the moment and pushed for change because ultimately he serves the current power structure (after all, he became rich and mildly famous under this status quo). Trump's (re)election represents the failure of Chomsky's view of reform, rather than gradually changing the system from within by the base, a radical populist change of the system from the top was an option. An option Chomsky foolishly discounted and discouraged.

Laguerre , Oct 26 2020 19:34 utc | 18
I don't much agree with anything said so far. OK Erdogan is a megalomaniac, and a bit of a nutter, which he is. But he has substantial support behind him, and I would say, not unlikely to be re-elected. He is a populist. Quite Trumpish.
William Gruff , Oct 26 2020 19:39 utc | 19
Chomsky was infected with Trump Derangement Syndrome.

It is so sad. That guy used to have a mind. Now he has lost it.

Laguerre , Oct 26 2020 20:02 utc | 20
Erdogan's electorate is Anatolian Turkish pro-Sunni and anti-Kurdish. That explains his policy in Syria. The Kurds are a danger for him, and he can support the jihadis in Idlib. It's a mistake in my view; better to let Asad recover control over Syrian territory, and let him keep Kurdish militias in order.

The Mediterranean conflict with Greece. He's right there. The Greeks have claimed sea areas which aren't theirs, but are defended by the EU, e.g. Macron's statements.

Libya, I can't see one side as better than the other. Supporting one side at least provides employments for Syrian Turkmens, who he otherwise would like to help.

Nagorno-Karabakh. Unlike others, I don't see this as Turkish led. It might be, but more likely stimulated by Azerbaijani resentment at the Armenian take-over of part of their territory by the Armenians in the 90s. The Azerbaijanis don't seem to be doing too badly, in spite of the Armenian propaganda, supported by b for no good reason.

bevin , Oct 26 2020 20:04 utc | 21
Chomsky is wrong. This is a perfect opportunity for opposition to the duopoly to make its weight and numbers felt by refusing to vote for, their enemy, Biden.
They would not win the election but they could demonstrate the real and growing support for Socialist policies and ideas.
If the price to pay for establishing the base of a real opposition is Trump limping back into office, less harm will be done than mandating Biden et al.
When the Democrats come crawling to request your vote bear in mind that their expectation of the support of the "left" is based upon their vigorous campaigns to keep socialist candidates off the ballot. By supporting them you support your own disenfranchisement and the omnipotence of the tiny anti-social oligarchy which employees Bidens and Trumps alike.
Jpc , Oct 26 2020 20:12 utc | 22
Gary 8
He attacked syria for the saudies en israeli interest, and defended LNA against the uae and israeli interest

The SA oil money isn't there anymore.
Hard to keep things going when you haven't someone to pay the bills.

Darras , Oct 26 2020 20:23 utc | 23
It's funny, in France we have an expression " tête de Turc"( Turk's head) to designate somebody that everybody like to hate. A kind of expiatory victim.
Jackrabbit , Oct 26 2020 20:33 utc | 24
Kadath @Oct26 19:25 #17
Trump's election proves that the establishment has utterly utterly failed and has been delegitimatized by these failures to such a monumental level that the "best" and "brightest" that the establishment choses to offer are rejected by the people in favor of a TV game show host!

Sorry Kadath, but this is just not right. Here's why:
  1. Hillary won the popular vote.
  2. It's difficult not-to-notice that the election was rigged:

    • Bernie as sheepdog;
    • Trump as the only MAGA! Nationalist and only populist in the Republican Primary

      Eighteen other smart, seasoned politicians didn't adjust their campaign(s) in any way that could effectively stop Trump which the Republican establishment supposedly hated;

    • Hillary's mistakes that no seasoned candidate would make:
      - screwing progressives;

      - ignoring/alienating the black vote;

      - insulting whites (deplorables!)

      - not campaigning (in the closing weeks) in the 3 states SHE KNEW would decide the election.


And why was it rigged? Because the Deep State Empire managers need a populist hero/'Glorious Leader' to lead the charge against Russia & China.

Thucydides Trap!

!!

Christian J. Chuba , Oct 26 2020 20:39 utc | 25
Wouldn't it be sweet if Israel stepped in to keep Azerbaijan supplied with drones, artillery, and cluster bombs to fill any void created by Turkish shortages?

Pompeo / Trump could take one last shot at threatening Iran and adding more life destroying sanctions because of Iran's highly aggressive deployment of security forces on their northern border.

JoeG , Oct 26 2020 20:40 utc | 26
Somewhere in CHappaqua...Hillary is celebrating her birthday...
Watching Amy Coney Barrett being sworn into the SCOTUS.

LOLOLOLOLOL

robin , Oct 26 2020 20:44 utc | 27
@ Blue Dotterel | Oct 26 2020 17:24 utc | 9

The irony of a french president condemning "islamist separatism" is certainly quite rich. And following a gruesome beheading no less.

I suppose it's just another example of that regular cognitive miracle. One where, for years on end, a nation's entire narrative war effort is focused entirely on glorifying the image of what can hardly be described as anything but "islamist separatist". A cognitive miracle indeed when one considers that the french were amongst the most enthusiastic imperial participants who turned the one african country with the highest living standard into the sorry mess of rubble and ash it is today.

A few years later, when the same wizards turned their attention to the middle east aiming to separate yet another secular nation into war-torn wastelands, considerable expense and effort were invested in building entire armies of bearded meanies.

The miracle is in the disconnect. The complete absence of empathy for our own victims while we commemorate our relatively tiny national trauma.

p>

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-85 , Main

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-85 | Main

[Oct 26, 2020] Politicians books as a subtle form of corruption

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Same principle with speaking engagements. Nobody in the corporate world seriously believed that listening to a speech from Hillary Clinton was worth $200,000 - especially when she sometimes kept getting these gigs at the same company every few months: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-03/every-hillary-and-bill-clinton-speech-2013-fees ..."
"... Furthermore, the book sales conduit adds an extra degree of separation between the ultimate source of the money and the recipient of the money. Somebody who wants to buy a politician could for example donate money to an NGO that does "political education" and buys political books to distribute to people, and that NGO buys the copies of the corrupt politician's book in bulk. ..."
Oct 26, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Learned here on SST that a lot of the huge book contracts given to swampies are a form of money laundering. I have long tried to figure out how the publishing companies could afford to pay yuudge advances for ghost written books in a country where so few people read much of anything any longer. Simple answer! Big money people order yuudge numbers of books in advance so that the publisher is assured a profit.

BillWade , 25 October 2020 at 12:32 PM

I think it was the previous mayor of Baltimore who got a multi-million dollar windfall from her best-selling children's book. I wonder how many kids actually read it.

Lots of trucks out with their flags here, people are becoming optimistic here in South Florida, feels almost normal here.

Trump taking New York would be the ultimate, lets hope. I'm looking forward to watching CNN's Wolf Blitzer on election night, it's been 4 years for me and CNN. I just want to see him squirm.

rgspenser , 25 October 2020 at 02:05 PM

Thanks for posting how money is routed through publishers.
This was right in front of me the whole time.

rho , 25 October 2020 at 05:08 PM

Colonel,

it looks a lot less like corruption when a politician receives money because he wrote an "inspiring book" that seemingly sells lots of copies than when he receives money outright for political favors.

Same principle with speaking engagements. Nobody in the corporate world seriously believed that listening to a speech from Hillary Clinton was worth $200,000 - especially when she sometimes kept getting these gigs at the same company every few months: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-03/every-hillary-and-bill-clinton-speech-2013-fees

Furthermore, the book sales conduit adds an extra degree of separation between the ultimate source of the money and the recipient of the money. Somebody who wants to buy a politician could for example donate money to an NGO that does "political education" and buys political books to distribute to people, and that NGO buys the copies of the corrupt politician's book in bulk.

Mark Logan , 25 October 2020 at 06:42 PM

Interesting question about book deals. Certainly it could be a channel to hide the names of donors, which would seem the only rational reason to do so. I would guess the lecture circuit a more appropriate way to do that. If I'm going to part with that much I'd at least want a song for their dinner out of it.

The 10 biggest book deals have a mixture of celebrities, I can't imagine anyone wanting to slip Bruce Springsteen $10 million under the table so it appears the publishers do make money on these deals, counter-intuitive though it be.

https://bookriot.com/biggest-book-deals/

The Twisted Genius , 25 October 2020 at 07:03 PM

Book writing can be far more lucrative than I ever thought possible. James Patterson got 150 million for a 17 book series. I would say he earned it although I've never read any of his stuff. Michelle Obama's first book sold over 10 million copies and netted her at least 65 million in a deal for both her and Barrack's memoirs.

Ken Follett got 50 million for his trilogy.

Bill Clinton got 15 million for his book while George W. Bush only got 7 million for his.

Hillary got 14 million for hers. Springsteen got 10 million for his autobiography.

Even Pope Jan Pavel II made a cool 8.5 million for his memoirs back in 1994. There are an awful lot of 7 figure book advances out there.

Another phenomenon in the book world is the mass purchase of books by organizations. For example the RNC bought $100K worth of Don Trump Jr's book and more than $400K worth of Sean Hannity's latest. I'm sure the RNC is not alone in this practice.

[Oct 26, 2020] The goal of neoliberal globalism promoted by CIA and MI6 is ending nation states to end their influence, laws and regulations, and thus try to dynamite, through sowing divide ( and in this they are helped by alleged opponent Soros and his network of franchises mastering regime change, color revolutions

Oct 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Eric , Oct 24 2020 21:10 utc | 18

... ... ...

The goal of this movement is ending nation states to end their influence, laws and regulations, and thus try to dynamite, through sowing divide ( and in this they are helped by alleged opponent Soros and his network of franchises mastering regime change, color revolutions

Blunt coups d´etat and lately "peaceful transitions of power", being both, Soros and the NRx, connected to the CIA...)countries with which make what they call "The Mosaic" of regions resulting, at the head of which there will be a corporation CEO and their stakeholders in a hierarchical autocratic order. These people think that Democracy simply does not work and thus must be finished, and that there are people ( white, of course ) who have developed a higher IQ ( at this poin

t I guess some of you have noticed this creed sound very familiar to you, from our neighbors here by the side at SST, where "james" and Pat lately love each other so much...) and must rule over the rest.

To achieve their goals, these people, as geeks from Silicon Valley, are willing to cross the human frontier to transhumanism so as to enhance their human capabilities to submit the rest...

Wondering why this topic have never been treated at MoA...nor at the Valdai Discussion Club...

The Alt-Right and the Europe of the Regions. According to Wikipedia, Steve Bannon is inspired by the theorist Curtis Yarvin ( https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilustration_oscura), who states that countries should be divided into feudal areas in the hands of corporations (Patchwork).

https://twitter.com/andrei_kononov/status/1126684073009639425

The Moldbug Variations

H.Schmatz , Oct 24 2020 23:01 utc | 28

@

[Oct 25, 2020] RNC Spox Liz Harrington- Everything Democrats Accuse Us Of Doing Is What They Did With The Steele Dossier - Video - RealClearPolitics

Oct 25, 2020 | www.realclearpolitics.com

RNC Spox Liz Harrington: Everything Democrats Accuse Us Of Doing Is What They Did With The Steele Dossier Posted By Tim Hains
On Date October 23, 2020

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1319351107253141504&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.realclearpolitics.com%2Fvideo%2F2020%2F10%2F23%2Fgop_spox_elizabeth_harrington_everything_democrats_accuse_us_of_doing_is_what_they_did_with_steele_dossier.html&siteScreenName=rcpvideo&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

RNC's national spokesperson Liz Harrington battled CNN's Christiane Amanpour for refusing to engage with allegations of corruption against Joe Biden and his family after years of hyping unverified Trump-Russia allegations.

"Why don't you want to report this? This is one of the most powerful families in Washington," she asked. "And you're okay with our interests being sold out to profit Joe Biden and his family, while we're suffering during a pandemic from communist China?"

me title=

https://c5x8i7c7.ssl.hwcdn.net/vplayer-parallel/20200902_2348/ima_html5/index.html

https://c5x8i7c7.ssl.hwcdn.net/vplayer-parallel/20200902_2348/videojs/show.html?controls=1&loop=60&autoplay=0&tracker=a71d2729-c152-42a5-b839-e31cfd08bff8&height=227&width=402&vurl=%2F%2Fd14c63magvk61v.cloudfront.net%2Fvideos%2Fdgv_rcp%2F20201024150810_5f9441771320b%2Fdgv_rcp_trending_articles_20201024150810_5f9441771320b_new.mp4&poster=%2F%2Fd14c63magvk61v.cloudfront.net%2Fvideos%2Fdgv_rcp%2F20201024150810_5f9441771320b%2Fdgv_rcp_trending_articles_20201024150810_5f9441771320b_new.jpg


"Absolutely, absolutely," CNN's Amanpour replied. Related Topics: Liz Harrington , Hunter Biden

[Oct 25, 2020] Monkeys Or Children- Russia Chooses Neither, Dooming Germany -

Oct 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Monkeys Or Children? Russia Chooses Neither, Dooming Germany by Tyler Durden Sat, 10/24/2020 - 09:20 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, 'n Guns blog,

Russia is done with the European Union. At last week's Valdai Discussion Forum Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made this quite clear with this statement.

Those people in the West who are responsible for foreign policy and do not understand the necessity of mutually respectable conversation–well, we must simply stop for a while communicate with them. Especially since Ursula von der Leyen states that geopolitical partnership with current Russia's leadership is impossible. If this is the way they want it, so be it. (H/T Andrei Martyanov)

Lavrov's statements echo a number of statements made in recent months by Russian leadership that there is no opportunity for diplomacy possible with the United States.

We can now add the European Union to that list. Pepe Escobar's latest piece goes over Lavrov's comments about the European Union and they are devastating, as devastating as when he and Putin described the U.S. as " Not Agreement Capable " a few years ago.

Lavrov reiterated this with the following comments at Valdai last week.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/zV_W3b_4G50

But as badly as the U.S. has acted in recent years in international relations, unilaterally abrogating treaty after treaty, nominally with the goal of remaking them to be more inclusive, Lavrov's upbraiding of the current leadership of the European Union is far worse.

Because they have gone along with, if not openly assisted, every U.S.-backed provocation against Russia for their own advantage. From Ukraine to MH-17, to Skripal to now Belarus and the ridiculous Navalny poisoning, the EU has proved to be worse than the U.S.

Because there can be no doubt the U.S. views Russia as an antagonist. We're quite clear about this. But Europe plays off U.S. aggression, hiding in the U.S.'s skirts while telling Russia, usually through German Chancellor Angela Merkel, "Be patient, we are reluctantly going along with this." But really they're happy about it.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

So Russia is ultimately caught between the U.S. and Europe on all basic issues of trade, politics, and international law.

Adding to Lavrov's frustration, Andrei Martyanov, as an astute analyst on Russian politics as anyone, is correct when he says (H/T to Pepe Escobar).

You do not negotiate with monkeys, you treat them nicely, you make sure that they are not abused, but you don't negotiate with them, same as you don't negotiate with toddlers. They want to have their Navalny as their toy–let them. I call on Russia to start wrapping economic activity up with EU for a long time. They buy Russia's hydrocarbons and hi-tech, fine. Other than that, any other activity should be dramatically reduced and necessity of the Iron Curtain must not be doubted anymore.

And the truth is that Russia is dealing with monkeys in the U.S. and toddlers in the EU. And Martanyov's right that it's time Putin et.al. simply turn their backs on the West and move forward.

Lavrov's statements at Valdai were momentous. They sent a clear signal that if Europe wants a future relationship with Russia they will have to change how they do business.

The problem is however, that the EU is suffused with arrogance on the eve of the U.S. election, mistakenly thinking Joe Biden will beat Trump.

Merkel has betrayed Putin at every turn since 2013. And Germany's appalling behavior over the Alexei Navalny poisoning was the last straw.

That what was another sabotage effort to stop the Nordstream 2 pipeline and add grist to Trump's re-election mill was given even a cursory glance by the highest levels of the German government was insulting enough.

That Merkel allowed her Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to run his mouth on the subject, and then throw the decision to sanction Russia (again) over this to the EU parliament and give it any kind of political play was truly treacherous.

And it proved, yet again, that Merkel's word is worth less than nothing. She tells Putin one thing and then does the exact opposite. Glenn Deisen writing for RT chalked this up to Germany's plans for domination. He rightly sees Germany using Russia to get what it wants in Europe.

Germany has taken the lead in advancing "European integration" and therefore prioritizes Eastern European member states that push for a more aggressive stance towards Russia. Economic connectivity with Russia is no longer an instrument for building trust and cooperation in the pan-European space, rather it was intended to strengthen Germany's position as the center of the EU. Moscow should work with Berlin to construct Nord Stream 2, but not forget why Nord Stream 1 was built while South Stream was blocked.

This is a point I've been making for years. Nordstream 2 is a political tool for Germany to reroute gas coming in from Russia which Merkel can use as a political lever over Poland and the Visegrads.

And it is the Poles who have consistently shot themselves in the foot by not reconciling their relationship with Russia, banding together with its Eastern European brothers and securing an independent source of Russian gas. Putin and Gazprom would happily provide it to them, if they would but ask.

But they don't and instead turn to the U.S. to be their protectors from both Russia and Germany, rather than conduct themselves as a sovereign nation.

That said, I think Mr. Diesen misses the larger point here. It is true Germany under Merkel is looking to expand its control over the EU and set itself up as a superpower for the next century. Putin himself acknowledged that possibility at Valdai. That may be more to dig at the U.S. and warn Europe rather than him actually believing it.

Because under Merkel and the EU Germany is losing its dynamism. And it may even lose control over the EU if it isn't careful. If you look at the current situation from a German perspective you realize that Germany's mighty export business is surrounded by hostile foreign powers.

  1. Russia -- Merkel cut off the country from Russian markets. Even though some of the trade with Russia has returned since sanctions over Crimea went into place in 2014 she hasn't fought the U.S.'s hyper-aggressive use of sanctions to improve Germany's position.
  2. The U.K. -- French President Emmanuel Macron looks like he's engineered a No-Deal Brexit with Boris Johnson which will put up major export barriers for Germany into the U.K. cutting them off from that market.
  3. The U.S. – Trump has all but declared Germany an enemy and when he wins a second term will tighten the screws on Merkel even tighter.
  4. China – They know that the incoming Great Reset, which will have its Jahr Null event in Europe likely next year, is all about consolidating power into Europe and sucking it away from the U.S., a process Trump is dead-set against.

However, don't think for a second that the Commies that run the EU and the World Economic Forum are teaming up with the Commies in China. Oh no, they have bigger plans than that.

And what's been pretty clear to me is Europe's delusions that it can subjugate the world under its rubric, forcing its rules and standards on the rest of us, including China, again allowing the U.S. to act as its proxy while it tries to maintain its standing.

I know what you're thinking. That sounds completely ludicrous.

And you're right, it is ludicrous.

But that doesn't mean it isn't true. This is clearly the mindset we're dealing with in The Davos Crowd. They engineered a mostly-fake pandemic to accelerate their plans to remake the world economy by burning it down.

The multi-polar world will see the fading U.S. and U.K. band together while Russia and China continue to stitch together Asia into a coherent economic sphere. Trump is right to pull the U.S. out of Central Asia and has gotten nothing but grief from the U.S. establishment while Europe, through NATO, continues trying to expand to the Russian border, now with openly backing the attempted coup in Belarus.

This was the dominant theme at Valdai and the focus of Putin's opening remarks.

[Oct 24, 2020] Syria: Six Million Displaced People Have Returned Home

Oct 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

arby , Oct 23 2020 13:34 utc | 104

Syria

"As the country tries to overcome aggression and sanctions from the U.S. and the European Union, the government plans to create more homes and announces that 11 new artisanal zones were established in Tartous, Quneitra, Homs, and Hama provinces. Also, with China's support is has imported transportation, including buses and 708 vehicles for the cleaning sector."


Syria: Six Million Displaced People Have Returned Home

[Oct 24, 2020] Immiration from Syria to Europe as The Trojan Horset of Muslim brothhood

Oct 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Majority of One , says: October 23, 2020 at 5:40 pm GMT

@RoatanBill slim Brotherhood mania. The MB was founded in the '20's by British intelligence bodies in Egypt in order to form a counter-balance to the growth of Arab nationalism. So we have a bunch of losers who refused to abide in a Syria which the government of that nation wished to remain NOT under sectarian control and remain a home for all the faiths which have lived side-by-side in that land for many centuries.

The logical destination for that moth-eaten bunch of fanatics and their dupes would be to the lands occupied by the Wahabist Saudi crime clan as well as those of the Gulf Dictatorships. Such brothers in fanaticism should be very welcome at those totally logical destinations.

[Oct 24, 2020] A small Marine artillery battalion fired more rounds into Ragga than any artillery battalion since Vietnam. Many of the victims are still buried there in the rubble caused by indiscriminate indirect fire.

Oct 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon , Oct 22 2020 21:29 utc | 27

@ arby 8
Syria: "Entire neighborhoods have been reduced to rubble. [11]"

According to news reports, Raqqa was devastated by the U.S.-led airstrikes that accompanied the SDF's four-month offensive to drive out the Islamic State, and a year later the city is still in ruins.
It's worse than that. The "so-called fight against ISIL" included the US military firing indirect fire weapons (artillery, rockets, mortars) into a civilian-occupied city. Many of the victims are still buried there in the rubble caused by indiscriminate indirect fire.

Feb 6, 2018 -- A small Marine artillery battalion fired more rounds than any artillery battalion since Vietnam. "They fired more rounds in five months in[to] Raqqa, Syria, than any other Marine artillery battalion, or any Marine or Army battalion, since the Vietnam war," said Army Sgt. Major. John Wayne Troxell, the senior enlisted adviser to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "In five months they fired 35,000 artillery rounds on ISIS targets, killing ISIS fighters by the dozens," Troxell told Marine Corps Times during a roundtable discussion Jan. 23. "We needed them to put pressure on ISIS and we needed them to kill ISIS." . . here

[Oct 24, 2020] Put me in charge, and I could stop the illegals in a matter of days. One easy policy: -- All fighting age males will be turned over to Assad for conscription as expendable shock troops.

Oct 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

A123 , says: October 22, 2020 at 10:21 pm GMT

@RoatanBill days. One easy policy:

-- All fighting age males will be turned over to Assad for conscription as expendable shock troops.

It is a win-win-win.

With that much additional manpower, Assad would be able to drive Turkish interlopers and Iranian al'Hezbollah terrorists out of his Syria.

It would open the door to Russia-U.S.-Syria cooperation. Once Iran is 100% gone, Deep State obstructionists in the U.S. establishment would not be able to interfere with Trump pulling troops out of " ahem .. oil field defense " positions.

Alas, Greek leaders are not willing to go that far. Yet

PEACE

[Oct 24, 2020] Wasn't all that long ago when b and many of the barflies were kind of celebrating the fact that the Yankees lost in Syria and were getting the boot. Turns out that is not what has happened at all.

Oct 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

arby , Oct 22 2020 23:09 utc | 38

Don Bacon @ 27

Yes. Wasn't all that long ago when b and many of the barflies were kind of celebrating the fact that the Yankees lost in Syria and were getting the boot.
Turns out that is not what has happened at all.

[Oct 24, 2020] Here are the consequences of the war for the people of Syria

Oct 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

arby , Oct 22 2020 19:00 utc | 8

"Here are the consequences of the war for the people of Syria.

The economy has contracted by two-thirds since 2011 [1], the year the United States and its Western allies, along with the Turks, Saudis, Emiratis, and Qataris, assisted by the Israelis, fanned the embers of an Islamist insurgency that has burned since the 1960s into a conflagration.
Over 80 percent of Syrians now live below the poverty line. [2]
Once classified as a lower middle income country, the World Bank in 2018 reclassified Syria as a low-income country. [3]
According to the country's president, Bashar al-Assad, Syrians are trapped "between hunger and poverty and deprivation [created by the long war] on one side and death [from the coronavirus] on the other." [4]
Food prices have increased more than 23 times over the past decade. [5]
The World Food Program warns of an impending famine. [6]
Syria's healthcare system, once one of the finest in the region, is in disarray. The country suffers a dearth of doctors, drugs and medical equipment. [7]
Dams and oil fields barely function. [8]
Industrial areas have been completely devastated. [9]
Schools and hospitals lie in ruins. [10]
Entire neighborhoods have been reduced to rubble. [11]

Washington's Long War on Syria: An Update

[Oct 24, 2020] The USA foreign policy establishment, including Joe Biden, as vulgar bullies

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is no fool like an old American fool. Like Joe Biden, for instance. In the last presidential "debate" he called Xi Jinping and Putin "thugs." What does this tell you about the state of American diplomacy? ..."
Oct 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

macilrae , says: October 23, 2020 at 5:37 pm GMT

I'm not even a US American but I recall deep my embarrassment when watching the vulgar Hillary Clinton handling herself in the presence of Sergey Lavrov – around the time of the excruciating "reset" event.

And today you guys have Pompeo for Christ sake! How can you stand the shame – where do you get these people?

OK, I do know where, alas.

Robert Konrad , says: October 23, 2020 at 6:05 pm GMT

There is no fool like an old American fool. Like Joe Biden, for instance. In the last presidential "debate" he called Xi Jinping and Putin "thugs." What does this tell you about the state of American diplomacy?

Sure, Joe is trying to win cheap political points by catering to the abysmally ignorant and savagely russophobic average American voters. But at what political cost to the country he represents! And what exactly does this old American fool want to do when he says that Russia and China will "pay a price."

What can America do to the world's supreme military power (Russia) and to the world's supreme economic power (China)? Particularly now that these two superpowers are working together.

How senile and stupid has Biden become! He stopped developing intellectually about 50 years ago. And now he never will.

Notsofast , says: October 23, 2020 at 10:17 pm GMT
@Robert Konrad

The senility may be new but joe biden has always been stupid. One of the only people on the planet that can stick both of his feet in his mouth at the same time.

[Oct 24, 2020] The World Order: New Rules or a Game Without Rules. So, what is happening now? Regrettably, the game without rules is becoming increasingly horrifying and sometimes seems to be a fait accompli."

Oct 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

gm , Oct 22 2020 19:00 utc | 9

@Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 22 2020 18:19 utc | 6

Re: "...Thus, six years ago, in 2014, we spoke about this issue when we discussed the theme The World Order: New Rules or a Game Without Rules. So, what is happening now? Regrettably, the game without rules is becoming increasingly horrifying and sometimes seems to be a fait accompli."

Putin said this virtually in the same breath directly after his previous paragraph you excerpted where he speaks of the serious ongoing challenges of the coronavirus pandemic.

What that says to me is that he is hinting with his trademark subtlety that he thinks the CV pandemic may not be a naturally arising event. In other words, a plandemic.


karlof1 , Oct 22 2020 19:12 utc | 12

gm @9--

Yes, that's the ongoing rhetorical battle between the Collectivist nations who uphold the sanctity of International Law and the Neoliberal Nations controlled by Financial Parasites that can't survive under a functional International Law System. That distinction is constantly becoming clearer particularly to those residing within the Neoliberal nations as they watch their lives being destroyed. IMO, we're on the cusp of entering the most critical decade of this century which will determine humanity's condition when 2101 is reached.

[Oct 23, 2020] Hating Russia is a full time and well paid job

Neocons do not want to fight Russia, they just want to profit from Russophobia while getting nice money from the US MIC.
Oct 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Mister Delicious , 7 hours ago

  1. Introduction
  2. The euphemisms
  3. Hostility to Putin's Russia is largely a Jewish phenomenon
  4. The media
  5. A de facto violation of free speech
  6. Shutting down an honest examination of Russian history
  7. The best alt-media journalists are neutered
  8. Much of what is written about Russian relations and history becomes meaningless and deceptive
  9. A lesson in relevance from the Alt-Right
  10. Malice towards none
  11. The problem extends to all areas of public life
  12. We need serious scholarship and analysis
  13. Low expectations from the existing alt-media
  14. A call for articles and support
  15. https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/
ebear , 6 hours ago

Has any nation on Earth suffered more destruction and loss of life in the 20th century? And yet, there they still are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btff8DmOg1k

John Hansen , 7 hours ago

I'd have more hope for Russia if the Russian ruling class weren't so obsessed with the West and didn't send their children to Western (woke) schools, etc.

theallseeinggod , 7 hours ago

They're not doing that well, but they're not repeating many of the west's mistakes.

Normal , 5 hours ago

Now the West has rules only for poor people.

Helg Saracen , 6 hours ago

Advice to Americans (for the sake of experiment): prohibit lobbying in US and the right of citizens with dual citizenship to hold public office in US. I assure - you will be surprised how quickly Russians go from non-kosher to kosher for Americans and how American politicians, the media will convince Americans of this at every intersection. :) Ha ha ha

Nayel , 5 hours ago

If the [Vichy] Left in America weren't so determined to project their own Bolshevik leanings on to a possible great ally that their ideology now fears, Russia would be just that: a great ally that could help America shake the Bolsheviks that have infiltrated the American government and plan the same program their Soviet forefathers once held over Russia...

Arising 2.0 , 1 hour ago

Western zionist controlled propaganda reminds me of Mohamed Ali- he used to talk up the ******** so much before a fight that when the time came to fight the opponent was usually traumatised or confused. Until Ali met with Joe Frazier (Russia) who didn't fall for all the pre-fight BS.

ThePinkHole , 39 minutes ago

Time for a pop quiz! Name the two countries below:

Country A - competency, attention to first principles, planning based on reality, consistency of purpose, and unity of execution.

Country B - incompetency, interfering in everything everywhere, planning based on hubris and sloppy assumptions, confusion, and disunity.

(Source: Adapted from Patrick Armstrong)

foxenburg , 3 hours ago

This one is always good for a laugh....the Daily Telegraph's Con Coughlin explaining in 2015 how Putin will fail in Syria...

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6990/russia-failure-syria

Money-Liberty , 6 hours ago

We have all this talk of the 'Ruskies' when in fact it is not the ordinary Russian people but rather a geopolitical power struggle. The ordinary US citizen or European just wants to maintain their liberty and be able to profit from their endeavours. The rich and powerful globalists who hide behind their military are the ones that play these games. I am no friend of Putin but equally I am no friend of our own political establishment that have been captured by Wall Street. I care about Main Street and as the US dollar loses its privilege there will be real pain to share amongst our economies. The last thing we need is for the elites of the Western alliance to profit with cold/hot wars on the backs of ourselves.

Having been behind the iron curtain as a young Merchant Navy Officer I found ordinary citizens fine and even organized football matches with the local communist parties. People have the same desires and aspirations and whether rich or poor we should respect each others cultures and territories. http://www.money-liberty.com/gallery/Predictions-2021.pdf

[Oct 23, 2020] Russia has been a fixture of the US military-industrial complex for a reason: they need more money and threat inflation is possible only with a suitable bogeyman

Oct 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

rotorhead1871 , 5 hours ago

..they have always been the reason for the industrial-military complex....but now, who needs them.....we got china to point the finger at. so having 2 useful idiot countries...will keep the weapons boys going for quite some time....

Snaffew , 7 hours ago

...he boogeyman has never been Russia, it resides right here in the US under the guise of government, military, mainstream media, propaganda and sanctions, sanctions, sanctions against anyone that rightfully takes our slice of entitled pie because they built a far better and far cheaper mousetrap.

Oh the horrors of claiming to be a democracy and a capitalist nation when you just can't seem to play by the rules. **** America---we have let the elites take us down the road to ruins. We are as much at fault as they are for believing their nonsensical bs the whole while all the evidence was smoking right in front of our face. Who's more stupid...them or us? I'd tell everyone to take a good long look in the mirror if you are looking for an answer to that question---

[Oct 23, 2020] A stark note from Lavrov about the USA neoliberal elite

In America, Truth is a Foreign Agent and World Peace is a threat to National Security.
Oct 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
kiwiklown , Oct 22 2020 9:05 utc | 7

The Russians ( Putin / Lavrov) say ever so politely that the US is not agreement-capable.

I add that the US ( politicians, Wall Streeters, MSM, think tanks ) are:

What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul? He turns into a ghoul without a soul, says I, a devil without human-ness! How dare they call us deplorables when they are the despicables?

[Oct 21, 2020] US Seeks to Prolong Terrorism in Syria, Not Defeat It - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Oct 21, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

Recent attacks on Syrian positions from terrorists of the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) and the release of thousands of prisoners in US-occupied eastern Syria illustrate how Washington is demonstratably prolonging instability in Syria as part of its promise to transform the nation into a "quagmire" for Russia and Iran.

Newsweek itself, in an article titled , "US Syria Representative Says His Job Is to Make the War a 'Quagmire' for Russia," had admitted earlier this year that:

The US special representative for Syria has urged continued American deployment to the war torn country in order to keep pressure on US enemies and make the conflict a "quagmire" for Russia.

The article further elaborated:

Assad -- who now controls the majority of the country -- is backed by Russia and Iran, both of which the US is trying to undermine. Jeffrey said Tuesday that the US strategy will both weaken America's enemies while avoiding costly mission creep.

"This isn't Afghanistan, this isn't Vietnam," he explained. "This isn't a quagmire. My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians."

Toward that end – efforts in US-occupied eastern Syria to properly deal with ISIS prisoners and their family members has been neglected – creating conditions aimed at breeding extremism rather than defusing it. Even the Washington Post – in a recent article titled , "Kurdish-led zone vows to release Syrians from detention camp for ISIS families," would admit:

Conditions inside al-Hol displacement camp, a sprawl of tents perched in the desert west of Hasakah city, have alarmed humanitarian groups and in some cases aided the radicalization of women and children who spent years under Islamic State rule.

The "release" is depicted by the Western media as lacking planning – however – if the goal of the US is to compound Syria's crisis rather than help resolve it – releasing thousands of prisoners – many of whom are likely only further radicalized – is the plan.

US media also reported on a major and recent clash between Syrian forces and ISIS militants requiring the use of Russian airpower to repel.

How Washington Found Itself in Bed with ISIS

Western headlines like Defense Post's article , "90 Dead as Syria Govt Forces Clash With IS: Monitor," claimed:

Clashes in the Syrian Desert between pro-government forces and holdouts of the Islamic State group have killed at least 90 combatants this month, a war monitor said on Wednesday.

Russian aircraft carried out strikes in support of their Syrian regime ally, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

The militants are alleged to be based in Syria's desert regions just west of the Euphrates River. However, in order to sustain ISIS' fighting capacity in an otherwise desolate region, weapons and supplies need to be continuously brought in.

Since it is unlikely the Syrian government is supplying ISIS fighters determined to kill Syrian troops and move westward toward government-held territory – it is the US and its regional allies supplying them instead.

The combination of the deliberately destructive administration of US-occupied territory in eastern Syria and the continued supply and arming of militants – including those affiliated with ISIS – are clear components of Washington's strategy of creating a "quagmire" for Syria and its allies in addition to the continued US military occupation itself and ongoing efforts to maintain crippling sanctions aimed at Syria's economy.

The US has made "quagmires" for Russia in the past. This included its support of militants in Afghanistan through the supply of weapons and training via Pakistan.

The Syrian conflict – since 2011 – has been the result of similar efforts by the US to create, arm, supply, and otherwise back militants attempting to overthrow the government in Damascus. Having failed this primary objective and after having spent whatever credibility the US had upon the international stage – Washington has now moved toward openly obstructing peace and hampering Syria's recovery from the ongoing conflict – admittedly to spite its international competitors including Russia, Iran, and even China.

When comparing America's "rules-based international order" with the emerging multipolar world presented by nations like Russia and China as an alternative – it is difficult to believe Washington sees its continued destabilization of nations and even entire regions of the world as a selling point for its world view rather than the primary reason nations around the globe should both oppose it and back desperately needed alternatives to it.

Attempts by Washington to continue depicting itself as a partner for combating global terrorism rather than a source of global terrorism seems to have fully run its course with the US all but admitting its presence in Syria is aimed at prolonging conflict rather than contributing to efforts to end it. This has been repeatedly illustrated by America's confrontation with Russia in Syria – including a recent incident in which US military vehicles unsuccessfully attempted to block a Russian military patrol.

It was Russia's 2015 entry into the conflict on Syria's behalf that decisively turned the tide of the conflict – using its superior airpower to target ISIS and Al Qaeda supply lines leading out of NATO-member Turkey's territory into Syria, collapsing their respective fighting capacities and allowing Syrian forces to restore order to nearly all major population centers of the country.

Today, remaining hostilities are centered on both Turkish and US-occupied territory inside Syria – the resolution of which will mark the conclusion of the conflict – a conclusion and resulting peace Ankara and Washington appear opposed to.

While Western pundits have argued that a US withdrawal would lead to a resurgence of ISIS – it is clear that ISIS thrives everywhere Syrian forces have been prevented from retaking because of America's illegal presence inside the country. A US withdrawal would be the first true step toward eliminating ISIS from both Syria and the region.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Tony Cartalucci is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook" where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from NEO

The original source of this article is Global Research Copyright © Tony Cartalucci , Global Research, 2020

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

[Oct 21, 2020] How Trump Got Played By The Military-Industrial Complex by Akbar Shahid Ahmed

Highly recommended!
Tramp was essentially the President from military industrial complex and Israel lobby. So he was not played. That's naive. He followed the instructions.
Oct 21, 2020 | www.huffpost.com

On March 20, 2018, President Donald Trump sat beside Saudi crown prince Muhammed bin Salman at the White House and lifted a giant map that said Saudi weapons purchases would support jobs in "key" states -- including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida and Ohio, all of which were crucial to Trump's 2016 election victory .

"Saudi Arabia has been a very great friend and a big purchaser of equipment but if you look, in terms of dollars, $3 billion, $533 million, $525 million -- that's peanuts for you. You should have increased it," Trump said to the prince, who was (and still is) overseeing a military campaign in Yemen that has deployed U.S. weaponry to commit scores of alleged war crimes.

Trump has used his job as commander-in-chief to be America's arms-dealer-in-chief in a way no other president has since Dwight Eisenhower, as he prepared to leave the presidency, warned in early 1961 of the military-industrial complex's political influence. Trump's posture makes sense personally ― this is a man who regularly fantasizes about violence, usually toward foreigners ― and he and his advisers see it as politically useful, too. The president has repeatedly appeared at weapons production facilities in swing states, promoted the head of Lockheed Martin using White House resources, appointed defense industry employees to top government jobs in an unprecedented way and expanded the Pentagon's budget to near-historic highs ― a guarantee of future income for companies like Lockheed and Boeing.

Trump is "on steroids in terms of promoting arms sales for his own political benefit," said William Hartung, a scholar at the Center for International Policy who has tracked the defense industry for decades. "It's a targeted strategy to get benefits from workers in key states."

In courting the billion-dollar industry, Trump has trampled on moral considerations about how buyers like the Saudis misuse American weapons, ethical concerns about conflicts of interest and even part of his own political message, the deceptive claim that he is a peace candidate. He justifies his policy by citing job growth, but data from Hartung , a prominent analyst, shows he exaggerates the impact. And Trump has made clear that a major motivation for his defense strategy is the possible electoral benefit it could have.

Next month's election will show if the bargain was worth it. As of now, it looks like Trump's bet didn't pay off ― for him, at least. Campaign contribution records, analysts in swing states and polls suggest arms dealers have given the president no significant political boost. The defense contractors, meanwhile, are expected to continue getting richer, as they have in a dramatic way under Trump.

Playing Corporate Favorites

Trump has thrice chosen the person who decides how the Defense Department spends its gigantic budget. Each time, he has tapped someone from a business that wants those Pentagon dollars. Mark Esper, the current defense secretary, worked for Raytheon; his predecessor, Pat Shanahan, for Boeing; and Trump's first appointee, Jim Mattis, for General Dynamics, which reappointed him to its board soon after he left the administration.

Of the senior officials serving under Esper, almost half have connections to military contractors, per the Project on Government Oversight. The administration is now rapidly trying to fill more Pentagon jobs under the guidance of a former Trump campaign worker, Foreign Policy magazine recently revealed ― prioritizing political reasons and loyalty to Trump in choosing people who could help craft policy even under a Joe Biden presidency.

Such personnel choices are hugely important for defense companies' profit margins and risk creating corruption or the impression of it. Watchdog groups argue Trump's handling of the hiring process is more evidence that lawmakers and future presidents must institute rules to limit the reach of military contractors and other special interests.

"Given the hundreds of conflicts of interest flouting the rule of law in the Trump administration , certainly these issues have gotten that much more attention and are that much more salient now than they were four years ago," said Aaron Scherb, the director of legislative affairs at Common Cause, a nonpartisan good-government group.

The theoretical dangers of Trump's approach became a reality last year, when a former employee for the weapons producer Raytheon used his job at the State Department to advocate for a rare emergency declaration allowing the Saudis and their partner the United Arab Emirates to buy $8 billion in arms ― including $2 billion in Raytheon products ― despite congressional objections. As other department employees warned that Saudi Arabia was defying U.S. pressure to behave less brutally in Yemen, former lobbyist Charles Faulkner led a unit that urged Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to give the kingdom more weapons. Pompeo pushed out Faulkner soon afterward, and earlier this year, the State Department's inspector general criticized the process behind the emergency declaration for the arms.

Red Crescent medics walk next to bags containing the bodies of victims of Saudi-linked airstrikes on a Houthi detention cente MOHAMED AL-SAYAGHI / REUTERS
Red Crescent medics walk next to bags containing the bodies of victims of Saudi-linked airstrikes on a Houthi detention center in Yemen on Sept. 1, 2019. The Saudis military campaign in Yemen has relied on U.S. weaponry to commit scores of alleged war crimes.

Even Trump administration officials not clearly connected to the defense industry have shown an interest in moves that benefit it. In 2017, White House economic advisor Peter Navarro pressured Republican lawmakers to permit exports to Saudi Arabia and Jared Kushner, the president's counselor and son-in-law, personally spoke with Lockheed Martin's chief to iron out a sale to the kingdom, The New York Times found.

Subscribe to the Politics email. From Washington to the campaign trail, get the latest politics news.

When Congress gave the Pentagon $1 billion to develop medical supplies as part of this year's coronavirus relief package, most of the money went to defense contractors for projects like jet engine parts instead, a Washington Post investigation showed .

https://schema.org/WPAdBlock

"It's a very close relationship and there's no kind of sense that they're supposed to be regulating these people," Hartung said. "It's more like they're allies, standing shoulder to shoulder."

Seeking Payback

In June 2019, Lockheed Martin announced that it would close a facility that manufactures helicopters in Coatesville, Pennsylvania, and employs more than 450 people. Days later, Trump tweeted that he had asked the company's then-chief executive, Marillyn Hewson, to keep the plant open. And by July 10, Lockheed said it would do so ― attributing the decision to Trump.

The president has frequently claimed credit for jobs in the defense industry, highlighting the impact on manufacturing in swing states rather than employees like Washington lobbyists, whose numbers have also grown as he has expanded the Pentagon's budget. Lockheed has helped him in his messaging: In one instance in Wisconsin, Hewson announced she was adding at least 45 new positions at a plant directly after Trump spoke there, saying his tax cuts for corporations made that possible.

Trump is pursuing a strategy that the arms industry uses to insulate itself from political criticism. "They've reached their tentacles into every state and many congressional districts," Scherb of Common Cause said. That makes it hard for elected officials to question their operations or Pentagon spending generally without looking like they are harming their local economy.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, a Democrat who represents Coatesville, welcomed Lockheed's change of course, though she warned, "This decision is a temporary reprieve. I am concerned that Lockheed Martin and [its subsidiary] Sikorsky are playing politics with the livelihoods of people in my community."

The political benefit for Trump, though, remains in question, given that as president he has a broad set of responsibilities and is judged in different ways.

"Do I think it's important to keep jobs? Absolutely," said Marcel Groen, a former Pennsylvania Democratic party chair. "And I think we need to thank the congresswoman and thank the president for it. But it doesn't change my views and I don't think it changes most people's in terms of the state of the nation."

With polls showing that Trump's disastrous response to the health pandemic dominates voters' thoughts and Biden sustaining a lead in surveys of most swing states , his argument on defense industry jobs seems like a minor factor in this election.

Hartung of the Center for International Policy drew a parallel to President George H.W. Bush, who during his 1992 reelection campaign promoted plans for Taiwan and Saudi Arabia to purchase fighter jets produced in Missouri and Texas. Bush announced the decisions at events at the General Dynamics facility in Fort Worth, Texas, and the McDonnell Douglas plant in St. Louis that made the planes. That November, as Bill Clinton defeated him, he lost Missouri by the highest margin of any Republican in almost 30 years and won Texas by a slimmer margin than had become the norm for a GOP presidential candidate.

President Donald Trump greets then-Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson at the Derco Aerospace Inc. plant in Milwaukee on July MANDEL NGAN VIA GETTY IMAGES
President Donald Trump greets then-Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson at the Derco Aerospace Inc. plant in Milwaukee on July 12, 2019. Trump does not appear to be winning his political bet that increased defense spending would help his political fortunes.

Checking The Receipts

The defense industry can't control whether voters buy Trump's arguments about his relationship with it. But it could, if it wanted to, try to help him politically in a more direct way: by donating to his reelection campaign and allied efforts.

Yet arms manufacturers aren't reciprocating Trump's affection. A HuffPost review of Federal Election Commission records showed that top figures and groups at major industry organizations like the National Defense Industrial Association and the Aerospace Industries Association and at Lockheed, Trump's favorite defense firm, are donating this cycle much as they normally do: giving to both sides of the political aisle, with a slight preference to the party currently wielding the most power, which for now is Republicans. (The few notable exceptions include the chairman of the NDIA's board, Arnold Punaro, who has given more than $58,000 to Trump and others in the GOP.)

Data from the Center for Responsive Politics shows that's the case for contributions from the next three biggest groups of defense industry donors after Lockheed's employees.

https://schema.org/WPAdBlock

One smaller defense company, AshBritt Environmental, did donate $500,000 to a political action committee supporting Trump ― prompting a complaint from the Campaign Legal Center, which noted that businesses that take federal dollars are not allowed to make campaign contributions. Its founder told ProPublica he meant to make a personal donation.

For weapons producers, backing both parties makes sense. The military budget will have increased 29% under Trump by the end of the current fiscal year, per the White House Office of Management and Budget. Biden has said he doesn't see cuts as "inevitable" if he is elected, and his circle of advisers includes many from the national security world who have worked closely with ― and in many cases worked for ― the defense industry.

And arms manufacturers are "busy pursuing their own interests" in other ways, like trying to get a piece of additional government stimulus legislation, Hartung said ― an effort that's underway as the Pentagon's inspector general investigates how defense contractors got so much of the first coronavirus relief package.

Meanwhile, defense contractors continue to have an outsize effect on the way policies are designed in Washington through less political means. A recent report from the Center for International Policy found that such companies have given at least $1 billion to the nation's most influential think tanks since 2014 ― potentially spending taxpayer money to influence public opinion. They have also found less obvious ways to maintain support from powerful people, like running the databases that many congressional offices use to connect with constituents, Scherb of Common Cause said.

"This goes into a much bigger systemic issue about big money in politics and the role of corporations versus the role of Americans," Scherb said.

Given its reach, the defense industry has little reason to appear overtly partisan. Instead, it's projecting confidence despite the generally dreary state of the global economy: Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun has said he expects similar approaches from either winner of the election, arguing even greater Democratic control and the rise of less conventional lawmakers isn't a huge concern.

In short, whoever is in the White House, arms dealers tend to do just fine.

[Oct 21, 2020] This Is Not A Russian Hoax 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials'

Highly recommended!
Is this 50 former Intel officials or 50 former national security parasites? Real Intel officials should keep quite after retirement. National security parasites go to politics and lobbying. One telling sign that a particular parson is a "national security parasite" is his desire to play "Russian card"
From comments: "Did the 50 former intelligence officials find the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction yet?"
Oct 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
"This Is Not A Russian Hoax": 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials'

by Tyler Durden Tue, 10/20/2020 - 08:45 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Hours before Politico reported the existence of a letter signed by '50 former senior intelligence officials' who say the Hunter Biden laptop scandal "has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation" - providing "no new evidence," while they remain "deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case," Tucker Carlson obliterated their (literal) conspiracy theory .

According to the Fox News host, he's seen 'nonpublic information that proves it was Hunter's laptop ,' adding " No one but Hunter could've known about or replicated this information ."

" This is not a Russian hoax. We are not speculating ."

Watch:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317255675320348673&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fnot-russian-hoax-tucker-carlson-has-seen-nonpublic-information-proving-laptop-was-hunter&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

TUCKER: "This afternoon, we received nonpublic information that proves it was Hunter's laptop. No one but Hunter could've known about or replicated this information. This is not a Russian hoax. We are not speculating." pic.twitter.com/cl2ktdmdVc

-- August Takala (@AugustTakala) October 17, 2020

Meanwhile, the Delaware computer repair shop owner who believes Hunter dropped off three MacBook Pros for data recovery has a signed work order bearing Hunter's signature . When compared to the signature on a document in his paternity suit, while one looks more formal than the other, they are a match.

Going back to the '50 former senior intelligence officials' and their latest Russia fixation, one has to wonder - do they think Putin was able to compromise Biden's former business associate , Bevan Cooney, who gave investigative journalist Peter Schweizer his gmail password - revealing that Hunter and his partners were engaged in an influence-peddling operation for rich Chinese who wanted access to the Obama administration?

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

Did Putin further hack Joe Biden in 2011 to make him take a meeting with a Chinese delegation with ties to the CCP - arranged by Hunter's group, two years they secured a massive investment of Chinese money?

The implications boggle the mind.

Here's the clarifying sentences from the '50 former senior intelligence officials' that exposes the utter farce of it all:

While the letter's signatories presented no new evidence , they said their national security experience had made them "deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case" and cited several elements of the story that suggested the Kremlin's hand at work.

"If we are right," they added, "this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this."

It would appear these former intel officials are not aware of the current intel official views, confirmed by DNI Ratcliffe yesterday that:

"Hunter Biden's laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign."

And then there's the fact that no one from the Biden campaign has yet to deny any of the 'facts' in the emails. lay_arrow jin187 , 2 hours ago

Totally ridiculous. This ******** beating around the bush for both sides pisses me off. Dump all the laptop contents on Wikileaks if it's real. Let the people sort it out. If you say it's not real, prove it. If Biden wants me to believe it's not real, then stand behind a podium, and say clear as day into a pile of cameras that's it's all a forgery, and that you've done nothing wrong.

Instead we have Giuliani swearing he has a smoking gun, but as far as I can tell he's just pointing his finger underneath his shirt. Biden on the other hand, keep using weasel words to imply it's fake, but never denies it outright. It's almost like he's trying to hedge his bet that no one will manage to prove it's real before he gets into office, and makes it disappear.

Roacheforque , 7 hours ago

To play the "Russian Card" yet again should be beyond embarrassing. An insult to the intelligence of anyone with an IQ over 80. And so it's harmful to the left wingnut derangeables. Like Assad's chemical weapons and Saddam's WMDs, it is now code for pure ********. Not even code, just more like a signal.

A signal that say's "guilty as charged - we got nothin' but lies and BS over here".

East Indian , 4 hours ago

An insult to the intelligence of anyone with an IQ over 80.

They know their supporters wont find this insulting.

Kayman , 4 hours ago

@vulvishka.

538 ? North Korea has better propaganda.

Don't forget to go all in, like you did with Hillary.

Antedeluvian , 2 hours ago

Unfortunately, some very bright people are sucked into the conspiracy theory. I know one. Very bright lawyer. She says, "I still think there is substantive evidence of Russian collusion." I can point to a sky criss-crossed with chemtrails (when you see these "contrails" crossing at the same altitude, this is one sure clue these are not from regular passenger jet traffic) and she refuses to look up. She KNOWS I am an idiot (a PhD scientist idiot at that) because I get news and analysis on the web from sites that just want to sell me tee shirts and coffee mugs (well, she is partly right there!) whereas she gets her news from MSNBC, a venerable and trustworthy news source.

4DegreesOfSeparation , 6 hours ago

More Than 50 Former Intel Officials Say Hunter Biden Smear Smells Like Russia

"If we are right," the group wrote in a letter, "this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote."

DescendantofthePatriots , 7 hours ago

That ****, James Clapper, signed his name at the top of this list.

Known liar, saboteur, and sneak.

The cognitive dissonance in our country is astounding. The fact that they would take these people's opinion over hard fact is astounding.

No wonder why we're sliding down the steep, slippery slope.

strych10 , 8 hours ago

So... let me get this straight.

50, that's 10 times five, fifty former intelligence officials are going with a convoluted narrative about a ludicrously complicated Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign involving planted laptops and at least half a dozen patsies when the two words "crack cocaine" explain the entire thing?

I'm not sure what's more terrifying; That these people think everyone else is dumb enough to believe this or that they're actually retired intelligence officials ​​​​​​.

Who the actual **** is running this ****show? The bastard child of Barney Fife and Inspector Clouseau?

Seriously, "Pink Panther Disinformation Operation" is more believable at this point.

Someone Else , 9 hours ago

This needs to get out, because a FAVORITE method of the Deep State, Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) is to parade some sort of a stupid letter with a bunch of signature hoping to look impressive but that really don't mean a damn thing.

Notre Dame graduates against the Supreme Court nominee, Intelligence agents alleging collusion, former State Department operatives against Trump. Its grandstanding that has been overdone.

moneybots , 8 hours ago

The letter by 50 former intelligence officials is itself, disinformation.

otschelnik , 8 hours ago

Remember when Weiner's attorney turned over Huma's home laptop to SDNY/FBI with all of Shillary's emails, and the FBI sat on it for a month and then Comey deep sixed them without even looking at them?

So now the FBI subpeona'd Hunter's laptop and burried it? Deja vu all over again.

enough of this , 8 hours ago

The FBI and DOJ constantly hide behind self-serving excuses to refuse the release of documents and, when forced to do so, they release heavily redacted files. They offer up the usual pretexts to fend off public disclosure such as: the information you seek cannot be disclosed because it involves an ongoing investigation, or the information you seek involves national security, or our methods and sources will be jeopardized if the information you seek is divulged to the public. But it seems the ones who would be most harmed by public disclosure are the corrupt FBI and DOJ officials themselves

Cobra Commander , 7 hours ago

A short 4 years ago the FBI and CIA were all concerned about "Kompromat" the Ruskies might have on Candidate Trump; concerned enough to spy on his campaign and open a counter-intelligence operation.

There are troves of Kompromat material, actual emails and video, on Joe, Hunter, and the whole Biden family; not made-up DNC-funded dossiers claiming a Russian consulate in Miami.

Now when it's Candidate Biden, everyone be all like, "Meh."

Cobra!

The Fonz...before shark jump , 5 hours ago

we gotta listen to the 50 former intelligence agents...you know the ones that had lone superpower status in the early 90s and then pissed it all away with 9/11 and infinity wars in middle east hahahahah ok buddy lol... histories D students....

Occams_Razor_Trader_Part_Deux , 7 hours ago

Signed by James Clapper and John Brennan;

You mean, the 2 Bozos who under the threat of perjury said there was NO evidence of Russian Collusion and the Trump campaign................. and 2 hours later called Trump 'Putin's puppet' on CNN.............

[Oct 20, 2020] Trump is the best U.S. president for Netanyahu but for Israel, he might be the worst

Oct 20, 2020 | www.haaretz.com

The direct benefits of his first term are outweighed by the general decline in America's global prestige and its indifference to Israel's declining democracy Share in Facebook Share in Twitter Send in e-mail Send in e-mail Zen Read Print article Chemi Shalev Chemi Shalev Get email notification for articles from Chemi Shalev Follow Published at 21:18

It has become an article of faith that whatever his other shortcomings, Donald Trump is good for Israel. Most Israelis believe that the 45th U.S. president was the best of them all, as Benjamin Netanyahu says, and many American Jews grudgingly concur. The latest American Jewish Committee poll found that only 22% of American Jews plan to vote for Trump but 42% believe he will be better for Israel than Joe Biden.

Tags:

[Oct 20, 2020] Internet Resources Become Weaponized by Philip Giraldi

Oct 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

Internet Resources Become Weaponized High Tech Oligarchs threaten democracy PHILIP GIRALDI OCTOBER 20, 2020 1,200 WORDS 90 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit 3 Share Share 2 Email Print More 5 SHARES

The current electoral campaign differs from that of 2016 in that the media, both conventional and online, has realized its power and has been openly playing a major role in what might well prove to be a victory across the board for the Democratic Party. At least that is the expectation, bolstered by a flood of possibly suspect opinion polls that appear to make the triumph of Joe Biden and company inevitable while at the same time denigrating President Donald Trump and covering up for Democratic Party missteps.

Most Americans no longer trust what is being reported in the mainstream media but when they look for "real" information they frequently turn to online resources that they believe to be more politically objective. That has never been true, however, and what most newshounds are actually seeking is commentary that reflects their own views. In reality, the news provided is almost always either spun or distorted and sometimes completely blocked, note particularly the resistance to reporting the tale of the shenanigans of Hunter Biden.

The New York Post is claiming that a trove of emails from a laptop reveals that "Hunter Biden introduced his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden, to a top executive at a Ukrainian energy firm less than a year before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating the company."

The emails include a message of appreciation that Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Burisma, allegedly sent Hunter Biden on April 17, 2015, about a year after Hunter joined the oil company Burisma's board at a reported salary of up to $50,000 a month. "Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It's realty [sic] an honor and pleasure," the email reads. An earlier email from May 2014 also shows Pozharskyi, reportedly Burisma's No. 3 exec, asking Hunter for "advice on how you could use your influence" on the company's behalf.

The correspondence, if authentic, disproves Joe Biden's claim that he's " never spoken to his son about his overseas business dealings ." One would think that the story would be a real blockbuster, welcomed by self-respecting journalists but the reality has been that the mainstream media is doing its best to kill it. Facebook and Twitter have both blocked it though Twitter has since relented, and much of the rest of the liberal media is regarding it as a hoax .

Facebook has in fact become something of a leader in reversing its self-promotion as a site for free exchange of ideas. It has removed large numbers of users and alleged suspect sites and has blocked any "denial or distortion" of the so-called holocaust in response to what it regards as a surge in anti-Semitism. It has hired a former Israeli government official to lead the censorship effort on the site.

As Facebook and Twitter are private companies, they can legally do whatever they want to set the rules for the use of their sites, but when the two most powerful social media companies choose to censor a major newspaper's story about a presidential candidate's possibly corrupt son less than three weeks before the election it suggests a more sinister agenda. They are quite likely banking on a Democratic victory and will expect to be rewarded afterwards.

Indeed, it should be assumed that Facebook and the other social media giants are reconfiguring themselves for the post-electoral environment in expectation that they will be more than ever politically and economically indispensable to aspiring politicians. This willingness to engage with politically powerful forces has led to increased involvement in the various mostly left-wing movements that have shaken the United States over the past five months. Television and radio stations as well as corporations and local businesses have rushed to endorse and even fund black lives matter without considering the damage that the group has been doing to property and persons that have had the misfortune to cross its path, not to mention some of the group's long-term more radical objectives. Individuals identified as blm leaders have demanded mandatory training to reprogram whites as well as punitive reparations, to include "white people" turning over their homes to blacks.

Some of the developments are quite dangerous, most notably the compiling of lists of organizations and individuals that are considered to be "enemies" of the new social justice order that intends to take over the United States. One has noted the desire for revenge permeating many of the comments on sites like Facebook (which claims to delete "threats" from its commentary), to include some material in recent weeks that has called for the "elimination" of Americans who do not go along with the new normal.

One of the most invidious steps taken by any of the corporate social media is a recent decision by Yelp to allow Antifa to compile the raw material on so-called "fascist businesses" that will be included on a list of "Businesses Accused of Racist Behavior Alerts." The list itself was set up to appease demands coming from the blm movement.

Yelp is a review site that provides grades and commentary on a broad range of goods and services, to include many businesses that cater to the public. The potential for abuse is enormous as Yelp is an information site that has no capability to investigate whether complaints of "racism" are true or not and Antifa, which is recognized as being at least in part behind the devastating Portland riots, is far from an objective observer. In fact, this is what Antifa has tweeted about its new role , which will allow group members to submit names of "non-friendly" businesses, defined as "also known as (AKA) any company that's hanging blue lives garbage in their store or anything else that's anti the BLM movement."

The Antifa intention is clearly to put unfriendly shops and restaurants out of business, so it will not exactly be interested in engaging in constructive criticism or changing behavior through negotiation. Using the intimidation provided by the "Alerts" list and direct threats of violence from Antifa and blm, businesses will be coerced into supporting radical groups lest they be targeted. It is somewhat reminiscent of the old Mafia protection rackets, and who can doubt that demands for money will follow on to the verbal threats?

The rise of the internet oligarchs might indeed do more serious damage to the freedoms that still survive in the United States than will victory by either Biden or Trump. What Americans are allowed to think and how they perceive themselves and the world have taken a serious hit over the past twenty years and it can only get worse.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[Oct 20, 2020] George Koo linked to a Youtube video of Mike Pompeous and the Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic at a press conference in Dubrovnik. Watch how Plenkovic deals with Pompeosity!

Oct 20, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN October 19, 2020 at 4:41 pm

YES!! This.

https://asiatimes.com/2020/10/pompeos-record-a-litany-of-failure/

We all like to have our worldview affirmed by a corroborating voice, even if that, too, is an opinion. This, for me, was like lying back in a hot bath.

I have said as far back as I can remember, during Pompeo's tenure as Giant Blasphemous Cream Puff of State, that the damage he was doing to the relationship between America and her allies was significant and perhaps irreparable. The article, if accurate, reveals a China which is quite a bit like Russia in its official treatment of minorities – subordinate ethnicities are recognized as distinct societies if their population meets a reasonable threshold, and where an ethnic population is regionally dominant, an autonomous government is established to facilitate local governance by people of the same ethnic background.

I was not aware that during the term of China's one-child policy – a dreadful time which led to the abortion or other more-horrible disposals of unwanted baby girls – mothers among ethnic minorities were permitted two or even three children.

The article is obviously written in defense of China, but the authors seem to have substantiated their claims satisfactorily where such material is offered. Unsubstantiated opinion is often a close match with those offered by commenters on this forum.

JEN October 19, 2020 at 5:51 pm

George Koo linked to a Youtube video of Mike Pompeous and the Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic at a press conference in Dubrovnik. Watch how Plenkovic deals with Pompeosity!

https://www.youtube.com/embed/0SakMXPwTtk?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

I swear I saw the Pompous One deflate considerably after Plenkovic's speech about China's BRI initiative. Good thing the wind was up and active otherwise the smell would have been horrific and everyone would have been knocked unconscious.

PATIENT OBSERVER October 19, 2020 at 4:51 pm

Mike Pompeo, otherwise known as the international man of catastrophe,

You knew it was going to be good from the first sentence.


[Oct 19, 2020] The Emails Are Russian- Will Be The Narrative, Regardless Of Facts Or Evidence by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Oct 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via CaitlinJohnstone.com,

Fight it all you want, but there's nothing you can do. "The emails are Russian" is going to be the official dominant narrative in mainstream political discourse, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. Resistance is futile.

Like the Russian hacking narrative, the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, the Russian bounties in Afghanistan narrative, and any other evidence-free framing of events that simultaneously advances pre-planned cold war agendas, is politically convenient for the Democratic party and generates clicks and ratings, the narrative that the New York Post publication of Hunter Biden's emails is a Russian operation is going to be hammered and hammered and hammered until it becomes the mainstream consensus. This will happen regardless of facts and evidence, up to and including rock solid evidence that Hunter Biden's emails were not published as a result of a Russian operation.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317449899860951040&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Femails-are-russian-will-be-narrative-regardless-facts-or-evidence&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

This is happening. It's following the same formula all the other fact-free Russia hysteria narratives have followed. The same media tour by pundits and political operatives saying with no evidence but very assertive voices that Russia is most certainly behind this occurrence and we should all be very upset about it.

"To me, this is just classic textbook Soviet Russian tradecraft at work," Russiagate founder and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is heard assuring CNN's audience .

"Joe Biden – and all of us – SHOULD be furious that media outlets are spreading what is very likely Russian propaganda," begins and eight-part thread by Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who claims the emails are "Kremlin constructed anti-Biden propaganda."

"It's not really surprising at all, this was always the play, but still kind of head-spinning to watch all the players from 2016 run exactly the same hack-leak-smear op in 2020. Even with everyone knowing exactly what's happening this time," tweets MSNBC's Chris Hayes.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

"How are you all circling the wagons instead of being embarrassed for peddling Russian ops 18 days before the election. It's not enough that you all haven't learned from your atrocious handling of 2016 -- you are doubling down," Democratic Party think tanker Neera Tanden tweeted in admonishment of journalists who dare to report on or ask questions about the emails.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317307227963678721&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Femails-are-russian-will-be-narrative-regardless-facts-or-evidence&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Virtually the entirety of the Democratic Party-aligned political/media class has streamlined this narrative of Russian influence into the American consciousness with very little inertia, despite the fact that neither Joe nor Hunter Biden has disputed the authenticity of the emails and despite a complete absence of evidence for Russian involvement in their publication.

This is surely the first time, at least in recent memory, that we have ever seen such a broad consensus within the mass media that it is the civic duty of news reporters to try and influence the outcome of a presidential general election by withholding negative news coverage for one candidate. There was a lot of fascinated hatred for Trump in 2016, but people still reported on Hillary Clinton's various scandals and didn't attack one another for doing so. In 2020 that has changed, and mainstream news reporters have now largely coalesced along the doctrine that they must avoid any reporting which might be detrimental to the Biden campaign.

"Dem Party hacks (and many of their media allies) genuinely believe it's immoral to report on or even discuss stories that reflect poorly on Biden. In reality, it's the responsibility of journalists to ignore their vapid whining and ask about newsworthy stories, even about Biden," tweeted The Intercept 's Glenn Greenwald recently.

"You don't even have to think the Hunter Biden materials constitute some kind of earth-shattering story to be absolutely repulsed at the authoritarian propaganda offensive being waged to discredit them -- primarily by journalists who behave like compliant little trained robots ," tweeted journalist Michael Tracey.

Last month The Spectator 's Stephen L Miller described how the consensus formed among the mainstream press since Clinton's 2016 loss that it is their moral duty to be uncritical of Trump's opponent.

"For almost four years now, journalists have shamed their colleagues and themselves over what I will call the 'but her emails' dilemma," Miller writes. "Those who reported dutifully on the ill-timed federal investigation into Hillary Clinton's private server and spillage of classified information have been cast out and shunted away from the journalist cool kids' table. Focusing so much on what was, at the time, a considerable scandal, has been written off by many in the media as a blunder. They believe their friends and colleagues helped put Trump in the White House by focusing on a nothing-burger of a Clinton scandal when they should have been highlighting Trump's foibles. It's an error no journalist wants to repeat."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1316900508775280642&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Femails-are-russian-will-be-narrative-regardless-facts-or-evidence&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

So "the emails are Russian" narrative serves the interests of political convenience, partisan media ratings, and the national security state's pre-planned agenda to continue escalating against Russia as part of its slow motion third world war against nations which refuse to bow to US dictates, and you've got essentially no critical mainstream news coverage putting the brakes on any of it. This means this narrative is going to become mainstream orthodoxy and treated as an established fact, despite the fact that there is no actual, tangible evidence for it.

Joe Biden could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and the mainstream press would crucify any journalist who so much as tweeted about it. Very little journalism is going into vetting and challenging him, and a great deal of the energy that would normally be doing so is going into ensuring that he slides right into the White House.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

If the mainstream news really existed to tell you the truth about what's going on, everyone would know about every questionable decision that Joe Biden has ever made, Russiagate would never have happened, we'd all be acutely aware of the fact that powerful forces are pushing us into increasingly aggressive confrontations with two nuclear-armed nations, and Trump would be grilled about Yemen in every press conference.

But the mainstream news does not exist to tell you the truth about the world. The mainstream news exists to advance the interests of its wealthy owners and the status quo upon which they have built their kingdoms. That's why it's so very, very important that we find ways to break away from it and share information with each other that isn't tainted by corrupt and powerful interests.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of my sweet merchandise , buying my books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with this platform, click here . Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I've written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

[Oct 19, 2020] Under Trump it especially cheats its friends, because they are the easiest marks

Notable quotes:
"... Of course the quick objection is that Turkey is getting a crap deal on every single aspect mentioned. This is especially true of Erdogan personally, whose true existential need is to win the war against the Kurds he re-started in Turkey. For instance, the US covertly helps Turkey stay in Syria but simultaneously it "supports" Rojava. And so on and so forth. Yes, the US government is a bully and cheats even its friends. Under Trump it especially cheats its friends, because they are the easiest marks. ..."
Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

steven t johnson , Oct 17 2020 20:58 utc | 54

james@30 asks "what is the usa offering Turkey here??"

Offering continued intervention in Syria, de facto in alliance with Turkey, which weakens the Kurds in effect; splitting the Kurds internationally by supporting the KRG; supporting the continued partition of Cyprus; supporting the effective dismantling of NATO, a very important point re Greek relations; neutrality in Libya and the disputes over eastern Mediterranean drilling; deeming Erdogan one of the good Muslims instead of pursuing a virulent regime change campaign; no economic warfare like in Venezuela.

Of course the quick objection is that Turkey is getting a crap deal on every single aspect mentioned. This is especially true of Erdogan personally, whose true existential need is to win the war against the Kurds he re-started in Turkey. For instance, the US covertly helps Turkey stay in Syria but simultaneously it "supports" Rojava. And so on and so forth. Yes, the US government is a bully and cheats even its friends. Under Trump it especially cheats its friends, because they are the easiest marks.

The thing is, Russia cannot bring Erdogan either victory over the Kurds or a healthy economy. Nor is it clear to me that Putin has any strategy whatsoever for any endgame.

Josh , Oct 17 2020 21:36 utc | 59
https://southfront.org/betrayed-in-west-kiev-regime-tries-to-find-love-in-turkish-arms/

Wow,

Cute couple, right???

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 21:56 utc | 62
Re Turkey. Erdogan is a megalomaniac nationalist. He is neither a servant of the US nor of Putin. He does what he thinks is in the interests of Turkey.

[Oct 19, 2020] Banking has an odd and opaque history of global control of money/finance and inciting wars

Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

chu teh , Oct 17 2020 22:10 utc | 65

This in reply to your #131 yesterday re JP Morgan, oligarch power and method used to create Federal Reserve:

There is more. Banking has an odd and opaque history of global control of money/finance. It was clear by ca. 1900 that the global keystone was control of USA banking...but how?, because any USA legislation had to be signed-off by a President...the ONLY exception being overriding a pres. veto. It could not be done in USA by pres. decree.

So the riddle is how could this rip-off be done in a freak nation that was an open society of free public discourse full of very active politician? Even if Congress could be bribed and otherwise cajoled to pass such legislation, how could any President be "arranged" to sign it?

CLUE -- W. Wilson -- headmaster of Princeton University suddenly rose to Governor of New Jersey , then suddenly ran for Pres of US. A most weird election resulted in WW becoming Pres and in his first year signed the Fed Res Act. Boom! Done!

CLUE -- How did the bankers, Warburg et al, manage to put WW under their control? How did they select WW and get hooks so deeply into headmaster WW and get him elected Pres.? What was their secret?...and that could be kept secret? and never in writing.

The ANSWER might well be known only to surviving members of families of those involved in WW's mysterious medical maladies. Though WW's doctors never disclosed publicly all his medical data, related family members of consulted medical experts would likely have it as a family secret...that WW had an "unspeakable" malady whose diagnosis was quietly handed down to successive generations.

And IMO it is so.

[Oct 19, 2020] New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks

Highly recommended!
Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 17 2020 23:20 utc | 76

New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks
Esper's speech demonstrates a confluence of policies, ideas, and funds that permeate through the system, and are by no means unique to a single service, think tank, or contractor.

First, Esper consistently situated his future expansion plans in a need to adapt to "an era of great power competition." CNAS is one of the think tanks leading the charge in highlighting the threat from Beijing.

They also received at least $8,946,000 from 2014-2019 from the U.S. government and defense contractors, including over $7 million from defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Huntington Ingalls, General Dynamics, and Boeing who would stand to make billions if the 500-ship fleet were enacted.

It's all about the money. Foreign and domestic policy is always all about the money, either directly or indirectly. Of course, the ultimate goal is power - or more precisely, the ultimate goal is relief of the fear of death, which drives every single human's every action, and only power can do that, and in this world only money can give you power (or so the chimpanzees believe.)

[Oct 19, 2020] To be fair, Russia was never given a time to grow. It was sanctioned, sanctioned and sanctioned.

Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

steven t johnson , Oct 18 2020 10:52 utc | 112

Not sure who this Andrei Martyanov is, but underlying all the comments is the proposition that Putin-managed capitalism works great, will work great forever, will not have a crisis ever and will make Russia totally independent in all ways. Stated so forthrightly, no doubt it sounds too stupid to admit to. Nonetheless this is the claim. I say capitalist restoration did not improve the Russian economy in the way implied by Martyanov. Putin is still a Yeltsinite, even if he is sober enough to pass for competent.

Smith , Oct 18 2020 11:44 utc | 113

To be fair, Russia was never given a time to grow. It was sanctioned, sanctioned and sanctioned.

China did have a sweet time from the 80s to 10s where they serve as the world factory.

michael , Oct 18 2020 11:47 utc | 114
@vk | Oct 17 2020 17:32 utc | 12

I take the opposite view: Looking from today, Russia is lucky that the USSR collapsed in 1991. It shed its debt, its currency passed through hyperinflation, and their economy collapsed and rebuilt. The US and most Western countries still have that coming for them, and soon.

Plus beyond that the strict Communist/Marxist atheism over 70+ years lead to a rebirth of Christian values in Russia, their biggest advantage in this cultural war. And they practice science, not scientism.

Note: Russia and China are more capitalist than the US, for quite some time now. (12+ years)

Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 12:01 utc | 115
@110 Abe as far as I understand it, the economic argument goes like this: take the number of rubles generated/spent/whatever in Russian economic activity, then use the current conversion rate to convert that into an "equivalent" amount of US dollars.

Then see what you can buy with that many US dollars.

If you went shopping in the USA, the answer would be that this many US dollars doesn't buy you much, ergo, Russian economic activity is pathetically low.

An example: the Russian government might budget xxx (fill in the figure) rubles to buy new T-90 tanks. In Washington they would convert that into US dollars, and then declare that this is chicken-feed. Hardly enough to buy less than 10 Abrams tanks.

Only the Russians aren't buying Abrams tanks from the USA, and are not spending dollars. They are buying T-90 tanks, and for the amount of rubles spent they'll get 50 tanks.

Every metric the US analyst are using tells them that the USA is vastly, vastly outspending the Russians on military equipment, to the point where it is obvious that the Russian military must be destitute and decrepit.

But if they every took the time to look they'll see 50 brand-spanking new T-90 main battle tanks. Weapons that their assumptions say that the Russians can't afford, and would wonder "Huh? Where'd they come from?"

If they ever looked, which is doubtful.

vk , Oct 18 2020 14:56 utc | 116
@ Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Oct 18 2020 4:11 utc | 96

I agree that comparing Russia's economy with the likes of Italy and Spain is ridiculous, but it's not that simple. Capitalism is not what is appears to be.

If a (capitalist) nation wants to get something from another (capitalist) nation, it needs to export something. There's no free lunch in international trade: if you want to import, you have to export or issue sovereign debt bonds (treasury bonds).

In this scenario, either Russia produces everything it needs in its own territory or it will have to export in order to import the technology it needs to do whatever it needs to do. Remember: the Russian Federation is a capitalist nation-state, it has to follow the laws of motion of capitalism, which take precedence over whatever Putin wants. To ignore that economic laws exist is to deny any kind of theory of collapse; nation-states would then be eternal, natural entities with no entropy.

Even if Russia produces everything it needs in its own territory, it is still capitalist. It would need, in order to "substitute imports", to super-exploit its own labor force (working class) in order to extract surpluses for its industrialization efforts. That's what the USSR did during Stalin.

If Russia is doing the imports substitution in the classical way (the way Latin America did during the liberal dictatorships of the 1950s-1980s), then it is trying to sell commodities to industrialized countries in order to import technology and machinery necessary to industrialize its own territory. That is probably the case here.

Assuming this more probable case, then I'm sorry to tell you it won't work. It may work in the short or even medium term, but it will ultimately fail in the long term. The thing is that, in a system of capitalist exchange between an agrarian and an industrial nation-state, the industrial nation-state will always have the advantage (i.e. have a trade surplus). That's because of Marx's labor theory of value: industrialized commodities ("manufactured goods") have more intrinsic value than agrarian/raw material commodities - just think about how many kilos of bananas Brazil would have to export to the USA in order to import one single unit of an iPhone 12, to use an contemporary example. As a social result, industrialized countries have a higher organic composition of capital (OCC) than agrarian countries, as they need more value to just keep themselves afloat (as a metaphor: it's more expensive to keep a big mansion than a little flat in a stationary state). Value (wealth) then tends to flow from lower OCC to the higher OCC, this is the material base that divides the First and Third World countries until today.

To make things even worse, raw materials/agricultural products have an inelastic demand, which means their prices fall when production rises, and their prices rise when production falls, relative to overall demand. You will pay whatever the water company will charge you for the cubic meter of water - but you won't consume more or less water because of its price, hence the term "inelastic": demand tends to be more or less constant on a macroeconomic level. The same problem suffers the commodity exporter nations: there will come a stage where their exports' overall value will collapse vis-a-vis the machinery and technology they need to import.

As a result, the commodity exporter nations will have to get more debt overseas, by issuing more T-bonds, just to keep the trade balance afloat. What was the quest for progress becomes a vicious battle for mere survival. A debt crisis is brewed.

And that's exactly what happened to the Latin American countries in the 1980s-1990s: their debt exploded and they were put to their knees by the USA (the country that issues the universal fiat currency). The USA then charged their debt, which triggered a wave of privatizations of everything those countries had built over decades. This is what will happen to Russia if it falls for the lure of imports substitution.

That's why I urge the Russians to review their concepts and try to get back to the Soviet times. It doesn't need to be exactly how it was before: you can make the due reforms and adopt a more or less Chinese model of socialism. That's the only way out, if the Russian people doesn't want to be enslaved by the liberals (capitalists).

pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:11 utc | 117
looks like the fbi is still in bed with the cia on russiagate, they are now pivoting to investigating the laptop as a russian intelligence operation.
pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:14 utc | 118
@vk from what i'm reading (stephen cohen: soviet fates and lost alternatives) the chinese adopted something like bukharin's nep policies, which stalin did his best to wipe out in the ussr. i've got some problems with cohen's last book, "war with russia?" but he has a lot of good information on the history of the ussr.
pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:17 utc | 119
russia is not "lucky" that it went through a massive collapse following idiotic u.s. austerity policies in the 90's. it is still recovering from that.
vk , Oct 18 2020 15:42 utc | 120
@ Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 18 2020 15:14 utc | 118

On the surface, yes: the comparison between Reform and Opening Up and NEP are irresistible. But it is not precise: the only merit it has is in the fact that it is fairer than simply classifying Deng Xiaoping's reforms as neoliberalism (Trotskysts, Austrian School) or capitalism (liberals).

The key here is the difference of the nature of the Chinese peasant class and the Russian peasant class. The Chinese peasant class, besides suffering a lot (millions of dead by famine) in the hands of a liberal government for decades (Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Government) (while the Russian equivalent - the "February Revolution" - only lasted a few months, engulfed by their insistence on continuing with the meat-grinder of WWI), had a different historical subtract.

Chinese late feudalism was much more developed, much more manufactured-centered than Russian late feudalism. As a result, the Chinese peasant was much more proletarian-minded than the feudal Russian peasant. Also, the Chinese didn't have the kulak problem (peasant petite-bourgeoisie) - instead, they had regional warlords who self-destructed during the chaotic republican period (1911-1949). When the warlords were gone, what was left was a much more proletarian-minded, egalitarian-minded, small peasantry. This peasantry didn't bother to migrate to the cities to work in the industry or to start their own factories in the countryside itself. That's why Deng Xiaoping's Reform and Opening Up was successful - not because of his genius, but because he was backed up by a capable people.

The Chinese peasantry, for example, didn't hoard or directed their grain surplus to exports in order to starve the proletariat to death in the cities - they sold it to the Chinese market. The Chinese peasantry also trusted their central government (CCP) and saw itself as part of the project - in complete opposition to the feudal-minded Russian kulak, who saw his piece of land as essentially an independent and self-sufficient cell/ecosystem.

That's why the Reform and Opening Up was successful (it survives until the present times) and the NEP soon failed - following the good harvest of 1924, came the awful harvest of 1926, which triggered a shit show where the peasantry hoarded the grain and almost starved the USSR to extinction, and which led to Stalin's ascension and the dekulakization process (forced collectivization).

pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:59 utc | 121
@vk thanks for your detailed and thorough response, i will keep it in mind as i read.
pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 16:11 utc | 122
i should add that i know little about the actual history of communism, but capitalism is revealing itself as a monstrous failure, and not all the propaganda in the world is succeeding at covering that up.
Abe , Oct 18 2020 16:32 utc | 123
Yeah, Right @ 115

I know how economic reasoning comes to that conclusion, but IRL comparing such different countries only by GDP metric is insane and beyond stupid.

Eg. Russia has GDP similar to California!

Yes, in US centric GDP metrics that favors and cheats US itself (surprise!).

But. One of those countries sent man in space, produces everything, has vast resources and is self sufficient nuclear superpower.
Other one cant even feed and provider water to its population without outside help.

GDP means nothing when sh*t hits the fan. What will "richer" country do if it goes to war with "poorer"? Throw money at them while they launch nukes at it?

vk , Oct 18 2020 17:43 utc | 124
@ Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 18 2020 16:11 utc | 122

There certainly are similarities between the NEP and the Reform and Opening Up. It's very possible Deng Xiaoping took Lenin as inspiration.

Forgot to mention the Scissors Crisis, which erupted in 1923, and triggered the NEP. That crisis is one more evidence that shows manufactured products are inherently more valuable than raw materials/agrarian products.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 19:57 utc | 125
@Eric.
The facts are that even in 2020 Russia does not have anything close to gas turbines that can replace Siemens

Before posting anything--learn your facts. You, obviously, have issues with accessing them.

https://www.interfax.ru/russia/694526

Again, for products of Western "education" basic logic and ability for a basic extrapolation seem beyond the grasp: there are no issues for Russia to produce anything, other than time and some money. Country which produces best hi-tech weapons in the world, dominates world's nuclear energy market (this is not your iPhone "hi tech") and has a full enclosed cycle for aerospace industry, among many other things, will have little trouble in substituting pretty much anything. I remember a bunch of morons, who pass for "analysts", from either WSJ or WaPo declaring 6 years ago that sanctions will deny Russia access to Western extraction technologies. Sure, for a country whose space program alone will crush whole economies of UK or Germany should they ever try to recreate it, will have "problems" producing compressor or drill equipment with the level of Russia's metallurgy and material science. Generally speaking, West's present pathetic state is a direct result of utter incompetence across the board in a number of key fields of human activity and your post, most likely based on some BS by Western media, is a good demonstration of this state of the affairs.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 20:00 utc | 126
@Jason

Per immigration policy, you can easily find a a truck load of resources, especially on the web-sites of Russian diplomatic missions (Embassies, Consulates etc.), easily available. Per cats--Russian love for cats is boundless and intense. You may say that Russia is a cat-obsessed country;)

steven t johnson , Oct 18 2020 20:05 utc | 127
vk@120 posits a mystical cultural difference in Russian and Chinese peasants, which unfortunately has pretty much the same content as the hypothesis of a racial difference. That the morally superior race is supposed to be Chinese doesn't really help. As often, some strange assertions of facts that aren't so accompany such bizarre thinking. The rich peasants in China (what would be kulaks in Russian history,) were notorious for moneylending. As ever, the inevitable arrears ended in the moneylender's family taking the land. Collectivization came early in China, well along the way by 1956. And a key aspect of it was the struggle against the Chinese equivalent of the kulak class. As for the insistence that private farming is superior, the growth of inequality in land drove millions, a hundred million or more, into the cities. Without residence permits this floating proletariat was effectively superexploited by the new capitalist elements, as Deng meant them to do. Nor did the warlords discredit themselves, not as a group. If anything the young warlord who forced Chiang to reject active war against the Communists, in order to fight the Japanese invaders, was the one who kept the GMD (KMT in Wade-Giles,) from discrediting itself. [Xian incident] And what warlords had to do with the Chinese rich peasantry *after* the Revolution is a complete mystery.

Socially, the deliberate uneven development promoted by Deng and his successors, is eroding the social fabric of the larger countryside. This, in addition to the neocolonial concessions, the growing links to the Chinese bourgeoisie of the diaspora suggest that as Dengists may go even back/forward to a new form of warlordism. The thing about comparing Bukharism/NEP to Dengism/the "Opening" is that Bukharin's program failed spectacularly. But modern China is not next door to Nazi Germany. Even more to the point, Stalin's victory over Hitler has provided a kind of moral shield for China, even under Deng, inspiring fear of losing a general war. If Bukharin had beaten Stalin, we can be as sure as any hypothetical can be, the USSR would have been defeated, not victorious. In modern China, the Bukharin won. There is an excellent chance the national government of today's China will be defeated.

Eric , Oct 18 2020 20:53 utc | 128
@125 Andrei Martyanov

That article describes a 110 MW turbine that has now finally been put into production (while Siemens, General Electric etc. produce utility-class gas turbines up to about 600 MW, with far higher efficiency and most likely reliability). The article further describes 40 GW of thermal electrical production to be "modernized" until 2031 (11 years from now), and apparently a microscopic 2 GW of new capacity from "domestic and localized" 65 MW turbines to be commissioned 2026-2028. (I don't understand Russian so I had to rely on Yandex's machine translation.) That's admittedly some kind of progress, but is simply not going to cut it. Nowhere close.

Imagine if China set the ambition to build its own semiconductors and its own turbofans for its stealth fighters sometime around 2040. Imagine if China was still producing a third of the amount of electricity of the United States instead of about double, etc., and considered this to be adequate. It would be akin to abandoning its ambitions for technological and industrial independence from the West, and that is exactly what Russia is doing in the realm of gas turbines. There is apparently no capability and no seriousness going into translating Russia's world-class research and science into actual large-scale, modern industrial production, and everything points to this continuing, while you can blather on all you want about people with "Western education" simply not getting anything.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 21:16 utc | 129
@Eric
That's admittedly some kind of progress, but is simply not going to cut it. Nowhere close.

That's admittedly you switching on "I am dense" mode and trying to up the ante with 600 MW, which are a unique product, while you somehow miss the point that 110 MWt MGT-110 of fully Russian production has completed a full cycle of industrial tests and operations (an equivalent of military IOC--Initial Operational Capability) and is in a serial production. But instead of studying the issue (even if through Yandex translate) with Siemens which when learning about MGT-110 offered Russia 100% localization with technology transfer, Russians declined, you go into generalizations without having even minimal set of facts and situational awareness. In fact 110 MWt turbines are most in demand product for a variety of applications. Get acquainted with this.

https://power-m.ru/en/customers/thermal-power/gas-turbines/

I am not going to waste my time explaining to you (you will play dense again) what IOC means and how it relates to serial production, I am sure you will find a bunch of unrealted "argumentation".

Imagine if China

I don't need to imagine anything, as well as draw irrelevant parallels with China.

There is apparently no capability and no seriousness going into translating Russia's world-class research and science into actual large-scale, modern industrial production, and everything points to this continuing, while you can blather on all you want about people with "Western education" simply not getting anything.

This is exactly what I am talking about. Hollow declarations by people who can not even develop basic factual base.

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 21:16 utc | 130
@125 Andrei Martyanov

It's great to see you here with your excellent facts and perspectives on Russia. I'm sorry you have to deal with people whose minds are too small to grasp the immense scale of Russia - scale in physical size, civilizational depth and importance to the balance of power in the world.

Russia alone stopped the creeping gray hegemony from the west that had looked like it would just ooze over the whole world and suffocate it in bullshit and tribute payments. And then China joined in the fun. The world has a future now, when a decade ago this didn't seem possible, at least from my view in the US. Geopolitically, Russia gave us this future, and China has come to show us how much fun it's going to be.

Many thanks to you and your people.

vk , Oct 18 2020 21:31 utc | 131
@ Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 18 2020 20:05 utc | 127

There's no mysticism here because we know how the kulaks emerged in Russia: they were the result of the catastrophic capitalist reforms of the 1860s, which completely warped the old feudal relations of the Russian Empire.

The reforms of the 1860s were catastrophic for two reasons:

1) it freed the peasants slowly. The State serfs - the last who gained their freedom - were left with no land. A complex partition system of the land, based on each administrative region, created a distorted division of land, where very few peasants got huge chunks of land (the future kulaks) and most received almost nothing (as Lenin demonstrated, see his first book of his Complete Works, below the rate of subsistence);

2) it tried to preserve the old feudal privileges and powers of the absolutist monarchy.

As a result, the Russian Empire had a bizarre economic system, a mixed economy with the worst of the two words: the inequality and absolute misery of capitalism and the backwardness and lack of social mobility of feudalism.

But yes, you're right when you state Mao's era was not an economic failure. His early era really saw an attempt by the CCP to make an alliance with the "national bourgeoisie", and this alliance was indeed a failure. This certainly led to a more radical approach by the CCP, still in the Mao era (collectivization). Life quality in China greatly increased after 1949, until the recession of the Great Leap Forward (which was not a famine, but threw back some socioeconomic indicators temporarily back to the WWII era). When the Great Leap Forward was abandoned, China continued to improve afterwards.

All of this doesn't change the fact that China's "NEP" was a success, while the original NEP wasn't. Of course, there are many factors that explain this, but it is wrong to call late Qing China as even similar to the late Romanov Russia.

I'm not saying Stalin's reform were a failure. Without them, they wouldn't be able to quickly import the Fordist (Taylorist) method they needed to industrialize. The USSR became a superpower in just 19 years - a world record. The first Five-Year Plan was a huge morale boost and success for the Soviet people - specially because it happened at the same time as the capitalist meltdown of 1929.

--//--

@ Posted by: Eric | Oct 18 2020 20:53 utc | 128

The thing with semiconductors (and other very advanced technologies) is that it is an industry that only makes sense for a given nation to dominate if they're going to mass produce it. That usually means said production must be export oriented, which means competing against already well-established competitors.

China doesn't want to drain the State's coffers to fund an industry that won't at least pay for itself. It has to change the wheels with the car moving. That's why it is still negotiating the Huawei contracts in the West first, why it still is trying to keep the Taiwanese product flowing first, only to then gradually start the heavy investment needed to dominate the semiconductor technology and production process.

They learned with the Soviets in this sense. When computers became a thing in the West, the USSR immediately poured resources to build them. They were able to dominate the main frame technology, and they were successfully implemented in their economy. Then came the personal computers, and, this time, the Soviets weren't able to make it integrate in their economy. The problem wasn't that the Soviets didn't know how to build a personal computer (they did), but that every new technology is born for a reason, and only makes sense in a given social context. You can't just blindly copy your enemy's technology and hope for the best.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 23:03 utc | 132
@Grieved
The world has a future now, when a decade ago this didn't seem possible, at least from my view in the US. Geopolitically, Russia gave us this future, and China has come to show us how much fun it's going to be. Many thanks to you and your people.

Thank you for your kind words. As my personal experience (my third book is coming out soon)shows--explaining economic reality to people who have been "educated" (that is confused, ripped off for huge tuition and given worthless piece of paper with MBA or some "economics" Bachelor of "Science" on it) in Western pseudo-economic "theory" that this "global" "rules-based order" is over, is pretty much an exercise in futility. And if a catastrophe of Boeing is any indication (I will omit here NATO's military-industrial complex)--dividends, stocks and "capitalization" is a figment of imagination of people who never left their office and infantile state of development and swallowed BS economic narrative hook, line and sinker without even trying to look out of the window. They still buy this BS of US having "largest GDP in the world" (in reality it is much smaller than that of China), the de-industrialization of the United States is catastrophic (they never bothered to look at 2018 Inter-agency Report to POTUS specifically about that)and its industrial base is shrinking with a lighting speed, same goes to Germany which for now retains some residual industrial capability and competences but:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-economy-manufacturing/german-manufacturing-output-to-shrink-4-this-year-bdi-says-idUKKBN1XT1D6

This is before COVID-19, after it Germany's economy shrank worst among Western nations, worse even than the US. It is a long story, but as Michael Hudson stated not for once in his books and interviews, what is "taught" as economics in the West is basically a pseudo-science. Well, it is. Or, as same Hudson stated earlier this year:"The gunboats don't appear in your economics textbooks. I bet your price theory didn't have gun boats in them, or the crime sector. And probably they didn't have debt in it either." And then they wonder in Germany (or EU)how come that EU structures are filled with pedophiles, "Green" fanatics and multiculturalists. Well, because Germany (and EU) are occupied territories who made their choice. And this is just the start. What many do not understand here is that overwhelming majority of Russians do not want to deal with Europe and calls for new Iron Curtain are louder and louder and the process has started. Of course, there is a lot of both contempt and schadenfreude on Russian part. As Napoleon stated, the nation which doesn't want to feed own army, will feed someone else's. Very true. Modern West worked hard for it, let it "enjoy" now.

karlof1 , Oct 18 2020 23:52 utc | 133
Andrei Martyanov @132 & elsewhere--

It's good to see you commenting here as barflies seem more inclined to listen to you than me. Did you watch Russian documentary on The Wall , which I learned about from Lavrov's meeting with those doing business within Russia on 5 Oct? I asked The Saker if his translation team would take on the task of providing English subtitles or a voice over but never got a reply one way or the other. IMO, for Russia to avoid the West's fate it must change its banking and financial system from the private to the public realm as Hudson advocates most recently in this podcast . As for Mr. Lavrov, he surprised the radio station interviewers by citing Semyon Slepakov's song "America Doesn't Like Us," of which barfly Paco thankfully provided a translation of the lyrics.С наилучшими пожеланиями крепкого здоровья и долгих лет жизни!

Smith , Oct 19 2020 0:01 utc | 134
So I don't get it, who won that engagement, Andrei or Eric?

Can Russia produce that turbo thingie or not?

Eric , Oct 19 2020 0:18 utc | 135
@132 Andrei Martyanov

I think you an Grieved misunderstand somewhat where I am coming from here. Michael Hudson would be (and has been) the first to describe how Russia's elites (and to a large extent it seems also the people) bought into a bogus neoliberal ideology teaching that somehow Russia needs to earn the money it needs to build its own economy in the form of foreign currency through export revenues. Apparently these economists and politicians in Russia never bothered to look how Western economies actually operate (as opposed to what they preach to countries they want to destroy), or for that matter how China has developed its economy (in all of these countries, the necessary credit is created on a keyboard.) The export revenues that Russia earns in the form of dollars and euros are sold to the central bank for the roubles that Russia's government needs to function. Bizarrely, this creates just as much inflation as it would if the central bank had just created the roubles without "backing" foreign currency. In fact, there is more inflation created, because in times of high oil prices, corresponding amounts of roubles are suddenly thrown into a domestic market that is underdeveloped, for example in its infrastructure and its food processing. There are reasons why China can expand its money supply by much greater proportions each year and still suffer far less inflation than Russia.

Unlike China, Russia had already attained much of the technological expertise for the equipment that it later decided it was unable to produce inside the country. A good example of this are the turboexpanders whose design was perfected (though the basic idea was a bit older) by Pyotr Kapisa in the 1930's in the USSR. This same technology went into the turbopumps of the rocket engines in the Energia boosters. These engines are still to this day, 30 years after the Soviet collapse, imported by the United States. As these rocket engines including the turbopumps are still produced in Russia, the know-how to manufacture was obviously not lost.

I read just the other day that as part of its import substitution program, Russia is considering to produce the turboexpanders for processing natural gas (separating methane from ethane) inside the country. Russia, with the world's largest natural gas reserves and production, and as I described already possessing the expertise to produce the turboexpanders needed for cryogenic separation, chose to hand over possibly billions of dollars to the West to import this machinery over the years, only to be helpless when the West introduced technological sanctions against its oil and gas sector. Very likely, in a couple of years we will receive the announcement that the drive to produce them domestically has been abandoned, after it was realized that their production will require new factories and new machinery, which do not fall out of the sky in Russia as they apparently do in the West and in China. Putin will announce that great business awaits whichever Western investor ready to provide the funds. (Spoiler: They won't! The West is not very interested in investing into building up Russia's industrial capabilities, preferring instead to loot its natural resources and to suck out its skilled worked and scientists.)

While Russia sits and waits for higher oil prices or foreign dollar credit on the one hand, and with unemployed skilled labor and rotting industrial infrastructure on the other hand, China spends the equivalent of trillions of dollars (in yuan, obviously) into fixed capital (not least infrastructure) each year. The funds for this are all created by keystrokes by the PBOC and provide employment for the domestic workforce. You don't have to ponder long on which model has been hugely successful, and which has been an unmitigated disaster.

I can't find the exact figures right now, but Russia produces something like 300,000 STEM graduates every year, more than the United States. (I may very well have read this originally on your blog, by the way.) Many of them will still be forced to emigrate to find gainful employment, even 20 years after the 1990's ended and Putin became President. These graduates remain even in post-Soviet times of a very high quality, and undergraduate students in Russia are trained at a higher level in mathematics and physics than in particular Americans are even as post-graduates. By refusing to invest in its own scientific infrastructure and industry the way China has done and does, Russia gives away all the education and training that were provided to these students, especially to the same Western countries that are seeking to destroy Russia. This is completely unforgivable.

I should add that I myself study physics in Germany. I have great appreciation for the Russian methods of teaching mathematics and physics, as many do here. I have learned, preferentially, mathematical analysis from Zorich, mechanics, electrodynamics etc. from Landau-Lifschitz, much about Fourier series from Tolstov, and so on, and have very often been awestruck and inspired in a mystical fashion by these works. I am not somehow unaware of the unparalleled quality (in particular after the destruction of Germany in WWII) of the USSR's and Russia's math/physics education or unfamiliar with the achievements of the USSR in science and engineering. It's precisely because I am familar with them that it frustrates me immensely how Russia's potential is needlessly wasted.

Digby , Oct 19 2020 0:28 utc | 136
What many do not understand here is that overwhelming majority of Russians do not want to deal with Europe and calls for new Iron Curtain are louder and louder and the process has started. Of course, there is a lot of both contempt and schadenfreude on Russian part.
Andrei (132), do you have a link to an opinion poll that supports this? Thanks in advance.
james , Oct 19 2020 1:01 utc | 137
@ Digby | Oct 19 2020 0:28 utc | 136.. if you haven't already listened to the lavrov interview that b linked to in his main post - it is a question and answer thing - you would benefit from doing so and it would help answer you question some too.. see b's post at this spot -"In a wide ranging interview with Russian radio stations" and hit that link
Digby , Oct 19 2020 2:17 utc | 138
@ james (137)
Well, I looked into the interview. While it is informative in its own right (at some point it briefly touches on Russo-Japanese relations), and some of the interviewers do show some concerns, I'm still not sure how it helps answer my question (maybe I missed something?). My initial impression was that Mr. Martyanov was referring to Russian civilians - not just radio interviewers.
Thanks anyway for the heads up.
james , Oct 19 2020 3:37 utc | 139
@ 138 digby... my impression was the radio interviewers questions were a reflection of the general sentiment of the public.. i could be wrong, but it seems to me they have completely given up on the west based on what they ask and say in their questions to lavrov...

on another note, you might enjoy engaging andrei more directly on his website which i will share here...

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/

cheers..

[Oct 18, 2020] More Pressure On Russia Will Have No Effect

Notable quotes:
"... Russia is militarily secure and the 'west' knows that. It is one reason for the anti-Russian frenzy. Russia does not need to bother with the unprecedented hostility coming from Brussels and Washington. It can ignore it while taking care of its interests. ..."
"... As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint? ..."
"... The nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Americans is a Germany-Russia-China triangle. If that happens it is game over! ..."
"... They don't want an actual war. They just ratchet up the tensions to keep Europe subdued and obedient and Russia off balance and thereby prevent any rapprochement between the two. ..."
"... The strong hatred and hostility coming from the US and the EU are due to the understanding that they don't have much time, and they must act now, or tomorrow it will be too late. ..."
"... Years ago Barack Obama gave speech to West Point graduates, proclaiming US moral and racial superiority (because they mix'n's*it) over whole world, Goebbels would be proud. Germany has long history of hating all those Slavs, and Israel... Lets not go there with how they threat those inferior brown people. ..."
"... Of course that end-point is money for military contractors and power for the FP elite in government and think-tanks which also means money. Yes, there are true-believers who see a mighty struggle between "good" (the USA) an "evil" (Russia/China) but they are incompetent. As for the American people they will believe whatever the NY Times says since they are militantly ignorant of history, geography, foreign affairs in general, and, above all, political science. ..."
"... The USA is lucky the USSR collapsed in 1991. If it managed to somehow survive for mere 17 years more, it would catch the 2008 capitalist meltdown ..."
"... It looks like the USA imported the Irish and imported their luck, too. ..."
"... This loathing was made blatantly manifest during WWII, of course, but it didn't die out because that generation and more likely their children remain with us. Ditto the generational Anglo-American hatred of Russians (yes, for the UK, and their haute bourgeoisie, it has deeper historical roots than the 20thC) and the USSR even more... ..."
"... "Maas added that Germany takes decisions related to its energy policy and energy supply 'here in Europe', saying that Berlin accepts ' the fact that the US had more than doubled its oil imports from Russia last year and is now the world's second largest importer of Russian heavy oil .'" [My Emphasis] ..."
"... The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people as a whole and make most of them become docile and lose their critical thinking skills and their ability to analyze their own societies. ..."
"... One of the best ways to lobotomize the publics of the US and UK is to very gradually impose martial law in the name of protecting national security and ensuring peace and harmony at home. ..."
"... At the time, I thought it was just Trump and his followers freaking out, now I think it's the NatSec people, who have finally seen the truth of their situation. As one can see in the Atlantic Council piece B posted, they are still trying to keep the old narrative patched together too. ..."
"... As I've said numerous times -- Fuck the US Empire and it's minion bitches. Jesse Ventura commented this past week that EVERY US Incumbent politician should be voted out of office this election. 99% of them are scum. ..."
"... That was the whole point of the first Cold War. It is the whole point of creating a Cold War 2.0. Absolutely nothing has changed. ..."
"... If the Russian Federation really has an ongoing imports substitution program, then this explains everything. Germany is an exports-oriented economy. It wants to integrate with the Russian economy in the sense to keep it as an agrarian-extrativist economy to feed it with cheap commodities to feed their industry. Germany's ideal Russia is Brazil. ..."
"... A Russia that also exports high-value commodities (manufactured commodities) is a direct threat to Germany, as it competes with it directly in the international market. That's the reason Germany doesn't want the BRI to come to Europe, as Merkel once said: Europe must not become China's peninsula. China is Germany's main competitor, as it is also a big manufacturing exporter. ..."
"... Perhaps the US only has one script in the playbook: to balkanise, disrupt and foster 5th columns until their opponent becomes a dysfunctional or failed state. ..."
"... The US and EU attempts to break Russia's independent foreign policy are just stepping stones to the eventual goal of a breakup Russia itself, never forget Albright's comments in the 90s about how Siberia shouldn't belong to Russia alone. ..."
"... We may yet see a Cuban missile crisis scenario but it looks more likely to be caused by arms sales to Taiwan than conflict in the Caucasus. ..."
"... I also think its naive to see these as "fires burning at Russia's borders" instead of as deliberately set bear traps . Azerbaijan is in a strategic location between Russia and Iran and the conflict with Armenia comes just before Russia is about to sell advanced weapons to Iran. ..."
Oct 17, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Over the last years the U.S. and its EU puppies have ratcheted up their pressure on Russia. They seem to believe that they can compel Russia to follow their diktat. They can't. But the illusion that Russia will finally snap, if only a few more sanctions ar applied or a few more houses in Russia's neighborhood are set on fire, never goes away.

As Gilbert Doctorow describes the situation:

The fires burning at Russia's borders in the Caucasus are an add-on to the disorder and conflict on its Western border in neighboring Belarus, where fuel is poured on daily by pyromaniacs at the head of the European Union acting surely in concert with Washington.

Yesterday we learned of the decision of the European Council to impose sanctions on President Lukashenko, a nearly unprecedented action when directed against the head of state of a sovereign nation.
...
It is easy enough to see that the real intent of the sanctions is to put pressure on the Kremlin, which is Lukashenko's guarantor in power, to compound the several other measures being implemented simultaneously in the hope that Putin and his entourage will finally crack and submit to American global hegemony as Europe did long ago.
...
The anti-Russia full tilt ahead policy outlined above is going on against a background of the U.S. presidential electoral campaigns. The Democrats continue to try to depict Donald Trump as "Putin's puppy," as if the President has been kindly to his fellow autocrat while in office. Of course, under the dictates of the Democrat-controlled House and with the complicity of the anti-Russian staff in the State Department, in the Pentagon, American policy towards Russia over the entire period of Trump's presidency has been one of never ending ratcheting up of military, informational, economic and other pressures in the hope that Vladimir Putin or his entourage would crack. Were it not for the nerves of steel of Mr. Putin and his close advisers , the irresponsible pressure policies outlined above could result in aggressive behavior and risk taking by Russia that would make the Cuban missile crisis look like child's play.

The U.S. arms industry lobby, in form of the Atlantic Council, confirms the 'western' strategy Doctorow describes. It calls for 'ramping up on Russia' with even more sanctions:

Key to raising the costs to Russia is a more proactive transatlantic strategy for sanctions against the Russian economy and Putin's power base, together with other steps to reduce Russian energy leverage and export revenue. A new NATO Russia policy should be pursued in tandem with the European Union (EU), which sets European sanctions policy and faces the same threats from Russian cyberattacks and disinformation. At a minimum, EU sanctions resulting from hostilities in Ukraine should be extended, like the Crimea sanctions, for one year rather than every six months. Better yet, allies and EU members should tighten sanctions further and extend them on an indefinite basis until Russia ends its aggression and takes concrete steps toward de-escalation.

It also wants Europe to pay for weapons in the Ukraine and Georgia:

A more dynamic NATO strategy for Russia should go hand in hand with a more proactive policy toward Ukraine and Georgia in the framework of an enhanced Black Sea strategy. The goal should be to boost both partners' deterrence capacity and reduce Moscow's ability to undermine their sovereignty even as NATO membership remains on the back burner for the time being.

As part of this expanded effort, European allies should do more to bolster Ukraine and Georgia's ground, air, and naval capabilities, complementing the United States' and Canada's efforts that began in 2014.

The purpose of the whole campaign against Russia, explains the Atlantic Council author, is to subordinate it to U.S. demands:

Relations between the West and Moscow had begun to deteriorate even before Russia's watershed invasion of Ukraine, driven principally by Moscow's fear of the encroachment of Western values and their potential to undermine the Putin regime. With the possibility of a further sixteen years of Putin's rule, most experts believe relations are likely to remain confrontational for years to come. They argue that the best the United States and its allies can do is manage this competition and discourage aggressive actions from Moscow. However, by pushing back against Russia more forcefully in the near and medium term, allies are more likely to eventually convince Moscow to return to compliance with the rules of the liberal international order and to mutually beneficial cooperation as envisaged under the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act.

The 'rules of the liberal international order' are of course whatever the U.S. claims they are. They may change at any moment and without notice to whatever new rules are the most convenient for U.S. foreign policy.

But as Doctorow said above, Putin and his advisors stay calm and ignore such trash despite all the hostility expressed against them.

One of Putin's close advisors is of course Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. In a wide ranging interview with Russian radio stations he recently touched on many of the issues Doctorow also mentions. With regards to U.S. strategy towards Russia Lavrov diagnoses :

Sergey Lavrov : [...] You mentioned in one of your previous questions that no matter what we do, the West will try to hobble and restrain us, and undermine our efforts in the economy, politics, and technology. These are all elements of one approach.

Question : Their national security strategy states that they will do so.

Sergey Lavrov : Of course it does, but it is articulated in a way that decent people can still let go unnoticed, but it is being implemented in a manner that is nothing short of outrageous.

Question : You, too, can articulate things in a way that is different from what you would really like to say, correct?

Sergey Lavrov : It's the other way round. I can use the language I'm not usually using to get the point across. However, they clearly want to throw us off balance , and not only by direct attacks on Russia in all possible and conceivable spheres by way of unscrupulous competition, illegitimate sanctions and the like, but also by unbalancing the situation near our borders, thus preventing us from focusing on creative activities. Nevertheless, regardless of the human instincts and the temptations to respond in the same vein, I'm convinced that we must abide by international law.

Russia does not accept the fidgety 'rules of the liberal international order'. Russia sticks to the law which is, in my view, a much stronger position. Yes, international law often gets broken. But as Lavrov said elsewhere , one does not abandon traffic rules only because of road accidents.

Russia stays calm, no matter what outrageous nonsense the U.S. and EU come up with. It can do that because it knows that it not only has moral superiority by sticking to the law but it also has the capability to win a fight. At one point the interviewer even jokes about that :

Question : As we say, if you don't listen to Lavrov, you will listen to [Defense Minister] Shoigu.

Sergey Lavrov : I did see a T-shirt with that on it. Yes, it's about that.

Yes, it's about that. Russia is militarily secure and the 'west' knows that. It is one reason for the anti-Russian frenzy. Russia does not need to bother with the unprecedented hostility coming from Brussels and Washington. It can ignore it while taking care of its interests.

As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

Posted by b on October 17, 2020 at 16:31 UTC | Permalink

james , Oct 17 2020 16:45 utc | 1

thanks b.... that lavrov interview that karlof1 linked to previously is worth its weight in gold...

it gives a clear understanding of how russia sees what is happening here on the world stage... as you note cheap talk from the atlantic council 'rules of the liberal international order' is no substitute for 'international law' which is what russia stands on.... as for the usa campaign to tar russia and claim trump is putins puppet.. apparently this stupidity really sells in the usa.. in fact, i have a close friend here in canada from the usa with family in the usa has bought this hook, line and sinker as well.. and he is ordinarily a bright guy!

as for the endpoint - the usa and the people of the usa don't mind themselves about endpoints... it is all about being in the moment, living a hollywood fantasy off the ongoing party of wall st... the thought this circus will end, is not something many of them contemplate.. that is what it looks like to me.. maga, lol...

Michael Droy , Oct 17 2020 16:52 utc | 2
Belarus - this is happenstance, not long term planning. Like Venezuela - indeed neither original Presidential candidate nor his wife had a Wikipedia entry a week or so before being announced as candidate (much like Guaido 2 weeks before Trump "made" him President.

Yes the Western media make the most of it, and yes there are many in place in and besides the media whose job it is to maximise any noise. But little is happening in Belarus. Sanctioning is all anyone can do now. (Sanctions = punishment therefore proof of guilt without trial or evidence).

US pressure is based on the Dem vs Rep "I am tougher on Russia than you" game spurred on by the MIC.
European pressure is based on the Euro Defence force concept and a low key but real desire to rid itself of Nato. So again we have Nato saying "without US/us Europe would be soft on Russia" and Europe saying we are tough on Russia whatever.

Meanwhile China takes over the real world.

Down South , Oct 17 2020 16:56 utc | 3
What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

It is about driving a wedge between Europe and Russia. The nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Americans is a Germany-Russia-China triangle. If that happens it is game over!

They don't want an actual war. They just ratchet up the tensions to keep Europe subdued and obedient and Russia off balance and thereby prevent any rapprochement between the two.

Putin has repeatedly stated he wants a Lisbon to Vladivostok free trade area.

The Anglo-Americans will never permit that. That Europe is committed to a course that is against their own best interest shows just how subservient they are to the Anglo-Americans.

I think it was the first head of NATO that said the purpose of the organization is to "keep the Russians out, the Germans down and the US in"

Absolutely nothing has changed since then.

bjd , Oct 17 2020 17:01 utc | 4
There is no endpoint. Those who argue for it, the Western think-tank industry and security and intelligence industry, are recipients of huge sums of money. It is bread and butter for large numbers of people. And the acceptance of the conclusions and advice of the immense stacks of papers thus produced mean money towards the defense industry and the cyber warfare industry. In the end, all this is driven by elites' fear of their own populations. Sowing FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) makes these populations docile. Rinse and repeat.
Passer by , Oct 17 2020 17:05 utc | 5
>>As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is.

The reason was probably the new Russian Constitution, which is basically a declaration of independence from the West. This has caused serious triggerings in western elites, although their reaction took some time to crystalise due to the Covid Pandemic.

>>What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

The endpoint is - EU and NATO move into Ukraine, Moldova, Serbia, Georgia, Belarus, Armenia.

A puppet government of someone like Navalny is installed Russia. That government further gives up Crimea, Kaliningrad and Northen Caucasus. In the long run, a soft partition of Russia into 3 parts follows (as per the Grand Chessboard 1997).

The possibility for that happening is overall negative, as the West is on a long term decline, that is, it will be weaker in 2030, and even weaker in 2040 or 2050.

OECD economies were 66 % of the world economy in 2010 but that share is estimated to drop to 38 % of the world economy in 2050 (with further drops after that).

The strong hatred and hostility coming from the US and the EU are due to the understanding that they don't have much time, and they must act now, or tomorrow it will be too late.

Seeji , Oct 17 2020 17:15 utc | 6
Apt cover picture!
Abe , Oct 17 2020 17:18 utc | 7
Well, the hostility in "western" "elite" (rulers) towards Russia is on much more primal level than money and power IMO. It is pure racial hatred combined with Übermensch God complex. Main controllers in modern "west" are US, Israel and Germany.

Years ago Barack Obama gave speech to West Point graduates, proclaiming US moral and racial superiority (because they mix'n's*it) over whole world, Goebbels would be proud. Germany has long history of hating all those Slavs, and Israel... Lets not go there with how they threat those inferior brown people.

Seeji , Oct 17 2020 17:19 utc | 8
@ Down South #3

Yes. And it was so depressing that Germany played the Navalny Novichok hoax recently borrowed from the Perfidious Albion!

Bemildred , Oct 17 2020 17:24 utc | 9
They forsee not having to admit they are incompetent yet.
Chris Cosmos , Oct 17 2020 17:26 utc | 10
"What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?"

Of course that end-point is money for military contractors and power for the FP elite in government and think-tanks which also means money. Yes, there are true-believers who see a mighty struggle between "good" (the USA) an "evil" (Russia/China) but they are incompetent. As for the American people they will believe whatever the NY Times says since they are militantly ignorant of history, geography, foreign affairs in general, and, above all, political science.

The problem as I see it is Europe generally, and Germany in particular. Why do they follow Washington diktats?

gottlieb , Oct 17 2020 17:31 utc | 11
Well let's see, the USA is $30 trillion in debt and counting, faces an upcoming economic depression to rival the 'great' one, with a citizenry on the brink of civil war and a political system that makes a 'banana republic' look like ancient Greece. Desperate is as desperate does.
vk , Oct 17 2020 17:32 utc | 12
As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

For a very simple reason: there's no other option. Capitalism can only work in one way. There's a limit to how much capitalism can reform within itself without self-destructing.

The West is also suffering from the "Whale in a Swimming Pool" dilemma: it has grown so hegemonic, so big and so gloated that its strategic options have narrowed sharply. It has not much more room for maneuver left, its bluffs become less and less effective. As a result, its strategies have become increasingly linear, extremely predictable. The "whale in a pool dilemma" is not a problem when your inner workings (domestic economy) is flourishing; but it becomes one when the economy begins to stagnate and, ultimately, decline (albeit slowly).

On a side note, it's incredible how History is non-linear, full of surprises. The Russian Federation is inferior to the Soviet Union in every aspect imaginable. Except for one factor: it now has an ascendant China on its side in a time where the West is declining. (Historical) context is everything.

The USA is lucky the USSR collapsed in 1991. If it managed to somehow survive for mere 17 years more, it would catch the 2008 capitalist meltdown and have an opportunity to gain the upper hand over capitalism (plus have a strong China on its side). Socialism/communism wouldn't have been demoralized the way it was in the 1990s, opening a huge flank for revolutions in the Western Hemisphere (specially Latin America). NATO would be much weaker. Since the USSR was closed to capitalism, the USA wouldn't be able to enforce as crippling economic sanctions on China and the USSR. The USSR would be able to "reform and open up" in a much safer environment (by copying China, instead of Yeltsin's neoliberalism), thus gaining the opportunity to make a Perestroika that could actually work.

But it didn't happen. Well, what can I say? It looks like the USA imported the Irish and imported their luck, too.

Anne , Oct 17 2020 17:37 utc | 13
Abe @7 - I would agree and have raised somewhere (old age?) that part of what we are seeing in this latest western-NATO cooked up charade re Navalny is, in part at least, a deep historical supremacist loathing of the Slavs an in general and the Russians in particular by the haute bourgeois Germans. This loathing was made blatantly manifest during WWII, of course, but it didn't die out because that generation and more likely their children remain with us. Ditto the generational Anglo-American hatred of Russians (yes, for the UK, and their haute bourgeoisie, it has deeper historical roots than the 20thC) and the USSR even more...

The pressure on Russia is enormous and I would enlarge on the economic sanctions aspect (siege warfare): Belarus, Armenia-Azerbaijan (Erdogan once again playing his role for the US/NATO - in this business, Iran is also a target), Kyrgyzstan - all on or very close to Russia's borders and thus dividing and draining (intention) Russia's focus and $$$$ (the Brzezinski game) in order to open it up to the western corporate-capitalist bloodsuckers. And I suspect that as the US (and UK) economies drain away, so these border country "revolts," "protests" etc. will grow...

Russia really needs to join with China in full comity. Bugger the west - they do not respect the rights of either country to their own culture, societal structures, mores, perspectives...nor apparently even those countries' rights to their own coastal waters, air space...

One wonders how the USA would react to Chinese and/or Russian warships in the Gulf or traversing (lengthwise) the Atlantic or Pacific????

karlof1 , Oct 17 2020 17:50 utc | 14
It appears Lavrov's saying we'll just ignore the EU and its major components for awhile got quick results as Germany's FM just announced "Nord Stream 2 will be completed" ; but he also said this:

"Maas added that Germany takes decisions related to its energy policy and energy supply 'here in Europe', saying that Berlin accepts ' the fact that the US had more than doubled its oil imports from Russia last year and is now the world's second largest importer of Russian heavy oil .'" [My Emphasis]

Now isn't that the interesting bit of news!! The greatest fracking nation on the planet needs to import heavy oil (likely Iranian, unlikely Venezuelan) from its #1 adversary. As for the end game, I've written many times what I see as the goal and don't see any need to add more.

winston2 , Oct 17 2020 18:02 utc | 17
"The Russians are coming' is a long standing fear built the American psyche almost from the very start. Russian colonization of the California Territory outnumbered the US population. The Monroe Doctrine was all about that,not S.America at all. The Brits ruled S.America by mercantile means until WWI cut the sea lanes, then and only then did it fall into the sphere of Yankee control.

Then there is Alaska. The Sewards Folly documents are almost certainly fakes, the verified Russian copy says a 100year LEASE,not a sale. The National Archives refuses examination by any but its own experts. Unless they are forgeries and they know it there can be no real reason for their stance. There is much more background to the antipathy than many are aware.

Rob , Oct 17 2020 18:02 utc | 18
@bjd (4) You nailed it, my friend. Cold wars are immensely profitable for certain sectors of the economy and the parasites who run them. The supreme imperative is always to have enemies--really big, bad, dangerous enemies--whether real or imagined. I will be voting for Biden, but I don't have much hope for positive change in American foreign policy. Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc. will continue to be vilified as nations to be feared and hated.
Dao Gen , Oct 17 2020 18:05 utc | 19
The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people as a whole and make most of them become docile and lose their critical thinking skills and their ability to analyze their own societies.

One of the best ways to lobotomize the publics of the US and UK is to very gradually impose martial law in the name of protecting national security and ensuring peace and harmony at home.

After several color revolutions succeeded, the Russiagate/Spygate op was carried out in the US, with British assistance. This op has been largely successful, though there has been limited resistance against its whole fake edifice as well as with the logic of Cold War2.0. Nevertheless, Spygate has shocked many tens of millions of Dems into a stupor, while millions more are dazed and manipulated by the Chinese bogeyman being manufactured by Trump. The most dangerous result of the martial law lite mentality caused by Spygate and its MSM purveyors is the growing support for censorship of free speech coming mostly from the Dems, such as Schiff and Warner. The danger inherent in this trend became very clear when FaceBook and Twitter engaged in massive and unprecedented arbitrary censorship of the New York Post and of various Trump-related accounts. This is the kind of thing you do during Stage 1 of a coup. Surely it was at least in part an experiment to see how various power points in the US would respond. Even though Twitter ended the censorship later, it was probably a successful experiment designed to gauge reactions and areas of resistance. In November, there could be further, more serious experiments/ops. If so, the current expansionist movements being made and planned by the US and NATO may well be integral parts of a new non-democratic model of "American-style democracy" -- not constitution-based but "rules-based."

Posted by: Dao Gen |

Ike , Oct 17 2020 18:13 utc | 21
"As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?"

I think the answer is clear. The US economy is collapsing and likewise those wedded to the US dollar system. The USA spent 90% more than it received last year. They are desperate to have access to Russia's largely untapped resources and it doesn't want any competition for its position as world hegemon. Thus Russia and China are in the crosshairs.

Fortunately the corruption in the USA has resulted in a weaker military capability over time and they are reduced to behaving in clandestine and terroristic ways to try and achieve this. The turmoil enveloping the USA is scape goated on Trump and Covid19 but is ultimately due to their faltering economy and a big helping of financial corruption. Talk about your chickens coming home to roost

Bemildred , Oct 17 2020 18:27 utc | 22
Posted by: Ike | Oct 17 2020 18:13 utc | 21

Talk about your chickens coming home to roost."

Sounds like thunder, all those chickens. I appeared to me that whomever is in charge here, they started pulling all the levers they could lay a hand on a couple weeks back in terms of stirring up trouble. Throwing sand in the eyes of ones enemy.

At the time, I thought it was just Trump and his followers freaking out, now I think it's the NatSec people, who have finally seen the truth of their situation. As one can see in the Atlantic Council piece B posted, they are still trying to keep the old narrative patched together too.

Paco , Oct 17 2020 18:27 utc | 23
Posted by: vk | Oct 17 2020 17:32 utc | 12

Politfiction, or what could have happened if is an entertaining but futile exercise. Everybody agrees, there was no need for the USSR to dissolve, it was like a big jackpot for an amazed rival that rushed to declare himself the winner. The price has been high, on both sides of the fence but of course with a lot more victims and destruction on the other side of the fallen wall. Gorbachov a tragic figure and Yelstyn a sinister one, in spite of his being a clown, a tragic one at that, bombing his parliament and laughing at the world together with the degenerate Clinton, the 90's were somber indeed. The west paid its price, a self declared victory that did not bring any benefit, the peace dividend never was, to the contrary, military budgets never stopped growing year after year. The end of history was proclaimed, no need to match or better the rival ideology, there is none, so proles you better stop complaining, or else and that's where we are.

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 18:34 utc | 25
Just to repeat the obvious, for the US actually to go to war is out of the question these days -- the US public would not tolerate the casualties. Therefore other methods have to be found to achieve the same objectives -- the maintenance of an eternal enemy in 1984 style, to keep up military budgets and world hegemony, neither of which are the elite ready to abandon. Economic sanctions have been the weapon of choice in the age of Trump, but there isn't really any other. Sometimes they are better aimed and sometimes not.

In any case I am not sure I agree that the EU is really submissive to the US in this respect. They don't want to offend the US, and some leaders have genuinely swallowed the Kool-Aid, but others haven't, and the continuation of Nordstream 2 is where they haven't.

steven t johnson , Oct 17 2020 18:38 utc | 26
Doctorow wrote "Of course, under the dictates of the Democrat-controlled House and with the complicity of the anti-Russian staff in the State Department, in the Pentagon, American policy towards Russia over the entire period of Trump's presidency..."

The Senate is more important for foreign affairs and has been Republican for Trump's entire term. The House was also Republican for half of Trump's term. Lastly the "staff" is not really able to run things in the presence of a minimally competent administrator, at the head of the State Department, acting under leadership of a competent, energetic president. There is no sign Doctorow is particularly intelligent or insightful.

I have long ago lost track of where the bar's consensus on Turkey is, whether the failing US means Erdogan must become the follower of the skilled, brave and indefatigable Putin...or whether his sultanship is suicidally persisting in thinking Russia cannot actually deliver anything his sultanship really needs and wants. At any rate it is entirely unclear what "international law" Lavrov thinks supports Russia.

As to the China Russia "alliance," the difficulty is that Putin has so very little to offer.

Steve , Oct 17 2020 18:39 utc | 27
I can hazard a guess to answer your final question. I think corruption is probably the main reason. Those involved in this are mostly interested in self-enrichment through the gullibility of their societies. I don't think the stenographers and the hot-heads neo liberals pushing for a show-down with Russia are intent on committing suicide by igniting a hot war with Russia, but they hope that Moscow could be intimidated and surrender eventually. As you rightly said, it is a pipe dream of course, but they get paid heavily for the hot air they emit.
Norwegian , Oct 17 2020 18:39 utc | 28
@James2 | Oct 17 2020 18:29 utc | 24
The west insulted the people's intelligence!!!
But unfortunately, the people didn't notice that.
dh-mtl , Oct 17 2020 18:46 utc | 29
'As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?'

The endpoint is quite clear: 'Global Governance, by Global Institutions under control of the 'Globalists' (i.e. the Davos crowd).' For this, the 'Globalists' must subdue Russia.

Russia is not only blocking the 'Globalist's' plans in its own right, but, since 2013, it has been protecting other nations from falling prey to 'Globalist' colonization (Syria, Eastern Ukraine, Iran, Venezuela, Libya, Belarus, etc.). And Russia is the lynch-pin to enable the 'Globalists' to corner China.

In addition, together with China, Russia is offering the world an alternative to 'Globalism', a 'Multi-Polar World Order' that is much more attractive than becoming a 'Globalist' vassal.

For the 'Globalists' time has become critical. They are facing revolts in their home countries (Trump, Brexit, Gilets-Jaunes, etc.). The main source of their geo-political power, (since they can no longer challenge Russia and China militarily) the U.S. dollar, is on the verge of collapse as the World's reserve currency. And the economic growth of China means that China has become the most important trading partner for most of the World's nations.

The window of opportunity for the 'Globalists' to create their 'Global Governance' system may have already closed. But, as usual, the losers of any war are usually the last to know. The desperation with which the 'Globalists' are fighting their last battles, against Trump, against Russia, against Brexit, is testimony to the fact that for the 'Globalists' losing this war means their extinction as a ruling elite.

james | Oct 17 2020 18:55 utc | 30

@ steven t johnson | Oct 17 2020 18:38 utc | 26..

c'mon steve.... what is the usa offering turkey here?? they could give a rats ass about turkey, or any other country in the middle east, excluding their 24/7 darling israel... the usa presence on the world stage is meant to sabotage any and all who don't bow down to the exceptional nations philosophy of 'might makes right'... the obvious benefits of russia-china synergy are apparent to both countries and they continue to capitalize on this, in spite of what you read in the usa msm.. russia as a lot to offer china... the fact that the nation apparently masquerading as a gas station has so much to offer is also the reason that all the pillage of the 90's hasn't turned out the way the harvard boys had envisioned... that you can't see the vast wealth and value of russia has nothing to do with the reality on the ground... keep the blinders on, lol...

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 19:09 utc | 31

The EU's attitude to the US is much like its attitude to Britain and Brexit. They don't want to split with the US, because, after all, there might be war, and NATO would be needed, but it's becoming increasingly less likely. In the same way, they would have preferred to stay in good relations with Britain, until Britain insisted on a hostile Brexit. Basic interests come first, and that will also be the case in the future with the US.
Abe , Oct 17 2020 19:11 utc | 32
Anne @ 13

Russia and China are already de-facto alliance. Militarily they cooperate at every level and will soon extend shared anti ballistic shield over China too. It is clear to any outside enemy (except for most retarded ones) that nuclear attack on one will be treated as attack on both of them. Not having formal alliance is somewhat an advantage (eg. limited attack on one of them by enemy that can be easily handled will not complicate situation) as it controls escalation. Lack of escalation control led to WW1 so...

Apart for military, Russia is one of rare fully self sufficient countries in the world. Having vast natural resources and territory, knowledge and industrial capacity to built EVERYTHING they need, they can afford to be sanctioned by whole world and close borders completely if needed. Having 100% secure land borders with China and already huge (and increasing) trade, including oil & gas, only make Russia's self sufficiency even more stable. It also strategically benefits China, as its main weakness is lack of those same resources Russia has in abundance and is willing to share.

So, if sh*t hits the fan, and Russia and China say f*ck it and close borders to rest of the world (even though China trade profits wouldn't be happy), both countries form self sufficient symbiosis that can carry on for centuries.

Which brings me to all those little fires US is starting in Russia's neighborhood. They don't matter. Unlike USSR, Russia's mission is self preservation only, not changing whole world into communist utopia (even though @VK here repeatedly fails to acknowledge it). And survive it will. All it needs is to wait few generations.

Unlike Russia, collective west is going down the drain. Soon enough, all those Slav hating in Bundestag, UK parlament and elsewhere will have more urgent problem of Islamic head choppers that became majority in their countries, while US will have problem to recruit enough men,women and "others" from pool of rainbow colored too-fat and unfit, godless faggot from broken family snowflakes.

joey_n , Oct 17 2020 19:36 utc | 34
@Down South (3)
At least someone still understands. For what it's worth, Lurk and I briefly discussed in the Brexit thread about England doing all it could to prevent comity between continental powers (e.g. Russia and Germany before the first world war).
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/10/its-a-hard-brexits-a-gonna-fall.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef026be41afef7200d#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef026be41afef7200d
Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 19:37 utc | 35
As China has been mentioned, I think it is worth saying that although I have full confidence that Putin will maintain his usual good sense in international conflicts, I have more doubts about the Chinese regime. I don't really understand their policy, which is becoming more nationalistic and edgy. I don't see why. They have great economic success; they should be more relaxed, but they aren't. The first signs came with their attitude towards the Muslims in China. One, the concentration camps in Xinjiang - in that case the Uyghur jihadists in Syria must have provoked anxiety in Beijing. But also increasing pressure on the Hui Muslims in central China (who are native Han) to become more "national". Some years ago they weren't bothered. Now they are.

This suggests that the question of Taiwan could blow up, apart from HongKong. They are less tolerant in Beijing.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36
@Down South
It is about driving a wedge between Europe and Russia. The nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Americans is a Germany-Russia-China triangle. If that happens it is game over!

It is a tired and false concept. There cannot be a "triangle" which includes Germany, due to Germany's increasingly diminishing status. Moreover, Russians do not view Europe as a viable part of Russia's future--the cultural gap is gigantic and continues to grow--the only place of Europe in general, and Germany in particular, in Russian plans is that of a market for Russia's hydrocarbons and other exports. A rather successful program of export-substitution in Russia in the last 6 years dropped technological importance of Germany for Russia dramatically. In some fields, such as high-power turbines made Germany irrelevant, as Siemens learned the hard way recently.

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 19:49 utc | 37

Andrei Martyanov | Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36

due to Germany's increasingly diminishing status.

Difficult to believe.

CitizenX , Oct 17 2020 19:54 utc | 38

@b on October 17, 2020 at 16:31 UTC

"U.S. and its EU puppies have ratcheted up their pressure...

The 'rules of the liberal international order' are of course whatever the U.S. claims they are. They may change at any moment and without notice to whatever new rules are the most convenient for U.S. foreign policy."

Outstanding assessment and thank you for addressing it.

As I've said numerous times -- Fuck the US Empire and it's minion bitches. Jesse Ventura commented this past week that EVERY US Incumbent politician should be voted out of office this election. 99% of them are scum.

Every politician, corporate CEO Banker and Media whore, Judge, CIA filth should have a pitchfork held to their throat and be tried for treason and war crimes. MIC/Pentagon should be destroyed. Majority of Americans are propagandized dumbfucks. Sounds a bit like an American Cultural Revolution is exactly the medicine.

There will come a day for reckoning and true justice, hopefully it is sooner than later. There should be no mercy. For those committing their treasonous crimes, they know better but have chosen poorly, they should be broken.

Russia, Putin and Lavrov have remained the adults in the room while the Empire Brats tantrum themselves.
Anyone else notice that the Anti-Russia rhetoric increased after Snowden was trapped in Russia?

... ... ...

Stonebird , Oct 17 2020 20:01 utc | 40
"Alas, repent, the endpoint is near...."

I agree with Ike and others who think the US money situation is the problem. But I also think that the underlying endpoint is hyperinflation, not just the loss of the dollars' "reserve status." Hyperinflation is when so much "money" has been produced that it no longer has any value and the Central Bank cannot control what comes next.

There is a point at which people want to get rid of dollars and panic buy or "invest" in assets, or anything solid or simply anything (Gold, land etc. bread) At which time the money they want to get rid of looses value continuously, as others don't want it either. A Rush for the exits happens.

Who has the MOST money - the Rich and the sovereign Nations? (Althought the latter may also be in the same situation as the US.) Russia has more or less got rid of all it's US holdings. The Chinese must be alarmed by the thought of the Fed issuing ONLY new-digicoins, and then the US simply refusing to pay debts to the Chinese at some future point. They might want out now. Not so much dumping everything but a steady reduction of US denominated "assets" or reserves.

Most of this becomes self-sustaining panic, as happened in the Weimar Rep. What can be considered "assets" to grab? ie Russia, minerals and it's Gold, China and its Gold. Then the choice might be to invest in the US military and use it while there is a residue of belief in the Dollar.

The only thing about a panic exit is that it happens very quickly. About a month or two between when the first bright sparks try to get out and when everyone else tries to grab part of a rapidly restricted choice of things to buy with an unending pile of "empty" dollars.

Buy wheelbarrows.

David , Oct 17 2020 20:07 utc | 41
Germany should've been conquered by the Soviet Union entirely as it was won with Soviet, largely Russian, blood. Germany is increasingly irrelevant to Russia's needs now as Martyanov points out above. Germany's existence today should be that of a Russian oblast, same with Eastern Ukraine from Kharkiv to Mariupol and Belarus.

Ask yourself what Germany produces that Russia can't produce for itself with import substitution schemes or similar schemes within a 10 year period. Russia's GDP by PPP is the size of Germany's already and depending on how it deals with the impact of COVID, may continue an upward year-on-year growth trend (People's Republic of China is the only major economy forecast to expand in fiscal quarter this year). The fact of the matter is that Russia's population is much larger, its industrial base, at least in heavy industry, is nearly self sufficient (not much light industry to speak of) and Germany depends on Russian oil and gas to keep its lights on. Russia can carry on without Germany just fine. There may be a noticeable impact now if Russia were cornered into doing that, but it's nothing that can't be overcome in short order.

juliania , Oct 17 2020 20:08 utc | 42
Thank you, b, and before reading comments, I will give my take on your last question:
As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

The whole 'rules based order' became very clear when the Trans Pacific Partnership, TPP, was being debated,and what happened then is what many have noted, the 'rules' were all to advantage the US. So, you might say that was the beginning of the end for the oligarchy. And the partnership reformed after it had taken out that problem, to be fair to all participants. All the oligarchy can do is keep on keeping on until it can't. This is really about survival for that class of individuals who intend to keep on being in charge here in the US and wherever its tentacles have reached. The only endpoint they see is their continuance. And I suppose their fear is that it is simply not possible for that to be the case.

Hopefully there will just come a point where, as in Plato's Republic, the dialogue simply moves on. There, it begins in the home of the ancient one, Cephalus, with a polite discussion, and the old man says his piece, to which Socrates responds:

"What you say is very fine indeed, Cephalus...but as to this very thing, justice, shall we so simply assert that it is the truth and giving back what a man has taken from another, or is to do these very things sometimes just and sometimes unjust? Take this case as an example of what I mean: everyone would surely say that if a man takes weapons from a friend when the latter is of sound mind, and the friend demands them back when he is mad, one shouldn't give back such things, and the man who gives them back would not be just, and moreover, one should not be willing to tell someone in this state the whole truth."

"What you say is right," he said.

[Allan Bloom translation]

In the dialogue, the old man leaves to 'look after the sacrifices', handing down the argument to his heir, Polymarchus. To me, Socrates has adroitly caused this to come about in much the fashion that Lavrov answers his press questioners in the link b provides. That is, he has done so with diplomacy, and a lesson to his younger companions which perhaps Cephalus is no longer able to understand. Quod erat demonstrandum.

m , Oct 17 2020 20:15 utc | 43
Spent much of your money for weapons, brag with your military and wonder why you are perceived as a thread ...
Josh , Oct 17 2020 20:24 utc | 47
https://tass.com/world/1213379
Down South , Oct 17 2020 20:26 utc | 48
Andrei Martyanov @ 36

It is a tired and false concept

Yet in your disparaging comments of Europe and Germany in particular you proceed to show how successful the Anglo-Americans have been in creating a wedge between Europe and Russia actually validating my original point.

"Keep the Russians out, the Germans down and the US in"

That was the whole point of the first Cold War. It is the whole point of creating a Cold War 2.0. Absolutely nothing has changed.

Passer by , Oct 17 2020 20:30 utc | 50
Posted by: m | Oct 17 2020 20:15 utc | 43

By whom exactly? US & several euro puppets? Typical racist thinking that Europe and its former colonies are somehow "the world" or "the international community".

Meanwhile opinion of Russia is positive in India (1,3 billion people, more than the whole West combined) and China (1,4 billion, more than the whole West combined).

Those who don't spend for their own weapons, spend for their master's weapons (like europuppets).

Btw your master (US) spends on weapons too. What are you going to do about it?

norecovery , Oct 17 2020 20:45 utc | 51
@ laguerre -- This interview with Pepe Escobar by Moderate Rebels will answer some of your questions regarding China's treatment of Muslim minorities.
https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebels/the-coronavirus-pandemic-and-us-hybrid-war-on-china-with-pepe-escobar
Down South , Oct 17 2020 21:01 utc | 55
joey_n @ 34

As was rightly pointed out in that discussion, British foreign policy towards Europe was to ensure that no single power was to be allowed to achieve hegemony over Europe. The famous "balance of power"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_balance_of_power

The Cold War with Russia is merely a British and US continuation of that exact same policy.

vk , Oct 17 2020 21:01 utc | 56
@ Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36

If the Russian Federation really has an ongoing imports substitution program, then this explains everything. Germany is an exports-oriented economy. It wants to integrate with the Russian economy in the sense to keep it as an agrarian-extrativist economy to feed it with cheap commodities to feed their industry. Germany's ideal Russia is Brazil.

A Russia that also exports high-value commodities (manufactured commodities) is a direct threat to Germany, as it competes with it directly in the international market. That's the reason Germany doesn't want the BRI to come to Europe, as Merkel once said: Europe must not become China's peninsula. China is Germany's main competitor, as it is also a big manufacturing exporter.

Down South , Oct 17 2020 21:19 utc | 57
https://youtu.be/ZVYqB0uTKlE

Watch in full. UK policy towards Europe in a nutshell

Digby , Oct 17 2020 21:24 utc | 58
@ David (41)
If I recall correctly, after WWII Stalin wanted a united, independent and Russia-friendly Germany, and even rejected the Morgenthau Plan.

https://thesaker.is/stalin-about-allies-idea-of-division-of-germany/

Eventually the Allied zones of occupation became West Germany, and the Soviet occupation zone became East Germany.

H.Schmatz , Oct 17 2020 21:40 utc | 60
@Posted by: vk | Oct 17 2020 21:01 utc | 56

But...it is not China currently main market for German exports...and Turkey second? In detriment of the EU....

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 21:46 utc | 61
Posted by: Down South | Oct 17 2020 21:19 utc | 57

Old stuff. It's why Britain is losing today. They haven't kept up.

Smith , Oct 17 2020 22:04 utc | 63
Unlike China, Russia lacks the weight of population and reliance on the globalist capitalist system to throw around, China will not shut itself up for Russia when it can trade with EU & Turkey instead.

Russia is increasingly put into weak position, where Russian troops are sent to do the dying, while the Chinese business whoop in afterwards to get all the juicy business deals. In other words, Russia does the dying while China enriches itself.

Russia only hope is that it becomes friendly with the EU, otherwise, it is going to be crushed between two superpowers, the EU and China.

kemerd , Oct 17 2020 22:08 utc | 64
I think the point of the sanctions and all the pressure on Russia is an appeal to Russian elite, Just a reminder that they are isolated from the rest of the elite and hope that it would help them throw Russian nationalists from power. I think this might succeed as Putin did no really take on the new Russian capitalist class, and that will probably be his undoing.
Don Bacon , Oct 17 2020 22:12 utc | 66
@vk 36
That's the reason Germany doesn't want the BRI to come to Europe

BRI in Europe - 16 countries: Austria*, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Ukraine * shaky

SCMP - Aug 17, 2020: China's rail shipments to Europe set records as demand surges for Chinese goods amid coronavirus

> July saw 1,232 cargo trains travel from Chinese cities to European destinations – the most ever in a single month
> Once regarded as merely ornamental, freight service along belt and road trade routes has become increasingly important as exporters turn to railway transport. . . here

c1ue , Oct 17 2020 22:18 utc | 67
Lavrov, Shoigu and Putin are calm, but the domestic economic situation is not. While I have noted before that Russia is better positioned to survive low oil prices than Saudi Arabia - it doesn't mean this is fun.

Couple that with COVID-19 economic losses, and stresses on the domestic Russian economy are enormous.

Among other signs: after bouncing around in the 60s for some time, the ruble just hit 80 to the USD. Anecdotally, I am hearing a lot of direct personal accounts of businesses not being able to pay their people because their own customers aren't paying.

Russia has done relatively little extra to assist with COVID-19 related economic harms, so this isn't great either.

norecovery , Oct 17 2020 22:30 utc | 68
@ laguerre -- The interview with Pepe Escobar deals with the whole range of issues in the hybrid war against China, but the information you're looking for Regarding the suppression and re-education of Muslim terrorists starts just past the 1-hour point.

https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebels/the-coronavirus-pandemic-and-us-hybrid-war-on-china-with-pepe-escobar

H.Schmatz , Oct 17 2020 22:30 utc | 69
@Posted by: c1ue | Oct 17 2020 22:18 utc | 67

One would say you are describing the state of affairs in the US... Projecting?

norecovery , Oct 17 2020 22:34 utc | 70
@ laguerre -- Start at 1:09:40
Don Bacon , Oct 17 2020 22:36 utc | 71
@ Laguerre 35

the Chinese regime. I don't really understand their policy, which is becoming more nationalistic and edgy.

No, it's become more multi-national and sensible. Take the BRI: Launched in 2013, it was initially planned to revive ancient Silk Road trade routes between Eurasia and China, but the scope of the BRI (Belt & Road Initiative) has since extended to cover 138 countries, including 38 in sub-Saharan Africa and 18 in Latin America and the Caribbean.

they should be more relaxed
China has been an open target for the US, which doesn't even mention China any more (Pompeo) but dumps on the "CCP" (Chinese Communist Party). China (like Russia) has not responded in kind.

their attitude towards the Muslims in China
The US State Dept slash CIA has been fomenting terrorism in Xinjiang for years and China has had to contend with it.

the question of Taiwan could blow up
Taiwan like some other places in the world, including Hong Kong, has been another place where the US has fomented instability. This has increased recently with Taiwan "president" Tsai declaring that Taiwan (January this year, BBC interview) is a separate country, which it isn't. China is being pushed to do his Abe Lincoln thing and save the union.

They are less tolerant in Beijing
Chinese by nature are tolerant, and Beijing has been tolerant in the face of US naval fleets and bomber visits in their near seas, plus political attacks, sanctions and tariffs.

winston2 , Oct 17 2020 22:38 utc | 72
66 watch what they do and have done and not what they.
Construction started four years ago on enlarging and modernization of the railway marshaling yards in Duisburg.
The volume of Chinese freight trains arriving daily is already quite amazing and planned to increase to one every hour next month 24/7.They are not returning empty. The oil and gas pipeline corridors also had ten plus railway tracks built alongside .Germany is already at the center of the BRI expansion into Germany and it started four years ago.
vk , Oct 17 2020 22:42 utc | 73
@ Posted by: H.Schmatz | Oct 17 2020 21:40 utc | 60

That's why Germany is not full anti-China.

--//--

@ Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 17 2020 22:12 utc | 66

Just because Germany doesn't want it, it doesn't mean it's not getting.

--//--

@ Posted by: c1ue | Oct 17 2020 22:18 utc | 67

I agree. Capitalism is a dead end for Russia. It's all about when Putin dies. After he dies, it will be a coin flip for Russia: it could continue its course or it could get another Yeltsin.

Smith , Oct 17 2020 22:48 utc | 74
@ vk

Germany being against BRI is news to me. Any proof? And it is very unlikely that China will be able to fool the europeans lile the american. The EU has regulations and aren't purely about profit.

And they still have strong domestic industry.

Patroklos , Oct 17 2020 22:54 utc | 75
Perhaps the US only has one script in the playbook: to balkanise, disrupt and foster 5th columns until their opponent becomes a dysfunctional or failed state. Then send in the acronyms (IMF etc), establish a provisional administration under trusted local elites but commandeer resource-rich areas under direct provincial command. That's US imperialism and it won't stop until they encounter opposition effective enough to resist it. That's why they'll never forgive Putin for Syria. In the end they want to finish doing to Russia (by other means...) what the Germans began in '41; and not just Russia, but anywhere their markets are prevented from calling the shots.
emersonreturn , Oct 17 2020 23:31 utc | 77
thank you, @72. the chinese learned much from their century of humiliation & clearly one of the important lessons was trade both ways, rather than take their silver, sell them tea, silks & porcelain & need nothing they offered.
Grieved , Oct 17 2020 23:40 utc | 78
@77 emersonreturn

That's an excellent observation, and a concept I had not encountered before. Thank you. How consciously China holds that narrative, if at all, I couldn't say.

But it's a great dynamic - kind of like keeping your enemies close. And if the German increase in reciprocal railroad trade with China is as it was stated up-thread, it would seem to be working.

emersonreturn , Oct 18 2020 0:02 utc | 79
@78, thank you, grieved...i've long admired you. in times such as these it can be a challenge to keep sight of the positive but as china prospers & wishes her trading partners to as well, & so long as russia continues to strive toward the high road rather than descend to the barroom floor perhaps we can also learn to rise...i'm reminded of a sufi saying: 'rise in love do not fall'. may we all.
Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 0:05 utc | 80
Do they even think about an endpoint? Is it really on their radar?

Or is this all being done because they are spoilt, and are throwing a tantrum because they aren't getting their way?

I assume that there are sober heads in the Pentagon that wargame possible "endpoints". If not sober at the beginning then sober when the results play out to their bitter end.

Or... maybe not. Post-retirement board seats are at stake, dammit! Full steam ahead and damn the torpedoes!

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 0:10 utc | 81
#35 Laguerre

I'm truly astonished that you don't know the truth of Xinjaing - in sum, that the concentration camps are a huge lie that can be revealed as such by any satellite, and that China has developed a progressive and worthy solution to the foreign-provoked terrorism within its border.

Fortunately, Qiao Collective, a great expert source on China, has recently compiled a treasure trove of links to know the truth:

Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation - Sep 21 Written By Qiao Collective

Based on a handful of think tank reports and witness testimonies, Western governments have levied false allegations of genocide and slavery in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. A closer look makes clear that the politicization of China's anti-terrorism policies in Xinjiang is another front of the U.S.-led hybrid war on China.

This resource compilation provides a starting point for critical inquiry into the historical context and international response to China's policies in Xinjiang, providing a counter-perspective to misinformation that abounds in mainstream coverage of the autonomous region.

kooshy , Oct 18 2020 0:29 utc | 82
Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36

Andrei

A good justification on Russian German transitional relation, and we hope Russia is not fooled again, by hopes. Those of us who hope for containing and reducing western dominance over the world affairs, politics and economy, hope that Russians have learned from their experience of the 90's joining G7, seat at NATO, joining western sanctions on smaller powers, etc. all those efforts were the carrots thrown at Russia to tame the bear, one would think up to Georgian war, it worked, that war perhaps woke the bear. Russians felt they are part of Europe,part of western community of privileged nations (first world) but all that was a decoy to move the NATO to Russian borders. I hope Russians once for all have learned, as long as they have a big modern military and plenty of energy resources that is not under the western (you read US) control they will never be accepted as a "western" country, Ironically, Russia is the largest European country.

As a strategist you know better than most to circumvent western power and to bring back the rule of international law, it would be impossible without having the Russian defensive political and military power (as in Syria) on the side of resistance. We just hope you are right Russia, will not be bought out again. IMO as you say, is just impossible for Germany, or even France to decouple from the US grip on europe.

jared , Oct 18 2020 1:04 utc | 83
Seems to me its been terribly effective. Russian economy pretty weak heavily reliant on raw materials, fracturing at the periphery. China and Russia seem less than alies.

Seems US has Germany, France by the short hairs. US had to bail them out in 2009. Europe is having some problems with solvency and cohesion - whats a bureaucrat to do? Its not really about the sovereigns, that's only for appearances.

jared , Oct 18 2020 1:06 utc | 84
Also seems maybe Russians are growing tired of lack of progress.
Don Bacon , Oct 18 2020 1:17 utc | 85
@ 77
The Century of Humiliation from 1842 to 1949 and the contemporary discourse around it are a driving narrative of contemporary Chinese history, foreign policy, and militarization of its surrounding regions like the South China Sea. The expansion of the Chinese navy in numbers, mission, and aggression is directly fueled by China's previous weakness and exploitation at the hands of western nations. . . . here
c1ue , Oct 18 2020 1:19 utc | 86
@H.Schmatz #69

The US economy is definitely in trouble, but the US has spent roughly $2 trillion this year to help its economy = a bit under 10% of 2019 GDP.

The difference is structural. The US economy is a service one - and lockdowns are literally the best way to damage it.

The Russian economy is still heavily dependent on natural gas and oil sales. Despite the initial devaluation, ongoing low oil prices plus increasing competition in natural gas (for example, Azerbaijan is now selling natural gas to Italy) is hurting its economy.

Nor has Russia spent much to compensate for COVID-19 losses beyond its existing health and social safety nets - the Russian plan was $73B / 5 trillion rubles = 4.3% of 2019 GDP.

Circe , Oct 18 2020 2:00 utc | 88
I am anti-war and I am an anti-war crimes liberal (examples of war crimes: ethnic cleansing, proof of genocide, torture, collective punishment via deprivation and occupation of dispossessed land). Yet, I am also a non-interventionist except in extreme circumstances but I am against regime change for the sake of neutralizing competing powers or converting them religiously or politically.

All this implies exercising the highest integrity and blocking out all external influence and pressure if one is a true liberal, and relying solely on conscience and wisdom.

Therefore, I don't like the term liberal sullied and usurped by fake liberals, neoliberals and Zionist liberals, and I also take offense to the way liberal as a general term is denigrated in this article.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 2:24 utc | 90
@vk

Germany is an exports-oriented economy. It wants to integrate with the Russian economy in the sense to keep it as an agrarian-extrativist economy to feed it with cheap commodities to feed their industry. Germany's ideal Russia is Brazil.

True, it was about 10 years ago. Economic reality, of course, is such that Germany already beat the record by consecutive 20 months of real economy shrinkage. In general, Germany's energy policy is suicidal and Russia is increasingly independent from imports.

A lot to be done in the future yet, of course, but as the whole comedy with high-power turbines and Siemens demonstrated, Russia can do it on her own, plus General Electric is always there, sanctions or no sanctions. It is a complicated matter, but it is Germany which increasingly becomes irrelevant for Russia as an old image of technologically-advanced Germans getting their hands on Russia's resources and ruling the world--this image is utterly obsolete, completely false and doesn't correspond to the reality "on the ground".

It is really a simple thing which many Westerners cannot wrap their brains around, that the country which has a space program which operates ISS and second fully operational global satellite navigation constellation, or which produces hypersonic weapons and whose shipbuilding dwarfs that of Germany will have relatively little troubles in developing other crucial industries and removing Western interests from those. Simple as that.

Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 3:01 utc | 91
@90 Very true. Every time I read someone proclaiming that the Russian economy is no bigger than Italy's, or Spain's, or ..... (fill in the blanks) I simply think to myself: "This word, I do not think it means what you think it means".

Because it should be obvious to everyone that Italy can not produce all the things that Russia produces.
Equally, Spain can not produce all the things that Russia produces.

So if someone has measured "economy" in such a way that the numbers for Russia are the same as the number for Italy - or Spain - is simply admitting that their economic models are flawed.

Don Bacon , Oct 18 2020 3:13 utc | 92
Map of the World's Manufacturing Output 2018

here

BiloxiMarxKelly , Oct 18 2020 3:20 utc | 93
PLEASE SHARE, THANK YOU MOA
https://youtu.be/kr04gHbP5MQ
Kadath , Oct 18 2020 3:28 utc | 94
The US and EU attempts to break Russia's independent foreign policy are just stepping stones to the eventual goal of a breakup Russia itself, never forget Albright's comments in the 90s about how Siberia shouldn't belong to Russia alone.

Ultimately, though the US and EU nation states are nothing more than tools of the globalist elite whose dream of a fully economically integrated world where the power of labour is completely crushed by the power of capital to move instantly across the planet is already falling apart. The economic elite have already pillaged all of the minor nations in the world and the two grand prizes, Russia and China are too powerful to attack directly now. unable to control their unbridled greed they've begone the process of auto-self cannibalism, destroying their own states (or killing their hosts as Michael Huddson would say) in order to completely centralize all capital within the 0.1%.

This will make them very rich, however hundreds of millions of Americans, Australians, Canadians, Japanese and Europeans will be impoverished in order to do this. When this is eventually realized by the majority of the people in these states, the economic elite will be lucky if they "just" lose everything but their lives in mass nationalization campaigns. I see very little evidence that the Russian or Chinese states would be willing to offer safe harbour for the criminal oligarchs of the West, like London has offered to criminal Oligarchs fleeing justice in Russia

Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 4:09 utc | 95
@92 Don Bacon Would be very interesting to know how they define "manufacturing".

I suspect very much that it includes many things that aren't actually, you know, "manufactured".

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 4:11 utc | 96
@Don Bacon.

Before posting here monetarist propaganda BS form Western "economic" sources learn to distinguish monetary expression of product and actual product in terms of quantity and quality.

Just to demonstrate to you: for $100,000 in a desirable place in the US you will be able to buy a roach-infested shack in a community known for meth-labs and high crime, for exactly the same money in Russia you will buy a superb brand-new house in a desirable location.

To demonstrate even more, for a price of a single Columbia-class SSBN ($8 billion+) which does not exist other than on paper yet, Russia financed and produced her 8-hulls state of the strategic missile submarines.

UK economy is dwarfed by Russia even in accordance by IMF and World Bank, in fact, it is, once one excludes still relevant RR and few other manufacturers, is down right third world economy. I am not going to post here all data from IMF, but even this can explain why you posted a BS. Anyone "counting" real economic sector in USD and Nominal GDP has to have head examined and is probably dumbed down through "economics" programs in Western madrasas, aka universities.

https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

In related news, learn what Composite Index of National Capability (CINC) is and check energy consumption and production of Germany and Russia, just for shits and giggles.

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/total-energy/world-consumption-statistics.html

But, of course, feel free to remain reliant on economic BS produced by Western "economists".

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 4:16 utc | 97
@92 Don Bacon, @95 Yeah, Right

Yes, and also it should be said that obviously these metrics aren't the correct ones to judge the power of a country among its peers.

Perhaps a better metric is for any nation to ask: Of all these countries, which one do we NOT want to punch us in the face?

This, after all, is how geopolitical stature is measured.

It's not what you produce, it's how you deploy it that matters.

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 4:35 utc | 98
@97 more

And of course, Martyanov @96 is absolutely correct - the relative values of currencies are proved to be nothing more than the entries of bookkeepers and bankers, all "sound and fury, signifying nothing." What matters is what the home unit of currency will buy at home.

A better question is as Andrei suggests, what does it cost for Russia to produce something that works, as opposed to what it costs the US to produce something that doesn't work because of theft and cost inflation in the delivery chain?

The ultimate - MAD - question that the US should ask itself is this: How much does it cost Russia to destroy the US, compared with the cost involved for the US to destroy Russia?

~~

The cost of living is higher in the US. The cost of doing anything is higher. But none of that means the quality of the result is greater - I certainly don't hear anyone lately saying the living is good, compared to what people pay for it.

Jackrabbit , Oct 18 2020 4:41 utc | 99
b quotes Gilbert Doctorow:
Were it not for the nerves of steel of Mr. Putin and his close advisers, the irresponsible pressure policies outlined above could result in aggressive behavior and risk taking by Russia that would make the Cuban missile crisis look like child's play.
We may yet see a Cuban missile crisis scenario but it looks more likely to be caused by arms sales to Taiwan than conflict in the Caucasus.

I also think its naive to see these as "fires burning at Russia's borders" instead of as deliberately set bear traps . Azerbaijan is in a strategic location between Russia and Iran and the conflict with Armenia comes just before Russia is about to sell advanced weapons to Iran.

!!

[Oct 16, 2020] Jacques Chirac President of France told Jr Bush if the United States finds WMDs in Iraq you put them there.

Oct 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com


WilliamRD • 12 hours ago

Jacques Chirac President of France told Jr Bush if the United States finds WMDs in Iraq you put them there. The CIA and MI6 knew Iraq had no WMDs because Tariq Aziz Saddam's long time number 2 was a CIA asset. Back in the 1980s Aziz was a regular on the Washington cocktail party circuit and a frequent guest on CNNs Crossfire with Pat Buchanan, Robert Novak vs Tom Braden and Michael Kinsley. Finally Dick Armey Republican and House Majority leader was going to vote against authorizing the war in the fall of 2002. Cheney goes up to Capitol Hill pulls Armey into the Vice Presidents office in the Capitol and tells him that Iraq is close to having suitcase nukes and has very close ties to Osama bin Laden. Both lies of course.

On one occasion when Jr Bush was talking to Chirac he told him that the war on terror is Biblical prophecy. Needless to say Chirac was stunned. Yes the Republican establishment lied the country into one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in our history. Almost as bad as Woodrow Wilson taking us into World war 1 which led to the rise Bolshevik revolution and Nazi Germany

ekaneti WilliamRD • 2 hours ago • edited

Vietnam was a bigger lie and worse than Iraq

WilliamRD ekaneti • an hour ago

Vietnam was bad for sure and had a much larger death count, but the region or the domino theory never materialized. The Middle East has been in chaos ever since our invasion and occupation of Iraq

[Oct 16, 2020] WilliamRD WilliamRD

Oct 16, 2020 | disqus.com

• 12 hours ago

Jacques Chirac President of France told Jr Bush if the United States finds WMDs in Iraq you put them there. The CIA and MI6 knew Iraq had no WMDs because Tariq Aziz Saddam's long time number 2 was a CIA asset. Back in the 1980s Aziz was a regular on the Washington cocktail party circuit and a frequent guest on CNNs Crossfire with Pat Buchanan, Robert Novak vs Tom Braden and Michael Kinsley. Finally Dick Armey Republican and House Majority leader was going to vote against authorizing the war in the fall of 2002. Cheney goes up to Capitol Hill pulls Armey into the Vice Presidents office in the Capitol and tells him that Iraq is close to having suitcase nukes and has very close ties to Osama bin Laden. Both lies of course.

On one occasion when Jr Bush was talking to Chirac he told him that the war on terror is Biblical prophecy. Needless to say Chirac was stunned. Yes the Republican establishment lied the country into one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in our history. Almost as bad as Woodrow Wilson taking us into World war 1 which led to the rise Bolshevik revolution and Nazi Germany

[Oct 16, 2020] Why the West Fuels Conflict in Armenia -

Oct 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Fazal Majid • 15 hours ago • edited

Britain created Saudi Arabia? They supported the westernized Hashemites rivals of the Saud to the hilt. Just one of the many factual errors in a muddle-headed article that seems to draw its inspiration from the reflexive anti-Americanism of the European loony left.

The Caucasus, like the former Yugoslavia, or India before partition, is made up of many populations coexisting. When ethno- or religious nationalism rears its ugly head, violence and ethnic cleansing inevitably ensue. The Armenians prevailed militarily due to Azerbaijani incompetence, not because of any intrinsic moral righteousness, but the thing about military gains is they can be reversed when the other side gets its act together, specially if it enjoys an overwhelming advantage in population and resources.

Foreign powers like Russia, Turkey, Iran, France or Israel are pouring oil on the fires of revanchism for political or mercantile reasons, instead of pushing both sides to meaningful negotiations (let's not forget the Armenians are perfectly happy with the status quo and have not exactly been eager to negotiate it away). The last thing the US should be doing is taking sides, and since this is Russia's backyard there is not much we can do other than pressuring Turkey to stop making things worse, but we all know how little real sway we have with Erdögan.

S A Chaplin Fazal Majid • 12 hours ago

@Majid - Very insightful comment, thank you. (And better written than the article.) You also taught me a new word: revanchism.

Blood Alcohol Fazal Majid • 8 hours ago • edited

The article seems to me to be disjointed and I have feeling the damage was done during editing. There's no egregious mistake is saying the Brits created "Saudi" Arabia. That is a historical fact and which family/tribe they supported is irrelevant in historical terms. Your charge of "reflexive anti-Americanism of the European loony left." because of a few inaccuracies in the article is way off the wall. The article is badly written but it is informative.

Regarding your claim, "Foreign powers like Russia, Turkey, Iran, France or Israel are pouring oil on the fires...", I agree with you with the exception of Iran's role in this mess. The very first official announcement by the IRI, which I posted to another article on the site, warned Turkey is pouring fuel to the file. There's no disagreement there. Iran has no military personnel nor funding going to either country. Azerbaijan has about 700 Kilometers of common border with Iran, and Armenia shares about 32 Kilometers of borders with Iran. Iran has a substantial, vibrant and patriotic Azari population. Many are in top IRI leadership including Khamenei. Iran also has a very substantial and vibrant Armenian population. Iran does recognize the Turk's genocide of its Armenian population. Iran is connected to Armenia via oil and gas pipelines, as well as power grids. Iran is the most important of energy supplier for Armenia.

A bit of recent history will shed some light on Iran's behavior and attitude towards each country. While Armenia remained one of Iran's stalwart neighbors, Azerbaijan took the path of endearing itself to the US and Israel axis of war mongering and destabilizing policies. This put Azerbaijan on Iran's list of "unfriendly" governments, I'm not talking about Azerbaijan's Shia population in this context. There's nothing for Iran in this war. Therefore Iran's latest announcement is to end the war as soon as possible through diplomatic means. The shells and missiles have started landing on Iranian soil but no casualties fortunately.

Fazal Majid Blood Alcohol • 7 hours ago • edited

The British had literally nothing to do with the creation of Saudi Arabia. Abdulaziz Ibn Saud took back his family fief of Riyadh in 1901 from the rival al-Rashid of Ha'il, then waged war over the other tribes of Arabia, enlisting a fanatical proto-ISIS like militia called the Ikhwan to conquer in 1924 the British-supported Hejaz ruled by Sharif Hussein of the Hashemite dynasty. He did not extend his conquests to Yemen, Oman, Kuwait or Transjordan and Syria because that would have meant waging direct war on the British and French empires, and in fact had to quell a rebellion of the Ikhwan who wanted to do exactly that.

The Saudis draw great pride in being the one nation in the Middle East that was not colonized by Western powers (mostly because it was worthless until the discovery of oil). Just because William Shakespear or Gertrude Bell toured the region does not make the al-Saud British puppets like the Hashemites were, whatever their many faults. While Abdulaziz bided his time and tactically made treaties with the British like temporarily accepting a protectorate status or agreeing to fight the al-Rashid (like he would do otherwise, they being his family's hereditary enemies....), they never provided him with any significant assistance, and in fact tried ineffectually to contain his rise.

Blood Alcohol Fazal Majid • 4 hours ago • edited

I think if we remove "Saudi" from the discussion and just talk about "Arabia" our difference of opinion will evaporate. The country is mistakenly, in my opinion, was named "Saudi Arabia" for the Western colonizers' special interest. The rest of your argument about who did what to whom in Arabia is inside baseball to me.

By the way, stay tuned. We many start hearing about the al-Rashid as soon as the "king" passes and mBS tries be big cheese of Arabia.

redfish Blood Alcohol • 5 hours ago

Of course Iran would just like the conflict to go away; its leaving them with only bad choices, whether that to be appearing to support Azerbaijan and alienating Armenia, with whom they have an important relationship, or appearing to support Armenia and alienating much of its local Azeri population. I think Iran publicly is walking a fine line and trying to stress diplomacy to solve the conflict as much as possible, though its still hard for them to extricate themselves from the politics of the situation.

Though, in that regard, its a bit wrong to compare the Azeri population in Iran to the Armenian population; its completely different in scale and importance. Iran has some concern that the Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict, if handled wrongly, would become regional or spill over into their borders, and they're less concerned about Armenia in that part.

Also wrong to not point out that Israel formed ties with Azerbaijan and Iran formed ties with Armenia around the same time; these were complementary moves, and its just as possible to explain Israel's ties with Azerbaijan as being as a result of Iran's ties with Armenia, rather than just the reverse. Just as well, Israel at the time had friendly relations with Turkey, which have since deteriorated. Its also true that the relationships are based on reasons independent of those kind of geopolitical moves, and are largely based on self-interest on both sides. Azerbaijan is also Israel's top oil supplier. Simply blaming all this on the US and Israel, and making Iran's stance towards Azerbaijan as a result of them being the victim of these types of deals, is a bit much.

Blood Alcohol redfish • 2 hours ago

I doesn't seem Iran can or even thinks about extricate herself from "the situation". Iran is situated right there and whether things spill over to Iran or not will play a big role in Iran's perception of the regional security.

No sure where I inferred any comparison between the Azari and the Armenian population of Iran. They are BOTH Iranians. After the breakup of the USSR, the Azerbaijani dictator Heydar Aliyev established relation with Israel and later the US, while refusing to join any of the several post-Soviet economic arrangements. That was accompanied by Azerbaijan making noises about "unification" of Azerbaijan. That pushed Iran to throw all its support behind Armenia then. The situation has changed and IRI and Azerbaijan have normal relations.

Iran cannot simple afford to consider the Armenian Iranians less "important" than her Azeri Iranians, if that's where you are going.

Kindi • 14 hours ago

The author may have been a banker, but he clearly was neither an historian or diplomat. He knows neither the details of what he writes, nor does he have a framework.

The decision to assign Karabakh to Azerbaijan was taken in 1921, not 1923 and was taken by the Bolshevik Caucasus Bureau, not by Stalin. General clashes between Azerbaijanis and Armenians took place in 1905, and the fighting for Karabakh proper erupted in 1918 with the formation of independent Armenian and Azerbaijan republics. Both well before the Bolsheviks or Stalin could do anything about Karabakh (although the Bolsheviks did join with the Armenian Dashnaks in March 1918 to seize Baku and butcher Azerbaijanis in the process. Yes, Azerbaijanis retaliated in September, but the Armenians did start it and got their hands plenty bloody, outside Baku as well).

The author's contempt for Azerbaijanis comes through in his comment that the Azerbaijanis have lost every time against the Armenians. He never reflects that the possible reason might be that the Armenians have been both better organized and more aggressive than the Azerbaijanis. He deliberately leaves out that Armenian expelled 800,000 Azerbaijanis from the territories surrounding Karabakh. He is stunning in his disingenuousness and ignorance. As for his framework, he has none. Where does he get the idea that Kosovo and Karabakh are interlinked and that they can be resolved through tradeoffs? Does he imagine that Muslims are one people and constitute a single union? Apparently.

An Arab world moving toward Pan-Arabism and socialism in 1924?!

As to the "Armenian settlement area" – the author might reflect on the Kurds' claims to 90% of that same area, and the bloody history of Kurdish-Armenian relations. If turning over old borders what do you do about Abkhazia, Circassia, and multiple places in the Balkans from where Muslims were expelled. Bring Greeks back into Turkey, too, while we are it? This article was not analysis, but uninformed blathering laced with ethnic invective. The Armenians have suffered enough to deserve such shoddy argumentation. AmCon should be ashamed to have run this.

BluStateConservative • 12 hours ago • edited

Turkey regularly threatens Europe with opening the gates with their "refugees" as leverage in negotiations. Erdogan travels to the heart of Europe to encourage the Turkish diaspora to perpetuate their grudges on European soil and encourage them to flex their political muscle to further an Islamist agenda. They slaughtered Armenians, Greeks, and Syriac Christians- never acknowledging the crime or showing remorse. Now they seek to finish what they started with the Armenian Genocide- and the world sits on its hands claiming that both sides are equally responsible.

This is outrageous! Turkey has proved time and time again that it is the aggressor, using threats to get what it wants, and does not behave as an ally. Turkey has single-handily destabilized entire countries in its dream of Neo-Ottoman domination over the region. Time to heavily militarize the Greek- Turkish frontier, kick Turkey out of NATO, and put it on notice that it's adventurism in Libya, Syria, and Armenia will be met overwhelming force. Feeble responses made by the West will only encourage the mad-dog Erdogan.

M Orban BluStateConservative • 11 hours ago

I don't think our (US) interest is threatened in those parts. Russia can handle it,it is their back yard.

BluStateConservative M Orban • 3 hours ago

It calling for military action by any means, but we can apply pressure on Turkey.

former-vet • 10 hours ago • edited

Explains well why Biden spent the other day criticizing the President for not taking a more active role in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. Warmongers gonna warmonger. I assume that's one of the main attractions for Biden's supporters - more dead women and children in Asia. They spent eight years driving around with "Support America's Foreign Invasions" yellow ribbon stickers on their SUVs under the last administration Biden was part of.

With not a new war for nearly four years, I can understand why the establishment and Democrat voters are pissed. At least the fake "neoconservatives" are back in the party they belong in.

Blood Alcohol former-vet • 9 hours ago • edited

War mongering is like Herpes. You can suppress it, but it's virus never goes away. Biden has had it for years. He supported W's war of choice in Iraq, which led to the carnage of thousands of American 20-somethings, thousands of mental illness sufferers and MILLIONS of dead Iraqi people of ALL ages. He is an unrepentant old neo-con war criminal.

[Oct 14, 2020] The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy -- RT Op-ed

Oct 14, 2020 | www.rt.com

The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy 30 Sep, 2020 16:19 Get short URL The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy FILE PHOTO: U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo © Getty Images / Alex Wong 182 1 Follow RT on RT

Tom Fowdy is a British writer and analyst of politics and international relations with a primary focus on East Asia.

His Holiness declining to meet the US secretary of state when he visited the Vatican on his European tour further proves that his misguided America-first chauvinism is alienating more nations than it's winning as friends.

Pompeo, everyone's favourite Cold Warrior and American chauvinist, is on a European tour . Visiting Greece, Italy, Croatia, and notably, the Vatican, the secretary of state is on a roll to win support for American security and energy interests across the region. But he wasn't welcomed by all. Attending the Holy See today, the US' 'top diplomat' found himself snubbed by the Pope as he rolled into town peddling his vitriolic anti-China agenda, and demanding the Church take on Beijing and refuse to renew a deal that gives it a say in the appointment of bishops within that country. Pope Francis wasn't too impressed and refused to meet him accordingly.

The snub is significant, because it reflects more broadly how Pompeo's highly aggressive and evangelical foreign policy agenda is being received around the world. In short, it's a shambles. Rather than respectfully and constructively engage with the interests of other countries, on his watch, the State Department does nothing but pressure other nations. And it does this while parroting the clichéd talking points of American exceptionalism, hysterical anti-Communism, and a refusal to take into account the interests and practicalities faced by its partners. The Vatican has its differences with Beijing, but how would embarking on a collision course help it or the cause of Catholics in China? It wouldn't.

ALSO ON RT.COM US' failure to recognize Cuba's medical efforts during Covid is due to an innate fear of linking socialism with anything positive

Pompeo is repeatedly described by major US newspapers, the Washington Post among them, as " the worst secretary of state in American history," and it's no surprise why. Diplomacy requires the skills of understanding, prudence, compromise, calibration, and negotiation. The current man in charge of America's relations with the rest of the world has none of those in his armoury – only a one-sided diatribe about how every nation Washington holds a grudge against is evil and a threat to the world, and the US' own political system is far superior (as demonstrated by last night's presidential debate, perhaps ?). Pompeo repeatedly positions himself as speaking on behalf of other nations' people against their governments, while pushing a policy that amounts to little more than bullying.

A look at Pompeo and the State Department's Twitter feed shows it to be a unilateral, repetitive loop of the following topics: 'The Chinese Communist Party is evil and a threat to the world', 'Iran is an evil terrorist state', American values are the best', 'We stand with the people of X', and so on, ad nauseam. To describe it as hubris would be generous, and, of course, it does nothing to support the equally inadequate foreign policy of the United States in practice. This is further distorted by the unilateralist and anti-global governance politics of Donald Trump, which place emphasis only on the projection of power to force other countries into capitulating to American demands.

Against such a backdrop, it's no surprise that a toxic mixture of foreign policymaking has led to other countries not being willing to take notice of Washington. It's winning neither hearts nor minds, and it's this that has set the stage for not only the Vatican snub, but the largely fruitless outcomes of his European adventures. Pompeo's visit to Greece produced no meaningful agreements or outcomes of note , and he failed to get Athens to publicly commit to any anti-China measures or even statements. A similar non-result was achieved from his visit to the Czech Republic a month or so ago – the Czech prime minister even came out and played down Pompeo's comments , after he engaged in a spree of anti-Beijing vitriol.

So, what's at stake for the Vatican? Undoubtedly, religion is a sensitive topic in mainland China. The Chinese state sees unfettered religion as a threat to social stability, or as a potential vehicle for imperialism against the country, and thus has aimed to strongly regulate it under terms and conditions set by the state.

ALSO ON RT.COM Oxford University's 'scholarly' RT hit piece has no room for the mundane reality of how the world's news organisations work

This has caused tensions with the Roman Catholic Church, which maintains a strict ecclesiastical hierarchy, answering to the Vatican and not national governments. With China being the world's most populous country, having among its vast population nine million Catholics, this means the Church has had to negotiate and compromise with the Beijing government to maintain its influence and control, and to secure the rights of its members to worship. This has resulted in a 'deal' whereby the Vatican can have a say in the appointment of its bishops in China, rather than the Church being completely subordinate to the government.

But Pompeo doesn't care about these sensitivities – he wants one thing: Cold War. He wants unbridled, unrestrained, and evangelical condemnation of China and, as noted above, is utilizing his 'diplomatic visits' to push that demand. However, building a foreign policy on preaching America First unilateralism, chauvinism, and zero compromise not surprisingly has its limitations. As a result, Pompeo is finding himself isolated and ignored in more than a few areas. Thus it was that, rather than completely squandering the Vatican's interests in diplomacy with China, Pope Francis simply refused to meet him. For someone as fanatically religious and pious as Pompeo, that's a pretty damning indictment of the incompetence within the US State Department right now.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Oct 11, 2020] About "The Insider":

Oct 11, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOW EXILE October 10, 2020 at 12:18 am

About "The Insider":

ABOUT THE PROJECT
The Insider is an online publication specializing in investigative journalism, fact-checking and political analytics.

The Insider has received numerous international awards, including the Council of Europe Innovation Award (2018), The European Press Prize (2019), Free Media Award (2019) and many others.

An important source of funding for The Insider is regular donations, so we encourage everyone who wants to support our publication to subscribe to regular donations.

CONTACTS
Moscow office: 119072, Bersenevskaya nab. 6, building 3, office 1.

[email protected]

From Russian Wiki:

"The Insider" is a Russian online publication. Founded in November 2013 by a member of the movement "Solidarity" , a journalist and political activist of liberal-democratic orientation Roman Dobrokhotov , who is the editor-in-chief of the publication.


Dobrokhotov. As I live and breathe -- a "kreakl"!!!!

In September 2018, in collaboration with "Bellingcat" Eliot Higgins, "The Insider" conducted an investigation, allegedly publishing copies of official documents of the Russian Federal migration service for passport application in the name of Alexander Petrov, one of the suspects of the British authorities in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal, which may indicate his connection with the Russian special services.

In February 2020, "The Insider", jointly with "Bellingcat"and "Der Spiegel", conducted an investigation and stated that the murder of Zelimkhan khangoshvili in Berlin in August 2019 was organized by the special unit of the FSB "Vimpel". They said that the FSB special assignment Centre was preparing a repeat killer, Vadim Krasikov, for this murder, and they also gave some details of Krasikov's movements around Europe.

On November 10, 2017, "The Insider" received from "The World Forum for Democracy" an award for innovation in democracy with the following wording:

"'The Insider' is an investigative publication that seeks to provide its readers with information about the current political, economic and social situation in Russia, while promoting democratic values and highlighting issues related to human rights and civil society. In addition, 'The Insider' carries out the project 'Antifake', the task of which is to systematically expose false news in the Russian media, which helps its audience to distinguish real information from false news and propaganda".

In 2019, "The Insider" and "Bellingcat" received the European Press Prize for establishing the identity of the two men allegedly responsible for the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal .

How drole! "The insider" likes to shout out "Fake!" yet seems to work closely with "Bellingcat".

[Oct 11, 2020] Islamist-Marxist MEK's history, including spying on Iran on behalf of Saddam Hussein when he invaded Iran, destroying its western cities. After murdering Americans - but the Lobby always gets what it wants, so MEK is now off the terrorist list and instead being funded by the U.S., and housed in a training camp in Albania.

Oct 11, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

>

mick • a month ago

MOSSAD UNIT 8200 at work, the tail that shakes the dog. Trying to get the US to start another war for their further domination of the Middle East.

Carpenter E • a month ago

Islamist-Marxist MEK's history, including spying on Iran on behalf of Saddam Hussein when he invaded Iran, destroying its western cities. After murdering Americans - but the Lobby always gets what it wants, so MEK is now off the terrorist list and instead being funded by the U.S., and housed in a training camp in Albania.

The MEK was founded in 1965 by three Islamic leftists with the goal of toppling the U.S.-supported regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

In the 1970s it undertook a campaign of assassinating U.S. advisers and bombing U.S. corporations in Iran. It supported the 1979 Revolution in Iran, but in 1981 it turned its guns against the Tehran government and began a campaign of assassinations and terrorist operations that resulted in the death of thousands of Iranians, including the executions of its own supporters by government officials, soldiers, police officers, and ordinary people.

It then moved its headquarters to Iraq, made a pact with the regime of Saddam Hussein, which was fighting a ferocious war with Iran. The MEK spied on Iranian troops for Iraq, attacked Iran at the end of Iran-Iraq war with Hussein's support, and helped Hussein put down the uprisings by the Iraqi Kurds in the north and Shi'ites in the south after the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91.

The MEK is despised by the vast majority of Iranians for what they consider to be treason committed against their homeland.

kouroi • a month ago

So funny. I remember reading Gore Vidal's novel "Creation", which deals with the Persian Empire, Zoroastrism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Socratic philosophy and morals.

The historical details in the book are relatively well researched, albeit one does get some literary licence for building up characters and story lines, etc. Now the Persian Imperial court is presented in the novel as being choke full of Greek Dissidents clamoring to the King of Kings to attack and subdue Greece/Athens, or what not. Marathon, Salamina, Thermopylae, Plateia follow... The Iranian "dissidents" should learn from their past...

The Athenian "wooden wall" (their ships) is Iran's missile force...

reaganite88 • 21 days ago

IF TRUE... a big if... this would be somewhat disturbing. One would hope that news outlets in their never-ending search for "content" would vet the authors just a tad.

But still... the rationale for going to war (with Iran or anyone else) rises or falls on its own merits. The arguments raised by these authors are of far more importance than whether the authors are real or fake. Think of how often we have seen academic credentials or military service exaggerated by AMERICAN academics and authors to goose their relevance. They may fall to the wayside as proponents of one thing or another when exposed but their arguments may still be true or false. Same goes for people who do NOT exaggerate their credentials.

I would think it would be far more dangerous if Twitter and other outlets were allowing our ADVERSARIES to create fake personalities promoting PEACE when in fact we need to take action against them.

[Oct 10, 2020] Tell me again how Trump "doesn't want to start a new war": If Trump thinks that he can win re-election by panding to Zionist lonny, he might be mistaken

It time to make him accountable at the election box. Not that it matter much as Biden is yet another neocon and Zionist, but stil...
American people are tied of sliding standard of living, permanent wars and jingoism. Trump might share Hillary fate in 2020, because any illusion that he is for common fold, who voted for him in 2016 now disappeared. So he is not better then neocon Biden and Biden is new bastard. So why vote for the old bastard if we have new, who might be slightly better in the long run
This is a very expensive foreign policy, that doesn't benefit the USA. It has potential to raise the price of oil significantly.
Notable quotes:
"... Behind the move was pressure from the Zionist lobby. President Trump is in need of campaign funds and the lobby provides those. ..."
"... I can also see this green lighting Israeli or joint American-Israeli strikes on alleged Iranian nuclear weapons development sites and other military and petro-state assets. ..."
"... It's disgusting to watch the people of the US/UK/EU go along with this. Western elites are fat, lazy, vicious, and cruel. ..."
"... Paul wrote: "Perhaps a Biden administration would be just as much a Zionist captive as the Trump administration." Yes at least as much or more zionist. Nothing about Harris or Biden (or the DNC) says they won't be. ..."
"... I nominate president Eisenhower as slightly less zionist on one occasion: during the Anglo,French, Zionist Suez invasion of 1956 Eisenhower remarked after numerous UN resolutions condemning the bandit state's aggression ' Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?' ..."
"... "The EU is trying to prop up the US Empire in response to its decline, instead of trying to free itself. " ..."
"... Donald Trump talked up his Iran policy in a profanity-laden tirade on Friday, telling conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh that Tehran knows the consequences of undermining the United States. ..."
"... "Iran knows that, and they've been put on notice: if you fuck around with us, if you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before." ..."
Oct 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
" Why U.S. Elections Do Not Change Its Foreign Policies | Main | The Ceasefire In Nagorno-Karabakh Is Unlikely To Hold " October 09, 2020 Europe And The New Sanctions On Iran

The U.S. has imposed new sanctions on Iran which will make ANY trade with the country very difficult:

[T]he Trump administration has decided to impose yet further sanctions on the country , this time targeting the entirety of the Iranian financial sector. These new measures carry biting secondary sanctions effects that cut off third parties' access to the U.S. financial sector if they engage with Iran's financial sector. Since the idea was first floated publicly , many have argued that sanctioning Iran's financial sector would eviscerate what humanitarian trade has survived the heavy hand of existing U.S. sanctions.

Behind the move was pressure from the Zionist lobby. President Trump is in need of campaign funds and the lobby provides those. The move is also designed to preempt any attempts by a potentially new administration to revive the nuclear agreement with Iran:

This idea appears to have first been introduced into public discourse in an Aug. 25, 2020, Wall Street Journal article by Mark Dubowitz and Richard Goldberg urging the Trump administration to "[b]uild an Iranian [s]anctions [w]all" to prevent any future Biden administration from returning to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear accord between Iran and the world's major powers on which President Donald Trump reneged in May 2018.

The new sanctions will stop all trade between the 'western' countries and Iran.

The Foreign Minister of Iran responded with defiance:

Javad Zarif @JZarif - 17:30 UTC · Oct 8, 2020

Amid Covid19 pandemic, U.S. regime wants to blow up our remaining channels to pay for food & medicine.

Iranians WILL survive this latest of cruelties.

But conspiring to starve a population is a crime against humanity. Culprits & enablers -- who block our money -- WILL face justice.

In response Iran will continue its turn to the east. Russia, China and probably India will keep payment channels with Iran open or will make barter deals.

The Europeans, who so far have not dared to counter U.S. sanctions on Iran, are likely to be again shown as the feckless U.S. ass kissers they have always been. They will thereby lose out in a market with 85 million people that has the resources to pay for their high value products. If they stop trade of humanitarian goods with Iran they will also show that their much vaunted 'values' mean nothing.

The European Union claims that it wants to be an independent actor on the world stage. If that is to be taken seriously this would be the moment to demonstrate it.

Posted by b on October 9, 2020 at 16:37 UTC | Permalink

Thomas Minnehan , Oct 9 2020 17:11 utc | 3
Unconscionable but what is new with pompass and his ghouls; treasury dept responsible for cranking up the sanctions program was formerly headed by a dual citizen woman who resigned suddenly after being exposed as an Israeli citizen-not hard to understand that sentiment in that dept has not changed.

The other aspect here is the FDD as key supporter of these severe sanctions; very virulent anti-Iranian vipers nest of ziocons with money bags from zionist oligarch funders.

karlof1 , Oct 9 2020 17:14 utc | 4
Ho-hum. As I wrote earlier, just the daily breaking of laws meaning business as usual. As noted, Russia has really upped the diplomatic heat on EU and France/Germany in particular, and that heat will be further merited if the response is as b predicts from their past, deplorable, behavior.

Much talk/writing recently about our current crisis being similar in many ways to those that led to WW1, but with the Outlaw US Empire taking Britain's role. I expect Iran's Iraqi proxies to escalate their attacks aimed at driving out the occupiers. IMO, we ought to contemplate the message within this Strategic Culture editorial when it comes to the hegemonic relationship between the Outlaw US Empire and the EU/NATO and the aims of both. The EU decided not to continue fighting against the completion of Nord Stream, but that IMO will be its last friendly act until it severs its relations with the Outlaw US Empire. With the Wall moved to Russia's Western borders, the Cold War will resume. That will also affect Iran.

james , Oct 9 2020 18:33 utc | 13
thanks b... it is interesting what a pivotal role israel plays in all of this... and why would there be concern that biden would be any different then trump in revoking the jcpoa? to my way of thinking, it is just pouring more cement and sealing the fate of the usa either way, as an empire in real decline and resorting to more of the same financial sanctions as a possible precursor to war.. frankly i can't see a war with iran, as the usa would have to contend with russia and china at this point... russia and china must surely know the game plan is exactly the same for them here as well.. as for europe, canada, australia and the other poodles - they are all hopeless on this front as i see it... lets all bow down to the great zionist plan, lol...
Daniel , Oct 9 2020 18:48 utc | 14
Yeah but at least Trump didn't start any new wars. /s

The Eurotools in Brussels are absolutely disgusting. A weaker bunch of feckless, milquetoast satraps is difficult to imagine. The EU perfectly embodies the 21st century liberal ethic: spout virtue signaling nonsense about peace, freedom, human rights and the "rules based international order" while licking the boots of Uncle Scam and the Ziofascists and going along with their war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Russia and China need to step up their game and boldly circumvent the collective punishment sanctions that are choking the life out of Iran, Syria and Venezuela. They still let the rogue states of the west get away with far too much.

augusto , Oct 9 2020 18:52 utc | 15
The Teheran men will not surrender to the yankee herds and hordes. And less so the telavivian.
It s easy to see that in the medium run this cruelly extended crime plays in chinese, russian and shia hands.
And they must start immediately a backlash handing hundreds of special forces and weapons opver to the Houthi hands.
Paco , Oct 9 2020 18:54 utc | 17
the Cold War will resume

The Cold War never ended.

Stonebird , Oct 9 2020 19:20 utc | 20
Of course there is a war on, and it has been gathering force for some time.

Iran is but one more skirmish or battle. However, Xi and Putin are using what I call the "Papou yes". You must always say "yes" as this way you avoid direct conflict, but then you go and do exactly what you were going to do in the first place . The person who does the demanding - having had his/her demands "met" has nothing further to add and will go away. (I have seen this effective technique in action).

At the moment it appears that the aim of the subversive (military/CIA/NGO) wings of the Empire are to start as many conflicts as possible. To isolate and overextend Russia, leading to it's collapse. (As they claim to have done before.)

The "Alternative axis" is just carrying on with it's own plan to overextend and eventually let the US dissolve into its own morasss. The opposition are trying to follow their own plan without giving an opening for the US/NATO to use its numerical military advantage, by not taking the bait.

The ultimate battle is for financial control of the worlds currency, or in the case of the US, to halt the loss of it's financial power. To avoid that The next step could be the introduction of a Fed. owned controlled and issued "digi-dollar", When all outstanding "dollar assets" are re-denominated into virtual misty-money which is created exclusively by the Fed. Banks become unnecessary as the Fed becomes the only "lender" available, Congress redundant, debts no longer matter and so on. Who cares about the reserves held by China and overseas "investors" if their use or even existence can be dictated by the Fed?
They have already published a "trial balloon" about introducing a digi-dollar.

Iran? the US is throwing ALL its cards into what looks like it's final battle to preserve the dollars supremacy. Why cut ALL the Iranian financial system out of their sphere of influence? Because it (thinks) it can and by doing so cower the wavering into obeying.

AtaBrit , Oct 9 2020 19:28 utc | 21
Thanks 'b', very well timed. I was actually heading to the open thread with this article until I saw your piece. This Asia Times article focuses on three key points:

- Iran has replaced the dollar with the Yuan as its main foreign currency
"This may become the east wind for the renminbi (yuan) and provide a new oil currency option for traders in oil-producing countries, including Iran," an editorial on qq.com said. "

- Several large banks in Iran are developing a gold encrypted digital currency called PayMon and had issued more than 1,000 crypto-currency mining licenses, which could promote the development of crude oil. Domestic traders use cryptocurrency to import goods and bypass American banks.

- The Iranian-Swiss Joint Chamber of Commerce
"Switzerland had received a special exemption from US supervisory authorities to allow the SHTA operations."

It remains to be seen how effective the Swiss Humanitarian Trade Agreement actually is. Some say it is nothing but a US propaganda stunt. Hopefully, that is not the case.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 9 2020 20:37 utc | 31
Sure. Tell me again how Trump "doesn't want to start a new war." Morons.
William Gruff , Oct 9 2020 20:50 utc | 32
What does Iran need that they cannot get from China and Russia? The USA has cheap corn, and the EU has... what, cheese? Other than that I don't see why Iran needs to trade with the empire and its more servile vassals anyway.
Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 , Oct 9 2020 20:55 utc | 33
Strange, that ther is a jewish or Israeki ´ animosity agains Iran (or agains tthe Medtans -- as thy are all named in all Greek records(H, that theer is a jewish animosity against, that ther is a jewish anikisit agains Iran (or the Medtans -- as thy are old ptt in all Greek Strenge(Hellemistic) tales, Cyrur+s the Great is reported to have liberatet the Jews of Babilon end sent them back to Jerusalem . So, "PRIMO SON VENETANO, SECUNDO SON CHRISTANO" -- STILL A COMMONLY ACCEPTED SAYING INVENEZIA WHEB I VISITED ABD AKED IT IN THE THE YEAR OF 1´2917! Iran (or the Medtans -- as thy are old ptt in all Greek Strenge(Hellemistic) tales, Cyrur+s the Great is reorted to have liberatet te´he Jews of Babilon end sent them back to Jerusalem . So, "PRIMO SON VENETANO, SECUNDO SON CHRISTANO" -- STILL A COMMONLY ACCEPTED SAYING INVENEZIA WHEB I VISITED ABD AKED IT IN THE THE YEAR OF 1´2917! ellenistic) tales, Cyrur+s the Great is reorted to have liberatet te´he Jews of Babylon end sent them back to Jerusalem . So, "PRIMO SON VENETANO, SECUNDO SON CHRISTANO" -- STILL A COMMONLY ACCEPTED SAYING INVENEZIA WHEB I VISITED ABD AKED IT IN THE THE YEAR OF 2017
Paco , Oct 9 2020 21:05 utc | 34
Quite impressed with all the theories about Europe and its behavior. The answer is very simple, Europe is occupied by a foreign power, it is a colony. And all the qualifiers are quaint.
davenitup , Oct 9 2020 21:09 utc | 35
It's the world's loss that great cultures like the Persians have been suppressed for so long. The madness needs to end.
Passer by , Oct 9 2020 21:11 utc | 36
Posted by: Red Ryder | Oct 9 2020 20:06 utc | 23

I disagree. What did the EU did on Iran, compared to Russia and China? It stopped most trade with Iran, including the purchase of iranian oil, and it stopped all investment projects. INSTEX is a joke. Meanwhile Germany recently banned Hezbollah.

Yes, they did vote for the JCPOA in the UN. I look at actions rather than words though, and EU has imposed de facto sanctions on Iran.

Moreover, German FM Maas told Israel recently that efforts are underway to keep the Iran arms embargo. (He is also a big "Russia fan" - sarc off)

In other words, we "support" the JCPOA, but in practice with arms and trade embargoes on Iran continuing.

Yeah right.

Posted by: powerandpeople | Oct 9 2020 20:15 utc | 24

No, its not so simple, unless you claim that european russophobia started with the US and did not exist before it. Guy Mettan has a good book on it. It is a thousand years old issue, involving Catholicism, France, Germany, Sweden, Britain, and others.

Yes, the US wants to divide the EU and Russia. But the EU itself is rotten from within.

Politics are more important than the economy, German Chancellor Merkel said in relation to Russia.

"Drang nach Osten" - "Drive to the East".

Germany dreams of capturing Eastern Europe and using is as some sort of colonised labor pool similar to what Latin America is for the US.

And this is why the EU, without any prodding, eagerly took the lead in the attempt of colour revolution in Belarus, where it played far bigger role than the US.

m , Oct 9 2020 21:24 utc | 37
I have to disagree with your assessment.

Signing and adhearing to the JCPOA turned Europe and Iran from opponents into partners. This is a great diplomatic achievement. However, no part of the JCPOA made the two allies or obliged the European side to wage an economic war with the USA on behalf of Iran. On the contrary, the Iranians would be the first to say they are no friends of Europa. They have been complaining about "Western meddling" in their region for years. (Note that they don`t differentiate but always speak collectively of "the West").

So that`s their chance to show the world how much of a sovereign nation they are and that they can handle their problems without the "meddling" of the "despicable" Europeans. There is no obligation - neither legal nor moral - for Europe to take the side of Iran in the US-Iran conflict.

And actually it is both sides - both Iran and the USA - who are unhappy with the current European neutrality.

_K_C_ , Oct 9 2020 21:31 utc | 38
Thanks to MoA for being one of the only honest brokers of news on Iran in the English language. As an American citizen living abroad (in EU) I have a more jaded and at the same time worried feeling about this.

Along with all the other stuff, including the current threat to close the U.S. embassy in the Iraqi "Green Zone" and the accompanying military maneuvers, which would spark war in the region, I see this hardening and expansion of sanctions as yet the next clue that the U.S. and Donald Trump's regime are looking toward re-election and a hot war with/on Iran. Rattling the cage ever more and backing Iran into the corner with brutal, all-encompassing sanctions is already an act of war, usually the first prior to bombs falling. I can also see this green lighting Israeli or joint American-Israeli strikes on alleged Iranian nuclear weapons development sites and other military and petro-state assets.

I hope I'm wrong but we've all seen this before and it never ends well. If the EU shows a spine, or more likely Russia and/or China step in directly, perhaps the long desired neocon/neolib/Zionist hot war against Iran can be avoided.

Perimetr , Oct 9 2020 21:32 utc | 39
I think it is very important for the US to kill another 500,000 children via sanctions, in order to demonstrate the importance of freedom and democracy and observing international law.
AriusArmenian , Oct 9 2020 21:48 utc | 40
While reading this post I was thinking what MoA wrote in the last two paragraphs. And also that Iran will just continue to turn to China, Russia, and others in the East.

It's disgusting to watch the people of the US/UK/EU go along with this. Western elites are fat, lazy, vicious, and cruel.

claudio , Oct 9 2020 22:17 utc | 41
@17 passer by
(and others)
"Europeans can not be helped. Ironically, it is their own rejection of their WW2 past that causes them to reject the multipolar world and sovereignty as "primitive things from the past"

plus, as you point out elsewhere, there are longer histories at play: the Crusades against the Slavs, the Moors and the Turks (and the Arabs, in fact), the invention of "western civilization" in the 19th century (Arians vs Semites, Europe vs Asia, ecc) ...

plus, there is the persisting aspiration for world domination, partly frustrated by WW1 and the upheavals of the XXth century, which transformed the UK and the whole of Europe (with Japan, Australia, etc) in a junior partner of the new US Empire

(that's the other lesson learned from WW2: no single european power could dominate the continent and the world, but they could dominate as junior partners under the new young leader of the wolf pack, the US)

plus, there are is a class war that can be better fought, by national oligarchies, within globalist rethoric and rules

plus, there are the US deep state instruments of domination over european national states

but Europeans (and Usaians) do understand the language of force, and they have - at the moment - encountered a wall in their attempts at expansion, in Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, ecc; an alternative multipolar alliance is taking shape

so they might attempt to win a nuclear war by 20 million deaths to 2 (or 200 to 20, who cares), but they might also decide to tune down their ambitions and return to reality; maybe

wj2 , Oct 9 2020 23:28 utc | 45
@m (#35)
EU promised to uphold JCPOA. They can't because of the US and they are doing next to nothing to change that. EU isn't neutral. They are stooges. Iran is right to complain about it, the US isn't.
Boss Tweet , Oct 9 2020 23:54 utc | 48
Trump is a man of peace, he hasn't started any new wars - whatever that means, lol.

As far as I know economic blocade is tantamount to war. If he wins reelection expect renewed kinetic attacks on venezuela and Iran. He's already lined up his zionist coalition with arabic satraps to launch his Iran quagmire. Trump is a deal maker, he understands the economy and will bring back manufacturing jobs to Murikkka, lol. I'm sure Boeing execs in deep trouble would love to sell plane to the Iranians but Mr. MIGA just made that impossible. Nothing to worry about, there's always the next socialist bailout for Boeing funded by taxpayers - suckers as Trump would call them. So much for winning, can't fix deplorable and stupid...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/08/iran-deal-fallout-boeing-may-lose-20-billion-in-aircraft-deals.html

Btw b, Trump's opposition to the Iran deal has nothing to do with money or the zionist lobby. Stable genius opposed JCPOA in 2015 even before announcing his run for the presidency. It's not about the mula but all about the mollah's, lol: The Donald in his own words at a tea party event in 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIDNonMDSo8

kooshy , Oct 10 2020 0:00 utc | 49
Ever since the Iranian revolution of 1979 multiple US regimes in DC have been totally successful in making majority Iranian people everywhere in the world, understand that the US is their chronic strategic enemy for decades to come. At same time, these US regimes have equally been as successful in making American people believe Iran is their enemy.
The difference between this two side's belief is, that, Iranian people by experiencing US regime' conducts have come to their belief, but the American people' belief was made by their own regime' propaganda machinery. For this reason, just like the people to people relation between the US and Russian people, Before and after the fall of USSR the relation between US and Iran in next few generations will not come to or even develop to anything substantial or meaningful. One can see this same trajectory in US Chinese relations, or US Cuban. Noticeably all these countries relation with US become terminally irreparable after their revolutions, regardless of the maturity or termination of the revolution. As much as US loves color revolutions, US hates real revolutions. The animosity no longer is just strategic it has become people to people, and the reason and blame goes to Americans since they never were ready to accept the revolutions that made nations self-servient to their interests. The bottom line truth is the US / and her poodles in europe know, ever since the revolution Iran no longer will be subservient to US interests.
Hermius , Oct 10 2020 0:23 utc | 51
This is leverage to bargain away the oil pipeline to germany. That is what is behind it. You scratch my back, the US is saying to the EU, in particular, Germany....
karlof1 , Oct 10 2020 0:25 utc | 52
It's an Economy based on Plunder! , so that's why sanctions here, there and everywhere!! But the real problem is we aren't participating in the Plunder!! Sometimes you gotta use extreme sarcasm to explain the truth of a situation, and that's what Max and Stacey do in their show at the link. 13 minutes of honest reporting about the fraudulent world in which we live. As for Jerome Powell, current Fed Chair, he's complicit in the ongoing criminal activity just as much as the high ranking politicos. Bastiat laid it out 180 years ago, but we're living what he described now. And that's all part of what I wrote @40 above. The moral breakdown occurred long ago but took time to perfect.
joey_n , Oct 10 2020 0:34 utc | 54
Patrick Armstrong did a Sitrep article last month
https://patrickarmstrong.ca/2020/09/24/russian-federation-sitrep-24-september-2020/
where he cited an article on Sputnik titled "Macron: Europe 'Will Not Compromise' With Washington on Iran Sanctions"
https://sputniknews.com/world/202009221080541258-macron-europe-will-not-compromise-with-washington-on-iran-sanctions/
Make of it what you will.
Xingu , Oct 10 2020 0:46 utc | 55
I think it is crazy that EU allows US to manage SWIFT to the point they invent new entities to sidestep SWIFT and US sanctions (which are weak and ineffective, but that is the trajectory of their weak attempts at independence). Force SWIFT to equally service all legal transactions according to EU law, and let US cut itself off from all international financial transfers if it doesn't like using EU's SWIFT. US corps won't allow that to happen, it's just that EU refuses to call US bluff. Of course they are now praying for Biden presidency, but if they can't assert themselves it is all ultimately the same thing.
dh , Oct 10 2020 1:17 utc | 58
These 'foreign policy experts' think the trade war with China has been a mistake. But they think Trump is too soft on Russia and he hasn't been tough enough on NK, Iran and Venezuela.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/foreign-policy-experts-rebuke-trump-administration-for-policies-that-emboldened-rivals-alienated-allies-135205214.html

Paul , Oct 10 2020 1:34 utc | 59
It has become a standard trick for outgoing US administrations to saddle the incoming administration with set in stone policies and judicial appointments.

"Behind the move was pressure from the Zionist lobby. President Trump is in need of campaign funds and the lobby provides those. The move is also designed to preempt any attempts by a potentially new administration to revive the nuclear agreement with Iran."

Perhaps a Biden administration would be just as much a Zionist captive as the Trump administration.

The danger for the world is the Trump administration may go even further than additional sanctions. So I refer to the previous post, US policy remains the same whatever bunch are the frontmen.

Theodore Herzl even tried to drag Kaiser Wilhelm11 into the Zionist spider web: https://middleeastrealitycheck.blogspot.com/2008/07/theodor-herzl-first-photoshopper.html

When that attempt failed they worked on convincing the Sultan of Turkey to give them someone else's homeland. The Zionist Zealot Mr Kalvariski became the administrator of the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association with the aim of establishing a jewish suprematist ghetto. Following that flop the Zionists turned to the hapless British and were rewarded by Balfour with his notorious British government double cross of the Arabs. Now it's the turn of the US and assorted captive nations to uphold and support tyranny and Talmudic violence.

Crush Limbraw , Oct 10 2020 1:59 utc | 60

I am SLOWLY coming to the conclusion that DaTrumpster understands DaDeepState better than any of us armchair pundits. His patient - and yes, perhaps faulty strategy - he's still standing after ALL DaCrap that's been thrown at him.
All the 'EXPURTS' - including MoA - can only see part of DaPicture at best.

I've been as hard on DaTrumpster as anyone on DaConservative side - but I am SLOWLY coming to understand WTF just might be going on.

Point - don't be too sure of your immediate inclinations - we ALL see through DaGlass DARKLY!

Don Bacon , Oct 10 2020 2:27 utc | 61
SWIFT is only a messaging system – SWIFT does not hold any funds or securities, nor does it manage client accounts. Behind most international money and security transfers is the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) system. SWIFT is a vast messaging network used by banks and other financial institutions to quickly, accurately, and securely send and receive information, such as money transfer instructions.
Sunny Runny Burger , Oct 10 2020 2:29 utc | 62
Paul wrote: "Perhaps a Biden administration would be just as much a Zionist captive as the Trump administration." Yes at least as much or more zionist. Nothing about Harris or Biden (or the DNC) says they won't be.

And hasn't it always been that way from one president to the the next? Was there ever one that was less zionist than the predecessor? (Maybe they're all so close this is an impossible question to answer, that too could be the case).

The sitting executive branch gives the favors right now and anyone incoming gives the favors after they win and thus each election becomes a double windfall for the lobby group?

A zionist double dip . Maybe most US voters could grasp it like that.

I can't back this up (much like my previous comment in this thread) but it's my impression. It would probably take a lot of work to make sure it's right; one would have to scrutinize so much over so many decades.

Paul , Oct 10 2020 3:29 utc | 63
@Sunny Runny Burger 60

I nominate president Eisenhower as slightly less zionist on one occasion: during the Anglo,French, Zionist Suez invasion of 1956 Eisenhower remarked after numerous UN resolutions condemning the bandit state's aggression ' Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?'

This could be a useful quote for todays world.

Later, in 1964, Eisenhower approved his hand picked emissary's US $150 million so called Johnston Plan to steal the waters of the Jordan River and further marginalize the Palestine Arabs and surrounding Arab states.

ARI , Oct 10 2020 3:36 utc | 64
Sanctions aren't the story. Once all the players have left the JCPOA, either Israel or the US can claim Iranians are at the point of producing a nuclear weapon. Without the JCPOA and inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities it will be impossible to prove or deny the allegations. Thus giving either the US or Israel justification it wants to conduct military strikes against Iran. The only things stopping this from happening is if the EU stays in the JCPOA...
_K_C_ , Oct 10 2020 3:53 utc | 65
Fully agree with ARI | Oct 10 2020 3:36 utc | 62

Exactly the aim. I said so in an earlier post. This is all part of the program to create a false justification to conduct military strikes inside Iran. At this point, I'm really surprised that the U.S. even tries to construct these narratives after Obama's Syria and Libya operations didn't even really bother, save for a few probably fake "chemical weapons" attack they alleged Assad committed. Libya I don't remember hearing anything. The embassy maybe? After the Soleimani strike and the shootdown of the U.S. drone, not to mention the alleged Iranian attacks on ARAMCO's oil facilities, I'm really quite surprised something more serious (not to minimize the awful acts of war which the sanctions definitely are) hasn't already happened. It will soon, especially if Trump gets re-elected. Wonder what all of his "no new wars" supporters will say then?

Everybody reading knows what SWIFT is. That's a nice attempt to circumscribe the overall sanctions regime and paint it as "no big deal."

Crush Limpbro - Checked out your site. You've got a long way to go before you can criticize MoA. Hope that comment draws a few clicks to keep you going, but I would caution other barflies to use a proxy; could be a honey trap to collect IP addresses.

El Cid , Oct 10 2020 4:10 utc | 66
This United States imposed and Zionist inspired siege on Iran and its people will only further strengthen the political and economic bonds with Russia and China. Meanwhile, the US collapses from its internal social limitations and its abandonment of public healthcare responses to the Corvid 19 pandemic. Europe it close behind the US in this respect.
ARIES , Oct 10 2020 4:17 utc | 67
IRGC Commander-In-Chief: U.S. Is Incapable Of Waging War Against Iran, Its Weapons Are Outdated:

https://toranja-mecanica.blogspot.com/2020/10/irgc-commander-in-chief-us-is-incapable.html

Paul , Oct 10 2020 4:20 utc | 68
ARI @62

What exactly is this 'Justification'.. . 'to conduct military strikes against Iran' that you refer to hasbara boy? Failure to obey foreign imposed zionist diktats?

Would this 'justification' apply to the bandit state if it refused to abide by the NNPT for example?
No double standards pass the test here.

kiwiklown , Oct 10 2020 4:42 utc | 69
Yet another proof that "Western values" and their "rules based international order" mean exactly nothing.

In the past, the West at least kept up some pretense that it was wrong to target unarmed civilians (still, they flattened Driesden; Hiroshima; North Korea, Vietnam, Laos). Today, they do not care to be seen openly, cruelly, brutally, sadistically killing civvies. These American bastards say, "... it is not killing if the victims drop dead later, like, not right now. " Or, "... it became necessary to destroy Iran in order to save Iran."

Iran is perfectly correct to call this a crime against humanity for the West to starve a population of food and medicine. This will boomerang just as the opium-pushing in China will boomerang on the West.

Meanwhile, just as those drug-pushing English bastards earned themselves lordships and knighthoods; just as presidential bastards retire to their Martha Vineyard mansions; so the current crop of bastards in American leadership will retire to yet more mansions, leaving the next couple generations to meet Persian wrath. The American way is to "win" until they are tired of winning, no?

But in truth, in objective reality, only those who have lost their human-ness are capable of crimes against humanity.

michaelj72 , Oct 10 2020 4:50 utc | 71
The US is cruising for a bruising in the middle east fucking with Iran like this. Not that the US hasn't deserved a good knockout punch the past 19 years since invading and destroying Afghanistan and Iraq, etc, etc. Regardless of their rhetoric, how the European rogues and rascals (France, Germany and the UK) can sleep at night is beyond me.
snake , Oct 10 2020 7:00 utc | 75
Yes Psychochistorian @ 1, At the nation state level, EU support for blockade terror and sanction torture (BT&ST), against reluctant nation states and non compliant individuals within those nation states, logically suggests EU nation states are not independent sovereign countries <=EU nation states exist in name only? Maybe its just like in the USA, these private monopoly powered Oligarcks (PMPO), own everything (privately owned copyrights, patents, and property) made possible by rules nation states turn into law. The citizens of those privately owned EU nation states are victims <=in condition=exploitable. Maybe PMPOs use nation states <=as profit support weapons, to be directed against <=any and all <=competition, whereever and however <=competition appears.

The hidden suspects <=capital market linked crowds through out the world..

Media is 92% owned by six private individuals, of the seven typical nation state layers of authority and power: 5 are private and two are public. Additionally, few in the international organizations have allegiance to historic cultures of the nation state governed masses. It is as if, the named nation states are <=threatened by knee breaking thugs, but maybe its not threat, its actual PMPO ownership.

If one accepts PMPO <=to be in control of all of USA and all of allied nation state, one can explain <=current BT&ST events. But private Oligarch scenarios <=raise obvious questions, why have not the PMPO challenged East eliminated <=Israel, MSM propaganda repeatedly blames or points to Israel <=to excuse the USA leaders for their BT&ST policies. Seems the PMPO are <=using the nation states, they own <=to eliminate non complying competition.

What is holding the East back? Russia and China each have sufficient oil, gas and technology to keep things functional, so why has not the competition in the East taken Israel out, if Israel is directing the USA to apply BT&ST against its competitors? Why is the white House so sure, its BT&ST policies will not end up destroying Israel? Maybe because Israel has no real interest <=in the BT&ST policy <=Israel is deceptions:fall guy? The world needs to pin the tail on the party driving USA application of BT&ST because no visible net gain to Governed Americans seems possible from BT&ST policies?

I think Passer @ 17 has hit the nail on its head. "The EU is trying to prop up the US Empire in response to its decline, instead of trying to free itself. "

Norwegian , Oct 10 2020 7:11 utc | 76
@ARI | Oct 10 2020 3:36 utc | 62
Sanctions aren't the story. Once all the players have left the JCPOA, either Israel or the US can claim Iranians are at the point of producing a nuclear weapon.

So you put that forward as a justification for attacking Iran militarily, but that means according to your logic you also have justification for attacking Israel or the US militarily. The rules are the same for all, right?

robin , Oct 10 2020 8:12 utc | 77
Economic warfare is certainly effective. However, time is running out for these weapons as America's lock on the world economy grows weaker. With a rapidly approaching expiry date, the word out may be to use em or lose em.

In a zero-sum great game, it makes sense to deploy such weapons now insofar as an opponent's loss is always a gain for oneself.

jscott , Oct 10 2020 9:26 utc | 79
Donald Trump talked up his Iran policy in a profanity-laden tirade on Friday, telling conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh that Tehran knows the consequences of undermining the United States.

"Iran knows that, and they've been put on notice: if you fuck around with us, if you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before."

Uncle Samuel is setting up a provocation for war.

uncle tungsten , Oct 10 2020 9:45 utc | 81
psychohistorian #1
What a shit show we are seeing. What is the next phase of this civilization war that is not a war because there are not enough dead bodies for some I guess?...but it sure looks like war to me.

Well for the first time in history Iran's symbolic "Red Flag" is still flying above the popular Jamkaran Mosque Holy dome. Perhaps the USA and its running dogs body count has risen in Iraq and Afghanistan? How would we know. These things are disguised from the fearless press in those countries ;)

Perhaps the dead and mangled are many but we do know that the US chief killer in Afghanistan was reduced to ashes immediately following General Shahid Qassem Suleimanis murder by the USA whilst on a diplomatic mission in Iraq.

In respect of b's observation above, the illegal occupier of Palestine is more likely tipping millions into the Harris Presidency as well as the possible Trump Presidency. I doubt either Harris or the biden bait and switch stooge would restore the JCPOA. Besides they would not be invited to sit at the table any time soon IMO. They would likely refuse to any conditions of reversing the sanctions and then carry on about all that 'unreasonable demands by a terrorist state' stuff etc etc.

No, Iran will be getting on with its future in a multilateral world where the United Nations has been reduced to pile of chicken dung by the USA while most other nations go along with global lunacy.


Circe , Oct 10 2020 12:56 utc | 87
You know what's telling about the bootlickers who hem and haw about U.S. policy with the T Administration, but never mention Trump as the real source of it even when profuse Zionist shit spills from his mouth on Limbaugh's show proving he's a Ziofascist pig?

What's telling is that these usual suspects jumped all over ARI @64 for zeroing in on Trump's precise intentions with Iran but they gave a pass to the real HASBARIST in the room, Crush Limbraw @60, exposing himself, putting his HARD-ON FOR TRUMP on full display.

@60 we ALL see through DaGlass DARKLY!
Speak for yourself- you Zionist MORON!

Ahhhhhh, you can always count on the DUPLICITY of MOA'S weathervane james and friends. Me, I ain't here to win a popularity contest like weathervane; I'm here to kick ass when I witness duplicity in action. My friend here is the truth that I'll defend to the grave.

********

Noooo, dum-dums Putin will not come to Iran's rescue when he's warm in bed with his Zionist Oligarchs and Russian squatters whom he pays homage to from time to time when he visits Ziolandia thanking them for choosing the stolen West Bank over Russia.

Iran knows that, and they've been put on notice. That's Trump blowhard driving the drumbeat.

Just rescue me from my self-destructive self for 4 more years, oh kings of Zion and Wall Street, and I'll give you WAR!!! all in CAPS with three exclamation points. The GREATEST war you've ever seen.

Linda Amick , Oct 10 2020 13:07 utc | 88
When I read the Great Reset article on the World Economic Forum website it seems to me that the western Globalists, in concert align the US and EU. That accounts for the basic vassal arrangements that predominate but allow for some nonalignments on certain issues.
Paco , Oct 10 2020 13:24 utc | 89
Posted by: vk | Oct 10 2020 0:58 utc | 56

That is precisely what the Belarusian authorities announced when Tikhanovskaya left Minsk, that she was helped in her way out, but we know how the MSM acts, they stick to their own script, just like a Hollywood movie.

The Belarusians must be watching with great attention what is happening in Kirguizia, riots and complete chaos, and thinking how lucky they were to avoid the color rev that was in the menu for them, which the same methods, discredit the oncoming election, claim fraud after it, use similar symbols like the clenched fist and the heart, new flag, start transliterating family and geographical names to a mythical and spoken by a very small minority language and then nobody knows if to spell Tikhanovskaya, Tsikhanouskaya or like the politically incorrect but street wise Luka called her, Guaidikha. And that is Kirguizia, how about a shooting war in Armenia and Azerbaijan, all those conflicts were unimaginable when the USSR existed, but the empire even on his way down is insatiable.

Circe , Oct 10 2020 13:25 utc | 90
@88 Linda Amick

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=RDPIAXG_QcQNU&feature=share&playnext=1

Paco , Oct 10 2020 13:35 utc | 91
Posted by: Circe | Oct 10 2020 12:56 utc | 87

There is over a million jews of Russian origin living in Israel, 20% of the population, with deep roots in Russia, language, culture and relatives. Do not let partisanship for the Dems blind you, a true successful leader is someone that defends his country's interests while at the same time tries to have good relations with everybody else, obviously that balance is not easy to achieve in a world full of conflicting interests, but so far Putin seems to be balancing his act while not loosing sight of the main thing, Russia.

Circe , Oct 10 2020 13:52 utc | 92
Paco, strange name for a Russiabot, oh well...

Nice way of putting: Putin belongs to the Zionist Club.

FYI, I'm not blind. I'm one of those special beings who was born with two extra eyes...in the back of my head.

Jackrabbit , Oct 10 2020 13:56 utc | 93
Circe @Oct10 12:56 #87
Putin will not come to Iran's rescue when he's warm in bed with his Zionist Oligarchs

If Putin is so close to Zionists, then why does Russia block the Zionist regime-change in Syria? Why has Russia denied Israel and USA entreaties to allow them to bomb Iran?

Russia Warns U.S. and Israel That Iran Is Its 'Ally' and Was Right About Drone Shoot Down

!!

Paco , Oct 10 2020 14:03 utc | 94
Posted by: Circe | Oct 10 2020 13:52 utc | 92

Not as strange as a mythological demigoddess that turned sailors into swain and that now enjoys to plunge into the mud with her creatures. A bot, what an easy label, it has lost any meaning.

Paco , Oct 10 2020 14:12 utc | 95
special beings who was born with two extra eyes...in the back of my head.

Alaska yellow fin sole, not bad, from Bristol Bay, but the Melva -a tunafish species with more oil in its meat- I cooked for lunch, just caught, has a lot more fish oil with its rich contents of vitamin D, add sunny Mediterranean weather and that is my pill for today, trying to keep the bug at bay.

expat , Oct 10 2020 14:39 utc | 96
Circe, why don't you do what your namesake would have done and whip yourself up some meds to calm down? You're starting to lapse into excessive use of upper case, italics, exclamation points, bolding, profanity, and of course, insults.

This may help. It looks like the orange man is in fact going down, so you will soon have Joe and Kamal empowered to dismantle the evil Putin-Netanyahu-Trump axis, and put the US back on the path to truth and justice.

Circe , Oct 10 2020 14:41 utc | 97
@93 Jackrabbit

It's called... lip service.

@94,95 Fransisco

A bot by any other name will smell as fishy. 🤭
Just messing with you!

ptb , Oct 10 2020 14:44 utc | 98
The unilateral and illegal-under-JCPOA sanctions mean it's time for EU to either confront the extraterritorial US policy it has clearly rejected in principle, or (more likely) acknowlege that it remains in practice just a collection of 'client states'. A sad moment for me, but useful for clarity.
Paco , Oct 10 2020 14:48 utc | 99
Posted by: Circe | Oct 10 2020 14:41 utc | 97

Hard to understand but you guys are incapable of spelling the name of a once great US city, San Francisco. I heard it has changed a lot, got to see long time ago, before the digital craze.

juliania , Oct 10 2020 15:51 utc | 100
This is a brief but subtle post by b, with quiet but telling headline. Perhaps, just guessing, a new take on the post he was having difficulty with earlier? The question of the EU is an interesting one - not to be considered as virulent as the former Soviet Union, but somehow as tugged at by the components thereof...

Sanctions on Iran? We do know what Iran is capable of; surely we have not forgotten? Indeed, by pressing these sanctions at this late date, the Trump administration surely has not forgotten either the effect sanctions had on Russia. They were postive to that country's independent survival, though the immediate effect was demonstrably harsh. So now, sanctions on Iran? One doesn't have to be a world leader to suppose similar cause, similar effect.

Ah, Paco has a wonderful meal of a beneficial fish called the Melva! Bravo, Paco; all is not lost! But you have hooked the sea-serpent as well -- take care! That one - carefully remove the hook and set it free ;)

p> next page "

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" Why U.S. Elections Do Not Change Its Foreign Policies , Main | The Ceasefire In Nagorno-Karabakh Is Unlikely To Hold "

next page "

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" Why U.S. Elections Do Not Change Its Foreign Policies | Main | The Ceasefire In Nagorno-Karabakh Is Unlikely To Hold "

[Oct 10, 2020] Neocons are addicted to regime change like narcoaddicts to heroin

Oct 10, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Originally from: Another Opinion Columnist Pushing War With Iran Who Doesn't Actually Exist - The American Conservative

Tradcon • a month ago

Not very surprising to be honest, some people simply cannot go without regime change to the point where they have to parade people about who weren't even born in Iran and who have little to no support in the country as "dissidents" to try to guilt people into supporting intervention. Of course with that comes slander against those who warn against that, which unfortunately means TAC.

dragnet20 Tradcon • a month ago

Exactly--these folks are addicted to regime change like heroin. Ignoring them is one thing Trump absolutely got right during his first term.

Clyde Schechter dragnet20 • a month ago

Trump ignored them??? Hardly. He hired John Bolton as his national security advisor, and Rudy Giuliani is his personal attorney. Both of those guys are heavily tied to this organization and advocate its line. And while he did stop short of actually invading Iran, he was on the brink of doing so recently, talked out of it only at the last minute. I'll give him credit for not going all the way with them, but he's given them far too wide a berth and much too much influence in his foreign policy if you ask me.

Blood Alcohol Clyde Schechter • a month ago

He did not go all the way with them because he was told by the military and others, who take their jobs and missions to server the American people seriously, that his attacks on Iran - invasion was not "the table" at all - would face a humiliating defeat at the same level of what happened to his efforts to extend the weapons sanctions at the UNSC. Pompeo was sent home with his tail between his legs.

dragnet20 Blood Alcohol • a month ago

The idea that Trump would have invaded if allowed doesn't pass the smell test. He spent much of the 2016 railing against regime change and foreign wars. His recent instincts on this topic have been largely correct.

Carpenter E Clyde Schechter • a month ago

Trump did not want more war, and wanted to end the existing wars, that much is clear. At the same time as he believes the Israeli line about Iran. But he did not want war with Iran - he knows they would mine the Strait of Hormuz shut, and the U.S. economy would go into a depression along with the world economy. No president would survive that.

But, he has had to appease top donor *Sheldon Adelson, in order to prevent a GOP revolt in the Congress. The threat was always that they'd join the Democrats in impeaching him, that Mike Pence would call for the same, and people would leave his cabinet. So he caved by sanctioning Iran and destroying the lives of millions of people. And he had to appease Israel by taking Syria's oil fields via the Marxist Kurd mercenaries, and let them burn the wheat fields. But he did not start a war, and did not want a war.

J Villain Tradcon • a month ago

"The list of MEK disinformation tactics"

Lets be honest here. It isn't MEK disinformation tactics it is the tactics
of the US wrapped up and packaged as MEK. Just as Falon Gong is backed
by the CIA. MEK is a bunch of backwards ass hats with terrorist
tendencies. They are not some national level intelligence agency. This
is most likely crud made up by the US intelligence agencies sold as MEK
and pushed on the American people to convince them that Iran will be
dropping nuclear weapons on their house any minute now if they can stop
eating babies long enough, so they need to push their government to go
to WAR!!!!! with Iran and kill some Muslims. The gullibility of the
American people is why there will never be a time when they are not at
war.

Blood Alcohol J Villain • a month ago

Throw in "Saudi" Arabia and Israel, and France (the home of their leader) then you've got all of them in the same room.

Carpenter E J Villain • a month ago

Possibly, but the MEK does have an online presence and such. But of course, it is all with Washington's money, and Washington's assistance.

For those who don't know: The MEK is a Marxist-Islamist group that initially supported the Revolution, but turned against Ayatollah Khomeini as they didn't get to share power. Because no one liked them. And Marxists were not allowed in revolutionary Iran - the MEK was chased out along with the Soviet-installed communist party in northern Iran.

The MEK have been killing Iranian police, bureaucrats and local administrators. This is their "revolution". They kill people mainly with bombs. The present Ayatollah's left arm is withered after one of their bomb attacks.

The MEK have been killing Iranian physics professors and technicians. They kill them with car bombs in traffic - a motorbike with two killers drive up to a car by a traffic stop and attach a bomb with magnets. Of course, you can wonder where they got the bombs, and money and transport. This is classic Mossad strategy. Likewise, dozens of technicians and professors in Iraq have been murdered. Israel hopes for a counter-reaction which the U.S. can exploit.

Rest assured, the political opposition in Iran hates the Marxist-Islamist MEK as much as the government does. Which Washington and Israel don't acknowledge.

The MEK was housed by Saddam Hussein in an old military base. They had to leave Iraq eventually after the overthrow of Hussein. The U.S. then shipped them to a brand new training base in Albania. Crazy as it might seem. Albania's government is of course as eager to be a paid Washington agent as the Kurds are.

Absurdly, this explicitly terrorist group has been taken off the terror list by Washington. While Iran is called "terrorist" for helping Hezbollah, who formed to fight back when Israel invaded Lebanon and massacred Shia villagers in the south with artillery, because they lived close to the Palestinian refugee camps. And then kept fighting when Israel occupied part of southern Lebanon, Shia land, as a "buffer zone" for many years.

Carpenter E Carpenter E • a month ago

The MEK killed thousands of people, including Americans. But the Lobby always gets what it wants.

The MEK was founded in 1965 by three Islamic leftists with the goal of toppling the U.S.-supported regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

In the 1970s it undertook a campaign of assassinating U.S. advisers and bombing U.S. corporations in Iran. It supported the 1979 Revolution in Iran, but in 1981 it turned its guns against the Tehran government and began a campaign of assassinations and terrorist operations that resulted in the death of thousands of Iranians, including the executions of its own supporters by government officials, soldiers, police officers, and ordinary people.

It then moved its headquarters to Iraq, made a pact with the regime of Saddam Hussein, which was fighting a ferocious war with Iran. The MEK spied on Iranian troops for Iraq, attacked Iran at the end of Iran-Iraq war with Hussein's support, and helped Hussein put down the uprisings by the Iraqi Kurds in the north and Shi'ites in the south after the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91.

The MEK is despised by the vast majority of Iranians for what they consider to be treason committed against their homeland.

disgustoo • a month ago

"As a matter of journalistic ethics any organization engaging in systematic dishonesty like this has provided a very good reason to blacklist them. ...This is not a matter of foreign policy differences: if you wish to see the U.S. pursue regime change in Iran, the MEK does not help make that case. Any publishers or think tanks who are aware of this dishonesty and still treat them like a legitimate opposition group should be considered part of a campaign not wholly different from the last time we were lied into a Mideast war."

If MEK does NOT help to make the case for regime change in Iran - & outside sponsored regime change is not ethical - then it would be unethical not to support them, in order to help prevent unethical regime change. Although that's probably not what horrible Hillary had in mind when, as Sec. of State in 2012, she de-listed them from the U.S. official list of terrorist organizations. But if anyone will lie "us" into a war with Iran, it will be AIPAC & innumerable other dishonest zionist organizations working on behalf of the Jewish terror state, & it's new Saudi terror state partner; both of whom look with favor on MEK as a bit partner in their joint effort to take out the government of Iran. MEK is pretty small potatoes compared to The Lobby, who are waging another campaign not wholly different from the last time they pushed us into a M.E. war to benefit lying israel.

Blood Alcohol Guest • a month ago

Why, do you "like" sock puppets"?!

Dodo • a month ago

Don't fall into this trap.

People tell you - You are a conservative, so do I. I support XYZ thus you should also support them.

Before the 2003 Iraqi War, Many then Bush administration officials and self-anointed "conservative opinion leaders" went on TV to lie to people to support their war. Today, we still suffer the consequence but they are preaching to us other wars.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Schopenhauer Dodo • a month ago • edited

In no way should the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq War be excused, nor should "conservative opinion leaders" be let off the hook, but the Congress was complicit, the Senate was complicit, the military was complicit, the intelligence community was complicit, and the majority of the electorate was complicit. Nobody cared whether the reason for the war was valid, people just wanted to vent their frustrations against terrorists on an unrelated Arab country that the US had already used as a whipping boy. What could happen?

Almost twenty years later and-- surprise! surprise!-- suddenly everyone recognizes the war for the folly it was. Some people, like Dreher, seem to have genuinely changed their stance based on what happened subsequently. But we'll all see what happens the next time the war mongers-- from both sides of the aisle and from all over the country-- start rattling their sabers.

IllinoisPatriot Schopenhauer • a month ago

Then there are the appeasers and anti-war peace-niks that would rather surrender than fight for liberty or that (if they are willing to fight) will on risk OTHER PEOPLE's (other American) lives, thus removing the need to ever put themselves at risk of learning what actually goes in in the countries they are so sympathetic to.

Charles IllinoisPatriot • a month ago • edited

"Then there are the appeasers and anti-war peace-niks that would rather surrender than fight for liberty"

Would you expound on that vis a vis current situations. Your sentence is straight out of the Vietnam era,

EliteCommInc. Charles • a month ago

The complete idiocy regarding Vietnam is the anti-war rhetoric surrounding. But has laid the framework for installing fear into anyone who doesn't tow the ridiculousness of what is argued by protesters -- which in every way has nearly every argument backwards.

Since the aggressors in Vietnam were the communists of four countries, it is very safe to say that those opposed to defending an independent S. Vietnam were in fact appeasing communist aggression and that is accurate.

The nation of Vietnam has rarely known peace and the lines during the conflict generally mark the region that separated the country's territorial history. The South Vietnamese sound reason to seek defend their territorial and political independence and we had sound reason to defend the same.

It was during that era that the liberal foundations showed their true colors. And if one doubt it --- just look at the anti-Vietnam advocates -- the managers of the Iraq and Afghanistan missteps and p[perhaps even worse their willingness to destroy the lives of anyone who challenged their rational based on the very case they made -- which was unsupportable.

There are some issues which simply are not really issues,

1. the lives of black people in the country and how they were/are socialized and the consequence

2.what the civil war was really about

3.Mexican invasion of US territory to retake territory they lost to band of squatters (lousy immigration enforcement) a war that is now taking place via our failure to enforce border protection.)

4.loss of the War of 1812
and

5. the colonial revolution and its justification

Blood Alcohol EliteCommInc. • a month ago • edited

"Since the aggressors in Vietnam were the communists of four countries, it is very safe to say that those opposed to defending an independent S. Vietnam were in fact appeasing communist aggression and that is accurate."
It's safe to say that BS like this is not hard to come by in the right wing nutjobs' circles. No Vietnamese had/has ever attempted to attack, invade, kill and spray Agent Orange anywhere in the US. So how come they became the aggressors?!
Viet Nam became truly independent AFTER expelling the American military.

Schopenhauer Blood Alcohol • a month ago

When it comes to discussing Vietnam with this guy-- it's Chinatown, there's nothing you can do.

Shiek Yerbooti Dodo • a month ago

If you're talking about Bush I think the quote is more like this:

"fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."

Wallstreet Panic Dodo • a month ago

"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. You've got to understand the nature of the regime we're dealing with. This is a man who has delayed, denied, deceived the world." George W. Bush, September 17, 2002

chris chuba • a month ago

Bless you for writing this but you are spitting into the wind. There are too many people who want to believe this. The IRaq war analogy is apt. You have govt in exile types like MEK (remember Chalabi) who have a vested interest in lying to us. You have the hyper-pro Israel crowd and the newly accepted pro-Saudi crowd w/money to burn. I actually expect and don't begrudge foreigners for trying to get the U.S. into their fights. I resent the MSM that is simply in love with U.S. military conflicts who accuse people who oppose them of being anti-American, conspiracy theorists.

The most laughable example was CNN accepting the notion that Iran has a massive cyber presence in influencing our elections because our Intel Agencies told them so. Iran is detested by the U.S. public as we steal civilian cargo from them that would make the lives of people in other countries better. We sell the stolen goods for our benefit and call them terrorists for their trouble. To suggest that they have sway over us is laughable yet this passes for journalism.

Iran will be the next Iraq. If there is a God it will be the rock that breaks us. If not then a crime of shocking proportions.

Fletcher chris chuba • a month ago

I largely agree but I think there's room for optimism, the US military particular the army is largely a broken instrument, morale is not good except for the contractors, General maintenance is down in favor of expensive toys that largely do not work. For all of the bluster of this generation of sociopaths the military in general is a shadow of itself not to mention we live in times of a rising China and the reemergence Russia, neither of which would allow in on opposed attack on Iran.

Blood Alcohol Fletcher • a month ago

True, but the military has also been the biggest obstacle for tRump to make his Saudi/Israeli clients happy.

Fletcher Blood Alcohol • a month ago

How so? Our government seems to be providing the Saudi's with with as many bombs as they need, Air Force retirees to fly in the backseatair of Saudi planes, we have slowed down on the transfer of Thermo nuclear Technology as well as I assume the the delivery systems for them true but that was likely just a temporary Flash of Conscience it'll probably never happen again for that individual but if there something I'm missing please do tell.

Blood Alcohol Fletcher • a month ago • edited

Look at it this way. Either the Saudi/UAE themselves have to deal militarily with Iran, or the US. The US military-industrial complex is for selling weapons to these client states whole-heartedly for obvious reasons. The Saudi/UAE has always expected and often demanded the US is the one to "cut the snake's head" as "king" Abdullah of the "Saudi" Arabia demanded frequently. These states know very well neither the "version" of the weaponry they buy from the West is capable of performing in a real war with a powerful enemy like Iran, nor are their personnel capable of operating them effectively. So what they say to the US is, OK we'll buy your junk, but you need to do the job. In other words, they want to fight Iran to the last AMERICAN soldier. The Pentagon wants none of that. But happy to run the cash register. I hope I made my point clear.

Sorosh Nabi • a month ago

MEK have no support in Iran. If a MEK member would walk down the street there the people would tear them to shreds. When they started killing Iranians and cooperating with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war they committed political suicide.

EliteCommInc. Sorosh Nabi • a month ago

You know, this really doesn't carry much weight. I am not going to dismiss the complaints of a group because the majority don't support them. That is not a case for regime change. I don't see a case for that as yet. But I don't buy this nonsense about Iran land of peace ----

They were instrumental in destabilizing any peace in Iraq and remain so. Their Islamic revolution has not passed and their ambitions are not as benign as as many including Iranians like to pretend.

Sorosh Nabi EliteCommInc. • a month ago

What does that have to do with anything that I said? If you want to come to power you need the support of the people MEK don't have that so they will never gain power. Also MEK are responsible for the revolution in the first place, they are the ones that carried out bombing and assassinations even of Americans in Iran. They are the ones that attacked the US embassy in Iran and held Americans hostage. There is a reason they were on the US terror list until 2012. As far as Iran being the land of peace not sure where you got that from, Iran has never claimed that and infact Iran will conduct foreign policy that benefits its goals, which is true of any nation. You should try to stay on topic when you reply to somebody though.

Blood Alcohol EliteCommInc. • a month ago • edited

Yes, as you know the Iranians attacked, invaded and looted Iraq's oil and cultural heritage. Had in not been for the US "rescue mission" Iranian would still be there. You must be tone deaf.

Feral Finster • a month ago

Same playbook as in the runup to the War on Iraq.

Gutbomb Feral Finster • a month ago

Mostly. They won't be bothering with the U.N. this time, though.

IllinoisPatriot Feral Finster • a month ago

... or Trump's run-up to the 2016 election.....

Thump the conspiracy theories and emphasize the hard-line approach with no idea or intent to actually go through with anything should he actually win. I see reference to Q-anon and I immediately think Trumpian conspieracy.

I'll pass.

john • a month ago

Conservatives are easy to target, they are prepared to believe all sorts of nonsense. Qanon aside they are prepared to believe that tax cuts pay for themselves and you can lose weight on a vinegar and ice cream diet.

CPT john • a month ago

As opposed to the people who believe that a man can become a "real woman" just by saying so, and nod approvingly when CNN shows the chyron "Mostly peaceful protests continue" over footage of burning buildings.

Fletcher john • a month ago

Really, that's pretty damn funny like you retards don't believe in a bunch of conspiracy nonsense and by the way don't put down Q is good fun to the geriatric Community on the other hand you clowns are playing footsie with actual Nazis in Ukraine while you accuse the right of being fascist that's beautiful congratulations it's going to be great in a couple years when this country has seceded from each other and all of you non-producers get to sort it out for yourselves, it's going to be magic.

hooly • a month ago

Fake dissident groups. Wow! Not even the Chinese are this duplicitous. And people whine and complain about Russian and Chinese 'infiltration' and 'meddling' ??

Iustitiae Semper Valet hooly • a month ago

Which fale dissident groups? I missed that. I am not being sarcastic. I see people who have been named as fake contributors all over the place. But I didn't see a reference to a fake dissident group.

IllinoisPatriot Iustitiae Semper Valet • a month ago

I'm still looking for the proof one way or the other of who the "good guys" are here.

Fake this, fake that I can get from Trump every time he opens his mouth about "fake news".

What I don't get from Trump (or from this article) is any references, documentation, or solid proof of any kind other than accusations and counter-accusations -- one side I'm supposed to believe because the author said so.

I'm not buying it without objective proof and trustworthy corroboration -- not just more sock-puppets.

PointyTailofSatan . • a month ago

I don't understand. The MEK hates the current Iranian government. Why the would the American Conservative be dissing them?

Blood Alcohol PointyTailofSatan . • a month ago • edited

They are being dissed by many smart conservatives and others, because they have become a tool of Saudi/Israel. They practically spearheaded killing Americans during the Shah, and now they are enjoying American political and financial support. In that vein the adage, my enemy's enemy is my friend, does not apply here. But if you are a money hungry Giuliani, Kennedy, Bolton or Howard Dean being a gang of killers, Saddam Husein mercenaries, and Saudi/Israeli agents don't matter.

Steve Blood Alcohol • a month ago

Bravo for this comment!! loved it!

Feral Finster PointyTailofSatan . • 19 days ago

Anyone remember Ahmad Chalabi's "Iraqi National Congress" or whatever it was called?

Same schtick, new players, same CIA..

Dyerville • a month ago

"We are especially on guard when it comes to unsolicited foreign policy commentary.""

So one would hope, but foreign meddling is rife. At least the Washington Examiner makes an effort, whereas the Washington Free Beacon functions almost openly as an Israeli organ inside the United States.

el disgustador • a month ago

Ehem...The Israelis have admitted they essentially founded, financed and thoroughly and continuously infiltrated the Palestinian revolutionary group, HAMAS to counter the PLO achieve the ongoing ethnic destruction of Palestinian land freedom and society...the MEK and their front group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran are comparable Israeli emanations whose ultimate goal is the land grab from the Nile to the Euphrates known as the Greater Israel project. This is Israeli history text book material, it is not conjecture...Read what former Israeli officials such as Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, former Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s. had to say the New York Times in that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a "counterweight" to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat (who himself referred to Hamas as "a creature of Israel.") "The Israeli government gave me a budget," the retired brigadier
general confessed, "and the military government gives to the mosques." Moreover, "Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation," said Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official who worked in Gaza for more than two decades to the Wall Street Journal in 2009. Deliberately planned, as far back as the mid-1980s, according to Cohen in an official report to his superiors playing the divide-and-rule in the Occupied Territories, by backing Palestinian Islamists against Palestinian secularists, HAMAS was built up to become an "existential threat" fake tool of nuclear mighty Israel. In his report Cohen wrote, "I suggest focusing our efforts on finding ways to break up this monster before this reality jumps in our face," he wrote. That was the point exactly, poor victimized Israel "endowed with the right to defend itself". With Palestine now Kushnerized into oblivion, Iran is next ...Go figure...

Go figure...

chris • a month ago

propaganda is unending when isn'treal wants more war isn't it?

Billo • a month ago

Let the Israel Jews fight and die in their own war. Iran is not our enemy, Israel is.

Ram2017 Billo • a month ago

Who is funding the MEK ?

ddearborn • a month ago • edited

Hmmm
Means, motive, opportunity and who benefits spells out in no uncertain terms that the entire create a justification and then go to war with Iran originates in Israel and is being sold by the Zionists and Israel's literal army of jewish/Zionist/pro-Israel agents masquerading as "lobbyists", "activists", "think tanks" "academics", the Media, Hollywood, Congress, most of the White House Staff, etc., etc., here in the US. In other words, by an Israeli controlled army in America made up of traitors, liars and criminals.... A group who collectively ALWAYS put Israel Uber Alles.

[Oct 10, 2020] BREAKING- Mike Pompeo Says He Has Hillary Clinton's Deleted Emails and Will Begin Releasing Them Before Election Day (VIDEO)

Oct 10, 2020 | www.thegatewaypundit.com

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday dropped a little October surprise said his department has Hillary Clinton's 'deleted' emails and will release them before the election.

"We're getting them out," Pompeo told Fox News Dana Perino.

TheGhostOfJamesOtisJr 17 minutes ago (Edited)

Shandong Carter Heavy Industry received all email, including classified material, sent to Hillary Clinton's private server based on an Intelligence Community Investigator General (ICIG) report. The ICIG determined all Hillary Clinton email was being forwarded to " [email protected] ", an address possibly connected to the Chinese equipment manufacturer Shandong Carter Heavy Industry The ICIG alerted FBI agent Peter Strzok who strangely did not seem alarmed by the connection despite the fact all but four of the emails sent to Hillary Clinton's private email server were forwarded to that address, roughly 600,000 in total.( pdf , p14/105) https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019-08-14%20Staff%20memo%20to%20CEG%20RHJ%20-%20ICIG%20Interview%20Summary%20RE%20Clinton%20Server.pdf

The following is an excerpt from testimony by Frank Rucker of the ICIG, "Mr. Strzok seemed to be 'aloof and dismissive.' [Rucker] said it was as if Mr. Strzok felt dismissive of the relationship between the FBI and ICIG and he was not very warm." - ( pdf p15/105)

The FBI later determined the email address was set up by a Clinton IT staffer named Paul Combetta. The FBI dismissed the possible China connection because they found no evidence to contradict Combetta's claim he "had no connection to, and had never heard of, ' Shandong Carter Heavy Industry Machinery CO., Ltd.'''( pdf p104/105) That's an odd statement because IT staffers wouldn't normally be expected to have relationships with Chinese heavy industry. IT workers usually set up email addresses for others.

Paul Combetta is the IT staffer who used BleachBit to erase emails on Clinton's private email server.( pdf p38 ) . Perhaps this is why the FBI didn't consider it necessary to question Combetta in front of a Grand Jury .( pdf , p127 ) That this didn't demonstrated criminal intent to the FBI is beyond comprehension. Obviously this goes beyond mere bias and borders on obstruction of justice. The numerous attempts to debunk this story are almost comical when combined with other evidence, namely Peter Strzok's leaking to the press:

December 15, 2016 Peter Strzok: " Think our sisters have begun leaking like mad. Scorned and worried, and political, they're kicking into overdrive. "
April 10, 2017 Peter Strzok: " I had literally just gone to find this phone to tell you I want to talk to you about media leak strategy with DOJ before you go. "
April 22, 2017 Peter Strzok: " Article is out! Well done, Page. "

https://www.justice.gov/file/1071991/download

Guess where EcoHealth Alliance connected virologist Edward C Holmes did his research in China? Shandong!

https://youtu.be/bEtVOTA1ZtU?t=5034 play_arrow play_arrow deFLorable hillbilly 28 minutes ago (Edited) remove link

There is only one important matter at this time. And that is confirming ACB to the SC prior to the so-called election. All this other stuff can wait. Lose and it's all pointless anyway.

[Oct 10, 2020] psychohistorian

Oct 10, 2020 | www.lettinggobreath.com

1

next page " Nice posting b

Yes, it is time for EU countries to show their true colors which will be ass kissers for empire, most likely.

Folks are saying Nord Stream II is being finished but will it ever go into use?

And of course this is not war because Trump hasn't started any wars, right?

What a shit show we are seeing. What is the next phase of this civilization war that is not a war because there are not enough dead bodies for some I guess?...but it sure looks like war to me.

bevin , Oct 9 2020 17:07 utc | 2
The next phase would appear to be Kyrgyzstan: from Belarus east to Sinkiang and Hong Kong the subversion and the attempts at regime change are constant.

While Eurasia seeks to unite for peace and prosperity, the United States and its sleazy satrapy is constantly trying to divide and weaken, to undermine and to intimidate. In doing so it relies heavily on abusing the tattered lineaments of democracy- electioneering and propagandising, the relics of a western culture which has become nothing more than a hollow shell containing an increasingly totalitarian plutocracy.

Joseph Dillard , Oct 9 2020 17:32 utc | 5
All this simply moves Iran into closer confederation with Russia and China and strengthens its resolve to send US middle eastern troops packing. Soon there will be a strong Russia-China-Iran axis that is immune to all Western sanctions. Those countries who are part of the BRI will get privileged economic treatment. The advantages will become increasingly apparent and the economic disadvantages of staying allied with the US will become increasingly apparent as well, particularly in light of the approaching collapse of the dollar. As long as we manage to avoid a hot war the civilizational die is cast; the US has chosen its destiny, in the dustbin of history, at least as a neoliberal oligarchy. When and how it will reinvent itself is an open question, but it is not unreasonable to think it will take decades. While Europe will eventually align with Eurasia, it will take another generation of politicians before that happens.
Loftwork , Oct 9 2020 17:36 utc | 6
If Iran isn't self-sufficient now, it will be by the time the US is finished with it. That isn't a comfortable place to be but with key sector support from the Eastern bloc it's at least as manageable as Cuba. The question is whether and how fast the Eastern bloc can consolidate its resources by e.g. petrodollar replacement and better shared infrastructure. The Eastern bloc isn't ideal, but when the West is apparently encouraging something like a holocaust of suffering humanity, it's the only other game in town.
Nathan Mulcahy , Oct 9 2020 17:39 utc | 7
No, this is not the moment. This is the last chance. Oh, these vassals with zero integrity and character!
Hoyeru , Oct 9 2020 17:40 utc | 8
High time for both Russia and China and Iran/Cuba/Venezuela to really get together and start speaking with one voice and show the despicable USA/West/NATO that they will stand together and defend each other. Otherwise it's all over.

Specific steps to implement:
1. create and begin using an alternative to the SWIFT and invite anyone who is being sanctioned by USA/West to join them
2. openly and officially declare that their currencies are backed by gold
3. openly and officially begin to speak against USA's actions around the world at the UN and invite anyone who is being sanctioned by USA/West to join them
4. get together and openly declare to the world they stand as one and to invite
anyone else who is being harassed by USA/West/NATO to join them
5. immediately begin clean up of all the terrorists/CIA Operatives in in Central Asia otherwise they will be in deep trouble

what are Putin and Xi doing?? Come on guys, wake up!

MichaelW , Oct 9 2020 17:46 utc | 9
EU and US. Just playing classical
And Trump don't make Amerika "Too big to fail" alone. But double down
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a510221c9228a7d1b9f383b3428db349
When you owe 5000€, you're afraid of your crédit or but when You owe 5000 T$, Who is afraid ?

Financial House of Card let them no choice but to S***MyD***, and wait

David G , Oct 9 2020 18:14 utc | 10
In March, Germany announced that the first transaction had been completed using Europe's INSTEX system to skirt sanctions -- more than a year after the scheme had supposedly been put in place.

I haven't seen anything further about it. Has it enabled any significant level of trade?

One Too Many , Oct 9 2020 18:20 utc | 11
Now I understand why Javad Zarif is in China for a two-day meeting:

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-10/08/c_139426303.htm

I guess it wasn't for the National Holiday?

Don Bacon , Oct 9 2020 18:28 utc | 12
Why would anyone need anything not Made in China? Plus China is the EU's second highest trade partner (after US) so Iran could have access to some of that if for some reason they needed an EU product. . . .Meanwhile Iran will be even more self-sufficient, as Russia has become with EU sanctions. . . .The US has been trying self-imposed "sanctions" (China uncoupling) to become more self-sufficient but it's not working.
Caliman , Oct 9 2020 18:53 utc | 16
EU continues its self-imposed slide into irrelevance. I suppose a servant's life is an easier life: you don't have to think for yourself and just need to please master. But it can hardly be a satisfactory experience, can it? Especially when the collar is held by such as Trump and Pompass.

The winds of change are coming and they will be interesting. China's economy is already greater than the US and that will expand many fold over the next few decades. The $ economy will not survive this, especially not as the US has shown it will use its power corruptly. The EU batter consider this; do they want to be part of the past or the future?

Passer by , Oct 9 2020 19:09 utc | 19
There is something much more significant happening with Europe, that is more than the Iran issue.

The EU is trying to prop up the US Empire in response to its decline, instead of trying to free itself.

The EU has chosen the side of the US against the multipolar world. It will be trying to prop up the Empire.

It is becoming increasingly hostile to any country that isn't a puppet to the US, like itself, and is lashing out at those countries. Like a zombie, it wants to infect others with its infection, and turn every other country into US puppets too. It thinks that this is normal and it wants to spread that "normality" to the rest of the world too.

Many analysts are already mentioning that the EU is becoming increasingly hostile to Russia.

Recently, serious statements came from Russian officials:

"Russia will not follow EU and US rules".

"There will be no more business as usual between Russia and France and Germany".

"France and Germany are now leading the anti-russian block within Europe".

"Russia will no longer be dependent on the EU".

"Europeans have delusions of grandeur".

These are all statements by Lavrov and Zacharova.

Recently, we have seen Germany and France banning Huawei, Europe together with US blocking the OPCW investigation at the UN, and Germany leading the charge at the UN stage against China. EU also took the lead in the colour revolution in Belarus.

There are two recent statesments by the french foreign minister and by the EU commision chief:

"Europe needs to unite against Russia and Turkey".

Surveys also show rising levels of anti-chinese hatred in Europe, and not only in the US.

What has happened is far more serious than the europeans being "feckless U.S. ass kissers". It is worse than that.

The EU chose the side of the US against the multipolar world. It does not want to free itself from the US. Actually it thinks that it is normal to be a puppet, that others should be US puppets too, and that a joint EU-US Empire should be supported, so that some kind of world wide liberal utopia can be build by it.

Europeans are psychologically damaged by WW2 and this is affecting their geopolitical behavior, turning them into forever puppets of the US.

They can not free themselves because when they were free once, they "did very bad things". Therefore they should always follow their "better" and "Big Daddy" US, who "freed them from themselves" and "put them in the right way".

Europeans can not be helped. Ironically, it is their own rejection of their WW2 past that causes them to reject the multipolar world and sovereignty as "primitive things from the past", and thus support a transnational globalist western empire that is here "to bring Utopia on Earth". For them Russia, China, Iran, India, Turkey etc. are just a bunch of primitives that are tryng to turn back the clock.

And thus it will increasingly start to lash out at any country that isn't a US puppet as those countries prevent the coming of Utopia.

[Oct 10, 2020] The Man Who Knew Russia- A Tribute to Stephen F. Cohen - The National Interest

Oct 10, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

October 9, 2020 Topic: Politics Region: Americas Tags: Russia Mikhail Gorbachev NATO Ronald Reagan Soviet Union The Man Who Knew Russia: A Tribute to Stephen F. Cohen

As we disregarded Russian fears and ignored the chance for a true partnership, Steve worried about the resumption of hostile relations between our two countries and possibly a new Cold War.

by Bill Bradley ,

me title=

[Oct 06, 2020] Polls are usually wrong as people typically respond in a politically correct way to them, hiding there actual preferences

That's where random sampling became a scam. People who hold minority views or views that they think are opposite of the reviewer often will not respond honestly creating false narrative that MSM propagate.
Notable quotes:
"... Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest ..."
"... So don't worry! As long as enough Americans keep playing Red v Blue, the Establishment will be just fine. ..."
Oct 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

Originally from: What They Are Not Talking About- War and Peace, Healthcare and Jobs Are Non-Issues, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review

Watching the network news on television or reading about current events in the newspapers seemingly transports one to an alternate universe where nothing seems to make sense. The profit driven news cycle in the United States is admittedly a poor mechanism for actually gaining an understanding of what is going on, but seven days of Ruth Bader Ginsburg worship hardly addresses what is ailing the country, particularly as questions about how she earned many millions of dollars while serving as a judge as well as some unsavory aspects of her career have been carefully buried.

A friend who is a retired U.S. Army general made an interesting comment several days ago, observing that when it comes to politics and voting patterns the so-called "silent majority" is indeed silent. What he meant was that many Americans who hold currently unpopular conservative views will not respond honestly to a call from an unknown pollster regarding voting intentions. This is particularly true of the current campaign in which Donald Trump is being reviled by the media and depicted by the Democrats as no less than a threat to American democracy. Biden by way of comparison pretty much gets a free pass, to include forgiveness for his frequent faux pas and mental lapses. In other words, Trump is being framed as someone poised to mount a totalitarian takeover of the United States, which in and of itself would disincline many voters to indicate openly that they would support him over Biden.

My friend was suggesting that the polls on the upcoming election just might be more than usually wrong. I would add to that the general vapidity of what one might expect from the presidential debates, which are similarly being framed in such a fashion as to avoid any topics that might really matter. But the polls do reveal two things. First, that there is a lack of any confidence in the integrity of politicians at all levels, and second, that jobs and healthcare are the principal concerns of nearly all voter demographics as they directly impact on quality of life.

Healthcare is admittedly a complicated issue given the fact that the entire system in the United States would have to be reformed, with considerable government intervention. The respected British medical journal The Lancet recently published "Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories" . The study revealed, to no one's surprise, that the United States has by far the world's most expensive medical care, at around $9,000 per person per year while at the same time delivering poorer results than virtually any other industrialized nation. Medical expenses are in fact a leading cause of personal bankruptcy by Americans.

So, what are the two parties saying about health care? The Republicans want to overturn so-called Obamacare and replace it with something else which they cannot describe while the Democrats insist that they want to keep Obamacare in place while also blaming the president for the response to the coronavirus. That's it. There is plenty of blame to go around on Covid-19 and Obamacare is in fact a bad program. It is good if the government is footing the bill for you, but anyone who is paying for his or her own insurance has seen the rates treble and even quadruple since the program became active. It has become a gold mine for the health care industry, which now assumes that it can charge whatever it wants and the suffering customer will be obliged to pay for it. That there is no effective regulation of health care is due to the fact that Big Pharma and other providers have completely corrupted Congress through political donations to make sure that the highly profitable status quo remains untouched.

And when it comes to the other great concern, "The Economy," which means jobs, the two major parties have even less to say since they know deep down that they have both conspired in the gutting of America's industrial and manufacturing infrastructure.

But another area dear to my own heart which the parties have been silent about is Foreign Policy, which also subsumes National Security, a related issue that the opinion polls do not specifically address. Both parties are strong on issuing position papers that refer to supporting allies, meaning Israel followed by everyone else, confronting threats from Russia and China, and maintaining the world's number one military. Beyond that it gets a bit vague. We have recently learned from a possibly unreliable source named Bob Woodward that President Trump sought to assassinate Syria's President Bashar al-Assad but was talked out of it. Trump did order the assassination of senior Iranian General Qassim Soleimani, whom he and Secretary of State have recently described as the "world's leading terrorist," which is manifestly untrue. Is assassinating foreign leaders something that the United States wants to engage in? Why is no one talking about it?

And then there are the "hot wars" being fought in Syria, Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan. None of those wars benefit from a constitutionally mandated declaration of war by Congress and they have cost the U.S. taxpayer trillions of dollars. Shouldn't that be under discussion? Or the "maximum pressure" economic wars being waged against Venezuela, Cuba, Syria and Iran? Those "wars" have collectively killed tens of thousands of civilians and have done nothing to enhance the security of the United States. Shouldn't Trump and Biden be talking about that?

Instead, we will see much finger pointing and hear a lot about how dangerous a win by either presidential candidate will be, all couched in general terms based on a lot of "what-ifs." But what the American public needs, particularly the silent majority, is a viable plan for decent and affordable healthcare similar to what most of the rest of the world enjoys. And a new government also must act decisively to challenge corporate offshoring interests to bring manufacturing jobs back home. But most of all, the United States needs peace after nineteen years of spreading chaos all over the globe. End the wars and bring the troops home. Do it now.

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest

Exile , says: Website October 2, 2020 at 1:09 am GMT

Much respect, Phil, but you know the news cycle in America is not driven by "profit" but rather by agenda. If profit drove the news CNN and MSNBC would be podcasts by now. (((Big Other))) is willing to lose a lot of money in the short-mid term to drive their long term agenda.

Alfa158 , says: October 2, 2020 at 2:19 am GMT

"What They Are Not Talking About: War and Peace, Healthcare and Jobs Are Non-Issues"
I'm not aware that either party has any credible idea what to do to really fix jobs and healthcare so they basically have nothing to talk about.
Trump wants less war and the Deep State would like more war but even if President Biden and then President Harris are willing to give it to them, the Covid Great Depression means we really can't afford them any more so there is no point in talking about that either.
The election comes down to how many people really hate Trump + how many Republicans and neutrals are willing to give him a second chance + how much the Democrats can stuff the ballot boxes. Every thing else is just WWF noise.

jsinton , says: October 2, 2020 at 8:06 am GMT

This article really hits it on the head for me. The last four years I've been screaming that the issues are:
1. End the forever wars, strengthen diplomacy
2. Jobs
3. More better jobs
4. Even more better jobs
5. Fix the trade balance (jobs)
6. End the healthcare boondoggle.

These are all issues that NO ONE talks about anymore.

obwandiyag , says: October 2, 2020 at 8:25 am GMT

People generally don't vote on issues. Except for fundamentalists, who vote on only one issue, abortion, which is precisely equivalent to not voting on any issues at all.

What they vote on is "like" and "dislike." If they "like" a candidate, then they vote for them. If they don't "like" a candidate, then they don't vote for them.

Very mature.

Tommy Thompson , says: October 2, 2020 at 8:34 am GMT

observing that when it comes to politics and voting patterns the so-called "silent majority" is indeed silent.

Thanks, that statement sums up the underlining problem, that is why the massive problems of the US are running out of control, with no fix in sight.

The general Middle Class public will not stand up for their own and true interests or even want to comprehend what those interests might be until they are in a jobless claims line. They go silent and let corrupted politicians of all shades run the show as if they dont have a dog in the fight.

Trump supporters should call him out where he goes off the reservation to serve Special interests and not their and the same goes for all others.

anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: October 2, 2020 at 12:15 pm GMT
@jsinton ct exploiting a viral dempanic with its trillion$ for Wall Street, another handful of 401Kibble to prevent snarling among the professional and managerial class who tend to read and think, and a paid vacation for the proles.

But Beltway politics abhors a vacuum, and draws its breath from strife. Which is why people have to be distracted and divided over transgender statues and Confederate bathrooms, strung along by the hopes/fears of Barr Durham indictments, and rallied to vote in the next Most Important Election Ever by food fights over robed, unelected politicians whose real job is to sanctify rule of a country and as much of the world as can be grabbed by Washington.

So don't worry! As long as enough Americans keep playing Red v Blue, the Establishment will be just fine.

anon [437] Disclaimer , says: October 2, 2020 at 1:49 pm GMT

This is the absolute crux of the matter. Debates are a ceremonial pissing contest. They always censor any of your principal concerns. As with all official US propaganda, you can categorically say there's never any mention of your rights.

Two things will happen in November. There will be a futile ritual to decide which CIA puppet ruler fucks you over. Then on November 9th, the whole world is going to talk about your rights. Unlike your parties, they ask you what you want. They encourage you, yes you, to demand what you want and they give you a platform in front of the whole world, in the most public forum on earth. You can watch it live. Hell, you can go there and have your say. A bunch of Americans will. Actual democracy. Holy fucking shit.

Think of it. You have two coincident four-year cycles of governance. One is phony bullshit. One is exactly what you need. The whole world is pushing your right to peace, to health, to a livelihood, to your culture, all your other rights you don't even know you got. It's like the whole world is yelling in your face, loud as they can, "Why do you put up with that shit?" The world is trying to teach you how you run a grown-up country – go through your rights systematically like a checklist, and make your government respect them. And your horseshit regime in DC makes sure you never hear a peep about this great institution of yours.

We could shitcan parties and elections, pick politicians by lot and run the country with human rights reviews. It's that simple. This is how we get rid of this parasitic, predatory US police state.

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/USindex.aspx

https://ushrnetwork.org/news/111/100/Upcoming-Universal-Periodic-Review-Hold-the-US-Accountable-to-its-Human-Rights-Obligations

https://www.upr-info.org/en/review/United-States

Realist , says: October 2, 2020 at 2:05 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

All I can say is: Welcome to "Mystery Babylon"; where the "government" has become an image of the beast.

Yes, the Deep State is in total control.

Pascal , says: October 2, 2020 at 2:16 pm GMT

If there's a constant in history, it's that politicians never talk about the things that matter to people because the solutions to the problems are too divisive – apart from the fact that they're clueless anyway beyond a few barfly level notions.
They'd rather concentrate on looks.
In France, in 1981, socialist candidate François Mitterrand came up with 120 propositions that nobody read but his campaign adviser, Jacques Séguéla, a publicist, thought he looked like a vampire and said to him: "If you don't have your canines filed down, you'll always inspire distrust. You'll never get elected to the presidency with such a set of teeth".
So he had his canines filed down.

TG , says: October 2, 2020 at 2:25 pm GMT

Because it's SYSTEMIC RACISM! That is the source of all of our problems.

And the thing about systemic racism is that it's invisible, the only way to fight it is to scream loudly about how bad it is, bend the knee when the national anthem is being played, and give your nice local diversity officer a raise and a corner office. Jobs? Healthcare? That just won't work, so don't even think about it.

Antiwar7 , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:36 pm GMT

Both main parties in the US (Republican and Democrat) are fundamentally controlled by billionaires and corporations (billionaire robots), so they have no interest in helping the little people.

Certain elements benefit from the broken medical system in the US. Ditto for offshoring jobs, fighting wars with and selling expensive weapons, ruining the environment, and welcoming third world immigration.

And the same forces control the media (MSM and big tech) which influences greatly what people see and what they care about, get emotional about.

That's why they won't be addressed.

Unless people wake up to the above.

How to get that to happen?

Carlton Meyer , says: Website October 2, 2020 at 6:42 pm GMT

There was no discussion of the destruction of Syria, which was spared when Russia intervened. If Wallace wanted to corner Trump, he could have mentioned that Trump said American troops would be withdrawn from Syria several times, but it never happened. Why? And what would Biden say if asked if American troops should leave Syria and Iraq?

https://www.youtube.com/embed/P512QBpjoq4?feature=oembed

Dutch Boy , says: October 2, 2020 at 7:18 pm GMT

Whatever health care system the Dems concoct will crash and burn because they will make the care available to illegal aliens while ceasing to control the influx of same.

[Oct 06, 2020] Max Boot is pro-Zionism and anti-White nationalism, forgetting that Zionism is a far right nationalist ideology

Oct 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

One morning a couple of years ago I received an urgent email from a moderately prominent libertarian figure strongly focused on antiwar issues. He warned me that our publication had been branded a "White Supremacist website" by the Washington Post , and urged me to immediately respond, perhaps by demanding a formal retraction or even taking legal action lest we be destroyed by that totally unfair accusation.

When I looked into the matter, my own perspective was rather different. Apparently Max Boot, one of the more agitated Jewish Neocons, had written a column fiercely denouncing some recent criticism of pro-Israel policies that Philip Giraldi had published in our webzine, and the "White Supremacist" slur was merely his crude means of demonizing the author's views for those of his readers who might be less than wholeheartedly enthusiastic about Benjamin Netanyahu and his policies.

After pointing this out to my correspondent, I also noted that a good 10% or more of our writers were probably "White Nationalists," and perhaps a few of them might even arguably be labeled "White Supremacists." So although Boot's description of our website was certainly wrong, it was probably less wrong than the vast majority of his other writing, which was typically focused on American military policy and the Middle East.

Our webzine is quite unusual in its willingness to feature a smattering of writers who provide a White Nationalist perspective. Such individuals are almost totally excluded from other online publications, except for those marginalized websites devoted to their ideas, which often tend to focus on such topics and related issues to the near exclusion of anything else. However, I believe that maintaining this sort of ideological quarantine or "ghettoization" greatly diminishes the ability to understand many important aspects of our world.

[Oct 06, 2020] What's at stake in the Armenia-Azerbaijan chessboard by Pepe Escobar

Oct 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

Yevardian , says: October 2, 2020 at 1:23 am GMT

And I suspect that Azerbaijan will do no harm to the Armenian civilians that stay. They'll be model liberators. And they'll take time to bring back Azerbaijani civilians (refugees/IDPs) to their homes, especially in areas that would become mixed as a result of return."

I never read such rubbish in my life.

AJ , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:02 am GMT
@Yevardian

Agreed, this is rubbish. "Mr. C" – assuming someone like this even exists, is either terribly misinformed or an outright liar. Basically, if we follow Escobar's logic, Armenian's are making a mistake by not agreeing to surrender their lives to the peace loving and rather humanistic dictatorship of Azerbaijan. While he touches on some relevant points, overall, Escobar has not done his homework and has come up with quite a bit of drivel.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Website October 2, 2020 at 3:39 am GMT

Pepe, you didn't mention the Armenian Genocide, the Greek Genocide, the Assyrian Genocide, all perpetrated by Turkey.

Why not? Would the Azeris, all Turks, be different? You say the Azeris if they won, Turks, would treat the Armenian population nicely. Huh?

I remember from Runciman's book on the First Crusade that the Turks had already taken over much of Anatolia but he seems to mention Armenians at every turn (from memory -- don't have the book handy).

My impression is that before the Genocide the Armenians were all over Anatolia. There was a narrow coastal strip at the western end that was historically part of Greece, and many different peoples of Asia Minor are mentioned in the NT, but they arguably were all Armenians, making the Armenians the indigenous people of Anatolia.

How is it that Turkey was allowed to keep part of Europe after WWI when they were losers? And did they keep faith? Is the current St Sophia turmoil the norm of Turkish good faith?

Time for all the Turks to get out of Anatolia, give it back to Armenia, and head for Azerbigan.

Aking , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:23 am GMT

Good article. What a web of " frenemies"

Anon [166] Disclaimer , says: October 2, 2020 at 6:00 am GMT
@Yevardian having been disciplined for some years now is, once again, at the throat of the west. Europe spent millions of lives and huge resources throwing the Moors out last time. If they don't take a stand and support Armenia they may very well have to do it again. As far as the mythical Mr C is concerned he comes across, to me, as yet another apologist for the Religion of Peace. Obviously cucked NATO will not help Armenia, they have neither the intestinal fortitude nor the will, so it will be left to Russia and the Visigrad nations, in the mean time Turkey is attempting to take Greek territory, Syrian territory, Libyan territory and anything else that it can get it's mitts on and the West does absolutely nothing. This will not end well.
true.enough , says: October 2, 2020 at 7:20 am GMT

I found this piece difficult to read: lots of data and suppositions scattered about.

Ankara, oh Ankara! Erdogan is overstretched, that's a fact.

Wielgus , says: October 2, 2020 at 7:26 am GMT
@Yevardian

I think few Armenian civilians will take the chance but I very much doubt Azerbaijanis will be "model liberators". The new Azerbaijani state was born from the Sumgait and Baku pogroms. I also don't think they will delay in moving Azeris into areas formerly inhabited by Armenians – their role model Erdoğan has been trying to change facts on the ground by moving ethnic Turks into Kurdish areas in his own country.

Tommy Thompson , says: October 2, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse endeavor, even if they were the majority, though most accounts say they were 40%.

I would strongly urge the Armenians to get off their nationalist high horse and solve the problem diplomatically and learn to live with their neighbors. Super nationalism is a dangerous and fake mantra that usually leads to disaster. My understanding was that the Azeris and Armenians always got along before this debacle. They should try to work out things and get back to a their original multi-cultural paradigm, that is living side by side instead of fighting and dying over territory and national flags. Live is short and when we pass to the other side you dont carry your flag with you.

Rahan , says: October 2, 2020 at 11:48 am GMT

The Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh declared independence in 1991: but that was not recognized by the "international community"

Just to throw in quickly that if Kosovo is "recognized", then bleeding Karabakh should also long since have been recognized. Especially since the Armenians have an actual holocaust in their 20th century past.

reezy , says: October 2, 2020 at 2:43 pm GMT
@Anon

I believe that it was Winston Churchill who said that the Turk was either at your feet or at your throat

Actually he said that about the Germans. Though it sounds like one of those patronizing aphorisms that can easily apply to anyone.

Lin , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT

Sabre dance–A famous piece of Armenian music composed by Khachaturian

https://www.youtube.com/embed/aH2Gpdr-WrA?feature=oembed

Aking , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:35 pm GMT
@Rahan

So, seems like the way to get sympathy to rob territory is to make full use of any "genocide" one had suffered as excuse . worked very well ( in fact, spectacularly well) so faR with the Chosen ones .

Showmethereal , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:19 pm GMT

Well i admittedly dont know enough about the situation to try to critique this piece as some of the other comments on here But i am skeptical about Armenia and their stated intent. If it is reallly about protecting an ethnic group – then why not offer them citizenship to move into your territory??? That would lead me to believe it is more about land and resources

Showmethereal , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:23 pm GMT
@true.enough

Yeah i dont know the nitty gritty in this conflict – but i do agree Edrogan seems to be biting off more than he can chew He has too many pots on the fire it seems. Kurds – Qatar/Saudis – Libya – Syria – Greece – Cyprus – and now this..?

Derer , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:33 pm GMT

Aside from refusing to participate against their Muslim cousins (Afghanistan, Libya), Turkey is using NATO doctrine quite effectively. It is a useful bullet prove vest for Erdogan. The Brussels morons will be sorry for not expelling Turkey from their military club long time ago.

SZ , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:37 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse driven to the Syrian desert AFTER some of them had aligned with the Russians who were about to invade eastern Anatolia in 1915. Similarly, most of Crimean Tatars were expelled from Crimea AFTER some of them had aligned with the invading Germans in 1941. As another comparison, American-Japanese living at the Pacific coast were banished to camps in the interior AFTER the Japanese army had attacked Pearl Harbor and not before.
When a group of people kill or drive out another group it's usually not for the fun of it but rather due to necessities of survival, whatever evil that might require at that particular time depending on the particular circumstances.
Surprised , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:50 pm GMT

It would be interesting to read a scholarly exposition on what the USSR and governments in Eastern Europe proper did or did not do to educate people away from their ancient hatreds, and why whatever they did do appears not to have been particularly successful. Or was it mostly successful and the hatreds were much more intense before 1917?

Tommy Thompson , says: October 2, 2020 at 8:04 pm GMT
@SZ

The ethnic cleansing of the Armenians was pretty bloody and barbaric and was meant as a public spectacle for reasons that are argued about till today.

It was well recorded by the inhabitants of Syria.

Uprising against your rulers does not give the rulers right to carry out genocide or ethnic cleansing in any case.

Anonymous [334] Disclaimer , says: October 3, 2020 at 2:52 am GMT

The entire Jewish American lobby and Israel are on Azerbaijan's side and anti-Armenian, just as when they were working with Turkey to deny the Armenian genocide.

Israel has also sold billions of dollars of weapons to Azerbaijan which the latter is using against Armenians. Israel gets oil from Azerbaijan

Of course, Azerbaijan and Turkey have imported jihadists from Syria and Libya to fight Christian Armenians now.

Apparently, Pepe, you and the Jewish lobby, Israel, Turkey, and the jihadists are on the same side.

Congratulations.

P.S. It would take a hundred pages to list all the factual errors you made. For example, Armenians were still the clear majority in Artsakh/Karabagh in 1988 and 1991. Armenians there had been grossly mistreated by Azerbaijan for decades.

The fighting occurred in the late 1980s only because Azerbaijan, backed by the Russian military, killed and harrassed Armenians. The Azeris also committed massacres of Armenians who were living in Baku and Sumgait in the late 1980s.

Stalin also placed Nakhichevan, an Armenian territory, inside Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan kicked out every Armenian from Nakhichevan. Azerbaijan was doing that to Artsakh/Karabagh too.

No wonder Artsakh voted to be independent from Azerbaijan, something you don't want to understand.
Better luck next time trying to fool readers, Pepe.

Felix Keverich , says: October 3, 2020 at 6:46 am GMT

The key fact remains that as long as Armenia proper is not attacked by Azerbaijan, Russia will not apply the CSTO treaty and step in. Erdogan knows this is his red line. Moscow has all it takes to put him in serious trouble – as in shutting off gas supplies to Turkey.

Russia isn't going to shut off gas to Turkey. Russia never does that (shutting off gas). It's a Western canard.

Russia could, however, impose a no-fly-zone over Georgia, effectively blocking resupply and reinforcements to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is almost completely surrounded by Russian allies and bases. They rely on Georgia for military transit.

Druid , says: October 3, 2020 at 7:29 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

Ignorant post. Armenian nationalist were active in Russia prior to ww1, then supported Russian entrance into Turkish territory because they shared a religion. They stabbed the ottomans , of which they were a big part, in the back. The young Turks , who were actually donmeh jews, had them marched off to Syria and lebanon, etc, causing many deaths! The Armenian is still causing trouble for the Turks. They sided with the mongols in their battles against the Muslims, along wit the Georgians, repeatedly. More to a small story

anon [154] Disclaimer , says: October 3, 2020 at 11:51 pm GMT

What's going to happen to USA? The poverty and racial intolerance ,both seem to be undermining the stability and the ideological integrity of the country . I see many states emerging from the body of America.But the problems will not be resolved . It might just like like Caucasian territory or Balkan .

Anonymous [231] Disclaimer , says: October 4, 2020 at 3:25 am GMT
@Yevardian

Pepe appears to be on the side of Azerbaijan, and thus also on the side of Turkey, Israel, the Jewish lobby, and jihadists.

Nice company.

vot tak , says: October 4, 2020 at 11:58 pm GMT

Reading this, my suspicion is this "mr. c" is part of the western disinformation machine, probably operating for the israelis.

Semiogogue , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:47 am GMT

1. BTC is described as 'bypassing Iran'. One could easily argue it also bypasses *Russia* . Perhaps that's what made it necessary for Soros & others to peel Georgia off from Russian control back in the day? Look how Russia responded by recapturing the Georgian Military Highway (South Ossetia).

2. Look in general at how Russia is willing to give up huge areas of territory so long as she keeps key strategic points of control: South Ossetia, Crimea, Transnistria, Abkhazia and Armenia. Smell the coffee.

3. 2. 'Mr. C' is quick to mention Baku/Ankara joint exercises in August, but fails to mention Kavkas 2020 exercises led by Russia. Uh duh.

4. 'Mr. C' seems to ignore the fact that Armenia couldn't have taken that territory in first place, or kept it, w/out Russian assistance. And idea 'Russia can do nothing' is absurd. As is the idea that Russia can't supply Armenia because there's no land connection. Did the allies have any problem keeping West Berlin supplied by air? Of course not. All nonsense.

5. The idea that there is a 'Russia/Turkey' strategic partnership is also silly. Where is this partnership? Turkey buying S-400s? So what? Are they in partnership in Syria? In Libya? No. So why would they be in N-K?

6. Weird. No mention of China and it's growing relationship with Turkey. This probably tells you all you need to know about the author. Unless of course the author is just a fool, which is also possible.

Jivinski , says: October 5, 2020 at 4:04 am GMT

"Yet even before the collapse the Azerbaijani Army and Armenian independentists were already at war (1988-1994), which yielded a grim balance of 30,000 dead and roughly a million wounded."

This is a wounded-to-killed ratio of thirty-three to one. Doesn't make sense.

Majority of One , says: October 5, 2020 at 4:35 am GMT

Were Russia to be as devious and underhanded as the puppet regime in the Di$trict of Corruption, they would arrange for an overthrow of the present NATO/EU/U$ regime in Yerevan. With those bastards out of the way and Armenia no longer playing double jeopardy, it might be possible for a new Orthodox oriented Armenian government to come to some sort of arrangement with Baku.

At the same time, perhaps Syrian spetsnaz units could practice some infiltration tactics into Turkish semi-occupied "greater" Idlib and Ghurka style, behead a few Turkish officers running the show there.

"Sultan" Erdogan is playing loose and wild with his shattering economy and massive military. It is high time he was given a black-eye–one that would cause him to lose face among his own countrymen.

Mactoul , says: October 5, 2020 at 5:08 am GMT
@SZ

How many of the Japanese-American deportees died as consequence of deportation vs how many Armenians that died as consequence of their deportation.

It is not deportation that is alleged to be the Turkish crime but genocide. Please keep it mind.

Yukon Jack , says: October 5, 2020 at 5:16 am GMT

This is my educated guess, the Anglo-Zionists led by Rothschild and Netanayahu destablize the oil in the Middle East to keep their prices of oil in USD above 100 $/barrel

They have also blown up oil derricks in the North Sea, shut down Iranian and Iraq and Syria oil production. The game is clear, low oil prices are being met with wiping out the competition.

And causing hell in Iran and Venezueala. Back in 1954 Operation Ajax took out Mossadeq and installed the Shah – puppet of big oil. Before it was BP it was the Persian Gulf Oil Co. BP is owned mostly by the crown.

Trump's secretary of state was Rex Tillerson CEO Exxon just like GW Bush picked Condoleeza Rice CEO Chevron to be his national security advisor.

The Israel angle is to get Iran and to goad Russia into war with the USA, the eventually goal is that USA-Russia-China are reduced while Jews rule the world from Jerusalem.

How much you wanna bet Bibi Satanyahu has a hand in this war? And Evangelical Christians will support Israel even if this war kills lots of Armenian Christians just like in Syria.

Since this war in on Russia's doorstep Putin an Lavrov will try negotiations first then what will they do next. Putin has vowed the war will never come to Russia which means Russia will enter the theater on the anti-Zionist side.

Have you noticed every state within a few hundred miles of Israel is being torched and the natives driven out?

Ghali , says: October 5, 2020 at 6:17 am GMT

Back again to Pepe Escobar's distortions of reality. Nagorno-Karabakh is an Armenian-occupied Azerbaijani territory. In fact, no country in the world recognises it as an "Independent" as Escobar likes to mislead us. Armenia should do the right thing and withdraw its forces, including foreign militants from there. Like Israel, Armenia is playing the role of a victim of a "holocaust".

GMC , says: October 5, 2020 at 7:20 am GMT

Considering that the 2nd largest US/NWO Embassy in the World is in Armenia – a country of 2.9 million people, and that the new President was put in power by the West – the end game is to continue to surround Russia, screw up the New Silk Road, and be at Iran's back door too. As said before , the domestic USA can totally look like the USSR in the 90s, but the NWO Foreign policy money is 100% – guaranteed. What do all those thousands of workers in that huge Embassy compound do ?

GMC , says: October 5, 2020 at 7:30 am GMT
@Tommy Thompson

Actually, once the Armenians were genocided , the Jewish bankers were the big shots left in Turkey. H Morgenthau, our Turkish ambassador along with being jewish himself, wrote about it in his reports. The Game hasn't changed much – it stays the same. Thanks.

J , says: October 5, 2020 at 7:44 am GMT

About a third of Iran's population is Azeri. Should they develop interest in the conflict, Iran may become involved. That would align Turkey and Iran vs Russia. That would be something.

ARemo , says: October 5, 2020 at 8:48 am GMT
@Yevardian

Damn right. We already have experience what happens when Turks get control of Christian Armenians – systematic gang rapes and death marches are the rule of the day. Turks are animals and letting them control any portion of Armenia is basically turning that place into a concentration camp.

Ming Shih-tsung , says: October 5, 2020 at 10:58 am GMT
@Yevardian

"Mr. C" probably stands for Cemal, given how biased he is.

anon [229] Disclaimer , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:01 pm GMT
@Yukon Jack Pahlavi ruled post 1953.

Fact: 1979 was the year that "big oil" LEGAL contracts were to expire and the "puppet" Shah had threatened as early as 1973 (when he was instrumental in making OPEC a powerful entity) that in 1979 Iran "would sell Iranian Oil to any buyer, at market prices".

Fact: Iran, in 1978 produced 6 million barrels per day. It has never been permitted to reach those levels again.

Fact: Chinese, Indian, Syrian, Venezuelan, and God knows who else, all projects of the Global Cabal have been getting Iranian Oil (under their engineered boxing of Iranian nation) at levels that very likely are equal if not LOWER than the terms the Qajar idiots gave the insatiablely greedy and slimey English.

Alfred , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:05 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse Genocide, all perpetrated by Turkey.

And you did not mention that the only quarters of Smyrna/Izmir that were not torched in a fire in 1922 were the Jewish and Turkish quarters – what a surprise! An antecedent to 9/11. Here is the Jewpedia hiding the real story – as usual.

The Armenian and Greek quarters were destroyed and the Jews got a monopoly on the commerce. Done deal!

Great fire of Smyrna

Wielgus , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:09 pm GMT
@GMC

If the "colour revolution" assumptions were in force, there would be a host of denunciations of Azerbaijan and Turkey (the latter perhaps the real prime mover in this) by the USA and EU etc. There aren't. The USA and EU may even tacitly support the Azerbaijanis, perhaps they hope the Russians and Iranians will become entangled in this affair and so forth.

Ugetit , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:14 pm GMT
@vot tak

my suspicion is this "mr. c" is part of the western disinformation machine, probably operating for the israelis.

While I know nothing about the situation, after reading the article and the mostly excellent comments, I suspect your suspicion is correct.

Alfred , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:38 pm GMT

I have a suggestion.

How about swapping Nagorno-Karabakh for North Cyprus. I am sure the Greeks would be very happy to live with the Armenians. But the Sultan's dreams of owning the Eastern Mediterranean would come to naught.

anon [137] Disclaimer , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:45 pm GMT
@Lin

I've always associated that piece with the circus not knowing the title or its origin.

Stebbing Heuer , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:50 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Stalin did nasty things like that to keep the republics feuding with each other rather than pushing back against Moscow. The mixed-up borders of the 'stans, further east, are testament to this. Fergana Valley?

Divide and rule. Still costing lives in pointless wars almost 100 years later.

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:07 pm GMT

At stake is the very existence of the Armenian people. Turkey is trying to finish what remains of them after the genocide last century. Both Erdoghan and Aliev have stated, that they want a "final solution" to the "Armenian problem".

It's an existential battle for the Armenians.

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT
@Yevardian

We all know what they did to the Armenians in 1915.

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:11 pm GMT
@Alfred

Exactly. The history of Turkey since 1880-s is full of ethnic cleansings and genocides of the non-muslim people such as Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians.

MLK , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT

My thanks to Escobar for taking on a subject rather obviously not susceptible to 2,700 word essays, along with attention worthy links.

His biases are not my own but he's thoughtful and certainly doesn't hide them.

In this and so many other incidents we can see how thoroughly Trump has moved the American ship of state despite the relentless efforts of foreign and domestic resistance to neutralize America First and destroy him.

It's really quite something the way Obama's presidency in all its disastrous fullness has been memory-holed. The defense of it being that it merely extended Bush's world-historical incompetence and malefactions.

Could you have turned US unipolarity following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact into a "moment" if you tried? I couldn't.

You will be way ahead of most everyone if you get your mind around that and the geopolitical sad story that is CCP China winning the post-Cold War quarter-century hands down.

We inevitably come back to the point that the whole drama can be interpreted from the perspective of a NATO geopolitical hit against Russia – according to quite a few analyses circulating at the Duma.

Ukraine is an absolute black hole. There's the Belarus impasse. Covid-19. The Navalny circus. The "threat" to Nord Stream-2.

To pull Russia back into the Armenia-Azerbaijan drama means turning Moscow's attention towards the Caucasus . . .

I confess that I get no end of enjoyment over bellyaching on behalf of those powers the Obama administration was turning the world over to. Nord Stream II was merely the down payment on Russia's assistance/acquiescence in throwing the electron to Hillary, with the sky the limit for China, Russia and Iran once Democrats and their foreign allies had neutralized free and fair elections.

Now all of these powers must deal with a real POTUS who asks "What have you done for the US lately?"

The USG and Russia have cooperated where geopolitical interests align. More will follow once Trump takes the oath again. As I've explained previously, despite its high-risk position in the Resistance matrix, Russia/Putin have (unsurprisingly, to me) acted skillfully and with circumspection.

The same cannot be said for Iran. Nor China, particularly since the end of last year.

Ashino Wolf Sushanti , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT

https://www.putin-today.ru/archives/109463
https://vz.ru
Михаил Мошкин

Why Russia needs Azerbaijan !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The aggravation of the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh has raised a number of questions. In particular, why Moscow is in no hurry to stand up for Armenia and why it does not sharply criticize
Azerbaijan. The answer is that Moscow and Baku have very close relations, and not only economic relations. So what is the value and irreplaceability of Azerbaijan for Russia?

[MORE]
Z-man , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:52 pm GMT

Border and population changes are in order. A quarter of N-K goes back to Azerbaijan and the rest closer to Armenia proper plus the capital city goes to Armenia with a 50 mile wide band connecting it with the rest of Armenia. The Azeris get the rest of their lands now occupied by the Armenians. Will it happen? Probably not, just look at Kosovo..

God's Fool , says: October 5, 2020 at 2:05 pm GMT

There is a province between Ngorno Karabakh and Armenia proper of roughly of the same size belonging to Azerbaijan, so why not just exchange it with each other to avoid further conflict and bloodshed?

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT
@God's Fool

There is no guarantee that Turkey will not try to then eliminate whatever remains of Armenia.

Remember, Turkey genocided Armenians and wiped out close to 80% of them in 1915 through 1922. Armenian populated areas stretched from what is now Armenia until the shores of Eastern Mediterranean. The only thing that is left of it is Kessab in modern day Syria.

Majority of One , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:14 pm GMT
@Ghali nial borders are fake, false and fraudulent, whether in Asia or Africa. Over time, justice will prevail and borders will reflect the ethno-national composition of its long-term inhabitants.

That said, the current regime in Yerevan needs to be overthrown, as it was established in conjunction with the interests of the Cabal/Nato and their various puppet regimes. Armenia is the oldest Orthodox Christian nation in the world and was severely genocided by the Donmeh covert Jewish Masons who called themselves the "Young Turks" who were led by Enver Pasha.

By the way, who are you, Ghali? Do you have a dog in the fight? Are you connected with an intel agency?

anaccount , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT

Excellent article, normally I pass over Pepe for the naughty articles on Unz but I might have to take another look.

My only critique is that the article feels pro-Azeri but that's balanced with an informative description how this started in July, including an accurate appraisal of Turkish behavior.

I'm not Azeri or Armenian so I didn't have a dog in this fight until I noticed Israel's support for Azerbaijan. It's nothing personal, I have only one hate.

Shaman911 , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:27 pm GMT

Jewish Bankers shifting profits to other Jewish bankers. Funding all sides and profiting from the mass graves again. 5000 years and nothing has changed.

GMC , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:36 pm GMT
@Wielgus

The Turks are the US Army in this – with their proxy armies sent to help the Azerbaijanis, just like the US Army /Israelis and their proxies Isis, al Nusra, al Qaeda etc. in Syria. The US and their 6000 employees at the Embassy, don't have to say anything – they back both sides – just like the Zionists do – in the US political parties. Things don't change , Tactics don't change. Thanks.

A.R. , says: October 5, 2020 at 4:30 pm GMT
@Majority of One

You are asking him if he has a dog in this fight? What about yourself? You very clearly have a dog in this fight yourself, haven`t you?
Try to cut down on the hypocrasy, why don`t you, and at the same time maybe moderate your "holier than thou" attitude.

[Oct 05, 2020] What's at stake in the Armenia-Azerbaijan chessboard

Notable quotes:
"... "the EU and Russia find common cause to limit Azerbaijani gains (in large part because Erdogan is no one's favorite guy, not just because of this but because of the Eastern Med, Syria, Libya)." ..."
"... "Iran favors Armenia, which is counter-intuitive at first sight. So the Iranians may help the Russians out (funneling supplies), but on the other hand they have a good relationship with Turkey, especially in the oil and gas smuggling business. And if they get too overt in their support, Trump has a casus belli to get involved and the Europeans may not like to end up on the same side as the Russians and the Iranians. It just looks bad. And the Europeans hate to look bad." ..."
Oct 05, 2020 | unz.com

It's important to remember that there was no "Azerbaijan" nation-state until the early 1920s. Historically, Azerbaijan is a territory in northern Iran. Azeris are very well integrated within the Islamic Republic. So the Republic of Azerbaijan actually borrowed its name from their Iranian neighbors. In ancient history, the territory of the new 20 th century republic was known as Atropatene, and Aturpakatan before the advent of Islam.

How the equation changed

Baku's main argument is that Armenia is blocking a contiguous Azerbaijani nation, as a look in the map shows us that southwest Azerbaijan is de facto split all the way to the Iranian border.

And that plunges us necessarily into deep background. To clarify matters, there could not be a more reliable guide than a top Caucasus think tank expert who shared his analysis with me by email, but is insistent on "no attribution". Let's call him Mr. C.

Mr. C notes that, "for decades, the equation remained the same and the variables in the equation remained the same, more or less. This was the case notwithstanding the fact that Armenia is an unstable democracy in transition and Azerbaijan had much more continuity at the top."

We should all be aware that "Azerbaijan lost territory right at the beginning of the restoration of its statehood, when it was basically a failed state run by armchair nationalist amateurs [before Heydar Aliyev, Ilham's father, came to power]. And Armenia was a mess, too but less so when you take into consideration that it had strong Russian support and Azerbaijan had no one. Back in the day, Turkey was still a secular state with a military that looked West and took its NATO membership seriously. Since then, Azerbaijan has built up its economy and increased its population. So it kept getting stronger. But its military was still underperforming."

That slowly started to change in 2020: "Basically, in the past few months you've seen incremental increases in the intensity of near daily ceasefire violations (the near-daily violations are nothing new: they've been going on for years). So this blew up in July and there was a shooting war for a few days. Then everyone calmed down again."

All this time, something important was developing in the background: Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who came to power in May 2018, and Aliyev started to talk: "The Azerbaijani side thought this indicated Armenia was ready for compromise (this all started when Armenia had a sort of revolution, with the new PM coming in with a popular mandate to clean house domestically). For whatever reason, it ended up not happening."

What happened in fact was the July shooting war.

Don't forget Pipelineistan

Armenian PM Pashinyan could be described as a liberal globalist. The majority of his political team is pro-NATO. Pashinyan went all guns blazing against former Armenian President (1998- 2008) Robert Kocharian, who before that happened to be, crucially, the de facto President of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Kocharian, who spent years in Russia and is close to President Putin, was charged with a nebulous attempt at "overthrowing the constitutional order". Pashinyan tried to land him in jail. But even more crucial is the fact that Pashinyan refused to follow a plan elaborated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to finally settle the Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh mess.

In the current fog of war, things are even messier. Mr. C stresses two points: "First, Armenia asked for CSTO protection and got bitch slapped, hard and in public; second, Armenia threatened to bomb the oil and gas pipelines in Azerbaijan (there are several, they all run parallel, and they supply not just Georgia and Turkey but now the Balkans and Italy). With regards to the latter, Azerbaijan basically said: if you do that, we'll bomb your nuclear reactor."

The Pipelineistan angle is indeed crucial: for years I have followed on Asia Times these myriad, interlocking oil and gas soap operas, especially the BTC (Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan), conceived by Zbigniew Brzezinski to bypass Iran. I was even "arrested" by a BP 4X4 when I was tracking the pipeline on a parallel side road out of the massive Sangachal terminal: that proved British Petroleum was in practice the real boss, not the Azerbaijani government.

In sum, now we have reached the point where, according to Mr. C,

"Armenia's saber rattling got more aggressive." Reasons, on the Armenian side, seem to be mostly domestic: terrible handling of Covid-19 (in contrast to Azerbaijan), and the dire state of the economy. So, says Mr. C, we came to a toxic concourse of circumstances: Armenia deflected from its problems by being tough on Azerbaijan, while Azerbaijan just had had enough.

It's always about Turkey

Anyway one looks at the Armenia-Azerbaijan drama, the key destabilizing factor is now Turkey.

Mr. C notes how, "throughout the summer, the quality of the Turkish-Azerbaijani military exercises increased (both prior to July events and subsequently). The Azerbaijani military got a lot better. Also, since the fourth quarter of 2019 the President of Azerbaijan has been getting rid of the (perceived) pro-Russian elements in positions of power." See, for instance, here .

There's no way to confirm it either with Moscow or Ankara, but Mr. C advances what President Erdogan may have told the Russians: "We'll go into Armenia directly if a) Azerbaijan starts to lose, b) Russia goes in or accepts CSTO to be invoked or something along those lines, or c) Armenia goes after the pipelines. All are reasonable red lines for the Turks, especially when you factor in the fact that they don't like the Armenians very much and that they consider the Azerbaijanis brothers."

It's crucial to remember that in August, Baku and Ankara held two weeks of joint air and land military exercises. Baku has bought advanced drones from both Turkey and Israel. There's no smokin' gun, at least not yet, but Ankara may have hired up to 4,000 Salafi-jihadis in Syria to fight -- wait for it -- in favor of Shi'ite-majority Azerbaijan, proving once again that "jihadism" is all about making a quick buck.

The United Armenian Information Center, as well as the Kurdish Afrin Post, have stated that Ankara opened two recruitment centers -- in Afrin schools -- for mercenaries. Apparently this has been a quite popular move because Ankara slashed salaries for Syrian mercenaries shipped to Libya.

There's an extra angle that is deeply worrying not only for Russia but also for Central Asia. According to the former Foreign Minister of Nagorno-Karabakh, Ambassador Extraordinary Arman Melikyan, mercenaries using Azeri IDs issued in Baku may be able to infiltrate Dagestan and Chechnya and, via the Caspian, reach Atyrau in Kazakhstan, from where they can easily reach Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.

That's the ultimate nightmare of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) -- shared by Russia, China and the Central Asian "stans": a jihadi land -- and (Caspian) sea -- bridge from the Caucasus all the way to Central Asia, and even Xinjiang.

What's the point of this war?

So what happens next? A nearly insurmountable impasse, as Mr. C outlines it:

1. "The peace talks are going nowhere because Armenia is refusing to budge (to withdraw from occupying Nagorno-Karabakh plus 7 surrounding regions in phases or all at once, with the usual guarantees for civilians, even settlers -- note that when they went in in the early 1990s they cleansed those lands of literally all Azerbaijanis, something like between 700,000 and 1 million people)."

2. Aliyev was under the impression that Pashinyan "was willing to compromise and began preparing his people and then looked like someone with egg on his face when it didn't happen."

3. "Turkey has made it crystal clear it will support Azerbaijan unconditionally, and has matched those words with deeds."

4. "In such circumstances, Russia got outplayed -- in the sense that they had been able to play off Armenia against Azerbaijan and vice versa, quite successfully, helping to mediate talks that went nowhere, preserving the status quo that effectively favored Armenia."

And that brings us to the crucial question. What's the point of this war?

Mr. C: "It is either to conquer as much as possible before the "international community" [in this case, the UNSC] calls for / demands a ceasefire or to do so as an impetus for re-starting talks that actually lead to progress. In either scenario, Azerbaijan will end up with gains and Armenia with losses. How much and under what circumstances (the status and question of Nagorno-Karabakh is distinct from the status and question of the Armenian occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh) is unknown: i.e. on the field of battle or the negotiating table or a combo of both. However this turns out, at a minimum Azerbaijan will get to keep what it liberated in battle. This will be the new starting point. And I suspect that Azerbaijan will do no harm to the Armenian civilians that stay. They'll be model liberators. And they'll take time to bring back Azerbaijani civilians (refugees/IDPs) to their homes, especially in areas that would become mixed as a result of return."

So what can Moscow do under these circumstances? Not much,

"except to go into Azerbaijan proper, which they won't do (there's no land border between Russia and Armenia; so although Russia has a military base in Armenia with one or more thousand troops, they can't just supply Armenia with guns and troops at will, given the geography)."

Crucially, Moscow privileges the strategic partnership with Armenia -- which is a member of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) -- while meticulously monitoring each and every NATO-member Turkey's movement: after all, they are already in opposing sides in both Libya and Syria.

So, to put it mildly, Moscow is walking on a geopolitical razor's edge. Russia needs to exercise restraint and invest in a carefully calibrated balancing act between Armenia and Azerbaijan; must preserve the Russia-Turkey strategic partnership; and must be alert to all, possible US Divide and Rule tactics.

Inside Erdogan's war

So in the end this would be yet another Erdogan war?

The inescapable Follow the Money analysis would tells us, yes. The Turkish economy is an absolute mess, with high inflation and a depreciating currency. Baku has a wealth of oil-gas funds that could become readily available -- adding to Ankara's dream of turning Turkey also into an energy supplier.

Mr. C adds that anchoring Turkey in Azerbaijan would lead to "the creation of full-fledged Turkish military bases and the inclusion of Azerbaijan in the Turkish orbit of influence (the "two countries -- one nation" thesis, in which Turkey assumes supremacy) within the framework of neo-Ottomanism and Turkey's leadership in the Turkic-speaking world."

Add to it the all-important NATO angle. Mr. C essentially sees it as Erdogan, enabled by Washington, about to make a NATO push to the east while establishing that immensely dangerous jihadi channel into Russia: "This is no local adventure by Erdogan. I understand that Azerbaijan is largely Shi'ite Islam and that will complicate things but not render his adventure impossible."

This totally ties in with a notorious RAND report that explicitly details how "the United States could try to induce Armenia to break with Russia" and "encourage Armenia to move fully into the NATO orbit."

It's beyond obvious that Moscow is observing all these variables with extreme care. That is reflected, for instance, in how irrepressible Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, earlier this week, has packaged a very serious diplomatic warning: "The downing of an Armenian SU-25 by a Turkish F-16, as claimed by the Ministry of Defense in Armenia, seems to complicate the situation, as Moscow, based on the Tashkent treaty, is obligated to offer military assistance to Armenia".

It's no wonder both Baku and Yerevan got the message and are firmly denying anything happened.

The key fact remains that as long as Armenia proper is not attacked by Azerbaijan, Russia will not apply the CSTO treaty and step in. Erdogan knows this is his red line. Moscow has all it takes to put him in serious trouble -- as in shutting off gas supplies to Turkey. Moscow, meanwhile, will keep helping Yerevan with intel and hardware -- flown in from Iran. Diplomacy rules -- and the ultimate target is yet another ceasefire.

Pulling Russia back in

Mr. C advances the strong possibility -- and I have heard echoes from Brussels -- that

"the EU and Russia find common cause to limit Azerbaijani gains (in large part because Erdogan is no one's favorite guy, not just because of this but because of the Eastern Med, Syria, Libya)."

That brings to the forefront the renewed importance of the UNSC in imposing a ceasefire. Washington's role at the moment is quite intriguing. Of course, Trump has more important things to do at the moment. Moreover, the Armenian diaspora in the US swings drastically pro-Democrat.

Then, to round it all up, there's the all-important Iran-Armenia relationship. Here is a forceful attempt to put it in perspective.

As Mr. C stresses, "Iran favors Armenia, which is counter-intuitive at first sight. So the Iranians may help the Russians out (funneling supplies), but on the other hand they have a good relationship with Turkey, especially in the oil and gas smuggling business. And if they get too overt in their support, Trump has a casus belli to get involved and the Europeans may not like to end up on the same side as the Russians and the Iranians. It just looks bad. And the Europeans hate to look bad."

We inevitably come back to the point that the whole drama can be interpreted from the perspective of a NATO geopolitical hit against Russia -- according to quite a few analyses circulating at the Duma.

Ukraine is an absolute black hole. There's the Belarus impasse. Covid-19. The Navalny circus. The "threat" to Nord Stream-2.

To pull Russia back into the Armenia-Azerbaijan drama means turning Moscow's attention towards the Caucasus so there's more Turkish freedom of action in other theaters -- in the Eastern Mediterranean versus Greece, in Syria, in Libya. Ankara -- foolishly -- is engaged in simultaneous wars on several fronts, and with virtually no allies.

What this means is that even more than NATO, monopolizing Russia's attention in the Caucasus most of all may be profitable for Erdogan himself. As Mr. C stresses, "in this situation, the Nagorno-Karabakh leverage/'trump card' in the hands of Turkey would be useful for negotiations with Russia."

No question: the neo-Ottoman sultan never sleeps.

Yevardian , says: October 2, 2020 at 1:23 am GMT

And I suspect that Azerbaijan will do no harm to the Armenian civilians that stay. They’ll be model liberators. And they’ll take time to bring back Azerbaijani civilians (refugees/IDPs) to their homes, especially in areas that would become mixed as a result of return.”

I never read such rubbish in my life.

AJ , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:02 am GMT
@Yevardian

Agreed, this is rubbish. “Mr. C” – assuming someone like this even exists, is either terribly misinformed or an outright liar. Basically, if we follow Escobar’s logic, Armenian’s are making a mistake by not agreeing to surrender their lives to the peace loving and rather humanistic dictatorship of Azerbaijan. While he touches on some relevant points, overall, Escobar has not done his homework and has come up with quite a bit of drivel.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: • Website October 2, 2020 at 3:39 am GMT

Pepe, you didn’t mention the Armenian Genocide, the Greek Genocide, the Assyrian Genocide, all perpetrated by Turkey.

Why not? Would the Azeris, all Turks, be different? You say the Azeris if they won, Turks, would treat the Armenian population nicely. Huh?

I remember from Runciman’s book on the First Crusade that the Turks had already taken over much of Anatolia but he seems to mention Armenians at every turn (from memory—don’t have the book handy).

My impression is that before the Genocide the Armenians were all over Anatolia. There was a narrow coastal strip at the western end that was historically part of Greece, and many different peoples of Asia Minor are mentioned in the NT, but they arguably were all Armenians, making the Armenians the indigenous people of Anatolia.

How is it that Turkey was allowed to keep part of Europe after WWI when they were losers? And did they keep faith? Is the current St Sophia turmoil the norm of Turkish good faith?

Time for all the Turks to get out of Anatolia, give it back to Armenia, and head for Azerbigan.

Aking , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:23 am GMT

Good article. What a web of “ frenemies”…

Anon [166] • Disclaimer , says: October 2, 2020 at 6:00 am GMT
@Yevardian having been disciplined for some years now is, once again, at the throat of the west. Europe spent millions of lives and huge resources throwing the Moors out last time. If they don’t take a stand and support Armenia they may very well have to do it again. As far as the mythical Mr C is concerned he comes across, to me, as yet another apologist for the Religion of Peace. Obviously cucked NATO will not help Armenia, they have neither the intestinal fortitude nor the will, so it will be left to Russia and the Visigrad nations, in the mean time Turkey is attempting to take Greek territory, Syrian territory, Libyan territory and anything else that it can get it’s mitts on and the West does absolutely nothing. This will not end well.
true.enough , says: October 2, 2020 at 7:20 am GMT

I found this piece difficult to read: lots of data and suppositions scattered about.

Ankara, oh Ankara! Erdogan is overstretched, that’s a fact.

Wielgus , says: October 2, 2020 at 7:26 am GMT
@Yevardian

I think few Armenian civilians will take the chance but I very much doubt Azerbaijanis will be “model liberators”. The new Azerbaijani state was born from the Sumgait and Baku pogroms. I also don’t think they will delay in moving Azeris into areas formerly inhabited by Armenians – their role model Erdoğan has been trying to change facts on the ground by moving ethnic Turks into Kurdish areas in his own country.

Tommy Thompson , says: October 2, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse deavor, even if they were the majority, though most accounts say they were 40%.

I would strongly urge the Armenians to get off their nationalist high horse and solve the problem diplomatically and learn to live with their neighbors. Super nationalism is a dangerous and fake mantra that usually leads to disaster. My understanding was that the Azeris and Armenians always got along before this debacle. They should try to work out things and get back to a their original multi-cultural paradigm, that is living side by side instead of fighting and dying over territory and national flags. Live is short and when we pass to the other side you dont carry your flag with you.

Rahan , says: October 2, 2020 at 11:48 am GMT

The Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh declared independence in 1991: but that was not recognized by the “international community”

Just to throw in quickly that if Kosovo is “recognized”, then bleeding Karabakh should also long since have been recognized. Especially since the Armenians have an actual holocaust in their 20th century past.

reezy , says: October 2, 2020 at 2:43 pm GMT
@Anon

I believe that it was Winston Churchill who said that the Turk was either at your feet or at your throat

Actually he said that about the Germans. Though it sounds like one of those patronizing aphorisms that can easily apply to anyone.

Lin , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT

Sabre dance–A famous piece of Armenian music composed by Khachaturian

https://www.youtube.com/embed/aH2Gpdr-WrA?feature=oembed

Aking , says: October 2, 2020 at 3:35 pm GMT
@Rahan

So, seems like the way to get sympathy to rob territory is to make full use of any “genocide” one had suffered as excuse…. worked very well ( in fact, spectacularly well) so faR with the Chosen ones….

Showmethereal , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:19 pm GMT

Well i admittedly dont know enough about the situation to try to critique this piece as some of the other comments on here… But i am skeptical about Armenia and their stated intent. If it is reallly about protecting an ethnic group – then why not offer them citizenship to move into your territory??? That would lead me to believe it is more about land and resources…

Showmethereal , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:23 pm GMT
@true.enough

Yeah i dont know the nitty gritty in this conflict – but i do agree Edrogan seems to be biting off more than he can chew… He has too many pots on the fire it seems. Kurds – Qatar/Saudis – Libya – Syria – Greece – Cyprus – and now this..?

Derer , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:33 pm GMT

Aside from refusing to participate against their Muslim cousins (Afghanistan, Libya), Turkey is using NATO doctrine quite effectively. It is a useful bullet prove vest for Erdogan. The Brussels morons will be sorry for not expelling Turkey from their military club long time ago.

SZ , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:37 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse iven to the Syrian desert AFTER some of them had aligned with the Russians who were about to invade eastern Anatolia in 1915. Similarly, most of Crimean Tatars were expelled from Crimea AFTER some of them had aligned with the invading Germans in 1941. As another comparison, American-Japanese living at the Pacific coast were banished to camps in the interior AFTER the Japanese army had attacked Pearl Harbor and not before.
When a group of people kill or drive out another group it’s usually not for the fun of it but rather due to necessities of survival, whatever evil that might require at that particular time depending on the particular circumstances.
Surprised , says: October 2, 2020 at 5:50 pm GMT

It would be interesting to read a scholarly exposition on what the USSR and governments in Eastern Europe proper did or did not do to educate people away from their ancient hatreds, and why whatever they did do appears not to have been particularly successful. Or was it mostly successful and the hatreds were much more intense before 1917?

Tommy Thompson , says: October 2, 2020 at 8:04 pm GMT
@SZ

The ethnic cleansing of the Armenians was pretty bloody and barbaric and was meant as a public spectacle for reasons that are argued about till today.

It was well recorded by the inhabitants of Syria.

Uprising against your rulers does not give the rulers right to carry out genocide or ethnic cleansing in any case.

Anonymous [334] • Disclaimer , says: October 3, 2020 at 2:52 am GMT

The entire Jewish American lobby and Israel are on Azerbaijan’s side and anti-Armenian, just as when they were working with Turkey to deny the Armenian genocide.

Israel has also sold billions of dollars of weapons to Azerbaijan which the latter is using against Armenians. Israel gets oil from Azerbaijan

Of course, Azerbaijan and Turkey have imported jihadists from Syria and Libya to fight Christian Armenians now.

Apparently, Pepe, you and the Jewish lobby, Israel, Turkey, and the jihadists are on the same side.

Congratulations.

P.S. It would take a hundred pages to list all the factual errors you made. For example, Armenians were still the clear majority in Artsakh/Karabagh in 1988 and 1991. Armenians there had been grossly mistreated by Azerbaijan for decades.

The fighting occurred in the late 1980s only because Azerbaijan, backed by the Russian military, killed and harrassed Armenians. The Azeris also committed massacres of Armenians who were living in Baku and Sumgait in the late 1980s.

Stalin also placed Nakhichevan, an Armenian territory, inside Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan kicked out every Armenian from Nakhichevan. Azerbaijan was doing that to Artsakh/Karabagh too.

No wonder Artsakh voted to be independent from Azerbaijan, something you don’t want to understand.
Better luck next time trying to fool readers, Pepe.

Felix Keverich , says: October 3, 2020 at 6:46 am GMT

The key fact remains that as long as Armenia proper is not attacked by Azerbaijan, Russia will not apply the CSTO treaty and step in. Erdogan knows this is his red line. Moscow has all it takes to put him in serious trouble – as in shutting off gas supplies to Turkey.

Russia isn’t going to shut off gas to Turkey. Russia never does that (shutting off gas). It’s a Western canard.

Russia could, however, impose a no-fly-zone over Georgia, effectively blocking resupply and reinforcements to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is almost completely surrounded by Russian allies and bases. They rely on Georgia for military transit.

Druid , says: October 3, 2020 at 7:29 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

Ignorant post. Armenian nationalist were active in Russia prior to ww1, then supported Russian entrance into Turkish territory because they shared a religion. They stabbed the ottomans , of which they were a big part, in the back. The young Turks , who were actually donmeh jews, had them marched off to Syria and lebanon, etc, causing many deaths! The Armenian is still causing trouble for the Turks. They sided with the mongols in their battles against the Muslims, along wit the Georgians, repeatedly. More to a small story

anon [154] • Disclaimer , says: October 3, 2020 at 11:51 pm GMT

What’s going to happen to USA? The poverty and racial intolerance ,both seem to be undermining the stability and the ideological integrity of the country . I see many states emerging from the body of America.But the problems will not be resolved . It might just like like Caucasian territory or Balkan .

Anonymous [231] • Disclaimer , says: October 4, 2020 at 3:25 am GMT
@Yevardian

Pepe appears to be on the side of Azerbaijan, and thus also on the side of Turkey, Israel, the Jewish lobby, and jihadists.

Nice company.

vot tak , says: October 4, 2020 at 11:58 pm GMT

Reading this, my suspicion is this “mr. c” is part of the western disinformation machine, probably operating for the israelis.

Semiogogue , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:47 am GMT

1. BTC is described as ‘bypassing Iran’. One could easily argue it also bypasses *Russia* . Perhaps that’s what made it necessary for Soros & others to peel Georgia off from Russian control back in the day? Look how Russia responded by recapturing the Georgian Military Highway (South Ossetia).

2. Look in general at how Russia is willing to give up huge areas of territory so long as she keeps key strategic points of control: South Ossetia, Crimea, Transnistria, Abkhazia and… Armenia. Smell the coffee.

3. 2. ‘Mr. C’ is quick to mention Baku/Ankara joint exercises in August, but fails to mention Kavkas 2020 exercises led by Russia. Uh duh.

4. ‘Mr. C’ seems to ignore the fact that Armenia couldn’t have taken that territory in first place, or kept it, w/out Russian assistance. And idea ‘Russia can do nothing’ is absurd. As is the idea that Russia can’t supply Armenia because there’s no land connection. Did the allies have any problem keeping West Berlin supplied by air? Of course not. All nonsense.

5. The idea that there is a ‘Russia/Turkey’ strategic partnership is also silly. Where is this partnership? Turkey buying S-400s? So what? Are they in partnership in Syria? In Libya? No. So why would they be in N-K?

6. Weird. No mention of China and it’s growing relationship with Turkey. This probably tells you all you need to know about the author. Unless of course the author is just a fool, which is also possible.

Jivinski , says: October 5, 2020 at 4:04 am GMT

“Yet even before the collapse the Azerbaijani Army and Armenian independentists were already at war (1988-1994), which yielded a grim balance of 30,000 dead and roughly a million wounded.”

This is a wounded-to-killed ratio of thirty-three to one. Doesn’t make sense.

Majority of One , says: October 5, 2020 at 4:35 am GMT

Were Russia to be as devious and underhanded as the puppet regime in the Di$trict of Corruption, they would arrange for an overthrow of the present NATO/EU/U$ regime in Yerevan. With those bastards out of the way and Armenia no longer playing double jeopardy, it might be possible for a new Orthodox oriented Armenian government to come to some sort of arrangement with Baku.

At the same time, perhaps Syrian spetsnaz units could practice some infiltration tactics into Turkish semi-occupied “greater” Idlib and Ghurka style, behead a few Turkish officers running the show there.

“Sultan” Erdogan is playing loose and wild with his shattering economy and massive military. It is high time he was given a black-eye–one that would cause him to lose face among his own countrymen.

Mactoul , says: October 5, 2020 at 5:08 am GMT
@SZ

How many of the Japanese-American deportees died as consequence of deportation vs how many Armenians that died as consequence of their deportation.

It is not deportation that is alleged to be the Turkish crime but genocide. Please keep it mind.

Yukon Jack , says: October 5, 2020 at 5:16 am GMT

This is my educated guess, the Anglo-Zionists led by Rothschild and Netanayahu destablize the oil in the Middle East to keep their prices of oil in USD above 100 $/barrel

They have also blown up oil derricks in the North Sea, shut down Iranian and Iraq and Syria oil production. The game is clear, low oil prices are being met with wiping out the competition.

And causing hell in Iran and Venezueala. Back in 1954 Operation Ajax took out Mossadeq and installed the Shah – puppet of big oil. Before it was BP it was the Persian Gulf Oil Co. BP is owned mostly by the crown.

Trump’s secretary of state was Rex Tillerson CEO Exxon just like GW Bush picked Condoleeza Rice CEO Chevron to be his national security advisor.

The Israel angle is to get Iran and to goad Russia into war with the USA, the eventually goal is that USA-Russia-China are reduced while Jews rule the world from Jerusalem.

How much you wanna bet Bibi Satanyahu has a hand in this war? And Evangelical Christians will support Israel even if this war kills lots of Armenian Christians just like in Syria.

Since this war in on Russia’s doorstep Putin an Lavrov will try negotiations first then what will they do next. Putin has vowed the war will never come to Russia which means Russia will enter the theater on the anti-Zionist side.

Have you noticed every state within a few hundred miles of Israel is being torched and the natives driven out?

Ghali , says: October 5, 2020 at 6:17 am GMT

Back again to Pepe Escobar’s distortions of reality. Nagorno-Karabakh is an Armenian-occupied Azerbaijani territory. In fact, no country in the world recognises it as an “Independent” as Escobar likes to mislead us. Armenia should do the right thing and withdraw its forces, including foreign militants from there. Like Israel, Armenia is playing the role of a victim of a “holocaust”.

GMC , says: October 5, 2020 at 7:20 am GMT

Considering that the 2nd largest US/NWO Embassy in the World is in Armenia – a country of 2.9 million people, and that the new President was put in power by the West – the end game is to continue to surround Russia, screw up the New Silk Road, and be at Iran’s back door too. As said before , the domestic USA can totally look like the USSR in the 90s, but the NWO Foreign policy money is 100% – guaranteed. What do all those thousands of workers in that huge Embassy compound do ?

GMC , says: October 5, 2020 at 7:30 am GMT
@Tommy Thompson

Actually, once the Armenians were genocided , the Jewish bankers were the big shots left in Turkey. H Morgenthau, our Turkish ambassador along with being jewish himself, wrote about it in his reports. The Game hasn’t changed much – it stays the same. Thanks.

J , says: October 5, 2020 at 7:44 am GMT

About a third of Iran’s population is Azeri. Should they develop interest in the conflict, Iran may become involved. That would align Turkey and Iran vs Russia. That would be something.

ARemo , says: October 5, 2020 at 8:48 am GMT
@Yevardian

Damn right. We already have experience what happens when Turks get control of Christian Armenians – systematic gang rapes and death marches are the rule of the day. Turks are animals and letting them control any portion of Armenia is basically turning that place into a concentration camp.

Ming Shih-tsung , says: October 5, 2020 at 10:58 am GMT
@Yevardian

“Mr. C” probably stands for Cemal, given how biased he is.

anon [229] • Disclaimer , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:01 pm GMT
@Yukon Jack p>

Fact: 1979 was the year that “big oil” LEGAL contracts were to expire and the “puppet” Shah had threatened as early as 1973 (when he was instrumental in making OPEC a powerful entity) that in 1979 Iran “would sell Iranian Oil to any buyer, at market prices”.

Fact: Iran, in 1978 produced 6 million barrels per day. It has never been permitted to reach those levels again.

Fact: Chinese, Indian, Syrian, Venezuelan, and God knows who else, all projects of the Global Cabal have been getting Iranian Oil (under their engineered boxing of Iranian nation) at levels that very likely are equal if not LOWER than the terms the Qajar idiots gave the insatiablely greedy and slimey English.

Alfred , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:05 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse perpetrated by Turkey.

And you did not mention that the only quarters of Smyrna/Izmir that were not torched in a fire in 1922 were the Jewish and Turkish quarters – what a surprise! An antecedent to 9/11. Here is the Jewpedia hiding the real story – as usual.

The Armenian and Greek quarters were destroyed and the Jews got a monopoly on the commerce. Done deal!

Great fire of Smyrna

Wielgus , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:09 pm GMT
@GMC

If the “colour revolution” assumptions were in force, there would be a host of denunciations of Azerbaijan and Turkey (the latter perhaps the real prime mover in this) by the USA and EU etc. There aren’t. The USA and EU may even tacitly support the Azerbaijanis, perhaps they hope the Russians and Iranians will become entangled in this affair and so forth.

Ugetit , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:14 pm GMT
@vot tak

…my suspicion is this “mr. c” is part of the western disinformation machine, probably operating for the israelis.

While I know nothing about the situation, after reading the article and the mostly excellent comments, I suspect your suspicion is correct.

Alfred , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:38 pm GMT

I have a suggestion.

How about swapping Nagorno-Karabakh for North Cyprus. I am sure the Greeks would be very happy to live with the Armenians. But the Sultan’s dreams of owning the Eastern Mediterranean would come to naught.

anon [137] • Disclaimer , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:45 pm GMT
@Lin

I’ve always associated that piece with the circus not knowing the title or its origin.

Stebbing Heuer , says: October 5, 2020 at 12:50 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Stalin did nasty things like that to keep the republics feuding with each other rather than pushing back against Moscow. The mixed-up borders of the ‘stans, further east, are testament to this. Fergana Valley?

Divide and rule. Still costing lives in pointless wars almost 100 years later.

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:07 pm GMT

At stake is the very existence of the Armenian people. Turkey is trying to finish what remains of them after the genocide last century. Both Erdoghan and Aliev have stated, that they want a “final solution” to the “Armenian problem”.

It’s an existential battle for the Armenians.

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT
@Yevardian

We all know what they did to the Armenians in 1915.

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:11 pm GMT
@Alfred

Exactly. The history of Turkey since 1880-s is full of ethnic cleansings and genocides of the non-muslim people such as Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians.

MLK , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT

My thanks to Escobar for taking on a subject rather obviously not susceptible to 2,700 word essays, along with attention worthy links.

His biases are not my own but he’s thoughtful and certainly doesn’t hide them.

In this and so many other incidents we can see how thoroughly Trump has moved the American ship of state despite the relentless efforts of foreign and domestic resistance to neutralize America First and destroy him.

It’s really quite something the way Obama’s presidency in all its disastrous fullness has been memory-holed. The defense of it being that it merely extended Bush’s world-historical incompetence and malefactions.

Could you have turned US unipolarity following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact into a “moment” if you tried? I couldn’t.

You will be way ahead of most everyone if you get your mind around that and the geopolitical sad story that is CCP China winning the post-Cold War quarter-century hands down.

We inevitably come back to the point that the whole drama can be interpreted from the perspective of a NATO geopolitical hit against Russia – according to quite a few analyses circulating at the Duma.

Ukraine is an absolute black hole. There’s the Belarus impasse. Covid-19. The Navalny circus. The “threat” to Nord Stream-2.

To pull Russia back into the Armenia-Azerbaijan drama means turning Moscow’s attention towards the Caucasus . . .

I confess that I get no end of enjoyment over bellyaching on behalf of those powers the Obama administration was turning the world over to. Nord Stream II was merely the down payment on Russia’s assistance/acquiescence in throwing the electron to Hillary, with the sky the limit for China, Russia and Iran once Democrats and their foreign allies had neutralized free and fair elections.

Now all of these powers must deal with a real POTUS who asks “What have you done for the US lately?”

The USG and Russia have cooperated where geopolitical interests align. More will follow once Trump takes the oath again. As I’ve explained previously, despite its high-risk position in the Resistance matrix, Russia/Putin have (unsurprisingly, to me) acted skillfully and with circumspection.

The same cannot be said for Iran. Nor China, particularly since the end of last year.

Ashino Wolf Sushanti , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT

https://www.putin-today.ru/archives/109463
https://vz.ru
Михаил Мошкин

Why Russia needs Azerbaijan !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The aggravation of the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh has raised a number of questions. In particular, why Moscow is in no hurry to stand up for Armenia and why it does not sharply criticize
Azerbaijan. The answer is that Moscow and Baku have very close relations, and not only economic relations. So what is the value and irreplaceability of Azerbaijan for Russia?

[MORE]
Z-man , says: October 5, 2020 at 1:52 pm GMT

Border and population changes are in order. A quarter of N-K goes back to Azerbaijan and the rest closer to Armenia proper plus the capital city goes to Armenia with a 50 mile wide band connecting it with the rest of Armenia. The Azeris get the rest of their lands now occupied by the Armenians. Will it happen? Probably not, just look at Kosovo..

God's Fool , says: October 5, 2020 at 2:05 pm GMT

There is a province between Ngorno Karabakh and Armenia proper of roughly of the same size belonging to Azerbaijan, so why not just exchange it with each other to avoid further conflict and bloodshed?

Дима Трамп , says: October 5, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT
@God's Fool

There is no guarantee that Turkey will not try to then eliminate whatever remains of Armenia.

Remember, Turkey genocided Armenians and wiped out close to 80% of them in 1915 through 1922. Armenian populated areas stretched from what is now Armenia until the shores of Eastern Mediterranean. The only thing that is left of it is Kessab in modern day Syria.

Majority of One , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:14 pm GMT
@Ghali e fake, false and fraudulent, whether in Asia or Africa. Over time, justice will prevail and borders will reflect the ethno-national composition of its long-term inhabitants.

That said, the current regime in Yerevan needs to be overthrown, as it was established in conjunction with the interests of the Cabal/Nato and their various puppet regimes. Armenia is the oldest Orthodox Christian nation in the world and was severely genocided by the Donmeh covert Jewish Masons who called themselves the “Young Turks” who were led by Enver Pasha.

By the way, who are you, Ghali? Do you have a dog in the fight? Are you connected with an intel agency?

anaccount , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT

Excellent article, normally I pass over Pepe for the naughty articles on Unz but I might have to take another look.

My only critique is that the article feels pro-Azeri but that’s balanced with an informative description how this started in July, including an accurate appraisal of Turkish behavior.

I’m not Azeri or Armenian so I didn’t have a dog in this fight until I noticed Israel’s support for Azerbaijan. It’s nothing personal, I have only one hate.

Shaman911 , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:27 pm GMT

Jewish Bankers shifting profits to other Jewish bankers. Funding all sides and profiting from the mass graves again. 5000 years and nothing has changed.

GMC , says: October 5, 2020 at 3:36 pm GMT
@Wielgus

The Turks are the US Army in this – with their proxy armies sent to help the Azerbaijanis, just like the US Army /Israelis and their proxies Isis, al Nusra, al Qaeda etc. in Syria. The US and their 6000 employees at the Embassy, don’t have to say anything – they back both sides – just like the Zionists do – in the US political parties. Things don’t change , Tactics don’t change. Thanks.

A.R. , says: October 5, 2020 at 4:30 pm GMT
@Majority of One

You are asking him if he has a dog in this fight? What about yourself? You very clearly have a dog in this fight yourself, haven`t you?
Try to cut down on the hypocrasy, why don`t you, and at the same time maybe moderate your “holier than thou” attitude.

[Oct 04, 2020] Is The War Over Nagorno-Karabakh Already At A Stalemate-

Oct 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Moon of Alabama Brecht quote " U.S. President Trump Has Caught 'The Flu' | Main October 03, 2020 Is The War Over Nagorno-Karabakh Already At A Stalemate?

Seven days after Azerbaijan attacked the Armenian held Nagorno-Karabakh territory it has not made any territorial progress.

Overview map

Iran and Georgia have both large Azeri and Armenian minorities within their territories.
bigger

Detail map

bigger

The highlands of Nagorno-Karabakh are ethnically Armenian. The light blue districts were originally Azeri but have been ethically cleansed during the war in the early 1990s.

Turkey is supporting Azerbaijan by supplying it with Turkish drones and with 'moderate Syrian rebel' mercenaries from Syrian and Libya . All are flown in through Georgian air space. Other mercenaries seem to come from Afghanistan . Additional hardware comes by road also through Georgia. Another supporter of the attacker is Israel. During the last week Azerbaijani military transport aircraft have flown at least six times to Israel to then return with additional Israeli suicide drones on board. These Harop drones have been widely used in attacks on Armenian positions. An Israeli made LORA short range ballistic missile was used by Azerbaijan to attack a bridge that connects Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia. Allegedly there are also Turkish flown F-16 fighter planes in Azerbaijan.

Turkey seems to direct the drones and fighter planes in Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh through AWACS type air control planes that fly circles at the Turkish-Armenian border.

The attack plan Azerbaijan had in mind when it launched the war foresaw to take several miles deep zones per day. It has not survived the first day of battle. Azerbaijan started the attack without significant artillery preparation. The ground attack was only supported by drone strikes on Armenian tanks, artillery and air defense positions. But the defensive lines held by Armenian infantry were not damaged by the drones. The dug in Armenian infantry could use its anti-tank and anti-infantry weapons to full extend. Azerbaijani tanks and infantry were slaughtered when they tried to break into the lines. Both sides had significant casualties but overall the frontlines did not move.

The war seems already to be at a stalemate. Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan can afford to use air power and ballistic missiles purchased from Russia without Russian consent.

The drone attacks were for a while quite successful. A number of old air defense systems were destroyed before the Armenians became wiser with camouflaging them. The Azerbaijani's than used a trick to unveil hidden air defense positions. Radio controlled Antonov AN-2 airplanes, propeller driven relicts from the late 1940s, were sent over Armenian positions. When the air defense then launched a missile against them a loitering suicide drone was immediately dropped onto the firing position .

That seems to have worked for a day or two but by now such drone attacks have been become rare. Dozens of drones were shut down before they could hit a target and Azerbaijan seems to be running out of them. A bizarre music video the Azerbaijanis posted showed four trucks each carrying nine drones. It may have had several hundreds of those drones but likely less than one thousand. Israel is currently under a strict pandemic lockdown. Resupply of drones will be an issue. Azerbaijan has since brought up more heavy artillery but it seems to primarily use it to hit towns and cities, not the front lines where it would be more useful.

It is not clear who is commanding the Azerbaijani troops. There days ago the Chief of the General Staff of Azerbaijan was fired after he complained about too much Turkish influence on the war. That has not helped. Two larger ground attacks launched by Azerbaijan earlier today were also unsuccessful. The Armenians are currently counter attacking.

In our last piece on the war we pointed to U.S. plans to 'overextend Russia' by creating trouble in the Caucasus just as it is now happening. Fort Russ notes :

The current director of the CIA, Gina Haspel , was doing field assignments in Turkey in the early stages of her career, she reportedly speaks Turkish, and she has history of serving as a station chief in Baku, Azerbaijan , in the late 1990s. It is, therefore, presumable that she still has connections with the local government and business elites.

The current Chief of the MI6, Richard Moore , also has history of working in Turkey -- he was performing tasks for the British intelligence there in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. Moore is fluent in Turkish and he also served as the British Ambassador to Turkey from 2014 to 2017.

The intelligence chiefs of the two most powerful countries in the Anglosphere are turkologists with connections in Turkey and Azerbaijan. It would be reasonable to assume that a regional conflict of such magnitude happening now, on their watch, is far from being a mere coincidence.

Before President Trump stopped the program the CIA had used the Azerbaijani Silk Way Airlines in more than 350 flights to bring weapons from Bulgaria to Turkey to then hand them to 'Syrian rebels'. Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, is not only a CIA station but also a Mossad center for waging its silent war against Iran.

The former Indian ambassador to Turkey M.K. Bhadrakumar has written two interesting pieces on the current conflict. In the first one he reminds us on the 2018 color revolution in Armenia which he had thought meant trouble for Moscow .

I have never perceived it that way. While Armenia's current Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan tried to get into business with 'western' powers and NATO there was no way he could fundamentally change Armenia's foreign policy. A hundred years ago Turkey, with the second biggest NATO army, had genocided Armenians. They have never forgotten that. The relation to Azerbaijan were also certain to continue to be hostile. That will only change if the two countries again come under some larger empire. Armenia depends on Russian arms support just as much as Azerbaijan does. (Azerbaijan has more money and pays more for its Russian weapons which allows Russia to subsidize the ones it sells to Armenia.)

After Nikol Pashinyan was installed and tried to turn 'west' Russia did the same as it did in Belarus when President Lukashenko started to make deals with the 'west'. It set back and waited until the 'west' betrayed its new partners. That has happened in Belarus a few weeks ago. The U.S. launched a color revolution against Lukashenko and he had nowhere to turn to but to Russia . Now Armenia is under attack by NATO supported forces and can not hope for help from anywhere but Russia.

Iran likewise did not fear the new government in Yerevan. It was concerned over Pashinyan's recent diplomatic exchanges with Israel which were at the initiative of the White House. But that concern has now been lifted. To protest against Israel's recent sale of weapon to Azerbaijan Armenia has called back its ambassador from Israel just two weeks after it opened its embassy there.

Pashinyan will have to apologize in Moscow before Russia will come to his help. As Maxim Suchkov relays :

This is interesting: Evgeniy "Putin's chef" Prigozhin gives short interview to state his "personal opinion" on Nagorno-Karabakh. Some takeaways:

- Karabakh is Azerbaijan's territory
- Russia has no legal grounds to conduct military activity in Karabakh
- there are more American NGOs in Armenia than national military units
- PM Pashinyan is to blame
- until 2018 Russia was able to ensure ARM & AZ discuss conflict at the negotiation table, then US brought Pashinyan to power in Yerevan and he feels he's a king & can't talk to Aliyev

I wonder if Prigozhin's remarks suggest he'd be reluctant to deploy his Wagner guys to Armenia, if needed or if he is asked to do so, or he's just indeed stating his own views or it's a way to delicately allude to Pashinyan that Moscow not happy with him ... ?

Russia's (and Iran's) interest is to refreeze the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. But that requires compliant people on both sides. It therefore does not mind that Azerbaijan currently creates some pressure on Pashinyan. But it can not allow Azerbaijan to make a significant victory. One of its main concern will be to get Turkey out of the game and that will require support for Armenia. Iran has a quite similar strategy. The U.S. will probably try to escalate the situation and to make it more complicate for Russia. It is likely silently telling Turkey to increase its involvement in the war.

Russia will likely only intervene if either side makes some significant territorial gains. Unless that happens it will likely allow the war to continue in the hope that it will burn out :

The upcoming winter conditions, coupled with the harsh terrain, will limit large-scale military operations. Also, the crippled economies of both Azerbaijan and Armenia will not allow them to maintain a prolonged conventional military confrontation.

Posted by b on October 3, 2020 at 17:28 UTC | Permalink

james , Oct 3 2020 17:42 utc | 1

thanks b....informative... another proxy war is how this looks to me with all the usual suspects involved... they couldn't get what they wanted in syria, so now onto this...
dh , Oct 3 2020 18:04 utc | 2
Trump hasn't said much about this conflict yet. He probably has his eye on Armenian/American voters.
Kali , Oct 3 2020 18:05 utc | 3
The war started the day after negotiations between Russia and Turkey over Syria and maybe Libya also failed. Now the Azeri military complains about too much Turkish involvement which can only mean one thing--complaining about taking orders from Turks. So this looks like a Turkish aggression against Moscow? Meant to make a point about Syria? Libya?
Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 18:17 utc | 4
In fact, most of your links are propaganda from both sides. We really have no idea what is going on on the ground.

In fact, most of your links are propaganda from both sides. We really have no idea what is going on on the ground.

Azerbaijan's position is justified, given that Armenia illegally occupies Azeri territory. The failure here is on the OSCE group for not being able or willing to resolve the conflict. Azerbaijan has a right to regain its territory by force, if necessary.

Russia may very well allow Azerbaijan to retake its territory, if it can, but draw a red line as to entering Armenia proper. The Current Armenian government is hardly a friend of Russia.

A good summary of the situation is Pepe Escobar's https://asiatimes.com/2020/10/explosive-stakes-on-the-armenia-azerbaijan-chessboard/


Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 18:21 utc | 5
Posted by: Blue Dotterel | Oct 3 2020 18:17 utc | 4

Saker's link doesn't require a login
https://thesaker.is/whats-at-stake-in-the-armenia-azerbaijan-chessboard/

Josh , Oct 3 2020 18:27 utc | 6
Thanks B.
james , Oct 3 2020 18:29 utc | 7
@ Blue Dotterel | Oct 3 2020 18:17 utc | 4... do you feel the same way about crimea and ukraine taking it back? curious... you live in turkey if i am not mistaken.. are you turkish??
Bemildred , Oct 3 2020 18:31 utc | 8
Mountains are not good places to fight wars. Tends to be bloody, expensive, and useless.

I wonder what Haspel thinks she is doing too?

Maybe they could federate Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia, form a union state, call it Caucasia, we can send all our white supremacists there.

Gary , Oct 3 2020 18:32 utc | 9
First Israeli attack on Armenia in 2017

In a rare move, the Defense Ministry suspended the export license of an Israeli drone manufacturer to Azerbaijan in light of claims that the company attempted to bomb the Armenian military on the Azeris behalf during a demonstration of one of its "suicide" unmanned aerial vehicles last month.
The two Israelis operating the two Orbiter 1K drones during the test refused to carry out the attack, Two higher ranking members of the Aeronautics Defense Systems delegation in Baku then attempted to carry out the Azerbaijani request , but, lacking the necessary experience, ended up missing their targets.
Last year, Azerbaijan used another Israeli suicide drone, an Israeli Aerospace Industries Harop-model, in an attack on a bus that killed seven Armenians.
Last year, the country's president, Ilham Aliyev, revealed Azerbaijan had purchased some $5 billion worth of weapons and defense systems from Israel.

Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 18:44 utc | 10
Posted by: james | Oct 3 2020 18:29 utc | 7

My citizenship is the same as yours. No one recognizes Nagorno Karabagh independence, not even Armenia.

Bulent Ecevit, two time PM of Turkey, leftist and a poet, suggested the logical solution to the problem years ago. He suggested that Armenia cede land along the Armenian/Iran border of similar size so that Azerbaijan could unite with its southern territory Nakhchivan, thus Nagorno Karabagh could be exchanged for this territory. Both sides would be winners one assumes.

Apparently, no one liked the idea despite its fairness. I assume the Azeris in NK would have to be exchanged with the Armenians in the corridor in a population exchange for this to be realized.

arata , Oct 3 2020 18:55 utc | 11
@2 Kali
"The war started the day after negotiations between Russia and Turkey over Syria and maybe Libya also failed"

More than a week before start of the war, everyone involved in the region politics knew the war is imminent. Two days before the start of war Zarif rushed to Moscow.
Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 18:57 utc | 12
Posted by: Bemildred | Oct 3 2020 18:31 utc | 8

You mean the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic
https://wiki2.org/en/Transcaucasian_Democratic_Federative_Republic

Didn't last long.

Iñigo , Oct 3 2020 19:02 utc | 13
This bastard of Prigozhin goes where the money flows.
And the money flows from Baku.
Do not give much credit to this thug.
Or perhaps Crimea belongs to Ukraine?
R Rose , Oct 3 2020 19:03 utc | 14
@ Blue Dotterel

"Bulent Ecevit, two time PM of Turkey, leftist and a poet, suggested the logical solution to the problem years ago. He suggested that Armenia cede land along the Armenian/Iran border of similar size so that Azerbaijan could unite with its southern territory Nakhchivan, thus Nagorno Karabagh could be exchanged for this territory. Both sides would be winners one assumes.

Apparently, no one liked the idea despite its fairness. I assume the Azeris in NK would have to be exchanged with the Armenians in the corridor in a population exchange for this to be realized."

That reads like a reasonable solution. Too bad it wasn't embraced.


b "The highlands of Nagorno-Karabakh are ethnically Armenian."? Nagorno Kharbakh is internationally recognized Azerbaijan territory

Pashinyan's placement in Armenia was meant to give an advantage to those that 'brung him' Your claims to the otherwise are some kind of pretzel logic.
Georgia absolutely flat out denied any passage of 'rebels' through their territory. That claim is utter unsubstantiated rubbish.

"have never perceived it that way. While Armenia's current Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan tried to get into business with 'western' powers and NATO there was no way he could fundamentally change Armenia's foreign policy"

Why because you say he couldn't? The one constant is change.


AtaBrit , Oct 3 2020 19:04 utc | 15
While it is not a solution as such, I fully agree with b's last point about Russia and Iran preferring to 'refreeze' the game and remove Turkey from the board.

Since the kick off I have wondered to what extent this is an Azerbaijani initiative and to what extent a Turkish one.

Either way, as I posted on the open thread, Lavrov and Cavusoglu agreed a couple of days ago that a ceasefire was necessary and Russia reiterated its strong stance against the presence of foreign militias in the conflict. Let's hope sober heads prevail. As Rouhani stated very clearly, the region can not withstand another war.

ARIES , Oct 3 2020 19:10 utc | 16
The "invisible hand" of International Zionism is driving the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh:

https://toranja-mecanica.blogspot.com/2020/10/a-mao-invisivel-do-sionismo.html

Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 19:11 utc | 17
Posted by: james | Oct 3 2020 18:29 utc | 7

Sorry, didn't really answer your question. Kosovo, N. Cyprus, Crimea (annexation) and NK independence are all regarded as illegal accoding to international law, as far as, I know. None have had a proper UN sponsored referendum.
Although Turkish N. Cyprus did vote to reunite with Greek S. Cyrprus in a UN referendum, but the Greek Cypriots nixed it, and were immediately admitted to the EU as a prize for their pigheadedness.

Is it any wonder that Turks don't trust the Christian West or East? Neither the Grek Cypriots or the Armenians have any incentive nor desire to negotiate in good faith because the US, Europe and Russia are unwilling to compel them to, but reward them instead with territorial freezes that benefit them.

The ethnic Muslim Turks in both cases get screwed because of the racist propaganda directed at them through the ages.

Pat , Oct 3 2020 19:19 utc | 18
Wow, Blue Dotterel, the hatred for Armenians runs deep in you. Nakhichevan was handed over to Azerbaijan by the Soviets even before Karabakh/Artsakh was. Then the ethnic cleansing of its majority Armenian population and destruction of ancient Armenian monuments began so there would be little trace of its pedigree. Armenia has been chipped away at and betrayed by their so-called betters generation upon generation. They are not budging nor should they.
Galust , Oct 3 2020 19:30 utc | 19
You can buy as many weapons as you want, if your soldiers don't know how to fight it's not going to help. Whether you get 4000 Syrian rebels or 40,000 to Azerbaijan it still won't help them. If Azerbaijan could take those lands they wound have done it without asking Russia's permission. Even with advanced weapons they stand no chance. Armenians are using mostly antiquated and cheap air defense tech to shoot down the most advanced and expensive drones in the world. Thousands of their troops got slaughtered And hundreds of tanks destroyed so they could get one village that no one needs ? Wow great results. If they continue with these results for 2 more weeks they are going to need a brand new army. One thing Azeris have difficulty understanding is that in real life Might makes Right. Armenians learned this lesson back in 1914 when they got slaughtered and no one cared, not even the Christian west or orthodox Russia. Azeris just need to learn to leave with defeat and shame. And Azeris don't understand how bizarre and funny their army music videos look outside Azerbaijan. Same thing with Armenian videos. Not sure why both sides think there is a need to glorify war which creates grief and misery.
circumspect , Oct 3 2020 19:32 utc | 20
As always and interesting piece of work with some interesting comments and links for one to learn some angles on this situation.
Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 19:33 utc | 21
Posted by: Pat | Oct 3 2020 19:19 utc | 18

What makes you think I hate Armenians? I grew up with many Armenian friends and acquaintences in my home country. Even in Turkey, I have worked with Armenians (Turkish citizens, of course) and even had and Armenian (from Armenia) cleaning women for my flat.

I certainly do think Armenians have had poor to incompetent, even racist leaders. Sort of like the US recently. Indeed, both countries have even had a similar Covid19 mismanagement.

No, I have no problem with Armenians, any more than I do with USAians or any other peoples.

Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 19:55 utc | 22
Posted by: Pat | Oct 3 2020 19:19 utc | 18

You state "the ethnic cleansing of its majority Armenian population" with out any context, but you do realise that Armenians are quite capable of and certainly committted ethnic cleansing themselves. From the Pepe Escobar article:
https://thesaker.is/whats-at-stake-in-the-armenia-azerbaijan-chessboard/

"The peace talks are going nowhere because Armenia is refusing to budge (to withdraw from occupying Nagorno-Karabakh plus 7 surrounding regions in phases or all at once, with the usual guarantees for civilians, even settlers – note that when they went in in the early 1990s they cleansed those lands of literally all Azerbaijanis, something like between 700,000 and 1 million people)."

So, fact, the Armenians ethnically cleansed some 700,000 to 1 million Azeris from the Azeri lands they now occupy including NK.

Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. Unfortunately, is commonplace in war time, and even in peace time.

Kooshy , Oct 3 2020 19:56 utc | 23
To make countries eligible to become part of the NATO the west first they would need to be cleansed going through a western inspired and planed color revolution. Russian resistance formula to prevent these countries joining NATO is to make these countries an economic, political and military basket case by making parts of these countries' territory contested, and out of control of western recognized seating governments. Once countries territorial integrity becomes challenged and out of control of western inspired governments, it becomes a challenge to be absorbed by any for any alliances. Such a country is a failed country dependent on western economic, political and military freebies. Likes of Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan etc. We shall see when, US/west feel, this will not work and will go nowhere, and tries to climb down the unipolar peak. Both of these countries are dependent on Iran and Russia.
Jen , Oct 3 2020 20:30 utc | 24
Blue Dotterel @ 17:

Self-determination is considered a major principle of international law. This principle is included in the UN's Charter (Chapter 1). Even if a group of people goes ahead with declaring its independence and breaking away from a country it dislikes being part of, as in the case of Crimea, without consulting with the UN in any way, the UN cannot object to this act. What Crimea did, did not violate international law.

Had the Crimeans consulted with the UN, they very likely would have been advised to remain part of Ukraine.

Self-determination does not require any support or sponsorship from the UN.


AriusArmenian , Oct 3 2020 20:33 utc | 25
Good analysis by MOA, and I also hope the war burns out going nowhere.

As to those that say NK is Azeri territory: after the Armenians were genocided on the street of Baku in the 1990's and Azeri's destroyed 5,000 Armenian monumemts would you just 'walk away' and not protect the people of NK? And after getting out followed by the Azeri's butchering the Armenians of NG it will be ignored!

Why did the Turks bring all those jihadis to Azerbaijan to fight: they will run the massacres in NK.

Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 20:47 utc | 26
Posted by: Jen | Oct 3 2020 20:30 utc | 24

I am not disagreeing with the Crimean's decision, and indeed sympathize with it, but still question whether it shouldn't be considered illegal. I mean, really, how does it differ from Kosovo separating from Serbia, or the Turkish Cypriots from the Greeks. The UN does not consider the Turkish Cypriots independent. Perhaps they need to be absorbed by Albania and Turkey respectively to be considered "legal", just as Russia absorbed Crimea, although it is not considered legal, either. So why hasn't Armenia annexed NK? Why hasn't the UN recognized NK as a separate state?

Anyway, we are not discussing our preferences here. The Greek Cypriots rejected uniting their country with the Turks under a UN referendum, but the Turks voted for a united country. Why are the Turkish Cypriots not recognized as a country by the UN or anyone, but Turkey. Why have they not been rewarded with EU membership as the Greeks were? Is it any surprise that the Greeks won't negotiate in good faith with the Turks? Why should they? They get the benefits. the Turks not.

Jackrabbit , Oct 3 2020 20:50 utc | 27
As I noted in the last thread on this topic: the war serves to make the Azeris more dependent on the West. 'Winning' the war is perhaps not the goal of those behind the conflict.

!!

Flo , Oct 3 2020 20:52 utc | 28
Amusing typo in "... but have been ethically cleansed during the war in the early 1990s."
Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 20:54 utc | 29
Posted by: AriusArmenian | Oct 3 2020 20:33 utc | 25

So far the jihadis are hearsay, not fact nay more than the PKK are fact fighting with the Armenians. It would not be surprizing in either case, but neither has been confirmed as fact, but merely propaganda.

Again, it is not surprising that some people in the "Christian world attribute all the massacres and destructions on the Muslims but ignor the massacres and ethnic cleansing committed by the "Christian" side. This is is a tacit, perhaps subconscious racism that has existed for hundreds of years. It is so difficult to be objective when you have been brought up to dislike, perhaps even hate the other, isn't it?

Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 20:56 utc | 30
Posted by: Flo | Oct 3 2020 20:52 utc | 28

Yeah, someone's got to learn to proof read.

james , Oct 3 2020 21:03 utc | 31
@ Blue Dotterel ... thanks for your comments... you never said, but i take it you are of turkish descent.. either way, i like the comments you make, even if i don't know enough to agree or disagree with them.. there are usually 2 sides to every story, but we often don't hear both sides stories..
Хау јес ноу , Oct 3 2020 21:13 utc | 32
"The Greek Cypriots rejected uniting their country"
As I understand it the war in Cyprus started when Greek Cypriots abolished the rules stipulated by British colonizers meant to subjugate majority Greek population. Those rules gave Turk Cypriots larger portion of the power then the Greek.
Voting for unification expecting to come back to the same discriminatory laws against Greek Cypriots is non-option for the Greek Cypriots.
The other thing regarding proposition to Armenians to trade its own historical land for the other part of its own land and call if fair is very biased by my opinion. It is almost the same as proposition to Serbia to trade part of its land with current Serbian majority in the Nato occupied part of the country (Kosovo and Metohia) for the other part of the Serbia proper where some of the land has Albanian majority.
Proposal to trade a corridor to the Azerbaijans Nakhchivan for the corridor to Armenians Nagorno Karabagh would be a fair proposal.
So in both cases/proposals (Cyprus and Armenia) on the surface seem fair but if someone scratch the surface the situation appear to be far from the fair.
And in the both cases the presentation is biased for the Turkish side ... by accident.
Et Tu , Oct 3 2020 21:16 utc | 33
MoA Rocks
sad canuck , Oct 3 2020 21:20 utc | 34
Stupid people fighting stupid wars for stupid reasons. The peoples of the Caucasus need to learn to live in peace with each other or the region will continue to be a backwater exploited for great power geopolitical games.

Russia and Iran are correct to stay out of this and let the idiots kill each other. If there was any significant security threat from the mob of unruly idiots running Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia; the Russian and Iranians would roll over them all in 48 hours and there is not a damn thing anyone outside the Caucasus could do about it.

Et Tu , Oct 3 2020 21:21 utc | 35
Posted by: Flo | Oct 3 2020 20:52 utc | 28

Yeah, someone's got to learn to proof read.

Agreed, sorry Mr B, no malice intended, but your blog's credibility with unfamiliar audiences could potentially be undermined with some occasionally 'liberal' use of the English language.

Respect for using your foreign language skills of course, but perhaps a friendly proof reader with native English skills could also be an idea..

Blue Dotterel , Oct 3 2020 21:23 utc | 36
Posted by: james | Oct 3 2020 21:03 utc | 31

No, I am of mixed European descent, both east and west. And yes, that is the problem; we seldom do seek out both sides. When one looks at the Assange case, one sees the the problem of our age (and many others) where the prosecution is allowed to present its case with all prejudice, but the defense is repeatedly hampered by the supposedly impartial judge. And the media, well what to the people get - propaganda, often through ommision in this case.

Similarly, peoples are judged by through the propaganda of a culture or society, usually to benefit those with power. So people are taught to demonize or denigrate the other assuming their own to have upstanding moral character or, if defeated in some way, victims needing redress.

After the bombing of the Turkish consulate in Ottawa in the early 80s by an Armenian terrorist group, ASALA, I made a point of educating myself on the so called genocide issue, but had a hard time finding the Turkish point of view in Canada. As fortune would have it, I found employment in Turkey, and eventually discovered what was difficult to find in Canada: an alternative point of view concerning the issue and many others. Examining the writers' treatment of facts and their academic backgrounds was certainly educational in many cases.

Suffice it to say that on being able to actually see the "defense", I came to different judgements from those I would be able to come to in my home country.

james , Oct 3 2020 21:33 utc | 37
i recommend a piano duel between an Azerbaijan and Armenian to work it out... forget the guns and killing people part...

one example of armenian musician (on youtube) Tigran Hamasyan

one example of azerbaijan musician (on youtube) Leila Figarova

james , Oct 3 2020 21:36 utc | 38
@ Blue Dotterel | Oct 3 2020 21:23 utc | 36.. thank you for this as well.. i hear what you are saying.. it is an ongoing battle to get all the information and nuances.. we probably don't ever get all the information necessary which is why i resort to believing war is not the answer.. easy for me to say this here on the westcoast of canada...
Clueless Joe , Oct 3 2020 21:49 utc | 39
Ah yes, the "other side's" point of view about Armenian genocide. Did you look for the Nazis' point of view about the Shoah, too?
Point is, Turkey has been genociding (directly or by proxies) non-Muslim people since the late 19th century, and keeps trying to do it everywhere it can. In a way, Kurds are lucky to be Muslim, they're just occupied and suppressed instead of being mass-murdered by the millions - unlike Cypriots, Greeks, Armenians, Yazidis, Assyrians and others.
S , Oct 3 2020 21:50 utc | 40
The seven surrounding regions should be returned to Azerbaijan, so that 600,000 refugees can return to their homes. NKAO should be allowed to join Armenia to avoid creating new refugees.

I understand that legally NKAO is part of Azerbaijan, but Armenians have been living in Artsakh for thousands of years, and it is unrealistic to expect them to give up and leave. On the other hand, it is morally wrong to preserve the status quo and thus accept the ethnic cleansing of the 90s. That's why a compromise is needed.

hopehely , Oct 3 2020 21:53 utc | 41
Posted by: Blue Dotterel | Oct 3 2020 19:55 utc | 22
Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. Unfortunately, is commonplace in war time, and even in peace time.

Yeah, when was that when Bulgarians expelled Turks from Bulgaria, 1989? It was tragic, hard to watch.
Nationalism is evil. I blame French for that disease.

Somewhat unrelated question: so Karabakh is written in Turkish Karabağ, which is quite similar (to me) to Montenegro, Karadağ. Is the similarity accidental, or both words have related meaning / connotation?

foolisholdman , Oct 3 2020 21:54 utc | 42
Posted by: Blue Dotterel | Oct 3 2020 20:54 utc | 29
So far the jihadis are hearsay, not fact nay more than the PKK are fact fighting with the Armenians. It would not be surprizing in either case, but neither has been confirmed as fact, but merely propaganda.

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/syrian-recruit-describes-role-foreign-173138233.html

David G , Oct 3 2020 22:16 utc | 43
Blue Dotterel | Oct 3 2020 18:44 utc | 10:
Bulent Ecevit, two time PM of Turkey, leftist and a poet, suggested the logical solution to the problem years ago. He suggested that Armenia cede land along the Armenian/Iran border of similar size so that Azerbaijan could unite with its southern territory Nakhchivan, thus Nagorno Karabagh could be exchanged for this territory. Both sides would be winners one assumes.
I would not be one who so assumes. Armenia would be nuts to give up their border with the one neighbor supportive of them while creating contiguity between Turkey and Azerbaijan's main territory.
james , Oct 3 2020 22:20 utc | 44
i recommend the 2 articles b linked to up above by M.K. Bhadrakumar for greater historical context of what is at play here...
Josh , Oct 3 2020 22:25 utc | 45
An article with an interesting perspective from almayadeen.net
https://m.almayadeen.net/analysis/1426965/%D8%AA%D8%B1%D9%83%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D9%88-%D8%A5%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A%D9%84----%D9%87%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%AA%D8%A7-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A3%D8%B0%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%86
Dr Wellington Yueh , Oct 3 2020 22:30 utc | 46
@james #37 re: piano duel

One of my all-time favorite recordings is Love, Devotion, Surrender (Santana, McLaughlin). The very first piece on the album, a cover of Coltrane's "A Love Supreme," has the two guitarists engage in a master-acolyte argument that frantically escalates, culminating in a crescendo of...agreement?

David G , Oct 3 2020 22:33 utc | 47
foolisholdman | Oct 3 2020 21:54 utc | 42:

Yeah, those Syrian "rebels" that Turkey shipped to Azerbaijan are more than hearsay and rumor. My heart really bleeds for them that when they got there they found they were facing a well-equipped and trained army, rather than having their pick of defenseless Christian villages where they could bring to bear their skills in robbing, raping, enslaving, and beheading.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 3 2020 22:42 utc | 48
Posted by: sad canuck | Oct 3 2020 21:20 utc | 34

Correct. This is what you get when chimpanzees are allowed to form "states" to further their primate competition with each other.

ptb , Oct 3 2020 23:00 utc | 49
@b Thanks for the detailed analysis!

Even without conquering anything, with a large supply of drones and cheap yet robust comms (I feel the need to think of point to point IR, but I don't know enough about modern radio), the attacker can do a lot of damage without losing anything that expensive, i.e. potentially cheap spotter and relay drones, plus the munitions themselves. Air defense technology made to counter turn-of-the-century jets/helis/cruise-missiles, is not really appropriate. Handing out manpads in quantity creates other problems.

Patroklos , Oct 3 2020 23:32 utc | 50
This is what I come to MoA for. And it's nice to see b disclose his authorship with his trademark idiomatic slips ("full extend" for "to their full extent", 'unveil' for 'reveal' and 'relicts' for 'relics', etc).
arby , Oct 3 2020 23:48 utc | 51
right on Patroklas.
David G , Oct 3 2020 23:59 utc | 52
Patroklos | Oct 3 2020 23:32 utc | 50:

"Full extend" was a slight error, but "unveil" seems perfectly fine to me, and "relicts" was a better choice than "relics" in that context. (Though really the Antonov An-2 isn't either a relic or relict "from the late 1940s": they were produced in vast numbers for decades.)

Chevrus , Oct 4 2020 0:16 utc | 53
@ Dr Wellington 46: Also 'Visions of the Emerald Beyond' by The Mahavishnu Orchestra is a fantastic album that I think captures the Fusion era with a sense of refinement and less of the "slop".
Bemildred , Oct 4 2020 0:18 utc | 54
Posted by: David G | Oct 3 2020 23:59 utc | 52

Extend should be extent, I like discover better there than reveal or unveil, and relic has religious connotations, relict implies "remnant" which might work, derelict suggests inoperable, hmmm.

Maybe "remnant" or "survivor" would work.

But to be honest B's usage didn't bother me reading over it, the Internets is nothing if not slovenly about grammar and usage.

Sunny Runny Burger , Oct 4 2020 1:28 utc | 55
Some people here speak of yet more "exchanges" of territory as if it wouldn't involve 100% replacement of the people living there. and almost certainly by murder. They seem to think ethnic cleansing can be undone by more ethnic cleansing or at the very least loudly support one more round of it as a "final solution". They make it easy to understand why Erdogan references Hitler in positive terms.

The suggestion that Armenia and Artsakh losing their borders to Iran is fair is silly and anything but fair. It is an invitation to more war and genocide after such a "peace deal". The "peace plan" is nothing but siege warfare, it is a barely disguised war plan targeting Armenia and Artsakh.

North Cyprus being presented as some kind of Turkish benevolence belies the fact of the current ethnic Turkic dominance of the demographics of North Cyprus which did not happen by natural means, ie. it was/is over forty years of steadfast ethnic cleansing. Almost none of them were Cypriot when the Turkish invasion happened no matter how much they lie and pretend they were.

Hoyeru , Oct 4 2020 2:00 utc | 56
@hopehely how conveniently you forget that Bulgaria was under the Ottoman rule for 500 years and plenty of Bulgarian got murdered by the Turks during that time. WHEN the Bulgarians rebelled against the Turks in 1875–78, the Europeans didn't wept for ALL the Bulgarian women, children and men that were savagely slaughtered by the Turks, but instead sent one guy who claimed he never saw any atrociousness.
YEah, most of modern peoples' memory goes as far back as WII, everything else is forgotten. FUCK YOU, the Turks have always been savages.
Piotr Berman , Oct 4 2020 2:11 utc | 57
Before President Trump stopped the program the CIA had used the Azerbaijani Silk Way Airlines in more than 350 flights to bring weapons from Bulgaria to Turkey to then hand them to 'Syrian rebels'. Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, is not only a CIA station but also a Mossad center for waging its silent war against Iran.

This is dubious. Why use an Azeri airline to ferry weapons over the border that separates Bulgaria from Turkey, with a choice of three highways, an electrified railroad, or even by a ship (164 nautical miles between the main ports of the two countries).

Biswapriya Purkayast , Oct 4 2020 2:18 utc | 58
If Blitzkrieg failed the Azeris will use the attrition war tactic and that is absolutely certain to succeed. Murad Gazdiev tweeted selfies posted by Jihadi imports in Azeri uniforms in Azerbaijan here: https://mobile.twitter.com/MuradGazdiev/status/1312372865937932289
Jihadis will therefore be used as canon fodder by Azerbaijan while the Ottomans take over the air combat, directly or indirectly. Unless Azerbaijan is stupid enough to attack Armenia directly there is nothing Russia will ever do about it.

At some point approaching rapidly Armenian frontline positions will collapse and then there will be a panicked refugee flood into Armenia from Nagorno Karabakh and the surrounding occupied Azeri areas. At that point Nagorno Karabakh will become impossible to defend. Whether Azerbaijan permits Erdogan to seed the area with jihadis is an open question, but at the least Erdo will place Ottoman troops there to "guard against Armenia".

Without Nagorno Karabakh Armenia is actually worth very little to Russia. Even if it could be "taught a lesson" by Putinist restraint it would be strategically useless and a resource hole. A NATO Armenia, with or without a NATO Azerbaijan, would be a strategic disaster but that's the way things seem headed.

circumspect , Oct 4 2020 2:39 utc | 59
Watching the latest South Front videos it is easy to see how drone technology makes it difficult to move vehicles and set up fixed positions. It looks like a very high technology affair to counter drones.

Very expensive very costly training would equate to excellent results in second and third world areas for combat drones. Again the war party wins. It would be cheaper to build stable societies. What a toxic mess. It must be some weird parallel groups of death cults pushing this continued chaos.

Maybe is is just plain old human nature with high tech advantages over bronze and iron weapons. Even the bronze age brought a long period of peace and prosperity for a time.

Counter-Drone equipment


uncle tungsten , Oct 4 2020 2:44 utc | 60
Turkey resupplies weapons to Azerbaijan through the fake independent Georgia
Dr Wellington Yueh , Oct 4 2020 2:48 utc | 61
@circumspect #59 re: human nature (stoopid monkeys with guns)

Pride, stubbornness and stupidity - toxic, and tragic. A movie that quite well illustrates this is Lolly-Madonna XXX . It's such a brutally sad movie.

Piotr Berman , Oct 4 2020 3:58 utc | 62
If Blitzkrieg failed the Azeris will use the attrition war tactic and that is absolutely certain to succeed. Murad Gazdiev tweeted selfies posted by Jihadi imports in Azeri uniforms ...
Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Oct 4 2020 2:18 utc | 58

I beg to differ. This is not Libya, both sides have relatively large armies, Armenians have weapons, high ground, prepared positions and people who believe that the choice is between standing the ground and exile (or worse). They will not be demoralized by few hundred casualties. Azerbaijan has low ground, attack uphill is not easy, and the motivation of soldiers is not as good. After bringing few hundred or even few thousands of second rate jihadists the equation will not change (inequality if you will).

Of course, if the war is protracted, both sides will need supplies. Except for Turkey, no one declared the will to supply either side, but unofficial traffic is bound to happen. Russia and Iran will surely neutralize any supplies from Turkey and Israel, they need to maintain the regional balance that so far is in their favor.

Then there is no potential for tipping the balance by direct intervention: it will trigger direct Russian response. Concerning the coming winter, one should read Wikipedia "Battle of Sarikamish". On New Year Eve of 1915, Turkish army advised by Germans attacked Russian positions after crossing high mountains. Because of even bloodier fighting in France, Russia was attacking in East Prussia to relieve the French and Caucasus Army was at half of full strength. The result was that 1/3 of Russian troops were lost, a lot of them to frostbite, and about the Turks there are debates: did 1/10 of them survive, a bit less, or a bit more.

p> " U.S. President Trump Has Caught 'The Flu' , Main

" U.S. President Trump Has Caught 'The Flu' | Main

[Oct 03, 2020] Top US general rushes to defend Pentagon after Trump accuses it of colluding with weapon manufacturers to fight endless wars

Oct 03, 2020 | www.rt.com

foxenburg 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 01:48 AM

An interviewer should test this man's integrity with a simple question, such as.. "When you retire, will promise to live off your generous pension....like Eisenhower in his rocking chair....and not go to work for an arms manufacturer or think tank or any other paid position?"
Rocky_Fjord 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 05:18 AM
John boy McCain just went into apoplexy in hell.

[Oct 02, 2020] Army Chief of Staff General James McConville disingenious defence of MIC

Notable quotes:
"... As soon as many generals retire, they become the high-paid consultants and lobbyists for the major weapons manufacturers. There was a time when the Boston Globe and papers wrote about it. I wonder how many will now. It is time to recognize the problem and face up to the destructive influence it is having on our nation and our families in both our foreign and domestic policies. ..."
"... This is another consequence of allowing the people who own the media to own other things. Allowing the people who make bullets and bombs to own media is a sure recipe for perpetual war. ..."
"... It is quite normal for a top General to protect his cabal of corruption. He still has his slush fund money to protect. These military "Heroes" are in the habit of sending men to their deaths, just to advance themselves into top jobs with the Military Industrial Complex. ..."
"... They retire into prime Lobbying positions as well. This corruption has produced more broken Veterans than Covid-19 has produced deaths. ..."
"... “ I can assure the American people that the senior leaders would only recommend sending our troops to combat when it is required in national security and in the last resort, ” As invading Syria, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Grenada, Cambodia, Laos.... and many other countries was a last resort to secure the US national security. ..."
"... Trump says those things, and at the same time increases the Pentagon's budget & spending to over $1 Trillion (more than the next 15 Countries combined, and 13 of them are your allies).. ..."
"... Trump is picking up some that vote that supported Tulsi Gabbard, or so I speculate. Though he speaks with a bit of forked tongue -- stealing oil in Syria, won't pull out of Iraq when told by Iraqi government; still in Afghanistan long after the Pentagon lost the war there again another war lost against a fourth world country. ..."
"... An interviewer should test this man's integrity with a simple question, such as.. "When you retire, will promise to live off your generous pension....like Eisenhower in his rocking chair....and not go to work for an arms manufacturer or think tank or any other paid position?" ..."
"... Trump should spin the rest of the beans. Directly and indirectly, the Violence Industry is the biggest employer in the US. It's a gigantic social program. ..."
"... I think Trump is posturing for re election purposes . He is clearly in the hands of the deep state. ..."
"... Trump promised to end America’s “endless wars” . Just look at the people he appointed. They all love war. and trying to expand them. Russia showed the world, convoys of stolen Syrian oil. Than Russia bombed them. Now the US is stealing even more Syrian oil and nobody is bombing it. ..."
"... Biden was thinking about rebuilding contracts for his family and friends before the first bombs ever fell General.. ..."
Oct 02, 2020 | www.rt.com

Army Chief of Staff General James McConville has vehemently rejected Donald Trump's comments alleging that the military's top commanders wish to entangle the US in as many wars as possible in order to enrich weapon manufacturers.

" I can assure the American people that the senior leaders would only recommend sending our troops to combat when it is required in national security and in the last resort, " McConville, a Trump appointee, said during an online conference on Tuesday. " We take this very, very seriously in how we make our recommendations. "

The general added that many of the US commanders have sons and daughters that currently serve in the military and some of them " may be in combat right now. " The general declined to more directly respond to Trump's allegations, saying the military should remain out of politics.

Will someone tell him? Morning Joe brings up EISENHOWER to counter Trump's critique of Pentagon & military industrial complex

The Chief of Staff was referring to the highly publicized comments Trump made on Monday. The president said that " the top people in the Pentagon " might not be " in love " with him " because they want to do nothing but fight wars " to provide business for the US military-industrial complex.

During his 2016 campaign, Trump promised to end America's " endless wars " as he often calls them. However, the long-time military bureaucrats he appointed to command publicly opposed Trump's propositions to reduce US military presence in Afghanistan and Syria.

T. Agee Kaye 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:41 PM

Please. Who is he kidding. Rather than recognize the problem like an Al-Anon, he discredits himself and his institution even by suggesting there isn't one. As soon as many generals retire, they become the high-paid consultants and lobbyists for the major weapons manufacturers. There was a time when the Boston Globe and papers wrote about it. I wonder how many will now. It is time to recognize the problem and face up to the destructive influence it is having on our nation and our families in both our foreign and domestic policies.
whitey Interests T. Agee Kaye 10 September, 2020 10 Sep, 2020 02:09 PM
This is another consequence of allowing the people who own the media to own other things. Allowing the people who make bullets and bombs to own media is a sure recipe for perpetual war.

The media needs to be splintered into a thousand pieces with the new owners not allowed to own anything else. The Sherman anti trust act used to spell this out in law.

LonDubh 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:04 PM
It is quite normal for a top General to protect his cabal of corruption. He still has his slush fund money to protect. These military "Heroes" are in the habit of sending men to their deaths, just to advance themselves into top jobs with the Military Industrial Complex.

They retire into prime Lobbying positions as well. This corruption has produced more broken Veterans than Covid-19 has produced deaths. VFW (Victims of Futile Wars) have seen their ranks increase and their support mechanism decreased. Another generation of American youth destined for the scrapheap of "Heros"

IgyBundy LonDubh 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 04:25 AM
Have you noticed what great liars these so called honorable military brass have become? Better than most politicians..
Frank Cannon LonDubh 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 09:09 PM
1/3 less troops in germany, no new wars , troops in Syria brought home . all indicates that he is making progress. & is fighting against endless wars
Northern Light 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:52 PM
“ I can assure the American people that the senior leaders would only recommend sending our troops to combat when it is required in national security and in the last resort, ” As invading Syria, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Grenada, Cambodia, Laos.... and many other countries was a last resort to secure the US national security.
Kwok Shsee Northern Light 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 09:49 AM
You forgot Iraq, Libya, Korea, and Yugoslavia~
changyao 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 06:58 PM
Everyone knows that there is collusion between some serving and ex top guns with the MIC. Resulting in endless wars everywhere and many countries are forced by security tension to buy more expensive weapons which they can ill afford
Juan_More changyao 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:41 PM
It is not the generals but the politicians that started the endless wars. The politicians get campaign donations to their Super PACs or to an offshore numbered bank account.
Jewel Gyn 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 09:07 PM
What national security threat and last resort when all wars conducted are in foreign soils. Even if there are threats on the hundreds of military bases deployed around the world, the question is still 'what the *f are US troops there in the first place'.
Mark La Brooy 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 09:59 PM
Is it any surprise that the US spends $700 billion on defense. Next comes China with only $90 billion or thereabouts. Yes, Trump is right. It is all about the US military industry complex and continuous war.
JingsGeordie 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:23 PM
Apparently it's been the last resort continually since 1775.
Sinalco 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:05 PM
Trump says those things, and at the same time increases the Pentagon's budget & spending to over $1 Trillion (more than the next 15 Countries combined, and 13 of them are your allies).. As they say, action speaks louder than words - those are just cheap empty words to rally his base for the coming election.
whitey Interests Sinalco 10 September, 2020 10 Sep, 2020 02:13 PM
Unfortunately Trumps base likes war.
GottaBeMe Sinalco 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 09:28 PM
If you remember, it’s congress that approves of spending. And both the Dems and repubs authorize more and more money to the military.
PublicEnemy_1 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 08:32 PM
Trump not as much of a war monger as the establishment would like. Most Americans oppose war but that has never slowed the establishment. Probably the biggest reason the establishment is so opposed to Trump, among the other obvious reasons.
Kwok Shsee PublicEnemy_1 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 09:57 AM
Are you a kindergartener or just plainly naive?!!! Trump knows Americans love to hear this, so he is giving you the LIP SERVICE FCOL !!! He will pamper the MIC just as he has been doing in the last 4 years once the election in November is over! Exactly because americans are so incredibly foolish that Trump or Biden will be your next president, LOL!
donkeyoatee 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 01:52 AM
How was Vietnam or Iraq anything to do with US "national security" or the wars in Yemen or anywhere in the middle east and around the globe. The US isn't doing "National security" it's doing interference and domination.
Ekaterina 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 08:00 PM
I would laugh if this whole situation wasn’t so pitiful and sad. Eisenhower was right.
Shelbouy 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 10:34 AM
So many people say that Trump has not started any wars, which makes him ok. He didn't have to, there were enough already going on. What he did not do is stop any!
Juan_More 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 07:39 PM
When the Generals and Colonels end up with very cushy jobs in the MIC after they retire. It certainly does look like something is up. After all who authorised the F35, Ford class aircraft carriers and my favourite winner of the silly name for a boat the USS Zumwalt
NonDucorDuco 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 08:12 PM
The MIC stooges at the Pentagon don't need to say anything, as Trump's remark reflects what everybody already knows for decades.
Enki14 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 06:42 PM
LOL The facts speak for themselves and if one considers the endless war(s) since 911 were based on LIES...the towers were brought down by controlled demolition...in charge that day was dick cheney.
whitey Interests Enki14 10 September, 2020 10 Sep, 2020 02:25 PM
Wall St did 911.
Rocky_Fjord 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:39 PM
Trump is picking up some that vote that supported Tulsi Gabbard, or so I speculate. Though he speaks with a bit of forked tongue -- stealing oil in Syria, won't pull out of Iraq when told by Iraqi government; still in Afghanistan long after the Pentagon lost the war there again another war lost against a fourth world country. And he's flirted with an invasion of Venezuela, perhaps to keep the hawks and neolibs like Bolton and Bill Krystal on the edge of their seats. Sort of like Merkel getting exercised over Navalny to counter all the blather of war hawks and those who want to scuttle Nordstream 2. Throwing the ideological dog a bone. It's satisfying to finally hear a US president pick up the theme Eisenhower warned of. Now let him tell the truth of the filthy soul of the CIA, to take up where JFK left off. Trump could do far worse than to thank Pence for his... See more
Jim Christian Rocky_Fjord 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:43 PM
Nah, Gabbi is a Democrat. But she's a good kid. She, unlike 99% of them, got a taste of ugly military service and spoke out, only to be crushed. All you need to know of military/political corruption is to study THAT.
Karl194 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 07:51 AM
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." Dwight Eisenhower (former USA President)
pykich Karl194 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 08:14 AM
says the man who signed the "Grenada Treaty"...
Jim Christian 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:37 PM
How many times has the 'good' general recycled himself between defense contractor jobs and board positions and then right back into the White House, sometimes to a University posting, then back to the Pentagon, rinsing and repeating several times after retirement? How do these Generals and Admirals become multi-millionaires otherwise? And there are hundreds of them. And they bring us the WORST, most corrupt procurement such as the Ford Class Carriers and the F-35, to name just TWO examples, albeit big ones Please. It's crooked as a 3-dollar bill. Look at the Pentagon opposition to Trump's every single overture toward peace in the Middle East (except Iran, which is a big mistake, our issues were resolved until they weren't under Trump). Any contest to the premise that the U.S. military is corrupt beyond repair is patently absurd. And this "General" is just the wrong representative to refute the truth. He is after all, part of the corruption.
Rocky_Fjord Jim Christian 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:46 PM
Two classes of US submarines were made with inferior steel from Australia. The steel was known by the contractor to be inferior, but the Pentagon did not run its own tests. So tens of billions wasted for subs that are unsafe at depths and of course in actual combat conditions. The generals and politicians float above it all like scu*m on a fe*tid pond.
shadowlady 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 09:24 PM
The Pentagon has to justify its enormous budget, they provoke conflict at every turn.
a325 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 09:06 PM
“I can assure the American people that the senior leaders would only recommend sending our troops to combat when it is required in national security and in the last resort" yada yada , of course you are going to say that. Admitting the truth would be instant career suicide
Raider Ssmc 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:47 PM
wasn't it Trump and many other presidents who were dishing out money left right and centre to the american war machine to build bigger and so called better weapons. Goes to show no matter what when push comes to shove the american government will always blame anyone else but themselves.
foxenburg 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 01:48 AM
An interviewer should test this man's integrity with a simple question, such as.. "When you retire, will promise to live off your generous pension....like Eisenhower in his rocking chair....and not go to work for an arms manufacturer or think tank or any other paid position?"
Dallas Snell Sr. 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 08:00 AM
Ever since Obama was elected we hear way to much out of these so called Generals. Jumping on a bandwagon is something active Generals should never do.
lectrodectus 10 September, 2020 10 Sep, 2020 02:06 AM
Frankiln Delanor Roosevelt: (During The Depression Created The WPA Works Progress Administration) "Instead Of Spending As Some Nations Do Half Their National Income In Piling Up Armaments And More Armaments For The Purposes Of War, We in America Are Wiser In Using Our Wealth On Projects Like This Which Will Us More Wealth And Greater Happiness For Our Children" (Fireside Chats) Similar To Dwight D Eisenhower.
RealWorld1 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 12:26 PM
Trump should spin the rest of the beans. Directly and indirectly, the Violence Industry is the biggest employer in the US. It's a gigantic social program.
Cabonnet 57 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 08:23 PM
I think Trump is posturing for re election purposes . He is clearly in the hands of the deep state.
Fred Dozer 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 12:17 AM
Trump promised to end America’s “endless wars” . Just look at the people he appointed. They all love war. and trying to expand them. Russia showed the world, convoys of stolen Syrian oil. Than Russia bombed them. Now the US is stealing even more Syrian oil and nobody is bombing it.
venze chern 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:18 PM
Is Trump really anti-war? Or he is just trying to exert his power over those hawkish generals in Pentagon to tell the world who is in charge of US? If he is truly against all kinds of war, that must be the only acceptable thing he has done so far.
pykich venze chern 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 08:13 AM
it would look like that he only engages in the conflicts that his son in law asks him to do, just a small subset of the larger set...
Anastasia Deko 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 03:42 PM
The war industry, the prison industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and many others, they all have their lobbyists and their plans for making more money. And manufacturing more wars, more prisoners, and more diseases is not beyond them. Freedom and democracy and high cholesterol are money making cons, and sometimes it takes a con like Trump to recognize it.
PurplePaw 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 02:59 PM
IF TRUMP WANTS TO END WARS ( KILLING) AND RIGHTLY SO THESE SO CALLED GENERALS NEED TO BE OUSTED FAST. THE MILITARY SHOULD BE IN MY VIEW INCLUDED IN POLITICS AND EXPOSED AS IN ANCIENT TIMES. A WARRIOR SHOULD BE ABLE TO BECOME CHIEF AS IN THE PAST. A PERSON LIKE ALEXANDER, JULIUS, BUT THEY MUST ALSO BE THE MOST GALLANT WITH HUMILITY AS IN ARTHUR'S DAYS. NONE OF THE HIGH MILITARY MEN HIDING BEHIND THE CLOAK IN THE DARK TO DECEIVE WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT. TO MUCH OF THAT WHERE THEY ARE. TRUMP IS RIGHT ON HERE, STOP ABORTION.
pykich 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 08:10 AM
They should ask him what his plans after retiring are...
Ph7 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 06:06 AM
If he's so worried about national security "his" troops should be on the streets of US not in the bushes of Afghanistan and Iraq .
Orwellmatters 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 10:44 PM
off topic, but very important, Sen. Ben Sasse's op-ed regarding repeal of the 17th amendment. Haven't seen mention of it at RT. Whether you are red or blue, this is massive in returning power to the people.
DavidG992 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 06:08 PM
He could stage this 'ati-war' show only becasue democrats have ceded opposition to the military-industrial war machine to a belligerent fraud.
Anastasia Deko DavidG992 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 09:50 PM
The Dem big shots are pro-war, so they didn't cede anything. They just hope that the public doesn't realize what Biden is really about.
Dallas Snell Sr. 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 08:06 AM
Absolute truth really bothers these folks a lot. And Trump is not afraid to speak it.
Frank Cannon 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 08:58 PM
They leave the military for high paying indusrty jobs as a form of Briberty / reward for keeping the endless wrs going & business good..
Mark90168 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 04:24 AM
Every candidate before election become wise due to seeing sword over his heads but after winning the election they again become hate mongers and wars lovers. The US election candidates should never be trusted. It reminds me "The game of thrones."
Taoist Student 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:44 PM
This is easy. Trump has always done exactly as the pentagon wants. this is a stunt for Qanon votes that's all. Trump is smart he reads. He knows what Qanon thinks and wants to give them a bone.
Rocky_Fjord Taoist Student 8 September, 2020 8 Sep, 2020 11:47 PM
So the man can think and act -- well that's a start.
flakebuster 15 September, 2020 15 Sep, 2020 06:26 PM
General James McConville , even if you tell us that tomorrow the Sun will rise from the East we will not believe you, until we see it ourselves, general McCorrupt.
Karl194 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 07:55 AM
The DEEP STATE is build by the bosses in the FBI, CIA and the PENTAGON.
Winter7Mute 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 04:41 AM
Violence as a way of gaining power... is being camouflaged under the guise of tradition, national honor [and] national security. For almost 100yrs now.
Mark90168 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 05:04 AM
Every candidate before election become wise due to seeing sword over his heads but after winning the election they again become hate mongers and wars lovers. The US election candidates should never be trusted. It reminds me the game of thrones.
Dallas Snell Sr. 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 08:11 AM
Biden was thinking about rebuilding contracts for his family and friends before the first bombs ever fell General..
IgyBundy 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 04:22 AM
Army Chief of Staff General James McConville a man without honor a coward and a liar.. As most of the US military seems to be..
Arti Doane 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 12:11 PM
After Obama's purge of the military all that's left are the money making war mongers.
far_cough 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 04:08 AM
this 'national security' lie is getting really tired. but these general think american people are stupid enough to buy it.

[Oct 01, 2020] Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations cost him -- but he never gave up by Lev Golinkin

Highly recommended!
I draw your attention to the irrefutable fact that Mr. Cohen said that the Buk missile, which brought down Malaysian Flight 370 over the skies of Donbas, was the Ukraine government "playing with its new toys and made a big mistake." -- and I draw your attention to the irrefutable fact that Mr. Cohen said that the Buk missile, which brought down Malaysian Flight 370 over the skies of Donbas, was the Ukraine government "playing with its new toys and made a big mistake."
He was a real giant in comparison with intellectual scum like Fiona Hill, Michael McFaul and other neocons.
Notable quotes:
"... I tried to explain to American friends what was happening, but quickly realized that ultimately, even friends believe what they read in the newspapers, and the newspapers were pushing the Washington line. Except for Steve Cohen. Steve was the only major figure in America who insisted on remembering the Russian-speaking Ukrainians who, like my family members, distrusted and hated the new Kiev government. He spoke of neo-Nazi paramilitiaries who fought for the US-backed government committing war crimes against civilians in eastern Ukraine. He spoke the truth, regardless of how unwieldy it was. ..."
"... There's a lot to say about Steve. He was extraordinarily kind, never forgetting that in geopolitics, the ones who have the most to lose aren't strategists but everyday individuals impacted by policy. He was a consummate teacher, insisting on giving mentees the skills to navigate the world, a real proponent of the Teach a man to fish philosophy. He had facets and stories and memories; he lived life with empathy and gusto. ..."
"... Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations drew all sorts of attention. America was hurtling toward a new cold war with Russia, and Steve well, from the perspective of Washington's foreign policy establishment, Steve was fucking up the narrative. Steve talked about inconvenient things, things like US-backed war criminals and America's own meddling in Russian affairs; in the process, he himself had become inconvenient. ..."
"... After all, this wasn't some random blogger. This was one of America's foremost Russia experts, a tenured professor at Princeton and New York University, someone who didn't just write about history but had dinner with it, had briefed US presidents, and was friends with legends like Mikhail Gorbachev. Steve had clout earned from decades of brilliant work; by 2014, he was using that clout to throw a wrench in the think tank world. ..."
"... It was something far colder, more sustained, something that ironically the Soviets did to dissidents: a relentless crusade to render the target untouchable, a leper without a platform. The barrage of articles and diatribes hurled at Steve in the national press painted him as not just a dissenter but a supporter of dictators and murderers. It was a vicious, prolonged assault carried out by think tank toadies, the kind of people who win races by kneecapping the competition. ..."
"... I'd often talk with Steve after a new hatchet job or smear on national television. Of course, the attacks were hurtful -- the only way to not be affected was to not care, and Steve cared. But I also noticed he was remarkably free of bitterness. Every time I thought he'd snap, he'd return the next day to write, discuss, keep fighting. ..."
"... It took me a couple of years to understand that what kept Steve going was faith in his beloved institutions. He believed in academia, in scholarship, in discourse, debate, and civility. He believed in the capacity of everyday people to explore and engage with their world, he believed in Russia, and he always believed in America. He believed in these things far more than he believed in the power of today's warmongers. ..."
"... In 1967 Noam Chomsky wrote an article in the NY Review entitled "the Responsibility of Intellectuals" the first sentence ran like this: "IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies.". Stephen Cohen did precisely that when all the parrots and pundits were lined up against him. ..."
"... Always I was skeptical of prevailing scholarly interpretive trends on the Soviet experience that were echoed by colleagues claiming expertise on the subject. Cohen provided the foundation for my skepticism and invigorated my lectures on American foreign policy. ..."
"... Once Cohen plied his knowledge against the hysterical narrative that culminated in 4 years of frothing neo-McCarthyism (by the freakin' "left," no less), we were no longer gonna see him on the PBS newshour any more likely than we would and will see chris hedges, chomsky, or margaret kimberly. ..."
"... His book War With Russia? was an oasis of counter-narrative when I picked it up. Losing voices like his is immeasurable as we hurtle toward total war with Russia and/or China, both of whom are finally, naturally, and perfectly predictably beginning to draw a line in the sand. ..."
Oct 01, 2020 | www.thenation.com

I first reached out to Stephen Cohen because I was losing my mind.

In the spring of 2014, a war broke out in my homeland of Ukraine. It was a horrific war in a bitterly divided nation, which turned eastern Ukraine into a bombed-out wasteland. But that's not how it was portrayed in America. Because millions of eastern Ukrainians were against the US-backed government, their opinions were inconvenient for the West. Washington needed a clean story about Ukraine fighting the Kremlin; as a result, US media avoided reporting about the "wrong" half of the country. Twenty-plus million people were written out of the narrative, as if they never existed.

I tried to explain to American friends what was happening, but quickly realized that ultimately, even friends believe what they read in the newspapers, and the newspapers were pushing the Washington line. Except for Steve Cohen. Steve was the only major figure in America who insisted on remembering the Russian-speaking Ukrainians who, like my family members, distrusted and hated the new Kiev government. He spoke of neo-Nazi paramilitiaries who fought for the US-backed government committing war crimes against civilians in eastern Ukraine. He spoke the truth, regardless of how unwieldy it was.

And so I e-mailed him, asking for guidance as I began my own writing career. Of course, there were many who clamored for Steve's time, but I had an advantage over others. Steve and I were both night owls, real night owls, the kind who have afternoon tea at three am. It was then, when the east coast was sleeping, that he became my mentor and friend.

There's a lot to say about Steve. He was extraordinarily kind, never forgetting that in geopolitics, the ones who have the most to lose aren't strategists but everyday individuals impacted by policy. He was a consummate teacher, insisting on giving mentees the skills to navigate the world, a real proponent of the Teach a man to fish philosophy. He had facets and stories and memories; he lived life with empathy and gusto.

But one thing Steve taught me is to stick to my strengths, and truth be told, there are others who can describe his life better than I. I'll stick to what I learned during our conversations at three in the morning, which is that, above all else, Stephen F. Cohen was a man of faith.

Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations drew all sorts of attention. America was hurtling toward a new cold war with Russia, and Steve well, from the perspective of Washington's foreign policy establishment, Steve was fucking up the narrative. Steve talked about inconvenient things, things like US-backed war criminals and America's own meddling in Russian affairs; in the process, he himself had become inconvenient.

After all, this wasn't some random blogger. This was one of America's foremost Russia experts, a tenured professor at Princeton and New York University, someone who didn't just write about history but had dinner with it, had briefed US presidents, and was friends with legends like Mikhail Gorbachev. Steve had clout earned from decades of brilliant work; by 2014, he was using that clout to throw a wrench in the think tank world.

The DC apparatchiks couldn't discredit Steve's credentials or track record -- he'd predicted events in Ukraine and elsewhere years before they occurred. They couldn't intimidate him -- he'd faced far worse threats, like the KGB. Instead, they set out to turn him into an America-hating, Putin-loving pariah.

This went beyond an ad hominem campaign. It was something far colder, more sustained, something that ironically the Soviets did to dissidents: a relentless crusade to render the target untouchable, a leper without a platform. The barrage of articles and diatribes hurled at Steve in the national press painted him as not just a dissenter but a supporter of dictators and murderers. It was a vicious, prolonged assault carried out by think tank toadies, the kind of people who win races by kneecapping the competition.

I'd often talk with Steve after a new hatchet job or smear on national television. Of course, the attacks were hurtful -- the only way to not be affected was to not care, and Steve cared. But I also noticed he was remarkably free of bitterness. Every time I thought he'd snap, he'd return the next day to write, discuss, keep fighting.

It took me a couple of years to understand that what kept Steve going was faith in his beloved institutions. He believed in academia, in scholarship, in discourse, debate, and civility. He believed in the capacity of everyday people to explore and engage with their world, he believed in Russia, and he always believed in America. He believed in these things far more than he believed in the power of today's warmongers.

Steve liked movies and would often end a lecture with a movie reference to drive home the thesis. When I think of him, I think of the ending of The Shawshank Redemption , the line about Andy Dufresne crawling through filth and coming out clean on the other side. Steve didn't live in a movie; I can't claim he emerged unscathed. What he did was come through without bitterness or cynicism. He refused to turn away from the ugliness, but he didn't allow it to blind him to beauty. He walked with grace. And he lost neither his convictions nor his faith.

Lev Golinkin Lev Golinkin is the author of A Backpack, a Bear, and Eight Crates of Vodka, Amazon's Debut of the Month, a Barnes & Noble's Discover Great New Writers program selection, and winner of the Premio Salerno Libro d'Europa. Golinkin, a graduate of Boston College, came to the US as a child refugee from the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkov (now called Kharkiv) in 1990. His writing on the Ukraine crisis, Russia, the far right, and immigrant and refugee identity has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, CNN, The Boston Globe, Politico Europe, and Time (online), among other venues; he has been interviewed by MSNBC, NPR, ABC Radio, WSJ Live and HuffPost Live.

Pierre Guerlain says: October 1, 2020 at 12:42 pm

In 1967 Noam Chomsky wrote an article in the NY Review entitled "the Responsibility of Intellectuals" the first sentence ran like this: "IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies.". Stephen Cohen did precisely that when all the parrots and pundits were lined up against him. He was a Mensch. History will bear him the historian out.

Valera Bochkarev says to Lance Haley: October 1, 2020 at 11:09 am

Hmm, who's the apologist here ?

If the Ukraine is SO sovereign how is it I did not see any outrage in your diatribe against 'Toria, Pyatt and the rest orchestrating the Maidan putsch or the $5Billion US spent on softening up the ukraine for the regime change ?

I believe in numbers, as in the number of military bases any given country has surrounding the ones it wants to subvert, in the amount of money allocated to vilify and eventually bring down the "unwanted" regimes and the quantity and 'quality' of sanctions imposed against those regimes; and the sum of all of the above perpetrated against humanity in the past 75 or so years.

Your vapid drivel, Mr Haley, evaporates almost without a trace once seen with those parameters in mind.

Numbers don't lie.

Michael Batinski says: September 30, 2020 at 5:48 pm

Let me add from the perspective of an American historian who taught for forty years in a midwestern university. From the start I depended on William Appleman Williams to keep perspective and to counter prevailing interpretive trends.

Always I was skeptical of prevailing scholarly interpretive trends on the Soviet experience that were echoed by colleagues claiming expertise on the subject. Cohen provided the foundation for my skepticism and invigorated my lectures on American foreign policy.

I will always be thankful.

Michael Batinski

Tim Ashby says: September 30, 2020 at 2:37 pm

The smothering agitprop in America trumps even Goebbels and co. with its beautifully dressed overton window and first-amendment-free-press bullshit.

Once Cohen plied his knowledge against the hysterical narrative that culminated in 4 years of frothing neo-McCarthyism (by the freakin' "left," no less), we were no longer gonna see him on the PBS newshour any more likely than we would and will see chris hedges, chomsky, or margaret kimberly.

Let's face it, we were lucky to win the editorial fight to even give him space in the Nation.

His book War With Russia? was an oasis of counter-narrative when I picked it up. Losing voices like his is immeasurable as we hurtle toward total war with Russia and/or China, both of whom are finally, naturally, and perfectly predictably beginning to draw a line in the sand.

[Oct 01, 2020] Getting Rid of the Myth of 'Isolationism' -

Notable quotes:
"... The Tragedy of American Diplomacy ..."
Oct 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Getting Rid Of The Myth Of 'Isolationism'

'Isolationism' is not real, and never has been. It is an insult thrown at realists by the architects of senseless wars. (By Mike Focus/Shutterstock)

SEPTEMBER 30, 2020

|

12:01 AM

DANIEL LARISON

No one claims to be an isolationist, but foreign policy analysts keep imagining and fearing a "resurgence" of isolationism around every corner. This fear was on display in a recent Atlantic article by Charles Kupchan, who tries to rehabilitate the label in order to oppose the substance of a policy of nonintervention and non-entanglement. Kupchan allows that a policy of avoiding entangling alliances and staying out of European wars was important for the growth and prosperity of the United States, but then rehearses the same old and misleading story about the terrible "isolationist" interwar years that we have heard countless times before. This misrepresents the history of that period and compromises our ability to rethink our foreign policy today.

Kupchan's article is not just an exercise in beating a dead horse, since he fears that the same thing that happened between the world wars is happening again: "If the 19th century was isolationism's finest hour, the interwar era was surely its darkest and most deluded. The conditions that led to this misguided run for cover are making a comeback." Kupchan wants to borrow a little from the people he calls "isolationists" so that the U.S. will remain thoroughly ensnared in most of its global commitments.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=www.theamericanconservative.com&width=838

At the same time that he warns that "U.S. statecraft has become divorced from popular will," he seems to want to keep it this way by rejecting what he calls the "isolationist temptation." If "a majority of the country favors either America First or global disengagement," as he says, the goal seems to be to ignore what the majority wants in favor of making a few tweaks to the same old strategy of U.S. primacy. Those tweaks aren't going to lessen popular support for a reduced U.S. role in the world, and they will likely make the public even more disillusioned with the remaining costs and demands of U.S. "leadership."

The key thing to remember in all this is that the U.S. has never been isolationist in its foreign relations. The thing that Kupchan calls America's "default setting" is not real. Isolationism is the pejorative term that expansionists and interventionists have used over the last century to ridicule and dismiss opposition to unnecessary wars. Isolationism as U.S. policy in the 1920s and 1930s is a myth , and the myth is deployed whenever there has been a serious challenge to the status quo in post-1945 U.S. foreign policy. Bear Braumoeller summed it up very well in his article , "The Myth of American Isolationism," this way: "the characterization of America as isolationist in the interwar period is simply wrong." We can't learn from the past if we insist on distorting it. As William Appleman Williams put it in The Tragedy of American Diplomacy , "It not only deforms the history of the decade from 1919 to 1930, but it also twists the story of American entry into World War II and warps the record of the cold war." Williams also remarked in a note that the use of the term isolationist "has thus crippled American thought about foreign policy for 50 years." Today we can say that it has done so for a century.

Our government eschewed permanent alliances for most of its history, and it refrained from taking sides in the European Great Power conflicts of the nineteenth century, but it never sought to cut itself from the world and could not have done that even if it had wished to do so. The U.S. was a commercial republic from the start, and it cultivated economic and diplomatic ties with as many states as possible. You can call the steady expansion of the U.S. across North America and into the Pacific and Caribbean "isolationism," but that just shows how misleading and inaccurate the label has always been.

Post-WWI America was a rising power and increasingly involved in the affairs of the world. Its economic and diplomatic engagement with the world increased during these years. If it wasn't involved in the way that later internationalists would have liked, that didn't make the U.S. isolationist. Braumoeller makes this point explicitly: "America was not isolationist in affairs relating to international security in Europe for the bulk of the period: in fact, it was perhaps more internationalist than it had ever been." The U.S. was behaving as a great power, but one that strove to maintain its neutrality. That was neither deluded nor disastrous, and we need to stop pretending that it was if we are ever going to be able to make the needed changes to our foreign policy today.

me title=

00:13 / 00:59 00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused

Kupchan acknowledges that there has to be an "adjustment" after the last several decades of overreach, but he casts this as a way of preventing more significant retrenchment: "The paramount question is whether that adjustment takes the form of a judicious pullback or a more dangerous retreat." No one objects to the desire for a responsible reduction in U.S. commitments, but one person's "judicious pullback" will often be denounced as a "dangerous retreat" by others. Just consider how many times we have been warned about a U.S. "retreat" from the Middle East over the last 11 years. Even now, the U.S. is still taking part in multiple wars across the region, and the "retreat" we have been told has happened several times never seems to take place. Warning about the perils of an "isolationist comeback" hardly makes it more likely that these withdrawals will ever happen.

He recommends that "judicious retrenchment should entail shedding U.S. entanglements in the periphery, not in the strategic heartlands of Europe and Asia." Certainly, any reduction in unnecessary U.S. commitments is welcome, but a thorough rethinking of U.S. foreign policy has to include every region. Kupchan is right to criticize slapdash, incompetent withdrawals, but one gets the impression that he thinks there shouldn't be any withdrawals except from the Middle East. He cites "Russian and Chinese threats" as the main reasons not to pull back at all in Europe or Asia, but this seems like an uncritical endorsement of the status quo.

It is in East Asia where the U.S. might be fighting a war against a major, nuclear-armed power in the future, and it is also there where the U.S. has some of the wealthiest and most capable allies. If the U.S. can't reduce its exposure to the risk of a major war where that risk is the greatest and its allies are strongest, when will it ever be able to do that? Reducing the U.S. military presence in East Asia will make it easier to manage U.S.-Chinese tensions, and it will give allies an additional incentive to assume more responsibility for their own security.

The U.S. has far more security commitments than it can afford and far more than can possibly be justified by our own security interests. That includes, but is not limited to, our overcommitment to the Middle East. Our foreign entanglements have been allowed to grow and spread to such an extent over the last seventy-five years that modest pruning won't be good enough to put U.S. foreign policy on a sound footing that will have reliable public support. There needs to be a much more comprehensive review of all U.S. commitments to determine which ones are truly necessary for our security and which ones are not. Ruling out the bulk of those commitments as untouchable in advance is a mistake.

There is broad public support for constructive international engagement, but there is remarkably little backing for preserving U.S. hegemony in its current form. In order to have a more sustainable foreign policy, the U.S. needs to scale back its ambitions in most parts of the world, and it needs to shift more of the security burdens for different regions to the countries that have the most at stake. That should be done deliberately and carefully, but it does need to happen if we are to realign our foreign policy with protecting the vital interests of the United States. ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .


Gaius Gracchus • 19 hours ago

Richard Hofsteder is largely responsible for this falsehood, like he is for making "populist" a by-word, as Thomas Frank points out in his new book.

I prefer the term "non-interventionist" or Washingtonian, myself. I continue to be stuck by the amazing wisdom of Washington's Farewell Address (largely written by Hamilton). It really should be our guide to this day.

Room_237 • 13 hours ago

The US had an active and fairly successful foreign policy in the 1920s. What hurt our foreign policy activities was the Great Depression.

bournite Room_237 • 11 hours ago

Try a seance and tell this Augusto Cesar Sandino. Two American brothers who owned a gold mine in his country had another brother at the State Department. That's how FP was "successful." https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

Disqus10021 bournite • 9 hours ago

Europe would have been better off if the US had stayed out of WWI and let major belligerents fight it out until they reached a cease fire on their own. The US entry into the war, tipped the scales in favor of Britain and France and resulted in a very harsh peace treaty being imposed on Germany in 1919. Four years later, Germany's currency collapsed, wiping out the savings of millions of average Germans. The Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930 made economic conditions for people in central Europe very bad and conrtibuted to the rising popularity of the Nazi party in Germany.

RAF • 12 hours ago • edited

The world is so much smaller today than it was when this country was formed and organized by the Founding Fathers. (Mothers were not allowed)

The idea of international associations and cooperation is required with today's world. When some country like China sneezes, the whole world needs a face mask!

The Age of Daniel Boone is dead. America must be fully engaged in world matters. That does not mean going into every country with our military. America needs to continue to give some leadership in world affairs. It would be suicidal to close the windows to the rest of the world.

rayray RAF • 4 hours ago

I agree. The world is interconnected, engagement is a necessity. The problem with the US FP at this point is to see every issue as an opportunity to throw around our military weight and call it "engagement". Being fully engaged in the world is a state department issue - smart and educated diplomats working the lines of communication and cooperation with every nation to build a reputation for US leadership, to foment peace, and to build prosperity. Obviously, under Trump and Pompeo this is a waste of breath.

Worth noting, a friend of mine, ex-CIA, has made an absolute fortune off of our military preoccupations. And even he said (perhaps exaggerating) that you could get rid of 90% of the traditional military with little or no loss in actual national security. Most of it is, as he said, corporate welfare and window dressing.

(Of course he then said you should spend what you've saved entirely on cyber-security)

bournite • 12 hours ago

Using the 'I' Word for War and Profit
Column by Tim Hartnett, posted on April 03, 2013
in War and Peace
Column by Tim Hartnett.

Exclusive to STR

For about a century now, Humpty-Dumpty has been the go-to man for fans of elaborate American foreign adventures. Unwelcome inquiries are put down with a one word incantation that blesses and immunizes government-funded schemes that are always cash cows for somebody. "Isolationist" means exactly what its users mean it to mean--no more and no less. Every entry on the first page of my online search for the word "isolationism" provided the same definition: "The national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries." Nobody on the furthest fringes of the political spectrum who gets ink or air time comes close calling for a plan fitting that description.

The word remains in healthy circulation despite the total absence of public figures advocating anything of the kind. Its real linguistic purpose is to obstruct examination of extra-territorial programs that don't work and often do considerable harm.

Most of us first learned of the dreaded I-beast in grade school study of WWI. Back in that good old day, the authorities had sense enough to put these naysayers in prisons after allowing hostile crowds to have at 'em for an hour or so. If the folks at The Weekly Standard, the Heritage Foundation, AEI, Fox News et al get their way, hoosegow entrepreneurs will be back in that market before too long. How could anyone oppose US entry into The Great War, anyway? It's what catapulted us to the top of the economic heap. We are probably only one good war away from reclaiming that title.

The first people to stoke lynch mobs with the "I" word claimed we were fighting a war "to make the world safe for democracy." The Irish, Indians, Algerians, Pacific Islanders, Russian peasants, Filipinos, the Congolese and millions of other Africans were not educated well enough to accept this as readily as freedom-loving Americans did. Without guys like J.P. Morgan, J.D. Rockefeller, Charles Schwab and others who hired PR men to keep the country thinking right thoughts, foreigners are often easily misled. Isolationists are as rare on Wall Street as atheists are in foxholes.

To understand the perfidious way that isolationism works, try and visualize a typical slice of American policy from say 1968. Some experts and officers in a room at the Pentagon decide a spot on the map could use a good bombing, and the order is relayed via satellite to South Vietnam. At five they leave work to fight rush hour traffic and get home in time for a smoke with Walter Cronkite. Some Navy fliers get dispatched, and once the napalm is fixed to the jets, they're airborne. Thirty-five minutes later, the right patch below them, it's bombs away and a U-turn. An undernourished five year old girl foolishly lives nearby and an eight ounce blob of gel burning at 1,800 degrees lands on her back. She is immediately screaming and burns for six minutes until an adult manages to put the incinerating child out.

Meanwhile, the flyboys are on terra firma again with beers, joints, Steppenwolf on the turntable and much lamenting of St. Louis' undeserved defeat at the hands of Detroit. The little girl's screaming still pierces the tropical air. The engineers and the chemists who designed the people-melting device are on the other side of the world asleep in their suburban beds. And the tiny thing can't stop screaming. The next day at Harvard, William Kristol is expounding on communism, the domino theory, social responsibility, moral courage and careful reading. And the 32 lb. waif is still going through an endless agony that no man of oxen strength should ever have to endure in a lifetime. Isolating on these kinds of details misses the "big picture," I've been told. Only communists, terrorists and other abominable -ists focus on this kind of inhumane minutiae.

Forty years later, John McCain was wittily singing the lyrics "bomb Iran" while doubtless a child was on fire somewhere that US ordnance had exploded. The one certain outcome of such events is a profit for weapons manufacturers. Isolationists are oddly skeptical of the many benefits anti-isolationists find in all-purpose bombing campaigns. What's always clear is that people who speak publicly about their love for humanitarian bombing expect to be paid for it.

There are a lot of things that "isolationists" just don't know, and it must be for this ignorance they are so despised by both mainstream media and Wall Street's favorite politicians. They don't know why we have 50,000 soldiers in Germany or another 30,000 in Japan. Why we paid to keep an incorrigible thug like Mubarak in business for 30 years. Why we need missiles in Eastern Europe. Why we helped every bloodthirsty, misanthropic power monger in Central America. Why we needed to help Turkey get Ocalan. Why South Ossetia's nationalistic prerogatives are our business. Why foreign governments should be pressured by our diplomats on Wall Street's behalf. Why our government takes some kind of stand in every foreign war, election, national event or internal matter of almost any kind. How we can indict one country for human rights violations while buddying up to worse offenders like Saudi Arabia regularly. Why our foreign initiatives proceed based on fantastic ideologies in contempt of facts. These are just a few of the quandaries that afflict the minds of people who aren't buying the divine right of American altruist aristocracy to fine tune the rest of the world. They aren't exactly keen on the hyper-interventionist tendencies that keep so many beltway bandits in the chips, either.

What they also don't know is why the elite media, the experts and elected officials, if they truly understand these things, can't be called upon to explain any of them to the rest of us satisfactorily. On March 20, Dana Milbank called Rand Paul an "isolationist" in his column without any explanation. In the future, he might want to right click on Microsoft Word and choose the Look up option before deploying the term.

After American involvement in Vietnam ended, many proponents of the action claimed the death toll there would have been even worse without our presence. Others go so far as to maintain that fighting in such conflicts protects US citizens' privileges, like freedom of speech, here at home. They expect us all to believe that "Isolationists," by any definition, wouldn't get away with spouting their un-American propaganda in public places, or on television if any were allowed there, but for a policy that napalms little girls.

While people smeared with the I-word persistently point out that they are merely against policies that are misguided, immoral and often murderous, their detractors insist that what they really oppose is America. In the "big picture" mindset of the interventionist, you can't have one without the other.

kouroi • 9 hours ago

Beat them over the head with a stick, that might do it.

As for the entanglements in east Asia, none of the countries under direct US vassalage have major disputes with China and do not need US protection. And it is likely that without the US Korea would be on a path to reunification. The US is trying to beat everyone in line to show who's the boss... So it seems, this K guy, like all his ilk are presenting things in a very Manichean way: either primacy or "isolationism". There is so much in between these two...

[Oct 01, 2020] Tucker Carlson pays tribute to Russia scholar Stephen F. Cohen - Fox News Video

Sep 29, 2020 | video.foxnews.com

The Nation contributing editor and frequent 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' guest died on Sept. 18 at age 81

[Sep 29, 2020] How much safer has the world become for Armenia since the collapse of the USSR

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOWEXILE September 27, 2020 at 2:17 am

Russian blogger:

Sep. 27th, 2020 | 02:57 pm

Ан-124 ВКС России прилетел в Армению.
Логистический ад, конечно.
Насколько для Армении мир стал безопаснее с развалом СССР, не правда ли?

An An-124 of the Russian Aerospace Forces has arrived in Armenia.

A logistical hell, of course.

How much safer has the world become for Armenia since the collapse of the USSR, isn't that so?

source

[Sep 29, 2020] Rostec announced the results of the Russian Be-200ES firefighting operations in Turkey

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL September 22, 2020 at 7:21 am

Russian Avaiation: Rostec announced the results of the Russian Be-200ES firefighting operations in Turkey
https://www.ruaviation.com/news/2020/9/21/15439/

Over the past three months, the Russian Be-200ES amphibious aircraft flew more than 200 times for suppressing wildland fires in Turkey. Aircraft with Russian crews onboard have been participating in the firefighting missions at difficult and strategically important places and locations since June 16. Total flight time exceeded 400 hours .
####

I don't know how I missed this.

So while Russia has been putting out fires in fancy parts of Turkey (Izmir), Turkey has been continuing its fires in Syria!

[Sep 29, 2020] Armenia claims Azerbaijani artillery attacks are intensifying as Nagorno-Karabakh officials allege they've downed Azeri warplane -- RT Russia Former Soviet Union

Sep 29, 2020 | www.rt.com

Fighting between Azerbaijani and Armenian forces over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh intensified, on Monday, with heavy civilian and military casualties reported amid disputed claims of an Azeri warplane being shot down.

Azerbaijani troops and forces from Nagorno-Karabakh have been trading artillery and rocket fire, with the population of much of Karabakh told to seek shelter. Meanwhile, Armenia has declared a general mobilization and barred men between the ages of 18 and 55 from leaving the country, except with the approval of military authorities.

The most intense attacks took place in the Aras river valley, near the border with Iran, and the Matagis-Talish front in the northeast of the region, according to Armenian Defense Ministry spokesman Artsrun Hovhannisyan. He claimed that the Azeri side has lost 22 tanks and a dozen other vehicles, along with 370 dead and many wounded.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1310588852793421824&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Frussia%2F501974-karabakh-fighting-intensifies-plane-downed%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

Artur Sargsyan, deputy commander of the Nagorno-Karabakh military, said their own losses so far have amounted to 84 dead and more than 200 wounded. Both figures should be understood in the context of an ongoing information war run by the belligerents.

Vagram Pogosyan, spokesman for the president of the self-declared Artsakh Republic – the ethnic Armenian de-facto government in the capital Stepanakert – said their forces shot down an Azeri An-2 airplane outside the town of Martuni on Monday. This is in addition to some three dozen drones, including ones provided by Turkey, that the Armenian forces claim to have shot down over the past 48 hours.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1310642793065459712&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Frussia%2F501974-karabakh-fighting-intensifies-plane-downed%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

Baku has denied the reports, saying only that two civilians were killed on Monday, in addition to five on Sunday, and 30 were injured. There was no official information on military casualties. Reports concerning the downed airplane were rejected as "not corresponding to reality."

Azeri forces have taken several strategically important locations near the village of Talish in Nagorno-Karabakh, Colonel Anar Eyvazov, spokesman for the Defense Ministry in Baku, said in a statement. He was also quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying that Lernik Vardanyan, an Armenian airborne commander, was killed near Talish. Armenia has denied this and labelled it "disinformation."

ALSO ON RT.COM Armenia braced for LONG WAR in Nagorno-Karabakh, PM Pashinyan's adviser warns saying Turkey behaves like 'regional terminator'

In a video conference on Monday, Azeri President Ilham Aliyev told UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres that the question of Nagorno-Karabakh should be resolved in line with UN Security Council resolutions guaranteeing the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and called for the urgent withdrawal of Armenian troops from "occupied territories."

The current Azeri offensive is backed by Turkey, whose President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called Armenia "the biggest threat" to peace in the region and called for it to end the "occupation" of Azeri land.

"Recent developments have given all influential regional countries an opportunity to put in place realistic and fair solutions," he said in Istanbul on Monday.

ALSO ON RT.COM Time to end 'occupation' of Nagorno-Karabakh, Turkish leader Erdogan tells Armenia as border clashes with Azerbaijan continue

Unconfirmed reports that Turkish-backed militants from northern Syria have been transported to Azerbaijan to fight the Armenians have been denied by Baku as "complete nonsense." They amount to "another provocation from the Armenian side," Khikmet Gadzhiev, an aide to President Aliyev, told Al Jazeera.

Meanwhile, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan vowed his people "won't retreat a single millimeter from defending our people and our Artsakh." All Armenians "must unite to defend our history, our homeland, identity, our future and our present, " Pashinyan tweeted on Sunday from Yerevan.

Nagorno-Karabakh is one of several border disputes left over from the collapse of the Soviet Union. An enclave predominantly populated by Armenians, it seceded from Azerbaijan in 1988 and declared itself the Republic of Artsakh following a bitter war in 1992-94.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Sep 29, 2020] Elena Evdokimova on Twitter -- War correspondent Alexander Kharchenko also believes that Turkey operates drones that attack Nagorny Kharabah

Sep 29, 2020 | twitter.com

by Alexander Kharchenko

yesterday at 8:42 pm

In Karabakh Turkish drones #Bayraktar started systematic destruction of enemy armored vehicles. Of course they are ruled by the Turks. Azerbaijani operators simply could not learn how to manage them in such a short time. The Armenian side opposes them with the outdated Osa-AKM complexes. They cannot cope with this task.

Most likely, the Coral electronic warfire system operate in conjusction with the drones. They create interference, operators are distracted by false targets, while drones enter the target and destroy it. If in the near future the Armenian side will not be able to quickly clear the airspace, then the Azerbaijanis will show many more shots with the destruction of armored vehicles.

What can be opposed to #Bayraktar ? Do not think that they are invulnerable. "BUKs" and "Pantsir" systems cope well with them. But we cannot say yet whether they are in the area of hostilities.

By their actions, the Ottomans make it clear that strike drones will be deployed anywhere in the world where there are Turkish interests. That's their brand. Similar to the Syrian mercenaries. Accordingly, their opponents first of all need to think about building an effective air defense system.

If you have a territorial dispute with Turkey, then it is better not to run to the UN with another note of protest. And he will directly turn to Russia with a request to urgently sell several "BUKs". Trust that there will be much more benefit from it. Indeed, while the world community calls on the parties to sit down at the negotiating table, dozens of your soldiers are dying on the battlefields. And "BUK" in seconds can prove to a presumptuous guest that he was not expected in this sky. And neither he nor his brothers should appear here.

[Sep 29, 2020] Azerbaijani Army And Syrian Jihadis Launch Attack On Armenian Lines

Sep 29, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Paco , Sep 28 2020 10:09 utc | 34

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 28 2020 3:16 utc | 26

Interesting link Evdokimova, 79% Armenians and 84% Azerbaijanis want the USSR back, that goes to confirm the castotrophe of the USSR dissolution, of course there would be no wars in that inmense area, in exchange for McDonalds advertised by Gorby we have now conflicts galore, Moldavia, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kirguizia, Abjazia, Osetia.... and who needs to eat that crap?

Jen , Sep 28 2020 11:06 utc | 35

An opportunity to hit several skittles with one ball was too much to leave alone for the Turks, especially if the skittles could be hit down in someone else's backyard and particularly if that someone else happens to be a client state of Turkey's.

It surely also suits the United States in some way, if that opportunity leads to Russia and Iran becoming bogged down fighting in the Caucasus, and they are forced to take their attention (and money, arms and fighters) away from Idlib province in NW Syria.

So presumably if the Azeris could beat the Armenians with imported "Syrian rebels", that then would encourage home-grown rebel wannabes in Daghestan, Chechnya and other Muslim areas in the northern Caucasus to "rise up" against Russian rule. At the same time, Azeris in NW Iran would be inspired (in the wildest dreams of both the American and Turkish governments) to rise up against Tehran and declare their part of Iran independent.

Unfortunately the Armenians, despite their government's pro-American tendencies, recovered from what must have been surprise attacks and were able to retaliate quickly and hard. Now Russia has taken the high road and offered itself as a mediator.

Let's see if the US and the EU can persuade the Armenians with their offers of loans worth billions (presumably contingent on Armenians deferring to Israel as to whose Holocaust deserves to be called a "Holocaust" and not a mere genocide - even though Winston Churchill about 100 years ago or so used the term to describe the Ottoman massacres of Armenians and other Christian groups in their empire) away from Russian mediation and negotiation. If the money fails to lure Armenia into the IMF / World Bank debt trap, there goes the opportunity to scatter all the skittles.

Chevrus , Sep 28 2020 18:20 utc | 46

I'm trying to get a better contextual setup to this conflict. I recall the USA directed coup attempt dubber "Electric Yerevan" when a company from said nation bought the power company, ran it into the ground and used it as a basis for sparking protests. Next I am hearing that the current president is a "Random Guido" who answer to the USA. If so how does this effect Armenias strategic partnership with Russia? From what little I know about the Armenian spirit they are fiercely devoted to their culture. Many Americans of Armenian would fly back to the old country in order to take up arms. It seems as though this conflict is going to escalate if only because the damage done so far. Armenia is fully mobilizing.
In regard to the Donbass situation, I gathered that the Ukrops army was heavily laden with conscripts many of whom fled to Russia. They succumbed to the cauldron tactic due in part to be order by "results driven" leaders in the rear. That and they stuck to the roads and were easily flanked by smaller NAF units operating "in the green" What I found interesting (and disturbing) about this conflict is that it resembles what could very well happen in the USA, minus the armor although....

Chevrus , Sep 28 2020 18:20 utc | 46

I'm trying to get a better contextual setup to this conflict. I recall the USA directed coup attempt dubber "Electric Yerevan" when a company from said nation bought the power company, ran it into the ground and used it as a basis for sparking protests. Next I am hearing that the current president is a "Random Guido" who answer to the USA. If so how does this effect Armenias strategic partnership with Russia? From what little I know about the Armenian spirit they are fiercely devoted to their culture. Many Americans of Armenian would fly back to the old country in order to take up arms. It seems as though this conflict is going to escalate if only because the damage done so far. Armenia is fully mobilizing.
In regard to the Donbass situation, I gathered that the Ukrops army was heavily laden with conscripts many of whom fled to Russia. They succumbed to the cauldron tactic due in part to be order by "results driven" leaders in the rear. That and they stuck to the roads and were easily flanked by smaller NAF units operating "in the green" What I found interesting (and disturbing) about this conflict is that it resembles what could very well happen in the USA, minus the armor although....

H.Schmatz , Sep 28 2020 20:13 utc | 47

Although it is, clearly I suppose, not my field, from known and new mostly military analysis sources recently found, I will try form a somehow readable post...( forgive thus if I do not write the weapons denomination correctly...I make the effort to keep you informed...and alos take into account, I am figuring out the events without thoroughly studying the maps, I have passed the day working/making food shopping/taking a nap... )

On the doubts about whether Russia would intervene on behalf of Armenia, that wouldv happen if Armenia request assistance under CIS agreements, but Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh ( currently Republic of Arsakh, the name of ancient Great Armenia, to eliminate the azeri denomination Karabakh.. ) is not Armenia, it is a region which apealed self-determination but not recognized by any nation so far...not even by Armenia, due the ceasfire signed in 1994 ( what implies that the war never ended, but was frozen for a while, to be reignited from time to time...) Thread ( you translate the Twitts on your own this time...otherwise would get too long post..)

https://twitter.com/descifraguerra/status/1310634361042145282

It is on the grounds of CIS agreements, I guess, that today some Russian MiG-29 overflow Yerevan...

https://twitter.com/Political_Room/status/1310604450424328192

Both countries are very mountainous terrain, this is Caucasus, what makes advancement quite difficult, thus, eventhough at first moments success was falling on the side of Azerbaijan ( which counts with the unestimable help of Turkish swarms of drones and intelligence from Turkish AWACSm it seems that Armenia, which has its borders mined, has inflicted heavy loses in armor to Azerbaijan today, destroyed and captured....( warning disturbing content of people flying in the air space..), also list of fallen in the Armenian side, most milennials...This is when most fallen could have originated...in Martakhert, in the North...

https://twitter.com/14Milimetros/status/1310173020082843655

https://twitter.com/Political_Room/status/1310635885738819584

#LATEST HOUR #URGENT #Azerbaiyan army claims to have destroyed #Armenia's air defense in Martakhert (north), with 12 OSA systems destroyed. The #Martakhert garrison would be surrounded and offered the option to surrender.

https://twitter.com/301_AD/status/1310574779733340160

#LATEST HOUR First list of fallen in combat by #Armenia. Note that most are kids born in 2000. The Armenian Defense Ministry also claims that during a successful counterattack they have captured 11 armor including an advanced BMP-3.

https://twitter.com/Political_Room/status/1310356974010339330

It seems that modern warfare through drones is rendering heavy armor a bit obsolete, well, like seating ducks slowly advancing in mountainous terrain of Caucasus..

https://twitter.com/SubBrief/status/1310359802615300097

The miniature air campaign being carried out by the #Azerbaijan drones against #Armenia seems to be very successful. Its main protagonist is being the MAM-L micromissiles from #Turkey.

https://twitter.com/Political_Room/status/1310604904042500105

#Azerbaiyan has already deployed the TOS-1 Buratino thermobaric rocket launchers. The #Azerbaiyan drone air campaign continues to wreak havoc on the Armenian ranks.

https://twitter.com/Political_Room/status/1310549583735459841

BTW, @flighradar24, where some people use to follow flights path is under attack...guys are saying this is Turkey/ Azrbaijan so that their drones can not be followed..

https://twitter.com/DragonLadyU2/status/1310662606261284869

Some additional points in this thread by another guy who works for @descifraguerra, with what is described by him as #cutremapa ( an outline made in the run without much precision so as to clarify his points.. ):

There are skirmishes throughout practically the entire front but the "serious" fighting is concentrated in the areas marked A (Murov Peak), B (Agdara - Heyvali axis) and C (Fuzuli region). Especially in the latter, I refer to the video.

The ultimate goal of the Azeris appears to be a south-north pincer on the capital of Artsakh, Stepanakert, with all the difficulties that this entails. Taking this into account, it seems that there are two previous objectives.

The first of these objectives is to cut the M11, the main logistics artery of Artsakh, for which they have two options: A) Take the peak of Murov and block the road taking advantage of the heights. But storming up the mountain is always tricky.
B) Take the Heyvali junction. To do so, they must first cross several towns, such as Aghdara, and it is in this area where it seems that more artillery fire is concentrating in the last hours.

The second ideal objective would be to cut the M12, the second most important road in the area and therefore the second most important supply route, but considering its position this is something very difficult to carry out in most of its tracing.

So it seems that they are opting for a second objective, a priori simpler: to capture the Fuzali region (remember, zone C on the map) and cut the M12 at the entrance to Stepanakert itself (just 1.37 km south From the capital).

For now, it seems that the Armenians are holding up well to the south, although it is the front in which the most intense fighting has taken place so far this day, but they have less and less anti-aircraft and that allows the Azeri drones to act.

On the growing military drone industry being built by Turkey ( guess where the command and control of those swarms of drones attacking one day after another Khmeimin and Syrian positions and warehousesd is placed ), in the hands of his son-in-law, it seems that Syrian oil smuggling resulted most profitting...

Turkey is laying the foundations of its geopolitics in the massive use of drones in places of conflict where it has great interests.

To achieve his goals, Erdogan managed to establish his own drone industry. He is currently in the hands of one of his sons-in-law.

https://twitter.com/14Milimetros/status/1310345958564204546

Some historical curiosities about the two "main" contenders...

Did you know...

-Armenia was the first country in the world to adopt Christianity as its official religion (301 AD)

-Azerbaijan was the first Muslim country in the world to adopt the secular parliamentary republic as a model state (1918).

https://twitter.com/14Milimetros/status/1310247759363088400


[Sep 29, 2020] Erdogan fancies Turkey to be Russia's equal on the world stage

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN September 29, 2020 at 3:45 pm

But Erdogan is so blatant in his challenges that it is plain he fancies Turkey to be Russia's equal on the world stage, and dares to poke it even as he takes actions that result in greater power and influence for Turkey. He needs a hard kick in the ass to remind him where his provocative actions are taking him. The west is unhappy with Turkey's cozying-up to Russsia, but is doubtless delighted when he behaves like this.

JAMES LAKE September 29, 2020 at 11:04 am

Karl,

Maybe Armenia could call it's new friends in NATO and in the EU

Please read the following it is a quote from an article over a Moon of Alabama.

" .. . Although a long-standing Russian partner, Armenia has also developed ties with the West: It provides troops to NATO-led operations in Afghanistan and is a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace, and it also recently agreed to strengthen its political ties with the EU. The United States might try to encourage Armenia to move fully into the NATO orbit. If the United States were to succeed in this policy, then Russia might be forced to withdraw from its army base at Gyumri and an army and air base near Yerevan (currently leased until 2044), and divert even more resources to its Southern Military District. "

Armenia after its colour revolution started to act in an anti -Russian way

Yet Russia is supposed to feel obliged to help Armenia?

What for? they have shown that they are going in another direction

And I think both Azerbaijan and Turkey looked at Armenia's behaviour to Russia and are taking full advantage of a weakened alliance.

KARL1HAUSHOFER September 29, 2020 at 1:10 pm

You make some good points. If Armenia has politically distanced itself from Russia and approached the West and the NATO then it makes no sense for Russia to offer help without strings attached. But Russia cannot let Turkey/Azerbaijan overrun Armenia either, or let Azerbaijan grab Nagarno-Karabakh, because it would strengthen Turkish position too much in the Caucasus region.

MARK CHAPMAN September 29, 2020 at 3:40 pm

Yes, you are plainly having the time of your life and yukking it up again like you do whenever something difficult happens to put Russia in a bad position – plainly, you are a real friend of Russia, and only motivated by concern. Keep on laughing and making jokes. Perhaps Russia should drop a bunker-buster on your house – would that be a martial enough reaction for you?

MARK CHAPMAN September 29, 2020 at 3:36 pm

They should – they should smack down a Turkish aircraft without warning and at the first available opportunity. Russia is trying to stabilize the situation and calm things down, while Turkey is openly backing Azerbaijan's military operation. A hard slap now could break the cycle, but it seems plain Erdogan will get away with whatever he is allowed to.

ET AL September 29, 2020 at 12:48 pm

It almost doesn't matter whether Turkey shot down the Armenian Su-25, rather that Armenia has publicly stated it. This is about crossing the Rubicon. For all the chest-beating and rah rah rah from In'Sultin' Erd O'Grand & Aliyev, both states have denied it happened. Here we clearly see the gulf between broadcast to self-and actual potential consequences of such an action.

Add to that Armenia has been open (not necessarily transparent) about its losses. Theres been nothing from Azerbaidjan except American Vietnam war style 'body counts' of Armenians.

It looks to me that Armenia are upping the ante to the max. and Azerbaidjan is left wanting by its response which makes no sense if its claims of victories/whatever are anywhere near true.

What I really want to know is what if any assistance, apart from words, the US is providing and comparatively Russia. One or them is clearly in a much better position than the other. There's really not much to go on as we know Russia does not broadcast and it certainly would not be in the current 'pro-EU' Armenian administrations interest either. Yet again, we are only left to ask what hasn't been said & done.

As far as I can see, Armenia is keeping most of its powder dry. The threat of 'other measures' is currently more useful (and doesn't entail the same risks) than actually enacting them. Maybe Putin will invite €µ to cover Aliyev's humilition as Sarkozy was for Sakaashiti's? Now that would be funny, but we must not get ahead of ourselves..

Strategically, each time In'Sultin' Erd O'Grand backs stunts like these, he exposes himself further to trouble at home. For Russia, not being fully NATO onside is evidently quite useful however distasteful his behavior is, but he may well be undoing himself and putting Turkey squarely back in to the western camp overall but retaining its nationalist Big Boy streak.

ET AL September 29, 2020 at 1:24 pm

BMPD: Директор Центра анализа стратегий и технологий о ситуации в Нагорном Карабахе
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4151211.html

Осеннее военное обострение в Нагорном Карабахе для многих стало совершенной неожиданностью. Но специалисты, которые следят за военно-политической обстановкой в Закавказье, подобное развитие событий давно предсказывали. В частности, эксперты Центра анализа стратегий и технологий (ЦАСТ) еще два года назад спрогнозировали обострение ситуации в Карабахе. В их книге "В ожидании бури: Южный Кавказ" даны оценки, которые, судя по всему, подтверждаются сегодня, пишет Сергей Вальченко в материале для сайта MK.ru
####

More at the link.

This looks like a reasonable analysis. If you are lazy like I am, use and online translator.

I don't see how Armenia can accept the loss of critical territory even if the Azeri operations are 'limited.' According to the interview, Azerbiajan is repeating the tactics of 2018 which is a big NO NO according to Tsun Tzu. I would be surprises is Armenia hasn't already planned for this. The big fly in this ointment is Yerevan which may delay or limit a response and listen to its 'western partners.' That would cement Azeri successes and damage the 'Pro-EU' government. One reasonable strategy would be to actually encourage Azeri 'successes' as tehy would be tempted to go further than their limited goals and draw the forces in to a pre-prepared 'cauldron', aka kiling zone as occured previously in the Donbass and wrap up the Azeri army and gain ground. There's the risk that it wouldn't work either, yet again Tsun Tzu do not fight the next war as you fough the last

[Sep 29, 2020] Strategic Aims Behind The War On Armenia

Sep 29, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Strategic Aims Behind The War On Armenia

On Sunday Ilham Aliyev, the longtime dictator of Azerbaijan, launched a war on the Armenian held Nagorno-Karabakh area. That he dared to do this now, 27 years after a ceasefire ended a war over the area, is a sign that the larger strategic picture has changed.

When the Soviet Union fell apart the Nagorno-Karabakh area had a mixed population of Azerbaijani (also called Azeri) Shia Muslims and Armenian Christians. As in other former Soviet republics ethnic diversity became problematic when the new states evolved. The mixed areas were fought over and Armenia won the Nagorno-Karabakh area. There have since been several border skirmishes and small wars between the two opponents but the intensity of the fighting is now much higher than before.


Source: Joshua Kushera - bigger

In 2006 Yasha Levine wrote about his visit to Nagorno-Karabakh for The Exile. He described the uneven opponents:

In 1994 the Armenians won and forced Azerbaijan to a ceasefire. In the meantime Nagorno-Karabakh organized itself into a sovereign country [called Artsakh] with its own army, elected officials and parliament. But it still hasn't been recognized by any country other than Armenia and is still classified as one of the "frozen conflicts" in the region, along with the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia.

But this "frozen conflict" may soon heat up, if you believe what Azerbaijan's playboy/gambling addict/president, Ilham Aliyev, says. Not that Azerbaijanis should get too excited about another war: If Armenians are still the fighters they were ten years ago, then statistically, it's the Azeris who'll do most of the dying. While matched evenly in soldiers, the Azeris had double the amount of heavy artillery, armored vehicles, and tanks than the Armenians; but when it was over, the Azeri body count was three times higher then that of the Armenians. Azeri casualties stood at 17,000. The Armenians only lost 6,000. And that's not even counting the remaining Azeri civilians the Armenians ethnically cleansed.

Since the strategically-important Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline opened up, pumping Caspian Sea oil to the West via Turkey, the Azeri president has been making open threats about reclaiming Nagorno-Karabakh by force. The $10 billion in oil revenues he expects to earn per year once the pipeline is fully operational is going to his head. $10 billion might not seem that much -- but for Azerbaijan it constitutes a 30% spike in GDP. In every single interview, Aliyev can't even mention the pipeline project without veering onto the subject of "resolving" the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Aliyev started spending the oil cash even before the oil started flowing and announced an immediate doubling of military spending. A little later he announced the doubling of all military salaries. Aliyev's generals aren't squeamish about bragging that by next year their military budget will be $1.2 billion, or about Armenia's entire federal budget.

Over the next 14 years the war that Yasha Levine foresaw in 2006 did not happen. That it was launched now points to an important change. In July another border skirmish broke out for still unknown reasons. Then Turkey stepped in :

Following the July conflict Turkey's involvement became much deeper than it had previously been, with unprecedentedly bellicose rhetoric coming from Ankara and repeated high-level visits between the two sides. Ankara appeared to see the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict as yet another arena in which to exercise its growing foreign policy ambitions, while appealing to a nationalist, anti-Armenian bloc in Turkey's domestic politics.

Turkey's tighter embrace, in turn, gave Baku the confidence to take a tougher line against Russia, Armenia's closest ally in the conflict but which maintains close ties with both countries. Azerbaijan heavily publicized (still unconfirmed) reports about large Russian weapons shipments to Armenia just following the fighting, and President Ilham Aliyev personally complained to his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin.

Turkey's President Erdogan intervened with more than rhetoric :

In August, Turkey and Azerbaijan completed two weeks of joint air and land military exercises, including in the Azerbaijani enclave of Naxcivan. Some observers have questioned whether Turkey left behind military equipment or even a contingent of troops.

The potential for robust Turkish involvement in the conflict is being watched closely by Russia, which is already on opposing sides with the NATO member in conflicts in Libya and Syria.

Russia sells weapons to both Azerbaijan and Armenia, but has a military base in Armenia and favors that strategic partnership.

Azerbaijan has bought drones from Turkey and Israel and there are rumors that they are flown by Turkish and Israeli personal. Turkey also hired 2,000 to 4,000 Sunni Jihadis from Syria to fight for the Shia Azerbaijan. A dozen of them were already killed on the first day of the war. One wonders how long they will be willing to be used as cannon fodder by the otherwise hated Shia.

There were additional rumors that there are Turkish fighter jets in Azerbaijan while Turkish spy planes look at the air-space over Armenia from its western border.


Source: IWN News - bigger

The immediate Azerbaijani war aim is to take the two districts Fizuli and Jabrayil in south-eastern corner of the Armenian held land:

While the core of the conflict between the two sides is the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, Fuzuli and Jabrayil are two of the seven districts surrounding Karabakh that Armenian forces occupy as well. Those districts, which were almost entirely populated by ethnic Azerbaijanis before the war, were home to the large majority of the more than 600,000 Azerbaijanis displaced in the conflict.

While there has been some modest settlement by Armenians into some of the occupied territories, Fuzuli and Jabrayil remain nearly entirely unpopulated.

The two districts have good farm land and Armenia, already poor, will want to keep them. It certainly is putting up a strong fight over them.

The war has not progressed well for Azerbaijan. It has already lost dozens of tanks (vid) and hundreds of soldiers. Internet access in the country has been completely blocked to hide the losses.

The losses do not hinder Erdogan's scribes to already write of victory :

Defending Azerbaijan is defending the homeland. This is our political identity and conscious. Our geopolitical mind and defense strategies are no different. Always remember, "homeland" is a very broad concept for us!

We are not making a simple exaggeration when we say "History has been reset." We are expecting a victory from the Caucasus as well!

Well ...

An hour ago the Armenian government said that Turkey shot down one of its planes:

Armenia says one of its fighter jets was shot down by a Turkish jet, in a major escalation in the conflict over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region.

The Armenian foreign ministry said the pilot of the Soviet-made SU-25 died after being hit by the Turkish F-16 in Armenian air space .

Turkey, which is backing Azerbaijan in the conflict, has denied the claim.
...
Azerbaijan has repeatedly stated that its air force does not have F-16 fighter jets. However, Turkey does.

A Turkish attack within Armenian borders would trigger the Collective Security Treaty which obligates Russia and others to defend Armenia.

A Russian entry into the war would give Erdogan a serious headache.

But that might not even be his worst problem. The Turkish economy is shrinking, the Central Bank has only little hard currency left, inflation is hight and the Turkish Lira continues to fall. Today it hit a new record low .


Source: Xe - bigger

Azerbaijan has quite a bit of oil money and may be able to help Erdogan. Money may indeed be a part of Erdogan's motivation to take part in this war.

Russia will certainly not jump head first into the conflict. It will be very careful to not over-extend itself and to thereby fall into a U.S. laid trap.

Last year the Pentagon financed RAND Corporation released a report that laid out plans against Russia :

Drawing on quantitative and qualitative data from Western and Russian sources, this report examines Russia's economic, political, and military vulnerabilities and anxieties. It then analyzes potential policy options to exploit them -- ideologically, economically, geopolitically, and militarily (including air and space, maritime, land, and multidomain options).

As one option the report discussed to over-extend Russia (pdf) in the Caucasus:

The United States could extend Russia in the Caucasus in two ways. First, the United States could push for a closer NATO relation-ship with Georgia and Azerbaijan, likely leading Russia to strengthen its military presence in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Armenia, and southern Russia.

Alternatively, the United States could try to induce Armenia to break with Russia. Although a long-standing Russian partner, Armenia has also developed ties with the West: It provides troops to NATO-led operations in Afghanistan and is a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace, and it also recently agreed to strengthen its political ties with the EU. The United States might try to encourage Armenia to move fully into the NATO orbit. If the United States were to succeed in this policy, then Russia might be forced to withdraw from its army base at Gyumri and an army and air base near Yerevan (currently leased until 2044), and divert even more resources to its Southern Military District.

The RAND report gives those options only a poor chance to succeed. But that does not not mean that the U.S. would not try to create some additional problems in Russia's southern near abroad. It may have given its NATO ally Turkey a signal that it would not mind if Erdogan gives Aliyev a helping hand and jumps into anther war against Russia.

Unless Armenian core land is seriously attacked Russia will likely stay aside. It will help Armenia with intelligence and equipment flown in through Iran. It will continue to talk with both sides and will try to arrange a ceasefire.

Pressing Azerbaijan into one will first require some significant Armenian successes against the invading forces. Thirty years agon the Armenians proved to be far better soldiers than the Azeris. From what one can gain from social media material that seems to still be the case. It will be the decisive element for the outcome of this conflict.

Posted by b on September 29, 2020 at 18:04 UTC | Permalink

div> As much as I appreciate b's conflict sitreps, I sure hope this one does not become a recurring one..

Posted by: Lozion , Sep 29 2020 18:29 utc | 1

As much as I appreciate b's conflict sitreps, I sure hope this one does not become a recurring one..

Posted by: Lozion | Sep 29 2020 18:29 utc | 1

c , Sep 29 2020 18:32 utc | 2
Thanks. The best explanación I have seen so far of this complicated situación
Sakineh Bagoom , Sep 29 2020 18:32 utc | 3
Love the report b.
This is how you use to have it on Syria. Keep it up.
GeorgeSmiley , Sep 29 2020 18:37 utc | 4
Best article in quite some time B, bravo!
karlof1 , Sep 29 2020 18:53 utc | 5
As I reported last week, the Armenians were one of the international participants in recent military exercises held in the Caucus region, and they frequently train with Russian troops as CSTO members. Neither the Azeris or Armenians can really afford a conflict, although the former have the better economic basis and have done a better job dealing with COVID. Because of their history, Armenians are better and more tenacious in combat. Until Nagorno-Karabakh is resolved, it will be exploited by the Outlaw US Empire.
Jackrabbit , Sep 29 2020 18:53 utc | 6
The war will draw Azerbaijan closer to NATO/Turkey just as Trump is turning the screws on Iran via extended UN sanctions.

Much of the Russian-Iranian trade would likely be conducted via Volga River and Caspian Sea.

What are the chances that we see mysterious attacks on shipping in the Caspian Sea?

<> <> <> <> <> <>

PS Erdogan's adventurism (aka Ottoman fantasies) seem like a smokescreen for Imperial operations.

!!

ptb , Sep 29 2020 18:57 utc | 7
Agreed very much with @1.

The trouble with this kind of intimate geography, is that it is very tempting to operate longer-range weapons or drones from the 'uncontested' portion of each country's territory, since each home territory is theoretically out of bounds of the conflict.

The main meaningful response to a long-range or unmanned attack, targeting the source, could then be used to blame the other side for any escalation. It seems Azerbaijan is more comfortable with this at the moment. Assuming they end up occupying more of the contested territory, they will end up on the receiving end of the same pattern, but either way the result would be the same.

Besides the muddled geopolitics and heartbreaking history, it makes for a relevant study in the state of modern drone and anti-drone systems, which will only increase in significance going forward, as guidance systems, software integration, networked/relay-based-communications and hard-to-detect point-to-point radio or IR comms are all more accessible now. (for example, what would you do if you had the capacity to make ~10 million of the things a year)

Altai , Sep 29 2020 19:02 utc | 8
Meanwhile, the radical blue ticks need some way to seem like they are superior to plebs who might be inclined to take Armenia's side. It's all very complicated, both sides are just as wrong you see!

https://twitter.com/Tom_deWaal/status/1310559223441485826

"1 No side has a monopoly of justice. Both sides have historical claims to Karabakh. It was the site of a medieval Armenian kingdom in the 12th century and an Azerbaijani (Persian Turkic Shia) khanate in the 18th c. Both peoples have lived together here, mostly peacefully."

But the people never changed, they were Armenian before and after the very brief period of being a part of that Khanate (75 years, he left this out) against their will. It's all the more surreal since the guy making the argument that 75 years of being under somebody's rule 300 years ago makes you theirs forever.

It's all the more surreal given the writers own father is from Amsterdam given.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Netherlands

1556–1714

I don't see anyone suggesting Spain has legitimate claims on Flanders and the Netherlands.

It must be hard for bluechecks because their vaunted 'rules-based international order' such it might ever have been said to exist with constant violation without consequence by powerful countries is the source of the problem. Azerbaijan is only still after this territory based on the thin logic that despite being 85-90% Armenian at it's lowest point in the last 250 years and 100% Armenian today and being totally separated from Azerbaijan politically, the UN still considers it's de jure Azerbaijan. The map says it's Azerbaijan!

Yul , Sep 29 2020 19:29 utc | 9
It is surprising seeing Erdogan who is a Muslim Brotherhood fanatic supporting a mostly Shia Muslim country of Azerbaijan.
May be Persia should get involved to get back the land it lost during the Persian-Russo wars !
R.A. , Sep 29 2020 19:33 utc | 10
B, it is good to see you reporting on matters that are within your area of expertise. Your reporting on conflicts of this kind is invaluable, and I always follow your reports with great interest.

I wish I could say the same for your recent post about Covid19, but there are aspects of that post that are unfortunate. It is clear, for example, that you have not been following the latest work on cross-reactive immunity--that is, the evidence that people who have not yet been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 nevertheless have some immunity to it, due to exposure to other corona-viruses. Nor is your overall analysis of the actual lethality of the disease convincing--you seem to be unaware of the vast difference between young people and children, who almost never die of Covid19, versus the elderly, who are much at risk. This has great implications for what policies are best in dealing with the disease.

I recommend the following source, which allows investigation of the lethality of Covid19 more thoroughly: https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/

ptb , Sep 29 2020 19:43 utc | 11
@Altai 8

Yes NK was historically Arm going back forever. Nevertheless, the geography made defending it impossible without occupying adjacent areas which as far as I know, were Azeri in modern times. There are few happy answers to be found here.

As far as biases are concerned, deWaal is giving the interview to Al Jazeera, and the network is (not surprisingly) somewhat more sympathetic to Turkish and therefore Azeri statements on the matter, though they typically do a better job keeping a professional facade than domestic (US) media at least. But that gives a hint.

AtaBrit , Sep 29 2020 19:45 utc | 12
Excellent couple of articles, 'b'. You are really on form. Thanks.

Think you are spot on regarding money and deflection. What we've seen recently from Erdogan is vast expenditure in construction - unnecessary pandemic hospitals with extortionate rental agreements to be met by the local authorities - and in technology - the latest TechnoFest headed by his other 'damat' advertised significant projects to be funded by the state, and of course oil and military: In these sectors nepotism and cronyism rule. it is those companies close to Erdogan that reap very significant benefits. So, any earnings that can be gleaned from Aliyev are very welcome I am sure.

The other aspect is deflection from a series of foreign policy failures, and several serious domestic failures, one being the management of Covid currently and its obvious manipulations and the abject failure of the online education system in which it is estimated between 35 and 50 percent of pupils are NOT participating. The others being the economy as 'b' alluded to and the failed Greek, Libyan and Syrian situations. Other than that, the political ground does not favour Erdogan at all and he is terrified of losing his 2023 deadline and therefore desperate to win back more of the electorate.

Turks talks about Turkey and Azerbaijan as One People, Two states - the Azeris do not say the same. But it is a sign of just how important this is to Turks. As 'b' has mentioned, the Turkish media is already in faitytale / victory mode - the last dreamt up report I saw claimed that PKK were moving from Syria to Iraq and into Armenia to fight against Azeris - and people are buying it, as they always do. Nationalism is very big in Turkey. There's a reason why criticising a military campaign is considered a crime!

I was tempted to think that this 'conflict' would go the way of every other contrived foreign policy foray this year, but Aliyev and Erdogan may be out to save each other's political lives here in which case we need to consider what they're fighting to defend - very wealthy authoritarian 'mafia states'. I do not think that Turkey would decide to push Russia too far unless it had NATO or US backing because Turkey's economy and regional influence are very dependent on Russia. So, I think this will be a limited show-piece that may score some territory. What is certain is that in both Turkey and Azerbaijan, victory is already guaranteed by the media! Does that imply a short 'conflict'?

Another aspect to remember is Iran. it has very good and important relations with both Azerbaijan and Armenia and would no doubt fully back any Russian intervention be it diplomatic or otherwise. It has also offered to mediate between the two. The Nagorno-Karabakh area is very important to Iran.

gottlieb , Sep 29 2020 19:47 utc | 13
So many fuses, so little time with desperate madmen on the march. As the good professor said, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." WWIII ain't your grandfather's World War.
Orage , Sep 29 2020 20:05 utc | 14
R.A.
The swprs has been a constant source of Covid-19 scepticism from the outset. It is not balanced and is full of cherry picking about its sources and analysis. It is a very serious error to focus entirely on mortality in Covid 19 and its major effect on older people. It does mean premature death for many. But even more seriously Covid-19 causes serious morbidity and together with a high infectious rate leads to very sharp swamping of health systems, major loss of front line workers because of illness and serious health and economic effects independent of the mortality. Focussing on mortality of elderly only is a narrow view and ignores why Covid 19 is such a serious pandemic.
Et Tu , Sep 29 2020 20:08 utc | 15
Was lacking some of the details and depth of B's report but it was clear Erdogan is running point on another Nato led shit sandwich on Russia's doorstep and a blatant 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' trap laid out for Putin.

What's the bet if Russia supports Armenia the media will paint this as 'Russian aggression' on poor Azerbaijan and an invasion of their sovereign territory? The region is technically still part of Azerbaijan. Yet when all the first videos showed Azeri drones striking Armenian tanks in defensive dugouts, while Armenian footage showed ATGM's striking Azeri armour maneuvering in open fields, it doesn't take a genius to work out who the aggressor was... but facts should never get in the way of a good narrative when it comes to Nato..

Another frozen conflict would be just the ticket to drain more resources from Russia, not to mention, the potential for instability and refugees right on Iran's doorstep would be too much for the US not to want to invest in. Combine that with Erdogan's megalomania, and he'll be happy to add 15% on all munitions charged to Azerbaijan to help plug some of his budget holes, no doubt.

Luckily I'm no military strategist, but when i hear things like this i can't help wonder if some good old 'domestic terrorism' or missiles flying into Baku, Washington or Istanbul are just what is needed for these psychopaths to be brought to the negotiating table nice and early and avoid a lot of human misery... It is just crazy to think we have leaders who actually start wars in order to poke Russia in the eye... one wonders, since they know exactly who is doing what and why, what sort of payback that may bring one day.

Debsisdead , Sep 29 2020 20:16 utc | 16
There is no doubt that Nagorno-Karabakh is traditionally part of Azerbaijan and only got claimed by Armenia after a surfeit of Armenians invaded the territory since the end of WW1. All in all a very similar situation to that which developed in Serbia vis a vis the invasion of Kosovo by Albanians.
MOA has consistently stood against the internationally illegal Kosovo enclave, so why the contradiction with Nagorno-Karabakh?

Surely it cannot be because of ideological reasons i.e. Armenia is 'good guys' & Azerbaijan are bad guys? That is precisely the type of logical inconsistency which causes wars.
Azerbaijan is in a tough enough situation with Armenia block the creation of a contiguous nation with Armenia's takeover of the south of Azerbaijan up to the Iranian border. If you look at the first map provided you will see an unlabelled black blob up against the Iranian border a part of Azerbaijan which has been deliberately isolated by Armenia from the rest of Azerbaijan.

This report sounds like something out of the NYT or Guardian next you'll be claiming with zero evidence that there are Turkey funded terrorists brought in from Idlib just as the guardian has been claiming.

Jen , Sep 29 2020 20:28 utc | 17
Another motivation for Ottoman Sultan wannabe Erdogan may be the possibility of extending Turkish influence (and by implication his and his family's) through Azerbaijan and the Caspian Sea into Central Asia all the way to and into ... Xinjiang in NW China, with the potential for Uyghur terrorists, nurtured by Turkish propaganda, money and arms, to get a free ride through Central Asia and straight into any future conflict zones Turkey might want to open up in Iranian Azerbaijan and all Iran's northern and eastern border areas with Turkmenistan and Afghanistan.

Of course this will have US, UK, EU (possibly) and Israeli blessing if it means Turkey will have to do most of the heavy lifting of money transactions.

james , Sep 29 2020 20:33 utc | 18
thanks b.... seeing erdogan involved here makes sense.. at some point, someone is going to take him out to bring peace back to the area.... until then he is a useful tool..

@ debs....thanks for your comments.. perhaps b will respond to them?? i agree with et tu, the narrative the msm will spin here will tell us a lot..

AtaBrit , Sep 29 2020 20:38 utc | 19
@Jen
If I remember rightly, and I'll try to find the reports, it was claimed back in July that Erdogan had offered to send Syrian militias to help defend Azerbaijan.
What makes you think the claim is unfounded?
The jihadists left in N.Syria are a serious problem for Turkey, so it would nake perfect sense to try to 'liquidate' them in contrived 'conflicts'.
albagen , Sep 29 2020 20:38 utc | 20
@ Debsisdead 16

When did that "invasion of Kosovo by Albanians" did happen? You seem so pretty sure of it that it makes me wonder if you are the creator of history itself, so you just invented it, and believe it.

waiting...

Altai , Sep 29 2020 20:38 utc | 21
@ptb

The solution would be to give back the adjacent territories that border Azerbaijan to Azerbaijan and maybe pay some kind of nominal compensation to the displaced in return for normalisation. They are to my knowledge much like parts of the buffer zone in Cyprus, full of abandoned towns and villages. (Some of which you can see tanks using for cover in the videos)

But the Caucuses are the Caucuses are grudges are grudges. Can't turn back the clock so it's all or nothing, one side loses and one side wins.

Then you have all the exclaves and enclaves to deal with, which ironically, haven't become an issue yet at all, probably because it would involve attacks on Armenia proper. Though there has already been one strike in Armenia proper of a bus that was set to carry Armenian solders.

alaff , Sep 29 2020 20:46 utc | 22
1. It is obvious that the current aggravation was not accidental, but prepared in advance.

2. Possible goals for Turkey:

> Anchoring Turkey in Azerbaijan - the creation of full-fledged turkish military bases.

> Inclusion of Azerbaijan in the Turkish orbit of influence (thesis "two countries - one nation", in which Turkey assumes supremacy) within the framework of the concept of neo-Ottomanism and (pseudo-)leadership of Turkey in the Turkic world.

> Economic goals and energy projects (Azerbaijani oil, gas) as part of the Turkish plan to turn the country into an energy supplier.

> Given the circumstances (Ukrainian black hole, Belarusian problem, coronavirus, spectacle with Navalny, threat to Nord Stream-2 etc), involve Russia in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, thereby tying Russia's hands in the Caucasus direction in order to act more freely and boldly in other theaters (the Mediterranean conflict with Greece, Syria, Libya...), given the problematic position of Turkey (simultaneous war on several fronts and the almost complete absence of assistants/allies). In this situation, the Nagorno-Karabakh leverage/'trump card' in the hands of Turkey would be useful for negotiations with Russia.

The latter assumption is probably the main one.

@Debsisdead, #16


There is no doubt that Nagorno-Karabakh is traditionally part of Azerbaijan

Funny.
Actually, this territory - Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan - have been the territory (or "property", if you will) of Russia for the last 200-250 years.
Richard Steven Hack , Sep 29 2020 21:12 utc | 23
Haven't bothered to follow this conflict at all so far. Thanks to b for providing his usual excellent context overview.
Tom , Sep 29 2020 21:21 utc | 24
Interesting historic fact. As long as the centre (USSR) held, the facts on the ground held, much like the other areas of conflicts in Georgia, Ukraine and Transnistria. With the end of the USSR, everything changed. This is what Putin meant when he called the breakup of the USSR as disaster. And NATO will continue to poke a stick at these vulnerabilities. Are the people of Armenia really that stupid that they see anything positive from joining NATO? Like that will protect them against Turkey. They can see how Greece is treated. Hopefully this conflict will put to bed any thought of Armenia being pried away from Russia.

Stalin's Legacy: The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict

Nagorno-Karabakh is a highly contested, landlocked region in the South Caucasus of the former Soviet Union. The present-day conflict has its roots in the decisions made by Joseph Stalin when he was the acting Commissar of Nationalities for the Soviet Union during the early 1920s. In April 1920, Azerbaijan was taken over by the Bolsheviks; Armenia and Georgia were taken over in 1921. To garner public support, the Bolsheviks promised Karabakh to Armenia. At the same time, in order to placate Turkey, the Soviet Union agreed to a division under which Karabakh would be under the control of Azerbaijan. With the Soviet Union firmly in control of the region, the conflict over the region died down for several decades.

https://adst.org/2013/08/stalins-legacy-the-nagorno-karabakh-conflict/

Vladimir , Sep 29 2020 21:27 utc | 25
As #12 seems to be implying as well, b is ignoring this region is the backyard of another regional powerhouse: Iran.

Any involvement from the US in Iran's backguard will be gladly countertargeted so that automatically means Turkey has very big ambitions to join this battle. This could very well end up in straight war if the diplomatic channels of mainly Russia are not effective enough..

Mackie , Sep 29 2020 22:15 utc | 26
@albagen

Kosovo Liberation Army ethnically cleansed the Serbs and others from Kosovo (with NATO help) and took over that territory. They are Albanians, no?

I see nothing wrong with what Debisdead's statement.

Jimmy , Sep 29 2020 22:56 utc | 27
Excellent insights on what is happening. Hang up the NWO scamdemic stuff.
conspiracy-theorist , Sep 29 2020 22:59 utc | 28
Posted by: Yul | Sep 29 2020 19:29 utc | 9

I've read somewhere that only English wankers call Iran "Persia". Iran lost those territories when the Turkic Qajar incompetents were ruling Iran (in a fashion).

It is informative to look into Qajar Iran. They somehow managed to take a Safavid (also Turkic) Iran from a fairly respectable state to the lowest state that Iran has likely been in its entire 3000+ year history. It is amazing what the Pahlavis managed to do to resurrect Iran in the short 50 turbulent years a Persian dynasty finally got to run Iran after centuries.

As to Sultan of Turkey making noises about Azar (Fire) PaadGaan (Guardians) being the homeland of the 'multi-faceted' spawn of the displaced Mongols of Turkistan, he can go and suck the Tsar of All Russians and Minions prick, again.

--

Interesting that "B" claims (without any proof whatsoever) that Russia intends to use Iran as a channel to transport arms to Armenia. Iran's media already has come out and has denied reports by "foreign media" to say such things. I guess that includes you, Moon Of Alabama.

--

Also interesting that the apparently very capable Turkish drone being used is not discussed here at Moon of Alabama. When did this place turn into the New York Times? What's next, B, a Pulitzer?

Since the bar keep is not sharing links to vidoes released by Azerbaijan's military showing multiple distinct drone hits on Armenian armour, then I won't either. But it is just a few clicks away.

--

Finally, this situation is a touchy one for Iran, aka as "Persia" amongst the wankers and related sorts. Will the "Muslim" revolutionaries, the children of Ayatollah cum Imam of "Persians" (lol) yet again choose infidels as waali, if they think this will permit them to warm the throne of Jamshid and the Hidden Imam and wisely rule and chart the destiny of "Persians"? The answer to that is answered by noting that no one has ever accused the Mullahs of "Persia" to be impractical men. Unholy, sure, some. But impractical, estaghforallah!

bevin , Sep 30 2020 0:17 utc | 29
"..Actually, this territory - Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan - have been the territory (or "property", if you will) of Russia for the last 200-250 years." alaff@22

A very good point. These countries have never been independent states. In 1918, under western influence, and led by mensheviks Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan formed the Trans-Caucasian Republic. My guess is that by the end of the Soviet era secularism dominated all three societies and religious disputes were largely forgotten.
One historical grudge very much alive is that of the Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks, a century ago.

Debsisdead , Sep 30 2020 1:14 utc | 30
Sorry grump one, I just got back from my wednesday morning doctor's run where I pick up some locals from around the area & run them to the Drs in town.

I hope that this conflict won't get characterised as a religious conflict, because that isn't really what it is about.
Armenians fled east during WW1 in direct response to the genocidal attacks on Armenians by Turks, so that should be easy eh? Blame the Turks, but it isn't that easy because of the French & Englanders machinations when sequestering all the assets of the Ottoman empire.

Right the way through WW1 which was at heart a war over assets for empires, even the spark that lit the fuse was caused by the Austro-Hungarian Empire's lust for grabbing Serbia & including it in their repressive empire, all the politicians & bureaucrats to empire of the 'big' nations, spent a lot more time and energy divvying up their hoped for imperial gains, than they ever spent on concern about the generation of young men being forced through the meat grinders.

There were 3 big nations on the winning side France, England & Russia, yet Sykes Picot is a secret agreement between only two of the triumvirate. Many suppose this is because Russia pulled out of WW1 after the October revolution, that is not correct as this secret agreement was signed in May 1916, 18 months before the Bolshevik soviet uprising. England & France were doing the dirty on Russia even while the Tsar was the bossfella.

Perfidious Albion seems to be the one most responsible as it has always claimed that a similarly secret deal England made with Russia, unbeknownst to France had been completed. A deal whereby England would grab the oil rich Mesopotamia & all the rest of Arabian peninsular in return for Russia getting Constantinople and most of Anatolia.

That seems unlikely since England and France had already spilt the blood of 213,980 French, English Australian, New Zealand & Canadian troops on the Dardanelles in pursuit of an invasion and eventual takeover of Constantinople which england had begun planning since back in 1905! Long before WW1. Winston Churchill in particular had been advocating this for more than a decade because he wanted to deny Russia easy access to the mediterranean.
A lie was told to the fatally foolish Tsar - it was that the anglo-french invasion of southern Turkey was to be a distraction that would require Turkey & Germany/Austria to divert troops from the eastern front thereby relieving pressure on Imperial Russia's armies.

So what? How does that effect Nagorno-Karabakh? Well it does, because after england screwed up at the Dardanelles, they then encouraged Armenians to take up arms against the Ottomans, all the while knowing that despite promises to the contrary, if the Armenians came unstuck against the 'easybeat' Turks, there would be no way of helping the Armenians out.

That is what happened of course. Kemal Attaturk the bloke who had overseen Gallipoli & england's send off was sent to oversee the fight against Armenian guerillas and the Armenians got monstered, so fled eastwards some as far as into the mountains of Nagorno-Karabakh.

The situation is even more complicated by the fact that after WW1 ended and elites all over europe were crazed with anxiety about a 'red' takeover of Europe, 'the west' kicked up even more trouble. By financing a mob oops sorry, army, of so-called white russians to resist the USSR in the South Western Caucasus, it meant that the USSR was unable to exert full control of the region for nearly 5 years. This is why as Tom says at #24 it wasn't until 1921 that the Soviet Union could credibly promise Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia, a blatant bribe to encourage the warring parties to talk not shoot, but really it was more like 1923 when the USSR got total control of the region.

I point out the mess that previous interference has caused because it is vital that history not repeat itself in that regard. If it does, then all that will result will be a conflict held in abeyance for a time until it flares up again.

There are two issues people & geography, maybe the boss of Azerbaijan is an arsehole who is trying to get back onside with Azerbaijanis by cranking up a conflict that is close to the hearts of most citizens because every time they look at a map they are confronted by the injustice of their nation cleaved in two. His alleged arseholery does not diminish the genuine injustice Azerbaijanis feel in their bones.

That is one group of people, the other group are the relatively small number of Armenians squatting illegally on Azerbaijani land.
The easiest way to fix the geography & people issue is for those Armenians to be relocated into decent accommodation within Armenia and return Nagorno-Karabakh plus a land corridor that rejoins Azerbaijan once again.
It will be complex to resolve as there will also be an issue with Armenians who have occupied the space between the two parts of Azerbaijan, but however much it costs, that is bound to be less than the cost of airplanes, rockets & artillery shells that will be expended keeping the conflict bubbling away.

[Sep 29, 2020] Trump Confirms U.S. is Israel's "Protector", by Philip Giraldi

Not that foreign policy is high priority for most of the USA electorate, but still it looks like some potential Trump voters do not approve this message.
That's why many of them probably will not vote for Trump in 2020, or will not vote at all because there is no difference in this area between Trump and Biden: you can call the same Zionist cutlet with two different names. but it is still the same cutlet.
People voted in Trump to be a protector of workers and lower middle class against financial oligarchy. Instead, they got "Ziotrump", a marionette of Israel lobby who is first and foremost the protector of Israel, MIC and the billionaire class.
The question is: Is Zionism an official ideology of the USA ruling elite? Zionism as any far right nationalism has it pluses and minuses, but why this important decision is not discussed?
Notable quotes:
"... I like being energy independent, don't you? I'm sure that most of you noticed when you go to fill up your tank in your car, oftentimes it's below two dollars. You say how the hell did this happen? While I'm president, America will remain the number one producer of oil and natural gas in the world. We will remain energy independent. It should be for many many years to come. The fact is, we don't have to be in the Middle East, other than we want to protect Israel. We've been very good to Israel. Other than that, we don't have to be in the Middle East." ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
Sep 29, 2020 | www.unz.com

For many years the security framework in the Middle East has been described as a bilateral arrangement whereby Washington gained access to sufficient Saudi Arabian oil to keep the energy market stable while the United States provided an armed physical presence through its bases in the region and its ability to project power if anyone should seek to threaten the Saudi Kingdom. The agreement was reportedly worked out in a February 1945 meeting between President Franklin D. Roosevelt and King Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, just as World War 2 was drawing to a close. That role as protector of Saudi Arabia and guarantor of stable energy markets in the region later served as part of the justification for the U.S. ouster of the Iraqi Army from Kuwait in 1991.

After 9/11, the rationale became somewhat less focused. The United States invaded Afghanistan, did not capture or kill Osama bin Laden due to its own incompetence, and, rather than setting up a puppet regime and leaving, settled down to a nineteen-years long and still running counter-insurgency plus training mission. Fake intelligence produced by the neocons in the White House and Defense Department subsequently implicated Iraq in 9/11 and led to the political and military disaster known as the Iraq War.

During the 75 years since the end of the Second World War the Middle East has experienced dramatic change, to include the withdrawal of the imperial European powers from the region and the creation of the State of Israel. And the growth and diversification of energy resources mean that it is no longer as necessary to secure the petroleum that moves in tankers through the Persian Gulf. Lest there be any confusion over why the United States continues to be involved in Syria, Iraq, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump remarkably provided some clarity relating to the issue when on September 8 th he declared that the U.S. isn't any longer in the Middle East to secure oil supplies, but rather because we "want to protect Israel."

The comment was made by Trump during a rally in Winston-Salem, N.C . as part of a boast about his having reduced energy costs for consumers. He said " I like being energy independent, don't you? I'm sure that most of you noticed when you go to fill up your tank in your car, oftentimes it's below two dollars. You say how the hell did this happen? While I'm president, America will remain the number one producer of oil and natural gas in the world. We will remain energy independent. It should be for many many years to come. The fact is, we don't have to be in the Middle East, other than we want to protect Israel. We've been very good to Israel. Other than that, we don't have to be in the Middle East."

The reality is, of course, that U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has been all about Israel for a very long time, at least since the presidency of Bill Clinton, who has been sometimes dubbed the first Jewish president for his deference to Israeli interests. The Iraq War is a prime example of how neoconservatives and Israel Firsters inside the United States government conspired to go to war to protect the Jewish State. In key positions at the Pentagon were Zionists Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. Feith's Office of Special Plans developed the "alternative intelligence" linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda and also to a mythical nuclear program that was used to justify war. Feith was so close to Israel that he partnered in a law firm that had an office in Jerusalem. The fake intelligence was then stove-piped to the White House by fellow neocon "Scooter" Libby who worked in the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.

After the fact, former Secretary of State Colin Powell also had something to say about the origins of the war, commenting that the United States had gone into Iraq because Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld bought into the neoconservative case made for doing so by "the JINSA crowd," by which he meant the Israel Lobby organization the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.

And if any more confirmation about the origins of the Iraq War were needed, one might turn to Philip Zelikow, who was involved in the planning process while working on the staff of Condoleezza Rice. He said "The unstated threat. And here I criticize the [Bush] administration a little, because the argument that they make over and over again is that this is about a threat to the United States. And then everybody says: 'Show me an imminent threat from Iraq to America. Show me, why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us?' So I'll tell you what I think the real threat is, and actually has been since 1990. It's the threat against Israel. And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it's not a popular sell."

So here is the point that resonates: even in 2002-3, when the Israel Lobby was not as powerful as it is now, the fact that the U.S. was going to war on a lie and was actually acting on behalf of the Jewish State was never presented in any way to the public, even though America's children would be dying in the conflict and American taxpayers would be footing the bill. The media, if it knew about the false intelligence, was reliably pro-Israel and helped enable the deception.

And that same deception continued to this day until Trump spilled the beans earlier this month. And now, with the special security arrangement that the U.S. has entered into with Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, the ability to exit from a troublesome region that does not actually threaten American interests has become very limited. As guarantor of the agreement, Washington now has an obligation to intervene on the behalf of the parties involved. Think about that, a no-win arrangement that will almost certainly lead to war with Iran, possibly to include countries like Russia and China that will be selling it military equipment contrary to U.S. "sanctions."

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

geokat62 , says: September 29, 2020 at 4:10 am GMT

Trump Confirms U.S. Is Israel's "Protector"

Protector? Is that a fancy word for "Bitch"?

JWalters , says: September 29, 2020 at 4:28 am GMT

Excellent synopsis of the situation. And if we look into the founding of Israel, we find it was founded by war profiteers. This would explain why peace has been so "elusive". It has been relentlessly dodged. "War Profiteers and the Roots of the 'War on Terror'"
https://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com/p/war-profiteers-and-roots-of-war-on.html

JWalters , says: September 29, 2020 at 4:32 am GMT
@geokat62

It means Netanyahu is the de facto president of the US.

Derer , says: September 29, 2020 at 5:13 am GMT

Trump Confirms U.S. Is Israel's "Protector"

This declaration is against the will of the American people. Hawkish policies of this nature, that endanger the American lives should be confirmed by a referendum of the people. Of course that would be logical step in a democracy but USA is not a democracy but a diktat of backroom unellected ruling clique.

sethster , says: September 29, 2020 at 6:07 am GMT

990. Jews are the scapegoats for all the deficiencies of low-IQ whites just as whites are the scapegoats for all the deficiencies of low-IQ non-whites. Let me explain how that works.

Why do we observe Jews at the forefront of many cutting-edge industries? (for example the media/arts and financial industries are indeed rife with them). The low-IQ answer is, of course, a simplistic conspiracy theory: Jews form an evil cabal that created all these industries from scratch to "destroy culture" (or at least what low-IQ people think is culture, i.e. some previous, obsolete state of culture, i.e. older, lower culture, i.e. non-culture). And, to be sure, there is a lot of decadence in these industries. But, in an advanced civilization, there is a lot of decadence everywhere anyway! It's an essential prerequisite even! So it makes perfect sense that the most capable people in such a civilization will also be the most decadent! The stereotype of the degenerate cocaine-sniffing whoremonging or homosexual Hollywood or Wall Street operative belongs here. Well, buddy, if YOU were subjected to the stresses and temptations of the Hollywood or Wall Street lifestyles, maybe you'd be a "degenerate" too! But you lack the IQ for that, so of course you'll reduce the whole enterprise to a simplistic resentful fairy tale that seems laughable even to children: a bunch of old bearded Jews gathered round a large table planning the destruction of civilization! Well I say enough with this childish nonsense! The Jews are simply some of the smartest and most industrious people around, ergo it makes sense that they'll be encountered at or near all the peaks of the dominant culture, being overrepresented everywhere in it, including therefore in its failings and excesses! This is what it means to be the best! It doesn't mean that you are faultless little angels who can do no wrong, you brainless corn-fed nitwits! There's a moving passage somewhere in Nietzsche where he relates that Europe owes the Jews for the highest sage (Spinoza), and the highest saint (Jesus), and he'd never even heard of Freud or Einstein! In view of all the immeasurable gifts the Jewish spirit has lavished on humanity, anti-semitism in the coming world order will be a capital offense, if I have anything to say on the matter. The slightest word against the Jews, and you're a marked man: I would have not only you, but your entire extended family wiped out, just to be sure. You think you know what the Devil is, but he's just the lackey taking my orders. Entire cities razed to the ground (including the entire Middle East), simply because one person there said something bad about "the Jews", that's how I would have the future! Enough with this stupid meme! To hell with all of you brainless subhumans! You've wasted enough of our nervous energy on this stupid shit! And the same goes to low-IQ non-whites who blame all their troubles on whites! And it's all true: Jews and whites upped the stakes for everybody by bringing into the world a whole torrent of new possibilities which your IQ is too low to handle! So whatcha gonna do about it? Are you all bark, or are you prepared to bite? Come on, let's see what you can do! Any of you fucking pricks bark, and we'll execute every motherfucking last one of you!

From http://orgyofthewill.net

Talha , says: September 29, 2020 at 6:46 am GMT

Honestly, I like way better out in the open like this. Now there is no reason to worry about all the other BS excuses, it's all on the table.

So now, as a public, we have been informed; so what are we going to do about it? Or are they so confident about their position that they know they can announce it to he world openly and be sure that there will be zero consequences?

GMC , says: September 29, 2020 at 9:59 am GMT

Protector, personal armies, saboteurs, financiers, assassin's, propagandists, liars, thieves, rapists, slavers, and that is just for starters – which includes inside and outside of the former country called the USA.

Oracle , says: September 29, 2020 at 10:22 am GMT
@sethster

No, you are wrong. The problem with the 'industriousness' is that it is characterized by the principle of profit before all, no matter how immoral the activity. People who do that don't care about a civilized society and should not be able to reap the benefits of one.

Also high IQ isn't exemplified by trickery, lying, subverting and eroding the morals of the host society.

Talha , says: September 29, 2020 at 10:58 am GMT
@Hess of Germans, what are those homeboys up to lately ?
Ugetit , says: September 29, 2020 at 10:59 am GMT

The US is not only the protector, but has been the enabler of the mafia from the start.

Chaim.Weizman and Nathan Sokolow approach the British with a dirty deal. The Zionists offer to use their international influence to bring the US into the war on Britain's side, while undermining Germany from within. The price that Britain must pay for U.S. entry is to steal Palestine from Ottoman Turkey (Germany's ally) and allow the Jews to settle there. Zionist agitated anti-German propaganda was unleashed in the US while the Zionists and Marxists of Germany begin to undermine Germany's war effort from within. Wilson establishes the Committee on Public Information (CPI) for the purpose of manipulating public opinion in support of the war.

-M.S. King, The Bad War, p 50.

Similar scenario for "WW2" which was little more than a continuation of the previous biggie. They really ought to be known as the One World Wars since they were obviously part of the plan for the world to be dominated by the International mafia through such creations as the League of Subjects and the United Slave Nations with the capitol at Tel Aviv.

Tommy Thompson , says: September 29, 2020 at 11:23 am GMT

Yes, Dr. Giraldi, you hit the nail on the head again.

However, the problem is that most White Middle Class Americans, are satisfied and fully compliant with this situation where the USA is a Megalethon Vassal and Servile State for the poor little Israeli state .

Also, let us be honest with ourselves, Blacks and other minorities on more occasions do dare to speak out on this issue, only to get trounced upon by the MSM and silence and snickers by the stay safe White American Middle Class. Do you ever find a Main Line White Politician speaking up for America's interests and placing them first vis a vis our best little ally ??? Only when it comes to Afro or the Hispanic – Americans sticking their heads up a little does Middle White Americana get all worked up and emotionally charged.

The White Middle Class and most certainly the well moneyed Corporate Class of America, does not mind giving away huge transfers of their tax dollars, national debt, high technologies, military hardware, and even their uniformed sons and daughter, upon command from the likes of Trump and their political opportunists managing the country (Rep and Dem alike). Serving and making America serve the Greater Zio Agenda for their ME and Global domination has become the norm and unquestionable. Try raising this issue at a dinner party and see how many people role their eyes and turn their heads away.

I doubt that the RU followers here, who seem more bent on street brawling with the false bogeymen like BLM and ANTIFA, are the ones that will stand up to the in your face take over of WDC by AIPAC and the Israel First Crowd, including front man Trump for the Kushner-Bibi WH.

Let us not forget the thieving and scamming Sunday preachers who tell them it is great to be in full service of the Zio (Jewish Talmudic based) domination agenda– as it has become a direct ticket to a Raptured Heaven . Jesus for them was been thrown under the bus long ago or strangely converted into a gun machine toting Israeli nut case extremist settler, clearing the land and villages of the indignies children and all.

Let us be frank, some elements of the America First Jewish intelligentsia are more likely to call out and the whorishness ( extremes only) of the Washington's ZOG policies than Middle Americana, who dare not risk their creature comforts, Game Time or corporate positions.

As the old adage goes, you get the Government That You Deserve .

lavoisier , says: Website September 29, 2020 at 11:29 am GMT
@sethster

Are you all bark, or are you prepared to bite? Come on, let's see what you can do! Any of you fucking pricks bark, and we'll execute every motherfucking last one of you!

Well your tribe has been incredibly effective at genocide and mass murder on an unprecedented scale of barbarism in the past, and I have no doubt you remain just as capable of such barbarity and cruelty today. Your rant makes that very clear.

Too bad the high IQ does not seem to correlate in a positive way with morality.

But thanks for the warning! Trust me, many of us are quite aware of your capabilities.

lavoisier , says: Website September 29, 2020 at 11:36 am GMT
@Talha

Germans are a totally deracinated and brainwashed people.

Germany sold Israel submarines capable of launching nuclear missiles!

A more cucked-up people are impossible to find!

It should be no mystery how Jews have gained such control over the Gentile.

It was granted to them, willingly.

lavoisier , says: Website September 29, 2020 at 11:43 am GMT
@Talha

Most Americans do not care that their country serves the unethical territorial ambitions of the Jews.

Most Americans believe Israel is a noble country filled with noble people that would never do anything unjust or immoral.

Most Americans believe Israel is our greatest ally.

This is sad, but it is true.

Hence the predicament and the peril of our fealty to Israel.

And the predicament and peril of all those who come into conflict with this rogue nation and people.

God's Fool , says: September 29, 2020 at 12:11 pm GMT

The only reason Trump "spilled the beans" about how we are in the Middle East to protect Israel and not to keep oil flowing is to get himself reelected and nothing else. As to war with China, Zuckerberg alone would be able to bribe the administration in particular, and both the parties in general, with his extra billions to keep them out of the war being that he has married a chink, er, Chan. All will be back to business as usual after the election at least, for four more years.

HallParvey , says: September 29, 2020 at 12:30 pm GMT
@JWalters

It means Netanyahu is the de facto president of the US.

Not quite. He is much more powerful than that. The entire Congress of the United States stands and applauds when he arrives to speak. They would never do that for Trump, or any president. The fear of being unpersoned keeps them in line.

Malla , says: September 29, 2020 at 12:32 pm GMT
@Ugetit endence and freedom but things actually became more messy. Also the "hated" Russian Romanovs were got rid off, Russia pushed under Communist Jewish dictatorship. Also the destruction of the Caliph, imagine a united Turko-Arab Empire, no way Israel would have survived that. Even T.E. Lawrence who helped the Arabs fight the Turks was totally disappointed with the behaviour of his own Zionist controlled government. He was going to speak to the British people about the great betrayal to the Arabs and being a war hero they would have listened to him. But before he could do so he met with an "accident" while riding his motorcycle. Yeah, very convenient.
Miville , says: September 29, 2020 at 12:35 pm GMT
@sethster re good at gathering Nobel Prizes, which is best arranged by jury-rigging and string-pulling thanks to their talent for networking, but no so good as making real inventions. In Israel proper the mean Jewish IQ, 94, is not only disappointing but a few points below even the Palestinian one. Spiritually the Jews have no longer been a chosen people for ages and most of the intellectual development they knew from about 1850 onwards was due to their being emancipated en masse from rabbinical authority, not by conforming to it : now that are falling back under an even worse collective authority with Zionism they are reversing the intellectual gains they once made.
Z-man , says: September 29, 2020 at 12:55 pm GMT

A bit off topic but RIP Steven F. Cohen.

anon [461] Disclaimer , says: September 29, 2020 at 1:14 pm GMT

Back in the second half of the 80s the big war games were all IRAQ IRAQ IRAQ!!1! There was a strong push from all the interagency pukes with their dotted-lines reports to Langley – to aim at Iraq, and to suppress any practical considerations that might interfere with this very lucrative debacle. We watched these moles countering evidence and analysis with declamatory bullshit they made up. Way back then CIA had decided. April Glaspie's headfake sprung a trap set in Kuwait by the NOCs infesting Bechtel. That horizontal-drilling rhubarb was years in preparation.

Iraq was one big war with three phases: beating up on the Iraqi armed forces; ten years of blowing shit up; the occupation.

It turned out great. CIA got money-laundering nirvana, a chaotic zone where they could ship pallets of money around. They got an arms entrepot that lasted 20 years.They got a great network of sites for the torture gulag, with secure impunity – when Iraq tried to accede to the Rome Statute in 05, the CIA torturers were on the spot to nip it in the bud. The tame jihadi boogeymen the torture camps produced were invaluable in creating Rumsfeld's "terrorist corridor" in the Sahel and justifying the P2OG and the Pan-Sahel Initiative. That put AFRICOM garrisons, US-trained warlords, and CIA torture sites in one of the most diplomatically recalcitrant regions of the world:

So turn that frown upside down! Your old bosses got a lot out of that charlie foxtrot.

Realist , says: September 29, 2020 at 1:19 pm GMT
@sethster re all conceived and started by Gentiles Henry Ford is a great example and he knew Jews quite well. The only industries , as you call them, that Jews are involved in are leech enterprises financial corporations are excellent examples of leech enterprises. The financial products they contrive are methods to extract value from productive industries.
A large percent of Jews are devoted obsessed with gaining wealth and power from the efforts of others which is the reason for their inordinate involvement in the Deep State and also for the abject loathing by many Gentiles throughout the ages.
Moi , says: September 29, 2020 at 1:29 pm GMT
@geokat62

Fact is you can fool all Americans all the time. We are a nation of ignorant people.

Moi , says: September 29, 2020 at 1:39 pm GMT
@Talha

Whether the truth is hidden or now out in the open doesn't matter to a people so stupid as to believe the Creator's offspring walked, eat and crapped on this little planet 2k years ago.

Exhibit B of their stupidity: Electing Trump (and more than a few of his predecessors).

Anonymous [311] Disclaimer , says: September 29, 2020 at 1:45 pm GMT

The NWO won't come to America as Greta Thunberg marching ahead of the Democrats in Mao suits under LGBTQ and GND banners and tumbrels of Christians headed for the guillotine, but as one transnational compliance regime after the other enacted by treaty, such as mandatory bi-annual vaccinations with largely inefficacious vaccines carrying not just behavior modifying chemicals and sterilants as adjuvants, but DNA-altering horrors. Anyone want to argue the threats posed by these DNA- or mRNA-modifying vaccines made from, among other things, insect DNA?

Some think it's over the top to talk about the NWO that's on the horizon as a Sino-Judaic, world-hegemonic NWO, but the United States government is itself already little more than a collection of compliance regimes in service to International Jewry. The 29 standing ovations from a Congress afraid to be the first to stop clapping for a kitchen cabinet salesman-turned-Caesar made that clear enough. The rest of the story, like the nonsense that Congress and DJT are voluntarily protecting Israel, is eyewash for fools when International Jewry owns them all like the trained seals who perform in the Central Park Zoo.

Old and Grumpy , says: September 29, 2020 at 2:01 pm GMT
@God's Fool

The Holy Rollers were never going to bail from Trump after the embassy move to Jerusalem. Jews on the other hand are likely not amused about such a revelation. So his words were unlikely about the election.

Old and Grumpy , says: September 29, 2020 at 2:04 pm GMT

How is this foreign policy now not a violation of the church-state separation? Especially since Israel describes itself as a Jewish state.

The Spirit of Enoch Powell , says: September 29, 2020 at 2:17 pm GMT
@lavoisier nd stern conversation, "For me, the new Germany exists only in order to ensure the existence of the State of Israel and the Jewish people." He's a brilliant intellectual and a thoughtful politician, and we don't need to worry – he won't give up his existential friendship so easily. And certainly not because of Bennett or his colleague Orit Strock, the party whip.

A very symbolic photo posted by the Israel Defence Forces' Twitter account, in the tweet linked to by user Talha

Heil Judea!

Realist

Realist , says: September 29, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT

@lavoisier

Too bad the high IQ does not seem to correlate in a positive way with morality.

Exactly.

Gidoutahere , says: September 29, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
@sethster

Weinstein, Epstein, Maxwell, Maddof, –cking geniuses. I thought your principal asset was "God's chosen people". Now I see it's your penetrating mind.

anon [143] Disclaimer , says: September 29, 2020 at 2:56 pm GMT

It is time to be more honest. A foreign war that the US loses may be the only way out of the political, moral and social impasse that currently afflicts the US. The forces that control the US government need to be removed and that seems increasingly unlikely to arise from simply domestic opposition.

It took World War II to remove Adolf Hitler from power in Germany. Why should anyone expect anything less to change the government of the United States? The US wants a war with Russia and China. Perhaps it is best that it be granted one? Let's see some articles on this proposition.

The Spirit of Enoch Powell , says: September 29, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT
@Talha

The odd thing is how so many Jews still support immigration despite the fact that a lot of the immigrants are (from the Jewish/Zionist perspective) at best indifferent to Israel and at worse outright hostile and want it gone.

Or perhaps they realise democracy is a sham and the Jewish elite have got their backs? Hence their plans to mongrelise Europeans nations don't really conflict with their Zionist ambitions.

One thing is for sure, when things start to get hairy in the West, all Jews will have a nice First World ethnocracy to move to.

anon [108] Disclaimer , says: September 29, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT

Trump's greatest contribution to the US/World might be exposing the naked ambition and evilness of the Ziocons. Before Trump, Ziocons lurked in the background as puppet masters, with their many plans obscured behind "diplomacy" and propaganda like "freedom" and "human rights", now thanks to Trump they are showing their true colors. Trump has managed to expose to the whole world including all our allies who is really running America and the extent they will go to destroy their perceived "enemies" to achieve world domination -- the end justifies the means. It is making our allies esp. Europe think twice about their alliance with JU.S.A.

anon [108] Disclaimer , says: September 29, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT

Trump's greatest contribution to the US/World might be exposing the naked ambition and evilness of the Ziocons. Before Trump, Ziocons lurked in the background as puppet masters, with their many plans obscured behind "diplomacy" and propaganda like "freedom" and "human rights", now thanks to Trump they are showing their true colors. Trump has managed to expose to the whole world including all our allies who is really running America and the extent they will go to destroy their perceived "enemies" to achieve world domination -- the end justifies the means. It is making our allies esp. Europe think twice about their alliance with JU.S.A.

karel , says: September 29, 2020 at 4:25 pm GMT
@lavoisier

You must have been misinformed if you think that "Germany sold Israel submarines". Not really as you can find out from the link bellow. The first two submarines were donated and the third was "hawkered" for about half the production cost.

https://rotefahne.eu/2011/01/brd-1108-mio-steuergelder-fuer-israelische-u-boote/

Harold Smith , says: September 29, 2020 at 4:26 pm GMT
@anon the empire starts WW3, e.g. the "big one" at Yellowstone, which will do so much damage as to make it impossible for the evil empire to continue it's pursuit of world domination and control.

BTW on a positive note, it looks like there is now some resistance from the private sector against the evil orange clown's self-destructive economic war against China:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-tariffs/some-3500-u-s-companies-sue-over-trump-imposed-chinese-tariffs-idUSKCN26G31G

Talha , says: September 29, 2020 at 4:37 pm GMT
@The Spirit of Enoch Powell a massive forward operating base for the West declined any normalization.

I do think it is game over for quite a while in the West regarding opposition to Israel. Israel may collapse or have to come to the table or something due to some game changer in the Middle East, but I don't see it happening due to lack of support from the West anytime soon.

Peace.

Note: This is a good analysis of various views:
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/265898/american-jews-politics-israel.aspx

[Sep 29, 2020] This nasty neocon Rachel MadCow

Notable quotes:
"... The DemoRats have never been a party dedicated to peace; the only ones thinking that are the walking bong-holes who assuage their cognitive dissonance by telling themselves that. Both the demorats and their willing accomplices 'across the aisle' have led us into constant war for nearly eight decades. Lilliputian Big enders and Little enders all. ..."
"... Screw the war mongers and the MIC. ..."
"... If you read the article, it's obvious that [neo]liberals/whores are the apogee of hypocrisy. ..."
"... Perpetual war is about $$$. It knows no party. Never has and never will. ..."
"... Yup. It's always about the money. ..."
Jan 13, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
True Blue , 1 hour ago link

Feral, yes; rabid, absolutely; smart... not so much. Why is anyone surprised?

The DemoRats have never been a party dedicated to peace; the only ones thinking that are the walking bong-holes who assuage their cognitive dissonance by telling themselves that. Both the demorats and their willing accomplices 'across the aisle' have led us into constant war for nearly eight decades. Lilliputian Big enders and Little enders all.

AI Agent , 1 hour ago link

She's a good lying propagandist... but she's not brilliant. Smart? maybe. Brilliant? Cow flop has more shine than Madcow.

desertboy , 36 minutes ago link

Maybe he meant "brilliant manipulator" -- sometimes they have meant the same thing.

Throat-warbler Mangrove , 1 hour ago link

Get.Us (a). Out.Now

Screw the war mongers and the MIC.

BlackChicken , 1 hour ago link

If you read the article, it's obvious that [neo]liberals/whores are the apogee of hypocrisy.

richardsimmonsoftrout , 1 hour ago link

"they're likely to emerge from 2020 with not only smeared consciences, but four more years in the opposition."

"Smeared consciences"... that's rich, pretty sure the psychopaths don't have a conscience.

navy62802 , 1 hour ago link

Perpetual war is about $$$. It knows no party. Never has and never will.

holdbuysell , 1 hour ago link

Yup. It's always about the money. As Fitts would say, that screeching you hear is the cash flow drying up for the rentiers. The murdering of women and children be damned. Hillary's demonic cackle is but the grotesque cherry on top: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y

[Sep 29, 2020] Problems for the party leader Batkivshchina, which was one of the main political forces supporting EuroMaidan

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOWEXILE September 28, 2020 at 7:33 am

Tymoshenko was both treated in Banderastan by doctors from "Charité" and at the "Charité" itself.

06.06.2012 00:39
Бассейна не хватает
Немецкий врач подробно рассказала нашему корреспонденту о состоянии Юлии Тимошенко

No swimming pool
A German doctor has told our correspondent in detail about the condition of Yulia Tymoshenko

An RG correspondent has met a doctor from the "Charité" hospital department "Physiotherapeutic Medicine and Rehabilitation", Dr. Annette Reizhauer, who has just returned from Kharkov, where she was engaged in the examination and treatment of former Prime Minister of the Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko.

-- Dr. Reishauer, is Yulia Tymoshenko really so seriously ill that the best specialists in the world should be treating her?

-- Reishauer: There is no doubt that Ms. Tymoshenko is seriously ill. On October 5, 2011, she had an intervertebral hernia with compression of the third spinal nerve ending on the right in the hip region, which causes severe pain and is the cause of paralysis. On November 5, an acute deterioration was reported, which led to chronic pain syndrome, secondary musculoskeletal lesions and muscular atrophy. Therefore, every effort should be made to treat this disease in accordance with existing standards .

And so on und so weiter.

-- RG: is it possible to carry out physiotherapy treatment?

-- Reishauer: Of course. This is urgently needed. After a long time of immobility, a decrease in muscle mass has been recorded.

-- Did you perform physiotherapy in Kharkov or just made a diagnosis?

-- Reishauer: Both. To be treated, you must first make a diagnosis.

-- Did you do it?

-- Reishauer: Naturally, when I was in Kharkov.

-- How long did you spend there?

-- Reishauer: One week.

-- Where did you live?

-- Reishauer: In a hotel.

-- Who paid for your accommodation? Relatives of Mrs. Tymoshenko, hospital or someone else?

-- Reishauer: The chairman of the board of our hospital, Professor Karl Max Einhoipl, agreed with her relatives that they will take care of the treatment and other costs.

-- How much does Yulia Tymoshenko's treatment cost?

-- Reishauer: I can't say that now. I was in Kharkov as part of my work at Charité, so the hospital with my relatives will discuss this, not me.

-- What kind of treatment does Yulia Tymoshenko receive?

-- Reishauer: We cannot publicly announce the plans. We agreed on this in advance. There was a very difficult situation in the Ukraine when my colleague visited there for the first time. The treatment plans were published against our wishes in the newspapers. This is absolutely unacceptable. However, I can say that the share of passive therapeutic measures will be reduced in favour of active ones. This is so that Ms. Tymoshenko can move more and more actively.

-- To swim, for example?

-- Reishauer: Unfortunately, swimming is not possible. There is no swimming pool.

Ukraine's Tymoshenko begins medical treatment in Berlin

Ukraine's former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko has started medical treatment in Germany. She suffers from a chronic back ailment linked to injuries she sustained while in prison on controversial corruption charges.

Tymoshenko received a thorough examination in Berlin's Charite hospital on Saturday, a day after arriving in the German capital.

Hospital chairman Karl Max Einhaeupl said doctors would decide on Monday whether the 53-year-old needed an operation for back pain resulting from three slipped disks she suffered more than two years ago.

He added that doctors were currently unsure how long treatment would take, but are positive Tymosenko [sic] would ultimately be able to move around again unassisted.

Although she was not suffering any paralysis, the former prime minister is said only to be able to walk using a walker, but it caused her great pain.

Tymoshenko was released from prison in Ukraine last month following the uprising that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych. Since then, she has only been seen in public in a wheelchair.

She is now considered a contender for Ukraine's presidential election on May 25.

Treatment offer denied

Tymoshenko reportedly suffered several injuries while serving more than two years in prison on charges of corruption, which Western leaders said were politically motivated.

Ukraine refused to grant Tymoshenko the right to travel to Germany for treatment during her incarceration. She also turned down an operation and injections, saying she did not trust the former Ukrainian authorities

Einhaeupl said doctors from the Charite clinic, who visited her in prison, found their hands "were tied severely in treatment."

Vee haf vays off mekking you feel besser, mein Liebchen!


Lying bitch speaking to her fans at the Maidan following her release from prison. Note the orthopaedic shoes she is wearing.

MARK CHAPMAN September 28, 2020 at 4:11 pm

And she rolled around for a bit in her martyr's wheelchair after getting out of the slammer – where, strangely enough, Amnesty International found the charges against her were 'politically motivated even as all agreed the contracts she signed on Ukraine's behalf with Russia were a license for the latter to rob the former – but it is very likely her 'treatment' was driven more than anything else by a desire to get back into those fuck-me-sailor heels and be 'cured' enough to parade around in them. Barring a loaves-and-fishes Miracle Of Jesus, the best way to be out of that chair and on her pins was to have some restorative treatment in a foreign hospital. It was not long at all before she was, thanks to wonderful German treatment, able to swagger about as before.

She was released from prison in 2014, following the capitulation of Yanukovych to the forces of the Glorious Maidan, in 2014. Even while she was still incarcerated, Ukrainian doctors said she did not need to be hospitalized while German doctors argued that she did. I know from years in the Navy – and from some people repeatedly missing deployments because of back problems – that it is perfectly possible to convince doctors that you suffer excruciating back pain although they can find no physical cause, and I don't doubt sometimes it is true. But doctors do not like to mess around with the back, and tend to believe the patient when they scream that 'that hurts'. I suspect they are even more likely to believe there was a serious problem when you praise their medical skill and claim that their treatment has done wonders.

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-tymoshenko-german-doctors/24916332.html

Tymoshenko entered hospital that same year, in March 2014, where her doctor claimed her improved appearance was due to 'freedom' and that "Stress can impair the back muscles, which in turn affects the spine". Which, to me, says they could not find any physical cause, although all along Team Tymoshenko had claimed she suffered three slipped disks while in prison.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/former-ukrainian-pm-yulia-tymoshenko-starts-medical-treatment-in-berlin-1.1720447

I'm not sure at what moment she started walking again, you'd have to go back through pictures by date, but a photo in this article shows her standing without any apparent aid in 2014, apparently casting her ballot in 2014 Ukrainian elections.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/yulia-tymoshenko-it-won-t-just-be-revolution-time-end-ukraine-a6683731.html

A miraculous recovery, indeed. This archived piece by the legendary John Helmer contains a wealth of information about Tymoshenko's background and seemingly Teflon-coated political career.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/02/john-helmer-the-political-motivation-of-chancellor-merkels-embrace-of-yulia-tymoshenko-and-war.html

Skadden, Arps, Meagher & Flohm, the American legal firm that produced a solid legal argument – while commissioned to do so by the Ukrainian government under Yanukoych – that Tymoshenko was a phony, something substantiated by Ukrainian media release of secret video recordings made of Tymoshenko 'moving nimbly about her cell' while unaware she was being recorded, was eventually beaten down and forced to apologize and pay Tymoshenko compensation.

I suspect they did so knowing their political connections with the US government would be severed if they did not, as they had attracted the personal spiteful attention of Victoria Nuland.

[Sep 29, 2020] Tensions between Turkey and Russia rise in Idlib following failed talks

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL September 27, 2020 at 9:38 am

Middle East Eye via Antiwar.com : Tensions between Turkey and Russia rise in Idlib following failed talks
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/syria-idlib-tensions-turkey-russia-talks-failed

Turkish officials are preparing for the worst case scenario as talks in Ankara made clear that Moscow doesn't want a new deal
####

This is a Turkey sympathetic piece but may be one reason for current events between Armenia and Azerbaidjan. As for Syria, Turkey has been claiming to keep the north/Idlib under control which is has until the last few weeks at it has used the previous time to reinforce its military presence ('observation posts') – vis Vinyard the Saker – and now claims it is not reponsible and its not fair that Russia reacts to attacks by its re-dressed (literally) jihadists. Turkey's preference is of course to do nothing despite the all the attacks, and that in itself explains a lot. Turkey is now publicly putting out its argument in advance that it is 'Russia wot broke the agreement' and thus 'we are not responsible for any of the consequences.' Erd O'Grand is due another significant spanking. Would he call NATO to his defense as he did before? Certainly. Will it happen? No. Not to mention his current intreagues around Cyprus and pissing of the French, Greeks and others. Trouble t'mill.

ET AL September 27, 2020 at 9:48 am

But here's a much better article again via Antiwar.com

AL Monitor: Turkey's military deterrence breaks down in Syria's last rebel stronghold
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/09/turkey-syria-russia-idlib-escalation-inevitable-m4-highway.html

Despite Turkey's efforts to maintain the status quo in Idlib, a Russian-backed Syrian assault seems increasingly likely.
####

In short, Turkey has not kept up its side of the deal of bringing the rebels under control and the supposed opening and joint patrols of the M4 & M5 highways has been suspended by Russia because of the attacks by rebadged jihadis. Turkey has clearly used the agreement to simply buy time for another 'cunning plan' and as no interest in fulfiling the agreement with Russia. The latter's patience is almost gone.

[Sep 29, 2020] This is a threat? Washington is considering closing its embassy in Iraq

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

PATIENT OBSERVER September 28, 2020 at 4:33 am

This is a threat?

https://www.rt.com/usa/501883-iraq-embassy-baghdad-closure-attacks/

Washington is considering closing its embassy in Iraq, nine months after the US killing of an Iranian general on Iraqi soil led to protests over what Baghdad called a "violation" of its sovereignty, according to reports.

Multiple media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and Sky News, reported on Sunday that US officials told their Iraqi counterparts that Washington will shut down its operations unless there is an end to rocket attacks on the embassy, which is located in the heavily-fortified Green Zone in Baghdad.

Sounds more like a possible victory for Iraq and its people. I suspect that there is much more to the story and the US is pre-emptively seeking a face-saving exit excuse if it were to come to that.

However, it would be extremely unlikely for the US to abandon the embassy given that it serves as the headquarters for numerous nefarious operations in Iraq and Iran

ET AL September 28, 2020 at 6:11 am

The claim that I have read is that this is in response to the USA's assassination of General Solemani in Lebanon. More precisely the i-Ranian strategy is not per se to cause American casualties but carry out sustained attacks via proxies on American interest in i-Rack, i.e. psychological pressure, cost etc. the ultimate goal being the USA leaving i-Rack as a suitable price for the assassination.I

I've also read (Vinyard the Saker?)that the USA has so far closed some of its smaller and less defensible outposts but concentrated what remains in fewer better defended bases. The USA does not want to leave i-Rack militarily and will hang on until it is out of options. The US embassy leaving i-Rack will not be good enough for i-Ran, but maybe this is the beginning of some kind of behind the scenes bargaining, though this is hard to believe considering the US is still pushing for a gulf coalition (WAR!) against i-Ran as well as polically neutralizing any potential spoiler countries. Also the embassay was built at quite a significant cost $750 billion.* So, you are right PO, this is bluff by the big puff Plumpeo.

i-Rack has also being trying to get rid of American military presence even though they have bought F-16IQs from Washington but the latter is using the same figleaf excuse as in Syria that they are 'fighting terrorists.'

* https://www.businessinsider.com/750-million-united-states-embassy-iraq-baghdad-2013-3

ET AL September 28, 2020 at 6:18 am

$750 million. Duh!

JRKRIDEAU September 28, 2020 at 6:47 am

$750 million. Duh
Given standard US contracting over-runs I was willg to believe "billions". The surprising thing is that it got built.

MARK CHAPMAN September 28, 2020 at 3:12 pm

The USA will never abandon its crown jewel in Iraq, and it would make little practical difference anyway, as it lies entirely within the American 'Green Zone', and they will surely not abandon that.

"But the location of the compound is well known in Baghdad anyway, where for several years it has been marked by large construction cranes and all-night work lights easily visible from the embattled neighborhoods across the river. It is reasonable to assume that insurgents will soon sit in the privacy of rooms overlooking the site, and use cell phones or radios to adjust the rocket and mortar fire of their companions. Meanwhile, however, they seem to have held off, lobbing most of their ordnance elsewhere into the Green Zone, as if reluctant to slow the completion of such an enticing target."

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/11/langewiesche200711

The Baghdad Embassy is the USA's most-expensive embassy in the world, and it costs far more to run it each year than the cost of building it, in excess of a Billion dollars a year. What America might do, and what Iraq does fear, is send its diplomats home for awhile, and use it as an excuse to open a military operation in Iraq against what it terms Iran-aligned militias.

[Sep 29, 2020] Some excellently timed next level trolling of the USA from Putin.

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL September 27, 2020 at 9:17 am

Neuters via Antiwar.com : Putin Calls For Mutual Ban on Election Meddling With US
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/09/25/putin-calls-for-mutual-ban-on-election-meddling-with-us/

US intel agencies claim Russia, China, and Iran are meddling in 2020 election

On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the US and Russia should sign an agreement promising not to meddle in each other's elections. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-putin/putin-says-russia-and-u-s-should-agree-not-to-meddle-in-each-others-elections-idUSKCN26G1LJ

Putin proposed, "exchanging guarantees of non-interference in each other's internal affairs, including electoral processes, including using information and communication technologies and high-tech methods."..

####

That is some excellently timed next level trolling from Pootie-McPoot-Face.

MARK CHAPMAN September 27, 2020 at 12:19 pm

Of course the USA will never agree to such a proposal, because (a) it does not regard its meddling as 'interference' but as the bringing of the gift of freedom, (b) it stands on its absolute right of judgment as to what is a situation that requires more democracy and what is not, and (c) it probably knows at some level that Russia did not meddle in the US elections, and that it would therefore in that case be constraining its own behavior in exchange for nothing.

But then, when refused – I imagine the US will try to extract something from the offer, such as "A-HA!! So you ADMIT to meddling in our elections!! – Russia can obviously claim, "Well, we tried."

[Sep 28, 2020] No wonder Pompey and his friend Jeffries won't give up on Syria! No wonder

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding, from what they said to where they said it. ..."
Sep 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Western government-funded intelligence cutouts trained Syrian opposition leaders, planted stories in media outlets from BBC to Al Jazeera, and ran a cadre of journalists. A trove of leaked documents exposes the propaganda network."

"Leaked documents show how UK government contractors developed an advanced infrastructure of propaganda to stimulate support in the West for Syria's political and armed opposition.

Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding, from what they said to where they said it.

The leaked files reveal how Western intelligence cutouts played the media like a fiddle, carefully crafting English- and Arabic-language media coverage of the war on Syria to churn out a constant stream of pro-opposition coverage.

US and European contractors trained and advised Syrian opposition leaders at all levels, from young media activists to the heads of the parallel government-in-exile . These firms also organized interviews for Syrian opposition leaders on mainstream outlets such as BBC and the UK's Channel 4.

More than half of the stringers used by Al Jazeera in Syria were trained in a joint US-UK government program called Basma, which produced hundreds of Syrian opposition media activists.

Western government PR firms not only influenced the way the media covered Syria, but as the leaked documents reveal, they produced their own propagandistic pseudo-news for broadcast on major TV networks in the Middle East, including BBC Arabic, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and Orient TV .

These UK-funded firms functioned as full-time PR flacks for the extremist-dominated Syrian armed opposition. One contractor, called InCoStrat, said it was in constant contact with a network of more than 1,600 international journalists and "influencers," and used them to push pro-opposition talking points.

Another Western government contractor, ARK, crafted a strategy to "re-brand" Syria's Salafi-jihadist armed opposition by "softening its image ." ARK boasted that it provided opposition propaganda that "aired almost every day on" major Arabic-language TV networks."

"The Western contractor ARK was a central force in launching the White Helmets operation.

The leaked documents show ARK ran the Twitter and Facebook pages of Syria Civil Defense, known more commonly as the White Helmets.

ARK took credit for developing "an internationally-focused communications campaign designed to raise global awareness of the (White Helmets) teams and their life saving work."

ARK also facilitated communications between the White Helmets and The Syria Campaign , a PR firm run out of London and New York that helped popularize the White Helmets in the United States.

It was apparently "following subsequent discussions with ARK and the teams" that The Syria Campaign "selected civil defence to front its campaign to keep Syria in the news," the firm wrote in a report for the UK Foreign Office." thegreyzone

--------------

Using really basic intelligence analytic tools; Occam's Razor, Walks like a duck, Smileyesque back azimuth's, etc. it has been clear that the UK government has been deeply involved in sponsoring and influencing the Syrian/ jihadi opposition in that miserable country. The wide spread British Old Boys network of aspirants to the tradition of imperial manipulation has been visible just below the surface if you had eyes to look and a brain to think.

A lot of the money for this folly came right out of USAID.

pl

https://thegrayzone.com/2020/09/23/syria-leaks-uk-contractors-opposition-media/

ISL , 27 September 2020 at 04:03 PM

Dear Colonel agreed.

I object to the line in the article that they "played the media like a fiddle" - as it implies the mainstream media is a victim as opposed to willing accomplice.

The American public very strongly told Obama they didn't want another invasion and war in the middle east (red lines or not) so rather ineffective propaganda.

Moreover, I suspect that given the US public inattention to overseas events that do not involve much US blood (in places they can not find on a map). Today's mess would be where more or less the same if the entire IO had never happened - though maybe with less cynicism of US/UK gov'ts and media.

OTH, it is curious how well the British Old Boys network (and US) aligns with Israeli interests (and runs counter to US or British interests). Maybe grayzone will investigate that (impressive) IO campaign. I think a small country in the middle east played US and UK elites like a fiddle.

The Twisted Genius , 27 September 2020 at 04:48 PM

I've only given this article a cursory reading so far and it is clear that the Brits are going balls to the wall on the PSYOPS/perception management front. This campaign flows naturally from the strong material support for the Syrian "moderate rebels" provided by the US, the Brits and probably others for years. We may still be blowing up IS jihadis, but we're also supporting our own brand of jihadis around Al-Tanf, giving free hand to Erdogan's jihadis along the Turkish-Syrian border and doing our best to stymie R+6 efforts to crush the remaining jihadis and unite Syria.

The article focuses on the contractors role in PSYOP. I'm not sure if it mentions the British government's role in this. The GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) probably manages most of those contractors. The British Army also has the 77th Brigade. This brigade's slogan is: "behavioural change is our unique selling point". Gordon MacMillan, a reserve officer with the 77th Brigade, is now Twitter's head of editorial operations for the Middle East.
The 77th was formed in 2015 and subsumed the 15th Psychological Operations Group which was headed by Steve Tathan, who went on to head the defence division of SCL, the now defunct parent of Cambridge Analytica. I'm sure the 77th is capable of managing some of those contractors, as well. I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few of contractors were also reservists in the 77th.

I bet we're not letting the Brits have all the fun. The CIA Special Activities Center (formerly SAD) includes the Political Action Group for PSYOP, economic warfare and cyberwarfare. That dovetails nicely with what CENTCOM is doing in Syria. I knew some of those guys a while back. I remember scaring them with some of my own anarchist hacker rantings when I was penetrating those hackers.

Our Army has fours PSYOP groups brigade-sized), two active and 2 reserve. I would think they have advanced their methodology since I took the course at Bragg. For a few years, they were called military information support operations (MISO) groups rather than PSYOP groups. They have since reverted to their PSYOP name although their activities are referred to as MISO. I don't know what the difference is.

Babak makkinejad , 27 September 2020 at 05:10 PM

ISL

No, no, no.

There is no such small country as you describe in the Near East.

There is an self-disciplined proxy force masquerading as a state which is mostly funded by the United States to further the religious policies of the WASP Culture Continent.

It is no accident that in this context, the names of US and UK occur often in the same sentences; one declared a crusade to wrestle control of Plastine from Muslims, and the otber one carried out that crusade and escalated it.

That is also the reason that US cannot end the war over Palestine or leave Islamdom

(Oil, Geostrategic considerations, arms sales, Realpolitik are just pseudo-rationications to obscure the real war.)

Diana Croissant , 28 September 2020 at 07:45 AM

Where is Candide (aka Voltaire) when we need him?

BABAK MAKKINEJAD , 28 September 2020 at 09:14 AM

Ishmael Zechariah

How WASP-dom has arrived in this crusade is not, in my opinion, as significant as that it has been waging it for more than a hundred years.

fakebot , 28 September 2020 at 10:43 AM

"WASP Culture" is into golfing, not crusading. Erik Prince and the religious fundamentalists, maybe, but they don't drive US policy.

Russia and/or Chinese dominion over Eurasia cannot be permitted. Their means to achieve that would be less ethical, not that the US or UK have been prince among men and salts of the earth, as noted in the article.

The US has tried in vain to win over hearts and minds. It has been a mostly noble effort to bring countries like Iraq and Afghanistan into the 21st century, but it was always more of a losing game. The problem lies too much in Islam and tribal rivalries.

[Sep 28, 2020] Ziocon Trump is a master of deception: has not delivered on any of his promises, hired neocons, assholes, and morons

Highly recommended!
Sep 28, 2020 | www.unz.com

Robert Dolan , says: September 26, 2020 at 7:06 pm GMT

@Realist d on him and tried to remove him from office. This is actually the greatest political scandal in American history, yet nothing will be done about it. The magic negro will never face any consequences and he and his ugly wife will remain free to race bait for another 30 years unimpeded.

Trump and the GOP allowed the covid hoax to wreck the economy and allowed massive riots to go on for many months. They allow the left to run wild while whites live under anarcho-tyranny.

If Trump wins, which is likely, he will just go right back to blabbing about how much he loves blacks and mexicans and gays and you will never hear another word about white people.

Robert Dolan , says: September 26, 2020 at 9:23 pm GMT
@restless94110 p> Obama fired many upper level military and replaced them with leftist cucks.

Besides Trump not getting rid of people he should have gotten rid of, he hired a shitload of scum, neocons, Goldman alums, etc., people who were obviously not going to promote his America First agenda.

From the looks of it he never intended to make good on any of his promises.

And as Ann Coulter says, immigration is really the only thing that matters. Trump didn't deport the 30 million illegals that don't belong here. He didn't do anything about birthright citizenship, E-verify, etc.

We still face the very same demographic disaster as before.

Realist , says: September 26, 2020 at 10:17 pm GMT
@Robert Dolan

Trump doesn't even have the balls to go after the people who spied on him and tried to remove him from office.

I agree on your points

Here is a video of Tom Fitton explaining the situation to Lou Dobbs.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/A5thJyj5I7I?feature=oembed

Realist , says: September 26, 2020 at 10:21 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

I don't think anyone was actually trying to remove him from office (they could've added his war crimes and violations of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to the impeachment charges if they were serious about removing him). Most likely it's all political theater to fool the people who need and/or want to be fooled.

This is a charade designed by the Deep State to distract any thought that both parties are just two sides to the Deep State coin.

restless94110 , says: September 26, 2020 at 10:57 pm GMT
@Robert Dolan did get rid of some military, he clearly didn't get rid of the right people.

You seem to think it's easy. It's not obviously.

I like Ann, but she is hysterical. Yet that is ok in a journalist/editorialist. Her function is to keep pushing. And she is doing that.

But Trump is moving at his own speed based on his own instincts. Meaning it might be faster for some, slower for others. Coulter is not able to understand that. But she does not have to. I still read her. And then I analyze her as a person in fear that the wall won't be built.

Looks to me like Ann is wrong. It's just not happening quickly enough for her.

[Sep 28, 2020] Trump is a lion when it comes to defending Israel and all things Zionist. He is a mouse and totally ineffectual when it comes to defending the interests of the American people who voted for him

Sep 28, 2020 | www.unz.com

lavoisier , says: Website September 27, 2020 at 12:27 am GMT

@Harold Smith s and neocons to key positions in his government; and he is totally ineffectual in defending free speech and the rights of the historic American nation to defend itself against racist blacks and a Jewish dominated injustice system.

It is really sad that there are so many individuals who still believe Trump is on our side when he has failed so miserably to keep the promises he was elected upon.

Of course Biden is a demented corruptocrat and the Democrats are pure evil, but Trump is an unprincipled moron incapable of keeping his promises.

Sad. Very sad that our nation has deteriorated to such an extent that so many people cling to a deluded belief that Trump is somehow a great leader serving the American nation.

[Sep 28, 2020] "Then there are the Chinese. OK, they really are communists, but who is it that has bought into the nonsense about them oppressing poor, innocent, religious head choppers?

Sep 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

One Too Many | Aug 9 2020 0:42 utc | 46

William Gruff , Aug 8 2020 23:50 utc | 40

"Then there are the Chinese. OK, they really are communists, but who is it that has bought into the nonsense about them oppressing poor, innocent, religious head choppers? Who cares even if those lies were true? Yep, that's millennial morons."

Actually it was the USG through funding of various think tanks and NGOs that started the whole fiasco with the MSM pushing the narrative. You know people with power in established organizations, who tend to be much older. I wouldn't blame the people at the bottom so much for the decisions made at the top.

[Sep 28, 2020] The great Orwellian hypocrisy of America's pants-wetting complaints that other countries are meddling in America's (fake) democracy is that the United States itself is guilty of regime changing, balkanizing, and colonizing scores of foreign nations dating back over a century to the USA's regime change and eventual colonization of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Notable quotes:
"... We have no evidence, but don't forget, they are evil and wouldn't hesitate to do it! ..."
Sep 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

ak74 , Aug 10 2020 6:55 utc | 71

"The statement then claims:

Ahead of the 2020 U.S. elections, foreign states will continue to use covert and overt influence measures in their attempts to sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies, increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American people's confidence in our democratic process."

What America is yet again conniving to do is to discredit any domestic political dissent against the fraud of "American Democracy" by connecting this dissent to those nations that are the latest targets of America's Two Minutes of Hate campaign.

This is a standard American tactic that the USA always resorts to when it fears its own citizens are starting to question the fairy tale of American "Democracy and Freedom." Thus, during the Cold War, the USA even to discredit some elements of the Civil Rights movement as being assets of the Soviet Union.

The great Orwellian hypocrisy of America's pants-wetting complaints that other countries are meddling in America's (fake) democracy is that the United States itself is guilty of regime changing, balkanizing, and colonizing scores of foreign nations dating back over a century to the USA's regime change and eventual colonization of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Bottom Line: America needs to drink a big up of Shut the F*ck Up with its pathetic Pity Party whining about foreigners trying to influence its bogus democracy.

This tired psyops is pathetic.

Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq
https://books.google.com/books/about/Overthrow.html?id=Q3o2BaNiJksC

Killing Hope
U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II
https://williamblum.org/books/killing-hope

padre , Aug 10 2020 15:12 utc | 74

We have no evidence, but don't forget, they are evil and wouldn't hesitate to do it!

[Sep 28, 2020] From Conflict to Crisis- The Danger of U.S. Actions by Jeanne M. Haskin

Sep 28, 2020 | www.amazon.com

In the United States, a great deal of study and energy goes into promoting respect for democracy, not just to keep it alive here but also to spread it around the world. It embraces the will of the majority, whether or not its main beneficiaries have more resources than other citizens do, as shown by the election of President Obama, who promised hope and change for the suffering majority, but did not sit long in office before being subjected to an economic vote of no-confidence.

Those who claim we run a plutocracy (government for the rich by the rich) -- or that we're victims of a conspiracy contrived by a shadow government -- are right while being wrong.

Our government is beyond the reach of ordinary American citizens in terms of economic power. However, the creation of a system to keep the majority of the populace at the losing end of a structure which neither promised nor delivered a state of financial equality was a predictable extension of the economic system the U.S. government was formed to protect.

... .... ...

Forty years of Cold War and the ultimate realization that abuse of the communist system and a hierarchy of privilege proved that system to be vulnerable to selfishness -- in common with the triumphant capitalist countries.

Because any desired outcome can be written into an equation to exclude unwanted facts or inputs by holding some things constant while applying chosen variables that may not hold true under every historical circumstance, it's considered "falsifiable" and therefore "scientific." But only if it appeals to the right people and justifies a given political need will it become sacrosanct (until the next round of "progress").

.... .... ...

Abusive Self- Interest

In 1764, twenty- five years before the embrace of Madame Guillotine (when heads rolled literally to put the fear of the mob into politics), contempt for the filth and poverty in which the French commoners lived while the nobility gorged on luxury goods showed how arrogant they were, not just in confidence that their offices of entitlement were beyond reproach and unassailable, but that mockery and insult in the face of deliberate deprivation would be borne with obedience and humility.

It certainly affected Smith's outlook, since he wrote The Wealth of Nations with a focus on self- interest rather than moral sentiments. And while this may be purely pragmatic, based on what

he witnessed, he also wrote about the potential for self- interest to become abusive, both in collusion with individuals and when combined with the power of government. Business interests could form cabals (groups of conspirators, plotting public harm) or monopolies (organizations with exclusive market control) to fix prices at their highest levels. A true laissez- faire economy would provide every incentive to conspire against consumers and attempt to influence budgets and legislation.

Smith's assertion that self- interest leads producers to favor domestic industry must also be understood in the context of the period. While it's true that the Enlightenment was a movement of rational philosophy radically opposed to secrecy, it's important to understand that this had to be done respectfully , insofar as all arguments were intended to impress the monarchy under circumstances where the king believed himself God- appointed and infallible, no matter his past or present policies, and matters were handled with delicacy. Yet, Smith's arguments are clear enough (and certainly courageous enough) to be understood in laymen's terms.

In an era when the very industry he's observing has been fostered by tariffs, monopolies, labor controls, and materials extracted from colonies, he did his best to balance observation with what he thought was best for society. It's not his fault we pick and choose our recipes for what we do and don't believe or where we think Smith might have gone had he been alive today.


The New Double Standard

The only practical way to resolve the contradiction between the existing beneficiaries of state favoritism in this period and Smith's aversion to it is to observe that the means to prevent competition and interference with the transition from one mode of commerce to another that enhances the strength of the favored or provides a new means to grow their wealth is to close the door of government intervention behind them and burn any bridges to it.

In psychological terms, the practice of "negative attribution" is to assume that identical behavior is justifiable for oneself but not another. It may not be inconsistent with a system of economics founded on self- interest, but it naturally begs a justification as to why it rules out everyone else's self- interest. The beauty of this system is that it will always have the same answer.

You may have guessed it.

Progress.

Reallocation of Assets

It was always understood that capitalism produces winners and losers. The art of economizing is to gain maximum benefit for minimum expenditure, which generally translates to asset consolidation and does not necessarily mean there is minimum sacrifice. There's an opportunity cost for everything, whether it's human, financial, environmental, or material. But the most important tenet of free market capitalism is that asset redistribution requires the U. S. government to go to DEFCON 1, unless assets are being reallocated for "higher productivity," in which case the entire universe is saved from the indefensible sin of lost opportunity.

Private property is sacred -- up until an individual decides he can make more productive use of it and appeals to the courts for seizure under eminent domain or until the government decides it will increase national growth if owned by some other person or entity. In like manner, corporations can suffer hostile takeovers, just as deregulation facilitates predatory market behavior and cutthroat competition promotes an efficiency orientation that means fewer jobs and lower incomes, which result in private losses.

In the varying range of causes underlying the loss of assets, the common threat is progress -- the "civilized" justification for depriving some other person or entity of their right to own property, presumably earned by the sweat of their brow, except their sweat doesn't have the same champion as someone who can wring more profit from it. The official explanation is that the government manages the "scarcity" of resources to benefit the world. This is also how we justify war, aggression, and genocide, though we don't always admit to that unless we mean to avoid it.


Perfectly Rational Genocide

History cooperates with the definition of Enlightenment if we imagine that thoughtfulness has something to do with genocide. In the context of American heritage, it has meant that when someone stands in the way of progress, his or her resources are "reallocated" to serve the pursuit of maximum profit, with or without consent. The war against Native Americans was one in which Americans either sought and participated in annihilation efforts or believed this end was inevitable. In the age of rational thought, meditation on the issue could lead from gratitude for the help early settlers received from Native Americans to the observation they didn't enclose their land and had no concept of private property,

to the conviction they were unmotivated by profit and therefore irreconcilable savages. But it takes more than rational thought to mobilize one society to exterminate another.

The belief in manifest destiny -- that God put the settlers in America for preordained and glorious purposes which gave them a right to everything -- turned out to be just the ticket for a free people opposed to persecution and the tyranny of church and state.

Lest the irony elude you, economic freedom requires divorcing the state from religion, but God can be used to whip up the masses, distribute "It's Them or Us" cards, and send people out to die on behalf of intellectuals and investors who've rationalized their chosenness.

CHAPTER TWO: INSTILLING THE ILLUSION OF CHOICE

Selfishness may be exalted as the root and branch of capitalism, but it doesn't make you look good to the party on the receiving end or those whose sympathy he earns. For that, you need a government prepared to do four things, which each have separate dictums based on study, theorization, and experience.

Coercion: Force is illegitimate only if you can't sell it.
Persuasion: How do I market thee? Let me count the ways.
Bargaining: If you won't scratch my back, then how about a piece of the pie?
Indoctrination: Because I said so. (And paid for the semantics.)

Predatory capitalism is the control and expropriation of land, labor, and natural resources by a foreign government via coercion, persuasion, bargaining, and indoctrination.

At the coercive stage, we can expect military and/ or police intervention to repress the subject populace. The persuasive stage will be marked by clientelism, in which a small percentage of the populace will be rewarded for loyalty, often serving as the capitalists' administrators, tax collectors, and enforcers. At the bargaining stage, efforts will be made to include the populace, or a certain percentage of it, in the country's ruling system, and this is usually marked by steps toward democratic (or, more often, autocratic) governance.

At the fourth stage, the populace is educated by capitalists, such that they continue to maintain a relationship of dependency.


The Predatory Debt Link

In many cases, post- colonial states were forced to assume the debts of their colonizers. And where they did not, they were encouraged to become in debt to the West via loans that were issued through international institutions to ensure they did not fall prey to communism or pursue other economic policies that were inimical to the West. Debt is the tie that binds nation states to the geostrategic and economic interests of the West.

As such, the Cold War era was a time of easy credit, luring postcolonial states to undertake the construction of useless monoliths and monuments, and to even expropriate such loans through corruption and despotism, thereby making these independent rulers as predatory as colonizers. While some countries were wiser than others and did use the funds for infrastructural improvements, these were also things that benefited the West and particularly Western contractors. In his controversial work Confessions of an Economic Hit Man , John Perkins reveals that he was a consultant for an American firm (MAIN), whose job was to ensure that states became indebted beyond their means so they would remain loyal to their creditors, buying them votes within United Nations organizations, among other things.

Predatory capitalists demand export- orientations as the means to generate foreign currency with which to pay back debt. In the process, the state must privatize and drastically slash or eliminate any domestic subsidies which are aimed at helping native industry compete in the marketplace. Domestic consumption and imports must be radically contained, as shown by the exchange rate policies recommended by the IMF. The costs of obtaining domestic capital will be pushed beyond the reach of most native producers, while wages must be depressed to an absolute bare minimum. In short, the country's land, labor, and natural resources must be sold at bargain basement prices in order to make these goods competitive, in what one author has called "a spiraling race to the bottom," as countries producing predominantly the same goods engage in cutthroat competition whose benefactor is the West.

Under these circumstances, foreign investment is encouraged, but this, too, represents a loaded situation for countries that open their markets to financial liberalization. Since, in most cases, the

IMF does not allow restrictions on the conditions of capital inflows, it means that financial investors can literally dictate their terms. And since no country is invulnerable to attacks on its currency, which governments must try to keep at a favorable exchange rate, it means financial marauders can force any country to try to prop up its currency using vital reserves of foreign exchange which might have been used to pay their debt.

When such is the case, the IMF comes to the rescue with a socalled "bailout fund," that allows foreign investors to withdraw their funds intact, while the government reels from the effects of an IMF- imposed austerity plan, often resulting in severe recession the offshoot of which is bankruptcies by the thousands and plummeting employment.

In countries that experienced IMF bailouts due to attacks on their currencies, the effect was to reset the market so the only economic survivors were those who remained export- oriented and were strong enough to withstand the upheaval. This means they remained internationally competitive, which translates to low earnings of foreign exchange. At the same time that the country is being bled from the bottom up through mass unemployment, extremely low wages, and the "spiraling race to the bottom," it is in an even more unfavorable position concerning the payment of debt. The position is that debt slavery ensues, as much an engine of extraction as any colonial regime ever managed.


The Role of Indoctrination

The fact that it is sovereign governments overseeing the work of debt repression has much to do with education, which is the final phase of predatory capitalism, concluding in indoctrination. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the lesson to the world was that socialism can't work, nor were there any remaining options for countries that pursued "the third way" other than capitalism. This produced a virulent strain of neoliberalism in which most people were, and are, being educated. The most high- ranking of civil servants have either been educated in the West or directly influenced by its thinking. And this status of acceptance and adherence finally constitutes indoctrination. The system is now self- sustaining, upheld by domestic agents.

While predatory capitalism can proceed along a smooth continuum from coercion to persuasion to bargaining to formal indoctrination, the West can regress to any of these steps at any point in

time, given the perceived need to interfere with varying degrees of force in order to protect its interests.


Trojan Politics

Democracy is about having the power and flexibility to graft our system of government and predatory capitalism onto any target country, regardless of relative strength or conflicting ideologies. An entire productive industry has grown up using the tools of coercion, persuasion, bargaining, and formal indoctrination to maximize their impact in the arena of U. S. politics. Its actors know how to jerk the right strings, push the right buttons, and veer from a soft sell to a hard sell when resistance dictates war, whether it's with planes overhead and tanks on the ground or with massive capital flight that panics the whole world.

When the U. S. political economy goes into warp overdrive, its job proves far more valuable than anything ever made in the strict material sense because there's never been more at stake in terms of what it's trying to gain. It's the American idea machine made up of corporations, lobbyists, think tanks, foundations, universities, and consultants in every known discipline devoted to mass consumerism, and what they sell is illusory opportunity dressed in American principles. They embrace political candidates who'll play by elitist rules to preserve the fiction of choice, and, in this way, they maintain legitimacy, no matter what kind of "reallocation" is on the economic agenda.

The issue is not whether we'll question it, but who we'll applaud for administering it.

In the Information Age, perception management is king.


[Sep 27, 2020] Azerbaijani Army And Syrian Jihadis Launch Attack On Armenian Lines

Sep 27, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Moon of Alabama Brecht quote " In Which We Debunk A Covidiot Pamphlet | Main | The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-77 " September 27, 2020 Azerbaijani Army And Syrian Jihadis Launch Attack On Armenian Lines

During the last weeks there was news that Turkey was hiring some 2,000 'Syrian rebels' to fight in Azerbaijan against Armenian forces which since 1993 occupy Nagorno- Karabakh . Earlier today the Azerbaijan forces and the mercenaries launched their attack on Armenian lines. It was a massacre. Two Azerbaijani helicopters were shot down. Some 10 tanks and armored troop transporters went up in flames . Azerbaijani artillery hit some civilian structures in Stepankert, the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh. Turkish(?) drones hit Armenia front positions .


bigger

The Azerbaijani tactic seems to be to bunch up a lot of their tanks in the open field and to wait for the Armenian artillery to destroy them. Russian troops are stationed in Armenia and additional heavy support from Russia was flown in today . But Russia is friendly with both countries and is already urging for an armistice. Armenia has mobilized its forces and reinforcements are moving towards the front.

This is now, after Syrian and Libya, the third country in which the wannabe Sultan of Turkey is trying to fight Russian supported forces. It ain't gonna work. But Erdogan has to keep on doing that as a domestic diversion because the Turkish economy has screeched to a halt. The recent central bank rate hike is unlikely to stop the loss of the Lira but will deepen the recession.

The situation might well escalated from here on. There will be a lot of disinformation coming from both sides.

Posted by b on September 27, 2020 at 12:55 UTC | Permalink

Josh , Sep 27 2020 13:19 utc | 1

Thanks B.
Biswapriya Purkayast , Sep 27 2020 14:03 utc | 2
Azerbaijan can't lift a finger without Ottoman backing. Armenia is traditionally a Russian ally, and even though the current regime is wooing Amerikastan, it can't survive without Russian protection. In any regular war Armenia will smash Azerbaijan flat but the Ottomans are guaranteed to get involved. Now Russia and the Ottomans are on different sides in Libya of course, Russia would back Greece in any conflict with Ankara, and increasingly Russia is getting fed up with Ottoman attempts to annex North Syria. I can only surmise that this is an Ottoman warning to Russia.
steven t johnson , Sep 27 2020 14:24 utc | 3
The claim the Azeri tanks were just sitting in a field waiting to be smashed by Russian artillery etc. actually sounds like the Russians attacking first. The aggressor usually has the initiative and thus usually has operational success in the opening round. It's theoretically possible that a Russian artillery offensive was on high alert, waiting to launch after a suitable "incident" which could be represented as an Azeri assault. Whatever the value of mercenaries from a losing war, a few weeks is very unlikely to permit meaningful incorporation into an actual fighting force. Therefore it is highly unlikely that their reinforcement was the enabling cause of an Azeri assault.

It is a strange and marvelous world, where wonders delightful and horrible abound. So it is barely possible the Azeris are terminally stupid, the underlying theory of the post. I would still say that it's *not* because non-Christians are stupid. More likely it's because the Azeris are getting their military advice from their friends the Russians.

R Rose , Sep 27 2020 14:30 utc | 4
@ # 2

"Armenia is traditionally a Russian ally"

Not so much anymore. It was the National Endowment for Democracy and George Soros Foundation that brought Armenia's most recent leader to power.


b "This is now, after Syrian and Libya, the third country in which the wannabe Sultan of Turkey is trying to fight Russian supported forces."

rubbish

H.Schmatz , Sep 27 2020 14:33 utc | 5
Thread on the reignitied conflict, IMO too coincidental with soon coming outcome of US elections..

https://twitter.com/descifraguerra/status/1310123197111689218

IMO this reigniting of an old conflict comes as response to recent Kavkas 2020 maneuvers organized by Russia which are taking place right now, with the participation of Armenia, and also as response of last meeting between Zarif and Lavrov, in whose presser Lavrov was quite explicit, at least more than before...

This comes, in the first place, as a new hot front ( apart from Belarus ) in the post-Soviet space to implicate Russia and make her choose amongst two neighbors she gets along with quite well, and at the same time, the transport of Syrian jihadi mercenary forces in a charter flight by Turkey imply that a new abcess the size and type of Idlib is planned to be inserted in the viccinity of both Russia and Iran, which will act as destablization force for future incursions after US elections...

As we talk Azerbaijan is announcing advances in the Southern front and the take over of some localities along Iranian border ...Why? What that has to do with Armenia? To implant there the jihadis for the coming "proxy war" on Iran, the same way they were implanted in Syria/Turkey northern East and West border and Syria/Lebanon Southern border...
Turkey here acting as US proxy PMC to position US managed and funded jihadi forces, as it has done in Syria and Lybia...

https://twitter.com/descifraguerra/status/1310165201073954816

https://twitter.com/descifraguerra/status/1310187962135609344

Also the conflict comes to shoot two, or three, birds with the same shot by starting another military conflict or destabilization process in the Silk & Road path...

This is the US MIC reasuring their rate of profit for the coming US presidency by extending the perpetual war...

Although may well be that they will not even wait for the elections results...

Is Steven Bannon Still Advising Trump? U.S. President Leads the Country Into Dangerous Waters With Latest Iran Move

H.Schmatz , Sep 27 2020 14:56 utc | 6
On the importance of this new conflict and its obvious connection with Iran...See map in thread linked above...Some more sources...Probable objective of past "color revolution" in Armenia...on the grounds of "alleged" US chaotic state...chaos in the US acts as veil for its own population ( so as thvey can not think of continuously started wars while they cop with the immeidate miserable oticome of the pandemic...) and for opponents... who may think of relaxing...Fortunately, Gerasimov, and IRGC, are always attentive...
THE SECOND WAR OF THE NAGORNO-KARABAJ HAS BREAKED In red the disputed region, in the center of which is Stefankert, the capital. In blue the areas supposedly conquered by #Azerbaiyan.

Everything indicates that the Azeri offensive began by surprise in the early hours of today, and has maintained a reasonable pace of advance

https://twitter.com/Political_Room/status/1310189589521403908

On the visible hand of Turkey in this reginition...no way Turkey is moving without NATO consent...and even support...recall "international coalition of the willing to fight ISIS in Syria"...which then turned into ISIS proxy war onto Syrian state and population...

I have been checking and Azerbaijan announced in June that they were interested in buying TB2 from Turkey. In no way have they been able to buy, receive and put the drones into operation in such a short time. It starts to get cloudy.

Twitter turco está diciendo abiertamente que son sus drones. Mientras Clash Report, que ya se ha comentado muchas veces que podría estar ligada a la inteligencia truca (por el acceso que tienen a cierto material informativo) habla de que los drones son Bayraktar TB2.

https://twitter.com/DragonLadyU2/status/1310186956475830272

Shooting is common in Upper Karabakh...but not in Down Karabakh...this conflict as part of war on Russian gas supply to Europe...

Although shooting is common in Upper Karabakh, a disputed area between Armenia and Azerbaijan, this is the fastest escalation in recent times. Just hours after the last incident, Armenia has declared martial law and total mobilization.

Let's not think that this is simply a local conflict between two countries: Azerbaijan is backed by Turkey, while Armenia is backed by Russia. And to this we can add the natural gas that comes to Europe from the Caspian.

https://twitter.com/elOrdenMundial/status/1310140310815731712

In case someone wants to follow, Youtube channel of Armenian TV which sometimes biradcast in Englisgh language...

In case anyone is interested in following him from the origin, YouTube channel with a live signal from an Armenian television (at times they speak in English)

https://twitter.com/carola1292/status/1310150136236998657


H.Schmatz , Sep 27 2020 15:07 utc | 7
@Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 27 2020 14:56 utc | 6

Well, sorry, posting too fast, as I must go now, and without time to check two times...
It seems that tweets by #DragonLadyU2 got middle trnaslated...Repost correctly and with blockquote, as it is not, as it could seem by the size of letter, info of mine, but of this account who is following the issue of Azerbaijani drones purchase...

I was introducing it as:

On the visible hand of Turkey in this reginition...no way Turkey is moving without NATO consent...and even support...recall "international coalition of the willing to fight ISIS in Syria"...which then turned into ISIS proxy war onto Syrian state and population...

I have been checking and Azerbaijan announced in June that they were interested in buying TB2 from Turkey. In no way have they been able to buy, receive and put the drones into operation in such a short time. It starts to get cloudy.

Turkish Twitter is openly saying that it is their drones. While Clash Report, which has already been commented many times that it could be linked to Turkish intelligence (due to the access they have to certain informative material), talks about the drones being Bayraktar TB2.

https://twitter.com/DragonLadyU2/status/1310186956475830272

H.Schmatz , Sep 27 2020 15:32 utc | 8
On preparations for this conflict, and who provoked whom...also reflected some intends of transforming this inot religious conflict...which then would reginite the whole Caucasus and Caspian region, and thus would end implying Iran and Russia...and probably palcing them in different sides...which could be one of the objectives, to put a breach into very good Russian/Iranian relations...Beware...
I'm reminded Israeli bizjet associated w secret flights was in Baku, Azerbaijan 3 days ago. Landed back in Israel along w Azeri ministry of defense cargo

https://twitter.com/avischarf/status/1310212966177009665

Now is when certain things start to make sense, airlift of Turkish military cargo planes bound for Azerbaijan on the 24th.

https://twitter.com/DragonLadyU2/status/1310201238403907584


Interesting thread on the preparations for the shipping of jihadis...on preparations time ago..( no idea baout this source I cathed over there...)

https://twitter.com/Elizrael/status/1310164366097027072

I have not been able to verify the arrival of Syrian fighters from the Turkish-backed factions (SNA) in Azerbaijan as of now. I can confirm that dozens of fighters from NW Syria (outside of regime control) left Syria via Turkey in an unknown direction about a week ago.

Families lost touch with these men since their departure. Rumored destinations include Azerbaijan, Qatar, Turkey and Libya. I am in touch with families & friends of men who left and will report once they manage to get in touch with their loved-ones.

About a month ago, rumors spread on WhatsApp among SNA fighters that they can register to go to Azerbaijan. Many registered over WhatsApp, others apparently thru offices in the Turkish-controlled areas.
The fighters registered due to the enticing rumored salaries of $2K-$2.5K

The SNA mercenaries who've gone to fight in Libya against Haftar were recruited with direct involvement by Turkish officers who met with commanders of the SNA factions to pressure them to send fighters. With the alleged Azerbaijan recruitment, there haven't been such meetings.

It seems likely that the recruitment is being carried out by a Turkish private security company that is also involved in shipping Syrians to fight in Libya. There is no need to apply pressure on Syrians to leave anymore. The number of men wanting to go far exceeds demand.

With time, the idea of being deployed oversees as a mercenary is becoming more socially acceptable in Syria, in both communities residing outside of regime control (men in Idlib have registered to go to Azerbaijan too) and in regime areas (where men are going to fight for Haftar)

Syrian lives are regarded as expendable, with Syria serving as an arena to settle geostrategic scores at Syrians' expense. Syrians resisted & still resist this logic, but the collapse of the economy is prompting many Syrians to be willing to sell themselves to the highest bidder.


div> I think that Jihadists have no nationality, therefore it is wrong to label them as "Syrian"!

Posted by: padre , Sep 27 2020 15:47 utc | 9

I think that Jihadists have no nationality, therefore it is wrong to label them as "Syrian"!

Posted by: padre | Sep 27 2020 15:47 utc | 9

H.Schmatz , Sep 27 2020 16:22 utc | 10
@Posted by: padre | Sep 27 2020 15:47 utc | 9

Indeed, that is a multinational proxy force, sometimes recruited in Gulf monarchies jails...

Attention also to the restarting of jihadi attacks in the land of Petit Napoleon...second from some days ago...

ptb , Sep 27 2020 16:40 utc | 11
some confused comments

(1) re: tanks bunched up - the linked Armenian MOD twitter-video with the cheesy music and 2 tank hits ( this one ) suggests it is not artillery? Recently dug cover beind them, but tanks mostly facing toward camera. Bulldozer still there. Direct hits. You can see from the reaction of the tanks what they think is the direction from which they were attacked. After the first hit, the next tank to be hit attempted (unsuccessfully) to hide behind the remains of the tank already destroyed. The others which were not already facing that way, turn their turrets toward the camera, which is the direction from which they think they were attacked. They start making smokescreen as the clip ends.

(2) We really don't need to see a war between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

(3) I don't really get the geopolitics of this. For Turkish strategic motivations, the relevant oil/gas pipeline does not pass thru the contested territory although is quite close. Not sure what to make of that. Map here , with Nagorno-Karabakh colored in under Azerbaijan. Turkey is in danger of being bypassed by Greece-Cyprus-Israel pipeline, how does this this help them in any way?

(4) For US-Iran conflict, just seems like general chaos. Perhaps there is a land route from Russia-Georgia-Iran, but it can't be as good as the caspian sea route.

(5) for Greece-Cyprus pipeline, there may be a commercial benefit, if the reliability of the Azerbaijan-Turkey route comes into question due to war or instability.

vk , Sep 27 2020 17:00 utc | 12
@ Posted by: ptb | Sep 27 2020 16:40 utc | 11

Looks like Turkey has gone rogue. Since the 2016 assassination attempt, Erdogan doesn't trust NATO anymore.

As for (3), it's very straightforward: Turkey probably wants some symmetrical leverage against Russia against the FUBARed situation in Idlib (which is draining Turkish coffers and soldiers). They are probably very desperate, and are looking for something on these lines: "look, Russia, you give us Idlib and we let Nagorno-Karabakh alone the next day. Deal?".

steven t johnson , Sep 27 2020 17:28 utc | 13
The Azeris making advances is to be expected if they had the aggressor's initiative. The post implies the Armenians are winning handily, which is not to be expected when a prepared Azeri offensive kicks off.
Ken Garoo , Sep 27 2020 17:30 utc | 14
Armenia has long been on the US Regime Change hitlist - June/July 2015, July 2017, April 2018 when the Random Guy Pashinyan was imposed as leader. He has the tricky task of balancing the demands of his owners versus the reality of Armenian interests.
p>

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" In Which We Debunk A Covidiot Pamphlet , Main | The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-77 "

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" In Which We Debunk A Covidiot Pamphlet | Main | The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-77 "

[Sep 27, 2020] The Real Russian Playbook Is Written in English by Patrick Armstrong

Jul 17, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

I hadn't given The Russian Playbook much attention until Susan Rice, Obama's quondam security advisor, opined a month ago on CNN that " I'm not reading the intelligence today, or these days -- but based on my experience, this is right out of the Russian playbook ". She was referring to the latest U.S. riots.

Once I'd seen this mention of The Russian Playbook (aka KGB, Kremlin or Putin's Playbook), I saw the expression all over the place. Here's an early – perhaps the earliest – use of the term. In October 2016, the Center for Strategic and International studies (" Ranked #1 ") informed us of the " Kremlin Playbook " with this ominous beginning

There was a deeply held assumption that, when the countries of Central and Eastern Europe joined NATO and the European Union in 2004, these countries would continue their positive democratic and economic transformation. Yet more than a decade later, the region has experienced a steady decline in democratic standards and governance practices at the same time that Russia's economic engagement with the region expanded significantly.

And asks

Are these developments coincidental, or has the Kremlin sought deliberately to erode the region's democratic institutions through its influence to 'break the internal coherence of the enemy system'?

Well, to these people, to ask the question is to answer it: can't possibly be disappointment at the gap between 2004's expectations and 2020's reality, can't be that they don't like the total Western values package that they have to accept, it must be those crafty Russians deceiving them. This was the earliest reference to The Playbook that I found, but it certainly wasn't the last.

Russia has a century-old playbook for 'disinformation' 'I believe in Russia they do have their own manual that essentially prescribes what to do,' said Clint Watts, a research fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and a former FBI agent. (Nov 2018)

The Russian playbook for spreading fake news and conspiracy theories is the subject of a new three-part video series on The New York Times website titled 'Operation Infektion: Russian Disinformation: From The Cold War To Kanye.' (Nov 2018)

I found headlines such as these: Former CIA Director Outlines Russian Playbook for Influencing Unsuspecting Targets (May 2017) ; Fmr. CIA op.: Don Jr. meeting part of Russian playbook (Jul 2017) ; Americans Use Russian Playbook to Spread Disinformation (Oct 2018) ; Factory of Lies: The Russian Playbook (Nov 2018) ; Shredding the Putin Playbook: Six crucial steps we must take on cyber-security -- before it's too late. (Winter 2018) ; Trump's spin is 'all out of the KGB playbook': Counterintelligence expert Malcolm Nance (May 2019) .

Of course, all these people are convinced Moscow interfered in the 2016 presidential election. Somehow. To some effect. Never really specified but the latest outburst of insanity is this video from the Lincoln Project . As Anatoly Karlin observes: "I think it's really cool how we Russians took over America just by shitposting online. How does it feel to be subhuman?" He has a point: the Lincoln Project, and the others shrieking about Russian interference, take it for granted that American democracy is so flimsy and Americans so gullible that a few Facebook ads can bring the whole facade down. A curious mental state indeed.

So let us consider The Russian Playbook. It stands at the very heart of Russian power. It is old: at least a century old . Why, did not Tolstoy's 1908 Letter to a Hindu inspire Gandhi to bring down the British Indian Empire and win the Great Game for Moscow? The Tolstoy-Putin link is undeniable as we are told in A Post-Soviet 'War and Peace': What Tolstoy's Masterwork Explains About Putin's Foreign Policy : "In the early decades of the nineteenth century, Napoleon (like Putin after him) wanted to construct his own international order ". Russian novelists: adepts of The Playbook every one . So there is much to consider about this remarkable Book which has had such an enormous – hidden to most – role in world history. Its instructions on how to swing Western elections are especially important: the 2016 U.S. election ; Brexit ; " 100 years of Russian electoral interference "; Canada ; France ; the European Union ; Germany and many more. The awed reader must ask whether any Western election since Tolstoy's day can be trusted. Not to forget the Great Hawaiian Pizza Debate the Russians could start at any moment.

What can we know about The Playbook? For a start it must be written in Russian, a language that those crafty Russians insist on speaking among themselves. Secondly such an important document would be protected the way that highly classified material is protected. There would be a very restricted need to know; underlings participating in one of the many plays would not know how their part fitted into The Playbook; few would ever see The Playbook itself. The Playbook would be brought to the desk of the few authorised to see it by a courier, signed for, the courier would watch the reader and take away the copy afterwards. The very few copies in existence would be securely locked away; each numbered and differing subtly from the others so that, should a leak occur, the authorities would know which copy read by whom had been leaked. Printed on paper that could not be photographed or duplicated. As much protection as human cunning could devise; right up there with the nuclear codes .

So, The Russian Playbook would be extraordinarily difficult to get hold of. And yet every talking head on U.S. TV has a copy at his elbow! English copies, one assumes. Rachel Maddow has comprehended the complicated chapter on how to control the U.S. power system . Others have read the impenetrably complex section on how to control U.S. voting machines or change vote counts . Many are familiar with the lists of divisions in American society and directions for exploiting them . Adam Schiff has mastered the section on how to get Trump to give Alaska back . Susan Rice well knows the chapter "How to create riots in peaceful communities".

And so on. It's all quite ridiculous: we're supposed to believe that Moscow easily controls far-away countries but can't keep its neighbours under control.

There is no Russian Playbook, that's just projection. But there is a "playbook" and it's written in English, it's freely available and it's inexpensive enough that every pundit can have a personal copy: it's named " From Dictatorship To Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation " and it's written by Gene Sharp (1928-2018) . Whatever Sharp may have thought he was doing, whatever good cause he thought he was assisting, his book has been used as a guide to create regime changes around the world. Billed as "democracy" and "freedom", their results are not so benign. Witness Ukraine today. Or Libya. Or Kosovo whose long-time leader has just been indicted for numerous crimes . Curiously enough, these efforts always take place in countries that resist Washington's line but never in countries that don't. Here we do see training, financing, propaganda, discord being sown, divisions exploited to effect regime change – all the things in the imaginary "Russian Playbook". So, whatever he may have thought he was helping, Sharp's advice has been used to produce what only the propagandists could call " model interventions "; to the "liberated" themselves, the reality is poverty , destruction , war and refugees .

The Albert Einstein Institution , which Sharp created in 1983, strongly denies collusion with Washington-sponsored overthrows but people from it have organised seminars or workshops in many targets of U.S. overthrows . The most recent annual report of 2014 , while rather opaque, shows 45% of its income from "grants" (as opposed to "individuals") and has logos of Euromaidan, SOSVenezuela, Umbrellamovement , Lwili , Sunflowersquare and others. In short, the logos of regime change operations in Ukraine, Venezuela, Hong Kong, Burkina Faso and Taiwan. (And, ironically for today's USA, Black Lives Matter). So, clearly, there is some connection between the AEI and Washington-sponsored regime change operations.

So there is a "handbook" but it's not Russian.

Reading Sharp's book, however, makes one wonder if he was just fooling himself. Has there ever been a "dictatorship" overthrown by "non-violent" resistance along the lines of what he is suggesting? He mentions Norwegians who resisted Hitler; but Norway was liberated, along with the rest of Occupied Europe, by extremely violent warfare. While some Jews escaped, most didn't and it was the conquest of Berlin that saved the rest: the nazi state was killed . The USSR went away, together with its satellite governments in Europe but that was a top-down event. He likes Gandhi but Gandhi wouldn't have lasted a minute under Stalin. Otpor was greatly aided by NATO's war on Serbia. And, they're only "non-violent" because the Western media doesn't talk much about the violence ; "non-violent" is not the first word that comes to mind in this video of Kiev 2014 . "Colour revolutions" are manufactured from existing grievances, to be sure, but with a great deal of outside assistance, direction and funding; upon inspection, there's much design behind their "spontaneity". And, not infrequently, with mysterious sniping at a expedient moment – see Katchanovski's research on the "Heavenly Hundred" of the Maidan showing pretty convincingly that the shootings were " a false flag operation" involving "an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland". There is little in Sharp's book to suggest that non-violent resistance would have had much effect on a really brutal and determined government. He also has the naïve habit of using "democrat" and "dictator" as if these words were as precisely defined as coconuts and codfish. But any "dictatorship" – for example Stalin's is a very complex affair with many shades of opinion in it. So, in terms of what he was apparently trying to do, one can see it only succeeding against rather mild "dictators" presiding over extremely unpopular polities. With a great deal of outside effort and resources.

His "playbook" is useful to outside powers that want to overthrow governments they don't like. Especially those run by "dictators" not brutal enough to shoot the protesters down. It's not Russian diplomats that are caught choosing the leaders of ostensibly independent countries . It's not Russians who boast of spending money in poor countries to change their governments . It's not Russian diplomats who meet with foreign opposition leaders . Russia doesn't fabricate a leader of a foreign country . It's not Russia that invents a humanitarian crisis , bombs the country to bits , laughs at its leader's brutal death and walks away. It's not Russia that sanctions numerous countries . It's not Russia that gives fellowships to foreign oppositionists . Even the Washington Post (one of the principals in sustaining Putindunnit hysteria) covered " The long history of the U.S. interfering with elections elsewhere "; but piously insisted "the days of its worst behavior are long behind it". Whatever the pundits may claim about Russia, the USA actually has an organisation devoted to interfering in other countries' business ; one of whose leading lights proudly boasted: " A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA. "

The famous "Russian Playbook" is nothing but projection onto Moscow of what Washington actually does: projection is so common a feature of American propaganda that one may certain that when Washington accuses somebody else of doing something, it's a guarantee that Washington is doing it. Also by this author

Patrick Armstrong was an analyst in the Canadian Department of National Defence specialising in the USSR/Russia from 1984 and a Counsellor in the Canadian Embassy in Moscow in 1993-1996. He retired in 2008 and has been writing on Russia and related subjects on the Net ever since.

[Sep 27, 2020] PODCAST- Tribute to Andre Vltchek- "West's sadistic personality disorder" by Kevin Barrett

Sep 27, 2020 | www.unz.com

One of the most vibrantly alive people I met, André Vltchek, just died . Though he barely made it past his mid-fifties he got in a lot more living than a hundred average Americans who live to collect their pensions. Allah yarhamhu.

In honor of this great Truth Jihadi we're replaying this 2018 interview:

André Vltchek on West's sadistic personality disorder (originally broadcast May 2, 2018)

The West claims to be the "free world" -- the global leader in human rights, humanitarianism, and free expression. Globetrotting independent journalist André Vltchek , who joins us from Borneo, isn't buying it. His latest essay begins:

Western culture is clearly obsessed with rules, guilt, submissiveness and punishment.

By now it is clear that the West is the least free society on Earth. In North America and Europe, almost everyone is under constant scrutiny: people are spied on, observed, their personal information is being continually extracted, and the surveillance cameras are used indiscriminately.

Life is synchronized and managed. There are hardly any surprises.

One can sleep with whomever he or she wishes (as long as it is done within the 'allowed protocol'). Homosexuality and bisexuality are allowed. But that is about all; that is how far 'freedom' usually stretches.

Rebellion is not only discouraged, it is fought against, brutally. For the tiniest misdemeanors or errors, people end up behind bars. As a result, the U.S. has more prisoners per capita than any other country on Earth, except the Seychelles.

Andre Vltchek's latest book is : The Great October Socialist Revolution: Impact on the World and Birth of Internationalism

Information on his other books and films

Luther Blisst , says: September 23, 2020 at 11:21 pm GMT

Andre taunted rightwing elites and illness – with a passion. I guess one of them caught up.

Living hard seems like a death-wish, maybe it was. Staring at darkness messes people up and he traveled again and again into the hearts of darkness across the planet because he wanted to be a modern Wilfred Burchett. He was one of the greats. My condolences to his family and friends.

Peace to Stephen Cohen too. You both will be missed.

PetrOldSack , says: September 24, 2020 at 11:00 am GMT

André Vltchek was not an intellectual heavyweight. What is fascinating about his life-story is how and who financed. That should be easy for insiders to fish out, and insiders there be.

As to my humble opinion, Chomsky was neither. From all angles, his pre-fabricated prestige, his in-group attitudes, his encrusted prestance, pettiness, pedantry, always within convention, his factoid approach, the channels of communication, the lack of any systemic approach, his "good guys bad guys" copper´ approach, did not warrant the few hours listening in on his tune and omni-presence. His numb personality, contrary to the combative Vltchek is noted as a minor.

Some "intellectuals" have half a page of original content in them over the course of a life-time (not the same as career (n´est ce pas Pinker?)), most have none. "History repeat itself", through the bull-horns of public intellectuals. They both practiced a sort of journalism that is superficial (accent on the superficial) agenda driven.

They both are within the K. B. range.

No Friend Of The Devil , says: September 24, 2020 at 9:07 pm GMT

@Robert Konrad,

Ex-CIA John Kiriakou stated that the CIA was attempting to recruit just about anyone that they were able to starting in the sixties ranging from Hollywood actors/actresses, musicians, writers, journalists, artists, business people, just about anyone. Operation Mockingbird is still widely used even if it is no longer regerred to it as Operation Mockingbird.

brabantian , says: September 26, 2020 at 11:14 am GMT

André Vltchek (1962-2020) was the son of a Czech nuclear physicist father, and a Russian-Chinese artist-architect mother, born in Soviet-era St Petersburg (then Leningrad). He spent part of his childhood as well in the famous Czech beer city of Pilsen.

Here, an article where Vltchek talked about his roots, and his nostalgia for life under Communism in eastern Europe
https://www.chinadailyhk.com/article/134280#How-we-sold-Soviet-Union-and-Czechoslovakia-for-plastic-shopping-bags

Eulogy for André Vltchek by China expert Jeff J Brown

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EmCFRyDLDJU?feature=oembed

Adûnâi , says: Website September 26, 2020 at 2:12 pm GMT

Western culture is clearly obsessed with rules, guilt, submissiveness and punishment.

What culture is not? Every single population on Earth wants to survive, Westerners want non-Aryans to survive, but the mechanism is always the same. The Stasi, the Gestapo, the CIA, the KGB – they all breathed air, and they all tortured dissenters. Turkey was almost overthrown in 2016. The Shah of Iran was, as were Hosni Mubarak and Gaddafi in Egypt and Libya. Bashar is facing quite a lot of criticism for being free – that critique comes in the form of bombs and jihadi freedom fighters. The Saudi Prince is wise for strangling and beheading Khashoggi. The USSR disintegrated after they had shut down the GULAG.

As a result, the U.S. has more prisoners per capita than any other country on Earth, except the Seychelles.

In 2012, the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in [the DPR of Korea] estimated 150,000 to 200,000 are incarcerated, based on testimonies of defectors from the state police bureau, which roughly equals 600–800 people incarcerated per 100,000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate

The World Prison Brief puts the United States' incarceration rate at 655 per 100,000.

Anon [790] Disclaimer , says: September 26, 2020 at 5:27 pm GMT

Okay. If the West is the least free society on the planet, why the heck do all these third-world people keep trying to move there? It is plain that Vltchek's thinking flunks the real-world reality test.

The reality is, the rest of the world is worse off than the West, or people wouldn't keep trying to leave the third world for the West.

Robert Konrad , says: September 27, 2020 at 12:50 am GMT
@Anon ey want to have freedom of their stupid religious beliefs, not freedom from religion. They still don't know that freedom of religion is not worth anything if it also doesn't guarantee freedom from religion.

Thomas Jefferson tried very hard to explain this to them, but Yankee morons have never learned what Jefferson tried to teach them. (With some notable exceptions, though, who, however, have absolutely no political power.)

Vltchek is/was right: American/Western civilization [sic] (siphilization, rather) is bankrupt and inhuman. It can only offer an abundance of material goods and military weapons as if the only goals of human life were material things and warfare.

[Sep 27, 2020] Neoliberalisn means war: two neoliberal state clash in disputed Nagono-Karabakh: Armenia Orders 'Full Troop Mobilization' Against Azerbaijan As Tanks Clash, Martial Law Declared

So a NATO member -- Turkey is supporting Azerbaijan while Russia supports Armenia. Yet another proxy war?
Sep 27, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Sunday saw huge clashes erupt between the armies of Armenia and Azerbaijan along the already militarized and disputed Nagorno-Karabakh border region. An official state of war in the region has been declared by Yerevan.

"Early in the morning, around 7 a.m. the Azerbaijani forces launched a large-scale aggression, including missile attacks..." Armenia's Defense Ministry stated Sunday. Armenia has since reportedly declared martial law and a "total military mobilization" in what looks to be the most serious escalation between the two countries in years.

Tank warfare unfolding Sunday. Armenian Defense Ministry produced footage (still frame) of attack on Azeri positions.

Air and artillery attacks from both sides ramped up, with each side blaming the other for the start of hostilities, while international powers urge calm. Crucially, civilians have already been killed on either side by indiscriminate shelling . At least a dozen soldiers on either side have also been reported killed.

Armenia's high command has ordered all troops throughout the country to muster and report to their bases : "I invite the soldiers appointed in the forces to appear before their military commissions in the regions," a statement said.

Armenia's military has released footage of significant tank warfare in progress. The below is said to be Armenian army forces destroying Azerbaijani tanks:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-mJffVrtPLk

And here's more from Sunday's fighting:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/D2jd1bw0AXQ?start=9

The recent conflict hearkens back to 2016, but before that to post-Soviet times. Christian Armenia and Muslim Azerbaijan fought a war at that time in which at least 200 people were killed over Armenian ethnic breakaway Nagorno Karabakh, which declared independence in 1991, despite being internationally recognized as within Azerbaijan territory .

me title=

The first war for the territory finished in 1994, but the region has been militarized since, amid sporadic shelling.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1310227591031332864&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Farmenia-declares-war-martial-law-effect-tank-warfare-azerbaijan-erupts-disputed&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

Dozens of civilians have already been injured Sunday in the major flare-up of fighting, as CNN reports :

While Armenia said it was responding to missile attacks launched by its neighbor Sunday, Azerbaijan blamed Armenia for the clashes.

In response to the alleged firing of projectiles by Azerbaijan, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan tweeted that his country had "shot down 2 helicopters & 3 UAVs, destroyed 3 tanks."

Multiple dramatic battlefield videos are circulating on social media confirming the large-scale deployment of tanks, artillery units, and airpower . Multiple Azerbaijani soldiers have been reported killed, but it's as yet unclear what casualty numbers could be.

Turkey's role in new fighting is attracting scrutiny. Its foreign ministry blamed Armenia and called for it to halt military operations, however, it hardly appears to be a mere outside or 'neutral' observer, given new widespread reports Turkey has transferred 'Syrian rebel' units to join the fighting on Azerbaijan's side .

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1310192700184985600&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Farmenia-declares-war-martial-law-effect-tank-warfare-azerbaijan-erupts-disputed&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

These reports of Turkish supplied Syrian mercenaries began days ago, in what regional analysts predicted would be a huge escalation in hostilities in the Caucuses.

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan late in the day slammed Turkey's meddling in the conflict . Ankara had called Armenia "an obstacle" to peace after the fresh hostilities broke out. Yerevan has now formally confirmed Turkey is supplying fighters .

Via BBC

Given the number of vital oil and gas infrastructure facilities and pipelines in the region , impact on global markets could be seen as early as Monday.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1310265444847120386&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Farmenia-declares-war-martial-law-effect-tank-warfare-azerbaijan-erupts-disputed&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

"At least 16 military and several civilians were killed on Sunday in the heaviest clashes between Armenia and Azerbaijan since 2016, reigniting concern about stability in the South Caucasus, a corridor for pipelines carrying oil and gas to world markets," Reuters reports.

Azerbaijan has also declared an official state of martial law while clashes between the armies are unfolding.

Meanwhile footage has emerged showing Armenia's nationwide mustering of its national and reserve forces :

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-3&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1310278856352370694&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Farmenia-declares-war-martial-law-effect-tank-warfare-azerbaijan-erupts-disputed&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

Unverified footage of frontline fighting into the night:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-4&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1310273042929590274&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Farmenia-declares-war-martial-law-effect-tank-warfare-azerbaijan-erupts-disputed&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

"Pipelines shipping Caspian oil and natural gas from Azerbaijan to the world pass close to Nagorno-Karabakh," Reuters reports. "Armenia also warned about security risks in the South Caucasus in July after Azerbaijan threatened to attack Armenia's nuclear power plant as possible retaliation ."

The fighting is expected to grow fiercer along front lines in the disputed region into the night as the prospect of a full 'state of war' is looming between the historic rivals.


[Sep 26, 2020] The origin of Full Spectrum Dominance Doctrine

Sep 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Anatol Lieven's recent piece, How the west lost , describes this moral defeat of the 'west' after its dubious 'victory' in the cold war:

Accompanying this overwhelmingly dominant political and economic ideology was an American geopolitical vision equally grandiose in ambition and equally blind to the lessons of history. This was summed up in the memorandum on "Defence Planning Guidance 1994-1999," drawn up in April 1992 for the Bush Senior administration by Under-Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and subsequently leaked to the media. Its central message was:
...
While that 1992 Washington paper spoke of the "legitimate interests" of other states, it clearly implied that it would be Washington that would define what interests were legitimate, and how they could be pursued. And once again, though never formally adopted, this "doctrine" became in effect the standard operating procedure of subsequent administrations. In the early 2000s, when its influence reached its most dangerous height, military and security elites would couch it in the terms of "full spectrum dominance." As the younger President Bush declared in his State of the Union address in January 2002, which put the US on the road to the invasion of Iraq: "By the grace of God, America won the Cold War A world once divided into two armed camps now recognises one sole and pre-eminent power, the United States of America."

But that power has since failed in the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, during the 2008 financial crisis and now again in the pandemic.

[Sep 26, 2020] What is predatory capitalism

Highly recommended!
Sep 26, 2020 | www.amazon.com

Extracted from: From Conflict to Crisis- The Danger of U.S. Actions by Jeanne M. Haskin

CHAPTER TWO: INSTILLING THE ILLUSION OF CHOICE

Selfishness may be exalted as the root and branch of capitalism, but it doesn't make you look good to the party on the receiving end or those whose sympathy he earns. For that, you need a government prepared to do four things, which each have separate dictums based on study, theorization, and experience. Coercion: Force is illegitimate only if you can't sell it. Persuasion: How do I market thee? Let me count the ways. Bargaining: If you won't scratch my back, then how about a piece of the pie? Indoctrination: Because I said so. (And paid for the semantics.)

Predatory capitalism is the control and expropriation of land, labor, and natural resources by a foreign government via coercion, persuasion, bargaining, and indoctrination.

At the coercive stage, we can expect military and/or police intervention to repress the subject populace. The persuasive stage will be marked by clientelism, in which a small percentage of the populace will be rewarded for loyalty, often serving as the capitalists' administrators, tax collectors, and enforcers. At the bargaining stage, efforts will be made to include the populace, or a certain percentage of it, in the country's ruling system, and this is usually marked by steps toward democratic (or, more often, autocratic) governance.

At the fourth stage, the populace is educated by capitalists, such that they continue to maintain a relationship of dependency.

The Predatory Debt Link

In many cases, post-colonial states were forced to assume the debts of their colonizers. And where they did not, they were encouraged to become in debt to the West via loans that were issued through international institutions to ensure they did not fall prey to communism or pursue other economic policies that were inimical to the West. Debt is the tie that binds nation states to the geostrategic and economic interests of the West.

As such, the Cold War era was a time of easy credit, luring postcolonial states to undertake the construction of useless monoliths and monuments, and to even expropriate such loans through corruption and despotism, thereby making these independent rulers as predatory as colonizers. While some countries were wiser than others and did use the funds for infrastructural improvements, these were also things that benefited the West and particularly Western contractors. In his controversial work Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins reveals that he was a consultant for an American firm (MAIN), whose job was to ensure that states became indebted beyond their means so they would remain loyal to their creditors, buying them votes within United Nations organizations, among other things.

Predatory capitalists demand export-orientations as the means to generate foreign currency with which to pay back debt. In the process, the state must privatize and drastically slash or eliminate any domestic subsidies which are aimed at helping native industry compete in the marketplace. Domestic consumption and imports must be radically contained, as shown by the exchange rate policies recommended by the IMF. The costs of obtaining domestic capital will be pushed beyond the reach of most native producers, while wages must be depressed to an absolute bare minimum. In short, the country's land, labor, and natural resources must be sold at bargain basement prices in order to make these goods competitive, in what one author has called "a spiraling race to the bottom," as countries producing predominantly the same goods engage in cutthroat competition whose benefactor is the West.

Under these circumstances, foreign investment is encouraged, but this, too, represents a loaded situation for countries that open their markets to financial liberalization.

[Sep 26, 2020] Galloway- Lying industry may be the only sector of Western economies still in full production TAXPAYERS pay for it

Highly recommended!
Sep 26, 2020 | www.rt.com

If you have ever wondered why Syrian jihadists, or so-called 'moderate opposition', got support from the woke liberal West, a recent leak by Anonymous reveals it's because Western governments funded this propaganda.

In the end, it is the sheer childishness of the propaganda which amazes me most, not that our rulers lie about other countries – I have always known that. But somehow there was a kernel of truth around which the web of lies was spun, for example about life in the old Soviet Union.

I began to realise the scope of Western ability to literally invent the most baseless lies only in the run-up to the Iraq War in 2003, and only because I knew more about Iraq than any politician in Britain or America and ten times more than the average made-up telly-dolly chuntering through their auto-cued war propaganda. The women presenters weren't any better.

This all came flooding back to me when I received an email from Anonymous earlier this week and then read Ben Norton's excellent analysis of it all in The GrayZone.

If anyone ever wondered how the hordes of head-chopping throat-cutting heart-eating gay-murdering women-hating 'Jihadists' of the Syrian War ever managed to get a fair press in a 'woke' liberal West that gets hot under the lace collar about JK Rowling novels, the answers are all in the Anonymous leak . The principle answer is that you, the taxpayer, paid for it.

That's right. The blizzard of 'White Helmets' (who made it right up to the Oscars to thank everyone who'd helped them except those that had helped them the most), "chemical-weapons attacks" and all the paraphernalia of a newly "moderate opposition" in Syria – was all paid for by YOU. Millions of pounds of British taxpayers' money was revealed to have been spent secretly on UK support for the throat-cutting coalition of chaos, which for a decade massacred its way across Syria wearing a snow-white Western beard of respectability.

It would appear that while the US (or rather its milk-cows in the Gulf) was paying for the lethal-weapons, perfidious Albion was doing what it does best – lying through its teeth whilst making those being lied to, pay for the privilege. Now that – thanks to the leaks – we know this, it should put us on guard for the next one. Yet somehow it doesn't, at least not for the purveyors of the news.

The Lazarus-like resurrection (and photo-shoot) of Russia's opposition figure and Western darling Alexey Navalny after yet another alleged Novichok (believed to be 5-8 times more toxic than VX nerve agent) attack without so much as a tracheostomy to show for it is swallowed whole in yet another anti-Russian public relations offensive.

ALSO ON RT.COM Caitlin Johnstone: MSM smear merchants target critics of Establishment China narratives

Grown sane men call my television show to talk about 'concentration camps' in China in which, we are told, "a million Uighur Muslims" are being held and forcibly sterilised. This is despite the allegations being largely based on studies backed by the American government and statements by Western media favourite, German researcher Adrian Zenz. Zenz, who is part of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, a US-backed advocacy group, believes that he is "led by God" on his "mission" against China. Meanwhile, according to China's official statistics the Uighur population in Xinjiang province increased by over 25 percent between 2010 and 2018, while the Han Chinese rose by only two percent.

The lying industry may be the only sector of the Western economies still in full production. No need for furlough or bounce-back loans. The lie-machines never still. No smoke is usually detected from their chimneys, but inside, their pants are well and truly on fire.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


[Sep 25, 2020] Fiona Hill still pushes "Russian Meddling" narrative

It is difficult to teach old chickenhawk a new tricks. Looks like she is a real "national security parasite" and will stay is this role till the bitter end.
"America's world management, NATO, the European Union and the construction of establishments and alliances the US constructed after World War II have taken a hit." took hit because of the crisis of neoliberalism not so much because of Russia resistance to the USA neoliberal domination and unwillingness to became a vassal state a la EU states, Japan and GB.
Her hostile remark confirms grave mistake of allowing immigrants to occupy high position in the US foreign policy hierarchy. They bring with themselves "ancient hatred"
Only a blind (or a highly indoctrinated/brainwashed) person is unable to see where all these neocon policies are leading...
Notable quotes:
"... America's world management, NATO, the European Union and the construction of establishments and alliances the US constructed after World War II have taken a hit ..."
"... "They lost the entire US political class ..."
Sep 25, 2020 | newschant.com

Fiona Hill, the National Security Council's senior director for European and Russian affairs till 2019, says divisions are rising inside the Kremlin over the knowledge of persevering with a "dirty tricks" marketing campaign that's had combined outcomes and will now face diminishing returns.

On the one hand, Russia's 2016 affect operations succeeded past the Kremlin's wildest goals. The US-dominated, unipolar world that Putin has lengthy railed in opposition to is now not. America's world management, NATO, the European Union and the construction of establishments and alliances the US constructed after World War II have taken a hit. "On that ledger, wow, yes, basically over-fulfilled the plan," mentioned Hill.

At the identical time, getting caught in the act of making an attempt to sabotage US democracy has proved pricey. "They lost the entire US political class and politicized ties so that the whole future of US-Russia relations now depends on who wins in November," she mentioned.

[Sep 25, 2020] The End Of The 'Rules Based International Order'

Notable quotes:
"... Accompanying this overwhelmingly dominant political and economic ideology was an American geopolitical vision equally grandiose in ambition and equally blind to the lessons of history. This was summed up in the memorandum on "Defence Planning Guidance 1994-1999," drawn up in April 1992 for the Bush Senior administration by Under-Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis "Scooter" Libby ..."
"... In the early 2000s, when its influence reached its most dangerous height, military and security elites would couch it in the terms of "full spectrum dominance." ..."
"... Bhadrakumar describes how the 'west', through its own behavior, created a mighty block that now opposes its dictates. He concludes ..."
"... Quintessentially, Russia and China contest a set of neoliberal practices that have evolved in the post-World War 2 international order validating selective use of human rights as a universal value to legitimise western intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign states. On the other hand, they also accept and continuously affirm their commitment to a number of fundamental precepts of the international order -- in particular, the primacy of state sovereignty and territorial integrity, the importance of international law, and the centrality of the United Nations and the key role of the Security Council. ..."
"... The rules are follow the dictates of our western neo-colonial institutions like the World Bank, the IMF et all. ..."
"... Its a pretty simple concept backed by the attack dog of the US military. ..."
"... 'Rules based order' was always a euphemism for exceptionalism of one kind or another. The term was invented to avoid having to say 'rule of law', which invited criticism because even the most minimal amount of law (such as Geneva conventions, ICC etc) was rejected in practice and in policy by the leading members of the actually existing world order. ..."
"... Rumor says the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" also envisioned the balkanization of Russia (the document is still classified, but it leaked to a NYT journalist at the time, who published a report on it). ..."
"... It is not over in the sense that the West hasn't given up in its attempts to take over the world. But as the "exceptionalist" western countries decline, they will go even crazier and crazier and there will be full blown hysteria. ..."
"... In this sense, the rule based order will be over as there will be only disorder and animalistic, crazed western rage and bullying. The West is like a trapped animal. It will start pouncing, raging and snarling like a wild animal. This is the real nature of the West. A hungry wild animal that needs to feed. ..."
"... But behind the liberal mask, there are hateful eyes and gnashing teeth, and hunger and greed for other people's resources. ..."
"... Expressed in words, the West's face says "I'm the best and you are nothing! Give me your stuff! And this is how it will forever be!" ..."
"... As Putin has said, the US is no longer agreement capable. ..."
"... Instead of bringing Russia into the Western liberal democracies (with the threat of major nuclear war now drastically reduced) the now Anglo-Zionist Empire just looted it. ..."
"... Actually the Trump Administration has done far more against Russia than all US administrations from the last 30 years. Do not listen what they say, look at what they do. Right now the US in a full blown Cold War with Russia with ever increasing attacks ..."
"... Rules based international order .... the U.S. functions as the the Supreme Court for the U.N. , 'we have invoked snapback sanctions and extended the arms embargo on Iran indefinitely and are enforcing it'. UN, 'but your vote failed'. ..."
"... Rules based International Order is the dog whistle for global private finance controlled economies. It is sad that we are in a civilization war with China/Russia about who runs international finance going forward and yet there is no discussion of the subject but instead all sorts of proxy conflicts. ..."
"... The US is not just facing relative decline -- the fact that others are catching up in key ways. The US is also facing absolute decline -- the fact that it is suffering a degradation of capacities and is losing competitive battles in key areas. Examples of absolute decline include the Russian and Chinese military-technological revolutions based on anti-ship and hypersonic missiles and air defense systems; Chinese 5G; China's demonstrative success in suppressing COVID and its overall manufacturing power; the declining quality of life for most Americans; and the collapse of American institutional competence. ..."
"... Related to this, we can't separate these dynamics from the political economy of the states in question. China, in particular, is showing that an interventionist state, with high levels of public ownership, is essential to qualitative power, human security, and economic and social development. ..."
"... Psssst, learning Russian is easier than Chinese and we already know a few Russian words, such as novichok. ..."
"... Russia after the Cold War was a shambles and today it remains a weak economy with a limited role on the world stage, concerned mainly with retaining some of its traditional areas of influence. China is a vastly more formidable competitor. If the US (and the UK, if as usual we tag along) approach the relationship with Beijing with anything like the combination of arrogance, ignorance, greed, criminality, bigotry, hypocrisy and incompetence with which western elites managed the period after the Cold War, then we risk losing the competition and endangering the world. [my emphasis] ..."
"... It is not over in the sense that the West hasn't given up in its attempts to take over the world. ..."
"... The contest between the Empire and the upstarts is not over by a long shot. What the West HAS lost is the "inevitability" argument. But for the upstarts to actually prevail in their "multi-lateral" vision, they have to actually entice countries to join them despite threats and intimidation from the Empire. ..."
"... The Empire's power-elite KNOW that Russia, China, and allies of Russia-China don't want to be subject to their "rules-based order". The Empire is actively working to undermine, subvert, and divide the countries that oppose it. While also securing their own territories/population via intimidation and propaganda. ..."
"... On rules based disorder and the capitulation of Merkel and her BND lapdogs to the 'hate Russia' fulminations of the UKUSA morons. I see that the German Parliament has NOT TAKEN its red pills these days and is reluctant to swallow the BS. ..."
"... My late father as an army officer prosecuted Japanese war criminals for their atrocities now the Anglo-Zionists are the pre-eminent war criminals and their leaders loudly proclaim "our values" as a pathological and propagandistic form of projection. Is it possible they are unaware of their blatant hypocrisy ? ..."
"... There is no "international law" and no "international order." There is only relative power. And when those powers clash, as seems inevitable, the world is in for a major nuclear war, and probably preceded by several more regional wars. Meanwhile, the US internally is collapsing into economic disaster, social unrest, political and social oppression, infrastructure failure, and medical disasters. We'll probably be in martial law sometime between November 3 and January 21 if not beyond that period, just for starters. ..."
"... America's "Rules-Based International Order" is a Goebbelsian euphemism for a Lies-Based Imperial Order, led by the USA and its war criminal allies (aka the self-styled Free World). ..."
"... The true nature of this America-led order is exposed by the USA's war of aggression against Iraq (which violated international law and had no United Nations sanction) and its decades-long War on Terrorism, which have murdered hundreds of thousands of people and maimed, immiserated, or refugeed millions of more people. ..."
"... The Empire is very much alive and dangerous. Ask Iran, ask Syria, as the Palestinians, ask the Russians, ask the Chinese. Ask numerous African nations. Even Pangloss was not so stupidly naive. ..."
"... quite right. 'Rules based order' was always a euphemism for exceptionalism of one kind or another. ie US and its "allies" is basically asking the rest of the world to finance their (the US et al) version of a welfare state. ..."
"... China and rest of the worlds foreign central banks stopped growing their foreign exchange reserves (on net) in 2014 leaving the US in a sort of limbo. ..."
"... "Major powers maintaining cooperation, at least not engaging in Cold War-style antagonism, is the important foundation of world peace. China is committed to maintaining cooperation among major powers, as well as being flexible in the balance of interests acceptable to all parties. The problem is the Trump administration is hysterically shaping decoupling and confrontation between Beijing and Washington, and has been mobilizing more forces to its side at home and abroad. Those US policymakers are deliberately splitting the world like during the Cold War. ..."
"... The first 'Cold War' was entirely contrived. The US knew the Soviet Union was weak and had no agenda beyond maintaining security and its own reconstruction after WW2. There was no threat of a Western European invasion, or of the USSR spreading revolution globally. All that Cold War ideology is a lie. And the same lying is taking place about China today. No difference. ..."
"... It's good to see discussion here of the nefarious role of the American far-right neocon warmongers in the State Department, intelligence services and military leadership just before the turn of the new century. What I have never seen clearly explained, however, is the connection between these very dangerous forces and the equally cynical and reactionary Israeli politicians and the Mossad, as well as Saudi Arabian officials. ..."
Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

The 'western' countries, i.e. the United States and its 'allies', love to speak of a 'rules based international order' which they say everyone should follow. That 'rules based order' is a way more vague concept than the actual rule of law:

The G7 is united by its shared values and commitment to a rules based international order. That order is being challenged by authoritarianism, serious violations of human rights, exclusion and discrimination, humanitarian and security crises, and the defiance of international law and standards.

As members of the G7, we are convinced that our societies and the world have reaped remarkable benefits from a global order based on rules and underscore that this system must have at its heart the notions of inclusion, democracy and respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, diversity, and the rule of law.

That the 'rules based international order' is supposed to include vague concepts of 'democracy', 'human rights', 'fundamental freedoms', 'diversity' and more makes it easy to claim that this or that violation of the 'rules based international order' has occurred. Such violations can then be used to impose punishment in the form of sanctions or war.

That the above definition was given by a minority of a few rich nations makes it already clear that it can not be a global concept for a multilateral world. That would require a set of rules that everyone has agreed to. We already had and have such a system. It is called international law. But at the end of the cold war the 'west' began to ignore the actual international law and to replace it with its own rules which others were then supposed to follow. That hubris has come back to bite the 'west'.

Anatol Lieven's recent piece, How the west lost , describes this moral defeat of the 'west' after its dubious 'victory' in the cold war:

Accompanying this overwhelmingly dominant political and economic ideology was an American geopolitical vision equally grandiose in ambition and equally blind to the lessons of history. This was summed up in the memorandum on "Defence Planning Guidance 1994-1999," drawn up in April 1992 for the Bush Senior administration by Under-Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and subsequently leaked to the media. Its central message was:
...
While that 1992 Washington paper spoke of the "legitimate interests" of other states, it clearly implied that it would be Washington that would define what interests were legitimate, and how they could be pursued. And once again, though never formally adopted, this "doctrine" became in effect the standard operating procedure of subsequent administrations. In the early 2000s, when its influence reached its most dangerous height, military and security elites would couch it in the terms of "full spectrum dominance." As the younger President Bush declared in his State of the Union address in January 2002, which put the US on the road to the invasion of Iraq: "By the grace of God, America won the Cold War A world once divided into two armed camps now recognizes one sole and pre-eminent power, the United States of America."

But that power has since failed in the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, during the 2008 financial crisis and now again in the pandemic. It also created new competition to its role due to its own behavior:

On the one hand, American moves to extend Nato to the Baltics and then (abortively) on to Ukraine and Georgia, and to abolish Russian influence and destroy Russian allies in the Middle East, inevitably produced a fierce and largely successful Russian nationalist reaction. ...

On the other hand, the benign and neglectful way in which Washington regarded the rise of China in the generation after the Cold War (for example, the blithe decision to allow China to join the World Trade Organisation) was also rooted in ideological arrogance.

Western triumphalism meant that most of the US elites were convinced that as a result of economic growth, the Chinese Communist state would either democratise or be overthrown; and that China would eventually have to adopt the western version of economics or fail economically. This was coupled with the belief that good relations with China could be predicated on China accepting a so-called "rules-based" international order in which the US set the rules while also being free to break them whenever it wished; something that nobody with the slightest knowledge of Chinese history should have believed.

The retired Indian ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar touches on the same points in an excellent series about the new Chinese-Russian alliance:

Bhadrakumar describes how the 'west', through its own behavior, created a mighty block that now opposes its dictates. He concludes:

Quintessentially, Russia and China contest a set of neoliberal practices that have evolved in the post-World War 2 international order validating selective use of human rights as a universal value to legitimise western intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign states. On the other hand, they also accept and continuously affirm their commitment to a number of fundamental precepts of the international order -- in particular, the primacy of state sovereignty and territorial integrity, the importance of international law, and the centrality of the United Nations and the key role of the Security Council.

While the U.S. wants a vague 'rules based international order' China and Russia emphasize an international order that is based on the rule of law. Two recent comments by leaders from China and Russia underline this.

In a speech in honor of the UN's 75th anniversary China's President Xi Jinping emphasized law based multilateralism :

China firmly supports the United Nations' central role in global affairs and opposes any country acting like boss of the world, President Xi Jinping said on Monday.
...
"No country has the right to dominate global affairs, control the destiny of others or keep advantages in development all to itself," Xi said.

Noting that the UN must stand firm for justice, Xi said that mutual respect and equality among all countries, big or small, is the foremost principle of the UN Charter.

No country should be allowed to do whatever it likes and be the hegemon or bully, Xi said. "Unilateralism is a dead end," he said.
...
International laws should not be distorted or used as a pretext to undermine other countries' legitimate rights and interests or world peace and stability, he added.

The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went even further by outright rejecting the 'western rules' that the 'rules based international order' implies:

Ideas that Russia and China will play by sets of Western rules under any circumstances are deeply flawed , Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview with New York-based international Russian-language RTVI channel.

"I was reading our political scientists who are well known in the West. The following idea is becoming louder and more pronounced: it is time to stop applying Western metrics to our actions and stop trying to be liked by the West at any cost . These are very reputable people and a rather serious statement. It is clear to me that the West is wittingly or unwittingly pushing us towards this analysis. It is likely to be done unwittingly," Lavrov noted. "However, it is a big mistake to think that Russia will play by Western rules in any case, just like thinking this in terms of China."

As an alliance China and Russia have all the raw materials, energy, engineering and industrial capabilities, agriculture and populations needed to be completely independent from the 'west'. They have no need nor any desire to follow dubious rules dictated by other powers. There is no way to make them do so. As M.K. Bhadrakumar concludes :

The US cannot overwhelm that alliance unless it defeats both China and Russia together, simultaneously. The alliance, meanwhile, also happens to be on the right side of history. Time works in its favour, as the decline of the US in relative comprehensive national power and global influence keeps advancing and the world gets used to the "post-American century."

---
P.S.
On a lighter note: RT , Russia's state sponsored international TV station, has recently hired Donald Trump (vid). He will soon host his own reality show on RT . The working title is reportedly: "Putin's Apprentice". The apprenticeship might give him a chance to learn how a nation that has failed can be resurrected to its former glory.

Posted by b on September 22, 2020 at 17:59 UTC | Permalink

Kali , Sep 22 2020 18:18 utc | 1

The Liberal International Order or Pax Americana are synonyms for The Rules Based Order. The plan that was followed for years was the outline given by Zbigniew Brzezinski and the Trilateral Commission in The Grand Chessboard to "contain" the ambition of Russia, China, and Iran over their interest to expand into Central Asia and the Middle East. Brzezinski changed in 2016, so did Kissinger, Brzezinski wrote that it was time to make peace and to integrate with Russia, China and Iran. But the elites had changed by then, newer people had taken over and no longer followed Brzezinski.
circumspect , Sep 22 2020 18:27 utc | 2
The rules are follow the dictates of our western neo-colonial institutions like the World Bank, the IMF et all. We will own you and you will do what we say and those are the rules. Any challenge to our authority will lead to war, economic ruin or both.

Its a pretty simple concept backed by the attack dog of the US military.

ptb , Sep 22 2020 18:37 utc | 3
'Rules based order' was always a euphemism for exceptionalism of one kind or another. The term was invented to avoid having to say 'rule of law', which invited criticism because even the most minimal amount of law (such as Geneva conventions, ICC etc) was rejected in practice and in policy by the leading members of the actually existing world order.
Patrick Armstrong , Sep 22 2020 18:52 utc | 4
Can't resist tooting my own horn.
https://patrickarmstrong.ca/2017/04/29/the-west-actually-lost-the-cold-war-it-turned-victory-into-defeat/
vk , Sep 22 2020 19:05 utc | 5
Rumor says the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" also envisioned the balkanization of Russia (the document is still classified, but it leaked to a NYT journalist at the time, who published a report on it).

.. .. ..

Passer by , Sep 22 2020 19:43 utc | 9
It is not over in the sense that the West hasn't given up in its attempts to take over the world. But as the "exceptionalist" western countries decline, they will go even crazier and crazier and there will be full blown hysteria.

In this sense, the rule based order will be over as there will be only disorder and animalistic, crazed western rage and bullying. The West is like a trapped animal. It will start pouncing, raging and snarling like a wild animal. This is the real nature of the West. A hungry wild animal that needs to feed.

All the liberalism is just self-congratulation about how exceptionalist it is. It is born out of narcisism and self-obsession during the "good times" of the West.

But behind the liberal mask, there are hateful eyes and gnashing teeth, and hunger and greed for other people's resources.

The real face of it is hateful and snarling. And it will be fully exposed during the next 10 years, as the West goes crazy and it becomes a hungry wild animal that desperately needs to feed.

Expressed in words, the West's face says "I'm the best and you are nothing! Give me your stuff! And this is how it will forever be!"

Countries need to stay out from the wild animal and carry a big stick just in case, until it succumbs from its internal hatreds and contradictions.

gepay , Sep 22 2020 19:44 utc | 11

As Putin has said, the US is no longer agreement capable. As b. outlines. the US elites no longer follow the rule of law. This is even true within the US. The US inherited the role formerly played by the British Empire after WW2.

The national security apparatus of both the US and the Soviet Union kept the Cold War going. Notice how soon after JFK was assassinated Khrushchev was deposed. Gorbachev rightly stopped the Soviets superpower regime. As Dmitri Orlov points out - Empire hollowed out the Soviet Union and he sees it doing the same to the US.

Instead of bringing Russia into the Western liberal democracies (with the threat of major nuclear war now drastically reduced) the now Anglo-Zionist Empire just looted it. The life expectancy of Russians fell 7 years in a decade until rescued by Putin.

It can now be seen that the Nixon-Kissinger opening up to China was not to gain access to its large market potential but to gain access to hundreds of millions of cheap, disciplined, and educated workers. The elites starting in the 70s became greedier. Jet travel,electronic communication, and computers allowed the outsourcing of manufacture.

The spread of air conditioning allowed even the too hot south to be a location. First in the US as the factories began their march through the non union southern states onto Mexico. Management from the north could now live in air conditioned houses, drive air conditioned cars and work in air conditioned offices.

The 70s oil inflation led to stagnation as the unionized labor were powerful enough to get cost of living raises. With the globalization of labor union power in the US has been destroyed. As Eric X Li points out China's one party rule actually changes policies easier than the Western democracies.

So China's government hasn't joined in with the West in just creating wealth for the top 1% and debt for the real economy.

As b. pointed out, the Anglo Zionist policies created the mutual benefit partnership of Russia and China. The Chinese belt and road initiative appears to be intent on creating a large trading zone that could benefit those involved. The US is just using sanctions and the military to turn sovereign functioning countries that don't go along with it into failed states and their infrastructure turned to rubble

Roy G , Sep 22 2020 20:11 utc | 13
Now, the US is forced into puppeteering the UN in order to maintain the illusion of the 'rules based order,' even as it slides further and further away from any meaningful international cooperation:

Fortunately for the world, the United States took responsible action to stop this from happening. In accordance with our rights under UNSCR 2231, we initiated the snapback process to restore virtually all previously terminated UN sanctions, including the arms embargo. The world will be safer as a result.

The United States expects all UN Member States to fully comply with their obligations to implement these measures. In addition to the arms embargo, this includes restrictions such as the ban on Iran engaging in enrichment and reprocessing-related activities, the prohibition on ballistic missile testing and development by Iran, and sanctions on the transfer of nuclear- and missile-related technologies to Iran, among others. If UN Member States fail to fulfill their obligations to implement these sanctions, the United States is prepared to use our domestic authorities to impose consequences for those failures and ensure that Iran does not reap the benefits of UN-prohibited activity.

https://www.state.gov/the-return-of-un-sanctions-on-the-islamic-republic-of-iran/

Passer by , Sep 22 2020 20:15 utc | 16
Any type of enmity btw the two countries under Trump is pure theater.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Sep 22 2020 20:07 utc | 10

Actually the Trump Administration has done far more against Russia than all US administrations from the last 30 years. Do not listen what they say, look at what they do. Right now the US in a full blown Cold War with Russia with ever increasing attacks.

foolisholdman , Sep 22 2020 20:22 utc | 17
Pompeo talks more or less continually about "China's bullying behaviour". To me it is wonderful that he can say this with a straight face. (Perhaps it is a result of his lessons in the CIA on "how to lie better".)All the countries that have engaged with China have benefitted from it, whether as salesmen or as recipients of aid or loans at advantageous rates. The countries that have engaged with America have mostly (All?) lost. (The fifty+ countries invaded and wrecked since WW2 or the NATO "allies" or the countries attacked with sanctions.) Either their economies were destroyed or billions upon billions of dollars were paid to the US MIC. The NATO member countries have got what from their membership? Formerly, they had "Protection" from an imaginary Soviet threat, more recently "Protection" from an equally imaginary Russian threat! Some bargain, that!
Christian J. Chuba , Sep 22 2020 20:38 utc | 18
Rules based international order .... the U.S. functions as the the Supreme Court for the U.N. , 'we have invoked snapback sanctions and extended the arms embargo on Iran indefinitely and are enforcing it'. UN, 'but your vote failed'.

U.S, 'we have the right to seize cargo between any two countries transported in international waters based on U.S. federal appeals court decision even though the transaction in no way involves the U.S. We call this Freedom of Navigation and why we need to have aircraft carriers in the South China Sea and Arabian Gulf'

We are completely and totally insane.

psychohistorian , Sep 22 2020 20:41 utc | 19
Rules based International Order is the dog whistle for global private finance controlled economies. It is sad that we are in a civilization war with China/Russia about who runs international finance going forward and yet there is no discussion of the subject but instead all sorts of proxy conflicts.

Thanks for the posting b as it gets to the core myths around the global private finance jackboot on the neck of countries in the West.

profk , Sep 22 2020 20:59 utc | 22
The US is not just facing relative decline -- the fact that others are catching up in key ways. The US is also facing absolute decline -- the fact that it is suffering a degradation of capacities and is losing competitive battles in key areas. Examples of absolute decline include the Russian and Chinese military-technological revolutions based on anti-ship and hypersonic missiles and air defense systems; Chinese 5G; China's demonstrative success in suppressing COVID and its overall manufacturing power; the declining quality of life for most Americans; and the collapse of American institutional competence.

Related to this, we can't separate these dynamics from the political economy of the states in question. China, in particular, is showing that an interventionist state, with high levels of public ownership, is essential to qualitative power, human security, and economic and social development.

Capitalism might enrich a few, but it is the primary cause of America's relative and absolute decline.

jayc , Sep 22 2020 21:01 utc | 23
US and allied military analysts have been talking over the last year or so of the need to enter a single focus and total "wartime" posture throughout our societies, with all financial and industrial output directed to the "war". This has influenced the information/ propaganda efforts, but also the uptick in military manoeuvres around Taiwan and renewed NATO pressure directed at Russia (including the recent provocative B52 flights). Don't think Russia/China can be tricked into over-reacting, but some kind of loss-of-life military confrontation may be what the rules-based side is looking for as the population at large will probably not accept a "wartime sacrifice" regimen without such.
Kiza , Sep 22 2020 21:26 utc | 26
Very well written article.

Whilst Russia and China are creating a truly new, unique and creative alliance and a market of everything, in Australia the "authorities" are sicking their police dogs on poor grannies sitting on park benches. This image of five brainless armed state goons in a show of force over two quiet little grannies really puts things into perspective. It must be that New World Order that Soros and puppets always talked about.

Psssst, learning Russian is easier than Chinese and we already know a few Russian words, such as novichok.

Leser , Sep 22 2020 21:42 utc | 29
Great analysis b and connecting the dots.

The post scriptum stopped the clock for me. Has our host slipped into our drink there a profound prophecy, disguised as jesting?

Many agree something big will happen (break?) soon, possibly with the elections. The other thing is the Americans' ability to change course, drop all baggage, and run off in a new, even the opposite direction with unfettered enthusiasm (and ferocity). No people has a greater capacity for almost instant renewal, once it chooses to.

I also notice that the spoof takes good aim at The Donald's peculiarities, though in a fair and human way. The proverbial Russian warmth, or a humorous invitation?

Meanwhile, I enjoy my newfound optimism in these dark times. Thanks b!

uncle tungsten , Sep 22 2020 21:59 utc | 32
Thanks b and on Anatol Lieven in the Prospect story (fairy story?)...
Russia after the Cold War was a shambles and today it remains a weak economy with a limited role on the world stage, concerned mainly with retaining some of its traditional areas of influence. China is a vastly more formidable competitor. If the US (and the UK, if as usual we tag along) approach the relationship with Beijing with anything like the combination of arrogance, ignorance, greed, criminality, bigotry, hypocrisy and incompetence with which western elites managed the period after the Cold War, then we risk losing the competition and endangering the world. [my emphasis]

Lieven simply does not see it. Has it ever occurred to Lieven that colonialism just might be rejected by both Russia and China and that there might be no competition? Does Lieven watch too much football?

What is it that endangers the world in Lieven's petite cortex? This verbose Lieven tosh is littered with fancy sentences trawled from here and there but always presented to us from a narrow dimensional mind with limited analysis and seemingly zero interrogation.

again:- "then we risk losing the competition and endangering the world"...

So Lieven thinks the current behaviour of the US hegemon and its collaborator the UK is innocuous? These were the two nations that blithely squandered the "peace dividend" from the end of cold war as he describes and have led us to this time of perpetual war. A perpetual war that he does not mention, does not allude to, does not treat as an important driver behind the current global mistrust and disengagement from the USUK drive for global dominance.

Lieven is putting lipstick on his pig and screaming about losing the competition to the imagined wolf outside his prison.

Beneath contempt.

Jackrabbit , Sep 22 2020 22:09 utc | 33
Passer by @Sep22 19:43 #8
It is not over in the sense that the West hasn't given up in its attempts to take over the world.
I agree. The contest between the Empire and the upstarts is not over by a long shot. What the West HAS lost is the "inevitability" argument. But for the upstarts to actually prevail in their "multi-lateral" vision, they have to actually entice countries to join them despite threats and intimidation from the Empire.

_________________________________

Passer by @Sep22 20:15 #14

Right now the US in a full blown Cold War with Russia with ever increasing attacks.
Yes. We still see the narratives like of Trump as Putin-lover despite the debunking of Russiagate and the clear evidence of Cold War tensions. The incessant propaganda reeks of desperation.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

Some seem to think that the Empire is cornered.

Aha! We've got you now, you scoundrels!

LOL.

The Empire's power-elite KNOW that Russia, China, and allies of Russia-China don't want to be subject to their "rules-based order". The Empire is actively working to undermine, subvert, and divide the countries that oppose it. While also securing their own territories/population via intimidation and propaganda.

!!

uncle tungsten , Sep 22 2020 22:53 utc | 36
On rules based disorder and the capitulation of Merkel and her BND lapdogs to the 'hate Russia' fulminations of the UKUSA morons. I see that the German Parliament has NOT TAKEN its red pills these days and is reluctant to swallow the BS. It would be satisfying to see the collective wisdom of the Parliament to exceed that of the BND. But then that is a low bar.
karlof1 , Sep 22 2020 22:55 utc | 37
An excellent look into the seemingly mundane but important business of negotiating arms control agreements is offered here: Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov's interview with the newspaper Kommersant, published on September 22, 2020 . Excerpt:

"For our part, we more than once described a balanced and mutually acceptable framework for future agreements in this sphere during our contacts with the American negotiators. Aware of the difficulties on the path forward in light of how widely different our approaches are, we proposed extending the New START as it was originally signed.

"We do not want any unilateral advantages, but we will not make any unilateral concessions either. A deal may be possible if the United States is ready to coordinate a new document on the basis of the balance of interests, parity and without expecting Russia to make unilateral concessions. But this will take time. We can have time to do this if the treaty is extended."

As predicted, the Outlaw US Empire makes an offer it knows will be refused so it can then blame Russia for being an unreliable negotiating partner--a trick we've all seen before.

Lavrov conducted a short interview with Sputnik mostly about Belarus and Ukraine and much of which is a rehash.

Passer by , Sep 22 2020 23:07 utc | 39
@Jackrabbit | Sep 22 2020 22:09 utc | 31

I agree. The contest between the Empire and the upstarts is not over by a long shot. What the West HAS lost is the "inevitability" argument. But for the upstarts to actually prevail in their "multi-lateral" vision, they have to actually entice countries to join them despite threats and intimidation from the Empire.

Yes, the big question remaining is to predict what will happen and when. This is what the real deal is. And I'm sure they are working on that in the Intel agencies. It can certainly be predicted that the US and the EU will be significantly weaker in 2030 that today. Will this be enough is the question.

We now have some new information about US long term health as published by CBO. Very interesting numbers.

They predict lower population growth and lower GDP growth for the US than previously estimated, as well as higher debt rates. US federal debt is to reach 195 % of GDP by 2050 under best case scenario.

http://www.crfb.org/papers/analysis-cbos-2020-long-term-budget-outlook

Analysts also seem to agree that the Covid 19 crisis further weakened the US vis a vis China, as the Chinese economy significantly outperformed almost everyone else this year, more than expected before the crisis.

I will also mention two important recent numbers. This year:

1. China, for the first time, became the biggest trading partner for the EU, beating the US.

2. China's retail market overtook the one of the US.

kiwiklown , Sep 22 2020 23:41 utc | 41
Posted by: vk | Sep 22 2020 19:05 utc | 4 -- "....Eurasia is where most of human civilization lives, it's the "World Island" - the world island not in the military sense, but in the economic sense. Every path to human prosperity passes through Eurasia - that's why the USA can't "let it alone" in the first place, while the reverse is not true, that is, Eurasia can give to the luxury of letting the Americas alone."

Excellent observation, VK.

Even if the World Island (thanks for your formulation) trades with itself, within itself, there is sufficient mass to last a century, during which the arrogantly exceptional West might just wake up from their Century of Humiliation.

Meanwhile, inertia alone will ensure that the West forgets that their vaunted "civilisation" was fed, watered, enriched by the Silk Route that came from the East -- from the Middle Kingdom (China) and from the Middle East (which is "middle", as you pointed out above, because all wealth passes through that region).

Paul , Sep 23 2020 0:02 utc | 43
Yes there are rules which are observed more by their breach than their observance: The Geneva Conventions. Just ask Julian Assange.

I find it incredible that the Anglo-Zionist captive nations can sign, ratify, incorporate into domestic law and then sign the additional protocol, making themselves high contracting parties, which requires them to report all and any breaches to Geneva, then ignore all the above commitments. One of these commitments includes educating their citizens on the basic provisions of the conventions. Again they haven't bothered, that could expose their hypocrisy to the public.

Even the bandit statelet signed but I am yet to see just one example of its application in the seventy plus years of its barbaric and bloodthirsty occupation of Palestine.

Interestingly, the conventions prohibit the occupied from signing away one iota of their territory to the occupier. So much for what Claude Pictet's Commentary to the Fourth Geneva Convention calls "alleged annexations." This book is available from the ICRC.

My late father as an army officer prosecuted Japanese war criminals for their atrocities now the Anglo-Zionists are the pre-eminent war criminals and their leaders loudly proclaim "our values" as a pathological and propagandistic form of projection. Is it possible they are unaware of their blatant hypocrisy ?

It seems the New World Order has some familiar and unsurprising antecedents:

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/452693/New-world-order-pledged-to-Jews-80-years-ago

Hold on tight, hubris is always fatal:

https://asiatimes.com/2020/09/pompeo-threatens-to-light-the-fuse-in-persian-gulf/

Jen , Sep 23 2020 0:09 utc | 44
Uncle Tungsten @ 30:

Anatol Lieven comes from an educated and cultured family in Britain's upper middle class layer. His older siblings - he is the youngest of five children - include a High Court judge (Dame Natalie Lieven), a Cambridge University professor / historian (Dominic Lieven) and a psychologist / linguistics researcher (Elena Lieven). They haven't done badly for a family from the old Baltic German aristocratic elite that used to serve the Russian empire as administrators for the Livonia governorate.

The British Lievens might see themselves as gatekeepers and interpreters of what the ruling classes desire (or appear to desire) and communicate that down to us. Hence their positions in intellectual and academic occupations - no engineers, technicians or academics in the physical or biological sciences among their number.

Anatol Lieven is right though about "competition", in the sense I believe he is using it: it is "competition" for supposed global leadership and influence as only the British and Americans understand it. Life as British and American elites understand it is the annual football competition writ large; there can only be one winner and the worst position to be in is second place and every other place below it. Never mind that what Russia and China have in mind is a vision of the world with multiple and overlapping leadership roles dispersed among nations according to various criteria: this ideal is simply too much for the Anglosphere elites to understand, let alone digest and accept.

Still, I wonder why Anatol Lieven is teaching in a university in Qatar of all places. Family influence and reputation must only go so far.

Richard Steven Hack , Sep 23 2020 0:54 utc | 47
Posted by: lizard | Sep 22 2020 21:59 utc | 29

if you aren't at least a little prepared for a disruption in critical supplies, and choose instead to waste time commenting on online forums, it won't matter how up to date you are on "rules based international order" vs. "international law". at that point the reality will be something like this: if you aren't holding it, you don't have it, and if you can't defend it, you won't be keeping it for long.

Got that absolutely right.

There is no "international law" and no "international order." There is only relative power. And when those powers clash, as seems inevitable, the world is in for a major nuclear war, and probably preceded by several more regional wars. Meanwhile, the US internally is collapsing into economic disaster, social unrest, political and social oppression, infrastructure failure, and medical disasters. We'll probably be in martial law sometime between November 3 and January 21 if not beyond that period, just for starters.

This month is National Preparedness Month. I recommend watching the following videos from well-known "preppers" who have been warning about this stuff for years.

78 Days Will Determine the Fate of America
5 Things You Need To Do Before the U.S. Election

A playlist of 23 videos for National Preparedness Month:
30 Days of Preparedness Collaboration - 2020

And this one from The Urban Prepper, an IT guy who is exceptionally well organized and logical in his videos. I recommend subscribing to his channel. He avoids most of the excessive "doom and gloom" hype that afflicts a lot of prepper channels and is oriented more about urban survival than "backwoods bushcraft" since most people live in cities.
Prepping 101: Prepping Architecture Diagram for Gear Organization

And if you don't watch anything else, watch this one from Canadian Prepper - he's absolutely right in this one and it specifically applies to the barflies here:
What is Really Going On? Its WORSE Than You Think

Jun , Sep 23 2020 1:06 utc | 48
Meanwhile, inertia alone will ensure that the West forgets that their vaunted "civilisation" was fed, watered, enriched by the Silk Route that came from the East -- from the Middle Kingdom (China) and from the Middle East (which is "middle", as you pointed out above, because all wealth passes through that region).
Posted by: kiwiklown | Sep 22 2020 23:41 utc | 39

============================================================================================

Thereby we have the answer to America's longest war:

https://twitter.com/danieldumbrill/status/1290456155286900737?lang=en

Richard Steven Hack , Sep 23 2020 1:19 utc | 50
Oh, and this one from Canadian Prepper in which he muses about whether and why we actually *want* the SHTF situation to occur. This one would resonate with a lot of the commentary here about the social malaise and the psychological reasons for it. Maybe nothing really new for some, but definitely relevant.

Society is Collapsing: Prepare for the Next Phase

uncle tungsten , Sep 23 2020 1:47 utc | 51
Jen #42
Still, I wonder why Anatol Lieven is teaching in a university in Qatar of all places. Family influence and reputation must only go so far.

Thank you that backgrounder explains a lot. Perhaps like Englanders before him he finds Qatar, safe and rewarding PLUS mounds of finest hashish and titillating company. From my understanding it is a grotesque abuser of human rights and everyone has a price.

ak74 , Sep 23 2020 2:15 utc | 52
America's "Rules-Based International Order" is a Goebbelsian euphemism for a Lies-Based Imperial Order, led by the USA and its war criminal allies (aka the self-styled Free World).

The true nature of this America-led order is exposed by the USA's war of aggression against Iraq (which violated international law and had no United Nations sanction) and its decades-long War on Terrorism, which have murdered hundreds of thousands of people and maimed, immiserated, or refugeed millions of more people. These crimes against humanity have been justified by Orwellian American lies about "Weapons of Mass Destruction," "fighting terrorism," or the curious events of Sept. 11th.

This America "Rules-Based" order is one drenched in the blood of millions of people--even as it sanctimoniously disguises itself behind endless propaganda about defending liberal democracy or the rule of law.

Truly, America and its allies can take their malignant Rules-Based Disorder back to Hell, where they all belong.

Two decades of US "war on terror" responsible for displacing at least 37 million people and killing up to 12 million
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/09/09/cost-s09.html?view=print

Erelis , Sep 23 2020 3:01 utc | 53
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 23 2020 0:50 utc | 44

"Thus your "side note" has no "relevance" whatsoever."

You sound like some podunk UN official from a podunk country trying to impress a waitress in a NYC bar. The Empire is very much alive and dangerous. Ask Iran, ask Syria, as the Palestinians, ask the Russians, ask the Chinese. Ask numerous African nations. Even Pangloss was not so stupidly naive.

uncle tungsten , Sep 23 2020 3:02 utc | 54
Jun #46

Thank you - YES that is the answer and always has been PLUS there will be no pipeline from Iran through Afghanistan to Pakistan and on to China. There will be NO overland pipeline or rail route to sound the death knell to the maritime mafia.

milomilo , Sep 23 2020 3:33 utc | 55
Please vote for trump 2020. no president destroy America from inside like what trump did. The goal is to accelerate American empire destruction and grip in this world. What better way to put such clown along his circus in white house. he will make a mess of everything and will definitely bring America down

i hope he win 2020 and America explode into civil war and chaos. With America destroyed internally , they wont have time to invade Venezuela or Iran

milomilo , Sep 23 2020 3:37 utc | 56
Remember , if Biden win 2020 , American foreign policy will revert into normalcy that means seeking alliance with EU and 5 eyes in a more meaningful way , aka giving them preferential treatment on trade..

all that to box in china and russia , reenable TPP , initiate the delayed venezuela overt invasion other than covert

this is dangerous for the whole world , not that it will save US in the long run but it will increase real shooting conflict with china and russia.. So focus on trump victory in 2020 , the more controversial the win the better , lets push america into chaos

defaultcitizen , Sep 23 2020 3:41 utc | 57
I appreciate the time and thought that goes into a post like this; all without a popup ad trying to sell me ANOTHER item I just bought via Amazon, in spite of the fact that I am among the least likely to want another right now. Voice of reason crying in the wilderness and all that.

The rule The Capitalist Ogres promote as the heart of Civilization is simply the age-old Golden Rule. Those with the gold, make the rules.

j. casey , Sep 23 2020 12:28 utc | 75
In the very short-term (3 months?) what is the outcome of US/Nato seizure of ships and cargo in international water?
chris m , Sep 23 2020 13:42 utc | 79
@ptb
quite right. 'Rules based order' was always a euphemism for exceptionalism of one kind or another. ie US and its "allies" is basically asking the rest of the world to finance their (the US et al) version of a welfare state.

as US et al can no longer fund their own unaffordable welfare promises made to their own electorates, they have to call on the rest of the world to do so (China has been effectively funding the US budget deficit since they entered the WTO.
and the EU (mainly Germany) was doing the same before China's entry into WTO)

China and rest of the worlds foreign central banks stopped growing their foreign exchange reserves (on net) in 2014
leaving the US in a sort of limbo.

chris m , Sep 23 2020 13:47 utc | 80
PS addendum: if you've ever wondered who has been financing the GWOT since 2001; it was the Chinese.
karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 15:21 utc | 82
chris m @80--

Well, you're sorta correct; it was all those nations including China that bought Outlaw US Empire debt. China certainly knows better now and for almost a decade now it's purchases--and those of the rest of the world -- of said debt have declined to the point where a huge crisis related to the debt pyramid threatens all those aside from the 1% living within the Outlaw US Empire. The Judo involved was very instructive.

karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 16:21 utc | 85
"Trump's UN address censured" headlines Global Times article that reviews yesterday's UNGA. Domestic BigLie Media didn't like what it heard from Trump:

"Commenting on the US' performance, many Western media tended to view US as being 'isolated,' and its unilateral efforts 'widely derided....'

"Some US media outlets cannot stand Trump's accusations. A WSJ report said many Democrats blamed Trump for "isolating the US and diluting American influence in the WHO or other bodies."

It went on to say Trump's threat of withdrawal is often used as leverage to "influence partner countries, or get allies to pay more for shared defense."

"Some US media linked Trump's address to his widely blamed effort to re-impose sanctions on Iran, saying his address came as 'UN members push back against Washington,' AP reported.

"Wednesday's Washington Post article reported that the Trump administration walked on a 'lonely path' at the UN where the US attacked WHO, and embarked on the 'widely derided' effort to snap back Iran sanctions.

"A week before the UN General Assembly, US media NPR predicted that the US 'appeared to be isolated' at this year's General Assembly, saying that Trump's 'America First' agenda left him out of sync with America's traditional allies as it has a long record of pulling out of international agreements, including one meant to tackle the world's climate crisis."

So, Trump's attack on China's environmental record was beyond hypocritical and ought to be termed psychopathic prevarication. The best comment from the article well describes the Trumptroll @53:

"'Trump's smears and attacks against China were apparently aimed at campaigning for his reelection. Only his die-hard fans - those who do not care about truth but support him - will buy his words ,' Ding Yifan, a researcher at the Institute of World Development of the Development Research Center of the State Council, told the Global Times." [My Emphasis]

And isn't that really the basic issue--the truth? 75 years of lies by the Outlaw US Empire to cover it's continuous illegalities and subversion of its own fundamental law while killing and displacing tens of millions of people. Guardian of the Free World my ass! More like Guardian of the Gates of Hell.

vk , Sep 23 2020 16:40 utc | 86
More on the situation of the "rules based international order":

The Eurozone economy stopped recovering and stagnated in September (PMI)

And here's a more general picture on the state of global capitalism today:

The 90% world economy (UNCTAD report)

karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 16:45 utc | 87
Yes, I'm biased, but anyone seeking truth and invoking the Rule of Law would find themselves at odds with the Outlaw US Empire. Today's Global Times Editorial makes the following key observations:

"Major powers maintaining cooperation, at least not engaging in Cold War-style antagonism, is the important foundation of world peace. China is committed to maintaining cooperation among major powers, as well as being flexible in the balance of interests acceptable to all parties. The problem is the Trump administration is hysterically shaping decoupling and confrontation between Beijing and Washington, and has been mobilizing more forces to its side at home and abroad. Those US policymakers are deliberately splitting the world like during the Cold War.

"The impulse to promote a cold war is the ultimate version of unilateralism, and shows dangerous and mistaken arrogance that the US is almighty. Everyone knows that the US is declining in its competitiveness under the rules-based international system the US itself initiated and created. It wants to build a new system more beneficial to itself, and allow the US to maintain its advantage without making any effort. This is simply impossible."

My research is pointing me to conclude the First Cold War was contrived so the Outlaw US Empire could impose privately owned finance and corporations and the political-economies connected to them upon the world lest the collective forces that were the ones to actually defeat Fascism gain control of their national governments and shape their political-economies into the public/collectively owned realm where the benefits would flow to all people instead of just the already powerful. That's also the intent of imposing a Second Cold War. Some seem to think there's no ideological divide at play, but as I've ceaselessly explained there most certainly is, thus the intense demonization of both Russia and China--the Strategic Competition also is occurring in the realm of Ideas. And the only tools available for the Outlaw US Empire to use are lies, since the truths involved would encourage any neutral nation to join the Win-Win vision of China and Russia, not the Zero-sum bankruptcy pushed by the Parasites controlling the Empire.

psychohistorian , Sep 23 2020 17:07 utc | 88
@ karlof1 | Sep 23 2020 15:56 utc | 84 and forward with the links and quotes...thanks

I do like the confirmation Pepe quote, thanks

It is sad to understand that much of the US population does not have the mental clarity to see that Trump is no different than Biden when it comes to fealty to the God of Mammon. Way too many Americans think that replacing Trump with Biden will make things all better.

The end of the rules based international order/global private finance cannot end soon enough, IMO

Timothy Hagios , Sep 23 2020 17:19 utc | 90
farm ecologist @ 89

Patrick Armstrong publishes the sitreps (and other content) at https://patrickarmstrong.ca/

karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 18:07 utc | 92
psychohistorian @88--

Thanks for your reply! As I discussed with the Missus last night, IMO only the people regaining control over the federal government can rescue themselves from the multiple dilemmas they face--the most pressing being the Debt Bomb and control of the monetary and fiscal systems by private entities as exemplified by the Federal Reserve and Wall Street, both of which employ the Financial Parasites preying on the nation's body-politic. Undoing all the past wrongs requires both Congress and the Executive be captured by The People who can then write the laws to end the wrongs while arresting and prosecuting those responsible for the last 20+ years of massive fraud. The biggest components would be ending the Federal Reserve, Nationalizing all the fraudster banks, writing down the vast majority of debt, and disbanding NATO thus ending the overseas empire. Those are the most fundamental steps required for the USA to avoid the coming calamity brought about by the Neoliberals. I also have finally developed my thesis on where, why and how that philosophy was developed and put into motion.

profk , Sep 23 2020 18:16 utc | 94
karlof,

The first 'Cold War' was entirely contrived. The US knew the Soviet Union was weak and had no agenda beyond maintaining security and its own reconstruction after WW2. There was no threat of a Western European invasion, or of the USSR spreading revolution globally. All that Cold War ideology is a lie. And the same lying is taking place about China today. No difference.

The key issues for the US were:

1. it needed western european capitalist states to buy US manufactured exports. Those states had to remain capitalist and subordinate to the US, i.e. to avoid what Acheson called 'neutralism' in world politics.

2. the US wanted gradual decolonization of the British and French empires so that US firms could access markets and resources in those same territories. but the US feared revolutionary nationalism in the colonies and the potential loss of market access by the former colonial powers, which would need resources from the post-colonial world to rebuild after WW2.

The key event which cemented the 'Cold War' in Europe was the division of Germany, which Carolyn Eisenberg shows was entirely an American decision, in her important book, Drawing the Line.

The driving force of all this, though, was the economic imperatives of US capitalism. The US needed to restore and save capitalism in Western Europe and Japan, and the Cold War was the ideological framework for doing so. The Cold War ideology also allowed the US to frame its meddling in Korea, Guatemala, Iran, etc.

The late historian Gabriel Kolko wrote the best analyses of these issues. His work is much better than the New Left 'revisionist' US historians.

karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 20:01 utc | 96
profk @94--

I agree with your recap and second your appraisal of Gabriel Kolko. Eisenberg's work somehow escaped my view but will no longer thanks to your suggestion.

But I see more to it all as the First Cold War had to occur to promote the financialization of the USA's industrial Capitalism which began within the USA in 1913 and was abruptly interrupted by the various market crashes, the failure of the international payments system and subsequent massive deflation and Great Depression. A similar plan to outsource manufactures to its colonies and commonwealth and financialize its economy was began in the UK sometime after the end of the US Civil War. At the time in England, the school of Classical Political-Economists and their political allies (CPE) were attempting to rid the UK and the rest of Europe of the last vestiges of Feudalism that resided in the Rentier and Banking Classes, the former being mostly populated by Royalty and its retainers. Land Rent was the primary source of their income while it was the stated intent of the CPE to change the tax burden from individuals and businesses to that of Land Rent and other forms of Unearned Income. That movement came swiftly on the heels of the abolition of the Slave Trade which was a vast source of Royal income. Recognizing this threat to the basis of their wellbeing, the Royals needed to turn the tables but in such a manner where their manipulation was secret because of the vast popularity of the CPE's agenda. Thus began the movement to discredit the CPE and remove their ideas from discourse and later completely from the history of political-economy. And there was another problem--German Banks and their philosophy inspired by Bismarck to be totally supportive of German industry, which provided the impetus for its own colonial pursuits primarily in Africa.

Within that paragraph is my thesis for the rise of Neoliberalism, much of which Dr. Hudson documents but hasn't yet gotten to/revealed the root cause of the counter revolution against the CPE. IMO, that reactionary movement underlies far more, particularly the growing animosity between the UK and Germany from 1875 to 1914. As Eisenberg's research proves, there's much more past to be revealed that helps to resolve how we arrived at the times we now face.

karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 20:16 utc | 97
CitizenX @95--

Indeed, as Hudson and Max Keiser ask: Why pay taxes at all since the Fed can create all the credit required. I've written about the pros and cons of Secession here before which are quite similar to those existing in 1861. In Washington for example, how to deal with all the Federal property located there. Just as Ft. Sumter didn't belong to South Carolina, the many military bases there don't belong to Washington. Trying to seize it as the South Carolinians attempted in 1861 merely creates the casus belli sought by Trump. Now if you could get the vast majority of the military stationed in Washington to support your cause, your odds of resisting would greatly improve.

IMO, trying to regain public control over the Federal government would be much easier.

uncle tungsten , Sep 23 2020 21:21 utc | 98
karlof1 #85

Thank you brother karlof1, YES, the minotaur indeed but where is Theseus and Ariadne when we need them? Please don't tell me that Biden and Harris are the 'chosen ones' - that would mock the legend and prove that the gods are truly crazy :))

karlof1 , Sep 23 2020 22:48 utc | 101
ooops *elicit* uncle tungsten @98--

Well, they've clearly been chosen; they're just not THE CHOSEN and IMO would never qualify.

By contrast, here's Maduro's UNGA statement , a man clearly superior in all respects to either Biden or Trump or any of their vassals.

karlof1 , Sep 24 2020 0:31 utc | 103
It seems to me that a review is required, that we need to turn back the clock to an earlier analysis whose veracity has only been boosted by subsequent events. So here from 2011: "On November 3, 2011, Alan Minsky interviewed me on KPFK's program, 'Building a Powerful Movement in the United States' in preparation for an Occupy L.A. teach-in." Here's a brief excerpt to remind people what this is all about:

"Once people realize that they're being screwed, that's a pre-revolutionary situation. It's a situation where they can get a lot of sympathy and support, precisely by not doing what The New York Times and the other papers say they should do: come up with some neat solutions. They don't have to propose a solution because right now there isn't one – without changing the system with many, many changes. So many that it's like a new Constitution. Politics as well as the economy need to be restructured. What's developing now is how to think about the economic and political problems that are bothering people. It is not radical to realize that the economy isn't working. That is the first stage to realizing that a real alternative is needed. We've been under a radical right-wing attack – and need to respond in kind. The next half-year probably will be spent trying to spell out what the best structure would be."

Billosky , Sep 24 2020 6:19 utc | 104
It's good to see discussion here of the nefarious role of the American far-right neocon warmongers in the State Department, intelligence services and military leadership just before the turn of the new century. What I have never seen clearly explained, however, is the connection between these very dangerous forces and the equally cynical and reactionary Israeli politicians and the Mossad, as well as Saudi Arabian officials.

Like many others, I have been slowly won over to the position that the attacks of 9-11, and especially the totally unprecedented collapses of the three WTC towers, could only have been caused by the precisely timed explosion of previously installed demolition materials containing nanothermite. But if one accepts that position the immediately subsequent question is "Who planned and carried out the attacks?" Many people have claimed it was the Mossad, others that it was the Mossad in concert with the US neocons etc., -- many of whom were Israeli/US dual citizens -- but even now, so many years after the horrific events, I can find no coherent account of how such conspirators, or any others for that matter, might actually have carried out WTC building demotions. Do any of you know of sources on the matter that have made good progress on connecting the dots and explaining what precisely happened -- the easier part -- and how exactly it was carried out, by whom, and how they have managed to get away with it for all this time?

Piotr Berman , Sep 24 2020 14:04 utc | 106
Lieven: If the US (and the UK, if as usual we tag along) approach the relationship with Beijing with anything like the combination of arrogance, ignorance, greed, criminality, bigotry, hypocrisy and incompetence with which western elites managed the period after the Cold War, then we risk losing the competition and endangering the world.[my emphasis]

Uncle Tungsten: Lieven simply does not see it. Has it ever occurred to Lieven that colonialism just might be rejected by both Russia and China and that there might be no competition? Does Lieven watch too much football?

What is it that endangers the world in Lieven's petite cortex?
-------
It is clear to me that Tungsten does not understand Lieven because Lieven does not cross all t's and dot all i's. There can be two reasons for Lieven style: (1) a British style, leaving some conclusions to the reader, it is not elegant to belabor the obvious (2) Lieven works in a pro-Western feudal state and that particular piece appeared in a neo-liberal outfit where it is already a clear outlier toward (what I see as) common sense. Neo-liberals view themselves as liberals, "tolerating a wide spectrum of opinion", but with clear limits about the frequency and content for the outliers of their tolerance.

Back to "endangering the world", how "loosing competition to China" can result in huge mayhem? I guess that Tungsten is a little dense here. The sunset of Anglo-Saxon domination can seem like the end of the world for the "members" of that domination. But a longer historical perspective can offer a much darker vision of the future. First, there is a clash of two blocks, one with superior industrial production, domination of markets of assorted goods -- both as importer and exporter, etc, the other with still superior military technology and combative spirit.

Recall (or check) the situation in east Asia ca. 1240 AD. One of the major power was Song China, after a calamitous defeat roughly 300 years later, diminished Song China succeeded in developing all kinds of practical and beautiful goods and vibrant commerce while having quite inept military. The second major power was the Mongols. You can look up the rest.

USA stresses the military types of pressures, and seeing its position slipping too far, they may resort to a series of gigantic "provocations" -- from confiscation of property by fiat, like they did to Venezuela, to piracy on open seas, no cargoes can move without their approval and tribute, from there things can escalate toward nuclear war.

More generally, western decline leads to decrease of wealth affecting the lower classes first but gradually reaching higher, enmity toward competitors, then hatred, such processes can have dire consequences.

Importantly, these are speculations, so stopping short of spelling them out is reasonable. However, give some credit to Lieven for "the combination of arrogance, ignorance, greed, criminality, bigotry, hypocrisy and incompetence with which western elites managed the period after the Cold War".

Noirette , Sep 24 2020 16:24 utc | 108
On the rule-based world order. Scattered thoughts.

The article by Lieven was good in one aspect: it at least mentioned the crazy economic template aka imho 'religion' that lead to a part of this mess. For the rest, hmm. The 'rules based international order' was always pretty much a phoney scaffold, used for presentation to hide, cover up, legitimised many goings on (after WW2 I mean.)

Like a power-point extolling xyz product, with invented or 'massaged' charts and all., with tick boxes for what it positive or followed. (Fairness, Democracy, etc. etc. as 'Natural' 'Organic' etc. Total BS.)

In these kinds of discussions I am always reminded of the 'rights of the child' which in CH are taught in grade 3-5, with a boiled down text, logo type pix, etc. It is very tough on teachers, and they often only pretend to push the content. There are many immigrant children in CH and the natives know that the 'rights' are not respected and not just in 'jungles' (anarchist / animalistic hot spots) as they say. The kids go nuts - as they still more or less believe that they 'have a voice' as it called -- the parents follow the kids, lotsa troubles. OK, these are aspirations - but 'democracy' (purposely used as a calling card following advice from a well-know ad agency..) is so as well. And presenting aspirations that can't possibly be achieved in any way, when not a smiley joke about meeting God or flying to Mars, and is socially important, is not well received.

Anyway, since the invasion of Iraq (totally illegal according to any standards) leading to the biggest demos in the world ever, a loud indignant cry, which invasion the UN condoned, ppl (in my experience, in CH, F, It) no longer have a shred of belief in 'international rules'. Which of course makes them more 'nationalist' in the sense of acting in the community, close at hand, as the Intl order is a shit-scene.

Passer by , Sep 24 2020 20:06 utc | 109
Do you have sources for the last two facts, about China overtaking the US as main trading partner to Europe and as retail market?

Posted by: fx | Sep 24 2020 11:41 utc | 105

China becomes EU's top trading partner from Jan-July: Eurostat

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202009/17/WS5f63070da31024ad0ba7a2fa.html

China retail market expected to overtake US this year

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-overtake-u-world-largest-135614391.html

https://www.asiatimesfinancial.com/we-will-be-top-economy-by-year-end-china-media-outlet-says

[Sep 25, 2020] I see Pompeo as the quintessential opportunist of this moment (beyond his spiritual master of course, B-Nut.)

Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vinnieoh , Sep 22 2020 21:41 utc | 27

Probably counting on the desperate vanity and ego of Trump with the looming election to not shorten the length of the leash on Pompass. Pompass must also have noticed that Trump is willing to shove the homeland into civil war in order to claim victory, so maybe Pompass finally has the latitude to slake his bloodthirstiness.

Since I'm wondering down the path of speculation, a bit further into the murk. If there is one thing that characterizes the US today from the highest to the low, it is corruption. I submit that this corruption finds its zenith in the military, and especially the procurement train: any engagement with a near-peer (or the coalition/bloc we're talking about here,) and the rot and corruption will collapse this empire in upon itself. I've had this suspicion for some time, and believe if the going got rough the collapse would come rather quickly and completely.

[Sep 25, 2020] US standard "negotiating" techniques

Highly recommended!
Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ashino , Sep 23 2020 9:23 utc | 67

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2020/09/russia-steals-everything.html
Comment by Reader Dark Fate
EXCERPTs

Following a long line of very arrogant american imperial "negotiators", mr oblivion billingslea used standard "negotiating" techniques like

(a) accusing the other side of crimes Americans have committed first and forever, eg, extreme lying, bad faith argumentation, military aggression, foreign government security breaching, assassination and poisoning [as in american presidents and independent thinkers], and of course, electoral cheating;

(b) putting the opponent in the "negotiation process" on the defensive or back foot by stating false news allegations amplified by the media controlled by the american empire;

(c) offering nothing useful or commitable to be done by the empire, and yet "magnanimously" demanding the moon as opponents' concessions, eg, russian, iranian and chinese nuclear weapons limits, but not for nato's development and deployment, and; (d) after making impossible demands, the imperials accuse the opponents of hostility and unwillingness to "negotiate".

The russians can skillfully agree by stating that they only require the americans to reduce their nukes to 320 pieces like china, and in less than five years.

This is why it is very important for sovereign nations to read the guidebook, called the "idiot's guide on running the american empire", and developing deep and lasting solutions.

As for the other american imperial military "advantages", eg, constellation of "aggression" satellites, andrei forgot to mention that these can be shot or burned down in minutes easily by russia, china and even iran, as these stations cannot hide or run away in earth orbits.

Replenishment of weapons and military supplies after 3 months is rather doomed as the cheap, mass production and manufacturing facilities do not exist. Which must be re-created somehow but now
American lands are the targets. Much, Much Different Than WW2 !!

And of course, russia can always nuke down the USA and its vassal countries, and thus permanently ruin their economies for a decade or more, they don't know how to run defense -- this was always the fatal weakness of all bullies - if they'll have enough time to "learn it"... let's see... I doubt this.

Let's see americans try to start and conduct a nuclear war after too many spy, internet and gps satellites are shot down. Russia can even do this today using conventional explosives, and the world will be shocked how helpless the american military and economy can be made even without using russian nukes.

There are countries still immune to the numerous american imperial diseases that are already documented daily in zerohedge postings. The better countries still have lots of parents telling their kids to study and work hard so they can have better lives than their ancestors.

In oregon and california, they teach unemployable kids to burn something or somebody sometime before dinner.

CdVision • 11 hours ago
I was about to say that what now comes out of the US & Trump's mouth in particular, is Orwellian. But that credits it with too much gravitas. The true comparison is Alice in Wonderland:
"Words mean whatever I want them to mean".

Ashino , Sep 23 2020 9:29 utc | 68
Reminiscence of the Future.. ( http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2020/09/russia-steals-everything.html)
Russia "Steals Everything" !! (Not just China, oops... ???!!!!)
And Jesus Christ was an American and was born in Kalamazoo, MI. It is a well-known fact. So Donald Trump, evidently briefed by his "utterly competent and crushingly precise aids", knows now that too! !!! LOL

Time For Daily Auto-Hypnosis, Comrades. !!!

https://vz.ru/news/2020/9/19/1061259.html
https://www.Путин-сегодня.ru/archives/108431
https://vk.com/deebeepublic?w=wall-197487820_23447
(Digital Translation)

> US President Donald Trump claims that Russia developed hypersonic weapons after allegedly stealing information from the United States.

> According to him, "Russia received this information from the Obama administration," Moscow "stole this information." Trump said that "Russia received this information and then created" the rocket, reports TASS.

> "We have such advanced weapons that President Xi, Putin and everyone else will envy us. They do not know what we have, but they know that it is something that no one has ever heard of. "

->We are the foremost and always number one. Everything is invented only by us, the rest can only either steal, or be gifted with our developments for good behavior. This situation is eternal, unchanging, everyone lags behind American Tikhalogii at least 50 years (the time frame was chosen so that even a 20-year-old would lose heart, "what's the point of trying to catch up, it won't work anyway, in my lifetime"). It was, is, and will be, this is the natural course of events.

All this is delivered in the format of the classic Sunday sermon of the American provincial Protestant church, coding the parishioners for further deeds and actions. And it worked effectively, creating in some basalt confidence "we are better because we are better", in others - "I don't mind anything for joining this radiant success, I'm ready for anything, I'll go for any hardships and crimes, if only There".

Only now it worked. In a situation where the frequency of pronouncing such mantras is more and more, emotions are invested in them too, but in fact everyone understands that this is what autohypnosis does not work.

The poor have stolen from the United States, if you look at it, literally everything. And 5G and the superweapon of the gods. Moreover, a pearl with a characteristic handwriting is not copy / paste, but move / paste, you bastards. Therefore, the United States does not even have any traces of developments left - the guys just sit in an empty room, shrug their hands, "here we have a farm of mechanical killer dolls, with the faces of Mickey Mouse overexposed, and now look - traces of bast shoes and candy wrappers from "Korkunov" only, ah-ah-ah, well, something like that, ah. "

At the same time, there are no cases of sabotage, espionage - whole projects were simply developed, developed, brought to a working product, and then the hob - and that's it, and disappeared. And this became noticeable only after years. And all the persons involved are like "wow, wow."

Psychiatric crazy fool of the head, no less.

But due to the fact that all of the above theses are driven very tightly into the template for the perception of the world, both those who voiced these theses and the listeners are satisfied.

Because the post-American post-hegemonic world is not terrible because in some ratings another country will be higher there, and Detroit will never be rebuilt "as it was". It is scary because it is not clear how to live for people who had no support in the form of global goals, faith, philosophy of life, and all this was replaced by narcissism on the basis of "successful success is my second self".

This means that the moment when this issue has to be resolved must be delayed to the last. Leaving the whole topic on the plane "we were offended, we are offended, we were dishonest, which means we have the right to any action" is not a bad move.

It's a pity that it doesn't really affect the essence of what is happening.

< >

[Sep 25, 2020] While the U.S. wants a vague 'rules based international order' China and Russia emphasize an international order that is based on the rule of law

After the dissolution of the USSR the US elite lost the traction with reality and became mad in a very literate sense of this word. A gang of exceptional idiots. Like in Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland. For Mad Hatter that was toxic substances (mercury) used in the hat industry, for the US elite it was toxic doze of exeptionalism and adoption of "Full spectrum dominance doctrine" promoted by crazy neocons like Wolfowitz and Libby. The best way to destroy the empire is to adopt "full spectrum Dominance Doctrine" which guarantee overextension and subsequent demise. The dominance disappears like The Cheshire Cat disappearance leaving only his grin, prompting Alice to remark that "she has often seen a cat without a grin but never a grin without a cat".
US officials like Pompeo now often sound like some podunk UN official from a podunk country trying to impress a waitress in a NYC bar.
Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

But at the end of the cold war the 'west' began to ignore the actual international law and to replace it with its own rules which others were then supposed to follow. That hubris has come back to bite the 'west'.

[Sep 25, 2020] Andre Vltchek was a great warrior, the world was kept informed by this wonderful spirit and passionate mind. I am very sad to hear of his passing.

Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Sep 22 2020 22:15 utc | 34

Colm O' Toole #26
Andre Vltchek whose done some great reporting on China, Russia, and the Middle East over the years was found dead today in Turkey.

Vale great warrior, the world was kept informed by this wonderful spirit and passionate mind. I am very sad to hear of his passing.

His works.

David G , Sep 22 2020 22:23 utc | 35
Colm O' Toole | Sep 22 2020 21:41 utc | 26:

I learned about places I've never been reading Vltchek. He will be missed by many.

Jen , Sep 22 2020 23:03 utc | 38
Colm O'Toole @ 26, Uncle Tungsten @ 32, David G @ 33:

I am also sad to hear of Andre Vltchek's passing. He used to be an occasional contributor to Off-Guardian.org.

His death is being treated as suspicious by Turkish police authorities. I myself am rather puzzled by the decision to travel overnight by car from Samsun to Istanbul, given his state of health (according to the report that Colm O'Toole linked to) and the length of the car journey (about nine hours) when he could have travelled by plane.

willie , Sep 23 2020 7:20 utc | 64
R.I.P DR.Stephen Cohen.

R.I.P. Andre Vitchek.

Maybe his latest outcry hindered some :

https://www.opednews.com/articles/Now-West-Should-Sit-On-Its-by-Andre-Vltchek-Brainwashing_China_Colonialism_Denial-200912-597.html

[Sep 25, 2020] if I lived in Germany I might identify how my country helps American drone pilots like Brandon Bryant violate our constitution.

Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
lizard , Sep 22 2020 21:59 utc | 31
our host misses the real challenge for humans on this planet, perhaps by design. I think Michael Krieger had it right, what we should be aiming for is the decentralizing of power. invest in localism. get to know your local power structure. get ready for trade and barter survival mode.

for example, if I lived in Germany I might identify how my country helps American drone pilots like Brandon Bryant violate our constitution. from the link:

On October 15, former U.S. drone operator Brandon Bryant testified before the German Parliament about the role the U.S. air base in Ramstein, Germany, plays in the U.S. drone program. Hours later, Shadowproof reported, two American Air Force officers showed up at the house of Bryant's mother in Missoula, Montana, to inform her that she was on the "hit list" of the Islamic State militant group (ISIS), which Bryant's attorney is calling a clear sign of whistleblower intimidation.

Bryant, now an outspoken critic of the U.S. drone program, left the Air Force after what he described as a moment of moral clarity. "We were hunting for Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen," he told a German parliamentary inquiry committee last week. "I suddenly realized that by doing what I was doing I was going against the American Constitution which I had sworn to protect. That was when I decided I had to get out."

Bryant came back to his hometown in Missoula and became active in local politics, culminating in a felony arrest for allegedly intimidating local council members over his criticism of how local officials use public funds. this was right before the pandemic, and since then there has been nothing in the news about his case. I would know, since I could possible be a witness in the case.

if you aren't at least a little prepared for a disruption in critical supplies, and choose instead to waste time commenting on online forums, it won't matter how up to date you are on "rules based international order" vs. "international law". at that point the reality will be something like this: if you aren't holding it, you don't have it, and if you can't defend it, you won't be keeping it for long.

[Sep 24, 2020] What Will Be The Foreign Policy Of The Next US President by Thierry MEYSSAN

Notable quotes:
"... Each of these two camps wields rhetoric that masks its true practice. Democrats and Republicans pose as heralds of the "free world" in the face of "dictatorships", as defenders of racial, gender and sexual orientation discrimination, and as champions of the fight against "global warming". The Jacksonians, for their part, take turns denouncing the corruption, perversity and ultimately hypocrisy of their predecessors while calling to fight for their nation and not for the empire. ..."
"... The two camps have in common only the same cult of force; whether it is at the service of the empire (Democrats and Republicans) or the nation (Jacksonians). ..."
Sep 08, 2020 | orientalreview.org

The U.S. 2020 presidential campaign pits two radically different visions of the United States: empire or nation?

On the one hand, Washington's claim to dominate the world by "containment" – a strategy articulated by George Kennan in 1946 and followed by all presidents until 2016 – and on the other hand, the rejection of imperialism and the desire to facilitate the fortunes of Americans in general – a strategy articulated by President Andrew Jackson (1829-37) and taken up only by President Donald Trump (2017-20).

Each of these two camps wields rhetoric that masks its true practice. Democrats and Republicans pose as heralds of the "free world" in the face of "dictatorships", as defenders of racial, gender and sexual orientation discrimination, and as champions of the fight against "global warming". The Jacksonians, for their part, take turns denouncing the corruption, perversity and ultimately hypocrisy of their predecessors while calling to fight for their nation and not for the empire.

The two camps have in common only the same cult of force; whether it is at the service of the empire (Democrats and Republicans) or the nation (Jacksonians).

The fact that the Jacksonians unexpectedly became a majority in the country and took control of the Republican Party adds to the confusion, but should not confuse Trumpism with what the Republican ideology has been since World War II.

In reality, Democrats and Republicans tend to be well-to-do people or professionals in new technologies, while Jacksonians – like the "yellow vests" in France – are rather poor and professionally tied to the land from which they cannot escape.

... ... ...

The Jacksonian agenda

As soon as he took office, Donald Trump questioned the Rumsfeld/Cebrowsky strategy of annihilating the state structures of all the countries of the "Broader Middle East" without exception and announced his wish to bring home the troops lost in the "war without end". This goal remains at the top of his priorities in 2020 ("Stop Endless Wars and Bring Our Troops Home").

As a result, he excluded the Director of the CIA and the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee from regular meetings of the National Security Council. In so doing, he deprived the supporters of imperialism of their main tool of conquest.

See:
- " Presidential Memorandum: Organization of the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council ", by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network , 28 January 2017. And " Donald Trump winds up "the" organization of US imperialism ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Voltaire Network , 31 January 2017.

There followed a battle for the presidency of this council with the indictment of General Michael T. Flynn, then his replacement by General H. R. McMaster, the exceptionalist John R. Bolton, and finally Robert C. O'Brien.

In May 2017, Donald Trump called on U.S. allies to immediately cease their support for jihadists charged with implementing the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy. This was the Riyadh speech to the Sunni heads of state and then to NATO heads of state and government. President Trump had declared NATO obsolete before changing his mind. However, he obtained not the abandonment of Russia's policy of containment, but the halving of the credits used for this purpose and the allocation of the funds thus preserved to the fight against jihadism. In doing so, it partially stopped making NATO an instrument of imperialism and turned it into a defensive alliance. It has therefore demanded that its members contribute to its budget. Support for jihadism, however, was pursued by the supporters of imperialism with private means, notably the KKR Fund.

See:
- " Presidential Memorandum: Plan to Defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria ", by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network , 28 January 2017.
- " Donald Trump's Speech to the Arab Islamic American Summit ", by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network , 21 May 2017.
- " Remarks by Donald Trump at NATO Unveiling of the Article 5 and Berlin Wall Memorials ", by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network, 25 May 2017.

Hence his watchwords: "Wipe Out Global Terrorists Who Threaten to Harm Americans" and "Get Allies to Pay their Fair Share.

Like the Democrats and Republicans, the Jacksonian Donald Trump is committed to restoring the capabilities of his armies ("Maintain and Expand America's Unrivaled Military Strength"). Unlike his predecessors, he did not seek to transform the Pentagon's delusional management by privatizing one department at a time, but rather developed a plan to recruit researchers to compete technologically once again with the Russian and Chinese armies.

See:
- " National Security Strategy of the United States of America ", December 2017. And " Donald Trump's National Security Strategy ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network , 26 December 2017.

Only Donald Trump's desire to regain primacy in missile matters is supported by Democrats and Republicans, although they do not agree on how to achieve it ("Build a Great Cybersecurity Defense System and Missile Defense System") : the tenant of the White House wants the USA to equip itself alone with these weapons that it can eventually deploy on the territory of its allies, while its opponents want to involve the allies in order to maintain their hold on them. From the point of view of the Democrats and Republicans, the problem is obviously not withdrawing from the Cold War disarmament treaties to build a new arsenal, but the loss of means of diplomatic pressure on Russia.

A professional politician, Joe Biden hopes to restore the imperial status of the former First World Power.

The program of Democrats and non-party Republicans

Joe Biden proposes to focus on three objectives: (1) reinvigorate democracy (2) train the middle class to cope with globalization (3) regain global leadership.

- Reinvigorate democracy : in his words, this means basing public action on the "informed consent" of Americans. In doing so, he used Walter Lipmann's 1922 terminology, according to which democracy presupposes "manufacturing consent". This theory was discussed at length by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky in 1988. It obviously has nothing to do with the definition formulated by President Abraham Lincoln: "Democracy is government of the people, by the people, for the people".

Joe Biden believes he is achieving his goal by restoring the morality of public action through the practice of "political correctness". For example, he condemns "the horrible practice [of President Trump] of separating families and placing the children of immigrants in private prisons," without saying that President Trump was merely applying a democratic law to show its futility. Or he announces that he wants to reaffirm the condemnation of torture that President Trump justified, without saying that the latter, like President Obama, has already banned the practice while maintaining life imprisonment without trial in Guantánamo.

He announced his intention to convene a Summit for Democracy to fight against corruption, to defend the "Free World" against authoritarian regimes, and to advance human rights. In view of his definition of democracy, it is a question of uniting allied states by denouncing scapegoats for what is wrong (the "corrupt") and promoting human rights in the Anglo-Saxon sense and especially not in the French sense. That is to say, to stop police violence and not to help citizens to participate in decision-making. This summit will launch an appeal to the private sector so that new technologies cannot be used by authoritarian states to monitor their citizens (but the USA and its NSA can always use them in the interest of the "Free World").

Finally, Joe Biden concludes this chapter by highlighting his role in the Transatlantic Commission for Electoral Integrity alongside his friends, former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who overthrew the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, and Michael Chertoff, former US Secretary of Homeland Security, who put all US citizens under surveillance. Not forgetting John Negroponte who organized the Contras in Nicaragua and Daesh in Iraq.

- Educating the middle class to cope with globalization . Joe Biden believes that the politics that have been pursued since the dissolution of the USSR have led to the rapid disappearance of the middle class, and that training the remaining middle class in the use of new technologies will prevent the relocation of their jobs.

- Renewing U.S. leadership . In the name of democracy, this means stopping the rise of "populists, nationalists and demagogues. This formulation helps us understand that democracy, according to Joe Biden, is not only the fabrication of consent, but also the eradication of the popular will. If demagogues pervert democratic institutions, populists serve the popular will and nationalists serve the community.

The Oval Office of the White House is looking for a tenant.

Joe Biden then specifies that he will stop wars "forever"; a formulation that seems to support the same goal as the Jacksonians, but differs in terminology. It is in fact a question of validating the current adaptation of the system to the limits imposed by President Trump: why make US soldiers die abroad when one can pursue the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy with jihadists at a lower cost? All the more so since when he was only an opposition senator, Joe Biden gave his name to the plan to partition Iraq that the Pentagon was trying to impose.

A verse follows on the enlargement of NATO to include Latin American, African and Pacific allies. Far from being obsolete, the Alliance will once again become the heart of U.S. imperialism.

Finally, Joe Biden pleads for the renewal of the 5+1 agreement with Iran and disarmament treaties with Russia. The agreement with President Hassan Rohani aims to classically divide Muslim countries into Sunni and Shia, while the disarmament treaties aim to confirm that the Biden administration would not envisage a global confrontation, but the continued containment of its competitor.

The program of the Democratic Party candidate and non-party Republicans concludes with the assurance of joining the Paris Accord and taking leadership in the fight against global warming. Joe Biden specifies that he will not give gifts to China, which is relocating its most polluting industries along the Silk Road. On the other hand, he omits to say that his friend, Barack Obama, before entering politics, was the drafter of the statutes of the Chicago Carbon Emissions Trading Exchange. The fight against global warming is not so much an ecological issue as a matter for bankers.

Conclusion

It must be said that everything is opposed to a clarification. Four years of upheavals by President Trump have only succeeded in replacing the "endless wars" with a low-intensity private war. There are certainly far fewer deaths, but it is still war.

The elites who enjoy imperialism are not ready to give up their privileges.

So it is to be feared that the U.S. will be forced to go through an internal conflict, a civil war, and break up like the Soviet Union once did.

[Sep 24, 2020] Obama, his pet Wookie and Critical Race Theory

Sep 24, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Reign in Fact , 6 hours ago

"" President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday to stop funding to federal government contractors who hold critical race theory training sessions."

YES!! "Silence is complicity" as leftarded sheep often bleat, and silence in the face of this ultra-racist bullsh!t has gone on far too long. Never should've been allowed to begin with.

Son of Loki , 6 hours ago

Obama and his pet Wookie encouraged it.

Nunyadambizness , 4 hours ago

His pet Wookie Biden?

[Sep 24, 2020] We have lost a real giant (Stephen F. Cohen has died)! by Saker

Notable quotes:
"... Cohen had the courage to take on the entire ruling elites of this country and their messianic supremacist ideology by himself, almost completely alone. ..."
"... He opposed the warmongering nutcases during the Cold War, and he opposed them again when they replaced their rabid hatred of the Soviet Union with an even more rabid hatred of everything Russian. ..."
Sep 24, 2020 | thesaker.is

First, he was a man of immense kindness and humility . Second, he was a man of total intellectual honesty . I can't say that Cohen and I had the same ideas or the same reading of history, though in many cases we did, but here is what I found so beautiful in this man: unlike most of his contemporaries, Cohen was not an ideologue , he did not expect everybody to agree with him, and he himself did not vet people for ideological purity before offering them his friendship.

Even though it is impossible to squeeze a man of such immense intellect and honesty into any one single ideological category, I would say that Stephen Cohen was a REAL liberal , in the original, and noble, meaning of this word.

I also have to mention Stephen Cohen's immense courage . Yes, I know, Cohen was not deported to GITMO for his ideas, he was not tortured in a CIA secret prison, and he was not rendered to some Third Word country to be tortured there on behalf of the USA. Stephen Cohen had a different kind of courage: the courage to remain true to himself and his ideals even when the world literally covered him in slanderous accusations, the courage to NOT follow his fellow liberals when they turned PSEUDO-liberals and betrayed everything true liberalism stands for. Professor Cohen also completely rejected any forms of tribalism or nationalism, which often made him the target of vicious hatred and slander, especially from his fellow US Jews (he was accused of being, what else, a Putin agent).

Cohen had the courage to take on the entire ruling elites of this country and their messianic supremacist ideology by himself, almost completely alone.

Last, but most certainly not least, Stephen Cohen was a true peacemaker , in the sense of the words of the Holy Gospel I quoted above. He opposed the warmongering nutcases during the Cold War, and he opposed them again when they replaced their rabid hatred of the Soviet Union with an even more rabid hatred of everything Russian.

I won't claim here that I always agreed with Cohen's ideas or his reading of history, and I am quite sure that he would not agree with much of what I wrote. But one thing Cohen and I definitely did agree on: the absolute, number one, priority of not allowing a war to happen between the USA and Russia. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Stephen Cohen dedicated his entire life towards this goal.

... ... ...

[Sep 24, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen, 1938–2020 - The Nation

Sep 24, 2020 | www.thenation.com

first "met" Steve through his 1977 essay "Bolshevism and Stalinism." His cogent, persuasive, revisionist argument that there are always alternatives in history and politics deeply influenced me. And his seminal biography, Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution , challenging prevailing interpretations of Soviet history, was to me, and many, a model of how biography should be written: engaged and sympathetically critical.

At the time, I was too accepting of conventional wisdom. Steve's work -- and soon, Steve himself -- challenged me to be critical-minded, to seek alternatives to the status quo, to stay true to my beliefs (even if they weren't popular), and to ask unpopular questions of even the most powerful. These are values I carry with me to this day as editorial director of The Nation , which Steve introduced me to (and its editor, Victor Navasky) and for which he wrote a column ("Sovieticus") from 1982 to 1987, and many articles and essays beginning in 1979. His last book, War with Russia? was a collection of dispatches (almost all posted at thenation.com ) distilled from Steve's weekly radio broadcasts -- beginning in 2014–on The John Batchelor Show .

T he experiences we shared in Moscow beginning in 1980 are in many ways my life's most meaningful. Steve introduced me to realms of politics, history, and life I might never have experienced: to Bukharin's widow, the extraordinary Anna Mikhailovna Larina, matriarch of his second family, and to his eclectic and fascinating circle of friends -- survivors of the Gulag, (whom he later wrote about in The Victims Return ) dissidents, and freethinkers -- both outside and inside officialdom.

Top Articles Why LeBron James Scares the Racist Right READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE SKIP AD

From 1985 to 1991, when we lived frequently in Moscow, we shared the intellectual and political excitement, the hopes and the great achievements of those perestroika years. We later developed a close friendship with Mikhail Gorbachev, a man we both deeply admired as an individual and as a political leader who used his power so courageously to change his country and the world. Gorbachev also changed our lives in several ways.

Our marriage coincided with perestroika . In fact, Steve spent the very first day after our wedding, our so-called honeymoon, at the United Nations with Gorbachev and the news anchor Dan Rather (Steve was consulting for CBS News at the time). Then, on our first anniversary, in 1989, we were with President Bush (the first) and Gorbachev on Malta when they declared the end of the Cold War. And we think of our daughter, Nika, now 29 years old, as a perestroika baby because she was conceived in Russia during the Gorbachev years, made her first visit to Moscow in July 1991 and since then has been back some 40 times. In a moving moment, a year after Raisa Maksimovna died, Gorbachev remarked to Steve that our marriage and partnership reminded him of his with Raisa because we too seemed inseparable.

Steve has often regretted that many of the Russian friends he made after 1985 did not know about his earlier Moscow life. He first visited the Soviet Union in 1959. But it was those pre- perestroika years, 1975 to 1982, that gave Steve what he once told me was his "real education. Not only in Russian society but in Russian politics, because I began to understand the connection between trends in society, trends in the dissident movement, and trends in the nomenklatura." They were "utterly formative years for me."

https://buy.tinypass.com/checkout/template/show?displayMode=inline&containerSelector=.inline-counter&templateId=OTFVM3RHWZ0B&offerId=fakeOfferId&showCloseButton=false&trackingId=%7Bjcx%7DH4sIAAAAAAAAAI2Qy27CMBBF_8VrjGwnMTY7WkGD-oiAKFB2QzDgkoQ0dgBR9d_rRKUVUhe1vJk5c65G84FAr1EfveQP4I8v8_AJdVAJW5VodRo3hBFGMJGYec0POGY9HLjavzwulq_hxNYy6MWexSAUJRRAyBUTHhfc831OZLqihIDwlQtW51JVWhWpaqOHi0FEFvJ-QvzBDR2eVVpbfSjaMSqIKHuEHFNM3GM2qEUgge7zADYKpDE029_4g_RHNrvDKVZ5mYFVbDoOIzEJh7N4FLHEKTswV4j6tqpVB9nvurWjeJQ8e9NwviR36JclUGkobDNS1FnWQSnkJehtYa6Noza65eiI_7wgFXgDa_M2Y_BeauPVyew_F9Sli-SiS6XsMsK7QrhmbVQ12KrCOrY-pc2iNkN9yokTORX88wsVekFK5wEAAA&experienceId=EXAO0X9CQ04A&activeMeters=%5B%7B%22meterName%22%3A%22In+article+Meter%22%2C%22views%22%3A3%2C%22viewsLeft%22%3A0%2C%22maxViews%22%3A3%2C%22totalViews%22%3A4%7D%5D&tbc=%7Bjzx%7DvaV6Q-AgGJ_DiTS_QNn8FA6olpAEC_GKej-sdbqQpRIS-Kfr2XuQ_uJ7-VsMBs9sgdDzuDJGAIvwcZFWTCJIbM0i5t_YYdOlPsJmO-rAn6uIfIuoy1Hh_-p5REhASnboV4_aTgrddjKMmaM4SpBJ-g&iframeId=offer-0-EhJo2&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Fworld%2Fstephen-cohen-obituary-russia%2F&parentDualScreenLeft=1536&parentDualScreenTop=0&parentWidth=1536&parentHeight=762&parentOuterHeight=864&aid=NmGa4IzWHL&tags=nation-history%2Cregions-and-countries%2Csociety%2Cworld%2Clived-history%2Cinstagram%2Crussia%2Cunited-nations%2Ckatrina-vanden-heuvel&contentSection=article&contentAuthor=Katrina+vanden+Heuvel&contentCreated=2020-09-21T10%3A34%3A52-04%3A00&pageViewId=2020-09-23-23-56-27-509-4zKXZYHQtu957T3t-a8e101aa89b283686344609cb100a84e&visitId=v-2020-09-23-23-56-27-518-fadsjS2aqpis3uVS-a8e101aa89b283686344609cb100a84e&userProvider=publisher_user_ref&userToken=&customCookies=%7B%22_pc_exit_popup_signup_confirm%22%3A%22true%22%7D&hasLoginRequiredCallback=true&width=640&_qh=a529b52d4f

They also informed his writings, especially his pathbreaking book Rethinking the Soviet Experience , which was published at the very time Gorbachev came to power. "There was a lot of tragedy," Steve used to say, "but also a lot of humor and warmth when people had little more that personal friendships and ideas to keep them company." From 1980, when I first traveled to Moscow with Steve, to 1982 when neither of us could get a visa (until 1985 when Gorbachev became leader), we lived in that Russia, spending many nights in friends' apartments and kitchens drinking into the night, and listening to uncensored, often pessimistic, thinking about the present and future of Russia.

I later became Steve's collaborator in smuggling samizdat manuscripts out of Russia to the West, and bringing samizdat books back to Russia and distributing them. By the time I joined him, Steve had managed to send dozens of such books to Moscow, and satisfying friends with a selection ranging from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Varlam Shalamov, George Orwell, and Robert Conquest to the Kama Sutra and, of course, the samizdat version of Steve's own book on Bukharin. I learned from Steve that one had to keep forbidden documents and manuscripts on one's person at all times, knowing that the KGB frequently searched apartments and hotel rooms. At a certain point, Steve's shoulder bag became so heavy that he developed a hernia on his right side. After surgery, he started carrying his bag on his left side, but developed a second hernia there, as well. He liked to say that the worst the KGB ever did to him was to cause him two hernias!

In fact, it was samizdat manuscripts that first brought us together. In 1978, Steve heard that I had a diplomatic passport, which would have exempted me from a customs search, and was about to travel to Moscow. (At the time my father was the United States representative to the United Nations in Geneva.) Through a mutual friend, Steve asked if I would bring out samizdat documents being held for him in Moscow. I would have been happy to do so, but Steve had been misinformed. I didn't have a diplomatic passport.

S teve could sometimes seem like a tough guy, but those who won his trust knew he was a person of great generosity, loyalty, and kindness. He was known in our New York City neighborhood on the Upper West Side as an impresario/organizer and longtime supporter of basketball tournaments for local, often poor, kids. In the United States and Russia, Steve mentored and supported young scholars. In the last decade, he set up fellowships for young scholars of Russian history at the several universities where he'd he studied and taught: Indiana University, Princeton, New York University, and Columbia. He lent his support to the establishment of Moscow's State Museum of the History of the Gulag -- and to its young director and team.

Life with Steve was never boring. He was supremely independent, the true radical in our family, unfailingly going to the root of the problem. He spoke his mind. He had a CD with a dozen variations of "My Way" -- from Billy Bragg to Frank Sinatra. And as The Chronicle of Higher Education subtitled its 2017 profile of Steve, he "was the most controversial Russia expert in America."

SUPPORT PROGRESSIVE JOURNALISM

If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nation 's work.

Through all our years together, Steve was my backbone, fortifying me for the battles Nation editors must wage (often with their own writers, sometimes including Steve!), and giving me the personal and political courage to do the right thing. But never more so than when we entered what might be called the "Russiagate era."

While Steve liked to say it's healthy to rethink, to have more questions than answers, there was a wise consistency to his political analysis. For example, as is clear from his many articles in The Nation in these last decades, he unwaveringly opposed American Cold War thinking both during the Cold War and since the end of the Soviet Union. He was consistent in his refusal to sermonize, lecture, or moralize about what Russia should do. He preferred to listen rather than preach, to analyze rather than demonize.

This stance was no recipe for popularity, which Steve professed to care little about. He was courageous and fearless in continuing to question the increasingly rigid orthodoxies about the Soviet Union and Russia. But in the last months, such criticism did take its toll on him. Along with others who sought to avert a new and more dangerous Cold War, Steve despaired that the public debate so desperately needed had become increasingly impossible in mainstream politics or media. Until his death he'd been working on a short article about what he saw as the "criminalization of détente." The organization he established, the American Committee on East-West Accord, tried mightily to argue for a more sane US policy toward Russia.

He fared better than I often did confronting the controversies surrounding him since 2014, in reaction to his views on Ukraine, Putin, election interference, and more. Positions he took often elicited slurs and scurrilous attacks. How many times could he be labeled "Putin's puppet"? "Putin's No.1 American apologist"? Endlessly, it seemed. But Steve chose not to respond directly to the attacks, believing -- as he told me many times when I urged him to respond -- that they offered no truly substantive criticism of his arguments, but were merely ad hominem attacks. What he did write about -- he was increasingly concerned about the fate of a younger generation of scholars -- was the danger of smearing those who thought differently about US policy toward Russia, thereby silencing skeptics and contributing to the absence of a needed debate in our politics, media, and academy.

M ikhail Gorbachev often told Steve how deeply influenced he was by his writings, especially his biography of Bukharin. Steve first met Gorbachev in 1987 at the Soviet Embassy in Washington. It was a reception for America's "progressive intelligentsia" -- which Steve found funny, because he considered himself a maverick and didn't like labels. But he was there that day, and within a few minutes a Kremlin aide told Steve that the general secretary wanted to talk to him. Minutes later, Mikhail Sergeevich approached and asked Steve, assuming the author of Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution must be eminent and of a "serious" age: " Deistvitelno [really] -- you wrote the book, or was it your father?"

Steve finally achieved that "serious" age Gorbachev spoke of! But his heart, spirit and mind remained youthful till the very end. Maybe it's because of his love of Jerry Lee Lewis's rock and roll, or New Orleans blues or Kentucky bluegrass, or his passion for basketball (shared with our daughter Nika and his 16-year-old grandson, Lucas), or his quest for a good anecdote (his annual anecdote lectures at Princeton and later NYU drew large crowds). Maybe it's because we continued our walks in nearby Riverside Park for as long as was possible -- walks full of loving and spirited argument and talk. Perhaps it's because, while Steve was a very serious person, he didn't take himself seriously.

O n Saturday, Mikhail Gorbachev sent these words about Steve:

Dear Katrina,
Please accept my sincere condolences on Steve's passing. He was one of the closest people to me in his views and understanding of the enormous events that occurred in the late 1980s in Russia and changed the world.
Steve was a brilliant historian and a man of democratic convictions. He loved Russia, the Russian intelligentsia, and believed in our country's future.
I always considered Steve and you my true friends. During perestroika and all the subsequent years, I felt your understanding and unwavering support. I thank you both.
Dear Katrina, I feel deep sympathy for your grief and I mourn together with you and Nika.
Blessed memory for Steve.
I embrace you,
Mikhail Gorbachev
19.09.20

F or 40 years, Steve was my partner, companion, co-conspirator, best friend, fellow traveler, mentor, husband (for 32 years), co-author. I will be forever grateful to him for introducing me to The Nation , to Russia, for a life that has been full of shared adventure, friendship and passion, and for our beloved daughter, Nika. MOST POPULAR 1

FEDERAL AGENCIES TAPPED PROTESTERS' PHONES IN PORTLAND 2

IS TRUMP PLANNING A COUP D'ÉTAT? 3

WHY LEBRON JAMES SCARES THE RACIST RIGHT 4

TRUMP WANTS ANOTHER 'BUSH V. GORE' 5

FASCISM IS THE CORE OF TRUMP'S MESSAGE

https://buy.tinypass.com/checkout/template/show?displayMode=inline&containerSelector=%23tp-meter&templateId=OT6SYOE39OW8&offerId=fakeOfferId&showCloseButton=false&trackingId=%7Bjcx%7DH4sIAAAAAAAAAI2QUW-CMBDHv0ufxbSllNY3E3GaLZoNJ-jbiZ3WYO2goHHZdx-QucVkD2v6cve73z-X-0Cgt2iAZscHYNNrMnlCPWRhp5ZanactoZhiD0uP-u0PuEdDL2hqdn1M16vJs6tkEC5854FQBBMAITdU-FxwnzGOZbYhGINgqglWF6sKrUymuugonbykyWg4fk3jOxpdVFY5fTLdGBFY2BDjOvNw86gLKhFIYJLIQ2hqYZg9sDt_mP3I5f50XqijzcGpdTqKxtE4mcUJ5qQx9lDeGBq4olI95L7rTp4veLyaR76cJwL9siUUGoxrR0yV5z2UwdGC3pny1qh1qTuOau_PAxLhvcG2PMQU3q0u_WoZ_-eA2jaRXPSJlH2KeV-0a1WlKoY7ZVzDtuesXdTlaEA4bkROBP_8AstBlSvmAQAA&experienceId=EXHRXWDAFUXS&activeMeters=%5B%7B%22meterName%22%3A%22PaywallMeter%22%2C%22views%22%3A2%2C%22viewsLeft%22%3A0%2C%22maxViews%22%3A2%2C%22totalViews%22%3A4%7D%5D&tbc=%7Bjzx%7DvaV6Q-AgGJ_DiTS_QNn8FA6olpAEC_GKej-sdbqQpRIS-Kfr2XuQ_uJ7-VsMBs9sgdDzuDJGAIvwcZFWTCJIbM0i5t_YYdOlPsJmO-rAn6uIfIuoy1Hh_-p5REhASnboV4_aTgrddjKMmaM4SpBJ-g&iframeId=offer-2-KEwYv&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Fworld%2Fstephen-cohen-obituary-russia%2F&parentDualScreenLeft=1536&parentDualScreenTop=0&parentWidth=1536&parentHeight=762&parentOuterHeight=864&aid=NmGa4IzWHL&tags=nation-history%2Cregions-and-countries%2Csociety%2Cworld%2Clived-history%2Cinstagram%2Crussia%2Cunited-nations%2Ckatrina-vanden-heuvel&contentSection=article&contentAuthor=Katrina+vanden+Heuvel&contentCreated=2020-09-21T10%3A34%3A52-04%3A00&pageViewId=2020-09-23-23-56-27-509-4zKXZYHQtu957T3t-a8e101aa89b283686344609cb100a84e&visitId=v-2020-09-23-23-56-27-518-fadsjS2aqpis3uVS-a8e101aa89b283686344609cb100a84e&userProvider=publisher_user_ref&userToken=&customCookies=%7B%22_pc_exit_popup_signup_confirm%22%3A%22true%22%7D&hasLoginRequiredCallback=true&width=1519&_qh=98fc21705d

Katrina vanden Heuvel TWITTER Katrina vanden Heuvel is editorial director and publisher of The Nation , America's leading source of progressive politics and culture. She served as editor of the magazine from 1995 to 2019.

Herbert Weiner says:

September 22, 2020 at 11:53 pm

My condolences for the passing of Stephen who fought the post Cold War policies against Russia with a balanced analysis--so contradictory to the intellectuals who gloat in our victory and are unrealistic to the "threat" posed by Russia which desperately needs peace and friendship with the West and, especially, us. He has shown that you can criticism and condemn Stalinism while also condemning our anti-Soviet policies. He walked that tightrope which I applaud. May his memory be a blessing.

Erwin Borda says: September 22, 2020 at 10:44 pm

Dear Katrina, at this time of America's political confusion, pain and intellectual despair, the lost of Steve is really big. He has been a source of inspiration to many, and the true defender of Russia in the middle of political adversity. Steve being an intellectual giant always exposed his ideas in a humble and honest way. What a lost for America and for the world!
Rest in Peace Steve! And for you Katrina and Nika my most sincere condolences!
God Bless you all!

Valera Bochkarev says: September 22, 2020 at 8:56 am

Boots, Applebaums, Kristols and Joffes of this world will come and go as specks of dirt clogging up our civilization while never measuring up to courageous moral and intellectual giants like Professor Cohen. His intellect, insight and humility will always be a shining beacon for those that have high hopes for humanity. Rest in peace, Steve Cohen. You've led a righteous and honorable life, Sir.

Pierre Guerlain says: September 22, 2020 at 2:43 am

I started reading Steve's articles in connection with the conspiracy theory that Russiagate is and then I watched many videos of him in interviews. I came to admire such a courageous man who was slandered by people who knew nothing, nothing about Russia, the country Steve knew so well but also nothing about geopolitics, international relations and the tricks of intel services. Always competent and with a gift for clear exposition, Steve warned about what is one of the gravest dangers: war with Russia. I too admired Gorbachev and saw how he was hoodwinked by people who unknowingly prepared Putin's rise. A great courageous thinker is gone and we miss him.

Ann Wright says: September 21, 2020 at 7:53 pm

I admired Steve's perspective from 1992 when I was in the second group that wasIn the US Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and two years later with the Us Embassy in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan for two years from 1994-1996. I've been back to Russia twice in the past three years and I agree totally with His view of the stupidity of another Cold War!!!

John Stewart says: September 21, 2020 at 5:12 pm

Katrina, thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. I took two courses with Professor Cohen at Princeton in 1973 and 1974, and he was without question the best lecturer I had in seven years of higher education. He became my intellectual mentor, although I was too shy to ever really talk with him. I graduated in Politics and Russian Studies in 1977, and he was an inspiration. I am especially saddened by his death because I have been thinking of picking up Russian studies soon when I retire and I wanted his advice on where I should do a Masters degree, with whom, and what topics needed someone to pick up. He was a great man, and a voice of sense about Russia. He will be greatly missed.

John Connolly says: September 21, 2020 at 3:10 pm

Dear Katrina: Thank You for this personal sharing of Your life with Stephen Cohen; and sincere condolences to You, Nika and Lucas.
I really appreciate Your clarity and candor about the unique position Steve occupied in the academic, intellectual and political firmament ... never completely clear to me until Your explication. Steve regularly engaged and sometimes enraged me with some of his positions -- some of them seeming to me ill-considered defenses of cloddish Stalinist bureaucrats or malevolent Russian authoritarians ... but I read everything he wrote in 'The Nation' and anywhere else I came across him. As a longtime Trotskyist/ Socialist I could find plenty to argue about with Brother Cohen, but also found great appreciation for the fact that almost no one else was currently thinking and writing about Russia or the Soviet experience with the rigor, insight, depth of experience and skill that Stephen owned and shared with us all. It goes without saying he will be missed by You his dearest and closest ones; but he will be sorely missed too by those of us in Your extended 'Nation' Family, and the Progressive millions he so widely taught and influenced to 'think different'.

[Sep 23, 2020] Mattis Told Intel Chief They May 'Have to Take Collective Action' Against 'Unfit' Trump -- Woodward

Notable quotes:
"... Former defense secretary Jim Mattis appears to have been plotting a coup with then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats after growing furious with President Trump for banning transgenders from the military and moving to pull out of Afghanistan and Syria. ..."
"... Mattis quietly went to Washington National Cathedral [in May 2019] to pray about his concern for the nation's fate under Trump's command and, according to Woodward, told Coats, "There may come a time when we have to take collective action" since Trump is "dangerous. He's unfit." ..."
"... Translation: we may have to stage a coup to get him out of power. Plenty of Democrats and former and current intelligence officials are working on a Color Revolution come November as we speak . ..."
Sep 10, 2020 | www.blacklistednews.com

SOURCE: CHRIS MENAHAN, INFORMATION LIBERATION

Former defense secretary Jim Mattis appears to have been plotting a coup with then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats after growing furious with President Trump for banning transgenders from the military and moving to pull out of Afghanistan and Syria.

From The Washington Post :

Mattis quietly went to Washington National Cathedral [in May 2019] to pray about his concern for the nation's fate under Trump's command and, according to Woodward, told Coats, "There may come a time when we have to take collective action" since Trump is "dangerous. He's unfit."

Translation: we may have to stage a coup to get him out of power. Plenty of Democrats and former and current intelligence officials are working on a Color Revolution come November as we speak .

In a separate conversation recounted by Woodward, Mattis told Coats, "The president has no moral compass," to which the director of national intelligence replied: "True. To him, a lie is not a lie. It's just what he thinks. He doesn't know the difference between the truth and a lie."

Mattis doesn't know the difference between a male and a female. Trump reportedly accurately said his generals were a "bunch of pussies."

"Not to mention my f**king generals are a bunch of pussies. They care more about their alliances than they do about trade deals," Trump told White House trade adviser Peter Navarro at one point, according to Woodward.

No lie detected!

Ann Coulter, who has repeatedly tried to tell Trump today's generals have nothing in common with those of the past like Trump-favorite Gen. George Patton, responded to the news on Wednesday by saying Trump has won her back!

And he wins me back! https://t.co/7nhtSuC4k9

-- Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) September 10, 2020

[Sep 23, 2020] Obama is not the first black president. He is black on the outside, but a white liberal on the inside. The same is true of Kamala Harris

Obama in foreign policy was Bush III. Another puppet of MIC
Sep 23, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

FND • 11 hours ago

" And now, America had elected a black man to the highest office in the land."

Obama is not the first black president. He is black on the outside, but a white liberal on the inside. The same is true of Kamala Harris. The first black president would be someone like Tim Scott or Al Sharpton. Someone who grew up in African American culture.

[Sep 23, 2020] Never Forget- Smoking Gun Intel Memo From 1990s Warned Of Frankenstein The CIA Created

Notable quotes:
"... knew and bluntly acknowledged ..."
"... War on The Rocks ..."
"... The U.S. State Dept.'s own numbers at the height of the war in Syria: access the full report at STATE.GOV ..."
Sep 23, 2020 | www.blacklistednews.com
SOURCE: ZEROHEDGE

As Americans pause to remember the tragic events of September 11, 2001 which saw almost 3,000 innocents killed in the worst terror attack in United States history, it might also be worth contemplating the horrific wars and foreign quagmires unleashed during the subsequent 'war on terror'.

Bush's so-called Global War on Terror targeted 'rogue states' like Saddam's Iraq, but also consistently had a focus on uprooting and destroying al-Qaeda and other armed Islamist terror organizations (this led to the falsehood that Baathist Saddam and AQ were in cahoots). But the idea that Washington from the start saw al-Qaeda and its affiliates as some kind of eternal enemy is largely a myth.

Recall that the US covertly supported the Afghan mujahideen and other international jihadists throughout the 1980's Afghan-Soviet War, the very campaign in which hardened al-Qaeda terrorists got their start. In 1999 The Guardian in a rare moment of honest mainstream journalism warned of the Frankenstein the CIA created -- among their ranks a terror mastermind named Osama bin Laden .

But it was all the way back in 1993 that a then classified intelligence memo warned that the very fighters the CIA previously trained would soon turn their weapons on the US and its allies. The 'secret' document was declassified in 2009, but has remained largely obscure in mainstream media reporting, despite being the first to contain a bombshell admission.

A terrorism analyst at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research named Gina Bennett wrote in the 1993 memo "The Wandering Mujahidin: Armed and Dangerous," that --

"support network that funneled money, supplies, and manpower to supplement the Afghan mujahidin" in the war against the Soviets, "is now contributing experienced fighters to militant Islamic groups worldwide."

The concluding section contains the most revelatory statements, again remembering these words were written nearly a decade before the 9/11 attacks :

US support of the mujahidin during the Afghan war will not necessarily protect US interests from attack.

...Americans will become the targets of radical Muslims' wrath. Afghan war veterans, scattered throughout the world, could surprise the US with violence in unexpected locales.

There it is in black and white print: the United States government knew and bluntly acknowledged that the very militants it armed and trained to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars would eventually turn that very training and those very weapons back on the American people .

And this was not at all a "small" or insignificant group, instead as The Guardian wrote a mere two years before 9/11 :

American officials estimate that, from 1985 to 1992, 12,500 foreigners were trained in bomb-making, sabotage and urban guerrilla warfare in Afghan camps the CIA helped to set up .

But don't think for a moment that there was ever a "lesson learned" by Washington.

Instead the CIA and other US agencies repeated the 1980s policy of arming jihadists to overthrow US enemy regimes in places like Libya and Syria even long after the "lesson" of 9/11. As War on The Rocks recounted :

Despite the passage of time, the issues Ms. Bennett raised in her 1993 work continue to be relevant today. This fact is a sign of the persistence of the problem of Sunni jihadism and the "wandering mujahidin." Today, of course, the problem isn't Afghanistan but Syria. While the war there is far from over, there is already widespread nervousness, particularly in Europe, about what will happen when the foreign fighters return from that conflict.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1304385396692914177&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blacklistednews.com%2Farticle%2F77999%2Fnever-forget-smoking-gun-intel-memo-from-1990s-warned-of-frankenstein-the-cia.html&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

On 9/11 we should never forget the innocent lives lost, but we should also never forget the Frankenstein of jihad the CIA created .

* * *

The U.S. State Dept.'s own numbers at the height of the war in Syria: access the full report at STATE.GOV

SHARE THIS ARTICLE...

[Sep 22, 2020] Americans had talent in diplomacy but they've lost it, Russian FM Lavrov says, as US triggers 'null and void' Iran sanctions -- RT Russia Former Soviet Union

Sep 22, 2020 | www.rt.com

US diplomacy is turning into the not-so-subtle art of making demands and ultimatums, Sergey Lavrov has lamented, as the Americans go it alone in restoring anti-Iran sanctions under a 2015 deal that no longer legally applies.

Washington's reasoning behind bringing back the UN sanctions against Iran looks "funny," as the majority of UN Security Council members – 13 out of 15 – do not support activating the 'snapback' mechanism, the Russian Foreign Minister said, in an exclusive interview with the Al Arabiya news channel.

The council "clearly stated that there is no legal position or moral reasons for anything close to the snapback and all the statements to the contrary are null and void," he reminded his audience. The 'snapback' issue leaves Washington at loggerheads with even its closest allies.

ALSO ON RT.COM US faces 'more' isolation after 'null & void' move to unilaterally reimpose UN sanctions, Tehran warns

Earlier on Sunday, the three European signatories to the Iran deal – Germany, France and the UK – stated the return of the sanctions will have no legal effect whatsoever.

However, the Trump administration continues to insist Washington now has the authority to target any country breaching the "re-imposed" sanctions. For Lavrov, this is telling, in terms of understanding the quality of US diplomacy.

The Americans lost any talent in diplomacy, unfortunately; they used to have excellent experts, [but] now what they're doing in foreign policy is to put a demand on the table, whether they're discussing Iran or anything else.

If their counterpart disagrees and refuses to toe the line, "they put an ultimatum, they give a deadline and then they impose sanctions, then they make the sanctions extra-territorial." Regrettably, the European Union also "is engaging in the same tricks more and more," Lavrov noted.

On Saturday, Washington moved to bring back sweeping UN sanctions against Tehran, insisting it was acting within its own right to do so as an original party to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the 2015 pact Iran sealed with major world powers. The US left the deal in 2018 following a decision by President Donald Trump.

ALSO ON RT.COM 'We've been through this in the Skripal case': West's Navalny poisoning claims driven by 'sanctions itch', Sergey Lavrov says

"I can only remind them that they should respect the hierarchy of the American administration, because their boss, President Trump, has personally signed an official decree withdrawing the United States from the JCPOA," Lavrov added sarcastically.

Sanctions aside, Washington is also busy trying to prevent the lifting of the UN arms embargo on Iran, set to expire on October 18. This endeavor doesn't make much sense either, the Russian minister commented. "There is no such thing as an arms embargo against Iran," he clarified. The UN Security Council reiterated the embargo will end on that date, and "there would be no limitations whatsoever after the expiration of this timeframe."

[Sep 22, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen -- In Memoriam by Gilbert Doctorow

Unfortunately in his brilliant analysis of USA-Russia relations Stephen Cohen never pointed out that the USA policy toward Russia is dictated by the interests of maintaining global neoliberal empire and the concept of "Full Spectrum Dominance" which was adopted by the USA neoliberal elite after the collapse of the USSR.
Like British empire the USA neoliberal empire is now overextended, metropolia is in secular stagnation with deterioration standard of living of the bottom 80% of population, so the USA under Trump became more aggressive and dangerous on the international arena. Trump administration behaves behaves like a cornered rat on international arena.
Notable quotes:
"... On Friday, 18 September, professor Steve Cohen passed away in New York City and we, the "dissident" community of Americans standing for peace with Russia – and for peace with the world at large – lost a towering intellectual and skillful defender of our cause who enjoyed an audience of millions by his weekly broadcasts on the John Batchelor Show, WABC Radio. ..."
"... from the start of the Information Wars against Russia during the George W. Bush administration following Putin's speech at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007, no voice questioning the official propaganda line in America was tolerated. Steve Cohen, who in the 1990s had been a welcome guest on U.S. national television and a widely cited expert in print media suddenly found himself blacklisted and subjected to the worst of McCarthyite style, ad hominem attacks. ..."
"... the opposition to Steve was led by experts in the Ukrainian and other minority peoples sub-categories of the profession who were militantly opposed not just to him personally but to any purely objective, not to mention sympathetic treatment of Russian leadership in the territorial expanse of Eurasia. ..."
"... Almost no one outside our 'dissident' community is concerned about the possibility of Armageddon in say two years' time due to miscalculations and bad luck in our pursuing economic, informational and military confrontation with Russia and China. ..."
"... My point in this discussion is that in the last decade of his life Stephen Cohen became one of the nation's most fearless and persistent defenders of the right to Free Speech. ..."
"... It was forced upon him by The New York Times, The Washington Post and other major media who pilloried him or blacklisted him over his unorthodox, unsanctioned, nonconformist views on the "Putin regime." It was forced upon him by university colleagues who sought to deny his right to establish graduate school fellowships in Russian affairs bearing his name and that of his mentor at Indiana University, Professor Tucker. ..."
"... In the face of vicious personal attacks from these McCarthyite forces, in the face of hate mail and even threats to his life, Steve decided to set up The American Committee and to recruit to its governing board famous, patriotic Americans and the descendants of the most revered families in the country. In this he succeeded, and it is to his credit that a moral counter force to the stampeding bulls of repression was erected and has survived to this day. ..."
Sep 22, 2020 | gilbertdoctorow.com

On Friday, 18 September, professor Steve Cohen passed away in New York City and we, the "dissident" community of Americans standing for peace with Russia – and for peace with the world at large – lost a towering intellectual and skillful defender of our cause who enjoyed an audience of millions by his weekly broadcasts on the John Batchelor Show, WABC Radio.

A year ago, I reviewed his latest book, War With Russia? which drew upon the material of those programs and took this scholar turned journalist into a new and highly accessible genre of oral readings in print. The narrative style may have been more relaxed, with simplified syntax, but the reasoning remained razor sharp. I urge those who are today paying tribute to Steve, to buy and read the book, which is his best legacy.

From start to finish, Stephen F. Cohen was among America's best historians of his generation, putting aside the specific subject matter that he treated: Nikolai Bukharin, his dissertation topic and the material of his first and best known book; or, to put it more broadly, the history of Russia (USSR) in the 20 th century. He was one of the very rare cases of an historian deeply attentive to historiography, to causality and to logic. I understood this when I read a book of his from the mid-1980s in which he explained why Russian (Soviet) history was no longer attracting young students of quality: because there were no unanswered questions, because we smugly assumed that we knew about that country all that there was to know. That was when our expert community told us with one voice that the USSR was entrapped in totalitarianism without any prospect for the overthrow of its oppressive regime.

But my recollections of Steve also have a personal dimension going back six years or so when a casual email correspondence between us flowered into a joint project that became the launch of the American Committee for East West Accord (ACEWA). This was a revival of a pro-détente association of academics and business people that existed from the mid-1970s to the early 1990s, when, following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the removal of the Communist Party from power, the future of Russia in the family of nations we call the 'international community' seemed assured and there appeared to be no further need for such an association as ACEWA.

I hasten to add that in the original ACEWA Steve and I were two ships that passed in the night. With his base in Princeton, he was a protégé of the dean of diplomats then in residence there, George Kennan, who was the leading light on the academic side of the ACEWA. I was on the business side of the association, which was led by Don Kendall, chairman of Pepsico and also for much of the 1970s chairman of the US-USSR Trade and Economic Council of which I was also a member. I published pro-détente articles in their newsletter and published a lengthy piece on cooperation with the Soviet Union in agricultural and food processing domains, my specialty at that time, in their collection of essays by leaders in the U.S. business community entitled Common Sense in U.S.-Soviet Trade .

The academic contingent had, as one might assume, a 'progressive' coloration, while the business contingent had a Nixon Republican coloration. Indeed, in the mid-1980s these two sides split in their approach to the growing peace movement in the U.S. that was fed by opposition in the 'thinking community' on university campuses to Ronald Reagan's Star Wars agenda. Kendall shut the door at ACEWA to rabble rousing and the association did not rise to the occasion, so that its disbanding in the early '90s went unnoticed.

In the re-incorporated American Committee, I helped out by assuming the formal obligations of Treasurer and Secretary, and also became the group's European Coordinator from my base in Brussels. At this point my communications with Steve were almost daily and emotionally quite intense. This was a time when America's expert community on Russian affairs once again felt certain that it knew everything there was to know about the country, and most particularly about the nefarious "Putin regime." But whereas in the 1970s and 1980s, polite debate about the USSR/Russia was entirely possible both behind closed doors and in public space, from the start of the Information Wars against Russia during the George W. Bush administration following Putin's speech at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007, no voice questioning the official propaganda line in America was tolerated. Steve Cohen, who in the 1990s had been a welcome guest on U.S. national television and a widely cited expert in print media suddenly found himself blacklisted and subjected to the worst of McCarthyite style, ad hominem attacks.

From my correspondence and several meetings with Steve at this time both in his New York apartment and here in Brussels, when he and Katrina van der Heuvel came to participate in a Round Table dedicated to relations with Russia at the Brussels Press Club that I arranged, I knew that Steve was deeply hurt by these vitriolic attacks. He was at the time waging a difficult campaign to establish a fellowship in support of graduate studies in Russian affairs. It was touch and go, because of vicious opposition from some stalwarts of the profession to any fellowship that bore Steve's name. Allow me to put the 'i' on this dispute: the opposition to Steve was led by experts in the Ukrainian and other minority peoples sub-categories of the profession who were militantly opposed not just to him personally but to any purely objective, not to mention sympathetic treatment of Russian leadership in the territorial expanse of Eurasia. In the end, Steve and Katrina prevailed. The fellowships exist and, hopefully, will provide sustenance to future studies when American attitudes towards Russia become less politicized.

At all times and on all occasions, Steve Cohen was a voice of reason above all. The problem of our age is that we are now not only living in a post-factual world, but in a post-logic world. The public reads day after day the most outrageous and illogical assertions about alleged Russian misdeeds posted by our most respected mainstream media including The New York Times and The Washington Post . Almost no one dares to raise a hand and suggest that this reporting is propaganda and that the public is being brainwashed. Steve did exactly that in War With Russia? in a brilliant and restrained text.

Regrettably today we have no peace movement to speak of. Youth and our 'progressive' elites are totally concerned over the fate of humanity in 30 or 40 years' time as a consequence of Global Warming and rising seas. That is the essence of the Green Movement. Almost no one outside our 'dissident' community is concerned about the possibility of Armageddon in say two years' time due to miscalculations and bad luck in our pursuing economic, informational and military confrontation with Russia and China.

I fear it will take only some force majeure development such as we had in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis to awaken the broad public to the risks to our very survival that we are incurring by ignoring the issues that Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Princeton and New York University was bringing to the airwaves week after week on his radio program.

Postscript

In terms of action, the new ACEWA was even less effective than its predecessor, which had avoided linking up with the peace movement of the 1980s and sought to exert influence on policy through armchair talks with Senators and other statesmen in Washington behind closed doors of (essentially) men's clubs.

However, the importance of the new ACEWA, and the national importance of Stephen Cohen lay elsewhere.

This question of appraising Stephen Cohen's national importance is all the more timely given that on the day of his death, 18 September, the nation also lost Supreme Justice Ruth Ginsburg, about whose national importance no Americans, whether her fans or her opponents, had any doubt.

My point in this discussion is that in the last decade of his life Stephen Cohen became one of the nation's most fearless and persistent defenders of the right to Free Speech. It was not a role that he sought. It was thrust upon him by the expert community of international affairs, including the Council on Foreign Relations, from which he reluctantly resigned over this matter.

It was forced upon him by The New York Times, The Washington Post and other major media who pilloried him or blacklisted him over his unorthodox, unsanctioned, nonconformist views on the "Putin regime." It was forced upon him by university colleagues who sought to deny his right to establish graduate school fellowships in Russian affairs bearing his name and that of his mentor at Indiana University, Professor Tucker.

In the face of vicious personal attacks from these McCarthyite forces, in the face of hate mail and even threats to his life, Steve decided to set up The American Committee and to recruit to its governing board famous, patriotic Americans and the descendants of the most revered families in the country. In this he succeeded, and it is to his credit that a moral counter force to the stampeding bulls of repression was erected and has survived to this day.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2020

[If you found value in this article, you should be interested to read my latest collection of essays entitled A Belgian Perspective on International Affairs, published in November 2019 and available in e-book, paperback and hardbound formats from amazon, barnes & noble, bol.com, fnac, Waterstones and other online retailers. Use the "View Inside" tab on the book's webpages to browse.]

[Sep 22, 2020] The New US-Russian Cold War -- Who is to Blame

It was all about Full Spectrum Domination. McFaul is not intellectual, he is a propagandist. Actually mediocre, obnoxious propagandist. In like Professor Cohen, intellectually he is nothing with academic credentials.
The level and primitivism lies about Ukraine would name any serious academic flash. It was about encircling Russia.
McFaul was behind Magnitsky which in best conspiracy tradition raises questions whether he works for MI6? We now know who Browder was and suspicious that he was Magnitsky killer or facilitator/financer (by hiring the jail doctor who traded Magnitsky) are very strong in view of "cui bono" question.
Notable quotes:
"... He is definitely not at the same level as Stephen F.Cohen. This is very alarming for the US, that people like him could have any power decision on Foreign Policy, and could explain the slow decline of the USA. ..."
"... McFaul is intellectually incoherent and disingenuous. Cohen wasted him ..."
"... We all know the truth... US economy heavily dependent on producing weapons and ammunition ..."
"... Mc Faul is clearly not supposed to have been in the positions of power, where he was. Something is fundamentally wrong with America. I think there is a crisis of personnel. Where are all these incredibly smart, high IQ people Harvard, Princeton, and the Ivy Leagues are supposedly pumping out? ..."
Sep 22, 2020 | www.youtube.com

TheInstallations , 2 years ago

McFaul is definitely not an academic, but much more a mediocre high civil servant. He is also very post modern in his approach. He is here to sell his book, not to argue ideas. He is incapable of building a rhetorical argument, and of having any political vision or strong analytical intelligence.

He is definitely not at the same level as Stephen F.Cohen. This is very alarming for the US, that people like him could have any power decision on Foreign Policy, and could explain the slow decline of the USA.

Confronted to people like Putin who is obviously an Old fashion politician like de Gaulles or Churchill, the Cold War can only lead us to catastrophe.

Yevgeny Goncharov , 2 years ago

Great facts from Prof. Cohen. Faulty logic from McFaul ("you cannot use those variables..."). McFaul will not get far in understanding Russia with this twisted approach, ie pretending like nothing (NATO, missile treaty, regime changes) happens.

The Maverick Historian , 2 years ago

Very informative debate! I think McFaul has only contributed to the new cold war with the treaties he helped write and the ill-informed advice he provided to the neoconservative Obama administration. Mr. Stephen Cohen is brilliant and I only wish he was more influential in shaping today's foreign policy. Though thankfully, McFaul is also no longer influential in shaping U.S. foreign policy.

Yevgeny Goncharov , 2 years ago

Very low from McFaul. Bringing personal attacks on him from social media as "facts" and "arguments" ("McFaul is a pedophile") . This not a level of academic argument from McFaul. He is no match to Cohen.

Aleksandar Mali , 1 year ago

It's so easy to understand! Russia is doing same thing usa will do when china starts to open military bases in latin America. Its not hard to imagine and in decade or to you will not have to imagine you will have that reality. Many Latin America countries will be interconnected with china with economic and military agreements than one day they will try to brig Mexico in China's sphere of influence if they refuse china can let's say "help" opposition to come in power and sign everything China wants.

I would like to see what American "experts" will say. How many of them will think that Mexico as a sovereign natio have right to sign any agreement it wants maybe even Russia can open military base and bring nuclear weapons to border of USA. So what it's their democratic right, isn't it?

Peace and Love , 2 years ago

McFaul is intellectually incoherent and disingenuous. Cohen wasted him

Salam Ahmed , 10 months ago

1:13:33 - 1:13:58 I swear by the all-powerful Albert Einistine that you are lying AND YOU KNOW IT. Russians said A BILLION times that U.S.A slowly but SURELY preparing for what they called "a calamitous war" by moving its lethal weapons nearer and nearer to the Russian territories.

We all know the truth... US economy heavily dependent on producing weapons and ammunition but the very very very main reason [for harassing Russia and the rest of world] is because the Rothschild family wants GLOBAL DOMINATION. SOLD FACT (ask ANY Russian intelligence officer about it and you will see what i mean).

SvendBosanvovski , 1 year ago (edited)

I have read Professor Cohen's last two works ("Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives" and "War with Russia?") and found them very informative and persuasive, but seeing him here expanding upon his key arguments is even more rewarding.

He shouldn't have to be brave to hold to his position, given his reputation as a scholar, but regrettably he is made to appear out of step with the critical mass of opinion makers who see more value promoting conflict with Russia than working towards a sensible accommodation.

rd264 , 2 years ago

I'm not an "expert" from Stanford, but as I recall the USSR imploded and the US [CIA etc] was totally surprised -so called pundits and experts in the US did not see it coming, then the next thing we get is US mainstream media claimed victory in the cold war, just blanket assertions that US won the cold war because the US is virtuous and clean and good, and we did it by the clear superiority of US way of life or some such crap.

Charles Krauthammer, for example. Now so called media and historians try to convince us that Reagan lead disarmament, but as I recall he blocked it at most points, for example, it was Gorbachev not Reagan who was out front and did all the leading at Reykjavik, and Reagan threw away Gorbachev's historic offer to totally disarm on the grounds that Star Wars was a more important priority, on Richard Perle's advice.

Now we are seeing something similar under Trump in which the US is again uninterested in peace and far more interested in wars by proxies and drones and global hegemony and control running the 7 seas and space to boot.

Dmitriy A , 1 year ago

Michael Foley is a liar of course US was involved I was me in US Army force and my friends used to travel to Georgia way before 2008 and of course everybody knows 2008 Russia and Georgia went to war with each other but our soldiers US government soldiers were teaching Georgians fighting with the NATO forces and all orange resolutions and Geo like him involved in Overturning government was famous Victoria Nuland

a 19 , 9 months ago

Mcfaul should have stayed in Montana

Larry Galearis , 2 years ago

Interesting debate and I hope Cohen is right, and is not the first of its kind. But still the FIRST EVER free debate about the New Cold War in the United States is (so far) still on Youtube. While listening to the two professors I found myself noting the difference in the presentation of facts from a career oriented politician/academic who is influenced by a forced narrative (McFaul) and one (Cohen) who is an academic historian who is in dissent and can speak freely (he is retired).

Keep in mind that Prof. McFaul has a career to worry about. It shows a LOT! Here we can see how political pressure can influence a debate. McFaul is still quite deserving of accolades for his courage to even say what he did in this debate.

And note how much free speech is missing in American society in the fact that this sort of thing is very difficult to achieve in a collapsed democracy. Note also that McFaul also stuck to "the Narrative" big lies like the so-called Crimea "annexation" when he would have known the truth of it....There are other examples. Americans are denied the fact that the public vote taken in Crimea was over 90% IN FAVOUR of joining Russia (again). This fact is simply too large for McFaul to be unaware of and yet most Americans are wallowing in this fake news. Or censored omissions. FWIW, Galearis

blackjackpinoko , 1 year ago

McFaul sounded like Pompeo

Steven Bishop , 2 months ago

The Monroe Doctrine. Has McFly read it?

Davide Sinigoi , 1 year ago

Prof. McFaul is a partisan. He bases his opinion of detailed facts, so detailed that he misses the bigger picture. The bigger picture is that he claims to be a sovereigns, but only when it comes to the US sovereignty. How about Russia's sovereignty?

Or Ukraine's whose government has been toppled by a (among others) US sponsored coup? How about Syria sovereignty? He furthers the view that the US had a fair posture towards Russia, which is not. This is also demonstrated by his personal deep dislike of Putin, which is something that both a real statesman or a real scholar should not influence opinions and actions.

McFaul's perspective is also flawed by the conflation of his (and Obama's) wishes and reality: that is that they don't like Putin and think to deal with Russia as if Putin was not there, but he is. You deal with the reality, not with your wishes. Putin is legitimate and strong Russia's president, whether McFaul likes him or not. A real respect for sovereignty demands respect for the head of the state you deal with. You don't question his legitimacy, as well as they don't questioned Clinton's, Bush's, Obama or Trump legitimacy. His point of view is that everything goes on in the world should have the US sanction, otherwise is not good.

This is imperial hubris, this is arrogance. This flaws his opinion in so far everything is measured upon american likes and dislikes. THis is not statesmanship, this is not scholarship, this is partisanship. He is also intellectually dishonest because he confuses a debate on right and wrong, which should be based on certain assumptions, with a debate on party interests, which has nothing to do with right and wrong, and is based on different assumptions. Indeed he is the less fit person in a debate on responsibility for the New Cold War because he was involved in its development and acquisition.

Partisanship is admitted, but shouldn't be disguised as neutrality or given any relevance just because of knowledge of technical details he knows - much of them are, frankly, irrelevant. His points are weak and inconsistent with geopolitical and a realist view of the international relations, they are biased by universal-liberal ideology, they are US-centric, he forgets too many essential points about the whole story. For instance he talks about the missed chance for Russian democracy (here a debate about what democracy is: his assumption is that the US democracy is .... please, don't make me laugh), but he doesn't mention that Soviet people voted in referenda and overwhelmingly wanted the USSR to keep on existing, but he forgets this "detail".

He forgets how the so much beloved Elcin sent the tanks against the parliament, many people were killed, how he allowed the pillaging of Russian people and resources by criminal oligarchs (many of them happily hosted by the UK and presented as political dissidents), and how the Russian 1996 were HEAVILY rigged and meddled by the US in order to reconfirm Elcin as a president. He complains about Putin being appointed by Elcin out of nothing. Well I can't recall any American complaints at that time, maybe because they thought he could be an alcoholic puppet like Elcin and that was clearly something the US liked and supported. So what about Obama (fake) words about wishing a strong Russia?

Obama spoke derogatory words about Russia. The only American interests about Russia is that is a militarily and strategically weak provider of cheap natural resources and that is not in tne position of competing for anything. I will stop here, although I could write pages and pages about McFlaws .... ooops! McFaul's inconsistency both as a scholar and even more as a statesman's advisor, but the debate was among a great intellectual with a clear vision of the world, and a small professor taken with insignificant details and too much love for Obama and blind believe in liberal universal ideology.

Alex P. , 9 months ago

Mc Faul is clearly not supposed to have been in the positions of power, where he was. Something is fundamentally wrong with America. I think there is a crisis of personnel. Where are all these incredibly smart, high IQ people Harvard, Princeton, and the Ivy Leagues are supposedly pumping out?

Bob Trajkoski , 1 year ago

McFaul believes in his own propaganda, irrational person and dangerous at that

Adam Rihak , 3 months ago

Prof. Cohen astonishing realpolitik ingenuity when asked "what the security interests of Ukraine and Georgia are" ( 1:16:21 ) unveils to me his understanding of politics as kind of imperialistic chess game where the US stands against the USSR (or RF for that matter). I have experienced the same feelings from his other debates (I remember one memorable at Munk Debates in 2015) - as if the historic fears, desires and dreams (of NATO or EU membership as the only effective shield against Russian military power) of so many ex-soviet countries means absolutely nothing - as if they were mere puppets of US "regime". As though the legitimate wishes of these sovereign countries means nothing at all. He is so surprised by that question he suddenly can't retrieve even the definition of what security interests of a country actually means - a rather strange quality in a historian. Ultimately he comes up with "they should make peace with their neighbors" - say this to countries that were along their history subjects of Soviet violent repression, military invasions, ethnic genocides and such. "I don't think Russian is a threat to them". Absolutely ridiculous.


Jean-Pierre Delorraine , 8 months ago (edited)

This Michael McFaul individual is such severe laughing-stock completely out of touch with reality. Stephen Cohen's version of the "new cold war" is much closer to reality and we should not forget the nefarious entities that pull the strings in D.C. U.S. covert involvement throughout eastern Europe and especially the Ukraine is more than evident. Putin and Russia in general is not stupid and see right through U.S. covert meddling on Russia's border. And those "peaceful demonstrators" in Syria that MacFaul dearly praises are mere agents of the CIA/Mossad complex. Where are they now?


Nikhilesh Surve , 4 months ago

Monroe doctrine doesn't care about the democratic rights of countries in the western hemisphere to enter into any alliance or partnership with USA's rival. Also, there's still no evidence of Russian hacking which is basis of their religion of RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA !

Pink Question , 3 months ago

Sure, since in Ukraine you guys didn't push money in mysterious organisations that would support the "democratic" narrative. I don't like NATO in my country and I see nato presence as an existential threat for Russia! Look back at the Cuba crisis it's exactly the SAME! You no good morally and ethically corrupt poor excuses of mouth pieces

Ser Korz , 2 years ago

Interesting how USA wants democracy for (all) others , but USA wants capitalist aristocracy for it self ( Jimmy Carter Tells Oprah America Is No Longer a Democracy, Now an Oligarchy https://mic.com/articles/125813/jimmy-carter-tells-oprah-america-is-no-longer-a-democracy-now-an-oligarchy#.AFxvdOCIa ).


Preben Soe , 9 months ago

Either that Faul person is delusional or he is outright lying - Did Turkey not get threatened with sanctions when they decided to trade with Russia on anti missile weapons.

Eamonn Wright555 , 1 year ago

You know Obama is a straight faced liar . Furthermore , we genocided innocent Christians and Muslims in three countries and created a diaspora of migrants to Europe. So , we are supposed to believe that all those PhDs did not foresee that , most people think that it was your intentional outcome all along . So it goes now in Venezuela. Mcfaul is one of many who just carry the water and carry out orders . It's almost as if , the powers that be want the USA to fall . Because they can not be this stupid .

Paul Srochenski , 1 year ago

Call Cohen tells the truth the other guy just lying a United States started that whole thing in Syria they backed up Isis they backed up all the terrorists and because they want to split the country up and give Israel that major part of it cuz they want the natural resources the oil out of there and everything else because that's what they do everywhere they go they want a natural Resorts and they don't care how many people they kill

Eamonn Wright555 , 1 year ago

You know Obama is a straight faced liar . Furthermore , we genocided innocent Christians and Muslims in three countries and created a diaspora of migrants to Europe. So , we are supposed to believe that all those PhDs did not foresee that , most people think that it was your intentional outcome all along . So it goes now in Venezuela. Mcfaul is one of many who just carry the water and carry out orders . It's almost as if , the powers that be want the USA to fall . Because they can not be this stupid .

Davide Sinigoi , 1 year ago

Prof. McFaul is a partisan. He bases his opinion of detailed facts, so detailed that he misses the bigger picture. The bigger picture is that he claims to be a sovereignist, but only when it comes to the US sovereignty. How about Russia's sovereignity? Or Ukraine's whose government has been toppled by a (among others) US sponsored coup? How about Syria sovereignty? He furthers the view that the US had a fair posture towards Russia, which is not. This is also demonstrated by his personal deep dislike of Putin, which is something that both a real statesman or a real scholar should not influence opinions and actions. McFaul's perspective is also flawed by the conflation of his (and Obama's) wishes and reality: that is that they donì't like Putin and think to deal with Russia as if Putin was not there, but he is. You deal with the reality, not with your wishes. Putin is legitimate and strong Russia's president, whether McFaul likes him or not. A real respect for sovereignty demands respect for the head of the state you deal with. You don't question his legitimacy, as well as they don't questioned Clinton's, Bush's, Obama or Trump legitimacy. His point of view is that everything goes on in the world should have the US sanction, otherwise is not good. This is imperial hubris, this is arrogance. This flaws his opinion in so far everything is measured upon american likes and dislikes. THis is not statesmanship, this is not scholarship, this is partisanship. He is also intellectually dishonest because he confuses a debate on right and wrong, which should be based on certain assumptions, with a debate on party interests, which has nothing to do with right and wrong, and is based on different assumptions. Indeed he is the less fit person in a debate on responsibility for the New Cold War because he was involved in its development and acutisation. Partisanship is admitted, but shouldn't be disguised as neutrality or given any relevance just because of knowledge of technical details he knows - much of them are, frankly, irrelevant. His points are weak and inconsistent with geopolitical and a realist view of the international relations, they are biased by universal-liberal ideology, they are US-centric, he forgets too many essential points about the whole story. For instance he talks about the missed chance for Russian democracy (here a debate about what democracy is: his assumption is that the US democracy is .... please, don't make me laugh), but he doesn't mention that Soviet people voted in referenda and overwhelmingly wanted the USSR to keep on existing, but he forgets this "detail". He forgets how the so much beloved Elcin sent the tanks against the parliament, many people were killed, how he allowed the pillaging of Russian people and resources by criminal oligarchs (many of them happily hosted by the UK and presented as political dissidents), and how the Russian 1996 were HEAVILY rigged and meddled by the US in order to reconfirm Elcin as a president. He complains about Putin being appointed by Elcin out of nothing. Well I can't recall any American complaints at that time, maybe because they thought he could be an alcoholic puppet like Elcin and that was clearly something the US liked and supported. So what about Obama (fake) words about wishing a strong Russia? Obama spoke derogatory words about Russia. The only American interests about Russia is that is a militarly and strategically weak provider of cheap natural resources and that is not in tne position of competing for anything. I will stop here, although I could write pages and pages about McFlaws .... ooops! McFaul's inconsistency both as a scholar and even more as a statesman's advisor, but the debate was among a great intellectual with a clear vision of the world, and a small professor taken with insignificant details and too much love for Obama and blind believe in liberal universal ideology.

Alex P. , 9 months ago

Mc Faul is clearly not supposed to have been in the positions of power, where he was. Something is fundamentally wrong with America. I think there is a crisis of personnel. Where are all these incredibly smart, high IQ people Harvard, Princeton, and the Ivy Leagues are supposedly pumping out?

Rufus Leaking , 1 week ago

I won't, for a second, try to justify the expansion of N.A.T.O. up to the borders of Russia. But I simply cannot get past the belief that the N.A.T.O. expansion was fueled by a (not implausible) fear that a non-Soviet Russia would eventually try to surround its borders with Moscow-friendly governments, just as Stalin did before, during, and after WWII. Russia has been invaded from the west so many times that the lingering fear of it is almost in the Russian people's genetic code. What the rest of the world sees as Soviet & post-Soviet Russian paranoia and expansionism could plausibly be seen by the Russians as a prudent precaution against further western aggression. I don't AGREE with this, but I can imagine how the Russian psyche might be so inclined. I don't agree with the N.A.T.O. expansion, but I can also see how western paranoia about Russian expansionism would fuel the resulting western "encroachment". Ask people in Latvia, Lithuania & Estonia (and, for that matter, Finland) who were alive in WWII if their fear of Russian expansion is based in reality, or is merely paranoia. Be prepared for "VERY STRONG" answers.

Virgocygni56 , 9 months ago

What is the date of this debate Anyone can suggest?

Bob Trajkoski , 1 year ago

McFaul believes in his own propaganda, irrational person and dangerous at that

Alyson Mc Vitty , 1 year ago

2nd speaker - mcfaul - is and idiot sort of manic.

Jsmes Oercy , 1 year ago

Wow the second guy is such a schmuck ,,z,,trying to be funny and failing

Charles DuBois , 6 months ago

Why does 'our' US/Euro left leave me a pronounced impression that they have some special axe grinding on Russia? Is my take on this wrong? And try as I may to ignore it, my gut reaction to our younger author is highly unfavorable. I shall re-watch tomorrow hoping to listen more obectively.

James Registe , 4 months ago

Who ELSE is to blame, Russia has been making overtures since Kruschev

popiedo , 1 year ago

Mcfaul just rambles and tries to crack jokes.

Colonel Chuck , 1 year ago

McFaul sure runs his mouth about nothing.

Adam Rihak , 3 months ago

Prof. Cohen astonishing realpolitik ingenuity when asked "what the security interests of Ukraine and Georgia are" ( 1:16:21 ) unveils to me his understanding of politics as kind of imperialistic chess game where the US stands against the USSR (or RF for that matter). I have experienced the same feelings from his other debates (I remember one memorable at Munk Debates in 2015) - as if the historic fears, desires and dreams (of NATO or EU membership as the only effective shield against Russian military power) of so many ex-soviet countries means absolutely nothing - as if they were mere puppets of US "regime". As though the legitimate wishes of these sovereign countries means nothing at all. He is so surprised by that question he suddenly can't retrieve even the definition of what security interests of a country actually means - a rather strange quality in a historian. Ultimately he comes up with "they should make peace with their neighbors" - say this to countries that were along their history subjects of Soviet violent repression, military invasions, ethnic genocides and such. "I don't think Russian is a threat to them". Absolutely ridiculous.

Jean-Pierre Delorraine , 8 months ago (edited)

This Michael McFaul individual is such severe laughing-stock completely out of touch with reality. Stephen Cohen's version of the "new cold war" is much closer to reality and we should not forget the nefarious entities that pull the strings in D.C. U.S. covert involvement throughout eastern Europe and especially the Ukraine is more than evident. Putin and Russia in general is not stupid and see right through U.S. covert meddling on Russia's border. And those "peaceful demonstrators" in Syria that MacFaul dearly praises are mere agents of the CIA/Mossad complex. Where are they now?

varro We , 2 years ago (edited)

I think it's fair to say that the US won the cold war, the eastern block was broke, there soviet union was a nightmare for humanity, the west was seen as a bright light and it was. So let's put aside propaganda, ask anyone from the eastern block and they will tell you that what Russia created was a genocide. Just look how fast all of those counties jumped to enter NATO. Soviet union collapsed. It's a very nice discussion and I learn a lot from this, there are a lot of things that US and Russia could have done to prevent another cold war, I think what we are with is with a belief in human wisdom, if there is any left.

[Sep 21, 2020] Pompous Pompeo continues his antics: Pompeo mocked for saying 'no other state' can block MULTILATERAL sanctions US wants to impose on Iran despite UNSC pushback

Sanctions will cost money not only to Iran, but to the USA too.
Sep 21, 2020 | www.rt.com

"If at any time the United States believes Iran has failed to meet its commitments, no other state can block our ability to snap back those multilateral sanctions," Pompeo declared in a statement posted on his official Twitter account on Sunday evening.

The top US diplomat was referring to the avalanche of sanctions Washington has been hellbent on slapping on Tehran after the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) overwhelmingly rejected the US resolution to extend a 13-year arms embargo against the Islamic Republic past October earlier this week.

The humiliating defeat , which saw only one member of the 15-nation body (the Dominican Republic) siding with the US, while China and Russia opposed the resolution, and all other nations, including France and the UK, abstained, did not discourage Washington, which doubled down on its threat to hit Iran with biting sanctions.

... ... ...

"Of course other states can block America's ability to impose multilateral sanctions. The US can impose sanctions by itself, but can't force others to do it," Nicholas Grossman, teaching assistant professor at the Department of Political Science, University of Illinois, tweeted.

"That's what 'multilateral' means. Is our SecState really this dumb?" Grossman asked.

Daniel Larison, senior editor at the American Conservative, suggested that Pompeo might be having a hard time grasping the meaning of the word 'multilateral'.

Some argued that Pompeo could not be unaware of the contradictory nature of his statement. Dan Murphy, former Middle East and South Asia correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor, called it "one of the most diplomatically illiterate sentences of all time."

"I guess the end game here is [to] alienate the rest of the world even further to feed his persecution complex?" Murphy wrote.

John Twomey, 16 August, 2020

Explanation. What Pompeo understands and what many others can't grasp is that the US decides if their sanctions are "multilateral" because the USA speaks for all other countries whether they like it or not.

My Opinion, 17 August, 2020

Reminiscing of his shady past as a new CIA recruit he said. "We lied, we cheated and we stole". Apparently, Mikey didn't do all too well in his literature classes, either and that's why the most suitable candidate from zionists perspective.

[Sep 21, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen- The Ukrainian Crisis - It s not All Putin s Fault

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is no chance of mending relations and even less of achieving some security partnership between US and Russia. The rift will only keep on widening as US political and financial elites are growing increasingly desperate (and thus even more aggressive) while Russia abandons its attempts to please the haters and moves its focus on to its future prospective partners who have genuine interest in cooperating with Russia and achieving common goals.... including opposing the common enemy if you like! Well at least I hope so: the only reason why US wish to get closer to Russia would be to stab it in the back... one more time! ..."
Sep 21, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Gerry Cooney , 3 years ago (edited)

Speaking as an Independent, I say that our country, the USA, has engineered past confilcts and wars in order to feed the military industrial complex. Not so much that it results in a nuke-shooting war, but in a regular non-nuke shooting war. The solution? Send the sons and daughters of the politicians into direct combat, every time they approve another war. That should keep things a bit more peaceful.

Playthell Benjamin , 3 years ago

Professor Cohen is this nation's most objective and therefore most valuable thinker on Russia! The charge that his views are "not patriotic" is a compliment rather than the insult they intended. A scholar's views are only valuable to the public and, more importantly, policy makers, if they are OBJECTIVE!!! Which is to say that he follows the FACTS wherever they lead!

Stratus Blue , 4 years ago

Any "discussion" with no mention of the supranational central bank cartel is intentional deceptive omission. The "brass ring" is forced use of petro-dollars. The central bank stock holders and bankers loaning all dollars into existence as national debt, do not care who owns land. They care who pays off national debts and interest on debt. Civil war is their racket. There are no sovereign nations. No genuine nations that create their medium of exchange publicly. No national people. Just participants in an extortion or its victims. The "Elite" collect on money they created as loans in their central banking accounts. All others are only human numbers assigned billing addresses.

Maria Schick , 4 years ago

Welcome to the New World Order ....where Multinational corporations rule & their profits are what are most important..... NOT nation states it's the 99.9% against the .01% and they use MSM propaganda & fear to control the DUMB masses thinking

Madaleine , 9 months ago

Global mafia in the background! Shut down funding cia ET Al

keepinitreal , 2 years ago

So infuriating that videos that carry the truth have 57k views, while nasty lying propaganda has millions!

SJ R , 4 years ago

I just discovered John Batchelor Show on which Cohen has a guest spot- I just was drawn to this man's thinking, probably because I had made up my mind about Russia during the Ukraine crises. Seeing the US has ruin every country we have gone into- I'm on Russia's side, especially where Russia and Ukraine has a history, on that side of the world.

Santos D , 4 years ago (edited)

38:49 - Apologies for the somewhat Utopian question here. I agree with everything Cohen has said, but regarding cause of jihadist terrorism ( ie implosion of the economies in the region), does it make sense to discuss primarily this game of terrorist whack a mole (bombing, invading and crushing Jihadist insurgencies)? Is there any point in talking about a pro active policy of recreating sustainable, stable economies in the region? What would that even look like?

Cezanne Monet , 11 hours ago

Brilliant scholar. RIP Prof Cohen. Watch if you want to understand today's geopolitical situation. The whole situation.

No Names , 4 years ago (edited)

Not very many average Americans would be able to easily access and watch this. Average Americans still consume mainly mainstream media. Too bad, because this lecture would have opened their eyes and have blown up their brain-contaminated minds by the CNN, the New York Times and alike.

Chris Bowers , 4 years ago

I agree wholeheartedly Loane. Have always been extremely impressed with and appreciative of Cohen's carefully & thoughtfully considered contribution. We in the US have gone a bit off the deep end when it comes to this deeply embedded belief in exceptionalism and superiority, and have been extremely rude to much of the rest of the world in the process. It amazes me how patient Russia has been with us, waiting for us to come around to a more sober understanding of the world we live in today. I have to conclude that what we are experiencing here in the US is a perennial phenomenon that comes with the end of all empires throughout history, the mission creep of over-extending resources and the big one, seemingly blind hubris.

M Ch , 4 years ago

There is no chance of mending relations and even less of achieving some security partnership between US and Russia. The rift will only keep on widening as US political and financial elites are growing increasingly desperate (and thus even more aggressive) while Russia abandons its attempts to please the haters and moves its focus on to its future prospective partners who have genuine interest in cooperating with Russia and achieving common goals.... including opposing the common enemy if you like! Well at least I hope so: the only reason why US wish to get closer to Russia would be to stab it in the back... one more time!

Raf Zam , 3 years ago (edited)

NATO'S reason to exist ended when the Warsaw Pact was demolished. It was created to confront the socialist Warsaw Pact but today ALL of the members of the pact are part of NATO, except Russia. So why is it still operating? Who are they confronting? They are a bunch of bureaucrats looking for a reason to stay employed in an organization that lost its excuse to be. However, their behavior has gone from increasing security to actually becoming a menace to trigger a nuclear war to destroy life on earth.

Donald Watts , 4 years ago

It will take a Republican President to turn our relationships with hostile nations around. For some irrational reasoning, the current administration refuses negotiation with it's enemies. Somehow this is going to create understanding. and a less dangerous world. I don't see a continuation of this Administrations policy anything but reckless . I am assuming this policy has been one determined through Clinton, and will remain so. Clinton has said on a number of occasions, it is the Obama Administration's policies that will be hers as well. As an ex cold warrior, who has spent a lot of time chasing Soviet boomers in the North Atlantic, I am not willing to gamble my children and grand children's lives . It is a dangerous and ego driven pissing match. Let us start talking , This administration and families can climb into their luxury nuclear bomb proof bunkers...... My family and most Americans don't have that luxury.

William Carr , 3 years ago

Dr. Cohen, so Putin gave the Northern Alliance to the USA after 911 to bludgeon Afghanistan for hiding Bin Laden? Paul Craig Robert, David Ray Griffin and a growing list of Americans believe 911 was a total bamboozle. If that is true which it looks increasingly like it was, does that mean Putin was playing along with the our Reichstag fire? What does that make Putin? NATO should have been totally remade after 1986, but it wasn't and we simply missed a huge opportunity not for worldwide U.S. hegemony, but for a new umbrella of security by super powers in alliance. Obviously, the proliferation of ethno-religious groups was in Putin's mind when he welcomed us into Afghanistan, but damn it man, tell people EXACTLY why we and the Russians want to be in the Golden Crescent besides the extraction of minerals.

[Sep 21, 2020] Stephen Cohen at the AJC 2017 Forum, about Russia and Terrorism

Highly recommended!
This was a really bright mind
Julia Ioffe is a joke -- she is essentially a typical "national security parasite" and of the level that surprisingly, is lower that Max Boor, although previously I thought this is impossible. Julia Ioffe is very typical of the anti-Russian thinking in the West.
Jun 23, 2017 | www.youtube.com

Stephen Cohen at the American Jewish Committee Forum 2017, about Russia and Terrorism. Full debate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0rtr...

alo1, 3 years ago

And again, Cohen smashed these government employers singlehandedly.

Drew Hunkins, 3 years ago

This incessant Russophobia constantly being trumpeted by the Washington militarist imperialists must stop. It's putting the world on the brink of nuclear war.

Stephen Cohen's a godsend along with a handful of the other intellectuals out there speaking and writing the truth that penetrates the miasma of disinformation, half-truths and exaggerations emanating from the state-corporate nexus in the American mass media.

Cohen, along with John Pilger, James Petras, Robert Parry, Michael Parenti, John Pilger, Eva Bartlett, Diana Johnstone and Paul Craig Roberts must be read widely in order for folks to get a grasp of where the Washington imperialist ruling class is driving the world.

mitrovdan, 3 years ago

at 25:40 he just destroys her totally. what a point he made, amazing!! "thank you professor" the guy on the left wants to end Cohen's carnage of the so called experts. Cohen made minced meat out of em. Fact after fact...stonewalled em both. Listen to her, ISIS doesn't have nuke's, she obviously doesn't have a clue.

MrWebster, 3 years ago

Cohen is always cogent and convincing. One area I wish some historian would look into is how "Russia-gate" is not echoing Cold War themes, but echoing themes from the German Nazis in particular their belief about a great Jewish conspiracy against Europe.

Even Putin recently remarked on all these accusations: "It reminds me of anti-Semitism, A dumb man who can't do anything would blame the Jews for everything." Look at how Putin is drawn and pictured on major outlets. The NYTimes blamed resistance to TPP on Putin.

The Russians like the Jews are behind every social problem. Popular culture shows and speaks of Russia in the same way Nazi propagandists wrote about Russia.

Undermining Western liberal democracies, Jews were compared to spiders catching people in the webs. Same with Putin. Pick up Hitler's speech after the invasion of the Soviet Union justifying it., Echos? Accidental rhetoric of conspiracies ?

DSCdaP, 3 years ago

"to look past a long list of transgressions and abuses..." this is what I absolutely hate about America, they are all so stupid and ignorant to their own countries misdeeds it is unbelievable, infuriating beyond belief. The US is currently fighting 7 wars simultaneously, which it all started itself under false pretences and hid the real reason beneath a thick layer of BS propaganda and misinformation.

The secession of Crimea is the least egregious event of the entire conflicts history. The EU and US have pumped billions of dollars into the coup which took place weeks before the Crimean referendum, on the 20th of February 2014, 2 weeks prior to that, an intercepted phone conversation between Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State of the United States to Europe) and Geoffrey Pyatt (US Ambassador to the Ukraine) was leaked on February 4th, 2014. In this phone conversation, they describe key positions within the Ukrainian government being filled by Klitshko and Yatz... fast forward a few weeks, who do we see? Klitsh and Yatz! It was the most obvious sponsored coup in history.

Putin snatched the Crimean peninsula from NATO, who wanted to seize Russias military harbour in Sevastopol (which the Russians have used to supply Syria, this was one and a half years before they entered the conflict directly, apart from being a very important strategic harbour in general), by suggesting a referendum to the local government and they accepted.

Why? Because they were ethnic Russians and knew who gained power in Kiev, the neo-Nazi, Bandera-worshipping OUN, which the US has nourished, supported and developed for the last 100 years within the Ukrainian territory. These Nazis hate Russians, they have a deep seeded hatred of all things Russian which has been indoctrinated and drilled into them by the CIA for decades, the first thing they did after seizing power was to demote the Russian language from the official list of languages of the Ukraine.

They have since honoured Ukrainian Nazi-collaborators from WWII by erecting statues, renaming streets, creating new holidays etc. This is just one example of US misinformation and propaganda, nothing they say accurately describes the truth, nothing, not one thing has it's bases in reality. Be it about Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and what have you, it's all lies and propaganda to mask their intentions.

North Korea is another example. North Korea is a hornets nest they kick once in a while to scare the Japanese and South Koreans into tolerating US occupation longer. Everything North Korea does is a direct response to threats and intimidations by the US. They staged a drill off the coast of North Korea which they called "Decapitation" for F's sake.

They have ratcheted up the tension again these past few months to sneak in their THAAD weapons stations, before the new President was chosen. And these THAAD systems have absolutely nothing to do with North Korea, it's against China and Russia, North Korea is a pretext.

The still active war, which has merely been under a seize fire for decades, against North Korea, could have been ended before there was colour television, but the US needs North Korea to exist in order to justify their occupation of S.Korea and Japan.

MrRondonmon , 1 day ago

And by the way, the CrowdStrike guy testified in 2017 that there was ZERO PROOF that the Russians hacked the DNC, but Schiff hid that for 2 years until John Ratcliff threatened to declassify it, then Schiff's sorry ass released the interviews. So, this man was 100 percent right, there is ZERO PROOF the Russians or anyone hacked the DNC. Its a damned lie, and it was always a lie.

Patty Rogers , 3 years ago

As usual, the journalists and leftist have nothing to offer- no facts, no forensic evidence, no truth. Only speculation hyperbole and hysteria. I don't believe Russia are the good guys but give me a break in all this crap!

beija flor , 2 years ago (edited)

why did cohen tell everyone even potential 'terrorists' that there is too much of exactly what 'terrorists' wish to get their hands on in the former soviet states?!!? if he is 'so afraid' of 'terrorism...' WHY did he say THAT?!!? not very bright... or perhaps he is FOS. idk?! wth?! SMH. maybe e is trying to inform people who r not 'terrorists,' so that people know n can figure out how to address the issues...?

Yet, for any terrorists who wanted to know how to get materials he spoke of, now they may know a region where they could potentially go to attain the materials... maybe in 'terrorists' circles they all know this already? it just seems concerning, is all...

Beth Lemmon, 2 years ago (edited)

Love Stephen Cohen, he is spot on and right about most if not all points, he's fair, wicked smart and sober minded. However he isn't right about POTUS Trump. If anyone has been watching this type of discourse about world geopolitics it looks like the NWO wants wars to depopulate the earth, set up a OWG and a utopia. It's so blatantly obvious to those who are honest and not ideologically possessed.

They recruit their stupid Antifa army and zombie possessed minions to do their dirty work in the streets. They want send our amazing military to do the fighting wars that are just to feed the MIC, and does nothing for America's good.

[Sep 21, 2020] Stephen Cohen Has Died. Remember His Urgent Warnings Against The New Cold War by Caitlin Johnstone

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God
"... In a world that is increasingly confusing and awash with propaganda, Cohen's death is a blow to humanity's desperate quest for clarity and understanding. ..."
Sep 19, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

Stephen F Cohen, the renowned American scholar on Russia and leading authority on US-Russian relations, has died of lung cancer at the age of 81.

As one of the precious few western voices of sanity on the subject of Russia while everyone else has been frantically flushing their brains down the toilet, this is a real loss. I myself have cited Cohen's expert analysis many times in my own work, and his perspective has played a formative role in my understanding of what's really going on with the monolithic cross-partisan manufacturing of consent for increased western aggressions against Moscow.

In a world that is increasingly confusing and awash with propaganda, Cohen's death is a blow to humanity's desperate quest for clarity and understanding.

I don't know how long Cohen had cancer. I don't know how long he was aware that he might not have much time left on this earth. What I do know is he spent much of his energy in his final years urgently trying to warn the world about the rapidly escalating danger of nuclear war, which in our strange new reality he saw as in many ways completely unprecedented.

The last of the many books Cohen authored was 2019's War with Russia? , detailing his ideas on how the complex multi-front nature of the post-2016 cold war escalations against Moscow combines with Russiagate and other factors to make it in some ways more dangerous even than the most dangerous point of the previous cold war.

"You know it's easy to joke about this, except that we're at maybe the most dangerous moment in US-Russian relations in my lifetime, and maybe ever," Cohen told The Young Turks in 2017. "And the reason is that we're in a new cold war, by whatever name. We have three cold war fronts that are fraught with the possibility of hot war, in the Baltic region where NATO is carrying out an unprecedented military buildup on Russia's border, in Ukraine where there is a civil and proxy war between Russia and the west, and of course in Syria, where Russian aircraft and American warplanes are flying in the same territory. Anything could happen."

Cohen repeatedly points to the most likely cause of a future nuclear war: not one that is planned but one which erupts in tense, complex situations where "anything could happen" in the chaos and confusion as a result of misfire, miscommunication or technical malfunction, as nearly happened many times during the last cold war.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/kqQbK_6meM8?feature=oembed

"I think this is the most dangerous moment in American-Russian relations, at least since the Cuban missile crisis," Cohen told Democracy Now in 2017. "And arguably, it's more dangerous, because it's more complex. Therefore, we -- and then, meanwhile, we have in Washington these -- and, in my judgment, factless accusations that Trump has somehow been compromised by the Kremlin. So, at this worst moment in American-Russian relations, we have an American president who's being politically crippled by the worst imaginable -- it's unprecedented. Let's stop and think. No American president has ever been accused, essentially, of treason. This is what we're talking about here, or that his associates have committed treason."

"Imagine, for example, John Kennedy during the Cuban missile crisis," Cohen added. "Imagine if Kennedy had been accused of being a secret Soviet Kremlin agent. He would have been crippled. And the only way he could have proved he wasn't was to have launched a war against the Soviet Union. And at that time, the option was nuclear war."

"A recurring theme of my recently published book War with Russia? is that the new Cold War is more dangerous, more fraught with hot war, than the one we survived," Cohen wrote last year . "Histories of the 40-year US-Soviet Cold War tell us that both sides came to understand their mutual responsibility for the conflict, a recognition that created political space for the constant peace-keeping negotiations, including nuclear arms control agreements, often known as détente. But as I also chronicle in the book, today's American Cold Warriors blame only Russia, specifically 'Putin's Russia,' leaving no room or incentive for rethinking any US policy toward post-Soviet Russia since 1991."

"Finally, there continues to be no effective, organized American opposition to the new Cold War," Cohen added. "This too is a major theme of my book and another reason why this Cold War is more dangerous than was its predecessor. In the 1970s and 1980s, advocates of détente were well-organized, well-funded, and well-represented, from grassroots politics and universities to think tanks, mainstream media, Congress, the State Department, and even the White House. Today there is no such opposition anywhere."

"A major factor is, of course, 'Russiagate'," Cohen continued. "As evidenced in the sources I cite above, much of the extreme American Cold War advocacy we witness today is a mindless response to President Trump's pledge to find ways to 'cooperate with Russia' and to the still-unproven allegations generated by it. Certainly, the Democratic Party is not an opposition party in regard to the new Cold War."

"Détente with Russia has always been a fiercely opposed, crisis-ridden policy pursuit, but one manifestly in the interests of the United States and the world," Cohen wrote in another essay last year. "No American president can achieve it without substantial bipartisan support at home, which Trump manifestly lacks. What kind of catastrophe will it take -- in Ukraine, the Baltic region, Syria, or somewhere on Russia's electric grid -- to shock US Democrats and others out of what has been called, not unreasonably, their Trump Derangement Syndrome, particularly in the realm of American national security? Meanwhile, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has recently reset its Doomsday Clock to two minutes before midnight."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/owbMRxC382A?feature=oembed

And now Stephen Cohen is dead, and that clock is inching ever closer to midnight. The Russiagate psyop that he predicted would pressure Trump to advance dangerous cold war escalations with no opposition from the supposed opposition party has indeed done exactly that with nary a peep of criticism from either partisan faction of the political/media class. Cohen has for years been correctly predicting this chilling scenario which now threatens the life of every organism on earth, even while his own life was nearing its end.

And now the complex cold war escalations he kept urgently warning us about have become even more complex with the addition of nuclear-armed China to the multiple fronts the US-centralized empire has been plate-spinning its brinkmanship upon, and it is clear from the ramping up of anti-China propaganda since last year that we are being prepped for those aggressions to continue to increase.

We should heed the dire warnings that Cohen spent his last breaths issuing. We should demand a walk-back of these insane imperialist aggressions which benefit nobody and call for détente with Russia and China. We should begin creating an opposition to this world-threatening flirtation with armageddon before it is too late. Every life on this planet may well depend on our doing so.

Stephen Cohen is dead, and we are marching toward the death of everything. God help us all.

medium.com

lay_arrow

novictim , 55 minutes ago

People are just now starting to realize that possible alternate path. But the Demoncrats in the USA must first be put down, politically euthanized, along with their neocon never-Trump Republican partners. And that cleaning up is on the way. Trump's second term will be the advancement of the USA-Russia initiative that is so long overdue.

PerilouseTimes , 48 minutes ago

Putin won't let western billionaires rape Russia's enormous natural resources and on top of that Putin is against child molesters, that is what this Russia bashing is all about.

awesomepic4u , 1 hour ago

Sad to hear this.

What a good man. It is a real shame that we dont have others to stand up to this crazy pr that is going on right now. Making peace with the world at this point is important. We dont need or want another war and i am sure that both Europe and Russia dont want it on their turf but it seems we keep sticking our finger in their eye. If there is another war it will be the last war. As Einstein said, after the 3rd World War we will be using sticks and stones to fight it.

Clint Liquor , 44 minutes ago

Cohen truly was an island of reason in a sea of insanity. Ironic that those panicked over climate change are unconcerned about the increasing threat of Nuclear War.

thunderchief , 41 minutes ago

One of the very few level headed people on Russia.

All thats left are anti Russia-phobic nut jobs.

Send in the clowns.

Stephen Cohen isn't around to call them what they are anymore.

Eastern Whale , 55 minutes ago

cooperate with Russia

Has the US ever cooperated with anyone?

fucking truth , 3 minutes ago

That is the crux. All or nothing.

Mustafa Kemal , 49 minutes ago

Ive read several of his books. They are essential, imo, if you want to understand modern russian history.

Normal , 1 hour ago

The bankers created the new CCP cold war.

evoila , 19 minutes ago

Max Boot is an effing idiot. Tucker wiped him clean too. It was an insult to Stephen to even put them on the same panel.

RIP Stephen.

Gary Sick is the equivalent to Stephen, except for Iran. He too is of an era of competence which is and will be missed as their voices are drowned out by neocon warmongers

thebigunit , 17 minutes ago

I heard Stephen Cohen a number of time in John Bachelor's podcasts.

He seemed very lucid and made a lot of sense.

He made it very clear that he thought the Democrat's "Trump - Russia collusion schtick" was a bunch of crap.

He didn't sound like a leftie, but I'm sure he never told me the stuff he discussed with his wife who was editor of the left wing "The Nation" magazine.

Boogity , 9 minutes ago

Cohen was a traditional old school anti-war Liberal. They're essentially extinct now with the exception of a few such as Tulsi Gabbard and Dennis Kucinich who have both been ostracized from the Democrat Party and the political system.

[Sep 20, 2020] Democratic-Defense-Against-Disinformation-2.0.pdf by Alina Polyakova and Daniel Fried

Counter disinformation network can't revive the dead chicken of neoliberal ideology.
Neoliberal elite lost legitimacy and as such has difficulties controlling the narrative. That's why all this frantic efforts were launched to rectify the situation.
Anti-Russian angle of Atlantic council revealed here quite clearly
Sep 20, 2020 | www.brookings.edu

The paper's biggest single recommendation was that the United States and EU establish a Counter-Disinformation Coalition, a public/private group bringing together, on a regular basis, government and non-government stakeholders, including social media companies, traditional media, Internet service providers (ISPs), and civil society groups. The Counter-Disinformation Coalition would develop best practices for confronting disinformation from nondemocratic countries, consistent with democratic norms. It also recommended that this coalition start with a voluntary code of conduct outlining principles and agreed procedures for dealing with disinformation, drawing from the recommendations as summarized above.

In drawing up these recommendations, we were aware that disinformation most often comes from domestic, not foreign, sources. 8 While Russian and other disinformation players are known to work in coordination with domestic purveyors of disinformation, both overtly and covertly, the recommendations are limited to foreign disinformation, which falls within the scope of "political warfare." Nevertheless, it may be that these policy recommendations, particularly those focused on transparency and social resilience, may be applicable to combatting other forms of disinformation.

[Sep 20, 2020] Darren Beattie Tucker Carlson Discuss Color Revolutions The Plot To Oust President Trump

Trump represent new "national neoliberalism" platform and the large part of the US neoliberal elite (Clinton gang and large part of republicans) support the return to "classic neoliberalism" at all costs.
Highly recommended!
The essence of color revolution is the combination of engineered contested election and mass organized protest and civil disobedience via creation in neoliberal fifth column out of "professionals", especially students as well as mobilizing and put on payroll some useful disgruntled groups which can be used as a foot soldiers, such as football hooligans. Large and systematic injection of dollars into protest movement. All with the air cover via domination in a part or all nation's MSM.
Norm Eisen - Wikipedia quote "From 1985 to 1988, between college and law school, Eisen worked as the Assistant Director of the Los Angeles office of the Anti-Defamation League . He investigated antisemitism and other civil rights violations, promoted Holocaust education and advanced U.S.–Israel relations ."
He served as US ambassador in Chich Republic from 2011 to 2014. Based on his experience wrote that book Democracy's Defenders published by The Brookings Institution, a neoliberal think tank, about the role of US embassy in neoliberal revolution in Czechoslovakia (aka Velvet Revolution of 1989) which led to the dissolution of the country into two. BTW demonstrations against police brutality were an essential part of the Velvet Revolution
Notable quotes:
"... Same tactics - color revolutions they (Soros, Nuland/Kagan, Eisen, McCain when alive) used to overthrow Orthodox countries in Eastern Europe. Belarus the latest. Ukraine (Orange, Maidan) 2014. Georgia (Rose rev). Serbia, Montenegro. Use young people who have bad sense of history and are more sympathetic to the "West." ..."
Sep 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

P McGill , 3 days ago

This is, without ANY question, one of Tucker's most important segments that he has ever done. IT IS EXTREMELY-RARE THAT """they""" ARE EXPOSED, BY-NAME, SO OPENLY AND DIRECTLY, BUT, IT HAPPENED, TONIGHT.

CJ Daly , 4 days ago

Please bring back Dr. Darren Beattie back. More info. on the color revolutions, Mr. Eisen, crew, and their relationship to mail in voting fraud and their impact on the 2020 election is needed. If Mr. Eisens methods are to be used in the 2020 election mass awareness is needed.

john doe , 2 days ago

This is not about Trump. The endgame of the deep state is to enslave people through social division. The election is a wrestling match for entertainment.

Chuck Emmorll , 2 days ago

Norm Eisen's loyalty? Israel?

viewoftheaskew , 3 days ago (edited)

Norm Eisen..., "Obama's Ethics Czar" wow that's a triple oxymoron lol.

Hapa Nice Day , 3 days ago (edited)

Purple is the color of this revolution. Remember the outfits Bill and Hillary wore when Hillary conceded to Trump.

Dave being , 2 days ago

Sounds like what's happening in Venezuela.

John Singer , 1 day ago

The deep state are plotting against the American people 24/7. Russia hoax was a coup, they will try it again.

sandra macey , 3 days ago

Sheesh, he looks scared. I hope he's being well protected now. Darren is a very brave man who is trying to tell the citizens of the US that there is malice aforethought towards the President and this election. It is now not a choice between Republicans or Democrats, it is a fight between good and evil. I'm sure Trump and his team are aware of the playbook and will do everything they can to sort this, with God's help. It may get hairy, but trust the plan.

Jordan Spackman , 2 hours ago

I have a feeling dems will "rig for red" to frame republicans for voter fraud, overlooking the overwhelming amount of voter fraud in favor of Biden Harris. Causing outrage and calls to remove the President from office and saying Biden actually won. When he really did not. Be prepared. Stay strong.

Peter Jones , 3 days ago

Same tactics - color revolutions they (Soros, Nuland/Kagan, Eisen, McCain when alive) used to overthrow Orthodox countries in Eastern Europe. Belarus the latest. Ukraine (Orange, Maidan) 2014. Georgia (Rose rev). Serbia, Montenegro. Use young people who have bad sense of history and are more sympathetic to the "West."

Nick Name , 2 days ago

american people still don't know and can't understand what's happening and what their government is doing, even right now it's happening in Belarus, it happened in Ukraine, Venezuela, Hong Kong and etc. and now it's happening in your own country, wake up people and don't forget who's behind all this - a NGO founded by CIA called NED (National endowment for democracy), Soros and his NGOs and the deep state.

[Sep 19, 2020] The Kremlin Plans to Modernize Russia, Again - The Nation

Sep 19, 2020 | www.thenation.com

Putin's quest for a transformed nation and his own legacy. By Stephen F. Cohen FEBRUARY 21, 2020 fb tw mail Print Flag of Russian Federation with gilded coat of arms waving on the dome of Senate Palace of Moscow Kremlin

(Vladimir Zhupanenko / Shutterstock)

Ready To Fight Back? Sign up for Take Action Now and get three actions in your inbox every week.

You will receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation's journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.

T he US media's three-year obsession with the mostly fictitious allegations of "Russiagate" has all but obscured, even deleted, important, potentially historic, developments inside that nation itself, still the world's largest territorial country. One of the most important is the Putin government's decision to invest $300-to-$400 billion of "rainy day" funds in the nation's infrastructure, especially in its vast, underdeveloped provinces, and on "national projects" ranging from education to health care and family services to transportation and other technology. If successfully implemented, Russia would be substantially transformed and the lives of its people significantly improved.

Not surprisingly, however, the plan has aroused considerable controversy and public debate in Russia's policy elite, primarily for two reasons. The funds were accumulated largely due to high world prices for Russia's energy exports and the state's budgetary austerity during the decade after Putin came to power in 2000, and they have been hoarded as a safeguard against Western economic sanctions and/or a global economic depression. (Russia's economic collapse in the Yeltsin 1990s, perhaps the worst modern-day depression in peacetime, remains a vivid memory for policy-makers and ordinary citizens alike.)

There is also the nation's long, sometimes traumatic, history of "modernization from above," as it is termed. In the late 19th century, the czarist regime's program to industrialize the country, "to catch up" with other world powers, had unintended consequences that led, in the accounts of many historians, to the end of czarism in the 1917 revolution. And Stalin's "revolution from above" of the 1930s, based on the forced collectivization of the peasantry, which at the time accounted for more than 80 percent of the population, along with very rapid industrialization, resulted in millions of deaths and economic distortions that burdened Soviet and post-Soviet Russia for decades.

Top Articles Countdown to Election: 52 Days READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE READ MORE SKIP AD

Nor are Russia's alternative experiences of modernization from below inspiring or at least instructive. In the 1920s, during the years known as the New Economic Policy, or NEP, the victorious Bolsheviks pursued evolutionary economic development through a semi-regulated market economy. It had mixed -- and still disputed -- results, and it was brutally abolished by Stalin in 1929. Decades later, Yeltsin's "free-market reforms" were widely blamed for the ruination and widespread misery of the 1990s, which featured many aspects of actual de-modernization.

With all this "living history" in mind, Putin's plan for such large-scale (and rapid) investment has generated the controversy in Moscow and resulted in three positions within the policy class. One fully supports the decision on the essentially Keynesian grounds that it will spur Russia's annual economic growth, which has lagged below the global average for several years. Another opposes such massive expenditures, arguing that the funds must remain in state hands as a safeguard against the US-led "sanctions war" (and perhaps worse) against Russia. And, as usual in politics, there is a compromise position that less should be invested in civilian infrastructure and less quickly.

Running through the discussion is also Russia's long history of thwarted implementation of good intentions. To paraphrase a prime minister during the 1990s, Viktor Chernomyrdin , "We wanted things to turn out for the best, but they turned out as usual." In particular, it is often asked, what will be the consequences of putting so much money into the hands of regional and other local officials in provinces where corruption is endemic? How much will be stolen or otherwise misdirected?

https://buy.tinypass.com/checkout/template/show?displayMode=inline&containerSelector=.inline-counter&templateId=OTFVM3RHWZ0B&offerId=fakeOfferId&showCloseButton=false&trackingId=%7Bjcx%7DH4sIAAAAAAAAAF2Q3VLCMBCF3yXXhNk0aZrlrioijNrRUWC8S5MAkbbUNgjo-O4Wxp_Rvdv9zjlzZt-J9pYMyG050mL8Nru6Jj1S66WbercbH0kEEVBAypBGEWWScqQxT2jdXvJmeHjaNEatx21KmQEu0ERKKOQoYpcvYpNEOmFCJtwsumC3r13jXWXcKXo4TzOY4_kdiPQPHe6d2Qa_qU4ylgtVmCWUikI3UYgRV02N-Yt9rsqysl6H9R9_an7M7Wqze3BlXejg1GTCZ3LGs1Gazee8s6x0-w3JIDRb1yPhaz-5s4fL6Q2_v5o9wRn5ZVPdeF2Fo6TaFkWPGF3W2i-r9vvw6lt_4uSV_vsgUKZoLDh9dCo7wEUo7kGfsVGHMJcJWLDoEmYtSqvB4MJaqWPLTd418HUXKVWfIfYjkH2luuO2dU26dFXomN2ZY9FQkAGTADIWMYqPT-ywOHvnAQAA&experienceId=EXAO0X9CQ04A&activeMeters=%5B%7B%22meterName%22%3A%22In+article+Meter%22%2C%22views%22%3A2%2C%22viewsLeft%22%3A1%2C%22maxViews%22%3A3%2C%22totalViews%22%3A2%7D%5D&tbc=%7Bjzx%7DvaV6Q-AgGJ_DiTS_QNn8FA6olpAEC_GKej-sdbqQpRIS-Kfr2XuQ_uJ7-VsMBs9sgdDzuDJGAIvwcZFWTCJIbM0i5t_YYdOlPsJmO-rAn6uIfIuoy1Hh_-p5REhASnboV4_aTgrddjKMmaM4SpBJ-g&iframeId=offer-0-3Bn8A&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Fworld%2Fthe-kremlin-plans-to-modernize-russia-again%2F&parentDualScreenLeft=1536&parentDualScreenTop=0&parentWidth=1536&parentHeight=714&parentOuterHeight=864&aid=NmGa4IzWHL&tags=foreign-policy%2Cmedia-analysis%2Cworld%2Cworld-leaders%2Ccold-war%2Ceconomic-development%2Crussia%2Csanctions%2Cvladimir-putin%2Cstephen-f-cohen&contentSection=article&contentAuthor=Stephen+F.+Cohen&contentCreated=2020-02-21T11%3A22%3A45-05%3A00&pageViewId=2020-09-19-22-16-39-537-psF3rEyZorc8kIsA-1c0349c284893945ebf5c72a714673cf&visitId=v-2020-09-19-22-10-18-543-Ue8Oy0DtlR0aB1G2-19b670d0d9e71dd96da0c9fdd6a5d3cb&userProvider=publisher_user_ref&userToken=&customCookies=%7B%22_pc_aclu_light_box_signup_confirm%22%3A%22true%22%2C%22_pc_exit_popup_signup_confirm%22%3A%22true%22%7D&hasLoginRequiredCallback=true&width=640&_qh=778f7c0f82

Nonetheless, Putin seems to be resolute. He is also insistent that his ambitious plan to transform Russia requires a long period of international peace and stability. Here again is plain evidence that those in Washington who insist Putin's primary goal is "to sow discord, divisions, and instability" in the world, especially in the West, where he hopes to find "modernizing partnerships," do not care about or understand what is actually unfolding inside Russia -- or Putin's vision of his own historical role and legacy.

Listen to the podcast here .

https://buy.tinypass.com/checkout/template/show?displayMode=inline&containerSelector=%23tp-meter&templateId=OT6SYOE39OW8&offerId=fakeOfferId&showCloseButton=false&trackingId=%7Bjcx%7DH4sIAAAAAAAAAF2Q3U_CMBTF_5c-U3L7sa7lbcpQopFEPuWttGU0bmNuRUDj_-5GxETv272_c05O7ifS3qIBeiruNB9_LO8fUQ9VOnML747jjlCggEFhojClmAjMFI5YjKtmxOr0vN7XRr6OmwQTA4wrQyWXiikeuc02MjHVMeEiZmbbBrtT5WrvSuMu0enq_nm1HCaj-Wr6h6YnZw7B78uLjGy4zE0GhcTQDg2RUru6siCBFhp2ufBv_I8_Mb_mZrc_zlxR5To4NkxgePM0X98-PAjZOna6uTI0CPXB9VD42S_myUxMXyYpU5NlJ7-yha69LkMnKQ953kNGF5X2WdlcD---8ReO3vG_BwImEkec4bmTkzMMQ_4M-obctUhtRAwWrHIxsVYJq8GorbVCR5aZTdvAV22kkH2iVJ-C6Muu1qFxdZK5MrTMHk1XNORoQASAiHik-Nc3m0Kac-YBAAA&experienceId=EXHRXWDAFUXS&activeMeters=%5B%7B%22meterName%22%3A%22PaywallMeter%22%2C%22views%22%3A2%2C%22viewsLeft%22%3A0%2C%22maxViews%22%3A2%2C%22totalViews%22%3A2%7D%5D&tbc=%7Bjzx%7DvaV6Q-AgGJ_DiTS_QNn8FA6olpAEC_GKej-sdbqQpRIS-Kfr2XuQ_uJ7-VsMBs9sgdDzuDJGAIvwcZFWTCJIbM0i5t_YYdOlPsJmO-rAn6uIfIuoy1Hh_-p5REhASnboV4_aTgrddjKMmaM4SpBJ-g&iframeId=offer-1-0qx8T&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Fworld%2Fthe-kremlin-plans-to-modernize-russia-again%2F&parentDualScreenLeft=1536&parentDualScreenTop=0&parentWidth=1536&parentHeight=714&parentOuterHeight=864&aid=NmGa4IzWHL&tags=foreign-policy%2Cmedia-analysis%2Cworld%2Cworld-leaders%2Ccold-war%2Ceconomic-development%2Crussia%2Csanctions%2Cvladimir-putin%2Cstephen-f-cohen&contentSection=article&contentAuthor=Stephen+F.+Cohen&contentCreated=2020-02-21T11%3A22%3A45-05%3A00&pageViewId=2020-09-19-22-16-39-537-psF3rEyZorc8kIsA-1c0349c284893945ebf5c72a714673cf&visitId=v-2020-09-19-22-10-18-543-Ue8Oy0DtlR0aB1G2-19b670d0d9e71dd96da0c9fdd6a5d3cb&userProvider=publisher_user_ref&userToken=&customCookies=%7B%22_pc_aclu_light_box_signup_confirm%22%3A%22true%22%2C%22_pc_exit_popup_signup_confirm%22%3A%22true%22%7D&hasLoginRequiredCallback=true&width=1519&_qh=1386bd0691

Stephen F. Cohen Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. A Nation contributing editor, his most recent book, War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate , is available in paperback and in an ebook edition. His weekly conversations with the host of The John Batchelor Show , now in their seventh year, are available at www.thenation.com .

[Sep 19, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen, Influential Historian of Russia, Dies at 81 - The New York Times

Sep 19, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

By Robert D. McFadden

Stephen F. Cohen, an eminent historian whose books and commentaries on Russia examined the rise and fall of Communism, Kremlin dictatorships and the emergence of a post-Soviet nation still struggling for identity in the 21st century, died on Friday at his home in Manhattan. He was 81.

His wife, Katrina vanden Heuvel, the publisher and part owner of The Nation, said the cause was lung cancer.

From the sprawling conflicts of the 1917 Bolshevik revolution and the tyrannies of Stalin to the collapse of the Soviet Union and Vladimir V. Putin's intrigues to retain power, Professor Cohen chronicled a Russia of sweeping social upheavals and the passions and poetry of peoples that endured a century of wars, political repression and economic hardships.

A professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University, he was fluent in Russian, visited Russia frequently and developed contacts among intellectual dissidents and government and Communist Party officials. He wrote or edited 10 books and many articles for The Nation, The New York Times and other publications, was a CBS-TV commentator and counted President George Bush and many American and Soviet officials among his sources.

ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story

https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

In Moscow he was befriended by the last Soviet leader, Mikhail S. Gorbachev, who invited him to the May Day celebration at Red Square in 1989. There, at the Lenin Mausoleum, Professor Cohen stood with his wife and son one tier below Mr. Gorbachev and the Soviet leadership to view a three-hour military parade. He later spoke briefly on Russian television to a vast audience about alternative paths that Russian history could have taken.

Loosely identified with a revisionist historical view of the Soviet Union, Professor Cohen held views that made him a controversial public intellectual. He believed that early Bolshevism had held great promise, that it had been democratic and genuinely socialist, and that it had been corrupted only later by civil war, foreign hostility, Stalin's malignancy and a fatalism in Russian history.

Subscribe for $1 a week.

A traditionalist school of thought, by contrast, held that the Soviet experiment had been flawed from the outset, that Lenin's political vision was totalitarian, and that any attempt to create a society based on his coercive utopianism had always been likely to lead, logically, to Stalin's state terrorism and to the Soviet Union's eventual collapse.

Professor Cohen was an enthusiastic supporter of Mr. Gorbachev, who after coming to power in 1985 undertook ambitious changes to liberate the nation's 15 republics from state controls that had originally been imposed by Stalin. Mr. Gorbachev gave up power as the Soviet state imploded at the end of 1991 and moved toward beliefs in democracy and a market economy.

Image
Mr. Cohen first came to international attention in 1973 with his biography of Lenin's protégé Nikolai Bukharin.

A prolific writer who mined Soviet archives, Professor Cohen first came to international attention in 1973 with "Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution," a biography of Lenin's protégé Nikolai Bukharin, who envisioned Communism as a blend of state-run industries and free-market agriculture. Critics generally applauded the work, which was a finalist for a National Book Award. Editors' Picks Who Gets Hurt When the World Stops Using Cash Films Hit Festivals Trying to Create Buzz Without a Crowd A Timely Collection of Vital Writing by Audre Lorde Continue reading the main story

https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story

"Stephen Cohen's full-scale study of Bukharin is the first major study of this remarkable associate of Lenin," Harrison Salisbury's wrote in a review in The Times. "As such it constitutes a milestone in Soviet studies, the byproduct both of increased academic sophistication in the use of Soviet materials and also of the very substantial increase in basic information which has become available in the 20 years since Stalin's death."

After Lenin's death, Mr. Bukharin became a victim of Stalin's Moscow show trials in 1938; he was accused of plotting against Stalin and executed. His widow, Anna Mikhailovna Larina, spent 20 years in exile and in prison camps and campaigned for Mr. Bukharin's rehabilitation, which was endorsed by Mr. Gorbachev in 1988.

Ms. Larina and Professor Cohen became friends. Given access to Bukharin archives, he found and returned to her the last love letter that Mr. Bukharin wrote her from prison.

In "Rethinking the Soviet Experience" (1985), Professor Cohen offered a new interpretation of the nation's traumatic history and modern political realities. In his view, Stalin's despotism and Mr. Bukharin's fate were not necessarily inevitable outgrowths of the party dictatorship founded by Lenin.

Richard Lowenthal, in a review for The Times, called Professor Cohen's interpretation implausible. "While I do not believe that all the horrors of Stalinism were 'logically inevitable' consequences of the seizure of power by Lenin and his Bolshevik Party," Mr. Lowenthal wrote, "I do believe that Stalin's victory over Bukharin was inherent in the structure of the party's system."

As Professor Cohen and other scholars pondered Russia's past, Mr. Gorbachev's rise to power and his efforts toward glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) cast the future of the Soviet Union in a new light, potentially reversing 70 years of Cold War dogma.

[Sep 19, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen, pre-eminent contemporary American scholar of Russia USSR, friend of Gorbachev advisor to Bush, dies at 81 -- RT Russia Former Soviet Union

Sep 19, 2020 | www.rt.com

19 Sep, 2020 11:44 / Updated 4 hours ago Get short URL Stephen F. Cohen, pre-eminent contemporary American scholar of Russia & USSR, friend of Gorbachev & advisor to Bush, dies at 81 Prof. Stephen F. Cohen © Getty Images via AFP / Eugene Gologursky 118 Follow RT on RT Stephen F. Cohen, the leading American Russia expert of his generation and a celebrated historian of Russia and the Soviet Union, who became a vocal critic of Washington's "new Cold War" with Moscow, has died at the age of 81.

Cohen succumbed to lung cancer at his home in Manhattan, on Friday, according to his wife Katrina vanden Heuvel, who is also the part-owner and publisher of The Nation magazine, where he worked as a contributing editor.

A native of Kentucky, he was a prolific and prominent scholar in his field, serving as a professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University. As a frequent visitor to Russia, Cohen became well-connected among leading Soviet dissidents, politicians and thinkers in the 1980s, even befriending Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev.

Cohen also advised former US President George Bush, senior, in the late 1980s, and assisted Anna Larina, the widow of Nikolai Bukharin, to rehabilitate her husband's name during the Soviet era. He had earlier written a biography of the journalist and politician, which argued that had Bukharin succeeded Vladimir Lenin as Bolshevik leader, rather than Joseph Stalin, the Soviet Union would have enjoyed greater openness, and perhaps even democracy.

//www.youtube.com/embed/-wc94DRFCik

Breaking with many American academics and political commentators, Cohen was highly critical of Washington's approach to Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. He warned of the dangers of NATO expansion and argued that much of the economic devastation seen in Russia during the 1990s could be traced to bad-faith policies and advice from the United States.

His principled, and patriotic stand, led to smears from members of the think tank racket and both liberal and neoconservative interventionists, keen to stoke tensions with Moscow. Cohen was labelled a Putin apologist. He responded by saying that he saw him as being "in the Russian tradition of leadership, getting Russia back on its feet."

READ MORE Will the Mueller report make the New Cold War even worse? (by Stephen Cohen) Will the Mueller report make the New Cold War even worse? (by Stephen Cohen)

After the election of Donald Trump, Cohen found himself in the crosshairs of the mainstream media for challenging the now-debunked Russiagate narrative, which he said was being used to sabotage bilateral relations and trigger a "new Cold War" with Moscow.

The unsubstantiated claim that Trump's presidential campaign "colluded" with the Kremlin would likely make a US-Russia detente "impossible" and could even help fuel an actual war between the two nations, Cohen argued. He lamented that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe into the conspiracy theory, which found no evidence of collusion, would do little to tone down the fiery rhetoric and anonymously sourced media hysteria concerning Russia and its alleged influence over the US political system.

The author of numerous books and countless articles, Cohen was a frequent guest on RT, where he often used his air time to sound the alarm over the dangerous state of US-Russia relations, lamenting that the hostility was both unnecessary and potentially calamitous.

//www.youtube.com/embed/pQK7M7_GMDc

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Sep 18, 2020] Novichok, Navalny, Nordstream, Nonsense, by Craig Murray

Novichok is now a visit card of MI6
Notable quotes:
"... As soon as Novichok was mentioned, I knew it was geopolitics and not internal Russian politics. ..."
"... NOVICHOK is a highly toxic and contagious substance. The reason why "it didn't kill the Skripals" is because it was never used on the Skripals just as it has not been used on Navalny. In both cases there would have been dozens of collateral victims. From the moment Navalny started to reel with pain during the domestic commercial flight to 4 days later when amid treatment in Berlin it is reasonable to estimate that 300 to 400 people had been in his proximity. Not one of them has shown or known to have contaged symptons. Let us list the narrative. ..."
"... I think my estimate of a total 300 to 400 people within the first 3 to 4 days having been within close proximity to Navalny is quite reasonable. If he was really was infected with an horrific chemical warfare agent, why would he even be allowed into Germany ? ..."
"... In political terms he is a cult leader of an SPB/Moscow elitist metropolitan cult that does not give a damn about most of Russia. ..."
"... Who benefits? For certain not the Joe Publics of UK, Russia and Germany but maybe the likes of Exxon, chevron, bp etc might. ..."
"... I suspected Navalny may be connected to our 'trusted friend' Browder. Now I know for sure. ..."
"... At some point, as background noise, there was some news read out on the radio. After the segment about the poisoning of Alexei Navalny, NordStream 2 and possible EU sanctions the taxi driver shook his head and said thoughtfully: "Yeah, mommy is stuck " ..."
"... "What mommy?" asked the taxi driver. "That same one, Angela Merkel. You know why Navalny was surrendered to Germany? Let me explain." And then, for a quarter of an hour, the taxi driver presented a coherent theory of what happened, worthy of study at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which answered all the questions that had been bothering me. ..."
"... Operatives at the German Ministry of International Affairs, who sympathized with Schröder's SPD, got in touch with Yulia Navalny (his wife) and offered to hospitalize him in a clinic in Germany. Yulia agreed, and appealed to Putin. ..."
"... The next day Berlin announced that analysis results showed poisoning with a cholinesterase inhibitor. This was its last warning shot. Then there was another phone call, to warn that the next time "Novichok" will be found. Moscow refused, and promised Minsk a billion dollars on that very day. ..."
"... There followed an attempt by Fritz Merz, Angela Merkel's deputy in the DCU, to lean on Merkel to shut down NordStream 2, but he swiftly got his ears boxed by the business lobby of German companies that invested in this pipeline and, whining and whimpering, crawled back into his hole. ..."
"... Then Lukashenko, being a tough nut to crack, presented an intentionally amateurish intercept of secret diplomatic communications between Poland and Germany in which they discussed their plans for poisoning Navalny. Now they are sitting in Warsaw and Berlin and have no idea how to respond to this movie -- to deny or to pretend that they didn't notice it. What a dilemma! ..."
"... If Merkel announces that it is the crime of the century in which a great Russian opposition figure has been fiendishly poisoned with "Novichok," then she would be obligated to sever all relations with the bloody regime and present evidence. But there won't be any evidence to present. And nobody will allow her to freeze the completion of the pipeline. Otherwise German companies, which invested in NordStream 2 will take the Reichstag even ahead of the irate German citizens. In either case, DCU/CSU will face a defeat. ..."
"... But what about Russia's friend Gehrhard Schröder? Being the chairman of the board of the NordStream 2 company and head of the SPD, he looks into the future with confidence and optimism. In any case, CDU/CSU will be deflated and SPD will reinforce its position in the Bundestag and either independently or in coalition with other parties will install its own leader as Bundeskanzler. NordStream 2, which has been in political limbo for a few years, will be completed and enter into service at full rated capacity very quickly. ..."
Sep 03, 2020 | craigmurray.org.uk

Matt , September 5, 2020 at 13:08

As soon as Novichok was mentioned, I knew it was geopolitics and not internal Russian politics.

Tatyana , September 5, 2020 at 17:01

Information about a mysterious woman appeared in the ru-net.
https://life.ru/p/1341159
https://aif.ru/society/people/kto_takaya_mariya_pevchih

A 33-year-old young woman who recently flew in from London. On August 15 she celebrated her birthday and then went with Navalny on the working trip. When the plane urgently landed in Omsk for Navalny's hospitalization, the woman also remained on the ground in the 'Ibis Siberia Omsk' hotel, waiting for Alexei to recover. She left from Russia to Britain on August 22.

Maria Konstantinovna Pevchikh (Мария Константиновна Певчих) born in 1987, russian. In 2010 she graduated from the sociological faculty of Moscow Lomonosov State University.

Lives in London. Fond of sports, trains under the program of "Navy Seals", an elite US military unit, owns bookstores in the UK and Australia.

Have close ties with Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Yevgeny Chichvarkin. Joined Navalny's activity in 2009. At that time, she was 22-year-old and worked as an assistant to one of the British parliamentarians.

It is alleged that the family and relatives do not know this woman.

Her photo
https://static.life.ru/publications/2020/7/21/17582829481.74346.jpg
https://cont.ws/uploads/pic/2020/9/%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%B0.jpg

The investigation previously published a chronology of events here
https://ria.ru/20200821/khronologiya-1576110899.html
They discovered that in Tomsk the blogger's company has booked seven rooms for four people, Navalny himself spent the night in a different room that was recorded in his name.

Laguerre , September 5, 2020 at 21:13

"The USA is perfectly willing to fight Russia to the last European NATO member.." That may be right, but I don't see why you're vituperative.

Republicofscotland , September 5, 2020 at 21:23

"WTF are you talking about? The USA is perfectly willing to fight Russia to the last European NATO member.."

Peter. An Ex-CIA man, of whom I've long forgotten his name used to say the same thing about Saudi Arabia, that the Saudis were willing to fight Iran down to the last American soldier.

Squeeth , September 6, 2020 at 17:06

Myth, the US state blames the pusillanimity of the public for its tactics of ultraviolence. The Russians would be drowning in their own blood were it not for Russian military power and the Chinese alliance.

Wikikettle , September 5, 2020 at 19:25

Sorry, they had the cheek to fly over Russian Air space many times taking pics.

Peter Moritz , September 5, 2020 at 18:20

and here some info about the lovely rogue Navalny:

"Recall that Alexei Navalny has two suspended sentences and is involved in several criminal cases at once.

"In December last year, he was sentenced in the case of embezzlement of money from the Yves Rocher company to a three and a half years suspended sentence. His brother Oleg was sentenced to a real three and a half years in prison.

In 2013, Navalny, who in 2009 worked as an adviser to the governor of the Kirov region, was found guilty of embezzling property of the state-owned company Kirovles and sentenced to five years in a general regime colony. He was taken into custody in the courtroom and placed in a pre-trial detention center, but the very next day the Kirov regional court changed the measure of restraint to a recognizance not to leave. As a result, the sentence was changed to a suspended one.

In addition, the Investigative Committee is investigating the case of the theft of 100 million rubles from the SPS party against Alexei Navalny since the end of December 2012.

Activists of Navalny's team – deputy of the Zyuzino metropolitan area Konstantin Yankauskas, as well as entrepreneurs Nikolai Lyaskin and Vladimir Ashurkov – are suspected of fraud related to violation of the procedure for financing the campaign in the election of the mayor of Moscow.

Navalny has repeatedly found himself in the role of a defendant in claims for the protection of honor and dignity – for throwing slanderous publications into the Internet. So, recently, the Lublin Court of Moscow satisfied such a claim by the chairman of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy, Innovative Development and Entrepreneurship Igor Rudensky."

(machine translated from here: https://vz.ru/news/2015/10/8/771336.html )

https://i2.wp.com/en.eurobelarus.info/files/175/225/navalny_kollag_1_.jpeg
The last picture should make clear what type of person the West again associates with .

Border Bus , September 5, 2020 at 19:31

If it comes to it, we must make sure that the likes of steele, urban, stoltenberg etc are right out there at the FRONT

Giyane , September 6, 2020 at 05:30

Tatyana

I have the same feeling as you. Russophobia simply indicates the bastards are working together against us the steeple. Chinaphobia maybe indicates the Chinese leadership and US leadership jointly want to cull the older generation with bio warfare.

Since none of UK , US. Russia nor China are democracies, their only task is to manage the narrative they tell the people. If I was to go out and buy a product made in China, half the cost would be for transport or profit to the dealer. That is a shared enterprise. One party for example manufactures a diesel generator, while the Western parties sit on their bums and take profit.

Sounds too cosy to me.

Mr Howard S Marks , September 7, 2020 at 01:24

You are really missing the point. NOVICHOK which you should know was developed (though not originally invented) in a lab in Soviet Uzbekistan, which following post Soviet independence, was dismantled by the CIA who took the samples back home to the USA. So it is the Americans not the Russians who have the original well-spring.

https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/25/world/us-and-uzbeks-agree-on-chemical-arms-plant-cleanup.html

NOVICHOK is a highly toxic and contagious substance. The reason why "it didn't kill the Skripals" is because it was never used on the Skripals just as it has not been used on Navalny. In both cases there would have been dozens of collateral victims. From the moment Navalny started to reel with pain during the domestic commercial flight to 4 days later when amid treatment in Berlin it is reasonable to estimate that 300 to 400 people had been in his proximity. Not one of them has shown or known to have contaged symptons. Let us list the narrative.

  1. Original domestic commercial flight, passengers, crew & colleagues travelling with him
  2. Ambulance to Russian hospital in Omsk ambulance crew
  3. Doctors, nurses, officials, press and Navalny family at hospital in Omsk
  4. German doctors arrived the next day, working along side Russian doctors whom they praised and credited with saving Navalny's life.
  5. Russian doctors agree to release Navalny for medivac transport against their own medical advice, respecting Navalny family wishes.
  6. Ambulance crew once again takes Navalny in the reverse direction back to the airport where the private jet was waiting. Introducing the patient with the "military grade nerve agent" oozing out of his skin to a new flight crew.
  7. Plane lands in Berlin and a German ambulance crew now handles the human chemical warfare torpedo. Note the German ambulance crew members had short sleeves. If the German Gov believed there was a possibility of a Novichok type substance at play why was the official greeting party not all dressed up like those Mi5 Salisbury central casting extras in Hazmat suits?
  8. The convoy arrives at the hospital in Berlin handing Navalny over to the German team no doubt comprised of endless staff members.

I think my estimate of a total 300 to 400 people within the first 3 to 4 days having been within close proximity to Navalny is quite reasonable. If he was really was infected with an horrific chemical warfare agent, why would he even be allowed into Germany ?

Howard Marks , September 7, 2020 at 01:38

As for Navalny and the Russian administration and the Russian public, they both view him as useful but not likeable. The Putin administration has made good use of reports by Navalny's anti-corruption group to expose both people in government and in business.

The Russian public watches the Youtube videos of Navalny's reports to the tune of millions of hits & clicks. However as a person Alexei Navalny is not like and for good reason. This is reflected in his 2% poll rated that due to all the current focus has moved up to 4% for Navalny as a potential "politician" (he is actually already a failed one) 4% is his high water mark.

The likes of The Guardian and The Independent have portrayed Navalny over the years as some kind of Russian Nelson Mandela when in fact Navalny is a better educated more sophisticated Tommy Robinson. Only Navalny is even more racist than so-called "Tommy Robinson" as I don't even recall him ever saying "All Muslims are cockroaches" as Navalny was once quoted to have said.

In political terms he is a cult leader of an SPB/Moscow elitist metropolitan cult that does not give a damn about most of Russia. He and his political cohorts such as Ms Sobol offer not one single policy for the people of the Russian Heartland. Who are far better cared for and better represented by Valdimir Putin, whom the Heartland people lovingly address as Vladimirovich, President Putin's middle name. Navalny is even more Neo-Liberal and far less small "l" liberal in general values and mindset than President Putin.

Tatyana , September 7, 2020 at 09:17

The description is very accurate, and the definition of "elite metropolitan cult" hit the bull's eye. Young people think that being an oppositionist is being active, fashionable, trendy (also at protests you can post photos on Instagram!) Unfortunately, if they are asked specific questions, they cannot answer. They are there for self-expression.

--

People follow ideas, Navalny's idea is not clear, where is the plan, where is the perspective? Looking at Navalny's activity, I feel they are trying to sell me something.

E.g. his website promotes the Smart Voting system
https://navalny.com/p/6418/
the title is "Do you want it like in Belarus? Here is a list of candidates, find yours"
the first paragraph point is "to support the rebellious people in word, action and money is very right, but you may do even more right thing "
the second "it is impossible to use your vote wisely without our smart voting system", a call to action "register"
the third "a few brave Spartans (sic!) broke through Putin's evil cordons and you can support them here is how:
1. Check out the list of candidates. Transfer money to someone you like

Well, actually I sell something myself and I wright similar marketing texts. Compare:
"Are you in search of Boho, Ethnic or Tribal fashion? You're in the right place Our unique *** is the way to express your style!

Does your daughter think of cutting off her gorgeous long hair? Get a pair of our *** for her to show your love and care Here is how: visit our shop *** Choose the one you like and let us work on the perfect *** crafted especially for you "

When people create an online store of political candidates, it is not credible. Our electoral system means collecting signatures, real signatures of living people, not collecting money.

Ryszard Daniel , September 7, 2020 at 17:16

Thank you for your courage to speak the truth Mr. Murray. I am trying to do it sometimes too here in the Netherlands, but I am an engineer, not a politician or journalist, so my means and persuasive talents are limited. However – to stay on the topic of poison – it feels good to see that the anti-Russian propaganda has not poisoned all minds in West Europe yet.

Tatyana , September 7, 2020 at 19:30

It's only today that I've realised who is Prigozhin. He is the owner of Concord group, they were those russian with whom Trump conspired to win elections!

Prigozhin sent 1 million roubles to Charite for Navalny.

Uncle Sam , September 8, 2020 at 09:02

He sent 1 million rubles while at the same time demanding 29 million rubles from Navalny's group. Это было издевательство

Tatyana , September 8, 2020 at 09:42

He demands 88 millions, I wrote about it previously. It is a demand due to court's decision. I don't think it was издевательство, it looks more like Prigozhin is afraid of being accused of poisoning 🙂

Nigel , September 9, 2020 at 17:18

Russophobes these days, which is an enormous section of the population, will believe anything dastardly about that country and its leadership. The narrative here, that doesn't stand up to the slightest scrutiny as Murray shows, is that the Russians are bumbling villains that couldn't kill a wet paper bag.

Another narrative is that they didn't kill Navalny on purpose. It's just "a warning", etc.. A villain is a villain.

One BS story is as good as another. Of course, there should be a delay between one fiction and the next one. However, the old saying still applies: throw enough sh*t and something is bound to stick.

At the interpersonal level, it's sometimes simpler to simply exaggerate the exaggeration: e.g., Putin is a villain and look at what he did to dirty my underwear; there's a Putin under your bed; yeah, and what about the bad weather we've been having? Putin, of course.

And it's not like any of this is new, e.g., US President Reagan: "Russia has been outlawed forever. Bombing begins in 5 minutes."

Border Bus , September 11, 2020 at 17:16

Who benefits? For certain not the Joe Publics of UK, Russia and Germany but maybe the likes of Exxon, chevron, bp etc might.

banagher , September 11, 2020 at 17:44

Interessant, ein Bericht aus der Prwda:

https://www.pravda.ru/society/1528118-Alexey_Navalny/

Tatyana , September 11, 2020 at 19:03

banagher, thanks a lot for the link! I suspected Navalny may be connected to our 'trusted friend' Browder. Now I know for sure.

banagher , September 12, 2020 at 09:37

In einem kritischen Bericht in Deutschland wird auch auf die investigative Tätigkeit von "Bellincat" erwähnt,

https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Nawalny-hat-sich-angeblich-fast-vollstaendig-erholt-und-soll-noch-staerker-bewacht-werden-4890152.html

banagher , September 12, 2020 at 09:39

sorry soll heissen: investigativen Bericht ..

George Craik , September 13, 2020 at 07:31

This is copied from Dimitry Orlov

Taxi Drivers Know Everything

It so happened that yesterday I was coming home in a taxi. The taxi driver, who looked like Bill Murray, turned out to be very talkative: during the trip, as often happens, we touched on all subjects, from the weather to blondes behind the wheel.

At some point, as background noise, there was some news read out on the radio. After the segment about the poisoning of Alexei Navalny, NordStream 2 and possible EU sanctions the taxi driver shook his head and said thoughtfully: "Yeah, mommy is stuck "

"What mommy?" I inquired.

"What mommy?" asked the taxi driver. "That same one, Angela Merkel. You know why Navalny was surrendered to Germany? Let me explain." And then, for a quarter of an hour, the taxi driver presented a coherent theory of what happened, worthy of study at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which answered all the questions that had been bothering me.

This is how it all came down.

At the beginning of August everybody was preparing for the elections in Belarus -- Belarus itself, as well as Russia and countries in the EU. It was an exciting game in which everybody placed bets on their own candidate. But I must immediately warn you that what we were observing was just the visible part of the iceberg, while the underwater currents were known only to a few.

Moscow and Minsk were demonstratively smashing dishes, shouting at each other and pulling each other by the hair, creating the illusion of a complete break in relations. This was as intended!

Europe, content and relaxed, was rubbing its hands and already seeing how it will very soon kick out "Europe's last dictator" and install a Belorussian Juan Guaido clone in Minsk, grabbing this delectable piece for itself.

The elections were held. Everybody froze. Not bothering to wait for the election results to come in, on orders from the Polish provocateur [Telegraph channel] Nexta the Belorussian white-red-white [Nazi occupation flag] opposition marched into battle.

At first everything was going to plan. Excited white-red-white crowds flooded the streets and started threatening the police, officials and journalists, starting skirmishes and strikes. Slovak and Spanish ambassadors in Belarus spoke out in support of the protesters and "came over to the side of the people." This was also as intended. It looked like just a bit more of this and ["Europe's last dictator"] Lukashenko would fall.

But then Moscow entered into the game. It recognized the outcome of the elections [which Lukashenko won] and started to support him organizationally, informationally and financially. Europe had to ramp up pressure. But how?

Nexta was crapping bricks and exhorting the white-red-white activists to get more active, but they just couldn't get any traction in their attempts to seize power. They turned out to be too weak compared to their own people.
And then, luckily, Navalny was poisoned. In any case, that's what some people imagined.

Operatives at the German Ministry of International Affairs, who sympathized with Schröder's SPD, got in touch with Yulia Navalny (his wife) and offered to hospitalize him in a clinic in Germany. Yulia agreed, and appealed to Putin.

Then the German minister of foreign affairs walked into Bundeskanzlerin's office and laid his joker on the table: "We can take away Navalny for treatment. If Moscow tries to prevent this, we will cause a loud scandal. We'll get his body and then decide how to play this." Merkel found this proposal attractive and, not thinking too long, agreed. Moscow did not object to Navalny's transfer.

After Navalny was brought to Germany and delivered to the Charité clinic in a cortège consisting of 12 cars, mommy Angela called Moscow and demanded: Russia must stop supporting Lukashenko, otherwise we will announce that Navalny had been poisoned with "Novichok." Moscow refused and increased support of Lukashenko, declaring that it has created a reserve of special forces to be sent into Belarus and take control -- just in case anyone makes a sudden move.

The next day Berlin announced that analysis results showed poisoning with a cholinesterase inhibitor. This was its last warning shot. Then there was another phone call, to warn that the next time "Novichok" will be found. Moscow refused, and promised Minsk a billion dollars on that very day.

At that point, Berlin's patience ran out. Navalny was immediately transferred to a military hospital, where it was immediately "discovered" that he had been poisoned with "Novichok." It was not possible to find "Novichok" while he was at Charité because journalists and officials could demand to see the test results, while at a military hospital such requests would be denied: the information is secret. But not even "Novichok" could force Moscow to stop supporting Minsk. Russia's prime minister Mikhail Mishustin was dispatched to Minsk with a briefcase bulging with papers to sign.

There followed an attempt by Fritz Merz, Angela Merkel's deputy in the DCU, to lean on Merkel to shut down NordStream 2, but he swiftly got his ears boxed by the business lobby of German companies that invested in this pipeline and, whining and whimpering, crawled back into his hole.

Then Lukashenko, being a tough nut to crack, presented an intentionally amateurish intercept of secret diplomatic communications between Poland and Germany in which they discussed their plans for poisoning Navalny. Now they are sitting in Warsaw and Berlin and have no idea how to respond to this movie -- to deny or to pretend that they didn't notice it. What a dilemma!

The interim result is thus as follows: Navalny is alive and well, sitting quietly in a German military hospital and inquiring periodically when he will be allowed to go home. But he won't be allowed to go home any time soon.

Now, a year ahead of elections, parliamentary electoral campaign is starting in Germany. Merkel's DCU/CSU coalition doesn't have a lot of popular support as it is. Some people are even now ready to take the Reichstag with their bare hands and put their own flag on top of it. And then we have this toxic story with "Novichok"!

If Merkel announces that it is the crime of the century in which a great Russian opposition figure has been fiendishly poisoned with "Novichok," then she would be obligated to sever all relations with the bloody regime and present evidence. But there won't be any evidence to present. And nobody will allow her to freeze the completion of the pipeline. Otherwise German companies, which invested in NordStream 2 will take the Reichstag even ahead of the irate German citizens. In either case, DCU/CSU will face a defeat.

But if she slams the transmission into reverse, apologizes and returns Navalny to Russia, claiming that what happened was an unfortunate series of errors, and punishes everybody who had put her in this situation to the full extent of German law, this won't save the situation either. German voter's won't forgive Merkel over the loss of Germany's international authority, loss of influence in Europe and total incompetence in handling foreign affairs, and will still punish her at the polls.

Therefore, her only choice is to bide her time, sitting with one buttock on each of two chairs -- blaming Russia for deploying "Novichok" and simultaneously supporting the completion of NordStream 2. But we are about to see a flood of eyewitness reports, photographs and documents from the various hospitals where the VIP patient has been treated, knocking out one of the two chairs. And so the possibility that Merkel's retirement will occur before her term is up should not be dismissed. In that case, she will have been unable to beat Helmut's Kohl's 16-year record as Bundeskanzler.

But what about Russia's friend Gehrhard Schröder? Being the chairman of the board of the NordStream 2 company and head of the SPD, he looks into the future with confidence and optimism. In any case, CDU/CSU will be deflated and SPD will reinforce its position in the Bundestag and either independently or in coalition with other parties will install its own leader as Bundeskanzler. NordStream 2, which has been in political limbo for a few years, will be completed and enter into service at full rated capacity very quickly.

When we rolled up to my house, the taxi driver asked: "Do you play chess?"

"Sometimes," I nodded.

In chess, there is a variation called "poisoned pawn." Your opponent, trying to gain material advantage, takes this pawn, ends up trapped and inevitably loses.

As I was getting out of the taxi, somewhat perplexed, I asked the taxi driver where he got all this information. He smiled a sad Bill Murray smile and answered: "From my brother. He lives in Germany and also works as a taxi driver." It was at this moment that I realized that taxi drivers know everything.

Source: SKonst https://aftershock.news/?q=user/182

[Sep 18, 2020] September 14, 2001- The Day America Became Israel - Antiwar.com Original

Notable quotes:
"... Apocalypse Now- ..."
"... Wall Street Journal ..."
"... War on the Rocks ..."
"... An Army Like No Other: How the Israel Defense Forces Made a Nation ..."
"... a defense industry with a country ..."
Sep 18, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

September 14, 2001: The Day America Became Israel

by Maj. Danny Sjursen, USA (ret.) Posted on September 18, 2020

This article is dedicated to the memory of an activist, inspiration, and recent friend: Kevin Zeese. Its scope, sweep, and ambition are meant to match that of Kevin's outsized influence. At that, it must inevitably fail – and its shortfalls are mine alone. That said, the piece's attempt at a holistic critique of 19 years worth of war and cultural militarization would, I hope, earn an approving nod from Kevin – if only at the attempt. He will be missed by so many; I count myself lucky to have gotten to know him. – Danny Sjursen

The rubble was still smoldering at Ground Zero when the U.S. House of Representatives voted to essentially transform itself into the Israeli Knesset , or parliament. It was 19 years ago, 11:17pm Washington D.C. time on September 14, 2001 when the People's Chamber approved House Joint Resolution 64, the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) "against those responsible for the recent attacks." Naturally, that was before the precise identities, and full scope, of "those responsible" were yet known – so the resolution's rubber-stamp was obscenely open-ended by necessity, but also by design.

The Senate had passed their own version by roll call vote about 12 hours earlier. The combined congressional tally was 518 to one. Only Representative Barbara Lee of California cast a dissenting vote , and even delivered a brief, prescient speech on the House floor. It's almost hard to watch and listen all these years later as her voice cracks with emotion amidst all that truth-telling :

I am convinced that military action will not prevent further acts of international terrorism against the United States. This is a very complex and complicated matter

However difficult this vote may be, some of us must urge the use of restraint. Our country is in a state of mourning. Some of us must say, let's step back for a moment and think through the implications of our actions today, so that this does not spiral out of control

Now I have agonized over this vote. But I came to grips with opposing this resolution during the very painful, yet very beautiful memorial service. As a member of the clergy so eloquently said, "As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore."

For her lone stance – itself courageous, even had she not since been vindicated – Rep. Lee suffered insults and death threats so intense that she needed around-the-clock bodyguards for a time. It's hard to be right in a room full of the wrong – especially angry, scared, and jingoistic ones. Yet the tragedy is America has become many of the things we purport to deplore: the US now boasts a one-trick-pony foreign policy and a militarized society to boot.

Endless imperial interventions and perennial policing at home and abroad, counterproductive military adventurism, governance by permanent "emergency" fiat, and an ever more martial-society? We've seen this movie before; in fact it's still playing – in Israel. Without implying that Israel, as an entity, is somehow "evil," theirs was simply not a path the US need or ought to have gone down.

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

In the nearly two decades since its passing, the AUMF has been cited at least 41 times in some 17 countries and on the high seas . The specified nations-states included Afghanistan, Cuba (Guantanamo Bay), Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Georgia, Iraq, Kenya, Libya, Philippines, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Jordan, Turkey, Niger, Cameroon, and the broader African "Sahel Region" – which presumably also covers the unnamed, but real, US troop presence in Nigeria, Chad and Mali. That's a lot of unnecessary digressions – missions that haven't, and couldn't, have been won. All of that aggression abroad predictably boomeranged back home , in the guise of freedoms constrained, privacy surveilled, plus cops and culture militarized.

Inevitably, just a few days ago, every publication, big and small, carried obligatory and ubiquitous 9/11 commemoration pieces. Far fewer will even note the AUMF anniversary. Yet it was the US government's response – not the attacks themselves – which most altered American strategy and society. For in dutifully deciding on immediate military retaliation, a "global war," even, on a tactic ("terror") and a concept ("evil") at that, this republic fell prey to the Founders' great obsession . Unable to agree on much else, they shared fears that the nascent American experiment would suffer Rome's " ancestral curse " of ambition – and its subsequent path to empire. Hence, Benjamin Franklin's supposed retort to a crowd question upon exiting the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, on just what they'd just framed: "A republic, if you can keep it!"

Yet perhaps a modern allegory is the more appropriate one: by signing on to an endless cycle of tit-for-tat terror retaliation on 9/14, We the People's representatives chose the Israeli path. Here was a state forged by the sword that it's consequently lived by ever since, and may well die by – though the cause of death, no doubt, would likely be self-inflicted. The first statutory step towards Washington transforming into Tel Aviv was that AUMF sanction 19 years ago tonight.

No doubt, some militarist fantasies came far closer on the heels of the September 11th suicide strikes: According to notes taken by aides, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld waited a whole five hours after Flight 77 impacted his Pentagon to instruct subordinates to gather the "best info fast. Judge whether good enough to hit [Saddam Hussein] at same time Not only [Osama Bin Laden]." As for the responsive strike plans, "Go massive," the notes quote Rumsfeld as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

Nonetheless, it was Congress' dutiful AUMF-acquiescence that made America's Israeli-metamorphosis official. The endgame that ain't even ended yet has been dreadful. It's almost impossible to fathom, in retrospect, but remember that as of September 14, 2001, 7,052 American troops and, very conservatively, at least 800,000 foreigners (335,000 of them civilians) hadn't yet – and need not have – died in the ensuing AUMF-sanctioned worldwide wars.

Now, US forces didn't directly kill all of them, but that's about 112 September 11ths-worth of dead civilians by the very lowest estimates – perishing in wars of (American) choice. That's worth reckoning with; and needn't imply a dismissive attitude to our 9/11 fallen. I, for one, certainly take that date rather seriously.

My 9/11s

There are more than a dozen t-shirts hanging in my closet right now that are each emblazoned with the phrase "Annual Marty Egan 5K Memorial Run/Walk." This event is held back in the old neighborhood, honoring a very close family friend – a New York City fire captain killed in the towers' collapse. As my Uncle Steve's best bud, he was in and out of my grandparents' seemingly communal Midland Beach, Staten Island bungalow – before Hurricane Sandy washed many of them away – throughout my childhood. When I was a teenager, just before leaving for West Point, Marty would tease me for being "too skinny for a soldier" in the local YMCA weight-room and broke-balls about my vague fear of heights as I shakily climbed a ladder in Steve's backyard just weeks before I left for cadet basic training. Always delivered with a smile, of course.

Marty was doing some in-service training on September 11th, and didn't have to head towards the flames, but he hopped on a passing truck and rode to his death anyway. I doubt anyone who knew him would've expected anything less. Mercifully, Marty's body was one of the first – and at the time, only – recovered , just two days after Congress chose war in his, and 2,976 others' name. He was found wearing borrowed gear from engine company he'd jumped in with.

I was a freshman cadet at West Point when I heard all of this news – left feeling so very distant from home, family, neighborhood, though I was just a 90 minute drive north. Frankly, I couldn't wait to get in the fights that followed. It's no excuse, really: but I was at that moment exactly 18 years and 41 days old. And indeed, I'd spend the next 18 training, prepping, and fighting the wars I then wanted – and, ( Apocalypse Now- style ) "for my sins" – "they gave me."

Anyway, Marty's family – and more so his memory – along with the general 9/11 fallout back home, have swirled in and out of my life ever since. In the immediate term, after the attacks my mother turned into a sort of wake&funeral-hopper, attending literally dozens over that first year. As soon as Marty had a headstone in Moravian Cemetery – where my Uncle Steve once dug graves – I draped a pair of my new dog tags over it on a weekend trip home. It was probably a silly and indulgent gesture, but it felt profound at the time. Then, soon enough, the local street signs started changing to honor fallen first responders – including the intersection outside my church, renamed "Martin J. Egan Jr. Corner." (Marty used to joke , after all, that he'd graduated from UCLA – that is, the University, corner of Lincoln Avenue, in the neighborhood.)

Five years later, while I was fighting a war in a country (Iraq) that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, Marty's mother Pat still worked at the post office from which my own mom shipped me countless care packages. They'd chat; have a few nostalgic laughs; then Pat would wish me well and pass on her regards. When some of my soldiers started getting killed, I remember my mother telling me it was sometimes hard to look Pat in the eye on the post office trips – perhaps she feared an impending kinship of lost sons. But it didn't go that way.

So, suffice it to say, I don't take the 9/11 attacks, or the victims, lightly. That doesn't mean the US responses, and their results, were felicitous or forgivable. They might even dishonor the dead. I don't pretend to precisely know, or speak for, the Egan family's feelings. Still, my own sense is that few among the lost or their loved ones left behind would've imagined or desired their deaths be used to justify all of the madness, futility, and liberties-suppression blowback that's ensued.

Nevertheless, my nineteen Septembers 11th have been experienced in oft-discomfiting ways, and my assessment of the annual commemorations, rather quickly began to change. By the tenth anniversary, a Reuters reporter spent a couple of days on the base I commanded in Afghanistan. At the time the outpost sported a flag gifted by my uncle, which had previously flown above a New York Fire Department house. I suppose headquarters sent the journalist my way because I was the only combat officer from New York City – but the brass got more than they'd bargained for. By then, amidst my second futile war "surge," and three more of the lives and several more of the limbs of my soldiers lost on this deployment, I wasn't feeling particularly sentimental. Besides, I'd already turned – ethically and intellectually – against what seemed to me demonstrably hopeless and counterproductive military exercises.

Much to the chagrin of my career-climbing lieutenant colonel, I waxed a bit (un)poetic on the war I was then fighting – "against farm boys with guns," I not-so-subtly styled it – and my hometown's late suffering that ostensibly justified it. "When I see this place, I don't see the towers," I said, sitting inside my sandbagged operations center near the Taliban's very birthplace in Kandahar province. Then added: "My family sees it more than I do. They see it dead-on, direct. I'm a professional soldier. It's not about writing the firehouse number on the bullet. I'm not one for gimmicks." It was coarse and a bit petulant, sure, but what I meant – what I felt – was that these wars, even this " good " Afghan one (per President Obama), no longer, and may never have, had much to do with 9/11, Marty, or all the other dead.

The global war on terrorism (GWOT, as it was once fashionable to say) was but a reflex for a sick society pre-disposed to violence, symptomatic of a militarist system led by a government absent other ideas or inclinations. Still, I flew that FDNY flag – even skeptical soldiers can be a paradoxical lot.

Origin Myths: Big Lies and Long Cons

Although the final approved AUMF declared that "such acts [as terrorism] continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States," that wasn't then, and isn't now, even true . The toppled towers, pummeled Pentagon, and flying suicide machines of 9/11 were no doubt an absolute horror; and such visions understandably clouded collective judgment. Still, more sober statistics demonstrate, and sensible strategy demands, the prudence of perspective.

From 1995 to 2016, a total of 3,277 Americans have been killed in terrorist acts on US soil. If we subtract the 9/11 anomaly, that's just 300 domestic deaths – or 14 per year. Which raises the impolite question: why don't policymakers talk about terrorism the same way they do shark attacks or lightning strikes? The latter, incidentally, kill an average of 49 Americans annually. Odd, then, that the US hasn't expended $6.4 trillion, or more than 15,000 soldier and contractor lives , responding to bolts from the blue. Nor has it kicked off or catalyzed global wars that have directly killed – by that conservative estimate – 335,000 civilians.

See, that's the thing: for Americans, like the Israelis, some lives matter more than others. We can just about calculate the macabre life-value ratios in each society. Take Israel's 2014 onslaught on the Gaza Strip. In its fifty-day onslaught of Operation Protective Edge, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) killed 2,131 Palestinians – of whom 1,473 were identified as civilians, including 501 children. As for the wildly inaccurate and desperate Hamas rocket strikes that the IDF "edge" ostensibly "protected" against: those killed a whopping four civilians. To review: apparently one Israeli non-combatant is worth 368 Palestinian versions. Now, seeing as everything – including death-dealing is "bigger in Texas" – consider the macro American application. To wit, 3,277 US civilians versus 335,000 foreign innocents equals a cool 102-to-1 quotient of the macabre.

Such formulas become banal realities when one believes the big lies undergirding the entire enterprise. Here, Israel and America share origin myths that frame the long con of forever wars. That is, that acts of terror with stateless origins are best responded to with reflexive and aggressive military force. In my first ever published article – timed for Independence Day 2014 – I argued that America's post-9/11 "original sin" was framing its response as a war in the first place. As a result, I – then a serving US Army captain – concluded, "In place of sound strategy, we've been handed our own set of martyrs: more than 6,500 dead soldiers, airmen, sailors, and marines." More than 500 American troopers have died since, along with who knows how many foreign civilians. It's staggering how rare such discussions remain in mainstream discourse.

Within that mainstream, often the conjoined Israeli-American twins even share the same cruelty cheerleaders. Take the man that author Belen Fernandez not inaccurately dubs "Harvard Law School's resident psychopath:" Alan Dershowitz. During Israel's brutal 2006 assault on Lebanon, this armchair-murderer took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal with a column titled " Arithmetic of Pain ."

Dershowitz argued for a collective "reassessment of the laws of war" in light of increasingly blurred distinctions between combatants and civilians. Thus, offering official "scholarly" sanction for the which-lives-matter calculus, he unveiled the concept of a "continuum of 'civilianality." Consider some of his cold and callous language:

Near the most civilian end of this continuum are the pure innocents – babies, hostages at the more combatant end are civilians who willingly harbor terrorists, provide material resources and serve as human shields; in the middle are those who support the terrorists politically, or spiritually.

Got that? Leaving aside Dershowitz's absurd assumption that there are loads of Palestinians just itching to volunteer as "human shields," it's clear that when conflicts are thus framed – all manner of cruelties become permissible.

In Israel, it begins with stated policies of internationally- prohibited collective punishment. For example, during the 2006 Lebanon War that killed exponentially more innocent Lebanese than Israelis, the IDF chief of staff's announced intent was to deliver "a clear message to both greater Beirut and Lebanon that they've swallowed a cancer [Hezbollah] and have to vomit it up, because if they don't their country will pay a very high price." It ends with Tel Aviv's imposition of an abusive calorie-calculus on Palestinians.

In 2008, Israeli authorities actually drew up a document computing the minimum caloric intake necessary for Gaza's residents to suffer (until they yield), but avoid outright starvation. Two years earlier, that wonderful wordsmith Dov Weisglass, senior advisor to then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, explained that Israeli policy was designed "to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger."

Lest that sound beyond the pale for we Americans, recall that it was the first female secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, who ten years earlier said of 500,000 Iraqi children's deaths under crippling U.S. sanctions: "we think, the price is worth it." Furthermore, it's unclear how the Trump administration's current sanctions- clampdown on Syrians unlucky enough to live in President Bashar al Assad-controlled territory is altogether different from the "Palestinian diet."

After all, even one of the Middle East Institute's resident regime-change-enthusiasts, Charles Lister, recently admitted that America's criminally-euphemized "Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act" may induce a "famine." In other words, according to two humanitarian experts writing on the national security website War on the Rocks , "hurting the very civilians it aims to protect while largely failing to affect the Syrian government itself."

It is, and has long been, thus: Israeli prime ministers and American presidents, Bibi and The Donald, Tel Aviv and Washington – are peas in a punishing pod.

Emergencies as Existences

In both Israel and America, frightened populations finagled by their uber-hawkish governments acquiesce to militarized states of "emergencies" as a way of life. In seemingly no time at all, the latest U.S. threshold got so low that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo matter-of-factly declared one to override a congressional-freeze and permit the $8.1 billion sale of munitions to Gulf Arab militaries. When some frustrated lawmakers asked the State Department's inspector general to investigate, the resultant report found that the agency failed to limit [Yemeni] civilian deaths from the sales – most bombed by the Saudi's subsequent arsenal of largesse. (As for the inspector general himself? He was " bullied ," then fired, by Machiavelli Mike).

Per the standard, Israel is the more surface-overt partner. As the IDF-veteran author Haim Bresheeth-Zabner writes in his new book , An Army Like No Other: How the Israel Defense Forces Made a Nation , Israel is the "only country in which Emergency Regulations have been in force for every minute of its existence."

Perhaps more worryingly, such emergency existences boomerang back to militarized Minneapolis and Jerusalem streets alike. It's worth nothing that just five days after the killing of George Floyd, an Israeli police officer gunned down an unarmed, autistic, Palestinian man on his way to a school for the disabled. Even the 19-year-old killer's 21-year-old commander (instructive, that) admitted the cornered victim wasn't a threat. But here's the rub: when the scared and confused Palestinian man ran from approaching police at 6 a.m. , initial officers instinctually reported a potential "terrorist" on the loose.

Talk about global terror coming home to roost on local streets. And why not here in the States? It wasn't but two months back that President Trump labeled peaceful demonstrators in D.C., and nationwide protesters tearing down Confederate statues, as "terrorists." That's more than a tad troubling, since, as noted, almost anything is permissible against terrorists, thus tagged.

In other words, the Israeli-American, post-9/11 (or -9/14) militarized connections go beyond the cosmetic and past sloganeering. Then again, the latter can be instructive. In the wake of the latest Jerusalem police shooting, protesters in Israel's Occupied Territories held up placards declaring solidarity with Black Lives Matter (BLM). One read: "Palestinians support the black intifada." Yet the roots of shared systemic injustices run far deeper.

Though it remains impolitic to say so here in the US, both "BLM and the Palestinian rights movement are [by their own accounts] fighting settler-colonial states and structures of domination and supremacy that value, respectively, white and Jewish lives over black and Palestinian ones." They're hardly wrong. All-but-official apartheid reigns in Occupied Palestine, and a de-facto two-tier system favoring Jewish citizens, prevails within Israel itself. Similarly, the US grapples with chattel slavery's legacy, lingering effects institutional Jim Crow-apartheid, and its persistent system of gross, if unofficial, socio-economic racial disparity.

Though there are hopeful rumblings in post-Floyd America, neither society has much grappled with the immediacy and intransigency of their established and routine devaluation of (internal and external) Arab and African lives. Instead, in another gross similarity, Israelis and Americans prefer to laud any ruling elites who even pretend towards mildly reformist rhetoric (rather than action) as brave peacemakers.

In fact, two have won the Nobel Peace Prize. In America, there was the untested Obama: he the king of drones and free-press-suppression – whose main qualification for the award was not being named George W. Bush. In Israel, the prize went to late Prime Minister Shimon Peres. According to Bresheeth-Zabner, Peres was the "mind behind the military-industrial complex" in Israel, and also architect of the infamous 1996 massacre of 106 people sheltering at a United Nations compound in South Lebanon. In such societies as ours and Israel's, and amidst interminable wars, too often politeness passes for principle.

Military Mirrors

Predictably, social and cultural rot – and strategic delusions – first manifest in a nation's military. Neither Israel's nor America's has a particularly impressive record of late. The IDF won a few important wars in its first 25 years of existence, then came back from a near catastrophic defeat to prevail in the 1973 Yom Kippur War; but since then, it's at best muddled through near-permanent lower-intensity conflicts after invading Southern Lebanon in 1978. In fact, its 22-year continuous counter-guerilla campaign there – against Palestinian resistance groups and then Lebanese Hezbollah – slowly bled the IDF dry in a quagmire often called " Israel's Vietnam ." It was, in fact, proportionally more deadly for its troops than America's Southeast Asian debacle – and ended (in 2000) with an embarrassing unilateral withdrawal.

Additionally, Tel Aviv's perma-military-occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip hasn't just flagrantly violated International law and several UN resolutions – but blown up in the IDF's face. Ever since vast numbers of exasperated and largely abandoned (by Arab armies) Palestinians rose up in the 1987 Intifada – initially peaceful protests – and largely due to the IDF's counterproductively vicious suppression, Israel has been trapped in endless imperial policing and low-to-mid-level counterinsurgency.

None of its major named military operations in the West Bank and/or Gaza Strip – Operations Defensive Shield (2002), Days of Penitence (2004), Summer Rains (2006), Cast Lead (2008-09), Pillar of Defense (2012), Protective Edge (2014), among others – has defeated or removed Hamas, nor have they halted the launch of inaccurate but persistent Katyusha rockets.

In fact, the wildly disproportionate toll on Palestinian civilians in each and every operation, and the intransigence of Israel's ironclad occupation has only earned Tel Aviv increased international condemnation and fresh generations of resistors to combat. The IDF counts minor tactical successes and suffers broader strategic failure. As even a fairly sympathetic Rand report on the Gaza operations noted, "Israel's grand strategy became 'mowing the grass' – accepting its inability to permanently solve the problem and instead repeatedly targeting leadership of Palestinian militant organizations to keep violence manageable."

The American experience has grown increasingly similar over the last three-quarters of a century. Unless one counts modern trumped-up Banana Wars like those in Grenada (1983) and Panama (1989), or the lopsided 100-hour First Persian Gulf ground campaign (1991), the US military, too, hasn't won a meaningful victory since 1945. Korea (1950-53) was a grinding and costly draw; Vietnam (1965-72) a quixotic quagmire; Lebanon (1982-84) an unnecessary and muddled mess ; Somalia (1992-94) a mission-creeping fiasco; Bosnia/Kosovo (1992-) an over-hyped and unsatisfying diversion. Yet matters deteriorated considerably, and the Israeli-parallels grew considerably, after Congress chose endless war on September 14, 2001.

America's longest ever war, in Afghanistan, started as a seeming slam dunk but has turned out to be an intractable operational defeat. That lost cause has been a dead war walking for over a decade. Operations Iraqi Freedom (2003-11) and Inherent Resolve (2014-) may prove, respectively, America's most counterproductive and aimless missions ever. Operation Odyssey Dawn, the 2011 air campaign in pursuit of Libyan regime change, was a debacle – the entire region still grapples with its detritus of jihadi profusion, refugee dispersion, and ongoing proxy war.

US support for the Saudi-led terror war on Yemen hasn't made an iota of strategic sense, but has left America criminally complicit in immense civilian-suffering. Despite the hype, the relatively young US Africa Command (AFRICOM) was never really "about Africans," and its dozen years worth of far-flung campaigns have only further militarized a long-suffering continent and generated more terrorists. Like Israel's post-1973 operations, America's post-2001 combat missions have simply been needless, hopeless, and counterproductive.

Consider a few other regrettable U.S.-Israeli military connections over these last two decades:

The wear and tear from the South Lebanon occupation and from decades of beating up on downtrodden and trapped Palestinians damaged Israel's vaunted military. According to an after-action review, these operations"weakened the IDF's operational capabilities." Thus, when Israel's nose was more than a bit bloodied in the 2006 war with Hezbollah, IDF analysts and retired officers were quick – and not exactly incorrect – to blame the decaying effect of endless low-intensity warfare.

At the time, two general staff members, Major Generals Yishai Bar and Yiftach Ron-Tal, "warned that as a result of the preoccupation with missions in the territories, the IDF had lost its maneuverability and capability to fight in mountainous terrain." Van Creveld added that: "Among the commanders, the great majority can barely remember when they trained for and engaged in anything more dangerous than police-type operations."

Similar voices have sounded the alarm about the post-9/11 American military. Perhaps the loudest has been my fellow West Point History faculty alum, retired Colonel Gian Gentile. This former tank battalion commander and Iraq War vet described "America's deadly embrace of counterinsurgency" as a Wrong Turn . Specifically, he's argued that "counterinsurgency has perverted [the way of] American war," pushed the "defense establishment into fanciful thinking," and thus "atrophying [its] core fighting competencies."

Instructively, Gentile cited "The Israeli Defense Forces' recent [2006] experience in Lebanon There were many reasons for its failure, but one of them, is that its army had done almost nothing but [counterinsurgency] in the Palestinian territories, and its ability to fight against a strident enemy had atrophied." Maybe more salient was Gentile's other rejoinder that, historically, "nation-building operations conducted at gunpoint don't turn out well" and tend to be as (or more) bloody and brutal as other wars.

Fast forward a decade, and B?n Tre's ghost was born again in the matter-of-fact admission of the IDF's then chief of staff, General Mordecai Gur. Asked if, during its 1978 invasion of South Lebanon, Israel had bombed civilians "without discrimination," he fired back : "Since when has the population of South Lebanon been so sacred? They know very well what the terrorists were doing. . . . I had four villages in South Lebanon bombarded without discrimination." When pressed to confirm that he believed "the civilian population should be punished," Gur's retort was "And how!" Should it surprise us then, that 33 years later the concept was rebooted to flatten presumably (though this has been contested) booby-trapped villages in my old stomping grounds of Kandahar, Afghanistan?

In sum, Israel and America are senseless strategy-simpatico. It's a demonstrably disastrous two-way relationship. Our main exports have been guns – $142.3 billion worth since 1949 (significantly more than any other recipient) – and twin umbrellas of air defense and bottomless diplomatic top-cover for Israel's abuses. As to the top-cover export, it's not for nothing that after the U.S. House rubber-stamped – by a vote of 410-8 – a 2006 resolution (written by the Israel Lobby) justifying IDF attacks on Lebanese civilians, the "maverick" Republican Patrick Buchanan labeled the legislative body as " our Knesset ."

Naturally, Tel Aviv responds in kind by shipping America a how-to-guide for societal militarization, a built-in foreign policy script to their benefit, and the unending ire of most people in the Greater Middle East. It's a timeless and treasured trade – but it benefits neither party in the long run.

"Armies With Countries"

It was once said that Frederick the Great's 18th century Prussia, was "not a country with an army, but an army with a country." Israel has long been thus. It's probably still truer of them than us. The Israelis do, after all, have an immersive system of military conscription – whereas Americans leave the fighting, killing, and dying to a microscopic and unrepresentative Praetorian Guard of professionals. Nevertheless, since 9/11 – or, more accurately, 9/14/2001 – US politics, society, and culture have wildly militarized. To say the least, the outcomes have been unsatisfying: American troops haven't "won" a significant war 75 years. Now, the US has set appearances aside once and for all and " jumped the shark " towards the gimmick of full-throated imperialism.

There are, of course, real differences in scale and substance between America and Israel. The latter is the size of Massachusetts, with the population of New York City. Its "Defense Force" requires most of its of-age population to wage its offensive wars and perennial policing of illegally occupied Palestinians. Israeli society is more plainly " prussianized ." Yet in broader and bigger – if less blatant – ways, so is the post-AUMF United States. America-the-exceptional leads the world in legalized gunrunning and overseas military basing . Rather than the globe's self-styled " Arsenal of Democracy ," the US has become little more than the arsenal of arsenals. So, given the sway of the behemoth military-industrial-complex and recent Israelification of its political culture, perhaps it's more accurate to say America is a defense industry with a country – and not the other way around.

As for 17 year-old me, I didn't think I'd signed up for the Israeli Defense Force on that sunny West Point morning of July 2, 2001. And, for the first two months and 12 days of my military career – maybe I hadn't. I sure did serve in its farcical facsimile, though: fighting its wars for an ensuing 17 more years.

Yet everyone who entered the US military after September 14, 2001 signed up for just that. Which is a true tragedy.

This originally appeared at Popular Resistance .

Danny Sjursen is a retired US Army officer and contributing editor at Antiwar.com His work has appeared in the NY Times, LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Popular Resistance, and Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War is now available for pre-order . Sjursen was recently selected as a 2019-20 Lannan Foundation Cultural Freedom Fellow . Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet . Visit his professional website for contact info, to schedule speeches or media appearances, and access to his past work.

Copyright 2020 Danny Sjursen

[Sep 18, 2020] New Documents Reveal Secret British Efforts To Arm, Assist And Propagandize 'Moderate Rebels' In Syria

Notable quotes:
"... Integrity Initiative ..."
"... Integrity Initiative ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... Integrity Initiative ..."
"... Integrity Initiative ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
Sep 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

New Documents Reveal Secret British Efforts To Arm, Assist And Propagandize 'Moderate Rebels' In Syria

In November 2018 some anonymous people published a number of documents that had been liberated from a clandestine British propaganda organization, the Integrity Initiative .

The same group or person who revealed the Integrity Initiative papers has now released several dozens of documents about another 'Strategic Communication' campaign run by the British Foreign Office. The current release reveals a number of train and assist missions for 'Syrian rebels' as well as propaganda operations run in Syria and globally on behalf of the British government.

Moon of Alabama , as well as other sites , had published a series of pieces about the Integrity Initiative . There were also connections between the Integrity Initiative and the Skripal 'novichok poisoning' affair.

They newly released documents about British operations in Syria are accessible under:

All the now published documents archived in one file are available for download under:

Most of the documents are detailed company responses to several solicitations from the Foreign Office for global and local campaigns in support of the 'moderate rebels' who are fighting against the Syrian government and people.

The documents lay out large scale campaigns which have on-the-ground elements in Syria, training and arming efforts in neighboring countries, command and control elements in Jordan, Turkey and Iraq, as well as global propaganda efforts. These operations were wide spread.


bigger

Most of the documents are from 2016 to 2019. They detail the organization of such operations and also portrait persons involved in these projects. They often refer back to previous campaigns that have been run from 2011/2012 onward. This is where the documents are probably the most interesting. They reveal what an immense effort was and is waged to fill the information space with pro-rebel/pro-Islamist propaganda.

The documents are not about the 'White Helmets' which were a separate British run Strategic Communication campaign financed by various governments. While the operations described in the new documents were coordinated with U.S. efforts they do not reference the CIA run campaigns in Syria which included similar efforts at a cost of $1 billion per year.

The various projects and the detailed commercial offers to implement them from various notorious companies are roughly described in the above two links. I will therefore refrain from repeating that here. Some of the documents' content will surely be used in future Moon of Alabama posts. But for now I will let you rummage through the stash.

Please let us know in the comments of the surprising bits that you might find.

Posted by b on September 18, 2020 at 15:51 UTC | Permalink

james , Sep 18 2020 16:22 utc | 1

thanks b... i will look at them and get back on this..
Red Ryder , Sep 18 2020 16:32 utc | 2
Documents the "war crimes industry" of the UK, and others, as expressed in Libya and Syria.

Assad has indicated he will pursue reparations from the nations that have killed 400,000 citizens, destroyed or stolen his industrial infrastructure (whole factories broken down and trucked into Turkey).

One reason why the US and UK and France want Assad dead is the tens of billions of dollars they will have to pay the Syrian people for the genocidal war waged for a decade in order to kill Assad and break Syria into pieces.

vk , Sep 18 2020 16:53 utc | 3
This confirms the UK has essentially kept the same military doctrine it adopted by necessity in 1945, which is: attach itself to the USA, focus on intelligence, punch above your weight. Ideologically, they rationalize that by attributing themselves the role of the cultured province of the USA; "Greece to the USA's Rome".

The British were always fascinated with intelligence/paramilitary forces. In their vision, it gives you (a nation) an air of sophistication, a civilizing aspect to the nation that wages this kind of warfare.

After the Suez fiasco of 1956, the UK gave up direct interventions in the Middle East. It now only intervenes there under the skirt of the USA. Of course, whenever they can, they do that with their weapon of choice, which is intelligence. So, yeah, these documents don't surprise me.

[Sep 18, 2020] Middle East Peace and Trump's New Art of the Deal by Larry Johnson - Sic Semper Tyrannis

Notable quotes:
"... He thinks the Palestinians will accept permanent helot status? Maybe so... But is that something we should relish? ..."
"... And what of Syria? What of Syria? Evidently Trump considered murdering President Assad two years ago. Is he going to abandon regime change now? is he going to abandon the policy of Pompeo and Jeffries? ..."
"... My guess is that the acceptability for Helot status of Palestinians will depend on how much worse it is compared to the status of Palestinian equivalents elsewhere. Syria and Lebanon certainly look far less attractive. ..."
"... Also, from my admittedly limited experience, Palestinians aren't exactly homogenous, Gaza =! West Bank. ..."
"... If the Israelis are smart (and I think they are), they will continue to exploit Palestinian disunity by not having one helot status but several, with privileges to repress and boss around the lesser helots (perhaps even some less desirable Israelis) awarded to the higher helots. ..."
"... The neocons have been firmly ensconced in ME policy since Reagan. At least Trump made a little bit of lemonade. Nothing earth shattering IMO but moved the ball forward 10 yds and away from own goals under the so-called experts & strategists of the past decades. ..."
"... Support for Israel and its maximalist dreams has always been bipartisan. ..."
"... The colonel has a much more realistic take on this: the intention is to co-opt the Arab states into forcing the Palestinians to accept permanent helot status. Not quite slaves but closes to it. ..."
"... There would be many ways to describe that, but I suspect "peace plan" would rank amongst the less accurate ones. ..."
"... I also remember when the Trump admin killed the Gen. Suleimani late last year the same people also touted it a national security success. This is shameful pattern. ..."
"... Just because Jared Kushner, Berkowitz (Kushner's mini-me), David Friedman and the Zionist anti-American paid shills of Christians United For Israel et.al put Israel's interest first does not make it a success for American interests abroad. Trump does not know two things about the ME. He just obeys orders from this outside 'advisors' when it comes to ME policy. ..."
"... When I read that " If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause." I think that The Islamic Republic of Iran is what is being offered or used as that cause. ..."
"... But if the present and future Israelis believe this means that the total advantage is totally theirs to press, then present and future Palestinians will continue searching for ways to make their unhappiness felt. But that outcome would not be Trump's fault. That outcome would be the majority-likudnic Israelis' choice. ..."
"... the problem with "outside in" strategy is that implies that if conditions are bad enough for the Palestinians, they will agree to any deal Trump can force down their throats. Instead, Palestinians have been offered terrible deals since 2000 (ie., a state that is never going to be a real state with permanent Israeli control over its borders, air space, and water tables ..."
"... The smarter plan is to acknowledge that the Zionists killed the Two-State Solution, and Palestinians might as well push this into an anti-Apartheid struggle. ..."
Sep 18, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

turcopolier , 16 September 2020 at 08:52 AM

All

It is clear that the heat has gone away in the fabled "Arab Street" over the issue of Israel. If that were not so, the rulers would not have dared to do this. That being so ... It will be very interesting to see how many people from these two countries go to Israel to visit holy sites like the al-Aqsa Mosque. There have not been many religious tourists from Egypt and Jordan. This is what the Israelis call pilgrims. Trump thinks that he can bring Saudi Arabia into such a deal? Good! Let's see it. He thinks that Iran can be brought into such a deal? Wonderful! Let's see it.

He thinks the Palestinians will accept permanent helot status? Maybe so... But is that something we should relish?

And what of Syria? What of Syria? Evidently Trump considered murdering President Assad two years ago. Is he going to abandon regime change now? is he going to abandon the policy of Pompeo and Jeffries?

I suggest that security should be very tight on airline flights from Bahrein and the UAE.

eakens , 16 September 2020 at 10:03 AM

I suspect this has less to do with peace and more to do with lining up a coalition against Iran. He's signing peace deals at the white house the same day he not only threatens Iran for a make believe assassination plot against our South African Ambassador, but admits he wanted to assassinate Assad.

He's making a big mistake though if he thinks Iranians will behave and respond similarly to the Arabs, and they are certainly not North Koreans.

He's being frog marched into a war with Iran while his ego is being stroked under the guise of a Nobel peace prize.

nbsp; tjfxh , 16 September 2020 at 11:17 AM

What say about Alastair Crooke's "Maintaining Pretence Over Reality: 'Simply Put, the Iranians Outfoxed the U.S. Defence Systems'" at Strategic Culture Foundation?

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/09/14/maintaining-pretence-over-reality-simply-put-iranians-outfoxed-us-defence-systems/

A.I.S. , 16 September 2020 at 11:49 AM

@ turcopolier:

Excellent questions.

My guess is that the acceptability for Helot status of Palestinians will depend on how much worse it is compared to the status of Palestinian equivalents elsewhere. Syria and Lebanon certainly look far less attractive. The other issue is the degree with which Arab elites can "reroute" Anti Israeli into Anti Iranian sentiments on the Arab street.

Also, from my admittedly limited experience, Palestinians aren't exactly homogenous, Gaza =! West Bank.

If the Israelis are smart (and I think they are), they will continue to exploit Palestinian disunity by not having one helot status but several, with privileges to repress and boss around the lesser helots (perhaps even some less desirable Israelis) awarded to the higher helots.

I think this will be fairly hard though. Various Historical, religion and cultural issues specific to the situation make it quite hard for Arabs to actually assimilate into Israeli society. There is also a lack of a unifying foe to unite against. If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause.

Leith , 16 September 2020 at 12:01 PM

"I suggest that security should be very tight on airline flights from Bahrein and the UAE."

Bingo! I won't be flying on Gulf Air or FlyDubai.

Jack , 16 September 2020 at 02:12 PM

The neocons have been firmly ensconced in ME policy since Reagan. At least Trump made a little bit of lemonade. Nothing earth shattering IMO but moved the ball forward 10 yds and away from own goals under the so-called experts & strategists of the past decades.

The TDS afflicted media couldn't bear that some lemonade was made. Wolf Blitzer interviewing Jared Kushner was all about pandemic nothing about the implications or process to having couple gulf sheikhs recognize Israel. The fact is that these gulf sheikhs only paid lip service to the plight of the Palestinians in any case. This formalizes what was reality. The "Arab Street" have always been a manifestation of whatever were powerful manipulations. The manipulators have been coopted in the current lemonade making. In any case Bibi must be very pleased. He didn't have to give up anything in his difficult domestic political predicament.

Jack , 16 September 2020 at 02:44 PM

https://twitter.com/partynxs/status/1306015487273377792?s=21

Support for Israel and its maximalist dreams has always been bipartisan.

Serge , 16 September 2020 at 05:18 PM

The arabs simply do not care anymore, from Morocco to Oman. Their spirit totally broken by the "Arab spring", youth disillusioned and jobless. The only dream left for most is to ape the western lifestyle. The others are fighting in wars.

I can see one of two futures, a Clean Break: Securing the Realm-style one in which all of the arabs live life as helots under the thumb of a Greater Israel. This would bring relative economic prosperity to most of the helots.

Yeah, Right , 16 September 2020 at 06:03 PM

I think I see the flaw in this article: ..."If that turns out to be the case and this maneuver succeeds in ultimately bringing about a two state solution for Israel and the Palestinians,"...

Surely you don't believe that these maneuvers are intended to bring about a Palestinian state?

The colonel has a much more realistic take on this: the intention is to co-opt the Arab states into forcing the Palestinians to accept permanent helot status. Not quite slaves but closes to it.

There would be many ways to describe that, but I suspect "peace plan" would rank amongst the less accurate ones.

Polish Janitor , 16 September 2020 at 06:14 PM

One running theme that I have been seeing from the former so-called neocon critics and ME wars opponents (Michael Scheuer comes to mind) is their uncontrollable exhilaration for any terrible so-called F.P. 'success' that the Trump admin achieves in the ME.

I also remember when the Trump admin killed the Gen. Suleimani late last year the same people also touted it a national security success. This is shameful pattern.

Just because Jared Kushner, Berkowitz (Kushner's mini-me), David Friedman and the Zionist anti-American paid shills of Christians United For Israel et.al put Israel's interest first does not make it a success for American interests abroad. Trump does not know two things about the ME. He just obeys orders from this outside 'advisors' when it comes to ME policy.

It it exactly what it is. Israel normalized relations with the most notorious dictatorships and wants to implement Pegasus spying program and wide-scale surveillance (among other nefarious things) in UAE and Bahrain. How is that a success for America? America should stay out of these Israeli-first trouble making schemes and stay neutral or out of there.

Let me tell you what a F.P. success is, OK? It would have been a huge success if America was able to lure Iran into its orbit to fend of the Chinese communists out of the region and out of our lives and have a stronger alliance with regards to its upcoming Cold War with China.

It would have been successful for America to balance China out with Iran, India, Turkey and Afghanistan, and not let China to invest billions in Haifa port (close to U.S. military forces there) a major hub of its Belt and Road initiative and a huge blow to U.S. new Cold war effort against China.

Think about it.

Allow me to raise a few points: first of all , every single one of these brutal backward Arab dictatorships has had low key but crucial relations with Israel since the Cold War and they just made it open, Big deal! Second, this joyfulness for a hostile anti-american country is quite sad for two reasons:

1. that Larry touts it as a success for America, which is anything but a success for America. It is a success for Bibi and Trump's evangelical/zionist sugar daddies to cough up some Benjamins for Trump's campaign and his GOP/Likudniks. I guess nowadays our judgement is so clouded and inverted that MAGA and MIGA are considered inseparable.

2. The delusion that dems are bitterly angry and anti-Israel (because they are anti-Trump) and therefore it automatically becomes an issue of partisan support for Trump and whatever he does. This idea is so absurd that I won't get into it. Dems were the first to congratulate Israel.

I would like Larry to tell me what he thinks of H.R. 1697 Israel Anti-Boycot Act which punishes American citizens for practicing their god-given 2nd Amendment rights. or the 3.8 billion of aid, or the the gifting of Golan heights to Bibi? Are these big foreign policy success too?

What the Arab-Israeli normalization means:

*The U.S. wants out of the ME to focus on China, a wet dream that Israel favors especially post Cold War. It does not want secular, (semi) democratic sovereign states around it, and if anyone pays attention close enough they do whatever they can to prevent any kind of political reform and change of government to occur among Arab nations. Israelis are staunch supporters of Saudi, Bahraini, UAE, Jordanian, and Egyptian dictatorships in the MENA region.

Israel will now be better positioned to roll-back any kind of grassroots reform in the ME with the help of their now openly pro-Israeli Arab rulers by directing policies to these backward rulers to divest from human development and political reform and instead invest more in security, tech, surveillance.

This trend also explains Israeli constant opposition to the Iran Deal, which would have had further ramifications for political reform and accelerated weakening of Hardliners in Tehran and a better position for America to pivot to China with the help of a moderated Iran. Israel does not want a powerful democratic nation near its borders, and especially not in Iran. Just take a look at Israel's neighbors and tell me how many of them are democratic and friendly with Israel and how does Israel behave when there are secular Arab democratic states around it?

John Merryman , 16 September 2020 at 10:17 PM

In the end, it's all just tribal superstition. Logically a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. The fact we are aware, than the myriad details of which we are aware.

One of the reasons we can't have a live and let live world is because everyone thinks their own vision should be universal, rather than unique. So the fundamentalists rule.

The reason nature is so diverse and dense is because it isn't a monoculture. Irrespective of our technology, we are still fairly primitive, in the grand scheme of things.

different clue , 17 September 2020 at 02:42 AM

A.I.S.,

When I read that " If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause." I think that The Islamic Republic of Iran is what is being offered or used as that cause.

If this all ends up in the longest run leading to today's and tomorrow's Israelis accepting the lesser Israel that Rabin ended up deciding would be necessary for a lesser-but-still-real Palestine to emerge as a real country resigned with both resigned enough to that outcome that they would tolerate eachother's separate independence over the long term, then this will go somewhere good.

But if the present and future Israelis believe this means that the total advantage is totally theirs to press, then present and future Palestinians will continue searching for ways to make their unhappiness felt. But that outcome would not be Trump's fault. That outcome would be the majority-likudnic Israelis' choice.

Mathias Alexander , 17 September 2020 at 04:53 AM

To have a two state solution Israel will have to leave enough of Palestine without Jewish settlement for there to be room for another state. Their actions show that they have no intention of doing that.

Matthew , 17 September 2020 at 09:26 AM

Larry: the problem with "outside in" strategy is that implies that if conditions are bad enough for the Palestinians, they will agree to any deal Trump can force down their throats. Instead, Palestinians have been offered terrible deals since 2000 (ie., a state that is never going to be a real state with permanent Israeli control over its borders, air space, and water tables)

The smarter plan is to acknowledge that the Zionists killed the Two-State Solution, and Palestinians might as well push this into an anti-Apartheid struggle. The gerontocracy that rules the PA will soon pass away. The younger generation of Palestinians are much more sophisticated.

As a trial lawyer, I see this type of behavior all the time. If you offer someone essentially nothing, they lose nothing by rejecting it. The Arab dictators will not be around forever. And before Camp David, the Palestinians have suffered far worse than they are suffering now.

BABAK MAKKINEJAD , 17 September 2020 at 09:55 AM

Matthew:

For any kind of Peace in Palestine, Jerusalem must revert back to Muslim Sovereignty.

It is all about who calls the shots there; just as it was 800 years ago.

Artemesia , 17 September 2020 at 10:35 AM

Matthew: Your description of Trump's strategy is no different from Vladimir Jabotinsky's 1923 Iron Wall doctrine
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/ironwall/ironwall.htm
and
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/quot-the-iron-wall-quot

In short: "We Jews know that Arabs (Palestinians) will never, ever voluntarily give up hope of resisting Jewish demands, and Jews will never stop with Jewish demands: that all of Palestine become Jewish.
Since 'voluntary' will not work, only force -- an Iron Wall -- will suffice.
Jabotinsky defines "Iron Wall" as the enforcement capacity of an outside power:

"we cannot promise anything to the Arabs of the Land of Israel or the Arab countries. Their voluntary agreement is out of the question. Hence those who hold that an agreement with the natives is an essential condition for Zionism can now say "no" and depart from Zionism. Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population. This colonization can, therefore, continue and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population – an iron wall which the native population cannot break through. This is, in toto, our policy towards the Arabs. To formulate it any other way would only be hypocrisy.

Not only must this be so, it is so whether we admit it or not. What does the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate mean for us? It is the fact that a disinterested power committed itself to create such security conditions that the local population would be deterred from interfering with our efforts."

Be aware that Benjamin Netanyahu's father, Benzion, was Jabotinsky's administrative assistant, then replacement, in New York; that Bibi is very much heir to the ideological fervor of Jabotinsky & of Benzion; and that Benzion and Benjamin laid out the blueprint for the GWOT at the Jerusalem Conference July 4, 1979
https://www.amazon.com/International-Terrorism-Challenge-Benjamin-Netanyahu/dp/0878558942

Trump plays only a walk-on role in this carefully scripted 150 year old zionist drama.

turcopolier , 17 September 2020 at 10:58 AM

Babak

To "Muslim Sovereignty?" No. It should be an international city.

turcopolier , 17 September 2020 at 11:30 AM

james

"there isn't a lot of difference between KSA and these fiefdoms of uae and bahrain.." A total crock. you obviously have never been to either of these places.

BABAK MAKKINEJAD , 17 September 2020 at 11:46 AM

Col. Lang:

Who or what Legitimate Authority would administer such an International City?

None has ever existed.

Artemesia , 17 September 2020 at 12:00 PM

Jews can have Jerusalem if they return Washington, DC to full USA sovereignty.

[Sep 18, 2020] Exposing war crimes should always be legal. Committing and hiding them should not by Caitlin Johnstone

Sep 18, 2020 | www.rt.com

By Caitlin Johnstone , an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her website is here and you can follow her on Twitter @caitoz ...Amid all the pedantic squabbling over when it is and is not legal under US law for a journalist to expose evidence of US war crimes, we must never lose sight of the fact that (A) it should always be legal to expose war crimes, (B) it should always be illegal for governments to hide evidence of their war crimes, (C) war crimes should always be punished, (D) people who start criminal wars should always be punished, (E) governments should not be permitted to have a level of secrecy that allows them to start criminal wars, and (F) power and secrecy should always have an inverse relationship to one another.

The Assange case needs to be fought tooth and claw, but we must keep in mind that it is so very, very many clicks back from where we need to be as a civilization. In an ideal situation, governments should be too afraid of the public to keep secrets from them; instead, here we are begging the most powerful government in the world to please not imprison a journalist because he arguably did not break the rules that that government made for itself.

Do you see how far that point is from where we need to be?

It's important to remember this. It's important to remember that the amount of evil deeds power structures will commit is directly proportional to the amount of information they are permitted to hide from the public. We will not have a healthy world until power and secrecy have an inverse relationship to each other: privacy for rank-and-file individuals, and transparency for governments and their officials.

"But what about military secrets?" one might object. Yes, what about military secrets? What about the fact that virtually all military violence perpetrated by the world's largest power structures is initiated based on lies ? What about the utterly indisputable fact that the more secrecy we allow the war machine, the more wars it deceives the public into allowing it to initiate?

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1028347374765318144&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F501031-caitlin-johnstone-exposing-war-crimes%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

In a healthy world, the most powerful government on Earth wouldn't be trying to squint at its own laws in such a way that permits the prosecution of a journalist for telling the truth.

In a healthy world, the most powerful government on Earth wouldn't prosecute anyone for telling the truth at all.

In a healthy world, governments would prosecute their own war crimes, instead of those who expose them.

In a healthy world, governments wouldn't commit war crimes at all.

In a healthy world, governments wouldn't start wars at all.

In a healthy world, governments would see truth as something to be desired and actively sought, not something to be repressed and punished.

In a healthy world, governments wouldn't keep secrets from the public, and wouldn't have any cause to want to.

In a healthy world, if governments existed at all, they would exist solely as tools for the people to serve themselves, with full transparency and accountability to those people.

We are obviously a very, very far cry from the kind of healthy world we would all like to one day find ourselves in. But we should always keep in mind what a healthy world will look like, and hold it as our true north for the direction that we are pushing in.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

By Caitlin Johnstone , an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her website is here and you can follow her on Twitter @caitoz

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Reality007 3 hours ago 18 Sep, 2020 10:07 AM

Unfortunately, no criminals that have committed or covered up war crimes, decades ago to present, will ever be indicted. They are all above the law while all innocents that revealed the truths must pay highly. We can only pray and hope for the best for Julian Assange.
Fred Dozer Reality007 1 hour ago 18 Sep, 2020 12:16 PM
I see nothing wrong with robbing banks in criminal controlled countries. These governments, murder, cheat, lie, & steal.
T. Agee Kaye 2 hours ago 18 Sep, 2020 11:10 AM
The right of a people to know what their government is doing, and the potential consequences of those actions on the people, nation, and society, is inalienable. The exposure of war crimes and any corruption is not illegal and cannot be made illegal. The trial of Assange is not about the legality of Assange's actions. It is a display of the influence that criminal interests have over the government and judiciary. It is an attempt to create legitimacy by creating precedent. Murder has plenty of precedent. It will never be legitimate.
Jewel Gyn 3 hours ago 18 Sep, 2020 10:21 AM
Agreed but having said that, we are not living in a perfect world. Bully with big fists exist and the lesser countries just stood by frustrated and sucking their thumbs, silent lest they be targeted for voicing out. And you can see clearly why US is walking away from any form of organised voice eg UN.
Odinsson 2 hours ago 18 Sep, 2020 10:51 AM
What we need in the case of Julian Assange is factual reporting. While the motivation to prosecute Assange is most likely political, there would be no ability to prosecute him were it not for his active support of PFC Manning's hacking of a DOD information system. It is not unlawful to publish classified information which was provided to you, so long as you are not involved in the criminal acts leading to the exfiltration of the data. Had Assange not aided PFC Manning by looking up hash codes in spreadsheets of known password to hash code translations then the grand jury would not have indicted him. FWIW, it is my opinion that the statute of limitations expired long ago and this should be grounds for dismissal of all charges against him.
jholf 1 hour ago 18 Sep, 2020 12:04 PM
These world leaders, claim to be Christians, ... their God 'commands', "Thou shalt not kill." Yet, for more than 6 decades, that is exactly what each of these Christian Commanders in Chief, have done for no reason, other than to fill the pockets of the elite. A man is known by his deeds, Assange gave us truth, while these world leaders gave us war and destructi

[Sep 17, 2020] Why the Blob Needs an Enemy by ARTA MOEINI

Highly recommended!
Crisis of neoliberal undermines the USA supremacy and the US elite hangs by the stras to the Full Specturm Domionanc edoctrine, whih it now can't enforce and which is financially unsustainable for the USA.
Collapse of neoliberalism means the end of the USA supremacy and the whole political existence on the USA was banked on this single card.
Notable quotes:
"... In America, this unfortunate status quo in support of primacy persists even in the Trumpian Age and within debates around the eccentric and unconventional presidency of Donald Trump. In fact, despite all the talk of political polarization in the United States, it appears that when it comes to naming new threats and enemies to "contain," "deter," and deem "existential," bipartisan consensus is found swiftly and quite readily. ..."
"... In a recent speech delivered in Europe, the U.S. defense secretary and former corporate lobbyist for Raytheon, Mark Esper, unified these two faces of the Janus that embodies the North Atlantic foreign policy establishment. Esper referred to both China and Russia as disruptive forces working to unravel the international order, which "we have created together," and called on the international community to preserve that order by countering both powers. As it stands, we are on the path to a series of cold wars throughout this century, if not a hot conflict between rival great powers that could spiral into World War III. Despite increased calls for realism and restraint in foreign policy, primacy is alive and well. ..."
"... There is, however, a more significant psychosociological reason for the blob's remarkable persistence. When it comes to foreign policy, Western policymakers today suffer from a Manichean worldview, a caustic mindset crystalized during a decades-running Cold War with the Soviet Union. ..."
"... Frozen in this Cold War mindset, the Atlanticist blob has internalized the bipolar moment that followed the Second World War, treating it as a permanent fixture and the normal state of the international system. In fact, the bipolar and unipolar periods we have undergone over the past 75 years are nothing but aberrations and historical anomalies. In truth, the reality of the international system tends toward multi-polarity -- and at long last it appears that the system is self-correcting. The North Atlantic establishment came of age during that time of exception, forming its (liberal) identity through the process of "alterity" and in a nemetic opposition to communism. ..."
"... Not surprisingly then, the North Atlantic elites continue to seek adversaries to demonize and "monsters to destroy" in order to justify their moral universalism and presumed ideological superiority, doing so under the garb of a totalizing and absolutist idea of exceptionalism. ..."
Sep 09, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The international order is no longer bipolar, despite the elites' insistence otherwise. Fortunately there is hope for change.

Despite its many failings and high human, social, and economic costs, American foreign policy since the end of the Second World War has shown a remarkable degree of continuity and inflexibility. This rather curious phenomenon is not limited to America alone. The North Atlantic foreign policy establishment from Washington D.C. to London, which some have aptly dubbed the "blob," has doggedly championed the grand strategic framework of "primacy" and armed hegemony, often coated with more docile language such as "global leadership," "American indispensability," and "strengthening the Western alliance."

In America, this unfortunate status quo in support of primacy persists even in the Trumpian Age and within debates around the eccentric and unconventional presidency of Donald Trump. In fact, despite all the talk of political polarization in the United States, it appears that when it comes to naming new threats and enemies to "contain," "deter," and deem "existential," bipartisan consensus is found swiftly and quite readily.

On the Left, and in the wake of President Trump's election, the Democratic establishment began fixating its wrath on Russia–adopting a confrontational stance toward Moscow and fueling fears of a renewed Cold War. On the Right, the realigning GOP has increasingly, if at times inconsistently, singled out China as the greatest threat to U.S. national security, a hostile attitude further exacerbated in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Alarmingly, Joe Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee, has recently joined the hawkish bandwagon toward China, even attempting to outflank Trump on this issue and attacking the president's China policy as too weak and accommodating of China's rise.

In a recent speech delivered in Europe, the U.S. defense secretary and former corporate lobbyist for Raytheon, Mark Esper, unified these two faces of the Janus that embodies the North Atlantic foreign policy establishment. Esper referred to both China and Russia as disruptive forces working to unravel the international order, which "we have created together," and called on the international community to preserve that order by countering both powers. As it stands, we are on the path to a series of cold wars throughout this century, if not a hot conflict between rival great powers that could spiral into World War III. Despite increased calls for realism and restraint in foreign policy, primacy is alive and well.

Indeed, the dominant tendency among many foreign policy observers is to overprivilege the threat of rising superpowers and to insist on strong containment measures to limit the spheres of influence of the so-called revisionist powers. Such an approach, coupled with the prospect of ascendant powers actively resisting and confronting the United States as the ruling global hegemon, has one eminent International Relations scholar warning of the Thucydides Trap.

There are others, however, who insist that the structural shifts undermining the liberal international order mark the end of U.S. hegemony and its "unipolar moment." In realist terms, what Secretary Esper really means to protect, they would argue, is a conception of "rules-based" global order that was a structural by-product of the Second World War and the ensuing Cold War and whose very rules and institutions were underwritten by U.S. hegemony. This would be an exercise in folly -- not corresponding to the reality of systemic change and the return of great power competition and civilizational contestation.

What's more, the sanctimony of this "liberal" hegemonic order and the logic of democratic peace were both presumably vindicated by the collapse of the Soviet Union and its totalitarian system, a black swan event that for many had heralded the "end of history" and promised the advent of the American century. A great deal of lives, capital, resources, and goodwill were sacrificed by America and her allies toward that crusade for liberty and universality, which was only the most recent iteration of a radically utopian element in American political thought going back to Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine. Alas, as it had eluded earlier generations of idealists, that century never truly arrived, and neither did the empire of liberty and prosperity that it loftily aimed to establish.

Today, the emerging reality of a multipolar world and alternate worldviews championed by the different cultural blocs led by China and Russia appears to have finally burst the bubble of American Triumphalism, proving that the ideas behind it are "not simply obsolete but absurd." This failure should have been expected since the very project the idealists had espoused was built on a pathological "savior complex" and a false truism that reflected the West's own absolutist and distorted sense of ideological and moral superiority. Samuel Huntington might have been right all along to cast doubt on the long-term salience of using ideology and doctrinal universalism as the dividing principle for international relations. His call to focus, instead, on civilizational distinction, the permanent power of culture on human action, and the need to find common ground rings especially true today. Indeed, fostering a spirit of coexistence and open dialogue among the world's great civilizational complexes is a fundamental tenet of a cultural realism.

And yet, despite such permanent shifts in the global order away from universalist dichotomies and global hegemony and toward culturalism and multi-polarity, there exists a profound disjunction between the structural realities of the international system and the often business-as-usual attitude of the North Atlantic foreign policy elites. How could one explain the astonishing levels of rigidity and continuity on the part of the "blob" and the military-industrial-congressional complex regularly pushing for more adventurism and interventionism abroad? Why would the bipartisan primacist establishment, which their allies in the mainstream media endeavor still to mask, justify such illiberal acts of aggression and attempts at empire by weaponizing the moralistic language of human rights, individual liberty, and democracy in a world increasingly awakened to arbitrary ideological framing?

There are, of course, systemic reasons behind the power and perpetuation of the blob and the endurance of primacy. The vast economic incentives of war and its instruments, institutional routinization and intransigence, stupefaction and groupthink of government bureaucracy, and the significant influence of lobbying efforts by foreign governments and other vested interest groups could each partly explain the remarkable continuity of the North Atlantic foreign policy establishment. The endless stream of funding from the defense industry, neoliberal and neoconservative foundations, as well as the government itself keeps the "blob" alive, while the general penchant for bipartisanship around preserving the status quo allows it to thrive. What is more, elite schools produce highly analytic yet narrowly focused and conventional minds that are tamed to be agreeable so as to not undermine elite consensus. This conveyor belt feeds the "blob," supplying it with the army of specialists, experts, and wonks it requires to function as a mind melding hive, while in practice safeguarding employment for the career bureaucrats for decades to come.

There is, however, a more significant psychosociological reason for the blob's remarkable persistence. When it comes to foreign policy, Western policymakers today suffer from a Manichean worldview, a caustic mindset crystalized during a decades-running Cold War with the Soviet Union. The world might have changed fundamentally with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the bipolar structure of the international system might have ended irreversibly, but the personnel -- the Baby Boomer Generation elites conducting foreign policy in the North Atlantic -- did not leave office or retire with the collapse of the USSR. They largely remain in power to this day.

Every generation is forged through a formative crisis, its experiences seen through the prism that all-encompassing ordeal. For the incumbent elites, that generational crisis was the Cold War and the omnipresent threat of nuclear annihilation. The dualistic paradigm of the international system during the U.S.-Soviet rivalry bred an entire generation to see the world through a black-and-white binary. It should come as no surprise that this era elevated the idealist strain of thought and the crusading, neo-Jacobin impulse of U.S. foreign policy (personified by Thomas Jefferson and Woodrow Wilson) to new, ever-expanding heights. Idealism prizes a nemesis and thus revels in a bipolar order.

Frozen in this Cold War mindset, the Atlanticist blob has internalized the bipolar moment that followed the Second World War, treating it as a permanent fixture and the normal state of the international system. In fact, the bipolar and unipolar periods we have undergone over the past 75 years are nothing but aberrations and historical anomalies. In truth, the reality of the international system tends toward multi-polarity -- and at long last it appears that the system is self-correcting. The North Atlantic establishment came of age during that time of exception, forming its (liberal) identity through the process of "alterity" and in a nemetic opposition to communism.

Not surprisingly then, the North Atlantic elites continue to seek adversaries to demonize and "monsters to destroy" in order to justify their moral universalism and presumed ideological superiority, doing so under the garb of a totalizing and absolutist idea of exceptionalism. After all, a nemetic zeitgeist during which ideology reigned supreme and realism was routinely discounted was tailor-made for dogmatic absolutism and moral universalism. In such a zero-sum strategic environment, it was only natural to demand totality and frame the ongoing geopolitical struggle in terms of an existential opposition over Good and Evil that would quite literally split the world in two.

Today, that same kind of Manichean thinking continues to handicap paradigmatic change in foreign policy. A false consciousness, it underpins and promotes belief in the double myths of indispensability and absolute exceptionality, suggesting that the North Atlantic bloc holds a certain monopoly on all that is good and true. It is not by chance that such pathological renderings of "exceptionalism" and "leadership" have been wielded as convenient rationale and intellectual placeholders for the ideology of empire across the North Atlantic. This sense of ingrained moral self-righteousness, coupled with an attitude that celebrates activism, utopianism, and interventionism in foreign policy, has created and reinforced a culture of strategic overextension and imperial overreach.

It is this very culture -- personified and dominated by the Baby Boomers and the blob they birthed -- that has made hawkishness ubiquitous, avoids any real reckoning as to the limits of power, and habitually belittles calls for restraint and moderation as isolationism. In truth, however, what has been the exceptional part in the delusion of absolute exceptionalism is Pax Americana, liberal hegemony, and the hubris that animates them having gone uncontested and unchecked for so long. That confrontation could begin in earnest by directly challenging the Boomer blob itself -- and by propagating a counter-elite offering a starkly different worldview.

Achieving such a genuine paradigm shift demands a generational sea-change, to retire the old blob and make a better one in its place. It is about time for the old establishment to forgo its reign, allowing a new younger cohort from among the Millennial and post-Millennial generations to advance into leadership roles. The Millennials, especially, are now the largest generation of eligible voters (overtaking the Baby Boomers) as well as the first generation not habituated by the Cold War; in fact, many of them grew up during the "unipolar moment" of American hegemony. Hence, their generational identity is not built around a dualistic alterity. Free from obsessive fixation on ideological supremacy, most among them reject total global dominance as both unattainable and undesirable.

Instead, their worldview is shaped by an entirely different set of experiences and disappointments. Their generational crisis was brought on by a series of catastrophic interventions and endless wars around the world -- chief among them the debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq and the toppling of Libya's Gaddafi -- punctuated by repeated onslaughts of financial recessions and domestic strife. The atmosphere of uncertainty, instability, and general chaos has bred discontent, turning many Millennials into pragmatic realists who are disenchanted with the system, critical of the pontificating establishment, and naturally skeptical of lofty ideals and utopian doctrines.

In short, this is not an absolutist and complacent generation of idealists, but one steeped in realism and a certain perspectivism that has internalized the inherent relativity of both power and truth. Most witnessed the dangers of overreach, hubris, and a moralized foreign policy, so they are actively self-reflective, circumspect, and restrained. As a generation, they appear to be less the moralist and the global activist and more prudent, level-headed, and temperamentally conservative -- developing a keen appreciation for realpolitik, sovereignty, and national interest. Their preference for a non-ideological approach in foreign policy suggests that once in power, they will be less antagonistic and more tolerant of rival powers and accepting of pluralism in the international system. That openness to civilizational distinction and global cultural pluralism also implies that future Millennial statesmen will subscribe to a more humble, less grandiose, and narrower definition of interest that focuses on securing core objectives -- i.e., preserving national security and recognizing spheres of influence.

Reforming and rehabilitating the U.S. foreign policy establishment will require more than policy prescriptions and comprehensive reports: it needs generational change. To transform and finally "rein in" North Atlantic foreign policy, our task today must be to facilitate and expedite this shift. Once that occurs, the incoming Millennials should be better positioned to discard the deep-seated and routinized ideology of empire, supplanting it with a greater emphasis on partnership that is driven by mutual interests and a general commitment to sharing the globe with the world's other great cultures.

This new approach calls for America to lead by the power of its example, exhibiting the benefits of liberty and a constitutional republic at home, without forcibly imposing those values abroad. Such an outlook means abandoning the coercive regime change agendas and the corrosive projects of nation-building and democracy promotion. In this new multipolar world, America would be an able, dynamic, and equal participant in ensuring sustainable peace side-by-side the world's other great powers, acting as "a normal country in a normal time." Reflecting the spirit of republican governance authentically is far more pertinent now and salutary for the future of the North Atlantic peoples than is promulgating the utopian image of a shining city on a hill.

Arta Moeini is research director at the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy and a postdoc fellow at the Center for the Study of Statesmanship. Dr. Moeini's latest project advances a theory of cultural realism as a cornerstone to a new understanding of foreign policy.

The Institute for Peace and Diplomacy will be co-sponsoring "The Future of Grand Strategy in the Post-COVID World," with TAC, tonight at 6 p.m. ET. Register for free here .

[Sep 17, 2020] Military desperados and Mattis "military messiah syndrome" by Scott Ritter

Highly recommended!
I always assumed that Trump was the candidate of MIC in 2016 elections, while Hillary was the candidate of "Intelligence community." But it looks like US military is infected with desperados like Mattis and Trump was unable fully please them despite all his efforts.
But it looks like US military is infected with desperados like Mattis and Trump was unable fully please them despite all his efforts. Military desperados are not interested in how many American they deprived of decent standard of living due to outside military expenses. All they want is to dominate the word and maintain the "Full Spectrum Dominance" whatever it costs.
Sep 16, 2020 | www.rt.com

... ... ...

It is Trump's tortured relationship with the military that stands out the most, especially as told through the eyes of former Secretary of Defense Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis, a retired marine general. It is clear that Bob Woodward spent hours speaking with Mattis -- the insights, emotions and internal voice captured in the book show a level of intimacy that could only be reached through in-depth interviews, and Woodward has a well-earned reputation for getting people to speak to him.

The book makes it clear that Mattis viewed Trump as a threat to the US' standing as the defender of a rules-based order -- built on the back of decades-old alliances -- that had been in place since the end of the Second World War.

It also makes it clear that Mattis and the military officers he oversaw placed defending this order above implementing the will of the American people, as expressed through the free and fair election that elevated Donald Trump to the position of commander-in-chief. In short, Mattis and his coterie of generals knew best, and when the president dared issue an order or instruction that conflicted with their vision of how the world should work, they would do their best to undermine this order, all the while confirming to the president that it was being followed.

This trend was on display in Woodward's telling of Trump's efforts to forge better relations with North Korea. At every turn, Mattis and his military commanders sought to isolate the president from the reality on the ground, briefing him only on what they thought he needed to know, and keeping him in the dark about what was really going on.

In a telling passage, Woodward takes us into the mind of Jim Mattis as he contemplates the horrors of a nuclear war with North Korea, and the responsibility he believed he shouldered when it came to making the hard decision as to whether nuclear weapons should be used or not. Constitutionally, the decision was the president's alone to make, something Mattis begrudgingly acknowledges. But in Mattis' world, he, as secretary of defense, would be the one who influenced that decision.

Mattis, along with the other general officers described by Woodward, is clearly gripped with what can only be described as the 'Military Messiah Syndrome'.

What defines this 'syndrome' is perhaps best captured in the words of Emma Sky, the female peace activist-turned adviser to General Ray Odierno, the one-time commander of US forces in Iraq. In a frank give-and-take captured by Ms. Sky in her book 'The Unravelling', Odierno spoke of the value he placed on the military's willingness to defend "freedom" anywhere in the world. " There is, " he said, " no one who understands more the importance of liberty and freedom in all its forms than those who travel the world to defend it ."

Ms. Sky responded in typically direct fashion: " One day, I will have you admit that the [Iraq] war was a bad idea, that the administration was led by a radical neocon program, that the US's standing in the world has gone down greatly, and that we are far less safe than we were before 9/11. "

Odierno would have nothing of it. " It will never happen while I'm the commander of soldiers in Iraq ."

" To lead soldiers in battle ," Ms. Sky noted, " a commander had to believe in the cause. " Left unsaid was the obvious: even if the cause was morally and intellectually unsound.

his, more than anything, is the most dangerous thing about the 'Military Messiah Syndrome' as captured by Bob Woodward -- the fact that the military is trapped in an inherited reality divorced from the present, driven by precepts which have nothing to with what is, but rather by what the military commanders believe should be. The unyielding notion that the US military is a force for good becomes little more than meaningless drivel when juxtaposed with the reality that the mission being executed is inherently wrong.

The 'Military Messiah Syndrome' lends itself to dishonesty and, worse, to self-delusion. It is one thing to lie; it is another altogether to believe the lie as truth.

No single general had the courage to tell Trump allegations against Syria were a hoax

The cruise missile attack on Syria in early April 2017 stands out as a case in point. The attack was ordered in response to allegations that Syria had dropped a bomb containing the sarin nerve agent on a town -- Khan Shaykhun -- that was controlled by Al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamic militants.

Trump was led to believe that the 59 cruise missiles launched against Shayrat Airbase -- where the Su-22 aircraft alleged to have dropped the bombs were based -- destroyed Syria's capability to carry out a similar attack in the future. When shown post-strike imagery in which the runways were clearly untouched, Trump was outraged, lashing out at Secretary of Defense Mattis in a conference call. " I can't believe you didn't destroy the runway !", Woodward reports the president shouting.

" Mr. President ," Mattis responds in the text, " they would rebuild the runway in 24 hours, and it would have little effect on their ability to deploy weapons. We destroyed the capability to deploy weapons " for months, Mattis said.

" That was the mission the president had approved, " Woodward writes, clearly channeling Mattis, " and they had succeeded ."

The problem with this passage is that it is a lie. There is no doubt that Bob Woodward has the audio tape of Jim Mattis saying these things. But none of it is true. Mattis knew it when he spoke to Woodward, and Woodward knew it when he wrote the book.

There was no confirmed use of chemical weapons by Syria at Khan Shaykhun. Indeed, the forensic evidence available about the attack points to the incident being a false flag effort -- a successful one, it turns out -- on the part of the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamists to provoke a US military strike against Syria. No targets related to either the production, storage or handling of chemical weapons were hit by the US cruise missiles, if for no other reason than no such targets could exist if Syria did not possess and/or use a chemical weapon against Khan Shaykhun.

Moreover, the US failed to produce a narrative of causality which provided some underlying logic to the targets that were struck at Khan Shaykhun -- "Here is where the chemical weapons were stored, here is where the chemical weapons were filled, here is where the chemical weapons were loaded onto the aircraft." Instead, 59 cruise missiles struck empty aircraft hangars, destroying derelict aircraft, and killing at least four Syrian soldiers and up to nine civilians.

The next morning, the same Su-22 aircraft that were alleged to have bombed Khan Shaykhun were once again taking off from Shayrat Air Base -- less than 24 hours after the US cruise missiles struck that facility. President Trump had every reason to be outraged by the results.

But the President should have been outraged by the processes behind the attack, where military commanders, fully afflicted by 'Military Messiah Syndrome', offered up solutions that solved nothing for problems that did not exist. Not a single general (or admiral) had the courage to tell the president that the allegations against Syria were a hoax, and that a military response was not only not needed, but would be singularly counterproductive.

But that's not how generals and admirals -- or colonels and lieutenant colonels -- are wired. That kind of introspective honesty cannot happen while they are in command.

Bob Woodward knows this truth, but he chose not to give it a voice in his book, because to do so would disrupt the pre-scripted narrative that he had constructed, around which he bent and twisted the words of those he interviewed -- including the president and Jim Mattis. As such, 'Rage' is, in effect, a lie built on a lie. It is one thing for politicians and those in power to manipulate the truth to their advantage. It's something altogether different for journalists to report something as true that they know to be a lie.

On the back cover of 'Rage', the Pulitzer prize-winning historian Robert Caro is quoted from a speech he gave about Bob Woodward. " Bob Woodward ," Caro notes, " a great reporter. What is a great reporter? Someone who never stops trying to get as close to the truth as possible ."

After reading 'Rage', one cannot help but conclude the opposite -- that Bob Woodward has written a volume which pointedly ignores the truth. Instead, he gives voice to a lie of his own construct, predicated on the flawed accounts of sources inflicted with 'Military Messiah Syndrome', whose words embrace a fantasy world populated by military members fulfilling missions far removed from the common good of their fellow citizens -- and often at conflict with the stated intent and instruction of the civilian leadership they ostensibly serve. In doing so, Woodward is as complicit as the generals and former generals he quotes in misleading the American public about issues of fundamental importance.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Scott Ritter

is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ' SCORPION KING : America's Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.' He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter

See also:

Whose side are generals on? As Joint Chiefs chairman APOLOGIZES for standing by Trump, Biden confident of military support The military is trapped in an inherited reality divorced from the present

Caitlin Johnstone: Tens of millions of people displaced by the 'War On Terror', the greatest scam ever invented Misleading the American public

Jewel Gyn 21 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 12:23 AM

Whichever construct you want to believe, the fact remains that US has continued to sow instability around the world in the name of defending the liberty and freedom. Which brings to the question how the world can continue to allow a superpower to dictate what's good or bad for a sovereign country.
Johan le Roux Jewel Gyn 18 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 03:42 AM
The answer you seek is not in the US's proclaimed vision of 'democracy' ot 'rescuing populations from the clutches of vile dictators.' They just say that to validate their actions which in reality is using their military as a mercenary force to secure and steal the resources of countries.
Joaquin Montano 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 04:57 PM
Bob Woodward was enshrined as a great, heroic like journalist by the Hollywood propaganda machine, but reality is he is a US Security agent pretending to be a well informed/connected journalist. And indeed, he is well informed/connected, since he was a Naval intelligence man, part responsible of the demise of the Nixon administration when it fell out of grace with the powerful elites, and the Washington Post being well connected with the CIA, the rest is history. And as they say, once a CIA man, always a CIA man.
DukeLeo Joaquin Montano 22 hours ago 16 Sep, 2020 11:36 PM
That is correct. Woodward is a Naval intelligence man. The elite in the US was not happy about Nixon's foreign policy and his detante with the Soviet Union. Watergate was invented, and Nixon had nothing to do with it. However, it brought him down, thank's to Woodward.
NoJustice Joaquin Montano 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:48 PM
But he also exposed Trump's lies about Covid-19.
lectrodectus 17 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 04:45 AM
Another first class article by ....Scott .. The book makes it clear that Mattis viewed Trump as a threat to the Us' standing as the defender of a " rules -based order -built on the back of decades -old alliances-that had been in place since the end of the second World War". It also makes it clear that " Mattis and the Military officials he oversaw placed defending this order above the implementing the will of the American People " These old Military Dinosaurs simply can't let go of the past, unfortunately for the American people / the World I can't see anything ever changing, it will be business as usual ie, war after War after War.
Jonny247364 lectrodectus 5 minutes ago 17 Sep, 2020 09:53 PM
Just because donny signs a dictact it does not equate to the will of the americian people. The americian people did not ask donny to murder Assad.
neeon9 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:56 PM
"a threat to the US’ standing as the defender of a rules-based order –" Who made that a thing? who voted for the US to be the policeman of the planet? and who said their "rules" are right? I sure didn't, nor did anyone I know, even my american friends don't know whose idea it was!
fezzie035fezzm 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:29 PM
It's interesting to note that every president since J.F.K. has got America into a military conflict, or has turned a minor conflict into a major one. Trump is the exception. Trump inherited conflicts (Afghanistan, Syria etc) but has not started a new one, and he has spent his three years ending or winding down the conflicts he had inherited.
NoJustice fezzie035fezzm 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:34 PM
Trump increased military deployment to the Middle East. He increased military spending. He had a foreign general assassinated. He had missiles fired into Syria. He vetoed a bill that would limit his authority to wage war. Trump is not an exception.
T. Agee Kaye 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 05:59 PM
Good op ed. 'Rage is built on a lie' applies to many things.
E_Kaos T. Agee Kaye 7 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 02:46 PM
True, the beginning of a new narrative and the continuation of an old narrative.
PYCb988 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 07:25 PM
Something's amiss here. Mattis was openly telling the press that there was no evidence against Assad. Just Google: Mattis Newsweek Assad.
erniedouglas 12 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 09:14 AM
What was Watergate? Even bet says there were tapes of a private relationship between Nixon and BB Rebozo.
allan Kaplan 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:03 PM
Continuation of a highly organized and tightly controlled disinformation campaign to do one singularly the most significant and historically one of the most illegal act of American betrayal... overthrow American elections at any and all costs to install one of the most deranged, demoralized sold out brain dead Biden and his equally brown nosing Harris only to unseat a legally and democratically elected US president according to our Constitution! Will their evil acts against America work? I doubt it! But at a price that America has never before seen. Let's sit back and watch this Rose Bowl parade of America's dirtiest of the dirty politics!
E_Kaos allan Kaplan 7 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 02:49 PM
"brown nosing harris", how apropos with the play on words.
Bill Spence allan Kaplan 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:29 PM
Both parties and their politicians are totally corrupt. Why would anyone support one side over the other? Is that because you believe the promises and lies?
custos125 17 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 04:35 AM
Is there any evidence that both Mattis and Woodward knew that the allegations of a Syrian use of chemical weapons by plane were not true, a false flag? On the assumption of this use, the capacity to fly such attack and deploy such weapons was destroyed for some time. I recommend reading of Rage, it is quite interesting, even if some people will not like it and try to keep people away from the book.
E_Kaos custos125 7 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 02:58 PM
My observations were: 1 - where were the bomb fragments 2 - why use rusted gas cylinders 3 - how do you attach a rusted gas cylinder to a plane 4 - were the rusted gas cylinders tossed out of a plane 5 - how did the rusted gas cylinders land so close to each other My conclusion - False Flag Incident
neeon9 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:58 PM
The is only one threat to peace in the world, and it's the US/Israeli M.I.C.. War mongering children, who actually believe, against all reason, that they are the most worthy and entitled race on earth! they are not. The US has been responsible for more misery in the world than any other state, which isn't surprising given how many Nazi's were resettled there by the Jews. They are also the only Ppl on the planet who think a nuclear war is winnable! How strange is that!
NoJustice 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:22 PM
So everything is a lie because Woodward didn't mention that there was no evidence found that linked the Syrian government to the chemical attack?
Strongbo50 6 minutes ago 17 Sep, 2020 09:58 PM
The left is firing up the Russian Interference narrative again, how Russia is trying to take the election. The real truth is in plain sight, The main stream media is trying to deliver Biden a win, along with google yahoo msn facebook and twitter. I say, come on Russia, if you can help stem that tide of lies please Mr Putin help. That's a joke but the media is real. And Woodward in his old age wants one more trophy on his mantle.
CuttySark 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 05:41 PM
Trump has become the great white whale. Seems like there are Ahab's everywhere willing to shoot their hearts upon the beast to bring it down whatever the cost. I think it was this kind of rage and attitude that got Adolf off to a good start.
NoJustice CuttySark 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 05:44 PM
He's an easy target because he keeps screwing up.
Gryphon_ 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:59 PM
The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon. Never in my life have I seen a newspaper that lies as much as the post. Bob Woodward works for the post.

[Sep 16, 2020] Fake News About Iran, Russia, China Is U.S. Journalism's Daily Bread

Notable quotes:
"... But CNN has and will continue to repeat the allegations as fact, so it's mission accomplished for the deep state. As another poster said on this board about manufacturing consent: "It is important to discuss the story, not its credibility, the more the discussion, the more the reaction and the more it reinforces the narrative." ..."
"... In the 1920s (or 30s), far-rightist Karl Popper coined the concept of systematic manipulation of "public opinion". This would become a hallmark of Western Civilization in the post-war. The public opinion theory states that the masses don't have an opinion for themselves or, if they have, it is sculpting/flexible. The dominant classes can, therefore, guide the masses like a shepherd, to its will. ..."
"... It is an insult to the noble profession, to call what the mainstream media in the west, especially in the USA do, journalism. In my opinion what they do is propaganda and stenography on behalf of those who are in power. I am not sure who coined the term but "presstitution" is not a bad attempt at describing their profession. ..."
"... While the western corporate media lie on a continuous basis - and that has the predictable effect - what is more insidious is not these acts of commissions ( meaning lies), but their acts of omission (meaning excluding or deemphasizing important contextual information) leading people to make the wrong conclusions. NPR in the US is an excellent example of such presstitution. ..."
"... Why are the US promoting conflict with China, with Russia? Why are they beating Europe, maybe with the intention to destroy it? Why is a new civil war in the US promoted? ..."
"... Normal (geopolitically interested) people would think: against China it is better to come together and unite, at least US & Europe, but eventually Russia included. For instance take the population of these three together: far less than China's. ..."
"... Journalism in the US is so superficial, it is a drop above the uppermost wavy comb. Not worth to pay attention to it. ..."
"... Other than few independent blog site such as this, every media outlet is in the service of its home government or foreign sponsors. Only born-suckers take the corporate media at face value. Modern journalism is nothing but an aggressive propaganda racket. ..."
"... Using lies (bearing false witness) to cause murder and theft are not exactly a new phenomenon. These 'groups of individuals', which are employing these fabricated deceptions, are doing nothing less than trying to commit murder and theft. ..."
"... Everything that was accomplished (albeit incompletely or moderately) through the New Deal and then the abortive Great Society absolutely spooked the oligarchy. Lifting much of the working class out of absolute wage slavery to the point where the next rung on Maslow's ladder was at least visible. And when it all culminated in the late 60's and early 70's with the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Surface Mining act, and various labor protection measures, the wealthy owner class decided the proles had gained too much power to influence "their" captive government. ..."
"... What differs, however, is the presentation. Trump is criticized (not praised) for being allegedly soft on Russia and Biden criticized for being allegedly soft on China. This clever trick ensures that just about everybody is onboard the bash-China-and-Russia train. ..."
"... In a violently polarized society, with red-blue antagonism reaching ridiculous heights, people tend to act exclusively in contradiction to the cult figure they hate so much. ..."
"... I've been saying for years here to watch the documentary - Century of the Self. If you want to learn about and understand America, its all here. Government, Corporations, Consumerism, Militarism, Deep State, Psychology, Individual selfishness and mental illness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s ..."
Sep 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Every few days U.S. 'intelligence' and 'officials' produce fake claims about this or that 'hostile' country. U.S. media continue to reproduce those claims even if they bare any logic and do not make any sense.

On June 27 the New York Times and the Washington Post published fake news about alleged Russian payments to the Taliban for killing U.S. troops.

The stories ran on the outlets' front pages.

Two week later the story was shown to have no basis :

[T]hat the story was obviously bullshit did not prevent Democrats in Congress, including 'Russiagate' swindler Adam Schiff, to bluster about it and to call for immediate briefings and new sanctions on Russia .

Just a day after it was published the main accusation, that Trump was briefed on the 'intelligence' died. The Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Advisor and the CIA publicly rejected the claim. Then the rest of the story started to crumble. On June 2, just one week after it was launched, the story was declared dead .
...
The NYT buried the above quoted dead corpse of the original story page A-19.

Despite that the Democrats continued to use the fake story for attacks on Donald Trump.

Yesterday the commander of the U.S. forces in the Middle East drove a stake though the heart of the dead corpse of the original story:

Two months after top Pentagon officials vowed to get to the bottom of whether the Russian government bribed the Taliban to kill American service members , the commander of troops in the region says a detailed review of all available intelligence has not been able to corroborate the existence of such a program.

"It just has not been proved to a level of certainty that satisfies me," Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of the U.S. Central Command, told NBC News. McKenzie oversees U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

But as one fake news zombie finally dies others get resurrected. Politico's 'intelligence' stenographer Natasha Bertrand produced this nonsensical claim :

The Iranian government is weighing an assassination attempt against the American ambassador to South Africa, U.S. intelligence reports say, according to a U.S. government official familiar with the issue and another official who has seen the intelligence.

News of the plot comes as Iran continues to seek ways to retaliate for President Donald Trump's decision to kill a powerful Iranian general earlier this year, the officials said. If carried out, it could dramatically ratchet up already serious tensions between the U.S. and Iran and create enormous pressure on Trump to strike back -- possibly in the middle of a tense election season.

U.S. officials have been aware of a general threat against the ambassador, Lana Marks, since the spring, the officials said. But the intelligence about the threat to the ambassador has become more specific in recent weeks. The Iranian Embassy in Pretoria is involved in the plot, the U.S. government official said.

Ambassador Lana Marks is known for selling overpriced handbags and for her donations to Trump's campaign. To Iran she has zero political or symbolic value. There is no way Iran would ever think about an attack on such a target. Accordingly the South African intelligence services do not believe that there is such a threat:

South African Minister of State Security Ayanda Dlodlo said the matter was "receiving the necessary attention" and that the State Security Agency (SSA) was "interacting with all relevant partners both in the country and abroad, to ensure that no harm will be suffered by the US Ambassador, including any other Diplomatic Officials inside the borders of our country."

However, an informed intelligence source told Daily Maverick that although the "matter has been taken seriously as we approach all such threats, specifically, there appears to be, from our perspective, no discernible threat. Least of all from the source that it purports to emanate from.

There was "no evidence or indicator", the source said, so the plot was "not likely to be real". The "associations made are not sustainable on any level but all precautions will be put in place".

The source suggested this was an instance of the "tail wagging the dog", of the Trump administration wielding a "weapon of mass distraction" to divert attention from its failures in the election campaign running up to President Donald Trump's re-election bid on November 3.

The spokesperson for the Iranian ministry of foreign affairs, Saeed Khatibzadeh, strongly denied the allegation in the Politico report which he called "hackneyed and worn-out anti-Iran propaganda".

In January the U.S. assassinated the Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad. Soleimani led the external campaigns of the Iranian Quds Forces. He was the one who orchestrated the campaign that defeated the Islamic State. His mythic-symbolic position for Iran and the resistance in the Middle East is beyond that of any U.S. figure.

There is simply no one in the U.S. military or political hierarchy who could be seen as his equal. Iran has therefore announced that it will take other ways to revenge the assassination of Soleimani.

As an immediate response to the assassination of Soleimani Iran had launched a precise missile attack against two U.S. bases in Iraq. It has also announced that it will make sure that the U.S. military will have to leave the Middle East. That program is in full swing now as U.S. bases in Iraq are again coming under daily missile attacks :

More than eight months after a barrage of rockets killed an American contractor and wounded four American service members in Kirkuk, Iraq, militia groups continue to target U.S. military bases in that country, and the frequency of those attacks has increased.

"We have had more indirect fire attacks around and against our bases the first half of this year than we did the first half of last year," Gen. Frank McKenzie, the commander of the U.S. Central Command, said. "Those attacks have been higher."
...
McKenzie's comments came just hours after he announced the United States would be cutting its footprint in Iraq by almost half by the end of September, with about 2,200 troops leaving the country .

Just hours agon two Katyusha rockets were fired against the U.S. embassy in Baghdad's Green Zone. Two British/U.S.convoys also came under attack . U.S. air defense took the missiles down but its anti-missile fire is only further disgruntling the Iraqi population.

These attacks are still limited and designed to not cause any significant casualties. But they will continue to increase over time until the last U.S. soldier is withdrawn from Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and other Middle East countries. That, and only that, is the punishment Iran promised as revenge for Soleimani's death.

The alleged Iranian thread against the U.S. ambassador to South Africa is just another fake news propaganda story. It is useful only for lame blustering:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump - 3:04 UTC · Sep 15, 2020

According to press reports, Iran may be planning an assassination, or other attack, against the United States in retaliation for the killing of terrorist leader Soleimani, which was carried out for his planning a future attack, murdering U.S. Troops, and the death & suffering...
...caused over so many years. Any attack by Iran, in any form, against the United States will be met with an attack on Iran that will be 1,000 times greater in magnitude!

The danger of such fake stories about Russia or Iran is that they might be used to justify a response in the case of a false flag attack on the alleged targets.

Should something inconvenient happen to Ambassador Lana Marks the Trump administration could use the fake story as an excuse to respond with a limited attack on Iran.

It is well known by now that U.S. President Donald Trump is lying about every time he opens his mouth. Why do U.S. journalists presume that the agencies and anonymous officials who work under him are more truthful in their utterings than the man himself is hard to understand. Why do they swallow their bullshit?

Posted by b on September 15, 2020 at 11:50 UTC | Permalink

jo6pac , Sep 15 2020 12:01 utc | 1

Amerikas propaganda machine never sleeps and sadly to many people believe the BS
Sunny Runny Burger , Sep 15 2020 12:27 utc | 2
US and European journalists are also lying constantly, that's why. Even when they make embarrassing attempts at "being unbiased" or "factual". Do they understand it? Many might not, but some do, perhaps fewer than anyone would think reasonable.

Btw a lot of these "journalists" in Europe in particular openly self-identify to "the left" or even as socialists and communists or "greens". So much for ideology as some kind of solution: entirely worthless and superficial.

Christian J. Chuba , Sep 15 2020 12:44 utc | 3
But CNN has and will continue to repeat the allegations as fact, so it's mission accomplished for the deep state. As another poster said on this board about manufacturing consent: "It is important to discuss the story, not its credibility, the more the discussion, the more the reaction and the more it reinforces the narrative."

Just for laughs, I looked at the reviews of Gordon Chang's book, 'The Coming Economic Collapse of China' to see if I could figure out the reasoning and one of the reviewers said that China weakens because they lack a free press to hold their govt accountable. I had a good laugh at that one.

vk , Sep 15 2020 12:54 utc | 4
There's an objective explanation for that.

In the 1920s (or 30s), far-rightist Karl Popper coined the concept of systematic manipulation of "public opinion". This would become a hallmark of Western Civilization in the post-war. The public opinion theory states that the masses don't have an opinion for themselves or, if they have, it is sculpting/flexible. The dominant classes can, therefore, guide the masses like a shepherd, to its will.

Friedrich von Hayek - a colleague of Popper and father of British neoliberalism (the man behind Thatcher) - then developed on the issue, by proposing the institutionalization of public opinion. He proposed a system of three or four tiers of intellectuals which a capitalist society should have. The first tier is the capitalist class itself, who would govern the entire world anonymously, through secret meetings. These meetings would produce secret reports, whose ideas would be spread to the second tier. The second tier is the academia and the more prominent politicians and other political leaderships. The third tier is the basic education teachers, who would indoctrinate the children. The fourth tier is the MSM, whose job is to transform the ideas and opinions of the first tier into "common sense" ("public opinion").

Therefore, it's not a case where the Western journalists are being fooled. Their job was never to inform the public. When they publish a lie about, say, Iran trying to kill an American ambassador in South Africa, they are not telling a lie in their eyes: they are telling an underlying truth through one thousand lies. The objective here is to convince ("teach") the American masses it is good for the USA if Iran was invaded and destroyed (which is a truth). They are like the modern Christian God, who teach its subjects the Truth through "mysterious ways".

Nathan Mulcahy , Sep 15 2020 12:56 utc | 5
It is an insult to the noble profession, to call what the mainstream media in the west, especially in the USA do, journalism. In my opinion what they do is propaganda and stenography on behalf of those who are in power. I am not sure who coined the term but "presstitution" is not a bad attempt at describing their profession.

Unfortunately they have been amazingly successful in brainwashing people. One current example, from numerous ones that could be cited, is the public's opinion on Julian Assange. .

While the western corporate media lie on a continuous basis - and that has the predictable effect - what is more insidious is not these acts of commissions ( meaning lies), but their acts of omission (meaning excluding or deemphasizing important contextual information) leading people to make the wrong conclusions. NPR in the US is an excellent example of such presstitution.

What I am saying is nothing new to the bar flies here. But I am extremely distressed when I see how poorly informed (propagandized, brainwashed) the vast majority of the people I know are. Let's say a decade ago, ideological polarization was the main reason why it was so difficult to have an open discussion on important issues the US. Today it has become even more difficult because, thanks to the success of the presstitutes, people also have different sets of "facts". And most alarmingly, after successfully creating a readership who believe in alternative "facts", the mainstream presstitutes are moving on to creating a logic-free narrative. Examples include Assad supposedly gassing his people when he was winning (even though that was guaranteed to produce western intervention against him). A more recent example is the Navalny affair. Sadly, very sadly, way too many people are affected.

Gerhard , Sep 15 2020 13:07 utc | 6
Hi, thanks, and sorry, but: why does nobody look behind the curtain?

Why are the US promoting conflict with China, with Russia? Why are they beating Europe, maybe with the intention to destroy it? Why is a new civil war in the US promoted?

Are these random developments of history? Are laws of history behind that?
NO!! Surely not!

Normal (geopolitically interested) people would think: against China it is better to come together and unite, at least US & Europe, but eventually Russia included. For instance take the population of these three together: far less than China's.

If something is going against the common sense, then there should be a reason behind. This reason I recommend You, with due respect, to find - and to uncover the plan.

Journalism in the US is so superficial, it is a drop above the uppermost wavy comb. Not worth to pay attention to it.

The actual demand is to understand and to show the forces playing deep underwater.
And to preview where these forces are determined to strike against.

Kind regards, Gerhard

DG , Sep 15 2020 13:30 utc | 7
They are all Judith Miller now.
morongobill , Sep 15 2020 13:39 utc | 8
Like the famed slogan of septic tank pumpers, the Gray Lady's masthead should read, "Your shit is our bread and butter!"
ptb , Sep 15 2020 13:53 utc | 9
Yep. We're into some pretty overt 1984 territory now... It's really a shame.
Richard Steven Hack , Sep 15 2020 14:37 utc | 10
Gareth Porter's latest on "Russian hacking"...

Dark Web Voter Database Report Casts New Doubts on Russian Election Hack Narrative

A new report showing that US state-level voter databases were publicly available calls into question the narrative that Russian intelligence "targeted" US state election-related websites in 2016.

The problem with these sorts of accusations about "state-sponsored" hacking is they assume that because a target has some connection to a state or some political activity that it means the hackers are "nation-state". In reality, personal identification information (PII) is a commodity on the black market, along with intellectual property - and *any* hacker will target *any* such source of PII. So the mere fact that it is an election year, and that voting organizations are loaded with PII, makes them an obvious target for any and every hacker.

"Oregon's chief information security officer, Lisa Vasa, told the Washington Post in September 2017 that her team blocks 'upwards of 14 million attempts to access our network every day."'

This is the usual ridiculous claim from almost every organization. They treat every Internet packet that hits their firewall as being an "attempt to access" the network (or worse, a "breach" - which it is not.) Which is technically true, but would only be relevant if they had *no* firewall - a setup which no organization runs these days. By definition, 99.99999% of those attempts are random mass scans of a block of IP addresses by either a hacker or some malware on someone else's machine - or even a computer security researcher attempting to find out how many sites are vulnerable.

Hoarsewhisperer , Sep 15 2020 14:52 utc | 11
"It just has not been proved to a level of certainty that satisfies me," Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of the U.S. Central Command, told NBC News. McKenzie oversees U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Barflies should write Gen Frank McKenzie inside the back cover of their diaries, and count the days until we hear of/from him again. I've a feeling he's crossed a line and knows precisely what he's doing and why. Imo, the Swamp has just been put on notice.

Sakineh Bagoom , Sep 15 2020 14:54 utc | 12
Posted by: vk | Sep 15 2020 12:54 utc | 4
In the 1920s (or 30s), far-rightist Karl Popper coined the concept of "public opinion".

vk, I can't find anything regarding this coinage. Could you please provide a link.
Wiki is specially devoid of it and it goes back to 16 century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion The term public opinion was derived from the French opinion publique which was first used in 1588 by Michel de Montaigne in the second edition of his Essays

juliania , Sep 15 2020 15:12 utc | 13
Thank you, b. In this world of illusion that mainstream press provides it is forgivable that we cannot even convince members of our own families that are dear to us of the underlying truths behind what these masters of deception continue to print. Surely they only do so because livelihoods are threatened, and the public perceptions are reaching a critical point where belief in what they write, read by the diminishing numbers of faithful few, reaches a pinnacle of perception and spills chaotically down into a watershed of realization.

I remember when we were told what happens on the top floor of the New York Times. It opened my eyes. And perhaps here also, b is providing a chink through which we may glimpse what is happening in military circles in fields of operation where facts collide with fiction:

"We have had more indirect fire attacks around and against our bases the first half of this year than we did the first half of last year," Gen. Frank McKenzie, the commander of the U.S. Central Command, said. "Those attacks have been higher."
...
McKenzie's comments came just hours after he announced the United States would be cutting its footprint in Iraq by almost half by the end of September, with about 2,200 troops leaving the country.
vk , Sep 15 2020 15:13 utc | 14
@ Posted by: Sakineh Bagoom | Sep 15 2020 14:54 utc | 12

On Hayek's "tiering", google "IHS model" ("pyramid of social change") and his book "The Intellectuals and Socialism".

On Popper's conception of "public opinion", see "The Open Society and Its Enemies" (1945). Yes, the term itself is not Popper's invention - he never claimed to have done so. But he gave it a "twist", and we can say nowadays every Western journalist's conception of "public opinion" is essentially Popper's.

Kooshy , Sep 15 2020 15:36 utc | 18
Why do swallow their bullshit?

because on matters related to Iran, China and Russia, they are not independent, there is no real difference between the two camps in US, Biden' foreign policy which is endorsed and supported by NYT and WP is not that different than Trump's, if not more radical. There is no free press in US, as matter of fact, as long as this United Oligarchy of America exist there will be no free press.

Sakineh Bagoom , Sep 15 2020 15:50 utc | 20
OK, I admit it. I read this rag, just because Paul Pillar posts there. And yes, there is an "Iran derangement" syndrome in US, where people go to sleep and dream Iran. They wake up from wet dream of bloody Iranian babies, asking, have we sanctioned Iran today? https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2020/09/14/when-it-comes-to-iran-how-many-failures-is-enough-for-pompeo/
jayc , Sep 15 2020 16:01 utc | 22
As well, this fake news propaganda barrage continues in the context of determined censorship of alternative media and social media - a campaign which has been largely promoted by the liberal intelligentsia in the US, in the name of reducing "fake news." Having to live within an ever-widening swamp of utter BS is wearying and mind-numbing - also to the point, one may assume.
Kooshy , Sep 15 2020 16:19 utc | 23
Posted by: Nathan Mulcahy | Sep 15 2020 12:56 utc | 5

Yes, I agree, IMO/observation, the US Government, the political parties and their supportive media are rapidly ideologically polarizing their constituencies to two hard entrenched ideological camps (which as you say has become hard shelled impenetrable). Except on one common ideological point, which almost all the population has been and is being brain washed as young as first grade, this common used term, which shield you from needing to investigate or form any other opinion is: US has always been, is and will be a "force for good" by its constitution, no matter what she has done or will do. This sentence when fully believed and carved in one' mind from childhood is very difficult to erase and crack. These two ideologically opposing camps about 70% of the population will not want to hear any fact or not, other than what they are told and believed all their life.

Noirette , Sep 15 2020 16:59 utc | 31
Re. K. Popper and topic above:

"Unlike utopian engineering, piecemeal social engineering must be "small scale," Popper said, meaning that social reform should focus on changing one institution at a time. Also, whereas utopian engineering aims for lofty and abstract goals (for example, perfect justice, true equality, a higher kind of happiness), piecemeal social engineering seeks to address concrete social problems (for example, poverty, violence, unemployment, environmental degradation, income inequality). It does so through the creation of new social institutions or the redesign of existing ones. These new or reconfigured institutions are then tested through implementation and altered accordingly and continually in light of their effects. Institutions thus may undergo gradual improvement overtime and social ills gradually reduced. Popper compared piecemeal social engineering to physical engineering. Just as physical engineers refine machines through a series of small adjustments to existing models, social engineers gradually improve social institutions through "piecemeal tinkering." In this way, "[t]he piecemeal method permits repeated experiments and continuous readjustments" (Open Society Vol 1., 163).

Only such social experiments, Popper said, can yield reliable feedback for social planners. In contrast, as discussed above, social reform that is wide ranging, highly complex and involves multiple institutions will produce social experiments in which it is too difficult to untangle causes..."

from: https://iep.utm.edu/popp-pol/

So Top-Down with a vengeance, but softly, softly, hunting for 'good results', for what and how these are defined is left out entirely, and who exactly runs the process...? (Btw China sorta follows this approach with 'social experiments' gathering data that is analysed etc. to improve governance.)

Biswapriya Purkayast , Sep 15 2020 17:16 utc | 33
Don't forget that the only time the Amerikastani Empire's warmongering imperialist media called Trump "presidential" was when he launched missiles at Syria on false pretences in support of al Qaeda.
David G , Sep 15 2020 17:16 utc | 34
The statement by praetor McKenzie probably won't do much to remove the "Russian bounties" tale from the received Beltway belief structure, where it lodged immediately upon publication, any more than earlier refutations, or its inherent implausibility, did. I see the bounties regularly referred to by Dems and Dem-adjacent media as established fact.

In the same light, it's worthwhile to read the Politico article on the alleged Iranian designs on the purse princess and try to spot other fictions included as supposedly factual background, some qualified as being American assertions, but others presented as undisputed fact, such as:

This new one about the plot to get the ambassador in Pretoria may be too trivial to get sustained attention, but it will show up as background in some future Politico article or the like, joining the rest in the Beltway's version of reality, which at this point is made almost entirely of these falsehoods encrusting on each other, decade after decade, creating the phony geopolitical mindscape these people live in.

Mere factual refutation – even from otherwise establishment-approved sources – won't remove these barnacles. For instance, in February the NY Times itself published a debunking of the initial account that it was an Iran-backed Shia militia, as opposed to Salafist I.S.-affiliated forces, that killed that U.S. contractor last December. But the good (if delayed) reporting is forgotten; the lie persists. The same fate awaits McKenzie's dismissal of the Russian bounties nonsense.

conspiracy-theorist , Sep 15 2020 18:04 utc | 37
The thoughtful reader would at this point stop and ponder. "Fake News About Iran, Russia, China Is U.S. Journalism's Daily Bread". I agree with this statement. But not just U.S. Journalism. Minimally U.K. Journalism is on-board, if not tutoring the Yanks in the art of Journalism. And then there is Europe herself, she too has armies of Journalists and many Journals. They too mostly fake around in general.

Now then, that leave Journalism in "Iran, Russia, China". It is fine trait to root for underdogs but Journalism in these states is also subject to a highly controlled and managed environment. It is disingenuous to ignore these facts.

Given this congregation of "fakers", worldwide, it is very reasonable to question the very "fight" that these "fakers" keep telling us is on between the "adversaries".

vinnieoh , Sep 15 2020 18:24 utc | 40
Good to see so many being able to name the operation of the official narrative. It serves also another purpose, witnessed by one of the most consequential actions of all, the wanton abandonment of international law and accountability - the GWOT and the launching of same in Afghanistan and Iraq. That other purpose is to create cover for those, elected in our name, to avoid responsibility.

"Who knew?" asked the soulless Rumsfeld. And the refrain returned from the hollowed out halls of the Greatest Democracy On Earth (tm) - "We were misled!", "Look it says so right there in the official narrative, REMEMBER?" But the misleaders are never rounded up and never face any consequences, cause truth be told all that voted for the AUMF belong in the pokey. And the congressional class of '02-'03 would do the same thing all over again, 'cause the narrative's got their back.

karlof1 , Sep 15 2020 18:34 utc | 41
Despite the future grimness predicted by 1984 , the ability and effectiveness of Media Structures to openly lie and thus herd the public to embrace the preferred Narrative hasn't turned out quite the way Orwell thought it might. Former authoritarian blocs learned the hard way that it's better to tell their citizens the truth and actively engage them in governance, while the Anglo-Imperial powers have gone in the opposite direction, thus the question why? IMO, the longstanding Narrative related to the mythical Dream has greatly eroded in the face of Reality, while at the same time the Rentier Class and the Duopoly it controls needs to try and obfuscate what it's doing. And thus we've seen the rise of BigLie Media to be used for the purpose of Divide and Rule. There're numerous works detailing how and why; two of the more important are Manufacturing of Consent and J is for Junk Economics . Part of the overall process of dumbing-down populations is the deliberate destruction of the educational process, particularly in the areas of philosophy and political-economy/history, which are essentially connected as one when considering the History of Ideas or a sub-area like the Philosophy of Science.

Such a dumbing-down of a nation's populous can be measured, the USSR and its Warsaw Bloc being the most evident, but also The Inquisition and its affect on the advancement of science within the regions it ruled, and the inward turning of China during the Ming Dynasty which allowed for its subjugation by Western forces beginning in the 16th Century. Most recently, this is evident in China's passing the Outlaw US Empire in terms of geoeconomics and thus overall geopolitical power. An explanation for India's inability to match China's development can be found in its refusal to do away with its semi-feudal caste system and not educate its masses so they can become a similar collective dynamo as in China. At the beginning of his brief tenure, JFK noted the Knowledge Gap that existed between a USSR that was nearing its intellectual heights (although that wasn't known then) and the USA whose educational system effectively excluded @60% of students from having the opportunity to advance. There would never have been a Dot.Com economy without JFK's initiative to improve educational outcomes. There seems to be a notion within the Outlaw US Empire's elite that an well educated populace presents a danger to their rule and they can get by using AI and Robotics to further their future plans. Here I'd refer such thinkers to the lessons provided by the failure of Asimov's Galactic Empire in his Foundation series of books--particular their reliance on AI, robotics, dumbing-down the populace to the point where no one recalls how atomics functioned. The sort of balance sheet being constructed by the Fed cannot repair or replace crumbling infrastructure or train the engineers needed to perform the work.

So, what continual BigLie Media lies tell us is the continued downward spiral of the West's intellectual abilities will continue while an East that values the Truth and Discovery moves on to eclipse it, mainly because the West has stopped trying, thinking it's found a better way based on the continual amassing of Debt, which is seen as wealth on their balance sheets. Ultimately, the West thinks the one person holding all the assets as the winner of its Zero-sum Monopoly Game is a better outcome than having millions of people sharing the winnings of a Win-Win system that promotes the wellbeing of all. I can tell you now which philosophy will triumph, but you all ought to be capable of reasoning that outcome.

Steve , Sep 15 2020 18:59 utc | 43
After a sound and an in-depth analysis, b sometimes confounds me with his credulity. Take this sentence for example: "Why do U.S. journalist presume that the agencies and anonymous officials who work under him are more truthful in their uttering than the man himself is hard to understand. Why do swallow their bullshit?" Of course there is no daylight between the US, and indeed the whole Western governments, and its Press. Other than few independent blog site such as this, every media outlet is in the service of its home government or foreign sponsors. Only born-suckers take the corporate media at face value. Modern journalism is nothing but an aggressive propaganda racket.

Mark2 , Sep 15 2020 19:13 utc | 45

You only have to look at who owns the media and who their close friends are, to understand why the media says what it says or lies what it lies ! It's an industry promoting the elites self-interest, creating fictioous enemy countries to feed the arms industry and create US domestic mass paranoia. The Israeli lobby groups are at the wheel of the whole dam clown car.
chet380 , Sep 15 2020 19:45 utc | 46
Even more admiration for coining 'Vichy Press'.
uncle tungsten , Sep 15 2020 20:39 utc | 49
Biden is outed in his coup machinations by Fort Russ a tale told with a bit of media spin.
Josh , Sep 15 2020 20:40 utc | 50
Using lies (bearing false witness) to cause murder and theft are not exactly a new phenomenon. These 'groups of individuals', which are employing these fabricated deceptions, are doing nothing less than trying to commit murder and theft.
Josh , Sep 15 2020 20:41 utc | 51
These acts happen to constitute real crimes, or at least attempted criminal acts, in reality.
Yeah, Right , Sep 15 2020 22:07 utc | 53
No doubt the two propaganda streams will merge until we will be told that the CIA now believes that Iran will attempt plausible deniability by funnelling the money through Putin, who will offer it to the Taliban by way of a bounty on the Ambassador's head.

The CIA's wet dream: the Taliban does it, Putin arranged it, but it was all Iran's fault, leading to:
A) infinite occupation of the poppy fie.... sorry, Afghanistan
B) even more sanctions on Russia
C) war with Iran

What's not to like?

spindoctor , Sep 15 2020 23:18 utc | 56
Posted by: vk | Sep 15 2020 12:54 utc | 4
In the 1920s (or 30s), far-rightist Karl Popper coined the concept of "public opinion".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystallizing_Public_Opinion published 1923.

spindoctor , Sep 15 2020 23:25 utc | 57
Posted by: vk | Sep 15 2020 12:54 utc | 4

From the link just cited:

'"Public opinion", according to Bernays, is an amorphous group of judgments which are not well elaborated even in the head of a single average individual. He extracts a quotation from Wilfred Trotter, which states that this average man has many strong convictions whose origin he can't explain (Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War, p. 36). People's minds have "logic-proof compartments" which must be approached by means beyond the rational. (pp. 61–68).'

vk , Sep 16 2020 1:12 utc | 58
@ Posted by: spindoctor | Sep 15 2020 23:18 utc | 56

Yes, I forgot to mention this very important book. If I'm not mistaken (and I may be), Popper got the term from Bernays.

Popper, von Hayek... these guys are the fathers of neoliberalism. I'm not mentioning backyard intellectuals here. They shaped the West as we know it today and, if you're a Westerner and wants to understand the civilization you live in, you have to know what they formulated.

Just to clear that off: I don't agree with Popper's (or Bernays, for that matter) conception on "public opinion". The Marxist conception of ideology is much more complete and precise scientifically.

ptb , Sep 16 2020 1:35 utc | 59
@karlof1 41

Speaking of education (although of science/tach, rather than critical thinking)...

Add in the migration of top-level educated individuals. In the US, an underdeveloped primary/secondary school system creates room at the university/grad level to absorb talent from the rest of the world. For many years, this was a source of competitive advantage -- imported human capital is better than home grown, because if you import, you take it away from someone else. Clever!

It was not that big a deal for the US if social mobility of native born lower and middle classes was stifled somewhat. (and I would say it still would not be a big deal if the resources of the country were not so grossly mismanaged/wasted/stolen).

But in the current century, or certainly the decade now ending, China alone can fill every US grad school science/tech program and still have people to spare for itself. Other parts of the world are right up there as well.

And then you have computers. Sometime between 2000 and 2010, computers became pretty much cheap enough that you could give one to a every kid, even in families of limited means. Provided the primary/secondary education system is there to support it, a country could develop as much tech talent as they had population. The first generation of kids whose childhood took place under this condition is now coming out of university - I would think vastly greater in numbers than any amount the US (or Euro) higher educational system can absorb. Should be a pretty serious shifting of gears in how human capital is distributed worldwide.

But none of this is about critical thinking. Few systems of organizing society actually promote that ... it tends to happen in spite of the organizing principles, rather than because of them. Nor are the most educated (regardless of country of origin) any less susceptible to the propaganda - if anything they are more so, due to the design of the message, because it is more important that they receive it. You want a book recommendation that talks about that, check out 'Disciplined Minds' by Jeff Schmidt (though perhaps with an overly pessimistic outlook -- people can recognize the reality he describes and deal with it... it is only the more naive/idealistic types who fall extra hard for the mythology and then find themselves in a conflict they can't handle). There are lots of other avenues to take too... about the psychology of self-discovery, discovery of self-vs-social-organism etc....

uncle tungsten , Sep 16 2020 4:34 utc | 61
Conspiracy-theorist #37

Exactly that and yet we are constantly fed a diet from the bottom of the barrel. NYT? WAPO? They are rags. Gutter press peddling drivel. Surely there are more erudite and critical publications in this world than these USA drivel sheets. I am aware of good journalism in Switzerland and elsewhere but currently separted from a device adequate to translate and quote.

Thank you Conspiracy-theorist it I way past time we escaped the neverending story of BS + HATE.

Greg L , Sep 16 2020 6:12 utc | 62
And this tidbit? Deep state is as deep state does... Trump Claims He Wanted To Assassinate Syrian President Assad, But Mattis Opposed It
vato , Sep 16 2020 7:49 utc | 63
A propos fake news, John Helmer reports on the Navalny saga and was lately on the Gorilla radio podcast with Chris Cook to discuss the newest events. It's a one-hour-talk but very enjoyable listening to Helmer. You can also follow his reports on his blog Dances With Bears .
vinnieoh , Sep 16 2020 12:55 utc | 64
karlof1 | Sep 15 2020 18:34 utc | 41

Try this on for size. This is a conclusion I arrived at several decades ago, wrote about several times, but not recently.

Everything that was accomplished (albeit incompletely or moderately) through the New Deal and then the abortive Great Society absolutely spooked the oligarchy. Lifting much of the working class out of absolute wage slavery to the point where the next rung on Maslow's ladder was at least visible. And when it all culminated in the late 60's and early 70's with the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Surface Mining act, and various labor protection measures, the wealthy owner class decided the proles had gained too much power to influence "their" captive government.

The princes and barons of industry and finance were very open about their complaints. The advance of regulation on their ability to pollute and to exploit must stop or they would take their bundles of riches and go elsewhere. It is what Saint Ronny was ALL about. And so all that got fat and filthy rich during the real American Century took their wealth where regulation and labor fairness and justice didn't exist to continue their exorbitant profit taking.

And then they imported those cheap products here to wreak what was left of our industrial base and to impress on all of us that they remain the boss, the real power. Drive down wages, destroy pensions and safety nets and put US proles back into wage slavery. Remember the 80's and 90's when Wal-Mart basically told established and storied US manufacturers "either you produce the goods we want for what our Asian suppliers can make them for, or you're finished." And that is exactly what happened. Wal-Mart was just the vanguard, it is now ubiquitous. Another aspect of this assault was forcing us proles into the stock market through our pensions and retirement funds so as to make us all sympathetic to de-regulation - so as not to hurt OUR bottom line. Many labor unions became just a sick symbiosis with the industries they "served."

Incomplete and observational, I am not erudite or lettered, but I think it is an accurate narrative.

Edward , Sep 16 2020 13:05 utc | 65
There is a curious schizophrenia where the U.S. press will treat presidential claims about foreign affairs as a sacred truth but treat claims denying adultery, such as in the Lewinski affair, as dismissible.
Geoff , Sep 16 2020 13:20 utc | 66
Living in the USA (Steve Miller classic) has always seemed to me about dealing with falsehood and deception. US highschool seemed like he time for me when the formidable pressure to conform became completely nonsensical, perhaps because it was so utterly cruel, but also because it seemed untruthful. You basically were required to accept modes if behavior and thought that seemed alien to human behavior, but were presented as the sine quo non of how to be. How to succeed, how to live. It seems to me that if you were attempting to retain truthfulness, this conformity was rife with logical fallacies of every sort which if you tried to deal with them, or confront them, you were ostracized or at worst outcast.

In the many years since, it seems like everything else, once a person adopts untruthful behavior, it is next to impossible to change course, so you deal with all kinds of people who have doubled down on their personal deceptions. Marriages based on financial success come to mind, and are like any deception, the cause of incredible dis ease and misey.

There is a philosophical concept I came upon called parrhesia that Foucault gives a fantastic series of lectures on which can be found by searching the web, that investigates the perils implicit in telling truth to falsehood, and the many disasters and tragedies that have befallen human kind in the attempts to do so.

I've come to think that humans by nature are basically incapable of avoiding whatever it is that is "truth." Because over and over life seems to present situations that are the unswervingly the same to everyone. Youth and aging, for example, and the end result never varies, like illness, death, and dying. And everyone has their own similar story navigating the human predicaments and facing an inalterable "truth," which might be in this example, death.

My wonder as I observe life as I age, is what is the damage done to those not only who try their honest best to remain truthful, but what is the damage done to those who cannot escape an adopted untruth and refuse to let go of it. I suppose in this moment of history, you need only look at pandemic, wildfires, and conflicts to see how far human beings have digressed from an Eden. But there must be a purpose to it all? Like, trying to cling to any kind of integrity.

Old and Grumpy , Sep 16 2020 13:31 utc | 67
You think international fake news is just a Trump thing? Just off the top of my head we have thins like Tonkin Bay, Kuwait babies being massacred by Iraqi troops, my personal favorite Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and a multiple of mean Assads killing their people with poison. That is just a bipartisan few. We have one political party, who serves the deep state. The deep state serves the interests of Wall Street and more importantly the Rothschild world banking system. Give the spooks a lot of credit they let us have two "choices" while controlling both. Think of it as a neo fascism kinda thing that ironically finances the anti fascists. The press is just a means to an end. Assume everything is an agenda, and read the independents for some actual thought. I may not agree with you all the time, but I do love you MoA. Thank you for all your work.
ptb , Sep 16 2020 14:02 utc | 68
@64 vinnieoh

'spooked oligarchy...reforms..culminated in ..70s'

Yep. When committed Dem's go off on Trump, it's deeply felt but kindof a ritual rant. Bring Ralph Nader into the conversation, just mention him in passing, and the response becomes live! Betrayal, danger of being shown up again!

William Gruff , Sep 16 2020 14:12 utc | 69
Old and Grumpy @67 has a good point. Anyone suggesting that fake news is in any way related to Trump being President are big parts of the problem for why fake news persists in the first place. Suggesting that it is because of Trump, and thus implying that the fake news will go away when Trump does, is either profoundly ignorant, or profoundly deceitful, though probably both. Trump ranting about fake news exposed the problem and forced it into the public discourse. Those rants did not create the problem.
ptb , Sep 16 2020 14:36 utc | 70
Re: @Geoff 66

"You basically were required to accept modes if behavior and thought that seemed alien to human behavior ... ... forced to double down"

I had short but deeply influential conversation right out of college with a recruiter/HR manager from Raytheon, of all places. He talked about exactly what you said. He spoke, in a hypothetical third person, about a mid-career guy with a mortgage and family who finds themselves questioning the defense industry. How that isn't the best place to be in, mentally. I changed my career plans that day, forever thankful for the encounter.

However, regarding people being able to avoid unpleasant realities, he was of the opinion that for most people, it is possible to do so. Even beneficial. (Except of course for the recipients of his company's products. I didn't say that but I think he figured out that I was thinking it). The issue, from the point of view of running an effective organization, is what happens if the doubters and believers start to mix? Part of his assigned task was to simply keep out people curious enough to ask too many questions. That's one of the "benefits" of really polarizing politics too.

William Gruff , Sep 16 2020 15:33 utc | 71
Geoff @66:

"My wonder as I observe life as I age, is what is the damage done to those not only who try their honest best to remain truthful, but what is the damage done to those who cannot escape an adopted untruth and refuse to let go of it."

That's what modern pharmaceuticals are for, and why one in six Americans (officially) are prescribed them. If we include the numbers of Americans who self-medicate with alcohol and/or grey/black market pharmaceuticals, then the proportion would be a bit (quite a bit) larger. People who succeed at being truthful (mostly to themselves) are not confronted with cognitive dissonance mind-quakes; however, such individuals are confronted with experiencing the retch reflex when consuming mass media.

Is being truthful vs embracing the lies then half-dozen of one and six of the other? I find satisfactory peace of mind from being truthful and simply avoiding the primary vector of deception; the mass media. Noble individuals like our host and some of the posters here will slog through that vile cesspool of lies and fish out the little nuggets of truth that leak out. It is selfish of me to leave such dirty work to others, but at least I am not hermetically isolated on a mountain somewhere.

J Swift , Sep 16 2020 16:12 utc | 74
Kooshy @ 23

An interesting thought. I have long had the feeling that a large part of the obviously orchestrated drive to almost define both of the two US parties with really incredibly unimportant issues like bathroom preferences were designed to split the voters as equally as possible, so that to swing elections one had only to control the votes of a very small number of tie breakers. I still think this is likely true, but I do think you make an important point that a lot can be learned about what is truly important to the PTB by reflecting on the topics that aren't being argued over.

Compare the "two" US political parties, and you will note that while they seem to be getting ever more extreme and irreconcilable and quasi-religious in their differences, these differences are always on the periphery. Both parties are being indoctrinated with certain common beliefs they will take for granted because they are never talked about -- because these points are not allowed to be in contention. So while even something like climate change can be a big divider (no worries, there's money to be made on both sides of that issue, and means of control); but you will never hear debate about

1. America is the greatest ever!

2. America is always and unquestionably a force for good, and even it's proven bad things (kidnapping, rendition, and torture programs) are done "for the greater good."

3. Unbridled capitalism is the only way, and the privatization and unwinding of any vestiges of social programs, like education, social security, and even utilities and infrastructure, is always a good thing deserving of priority.

4. Individualism is the best, if not only, way. To be a hero you must strike alone against the bad guys/the system/the government; someone who rallies others, causes forces to be gathered and united, unionized, whatever are discouraged or ignored.

5. "Leadership" in the affairs of others around the world is American right, responsibility, and destiny. Having the largest, almost entirely offensively oriented military on earth is essential; and having it, we must use it to get our money's worth.

6. Omnipresent "intelligence" services equal safety and are absolutely required for life to be normal. I'm sure there are other examples of "universally agreed" doctrines in the US, but these are some that leap out.

Noirette , Sep 16 2020 16:32 utc | 75
These crazy MSM lies Anecdote. Last Sat (Geneva, Switz.) I spoke to 20 ppl whom I know somewhat, all know I like to discuss news etc. I said, weird news this week, making no mention of Navalny. 18/20 believed Putin poisoned Navalny and brought it up spontaneously! There is something so appealing and narratively 'seductive' about spies and 'opponents' (Skripal ) and mysterious poisons used by evil doers etc. that fiction just flows smoothly into fact or whatever is 'real.'

I had to mention Assange myself to most, but there the reaction was very mixed, most thought Assange was being persecuted, or it was 'not right', and took this story seriously in one way or another - 4 ppl claimed not to know the latest news. Here, NGOs, Leftists and Others have made demands for him to be offered asylum in Switz, so he has been front page.

In F.

https://www.lematin.ch/story/l-asile-pour-julian-assange-est-demande-a-la-suisse-327216661898

Besides that (I'm always interested in from-the-ground view-points, experiences, so post some myself) what is going on is monopoly consolidation:

Mega MSM in cahoots with the MIC, Big Pharma, Big Agri, Finance, and so on. Corporations joining up their positions bit by bit while also competing in some ways, bribing and owning the Pols. who are front-men and women tasked with providing a lot of drama, manufactured agitation, etc., which in turn is fodder for the MSM, etc.

Overall, the most important sector to watch is the GAFAM, 1, the reign of the middle men is close at hand (control information, both the channels and the content, and commerce up to a point.) All this leaves out energy considerations, another vital topic left aside.

1. google apple facebook amazon microsoft

karlof1 , Sep 16 2020 17:02 utc | 78
ptb @59--

Thanks for your reply! I've touched on the topic of human capital and its development occasionally here, positing it's the #1 asset of all nations. Those nations who neglect to develop their own human capital are bound to become deficient when it comes to basic comparative advantages with other nations, particularly as political-economy shifts from being materialistic to knowledge-based; thus Pepe Escobar agreeing wholeheartedly with my comment about India. (He added this article to his FB timeline and I posted my comment there.)

From 1999-2003, I was involved in developing distance learning platforms for the rapidly advancing ability to learn outside of a school's four walls. The other educators I worked with and myself had great hopes for the virtual classroom and what it might do to aide both teachers and students. At the time we thought this development would provide a great opportunity for the third member of the educational team--parents--to play a greater role in the process since active parental involvement was proven to generate better student outcomes. But for that to be properly implemented, equitable funding for all school districts became an even greater issue than it was already. This issue highlighted the huge problems related to financing education at a moment when BushCo Privatizers began to seriously threaten what was already in place. And that problem has only worsened, the vast disparities being very evident thanks to COVID-forced distance learning. The primary reason good teachers can't be retained is the entire system's a massive Clusterfuck. And computers aren't substitutes for even poor teachers. And parents are even more aloof from becoming involved in the process than ever before.

The dumbing-down I mention is now entering its third generation. The educational structure needs to be completely refitted nationally, but I wouldn't give that task to any of the fuckwits employed by the past three administrations--Yes, I'm arguing education needs to be a completely federal program instead of the 53 different school systems in states and territories; and yes, I'm aware of the pitfalls and potential corruption that poses, which is a microcosm of all the problems at the federal level of government. This problem is yet another very basic reason why the Duopoly and its backers need to be ousted from government and kept as far away as possible as the structure is torn down and rebuilt--The USA will never be great again until that is done.

jared , Sep 16 2020 17:16 utc | 79
@ J Swift | Sep 16 2020 16:12 utc | 74

I suggest that the reason that the media focus on the ridiculous is to convince the public that there is nothing important happening - except where the MSM wants the participation of the public as in with anti-Russia, anti_China, anti-Socialism, etc. Good to get the public participation directed at harmless targets.

They've got to fill the papers with something. The public must be kept warm, comfortable, semi-comatose, watching cat videos...

Last thing anybody wants is the involvement of the public, they will only screw everything-up or try anyway.

karlof1 , Sep 16 2020 17:40 utc | 80
vinnieoh @64--

Thanks for your reply! Your explanation sadly is correct, but it was put into motion prior to Reagan becoming POTUS. The tools used to undo the New Deal were put into place before FDR became POTUS. And FDR's unwillingness to prosecute those who attempted to overthrow his government provided that faction to infiltrate government and eventually attempt to undo the good that was done prior to WW2. When looked at closely, American society was generally quite Liberal in the positive aspects of that term and during the Depression was becoming ever more Collectivist with the war advancing that even further. At the war's end, it was paramount for the forces taking control of the nation to push the public to the right and away from its collectivist proclivities. Where we find ourselves today thus is not an accident of history but an engineered outcome. You may recall voices on the Right accusing Liberals and their organizations of engaging in Social Engineering. Those accusations were projections since it was actually forces on the Right that were maneuvering society to the Right while assiduously applying the principle of Divide and Rule to create a condition where they would be immune from political challenge, which is where we are now.

A few understand this ugly truth and how we arrived here. What's missing is scholarship that links the changes that began in the 1870s with today's situation. Yes, there're good examinations of various pieces of the overall puzzle. But it appears that only Hudson and those in his small circle have figured it out; yet, they haven't produced a complete history that encapsulates it all. And for us to have a realistic chance to undo what's been done, we need to know how it all transpired.

robin , Sep 16 2020 17:56 utc | 81
Antonym @ 60
"There are big differences between Trump and Biden regarding their foreign policies: Trump is hard on Xi-China and soft on Putin Russia, while Biden is the reverse."

I don't share your view. The current administration's foreign policy is very much aligned with that of past administrations and the diplomatic circus surrounding the Skripal affair alone is evidence that nobody is soft on Russia.

What differs, however, is the presentation. Trump is criticized (not praised) for being allegedly soft on Russia and Biden criticized for being allegedly soft on China. This clever trick ensures that just about everybody is onboard the bash-China-and-Russia train.

In a violently polarized society, with red-blue antagonism reaching ridiculous heights, people tend to act exclusively in contradiction to the cult figure they hate so much.

If a Trump hater hears the criticism that the president is too soft on Russia, he will readily grab the bash-Russia stick hoping to score a few hits on Trump. The same person's reaction to a criticism on Biden will be either indifference or angry denial. In either case, he will not be opposed to the bash-Russia nor the bash-China movement.

The dem hater's reaction is similar. Indifference to the soft-on-Russia claim (ie. no opposition to the bash-Russia movement) and active support for the China-bashing.

Curmudgeon , Sep 16 2020 18:13 utc | 82
The article and subsequent discussion brings to mind Dawkins discussion of Memes and Memetics. Not those pesky internet memes. The propaganda war is fierce, and almost without exception the people here are poking and prodding perhaps without being able to put the finger on the "EZ button". This is war, baby, so one thinks the following link may be useful:

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Memetic+warfare%3a+the+future+of+war.-a0263040903

Wherein: " Ideally the virus of the mind being targeted will be overwritten with a higher fidelity, fecundity, and longevity memeplex in order to assure long term sustainability. When this is not practical, it is still possible to displace a dangerous memeplex, by creating a more contagious benign meme utilizing certain packaging, replication, and propagation tricks."

The lie is irrelevant, whether true or false, it must be believable, and it must successfully replicate.

J Swift , Sep 16 2020 20:34 utc | 85
karlof1 @ 80

You are right, the early FDR days were, in hindsight, one of the most important in setting the course of the US for the next century, and unfortunately Big Business won, taking us on a long, ugly road to the right. I agree this would be a most fascinating history book if some of those respected, genuinely knowledgeable people you often cite could collaborate on an opus.

Yes, most people do not know that the wide ranging labor laws implemented at that time were actually not meant to empower organized labor, but to limit it. Perhaps FDR thought it was the best he could do for the working class, but I tend to think it was more a case of him thinking that by outlawing general strikes, wildcat strikes, strikes in support of other unions, and setting up an NLRB with a lot of political control by business, the powers who had so recently let it be known they were ready to actively try to overthrow the government might be mollified. I think he feared the US was at the cusp of a revolution, and perhaps it was. Whether or not if would have been better had that been allowed to proceed is the big question.

lulu , Sep 16 2020 20:58 utc | 86
Anti-China activists funded by NED & Co make up all sorts of horrid stories online, which are then picked up by MSM and political NGOs to spoon feed world audiences/viewers. Viola, you have "fact-based" anti-China news!

Here is an example how an Uyghur activist in Canadian continue to her make-up-to-believe "1 million Uyghurs in concentration camp" is caught on Twitter red handed .

This is literally what these overseas Uyghur activists do all day. Putting a random caption on a video they ripped down from a medical worker's tiktok in China. And people believe it. They'd even believe if the follow up rebuttal is that this is a forced labour doctor.

Another one: There's a guy (Arslan Hidayat, Aussie Uighur) on Twitter who takes footage of ordinary people doing ordinary things, sets them in China and invents a fantastical and sinister scenario.

His twitter functions as the aggregator of fake anti-China propaganda from the past few years.

CitizenX , Sep 16 2020 21:11 utc | 87
Ed Bernays (Freuds Nephew)

Glad to see his name mentioned here. I've been saying for years here to watch the documentary - Century of the Self. If you want to learn about and understand America, its all here. Government, Corporations, Consumerism, Militarism, Deep State, Psychology, Individual selfishness and mental illness.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s

karlof1 , Sep 16 2020 21:34 utc | 88
j Swift @85--

Thanks for your reply! JK Galbraith in his American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power lamented what you recap in your 2nd paragraph and that there was thus no power capable of offsetting Big Business although one was sorely needed. As I wrote, some very sharp minds have written about small segments of the overall movement toward totalitarianism since the 1870s, Galbraith's 1952 book being one that's still worth reading.

[Sep 16, 2020] The Interface between Propaganda and War

Sep 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

snake , Sep 15 2020 22:09 utc | 54

Karlof 1 @ 32 attacks vk @4-- Your attempt to credit Karl Popper with the concept of public opinion is just as false as the stories b wrote about. Click here for a history of that concept. by: karlof1 | Sep 15 2020 17:04 utc | 32


What I like about what vk@ 4 said is that he has given this list a beginning to not only understand our plight as members of the governed classes, but also to analyze our experience with this stuff and to develop a set of rules that can allow us to defend our minds against being controlled by invisible hands of mind control.

can we on this list develop a defensive strategy and use it to teach the governed masses?

Around the globe and throughout history it can be observed that the oligarchs invent a collection of values and stuff them into structures they call nation states, culture, institutions and journalist are all designed to, and rewarded for supporting the values, while media is charged to keep the propaganda circulating.

The H&C propaganda model pulls together from across the political communications literature the variety of factors which essentially constrain journalist and means that they don't actually play the independent autonomous and watchdog role that we expect them to in a democracy ae Herman Chromsky talk about the importance oe size concentration ownership oe mainstream media the way in w/e ownership of most oe media outlets w/people go to for their information is essentially associated w/very large conglomerates w/h overlapping interests and overlapping interests with government and this produces a large structural constraint oe way the media operates.

The Interface between Propaganda and War: Prof.
The Propaganda Model: The filters (Herman & Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, the political economy of the mass media).

[Sep 14, 2020] While We're at It by R. R. Reno

Notable quotes:
"... On the strength of Adrian Vermeule's review last month (" Liturgy of Liberalism ," January 2017), I picked up Ryszard Legutko's The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies . Legutko sees many parallels between the communism that dominated the Poland of his youth and the political-social outlook now treated as obligatory by Eurocrats and dominant in America, which he calls "[neo]liberal democracy." ..."
"... One parallel struck me as especially important: "Communism and [neo]liberal democracy are related by a similarly paradoxical approach to politics: both promised to reduce the role of politics in human life, yet induced politicization on a scale unknown in previous history." We're aware of the totalitarian dimension of communism. But liberalism? Isn't it supposed to be neutral with respect to substantive outlooks, endorsing only the constitutional and legal frameworks for free and fair political debate? Actually, no. Liberals always assert that liberalism is the view of politics, society, and morality "most adequate of and for modern times." ..."
"... [Neo]Liberalism, Legutko points out, is committed to dualism, not pluralism. He gives the example of Isaiah Berlin, who made a great deal out of the importance of the pluralism of the liberal spirit. Yet "Berlin himself, a superbly educated man, knew very well and admitted quite frankly that the most important and most valuable fruits of Western philosophy were monistic in nature." This means that liberalism, as Berlin defines it, must classify nearly the entire history of Western thought (and that of other cultures as well) as "nonliberal." Thus, "the effect of this supposed liberal pluralism" is not a welcoming, open society in which a wide range of substantive thought flourishes, but "a gigantic purge of Western philosophy, bringing an inevitable degradation of the human mind." ..."
"... The purge mentality has a political dimension. Since 1989, European politics has shifted away from a left vs. right framework toward "mainstream" vs. "extremist." This is a telling feature of [neo]liberal democracy as an ideology. "The tricky side of 'mainstream' politics is that it does not tolerate any political 'tributaries' and denies that they should have any legitimate existence. Those outside the mainstream are believed to be either mavericks and as such not deserving to be treated seriously, or fascists who should be politically eliminated." ..."
"... Lumpenproletariat ..."
"... Legutko speaks of "lumpenintellectuals." These are the professors and journalists who buttress the status quo by rehearsing ideological catechisms and exposing heretics. We certainly have a lumpenintelligentsia ..."
"... I regularly read two lumpenintellectuals in order to understand the orthodoxies of our political mainstream: Tom Friedman over at the New York Times and Bret Stephens at the Wall Street Journal . The former is a cheerleader for today's globalist orthodoxies, complete with ritual expressions of misgivings. The latter eagerly plays the role of Leninist enforcer of those orthodoxies ..."
"... Weekly Standard ..."
"... The Weekly Standard ..."
Sep 14, 2020 | www.firstthings.com

♦ Boys and girls are different. There, I've said it, a heresy of our time. We're not supposed to suggest that a woman shouldn't fight in combat, or that an athletic girl doesn't have a right to play on the boys' football team -- or that a young woman doesn't run a greater risk than a young man when binge drinking. We are not supposed to reject the conceit that the sexes are interchangeable, and therefore a man can become a "woman" and use the ladies' bathroom.

Male and female God created us. I commend this heresy to readers. Remind people that boys in girls' bathrooms put girls at risk, and that Obergefell is a grotesque distortion of the Constitution. True -- and don't miss the opportunity to say, in public, that men and women are different. This is the deepest reason why gender ideology is perverse. As Peter Hitchens observes in this issue (" The Fantasy of Addiction "), there's a great liberation that comes when, against the spirit of the age, one blurts out what one knows to be true.

♦ Great Britain recently announced regulatory approval for scientists to introduce third-party DNA into the reproductive process. The technological innovation that allows for interventions into the most fundamental dimensions of reproduction and human identity is sure to accelerate. Which is a good reason for incoming President Trump to revive the President's Council on Bioethics. (It existed under President Obama, but was told to do and say nothing.) We need sober reflection on the coming revolution in reproductive technology. Trump should appoint Princeton professor Robert P. George to head the Bioethics Commission. He has the expertise in legal and moral philosophy, and he knows what's at stake. (See " Gnostic Liberalism ," December 2016.)

♦ On the strength of Adrian Vermeule's review last month (" Liturgy of Liberalism ," January 2017), I picked up Ryszard Legutko's The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies . Legutko sees many parallels between the communism that dominated the Poland of his youth and the political-social outlook now treated as obligatory by Eurocrats and dominant in America, which he calls "[neo]liberal democracy."

One parallel struck me as especially important: "Communism and [neo]liberal democracy are related by a similarly paradoxical approach to politics: both promised to reduce the role of politics in human life, yet induced politicization on a scale unknown in previous history." We're aware of the totalitarian dimension of communism. But liberalism? Isn't it supposed to be neutral with respect to substantive outlooks, endorsing only the constitutional and legal frameworks for free and fair political debate? Actually, no. Liberals always assert that liberalism is the view of politics, society, and morality "most adequate of and for modern times."

This gives [neo]liberalism a partisan spirit all the more powerful because it is denied.

Although such words as "dialogue" and "pluralism" appear among its favorite motifs, as do "tolerance" and other similarly hospitable notions, this overtly generous rhetorical orchestration covers up something entirely different. In its essence, liberalism is unabashedly aggressive because it is determined to hunt down all nonliberal agents and ideas, which it treats as a threat to itself and to humanity.

[Neo]Liberalism, Legutko points out, is committed to dualism, not pluralism. He gives the example of Isaiah Berlin, who made a great deal out of the importance of the pluralism of the liberal spirit. Yet "Berlin himself, a superbly educated man, knew very well and admitted quite frankly that the most important and most valuable fruits of Western philosophy were monistic in nature." This means that liberalism, as Berlin defines it, must classify nearly the entire history of Western thought (and that of other cultures as well) as "nonliberal." Thus, "the effect of this supposed liberal pluralism" is not a welcoming, open society in which a wide range of substantive thought flourishes, but "a gigantic purge of Western philosophy, bringing an inevitable degradation of the human mind."

♦ The purge mentality has a political dimension. Since 1989, European politics has shifted away from a left vs. right framework toward "mainstream" vs. "extremist." This is a telling feature of [neo]liberal democracy as an ideology. "The tricky side of 'mainstream' politics is that it does not tolerate any political 'tributaries' and denies that they should have any legitimate existence. Those outside the mainstream are believed to be either mavericks and as such not deserving to be treated seriously, or fascists who should be politically eliminated."

♦ Karl Marx coined the term Lumpenproletariat . Lumpen means "rag" in German, and its colloquial meanings include someone who is down-and-out. According to Marx, this underclass has counter-revolutionary tendencies. These people can be riled up by demagogues and deployed in street gangs to stymie the efforts of the true proletariat to topple the dominant class.

Legutko speaks of "lumpenintellectuals." These are the professors and journalists who buttress the status quo by rehearsing ideological catechisms and exposing heretics. We certainly have a lumpenintelligentsia , left and right: tenured professors, columnists, think tank apparatchiks, and human resources directors.

♦ I regularly read two lumpenintellectuals in order to understand the orthodoxies of our political mainstream: Tom Friedman over at the New York Times and Bret Stephens at the Wall Street Journal . The former is a cheerleader for today's globalist orthodoxies, complete with ritual expressions of misgivings. The latter eagerly plays the role of Leninist enforcer of those orthodoxies.

♦ Bill Kristol recently stepped down as day-to-day editor at the Weekly Standard . .... As he put it with characteristic humor, "Here at The Weekly Standard , we've always been for regime change."...

[Sep 14, 2020] Israel Funds America's Israel Lobby, While U.S. Taxpayers Pay for Endless Fraud Against Themselves by Philip Giraldi

Sep 14, 2020 | geopolitics.co

SEPTEMBER 12, 2020 GEOPOLITICS101 1 COMMENT

Imagine for a moment that there is a foreign government that receives billions of dollars a year in "aid" and other benefits from the United States taxpayer. Consider beyond that, the possibility that that government might take part of the money it receives and secretly recycle it to groups of American citizens in the United States that exist to maintain and increase that money flow while also otherwise serving other interests of the recipient country.

That would mean that the United States is itself subsidizing the lobbies and groups that are inevitably working against its own interests. And it also means that U.S. citizens are acting as foreign agents, covertly giving priority to their attachment to a foreign country instead of to the nation in which they live.

I am, of course, referring to Israel. It does not require a brilliant observer to note how Israel and its allies inside the U.S. have become very skilled at milking the government in the United States at all levels for every bit of financial aid, trade concessions, military hardware and political cover that is possible to obtain.

The flow of dollars, goods, and protection is never actually debated in any serious way and is often, in fact, negotiated directly by Congress or state legislatures directly with the Israeli lobbyists. This corruption and manipulation of the U.S. governmental system by people who are basically foreign agents is something like a criminal enterprise and one can only imagine the screams of outrage coming from the New York Times if there were a similar arrangement with any other country.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/hmDyIYT3GYY?feature=oembed

The latest revelation about Israel's cheating involves subsidies that were paid covertly by Israeli government agencies to groups in the United States which in turn took direction from the Jewish state, often inter alia damaging genuine American interests. The groups involved failed to disclose the payments, which is a felony .

They also failed to register under the terms of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, which mandates penalties for groups and individuals acting on behalf of foreign governments.

In particular, FARA mandates that the finances and relationships of the foreign affiliated organization be open to Department of the Justice inspection. It states that "any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or otherwise acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal." Those who fail to disclose might be penalized by up to five years in prison and fines up to $250,000.

Israel's various friends and proxies, uniquely, have been de facto exempt from any regulation by the U.S. government. The last serious attempt to register a major lobbying entity was made by John F. Kennedy, who sought to have the predecessor organization to today's American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) comply with FARA. Kennedy was killed before he could complete the process.

To be sure, the U.S. government has recently been aggressive in demanding FARA registration for other nations as well as for Americans working for foreign powers. There have been several prominent FARA cases in the news.

Major Russian news agencies operating in the U.S. were compelled to register in 2017 because they were funded largely or in part by the Kremlin. Also, as part of their plea deals, the former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn both conceded that they had failed to comply with FARA when working as consultants with foreign governments.

A leading recipient of the Israeli government's largesse has been the Israel Allies Foundation (IAF), which has a presence in 43 countries worldwide, though it is registered in the U.S. as a non-profit . It received a grant of $100,000 from Israel's Strategic Affairs Ministry in 2019, part of the $6.6 million that was doled out to eleven American organizations in 2018-9.

Israel Allies particularly uses Lawfare to target the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has a large and growing presence on university campuses. Effective lobbying by IAF in the U.S. has resulted in more than half of all states passing legislation that bans or limits the BDS activity while legislation that would criminalize organizations working against Israel has also been moving through congress. IAF has been directly involved in drafting such legislation and has more recently been pushing for new laws that would legally define criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism.

The Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs initially, in 2015-7, tried to give money openly to diaspora organizations but found that many American Jewish groups, to their credit, would not take it due to concerns over FARA and being accused of "dual loyalty." So, the Ministry created an ostensibly non-government "public benefit company" cut-out to distribute the cash in a more secretive fashion. The mechanism was given the operational name Concert.

Concert's sole purpose was to provide money to diaspora advocacy groups that would work primarily against BDS and other efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state. Concert had an independent board, but its activity of directed by the Strategic Affairs Ministry's director-general.

Concert's internal documents are predictably vague in describing the activities that it was funding, and one might assume that they are purposely misleading. They refer to "defensive and offensive" actions, on "corporate responsibility," "the digital battlefield," and regarding "amplification units" that would provide "support for organizations in a pro-Israeli network."

The intention was to improve Israel's image due to the widespread and completely accurate perception that its human rights record is among the worst in the world . Concert was created to serve as a mechanism to be exploited where situations prevailed that "require an 'outside the government' discussion with the different target audiences [and] provide a rapid and coordinated response against the attempts to tarnish the image of Israel around the world."

Interestingly, one of the most recognizable recipients of Concert funds was Christians United for Israel (CUFI), America's largest pro-Israel group, which received nearly $1.3 million in February 2019 to pay for several 10 week-long "pilgrimages" to the Holy Land. Each pilgrimage involved thirty "influential Christian clerics from the U.S." who were clearly propagandized while they were in the Middle East. Other large disbursements went to predominantly Jewish student groups, presumably to provide them with both resources and necessary training to oppose campus critics of Israel.

The simple way to deal with the massive and illegal Israeli influencing operations that are being directed against the United States would be first of all to deduct every identifiable dollar that is being spent by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to empower supporters in America from the $3.8 billion plus that Israel receives each year directly from the U.S. Treasury. Israel would not be concerned if the United States were to recover a paltry $10 million or so, but it would definitely send a message.

And then one might follow-up by requiring all the Israeli proxies that together make up the Israel Lobby to register under FARA. One might start with AIPAC, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) but there will be many, many more before the work is done. And CUFI, for sure. The fundamentalist Christian head cases that place Israel's interests ahead of those of their own country finally need to have their bell rung.

Philip Giraldi Ph.D., is an Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. Josh SEPTEMBER 12, 2020 AT 11:31 PM

Yes. That is how any parasite operates upon its host. Basically.

[Sep 14, 2020] Is Biden an old-school right-wing Democrat war criminal.

Sep 14, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

booboo , 6 hours ago

"The Past is Prologue

It is September 2020. Americans are focused on an election between an Orange Fascist criminal and an old-school right-wing Democrat war criminal. Where Donald Trump projects chaos and disorder, Biden projects stability, order, and a return to normalcy. If Trump is the virus, then surely Biden is the cure"

so this *** clown spends 5000 words on the criminal operation in Libya under Obama/Biden/Clinton which leave the country in utter chaos and this is his money shot? Orange man bad fascist, old school democrat War Criminal normal.

what a load of tripe

Ace006 , 5 hours ago

A+. He provides much needed clarity and perspective on the Libyan tragedy and then crashes into the usual delusional, leftist landfill of fascism, murder of black youth, BLM (all hail), and Biden as, so help me, some kind of a cure for anything.

... ... ...

[Sep 14, 2020] The Plot Against Libya- An Obama-Biden-Clinton Criminal Conspiracy -

Sep 14, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

The Plot Against Libya: An Obama-Biden-Clinton Criminal Conspiracy

by Tyler Durden Fri, 09/11/2020 - 23:40 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Eric Draitser via Counterpunch.org,

The scorching desert sun streams through narrow slats in the tiny window. A mouse scurries across the cracked concrete floor, the scuttling of its tiny feet drowned out by the sound of distant voices speaking in Arabic. Their chatter is in a western Libyan dialect distinctive from the eastern dialect favored in Benghazi. Somewhere off in the distance, beyond the shimmering desert horizon, is Tripoli, the jewel of Africa now reduced to perpetual war.

But here, in this cell in a dank old warehouse in Bani Walid, there are no smugglers, no rapists, no thieves or murderers. There are simply Africans captured by traffickers as they made their way from Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, Eritrea, or other disparate parts of the continent seeking a life free of war and poverty, the rotten fruit of Anglo-American and European colonialism. The cattle brands on their faces tell a story more tragic than anything produced by Hollywood.

These are slaves: human beings bought and sold for their labor. Some are bound for construction sites while others for the fields. All face the certainty of forced servitude, a waking nightmare that has become their daily reality.

This is Libya, the real Libya. The Libya that has been constructed from the ashes of the US-NATO war that deposed Muammar Gaddafi and the government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The Libya now fractured into warring factions, each backed by a variety of international actors whose interest in the country is anything but humanitarian.

But this Libya was built not by Donald Trump and his gang of degenerate fascist ghouls. No, it was the great humanitarian Barack Obama, along with Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Susan Rice, Samantha Power and their harmonious peace circle of liberal interventionists who wrought this devastation. With bright-eyed speeches about freedom and self-determination, the First Black President, along with his NATO comrades in France and Britain, unleashed the dogs of war on an African nation seen by much of the world as a paragon of economic and social development.

But this is no mere journalistic exercise to document just one of the innumerable crimes carried out in the name of the American people. No, this is us, the antiwar left in the United States, peering through the cracks in the imperial artifice – crumbling as it is from internal rot and political decay – to shine a light through the gloom named Trump and directly into the heart of darkness.

There are truths that must be made plain lest they be buried like so many bodies in the desert sand.

The War on Libya: A Criminal Conspiracy

me title=

To understand the depth of criminality involved in the US-NATO war on Libya, we must unravel a complex story involving actors from both the US and Europe who quite literally conspired to bring about this war, while simultaneously exposing the unconstitutional, imperial presidency as embodied by Mr. Hope and Change himself.

In doing so, a picture emerges that is strikingly at odds with the dominant narrative about good intentions and bad dictators. For although Gaddafi was presented as the villain par excellence in this story told by the Empire's scribes in corporate media, it is in fact Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, former French President Nicholas Sarkozy, French philosopher-cum-neocolonial adventurist Bernard Henri-Levy, and former UK Prime Minister David Cameron, who are the real malevolent forces. It was they, not Gaddafi, who waged a blatantly illegal war on false pretenses and for their own aggrandizement. It was they, not Gaddafi, who conspired to plunge Libya into chaos and civil war from which it is yet to emerge. It was they who beat the war drums while proclaiming peace on earth and good will to men.

The US-NATO war on Libya represents perhaps one of the most egregious examples of US military aggression and lawlessness in recent memory. Of course, the US didn't act alone as a wide cast of characters played a role as the French and British were keen to involve themselves in the reassertion of control over a once lucrative African asset torn from European control by the evil Gaddafi. And this, only a few years after former UK Prime Minister and Iraq war criminal Tony Blair met with Gaddafi to usher in a new era of openness and partnership.

The story begins with Bernard Henri-Lévy, the French philosopher, journalist, and amateur foreign service officer who fancied himself an international spy. Having failed to arrive in Egypt in time to buttress his ego by capitalizing on the uprising against former dictator Hosni Mubarak, he quickly shifted his attention to Libya, where an uprising in the anti-Gaddafi hotbed of Benghazi was underway. As Le Figaro chronicled , Henri-Levy managed to talk his way into a meeting with then head of the National Transition Council (TNC) Mustapha Abdeljalil, a former Gaddafi official who became head of the anti-Gaddafi TNC. But Henri-Levy wasn't there just for an interview to be published in his French paper, he was there to help overthrow Gaddafi and, in so doing, make himself into an international star.

Henri-Levy quickly pressed his contacts and got on the phone with French President Nicholas Sarkozy to ask him, rather bluntly, if he'd agree to meet with Abdeljalil and the leadership of the TNC. Just a few days later, Henri-Levy and his colleagues arrived at the Élysée Palace with TNC leadership at their side. To the utter shock of the Libyans present, Sarkozy tells them that he plans to recognize the TNC as the legitimate government of Libya. Henri-Levy and Sarkozy have now, at least in theory, deposed the Gaddafi government.

But the little problem of Gaddafi's military victories and the very real possibility that he might emerge victorious from the conflict complicated matters as the French public had become aware of the scheme and was rightly lambasting Sarkozy. Henri-Levy, ever the opportunist, stoked the patriotic fervor by announcing that without French intervention, the tricolor flag flying over five-star hotels in Benghazi would be stained with blood. The PR campaign worked as Sarkozy quickly came around to the idea of military intervention.

However, Henri-Levy had a still more critical role to play: bringing the US military juggernaut into the plot. Henri-Levy organized the first of what would be several high-level talks between US officials from the Obama Administration and the Libyans of the TNC. Most importantly, Henri-Levy set up the meeting between Abdeljalil and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. While Clinton was skeptical at the time of the meeting, it would be a matter of months before she and Joe Biden, along with the likes of Susan Rice, Samantha Power, and others would be planning the political, diplomatic, and military route to regime change in Libya.

The Americans Enter the Fray

There would have been no war in Libya were it not for the US political, diplomatic, and military machine. In this sense, despite the relatively meager US military involvement, the war in Libya was an American war. That is to say, it was a war that could not have happened were it not for the active collaboration of the Obama Administration with its French and British counterparts.

As Jo Becker of the NY Times explained in 2016, Hillary Clinton met with Mahmoud Jibril, a prominent Libyan politician who would go on to become the new Prime Minister of post-Gaddafi Libya, and his associates, in order to assess the faction now garnering US support . Clinton's job, according to Becker, was "to take measure of the rebels we supported" – a fancy way of saying that Clinton attended the meeting to determine whether this group of politicians speaking on behalf of a diverse group of anti-Gaddafi voices (ranging from pro-democracy activists to outright terrorists affiliated with global terror networks) should be supported with US money and covert arms.

The answer, ultimately, was a resounding yes.

But of course, as with all America's warmongering misadventures, there was no consensus on military intervention. As Becker reported, some in the Obama Administration were skeptical of the easy victory and post-conflict political calculus. One prominent voice of dissent, at least according to Becker, was former Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Himself no dove, Gates was concerned that Clinton and Biden's hawkish attitude toward Libya would ultimately lead to an Iraq-style political nightmare that would undoubtedly end with the US having created and then abandoned a failed state – exactly what happened.

It is important to note that Clinton and Biden were two of the principal voices for aggression and war. Both were supportive of the No-Fly Zone from early on, and both advocated for military intervention. Indeed, the two have been simpatico in nearly every war crime committed by the US in the last 30 years, including perhaps most egregiously in support of Bush's crime against humanity that we call the second Iraq War.

As former Clinton lackey (Deputy Director of Secretary of State Clinton's Policy Planning staff) Derek Chollet explained, "[Libya] seemed like an easy case." Chollet, a principal participant in the American conspiracy to make war on Libya who later went on to serve directly under Obama and at the National Security Council, inadvertently illustrates in stark relief the imperial arrogance of the Obama-Clinton-Biden liberal interventionist camp. In calling Libya an "easy case" he of course means that Libya was a perfect candidate for a regime change operation whose primary benefit would be to boost politically those who supported it.

Chollet, like many strategic planners at the time, saw Libya as a slam dunk opportunity to turn the demonstrations and uprisings of 2010-2011, which quickly became known as the Arab Spring, into political capital from the Democratic camp of the US ruling class. This rapidly became Clinton's position. And soon, the consensus of the entire Obama Administration.

Obama's War Off the Books

One of the more pernicious myths of the US war on Libya was the notion – propagated dutifully by the defense lobbyists-cum-journalists at major corporate media outlets – that the war was a cheap little war that cost the US almost nothing. There were no American lives lost in the war itself (Benghazi is another mythology to be unraveled later), and very little cost in terms of "treasure", to use that despicable imperialist phrase.

But while the total cost of the war paled in comparison to the monumental-scale crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, the means by which it was funded has cost the US far more than dollars; the war on Libya was a criminal and unconstitutional endeavor that has further laid the groundwork for the imperial presidency and unconstrained executive power. As the Washington Post reported at the time:

Noting that Obama had said the mission could be paid for with money already appropriated to the Pentagon, [former House Speaker] Boehner pressed the president on whether supplemental funding would be requested from Congress.

Unforeseen military operations that require expenditures such as those being made for the Libyan effort normally require supplemental appropriations since they are outside the core Pentagon budget. That is why funds for Afghanistan and Iraq are separate from the regular Defense Department budget. The added costs for some of the operations in Libya are minimal But the expenditures for weapons, fuel and lost equipment are something else.

Because the Obama Administration did not seek congressional appropriations to fund the war, there is very little in the way of paper trail to do a proper accounting of the costs of the war. As the cost of each bomb, fighter jet, and logistical support vehicle disappeared into the abyss of Pentagon accounting oblivion, so too did any semblance of constitutional legality. In essence, Obama helped establish a lawless presidency that not only has little respect for constitutionally mandated checks and balances, but completely ignores the rule of law. Indeed, some of the crimes that Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr are guilty of have their direct corollary in the Obama Administration's prosecution of the Libya war.

So where did the money come from and where did it go? It's anybody's guess really, unless you're one of those rubes who likes taking the Pentagon's word for it. As a Pentagon spokesperson told CNN in 2011, "The price tag for U.S. Defense Department operations in Libya as of September 30 [was] $1.1 billion. This included daily military operations, munitions, the drawdown of supplies and humanitarian assistance." However, to illustrate the downright Orwellian impossibility of discerning the truth, Vice President Joe Biden doubled that number when speaking on CNN, suggesting that "NATO alliance worked like it was designed to do, burden-sharing. In total, it cost us $2 billion, no American lives lost."

As is painfully evident, there is no clear way to know how much was spent other than to take the word of those who prosecuted the war. With no congressional oversight, and no clear documentary record, the war on Libya disappears down the memory hole, and with it the idea that there is a separation of powers, Congressional authority to make war, or a functioning Constitution.

America's Dirty War in Libya

While the enduring memory of Libya for most Americans is the political theater that resulted from the attack on the US facility in Benghazi that killed several Americans, including US Ambassador Stevens, it is not nearly the most consequential. Rather, America's use of terrorist groups (and the insurgents who emerged from them) as military proxies may perhaps be the real legacy from a strategic perspective. For while the corporate media presented the narrative of spontaneous protests and uprisings to overthrow Gaddafi, it was in fact a loose network of terror groups that did the dirty work.

While much of this recent history has been buried by bad reporting, establishment mythmaking, and conspiracist muddying of the truth, it was surprisingly well reported at the time. For example, as the New York Times wrote of one of the primary US-backed forces on the ground during the war in 2011:

"The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group was formed in 1995 with the goal of ousting Colonel Qaddafi. Driven into the mountains or exile by Libyan security forces, the group's members were among the first to join the fight against Qaddafi security forces Officially the fighting group does not exist any longer, but the former members are fighting largely under the leadership of Abu Abdullah Sadik [aka Abdelhakim Belhadj]."

Even at the time, there was considerable unease among Washington's strategic planners that the Obama Adminstration's embrace of a terror group with known links to al-Qaeda could prove to be a major blunder. "American, European and Arab intelligence services acknowledge that they are worried about the influence that the former group's members might exert over Libya after Colonel Qaddafi is gone, and they are trying to assess their influence and any lingering links to Al Qaeda," the Times noted.

Of course, those in the know at the various US intelligence agencies already had a pretty good sense of who they were backing, or at least the elements likely to be involved in any US operation. Specifically, the US knew that the areas from which it was drawing anti-Gaddafi opposition forces was a hotbed of criminal and terrorist activity.

In a 2007 study entitled "Al-Qa'ida's Foreign Fighters in Iraq: A First Look at the Sinjar Records" which examined the origins of various criminal and terrorist groups active in Iraq, the Combating Terrorism Center at the US Military Academy at West Point concluded that:

"Almost 19 percent of the fighters in the Sinjar Records came from Libya alone. Furthermore, Libya contributed far more fighters per capita than any other nationality in the Sinjar Records, including Saudi Arabia The apparent surge in Libyan recruits traveling to Iraq may be linked with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group's (LIFG) increasingly cooperative relationship with al-Qa'ida which culminated in the LIFG officially joining al-Qa'ida on November 3, 2007 The most common cities that the fighters called home were Darnah [Derna], Libya and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, with 52 and 51 fighters respectively. Darnah [Derna] with a population just over 80,000 compared to Riyadh's 4.3 million, has far and away the largest per capita number of fighters in the Sinjar records."

It was known at the time that the majority of the anti-Gaddafi forces hailed from the region including Derna, Benghazi, and Tobruk – the "Eastern Libya" so often referred to as anti-Gaddafi – and that the likelihood that al-Qaeda and other terror groups were among the ranks of the US recruits was very high. Nevertheless, they persisted.

Take the case of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, charged by the US with guarding the CIA facility in Benghazi at which Ambassador Stevens was murdered. As the Los Angeles Times reported in 2012:

"Over the last year, while assigned by their militia to help protect the U.S. mission in Benghazi, the pair had been drilled by American security personnel in using their weapons, securing entrances, climbing walls and waging hand-to-hand combat The militiamen flatly deny supporting the assailants but acknowledge that their large, government-allied force, known as the Feb. 17 Martyrs Brigade, could include anti-American elements The Feb. 17 brigade is regarded as one of the more capable militias in eastern Libya."

But it wasn't just LIFG and al-Qaeda affiliated criminal groups entering the fray thanks to Washington rolling out the blood-stained red carpet.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

A longtime asset of the US, General Khalifa Hifter and his so-called Libyan National Army have been on the ground in Libya since 2011, and have emerged as one of the primary forces vying for power in post-war Libya. Hifter has a long and sordid history working for the CIA in its attempts to overthrow Gaddafi in the 1980s before being resettled conveniently near Langley, Virginia. As the New York Times reported in 1991:

The secret paramilitary operation, set in motion in the final months of the Reagan Administration, provided military aid and training to about 600 Libyan soldiers who were among those captured during border fighting between Libya and Chad in 1988 They were trained by American intelligence officials in sabotage and other guerrilla skills, officials said, at a base near Ndjamena, the Chadian capital. The plan to use the exiles fit neatly into the Reagan Administration's eagerness to topple Colonel Qaddafi.

Hifter, leader of these failed efforts, became known as the CIA's "Libya point man," having taken part in numerous regime change efforts, including the aborted attempt to overthrow Gaddafi in 1996. So, his arrival in 2011 at the height of the uprising signaled an escalation of the conflict from an armed uprising to an international operation. Whether Hifter was directly working with US intelligence or simply complimenting US efforts by continuing his decades-long personal war against Gaddafi is somewhat irrelevant. What matters is that Hifter and the Libyan National Army, like LIFG and other groups, became part of the broader destabilization effort which successfully toppled Gaddafi and created the chaotic hellscape that is modern Libya.

Such is the legacy of the US dirty war on Libya.

The Past is Prologue

It is September 2020. Americans are focused on an election between an Orange Fascist criminal and an old-school right-wing Democrat war criminal. Where Donald Trump projects chaos and disorder, Biden projects stability, order, and a return to normalcy. If Trump is the virus, then surely Biden is the cure.

It is September 2020. Libya prepares to enter its eighth year of civil war. Slave markets like the one in Bani Walid are as common as youth literacy centers were in Gaddafi's Libya. Armed gangs and militias wield power even in areas nominally under government control. A warlord regroups in the East as he looks to Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates for support.

It is September 2020 and the US-NATO war on Libya has faded to a distant memory as other issues like Black Lives Matter and police murder of Black youth have captured the public imagination and discourse.

But these issues are, in fact, united by the bond of white supremacy and anti-Blackness. The Libya once known as the "Jewel of Africa," a country that provided refuge for many sub-Saharan African migrant workers while maintaining independence from the US and the former colonial powers of Europe, is no more. In its place is a failed state that now reflects the kind of vicious anti-Black racism forcefully suppressed by the Gaddafi government.

Libya as the global exemplar of the exploitation and disposability of the black body.

Squint a little and you can see President Joe Biden getting the old band back together. Hillary Clinton welcomed into the Oval Office as an influential voice, someone to give words to the demented thoughts of the living corpse serving as Commander-in-Chief. Derek Chollet and Ben Rhodes laughing together as they buy another round at their favorite DC hangout, toasting to the re-establishment of order in Washington. Barack Obama as the éminence grise behind the political resurgence of the liberal-conservative dominant structure.

But in Libya, there is no going back, no fixing the past to escape the present.

Perhaps the same might be true of the United States.

AVmaster , 13 hours ago

Number of wars the boy king and his minions started: 6, that we know of: Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.

(Not withstanding the proxy wars during the "muslim spring" like in egypt)

Number of wars Trump has started: 0

This is NOT including the ongoing wars that trump inherited but has dialed back somewhat, like reduced troop presence in iraq/afghan.

fucking truth , 12 hours ago

Trump hasn't started any but he still feeds the beast, hopefully his next four will see a correction to this behaviour,one can only hope.

ay_arrow 2
GreatUncle , 3 hours ago

Has no choice.

The economic reality is the MIC is a big part of the US domestic economy.

Shut that down and you would go into a full blown depression.

If you build bullets, missile, bombs, F35's etc. they have to be used or you have to start scrapping them.

The issue though is not the MIC as such but the lack of any moral integrity and disregard for human life by those mentioned in the article. Once the country was put into this position by them it is much more difficult to extract.

Now I think those in the article should be prosecuted for not going to Congress to declare a war and fund it correctly as this is supposed to be the check and balance of a rogue president.

play_arrow
Bollixed , 2 hours ago

Regarding the MIC, many of those companies consist of manufacturing entities comprised of engineers, factory infrastructure and logistics infrastructure funded by government spending that could realistically be 'retooled' to produce things that could benefit society instead of piss money away on the tools of destruction. America is in need of a massive infrastructure overhaul from our electric grid to our transportation modes to name just two. Nothing is preventing those MIC giants from refocusing their efforts toward a better America versus the current focus they are paid to undertake. It's a matter of priorities and right now I find their priorities misplaced and vulgar.

The money is available at their current funding rates, the manpower and brain power is there, what is lacking is the will to turn the ship around and start putting humans before profits. There is no need to go into a full blown depression as with the shut down of that capacity if those entities are given a mandate to redirect their output for the good of society and create things of lasting value. In other words, take the retooling mindset that turned refrigerator factories into weapons factories like they did in WW2 and take the weapons factories and turn them into entities for the betterment of society. And then wean them off of the government teat.

DeepStateThrombosis , 3 hours ago

Unused funds from the Pentagon can be redirected to the Wall and other Defense protections not known to the public at this time.

ay_arrow
DaiRR , 1 hour ago

DemoRats and NeoCons will try every way possible to keep the wars going.

The USA is incredibly blessed to have Donald J. Trump in the White House.

play_arrow 1
muggeridge , 11 hours ago

To think Americans demonstrated in the millions to stop the Vietnam war exposed as a fraud by Daniel Ellsberg in the PENTAGON PAPERS. Obama did admit that the removal of Ghadaffy was his biggest foreign policy mistake. Clinton also in trouble over Tunisia while Secretary of State with US ambassador killed in 2012. She took responsibility but was found not to have acted improperly by US Congress. However her part in this tragedy remains an open question. Today the only Middle Eastern country still standing IRAN supported by China. Syria supported by Russia. Cold Wars never go away?


play_arrow 2
GreatUncle , 3 hours ago

Cold war is an inevitable consequence of a MIC that must continually produce and expend munitions to keep its part of the economy going.
2 play_arrow

scaleindependent , 10 hours ago

Final Jeopardy, genius!

What is Syria and Iran?


HIS acts against those countries ARE acts of war.

lay_arrow
muggeridge , 10 hours ago

Regime Change as our modus operandi to serve the cause of military superiority as if pre-set by computer.

How everything became war and the military became everything by Rosa Brooks Tales of the Pentagon.

Something funny happened on the way to the forum; Broadway musical. Hail Caesar?

play_arrow
CheapBastard , 7 hours ago

Hey, military contractors have to put food on the table also, even if it means murdering millions of innocent people in Yugoslavia (like Clinton did) or in the middle east (like Bush and Obama did).

play_arrow
GreatUncle , 3 hours ago

Yep some people don't get it.

With all the military contractors now moved into peaceful protests maybe we actually need more war to keep them gainfully employed.

Get the picture?


2 play_arrow
SoilMyselfRotten , 3 hours ago

HIS acts against those countries ARE acts of war

Don't forget also blockading Venezuela


No1uNo , 9 hours ago

No Libya story is complete without mentioning David Shayler- the MI6 agent turned whistleblower who was tasked with blowing up Gaddafi in his car - but refused to do so when he was accompanied by his wife and children. (under the Tony Blair govt). -yep.
Shayler later went into a bizarre series of personas -which is understood by many as self preservation tactic - (testimony of mentally unstable is not recognised in court - so no threat).

Then there's the covert ratlines of gathering the ex-Libyan army weapons & shipping them to ISIS Syria via Turkey and White Helmets (see James Corbett) organised by HRC via Benghazi -so no rescue for US Ambassador & team (RIP) HRC prefer'd keep op covert. Carrier 50 miles off coast -HRC killed US Diplomats & support team. -Biden knew.

Also check out the courageous Dilyana Gaytandzhieva who runs armswatch .com and some SM in her name. for laypersons overview of extent of games-within-games & wheels-within-wheels in arms trade/ chem weapons "research". She's currently researching the Beirut bombings - which will be another revelation when it hits.

sauldaddy , 11 hours ago

That awkward moment when you find out the first Black President brought slavery BACK to Africa .....Q- That awkward moment when you find out the first Black President brought slavery BACK to Africa

_arrow
. . . _ _ _ . . . , 13 hours ago

Qaddafi kept African migrants out of the Mediterranean and away from Europe's shores.
Sarkozy couldn't allow that knowing what was in store for Europe.
He predicted what would happen to Europe were he to be deposed. He was right. Macron's (and Merkel's) policies are proof.
That and the gold dinar was his undoing.
.
P.S. Don't tell the leftists, but Libya was the only case of a successful socialist state. On second thought, it might be funny to see them publicly defending Qaddafi.

Ms No , 13 hours ago

That may work for a while when you pull black gold out of the ground, for a while. Oil declines and free **** armies breed faster. Then you are Saudi Arabia and we are about to see how that ends up.

play_arrow
not dead yet , 12 hours ago

Libyan youth unemployment was over 30% because these spoiled kids with their families getting oil checks in the mail every month refused to do menial jobs. Qaddafi kept the black Africans out of the boats by letting them do the work the kids and other Libyans thought was beneath them. A lot of the money the Africans made they sent home which was spent in the local economies which increased jobs there. Libya also invested heavily in Africa which created lots of jobs. These actions kept the number of Africans headed to Europe a trickle. Once Qaddafi was gone so were all the jobs in Libya and the money that flowed into Africa dried up and jobs were lost. A lot of businesses the Libyans created in Africa were confiscated by the local governments and no doubt given to cronies who ran them into the ground.

No1uNo , 9 hours ago

Gaddafi thought wrongly that job description would save him. Also suggested trading oil for €uro's over dollar$, which blew the lid on powder keg. In the end they say it was the oil, though my thinking was DC think tanks didn't want a monied "Mexico" on south coast of Euroland - could make Europe too financially powerful & too difficult to control.

play_arrow
. . . _ _ _ . . . , 6 hours ago

I had heard about selling oil for Euros in relation to Saddam, but not to Qaddafi. Qaddafi was about the gold Dinar.
??

No1uNo , 6 hours ago

Yep, it's what can happen if I'm not careful when I post and try to watch a documentary at the same time.
Thanks for your vigilance.

In case anyone's interested: ex-mossad agent - 57mins
https://archive.org/details/victor-ostrovsky-1995

play_arrow
Steverino , 13 hours ago

Find the Libyan gold that dissapeard.... and one likely finds the source of the overthrow....

quanttech , 13 hours ago

try the french treasury...

Bill300 , 12 hours ago

Look no further than Hillary's brother. General Gage, a former Special Forces Colonel, had been hired by Hillary, et al, to assemble a merc army to secure Qaddafi's gold amidst the fog of war and transport it to Haiti to be laundered thru Hugh Rodham's little gold mine. Does anyone really think Obama sold enough books to buy a $12M seaside mansion in Massachusetts and the Washington DC home?

These people are so evil.

Justapleb , 12 hours ago

That's certainly titillating. Do you have a source that puts these things together?

I tried some Google searches, but I already know those searches are censored so it is not an easy thing to find

dark pools of soros , 4 hours ago

you gotta get your hands dirty if you want to know whats in the soil

DaCrustyDad , 13 hours ago

Imagine if some country invaded us and slaughtered about 23.5 million (apples for apples based on the 500k civilians killed out of 7,000,000)? Obama and the Clinton's should be playing basketball at Pelican Bay the rest of their lives at best.

quanttech , 12 hours ago

It's mind boggling.

Trump dropped 7400 bombs on Afghanistan in 2019. That would be like 60,000 bombs dropping on the US one year.

Arch_Stanton , 9 hours ago

Libya was a modern, secular Arab state. A model for the rest of Islam. Who the f@@k decided it was appropriate to reduce Libya to a 19th century sh1thole?

Shifter_X , 9 hours ago

Hillary ******* Clinton

Constitution101 , 6 hours ago

on instruction from the cabalist banksters who never permit a rival currency system.

Qaddafi's gold-backed dinar throughout Nth Africa would have exposed and displace their petrodollar scam in which they infinitely print their cronies untold trillion$.

end the fed, and all central banks.

Best Satan in Town , 6 hours ago

That's the story in a nutsh-ell

desertboy , 10 hours ago

The petrodollar centrality gets monotonously overplayed. For anyone who cares to look, the geopolitics of the West/NATO are the geopolitics of all its central bank owners as an interlinked group, who are keeping all their options open.

Destroying Libya went beyond the petrodollar to the fight for influence in Africa's future, where France's history in Africa has made it the designated hitter. Note the new CFR-type buzz on a "resurgent France" due to this role.

No1uNo , 8 hours ago

I maintained elsewhere on this thread, was advice of DC think tanks he was taken out. Because a well funded, well educated, low cost, labor factory resource state on south coast of eurozone makes europe too competitive to DC tank's interests. (and open Africa's growing economy to cheap - outside eurozone - euro profiting business interests).

Gaddafi was never a threat to Europe, but europe buying his oil and building his economy......different story.

No1uNo , 9 hours ago

B-I-N-G-O !
get your case of beer for that one!

not dead yet , 11 hours ago

Qaddafi would have not met with death if he only wanted to sell oil in the Gold Dinar. Instead he wanted the Gold Dinar as the currency for all of Africa. The system was being set up along with 4 central banks to manage African economic and monetary affairs when Libya was attacked. Libya also invested heavily in Africa creating lots of jobs and enhancing communications. Unlike the IMF and World Bank with their draconian edicts attached to their loans, like no loans for fossil fueled power plants and other eco garbage, almost guaranteeing default the Libyan Development Fund attached no such garbage to their loans making success possible. Europe was charging Africa $500 million a year for use of their satellites. Qaddafi ponied up $300 million of the $400 million needed to put up Africa's first satellite screwing Europe out of $500 million a year. Qaddafi was also the driving force for Africa for Africans and which kept US African command and it's troops out of Africa. Now the US has troops all over Africa. Qaddafi really was bad. Bad for Western exploitation of Africa.

At the time of Qaddafi's demise the Libyan Development Fund had $32 billion in banks around the world. Western governments and media tried to claim it was money stolen by Qaddafi. Last I knew the Libyan's, the rightful owners of that money, haven't seen a penny.

Constitution101 , 6 hours ago

great info.

got a good concise source?

dark pools of soros , 4 hours ago

you have to dig deep to get little nuggets of truth about Libya since so many sides want to tarnish and twist to push their agenda and greed on its riches

SmokeyBlonde , 12 hours ago

America, as a country, deserves whatever happens just for electing and re-electing Obama.

Far too many grifters, Bolsheviks, pedocrats, and sub-moron IQ feral ghetto rats oh-so-pleased with themselves for being so enlightened and bringing chaos to the whole F'n world.

ReflectoMatic , 11 hours ago

The Democrats are working with the globalist at the United Nations & World Economic Forum. The program being run is the destruction of the United States and elimination of humans, per instructions from "The Cult of Rasur", which is located in the jungle at Mount Rasur in Costa Rica but now renamed as the United Nations University For Peace. The university teaches occult and meditation and only graduates 20 students per year, those students then take positions of influence within the UN. The cult was founded by Maurice Strong & Dr Muller, Strong also created the Agenda 21 & World Economic Forum, plus in 1982, the more exclusive secret group of 300 called just "World Forum" which met in Vail Colorado near his hippie commune at the Baca Grande in the San Luis Valley.

The GAIA Theory which was converted into GAIA Religion at the Maurice Strong Hippie Commune in Colorado. David Perkins was there, apparently one of the first hippies to arrive at the commune around 1978. In this podcast we get a rare look into the mindset of the globalist and the creation of Agenda 21.

http://radiomisterioso.com/audio/David_Perkins_6_21_18.mp3

It's not clear if David Perkins & his partner, Chris O'Brian, are aware of Maurice Strong & Klaus Schwab conducting the special and secret World Forum of 300 at Vail in 1982. At that 1982 event the concepts David Perkins describes, combined with concepts gotten by paranormal activities at Mount Rasur in Costa Rica, were passed down to the 300 and thus began the creation that has brought the world to a standstill.

Chris O'Brian has an interesting podcast also, describing the Maurice Strong hippie commune, in this he describes meeting Lawrence Rockefeller at the commune.

https://slvoices.com/2019/12/21/the-mysterious-san-luis-valley-part-1/

I saw it posted here that Amschel Rothschild Said Rothschilds Have Met with Satan met the Devil in Colorado , now we know where in Colorado.

And finally, who the heck is this guy, the one in the middle? MJ-12 captured this photo of him in Hollywood in 1972, he was then usually seen in company of Curtis LeMay, grandson of the General who founded JPL NASA MJ-12, then in 1982 he was at that World Forum in Vail and in charge of covertly poisoning them all with LSD. He was born in Berkley or Alameda in 1951 while his mother was at theater watching "Day The Earth Stood Still". Seems there is a message which needs to be understood.

https://vault.myvzw.com/webcs/7V1ewnG0Xl

David Champaign, night manager at the Christie Lodge in Avon Colorado, can give further description and verification that the ultra-secret World Forum did occur.

If you listened to that podcast, there was mention of the "group of psychics" at the Baca hippie commune. The guy in the photo, the link just above, the photo was taken in the presence of Allen J Funk MJ-12, Funk's only friend took the photo, Bob Custer. Bob shared hotel rooms with the Stones & Monkeys while on concert tour as official photographer. The guy in the photo and Bob were taken one night, in Allen's white Cadillac convertible, to a house in the hills east of JPL Pasadena. There he met Bob's ex, Val, and Val's work associates, the work Val and associates did was some secret psychic project in Central America and perhaps in Colorado, usually Val just came over to Bob's house to visit when Val was not off at those remote locations. Secret about it they were.

Shifter_X , 8 hours ago

These are self-loathing humans. Imagine wanting to destroy the human race.

SMH

bobroonie , 13 hours ago

Obama bombed Libya in defense of Islamic terrorists he sold weapons to. 600 requests for more security from Ambassador Stevens unanswered.. But when defense contractor Osprey Global's Sidney Blumenthal called Clinton gave him special treatment. Lots of money to be made for a defense contractor and the Secretary of State that starts the war.

not dead yet , 12 hours ago

At the time Stevens died, he was not murdered he died of smoke inhalation as the invaders set the place on fire and the safe room wasn't air tight, Benghazi was the most dangerous place on earth for diplomats. Attempted murders and kidnappings of diplomats were so rife that most governments closed their missions and evacuated their people. Stevens was well aware of this and he went to Benghazi, the US Embassy is in Tripoli, anyway with his last meeting running guns with the Turks. By doing so he signed his death warrant. According to many at the time Stevens was begging for more security shortly before he left for Benghazi he was offered a military security detachment that was already in Tripoli and Stevens refused. Seems Stevens and Hillary didn't want the military to know what they were up to.

quanttech , 12 hours ago

the ambassador got what was coming to him. he was a terrorist, plain and simple.

the rest of the Americans were rescued ... by Qadaffi loyalists. the Americans are shy to admit this.

David2923 , 5 hours ago

Facts you probably do not know about Libya under Muammar Gaddafi:

• There are no electricity bills in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens.

• There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at 0% interest by law.

• If a Libyan is unable to find employment after graduation, the state pays the average salary of the profession as if he or she is employed until employment is found.

• Should Libyans want to take up a farming career, they receive farm land, a house, equipment, seed and livestock to kick start their farms – all for free.

• Gaddafi carried out the world's largest irrigation project, known as the Great Man-Made River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.

• A home considered a human right in Libya. (In Qaddafi's Green Book it states: "The house is a basic need of both the individual and the family, therefore it should not be owned by others.")

• All newlyweds in Libya receive 60,000 Dinar (US$ 50,000 ) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start a family.

• A portion of Libyan oil sales is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.

• A mother who gives birth to a child receives US $5,000.

• When a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidizes 50% of the price.

• The price of petrol in Libya is $0.14 per liter.

• For $ 0.15, a Libyan local can purchase 40 loaves of bread.

• Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Libya can boast one of the finest health care systems in the Arab and African World. All people have access to doctors, hospitals, clinics and medicines, completely free of charge.

• If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need in Libya, the government funds them to go abroad for it – not only free but they get US $2,300/month accommodation and car allowance.

• 25% of Libyans have a university degree. Before Gaddafi only 25% of Libyans were literate. Today the figure is 87%.

• Libya has no external debt and its reserves amount to $150 billion – though much of this is now frozen globally.

Here is photo of the man who helped kill the Col shaking hands with the Col. https://news.antiwar.com/2011/03/03/un-postpones-praising-gadhafis-human-rights-record/

Vivekwhu , 5 hours ago

You have explained why Libya was perfectly ripe for looting by the US Evil Empire and its slave states.

dark pools of soros , 5 hours ago

Yes I've been shining a light on this for years. The true history of Libya should red pill EVERYONE that can still think for themselves.

We are destroying George Washington statues while worshiping a black african american president who destroyed the one rare prosperous socialist African nation.. which now has slave trading!!!! all because it didn't share it's water to french/italian bottlers. And of course the Gold Dinar becoming the African currency.

Lokiban , 11 hours ago

Gadhaffi's two mistakes leading to this war.
Threaten to sell his sweet oil in gold dinars

Threaten French president Sarkozy to pull out all of his money out of France and reveal to the public the donations he made to the French presidential campaign of Sarkozy, which we know is illegal because foreigners can't donate money.

That sealed his fate. America needed to stop this gold for oil scheme just like it did in Iraq and French president Sarkozy's presidency was ont he line.

NuYawkFrankie , 12 hours ago

Slick Willy --> War Criminal

Chimp --> War Criminal

Obongo --> War Criminal

Hillarity --> War Criminal

Groper Joe --> War Criminal

Etc... etc... etc...

Are you at least BEGINNING to see a pattern here???

If not, you soon will do as 'the chickens come home to roost' and ZOG focusses it's attention on YOUR a$$!

Apeon , 11 hours ago

Apparently you are not old enough to remember Johnson

NuYawkFrankie , 8 hours ago

I'm holding "Johnson" as we speak... and the most I can accuse him of is being a naughty - sometimes a VERY naughty- boy. Looks like he's due for another spanking!

NAV , 2 hours ago

But in Libya, there is no going back, no fixing the past to escape the present.

Perhaps the same might be true of the United States.

Obama left this country and Libya in rags, what else is there to say.

Yet Obama lives, while Gaddafi is dead, a man who had the good of his people in mind and already was using primary water from which eventually all of Africa could be watered and developed into a paradise for his people, a people who live on a continent rich with more natural resources than any other.

But this could not be allowed by the Devil's Globalists who want to own all the world's resources in order to make beggars of all mankind. Obama was their man. He not only betrayed Africa but all men for a $40,000,000 pot of silver proffered by the world enemy of liberty - the DEEPSTATE.

NAV , 2 hours ago

But in Libya, there is no going back, no fixing the past to escape the present.

Perhaps the same might be true of the United States.

Obama left this country and Libya in rags, what else is there to say.

Yet Obama lives, while Gaddafi is dead, a man who had the good of his people in mind and already was using primary water from which eventually all of Africa could be watered and developed into a paradise for his people, a people who live on a continent rich with more natural resources than any other.

But this could not be allowed by the Devil's Globalists who want to own all the world's resources in order to make beggars of all mankind. Obama was their man. He not only betrayed Africa but all men for a $40,000,000 pot of silver proffered by the world enemy of liberty - the DEEPSTATE.

you know it makes sense , 5 hours ago

Who writes this crap and who believes a word of it ?.

No mention that Gaddafi planned to set up a new gold backed African money to sell his oil rather than the euro or the dollar. 143+ tons of gold and 140 tons of silver went missing.

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/06/new-hillary-emails-reveal-true-motive-for-libya-intervention/

truepublica.org.uk/global/hillary-emails-reveal-nato-killed-gaddafi-stop-libyan-creation-gold-backed-currency/

It was because of this lie and NATO's involvement in the destruction of Libya that both Russia and China vowed never again to allow this to happen to another country

taglady , 7 hours ago

Trump: "lock her up" became "she's been through enough." What has she been through exactly? "Make America great again" became we need to bail out Boeing and the rest because of an "invisible enemy." It's invisible alright, because it doesn't exist. The only invisible enemy are the parasites shoveling our money into their own very deep pockets in every conceivable way. Like Biden and his entire family and the Clintons and the Obamas and many others have been doing for many years. Like Bush and Cheney made out so well after 911. That's how Gates and the pharmaceutical industry became so bloated while real Americans have struggled to make ends meet.

taglady , 7 hours ago

Interesting coalition between finance, government and media. Like when Bush announced the necessary, unconstitutional war and changes to our society after 911. We didn't get to vote on these changes. No referendum ever happened. Just an announcement in the media and media spin on public opinion, then preplanned actions by corrupt officials. This alliance was never more obvious than during the cv response. We are censored and silenced while liars and thieves are given the bully pulpit to beat us over the head with their idiocracy to enrich very few parasites, again. Then the public is blamed for the rogue actions of government/ business/media. America is bad. We just keep voting for these dummies. Except our voting system is run by the same corrupt dummies who keep getting re-elected. Hmmm. Just like they did to Kadafi and many others. Suddenly Libya is poor. What happened to all of Kadafi's gold? Probably the same thing that happened to the Pentagon trillions and SS "surplus" and public pensions across America. Taxation without representation leaves us broke, without a voice and broken. What are we going to do about it?

Iconoclast27 , 1 hour ago

The problem is you believe imperialism and colonialism has ended in the African continent when that clearly isn't the case, this Libyan regime change op being the latest example of interference you are claiming no longer exists.

John C Durham , 1 hour ago

Actually the end of colonialism that FDR ("Winston, Colonialism is the Cause of this War. This war is going to end all Colonialism".) wished for is hardly over. We got Democratic Party's Truman, not the great Henry Wallace, remember?

Libya only proves this true.

LEEPERMAX , 5 hours ago

America's "BOTCHED CIA OPERATION OF THE CENTURY" as they funneled GADDAFI WEAPONS from the PORT OF BENGHAZI into SYRIA as OBAMA & CO. completed their agenda to DESTABILIZE THE MIDDLE EAST and eventually ALL OF EUROPE.

NO MORE . . . NO LESS

QABubba , 5 hours ago

This is the very reason I sat out the 2016 election. They say citizens don't vote foreign policy but I did. The "We came, we saw, he died" statement illustrated that our leaders didn't have a clue as to the geopolitical damage we had done. The US supported a "no fly zone" in the UN Security Council. Russia supported it. Gaddafi declared his own, stating that none of his air force would fly. The US and their allies quickly "redefined" it to mean they could destroy his air force on the ground, and once destroyed, any of his antiaircraft guns, and once destroyed, any of his tanks and artillery (which don't fly), and his troop convoys.

Gaddafi's, Russia's, perhaps North Korea's big mistake was believing the US would stand by their agreement in the UN Security Council. This and the Eastward creep of Nato may very well be the deciding factor's in Putin's view that he has no responsible actors in the West to deal with. North Korea was watching. Any dream of getting a denuclearized North Korea just receded by about 50 years.

And of course, our presstitute media had a starring role as always. The average American thinks this was a just war, and knows nothing of the slave markets, and nothing about the flood of African immigrants, who are majority muslim, and have no plans whatsoever to assimilate, into Europe. The leaders of France and supposedly Great Britain have stabbed their citizens in the back, as they will now have to watch European culture destroyed.

Vivekwhu , 6 hours ago

Many thanks are due to Draitser for this excellent report on the vile activities of the US Evil Empire in Libya. The power motives have been laid bare, but the massive greed of the US/EU imperial elites have not been detailed. The greed for Libyan oil by France and Italy is well known but the US also looted Libyan gold, just as they looted Ukrainian gold after the 2014 Maidan coup.

By removing Gaddaffi (and who can forget Clinton's evil words "We came, we saw, he died") and looting the gold they scuppered the plans to create a gold-backed dinar for all of Africa, that would have challenged the use of USD, French-controlled "Franc" and other fiat currencies.

That would have been shocking for the US/EU imperial elite that regards Africa as their private fiefdom to loot at will.

Combined with a lust for power, the US/EU imperial elites have an insatiable greed. After all, what use is an empire if the elites can't gorge themselves at will?

lastugro , 10 hours ago

... and Medvedev led Russia abstained (did not veto the vote) at the UNSC session where the intervention was approved. Russia bears a tacit responsibility.

Michael Norton , 11 hours ago

Obama supplied ISIS with leftover weapons from the Libya operation to take out Bashar Assad in Syria. That didn't work out for him too well, did it? Got an ambassador and some CIA spooks killed in Benghazi.

dogfish , 9 hours ago

And Trump steals the oil, the oil that is desperately needed by the suffering Syrians. Trump is a real humanitarian.

Maghreb2 , 5 hours ago

Obama believed every word he was fed about the R2P Right to Protect fantasy concocted at the U.N. At the same time if you knew how dangerous the man was with his Green Revolution and Desert sorcery you would have had him killed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/12/barack-obama-says-libya-was-worst-mistake-of-his-presidency

The first step of his plan was the Libyan African Gold Dinar which would have been a commodity backed gold cuerrency. This would have broken Rothschild and most of the colonial banking systems. On its own it was a just move but not even the Chinese could have an African Bloc form that fast with that much growth. Imploding the CFA system would have destroyed France as we know it and made it poorer than Poland.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mandrake/3520920/Now-Nat-Rothschild-hobnobs-with-Gaddafi-jnr.html

https://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/articles/573aeac75632a39742ed39a0/

Second factor was his ruthless plans to deal with his Islamic Nationalist and Monarchist "Brothers". Gaddafis Green revolution could have spread across the desert wastes and easily overthrown the Al Sauds and trapped Arab natioanlists in their citites. Not a powerful fighter but understood desert warfare. It was the cost of Soviet equipment and the French adapted technicals that made him weaker. The Wars of the Sahara desert like those of Polisario Front and Libyan Chad War were decided by mobility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_War

Finally there were reports amongst the occultists that the man was obsessed with the Occult and the Djinn. Giving a warlord his own banking system and access to African black Magic was enough even for the Jesuits to view the man as a threat to global peace. Rumours the djinns warned him of advance of air strikes and gave strength to his soldiers in the deserts made him a force to be reckoned with in his borders. The association with Abu Nidal is rumoured to have revealed things about the nature of these desert beings. If he had the innate gift for it his tribe probably would have joined us at some point. Reports he had fallen out with the real Green a man a sage and advisor to the Islamic leaders point to a major rupture with the Islamic creed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khidr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senusiyya

https://eng-archive.aawsat.com/theaawsat/news-middle-east/colonel-gaddafi-using-african-magic-to-prolong-his-reign-libyan-rebel-officer

Only God can really judge whether his plan to emancipate Africa was his own power grab to free the continent or another mad man trying to join the global elite by enslaving them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hwiCkU73NA

Maghreb2 , 5 hours ago

The Moroccans learnt a lot from that mess. Islamic world lacks something like the Jesuits to keep these things under wraps.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-goldman-sachs-libya/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USJCcZGbb7w

SmokeyBlonde , 4 hours ago

It would appear, at this point in time, that regardless of motive of his plan, the US-backed alternative has turned out far worse. The only positive result is more money in the pockets of the MIC and the opportunity to play war games in the desert.

Maghreb2 , 2 hours ago

Like I said he was a dangerous man. It takes one to rock the boat like he did. End of the day the system could have been put in place for the African Gold Standard to start to expand into areas that were tired of the Central African Franc system but it would have destroyed Rothschild and led to hundreds of million of Black Muslims having resources to throw at Israel.

https://www.investigaction.net/fr/macron-libye-la-rothschild-connection/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_African_CFA_franc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjyRchz8PFY

Making Chad, Senegal and Mali into something like Yugoslavia with Chinese and Russian Weaponry was beyond the imaginings of Africom. Would have lowered the birth rates with the development and solved the migration and economic crisis. Having these countries like Sweden would have also created living space for white liberals who were highly educated. Instead all the money vanished with the Kleptokrats. Its only insane Facists who want dead Africans on their doorsteps in Berlin and on the television that agree with this madness.

Euafrica, Eurabia could be avoided by making sure the Africans slow their birth rates through development and saving wealth rather than following it to Europe when the big men run with gold and dollars.

At the same time he was known as a devil to the Arabs and the dissidents. Sort of like Rockefeller with the company towns and corporate face. You ask the bastards to resign and why all these people has vanished and gives you statistics on how many electrical appliances have been handed out and says he was never in charge and you don't know how the system works.

https://www.countercurrents.org/janson170812.htm

Hard to say but he played the game. Robbed Bunker Hunt which was enough for us. Bunker C%nt as we called him when he tried to bring down the Morgue in Texas. Stuff like that is why the Illuminati are feared. Its hard for anyone to gauge what is going on and what the domino effects are. He was trained by the Americans and British and supplied with Socialist apparatus. Gianni Agnelli the suavest yid since Joseph kept NATO off his back. He had ties to the U.S deep State as well but that goes back to Wheelus.

https://www.nytimes.com/1986/09/24/business/libya-s-fiat-stake-sold-for-3-billion.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheelus_Air_Base

https://www.nytimes.com/1973/08/09/archives/bp-and-bunker-hunt-sue-coastal-states-on-libya-oil-alternative.html

Like we said about the Occult everyone has a backer but that man had demons watching over him. According to some. Thin line between a Djinn and Shaytan when politics and murder get involved.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/gaddafis-son-had-fingers-cut-off/news-story/ca6d3416e46441842ac8aca3edb11cb7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcgNqHnjLK8

freedommusic , 5 hours ago

Failed nation states make a perfect platform for a profitable global criminal enterprise.

voting machine , 6 hours ago

Allen Dulles couldn't have scripted this operation any better.

This is right out of the CIA hand book. Regime change 101

Jackprong , 7 hours ago

As is painfully evident, there is no clear way to know how much was spent other than to take the word of those who prosecuted the war. With no congressional oversight, and no clear documentary record, the war on Libya disappears down the memory hole, and with it the idea that there is a separation of powers, Congressional authority to make war, or a functioning Constitution.

Got an answer for this: CUTBACKS!

bshirley1968 , 3 hours ago

" The story begins with Bernard Henri-Lévy, the French philosopher, journalist, and amateur foreign service officer who fancied himself an international spy. "

"Lévy was born in 1948 in Béni Saf , French Algeria , to an affluent Algerian Jewish family. "

you_do , 6 hours ago

The war against Libya is a crime .

The arguments for it are mostly fake .

The real reason is the threat against the `dollar`.

JeanTrejean , 6 hours ago

It's the Frenchmen Sarkozy and B.H. Levy who are responsible for this agression.

The USA and NATO (outside Europe) were just "dumb followers".

Vivekwhu , 6 hours ago

Nothing dumb about Obomber: why did he loot and murder in Libya (or Yemen, Ukraine, Syria etc)? Because he CAN!!!

Joiningupthedots , 21 minutes ago

Everything The West touches turns to rat ****.

Mercifully Russia recognised its mistake with Libya and stepped in to save Syria from the same fate.

Every country, its military bandits politicians involved in the unprovoked attack and subsequent destruction of Libya can be considered........WAR CRIMINALS.

Hopefully one day they will be stupid enough to attack Russia or China and be completely destroyed for their stupidity.

OTBorder@CA , 1 hour ago

First of all, Gadhafi gave an unconditional surrender that was brokered by international diplomatic channels over a month before our invasion. Obama & his minions ignored it. We knew many pilots that flew "missions" over Libya during this war & were involved in a massive bombing campaign. Don't forget the Wikileaks where France signed onto the war on the condition they got a % of Libya's gold. My wish is that someday history will tell the truth about the bastard Obama. Read the Lost Arab Spring by, Walid Phares to see all of the other Countries Obama tried to overthrow & have radical Islamic Terrorists replace the peaceful governments.

csc61 , 1 hour ago

The author gives these idiots far too much credit. People must come to the understanding that presidents and politicians (on all sides) simply do as they're told. It is the hidden hand, the international financiers, who are ruining the world. Politicians are mere pawns ... minions willing to sell their souls for a few short years of presumed power, only to scurry off afterward to play the role of elder statesmen. Politicians are nothing more than privileged degenerates who proved early in their political lives they could be easily corrupted and compromised. It is not them who do the damage directly - these things would happen no matter who's in charge. No, they're simply the ones pushed out front to sign documents and take blame for the world's ruination ... a small price they are willing to pay to feed their narcissistic appetites.

Mentaliusanything , 7 hours ago

I would caption that image as "Who is going first to the platform and rope... Biden thinks he has won a Prize and is excited , The Kenyan says you first Bro (loser) and the white Privileged woman is laughing as she says , You have nothing on Me... Bitches, I bury mine deep and dead, I do not swing

Scipio Africanuz , 8 hours ago

Fair enough..

Now that we've completed stage 1 of the harvest, perhaps we ought boost the Republic of Liberty, and hopefully, temper the anxious wrath of folks..

Libya was a catastrophic mistake, borne of hubris, vanity, intellectual rigidity, vainglory, and confusion. Hubris on the part of some, Sarkozy comes to mind, vanity on the part of some, Hillary Clinton comes to mind, confusion on the part of some, Obama comes to mind, and Ideological rigidity on the part of some, Biden comes to mind, and vainglorious pride on the part of some, the security establishment and their directors come to mind..

Having cleared that, it's no use crying over spilt milk, what's necessary, if the humility to acknowledge errors is available, is contributing rationally, and pernitently, to fixing the errors, and not by the same thinking that led to the errors, but fresh thinking that ought now understand that..

What's sown, is what's reaped, but MERCY it is, mitigates the harvests of depravity, via the provision of energy to restitute, and make amends..

The caveat however, is that mercy is NEVER deployed without REPENTANCE and RECALIBRATION,
which are the foundational pillars that make MERCY provide the energy to effect RESTITUTION..

Having clarified that, it's pertinent to inform, that Providence is NOT interested, in any way, shape, or form, in the damnation of anyone and why?

Well, which loving father is interested in the damnation of his children, no matter how depraved?

Still, patience ought not be mistaken for coddling and why?

With one, patience, the intent is to provide time for change..

With the other, coddling, the gambit is the turning of blind eyes to depravity..

But seeing as God, the Almighty Father is CONSISTENTLY Just, we can conclude then, that patience is the prerequisite for either Mercy or Damnation and how so?

Because if patience is deployed, and the depraved utilize it to change, then their salvation is self directed..

And if not, utilized that is, then their damnation as well, is self obtained..

And thus is the Justice and Honor of Divine Providence satisfied..

It's that simple..

And on that note VP Biden, we'll no longer refer to you as that, but as Joseph..

That ought awaken in you the grave responsibility on your shoulders, like that of the Biblical Joseph, whose father made for him, a "Coat of MANY colors.."

And if you be perceptive Joseph, you're now about to wear E Pluribus Unum (Coat of many colors..), created as a singular garment (ONE NATION..), for a reason (the glorification of Provident Divinity..
)

And the glorification?

That E Pluribus Unum (coat of many colors created as a singular garment..), ought demonstrate to all who see it worn, the goodness, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, and LOVE of the Provider of the Coat..

And considering Joseph, that in service of the Republic, you've not withheld the fruit of your loins, it's appropriate then, that you ought now demonstrate that love for the Republic, by putting it first, just as you'd put the fruits of your loins first, except above Divine Providence, known to you, as God Almighty..

So then Joseph, as we begin the next stage of the harvest, remember your oath that "you keep your promises..", you'll be judged by that oath..

And Joseph, "a promise is a debt..", it MUST be paid..

And to boost you energetically, here's Parton the Sweet Voiced Nightingale..

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h7I_9MMcWvk

Good luck and God speed...

[Sep 12, 2020] Never Forget- Smoking Gun Intel Memo From 1990s Warned Of 'Frankenstein The CIA Created' - Zero Hedge

Sep 12, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

As Americans pause to remember the tragic events of September 11, 2001 which saw almost 3,000 innocents killed in the worst terror attack in United States history, it might also be worth contemplating the horrific wars and foreign quagmires unleashed during the subsequent 'war on terror'.

Bush's so-called Global War on Terror targeted 'rogue states' like Saddam's Iraq, but also consistently had a focus on uprooting and destroying al-Qaeda and other armed Islamist terror organizations (this led to the falsehood that Baathist Saddam and AQ were in cahoots). But the idea that Washington from the start saw al-Qaeda and its affiliates as some kind of eternal enemy is largely a myth.

Recall that the US covertly supported the Afghan mujahideen and other international jihadists throughout the 1980's Afghan-Soviet War, the very campaign in which hardened al-Qaeda terrorists got their start. In 1999 The Guardian in a rare moment of honest mainstream journalism warned of the Frankenstein the CIA created -- among their ranks a terror mastermind named Osama bin Laden .

1998 CNN still of Osama bin Laden, right, along with Egyptian jihadist Ayman al-Zawahiri in Afghanistan, CNN/Getty Images

But it was all the way back in 1993 that a then classified intelligence memo warned that the very fighters the CIA previously trained would soon turn their weapons on the US and its allies. The 'secret' document was declassified in 2009, but has remained largely obscure in mainstream media reporting, despite being the first to contain a bombshell admission.

A terrorism analyst at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research named Gina Bennett wrote in the 1993 memo "The Wandering Mujahidin: Armed and Dangerous," that --

"support network that funneled money, supplies, and manpower to supplement the Afghan mujahidin" in the war against the Soviets, "is now contributing experienced fighters to militant Islamic groups worldwide."

UNCLASSIFIED

SECRET/NOFORWNOCONTRACT/ORCON

RELEASED IN FULL

United States Department of State
Bureau of Intelligence and Research

WEEKEND EDITION

21-22 August 1993

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: FRANK II PEREZ
DATEj'CASK ID: 23 NOV 2007 200605437

The Wandering Mujahidin: Armed and Dangerous

During the war in Afghanistan, eager Arab
youths volunteered en masse to fight a historic "jihad"
against the Soviet •'infidel." The support network
that funneled money, supplies, and manpower to sup-
plement the Afghan mujahidin is now contributing
experienced fighters to militant Islamic groups world-
wide. Veterans of the Afghan jihad are being inte-

... ... ...

dump hundreds more devout fighters into the net-
work. exacerbating the problems of governments that
are accepting the wandering mujahidin.

* * *

When the Boys Come Home

The concluding section contains the most revelatory statements, again remembering these words were written nearly a decade before the 9/11 attacks :

US support of the mujahidin during the Afghan war will not necessarily protect US interests from attack.

...Americans will become the targets of radical Muslims' wrath. Afghan war veterans, scattered throughout the world, could surprise the US with violence in unexpected locales.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

ue until wc throw India out," apparently is well armed
and operating about 80 miles southeast of Srinagar.

Mujahidin in Every Corner

Beyond the Middle East and South Asia, small
numbers of Afghan war veterans are taking up causes
from Somalia to the Philippines. Mujahidin connections
to the larger network heighten the chances that even
an ad hoc group could carry out destructive insurgent
attacks. Veterans joining small opposition groups can
contribute significantly to their capabilities; therefore,
some militant groups are actively recruiting returning
veterans, as in the Philippines where the radical Mus-
lim Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) reportedly is using muja-
hidin members' connections to the network to bolster
funding and broker arms deals. The ASG is believed
to have carried out the May bombings of Manila's
light rail system.

Focus on the United States

The alleged involvement of veterans of the Af-
ghan war in the World Trade Center bombing and the
plots against New York targets arc a bold example of
what tactics some fop^r mujahidin are willing in use
in their ongoing jihad (see box, p. 3). US support of
the mujahidin during the Afghan war will not neces-
sarily protect US interests from attack.

The growing perception by Muslims that the US
follows a double standard with regard to Islamic issues --
particularly in Iraq, Bosnia, Algeria, and the Isracli-
occupicd territories -- heightens the possibility that
Americans will become the targets of radical Muslims'
wrath. Afghan war veterans, scattered throughout the
world, could surprise the US with violence in unex-
pected locales.

(Gina BennoB. INfVTNA)

There it is in black and white print: the United States government knew and bluntly acknowledged that the very militants it armed and trained to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars would eventually turn that very training and those very weapons back on the American people .

And this was not at all a "small" or insignificant group, instead as The Guardian wrote a mere two years before 9/11 :

American officials estimate that, from 1985 to 1992, 12,500 foreigners were trained in bomb-making, sabotage and urban guerrilla warfare in Afghan camps the CIA helped to set up .

But don't think for a moment that there was ever a "lesson learned" by Washington.

Frankenstein the CIA created

So he found a different theatre for his holy war and achieved a different sort
of martyrdom. Three years ago, he was convicted of planning a series of
massive explosions in Manhattan and sentenced to 35 years in prison.

Hampton-el was described by prosecutors as a skilled bomb-maker. It was
hardly surprising. In Afghanistan he fought with the Hezb-i-Islami group of
mujahideen, whose training and weaponry were mainly supplied by the CIA.

He was not alone. American officials estimate that, from 1985 to 1992,12,500

foreigners were trained in bomb-making, sabotage and urban guerrilla

warfare in Afghan camps the CIA helped to set up.

Instead the CIA and other US agencies repeated the 1980s policy of arming jihadists to overthrow US enemy regimes in places like Libya and Syria even long after the "lesson" of 9/11. As War on The Rocks recounted :

Despite the passage of time, the issues Ms. Bennett raised in her 1993 work continue to be relevant today. This fact is a sign of the persistence of the problem of Sunni jihadism and the "wandering mujahidin." Today, of course, the problem isn't Afghanistan but Syria. While the war there is far from over, there is already widespread nervousness, particularly in Europe, about what will happen when the foreign fighters return from that conflict.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1304385396692914177&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fnever-forget-1993-smoking-gun-intel-memo-warned-frankenstein-cia-created&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

On 9/11 we should never forget the innocent lives lost, but we should also never forget the Frankenstein of jihad the CIA created .

* * *

The U.S. State Dept.'s own numbers at the height of the war in Syria: access the full report at STATE.GOV

19 June 2015, From US Department of
State, Country Report on Terrorism 2014:
"The rate of foreign terrorist fighter travel to Syria
[during 2014]- totaling more than 16,000 foreign
terrorist ficjhters from more than 90 countries as
of late December - exceeded the rate of foreign
terrorist fighters who traveled to Afghanistan and
Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, or Somalia at any point in
the last 20 years"

me name=

[Sep 11, 2020] John Brennan's CIA Trump Task Force by Larry C Johnson

Sep 11, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

I was mildly amused by Paul Sperry's recent tweet announcing as "breaking news" that Obama's CIA Director, John Brennan, set up a Task Force to target Donald Trump. This should not be considered something "new." I reported on this almost one year ago (October 2019 to be precise). You can check out the original pieces here and here . The following provides an updated, consolidated piece.

While chatting in late October 2019 with a retired CIA colleague, he dropped a bombshell–he had learned that John Brennan set up a Trump Task Force at CIA in early 2016. One of my retired buddy's friends, who was still on duty with the CIA in 2016, recounted how he was approached discreetly and invited to work on a Task Force focused on then Presidential candidate Donald Trump. The Task Force members were handpicked instead of following the normal procedure of posting the job. Instead of opening the job to all eligible CIA personnel, only a select group of people were invited specifically to join up. Not everyone accepted the invitation, and that could be a problem for John Brennan

A "Task Force" normally is a short term creation comprised of operations officers (i.e., guys and gals who carry out espionage activities overseas) and intelligence analysts. The purpose of such a group is to ensure all relevant intelligence capabilities are brought to bear on the problem at hand. I am not talking about an informal group of disgruntled Democrats working at the CIA who got together like a book club to grouse and complain about the brash real estate guy from New York. It was a specially designed covert action to try to destroy Donald Trump.

A "Task Force" is a special bureaucratic creation that provides a vehicle for bring case officers and analysts together, along with admin support, for a limited term project. But it also can be expanded to include personnel from other agencies, such as the FBI, DIA and NSA. Task Forces have been used since the inception of the CIA in 1947. Here's a recently declassified memo outlining the considerations in the creation of a task force in 1958. The author, L.K. White, talks about the need for a coordinating Headquarters element and an Operational unit "in the field", i.e. deployed around the world.

While a "Task Force" can be a useful tool for tackling issues of terrorism or drug trafficking, it is not appropriate or lawful for collecting on a U.S. candidate for the Presidency. But Brennan did it with the blessing of the Director of National Intelligence, Jim Clapper.

A Task Force operates independent of the CIA " Mission Centers " (that's the jargon for the current CIA organization chart).

So what did John Brennan do? My friends said that a Trump Task Force was running in early 2016 and may have started as early as the summer of 2015. Recruitment to Task Force included case officers (i.e., men and women who recruit and handle spies overseas), analysts and admin personnel were recruited. Not everyone invited accepted the offer. But many did.

But this was not a CIA only operation. Personnel from the FBI also were assigned to the Task Force. We have some clues that Christopher Steele's FBi handler, Michael Gaeta, may have been detailed to the Trump Task Force ( see here ).

So what kind of things would this Task Force do? The case officers would work with foreign intelligence services such as MI-6, the Italians, the Ukrainians and the Australians on identifying intelligence collection priorities. Task Force members could task NSA to do targeted collection. They also would have the ability to engage in covert action, such as targeting George Papadopoulos. Joseph Mifsud may be able to shed light on the CIA officers who met with him, briefed on operational objectives regarding Papadopoulos and helped arrange monitored meetings. Was the honey pot (i.e., the attractive woman) named Azra Turk, who met with George Papadopoulos, part of the CIA Trump Task Force?

The Task Force also could carry out other covert actions, such as information operations. A nice sounding euphemism for propaganda, and computer network operations. There has been some informed speculation that Guccifer 2.0 was a creation of this Task Force.

In light of what we have learned about the alleged CIA whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, there should be a serious investigation to determine if he was a part of this Task Force or, at minimum, reporting to them.

When I described this development last November to one friend, a retired CIA Chief of Station, his first response was, "My God, that's illegal." We then reminisced about another illegal operation carried out under the auspices of the CIA Central American Task Force back in the 1980s. That became known to Americans as the Iran Contra scandal.

We know one thing for certain about he work of this Task Force–it failed to produce any intelligence to corroborate the specious claim that Donald Trump was colluding with the Russians. Even though the despicable Brennan has continued to insist that Trump was/is under the thumb of Putin, he failed to provide any substantive information in the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that supported the claim.

Deap , 08 September 2020 at 11:38 PM

The curious "leaks" of Michael Cohen tapes on both Cuomo and Zucker, broadcast by Tucker Carlson, makes me think Cohen also has some Trump tapes.

Cohen of course would be be more than willing to drop any Trump tapes into Tucker Carlson's lap too - or at least work a tease dropping these bit player tapes on others first to weasel a Trump pardon for Cohen at the 11th hour, in return for not dumping his Trump tapes pre-election on Carlson's lap too.

Do you think these "leaked" Cohen tapes are just coincidentally coming out now - or was Micheal Cohen a fifth column all along, and even in direct cahoots with Brennan too? Other Trump business partners were IC assets, why not Cohen who would do anything for a buck and publicity.

Deap , 08 September 2020 at 11:49 PM

The night before the Mueller report came out pundit Brennan on prime time TV (whomever he was working for CNN, MSNBC?) claimed Trump would be facing multiple indictments.

The next day when his distinguished punditry proved 100% false, Brennan then claimed on prime time TV his source (sources?) were obviously wrong. And they moved quickly on to the next topic.

Brennan was obviously operating off of some form of inside intelligence (or just making things up for effect and a paycheck?) .

Just a few lines were uttered on both nights, but now in retrospect, Brennan did admit some sort of intelligence gathering group was passing on this critical information to him - bogus or not. He claimed was in some sort of insider loop.

It would be good to review both those pre-and post Mueller report statements now. Who was he hoodwinking and should he have been paid for his "insights"?

Deap , 08 September 2020 at 11:52 PM

Was Brennan's "source" Michael Cohen?

walrus , 09 September 2020 at 06:33 AM

Cohen is a know nothing "would be if they could be". I have described this type before. He had no access to Trump, the person, as opposed to a tenuous business relationship with Trump the company.

Fred , 09 September 2020 at 08:06 AM

"But Brennan did it with the blessing of the Director of National Intelligence, Jim Clapper. " Obama isn't mentioned at all? I wonder who was actually running the show.

turcopolier , 09 September 2020 at 08:48 AM

Fred
IMO Obama was VERY careful about this.

Fred , 09 September 2020 at 09:10 AM

Col.,

I'm sure he was. He's being very careful about all the current actions on the left too. He'll be running what's left of the democratic party, if they don't succeed in bringing down the constitutional republic this election.

TV , 09 September 2020 at 10:25 AM

So, where's Durham?
Hiding under his desk or.....making a deal for a partnership in a big time DC law firm (the swamp)?

Jack , 09 September 2020 at 10:58 AM

Sir,

For a community organizer Obama is pretty crafty. He found favor with the Chicago big money who backed him for the Illinois legislature and then the Senate. And then directly to the presidency. Now he's best friends with David Geffen and Richard Branson and hangs out with the billionaire class.

He is the "puppeteer" of the Democratic Party, IMO. I'm convinced that if Biden fails, Michelle will run and likely beat an establishment Republican in 2024.

plantman , 09 September 2020 at 11:56 AM

Larry,

Who do you think was the ringleader in this operation: Brennan, Comey or Clapper?
To me, it seems most likely that it was Brennan (with Obama's reluctant approval). Comey and Clapper don't strike me as the kind of guys who would risk everything on an operation that could backfire.

What I'd really like to know is whether Director Brennan communicated with elites outside the agency who might have encouraged the spying to begin with. Can you clarify this point? Does the CIA take orders or instructions from powerful-connected elites outside of the agency??

scott s. , 09 September 2020 at 12:01 PM

It seems we know that NSA identified unreasonable queries of their comms database in 2016, leading Adm Rodgers to shut off access. Immediately after, we see FBI getting involved and setting up Crossfire Hurricane. After the election, we see FBI working with DoJ NSD to move the op into a special counsel organization which then runs the op. It appears the Senate Select Committee (Burr/Warner) was complicit in the op, not to mention Schiff.

FakeBot , 09 September 2020 at 12:37 PM

I'm not sure Obama wants to run the Democratic party. It's likelier he wants to secure his legacy and play a supportive role within the party rather than lead it.

Deap , 09 September 2020 at 01:58 PM

Obama's community organizing skills are null. It was only a title; never an actual product. He will remain the token figure head of the party; but hot heads under the radar are now its life and blood of the Democrat party today. With no small dose of our tax dollars.

Democrats produce nothing; they only consume. There is a brewing turf war within the Democrat party between their historic connection to the government unions and the new socialists - two very different forces with two very different goals. Ironically, the Democrat government unions created the new wave of Democrat socialists.

Watch how this play out - Biden is clueless about what is now seething under his titular party head. Didn't Biden promise he would put Alexandra Cortez in a key administrative position?

akaPatience , 09 September 2020 at 02:09 PM

I remember the eye-opening essay about the CIA Trump task force, especially in light of Brennan's self-assured posture that only briefly slumped (along with all of his brethren on the Left) when the Mueller report finally came out and dashed such great expectations. We can only hope that the Durham probe will expose and at the very least somehow strongly condemn and spell out WITH EVIDENCE in no uncertain terms any seditious activity. After hearing that Trey Gowdy doubts any more prosecutions will come of the probe, I'm not going to hold my breath for perp walks.

Laughably, the Left's still beating that same old Russian Dead Horse though. Just as with the DNC's lackluster national convention, I'm surprised, almost shocked actually, that in spite of the overwhelming support of the "creative class", Democrats can't come up with a better hoax. On the other hand I can't remember the last time I was dying to see a new film, buy a new book or recording, or tune into a new TV drama, so while it could just be me, I suspect the "creative class" ain't quite what it used to be...

Re: Michael Cohen comments: I have to agree with walrus and take exception to the MSM characterization of Cohen as "Trump's personal attorney". My husband and I have a small real estate company but even so, we've simultaneously employed several attorneys for various personal and business needs and our holdings are minuscule compared to Trump's. SO I seriously doubt that the MSM's inference about Cohen's role and insight into Trump's private and business dealings - that he knows all - is greatly exaggerated.

Deap , 09 September 2020 at 04:16 PM

Cohen does not need to "know all", if he was recording Trump. He just has to dole out a few juicy sound bites prior to Nov, with our without context when they did contact each other pre-2016.

Cohen's chance to make Trump squirm since Cohen just demonstrated he was willing to do this to Cuomo and Zucker - so will he or won't he IF he has Trump tapes too - just crude talk at this point would not be welcome as Trump tries to take the edge off his usual "gruff" personality.

No magic carpet to the White House for anyone. I also think people don't like giving any race like this away too early in the game - all the prior elections have swung back and forth almost daily, until they finally broke on election day.

Even John McCain and Romney were still nip and tuck until the final hours if one watched certain indicators. Ironically, the only race called conclusively before election day was Clinton-Trump 2016, and we know how that finally worked out. So more cat (Trump) and mouse (Biden) on a seesaw for a few more months.

All of which begs to say, where the heck is the Durham Report and when will we start seeing accountability for Democrat/Obama high crimes and misdemeanors?

There is a deep cynicism even in California that "no one gets punished" for anything any more, unless you are unlucky enough to be a law abiding, responsible person. Everyone else gets a free ride and a double standard of justice - and it is causing a lot of anger out here. "Law and order" is a building hunger our west.

Christie , 09 September 2020 at 05:00 PM

I hope Larry or someone on this forum can discuss this new Mondoweiss piece, pertaining mostly to the G2, Flynn, and Steele material:

https://mondoweiss.net/2020/09/israel-is-cited-often-in-senate-report-as-link-to-russian-interference-but-our-media-ignore-the-connection/

Various independent media journalists covered the 'favor' Flynn did for Israel, but not the MSM.

This Lee Smith piece may have been discussed here before, but if not, comments would be welcome on that as well.

"How Russiagate Began with Obama's Iran Deal Domestic Spying Campaign",

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/russiagate-obama-iran

nbsp; Bill H , 09 September 2020 at 05:48 PM

Where is the Durham Report? Hahaha. We've had the Durham Report. One small fish indicted. That's it. Were you really expecting more?

I said when the "investigation" was first made public that it was a red herring, a tool to keep us from making noise because we would be pinning our hopes on this "report" that would make everything wonderful. I said then that it would never be anything but a pacifier dangling in front of our noses, like a carrot keeping a donkey dragging the cart along.

nbsp; akaPatience , 09 September 2020 at 06:08 PM

Correction: I meant to say I DON'T doubt the MSM's characterization of Cohen's insight is exaggerated.

Back to the main topic: I wonder if, as in the FBI anti-Trump efforts, there's any damning CIA electronic evidence like texts or emails?

Deap , 10 September 2020 at 12:22 AM

This article came out in May 2020 - essentially why did Obama want to frame Flynn?

It was Iran-gate; not Russia-Gate that drove the Obama spying and the Russia-gate cover-up, according to this author.. Was this the motivation for the Trump Task Force in your post- to spy on Team Trump to learn if they were going to undo Obama's Iran "legacy", particularly since Flynn was advising them? https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/russiagate-obama-iran

The Flynn Spygate unraveling is far more credible as Iran-gate, and ties up many of the very loose ends, much better than the Russia-gate nonsense. If this is the more credible explanation of Obama's Spygate, what happened after this article was published several months ago in May, during the height of the "pandemic". Has this theory been debunked?

And is its current article re-circulation right now tying Obama to Iran-gate spying the reason Adam Schiff, out of no where, is back to screaming Russia-gate yet again?

And everyone else on the left is back to screaming high crimes, misdemeanors and impeachment ......yet again. Gheesh - long and complicates article but it did gel for me. Including explaining the always mysterious role played by Samatha Powers, the Queen of US Unmaskers.

Still waiting to hear more about Obama's Ambassador to that tiny Italian enclave San Marino, that got in his licks unmasking Flynn too. Who was he fronting at the time. And why San Marino?

Deap , 10 September 2020 at 12:52 AM

Connecting the dots - Obama's San Marino Ambassador unmasks Micheal Flynn

The Atlantic Media Company, parent company of the Atlantic Magazine the wife of Obama's former US Ambassador to Italy - Linda Douglass -, who himself had been curiously caught up among the many 11th hour unmaskings of Gen Flynn. For as yet undisclosed reasons.

Atlantic Magazine, part of the Atlantic Media Group, now partly owned by Steve Job's very wealthy widow Laurane Jobs and rabid anti-Trumper, is taking great delight dropping bogus bombs against Trump, that can't even last for a 24 hour credibility cycle. With the promise of many more to come.

Will Linda Douglass be delving into her husband and San Marino Ambassador's great treasure trove of Obama era unmaskings to provide these daily TDS hit pieces? A classified no-no. Or just continue to make stuff up.

Or does this recent leftist media hit piece frenzy mean Russia-gate, Iran-gate and/or Obama Spy-gate is finally going to be broken open?

Such a small, small world. Why was Obama's Ambassador to San Marino unmasking Micheal Flynn? And his wife just happens to now work for the Atlantic Magazine.

j. casey , 10 September 2020 at 10:51 AM

Mr. Johnson:

May I suggest an article updating the recent moves in the Flynn case? Looks like the prosecution is playing to time?

Thanks.

nbsp; Jimmy_W , 10 September 2020 at 12:25 PM

Deap,
Iran-Gate might be the motivating, proximate cause for Obama to approve the overall "counterintelligence" mission. With Russia-Gate the legal cover / excuse. For Brennan / Comey / et al, however, it does not seem like the personal reason for their involvement. The Trump anti-Borg inclinations is probably what motivated the Borg to go after him.

Artemesia , 10 September 2020 at 02:28 PM

Deap, my initial reaction to your mention of an Italian connection was to point to Michael Ledeen, Flynn's co-author and, apparently, consultant - colleague.

Ledeen is known for his Italian connections -- he is thought to have been responsible for the yellow-cake fabrication that pushed along Iraq war.

But the SanMarino connection appears to be on the other side of the ledger that Ledeen inhabits -- tho one should put nothing past that crafty warmonger.

https://militarist-monitor.org/profile/michael-ledeen/

"Iran has long been Ledeen's bête noir, arguing that .the country has been heavily involved in supporting attacks against U.S. forces in hotspots across the globe.[9] "No matter how well we do, no matter how many high-level targets we eliminate, no matter how many cities, towns, and villages we secure, unless we defeat Iran we will always be designing yet another counterinsurgency strategy in yet another place. We are in a big war, and Iran is at the heart of the enemy army." '

If Flynn's anti-Iran sentiments are as unhinged as Ledeen's, then I have little sympathy for his troubles, even though it appears that Ledeen's view prevailed in the Trump administration. Flynn: twice back-stabbed.

I followed John Kerry's and Wendy Sherman's negotiations carefully; I listened to hours and hours of the Congressional debates over the deal -- not a treaty, the debates seemed a sop to Congress; I listened as Iranian representatives (Mousavian, iirc) explained that the Deal was not good for Iran and most Iranians understood that, but that Iranians would go along to show good faith; because they were backed into a corner; and because of the belief that an Iran that was engaged in robust trade with Europeans & others would "come in from the terror cold." I was at American University when Obama announced that the JCPOA was affirmed.

From an "America First" perspective I endorse(d) Obama's vision, as the Forward article explained it:

"[JCPOA} was his instrument to secure an even more ambitious objective -- to reorder the strategic architecture of the Middle East.

Obama did not hide his larger goal. He told a biographer, New Yorker editor David Remnick, that he was establishing a geopolitical equilibrium "between Sunni, or predominantly Sunni, Gulf states and Iran." According to The Washington Post's David Ignatius, another writer Obama used as a public messaging instrument, realignment was a "great strategic opportunity" for a "a new regional framework that accommodates the security needs of Iranians, Saudis, Israelis, Russians and Americans."

The catch to Obama's newly inclusive "balancing" framework was that upgrading relations with Iran would necessarily come at the expense of traditional partners targeted by Iran -- like Saudi Arabia and, most importantly, Israel. Obama never said that part out loud, but the logic isn't hard to follow: Elevating your enemy to the same level as your ally means that your enemy is no longer your enemy, and your ally is no longer your ally."

From my America First pov, "rebalancing" USA relations such that Israel -- not a formal ally and never a trustworthy informal ally (ask survivors of USS Liberty), and other states in MidEast all held positions on a more level playing field in the eyes of American foreign policy, is appealing.

The Forward article failed to mention Ledeen, but it was, unsurprisingly, unapologetically pro-Israel and from a decidedly Jewish perspective.


The Forward's tone and underlying assumptions were and are offensive to me.


Keith Harbaugh , 10 September 2020 at 05:28 PM

Regarding the statement
"The Task Force members were handpicked instead of following the normal procedure of posting the job.
Instead of opening the job to all eligible CIA personnel, only a select group of people were invited specifically to join up."
Two questions naturally arise:
Who was doing the selection, and
was the politics of the candidates a factor, perhaps a very big factor, in the selection process?

For another case where "the right people" were requested by a political officer, consider this:
Flynn Docket #231 (dated 2020-06-24), Strzok's Notes, quotes "P" saying:
"Make sure you look at this [matters dealing with Flynn] - have the right people on it".
This was also mentioned in a Senate floor speech by Chuck Grassley:
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-flynn-investigation-what-did-obama-and-biden-know-and-when-did-they-know

"Right" to whom, and by what criteria?
Did the FBI director not know this was an important matter, which required the best investigators?
In any case, we can see who was put on it, such Trump-haters as Strzok, Page, and Clinesmith.
Just Trump's bad luck, or something more deliberate?

Deap , 10 September 2020 at 06:20 PM

Artemesia, thanks for your insights.

There was not really an "Italian" connection in the Iran-gate piece bur rather the curiosity why Obama's Italian ambassdor had interests in unmasking Michael Flynn, since his name showed up on the odd list of Obama persons who did unmask Flynn.

His name being there - Ambassador Phillips - may have been there due to his other Obama connections, or his wife Linda Douglass' Obama connections. Or his wife's current connection to the tabloid Atlantic Magazine.

Not really anything Italian per se, or even wee San Marino. Other than perhaps a mutual veneration for things Machiavellian-as this unfolding story twists and turns..

[Sep 11, 2020] MSM's attempts to spin Trump's attacks on senseless wars as disrespect for military at large are a dismal distortion of reality -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... By Tony Cox , a US journalist who has written or edited for Bloomberg and several major daily newspapers. ..."
"... "Trump has lost the right and authority to be commander in chief," ..."
"... "despicable comments" ..."
"... "Killing generals could get to be a habit with me." ..."
"... "right and authority" ..."
"... "when it's required for national security and a last resort." ..."
"... "pattern of public statements ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Sep 11, 2020 | www.rt.com

MSM's attempts to spin Trump's attacks on senseless wars as disrespect for military at large are a dismal distortion of reality 11 Sep, 2020 12:06 Get short URL © Getty Images / David Dee Delgado 29 Follow RT on RT

By Tony Cox , a US journalist who has written or edited for Bloomberg and several major daily newspapers. The New York Times and CNN are desperate to paint Donald Trump as an enemy of the military, due to his desire not to get involved in pointless wars. But this is simply not true, and Trump has the backing of many soldiers.

Someone should tell the New York Times, CNN and other mainstream media outlets that soldiers don't actually like getting killed or maimed for no good reason. Nor do they like generals and presidents who spill their blood in vain.

Alas, ignorance of these obvious truths probably isn't the issue. This is likely just another case of the biggest names in news pretending to not get the point so they can take the rest of us along for a ride in their confidence game of alternative reality.

The latest example is the New York Times spinning President Donald Trump's critique this week of Pentagon leadership and the military industrial complex as disrespect for the military at large. "Trump has lost the right and authority to be commander in chief," the Times quoted retired US Marines General Anthony Zinni as saying. Zinni cited Trump's alleged "despicable comments" about the nation's war dead – reported last week by The Atlantic , citing anonymous sources – as one of the reasons Trump "must go."

ALSO ON RT.COM After Trump helps crush ISIS, end Korea nuke tests and avoid new wars, Republican haters warn he 'imperiled America's security'

Never mind that Trump and all on-the-record administration sources denied The Atlantic's report. The Times couldn't resist when the pieces seemed to fit so well together for the military's latest propaganda campaign against Trump. First the president disses the troops, calling them "losers" and "suckers," then he has the temerity to say Pentagon leaders want to fight wars to keep defense contractors happy.

Except the pieces don't fit. The many people who occupy so-called boots on the ground don't have the same interests as the few people who send them to war. In fact, combat troops are given reason to hate the generals who send them to die when there's not a legitimate national security reason for the war they're fighting. And the US has fought a long line of wars that didn't serve the nation's national security interests. Even when a war is justified, the interests of top brass and front-line soldiers often clash.

Remember that great 1967 war movie, ' The Dirty Dozen' ? A group of 12 soldiers who were condemned to long prison sentences or execution in military prison for their crimes were sent on a 1944 suicide mission to kill high-ranking German officers at a heavily defended chateau far behind enemy lines. After succeeding in the mission and escaping the Germans, the lone surviving convict, played by tough-guy actor Charles Bronson, told the mission leader, "Killing generals could get to be a habit with me."

ALSO ON RT.COM NATO cannot survive a second Trump term

So no, New York Times, speaking out against ill-advised wars does not equal bashing the military. And sorry, General Zinni, but generals, defense contractors and their media mouthpieces don't get to decide who has the "right and authority" to be commander in chief. The voters decided that already, and they expressed clearly that they don't want senseless and endless wars and foreign interventions.

The Times cited General James McConville, the Army's chief of staff, as saying Pentagon leaders would only recommend sending troops to combat "when it's required for national security and a last resort." And no, it wasn't a comedy skit. What's the last US war or combat intervention that measured up to that standard? Let's just say the late Bronson, who died in 2003 at the age of 81, was a young man the last time that happened.

CNN tried a similar ploy on Sunday, while trying to sell the "losers" and "suckers" story in an interview with US Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert Wilkie. Host Dana Bash said the allegations fit a "pattern of public statements " by the president because Trump called US Senator John McCain a "loser" in 2015 and said McCain shouldn't be considered a hero for being captured in the Vietnam War. She repeatedly suggested to Wilkie, who didn't take the bait, that Trump's attacks on McCain, who died in 2018, showed disrespect for the troops.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1302611067995074561&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F500455-trump-military-media-lies%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

Apparently, this follows the same line of propagandist thought which told us that saying there are rapists among the illegal aliens entering the US from Mexico – which is undeniably true – equals saying all Mexicans are rapists. In CNN land, a bad word about McCain is a bad word about all soldiers.

McCain was a warmonger who didn't mind getting US troops killed or backing terrorist groups in Syria. If he had his way , many more GIs would be dead or disabled, because the intervention in Syria would have been escalated and the US might be at war with Iran. Soldiers wouldn't want their lives wasted in such conflicts.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=339455679800700928&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F500455-trump-military-media-lies%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px

All wars are hard on the people who have to fight them, but senseless wars are spirit-crushing. An average of about 17 veterans commit suicide each day in the US, according to Veterans Administration data . Veterans account for 11 percent of the US adult population but more than 18 percent of suicides.

The media's deceiving technique of trying to pretend that ruling-class chieftains and front-line grunts are in the same boat reflects a broader campaign of top-down revolution against populism. The military is just one of several pro-Trump segments of the population that must be turned against the president. Other pro-Trump segments, such as police , are demonized and attacked.

Trump has managed to keep the US out of new wars and has drawn down deployments to Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan – despite Pentagon opposition. His rival, Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden, can be expected to rev up the war machine if he takes charge. His foreign policy adviser, Antony Blinken, lamented in a May interview with CBS News that Trump had given up US "leverage" in Syria.

Trump also has turned around the VA hospital system, ending decades of neglect that left many veterans to die on waiting lists.

Like past campaigns to oust Trump, the notion that he's not sufficiently devoted to the troops might be a tough sell. No matter how good their words may sound, the people who promote endless wars without clear objectives aren't true supporters of the rank and file.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Sep 11, 2020] DoD Confirms $10-$20 Billion COVID Bailout For Contractors After Trump Blasted Military-Industrial Complex -

Sep 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

DoD Confirms $10-$20 Billion COVID Bailout For Contractors After Trump Blasted Military-Industrial Complex by Tyler Durden Fri, 09/11/2020 - 09:45 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

This is surely the last thing the American people want to hear, but it does confirm President Trump's recent statements saying that top Pentagon brass essentially seeks out constant wars to keep defense contractors "happy": the Department of Defense plans to cut major military contractors a $10 billion to $20 billion COVID bailout check .

Defense One reports : "With lawmakers and the White House unable to come to an agreement on a new coronavirus stimulus package, it's unlikely that money requested to reimburse defense contractors for pandemic-related expenses will reach these companies until at least the second quarter of 2021, according to the Pentagon's top weapons buyer."

Defense undersecretary for acquisition and sustainment, Ellen Lord, in recent statements has indicated the private defense firm stimulus would cover the period from March 15 to Sept. 15 and is estimated at "between $10 and $20 billion."

President Trump at Andrews Air Force Base, via AP.

"Then we want to look at all of the proposals at once," Lord said at a press briefing Wednesday. "It isn't going to be a first in, first out, and we have to rationalize using the rules we've put in place what would be reimbursable and what's not."

And strongly suggesting that it won't be the last of such stimulus for defense firms who have already profited immensely off post 9/11 'wars of choice' launched under Bush and Obama, Lord said , "I would contend that most of the effects of COVID haven't yet been seen."

To recall, here's what Trump said at the start of this week :

"I'm not saying the military's in love with me," Trump added , as he advocated for the removal of U.S. troops from "endless wars" and lambasted NATO allies that he says rip off the U.S. "The soldiers are."

"The top people in the Pentagon probably aren't because they want to do nothing but fight wars so all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy," he added.

"Some people don't like to come home, some people like to continue to spend money," the president said. "One cold-hearted globalist betrayal after another, that's what it was."

The "outrage" that followed included reporters claiming that Trump's words were "unprecedented".

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

But that's far from the truth, as Glen Greenwald reminded his fellow journalists:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1303109722468429824&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fafter-trump-lambasted-endless-wars-enriching-defense-firms-dod-confirms-10-20-billion&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Well over a half-century ago, Eisenhower warned, "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex . The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

And further: "We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

[Sep 11, 2020] Will the alleged Alexey Navalny poisoning sink the Nord Stream 2 pipeline- It might, but it shouldn t -- RT Op-ed

Sep 11, 2020 | www.rt.com

Will the alleged Alexey Navalny poisoning sink the Nord Stream 2 pipeline? It might, but it shouldn't 11 Sep, 2020 17:39 / Updated 4 hours ago Get short URL © REUTERS/Stine Jacobsen/File Photo; © AFP/Vasily MAXIMOV 11 Follow RT on RT

By Dr. Karin Kneissl , who works as an energy analyst and book author. She served as the Austrian minister of foreign affairs from 2017-2019. In June, she published her book on diplomacy 'Diplomatie Macht Geschichte' in Germany through Olms, and in early September her book 'Die Mobilitätswende', or 'Mobility in Transition', was released in Vienna by Braumüller. The cacophony of noise generated in the wake of the attack on the Russian opposition figure is drowning out the reality. As Angela Merkel has always maintained, the German-Russian gas deal is purely a commercial project.

Nord Stream has always had the ingredients to drive sober-minded Germans emotional. I remember energy conferences in Germany back in 2006 when already the idea of such a gas pipeline as a direct connection from Russia to Germany provoked deep political rows, not just in Berlin but across the EU.

Conservatives disliked it for the simple reason that it was a "Schröder thing," the legacy of social democrat Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who lost the election of September 2005 to Angela Merkel. Schröder had negotiated the project with his good friend, President Vladimir Putin, and then chaired the company in charge of implementing it.

READ MORE Nord Stream 2 must be completed: Don't politicize Russian energy project over Navalny situation – Merkel Party politics and pipelines

Around that time, I was invited to an energy conference in Munich by the conservative think tank, the Hanns Seidel Foundation, managed by the Bavarian party CSU, the traditional junior partner of the ruling CDU in the government. The bottom-line of the debate on Nord Stream was negative, with the consensus being that the German-Russian pipeline would lead to the implosion of a European common foreign policy and damage the EU's energy ambitions.

I attended many other such events across Germany, from parliament to universities, and listened carefully to all the arguments. The feelings towards Nord Stream were much more benign at meetings held under the auspices of the SPD.

But over the years, the rift between different political parties evaporated, and a consensus emerged which supported enhanced energy cooperation between Berlin and Moscow. Politicians of all shades defended the first pipeline, Nord Stream 1, after it went operational in 2011, bringing Russian gas directly to Germany under the Baltic Sea.

They also enthusiastically supported the creation of the second, Nord Stream 2, better known by its acronym NS2. This $11bn (£8.4bn) 1,200km pipeline is almost finished and was due to go online next year.

But now, in the very final stage of construction, everything has been thrown in limbo thanks to the alleged poisoning of Russian opposition figure Alexey Navalny.

NS2 has always been controversial. Critics, such as the US and Poland, have argued that it makes Germany too reliant on energy from a politically unreliable partner. President Trump last year signed a law imposing sanctions on any firm that helps Russia's state-owned gas company, Gazprom, finish it. The White House fears NS2 will tighten Russia's grip over Europe's energy supply and reduce its own share of the lucrative European market for American liquefied natural gas.

These sanctions have caused delays to the project. A special ship owned by a Swiss company menaced with sanctions had to be replaced. And prior to that, various legal provisions were brought up by the European Commission that had to be fulfilled by the companies in retrospect.

Now the case of Navalny, currently being treated at a Berlin clinic after being awoken from a medically induced coma, has thrown everything up in the air again. It has triggered a political cacophony that threatens relations between Germany, the EU, Russia, and Washington. And at the center is the pipeline.

READ MORE 'Fraught with consequences for Russian-German relations': Moscow furious with Berlin over lack of cooperation on Navalny

Various German sources, among them laboratories of the armed forces, have alleged that Navalny had been poisoned with the nerve agent Novichok. Foreign Minister Heiko Maas (SPD) stated in an interview published on Sunday by Bild: " I hope the Russians don't force us to change our stance on Nord Stream 2 – we have high expectations of the Russian government that it will solve this serious crime ." He claimed to have seen " a lot of evidence " that the Russian state was behind the attack. " The deadly chemical weapon with which Navalny was poisoned was in the past in the possession of Russian authorities ," he insisted.

He conceded that stopping the almost-completed pipeline would harm German and broader European business interests, pointing out that the gas pipeline's construction involves "over 100 companies from 12 European countries, and about half of them come from Germany." Maas also threatened the Kremlin with broader EU sanctions if it did not help clarify what happened "in the coming days." Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov responded by labeling the accusations "groundless" and Moscow has staunchly denied any involvement in the affair.

The whole matter is complicated by domestic political considerations in Germany. CDU politician Norbert Röttgen, who heads up foreign affairs within the ruling party and has demanded that the pipeline should be stopped, is among those conservatives vying to lead the CDU in the run-up to Chancellor Angela Merkel's retirement next year. Meanwhile, Merkel is still trying to strike a balance between the country's legal commitments, her well-known mantra that NS2 is a " purely commercial project, " and what is now a major foreign policy crisis.

The chancellor had always focused on the business dimension. But most large energy projects also have a geopolitical dimension, and that certainly holds true with Nord Stream.

When I was Austria's foreign minister, I saw first-hand the recurring and very harsh criticism of the project by US politicians and officials. I remember the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, in a speech at the margins of the UN General Assembly in September 2018 that focused solely on NS2. I replied by pointing out to him that pipelines are not built to annoy others, but because there is demand. One thing was certain – the US opposition to Nord Stream would not wane and now the Navalny case has given it new impetus. What we are witnessing is a tremendous politicization of the pipeline with a wide range of people all shouting very loudly.

ALSO ON RT.COM Craig Murray: Opposition figure Navalny may possibly have been targeted by Russian state, but Western narrative doesn't add up Diplomatic confrontation instead of solution

So here we are, in a very poisoned atmosphere where it might be difficult to revise positions without losing face. The social democrat Maas, just like the conservative Röttgen and many others, have taken to the media for different reasons. In my observation, it might have to do with their respective desires to take a strong position in order to also mark their upcoming emancipation from the political giant Merkel (she is due to step down next year).

Due to her professional and empathetic handling of the pandemic, she is today much more popular than before the crisis. That makes it difficult for a junior partner, represented by Foreign Minister Maas, and for all those who wish to challenge her inside the party.

What is needed is to get the topic out of the media and out of the to-and-fro of daily petty politics. Noisy statements might serve some, but not the overall interests involved. And there are many at stake. It is not only about energy security in times of transition, namely moving away from nuclear, but much wider matters.

As a legal scholar, I deem the loss of trust in contracts. Vertragstreue, as we call it in German – loyalty to the contract – will be the biggest collateral damage if the pipeline is abandoned for political reasons. This fundamental principle of every civilization was coined as pacta sunt servanda by the Romans – agreements must be kept. Our legal system is based on this. Who would still conclude contracts of such volumes with German companies if politics can change the terms of trade overnight?

ALSO ON RT.COM German FM links Nord Stream 2 to Navalny, threatens sanctions as Moscow accuses Berlin of dragging feet on alleged poisoning probe Remember South Stream

In June 2014, construction sites on the coasts of the Black sea, both in Russia and Bulgaria, were ready for starting the gas pipeline South Stream. After pressure from the European Commission, the work never started. The political reason was the dispute on Ukraine – in particular, the annexation of the Crimea. However, the legal argument was that the tenders for the contracts were in contradiction with EU regulations on competition. Tens of thousands of work permits, which had been issued from Bulgaria to Serbia etc., were withdrawn. The economic consequence was the rise of China's influence in the region. South Stream was redirected to Turkey.

So here we are in the midst of a diplomatic standoff. It is a genuine dilemma, but it could also turn into a watershed. Will contracts be respected or will we move into a further cycle of uncertainty on all levels? Germany is built on contracts, norms (probably much too many) and not on arbitrariness.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

silvermoon 5 hours ago

All these weeks have passed and Germany has still not shown shared actual evidence of their Navalny tests with Russia though. That is the same as saying we found the gun with your finger prints on it but never showing it.

Count_Cash silvermoon 3 hours ago

Correct, Germany has only since 10th September (if confirmed) shared any 'evidence'. That is sufficient intervening time to concoct any test result and associated materials that they want - another Diesel scandal. Indeed people will ask why when you had the patient on 22nd of august, it took you so long to send samples to the OPCW, despite almost immediately yelling Poison!

gainwmn silvermoon 5 hours ago

U stupid sheep: Germany did show it to the OPCW, i.e. the organization RF is the member of, and therefore the latter gets the full access to all the data provided by Germany, as well as any other of 192 members. Kremlin lies and demands in this regard is more than ridiculous, they completely destroy any shred of trust left to all RF governmental structures and regime itself.

Teodor Nitu gainwmn 3 hours ago

Riiight!...Those Russians...not only their chemical weapons are no longer working, but they are no longer capable to choose the proper time to use them, or so the story goes. Think about it; they 'used' novichok to kill the Skripals and they are still alive and well (supposedly), now they (Russians) 'used' novichok again to kill Navalny and he is alive and getting better.

Besides, they chose the absolutely wrong time to do it. With Skripals it was just before the opening of the World Cup in Russia and now, just before the finishing of the North Stream 2 pipeline.

It sounds that they are sabotaging their own interests, aren't they? Are they (Russians) that stup!d? Some 'smart' posters here seem to believe it. But lets get real, one has to be able to see beyond the length of his nose, in order to understand what is really going on.

silvermoon Teodor Nitu 2 hours ago

Russia had all their chemical weapons legally destroyed. Along with hundreds of countries. The US, UK and Israel never did. Navalny the innocent anti Putin. Can't win one way try another.

Pro_RussiaPole gainwmn 2 hours ago

So why is Russia still asking for it? Clearly, something is being withheld. As for the OPCW, their credibility has been shot for years with all their fake Syrian chem weapon attack reports.

seawolf 6 hours ago

Even if there was not Navalny's story, they could invent another to stop the project.

Abraxas79 seawolf 4 hours ago

Exactly. I hope Russia is the one that abandons it. Let Germany be the one that decides to cancel it and go along with it. Concentrate on supplying China and other Asian nations and internal consumption. Forget about Europe. You don't have to turn off the current supply, just charge more for it when the market allows. Looks like the next German leader according to this article is quite the Russophobe, which means relations will only get worse.

Pro_RussiaPole Abraxas79 2 hours ago

If this navalny farce does end up cancelling the NS2 project, Russia should stop all gas transit to western Europe through Poland and Ukraine by spring of next year. Tell those countries that will be cut off that Russia can either sell them LNG, or that they will have to connect to other sources of gas. Because if certain countries are so against Russian gas, then why are they not doing anything against Russian gas going through Poland and Ukraine, and why isn't Trump threatening sanctions on these countries for doing so?

Blue8ball713 RTjackanory 3 hours ago

Its a far longer list and it have the fingerprints of GB secret services all over it.

Reply Gabriel Delpino seawolf 46 seconds ago It is not in the interest of Germany to stop de project. Reply

magicmirror 6 hours ago

Europe should have nothing to do with the USA ....... proved time and time again they cannot be trusted. All they want is markets, resources and consumers. They lie, they cheat, they steal...... (quoting mr Pompeo, I think). A big opportunity to win Europe's independence.

SmellLaRata 5 hours ago

All due respect for Mr. Navalny but since when does an individual fate of one person dictates the fate for millions ? And c' mon Germany. Your hypocrisy is so utterly laughable. You ignore the Assange and Snowden cases, the slaughter of Kashoggi, the brutal beating of yellow vests, the brutal actions against the Catalans ... but Navalni. Not even a hint of a proof of government involvemen. But it fits the agenda, does it? The agenda which is dictated by the deep state agitators who so much flourished under Obama.

gainwmn SmellLaRata 4 hours ago

Even being not a fan (to say the least) of the US foreign and some of the domestic policy, I have to point out that tried by U analogy is largely out of balance: first, the issue in Navalny (as well as in Scripals' and others cases acted on with poisons) case is not so much the assassination attempt on a person's life, as the banned use of chemical weapons, the ban RF's signature has been under since 1993. And that conclusion (Russia's guilt) has not been made by the UK or Germany or any other country alone, but the OPCW - the organization not only RF is the member of, but also 191(!) other countries, out of which not a single country (except RF) rejected that conclusion!; second, the US did not made attempt on either Snowden's or Assange's life, with any kind of weapon, not already mentioning the weapons banned by the international agreements American government(s) signed. This is a large - I would say - decisive difference! As far as Kashoggi's case or other cases sited by U, RF did not react with sanctions against the respective perpetrators either, thus demonstrating the same disregard for the law and order as the US did... therefore making all lies about innocent RF and evil US, foolish, at the least.

Pro_RussiaPole gainwmn 2 hours ago

The US and its lackeys are killing Assange. They are doing it slowly. And many voices going along with a lie does not make the lie true. Because these poisoning allegations are lies. The accused were never allowed to see the evidence or challenge it. And there is the whole issue of politicized reports coming out of the OPCW that contradicted evidence and reality.

Nathi Sibbs 4 hours ago

After completing the pipe and it start running Russia must turn off all Ukraine pipes. No more gas for free from Russia, Ukraine must start importing LNG from thier reliable partner USA. I think imports from USA will be good for Ukrainian Nazi people

Abraxas79 Nathi Sibbs 4 hours ago

How are they going to pay for it? Ukraine's only exports these days are its women to various brothels across Europe and North America.

Hilarous 5 hours ago

The German leaders know very well that the case of Navalny will never be resolved and exists for no other reason than to seize a pretext to demonize Russia and to end Nord Stream 2 in exchange for US freedom gas

magicmirror Hilarous 4 hours ago

freedom gas and handsome presents .....

SandythePole 3 hours ago

This is an excellent account by Dr Karin Kneissl. It is a genuine dilemma for 'occupied' Europe. Its occupying master does NOT want NS2 and will do anything to stop it. Russia suffers sanctions upon sanctions, but still gallantly tries to maintain friendly and honourable business relations with its implacable neighbours. For how much longer is this to continue? Surely there must be some limit to the endless provocations of occupied Europe and its Western master. Perhaps it is time to shut off the oil and gas and leave Germany to sail under its own wind.

dunkie56 3 hours ago

Perhaps Russia should disengage with Germany/EU totally and forge ahead in partnership with China and India and whoever wants to do business. let the EU tie it's ship to the sinking US ship and drown along with it's protection racket partner! Then Russia should build a new iron curtain between itself and all countries who want to align with the EU..in the long run Russia has tried to forge a partnership with the West but it just has not born any fruit and even as pragmatic as Russia is they must be coming to the conclusion they are flogging a dead horse!

Blue8ball713 dunkie56 2 hours ago With 146 million citizen Russia is too small to be a real partner to anyone like China or India. Best fit is the EU, but the EU is controlled or better said occupied by the USA. Its part of their hegemonial system. So Russia is left out in the rain..

micktaketo 5 hours ago

I am not sure if it is the right thing to do but I think Russia should sue the German authorities if this deal is withdrawn and if it is have nothing to do with Germany again along with other corrupt countries that cannot prove or at the least bring forth their evidence to be seen, to be transparent to all even Russia the first, because Russia is the one being accused. These countries must think we the people are all completely stupid and Russia more so. This corruption stinks to high heaven and is obvious to all sane people who love fairness. You cannot trust an entity that believes in getting what they want by hook or by crook. Russia learn your lesson ! So you countries that love whats good for you and your people do not cheat them for they voted for you to help them. Germany do not kick yourself, it will hurt your people. Saying, There is more than one way to skin a cat, they say.

Mutlu Ozer 3 hours ago

There is a simple concept to investigate a crime to find the criminals: Just look at whose benefit the crime is? EU politicians are certainly smart people to know this basic concept of criminal investigation. However, now they are playing a new strategy about how to domesticate(!) not only Russia China as well... Germans are the main actors in the stage of the WW-I and WW-II. I surely claim that Germans would be the main architect of the last war, WW-III.

[Sep 10, 2020] Steele -Acted Crazy- - FBI Handler Says -People's Ears Were Bleeding- -

Sep 10, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Steele "Acted Crazy" - FBI Handler Says "People's Ears Were Bleeding"

by Tyler Durden Thu, 09/10/2020 - 16:40 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Eric Felten via RealClearInvestigations.com,

"Crazy" was the term the FBI agent used to describe the behavior of Christopher Steele, author of the now-debunked Trump-Russia dossier. "I've seen crazy source-related stuff in 20 years in New York and this was one of the craziest," the veteran agent testified to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Christopher Steele: "I'm very upset about – we're very upset – about the actions of your agency," Steele said, according to Gaeta. Using the first person plural, Steele likely meant himself and his client, Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson. Victoria Jones/PA via AP

Nevertheless, the FBI continued to rely on Steele's allegations – that Donald Trump and his team were conspiring with Russians who possessed compromising information – to justify its surveillance of the Trump campaign. Without evidence to verify Steele's claims, the FBI fell back on its assertion that the former British intelligence agent was reliable.

The previously unreported testimony of FBI agent Michael Gaeta is found on page 900 of the fifth and final volume of the Senate committee's probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. It raises new questions about the basis of the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign, Crossfire Hurricane, and the declarations it made to the FISA court in four separate applications submitted to spy on American citizens.

Gaeta had a long history with the London-based Steele, who had started his own firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, after leaving the British spy service MI6 in 2009. Between 2013 and 2016, the bureau had paid Steele $95,000 to pass along tidbits on Eurasian organized crime; Gaeta was his contact at the bureau . It was Gaeta whom Steele approached in July 2016 with wild and depraved stories of collusion and kompromat. Gaeta became the "handling agent" for Steele's participation in Crossfire Hurricane. Among his tasks was to get Steele paid (a process that came along slowly) and to see to it that Steele didn't violate the FBI's rules on confidentiality.

This requirement for discretion created a conflict of interest for Steele, who was also being paid for the same information by the Washington-based firm Fusion GPS. Fusion, in turn was being paid by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign for opposition research on Trump. The Democrats wanted Steele's information spread far and wide. They also wanted to be able to claim that the FBI was investigating the allegations. Paid FBI informants, however, are not allowed to tell anyone of their work for the FBI or of the bureau's investigations.

Gaeta was astonished, then, when shortly before the 2016 election an article appeared in Mother Jones titled "A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump." The sub-headline asked, "Has the bureau investigated this material?" Gaeta was convinced Steele was the source for the article and confronted him about it. Steele readily admitted he was behind the Mother Jones story.

The conversation that followed and its aftermath have been described before, but in bloodless ways that fail to capture the importance of that confrontation in determining Steele's reliability and credibility. For example, a Justice Department inspector general report says "Handling Agent 1 advised Steele that he must cease collecting information for the FBI, and it was unlikely that the FBI would continue a relationship with him."

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890 "Listen, Is It About the Money?"

Here's how Gaeta recounted that conversation to the Senate: "Listen, is it about the money?" Gaeta asked Steele. "Because we have the money now. Is it about the money?" The FBI had promised, but had yet to deliver to Steele, $15,000 for one meeting with Crossfire Hurricane agents. The bureau had further promised Steele he would be paid "significantly" for his Trump-Russia research.

Gaeta assumed at first a delay in payment had made Steele go rogue.

"Yes, I'm owed the money, but that's secondary," Steele told Gaeta. "I'm very upset about – we're very upset – about the actions of your agency." By the "we" in "we're very upset" one can reasonably infer that Steele was speaking about himself and his client, Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson (whose client, not counting cutouts, was Hillary Clinton's campaign).

The handling agent was shocked: "I had no idea what he was talking about." Before Gaeta could inquire further, Steele started railing about ''your Director" and his "reopening of the investigation." This was an apparent reference to former FBI Director James Comey's decision to reopen the probe into Hillary Clinton's private email server after 340,000 copies of State Department emails between Clinton and her close personal aide, Huma Abedin, were discovered on a laptop used by Abedin and her husband, Anthony Weiner. He was a disgraced congressman under investigation by the bureau's New York office for sending sexually explicit messages and photos to an underage girl.

At which point it all became clear to the handling agent:

"I'm now understanding that he did this because he was upset that the Director's reopening of the investigation was going to negatively affect the election for Hillary Clinton."

The handling agent described his reaction to Steele's behavior as "surprise and disbelief." Gaeta told the Senate that Steele's actions and attitude weren't just "crazy source-related stuff," but "one of the craziest" the veteran agent had seen in two decades of handling sources. The words are significant: Steele's behavior with the FBI has been characterized as a sort of professional disagreement, uncomfortable perhaps but not unreasonable. Gaeta's blunt assessment casts things in a much harsher light and undercuts subsequent efforts by the FBI's top officials to rehabilitate Steele in order to justify using his "reporting."

Although it has been downplayed until now, Steele's acting out – and his overtly declared partisan motivations -- constituted a crisis for the bureau, so much so that the handling agent describes it in violent terms:

"After that point – after everybody digests what happened," Gaeta told the Senate committee, "[p]hones were ringing at that point; people's ears were bleeding."

Bill Priestap, left, with Michael Horowitz, DoJ inspector general. Priestap vouched for Steele's reliability, and that misrepresentation is important because it was Priestap who was responsible for the official launch of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation in the first place. AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Whose ears would those have been? Gaeta's first call likely would have gone to Bill Priestap, assistant director of the FBI's Counterintelligence Division.

He had just been made Gaeta's point of contact at FBI headquarters.

"Management said we were going to close him," Gaeta told the Senate.

"At that point it's just obvious. That's all you could do." The "management" was Priestap, according to Inspector General Michael Horowitz. "Priestap decided that Steele had to be closed immediately." Gaeta drew up the paperwork and Steele was removed from the list of official bureau sources on Nov. 17, 2016.

In the wake of Donald Trump's election, President Obama ordered a multi-agency "Intelligence Community Assessment" of Russian interference in the presidential campaign. James Comey, the director whose actions had prompted Steele to go outside the bureau in the first place, now pushed for Steele's "reporting" to be included in the document, even though none of it had been corroborated. Comey called Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

"I informed the DNI that we would be contributing the [Steele] reporting (although I didn't use that name) to the IC [Intelligence Community] effort," Comey reported in an email to his top deputies the next day.

"I told him the source of the material, which included salacious material about the President-Elect, was a former [REDACTED] who appears to be a credible person."

First in the list of recipients of Comey's email was Priestap.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Priestap would have known from Gaeta that Steele's behavior was among the "craziest" the handling agent had run into in two decades of source work. He would have known also that, by his own admission, Steele's motivations were to promote Hillary Clinton's campaign apparently by sabotaging Trump's. Yet Priestap went along with Comey's presentation of Steele as a credible source. More than that, Priestap promoted the idea of including Steele's allegations in the intelligence assessment, himself writing to the CIA and describing the former British spy as "reliable."

Finally, Priestap vouched for Steele's reliability even though he later admitted to the Justice Department inspector general that he "understood that the information [from Steele] could have been provided by the Russians as part of a disinformation campaign."

Steele Cast as 'Person of Integrity'

But that's not how Steele's materials were presented to the secret FISA court. Shortly after the election, Priestap went with FBI agent Peter Strzok to London to see if they could rehabilitate Steele's credibility by gathering the opinions of "persons who previously had professional contacts with Steele." They found some who described Steele as "smart" and a "person of integrity" But several lamented Steele's "poor judgment" or "lack of judgment" and his habit of "pursuing people [with] political risk but no intel value." But because Priestap and Strzok did not find any former colleagues to say Steele made things up out of whole cloth, the Crossfire Hurricane team declared him to be credible for the purpose of justifying surveillance warrants.

The willingness of the assistant director for counterintelligence to misrepresent essential information is important because it was Priestap who was responsible for the official launch of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation in the first place.

Gaeta explained to senators just how serious and irrevocable a break it was to "close" a source: ''Once he's closed, nobody is allowed – we can't talk to him."

In this case, that practice was not followed. Priestap's apparent rationale was that the decision to close Steele as a source was not made because he offered unfounded claims but because he had violated confidentiality agreements by sharing them with the press. And so, the FBI continued to gather new "reporting" by Steele. One of channels was David Corn, the Mother Jones reporter who had written the article about Steele's accusations. Corn was a longtime friend of then-FBI General Counsel James Baker. Their children had gone to the same school years before and carpooled. Corn gave Steele memos to Baker and then Baker passed them on to Priestap. Thus the strange situation in which an assistant director of the FBI forbade agents from talking to Steele because of the source's indiscretion with Mother Jones and then proceeded to gather Steele materials through a back-channel relationship with Mother Jones.

Strange, yes, perhaps even crazy.

fxrxexexdxoxmx2 , 1 hour ago

They will never give up reshaping this story.

Here is the truth

Barack Hussein Obama used the DOJ,FBI, CIA, State Department to spy on his campaign rival.

Those loyal to him then used the same agencies in an COUP attempt to remove a duly elected President.

End of story, no spin.

JimmyJones , 1 hour ago

Oh I love President Trump for completely exposing the Deep State and their partners in Crime at the MSM...

BaNNeD oN THe RuN , 58 minutes ago

"completely exposing the Deep State"??

This is but a small corner of a huge termite infestation.

Blondefire , 1 hour ago

The only thing crazier than the Steele dossier are the deaths of Seth Rich and Epstein, or HRC maintaining a private email server which was literally a superhighway for highly classified information to be funneled directly to China for which no one ever suffered even trivial consequences, or HRC and WJC supporting the Uranium One deal along with Sleepy Joe and selling materials vital to our national defense to our sworn enemies, or Obummer being elected to any office higher than dog catcher, or the entire set of circumstances surrounding the death of Justice Scalia and the complete lack of curiosity on the part of the "impartial press", or the deaths of innocent patriots in Benghazi during an arms deal gone wrong, or the complete lack of curiosity on the part of the "impartial press" on the Las Vegas massacre and resultant civilian deaths during an arms deal gone wrong, or the current situation across the nation with civilian police forces being slandered and defunded, with officers being arrested or encouraged to resign en masse, presumably to create a vacuum which can only be filled by a national police force of some sort and probably overseen by the DHS, or almost any of the other headlines from the past 10 years.

MitchRyderAndTheDetroitWheels , 59 minutes ago

I am only 70 and I wouldn't piss on any of the members of the FBI/CIA/Congress if they were on fire. They are all useless to the common good of this country. The entire government workforce in DC needs to be fired starting this afternoon. The most useless MFers on the planet work in city/count/state/federal government. It takes 7 of them to do the job of one good associate.

Bay of Pigs , 1 hour ago

Huma Abedin. Oh yeah, I remember her.

Anyone know what happened to her husband's laptop?

MitchRyderAndTheDetroitWheels , 1 hour ago

Lindsey Graham isn't going to do **** about anything going forward because he like his useless butt boy John McCain are knee deep in this coup.

MrBoompi , 1 hour ago

Steele is a criminal along with a long list of others, starting off with Obama and Brennan.

MitchRyderAndTheDetroitWheels , 56 minutes ago

Barr has 2 more weeks before The Donald has to stand and use the Pulpit....it's ugly now with the dems coming everyday with a new scheme for Trump to have to counter. The good news is the MSM is Chicken Little at this point. Only a F fool believe anything they say since 95% of everything they say about Trump is already negative.

play_arrow
I love your wife , 1 hour ago

How come the fact that Steele is a foreigner never comes in to play?

mikka , 1 hour ago

He is an "allied" foreigner.

BetterOffDead , 27 minutes ago

Are we sure he is retired from MI-6? Sounds like foreign interference in our election, sponsored by a candidate for president. Good thing she didn't win, she would have been impeached for this! /sarc


7 play_arrow
Ditch , 1 hour ago

There are no good actors in any of these stories. And don't tell me to just wait for Sessions, Horrorwitz,Dumbham ...

play_arrow
Joebloinvestor , 51 minutes ago

The FBI acts with impunity and no integrity.

Slammofandango , 15 minutes ago

Just to be clear, Steele was paid by the FBI, with our tax dollars, to meet with the FBI so as to lend legitimacy to fiction created by a company paid to smear Hillary Clinton's political opposition, with itself being paid with other funds that came by way of a law firm hired by Hillary Clinton.

play_arrow
Freespeaker , 26 minutes ago

Rod Rosenstein is complicit. He should lose his pension and other gov benefits. He should be seriously considered for prosecution.


4 play_arrow
RickyLaFleur , 14 minutes ago

Shadowgate explains why these outsourced contractors are the root of the problem. We have been advised.

Freespeaker , 9 minutes ago

They are part of the problem. But really it is just another way to cover things up.

sborovay07 , 21 minutes ago

The treasonists behind the coup, other than 1, still remain free. Strzok, instead of making license plates, has his 2nd book coming out. Meanwhile, the individual who could have exposed the hoax, Julian Assange, is withering away in prison. It has been so obvious for a number of years that the Deep State operatives on both sides of the political spectrum still control the system. Most Americans are not aware of this as the MSM/Socialist/Marxist/Globalist/DeepState cabal will never admit their crimes. Assange, as in my book, Dad, Why Are You Still Talking About Saul Alinsky, He's Been Dead Since 1972? Socialism and the Deep States War on Our Constitution, tells a tale to Congress that the Deep State and Obama treasonists never want you to hear. They need to pay!!!

play_arrow
LOL123 , 22 minutes ago

Priestap may have been the first on list from comey but that's not the first source of dossier.

"

Rahm Emmanuel, who became President Obama's chief of staff, wouldn't allow him (sidney blumenthal) near the Obama White House. Hillary kept him, however, at a $10,000 a month sinecure at the Clinton Foundation where he went on to be instrumental in creating the bengaziscandal from his "Libyan sources."

Trey Gowdy said that the FBI used information from Hillary Clinton hatchet man Sidney Blumenthal to corroborate the Steele dossier.

"I have seen each factual assertion listed in that dossier, and then I've seen the FBI's justification. And when you're citing newspaper articles as corroboration for a factual assertion that you have made, you don't need an FBI agent to go do a Google search," said Gowdy, a former South Carolina congressman and member of the House Intelligence Committee, in a Fox News interview.

"And when the name Sidney Blumenthal is included as part of your corroboration, and you're the world's leading law enforcement agency, you have a problem," Gowdy said.In 2018, Gowdy hinted that Blumenthal was responsible for the creation of the dossier.

"When you hear who the source or one of the sources of that information is, you're going to think, 'Oh my gosh, I've heard that name somewhere before. Where could it possibly have been?'" Gowdy said in February 2018

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trey-gowdy-claims-hillary-clinton-hatchet-man-sidney-blumenthal-was-used-to-corroborate-steele-dossier

Blumenthal, you recall , was an assistant senior advisor to President Clinton from 1997 to 2001, the prime Clinton scandal years, following a career as a writer for the New Yorker. He was a prime witness in the grand jury testimonies over the Monica Lewinsky scandal and famous for leaking creepy stories about the Ken Starr special prosecutor investigation to the press, and came to be known as a man who would do anything for the Clintons. He got a reputation so slimey that even Rahm Emmanuel, who became President Obama's chief of staff, wouldn't allow him near the Obama White House. Hillary kept him, however, at a $10,000 a month sinecure at the Clinton Foundation where he went on to be instrumental in creating the Benghazi scandal from his "Libyan sources." These days, he's affiliated with David Brock's Media Matters, the slime machine featured by Sharyl Attkisson in her bestseller, The Smear: How Shady Politcal Operatives Control What You See, What You Think and How You Vote .

Since then, he's got Clinton in this Steele dossier mess. You'd think Hillary would not want to have anything to do with him after Benghazi, but they're birds of a feather. Blumenthal is to Clinton as Ben Rhodes is to Obama.

Blumenthal was on Hillarys retainer and he is really good at making **** up and getting FBI/CIA involved so much so that he was NOT ALLOWED IN OBAMAS WHITE HOUSE.

To try and pin this on Priestap is a joke.

ay_arrow
Freespeaker , 1 hour ago

Halper, Steele and Mifsud should testify publicly.


play_arrow
Shifter_X , 23 minutes ago

No one talks about the true origins of the "pee" story anymore

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-11/how-4chan-mcfooled-john-mccain-buzzfeed-and-cia-believing-trumps-golden-showers

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-10/4chan-claims-have-fabricated-anti-trump-report-hoax

y_arrow
I Write Code , 49 minutes ago

Spooks is all crazy.

Makes Hillary seem almost norbal.

[Sep 09, 2020] Proof of collusion at last! - IRRUSSIANALITY

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The Guardian ..."
"... BNE Intellinews ..."
"... bne IntelliNews ..."
"... The idea, therefore, that Paul Manafort was an agent of influence for the Russian government flies against everything we know about what he actually did. As for Kilimnik, maybe he is a Russian intelligence agent – I'm not in a position to say. But if he is, he's a very weird one, who spent years actively pushing the Ukrainian government to pursue a policy which directly contradicted Russian interests. ..."
"... None of this, needless to say, appears in the US Senate report. Instead, the report chooses to focus on the apparently shocking revelation that Manafort shared Trump campaign polling data with Kilimnik, as if this sharing of private information was in some ways a massive threat to national security and proof that Manafort was working for the Russians. The fact that both Manafort and Kilimnik spent years doing their damnedest to undermine Russia is simply ignored. Go figure! ..."
Sep 09, 2020 | irrussianality.wordpress.com

PROOF OF COLLUSION AT LAST! SEPTEMBER 2, 2020 PAULR 18 COMMENTS

Despite the secondary roles played some bit part actors in the Russiagate drama, the central figure in allegations that Donald Trump colluded with the Russian government to be elected as president of the United States has always been Trumps' onetime campaign manager Paul Manafort. The recent US Senate report on Russian 'interference' in the 2016 presidential election thus started off its analysis with a long exposé of Manafort's comings and goings.

Simply put, the thesis is as follows: while working in Ukraine as an advisor to 'pro-Russian' Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich, Manafort was in effect working on behalf of the Russian state via 'pro-Russian' Ukrainian oligarchs as well as Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska (a man with 'close ties' to the Kremlin). Also suspicious was Manafort's close relationship with one Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the US Senate claims is a Russia intelligence agent. All these connections meant that while in Ukraine, Manafort was helping the Russian Federation spread its malign influence. On returning to the USA and joining the Trump campaign, he then continued to fulfill the same role.

The fundamental flaw in this thesis has always been the well-known fact that while advising Yanukovich, Manafort took anything but a 'pro-Russian' position, but instead pressed him to sign an association agreement with the European Union (EU). Since gaining independence, Ukraine had avoided being sucked either into the Western or the Russian camp. But the rise of two competing geopolitical projects – the EU and the Russia-backed Eurasian Union – was making this stance increasingly impossible, and Ukraine was being put in a position where it would be forced to choose. This was because the two Unions are incompatible – one can't be in two customs unions simultaneously, when they levy different tariffs and have different rules. Association with the EU meant an end to the prospect of Ukraine joining the Eurasian Union. It was therefore a goal which was entirely incompatible with Russian interests, which required that Ukraine turn instead towards Eurasia.

Manafort's position on this matter therefore worked against Russia. Even The Guardian journalist Luke Harding had to concede this in his book Collusion , citing a former Ukrainian official Oleg Voloshin that, 'Manafort was an advocate for US interests. So much so that the joke inside [Yanunkovich's] Party of Regions was that he actually worked for the USA.'

If anyone had any doubts about this, they can now put them aside. On Monday, the news agency BNE Intellinews announced that it had received a leak of hundreds of Kilimnik's emails detailing his relationship with Manafort and Yanukovich. The story they tell is not at all what the US Senate and other proponents of the Trump-Russia collusion fantasy would have you believe. As BNE reports:

Today the Yanukovych narrative is that he was a stool pigeon for Russian President Vladimir Putin from the start, but after winning the presidency he actually worked very hard to take Ukraine into the European family. As bne IntelliNews has already reported, Manafort's flight records also show how he crisscrossed Europe in an effort to build support in Brussels for Yanukovych in the run up to the EU Vilnius summit.

On March 1, his first foreign trip as newly minted president was to the EU capital of Brussels. The leaked emails show that Manafort influenced Yanukovych's decision to visit Brussels as first stop, working in concert with his assistant Konstantin Kilimnik In a memorandum entitled 'Purpose of President Yanukovych Trip to Brussels,' Manafort argued that the decision to visit Brussels first would underscore Yanukovych's mission to "bring European values to Ukraine," and kick start negotiations on the Association Agreement.

The memorandum on the Brussels visit was the first of many from Manafort and Kilimnik to Yanukovych, in which they pushed Yanukovych to signal a clear pro-EU line and to carry out reforms to back this up.

To handle Yanukovych's off-message antics, Manafort and Kilimnik created a back channel to Yanukovych for Western politicians – in particular those known to appreciate Ukraine's geopolitical significance vis-à-vis Russia. In Europe, these were Sweden's then foreign minister Carl Bildt, Poland's then foreign minister Radosław Sikorski and European Commissioner for Enlargement Stefan Fule, and in the US, Vice President Joe Biden.

"We need to launch a 'Friends of Ukraine' programme to help us use informal channels in talks on the free trade zone and modernisation of the gas transport system," Manafort and Kilimnik wrote to Yanukovych in September 2010. "Carl Bildt is the foundation of this informal group and has sufficient weight with his colleagues in questions connected to Ukraine and the Eastern Partnership. ( ) but he needs to be able to say that he has a direct channel to the President, and he knows that President Yanukovych remains committed to European integration."

Beyond this, the emails show that Manafort and Kilimnik also tried hard to arrange a meeting between Yanukovich and US President Barack Obama, and urged Yanukovich to show leniency to former Prime Minister Yuliia Timoshenko (who was imprisoned for fraud).

It is noticeable that the members of the 'back channel' Manafort and Kilimnik created to lobby on behalf of Ukraine in the EU included some of the most notably Russophobic European politicians of the time, such as Carl Bildt and Radek Sikorski. Moreover, nowhere in any of what they did can you find anything that could remotely be described as 'pro-Russian'. Indeed, the opposite is true. As previously noted, Ukraine's bid for an EU agreement directly challenged a key Russian interest – the expansion of the Eurasian Union to include Ukraine. Manafort and Kilimnik were therefore very much working against Russia, not for it.

The idea, therefore, that Paul Manafort was an agent of influence for the Russian government flies against everything we know about what he actually did. As for Kilimnik, maybe he is a Russian intelligence agent – I'm not in a position to say. But if he is, he's a very weird one, who spent years actively pushing the Ukrainian government to pursue a policy which directly contradicted Russian interests.

None of this, needless to say, appears in the US Senate report. Instead, the report chooses to focus on the apparently shocking revelation that Manafort shared Trump campaign polling data with Kilimnik, as if this sharing of private information was in some ways a massive threat to national security and proof that Manafort was working for the Russians. The fact that both Manafort and Kilimnik spent years doing their damnedest to undermine Russia is simply ignored. Go figure!

[Sep 09, 2020] Hypocrisy Thy Name is Zion by Philip Giraldi

Sep 09, 2020 | www.unz.com

Hypocrisy Thy Name Is Zion Jewish groups support BLM while ignoring Palestinian genocide PHILIP GIRALDI SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 1,500 WORDS 155 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit 3 Share Share 3 Email Print More 6 SHARES RSS

There is a tendency on the part of major Jewish groups in the United States and in Europe to discover what they describe as anti-Semitism wherever one turns. Last month, a statue of the well-known and highly respected 18 th century French writer and political philosopher Voltaire was removed from outside the Académie Française in Paris. Voltaire was a major figure in the "Enlightenment," during which what we now call science and applied rationalism challenged the authority of the church and the King.

The statue had recently been vandalized by the French version of Black Lives Matter (BLM) because Voltaire had reportedly invested in the French East India Company, which engaged in the triangular trade between Europe, Africa and the New World. The commodities included Africans who were destined to become slaves in the European colonies. Beyond that Voltaire, a man of his times, believed blacks to have "little or no intelligence" and also considered Jews to be born "with raging fanaticism in their hearts."

Voltaire was reportedly much admired by Hitler, so perhaps it would not be off base to suggest that in France, where the Jewish community is extremely powerful while Africans are not, it was Voltaire cast as the anti-Semite that consigned his statue to a government warehouse never to be seen again. By that reasoning, one expects that the world will soon have a ban on the music of Richard Wagner and Ludwig van Beethoven as they too were admired by Hitler.

The idea that someone can change history by ignoring aspects of it means that school textbooks are being rewritten at a furious pace to make sure that there is overwhelming coverage of the holocaust and black achievement. Also, the erasing of monuments is being pursued with singular intensity in the United States, where the Founding Fathers and other dead white males are being one by one consigned to the trash heap. Doing so, unfortunately, also destroys the learning experience that can be derived from using the monuments as visual mechanisms for confronting and understanding the mistakes made in the past. A commission set up by the mayor of the District of Columbia has, for example, compiled a hit list of monuments and commemorations that must be either removed, renamed or placed into "context." It includes the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument. The name "Columbia" is, of course, certain to be changed.

Interestingly, Jewish groups in the United States have been in the forefront in supporting BLM's apparent mission to upend what used to pass for America's European-derived culture. Ironically, that culture includes free speech, democracy and mercantilism, all of which have greatly benefited Jews. The narrative is, of course, being wrapped around the common cause of blacks and Jews together fighting against the alleged white nationalists who are being blamed by the media for much of the violence taking place even when videos taken at the scenes of the rioting definitely show nearly all black mobs doing the arson and looting.

And blacks who are skeptical of the Jewish role are quickly put in their place, as was Rodney Muhammad of Philadelphia, who was removed from his executive position with the NAACP after expressing skepticism about all the Jewish friends that blacks suddenly appeared to be acquiring, quoting an observation often attributed to the now disgraced Voltaire on a Facebook entry, "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

The lead organization in shaping the acceptable narrative is the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which promotes itself as "Fighting Hate for Good." In other words, anyone on the other side of the narrative is by definition a "hater." ADL apparently advertised an online discussion topic for August 28 th , shortly after the shooting incident in Kenosha Wisconsin that killed two white men and injured a third. The headline reads "Why all white American middle schoolers must publicly condemn the Anti-Semitic murders by white supremacist Kyle Rittenhouse."

If the ad is indeed genuine, one notes immediately that the killings are being framed as anti-Semitism without any actual evidence to suggest that anything like that was involved or that the shooter knew the religion of those who were confronting him. All three of the "victims" are described as BLM supporters, which they apparently were, but it ignores the fact that they were also Antifa activists and all three had criminal records involving violence . One of them, Joseph Rosenbaum, is, to be sure Jewish, and also a pedophile , and the other two might also be Jews if ADL is correct, but that does not seem to have been material in what took place. Credible accounts of the shooting suggest that Rittenhouse was attacked by the three, one of whom, Grosskreutz, had a gun, and was being beaten on his head with Huber's sidewalk surfboard. He responded in self-defense.

And ADL is not alone in its defense of BLM. More than six hundred Jewish groups have signed on to a full page newspaper ad supporting the movement. The ad says "We speak with one voice when we say, unequivocally: Black Lives Matter" and then goes on to assert "There are politicians and political movements in this country who build power by deliberately manufacturing fear to divide us against each other. All too often, anti-Semitism is at the center of these manufactured divisions."

So, once again, it is all about the perpetual victimhood of Jews. That Jews constitute the wealthiest and best educated demographic in the United States would seem to suggest that they are especially favored, which they are, rather than targeted by raging mobs of hillbillies. More than 90% of discretionary Department of Homeland Security funds goes to protect Jewish facilities and the Department of Education and Congress are always prepared to create new rules protecting Jews from feeling "uncomfortable" in their occasional interactions with critics of Israel.

Jews largely think and vote progressive, which is part of the reason for aligning with blacks even though rioting and looting is likely to affect them more than other demographics as many of them might still have businesses in the cities that are most likely to be hit. But there is also a much bigger reason to do so. Many blacks in BLM as well as progressive white supporters were beginning to suggest that the movement should broaden its agenda and recognize inter alia the suffering of others, to include the Palestinian people. A strong show of support from Jewish groups, backed up by what one might presume to be a flow of contributions to the cause, would presumably be a way of nipping that sentiment in the bud just as Jewish donors to the Democratic Party were able to block any language in the party platform sympathetic to the Palestinians.

It is of course the ultimate irony that Jewish groups are very sensitive to the suffering of blacks in the United State while at the same time largely ignoring the war crimes and other devastation going on in Israel and Palestine at the hands of their co-religionists. The beating and shooting of unarmed and unresisting Palestinians, to include children, the destruction of the livelihoods of farmers, and the demolition of homes to make way for Jewish settlers is beyond belief and is largely invisible as the Jewish influenced U.S. media does not report it. It is, simply put, genocide. And on top of that, Israel has been bombing defenseless civilians in Gaza nearly daily of late, attacking and destabilizing Lebanon and Syria, and also conniving with American Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to go to war with Iran.

It should not be surprising if black groups would be suspicious of the motives of the Jewish organizations that suddenly seem to want to be friendly. When Rodney Muhammad was removed from his position with the NAACP in Philadelphia, Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of ADL, tweeted "Credit to Executive Committee of Philly NAACP & National NAACP for taking action here. We hope this will enable new opportunities for collaboration as the local Black & Jewish communities can do more to fight against hate & push for dignity of all people."

Greenblatt has been a leader in the fight to criminalize both criticism of Israel and also the free speech being exercised by supporters of the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS). For him, "dignity of all people" clearly does not include Palestinians or even anyone who peacefully supports their cause.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[Sep 06, 2020] Oh, look, no masks! And you thought that Obama official dirty tricks will be unmasked up by the investigation done by the Mueller team?

Sep 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

... ... ...

And in the nation's capital - Play it again, Sam.

Oh, look, no masks! And you thought that got covered up by the investigation done by the Mueller team? Let's go over this one more time:

The document declassified by DNI Grenell shows that there were 14 unique days when the NSA received requests to "unmask"--the first was on 30 November 2016 by UN Ambassador Samantha Power and the last came on 12 January from Joe Biden. There were two separate requests on the 14th of December by Samantha Power, which indicates two separate NSA reports. Samantha Power would not have to submit two requests for the same document.

[Sep 01, 2020] Are We Deliberately Trying to Provoke a Military Crisis With Russia by Ted Galen Carpenter

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There has been a long string of U.S. provocations toward Russia. The first one came in the late 1990s and the initial years of the twenty-first century when Washington violated tacit promises given to Mikhail Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders that if Moscow accepted a united Germany within NATO, the Alliance would not seek to move farther east. Instead of abiding by that bargain, the Clinton and Bush administrations successfully pushed NATO to admit multiple new members from Central and Eastern Europe, bringing that powerful military association directly to Russia's western border. In addition, the United States initiated "rotational" deployments of its forces to the new members so that the U.S. military presence in those countries became permanent in all but name. Even Robert M. Gates, who served as secretary of defense under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama, was uneasy about those deployments and conceded that he should have warned Bush in 2007 that they might be unnecessarily provocative. ..."
"... Such provocative political steps, though, are now overshadowed by worrisome U.S. and NATO military moves. Weeks before the formal announcement on July 29, the Trump administration touted its plan to relocate some U.S. forces stationed in Germany. When Secretary of Defense Mike Esper finally made the announcement, the media's focus was largely on the point that 11,900 troops would leave that country. ..."
"... Among other developments, there already has been a surge of alarming incidents between U.S. and Russian military aircraft in that region. Most of the cases involve U.S. spy planes flying near the Russian coast -- supposedly in international airspace. On July 30, a Russian Su-27 jet fighter intercepted two American surveillance aircraft; according to Russian officials, it was the fourth time in the final week of July that they caught U.S. planes in that sector approaching the Russian coast. Yet another interception occurred on August 5, again involving two U.S. spy planes. Still others have taken place throughout mid-August. It is a reckless practice that easily could escalate into a broader, very dangerous confrontation. ..."
"... The growing number of such incidents is a manifestation of the surging U.S. military presence along Russia's border, especially in the Black Sea . They are taking place on Russia's doorstep, thousands of miles away from the American homeland. Americans should consider how the United States would react if Russia decided to establish a major naval and air presence in the Gulf of Mexico, operating out of bases in such allied countries as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. ..."
"... I think this has been bipartisan policy since at least 1947. Unlikely to change anytime soon, even with realists gaining ground. Perhaps expanding NATO east, sending support to Ukraine, and intervening in Syria (despite attempts to leave, the best we can get at this point are small troop reductions that most likely are redeployed to neighboring countries) aren't the best idea after all? ..."
"... they think Russia is a weak state and can do nothing therefore they are free to do as they please. ..."
"... the US leadership wants ether country to take a shot at some thing US. Then then can scream and stomp their feet that no one on earth is allowed to trade with ether country and the US can block all trade with ether country. ..."
"... The other thing at play is Americans love it when their leaders act like gangsters. That's why leaders do it. Nothing will get you votes faster in the US than saying your going to kill people. I see US citizens try that non-sense about it's all Washington we don't want that. But you keep voting for people that are going to give you the next war fix. When you stop they will stop. ..."
"... if people are convinced that Russia is a weak state -- then it is easier to approve adventures abroad -- including ringing Russia. ..."
"... Please explain to me, a Russian person, what kind of anti-American policy Russia is spreading in countries? If we exclude acts of counteraction against American expansion and aggression against Russia? ..."
"... The only people that are destroying Americans are within our borders, wielding power to fulfill their mission -- enrich themselves, keep the borders open, and our military all over the globe. ..."
"... I think there is a third option besides escalation and deescalation - exhaustion. Projecting power across the globe is expensive, it is a slow but steady drain on US resources, which are needed elsewhere (for example to quell the riots in major US cities). ..."
"... I see it as exhaustion by corruption. The US military is increasingly bureaucratic, political and ineffectual. Our weapons are gold-plated, hyper-tech focused and require highly-skilled people to maintain them, which means we can't quickly train new people up. The weapons themselves are so complex and expensive that there is no way to manufacture them at scale quickly. ..."
"... Read Jean Lartegy's "The Centurions." That is the direction where the tactically brilliant, but strategically incompetent US military leadership is headed. ..."
"... Stop focusing on what Trump says and look at what his administration does. Troops in Poland and Eastern Europe, Nord Stream 2, intrusive US reconnaissance flights along Russia's borders, support of Ukraine, interference with Russian patrols in Syria, the continuing attempt to destabilize Assad in Syria, the destruction of JCPOA, global sanctions campaign on Russia among others, withdrawal from arms control treaties, accusation that Russia was cheating on INF treaty, hiring dozens of anti-Russia hardliners, etc, etc. ..."
"... I don't think US-Russian cooperation is doable at this point--or any time soon. Given how erratic US policy is--yawing violently from one direction to another--Russia has no reason to accept the damage to its relationship with China that shifting to a strategic arrangement with the US would entail. The risk is too high and the potential rewards too uncertain. ..."
"... We have pretty much alienated the Russian state under Putin, and now we're trying to wait him out, with the expectation that there is no one of his capabilities to maintain the strategic autonomy of the Russian state in the longer term and that once he exits the scene, some Yeltsin-like stooge will present himself. ..."
"... Everyone is focusing on Russia because of the Russia hoax. Dems started a new cold war based on an irrational fear that Russia was threatening our democracy. ..."
"... The foreign policy elite dislikes Russia, always has, and will do anything to keep this "adversary" front and center because their prospects for prestige, power and position depend upon the presence of an enemy. As an example see Strobe Talbot and Michael McFaul. ..."
Aug 28, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Tensions are becoming dangerous in Syria and on Russia's back doorstep. US soldiers stand near US and Russian military vehicles in the northeastern Syrian town of al-Malikiyah (Derik) at the border with Turkey, on June 3, 2020. (Photo by DELIL SOULEIMAN/AFP via Getty Images)

A dangerous vehicle collision between U.S and Russian soldiers in Northeastern Syria on Aug. 24 highlights the fragility of the relationship and the broader test of wills between the two major powers.

According to White House reports and a Russian video that went viral this week, it appeared that as the two sides were racing down a highway in armored vehicles, the Russians sideswiped the Americans, leaving four U.S. soldiers injured. It is but the latest clash as both sides continue their patrols in the volatile area. But it speaks of bigger problems with U.S. provocations on Russia's backdoor in Eastern Europe.

A sober examination of U.S. policy toward Russia since the disintegration of the Soviet Union leads to two possible conclusions. One is that U.S. leaders, in both Republican and Democratic administrations, have been utterly tone-deaf to how Washington's actions are perceived in Moscow. The other possibility is that those leaders adopted a policy of maximum jingoistic swagger intended to intimidate Russia, even if it meant obliterating a constructive bilateral relationship and eventually risking a dangerous showdown. Washington's latest military moves, especially in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea, are stoking alarming tensions.

There has been a long string of U.S. provocations toward Russia. The first one came in the late 1990s and the initial years of the twenty-first century when Washington violated tacit promises given to Mikhail Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders that if Moscow accepted a united Germany within NATO, the Alliance would not seek to move farther east. Instead of abiding by that bargain, the Clinton and Bush administrations successfully pushed NATO to admit multiple new members from Central and Eastern Europe, bringing that powerful military association directly to Russia's western border. In addition, the United States initiated "rotational" deployments of its forces to the new members so that the U.S. military presence in those countries became permanent in all but name. Even Robert M. Gates, who served as secretary of defense under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama, was uneasy about those deployments and conceded that he should have warned Bush in 2007 that they might be unnecessarily provocative.

As if such steps were not antagonistic enough, both Bush and Obama sought to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. The latter country is not only within what Russia regards as its legitimate sphere of influence, but within its core security zone. Even key European members of NATO, especially France and Germany, believed that such a move was unwise and blocked Washington's ambitions. That resistance, however, did not inhibit a Western effort to meddle in Ukraine's internal affairs to help demonstrators unseat Ukraine's elected, pro-Russia president and install a new, pro-NATO government in 2014.

Such provocative political steps, though, are now overshadowed by worrisome U.S. and NATO military moves. Weeks before the formal announcement on July 29, the Trump administration touted its plan to relocate some U.S. forces stationed in Germany. When Secretary of Defense Mike Esper finally made the announcement, the media's focus was largely on the point that 11,900 troops would leave that country.

However, Esper made it clear that only 6,400 would return to the United States; the other nearly 5,600 would be redeployed to other NATO members in Europe. Indeed, of the 6,400 coming back to the United States, "many of these or similar units will begin conducting rotational deployments back to Europe." Worse, of the 5,600 staying in Europe, it turns out that at least 1,000 are going to Poland's eastern border with Russia.

Another result of the redeployment will be to boost U.S. military power in the Black Sea. Esper confirmed that various units would "begin continuous rotations farther east in the Black Sea region, giving us a more enduring presence to enhance deterrence and reassure allies along NATO's southeastern flank." Moscow is certain to regard that measure as another on a growing list of Black Sea provocations by the United States.

Among other developments, there already has been a surge of alarming incidents between U.S. and Russian military aircraft in that region. Most of the cases involve U.S. spy planes flying near the Russian coast -- supposedly in international airspace. On July 30, a Russian Su-27 jet fighter intercepted two American surveillance aircraft; according to Russian officials, it was the fourth time in the final week of July that they caught U.S. planes in that sector approaching the Russian coast. Yet another interception occurred on August 5, again involving two U.S. spy planes. Still others have taken place throughout mid-August. It is a reckless practice that easily could escalate into a broader, very dangerous confrontation.

The growing number of such incidents is a manifestation of the surging U.S. military presence along Russia's border, especially in the Black Sea . They are taking place on Russia's doorstep, thousands of miles away from the American homeland. Americans should consider how the United States would react if Russia decided to establish a major naval and air presence in the Gulf of Mexico, operating out of bases in such allied countries as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.

The undeniable reality is that the United States and its NATO allies are crowding Russia; Russia is not crowding the United States. Washington's bumptious policies already have wrecked a once-promising bilateral relationship and created a needless new cold war with Moscow. If more prudent U.S. policies are not adopted soon, that cold war might well turn hot.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in security studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at The American Conservative, is the author of 12 books and more than 850 articles on international affairs. His latest book is NATO: The Dangerous Dinosaur (2019).

Tradcon • 5 days ago • edited

I mean, I think this has been bipartisan policy since at least 1947. Unlikely to change anytime soon, even with realists gaining ground. Perhaps expanding NATO east, sending support to Ukraine, and intervening in Syria (despite attempts to leave, the best we can get at this point are small troop reductions that most likely are redeployed to neighboring countries) aren't the best idea after all?

Mike P Tradcon • 4 days ago

This is a very anti American article! Patriots know that where the U.S. gives political or economic ground Russia and other adversaries will fill the vacum with policies intended to destroy American peoeple. So no, it is not a bad idea to be involved in Syria and Ukraine in fact it is a very good idea.

northernobserver Mike P • 4 days ago

The entire framing of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood as "pro American" and those who oppose them as "anti American" is delusional.
Russia is a weak state trying to maintain its natural spheres of influence along the Curzon line. Why has the State Department/ Pentagon decided to try and roll this back? How the F to they expect Russia to react. How would America react if a foreign power tried to turn Mexico into a strategic asset. So why is it ok to make Ukraine into a Nato member? It's reckless and ultimately it is pointless. Weakening Russia further serves little strategic purpose and potentially threatens to destabilize the Balkans and mid east with Turkish adventurism. What will America do if the Turks seize Rhodes under some pretext?

Syria is another case of State Department midwits not understanding the results of their regime change. What purpose does it serve to put a Sunni extremist government in Damascus. How hateful do you have to be to subject Syria's minorities to genocide at the hands of an ISIS sympathetic government? How do you delude yourself that such a regime will serve America's interests in the long run? So you can own Iran before the election? You are trading victory today for permanent loss tomorrow. It's insane.

Aen Elle northernobserver • 4 days ago
How the F to they expect Russia to react.

Just like you, they think Russia is a weak state and can do nothing therefore they are free to do as they please. Also, since Turkey is a NATO member and as such an ally to the U.S. shouldn't you be cheering in good faith for Turkey and against Russia?

Bianca Aen Elle • a day ago

You got that one. Because Turkey is a thorn in NATO side. It has massive economic interests in Russia, China and the rest of Asia. The "adventure" in Syria is coordinated with Russia to the last detail, while playacting tensions. US problem in Syria is not Russia or Turkey, but Russia AND Turkey.

As US is frowning at Egypt Al-Sisi , or Saudi MBS -- it is because they frown at Egypt AND Russia, as well as Saudi Arabia AND Russia.
Basically, countries nominally counted in OUR camp are frowned upon when collaborating with the ENEMY countries.
Our foreign policy is stuck in Middle East -- and cannot get unstuck. Cannot be better illustrated then Pompeo addressing Republican convention from Jerusalem.

The only way Russia can challenge encirclement is by challenging US in its home away from home -- Middle East. And creating new realities in the ground by collaborating with the countries in the region -- undermining monopoly.

And as the entire world is hurting from epidemic related economic setbacks, Russia and China are economies that are moving forward. And nobody in the Middle East can afford to ignore it.

J Villain northernobserver • 4 days ago

I agree with you with the exception of Russia being weak. One day the US which has never seen any thing in advance will push Russia one time to many and find the Russian Army in Poland and Romania. That is if China doesn't take out some thing precious to the US in the mean time like a U2, aircraft carrier etc.

There are two things at play here. The first is the US leadership wants ether country to take a shot at some thing US. Then then can scream and stomp their feet that no one on earth is allowed to trade with ether country and the US can block all trade with ether country.

The other thing at play is Americans love it when their leaders act like gangsters. That's why leaders do it. Nothing will get you votes faster in the US than saying your going to kill people. I see US citizens try that non-sense about it's all Washington we don't want that. But you keep voting for people that are going to give you the next war fix. When you stop they will stop.

PJ London J Villain • a day ago

I agree with your assessment except Russia will not put troops into any country without the express request from the legitimate government. They are not going into Poland and especially not Romania (Transnistria maybe) why would they? The countries do not have any resources that Russia wants. The only reason to put troops into Belarus is to maintain a distance between Poland and the borders.

Russia needs nothing from the rest of the world except trade. Un-coerced, free trade. This drives the US corporations crazy as no one will trade with the US anymore without coercion.

PS the same goes for China with the proviso that Taiwan is part of China and needs to be reabsorbed into the mainstream. It will take +20 years but China just keeps the pressure on until there will be no viable alternative.

Bianca northernobserver • a day ago

It has never meant to serve American interests. Ever. Once you put it in perspective, it makes sense.

But if people are convinced that Russia is a weak state -- then it is easier to approve adventures abroad -- including ringing Russia.

The problem for never satiated Zealots is the following -- regional powers in the Middle East are hitching their wagons to Eurasian economic engine. That is definitely true of Turkey, Egypt and even Saudi Arabia. The tales of Moslem Brotherhood are here to interpret something today from the iconography from the past. And to explain today what an entirely different set of leaders did -- be that few years ago or one hundred years ago. Same goes for iconography of Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Communism, Socialism, authoritarianism, and other ISMS.

Those icons serve the same purpose as icons in religion or in cyber-space. You look at them, or you click -- and the story and explanation is ready made for your consumption. Time to watch actions -- not media iconography to tell us what is going on.

Tradcon Mike P • 4 days ago

If we're being purely ideological here those with an overtly internationalist disposition (barring leftists) are those who want to be involved overseas, hardly ones to go on about national interest or pride. Its been a common stance associated with American Nationalism and Paleoconservatives to be anti-intervention, these people (of which I consider myself a part) can hardly be bashed for holding unpatriotic views.)

Russia has a declining population, and an economy smaller than that of Spain. Its hardly a threat and our involvement in Eastern Europe was relatively limited pre-2014 and even so the overall international balance of power hasn't shifted after Russian annexation of Crimea, and the Ukrainians proved quite capable of defending their nation (though not so capable as to end retake separatist strongholds.

Alexandr Kosenkov Mike P • 3 days ago

Please explain to me, a Russian person, what kind of anti-American policy Russia is spreading in countries? If we exclude acts of counteraction against American expansion and aggression against Russia? What ideological foundations does Russia have after 1991? Isn't Russia's actions a guerrilla war on the communications of the self-proclaimed "Empire of Good", which is pursuing a tough offensive policy? And is it not because the Russians support a significant part of Putin's initiatives (despite a number of Putin's obvious shortcomings) precisely because they have experience of cooperation with the "Empire of Good" in the 90s: give loans, corrupt officials and deputies, put Russian firms under control big American companies, and then just give orders from the White House.
PS. I beg your pardon my google english

Bianca Mike P • a day ago

Another Zealot in Patriot garb. The only people that are destroying Americans are within our borders, wielding power to fulfill their mission -- enrich themselves, keep the borders open, and our military all over the globe.

kouroi • 4 days ago • edited

It would be interesting to read the minds of the US pilots engaged in these activities. My guess is that the cognitive dissonance energy in those heads is equivalent to the biggest nuclear bomb ever exploded...

Vhailor • 4 days ago

Hmmm... I think there is a third option besides escalation and deescalation - exhaustion. Projecting power across the globe is expensive, it is a slow but steady drain on US resources, which are needed elsewhere (for example to quell the riots in major US cities).

In a major crisis this could lead to a breaking point. What if some US adversary decides to double down and attack (directly or by proxy) US troops and the US will not be able to respond? A humiliating defeat combined with an exhausted public decidedly set against military adventures abroad could cause a rapid retrenchment and global withdrawal.

Kent Vhailor • 4 days ago

I see it as exhaustion by corruption. The US military is increasingly bureaucratic, political and ineffectual. Our weapons are gold-plated, hyper-tech focused and require highly-skilled people to maintain them, which means we can't quickly train new people up. The weapons themselves are so complex and expensive that there is no way to manufacture them at scale quickly.

The DOD today is only about personal political position, and grubbing tax-payer dollars for self-aggrandizement. In any real war with a real adversary, we wouldn't stand a chance.

Vhailor Kent • 4 days ago

I wouldn't be so pessimistic regarding US military capabilities and I'm neither a US citizen or a fan of US global hegemony.

The US armed forces are made up of professionals. There are some universal advantages and disadvantages of such forces. A professional army is good at fighting wars but bad at controlling territory because of its limited size and higher costs-per-soldier. In order to control territory you need "boots on the ground" in great numbers, standing at checkpoints and patrolling the countryside. They didn't have to be trained to the level of Navy SEALS, for them it is enough if they can shoot straight and won't be scared from some fireworks and the US lacks such forces.

kouroi Vhailor • 4 days ago

So how is one going to get the millions of manpower to fulfill these tasks? Pauperize the masses so that joining the army becomes the only viable solution? Introduce the Draft? Provide a pathway for US citizenship for any foreigner that joins, establishing a US Foreign Legion?

And then, how you'll have enough boots on the ground to pacify Russia or China. It took more than a month to establish and secure the beach heads in Bretagne in France in 1944. How do you think you can even get those boots to land in Russia or China, when you know that the ICBMs are going to start flying towards the continental US if something like this will ever happen?

Vhailor kouroi • 4 days ago

So how is one going to get the millions of manpower to fulfill these tasks? Pauperize the masses so that joining the army becomes the only viable solution? Introduce the Draft?

It is no longer possible to introduce the draft in the US - even mentioning it would lead to social unrests.

Baruch Dreamstalker Vhailor • 4 days ago

The idea of a soft-mandatory year of service with a military option has been floated. It generates neither unrest nor interest.

alan Vhailor • 21 hours ago

Read Jean Lartegy's "The Centurions." That is the direction where the tactically brilliant, but strategically incompetent US military leadership is headed.

Scaathor Kent • 4 days ago

In addition, those gold-plated weapon systems often do not work as advertised. Look how the multi-billion IADS of the Saudis couldn't protect their refinery complex from a cruise missile attack from Yemen. Look at the embarrassing failures of the LCS and Zumwalt ship classes, and the endless problems with the Ford CVN. The F35 is proving a ginormous boondoggle that will massively enrich LM shareholders but will do squat for US military capabilities.

kouroi Vhailor • 4 days ago

It will go on as long as the US is able to benefit of its present ability to print money and have the world use that money...

Baruch Dreamstalker William Toffan • 15 hours ago

The alternative is an incumbent who runs against the condition of his own country as an outsider. It take an idiot to support that.

PJ London Feral Finster • a day ago

He already did and the Military ignored him.
He backtracked with endless excuses and conditionals.
https://www.nbcnews.com/new...
**
Bill Clinton once reportedly told senior White House reporter Sarah McClendon, "Sarah, there's a government inside the government, and I don't control it."
**
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
– Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States (1856-1924)
**
Do you really think that the adults with so much to lose would allow an idiot like Trump (or Clinton or Obama or Bush) to actually run things?

Feral Finster PJ London • a day ago

And then, like the cuck he is, Trump knuckled under. "I like oil!"

Dan Greene bumbershoot • 3 days ago

Stop focusing on what Trump says and look at what his administration does. Troops in Poland and Eastern Europe, Nord Stream 2, intrusive US reconnaissance flights along Russia's borders, support of Ukraine, interference with Russian patrols in Syria, the continuing attempt to destabilize Assad in Syria, the destruction of JCPOA, global sanctions campaign on Russia among others, withdrawal from arms control treaties, accusation that Russia was cheating on INF treaty, hiring dozens of anti-Russia hardliners, etc, etc.

I'll repeat: Focus on what Trump does, not what he says, and then total up the pro-Russia and anti-Russia actions of this administration and see what that reveals.

peter mcloughlin • 4 days ago

A danger with this "new Cold War" is the assumption it will end like the first one – peacefully. If this is the thinking among policy-makers we are in a very perilous situation. History shows that fatal miscalculations contributed to the First World War, and as a consequence the second. Today there is no room for miscalculation, which will set off unstoppable escalation into a third.
https://www.ghostsofhistory...

I Don't Matter • 4 days ago

Russians deliberately repeatedly ram an American vehicle, but I'm sure it's all our fault. Shouldn't have worn that skirt I guess.
Before y'all armchair Putin experts say all your loving things: you have nothing to contribute unless you speak fluent Russian. I watched the video taken and published by the Russians and it was pretty clear what they were doing.

Feral Finster I Don't Matter • 4 days ago

The United States is not invited in Syria or wanted. Russian troops are in Syria at the invitation of the legitimate and recognized government.

Whatever happens to American troops there is deserved.

dba12123 . I Don't Matter • 3 days ago • edited

Something critical is being missed entirely. The United States has invaded Syria without a mandate from the UN. Its' president has explicitly stated that it is the intention of the US to take Syria's oil. Both are violations of international law. Any hostile action taken against the illegal US presence in Syria is justifiable as self defense. While the US presence in Syria is illegal, Russia's presence is not. Russia was invited into Syria by the UN recognized Syrian government to assist it in defending against the US regime change by Al Qaeda proxy operation..

hooly • 4 days ago

establish a major naval and air presence in the Gulf of Mexico, operating out of bases in such allied countries as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.

What would happen if China or Russia established bases in the Caribbean and Latin America? Trump joked about selling Puerto Rico, what if the Chinese bought it?

L RNY • 4 days ago

If the Israeli's have a problem with Russia being in Syria then Israel should deal with it. Its not our problem and Russia is not our enemy. Infact India is bringing closer relations between Russia and Japan. Which do you want? Russian antagonism because Israel doesn't want Russians in Syria or Russian partnership with India, Japan, Australia and the US dealing with China? Remember....you could spend 1000 years in the middle east and not make a dent in the animosities between peoples there...so one is a futile endeaver...while the other has great benefit.

Carlton Meyer • 4 days ago

Note that Russian soldiers are in Syria at the request of its government to help fend off foreign invaders. The American troops are there illegally, with no UN or even Congressional authorization.

Also note the USA risks another Cuban missile crisis by withdrawing from the INF treaty after illegally building missile launch complexes in Romania and Poland that can hit Russia with nuclear cruise missiles.

The USA did much more than "meddle" in Ukraine. The Obama/Biden team openly organized a coup to overthrow its elected President because he didn't want to join NATO and the EU.

https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FnW7lNABfDVk%3Ffeature%3Doembed&display_name=YouTube&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DnW7lNABfDVk&image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FnW7lNABfDVk%2Fhqdefault.jpg&key=21d07d84db7f4d66a55297735025d6d1&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=youtube

Hrant Carlton Meyer • 4 days ago

Is that guy in the middle of the left seated Vlad Klitschko? I great boxer no doubt, but also known for his stunning stupidity. Is he part of the new Ukrainian political elite? Poor Ukraine.

Aen Elle Hrant • 4 days ago

Klichko has been the mayor of Ukrainian capital city Kiev since the victory of Euromaidan in 2014 until present day.

longlance • 4 days ago

Russia has been threatened & attacked by military powers to its West, East & South for 1000 years. Russia is now lean & mean, but still standing.

Baruch Dreamstalker • 4 days ago • edited

A Russian vehicle sideswipes an American vehicle, injuring two US soldiers, and that's an American provocation? An American spy plane claims to be in international waters, and you tack in a "supposedly" in that sentence? "Violating" a tacit promise, really? Russia aggression against Georgia and Crimea is OK because Sphere of Influence? This article is loaded with Blame America First crap usually associated with the Left (much to this liberal's disgust). Never expected to find it here.

Yes, the expansion of NATO east must have looked to Russia like something coming at their borders entirely too fast. I thought it was a terrible idea at the time, and wrote it off to the wheels of a fifty-year-old bureaucracy not knowing how to slow down. Your eye-straining gaze at the tea-leaves for Deeper State motives is unpersuasive, even without your odious prejudices.

kouroi Baruch Dreamstalker • 4 days ago

Maybe some play of Rashomon would be in order here. That is your perspective.

Now your honor, what I have seen is that Georgia attacked first and hoped to occupy a certain area that Russian Federation was protecting, As a side comment, I have to point to an Orwellian use of the word "aggressive" and "attack". It seems that anything that the US cannot wantonly control or bomb is inherently aggressive and attacking either directly or indirectly the "rules based order".

Crimea had Russian assets that became endangered. Crimea was part of Russia until 1954, when was donated in an unsanctioned manner to Ukraine. The majority Russian population in Crimea has been persecuted by the Ukrainian state since at least 1994. The Euromaidan would have exacerbated that. A referendum was carried on and just considering ethnic lines, Russians won in their desire to re-unite with the Russian Federation. There aren't many legal arguments against that referendum and that process, if one looks for them...

So the above perspectives have nothing to do with just "sphere of influence" but with direct core interests of the Russian state and its core security...

The deep state is a tool that is trying to fulfill one objective: integration of Russian economy under the control of US and its Oligarchy. Otherwise it will always be a threat. A Nationalist, democratic (but not oligarchic) and sovereign Russia will always be considered an enemy of the world hegemon...

And the provocation is the actual presence in Syria of US troops. Ramming the US military vehicle is not a provocation from Russians, it is a simple eviction notification. End of story!

Hannibal Jubal • 4 days ago

Isn't it just amazing how this writer gets to turn an incident of provocation by Russian soldiers into a story of persistent provocation by America. That is remarkable dexterity even for this paper. I am used to them suggesting that we should leave the people of Eastern Europe to the tender mercies of the whims and wishes of a dictator in Moscow - because they are in his backyard. But to be able to switch from that incident to their regular theme is an achievement one can recognize, though not respect. The people of those countries should have a choice about who they associate, and they certainly have a right not to align with people they fear. Calling us for not respecting he rights of other people to decide their fates is right and proper. I enthusiastically support this paper when they do. But when they turn right around and castigate us for not respecting Russia's right to do it - I am flabbergasted.

Dan Greene Hannibal Jubal • 3 days ago

"Isn't it just amazing how this writer gets to turn an incident of provocation by Russian soldiers into a story of persistent provocation by America."

How do you know it's an incident of provocation by Russian soldiers? It almost certainly is almost the exact opposite.

Dan Greene • 3 days ago • edited

This piece spends too much time re-hashing everything Russia-US since 1990 and fails to focus on the key current issues.

The vehicle incidents in Syria are distinct from the European issue -- see below in this post -- that is generating some of the other tensions the author lists. Syria is really part of the larger Middle East issue.

His brief summary of the latest Syria mishap is inadequate to convey what actually happened.

If you actually look at the video, it does NOT appear to be the case that a Russian vehicle simply "sideswiped" a US vehicle. It appears that the US was maintaining a checkpoint on a road that in effect blocked Russian passage. Given the terrain, the Russians could of course bypass such a checkpoint, which is what they appear to have done. Then, however, other US vehicles left the checkpoint and attempted to block and turn back the Russian bypass movement, and this led to the collision. So the incident is part of a larger US policy to impede Russian operations in NE Syria.

Almost two years ago, Trump ordered US forces out of Syria, and Russia, in agreement with that plan, sent patrols to the NE to ensure that provisions of an stability agreement with Turkey and the Kurds were maintained. But then Trump was almost immediately convinced--by whom is not clear, but ultimately Israel in all probability--to do a 180 and keep US forces in NE Syria, the superficial rationale being to take control of oil, the kind of pirate operation that Trump likes. In fact, the goal of those who influence Trump is to keep Syria weak and unable to rebuild with the expectation that Assad can still be overthrown at some future point. This is the desire of Israel and its operatives in the US.

Trump's zag after the zig of planned withdrawal left the US-Russian understanding in chaos. Now both the US AND the Russians were operating in NE Syria. And over time the US has become more and more aggressive about impeding Russian operations. The Russians claim--credibly--that we are demanding that they, in moving their patrols up to the area of the Syria-Turkey border area not use the M4 highway, the main and direct route and instead follow a secondary route that circuitously follows the border. The Russians don't accept that demand. And the vehicle incidents that we are seeing are the outcome of that disagreement. The Russians are driving up Highway 4 and when they get to the US checkpoint are bypassing and then continuing up the highway. We are aggressively trying to deter them from that route choice.

Not sure why this article does not go into detail on this issue in order to clarify it.

Much of the other stuff the author is talking about here--intrusive air ops in the Black Sea, etc--is really a separate, European issue. The US is highly concerned about the economic interactions between Russia and Europe--especially the big economies of Western Europe and most especially Germany. We are worried that over time Russian-European economic integration will erode our strategic control and dominance over Europe in general.

Hence, we are making common cause with the anti-Russian elements in "the New Europe," i.e., Eastern Europe to try, in essence, to place a barrier between Russia and Western Europe, playing off Poland, the Baltics and Romania, among others, against Russia, Germany, France et al. Moving more US forces into Poland and the so-called "Black Sea Region"; impeding Nord Stream 2 and other Russian pipeline initiatives; indulging in recurrent anti-German propaganda for not maintaining a more robust anti-Russian military posture; fomenting (behind the scenes) the recent disturbances in Belarus; and promotion of the so-called "Three Seas Initiative" intended to weld Eastern and Central Europe together into a reliable tool of US policy are all part of this plan to retain US strategic control of Europe over the long term.

That's what the heightened tensions in Europe are about.

As I said, the Syria issue, part of the larger Middle East struggle, is separate from the parallel struggle for mastery in Europe.

It's all an important topic, but this article doesn't really capture the salient points.

Dan Greene Hannibal Jubal • 3 days ago • edited

You're living in a dreamland.

And you're playing word games. Syria's oil is effectively under US control. Yes, we are deriving strategic benefit from it in that we are denying it to the Syrian government in order to further destabilize it. It's not a good policy, but the policy does benefit from denying Syria its oil.

The problem is that most of the oil is on Arab land, not Kurdish land, and the Arabs of the Northeast are now realigning themselves with Assad, so holding on to the oil is likely to get more difficult in the future.

I have no idea what you mean by "slander." Guess that means truths you find inconvenient. Sorry--not in the business of coddling the faint of heart. Trump likes the idea of taking resources which he imagines to be payment for services we have rendered--like leaving the country in a state of ruin. He talked about Iraqi oil that way too, but taking that would be much harder.

Time for you to stop dismissing every reality you don't like as unpatriotic.

dba12123 . Hannibal Jubal • 3 days ago

The "Assad regime" is the UN recognized government of Syria. That is the only entity entitled to the country's resources. How is it "the property of the Syrian nation" if the Syrian government and its people no longer have access to it? To whom is the oil being sold? Who is receiving the proceeds of the oil sales?

Here are some of Trump's own words with respect to Syria's oil. "I like oil. We are keeping the oil." 4/11/2019. "The US is in Syria solely for the oil." "We are keeping the oil. We have the oil. The oil is secure. We left troops behind only for oil." "The US military is in Syria only for oil." What part of Trump's public assertion that "We are keeping the oil" are you having difficulty in understanding? How can you say the US "did not take possession of the oil" when Trump could not have been more explicit in saying precisely the opposite? Do you not comprehend that the US presence in Syria has no mandate either from the UN or from the US Congress. Do you not understand that the US presence in Syria is illegal under international law? Do you not understand that "Keeping the oil" is a violation of international law? Your post is one of the most ridiculous I have even read.

Dan Greene Hannibal Jubal • 2 days ago • edited

1. It's quite clear from the video that the US had set up a checkpoint on the road at left in the video. (Indeed, we are open about the fact that we are doing so in general in NE Syria.) And it's equally clear that Russian vehicles are seen bypassing those checkpoints. The encounter between US and Russian vehicles takes place off the road. There is only one logical interpretation of what happened. What is your alternative explanation?

2. "No one reading this can believe that Eastern Europeans have genuine cause to fear Russia, or that these countries continually request more military and political involvement than we are willing to provide or that we are not inducing them to do anything or manipulating them."

First of all, there are no current indications of any Russian intent to do anything in regard to Eastern Europe. Yes, one can understand the history, which is why there is anti-Russian sentiment in Eastern Europe, but aside perhaps from the Baltic states in their unique geographic position, there is no country that has any basis in reality to worry about Russian aggression in the present.

Of course, this does not stop the Poles from doing exactly that. And perhaps the Romanians to a much lesser extent. So yes, there is fear in a few key countries based on past history, Poland being the keystone of the whole thing, and yes, we are indeed manipulating that fear in an attempt to block/undermine any economic integration between Germany and Russia. We are also trying to use the "Three Seas Initiative" to block Chinese commercial and tech penetration of Eastern Europe--5G and their plan to rebuild the port of Trieste to service Central and NE Europe.

Do you actually believe Russia, which has lately been cutting its defense budget, is actually going to invade Europe? That really is a fantasy. The only military operations they will take are to prevent further expansion of NATO into Ukraine and Belarus. The real game today is commercial and tech competition. Putin knows it would be disastrous for Russia to start a war with NATO. Not sure why that's hard for you to see.

Your notion of the Russian threat--as it exists today--is wildly exaggerated.

Dr.Diprospan • 3 days ago

Once President Putin remarked that there are forces in the United States trying to use Russia for internal political struggle. He added that we will nevertheless try not to be drawn into these confrontations.

A scene from a Hollywood action movie rises before my eyes, when two heroes of the film are fighting and a circular saw is spinning nearby, and each of the heroes is trying to shove a part of the enemy's body under this saw.

The relationship between Russian and American servicemen, I would compare with two hockey teams, when the tough behavior of the players on the ice does not mean that the players of one team would be happy with the death of the entire opposing team, say in some kind of plane crash, since the presence of a strong opponent is a necessary condition for getting a good salary.

Still, I would not completely deny the possibility of a "hot war".

Since the times of the Roman Empire, the West of Europe has been trying to take control of the territory of Europe, Eurasia, and Eurasia, in turn, dreams of mastering the technologies of the West.

The defeat of the 3rd Reich provided the Soviet Union with a breakthrough in the nuclear industry and space...

It's hard to imagine that Russia is capable of defeating NATO, but I can imagine that in the current situation, President Putin can offer China to build military bases in western Russia for a million Chinese servicemen, for 100 thousand on the Chukchi Peninsula, for 500 thousand on Sakhalin...

The extra money for renting military bases in a coronavirus crisis will not hurt anyone.

stevek9 • 3 days ago • edited

Of all the things about Hillary Clinton to despise, her selfish attempt to explain her loss, and to attack the President (to whom she never conceded the election!) by blaming Russia, is at the top of the list. To generate a completely unnecessary conflict with a nuclear super-power that could burn this country to ashes in minutes, out of personal vindictiveness, ... is lower than it can get.

Denmark002 • 3 days ago

We are totally messing with fire... we will need Europe but Russia as well to defeat the Chinese.

Dan Greene LostForWords • 2 days ago • edited

I don't think US-Russian cooperation is doable at this point--or any time soon. Given how erratic US policy is--yawing violently from one direction to another--Russia has no reason to accept the damage to its relationship with China that shifting to a strategic arrangement with the US would entail. The risk is too high and the potential rewards too uncertain.

We have pretty much alienated the Russian state under Putin, and now we're trying to wait him out, with the expectation that there is no one of his capabilities to maintain the strategic autonomy of the Russian state in the longer term and that once he exits the scene, some Yeltsin-like stooge will present himself.

We thought we were dealing with the main threats to our global hegemony sequentially--Russia "defeated" in the Cold War, and then on to a defeat of "militant Islam" in the Greater Middle East and finally to a showdown with China. But now, the sequencing has fallen apart, and we're trying to prosecute all three simultaneously.

We're in serious trouble.

Ram2017 LostForWords • a day ago

Hizbollah arose as a defensive militia because of an Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is not a terrorist group even though labelled so by the US.

William H Warrick III MD • a day ago

You have inverted the facts. The video evidence shows the Americans side-swiped the Russian vehicle and claimed "American soldiers had 'concussions'". A concussion requires loss of consciousness or significant changes in mental function. In football, you have your "Bell rung". You can't add 2+2 correctly. There is no evidence to support that.

Mark Thomason • a day ago

No, we are just trying to outdo each other with "Putin-under-the-bed" and all-powerful-Putin causing all the world's evils.

Jamie • a day ago

Everyone is focusing on Russia because of the Russia hoax. Dems started a new cold war based on an irrational fear that Russia was threatening our democracy.

Along with Dems, I also blame Putin; he bribed Hillary millions for uranium -- that doesn't lend to good relations.

alan • a day ago

The foreign policy elite dislikes Russia, always has, and will do anything to keep this "adversary" front and center because their prospects for prestige, power and position depend upon the presence of an enemy. As an example see Strobe Talbot and Michael McFaul.

[Aug 31, 2020] Russiagate without end- US appeals court REVERSES earlier decision to end Flynn criminal case -- RT USA News

Aug 31, 2020 | www.rt.com

A full-bench US federal appeals court has reversed an earlier decision to dismiss the 'Russiagate' case against former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, returning it to the judge who refused to let the charges be dropped.

In a 8-2 ruling on Monday, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Judge Emmet Sullivan, and sent the case back to him for review. Sullivan had been ordered by a three-judge panel in June to drop the case against Flynn immediately, but hired an attorney and asked for an en banc hearing instead.

Flynn's attorney Sidney Powell said the split was "as expected" based on the tone of the oral arguments, pointing to a partisan divide on the bench, and added it was a "disturbing blow to the rule of law."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1300472878585065477&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F499542-appeals-court-denies-michael-flynn%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=223fc1c4%3A1596143124634&width=550px

The former top lawyer for the Barack Obama administration, Neal Katyal, hailed the decision as "an important step in defending the rule of law" and argued the case should not be dismissed because Flynn had pleaded guilty.

Flynn had indeed pleaded guilty to one charge of lying to the FBI, but Powell moved to dismiss the charges due to the failure of his previous attorneys – a law firm with ties to the Democrats – and the government to disclose evidence that could set him free. After producing documents revealing that the FBI set out to entrap Flynn, had no valid cause to interview him in the first place, and the prosecutors improperly extorted him into a plea by threatening to charge his son, the Justice Department moved to drop all charges.

ALSO ON RT.COM End of Russiagate? DOJ drops case against Trump adviser Flynn that started 'witch hunt'

Sullivan had other ideas, however. In a highly unusual move, he appointed a retired judge – who had just written a diatribe about the case in the Washington Post – to be amicus curiae and argue the case should not be dropped. It was at this point that Powell took the case to the appeals court, citing Fokker, a recent Supreme Court precedent that Sullivan was violating.

Ignoring the fact that Sullivan had appointed the amicus and sought to prolong the case after the DOJ and the appeals court both told him to drop it, the en banc panel argued the proper procedure means he needs to make the decision before it can be appealed.

One of the judges, Thomas Griffith, actually argued in a concurring opinion that it would be "highly unusual" for Sullivan not to dismiss the charges, given the executive branch's constitutional prerogatives and his "limited discretion" when it came to the relevant federal procedure, but said that an order to drop the case is not "appropriate in this case at this time" because it's up to Sullivan to make the call first.

ALSO ON RT.COM 'Russiagate' case against ex-Trump adviser Michael Flynn effectively OVER, as DC appeals court orders to close it

The court likewise rejected Powell's motion to reassign a case to a different judge.

Conservatives frustrated by the neverending legal saga have blasted the appeals court's decision as disgraceful. "The Mike Flynn case is an embarrassing stain on this country and its 'judges'," tweeted TV commentator Dan Bongino. "We don't have judges anymore, only corrupted politicians in black robes."

While Flynn was not the first Trump adviser to be charged by special counsel Robert Mueller's 'Russiagate' probe, he was the first White House official pressured to resign over it, less than two weeks into the job.

With Mueller failing to find any evidence of "collusion" between President Donald Trump's campaign and Russia, Democrats have latched onto Flynn's case as proof of their 'Russiagate' conspiracy theory. The latest argument is that the effort to drop the charges against Flynn is politically motivated and proof of Attorney General Bill Barr's "corruption."

Barr is currently overseeing a probe by US attorney John Durham into the FBI's handling of the investigation against Trump during and after the 2016 election, with the evidence disclosed during the Flynn proceedings strongly implicating not just the senior FBI leadership but senior Obama administration figures as well.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Aug 31, 2020] US foreign policy elite wants Biden detests Trump because President failed to launch new NATO missions to justify its existence by George Szamuely

Notable quotes:
"... The "humanitarian intervention" in Libya having ended in debacle and war crimes (including the execution of Muammar Gaddafi) in which NATO was clearly involved, it was back to the old Cold War mission of "containment." ..."
Aug 31, 2020 | www.rt.com

US foreign policy elite wants Biden & detests Trump because President failed to launch new NATO missions to justify its existence

One reason for the extraordinary hostility of the foreign policy insiders' brigade toward President Trump is that he has not wasted his time conjuring up new missions to justify NATO's continued existence.

Instead, he has promised to withdraw 12,000 US troops from Germany and, to add insult to injury, he has demanded that NATO member states increase their financial contributions toward the upkeep of the military alliance ostensibly there to "protect" them.

This is sacrilege to a foreign policy elite that have spent the last 70 years worshipping at the altar of NATO.

"US troops aren't stationed around the world as traffic cops or welfare caseworkers -- they're restraining the expansionary aims of the world's worst regimes, chiefly China and Russia," Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., fumed.

Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice expressed alarm about the "continued erosion of confidence in our leadership within NATO, and more efforts that call into question our commitment, and more signals to the authoritarians within NATO and Russia itself that this whole institution is vulnerable."

Trump, according to Nicholas Burns, former US ambassador to NATO and current adviser to Joe Biden, has cast America's military allies primarily as a drain on the US Treasury, and he has aggressively criticized Washington's true friends in Europe -- democratic leaders such as France's President Emmanuel Macron and Germany's Chancellor, Angela Merkel -- even as he treats Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, and other 'authoritarians' around the world with unusual tact.

Seventy former Republican national security officials recently issued a statement accusing Trump of having "disgraced America's global reputation and undermined our nation's moral and diplomatic influence." And -- horror of horrors! -- Trump "has called NATO 'obsolete.' "

https://platform.twitter.com

Not only has Trump failed to spell out a new mission for NATO, the one mission of sorts he has come up with -- extraction of more funds from NATO member-states -- is calculated to cause mutual recriminations within the alliance. Trump regularly boasts that he has cajoled NATO to cough up an additional $130 billion a year "and it's going to be $400 billion," he recently warned.

To the denizens of Washington's foreign policy think-tanks, pressuring NATO member states to come up with more money is a dangerous business. It could have the undesirable effect of forcing them to wonder whether devoting scarce resources to NATO -- particularly now following the Covid economic downturn -- is a sound investment.

ALSO ON RT.COM Caitlin Johnstone: The modern US war machine kills more like a python than a tiger NATO desperate to find reasons to justify its existence

It is no secret that ever since the fall of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, NATO has been desperately searching for a reason to justify its existence. The alliance has expanded its membership from 16 to 30 in 20 years, while failing to put forward a convincing reason, other than inertia, for staying in business.

To be sure, there were and are threats -- cybersecurity, mass migration, human trafficking, narcotics, nuclear proliferation, international terrorism -- but it was never clear how a narrowly-focused military alliance would be able to address them unilaterally. NATO has thus been forced to engage in some vigorous head-scratching.

READ MORE Let them eat yellowcake: As Powell backs Dems, warmongers seek to regain full control of US policy, regardless of what voters want

During the 1990s, we had the "humanitarian intervention" craze. This led to the NATO bombing of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1994 and 1995 and, more horrifically, to the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. Neither operation achieved anything that could not have been achieved years earlier -- and without the use of force.

In 2001, NATO got in on the Global War on Terror. After 9/11 NATO, for the first time in its history, invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, declaring that the terrorist attack on the US was an attack against every NATO member.

When the United States retaliated by invading Afghanistan in October 2001, NATO was on hand to assist. In December, it established something called the International Security Assistance Force, the nebulous mission of which was to "assist the Afghan Government in exercising and extending its authority and influence across the country, paving the way for reconstruction and effective governance."

Next came Iraq. Despite the vocal opposition of France and Germany to the 2003 invasion, NATO, in no time got involved. In 2004, it established NATO Training Mission-Iraq, the aim of which was supposedly to "assist in the development of Iraqi security forces training structures and institutions so that Iraq can build an effective and sustainable capability that addresses the needs of the nation." One of its tasks was to train the Iraqi police. However, as WikiLeaks' Iraq War Logs disclosure revealed, Iraq's finely-trained police conducted horrific torture on detainees. Neither NATO's Afghanistan nor its Iraqi mission covered itself in glory.

With the Democrats returning to power in Washington in 2009, NATO was back in the "humanitarian intervention" business. Its bombing of Libya in 2011 destroyed government, law and public order, institutions that before the intervention had ensured that the people of Libya were able to go about their daily lives free from the fear of death, not to mention the spectacle of slave markets.

The "humanitarian intervention" in Libya having ended in debacle and war crimes (including the execution of Muammar Gaddafi) in which NATO was clearly involved, it was back to the old Cold War mission of "containment."

Following the February 21, 2014, coup in Kiev and the reincorporation of Crimea into Russia, NATO's new mission was very much like its old. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen promised that: "We will have more planes in the air, more ships on the water, and more readiness on the land. For example, air policing aircraft will fly more sorties over the Baltic region. Allied ships will deploy to the Baltic Sea, the Eastern Mediterranean and elsewhere."

Six years on, it's clear that there simply aren't enough armed conflicts in the world to justify the continued existence, not to mention huge expense, of such a gargantuan military organization. NATO has therefore resorted to seizing on the latest fashionable social and cultural issues to prove how up-to-date it is.

ALSO ON RT.COM NATO's appalling failure in Afghanistan has fuelled a drug explosion across Europe More NATO as solution to Climate change?

For example, NATO has added "climate change" to its repertoire. NATO's 2010 Strategic Concept declared that "Key environmental and resource constraints, including health risks, climate change, water scarcity and increasing energy needs will further shape the future security environment in areas of concern to NATO and have the potential to significantly affect NATO planning and operations."

One would have thought that the most effective way NATO could contribute to minimizing global warming would be to cut back on armaments, military exercises and naval and air patrols. But no, apparently the solution to "climate change" is more NATO, not less.

READ MORE Turkey will be the death of NATO – its recent clash with fellow member France off the coast of Libya is an early symptom

Then came the issue gender equality. "Achieving gender equality is our collective task. And NATO is doing its part," said Mari Skåre, the NATO Secretary General's Special Representative for Women, Peace and Security, in 2013. In March 2016, on International Women's Day, NATO held a so-called "Barbershop Conference" on gender equality. Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg took the opportunity to declare that gender equality was a frightfully important issue for the alliance because "NATO is a values-based organization and none of its fundamental values -- individual liberties, democracy, human rights and the rule of law -- work without equality .We learned in Afghanistan and in the Balkans that by integrating gender within our operations, we make a tangible difference to the lives of women and children".

Definitely a "tangible difference to the lives of women and children" : As a result of NATO's bombing campaigns in Yugoslavia and Libya, thousands of women and children lost their lives. In Libya, for example, NATO helped deliver perhaps thousands of women into the hands of ISIS.

This is how Human Rights Watch in 2017 described the record of ISIS rule in Libya:

"In the first half of 2016, fighters loyal to ISIS controlled the central coastal town of Sirte and subjected residents to a rigid interpretation of Sharia law that included public floggings, amputation of limbs, and public lynchings, often leaving the victims' corpses on display."

Trump's failure to articulate a new mission for NATO, combined with his desire to extract more and more funds from the 29 member nations, puts the military alliance in a very vulnerable position. With no new mission and no obvious threats to Europe on the horizon -- or at least none that NATO seems capable of addressing -- its member states, sooner or later, are bound to question the value of belonging to an organization, with such high membership fees and so few benefits. No wonder the foreign-policy cognoscenti are fulminating and praying for a Biden presidency.

One of the reasons the foreign policy crowd detests Trump is that he hasn't wasted his time trying to invent some "new mission" for NATO. Where Trump differs from his predecessors is that he hasn't bothered trying to invent some new reason for NATO's continued existence: Clinton had Yugoslavia, Bush Afghanistan & Iraq, Obama Libya. Trump hasn't identified any "new mission" for NATO. Maybe because there isn't one.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! Michael Chan 3 hours ago Presidentials elections in the US are a joke. The voters are given two choices: either Trump or Biden. Both are bad. They can only choose between who they think is less bad, knowing full well that they will regret their choice the minute they leave the voting booth. So, half of the voters will choose not to vote. And it seems that one of the two candidates will be happy if more than 90% of the voters choose not to vote. Reply 2 CHEVI789 Michael Chan 2 hours ago You are lead to believe you have a choice, the fact is they are the same evil that both are controlled by the same group. Reply T. Agee Kaye 4 hours ago Good article. If true, NATO will want a doozy of a conflict to make up for lost time / earnings. Reply 2 MarkG1964 4 hours ago The problem is that the Trump administration has failed everywhere. Talks with North Korea have stalled, and even President Moon in South Korea is losing patience with US policy. Sanctions and tariffs against China have failed miserably, as it's left a record number of US farmers facing bankruptcy, has not helped to reduce the US trade deficit with China, or persuaded US manufacturers to relocate back to the US. In Venezuela, every attempt to replace President Maduro with Gaido has fallen short. The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria continue unabated, with no end in sight. Whether it's Biden or Trump, the US can't afford another four years of the same. Reply Jeff_P 5 hours ago The purpose of NATOs existence is to provide the US with cannon fodder for its hegemonic designs. Nothing else. Reply 1 Bob 3 hours ago the USA should let Europe defend itself. Save us taxpayers billions of dollars Reply Krieger 3 hours ago NATO = Neocon America's Terrorist Organization Reply 1 CHEVI789 2 hours ago Now tell me if america is not the tyrant and dictator of the world. I really feel sorry for the good americans who's name is tainted by the evil running their country, being the you know who. Reply shadowlady 1 hour ago Clearly the old farts in Washington DC are still stuck in the Cold War era, the US taxpayers can't continue to police the world with US military.

George Szamuely is a senior research fellow at Global Policy Institute (London) and author of Bombs for Peace: NATO's Humanitarian War on Yugoslavia. Follow him on Twitter @GeorgeSzamuely

[Aug 29, 2020] To Capture and Subdue- America's Theft of Syrian Oil Has Very Little To Do With Money by Steven Chovanec

Aug 29, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org


undefined

Near the end of July, one of the most important recent developments in US foreign policy was quietly disclosed during a US Senate hearing. Not surprisingly, hardly anybody talked about it and most are still completely unaware that it happened.

Answering questions from Senator Lindsey Graham, Secretary of State Pompeo confirmed that the State Department had awarded an American company, Delta Crescent Energy, with a contract to begin extracting oil in northeast Syria. The area is nominally controlled by the Kurds, yet their military force, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), was formed under US auspices and relies on an American military presence to secure its territory. That military presence will now be charged with protecting an American firm from the government of the country that it is operating within.

Pompeo confirmed that the plans for implanting the firm into the US-held territory are "now in implementation" and that they could potentially be "very powerful." This is quite a momentous event given its nature as a blatant example of neocolonial extraction, or, as Stephen Kinzer puts it writing for the Boston Globe, "This is a vivid throwback to earlier imperial eras, when conquerors felt free to loot the resources of any territory they could capture and subdue."

Indeed, the history of how the US came to be in a position to "capture and subdue" these resources is a sordid, yet informative tale that by itself arguably even rivals other such colonial adventures.

To capture and subdue

When a legitimate protest movement developed organically in Syria in early 2011, the US saw an opportunity to destabilize, and potentially overthrow, the government of a country that had long pushed back against its efforts for greater control in the region.

Syria had maintained itself outside of the orbit of US influence and had frustratingly prevented American corporations from penetrating its economy to access its markets and resources.

As the foremost academic expert on Middle East affairs, Christopher Davidson, wrote in his seminal work, "Shadow Wars, The Secret Struggle for the Middle East," discussing both Syria and Libya's strategic importance, "the fact remained that these two regimes, sitting astride vast natural resources and in command of key ports, rivers, and borders, were still significant obstacles that had long frustrated the ambitions of Western governments and their constituent corporations to gain greater access."

" With Syria ," Davidson wrote, "having long proven antagonistic to Western interests a golden opportunity had presented itself in 2011 to oust [this] administration once and for all under the pretext of humanitarian and even democratic causes."

The US, therefore, began organizing and overseeing a militarization of the uprising early on , and soon co-opted the movement along with allied states Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar. Writing at the end of 2011, Columbia University's Joseph Massad explained how there was no longer any doubt that "the Syrian popular struggle for democracy [has] already been hijacked," given that "the Arab League and imperial powers have taken over and assumed the leadership of their struggle."

Soon, through the sponsoring of extremist elements, the insurgency was dominated by Salafists of the al-Qaeda variety.

According to the DIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff , by 2013 "there was no viable 'moderate' opposition to Assad" and "the US was arming extremists." Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh revealed that "although many in the American intelligence community were aware that the Syrian opposition was dominated by extremists," still "the CIA-sponsored weapons kept coming."

When ISIS split off from al-Qaeda and formed its own Caliphate, the US continued pumping money and weapons into the insurgency, even though it was known that this aid was going into the hands of ISIS and other jihadists. US allies directly supported ISIS.

US officials admitted that they saw the rise of ISIS as a beneficial development that could help pressure Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to give in to America's demands.

Leaked audio of then-Secretary of State John Kerry revealed that "we were watching and we know that this [ISIS] was growing We saw that Daesh was growing in strength, and we thought Assad was threatened. We thought, however, we could probably manage -- that Assad would then negotiate." As ISIS was bearing down on the capital city of Damascus, the US was pressing Assad to step down to a US-approved government.

Then, however, Russia intervened with its air force to prevent an ISIS takeover of the country and shifted the balance of forces against the jihadist group. ISIS' viability as a tool to pressure the government was spent.

The arsonist and the firefighter

So, a new strategy was implemented: instead of allowing Russia and Syria to take back the territories that ISIS captured throughout the war, the US would use the ISIS threat as an excuse to take those territories before they were able to. Like an arsonist who comes to put out the fire, the US would now charge itself with the task of stamping out the Islamist scourge and thereby legitimize its own seizure of Syrian land. The US partnered with the Kurdish militias who acted as their "boots on the ground" in this endeavor and supported them with airstrikes.

The strategy of how these areas were taken was very specific. It was designed primarily to allow ISIS to escape and redirect itself back into the fight against Syria and Russia. This was done through leaving " an escape route for militants " or through deals that were made where ISIS voluntarily agreed to cede its territory. The militants were then able to escape and go wreak havoc against America's enemies in Syria.

Interestingly, in terms of the oil fields now being handed off to an American corporation, the US barely even fought ISIS to gain control over them; ISIS simply handed them over .

Syria and Russia were quickly closing in on the then-ISIS controlled oilfields, so the US oversaw a deal between the Kurds and ISIS to give up control of the city. According to veteran Middle East war correspondent Elijah Magnier, "US-backed forces advanced in north-eastern areas under ISIS control, with little or no military engagement: ISIS pulled out from more than 28 villages and oil and gas fields east of the Euphrates River, surrendering these to the Kurdish-US forces following an understanding these reached with the terrorist group."

Sources quoted by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights claimed that ISIS preferred seeing the fields in the hands of the US and the Kurds rather than the Syrian government.

The rationale behind this occupation was best described by Syria expert Joshua Landis, who wrote that the areas of northern Syria under control of the Kurds are the US' "main instrument in gaining leverage" over the government. By "denying Damascus access to North Syria" and "controlling half of Syria's energy resources" "the US will be able to keep Syria poor and under-resources." So, by "promoting Kurdish nationalism in Syria" the US "hopes to deny Iran and Russia the fruits of their victory," while "keeping Damascus weak and divided," this serving "no purpose other than to stop trade" and to "beggar Assad and keep Syria divided, weak and poor."

Or, in the words of Jim Jeffrey, the Trump administrations special representative for Syria who is charged with overseeing US policy, the intent is to "make life as miserable as possible for that flopping cadaver of a regime and let the Russians and Iranians, who made this mess, get out of it."

Anchoring American troops in Syria

This is the history by which an American firm was able to secure a contract to extract oil in Syria. And while the actual resources gained will not be of much value (Syria has only 0.1% of the world's oil reserves), the presence of an American company will likely serve as a justification to maintain a US military presence in the region. "It is a fiendishly clever maneuver aimed at anchoring American troops in Syria for a long time," Stephen Kinzer explains , one that will aid the policymakers who hold "the view that the United States must remain militarily dominant in the Middle East."

This analysis corroborates the extensive scholarship of people like Mason Gaffney, professor of economics emeritus at the University of California, who, writing in the American Journal of Economics and Sociology, sums up his thesis that throughout its history "US military spending has been largely devoted to protecting the overseas assets of multinational corporations that are based in the United States The US military provides its services by supporting compliant political leaders in developing countries and by punishing or deposing regimes that threaten the interests of US-based corporations."

In essence, by protecting this "global 'sprawl' of extractive companies" the US Department of Defense "provides a giant subsidy to companies operating overseas," one that is paid for by the taxpayer, not the corporate beneficiaries. It is hard to estimate the exact amount of money the US has invested into the Syria effort, though it likely is near the trillion dollar figure . The US taxpayer doesn't get anything out of that, but companies that are awarded oil contracts do.

What is perhaps most important about this lesson however is that this is just a singular example of a common occurrence that happens all over the world. A primary function of US foreign policy is to " make the world safe for American businesses ," and the upwards of a thousand military bases the US has stationed across the globe are set up to help protect those corporate investments. While this history is unique to Syria, similar kinds of histories are responsible for US corporation's extractive activities in other global arenas.

So, next time you see headlines about Exxon being in some kind of legal dispute with, say, Venezuela, ask yourself how was it that those companies became involved with the resources of that part of the world? More often than not, the answer will be similar to how this US company got involved in Syria.

Given all of this, it perhaps might seem to be too mild of a critique to simply say that this Syria enterprise harkens back to older imperial eras where conquerors simply took what they wished: the sophistication of colonialism has indeed improved by leaps and bounds since then.

Reprinted with permission from Mint Press News .

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/august/27/to-capture-and-subdue-america-s-theft-of-syrian-oil-has-very-little-to-do-with-money/#.X0htOc1QUu4.twitter

https://www.facebook.com/v2.6/plugins/like.php?action=like&app_id=172525162793917&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df240e55f8864604%26domain%3Dronpaulinstitute.org%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fronpaulinstitute.org%252Ff31f7bfd9ea8e34%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=arial&height=25&href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ronpaulinstitute.org%2Farchives%2Ffeatured-articles%2F2020%2Faugust%2F27%2Fto-capture-and-subdue-america-s-theft-of-syrian-oil-has-very-little-to-do-with-money%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&share=false&show_faces=false&width=90 Related

[Aug 27, 2020] Awan Brothers Helped Schultz Threaten Election Fraud Lawyers

Jul 30, 2017 | newspunch.com
July 30, 2017 Sean Adl-Tabatabai News

https://newspunch.com/awan-brothers-wasserman-schultz-threats/

The Awan Brothers aided former DNC chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz in making threatening voice modulated phone calls to attorneys suing the DNC for election fraud.

Lt. Colonel Tony Schaffer told Fox News that Schultz ordered the Awan Brothers to scare off the lawyers due to the threat they pose in exposing widespread election fraud committed by the Democratic Party in 2016.

Disobedientmedia.com reports: If substantiated, the claims may have significance for the DNC fraud lawsuit proceedings, and add to the growing controversy surrounding the recent arrest of Imran Awan on bank fraud charges.

Jared Beck, and attorney litigating the DNC Fraud Lawsuit noted on Twitter :

[Aug 27, 2020] Rand Paul Delivers Blistering Foreign Policy Attack- -Biden Will Choose War Again- -

Aug 27, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Among the most notable highlights at last night's Republican National Convention, Senator Rand Paul delivered a blistering take down of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's foreign policy, which Paul linked to multiple wars under Democrat administrations spanning decades (going back to Clinton's bombing of Serbia).

"I fear Biden will choose war again," Paul asserted . "He supported war in Serbia, Syria, Libya. Joe Biden will continue to spill our blood and treasure. President Trump will bring our heroes home."

"If you hate war like I hate war, if you want us to quit sending $50 billion every year to Afghanistan to build their roads and bridges instead of building them here at home , you need to support President Trump for another term," said Paul, who has long been a fierce critic of former President Obama's foreign policy, including overt intervention in Libya, and covert action toward destabilizing Syria.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1298426809290285057

He slammed Biden as a hawk who has "consistently called for more war" and with no signs anything would be different.

Interestingly, Sen. Paul has also in the recent past led foreign policy push back against President Trump - especially over the two times Trump has bombed Syria following alleged Assad chemical attacks, which Paul along with other anti-interventionists across the aisle like Tulsi Gabbard questioned to begin with.

But it appears Paul is firmly supportive of Trump's newly released 50-point agenda for his second term outlining the Commander-in-Chief will "stop endless war" and ultimately bring US troops "home." The plan still emphasized, however, the administration will "maintain" US military strength abroad while 'wiping' out global terrorism.

"President Trump is the first president in a generation to seek to end war rather than start one. He intends to end the war in Afghanistan. He is bringing our men and women home. Compare President Trump with the disastrous record of Joe Biden, who has consistently called for more war ," Paul said further.

Back during the primaries in 2016, Paul and Trump sparred intensely over national security questions:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1298422787120361472

He also highlighted Biden's unrepentant yes vote to go to war in Iraq .

"I'm supporting President Trump because he believes as I do that a strong America cannot fight endless wars. We must not continue to leave our blood and treasure in Middle East quagmires," Paul concluded.

Elsewhere in the approximately four-minute speech, Paul said Trump will fight "socialists poisoning our schools and burning our cities."

Cluster_Frak , 7 hours ago

Obama was a warmonger and so is Biden. They love war and doing everything possible for the next war to be on the home ground.

Davidduke2000 , 7 hours ago

Obama had skeletons in his closet, he did what the neocons want, Trump gave them the embassy and other shenanigans.

Izzy Dunne , 2 hours ago

And so is Trump. They are all warmongers, because war is what the US does...

Weihan , 7 hours ago

Paul is right.

Biden knows who butters his bread. At least candidate Trump - in principle - stood for opposition to the deep state's monstrous agenda.

Biden, Clinton, Bush, Obama are despicable warmongers. Their administrations were responsible for the slaughter of tens of thousands in Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and the list would have gone on and on had it not been for Trump.


Remember Biden's 1992 Wall Street Journal article titled:

"How I Learned to Love the New World Order."

JUICE E SMALL IT EMPIRE , 7 hours ago

Rand was the only guy I watched last night and he was on point. I did not disagree with anything he said.

kulkarniravi , 8/26/2020, 2:33:07 PM

You can diss Obama all you want, but he signed a peace accord with Iran and Trump reneged on it. Iran is not the villain, at least not when compared to the likes of Saudi Arabia. And what's the deal with Cuba?

d_7878 , 6 hours ago

Rand on Trump:

"Are we going to fix the country through bombast and empty blather?

"Unless someone points out the emperor has no clothes, they will continue to strut about, and then we'll end up with a reality TV star as our nominee."

"Donald Trump is a delusional narcissist and an orange-faced windbag"

"Have you ever had a speck of dirt fly into your eye?""[It is] annoying, irritating and might even make you cry.

"If the dirt doesn't go away, it will keep scratching your cornea until eventually it blinds you with all its filth. A speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president."

Trump is a "fake conservative."

mike_1010 , 7 hours ago

Trump might be talking peace, but he has increased US military spending significantly more than previous presidents. He also tore up the US peace agreement with Iran and nearly triggered a US war with Iran by assassinating one of their top generals.

If any president is going to start a war with Iran, then it's Trump. And such a war would dwarf any recent wars USA has fought. Because Iran is three times bigger than Iraq in terms of their population, and they've been preparing for a possible US attack for decades.

Perhaps Biden might start a small war here or there. But Trump goes big on anything he does. If he starts a war, then it's going to be either with China or Iran.

So, neither Biden nor Trump is to be trusted, when it comes to war. But I'd say that Trump is the bigger danger compared to Biden. Because if Trump starts a war, then it might end up being a nuclear war.

Airstrip1 , 6 hours ago

Rand Paul needs to ask himself if the pot is blacker than the kettle.

How can he expect people to believe this disingenuous claptrap ?

The USA is an Empire-building Crime Cartel.

Dims or Reps are just frontmen managers for the Mob.

chopsuey , 7 hours ago

Ron and Rand. The dog and pony show. The alternative. They say what you want to hear.

I say

Phuck OFF Ron and Rand. You had many many years to do something (anything) about the endless "wars" and in reality, they are not really wars. They are ruthless invasions of vulnerable countries whereupon natural resources are contained, the culture and its symbolic treasures are destroyed/stolen and thousands to millions are killed in the name of USA. These unwarranted invasions are justified with lies and fraud and deceit.

Washington DC is the military capital of the world doing the dirty work of the elite. And its soldier are your kids and grandkids.

Wake the Phuck UP people. It will not end until they have achieved their objectives. You are fodder for their cannon.

Dragonlord , 7 hours ago

Biden voted for war in Iraq and supported Obama aggression in Libya, Syria, etc and he is disappointed that Trump did not help Kurd to wage war against Turks for their independence.

ConanTheContrarian1 , 7 hours ago

Not sure. Trump has to play ball with established Deep State interests while he tries (I hope) to set things right. So, yes, questions will abound for some time.

takefive , 7 hours ago

whatever the reason, he is now part of the swamp. and that's why he's in a tough re-election battle with a stiff.

Ex-Oligarch , 3 hours ago

You have it exactly wrong. If Trump were really part of the swamp, they wouldn't be fighting so desperately to prevent his re-election. They wouldn't have spent three years on the Russiagate failed coup, they wouldn't have gone through the ridiculous partisan impeachment exercise, they wouldn't have torpedoed the economy over coronavirus, and we wouldn't have organized race riots in all the democrat strongholds.

LaugherNYC , 3 hours ago

Rand Paul is just about the only grown-up in American politics.

How much bettter off would the USA be with a Paul/Gabbard ticket?

But ANYTHING is better than Joe Biden. Literally ANYTHING.

Well...assuming Hillary were dead or incapacitated,

DaVinciCode , 7 hours ago

It's happening. Yugoslavian girl give dire warning to Americans.

This all happened in her country the same way.

PLEASE LISTEN - it is coming to the USA and the West

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-DSjSEl_CM

(copied from a fellow :-) thanks)

captain noob , 7 hours ago

No

synthetically derived , 5 hours ago

I agree with the Yugoslav girl's premise that the powers that be have been deceptively employing a divide-and-conquer strategy to get the American people to fight among themselves rather than confront their own corrupt government, but I do not buy into the conclusion drawn that the solution lies in trusting the head of the government (in this case Trump) to do right by the people.

As George Carlin famously said, "it's a big club, and you ain't in it!" The American people are not going to be able to fix the problems now confronting them by voting for one uniparty politician over another any more than the Yugoslav people were

wick7 , 7 hours ago

The Democrats will get their regime change war no matter what. If Biden is elected they'll continue the Syrian war that has cost 800,000 innocent lives so far. If Trump is elected they'll try to have one here to take him down.

yojimbo , 7 hours ago

Afghani GDP - $20bn. US military spending - $50bn.

They must have the best services in the world!

yesnomaybe , 7 hours ago

That video clip from the 2016 GOP debate is classic... as Paul questions Trump attacking personal appearances, Trump flat out denies it, and then proceeds to do just that in his next breath.

In all seriousness, Rand is a stand up guy and would make a great president.

Maghreb2 , 7 hours ago

Ru Paul has as much chance of stopping this war as Rand Paul. If he was a threat to the people starting it he would be getting the **** bashed out of him or shot dead by a mad man. Don't see many people talking about auditing the Fed outside of Texas anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/politics/rand-paul-attack.html

He's got a point. Biden's son is in Ukraine milking it high on crack cocaine like a senators son should in the new Roman Emperor. Ukrainian color revolution and CIA long war strategy means he has set up shop there permanently like a little princeling. Same as princess Kushners wonderful tour of the Middle Eastern courts to meet his boyfriends. Old days they would both have be poisoned to death or strangled as children for disrespecting the senate.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/08/will-hunter-biden-jeopardize-his-fathers-campaign

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/20/politics/kushner-uae-israel-f-35-fighter-jet/index.html

Real rules of Eastern European politics are Nationalist winding up dead in dust bins behind the American Embassy and Russians threatening to switch of the gas and freeze everyone to death every winter. Footage of hard man dictator Lukashenko showing up at opposition protests with an assault rifle is broadcast to school children. I'd like to see Hunter Biden and Jared Kushner show up to something like that.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2020/08/24/belarus-protests-lukashenko-rifle-fred-pleitgen-live-nr-intl-ldn-vpx.cnn

Truth is Trump is a ******* liar. the Moment they started to shut down Rammenstein airbase they moved forces close to the Belarus border to pull another color revolution right in front of Putin. Trump and the Republicans are just stooges for the Zionist mafia. They are playing war scare but its too piss take for anyone now. Polish and Baltic States are NATO and have their own prerogative. They just push people closer to war.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFKyYOZjFzc

Rand Paul should worry about the Civil War that should come after the election.

Aint no senators sons for that game....

DEDA CVETKO , 5 hours ago

Thank you, Rand, for remembering the little Serbia -- twice (in both World Wars) America's fiercest and most loyal ally, and now a roadkill of the Clinton Foundation and Madeleine Albright, the new owner of Kosovo.

The nations that sadistically massacre and dismember their friends and allies do not have a future, nor the right to claim any.

Scipio Africanuz , 5 hours ago

Again Senator Paul, we don't do self deception..

In almost four years, how many legions have been repatriated home, or how many of the existing wars have been ended?

All we've observed, is an escalation of hybrid wars, reducing in some, kinetism, and increasing death tolls via other means, and in some, increased covert kinetism..

Your candidate brazenly murdered a top general of a nation not at war with the US..

Imagine Senator Paul, if Iran had murdered Petraeus, would the US not have declared war?

That the Iranians didn't significantly escalate, was NOT due to fear, but back channel advocacy and energetic remonstrations by adult folks..

If you believe Biden is worse than your candidate who's done worse, in terms of brazen law abrogation, then why aren't you a candidate, or is it that you'd prefer partisanship to patriotism?

Look within your party for corollary and accomplice warmongers, and leave Biden alone after all, you do have a rabid warmongering Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton as party colleagues, no?

Senator Paul, there's principle, character, and integrity and then there's opportunism, partisanship, and betrayal..

Of nobility..

Anyhow, you're sovereign and thus, fully entitled to your choices, we simply point out inconsistencies between what you espouse, and what you support..

Character, Senator Paul, is destiny..

Cheers...

Anthraxed , 4 hours ago

Trump has dropped more bombs than Obama at the same time in his term.

You're in complete denial if you think Trump has stopped any of the wars. And yes, he is expanding the wars to a much larger country.

Trump's first veto was a bill that would have stopped the Yemen war.

Reality is like Cryptonite for Trumptards.

quanttech , 4 hours ago

lol, 10 minutes ago I was being accused of being Antifa, and now I'm a Trumptard. Definitely doing something right.

Yes, Trump is a war criminal extraordinaire. He dropped a MOAB. He removed controls on civilian casualties. He dropped 7400+ bombs on Afghanistan in 2019.... 60% of the casualties were civilians, mostly children.

He also stupidly listened to his generals when they told him to kill Sulemani. BUT... when the Iranians retaliated (and they DID retaliate, injuring dozens of US soldiers) Trump de-escalated. Similarly, when the Iranians downed a drone, the generals wanted to retaliate - Trump asked how many Iranians would die. The generals said 150. Trump said it didn't make sense to kill 150 people for downing a drone.

Trump is a moron who is completely out of it most of the time. But when he pays attention for a moment, he's against a a war with Iran.

Now, if I'm a Trumptard, then you're a Hillaryhead. My question to you is... where would we be if Hillary was president? Answer: at war with Iran. Another question: where will we be if Biden is president?

Dull Care , 3 hours ago

How much authority do you think Trump has over the foreign policy? Not a rhetorical question but I have yet to see an American president run for office advocating a more interventionist foreign policy yet it doesn't change greatly no matter who is in office. Trump often carries a big stick but he's nowhere near as reckless as his predecessors.

The one thing we know is Trump is hostile to the Chinese government and hasn't turned around relations with Russia.

quanttech , 1 hour ago

"... I have this feeling that whoever's elected president when you win, you go into this smoky room with the twelve industrialists capitalists scum-***** who got you in there. And a big guy with a cigar goes: 'Roll the film.' And it's a shot of the Kennedy Assassination from an angle you've never seen before - It looks suspiciously off the grassy knoll. Then the screen comes up, and they go to the new president: 'Any questions?'"
- Bill Hicks, Rant in E-Minor (1993)

Observer 2020 , 5 hours ago

The spiritual, moral, ethical, philosophical, intellectual and cultural bankruptcy of Biden and his fellow death cult reprobates is depthless. One need know nothing more about them that they have become so detached from reality as to regard abortion, partial birth abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, generational genocide, genocide, of the white race, unremitting sociocultural warfare and the balkanization of this nation as being virtues.

Anyone who would even begin to contemplate supporting Biden or any of his fellow Fifth Columnists should be regarded as being too demented or otherwise Bidenesque to be competent to vote.

12Doberman , 5 hours ago

Biden has a record showing him to be a Neocon...and that's why we see the neverTrumpers supporting him.

Musum , 5 hours ago

And Pompeous is 10X worse than Biden. And he serves as Trump's Sec. of State.

chinoslims , 5 hours ago

Hey Trump is self professed king of Israel

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/donald-trump-king-of-israel

Musum , 5 hours ago

Of course, he's just a viceroy serving on behalf of the kosher people.

ted41776 , 8 hours ago

it's not what the president chooses

it's what chooses the president

conraddobler , 8 hours ago

This has lost all it's entertainment value.

Hollywood and the Postman was a more realistic view, in that movie I believe the warlord was a former copier either salesman or technician, can't remember but it's more likely a guy like that would have leadership capabilities than these clowns would.

invention13 , 1 hour ago

It saddens me that people can just go about their business in this country without giving a thought about the men and women who are getting injured and coming home stressed out and addicted to painkillers. Also that the real motive for continued military involvement in the ME is that some people are making tons of money off it. We need our own version of Smedley Butler these days.

It is all decadent beyond belief.

mrjinx007 , 1 hour ago

That MF no good SOB war mongering no good neocon SOB Shawn did everything he could to get RP to agree with him that we need to continue with the policy of regime change.

Rand just basically told him to shut the f up and stop blowing the Neo-cons' erections. It was precious. You know how people like this ******* Hannity get their funding from. Deep state, MIC, and all the f'king Rino's like Tommy Cotton.

gm_general , 2 hours ago

Thanks to Hillary and Obama, Libya is a complete mess and black people are being sold as slaves there. Let that sink in.

[Aug 27, 2020] Only a neolibral moron like Obama could bring slavery back to Libya.

Aug 27, 2020 | www.unz.com

niteranger , says:

[Aug 25, 2020] An Open Letter to Strobe Talbott About RussiaGate by Tom Couser

RussiaGate is about MIC, Intelligence agencies and Dem leadership need to have an enemy to milt taxpayers and retain power and military budget. Nothing personal, strictly business.
Aug 25, 2020 | www.antiwar.com

Tom Couser Posted on August 20, 2020

I met Strobe Talbott in 1968 when he and I were graduate students at Magdalen College, Oxford. I liked him and respected him, and after we lost touch as friends, I followed his career at Time , the State Department, and the Brookings Institution with admiration. In recent years, however, I've become disillusioned with the foreign policy he advocated with regard to Russia and was disturbed to learn of his involvement in the genesis of the Russiagate narrative.

August 3, 2020

Dear Strobe,

It has been a long time – a very long time – since we've been in touch, but I assume you remember me from 1968, when we met at Magdalen College, Oxford. Having just graduated from Yale, you were there on a Rhodes Scholarship; I was on a Reynold Scholarship granted by my alma mater, Dartmouth. Despite your three-barreled WASP name (Nelson Strobridge Talbott) and your distinguished pedigree (son of a Yale football captain, Hotchkiss alum, etc.) you were unpretentious, and we made friends quickly.

Despite assurances from my draft board that I would not be drafted that year, I got an induction notice on Nixon's inauguration day. You were the first person I consulted. Safe from the draft, like most Rhodes Scholars, you listened sympathetically. We were together in our opposition to the War if not in our vulnerability to the draft.

You and I played the occasional game of squash. And when my Dartmouth fraternity brother and Rhodes Scholar John Isaacson injured your eye with his racket, I visited you in the Radcliffe Infirmary during your convalescence. I was reading Tristram Shandy as part of my program, and one day I read some bits to you. You seemed to share my amusement; I can still see you smiling in your hospital bed with a big patch on one eye. When your father came from Ohio to visit you, he invited me, along with your Yale classmate Rob Johnson out to dinner at the Bear.

You had majored in Russian at Yale and were writing a thesis on some topic in Russian literature, Mayakovsky, perhaps? At any rate, you seemed committed to Russian studies. (Little did I know.) When I chose to take a student tour behind the Iron Curtain during the spring vac, you gave me some reading suggestions and advised me to dress warmly. Having packed for England's relatively mild climate, I lacked a warm enough coat; you generously loaned me your insulated car coat, which served me well in Russia's raw spring cold.

You likely debriefed me after my travels; I must have passed on to you my sense of the Soviet Union as a very drab place with a demoralized, often drunk, population, and a general sense of repression. Which is not to say that I didn't enjoy my trip – just that I was struck by the stark differences at the time between the West and the East. How lucky I was to have been born in the "free world."

The tour returned from Moscow and St. Petersburg via Ukraine and Czechoslovakia. In Prague, just after the brutal suppression of Prague Spring, we were acutely aware of how hated the Russians were. This just reinforced my distaste for what Ronald Reagan later termed the Evil empire – perhaps the only thing he said I ever agreed with. So, like you, I was staunchly anti-Communist at the time.

The next year, you got a gig polishing the text of Nikita Krushchev's memoirs, which had been smuggled out of Russia. The publisher put you up in an "undisclosed location," which you let on was the Commodore Hotel in Cambridge, Massachusetts; we met for coffee in Harvard Square with friends of yours, possibly including Brooke Shearer whom you later married, and one of her brothers, Cody or Derek. It may have been then that I drove you to the school where I was teaching on a deferment, Kimball Union Academy in central New Hampshire; you stayed overnight before returning to civilization.

Your second year, you moved into a house with Bill Clinton and two other Rhodes Scholars.

During the next few years – the early 70s – you and I exchanged occasional letters. After that, the rest is history: your illustrious career – as a journalist at Time , then as a Russia hand and Deputy Secretary of State Department in the Clinton administration, and then as president of the Brookings Institution – was easy to follow in the media.

Eventually our paths diverged, I lost touch with you, with one exception.

In the mid-1990s, while you were serving at State, a close friend asked me to ask you to do her a favor. I hate asking for favors, even for myself, and resent those who use connections to advance themselves. But all my friend needed was for a senior State official to sign off on a job application of some sort. I phoned your office from mine. I got a frosty reception from your administrative assistant, who was justifiably protective of your time, but she put me through. You recognized my voice, sounded glad to be in touch, and granted the favor. It never came to anything, but I remember how pleased I was even to have such a brief task-oriented phone encounter with you after a lapse of two decades.

In any case, over the next several decades I followed your career with interest and was pleased with your success.

As I was by that of another member of the Oxford cohort, Bob Reich, another fraternity brother of mine. We were not close, and I saw him less often in Oxford than I saw you. But you and he both wound up in the Clinton administration – the Oxford troika, I like to call you. You and Bob were doing what Rhodes Scholars were supposed to do: go into professions, network, and perform public service. The Rhodes to success. Never a whiff of scandal about either of you. You, Strobe, were very much what we Dartmouth men referred to as a straight arrow.

So why am I writing you now, after all these years? And why a public letter?

In part, because I have become progressively more critical of the foreign policy that you have advocated. Early on you were advocating disarmament. Good. And closer relations with the Soviet Union. Also good. Indeed, you were regarded as something of a Russophile (never a compliment). But while you initially resisted the expansion of NATO, you eventually went along with it. Like George Kennan, I consider that decision to be a serious mistake (and a breach of a promise not to expand NATO "one inch" to the east after Germany was reunited).

When the Cold War ended, the Warsaw Pact dissolved. NATO did not; instead, it expanded eastward to include former Warsaw Pact members and SSRs until today it borders Russia. Russia resistance to this is inevitably denounced in the West as "Russian aggression." Hence the tension in Ukraine today. You're not personally responsible for all of this of course. But you are deeply implicated in what seems to me a gratuitously provocative, indeed imperialistic, foreign policy.

Two old friends could amicably agree disagree on that, as I disagree with virtually all my liberal friends.

But your loyalty to the Clintons has apparently extended to involvement in generating the Russiagate narrative, which has exacerbated tensions between Russia and the USA and spread paranoia in the Democratic establishment and mainstream media. I am always disturbed by the hypocrisy of Americans who complain about foreign meddling in our elections, when the USA is the undisputed champ in that event. Indeed, we go beyond meddling (Yeltsin's reelection in 1996) to actual coups, not to mention regime-change wars.

My concern about this has come to a head with the recent revelation of your complicity in the dissemination of the Steele dossier, whose subsource, Igor Danchenko, was a Russian national employed by Brookings.

I don't know which is worse: that you and your colleagues at Brookings believed the dossier's unfounded claims, or that you didn't but found it politically useful in the attempt to subvert the Trump campaign and delegitimize his election. I suspect the latter. But doesn't this implicate you in the creation of a powerful Russophobic narrative in contemporary American politics that has demonized Putin and needlessly ramped up tension between two nuclear powers?

A lifelong Democrat who voted for Bill twice and Hillary once, I am no fan of Trump or of Putin. But Russiagate has served as a distraction from Hillary's responsibility for her catastrophic defeat and from the real weaknesses of the neoliberal Democratic Party, with its welfare "reform," crime bill, and abandonment of its traditional working-class base.

Moreover, in and of itself, the Russiagate story represents what Matt Taibbi has called this generation's WMD media scandal. The narrative, challenged from the beginning by a few intrepid independent journalists like Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, and Aaron Maté, and the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, is now being further undermined by the declassification of documents by the Senate. If, as I have recently read, you were active in disseminating the Steele dossier, you have contributed to the mainstream media's gas-lighting of the American public – liberals, at least (like most of my friends). Ironically, then, you have given credence to Trump's often, but not always, false charge: "Fake News." Once described as a Russophile, you now seem complicit in the creation of a nation-wide paranoid and hysterical Russophobia and neo-McCarthyism.

Say it ain't so, Strobe!

So long, old friend,

Tom Couser

[Aug 22, 2020] Kamala is a MIC marionette

Highly recommended!
Aug 22, 2020 | www.unz.com

Realist , says: August 21, 2020 at 12:17 pm GMT

It took balls for Carlson to have Anya Parampil on his show last night. He has had her on before, so he knows what she is like she tells it like it is. He will get shit for that.

I don't think he agrees with everything she said but agrees with some of it.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/_UuJB0l1YUY?feature=oembed

[Aug 22, 2020] U.S. Will Sanction Other Countries For Not Enforcing UN Sanctions That Do Not Exist

Aug 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

psychohistorian , Aug 21 2020 17:03 utc | 1

I hope that the U.S. will follow through on this. The more it sanctions left and right for totally irrational reasons the more incentives will other countries have to build mechanisms that make U.S. sanctions ineffective and useless. Russia has already done that and China to some extend. The Europeans should have done this long ago but are only now considering it seriously.

There are also counter measures that could and should be considered. A European tax on digital products would seriously hurt Google, Facebook, Ebay and other U.S. companies. When their profits and stocks drop the Trump administration might learn that wreaking balls have the tendency to swing back.

We are seeing desperate measures taken to keep empire from crashing further and faster. We may be at the point where things where going slowly and then speed up all of a sudden.

I agree that Trump tactics have been like those of a wrecking ball and I don't think he/his handlers care about any coincidental damage.....this game continues to be for control of all the marbles and empire is losing, hence more delusional bullying.

The facets of the civilization war humanity is in will visit and touch every country. The bonds of financial slavery will be broken by this war.

Bemildred , Aug 21 2020 17:16 utc | 4

It seems to me Trump/Pompass are hoist on their own petard here, in that: had they stayed in the JCPOA, they would now be in a better position to induce "snapback". Hmmm. Priceless.

jared , Aug 21 2020 17:16 utc | 5

It's almost as if the U.S. state is a mindless, merciless, soulless entity which evil, selfish people serve for own self-interest. Fortunately it would appear this monstrous creature is discrediting and destroying itself. Perhaps with help from occasional provocation. It flails like a blinded cyclops, momentarily very dangerous.

Any group still collaborating with the US deserves no sympathy for what happens.

vk , Aug 21 2020 17:39 utc | 10
There are also counter measures that could and should be considered. A European tax on digital products would seriously hurt Google, Facebook, Ebay and other U.S. companies. When their profits and stocks drop the Trump administration might learn that wreaking balls have the tendency to swing back.

I don't think the EU can do that (unless it's just a symbolic tax, "to the delight of the masses"). At this point in history, those big American companies are probably very well fused and entrenched with the European government and governments of its members.

Besides, to do that would (that is, even if it could) automatically mean having to go back to China as an inferior part, and we already know at least Germany and France don't want that (they want a new European imperialism, as Merkel has already made clear many times over the years of her endless reign).

annie , Aug 21 2020 17:48 utc | 13

The U.S. hopes to pressure Iran until it formally declares the deal dead. That could then give pretext for launching a larger conflict against the country.

israel/neocons want war with iran before trump leaves office bc while they don't think biden/harris would necessarily start it they'd have no choice but to continue if war was already started, hence the (30 day) timeline.

dh , Aug 21 2020 17:54 utc | 15
@11 Higher oil prices and a meltdown on Wall Street won't help Trump at all. Nor would a lot of US troops with bad headaches.
d dan , Aug 21 2020 18:25 utc | 16
If the sanctions are really imposed, it is likely the poodles (UK, France, Germany) will chicken out rather than fighting against US. That will give Russian and China companies and arms sellers a field day - bigger profits, less competitions - won't they?

So, who says Trump is not an agent of Russia / China? /sarc

Oui , Aug 21 2020 20:13 utc | 21

The world's largest producer and arms trader, sponsor of terror ...

"It is an enormous mistake not to extend this arms embargo. It's nuts!" Pompeo told reporters at the United Nations.

In the meantime, Iran announced a new ballistic missile with a range of approximately 870 miles and is named after Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani. A new cruise missile boasting a range more than 620 miles was named after Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

Interview Pompeo at a friendly CNBC broadcast today.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/08/21/us-prepared-to-enforce-sweeping-un-sanctions-on-iran-pompeo-says.html

Peter AU1 , Aug 21 2020 20:34 utc | 23

Daniel 20

EU falling out with US is over Iran and China as much as Trump. Going by Belarus though, the EU is still fully aboard US/Brit anti Russia moves.

Under Biden, I can't see US policy towards Iran and China changing at all as that is bipartisan.

Clueless Joe , Aug 21 2020 20:52 utc | 25
What the useless morons leading Europe should realize is that the only way forward is to isolate the US and work with everyone else, China and Russia to begin with, to fully blockade the country economically. Basically do to them what they'll end up doing sooner or later to any other country. That EU countries can't see that they'll share Iran or Russia fate in the future is painful - one wonders how world leaders can be so dumb.
Hoyeru , Aug 21 2020 21:05 utc | 26
to CLueless Joe:

all those European "allies" have simply been bought with money. Money talks and BS walks, right? But they are finally understanding that US will trample them over as much as it would trample Iran. the North Stream 2 project gave them a big clue.
The US has been stomping on the Euro for decades now, in fear it will become more powerful than US dollar.
It just takes time. 50 million jobless in USA, dollar's purchasing power collapsing, while the Americans argue over Antifa and BLM and the rights of transgenders as their country is imploding all around them. Soon very soon indeed. The only problem is US might start a war to divert the attention of the average American moron. War is always the final card they use.

psychohistorian , Aug 21 2020 21:14 utc | 27

Below is a quote from the latest Reuters posting
"
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States was further isolated on Friday over its bid to reimpose international sanctions on Iran with 13 countries on the 15-member U.N. Security Council expressing their opposition, arguing that Washington's move is void given it is using a process agreed under a nuclear deal that it quit two years ago.
"

Piotr Berman , Aug 21 2020 21:18 utc | 28

Something is puzzling to me. What countries will be intimidated by the "snapback" sanctions of weapon trade with Iran? It is quite possible that Chinese and Russian have some shipments ready or getting ready for the Fall delivery. But Iran is not about to engage in some huge shopping spree.

[Aug 21, 2020] Pompeo reveals some deep parallel, but experts vary if this is between China and Nazi Germany, or himself and Goebbels

Jun 07, 2020 | www.rt.com

7 Jun, 2020

The editor-in-chief of a major Chinese tabloid slammed Mike Pompeo for comparing his country to Nazi Germany, likening his words to those of Hitler's propaganda chief and reminding the secretary of state of America's endless wars.

Hu Xijin took to Twitter on Sunday venting his anger about Mike Pompeo's remarks.

"You are inciting radical hostility and ripping the world apart. You aren't like a top diplomat, instead, you talk like Goebbels of Nazi Germany. I'm worried that world peace will eventually be destroyed by extreme politicians like you," he wrote.

[Aug 21, 2020] It's Not Happening- The Mainstream Media Is the Enabler of American Dysfunction by Philip Giraldi

Aug 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

In Chicago the looting that centered on the high-end Miracle Mile Michigan Avenue shopping area was so bad that that part of the city had to be closed off by raising the city's bridges. Twelve policemen were injured and more than a hundred looters were arrested. U-Haul trucks were even brought in by the rioters and stolen cars were used to smash open shop windows. It was the second major trashing of the area in the past three months.

Illinois Retail Merchants Association president Rob Karr released a statement on the following day which included: "There's a limit to how many times retailers are willing to be kicked. It will be difficult after retailers who have invested millions in reopening to have to do it again. There has to be a lot of confidence that they can be protected and, so far, that confidence is lacking."

Chicago's flagship Macy's outlet on the avenue has already indicated that it is considering closing due to the shoplifting, looting and general lack of security. In short, many American cities are no longer able to make even an effort to protect the persons and property of their citizens and taxpayers. Was the Chicago story important enough to report by the New York Times ? Yes, but only late in the day on a back page.

Chicago is reportedly responding to the crisis by creating a special task force on looting , but the follow-up coverage in the national media was predictably pretty toothless. On the day after Michigan Avenue was laid waste, Black Lives Matter (BLM) held a rally outside the police station where some of the arrested rioters were being held. Fox News alone among national media covered the story, reporting how one BLM organizer Ariel Atkins described the estimated $60 million dollars-worth of looting as really just "reparations." She said "I don't care if someone decides to loot a Gucci or a Macy's or a Nike store, because that makes sure that person eats That is reparations. Anything they wanted to take, they can take it because these businesses have insurance." Presumably the rioters, who did not on this occasion loot supermarkets for food and instead chose to steal luxury items will be able to eat their Gucci loafers.

In a similar vein, the New York Times did have something to say about businesses shutting down or leaving Manhattan. A long article entitled "Retail Chains Abandon Manhattan: 'It's Unsustainable'" described how many restaurants and shops, including major chains and department stores, are closing due to unaffordable high rents that can no longer be paid due to a lack of tourists and office workers' business as a result of the pandemonium. The article does not mention a lack of security due to the city government's permissive attitude towards demonstrations that sometimes turn violent, a curious omission as friends of mine who live in Manhattan have observed the results of random looting and arson in many parts of the city, leading to boarded-up shops and sharply diminishing retail activity. Some long-time residents describe it as a "return to the '70s" when the city became unlivable for many.

America's newspaper of record the Washington Post promotes its product with a phrase "Democracy dies in darkness." In reality, the darkness is created by the media itself, which no longer reports what is taking place in an objective fashion. What does appear in the papers, online and on television and radio, no matter what the political orientation, is a product that is engineered to send a certain message. That message is itself disinformation, not substantially different than what takes place in the controlled media put out by so-called totalitarian regimes. In fact, news sources like Russia Today are likely to be much more reliable than CNN or FOX on many issues.

Opinion polls suggest that the American public has largely figured things out and reveal that few trust the media to do its job in an objective fashion. In that light, articles like the recent Politico piece have appeared that have questioned how it can be that the Trump White House is optimistic over the prospects for the November election when opinion polls suggest a large margin of victory for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. If journalists were doing their jobs and were actually getting out on the streets and talking to people, they would discover that people are really worried about the future of the country and what it all will mean for their children and grandchildren. And many of them blame the unrest on the Democratic Party coddling of radical groups that are actively fomenting ethnic and racial divisions for political gain, not on the Republicans. Trump's playing on those fears might well have a great impact when it comes time to vote. Someone who responded to an opinion poll the week before saying he or she would vote for a safe choice Biden might well go into the voters' booth and instead pull the lever for Trump.

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest .

[Aug 21, 2020] On Bombs And Bombings by Caitlin Johnstone

Notable quotes:
"... The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House. ..."
"... "The US-centralized empire is held together by endless violence, and the plutocrats who run it have built their kingdoms upon the status quo of that empire." That statement is a synopsis of the past 500+ years of European expansion/ imperialism ..."
Aug 19, 2020 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

For a full week now the Israeli army has been bombing Gaza, a population that is about to run out of fuel for its only power plant due to a years-long Israeli program of deliberate siege warfare .

Yesterday the US ordered an airstrike on Syrian forces, killing one, when they refused to let the illegal occupying force past a checkpoint in northern Syria.

In both cases an arm of the US-centralized empire used wildly disproportionate force against people who stood against a hostile occupation of their own country. In both cases the more powerful and violent occupiers claimed they were acting in "self-defense". In both cases dropping explosives from the sky upon human beings barely made the news.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1295478503694114816&lang=en&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.informationclearinghouse.info%2F55476.htm&theme=light&widgetsVersion=223fc1c4%3A1596143124634&width=550px

Bombs should not exist. Explosives designed to blow fire and shrapnel through human bodies should not be a thing. In a sane world, there wouldn't be bombs, and if some mentally unbalanced person ever made and used one it would be a major international news story.

Instead, bombs are cranked out like iPhones at enormous profit , and nearly all bombings are ignored. Many bombs are being dropped per day by the US and its allies, with a massive civilian death toll , and almost none of those bombings receive any international attention. The only time they do is generally when a bombing occurs that was not authorized by the US-centralized empire.

This is one of those absolutely freakish things about our society that has become normalized through careful narrative management, and we really shouldn't allow it to be. The fact that explosives designed to rip apart human anatomy are dropped from the sky many times per day for no other reason than to exert control over foreign countries should horrify us all.

An interesting social experiment when you talk to someone might be to tell them solemnly, "There's been a bombing." Then when they say "What?? Where??", tell them "The Middle East mostly. Our government and its allies drop many bombs there per day in order to keep a resource-rich geostrategic region balkanized and controllable."

Then watch their reaction.

You will probably notice a marked change in demeanor as the person learns that what you meant is different from what they thought you meant. They will likely act as though you'd tricked them in some way. But you didn't. You just called a thing the thing that it is, and let their assumptions do the rest.

When someone gravely tells you "There's been a bombing," what they almost always mean is that there has been a suspected terrorist attack in a western, majority-white nation. They don't mean the kind of bombing that kills exponentially more people and does exponentially more damage than terrorism in western nations. They don't mean the kind of terrorism that our government enacts and approves of.

There's a lot of pushback nowadays against the racism and prejudices that are woven throughout the fabric of our society, and rightly so . But what doesn't get nearly enough attention in this discourse is the fact that while some manifestations of bigotry may have been successfully scaled back somewhat in our own countries, it was in a sense merely exported overseas.

The violence that is being inflicted overseas in our name by the US-centralized empire is more horrific than any manifestation of racism we're ever likely to encounter at home. It is more horrific than the pre-integration American South. It is more horrific than even slavery itself. Yet even the more conscious among us fail to give this relentless onslaught of violence a proportionate degree of recognition and condemnation, even while the consent for it is largely born of the unexamined bigoted notion that violence against people in developing and non-western countries does not matter.

Like many other forms of bigotry, this one has been engineered and promulgated by powerful people who benefit from it. If the mainstream news media were what it purports to be, namely an institution dedicated to creating an informed populace about what's truthfully going on in the world, we would see the bombings in foreign nations given the same type of coverage that a bombing in Paris or London receives.

This would immediately bring consciousness to the unconscious bigotry that those in the US-centralized empire hold against people in low and middle income countries, which is exactly why the plutocrat-owned media do not report on it in this way. The US-centralized empire is held together by endless violence, and the plutocrats who run it have built their kingdoms upon the status quo of that empire.

When people set out to learn what's really going on in their world they often start cramming their heads with history and geopolitics facts and figures, which is of course fine and good. But a bigger part of getting a clear image of what's happening in the world is simply turning your gaze upon things you already kind of knew were happening, but couldn't quite bring yourself to look at.

Caitlin's articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking her on Facebook , following her antics on Twitter , checking out her podcast , throwing some money into her hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying her book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . https://caitlinjohnstone.com

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

From the Ramparts, 17 hours ago

"The US-centralized empire is held together by endless violence, and the plutocrats who run it have built their kingdoms upon the status quo of that empire." That statement is a synopsis of the past 500+ years of European expansion/ imperialism.

The AmeriKKKan Empire is the reigning heir to that legacy of Western thuggery, plunder and pillage.

[Aug 19, 2020] American imperialism vs. EU imperialism: Pushed into the Ukrainian adventure by the US? Rubbish. The EU and its constituent members were attempting to play their own hand and were not merely following the US lead submissively.

Highly recommended!
Aug 19, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

likbez , 17 August 2020 at 11:05 AM

IMO NATO should have ended with the fall of the USSR. It now "confronts" a largely imaginary threat, concocted for the purpose of maintaining the status quo in US government expenditures for defense and supporting the imperial dreams of the neocons.

Does anyone really think Russia is going to invade the Baltics? Really?


Hear! Hear!
blue peacock , 17 August 2020 at 11:20 AM

Col. Lang,

Isn't the western alliance for all intents & purposes already dead?

It is a shame as it could work together to counter the totalitarian CCP. But Mama Merkel it seems would rather get a few yuan from the communists and turn a blind eye to CCP authoritarianism until it becomes obvious that the CCP are ruthless and will be competing with Germany around the world for machine tools and autos by undercutting them on price and heavily subsidizing their companies until German industry is destroyed.

Barbara Ann , 17 August 2020 at 11:57 AM

I have heard of these elusive creatures called "Europeans", but have yet to meet one, so am not able to comment on their alleged "smug superiority". How many divisions do they have?

JohnH , 17 August 2020 at 01:13 PM

If anything drives the US and Europe apart, it will be trade, not security. Germany is clearly chafing under the US bit, which sacrifices European industry to US interests -- sanctions on Nordstream 2, trade with Russia, trade with Iran, and China and Huawei. The US clearly prioritizes it's own LNG , finance, technology and arms industries over European prosperity. It amazes me that it has taken Europe so long to wake up.

Biden will do nothing to change that dynamic, since he is beholden to the same interests as Trump.

james , 17 August 2020 at 01:36 PM

nato is an anachronism much like a lot of western type institutions today..

i am predicting a trump win via the astro...

srw , 17 August 2020 at 01:58 PM

Does anyone really think Russia is going to invade the Baltics? The Baltics and most likely the Poles do with past history in mind. I would like to see them and the Ukrainians transition into something like the Finns who acknowledge Russian power but maintain their independence. Right now they are looking at NATO as their guarantee of independence in the future. Who can blame them when looking at history.

Polish Janitor , 17 August 2020 at 03:28 PM

Col. Lang,

The Trump admin's (and for that matter, Trump's own instincts) are and have continuously been quite correct with regards to EU's defense expenditures agenda. The European 'humanists' take advantage of the American defense umbrella inside their own countries so they can afford to NOT spend on defense and instead spend more on domestic and economic development. So while America continues to pay for the EU's defense it cannot afford to invest in its own domestic programs (infrastructure, etc.) adequately. These Europeans then with the collaboration of their Atlanticist fellows on the other side of the pond do nation-building and democratization projects (call it endless wars) abroad, such as in Afghanistan. Just don't ask them about their track record in this department.

However, the thing is when their immediate interests are in danger they forget about America in a heartbeat. Examples, Germany's Nordstream pipeline with Russia, 5G infrastructure and development, trade with China, Paris climate accord, etc.

I tend to believe that EU knows best how to make an existential threat out of Russia. Anyone still remembers the novichok incident back in 2018? The thing with Russia is that from the POV of EU, they view their Eastern neighbor as a solid and stable illiberal system that is not within the ideological orbit of the western liberal democracy and thus they feel threatened by that ideologically, NOT a scenario in which from Tallinn to Toulouse is invaded and captured by Putin. In this endeavor they also have found willing partners in 'anti-authoritarian' hawks such as Bob Kagan, Hilary, Sam Power et.al that tow the same line and advocate for NATO expansion and other similar projects.

The EU in definitely terrified of a scenario in which the U.S. (under a nationalist conservative administration) starts de-funding NATO or withdraws its troops from Europe. In this case they need to cut public spending and allocate more on defense which has a clear impact on the 'democratic spirit' of EU's over-hyped social democracy.

In the past few years we have seen the rise of right-wing populsit nationalist parties in pretty much every single major EU country. I believe there are strong tendencies in the Trump admin-if DJT manages to stay in power for another 4 years- to do a little *something something* about EU's decades-long nefarious free-riding of U.S. defense umbrella and I don't think the effeminate EU leaders will gonna like it very much.

English Outsider , 17 August 2020 at 04:31 PM


Barbara Ann - You say "I have heard of these elusive creatures called "Europeans", but have yet to meet one, so am not able to comment on their alleged "smug superiority". How many divisions do they have?"

The term "European" has become disputed territory. As an Englishman I regard myself fully as "European" as any German or Frenchman but for many the term now seems to mean exclusively "Member of the European Union". Tricky, that one.

Me, I prefer the term "Westerner". It takes in the so-called "Anglosphere" as well and therefore covers all the ground without going into the fact that some parts have become considerably less powerful over the last century and others considerably more. Also accommodates without fuss the fact that the cultural centre of gravity, at some indeterminate time in that last century, moved across from Paris, Vienna and Berlin to New York and parts west.

Not always to your advantage, to you as an American that is, because a fair chunk of the Frankfurt mob moved over your way with it. You caught from Old Europe the destructive and vacuous tenets of "Progressivism" and are now sharing the disease in its full vigour with us.

I mention that last because the violent TDS you see across the Atlantic isn't specifically European. It's merely that it's natural for progressives to detest Trump or rather, not the man himself but the "populist" forces he is taken to represent. It's garlic to the vampire for the progressive, the Little House on the Prairie or its various European equivalents, and the allergic reaction will become stronger yet. That "smug superiority" you will therefore find in the States as readily as you will find it here. America or here we live on sufferance in occupied territory, if we are not progressives ourselves, and should not the occupiers always be superior and smug?

I went hunting for the Telegraph article the Colonel discusses above. I didn't like that article at all. It gets the "freeloading" part right but in the context of a Russophobia that's seemingly set in stone. And the Telegraph is not so much a progressive newspaper as one that, while throwing a few token bones to its mainly Conservative readership, buys the progressive Weltanschauung just as much as the Guardian or New York Times.

"How many divisions do they have?" A few more than the pope but maybe that's not the point. I recently tried to follow the twists and turns of Mrs May's negotiations with the EU as they related to defence. I got the impression that in the matter of defence the supply of divisions could safely be left to the Americans. It was the allocation of defence contracts that they were all concerned about.

Deap , 17 August 2020 at 04:46 PM

Residing in Europe in the late 1960's at a US joint NATO military attachment in Northern Italy, we mused were we there to keep our eye on the Russians, or in fact keep our eyes on the Germans. One still saw in the back rooms, AXIS memorabilia.

As an aside: the only reason Michelle Obama chose as one of her FLOTUS projects - support of military families -- was so she could get Uncle Sam to jet her around to all those US military bases still in Europe for tea with the commander's wife and then on to her real purpose - shopping and having fun with friends and families she was able to drag along. On our dime.

Deap , 17 August 2020 at 04:53 PM

My last visit to Europe found there are now more Turks, than former "Europeans; except in France where they were more Algerians, than native French. And of course UK has long been little more than the entrenched polyglot of their vast far flung Empire.

Indeed, who is a "European" today. Birth rate demographics from the former colonies, boat people or import of cheap labor has now taken over anything we used to call "European". Can a resident Turk really serve up a perfect plate of raclette in Switzerland? One word answer: no. And that is a sad loss. One must instead shift their tastes to shwarma, if one wants European food today.

Diana Croissant , 17 August 2020 at 06:19 PM

In regard to Europeans--and perhaps some Australians whom I've met--I have often felt that they in some ways did feel a bit superior to Americans.

Their sense of superiority, however, seemed more rooted in a sense of cultural superiority. Those on the blog who viewed the comic rendition of the Three Little Pigs that was recently posted here might think of that and its wonderful ending about the house that was "American made." it was a wonderful ending for that well-known tale and a great defense of our culture's current limited and plain vocabulary in some groups.

As an English major and English teacher, so much of the great literature that we taught did come from England. I took three Comps when I earned my Masters: English literature from Beowulf (which I read in Old English) to Chaucer's Catterbury Tales (which I read in Middle English) and then to Virginia Woolf.

For my comp in American literature, I read from Washington Irving to the modern American writers at the time I was in college.

My third comp was in Modern Linguistic Theory.

Of course we taught Shakespeare and Dickens---English writers--to our junior high and high school classes. We studied mostly American writers in regard to short stories, as short stories are considered the American genre. Our teaching of poetry covered both English and American poets. As far as novels go, we taught both English and American novels.

Russian and German novelists were also on our list of reading for our comps. (We read them in English translation.)

In summary, American culture was often overshadowed by the many longer centureies of European culture in much of my college career.

What the Europeans can't deny, though they may want to, is that the tehcology and innovation in things like automobile production, electricity, telephones, and into space expoloration ---many things like that--is where we can indeed be quite proud.

They can continue to feel culturally superior to us if it makes them feel better. I defy them, however, to minimize our importance in World War II.

Babak makkinejad , 17 August 2020 at 11:24 PM

Deap

A European was understood, in Iran, to be a Christian. A Turk in Germany or and Algerian in France is just that, a Turk, an Algerian, i.e. another Muslim.

There are professional and managerial middle class French Muslims in Paris and elsewhere, but are they French? I do not know how assimilated they are.

Mathias Alexander , 18 August 2020 at 03:01 AM

" he will follow some Trump-era objectives, because that is what American interests demand, thus showing that Trump was no extremist on China."
So if Biden and Trump both want something, that shows that it isn't extreme. How does that work again?
The drive for confrontation with Russia contradicts Europe's desire to do buisness with her. Hence the end of the Western Alliance.

Mathias Alexander , 18 August 2020 at 04:18 AM

"The US faces a rapidly escalating political crisis. The losing party in November will undoubtedly go to the federal courts to claim that their opponents cheated in the process."
They all went along with electronic voting and postal ballots. Now they're all going to complain about the consequences.

Paco , 18 August 2020 at 04:43 AM

Of course NATO should have disappeared together with the Berlin Wall, but it is alive, kicking and ever looking for trouble, Belarus comes to mind.
The problem with propaganda is that the emitter ends up believing it, Europe does not need any protection, we have the means to protect ourselves.
The US is an occupation force, and on top of it demands payment for it. Pick up your gear and go home, and by the way, Europe should worry about countries armed to their teeth by the US, I'm thinking about Morocco for instance, since I live in Spain. The beautiful line of the Sierra that I contemplate every morning while stretching has been contaminated with a radar station of the Aegis system, and that means we in our quite and beautiful Andalusian town are a target for the biggies. Stop believing your propaganda, pick up your gear and let everybody take care of themselves, the benefits will be for the US population in the first place, and the world will rejoice.

A.I.S. , 18 August 2020 at 06:20 AM

The reason German military contribution to the "western alliance" is what it is is very simple.
It is according to the incentives that threats that German leadership perceives.

First: Objective strategic things:
Essentially, noone is going to invade Germany. This removes one major reason to have a large army. Secondly, Germany is not going to productively (in terms of return of investment) invade anyone else. This removes the second major reason to have a large army. There is something to be said to have a cadre army that can be surged into a real army if conditions change.

Second: Incentives of German political leaders.
While the degree of German vassal stateness concerning the USA is up to a degree of debate, that the USA has a lot of influence over Germany is in my view not. Schröder got elite regime changed over his Iraq war opposition (it was amazing that literally all the newspaper were against him, had a big impact on me growing up during this time).
Essentially, if you are in Nato, at some point, Uncle Sam will invite you to some adventure. If you say yes to this adventure you commit your armed forces to some confrontation in the middle east if you are lucky, or against Russia in Eastern Europe if you are unlucky. Your population is not going to like this, and you may face losing elections over this. It is also expensive in terms of life and material (although not very expensive compared to actual wars against competent enemies).
If you say no, Uncle Sam will be displeased with you and will make this known for example by sicking the entire "Transatlantic leadership networks" on you, which can also make you lose the next election.

Essentially, if Uncle Sam comes asking, you lose the next election if you say yes, and you also lose if you say no. Saying no is on balance cheaper, because you dont incurr the financial and human costs of joing a random US adventure on top of the risk of losing the next election.
The winning play is to get your army in such a state that Uncle Sam will not even ask.

Germany basically did create condition that enabled this.
Its a reasonably happy state for Germany to be in.

We are basically doing Brave Soldier Schweijk on the national level.

Solutions from a US pov:

1: Do less military adventures. If you do less adventures, people will fear being shanghaied along less. This will decrease the drawbacks associated with having a reasonable military as a Nato state.

2: Dont soft regime change governments that say no to your foreign adventures. Instead, maybe listen to them. Had the US listend to French and German criticism regarding the wisdom of going to war with Iraq, the US and also a lot of others would have been much better off.

3: Make it clear that particpation in foreign adventures is actually voluntary instead of "voluntary", make also clear that participation in defensive operations is not voluntary and is what Nato was created for and that you expect a considerable contribution towards this. Also, do some actual exercises. For example, if Germany claims that its military expenditure is sufficient, stress test this premise by having a realistic exercise in which a German divisions goes up against an American one. Yes, do some division size exercizes pretty please. Heck, after ensuring that this exercize wont be a failfest, have some Indian be the referee.

Barbara Ann , 18 August 2020 at 08:03 AM

Territoriality European Outsider

Now we are getting to the heart of the matter. My jest about never having met a European was of course designed to illustrate that "Europe" is a secondary construct. Never has a person, upon meeting me, introduced themselves as a "European".

Europe is a moveable feast and even territorial definitions are slippery. "Europeans" I think, must be characterized by short memories, for was it not less than 25 years ago that European NATO planes bombed their fellow Europeans in Bosnia? It can't have been an accident either, as I understand the op. was called "Operation Deliberate Force".

If Europe is synonymous with the EU it has precisely zero divisions and though you yourself may remain "Western", you are as a consequence of Brexit no longer "European". No, I think you and Polish Janitor are close by identifying "European" as a progressive/liberal, democratic (read "globalist") value system. An insufficiency of "European-ness" can thus be used to justify NATO involvement across various geographies - from Bosnia to Afghanistan (& shortly Belarus?).

But of course the "European" members of NATO are hardly on the same page. It looks not at all unlikely that two of its members may go to war in the Eastern Mediterranean.

I agree with you re the Telegraph article btw. "European" smugness is well represented in that organ.

nbsp; turcopolier , 18 August 2020 at 08:21 AM

Mathias Alexander

No. They did NOT all go along with "electronic voting and postal ballots." The 50 states each run federal elections in any way they please. The US Constitution requires that. There are a wide variety of voting machines in use and only a few states use mailed in ballots. the Republican Party particularly opposes mail in voting.

Barbara Ann , 18 August 2020 at 09:28 AM

Darn spellchecker "Territorially" of course EO.

I should also have added that "European" by the above definition is pretty much synonymous with "Atlanticist".

Jack , 18 August 2020 at 12:54 PM

Paco,

You should be complaining to the politicians you elect. They're the ones requesting US military protection. Prior to Trump, our governments were quite happy to provide that protection. He's now asking for some cost sharing.

Be careful though, before you know it Spain could become a vassal of the Chinese communists as many countries in Africa are finding out now. Hopefully you can continue to extract euros from the Germans and Dutch while battling the separatists in Catalonia. There's a thin veneer between stability & strife.

Deap , 18 August 2020 at 01:01 PM

Paco, with a huge cost of lives and treasure the US was twice asked to clean up Europe's self-inflicted messes in the past century. Promise you won't call on us again, and we can talk. I know, past is not necessarily prologue but do at least meet us half way. It is only good manners.

English Outsider , 18 August 2020 at 01:17 PM


Barbara Ann - Lots of Europes of course. "My" Europe may no longer be on the active list. Traces here and there. Few green shoots that are visible to me. Many rank growths overlaying it.

Also many "European Unions". They exist all right, in uneasy company.

So many "EU's". A ramshackle Northern European trading empire - I think that's too unstable to be long for this world but I could be wrong. A nascent superpower, that denied by many but for some their central aim.

A bureaucratic growth. A handy market place for all. A Holocaust memorial centre; when the EU politicians find themselves in a tight spot they can always call on Auschwitz and all fall back in line. I saw Mrs Merkel pull that trick at the last but one Munich Security Conference and all there, because Mrs Merkel was at that time in a very tight spot, applauded with relief.

A Progressive Shangri-La, all the more enticing for never being defined. Those adherents of that "EU" do actually call themselves "EU citizens" and I see the term is becoming more common usage. Maybe those are the self proclaimed "European citizens" you have not met.

And the producer of reams of lifeless prescription that seek to force all into the same mould and tough on the poor devils who can't fit the model. And on their families.

Lots of "EU's". I like none of them. While we wait for that edifice of delusion to collapse I hope the damage it does to "My" Europe is not irreparable.

Artemesia , 18 August 2020 at 02:26 PM

@ Diana Croissant: "They can continue to feel culturally superior to us if it makes them feel better. I defy them, however, to minimize our importance in World War II."

What an unfortunate conclusion to your essay.


Paco , 18 August 2020 at 05:47 PM

Jack, with all due respect, the politician who committed treason and gave away Spanish territory for a foreign power to install bases died in 1975, nobody voted for him, general Franco, an ally of Hitler, someone who sent over 50k troops to the siege of Leningrad, one of the greatest crimes in the history of mankind, a million casualties, mainly civilians, dead by hunger and disease, that fascist ally of Hitler we had to endure for 40 years, the price to close your eyes and your nose not to smell the stench were bases, an occupying force watching one of the strategic straights in Rota, close to Gibraltar, plus other bases inland. I could go on, and remind you of 4H bombs dropped over Palomares after a broken arrow incident, one of them broke and plutonium is still poisoning an area that your government is not willing to clean. So that is what foreign occupation looks like, if something goes wrong, well, we are protecting you . they say. History should be taught with a bit more detail in the USA.

English Outsider , 18 August 2020 at 06:35 PM

A.I.S

I'm afraid you're reading the dynamics of the European/US relationship quite incorrectly. Bluntly, you have the facts wrong.

This site, and particularly the Colonel's committee of correspondence, is packed with experts who have lived in this field and know their way around it. So I don't venture a comprehensive rebuttal myself - my knowledge is partial and I do not have the background to be sure of getting it dead right. But here -

"Essentially, if you are in Nato, at some point, Uncle Sam will invite you to some adventure. If you say yes to this adventure you commit your armed forces to some confrontation in the middle east if you are lucky, or against Russia in Eastern Europe if you are unlucky."

That is transparent nonsense.

Obama has stated that it was the Europeans, including the UK, who pushed him into some middle East interventions. I don't think he was shooting a line. The leaked Blumenthal emails confirm that and we merely have to look at the thrust of French military actions to understand that the French in particular push continually for intervention in the ME.

They are still doing so, and not for R2P purposes. They would see the ME and parts of Africa as part of the EU sphere of influence and their initial reaction to Trump's abortive attempt to withdraw from Syria shows they would be more than prepared to go it alone there if they could.

A squalid bunch, and here I must include my own country in that verdict. Reliant on US logistics and military strength they seek to pursue their own interests and could they but do so they would do so unassisted. Don't pretend that it's the Americans who force them into these genocidal adventures.


As for the Ukraine, we see from Sakwa's unflattering study of the EU adventure there that that was building up well before 2014. The dramatic rejection of the EU deal was the prelude to the coup. The Ashton tape shows an astonishing degree of EU intervention in Ukrainian internal affairs before that coup. And from the Nuland tape we get a glimpse of the EU regime change project that shows it was deeply implicated.

Pushed into the Ukrainian adventure by the US? Rubbish. The EU and its constituent members were attempting to play their own hand and were not merely following the US lead submissively.

We hear little of European neocon ventures. But what little has surfaced about them shows that your picture of peace loving Europeans dragged into these conflicts by an overbearing "Uncle Sam" is dishonest and misleading.

So I tell my German friends and relatives when they push the same line. They look at me with disbelief and go off and hunt around the internet themselves. And then come back and do not disagree. I suggest you do the same. The facts are all there, even for those of us without inside knowledge or who lack the requisite background.

[Aug 19, 2020] Managing the Narrative by Philip Giraldi

Aug 19, 2020 | www.unz.com

Managing the Narrative Corporations and government use internet to control information PHILIP GIRALDI AUGUST 18, 2020 1,400 WORDS 78 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit Share Share Email Print More

Some Americans continue to believe that when they go to the internet they will get a free flow of useful information that will guide them in making decisions or coming to conclusions about the state of the world. That conceit might have been true to an extent twenty years ago, but the growth and consolidation of corporate information management firms has instead limited access to material that it does not approve of, thereby successfully shaping the political and economic environment to conform with their own interests. Facebook, Google and other news and social networking sites now all have advisory panels that are authorized to ban content and limit access by members. This de facto censorship is particularly evident when using the internet information "search" sites themselves, a "service" that is dominated by Google. Ron Unz has observed how when the CEO of Google Sundar Pichai faced congressional scrutiny on July 29 th together with other high-tech executives, the questioning was hardly rigorous and no one even asked how the sites are regulated to promote certain information that is approved of while suppressing views or sources that are considered to be undesirable.

The "information" sites generally get a free pass from government scrutiny because they are useful to those who run the country from Washington and Wall Street. That the internet is a national security issue was clearly demonstrated when the Barack Obama Administration sought to develop a switch that could be used to "kill it" in the event of a national crisis. No politician or corporate chief executive wants to get on the bad side of Big Tech and find his or her name largely eliminated from online searches, or, alternatively, coming up all too frequently with negative connotations.

Google, for example, ranks the information that it displays so it can favor certain points of view and dismiss others. Generally speaking, progressive sites are favored and conservative sites are relegated to the bottom of the search with the expectation that they will not be visited. In late July, investigative journalists noted that Google was apparently testing its technical ability to blacklist conservative media on its search engine which processes more than 3.5 billion online searches every day, comprising 94 percent of internet searching. Sites targeted and made to effectively disappear from results included NewsBusters, the Washington Free Beacon, The Blaze, Townhall, The Daily Wire, PragerU, LifeNews, Project Veritas, Judicial Watch, The Resurgent, Breitbart, Drudge, Unz, the Media Research Center and CNSNews. All the sites affected are considered to be politically conservative and no progressive or liberal sites were included.

One has to suspect that the tech companies like Google are working hand-in-hand with some regulators within the Trump administration to "purge" the internet, primarily by removing foreign competition both in hardware and software from countries like China. This will give the ostensibly U.S. companies monopoly status and will also allow the government to have sufficient leverage to control the message. If this process continues, the internet itself will become nationally or regionally controlled and will inevitably cease to be a vehicle for free exchange of views. Recent steps taken by the U.S. to block Huawei 5G technology and also force the sale of sites like TikTok have been explained as "national security" issues, but they are more likely designed to control aspects of the internet.

Washington is also again beating the familiar drum that Russia is interfering in American politics, with an eye on the upcoming election. Last week saw the released of a 77 page report produced by the State Department's Global Engagement Center (GEC) on Russian internet based news and opinion sources that allegedly are guilty of spreading disinformation and propaganda on behalf of the Kremlin. It is entitled "Understanding Russia's Disinformation and Propaganda Ecosystem" and has a lead paragraph asserting that "Russia's disinformation and propaganda ecosystem is the collection of official, proxy, and unattributed communication channels and platforms that Russia uses to create and amplify false narratives."

Perhaps not surprisingly, The New York Times is hot on the trail of Russian malfeasance, describing the report and its conclusions in a lengthy article "State Dept. Traces Russian Disinformation Links" that appeared on August 5 th .

The government report identifies a number of online sites that it claims are actively involved in the "disinformation" effort. The Times article focuses on one site in particular, describing how "The report states that the Strategic Culture Foundation [website] is directed by Russia's foreign intelligence service, the S.V.R., and stands as 'a prime example of longstanding Russian tactics to conceal direct state involvement in disinformation and propaganda outlets.' The organization publishes a wide variety of fringe voices and conspiracy theories in English, while trying to obscure its Russian government sponsorship." It also quotes Lea Gabrielle, the GEC Director, who explained that "The Kremlin bears direct responsibility for cultivating these tactics and platforms as part of its approach of using information and disinformation as a weapon."

As Russia has been falsely accused of supporting the election of Donald Trump in 2016 and the existence of alternative news sites funded wholly or in part by a foreign government is not ipso facto an act of war, it is interesting to note the "evidence" that The Times provides based on its own investigation to suggest that Moscow is about to disrupt the upcoming election. It is: "Absent from the report is any mention of how one of the writers for the Strategic Culture Foundation weighed in this spring on a Democratic primary race in New York. The writer, Michael Averko, published articles on the foundation's website and in a local publication in Westchester County, N.Y., attacking Evelyn N. Farkas, a former Obama administration official who was running for Congress. In recent weeks, the F.B.I. questioned Mr. Averko about the Strategic Culture Foundation and its ties to Russia. While those attacks did not have a decisive effect on the election, they showed Moscow's continuing efforts to influence votes in the United States "

Excuse me, but someone writing for an alternative website with relatively low readership criticizing a candidate for congress does not equate to the Kremlin's interfering in an American election. Also, the claim that the Strategic Culture Foundation is a disinformation mechanism is overwrought. Yes, the site is located in Moscow and it may have some government support but it features numerous American and European contributors in addition to Russians. I have been writing for the site for nearly three years and I know many of the other Americans who also do so. We are generally speaking antiwar and often critical of U.S. foreign policy but the contributors include conservatives like myself, libertarians and progressives and we write on all kinds of subjects.

And here is the interesting part: not one of us has ever been told what to write. Not one of us has ever even had a suggestion coming from Moscow on a good topic for an article. Not one of us has ever had an article or headline changed or altered by an editor. Putting on my ex-intelligence officer hat for a moment, that is no way to run an influencing or disinformation operation intended to subvert an election. Sure, Russia has a point of view on the upcoming election and its managed media outlets will reflect that bias but the sweeping allegations are nonsense, particularly in an election that will include billions of dollars in real disinformation coming from the Democratic and Republican parties.

Putting together what you no longer can find when you search the internet with government attempts to suppress alternative news sites one has to conclude that we Americans are in the middle of an information war. Who controls the narrative controls the people, or so it seems. It is a dangerous development, particularly at a time when no one knows whom to trust and what to believe. How it will play out between now and the November election is anyone's guess.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

geokat62 , says: August 18, 2020 at 4:34 am GMT

One has to suspect that the tech companies like Google are working hand-in-hand with some regulators within the Trump administration to "purge" the internet

Direct quote from Donald Trump EXPOSED – Israel, Zionism

https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=8992

DJT: And we have kids that are watching the internet and they want to be masterminds. And then you wonder why do we lose all these kids. They go over there. They're young and they're impressionable. They go over there. They want to join ISIS. We're losing a lot of people because of the internet. And we have to do something. We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them maybe in certain areas closing that internet up in some way . Somebody will say "oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech" These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people. We've gotta maybe do something with the internet , because they are recruiting by the thousands .

mijj13 , says: August 18, 2020 at 5:13 am GMT

It's true. Knowledge of evidence based reality is a threat to US National Security.
Those who value US National Security are right to fear general access to evidence based reality.

Their suggestion that Russia is the sole source of knowledge of evidence based reality, though flattering to Russia, merely illustrates an entertaining cartoon mindset.

it's the stupidity stupid. , says: August 18, 2020 at 5:51 am GMT

no one knows whom to trust and what to believe

huh?

russia-gate etc. has been a criminal conspiracy from the beginning. who didn't know this? the US is led by psychopaths, evil people. not ignorant, misguided, etc. evil! why are people so reluctant to use that word?

business, media, government, education, military, etc. it doesn't matter. the top brass are monsters.

if you want a picture of the future winston, imagine psychopaths commanding armies of autists.

eventually what will happen is something like "the troubles". and this will not be stopped by government action. there will have to be something like the good friday accords, a second constituional convention, and partition.

Anonymous [187] Disclaimer , says: August 18, 2020 at 6:08 am GMT

There we go again! Mr Giraldi along with his friend Larry Romanoff, reframing the narrative into China vs US, to deflect attention away from the Deep State common to both.

[Aug 19, 2020] The Anger Campaign Against China by Larry Romanoff

Aug 19, 2020 | www.unz.com

If 'liberal' dogs can't bark at Jews and Deep State, they bark at Russia.

The Origins of Mass Manipulation of the Public Mind

Many years ago, the American political commentator Walter Lippmann realised that political ideology could be completely fabricated, using the media to control both presentation and conceptualisation, not only to create deeply-ingrained false beliefs in a population, but also to entirely erase undesirable political ideas from the public mind. This was the beginning of not only the American hysteria for freedom, democracy and patriotism, but of all manufactured political opinion, a process that has been operative ever since. Lippmann created these theories of mass persuasion of the public, using totally fabricated "facts" deeply insinuated into the minds of a gullible public, but there is much more to this story. An Austrian Jew named Edward Louis Bernays who was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, was one of Lippmann's most precocious students and it was he who put Lippmann's theories into practice. Bernays is widely known in America as the father of Public Relations, but he would be much more accurately described as the father of American war marketing as well as the father of mass manipulation of the public mind.

Bernays claimed "If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind" it will be possible "to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it". He called this scientific technique of opinion-molding the 'engineering of consent', and to accomplish it he merged theories of crowd psychology with the psychoanalytical ideas of his uncle Sigmund Freud. [10] [11] Bernays regarded society as irrational and dangerous, with a "herd instinct", and that if the multi-party electoral system (which evidence indicates was created by a group of European elites as a population control mechanism) were to survive and continue to serve those elites, massive manipulation of the public mind was necessary. These elites, "invisible people", would have, through their influence on government and their control of the media, a monopoly on the power to shape thoughts, values, and responses of the citizenry. His conviction was that this group should flood the public with misinformation and emotionally-loaded propaganda to "engineer" the acquiescence of the masses and thereby rule over them. According to Bernays, this manufactured consent of the masses, creating conformity of opinion molded by the tool of false propaganda, would be vital for the survival of "democracy". Bernays wrote:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. People are governed, their minds molded, their tastes formed, their ideas suggested, largely by men they have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner . In almost every act of our daily lives we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind." [12]

In his main work titled 'Propaganda', [13] which he wrote in 1928, Bernays argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy because individuals were inherently dangerous (to the control and looting of the elites) but could be harnessed and channeled by these same elites for their economic benefit. He clearly believed that virtually total control of a population was possible, and perhaps easy to accomplish. He wrote further that:

"No serious sociologist any longer believes that the voice of the people expresses any wise idea. The voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is made up for it by those persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion. It is composed of inherited prejudices and symbols and clichés and verbal formulas supplied to them by the leaders. Fortunately, the politician is able, by the instrument of propaganda, to mold and form the will of the people. So vast are the numbers of minds which can be regimented, and so tenacious are they when regimented, that [they produce] an irresistible pressure before which legislators, editors, and teachers are helpless. "

And it wasn't only the public masses that were 'inherently dangerous', but a nation's leaders fit this description as well, therefore also requiring manipulation and control. Bernays realised that if you can influence the leaders of a nation, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you can control the government and the country, and that is precisely where he set his sights. Bernays again:

"In some departments of our daily life, in which we imagine ourselves free agents, we are ruled by dictators exercising great power. There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes. Nor, what is still more important, the extent to which our thoughts and habits are modified by authorities. The invisible government tends to be concentrated in the hands of the few because of the expense of manipulating the social machinery which controls the opinions and habits of the masses."

And in this case, the "few" are the wealthy industrial elites, their even wealthier banker friends, and their brethren who control the media, publishing and entertainment industries.

Until the First World War, these theories of creating an entirely false public opinion based on misinformation, then manipulating this for population control, were still only theories, but the astounding success of propaganda by Bernays and his group during the war laid bare the possibilities of perpetually controlling the public mind on all matters. The "shrewd" designers of Bernays' "invisible government" developed a standard technique for what was essentially propaganda and mind control, or at least opinion control, and infiltrated it throughout the US government, its departments and agencies, and its leaders and politicians. Coincident with this, they practiced infecting the leaders of every identifiable group – fraternal, religious, commercial, patriotic, social – and encouraging these men to likewise infect their supporters.

Many have noted the black and white mentality that pervades America. Much of the blame must be laid on Bernays' propaganda methods. Bernays himself asserted that propaganda could produce rapid and strong emotional responses in the public, but that the range of these responses was limited because the emotional loading inherent in his propaganda would create a kind of binary mentality, eventually forcing the population into a programmed black and white world – which is precisely what we see in the US today. This isn't difficult to understand. When Bernays flooded the public with fabricated tales of Germans shiskababbing babies, the range of potential responses was entirely emotional and would be limited to either abhorrence or perhaps a blocking of the information. In a sense, our emotional switch will be forced into either an 'on' or 'off' position , with no other reasonable choices.

The elite few, as Bernays called them, realised early on the potential for control of governments, and in every subsequent US administration the president and his White House staff, the politicians, the leaders of the military and intelligence agencies, all fell prey to this same disease of shrewd manipulation. Roosevelt's "intense desire for war" in 1939 [14] [15] [16] was the result of this same infection process and, once infected, he of course approved of the infection of the entire American population. Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.

Bernays – Marketing War

In the discovery of propaganda as a tool of public mind control and in its use for war marketing, it is worthwhile to take a quick look at the historical background of Bernays' war effort. At the time, the European Zionists had made an agreement with England to bring the US into the war against Germany, on the side of England, a favor for which England would grant them the possession of Palestine as a location for a new homeland. [19] Palestine did not 'belong' to England, it was not England's to give, and England had no legal or moral right to make such an agreement, but it was made nevertheless.

US President Wilson was desperate to fulfill his obligations to his handlers by putting the US into the First World War as they wished, but the American population had no interest in the European war and public sentiment was entirely against participating. To facilitate the desired result, Wilson created the Committee on Public Information (The Creel Commission), [20] to propagandise the war by the mass brainwashing of America, but Creel was merely the 'front' of a group that consisted of specially hand-picked men from the media, advertising, the movie industry, and academia, as well as specialists in psychology. The two most important members were Walter Lippman, whom Wilson described as "the most brilliant man of his age", and Bernays who was the group's top mind-control expert, both Jews and both aware of the stakes in this game. Bernays planned to combine his uncle Freud's psychiatric insights with mass psychology blended with modern advertising techniques, and apply them to the task of mass mind control. It was Bernays' vast propaganda schemes and his influence in promoting the patently false idea that US entry to the war was primarily aimed at "bringing democracy to all of Europe", that proved so successful in altering public opinion about the war. Thanks to Edward Bernays, American war marketing was born and would never die.

Note to Readers: Some portion of the immediately following content which details the specifics of the propaganda of Lippman and Bernays for World War I is not my own work. It was extracted some years ago from a longer document for which I cannot now locate the original source. If a reader is able to identify this source, I would be grateful to receive that information so I can properly credit the author for his extensive research.

"Wilson's creation of the CPI was a turning point in world history, the first truly scientific attempt to form, manipulate and control the perceptions and beliefs of an entire population." With Wilson's authority, these men were given almost unlimited scope to work their magic, and in order to ensure the success of their program and guarantee the eventual possession of Palestine, these men and their committee carried out "a program of psychological warfare against the American people on a scale unprecedented in human history and with a degree of success that most propagandists could only dream about".

Having received permission and broad authority from the US President and the White House to "lead the public mind into war" [21] and, with their success threatened by widespread anti-war sentiment among the public, these men determined to engineer what Lippman called "the manufacture of consent" . The committee assumed the task to "examine the different ways that information flowed to the population and to flood these channels with pro-war material". Their effort was unparalleled in its scale and sophistication, since the Committee had the power not only to officially censor news and withhold information from the public, but to manufacture false news and distribute it nationally through all channels. In a very short time, Lippman and Bernays were well enough organised to begin flooding the US with anti-German propaganda consisting of hate literature, movies, songs, media articles and much more.

... ... ...

Everything we have read above about the marketing of war during preparation for the two World Wars, is from a template created by Lippman and Bernays exclusively to support the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and to promote the agenda of Zionism. That template has been in constant use by the US government (as the Bankers' Private Army) since the Second World War, 'engineering consent and ignorance' in the American and Western populations to mask almost seven decades of atrocities, demonising innocent countries and peoples in preparation for 60 or 70 politically-inspired color revolutions or 'wars of liberation' fought exclusively for the financial and political benefit of a handful of European bankers using the US military as a private army for this purpose, resulting in the deaths and miseries of hundreds of millions of innocent civilians.

... ... ...

We can easily think of George W. Bush's demonisation of Iraq, the sordid tales of mass slaughters, the gassing of hundreds of thousands and burial in mass graves, the nuclear weapons ready to launch within 15 minutes, the responsibility for 9-11, the babies tossed out of incubators, Saddam using wood shredders to eliminate political opponents and dissidents. We can think of the tales of Libyan Viagra, all proven to have been groundless fabrications – typical atrocity propaganda. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran and dozens of other wars and invasions followed this same template to get the public mind onside for an unjustified war launched only for political and commercial objectives.

Fast Forward to 2020

We are at the same place today, with the same people conducting the same "anger campaign" against China in preparation for World War III. John Pilger agrees with me , evidenced in his recent article "Another Hiroshima is coming – unless we stop it now." [43] And so does Gordon Duff . [44] The signs now are everywhere, and the campaign is successful. It is necessary to point out the need for an 'anger campaign' as opposed to a 'hate campaign'. We are not moved to action from hate, but from anger. I may thoroughly despise you, but that in itself will do nothing. It is only if I am moved to anger that I want to punch your lights out. And this, as Lippman and Bernays so clearly noted, requires emotionally-charged atrocity propaganda of the kind used so well against Germany and being so well used against China today. Since we need atrocity propaganda to start a war, there seems to be no shortage.

... ... ...

Then, Mr. Pompeo tells us, "The truth is that our policies . . . resurrected China's failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that were feeding it." [55] Further, that (due to COVID-19) China "caused an enormous amount of pain, loss of life," and the "Chinese Communist Party will pay a price". [56] Of course, we all know that "China" stole the COVID-19 virus from a lab in Winnipeg, Canada, then released it onto the world – and Pompeo has proof [57] , and even "A Chinese virologist has proof" that "China" engaged in a massive cover-up while contaminating the world [58] and then "fleeing Hong Kong" because "I know how they treat whistle-blowers." [59] And of course, "China needs to be held accountable for Covid-19's destruction" [60] which is why everyone in the US wants to sue "China". "Australia" demands an international criminal investigation of China's role in COVID-19. [61] What a surprise.

And of course we have an almost unlimited number of serious provocations , from Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the South China Seas, to Chinese consulates, media reporters, students, researchers, visa restrictions, spying, Huawei, the trade war, all done in the hope of making the Chinese leaders panic and over-react, the easiest way to justify a new war.

The list could continue for several hundred pages. Never in my life have I seen such a continuous, unabating flood of hate propaganda against one nation, surely equivalent to what was done against Germany as described above to prepare for US entry into the First World War. And it's working, doing what it is intended to do. Canada, Australia, the UK, Germany, India, Brazil, are buying into the war-mongering and turning against China. More will follow. The Global Times reported "Mutual trust between Australia and China at all-time low". [62]

"Boycott China" T-shirts and caps are flooding India, Huawei is being increasingly banned from Western nations, Chinese social media APPs like Tik-Tok are being banned, and Bryan Adams recently slammed all Chinese as "Bat-eating, wet-market-animal-selling, virus-making, greedy bastards". [63] [64] In a recent poll (taken because we need to measure the success of our handiwork in the same way Bernays and the Tavistock Institute did as noted earlier), half of all ethnic Chinese in Canada have been threatened and harassed over COVID-19.

About 45% of Chinese in Canada said they had been " threatened or intimidated in some way", fully 50% said they had recently been insulted in public, 30% said they had experienced . . . "some kind of physical altercation", and 60% said the abuse was so bad "they had to reorganise their daily routine to avoid it". One woman in her 60s said a man told her and her daughter "Every day I pray that you people die". [65]

... ... ...

Several years ago, CNN was sued by one of their news anchors for being ordered to lie in the newscasts. CNN won the case. They did not deny ordering the news anchor to lie. Their defense was based simply on the position that American news media have "no obligation to tell the truth". And RT recently reported that nearly 9 out of 10 Americans see a "medium or high" bias in all media coverage, [65] yet, as we can see, most of those same people, and a very large portion of the population of many nations still succumb to the same hate propaganda.

... ... ...

[Aug 19, 2020] UAE is committed to contain #Turkey amp; turn its presence in Libya into a quagmire that bleeds it. by Jalel Harchaou

Aug 19, 2020 | twitter.com

More than anybody, #UAE is committed to making sure #Ankara having won the #Tripoli battle in Jun never helps it win the #Libya war. Idea is to contain #Turkey & turn its presence into a quagmire that bleeds it. By promising to help #Greece , the #French navy joins that endeavor


Jalel Harchaoui @JMJalel_H Aug 12

France to bolster Mediterranean military presence. With Macron determined to assert French leadership in the the Mediterranean, he will have to team up w RU to take on Turkey. This means France will work w RU in Lebanon too. At cross purposes w the US. https:// reut.rs/31O3fjY Show this thread
Nabil Ferhat @FerhatNabil Aug 13
Replying to
@JMJalel_H Aug 13
@JMJalel_H and
@joshua_landis Aug 13
@joshua_landis Will FR have the necessary resources and supports in the long run to succeed?

[Aug 18, 2020] Rules for thee but not for me: Pompeo denounces proposed Russian law that would require labeling of propaganda content

Notable quotes:
"... "This decree will impose new burdensome requirements that will further inhibit RFE/RL's and VOA's ability to operate within Russia," ..."
"... "vital sources of independent news and information for the people of Russia" ..."
"... "more than 70 years." ..."
"... "be consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States" ..."
"... "provide a surge capacity to support United States foreign policy objectives during crises abroad." ..."
"... "foreign agents" ..."
"... "feel like criminals, or believe that they are in danger when they watch or read our materials." ..."
"... "state-affiliated," ..."
Aug 18, 2020 | www.rt.com

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has voiced his opposition to a proposed Russian rule that would require labeling of propaganda content, saying it would burden "independent" information work by outlets such as Voice of America.

"This decree will impose new burdensome requirements that will further inhibit RFE/RL's and VOA's ability to operate within Russia," Pompeo said Monday, commenting on the draft rule published by the media regulator Roskomnadzor.

Pompeo called VOA and its sister outlet Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty "vital sources of independent news and information for the people of Russia" for "more than 70 years."

Far from independent, however, they were both established as US propaganda outlets at the dawn of the Cold War. They are fully funded by the government, and the charter of their parent organization – now known as US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) – mandates that they "be consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States" and "provide a surge capacity to support United States foreign policy objectives during crises abroad."

The 1948 law that established these outlets outright prohibited their content from being broadcast in the US itself, until the Obama administration amended it in 2013.

The proposed rule would require all content produced by designated "foreign agents" in the Russian Federation to be clearly labeled. When the draft of it was made public last month, acting RFE/RL president Daisy Sindelar protested that its purpose was to "intimidate" her audience and make them "feel like criminals, or believe that they are in danger when they watch or read our materials."

Yet the Russian regulation is the mirror image of the requirement imposed under the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) on RT, Sputnik and China Global Television Network (CTGN) since 2017, which only a handful of groups such as the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) condemned as an attack on free speech. The USAGM remained conspicuously silent even as the designated outlets were denied credentials to access government press conferences.

US-based social media companies have also bowed to political pressure and labeled Russian- and Chinese-based outlets as "state-affiliated," while refraining from using that descriptor for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), German outlet Deutsche Welle, the French AFP, Turkish TRT, or any of the USAGM outlets, once again showcasing the double standard.

jangosimba 10 August, 2020

He cheats, he lies, he murders, he steals.
Zogg jangosimba 11 August, 2020
That's a small part of CIA job description.
Harbin

William Johnson 1 hour ago

Mike reminds me that character from "Godfather" series, the old , dumb henchman ready to follow any order...

[Aug 16, 2020] CIA Behind Guccifer Russiagate A Plausible Scenario

Highly recommended!
Aug 16, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

If Zerohedge comment reflect general population sentiments this is clear sign of the crisis of legitimacy of neoliberal élite.

Via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

William Binney is the former technical director of the U.S. National Security Agency who worked at the agency for 30 years. He is a respected independent critic of how American intelligence services abuse their powers to illegally spy on private communications of U.S. citizens and around the globe.

Given his expert inside knowledge, it is worth paying attention to what Binney says.

In a media interview this week, he dismissed the so-called Russiagate scandal as a "fabrication" orchestrated by the American Central Intelligence Agency. Many other observers have come to the same conclusion about allegations that Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. elections with the objective of helping Donald Trump get elected.

But what is particularly valuable about Binney's judgment is that he cites technical analysis disproving the Russiagate narrative. That narrative remains dominant among U.S. intelligence officials, politicians and pundits, especially those affiliated with the Democrat party, as well as large sections of Western media. The premise of the narrative is the allegation that a Russian state-backed cyber operation hacked into the database and emails of the Democrat party back in 2016. The information perceived as damaging to presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was subsequently disseminated to the Wikileaks whistleblower site and other U.S. media outlets.

A mysterious cyber persona known as "Guccifer 2.0" claimed to be the alleged hacker. U.S. intelligence and news media have attributed Guccifer as a front for Russian cyber operations.

Notably, however, the Russian government has always categorically denied any involvement in alleged hacking or other interference in the 2016 U.S. election, or elections thereafter.

William Binney and other independent former U.S. intelligence experts say they can prove the Russiagate narrative is bogus. The proof relies on their forensic analysis of the data released by Guccifer. The analysis of timestamps demonstrates that the download of voluminous data could not have been physically possible based on known standard internet speeds. These independent experts conclude that the data from the Democrat party could not have been hacked, as Guccifer and Russiagaters claim. It could only have been obtained by a leak from inside the party, perhaps by a disgruntled staffer who downloaded the information on to a disc. That is the only feasible way such a huge amount of data could have been released. That means the "Russian hacker" claims are baseless.

Wikileaks, whose founder Julian Assange is currently imprisoned in Britain pending an extradition trial to the U.S. to face espionage charges, has consistently maintained that their source of files was not a hacker, nor did they collude with Russian intelligence. As a matter of principle, Wikileaks does not disclose the identity of its sources, but the organization has indicated it was an insider leak which provided the information on senior Democrat party corruption.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

William Binney says forensic analysis of the files released by Guccifer shows that the mystery hacker deliberately inserted digital "fingerprints" in order to give the impression that the files came from Russian sources. It is known from information later disclosed by former NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden that the CIA has a secretive program – Vault 7 – which is dedicated to false incrimination of cyber attacks to other actors. It seems that the purpose of Guccifer was to create the perception of a connection between Wikileaks and Russian intelligence in order to beef up the Russiagate narrative.

"So that suggested [to] us all the evidence was pointing back to CIA as the originator [of] Guccifer 2.0. And that Guccifer 2.0 was inside CIA I'm pointing to that group as the group that was probably the originator of Guccifer 2.0 and also this fabrication of the entire story of Russiagate," concludes Binney in his interview with Sputnik news outlet.

This is not the first time that the Russiagate yarn has been debunked . But it is crucially important to make Binney's expert views more widely appreciated especially as the U.S. presidential election looms on November 3. As that date approaches, U.S. intelligence and media seem to be intensifying claims about Russian interference and cyber operations. Such wild and unsubstantiated "reports" always refer to the alleged 2016 "hack" of the Democrat party by "Guccifer 2.0" as if it were indisputable evidence of Russian interference and the "original sin" of supposed Kremlin malign activity. The unsubstantiated 2016 "hack" is continually cited as the "precedent" and "provenance" of more recent "reports" that purport to claim Russian interference.

Given the torrent of Russiagate derivatives expected in this U.S. election cycle, which is damaging U.S.-Russia bilateral relations and recklessly winding up geopolitical tensions, it is thus of paramount importance to listen to the conclusions of honorable experts like William Binney.

The American public are being played by their own intelligence agencies and corporate media with covert agendas that are deeply anti-democratic.

me name=


lay_arrow desertboy , 13 hours ago

Well - who set up them up, converted from the OSS? The banksters.

"Wild Bill" Donovan worked for JP Morgan immediately after WWII.

"our" US intelligence agencies were set up by, and serve, the masters of high finance. Is this in dispute?

meditate_vigorously , 11 hours ago

They have seeded enough misinformation that apparently it is. But, you are correct. It is the Banksters.

Isisraelquaeda , 2 hours ago

Israel. The CIA was infiltrated by the Mossad long ago.

SurfingUSA , 15 hours ago

JFK was on to that truth, and would have been wise to mini-nuke Langley before his ill-fated journey to Dallas.

Andrew G , 11 hours ago

Except when there's something exceptionally evil (like pedo/blackmail rings such as Epstein), in which case it's Mossad / Aman

vova.2018 , 7 hours ago

Except when there's something exceptionally evil (like pedo/blackmail rings such as Epstein), in which case it's Mossad / Aman

The CIA & MOSSAD work hand in hand in all their clandestine operations. There is not doubt the CIA/MOSSAD are behind the creation, evolution, training, supplying weapons, logistic-planning & financing of the terrorists & the destruction of the Middle East. Anybody that believes the contrary has brain problems & need to have his head examined.

CIA/MOSAD has been running illegal activities in Colombia: drug, arms, organs & human (child-sex) trafficking. CIA/MOSAD is also giving training, logistic & arms to Colombia paramilitary for clandestine operation against Venezuela. After Bolsonaro became president, MOSSAD started running similar operation in Brazil. Israel & Brazil also recognizes Guaido as the legit president of Venezuela.

​​​​​​CIA/MOSSAD have a long time policy of assassinating & taking out pep who are a problem to the revisionist-zionist agenda, not just in the M-East but in the world. The CIA/MOSSAD organizations have many connections in other countries like the M-East, Saudi Arabia, UAE, et al but also to the UK-MI5.

The Israelis infiltrated the US to the highest levels a long time ago - Proof

  • Israel has & collects information (a database) of US citizens in coordination with the CIA & the 5 eyes.
  • Israel works with the NSA in the liaison-loophole operations
  • Mossad undercover operations in WDC & all over the world
  • The American Israel Public Affairs Committee – AIPAC
  • People with 2 citizenships (US/Israel) in WDC/NYC (the real Power)
  • From Steve Bannon a christian-zionist: Collusion between the Trump administration and Israel .
  • D-Trump, Ivanka Trump & husband Kushner (orthodox Juus)
  • Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell, members of the MOSSAD ran their entire pedo-honey-pot operation for the CIA/Mossad
  • CIA/MOSSA want to punish Iran for its role in Syria's victory over ISIS (created by CIA/Mossad) - PROOF: McCain Armed ISIS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziNlUuc167E

New book details Israel's secret history of assassinations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge-mnC2wGss

CIA Assassination Manual Revealed (CIA = Cover action agency)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3gQfoFCpPs

GreatUncle , 6 hours ago

Well I never expected anything different.

They have a hand in everything and probably the murder of JFK.

Hell the CIA have even had their own president.

They are supposed to be commanded by the president but personally I think they are a rogue operation controlled by somebody else.

Lyman54 , 16 hours ago

Millie Weavers documentary explains everything quite well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HFxVvrXjCg

sborovay07 , 15 hours ago

Funny how a number of the right wing conspiracy stories according to the MSM from a couple years back were true from the get go. 1 indictment over 4 years in the greatest attempted coup in this country's history. So sad that Binney and Assange were never listened to. They can try to silence us who know of the truth, but as Winston Churchill once said, 'Truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is.' KDP still censors my book on their advertising platform as it promotes conspiratorial theories (about the Obama led coup) and calls out BLM and Antifa for what they are (marxists) . Yet the same platform still recommends BLM books stating there is a pandemic of cops killing innocent blacks. F them!!!! #RIPSeth #FreeJulian #FreeMillie

smacker , 11 hours ago

Yes, and we all know the name of the DNC leaker who downloaded and provided WikiLeaks
with evidence of CIA and DNC corruption.
He was assassinated to prevent him from naming who Guccifer 2.0 was and where he is located.

The Russia-gate farce itself provides solid evidence that the CIA and others are in bed with DNC
and went to extraordinary lengths to prevent Trump being elected. When that failed, they instigated
a program of x-gates to get him out of office any way they could. This continues to this day.

This is treason at the highest level.

ACMeCorporations , 12 hours ago

Hacking? What Russian hacking?

In recently released testimony, the CEO of CrowdStrike admitted in congressional testimony, under oath, that it actually has no direct evidence Russia stole the DNC emails.

Nelbev , 9 hours ago

"The proof relies on their forensic analysis of the data released by Guccifer. The analysis of timestamps demonstrates that the download of voluminous data could not have been physically possible based on known standard internet speeds. ... a disgruntled staffer who downloaded the information on to a disc. That is the only feasible way such a huge amount of data could have been released. ... William Binney says forensic analysis of the files released by Guccifer shows that the mystery hacker deliberately inserted digital "fingerprints" in order to give the impression that the files came from Russian sources. ... "

Any computer file is a bunch of 1s and 0s. Anyone can change anything with a hex editor. E.g. I had wrong dates on some photographs once, downloaded as opposed to when taken, just edited the time stamp. You cannot claim any time stamp is original. If true time stamps, then the DNC files were downloaded to a thumb drive at a computer on location and not to the internet via a phone line. However anyone can change the time stamps. Stating a "mystery hacker deliberately inserted digital [Russian] 'fingerprints' " is a joke if denying the file time stamps were not tampered with. The real thing is where the narrative came from, political spin doctors, Perkins Coie law firm hired by DNC and Hillary campaign who hired Crowdstrike [and also hired Fusion GPS before for pissgate dossier propaganda and FISC warrants to spy on political opponents] and Perkins Coie edited Crowdstrike report with Russian narrative. FBI never looked at DNC servers. This is like your house was broken into. You deny police the ability to enter and look at evidence like DNC computers. You hire a private investigator to say your neighbor you do not like did it and publicise accusations. Take word of political consultants hired, spin doctor propaganda, Crowdstrike narrative , no police investigation. Atlantic Council?

Vivekwhu , 8 hours ago

The Atlantic Council is another NATO fart. Nuff said!

The_American , 15 hours ago

God Damn traitor Obama!

Yen Cross , 14 hours ago

TOTUS

For the youngsters.

Teleprompter Of The United States.

Leguran , 6 hours ago

The CIA has gotten away with so much criminal behavior and crimes against the American public that this is totally believable. Congress just lets this stuff happen and does nothing. Which is worse - Congress or the CIA?

Congress set up the system. It is mandated to perform oversight. And it just sits on its thumbs and wallows in it privileges.

This time Congress went further than ever before. It was behind and engaged in an attempted coup d'état.

Know thy enemy , 10 hours ago

Link to ShadowGate (ShadowNet) documentary - which answers the question, what is the keystone,,,,,

https://www.pscp.tv/Tore_says/1RDGlrYynRgxL

"Comey here, and Holder, while I get a rope for Lynch, and don't forget Brennan."

Kudo's to Millie

DontHateMeBecauseImABureaucrat , 9 hours ago

Neither google nor Apple will open the link. Or it's not there.

bringonthebigone , 8 hours ago

currently it is up here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HFxVvrXjCg

I Claudius , 5 hours ago

It's time for Assange and Wikileaks to name the person who they rec'd the info from. By hiding behind the "we don't name names" Mantra they are helping destroy America by polarizing its citizens. Name the damn person, get it all out there so the left can see that they've been played by their leaders. Let's cut this crap.

freedommusic , 7 hours ago

...all the evidence was pointing back to CIA as the originator [of] Guccifer 2.0.

Yep, I knew since day one. I remember seeing Hillary Clinton talking about Guccifer . As soon as uttered the name, I KNEW she with the CIA were the brainchild of this bogus decoy.

They copy. They mimic. These are NOT creative individuals.

Perhaps hell is too good a place for them.

on target , 4 hours ago

This is old news but worth bringing up again. The CIA never wanted Trump in, and of course, they want him out. Their fingerprints were all over Russiagate, The Kavanaugh hearings, Ukrainegate, and on and on. They are just trying to cover their asses for a string of illegal "irregularities" in their operations for years. Trump should never have tried to be a get along type of guy. He should have purged the entire leadership of the CIA on day one and the FBI on day 2. They can not be trusted with an "America First" agenda. They are all New World Order types who know whats best for everyone.

fersur , 7 hours ago

Boom, Boom, Boom !

Three Reseachable Tweets thru Facebook, I cut all at once, Unedited !

"#SusanRice has as much trouble with her memory as #HillaryClinton. Rice testified in writing that she 'does not recall' who gave her key #Benghazi talking points she used on TV, 'does not recall' being in any meetings regarding Benghazi in five days following the attack, and 'does not recall' communicating with anyone in Clinton's office about Benghazi," Tom Fitton in Breitbart.

"Adam Schiff secretly subpoenaed, without court authorization, the phone records of Rudy Giuliani and then published the phone records of innocent Americans, including @realDonaldTrump 's lawyers, a member of Congress, and a journalist," @TomFitton .

BREAKING: Judicial Watch announced today that former #Obama National Security Advisor and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, admitted in written responses given under oath that she emailed with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Clinton's non-government email account and that she received emails related to government business on her own personal email account.

STONEHILLADY , 7 hours ago

It's not just the Democrats, the warmongering neocons of the Republican party are also in on it, the Bush/Romney McCain/McConnell/Cheney and many more. It's called "Kick Backs" Ever notice these so called retired Generals all end up working for all these spying companies that span the 5eyes to Israel. It seems our POTUS has got his hands full swimming up stream to get this stopped and actually get rid of the CIA. It's the number 1 reason he doesn't trust these people, they all try to tell him stuff that is mis-directed.

Liars, leakers, and thieves are running not only our nation but the world, as George Carlin said, "It's a Big Club, and we ain't in it." If you fall for this false narrative of mail in voting and not actually go and vote on election day, you better start learning Chinese for surely Peelosi and Schumer will have their way and mess up this election so they can drag Trump out of office and possible do him and his family some serious harm, all because so many of you listen to the MSM and don't research their phony claims.

Max21c , 7 hours ago

It's called "Kick Backs" Ever notice these so called retired Generals all end up working for all these spying companies that span the 5eyes to Israel.

American Generals & Admirals are a lot more corrupt today than they were a few generations back. Many of them are outright evil people in today's times. Many of these people are just criminals that will steal anything they can get their banana republic klepto-paws on. They're nothing but common criminals and thieves. No different than the Waffen SS or any other group of brigands, bandits, and criminal gangsters.

Max21c , 7 hours ago

The CIA, FBI, NSA, Military Intelligence, Pentagon Gestapo, defense contractors are mixed up in a lot of crimes and criminal activities on American soil against American citizens and American civilians. They do not recognize borders or laws or rights of liberty or property rights or ownership or intellectual property. They're all thieves and criminals in the military secret police and secret police gangsters cabal.

BandGap , 7 hours ago

I have seen Binney's input. He is correct in my view because he scientifically/mathematically proves his point.

The blinded masses do not care about this approach, just like wearing masks.

The truth is too difficult for many to fit into their understanding of the world.

So they repeat what they have been told, never stopping to consider the facts or how circumstances have been manipulated.

It is frustrating to watch, difficult to navigate at times for me. Good people who will not stop and think of what the facts show them.

otschelnik , 8 hours ago

It could have been the CIA or it could have been one of the cut-outs for plausible deniability, and of all the usual suspects it was probably CrowdStrike.

- CGI / Global Strategy Group / Analysis Corp. - John Brennan (former CEO)

- Dynology, Wikistrat - General James L. Jones (former chairman of Atlantic Council, NSA under Obama)

- CrowdStrike - Dmitri Alperovich and Shawn Henry (former chief of cyber forensics FBI)

- Clearforce - Michael Hayden (former dir. NSA under Clinton, CIA under Bush) and Jim Jones Jr. (son Gnrl James Jones)

- McChrystal Group - Stanley McChrystal (former chief of special operations DOD)

fersur , 8 hours ago

Unedited !

The Brookings Institute – a Deep State Hub Connected to the Fake Russia Collusion and Ukraine Scandals Is Now Also Connected to China Spying In the US

The Brookings Institute was heavily involved in the Democrat and Deep State Russia collusion hoax and Ukraine impeachment fraud. These actions against President Trump were criminal.

This institute is influenced from foreign donations from entities who don't have an America first agenda. New reports connect the Institute to Chinese spying.

As we reported previously, Julie Kelly at American Greatness released a report where she addresses the connections between the Brookings Institute, Democrats and foreign entities. She summarized her report as follows: Accepting millions from a state sponsor of terrorism, foisting one of the biggest frauds in history on the American people, and acting as a laundering agent of sorts for Democratic political contributions disguised as policy grants isn't a good look for such an esteemed institution. One would be hard-pressed to name a more influential think tank than the Brookings Institution. The Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit routinely ranks at the top of the list of the best think tanks in the world; Brookings scholars produce a steady flow of reports, symposiums, and news releases that sway the conversation on any number of issues ranging from domestic and economic policy to foreign affairs.

​​ Brookings is home to lots of Beltway power players: Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen, former chairmen of the Federal Reserve, are Brookings fellows. Top officials from both Republican and Democrat presidential administrations lend political heft to the organization. From 2002 until 2017, the organization's president was Strobe Talbott. He's a longtime BFF of Bill Clinton; they met in the 1970s at Oxford University and have been tight ever since. Talbott was a top aide to both President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Kelly continued:

Brookings-based fellows working at Lawfare were the media's go-to legal "experts" to legitimize the concocted crime; the outlet manipulated much of the news coverage on collusion by pumping out primers and guidance on how to report collusion events from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's appointment to his final report.

Now, testimony related to a defamation lawsuit against Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous "dossier" on Donald Trump, has exposed his direct ties to Talbott in 2016 when he was still head of Brookings. Talbott and Steele were in communication before and after the presidential election; Steele wanted Talbott to circulate the dossier to his pals in John Kerry's State Department, which reportedly is what Talbott did . Steele also briefed top state department officials in October 2016 about his work.

But this isn't the only connection between the Brookings Institute and the Russia collusion and Ukrainian scandals. We were the first to report that the Primary Sub-Source (PSS) in the Steele report, the main individual who supplied Steele with bogus information in his report was Igor Danchenko.

In November 2019, the star witness for the Democrat Representative Adam Schiff's impeachment show trial was announced. Her name was Fiona Hill.

Today we've uncovered that Hill is a close associate of the Primary Sub-Source (PSS) for the Steele dossier – Igor Danchenko – the individual behind most all the lies in the Steele dossier. No wonder Hill saw the Steele dossier before it was released. Her associate created it.

Both Fiona Hill and Igor Danchenko are connected to the Brookings Institute.

They gave a presentation together as Brookings Institute representatives:

Kelly writes about the foreign funding the Brookings Institute partakes:

So who and what have been funding the anti-Trump political operation at Brookings over the past few years? The think tank's top benefactors are a predictable mix of family foundations, Fortune 100 corporations, and Big Tech billionaires. But one of the biggest contributors to Brookings' $100 million-plus annual budget is the Embassy of Qatar. According to financial reports, Qatar has donated more than $22 million to the think tank since 2004. In fact, Brookings operates a satellite center in Doha, the capital of Qatar. The wealthy Middle Eastern oil producer spends billions on American institutions such as universities and other think tanks.

Qatar also is a top state sponsor of terrorism, pouring billions into Hamas, al-Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood, to name a few. "The nation of Qatar, unfortunately, has historically been a funder of terrorism at a very high level," President Trump said in 2017. "We have to stop the funding of terrorism."

An email from a Qatari official, obtained by WikiLeaks, said the Brookings Institution was as important to the country as "an aircraft carrier."

Yesterday the Brookings Institute was connected to spying by Communist China in a post at the Washington Free Beacon :

Part 1 of 2

fersur , 8 hours ago

Part 2 of 2 !

The Brookings Institution, a prominent Washington, D.C., think tank, partnered with a Shanghai policy center that the FBI has described as a front for China's intelligence and spy recruitment operations, according to public records and federal court documents.

The Brookings Doha Center, the think tank's hub in Qatar, signed a memorandum of understanding with the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences in January 2018, the institution said . The academy is a policy center funded by the Shanghai municipal government that has raised flags within the FBI.

The partnership raises questions about potential Chinese espionage activities at the think tank, which employs numerous former government officials and nearly two dozen current foreign policy advisers to Joe Biden's presidential campaign.

It is really frightening that one of two major political parties in the US is tied so closely with the Brookings Institute. It is even more frightening that foreign enemies of the United States are connected to this entity as well.

Let it Go , 8 hours ago

One thing for sure is these guys have far to much of our money to spend promoting their own good.

fersur , 7 hours ago

Unedited !

Mueller Indictments Tied To "ShadowNet," Former Obama National Security Advisor and Obama's CIA Director – Not Trump

By Patrick Bergy, Cyber-Security, Veteran & Former DoD Contractor

December 18th, 2018

According to a report in the Daily Beast, which cited the Wall Street Journal's reporting of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into two companies, Wikistrat and Psy Group, "The firm's advisory council lists former CIA and National Security Agency director Michael Hayden, former national security adviser James L. Jones."

According to numerous reporting from major news outlets like the Wall Street Journal and Daily Beast, both Wikistrat and Psy Group represent themselves as being social media analysts and black PSYOP organizations. Both Wikistrat and Psy Group have foreign ownership mixed between Israeli, Saudi (Middle East) and Russian. Here is what the Wall Street Journal, The Daily Beast and pretty much everyone else out there doesn't know (or won't tell you).

The fact Obama's former National Security Advisor, General James Jones, and former Obama CIA director, Gen. Michael Hayden, are both on Wikistrat's advisory board may not seem suspicious, but both of these general's have another thing in common, and that is the ShadowNet. The ShadowNet, and its optional companion relational database, iPsy, were both originally developed by the small, family owned defense contracting company, Dynology. The family that owns Dynology; Gen. James Jones. I would add Paul Manafort and Rick Davis was Dynology's partner at the time we were making the ShadowNet and iPsy commercially available.

After obtaining the contract in Iraq to develop social media psychological warfare capabilities, known in military nomenclature as Interactive Internet Activities, or IIA, Gen. Jones kept the taxpayer funded application we developed in Iraq for the 4th Psychological Operation Group, and made it commercially available under the trademark of the "ShadowNet" and the optional black PSYOP component, "iPsy." If you think it is interesting that one of the companies under Mueller's indictment is named, "Psy" Group, I did as well. In fact, literally everything both publicly described in news reports, and even their websites, are exactly the same as the ShadowNet and iPsy I helped build, and literally named.

The only thing different I saw as far as services offered by Wikistrat, and that of Dynology and the ShadowNet, was described by The Daily Beast as, "It also engaged in intelligence collection." Although iPsy was a relational database that allowed for the dissemination of whatever the required narrative was, "intelligence collection" struck another bell with me, and that's a company named ClearForce.

ClearForce was developed as a solution to stopping classified leaks following the Edward Snowden debacle in 2013. Changes in NISPOM compliance requirements forced companies and government agencies that had employees with government clearances to take preventive measure to mitigate the potential of leaking. Although the NISPOM compliance requirement almost certainly would have been influenced by either Hayden, Jones or both, they once again sought to profit from it.

Using components of the ShadowNet and iPsy, the ClearForce application (which the company, ClearForce, was named after,) was developed to provide compliance to a regulation I strongly suspect you will find Jones and Hayden had a hand in creating. In fact, I strongly suspect you will find General Jones had some influence in the original requirement for our Iraq contract Dynology won to build the ShadowNet – at taxpayer expense! Dynology worked for several years incorporating other collection sources, such as financial, law enforcement and foreign travel, and ties them all into your social media activity. Their relationship with Facebook and other social media giants would have been nice questions for congress to have asked them when they testified.

Part 1 of 2 !

fersur , 7 hours ago

Part 2 of 2 !

The ClearForce application combines all of these sources together in real-time and uses artificial intelligence to predictively determine if you are likely to steal or leak based on the behavioral profile ClearForce creates of you. It can be used to determine if you get a job, and even if you lose a job because a computer read your social media, credit and other sources to determine you were likely to commit a crime. It's important for you to stop for a moment and think about the fact it is privately controlled by the former CIA director and Obama's National Security Advisor/NATO Supreme Allied Commander, should scare the heck out of you.

When the ClearForce application was complete, Dynology handed it off to ClearForce, the new company, and Michael Hayden joined the board of directors along with Gen. Jones and his son, Jim, as the president of ClearForce. Doesn't that kind of sound like "intelligence collection" described by the Daily Beast in Wikistrat's services?

To wrap this all up, Paul Manafort, Rick Davis, George Nader, Wikistrat and Psy Group are all directly connected to Mueller's social media influence and election interreference in the 2016 presidential election. In fact, I believe all are under indictment, computers seized, some already sentenced. All of these people under indictment by Mueller have one key thing in common, General James Jones's and Michael Hayden's social media black PSYOP tools; the ShadowNet, iPsy and ClearForce.

A recent meeting I had with Congressman Gus Bilirakis' chief of staff, Elizabeth Hittos, is confirmation that they are reviewing my DoD memorandum stating the work I did on the IIA information operation in Iraq, the Dynology marketing slicks for the ShadowNet and iPsy, along with a screenshot of Goggle's Way-Back Machine showing Paul Manafort's partnership with Dynology in 2007 and later. After presenting to her these facts and making clear I have much more information that requires the highest classification SCIF to discuss and requires being read-on to the program, Elizabeth contacted the office of Congressman Devin Nunez to request that I brief the intelligence committee on this critical information pertaining directly to the 2010 Ukrainian elections, Michael Brown riots, 2016 election interference and the "Russia collusion" hoax. All of that is on top of numerous questionable ethical and potentially illegal profits from DoD contracts while servings as NATO Commander and Obama's National Security Advisor.

We also need to know if the ShadowNet and iPsy were allowed to fall into foreign hands, including Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel. I'm pretty sure South America is going to have a few questions for Jones and Obama as well? Stay tuned!

Balance-Sheet , 4 hours ago

Intelligence Agencies of all countries endlessly wage war at all times especially 'Information Warfare' (propaganda/disinformation) and the primary target has always and will always be the domestic population of the Intelligence Agency's country.

Yes, of course the CIA does target ALL other countries but the primary target will always be the Americans themselves.

Balance-Sheet , 4 hours ago

Intelligence Agencies of all countries endlessly wage war at all times especially 'Information Warfare' (propaganda/disinformation) and the primary target has always and will always be the domestic population of the Intelligence Agency's country.

Yes, of course the CIA does target ALL other countries but the primary target will always be the Americans themselves.

Paralentor , 5 hours ago

A lot more detail can be found here:

https://banned.video/watch?id=5f37fcc2df77c4044ee2eb03

SHADOW GATE – FULL FILM

462,864 views

yerfej , 8 hours ago

The neoliberals own the media, courts, academia, and BUREAUCRACY (including CIA) and they will do anything to make sure they retain power over everyone. These control freaks work hard to create all sorts of enemies to justify their existence.

LaugherNYC , 15 hours ago

It is sad that this information has to be repeatedly published, over and over and over, by SCI and other Russian. outlets.

Because no legit AMERICAN news outlet will give Binney or Assange the time of day or any credence, this all becomes Kremlin-sponsored disinformation and denials. People roll their eyes and say "Oh God, not the whole 'Seth Rich was murdered by the CIA' crap again!! You know, his FAMILY has asked that people stop spreading these conspiracy theories and lies."

SCI is a garbage bin, nothing more than a dizinformatz machine for Putin, but in this case, they are likely right. It seems preposterous that the "best hackers in the world" would forget to use a VPN or leave a signature behind, and it makes far more sense that the emails were leaked by someone irate at the abuses of the DNC - the squashing of Bernie, the cheating for Hillary in the debates - behavior we saw repeated in 2020 with Bernie shoved aside again for the pathetic Biden.

Would that SOMEONE in the US who is not on the Kremlin payroll would pick up this thread. But all the "investigative journalists" now work indirectly for the DNC, and those that don't are cancelled by the left.

Stone_d_agehurler , 15 hours ago

I am Guccifer and I approve this message.

Sarc/

But i do share your opinion. They are likely right this time and most of the pundits and media in the U. S. know it. That's what makes this a sad story about how rotten the U. S. system has become.

Democrats will sacrifice the Union for getting Trump out of office.

If elections in Nov won't go their way, Civil War II might become a real thing in 2021.

PeterLong , 4 hours ago

If " digital "fingerprints" in order to give the impression that the files came from Russian sources" were inserted in the leak by "Guccifer", and if the leak to wikileaks came from Seth Rich, via whatever avenue, then the "Guccifer" release came after the wikileaks release, or after wikileaks had the files, and was a reaction to same attempting to diminish their importance/accuracy and cast doubt on Trump. Could CIA and/or DNC have known the files were obtained by wikileaks before wikileaks actually released them? In any case collusion of CIA with DNC seems to be a given.

RightlyIndignent , 4 hours ago

Because Seth had already given it to Wikileaks. There is no 'Fancy Bear'. There is no 'Cozy Bear'. Those were made up by CrowdStrike, and they tried the same crap on Ukraine, and Ukraine told them to pound sand. When push came to shove, and CrowdStrike was forced to say what they really had under oath, they said: "We have nothing."

novictim , 4 hours ago

You are leaving out Crowd Strike. Seth Rich was tasked by people at the DNC to copy data off the servers. He made a backup copy and gave a copy to people who then got it to Wiki leaks. He used highspeed file transfers to local drives to do his task.

Meanwhile, it was the Ukrainian company Crowd Strike that claimed the data was stolen over the internet and that the thieves were in Russia. That 'proof" was never verified by US Intelligence but was taken on its word as being true despite crowd strike falsifying Russian hacks and being caught for it in the past.

Joebloinvestor , 5 hours ago

The "five eyes" are convinced they run the world and try to.

That is what Brennan counted on for these agencies to help get President Trump.

As I said, it is time for the UK and the US to have a serious conversation about their current and ex-spies being involved in US elections.

Southern_Boy , 5 hours ago

It wasn't the CIA. It was John Brennan and Clapper. The CIA, NSA FBI, DOJ and the Ukrainian Intelligence Service just went along working together and followed orders from Brennan who got them from Hillary and Obama.

Oh, and don't forget the GOP Globalist RINOs who also participated in the coup attempt: McCain, Romney, Kasich, Boehner, Lee and Richard Burr.

With Kasich now performing as a puppy dog for Biden at the Democrat Convention as a Democrat DNC executive, the re-alignment is almost complete: Globalist Nationalist Socialist Bolshevism versus American Populism, i.e. Elites versus Deplorables or Academics versus Smelly Wal-Mart people.

on target , 5 hours ago

No way. CIA up to their eyeballs in this as well as the State Department. Impossible for Russiagate or Ukrainegate without direct CIA and State involvement.

RightlyIndignent , 4 hours ago

Following Orders? How did that argument go at Nuremberg? (hint: not very well)

LeadPipeDreams , 6 hours ago

LOL - the CIA's main mission - despite their "official" charter, has always been to destabilize the US and its citizens via psyops, false flags, etc.

Covid-1984 is their latest and it appears most successful project yet.

Iconoclast27 , 5 hours ago

The CIA received a $200 million initial investment from the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations when it was first established, that should tell you everything you need to know how who they truly work for.

A_Huxley , 6 hours ago

CIA, MI6, 5 eye nations.

All wanted to sway the USA their own way.

Let it Go , 8 hours ago

Almost as frightening as the concentrated power held by companies such as Facebook and Google is the fact Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and the world's richest man, is the person who owns and controls the Washington Post. It is silly to think Jeff Bezos purchased the Washington Post in 2013 because he expected newspapers to make a lucrative resurgence.

It is more likely he purchased the long-trusted U.S. newspaper for the power it would ensure him in Washington when wielded as a propaganda mouthpiece to extend his ability to both shape and control public opinion. More on this subject in the article below.

https://Amazon, Jeff Bezos, And The Influential Washington Post_31.html

avoiceofliberty , 16 hours ago

The amazing thing about Binney's forensic analysis is that it has been around since 2018 .

It's also been clear since 2017 the hack of the DNC computers didn't hold up under scrutiny .

How it is the Democrats, the Deep State, and the legacy media are still able to cling to the remnants of these long discredited narratives is a mystery.

avoiceofliberty , 6 hours ago

At the official level, you have a point.

However, even before Mueller was appointed, a review of the materials in the extant public record of both the DNC "hack" and the history of Crowdstrike showed the narrative simply did not make sense. A detailed investigation of materials not made public was not necessary to shoot down the entire narrative.

Indeed, one of the great scandals of the Mueller probe is the way it did not bring prudential skepticism to the question of the DNC "hack". When building a case, either for public debate or for public trial, a dose of skepticism is healthy; it leads to a careful vetting of facts and reasoning.

Alice-the-dog , 6 hours ago

The CIA has been an agency wholly independent of the US government almost since its inception. It is not under any significant control by the government, and has its own agenda which may occasionally coincide with that of the government, but only coincidentally. It has its own view of how the world should look, and will not balk at any means necessary to achieve such. Including the murder of dis-favorable members of government.

snodgrass , 6 hours ago

It's the CIA and the FBI, Obama and people in his administration who cooked up Russiagate.

Floki_Ragnarsson , 7 hours ago

The CIA whacked JFK because he was going to slow the roll to Vietnam AND disband the CIA and reform it.

It is broken and needs to be disbanded and reformed along lines that actually WORK! The CIA missed the fall of the USSR, 9/11, etc. HTF does THAT happen?

DeportThemAll , 6 hours ago

The CIA didn't "miss" 9/11... they participated in it.

Let it Go , 8 hours ago

The CIA is a tool that when improperly used can do great damage.

Anyone who doesn't believe that countries use psychological warfare and propaganda to sway the opinions of people both in and outside of their country should be considered naive. Too many people America is more than a little hypocritical when they criticize other countries for trying to gain influence considering our history of meddling in the affairs of other countries.

Americans have every reason to be concerned and worried considering revelations of just how big the government intelligence agencies have grown since 9-11 and how unlimited their spying and surveillance operations have become. The article below explores this growth and questions whether we have lost control.

http://Psychological Warfare And Propaganda Out Of Control.html

tion , 16 hours ago

The idea of Binney and Jason Sullivan privately working to 'secure the vote' is something that I actually consider to be very eyebrow raising and alarming.

Son of Captain Nemo , 8 hours ago

Bill Binney under "B" in the only "yellow pages" that show a conscience and a soul!...

https://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/#/General/B/williambinneysevernMDUS

fliebinite , 9 hours ago

This is the dumbest article ever. Russiagate is a total fabrication of the FBI as per Clinesmith, CIA provided information that would have nipped it at the bud. Read the real news.

bringonthebigone , 9 hours ago

Wrong. this article is one small piece of the puzzle. Clinesmith is one small piece of the puzzle. The Flynn entrapment is one small piece of the puzzle. The Halper entrapment was one small piece of the puzzle.

Because Clinesmith at the FBI covered up the information saying Page was a CIA source does not mean it was a total FBI fabrication and does not mean the CIA was not involved and does not mean the DNC server hack is irrelevant.

Milley Weaver gets close in her recent video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HFxVvrXjCg

Sundance does a better job pulling it all together.

PKKA , 14 hours ago

Relations have already soured between Russia and the United States, and sanctions have been announced. Tensions have grown on the NATO-Russia border. The meat has already been rolled into the minced meat and it will not be possible to roll the minced meat back into the meat. The CIA got it. But the Russian people now absolutely understand that the United States will always be the enemy of Russia, no matter whether socialist or capitalist. But I like it even more than the feigned hypocritical "friendship". Russia has never reached such heights as during the good old Cold War. All Russians have a huge incentive, long live the new Cold War!

smacker , 12 hours ago

More and more people have worked out that the fabricated tensions between the US and Russia
and US and China have little to do with those two countries posing any sort of threat to world peace.

It is all about the US trying to remain in No.1 position as uni-polar top dog via the Anglo American Empire.
We see examples of this every day in the M/E, South China Sea, Taiwan, Libya all over Eastern Europe,
Ukraine, Iran and now Belaruse. HK was added along the way.

Both Russia and China openly want a multi-polar world order. But the US will never accept that.

Hence the prospect of war. The only unknown today is what and where the trigger will be.

smacker , 12 hours ago

More and more people have worked out that the fabricated tensions between the US and Russia
and US and China have little to do with those two countries posing any sort of threat to world peace.

It is all about the US trying to remain in No.1 position as uni-polar top dog via the Anglo American Empire.
We see examples of this every day in the M/E, South China Sea, Taiwan, Libya all over Eastern Europe,
Ukraine, Iran and now Belaruse. HK was added along the way.

Both Russia and China openly want a multi-polar world order. But the US will never accept that.

Hence the prospect of war. The only unknown today is what and where the trigger will be.

hang_the_banksters , 31 minutes ago

the best proof thAt Guccifer 2 was CIA hacking themselves to frame Wikileaks is this:

Guccifer has not yet been identified, indicted and arrested.

you'd think CIAFBINSA would be turning over every stone to the ends of the earth to bust Guccifer. we just had to endure 4 years of hysterical propaganda that Russia had hacked our election and that Trump was their secret agent. so Guccifer should be the Most Wanted Man on the planet. meanwhile, it's crickets from FBI. they arent even looking for him. because Guccifer is over at Langley. maybe someone outta ask Brennan where G2 is now.

remember when DOJ indicted all those GRU cybersoldiers? the evidence listed in the indictment was so stunning that i dont believe it. NSA so thoroughly hacked back into GRU that NSA was watching GRU through their own webcams and recording them doing Google searches to translate words which were written in Guccifer's blog posts about the DNC email leaks. NSA and DOJ must think we are all stupid, that we will believe NSA is so powerful to do that, yet they cant identify Guccifer.

i say i dont believe that for a second because no way Russian GRU are so stupid to even have webcams on the computers they use to hack, and it is absurd to think GRU soldiers on a Russian military base would be using Google instead of Yandex to translate words into English.

lay_arrow
ConanTheContrarian1 , 1 hour ago

As a confirmed conspiracy theorist since I came back from 'Nam, here's mine: The European nobility recognized with the American and French revolutions that they needed a better approach. They borrowed from the Tudors (who had to deal with Parliament) and began to rule by controlling the facade of representative government. This was enhanced by funding banks to control through currency, as well as blackmail and murder, and morphed into a complete propaganda machine like no other in history. The CIA, MI6 and Mossad, the mainstream media, deep plants in bureaucracy and "democratic" bodies all obey their dictates to create narratives that control our minds. Trump seems to offer hope, but remember, he could be their latest narrative.

greatdisconformity , 1 hour ago

A Democracy cannot function on a higher level than the general electorate.

The intelligence and education of the general electorate has been sliding for generations, because both political parties can play this to their advantage.

It is no accident that most of the messages coming from politicians are targeted to imbeciles.

[Aug 13, 2020] Trump Names Neocon Regime Changer as Iran Envoy

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
Aug 13, 2020 | www.antiwar.com

With Elliott Abrams at the helm, the president found a way to make his Tehran policy even worse

Daniel Larison Posted on August 7, 2020 From The American Conservative :

The New York Times reports on the resignation of Brian Hook, who will be replaced by none other than Elliott Abrams:

Mr. Hook will be succeeded by Elliott Abrams, a conservative foreign policy veteran and Iran hard-liner who is currently the State Department's special representative for Venezuela.

As the administration's special envoy, Hook had no success in gaining support from other governments for the "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran. His brief stint as a negotiator with our European allies yielded nothing, and when he was trying to negotiate with them Trump famously had no idea who he was . He mostly served as one of the administration's leading propagandists .

He was responsible for lies about Yemen, cringe-inducing video messages , promoting the administration's weird fixation with Cyrus the Great , and embarrassing historical revisionism about the 1953 coup. When he wasn't trying to bribe ships' captains to steal Iranian cargo, he was insulting our intelligence with phony claims of wanting to normalize relations with Tehran.

Last year he came under fire from the State Department's Inspector General for his role in the mistreatment of Sahar Nowrouzzadeh , who was the target of political retaliation at the department on account of her support for the JCPOA and at least partly because of her Iranian heritage.

Hook is described in the Times ' report as a "survivor," but they neglect to mention that the reason he has survived so long in the Trump administration is his cowardice .

Perhaps the most bizarre thing about the coverage of Hook·s resignation is that it is framed as somehow undermining the chances of diplomacy with Iran.

[Aug 13, 2020] Today, Washington is saturated with China hawks. Unfortunately, andy voices that champion keeping America strong by avoiding conflict with China are reflexively smeared as "appeasement."

Aug 13, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

America's actions have already caused Beijing and Moscow to put aside historic enmity and increase its partnership on economic issues and increasingly frequent joint military drills . China and Iran recently completed the basics of an energy and military cooperation agreement. Moreover, President Xi Jinping has become increasingly effective at deepening ties with European, African, and Latin American states.

Today, Washington is saturated with China hawks. Unfortunately, andy voices that champion keeping America strong by avoiding conflict with China are reflexively smeared as "appeasement." I fear America may one day find out to its harm that rejecting sober diplomatic engagement, which could have extended its security and prosperity well into the future, was dismissed in favor of an unnecessary military-first tactic of coercing China.

Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army who retired in 2015 after twenty-one years, including four combat deployments. Follow him @DanielLDavis1.

[Aug 12, 2020] New notes will show FBI lied to Congress about Steele dossier

From MoA : "Russiagate, the deep state campaign to disenfranchise President Donald Trump, is further unraveling. The Spies Who Hijacked America is a first-person account that convincingly documents an MI6-linked conspiracy by former director Richard Dearlove, former agent Christopher Steele and FBI informant Stefan Halper to frame Carter Page that led to the FBI launching of "Crossfire Hurricane". The long read is very interesting but it still does not account for who or what instigated the British spies into launching their campaign against Trump. My hunch is that then CIA director John Brennan was the central person behind it."
Notable quotes:
"... Sunday Morning Futures ..."
Aug 12, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"A top Republican defended his committee releasing the declassified FBI interview with a top source for British ex-spy Christopher Steele and said a forthcoming document would show the bureau misled Congress about the reliability of his anti-Trump dossier.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, criticized the former MI6 agent, said Steele's dossier was compromised by Russian disinformation, and argued newly public FBI notes from a January 2017 discussion with Steele's "primary subsource" demonstrated the FBI knew the dossier was unreliable but continued to use it anyway. During his interview with Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures on Fox News, he also previewed new bureau records to be released in the upcoming week he said would show the FBI misled not just the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about the Steele dossier, but also lawmakers.

"We also now have found, and this will come out next week, that Congress got suspicious about the Russian subsource and reliability of the Steele Dossier, and that members of Congress asked to be briefed about it," Graham said. "Here is what I think I'm going to be able to show to the public: not only did the FBI lie to the court about the reliability about the Steele dossier, they also lied to the Congress. And that is a separate crime. "" Washington Examiner

-------------

The first thing to do is fire Christopher Wray, the present Director of the FBI, for malfeasance and neglect of duty in this whole matter.

The second thing to do is to seriously consider dissolution of the FBI and its replacement with a new federal police force severely limited to criminal investigations of violations of federal law.

There should also be a separate domestic internal security investigative body modeled on the UK's MI-5 (the Security Service). Whether or not such a service should have the power of arrest is an open question. If arrests become necessary after their investigations the agents of some other federal police force could be used to make them after examination of the security service's case.

The rest of the USIC should be examined with an eye to re-organization in light of the partisan role they played in the 2016 election.

pl

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/lindsey-graham-new-notes-will-show-fbi-lied-to-congress-about-steele-dossier

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_A._Wray

blue peacock , 09 August 2020 at 11:16 AM

Col. Lang

How can any of the law enforcement and IC be re-organized when everyone in DC from the politicians in both parties to the media and the top honchos in government are all part of the same social and professional circle? They just keep rotating around.

Elliott Abrams epitomizes this. He's a convicted felon in the Iran-Contra affair in the Reagan administration. Get's pardoned by Bush pere. Pushed hard for the disastrous Iraq invasion in the George W. Bush administration. Then in charge of the Venezuela coup attempt in the Trump administration. Fails at that. And then now gets appointed to head the Iran desk to create more trouble.

DC is incestuous and corrupt beyond redemption.

As far is Wray is concerned why hasn't he been fired sometime back? Why did Trump hire him and Rosenstein in the first place?

Jack , 09 August 2020 at 12:40 PM
@LindseyGrahamSC saying today the 2018 SSCI had doubts about Steele's primary sub source, and pointing fingers at the 2018 FBI for misinformation, carries an identical motive to Sally Yates testimony last week.

It's all CYA in DC Central. Graham protecting SSCI.

https://twitter.com/thelastrefuge2/status/1292483937508429825?s=21

It appears the Republicans in the Senate were in on the Russia Collusion hoax and now throwing the FBI under the bus. DC is a cesspool of corruption. Only voters can reform this club by voting both parties out.

Jack , 09 August 2020 at 12:54 PM
Writing on Substack, Steven Schrage for the first time tells the story of how he worked alongside "FBI Informant" Stefan Halper at Cambridge during the "Russiagate" period:

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1292470973569146882?s=21

We are nearly at the end of Trump's term yet his administration hasn't provided a full accounting of the election interference and framing of Trump and some of his team by the previous Obama administration and his own administration.

Jim , 09 August 2020 at 01:26 PM

Sen. Graham thinks [or at least says] Russia hacked the Democrats; and thinks [or at least says] Igor Dancheko represent "Russian disinformation."

"The sub-source [Danchenko] was a senior Russian researcher at the Brookings Institution and an employee of Christopher Steele living in the United States. He calls up a bunch of people in Russia. Who do you think this information came from? It came from the Russian intelligence service. They played this guy like a fiddle," Graham has recently said.

Unctuous Graham himself continues maliciously to spread lies.

The first words out of his mouth at last week's hearing with the unctuous Sally Yates was Russia hacked the Democrats.

In other words, he was pretending -- and in his thus lying, creating a "predicate" for all of the Russia Hoax nonsense that continues and which he helps to continue, by lying.

So is this liar going to get to the bottom of it, or instead create and continue to create alternate reality from which more propaganda be disseminated and spun onto American public?

He, and those pushing these lies, our congressional leaders -- and think we are not aware of their vile and moral turpitude.

Not only did the FBI and Sally Yates and Rosenstein lie to the court about the reliability about the Steele dossier.

And not only does Graham continue to lie to the American people.

Who is assisting Graham to run his ongoing and continuing cover up?

The FBI? The DOJ? The CIA? Senator Warner? etc. . . .

Why does the Senate list Mark Warner, a Democrat, as "Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee"?

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/

Of 24 US Senate committees, 3 list a Democrat as vice chair; the rest list a ranking member. Why is this?

https://www.senate.gov/committees/

When the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was formed in 1976, via Senate Resolution 400 of the 94th Congress, this is what they decided:

[[[(b) At the beginning of each Congress, the Majority Leader of the Senate shall select a chairman of the select Committee and the Minority Leader shall select a vice chairman for the select Committee. The vice chairman shall act in the place and stead of the chairman in the absence of the chairman. Neither the chairman nor the vice chairman of the select committee shall at the same time serve as chairman or ranking minority member of any other committee]]]

https://www.senate.gov/general/resources/pdf/authority_and_rules_of_senate_committees.pdf

PS
Fire Wray, dissolve FBI, excellent suggestions.

In its place, a new federal police force severely limited to criminal investigations of violations of federal law, also a step in the right direction.

Should the nation's federal police chief report to the AG directly, or directly to the president?

Should this job be subject to advise and consent of senate, or, as is case with National Security Advisor, not subject to advise and consent of senate?

And feel free to criticize, but someone like . . . Attorney Michael Bernard Mukasey, former federal judge and 81st Attorney General of the United States --- he, be named acting FBI, right now, forthwith?
-30-

Jack , 09 August 2020 at 01:29 PM

Sir

It appears that SSCI with Burr and Warner are in on the coup attempt. They likely had Wolfe leak the Carter Page FISA application which was marked by a FBI special agent to his squeeze who took it with her to the NY Times. Mueller then takes over that investigation and buries it including lying to FISC. Wolfe gets away with a slap on the wrist. They are all implicated in the coup attempt - Republicans & Democrats in Congress, the FBI, DOJ, DNI, CIA, Obama, Biden, the media!

In a functioning constitutional republic this would be considered outrageous no matter one's opinion of Trump. The fact that the Trump administration itself is playing a huge role in obfuscating this subversion of the constitution by those entrusted to protect and defend it is telling. I'm old and my creator beckons. It pains me to no end what legacy we are leaving behind to our grandchildren and their children. My grandpa would be so dismayed!

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/08/08/the-truth-doesnt-care-about-your-feelings-the-big-ugly/

nbsp; turcopolier , 09 August 2020 at 02:53 PM

jim

I would certainly support Mukasy's nomination.

nbsp; Fred , 09 August 2020 at 03:54 PM

The leaders and/or senior staff, of the SSCI new all along. Why did the SSCI leadership (Senators Burr, Warner and Feinstein) ask the judge to go easy on SSCI Security Director James Wolfe when he was sentenced for lying to the FBI?
https://fas.org/irp/congress/2018_cr/ssci-wolfe.pdf
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-us-senate-employee-sentenced-prison-term-false-statements-charge

Who compromised this trio of senior senate leadership? Feinstein had a Chinese spy on her staff for a decade, apparently oblivious to that the whole time. Of course Russia is all we hear about, then and now.

nbsp; ex PFC Chuck , 09 August 2020 at 04:04 PM

Jack,
Just to clarify, the link you posted above is about Steven Schrage, not by him. It was written by Matt Taibbi at his personal internet perch. I agree it's definitely worth the time to read.

Rick Merlotti , 09 August 2020 at 04:15 PM

Jack

I was about to link the Tiabbi material when I saw your post. This is a must read. It ties up some loose threads on russiagate/obamagate.

walrus , 09 August 2020 at 04:41 PM

Col. Lang,

The FBI is indeed fighting for its survival, as I suspect are elements of the DOJ and other elements of the I C . If Trump is re elected, he will have a mandate for reform, that is why they will stop at nothing to prevent it.

I think, as someone else here at SST has suggested, the swamp is going to use the 20th Amendment to install Pelosi or similar. The chosen vehicle will be corruption of a mail in ballot process. As my first boss told me as we watche ounance manager being marched away by the police: "when someone is going to steal from you, the first thing they do is mess up the paperwork". That maxim proved true a number of times in my career.

sbin , 09 August 2020 at 05:32 PM

DC District of Corruption is beyond redemption.
The 17 "intelligence" agencies are rotten to the core as well.
I love my country but have a growing dislike of my federal government.
More like feral government.
Doubt the newly found corona super powers are going away anytime soon.

Grandparents were Irish immigrants.Learned early to keep a well stocked cellar and as much savings as possible.
Hard times are coming.

blue peacock , 09 August 2020 at 06:01 PM

Jack

It seems that Steven Schrage coming forward NOW with a recording of Halper stating that Flynn's gonna be f*ked 2 days before the leak to David Ignatius is a new shiny object to distract. Similar to Ms. Lindsey's faux outrage NOW that the FBI lied to SSCI. Of course he knew and so did Burr & Warner back in 2018. They kept quiet all this time. The big question is what did Senators Burr & Warner know and when and what role did they play in the coverup? And of course the same goes for Ms. Lindsey and the rest of the coterie in Congress?

Col. Lang,

What do your expert senses detect when both Rosenstein & Sally Yates have the best Captain Renault impersonation? They knew nuttin!! They just sign FISA applications and keep seats warm.

TV , 09 August 2020 at 08:19 PM

For years,the Feebs have been flat-footed keystone cops in the counterintelligence area.
Want more evidence?
Peter Strzok - a mediocrity with no sense of op security rose to number 2 in the FBI CI division.
Look at the bumbling mess these dolts made out of their attempted "coup."
Spy catching is not police work;it's "intelligence" work.

Oilman2 , 09 August 2020 at 08:38 PM

"The rest of the USIC should be examined with an eye to re-organization in light of the partisan role they played in the 2016 election."

Isn't this exactly what Gen. Flynn was about to do? Audit the IC?

nbsp; turcopolier , 09 August 2020 at 08:56 PM

blue peacock

These are partisan scum in spite of Ms Yates beautiful manners and voicings.

JerseyJeffersonian , 09 August 2020 at 09:32 PM

Col. Lang,

I think that what other posters may be seeing and commenting upon is trenchently conveyed in this quote from Carroll Quigley's Tragedy and Hope:


"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy."


This understanding adequately accounts for the behavior of The Borg toward President Trump's stated aims, and the defenestration of General Flynn. They don't want anything to change, and will go to any lengths to prevent it from happening. I guess we'll have to see if this will, indeed, be how it plays out. In my heart of hearts I certainly hope not.

blue peacock , 10 August 2020 at 12:33 AM

Fred

Wolfe was only indicted for lying to the FBI. He was never indicted for the big stuff of leaking the classified Carter Page FISA application provided by the FBI to SSCI to his "mistress" Ali Watkins. She moved to the NY Times and then began writing exposes that sold a certain now proven false narrative.

Was Wolfe ordered to leak it by Burr & Warner? Why was the leak investigation taken over by Mueller? What role did SSCI have in the coverup? What was Warner doing as some of his text messages to Steele's attorney Adam Waldman was released by Mueller?

Was SSCI a co-conspirator in the framing of a duly elected President?

Dan , 10 August 2020 at 02:13 PM

"Just to clarify, the link you posted above is about Steven Schrage, not by him"

Hi Ex-PFC Chuck - the piece was definitely written by Schrage. Its a first-person account of his work under Halper, with a ton of observations about his character and past.

For what its worth I sensed a little bit of CYA in the piece, like Schrage is trying to cleave himself from the rest of the group. His account of how and why Carter Page got to his symposium doesn't really add up - did he make a similar effort to get a member of the Clinton campaign? Appears not.

james , 10 August 2020 at 03:36 PM

here is an article that moa shared today very relevant to this thread and topic...

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-spies-who-hijacked-america

title - The Spies Who Hijacked America
As a doctoral candidate at Cambridge working under "FBI Informant" Stefan Halper, I had a front-row seat for Russiagate

nbsp; Fred , 10 August 2020 at 08:40 PM

Blue Peacock,

"Was SSCI a co-conspirator in the framing of a duly elected President?"

Good questions. I would go back a couple decades and see how much money in donations those members got from people who could have corrupted them, such as Jeffery Epstein and those connected to him, and see if they have any other foreign financial entanglements.

[Aug 12, 2020] Have to wonder at the re-emergence of Russiagate. Seems a major reason for its emergence is to shame voters into voting for Biden

Aug 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Erelis , Aug 10 2020 19:51 utc | 28

Have to wonder at the re-emergence of Russiagate. Seems a major reason for its emergence is to shame voters into voting for Biden. If you do not vote for Biden, you are Putin's useful idiot. In particular aimed at African Americans. Recently a NYT reporter claimed that it was Russian mean tweets, etc that caused a very dramatic drop in African American turn out in 2016. See screen shot by Aron Mate as the NYT reporter deleted the tweets.

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1292637512813481984/photo/1

Looks like the DNC may be very nervous about Black turnout after Biden's many racial gaffes. Imagine Black turnout if he chooses Susan Rice as his VP. The DNC may have to go to Putin to ask for his help.


librul , Aug 10 2020 20:50 utc | 35

Spawn of the Dossier

Were you aware that the Steele dossier had a significant other?

"Rep Devin Nunes:

"You may remember that the State Department was involved and there were additional
dossiers that weren't the Steele dossier- except that they mirrored the Steele dossier.
And we think there is a connection between the [former] president of Brookings
and those dossiers that were given to the State Department."
"
...
Also from article:

"
The "additional dossiers that weren't the Steele dossier" addressed by Nunes
is a reference to a lesser known dodgy dossier produced by Brookings-affiliated
journalist Cody Shearer (brother-in-law of Strobe Talbott) which was crafted
explicitly to validate the wildly unsupported claims found in Steele's dossier.
"

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/08/10/the-brookings-hand-behind-russiagate-points-back-to-rhodes-trust-coup-on-america/

Jackrabbit , Aug 10 2020 21:03 utc | 38

I know it sounds wacky to those of you who still put some store in MSM nonsense, but I still believe that what we know as "Russiagate" was a carefully planned operation to:

  1. initiate a new anti-Russia McCarthyism -
    after Trump's election, MSM repeated Russigate accusations about Russian meddling every night for months;
  2. elect MAGA Nationalist (Trump, not Hillary!) -

    as Kissinger had called for in his Aug 2014 WSJ Op-Ed;

  3. discredit Wikileaks/Assange;
  4. lead to a vindictive settling of scores with Assange, Flynn, Manafort.

Also: It's likely that Skripal was the true "primary sub-source" and that he was drugged because he planned to flee back to Russia because he realised that he knew too much. He knew that the "dirty dossier" was meant to be untrue and easily debunked. It would never actually tarnish Trump - only Russia. Not surprisingly, Trump's MAGA Nationalism has been strengthened by Russiagate allegations while the anti-Russia sentiment remains.

!!

[Aug 12, 2020] Interview with Hassan Nasrallah providing insight into his tactical and strategic thinking processes w.r.t the conflict with Israel

Aug 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Arch Bungle , Aug 11 2020 15:52 utc | 88

Incredible interview with Hassan Nasrallah ("The Old Man of The Mountain" as I think of him) providing insight into his tactical and strategic thinking processes w.r.t the conflict with Israel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_xJ1jb3r74

Probably excellent material for textbooks on asymmetric warfare ...

[Aug 09, 2020] NYT as an amplifier for the mislabeled US 'Intelligence' Agencies rumor and baseless claims about foreign interferences in US elections

The first and the most important fact that there will no elections in November -- both candidates represent the same oligarchy, just slightly different factions of it.
Look like NYT is controlled by Bolton faction of CIA. They really want to overturn the results of 2020 elections and using Russia as a bogeyman is a perfect opportunity to achieve this goal.
Neocons understand very well that it is MIC who better their bread, so amplifying rumors the simplify getting additional budget money for intelligence agencies (which are a part of MIC) is always the most desirable goal.
Notable quotes:
"... But a new assessment says China would prefer to see the president defeated, though it is not clear Beijing is doing much to meddle in the 2020 campaign to help Joseph R. Biden Jr. ..."
"... The statement then claims: "Ahead of the 2020 U.S. elections, foreign states will continue to use covert and overt influence measures in their attempts to sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies, increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American people's confidence in our democratic process." ..."
"... But how do the 'intelligence' agencies know that foreign states want to "sway preferences", "increase discord" or "undermine confidence" in elections? ..."
"... But ascribing motive and intent is a tricky business, because perceived impact is often mistaken for true intent. [...] Where is the evidence that Russia actually wants to bring down the liberal world order and watch the United States burn? ..."
"... Well there is none. And that is why the 'intelligence' agencies do not present any evidence. ..."
"... Is there a secret policy paper by the Russian government that says it should "increase discord" in the United States? Is there some Chinese think tank report which says that undermining U.S. people's confidence in their democratic process would be good for China? ..."
"... If the 'intelligence' people have copies of those papers why not publish them? ..."
"... Let me guess. The 'intelligence' agencies have nothing, zero, nada. They are just making wild-ass guesses about 'intentions' of perceived enemies to impress the people who sign off their budget. ..."
"... Nowadays that seems to be their main purpose. ..."
Aug 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
No Evidence Of Foreign Interference In U.S. Elections, U.S. Intelligence Says

Yesterday the mislabeled U.S. 'Intelligence' Agencies trotted out more nonsense claims about foreign interferences in U.S. elections.

The New York Times sensationally headlines:

Russia Continues Interfering in Election to Try to Help Trump, U.S. Intelligence Says
But a new assessment says China would prefer to see the president defeated, though it is not clear Beijing is doing much to meddle in the 2020 campaign to help Joseph R. Biden Jr.

But when one reads the piece itself one finds no fact that would support the 'Russia Continues Interfering' statement:

Russia is using a range of techniques to denigrate Joseph R. Biden Jr., American intelligence officials said Friday in their first public assessment that Moscow continues to try to interfere in the 2020 campaign to help President Trump.

At the same time, the officials said China preferred that Mr. Trump be defeated in November and was weighing whether to take more aggressive action in the election.

But officials briefed on the intelligence said that Russia was the far graver, and more immediate, threat. While China seeks to gain influence in American politics, its leaders have not yet decided to wade directly into the presidential contest, however much they may dislike Mr. Trump, the officials said.

The assessment, included in a statement released by William R. Evanina, the director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, suggested the intelligence community was treading carefully, reflecting the political heat generated by previous findings.

The authors emphasize the scaremongering hearsay from "officials briefed on the intelligence" - i.e. Democratic congress members - about Russia but have nothing to back it up.

When one reads the statement by Evanina one finds nothing in it about Russian attempts to interfere in the U.S. elections. Here is the only 'evidence' that is noted:

For example, pro-Russia Ukrainian parliamentarian Andriy Derkach is spreading claims about corruption – including through publicizing leaked phone calls – to undermine former Vice President Biden's candidacy and the Democratic Party. Some Kremlin-linked actors are also seeking to boost President Trump's candidacy on social media and Russian television.

After a request from Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's personal attorney, a Ukrainian parliamentarian published Ukrainian evidence of Biden's very real interference in the Ukraine. Also: Some guest of a Russian TV show had an opinion. How is either of those two items 'evidence' of Russian interference in U.S. elections?

The statement then claims: "Ahead of the 2020 U.S. elections, foreign states will continue to use covert and overt influence measures in their attempts to sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies, increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American people's confidence in our democratic process."

But how do the 'intelligence' agencies know that foreign states want to "sway preferences", "increase discord" or "undermine confidence" in elections?

As a recent piece in Foreign Affairs noted :

The mainstream view in the U.S. media and government holds that the Kremlin is waging a long-haul campaign to undermine and destabilize American democracy. Putin wants to see the United States burn, and contentious elections offer a ready-made opportunity to fan the flames.

But ascribing motive and intent is a tricky business, because perceived impact is often mistaken for true intent. [...] Where is the evidence that Russia actually wants to bring down the liberal world order and watch the United States burn?

Well there is none. And that is why the 'intelligence' agencies do not present any evidence.

Even the NYT writers have to admit that there is nothing there:

The release on Friday was short on specifics, ...

and

Intelligence agencies focus their work on the intentions of foreign governments, and steer clear of assessing if those efforts have had an effect on American voters.

How do 'intelligence' agencies know Russian, Chinese or Iranian 'intentions'. Is there a secret policy paper by the Russian government that says it should "increase discord" in the United States? Is there some Chinese think tank report which says that undermining U.S. people's confidence in their democratic process would be good for China?

If the 'intelligence' people have copies of those papers why not publish them?

Let me guess. The 'intelligence' agencies have nothing, zero, nada. They are just making wild-ass guesses about 'intentions' of perceived enemies to impress the people who sign off their budget.

Nowadays that seems to be their main purpose.

Posted by b on August 8, 2020 at 18:08 UTC | Permalink

[Aug 08, 2020] -No Difference Between John Bolton, Brian Hook Or Elliott Abrams-- Iran FM -

Aug 08, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

"No Difference Between John Bolton, Brian Hook Or Elliott Abrams": Iran FM

by Tyler Durden Fri, 08/07/2020 - 22:45 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

"There's no difference between John Bolton, Brian Hook or Elliott Abrams," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi said in a tweet with the hashtag #BankruptUSPolicy on Friday.

"When U.S. policy concerns Iran, American officials have been biting off more than they can chew. This applies to Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump and their successors," Mousavi added.

Indeed in perhaps one of the greatest symbols or representations of the contradictions and absurdity inherent in US foreign policy of the past few decades, and a supreme irony that can't be emphasized enough: the new US envoy to Iran who will oversee Pompeo's 'maximum pressure' campaign remains the most publicly visible face of the 1980's Iran-Contra affair .

Elliott Abrams has been named to the position after Brian Hook stepping down. This means the man who will continue to push for the extension of a UN arms embargo against Iran once himself was deeply involved in illegally selling weapons to Iran and covering it up .

Most famously, or we should say infamously, Abrams pleaded guilty to lying to Congress in 1991 following years of the Iran-Contra scandal engulfing the Reagan administration; however, he was also pardoned by outgoing president George H.W. Bush at around the same time.

"Pardoned by George H.W. Bush in 1992, Abrams was a pivotal figure in the foreign-policy scandal that shook the Reagan administration, lying to Congress about his knowledge of the plot to covertly sell weapons to the Khomeini government and use the proceeds to illegally fund the right-wing Contras rebel group in Nicaragua ," NY Mag reviews.

Some are noting this heightens the chances that Washington could get dragged into a war involving Israel and Iran.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1291802541223809025&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmarkets%2Fno-difference-between-john-bolton-brian-hook-or-elliott-abrams-iran-fm&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=223fc1c4%3A1596143124634&width=550px

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

Recall too that Abrams has been Trump's point man for ousting Maduro from Venezuela, and it appears he'll remain in the post of special envoy for Venezuela as well.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1291783763945574402&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmarkets%2Fno-difference-between-john-bolton-brian-hook-or-elliott-abrams-iran-fm&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=223fc1c4%3A1596143124634&width=550px NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

The Grayzone journalist, Anya Parampil, who has frequently reported from Venezuela, alleged this week that Abrams will "try and destroy Venezuela and Iran at the same time".

me name=

https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4879&num_ads=18&cf=1258.5.zerohedge%20190919&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmarkets%2Fno-difference-between-john-bolton-brian-hook-or-elliott-abrams-iran-fm
Wild Bill Steamcock , 14 hours ago

Abrams is a disgrace. This Administration should be dying in it's own shame bringing this swine back into government.

He's a leach. He's about lining his own pockets. He can't even own a .22 single shot, yet he's shaping international policy.

This country is dead. And the fact Trump has democrat and zionist Kushner as advisor, bringing in guys like Bolton and Abrams, Reince Priebus, H.R. McMaster and that Ukranian pet goblin of his, in not firing Comey et. al day 1 means he's not the answer. Face it.

And to be fair, it doesn't matter anymore who is POTUS. It hasn't really mattered in quite some time. The Plan rolls along.

Kinskian , 15 hours ago

Trump is a clumsy and transparent Zionist stooge.

PT , 14 hours ago

Gotta admit, if you're going to have a Zionist stooge then you are better off having a clumsy and transparent one.

Dank fur Kopf , 14 hours ago

Elliott Abrams is a moron. He's been running the exact same stupid coup strategy for decades, and can't conceive of a world where the enemy has worked out how to defeat that.

Venezuela was set to be US foreign policies most embarrassing failure--but maybe Iran will be worse.

Dank fur Kopf , 14 hours ago

Let's predict what Abrams will attempt:

Running out of the US/UK embassies, Abrams will attempt to identify a potential alternative leader who is corrupt and controllable. They'll throw political support behind this false leader, and try and find enough military to support him. Then, protests in the streets, and the small faction of the military--supported by foreign forces--will attempt to establish control.

Counter: China and Russia will import anti-coup specialists. Individuals in the Iranian military will pretend to be on board claiming to have thousands at call, and when the false leader gives the call, they won't answer. All the conspirators will be caught out on the street, and have to flee to embassies for political asylum. Like what happened in Venezuela recently, and Turkey in 2016. This will allow Iran to do a purge of all the real threats (remembering that Iran has the death penalty for sedition), and give them enough justification to end diplomatic missions in the country that are being used as launch pads.

[Aug 08, 2020] Voting Fraud Is Real- The Electoral System Is Vulnerable -

Aug 08, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Voting Fraud Is Real: The Electoral System Is Vulnerable

by Tyler Durden Thu, 08/06/2020 - 21:05 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Philip Giraldi via The Strategic Cultuire Foundation,

The United States national election is now only three months away and it should be expected that the out-and-out lies emanating from both parties will increase geometrically as the polling date nears. One of the more interesting claims regarding the election itself is the White House assertion that large scale voting by mail will permit fraud, so much so that the result of the voting will be unreliable or challenged. To be sure, it is not as if voter fraud is unknown in the United States. The victory of John F. Kennedy 1960 presidential election has often been credited to all the graveyards in Mayor Richard Daley's Chicago voting to swing Illinois into the Democratic camp.

The Democrats are insisting that voting by mail is perfectly safe and reliable, witness the use of absentee ballots for many years. The assertions by Democratic Party-affiliated voting officials in several states and also from friends on the federal level have been played in the media to confirm that fraud in elections has been insignificant recently. That may be true, up until now.

The Democrats, of course, have an agenda. For reasons that are not altogether clear, they believe that voting by mail would benefit them primarily, so they are pushing hard for their supporters to register in their respective states and cast their ballots at the local mail box. Nevertheless, there should be some skepticism whenever a major American political party wants something. In this case, the Democrats are likely assuming that people at lower income levels who will most likely vote for them cannot be bothered to register and vote if it requires actually going somewhere to do it. They have spoken of "expansion of voting," presumably to their benefit. The mail is a much easier option.

A Fox News host has rejected the impelling logic behind the mail option, saying "Can't we just have this one moment to vote for one candidate every four years, and show up and put a ballot in without licking an envelope or pressing on a stamp? If you can shop for food, if you can buy liquor, you can vote once every four years."

The fundamental problem with the arguments coming from both sides is that there is no national system in the United States for registering and voting. Elections are run at state level and the individual states have their own procedures. The actual ballots also differ from voting district to voting district. To determine what safeguards are actually built into the system is difficult as how electoral offices actually function is considered sensitive information by many, precisely because it might reveal vulnerabilities in the process.

To determine how one might actually vote illegally, I reviewed the process required for registering and voting by mail in my own state of Virginia. In Virginia one can both register and vote without any human contact at all. The registration process can be accomplished by filling out an online form, which is linked here . Note particularly the following: the form requires one to check the box indicating U.S. citizenship. It then asks for name and address as well as social security number, date of birth and whether one has a criminal record or is otherwise disqualified to vote. You then have to sign and date the document and mail it off. Within ten days, you should receive a voter's registration card for Virginia which you can present if you vote in person, though even that is not required.

But also note the following: no documents have to presented to support the application, which means that all the information can be false. You can even opt out of providing a social security number by indicating that you have never been issued one, even though the form indicates that you must have one to be registered, and you can also submit a temporary address by claiming you are "homeless." Even date of birth information is useless as the form does not ask where you were born, which is how birth records are filed by state and local governments. Ultimately, it is only the social security number that validates the document and that is what also appears on the Voter's ID Card, but even that can be false or completely fabricated, as many illegal immigrant workers in the U.S. have discovered.

In a state like Virginia, the actual mail-in ballot requires your signature and that of a witness, who can be anyone. That is also true in six other states. Thirty-one states only require your own signature while only three states require that the document be notarized, a good safeguard since it requires the voter to actually produce some documentation. Seven states require your additional signature on the ballot envelope and two states require that a photocopy of the voter ID accompany the ballot. In other words, the safeguards in the system vary from state to state but in most cases, fraud would be relatively easy.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

And then there is the issue of how the election commissions in the states will be overwhelmed by tens of thousands of mail-in ballots that they might be receiving in November. That overload would minimize whatever manual checking of names, addresses and social security numbers might otherwise take place. Jim Bovard has speculated how :

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

"The American political system may be on the eve of its worst legitimacy crisis since the Civil War. Early warning signals indicate that many states could suffer catastrophic failures in counting votes in November Because of the pandemic, many states are switching primarily to mail-in voting even though experiences with recent primaries were a disaster. In New York City, officials are still struggling to count mail-in ballots from the June primary. Up to 20% of ballots 'were declared invalid before even being opened , based on mistakes with their exterior envelopes,' the Washington Post noted, thanks largely to missing postmarks or signatures. In Wisconsin, more than 20,000 ' primary ballots were thrown out because voters missed at least one line on the form, rendering them invalid.' Some states are mailing ballots to all the names on the voting lists, providing thousands of dead people the chance to vote from the grave."

Add into the witch's cauldron the continued use of easily hacked antiquated voting machines as well as confusing ballots in many districts, and the question of whether an election can even be run with expectations of a credible result becomes paramount. President Trump has several times claimed that the expected surge in mail-in voting could result in " the most corrupt vote in our nation's history ." Trump is often wrong when he speaks or tweets spontaneously, but this time he just might be right. gcjohns1971 , 8 hours ago

This was why the founders required voters to be property owners. You have to have a stake in the system to have a vote in the system or you will only vote for the property owners' wealth to be given to you.

joego1 , 8 hours ago

Pretty soon that would mean only Black Rock could vote.

rent slave , 7 hours ago

Some people pay taxes and have wealth without owning property.Plus ,some property owners are nearly indigent and dependent on government handouts.

Chocura750 , 7 hours ago

Voting by mail gives the elderly and shutins the ability to vote. These are usually Republican leaning which makes me wonder why the Republicans oppose it. Mail in voting has been done for years without any problems.

Wild Bill Steamcock , 8 hours ago

I had recently come to the conclusion, and in hind sight its a fairly obvious one that mail-in voting is no more prone to fraud than the electronic voting machines. Hell, it's easier to manipulate those, at least with the mail in ballots there is a paper trail.

Glad to see the article points this out.

But, the election outcome will be what TPTB want it to be. Voting and elections are too important to be left to us commoners. ay_arrow

Billy the Poet , 8 hours ago

One would have to have access to electronic voting equipment in order to manipulate the data. Mail in voter fraud involves nothing more than getting ahold of ballots and sending them in which sounds like a lower bar. No special access or skills necessary. It could end up like "we found a box of ballots in the truck of my car" on steroids.

NoDebt , 8 hours ago

Any system run by the corrupt will be compromised.

Let me explain how I see this going down with new mail-in voting this cycle:

Lots of mail-in ballots will come in that are rejected for one reason or another (arrived too late, had no postmark, signature didn't match, whatever). The Ds will already have favorable judges lined up ready to overturn those rulings. While those rulings are waiting to be overturned, thousands more in a similar circumstance will keep mysteriously piling up. The hand-picked judge will rule them all valid and they will be counted.

HERE IS THE TRICK WHICH WILL BE EXPLOITED:

Remember when Trump won in '16 they simply stopped reporting results for about 6 hours from any state anywhere in the US? Went on from about 10pm (when it became obvious Trump was about to pull off his upset) to about 4am, give or take.

What were they doing in those hours? LOOKING FOR MORE VOTES FOR HILLARY. They couldn't find or manufacture enough in that time period.

But what if you were to stretch that period of time out not just for hours, but days or even weeks? Plenty of time to "find" the votes needed to tip the election so that once the judge rules in their favor, all of the rejected mail-in ballots, plus the number needed to tip the outcome are in. And once the judge rules, they are ALL in. Not just the technically questionable ones, but the outright fraudulent ones that were added after the fact.

ALL THEY NEED IS TIME. AND MAIL-IN VOTING GIVES THEM THAT TIME.

Billy the Poet , 8 hours ago

It would also be easier to make sure that your loyal constituents remained loyal by watching them fill out ballots (or filling out ballots for them), rewarding them on the spot and mailing in the votes.

Much easier than dragging people to the polls and hoping that they stick around long enough and manage to pull the right lever.

You could go door to door and buy blank ballots and do the same thing. If people are willing to sell EBT cards they'd probably be willing to sell their ballot.

bIlluminati , 5 hours ago

Even easier. See that ballots from known Republican strongholds don't get postmarked, or, if postmarked, never make it to their destination. Or Demonrat votes. Or open envelopes to see how they voted, and replace the ones that voted "the wrong way". President Trump could get as few as 50 million votes if the Dims want a landslide, and blame it on corona.

GoozieCharlie , 6 hours ago

In 2016 I was amazed (but not surprised) at the school buses full of adult coloreds tooling around on secondary roads near the triple point where OH, MI, and IN come together, on the Monday before election day. Also, i'd never seen so many coloreds in the convenience stores in that very lily white area.

NeitherStirredNorShaken , 8 hours ago

The entire voting process including electorate is one massive fraud. Are people that vote and participate pretending they live in some kind of Democracy really believing the delusion?

And you're making fun of the of so called woke retards?

Here's what happens in a rigged vote when a recount is ordered. 10,000 voting machines burn in a warehouse fire the same night the recount is court ordered.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/us/politics/11voting.html

Observer 2020 , 7 hours ago

Anyone who militates against the integrity of the electoral process is a traitor, nothing less.

The disloyal opposition's efforts to render this nation's electoral system a Third World burlesque, by qualifying to vote millions, if not tens of millions, of illegals and by advocating the wanton distribution of mail in ballots, constitutes the felonious disenfranchisement of natural born citizens - an act of treason.

CatInTheHat , 6 hours ago

Blatant election fraud in Broward county Florida..

Tim Canova vs. Wasserman Schulz

[Aug 08, 2020] Takes one to know one- New 'Russian disinformation' scare-sheet by State Department's propaganda arm is full of projection -- RT Op-ed

Aug 08, 2020 | www.rt.com

Takes one to know one? New 'Russian disinformation' scare-sheet by State Department's propaganda arm is full of projection Helen Buyniski Helen Buyniski

is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23 6 Aug, 2020 12:42 Get short URL FILE PHOTO. The State Department Building is pictured in Washington, U.S., January 26, 2017. © REUTERS/Joshua Roberts 16 1 Follow RT on RT The State Department has released a report purporting to unmask "Russia's disinformation and propaganda ecosystem," highlighting supposed Russian proxies in an effort to cast all opposition to US policy as Kremlin-linked.

Behind every narrative unfriendly to US geopolitical aims is a Russian proxy typing madly away, according to the Global Engagement Center (GEC), the State Department's "counter-propaganda" vehicle, which released a report to that effect on Wednesday titled "Pillars of Russia's Disinformation and Propaganda Ecosystem."

More than half of the 76-page paper consists of "proxy site profiles" – writeups of websites deemed to be secretly (or not-so-secretly) operated by the Kremlin. While some are openly connected to the Russian government (New Eastern Outlook, an official publication of the Russian Academy of Sciences), others – like Montreal-based Global Research – are not.

READ MORE 'We must deal with Russia as it is, not as we wish it to be': US ex-diplomats, academics call for engagement with Moscow

In the eyes of the GEC, however, all "serve no other purpose but to push pro-Kremlin content" (which might be news to the websites' operators). Most have previously appeared on lists of "Russian propaganda websites" such as the sprawling blacklist published by PropOrNot – a shady outfit linked to pro-war think tank, the Atlantic Council – in November 2016.

While the report is supposedly dedicated to "exposing Russia's tactics so that partner and allied governments, civil society organizations, academia, the press, and the international public" can arm themselves against evil Kremlin propaganda, its focus on specific websites, their social media follower counts, and the amount of traffic they get seems tailor-made for legitimizing government censorship. Any ideas which resemble the content of these particular websites are to be squashed, sidelined, and suppressed, as are any other sites who publish writers associated with the "proxy sites."

The "ecosystem" metaphor is deployed to explain why some alleged Russian proxies occasionally come out with material opposing the Russian government line – they're just "muddying the waters of the information environment in order to confuse those trying to discern the truth."

As for "truth," the report has an interesting interpretation of the concept. The claims that it deems to constitute "disinformation" include the assertion that "financial circles and governments are using the coronavirus to achieve [their] own financial and political goals" (are there any that aren't?).

They also include claims that "EU bureaucrats and affiliated propaganda bodies are blaming Russia for the crisis over the outbreak of coronavirus" (who knew the Financial Times was a Kremlin disinfo outlet too?)

READ MORE Credibility of European Court of Human Rights lies in ruins after judges' links to Soros revealed

Also included are claims that "George Soros' tentacles entangle politics and generate chaos around the world" (if the shoe fits ).

The GEC report wouldn't be a Russia scare-sheet if it didn't include a heavy dose of projection, and this one does not disappoint. The Kremlin's "weaponization of social media" and "cyber-enabled disinformation" are deemed "part of its approach to using information as a weapon," while Moscow is accused of "invest[ing] massively in its propaganda channels, its intelligence services and its proxies to conduct malicious cyber activity to support their disinformation efforts."

But the CIA and US military intelligence have been engaging in pre-emptive cyber-warfare for two years with the full knowledge and consent of the executive branch – a legitimization of covert activities that previously ran on a don't-ask-don't-tell basis dating at least back to the development of the Stuxnet virus that devastated Iran's nuclear sites over a decade ago.

US weaponization of social media is so pervasive the US Army was recently booted off streaming platform Twitch for relentlessly propagandizing teenage users. The Pentagon has been spreading pro-US propaganda using hordes of "sock puppets" – fake social media accounts purporting to be real people – for upwards of a decade. Indeed, the report hints at these very operations, praising the "thriving counter-disinformation community" that is "pushing back" against those naughty Russians.

With social media platforms jittery over the looming US election in November, the report appears designed to serve as a handy cheat-sheet as to which opinions to censor to avoid a repeat of President Donald Trump's upset victory in 2016 – even though none of the listed "proxies" could be considered pro-Trump by any stretch of the imagination. It also provides a portable reference for Americans worried about committing thought-crime, though the complete lack of fanfare accompanying its publication – Secretary of State Mike Pompeo mentioned it in passing during a press conference on Wednesday – would seem to suggest it is not meant for the hoi polloi.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


[Aug 07, 2020] The New Puritans by Israel Shamir

Aug 02, 2020 | www.unz.com

Paolo Roberto, 50, a native of Sweden (his father was an Italian), had made a name for himself: a well-known boxer, he had his own TV show, he appeared in many programmes; Swedish girls loved to dance with him in Dancing with the Stars ; he also had a profitable business: he imported Italian olive oil and gastronomic products sold in the large Swedish supermarket chain CO-OP. All that glory vanished in a moment. Swedish police trapped him as he visited a girl of dubious character and then paid her for her services. It was a honey-trap. The policemen appeared from their hiding places and whisked Roberto off to the local precinct where he was booked and the nation alerted. He didn't deny a thing; he expressed extreme remorse.

In Sweden, it is perfectly legal to be engaged in prostitution. Today no one in Sweden can tell a woman what to do with her own body, be it abortion, sex change or prostitution. Yet it is a crime for a man to pay a woman for sex.

It is not sane; it is as though selling crack were legal while buying crack is the only crime. Usually it is other way around, a casual user goes free while the pusher is arrested. But it does not matter; Sweden is not the only country in the world with such a strange law on her books.

Roberto was charged for this crime. It could be worse: Sweden has some extraordinary crimes in its law book, one of them is Rape by Misadventure or Careless Rape which is committed by a man who has sex with a woman who ostensibly agrees to or even solicits sex but inwardly she is not willing. She may be doing it for money, or boredom, but not for pleasure, and the man carelessly overlooked her conflicting emotions. It is Swedish Rape. Pity they never apply the same logic to working people; we often do even less pleasant things for money, to buy food or pay rent, but the landlord is not punished for raping his tenants.

This new definition of rape deserves Victor Hugo's pen. It is Swedish Rape to have sex without a condom. It is Swedish Rape if the next day, or a few days later, the woman feels she may have been raped. Or cheated, or underpaid, or mistreated. For this ill-defined offence, Julian Assange has already spent ten years in various detention halls. If he would have killed the girl he would be free by now. Note that you may be guilty of Swedish Rape if you claim to be infertile and your partner becomes pregnant. Are you guilty of rape if you claim to be a Jew but aren't? This is an Israeli contribution to the concept of rape. But I digress.

Paolo Roberto is charged with paying a woman for sex, the crime Judah, son of Jacob, committed with Tamar (Genesis 38). The 25-year-old girl consented, but that does not matter. She came from a rather poor South European country, so probably her consent doesn't mean much. Or perhaps she consented just in order to entrap the guy and this is how Swedish justice works. Swedish prisons would be empty if police weren't allowed to entice and entrap Swedes.

The consequences for Paolo were terrible: he hasn't been tried yet; he hasn't been found guilty; his likely punishment is little more than a fine; but he was dropped like a hot potato by Swedish TV, by Swedish sports, by the Swedish chain that marketed his olive oil. His company was bankrupted overnight. The man was crushed like a bug. It was not Swedish law that crushed him. In the eyes of Swedish law he is still innocent until proven guilty. Swedish law did not force the supermarkets to remove his olive oil (actually, a very good one, I used to buy it) from its shelves. Paolo was lynched by the New Puritan spirit that is part and parcel of the New Normal.

Once upon a time, Sweden was an extremely liberal and free country. Swedes were known, or even notorious for free sexual mores. Independent and brave Swedish girls weren't shy, and they were comfortable with very unorthodox 'family' unions. But, while the US has always espoused its own brand of politically-correct Puritanism, the global media is now dragging along the other Western states in its wake. France and even Sweden participated in their own renditions of the American BLM protests, called for #MeToo, and seem eager to trade in their own cultures for the New Puritanism.

This rising Puritanism is a contrarian response to the personal freedom we enjoyed since the 1960's, and a jaded weariness with the excessive commercial sexuality of the mass media. The media sells everything with a lot of sex. You cannot turn a TV on, daytime or night, without seeing an implied or explicit act of copulation. They sell cars, snacks and sneakers by displaying naked bodies. This flood of pornography is turning the public mood against sex. Who should we blame for this blatant exploitation of sex? Men.

The Old Puritanism was hard on women; the witches were burned, and the whores were evicted from their homes. The New Puritanism is hard on men. Men are being taught that hanky-panky can have serious consequences. On the site of one of their destroyed statues of Jefferson, the Americans should erect a statue of Andrea Dworkin, the obese lying feminist who famously said that every intercourse is rape, and Penetration is Violation . She is an icon of New Puritan America.

They could not outlaw sex per se, so they invent sordid stories of incestuous sex, of paedophilia, of abusing priests, each storyteller trying to outdo the last. The vast majority of these stories are sheer inventions, like the witchcraft stories of the 17 th century in Old Puritan New England. We are in the midst of a global media campaign, and men are the targets. The Patriarchy will be diminished by the systematic demonization of boys and men.

In the current media frenzy I cannot trust any story, any accusation of a man involved in a sordid sexual crime: these media campaigns are too often employed to unseat a commercial competitor or destroy the popularity of a political rival. Often the man is not even accused of any crime, but only of frivolous behaviour: a touch, or an immodest proposal; natural acts celebrated in the days of my youth. Yes, my young readers, in the 1970's you could touch a woman's knee and suggest she accompany you on a passionate weekend at a seaside resort, and she would often agree. This libertine era is over completely. Even to me, it now seems mythical, like Atlantis. It is gone.

The US is the media's inspirational model of the New Puritanism. Remember the women who lined up to claim that the future Supreme Court judge tried to kiss or even rape them when they were kids in college? The most credible of them would not even allege he behaved criminally; just immorally according to New Puritan standards. Now every relationship must be re-evaluated in the light of the New Puritanical historical revisionism. Women who pose for a picture with a presidential candidate now have a certain amount of power over him. During a media campaign the allegations come fast and furious, but upon investigation they turn out to be spurious and motivated by self-interest or politics.

It is good to see that sometimes, quite rarely, a man can still escape a close encounter with his life intact. Former First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond had been accused of all the usual sexual sins and was fully cleared by the court . No less than ten women were recruited (apparently with the knowledge of Nicola Sturgeon, Salmond's successor); they came forward and claimed that they were sexually attacked by Salmond. They were rather sloppy with their proofs, and it turns out that they claimed they were attacked at times and places where Salmond could not have been present. The case was dismissed and Salmond was found not guilty . Scottish prosecutors had spent years of labour trying to condemn Salmond, and it spectacularly failed.

You might ask, why have these perjurers (who are well-connected women close to the centre of power of the ruling SNP party) not been prosecuted for their attempt to frame the man? Well, the very idea of these trials is that the accusing woman can't lose. If she wins, she can collect millions, and if she loses, even her name remains secret. These ten perjurers are exempt from legal consequence; nor are they required pay expenses and damages. The women are protected. Who pays? Our colleague, the excellent writer and former HM Ambassador Craig Murray , that's who. Murray was reporting on the trial of Alex Salmond for the public's benefit, published onto his own blog, when he was charged with disclosing the identities of some of the perjuring women. A conscientious man, Craig wasn't guilty of naming names, but even his vague description of "an SNP politician, a party worker and several current and former Scottish government civil servants and officials" was considered by the court to be a monstrous breach of confidentiality.

The public was well prepared for this onslaught on mankind by the poisonous #MeToo culture, a massive wave of carefully coordinated media hysteria. Women in communes and nunneries are known to menstruate at the same time when living in close proximity. #MeToo was a similar mass event. It was designed to push women's buttons. They even offered up an appropriately grotesque scapegoat: Harvey Weinstein, a movie producer with 386 Hollywood production credits under his belt.

The actresses that accused Weinstein (over eighty women) would still be unknowns if he had not given them parts in his movies. And they repaid him with such cruel ingratitude. Actresses have a certain psychological setup that makes them extremely untrustworthy. They have many other qualities to offset this deficiency, but you can't just accept the words of a lady who plays today Lady Macbeth and tomorrow Madam Butterfly as solid truth. They are acting, in life as well as in their line of work.

Consider the beautiful Angelina Jolie. She is mad as a hatter. Even her own father said that she had "serious mental problems." Her long history of violent self-abuse culminated with her choice to cut off her breasts because of a DNA test that indicated risk for breast cancer. She has had a long line of boyfriends and husbands, and a lot of kids adopted out of Africa, taken away from their natural parents. Is she a reliable witness? She would say anything that is fashionable. The woman wants to be adored as the model of an excellent person; this is a honourable goal, but she is extremely unsuitable for it.

Weinstein's eighty accusers collected millions; the great producer went to a life-long jail sentence. The public, the great American public was eager to lynch the man who gave them True Romance and Pulp Fiction . Was he guilty as charged? Even the charges were a travesty of justice. Men of his generation (and of mine, too) routinely propositioned women. We are all guilty, though not many of us racked up Weinstein's numbers. Yet every woman was free to refuse. No police reports against Weinstein appeared until the #MeToo media campaign was in full swing. Did he harass them? You and me are harassed daily by offers to take another credit card or bank loan; we are free to refuse this definitely harassing offer. Every unsolicited proposal is harassment; and we receive daily hundreds of proposals of various nature. What is so different about a sexual proposal to a woman? Weinstein may or may not have committed a crime, but in the poisonous air of #MeToo there is no need to prove any accusation, and the man was lynched.

Perhaps now I am going to lose your tentative sympathy, but I do not believe the allegations against Jeffrey Epstein and Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, either. And the attack on Prince Andrew is similarly unbelievable. Chapeau for Mr Trump who dared to express sympathy to Ms Maxwell. This was an act of incredible bravery, to step out of line and to say a few kind words to her and about her. The cowardly Clinton and Obama, who were close friends with Epstein and Maxwell, were mum. Trump who was not particularly close to the couple, spoke up for them. He really deserves being re-elected, despite his many faults. Such a man is a master of his own mind, and this is a very rare quality.

I may mull over a proposal to buy the Brooklyn Bridge, but how possibly can one believe the stories of the disturbed woman who claims that she had to be forced to have sex with fabulously wealthy Mr Epstein or to meet glamorous Prince Andrew, let alone that she suffered "extreme distress, humiliation, fear, psychological trauma, loss of dignity and self esteem and invasion of her privacy" on his island retreat? The complete absence of evidence and the complete lack of objectivity could only prevail in the midst of a media campaign. It is believable what Ms Maxwell said in a deposition, that Ms Giuffre was "totally lying." Indeed all these gold diggers are totally lying.

Like this one : An anonymous accuser says she'll testify that 'evil' Ghislaine Maxwell raped her '20-30 times' starting from when she was 14 and claims she was forced to abort Jeffrey Epstein's baby. Honest and reputable men like Prince Andrew are forced into the demeaning and impossible position of having to argue and justify themselves against wild accusations. There are no reasonably believable accusations of crime against these people. A woman had a photo of her taken with Prince Andrew. She was at least 17; at this age girls in England are perfectly entitled to have an affair with a man. Other girls in other photos were apparently of age, too. Young, yes, but not criminally young. Furthermore, a posed photo does not always indicate a sexual relationship. Some women claim they were babies and they were raped, but there are no proofs of anything except their greed.

Mike Robeson who investigated the claims came to conclusion that they were often initiated by big business to rip off rich Jews. New Puritanism is the Joker card that can trump the antisemitism ace. He wrote:

I've read Whitney Webb's investigative articles on Epstein, which are often cited by the alternative and leftist crowd as evidence of his Mossad connections and blackmailing activities. But Webb's articles are actually full of unsubstantiated rumors, possible immoral or illegal activities between high level people based on coincidental social or business connections and potentially damning rumors corroborated mainly by her previous articles and posts. She has done some fine reporting on other issues. But on the Epstein case, she is part of what Israel rightly refers to as the New Puritanism.

Supposed evidence of Frau Maxwell's salacious involvement is the famous photo of Prince Andrew below. This is all the New Puritans need to justify believing the rumors and drawing their "I told ya' so!" conclusions. But hobnobbing has long been a sport played by the wannabes with the tacit collusion of the rich and/or famous.

Take a look at the fun couple under Prince Andrew and his alleged squeeze. You may recognize Rosalynn Carter, then First Lady of the US. Standing next to her is none other than William Gacy , a few months before he was arrested as a serial killer and cannibal of those he'd butchered. Are we to draw certain conclusions from this photo?

Below Rosalynn Carter is another photo, this one showing then President George Bush being hobnobbed by political has-been George Wallace and by young political wannabe Bill Clinton. What conclusions can be drawn from this? Was George already then grooming Billy Boy for higher things in life? Or is it merely more photographic evidence of how wannabes crawl up the ladder of personal and career advancement? For it is clear that the rich and/or famous, like Rosalynn Carter and Prince Andrew, have to put up with photo ops, sometimes to their later discredit.

Very little about the Epstein case makes sense – not his social and financial connections and especially not his alleged links with the Mossad. Every rich Jew in the US is sayanim, but that doesn't mean they are running blackmail ops. And the pedo accusations are ridiculous. His 'victims', none of whom were less than 16 (legal to marry in most European countries and many American states) were willing, well paid and well taken care of gals who got lucky to catch a good-looking sugar daddy. Whatever he knew about his rich and famous clients that may have gotten him killed may have had something to do with what he knew about them, sure. He probably shared his largesse with his friends and possible donors and contributors. But if he had been sexually blackmailing them over the years, why did they keep going back to him?

The blackmail angle doesn't make sense. It makes more sense that a lot of famous people may have preferred him dead to testifying about his activities. Who, famous or not famous, would want to get dragged through the mud by the overzealous New Puritan prosecution teams that had already destroyed the lives of innocent defendants of sexual accusations like Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nasser, as well as hundreds of others in the past decades of America's sexual abuse/devil worship hysteria. The Pizzagate fiasco is a demonstration of how mobs can be raised, aimed and defused by an orchestrated media campaign.

From what I see of Epstein's photos, he was an intelligent, good lucking, confident, fun loving guy. If he was nailing more hot chicks than I ever did, more power to him.

Another motivation for the liquidation of Epstein's empire is the collaboration between the media and the unknown figures behind the scenes who are likely to walk away with Epstein's millions. Are you familiar with the story of Howard Hughes and the destruction of his Las Vegas empire? It happened to him. Something similar has happened in the past few years to other wealthy Jews like Donald Sterling , who was first falsely accused of being a racist and then forced to relinquish his ownership of an NBA team. Other examples? Richard Fuld of Lehmann Bros. and Bernie Madoff were taken down by their Wall Street rivals and then used as scapegoats to expiate the sins of corporate raiders. Harvey Weinstein was the sacrificial schwein to absolve the sick Hollywood culture. Now that Weinstein has been destroyed, Hollywood can go back to business as usual.

But what about the intimidation faced by hundreds of girls victimized on Epstein's private island? Why do they claim to be afraid of retribution even after his death? The girls were treated well. They admit that they cooperated in finding more girls who would massage Epstein, even supposedly knowing that they too would be 'horribly abused' by the 'monster'. The reporters and the interviewed women are perfect examples of New Puritans. I feel dirty after watching them perform. None of their emotional anecdotes reach evidentiary standards and any court would dismiss their cases out of hand.

As for the source of Epstein's fortune, here is a plausible investigation . It is interesting that no one can really agree on the amount nor the source of his millions.

Justice, or what is passing under that name, gets screwed whenever the law is used to empower a person with a personal grudge, either on his own behalf or to benefit a media consortium. Emotional appeals could never been considered in the better world of Jefferson, Lincoln and Washington. Perhaps they had slaves, but they would not have condemned a man, free or slave, on the basis of empty accusations. Physical evidence is still required in the legal courts. Only on TV can people be destroyed by edited testimony.

I am very tolerant of anti-Jewish rhetoric. So tolerant that I am often accused of it myself. Still, the accusations against Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and let's not forget poor Mr Harvey Weinstein, are often marked by cliché characters such as the crass foul-mouthed Jew and the innocent girl he despoils. Meanwhile, the facts of each case are monotonously repeated: one man's career is destroyed while dozens of girls become famous; millions of dollars are suddenly difficult to track and soon begin to evaporate; the man is demonized and the women are sainted.

Can the New Puritanism overturn the Jews and their unstoppable juggernaut cry of antisemitism? Leo Frank was lynched by the mob and the ADL was formed to make sure it never happened again, no matter what the crime. Is New Puritanism the new mob violence? Perhaps mob violence is the only way our rulers can overwhelm the paralyzing effects of being called antisemitic. Perhaps the New Puritanism is an opening salvo in a larger war between shadow forces.

But I could never believe that Maxwell and Epstein were connected with the Israeli Intelligence agency, the Mossad. With all my sympathy to our esteemed colleagues Philip Giraldi and Whitney Webb , there is not a single shred of evidence for such connection. Conjecture, yes; evidence, no. Even the father of Ghislaine, the late Mr Maxwell, who was not a saintly person by any means, might be with better evidence accused of collaborating with Soviet Intelligence, the KGB, than with the Israelis. A person of his standing probably connected with Israelis, too, but he was no Mossad agent.

I can understand my American friends. There never was a time worse for American men, when the statues and memorials of their great ancestors have been uprooted, when their wives and daughters are queuing to press their pink lips upon the boots of black ghetto dwellers, when their manhood is defined as "toxic" and their sons are dreaming of a same-sex union with a glorious black buck. If the US were occupied by the Communists as Amerika envisaged, it wouldn't be as bad as what you've got now. You have been humiliated thoroughly. I understand that in such a situation you might jump at the chance to break the bones of rich Liberal Jews like Epstein and Weinstein. I wouldn't refuse you this comfort. They are anyway already lynched.

However, if you want ever to walk free, you'd better deal with the New Puritan takeover. Women are wonderful creatures, but often they can be manipulated and do what they are asked to do. They are also excellent actors and are not troubled by honour. Men are more independent and solitary by nature; that is why our Masters want to suppress masculinity. It is easier to shepherd a flock of cows than so many bulls. Women love to be the victims, to blame men for their failings; add social distance and fear of viral infection; add the mask (the New Western Burka); add lockdown, and the problem of how to send the children to school might just solve itself. No children. The New Puritans are currently purging Hollywood of the most relentlessly heterosexual men, but when they run out of rich Jews, they just might come after you.

The New Normal is the New Puritan. The pandemic fit into it tight as a glove. Under millions of cameras and tracing applications, privacy shrinks and disappears. New Puritanism erases the gap between public and private realms. In the world we knew, there was a difference between the twain. A man having an affair with a woman (or with another man) was in a private realm. Do whatever you wish in privacy of your home; just don't frighten the horses, Victorians once said. Now there can be no privacy. Sex is already more of a political opinion than a physical act. You might be lionized as a homosexual or despised as a breeder, your choice. Any affair, or even the attempt to start an affair could be deadly in the post #MeToo world. In an era of socialized medicine, sex is seen as a dangerous weakness that might endanger lives and imperil the global healthcare system.

Much of the severity of New Puritanism can be sourced directly to American culture. America was founded by the Old Puritans of Mayflower in 1620 and has periodically been subject to hysterical outbursts, from witches to Red scares. Nowhere has the use of sex for advertising and commerce been so widely spread as in the US. As the US has become the model for the world, an epidemic of American hysteria is starting to infect countries all around the world. #MeToo reached even Russia, but it is still only a minor phenomenon, mainly to be found among only the most woke of hipsters.

Orwell imagined a future of "state-enforced repression and celibacy" while Huxley predicted "deliberate, narcotising promiscuity". The New Puritans have chosen Orwell's world. I grew up in something more akin to Huxley's, and I can tell you which one is better. Communist Russia was very permissive in the private sphere. People had a lot of sex, with their girl/boy friends, with spouses, with neighbours, with wives of their friends, with their colleagues, with their teachers and students. The Soviets had none of the restrictions we have now against sexual relations in the University between teachers and students; in fact, no restrictions against sex with coworkers, something that now we would call abusive and then call the police. As religion had little influence in Soviet society, adultery was frequent, and unless connected with a public scandal, had no consequences.

Russians as well as the French could not understand why Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky made waves in the US that blew into an impeachment trial and ended with the bombardment of Belgrade. Bill was unfaithful to Hillary? That's not nice, but it is their private affair. President Clinton lied? Well, he was not in the confession booth. Traditional religions, be it Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, are quite tolerant of venial sin. Puritanism, the Old as well as its New offspring are deadly serious in everything, and are unafraid of killing or bullying a sinner to death. They may have begun with witches, but they are ending up targeting ordinary folk.

Currently their targets have a lot of wampum, for it is no fun to bully a person for no material gain. Us, impecunious men, we have nothing to be afraid of yet. But it might be wise to save society before the New Puritans bring down disaster onto all of us. In my opinion, America's influence on the world should be reversed, or at least limited. Let America get influenced by Europe for a change. Mercifully, Europe is suffering from a very light case of New Puritanism that may be entirely cured with a healthy dose of Anti-Americanism. I hear the vaccine is under development.

Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected]

This article was first published at The Unz Review .

Svevlad , says: August 2, 2020 at 11:52 am GMT

Nordoids are the most totalitarian people – it's just that they are told to be woke

anon [501] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 12:38 pm GMT

Picture two is not proof, it's illustration. In fact Cord Meyer recruited Clinton as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford, feathered his wife's nest with a ridiculous bonanza of commodity trading top-ticks, then appointed Bill to run the CIA covert ops slush fund at Mena airfield. That picture is junior secret agent Bill Clinton at the office picnic with his big boss the DCI.

As for picture number one, I'll be forever grateful for the heartwarming thought that Rosalyn also puts on a clown costume, handcuffs boys, buttfucks them, strangles them, and buries them in the crawlspace.

Jack McArthur , says: August 2, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT

Virtually all you wrote is true but with "Very little about the Epstein case makes sense – not his social and financial connections and especially not his alleged links with the Mossad" you seem to have quite deliberately blown your cover as another lying judaizer to those who think Jews are normally incapable of true conversion and that your role in creation is to show what bad is compared to good.

Parsnipitous , says: August 2, 2020 at 4:04 pm GMT
@Jack McArthur

Indeed, it appears so: a very incisive first half of the article, describing a real phenomenon (used to manipulate public opinion and society) seems designed to drop the Epstein turd into.

Epstein is no Puritan witch hunt: Robert Maxwell gets something akin to a state funeral in Israel, his daughter pimps for guy who uses lavish Wexner money for beehives of celebrities into which a steady supply of young female flesh is injected and this guy is telling us we just need to relax a bit.

Israel Shamir is being dishonest here.

ThreeCranes , says: August 2, 2020 at 4:21 pm GMT

" then First Lady of the US. Standing next to her is none other than William Gacy, a few months before he was arrested as a serial killer and cannibal of those he'd butchered. Are we to draw certain conclusions from this photo?"

Yes. That she wasn't to his taste.

ThreeCranes , says: August 2, 2020 at 4:52 pm GMT

Thanks, Israel. Well reasoned and well presented. Although some or many may not agree with you, it's refreshing to read a straight forward exposition. At least you're laying it out there for others to take a crack at it.

"Women are wonderful creatures, but often they can be manipulated and do what they are asked to do. They are also excellent actors and are not troubled by honour. "

I've never met a woman who wasn't a bald-faced liar about anything that concerned her personally. (And no, I'm not an Incel. Far from it)

"Much of the severity of New Puritanism can be sourced directly to American culture. America was founded by the Old Puritans of Mayflower in 1620 and has periodically been subject to hysterical outbursts, from witches to Red scares."

So true. The country was settled by all manner of religious zealots, each and every one of them forming some sort of utopian colony here–almost all of which went down in flames.

Dumbo , says: August 2, 2020 at 5:01 pm GMT

The Old Puritanism was hard on women; the witches were burned, and the whores were evicted from their homes. The New Puritanism is hard on men.

Well, it is particularly hard on "beta" men. Their idea is basically to let "alphas" have harems but all other men to become incels or worse. Just look at this guy, punished for visiting a whore (in their view anyone who pays for sex is by definition not an alpha, so it makes sense to punish johns but allow or even celebrate whores)

Yes, Feminism is a kind of inverted puritanism. But being hard on sluts and whore makes sense if you want to preserve society's order and families. Feminist rules against men only help to destroy society.

So there's a very big difference between the Old Puritanism and the New Puritanism.

From what I see of Epstein's photos, he was an intelligent, good lucking, confident, fun loving guy. If he was nailing more hot chicks than I ever did, more power to him.

Come on. No one knows how this guy made money. For all purposes he was a nobody. Yet he was seen with Elon Musk, Woody Allen, Trump, Clinton, Bill Gates, Prince Andrew, anyone who was "someone" dined with him and maybe one of his girls. There's something very fishy about this. I don't know, maybe he and Maxwell were just the preferred pimp of the elites, or maybe there's something else. Robert Maxwell (Ghislaine's dad) was an Israeli spy and a media magnate, just that is very suspicious.

I mean, of course I don't trust the little whore Giuffre (whoever trusts whores or actresses, but I repeat myself, is an idiot). But there is something very strange and rotten about Epstein and the fact that he met with almost everybody in the so-called elite.

Dumbo , says: August 2, 2020 at 5:08 pm GMT

Nicola Sturgeon, Salmond's successor

Salmon(d) and Sturgeon? Who was the next one, Sardine?

Fidelios Automata , says: August 2, 2020 at 5:24 pm GMT

Much of this article makes sense, though I can't buy the defense of Epstein and Maxwell. It's absurd to call him a "pedophile" as many journalists do. He was a pimp for the Deep State's extortion racket.

Curmudgeon , says: August 2, 2020 at 5:36 pm GMT

Thanks for this. I have been criticized by many for observing holes in the narrative and objecting to trial by media.
I have, since the start of the last Epstein narrative questioned the "intelligence" connection. Not because it wasn't possible, rather that Virginia Roberts narrative about escaping was implausible. If Epstein was doing his alleged blackmail routine for Mossad or any other intelligence service, Roberts would have been suicided long ago. Loose ends like that are a danger to the operation.
That doesn't mean that Epstein wasn't diddling underage girls nor does it mean that Maxwell wasn't recruiting girls to massage Epstein. In Maxwell's case, she may, or may not have known Epstein was diddling them as alleged. I have yet to see a reasonable explanation of how these underage girls got passports without parental consent, and if they did, who was the guarantor? Apparently, all of these accusers had parents who were uninterested in their underage daughters traveling with a male more than twice their age, on his private jet.
As for Weinstein, Shirley Temple's mother complained people in the studio were trying to get into her daughter's pants and she had to be vigilant. Marilyn Monroe, on marrying Joe DiMaggio, is reported to have said that she`d never have to suck another cock. The casting couch stories have been rampant for as long as I have been alive, yet I am supposed to believe that none of Weinstein`s accusers knew that it was the price of admission. That does not mean I approve of taking advantage of women, that has always been done in many ways. Post war turned millions of German and Italian women into prostitutes, for occupying soldiers, in order to feed themselves and their families. Apparently that was ok, but young actresses being turned into millionaires is not.

Anon [252] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 5:58 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

Not true at all, the majority of people who settled the USA were regular Anglos, especially in the South.

And Anglo DNA is something like 25% of the USA. This country is full of immigrants from other stocks, and you know what? They are far more likely to be Democrat-voting liberals, while the Anglo Americans are more likely to be rural Republicans who think things like MeToo and BLM are crazy.

Get a new theory.

anon [313] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 6:06 pm GMT

If the US were occupied by the Communists as Amerika envisaged, it wouldn't be as bad as what you've got now.

Yes, the Commie occupiers had the good sense to execute the entire US Congress.

sarz , says: August 2, 2020 at 6:37 pm GMT

What a total crock of shit. I have long maintained that Shamir is Mossad and a pretend convert to Christianity. This is the guy who argued with passion that those who say that Muslims did not do 9/11 are depriving them of credit for their rare success. It's nevertheless surprising to see him cashing in his chips in such a stupid and lazy way. It's in fact so stupid that it brings to mind Gordon Duff, himself an intelligence figure, alerting me to the hugely disparate quality of Shamir emissions with the explanation that the persona "Israel Shamir" is the work of a committee. It looks like desperate times for the big Jews. The big satanic game -- implicating the Rothschilds, the British royals, and a whole gaggle of Jews and crypto-Jews including Trump and Bill Gates, and all their attendant goys such as the Clintons -- could all fall apart.

Israel Adam pretend-Christian Shamir, who is Moloch and why was there a temple to him on Epstein's island?

Anyone who finds Shamir's protestations of Jewish innocence plausible need look no farther than Maria Farmer's interview with Whitney Webb. Maria doesn't mention Moloch, but she keeps wondering what happened to all those girls. Thousands seem to have just disappeared.

Anonymous [184] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 6:37 pm GMT

innocent defendants of sexual accusations like Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nasser,

I agree with most of the article, but do you have any proof that Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nasser are innocent?

Prince Andrew fooling around with a consenting 17 year old does not compare with what Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nasser were accused and convicted of doing.

ThreeCranes , says: August 2, 2020 at 7:01 pm GMT
@Anon

How much have you seen, first hand, of America? The East Coast and Midwest is littered with former religious communes. Okay, I may have indulged in a little hyperbole, but nevertheless, there were a lot of them. And I don't know what you're going on about Democrats, Anglos and such. Seems off topic to me.

From Wiki

[MORE]
Chris Moore , says: Website August 2, 2020 at 7:14 pm GMT

I have long maintained that Shamir is Mossad and a pretend convert to Christianity. This is the guy who argued with passion that those who say that Muslims did not do 9/11 are depriving them of credit for their rare success. It's nevertheless surprising to see him cashing in his chips in such a stupid and lazy way.

It's hard to imagine an authentic Christian would defend the deep state and Zionist Hebrew pedophile operative Epstein. Hebrew-supremacist blood is thicker than any ideology, I guess. His big Hebrew ego just can't let go of it's delusions of being forged by sacred, primeval forces. I'm sure a rat would have a huge ego if it could speak, too.

Anonymous [247] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 7:30 pm GMT

Yes, the anti-Semitic trope of the Jew despoiling the innocent. The only stereotype I can read here is that of the eternal victim. So Madoff didn't steal millions from elderly pensioners. And Epstein wasn't linked to the former head of Israeli intelligence or invest in security companies run by former Unit 8200 types. And Wexner (of Mega Group) didn't gift him a multimillion dollar surveillance lair. And Maxwell was trolling the parking lot of Groton School and Philips Andover after the kiddies got released from their chemistry AP test, not preying on broken girls from broken homes. F#ck you Shamir.

traducteur , says: August 2, 2020 at 7:51 pm GMT

Leo Frank was lynched by the mob

He had murdered the girl, don't forget, and had been convicted by the courts, despite a protracted and lavishly financed Jewish effort to pin the crime on a Black man who had not committed it. The mob dragged Frank out of prison and lynched him only after his death sentence had been commuted by the Governor of Georgia.

Beb , says: August 2, 2020 at 8:04 pm GMT

Sir, you have the touch! A most amusing article.

israel shamir , says: August 2, 2020 at 8:13 pm GMT
@traducteur

Some people deserve lynching. "Was lynched" is not a synonym of "innocent".

sarz , says: August 2, 2020 at 8:19 pm GMT
@traducteur

He had murdered the girl, don't forget

All of us regulars at Unz Review know fully well that speaking of Leo Frank being lynched by the mob as the main story just won't do. Whoever is handling the Israel Shamir persona at Herzliya these days doesn't have all that much interest in what Ron and others here have been discussing.

sarz , says: August 2, 2020 at 8:21 pm GMT
@israel shamir

Damage control.

sarz , says: August 2, 2020 at 8:24 pm GMT
@Beb

Who are you, Beb, and why are you saying such silly stuff?

Mike Robeson , says: August 2, 2020 at 9:03 pm GMT

Here is additional support for Shamir's take on Epstein's primary accuser –
"Virginia Roberts . claimed to have met him when she was fifteen and to have been forced to work as his sex slave. In reality, she was seventeen, which is still below the age of consent in Florida, but does materially alter her claim that she had sex with Prince Andrew when she was under age because the age of consent in England is sixteen, something of which she was almost certainly unaware .

Among her lurid claims, many of which are demonstrably false, she admits she recruited other, genuinely underage girls for Epstein, yet she has been given a free pass on this. Roberts travelled to Thailand on Epstein's dollar, and while there she had a change of heart, breaking with him. She experienced no adverse consequences for this. Now she is back, regretting her past, sordid life and eager to cash in on it. In what sense can this woman be claimed to be a victim?"
https://theduran.com/victim-narratives-in-the-news/?ml_subscriber=1479058990255051922&ml_subscriber_hash=i0d9&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the_duran_daily&utm_term=2020-08-02

Mike Robeson , says: August 2, 2020 at 9:11 pm GMT

Edward J.Epstein, a long time investigative journalist including on the JFK assassination, recently published his own angle on the sources of Jeffrey Epstein's riches, and they have nothing to do with sexual blackmail –

"An extremely savvy financier and philanthropist told me after Epstein's death about a proposition Epstein had once made him: that he could save more than $40 million in US taxes if he gave him $100 million to manage.

Epstein claimed the money would be concealed in a maze of offshore non-profits he controlled so that part of the profits would be transferred to the financier's own philanthropic foundation, with the balance retained offshore and out of the reach of the taxman.

When the financier told him that the scheme amounted to illicit tax evasion, Epstein said it was highly unlikely the Internal Revenue Service would unravel it, and, if it did, he would protect the financier from any criminal exposure.

The financier asked him how? Epstein said the financier would have to sign over the funds to him, thus giving him total discretion over where and how the money was invested. This piece of paper, he said, would provide an alibi to the US tax authorities.

The financier turned down Epstein's proposition, but others – Arab princes, Russian oligarchs and those interested in hiding some part of their wealth – might have accepted it.

Indeed, shortly before his arrest last year, Epstein told an associate that he was going into the business of hiding funds for billionaires who were contemplating divorcing their wives – for a hefty commission, of course.

He also claimed to be in the final stages of buying a property in Morocco, one of four countries in the world not to have an extradition treaty with the US.

So perhaps the mystery of Epstein's fortune is not how he made his millions, but to whom the money ultimately belongs.

Many very powerful people may have had cause to rue Epstein's incarceration on sex charges – and, given the fact that they were hiding their assets from the authorities, it's highly unlikely they will ever publicly come forward to try to recover their investments."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8537413/EDWARD-JAY-EPSTEIN-investigates-seemingly-unsolvable-mystery-Jeffrey-Epstein-fortune.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead

anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 9:15 pm GMT

The column seems intended to discomfit and/or discredit as many different people around here as possible. (I just checked Wikipedia to see how Mr. Multiname is being curated these days, and noticed that the first of the "RELATED ARTICLES" is Gilad Atzmon.) The oddest yet from this website's oddest writer.

hobo , says: August 2, 2020 at 9:30 pm GMT

" Even the father of Ghislaine, the late Mr Maxwell, might be with better evidence accused of collaborating with Soviet Intelligence, the KGB, than with the Israelis. "

Of course. This makes perfect sense. It explains why the Israeli's gave him a state funeral attended by Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli President Chaim Herzog, and "no less than six serving and former heads of Israeli intelligence" .. because, after all, he was KGB Right.

Mike Robeson , says: August 2, 2020 at 10:04 pm GMT
@Anonymous in the Nasser case, a number of public figures have come forward in Sandusky's defence. The most active is John Ziegler who maintains a website full of articles showing that the case against Sandusky and Penn State was and is a sham and money grab. ( http://johnziegler.com/ )
There is also the well known author Mark Pendergrast who wrote a book on the case. Here are links to two video interviews of both –

https://www.youtube.com/embed/wDcpk2m1zsk?feature=oembed

https://www.youtube.com/embed/dFu2zLiliy4?feature=oembed

Anon [143] Disclaimer , says: August 2, 2020 at 11:15 pm GMT
@Anonymous likely that Nassar was sacrificed to atone for all the sex abuse that happens in kids sports. Now that he is destroyed then child sporting can go back to business as usual because the monster was vanquished. Note that the Nassar story could have been spun to criticize the families who hand their children over to strangers, or to attack child sports in general. But it wasn't. It was aimed directly at one man, and when he was gone the story was gone. That makes him the sacrificial lamb.

On the other hand, the Sandusky story was immediately expanded into the Pedo Rings story, indicating it was part of this long term project.

Haruto Rat , says: August 2, 2020 at 11:22 pm GMT
@Mike Robeson

&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the_duran_daily&utm_term=2020-08-02

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter!

No, seriously. Are people still clicking links in their mail?

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: August 3, 2020 at 1:45 am GMT

This use of "Puritan" as a swear-word looks simplistic, beyond simplistic, to me. Like brain-washed Americans using "Socialist" as a swear-word in just the same way.

They might have been bible-fundamentalists, they might have been creationists, they might have thought the world was flat, but was every witch ever burned in Germany burned by Puritans? Was witchcraft a solely Puritan fantasy? The first ever mention of a witch was by them?

But thanks for reminding me of the mad hatter. I'll get a copy of Alice In Wonderland and compare it with what you write.

PS PC has a very different origin, a different so-called religion.

Jack McArthur , says: August 3, 2020 at 2:45 am GMT
@Mike Robeson nd his supporters an advantage by putting their argument adroitly – if dishonestly – before the public first. Not until David Martin responded with Wilderness of Mirrors was an opposing view presented coherently."
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/5195-edward-j-epstein-legend-the-secret-world-of-lee-harvey-oswald/#comments

"JFK Assassination ~ Edward J Epstein Not a Shred of Conspiracy"

https://www.youtube.com/embed/cQc4whcSVVg?feature=oembed

Jefferson Temple , says: August 3, 2020 at 3:06 am GMT
@Mike Robeson

And this excuses Prince Andrew for fucking teenagers how? A man born into royalty with every advantage but apparently unable to handle actual mature women. So that makes it cool for him to partake of sleazy Jeff's procured girls?

No decent guy thinks of doing stuff like that. If that's what having money does to men, I'll happily remain relatively poor.

ivan , says: August 3, 2020 at 3:13 am GMT

Thanks Mr Shamir. What you wrote sounds about right. I do not like the fact that rich and powerful men got their way with young girls. But this has been the way of the world since time immemorial. It was all done in the open, and for decades, right under the noses of the NYT. But neither they nor the New Puritans thought it fit to investigate, since their focus was elsewhere, namely to tame the Catholic Church through grinding it in the pedophile mill over alleged crimes largely committed in the 70s. Only now that the Pavlovian Dog known as Public Opinion can't get any further stimulus from allegations concerning the Papists, they have turned to Epstein and the Jews with a Royal thrown in instead. But at the end of it, it would make no difference to the men, women and children trafficked for sex, since the New Puritans would have turned their focus elsewhere. And for what it is worth I don't think this a Mossad operation either. I mean how good are these guys? And is it not the responsibility of politicians holding or aspiring to high office to keep themselves clear of such people and places?

Jefferson Temple , says: August 3, 2020 at 3:24 am GMT

You're right, you lost my sympathy with this robust defense of Jeffrey Epstein. I appreciate that it's good to be skeptical of what is reported as well as of the mob mentality but there is no real defense of this guy based on what I've seen and heard over the past two years.

All of his residences with surveillance cameras covering every room.

The source of his money being very murky.

His willingness to share his paid-for harem with the most powerful and connected. Out of the goodness of his heart? No.

The 100% implausible jail suicide.

Isn't that enough red flags?

Even swine like Bret Kavanaugh deserve to not be lynched but Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaineare in a whole other rarefied class of scum. Why bother to make excuses for them? Do you really believe that Trump wished Maxwell well out of magnanimity? More like he's hoping that none of their dirt on him will see daylight.

Priss Factor , says: Website August 3, 2020 at 4:48 am GMT

Puerile puritans or Pueritans

sarz , says: August 3, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT

Xymphora is also having none of it. (It's an indication of Ron Unz's good editorial judgment that Shamir's article is not listed on the main page.)

Xymphora (from the website) :

"The New Puritans" (Shamir). Besides being completely clueless about #metoo – it's about power relationships, not flirting – he has a list of completely innocent people: Jerry Sandusky, Larry Nasser, Donald Sterling, Richard Fuld, Bernie Madoff and, of course, Harvey Weinstein, goyim. Then he tell us that the Mossad has nothing to do with Epstein-Maxwell. I'm starting to think Shamir's history of being an 'anti-Semite' was just producing credibility for this important career-defining moment when the operations of the Mossad and the MEGA Group required protection.

Aristotle1 , says: August 3, 2020 at 6:30 am GMT

As clear and intelligent as ever. "It is easier to shepherd a flock of cows than so many bulls".

I suspect the Epstein ring may be linked to Mossad. It is clearly some sort of Jewish influencing network so seems like an Israeli soft power operation. Having said that Shamir is spot on about all the pearl-clutching even by sensible alt-right figures.

ivan , says: August 3, 2020 at 7:30 am GMT
@Jefferson Temple

Stupid idiot. What did Kavanaugh do at sixteen that other boys his age did not?

The Alarmist , says: August 3, 2020 at 8:33 am GMT

Given what happens daily in Sweden, it would seem the only thing Roberto did wrong was to have a family that came from the wrong side of the Med.

The Alarmist , says: August 3, 2020 at 8:49 am GMT

President Clinton lied? Well, he was not in the confession booth.

Clinton lied under oath in a deposition submitted in a judicial proceeding. He also coached other witnesses to support his story. These were crimes more serious than any that could have been charged against Nixon, who was hounded out of office. Clinton took serious charges and spun them into a story of a harmless peccadillo. Utter brilliance. And while the Judge in the case tried to sweep these actual crimes under the rug as immaterial to the case, it nevertheless cost the President his law licence.

Thomas Faber , says: August 3, 2020 at 10:56 am GMT

How a society views sexuality has a tremendous influence on it's long-term structure and stability.

I do not agree that the Epstein/MOSSAD-blackmail angle makes no sense, but I think that Mr. Shamir makes some good points. Excessively strict public morals is a ripe breeding ground for sanctimonious hypocrisy, and hidden rot, and can have frigthening consequences, and it would not surprise me to learn that the damnable Jesuit Order has a hidden yet decisive influence on this "New Puritanism" that the article traces the tentative outlines of.

On the other hand, too loose sexual morals fosters dissipation – as seen in the lives of highly promiscuous people, or on a larger scale, societies such as Soviet Russia, or various empires after they lost their moral vigour – such as much of contemporary America. Some amount of discipline and self-restraint is needed – this seems to be a moral law of nature.

These waters call for good personal judgment, fairness and balance, and wisdom.

israel shamir , says: August 3, 2020 at 11:06 am GMT

Today, more of the same in Daily Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/30/former-tory-mp-charlie-elphicke-guilty-sexually-assaulting-two/
The woman complained that Elphicke sexually assaulted her after inviting her for a drink at his London home in 2007.
She was in her early 30s and said Elphicke – who had recently become a father for the second time – proceeded to kiss her, grope her breast and then chase her round his house trying to slap her bottom, chanting: "I'm a naughty Tory".
The woman came close to selling her story to The Mirror newspaper for £30,000 around a decade later, but instead went to police.
She broke down as she gave evidence to the court. She cannot be identified for legal reasons. END QUOTE.
Is not it typical. The guy had a try 14 years ago. Why didn't she report it to police same day? Why wait for so long? Act now, or forget. She tried to make money of this allegation. Still she can't be identified for legal reasons. So she can try it again, with another victim who made a pass at her some time or another during last thirty years. This is incredible!

Brás Cubas , says: August 3, 2020 at 11:19 am GMT

I haven't read the entire article yet, so this comment applies only to its initial part.

Shamir is not very persuasive. He has the merit of explaining the situation clearly, but, by doing so, he makes his criticism of Swedish law somewhat misdirected. As he explains it, the legal punishment is very mild. The biggest punishment, he tells us, comes from private entities. But doesn't that imply that, even if that law did not exist, things would happen almost exactly as they did?

So, the problem, if it exists, is one of societal codes of moral. I, for one, think that Sweden is autonomous to decide which codes of moral are best to itself. It's not society which reflects the law, but the other way around. It is the law which reflects the wish of the majority of Swedes, which is normal in a healthy democracy.

Kali , says: August 3, 2020 at 12:09 pm GMT
@israel shamir

The woman came close to selling her story to The Mirror newspaper for £30,000 around a decade later, but instead went to police.

She tried to make money of this allegation.

This is incredible!

Indeed!

Anonymous [247] Disclaimer , says: August 3, 2020 at 12:10 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

And Clinton bombed an aspirin factory and killed some poor schmuck to take the attention away from his lying.

Bemildred , says: August 3, 2020 at 12:36 pm GMT

I don't find Shamir persuasive either. He has a point, women are not particularly more moral or ethical than men, they need to be watched just like anybody, but OTOH regular witch-hunts for politicians and plutocrats of both genders who cannot resist exploiting their positions financially or keep their hands off the staff could be a good thing, overall.

He comes across as somebody with skin in the game here too.

israel shamir , says: August 3, 2020 at 12:48 pm GMT
@Anonymous

This is stated in the quote from Mike Robeson, so it is better he will respond to the items mentioned in his quote (signposted on the webpage). I have too little knowledge about these details.

The Alarmist , says: August 3, 2020 at 1:23 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Sure, but Americans especially American Presidents are exempted from international laws governing war crimes and crimes against humanity. It's why they can sanction entire populations with impunity.

The irony of America bombing an aspirin factory in another country, however, is that much of America's asprin needs are met with imports.

MarkM66 , says: August 3, 2020 at 1:42 pm GMT

https://www.bitchute.com/video/LQ8EHCBlm8w/

This is an interesting analysis. If the data is correct, how much is just bs and how much is actually verifiable?

anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: August 3, 2020 at 1:47 pm GMT
@israel shamir

I have too little knowledge about these details.

Then why did you write it? And who is your wingman "Mike Robeson"?

Further indication that you're a disingenuous weasel and provocateur.

israel shamir , says: August 3, 2020 at 1:50 pm GMT
@sarz

I commented on Xymphora: Regarding the New Puritans: " Jerry Sandusky, Larry Nasser, Donald Sterling, Richard Fuld, Bernie Madoff and, of course, Harvey Weinstein, goyim." – these are words of Mike Robeson I quote. It is even signposted as the quote. I hardly know these names (excepting Weinstein). So I think you may correct your post.

Jefferson Temple , says: August 3, 2020 at 2:10 pm GMT
@ivan

His horny boyhood is not what I was referring to, Yvonne. Talking about his record with Ken Starr and the "suicide" of Vince Foster.

Justvisiting , says: August 3, 2020 at 2:31 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

I've never met a woman who wasn't a bald-faced liar about anything that concerned her personally.

They do exist, but they are always at least moderate on the Asperger's scale.

Jefferson Temple , says: August 3, 2020 at 3:11 pm GMT
@Thomas Faber

Yes. I'm not sure how it is puritanical to not want middle aged rich men to buy the services of even one minor girl for any sexual purposes. I thought that was just a civilized notion of protecting the young.

I think Shamir is being a bit duplicitous.

anon [327] Disclaimer , says: August 3, 2020 at 4:13 pm GMT

Perhaps now I am going to lose your tentative sympathy, but I do not believe the allegations against Jeffrey Epstein and Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, either. And the attack on Prince Andrew is similarly unbelievable. Chapeau for Mr Trump who dared to express sympathy to Ms Maxwell.

Trump's "sympathy" to Maxmossad was political noncommitment. Being a gentleman.

How clean and uninvolved are Wexner and Ehud?

You have lost more than sympathy.

Rev. Spooner , says: August 3, 2020 at 5:12 pm GMT
@Brás Cubas

"It's not society which reflects the law, but the other way around. It is the law which reflects the wish of the majority of Swedes, which is normal in a healthy democracy. "
One of us is an idiot.

Curmudgeon , says: August 3, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT
@Jefferson Temple Unless you have inside information, his apparent inability to handle actual mature women is conjecture, and open ended. Some women are mature at 20, others are not mature at 50.
Jeff's procured girls, beyond them having been employed by him, are unproven allegations. Curious the parents were seemingly disinterested in their daughters traveling with a male more than twice the age of their daughter.

That does not mean girls were not procured for illicit purposes or that Andrew may be morally bankrupt, regardless of whatever happened between him and Giuffre.

Curmudgeon , says: August 3, 2020 at 5:47 pm GMT
@Mike Robeson

Even the thoroughly unlikable Dershowitz is begging for the release of all documents around this. He claims Giuffre is hiding stuff and has told several whoppers.
https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/alan-dershowitz-joins-tucker-carlson-to-respond-to-accusations-in-unsealed-ghislaine-maxwell-documents

Begging the FBI to investigate would be an odd defense, unless of course there was a fix already in.

Dumbo , says: August 3, 2020 at 7:00 pm GMT
@Chris Moore That said, I disagree with the two main points of the article. One, this is not a "new puritanism", it's something else, the comparison is patently false. How "puritan" is modern society if there's porn everywhere?

Two, there's no way to defend Epstein and say that he was just a "normal, rich, intelligent guy". The guy was, at best, a pervert and a well-connected pimp for politicians (but how did he get there?). At worst , well, there are many theories and I won't dwell into that. No way to defend that Jewish scum (sorry, but, he was Jewish, and he was scum).

brabantian , says: August 3, 2020 at 7:02 pm GMT
@Jack McArthur 'Arrest of Julian Assange is Just Theatre – Assange is a Rothschild-Israeli Operative'
https://www.henrymakow.com/2019/04/Julian-Assange-Arrest-is-Theatre.html
'Assange & Snowden are CIA 'Rat Traps'
https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/11/assange-snowden-rat-traps.html
[MORE]
Jake , says: August 3, 2020 at 7:14 pm GMT

If the US were occupied by the Communists as Amerika envisaged, it wouldn't be as bad as what you've got now.

And that's the horrifying truth. For non-rich white Americans, Stalinism, as evil as it was, would not have been as bad as what we now have under Anglo-Zionist Capitalist Globalism.

Rich , says: August 3, 2020 at 7:26 pm GMT

In my Catholic family, putting your hands on a female relatives' body in any unwanted way, would result in a visit from one of her brothers or cousins and a serious beating. It's also interesting to see that my old parish priests were right when they spoke about the immorality of the godless communists in that apparently adultery was common and accepted in the Soviet Union.

The older I get, the more respect I gain for the moral teachings of the Christian Faith, adhering to it will keep any young man out of the trouble Mr Shamir writes about.

Thomas Faber , says: August 3, 2020 at 8:03 pm GMT
@brabantian

That Mr. Shamir believes that Assange is legit is hardly evidence for him being a Mossad operative.

More likely, he is a big-hearted man, who wishes to believe the best about people. This is also what gives his writings their warm quality.

That it is sometimes the cynical view that is the correct one, and especially so in these days, should not make us too hasty in our judgments.

Jefferson Temple , says: August 3, 2020 at 8:10 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon ext">

Using Mick Jagger as a yardstick for acceptable behavior? Is that really what you meant?

I'm thinking that at least some of those girls actually were responsible for their choices but under the law, I don't think they can be held responsible. No character flaw or selfish motive changes the fact that they were minors. A full grown man and woman is a different story. They get the full advantages that society affords to adults as well as the accountability. I don't care who rich guys want to fuck. If they target my daughter, they're going to need an ambulance.

sarz , says: August 3, 2020 at 8:16 pm GMT
@israel shamir

You quoted a big passage from Mike Robeson without reservation. So what if it's signposted as a quote? One assumes from the context that you are endorsing his views. It does make you look ridiculous, and I can understand your subsequent eagerness to dissociate yourself from the quote. But there it is.

anon [327] Disclaimer , says: August 3, 2020 at 9:12 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon

Fix or snake belching fire to deceive.

Sollipsist , says: August 3, 2020 at 10:03 pm GMT

I don't think you quite understand Catholics if you think we have a healthy and casual outlook on sex

("We" in my case is cultural and geographic history. I haven't been actually practicing nor even much of a believer for a long time. But the culture tends to stick with you for life, no matter what you do)

For one thing, we are probably only second to Jews when it comes to being guilt-ridden from birth about sex (among most other things). The jury is still out whether this drives more of us toward sin than away from it. Catholics are infamously indiscriminately promiscuous (Zappa wrote a song about it) and somewhat less good at learning from their mistakes as many others

The incidence of priestly abuse may be exaggerated for Puritanical effect, but it's by no means an unfounded myth; we were joking about altar boys at least as far back as the 70s when I took First Communion. BTW we had a Father Chester and, whatever the truth was, his nickname rhymed

Ivan , says: August 3, 2020 at 11:53 pm GMT
@Jefferson Temple

My sincere apologies. I am not upto speed on those.

SaneClownPosse , says: August 4, 2020 at 12:00 am GMT
@anon a, Arkansas to run drugs into the USA. Must of have had some local pull.

An early image of William Jefferson Clinton seated next to George Herbert Walker Bush may shed light on the Intelligence connections of Bill, besides the two spook schools Yale and Oxford.

Then there is Hillary's lesbianism. Why would a supposed hetero male marry a lesbian? Bill did not need her political connections, nor her family connections. Chelsea looks like Bill, not. Possible that Bill's taste was never a Monica, nor a Hillary, nor a 16 year old Lolita. Bill and Hill, a match made in Langley.

Dr. Robert Morgan , says: August 4, 2020 at 12:35 am GMT

Israel Shamir: "Currently their targets have a lot of wampum, for it is no fun to bully a person for no material gain. Us, impecunious men, we have nothing to be afraid of yet."

This isn't true at all, at least in America, and I suspect it's the same elsewhere. Here, so-called sexual harassment has been a cause of action since at least the 1980s. As someone who was metooed way back then, before it became a thing, I can tell you that poverty is no guarantee you won't be targeted. People are scum and really get a kick out of victimizing each other. They'll do it just for the fun of it. Financial incentives aren't the cause of this; it's just the icing on the cake for the so-called victim. Also, there is an absurd culture of chivalry toward women in the matriarchal West that has lingered long past its expiration date, such that a certain type of man enjoys "white knighting" for women who make such claims. For such men, and they are very numerous, all a woman has to do is turn on the water works, start crying and acting hysterical, and she'll be believed. Often it won't even take that. From my point of view, when I see guys at the top, like Weinstein and Epstein, having now to deal with it too, I have to confess to a certain degree of shadenfreude. During my own tribulations with this, they were the ones getting away with it, and often even the enforcers and enablers of it.

I see it as yet another unintended side effect of two fundamental, revolutionary technological changes. These changes were first thought by almost everyone concerned to be wonderful, a sign of Progress at last, but nobody was looking down the road far enough. First, due to the advent and widespread use of scientific birth control and abortion, women were given for the first time in history complete control over their own fertility. This led directly to sexual liberation and modern feminism, both of which would be impossible without this development. Second, a change in the political technology, namely the extension of the vote to women. Why, you might ask, did an all-male government ever pass such laws, or in America, empower its enforcement arm, the EEOC? Because of the woman's vote, of course. No politician today can hope to succeed without it.

Exile , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:26 am GMT

But I could never believe that Maxwell and Epstein were connected with the Israeli Intelligence agency, the Mossad. With all my sympathy to our esteemed colleagues Philip Giraldi and Whitney Webb, there is not a single shred of evidence for such connection.

Is this one of C.J. Hopkins "I'm a Russian Asset" parodies? Are you serious?

How many Mossad heads attended "Robert Maxwell's" funeral, Shamir?

Weinstein did nothing wrong?

What do they have on you, Izzy? Blink three times fast in your next video appearance to let us know they got to you.

No one with their head north of their colon believes anything you just said here. So that's a plus.

Reg Cæsar , says: August 4, 2020 at 3:55 am GMT

The Old Puritanism was hard on women; the witches were burned

Where? Not here.

Jefferson Temple , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:09 am GMT
@Ivan

Thanks. I didn't take it personally. But it seems that Kavanaugh is dirty, and so is Trump. Makes me wonder about the operations to take them down. Russia gate for Trump and Blasey Ford gate for Kavanaugh. Both so ridiculous that it is almost as if their foes couldn't use the real dirt without self-incriminating.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:06 am GMT
@Sollipsist l, impossible for little children to doubt what the big person says, whether Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Easter Rabbit, anything. So easy to indoctrinate. And it's continued to the present day, the only denomination that has it's own elementary schools everywhere. Everywhere. All about capturing the children.

But going back to "Puritan", Wikipedia on Savonarola, in 1494 "he instituted an extreme puritanical campaign "

So, Ha! Ha!, Roman "Catholic" Puritans of the Fifteenth Century! Didn't molest children back then, but have ever since!

Adûnâi , says: Website August 4, 2020 at 8:22 am GMT
@Dr. Robert Morgan ds benevolent, Christian causes.

Feel free to check out how these egalitarian English men have in 10 min permanently banned my 6 year old Wikipedia account over a comment I made three years ago – proclaiming that marriage is between a man and a woman is considered homophobic now. (It's a self-plug, but it's also Christian psychology in real-time, you might appreciate it.)

http://archive.vn/AjJRF

Does this homosexual psychosis stem from technology, too? The most industrialized nations on the planet are not sodomitic at all. It all seems to me like an American cultural thing.

anon [327] Disclaimer , says: August 4, 2020 at 1:42 pm GMT
@SaneClownPosse

You mean Beelzebubba didn't spawn pointless, baby Hagwitch?

Who would get near cackling Hagwitch?

Rich , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:11 pm GMT
@SaneClownPosse

The portrait of Bill Clinton in a blue cocktail dress that was hanging on the wall in Epstein's house says it all.

Dr. Robert Morgan , says: August 4, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT

Adûnâi: "Are you not confusing the cause and effect?"

Certainly there is an interplay between the two factors I mentioned that magnifies their societal effects. They strengthen and support each other.

Adûnâi: "But why did women get the vote to begin with? You don't explain.

From what I know, they were first employed in WW1, and it was a "symbol of gratitude"? Sounds quite cucked and Christian."

Technology develops according to its own internal logic, often with unpredictable and sometimes even catastrophic effects on human societies. It is deeply hostile to natural distinctions of race, sex, and culture that impede its efficient operation. Technological change drives cultural change, and war stimulates technological change.

Adûnâi: "Why then have the Eastern countries not faced it? Neither the USSR nor modern China?"

I'd say they have, in their own way. There are, for example, plenty of female professionals in both countries, who function in their jobs as the equivalent of men. This would be impossible if they were constantly pregnant and caring for children. Then too, there is the low birth rate, which is only possible with scientific birth control. They also participate equally with men in politics, AFAIK, and have equal rights as citizens. N.b. too that in China, at least, this happened without Christianity -- although, as has been said by Spengler and others, Marxism can itself be regarded as a form of Christianity.

Adûnâi: "Does this homosexual psychosis stem from technology, too?"

Efficiency is the god of technology, and that is unquestionably true all over the world. To the extent that cultural factors impede the efficient operation of technology, they have to change, or all that results is inferior technology. Man's increasing dependence on technology is why a kind of global culture is emerging now, instead of earlier in history. Cultural distinctions are being destroyed at an accelerating pace, and also races are being mixed as an unintended and unforeseen consequence of this dependence.

Because of this, I suspect the decadence you notice today in the West will eventually show up in the East as well. It's just that because they were relative late comers to technology and industrialization, it may take a little longer, that's all. There's a certain cultural inertia that needs to be overcome.

israel shamir , says: August 4, 2020 at 3:30 pm GMT

Russian method
In a far away Russian village, gals have heard of the Western way to deal with men, and they brought their rape complaints to local police. Police checked the claims, found them without merit, and both ladies were fined 5000 ruble ($80) each. How neat!
https://pervo.info/v-achite-eshhyo-odno-lozhnoe-iznasilovanie/

Adûnâi , says: Website August 4, 2020 at 4:49 pm GMT
@Dr. Robert Morgan d partially in the latter. WW3 > world-wide NatSoc.

Even without technology, give humans enough time, and one race will emerge triumphant. Whereas the high tide of Islam failed to conquer Anatolia, the Seljuks came to the Aegean, and the Ottomans reached Vienna. Failures are weeded out, and those remain who are strong, not who can make money most efficiently.

@Israel Shamir

And yet, the rural folk of Russia is dying out. Natural change (2018): -3 per 1000 rural vs -1 per 1000 urban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#After_WWII

76239 , says: August 4, 2020 at 6:44 pm GMT

The Old Puritanism is Yankee through and through.

America has a Yankee problem. Its inexorably opposed to the notion of "live and let live."

Dr. Robert Morgan , says: August 4, 2020 at 7:35 pm GMT

Adûnâi: "Everything indeed will be shown in due time. What else are we doing here but trying to predict the future?"

Yes, I agree with most of what you wrote in this comment. All I'm doing is pointing to the trend, the way the technological system tends to grind away cultural differences. Of course, some cultural differences may not affect the efficiency of the system, and those might remain. Western "decadence" might or might not be one of those things. Ted Kaczynski says something relevant about this in ISAIF:

29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.

A corollary of this would seem to be that only trivial differences will remain between cultures as different cultures fully adapt themselves to the global technological system. The urging of "oversocialized leftists" isn't actually necessary, as the system itself contains its own rewards for compliance and punishments for failure to comply. There's also nothing particularly tied to naturally-occurring races in that system of values; at least, not obviously so. The system is hostile to natural race distinctions precisely because it is necessarily race-neutral. Might it create its own artificial race of genetically engineered humans in order to maximize efficiency? That could be. Certainly, genetic changes to man have been a side effect of civilization itself. E.g., human beings are much less violent than they used to be. Obedience, non-violence (at least on a personal level), and conformity has been bred into us modern humans.

Adûnâi: "Are you of the view that collapse is imminent, even without Unabombers? And if it is, there will be no going back to high technology?"

It's probably a mistake to underestimate the resilience of the system. Anyone interested in trying to preserve the status quo as to race will have to act fast to bring the system down, or it will be too late. Whether high tech can be rebuilt after a global collapse would depend on a lot of factors impossible to know without knowing at least the method used to cause the collapse, as that would have an effect on how long any ensuing "Dark Age" would last.

ivan , says: August 4, 2020 at 9:51 pm GMT
@Jefferson Temple

Yes its kind of strange. Kavanaugh is not an ideological conservative in the mould of Scalia or Thomas. Makes one wonder what the fuss was all about. I must revisit what you wrote about earlier on his earlier judgements.

Sollipsist , says: August 4, 2020 at 9:58 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

I'm not disagreeing, but don't forget it was 19th Century "Great Awakening" Protestants who were responsible for creating the public school system in the US. Can we question their motives?

israel shamir , says: August 5, 2020 at 2:45 pm GMT

In England, a struggle to dismiss a parliamentarian because of a vague complaint
Chief whip Mark Spencer today stood by his decision not to suspend the senior Tory MP arrested on suspicion of rape.
The party is under mounting pressure, including from the alleged victim, to strip the ex-minister of the Conservative whip.
But Mr Spencer said it was right to allow the police to conclude their investigation before taking any action, while also stressing the need to protect the identity of the accuser.
The former parliamentary researcher in her 20s has alleged she was assaulted and forced to have sex.
What does "forced to have sex" means?

Adûnâi , says: Website August 5, 2020 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Dr. Robert Morgan , it's "a triumph of the Natural, Racial Order" that confuses the plans of the globo. The very globohomo is contingent upon the qualities of the Nordic race. It has evolved to seek efficiency, and now – under the guidance of Christianity – it is employing it in its own self-destruction. But as they near the end, their efforts become discordant, muffled, inefficient.

> "Ted Kaczynski"

By the way, why do you prefer calling him his real name instead of "the Unabomber"? "Ted" is so much more boring, and the in "Kaczynski" is mispronounced as by Americans while it should be in Polish. The Unabomber has a ring to it.

GoyRightActivist , says: August 5, 2020 at 8:46 pm GMT
@israel shamir

Shamir now confesses to be a Mossad Psyop who pretended to be a hero of the Goyim. The choosen ones raping and pimping gentile children and women is nothing to him. Criticism is New Puretanism. A surrogate for the word Antisemitism as Derschowitz uses it for his accuser? Calling Robert Maxell a KGB Agent i and other are struggling to understand if you are trolling or trutly a Mossad apologet. The worst is you are friends with Gilad Atzmon hopefully he is as bluffed by your (new?) behaviour and views as we are.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: August 5, 2020 at 11:51 pm GMT
@Sollipsist

Hmm. Secular schooling is bad?

Anyway, just noticed more ammo lying on the ground right here at UR. Andy Flick-Chick, his 2020-02-13 article, The Philippines Are Choosing New Allies: Pres. Duterte, hugely popular there, "sexually molested by a priest when he was a child, he holds a grudge against Christianity."

Adûnâi , says: Website August 6, 2020 at 11:22 am GMT
@Dr. Robert Morgan he principle of the pursuit of individual happiness trumps any search for the efficiency of the collective.

I would concede that the history of technological intelligent life on this planet has been aimed at the discovery of the correct proportion between efficiency and race. But not more. Simply put, what I am observing to-day is the death of race-denialists in the Occident and the triumph of racists in the Orient. The latter are more efficient, too.

A little video celebrating the unity of the Man and the Machine. Those visions are not Checharian and not bucolic.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/zhk9FJR_OGY?feature=oembed

Dr. Robert Morgan , says: August 6, 2020 at 4:45 pm GMT

Adûnâi: "If it were indeed calculating the most efficient society, it would probably try to mix and match, and as homosexualism is not exactly important, it would be discounted as a Western obstacle." I would say, if there is no reason ruling the system, it turns into idiocracy."

You have to keep in mind that the focus of technique when evaluating efficiency is necessarily quite narrow. For instance, having a horse is more efficient (in some ways) than walking, while having an automobile is still more efficient than having a horse. So an evaluation of efficiency is both relative and contextual. Someone might object, for example, that automobiles aren't really more efficient than walking, because by using automobiles, you have to accept that tens of thousands of people are going to die annually in car accidents. That's true, but still, the judgement of society (i.e., the "group mind" that I've referred to) has been that using automobiles is worth it, i.e., more "efficient". And there can be little doubt that, overall, a society that has the technology necessary to produce and use automobiles would defeat a society at a more primitive technological level in the contest of survival between them.

But generally, one cannot determine in advance "the most efficient society" any more than one can determine in advance "the fittest animal". Whatever form of social organization is most efficient must emerge gradually, as man does his dance of death with technology. Humanity is like a blind man groping his way down a corridor. Nobody knows where technological development will lead, and its development cannot be steered. Attempts to allow ideology to steer technology only result in inferior technology.

As for "homosexualism", thinking about it some more, I'd say it's just another side effect of female empowerment. Due to the development of scientific birth control methods women are now participating in work and politics on equal footing with men, and there are social consequences that weren't foreseen: e.g., more men are raised without a father in the home; more men who, in their work life, will necessarily have a woman as their "boss"; decoupling sex from its natural function of reproduction leads to regarding sexuality as a matter of "lifestyle choice". Given basic human psychology, I'd say these trends favor an increase in "homosexualism". Certainly they are quite destructive of patriarchy.

Adûnâi: "A lack of will is a lack of life. I emphasise the role of the individual in history. If the system is so smart, why does it allow the vector to turn towards disorder* for a period?"

Individual will has nothing to do with technique. It can't control it. Just to stick with the example of birth control technologies, you cannot "will" away the fact that they empower women, and at the same time disempower men. To use the technique at all, you just have to accept this, just as with the use of automobiles, a society accepts that the cost is tens of thousands of lives every year.

Disorder arises, and empires fall, precisely because all the consequences of a given technological configuration aren't foreseen; in fact, they're not even foreseeable. Shit happens, as the saying goes.

Adûnâi: "By the way, why do you prefer calling him his real name instead of "the Unabomber"? "

Because it's his ideas that are important, not his relatively ineffectual bombs.

Dr. Robert Morgan , says: August 6, 2020 at 5:03 pm GMT

Adûnâi: "Simply put, what I am observing to-day is the death of race-denialists in the Occident and the triumph of racists in the Orient. The latter are more efficient, too."

This is the question to be decided in the future, by the result. I agree that the West, precisely because of its Christian worldview, tends to confuse what it regards as moral superiority with technological superiority. But then, if the prize is survival itself, morals can change. Also, there's a time honored Christian tradition of hypocrisy that must be taken into account. Only the event of the matter will show which form of technological organization is more efficient.

Sollipsist , says: August 6, 2020 at 5:04 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse /p>

Kinda sad that people are so often especially motivated by childhood trauma; the simplicity, irrationality and disproportionate responses that are understandable in the childish mind are unnaturally preserved throughout adulthood. A little girl gets abused by a pervert uncle, and years later her supposed reason and free will convinces her that men are evil, old men especially, traditional families and patriarchal society are the enemy, and she was "born" a lesbian. So pretty much everybody in her sphere of influence ends up paying for the act of one degenerate.

Parsnipitous , says: August 7, 2020 at 2:51 am GMT
@sarz

Up to this article, I took him to be honest, regardless of how muddy his background was. Maybe he's testing his audience, but this is laughable.

Of course, if you're opposed to a superficially feminized, #metoo, gotcha culture, you may sympathize at first.

But he's covering up for a zio-criminal entity that hasn't yet been unraveled. He's actually trying the line that Epstein was some cavalier 70s Don Juan simply born a bit too late.

Big Chutzpah, Israel!

Parsnipitous , says: August 7, 2020 at 2:53 am GMT
@anonymous

Because he's full of shit

Parsnipitous , says: August 7, 2020 at 3:06 am GMT
@Curmudgeon

Whores will be whores. Don't care about them, as they squirmed around Weinstein and Epstein. Pretending Epstein is all about whores however, just turned Israel Shamir into a whore in his own right. Pat yourself on the back, but we still don't know shit about Epstein, the intelligence angle that is.

Maybe Israel can get his friend Assange on the ball?

[Aug 06, 2020] Is War With China Inevitable by J

Notable quotes:
"... "When I analyze the current situation, I understand that this is a rehearsal for biological warfare," ..."
"... "I am not saying that this virus was created by humans... but this is a test of the health system's strength, including the country's biological defense." ..."
"... More sinophobic drivel and propaganda. Is it coming from Bannon, Navarro,Fox News, and the other similar warmongering outfits ? This type of propaganda is irrational but certainly purposeful to whip declining exceptionals into war frenzy. They are correct in one aspect - China is outpacing the US and will eventually in 10-20 years surpass it as #1 in Economic power (already the case) and Technology ..."
"... China is a missile-based military deploying hypersonics. This means the US Navy has to standoff 1000 km from the Chinese naval forces or missiles from mainland will decimate the carrier task forces within that range. ..."
"... More sinophobic drivel and propaganda. Is it coming from Bannon, Navarro,Fox News, and the other similar warmongering outfits ? This type of propaganda is irrational but certainly purposeful to whip declining exceptionals into war frenzy. They are correct in one aspect - China is outpacing the US and will eventually in 10-20 years surpass it as #1 in Economic power (already the case) and Technology ..."
"... China is a missile-based military deploying hypersonics. This means the US Navy has to standoff 1000 km from the Chinese naval forces or missiles from mainland will decimate the carrier task forces within that range. ..."
"... Of course having moved much of our manufacturing base into China and then allowing their students to take up most of the hard engineering class space and lab assistantships while diverting our students to 'studies' programs has been a resounding success. ..."
"... "There are few viable military options for warmongering chickenhawks advising..." Bush, Obama, Biden, a Triumverate of peacemakers. Remind me who is ordering troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. ..."
"... Of course having moved much of our manufacturing base into China and then allowing their students to take up most of the hard engineering class space and lab assistantships while diverting our students to 'studies' programs has been a resounding success. ..."
"... "There are few viable military options for warmongering chickenhawks advising..." Bush, Obama, Biden, a Triumverate of peacemakers. Remind me who is ordering troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. ..."
Aug 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The rattling of sabres between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the U.S. is becoming louder, and causing many to ponder if World War III is not far off. There are those in the international community increasingly alarmed given the COVID situation, the South China Sea imbroglio, and China's growing threat that they intend to invade and absorb Taiwan into Communist China within a year. These items have led to the belief that World War III is on the horizon.

Just recently, Dr.Leonid Roshal, a noted Moscow physician, hostage negotiator, and advisor to the WHO remarked that the COVID pandemic is a dry run for World War III, and that COVID-19 is practice for future biological warfare. Covid-19 pandemic has functioned as a "rehearsal for biological warfare," Dr. Roshal also believes that the rapidly-spreading virus was a test for the world's healthcare systems.

In an interview with Forbes, Professor Roshal, President of the Research Institute of Emergency Pediatric Surgery and Traumatology, explained that not all nations were ready for a mass influx of patients, and their lack of preparation has been exposed by the pandemic.

"When I analyze the current situation, I understand that this is a rehearsal for biological warfare," he explained. "I am not saying that this virus was created by humans... but this is a test of the health system's strength, including the country's biological defense."

In addition, Hong Kong-based virologist Yan Li-Meng, currently in hiding at an undisclosed location, claims that the COVID-19 coronavirus came from a People's Liberation Army lab, and not from a Wuhan wet market as Beijing has claimed. Speaking on a live stream interview on Taiwan's News Agency Lude Press, she said, "At that time, I clearly assessed that the virus came from a Chinese Communist Party military lab. The Wuhan wet market was just used as a decoy." Yan has been in hiding in the U.S. after fleeing Hong Kong in April.

Chinese PLA Senior Colonel Ren Guoqiang stated recently that TAIWAN WILL be reunified with the rest of China - and any attempt by the United States to interfere is futile and dangerous. Senior Colonel Guoqiang is Deputy Director of the Ministry of Defense's Information Office, and Chinese Defense Ministry Spokesman. J

entrybody comment-odd comment-has-avatar">

Well, this is certainly a depressing and frightening post. I can't say, however, that I have been thinking along the same lines. However, since I am basically a nobody, I have tried to assure myself that I am being paranoid. So, it's not helping that some people who are much more knowledgeable have expressed in print some of the fears I have been feeling over these months dealing with the pandemic.

All I can do is pray and hold fast to my faith in God. Perhaps He will lift up the people who can deter us from the predictions of this post. (But are we worthy of being saved?)

Posted by: Diana Croissant , 05 August 2020 at 03:44 PM

Well, this is certainly a depressing and frightening post. I can't say, however, that I have been thinking along the same lines. However, since I am basically a nobody, I have tried to assure myself that I am being paranoid. So, it's not helping that some people who are much more knowledgeable have expressed in print some of the fears I have been feeling over these months dealing with the pandemic.

All I can do is pray and hold fast to my faith in God. Perhaps He will lift up the people who can deter us from the predictions of this post. (But are we worthy of being saved?)

Posted by: Diana Croissant 05 August 2020 at 03:44 PM

entrybody comment-even comment-has-avatar">

J

I don't believe there will be any direct military conflict. However, we can expect some saber rattling from both sides.

Sec.Azhar is leading a US delegation to Taiwan. On another note Taiwan ain't HK. They have an independent government. While they will eventually be overwhelmed in any military conflict with China if no other country intervenes on Taiwan's side, they definitely have the capability to inflict a black eye.

The CCP has been emboldened precisely because the US government has actively abetted their rapaciousness for many decades under both parties. From Clinton's MFN designation to Bush & Obama administrations actively supporting the shuttering of US manufacturing.

Trump is making the first course correction albeit in a limited manner with tariffs. He has however changed the tone in an important manner by no longer just kowtowing to whatever the CCP wants.

This story of ARM China exemplifies CCP long-term policy of requiring JVs to access the Chinese market and once technology and know-how have been successfully transferred, then expropriating it. The west in general and the US in particular have turned a blind eye. Huawei got going by stealing cisco source code and design.
https://www.businessinsider.com/arm-conflict-china-complicates-acquisition-prospects-2020-8

It is high time for the US to make the totalitarian Chinese communists pay a price and directly take the fight to them economically and financially. The CCP must be doing their best to insure a Biden win to return to the status quo or wait another Trump term and hope an establishment Democrat or Republican wins after. They have bought and paid the establishment politicians, entire think-tanks, many in academia and the media.

Posted by: Jack , 05 August 2020 at 03:58 PM

J

I don't believe there will be any direct military conflict. However, we can expect some saber rattling from both sides.

Sec.Azhar is leading a US delegation to Taiwan. On another note Taiwan ain't HK. They have an independent government. While they will eventually be overwhelmed in any military conflict with China if no other country intervenes on Taiwan's side, they definitely have the capability to inflict a black eye.

The CCP has been emboldened precisely because the US government has actively abetted their rapaciousness for many decades under both parties. From Clinton's MFN designation to Bush & Obama administrations actively supporting the shuttering of US manufacturing.

Trump is making the first course correction albeit in a limited manner with tariffs. He has however changed the tone in an important manner by no longer just kowtowing to whatever the CCP wants.

This story of ARM China exemplifies CCP long-term policy of requiring JVs to access the Chinese market and once technology and know-how have been successfully transferred, then expropriating it. The west in general and the US in particular have turned a blind eye. Huawei got going by stealing cisco source code and design.
https://www.businessinsider.com/arm-conflict-china-complicates-acquisition-prospects-2020-8

It is high time for the US to make the totalitarian Chinese communists pay a price and directly take the fight to them economically and financially. The CCP must be doing their best to insure a Biden win to return to the status quo or wait another Trump term and hope an establishment Democrat or Republican wins after. They have bought and paid the establishment politicians, entire think-tanks, many in academia and the media.

Posted by: Jack 05 August 2020 at 03:58 PM

entrybody comment-even comment-has-avatar">

More sinophobic drivel and propaganda. Is it coming from Bannon, Navarro,Fox News, and the other similar warmongering outfits ? This type of propaganda is irrational but certainly purposeful to whip declining exceptionals into war frenzy. They are correct in one aspect - China is outpacing the US and will eventually in 10-20 years surpass it as #1 in Economic power (already the case) and Technology .

There are few viable military options for warmongering chickenhawks advising Trump. Certainly, US Naval Intel and PACCOM (now INDOPACCOM) brass who would love a grand Coral Sea 2.0 battle to destroy PLAN vessel on the seas. However, no one, except few Marine 4 stars want any land war. The Marines think they can defeat the PLA on some islands. That kind of warfare is for hollywood movies. China is a missile-based military deploying hypersonics. This means the US Navy has to standoff 1000 km from the Chinese naval forces or missiles from mainland will decimate the carrier task forces within that range.

There won't be any war in SE Asia or East Asia. This area now has a circuit breaker, Russia. Russia is building a naval presence, expanding it's aerospace arm, has basing rights in the zone in Vietnam and has long range radars that cover a lot of the zones, and submarines the US is having issues tracking.

The signals from China and Russia to the US military is very clear. You can walk and talk like the Hegemon but the days of regional hegemony are over. ASEAN nations will not accepting accept a return to gunboat diplomacy and colonization. All these nations want prosperity and progress, not western hegemony and military destruction.

This is why the hybrid war of sanctions, trade war, Infowars, cyberwar, proxies in Central Asia (ISIS and AQ), color revolution attempts in Hong Kong, hysterics about Tibet and Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia (Bannon front) are on the front burner. Military action is a losing proposition for the US. They simply cannot win anything anywhere in the Asia Pacific, western Asia or even against near peer powers proxies like Venezuela.

China simply has to do what Russia does and tell the US to pound sand.

Posted by: Horatio , 05 August 2020 at 04:51 PM

More sinophobic drivel and propaganda. Is it coming from Bannon, Navarro,Fox News, and the other similar warmongering outfits ? This type of propaganda is irrational but certainly purposeful to whip declining exceptionals into war frenzy. They are correct in one aspect - China is outpacing the US and will eventually in 10-20 years surpass it as #1 in Economic power (already the case) and Technology .

There are few viable military options for warmongering chickenhawks advising Trump. Certainly, US Naval Intel and PACCOM (now INDOPACCOM) brass who would love a grand Coral Sea 2.0 battle to destroy PLAN vessel on the seas. However, no one, except few Marine 4 stars want any land war. The Marines think they can defeat the PLA on some islands. That kind of warfare is for hollywood movies. China is a missile-based military deploying hypersonics. This means the US Navy has to standoff 1000 km from the Chinese naval forces or missiles from mainland will decimate the carrier task forces within that range.

There won't be any war in SE Asia or East Asia. This area now has a circuit breaker, Russia. Russia is building a naval presence, expanding it's aerospace arm, has basing rights in the zone in Vietnam and has long range radars that cover a lot of the zones, and submarines the US is having issues tracking.

The signals from China and Russia to the US military is very clear. You can walk and talk like the Hegemon but the days of regional hegemony are over. ASEAN nations will not accepting accept a return to gunboat diplomacy and colonization. All these nations want prosperity and progress, not western hegemony and military destruction.

This is why the hybrid war of sanctions, trade war, Infowars, cyberwar, proxies in Central Asia (ISIS and AQ), color revolution attempts in Hong Kong, hysterics about Tibet and Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia (Bannon front) are on the front burner. Military action is a losing proposition for the US. They simply cannot win anything anywhere in the Asia Pacific, western Asia or even against near peer powers proxies like Venezuela.

China simply has to do what Russia does and tell the US to pound sand.

Posted by: Horatio 05 August 2020 at 04:51 PM

entrybody comment-odd comment-has-avatar">

Bjorn H

... BTW, "J" is a farmer in Oklahoma who served a long time in USAF.

Posted by: turcopolier , 05 August 2020 at 05:04 PM

Bjorn H

... BTW, "J" is a farmer in Oklahoma who served a long time in USAF.

Posted by: turcopolier 05 August 2020 at 05:04 PM

entrybody comment-even comment-has-avatar">

We've been in a war with China for a few decades now, and losing. Of course having moved much of our manufacturing base into China and then allowing their students to take up most of the hard engineering class space and lab assistantships while diverting our students to 'studies' programs has been a resounding success.

Horatio,

"There are few viable military options for warmongering chickenhawks advising..." Bush, Obama, Biden, a Triumverate of peacemakers. Remind me who is ordering troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

Posted by: Fred , 05 August 2020 at 05:05 PM

We've been in a war with China for a few decades now, and losing. Of course having moved much of our manufacturing base into China and then allowing their students to take up most of the hard engineering class space and lab assistantships while diverting our students to 'studies' programs has been a resounding success.

Horatio,

"There are few viable military options for warmongering chickenhawks advising..." Bush, Obama, Biden, a Triumverate of peacemakers. Remind me who is ordering troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

Posted by: Fred 05 August 2020 at 05:05 PM

entrybody comment-odd comment-has-avatar">

The rattling. of sabres between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the U.S.

That line as introduction gives away the article as plain and unsofisticated propaganda. Nobody refers to the USA as the Republican Party, the red scare is a momified bogey..

Posted by: Paco , 05 August 2020 at 05:28 PM

The rattling. of sabres between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the U.S.

That line as introduction gives away the article as plain and unsofisticated propaganda. Nobody refers to the USA as the Republican Party, the red scare is a momified bogey..

Posted by: Paco 05 August 2020 at 05:28 PM

[Aug 05, 2020] Democratic Party Boosters Have Little to Offer by Philip Giraldi

Aug 05, 2020 | www.unz.com

Hillary is a co-founder of Onward Together , a Democratic Party front group that is affiliated to other activist organizations. In a recent e-mail she played the race card in a bid to solidify the black vote behind the Democratic Party, writing "Friend, George Floyd's life mattered. Ahmaud Arbery and Breonna Taylor's lives mattered. Black lives matter. Against a backdrop of a pandemic that has disproportionately ravaged communities of color, we are being painfully reminded right now that we are long overdue for honest reckoning and meaningful action to dismantle systemic racism."

It is, of course, a not-so-subtle bid to buy votes using the currently popular code words "systemic racism" as a pledge that the Democrats will take steps to materially benefit blacks if the party wins the White House and a majority in the Senate. She ends her e-mail with an odd commitment, "I promise to keep fighting alongside all of you to make the United States a place where all men and all women are treated as equals, just as we are and just as we deserve to be." The comment is odd because she is on one hand promising to promote the interests of one group based on skin color while also stating that everyone should be "treated as equals." Someone should tip her off to the fact that employment and educational racial preferences and reparations are not the hallmarks of a government that treats everyone the same.

But if one really wants to dig into the depths of the Democratic Party soul, or lack thereof, there is no one who is better than former U.N. Ambassador and Secretary of State under Bill Clinton, the estimable Madeleine Albright. She too has written an e-mail that recently went out to Democratic Party supporters, saying:

"I'm deeply concerned. Donald Trump poses an existential threat to our standing in the world and continues to threaten the decades of diplomatic progress we had made. It is easy to forget from the comfort of our homes that for many people, America is a beacon of hope and opportunity. We're known as a country that keeps our promises and upholds justice and democracy, and that didn't just happen overnight. We've spent decades building our nation's reputation on the world stage through careful, strategic diplomacy -- but in just under four years, Trump has done unspeakable damage to those relationships and has insulted even our closest allies."

Albright, who is perhaps most famous for having stated that she thought that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. imposed sanctions was "worth it," is living in a fantasy bubble that many politicians and high government officials seem to inhabit. She embraces the America the "Essential Nation" concept because it makes her and her former boss Bill Clinton look like great statesmen. She once enthused nonsensically that "If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us."

Madeleine Albright's view that "America is a beacon of hope and opportunity known as a country that keeps our promises and upholds justice and democracy" is also, of course, completely delusional, as opinion polls regularly indicate that nearly the entire world considers the U.S. to be extremely dangerous and virtually a rogue state in its blind pursuit of narrow self-interest combined with an unwillingness to uphold international law. And that has been true under both Democratic and Republican recent presidents, including Clinton. It is not just Trump.

Albright is clearly on a roll and has also submitted to a New York Times interview , further enlightening that paper's readership on why the Trump administration is failing in its job of protecting the American people. The questions and answers are singularly, perhaps deliberately, unexciting and are largely focused on coronavirus and the new world order that it is shaping. Albright faults Trump for not promoting an international effort to defeat the virus, which is perhaps a bridge too far for most Americans who are not even very receptive to a nationally mandated pandemic response, let alone one requiring cooperation with "foreigners."

Albright's persistence as a go-to media "expert" on international relations is befuddling given her own history as an integral part of the inept foreign policy promoted by the Clinton Administration. She and Bill Clinton became cheerleaders for an unnecessary Balkan war that still resonates and were responsible for what was possibly the greatest foreign policy blunder (with the possible exception of the Iraq War) since the Second World War. That consisted of ignoring the commitment to post-Soviet Russia to not take advantage of the 1991 end of Communism by expanding U.S. or NATO military presence into Eastern Europe. Clinton/Albright reneged on that understanding and opened the door for many of the former Soviet allied states to enter NATO, thereby introducing a hostile military presence right up to Russia's border.

Simultaneously, the U.S. enabled the election as Russian president of the hapless drunk Boris Yeltsin, who, guided by advisers sent by the White House, oversaw the western looting of his country's natural resources. The bad decision-making under the Clintons led inevitably to the rise of Vladimir Putin as a corrective, which, exacerbated by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and a maladroit Donald Trump, has in turn produced the poisoned bilateral relationship between Washington and Moscow that currently prevails.

So, one might reasonably suggest to Joe Biden that if he really wants to get elected in November it would be a good idea to keep the Clintons, Albright and maybe even Obama carefully hidden away somewhere. Albright's interview characteristically concludes with her plan for an "Avengers style dream team" to "fix the world right now." She said that "Well, it certainly would be a female team. Without naming names, I would really try to look for women who are in office, both in the executive and legislative branch. I would try to have a female C.E.O., but also somebody who heads up a nongovernmental organization. You don't want everybody that's exactly the same. Oh, and I'm about to do a program for the National Democratic Institute with Angelina Jolie, and she made the most amazing movie about what was going on in Bosnia, so I would want her on my team."

No men allowed and a Hollywood actress who is regarded as somewhat odd? Right.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is <a://councilforthenationalinterest.org%2C/" title="https://councilforthenationalinterest.org%2C/" href="https://councilforthenationalinterest.org%2C/">https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is <a:[email protected]" title="mailto:[email protected]" href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected].

Priss Factor , says: Website August 4, 2020 at 4:05 am GMT

Elites are afraid that vulgar Trump will give THE GAME away.

Elites like to speak softly and use a big stick.

Be imperialist with 'liberal democratic' face.

Trump shows the obnoxious face of US power.

Carlton Meyer , says: Website August 4, 2020 at 4:14 am GMT

Hillary and Barack were also complicit in unnecessary wars against Libya and Syria that have devastated both countries.

Most Americans remain unaware of their destruction of Libya, Africa's most prosperous nation, which claimed 40,000 black lives. Thousands more were killed as they destroyed Somalia and Sudan as part of the neocon plan from the Bush era to destroy "seven countries in five years" as General Wesley Clark told the world. Thousands more died as they attempted to destroy Syria. Here is a short summary of their destruction of Libya:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/n5Lh4HUyudk?feature=oembed

Majority of One , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:33 am GMT

Take a close look at the visage of Mad Albright. What do you see beyond the simple ravages of the aging process on a life misspent? Check out those eyes, unmasked by the rouge. Take a close look. What do you see? Can you discern the sociopathic evidence, the haunting by the scores of thousands of Iraqi children who starved to death under the tender mercies of United $tates of America Corporation's foreign policy on behalf of the agenda of the elite crime clans of highest international finance.

Maddie is a minion, a minion for genocide and for a total lack of elementary human empathy. She is an ambulatory exemplar of Kali Yuga, the age of devolution, which in polar opposition to the Celestial Kingdom which reigned in China as recently as the Ming Dynasty. During that era where administrative positions were based as much as possible on merit, the contrast is vivid versus the current reality in our ruptured republic where instead of the cream, the scum rises to the top.

Derer , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:55 am GMT

Remove that pic of know nothing old owl from this site – some children might see it!

We need updates on Biden's mega corruption in Ukraine investigation. Trump was impeached for talking to Ukraine president about Biden's corruption and that lifetime taxpayers leech is Democrats front runner for the highest office – pathetic.

Ahoy , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:22 am GMT

During the days of her power and glory (Yeltsin years) Albright had made nine maps of the countries that would be created by the dissolution of Russia. Somebody walked in the poker game room and said "Let's play a different game". Enter the Putin era.

The democrats are just snake skins laying on the asphalt. The new sheriff in town (Syria, Libya) is laying out a different plan. Good by NWO , halo multipolar world.

Joe Levantine , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:54 am GMT

Trump declared on many occasions " we are there because we want the oil"; crude? Yes but honest at least. For those who prefer smooth talkers like the Clintons and the Obamas, I state that the legacy of those two administrations has done more harm to the foreign perception of US power In the Middle East and Eastern Europe than any vulgar language pronounced by Trump who, so far, can be credited with not having started any foreign wars.

At least Trump tried to withdraw American troops from Syria only to be kept in check by the reality of the American Deep state power structure. Had he succeeded in his endeavour, US Russia relations would have better than they are today.

Yukon Jack , says: August 4, 2020 at 6:06 am GMT

Three months to the election and what is on the main menu? Two old white men, neither fit to serve the office of the Presidency. The nation is a tired old whore, spent from all those wars for Zion, and it seems to me the crazy cat lady from the Simpsons is better than Trump or Biden. Both candidates are loony tune, both are completely unacceptable. We are looking at Weimar in the mirror. The nation has run it's course, the Republic is dead.

(Weimar Germany, of course, collapsed. Weimar is also the prelude democratic state before the rise of the authoritarian state. All those who thought Trump was a new Hitler are fools, Trump is the slavish whore of the Jews, not the opposing force, not the charismatic leader who restores sanity to the nation wrecked by Jews. What Trump is, is the final wrecking ball, not the savior.)

Gone are the glory days of imperial dreams, Amerika is not longer fit to wage another big war in the Middle East for Israel. So what is Bibi to do, Israel is in corona crazy lockdown, and his influence on Amerikan politics seems to me slipping badly. How much longer will AIPAC be allowed to influence our politicians if we go into a hyper deflationary crash? It seems to me the Greater Israel project is about to get the rug pulled out, because if the USA crashes and burns no one will tolerate one more cent going to that god forsaken shithole.

Franz , says: August 4, 2020 at 7:08 am GMT

Albright is clearly on a roll

Most people thought she was dead. I sure did.

"If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us."

Whom the gods would destroy they first make Madeleine.

vot tak , says: August 4, 2020 at 8:59 am GMT

The main difference between the reps and dems is their party names. Both represent the same oligarch interests. Most of the dem objections to trump are psywar manipulations for public consumption, not serious policy differences. Pretty much all fluff. The reps also do the same about influencial dems, they endlessly talk nonsense about inconsequential things about them.

The drama queenery is to manipulate the public into thinking their votes for either party actually matter in some way. As of late, that psywar has been failing since most people don't see much difference between the two and believe both parties don't represent them and are lying scum. Trying to neutralize this view by the people is part of the reason the psywar critters have ramped up the hysterics.

Really No Shit , says: August 4, 2020 at 11:32 am GMT

Barack's mother, Madeleine's father and Chelsea's husband all have one thing in common and that something is without which sleepy Joe can't be elected so the author's advice to keep Obamas, Clintons and Albright at bay is moot at best!

chuckywiz , says: August 4, 2020 at 12:06 pm GMT

Her statement about Iraqi children should not come as a surprise to any. She was is from that part of Europe which is famous for being racist.

I came across with an interesting story during Balkan "peace" negotiations in a Paris in 90s. The Bosnian and Serbian delegates were negotiating in Paris hotel where American delegate was staying. One time, at 4 O'clock in the morning out curiosity sMadeline went and knocked on the negotiators door. One of them opened the door and failed to recognize her and thought her to be the cleaning lady. Told her to come back later.
That role suits her perfectly.

ThreeCranes , says: August 4, 2020 at 12:13 pm GMT

I would rather live in a State headed up by Vladimir Putin and his cronies than in one led by Albright and hers.

Albright puts us, we gentiles, in the same basket as those 500,000 Iraqi children; contemptible nothings, dismissed with a backwards wave of the hand.

Putin, at least, would recognize and honor our common European ancestry and heritage .

BL , says: August 4, 2020 at 1:08 pm GMT

Set everything else aside and consider the relationship of each POTUS to the sovereign.

The terminology I use is that they fall somewhere on the spectrum from figurehead to real POTUS.

Obama and Trump are opposites in this respect. Obama took office having gifted the national security state a globally appealing front-man. While he had campaigned and started his presidency looking like he wanted to use his power to move the needle in the right direction, he was quickly snapped like a butter bean, retreating into the presidential safe space offered, at least up until that point, to a POTUS that accepted the constrained role to which the American presidency had been consigned in the modern era.

There were signs almost immediately with Obama. After decisively winning election and becoming our first black president, he was house-trained early on over a single comment defending his Harvard professor friend after a silly arrest.

Does anyone other than me even remember this incident? Or how it completely emasculated the new POTUS, with him retreating behind a teleprompter for everything other than occasional unscripted remarks that, if unwittingly notable or problematic, were quickly corrected by some handler.

Now consider Trump. Both as candidate and POTUS he's Obama's opposite. Where Obama had the establishment wind at his back, writ large those same forces tried to destroy Trump's candidacy and presidency.

Rather than belabor any particulars I'll just note that the psychological driver for the ruling and governing classes, regardless of their ideological and programmatic preferences, is boundless resentment toward him.

After all, it isn't an overstatement to note that more than any other president, Trump got there on his own, with a near complete array of establishment forces, domestic and foreign, against him, including his own party.

Who would have thought such a thing possible before Trump did it?

Little has changed since 2016. We're in our current moment because destroying Trump remains as close to a dues ex machina as any of us have or will see in our lifetimes. There are real, monumental interests at stake but when you get right down to it most personalities in the ruling and governing classes -- who to a one grew up with mama telling them they should be POTUS someday, need him gone so they can go back to feeling better about themselves.

A123 , says: August 4, 2020 at 1:31 pm GMT
@RoatanBill pointees he has to placate some truly awful people, such as Mitt Romney. Some personnel selections that appear to be made by the President are actually part of package deals where key Senators get to pick their names. That is why certain parts of the administration are out of touch with Trump's agenda.

Trump has been 100% successful preventing NeoConDemocrats from starting new wars. Unwinding the messes he inherited from prior administrations is much more complicated.

Hopefully Trump's now inevitable second term will include a friendlier Senate. That will help him get more done than his first term which was impeded by the ObamaGate deception.

RoatanBill , says: August 4, 2020 at 1:59 pm GMT
@A123 Is that true or isn't it? Yes or no?

I don't care about all the political backstabbing and massaging. If he had any balls he'd use the same New York English I grew up with and tell the entire Congress, the Supreme Court and the intel agencies to go F themselves and do so on national TV. The silent majority in the country would back up his play.

But he doesn't do that because he's a bought and paid for politico just like the rest of them. The deep state probably has dirt on him like everyone else in the District of Criminals and they tell him how to behave. He backs off and allows more deaths to occur to save his sorry ass from some exposure.

A123 , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:34 pm GMT
@RoatanBill asking the wrong question . Let me Fix That For You.

As Impeachment Jury, the Senate has final say on whether Trump stays in office.

Is that true or isn't it? Yes or no?

Are you leading a movement to:
-- Jettison the Constitution
-- Dissolve Congress and the Supreme Court
-- Proclaim Trump as God Emperor of the Golden Throne
When you finish this task, I will back your position that Trump can act unilaterally with regard to foreign troop deployments.

Until then, I strongly recommend a more realistic and nuanced view on what a President can accomplish.

anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:41 pm GMT

complicit in unnecessary wars against Libya and Syria

That's putting it in polite terms. In reality it's massive war criminality, wars of aggression that killed, maimed and uprooted millions of people in other countries. Not that it caused as much of a stir domestically as the death of Floyd but there you have it, the order of priorities of the American people and their supposed leaders. During the Vietnam war a common chant was "Hey hey, LBJ, how many kids you kill today?". This is true for the Clintons, Obama, Albright and all the rest of them yet somehow they still have their fans. They're past their expiration dates yet are still kicking around since the Dem party is sclerotic with no new blood, no new ideas, just the same old parasites. Their presidential candidate is way past retirement age and has been obviously faltering in public. This is their champion, a lifelong mediocrity who is entering senility? US no longer has any wind in its sails.

EliteCommInc. , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:47 pm GMT

O think out move in the Balkans was essentially correct. Even Russia scolded their allies for their behavior as over the top in brutality. If Russia your closest ally says you are over the top -- then there's a good chance the genocide claim has merit.

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- –

But I see no reason for Dr. Giraldo to be tepid here. somalia is the a complete embarssment. The admin took a feed and water operation and turned into a "warloard" hunt without any clue began interfering into the internal affairs of a complex former colonized region left bankrupt to reconfigure itself and began a failed bid to set aright -- ohhh that should sound familiar.

1. They turned a mess into a "warlord" victory for the leader they thought most dangerous(and I hate that word and its connotations -- a civil conflict) and then to top it off

2. ran away with their tail between their legs -- it was in my mind the second sign of US vulnerability to asymmetric warefare

counter balance that against not intervening in the genocide in Africa's Rwanda. The deep level hypocrisy here or complete bankrupt moral efficacy -- intervening in Bosnia-Herzegovina but completely ignoring the a worse case in Africa.

All of which occurred under the foreign policy headship of Mrs Albright. Ahhh they are women hear them roar . . . Let's get it straight.

Women wanted us in

Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Ukraine, Libya, they want to intervene . . . in the name of humanity for any host of issues, in a bid to appear tough they will on occasion say the incedulous -- but the bottom lie

female leadership has demonstrated to be no more effective, astute, or beneficial than that of the men.

And allow me to get this out of the way before it starts though start it will,

In fact, it appears that not even white skin is not road to effective political leadership or governance as all of the key players have been predominately and by that I mean near all white. But here the test cases about femininity alone being a key qualifier just does not pan out. And no personal offense Dr. Giraldi neither is an elite education.

RoatanBill , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:52 pm GMT
@A123 ght as the dollar keeps declining in importance and the whole world is sick of the sanctions and bullying.

So, Yes, I'm in favor of ending the Constitution as it has shown to be a useless piece of paper except to deceive those that think it's worth something. Yes, I'm in favor of getting rid of the criminals in DC including the asshat president, all of congress and the absolutely useless supreme court. I'm in favor of 50 new countries once the empire expires offering 50 experiments on how to govern and let the best idea win.

Your more nuanced approach is exactly what Trump is doing – exactly nothing. He's the most do nothing president in decades.

W. Baker , says: August 4, 2020 at 2:56 pm GMT
@Franz

"Whom the gods would destroy they first make Madeleine." Is it okay, if I steal that derivative quotation of Longfellow?

Brilliant!

Jus' Sayin'... , says: August 4, 2020 at 3:03 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

If a primary principle, supposedly justifying the Nuremburg Trials, that initiating wars of aggression is a criminal act against humanity, then the Clintons, Bush II, Albright, essentially all the USA's senior foreign policy and military bureaucrats over the last thirty years, and all the Zionist/neocons urging them on and aiding and abetting their criminal acts, would end their lives in Spandau Prison or dangling at the end of a rope.

Jus' Sayin'... , says: August 4, 2020 at 3:32 pm GMT
@A123 ons">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Government_Policy_and_Supporting_Positions

In the following years I've been shocked again and again to observe Trump's ignorance of government and politics and, even more disturbing, his apparent unwillingness to recover and learn from his mistakes. I'm not sure whether this is due to stupidity, laziness, or sociopathic levels of grandiosity. Whatever the cause, the result has been an inability on the part of Trump to fill many campaign promises. (A less sympathetic interpretation of events might be that Trump's campaign promises were deliberate lies.)

Taras77 , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:26 pm GMT
@Majority of One

The woman is a psychopathic monster!

RoatanBill , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:29 pm GMT
@A123 ng out of the country. The Chinese were eager to comply to get access to the processes involved. The Chinese didn't have to steal anything, as the US corporations voluntarily gave them the tech as part of the deal to be in China. The reason to move out of the US is due to the high labor rate and regulations costs. Those costs are high because the Fed Gov that you apparently like is sucking the life out of the population with high taxes, an oversize and out of control military and intelligence services, a financial sector that repeatedly rapes the country and gets away with it, etc, etc, etc.

Keep voting. It shows you're well programmed.

BL , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:30 pm GMT
@A123 a rel="nofollow" href="https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Law_of_conservation_of_energy"> https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Law_of_conservation_of_energy

In other words, the Democrats and their Allied Media's malefactions against Trump forestalled them suffering what Republicans did post-Watergate in the House and Senate midterms in 1974, but all of that negative energy didn't go away.

Either they will get their comeuppance in 2020, or it will remain and grow, biting them in ass soon enough.

We Americans are kinda attached to our constitutional republic thingie, including our right to choose the POTUS.

Taras77 , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:38 pm GMT

It really is stunning that the dimo crats have learned nothing from their decades of disaster after disaster after disaster!

From regime change to financial debacles to the looting of the break up of the Soviet Union: the cretins are now once again being trotted out as part of the biden farcial "campaign."

A case in point is the odious Larry Summers: This article goes far in summarizing this pending disaster with the prominent placement of summers:

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/08/memo-to-biden-cut-your-ties-to-larry-summers/

Majority of One , says: August 4, 2020 at 4:52 pm GMT
@Joe Levantine could be behind the lines calling the shots) and the other, representing the Marianas Trench of the Deep $tate (CIA) and also the Rushdoony loonies of the Dispensationalist "Great Rupture" Christian-Zionist ambulatory oxymorons are THEIR reeking heinies.

Trump is merely a girlie-lusting ram compared with those two prowling lobos, sporting images of blood in their eyes and hatred in their hearts. Suburban soccer-moms detest the Dumpster, mainly because he exacerbates their emotional radar-screens. They totally overlook the deep danger lurking beneath the surface in the likes of Bolton and Pomposity, because they are adroit at masking their totally psychopathic sociopathy.

Curmudgeon , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:09 pm GMT

No men allowed and a Hollywood actress who is regarded as somewhat odd? Right.

Almost 40 years ago my late aunt (in her mid 70s) opined that more women leaders were needed to stop all of the wars. I asked her if she thought Golda Meir, Sirimavo Bandaranaike, and Margaret Thatcher were really women, and if so, how were they any different than the men?

ChuckOrloski , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:13 pm GMT

Dear Friends,

In a Foreword to Christopher Bollyn's book, "The War on Terror; The Plot to Rule the Middle East," USMC vet, Alan Sabrosky wrote:
"The book provides a way for even informed readers to better appreciate the origins, evolution, and extent to which Israel has driven a process by which the United States and other countries have systematically destroyed Israel's enemies, at no cost to itself. As we have torn up or assailed a long list of countries -- only Iran has not yet been openly attacked."

A less known fact is how the US is undergoing systematic Israel attack, and I suggest that the best outcome is our being "Balkanized," as described by vagabond, Linh Dinh, who now describes the resilient life in Serbia.

The Process continues even if Trumpstein does or does not consent to leave the Blue & White House.
Thank you, Friends.

Franz , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
@W. Baker 90s.

The Cato article in May on her "new book" gives her the right treatment. Even if you are a long way from libertarian, well worth a read. The first paragraph:

"Madeleine Albright is back with a new book to sell. Interviewed in by the New York Times magazine, she reminds us how she continues to live in the past. Unfortunately, that's what made her advice as UN ambassador and secretary of state so uniformly bad."

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/madeleine-albright-back-she-still-living-past

Majority of One , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:25 pm GMT
@BL culate faceman which the shotcallers running the Deep $tate tend to prefer as their podium images.

The failure of the Wicked Witch of the West to achieve her 2017 coronation was a total shock to the system for the DNC, FBI, CIA, Chew Pork Slymes and other major institutional minions for the ruling plutocratic oligarchy. Even before Trump's Inauguration, they set out to destroy his presidency. After all, it had been decreed from on high that our ruptured republic would be blessed by our first female (more or less) chief executive and that she would be totally on-message and not some small (d) Democrat the likes of Tulsi Gabbard–an irrepressible anti-imperialist.

Alden , says: August 4, 2020 at 5:42 pm GMT
@A123

Great post, absolutely right.

President issues executive order at 4 PM. Liberals electronically file for a court order at 5 PM. 8AM next day some judge, county, state or federal, issues an injunction forbidding carrying out the executive order. The executive order is tied up in the courts for months.

Last President to successfully defy the courts was Lincoln. The judiciary overturns laws passed by legislators and referendums. The judiciary's orders create new laws.

That's the system

Rurik , says: August 4, 2020 at 6:28 pm GMT
@Ray Caruso who looks cross eyed at terrorist states Israel or Saudi Arabia , it takes some pretty rancid balls to call those defending their nations from an illegal aggressor, 'terrorists'.

What, if not massive and collective terror, is the murder by drone of villagers and leaders? When their children look at the sky, they don't see wonder and beauty, but terror of an arbitrary death.

The only thing we Americans should be feeling these days, is an excruciating shame for the mass-murder and nation destructions our government has perpetrated in our name.

'The exceptional people'. If only we understood just how true that is.

anon [216] Disclaimer , says: August 4, 2020 at 8:26 pm GMT

Dr. Phil is sound on this issue. Democrat nomenklatura must impute some cultic authority to the quivering rhytides of their living-dead mummies.

A gerontocracy is the appropriate government for this degenerate state. The interview excerpt is priceless with Albright's senile brain fart: "let's hire Angelina Jolie, she made an amazing movie!" about how those crispies fucked the Balkans up for shits & grins. You can just see her masticating bon-bons in her slow-motion catapult chair, watching the genocide she caused like it's Star Wars, feeling transient stirrings in her crepey loins at the more romantic rape scenes. Just give that rank old downer cow the bolt gun.

One cavil on the rhetorical devices of the piece: even in jest it makes no sense to suggest ideas to Vegetable-in-Chief Joe Biden. CIA is going to hook him up to a teleprompter or some brain electrodes or whatever and make him talk and nod and gesture like audio-animatronic Lincoln at Disneyland. He's gonna say we have to blow shit up. And MBNA needs privatized debtors' prisons. It's pointless to offer friendly advice to the captive parties of this failed state. It's like telling NAMBLA they should fuck adults. Wipe out this roach motel of a party. The Greens have signed on to BAP's demilitarization pledge. Or write in your Grammy's moldering corpse. Or that big wet floater dump you took this morning. Fuck the USA and its fake democracy.

turtle , says: August 4, 2020 at 8:33 pm GMT
@A123

Trump's now inevitable second term

Dream about a world so fine,
Sweet as apple-berry wine.
Dream on .

Timur The Lame , says: August 4, 2020 at 8:34 pm GMT

OK, now to be serious. This article and most of the responses to it thus far, however erudite and with good intention seem to have fallen into a trap before they realized it was a trap namely that everything depends on the result of Dems vs Repubs version 2020. Will Mr. Giraldi write an article to show how it makes even in the slightest way a difference who is the President at this late stage ( or any stage) of decay in the US? I know he knows better to especially on this site. So has he really shed his roots?

I have recently entered into cash bets with almost all of my friends of all dispositions and mental acuity on the prospect of Trump being re-elected. They think that I am crazy. I may be but not on this topic. They are all infected with a mental disease called "normiesm". It is immensely frustrating for me to put any kind of 'out of the box' thinking into conversations regarding Trump because they react like women going through hormonal flushes. All verbal reactions seemingly in lockstep.

So with the monetary challenges shoved in their faces they all seemed to pause briefly to wonder if it was decent to take money from a fool such as I. After a few profanities and insults as to their inter-cranial pressure from me they gladly accepted to a one and some doubled down.

Taking their money, as I will, is the only way that they can be brought to bear to hear me out about my logic. Funny, but it always seems to come down to money.

Now lookie here. What have we had since the Trump inauguration? Four years of 24/7/365 vilification, right versus left, grabbing P ***** , Putin, Stormy Daniels, impeachment (a 24 hour respite when he sent 77 missiles into Syria) and then back to 24/7 of Trump foibles.

Do you see what is/was happening? TDS was the precursor of Covid. And like a charm it worked and still works. Divide and conquer, bread and circuses rolled onto one tasty bagel. Look around you. Would you recognize main-street 4 months ago? I would not. Why would the PTB want to remove Trump? He is a major cog in their satanic wheel whether he knows it or not.

So with the powerful combination of TDS, COVID, BLM and antifa backed by MSM effectively scaring the normies from even uttering a peep , I would say that things are going swimmingly in some power's interests.

Mr Giraldi, "New Dummies, Same Ventriloquist" should be your next article for the sake of your own credibility not digging up another corpse (living or not) like that of of Madeleine Halfbright.

Cheers-

A123 , says: August 4, 2020 at 8:35 pm GMT
@RoatanBill

You're a hopium addict,

Your use of the ad hominem 'hopium addict' slur shows your frustration. You can't come up with an actual retort, so you lash out.

I notice that you intentionally came out against me personally, because you are unable to defeat my ideas. Your sad & pathetic attempt to paint you submission to Biden as a virtue has failed. And, your personal attacks are simply shameless.

PEACE

turtle , says: August 4, 2020 at 8:43 pm GMT
@Anonymous

starving and incinerating 500,000 or so Iraqi children.

No word on what she might have thought had she heard of the demise of 5000 (1% of 500,000) Jewish children.
But I'll bet I can guess

Majority of One , says: August 4, 2020 at 10:03 pm GMT
@Alden ferson's administration. But as Leo the Lip Durocher insisted, "nice guys finish last."

Jefferson should have had his fellow Virginian arrested and imprisoned for overstepping his constitutional powers. Didn't happen. Marshall (the darling of the Kavanaugh-cloned Federalist Society of statist lawyers) had set a bad precedent, much to the dismay of the president and all freedom-loving elements of WE THE PEOPLE. The very root concept of small (r) republicanism, that of popular sovereignty ,was promptly derailed by that closet monarchist.

Well, at least his fellow Federalist (and London bankster tool) Alexander Hamilton got his just desserts.

Hegar , says: August 4, 2020 at 10:52 pm GMT

Simultaneously, the U.S. enabled the election as Russian president of the hapless drunk Boris Yeltsin, who, guided by advisers sent by the White House, oversaw the western looting of his country's natural resources.

False. But Giraldi knows most readers won't know the truth. It wasn't "western looting," it was looting by a group inside Russia, "the oligarchs". Eight out of the twelve were Jews, among them the top oligarch, Berezovsky.

Philip Giraldi also doesn't mention that Madeleine Albright is a Jew. It's as if her lust for war springs from being pro-American to a fault. Right? Except it's all about destroying Israel's targets, the few Middle Eastern and Central Asian nations that support the Palestinians. And Russia, for giving some support to pro-Palestinian Iran and Syria. The Israeli Lobby always gets what it wants.

Both in Russia and in the Middle East it's about race, not "the West". Of course, ask a communist like "Eric Striker" who writes for Unz Review, and he'll do everything he can to make you believe it's "the Right," "capitalists," "the West" who are behind it all, while conveniently forgetting the Left's domination of media, universities and politics. The lies flow freely.

snag , says: August 5, 2020 at 2:40 am GMT

Bi*ch had the audacity to visit that place and show her face to these people.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/uDfsAxvIMyc?feature=oembed

anon [161] Disclaimer , says: August 5, 2020 at 2:40 am GMT
@ChuckOrloski

'Steal of the Century' (Part 2), filmed in occupied #Palestine is now out! (The first part is being censored on Youtube.) Find out what Donald Trump's plan has paved the way for and what's happening right now in Palestine. •Premiered Aug 2, 2020

'Steal Of The Century': Trump's Palestine-Israel Catastrophe (Documentary) | Episode 2/2

https://www.youtube.com/embed/o3OqReiTpXI?feature=oembed

[Aug 04, 2020] The Cold Warriors

Aug 04, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

The Cold Warriors

Robert Waldmann | August 2, 2020 12:43 pm

HISTORY

I have no expertise in this field. This post will not be cluttered with links, because I will write from memory and not link to anything. I suppose in a way, this post is a slap in the face of Tom Nichols , who is a subset of the topic, is supposed to be an expert on the topic, and is the author of " The Death of Expertise ". I will attempt to explain how his errors are due to envy and neurosis.

Honestly, my trigger was lest nasty (and less based on envy). Someone asked in a Tweet what is the consensus on the old domino theory which lead to US involvement in the war in Vietnam (which is also called "the American war" by the Vietnamese). I will put my anti Nichols spite after the jump (note I advertised his book). His alleged field of expertise is preventive war . There, that's another advertisement. Actually I think I will just post a separate post sniping at him.

OK so the Domino theory.

The logic was as follows. In 1938, France, the British Empire, and Czechoslovakia could have stopped Hitler. But all he demanded was the Sudetenland which was predominately inhabited by ethnic Germans. Neville Chamberlain insisted on reaching an agreement. Benes and Daladier had to go along, so the chance to defeat Nazism with heavy but not immense losses was lost.

Heeeyyy wait a minute, wasn't I supposed to be talking about the 1960s not 1938 ? Yes, but the first problem is that there are influential people in the USA for whom all years are 1938 (note I use the present tense -- they are still around and are very dangerous).

The first key methodological assumption of the Domino theory is that all years are 1938 and all negotiations are held in Munich. The second is that Neville Chamberlain made every possible error, so, as long as one did the opposite of what he would have done, everything will be fine. The rest is commentary.

I now invite historians, experts in international relations and political scientists to contest my analysis (knowing that not very many read Angry Bear).

The domino theory maintained that the USA had to stop the Communists in Vietnam or else they would move on to Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Burma, East Pakistan, and India. The logic was exactly (and only) that it would have been better to fight Hitler at the old fortified border between Germany and Czechoslovakia than to let him take the Sudetenland, then the rest of Czechoslovakia, and then fight him in Poland. Notably, Hitler was surprised when France and Britain declared war on September 1 1939. The theory was that, restraint, compromise, or the most dreaded retreat would be perceived as weakness and make further aggression inevitable. One detail was overlooked. Hitler was one person, Khrushchev, Mao and Ho Chi Minh were three different people. The USSR had advanced weapons, the PRC had huge armies, North Vietnam had no fear of either and knew how to play one off the other.

Then Khrushchev was overthrown by the Red Army. The communist Soviet Union had not reached the advanced stage of Communist development which made a Communist military dictatorship possible later in Poland, so the generals gave power to a troika (sleigh pulled by 3 horses). The first among equals was Leonid Brezhnev. The USA still faced 3 adversaries lead by men incapable of pity. Brezhnev was incapable of pity or any other higher mental functioning. He liked clowns. The one key qualification for being Khrushchev's second in command was being a total idiot (preferably lacking in ambition) and therefore being no threat. From then on, the analogy should have been negotiating with Rudolf Hesse in Munich (Hesse was similarly chosen for his total idiocy).

Notably one of the challenges for the US war effort in South Vietnam was the fact that the Communist Pathet Lao effectively controlled Laos and Communist friendly (and superhumanly vain) Prince Norodom Sihanouk) controlled Cambodia. Notably this is a problem for the domino theory. The dominoes which were supposed to be knocked down by the fall of South Vietnam had it already fallen. Their impact on Thailand was fairly minor (it might not have seemed that way to the Thai communists who fought and died in the jungle, but there were never many of them and almost no one noticed when they gave up and made peace (I forget the date)).

In contrast, US firm resoluteness in Vietnam made a large fraction of the world (and a substantial minority in the USA) hate the US government. It is also estimated to have caused 3 million deaths (from surveys decades later asking people if they had lost relatives).

During the resolute effort against the Hitler like world Communist movement, the USSR and the PRC fought a border war. They became each others' most bitter enemies -- the USA was not even number one on their enemies list. Soon after the final victory of the Vietnamese Communists, there was a brief war between Vietnam and the PRC. The enemy was the enemy of the enemy. The Soviet Chinese war occurred some time during the US war in Vietnam. It should have changed everything. But to completely reverse US policy, US policymakers would have to admit that they had made a mistake, and that is not possible.

The after aftermath is that Communist China became more capitalist than the USA and the USSR collapsed. Impressively right up to the collapse, US hawks insisted that there was a high risk of Soviet conquest of the world. Also impressively the people who clearly demonstrated that they were clueless gained status from the collapse, because it (coincidentally) occurred while Ronald Reagan was in the White House. Oddly, some sincere people including Max Boot and Anne Applebaum took seriously Reagan's claim to be a principled supporter of freedom around the world. I am not much older than they are and remember the distinction between acceptable authoritarians and unacceptable totalitarians (in other words our sons of bitches and sons of bitches who weren't ours). I remember the mockery of Carter's human rights campaign. I remember the US alliance with Argentine fascist mass murderers in opposition to the fascists non mass murdering Sandinistas (currently in power to remind us of the utter worthlessness of the domino theory).

So how can we assess the scientific standing of the domino theory ? How does it compare with the Ptolemaic model of the solar system, the phlogiston theory of burning, the caloric theory of heat, and the four humors theory of health and disease ? Digressions after the jump.

Obviously it does not reach the standing of the Ptolemaic model which is an astounding scientific accomplishment . Ptolemy's model as written in Almagest gave useful predictions over a thousand years after it was published. This record remains unequaled. It happens not to be true, but it is excellent science. In particular it is often said that while Ptolemy was a great scientist, the medieval Ptolemaic astronomers were the epitome of a sort of bad science -- the degenerative research program (google Lakatos). It is often asserted as a known historical fact that, when the model didn't fit the data, they added fiddle factors in the form of additional epicycles. It is asserted that this lead nowhere useful and never would have, so a scientific revolution was needed. One problem with this story is that there is no historical evidence at all that any Ptolemaic astronomer after Ptolemy added even one epicycle. It is frequently stated as fact, but no archival evidence has ever been presented. In fact, it is pretty clear that Ptolemy's model with no modifications was used by a Ptolemaic astronomer during Copernicus's lifetime. The astronomer was named Copernicus (who was Ptolemaic before he wasn't). He reports the differences between forecasts and measurements. We believe we know what he saw (as we have great confidence in Newton's model and (irrelevantly in this case) more in Einstein's. So one can infer the forecasts from the reported forecast errors. They are exactly the forecasts Ptolemy would have made.

So the Ptolemaic model of the solar system and the domino theory are like night and day -- roughly tied for best effort ever and in the running for worst human idiocy.

OK Phlogiston. The phlogiston theory of burning asserted that burning was a process of release of a substance called phlogiston. The modern theory of oxidation asserts that burning was the process of adding or combining with a substance called oxygen. Each is reasonable. The phlogiston theory is more intuitive (and unsurprisingly older) because with most burning the ashes weigh less than the burned object. It makes perfect sense. Even when Priestly produced pure oxygen, he quite reasonably described it as air without phlogiston in it (dephlogistonized air). Lavoisier was, for some reason, obsessed with mercury which oxidizes to cinnabar (which is solid but soft and red). He got the money for his research by marrying a tax farmer and then becoming as ruthless as his father in law. (In tax farming the state sold the right to tax revenues to an individual for a fixed amount, then that individual collected taxes for himself). Another of Lavoisier's inventions was the tariff wall around Paris -- people had to pay to enter or leave. He lived just before the French revolution. It isn't really surprising that he was guillotined). But his obsessive focus on mercury allowed him to notice that the cinnabar weighed more -- that the amount of air in a closed system declined as the mercury oxidized, and that the process stopped when the volume of air (under one atmosphere of pressure) decreased by 20%. He noticed more generally that chemical reactions involve constant (complicated) proportions by weight. He invented modern chemistry. But he didn't show that there was anything wrong with the Phlogiston model except that it didn't happen to correspond to what was happening on earth (with mercury and a few other elements or, it was later learned, anything). The phlogiston theory is not like the domino theory. It fit some facts. It was reasonable given available evidence.

The caloric theory of heat held that heat is a substance which is released when things cool. It has the defect that it assumes that, because heat has a name, it has an independent existence (and weight and location and such). It's an OK theory. It's fault is that it isn't true. It fits some facts about conservation of heat in closed systems without chemical or nuclear reactions. It's OK, just not true.

The four humors theory of disease. Bingo. Total nonsense. Also highly profitable nonsense for physicians. It survived a long time. I have no idea of where to find a hint of a clue of any useful application.


Kaleberg , August 2, 2020 2:17 pm

It's not a bad analysis. You can think of Korea as Vietnam: The Prequel. The Domino Theory was pretty bogus and ignored the actual political situation, but foreign relations theory was pretty polarized by then. The great European powers were multilateral, with shifting alliances, for centuries. Now and then there was polarization as with Napoleon and Hitler. Domino Theory was, as you noted, a left over from World War II.

A major difference between the Ptolemaic theory and Domino theory is that the former stood for over a thousand years and was remarkably useful. It was only better observations and longer term data collection that revealed the problems in the geocentric theory. It would be centuries again before anyone noticed the precession of Mercury. One big selling point for the heliocentric theory was that it solved a standing problem in astrology concerning the strength of influence of Mercury and Venus on human fate. Domino theory lasted from the 1950s into the 1980s and was never particularly accurate or useful.

Phlogiston is a better comparison, though it had a longer useful life.

[Aug 03, 2020] How The Billionaires Control American Elections by Eric Zuesse

Notable quotes:
"... Greenwald went on, after that, to discuss other key appointees by Nancy Pelosi who are almost as important as Adam Smith is, in shaping the Government's military budget. They're all corrupt. ..."
"... Numerous polls (for examples, this and this ) show that American voters, except for the minority of them that are Republican, want "bipartisan" government; but the reality in America is that this country actually already does have that: the U.S. Government is actually bipartisanly corrupt, and bipartisan evil. In fact, it's almost unanimous, it is so bipartisan, in reality. ..."
"... That's the way America's Government actually functions, especially in the congressional votes that the 'news'-media don't publicize. However, since it lies so much, and its media (controlled also by its billionaires) do likewise, and since they cover-up instead of expose the deepest rot, the public don't even know this. They don't know the reality. They don't know how corrupt and evil their Government actually is. They just vote and pay taxes. That's the extent to which they actually 'participate' in 'their' Government. They tragically don't know the reality. It's hidden from them. It is censored-out, by the editors, producers, and other management, of the billionaires' 'news'-media. These are the truths that can't pass through those executives' filters. These are the truths that get filtered-out, instead of reported. No democracy can function this way -- and, of course, none does. ..."
"... The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society , and we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings . ..."
"... But we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding it's fear of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections , on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. It's preparations are concealed, not published. It's mistakes are buried, not headlined. It's dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned. No rumor is printed. No secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War in short with a wartime discipline, no democracy would ever hope or wish to match. ..."
Aug 03, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

How The Billionaires Control American Elections

by Tyler Durden Sun, 08/02/2020 - 23:40 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

The great investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald gave an hour-long lecture on how America's billionaires control the U.S. Government, and here is an edited summary of its opening twenty minutes, with key quotations and assertions from its opening -- and then its broader context will be discussed briefly:

"How Congress Maintains Endless War – System Update with Glenn Greenwald" - The Intercept, 9 July 2020

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ejqYrzEX14E

2:45 : There is "this huge cleavage between how members of Congress present themselves, their imagery and rhetoric and branding, what they present to the voters, on the one hand, and the reality of what they do in the bowels of Congress and the underbelly of Congressional proceedings, on the other. Most of the constituents back in their home districts have no idea what it is that the people they've voted for have been doing, and this gap between belief and reality is enormous."

Four crucial military-budget amendments were debated in the House just now, as follows:

  1. to block Trump from withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

  2. to block Trump from withdrawing 10,000 troops from Germany

  3. to limit U.S. assistance to the Sauds' bombing of Yemen

  4. to require Trump to explain why he wants to withdraw from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty

On all four issues, the pro-imperialist position prevailed in nearly unanimous votes - overwhelming in both Parties. Dick Cheney's daughter, Republican Liz Cheney, dominated the debates, though the House of Representatives is now led by Democrats, not Republicans.

Greenwald (citing other investigators) documents that the U.S. news-media are in the business of deceiving the voters to believe that there are fundamental differences between the Parties. "The extent to which they clash is wildly exaggerated" by the press (in order to pump up the percentages of Americans who vote, so as to maintain, both domestically and internationally, the lie that America is a democracy -- actually represents the interests of the voters).

16:00 : The Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee -- which writes the nearly $750B annual Pentagon budget -- is the veteran (23 years) House Democrat Adam Smith of Boeing's Washington State.

"The majority of his district are people of color." He's "clearly a pro-war hawk" a consistent neoconservative, voted to invade Iraq and all the rest.

"This is whom Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats have chosen to head the House Armed Services Committee -- someone with this record."

He is "the single most influential member of Congress when it comes to shaping military spending."

He was primaried by a progressive Democrat, and the "defense industry opened up their coffers" and enabled Adam Smith to defeat the challenger.

That's the opening.

Greenwald went on, after that, to discuss other key appointees by Nancy Pelosi who are almost as important as Adam Smith is, in shaping the Government's military budget. They're all corrupt. And then he went, at further length, to describe the methods of deceiving the voters, such as how these very same Democrats who are actually agents of the billionaires who own the 'defense' contractors and the 'news' media etc., campaign for Democrats' votes by emphasizing how evil the Republican Party is on the issues that Democratic Party voters care far more about than they do about America's destructions of Iraq and Syria and Libya and Honduras and Ukraine, and imposing crushing economic blockades (sanctions) against the residents in Iran, Venezuela and many other lands. Democratic Party voters care lots about the injustices and the sufferings of American Blacks and other minorities, and of poor American women, etc., but are satisfied to vote for Senators and Representatives who actually represent 'defense' contractors and other profoundly corrupt corporations, instead of represent their own voters. This is how the most corrupt people in politics become re-elected, time and again -- by deceived voters. And -- as those nearly unanimous committee votes display -- almost every member of the U.S. Congress is profoundly corrupt.

Furthermore: Adam Smith's opponent in the 2018 Democratic Party primary was Sarah Smith (no relation) and she tried to argue against Adam Smith's neoconservative voting-record, but the press-coverage she received in her congressional district ignored that, in order to keep those voters in the dark about the key reality. Whereas Sarah Smith received some coverage from Greenwald and other reporters at The Intercept who mentioned that "Sarah Smith mounted her challenge largely in opposition to what she cast as his hawkish foreign policy approach," and that she "routinely brought up his hawkish foreign policy views and campaign donations from defense contractors as central issues in the campaign," only very few of the voters in that district followed such national news-media, far less knew that Adam Smith was in the pocket of 'defense' billionaires. And, so, the Pentagon's big weapons-making firms defeated a progressive who would, if elected, have helped to re-orient federal spending away from selling bombs to be used by the Sauds to destroy Yemen, and instead toward providing better education and employment-prospects to Black, brown and other people, and to the poor, and everybody, in that congressional district, and all others. Moreover, since Adam Smith had a fairly good voting-record on the types of issues that Blacks and other minorities consider more important and more relevant than such things as his having voted for Bush to invade Iraq, Sarah Smith really had no other practical option than to criticize him regarding his hawkish voting-record, which that district's voters barely even cared about. The billionaires actually had Sarah Smith trapped (just like, on a national level, they had Bernie Sanders trapped).

Of course, Greenwald's audience is clearly Democratic Party voters, in order to inform them of how deceitful their Party is. However, the Republican Party operates in exactly the same way, though using different deceptions, because Republican Party voters have very different priorities than Democratic Party voters do, and so they ignore other types of deceptions and atrocities.

Numerous polls (for examples, this and this ) show that American voters, except for the minority of them that are Republican, want "bipartisan" government; but the reality in America is that this country actually already does have that: the U.S. Government is actually bipartisanly corrupt, and bipartisan evil. In fact, it's almost unanimous, it is so bipartisan, in reality.

That's the way America's Government actually functions, especially in the congressional votes that the 'news'-media don't publicize. However, since it lies so much, and its media (controlled also by its billionaires) do likewise, and since they cover-up instead of expose the deepest rot, the public don't even know this. They don't know the reality. They don't know how corrupt and evil their Government actually is. They just vote and pay taxes. That's the extent to which they actually 'participate' in 'their' Government. They tragically don't know the reality. It's hidden from them. It is censored-out, by the editors, producers, and other management, of the billionaires' 'news'-media. These are the truths that can't pass through those executives' filters. These are the truths that get filtered-out, instead of reported. No democracy can function this way -- and, of course, none does.

Patmos , 8 hours ago

Eisenhower originally called it the Military Industrial Congressional Complex.

Was probably still when Congress maybe had a few slivers of integrity though.

As McCain's wife said, they all knew about Epstein.

Alice-the-dog , 2 hours ago

And now we suffer the Medical Industrial Complex on top of it.

Question_Mark , 1 hour ago

Klaus Schwab, UN/World Economic Forum - power plant "cyberattack" (advance video to 6:42 to skip intro):
please watch video at least from minute 6:42 at least for a few minutes to get context, consider its contents, and comment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOvz1Flfrfw


source for UN/WEF partnership:
https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/06/world-economic-forum-and-un-sign-strategic-partnership-framework/

EngageTheRage , 9 hours ago

How jewish billionaires control America.

NewDarwin , 9 hours ago

Vot3 for trump but don't waste too much energy on the elections. All Trump can do is buy us time.

Their plan has been in the works for over a century.

1) financial collapse with central banking.

2) social collapse with cultural marxism

3) government collapse with corrupt pedophile politicians.

EndOfDayExit , 7 hours ago

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

Humans are just not wired for eternal vigilance. Sheeple want to graze and don't want to think.

JGResearch , 8 hours ago

Money is just the tool, it goes much deeper:

The Truth, when you finally chase it down, is almost always far
worse than your darkest visions and fears.'

– Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear
'The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes' *

- Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

This information helps understand the shift to the bias we are witnessing at The PBS Newshour and the MSM. PBS has always taken their marching orders from the Council on Foreign Relations.

Some of the mebers of the CFR:

Joe Biden (47th Vice President of the United States )

Judy Woodruff, and Jim Lehrer (journalist, former anchor for PBS ) is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. John McCain (United States Republican Senator from Arizona , 2008 Republican Party nominee for the Presidency), William F. Buckley, Jr (commentator, publisher, founder of the National Review ), Jeffery E Epstein (financier)

https://www.cfr.org/membership/roster

The Council on Foreign Relations has historical control both the Democratic establishment and the Republican establishment until President Trump came along.

Until then they did not care who won the presidency because they control both parties at the top.

FYI: Hardly one person in 1000 ever heard of the Council on Foreign Relations ( CFR ). Until Trump both Republicans and Democrats control by the Eastern Establishment.There operational front was the Council on Foreign Relations. Historically they did not care who one the election since they controlled both parties from the top.

The CFR has only 3000 members yet they control over three-quarters of the nation's wealth. The CFR runs the State Department and the CIA. The CFR has placed 100 CFR members in every Presidential Administration and cabinet since Woodrow Wilson. They work together to misinform the President to act in the best interest of the CFR not the best interest of the American People.

At least five Presidents (Eisenhower, Ford, Carter, Bush, and Clinton) have been members of the CFR. The CFR has packed every Supreme court with CFR insiders.

Three CFR members (Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and Sandra Day O'Connor) sit on the supreme court. The CFR's British Counterpart is the Royal Institute of International Affairs. The members of these groups profit by creating tension and hate. Their targets include British and American citizens.

The CFR/RIIA method of operation is simple -- they control public opinion. They keep the identity of their group secret. They learn the likes and dislikes of influential people. They surround and manipulate them into acting in the best interest of the CFR/RIIA.

KuriousKat , 8 hours ago

there are 550 of them in the US..just boggles the mind they have us at each others throat instead of theirs.

jmNZ , 3 hours ago

This is why America's only hope is to vote for Ron Paul.

x_Maurizio , 2 hours ago

Let me understand how a system, which is already proven being disfunctional, should suddenly produce a positive result. That's craziness: to repeate the same action, with the conviction it will give a different result.

If you would say: "The only hope is NOT TO TAKE PART TO THE FARCE" (so not to vote) I'd understand.
But vot for that, instead of this.... what didn't you understand?

Voice-of-Reason , 6 hours ago

The very fact that we have billionaires who amass so much wealth that they can own our Republic is the problem.

Eastern Whale , 8 hours ago

all the names mentioned in this article is rotten to the core

MartinG , 5 hours ago

Tell me again how democracy is the greatest form of government. What other profession lets clueless idiots decide who runs the business.

Xena fobe , 4 hours ago

It isn't the fault of democracy. It's more the fault of voters.

quikwit , 3 hours ago

I'd pick the "clueless idiots" over an iron-fisted evil genius every time.

_triplesix_ , 8 hours ago

Am I the only one who noticed that Eric Zuesse capitalized the word "black" every time he used it?

F**k you, Eric, you Marxist trash.

BTCtroll , 7 hours ago

Confirmed. Blacks are apparently a proper noun despite being referred to as simply a color. In reality, no one cares. Ask anyone, they don't care expert black lies matter.

freedommusic , 4 hours ago

The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society , and we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings .

And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.

Our way of life is under attack.

But we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding it's fear of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections , on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. It's preparations are concealed, not published. It's mistakes are buried, not headlined. It's dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned. No rumor is printed. No secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War in short with a wartime discipline, no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

...I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to re-examine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self restraint, which that danger imposes upon us all.

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation and obligation which I share, and that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people, to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need and understand them as well, the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program, and the choices that we face.

I am not asking your newspapers to support an administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people, for I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens, whenever they are fully informed.

... that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment. The only business in America specifically protected by the constitution, not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply give the public what it wants, but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises, and our choices, to lead, mold, educate, and sometimes even anger, public opinion.

-- JFK

[Aug 03, 2020] American exceptionalism fans imperial designs. We must reject it. by CLAES G. RYN

Notable quotes:
"... A striking example of philosophical messiness and confusion is that the conservative movement even incorporated clearly anti-conservative ideas, specifically, the anti-historicism advanced by Leo Strauss and his followers. Strauss championed what he called "natural right," which he saw as sharply opposed to tradition. He called the latter "the ancestral" or "convention." To look to them for guidance was to be guilty of the great offense of "historicism," by which he meant moral relativism or nihilism. History, Strauss insisted, is irrelevant to understanding what is right. Only ahistorical, purely abstract reason is normative. ..."
"... The Jaffaite notion that America rejected the past and was founded on revolutionary, abstract, universal ideas contributed to what this writer has termed "the new Jacobinism." According to this ideology, America is "exceptional" by virtue of its founding principles. Since these principles belong to all humanity, America must help remake societies around the world. "Moral clarity" demands uncompromising adherence to the principles. The forces of good must defeat the forces of evil. Inherently monopolistic and imperial, American principles justify foreign policy hawkishness and interventionism. ..."
"... These contrasting views of America entail wholly different nationalisms. The moralistic universalism of American exceptionalism, with its demand that all respect its dictates runs counter to the American constitutional spirit of compromise, deliberation, and respect for minorities. Exceptionalism does not defuse or restrain the will to power, but feeds it, justifying arrogance, assertiveness, and even belligerence. ..."
"... In a speech in the spring of 2019, Pompeo declared that America is "exceptional." America is, he said, "a place and history apart from normal human experience." It has a mission to oppose evil in the world. America is entitled to "respect." It should dictate terms to "rogue" powers like Iran and confront countries like China and Russia that are "intent on eroding American power." This speech was given and loudly cheered at the 40th anniversary gala of the Claremont Institute in California, whose intellectual founder was -- Harry Jaffa. ..."
"... American exceptionalism is in important ways the opposite of a conservatism or a nationalism that defends the moral and cultural heritage that generated American constitutionalism. Exceptionalism fans imperial designs. ..."
"... the phony opposition between nationalism and American exceptionalism on the one hand, and globalism. Any nationalism is only one step removed from globalism, but the nationalism of small countries is usually fairly harmless because the countries themselves are weak. But American nationalism and exceptionalism is in practice indistinguishable from globalism. It simply makes explicit from which location the globe will be ruled. ..."
"... The original idea behind American Exceptionalism is that we are the "Shining City on the Hill". In other words, we were a good example to others. There was nothing in there about the residents of that Shining City going out and invading its neighbors to force them to follow its good example. ..."
"... Sociopaths respect no limits on their power. ..."
"... Actually, according to Kurt Vonnegut, it was neither nationalism nor liberty - but piracy! One group of pirates trying to break away from another. Then again, perhaps that is what you mean by the heralded "liberty"? ..."
Jul 25, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
A child waves the United States flag from the crown of Liberty Enlightening the World, less formally known as The Statue of Liberty, on Liberty Island in New York Harbor. | Detail of: 'Statue of Liberty' by Frederic Auguste Bartholdi.

Reactions to globalization, the Trump presidency, and the coronavirus pandemic have turned discussions of American conservatism increasingly into discussions of "nationalism." Regrettably, terminological confusion is rampant. Both "conservatism" and "nationalism" are words of many and even contradictory meanings.

The strengths of post-World War II American intellectual conservatism have been widely heralded. As for its weaknesses, one trait stands out that has greatly impeded intellectual stringency: a deep-seated impatience with the supposedly "finer points" of philosophy. Making do with loosely defined terms has made conservatism susceptible to intellectual flabbiness, contradiction, and manipulation.

This deficiency is connected to a virtual obsession with electoral politics. William F. Buckley's path-breaking National Review was an intellectual magazine, but its primary purpose was to prepare the ground for political victories, most of all for capturing the presidency. The desire to forge a political alliance among diverse groups pushed deep intellectual fissures into the background. Having a rather narrowly political understanding of what shapes the future, most conservatives thought that the election and presidency of Ronald Reagan signified the "triumph" of conservatism; but the triumph was hollow. The reason is that in the long run politicians have less power than those who shape our view of reality, our innermost hopes and fears, and our deeper sensibilities. A crucial role is here played by "the culture" -- universities, schools, churches, the arts, media, book publishing, advertising, Hollywood, and the rest of the entertainment industry -- which is why America kept moving leftward.

For post-war so-called "movement" conservatives, conservatism meant chiefly limited government, a free market, anti-communism, and a strong defense. These tenets were all focused on politics, and vastly different motives hid behind each of them. Why were these tenets called "conservatism"? Rather than point to a few policy preferences, should that term not refer to a general attitude to life, a wish to conserve something, the best of a heritage? One thinks of the moral and cultural sources of American liberty and constitutionalism. But, outside of ceremonial occasions, most movement conservatives placed their emphasis elsewhere.

A striking example of philosophical messiness and confusion is that the conservative movement even incorporated clearly anti-conservative ideas, specifically, the anti-historicism advanced by Leo Strauss and his followers. Strauss championed what he called "natural right," which he saw as sharply opposed to tradition. He called the latter "the ancestral" or "convention." To look to them for guidance was to be guilty of the great offense of "historicism," by which he meant moral relativism or nihilism. History, Strauss insisted, is irrelevant to understanding what is right. Only ahistorical, purely abstract reason is normative.

Hampered by a lack of philosophical education, many Straussians have been oblivious to the far-reaching and harmful ramifications of this anti-historicism. By blithely combining it with ideas of very different origin, they have concealed, even from themselves, its animosity to tradition.

One of Strauss's most influential disciples, Harry Jaffa, made the radical implications of Straussian anti-historicism explicit. In his view, America's Founders did not build on a heritage. They deliberately turned their backs on the past. Jaffa wrote: "To celebrate the American Founding is to celebrate revolution." America's revolution belonged among the other modern revolutions. It is mild "as compared with subsequent revolutions in France, Russia, China, Cuba, or elsewhere," he wrote, but "it nonetheless embodied the greatest attempt at innovation that human history had recorded." The U.S. Constitution did not grow out of the achievements of ancestors. On the contrary, radical innovators gave America a fresh start. What is distinctive and noble about America is that, in the name of ahistorical, abstract, universal principles, it broke with the past.

This view flies in the face of overwhelming historical evidence. The reason the Founders were upset with the British government is that it was acting in a radical, arbitrary manner that violated the old British constitution. John Adams spoke of "grievous innovation." John Dickinson protested "dreadful novelty." What the colonists wanted, Adams wrote, was "nothing new," but respect for traditional rights and the common law. The Constitution of the Framers reaffirmed and creatively developed an ancient heritage.

The Jaffaite notion that America rejected the past and was founded on revolutionary, abstract, universal ideas contributed to what this writer has termed "the new Jacobinism." According to this ideology, America is "exceptional" by virtue of its founding principles. Since these principles belong to all humanity, America must help remake societies around the world. "Moral clarity" demands uncompromising adherence to the principles. The forces of good must defeat the forces of evil. Inherently monopolistic and imperial, American principles justify foreign policy hawkishness and interventionism.

Compare this notion of America to what is implied in Benjamin Franklin's famous phrase about what the Constitutional Convention had produced -- "a republic, if you can keep it." To sustain the Constitution, Americans would have to cultivate the moral and cultural traits that had given rise to it in the first place. To be an American is to defend an historically evolved inheritance, to live up to what may be called the "constitutional personality." Only such people are capable of the kind of conduct that the Constitution values and requires. Americans must, first of all, be able to control the will to power, beginning with self. They must respect the law, rise above the passions of the moment, take the long view, deliberate, compromise, and respect minorities. Whether applied to domestic or foreign affairs, the temperament of American constitutionalism is modesty and restraint. There is no place for unilateral dictates.

These contrasting views of America entail wholly different nationalisms. The moralistic universalism of American exceptionalism, with its demand that all respect its dictates runs counter to the American constitutional spirit of compromise, deliberation, and respect for minorities. Exceptionalism does not defuse or restrain the will to power, but feeds it, justifying arrogance, assertiveness, and even belligerence.

During the presidency of Donald Trump many proponents of American exceptionalism who want preferment have recast their anti-historical universalism as "nationalism," showing that the term can mean almost anything. It is now "nationalist" to demand that American principles be everywhere respected. For example, Mike Pompeo, a person of strong appetites and great ambition, has put this belief behind his campaign of assertiveness and "maximum pressure."

In a speech in the spring of 2019, Pompeo declared that America is "exceptional." America is, he said, "a place and history apart from normal human experience." It has a mission to oppose evil in the world. America is entitled to "respect." It should dictate terms to "rogue" powers like Iran and confront countries like China and Russia that are "intent on eroding American power." This speech was given and loudly cheered at the 40th anniversary gala of the Claremont Institute in California, whose intellectual founder was -- Harry Jaffa.

What may seem to political practitioners and political intellectuals to be hair-splitting philosophical distinctions can, on the contrary, have enormous practical significance. American exceptionalism is in important ways the opposite of a conservatism or a nationalism that defends the moral and cultural heritage that generated American constitutionalism. Exceptionalism fans imperial designs. The culture of constitutionalism opposes them.

Claes G. Ryn is professor of politics and founding director of the new Center for the Study of Statesmanship at The Catholic University of America. His many books include America the Virtuous and A Common Human Ground , now in a new paperback edition.

Related: Introducing the TAC Symposium: What Is American Conservatism?

See all the articles published in the symposium, here.

FND • 10 days ago

Leo Strauss is the father of neoconservatism.

bumbershoot • 10 days ago
Americans must, first of all, be able to control the will to power, beginning with self. They must respect the law, rise above the passions of the moment, take the long view, deliberate, compromise, and respect minorities.

All lovely ideas. Too bad our "conservative" president is capable of none of these.

kirthigdon • 10 days ago

Great essay by Professor Ryn in exposing again, as he has done so often before, the phony opposition between nationalism and American exceptionalism on the one hand, and globalism. Any nationalism is only one step removed from globalism, but the nationalism of small countries is usually fairly harmless because the countries themselves are weak. But American nationalism and exceptionalism is in practice indistinguishable from globalism. It simply makes explicit from which location the globe will be ruled.

Feral Finster • 9 days ago

All true, every word, but the problem with American exceptionalism isn't a matter of semantics or clever arguments but a matter of power.

This is why the definition of exceptionalism keeps shifting, because as a practical matter it means "whatever is in the interests of empire" at this particular moment in this particular case.

TheSnark • 9 days ago • edited

The original idea behind American Exceptionalism is that we are the "Shining City on the Hill". In other words, we were a good example to others. There was nothing in there about the residents of that Shining City going out and invading its neighbors to force them to follow its good example.

These days we are trying to force others to follow good ideals and high standards that we are ourselves following less and less.

Gaius Gracchus TheSnark • 9 days ago

Exactly. The author twists words and creates strawmen and red herrings and argues with dead men.

Washington and Hamilton set forth an idea of country separate from all others and different. Yes, America is and was exceptional. Friend to all, ally to none, an example to all the world, based in English heritage and culture. It was founded by conservative revolutionaries, who attempted to claw back freedoms taken away by those in London, who were becoming overlords of an empire. There was "year zero", and early America could draw on all of English history, plus the Enlightenment, the Renaissance, ancient Greece and Rome, as well as religious traditions going back to antiquity.

It was always the Jeffersonian impulse towards revolution that was different. Jefferson loved the Year Zero France. But Jefferson at his core was an idealist.

The problem was that idealists like Jefferson gradually gained power a little over a hundred years ago. Their idealism was used by those who wanted to exploit America's power to further their own goals contrary to the ideals of American exceptionalism and American tradition. Greed and idealism went together and America used the cover of American exceptionalism to create an empire.

As to Buckley, his goal seems more like controlled opposition than anything else. He was a gatekeeper for the powerful, defining acceptable conservatism, keeping conservatism on the plantation. Conservativism Inc continues to try to do so.

Trump is a return to classic American traditionalism and exceptionalism. He is attempting to reshape the world along nationalistic lines, which is why AMLO in Mexico praised him so much. Globalists don't want to lose their power. Oligarchs don't want to give up their exploitation and extraction systems. Pundits don't want to give up their money train and status. Bureaucrats don't want actual democracy.

We will see how it shakes out.

Andrew Gaius Gracchus • 8 days ago

Not so sure about the traditionalism part, but he at least represents the first real rejection of Wilsonianism in decades.

Disqus10021 L RNY • 9 days ago

On Wikipedia's list of the 50 cities with the world's highest homicide rates (per 100,000 population), the US has 4, South Africa has 4 and the rest are in Latin America. It hardly makes us the shining city on a hill or exceptional, unless you think a high crime rate is good.

Daniel Baker • 9 days ago

Mark Twain said, "The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them." Today I would modify Twain a bit; when conservatives adopt some radical idea, the radicals respond by declaring that idea worn out. Exhibit A would be the idea of "American exceptionalism."

The historical fact is that American exceptionalism is a Communist concept, devised by Stalin in 1929 to describe -- and to dismiss -- what his American agents told him about the huge differences between American society and European societies, both of which Soviet-sponsored parties were trying to control. These differences included far lesser class distinctions, greater racial animosities, a labor movement much more concerned with economic bargaining than fielding political candidates, vastly weaker political parties, much more ethnic and religious diversity, and more hostility to centralized government. Today, we would have to add far more imprisonment of criminals, more approval of the death penalty, and a jealous passion for the right to have guns, although those differences weren't nearly as wide in 1929 as now. American exceptionalism exists. You can argue about whether it is good or bad, and certainly some of the differences between America and Europe are better or worse than others, but it's pure pretense to claim that America is an ordinary, unexceptional Western country. And no one on the left made any such pretense, until people on the right started talking about and glorifying (or at least not denigrating) "American exceptionalism," which had previously been solely a term of contempt. The radicals invented the views, then declared them worn out when the conservatives adopted them.

The truth that America is an exceptional country does not, of course, mean that its foreign policy has always been wise, and certainly it does not mean that America's catastrophic blundering in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq were either morally right or good for Americans. It merely means that we can't correct those mistakes by pretending that the country we're trying to rescue is unexceptional, that it is no different from other societies, and thus that foreign policies accepted by European or Asian voters will necessarily be winners here too.

Daniel Baker Guest • 8 days ago

I don't know why you think any of this is even relevant to my point: that American exceptionalism is real, and that desperately needed foreign policy reforms won't work if we ignore that fact. Worse, the points you raise all distort the real nature of America's differences from other Western countries.

American and European laws on abortion are very little different; in most of Europe, as in America, abortion is legal and accepted, Poland being one of the very few exceptions. We're probably closest to Ireland, where abortion has been recently legalized but remains socially frowned on. Again, whether you or I think that's a good thing or a bad thing doesn't matter; it's simply not one of the major points of difference between America and Europe.

Explaining the difference in imprisonment between Europe and America solely by America's greater black and Hispanic population is wrong in so many ways I hardly know where to begin. First, the difference in imprisonment is very recent, starting in the early 1990s and largely devised by a centrist Democratic US president; America's black and Hispanic population has always been much larger than Europe's, so it can't explain the difference in imprisonment. Second, America imprisons whites as well as blacks much more than Europe does. Third, poor blacks and Hispanics commit crimes at the same rate as poor whites of the same economic status; poor people of whatever race or color choose to commit crimes more often, because they have more incentive to make that choice. The higher black and Hispanic crime rate simply reflects the fact that far more of them are poor. As long ago as the 19th century, the British poor were called by the upper class "the criminal classes," and that reflected the undeniable truth that the British poor, like poor people everywhere, committed more crime than anyone else.

I thank you for the BBC link; I had long suspected that Europe's ban on the death penalty often didn't reflect popular opinion at first, but I didn't have the data proving it. But that doesn't in any way change the fact that considerably more Americans than Europeans support the death penalty, and long have, which is why European elites were able to get away with banning it without losing elections, and American elites have not.

Again, I'm not saying anything about whether any of these differences between America and the rest of the West are good or bad.. My point is that they exist, and it's no good pretending that they don't merely because America's foreign policy isn't working very well.

Scott McLoughlin • 9 days ago

I'll say it over and over, but GOP is Right Wing Lockean (Maritime Imperialist) "Anything Goes" Liberalism. DNC is Left Wing Lockean (Maritime Imperialist) "Anything Goes" Liberalism. We use these words wrong in our USA. Traditionalist Conservatives have NEVER enjoyed political party representation here. We are to-date completely a-historical and delusionally racist "Novum Organum" conquistadors with English accents. Good News? Better futures lie ahead of us. Start with agrarianism, potable water, and arable land. North America is underpopulated. I worked for State Dept. I witnessed the World Bank's destruction of Ukraine. Ask me a real question. I'll answer honestly. We suffer post-WW2 legacy Daddy and Mommy Warbucks here, writing checks to their own kids. We can, must and will do better. Those without pasts are without futures. To Survive is to Sur Vivre, Live Above. Hold tight. Have faith.

Ray Woodcock • 9 days ago

There is the wish for what definitions should do in political and religious discussion, and then there is the reality of what they actually do. The wish is that, by using the word "definition," I am referring to something like the definition of a mathematical concept. We can define precisely what addition means. The problem is, we cannot do that with terms like conservatism. Ryn's argument illustrates the failure of that attempt: we have "wholly different nationalisms"; we have something that calls itself conservatism but it's wrong, because Ryn says so.

Definitionism leads to abstruse dispute, as scholars tussle over what is really nationalistic or conservative. The rest of us look on askance. Most people are not interested in a discussion filled with labels, like, "I'm a cisgender vegetarian transsexual white socialistic vegetarian Capricorn with subclinical mental disabilities." For most people, that sort of definition-oriented declaration comes across as hostile to discussion. Like, "I'm here in my castle. I dare you to try to penetrate it." The intrepid soul who attempts to start an actual friendly conversation, in response to that sort of statement, is likely to move away from definitionism. Not "You cannot be white: your skin is brown," but rather, "Really! My sister is a Capricorn!"

Definitionism (in some ways a/k/a labeling) is more likely to destroy dialogue than to create it. "Oh, you're a [fill in the blank]: you can't be good." It is possible to be a Nazi, a Bolshevik, or anything in between -- and still, in various regards, to be smart, friendly, successful, etc. Political dialogue is like dipping a ladle into a soup kettle: you may pull out some beans, some meat, some corn -- but possibly no one knows what else lurks in there. The attempt to define is is not merely a lost cause -- it basically misses the point.

dbriz • 8 days ago • edited

Ah but the revolution was not based at all on nationalism. It was for liberty. The Articles, as the war, were not based on ideas of nationalism but more libertarian than not. Lest we forget, the convention was called to improve the Articles. That the federalists (nationalists) hijacked the convention required quashing liberty in favor of a cleverly designed campaign masking the future.

Patrick Henry was on to it early:

"When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: liberty, sir, was then the primary object .But now, sir, the American spirit, assisted by the ropes and chains of consolidation, is about to convert this country into a powerful and mighty empire .Such a government is incompatible with the genius of republicanism. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this government..."

In the end the anti federalists have been proven right.

Feral Finster dbriz • 8 days ago

Sociopaths respect no limits on their power.

Peekachu dbriz • 3 days ago

Actually, according to Kurt Vonnegut, it was neither nationalism nor liberty - but piracy! One group of pirates trying to break away from another. Then again, perhaps that is what you mean by the heralded "liberty"?

David Naas • 4 days ago
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

(John Adams, October 11, 1798.).

Are we still "a moral and religious people"? Well, are we?

Mayhap we are in deep trouble? Well, are we?

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free . . . it expects what never was and never will be"

(Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Colonel Charles Yancey, January 6, 1816.)

No comment.

"I am only one, but I am one. I can't do everything, but I can do something. What I can do, that I ought to do. And what I ought to do, By the grace of God, I shall do."

(Edward Everett Hale)

[Aug 03, 2020] Nationalism and the collapse of the USSR

Nearly all these erstwhile Marxists turned neo-liberal after the fall of the wall of Berlin
Aug 03, 2020 | www.unz.com

Curmudgeon , says: August 1, 2020 at 7:15 pm GMT

@onebornfree w.britannica.com/topic/commonwealth-political-science">https://www.britannica.com/topic/commonwealth-political-science
What is labelled socialism today is nowhere near what the original socialists would consider socialism, which is closer to the co-operative movement and anarchy than communism.

On the other hand, Marxism (communism) is about complete state control and was international in scope. One (of many) reason for the breakdown of the USSR, was that it was, in fact, becoming socialistic in many countries, starting with Hungary in 1956 then Czechoslovakia in 1968 becoming nationalist. Even Russia was becoming more nationalistic.

Miro23 , says: August 2, 2020 at 2:30 am GMT
@Druid unknown in Russia 1917. It wasn't really understood. In contrast Neo-Bolshevism USA 2020 has the prior example of Bolshevism Russia 1917 to learn from and check the mechanism.

– The Russian population 1917 held some arms (which were immediately made illegal – retention carrying the death penalty). But nothing at all like the vast armoury presently held by the US public.

– The Bolsheviks successful subverted the demoralized and badly organized Russian Imperial Army (at least in Petrograd where it mattered). The US military is in a much better state, and is maybe not so attracted by SJW/BLM/Antifa (middle and lower ranks).

[Aug 02, 2020] Russiagate, Nazis, and the CIA by ROB URIE

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The U.S. has spent a century or more trying to install a U.S.-friendly government in Moscow. Following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the U.S. sent neoliberal economists to loot the country as the Clinton administration, and later the Obama administration, placed NATO troops and armaments on the Russian border after a negotiated agreement not to do so . Subsequent claims of realpolitik are cover for a reckless disregard for geopolitical consequences. ..."
"... The paradox of American liberalism, articulated when feminist icon and CIA asset Gloria Steinem described the CIA as ' liberal, nonviolent and honorable ,' is that educated, well-dressed, bourgeois functionaries have used the (largely manufactured) threat of foreign subversion to install right-wing nationalists subservient to American business interests at every opportunity. ..."
"... To the point made by Christopher Simpson , the CIA could have achieved better results had it not employed former Nazi officers, begging the question of why it chose to do so? ..."
"... Russiagate is the nationalist party line in the American fight against communism, without the communism. Charges of treason have been lodged every time that military budgets have come under attack since 1945. In 1958 the senior leadership of the Air Force was charging the other branches of the military with treason for doubting its utterly fantastical (and later disproven) estimate of Soviet ICBMs. Treason is good for business. ..."
"... Shortly after WWII ended, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi military officers, including former Gestapo and SS officers responsible for murdering tens and hundreds of thousands of human beings , to run a spy operation known as the Gehlen Organization from Berlin, Germany. Given its central role in assessing the military intentions and capabilities of the Soviet Union, the Gehlen Organization was more likely than not responsible for the CIA's overstatement of Soviet nuclear capabilities in the 1950s used to support the U.S. nuclear weapons program. Former Nazis were also integrated into CIA efforts to install right wing governments around the world. ..."
"... Under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act passed by Congress in 1998, the CIA was made to partially disclose its affiliation with, and employment of, former Nazis. In contrast to the ' Operation Paperclip ' thesis that it was Nazi scientists who were brought to the U.S. to labor as scientists, the Gehlen Organization and CIC employed known war criminals in political roles. Klaus Barbie, the 'Butcher of Lyon,' was employed by the CIC, and claims to have played a role in the murder of Che Guevara . Wernher von Braun, one of the Operation Paperclip 'scientists,' worked in a Nazi concentration camp as tens of thousands of human beings were murdered. ..."
"... To understand the political space that military production came to occupy, from 1948 onward the U.S. military became a well-funded bureaucracy where charges of treason were regularly traded between the branches. Internecine battles for funding and strategic dominance were (and are) regularly fought. The tactic that this bureaucracy -- the 'military industrial complex,' adopted was to exaggerate foreign threats in a contest for bureaucratic dominance. The nuclear arms race was made a self-fulfilling prophecy. As the U.S. produced world-ending weapons non-stop for decades on end, the Soviets responded in kind. ..."
"... Long story short, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi officers who had the ideological predisposition and economic incentive to mis-perceive Soviet intentions and misstate Soviet capabilities to fuel the Cold War. ..."
"... the U.S. had indicated its intention to use nuclear weapons in a first strike -- and had demonstrated the intention by placing Jupiter missiles in Italy, nothing that the U.S. offered during the Missile Crisis could be taken in good faith. ..."
"... Following the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, the Cold War entered a new phase. Cold War logic was repurposed to support the oxymoronic 'humanitarian wars' -- liberating people by bombing them. In 1995 'Russian meddling' meant the Clinton administration rigging the election of Boris Yeltsin in the Russian presidential election. Mr. Clinton then unilaterally reneged on the American agreement to keep NATO from Russia's border when former Baltic states were brought under NATO's control . ..."
"... The Obama administration's 2014 incitement in Ukraine , by way of fostering and supporting the Maidan uprising and the ousting of Ukraine's democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych, ties to the U.S. strategy of containing and overthrowing the Soviet (Russian) government that was first codified by the National Security Council (NSC) in 1945. The NSC's directives can be found here and here . The economic and military annexation of Ukraine by the U.S. (NATO didn't exist in 1945) comes under NSC10/2 . The alliance between the CIA and Ukrainian fascists ties to directive NSC20 , the plan to sponsor Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis in order to install them in the Kremlin to replace the Soviet government. This was part of the CIA's rationale for putting Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis on its payroll in 1948. ..."
"... That Russiagate is the continuation of a scheme launched in 1945 by the National Security Council, to be engineered by the CIA with help from former Nazi officers in its employ, speaks volumes about the Cold War frame from which it emerges ..."
"... Its near instantaneous adoption by bourgeois liberals demonstrates the class basis of the right-wing nationalism it supports. That liberals appear to perceive themselves as defenders 'democracy' within a trajectory laid out by unelected military leaders more than seven decades earlier is testament to the power of historical ignorance tied to nationalist fervor. Were the former Gestapo and SS officers employed by the CIA 'our Nazis?' ..."
"... Furthermore, are liberals really comfortable bringing fascists with direct historical ties to the Third Reich to power in Ukraine? And while there are no good choices in the upcoming U.S. election, the guy who liberals want to bring to power is lead architect of this move. ..."
Jul 31, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org
Facebook Twitter Reddit Email

The political success of Russiagate lies in the vanishing of American history in favor of a façade of liberal virtue. Posed as a response to the election of Donald Trump, a straight line can be drawn from efforts to undermine the decommissioning of the American war economy in 1946 to the CIA's alliance with Ukrainian fascists in 2014. In 1945 the NSC (National Security Council) issued a series of directives that gave logic and direction to the CIA's actions during the Cold War. That these persist despite the 'fall of communism' suggests that it was always just a placeholder in the pursuit of other objectives.

The first Cold War was an imperial business enterprise to keep the Generals, bureaucrats, and war materiel suppliers in power and their bank accounts flush after WWII. Likewise, the American side of the nuclear arms race left former Gestapo and SS officers employed by the CIA to put their paranoid fantasies forward as assessments of Russian military capabilities. Why, of all people, would former Nazi officers be put in charge military intelligence if accurate assessments were the goal? The Nazis hated the Soviets more than the Americans did.

The ideological binaries of Russiagate -- for or against Donald Trump, for or against neoliberal, petrostate Russia, define the boundaries of acceptable discourse to the benefit of deeply nefarious interests. The U.S. has spent a century or more trying to install a U.S.-friendly government in Moscow. Following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the U.S. sent neoliberal economists to loot the country as the Clinton administration, and later the Obama administration, placed NATO troops and armaments on the Russian border after a negotiated agreement not to do so . Subsequent claims of realpolitik are cover for a reckless disregard for geopolitical consequences.

The paradox of American liberalism, articulated when feminist icon and CIA asset Gloria Steinem described the CIA as ' liberal, nonviolent and honorable ,' is that educated, well-dressed, bourgeois functionaries have used the (largely manufactured) threat of foreign subversion to install right-wing nationalists subservient to American business interests at every opportunity. Furthermore, Steinem's aggressive ignorance of the actual history of the CIA illustrates the liberal propensity to conflate bourgeois dress and attitude with an imagined gentility . To the point made by Christopher Simpson , the CIA could have achieved better results had it not employed former Nazi officers, begging the question of why it chose to do so?

On the American left, Russiagate is treated as a case of bad reporting, of official outlets for government propaganda serially reporting facts and events that were subsequently disproved. However, some fair portion of the American bourgeois, the PMC that acts in supporting roles for capital, believes every word of it. Russiagate is the nationalist party line in the American fight against communism, without the communism. Charges of treason have been lodged every time that military budgets have come under attack since 1945. In 1958 the senior leadership of the Air Force was charging the other branches of the military with treason for doubting its utterly fantastical (and later disproven) estimate of Soviet ICBMs. Treason is good for business.

Shortly after WWII ended, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi military officers, including former Gestapo and SS officers responsible for murdering tens and hundreds of thousands of human beings , to run a spy operation known as the Gehlen Organization from Berlin, Germany. Given its central role in assessing the military intentions and capabilities of the Soviet Union, the Gehlen Organization was more likely than not responsible for the CIA's overstatement of Soviet nuclear capabilities in the 1950s used to support the U.S. nuclear weapons program. Former Nazis were also integrated into CIA efforts to install right wing governments around the world.

By the time that (Senator) John F. Kennedy claimed a U.S. 'missile gap' with the Soviets in 1958, the CIA was providing estimates of Soviet ICBMs (Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles), that were wildly inflated -- most likely provided to it by the Gehlen Organization. Once satellite and U2 reconnaissance estimates became available, the CIA lowered its own to 120 Soviet ICBMs when the actual number was four . On the one hand, the Soviets really did have a nuclear weapons program. On the other, it was a tiny fraction of what was being claimed. Bad reporting, unerringly on the side of larger military budgets, appears to be the constant.

Under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act passed by Congress in 1998, the CIA was made to partially disclose its affiliation with, and employment of, former Nazis. In contrast to the ' Operation Paperclip ' thesis that it was Nazi scientists who were brought to the U.S. to labor as scientists, the Gehlen Organization and CIC employed known war criminals in political roles. Klaus Barbie, the 'Butcher of Lyon,' was employed by the CIC, and claims to have played a role in the murder of Che Guevara . Wernher von Braun, one of the Operation Paperclip 'scientists,' worked in a Nazi concentration camp as tens of thousands of human beings were murdered.

The historical sequence in the U.S. was WWI, the Great Depression, WWII, to an economy that was heavily dependent on war production. The threatened decommissioning of the war economy in 1946 was first met with an honest assessment of Soviet intentions -- the Soviets were moving infrastructure back into Soviet territory as quickly as was practicable, then to the military budget-friendly claim that they were putting resources in place to invade Europe. The result of the shift was that the American Generals kept their power and the war industry kept producing materiel and weapons. By 1948 these weapons had come to include atomic bombs.

To understand the political space that military production came to occupy, from 1948 onward the U.S. military became a well-funded bureaucracy where charges of treason were regularly traded between the branches. Internecine battles for funding and strategic dominance were (and are) regularly fought. The tactic that this bureaucracy -- the 'military industrial complex,' adopted was to exaggerate foreign threats in a contest for bureaucratic dominance. The nuclear arms race was made a self-fulfilling prophecy. As the U.S. produced world-ending weapons non-stop for decades on end, the Soviets responded in kind.

What ties the Gehlen Organization to CIA estimates of Soviet nuclear weapons from 1948 – 1958 is 1) the Gehlen Organization was central to the CIA's intelligence operations vis-à-vis the Soviets, 2) the CIA had limited alternatives to gather information on the Soviets outside of the Gehlen Organization and 3) the senior leadership of the U.S. military had long demonstrated that it approved of exaggerating foreign threats when doing so enhanced their power and added to their budgets. Long story short, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi officers who had the ideological predisposition and economic incentive to mis-perceive Soviet intentions and misstate Soviet capabilities to fuel the Cold War.

Where this gets interesting is that American whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg was working for the Rand Corporation in the late 1950s and early 1960s when estimates of Soviet ICBMs were being put forward. JFK had run (in 1960) on a platform that included closing the Soviet – U.S. ' missile gap .' The USAF (U.S. Air Force), charged with delivering nuclear missiles to their targets, was estimating that the Soviets had 1,000 ICBMs. Mr. Ellsberg, who had limited security clearance through his employment at Rand, was leaked the known number of Soviet ICBMs. The Air Force was saying 1,000 Soviet ICBMs when the number confirmed by reconnaissance satellites was four.

By 1962, the year of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the CIA had shifted nominal control of the Gehlen Organization to the BND, for whom Gehlen continued to work. Based on ongoing satellite reconnaissance data, the CIA was busy lowering its estimates of Soviet nuclear capabilities. Benjamin Schwarz, writing for The Atlantic in 2013, provided an account, apparently informed by the CIA's lowered estimates, where he placed the whole of the Soviet nuclear weapons program (in 1962) at roughly one-ninth the size of the U.S. effort. However, given Ellsberg's known count of four Soviet ICBMs at the time of the missile crisis, even Schwarz's ratio of 1:9 seems to overstate Soviet capabilities.

Further per Schwarz's reporting, the Jupiter nuclear missiles that the U.S. had placed in Italy prior to the Cuban Missile Crisis only made sense as first-strike weapons. This interpretation is corroborated by Daniel Ellsberg , who argues that the American plan was always to initiate the use of nuclear weapons (first strike). This made JFK's posture of equally matched contestants in a geopolitical game of nuclear chicken utterly unhinged. Should this be less than clear, because the U.S. had indicated its intention to use nuclear weapons in a first strike -- and had demonstrated the intention by placing Jupiter missiles in Italy, nothing that the U.S. offered during the Missile Crisis could be taken in good faith.

The dissolution of the USSR in 1991 was met with a promised reduction in U.S. military spending and an end to the Cold War, neither of which ultimately materialized. Following the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, the Cold War entered a new phase. Cold War logic was repurposed to support the oxymoronic 'humanitarian wars' -- liberating people by bombing them. In 1995 'Russian meddling' meant the Clinton administration rigging the election of Boris Yeltsin in the Russian presidential election. Mr. Clinton then unilaterally reneged on the American agreement to keep NATO from Russia's border when former Baltic states were brought under NATO's control .

The Obama administration's 2014 incitement in Ukraine , by way of fostering and supporting the Maidan uprising and the ousting of Ukraine's democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych, ties to the U.S. strategy of containing and overthrowing the Soviet (Russian) government that was first codified by the National Security Council (NSC) in 1945. The NSC's directives can be found here and here . The economic and military annexation of Ukraine by the U.S. (NATO didn't exist in 1945) comes under NSC10/2 . The alliance between the CIA and Ukrainian fascists ties to directive NSC20 , the plan to sponsor Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis in order to install them in the Kremlin to replace the Soviet government. This was part of the CIA's rationale for putting Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis on its payroll in 1948.

That Russiagate is the continuation of a scheme launched in 1945 by the National Security Council, to be engineered by the CIA with help from former Nazi officers in its employ, speaks volumes about the Cold War frame from which it emerges.

Its near instantaneous adoption by bourgeois liberals demonstrates the class basis of the right-wing nationalism it supports. That liberals appear to perceive themselves as defenders 'democracy' within a trajectory laid out by unelected military leaders more than seven decades earlier is testament to the power of historical ignorance tied to nationalist fervor. Were the former Gestapo and SS officers employed by the CIA 'our Nazis?'

The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act came about in part because Nazi hunters kept coming across Nazi war criminals living in the U.S. who told them they had been brought here and given employment by the CIA, CIC, or some other division of the Federal government. If the people in these agencies thought that doing so was justified, why the secrecy? And if it wasn't justified, why was it done? Furthermore, are liberals really comfortable bringing fascists with direct historical ties to the Third Reich to power in Ukraine? And while there are no good choices in the upcoming U.S. election, the guy who liberals want to bring to power is lead architect of this move. Cue the Sex Pistols .

[Aug 02, 2020] Balkans Ahead! by Linh Dinh

Aug 02, 2020 | www.unz.com

Belgrade has been razed 44 times. In the 20th century, it was bombed thrice. In World War II, hundreds of thousands of Serbs were mass murdered by Croats, an undisputed fact still little known.

From the taxi into town, I was reintroduced to the concrete housing blocks that are typical of the former Eastern Bloc. Belgrade's few high-rises are left over the 1970's, perhaps the worst decade for architecture ever. Its gorgeous buildings from the late 19th and early 20th centuries have been crumbling for decades.

I passed a monstrously huge banner of Serbian soldiers, with the lead one a stern female saluting, with accusation in her eyes. This draped the former Yugoslav Defense Ministry . Bombed by NATO in 1999, its mauled remains are left as is .

At a nearby park days later, I'd chance upon a bronze statue of a small girl holding a rag doll. Framed by a black marble slab resembling butterfly wings, she stood on a grave-like marker that's partly inscribed, "DEDICATED TO THE CHILDREN KILLED BY NATO AGGRESSION 1999."

Most of the world, though, don't see Serbians as victims so much as perpetrators of genocide, as recently evidenced by the Siege of Sarajevo and, even more so, Srebrenica.

On July 13th, 2012, Eric Margolis wrote :

During the mid 1990's, the world turned its back on the massacres of Muslims in Bosnia. The UN would not call it genocide because that would have demanded military intervention. Most shamefully, the Muslim world also closed its eyes as up to 160,000 Bosnian Muslims were slaughtered, starved and tortured in Serb-run concentration camps. At least 10,000 Muslim girls and women were gang raped, some in special rape camps.

A hundred-and-sixty-thousand is an atrociously high number of victims, but how many were actually slaughtered, as opposed to tortured or starved? Surely, Margolis didn't mean they were all starved, tortured then slaughtered? It's an oddly ambiguous passage for a seasoned author.

In any case, Margolis had seen it coming:

In 1988, I wrote warning that Milosevic would create disaster in Bosnia and Kosova, the Albanian-majority region of southern Serbia. I was denounced in Belgrade and declared an enemy of the Serbs. In truth, I had always been an admirer of Serbs as courageous, intelligent people. But the Serbs that Milosevic rallied were the scum of the gutter, criminals, racists, brutal pig farmers, fanatical priests.

On December 8th, 2017, The Saker presented an entirely different take :

Truly, that war had it all, every dirty trick was used against the Serbs: numerous false flags attacks, pseudo-genocides, illegal covert operations to arm terrorists groups, the covert delivery of weapons to officially embargoed entities, deliberate attacks against civilians, the use of illegal weapons, the use of officially "demilitarized zones" to hide (fully armed) entire army corps – you name it: if it is disgusting it was used against the Serbian people. Even deliberate attacks on the otherwise sacrosanct journalistic profession was considered totally normal as long as the journalists were Serbs. As for the Serbs, they were, of course, demonized. Milosevic became the "New Hitler" (along with Saddam Hussein) and those Serbs who took up arms to defend their land and families became genocidal Chetniks.

On January 3rd, 2019, The Saker added :

Brigadier-General Pierre Marie Gallois of the French Army has condemned the NATO destruction of Yugoslavia, and has gone on record stating that the endless stories of Serb atrocities, such as mass rapes and the siege of Sarajevo were fabricated. Gallois also argues that the German elite sought revenge for the fierce Serb resistance during the two world wars, especially with regard to the Serb partisans that held up German divisions that were headed towards Leningrad and Moscow during Operation Barbarossa. While relentlessly demonized, the Serbs were in many ways the greatest victims of the NATO-orchestrated Balkan wars, as hundreds of thousands of Serbs were forcibly expelled from both Croatia and Kosovo while Serbia was turned into a free-fire zone by NATO for over seventy days. Washington took advantage of the conflict to solidify control over its European vassals.

The Saker's parents fled to Belgrade as Russian refugees, and he even had a Serbian godmother, so there is a strong emotional attachment here, which The Saker freely admits.

Still, The Saker at his website has rebutted the inflated hooey of Srebrenica with some hard facts .

It's entirely unclear, even approximately, how many were intentionally executed, instead of being killed in battle, whether by Serbs or other Muslims, or who died because of starvation, suicide or illness.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia's star witness, and the only one convicted of direct participation in the Srebrenica "genocide," was not a Serb, but a Bosnian Croat, Drazen Erdemovic.

On June 27th, 1996, the ICTY itself declared Erdemovic mentally impaired, yet, on July 5th, 1996, it put him on the witness stand anyway.

Even more incredibly, Erdemovic admitted he had fought for all three sides during that conflict, Serbs, Croats and Bosnian Muslims. Dude couldn't decide whom he was trying to kill or defend.

In exchange for his testimonies against Serbs, Erdemovic was jailed for just five years, then given a new identity and whisked to a new country, so who knows, he might be living next to you as John Smith.

3

It's just a neighborhood squabble, you might be thinking. Who cares about Montenegroes? I've got my own black asses to kiss. I'm already kneeling, massa.

As always, though, there are lessons aplenty from the Balkans.

Serbs didn't have a country for five centuries, and Croats went stateless for eight, yet neither lost their fierce sense of nationhood, that is, their nationalism. It's not a debatable concept, but a deeply felt necessity, for how can any population with a unique history, heritage and identity not have its own homeland?

In the 21st century, such tribal thinking is not just deemed barbaric, but evil, Nazism, in short, except in Israel, of course. Gas chambers, remember?

When nations are contorted, tortured or simply enticed into any supranational entity, a correction, often violent, is inevitable, and that's exactly what has happened, repeatedly, in the Balkans. Wholesome pig farmers convulsed against the Ottomans, Austro-Hungarian Empire and Communists, etc. There is no progress beyond this.

This innate nationalism can only be purged when a population has been thoroughly cowed and/or brainwashed into renouncing itself, but the Serbs, for all for their defeats and humiliations down the centuries, never did. There's a magnificent lesson there.

Rebecca West, "So in the first battle of Kossovo the Serbs learned the meaning of defeat, not such defeat as forms a necessary proportion of all effort, for in that they had often been instructed during the course of their history, but of total defeat, annihilation of their corporate will and all their individual wills. The second battle of Kossovo taught them that one may live on such a low level of existence that even defeat cannot be achieved. The third taught them that even that level is not the lowest, and that there is a limbo for subject peoples where there is neither victory nor defeat but abortions which, had they come to birth, would have become such states."

Repeatedly butchered, suffocated and written off, Serbs have rebirthed themselves, thanks to their nationalism.

4

When the Turks were in Belgrade, they embellished this city with 273 beautiful mosques, so where the hell are they?! Only one is left, unfortunately, and the Bajrakli Mosque almost joined all the rest when it was torched in 2004, in retaliation for the burning of Serbian churches in Kosovo.

Built in 1575, it is elegant, intimate and handsomely proportioned, with the only false note the jivey, concrete minaret, clearly a recent replacement. Inside , I admired its minbar , octagonal wooden tablets etched with calligraphy and, especially, the stone, baroque frame around some verse, a nice East meets West touch. Light angled in from high windows . The darkened dome soothed.

It's an active mosque. Half a dozen suited Muslims milled outside, until they all left, so that I could have cleared out their mosque had I wanted to, and started World War III. Outside the gate, there was an old beggar , but she too disappeared, because I had already given her sixty cents.

Leaving the Bajrakli Mosque, I walked by Dukat, a Turkish restaurant, then Zein, a Lebanese one. The Arabic Zuwar was also nearby. Though not nearly as cosmopolitan as, say, Busan, contemporary Belgrade is no xenophobic backwater. Chinese takeouts dot the city, and there's even a Chinese shopping center at Blok 70, in New Belgrade.

I'm writing this in a bar, Dzidzi Midzi , where American pop music is played nonstop. On its walls are mostly photos of American icons, such as Hitchcock, Dylan, Hendrix, Buffalo Bill, Jack Nicholson, John Belushi, Dan Aykroyd, Louis Armstrong and Bruce Lee (who was born in San Francisco, graduated from the University of Washington, married an American and is buried in Seattle). Though imploding, America still mesmerizes. Tellingly, there's just one Serb, Nicolas Tesla, and one Russian, Yuri Gagarin, who's depicted as a generic, faceless astronaut, with a quotation in English, "I see no god up here "

This is no touristy brewpub, but a Janko Janković joint in Hadžipopovac, a neighborhood of drab buildings, frankly. I'm paying $1.90 for a pint of Staropramen, and a flatbread sandwich with prosciutto and gouda is just $2.50.

Although Vietnam doesn't have an embassy here, there's a Vietnamese at the University of Belgrade. Here nine years and working on his second degree, this young man's so in love with Serbia, he's changed his name to Hoan Zlatanovic. Odder still was the Japanese who fought alongside Serbs and Russians in Bosnia. A self-declared "Japanese cheknik," he risked his life while forgoing a salary and his monthly cigar.

Oddest, perhaps, is Serbia's yearning to join the European Union, though not NATO, which already includes Croatia, Slovenia, Albania, North Macedonia and Montenegro. They're all leaning West. Last to board, they'll get to enjoy some choppy sailing with the big boys.

Bombing Serbia, America gave Russia and China a wakeup call, and forced them towards a new understanding. Everything changed after 1999. Again, this tiny nation played an outsized role in remaking our world.

Balkanizing, Americans can look here for warnings and inspiration. Five hundred years from now, a Serbian nation will still exist.

Linh Dinh's latest book is Postcards from the End of America . He maintains a regularly updated photo blog .

Erik Sieven , says: August 1, 2020 at 8:43 pm GMT

"Gallois also argues that the German elite sought revenge for the fierce Serb resistance during the two world wars, especially with regard to the Serb partisans that held up German divisions that were headed towards Leningrad and Moscow during Operation Barbarossa"
I wonder whether this french general has talked to some actual Germans. Everybody who knows just a little bit about german elites in the nineties knows that this an abstruse idea.

Franz , says: August 1, 2020 at 10:03 pm GMT

Balkanizing, Americans can look here for warnings and inspiration. Five hundred years from now, a Serbian nation will still exist.

Beautiful tail on a beautiful essay. Thanks, Linh.

As also, the Serbs had no choice in any Balkanization, but their American counterparts look on sheepishly as their plutocrat masters are inflicting it on the USA. Our end won't be justice: The same scum who used 1999 as practice are just using what they learned in California, etc. They won't be happy till the whole world is stateless and landless. Except them.

"Balkanization" is a curiously old subject. As a true wet-behind-the-ears nipper the first public speech I ever heard was during the one (and only) week I ever spent in New England. Ayn Rand gave her speech, entitled Global Balkanization at Boston's Ford Hall Forum in 1977. Just as a curiosity I wanted to see if it has any of it held up. She might have been on everyone's brown list by then, but her energy levels were still high:

https://ari.aynrand.org/issues/culture-and-society/education-and-multiculturalism/global-balkanization/

[Aug 02, 2020] The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil to US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White House."

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU1 , Aug 2 2020 14:35 utc | 2

I put these comments on the open thread about the same time b started this one

https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1289724554982629377
The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil to US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White House."

Trump a few months back "We've kept the oil". Well, he hasn't had a problem hanging onto it and getting an American company involved.

Delta Crescent Energy. Formed beginning of 2019 and nothing else on it. I guess Trump and a few mates divvying up the spoils.
https://www.bizapedia.com/de/delta-crescent-energy-llc.html

Laguerre , Aug 2 2020 15:00 utc | 6

The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil to US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White House."

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 2 2020 14:35 utc | 2

Very likely the Kurds were under pressure from Trump, and the act wasn't voluntary. It's not even the Kurds' oil to sign a deal on (except one well). We'll see whether the operation actually succeeds. At the moment, everybody is waiting to see whether Trump is re-elected in November. Signing a piece of paper now is of no significance.

[Aug 02, 2020] The USA military establishment are the masters of the deception game: the right to combat the internal enemy it is the right to instll puppet regime which will exterminate social workers, trade unionists, men and women who are not supportive of the establishment, and who are assumed to be communist extremists

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Maracatu , Aug 2 2020 15:01 utc | 7

How a US military doctrine became Colombia's 'origin of evil' | Part 1: "Popeye" :
What is known in Latin America as the National Security Doctrine [is] not defense against an external enemy, but a way to make the military establishment the masters of the game [with] the right to combat the internal enemy : it is the right to fight and to exterminate social workers, trade unionists, men and women who are not supportive of the establishment, and who are assumed to be communist extremists. And this could mean anyone, including human rights activists such as myself.

Colombia's former Foreign Minister Alfredo Vasquez

[Aug 02, 2020] Nationalism and the collpase of the USSR

Aug 02, 2020 | www.unz.com

Curmudgeon , says: August 1, 2020 at 7:15 pm GMT

@onebornfree w.britannica.com/topic/commonwealth-political-science">https://www.britannica.com/topic/commonwealth-political-science
What is labelled socialism today is nowhere near what the original socialists would consider socialism, which is closer to the co-operative movement and anarchy than communism.

On the other hand, Marxism (communism) is about complete state control and was international in scope. One (of many) reason for the breakdown of the USSR, was that it was, in fact, becoming socialistic in many countries, starting with Hungary in 1956 then Czechoslovakia in 1968 becoming nationalist. Even Russia was becoming more nationalistic.

Miro23 , says: August 2, 2020 at 2:30 am GMT
@Druid unknown in Russia 1917. It wasn't really understood. In contrast Neo-Bolshevism USA 2020 has the prior example of Bolshevism Russia 1917 to learn from and check the mechanism.

– The Russian population 1917 held some arms (which were immediately made illegal – retention carrying the death penalty). But nothing at all like the vast armoury presently held by the US public.

– The Bolsheviks successful subverted the demoralized and badly organized Russian Imperial Army (at least in Petrograd where it mattered). The US military is in a much better state, and is maybe not so attracted by SJW/BLM/Antifa (middle and lower ranks).

[Aug 02, 2020] Modern jihadism was co-invented in 1979 by Saudi Prince

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

LuBa , Aug 1 2020 7:13 utc | 77

"Modern jihadism was co-invented in 1979 by Saudi Prince"

Yes after the Mecca siege they found the potential of wahabi islam(redefined by Qutb teachings in the previous years) to be used against the enemy of zionism.Without 20 November 1979 (not in Teheran but in Mecca) there wouldn't have been any suicide bomber in the years after.Those men with long beards and strong motivations were a great threat to the saudi family..they had no fear to die for their struggle because the struggle was all their life...They had a genuine hatred for usa and saudi corrupted state.It was only a matter of annihilating them internally and at the same time promoting their birth everywhere in the Sunni Islamic world...to serve the zionist scum.

[Aug 02, 2020] The only reason the US hasn't attacked Syria is because Putin out-maneuvered the US six times: 3 times in the UNSC and 3 times on the ground during Obama

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard Steven Hack , Aug 2 2020 0:13 utc | 140

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 1 2020 16:47 utc | 121 The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons
states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

Which is precisely my point: the US had to say this because if they did it the geopolitical heat would be to great.

I've had further thoughts:

1) The only reason the US hasn't attacked Syria is because Putin out-maneuvered the US six times: 3 times in the UNSC and 3 times on the ground during Obama. The third time Russia explicitly said that anyone attacking Syrian military would be shot down. The reason that held was because Russia troops were *already* on the ground in Syria with the capability to do just that. Obama recognized that was a non-starter for him and he backed down from his contemplated "no-fly zone".

And when Trump launched his cruise missiles, that's exactly what Russia did - they used their ECM to degrade or down most of those missiles.

2) Now, if Putin were to figure out some way to *actually* threaten the US with nuclear retaliation - whether directly or *implied* (more so than anything you've quoted so far), that might actually work as a deterrent. The best way to do that would be what Putin did in Syria - put Russian boots on the ground. If Putin could work a deal with Iran that put a significant number of Russian forces on the ground inside Iran, thus making any US or Israeli attack on important Iranian assets an attack on Russian forces, that would likely be a deterrent.

The problem is that Iran didn't even want Russian planes based in Iran for use in Syria (except one time IIRC). No country wants someone else's military inside their borders, especially in large numbers, so Iran is unlikely to agree to basing large numbers of Russian troops inside Iran. A few nuclear technicians wouldn't be enough of a deterrent - it would require significant Russian assets. I don't see it happening, but it is possible.

3) Putin's responses to the US Nuclear Posture Review relate to Russia and the former Soviet states. Apparently no one can figure out that the word "ally" has more significant meanings depending on context, and as I've said before, nothing Putin has said has put that context in military alliance terms with regard to Iran.

4) Apparently, as US and Israeli provocations against Iran continue to grow, signaling a continuing intent to get a war started, everyone's cognitive dissonance has apparently grown with it, so now everyone is hiding behind the notion that Putin will launch WWIII over Iran as an excuse to believe that an Iran war is "impossible".

Dream on. We'll see. As I've said elsewhere many times, once the Iran war starts, I expect to see abject apologies from everyone who doubted the possibility.

[Aug 02, 2020] Libya invasion was pure neocolonialism

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

H.Schmatz , Aug 1 2020 13:41 utc | 100

The "no-fly zone" issue is covered in a second video suggested when this one almost ends...It is also told that Obama opposed at first the destruction of Lybia, along with the important participation of some NATO superpowers on basis of geopolitical interests and, of course, looting of always...It was a coalition of the willing with assorted goals...althoughm ainly benefitted the US in its cursade on the ME...

All these wars have happened to destroy kinda powerful nations ( competing economic/military powers...), like Lybia in Africa and Yugoslavia in Europe on behalf of others´hegemony...

[Aug 02, 2020] The seal story about Benghazi has appeared in a short video. Hillary and Stevens caught in a massive gun running scheme.

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Bob Dvorak , Aug 1 2020 2:11 utc | 53

The seal story about Benghazi has appeared in a short video. Hillary and Stevens caught in a massive gun running scheme.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc4wrSIOUxc

Jackrabbit , Aug 1 2020 2:58 utc | 59

Bob Dvorak @Aug1 2:11 #53

Great video that everyone should see (especially clueless Americans) but it should've included Obama's illegally turning a "no fly" Zone into a bombing campaign.

The UN had only authorized a "no fly" zone and Obama never sought authorization from Congress for war.

!!

juliania , Aug 1 2020 4:03 utc | 64

Okay, I'll bite, Jackrabbit - sorry if I haven't followed your line of thinking on CIA and Hillary ...wanting to elect Trump??? That really doesn't make sense to me. That would mean everything about the really outrageous campaign against Trump's presidency has been orchestrated so we chumps wouldn't guess they really were secretly rejoicing?

Sorry, I just don't buy it. But of course, I could be wrong. Who knows what dark deeds are being secretly devised behind all these curtains of lies? (A good reason to suppose there is a God who sees and who will someday reveal to us mortals what has really been going on. I can't wait to find out.)

[Aug 02, 2020] A couple of relevant section from the NPR which I think Putin was replying to.

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU1 , Aug 1 2020 16:34 utc | 119

A couple of relevant section from the NPR which I think Putin was replying to.

https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FINAL-REPORT.PDF
From page 21...
"The United States would only consider the employment of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances
to defend the vital interests of the United States, its allies, and partners. Extreme circumstances
could include significant non-nuclear strategic attacks. Significant non-nuclear strategic attacks
include, but are not limited to, attacks on the U.S., allied, or partner civilian population or
infrastructure, and attacks on U.S. or allied nuclear forces, their command and control, or warning
and attack assessment capabilities.
The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons
states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.
Given the potential of significant non-nuclear strategic attacks, the United States reserves the right
to make any adjustment in the assurance that may be warranted by the evolution and proliferation
of non-nuclear strategic attack technologies and U.S. capabilities to counter that threat."

And page 34...
"Our deterrence strategy is designed to ensure that the Iranian leadership understands that
any non-nuclear strategic attack against the United States, allies, and partners would be
defeated, and that the cost would outweigh any benefits. There is no plausible scenario in
which Iran may anticipate benefit from launching a strategic attack. Consequently, U.S
deterrence strategy includes the capabilities necessary to defeat Iranian non-nuclear,
strategic capabilities, including the U.S. defensive and offensive systems capable of
precluding or degrading Tehran's missile threats. The United States will continue to
strengthen these capabilities as necessary to stay ahead of Iranian threats as they grow.
Doing so will enhance U.S. security and that of our regional allies and partners."

The page 34 section states plainly that US is willing to use nuclear weapons against Iran's non nuclear capabilities.

Peter AU1 , Aug 1 2020 16:47 utc | 121

I should have highlighted this in my previous post.

The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons
states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

Jackrabbit , Aug 1 2020 17:03 utc | 123

After the drone shoot-down last week, Israel and USA sought to convince Russia to allow a strike against Iran. The Russians rebuffed this request as well as the depiction of Iran as a terrorist state

Newsweek: Russia Warns U.S. and Israel That Iran Is Its 'Ally' and Was Right About Drone Shoot Down

"In the context of the statements made by our partners with regard to a major regional power, namely Iran, I would like to say the following: Iran has always been and remains our ally and partner , with which we are consistently developing relations both on bilateral basis and within multilateral formats,"

!!

[Aug 02, 2020] Iran launching very clever non-silo dug down ballistic missiles. Anyone can copy the idea in earth or sand, it looks relatively simple and perhaps genius.

Aug 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sunny Runny Burger , Aug 1 2020 0:42 utc | 41

News I noticed:

...Iran launching very clever non-silo dug down ballistic missiles. Anyone can copy the idea in earth or sand, it looks relatively simple and perhaps genius. It should only require minimal additions similar to when missiles are "containerized"/vertical on ships.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dytSOhfg1UM for the video.

· "W93/MK7 Navy Warhead -- Developing Modern Capabilities to Address Current and Future Threats" - Pentagon, Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), unclassified 5-page white paper, May 2020 is still not "leaked". Seems a dud: reading between the lines not written no one was convinced and instead complained about anyone saying there's any problems (how "exceptional").

Grieved , Aug 1 2020 0:54 utc | 43

@41 Sunny Runny Burger

That's a great little video clip. Missiles erupting out of the ground. Trying to guess where the next one's coming from. I'll call it genius.

Peter AU1 , Aug 1 2020 1:54 utc | 49

Millenium Challenge 2002

"Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated electronic surveillance network. Van Riper used motorcycle messengers to transmit orders to front-line troops and World-War-II-style light signals to launch airplanes without radio communications.

Red received an ultimatum from Blue, essentially a surrender document, demanding a response within 24 hours. Thus warned of Blue's approach, Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet by the second day of the exercise. In a preemptive strike, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles that overwhelmed the Blue forces' electronic sensors and destroyed sixteen warships. The losses were as follows: one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five of six amphibious ships. An equivalent success in a real conflict would have resulted in the deaths of over 20,000 service personnel. Soon after the cruise missile offensive, another significant portion of Blue's navy was "sunk" by an armada of small Red boats, which carried out both conventional and suicide attacks that capitalized on Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected."

Iranians are not part of the rules based order it seems - not that the bad guys in the war game was played by Iranians.

Grieved , Aug 1 2020 4:29 utc | 69

@50 Peter AU1 & #55 Bemildred

In the 2002 war game, the US was defeated in 2 days - lost a massive part of its fleet or some such. So they stopped the game and changed the rules. I think that's when Van Riper quit the game in disgust, and of course ultimately went public. But even with the rules changed, the US still lost.

The point about these exercises is that they are real endeavors to create a playbook that will result in victory. Millennium cost about $200 million to stage, and even for the Pentagon that was war-fighting money spent to try to get somewhere. The next point even more crucial is that in EVERY exercise the Pentagon has undertaken since this game, the US is ALWAYS beaten by Iran.

This is the point I frequently try to hammer home here - the Pentagon has no map whatsoever that leads to victory in warfare against Iran. Any warfare will always result in defeat for the US - and we know how unpalatable a public defeat would be for the whole MIC stream of income. The fundamentals are stacked against the US. It's very similar to Israel's position right now against Hezbollah. For both the US and Israel, neither one can move forward along the path it wants to go because its foe simply cannot be beaten by any stratagem it can devise.

Sharmine Narwani talked about this extensively in her interview with Ross Ashcroft last year on Renegade, Inc. It's an excellent interview. She's expert on the geopolitics of the ME and laid out many of the fundamentals that create and support Iran's unwavering position in this theater and in the great game:

What's the real plan with Iran?

I keep this episode bookmarked largely to share it here from time to time. You will both enjoy the interview. The takeaway is that the US can bluster all it wants, but it dare not cross a red line with Iran - such as it already has, for example, with Soleimani's murder, and for which it has not yet suffered its full punishment, which is complete banishment from the ME (and which I am convinced Iran will ultimately achieve).

~~

When your generals tell you constantly, daily, that you can't go into battle in a certain theater, you are free to bluster all you want. In fact, it's all you have left, and you pour all your feeble energy into it. Thus, the US.

Sakineh Bagoom , Aug 1 2020 6:44 utc | 75

Peter AU1 50 & 55 Bemildred & Grieved 70
RE: Millenium Challenge 2002
And yet, I keep pointing out that, that was 18 long years ago, when Iran did NOT have the following:

Terminal guidance for it's ballistics
Armed drone technology
Satellite to map out the battlefield
Proximity to Israel (two countries sat between Iran and Israel)
Electronic surveillance and response, like spoofing a drone to land in Iran.
S300 and home built variations
Cyber
Experience watching coalition forces fighting in ME
Etc, etc,

Peter AU1 , Aug 1 2020 9:03 utc | 84

Re Iran

US could not attack Iran conventionally but with Trump's earlier fixation on nuclear weapons I think he was going to give that a try. Putin must have thought so to as he very publicly laid Russia's nuclear umbrella over Iran and maintained the status quo.

It was after this meeting the Russian envoy made the point plain and public in the presser that Iran was an ally of Russia.
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-iran-us-israel-drone-ally-1445802

Richard Steven Hack , Aug 1 2020 9:55 utc | 86

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 1 2020 9:03 utc | 88 US could not attack Iran conventionally

The US is perfectly capable of *attacking* Iran conventionally. The only thing to question is whether the US can *defeat* Iran in the sense that Iran "surrenders" officially to the US. *That* is in my view impossible short of the US actually killing thirty million Iranians by nuking Iran.

Which in turn I believe even Trump would not do. He really would get Pentagon pushback on that, as well as from every US ally and the UNSC, because no one wants to get the geopolitical hear from being the first country to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear country (this isn't WWII any more, before anyone brings up Hiroshima.)

As for Putin declaring Iran an ally, that does *not* mean that Putin would risk a nuclear confrontation with the US over Iran. Not going to happen - even if the US nuked Tehran. Putin's charge is to take care of Russian interests - and having Iran as an "ally and partner" does qualify as an "interest". But it is *not* an *overriding* interest. Putin would not be authorized by the Russian people to risk their country being nuked over a bunch of Persians and if he did, they'd kick his butt out at the next election - and rightly so.

Current Russian military doctrine (discussed here specifies the following:


The section on use begins by repeating the formulation in the last two Russian military doctrines (translation from the Russian Embassy in the U.K.): "The Russian Federation shall reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy." Like the doctrines, Foundations underlines that the president of the Russian Federation makes any decision to use nuclear weapons. However, unlike the doctrines, it then, in paragraph 19, outlines four conditions that could allow for (not require) nuclear use:

credible information that Russia is under ballistic missile attack (the missiles don't have to be nuclear -- this isn't specified -- but in many cases, it's hard to tell before they land);
the use of nuclear or other WMD by an adversary against Russian territory or that of its allies;
adversary actions against Russian critical government or military infrastructure that could undermine Russia's capacity for nuclear retaliation (so, for example, a cyber attack on Russia's command and control -- or perhaps one that targets Russian leadership could also qualify); and, finally,
conventional aggression against Russia that threatens the very existence of the state.

The primary requirement is the use of nukes or "WMDs" against Russia, or conventional weapons where their use is an "existential threat", i.e., Russia is about to be defeated on a conventional battlefield.

the phrase "and/or its allies" almost certainly does *not* include Iran. There are two "alliances" to which Russia is a party, according to Wikipedia:
1) Collective Security Treaty Organization: Military alliance with 6 former Soviet republics: Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.
2) Union State: an alliance between Russia and Belarus (also already covered by 1).

Russia and Iran do not have any formal military or mutual-defense alliance agreements. Russia and Iran are "allied" only with regard to Syria and Islamic terrorism in general. Russia is willing to sell Iran arms, obviously. Equally obviously, that does not indicate a willingness to risk nuclear war.

Putin made the following statement in June of 2019:

After talks Friday with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani at the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek, Putin said that "relations between Russia and Iran are multifaceted, multilateral" and that "this concerns the economy, this concerns the issues of stability in the region, our joint efforts to combat terrorism, including in Syria."

Nothing in that statement indicates a willingness to use Russia's nuclear arsenal to threaten the US to prevent a US attack on Iran.

It is of course *possible* that some in the Pentagon, the Deep State, and/or Congress, may interpret that to be the case. But I think the primary restraint on any President would be the heat for a first use of nukes on a non-nuclear country - even if the alleged "reason" was that Iran was developing nukes.
Even severe damage to US Navy assets in the region would not be sufficient to justify the use of nukes against Iran, in particular because the only viable target for nukes would Tehran or some other major Iranian city.

It is just possible that a tactical nuke would be used against a heavily buried facility involved in nuclear weapons development (or more precisely, alleged to be so - because Iran won't be developing nukes regardless of any US attack.) But even that would likely produce more heat than the US would want - and if it was done, it would be done as covertly as possible and then denied by the US. And even in that case, Russia would not threaten a nuclear response over that.

Of course, if the US leadership were to become even more unhinged than Trump, or say, the Russian leadership after Putin were to become more hawkish, then all bets are off. But under current conditions, it's not going to happen.

Peter AU1 , Aug 1 2020 10:52 utc | 90

Putin's speech March 1 2018

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/56957
"In this connection, I would like to note the following. We are greatly concerned by certain provisions of the revised nuclear posture review, which expand the opportunities for reducing and reduce the threshold for the use of nuclear arms. Behind closed doors, one may say anything to calm down anyone, but we read what is written. And what is written is that this strategy can be put into action in response to conventional arms attacks and even to a cyber-threat.

I should note that our military doctrine says Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons solely in response to a nuclear attack, or an attack with other weapons of mass destruction against the country or its allies, or an act of aggression against us with the use of conventional weapons that threaten the very existence of the state. This all is very clear and specific.

As such, I see it is my duty to announce the following. Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies, weapons of short, medium or any range at all, will be considered as a nuclear attack on this country. Retaliation will be immediate, with all the attendant consequences."

Patrushev from my link above.
"In the context of the statements made by our partners with regard to a major regional power, namely Iran, I would like to say the following: Iran has always been and remains our ally and partner, with which we are consistently developing relations both on bilateral basis and within multilateral formats"


Patrushev went to the meeting as a presidential envoy. After Putin's 2018 speech, I wondered who Russia considered an ally as I had not seen Russia name any. I tend to think Patrushev had reason to publicly name Iran as an ally at that presser. My guess is Israel and US were trying to get Russia to stand aside while they attacked Iran.

Richard Steven Hack , Aug 1 2020 13:20 utc | 96

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 1 2020 10:52 utc | 95 I tend to think Patrushev had reason to publicly name Iran as an ally at that presser. My guess is Israel and US were trying to get Russia to stand aside while they attacked Iran.

Nonetheless, the two statements do not constitute an official declaration that Iran is an ally in the sense of being under the Russian nuclear umbrella, as the countries in the list I quoted from Wikipedia are. The Collective Security Treaty Organization "charter reaffirmed the desire of all participating states to abstain from the use or threat of force. Signatories would not be able to join other military alliances or other groups of states,[3] while aggression against one signatory would be perceived as an aggression against all."

That's a military alliance which specifically declares those countries as "allies" in the military sense and specifically states that an attack on any of them is an attack on all of them.

Putin nor anyone else in Russia has specifically stated that Iran is an ally in those same terms. Putin's reference to Iran as an ally applied to economic matters and the security of Syria.

There is an article at Stratfor which I cannot access, but the tagline says: "Nikolai Bordyuzha, secretary-general of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), said Feb. 25 [2020] that Moscow's nuclear umbrella has been extended to other CSTO member countries..." In other words, the nuclear umbrella didn't even cover the former Soviet Union countries until this year, apparently. From another article I found, Russia extended the umbrella to Belarus in 2000. Another article I found says this:


Finally, Russia has created its own military alliance through the Collective Security Treaty (1992) or "Tashkent treaty". In 2002, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was created, with a view to parallel NATO. As of June 2009, the organization included Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, which are implicitly covered by a Russian nuclear guarantee. Even though Russian officials refer sometimes to all Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS) countries being protected by Moscow's nuclear forces, it is reasonable to assume that only CSTO countries are effectively under the Russian nuclear umbrella.

So I simply don't see any reference anywhere to Russia explicitly extending its nuclear umbrella outside of the former Soviet Bloc countries. Again, all of the references made by Russians - Putin or otherwise - to Iran as an "ally" do not reference a military dimension. Of course, it's always *possible* that Putin or some future Russian leader *would* extend that umbrella to Iran, depending on future circumstances. But it seems highly unlikely.

I repeat: There is no chance that Russia will go to nuclear war over Iran. Or even conventional war against US military assets engaged in an attack on Iran because that would risk escalation to a nuclear level. The most Russia will do is supply arms and intelligence to Iran.

[Aug 01, 2020] Executed Turkish general exposed misuse of Qatari funds for Syria extremists- Report - Al Arabiya English

Highly recommended!
Aug 01, 2020 | english.alarabiya.net

Executed Turkish general exposed misuse of Qatari funds for Syria extremists: Report Semih Terzi, a general within the Turkish army, was executed on the night of the 2016 Turkish coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. (Photo via the stockholmcf) Ismaeel Naar, Al Arabiya English Friday 31 July 2020 Text size A A A

me title=

The Turkish army executed a senior general within its ranks after he had discovered the embezzlement of illicit Qatari funding for extremists in Syria by public officials, according to a 2019 court testimony unveiled in a report by the Nordic Monitor.

Semih Terzi, a general within the Turkish army, was executed on the night of the 2016 Turkish coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app.

The new allegations unveiled in court testimonies from a hearing March 20, 2019at Ankara 17th High Criminal Court were made by Col. Fırat Alakuş, an army officer working within Turkey's Special Forces Command's intelligence section.

According to the Nordic Monitor, Terzi is said to have been executed after discovering that Lt. Gen. Zekai Aksakallı, in charge of the Special Forces Command at the time, was working covertly with Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MIT) "in running illegal and clandestine operations in Syria for personal gain while dragging Turkey deeper into the Syrian civil war."

Read more:

Qatar, Turkey, Muslim Brotherhood leading campaign to 'vilify' UAE: Gargash

Turkey leans on Qatar for $15 billion deal as economy stutters amid coronavirus

Syrian refugees file law suit against Qatar's Doha Bank for terror funding

"[Terzi] knew how much of the funding delivered [to Turkey] by Qatar for the purpose of purchasing weapons and ammunition for the opposition was actually used for that and how much of it was actually used by public officials, how much was embezzled," Col. Alakuş was quoted as saying by the Nordic Monitor via his court testimony.

The Nordic Monitor said in its report published on Friday that Alakuş testified that Aksakallı had run a gang outside of the chain of command within the Turkish intelligence that was involved in illicit activities.

The report further alleged that Terzi was aware of public officials involved in oil-smuggling operations with ISIS from Syria.

"[Terzi] was aware of who in the government was involved in an oil-smuggling operation from Syria, how the profits were shared, and what activities they were involved in," Alakuş said in his testimony.

[Aug 01, 2020] This withdrawal of American troops and personnel from Germany points to the direction of European long-term decline in importance, as it seems the USA is opting for a more aggressive model against the Russian Federation. Either it believes the Russian Federation will fall soon (after Putin's death) or it is giving up Europe altogether

Aug 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Jul 31 2020 18:08 utc | 16

AFRICOM confirms HQ is leaving Stuttgart, German defense minister says US withdrawal is 'regrettable'

USA's shift to the Western Pacific (Australia) is taking shape. This withdrawal of American troops and personnel from Germany points to the direction of European long-term decline in importance, as it seems the USA is opting for a more aggressive, less in-depth model against the Russian Federation. Either it believes the Russian Federation will fall soon (after Putin's death) or it is giving up Europe altogether. Both scenarios imply in Germany's (the EU) decline.

[Aug 01, 2020] Syrian Army Uncovers Organ Trading Hub Of Turkish-Backed Militants In Southern Idlib -

Aug 01, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Syrian Army Uncovers Organ Trading Hub Of Turkish-Backed Militants In Southern Idlib by Tyler Durden Sat, 08/01/2020 - 19:00 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Submitted by South Front,

The joint Russian-Turkish patrol set to be held in southern Idlib on July 29 was delayed due to increased military tensions and the inability of Ankara to ensure the security of the patrol in its area of responsibility. And the situation does not seem to be improving.

According to pro-militant sources, on the evening of July 29th and morning of July 30th, the Syrian Army launched over 500 shells at militants' positions in the Zawiya Mount area, including Kansafra, al-Bara, Kafar Aweed, Fatterah and Erinah. In response, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and its allies struck Syrian Army checkpoints at Kafr Nabl, As Safa, Hakoura and in nearby areas.

https://southfront.org/wp-content/plugins/fwduvp/content/video.php?path=https%3A%2F%2Fsouthfront.org%2Fsyrian-army-uncovers-organ-trading-hub%2F&pid=1995

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.400.1_en.html#goog_1616854260

In the last few days, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Turkistan Islamic Party reinforced their positions on the contact line with the Syrian Army, south of the M4 highway. Their forces reportedly remain on high alert. Pro-government sources say that the inability of Ankara to secure another joint patrol in southern Idlib is a signal that the militants are preparing for offensive actions there.

Meanwhile, the Syrian Army uncovered a hideout that had been used by militants working as organ traders in the village of al-Ghadfah in southern Idlib. According to Syria's state-run news agency SANA, government forces found human organs, including hearts, livers and heads in the hideout. The organs were preserved in jars with chloroform. The jars carried the names of the victims. Personal IDs of the victims, men and women, were also found in the hideout.

The hideout included a room designated for religious studies with radical ideological publications. This indicates that the site had belonged to one of the multiple militant groups that still operate in Greater Idlib thanks to the Turkish opposition to counter-terrorism operations there.

Al-Ghadfah is located in the vicinity of the city of Maarat al-Numan and for a long time it has been controlled by Turkey's main partner in Idlib – Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. The town was liberated by the Syrian Army and its allies in January 2020.

Lt. Sharif al-Nazzal of the Syrian Military Intelligence Directorate (MID) was assassinated in the town of Sahem al-Golan in western Daraa on July 29. The lieutenant was with another intelligence officer known as "Abu Haider", when they were attacked by unidentified gunmen. Both officers were shot dead on the spot.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Opposition sources claimed that al-Nazzal, a native of Sahem al-Golan, was close to Lebanon's Hezbollah and Iranian forces. The officer headed a detachment of the MID in the western Daraa countryside. No group has claimed responsibility for the assassination. Nonetheless, in previous stages of the conflict Israel was extensively supporting militant groups in southern Syria. It is possible that Tel Aviv may have access to cells of these groups for support with particular operations.

Two members of the US-backed Revolutionary Commando Army militant group based in al-Tanf were detained by the Syrian Army near the US-controlled zone. The detained persons were moving on a motorcycle and possessed assault rifles and night-vision goggles. They were reportedly involved in an information gathering operation about civilian and military facilities in the Homs desert.

In the past, Damascus has repeatedly claimed that the US was planning to use its proxies in al-Tanf for destabilizing operations in the government-controlled area.

[Aug 01, 2020] Pompeo Vows US To Take -Necessary Action- If UN Arms Embargo On Iran Ends -

Aug 01, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

For months the US has been in a full court diplomatic press on fellow UN Security Council members in an attempt to ensure that a UN arms embargo against Iran does not expire.

The embargo on selling conventional weapons to Iran is set to end October 18, and is ironically enough part of the 2015 nuclear deal brokered under Obama, which the Trump administration in May 2018 pulled out of.

But now Pompeo vows the US will "take necessary action" -- no doubt meaning more sanctions at the very least, and likely military action at worst. He told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this week that "in the near future... we hope will be met with approval from other members of the P5."

And he followed with :

"In the event it's not, we're going to take the action necessary to ensure that this arms embargo does not expire," he said.

"We have the capacity to execute snapback and we're going to use it in a way that protects and defends America," Pompeo told the committee further.

Speaking to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo continued to call on the world to accept extending the UN arms embargo against Iran. The embargo is scheduled to expire on October 18.

But it's clear at this point that the UN is not intent on extending the embargo . Russia for one has promised as much. Both Russia and China also have recent weapons deals in the works with the Islamic Republic.

LibertarianMenace , 55 minutes ago

"protects and defends America"

Nothing is farther from the truth, fat man. We know (((who))) it is we're "protecting".

bumboo , 37 minutes ago

Is this fat guy being blackmailed to saying stupid things all the time

monty42 , 35 minutes ago

He works for the Council on Foreign Relations who have been bankrupting the States with perpetual war since they fomented WW2.

LibertarianMenace , 30 minutes ago

Yes, him and the rest of the USG. When you can assassinate a U.S. President in broad daylight and get away with it, you can get away with more extravagant illusions, like 09/11, or if people are finally catching on, throw in just a smidgen of reality like CV-19. Sky is the limit.

This is Trump's redeeming value: he's showing all, including the densest among us (((who))) it is that runs the country. Whether he does it intentionally or not, as in kowtowing to (((them))), is ultimately irrelevant. (((They))) have to be a bit uncomfortable from the unaccustomed exposure. The censoring just proves it.

Tag 'em And Bag 'em , 36 minutes ago

This pneumatic bull frog is a deep state sock puppet with a Zionist hand way up his ***.

When his lips move, Satanyahoo's voice comes out

This has zero to do with the interests of real Americans.

**building 7 didn't kill itself**

Tag 'em And Bag 'em , 23 minutes ago

TRUMP: "Larry Silverstein is a great guy, he's a good guy, he's a friend of mine."

https://youtu.be/o62aUVobO04

**building 7 didn't kill itself**

Fluff The Cat , 43 minutes ago

The reason that the US government are trying to get Iran is because Epstein/Mossad has blackmailed them all into doing their bidding.

Why don't you cover that in the news, huh?

El Chapo Read , 31 minutes ago

"Necessary Action" = Call Israel and ask what they want him to do.

jaser , 43 minutes ago

Protect America? Protect corrupt Netanyahu more like it. Your nation is about to implode and you just cut off the $600 welfare payment to your citizens hey but let's ban TikTok and protect America from Iran.

malMono , 39 minutes ago

This why Biden might win...idiots like pompeo are a turnoff.

Grouchy-Bear , 34 minutes ago

Sometimes it looks like Pompeo is actually in charge. Okay, most of the time he is in charge. Why go through the election process at all? Pompeo is running the country and was never elected...

malMono , 39 minutes ago

This why Biden might win...idiots like pompeo are a turnoff.

Grouchy-Bear , 34 minutes ago

Sometimes it looks like Pompeo is actually in charge. Okay, most of the time he is in charge. Why go through the election process at all? Pompeo is running the country and was never elected...

rwe2late , 43 minutes ago

Embargo Iran to make them as desperate as possible.

Then accuse them of being "aggressive" while one attacks and bombs Iran's near neighbors (Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen).

Sounds like a plan of aggressive war if done by any but an "exceptional" nation.

(It's not like the US denies it)

https://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166

Ron_Paul_Was_Right , 17 minutes ago

If Russia and China want to trade with Iran, how in the world is it the US Government's right to tell them not to? If we want to put sanctions on Iran, go for it. But at this point, the dollar is collapsing as world reserve currency. Iran should well be able to buy anything they need, from China/Russia and the rest of the world which doesn't respect US sanctions, or so I would think.

My point - there's really getting nothing that the US even can do about Iran. So maybe...we should just stop and give it a rest.

Einstein101 , 13 minutes ago

Iran should well be able to buy anything they need, from China/Russia

Fact is Russia and China sell almost nothing to Iran, fearing US sanctions.

Cassandra.Hermes , 2 minutes ago

Don't forget Turkey, Azerbaijan and Europe! Turkish stream is not only bypassing Ukrain but it is connected to Azeri pipeline that is 10km from Iranians border.

monty42 , 15 minutes ago

"Obviously the Iranian army has a bunch of non thinkers..."

Hypocrisy much? The US regime employs paid mercenaries who swore to uphold and defend the Constitution, yet lie and unthinkingly "just follow orders" and believe that absolves them of their oathbreaking and actions.

"Dude, I am FREE. I have firearms that are deadly." Heh, only a very limited arsenal permitted by the Central Committee in D.C., to maintain firepower supremacy in the empire's favor. Your firearms may be deadly, but the empire mercenary can take you out without you ever seeing their face.

Clearly having firearms and ammo alone do not prevent tyranny, the States under the D.C. regime prove that.

vipervenom , 17 minutes ago

pompass the fat boy coward sending our troops to die while he hides behind his own extra large rear end.

[Jul 31, 2020] Tucker Carlson calls Obama 'one of the sleaziest and most dishonest figures' in US political history

Highly recommended!
So Obama managed to beat Clinton? Incredible achievement !
BTW Gen. Flynn case goes 'all the way to the top' to Obama: Rep. Jordan
Jul 31, 2020 | www.msn.com

Tucker Carlson described former President Obama as "one of the sleaziest and most dishonest figures in the history of American politics" after his eulogy at the funeral of civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) on Thursday.

© The Hill tucker Carlson

Carlson, who also described the former president as "a greasy politician" for calling on Congress to pass a new Voting Rights Act and to eliminate the filibuster, which Obama described as a relic of the Jim Crow era that disenfranchised Black Americans, in order to do so.

me marginwidth=

"Barack Obama, one of the sleaziest and most dishonest figures in the history of American politics, used George Floyd's death at a funeral to attack the police," Carlson said before showing a segment of Obama's remarks.

Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

[Jul 30, 2020] Bolton is a typical crazy neocon who wants to dominate the world

Jul 30, 2020 | www.amazon.com

Pseudo D 3.0 out of 5 stars , June 24, 2020

superhawk

Ambassador John Bolton hinted that he doesn't like being called a hawk, since foreign policy labels are simplistic.

But first of all, he labeled libertarian Sen. Rand Paul an isolationist, rather than say, a non- interventionist. And after nearly 500 pages (all but the epilogue), what you will absorb is absolutely the worldview of a geopolitical hawk. He is not technically a neoconservative (like, say, Paul Wolfowitz) because the latter were more focused on nation building and spreading democracy. Bolton sees what he's promoting as defense, but it requires a constant offense.

Bolton is very bright, as Jim Baker noted decades ago, and very well-read, even endorsing his fellow Baltimorean and my teacher Steve Vicchio's book on Lincoln's faith. But his intelligence is all put into an ideological reading of situations. As Aristotle would put it, the problem is not lack of theoretical wisdom, but the deficiency in practical wisdom and prudential judgment. Certainly there are bad actors in the world, and vigilance is required. But when is aggressive action called for, and when is it better to go with diplomacy? In this book, I find few cases of such restraint. For Bolton, it seems that the goal of peace and security requires the constant threat of war and presence on every continent. All this intervention around the world requires troops, soldiers, real men and women and their lives and those of their families, requiring lots of sacrifice. At times, his theorizing seems distant from these realities on the ground.

So Bolton is critical of the "axis of adults" in the Trump administration, the "generals", but not Kelly and not much on his predecessor McMaster, much less the eccentric Flynn. So his beef is with Mattis, another fine student of history. Bolton says he went by the rules, as James Baker had said that Bush 41 was "the one who got the votes". He tried to influence Trump within the rules, while Mattis, Tillerson and Haley pursued their own foreign policy. I'm sure that Mattis was sometimes right and sometimes wrong, but I would trust his prudential judgment above that of the equally bright Bolton, because of his life experience, being the one on the ground and knowing what war is like.

When Bolton was considered for secretary state right after the 2016 election, I said, well I don't care for the guy, but at least I've heard of him and we know what we're dealing with. His opponent in GOP foreign policy is the libertarian and non-interventionist Sen. Rand Paul. What does Bolton say about the big players in the Trump administration? Nikki Haley is dismissed as a lightweight who was posing for her political future. Well, that's basically what Trump, "the one that got the votes", put her there for. But it's interesting that Bolton is so anti-Haley, when she was for Rubio and the more hawkish platform.

Tillerson's successor Mike Pompeo had sort of a love-hate relationship with Bolton.

Steve Mnuchin is the epitome of the globalist establishment, along with Javanka. Jared Kushner is dismissed as no Kissinger, but when it comes to China, his soft stance is blamed on Kissinger! While Bolton didn't testify in the impeachment, Fiona Hill is mentioned only with respect in this book.

Everybody's flaw, from Bolton's point of view, is being less belligerent than Bolton. (Even in the Bush administration, the only name I can think of would be Michael Ledeen). He even defends the concept of Middle Eastern "endless wars" on the grounds that we didn't start them and can't dictate when they end. Obama was a dove, but in 2016 the GOP marked a shift, with Trump, Paul, Ben Carson and even Ted Cruz opposing the "invade every country on earth" philosophy that this book promotes. It's true that Trump is not an ideologue and thinks in terms of individual transactions. But the movement I see is a dialectic of alternating between aggression and diplomacy, or as he sees it, friendly relationship among leaders.

Bolton is a superhawk on North Korea and Iran throughout, while China and Russia are our hostile rivals. Other matters are Syria, Iraq and ISIS, Venezuela, Afghanistan and finally Ukraine, which by the end of the book I had almost forgotten. If Bolton is dovish anywhere, it's on the Saudis, the rivals with Iran in the Sunni-Shiite dispute chronicled recently in the book "Black Wave".

You can learn a lot from this book, but just keep in mind that it's filtered through the mind of a strong ideologue, so other people's faults are seen through that lens. But he has great knowledge of the details of policy. Bolton would like to be an inter-generational guru like Henry Kissinger or Dean Acheson, but both parties have turned away from the "endless wars" philosophy.

If you are looking for anti-Trump material, I don't really see the point of investing this time and intellectual effort. The more sensational parts have been reported-the exchanges involving Xi Jinping and Kim Jong Un, and to a lesser extent Erdogan. As most reviewers have said, it's about 100 pages too long, but Bolton is looking for a scholarly work like Kissinger's Diplomacy or World Order, and this is the one that he hopes people will read.

C Wm (Andy) Anderson

Not Only is Bolton's Take on Trump Being Dangerous; Bolton Himself is a Danger to America

#1 HALL OF FAME TOP 10 REVIEWER 3.0 out of 5 stars Not Only is Bolton's Take on Trump Being Dangerous; Bolton Himself is a Danger to America Reviewed in the United States on June 23, 2020 Verified Purchase Two reviewers did better at explaining why this book is not rated by me as a must-read. Linda Galella and gammyjill. Bolton laid out some truly explosive allegations but let his own ego cloud his message.

John Bolton, on some fundamental level, is a brilliant, dedicated conservative intent on improving the future of the country he and I love. THAT similarity is probably the only point we share.

I wanted to love this book, because I knew it would be jam-packed with juicy tidbits that justify me derision of the biggest failure ever to assume the office of POTUS. Instead, quite early on, I realized the reason Trump became President was the enormous ineptitude of those otherwise brilliant people who, in short, simply felt that somebody opposing those the person they despise, on principle, was better for America than the other guy or gal.

Throughout this book, Bolton reminds us of Trump's inability to focus attention on the information provided by his handlers. Yes, Trump is naive and intellectually lazy. Yes, so, too, are many of those aiding and abetting Mr. Trump. But, yes, Mr. Bolton also suffers from gross naïveté, and, is just plain foolish. His ego led him to join the Trump Administration, as he admits in "The Room Where It Happened."

Bolton's greatest error, however, was in refusing to tell the country what he chose to sell to the public through this book.

The writing is, mechanically, quite good. But, Bolton comes across as thinking he is the only person of intelligence. That becomes clear by page two, and never changes, except for his insight that he was wrong about Trump.

Unfortunately, Bolton also was wrong about Bolton.

Whoa. Hold on. Just about everyone in both political parties is no better than Bolton. A few exceptions would be Former governor John Kasick and Utah Senator Mitt Romney. Oh, and former Vice President Joe Biden, I believe. Yet, to be honest, I need to see him prove me right. I would hate to make the same mistake regarding Biden as Bolton did regarding Trump.

Americans need to take a good, hard look at how we are governed and at those whom we support.

BOTTOM LINE

Writing quality, passable. But don't expect to gain a great deal of new knowledge.

Three stars out of five.

[Jul 30, 2020] It s Official: Pompeo Has Declared Cold War With China It s Official- Pompeo Has Declared Cold War With China - The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... Pompeo is a disgusting man. The US Oligarchic Regime is projecting a lot. It is this Regime that does not recognize any other order than its own, and always puts a messianic spin on its discourse. ..."
"... Mike Pompous can be counted upon to do everything possible to torpedo legitimate US interests below the waterline, and then nuke any survivors. ..."
Jul 29, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Mike Pompeo declared the start of a new Cold War with China last week.

...Pompeo's speech was an expression of this unreasonable and unrealistic view, and it is likely to leave most U.S. allies in East Asia and elsewhere cold. Our allies do not wish for deepening antagonism and strife between the U.S. and China, and if push comes to shove Washington may find itself without much support in the region. Calling for a "new alliance" to oppose China when Trump and Pompeo have done such an abysmal job of managing existing alliances in the region just drives home how divorced from reality the speech was.

... ... ...

The Secretary also relied on a familiar mix of simplistic analysis and threat inflation that he has used so often when talking about Iran: "It's this ideology, it's this ideology that informs his decades-long desire for global hegemony of Chinese communism." Pompeo is falling back on two of the stalest talking points from the Cold War. He interprets the behavior of another state primarily in terms of its official ideology rather than its concrete interests, and he attributes to them a goal of "global hegemony" that they are not pursuing to make them seem more dangerous and powerful than they are. China does seek to be the leading state in its own part of the world, but there is no evidence that they aspire to the global domination that Pompeo claims. A hard-line ideologue and hegemonist himself, Pompeo wrongly assumes that the things that motivate him must also drive the actions of others.

... ... ...

Most of the people on the receiving end of this "engagement" and "empowerment" will likely resent the condescension and interference from a foreign government in their country's affairs. Even if we assume that the vast majority of people in China might wish for a radically different government, they are liable to reject U.S. meddling in what they naturally consider to be their business. But, of course, Pompeo isn't serious about "empowering" the Chinese people, just as he isn't serious about supporting the people of Iran or Venezuela or any of the other countries on Washington's list of official foes. We can see from the economic wars that the U.S. has waged on Iran and Venezuela that the administration is only too happy to impoverish and strangle the people they claim to help. Hard-liners feign concern for the people that they then set out to harm in order to make their aggressive and destructive policies look better to a Western audience, but they aren't fooling anyone these days.

Pompeo's bombastic, caustic style and his personal lack of credibility make him an unusually poor messenger, and the Trump administration is uniquely ill-suited to rally a group of states in common cause. But the main problem with the policy Pompeo promotes is that an intensifying rivalry with China is not in the American interest. The U.S. has found that it is virtually impossible to change the behavior of adversaries when that behavior concerns what they believe to be their core security interests. ...

Fred Bowman • a day ago • edited

I was reading the words that Nixon wrote about China that Pompeo quoted and it occurred to me that if you took out the word "China" and replaced it with the "United States" then that statement would be completely accurate in describing how America acts in the world. In OTW, it's "the Pot calling the Kettle black".

daveyl123 Fred Bowman • a day ago

I wouldn't enjoin the American people with our out-of-touch, out-of-control and (In the cases of Hillary, Waters, Biden and Pelosi..) out of their minds government.

We're so conditioned to global conflicts now, it's merely a matter of the U.S. population learning how to spell the names of foreign leaders and their capitals marked for "Regime Changes", while crossing our fingers in hopes that our buildings will not again be subjected to airliner collisions and collapses in the wake of this aggression.

It would behoove Americans to start pulling on the reins of our bellicose administrations to confine their authority and actions to benefit our citizens.

KennesawJack • a day ago • edited

Your comment that we have coexisted with China for 70 years is not quite accurate. There was this little dust-up called the Korean Conflict as I recall...

kouroi BobPM • a day ago

The main purpose of TPP was to force the Chinese to privatize the State Owned Enterprises, likely via Wall Street.

L RNY • a day ago

The communist Chinese can control our movie, sports, news and entertainment industries by denying them access to China if they don't show China in a positive light or if they show China in a negative life...

daveyl123 John Achterhof • 2 hours ago

You define with accuracy the core tenets of Socialists. Once a government expands to the proportions needed to implement that form of socioeconomic leadership, the character of those leaders becomes tyrannical, while they target segments of their populations for reeducation or elimination. (Abortions would fit that scenario nicely..) Obama was just such a leader, and had he somehow been able to ignore term limits, his administration would have resembled those of any Socialist State.

rayray L RNY • a day ago

All of the policies you mention above would achieve absolutely nothing while inflaming conflict - thus increasingly the problems you outline. These hawkish responses prove the point...the issue isn't that there are or aren't issues, but that the US has lost the ability to have real discussions of these issues with world players and allies.

Much of that is because Trump patently hasn't the temperament, sophistication, or intelligence for discussion and diplomacy - this was proven again and again in the zero sum ineptitude of his private ventures.

The rot of that malignant ineptitude flows down from the head and into every aspect of government, both domestic and foreign. Thus we see his response to every domestic crisis is to inflame division. And the same in the foreign theater. He cannot be gotten rid of soon enough.

daveyl123 L RNY • a day ago • edited

I don't believe our government is so foolish as to contemplate a shooting war with the Chinese. They have nuclear warheads. Their populations are fanatics when it comes to conflicts against them...

L RNY daveyl123 • 21 hours ago

Men will not fight another war nor will women leave their jobs when the men return from war as they did with WWII. There will be no war in Europe simply because Europe (including Russia) is depopulating at such a rapid rate they cant afford a losing more of their population through conflict. I dont see a shooting war with China either. I think that is the purpose of the tariffs and detachment of economies. US intelligence says that China does not want war with the US either. I don't think there is any country that would jump to a pre-emptive nuclear attack in case of a hot war. They dont have the air force superiority or the Navy or superiority in space yet.

Its not the Chinese way. The Chinese wait until they have superiority then they act otherwise they like to fly below the radar and get away with as much espionage and intimidation as possible. The opium wars came about because of the Chinese culture of trade exporting much but importing little thus creating a trade imbalance and indebting their trading partners.

Chinese culture has many forms of achieving superiority without restoring to conflict. The think tanks and experts are predicting that Xi may be pushed out of power by his competitors in the politburo which could defuse the situation. I don't think it will change detaching the economies. After COVID, countries are shifting focus from lowest cost possible to lowest cost and lowest risk possible.

That's why medical instruments, pharmaceuticals, etc are either moving out of China or moving part of their production to the US or they can win against a declining, an indebted power, an over stretched power, etc. Take a lesson with Russia and the US. Russia did not confront the US directly. It used proxies elsewhere around the world. Russia did not want a war with NATO or with the US. That balance kept the peace. If you want peace with China then there is going to have to be some sort of parity or superiority of China's neighbors via an alliance and/or superiority in trade/technology/economy. If you want war then you pacify and try to avoid war leaving a strategic space where your competitor thinks they can win. To avoid war, you need parity or superiority.

kouroi • a day ago

Pompeo is a disgusting man. The US Oligarchic Regime is projecting a lot. It is this Regime that does not recognize any other order than its own, and always puts a messianic spin on its discourse.

The US itself is not a democracy, but as B. Franklin put it from the beginning, is a Republic, which from the birth was design to promote and preserve the haves, the existing Oligarchy. While they looked for a balance of power in order to prevent the rise of an autocrat (the other bugbear of Oligarchy), the main fear of the framers was democracy and the threat of the mob voting for re-distribution...

The success of the socialist state of China is an indication of what might have happened if the socialist block in ensemble wouldn't have suffered the containment enforced by the US. Given the ability to engage in normal economic intercourse with the world, China developed and lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. Vietnam is another example. But look what is happening with Cuba or North Korea or Venezuela. It is not the socialist system per se, but the blockade of those countries and the crushing economic war that ruins them.

Fortunately, Russia has learned from the mistakes of the past.

It is good that the cards are on the table to see that US Oligarchy wants to rule everything, because it is a corrupting way of life and mind. Because of this, the march for more open societies, with more, no less democracy, and people representation and input is halted.

And of course, in this new Cold War, a lot of civil liberties and freedom of speech will be curtailed. In my neck of the woods we have already experienced individuals assaulting people of Chinese ethnicity. Way to go America!

Jeff Dickey kouroi • 2 hours ago

Mike Pompous can be counted upon to do everything possible to torpedo legitimate US interests below the waterline, and then nuke any survivors. He, along with Barr, Graham, and the rest of the Trump circus, are a cautionary tale for what happens to governments that let ideologues deliberately divorced from reality run a country. They've turned what was once the United States from a superpower to a failed state in an absurdly short period of time. History will be far less kind to these political Bernie Madoffs than to the original financial exemplar.

daveyl123 • a day ago

Wars ain't nothing to bandy about among administration subordinates. Pompeo is not supposed to be declaring wars--hot or cold. Wars cost big money, lives and property. Only the most grave threats against our country should prompt our leaders to even consider conflicts, much less initiate them. The American people cannot just sit back and absorb such profound adjustments to our national security posture and defense expenditures being unilaterally decided by Washington. It is also a condition of conflicts that our civil rights will be under increased constraints. I chuckled a little when China was listed as our 'new' foe. We won't fight the Chinese because we'll have another Vietnam War on our hands. Our troops aren't used to our enemies fighting back. They've been deployed into banana wars against poorly trained and ill equipped armies of Middle East camel holes. The U.S. Armed Forces' new culture, consisting of socially-engineered, politically-corrected soldiers-of-tolerance have yet to confront true fanatics. These facts were known waaaaay back during our Korean War Adventure.

I've always said that if the Chinese are good at anything, it's making more Chinese.

Adriana Pena • a day ago

Because we did not have enough problems already.

"Eramos pocos y pario la abuela"

hooly • a day ago

New Cold War? Bring it on. Competition is good. A strong rival is desired. Instead of a struggle over Ideology, this will be a Civilizational struggle, Western Civilization VS Central Civilization, liberal democracy VS Confucian/Legalist authoritarianism, Euro-America VS the Han Chinese. But this time, is America up to the tast?

During the Cold War we were led by 'Greatest Generation' who lived through the Great Depression and fought in World War II, is today's America of Facebook, Twitter, conspiracy theories, selfies, BLM, safe spaces, Diversity, mass immigration and Woke political correctness run amok up to the task?

While China is a predator, homogeneous, nationalist, revanchist and bent on returning to the glory it thinks it deserves. All I can say is, thank god for nuclear weapons and the Chinese Communist Party for keeping a short leash on the patriotic passions of the Han Chinese.

Myron Hudson • a day ago

We had "an alliance of democracies" in the TPP which was developed to counter China. Of course, it handed much of our domestic sovereignty over to multinational corporations, but that's what you can expect from a corporatist like Obama. Still, might have been better than this.

Anton • 20 hours ago

On point analysis.

Ho Hum • 14 hours ago

I wonder if the Nixon family knew in advance that Pompeo was going to trash Richard Nixon's greatest legacy?

A war between China and the U.S. would not simply be costly for the US - it could end in the destruction of the world as we know it if it turns nuclear. Trump and Pompeo are sociopathic madman. I would not put it past Trump to use Nukes against China. He is just that stupid and evil.

peter mcloughlin • an hour ago

President Nixon's détente with China had an important geopolitical consideration, leverage on Russia. "We're using the China thaw to get the Russians shook", he is quoted to have said. There is much talk among hawks these days of a "new Cold War", with that the confidence it will end like the first one: victory for the west and no nuclear annihilation. But this is a danger illusion: today America is in a hegemonic struggle with China for global dominance. It seems neither side can back down. The present crisis is like the Cold War in one crucial sense – world war must be avoided at all costs. The powers are not heeding the warning of history.
https://www.ghostsofhistory...

[Jul 30, 2020] Financial capitalism is bloodthirstily by definition as it needs new markets. It fuels wars.

Jul 29, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

steven t johnson 07.29.20 at 3:14 pm (50 )

PS likbez@46 reminded me of a line from the movie Reds. Warren Beatty's John Reed spoke of people who "though Karl Marx wrote a good antitrust law." This was not a favorable comment. The confusion of socialism and what might be called populism is quite, quite old. Jack London's The Iron Heel has its hero pointing out even before the Great (Class) War that the normal operations of capitalism, concentration and centralization, destroyed the middle class paradise of equal competition. It wasn't conspiracies.

likbez 07.29.20 at 3:30 pm

@steven t johnson 07.29.20 at 3:14 pm (51)

Jack London's The Iron Heel has its hero pointing out even before the Great (Class) War that the normal operations of capitalism, concentration and centralization, destroyed the middle class paradise of equal competition.

I think the size of the USA military budget by itself means the doom for the middle class, even without referring to famous Jack London book (The Iron Heel is cited by George Orwell 's biographer Michael Shelden as having influenced Orwell's most famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.).

Wall Street and MIC (especially intelligence agencies ; Allen Dulles was a Wall Street lawyer) are joined at the hip. And they both fully control MSM. As Jack London aptly said:

"The press of the United States? It is a parasitic growth that battens on the capitalist class. Its function is to serve the established by moulding public opinion, and right well it serves it."
― Jack London, The Iron Heel

Financial capitalism is bloodthirstily by definition as it needs new markets. It fuels wars. In a sense, Bolton is the symbol of financial capitalism foreign policy.

It is important to understand that finance capitalism creates positive feedback loop in the economy increasing instability of the system. So bubbles are immanent feature of finance capitalism, not some exception or the result of excessive greed.

[Jul 29, 2020] The UK government didn't find evidence because it didn't look for it, and backs increased powers for intelligence agencies and media censorship as a result

Jul 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

WARREN July 27, 2020 at 10:07 am

https://www.youtube.com/embed/NG17cgS2-sU?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

UK 'Russia report' fear-mongers about meddling yet finds no evidence
10,974 views•25 Jul 2020

The Grayzone
111K subscribers
Pushback with Aaron Maté

A long-awaited UK government report finds no evidence of Russian meddling in British domestic politics, including the 2016 Brexit vote. But that hasn't stopped the fear-mongering: the report claims the UK government didn't find evidence because it didn't look for it, and backs increased powers for intelligence agencies and media censorship as a result. Afshin Rattansi, a British journalist and host of RT's "Going Underground", responds.

Guest: Afshin Rattansi, British journalist and host of RT's "Going Underground."

[Jul 29, 2020] How Modern Jihadism Became Co-Invented by the U.S. and Saudi Governments -- Strategic Culture

Jul 29, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

Modern jihadism was co-invented in 1979 by Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan al Saud, and U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, working together, and here is the background for it, and the way -- and the reasons -- that it was done:

Back in the later Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church and its aristocracies had used religious fervor in order to motivate very conservative and devout people to invade foreign countries so as to spread their empire and to not need to rely only on taxes in order to fund these invasions, but also to highly motivate them by their faith in a heavenly reward. It was far cheaper this way, because these invading forces wouldn't need to be paid so much; the reason why they'd be far cheaper is that their pay would chiefly come to them in their afterlife (if at all). That's why people of strong faith were used. (Aristocracies always rule by deceiving the public, and faith is the way.) Those invaders were Roman Catholic Crusaders, and they went out on Crusades to spread their faith and so 'converted' and slaughtered millions of Muslims and Jews, so as to expand actually the aristocracies' and preachers' empire, which is the reason why they had been sent out on those missions (to win 'converts'). This was charity, after all. (Today's large tax-exempt non-profits are no different -- consistently promoting their aristocracy's invasions, out of 'humanitarian' concern for the 'welfare', or else 'souls', of the people they are invading -- and, if need be, to kill 'bad people'. This has been the reality. And it still is. It's the way to sell imperialism to individuals who won't benefit from imperialism -- make mental slaves of them.)

The original Islamic version of the Christian Crusades, Islamic Holy War or "jihad," started on 14 November 1914 in Constantinople (today's Istanbul) when the Sheikh Hayri Bey, the supreme religious authority in the Ottoman Empire , along with the Ottoman Emperor, Mehmed V , declared a Holy War for their Muslim followers to take up arms against Britain, France, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro in World War I. They were on Germany's side, and lost. (That's the reason why the Ottoman Empire ended.) Both the Sheikh and the Emperor had actually been selected -- and then forced -- by Turkey's aristocracy, for them to declare Islamic Holy War at that time. In fact, the sitting Sheikh, Mehmet Cemaleddin Efendi , in 1913, was actually an opponent of the pro-German and war-oriented policy of the Union and Progress Party, which represented Turkey's aristocrats, and so that Sheikh was replaced by them, in order to enable a declaration of Islamic Holy War. Jihad actually had its origin in Turkey's aristocracy -- not in the Muslim masses, and not even in the Muslim clergy. It resulted from an overly ambitious Turkish aristocracy, hoping to extend their empire. It did not result from the public. And, at that time, relatively few Muslims followed this 'Holy' command, which is one reason why the Ottoman Empire soon thereafter ended.

Incidentally, so as to clarify how Turkey's aristocracy ran the show, at that time, Taner Akçam's September 2006 "The Ottoman Documents and the Genocidal Policies of the Committee for Union and Progress toward the Armenians in 1915" reported that:

The fact that the decision about the Armenians was made after a great deal of thought, based on extensive debate and discussion by the Central Committee of the CUP [Committee for Union and Progress] , can be understood by looking at other sources of information as well. The indictment of the Main Trial states as follows: ''The murder and annihilation of the Armenians was a decision taken by the Central Committee of the Union and Progress Party.'' These decisions were the result of ''long and extensive discussions.'' In the indictment are the statements of Dr. Nazım to the effect that ''it was a matter taken by the Central Committee after thinking through all sides of the issue'' and that it was ''an attempt to reach a final solution to the Eastern Question .'' 54 In his memoirs, which were published in the newspaper Vakit, Celal, the governor of Aleppo, describes the same words being spoken to him by a deputy of the Ottoman Parliament from Konya, coming as a ''greeting of a member of the Central Committee .'' This deputy told Celal that if he had ''expressed an opinion that opposed the point of view of the others, [he would] have been expelled .'' 55

(And, consequently, when Hitler allegedly -- on 22 August 1939 , right before his invasion of Poland which started WW II, and it is on page 2 here , but the sincerity and even the authenticity of that alleged private 'speech' by him should be questioned and not accepted outright by historians -- cited Turkey's genocide against Armenian Christians as being proof that genocide is acceptable, Hitler would actually have been citing there not only a Muslim proponent of genocide, but an ally of Germany who had actually done it, because the Ottoman Empire's aristocracy had been both Muslim and German-allied. Hitler would, in that 'speech', if he actually said it, have been citing that earlier ally of Germany, which had actually genocided Christians. The genocide happened, even if that speech mentioning it was concocted by some propagandist during WW II.)

The new jihad, or Islamic version of the Crusades, is, however, very different from the one that had started on 14 November 1914. It wasn't Turkish, it instead came straight from Turkey's top competitor to lead the world's Muslims, the royal family who owned Saudi Arabia, the Sauds. But they partnered with America's aristocracy, in creating it.

Today's jihadism started in 1979, when U.S. President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski (a born Polish nobleman), and his colleague Prince Bandar bin Sultan al Saud, re-created jihad or Islamic Holy War, in order to produce a dirt-cheap army of Pakistani fundamentalist Sunni students or "mujahideen," soon to be renamed Taliban ( Pashto & Persian ṭālibān, plural of ṭālib student, seeker, from Arabic ) so as to invade and conquer next door to the Soviet Union the newly Soviet-allied Afghanistan, and to turn it 'pro-Western', now meaning both anti-Soviet, and anti-Shiite. (The Saud family hate Shiites , and so do America's aristocrats, whose CIA had conquered Shiite Iran in 1953, and who became outraged when Shiites retook Iran in 1979. And, from then on, America's aristocracy, too, have hated Shiites and have craved to re-conquer Iran. By contrast, the Sauds had started in 1744 to hate Shiites.) So, modern Islamic Holy War started amongst fundamentalist Sunnis in Pakistan in 1979, against both the Soviets and the Iranians (and now against both Russia and Iran ). Here is a video of Brzezinski actually doing that -- starting the "mujahideen" (subsequently to become the Taliban) onto this 'Holy War':

https://www.youtube.com/embed/A9RCFZnWGE0?feature=oembed

Brzezinski , incidentally, had been born a Roman Catholic Polish aristocrat whose parents hated and despised Russians, and this hostility went back to the ancient conflicts between the Roman Catholic and the Russian Orthodox Churches.

So: whereas on the American end this was mainly a Roman Catholic versus Orthodox operation, it was mainly a Sunni versus Shiite operation on the Saudi end.

Here's more of the personal background regarding the co-creation, by the aristocracies of America and of Saudi Arabia, of today's jihadism, or "radical Islamic terrorism":

Whereas Nelson Rockefeller in the Republican Party sponsored Harvard's Henry Kissinger as the geostrategist and National Security Advisor, David Rockefeller in the Democratic Party sponsored Harvard's and then Columbia's Zbigniew Brzezinski as the geostrategist and National Security Advisor. The Rockefeller family was centrally involved in controlling the U.S. Government.

According to pages 41-44 of David B. Ottaway's 2008 The King's Messenger: Prince Bandar , U.S. President Jimmy Carter, whose National Security Advisor was Brzezinski, personally requested and received advice from a certain graduate student at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan al Saud, regarding geostrategy. At the time, Brzezinski commented favorably on Bandar's graduate thesis. But that's not all. "Secretly, Carter had already turned to the kingdom for help, calling in Bandar and asking him to deliver a message to [King] Fahd pleading for an increase in Saudi [oil] production. Fahd's reply, according to Bandar, was 'Tell my friend, the president of the United States of America, when they need our help, they will not be disappointed.'13 The king was true to his world." However, Bandar's advice went beyond oil. And the re-creation, of the fundamentalist-Sunni movement (amongst only fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, both in 1914 and in 1979), that now is called "jihadism," was a joint idea, from both Brzezinski and Bandar.

On 2 July 2014, Akbar Ganji headlined at Huffington Post, "U.S.-Jihadist Relations (Part 1): Creating the Mujahedin in Afghanistan" , and he noted that :

It was the United States that, together with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Pakistan, dispatched the jihadists to Afghanistan. Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia played a key role in those operations, with Saudi Arabia providing the key financial, military and human support for them. The kingdom encouraged its citizens to go to Afghanistan to fight the Soviet army. One such citizen was Osama bin Laden. Saudi Arabia agreed to match, dollar for dollar, any funds that the CIA could raise for the operations. The U.S. provided Pakistan with $3.2 billion , and Saudi Arabia bought weapons from everywhere, including international black markets, and sent them to Afghanistan through Pakistan's ISI.

That was then, and this is now, but it is merely an extension of that same operation, even after the Soviet Union and its communism and its Warsaw Pact military alliance all ended in 1991, and Russia ended its side of the Cold War but the United States secretly continued its side , as is shown here, by an example. This example, of America's continuing its Cold War, is America's longstanding effort, after the death of FDR in 1945, to overthrow and replace Syria's pro-Russian Government and install instead a Syrian Government that will be controlled by the Sauds:

U.S. President Barack Obama was warned in 2012 by U.S. DOD intelligence that if he would try to overthrow and replace Syria's secular, non-sectarian (and predominantly Shiite) Government (as the Sauds had been urging every U.S. President ever since Truman to do -- to replace those secular Shiites by fundamentalist Sunnis ), he would be able to do it only with the support of Syria's minority of fanatically Sunni fundamentalists , who were especially concentrated in Syria's northwestern province of Idlib, bordering Turkey. Obama went for the idea , and promoted it as being his attempt to 'liberate' Syria, from being led by the "barbaric" secular, non-sectarian, Shiite, Bashar al-Assad. As far back as 2009, Obama had been informed that an intense drought was ripening Syria for overthrow (regime-change), but Obama wanted to wait for his second term before he'd go all-out for this conquest. Obama didn't want his re-election chances to be clouded by possible accusations that he would be arming Al Qaeda. But, anyway, he needed to do it that way because only as late as December 2012 did Syria's domestic jihadists make clear to him that they'd go along with his plan to wage war against Assad only if they would be led by Syria's Al Qaeda, called "Al Nusra." So, this invasion began only in his second term, starting in January 2013. But the planning for the 'rebellion' -- the "Arab Spring" in Syria -- actually began in 2009 , and the U.S. State Department, under Hillary Clinton, was centrally involved . Turkey "began operations in April-May 2011" to overthrow Assad, but Obama had actually started it, Erdogan didn't. Turkey merely cooperated with it. Altogether, throughout the U.S.-initiated war in Syria, something on the order of around a hundred thousand jihadists have come into Syria from around the world so as to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. Virtually all of them entered through Turkey, to its north. The influx was a trickle as late as 2013, escalated in 2014, approximately doubled in 2015, and continued escalating , but no reliable count of the incoming jihadists exists. Though Turkey was the pathway, this invasion started actually in Washington.

So, in this new 'Islamic holy war', to overthrow Syria's non-sectarian Government, the fighters entered Syria through Turkey, and they were welcomed mainly in Syria's province of Idlib, which adjoins Turkey.

On 13 March 2012, the Al Jazeera TV station, of the pro-jihad Thani royal family of Qatar, headlined "Inside Idlib: Saving Syria" , and opened

The Syrian government crackdown on the dissenting northern city of Idlib has continued for a third day, with casualties from random shelling and sniper fire mounting, and growing concerns for many citizens detained by government forces. "I can't tell you what an unequal contest this is . The phrase that we felt yesterday applied to it was 'Shooting fish in a barrel' – these people can't escape, they can't help themselves, they have very little weaponry, what can they do but sit there and take it?"

The UK Government had given Qatar to the Thanis in 1868. On 12 September 1868 , Mohammed Bin Thani signed "an agreement with the British Political Resident Col. Lewis Pelly, which was considered as the first international recognition of the sovereignty of Qatar"; so, on that precise day, Britain's Queen Victoria gave Qatar to his family, which owns it, to the present day. The Thanis are the leading financial backers of the Muslim Brotherhood, which spreads Thani influence to foreign countries. (At least up till 9/11, the Saud family have been the main financial backers of Al Qaeda .) The Thanis have been, along with the Sauds, the main financial backers of replacing the non-sectarian Syrian Government by a fundamentalist-Sunni Syrian Government. Whereas the Sauds want to control that new government, also the Thanis do, and this is one reason for the recent falling-out between those two families. America's aristocracy prefers that Syria's rulers will be selected by the Saud family, because they buy more weapons from the U.S. than does any other country. However, everything is transactional between aristocracies, and, so, international alliances can change. It's always a jostling, everyone grabbing for whatever they can get: aristocracies operate no differently than crime-families do, because FDR's dream of an anti-imperialistic U.N., which would set and enforce international laws, died when he did; we live instead in an internationally lawless world -- he died far too soon. In a sense (at least ideologically), Hitler won, but, actually, Churchill did (he was as much an imperialist as Hitler and Mussolini were).

Anyway, uncounted tens of thousands of jihadists from all over the world descended upon Syria, funded by the Sauds and the Thanis, and armed and trained by the United States, to conquer Syria. At the Syrian Government's request, Russia started bombing the jihadists on 30 September 2015 . That air-support for the Syrian Army turned the war around. By the time of 4 May 2018, Britain's Financial Times headlined "Idlib offers uncertain sanctuary to Syria's defeated rebels" ("rebels" being the U.S. and UK Governments' term for jihadists who were serving as the U.S., Saud and Thani, proxy-forces or mercenaries to conquer Syria) and reported (stenographically transmitting what the CIA and MI6 told them to say) that, "more than 70,000 rebels and civilians" -- meaning jihadists and their families -- who were "fleeing the last rebel holdout near the capital," had been given a choice, and this "choice was die in Ghouta, or leave for Idlib," and chose to get onto the Government-supplied buses taking them to Idlib. So, perhaps unnumbered hundreds of thousands of jihadists did that, from all over Syria, and collecting them in Idlib.

As I reported on 10 May 2018:

On May 8th, Syria's Government bannered, "6th batch of terrorists leave southern Damascus for northern Syria" and reported that "During the past five days, 218 buses carrying terrorists with their families exited from the three towns to Jarablos and Idleb under the supervision of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent." Jarablos (or " Jarabulus ") is a town or "District" in the Aleppo Governate; and Idleb (or " Idlib ") is the capital District in the adjoining Governate of Idlib, which Governate is immediately to the west of Aleppo Governate; and both Jarabulus and Idlib border on Turkey to the north. Those two towns in Syria's far northwest are where captured jihadists are now being sent.

The Government is doing that because at this final stage in the 7-year-long war, it wants civilian deaths and additional destruction of buildings to be kept to a minimum, and so is offering jihadists the option of surviving instead of being forced to fight to the death (which would then require Syria's Government to destroy the entire area that's occupied by the terrorists); this way, these final clean-up operations against the terrorists won't necessarily require bombing whole neighborhoods -- surrenders thus become likelier, so as to end the war as soon as possible, and to keep destruction and civilian casualties at a minimum.

The Syrian and Russian Governments had planned to finish them off there in Idlib, so that none of them could escape back into their home countries to continue their jihad. However, the U.S. and its allies raised 'humanitarian' screams at the U.N. and other international organizations, in order to protect the 'rebels' against the 'barbarous dictator' of Syria, its President, Bashar al-Assad -- just in order to create more anti-Assad (and anti-Russian, and anti-Iranian) propaganda. And, so, on 9 and 10 September 2018, Putin and Erdogan and Rouhani met in Rouhani's Tehran to decide what to do. By that time, Erdogan was riding the fence between Washington and Moscow. On 17 September 2018, I headlined "Putin and Erdogan Plan Syria-Idlib DMZ as I Recommended" and reported that Putin and Rouhani entrusted Idlib to Erdogan, with the expectation that Erdogan would keep the jihadists penned-up there, so that Putin and Assad would be able to bomb them to hell after the 'humanitarian crisis' in Idlib would be no longer on front pages.

As things turned out, Erdogan double-crossed Putin and Rouhani, and just grabbed the territory .

The role of the United Nations in this has been to stand aside and pretend that it's a 'humanitarian crisis' (as the U.S. regime wanted it to be called) instead of a U.S.-and-allied invasion, aggressive war, and consequently a vast war-crime such as Hitler's top leaders were prosecuted and executed for at Nuremberg. As Miri Wood wrote, at Syria News, on 28 February 2018 :

Members of the General Assembly must be in good financial standing to vote. Dues are on a sliding scale but do not factor in draconian sanctions against targeted members, nor crimes of war involved in their destruction. As such, CAR, Libya, Venezuela and Yemen have been stripped of their voting rights. The non-permanent SC members function as obedient House Servants to the P3 bullies, ever mindful of placing self-preservation above moral integrity .

So Truman's U.N. turns out to be on the side of the new Nazism, against its victims.

Erdogan wants to be with the winners. He evidently believes that whatever empire he'll be able to have will be just a vassal nation within the U.S. Empire. He had been extremely reluctant to accept this viewpoint , but, apparently, he now does. And so, now, Erdogan has become so confident that he has the backing of Christian-majority America and of Christian-majority Europe, so that Turkey's Hagia Sophia , which had been "the world's largest cathedral for nearly a thousand years, until Seville Cathedral was completed in 1520," has finally become officially declared by the Turkish Government to be, instead, a mosque. He feels safe enough to insult the publics in the other NATO countries so as to be able now to assert publicly his support for Islam against Christianity, because he knows that NATO's other aristocracies -- all of them majority-Christian, and all of these aristocrats ruling their respective Christian-majority countries -- don't really give a damn about that. Amongst themselves, the concern for 'heaven' is all just for show, because they are far more interested to buy Paradise in the here-and-now, for themselves and for their families. As for any possible 'afterlife', it will be reflected in the big buildings and charities that will bear their names, after they're gone. Erdogan feels safe, knowing that they're all psychopaths. And, as for the publics anywhere -- Syria, Libya, even in Turkey itself -- they don't matter, to him, any more than they do to the leaders of those other NATO countries.

Consequently, too, on July 18th, the American Herald Tribune headlined "As It Did in Libya, Turkey Recruits Syrian Militants to Fight in Azerbaijan" , and Khaled Iskef, a journalist for Beirut's Almaydeen TV, reported, based on unnamed "private sources in the northern countryside of Aleppo," that

Turkish forces started recruiting numbers of its armed fighters to send them to Azerbaijan in order to assist the Azerbaijani forces in confronting the Armenian army.

According to sources, Turkey opened special promotion offices in different parts of Afrin northern Aleppo, to attract the militants and encourage them to sign contracts by which they would move to fight in Azerbaijan for a period of six months, renewable in case they wanted to.

According to the contract, the militants receive a monthly salary of $2500, while the advantage of granting Turkish citizenship to the families of the militants in case they died is absent, contrary to the contracts that Turkey had signed with the armed men who wanted to move to Libya.

The sources said that Turkey has designated centers for registering militants wishing to fight in Azerbaijan within the towns of Genderes and Raju, along with Afrin city, and these centers have already started receiving requests by the militants.

Armenia is virtually 100% Christian, and, according to Wikipedia :

The Armenian Genocide [c] (also known as the Armenian Holocaust ) [13] was the systematic mass murder and expulsion of 1.5 million [b] ethnic Armenians carried out in Turkey and adjoining regions by the Ottoman government between 1914 and 1923. [14] [15] The starting date is conventionally held to be 24 April 1915, the day that Ottoman authorities rounded up, arrested, and deported from Constantinople (now Istanbul) to the region of Angora ( Ankara ), 235 to 270 Armenian intellectuals and community leaders , the majority of whom were eventually murdered.

So, the recruitment of fundamentalist-Sunni mercenaries in the areas of Syria that Turkey has captured, and sending those men "to assist the Azerbaijani forces in confronting the Armenian army," is likewise consistent with the NATO member-country Turkey's restoration of its former Ottoman Empire. Using these jihadist proxy-soldiers, NATO is now invading Christian Armenia.

However, Iskef was reporting without paying any attention to the aristocratic interests which were actually very much involved in what Erdogan was doing here. On July 19th, Cyril Widdershoven at the "Oil Price" site bannered "The Forgotten Conflict That Is Threatening Energy Markets" and he reported the economic geostrategic factors which were at stake in this now-emerging likely hot war, which is yet another "pipeline war," and which pits Turkey against Russia. In this particular matter, Turkey has an authentic economic reason to become engaged in a possible hot war allied with Muslim Azerbaijan against Christian Armenia. Russia, yet again, would be backing Christian soldiers. Of course, NATO, also yet again, would be on the Muslim side, against the Christians. But, this time, NATO would be backing Azerbaijan, which is 85% Shiite. Consequently, in such a conflict, the U.S. could end up on the same side as Iran, and against Russia.

If history is any guide, aristocratic interests will take precedence over theocratic interests, but democratic interests -- the interests of the publics that are involved -- will be entirely ignored. The sheer hypocrisy of the U.S. regime exceeds anything in human history.

How can anybody not loathe the U.S. regime and its allies? Only by getting one's 'news' from its 'news'-media -- especially (but not only) its mainstream ones.

[Jul 29, 2020] Russia and the next Presidential election in the US by The Saker

Jul 29, 2020 | www.unz.com

A quick look at Russia

Before looking into Russian options in relation to the US, we need to take a quick look at how Russia has been faring this year. The short of it would be: not too well. The Russian economy has shrunk by about 10% and the small businesses have been devastated by the combined effects of 1) the economic policies of the Russian government and Central Bank, and 2) the devastating economic impact of the COVID19 pandemic, and 3) the full-spectrum efforts of the West, mostly by the Anglosphere, to strangle Russia economically. Politically, the "Putin regime" is still popular, but there is a sense that it is getting stale and that most Russians would prefer to see more dynamic and proactive policies aimed, not only to help the Russian mega-corporations, but also to help the regular people. Many Russians definitely have a sense that the "little guy" is being completely ignored by fat cats in power and this resentment will probably grow until and unless Putin decides to finally get rid of all the Atlantic Integrationists aka the "Washington consensus" types which are still well represented in the Russian ruling circles, including the government. So far, Putin has remained faithful to his policy of compromises and small steps, but this might change in the future as the level of frustration in the general population is likely to only grow with time.

That is not to say that the Kremlin is not trying. Several of the recent constitutional amendments adopted in a national vote had a strongly expressed "social" and "patriotic" character and they absolutely horrified the "liberal" 5th columnists who tried their best two 1) call for a boycott, and 2) denounce thousands of (almost entirely) imaginary violations of the proper voting procedures, and to 3) de-legitimize the outcome by declaring the election a "fraud". None of that worked: the participation was high, very few actual violations were established (and those that were, had no impact on the outcome anyway) and most Russians accepted that this outcome was the result of the will of the people. Furthermore, Putin has made public the Russian strategic goals for 2030 ,which are heavily focused on improving the living and life conditions of average Russians (for details, see here ). It is impossible to predict what will happen next, but the most likely scenario is that Russia has several, shall we say, "bumpy" years ahead, both on the domestic and on the international front.

JasonT , says: July 28, 2020 at 10:53 pm GMT

Good analysis.

I would add that Russia should also start opening channels of communication with various organizations in Canada, especially those in the far north. While Canada is small politically, it is vastly bigger than the U.S. in natural resources, very strategically located and right next door to Russia.

Twilight Patriot , says: Website July 29, 2020 at 12:26 am GMT

I really agree with you that the "blame Russia" and "blame China" thing has gotten out of hand in US politics. Whether it will turn into a shooting war seems doubtful to me, as the government is still full of people who are looking out for their own interests and know that a full-sized war with Russia, China, Iran or whoever will not advance their interests.

But who would have guessed, a few years ago, that "Russian asset" would become the all-purpose insult for Democrats to use, not just against Republicans, but against other Democrats?

... ... ...

aandrews , says: July 29, 2020 at 3:22 am GMT

" at worst, the crisis will move to a new stage . "

Highly likely.

I think Trump can win, though, if he successfully hangs the escalating Antifa/BLM mayhem around the Democrat's necks. Normal, salt-of-the-earth-type Americans won't vote for the party of Maoist mayhem. I just hope their numbers are still sufficient. So, really, the mayhem needs to worsen and get ultra-bad, and Trump needs to carefully respond with just enough law enforcement to bait the Democrats into defending the insurrectionists and their tactics and loudly condemning Trump's "fascist" response. Normal people will see the true story and in the privacy of the voting booth, not vote Democrat. And if you think the other side lost their minds after the 2016 election .

GMC , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:54 am GMT

Thanks Saker – I would have loved it, had Alaska been able to hang on to the 90s relationship with Russia. It was a perfect match, except that Russian economy { as we were told} was just tanking, and they had no money to throw into the tourist trade. Not that us Alaskans, expected much more than what our bush villages had to offer. lol But , I'm afraid this will never happen again, with the Zio freaks in charge of the US. I recall when I was flying and living in McGrath in the 90s, that a womens Russian helicopter team dropped down to refuel and I was workin on my cessna about 50 yrds away. I saw about 6+ really good looking Russian chicks come out of those choppers, and us guys were floored ! We started to communicate with them, they told us that they were re -tracing the WW II lend lease route and were headed to the lower 48. Just about the time we started getting close tho, an old Lady colonel jumped out and put the girls in place – lol . I also remember the Magadan hockey team came over to play against our University teams Anchorage and Fairbanks. My neighbor here in Kryme, was on that Russian team – small world. Ya, Russia and Alaska would be a great match today – just gotta get rid of Washington. Thanks for the memories.

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website July 29, 2020 at 12:22 pm GMT

" until and unless Putin decides to finally get rid of all the Atlantic Integrationists aka the "Washington consensus" types which are still well represented in the Russian ruling circles, including the government."

Putin's regime is merely a less unbearable version of the Yeltsin regime, with open loot by oligarchs replaced by less overt loot by smaller scale actors. Putin is exactly as beholden to the neoliberal capitalist system as Yeltsin. To expect Putin to change sides as this point is ludicrous.

" Russia and the Empire have been at war since at least 2013, for no less than seven years (something which Russian 6th columnists and Neo-Marxists try very hard to ignore)."

I have no idea what a "neo" Marxist is (apart from a blatant made up term to taint us by association with the neo-Nazis), but as a Marxist, which the Saker obviously is not, it's obvious to me that the Imperialist States of America has been at war with Russia since the Yeltsinite attack on the Moscow parliament in 1993, and probably from the failed patriotic coup of 1991. If we ignore the Saker's idea of a war since 2013 it's only because we know it's twenty years out of date.

Things will never improve between Amerikastan and Russia and don't need to. Amerikastan is sinking and will sink; Putin will, if he continues on the neoliberal capitalist track, sink Russia as well in the end.

RoatanBill , says: July 29, 2020 at 12:32 pm GMT

The video link to Sahra Wagenknecht's report was the best part of this article although the article itself was spot on if one has any respect for reality.

I keep waiting for Germany to tell NATO and the US to get the hell out, but their political establishment is just as corrupt as the US's.

The amount of money the US Fed Gov steals from the population in taxes and regulation or causes loss of purchasing power by increasing debt could be much better put to use than shoveling it into the military to murder people around the globe. The entire Fed Gov will, I hope, disappear like fart gas as a result of the economic collapse in the making.

mark tapley , says: July 29, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT
@Emily at was just a brutal form of monopoly capitalism that is the essence of the Zionist syndicate we all are up against. Today piratized not privatized Russia is suffering a less severe form but it is estimated that half Jew Putin and his oligarch cronies control ap. 30% of the Russian economy. all of this insider theft was "codified and Legalized" by Larry Summers and the Harvard Jews. Same thing is happening in Jewmerica and moving lots faster now with the theft under cover of the fake virus. Don't forget in 08-09 the bailout for billionaires cost the regular economy trillions then too. No problem, the Jews at Black Rock picked up some great bargains as they will this time.
Stanley Dundee , says: Website July 29, 2020 at 5:27 pm GMT

Per the Saker:

The real cause of the West's hatred for Russia is as simple as it is old: Russia cannot be conquered, subdued, subverted or destroyed.

I would add that Putin (a masterful statesman) tamed Russia's oligarchs. The greatest fear of America's oligarchs might well be a similar taming by a masterful American statesman. Hence the refusal to allow anyone other than corrupted mediocrities anywhere near nominal power in the US. And hence the entirely genuine hatred for Putin. He embodies their worst nightmare.

Harold Smith , says: July 29, 2020 at 5:50 pm GMT

"Russia will never attack first (which is a major cause of frustration for western russophobes)"

Now that team orange clown (with the full support of congress) has done away with the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, apparently replacing it with the concept of a "winnable" nuclear war (impliedly by way of a devastating first strike), the time may come when Russia may have to either strike first or be struck first.

Also, what about the case where the empire is finally successful in starting a war against Iran, for example, and the war goes badly for the empire (i.e. Iran is inflicting some serious damage), whereupon the empire resorts to nukes. Would Russia just sit back and watch, or would Russia then realize that the monster has to be put down?

"The real cause of the West's hatred for Russia is as simple as it is old: Russia cannot be conquered, subdued, subverted or destroyed."

In a sense that's true as far as it goes, but it really doesn't explain very much. Lots of countries are unable to subdue, subvert or conquer other countries but that in itself doesn't generally lead to "hatred." The simpler and more profound explanation is that the empire does what it does because it's evil. And the evil empire is analogous to an aggressive cancer: either the cancer wins and the patient dies, or the cancer is completely eradicated and the patient survives. There is no peaceful coexistence with the evil empire just like there is no peaceful coexistence with glioblastoma. You cannot negotiate with it to find some kind of a reasonable compromise.

AnonFromTN , says: July 29, 2020 at 6:53 pm GMT
@JVC

The US government and FRS seem to be hell-bent on destroying the value of the US $: when someone issues debt obligations (treasuries) and then buys them himself because there are no other takers, you cannot help smelling a rat.

The crash of the $ will hurt everyone, but some will recover faster than others. Euro and yen would be buried with the US $, but assets in less US-dependent countries that have real economies producing things other than hot air will likely fare better. Which leaves Russia, big China, South Korea, and some SE Asia countries.

Harold Smith , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:14 pm GMT
@Stanley Dundee

"And hence the entirely genuine hatred for Putin. He embodies their worst nightmare."

Evil hates a good example.

cassandra , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:27 pm GMT
@Jake t statistic for China is surprisingly better than I would have guessed. According to the CBO chart at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States ,

the US was at about the same level in 2013: "The top 10% of families held 76% of the wealth in 2013, while the bottom 50% of families held 1%. Inequality worsened from 1989 to 2013"

Indications are that the worsening has only continued since then, and with all the money being poured into the stock market by the Fed this year, 2020 is on track to be exceptionally iniquitously inequitable.

Xaxa , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:47 pm GMT

Trump 're-election' is certain. All roads are paved toward it. In fact and so far Trump is the best Neocon/Deep State's man they found. Stop pretending Saker!

Agent76 , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:50 pm GMT

June 17, 2020 America: An Empire Eating Itself

Empire has one trick – divide and conquer. When it runs out of territory, nations, and people abroad to consume, it turns inward on itself.

https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2020/06/america-empire-eating-itself.html

Jul 3, 2020 Independence Day Under Dictatorship

The US is under rule by decree, not by rule of law. Looking at the original list of grievances the Colonists had against King George, it looks like most of them are met – and then some – by our current system of government. Can we regain our independence?


Wally , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:53 pm GMT
@Herald

said:
"A Trump re-election will virtually guarantee civil war, but that is still a better option than a Biden hot war against Russia. Either way though, the country is totally fucked."

– We already have a civil war.

– Either way there will be no "hot war against Russia". That's just silly.

– And there is no "Biden" there.

– The US is much, much better off with Trump, it's not even close. Especially if you value free speech, fighting violence, and at least some semblance of a market economy devoid of the 'Green New Deal' scam.

Alfred , says: July 29, 2020 at 8:35 pm GMT
@Anon

after Vietnam war, Vietnam, ally of China , keep their regime in their own hand.

The ally of North Vietnam was Russia.

China blocked the transit of Russian weapons to North Vietnam. After North Vietnam defeated the Americans, with Russian help, China invaded North Vietnam and was defeated.

marryne , says: July 29, 2020 at 8:47 pm GMT

For Saker it is always about Russia, Russia, Russia Sure, Russia is a big world power, it used to be and it is now. It is so mostly because of its military, which draws its strength and know-how from the USSR (meaning it is not strictly Russian). However, Russia will never again be a superpower as the USSR had been. It was possible then only because of the (historically) unparalleled appeal of the communist ideology. Firstly and objectively, Russia does not have an economy necessary to support such a status. Secondly, Russia has no sufficient population which, again, is a limiting factor to its economy. Putin probably realized that although he did not realize that the Putin-inspired immigration from the former Muslim republic of the USSR will not alleviate the problem. But again, who would even want to go to today's Russia if not Asiatic muslims. It will slowly but surely make Russia not much different from the West. Muscovites, just like New Yorkers are already leaving the city, those who can afford.
And, subjectively, Russia or the Russians don't have the most important ingredient fort the superpower status – the MENTALITY. The recent (1990-2020) Russian history clearly displays that. It shows that in order to realize the centuries old dreams of the few (so called "elites") Russia as a nation and as country had put itself to the downward trajectory: As an empire it sold Alaska; as a civilization – it destroyed itself by dismantling the rest of the empire, the USSR. As an ally it abandoned and handed over the most Russophile german friend and ally E. Honecker and others to the "partners" in the west. And, as an orthodox and Slavic "brother" it betrayed and abandoned the only people that have always loved Russia – the Serbs. As an ally it behaved recklessly and treacherously. Russia will do the same again. So, hate Russia.

Ko , says: July 29, 2020 at 8:59 pm GMT

Since 2016 I've always believed Trump will be legally elected in 2020 but the DNC/Deep State will reject the result much more forcefully and violently than they've been doing since 2016. The DNC/Deep State will establish a shadow government minus the shadow. It will not be Joe Biden leading it but someone much younger, possibly Biden's VP choice – who was (will be) selected to replace Biden should Biden actually win. Hell, it may even be Hussein since he's such a treasonous pussy and easy to manipulate. The communists behind the scenes (aren't they always such cowards) currently coordinating BLM and Antifa riots all over America will again use rioting but with firearms and bombings. This must be met with a military response and the violence will be nationwide. At some point either Trump declares martial law and outright civil war ensues, or a military coup takes over with or without Trump as a figurehead and they crush the communists and leftists while right wing militias join in the hunt. The only wild-card is if race driven factionalism within lower ranks cause wide divisions and some officers break away – then the whole show is over and there will be no place safe from people with guns and bad intentions. We will be fighting over food and gasoline. At least, like in China, there will be plenty of dogs to satisfy hunger.

mark tapley , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:01 pm GMT
@Wally

To Wally and Herald: How many Presidential election circuses have you guys seen. Probably a lot of them like me...

cassandra , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:16 pm GMT

Putin's difficulty is that Russia is really too important for the West to ignore.

Western elites, and not just in the US, but in the EU and the western-hemisphere in general, are facing a problem: people are beginning to notice that human values are not universal. This had been one of the main pillars for the existence and credibility of a technocratic elite, specifically for the people to trust the elites to implement some unspecified but benevolent neo-enlightenment.

Putin became truly anathema first when he rejected western neoliberal criminality because

[Hide MORE] it was destroying his country, secondly, when he thwarted amputation of Crimea by color revolution, and thirdly, when he kept calling out NATO/EU expansionism for what it was. This made conversion of Russia to the neoliberal finance and 'universal value" system even less likely than the conversion to Roman Catholicism prophesied at Fatima. Putin decided that Russia would live by its own values, thank you very much. Russia could still have been an arms-length ally, but Anglo-Zionist geopolitical extremism forced him to make cause with a clearly adversarial China, and encouraged him to circumvent the western currency system as well.

But peoples within the west were also developing this NGTOW (Nations Going Their Own Way) attitude. Hungary and Poland were already becoming thorns in the side of the EU over the "human value" immigration, and the elections of Trump and Brexit were further assertions of populist preferences. Other politicians like Wagenknecht, LePen and Salvini are nurturing this movement elsewhere. It remains to be seen whether the neoliberal oligarchy, by dialing up propaganda and censorship, and by using Orwellian cancel terrorism, can quell this awakening rebellion.

alwayswrite , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:18 pm GMT
@marryne elves out

Capital flight is enormous,especially through London

Ask yourself why????

Because British intelligence knows absolutely the places all this money goes to

British intelligence aren't stupid, they've played this game for centuries

Which gives them enormous leverages over the Russians,who are trapped by this age old system

Putin knows this as do all Russian oligarchs

Money rules,not silly hypersonic weapons !!!!

Which doesn't come into the sakers evaluation

Basically,the saker doesn't understand power,money power!!!

AnonFromTN , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:59 pm GMT
@Wally licies.
6. Dramatically improve US education, from elementary school up.
7. Reform US healthcare, with a view of making it healthcare, rather than extortion racket it is today.

There are many other things, but anyone attempting to do even half of those listed would be promptly JFK'ed by the Deep State. That is why there is no one in the US politics decent enough to even talk about real problems, not to mention attempting to do what needs to be done to save the country. Hence, I can name no names.

As things stand, even Trump is better than senile and corrupt Biden. But being better than that piece of shit is not a big achievement.

hu_anon , says: July 29, 2020 at 10:07 pm GMT
@Alfred

China allowed Soviet arms through to North Vietnam and was herself giving weapons to them. The Soviets didn't trust the Chinese though, so they preferred to transport more advanced weapons on ships rather than by train through China, to prevent the Chinese from getting a close look on these.

China attacked Vietnam for invading Cambodia, but this war exposed the weakness of the Chinese Army. Deng Xiaoping was able to push through military reforms after the debacle.

mark tapley , says: July 29, 2020 at 10:30 pm GMT
@Ko e and destabilize western nations. These paid activists, opportunists and useful idiots could be taken care of by the local law enforcement as the constitution mandates if allowed to do so. The goal of the Zionist criminals is to create enough chaos and breakdown that people will demand that the national gov. step in with martial law. This is exactly what the Zionists want so they can get rid of the locally controlled police and implement a gestapo of thugs that are accountable only to the elite at the top.

The zionist politicians and their operatives from the mayors to the Governors on up need to be thrown out of office. That is the first step in restoring the Republic.

annamaria , says: July 29, 2020 at 10:49 pm GMT
@alwayswrite ernative media has excellent analysts) instead of immersing in the stinky products of presstituting MSM controlled by 6 zio-corporations.

Your hysterics about Russia's alleged attempts at destabilizing the EU are particularly entertaining. For starter, 1. learn about US bases in Europe and beyond, and 2. read about the consequences of the wars of aggression (also known as Wars for Israel) in the Middle East for the EU.

If you are in search of neonazi, turn your attentions to a great project run by ziocons and neonazi in Ukraine. See Grossman, Kolomojsky, Zelinsky, Nuland-Kagan, Pyatt, Carl Gershman (NED), and the whole Kagans' clan united with Banderites What can go wrong?

[Jul 28, 2020] Turkey On The Warpath

Putin decision to save Erdogan from the coup in retrospect looks like a blunder...
Jul 28, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Uzay Bulut via The Gatestone Institute,

Turkey is currently involved in quite a few international military conflicts -- both against its own neighbors such as Greece, Armenia, Iraq, Syria and Cyprus, and against other nations such as Libya and Yemen. These actions by Turkey suggest that Turkey's foreign policy is increasingly destabilizing not only several nations, but the region as well.

In addition, the Erdogan regime has been militarily targeting Syria and Iraq, sending its Syrian mercenaries to Libya to seize Libyan oil and continuing, as usual, to bully Greece. Turkey's regime is also now provoking ongoing violence between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.398.1_en.html#goog_750179333

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.398.1_en.html#goog_1565758762 NOW PLAYING

Erdogan leads first Muslim prayer after Hagia Sophia mosque reconversion

Istanbul's Hagia Sophia reconversion to a mosque, 'provocation to civilised world', Greece says

Turkish top court revokes Hagia Sophia's museum status, 'tourists should still be allowed in'

Erdogan: Interference over Hagia Sophia 'direct attack on our sovereignty'

Libya's GNA says Egypt's warning on Sirte offensive a 'declaration of war'

Erdogan says 'agreements' reached with Trump on Libya

What Turkish Election Results Mean for the Lira

Erdogan Sparks Democracy Concerns in Push for Istanbul Vote Rerun

Since July 12, Azerbaijan has launched a series of cross-border attacks against Armenia's northern Tavush region in skirmishes that have resulted in the deaths of at least four Armenian soldiers and 12 Azerbaijani ones. After Azerbaijan threatened to launch missile attacks on Armenia's Metsamor nuclear plant on July 16, Turkey offered military assistance to Azerbaijan.

"Our armed unmanned aerial vehicles, ammunition and missiles with our experience, technology and capabilities are at Azerbaijan's service," said İsmail Demir, the head of Presidency of Defense Industries, an affiliate of the Turkish Presidency.

One of Turkey's main targets also seems to be Greece. The Turkish military is targeting Greek territorial waters yet again. The Greek newspaper Kathimerini reported :

"There have been concerns over a possible Turkish intervention in the East Med in a bid to prevent an agreement on the delineation of an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) between Greece and Egypt which is currently being discussed between officials of the two countries."

Turkey's choice of names for its gas exploration ships are also a giveaway. The name of the main ship that Turkey is using for seismic "surveys" of the Greek continental shelf is Oruç Reis , (1474-1518), an admiral of the Ottoman Empire who often raided the coasts of Italy and the islands of the Mediterranean that were still controlled by Christian powers. Other exploration and drilling vessels Turkey uses or is planning to use in Greece's territorial waters are named after Ottoman sultans who targeted Cyprus and Greece in bloody military invasions. These include the drilling ship Fatih "the conqueror" or Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II, who invaded Constantinople in 1453; the drilling ship Yavuz , "the resolute", or Sultan Selim I, who headed the Ottoman Empire during the invasion of Cyprus in 1571; and Kanuni , "the lawgiver" or Sultan Suleiman, who invaded parts of eastern Europe as well as the Greek island of Rhodes.

Turkey's move in the Eastern Mediterranean came in early July, shortly after the country had turned Hagia Sophia, once the world's greatest Greek Cathedral, into a mosque. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan then linked Hagia Sophia's conversion to a pledge to "liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque" in Jerusalem.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

On July 21, the tensions arose again following Turkey's announcement that it plans to conduct seismic research in parts of the Greek continental shelf in an area of sea between Cyprus and Crete in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean.

"Turkey's plan is seen in Athens as a dangerous escalation in the Eastern Mediterranean, prompting Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to warn that European Union sanctions could follow if Ankara continues to challenge Greek sovereignty," Kathimerini reported on July 21.

Here is a short list of other countries where Turkey is also militarily involved:

In Libya , Turkey has been increasingly involved in the country's civil war. Associated Press reported on July 18:

"Turkey sent between 3,500 and 3,800 paid Syrian fighters to Libya over the first three months of the year, the U.S. Defense Department's inspector general concluded in a new report, its first to detail Turkish deployments that helped change the course of Libya's war.

"The report comes as the conflict in oil-rich Libya has escalated into a regional proxy war fueled by foreign powers pouring weapons and mercenaries into the country."

Libya has been in turmoil since 2011, when an armed revolt during the "Arab Spring" led to the ouster and murder of dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Political power in the country, the current population of which is around 6.5 million, has been split between two rival governments. The UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA), has been led by Prime Minister Fayez al Sarraj. Its rival, the Libyan National Army (LNA), has been led by Libyan military officer, Khalifa Haftar.

Backed by Turkey, the GNA said on July 18 that it would recapture Sirte, a gateway to Libya's main oil terminals, as well as an LNA airbase at Jufra.

Egypt, which backs the LNA, announced , however, that if the GNA and Turkish forces tried to seize Sirte, it would send troops into Libya. On July 20, the Egyptian parliament gave approval to a possible deployment of troops beyond its borders "to defend Egyptian national security against criminal armed militias and foreign terrorist elements."

Yemen is another country on which Turkey has apparently set its sights. In a recent video , Turkey-backed Syrian mercenaries fighting on behalf of the GNA in Libya, and aided by local Islamist groups, are seen saying, "We are just getting started. The target is going to be Gaza." They also state that they want to take on Egyptian President Sisi and to go to Yemen.

"Turkey's growing presence in Yemen," The Arab Weekly reported on May 9, "especially in the restive southern region, is fuelling concern across the region over security in the Gulf of Aden and the Bab al-Mandeb.

"These concerns are further heightened by reports indicating that Turkey's agenda in Yemen is being financed and supported by Qatar via some Yemeni political and tribal figures affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood."

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

In Syria , Turkey-backed jihadists continue occupying the northern parts of the country. On July 21, Erdogan announced that Turkey's military presence in Syria would continue. "Nowadays they are holding an election, a so-called election," Erdogan said of a parliamentary election on July 19 in Syria's government-controlled regions, after nearly a decade of civil war. "Until the Syrian people are free, peaceful and safe, we will remain in this country."

Additionally, Turkey's incursion into the Syrian city of Afrin, created a particularly grim situation for the local Yazidi population:

"As a result of the Turkish incursion to Afrin," the Yazda organization reported on May 29, "thousands of Yazidis have fled from 22 villages they inhabited prior to the conflict into other parts of Syria, or have migrated to Lebanon, Europe, or the Kurdistan Region of Iraq... "

"Due to their religious identity, Yazidis in Afrin are suffering from targeted harassment and persecution by Turkish-backed militant groups. Crimes committed against Yazidis include forced conversion to Islam, rape of women and girls, humiliation and torture, arbitrary incarceration, and forced displacement. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in its 2020 annual report confirmed that Yazidis and Christians face persecution and marginalization in Afrin.

"Additionally, nearly 80 percent of Yazidi religious sites in Syria have been looted, desecrated, or destroyed, and Yazidi cemeteries have been defiled and bulldozed."

In Iraq , Turkey has been carrying out military operations for years. The last one was started in mid-June. Turkey's Defense Ministry announced on June 17 that the country had "launched a military operation against the PKK" (Kurdistan Workers' Party) in northern Iraq after carrying out a series of airstrikes. Turkey has named its assaults "Operation Claw-Eagle" and "Operation Claw-Tiger".

The Yazidi, Assyrian Christian and Kurdish civilians have been terrorized by the bombings. At least five civilians have been killed in the air raids, according to media reports . Human Rights Watch has also issued a report , noting that a Turkish airstrike in Iraq "disregards civilian loss."

Given Turkey's military aggression in Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Armenia, among others, and its continued occupation of northern Cyprus, further aggression, especially against Greece, would not be unrealistic. Turkey's desire to invade Greece is not exactly a secret. Since at least 2018, both the Turkish government and opposition parties have openly been calling for capturing the Greek islands in the Aegean, which they falsely claim belong to Turkey.

If such an attack took place, would the West abandon Greece?

Gaius Konstantine , 10 hours ago

If such an attack took place, it will get real messy, real fast. The Turkish military is only partially adept at fighting irregular forces that lack heavy weaponry while Turkey has absolute control of the sky. Even then, the recent performance of Turkish forces has been lacklustre for "the 2nd largest Army in NATO".

Turkey should understand that a fight with Greece will mean that the advantages she enjoyed in her recent adventures will not be there. Nor should Turkey look to the past and expect an easy victory, the Greek Army will not be marching deep into Anatolia this time, (which was the wrong type of war for Greece).

So what happens if they actually take it to war?

The larger Greek islands are well defended, they won't be taken, but defending the smaller ones is hard and Turkey will probably grab some of those. The Greeks, who have absolute control and dominance in the Aegean will do several things. Turkish naval and air bases along the Aegean coastline will be attacked as will the bosphorus bridges, (those bridges WILL go down). The Greek army, which is positioned well, will blitz into eastern Thrace and stop outside Istanbul where they will dig in and shell the city, thereby causing the civilians to flee and clogging up the tunnels to restrict military re-enforcement.

That's Greece acting alone, a position will be achieved where any captured islands will be traded for eastern Thrace. Should the French intervene, (even if it's just air and naval forces), it gets a lot more interesting.

The mighty Turkish fleet was just met by the entire Greek navy in the latest stand-off, it was enough to cause Turkey to reconsider her options. There will be no Ottoman empire 2.0

OliverAnd , 9 hours ago

The Greeks need their navy for surgically precise attacks against Turkey's navy. Every island, especially the large ones are unsinkable aircraft carriers. No one has mentioned in any article that Turkey's navy is functioning with less than minimum required personnel. No one has mentioned that their air force is flying with Pakistani pilots. The only way Turks will land on Greek uninhabited islands is only if they are ship wrecked and that for a very very short period of time. Turkey's population is composed of 25% Kurds... that will also be very interesting to see once they awaken from their hibernation and realize their great and holy goal of Kurdistan. Egypt will not waste the opportunity to join in to devastate whatever Turkish navy remains. Serbian patriots will not allow the opportunity to go to waste and will attack Kosovo and indirectly Albania composed primarily of Turkish descendants... realize the coverage lately of how the US did wrong for supporting these degenerate Muslim Albanians.

I have no doubt Greeks will make it to Aghia Sophia but will not pass Bosporus. The result will be a Treaty that is a hybrid of the Treaty of Lausanne and the Treaty of Sevron. If the Albanians decide to support the Turks by attacking Greeks in the North and in Northern Epeirus they should expect annexation of Northern Epeirus to Greece. Erdogan bases his bullying on Trump's incompetences and false friendship. This is why America is non existent in any of these regions. If Trump wins the election it will be a long war and very destabilized for the region. If Trump loses the war will be much much quicker. The outcome will remain the same. The Russians will not allow Turkey to dictate in the area. Israel will not allow Turkey to dictate in the area. Egypt will not allow Turkey to dictate in the area. Not even European Union. UK is the questionable.

bobcatz , 2 hours ago

And the US in the Middle East is not????????

ALL MidEast terrorism, shenanigans, and warmongering are for APARTHEID Israhell.

Joy Division , 7 hours ago

The West has Turkey's back otherwise the Turkish currency the Turkish Lira would have collapsed by now under attacks from the City of London Freemasonic Talmudic bankers.

Remember what happened to the Russian Rouble when Russia annexed Crimea?

The Fed and the ECB in cahoots with the usual Talmudic interests, are supporting the Turkish Lira and propping up the Erdogan regime.

There is NO OTHER explanation.

The Turks have NO foreign currency reserves, no net positive euro nor dollar reserves. Their tourism industry and main hard currency generator has COLLAPSED (hotels are 95 percent empty). The Turkish central bank has resorted to STEALING Turkish citizens' dollar-denominated bank accounts via raising Turkish Banks' foreign currency reserve requirements which the Turkish central bank SPENDS upon receipt to buy TLs and prop up the Turkish Lira.

This is utter MADNESS and FRAUD and LARCENY.

London-based currency traders would be all over the Turkish Lira and/or Turkish bonds and stocks by now UNLESS they had been instructed by the Fed and the ECB or the Talmudic bankers that own and control both, to lay off the Turkish Lira.

Despite the noise on TV or the press,

BY DEFINITION,

Erdogan and the Turks are only doing the bidding of the TRIBE hence Erdogan has the blessing and the protection of the people ZH censors the name.

BUT

You know how those parasites treat their host and what the inevitable outcome is, right?

Indeed,

Erdogan and the Turks are being set up to be thrown under the proverbial bus at the appropriate time.

The Neo-Ottoman Sultan has inadvertently set up his (ill begotten) country for eventual destruction and partition. The Kurds will get a piece of it. Who knows, maybe even the Armenians will be able to recover some bits of their ancient homeland.

Greeks in Constantinople? Nothing is impossible thanks to the hubris and chutzpah of Erdogan who is purported to have "Amish" blood himself.

Know thyself , 5 hours ago

Good for the UK that they have left the EU.

Apart from the Greeks, who would be fighting for their lives and homeland, the only EU forces capable of acting are the French. German does not have an operative army or navy; Italy, Spain and Portugal have neglected their armed forces for many years, and the Baltic and Eastern Nations are unlikely to want to get involved. The Netherlands have very good forces but not many of them.

MPJones , 7 hours ago

We can live in hope. Erdogan certainly seems to need external enemies to hold the country together. Let us also hope that Erdogan's adventurism finally wakes up Europe to the reality of the ongoing Muslim invasion so that the necessary Muslim repatriation can get going without the bloodshed which Islam's current strategy in Europe will otherwise inevitably lead to.

Know thyself , 5 hours ago

The Turkish army is a conscript army. They will need to be whipped up with religious fervour to perform. Otherwise they will look after their own skins.

But remember that the Turks put up a good defence in the Dardanelles in the First World War.

HorseBuggy , 9 hours ago

What do you expect? He killed Russian fighter pilots and he survived, this empowers terrorists like him. Those pilots were the only ones at that time fighting ISIS. May they RIP.

Max.Power , 9 hours ago

Turkey is in a "proud" group of failed empires surrounded by nations they severely abused less than 100 years ago.

Other two are Germany and Japan. Any military aggression from their side will be met with rage by a coalition of nations.

US position will be irrelevant at this point, because local historical grievances will overweight anything else.

monty42 , 10 hours ago

"Libya has been in turmoil since 2011, when an armed revolt during the "Arab Spring" led to the ouster and murder of dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Political power in the country..."

Kinda gave yourself away there. The coordinated assault on Libya by the US, Britain, France, and their Al-CiA-da allies on the ground resulted in the torture, sodomizing, and murder of Gaddafi, as well as his son and grandchildren killed in bombings by the US.

Also, let's not forget that Turkey is still in NATO, and their actions in Syria were alongside the US regime and terrorist proxies labeled "moderate rebels". The same terrorists originally used in Libya, then shipped to destroy Syria, now flown back to Libya. The attempt to paint all of those things as Turkey's actions alone is not honest.

When Turkey isn't in NATO anymore, let me know.

TheZeitgeist , 10 hours ago

Don't forget that Hiftar guy Turks are fighting in Libya was a CIA toadie living in Virginia for a decade before they gave him his "chance" to among other things become a client of the Russians apparently. Flustercluck of the 1st order everywhere one looks.

monty42 , 10 hours ago

Then they put on this whole production where it's the CIA guy or the terrorist puppet regime they installed, so that the rulers win regardless of the outcome. The victims are those caught up in their sick game.

GalustGulbenkyan , 9 hours ago

Turkish population has been recently getting ****** due to the economic contractions and devaluation of the Lira. Once Turkey starts fighting against a real army the Turks will realize that they are going to be ****** by larger dildos. In 1990's they sent thousands of volunteers to Nagorno Karabagh to fight against irregular Armenian forces and we know how that ended for them. Greeks and Egyptians are not the Kurds. Erdogan is a lot of hot air and empty threats. You can't win wars with Modern drones which even Armenians have learned how to jam and shoot down with old 1970's soviet tech.

Guentzburgh , 5 hours ago

Greece should be aligned with Russia, EU and USA are a bad choice that Greece will regret.

Greece needs to pivot towards Russia which will open huge opportunities for both countries

KoalaWalla , 6 hours ago

Greeks are bitter and prideful - they would not only defend themselves if attacked but would counter attack to reclaim land they've lost. But, I don't know that Erdogan is clever enough to realize this.

60s Man , 9 hours ago

Turkey is America's Mini Me.

currency , 3 hours ago

Erdogan is in Trouble at home declining economy and his radical conservative/Thug type policies. Turks are moving away from him except the hard core radicals and conservatives. He and his family are Corrupt - they rule with threats and use of THUGS. Sense his constant wars may be over stretched Time for a Turkish Spring.

Time for US, Nato and etc. to say goodbye to this THUG

OrazioGentile , 7 hours ago

Turkey seems to be on a warpath to imploding from within. Erdogan looks like a desperate despot with a failing economy, failing political clout, and failing modernization of his Country. Like any despot, he has to rally the troops or he will literally be a dead man walking.

HorseBuggy , 9 hours ago

The world fears loud obnoxious tyrants and Erdogan is the loudest tyrant since Hitler. Remember how countries pandered to Hitler early on? Same thing is happening with Erdogan.

This terrorist will do a lot more damage than he has already before the world wakes up.

By the time Hitler was done, 70 million people were dead, what will Erdogan cause?

OliverAnd , 9 hours ago

Turkey is not Germany. Not by far. Erdogan may be a bigger lunatic than Hitler, but Turkey is not Germany of the 30's. Without military equipment/parts from Germany, Italy, Spain, France, USA, and UK he cannot even build a nail. Economies are very integrated; he will be disposed of very very quickly. He has been warned. He is running out of lives.

NewNeo , 9 hours ago

You should research a lot more. Turkey is a lot more power thank Nazi Germany of the 1930's. Turkey currently have brand new US made equipment. It even houses the nuclear arsenal of NATO.

You should probably look at information from stratfor and George Friedman to give you a better understanding.

The failed coupe a few years ago was because the lunatic had gone off the reservation and was seen as a threat to the region. Obviously the bankers thought it in their benefit to keep him going and tipped him off.

OliverAnd , 8 hours ago

Clearly the lockdown has hindered your already illiteracy. Turkey has modern US equipment. Germany did not need US equipment. They made their own equipment; in fact both the US and USSR used Grrman old tech to develop future tech.

The coup was designed by Erdogan to bring himself to full power. When this is all done he will be responsible for millions of Turkish lives; after all he is not a Turk but a Muslim Pontian.

[Jul 27, 2020] Germany Rejects Trump Bid To Let Russia Back Into G7- 'No Chance Due To Ukraine'

So Merkel and Obama staged the coup and Russia is guilty of consequences.
Jul 27, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

For much of the past year Trump has caused angst among allies by maintaining a consistent position that Russia should be invited back into the Group of Seven (G7), making it as it was prior to 2014, the G-8.

Russia had been essentially booted from the summit as relations with the Obama White House broke down over the Ukraine crisis and the Crimea issue. Trump said in August 2019 that Obama had been "outsmarted" by Putin.

But as recently as May when Germany followed by other countries rebuffed Trump's plans to host the G7 at Camp David, Trump blasted the "very outdated group of countries" and expressed that he planned to invite four additional non-member nations, mostly notably Russia .

... per Reuters :

Germany has rejected a proposal by U.S. President Donald Trump to invite Russian President Vladimir Putin back into the Group of Seven (G7) most advanced economies , German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said in a newspaper interview published on Monday.

Interestingly enough the Ukraine and Crimea issues were raised in the interview: "But Maas told Rheinische Post that he did not see any chance for allowing Russia back into the G7 as long as there was no meaningful progress in solving the conflict in Crimea as well as in eastern Ukraine," according to the report.

[Jul 27, 2020] France-Turkey naval clash- Proxy war in Libya enters a new stage -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... By Dr. Karin Kneissl , who works as an energy analyst and book author. She served as the Austrian minister of foreign affairs between 2017-2019. She is currently writing her book 'Die Mobilitätswende' (Mobility in transition), to be published this summer. ..."
"... "humanitarian corridor" ..."
"... "good opposition" ..."
"... "humanitarian war," ..."
"... "worst mistake." ..."
"... "geopolitical commission." ..."
"... "community of the good ones" ..."
"... "Friends of Libya," ..."
"... "good opposition" ..."
"... "exclusive economic zone" ..."
"... "other actors" ..."
"... "mare nostrum" ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Jul 27, 2020 | www.rt.com

By Dr. Karin Kneissl , who works as an energy analyst and book author. She served as the Austrian minister of foreign affairs between 2017-2019. She is currently writing her book 'Die Mobilitätswende' (Mobility in transition), to be published this summer. A confrontation between the two NATO states France and Turkey continues to trouble the Mediterranean region; Egyptian forces are mobilizing. And many other military players are continuing operations there.

In March 2011, during a hectic weekend, the French delegation to the UN Security Council managed to convince all other member States of the Council to support Resolution 1973. It was all about a "humanitarian corridor" for Benghazi, which was considered the "good opposition" by the government of Nicolas Sarkozy. One of his whisperers was the controversial philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy, who supported a French intervention. Levy, fond of the "humanitarian war," found a congenial partner in Sarkozy.

France was at root of crisis

Muammar Gaddafi had been received generously with all his tents in the park of the Elysée, but suddenly he was coined the bad guy. The same had happened to Saddam Hussein in Iraq. It was not the Arab dictator who had changed; it was his usefulness to his allies. The Libyans had been distributing huge amounts of money in Europe, in particular in Rome and Paris at various levels. In certain cases they knew too much. Plus, the Libyans had been protecting the southern border of the Mediterranean for the European Union.

READ MORE Turkish media claims Egyptian military used fake photo to report on joint naval drills with France

So, the French started the war in 2011, took the British on board, which made the entire adventure look a bit like a replay of the Suez intervention of 1956, the official end of European colonial interventions. A humanitarian intervention changed into regime change on day two, which was March 20, 2011. Various UN Security Council members felt trapped by the French.

The US was asked to help, with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and many other advisers in favor of joining that war. President Obama, however, was reluctant but, in the end, he gave in. In one of his last interviews while still in the White House, Obama stated that the aftermath of the war in Libya was his "worst mistake."

Libya ever since has mostly remained a dossier in the hands of administrative officials in Washington, but not on the top presidential agenda anymore. This practice has been slightly shifting in the past weeks. US President Donald Trump and France's Emmanuel Macron had a phone conversation on how to deescalate the situation there. Trump also spoke on that very topic with Turkish President Recep T. Erdogan. Paris supports General Haftar in his war against the Turkish-backed Government of National Accord, which is also supported by the European Union, in theory

The triggering momentum for the current rise in tensions was a naval clash between French- and Turkish-supported vessels. Both nations are NATO members, and an internal alliance investigation is underway. But France decided to pull out of the NATO naval operation that enforces the Libya arms embargo, set up during the high-level Berlin conference on Libya in mid-January 2020. Without the French vessels it will be even more toothless than its critics already deem it. This very initiative on Libya was the first test for the new European commission headed by Ursula von der Leyen and claiming to be a "geopolitical commission." The EU strives to speak the language of power but keeps failing in Libya, where two members, namely Italy and France, are pursuing very different goals. Rome is anxious about migration while Paris cares more about the terrorist threat. But both have an interest in commodities.

ALSO ON RT.COM France, Germany & Italy threaten 'sanctions' against countries that interfere in Libya It's about oil and gas

When Gaddafi was reintegrated in the "community of the good ones" in early 2004 after a curious British legal twisting on the Lockerbie attack of December 1988, a bonanza for oil and gas concessions started. The Italian energy company ENI and BP were among the first to have a big foot in the door. I studied some of those contracts and asked myself why companies were ready to accept such terms. The answer was maybe in the then rise in the oil price of oil and the proximity of Libya to the European market.

Interestingly, in September 2011, the very day of the opening ceremony of the Paris conference dubbed "Friends of Libya," a secret oil deal for the French company Total was published by the French daily Libération. The "good opposition" had promised the French an interesting range of oil concessions. Oil production continuously fell with the rise of the war, attracting sponsors, militias and smugglers from all horizons. The situation in Libya has since been called 'somalization,' but it would become even worse, since many more regional powers got involved in Libya than ever was the case in hunger-ridden Somalia.

READ MORE Turkey will be the death of NATO – its recent clash with fellow member France off the coast of Libya is an early symptom

In exchange for its military assistance, Turkey recently gained access to exploration fields off Libya's shores. Ankara had identified an "exclusive economic zone" with the government in Tripoli, which disregards the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Actually, Israel made the same bilateral demarcation with Cyprus about ten years ago, when Noble Energy started its delineation of blocs in the Levant Basin. So Turkey is infringing on Greek and Cypriot territorial waters, while President Macron keeps reminding his EU colleagues of the "other actors" in the Mediterranean Sea. Alas, it is nobody's "mare nostrum" as it was 2,000 years ago in the Roman era. In principle, all states which have ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea should simply comply with their legal obligations.

The crucial question remains: who has which leverage to de-escalate? Is it the US President, who seemingly has acted more wisely on certain issues in recent times? Or will Russian and Turkish diplomacy be able to negotiate and implement a truce? The tightrope-walk diplomacy between these last two countries is a most interesting example of classical diplomacy: interest-based and focused; able to conduct hard-core relations even in times of direct military confrontation and assassinations (remember the Russian Ambassador Karlov, shot by his Turkish bodyguard in Ankara in December 2016?).

Meanwhile, yet another actor could move in to complicate everything even more. On July 20, the Egyptian parliament voted unanimously for the deployment of the national army outside its borders, thereby taking the risk of direct confrontation with Turkey in Libya. Egyptian troops would be mobilized in support of the eastern forces of General Khalifa Haftar. Furthermore, Cairo would thereby compete even more obviously with Algeria, spending a fortune on military control of its border with Libya. Algeria in the past could rely on US support in the region, but with the gradual decline in US engagement in that part of the world, the country faces a fairly existential crisis.

There are currently two powers, among those involved in Libya, that can still contain the next stage of a decade of proxy wars started by a French philosopher and various EU oil interests: Russia and the USA.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Quizblorg 48 minutes ago Does anything here make sense? No, because France this, Italy that is not how the world is run. The parties involved here go far beyond countries. Also no mention of Saudi-Arabia/Israel. Who engineered the "Arab Spring"?

[Jul 27, 2020] Militarism kiiled the remnants of democracy in the USA long ago by William J. Astore

Notable quotes:
"... The reality is that, in the summer of 2020, America faces two deadly viruses. The first is Covid-19. With hard work and some luck, scientists may be able to mass-produce an effective vaccine for it, perhaps by as early as next spring . In the meantime, scientists do have a sense of how to control it, contain it, even neutralize it, as countries from South Korea and New Zealand to Denmark have shown, even if some Americans, encouraged by our president, insist on throwing all caution to the winds in the name of living free. The second virus, however, could prove even more difficult to control, contain, and neutralize: forever war, a pandemic that U.S. military forces, with their global strike missions, continue to spread across the globe. ..."
"... To survive, the human body needs a healthy immune system, so when it goes haywire, becomes wildly inflamed, and ends up attacking and degrading our vital organs, we're in trouble deep. It's a reasonable guess that, in analogous terms, American democracy is already on a ventilator and beginning to feel the effects of multiple organ failure. ..."
"... Unlike a human patient, doctors can't put our democracy into a medically induced coma. But collectively we should be working to suppress our overactive immune system before it kills us. In other words, it's truly time to defund that military machine of ours, as well as the militarized version of the police, and rethink how actual threats can be neutralized without turning every response into an endless war. ..."
Jul 27, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

...as Martin Luther King, Jr., pointed out in 1967 during the Vietnam War, the United States remains the world's greatest purveyor of violence -- and nothing in this century, the one he didn't live to see, has faintly proved him wrong. Considered another way, Washington should be classified as the planet's most committed arsonist, regularly setting or fanning the flames of fires globally from Libya to Iraq, Somalia to Afghanistan, Syria to -- dare I say it -- in some quite imaginable future Iran, even as our leaders invariably boast of having the world's greatest firefighters (also known as the U.S. military ).

Scenarios of perpetual war haunt my thoughts. For a healthy democracy, there should be few things more unthinkable than never-ending conflict, that steady drip-drip of death and destruction that drives militarism , reinforces authoritarianism, and facilitates disaster capitalism . In 1795, James Madison warned Americans that war of that sort would presage the slow death of freedom and representative government. His prediction seems all too relevant in a world in which, year after year, this country continues to engage in needless wars that have nothing to do with national defense.

You Wage War Long, You Wage It Wrong

U.S. helicopters on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Midway (CV-41) during the evacuation of Saigon, April 1975. (DanMS, Wikimedia Commons)

To cite one example of needless war from the last century, consider America's horrendous years of fighting in Vietnam and a critical lesson drawn firsthand from that conflict by reporter Jonathan Schell. "In Vietnam," he noted , "I learned about the capacity of the human mind to build a model of experience that screens out even very dramatic and obvious realities." As a young journalist covering the war, Schell saw that the U.S. was losing, even as its military was destroying startlingly large areas of South Vietnam in the name of saving it from communism. Yet America's leaders, the " best and brightest " of the era, almost to a man refused to see that all of what passed for realism in their world, when it came to that war, was nothing short of a first-class lie.

Why? Because believing is seeing and they desperately wanted to believe that they were the good guys, as well as the most powerful guys on the planet. America was winning, it practically went without saying, because it had to be. They were infected by their own version of an all-American victory culture , blinded by a sense of this country's obvious destiny: to be the most exceptional and exceptionally triumphant nation on this planet.

As it happened, it was far more difficult for grunts on the ground to deny the reality of what was happening -- that they were fighting and dying in a senseless war. As a result, especially after the shock of the enemy's Tet Offensive early in 1968, escalating protests within the military (and among veterans at home) together with massive antiwar demonstrations finally helped put the brakes on that war. Not before, however, more than 58,000 American troops died, along with millions of Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians.

In the end, the war in Indochina was arguably too costly, messy, and futile to continue. But never underestimate the military-industrial complex , especially when it comes to editing or denying reality, while being eternally over-funded for that very reality. It's a trait the complex has shared with politicians of both parties. Don't forget, for instance, the way President Ronald Reagan reedited that disastrous conflict into a " noble cause " in the 1980s. And give him credit! That was no small thing to sell to an American public that had already lived through such a war. By the way, tell me something about that Reaganesque moment doesn't sound vaguely familiar almost four decades later when our very own " wartime president " long ago declared victory in the "war" on Covid-19, even as the death toll from that virus approaches 150,000 in the homeland.

President Donald Trump during briefing on Covid-19 testing capacity May 11, 2020. (White House, Shealah Craighead)

In the meantime, the military-industrial complex has mastered the long con of the no-win forever war in a genuinely impressive fashion. Consider the war in Afghanistan. In 2021 it will enter its third decade without an end in sight. Even when President Donald Trump makes noises about withdrawing troops from that country, Congress approves an amendment to another massive, record-setting military budget with broad bipartisan support that effectively obstructs any efforts to do so (while the Pentagon continues to bargain Trump down on the subject).

The Vietnam War, which was destroying the U.S. military, finally ended in an ignominious withdrawal. Almost two decades later, after the 2001 invasion, the war in Afghanistan can now be -- the dream of the Vietnam era -- fought in a "limited" fashion, at least from the point of view of Congress, the Pentagon, and most Americans (who ignore it), even if not the Afghans. The number of American troops being killed is, at this point, acceptably low , almost imperceptible in fact (even if not to Americans who have lost loved ones over there).

More and more, the U.S. military is relying on air power , unmanned drones, mercenaries, local militias, paramilitaries, and private contractors. Minimizing American casualties is an effective way of minimizing negative media coverage here; so, too, are efforts by the Trump administration to classify nearly everything related to that war while denying or downplaying " collateral damage " -- that is, dead civilians -- from it.

Their efforts boil down to a harsh truth: America just plain lies about its forever wars, so that it can keep on killing in lands far from home.

When we as Americans refuse to take in the destruction we cause, we come to passively accept the belief system of the ruling class that what's still bizarrely called "defense" is a "must have" and that we collectively must spend significantly more than a trillion dollars a year on the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and a sprawling network of intelligence agencies, all justified as necessary defenders of America's freedom. Rarely does the public put much thought into the dangers inherent in a sprawling "defense" network that increasingly invades and dominates our lives.

Unmanned MQ-9 Reaper taxis after a mission in Afghanistan, Oct. 1, 2007. (Wikimedia)

Meanwhile, it's clear that low-cost wars , at least in terms of U.S. troops killed and wounded in action, can essentially be prolonged indefinitely, even when they never result in anything faintly like victory or fulfill any faintly useful American goal. The Afghan War remains the case in point. "Progress" is a concept that only ever fits the enemy -- the Taliban continues to gain ground -- yet, in these years, figures like retired general and former CIA Director David Petraeus have continued to call for a " generational " commitment of troops and resources there, akin to U.S. support for South Korea.

Who says the Pentagon leadership learned nothing from Vietnam? They learned how to wage open-ended wars basically forever, which has proved useful indeed when it comes to justifying and sustaining epic military budgets and the political authority that goes with them. But here's the thing: in a democracy, if you wage war long, you wage it wrong. Athens and the historian Thucydides learned this the hard way in the struggle against Sparta more than two millennia ago. Why do we insist on forgetting such an obvious lesson?

'We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us'

Sept. 11, 2001: Firefighters battling fire in portion of the Pentagon damaged by attack. (U.S. Navy/Bob Houlihan)

World War II was arguably the last war Americans truly had to fight. My Uncle Freddie was in the Army and stationed at Pearl Harbor when it was attacked on Dec. 7, 1941. The country then came together and won a global conflict (with lots of help) in 44 months, emerging as the planetary superpower to boot. Now, that superpower is very much on the wane, as Trump recognized in running successfully as a declinist candidate for president in 2016. (Make America Great Again !) And yet, though he ran against this country's forever wars and is now president, we're approaching the third decade of a war on terror that has yielded little, spread radical Islamist terror outfits across an expanse of the planet, and still seemingly has no end.

"Great nations do not fight endless wars," Trump himself claimed only last year. Yet that's exactly what this country has been doing, regardless of which party ruled the roost in Washington. And here's where, to give him credit, Trump actually had a certain insight. America is no longer great precisely because of the endless wars we wage and all the largely hidden but associated costs that go with them, including the recently much publicized militarization of the police here at home. Yet, in promising to make America great again, President Trump has failed to end those wars, even as he's fed the military-industrial complex with even greater piles of cash.

There's a twisted logic to all this. As the leading purveyor of violence and terror, with its leaders committed to fighting Islamist terrorism across the planet until the phenomenon is vanquished, the U.S. inevitably becomes its own opponent, conducting a perpetual war on itself. Of course, in the process, Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Somalis, and Yemenis, among other peoples on this embattled planet of ours, pay big time, but Americans pay, too. (Have you even noticed that high-speed railroad that's unbuilt , that dam in increasing disrepair , those bridges that need fixing, while money continues to pour into the national security state?) As the cartoon possum Pogo once so classically said , "We have met the enemy and he is us."

Early in the Iraq War, General Petraeus asked a question that was relevant indeed: "Tell me how this [war] ends." The answer, obvious to so many who had protested in the global streets over the invasion to come in 2003, was "not well." Today, another answer should be obvious: never, if the Pentagon and America's political and national security elite have anything to do with it. In thermodynamics class, I learned that a perpetual motion machine is impossible to create due to entropy. The Pentagon never took that in and has instead been hard at work proving that a perpetual military machine is possible until, that is, the empire it feeds off of collapses and takes us with it.

America's Military Complex as a Cytokine Storm

U.S. Air Force basic military graduation on April 16, 2020, on Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas. (U.S. Air Force, Johnny Saldivar)

In the era of Covid-19, as cases and deaths from the pandemic continue to soar in America, it's astonishing that military spending is also soaring to record levels despite a medical emergency and a major recession.

The reality is that, in the summer of 2020, America faces two deadly viruses. The first is Covid-19. With hard work and some luck, scientists may be able to mass-produce an effective vaccine for it, perhaps by as early as next spring . In the meantime, scientists do have a sense of how to control it, contain it, even neutralize it, as countries from South Korea and New Zealand to Denmark have shown, even if some Americans, encouraged by our president, insist on throwing all caution to the winds in the name of living free. The second virus, however, could prove even more difficult to control, contain, and neutralize: forever war, a pandemic that U.S. military forces, with their global strike missions, continue to spread across the globe.

Sadly, it's a reasonable bet that in the long run, even with Trump as president, America has a better chance of defeating Covid-19 than the virus of forever war. At least, the first is generally seen as a serious threat (even if not by a president blind to anything but his chances for reelection); the second is, however, still largely seen as evidence of our strength and exceptionalism. Indeed, Americans tend to imagine "our" military not as a dangerous virus but as a set of benevolent antibodies, defending us from global evildoers.

When it comes to America's many wars, perhaps there's something to be learned from the way certain people's immune systems respond to Covid-19. In some cases, the virus sparks an exaggerated immune response that drives the body into a severe inflammatory state known as a cytokine storm . That "storm" can lead to multiple organ failure followed by death, yet it occurs in the cause of defending the body from a viral attack.

In a similar fashion, America's exaggerated response to 19 hijackers on 9/11 and then to perceived threats around the globe, especially the nebulous threat of terror, has led to an analogous (if little noticed) cytokine storm in the American system. Military (and militarized police ) antibodies have been sapping our resources, inflaming our body politic, and slowly strangling the vital organs of democracy. Left unchecked, this "storm" of inflammatory militarism will be the death of democracy in America.

To put this country right, what's needed is not only an effective vaccine for Covid-19 but a way to control the "antibodies" produced by America's forever wars abroad and, as the years have gone by, at home -- and the ways they've attacked and inflamed the collective U.S. political, social, and economic body. Only when we find ways to vaccinate ourselves against the destructive violence of those wars, whether on foreign streets or our own, can we begin to heal as a democratic society.

To survive, the human body needs a healthy immune system, so when it goes haywire, becomes wildly inflamed, and ends up attacking and degrading our vital organs, we're in trouble deep. It's a reasonable guess that, in analogous terms, American democracy is already on a ventilator and beginning to feel the effects of multiple organ failure.

Unlike a human patient, doctors can't put our democracy into a medically induced coma. But collectively we should be working to suppress our overactive immune system before it kills us. In other words, it's truly time to defund that military machine of ours, as well as the militarized version of the police, and rethink how actual threats can be neutralized without turning every response into an endless war.

So many years later, it's time to think the unthinkable. For the U.S. government that means -- gasp! -- peace. Such a peace would start with imperial retrenchment (bring our troops home!), much reduced military (and police) budgets, and complete withdrawal from Afghanistan and any other place associated with that "generational" war on terror. The alternative is a cytokine storm that will, in the end, tear us apart from within.

A retired lieutenant colonel (USAF) and professor of history, William J. Astore is a TomDispatch regular . His personal blog is " Bracing Views ."

This article is from TomDispatch.com .

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Richard A. Pelto , July 27, 2020 at 18:00

To understand what enables all the absurdity noted, try identifying what made short shrift of Tulsi Gabbard’s run for the democrat nomination. She clearly was raising the wrong questions about war, and some one like Biden and Hillary were providing the narratives that enable what is happening to continue.

evelync , July 27, 2020 at 17:26

Why do we live a different public from private life?

– The secretive State Dept and Intelligence agencies adopt policies that serve short term financial interests of MICIMATT
NOT the long term public interest.

Trump was elected in part because people are sick of endless regime change wars and reckless financial deregulation and unfair trade.
He made promises (which he lied about) because in spite of his glaring flaws he’s a clever manipulator of peoples’ feelings and he knows what people worry about.

Aaron , July 27, 2020 at 13:48

The war on terror is an Israeli construct, it’s a perpetual war, an impossible kind of war for our military to win in any conventional sense, whereby we could then pack up and go home, which is exactly the way the Zionists want it to be played out. The goal has been to Balkanize all of the countries that Israel feels threatened by and break them apart into ethnic statelets, and thereby hugely weakening their overall power.

Not unlike what happened to the former Yugoslavia. Remember that after the war in Afghanistan started, a person in the Pentagon told Wesley Clark that we were going to war in 7 Middle East countries, and he said he asked the person “Why?” and they didn’t give him an answer other than that was the plan.

Sure, there are always the war profiteers and all that, but the particular mission that our military is serving in that overall region is a Zionist plan.

The American people have bought this for the most part because the Zionist mainstream media has successfully conflated the goals of the state of Israel with our own goals, and that we must equate any and all things Israeli with “The West”, and so whatever antipathy is directed at them, we are to construe that they are attacking America also. And not only have many thousands of American troops been killed, tens of thousands injured, the p.t.s.d. and suicides will go on, as Petraeus seems to imply, for generations. This is a like a terrible, persistent sickness.

Will there be a modern day Alexander to cut this Gordian Knot? The financial, emotional, spiritual, moral toll of this forever war is indeed killing our democracy.

[Jul 27, 2020] 25 YEARS OF CN- 'Iraq the Nuremberg Precedent' -- March 16, 2006 by Peter Dye

Notable quotes:
"... International law is simply a weapon for the empire when it is invoked by it, and it is a useless farce for those the empire opposes. ..."
"... Interesting, but how is it possible to prosecute the US when it already dominates the world? If Hitler and the Germans had won the war there wouldn't have been a Nuremberg Trial. ..."
Mar 16, 2006 | consortiumnews.com

Editor's Note: As the United States approaches the third anniversary of the Iraq invasion, much of the commentary is focusing on the Bush administration's "incompetence" in prosecuting the war -- the failure to coimnit enough troops, the decision to disband the old Iraqi army without adequate plans for training a new one, the highhandedness of the U.S. occupation.

But what about the legal and moral questions aiising from the unprovoked invasion of Iraq? Should George W. Bush and his top aides be held accountable for violating the laws against aggressive war that the United States and other Western nations promulgated in punishing senior Nazis after World War II? Do the Nuremberg precedents that prohibit one nation from invading another apply to Bush and American officials -- or are they somehow immune? Put bluntly, should Bush and his inner circle face a war-crimes tiibunal for the tens of thousands of deaths in Iraq?

Despite the present-day conventional wisdom in Washington that these are frivolous questions, they actually go to the heart of the American commitment to the rule of law and the concept that the law applies to everyone. In this guest essay, Peter Dyer looks at this larger issue:

Just over six decades ago, the first Nuremberg Trial began. On Nov. 21, 1945, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson opened the prosecution of 21 Germans for initiating a war of aggression and for the crimes which flowed from this act. Now is a good time to reconsider some of the history and issues involved in this momentous trial in the light of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

The trial lasted for over a year, culminating in verdicts of guilty of one, some, or all of these crimes for 18 of the defendants. Eleven were sentenced to death.

While the Nuremberg trial is, these days, seldom invoked or discussed, it was, and still is, in the words of Tribunal President Sir Geoffrey Lawrence, "unique in the history of the jurisprudence of the world." Among the most groundbreaking aspects were the drive to formally criminalize the three categories of crimes, and to establish responsibility by individuals for these crimes.

These days, the Nuremberg Trial is chiefly remembered for the prosecution and punishment of individuals for genocide. Equally important at the time, however, was the focus on wars of aggression. Thus, the first sentence of Justice Jackson's opening statement: "The privilege of opening the first trial in history for crimes against the peace of the world imposes a grave responsibility."

Crimes against peace and the responsibility tor them were detined in Article 6, the heart of the Charter of the IMT: "The tribunal.. .shall have the power to try and punish persons who.. .whether as individuals or as members of organizations, committed any of the following crimes...(a) Crimes Against Peace, namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances..

The desire was not only to punish individuals for crimes but to set an international moral and legal precedent for the future. Indeed, before the end of 1946, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted Resolution 95 (1), affirming '4he principles of International Law recognized by the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and the judgment of the Tribunal." And, of course, the United Nations Charter forbids armed aggression and violations of the sovereignty of any state by any other state, except in immediate self defense (Article 2, Sec. 4 and Articles 39 and 51).

Invoking the precedent set by the United States and its allies at the Nuremberg trial in 1946, there can be no doubt that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a war of aggression. There was no imminent threat to U.S. security nor to the security of the world. The invasion violated the U.N. Charter as well as U.N. Security Council Resolution #1441.

The Nuremberg precedent calls for no less than the arrest and prosecution of those individuals responsible for the invasion of Iraq, beginning with President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

Those who still justify the invasion of Iraq would do well to remember the words of Justice Jackson: "Our position is that whatever grievances a nation may have, however objectionable it finds the status quo, aggressive warfare is an illegal means for settling these grievances or for altering these conditions."

And, for those who have difficulty visualizing American leaders as defendants in such a trial, Justice Jackson's words again: "...(L)et me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn, aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment...This trial represents mankind's desperate effort to apply the discipline of the law to statesmen who have used their powers of state to attack the foundations of the world's peace and to commit aggression against the rights of their neighbors."

Peter Dyer is a machinist who moved with his wife from California to New Zealand in 2004.

Aaron , July 26, 2020 at 20:17

Well, it would have been up to one person to call for an investigation and prosecute any illegal actions pertaining to the invasion – Barack Obama. Nobody in the Bush administration would have done it, and it was something that Obama talked about alot in his speeches in his campaign to be president.

Ana Márcia Vainsencher , July 25, 2020 at 17:47

Law is only applied to the USA "enemies", are they real, or no. Historically, the USA loves to create enemies. It's the king of wars.

frank scott , July 26, 2020 at 00:30

Sadly, we still entertain notions of war crimes, meaning that mass murders can be conducted in legal ways that's the disease right there: all we have to do is make rules for how to slaughter human beings according to a scholarly and civilized rule book written by our most gifted and trained in the humanities experts and then wipe out as many humans as we need to in a completely legal way hello?

How about a Geneva convention to write up rules of child rape, wife beating, or maybe the only thing to get "civilized" people upset: pet murdering?

Germany was only doing the politcal economic business of capital, as were its enemies, except for Russia which played the greater role in the defeat of "evil" nazi capitalism..anti-democratic capitalism is in the business of war and it will take democratic communism to bring about peace and global sanity before it destroys humanity.

Andrew Thomas , July 25, 2020 at 13:25

It has been clear for several decades that Nuremberg was not a precedent. It was -- and this is very difficult to actually write out -- victor's justice, which is exactly what the Nazis and their sympathizers said it was then. The US has been "projecting power" around the world ever since in violation of the spirit of the legal terms of the international order it was instrumental in creating post World War II; and its clear provisions at least since Reagan told the World Court to drop dead re: Nicaragua vs. US.

Other more informed readers may have much earlier examples. International law is simply a weapon for the empire when it is invoked by it, and it is a useless farce for those the empire opposes.

Robert Sinuhe , July 25, 2020 at 10:34

Interesting, but how is it possible to prosecute the US when it already dominates the world? If Hitler and the Germans had won the war there wouldn't have been a Nuremberg Trial. Principles are morals and just but power trumps all.

[Jul 26, 2020] Former Poroshenko Ally Admits Euromaidan In 2014 Was Entirely Funded By "Organized Criminal Group" - Defend Democracy Press

Highly recommended!
Jul 26, 2020 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Former Poroshenko Ally Admits Euromaidan In 2014 Was Entirely Funded By "Organized Criminal Group" 25/07/2020

24.07.2020

On July 21 st , Ukrainian businessman and politician David Zhvania revealed some open secrets of the Ukrainian politics, including crimes that former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko had carried out. The irony of the situation is that Zhvania was, at one point, the leader of Poroshenko's campaign headquarters.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JChtKpaulOs

He said that Euromaidan was ruled by criminal groups led by the people who were leading the parties that came into power following the coup – the BPP (Bloc of Petro Poroshenko) and the National Front.

He also said that he had participated in giving multimillion-dollar bribes to European officials in exchange for their support to Poroshenko's election as president.

The former member of Ukrainian parliament, in his video message, said that Ukraine is threatened with a new coming to power of Poroshenko.

"A creeping revenge is taking place in the country – Zelensky's rating falls, and Poroshenko and his entourage are again striving for power. I cannot look at it calmly, so I decided to give this press conference. Warn the citizens of Ukraine not to make a mistake. Tell everyone. who is Poroshenko and his entourage.

This is a criminal group that from the very beginning participated in the Maidan solely for the sake of seizing power and personal enrichment," Zhvania said.

He said that following the 2014 Maidan, an organized criminal group took power in Ukraine, and he admitted that he was part of it.

According to Zhvania, it was this criminal group that financed the protests and thwarted any options for agreements with the authorities (the Yanukovich government), which were designed to avoid escalation.

Read also: Les gilets jaunes lancent un ultimatum au Président

"I was also a member of the organized criminal group, which seized power in 2014 on the wave of popular protests. We financed the Maidan, we fueled protest moods in the media, thwarted the government's peace initiatives, conducted separate negotiations with deputies of the Party of Regions, and negotiated with foreign embassies.

The organized criminal group included Martynenko, Poroshenko, Turchynov, Yatsenyuk, Klitschko. Each of whom has attached its own group. Turchinov, for example, brought Pashinsky and Parubiy," Zhvania said and added that he was ready to testify on this matter.

After the coup victory, Zhvania's group engaged in political corruption to secure the presidency for Poroshenko.

"I and Klimkin (note: Klimkin later became the foreign minister) directly participated in the transfer of 5 million euros through the Ukrainian Embassy in Germany for one high-ranking European official at that time in order to ensure support for Poroshenko as a candidate for the presidency of Ukraine from the EU. I am ready to provide the circumstances of this to the investigating authorities," Zhvania claimed.

In his opinion, Poroshenko became president as a result of the consensus of the oligarchs. And he took on certain obligations to them, which in most cases he carried out.

According to Zhvania, during his tenure as president, Poroshenko acquired approximately $3.4 billion in bribes.

The former politician hoped that President Zelensky "will have enough political will to bring the case of Poroshenko and his entourage to an end."

"Poroshenko today, on the eve of local elections, may try to run for mayor. Before Maidan, it was his dream – he humiliatingly begged Yanukovych for the right to run for mayor of Kiev, was ready to give a bribe for this. Yanukovych did not allow, and Poroshenko did not dare to disobey," Zhvania said and promised to reveal more in the following weeks.

Read also: Brazil's Neo-Liberal Fascist Road to Power | By James Petras

In brief, he said:

  1. The Euromaidan in 2014 was not a spontaneous protest, but was financed by political circles to overthrow Yanukovych.
  2. Any peace initiatives were thwarted by a group that included Martynenko, Poroshenko, Turchynov, Yatsenyuk and Klitschko.
  3. Zhvania and Klimkin gave 5 million euros in bribes to a European official to lobby for Poroshenko's interests as a presidential candidate in 2014.

David Zhvania is a well-known Ukrainian businessman from Georgia. Long-term business partner of the deputy of several iterations of Parliament Nikolay Martynenko.

Zhvania was also a member in four different Ukrainian parliament configurations. In 2004, he was an ally of Yushchenko, was a member of the Our Ukraine bloc, and took part in the Orange Revolution. In 2005, he served as Minister of Emergency Situations in the government of Yulia Tymoshenko.

In 2006 he went to the Verkhovna Rada from "Our Ukraine" and Yushchenko, but he had a falling out with him.

In 2010, he became friends with the Yanukovych team.

In the 2012 elections, he entered parliament as a self-nominated and non-partisan candidate in 140 constituencies. He was a member of the Party of Regions faction, but left it in 2013 when the Revolution of Dignity began.

In the 2014 elections, he was one of the heads of the electoral headquarters of the Petro Poroshenko Bloc. People's Deputy Aleksandr Onishchenko stated that he transferred money to Zhvania for a seat in the parliament of the 8th convocation.

[Jul 26, 2020] As Congress Blocks Defunding the Pentagon, Here Are Ten Things We Could Have Spent the Money On

Jul 26, 2020 | www.mintpressnews.com

July 22nd, 2020

By Alan Macleod

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/follow_button.c4b33f07650267db9f8a72eaac551cac.en.html#dnt=true&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&screen_name=AlanRMacLeod&show_count=false&show_screen_name=false&size=m&time=1595820803798

9 Comments Facebook Twitter Reddit Email More 64

T he majority of House Democrats joined with the Republican colleagues yesterday in voting down progressive legislation that would have cut the Pentagon budget by 10 percent ($74 billion) and used the money to fund healthcare, housing, and education for the poorest Americans.

The amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, sponsored by Barbara Lee (D–CA) and Mark Pocan (D–WI) was soundly defeated 93-324 , with 139 Democrats joining all 185 voting Republicans in rejecting the idea. Despite the defeat, Pocan vowed to continue pushing an anti-war agenda. "We will keep fighting for pro-peace, pro-people budgets until it becomes a reality," he said . Democrats who voted against the military budget cuts received over three times the contributions from the defense industry as those who voted for the reduction. Earlier today, the Senate also voted down the proposal.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=AlanRMacLeod&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1285649805738377216&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mintpressnews.com%2Fcongress-defends-military-spending-ten-things-we-could-spend-the-money-on%2F269698%2F&siteScreenName=MintPressNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=500px

The result will no doubt disappoint the majority of Americans as well. A poll conducted last week by Data for Progress found that 56 percent of the country supported the idea to defund the military and use the money to fight COVID-19 alleviate the growing housing crisis. Democrat-voters supported the plan by 69 to 19 percent, with Republicans also backing it, by 50 to 37 percent. The proposal is hardly a radical shift; the military's budget has increased by around 20 percent under President Trump alone, reaching near-historic highs.

The National Priorities Project, a part of the Institute for Policy Studies think tank, put together a list of ten better uses for the $74 billion than giving it to one of the world's largest bureaucracies. This included:

  1. Housing every one of the United States' over half a million homeless people.
  2. Creating more than one million infrastructure jobs across America, especially in many of the most economically depressed locations.
  3. Conduct two billion COVID-19 tests, or six tests per person (44 times as many as has already been done).
  4. Easily close the $23 billion funding gap between majority-white and majority non-white public schools.
  5. Fund free college programs for more than two million of the poorest American students.
  6. A revolution in clean energy. $74 billion could create enough solar and/or wind energy to meet the needs of virtually every American household.
  7. One million well-paid clean energy jobs, enough to transition most dirty industry workers into renewables.
  8. Hire 900,000 new elementary school teachers, or nine per school, creating a golden age of education.
  9. Send a $2,300 check to the more than 32 million currently unemployed people across the country.
  10. Purchase enough N95 masks for all 55 million essential workers to use, one per day, every day for a year, with change to spare.

Ashik Siddique of the National Priorities Project told MintPress that he was disappointed with the results, but that he was hopeful for the future:

It's important to note how quickly the political landscape is shifting around this issue. This is the first time in decades that Congress has seriously considered reinvesting away from Pentagon spending. Just a few years ago, it would have been hard to imagine getting even 93 votes in the House and 23 in the Senate -- or nearly 40 to 50 percent of the Democratic Caucus -- to cut the Pentagon budget by 10 percent, as they did this time.

That sets up a much stronger baseline to work from next year -- especially since the budget caps put in place by the Budget Control Act of 2011 will expire, giving Americans the chance to more deeply transform this country's militarized agenda in a way that has not been on the table for decades."

Siddique's figures demonstrate just how much money is spent on war and what could be possible in the United States if there was a paradigm shift away from bloated military spending. The U.S. military budget is by far the largest in the world, rivaling that of all other countries combined. More than half of all discretionary spending goes to the Pentagon, with the U.S. spending far more per capita on weaponry than comparable countries. Yet even the $740 billion defense bill does not tell the full story, as it does not include the costs of nuclear weapons (borne by the Department of Energy), nor many veterans' pensions.

https://cdn.iframe.ly/unjDmtn?iframe=card-small&v=1&app=1

In February the Pentagon announced its fiscal year 2021 budget request, in which it signaled a move away from the Middle East as its primary focus, towards that of Russia and China. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper declared the Asian Pacific region to be the U.S.' new "priority theater." There appears to be no partisan split in foreign policy, with both Democrats and Republicans viewing China as an increasing nemesis. In recent weeks Donald Trump and Joe Biden have accused each other of being in Beijing's pockets while ratcheting up the tensions with the world's most populous country.

Like with the cut to military spending, however, the political elite's opinion varies radically with that of the general public. When polling group Pew asked what was the number one international threat to America, the spread of infectious disease was by some way the top answer. Unfortunately, the Trump administration has been cutting health budgets, including attempting to slash funding for the Center for Disease control. Internationally, he has also committed the U.S. to leaving the World Health Organization, a move that is sure to wreak havoc internationally and undermine cooperation against future worldwide health threats.

Feature photo | President Donald Trump, right, looks over a helicopter with United States Military Academy Lt. Gen. Darryl Williams, prior to a commencement ceremony on the parade field, at the United States Military Academy in West Point, N.Y., June 13, 2020. Alex Brandon | AP

Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent . He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary . Republish our stories! MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.

[Jul 26, 2020] Steele's -Primary Subsource- Was Alcoholic Russian National Who Worked With Trump Impeachment Witness At Brookings

Jul 26, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Steele's "Primary Subsource" Was Alcoholic Russian National Who Worked With Trump Impeachment Witness At Brookings by Tyler Durden Sat, 07/25/2020 - 16:50 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Paul Sperry via RealClearInvestigations.com,

The mysterious "Primary Subsource" that Christopher Steele has long hidden behind to defend his discredited Trump-Russia dossier is a former Brookings Institution analyst -- Igor "Iggy" Danchenko, a Russian national whose past includes criminal convictions and other personal baggage ignored by the FBI in vetting him and the information he fed to Steele , according to congressional sources and records obtained by RealClearInvestigations. Agents continued to use the dossier as grounds to investigate President Trump and put his advisers under counter-espionage surveillance.

The 42-year-old Danchenko, who was hired by Steele in 2016 to deploy a network of sources to dig up dirt on Trump and Russia for the Hillary Clinton campaign, was arrested, jailed and convicted years earlier on multiple public drunkenness and disorderly conduct charges in the Washington area and ordered to undergo substance-abuse and mental-health counseling, according to criminal records.

me title=

Fiona Hill: She worked at the Brookings Institution with dossier "Primary Subsource" Igor "Iggy" Danchenko (top photo), and testified against President Trump last year during impeachment hearings. AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

In an odd twist, a 2013 federal case against Danchenko was prosecuted by then-U.S Attorney Rod Rosenstein, who ended up signing one of the FBI's dossier-based wiretap warrants as deputy attorney general in 2017.

Danchenko first ran into trouble with the law as he began working for Brookings - the preeminent Democratic think tank in Washington - where he struck up a friendship with Fiona Hill, the White House adviser who testified against Trump during last year's impeachment hearings. Danchenko has described Hill as a mentor, while Hill has sung his praises as a "creative" researcher.

Hill is also close to his boss Steele, who she'd known since 2006 . She met with the former British intelligence officer during the 2016 campaign and later received a raw, unpublished copy of the now-debunked dossier.

It does not appear the FBI asked Danchenko about his criminal past or state of sobriety when agents interviewed him in January 2017 in a failed attempt to verify the accuracy of the dossier, which the bureau did only after agents used it to obtain a warrant to surveil Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. The opposition research was farmed out by Steele, working for Clinton's campaign, to Danchenko, who was paid for the information he provided.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

A newly declassified FBI summary of the FBI-Danchenko meeting reveals agents learned that key allegations in the dossier, which claimed Trump engaged in a "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation" with the Kremlin against Clinton, were largely inspired by gossip and bar talk among Danchenko and his drinking buddies, most of whom were childhood friends from Russia.

The FBI memo is heavily redacted and blacks out the name of Steele's Primary Subsource. But public records and congressional sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, confirm the identity of the source as Danchenko.

In the memo, the FBI notes that Danchenko said that he and one of his dossier sources "drink heavily together." But there is no apparent indication the FBI followed up by asking Danchenko if he had an alcohol problem, which would cast further doubt on his reliability as a source for one of the most important and sensitive investigations in FBI history.

The FBI declined comment. Attempts to reach Danchenko by both email and phone were unsuccessful.

The Justice Department's watchdog recently debunked the dossier's most outrageous accusations against Trump, and faulted the FBI for relying on it to obtain secret wiretaps. The bureau's actions, which originated under the Obama administration, are now the subject of a sprawling criminal investigation led by special prosecutor John Durham.

Rod Rosenstein: In an odd twist, a 2013 drunkenness case against Danchenko was prosecuted by then-U.S Attorney Rod Rosenstein, who ended up signing one of the FBI's dossier-based wiretap warrants as deputy attorney general in 2017. (Greg Nash/Pool via AP)

One of the wiretap warrants was signed in 2017 by Rosenstein, who also that year appointed Special Counsel Robert Mueller and signed a "scope" memo giving him wide latitude to investigate Trump and his surrogates. Mueller relied on the dossier too. As it happens, Rosenstein also signed motions filed in one of Danchenko's public intoxication cases, according to the documents obtained by RCI.

In March 2013 -- three years before Danchenko began working on the dossier -- federal authorities in Greenbelt, Md., arrested and charged him with several misdemeanors, including "drunk in public, disorderly conduct, and failure to have his [2-year-old] child in a safety seat," according to a court filing . The U.S. prosecutor for Maryland at the time was Rosenstein, whose name appears in the docket filings .

The Russian-born Danchenko, who was living in the U.S. on a work visa, was released from jail on the condition he undergo drug testing and "participate in a program of substance abuse therapy and counseling," as well as "mental health counseling," the records show. His lawyer asked the court to postpone his trial and let him travel to Moscow "as a condition of his employment." The Russian trips were granted without objection from Rosenstein. Danchenko ended up several months later entering into a plea agreement and paying fines.

In 2006, Danchenko was arrested in Fairfax, Va., on similar offenses, including "public swearing and intoxication," criminal records show. The case was disposed after he paid a fine.

At the time, Danchenko worked as a research analyst for the Brookings Institution, where he became a protégé of Hill. He collaborated with her on at least two Russian policy papers during his five-year stint at the think tank and worked with another Brookings scholar on a project to uncover alleged plagiarism in Russian President Vladimir Putin's doctoral dissertation -- something Danchenko and his lawyer boasted about during their meeting with FBI agents. (Like Hill, the other scholar, Clifford Gaddy, was a Russia hawk. He and Hill in 2015 authored "Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin," a book strongly endorsed by Vice President Joe Biden at the time.)

"Igor is a highly accomplished analyst and researcher," Hill noted on his LinkedIn page in 2011.

"He is very creative in pursuing the most relevant of information and detail to support his research."

Strobe Talbott of Brookings with Hillary Clinton: He connected with Christopher Steele and passed along a copy of his anti-Trump dossier to Fiona Hill. AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

Hill also vouched for Steele, an old friend and British intelligence counterpart. The two reunited in 2016, sitting down for at least one meeting. Her boss at the time, Brookings President Strobe Talbott, also connected with Steele and passed along a copy of his anti-Trump dossier to Hill. A tough Trump critic, Talbott previously worked in the Clinton administration and rallied the think tank behind Hillary.

Talbott's brother-in-law is Cody Shearer, another old Clinton hand who disseminated his own dossier in 2016 that echoed many of the same lurid and unsubstantiated claims against Trump. Through a mutual friend at the State Department, Steele obtained a copy of Shearer's dossier and reportedly submitted it to the FBI to help corroborate his own.

In August 2016, Talbott personally called Steele, based in London, to offer his own input on the dossier he was compiling from Danchenko's feeds. Steele phoned Talbott just before the November election, during which Talbott asked for the latest dossier memos to distribute to top officials at the State Department. After Trump's surprise win, the mood at Brookings turned funereal and Talbott and Steele strategized about how they "should handle" the dossier going forward.

During the Trump transition, Talbott encouraged Hill to leave Brookings and take a job in the White House so she could be "one of the adults in the room" when Russia and Putin came up. She served as deputy assistant to the president and senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council from 2017 to 2019.

She left the White House just before a National Security Council detailee who'd worked with her, Eric Ciaramella, secretly huddled with Democrats in Congress and alleged Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to launch an investigation of Biden and his son in exchange for military aid. Democrats soon held hearings to impeach Trump, calling Hill as one of their star witnesses.

Congressional investigators are taking a closer look at tax-exempt Brookings, which has emerged as a nexus in the dossier scandal. As a 501(c)(3) non-profit, the liberal think tank is prohibited from lobbying or engaging in political campaigns. Gryffindor/Wikimedia

Under questioning by Republican staff, Hill disclosed that Steele reached out to her for information about a mysterious individual, but she claimed she could not recall his name. She also said she couldn't remember the month she and Steele met.

"He had contacted me because he wanted to see if I could give him a contact to some other individual, who actually I don't even recall now, who he could approach about some business issues," Hill told the House last year in an Oct. 14 deposition taken behind closed doors.

Congressional investigators are reviewing her testimony, while taking a closer look at tax-exempt Brookings, which has emerged as a nexus in the dossier scandal.

Registered with the IRS as a 501(c)(3) non-profit, the liberal think tank is prohibited from lobbying or engaging in political campaigns. Specifically, investigators want to know if Brookings played any role in the development of the dossier.

"Their 501(c)(3) status should be audited, because they are a major player in the dossier deal," said a congressional staffer who has worked on the investigation into alleged Russian influence.

Hill, who returned to Brookings as a senior fellow in January, could not be reached for comment. Brookings did not respond to inquiries.

Ghost Employee

As a former member of Britain's secret intelligence service, Steele hadn't traveled to Russia in decades and apparently had no useful sources there . So he relied entirely on Danchenko and his supposed "network of subsources," which to its chagrin, the FBI discovered was nothing more than a "social circle."

It soon became clear over their three days of debriefing him at the FBI's Washington field office - held just days after Trump was sworn into office - that any Russian insights he may have had were strictly academic.

Danchenko confessed he had no inside line to the Kremlin and was "clueless" when Steele hired him in March 2016 to investigate ties between Russia and Trump and his campaign manager.

Christopher Steele, former British spy, leaving a London court this week in a libel case brought against him by a Russian businessman. Dossier source Danchenko's drinking pals fed him a tissue of false "rumor and speculation" for pay -- which Steele, in turn, further embellished with spy-crafty details and sold to his client as "intelligence." (Victoria Jones/PA via AP)

Desperate for leads, he turned to a ragtag group of Russian and American journalists, drinking buddies (including one who'd been arrested on pornography charges) and even an old girlfriend to scare up information for his London paymaster, according to the FBI's January 2017 interview memo, which runs 57 pages. Like him, his friends made a living hustling gossip for cash, and they fed him a tissue of false "rumor and speculation" -- which Steele, in turn, further embellished with spy-crafty details and sold to his client as "intelligence."

Instead of closing its case against Trump, however, the FBI continued to rely on the information Danchenko dictated to Steele for the dossier, even swearing to a secret court that it was credible enough to renew wiretaps for another nine months.

One of Danchenko's sources was nothing more than an anonymous voice on the other end of a phone call that lasted 10-15 minutes.

Danchenko told the FBI he figured out later that the call-in tipster, who he said did not identify himself, was Sergei Millian, a Belarusian-born realtor in New York. In the dossier, Steele labeled this source "an ethnic Russian close associate of Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump," and attributed Trump-Russia conspiracy revelations to him that the FBI relied on to support probable cause in all four FISA applications for warrants to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page -- including the Mueller-debunked myth that he and the campaign were involved in "the DNC email hacking operation."

Danchenko explained to agents the call came after he solicited Millian by email in late July 2016 for information for his assignment from Steele. Millian told RCI that though he did receive an email from Danchenko on July 21, he ignored the message and never called him.

"There was not any verbal communications with him," he insisted. "I'm positive, 100%, nothing what is claimed in whatever call they invented I could have said."

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Millian provided RCI part of the email, which was written mostly in Russian. Contact information at the bottom of the email reads:

Igor Danchenko
Business Analyst
Target Labs Inc.
8320 Old Courthouse Rd, Suite 200
Vienna, VA 22182
+1-202-679-5323

At the time, Danchenko listed Target Labs, an IT recruiter run by ethnic-Russians, as an employer on his resumé. But technically, he was not a paid employee there. Thanks to a highly unusual deal Steele arranged with the company, Danchenko was able to use Target Labs as an employment front.

It turns out that in 2014, when Danchenko first started freelancing regularly for Steele after losing his job at a Washington strategic advisory firm, he set out to get a security clearance to start his own company. But drawing income from a foreign entity like Steele's London-based company, Orbis Business Intelligence, would hurt his chances.

So Steele agreed to help him broker a special "arrangement" with Target Labs, where a Russian friend of Danchenko's worked as an executive, in which the company would bring Danchenko on board as an employee but not put him officially on the payroll. Danchenko would continue working for Steele and getting paid by Orbis with payments funneled through Target Labs. In effect, Target Labs served as the "contract vehicle" through which Danchenko was paid a monthly salary for his work for Orbis, the FBI memo reveals.

Though Danchenko had a desk available to use at Target Labs, he did most of his work for Orbis from home and did not take direction from the firm. Steele continued to give him assignments and direct his travel. Danchenko essentially worked as a ghost employee at Target Labs.

Asked about it, a Target Labs spokesman would only say that Danchenko "does not work with us anymore."

Brian Auten: He wrote the memo on the FBI's interview with the Primary Subsource, which is silent about Danchenko's criminal record. Patrick Henry College

Some veteran FBI officials worry Moscow's foreign intelligence service may have planted disinformation with Danchenko and his network of sources in Russia. At least one of them, identified only as "Source 5" in the FBI memo, was described as having a Russian "kurator," or handler.

"There are legions of 'connected' Russians purveying second- and third-hand -- and often made-up -- due diligence reports and private intelligence," said former FBI assistant director Chris Swecker. "Putin's intelligence minions use these people well to plant information."

Danchenko has scrubbed his social media account. He told the FBI he deleted all his dossier-related electronic communications, including texts and emails, and threw out his handwritten notes from conversations with his subsources.

In the end, Steele walked away from the dossier debacle with at least $168,000, and Danchenko earned a large undisclosed sum.

The FBI interview memo, which is silent about Danchenko's criminal record, was written by FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten, who was called out in the Justice inspector general report for ignoring inconsistencies, contradictions, errors and outright falsehoods in the dossier he was supposed to verify.

It was also Auten's duty to vet Steele and his sources. Auten sat in on the meetings with Danchenko and also separate ones with Steele. He witnessed firsthand the countless red flags that popped up from their testimony. Yet Auten continued to tout their reliability as sources, and give his blessing to agents to use their dossier as probable cause to renew FISA surveillance warrants to spy on Page.

As RCI first reported, Auten teaches a national security course at a Washington-area college on the ethics of such spying .

me name=

[Jul 26, 2020] Russian hatefest was over the top. It was a classic case of accusing Russia of what we do. Russia (aka United States) nihilistically creates trouble and by amplifying discord in other countries in order to deflect from their own domestic problems and foreign adventurism in places like Syria and Ukraine.

Jul 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christian J. Chuba , Jul 26 2020 15:54 utc | 7

Made the mistake of watching Fareed Zakaria show

The good , a 5 minute segment where a guest picked winner / loser countries post covid19 world.
Winners: Germany, Taiwan, and Russia, Loser: United States.
It was amusing to watch Zakaria's face contort at the mention of Russia being named a winner, 'wha-whaaaaaaat?' The guest had to reassure Zakaria that Russia is a crap country and only benefits because of Putin's Fortress Russia campaign and low debt making it capable of weathering storms. Zakaria's face still frozen in a mask of horror.

The bad a rather long segment on Russia, China, and Iran's meddling campaign for our next election. This was more painful to me then when I had appendicitis and had to wait several hours before anyone could drive me to the emergency room.
1. Two experts, a China hater and a Russia hater from different 'Institutes'

2. The gratuitous adding of Iran to the list without explanation. Pro-Iranian views are invisible.

3. Russian hatefest was over the top. It was a classic case of accusing Russia of what we do. Russia (aka United States) nihilistically creates trouble and by amplifying discord in other countries in order to deflect from their own domestic problems and foreign adventurism in places like Syria and Ukraine.

Nihilistic spoilers? We the U.S. lost in Syria but are now trying to create a quagmire for Russia and are pulling out all of the stops to make Syrians brutally suffer with a full scale trade embargo and partition of their country.

[Jul 26, 2020] China reaction to Mike Pompeo's 'new Iron Curtain speech'

Notable quotes:
"... Attempting to neutralise a global competitor is the main goal of Americans. Neutralising China's rapid, dynamic development is the essence of the American strategy ..."
Jul 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jul 26 2020 17:41 utc | 17

Recap from today's Global Times where the argument is to continue to stay the course and counterpunch in the typical martial arts fashion, as this op/ed from today's Global Times says :

"Chinese analysts said Sunday the key for China to handle the US offensive is to focus on its own development and insist on continued reform and opening-up to meet the increasing needs of Chinese people for better lives. In the upcoming three months, before the November US presidential election, the China-US relationship is in extreme danger as the Trump administration is likely to launch more aggressions to force China to retaliate, they said."

Stay the course; Trump's shit is just an election ploy. However,

"The US' posturing is serving to distract from domestic pressure over President Trump's failure in handling the pandemic when Trump is seeking reelection this year, Chinese observers said. However, the Trump administration's China stance still reflects bipartisan consensus among US elites, so China should not expect significant change in US policy toward China even if there is a power transition in November, which means China should prepare itself for a long fight."

Don't stray from the Long Game. An international conference was held that I'll try to get a link for. Here's GT's summation:

"According to the Xinhua News Agency on Saturday, international scholars said at a virtual meeting on the international campaign against a new cold war on China on Saturday that 'aggressive statements and actions by the US government toward China poses a threat to world peace and a potential new cold war on China goes against the interests of humanity.'

"The meeting gathered experts from a number of countries including the US, China, Britain, India, Russia and Canada.

"Experts attending the meeting issued a statement calling upon the US to step back from this threat of a cold war and also from other dangerous threats to world peace it is engaged in.

"The reason why international scholars are criticizing the US rather than China is that they can see how restrained China remains and the sincerity of China to settle the tension by dialogue, even though the US is getting unreasonably aggressive, said Chinese experts.

"Washington has made a huge mistake as it has chosen the wrong target - China - to be 'the common enemy or common fear' to reshape its declining leadership among the West. Right now, the common enemy of humanity is COVID-19, and this is why its new cold war declaration received almost no positive responses from other major powers and even raised concern, said Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing, on Sunday."

Today's Global Times lead editorial asked most of the questions everyone else's asking:

"People are asking: How far will the current China-US confrontation keep going? Will a new cold war take shape? Will there be military conflicts and will the possible clashes evolve into large-scale military confrontation between the two?

"Perhaps everyone believes that China does not want a new cold war, let alone a hot war. But the above-mentioned questions have become disturbing suspense because no one knows how wild the ambitions the US ruling team has now, and whether American and international societies are capable of restraining their ambitions."

IMO, the editor's conclusions are quite correct:

"The world must start to act and do whatever it can to stop Washington's hysteria in its relations with China.

"Right now, it is no longer a matter of whether China-US ties are in freefall, but whether the line of defense on world peace is being broken through by Washington. The world must not be hijacked by a group of political madmen. The tragedies in 1910s and 1930s must not be repeated again ."

Trump is elevated to the same plane as Hitler and Mussolini, and the Outlaw US Empire is now the equivalent of Nazi Germany and the Fascist drive to rule the world--a well illustrated trend that's been ongoing since 1991 that only those blinded by propaganda aren't capable of seeing. I think it absolutely correct for China to focus its rhetoric on the Outlaw US Empire's utter failure to control COVID, which prompts some probing questions made from the first article:

"Shen Yi, a professor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs of Fudan University, told the Global Times on Sunday that there is wide consensus among the international community that the COVID-19 pandemic is the most urgent challenge that the world should deal with. Whether on domestic epidemic control or international cooperation, the US has done almost nothing right compared to China's efforts to assist others and its successful control measures for domestic outbreaks .

"In response to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's 'new Iron Curtain speech' at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library on Thursday declaring a new cold war against China, Shen said, ' We can also ask 'is Pompeo an ally of coronavirus?' Because he wants to confuse the world to target the wrong enemy amid the tough fight against the pandemic, so that the virus can kill more people, especially US people, since his country is in the worst situation .'

Shen said, 'In 2018, US Vice President Mike Pence already made a speech which the media saw as a new 'Iron Curtain speech,' and in 2020, Pompeo made a similar speech again, which means their cold war idea is not popular and brings no positive responses from its allies, so they need to try time and again. Of course, they will fail again.'" [My Emphasis]

Wow! The suggestion that Trump, Pompeo, Pence, and company want to "kill more people, especially US people" seems to be proven via their behavior which some of us barflies recognize and have discussed. Now that notion is out in the public, internationally. You don't need Concentration Camps and ovens when the work can be done via the dysfunctional structure of your economy and doing nothing about the situation.

Shen provides the clincher, what Gruff, myself, and others have said here:

"'So if we want to win this competition that was forced by the US, we must focus on our own development and not get distracted. The US is not afraid of a cold war with us, it is afraid of our development .'" [My Emphasis]

My synopsis of both articles omitted some additional info, so do please click the links to read them fully.

karlof1 , Jul 26 2020 18:02 utc | 19

Sputnik offers this analysis of the China/Outlaw US Empire issue , where I found this bit quite apt from "Alexey Biryukov, senior adviser at the Centre for International Information Security, Science and Technology Policy (CIIS) MGIMO-University":

"'The US is fighting with a country that is developing very rapidly, gaining power, increasing its competitiveness in areas where previously there was undeniably US leadership. Attempting to neutralise a global competitor is the main goal of Americans. Neutralising China's rapid, dynamic development is the essence of the American strategy . Meanwhile, China is interested in developing friendly relations with all countries. Recently, it presented the idea of building a community of common destiny for humanity. That's what Sino-American relations should be built around . It would seem that the pandemic should have brought people together around the idea of building a prosperous world for all, not just someone. But the Americans didn't understand that: they started looking for the guilty ones. This is the favourite strategy of Anglo-Saxons, Americans including, to look for the guilty . As a result, they found their main competitor – China'". [My Emphasis]

That is the "guilty ones" that aren't within the Outlaw US Empire. Many more opinions are provided in the article, but they all revolve around the one theme of Trump's actions being motivated by the election and his morbidly poor attempts to corral COVID.

[Jul 26, 2020] Takes much more bravery to go against the dumbass belligerent society you are unfortunately born into

Jul 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

obwandiyag , says: July 23, 2020 at 11:44 pm GMT

@Wade onal murderers, do ya?

You're right about the rich eating our lunch.

But you're wrong about Marines. They kill people for a living. Innocent people. Like Iraqis. And Afghans. Anyone who thinks that murdering Iraqis and Afghans, who never did nothing to Americans, nor Vietnamese, who also did nothing to Americans, or, as Cassius Clay said, "I ain't got nothing against no Vietcong." And he didn't. Because he was an American. So, I thank the service of conscientious objectors, draft dodgers, and deserters. They are the real heroes. Takes much more bravery to go against the dumbass belligerent society you are unfortunately born into. Oh, fuck it, you'll never understand.

Wade , says: July 24, 2020 at 2:24 pm GMT
@obwandiyag ompletely object to our whole response to 911 as it was indeed a false flag.

If so many people were so easily fooled in the US by our "American Pravda" including myself, how can I hold it against an 18 year old or some other kid who hasn't even gone to college that he too cannot see through the dense haze of lies bellowed by those who rule over us? So yes, I admire their bravery but I want desperately for the US military to withdraw from the Middle East (and most everywhere else) and return home to protect us and only us from any real invasion should it ever occur.

We need a) a good military and b) honest leadership. We have the former but not the latter.

[Jul 26, 2020] Not a chance ro stopm militarism in the USA. Too many people's livelihood depends on war. From billionaires to the person who putting bullets in boxes. Anyone who advocate no war will end up in prison for colluding with the Russians.

Jul 26, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Angry Panda , 16 hours ago

Not a chance. Too many people's livelihood depends on war. From billionaires to the person who putting bullets in boxes. Anyone who advocate no war will end up in prison for colluding with the Russians.

monty42 , 16 hours ago

Colluding with the Reds, Terrorists, Chicoms, Covid...pick an enemy. That's how it works. They roll out their psyops and make sure to inform you up front that those who question the narrative are in the enemy column.

uhland62 , 14 hours ago

They've done it with us since 1970.

A_Huxley , 15 hours ago

Contractors like their world travel and over time.

Too many US camps, forts, bases around the world to keep working.

quanttech , 13 hours ago

The single most powerful voice against the wars in the last two years has been Tucker Carlson - and look at what they're doing to him.

optimator , 8 hours ago

A vibrant economy can't tell the difference between manufacturing a submarine or a refrigerator.

monty42 , 16 hours ago

Honor your oath and the wars for empire will stop. A standing army is only viable through the Constitution for a short term defense of the States, not for endless wars of aggression and invasion for the spread of a military empire.

quanttech , 13 hours ago

Correct. Lt. Ehren Watada refused his illegal orders to deploy to Iraq. His case was dismissed, and he was simply discharged. Today he co-owns a restaurant in Vegas.

THERE'S LITERALLY NO PENALTY FOR FOLLOWING THE LAW.

alexcojones , 16 hours ago

As an old veteran, I've spent 50 years atoning some how, some way, myself.

"Vietnam veteran Tim O'Brien wrote: "There should be a law . . . If you support a war, if you think it's worth the price, that's fine, but you have to put your own precious fluids on the line. You have to head for the front and hook up with an infantry unit and help spill the blood." As every old veteran knows, the day that happens is the day warfare ends forever, when bullets are fattening rather than fatal to your health.

Brothers in Arms | Strike-The-Root:

Omni Consumer Product , 14 hours ago

Heinlein's proposal in Starship Troopers - that only combat troops be given the franchise to vote - is a concept with merit

ConanTheContrarian1 , 8 hours ago

I don't know that we have to make atonement. The official government position that we were invited there to help the legitimate government of South VietNam still holds water. The Nguyen and Tranh had been at war with each other for centuries until the French took over, and the war was simply a continuation that the Dogpile Democrats of the day didn't see as anything other than a way to make money. Just because you reject rightwing propaganda, don't fall for the leftwing either.

Atlana99 , 16 hours ago

We need thousands of hardcore street activists to print these fliers out and place them on car windshields all across America:

https://t.me/JohnUbele/75

pocomotion , 16 hours ago

Bring HOME ALL THE MILITARY. Then we will not need a debate!

TBT or not TBT , 16 hours ago

You'd ... still need to convince a few people to do that first, "Bring HOME..." bit.

[Jul 26, 2020] Caitlin Johnstone- I say keep Confederate names on US bases. Add more of them! THAT's more honest for American murder machine -- RT Op-ed

Jul 26, 2020 | www.rt.com

By Caitlin Johnstone , an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her website is here and you can follow her on Twitter @caitoz Senate has passed a bill calling for the removal of Confederate names from US bases, but it'd be more truthful for them to continue to be named after racists, killers & oppressors, as they embody the values of the US war machine.

"JUST IN: Senate Passes $740 Billion Defense Bill With Provision To Remove Confederate Names Off Military Bases" reads a headline from the digital news site Mediaite , which could also serve as a perfect diagnosis for everything that is sick about mainstream liberal orthodoxy.

The Democrat-led House and Republican-led Senate have now both passed versions of this bill authorizing three-quarters of a trillion dollars for a single year of military spending, both by overwhelming bipartisan majorities, on the condition that the names of Confederate Civil War leaders be removed from military bases.

Unsurprisingly, the Security Policy Reform Institute's Stephen Semler found a direct relationship between how much a House Democrat has been paid by the war industry and how likely they were to have voted for the bloated military budget, which also obstructs any attempts to scale down troop presence in Afghanistan.

This is everything that is horrible about the Democratic Party and the ideological position of mainstream liberals. Their leaders have figured out a way to trade hard objects for empty narrative. To get people to consent to almost limitless amounts of thievery, murder and exploitation in exchange for words and stories.

They'll get rid of Confederate names on bases, but they won't even slightly reduce the vast fortunes they're stealing from an impoverished populace and pouring into global slaughter and oppression. They'll kneel wearing Kente cloth , but they won't even think about dismantling the US police state. They'll say "I hear you, and that's something we're looking at," but they'll never intervene against plutocrats funnelling money away from the needful to add to their unfathomably vast fortunes. They'll call you whatever gender pronoun you like, but they'll never do anything to inconvenience the oligarchs and warmongers.

They'll still make you fight tooth and claw for each empty concession, because otherwise they'd be devaluing the empty, imaginary currency they're trading you in exchange for the concrete things they want. But in the end there is no amount of narrative the powerful won't swap out for actual policy changes of substance, because narrative in and of itself has no value. Manipulators understand this distinction with crystal clear lucidity. Their victims do not.

In reality, it would be a lot more truthful and authentic for bases within the US war machine to continue to bear the names of racists, killers and oppressors, since these embody the values of that war machine far better than anything with a more pleasant ring to it. As long as you're robbing the American people to murder brown-skinned foreigners for corporate interests and geostrategic resource control, you might as well have names which reflect such values on your war machinery.

ALSO ON RT.COM Caitlin Johnstone: In post-Iraq invasion world, it's absolutely insane to blindly believe the US narrative on China

So I say keep the Confederate names on the bases. Hell, add more of them. Add the names of Nazis, genocidal warlords, and serial killers too while you're at it. It'd certainly be a lot more honest and accurate to have a Fort Jeffrey Dahmer as part of America's murder machine than a Fort Colin Kaepernick.

War is the single worst thing in the world. It is the most evil, insane, counter-productive, wasteful, damaging, kleptocratic and unsustainable thing that human beings do, by a very wide margin. If Americans could viscerally experience all of the horrors that are inflicted by the war machine their wealth and resources are being funneled into, with their perception unfiltered by propaganda and government secrecy, they would fall to their knees screaming with abject rage. They would be in the streets immediately forcing an end to this unforgivable savagery. Which is exactly why America has so much government secrecy and propaganda.

If Americans could see with their perceptions unmanipulated, their response to the news that $740 billion is being stolen from the American people by a sociopathic murder machine in exchange for removing the names of Confederate leaders from its bases would not be "Oh good, maybe we'll get a Fort Harriet Tubman!" It would be rage. Unmitigated, unforgiving rage. Which is all the status quo deserves. Which is all the Democratic Party exists to prevent.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Jul 26, 2020] Watch- China Answers Houston Closure With Raid On US Consulate In Chengdu

Closing consulates is far from the best foreign policy and fat Pompeo known it. It just starts the unnecessary and counter productive spiral of retaliation and Chinese have more leverage over the USA as more the USA diplomatic personnel woks in China than the china diplomatic personnel in the USA. They were always burned in Russia and now they stepped on the same rake again.
Jul 26, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Musum , 8 hours ago

One good turn deserves another.

Maybe fat Pompeo knows he's on his way out and desperate to make a lasting mark on the geopolitical stage on behalf of the West Point mafia and his brothers-in-arm at the Jweish mafia.

QABubba , 8 hours ago

Quit stealing Russian consulates, Chinese consulates, etc.

It serves no purpose.

Haboob , 7 hours ago

Closing diplomacy with nations as USA shrinks on the world stage shows America's juvenile behavior.

Salisarsims , 7 hours ago

We are a young twenty something nation what do you expect but drama.

Haboob , 7 hours ago

It is funny how the young and arrogant always think they are right and have manifest destiny over the old and wise. The young never listen to the old and as the story goes they are defeated everytime. China is older than America, older than the west, they understand this world we are living in far more than we do.

me or you , 9 hours ago

He is right!

The world has witnessed the US is not more than a banana Republic with a banana healthcare system

To Hell In A Handbasket , 9 hours ago

I love seeing how gullible the USSA dunces are susceptible to hating an imaginary enemy. Go on dunces wave the star spangled banner, and place the hand over the heart, you non-critical thinking imbeciles. I told you fools years ago we are going to invoke the Yellow Peril 2.0, and now we are living it. China bad, is just as stupid as Russia bad, while the state stenographers at the MSM netowrks do all in their power to hide our rotten behaviour.

Who falls for this ****? The poorly educated, and the inherently stupid.

To Hell In A Handbasket , 8 hours ago

No, it's called nationalism or self preservation.

What are the citizens of the US suppose to do,

You are wrong on so many levels, but ultimately the Chinese have beaten us at our own rigged game. When I was riling against unfettered free-markets, and the movement of capital, that allowed the west for centuries to move into undeveloped foreign markets and gain a stranglehold, I was called a communist, and a protectionist.

While the USSA money printing b@stards was roaming around the planet like imperialists, and their companies was not only raping the planet, but gouging foreign markets, the average USSA dunce was brainwashed into believing USSA companies were the best.

Now these same market and economic rules we the west have set for the last several hundred years no longer work for us, we want to change the rules. Again, my point is "where was you on this position 5-10-20-30 years ago?" I've always seen this outcome, because logic said so. To reject our own status quo, and return to mercantilism, makes us look like the biggest hypocrites ever.

[Jul 26, 2020] Patriotic Dissent- How A Working-Class Soldier Turned Against -Forever Wars- -

Jul 26, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Patriotic Dissent: How A Working-Class Soldier Turned Against "Forever Wars"

by Tyler Durden Sat, 07/25/2020 - 00:05 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Steve Early and Suzanne Gordon via Counterpunch.org,

When it comes to debate about US military policy, the 2020 presidential election campaign is so far looking very similar to that of 2016. Joe Biden has pledged to ensure that "we have the strongest military in the world," promising to "make the investments necessary to equip our troops for the challenges of the next century, not the last one."

In the White House, President Trump is repeating the kind of anti-interventionist head feints that won him votes four years ago against a hawkish Hillary Clinton. In his recent graduation address at West Point, Trump re-cycled applause lines from 2016 about "ending an era of endless wars" as well as America's role as "policeman of the world."

In reality, since Trump took office, there's been no reduction in the US military presence abroad, which last year required a Pentagon budget of nearly $740 billion. As military historian and retired career officer Andrew Bacevich notes , "endless wars persist (and in some cases have even intensified ); the nation's various alliances and its empire of overseas bases remain intact; US troops are still present in something like 140 countries ; Pentagon and national security state spending continues to increase astronomically ."

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.398.1_en.html#goog_129109962

When the National Defense Authorization Act for the next fiscal year came before Congress this summer, Senator Bernie Sanders proposed a modest 10 percent reduction in military spending so $70 billion could be re-directed to domestic programs. Representative Barbara Lee introduced a House resolution calling for $350 billion worth of DOD cuts. Neither proposal has gained much traction, even among Democrats on Capitol Hill. Instead, the House Armed Services Committee just voted 56 to 0 to spend $740. 5 billion on the Pentagon in the coming year, prefiguring the outcome of upcoming votes by the full House and Senate.

An Appeal to Conscience

Even if Biden beats Trump in November, efforts to curb US military spending will face continuing bi-partisan resistance. In the never-ending work of building a stronger anti-war movement, Pentagon critics, with military credentials, are invaluable allies. Daniel Sjursen, a 37-year old veteran of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan is one such a critic. Inspired in part by the much-published Bacevich, Sjursen has just written a new book called Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War (Heyday Books)

Patriotic Dissent is a short volume, just 141 pages, but it packs the same kind of punch as Howard Zinn's classic 1967 polemic, Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawal . Like Zinn, who became a popular historian after his service in World War II, Sjursen skillfully debunks the conventional wisdom of the foreign policy establishment, and the military's own current generation of "yes men for another war power hungry president." His appeal to the conscience of fellow soldiers, veterans, and civilians is rooted in the unusual arc of an eighteen-year military career. His powerful voice, political insights, and painful personal reflections offer a timely reminder of how costly, wasteful, and disastrous our post 9/11 wars have been.

Sjursen has the distinction of being a graduate of West Point, an institution that produces few political dissenters. He grew up in a fire-fighter family on working class Staten Island. Even before enrolling at the Academy at age 17, he was no stranger to what he calls "deep-seated toxically masculine patriotism." As a newly commissioned officer in 2005, he was still a "burgeoning neo-conservative and George W. Bush admirer" and definitely not, he reports, any kind of "defeatist liberal, pacifist, or dissenter."

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

Sjursen's initial experience in combat -- vividly described in his first book, Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of The Surge (University Press of New England) -- "occurred at the statistical height of sectarian strife" in Iraq.

"The horror, the futility, the farce of that war was the turning point in my life," Sjursen writes in Patriotic Dissent .

When he returned, at age 24, from his "brutal, ghastly deployment" as a platoon leader, he "knew that the war was built on lies, ill-advised, illegal, and immoral." This "unexpected, undesired realization generated profound doubts about the course and nature of the entire American enterprise in the Greater Middle East -- what was then unapologetically labeled the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT)."

A Professional Soldier

By the time Sjursen landed in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, in early 2011, he had been promoted to captain but "no longer believed in anything we were doing."

He was, he confesses, "simply a professional soldier -- a mercenary, really -- on a mandatory mission I couldn't avoid. Three more of my soldiers died, thirty-plus were wounded, including a triple amputee, and another over-dosed on pain meds after our return."

Despite his disillusionment, Sjursen had long dreamed of returning to West Point to teach history. He applied for and won that highly competitive assignment, which meant the Army had to send him to grad school first. He ended up getting credentialed, while living out of uniform, in the "People's Republic of Lawrence, Kansas, a progressive oasis in an intolerant, militarist sea of Republican red." During his studies at the state university, Sjursen found an intellectual framework for his "own doubts about and opposition to US foreign policy." He completed his first book, Ghost Riders , which combines personal memoir with counter-insurgency critique. Amazingly enough, it was published in 2015, while he was still on active duty, but with "almost no blowback" from superior officers.

Before retiring as a major four years later, Sjursen pushed the envelope further, by writing more than 100 critical articles for TomDispatch and other civilian publications. He was no longer at West Point so that body of work triggered "a grueling, stressful, and scary four-month investigation"by the brass at Fort Leavenworth, during which the author was subjected to "a non-publication order." At risk were his career, military pension, and benefits. He ended up receiving only a verbal admonishment for violating a Pentagon rule against publishing words "contemptuous of the President of the United States." His "PTSD and co-occurring diagnoses" helped him qualify for a medical retirement last year.

Sjursen has now traded his "identity as a soldier -- the only identity I've known in my adult life -- for that of an anti-war, anti-imperialist, social justice crusader," albeit one who did not attend his first protest rally until he was thirty-two years old. With several left-leaning comrades, he started Fortress on A Hill, a lively podcast about military affairs and veterans' issues. He's a frequent, funny, and always well-informed guest on progressive radio and cable-TV shows, as well as a contributing editor at Antiwar.com , and a contributor to a host of mainstream liberal publications. This year, the Lannan Foundation made him a cultural freedom fellow.

In Patriotic Dissent , Sjursen not only recounts his own personal trajectory from military service to peace activism. He shows how that intellectual journey has been informed by reading and thinking about US history, the relationship between civil society and military culture, the meaning of patriotism, and the price of dissent.

One historical figure he admires is Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, the recipient of two Medals of Honor for service between 1898 and 1931. Following his retirement, Butler sided with the poor and working-class veterans who marched on Washington to demand World War I bonus payments. And he wrote a best-selling Depression-era memoir, which famously declared that "war is just a racket" and lamented his own past role as "a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."

Reframing Dissent NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Sjursen contrasts Butler's anti-interventionist whistle-blowing, nearly a century ago, with the silence of high-ranking veterans today after "nineteen years of ill-advised, remarkably unsuccessful American wars." Among friends and former West Point classmates, he knows many still serving who "obediently resign themselves to continued combat deployments" because they long ago "stopped asking questions about their own role in perpetuating and enabling a counter-productive, inertia-driven warfare state."

Sjursen looks instead to small left-leaning groups like Veterans for Peace and About Face: Veterans Against the War (formerly Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bring Our Troops Home. US, a network of veterans influenced by the libertarian right. Each in, its own way, seeks to "reframe dissent, against empire and endless war, as the truest form of patriotism." But actually taming the military-industrial complex will require "big-tent, intersectional action from civilian and soldier alike," on a much larger scale. One obstacle to that, he believes, is the societal divide between the "vast majority of citizens who have chosen not to serve" in the military and the "one percent of their fellow citizens on active duty," who then become part of "an increasingly insular, disconnected, and sometimes sententious post-9/11 veteran community."

Not many on the left favor a return to conscription.

But Sjursen makes it clear there's been a downside to the U.S. replacing "citizen soldiering" with "a tiny professional warrior caste," created in response to draft-driven dissent against the Vietnam War, inside and outside the military. As he observes:

"Nothing so motivates a young adult to follow foreign policy, to weigh the advisability or morality of an ongoing war as the possibility of having to put 'skin in the game.' Without at least the potential requirement to serve in the military and in one of America's now countless wars, an entire generation -- or really two, since President Nixon ended the draft in 1973–has had the luxury of ignoring the ills of U.S. foreign policy, to distance themselves from its reality ."

At a time when the U.S. "desperately needs a massive, public, empowered anti-war and anti-imperial wave" sweeping over the country, we have instead a "civil-military" gap that, Sjursen believes, has "stifled antiwar and anti-imperial dissent and seemingly will continue to do so." That's why his own mission is to find more "socially conscious veterans of these endless, fruitless wars" who are willing to "step up and form a vanguard of sorts for revitalized patriotic dissent." Readers of Sjursen's book, whether new recruits to that vanguard or longtime peace activists, will find Patriotic Dissent to be an invaluable educational tool. It should be required reading in progressive study groups, high school and college history classes, and book clubs across the country . Let's hope that the author's willingness to take personal risks, re-think his view of the world, and then work to change it will inspire many others, in uniform and out.

me name=


Justus_Americans , 59 minutes ago

Do we need to be in 160 countries with our military and can we afford it?

Cat Daddy , 1 hour ago

I am all for bringing the troops home except for this one unnerving truth; nature abhors a vacuum, specifically, when we pull out, China moves in. A world dominated by the CCP will be a dangerous place to be. When we leave, we will need to make sure our bases are safely in the hands of our friends.

dogbert8 , 1 hour ago

War is effectively the way the U.S. has done business since the Spanish American War, our first imperial conquests. War is how we ensure big business has the materials and markets they demand in return for their support of political parties and candidates. War is the only area left with opportunities for growth and profit. Don't think for a minute that TPTB will ever let us stop waging war to get what we (they) want.

TheLastMan , 2 hours ago

If you are new to zh all you need to do is study PNAC and the related nature of all parties to understand the criminality of USA militarization and for whose benefit it serves

Anonymous IX , 2 hours ago

I have written many times on this platform the exact same sentiments.

I am most disheartened by the COVID + Antifa/BLM Riots because of the facts this author presents.

We are distracted with emotional and highly volatile MASSIVELY PROPAGANDIZED stories by MSM (I don't watch) while the real problem in the world is as the author describes above.

We are war-mongering nation who needs to bring our troops home and disband over half of our overseas installations and bases.

We have no right to levy economic sanctions to impoverish, sicken, and weaken the citizens of Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, or anywhere else.

Yet, we run around arguing about masks and who can go into a restaurant or toppling statutes and throwing mortar-type fireworks at federal officers. This is what we do instead of facing a real problem which is that we are war-mongering nation with no moral/ethical conscience. These scraggily bearded white Antifas need to WTFU and realize who their true enemy.

Oh, wait. They work for the true enemy! Get it?

Max21c , 1 hour ago

We have no right to levy economic sanctions to impoverish, sicken, and weaken the citizens of Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, or anywhere else.

I don't agree with the economic sanctions nonsense thing as they seem to be more of a crutch for people that are not any good at planning, strategy, analytical thinking, critical thinking, strategic thinking, and lack much in the way of talent or creativity or intellectual acumen or intellectual skills...I believe there's around just shy of 10k economic sanctions by Washington...

But the USA does have the right to receive or refuse to receive foreign Ambassadors and Consuls and to recognize or not recognize other nations governments thus it does have some degrees of the right to not trade or engage in commerce with other nations to a certain extent... per imports and exports... et cetera... though it's not necessarily an absolute right or power

IronForge , 2 hours ago

Sjursen may admire General Butler; but he doesn't seem to know that several of the General's Descendants Served in the US Military.

Sjursen isn't Butler. The General Prevented a Coup in his Time.

The USA are a Hegemony whose KleptOchlarchs overtook the Original Constitutional Republic.

PetroUSD, MIC, Corporate Expansion-Conquest, AgriGMO, and Pharma Interests Span the Globe.

Wars are Rackets; and Societies to Nation-States have waged them over Real Estate, Natural Resources, Trade Routes, Industrial Capacity, Slavery, Suppresive Spite, Religious/Ideological Zeal, Economic Preservation, and Profiteering Greed.

YET, Militaries are still formed by Nation-States to Survive and for Some - Thrive above such Competitive Existenstential Threats.

*****

The Hegemony are running up against New Shifts in Global Power, Systems, and Influences; and are about to Lose their Unilateral Advantages. The Hegemon themselves may suffer Societal Collapses Within.

Sjursen should read up on Chalmers Johnson. Instead of trying to Coordinate Ineffective Peace Demonstrations, the Entire Voting/Political Contribution/Candidacy Schemes should be Separated from the Oligarchy of Plutocrats and Corporate/Political KleptOchlarchs.

Without Bringing the Votes back to the Collective Hands of Citizenry Interests First and Foremost, the Republic are Forever Conquered; and the Ethical may have to resort to Emigration and/or Secession.

Ink Pusher , 2 hours ago

Nobody rides for free,there's always a cost and those who can't pay in bullion will often pay in bodily fluids of one form or another.

Profiteers that create warfare for profit are simply parasitical criminals and should not be considered a "special breed" when weighed upon the Scales of Justice.

gzorp , 2 hours ago

Read 'Starship Troopers' by Robert A Heinlein (1959) pay especial attention to the "History and Moral Philosophy" courses... that's where his predictions for the future course of 'America's' future appear.... rather accurately. Heinlein was a 1930's graduate of Annapolis (Navy for you dindus and nohabs).....

A DUDE , 2 hours ago

t's not just the war machine but the entire system, the corporatocracy, of which the MIC is a part. And there is no way to change the system from within the system because whatever is anti-establishment becomes absorbed and neutered and part of the system.

So why would anyone vote is my question? 11. Trump and Biden Are Far Right of Center and Running to Offenbach Nearly Every Day

sbin , 2 hours ago

Tulsi Gabbard ran on anti interventionism foreign policy.

Look how fast the DNC disappeared her.

Of course destroying Kamala Harris in a debate and going after the ancient evil Hitlery sealed her fate.

BarkingWolf , 2 hours ago

In reality, since Trump took office, there's been no reduction in the US military presence abroad, which last year required a Pentagon budget of nearly $740 billion. As military historian and retired career officer Andrew Bacevich notes , "endless wars persist (and in some cases have even intensified ); the nation's various alliances and its empire of overseas bases remain intact; US troops are still present in something like 140 countries ; Pentagon and national security state spending continues to increase astronomically ."

Now wait just a minute there mister, that sounds like criticism of the Donald John PBUH PBUH PBUH ... you can't do that ... the cult followers will call you a leftist and a commie if you point out stuff like that even if it is objectively true! That's strike one, punk.

An Appeal to Conscience

Even if Biden beats Trump in November, efforts to curb US military spending will face continuing bi-partisan resistance.

November doesn't have anything to do with anything really. The appeal to conscience is wasted. The appeal would be better spent on removing the political class that is on the AIPAC dole and have dual citizenship in a foreign country in the ME while pretending to serve America while they are members of Congress. That's only the tip of the spear ... and that is a nonstarter from the get go.

Sjursen skillfully debunks the conventional wisdom of the foreign policy establishment, and the military's own current generation of "yes men for another war power hungry president."


I don't think Trump is necessarily a war power hungry president. While it is true that we have not withdrawn from Syria and basically stole their oil as Trump has repeated promised he would do, it is also true that Trump has yet to deliver Israels war with Iran and in fact had called back an invasion of Iran ten minutes before a flotilla of US warships was about to set sail to ignite such an invasion leaving Tel Aviv not only aggrieved, but angry as well.

Sjursen has now traded his "identity as a soldier -- the only identity I've known in my adult life -- for that of an anti-war, anti-imperialist, social justice crusader," albeit one who did not attend his first protest rally until he was thirty-two years old. With several left-leaning comrades ...

Okay, this is where you are starting to lose me .... i't like listening to a concert and suddenly the music is hitting sour notes that are off key, off tempo, and don't seem to fit somehow.

Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, the recipient of two Medals of Honor for service between 1898 and 1931. Following his retirement, Butler sided with the poor and working-class veterans who marched on Washington to demand World War I bonus payments. And he wrote a best-selling Depression-era memoir, which famously declared that "war is just a racket" and lamented his own past role as "a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."

"On July 28, 1932, at the command of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, they marched down Pennsylvania Avenue toward the Capitol to launch an attack on World War I veterans. " https://www.stripes.com/news/us/the-veterans-were-desperate-gen-macarthur-ordered-us-troops-to-attack-them-1.480665

Butler was correct, war especially nowadays, is a racket that makes rich people who never seem to get their hands dirty, even richer. As one grunt put it long ago, "it's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it."

That "somebody" is going to be the kids of the little people (the real high-class muscle-men ) who are hated by their political class overlords even as the political class are worshipped as gods.

Sjursen looks instead to small left-leaning groups like Veterans for Peace and About Face: Veterans Against the War (formerly Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bring Our Troops Home. US, a network of veterans influenced by the libertarian right.

The problem here is that the so-called "left" brand has always been about war and the capitalism of death.

The Democrat party is really the group that started the American civil war for instance, they are the ones behind legacy of Eugenists like Margaret Sanger who was a card carrying Socialist who founded the child murder mill known today as Planned Parenthood that sadly still exists under Trump but has turned into the industrialized slaughter of children ...even after birth so that their organs can be "harvested" for profit.

Sjursen's affinity for "the left" as saintly purveyors of peace, goodness, love, and life strikes me as rather disingenuous. Then he seems to argue if I read the analysis correctly that conscription will somehow be the panacea for the insatiable appetite for war?

One false flag such as The Gulf of Tonkin or 911 or even Perl Harbor or the Sinking of the Lusitania or the assassination of an Arch Duke ... is all that is really needed to arouse the unbridled hoards to march off to battle with almost erotic enthusiasm -the political class KNOWS IT!

Amendment X , 2 hours ago

And don't forget President Wilson (D) who was re-elected on the platform "He kept us out of the war" only to drag U.S. into the hopeless European Monarchary driven WWI.

11b40 , 1 hour ago

Yo! Low class muscle man here, and I have to agree with bringing back the draft. It should never have been eliminated, and is the root of the golbalists abiity to keep us in Afghanistan, and other parts of the ME, for going on 20 years.

Skin in the game. It means literally everything. As noted we now have 2 generations of men who never had to give much thought at all to what's happening around the world, and how America is involved....and look at the results. It would be a much different situation today if all those 18 year olds had to face the draft board with an unforgiving lottery.

Yes, one false falg can whip up the country to a war time fever pitch, but unless there is a real, serious threat, the fever cannot be maintained. The 1969 draft lottery caught me when I stayed out the first semester of my senior year. Didn't want to go, but accepted my fate and did the best job I could to stay alive and keep those around me as safe as possible. In 1966, I was in favor of the war, and was about to go Green Beret on the buddy system. We were going to grease gooks with all the enthusiasm of John Wayne. My old man, an artillery 1st Sgt at the time in Germany, talked me out of it. More like get your *** on a plane back to the States and into college, befroe i kick it up around your shouders. A WW2 & Korea vet, he told me then it was the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

The point is, when kids are getting drafted, Mom's, Dad's, and everyone else concerned with the safety of their friends & relatives, start paying attention and asking hard questions of politicians. Using Afghanistan as an example, we would have been on the way out by the 2004 election cycle, or at max before the next one in 2008. That was 12 years ago, and we are still there.

I addition, the reason we went would have been more closely examined, and there may have been a real investigtion into 9/11. Plus, I am convinced that serving your country makes for a better all around citizen, and God knows, we need better citizens.

Cassandra.Hermes , 2 hours ago

Trump and Pompeo started new cold war with China, but have no way to back up their threats and win it!! When i was in Kosovo peace corps i heard so many stories from Albanian who were blamed to be Russian or American spy because of double cold war against Albania. Trump and Pompeo just gave excuse to Xi to blame anyone who protest as American spy. BBC were showing China's broadcast of the protests in Oregon to Hong Kong with subtitle "Do you really want American democracy?", LMFAO

Max21c , 2 hours ago

Joe Biden has pledged to ensure that "we have the strongest military in the world," promising to "make the investments necessary to equip our troops for the challenges of the next century, not the last one."

The United States shall continue to have a weak military until it starts to fix its foreign policy and diplomacy. You cannot have the strongest military in the world if you lack a good foreign policy and good diplomacy. Brains are a lot more important than battleships, battalions, bullets, barrels, or bombs. Get a frickin' clue you friggin' Washington morons.

Washington is weak because they are dumb. Blind, deaf, and dumb.

Heroic Couplet , 2 hours ago

Too little, too late. Great ad for a book that will be forgotten in a week. Read Bolton's book. The minute Trump tries to reduce troops, Bolton is right there, saying "No, we can't move troops to the perimeter. No, we can't move troops from barracks to tents at the perimeter." Who needs AI?

Erik Prince wrote 3.5 years ago that 4th gen warfare consists of cyberwarfare and bio-weapons. The US military is fooked. There's probably an interesting book to be researched: How do Republicans feel about contracting COVID-19 after listening to Trump fumble?

ChecksandBalances , 3 hours ago

Blame the voters. Run on a platform to reduce military and police spending. See how many of those lose. Probably all of them. You have to stop feeding the beast. This is a slogan Trump correctly said but as usual didn't actually mean. We should cut all military and police spending by 1/2 and then take the remaining money and build a smarter, more efficient military and police force.

Max21c , 3 hours ago

It's not just the "Deep State." It's Washingtonians overall. It's Deep Crazy. They're all Deep Crazy! They're nuts. And the rare exceptions that may know better and have enough common sense to know its wrong to sick the secret police on innocent American civilians aren't going to say anything or do anything to stop it. The few that know better in foreign policy aren't going to say anything or do anything against the new Cold Wars on the Eastern Front against China or on the Western Front against Russia since they're not willing to go up against the Regime. So the Regimists know they have carte blanche to persecute or terrorize or go after any that stand in their way. This is how tyrannies and police states operate. It's the nature of the beast. At a minimum they brow beat people into submission. People don't want to stick their neck out and risk going up against the Regime and risk losing to the Regime, its secret police, and the powers that be. They shy away from anything that would bring the Regime and its secret police and its radicals, extremists, fanatics, and zealots their way.

nonkjo , 4 hours ago

It's okay to be against "forever war" and still not have to be a progressive douchbag.

Sjursen is an unprincipled ******** artist. He leaves Iraq disillusioned as a lieutenant but sticks around long enough for them to pay for his grad school and give him some sweet "resume building" experiences that he can stand on to sell books? FYI, from commissioning time as a second lieutenant to promotion to captain is 3 years...that means Sjusen was so disillusioned that he decided to stick around for 12 more years which is about 9 years longer than he actually needed to as an Academy grad (he only had to serve 6 unless he elected to go to grad school).

The bottom line is Sjusen capitalizes on people not knowing how the military works. That is, that his own self-interest far outweighs his the principles he espouses. Typical leftist hypoctite.

Max21c , 4 hours ago

...the U.S. "desperately needs a massive, public, empowered anti-war and anti-imperial wave ..."

Perhaps the USA just needs a better foreign policy. Though we all know that's not going to happen with the flaky screwballs of Washington and the flaky screwballs in the Pentagon, CIA, State Department, foreign policy establishment, think tanks et cetera.

Minor technical point: the time for the "anti-imperial wave" was before Washingtonians destroyed much of the world and created their strategic blunders and disastrous foreign policy. You folks all went along with this nonsense and now you have your quagmires, forever wars, and numerous trouble spots that have popped up here and there along the way to boot.

Pottery barn rule: you broke it and you own it and it's yours...Ma'am please pay at the register on the way out...Sorry Ma'am there's no more free gluing...though the gluing specialist may be in on the third Thursday this month though it's usually the second Tuesday each month...

Contemporaneously, in the same vein the American public has been brainwashed into going along with the new Cold Wars on the Western Front against Moscow and the even newer Cold War on the Eastern Front against Beijing. It's like P.T. Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute," and you fools in the American public just keep buying right in to the brainwashing. They're now successfully indoctrinating you into buying into their new Cold Wars with Russia and China. The Cold War on the Eastern Front versus Peking is more getting more fanciful attentions at the moment and the Cold War on the Western Front has temporarily been relegated to the back burner but they'll move the Western Front Cold War from simmer to boil over whenever it suits their needs. It's just a rendition of the Oceania has always been at war with East Asia and Eurasia is our friend are just gameplays right out of George Orwell's 1984.

Most of the quagmires can be fixed to a certain extent by applying some cement and engineering to the quicksand and many of the trouble spots can become more settled and less unstable if not stable in some instances. Even some of the more serious strategic problems like the South China Sea, North Korean nuclear weapons development, and potential Iranian nuclear weapons development can still be resolved through peaceful strategies and solutions.

In re sum, while I won't disparage a peace movement I do not believe it is either necessary nor proper simply because you will not solve anything through a peace movement. The sine qua non or quintessential element is simply to end one of these wars successfully through a peaceful diplomatic solution or solve one of these serious foreign policy problems through diplomacy which is something that hasn't been the norm since the downfall of the Berlin Wall, is no longer in favor, and which is the necessary element to prove that peace can be achieved through strategy and diplomacy and thereby change the course of the country's future.

In foreign affairs the foreign policy establishment has its pattern of behavior and it is that pattern of behavior that has to be changed. It's the mindset of the Washingtonians & elites that has to be changed. Just taking to the streets won't really change their ways or their beliefs for any significant part of the duration. They may pay lip service to peace & diplomacy but it won't win out in their minds in the long run. They are so warped in their views and beliefs that it'll have little or no effect over the long haul. As soon as the protests dissipate they'll be right back at it, back to their bad ways and bad behavior.

Son of Captain Nemo , 4 hours ago

For the past 19 years... And as Anti-War as you will ever get!...

https://action.ae911truth.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=11418&killorg=True&loggedOut=True

https://www.ae911truth.org/grandjury

P.S.

Remind 0range $hit $tain ( https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/11/14/trump-im-reopening-911-investigation/ ) that if he makes this a campaign pledge and an issue for debate he maybe can avoid a war crimes tribunal given how much has already been spent on the war machine ( https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/944-trillion-reasons-why-fed-quietly-bailing-out-hedge-funds )!

Hatterasjohn , 4 hours ago

Was it George Carlin that said " if voting made a difference they wouldn't let us do it " ? The only way to stop these forever wars is for people to stop joining the military. Parents should teach their children that joining the military and trotting off to some country to fight a war for the elite is not being patriotic . I was in the military from 1964 -1968. When Lyndon Johnson became president he drug out the Vietnam war as long as he could. Oh ! Lady Byrd Johnson bought Decon Company [ rat poison ] when most people never heard of it. Johnson bought this rat poison , government paid for ,at an inflated price . Sent ship loads of it to Vietnam .Never mind all the Americans and so called enemy killed.. Jane Fonda , Hanoi Jane , was really a hero who helped save countless lives by helping to end the war. Tommy and **** Smothers , Smother Brothers , spoke out against the war . Our government had them black balled from TV. Our government is probably as corrupt as any other country.

No-Go zone , 5 hours ago

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-19/top-us-general-says-american-troops-should-be-ready-die-israel

cowboyted , 7 hours ago

A piece of irony, one of our greatest generals was Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied Supreme Commander in WWII and two term president. He kept the peace for almost 10 years and warned Americans to beware of the "military-industrial complex." Most military men never want war, they just make sure they are ready if it comes. We have had the military industrial complex for way too long, it needs to be reduced and we need more generals to run for president, Gen. Flynn maybe? I'll also take Schwartzkoff.

cowboyted , 7 hours ago

The U.S. should only use our military if we are attacked, period. Otherwise, as Jefferson astutely stated, a standing army is a threat to democracy.

captain noob , 7 hours ago

Capitalism has no morals

Profit is the driving force of every single thing

cowboyted , 7 hours ago

The U.S. should only use our military if we are attacked, period. Otherwise, as Jefferson astutely stated, a standing army is a threat to democracy.

Chief Joesph , 7 hours ago

After what General Smedley Butler had to say and warned us about, here we are, 90 years later, doing the very same thing. Goes to show how utterly dumb, unprogressive, sheepish, and Medieval Americans really are. And you thought this is what makes America Great????

cowboyted , 8 hours ago

The U.S. Constitution provides for a "national defense." Yet, the last time we were attacked by a foreign nation was on Dec. 7, 1941 in which, the Congress declared war on Japan. Yet, in the past 100 years our country's leaders have convinced Americans that we can wage war if the issue concerns our "national INTEREST." This is wrong and needs to be deleted and replaced with our Constitution's language. Also, Congress is the ONLY Constitutional authority to declare war, not the executive branch. Too many countries, including the U.S., spend too much money preparing for war on levels of destruction that are unnecessary. We must attain a new paradigm with leading countries to achieve a mutual understanding that the people of the world are better off with jobs, food, families, peace, and a chance at a better life, filled with hope, faith, and flourishing communities. Things have to change.

transcendent_wannabe , 8 hours ago

I have to agree in sentiment with the author, but the reality of humans on earth almost demands constant war, it is the price we pay for the modern city lifestyle. There are various reasons.

1. Ever since WW1, the country has become citified, and the old peaceful country farm life was replaced with the rat race of industrial production. Without war, there is no need for the level of industrial production required to give full employment to the overpopulated cities. People will scream for war and jingoism when they have no city jobs. How do you deal with that? Sure, War is a Racket, but so far a necessary racket.

2. Every 20 years the military needs a real shooting war to battle test its upcoming soldiers and new equipment. Now the battles are against insurgencies... door-to-door in cities and ghettos, and new tactics need to be field tested. If the military goes more than 20 years without a real shooting war, they lose the real men, the sargeant majors, who just become fat pot bellied desk personel without the adrenaline of a real fight.

3. Humans inately like to fight. Even children, boys wrestle, girls taunt one another. There is no way discovered yet to keep people from turning violent in their attempts to steal what others have, or to gain dominance thru physical intimidation. Without war, gangs will form and fight over territorial boundaries. There is no escaping it.

4. Earth is where the battle field is, Battlefield Earth. There is no fighting allowed in heaven, so Earth is where souls come to fight. Nobody on earth likes it, but fighting and war is here to stay, and you should really use this life to find out how to transcend earth and get to a place where war is not needed or allowed, like heaven or Valhalla.

Tortuga , 8 hours ago

So. He thinks the crooked, grifting, regressive hate US murdering dim pustules aren't the warmongering, globalist, hate US, crooked, grifting, murdering republicrats. What a mo ron.

HenryJonesJr , 8 hours ago

Real conservatives were always against foreign intervention. It was the Left that embraced foreign wars (Wilson / Roosevelt / Truman / Johnson).

messystateofaffairs , 8 hours ago

From my perspective being a professional goon to serve the greater glory of international criminals, is, aside from having to avoid the mirror, way too much hard and dangerous work for the money. As a civilian of a society run by criminals on criminal imperialist principles, I have no literal PTSD type of skin in that filthy game, but like most citizens, knowing and unknowing, I do swim in that sewer everyday, doing my best to avoid bumping into the larger turds. My "patriotism" lies where the turds are fewest, anywhere in the world that might be.

bh2 , 8 hours ago

The threat to US interests is not in the ME (apart from Israel). It's in the Pacific.

NATO was never intended to be a defense arrangement perpetually funded by the US. Once stood up and post-war economies in Europe were restored, it was supposed to be a European defense shield with the US as ultimate backup. Not as a sugar-daddy for wealthy nations. Now that Russia is no longer situated to attack through the Fulda Gap, NATO is a grotesque expression of Parkinson's Law writ large.

China is a real threat to US interests. That's obvious simply by consulting a map. Military assets committed to engagement in theaters that no longer seriously matter is feckless and spendthrift. Particularly when Americans are put in harm's way with no prospect of either winning or leaving.

Worse yet is the accelerating prospect of being drawn into conflict in the South China Sea because fewer than decisive US and allied assets are deployed there.

While nations are now responding to that threat (including Japan, who are re-arming), China must realize a successful Taiwan invasion faces steadily diminishing prospects. They must act soon or give up the opportunity. Moreover, the CCP are loosing face with their own people because of multiple calamities wreaking havoc. The danger of a desperate CCP turning to a hot war to save face is an ever-rising threat. (If Three Gorges Dam fails, that could be the final straw.)

FDR deliberately suckered Japan into attacking the US (but apparently never guessed it would be on Pearl Harbor). It appears modern neo warmongers of all stripes would be delighted if China were tempted into yet another senseless war in the Pacific. And more lives lost on all sides.

While the size of US military and (ineptly named) "intelligence" budgets are vastly out of scale, the short-term cost in money is secondary to risk of long-term cost in blood. Surging the budget may make good sense when guns are all pointing in the wrong direction and political donors don't care as long as it pays well.

Defeating that outrageously wasteful spending is the first battle to be won. Disengaging from stupid, distracting, unwinnable conflicts is an imperative to achieve that goal.

The Judge , 8 hours ago

US. is the real threat to US interests.

DeptOfPsyOps-14527776 , 8 hours ago

An important part of this statue quo is propaganda and in particular neo-con propaganda.

Once it was clear that agitating against the Russian federation had failed, they started agitating against the PRC.

FDR administration wasn't that clever, they just had (((support))). They wanted Imperial Japan unable to strengthen itself against the United Kingdom as it was waging a war against the European Axis, did not realize that the Japanese fleet could reach as far as Hawaii and after Pearl Harbor, believed the West Coast could have been attacked as well.

Hovewer, they likely expected the Japanese to intercept their fleet on the way to the Phillipines after a war between Imperial Japan and the Commonwealth had started.

Salzburg1756 , 8 hours ago

"FDR deliberately suckered Japan into attacking the US (but apparently never guessed it would be on Pearl Harbor)." No, we knew the japs were going to attack Pearl Harbor. We had broken their code. That's why we sent our best battle ships away from Hawaii just before the attack. Most of the ships they sank were old and worthless; our good ships were out at sea.

TheLastMan , 4 hours ago

What constitutes "America's interests"?

the us military is the world community welcome wagon for global multi national Corp chamber of commerce

Do us citizens serve corporations or do corporations serve us citizens?

next ?, who owns / controls corporations?

Alice-the-dog , 8 hours ago

There is a reason why suicide is the leading cause of death among active duty military. They come to realize that what they are doing is perfect male bovine fecal matter. That they are guilty of participating in completely unwarranted death and destruction.

847328_3527 , 9 hours ago

Liberals and "progressives" are traditionally against wars. This new "woke" group of Demorats shows they are NOT liberals or progressives since they support the Establishment War Criminals like Obama and his side kick, demented Biden, and Bloodthirsty Clinton.

[Jul 25, 2020] Propaganda for kids- UK govt-backed 'news' site teaches children about 'ruthless' Putin 'shameless' Russia -- RT UK News

Jul 25, 2020 | www.rt.com

Propaganda for kids: UK govt-backed 'news' site teaches children about 'ruthless' Putin & 'shameless' Russia 24 Jul, 2020 19:09 / Updated 1 day ago Get short URL © Getty Images / Robert Daly 98 32 Follow RT on RT Is Vladimir Putin "the most dangerous man in the world?" If you trust the same news sources that some British schoolchildren's teachers do, then yes. Perhaps it's a good thing that the kids aren't listening.

When schools in Britain eventually reopen in September, children filling into the classrooms won't just be learning their reading, writing and arithmetic. On top of these fundamentals, their teachers will spoon-feed them blatant propaganda that would make Herr Goebbels blush.

The propaganda source in question is The Day, a news site founded by a team of established journalists and directed at teens. Designed for use in the classroom, each of The Day's stories is presented alongside a range of thought-provoking questions and exercises to help young people learn to "think for themselves and engage with the world."

Though UK-focused, The Day is used in classrooms around the world as a teaching aid.

ALSO ON RT.COM Madonna LIES about getting fined A MILLION DOLLARS in Russia for speaking up about gay rights – what else is new?

A recent article describes Russian President Vladimir Putin as "the most dangerous man in the world" and suggests "nothing can be done to bring this rogue state [Russia] to heel." Moscow's entire foreign policy is "shameless" and Putin is described as a man who delights in stoking unrest in the West. The widely-debunked accusations of Russian interference into the 2016 US election are treated as fact, as are the rumors that Putin meddled in the UK's Brexit referendum and in last year's general election.

The children are also offered Bill Browder's opinion that Russia is a "mafia state running a mafia operation." Browder, the site omits, is a magnate and fraudster who made billions of dollars in Russia during the privatization rush of the 1990s and reinvented himself as an anti-Putin activist once his revenue stream was cut off.

Below the article, kids are asked to answer a number of questions, such as "Should Russia be expelled from the United Nations?" and even to write a creative story about what it would be like to meet Putin during his KGB days. For good measure, the New York Times' recent evidence-free and widely criticized story claiming Russia paid bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan is suggested as further reading to help kids become an "expert" on all things Putin.

ALSO ON RT.COM The Russians are coming, again! Poorly understood cybercrimes play perfectly into political agendas

The Day does not bill itself as an anti-Russia think tank for kids. Quite the opposite. Ironically, its founder, Richard Addis, wanted to set up the site to fight deceptive journalism, hoaxes, "slanted reporting" and "stories where the truth is contentious" -- fake news in other words.

He was supported in this quest by the British government's Commission on Fake News and the Teaching of Critical Literacy Skills in Schools, which partnered with The Day to compile a damning report in 2018, revealing that only two percent of British youngsters have the critical thinking skills to spot phony news.

"It is clear that our schools are absolutely vital in encouraging children to burrow through the rubbish and rootle out the truth," Addis said at the time. Stories on the site with titles like 'Putin the terrible' and 'Toxic Putin on mission to poison the West' are clearly what Addis considers balanced journalism.

ALSO ON RT.COM George Galloway: Labour's demand for Ofcom review of RT licence is apostasy against democratic principles

Balance, however, is not a common trait among British Russia-watchers. Parliament's long-awaited 'Russia report' relies almost wholesale on "allegations" to back up its claim that Moscow "poses a significant threat to the UK." The report even relies on articles by BuzzFeed to substantiate its shaky claims.

As slanted as its coverage is, The Day's message may fall on deaf ears. According to the same government report, only a quarter of older children actually trust the news they read online. As such, The Day's propagandizing might all be in vain.

[Jul 25, 2020] Full Spectrum Dominance (FDS) will be very expensive for the US Evil Empire

Jul 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Vivekwhu , 1 hour ago

The violent US, run by greedy billionaires, has to be cut down to size before they start WW3. Full Spectrum Dominance (FDS) will be very expensive for the US Evil Empire. Did the deluded US elites really think RF and China will not respond to their quest for space dominance???

[Jul 25, 2020] As long suffering is not at your doorsteps, human race as individuals, is as bad as our governments.

Jul 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Man , Jul 25 2020 4:09 utc | 84

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 25 2020 0:16 utc | 62

"And USA's propaganda is second to none. That's important because winning a war, whether Cold or Hot, requires a populace that will accept sacrifices. Blaming the other side for the need for such sacrifices is an art as much as a science."

Was causing the death of two million Iraqi's is one of the scarifies you talk about that the populace had to accept?

Sometimes I have a problem to understand the way the so called "western people" behave. I am almost reaching a conclusion that the art of media is to give the populous an excuse to themselves why they appear to be accepting scarifies.

We should stop lying to ourselves that we care about others. As long suffering is not at your doorsteps, human race as individuals, is as bad as our governments.

[Jul 25, 2020] One way to look at the recent voting on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and on Mark Pocan's amendment to the NDAA (that would have reduced military spending by 10 percent)

Jul 25, 2020 | stephensemler.substack.com

The more money a member of Congress accepts from the defense industry, the higher the probability that they'll vote how the defense industry wants them to vote. (So probably what you expected.)

... ... ...

If you order the members of Congress based on the amount each of them accepted from the defense sector (2020 cycle) with their respective votes then break your list down (roughly) into fourths, you'll get something that looks like this:

Amount member accepts from defense
industry Likelihood that member lets us down Less than $3,000 70% $3,000-$9,999 77% $10,000-$29,999 84% More than $30,000 More than 98% Notes

[Jul 24, 2020] Cold Wars Profit by Craig Murray

Jul 24, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

Consortiumnews Volume 26, Number 206 – Friday, July 24, 2020

AFGHANISTAN , COMMENTARY , FOREIGN POLICY , HISTORY , HUMAN RIGHTS , MEDIA , PROPAGANDA , RUSSIA , RUSSIAGATE , UKRAINE , UNITED KINGDON , UNTIL THIS DAY--HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE NEWS Cold Wars & Profit July 21, 2020 Save

Craig Murray lambasts a Russophobic media that celebrates a supposed cyber attack on UK vaccine research, ignores collapse of key evidence of a "hack" and dabbles in dubious memorabilia.

The Guardian's headquarters in London. (Bryantbob, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons)

By Craig Murray
CraigMurray.org.uk

... ... ...

Attack on UK Vaccine Research

Andrew Marr, center, in 2014. ( Financial Times , Flickr)

A whole slew of these were rehearsed by Andrew Marr on his flagship BBC1 morning show. The latest is the accusation that Russia is responsible for a cyber attack on Covid-19 vaccination research. This is another totally evidence-free accusation. But it misses the point anyway.

The alleged cyber attack, if it happened, was a hack not an attack -- the allegation is that there was an effort to obtain the results of research, not to disrupt research. It is appalling that the U.K. is trying to keep its research results secret rather than share them freely with the world scientific community.

As I have reported before , the U.K. and the USA have been preventing the WHO from implementing a common research and common vaccine solution for Covid-19, insisting instead on a profit driven approach to benefit the big pharmaceutical companies (and disadvantage the global poor).

What makes the accusation that Russia tried to hack the research even more dubious is the fact that Russia had just bought the very research specified. You don't steal things you already own.

Evidence of CIA Hacks

If anybody had indeed hacked the research, we all know it is impossible to trace with certainty the whereabouts of hackers. My VPNs [virtual private networks] are habitually set to India, Australia or South Africa depending on where I am trying to watch the cricket, dodging broadcasting restrictions.

More pertinently, WikiLeaks' Vault 7 release of CIA material showed the specific programs for the CIA in how to leave clues to make a leak look like it came from Russia. This irrefutable evidence that the CIA do computer hacks with apparent Russian "fingerprints" deliberately left, like little bits of Cyrillic script, is an absolutely classic example of a fact that everybody working in the mainstream media knows to be true, but which they all contrive never to mention.

Thus when last week's "Russian hacking" story was briefed by the security services -- that former Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn deployed secret documents on U.K./U.S. trade talks which had been posted on Reddit, after being stolen by an evil Russian who left his name of Grigor in his Reddit handle -- there was no questioning in the media of this narrative. Instead, we had another round of McCarthyite witch-hunt aimed at the rather tired looking Corbyn.

Personally, if the Russians had been responsible for revealing that the Tories are prepared to open up the NHS "market" to big American companies, including ending or raising caps on pharmaceutical prices, I should be very grateful to the Russians for telling us. Just as the world would owe the Russians a favor if it were indeed them who leaked evidence of just how systematically the DNC rigged the 2016 primaries against Bernie Sanders.

But as it happens, it was not the Russians. The latter case was a leak by a disgusted insider, and I very much suspect the NHS U.S. trade deal link was also from a disgusted insider.

When governments do appalling things, very often somebody manages to blow the whistle.

Crowdstrike's Quiet Admission

Crowdstrike's Shawn Henry presenting at the International Security Forum in Vancouver, 2009.
(Hubert K, Flickr)

If you can delay even the most startling truth for several years, it loses much of its political bite. If you can announce it during a health crisis, it loses still more. The world therefore did not shudder to a halt when the CEO of Crowdstrike admitted there had never been any evidence of a Russian hack of the DNC servers.

You will recall the near incredible fact that, even through the Mueller investigation, the FBI never inspected the DNC servers themselves but simply relied on a technical report from Crowdstrike, the Hillary Clinton-related IT security consultant for the DNC.

It is now known for sure that Crowdstrike had been peddling fake news for Hillary. In fact, Crowdstrike had no record of any internet hack at all. There was no evidence of the email material being exported over the internet. What they claimed did exist was evidence that the files had been organized preparatory to export.

Remember the entire "Russian hacking" story was based ONLY on Crowdstrike's say so. There is literally no other evidence of Russian involvement in the DNC emails, which is unsurprising as I have been telling you for four years from my own direct sources that Russia was not involved. Yet finally declassified congressional testimony revealed that Shawn Henry stated on oath that "we did not have concrete evidence" and "There's circumstantial evidence , but no evidence they were actually exfiltrated."

This testimony fits with what I was told by Bill Binney, a former technical director of the National Security Agency (NSA), who told me that it was impossible that any large amount of data should be moved across the internet from the USA, without the NSA both seeing it happen in real time and recording it. If there really had been a Russian hack, the NSA would have been able to give the time of it to a millisecond.

That the NSA did not have that information was proof the transfer had never happened, according to Binney. What had happened, Binney deduced, was that the files had been downloaded locally, probably to a thumb drive.

Bill Binney. (Miquel Taverna / CCCB via Flickr)

So arguably the biggest news story of the past four years -- the claim that Putin effectively interfered to have Donald Trump elected U.S. president -- turns out indeed to be utterly baseless. Has the mainstream media, acting on security service behest, done anything to row back from the false impression it created? No it has doubled down.

Anti-Russia Theme

The "Russian hacking" theme keeps being brought back related to whatever is the big story of the day.

Brexit? Russian hacking.
U.K. general election 2019? Russian hacking
Covid-19 vaccine? Russian hacking.

Then we have those continual security service briefings. Two weeks ago we had unnamed security service sources telling The New York Times that Russia had offered the Taliban a bounty for killing American soldiers. This information had allegedly come from interrogation of captured Taliban in Afghanistan, which would almost certainly mean it was obtained under torture.

It is a wildly improbable tale. The Afghans have never needed that kind of incentivization to kill foreign invaders on their soil. It is also a fascinating throwback of an accusation – the British did indeed offer Afghans money for, quite literally, the heads of Afghan resistance leaders during the first Afghan War in 1841, as I detail in my book "Sikunder Burnes."

Taliban in Herat, Afghanistan, 2001. (Wikipedia)

You do not have to look back that far to realize the gross hypocrisy of the accusation. In the 1980s the West was quite openly paying, arming and training the Taliban -- including Osama bin Laden – to kill Russian and other Soviet conscripts in their thousands. That is just one example of the hypocrisy.

The U.S. and U.K. security services both cultivate and bribe senior political and other figures abroad in order to influence policy all of the time. We work to manipulate the result of elections -- I have done it personally in my former role as a U.K. diplomat. A great deal of the behavior over which Western governments and media are creating this new McCarthyite anti-Russian witch hunt, is standard diplomatic practice.

My own view is that there are malign Russian forces attempting to act on government in the U.K. and the USA, but they are not nearly as powerful as the malign British and American forces acting on their own governments.

The truth is that the world is under the increasing control of a global elite of billionaires, to whom nationality is irrelevant and national governments are tools to be manipulated. Russia is not attempting to buy corrupt political influence on behalf of the Russian people, who are decent folk every bit as exploited by the ultra-wealthy as you or I. Russian billionaires are, just like billionaires everywhere, attempting to game global political, commercial and social structures in their personal interest.

The other extreme point of hypocrisy lies in human rights. So many Western media commentators are suddenly interested in China and the Uighurs or in restrictions on the LBGT community in Russia, yet turn a completely blind eye to the abuse committed by Western "allies" such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

As somebody who was campaigning about the human rights of both the Uighurs and of gay people in Russia a good decade before it became fashionable, I am disgusted by how the term "human rights" has become weaponized for deployment only against those countries designated as enemy by the Western elite.

Finally, do not forget that there is a massive armaments industry and a massive security industry all dependent on having an "enemy." Powerful people make money from this Russophobia. Expect much more of it. There is money in a Cold War.

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.

This article is from CraigMurray.org.uk .

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Please Contribute to Consortium
News on its 25th Anniversary

Donate securely with PayPal here .

Or securely by credit card or check by clicking the red button: 2840

Tags: Cold War Craig Murray Russophobia Ukrainian Insurgent Army Ukrainian Resistance

Post navigation ← COVID-19: The Pentagon Confronts the Pandemic State Dept-Funded Transparency International Silent on Jailed Transparency Activist Julian Assange → 12 comments for " Cold Wars & Profit "

DH Fabian , July 22, 2020 at 19:54

On the core subject here: By necessity, a pandemic requires a cooperative international response. Only one country has refused to do so: The US. In their supreme arrogance, our ruling class lost track the fact that the US needs the rest of the world, not the other way way around.

Zalamander , July 22, 2020 at 19:12

One by one the so-called Russiagate "evidence" have collapsed. The fake Steele Dossier, "Russian spy" Joseph Mifsud who is actually a self-admitted member of the Clinton Foundation, Roger Stone's non-existant Wikileaks contacts, Russian Afgan bounties, etc. But the neoliberal mainstream media still presents these as "facts" with no retractions. This is not journalism, its disinformation designed to distract the American public from the failures of capitalism.

Piotr Berman , July 22, 2020 at 18:03

Peter Janney
July 22, 2020 at 06:55
Craig Murray succinctly (and very beautifully) gives us a REAL glimpse of what great journalism really looks like.
-- --
Perhaps it is great writing, but is it journalism?

Some people in National Union of Journalists (a trade union in UK) ponder that question for many months, unable to decide if Craig should be allowed to join or not. If he is neither a flack nor a hack, who kind of journalist is he? (More details at Craig Murray's web site).

Peter Janney , July 23, 2020 at 06:06

Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed.
Everything else is public relations.
-- George Orwell

rosemerry , July 22, 2020 at 16:42

All of the Russophobia and lies serve the rulers of the USA?UK and their poodles well. The whole year of Skripal mania started by Theresa May and joined in by Trump, with the media such as the Guardian's scurrilous Luke Harding providing fantasy "evidence" and the whole story conveniently disappearing, like the Skripals, when other "news" arrived, has no benefit to seekers of even the minimum of truth.

DH Fabian , July 22, 2020 at 19:46

Certainly, and this is key to understanding the current situation. What we're seeing now is the final stages of the long-sinking West -- those once-mighty partners of empire, the UK/US. This descent appears to have begun with the Reagan/Thatcher years, and is now in the final stages. We've seen a rather dramatic growth of psychosis in the political-media-public discussion over the past 3-4 years, driven by an irrational obsession with China/Russia. (Russia and China both quietly observe, prepared to respond if attacked.) There really isn't anything we can do about it, beyond acknowledging it as what it is.

Jerome J Donnelly , July 22, 2020 at 12:12

Very good, but needs to be supplemented by reference to the interview with NIH Director Franaic Collins on last Sunday's Meet the Press. When host Chuck Todd asked Collins about Russian hacking of US vaccine research Collins smiled and answered by pointing out that the research wasn't intended to be secret and that it was all to be published for "transparency." Todd looked disappointed, mumbled, "OK," and changed the subject. No media have reported this exchange, which is retrievable on the internet.

JOHN CHUCKMAN , July 22, 2020 at 10:58

Brilliant, but that's what one expects of Craig Murray.

Ray McGovern , July 22, 2020 at 10:13

Brilliant article, Craig. You do have a way of saying things. Thanks.

Question: "Team Mueller" forgot to interview you. Have any of the new investigators taken the trouble to talk to you?

Ray

Bob Van Noy , July 22, 2020 at 09:18

Can't thank you enough Craig Murray for your professional life of honesty!

Please read: hXXp://off-guardian.org/2020/07/21/globocap-uber-alles/

Peter Janney , July 22, 2020 at 06:55

Craig Murray succinctly (and very beautifully) gives us a REAL glimpse of what great journalism really looks like. I commend his courage for never bending in the face of all the bullshit we have had to tolerate from the mainstream media. Thank you, thank you dear Craig . . .

geeyp , July 22, 2020 at 00:10

Regarding Craig's last summing up paragraph, all one need do to confirm that is read the previous article of Michael T. Klare.

[Jul 24, 2020] Blowback from the destruction of Libya, the attempted destruction of Syria, and the ugly face of European neo-imperialism:

Jul 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Jul 23 2020 18:32 utc | 21

Blowback from the destruction of Libya, the attempted destruction of Syria, and the ugly face of European neo-imperialism:

Pernicious life and death policies in the Mediterranean

There is circumstantial evidence the European Union is systematically sinking boats loaded with refugees coming from the Libyan route. The MS editorial is correct in calling the Mediterranean "the graveyard of many people from the Middle East and Africa."

It looks like a continental-wide operation of genocide and silence: the Italian and Greek Coast Guards do the dirty job with secret blessing from their governments, and their governments count with the tacit blessing (and silence) from the other EU governments and their respective MSMs. The Russian and Chinese MSMs do nothing because they can't prove it (as they don't have access to the local) and are more honest than the Western MSM (they don't report what they can't know).

I wouldn't be surprised if we were talking, after all of this is done, of about some 100,000 dead drowned in the Mediterranean. After that dead boy in a Turkish beach fiasco, they took care of perfecting the scheme, so that the Italian and Greek coast guards can operate deeper into the sea, where the drowned corpses cannot be beached. If true, this would be the most well covered genocide in modern history, and the first one will full and direct complying from the "free press".

[Jul 24, 2020] Nobel peace price hawk and other stories

Jul 24, 2020 | www.rt.com

Roger Thornhill 2 hours ago If I recall correctly, Obama gave the Russians all of 48 hours to leave their consulate in San Francisco, which had been occupied since the 19th Century. This was around Christmas time in 2016. So I don't find this particularly surprising. Two days to have the diplomats, staff, and families completely out of the country.

[Jul 23, 2020] Opinion - Defund the Pentagon- The Liberal Case - POLITICO

Highly recommended!
Jul 23, 2020 | www.politico.com

Defund the Pentagon: The Liberal Case

Cutting the defense budget by a modest 10 percent could provide billions to combat the pandemic, provide health care and take care of neglected communities.

Capitol Souvenir Company, Inc. via Boston Public Library

By SEN. BERNIE SANDERS

07/16/2020 02:15 PM EDT

Sen. Bernie Sanders is an independent from Vermont.

▶ Click here for the conservative case for reducing defense spending.

Fifty-three years ago Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. challenged all of us to fight against three major evils: "the evil of racism, the evil of poverty and the evil of war." If there was ever a moment in American history when we needed to respond to Dr. King's clarion call for justice and demand a "radical revolution of values," now is that time.

Whether it is fighting against systemic racism and police brutality, defeating the deadliest pandemic in more than a hundred years, or putting an end to the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, now is the time to fundamentally change our national priorities.

Advertisement

me title=

Sadly, instead of responding to any of these unprecedented crises, the Republican Senate is on a two-week vacation. When it comes back, its first order of business will be to pass a military spending authorization that would give the bloated Pentagon $740 billion -- an increase of more than $100 billion since Donald Trump became president.

me title=

Let's be clear: As coronavirus infections , hospitalizations and deaths are surging to record levels in states across America, and the lifeline of unemployment benefits keeping 30 million people afloat expires at the end of the month, the Republican Senate has decided to provide more funding for the Pentagon than the next 11 nations' military budgets combined.

Under this legislation, over half of our discretionary budget would go to the Department of Defense at a time when tens of millions of Americans are food insecure and over a half-million Americans are sleeping out on the street. After adjusting for inflation, this bill would spend more money on the Pentagon than we did during the height of the Vietnam War even as up to 22 million Americans are in danger of being evicted from their homes and health workers are still forced to reuse masks, gloves and gowns.

Moreover, this extraordinary level of military spending comes at a time when the Department of Defense is the only agency of our federal government that has not been able to pass an independent audit, when defense contractors are making enormous profits while paying their CEOs outrageous compensation packages, and when the so-called War on Terror will cost some $6 trillion.

Let us never forget what Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a former four-star general, said in 1953: "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

What Eisenhower said was true 67 years ago, and it is true today.

If the horrific pandemic we are now experiencing has taught us anything it is that national security means a lot more than building bombs, missiles, nuclear warheads and other weapons of mass destruction. National security also means doing everything we can to improve the lives of tens of millions of people living in desperation who have been abandoned by our government decade after decade.

https://3565f954715d35ca5f1c38d2fcda79fc.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

Advertisement

me title=

That is why I have introduced an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act that the Senate will be voting on during the week of July 20th, and the House will follow suit with a companion effort led by Representatives Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.). Our amendment would reduce the military budget by 10 percent and use that $74 billion in savings to invest in communities that have been ravaged by extreme poverty, mass incarceration, decades of neglect and the Covid-19 pandemic.

Under this amendment, distressed cities and towns in every state in the country would be able to use these funds to create jobs by building affordable housing, schools, childcare facilities, community health centers, public hospitals, libraries and clean drinking water facilities. These communities would also receive federal funding to hire more public school teachers, provide nutritious meals to children and parents and offer free tuition at public colleges, universities or trade schools.

This amendment gives my Senate colleagues a fundamental choice to make. They can vote to spend more money on endless wars in the Middle East while failing to provide economic security to millions of people in the United States. Or they can vote to spend less money on nuclear weapons and cost overruns, and more to rebuild struggling communities in their home states.

In Dr. King's 1967 speech, he warned that "a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."

He was right. At a time when half of our people are struggling paycheck to paycheck, when over 40 million Americans are living in poverty, and when 87 million lack health insurance or are underinsured, we are approaching spiritual death.

At a time when we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on Earth, and when millions of Americans are in danger of going hungry, we are approaching spiritual death.

At a time when we have no national testing program, no adequate production of protective gear and no commitment to a free vaccine, while remaining the only major country where infections spiral out of control, we are approaching spiritual death.

At a time when over 60,000 Americans die each year because they can't afford to get to a doctor on time, and one out of five Americans can't afford the prescription drugs their doctors prescribe, we are approaching spiritual death.

Now, at this unprecedented moment in American history, it is time to rethink what we value as a society and to fundamentally transform our national priorities. Cutting the military budget by 10 percent and investing that money in human needs is a modest way to begin that process. Let's get it done. MOST READ

  1. Matt Gaetz appears to run afoul of House ethics rules
  2. House votes to remove Confederate statues from Capitol
  3. GOP congressman: Trump's Ghislaine Maxwell comments were 'unacceptably obtuse'
  4. Feds assemble 'Operation Diligent Valor' force to battle Portland unrest
  5. Past D.C. Bar Association chiefs call for probe of William Barr
SHOW COMMENTS POLITICO

[Jul 23, 2020] Demorats defeat amedment ot cut Defence by 10%

Highly recommended!
Jul 23, 2020 | news.antiwar.com

Amendment to make across-the-board reductions overwhelmingly defeated by members of both parties

Eric Garris Posted on July 21, 2020 Categories News

By a vote of 324-93 , the House of Representatives soundly defeated an amendment to reduce Pentagon authorized spending levels by 10%. The amendment does not specify what to cut, only that Congress make across-the-board reductions. The amendment to the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was offered by Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI). No Republicans voted for the amendment. Libertarian Justin Amash supported the amendment.

Earlier, the House defeated an amendment to stop the Pentagon's submission of an unfunded priorities list. Each year, after the Pentagon's budget request is submitted to Congress, the military services send a separate "wish list," termed "unfunded priorities." This list includes requests for programs that the military would like Congress to fund, in case they decide to add more money to the Pentagon's proposed budget.

This article was written while observing the voting on CSPAN. The House Clerk has not yet posted the roll-call vote. Additional information will be added to the article when available.

[Jul 23, 2020] This is a biggie: Egypt's parliament approves troop deployment to Libya

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I suspect In'Sultin Erd O'Grand is a mole of the garden kind. He goes about digging one hole for himself after another. ..."
Jul 23, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL July 21, 2020 at 6:01 am

This is a biggie:

Al's Jizz Error: Egypt's parliament approves troop deployment to Libya
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/07/egypt-legislators-vote-deploying-troops-libya-200720141515828.html

Move comes as Libya gov't and Turkey demand an end of foreign intervention in support of commander Khalifa Haftar.
####

I suspect In'Sultin Erd O'Grand is a mole of the garden kind. He goes about digging one hole for himself after another. If he keeps this up, all the holes will merge in to one and he will disappear! It would give the West a chance to have someone running Turkey with a more reliably western perspective though I think it is clear that whatever comes next, Turkey will not allow itself to be treated as a western annex and pawn.

[Jul 23, 2020] GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT, AGAIN

Neocon pressitituers like applebaum and Lukas are actually will-paid lobbyst of US MIC
Jul 23, 2020 | irrussianality.wordpress.com
JULY 21, 2020 PAULR 23 COMMENTS

I've complained before about the habit of the intelligence community of inviting evidence from a very narrow group of experts, occupying what can only be called an extreme position. Well, here we go again.

The long awaited report on the Russian 'threat' by the British parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee has finally come out. Having downloaded it, I immediately turned to the back page to see where the committee had got its information, on the principle of 'garbage in, garbage out'. Having done so, I am afraid that I let out an expletive so loud that people from the other side of the house ran over to see what was wrong. For this is what I saw:

Oh, FFS. Applebaum, Browder, Donnelly, Lucas, and Steele. Really??? I'm assuming that most readers know these names, but just in case you don't, it's like they've pulled in all the most discredited, Russophobic 'experts' they can find, and ignored everybody else who has any sort of knowledge of the subject. This is not a representative sample of expert opinion about Russia.

I have no objection to one or two such people being summoned as witnesses, but when all you have is representatives of the most extreme wing of the Russia-watching community, some of whom, most notably Christopher Steele, have been thoroughly discredited, then what you are not getting is a balanced, all-round picture of what you are studying.

The report thanks these witnesses for the fact that 'they provided us with an invaluable foundation for the classified evidence sessions'. In short, the five external witnesses mattered. The picture of Russia provided by these people is the ideological rock on which the rest of the report is built.

Such an extreme, one-sided set of external witnesses not only casts doubt on the value of the information provided to the committee, but also on the impartiality of the committee itself. It speaks to extreme lack of an open mind, as if experts were chosen because they conformed to a strong predisposition which the committee was not interested in challenging.

Intelligence work requires a willingness to consider multiple competing hypotheses. Looking at the list of 'experts' makes it clear that this committee has only been exposed to variations of one – 'Russia is evil', 'Russia is out to get us', 'Russia is inherently aggressive and dictatorial'. This is no way to do intelligence work.

I'll write something about the content of the report in my next post. But as I said, 'garbage in, garbage out'.

[Jul 23, 2020] Iran's top security official: Harsher revenge awaits perpetrators of Gen. Soleimani's assassination

Jul 23, 2020 | www.presstv.com

News / Politics Iran's top security official: Harsher revenge awaits perpetrators of Gen. Soleimani's assassination Wednesday, 22 July 2020 4:29 PM [ Last Update: Wednesday, 22 July 2020 4:29 PM ]

Members of the Iraqi honor guard walk past a huge portrait of Iran's late top general Qassem Soleimani (L) and Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, both killed in a US drone strike near Baghdad airport last month, during a memorial service held in Baghdad's high-security Green Zone on February 11, 2020. (Photo by AFP)

Iran's top security official says harsher revenge awaits the perpetrators of the attack that killed senior Iranian anti-terrorism commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani and his companions.

In a post on his Twitter page on Wednesday, Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali Shamkhani said that US President Donald Trump had admitted that the American, upon his direct order, committed the crime of assassinating General Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force of Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) counter-terrorism force, who were two prominent figures of the anti-terrorism campaign.

"The two Iranian and Iraqi nations are avengers of blood of these martyrs and will not rest until they punish the perpetrators," read part of the tweet.

"Harsher revenge is one the way," it concluded.

The two commanders and a number of their companions were assassinated in a US airstrike near Baghdad airport on January 3, as General Soleimani was on an official visit to the Iraqi capital.

Both commanders were extremely popular because of the key role they played in eliminating the US-sponsored Daesh terrorist group in the region, particularly in Iraq and Syria.

UN experts calls US drone attack on Gen. Soleimani 'unlawful' killing A senior UN human rights investigator says the United States' assassination of top Iranian commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad was an "unlawful" killing in violation of the international law.

In retaliation for the attack, the IRGC fired volleys of ballistic missiles a US base in Iraq on January 8. According to the US Defense Department, more than 100 American forces suffered "traumatic brain injuries" during the counterstrike. The IRGC, however, says Washington uses the term to mask the number of the Americans, who perished during the retaliation.

Iran has also issued an arrest warrant and asked Interpol for help in detaining Trump, who ordered the assassination, and several other US military and political leaders behind the strike.

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said on Tuesday Iran will never forget Washington's assassination of General Soleimani and will definitely deliver a "counterblow" to the United States.

Leader: Iran to deal US 'counterblow' for Gen. Soleimani's assassination Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei meets with visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi in Tehran.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran will never forget this issue and will definitely deal the counterblow to the Americans," Ayatollah Khamenei said in a meeting with visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi in Tehran.

"They killed your guest at your own home and unequivocally admitted the atrocity. This is no small matter," Ayatollah Khamenei told the Iraqi premier.

A UN special rapporteur says has condemned the US assassination and said Washington has put the world at unprecedented peril with its murder of Iran's top anti-terror commander.

UN expert raps US for arbitrary drone attack that killed Gen. Soleimani A UN special rapporteur slams the US for refusing to take responsibility for the assassination of General Soleimani in violation of international law.

Agnes Callamard, UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, has also warned that it is high time the international community broke its silence on Washington's drone-powered unlawful killings.

Press TV's website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

[Jul 23, 2020] 'Putin Hacked Our Vaccine' the excessive use of words like ridiculous and stupid; calim is both stupid and evil

Notable quotes:
"... CaitlinJohnstone.com ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... This article was re-published with permission. ..."
"... The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News. ..."
Jul 23, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

COVID-19: 'Putin Hacked Our Vaccine' Is Dumbest Story Yet July 17, 2020 Save

Caitlin Johnstone tackles the latest "Russiavape" story.

By Caitlin Johnstone
CaitlinJohnstone.com

O MG you guys Putin hacked our coronavirus vaccine secrets!

Today mainstream media is reporting what is arguably the single dumbest Russiavape story of all time, against some very stiff competition.

"Russian hackers are targeting health care organizations in the West in an attempt to steal coronavirus vaccine research, the U.S. and Britain said," reports The New York Times .

"Hackers backed by the Russian state are trying to steal COVID-19 vaccine and treatment research from academic and pharmaceutical institutions around the world, Britain's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) said on Thursday," Reuters reports .

"Russian news agency RIA cited spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying the Kremlin rejected London's allegations, which he said were not backed by proper evidence," adds Reuters.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1283787832549691395&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%2F2020%2F07%2F17%2Fcovid-19-putin-hacked-our-vaccine-is-dumbest-story-yet%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=550px

I mean, there are just so many layers of stupid.

First of all, how many more completely unsubstantiated government agency allegations about Russian nefariousness are we the public going to accept from the corporate mass media? Since 2016 it's been wall-to-wall narrative about evil things Russia is doing to the empire-like cluster of allies loosely centralized around the United States, and they all just happen to be things for which nobody can actually provide hard verifiable evidence.

Ever since the shady cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike admitted that it never actually saw hard proof of Russia hacking the DNC servers, the already shaky and always unsubstantiated narrative that Russian hackers interfered in the U.S. presidential election in 2016 has been on thinner ice than ever. Yet because the mass media converged on this narrative and repeated it as fact over and over they've been able to get the mainstream headline-skimming public to accept it as an established truth, priming them for an increasingly idiotic litany of completely unsubstantiated Russia scandals, culminating most recently in the entirely debunked claim that Russia paid Taliban-linked fighters to kill coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Secondly, the news story doesn't even claim that these supposed Russian hackers even succeeded in doing whatever they were supposed to have been doing in this supposed cyberattack.

"Officials have not commented on whether the attacks were successful but also have not ruled out that this is the case," Wired reports .

Thirdly, this is a "vaccine" which does not even exist at this point in time, and the research which was supposedly hacked may never lead to one. Meanwhile, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University reports that it has "successfully completed tests on volunteers of the world's first vaccine against coronavirus," in Russia.

Fourthly, and perhaps most importantly, how obnoxious and idiotic is it that coronavirus vaccine "secrets" are even a thing?? This is a global pandemic which is hurting all of us; scientists should be free to collaborate with other scientists anywhere in the world to find a solution to this problem. Nobody has any business keeping "secrets" from the world about this virus or any possible vaccine or treatment. If they do, anyone in the world is well within their rights to pry those secrets away from them.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1283875929152909312&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%2F2020%2F07%2F17%2Fcovid-19-putin-hacked-our-vaccine-is-dumbest-story-yet%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=550px

This intensely stupid story comes out at the same time British media are blaring stories about Russian interference in the 2019 election, which if you actually listen carefully to the claims being advanced amounts to literally nothing more than the assertion that Russians talked about already leaked documents pertaining to the U.K.'s healthcare system on the internet.

"Russian actors 'sought to interfere' in last winter's general election by amplifying an illicitly acquired NHS dossier that was seized upon by Labour during the campaign, the foreign secretary has said," reports The Guardian .

"Amplifying." That's literally all there is to this story. As we learned with the ridiculous U.S. Russiagate narrative , with such allegations, Russia "amplifying" something can mean anything from RT reporting on a major news story to a Twitter account from St. Petersburg sharing an article from The Washington Post . Even the foreign secretary's claim itself explicitly admits that "there is no evidence of a broad spectrum Russian campaign against the General Election."

"The statement is so foggy and contradictory that it is almost impossible to understand it," responded Russia's foreign ministry to the allegations. "If it's inappropriate to say something then don't say it. If you say it, produce the facts."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1283786417206956034&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%2F2020%2F07%2F17%2Fcovid-19-putin-hacked-our-vaccine-is-dumbest-story-yet%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=550px

Instead of producing facts you've got the Murdoch press pestering Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party candidate, on his doorstep over this ridiculous non-story, and popular right-wing outlets like Guido Fawkes running the blatantly false headline "Government Confirms Corbyn Used Russian-Hacked Documents in 2019 Election." The completely bogus allegation that the NHS documents came to Jeremy Corbyn by way of Russian hackers is not made anywhere in the article itself, but for the headline-skimming majority this makes no difference. And headline skimmers get as many votes as people who read and think critically.

All this new Cold War Russia hysteria is turning people's brains into guacamole. We've got to find a way to snap out of the propaganda trance so we can start creating a world that is based on truth and a desire for peace.

Caitlin Johnstone is a rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper who publishes regularly at Medium . Her work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking her on Facebook , following her antics on Twitter , checking out her podcast on either Youtube , soundcloud , Apple podcasts or Spotify , following her on Steemit , throwing some money into her tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of her sweet merchandise , buying her books " Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone " and " Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers ."

This article was re-published with permission.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Putin Apologist , July 19, 2020 at 17:50

"How many more completely unsubstantiated government agency allegations about Russian nefariousness are we the public going to accept from the corporate mass media?"

The Answer is none. Nobody (well, nobody with a brain) believes anything the "corporate mass media" says about Russia, or China, Iran or Venezuela or anything else for that matter.

James Keye , July 19, 2020 at 10:26

Guy , July 18, 2020 at 15:32

But,but, but we never heard the words "highly likely" ,they must be slipping.LOL


DH Fabian , July 18, 2020 at 13:41

The Democrat right wing are robotically persistent, and count on the ignorance of their base. By late last year, we saw them begin setting the stage to blame-away an expected 2020 defeat on Russia. Once again, proving that today's Democrats are just too dangerous to vote for. Donald Trump owes a great deal to his "friends across the aisle."

[Jul 23, 2020] Am I in an IMAX theater? Because there is so much projection going on here.

Jul 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

jayc , Jul 22 2020 18:40 utc | 21

There's no way the trillion in T-bills will be seized/defaulted/whatever. The damage to US credibility will be unrecoverable.

It is certainly crazy time. AG Barr threatened major US corporations Disney & Apple with having to register as "foreign agents" due to their Chinese investments. Earlier in the year, the FBI and Congress decided to destroy the career of one of America's top scientists over failure to submit relatively inconsequential paperwork. These are the types of things which should result in a determined pushback against an intrusive national security state, but the balance of power in USA may have flipped.

J W , Jul 22 2020 17:01 utc | 4

Am I in an IMAX theater? Because there is so much projection going on here.

[Jul 23, 2020] Mike Pompeo Delineates Atlanticist Playbook To Target China, Russia and Iran

Jul 23, 2020 | www.mintpressnews.com

ast week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sat down for a teleconference Q&A with Hudson Institute senior fellow, Marie-Josee Kravis at the Economic Club of New York ; a think tank founded at the start of the 20th century, which broaches issues surrounding " social, economic and political questions ." The organization is currently chaired by the President and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and counts several corporate leaders from some of the country's most important institutions on its board of trustees, such as Mastercard, Goldman Sachs, PayPal, and many others.

On the occasion of the 548th meeting , the top American diplomat was lobbed a number of canned questions regarding the "state of U.S.-China relations" by Kravis. He immediately brought up Henry Kissinger's secret trip to Beijing in the 1970s when Nixon's secretary of state set up the eventual 'opening' of China, asserting that the last four decades of "dialogue-at-all-costs diplomacy" has failed to achieve "the outcome that I think Dr. Kissinger hoped [for]."

Pompeo, the " official face of Trump administration thuggery " claimed that China has shown a pattern of persistent "unilateral aggression" over the years and "thievery" of intellectual property that has subverted the "good work done by American businesses" and directly blamed the Chinese for the evisceration of the American middle class; an accusation that rings especially hollow coming from a Koch-sponsored politician, but is nothing more than the State Department's chief mouthpiece executing the narrative dictates of the U.S. National Security Council, which long-ago established a strategic policy to thwart the PRC's drive to become a self-reliant economic powerhouse and its inexorable encroachment on the West's designs over Eurasia.

After a few remarks about the recent policy change regarding the South China Sea, Pompeo went on talk about the "fairness and reciprocity and security" that president Trump is ostensibly trying to obtain for "the American people" via the ongoing trade war with China, but instead of tackling the issue directly, framed it as a matter of China's disrespect for the "rule of law" and international institutions in regards to the "virus [that] broke out in Wuhan" and "what they did with respect to the World Health Organization", regurgitating long-held narratives of China's supposed interference in the WHO's response.

NATO's shifting role

Once the anti-Xi Jinping stage was set, Kravis turned the conversation to broader Atlanticist perspectives from the point of view of the U.S. State Department's attempts to bring the EU into stricter alignment with U.S. goals in the region. She asked about the call Pompeo held with recently-installed EU chief diplomat, Borrell, and 27 EU foreign ministers two weeks ago, in which a "distinct bilateral dialogue focused on China" was suggested.

Pompeo argued that the "tide has turned" on the EU's resistance to take a hardline approach to China, claiming that Europe was now open to it as a result of the "work that we have done to demonstrate to the world the threat that the Chinese Communist Party poses to them." He provided two examples that were meant to buttress his point, but neither were from the EU itself. One centered around the UK's decision to exclude China from its implementation of 5G technology, and the other was India's move to excise 50 Chinese information applications that were operating in that country.

The call with the EU ministers also comes on the heels of big changes at NATO, as Germany assumes the presidency of the EU and the Chairmanship of NATO's National Reserve Forces Committee, even as Trump plans to slash its troop numbers in the pivotal nation – a plan that has garnered some resistance from both the Pentagon and Congress.

Bipartisan sanctions, unilateral edicts, and COVID

The subject of China's relationship with Iran and Venezuela was touched on towards the latter part of the interview, in which Pompeo warned about the end of the JCPOA, known colloquially as the Iran Nuclear deal; stating that it "would be tragic" and represent the imminent transformation of Iran into "the world's largest state sponsor of terror." He said that he hoped the arms embargo could be extended diplomatically and that the UN Security Council – presently headed by China – could be persuaded to go along with it, but cited Democrats Kerry, Sherman and former president Obama to express the bipartisan will to "unilaterally reimpose (sic) all of those sanctions" in case they didn't.

The topic of Venezuela's gasoline sales to Iran was touched on briefly, as was the static situation with North Korea before returning to China and WHO, specifically. Kravis posed the question of which "institution or organization or format, process" would be best to "replace the WHO in terms of sharing of information, sharing of data, sharing of research." Pompeo touted PEPFAR, President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief, as precedent for a U.S. action in response to the "last time the WHO failed with respect to a pandemic," and praised Deborah Birx – head of Trump's COVID-19 task force – whose medical license has been expired for a decade.

The top American diplomat expressed hope that the U.S. would be able to "build a coalition" around this issue, as they had done when a "Chinese candidate" was about to lead the "World Intellectual Property Organization" and had successfully built a "coalition" to insert the State Department's preferred candidate in the position. The softball Q&A ended on an ironic note when Kravis asked Pompeo about diversity in the State Department. "We don't have enough Mandarin speakers here." he conceded.

Feature photo | Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks at the National Constitution Center about the Commission on Unalienable Rights, July 16, 2020, in Philadelphia. Brendan Smialowski | AP

Raul Diego is a MintPress News Staff Writer, independent photojournalist, researcher, writer and documentary filmmaker.

[Jul 23, 2020] Wartime Without End, War Powers Without Check -

Jul 23, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

kouroi • 13 days ago

The Congress is serving the interests of the US Oligarchy, at home and abroad. The strategy is simple: keep allies/vassals in obeisance and non-competitive and destroy polities that do not subject themselves to a similar system (which ends up to become subservient to the US interests anyways, in the long run). Thus, all enemies are polities were Oligarchy doesn't run the roster, and are semi-socialist / socialist countries: Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, in the past Iraq.

Fully fledged democracies, that truly enact the will of the people, would not do something like this.

Carlton Meyer • 13 days ago

For those too young to remember the horrible American war on Yugoslavia in 1999, or those who have forgot, or were misled with lies about Kosovo, here is a quick summary:

https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FUsRkqnFn8DA%3Ffeature%3Doembed&display_name=YouTube&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUsRkqnFn8DA&image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FUsRkqnFn8DA%2Fhqdefault.jpg&key=21d07d84db7f4d66a55297735025d6d1&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=youtube

ericsiverson Carlton Meyer • 11 days ago

This is a very accurate and honest report what { NATO } the North American Terrorist Organization did to Yugoslavia . If you Americans wish to know what kind of global government you are promoting . You only have to find the actual transcripts of Milosevic's trail . Don't read or listen to any fake news of the trail . You must read the trail transcripts and judge for yourself The butcher of Balkans has kind of been exonerated after his death . The world court is something to be very afraid of not at all a instrument of justice .But the trail transcripts are about 5000 pages so you will have to work to find out the truth .

Ram2017 • 11 days ago

WW2 and it's depiction in various films and TV programs has had an unexpected effect on the military psyche. The US believes it won the war on it's own and the troops came home as heroes. This is the expectation of the US military even today, unable to accept that it can be defeated. "Thank you for your service" is a given whatever crimes had been committed abroad on the innocent who had done them no harm whatsoever. The ICC is opposed on the theory that US troops cannot commit torture or massacres.

Adriaan de Leeuw Ram2017 • 11 days ago

The Joke is that the US has not one a war since WWII, except maybe Granada. As for War Crimes, the Current President himself committed a War Crime, He gave a Pardon to a Convicted War Criminal, that is actually breach of the Geneva Conventions, which is US Treaty Law and as such equal to the Constitution itself in importance. Schedule 4 Article 146

The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention defined in the following Article.

Each High Contracting Party shall be under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts. It may also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of its own legislation, hand such persons over for trial to another High Contracting Party concerned, provided such High Contracting Party has made out a prima facie case.

Each High Contracting Party shall take measures necessary for the suppression of all acts contrary to the provisions of the present Convention other than the grave breaches defined in the following Article.

In all circumstances, the accused persons shall benefit by safeguards of proper trial and defense, which shall not be less favorable than those provided by Article 105 and those following of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949.

Article 147

Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or willfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.

Article 148

No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the preceding Article.

The President has by absolving the Navy Seal of the Liability, Absolved the United States of the War Crime also, Now I understand that we will hear arguments here of the Presidents ability to Pardon, but take this as a given, there is no way that During the Nuremberg Trials the Prosecution of those War Crimes would have accepted the argument that the Head of State of Germany (Hitler) had the blanket Authority to Pardon German War Criminals. as such and this is why this was placed in the Geneva Conventions the very act of Absolving a War Crime is itself a War Crime!

bootin buddin Ram2017 • 10 days ago

We could care less what the ICC is opposed to. We are not subject to the ICC or international law. We can enforce it if needed but do not have to abide by it.

rayray bootin buddin • 10 days ago

The micrograins of ICC jurisdiction and validity require a sharper legal mind than mine to sift through. But the debate is revelatory of something else -

In general, the current domestic ICC debate reveals part of the true nature of the US (helped in no small part by the hamfisted and transparent vulgarity of President Trump): that we are in fact the rogue state that we accuse everyone else in the world of being.

If we are who we say we are we should be straight up supporting the ICC, helping to fund it and increase its reach and investigative power. Far better than any military intervention to deal with the truly bad actors in the world would be a legal intervention. The idea that vicious and violent despots should run scared when they travel or otherwise face arrest and extradition is exactly right.

But we're not. Why? The answer is obvious at this point - because we have powerful players in our midst that would face that arrest. And should face that arrest.

[Jul 21, 2020] The praetorian guard has become indistinguishable from the yellow journalist

Jul 21, 2020 | www.realclearinvestigations.com

debard 1 day ago

The praetorian guard has become indistinguishable from the yellow journalists. Indict them all for treason.

russellremmert 1 day ago

is steel in prison yet Reply 12

DonEstif -> russellremmert 1 day ago

Almost, he's an expert pundit used by CNN

Ban-me Fagggot 1 day ago

If Russia stole the election when Obama was President, why wouldn't they steal the election when Trump is President? Democrats should protest by not voting. It wont make a difference.

TGrade1 1 day ago

Behind all of this, hidden behind the curtain, is a pants suit...

Justis -> TGrade1 11 hours ago

And more importantly, the then leader of the free world, Obama...

[Jul 21, 2020] When "not a fan of military spending" for some reason sounds like a military contractor or, worse, MIC lobbyist

Jul 21, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

Tom 07.20.20 at 1:37 pm (
23 )

As a share of GDP, military spending today is half of what it was in 1986. Data here:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=US

I am not a fan of military spending – following an excellent post by John about Eisenhower's famous speech (more tanks or more hospitals), I often use it as an example opportunity cost when teaching. One can certainly claim that the budget should be lower but, as a share of overall economic resources, the budget has been cut substantially in the last 30 years.

likbez 07.22.20 at 3:46 am ( 25 )

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

@Tom 07.20.20 at 1:37 pm

Funny, but "not a fan of military spending" for some reason sounds like a military contractor or, worse, MIC lobbyist ;-)

If you are not fun of military spending how do you explain

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.CD?end=2018&locations=US&start=1960&view=chart

[Jul 20, 2020] Riots and Trump pro-Izreal, pro-Zionist stance

Jul 20, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Deap , 19 July 2020 at 05:47 PM

Vegitius wrote: " The list is long and growing:

----his erratic response to this pandemic,
---- his pathetic non-response to this globalist/deep state color revolution,
----his continued reliance on anti-white and anti-American Israelis like Kushner,
----his apparent willingness to grant amnesty for criminal Mexicans and
----go along with idiotic GOP calls to end relief for those thrown out of work, etc, etc.

Sorry, none of these have any traction with 2020 Trump supporters. Trump is 2020 by entirely different yardsticks. The first one is Trump is not Joe Biden and he is not a Democrat. There are other positives as well. Sorry you can't see them.

But "covid" is not going to take Trump down because "covid" exposed the failings of the deep state and Democrat state leadership more than anything else. Medicare for All, after this string of Fauci and CDC stunts, is DOA.

nbsp; likbez , 20 July 2020 at 06:03 AM

----his continued reliance on anti-white and anti-American Israelis like Kushner,

Sorry, none of these have any traction with 2020 Trump supporters.


What is interesting is that why pathetic Zionist stooge Kushner really discredits and drags down Trump, Trump pro-Zionist stance is now slightly more understandable and, may be, even slightly more acceptable than before BLM/Antifa riots.

What would you do if a minority does not want to integrate and asks for an undeserved preferential treatment? And which stages riots increasing social tension and wantonly looting and destroying property (that's what "peaceful protesters" during "summer of love" actually do ) .

[Jul 20, 2020] The US military is defending US global hegemony, and is priced accordingly. What you think of US military spending depends on what you think of the US as a hegemon.

Jul 20, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

Ebenezer Scrooge 07.19.20 at 1:13 pm

US military spending is certainly much higher than it needs to be for US defense needs. But the US military is not primarily defending the US. It is defending Asia from China, NATO from Russia, and a number of countries from Iran, not to speak of Norkland.

IOW, the US military is defending US global hegemony, and is priced accordingly. What you think of US military spending depends on what you think of the US as a hegemon.

Alan White 07.19.20 at 2:15 pm ( 21 )

Thanks John that's very helpful -- I thought those two figures would be much closer together. Reading CT is always instructive in one way or another.

James Wimberley 07.19.20 at 5:02 pm ( 22 )

Long comment on the cross-post, on the cost of the energy transition part of the GND:
https://johnquiggin.com/2020/07/18/a-trillion-here-a-trillion-there-pretty-soon-youre-talking-real-money-creation/#comment-226012

Tom 07.20.20 at 1:37 pm ( 23 )

As a share of GDP, military spending today is half of what it was in 1986. Data here:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=US

I am not a fan of military spending – following an excellent post by John about Eisenhower's famous speech (more tanks or more hospitals), I often use it as an example opportunity cost when teaching. One can certainly claim that the budget should be lower but, as a share of overall economic resources, the budget has been cut substantially in the last 30 years.

[Jul 19, 2020] A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon you're talking real money

Jul 19, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

Alan White 07.19.20 at 1:21 am

John, what say you about US/global military spending, which if cut and reallocated in the low double digits could transform society? Do you think it's just politically untouchable? If the US cut its military budget by say 25% it would still be formidable, especially given its nuclear deterrent. For the life of me I can never understand why military budgets are sacrosanct. Is it just WW2 and Cold War hangover? Couldn't the obvious effects of climate change and the fragility of the economy subject to natural threats like the pandemic change attitudes about overfunding the military (like the debacle of the F-35 program)?

John Quiggin 07.19.20 at 3:50 am ( 15 )

Alan White @13 Military spending is about 3.4 per cent of US GDP, compared to 2 per cent or less most places. So that's a significant and unproductive use of resources that could be redirected to better effect. But the income of the top 1 per cent is around 20 per cent of total income. If that was cut in half, there would be little or no reduction in the productive services supplied by this group. If you want big change, that's where you need to look.

eg 07.19.20 at 4:08 am ( 16 )

@Alan White #13

I think some of the reluctance to cut military spending in the US is the extent to which it acts as a politically unassailable source of fiscal stimulus and "welfare" in a country where such things are otherwise anathema. Well, that and all of the grift it represents for the donor class.

likbez 07.19.20 at 10:18 am ( 17 )

@John Quiggin 07.19.20 at 3:50 am *15)

Alan White @13 Military spending is about 3.4 per cent of US GDP, compared to 2 per cent or less most places.

GDP is a fake metric in general (due to the size of FIRE sector in the US economy) and especially when we are discussing military spending.

Military spending is 53% of discretionary spending which put the USA in the category of the most militarized countries. https://www.nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2020/militarized-budget-2020/

[Jul 19, 2020] The Chinese and Russian Foreign Ministers just jointly agreed in a rare published account of their phone conversation that the Outlaw US Empire " has lost its sense of reason, morality and credibility .

Jul 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jul 18 2020 22:54 utc | 6 4

Does Cancel Culture intersect with Woke? The former's not mentioned in this fascinating essay , but the latter is and appears to deserve some unpacking beyond what Crooke provides.

As for the letter, it's way overdue by 40+ years. I recall reading Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind and Christopher Lasch's Culture of Narcissism where they say much the same.

What's most irksome are the lies that now substitute for discourse--Trump or someone from his admin lies, then the WaPost, NY Times, MSNBC, Fox, and others fire back with their lies. And to top everything off--There's ZERO accountability: people who merit "canceling" continue to lie and commit massive fraud.

The Chinese and Russian Foreign Ministers just jointly agreed in a rare published account of their phone conversation that the Outlaw US Empire " has lost its sense of reason, morality and credibility .

Yes, they were specifically referring to the government, but I'd include the Empire's institutions as well. In the face of that reality, the letter is worse than a joke.

[Jul 18, 2020] SCOTT RITTER- Powell Iraq -- Regime Change, Not Disarmament- The Fundamental Lie Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... Special to Consortium News ..."
"... Powell was part of the policy team that crafted the post-Gulf War response to the fact that Iraq's president, Saddam Hussein, survived a conflict he was not meant to. After being labeled the Middle East equivalent of Adolf Hitler whose crimes required Nuremburg-like retribution in a speech delivered by President Bush in October 1990, the Iraqi President's post-conflict hold on power had become a political problem for Bush 41. ..."
"... Powell was aware of the CIA's post-war assessment on the vulnerability of Saddam's rule to continued economic sanctions, and helped craft the policy that led to the passage of Security Council resolution 687 in April 1991. That linked Iraq's obligation to be disarmed of its WMD prior to any lifting of sanctions and the reality that it was U.S. policy not to lift these sanctions, regardless of Iraq's disarmament status, until which time Saddam was removed from power. ..."
"... Regime change, not disarmament, was always the driving factor behind U.S. policy towards Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Powell knew this because he helped craft the original policy. ..."
"... The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of ..."
"... Consortium News. ..."
"... 25th Anniversary ..."
Jul 18, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

SCOTT RITTER: Powell & Iraq -- Regime Change, Not Disarmament: The Fundamental Lie July 18, 2020 Save

Regime change, not disarmament, was always the driving factor behind U.S. policy towards Saddam Hussein. Powell knew this because he helped craft the original policy.

By Scott Ritter
Special to Consortium News

T he New York Times Magazine has published a puff piece soft-peddling former Secretary of State Colin Powell's role in selling a war on Iraq to the UN Security Council using what turned out to be bad intelligence. "Colin Powell Still Wants Answers" is the title of the article, written by Robert Draper. "The analysts who provided the intelligence," a sub-header to the article declares, "now say it was doubted inside the CIA at the time."

Draper's article is an extract from a book, To Start a War: How the Bush Administration Took America into Iraq , scheduled for publication later this month. In the interest of full disclosure, I was approached by Draper in 2018 about his interest in writing this book, and I agreed to be interviewed as part of his research. I have not yet read the book, but can note that, based upon the tone and content of his New York Times Magazine article, my words apparently carried little weight.

Regime Change, Not WMD

I spent some time articulating to Draper my contention that the issue with Saddam Hussein's Iraq was never about weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but rather regime change, and that everything had to be viewed in the light of this reality -- including Powell's Feb. 5, 2003 presentation before the UN Security Council. Based upon the content of his article, I might as well have been talking to a brick wall.

Powell's 2003 presentation before the council did not take place in a policy vacuum. In many ways, the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq was a continuation of the 1991 Gulf War, which Powell helped orchestrate. Its fumbled aftermath was again, something that transpired on Powell's watch as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the administration of George H. W. Bush.

Powell at UN Security Council. (UN Photo)

Powell was part of the policy team that crafted the post-Gulf War response to the fact that Iraq's president, Saddam Hussein, survived a conflict he was not meant to. After being labeled the Middle East equivalent of Adolf Hitler whose crimes required Nuremburg-like retribution in a speech delivered by President Bush in October 1990, the Iraqi President's post-conflict hold on power had become a political problem for Bush 41.

Powell was aware of the CIA's post-war assessment on the vulnerability of Saddam's rule to continued economic sanctions, and helped craft the policy that led to the passage of Security Council resolution 687 in April 1991. That linked Iraq's obligation to be disarmed of its WMD prior to any lifting of sanctions and the reality that it was U.S. policy not to lift these sanctions, regardless of Iraq's disarmament status, until which time Saddam was removed from power.

Regime change, not disarmament, was always the driving factor behind U.S. policy towards Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Powell knew this because he helped craft the original policy.

I bore witness to the reality of this policy as a weapons inspector working for the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), created under the mandate of resolution 687 to oversee the disarming of Iraq's WMD. Brought in to create an intelligence capability for the inspection team, my remit soon expanded to operations and, more specifically, how Iraq was hiding retained weapons and capability from the inspectors.

SCUDS

UN weapons inspectors in central Iraq, June 1, 1991. (UN Photo)

One of my first tasks was addressing discrepancies in Iraq's accounting of its modified SCUD missile arsenal; in December 1991 I wrote an assessment that Iraq was likely retaining approximately 100 missiles. By March 1992 Iraq, under pressure, admitted it had retained a force of 89 missiles (that number later grew to 97).

After extensive investigations, I was able to corroborate the Iraqi declarations, and in November 1992 issued an assessment that UNSCOM could account for the totality of Iraq's SCUD missile force. This, of course, was an unacceptable conclusion, given that a compliant Iraq meant sanctions would need to be lifted and Saddam would survive.

The U.S. intelligence community rejected my findings without providing any fact-based evidence to refute it, and the CIA later briefed the Senate that it assessed Iraq to be retaining a force of some 200 covert SCUD missiles. This all took place under Powell's watch as chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

I challenged the CIA's assessment, and organized the largest, most complex inspection in UNSCOM's history to investigate the intelligence behind the 200-missile assessment. In the end, the intelligence was shown to be wrong, and in November 1993 I briefed the CIA Director's senior staff on UNSCOM's conclusion that all SCUD missiles were accounted for.

Moving the Goalposts

The CIA's response was to assert that Iraq had a force of 12-20 covert SCUD missiles, and that this number would never change, regardless of what UNSCOM did. This same assessment was in play at the time of Powell's Security Council presentation, a blatant lie born of the willful manufacture of lies by an entity -- the CIA -- whose task was regime change, not disarmament.

Powell knew all of this, and yet he still delivered his speech to the UN Security Council.

In October 2002, in a briefing designed to undermine the credibility of UN inspectors preparing to return to Iraq, the Defense Intelligence Agency trotted out Dr. John Yurechko, the defense intelligence officer for information operations and denial and deception, to provide a briefing detailing U.S. claims that Iraq was engaged in a systematic process of concealment regarding its WMD programs.

John Yurechko, of the Defense Intelligence Agency, briefs reporters at the Pentagon on Oct. 8, 2002 (U.S. Defense Dept.)

According to Yurechko, the briefing was compiled from several sources, including "inspector memoirs" and Iraqi defectors. The briefing was farcical, a deliberate effort to propagate misinformation by the administration of Bush 43. I know -- starting in 1994, I led a concerted UNSCOM effort involving the intelligence services of eight nations to get to the bottom of Iraq's so-called "concealment mechanism."

Using innovative imagery intelligence techniques, defector debriefs, agent networks and communications intercepts, combined with extremely aggressive on-site inspections, I was able, by March 1998, to conclude that Iraqi concealment efforts were largely centered on protecting Saddam Hussein from assassination, and had nothing to do with hiding WMD. This, too, was an inconvenient finding, and led to the U.S. dismantling the apparatus of investigation I had so carefully assembled over the course of four years.

It was never about the WMD -- Powell knew this. It was always about regime change.

Using UN as Cover for Coup Attempt

In 1991, Powell signed off on the incorporation of elite U.S. military commandos into the CIA's Special Activities Staff for the purpose of using UNSCOM as a front to collect intelligence that could facilitate the removal of Saddam Hussein. I worked with this special cell from 1991 until 1996, on the mistaken opinion that the unique intelligence, logistics and communications capability they provided were useful to planning and executing the complex inspections I was helping lead in Iraq.

This program resulted in the failed coup attempt in June 1996 that used UNSCOM as its operational cover -- the coup failed, the Special Activities Staff ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, and we inspectors were left holding the bag. The Iraqis had every right to be concerned that UNSCOM inspections were being used to target their president because, the truth be told, they were.

Nowhere in Powell's presentation to the Security Council, or in any of his efforts to recast that presentation as a good intention led astray by bad intelligence, does the reality of regime change factor in. Regime change was the only policy objective of three successive U.S. presidential administrations -- Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43.

Powell was a key player in two of these. He knew. He knew about the existence of the CIA's Iraq Operations Group. He knew of the successive string of covert "findings" issued by U.S. presidents authorizing the CIA to remove Saddam Hussein from power using lethal force. He knew that the die had been cast for war long before Bush 43 decided to engage the United Nations in the fall of 2002.

Powell Knew

Powell knew all of this, and yet he still allowed himself to be used as a front to sell this conflict to the international community, and by extension the American people, using intelligence that was demonstrably false. If, simply by drawing on my experience as an UNSCOM inspector, I knew every word he uttered before the Security Council was a lie the moment he spoke, Powell should have as well, because every aspect of my work as an UNSCOM inspector was known to, and documented by, the CIA.

It is not that I was unknown to Powell in the context of the WMD narrative. Indeed, my name came up during an interview Powell gave to Fox News on Sept. 8, 2002, when he was asked to comment on a quote from my speech to the Iraqi Parliament earlier that month in which I stated:

"The rhetoric of fear that is disseminated by my government and others has not to date been backed up by hard facts that substantiate any allegations that Iraq is today in possession of weapons of mass destruction or has links to terror groups responsible for attacking the United States. Void of such facts, all we have is speculation."

Powell responded by declaring,

"We have facts, not speculation. Scott is certainly entitled to his opinion but I'm afraid that I would not place the security of my nation and the security of our friends in the region on that kind of an assertion by somebody who's not in the intelligence chain any longer If Scott is right, then why are they keeping the inspectors out? If Scott is right, why don't they say, 'Anytime, any place, anywhere, bring 'em in, everybody come in -- we are clean?' The reason is they are not clean. And we have to find out what they have and what we're going to do about it. And that's why it's been the policy of this government to insist that Iraq be disarmed in accordance with the terms of the relevant UN resolutions."

UN inspectors in Iraq. (UN Photo)

Of course, in November 2002, Iraq did just what Powell said they would never do -- they let the UN inspectors return without preconditions. The inspectors quickly exposed the fact that the "high quality" U.S. intelligence they had been tasked with investigating was pure bunk. Left to their own devices, the new round of UN weapons inspections would soon be able to give Iraq a clean bill of health, paving the way for the lifting of sanctions and the continued survival of Saddam Hussein.

Powell knew this was not an option. And thus he allowed himself to be used as a vehicle for disseminating more lies -- lies that would take the U.S. to war, cost thousands of U.S. service members their lives, along with hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, all in the name of regime change.

Back to Robert Draper. I spent a considerable amount of time impressing upon him the reality of regime change as a policy, and the fact that the WMD disarmament issue existed for the sole purpose of facilitating regime change. Apparently, my words had little impact, as all Draper has done in his article is continue the false narrative that America went to war on the weight of false and misleading intelligence.

Draper is wrong -- America went to war because it was our policy as a nation, sustained over three successive presidential administrations, to remove Saddam Hussein from power. By 2002 the WMD narrative that had been used to support and sustain this regime change policy was weakening.

Powell's speech was a last-gasp effort to use the story of Iraqi WMD for the purpose it was always intended -- to facilitate the removal of Saddam Hussein from power. In this light, Colin Powell's speech was one of the greatest successes in CIA history. That is not the story, however, Draper chose to tell, and the world is worse off for that failed opportunity.

Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Please Contribute to Consortium
News on its 25th Anniversary


[Jul 17, 2020] The USA foreign policy shows a penchant for amoral deceptiveness of ALL other countries, even best allies, chronically

Jul 17, 2020 | off-guardian.org

voxpox , Jul 16, 2020 9:25 PM

I like this article, it says it all. I have also long harbored a theory that the US intelligence are behind most of the worlds financial cyber-crime, systematically fleecing the world to fund their many many operations around the world. They have the tech with Windows back-doors, the motivation to hide 'off the book' operations and a proven lack of morals as demonstrated during the Iran–Contra affair, many years ago. but what do I know. As Bill Maher says, 'I can't prove it but I know it's true'.

John Ervin , Jul 16, 2020 11:59 PM Reply to voxpox

The USA foreign policy shows a penchant for amoral deceptiveness of ALL other countries, even best allies, chronically.

So that gives heft to Bill Maher's maxim. Perennial treaty busters and oath breakers, why would anyone trust? Fool me once etc.

That's at the core of my take on all USA has said about C-19(84). Been there, done that, with 100 other false flags, always the same tune.

The boy who cried wolf: Uncle Scam. Always proven false after all the marbles are stolen. Or at some point down the road. If not, it shall be, like the JFK fiasco. Like the lone holdout among nations on the Napalm Ban, or sole rogue to drop an A bomb (75th Anniversary of that cowardly Holocaust coming up in a few weeks.)

Lone, lone, lone. A sad little homeboy in the Land of the Lone Gunman. So many, though. Too many, for the world's good .

~~~~~~~~~

Don't take it from me, though, I'm a total patriot, really, compared to Mr. Gonzo, Hunter S. Thompson:

"America just a nation of 200 million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms at all about using them on anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable."

Hunter always said it like it is, at least at yhr time he saw it, he rode with the Hell's Angels and wrote the 1st book about them, and wasn't much shy about calling a spade a spade.

And. Like my own old man: another highly assisted apparent suicide.

~~~~~~~~

Old Radio broadcast:

"Who was that masked man?!

Why, it's the Lone Ranger!"

[Jul 16, 2020] 'Canada Adopts America First Foreign Policy,' US State Dept boasted in 2017, with appointment of FM Chrystia Freeland by Ben Norton

Jul 16, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

The US embassy in Ottawa boasted in a March 2017 memo, "Canada Adopts 'America First' Foreign Policy," just after PM Trudeau appointed hard-line hawk Chrystia Freeland as foreign minister.

The US State Department boasted in a declassified memo in March 2017 that Canada had adopted an "America first" foreign policy.

The cable was authored just weeks after the centrist government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appointed Chrystia Freeland as foreign minister. The former editor of the major international news agency Reuters, Freeland has pushed for aggressive policies against states targeted by Washington for regime change, including Venezuela, Russia, Nicaragua, Syria, and Iran.

The State Department added that Trudeau had promoted Freeland "in large part because of her strong U.S. contacts," and that her "number one priority" was working closely with Washington.

Under Freeland, the granddaughter of a Ukrainian Nazi propagandist, Canada has strongly campaigned against Russia, strengthened its ties with Saudi Arabia and Israel, and played a key role in the US-led right-wing coup attempt in Venezuela.

The memo offers the most concrete evidence to date that the United States sees Ottawa as an imperial subject and considers Canadian foreign policy as subordinate to its own.

Canada 'Prioritizing U.S. Relations, ASAP'

On March 6, 2017, the US embassy in Canada's capital of Ottawa sent a routine dispatch to Washington entitled "Canada Adopts 'America First' Foreign Policy."

Almost all of the now declassified document is redacted. But it includes several pieces of revealing information.

The cable notes that the Canadian government would be "Prioritizing U.S. Relations, ASAP." It also says to "Expect lncreased Engagement."

US State Department Canada adopts America first foreign policy email

The only section that is not redacted notes that the Trudeau administration "upgraded Canada's approach to the bilateral relationship."

"PM Trudeau promoted former Minister of International Trade Chrystia Freeland to Foreign Minister in large part because of her strong U.S. contacts, many developed before she entered politics," the cable says.

"Her mandate letter from the PM listed her number one priority as maintaining 'constructive relations' with the United States," the memo continues.

"Trudeau then added to her responsibilities for U.S. affairs, giving her responsibility for U.S.-Canada trade, an unprecedented move in the Canadian context," the State Department wrote.

Chrystia Freeland's 'key role' in Venezuela coup attempt

Foreign Minister Freeland has worked closely with the US government to advance its belligerent policies, especially those that target independent and leftist governments that refuse to submit to Washington's diktat.

Under Freeland's leadership, Canada took the lead in the plot to destabilize Venezuela this January. The Associated Press reported on how Ottawa joined Washington and right-wing Latin American governments in carefully planning the putsch.

Two weeks before coup leader Juan Guaidó declared himself "interim president," Freeland personally called him to "congratulate him on unifying opposition forces in Venezuela."

The AP reported: "Playing a key role behind the scenes was Lima Group member Canada, whose Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland spoke to Guaido the night before Maduro's searing-in ceremony to offer her government's support should he confront the socialist leader."

In 2017, Freeland helped to establish the Lima Group, an alliance of Canada and right-wing governments in Latin America that coalesced to push regime change in Venezuela. Because the US is not a member, Freeland has ensured that the Lima Group will act in Washington's interests and advance North American imperial power in the region.

Canada's former ambassador to Venezuela, Ben Rowswell, criticized the coup-plotting to the newspaper The Globe and Mail. "It's an unusual move for any country to comment on who the president of another country should be," he said, "to have countries that represent two-thirds of the population of Latin America do it in minutes shows there was a remarkable alignment that's got to be nearly unprecedented in the history of Latin America."

Trudeau and Freeland have repeatedly called for the overthrow of the elected Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Canadian mining corporations , which are already heavily exploiting Honduras , have been desperate to get access to Venezuela's substantial mineral reserves .

A Canadian hawk

Chrystia Freeland strongly supports sanctions against Western enemies and is a vocal advocate of unilaterally seizing the assets of foreign leaders deemed by Washington to be "dictators."

She has pushed this "America first" foreign policy especially hard in Latin America and the Middle East.

In addition to imposing brutal sanctions on Venezuela , helping the US maintain a crippling economic blockade of the country, the Trudeau government has also sanctioned Nicaragua , whose democratically elected socialist government survived a violent right-wing onslaught in 2018 . Freeland has echoed the Trump administration's harsh rhetoric against Nicaragua's Sandinista government.

Canada has also followed the US in expanding the economic attack against Syria, part of a renewed effort to destabilize the government of Bashar al-Assad. Weeks after Freeland was promoted, Ottawa pushed through a new round of sanctions against Damascus .

Freeland has also joined Washington in its campaign to suffocate Iran. The Canadian foreign minister has refused to re-establish diplomatic ties with Tehran.

At the same time, Freeland strengthened ties with the far-right government of Benjamin Netanyahu, pledging Canada's "ironclad" support for Israel .

Nazi propagandist's granddaughter

In Canada, Chrystia Freeland is perhaps best known for her anti-Russia campaigning. She has expressed her country's "unwavering" support for Ukraine and boasted that she is "ready to impose costs on Russia." The Trudeau administration has imposed several rounds of harsh sanctions on Russia .

While she has staunchly supported Ukraine, Freeland obscured the fact that she was the granddaughter of a fascist Ukrainian Nazi collaborator who edited a propaganda newspaper that was founded and overseen by Nazi Germany. Shockingly, the paper was founded after the Nazi regime stole the publication's presses and offices from a Jewish publisher, whom it then killed in a death camp.

Freeland knew about her grandfather's Nazi collaboration , but tried to hide this embarrassing fact by falsely branding it as " Russian disinformation ." The Canadian government even went so far as to expel a Russian diplomat who dared to publicize the truth about her Nazi lineage.

From the heights of journalism to electoral politics

Before entering formal politics as a member of Canada's centrist Liberal Party in 2013, Chrystia Freeland spent decades in journalism. She worked for major American, British, and Canadian corporate media outlets.

After years shaping Western news coverage inside Ukraine and Russia, Freeland was promoted in 2010 to her highest position of all: global editor-at-large of Reuters , a major international news agency that has vast global influence.

Freeland cut her teeth doing anti-Russia reporting for the corporate press. She won awards for her puff pieces on the anti-Putin oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

In 2000, Freeland published a book, titled "Sale of the Century: The Inside Story of the Second Russian Revolution." The book's blurb notes that it documents "the country's dramatic, wrenching transition from communist central planning to a market economy," praising "Russia's capitalist revolution."

This was after Russia was looted by oligarchs empowered by Washington, and following the excess deaths of 3 to 5 million of its most vulnerable citizens due to the US-orchestrated demolition of the country's social welfare state.

More pro-US operatives in Canada's Trudeau government

The declassified State Department cable also touts several other appointees in the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as key US proxies.

The Canadian government selected a retired lieutenant general, Andrew Leslie, who the memo notes "has extensive ties to U.S. military leaders from his tours in Afghanistan," as a parliamentary secretary at Global Affairs Canada, giving him "responsibility for relations with the United States."

"PM Trudeau also elevated Transport Minister Mare Garneau -- who also brings strong U.S. ties from a career as an astronaut and nine years in Houston -- to head the Canada-U.S. Cabinet Committee," the document adds.

The Trudeau government took what the State Department happily noted was an "unprecedented" decision to hold weekly meetings of the Canada-US Cabinet Committee, "even without a formal agenda, as ministers engage in freewheeling discussions of strategy and share information, in addition to making policy decisions."

Prime Minister Trudeau campaigned on a progressive platform, but has continued governing Canada with many of the same center-right, neoliberal policies of previous administrations. He has almost without exception followed the US lead on major foreign-policy decisions, while aggressively building fossil-fuel pipelines at home.

Because Trudeau is from Canada's centrist Liberal Party and has to maintain a veneer of resistance against the far-right US president, the State Department memo notes that Ottawa's former Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney serves as "Trudeau's 'Trump Whisperer.'"

Totally ignored by media

This US State Department cable was first uncovered and publicized by the Communist Party of Canada on July 2.

The memo, which was drafted by Nathan Doyel, a political officer at the embassy at the time, was declassified and published on May 31, 2019, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

It can be clearly seen on the US State Department website , with the subject line "CANADA ADOPTS 'AMERICA FIRST' FOREIGN POLICY."

US State Department Canada adopts America first foreign policy

No media outlets have reported on this cable. Indeed, its discovery has been entirely ignored by the North American press corps.

Commenting on the document, the Canadian communist party wrote on social media , "If a formerly classified internal memo came out from the Russian or Chinese foreign ministry titled CANADA ADOPTS RUSSIA FIRST FOREIGN POLICY or CANADA ADOPTS CHINA FIRST FOREIGN POLICY, would the Canadian media be interested in that story?"

The party added, "In light of repeated insistence by the federal government that Canadians can expect foreign interference in elections and institutions, does such a memo merit further investigation by the Canadian media?"

Ben Norton

Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with editor Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @ BenjaminNorton .

[Jul 16, 2020] In Defense of Restraint by Daniel Larrison

Restraint in foreign policy is impossible until full Spectrum Dominance Doctrine is abolished
Jul 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Over the last ten years, foreign policy restraint has emerged as the biggest challenger to the U.S. foreign policy status quo. The persistent failure of policies of endless war and the costly, aggressive pursuit of primacy have left an opening for the alternative strategy that restraint represents.

As a result, it has also become a natural target for criticism from the defenders of U.S. hegemony. Much of this criticism has been of the knee-jerk, dismissive variety that critics of American policies are all too familiar with, but there has been some more serious engagement with the ideas of restrainers as well. Unfortunately, even the more serious engagement with pro-restraint arguments tends to devolve into polemic.

Michael Mazarr recently wrote an essay for the summer issue of The Washington Quarterly in which he identifies what he sees as the failings of the restraint camp. It is probably the fairest response to arguments for restraint so far, but it does not score any significant hits. It is frustrating in that it cites the works of leading restrainers, but fails to reckon fully with what they are saying. Mazarr is familiar with restrainers' arguments, and he makes a number of debaters' points about them, but he doesn't make a persuasive case against restraint.

He identifies what he considers to be restrainers' errors in a few broad categories: 1) a binary definition of the foreign policy debate; 2) caricaturing U.S. foreign policy as an aggressive drive for primacy; 3) overstating the failures of U.S. post-Cold War foreign policy; 4) inconsistency in prescription. The first three of these criticisms don't hold up, and the fourth is not a serious objection to the views of a broad range of writers and analysts.

The first objection is that the restrainers' contrast between primacy/liberal hegemony and restraint is too simplistic. According to Mazarr, this "overlooks a huge, untidy middle ground where the views of most U.S. national security officials reside and where most U.S. policies operate." Here he appeals to the diversity of views among foreign policy professionals to counter restrainers' objections to the current strategy of primacy without actually addressing the pitfalls of primacy that restrainers criticize.

It's not clear that the "huge, untidy middle ground" is as vast or as wild as he suggests. The vast majority of people in that "middle ground" favor the continued maintenance of U.S. primacy or liberal hegemony. The fact that there is a narrow range of views among adherents of the current strategy is not surprising. It also isn't terribly relevant to the objections that restrainers have made against the strategy.

For restrainers, as Mazarr puts it, "the reigning concepts that guide America's role in the world embody a limitless drive for supremacy and power that has produced an infatuation with militarism and a litany of interventions and wars." That is a fair summary as far as it goes, but Mazarr never manages to refute this claim.

Consider each part and ask yourself if it rings true. Is the U.S. government guided by a belief that it should pursue supremacy and power on the world stage? Yes, it is. This is what is euphemistically referred to as American "global leadership." This is as close to an unquestioned assumption in mainstream foreign policy circles as there is. Has this produced an infatuation with militarism? Our massive military budget, militarized foreign policy, and intrusive response to many foreign conflicts bear witness that this is so. Not only is there a bias in favor of action in our debates, but action is almost always defined in terms of military options, and choosing not to use military options is routinely ridiculed as "doing nothing." Has this infatuation with militarism resulted in a litany of interventions and wars? We know it has and continues to do so. Mazarr claims that restrainers are using "extreme and unconditional language" and set up "caricatures and straw people," but, if anything, most pro-restraint arguments are rather mild in their description of the last few decades of unchecked militarism.

Have restrainers oversold the failure of post-Cold War U.S. foreign policy? It's possible, but I don't think it's true. If U.S. "leadership" is judged on the terms set by its own advocates, how can we judge it as anything but a failure over the last thirty years? Has it made the world more stable and secure? On the whole, it has not. The U.S. has been one of the most destabilizing actors in the world for decades with its wars and interference in other nations' affairs. Has it reduced nuclear proliferation? It has not, and its wars for regime change have made it more difficult to convince would-be nuclear weapons states to dismantle their weapons programs.

The biggest effort that the U.S. made in the name of counter-proliferation was a terribly costly blunder and an attack on international law. Has it reduced the incidence of terrorism? On the contrary, the "war on terror" has exacerbated and encouraged the spread of jihadist terrorism in the world. Has the U.S. deterred great power competition? Far from it. Mazarr's defense of this record amounts to saying that it was not as ideological and destructive as it might have been, which is not really much of a defense. Are restrainers too extreme in their indictment of this record of failure? In light of the persistent denial and whitewashing of the disasters unleashed by our policies, I would say that we have been too diplomatic.

Mazarr writes that "[t]he restraint literature downplays the often-powerful reluctance with which successive US administrations have grappled with most decisions to intervene." He mentions Libya as an example of this "hesitancy," but neglects to add that the internal debate over this lasted just a couple weeks before Obama ordered unauthorized military action to help bring down a foreign government. Obama's reluctance could not have been that powerful if he chose to start a war against another government without Congressional approval. When we consider how completely unrelated to U.S. vital interests the conflict in Libya was, the fact that the U.S. did intervene when it had no particular reason to is proof that restrainers' complaints on this score are backed up by the record.

He touts the fact that the U.S. has "shunned" other opportunities for intervention as if the U.S. does not routinely meddle even in those conflicts where it does not directly act. The U.S. didn't "act" in the Great Lakes crises in the late '90s and early 2000s because it had outsourced that crisis to its clients in Uganda and Rwanda, who then proceeded to turn Congo into a charnel house. The U.S. declined to go to WWIII over territorial disputes between Russia and its neighbors, but the escalation of those disputes grew out of an incessant, U.S.-led drive to expand Euro-Atlantic institutions to Russia's doorstep. Each example Mazarr cites as proof that the restrainers are overstating their case just reminds us that not all failures of U.S. foreign policy involve our direct military intervention in a conflict. It doesn't prove that U.S. foreign policy hasn't failed during the last few decades.

In one of the oddest portions of the essay, he informs us that the U.S. has already adopted the restrainers' agenda with respect to North Korea and Iran. That will come as news to us and to those two governments. It is misleading at best to claim that the Agreed Framework and the JCPOA amount to "normalizing" relations with North Korea and ending our "grudge match" with Iran. The idea that strong opposition to these agreements came only from "hawkish factions in two Republican administration" is simply wrong as a matter of fact. The hawkish factions were just the loudest and most vehement of the opponents. Agreements like these might be helpful for laying the groundwork for normal relations in the future, but they are just the start of what many restrainers are calling for.
Having failed to land any serious blows thus far, Mazarr turns to restrainers' prescriptions and points out that there is disagreement about what U.S. policy should be in many places. Since restraint is a strategy that allows for a range of views about specific policies, this is to be expected, especially when advocates of restraint have not yet been in a position to implement policy.

Earlier in the essay Mazarr complains that restrainers' language is too extreme and unconditional, and then later he disapproves of restrainers' use of nuance:

Just which military interventions "do not enhance U.S. security"? Which areas are "of little strategic importance"? What is an "unrealistic"goal, and how big does a defense budget have to become before it is "bloated"? This same adjectival approach to analysis crops up again and again in the restraint literature.

These are not serious questions. Mazarr can easily learn from the scholars he is citing what they mean when they say these things, but instead he quibbles about the reasonable qualifications that they are making. When they make unqualified statements, he condemns them for lacking nuance, and then he accuses them of waffling when they make qualifications. Most restrainers have been very clear that the U.S. has vital interests in Europe and East Asia, and that most other regions are not that important for our security. The military budget's bloat is a function of an overly ambitious strategy that commits the U.S. to defend dozens of countries, most of which do not need protection or could provide for their own defense. Unrealistic goals include, but are not limited to, compelling North Korea to disarm, forcing Iran to abolish its nuclear program, and using sanctions to coerce other states into abandoning their core interests.

Mazarr allows that "[p]roponents of restraint have played and continue to play a critical role in highlighting the risks of overweening ambition," but he does not think the U.S. should significantly scale back its ambitions. He grants that "rethinking of many key assumptions of U.S. national security policy is overdue, and proponents of restraint have delivered important warnings," but he doesn't rethink any key assumptions and proceeds to reject many of these warnings as overwrought. He seems to see restrainers as an occasionally useful check on the excesses of U.S. interventionism, but nothing more than that.

The failures of the last thirty years stem from an excessively ambitious role for the U.S. that no government could competently execute. If we want to have a more successful and peaceful foreign policy than we have had for at least the last thirty years, we need to have a much less ambitious and overreaching one. Restraint is the best answer currently available because it accepts that the U.S. does not have to dominate and shape the world. It is that drive to dominate and dictate terms to other states that has so often led the U.S. and other countries down the road to ruin. It is time to choose a different path.

Tradcon • a day ago

Excellent piece from Larison, he could not be more correct.

kouroi • a day ago

Add to all this the US strategic policy of full spectrum dominance and all the economic wars unleashed by the US.

It appears that the US is moving to add North Stream 2 and Turkish Stream going to Europe on CATSAA. How is this not economic aggression! In what universe is this right? USSR has built pipelines to Western Europe in the middle of the cold war. And the State Department insists this is due to strategic considerations, having nothing to do with the US trying to sell LNG to Europe....

It is no wonder such news are not really making the news in the US, because that would really sound weird to any Joe 6 pack...

Fazal Majid • 19 hours ago

Even describing it as "restraint" shows how skewed the Overton window is towards warmongering as the default.

Feral Finster • 13 hours ago

You can win all the intellectual arguments you want (and the arguments are easy to win, at least on any terms other than those of a full-blown sociopath who isn't even bothering to hide it) - the people of influence and authority still get the wars they crave.

Unless and until the United States either is utterly humiliated in a major war or faces economic collapse, nothing will change; the people of influence and authority still are in charge.

E.J. Smith Feral Finster • 12 hours ago

Great comment. Given the 'charlie foxtrot' that has become the Middle East in the wake of Iraq II, Afghanistan and the GWOT and the current economic and political situation in the U.S. in the wake of COVID-19 (whether you accept the MSM version or not), "utter humiliation" has occurred. The problem is that the establishment will never admit this and the salient lesson is never learned. You can use the Vietnam experience as an example.

The lesson of Vietnam, in my humble opinion, is that the U.S. is limited in its ability to project power and to engage in nation building exercises. The narrative changed in the '80s when lack of political will became the primary culprit for U.S. defeat in South East Asia rather than the more complicated array of factors that made the war unwinnable from the beginning. Regardless, in the mid-80s Sec. Def. Caspar Weinberger consolidated the Vietnam lessons into a doctrine that fundamentally advocated restraint. Arguably, the Weinberger doctrine resulted in the U.S. decision to terminate Iraq War I when it did out of recognition that the U.S. was in no position to prosecute a full-blown invasion of Iraq and to administer the country post-Saddam.

Although it was entirely ignored by the neocons and by the author himself, the Powell Doctrine was based upon similar notions of restraint. For example, Point 5 emphasizes that the consequences of military action have been thought out as a precondition to military engagement.

Feral Finster E.J. Smith • 12 hours ago

Until that humiliation starts to hurt and discredit those in power, it hasn't happened.

The Finster aims to please.

dbriz Feral Finster • an hour ago

And let us note the recent report that our "it's time we end the wars" leader has given those great peacemakers in the CIA operations department the green light to effect cyberwar against Iran. Not hard to imagine who in the neighborhood will happily assist in that.

What could go wrong?

L RNY • 9 hours ago

Its why Trump is so hated by neocons and neoliberals alike. They both want war....particularly if the democrats are the ones declaring the war and managing it but look at how much the neocons, the neoliberals, the war profiteers, the lobbyists...all work to keep the federal money flowing toward war where it can easily be spent often without tracking and easily used for undocumented bribes and payoffs and inside deals between US politicians like Biden and foreign governments like Ukraine or China.
The US is quite good at military destruction but you cant get new sewars, new water mains, new gas lines, new electrical plants, new mass transit, new airports, new roads, new housing, preservation of wilderness, preservation of wetlands and estuaries, maintenance of canals, and roads and bridges...etc. All the money is being siphoned off to foreign allies, foreign wars and if money is spent domestically then it is spent on politicians skimming money off civilian projects and its spent on democratic constituencies like Black Lives Matters, Planned Parenthood, Diversity, Immigration, Multiculturalism, affirmative action, teachers unions and other govt unions, etc....its not spent on actual physical infrastructure projects.

E.J. Smith L RNY • 8 hours ago

For example, in Iraq we were good at destroying Saddam's Republican Guard, blowing up cities, and dismantling the Ba'athist infrastructure. We weren't good at convincing Iraqis that the U.S. invasion and western paternalism were truly in their best interest.

It's the same reason that Vietnamization ultimately failed and why the ARVN and RVN government quickly collapsed in a matter of months in 1975 despite the human cost and billions in economic and military aid being poured into the country. It's probably why most believe that an actual American withdrawal from Afghanistan will inevitably result in a return to Taliban control, again despite trillions being poured into the country.

joeo L RNY • 7 hours ago

So true. Be they Republicans or Democrats neither seems able to end the wars we are in or admit the economic sanctions are not working. Perhaps the elections of Social Democrats will change the arguments.

[Jul 16, 2020] 'Cancel culture' prevents the truth about Israel-Palestine from being discussed -- including the rising risk of a war with Iran

Notable quotes:
"... New York Times ..."
"... Washington Post, ..."
Jul 16, 2020 | mondoweiss.net

BY JAMES NORTH

JULY 13, 2020

There is no issue in American life about which the mainstream media ignores or distorts the truth more than Israel/Palestine, and censors or "cancels" the people who could tell it.

So far, the growing debate over "cancel culture" has understandably focused on individual cases. Certainly, Israel/Palestine has many examples of courageous thinkers who have suffered for their views: Steven Salaita and Norman Finkelstein come immediately to mind. But the blackout has been so far-reaching for so long that we can say that an entire subject has been ignored or distorted in the mainstream almost beyond recognition.

Right now, Israel is conducting a violent sabotage campaign against Iran, in an effort to provoke America into war -- and there is a nearly complete news blackout in the United States.

Maybe the 153 celebrated signatories to that now famous letter to Harper's magazine that warned about "cancel culture" could draft another epistle, one that appeals for an end to suppressing free discussion about Israel and Palestine.


On July 10, another explosion hit near near Tehran, the latest in a string that have struck at, among other targets, Iran's nuclear energy program at Natanz. The New York Times , to its credit, is reporting on the sabotage campaign, and the paper even said that one of the attacks was "apparently engineered by Israel." But beyond the basic facts, nothing: no editorials, no opinion pieces warning about the risk of war, no reminder that Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying to instigate the U.S. against Iran for at least a decade. There was no effort to explain that Israel's attacks are meant to goad Iran into retaliating, which will draw in the U.S., and possibly help Donald Trump's sinking reelection campaign.

At least the Times is doing the bare minimum. So far in the Washington Post, not a word from its own reporters or commenters; you would think that the paper could find sources in the D.C. intelligence community to explain the danger of war. On National Public Radio, one short, confused report that provided no context at all. Foreign coverage on the U.S. cable networks continues to be an insignificant joke.

U.S. soldiers, sailors and pilots could soon find themselves in a shooting war that would stun our citizens with its suddenness.

The mainstream U.S. media's failure to report Israel's effort to provoke fighting with Iran is happening at the same time as American journalistic malpractice continues over Netanyahu's plan to illegally annex up to 30 percent of occupied West Bank Palestine. There has been very little news coverage of annexation, and Palestinian voices continue to be ignored. Three members of the New York Times editorial board have extensive experience with Israel/Palestine: Thomas Friedman, Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss. None of them has yet written a single word about annexation.

Here is a final paradox. "Cancel culture" means that the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream are nearly closed to the truth about both Israel's instigation over Iran, and its probable illegal annexation in the West Bank. But Friedman, the most influential foreign affairs columnist in America, has to, along with his editorial page colleagues, self cancel -- because he, like them, can't write anything without sharply criticizing Israel.

[Jul 16, 2020] The spate of gas explosions are unlikely to be accidents

Jul 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU1 , Jul 15 2020 20:41 utc | 30

The spate of gas explosions are unlikely to be accidents. One maybe but not a spate of them. Unlikely to be cyber as both a physical leak and ignition source are required.

Sat image of the site of the first explosion and grass fire https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2020/06/AP20179369014525-1024x640.jpg

The gas tank can be seen on google https://www.google.com.au/maps/@35.688164,51.6513532,92m/data=!3m1!1e3
Out away from buildings and easy to access. Something to create a leak and a delayed ignition source is all that's required.

Richard Steven Hack , Jul 16 2020 1:05 utc | 50

@Peter AU1 | Jul 15 2020 20:41 utc | 30

I agree that most of these explosions are probably not "cyberattacks". Despite all the scare stories about hacking destroying infrastructure, it's not that easy, especially in the US where every industry and every company within that industry has their own "standards", which means there are no real standards a hacker can rely on. It's much easier to steal data than it is to influence hardware, although that certainly can be done in many cases.

On the other hand, there are plenty of internal Iranian dissidents and foreign visitors who can be employed by both the CIA and Israel to further a spate of physical attacks.

Obviously these sorts of attacks are going to do next to nothing to actually damage Iranian infrastructure, as Iran is a big country. These sorts of sabotage are merely a psychological warfare ploy. This is amplified by Western media coverage of the incidents which is intended to portray Iran as weak and unable to defend itself.

I've often speculated about what a few hundred saboteurs could do if inserted into the US, armed with nothing but small arms and a decent amount of explosives. Depending on how well they are kept covert and how smart they are in choosing targets, you could bring the US to its knees in perhaps six months of operations. Car bombs, for instance - the US is *made* for car bombs, given our reliance on vehicles and the congestion in the inner cities. Detonate a car bomb in each of the 50 Major Metropolitan Areas simultaneously and do so consistently every week for a month and most of the inner cities would be shut down and under martial law.

That's the kind of actual physical campaign that could produce significant results in a country. These pin-prick attacks in Iran are just a combination of psychological warfare plus perhaps some effects as causing their protective services to be overstretched somewhat.

Mostly what they are is an attempt to provoke Iran into doing something *overtly* against Israel or the US. The neocons want Iran to be the instigator of the war, not the US or Israel. They want Iran to provide a casus belli for the war, so that Trump and Netanyahu can present themselves as blameless for the resulting disaster, much like Bush presented Iraq as responsible for 9/11.

In essence, the US and Israel are acting as Internet trolls, pin-pricking Iran in an attempt to get Iran to engage and thus manipulate Iran for their own purposes.

Hopefully Iran will not take the bait, or if it does so, that it makes sure its retaliations are as covert and deniable as the CIA's while being at least equally as damaging or more so. If I were Iran, I would specifically target the CIA and its assets in the region. It would not be hard to identify the CIA officers stationed in most countries and conduct harassment operations against them, even perhaps engineering "accidental deaths". It would be an analog of the US-Russian Cold War days. Competent spies aren't that plentiful and killing them off tends to put a real crimp in operations while mostly being deniable since all such events would be "classified".

[Jul 16, 2020] We support the environment as long as it benefits our trade partners and is poitically balanced in our favor.

Jul 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL July 14, 2020 at 9:14 am

Politico.eu : EU's new green label for fertilizer is set to benefit Russia
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-new-green-label-fertilizer-benefits-russia-cadmium-phosphate/

That scientific debate soon turned into a geopolitical one, however. EU farmers are overwhelmingly dependent on North and West Africa for phosphate where, because of the natural conditions, there is usually a cadmium level far higher than 20mg/kg. At the same time, phosphate coming from Russia has far lower natural levels of the metal.

Southern European countries feared that switching phosphate supplies away from Africa to Russia could severely undermine volatile North African economies and trigger social problems

One of the countries that has strongly opposed the new labeling rules is Poland -- a country that historically wants to avoid commercial dependence on Russia but also has its own national fertilizer business and has invested in a Senegalese phosphate mine
####

Plenty more at the link.

We support the environment as long as it benefits our trade partners and is poitically balanced in our favor.

This looks like the european industry is waving the 'Russia Bad' flag because it cannot counter the technical aspects and more environmental policies coming out of the EU.

They are also arguing in favor of less transparency and less information for farmers which is suspect because their fear is that low cadmium fertilizer (from Russia/wherever) may get tax-breaks to promote its use.

Rather than figure out a way to adapt and help their partners, their first reaction is to throw poo at the walls.

[Jul 16, 2020] The Vatican may be the most influential element on US foreign policy, even more so than Israel whose interests are not nearly as global

Jul 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

PATIENT OBSERVER July 5, 2020 at 12:58 pm

The Vatican may be the most influential element on US foreign policy, even more so than Israel whose interests are not nearly as global. Via the Saker:

https://thesaker.is/with-fire-and-sword-obamas-black-crusaders-and-the-war-in-the-ukraine/

In can be argued that the Vatican's interest simply aligns with the "deep state" or it can be argued that the Vatican is part of the deep state. Indeed the Vatican predates the "deep state" by centuries and may be the first transational empire.

In any case, the Vatican has been the key player in major international operations from Poland to Argentina to S Vietnam. Of course, lets not forget their unforgettable role in WW II and the war against Serbia and the Soviet Union.

The posted article is well worth the long read. The Vatican has gotten a free pass in the West for far too long with their mass rape of children, organizers of genocide, buddy-buddy with organized crime and crooked bingo operations. Their role in Ukraine was particularly eye-opening for me.

I would imagine that the Pope is absolutely fuming about that Russian military cathedral. My take? That cathedral was built, in part, as a message to the Holy See that if they mess with Russia or its church, the response will be swift and final.

[Jul 16, 2020] If Pompeo has a functioning brain, he should realize that all these blatant efforts to reserve markets for America by sanctioning all its competitors out of the picture is having the opposite effect, and frightening customers away from becoming dependent on American products

Jul 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOWEXILE July 15, 2020 at 7:58 am

Fat bully boy speaks for Bully Boy state:

"Today the Department of State is updating the public guidance for CAATSA authorities to include Nord Stream 2 and the second line of TurkStream 2. This action puts investments or other activities that are related to these Russian energy export pipelines at risk of US sanctions. It's a clear warning to companies aiding and abetting Russia's malign influence projects and will not be tolerated. Get out now or risk the consequences".

Pompeo speaking at a press conference today.

CAATSA -- Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act

So Russia and Turkey are "adversaries" of the USA?

In what way?

Do these states wish to wage war against the USA?

Is it adversarial to United States interest to compete economically with the hegemon?

MOSCOWEXILE July 15, 2020 at 7:59 am

Link to above:

https://sputniknews.com/world/202007151079893067-us-plans-to-add-nord-stream-2-turkstream-to-list-of-projects-to-be-sanctioned/

MARK CHAPMAN July 15, 2020 at 3:51 pm

Who cares? Really, is Pompeo still scary? If he has a functioning brain, he should realize that all these blatant efforts to reserve markets for America by sanctioning all its competitors out of the picture is having the opposite effect, and frightening customers away from becoming dependent on American products which might be withheld on a whim when America wants political concessions. 'Will not be tolerated' – what a pompous ass. Sanction away. The consequence is well-known to be seizure of assets held in the United States or an inability to do business in the United States. That will frighten some into submission – like the UK, which was threatened with the cessation of intelligence-sharing with the USA (sure you can spare it?) if it did not drop Huawei from its 5G networks. But others will take prudent steps to limit their exposure to such threats, in the certain knowledge that if they work, they will encourage the USA to use the technique again.

[Jul 15, 2020] Obama was a sell-out from the get-go

Jul 15, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

Sioux Rose , March 10, 2020 at 14:52

There's no question that Obama was slick, polished and well-spoken. However, as to this idea of holding his feet to the fire, it doesn't explain why he got so cozy with Goldman Sachs figures; went after Edward Snowden and did little to stem the dark tide of the war on terror. I think he was a sell-out from the get-go.

And while this article makes a compelling case for Biden's loss of mental acuity, if Donald Trump throws those barbs, there are
plenty of filmed segments of his own loss of words, his word salads, his nasal breathing, possible use of inhaled drugs, and overall cognitive decline. Add in that many psychiatrists have gone on record to discuss his malignant narcissism and clinical (dangerous) mental illness.

[Jul 15, 2020] Erdogan never ceases to amaze. He's the weakest standing strongmen who can barely cling on to power domestically yet he still makes big dawg moves in Syria and Egypt.

Jul 15, 2020 | www.unz.com

Gorgeous George , says: July 15, 2020 at 6:37 am GMT

Erdogan never ceases to amaze. He's the weakest standing strongmen, the midget giant on glass legs. He can barely cling on to power domestically yet he still makes big dawg moves in Syria and Egypt. He needed this Hagia Sophia conversion like he needed a bullet to his head.

On one level I'm sure that he's aware of all this, which just means that his ego is of galactic proportions.
Also I don't see him allowing a peaceful power transfer to happen, he knows that anyone that defeats him in election will do so not only on the merits he might have as a candidate, but also because of anti-Erdo sentiments that grow. So someone will run on "lock him up" platform and win, maybe not this year but soon, and when that happens there will be blood.

[Jul 14, 2020] A British court decision unmasks new evidence of FBI abuses in the Russia collusion probe.

Jul 14, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL July 10, 2020 at 12:22 pm

JustTheNews.com : New Steele evidence strengthens Durham prosecution as frustration over inaction grows
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/new-steele-evidence-strengthens-durham-prosecution

A British court decision unmasks new evidence of FBI abuses in the Russia collusion probe.

Warby's lengthy ruling unearthed a gem of new evidence to answer the question: Steele kept his own notes of what he told FBI agents the first time he met them on July 5, 2016 in London to discuss his anti-Trump Russia research.

And, Warby revealed, the notes make clear that Steele told his FBI handlers from the get-go that the dossier's "ultimate client were (sic) the leadership of the Clinton presidential campaign."

And after Trump won the election, the judge added, Steele disclosed he gave copies of his dossier to longtime Clinton friend Strobe Talbot in hopes it would get to the top of the State Department
####

Plenty more at the link.

BiDumb has to win in November to make all this go away.

[Jul 14, 2020] Angloshere propaganda mostly projects onto target countries what they themselves are doing

Jul 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU1 , Jul 13 2020 4:56 utc | 150

JC 143

Plenty of decent people have headed to five eyes thinking they would find a better life, but we also take in the scum of the world that can be used against their own countries. These generally rise to high places.
Imperial France seems of the same mindset and Chechen freedom fighters are now fighting for their freedom in France. Yankistans freedom fighter Osama Bin Larden was just fighting for freedom apparently. Like the AQ media wing 'White Helmets' that UK and Canada took in, not to mention the nazi's that participated in the genocides in their own countries in WWII.

When peasants living conditions are constantly improving, there will be no revolt and no civil war. Yankistan propaganda can't even come up with an opposition in China.

Angloshere propaganda mostly projects onto target countries what they themselves are doing.

[Jul 14, 2020] There is a recent book which analyses how the US policy of preventive mass murder and torture in Indonesia has inspired policies, structures and knowhow in many of US client states

Jul 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

JC , Jul 12 2020 20:08 utc | 100

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jul 12 2020 1:38 utc | 48 & 64
Posted by: Lucci | Jul 12 2020 15:59 utc | 87

To clear the air, I recalled the "Non-Aligned Movement a forum of developing states not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc or nations." It consist of - Nehru India, Tito Yugoslavia, Bung Karno, Bapa Sukarno Indonesia, Zhou Enlai China, Habib Bourguiba Tunisian, Norodom Sihanouk Cambodian, U Nu Burma, Kwame Nkrumah, Gamal Abdel Nasser Egypt, Fidel Castro Cuba, at the Bandung conference in 1955, the Non-Aligned Movement was born. Later many nationalism leaders were disposed. How about Sukarno, did he "slaughter" the Chinese? Nope that's from what I was told from BBC and it remains in my mind until uncle tungstan and Lucci points out my mistakes, it was Suharto with CIA and Brit Foreign Office that brought down Sukarno and Suharto was disposed his wife was known as Ten Percent.

How we destroyed Sukarno

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/how-we-destroyed-sukarno-1188448.html

I was growing up and aligned with Americans exceptionlism. It was after ww2 and nationalism on the rise (almost) everywhere changed of government. In school each morning assembled to raised the union jack and sing god save the freaking queen. That's when I was indoctrinated from BBC the evils of communism and socialism. Western imperialist was the way to go man. Much of my lunch hours in the library mainly reading, one book, my librarian recommended The Jungle is Neutral by Spencer F, Chapman . The book still available and probably my view has changed am no longer accepting the stupid Brit and Yank.

Tuyzentfloot , Jul 12 2020 21:07 utc | 103

@ JC there is a recent book which analyses how the US policy of preventive mass murder and torture in Indonesia has inspired policies, structures and knowhow in many of US client states : https://vincentbevins.com/book/

uncle tungsten , Jul 12 2020 21:19 utc | 104
JC #100

Thank you for clearing the air on Sukarno. The Indonesian coup that destroyed the democratic socialis government he led was a tragic loss to the people of Indonesia. The coup leader Suharto fully backed by the CIA murdered many hundreds of thousands of civilians and their elected officials and educators and medical staff. It was a ruthless murderous purge. The Dulles brothers at the top.

Suharto then ruled for decades and Indonesia became the evil corruption ridden prison it is today. This sad country is our planets exemplar failed state ruled by criminal oligarchs and their owned courts and religion.

Indonesian people are great in their spirit and humility, they deserve better.

Jen , Jul 12 2020 23:50 utc | 114

JC and others who have been conversing with him on the issue of the Indonesian military's persecution and slaughter of Chinese Indonesians and others perceived to be Communist or sympathetic to Communism or socialism might be interested in watching Joshua Oppenheimer's "The Act of Killing" to see how small-time thugs and young people (especially those in the Pancasila Youth movement) alike were caught up in the anti-Communist brainwashing frenzy in Indonesia during the 1960s and participated in the mass persecution and slaughter themselves.

Oppenheimer tracked down some of these former killers in North Sumatra and got them to re-enact their crimes in whatever from they desired. For various reasons, some of them psychological, they were quite enthusiastic about this idea. Significantly they chose to re-enact their crimes as a Hollywood Western / Godfather-style pastiche film, even getting their relatives and friends to play extras.

The mass murderers interviewed did well for themselves with some of them even becoming politicians and rising to the level of Cabinet Minister in the Indonesian government. The film also shows something of how deeply corruption is embedded in everyday life with one prospective political candidate going around bribing villagers and demanding money from small-time ethnic Chinese shopkeepers in his electorate and threatening them with violence if they do not cough up.

The major issue I have with the film is that by focusing on these mass murderers in North Sumatra, it misses the overall national and international political and social context that still supports and applauds what these killers did. As long as this continues, the likelihood that similar persecutions and genocidal purges of outsider groups and individuals, be they Chinese, Christian, Shi'a and other heterodox Muslim, academics, trade unionists, separatists in Maluku, West Papua or other parts of Indoneisa, and all these purges supported by the West in some way, will occur in the future is strong.

Antonym , Jul 13 2020 1:44 utc | 132

@ Jen 114
"As long as this continues, the likelihood that similar persecutions and genocidal purges of outsider groups and individuals, be they Chinese, Christian, Shi'a and other heterodox Muslim, academics, trade unionists, separatists in Maluku, West Papua or other parts of Indoneisa, and all these purges supported by the West in some way, will occur in the future is strong."

Yeah, "we" Anglos" are the only bad guys on this planet - not.
The CIA & co are not yet into slaughtering of Christians. Extremist Indonesian Sunni Muslims were guilty in the above atrocities, continuing as harassments till today. Hard to swallow: bad brown people do exist!

[Jul 13, 2020] George Washington Tried To Warn Americans About Foreign Policy Today by Doug Bandow

Highly recommended!
This is all about maintaining the US-centered global neoliberal empire. After empires is created the the USA became the salve of imperial interests and in a way stopped existing as an independent country. Everything is thrown on the altar of "full spectrum Dominance". The result is as close to a real political and economic disaster as we can get. Like USSR leadership the US elite realized now that neoliberalism is not sustainable, but can't do anything as all bets were made for the final victory of neoliberalism all over the world, much like Soviets hoped for the victory of communism. That did not happened and although the USA now is in much better position then the USSR in 60th (but with the similar level of deterioration of cognitive abilities of the politicians as the USSR). In this sense COVID-19 was a powerful catalyst of the crush of the US-centered neoliberal empire
Notable quotes:
"... On the other side are the targets of "inveterate antipathies." This also characterizes US Middle East policy. So hated are Iran and Syria that Washington, DC is making every effort to destroy their economies, ruin their people's livelihoods, wreck their hospitals, and starve their population. The respective governments are bad, to be sure, but do not threaten the US Yet, as the nation's first president explained to Americans, "Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy." ..."
"... Consider how close the US has come to foolish, unnecessary wars against both nations. There were manifold demands that the US enter the Syrian civil war, in which Americans have no stake. Short of combat the Obama administration indirectly aided the local affiliate of al-Qaeda, the terrorist group which staged 9/11 and supposedly was America's enemy. Moreover, there was constant pressure on America to attack Iran, targeted by the US since 1953, when the CIA helped replace Tehran's democracy with a brutal tyrant, whose rule was highlighted by corruption, torture, and a nuclear program – which then was taken over by Iran's Islamic revolutionaries, to America's horror. ..."
"... The US now is pushing toward a Cold War redux with Russia, after successive administrations treated Moscow as if it was of no account, lying about plans to expand NATO and acting in other ways that the US would never tolerate. Imagine the Soviet Union helping to overthrow an elected, pro-American government in Mexico City, seeking to redirect all commerce to Soviet allies in South America, and proposing that Mexico join the Warsaw Pact. US policymakers would be threatening war. ..."
"... In different ways many US policies illustrate the problem caused by "passionate attachments" – the almost routine and sometimes substantial sacrifice of US economic and security interests to benefit other governments. For instance, hysteria swept Washington at the president's recent proposal to simply reduce troop levels in Germany, which along with so many other European nations sees little reason to do much to defend itself. There are even those who demand American subservience to the Philippines, a semi-failed state of no significant security importance to the US Saudi Arabia is a rare case where the attachment is mostly cash and lobbyists. In most instances cultural, ethnic, religious, and historical ties provide a firmer foundation for foreign political influence and manipulation. ..."
Jul 13, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

Ben Rhodes, Barack Obama's deputy national security adviser, unkindly characterized the foreign policy establishment in Washington, D.C., as "the Blob." Although policymakers sometimes disagree on peripheral subjects, membership requires an absolute commitment to U.S. "leadership," which means a determination to micro-manage the world.

Reliance on persuasion is not enough. Vital is the willingness to bomb, invade, and, if necessary, occupy other nations to impose the Blob's dictates on other peoples. If foreigners die, as they often do, remember the saying about eggs and omelets oft repeated by communism's apologists. "Stuff happens" with the best-intentioned policies.

One might be inclined to forgive Blob members if their misguided activism actually benefited the American people. However, all too often the Blob's policies instead aid other governments and interests. Washington is overrun by the representatives of and lobbyists for other nations, which constantly seek to take control of US policy for their own advantage. The result are foreign interventions in which Americans do the paying and, all too often, the dying for others.

The problem is primarily one of power. Other governments don't spend a lot of time attempting to take over Montenegro's foreign policy because, well, who cares? Exactly what would you do after taking over Fiji's foreign ministry other than enjoy a permanent vacation? Seize control of international relations in Barbados and you might gain a great tax shelter.

Subvert American democracy and manipulate US foreign policy, and you can loot America's treasury, turn the US military into your personal bodyguard, and gain Washington's support for reckless war-mongering. And given the natural inclination of key American policymakers to intervene promiscuously abroad for the most frivolous reasons, it's surprisingly easy for foreign interests to convince Uncle Sam that their causes are somehow "vital" and therefore require America's attention. Indeed, it is usually easier to persuade Americans than foreign peoples in their home countries to back one or another international misadventure.

The culprits are not just autocratic regimes. Friendly democratic governments are equally ready to conspiratorially whisper in Uncle Sam's ear. Even nominally classical liberal officials, who believe in limiting their own governments, argue that Americans are obligated to sacrifice wealth and life for everyone else. The mantra seems to be liberty, prosperity, and peace for all – except those living in the superpower tasked by heaven with protecting everyone else's liberty, prosperity, and peace.

Although the problem has burgeoned in modern times, it is not new. Two centuries ago fans of Greek independence wanted Americans to challenge the Ottoman Empire, a fantastic bit of foolishness. Exactly how to effect an international Balkans rescue was not clear, since the president then commanded no aircraft carriers, air wings, or nuclear-tipped missiles. Still, the issue divided Americans and influenced John Quincy Adams' famous 1821 Independence Day address.

Warned Adams:

"Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom."

"The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force . She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit . [America's] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice."

Powerful words, yet Adams was merely following in the footsteps of another great American, George Washington. Obviously, the latter was flawed as a person, general, and president. Nevertheless, his willingness to set a critical precedent by walking away from power left an extraordinary legacy. As did his insistence that the Constitution tasked Congress with deciding when America would go to war. And his warning against turning US policy over to foreign influences.

Concern over obsequious subservience to other governments and interests pervaded his famous 1796 Farewell Address. Applied today, his message indicts most of the policy currently made in the city ironically named after him. He would be appalled by what presidents and Congresses today do, supposedly for America.

Obviously, the US was very different 224 years ago. The new country was fragile, sharing the Western hemisphere with its old colonial master, which still ruled Canada and much of the Caribbean, as well as Spain and France. When later dragged into the maritime fringes of the Napoleonic wars the US could huff and puff but do no more than inconvenience France and Britain. The vastness of the American continent, not overweening national power, again frustrated London when it sought to subjugate its former colonists.

Indeed, when George Washington spoke the disparate states were not yet firmly knit into a nation. Only after the Civil War, when the national government waged four years of brutal combat, which ravaged much of the country and killed upwards of 750,000 people in the name of "union," did people uniformly say the United States "is" rather than "are." However, the transformation was much more than rhetorical. The federal system that originally emerged in the name of individual liberty spawned a high tax centralized government that employed one of the world's largest militaries to kill on a mass scale to enforce the regime's dictates. The modern American "republic" was born. It acted overseas only inconsistently until World War II, after which imperial America was a constant, adding resonance to George Washington's message.

Today Washington, D.C.'s elites have almost uniformly decided that Russia is an enemy, irrespective of American behavior that contributed to Moscow's hostility. And that Ukraine, a country never important for American security, is a de facto military ally, appropriately armed by the US for combat against a nuclear-armed rival. A reelection-minded president seems determined to turn China into a new Cold War adversary, an enemy for all things perhaps for all time. America remains ever entangled in the Middle East, with successive administrations in permanent thrall of Israel and Saudi Arabia, allowing foreign leaders to set US Mideast policy. Indeed, both states have avidly pressed the administration to make their enemy, Iran, America' enemy. The resulting fixation caused the Trump administration to launch economic war against the rest of the world to essentially prevent everyone on earth from having any commercial dealing of any kind with anyone in Tehran.

Under Democrats and Republicans alike the federal government views nations that resist its dictates as adversaries at best, appropriate targets of criticism, always, sanctions, often, and even bombs and invasions, occasionally. No wonder foreign governments lobby hard to be designated as allies, partners, and special relationships. Many of these ties have become essentially permanent, unshakeable even when supposed friends act like enemies and supposed enemies are incapable of hurting America. US foreign policy increasingly has been captured and manipulated for the benefit of other governments and interests.

George Washington recognized the problem even in his day, after revolutionary France sought to win America's support against Great Britain. He warned: "nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest."

Is there a better description of US foreign policy today? Even when a favored nation is clearly, ostentatiously, murderously on the wrong side – consider Saudi Arabia's unprovoked aggression against Yemen – many American policymakers refuse to allow a single word of criticism to escape their lips. The US has indeed become "a slave," as George Washington warned.

The consequences for the US and the world are highly negative. He observed that "likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."

This is an almost perfect description of the current US approach. American colonists revolted against what they believed had become ever more "foreign" control, yet the US backs Israel's occupation and mistreatment of millions of Palestinians. American policymakers parade the globe spouting the rhetoric of freedom yet subsidize Egypt as it imprisons tens of thousands and oppresses millions of people. Washington decries Chinese aggressiveness, yet provides planes, munitions, and intelligence to aid Riyadh in the slaughter of Yemeni civilians and destruction of Yemeni homes, businesses, and hospitals. In such cases, policymakers have betrayed America "into a participation in the quarrels and wars without adequate inducement or justification."

On the other side are the targets of "inveterate antipathies." This also characterizes US Middle East policy. So hated are Iran and Syria that Washington, DC is making every effort to destroy their economies, ruin their people's livelihoods, wreck their hospitals, and starve their population. The respective governments are bad, to be sure, but do not threaten the US Yet, as the nation's first president explained to Americans, "Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy."

Consider how close the US has come to foolish, unnecessary wars against both nations. There were manifold demands that the US enter the Syrian civil war, in which Americans have no stake. Short of combat the Obama administration indirectly aided the local affiliate of al-Qaeda, the terrorist group which staged 9/11 and supposedly was America's enemy. Moreover, there was constant pressure on America to attack Iran, targeted by the US since 1953, when the CIA helped replace Tehran's democracy with a brutal tyrant, whose rule was highlighted by corruption, torture, and a nuclear program – which then was taken over by Iran's Islamic revolutionaries, to America's horror.

Read George Washington and you would think he had gained a supernatural glimpse into today's policy debates. He worried about the result when the national government "adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations has been the victim."

What better describes US policy toward China and Russia? To be sure, these are nasty regimes. Yet that has rarely bothered Uncle Sam's relations with other states. Saudi Arabia, a corrupt and totalitarian theocracy, has been sheltered, protected, and reassured by the US even after invading its poor neighbor. Among Washington's other best friends: Bahrain, Turkey, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates, tyrannies all.

The US now is pushing toward a Cold War redux with Russia, after successive administrations treated Moscow as if it was of no account, lying about plans to expand NATO and acting in other ways that the US would never tolerate. Imagine the Soviet Union helping to overthrow an elected, pro-American government in Mexico City, seeking to redirect all commerce to Soviet allies in South America, and proposing that Mexico join the Warsaw Pact. US policymakers would be threatening war.

Washington, DC also is treating China as a near-enemy, claiming the right to control China along its own borders – essentially attempting to apply America's Monroe Doctrine to Asia. This is something Americans would never allow another nation, especially China, to do to the US Imagine the response if Beijing sent its navy up the East Coast, told the US how to treat Cuba, and constantly talked of the possibility of war. America's consistently hostile, aggressive policy is the result of "projects of pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives."

This kind of foreign policy also corrupts the American political system. It encourages officials and people to put foreign interests before that of America. As George Washington observed, this mindset: "gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; guiding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation."

For instance, Woodrow Wilson and America's Anglophile establishment backed Great Britain over the interests of the American people, dragging the US into World War I, a mindless imperial slugfest that this nation should have avoided. After the Cold War's end Americans with ties to Central and Eastern Europe pushed to expand NATO to their ancestral homes, which created new defense obligations for America while inflaming Russian hostility. Ethnic Greeks and Turks constantly battle over policy toward their ethnic homelands. Taiwan has developed enduring ties with congressional Republicans, especially, ensuring US government support against Beijing. Many evangelical Christians, especially those who hold a particularly bizarre eschatology (basically, Jews must gather together in their national homeland to be slaughtered before Jesus can return), back Israel in whatever it does to assist the apparently helpless God of creation finish his job. The policies that result from such campaigns inevitably are shaped to benefit foreign interests, not Americans.

Regarding the impact of such a system on the political system George Washington also was prescient: "As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public council. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter."

In different ways many US policies illustrate the problem caused by "passionate attachments" – the almost routine and sometimes substantial sacrifice of US economic and security interests to benefit other governments. For instance, hysteria swept Washington at the president's recent proposal to simply reduce troop levels in Germany, which along with so many other European nations sees little reason to do much to defend itself. There are even those who demand American subservience to the Philippines, a semi-failed state of no significant security importance to the US Saudi Arabia is a rare case where the attachment is mostly cash and lobbyists. In most instances cultural, ethnic, religious, and historical ties provide a firmer foundation for foreign political influence and manipulation.

What to do about such a long-standing problem? George Washington was neither naïf nor isolationist. He believed in what passed for globalism in those days: a commercial republic should trade widely. He didn't oppose alliances, for limited purposes and durations. After all, support from France was necessary for the colonies to win independence.

He proposed a practical policy tied to ongoing realities. The authorities should "steer clear of permanent alliances," have with other states "as little political connection as possible," and not "entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils" of other nations' "ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice." Most important, the object of US foreign policy was to serve the interests of the American people. In practice it was a matter of prudence, to be adapted to circumstance and interest. He would not necessarily foreclose defense of Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Germany, but would insist that such proposals reflect a serious analysis of current realities and be decided based on what is best for Americans. He would recognize that what might have been true a few decades ago likely isn't true today. In reality, little of current US foreign policy would have survived his critical review.

George Washington was an eminently practical man who managed to speak through the ages. America's recently disastrous experience of playing officious, obnoxious hegemon highlights his good judgment. The US, he argued, should "observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all."

America may still formally be a republic, but its foreign policy long ago became imperial. As John Quincy Adams warned, the US is "no longer the ruler of her own spirit." Americans have learned at great cost that international affairs are too important to be left to the Blob and foreign policy professionals, handed off to international relations scholars, or, worst of all, subcontracted to other nations and their lobbyists. The American people should insist on their nation's return to a true republican foreign policy.

Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute . A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire .

[Jul 13, 2020] Daily Fail: EDWARD LUCAS: At last! The end of the age of appeasing Beijing bullies

Jul 13, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL July 7, 2020 at 2:53 am

Ever wondered what happened to our mouth foaming favorite russophobe, Ed Lucas?

Daily Fail: EDWARD LUCAS: At last! The end of the age of appeasing Beijing bullies
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8495983/EDWARD-LUCAS-end-age-appeasing-Beijing-bullies.html

####

Remember, Sir John Sawers is the former chief of MI6 and is in no way linked to the UK government. He is a private individual. This is not Hybrid Warfare.

Which is good, because it allows Ed to earnestly parrot his talking points and add plenty of filler in that well known balanced, independent and journalistically shining star of an outlet, the Daily Fail.

The lesson I think we can take from this is that UK gov has finally been caught in its own bitch 'n' slap China trap and also a victim of t-Rump's bash China campaign. Time has run out on this strategy. It was more than happy to sign on to loud anti-China slogans, as long as it didn't cost UK plc serious cash or future investme nt. The problem is that China has had enough of mostly ignoring those slings and arrows for years.

The new so-called 'Wolf-warrior' China response that the west is publicly bemoaning as 'threatening' comes after so much sinophobia. Thus, UK gov has got the message much more forcefully in the last few days and the opposition like 'ex' directors of British intelligence and others are all hands to the wheel because they do not hold official power and have no other way of influencing the government. 2020 really is a momentous year.

MARK CHAPMAN July 7, 2020 at 8:28 am

I didn't really have time to read it because I have to leave for work, but the headline alone is enough to showcase classic Lucas behavior – enthusiastically cheer the government 'taking a stand', and leaving the accountants to sort out the damage and try to salvage something from the rubble. You know, it is a miracle Britain has survived as long as it has with the eejits who are let to run it.

[Jul 13, 2020] Washington has essentially forgotten how to negotiate on mutually-respectful terms, and favours maneuvering its 'partners' into relationships in which the USA has an overwhelmingly dominant position, and then announcing it is 'leveling the playing field'. Which means putting its thumb on the scale.

Jul 13, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN July 7, 2020 at 8:12 am

Again, probably not an urgent problem unless some existing Chinese aircraft in service are on their last legs and urgently must be replaced. In which case they could go with Airbus if the situation could not wait. China has options. Boeing does not.

The west loves to portray the Chinese as totally without ethics, and if you have a product they can't make for themselves, they will buy it from you only until they have figured out how to make it themselves, and then fuck you, Jack. I don't see any reason to believe the Chinese value alliances less than the west does, or are any more incapable of grasping the value of a give-and-take trade policy. The west – especially the United States – favours establishing a monopoly on markets and then using your inability to get the product anywhere else as leverage to force concessions you don't want to make; is that ethical? China must surely see the advantages of a mutually-respectful relationship with Russia, considering that country not only safeguards a significant length of its border from western probing, but supplies most of its energy. There remain many unexplored avenues for technical, engineering and technological cooperation. At the same time, Russia is not in a subordinate position where it has to endure being taken advantage of.

Trade is hard work, and any partner will maneuver for advantage, because everyone in commerce likes market share and money. But Washington has essentially forgotten how to negotiate on mutually-respectful terms, and favours maneuvering its 'partners' into relationships in which the USA has an overwhelmingly dominant position, and then announcing it is 'leveling the playing field'. Which means putting its thumb on the scale.


[Jul 13, 2020] How to Make a Brick from Straw and Bullshit

After neocons in Washinton adopted Magnitsky act all bets for US-Russia cooperation are off. And that in a long run will hurt the USA too.
Notable quotes:
"... Every time you "impose costs" on another country, you make more enemies and inspire more end-around plays which take you as an economic player out of that loop. And by and by what you do is of no great consequence, and your ability – your LEGAL ability, I should interject – to 'impose costs' is gone. ..."
Jul 13, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN July 13, 2020 at 10:49 am

Every time you "impose costs" on another country, you make more enemies and inspire more end-around plays which take you as an economic player out of that loop. And by and by what you do is of no great consequence, and your ability – your LEGAL ability, I should interject – to 'impose costs' is gone. Sooner or later America's allies are going to refuse to recognize its extraterritorial sanctions, which it has no legal right to impose; it gets away with it by threatening costs in trade with the USA, which is a huge economy and is something under its control. But that practice causes other countries to gradually insulate themselves against exposure, and one day the cost of obeying will be greater than the cost of saying "Go fuck yourself".

The New York Times goes a little further, stressing that the agreement would entail an economic and military partnership: "It calls for joint training and exercises, joint research and weapons development and intelligence sharing -- all to fight "the lopsided battle with terrorism, drug and human trafficking and cross-border crimes." This would give Iran access to some fairly high-tech systems, perhaps fighter aircraft and training and tech support, but of that part of the package, I would rate intelligence sharing the highest. It would potentially give Iran a heads-up on what the USA is planning in the region before it even is briefed to Congress – Washington leaks like a sieve, and while it is often intentional, it happens when it is not desired as well.

https://www.nytimes.com/svc/oembed/html/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2020%2F07%2F11%2Fworld%2Fasia%2Fchina-iran-trade-military-deal.html

Washington's policy now consists of little more than frantically papering over cracks as they appear; its ability to direct the world is gone and its ability to influence it is deteriorating by the day as it becomes more and more intensely disliked, and everyone's enemy. Perversely, this brings war closer as a possibility, as threats of it are no longer an effective deterrent to partnerships and exchanges the USA does not like. More and more of those threatened are taking the attitude of "Put up or shut up". Trade deals outside Washington's influence increase those countries' insulation against US sanctions, and perhaps it is beginning to dawn on the western banking cartel that it is in imminent danger of being isolated itself, like a fleck of grit that irritates an oyster and finds itself encased in nacre.

ET AL July 13, 2020 at 9:22 am

SCMP: China hits back, sanctioning US officials and Congress members in response to Xinjiang ban
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3092945/china-hits-back-sanctioning-us-officials-response-uygur-ban

Beijing follows through on its promised retaliation for Washington's move to hold individuals to account

Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio among those facing sanctions in latest tit-for-tat move
####

More at the link.

What springs to mind is that Groucho Marx quote: "I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member."

That the US sanctions China with an act named after a dodgy Russian book-keeper working for a thief is all kinds of wrong, but as we all know, the ends justify the means. Hamsters are happy.

[Jul 13, 2020] Michele Flournoy- Queen of the Blob -

Jul 13, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Home / The State Of The Union / Michele Flournoy: Queen Of The Blob Michele Flournoy: Queen Of The Blob

This is how the elite, Ivy League-educated technocrats profit while the nation's real interests take a back seat. Michele Flournoy in 2015 CNAS/Flickr

JULY 7, 2020

|

8:00 PM

KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS

Jonathan Guyer, managing editor of The American Prospect, has an unbelievably well-reported piece on the making of a Washington national security consultancy, starring two high placed Obama-era officials and one of the Imperial City's more successful denizens -- Michele Flournoy.

Flournoy may not be a household name anywhere but the Beltway, but when she met Sergio Aguirre and Nitin Chadda (Chiefs of staff to UN Ambassador Samantha Power and Secretary of Defense Ash Carter respectively) she was already trading lucratively on her stints in two Democratic administrations. In fact, according to Guyer, by 2017 she was pulling nearly a half a million dollars a year a year wearing a number of hats: senior advisor for Boston Consulting Group (where she helped increase their defense contracts to $32 million by 2016), founder and CEO of the Democratic leaning Center for a New American Security, senior fellow at Harvard's Belfer Center, and a member of various corporate boards.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com&width=838

Hungry to get their own consulting business going after Hillary Clinton's stunning loss in 2016, according to Guyer, Aguirre and Chadda approached Flournoy for her starpower inside the Blob. Flournoy did not want "to have a firm with her name on it alone," so they sought and added Tony Blinken, former Under Secretary of State and "right hand man" to Joe Biden for 20 years. WestExec Advisors, named after the street alongside the West Wing of the White House, was born. "The name WestExec Advisors trades on its founders' recent knowledge of the highest echelons of decision-making," writes Guyer. "It also suggests they'll be walking down WestExec toward 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue someday soon."

Soon the firm was raking in corporate contracts and the high sums that go with it. They weren't lobbying per se (wink, wink) but their names and connections provided the grease on the skids their clients needed to make things happen in Washington. They shrewdly partnered with a private equity group and a Google affiliate. Before long, Guyer says, they did not need to market: CEO's were telling other CEO's to give them a call. More:

The founders told executives they would share their "passion" for helping new companies navigate the complex bureaucracy of winning Pentagon contracts. They told giant defense contractors how to explain cutting-edge technologies to visitors from Congress. Their approach worked, and clients began to sign up.

One was an airline, another a global transportation company, a third a company that makes drones that can almost instantly scan an entire building's interior. WestExec would only divulge that it began working with "Fortune 100 types," including large U.S. tech; financial services, including global-asset managers; aerospace and defense; emerging U.S. tech; and nonprofits.

The Prospect can confirm that one of those clients is the Israeli artificial-intelligence company Windward.

To say that the Flournoy helped WestExec establish itself as one of the most successful of the Beltway's defense and national security consultancies is an understatement. For sure, Flournoy has often been underestimated -- she is not flamboyant, nor glamorous, and is absolutely unrecognizable outside of the Washington market because she doesn't do media (though she is popular on the think tank conference circuit ). She's a technocrat -- smart and efficient and highly bred for Washington's finely tuned managerial class. She is a courtier for sure, but she is no sop. She has staying power, quietly forging relationships with the right people and not trying too hard to make a name or express ideas that might conflict with doctrine. She no doubt learned much in two stints in the Pentagon, which typically chews up the less capable, greedier, more narcissistic neophytes (not to mention idealists). She's not exactly known as a visionary, however, and one has to wonder which hat she is wearing when she expounds on current defense threats, like this piece about beefing up the Pentagon budget to confront China .

But what does it all mean? Flournoy has been at the forefront of strategy and policy in two administrations marked by overseas interventions (Clinton from 1993 to 2000) and Obama (2009 to 2012). All of her aforementioned qualities have helped her to personally succeed and profit -- especially now, no doubt helping weapons contractors get deals on the Hill, as Guyer susses out in his piece, not to mention how well-placed she would be for an incoming Biden Administration. But has it been in the best interest of the country? I think not. For this, she is queen of the Blob.

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.394.0_en.html#goog_87831358 00:12 / 00:59 00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused

But elite is as elite does. She went from Beverly Hills High School to Harvard to Oxford, and then back to Harvard, before landing a political appointment in the Clinton Administration. In between government perches, she did consulting and started CNAS in hopes of creating a shadow national security council for Hillary Clinton. When Clinton didn't get the nomination, Flournoy and her colleagues supported Obama and helped populate his administration, supporting the military surge in Afghanistan and prolonging the war. She was called the "mastermind" behind Obama's Afghan strategy, which we now know was a failure, an effort at futility and prolonging the inevitable. In fact, we know now that most of the war establishment was lying through its teeth . But that hasn't stopped her from getting clients. They pay for her influence, not her ability to win wars.

Queen of the Blob, Queen of Business as Usual -- a business, as we well know from Guyer's excellent reporting, that pays off bigtime. But it has never paid off for the rest of America. But really, why should she care? She was never really with "us" to begin with.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC since 2007, focusing on national security, foreign policy, civil liberties and domestic politics. She served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News in Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also worked as a beat reporter at Bridge News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger, she got her start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.

email

Tom Sadlowski • 6 days ago

I wish that you would cover this equally in both parties; the near entire senior level of the political apparatus (apart from the few individuals truly invested in the best for all Americans) has become corrupted informing the policies, or lack thereof; whether implemented, ignored, or written into law.

Connecticut Farmer Tom Sadlowski • 5 days ago

I think that what she wrote actually applies to both parties. One is the same as the other (as Ralph Nader called 'em "The Republicrats").

And neither of 'em give a rat's ass for you, for me,or for the rest of us pilgrims.

State Dept • 6 days ago

We really need to get these "Blob" people out of our government. Electing Trump didn't fix the problem, and judging by this article, electing Biden won't either. Half of them people aren't even recognizably American. They're global elites, and they'll continue to use Americans and what's left of America to further their globalist agenda. With someone like Flournoy, selling powerful US technology to known spies and thieves like the Israelis, who take our tech, copy it, and sell it to enemies like China, only scratches the surface of what's going on. She should be in prison after all the damage she's done to America, not looking forward to yet another national security role in which she can get more Americans killed, wreck more foreign countries, and waste and steal more billions of taxpayer money.

Teddy007 • 6 days ago

Ms. Flournoy is an example of the type of competent high level staffer of which the Trump Administration is devoid. Do you think that Mr. Fluornoy that those who work for her would have had anything overturned at the Supreme Court because they were too lazy to complete the paperwork?

Bostonian Teddy007 • 4 days ago

"Ms. Flournoy is an example of the type of competent high level staffer of which the Trump Administration is devoid."

I have to agree that Trump's administration is devoid of competent people, but don't forget that it was incompetents like Flournoy that got Trump elected.

Teddy007 Bostonian • 4 days ago

If you want to ID the individual most likely for President Trump winning, look up Joel Benenson. He was Hilary Clinton's chief of strategy and was convinced that Trump could not win any of the blue wall states. Ms. Fluornoy had nothing to do with that. Mr. Fluornoy would have been the Secretary of Defense in a Hillary Clinton Administration and probably would have been more competent that the current Secretary of Defense.

Alan Vanneman • 6 days ago

You would have done better just to critique her article in Foreign Affairs. As it is, you sound like you're mad at Michele because she makes more money than you do (presumably).

kouroi Alan Vanneman • 5 days ago

I think that it is a bit unfair, given the fact that the odds are stack the way they are. Ms. Vlahos has dedicated many years (they are so many she only whispers the number) on issues related with foreign policy. The path she has chosen is the harder path, the ethical, and moral one, which was never going to pay. If Ms. Vlahos is incensed, I bet that it is not because of the money, but because she sees that in Washington DC, only crime and wanton murder pays. She is accusing Ms Flournoy that she is a sellout to the crime syndicate, like a cop that has started herself supporting the drug trafficking.

You should know that people believe in more things than only making money. Ms. Flournoy it seems, has decided that she wants a piece of the cake and to hell with this absurd idea of "arms to plowshares"....

stephen pickard kouroi • 5 days ago

Ms. Valhos can speak for herself. No one should project onto others their values. But it does seem that Valhos does make a point that Flournoy does not have any guiding philosophy . Except to be in a position to make a fine living from her contacts.

Could be that Flournoy is more greedy than not. She sure has the resume that would get her into any job which she wanted to interview for. And she paid her dues also.

When one looks at Valhos's resume it likewise is impressive. She too it seems to be proud of her connection to the elites. We should not condem either. We all want our children to excell. Unless Flournoy is an unindicted co conspirator, this article is just a piece of fluff. Too much time on Valhos's hands perhaps?

While I don't have anything else to do, I had hoped to read some good dirt. Alas all I got was one high achieving person carping bout another person of similar achievement. Bless them both.

kouroi stephen pickard • 5 days ago

The dirt presented is facilitating arms contracts. By peddling the need of strong military and war. Being a merchant of death, which Ms. Vlahos doesn't seem to be, disqualifies Ms. Flournoy entirely. of anything.

johnhenry stephen pickard • 5 days ago • edited

You write like a person in-the-know, but very poorly for all that.

stephen pickard johnhenry • 4 days ago

Not sure what you mean " poorly for it". I tend not to get wrapped around the axle . But like it when someone comments on me personally. Lost perspective in old age. Would like to know more what you mean. Unless you just want to be mean

hooly • 5 days ago • edited

But really, why should she care? She was never really with "us" to begin with.

That's a bit harsh don't you think? I remember that time on September 11, 2001, I was in the New York area when it happened, I even had a close acquaintance who died in the Twin Towers. I remember when America was united in its blood lust, it its ravenous quest for revenge, ... revenge on anything and anyone. When America's vengeful eye was set on the Taliban government of Afghanistan, it was off to the races. Left and Right, liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, ... all were united in avenging 9/11 on the evil Taliban and Afghan tribal peoples for harboring OBL. And I'm sure both you Miss Vlahos and Miss Flournoy were united as well in wanting someone to pay ... am I right? So don't give me this BS about 'us' and 'them' okay? America is a democracy, the American people get the government they vote for, they get the President, Senators and Members of Congress they vote for, that means they also get the flunkies, hangers on and entourages of think tankers and careerists they vote for. Understand? You get what you deserve, you don't get to whine and complain when you're leaders are incompetent and corrupt okay? So don't give me this 'us and them' nonsense and absolve yourself of the blood lust you once had all those years ago on September 11, 2001.

=marco01= hooly • 5 days ago

No, liberals were not for taking it out on the Afghan tribal peoples. We were for getting those responsible, and sorry no, we didn't include the Afghan tribal people in on that too, despite any sympathies some of them may have had for AQ.

We had no 'blood lust' and we don't believe in collective punishment.

Bureaucrat =marco01= • 7 hours ago

Did you just say liberals "don't believe in collective punishment"? I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not lock-step in support of the #BLM and Critical Race Theory...

But your other point about liberals being anti-war is also flawed. Just connect the foreign intervention (not just wars, but also funding to foreign opposition groups) with some humanitarian urgency (think of those Afghan women!) and liberals have always advocated for the same foreign policies than neoconservatives.

johnhenry hooly • 5 days ago • edited

"...I'm sure both you Miss Vlahos and Miss Flournoy..."

It's been decades since I've seen the word "Miss" used in print - except when I write to my granddaughter. In my profession, I write to women all the time, and although it used to be that unmarried ones were quite accepting of - and indeed expecting to receive - missives from me addressing them as such, I would be embarrassed to use that appellation when addressing adult women today in a professional or unacquainted capacity. Now, I only use it for women who wish it - old women, unmarried Catholic women and irascible old-school lesbians.

Your Time Machine needs a lube job.

Ron Johnson • 5 days ago

Ah, yes. Highly educated, multiple degrees, cultivated....and extremely dangerous. All of that wonderful education dedicated to wanton killing and influence peddling. These people, the hidden professionals of pull, are the most difficult to fight because unlike a politician or a bureaucrat they are nearly invisible. She can only be effective if she is not seen. To her, public exposure is toxic. So expose away! Make her name known to everyone.

[Jul 13, 2020] Craig Murray about the glorification of war

Notable quotes:
"... Glorifying war is disturbing but so is the normalization of war. Most do not realize that large standing armies and large police forces were unknown/unusual only a century ago. ..."
"... And very few understand the mentality of the power-elite or how they have secreted themselves and their objectives behind gated communities, political divisiveness, and unaccountable 'national security' bullshit (more like 'war strategy'). ..."
Jul 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit , Jul 13 2020 15:11 utc | 181

Craig Murray writes about the glorification of war:

The BBC World War Two Porn Page
Glorifying war is disturbing but so is the normalization of war. Most do not realize that large standing armies and large police forces were unknown/unusual only a century ago.

And very few understand the mentality of the power-elite or how they have secreted themselves and their objectives behind gated communities, political divisiveness, and unaccountable 'national security' bullshit (more like 'war strategy').

The ideologies of the Empire are: neoConservativism (a form of aristocracy); neoLiberalism (a form of facism); and Zionism (a form of colonialism).

In short, a combination of the worst inclinations in the Western tradition.

!!

[Jul 13, 2020] Here's a great must-see 36-minute piece by Abby Martin about the US perpetual occupation of Afghanistan.

Jul 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Canadian Cents , Jul 13 2020 0:04 utc | 115

Here's a great must-see 36-minute piece by Abby Martin about the US perpetual occupation of Afghanistan.

It was posted on YouTube on June 26, but I only came across it last night thanks to a Paul Craig Roberts article, and I don't think it's been mentioned here at MoA yet by anyone yet (at least I wasn't able to find any mentions using the MoA search.)

I'm sure many of us have come across many of the points over the years, but she does a great job of reviewing and bringing it all together.

Afghanistan War Exposed: An Imperial Conspiracy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3LFbOSPfrE

Google/Youtube has of course made the video "age-restricted", though I don't really see why, requiring sign-in and probably greatly reducing its viewership as a result.

This alternate link to the same video doesn't seem to require sign-in:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/C3LFbOSPfrE

[Jul 11, 2020] Pounding to nothing - Patrick Porter - The Critic Magazine

Jul 11, 2020 | thecritic.co.uk

Pounding to nothing

Patrick Porter reviews The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir, by John Bolton ARTILLERY ROW BOOKS 4 July, 2020

By

Share

P resident Donald Trump's third National Security Advisor opens his memoir with this quote from the Duke of Wellington at Waterloo: 'Hard Pounding, this, gentlemen. Let's see who will pound the longest.' And pound for pound, that's the (nearly) 500 page memoir in a nutshell. Unremitting pounding is both the theme and the style. As John Bolton urged the White House to take a 'harder line" on Iran and North Korea, Trump's chief of staff "urged me to keep pounding away in public, which I assured him I would.' China 'pounded away during my tenure, sensing weakness at the top.' As with Bolton's mission, so too with America's statecraft, that must 'keep moving and keep firing, like a big grey battleship.'

From his infamous unsubtle moustache to his bellicosity, Bolton traffics on a self-image of straight shooter who sprints towards gunfire. He does not set out to offer a meditation on a complex inner life. This image is also slightly misleading. For all the barrage, Bolton turns out to be a more conflicted figure, especially when his supporting fire is most called upon.

The Room Where it Happened is Bolton's account of his part in the power struggles within Trump's almost medieval court, his attempt to steer the executive branch towards the right course, unmasked supremacy everywhere, and his failure and disillusion with Trump's chaotic, self-serving and showbiz-driven presidency.

The room where it happened: A White House memoir, by John Bolton

The memoir itself is a non-trivial political event. Other reviewers have assailed it for being turgid. Bolton, though, has at least done the state some service by habitually recording and recounting every meeting. This is an important record of an important eighteen months packed with the escalating brinksmanship with Iran, an impeachment inquest, the return of great power competition and a fierce struggle to control the policy levers in Washington itself. For that detail, especially when contrasted with the exhausting melodrama of the era, Bolton deserves a little credit. The Trump administration's determined effort to suppress it on the grounds of classified information suggests there is substance to Bolton's allegations of corruption and turmoil at the heart of government.

It is also, though, a work of self-vindication. Bolton's life is an adversarial one. A former attorney, he became a policy advocate and a Republican Party institution, consistently taking the hardest of lines. He was ever drawn to aggressive combatants – like Hillary Clinton, in his formative years he supported Barry Goldwater. He interned for Vice-President Spiro Agnew, the "number one hawk." As a measure of Bolton's faith that war works and that co-existence with "rogue states" is impossible, he advocated attacking a heavily (and nuclear)-armed North Korea in 2018, an adversary that lies in artillery range of Seoul and thousands of Americans as effective hostages, and offered up a best-case scenario in doing so.

Bolton brought to government a world view that was dug-in and entrenched. For Bolton, the world is hostile, and to survive America must be strong (wielding and brandishing overwhelming force) at all times. Enemy regimes cannot be bargained with or even co-existed with on anything less than maximalist terms dictated by Washington. The US never gives an inch, and must demand everything. And if those regimes do not capitulate, America must topple or destroy them: Iran, Syria, Libya, Venezuela, Cuba, Yemen and North Korea, and must combat them on multiple fronts at once. In doing so, America itself must remain unfettered with an absolutely free hand, not nodding even hypocritically to law or custom or bargaining.

If Bolton's thoughts add up to anything, it is a general hostility, if not to talking, certainly to diplomacy – the art of giving coherence and shape to different instruments and activities, above all through compromise and a recognition of limits. The final straw for Bolton was Trump's cancelling an airstrike on Iran after it shot down a drone. An odd hill to die on, given the graver acts of corruption he as witness alleges, but fitting that the failure to pull the trigger for him was Trump's most shocking misdemeanour.

What is intended to be personal strength and clarity comes over as unreflective bluster

This worldview is as personal as it is geopolitical. Importantly for Bolton, in the end he fights alone, bravely against the herd. He fights against other courtiers, even fellow hawks, who Bolton treats with dismissive contempt – Nikki Haley, Steve Mnuchin, Mike Pompeo, or James Mattis who like Bolton, champions strategic commitments and views Iran as a dangerous enemy, but is more selective about when to reach for the gun. The press is little more than an "hysterical" crowd. Allies like South Korea, who must live as neighbours with one of the regimes Bolton earmarks for execution, and who try conciliatory diplomacy occasionally, earn slight regard. Critics, opponents or those who disagree are 'lazy,' 'howling' or 'feckless.'

For a lengthy work that distils a lifetime's experience, it is remarkably thin regarding the big questions of security, power and order. The hostile world for him contains few real limits other than failures of will. He embraces every rivalry and every commitment, but explanations are few and banal. 'While foreign policy labels are unhelpful except to the intellectually lazy,' he says, 'if pressed, I like to say my policy was "pro-American".' Who is lazy, here?

The purpose of foreign policy, too, is largely absent. Armed supremacy abroad, and power-maximisation, seems to be the end in itself, regardless of what is has wrought at home. This makes his disdain for Trump's authoritarian ways especially obtuse: what does he think made possible an imperial presidency in the first place?

There's little room for principled or reasonable disagreement. What is intended to be personal strength and clarity comes over as unreflective bluster, in a town where horse-trading and agility matter. Unintentionally, it is a warning to anyone who seeks to be effective as well as right, and to those of us who debate these questions.

The most provocative part of the book comes at the end, and points to a man more conflicted than his self-image of the straight shooter. Bolton issues an extended, uneasy defence of his decision not to appear as a witness before the House impeachment inquiry against a president he believed to be corrupt. Having celebrated the need to "pound away" with inexhaustible energy, it turned out his ammunition was low. 'I was content to bide my time. I believed throughout, as the line in Hamilton goes, that "I am not throwing away my shot".' Drawing on a characteristic claim to certainty, 'it would have made no significant difference in the Senate outcome.' How can he know this? And even if the odds were long, was there not – for once – a compelling basis in civic virtue to be that relentless grey battleship, pounding away? He now hopes "history" will remember Trump as a one-term president. History needs willing agents.

Other reviews have honed in on Bolton's decision to delay his revelations for a book pay-day. But consider another theme – the war-hawk who is in fact torn and agonised around combat when it comes to himself. It echoes his retrospective rationale for not fighting in Vietnam, a war he supported, and (as he has recorded) the detailed efforts he made to avoid service in that tragic theatre after being drafted. It was, he decided, bound to fail given that the anti-war Democrats would undermine the cause, a justification he later sheepishly regretted.

So twice the advocate of forceful confrontation refused the call to show up, generously awarding to himself a rationale for non-intervention that relieves him of commitment. He refuses to extend that same exonerating, prudential logic to his country, when it debates whether to wade in to conflict abroad. Neither does he extend it to other Americans who think the nation, like Bolton, might be better off sometimes holding its fire, biding its time, dividing its enemies, and keeping its powder dry.

Given that Bolton failed in the end to attend the "room where it happened", his title is unwittingly ironic. In his favour, Bolton's testy defence of his absence at least suggests something. In contrast with the front cover of another forthcoming, Trump-era memoir , he retains a modest capacity for embarrassment.

[Jul 11, 2020] Pablo Miller, Mark Urban and Hamish de Bretton-Gordon all served in the same tank regiment in the British Army

Jul 11, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN July 6, 2020 at 8:38 am

Thanks, Jennifer; I didn't really have to do much – Moscow Exile was kind and psychic enough to print out Straw's whole editorial, else I might have had to subscribe to The Independent to even see it. *Shudder*. And Straw just opened his head and let the bullshit flow – I only had to redirect the stream a little here and there.

I don't think Miller was the neighbour, I seem to remember a different name nope, that was Ross Cassidy, who was cited by John Helmer as perhaps the only person Skripal trusted enough to have left a key with him, but he didn't live next door. Pablo Miller does indeed also live in Salisbury, but I have seen no mention of where,

https://www.theblogmire.com/joining-some-dots-on-the-skripal-case-part-2-four-invisible-clues/

Pablo Miller, Mark Urban and Hamish de Bretton-Gordon all served in the same tank regiment in the British Army. I have seen one other source – can't remember where now – that claimed Christopher Steele also served in the same regiment, but that's not true – he was recruited straight out of Cambridge at graduation, by MI6, and worked for them for 22 years. That's not to say there were not connections, though – Steele was also Case Officer for Litvinenko, and was allegedly the first to assess that Litvinenko's death was 'a Russian state hit'.

"Over a career that spanned more than 20 years, Steele performed a series of roles, but always appeared to be drawn back to Russia; he was, sources say, head of MI6's Russia desk. When the agency was plunged into panic over the poisoning of its agent Alexander Litvinenko in 2006, the then chief, Sir John Scarlett, needed a trusted senior officer to plot a way through the minefield ahead – so he turned to Steele. It was Steele, sources say, who correctly and quickly realised that Litvinenko's death was a Russian state "hit"."

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/12/intelligence-sources-vouch-credibility-donald-trump-russia-dossier-author

You'll enjoy that piece by The Grauniad – it goes on and on about how first-rate credible Steele was, and how the quality of his work is above reproach. His legendary 'dossier', obviously, has since fallen apart and been dismissed as fanciful disinformation.

[Jul 11, 2020] Mutiny on the Bounties by Ray McGovern

Jul 03, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

Has there been another mutiny in Trump's White House, as Obama's former ambassador to Russia piles on the nonsense about Trump being in Putin's pocket?


Special to Consortium News

C orporate media are binging on leaked Kool Aid not unlike the WMD concoction they offered 18 years ago to "justify" the U.S.-UK war of aggression on Iraq.

Now Michael McFaul, ambassador to Russia under President Obama, has been enlisted by The Washington Post 's editorial page honcho, Fred Hiatt, to draw on his expertise (read, incurable Russophobia) to help stick President Donald Trump back into "Putin's pocket." (This has become increasingly urgent as the canard of "Russiagate" -- including the linchpin claim that Russia hacked the DNC -- lies gasping for air.)

In an oped on Thursday McFaul presented a long list of Vladimir Putin's alleged crimes, offering a more ostensibly sophisticated version of amateur Russian specialist, Rep. Jason Crow's (D-CO) claim that: "Vladimir Putin wakes up every morning and goes to bed every night trying to figure out how to destroy American democracy."

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry with McFaul meeting Vladimir Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, on May 7, 2013. (State Department)

McFaul had -- well, let's call it an undistinguished career in Moscow. He arrived with a huge chip on his shoulder and proceeded to alienate just about all his hosts, save for the rabidly anti-Putin folks he openly and proudly cultivated. In a sense, McFaul became the epitome of what Henry Wooton described as the role of ambassador -- "an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country." What should not be so readily accepted is an ambassador who comes back home and just can't stop misleading.

Not to doubt McFaul's ulterior motives; one must assume him to be an "honest man" -- however misguided, in my opinion. He seems to be a disciple of the James Clapper-Curtis LeMay-Joe McCarthy School of Russian Analysis.

Clapper, a graduate summa cum laude , certainly had the Russians pegged! Clapper was allowed to stay as Barack Obama's director of national intelligence for three and a half years after perjuring himself in formal Senate testimony (on NSA's illegal eavesdropping). On May 28, 2017 Clapper told NBC's Chuck Todd about "the historical practices of the Russians, who typically, are almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/tcN_tWk089w?feature=oembed

As a finale, in full knowledge of Clapper's proclivities regarding Russia, Obama appointed him to prepare the evidence-impoverished, misnomered "Intelligence Community Assessment" claiming that Putin did all he could, including hacking the DNC, to help Trump get elected -- the most embarrassing such "intelligence assessment" I have seen in half a century .

Obama and the National Security State

I have asked myself if Obama also had earned some kind of degree from the Clapper/LeMay/McCarthy School, or whether he simply lacked the courage to challenge the pitiably self-serving "analysis" of the National Security State. Then I re-read "Obama Misses the Afghan Exit-Ramp" of June 24, 2010 and was reminded of how deferential Obama was to the generals and the intelligence gurus, and how unconscionable the generals were -- like their predecessors in Vietnam -- in lying about always seeing light at the end of the proverbial tunnel.

Thankfully, now ten years later, this is all documented in Craig Whitlock's, "The Afghanistan Papers: At War With the Truth." Corporate media, who played an essential role in that "war with the truth", have not given Whitlock's damning story the attention it should command (surprise, surprise!). In any case, it strains credulity to think that Obama was unaware he was being lied to on Afghanistan.

Some Questions

Clark Gable (l.) with Charles Laughton (r.) in Mutiny on the Bounty, 1935.

Does no one see the irony today in the Democrats' bashing Trump on Afghanistan, with the full support of the Establishment media? The inevitable defeat there is one of the few demonstrable disasters not attributable directly to Trump, but you would not know that from the media. Are the uncorroborated reports of Russian bounties to kill U.S. troops aimed at making it appear that Trump, unable to stand up to Putin, let the Russians drive the rest of U.S. troops out of Afghanistan?

Does the current flap bespeak some kind of "Mutiny on the Bounties," so to speak, by a leaker aping Eric Chiaramella? Recall that the Democrats lionized the CIA official seconded to Trump's national security council as a "whistleblower" and proceeded to impeach Trump after Chiaramella leaked information on Trump's telephone call with the president of Ukraine. Far from being held to account, Chiaramella is probably expecting an influential job if his patron, Joe Biden, is elected president. Has there been another mutiny in Trump's White House?

And what does one make of the spectacle of Crow teaming up with Rep. Liz Cheney (R, WY) to restrict Trump's planned pull-out of troops from Afghanistan, which The Los Angeles Times reports has now been blocked until after the election?

Hiatt & McFaul: Caveat Editor

And who published McFaul's oped? Fred Hiatt, Washington Post editorial page editor for the past 20 years, who has a long record of listening to the whispers of anonymous intelligence sources and submerging/drowning the subjunctive mood with flat fact. This was the case with the (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the U.S.-UK attack. Readers of the Post were sure there were tons of WMD in Iraq. That Hiatt has invited McFaul on stage should come as no surprise.

To be fair, Hiatt belatedly acknowledged that the Post should have been more circumspect in its confident claims about the WMD. "If you look at the editorials we write running up [to the war], we state as flat fact that he [Saddam Hussein] has weapons of mass destruction," Hiatt said in an interview with the Columbia Journalism Review . "If that's not true, it would have been better not to say it." [CJR, March/April 2004]

At this word of wisdom, Consortium News founder, the late Robert Parry, offered this comment: "Yes, that is a common principle of journalism, that if something isn't real, we're not supposed to confidently declare that it is." That Hiatt is still in that job speaks volumes.

'Uncorroborated, Contradicted, or Even Non-Existent'

It is sad to have to remind folks 18 years later that the "intelligence" on WMD in Iraq was not "mistaken;" it was fraudulent from the get-go. The culprits were finally exposed but never held to account.

Announcing on June 5, 2008, the bipartisan conclusions from a five-year study by the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Jay Rockefeller ( D-WV) said the attack on Iraq was launched "under false pretenses." He described the intelligence conjured up to "justify" war on Iraq as "uncorroborated, contradicted, or even non-existent."

Homework

Yogi Berra in 1956. (Wikipedia)

Here's an assignment due on Monday. Read McFaul's oped carefully. It appears under the title: "Trump would do anything for Putin. No wonder he's ignoring the Russian bounties: Russia's pattern of hostility matches Trump's pattern of accommodation."

And to give you a further taste, here is the first paragraph:

"Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have paid Taliban rebels in Afghanistan to kill U.S. soldiers. Having resulted in at least one American death, and maybe more, these Russian bounties reportedly produced the desired outcome. While deeply disturbing, this effort by Putin is not surprising: It follows a clear pattern of ignoring international norms, rules and laws -- and daring the United States to do anything about it."

Full assignment for Monday: Read carefully through each paragraph of McFaul's text and select which of his claims you would put into one or more of the three categories adduced by Sen. Rockefeller 12 years ago about WMD on Iraq. With particular attention to the evidence behind McFaul's claims, determine which of the claims is (a) "uncorroborated"; which (b) "contradicted"; and which (c) "non-existent;" or (d) all of the above. For extra credit, find one that is supported by plausible evidence.

Yogi Berra might be surprised to hear us keep quoting him with "Deja vu, all over again." Sorry, Yogi, that's what it is; you coined it.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. During his 27-year career as a CIA analyst, he prepared and briefed The President's Daily Brief for Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Please Contribute to
 Consortium News on its 25th Anniversary

Donate securely with PayPal here .

Or securely by credit card or check by clicking the red button: 6075

Tags: Clark Gabel Curtis LeMay Donald Trump Eric Chiaramella Henry Wooton James Clapper Joe Biden Joe McCarthy Michael McFaul Ray McGovern Vladimir Putin Yogi Berra

Tarus77 , July 6, 2020 at 14:25

Gad, one wonders if it can ever get much lower in the press and the answer is yes, it can and will go lower, i.e. the mcfaul/hiatt tag team. They are still plumbing for the lows.

The question becomes just how stupid these two are or how stupid do they believe the readership is to read and believe this garbage.

Voice from Europe , July 6, 2020 at 11:58

By now the Russia did it ! is in effect a joke in Russia. Economically, politically, geo strategically China and Asia and Africa have become more important and reliable partners of Russia than the USA. And Europe is also dropping fast on the trustworthy partners list…..

John , July 5, 2020 at 12:55

Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are both long-time members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), flagship of the globalist “liberal world order”. The CFR and its many interlocking affiliates, along with their media assets and frontmen in government, have dominated US policy since WW2. Most of the Fed chairmen and secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense and CIA have been CFR members, including Jerome Powell and Mark Esper.

The major finance, energy, defense and media corporations are CFR sponsors, and several of their execs are members. David Rubenstein, billionaire founder of the notorious Carlyle Group, is the current CFR chairman. Laurence Fink, billionaire chairman of BlackRock, is a CFR director. See lists at the CFR website.

Anna , July 6, 2020 at 09:38

Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are both very active promoters of hate crimes. Neither has any decency hence decency is allergic to war profiteers and opportunistic liars.
The poor USA; to descend to such a deep moral hole that both Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are still alive and prospering. Shamelessness and presstituting are paid well in the US.

Juan M Escobedo , July 5, 2020 at 11:35

Dems and Reps are already mad.You cannot destroy what does not exist;like Democracy in these United States.Nor God or Putin could.This has always being a fallacy.This is not a democracy;same thing with”comunist China or the USSR.Those two were never socialist.There has never being a real Socialist or Communist country.

Guy , July 4, 2020 at 12:26

“It is sad to have to remind folks 18 years later that the “intelligence” on WMD in Iraq was not “mistaken;” it was fraudulent from the get-go. The culprits were finally exposed but never held to account.”
That statement goes to the crux of the matter .Why should journalists care about what is true or a lie in their reports ,they know they will never be held to account .They should be held to account through the court system . A lie by any journalist should be actionable by any court of law . The fear of jail time would sort out the scam journalists we presently have to endure . As it is they have perverted the profession of journalism and it is the law of the jungle .No true democracy should put up with this. We are surrounded with lies that are generated by the very establishment that should protect it’s citizens from same .

Skip Scott , July 4, 2020 at 15:36

They are spoon fed those lies by our “intelligence” agencies. As CNN’s Jeff Zucker said, “We’re not investigators, we’re journalists”.
Replace “journalists” with “toadies” or “shills” for our “intelligence” community and you’ve gotten to the truth of the matter.

Anna , July 6, 2020 at 09:50

The ‘journalists’ observe how things have been going on for Cheney the Traitor and Bush the lesser — nothing happened to the mega criminals. The hate-bursting and war-profiteering Cheney’s daughter has even squeezed into US Congress.
In a healthy society where human dignity is cherished, the Cheney family will be ostracized and the family name became a synonym for the word ‘traitor.’ In the unhealthy scoiety of Clintons, Obamas, Epstein, Mueller, Adelsons, Clapper, and Krystols, human dignity is a sin.

Ricard Coleman , July 6, 2020 at 11:42

Our institutions including journalism are not merely corrupt, they are degenerate. That is, the corruption is not occasional or the exception is is by design, desired and entirely normal.

Stan W. , July 4, 2020 at 12:10

I’m still confident that Durham’s investigation will expose and successfully prosecute the maggots that infest our government.

Skip Scott , July 4, 2020 at 15:29

What is the basis for this confidence?

John Puma , July 4, 2020 at 12:03

Re: whether Obumma “had earned some kind of degree from the Clapper/LeMay/McCarthy School” of Russia Analytics.

It would be a worthy addition to his degree collection featuring that earned from the Neville Chamberlain Night School of Critical Political Negotiation.

Jeff Harrison , July 4, 2020 at 11:16

Hmmm. Lessee. The US attacks Afghanistan with about the same legitimacy that we had when we attacked Iraq and the Taliban are in charge. We oust the Taliban from power and put our own puppets in place. What idiot thinks that the Taliban are going to need a bounty to kill Americans?

Wendy LaRiviere , July 4, 2020 at 18:29

Jeff Harrison, I like your logic. Plus, I understand that far fewer Americans are being killed in Afghanistan than were under Obama’s administration.

AnneR , July 4, 2020 at 10:27

Frankly, I am sick to death of the unwarranted, indeed bestial Russophobia that is megaphoned minute by minute on NPR and the BBC World Service (only radio here since my husband died). If it isn’t this latest trumped up (ho ho) charge, there are repeated mentions, in passing, of course, of the Russiagate, hacking, Kremlin control of the Strumpet to back up the latest bunch of lies. Doesn’t matter at *all* that Russiagate was debunked, that even Mueller couldn’t actually demonstrably pull the DNC/ruling elites rabbit out of the hat, that the impeachment of the Strumpet went nowhere. And it clearly – by its total absence on the above radio broadcasts – doesn’t matter one iota that the Pentagonal hasn’t gone along, that gaping holes in the confabulation are (and were) obvious to those who cared to think with half a mind awake and reflecting on past US ruling elite lies, untruths, obfuscations. Nope. Just repeat, repeat, repeat. Orwell would clap his hands (not because he agreed with the atrocious politics but the lesson is learnt).

Added to the whipped up anti-Russia, decidedly anti-Putin crapola – is of course the Russian peoples’ vote, decision making on their own country’s changes to the Basic Law (a form of Constitution). When the radio broadcasts the usual sickening anti-Russian/Putin propaganda regarding this vote immediately prior they would state that the changes would install Putin for many more years: no mention that he would have to be elected, i.e. voted by the populace into the presidency. (This was repeated ad infinitum without any elaboration.) No other proposed changes were mentioned – certainly not that the Duma would gain greater control over the governance of the country and over the president’s cabinet. I.e. that the popularly elected (ain’t that what we call democracy??) representatives in the Duma (parliament) would essentially have more power than the president.

But most significantly, to my mind, no one has (well of course not – this is Russia) raised the issue of the fact that it was the Russian people, the vox populi/hoi polloi, who have had some say in how they are to be governed, how their government will work for them. HOW much say have we had/do we have in how our government functions, works – let alone for us, the hoi polloi? When did we the citizenry last have a voting say on ANY sentence in the Constitution that governs us??? Ummm I do believe it was the creation of the wealthy British descended slave holding, real estate ethnic-cleansing lot who wrote and ratified the original document and the hardly dissimilar Congressional and state types who have over the years written and voted on various amendments. And it is the members of the upper classes in the Supreme Court who adjudicate on its application to various problems.

BUT We the hoi polloi have never, ever had a direct opportunity to individually vote for or against any single part of the Constitution which is supposed to be the “democratic” superstructure which governs us. Unlike the Russians a couple of days ago.

Richard Coleman , July 6, 2020 at 15:48

“HOW much say have we had/do we have in how our government functions, works…” See, that’s your mistake right there. WE don’t have a government. We need one, but we ain’t got one. THEY have a government which they let us go through the motions of electing. ‘Member back when Bernie was talking about a Political Revolution?

Here’s a little fact for you. The five most populous states have a total of 123,000,000 people. That’s 10 Senators. The five least populated states have a total of 3.5 million. That’s also 10 Senators. Democracy anyone?

vinnieoh , July 4, 2020 at 09:37

There have been three coup d’état within the US within the lifetimes of most that read these pages. The first was explained to us by Eisenhower only as he was exiting his time from the national stage; the MIC had co-opted our government. The second happened in 2000, with the putsch in Florida and then the adoption by the neocon cabal of Bush /Chaney of the PNAC blueprint “Strategies for Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (Defenses – hahahaha – shit!). The third happened late last year and early this year when the bottom-up grass-roots movement of progressivism was crushed by the DNC and the cold-warrior hack Biden was inserted as the champion of “the opposition party.”

And, make no mistake that Kamala Harris WILL be his running mate. It was always going to be Harris. It was to be Harris at the TOP of the ticket as the primaries began, but she wasn’t even placing in the top tier in any of the contests. However, the poohbahs and strategists of the DNC are nothing if not determined and consistent. If Biden should win, we should all start practicing now saying “President Harris” because that is what the future holds. For the DNC, she looks the part, she sounds the part, but more importantly she is the very definition of the status quo, corporate ass-kisser, MIC tool.

The professional political class have fully colluded to fatally cripple this democratic republic. “Democracy” is just a word they say like, “Where’s my kickback?” (excuse me – my “motivation”.) This bounty scam and the rehabilitation of GW Bush are nothing but a full blitzkrieg flanking of Trump on the right. And Trump of course is so far out of his depth that he actually believes that Israel is his friend. (A hint Donny: Israel is NO-ONE’S friend.)

What is most infuriating? hope-crushing? plain f$%&*#g scary? is that the majority of Americans from all quarters do not want any of what the professional political class keeps dumping on us. The very attempt at performing this upcoming election will finally and forever lay completely bare the collapse of a functioning government. It’s going to be very ugly, and it may very well be the end. Dog help us all.

Richard Coleman , July 6, 2020 at 15:51

Don’t you think that the assassination of JFK counts as a coup d’etat?

Zhu , July 7, 2020 at 02:10

Apres moi, le Deluge.

John Drake , July 7, 2020 at 11:25

Oh gosh how can you forget the Kennedy Assassination. Most people don’t realize he was had ordered the removal of a thousand advisors from Vietnam starting the process of completely cutting bait there, as he had in Laos and Cambodia. All of which made the generals apoplectic. The great secret about Vietnam-which Ellsberg discovered much latter, and mentioned in his book Secrets, another good read- was that every president had been warned it was likely futile. Kennedy was the only one who took that intelligence seriously-like it was actually intelligent intelligence.

Enter stage right Allen Dulles(fired CIA chief), the anti Castro Cubans, the Mafia and most important the MIC; exit Jack Kennedy.

Douglas, JFK why he died and why it matters is the best work on the subject. And no Oswald did not do it; it was a sniper team from different angles, but read the book it gets complicated.

Roger , July 4, 2020 at 09:11

from Counterpunch.org : “Around 15,000 Soviet troops perished in the Afghan War between 1979 and 1989. The US funneled more than $20 billion to the Mujahideen and other anti-Soviet fighters over that same period. This works out to a “bounty” of $1.33 million for each Soviet soldier killed.”

Skip Scott , July 4, 2020 at 08:35

I am wondering how Cheney and Crow can block Trump from withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan. Is Trump Commander in Chief, or not? How can two senators stop the Commander in Chief from commanding troop movements? I realize they control the budget, but aren’t they crossing into illegality by restricting Trump’s ability to “command”?

Toad Sprocket , July 4, 2020 at 16:49

Yeah, I imagine it’s illegal. Didn’t Lindsay Graham threaten the same thing when Trump was thinking of pulling troops/”advisers” from Syria? And other congress warmongers joined in though I don’t think any legislation was passed. They can’t be bothered to authorize the starts of wars but want to step in when someone tries to end them.

Oh, and Schumer on South Korea troops, I think that one did pass. Almost certainly illegal if it came down to it, but our government is of course lawless. And our courts full of judges who are bought off or moronic or both.

dean 1000 , July 4, 2020 at 06:52

The soft coup attempt continues Ray. More lies and bullshit. It may continue until election day. Will the media fess-up to its lies after the fact again?

Francis Lee , July 4, 2020 at 04:49

“Vladimir Putin wakes up every morning and goes to bed every night trying to figure out how to destroy American democracy.”

Yes, of course it is a well-known ‘fact’ that Putin has nothing better to do than destory American democracy, and I bet he has dreams about it too! But I am minded to think that if anybody has a penchant for destroying American democracy it is the powers that be in the US deep state, intelligence agencies, and zionist cliques controlling the President and Congress.

”Those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.”

The American establishment seems to be suffering from a bad case of ‘projection’ as psychiatrists call it. That is to say accusing others of what they are themselves actually doing.

The whole idiotic circus would be hilarious if it were not so serious.

Antonia Young , July 4, 2020 at 12:20

Putin’s (and by extension the Russian Federation’s) primary objective is international stability. “Destroying America, dividing Americans is the last thing he wants.) Putin learned many lessons during the break-up of the U.S.S.R. observing the carpet baggers/oligarchs/vultures who descended on the weak nation, absconding with it’s wealth and resources at mere fractions of their real value. The deep state’s worst fear is the co-operation btwn Putin and President Trump to make the world more peaceful, stable, co-operative and prosperous.

rosemerry , July 4, 2020 at 16:10

The whole conceited and arrogant “belief” that
1. the USA has any resemblance to a democracy and
2 Pres. Putin has nothing else to do but think how he could do a better job of showing the destructive and irresponsible behavior of the USA than its own leaders” and media can do with no help
has no basis in reality.

If anything, Putin is such a stickler for international law, negotiations, avoidance of conflict that he is regarded by many as too Christian for this modern, individualistic, LBGTQ,”nobody matters but me” worldview of the USA!

Steve Naidamast , July 5, 2020 at 19:54

“If the enemy is self destructing, let them continue to do so…”

Napoleon

Zhu , July 7, 2020 at 02:17

“zionist cliques”: Christian Zionist fighting Fundies, eager for the End of the World, the Second Coming of Jesus.

delia ruhe , July 4, 2020 at 01:09

Yup, we got a Bountygate. Since my early morning visit to the Foreign Policy site, the place has exploded with breathless articles on the dastardly Putin and the cowardly Trump, who has so far failed to hold Putin to account. Reminded me of a similar explosion there when Russiagate finally got the attention the Dems thought it deserved.

(Anyone think that the intel community pays a fee to each of the FP columnists whenever one of their a propaganda narratives needs a push to get it off the ground?)

JOHN CHUCKMAN , July 4, 2020 at 08:52

Udo Ulfkotte was a German journalist.

He wrote a sensational book about the practices he experienced of the CIA paying German journalists to publish certain stories.

The book was a big best seller in Germany.

Its English translation was suppressed for years, but I believe is now available.

Susan Siens , July 5, 2020 at 16:30

Reply to John Chuckman: I’d love to read this book but it wasn’t available a few years ago when I looked. I’ll look again!

Voice from Europe , July 6, 2020 at 11:52

Gekaufte journalisten.
Ulfkotte admitted he signed off on numerous articles that were prepared for him during his career. The last year’s of his life he changed his mores and advocated “better die in truth than live with lies”.

Richard A. , July 4, 2020 at 00:59

I remember the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour from decades ago. Real experts on Russia like Dimitri Simes and Stephen Cohen were the ones to appear on that NewsHour. The NewsHour of today rarely has experts on Russia, just experts on Russia bashing–like Michael McFaul. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Antonia Young , July 3, 2020 at 23:35

Thank you, Ray for your clarion voice in the midst of WMD-seventeen-point-oh. Will the American people have the wisdom to notice how many times we’re being fooled? And finally wake up and stop supporting these questionable news outlets? With appreciation for your excellent analysis, as usual. ~Tonia Young (Formerly with the Topanga Peace Alliance)

Blessthebeasts , July 4, 2020 at 11:55

The majority of Americans have a lot more to worry about than the latest nonsense about Russia. I think most people just tune it out.
The ones being fooled are the fools who have been lapping this crap up from the get go. The supposed educated class who think themselves superior and well informed because they read and listen to the propaganda of PBS, NPR, NYT etc.
They don’t seem to realize the ship is sinking while they’re playing these ridiculous games.

Susan Siens , July 5, 2020 at 16:34

The supposedly educated class, yes! It can be stunning how people believe anything they hear on PBS or NPR, and then they make fun of people who believe anything they hear on Fox News. What’s the difference? Both are propaganda tools.

And, yes, watch us go down in flames while so-called progressives boo-hoo about Trump thinking he’s above the law (like every other president before him). Our local “peace and justice” group sent me an email asking me to sign a petition supporting Robert Mueller. I was gobsmacked, and then I realized our local “peace and justice” group had been taken over by Democratic Party “resisters.” Jeezums, why is every word hijacked?

[Jul 09, 2020] U.S. UK intensify campaign against Russia; UK harks back to first pillar of new Cold War, the Magnitsky hoax – The Komisar Scoop

Notable quotes:
"... Browder testimony to Senate Judiciary Committee ..."
"... claimed that Magnitsky was beaten to death by 8 riot guards ..."
"... Browder's Hermitage Fund in 2009 put out press release noting Starova's complaint to police. See last graph. Browder deleted it when his narrative changed, but the Wayback Machine preserved it. ..."
"... She says there has been a violation of Article 165 of the criminal code. ..."
"... Browder translates that into Starova accusing his companies of the theft of state funds. She talks about involvement of Viktor Markelov, who organized the fraud. In his testimony , Markelov said he got documents from a "Sergei Leonidovich." Magnitsky's full name was Sergei Leonidovich Magnitsky. ..."
"... Magnitsky's body on a cot in the hospital ward. ..."
"... Script: The position of the corpse of Mr. S. L. Magnitsky. ..."
"... Script: The situation in the [hospital] ward, viewed towards the door. ..."
"... Magnitsky face shoulders on hospital-bed ..."
"... Script: Chest image of Mr. S. L. Magnitsky. ..."
"... Browder doctored report claims a section illegible, third line. ..."
"... Russian document shows nothing is illegible. ..."
"... Dr. Robert Bux ..."
"... They do exist, but Browder did not give them to PHR. ..."
"... Forensic photos of bruises on Magnitsky's hands and knee ..."
"... Forensic schematic drawings showing marks of injuries show no injuries. ..."
"... closed craniocerebral injury ..."
"... No signs of a violent death detected." ..."
"... Magnitsky death certificate – no signs of a violent death detected ..."
Jul 09, 2020 | www.thekomisarscoop.com

U.S. & UK intensify campaign against Russia; UK harks back to first pillar of new Cold War, the Magnitsky hoax

By Lucy Komisar
July 6, 2020, Committee for an East-West Accord .

Browder testimony to Senate Judiciary Committee
claimed that Magnitsky was beaten to death by 8 riot guards .

The U.S. and UK are intensifying their collaborative Cold War against Russia. In Washington, calls for sanctions are based on the fake "bountygate," and the UK has sanctioned selected Russians based on William Browder's Magnitsky hoax.

The "bountygate" charge that Russia paid militants to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan is unproved by U.S. intelligence agencies and even discounted by the international wire-tapping National Security Agency (NSA). The UK sanctions against 25 Russians, judges and court officials, tax investigators, and prison doctors, are based on disproved claims by billionaire investor William Browder that they were responsible for the death of his accountant Sergei Magnitsky.

Browder's Magnitsky story is a pillar of America's Russiagate, which has five. Before bountygate, there was the 2019 Mueller Report which found no evidence that President Trump had colluded with the Russians, the Jan 2017 intelligence agencies' charge of Russian interference in the U.S. 2016 election which concludes with the admission that they had no proof; and the 2016 accusation that Russians had stolen Democratic National Committee emails, made by the private security group CrowdStrike, later walked back by CrowdStrike's president Shawn Henry at a secret House hearing in Dec 2017, but not revealed till this May.

With the UK, we return to the first pillar of the U.S. Russiagate story, the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which targeted many on the U.S. list. The Magnitsky Act is recognized as the beginning of the deterioration of U.S.-Russian relations. It is based on a hoax invented by Browder and easily disproved by documentary evidence, if governments cared about that.

The European Court of Human Rights on Magnitsky's arrest

First, a few of the obvious fake charges. Three judges are accused of detaining Magnitsky, which the UK says "facilitated" his mistreatment and denial of medical care. However, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in August 2019, "The Russians had good reason to arrest Sergei Magnitsky for Hermitage tax evasion." The Court said: "The accusations were based on documentary evidence relating to the payment of taxes by those companies and statements by several disabled persons who had confessed to sham work for the two companies."

The decision to arrest him was made after "investigating authorities noted that during a tax inquiry which had preceded the criminal investigation, Mr Magnitskiy had influenced witnesses, and that he had been preparing to flee abroad. In particular, he had applied for an entry visa to the United Kingdom and had booked a flight to Kyiv." He was a flight risk.

Several of the UK targets were said to have "facilitated" mistreatment of Magnitsky because they had been involved in a fraud he exposed. The reference is to a $230-million tax refund scam against the Russian Treasury.

Back to the ECHR: "The Court observe[d] that the inquiry into alleged tax evasion, resulting in the criminal proceedings against Mr Magnitskiy, started in 2004, long before he complained that prosecuting officials had been involved in fraudulent acts." The taxes were the real story; the fraud narrative was a cover-up.

The fake fraud story

Magnitsky did not uncover a massive fraud. That was the tax refund fraud in which companies engaged in collusive lawsuits, "lost" the suits, and "agreed" to pay damages equal to their entire year's profits. They then requested a full refund of taxes paid on the now zero gains. The fake lawsuits and payouts were first revealed to police by Russian shell company director Rimma Starova April 9 and July 10, 2008. (Russian originals April and July .)

With investigators on the trail, Browder's Hermitage Fund director Paul Wrench filed a complaint about the fraud, and Browder gave the story to The NYTimes and the Russian paper Vedomosti , which published it July 24, 2008, long before Magnitsky mentioned it in October 2008. His testimony did not accuse any officials.

Browder's Hermitage Fund in 2009 put out press release noting Starova's complaint to police. See last graph. Browder deleted it when his narrative changed, but the Wayback Machine preserved it. She says there has been a violation of Article 165 of the criminal code. Browder translates that into Starova accusing his companies of the theft of state funds. She talks about involvement of Viktor Markelov, who organized the fraud. In his testimony , Markelov said he got documents from a "Sergei Leonidovich." Magnitsky's full name was Sergei Leonidovich Magnitsky.

The main story at the center of the Magnitsky Acts in the U.S. and UK are not that he was mistreated or failed to get good medical care, which is what is mostly alleged here. That would put dozens of U.S. prison officials in the crosshairs, including recently those running state prison systems in Alabama and Mississippi . It is that he was murdered. In the only reference to beating, the head of the Matrosskaya detention center is accused of "ordering the handcuffing and beating" of Magnitsky before he died.

The U.S. Act, on which the British version is modeled, says that in detention Magnitsky "was beaten by 8 guards with rubber batons on the last day of his life." But the alleged assailants' names are not on the list. A key argument made by sponsors Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md) and Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass) was that the people targeted – tax investigators, court officials, hospital workers -- played a role in this claimed murder of Magnitsky. (Cardin and McGovern haven't responded to my requests to comment on contradictory evidence.)

UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab takes the same line, declaring, "You cannot set foot in this country, and we will seize your blood-drenched ill-gotten gains if you try," as he announced the new sanctions. Blood-drenched? No evidence supplied for the sanctioned Russians.

For Browder, the purpose of the Magnitsky Acts he promotes in the West is as a political tool to build a wall against Russia's attempt to have him answer for documented financial frauds totaling at least $100 million, and with new evidence as much as $400 million.

The death hoax: Forensic photos tell the truth

Here is the story of Magnitsky death hoax, with links to evidence, including how Browder forged and falsified documents.

Browder had the Russian forensic reports and photos that were made after Magnitsky's death but suppressed what did not support his arguments. The photos in this forensic report show that Magnitsky, allegedly beaten to death, didn't have a life-threatening mark on his body.

Magnitsky's body on a cot in the hospital ward. Script: The position of the corpse of Mr. S. L. Magnitsky.

Script: The situation in the [hospital] ward, viewed towards the door.

Magnitsky face shoulders on hospital-bed . Script: Chest image of Mr. S. L. Magnitsky.

Browder doctored part of another forensic report provided in translation to the Physicians for Human Rights, Cambridge, Mass., for its analysis of Magnitsky's death. It notes as "illegible" words that show there were no beating marks on Magnitsky's body and that there was no scalp damage. The deleted parts of the true translation are underlined.

"The cadaverous spots are abundant, bluish-violet, diffuse, located on the back surface of the neck, trunk, upper and lower extremities, with pressure on them with a finger disappear and restore their original color after 8 minutes. Damage not found on the scalp."

The doctored line reads, "The cadaverous spots are abundant, bluish-violet, diffuse, located on the back surface of the neck, trunk, upper and lower extremities, (illegible) not found on the scalp."

Here in the report that Browder gave PHR:

Browder doctored report claims a section illegible, third line.

The paragraph in the Russian document shows nothing is illegible.

Russian document shows nothing is illegible.

The Russian words omitted in the doctored English document are "при надавливании на них пальцем исчезают и восстанавливают свою первоначальную окраску через 8 минут. Повреждений на волосистой части головы не обнаружено."

The full Russian text can be translated online: Трупные пятна обильные, синюшно-фиолетовые, разлитые, располагающиеся на задней поверхности шеи, туловища, верхних и нижних конечностей, при надавливании на них пальцем исчезают и восстанавливают свою первоначальную окраску через 8 минут. Повреждений на волосистой части головы не обнаружено. Кости лицевого скелета, хрящи носа на ощупь целы. Глаза закрыты.

What the American pathologist who analyzed Browder's documents said

Dr. Robert Bux

Dr. Robert C. Bux, then coroner/chief medical examiner for the El Paso County Coroner's Office in Colorado Springs, was the forensic expert on the team that wrote the PHR report . Bux told me, "I do not think that these spots are contusions. Contusions will not go away and can be demonstrated by incising or cutting into the tissues under the skin. These are reportedly all on the posterior aspect of the neck, body and limbs and may represent postmortem lividity when the body was viewed by the prosecutor of the autopsy."

Dr. Bux said, "If this is lividity (red purple coloration of the skin) it is not yet fixed and will blanch to a pale skin color and red purple coloration will disappear. If the body is then placed face up i.e. supine then after a few minutes then it will appear again. This is simply due to blood settling in the small blood vessels and a function of gravity."

It's not what a layman reading Browder's forged "illegible" might think.

Dr. Bux added, "Having said all of this, I have never seen any autopsy photographs demonstrating this, and while photographs should have been taken to document all skin abnormalities as well as all surfaces of the body to document the presence or absence of trauma, I do not know if photographs were taken and withheld or never taken ."

PHR said, "A full and independent review of the cause of death of S.L. Magnitsky is not possible given the documentation presented and available to PHR." The document list is at its report pages 2-3 .

The PHR autopsy protocol claims that there are "photo tables on 2 sheets" and "schematic representation of injuries on 1 sheet. However, if they exist, they were not available for the present review."

They do exist, but Browder did not give them to PHR.

Browder posted and widely distributed this composite of photos of bruises on Magnitsky's hand and knee taken November 17 th , 2009, the day after the accountant's death.

Forensic photos of bruises on Magnitsky's hands and knee

He got them from Russian forensic Report 2052. Katie Fisher , doing public relations for Hermitage, posted them, but not the text, to Google Cloud.

The report cited "circular abrasions in the wrist area," a "bluish-violet bruise" and "multiple strip-like horizontally located abrasions."

It said, "A bruise located on the inner surface of the right lower limb in the projection of the ankle joint appeared 3-6 days before the time death."

It concluded, "[T]hese injuries in living persons do not entail a temporary disability or a significant permanent loss of general disability and are not regarded as harm to health, they are not in a cause and effect relationship with death."

The forensic reports attribute bruises to Magnitsky wearing handcuffs and kicking and hitting against cell doors. Magnitsky's lawyer Dmitri Kharitonov told filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, "I think he was simply banging on the door with all his force trying to make them let him out and none paid attention."

No other injuries found

The same report includes schematic drawings of Magnitsky's body on which to note other relevant marks or injuries.

The report said, "There were no marks or injuries noted on his head or torso No other injuries were found on the corpse " Browder didn't send PHR these drawings or make them public.

Forensic schematic drawings showing marks of injuries show no injuries.

Asked if there was evidence that Magnitsky was "beaten to death by riot guards," Dr. Bux told me, "I have no evidence to suggest that this occurred." For the record, PHR said Magnitsky's death was from untreated serious illness. Even without the body photos, its experts didn't claim a beating. Forensic analysts never have.

Manipulating the death certificate

To promote his fabrication, Browder posted a deceptive PowerPoint of the death certificate that indicated a " closed craniocerebral injury ?" circled in red, with the other text too small to read.

The true document told a different story: " No signs of a violent death detected." That url is at the bottom of Browder's own PowerPoint.

Magnitsky death certificate – no signs of a violent death detected

"Closed" meant "past." Several forensic documents include an interview with Magnitsky's mother Natalya Magnitskaya. She told investigators, "In 1993 – I can't say a more accurate date, S.L Magnitsky had a craniocerebral injury. He slipped on the street and as a result hit his head, after which he had headaches for some time."

Investigators obtained full medical records including this on page 29 of Report 555-10 in English, which Browder gave PHR: " On February 4, 1993, at about 08:40 a.m.., in his house entrance he slipped and fell down hitting his head, lost consciousness for a short time, vomited, attended for emergency help by an ambulance which took him to the City Clinic Hospital (GKB). Was examined by the neurosurgeon in the reception ward, craniogram without pathema. Diagnosis: brain concussion, recommended treatment to be taken on an out-patient clinic basis."

Browder's assertion that the "closed craniocerebral injury" came from a beating was a lie.

Browder's changing stories on the death of Magnitsky

Browder did not initially claim Magnitsky had been murdered. He said Magnitsky, left alone uncared for in a room, had simply died. After a few years, pushing the Magnitsky Act, he declared Magnitsky had been tied up and beaten by rubber baton-wielding thugs until dead.

Graphic by Michael Thau.

Browder December 2009 tells Chatham House , London, "I don't know what they were thinking. I don't know whether they killed him deliberately on the night of the 16th, or if he died of neglect."

"They put him in a straight-jacket, put him in an isolation room and waited 1 hour and 18 minutes until he died." December 2010, San Diego Law School .

Then, promoting the Magnitsky Act, "They put him in an isolation cell, tied him to a bed, then allowed eight guards guards beat him with rubber batons for 118 min until he was dead." December 2011, University of Cambridge Judge Business School.

" .they put him in an isolation cell, chained him to a bed, and eight riot guards came in and beat him with rubber batons. That night he was found dead on the cell floor." July 2017, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee .

What the Moscow Public Oversight Commission says really happened

The Public Oversight Commission , an independent Russian NGO, reports Magnitsky's final day differently. November 16, 2009:

7:00pm. The patient behaves inadequately. Talks to a "voice," looks disorientated, and shouts that someone wants to kill him. His condition is diagnosed as psychosis. The emergency doctor was called. There are no body damages apart from traces of handcuffs on the wrists.

7:30pm. He was left unattended without medical support.

8:48pm. Emergency team arrived. When emergency doctors entered the special cell, Sergei was sitting on the cot, with his eyes unfocused.

9:15pm. The patient was surveyed again as his condition deteriorated. He lost consciousness. The reanimation procedure was started (indirect heart massage and ventilation of lungs using the Ambu pillow). The patient was transferred to the special room where he received an artificial ventilation of lungs and a hormones injection.

9:50pm. The patient died."

The commission reported no evidence of beating. The Russian forensic and medical experts' conclusion was that Magnitsky had heart disease (arteriosclerosis), diabetes, hepatitis, and pancreatitis, some illnesses predating arrest. They wrote detailed criticism of the doctors' treatment, saying that it wasn't timely or adequate and that "the shortcomings in the provision of the medical assistance to S.L. Magnitsky" caused his death.

But it's not the riot squad beating Browder, with no evidence, sold to the U.S. Congress, the State Department, the UK Parliament, the Foreign Office and the media. Or that U.S. or UK authorities or media ever attempted to prove. Because like the Tonkin Gulf "incident" and Iraq's WMD, the weaponized Russiagate stories have a foreign/military policy goal. Truth is quite irrelevant.

ShareThis

Click here to donate to The Komisar Scoop

7 Responses to " U.S. & UK intensify campaign against Russia; UK harks back to first pillar of new Cold War, the Magnitsky hoax "

  1. Pingback: U.S. & UK intensify campaign against Russia; UK harks back to first pillar of new Cold War, the Magnitsky hoax – The Chaos Cat

  2. Pingback: Links 7/9/2020 | naked capitalism

  3. Pingback: Links 7/9/2020 – collabor8.life

  4. Pingback: Links 7/9/2020 – Viral News Connection

  5. Pingback: Links 7/9/2020 - Health News at Your Fingertips

  6. Pingback: Links 7/9/2020 – Beachum News

  7. matsb Jul 9, 2020 at 3:39 pm

    Very good article. Thank you!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


[Jul 09, 2020] Russia-Baiting Is the Only Game in Town by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... The cash must be Russian sourced , per the NYT, because a couple of low level Taliban types, who were likely tortured by the Afghan police, have said that it is so. ..."
Jul 09, 2020 | www.unz.com

There is particular danger at the moment that powerful political alignments in the United States are pushing strongly to exacerbate the developing crisis with Russia. The New York Times, which broke the story that the Kremlin had been paying the Afghan Taliban bounties to kill American soldiers, has been particularly assiduous in promoting the tale of perfidious Moscow. Initial Times coverage, which claimed that the activity had been confirmed by both intelligence sources and money tracking, was supplemented by delusional nonsense from former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice, who asks "Why does Trump put Russia first?" before calling for a "swift and significant U.S. response." Rice, who is being mentioned as a possible Biden choice for Vice President, certainly knows about swift and significant as she was one of the architects of the destruction of Libya and the escalation of U.S. military and intelligence operations directed against a non-threatening Syria.

The Times is also titillating with the tale of a low level drug smuggling Pashto businessman who seemed to have a lot of cash in dollars lying around, ignoring the fact that Afghanistan is awash with dollars and has been for years. Many of the dollars come from drug deals, as Afghanistan is now the world's number one producer of opium and its byproducts.

The cash must be Russian sourced , per the NYT, because a couple of low level Taliban types, who were likely tortured by the Afghan police, have said that it is so. The Times also cites anonymous sources which allege that there were money transfers from an account managed by the Kremlin's GRU military intelligence to an account opened by the Taliban. Note the "alleged" and consider for a minute that it would be stupid for any intelligence agency to make bank-to-bank transfers, which could be identified and tracked by the clever lads at the U.S. Treasury and NSA. Also try to recall how not so long ago we heard fabricated tales about threatening WMDs to justify war. Perhaps the story would be more convincing if a chain of custody could be established that included checks drawn on the Moscow-Narodny Bank and there just might be a crafty neocon hidden somewhere in the U.S. intelligence community who is right now faking up that sort of evidence.

Other reliably Democratic Party leaning news outlets, to include CNN, MSNBC and The Washington Post all jumped on the bounty story, adding details from their presumably inexhaustible supply of anonymous sources. As Scott Horton observed the media was reporting a "fact" that there was a rumor.

Inevitably the Democratic Party leadership abandoned its Ghanaian kente cloth scarves, got up off their knees, and hopped immediately on to their favorite horse, which is to claim loudly and in unison that when in doubt Russia did it. Joe Biden in particular is "disgusted" by a "betrayal" of American troops due to Trump's insistence on maintaining "an embarrassing campaign of deferring and debasing himself before Putin."

The Dems were joined in their outrage by some Republican lawmakers who were equally incensed but are advocating delaying punishing Russia until all the facts are known. Meanwhile, the "circumstantial details" are being invented to make the original tale more credible, including crediting the Afghan operation to a secret Russian GRU Army intelligence unit that allegedly was also behind the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury England in 2018.

Reportedly the Pentagon is looking into the circumstances around the deaths of three American soldiers by roadside bomb on April 8, 2019 to determine a possible connection to the NYT report. There are also concerns relating to several deaths in training where Afghan Army recruits turned on their instructors. As the Taliban would hardly need an incentive to kill Americans and as only seventeen U.S. soldiers died in Afghanistan in 2019 as a result of hostile action, the year that the intelligence allegedly relates to, one might well describe any joint Taliban-Russian initiative as a bit of a failure since nearly all of those deaths have been attributed to kinetic activity initiated by U.S. forces.

The actual game that is in play is, of course, all about Donald Trump and the November election. It is being claimed that the president was briefed on the intelligence but did nothing. Trump denied being verbally briefed due to the fact that the information had not been verified. For once America's Chief Executive spoke the truth, confirmed by the "intelligence community," but that did not stop the media from implying that the disconnect had been caused by Trump himself. He reportedly does not read the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB), where such a speculative piece might indeed appear on a back page, and is uninterested in intelligence assessments that contradict what he chooses to believe. The Democrats are suggesting that Trump is too stupid and even too disinterested to be president of the United States so they are seeking to replace him with a corrupt 78-year-old man who may be suffering from dementia.

The Democratic Party cannot let Russia go because they see it as their key to future success and also as an explanation for their dramatic failure in 2016 which in no way holds them responsible for their ineptness. One does not expect the House Intelligence Committee, currently headed by the wily Adam Schiff, to actually know anything about intelligence and how it is collected and analyzed, but the politicization of the product is certainly something that Schiff and his colleagues know full well how to manipulate. One only has to recall the Russiagate Mueller Commission investigation and Schiff's later role in cooking the witnesses that were produced in the subsequent Trump impeachment hearings.

Schiff predictably opened up on Trump in the wake of the NYT report, saying "I find it inexplicable in light of these very public allegations that the president hasn't come before the country and assured the American people that he will get to the bottom of whether Russia is putting bounties on American troops and that he will do everything in his power to make sure that we protect American troops."

Schiff and company should know, but clearly do not, that at the ground floor level there is a lot of lying, cheating and stealing around intelligence collection. Most foreign agents do it for the money and quickly learn that embroidering the information that is being provided to their case officer might ultimately produce more cash. Every day the U.S. intelligence community produces thousands of intelligence reports from those presumed "sources with access," which then have to be assessed by analysts. Much of the information reported is either completely false or cleverly fabricated to mix actual verified intelligence with speculation and out and out lies to make the package more attractive. The tale of the Russian payment of bribes to the Taliban for killing Americans is precisely the kind of information that stinks to high heaven because it doesn't even make any political or tactical sense, except to Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and the New York Times. For what it's worth, a number of former genuine intelligence officers including Paul Pillar, John Kiriakou , Scott Ritter , and Ray McGovern have looked at the evidence so far presented and have walked away unimpressed. The National Security Agency (NSA) has also declined to confirm the story, meaning that there is no electronic trail to validate it.

Finally, there is more than a bit of the old hypocrisy at work in the damnation of the Russians even if they have actually been involved in an improbable operation with the Taliban. One recalls that in the 1970s and 1980s the United States supported the mujahideen rebels fighting against the Soviet presence in Afghanistan. The assistance consisted of weapons, training, political support and intelligence used to locate, target and kill Soviet soldiers. Stinger missiles were provided to bring down helicopters carrying the Russian troops. The support was pretty much provided openly and was even boasted about, unlike what is currently being alleged about the Russian assistance. The Soviets were fighting to maintain a secular regime that was closely allied to Moscow while the mujahideen later morphed into al-Qaeda and the Islamist militant Taliban subsequently took over the country, meaning that the U.S. effort was delusional from the start.

So, what is a leaked almost certainly faux story about the Russian bounties on American soldiers intended to accomplish? It is probably intended to keep a "defensive" U.S. presence in Afghanistan, much desired by the neocons, a majority in Congress and the Military Industrial Complex (MIC), and it will further be played and replayed to emphasize the demonstrated incompetence of Donald Trump. The end result could be to secure the election of a pliable Establishment flunky Joe Biden as president of the United States. How that will turn out is unpredictable, but America's experience of its presidents since 9/11 has not been very encouraging.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

Zarathustra , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:28 am GMT

Also there are the poppy fields.

Milton , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:35 am GMT

The Deep State vermin who pulled-off the violent, proxy overthrow of Yanukovych in 2014, and who are also behind the Arab Spring, Syrian Rebels, ISIS, and the ongoing domestic unrest Stateside, are the descendants of the vermin who overthrew Christian Russia in 1917 using the same modus operandi of color revolution and “peaceful protests.”. Putin undid all their hard work in Russia and kicked them out and seized their ill gotten gains: this, coupled with their congenital hatred of Russia, is the reason for the non-stop, bipartisan refrain of “Russia, Russia, Russia.”

anonymous [316] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT

It is probably intended to keep a “defensive” U.S. presence in Afghanistan, much desired by the neocons, a majority in Congress and the Military Industrial Complex (MIC), and it will further be played and replayed to emphasize the demonstrated incompetence of Donald Trump.

There are other reasons for wishing to stay in Afghanistan. Generals don’t like losing wars. It is personally humiliating to retreat. The whole country is also worn down by lost wars and the psychological blow lasts for over 10 years like during the post-Vietnam era. Keeping 10,000 troops in Afghanistan permanently won’t win the war but it will prevent a defeat and potentially humiliating last minute evacuation when the Taliban retake Kabul.

Also Al-Qaeda is still present in Afghanistan: “Al-Qaeda has 400 to 600 operatives active in 12 Afghan provinces and is running training camps in the east of the country, according to the report released Friday. U.N. experts, drawing their research from interviews with U.N. member states, including their intelligence and security services, plus think tanks and regional officials, say the Taliban has played a double game with the Trump Administration, consulting with al-Qaeda senior leaders throughout its 16 months of peace talks with U.S. officials and reassuring Al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri, among others, that the Taliban would “honour their historical ties” to the terrorist group.” https://time.com/5844865/afghanistan-peace-deal-taliban-al-qaeda/

vot tak , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:10 am GMT

While the melodrama about trump=pro Russia and dems=anti Russia makes good political theater to keep folks running in circles chasing their tails, this is not the main reason for the continuous attacks on Russia by organs of the zpc/nwo. The main reason is Russia is not owned by them. Not a colony. The main reason for the psywar is not about trump vs dems, it is about keeping the Russia=bad guys theme seeded in the propaganda. That was the main reason behind “Russiagate”, as well. And as with that scam, both “sides” knowingly played their part hyping the theater to keep that Russia=bad guy propaganda theme in the mind of americans.

Robert Dolan , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:12 am GMT

I can’t imagine that any intelligent person believes this bullshit about Russia. I completely tune it out the same way I tuned out any news about “CHAZ.”

Some things are just too silly to bother with.

Harold Smith , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:29 am GMT

“So, what is a leaked almost certainly faux story about the Russian bounties on American soldiers intended to accomplish? It is probably intended to keep a “defensive” U.S. presence in Afghanistan, much desired by the neocons, a majority in Congress and the Military Industrial Complex (MIC), and it will further be played and replayed to emphasize the demonstrated incompetence of Donald Trump.”

Let’s say for the sake of argument that the story is true. So what? I don’t see how it can be used as justification to double down on a pointless war. (Reasonable people might see it as another reason to get out of Afghanistan sooner rather than later).

Moreover, I don’t think they’d have to create such drama to get Trump the imperialist to keep the troops in Afghanistan (if he actually had any intention to withdraw them in the first place).

This propaganda effort reminds me of the Skripal affair. Perhaps Trump’s handlers and enablers realize that he’ll lose the election (if we have one) so they’re trying to manipulate him into escalating tensions with Russia (just as they are with China, Iran and Venezuela).

Alfred , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:30 am GMT

The Americans were always very proud and upfront about how they organized, trained, equipped and financed the Taliban to oust the Russians from Afghanistan. In view of this, why do they act so surprised should the Russians do something similar on a much smaller scale?

Obviously, the whole story was concocted in Washington, but so what?

Anyone with half a brain should know that the Americans are in Afghanistan because the Americans control the world trade in narcotics. Columbia is the cocaine end of the business.

I do wish some smart chemists would synthesize heroin and cocaine in a laboratory and put the CIA out of business.

Patagonia Man , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:33 am GMT

“and it will further be played and replayed to emphasize the demonstrated incompetence of Donald Trump”

The demonization of a democratically-elected President by the zionist-owned New York Times , Washington Post and CNN is somewaht reminiscent of the demonization of a certain Austrian in the Western media after the 1933 World Jewry’s declaration of war on Nazi Germany.

“He who controls the narrative controls the consciousness”

With Wolf Blitz’s, Bolton’s, and this week’s release of Trump’s relative’s book discrediting his mental health. How many books is that now???

But, times have moved on. Trump can ride this wave by learning the dark art of playing the victim using the mantra ‘look how hard I’m trying’ and appealing to US voters as their ‘law and order’ president.

Geopolitically speaking, if the US Zio-cons were smart, rather than suffering from ‘Groupthink’, they would be trying to entice Russia away from its partner, China, and draw Russia into playing a greater role in Europe. Recall that Putin had asked if Russia could join NATO.

But, alas, they’re still making the same mistake they did in 1991 after the collapse of Central Industrialism in the former USSR.

No Friend Of The Devil , says: July 7, 2020 at 6:51 am GMT

The Mujahudeen morphing into Al Qaeda is a new one on me that I have never heard before. I had read and heard countless times that it was Al Qaeda all along in Afghanistan that the U.S. assisted to fight against the USSR. It does not make sense either, since the MEK ( Mujahudeen ) is a twisted Shiite cult Iranian, and Al Qaeda is Arabic and twisted Sunni cult. So, the language and religious differences do not make any sense that one became the other.

I guess that it makes perfect sense to say anything at all, regardless of the facts, to the Terrible Trio in the DNC, just to keep the focus on themselves, rather than on Biden.

Mike_from_Russia , says: July 7, 2020 at 7:32 am GMT

We in Russia read both the main and alternative press in the United States with great interest. Sites with those translations are quite popular.

Mikhail , says: • Website July 7, 2020 at 7:40 am GMT

Initial Times coverage, which claimed that the activity had been confirmed by both intelligence sources and money tracking, was supplemented by delusional nonsense from former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice, who asks “Why does Trump put Russia first?” before calling for a “swift and significant U.S. response.” Rice, who is being mentioned as a possible Biden choice for Vice President, certainly knows about swift and significant as she was one of the architects of the destruction of Libya and the escalation of U.S. military and intelligence operations directed against a non-threatening Syria.

The pathetic Rice has plenty of company. During a 7/5 CNN puff segment with Dana Bash, Tammy Duckworth (another potential Biden VP), out of the blue said that the Russians put out a bounty on US forces. Of course, Bash didn’t challenge Duckworth.

Downplayed in all of this is the fact that Russia was one of the first, if not the first nation, to console the US on 9/11, followed by Russian assistance to the US military operation in Afghanistan.

Achilles Wannabe , says: July 7, 2020 at 7:54 am GMT

“…the kind of information that stinks to high heaven because it doesn’t even make any political or tactical sense, except to Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and the New York Times.”

Pelosi is the proud daughter of a shabbos goy father; Schumer is “shomer” or professed guardian of Israel; Schiff is the decendent of the Internationale Banker who supported Trotsky’s take down of the Czar; the NYT is what happens when Hebrews learn to write English. The Jews have been trying to rule Russia for almost 200 years as Solzhenitsyn would have told us if he could have gotten a publisher in the Jewish American publishing industry. If Stalin hadn’t thrown the Bolshevik Jews out, there might not have been a cold war. Watch out Gentiles. These people have taken us into 3 wars for their interests and they NEVER change.

Ray Caruso , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:01 am GMT

And, of course, the “conservative” maggots are going along with the obvious liberal lies once again. There has never been a group of more cowardly and worthless individuals than American “conservatives”.

Emily , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:10 am GMT

Russia
The hope of the world.
Edgar Cayce
Famous US psychic.

As the USA continues its path into a political, moral and military cesspit of pure corruption, lies, violence, mass murder and sheer evil, it is increasingly difficult to argue with Cayce.
He was certainly on to something, and that something was like, 80 years ago.
One can even put more belief and trust in a psychic these days – than anything being claimed or reported by the USA alphabets, government or MSM
Sickening and frightening really.

Emily , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:15 am GMT
@Zarathustra

Absolutely and full of the USA military.
Take a look.
Notice U tube has censored the Vid.
Tells you all you need to know about the content – if you have half a brain …….
https://www.globalresearch.ca/drug-war-american-troops-are-protecting-afghan-opium-u-s-occupation-leads-to-all-time-high-heroin-production/5358053

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:23 am GMT

Philip, I wish you hadn’t written, “a certainly forks story.”

I’ve been seeing that too much, recently, that silly fashion of using “forks” for “false”.

Please stop it. Use correct English.

Emily , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:25 am GMT
@anonymous

There are other reasons for wishing to stay in Afghanistan. Generals don’t like losing wars

You would have thought by now the American Generals would have got used to ‘losing wars’.
They haven’t won one other than Grenada in living memory.
The Russians even had to win WW2 for them….
Russia and China would eat them alive today.
So we are now down to sheer bullying, bluster and illegal economic sabotage.
Venezuela springs to mind.

Franklin Ryckaert , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:47 am GMT
@Milton

Yes, but they also hate Putin for liberating Russia from its rapacious oligarchs, nearly all of whom were Jews. The present artificially created hatred for Russia in the US is in reality the hatred of the frustrated Jewish Mafia.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:59 am GMT
@Alfred

I agree. Except it would be fatal for the smart chemists. They’d all die for reasons smart chemists wouldn’t be able to work out.

But isn’t this the Art of the Deal? Breaching the deal? Hadn’t the US just made a deal with the Taliban to pull out? Pull its troops out?

So Russia was needed to help the U.S. pull out of the deal, right? Doesn’t Russia provide that help again and again and again?

animalogic , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:07 am GMT
@Robert Dolan

“I can’t imagine that any intelligent person believes this bullshit about Russia”

Lenny is clapping his hands excitedly.
“Oy believe it, George ! I do – I do – I do !”
George grunts, clears his throat & spits with some force & accuracy at a scrunched up copy of the NYT.

animalogic , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:14 am GMT
@Harold Smith

“Let’s say for the sake of argument that the story is true.”
For amusement’s sake, lets wonder what would happen should the Russians offer a bounty to US & allied troops to kill each other . A kind of cash incentive to bring back the final years of the Vietnam war.

Anon [833] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:26 am GMT

It sure will be entertaining to watch Joe Biden try to cope with the duties of the presidency. He makes the fictional President Camacho from the movie “Idiocracy” look like a statesman with the intellectual skills of a Teddy Roosevelt by comparison. I can picture his inaugural address in my head, as he inevitably loses his place on the teleprompter and starts babbling about pony soldiers and you know, the thing. After a grope fest at his inaugural ball, instead of the Oval Office he will immediately be consigned to the White House basement for the duration of his term. If you thought an inarticulate President Donnie made for good reality TV, just wait till a totally incoherent President Joe has the whole world rollicking with laughter. Plus, Republicans get their turn to amuse with grid lock of the Congress and the discharge of mass quantities of bog sediment at the administration every single day for four solid years. It’s a win for comedy no matter which candidate is elected!

animalogic , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:29 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

Ann, you’ve got the quote wrong. Here is what he actually wrote:

“So, what is a leaked almost certainly faux story about the Russian bounties”

I’m going to assume you didn’t mean “forks” but actually “faux”.
Using “faux” is here is not incorrect. Giraldi could have meant the NYT article was “not real, but made to look or seem real” — which goes considerably further than “false”.
However, that does not necessarily mean that other users of “faux” are not indulging themselves in a “silly fashion”.

mcohen , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:51 am GMT

Meena talk to me

Robjil , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:52 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

Forked tongue.

In that sense it makes sense.

The US/Israel and its Zion MSM always talks in Forked tongue.

Patagonia Man , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:56 am GMT
@Emily to consecrate Russia to the heart of Mother Mary – which still hasn’t fully been fulfilled, btw – is another indication of Russia’s leadership in a community of a shared future for humanity, aka Community of Common Destiny (CCD), as advocated by the Russian President’s ‘double-helix’ partner, China’s President Xi Jinping.

Compare and contrast that with, then President, Obama’s words to Putin: “The United States has exclusive rights to anywhere in the world.”

What an incredibly exciting time to be alive!

Cheers!

Patagonia Man , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:07 am GMT
@anonymous

Just a headsup!

Newsweek, TIME, The Readers Digest , & CNN are US propaganda outlets. It would be unwise to cite any of these sources.

Cheers!

Franz , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
@Alfred family bankruptcy when every pharmacist knows they re-branded and off-shored their loot several years ago. Their fine was pocket lint to them.

But that fake allowed the corporate-government axis to make ALL serious painkillers effectively illegal, including the ones being used safely before Purdue Pharma came along.

Narcotics are safe when used properly, but where’s the CIA’s take there? So they killed their competitors and made your family doctor an agent. And sell lots of dope. Because the nation the CIA protects is in terminal debt, agencies need hard cash from somewhere .

tyrone , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:43 am GMT
@Robert Dolan

Yeah, but you don’t want to accidentally drive into some “CHAZ” ……planet of the apes scenario.

tyrone , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:51 am GMT
@Emily

That’s why the democrats and the left fight to keep the southern border open ,the hordes of third world peasants are just a “bonus”……look at who the drugs are destroying i.e. the target

Erzberger , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:52 am GMT

The Democrats have predictably been outdone by the anti-Trump Republicans in this matter. You can’t sink any lower in Russia-baiting than the Lincoln project’s recent release, “Fellow Traveler”. Beyond stupid and revolting. Gives you a clue of their very low opinion of the American voter

https://www.youtube.com/embed/eUBAAeuBpPQ?feature=oembed

peter mcloughlin , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:57 am GMT

There is a dangerous illusion – characterized in part by demonizing rivals – and that is the developing crisis is merely a re-run of the Cold War. After the Napoleonic wars the Congress system was established to maintain peace in Europe. It worked reasonably well, interrupted significantly by the Crimean war, but finally buried with the outbreak of WWI in 1914; it did not prevent that cataclysmic conflict. Then came the League of Nations for a short time; it did not stop WWII. The United Nations and other post-war institutions were established in the 1940s. Now we are in the approaches to WWIII. But very few see. The apocalyptic conflict feared during the Cold War is nearing.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

Sick of Orcs , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:18 am GMT

Russia Hoax 2 is supposed to keep our minds off the Uniparty’s anarcho-tyranny, but it’s awfully hard to fear Putin with orcs and shitlibs running amok wrecking statues of racist elks.

BL , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:30 am GMT
@Robert Dolan olostomy Bag, or were able to steal it on election night, Trump would be spending the rest of his life in prison right now.

And Russia would have acquiesced to, though more likely quietly assisted, the frame-up. What we don’t know at this point is what generational geopolitical payoff Russia was promised by Brennan in March 2016, for its participation. My suspicion is that Nord Stream II was merely a down payment.

I don’t envy Barr or Durham. How do they resolve this greatest political scandal in American history when at the center of it you have a former CIA Director who is a Russian mole.

Tom Welsh , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:55 am GMT

Michael Morell: “Let Us Kill Iranians and Russians in Syria!”

https://gosint.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/michael-morell-let-us-kill-iranians-and-russians-in-syria/

JoaoAlfaiate , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:55 am GMT

If you review the New York Times editorial page and its oped pieces you will see more half of the content each day is anti Trump. The Times has also played up the civil rights aspect of the BLM movement while playing down the hooliganism of Antifa and the looting by Blacks which has accompanied it. Many neighborhoods in Manhattan were trashed and looted far beyond what The Times reported. So promoting the “Russian Bounty” lie doesn’t surprise me at all. Remember also Times employees went absolutely crazy when the paper printed an oped by Sen. Tom Cotton. What a bunch of lying flakes and chicken shits.

Really No Shit , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:55 am GMT
@Franklin Ryckaert

“The Deep State vermin…” that @Milton is talking about is about the Jews. You’re merely reinforcing his salient points.

Tom Welsh , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:57 am GMT
@Anon

“… the intellectual skills of a Teddy Roosevelt…”

????

Patagonia Man , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:57 am GMT
@tyrone of more and more of the total of products and services produced in the US economy every year (GDP) goes to capital, i.e., the holders of wealth, rather than workers, which in turn creates a drag on further GDP – so eventually it becomes self defeating.

Think: Vicious Cycle of Poverty, as opposed to Virtuous Cycle of Prosperity.

But that explains why neither the Dems / Repubs are determined to do anything about the 1,000,000+ illegal immigrants crossing the US-Mexican border every year.

As said many times by many others: ‘The US has one political party – the business party, with 2 wings.’

Tom Welsh , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:59 am GMT
@Emily

“The Russians even had to win WW2 for them….”

The Soviets actually had to stop the Wehrmacht cold (very cold, indeed) and be ready to start rolling it back before the USA even dared to join the war.

Old and Grumpy , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:00 pm GMT
@Patagonia Man

US Ziocons movement is a family affair. They’re into the second and third generation, who are still following their daddy’s’ or grandpa’s playbook. Original ideas are hard to come by with this lot.

Z-man , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:04 pm GMT

The Democrats are suggesting that Trump is too stupid and even too disinterested to be president of the United States so they are seeking to replace him with a corrupt 78-year-old man who may be suffering from dementia.

Good one but what do you mean may be suffering ? (Grin)
Not only replace Trump with Biden but with all the radicals now infesting theDemo’krat party and manipulating demented, sleepy Joe.

anonymous [400] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:06 pm GMT

These are all made up stories. By the time one fake story is laboriously dismantled another one is made up. It’s always a game of playing catch-up. Russia makes a good boogyman and has served well in that role for three generations now so it’s a tested formula. It’s a dangerous game since all these idiots could sleepwalk us into an armed clash with Russia somewhere. Then of course there’ll plenty of problems but perhaps there’s a calculation that something like that could benefit this band of war inciters.

Patagonia Man , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:12 pm GMT
@BL ?

Are you not aware that cover stories are used to control explanations – to prevent any critical thinking by American voters of any incident/event?

This excellent,, short article explains what you need to know to defend yourself against cover stories in the future: Cover Stories Are Used To Control Explanations – UR columnist & insider Paul Craig Roberts.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/25/cover-stories-used-control-explanations/

Old and Grumpy , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:17 pm GMT

I know old liberals have ate up all things Russia, Russia, Russia. Have the POBs (people of brown)? Have all those post ’67 immigrants? They all vote democrats, and are now the future demographic of America. Its their kids that have to wanna die for the war machine now. Has the Yiddish propaganda sheet worked its magic on them? The 1619 Project sure did. My humble guess is no, despite their voting. Most just want money.

Folks, it is time to get your love ones to stop enlisting and re-enlisting in the US military. It is the only boycott we can do that will actually hurt.

Patagonia Man , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:19 pm GMT
@anonymous

anonymous[400]

“but perhaps there’s a calculation that something like that could benefit this band of war inciters.”

What better way for a tiny ethno-religious (~22 million) of getting majority-Christian nations to wipe each other out?

Same was true of WWI.

Except for Japan, the same was true of WWII.

Its not referred to as the oldest hatred for nuttin’!

anonymous [144] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:20 pm GMT

For what it’s worth, Pillar got shitcanned and rusticated by Cofer Black, Kiriakou got locked up, Ritter got framed as a pedo, and McGovern got the shit beat out of him by my DoS goons. So shut the fuck up a little, OK?

XXOO

Mistress Gina

Truth3 , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:30 pm GMT

Explainable in one simple sentence…

JEWS ARE LIARS AND THEY HATE RUSSIA AND WILL USE ANY LIE AS A WEAPON NO MATTER HOW STUPID IT MAY BE.

Z-man , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:31 pm GMT

So, what is a leaked almost certainly faux story about the Russian bounties on American soldiers intended to accomplish?

To sound like a broken record again , the CABAL hates Russia and specifically Putin because he re-established Christian Orthodoxy as the de facto state religion of Mother Russia. They would get The USA into a hot war with Russia if it meant hurting Putin, never mind what it would do to us. Their hatred is so strong that they could care less what it would do to America, the snakes that they are.

Dick French , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:40 pm GMT

All Russians would have to do to exploit the current unrest in America would be to knock out a social media platform or two, or perhaps to leak dirt on the people ginning up war. Those targets are absolutely hated by the American people outside the Imperial City.

Richard B , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:45 pm GMT
@Zarathustra and historically illiterate pseudo-intellectual BS about 1619 and Evil America that, because its evil, should change the names of the military bases where those soldiers trained under the impression they were going to defend their country!

The Hostile Elite is a rabid dog so totally out of control it needs to be put down immediately.

Whatever happens, no one should ever take the moral condemnation of psychopaths seriously.

Battered Wife Syndrome?

I give you Battered Nation Syndrome.

Time to prove to the world it’s possible to recover from it and move into a larger freedom.

dimples , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:45 pm GMT
@No Friend Of The Devil not called al-
Qaeda at this stage but some other name. Apparently the name al-Qaeda was first used by the FBI to reference this group due to some sort of misunderstanding, but it eventually became the name they adopted for themselves since that was what everybody was calling them anyway when they became famous after further adventures.

The above should be taken with a grain of salt since this is only what I have been able to glean from reading various articles. Presumably what is called al-Qaeda today are the descendants or associates of personnel from this particular group as opposed to other groups, but I don’t know.

Jake , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:46 pm GMT

When Russia was controlled by Marxists, Leftists and Liberals loved Russia, defended Russia, excused Russia, promoted Russia. Now that Russia has survived Marxist totalitarianism and begun rediscovering Russian cultural heritage, which features Christianity, Leftists and Liberals HATE Russia.

Who coulda thunk it possible?

More important is that our Neocons and our old guard Yank ‘conservatives’ – who control foreign policy for both Republicans and Democrats – in the military and the spy game see Russia today exactly as the Leftists and Liberals see Russia.

Both the Neocons and the Yank WASP Country Club types in the so-called ‘conservative’ arena agree with Leftists and Liberals about Russia.

There’s plenty of meaning there for those with ears to hear and eyes to see.

Anglo-Zionist Empire.

Beavertales , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:46 pm GMT

The Dem’s election strategists are grasping at straws again.

The deplorables they despise the most are flyover Americans who go to church or who serve in the military. These are the people they think are stupid and easily manipulated by wild tales and false flags.

The “bounty on American soldiers” is hogwash to gin up what they perceive to be a voting bloc of gullible whites.

The Dems weakness with working class whites is one they will try to shore up by crassly fake, flag-waving appeals to bedrock patriotism.

Erzberger , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:47 pm GMT
@anonymous equal, except negroes.’ When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read ‘all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.’ When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”

With Russia abolishing serfdom and slavery at the time – and much later than Western Europe – something had to be done to not be outdone by the Russians, of course. The hypocrisy would indeed have been unbearable. It still is.

Jake , says: July 7, 2020 at 12:51 pm GMT
@Really No Shit the mass of whites before the post-WW2 era, then you are ignorant. If you think the current Deep State is entirely Jewish, or even majority Jewish, you are ignorant.

Without any doubt, Jews now, and for decades, have per capita dominated the American Deep State. But they did not create it, nor did they create its evil. The Mossad did NOT create MI6 and the CIA. British Secret Service created the CIA and the Mossad.

America has a Deep State that flowed naturally from the British Deep State. The Brit Empire was the Anglo-Zionist Empire Part 1. America is the Anglo-Zionist Empire Part 2.

mike99588 , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:00 pm GMT
@Tom Welsh

Best to let someone else do the dying for you…

US strategy at the end of WWII included letting Germans and Soviets wear each other down and kill as many of each other as possible, without US forces involvement. Obviously “we”, various US investors and the US taxpayer still gave the Soviets too much stuff, that propelled USSR economic success claims for the next 20 years.

mike99588 , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:05 pm GMT
@Beavertales

Just more Liberal/Dim/Zio/CCP sponsored horsesh*t, to drive US and Russia apart, to drive Russia toward China, when US would be better off trying to treat Russia neutrally (hang our CCP paid dems).

Richard B , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:10 pm GMT
@Milton

The Deep State vermin who pulled-off the violent, proxy overthrow of Yanukovych in 2014, and who are also behind the Arab Spring, Syrian Rebels, ISIS, and the ongoing domestic unrest Stateside, are the descendants of the vermin who overthrew Christian Russia in 1917 using the same modus operandi of color revolution and “peaceful protests.”.

Spot on!

But, a more accurate name than The Deep State is Judeocracy Inc.

Ahoy , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:24 pm GMT

Henry when he was running the world. All smiles and happiness for things going well.

https://www.google.com/search?q=putin+photo+with+kissinger&rlz=1C1SQJL_enGR884GR884&sxsrf=ALeKk01SoCRUg9amQT8FuVu5GpM2aFx0Ig:1594106491151&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=hvCJDUJwL5ljFM%252C6-3cEPq7dQi5TM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kQDzP_0uOL0EoB7SIJD7ymANoY-UQ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwitl465zbrqAhVJxKYKHY5vDf8Q9QEwAXoECAkQBw&biw=1366&bih=657#imgrc=CD-Byc60rmzoLM

Then after this very polite send off Russia is bad, very bad.

https://www.thejc.com/culture/books/review-world-order-1.59212

Alfred , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:28 pm GMT
@Mikhail

followed by Russian assistance to the US military operation in Afghanistan.

Few people seem to understand the logistics of the war in Afghanistan. The US and their allies were hugely dependent on the Russian railway system. It is just so ridiculous to listen to these monkeys who pretend to be statesmen and women.

Susan Rice clearly uses skin whitener and hair straightener to look as much as possible like those she hates so much.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:30 pm GMT

Unfortunately, the matter with Russia is settled. And while I did not think there was evidence to support the matter. The current executive sign an intel report that accused the Russians and Pres. Putin specifically with sabotaging US election and murder and attempted murder. Unless our executive can reconcile that matter by extracting some manner of penance for hat behavior — reconciling with Russia is just a flat water tide.

Their actions constituted acts of war and while I may disagree with the assessment —

that is the US disposition on which nothing Russia says can be taken further than a pipe.

That intel report which this executive signed locks our posture in place regarding Russia. We kill people in this country for being suspects.

I don’t think the US citizen would look to kindly on shaking hands with a saboteur and murderer.

Whether the signing was a matter of political expediency is irrelevant,. The executive openly cited Russia as an enemy of the US. For me it was one of the most painful memories of the executives tenure, because

1. destroyed a large portion of our foreign policy agenda of toning down our presence anywhere

2. demonstrated the executive was not as string as I believed he needed to be.

If they were willing to interfere in our election and engage in political murder in allied states —there’s no reason to doubt that they would support the murder of our troops in a conflict one.

———————-

It was a devastating moment when the executive agreed to that intel report.

Emily , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:30 pm GMT
@tyrone 07110001-8
https://ips-dc.org/the_cia_contras_gangs_and_crack/
https://artvoice.com/2017/10/27/american-made-cia-drug-sex-trafficking-national-interest/
Latest on the final arrest of Kosovo vile war criminal Thaci a couple of weeks ago
https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-ally-indicted-organ-trade-murder-scheme/5717900
Tom Welsh , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:33 pm GMT
@No Friend Of The Devil iv>

“A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring”.

– Alexander Pope (“Essay on Criticism”)

The MEK is one of many organisations that use the word “mujahidin” in their names. That word is quite generic.

mujahedin (also mujahidin, mujaheddin, or mujahideen)
n plural noun Islamic guerrilla fighters.

ORIGIN
from Persian and Arabic mujahidin, colloquial plural of mujahid, denoting a person who fights a jihad.

– Concise Oxford English Dictionary

Z-man , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:35 pm GMT
@Jake

Agree. See post #49 above.

Emily , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:39 pm GMT
@mike99588 r Germany.
And vastly profiting from both sides – shamelessly.
Britain and the Commonwealth faced Germany alone through dark days indeed until Russia became our ally – before the USA incidently – conveniently overlooked..
The Americans finally came in Dec 1941 after Russia was already standing with us.
It has not been forgotten in Britain to this day.
The USA bled this country for decades, paying for what was so much crap amongst all else..
Lend lease – what a scam that was!!!!!
Whilst you traded and supported the nazi war machine against us.
Jake , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:45 pm GMT
@Truth3

When you work that into the British Empire acting to prevent Russia from forcing the Turks out of Europe and thereby liberating Constantinople, and acting to harm Russia deeply in order to win ‘The Great Game,’ you perhaps will then see that back to Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans that WASP Empire is Anglo-Zionist Empire.

Gidoutahere , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:51 pm GMT

Well, unlike the JewSA, Russia isn’t enthralled with the Jews. Putin and company kicked out Soros and his Open Society as well as the Rothschild bankers. Lastly the four billionaire Jew oligarchs who were running the Yeltsin economic shitshow were also shown the door. Perhaps the “Assad must go” flop played into Jewish ire as well.

David Rodriguez , says: July 7, 2020 at 1:59 pm GMT

Amusing to see Democrats so deeply concerned over the “Russian threat”. I was in the Agency during the Cold War. When the Soviets REALLY were a threat, most of those same Democrats urged retreat, compromise, submission. It makes my guts churn to see these “patriots” making hysterical claims against Russia. It is almost as if they resent the fact that Putin has rejected their entire Globalist plan, re-Christianized Russia, and locked up at least a few of the so-called “oligarchs” who were looting the Russian people of their patrimony. The case of Bill Browder deserves some attention. This Red Diaper baby (his grandfather was Earl Browder, chief of the CPUSA) has been one of the cheerleaders in the campaign to demonize Russia. Following the family tradition of a lack of loyalty (he holds British and U.S. passports, just in case!) this weasel used his granddad’s old Soviet contacts to make hundreds of millions carting off anything of any value left in the old Soviet Union. Of course, he worked with an equally greasy gang of former Soviets to do this, including one Sergei Magnitsky, a “tax advisor” working with Browder who assumed room temperature in a Russian jail after he was nabbed by the tax police. I really wonder if some of these Democrats and others who so denounce Putin had visions of sugar plums and hundreds of millions of dollars dancing in their heads, dreams rudely brought to earth by Putin?

Agent76 , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:08 pm GMT

Follow the CIA drug money!

Oct 20, 2009 Taliban Is Getting American Troops Hooked On Heroin

It diminishes the effectiveness of our troops as well as raises money for the Taliban, who are the ones growing the poppy. How can the US combat this new strategy?

https://www.youtube.com/embed/cb3BXJIA1P8?feature=oembed

December 3, 1993 Opioid problem America?

The CIA Drug ConnectionIs as Old as the Agency

LONDON— Recent news item: The Justice Department is investigating allegations that officers of a special Venezuelan anti-drug unit funded by the CIA smuggled more than 2,000 pounds of cocaine into the United States with the knowledge of CIA officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/03/opinion/03iht-edlarry.html

June 10, 2014 Drug War? American Troops Are Protecting Afghan Opium

U.S. Occupation Leads to All-Time High Heroin Production

http://www.globalresearch.ca/drug-war-american-troops-are-protecting-afghan-opium-u-s-occupation-leads-to-all-time-high-heroin-production/5358053

Zarathustra , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:15 pm GMT
@Emily

Very noble endeavor. US Government should be really proud of it.

Agent76 , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:18 pm GMT

Jul 4, 2020 78% of Russians VOTE to break away from western neoliberal dogma

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated on Thursday that the result was a clear sign of the Russian people’s trust in president Putin.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/9QrHFids_s4?feature=oembed

Alfred , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:24 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc. e accused is served by having his lawyers present. Since the defendants have refused to appear in person – three of them disputing the Dutch jurisdiction — the defence lawyers should withdraw.”

THE DUTCH WRITING ON THE UKRAINIAN WALL – STEENHUIS RULING IN MH17 TRIAL PREJUDGES VERDICT

Erzberger , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:30 pm GMT
@Emily t was only done to get into a position to share the spoils. Britain was no more than a vassal state of the US after WW I, and in no position to defeat Germany. Only Russia could, and they did, and would have done so with or without the Anglo-Americans. Stop whining about suffering you brought onto yourself. Besides, Britain suffered very little compared to the continent, including Germany, and European Jewry, and all of them would have suffered less without the British arrogance that they had to defend their national honour. Hope they stay out of European affairs now but it doesn’t look good at this fake Brexit moment
ChuckOrloski , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT

Wisely, Agent76 said, “The CIA Drug Connection is as Old as the Agency.”

Re; above, I suggest Grandfathered by Operation Gladio and it’s Vatican Bank money laundering component???

Am aware how an England bank, USBC, was caught laundering the Afghanistan drug trade billions and got a “slap on wrist.”

Linked below is an obscure article on President Putin’s special (on scene) Afghanistan envoy, Zamir Kabulov, who accused US intelligence in Afghanistan of drug trafficking.

https://tolonews.com/afghanistan/russia-answers-bounty-claims-says-us-drug-trafficking

Also, my special thanks to commenters, Harold Smith, Franz, and Alfred.

Alfred , says: July 7, 2020 at 2:58 pm GMT
@No Friend Of The Devil to attack Iran. They are totally despised by ordinary Iranians. They are a cult with something in common with the Cambodian Pol Pot way of life. Very dangerous people. They have absolutely nothing in common with the Taliban who are trying to liberate their country from the Americans.

MEK: Who is this Iranian ‘cult’ backed by the US?

Steve from Detroit , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:08 pm GMT
@Alfred

I’m not joking, I initially thought that was Michael Jackson.

ImaBotKnot , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:08 pm GMT
@Gidoutahere ld bring to an end a fledgling democracy and a return to the Cold War days.

“In return, Maxwell’s massive debts would be wiped out by a grateful Kryuchkov, [Vladimir Kryuchkov, head of the KGB] who planned to replace Gorbachev. The KGB chief wanted Maxwell to use the Lady Ghislaine, named after Maxwell’s daughter, as a meeting place between the Russian plotters, Mossad chiefs and Israel’s top politicians. ? Apparently the Rothschilds/Israel Deep State wanted Gorbachev or Yeltsin.

Events are so tangled and interconnected, as Ghislaine is still a Israel Deep State operative.

annamaria , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:15 pm GMT
@anonymous ease the MIC and the Lobby. It is not for nothing that Rice was called “the Typhoid Mary of the Obama-era foreign policy.”
“Her religion is Christianity.” Oh my. What church has been allowing the war criminal Susan Rice to attend religious service next to decent people? This church of anti-Christians: https://bluebicyclebooks.com/2019/10/13/former-u-n-ambassador-susan-rice-at-grace-church-cathedral-mon-nov-18-7-pm/ Grace Church Cathedral, 98 Wentworth St., downtown Charleston.
Trinity , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT

Funny, I don’t see White Russians hating themselves or other Whites for being proud of their heritage.

Funny, I don’t see White Russians tearing down monuments and statues or desecrating their flag.

Funny, I don’t see White Russians wanting their country to be invaded by hordes of hostile nonwhite WMD.

Funny, I don’t see White Russians apologizing or backing down from identifying themselves as a Christian nation.

Oh, I get it. This is why the so-called, “Deep State” and “Neo-Cons aka Neo-Commies” hate Russia so much. I get it now. It burns (((their))) collective asses that there are actually some largely homogeneous and traditional White nations still around who aren’t willingly accepting their own genocide or apologizing for being evil White racists. My gawd, this is my epiphany, this is MY AWAKENING ( shout out to Dr. Duke’s EXCELLENT BOOK), now I know why Russia is so vilified by (((our media.))) (((Our media))) is racist against Whites, and (((they))) hate the idea that a traditional White Christian nation still exists, especially a powerful nation like Russia. Oh dear, how could I be so gullible not to see this one. I’m Irish American and I am told I must hate the Russkies to be patriotic by other patriotic Israel Firsters.

neutral , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:41 pm GMT

It has to do with two things, and only those two things, all other rubbish about “human rights”, “international law”, blah blah blah, is propaganda meant for the common man.

1) Russia is white, that means it can easily be demonized and is demonized.
2) The jews that fled Russia are an especially virulent strain of the jew, their hatred for Russia has few equal.

Mefobills , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:51 pm GMT
@Jake http://canadianpatriot.org/origins-of-deep-state-part2/
http://canadianpatriot.org/what-is-the-fabian-society-and-to-what-end-was-it-created/

Note that the bad actors were anglo-zionists of their day, grabbing with usury. Their understanding of sin was already perverted in that era.

The sin nature of the Jew has spread and become a sect within Christianity, hence Judeo-Christianity and Zionist-Christianity

barr , says: July 7, 2020 at 3:53 pm GMT

Russia is killing US soldiers. Trump’s response is a shameful dereliction of duty
Michael H Fuchs

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/07/trump-russia-us-soldiers-afghanistan-putin
seems that BBC CNN NYT and Guardian -all are taking their cues from the coteries of Hillary Biden Cotton Rubio.

Agent76 , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:00 pm GMT

Jul 7, 2020 IMF PONZI scheme in Ukraine continues BLM Ponzi scheme boomerang

https://www.youtube.com/embed/NMFBly-o0Ug?feature=oembed

endthefed , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:01 pm GMT

Maybe someone has already stated the obvious. Regardless of the validity (or lack of) a bounty program; it’d be real hard to affect US troops if there were no US troops in Afghanistan.

Jeff Davis , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT
@anonymous

Intel community horseshit.

Curmudgeon , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:16 pm GMT
@Erzberger ica and the Balkans.
Fourth, had the Admiral Canaris led traitors not been hiding munitions or sending them to the wrong place, the Soviets may not have recovered even with the US re-supply.

If there is something to yawn about, it is the WWII narrative is tiresome. Stalin wasn’t a “good guy”, and neither were Churchill or Roosevelt. The reality is that it took the “world” to defeat Germany. The Italians were of no help, and the Japanese were as much a drain as a resource to Germany. Germany was destroyed to allow the advancement of Marxism, which had already embedded itself in the UK and US.

DaveE , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:18 pm GMT
@Patagonia Man

‘The US has one political party – the business party, with 2 wings.’

Those two ‘wings’ are the Globalists and the Zionists. The Democrats and Republicans are just interns looking for a summer job.

Bill Jones , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:20 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

“If they were willing to interfere in our election and engage in political murder in allied states”

No you fool, we’re talking about Russia, not Israel.

Desert Fox , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:25 pm GMT

The zionists are pissed that Russia has saved Syria from the zionist mercenaries aka AL CIADA aka ISIS, which are creations the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI6 and NATO and so the anti Russian propaganda, pouring out of the zionist owned MSM.

Alfred , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:31 pm GMT
@mike99588

Obviously “we”, various US investors and the US taxpayer still gave the Soviets too much stuff, that propelled USSR economic success claims for the next 20 years

The Russians paid for all the “giving” with gold. Kindly stop repeating lies. Even the British went almost bankrupt repaying the Americans for their “generosity”.

It will be interesting to see how the Russians will treat the Americans when the USA experiences feudalism. I suspect the Russians will be far more generous than the Americans deserve.

annamaria , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT
@neutral kids.
Hilary Clinton has been a very effective butcher of Libyan and Syrian population at large; young children and pregnant women were the greatest victims of Clinton’s subhuman policies.
Susan Rice was good at promoting mass slaughter in Syria, and, along with H. Clinton, S. Rice should be credited with the slave markets in Libya.
Nuland-Kagan helped to make Ukraine into the poorest country in Europe, where zionists and neo-nazis found a complete mutual understanding. So much for holobiz squealing.

What’s wrong with the US? How come that the US society produced these monstrosities?

Harold Smith , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:38 pm GMT
@barr

Being that America kills other countries’ soldiers (and civilians) all the time, why can’t Russia (or any other country) do the same thing? What goes around comes around, right?

DaveE , says: July 7, 2020 at 4:49 pm GMT

Some things (Russiagate) are just too silly to bother with.

I agree – except that I’m getting quite a chuckle these days at the sheer, utter desperation of the “Russia did it”, “Saddam did it”, “Bin Laden did it”, “Assad did it”, etc. etc. etc. noise from the crowd who DID do it.

Shlomo is cornered and exposed – and that IS worth the subscription fee to watch, FINALLY.

anonymous [245] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:08 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Please at least proofread your gibberish. Some of it might even make sense.

Wally , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:29 pm GMT
@Alfred

said:
“Anyone with half a brain should know that the Americans are in Afghanistan because the Americans control the world trade in narcotics.”

– Yawn. I’ve heard that before, but have seen no proof.

– So use your “half a brain” and give us the proof.

Sorry, Hollywood movies are not proof.

No doubt you’re one of those ‘No Blood For Oil’ types that Zionists love so much.

Trinity , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:35 pm GMT

“There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states.” General (((Wesley Clark)))

Obviously a patriotic “American” General like Mr. Clark has no problem with the racist state of Israel.

Just another COHENcidence? Nah, after finding about “6 million” COHENcidences you start thinking for yourself, stop dropping the idea that “conspiracy theories” are “conspiracies” and start realizing you have been fed a load of horseshit for a century and counting. We don’t have a Russia problem but Houston, we do have a problem. Wonder what that problem is?

Zarathustra , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:35 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon

And we have to believe you? {You are a real jerk.)

Mr. Cocktail Party Talk , says: July 7, 2020 at 5:48 pm GMT
@Tom Welsh te Phi Beta Kappa from Harvard, at a time when that meant something. He also wrote (presumably without the assistance a ghost writer) some 40-odd books, as Tucker Carlson pointed out in a recent monologue.

I think by any standard, these achievements indicate a fairly high level of intellectual skills.

Whether or not he was a nutcase is another matter, and not mutually exclusive of his having considerable intellectual skills. A good place to start on this question is to read what H.L. Mencken wrote about him.

And it is said that Roosevelt is included in the Mt. Rushmore tableau because he was friends with Borglum the sculptor.

Really No Shit , says: July 7, 2020 at 6:31 pm GMT
@Jake

You retort:

“The Brit Empire was the Anglo-Zionist Empire Part 1. America is the Anglo-Zionist Empire Part 2.”

I rest my case!

Alfred , says: July 7, 2020 at 6:43 pm GMT
@Trinity of different nations. But they live in harmony. Their common language is Russian. When Putin goes to visit the Dagestan, he tells them that their men are brave and their women beautiful. They love it. And they love Putin for it. Sadly, Google and Youtube seem to have cleaned up this stuff.

Here is some compensatory eye-candy:

Iceland’s Miss Universe has her Siberian roots revealed

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: July 7, 2020 at 6:49 pm GMT
@Jake

The current news that the Brutish govt has approved new arms sales to Saudia because Saudi mass killings of Yemeni civilians are all “isolated incidents” so it’s quite proper to sell them the means seems to prove your point.

ThreeCranes , says: July 7, 2020 at 6:58 pm GMT
@Zarathustra

“(You are a real jerk)”. Also sprach Zarathustra.

And this is your idea of a sound argument? Nietzsche would hide his face in shame.

Curmudgeon , says: July 7, 2020 at 7:21 pm GMT
@Zarathustra tinue to ignore the truth.

https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=9780898753974&i=stripbooks&linkCode=qs

No. 6 (page 15) from November 4, 1941:

“Your decision, Mr President, to grant the Soviet Union an interest-free loan to the value of $1,000,000,000 to meet deliveries of munitions and raw materials to the Soviet Union is accepted by the Soviet Government with heartfelt gratitude as vital aid to the Soviet Union in its tremendous and onerous struggle against our common enemy — bloody Hitlerism.” (here)

Trinity , says: July 7, 2020 at 7:38 pm GMT
@Alfred

Iceland is looking better each and every day especially from behind enemy lines in Negro occupied JawJah.

Anon [127] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:13 pm GMT
@Alfred

The US is in central Asia for much more than that, it’s about blocking China and Russia, as well as partially cutting off Iran on it’s eastern flank. Iran is almost surrounded by US bases. The US wants to have more control point/choke point control over continental transport routes in Asia. (One such prize would be the Dzungarian Gate, but that’s a little too ambitious for the moment. ) Afghanistan does have resources, but it would be a target without them, as it is so valuable as a (potential) transit corridor.

Antiwar7 , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:19 pm GMT
@Robert Dolan

Totally agree. So that gives an estimate of how many people are intelligent.

Larchmonter420 , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:45 pm GMT
@mcohen

Meena talk to me

The most intelligent person ever walked on earth. A walking taking genius like Einstein on earth!

Ace , says: July 7, 2020 at 8:48 pm GMT
@Emily ulture/history/item/4691-china-betrayed-into-communism" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4691-china-betrayed-into-communism">Marshall’s doing all in his power to ensure the victory of Mao over Nationalist forces in 1949

U.S. civilian leaders seem to swoon over enemy sanctuaries for some strange reason. Kill U.S. troops in theater. No problemo but pinky swear we won’t go after you if you go back across the border.

God bless Richard Nixon and his destruction of NVA base areas in Cambodia. Thereafter, enemy activity ceased around my camp and all through MR IV.

Zarathustra , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:02 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

He claims to read the minds of dead people.
That was kind of too much for me.

Moi , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:28 pm GMT
@Richard B

The US is a Judeocracy

Moi , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:30 pm GMT
@Milton

Anybody who believes what “our” government or the MSM tells us an idiot (and/or a regular American).

Truth3 , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:36 pm GMT

Thank you again to Phil Giraldi, for your tireless work to expose the evil with healthy doses of TRUTH.

Moi , says: July 7, 2020 at 9:36 pm GMT
@Ray Caruso

There was no need to qualify Americans by saying American conservatives. Ignorance, stupidity and violence are like apple pie for us.

Emily , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:00 pm GMT
@Wally

Reading your comment, Wally, I find your name extremely apt.
None so blind as those who refuse to even read.
You can take a horse to water but cannot make him drink.
You can put all the proof necessary but if you refuse to check it out – well – stay a ‘ Wally’.
I guess you subscribe to the philosophy of ‘Ignorance is bliss’.

Bill Jones , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:02 pm GMT
@Agent76

I found this interview on Putin and what, how and why he’s setting up a post Putin power structure interesting

https://www.spreaker.com/user/tomluongo/episode-16-alexander-mercouris-and-whats

Would that there was his like in the West.

Erzberger , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:08 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon Wehrmacht, the Warsaw Rising they so strongly encouraged would not have happened, and not have led to the disaster it was for the city and its inhabitants

“Stalin wasn’t a “good guy”, and neither were Churchill or Roosevelt. “ no objections

“The reality is that it took the “world” to defeat Germany. “ Much of Europe fought on the side of Germany because they realized that Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt weren’t good guys, and they had nothing to look forward to but a horrible peace in case of their victory. Why do you think the EC got together so quickly after the war?

Erzberger , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:20 pm GMT
@Erzberger

Also: the sheer idiocy of claiming that poor little “Britain and the Commonwealth” stood alone against the German monster state! Do you ever look at a map? at human and natural resources? This should have been a turkey shoot if your side had not been as lacking in courage as it was, and as incompetent. And if the rest of Europe wasn’t to a very large extent in the German camp, as it is today

Michael888 , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:29 pm GMT

Scott Ritter has a separate article at consortiumnews noting that the Russians have been giving money to the Taliban (AID) to fight Americans, the CIA and their ISIS proxies since 2014. Surely Obama and/or Biden would have stopped these Russian “bounties” if they were important.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 7, 2020 at 10:56 pm GMT

“Please at least proofread your gibberish. Some of it might even make sense.”

The executive in the WH has agreed that Russia sabotaged the US election process and engaged murder and attempted in states of our allies.

There is no turning the clock bank unless Russia makes some gesture of amelioration — there behavior constitutes an attack on the US. As such they are active enemies of the US.

Unfortunately anyone seeking some manner of Russian love fest — should probably forget it. Whether the executive signed for politically expedient reasons simply doesn’t matter.

—————————-

EliteCommInc. , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:17 pm GMT

“If you believe any of the Skripals nonsense and the MH-17 false flag, you are either gullible or a troll.”

Uhhhh, wholly irrelevant. My position in opposition to the contend that Russia sabotaged the US election was vehemently dubious. My comments at the time make my position abundantly clear. The evidence for the case against Russia in the US simply no there. But at the end of the day, the executive choose to go the other direction. That is unfortunate. But it was also a sign of things to come concerning the executives ability to stand.

And my comments today make that very clear. Your knee-jerk response that I believe what the executive signed onto is incorrect. I knew that his choice destroyed a good deal of his foreign poliy admonition to reduce tensions.

But that was his choice mistake or not he made that choice and as I expressed at the time — we would have to live by it.

——————————————–

In fact, if I were on the opposition, I would like nothing better for the executive to start behaving as though the intel report doesn’t exist. Because I would pull out that report with his signature and commence calling him a weakling, indecisive, and a danger to the US — who is to toothless to hold Russia accountable for her acts of terror in the US and Europe.

I would then commence a campaign explaining why the executive wants to decrease troops ion Europe — he wants to cede our allies over to Russian domination —

But then I am not on the opposition. It was a mistake on the facts for the executive to sign that report for which there was little to no evidence supporting it.

Now if you have a response that gives the president some manner of face saving as he makes nice with a country that overthrew a US election in the US, and engaged in murder and attempted murder — have at it.
—————

Minus some kind of amelioration by the Russians or an about face by the current executive (and tat would really be interesting) no peace and love and understanding can move forward. I can say with certainty

Russia, Pres. Putin has no intention of apologizing for something they most likely did not do regarding US elections.

Though I am sure he will once again have reason to chuckle.

Those of you angry, frustrated, irritated . . . and yada I suggest you take that up with the WH They made that choice.

But by all means name call as opposed to deal with the obvious reality.

anonymous [245] • Disclaimer , says: July 7, 2020 at 11:25 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Or not.

Hibernian , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:03 am GMT
@Emily

You do understand that the US and the UK have been separate sovereigns since 1776, don’t you?

Art , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:28 am GMT

Trump should put on his big boy pants, tell the “Russia Russia Russia” types to go to hell – and schedule a meeting with Putin.

Let the “conservatives” and Jew media poop on themselves.

The voters will love it.

Neoconned , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:36 am GMT

I find it ironic given that during the Soviet era it was those on the left who laughed at Republicans for being Sovietphobes.

But later now its the neolib media pushing the identity politics narrative that has dusted off the tired old Cold War Russia chicken little stuff.

Mefobills , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:38 am GMT

Russia-baiters may also be upset by new Constitution changes in Russia.

https://russia-insider.com/en/new-constitution-means-russias-political-stability-strong-while-west-sinks/ri30819

EliteCommInc. , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:43 am GMT

“Or not.’

The US can not make nice with Russia until Russia makes amends for sabotaging the US election and engage in acts of murder or attempted in murder in the sovereign states of our allies. So says the executive in the WH. In fact he says that Pres. Putin ordered the sabotage and murder.

I think you understand.

There is no way for the current executive to move forward with better relations with Russia without extracting some admission and compensation for sad acts without reaping serious political damage — I would say a loss of credibility, but that is already in question – sadly.

AnonFromTN , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:44 am GMT

Interestingly, whoever invented this lie about Russia and Taliban not only did not know the realities of Afghanistan, but was stupid enough not to consult someone who knows. There is no such thing as a bank transfer in Afghanistan. It exists in the Middle Ages (democracy, my foot!), so the only form of money that functions there is cash, in hand, in a case, or in a bag, depending on the amount.

Art , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:50 am GMT

Serious questions – does the CIA run the State Department and US foreign policy?

Did Pompeo just move the CIA’s agenda to the State Department, when he became Secretary of State?

Who sets US foreign policy – the CIA and the Pentagon? Why are a spy agency and generals running world policy – what good can come of that?

Is Trump the tail on the US foreign policy dog? It seems as though, those two do what they want – not what Trump and his voters desire.

joun , says: July 8, 2020 at 1:23 am GMT

The USA is quickly going to find itself in a corner. There is no realistic path away from a total confrontation with Russia. No politician will dare dissent. I hope Russia is prepared for this.

dimples , says: July 8, 2020 at 1:45 am GMT
@Beavertales

“The deplorables they despise the most are flyover Americans who go to church or who serve in the military. These are the people they think are stupid and easily manipulated by wild tales and false flags.”

Well let’s face it, they usually are. These are the milch cows the MIC relies on to keep its funding secure.

Bob Gwen , says: July 8, 2020 at 1:49 am GMT

Everyone knows that Americans are the most dumbfuck stupid people on the planet. It is more shocking to think that propaganda would NOT affect most of the population.

gsjackson , says: July 8, 2020 at 2:27 am GMT
@Emily ass="comment-text">

Anecdotally, when my family lived in England in a village near London in 1957-58 we were treated like royalty. I’ve always assumed it’s because we were the beloved Yanks who saved Britain’s behind in the war. That doesn’t undercut what you say about the underlying resentment, but my clear impression and that of my parents was that the post-war Brits loved them some Yanks.

Another anecdote, this one not so feel-good. In 1956 we lived on Lakenheath AFB in the UK. During the Suez crisis the base was on full stand-by alert in case we had to go to war with Britain. Seriously.

anon [327] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:11 am GMT

In these tough times of toilet paper,
the NYT and WaPo are most useful.

The ink is sustenance for roaches;
the paper is bedding, blanket, headrest,
and ass wipe for the homeless.

Both are well known virus carriers.

Derer , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:33 am GMT
@Patagonia Man re in Washington is beyond repair. The despicable sinister schemes, backstabbing, lies, fake facts in a quest for power has nothing to do with democracy but criminality.

It is time to galvanize support for direct voting…enabled by evolving technology. That process would eliminate:
@ need for electing deceiving proxies that always betray their promises to represent the public interest.
@ Washington proxies making decisions…should be reduced to debating issues.
@ the special interest groups, lobbies self-serving agenda.
@ sending our young people dying on far away places in unnecessary wars.

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:48 am GMT
@Patagonia Man

When was Paul Craig Roberts last an insider? Do you think him capable of picking cover stories generically, that is without relevant particular knowledge of inside stuff?

And you seem to claim to have that ability to pick a cover story. So…. how? What are the generic indicia?

anonymous [157] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:50 am GMT
@annamaria cyclebooks.com/2019/10/13/former-u-n-ambassador-susan-rice-at-grace-church-cathedral-mon-nov-18-7-pm/">https://bluebicyclebooks.com/2019/10/13/former-u-n-ambassador-susan-rice-at-grace-church-cathedral-mon-nov-18-7-pm/

Oh gee, your point would make one think that no other pagan Christian Church has produced such mass murderers, or in fact, even greater ones… which would be ludicrous as per history, yeah?

The real source of such satanic evil should be traced to Whitevil (including their Judevil cousins of course) supremacy and their in-house “niggas,” such as the witch you mention.

Neoconned , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:57 am GMT
@Alfred

Looks like a lot of the blonds here except the ones here date thugs and run around til they’re 24ish from dude to dude til they discover the joys of pills & meth and take the full bath into the toilet….

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: July 8, 2020 at 9:08 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse political dancing around and inventing another culprit as criminals always do, successfully disappeared them. Don’t hope they will ever appear again.

And this is the Brutish government that killed another Russian by polonium poisoning and of course invented another culprit, again as criminals always do.

And is now selling weapons for mass killing to Saudia says mass killings are merely incidentals.

Consistently, modern Britain makes Nazi Germany look angelic. Consistently.

These are not Christian moral values. What religion or ritual system or control system acts like this once it takes charge?

anonymous [245] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 10:01 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz The same person also fuzzes up threads by pretending to be more than one commenter, the technique known as “sock puppetry.” See under Mr. Derbyshire’s February 15, 2019, article comment ## 28, 42, 43, 44, 68, 122, where he/she/they got sloppy also posting as “Anon[436].”

Over time, Wizard has emerged as sympathetic to the international bureaucracy of the Establishment of which he may even be a (former?) part, the type of “diplomat” exemplified by Mrs. Nuland’s Ivy League cookie caddy in Ukraine. He broke character a while back, showing emotional hostility to China. But who can be sure? Among this website’s oddest, sophisticatedly trollish commenters.

anonymous [157] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 10:45 am GMT
@No Friend Of The Devil

It does not make sense either, since the MEK ( Mujahudeen ) is a twisted Shiite cult Iranian, and Al Qaeda is Arabic and twisted Sunni cult.

Both of those cults share the same patron… the pagan Christian cult of Whitevil terrorists.

The patron must be destroyed, if we are to destroy other terrorist cults, and for this wretched earth to have any hope of peace.

Patagonia Man , says: July 8, 2020 at 11:25 am GMT
@Emily

You will find that Roosevelt privately was giving both the UK & France assurances that if either were attacked, the US would come to their aid well before 1938 – even tho’ US multinational corporations were still trading with the NSDAP in Germany well into 1941.

Talk about walking both sides of the street!

geokat62 , says: July 8, 2020 at 12:30 pm GMT

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1280562342099480576&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fpgiraldi%2Frussia-baiting-is-the-only-game-in-town%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=500px

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 1:42 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

As you can’t even get the Julian Assange bit right I don’t suppose it’s any use asking you to justify your bald assertions or even flesh them our with detail. Let alone explain when Britain became “modern” and ceased to be the country which is rightly credited with ending theslave trade and led the way in abolition of slavery.

Yes, several governments have treated Assange contemptibly but he is remanded without bail pending the resumption of the extradition hearing, not imprisoned for life in cruel or any conditions. How can you waste readers time with such garbage?

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 1:48 pm GMT
@geokat62

How much credit do you give to someone who sloppily uses the term “terrorist in that context referring to the equovalent of precision bombing in contrast to area bombing without precise aiming?

Alfred , says: July 8, 2020 at 2:02 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Sorry if I misunderstood you.

I am really not qualified to comment on the internal wrangling of the various factions in the USA. I look at their foreign policy actions, not proclamations, with much greater interest.

Alfred , says: July 8, 2020 at 2:06 pm GMT
@gsjackson

Oversexed Overpaid and Over Here: The American Airmen In Britain DVD (Timereel)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/NERTDbNmdv0?feature=oembed

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 2:14 pm GMT
@Erzberger ut down war industry was started by Germany, arguably in Belgium in August 1814 but certainly in December 1914 when German cruisers indiscriminately shelled three North East England towns. An aberration? No. It was followed by Zepellin raids on London and the use of Big Bertha against Paris. Then, what message and implicit set of rules do you find in the destruction of Guernica? And many civilians were killed in the bombing of Warsaw. Even the virtually symbolic bombing of Berlin was a response to bombs dropped on London, the only point in your favour there being the fact that those bombs were probably not meant to be dropped on London.
Anon [427] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:00 pm GMT
@anonymous

How intriguing. Not having your obsessive interest in warning about Wizard of Oz I have failed, at my level of diligence, to find any evidence at all of emotional hostility to China or indeed, about anything much except perhaps the hypocritical mistreatment of individuals like Julian Assange by governments. Can you help?

geokat62 , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

How much credit do you give to someone who sloppily uses the term “terrorist

The Wizard of Pedantry obsessed about the proper usage of a term, while the offending party is committing acts of war, lol.

Franklin Ryckaert , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT
@geokat62

quod erat expectandum .

Franklin Ryckaert , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:26 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Alright then, call it “precision terrorism” (an Israeli specialty). Will that be acceptable to your hasbara boss?

Trinity , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:27 pm GMT

The Germans couldn’t believe how inept the average French, American, and British soldier really were, even British described how frightened many of the America soldiers, most barely old enough to shave, appeared. The German was appalled at the physical fitness of the British soldier as well, describing them as weak and frail for the most part. Here is the truth, Western Europe and America fought the German B team at best, often these Germans were little more than schoolboys in some cases. Everyone knows that the bulk of the serious fighting was done on the Eastern Front. Think if tiny Germany hadn’t had to fight on two fronts against what must have seemed like half the world. It doesn’t speak well that it took so many years to defeat a country as small as Germany, a country that was at an extreme disadvantage. The average Western soldier, be it a Frenchmen, a Brit or an American was nothing special to say the least. This isn’t a I hate America thing, but merely the truth. The average German soldier was head and shoulders above the average Brit or America G.I.

Franklin Ryckaert , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:40 pm GMT
@anonymous

Wizard of Oz = Wizard of Iz.

Grahamsno(G64) , says: July 8, 2020 at 3:55 pm GMT

I’m surprised that this hasn’t been posted yet.

https://www.rt.com/russia/494077-nyt-taliban-gru-evidence/

Finally, seven days after its ‘scoop’, the NYT ran another story on the subject, entitled ‘New Administration Memo Seeks to Foster Doubts About Suspected Russian Bounties’, which was published on July 3 and buried in the bowels of the paper.

Its opening paragraphs sought to back up the original story, claiming that an intelligence memo had said the “… CIA and the National Counterterrorism Centre had assessed with medium confidence – meaning creditable sources and plausible, but falling short of near certainty – that a unit of the Russian military service, known as the GRU, offered the bounties.”

It was only in the last paragraph that the real story – that there was no story – was revealed: “The agency did intercept data of financial transactions that provide circumstantial support for the detainee’s account, but the agency does not have explicit evidence that the money was bounty payments.”

So the blood libel lasted a week!

One of the greatest things about the Trump Presidency was to carve the ‘Fake News’ meme on the MSM’s forehead.

annamaria , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:03 pm GMT
@Ace

The US has its comeuppance in the locally-produced “democracy on the march.” The jolly game of regime change is now played in American towns.

Cheney the Traitor and Obama the Fraud are only marginally different. The US is run by financiers and war criminals.

annamaria , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:19 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

“…there behavior constitutes an attack on the US”

Mister/Miss, since when the zionized Congress of the US serves the citizenship of the US? Thank you for reminding (and you do this regularly) of the unfortunate fact that the US is an occupied territory and the US Congress is a nest of liars, war profiteers, and rabid zionists.

Les Wexler, Ben Cardin, Chuck Schumer, and Clintons have inflicted more harm to the US than any Maria Butin and such. And don’t forget Dick Cheney and Co, the committed traitors and profiteers by any means.

annamaria , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:20 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Skripals! Well. There was also the Steel dossier and Browder/Magnitsky Act. You certainly have a weak spot for bad forgeries.

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:29 pm GMT
@geokat62

In my experience people who are sloppy with language are sloppy with thinking. I thought you might have had similar relevant experience unlike most commenters here. For example, if you were employing a director of research or even just a junior researcher for a committee of inquiry would you not rate their careful use of language as a qualification? You want to be able to rely on the facts they turn up and their reasoning underlying proposed conclusions do you not?

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT
@Franklin Ryckaert

I am content to know that you don’t read my comments and are as sloppy and inaccurate in calling me hasbara as the person who called destroying an Iranian nuclear facility “terrorist”. To extend my last comment, you wouldn’t even be on the long list for assisting any inquiry I chaired.

Derer , says: July 8, 2020 at 5:35 pm GMT
@Ace

Do you know at least, what were you fighting for in Vietnam? How Vietnam threatened US shores?
Do not tell me fighting communist ideology, because the same Nixon and Kissinger that bombed Cambodia civilians embraced that communist ideology in China with grave consequences. We have lunatics in Washington and it is time for direct voting – majority rules.

Erzberger , says: July 8, 2020 at 5:48 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz as right in the sense that despite the British and French declaration of war, not much happened – other than the naval blockade and the lame French invasion of the Saar region. Neither Britain nor France had the courage to follow up on their war declaration, for fear of unpopular casualties or further destruction of land and people (France), and both hoped to gain a cheap victory by starving out the German war effort. Had they actually opened a second front in the fall of 39, the Germans would have collapsed, and the war would have been over before Christmas.

The GErman victory over FRance surprised everyone, including the Germans

Curmudgeon , says: July 8, 2020 at 5:59 pm GMT
@Erzberger https://barnesreview.org/product/the-stroop-report/

I think the EC got together so quickly because the US wanted to impose their economic model on Europe with the illusion of control. The Marshall Plan was unraveling as the swindle it was, and the EC was the answer to keep up the illusion. While the UK was in on the scam, they were the front for the Americans, as the idiot Churchill had pissed away the Empire to buy his 15 minutes of fame.
Once the shooting starts there are no good guys. Like all wars, WWII was an economic war. The German economic system could not be allowed to succeed, it was catching on.

Derer , says: July 8, 2020 at 6:00 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

You must must have quite a deteriorated mind when Russia can influence your vote. Tell me the logistics of the process. You must have equally deteriorated mind believing what CNN, MSNBC, WP or NYT and others dishonest outfits tell you – they are a propaganda machine for a small unpatriotic parasitic group.

anon [178] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 6:09 pm GMT

There is a hierarchy in the blame game . Trump isn’t on the top . If he were, the vile Democrats would be asking review and discussion by broader media ,Dept of Justice and Treasury either to discredit or confirm the following story

in–“Venezuela’s interim government wants access to funds confiscated in the US from corrupt officials, saying it belongs to the Venezuelan people. But US officials appear to have other plans. The Treasury Department diverted $601 million last year from its forfeiture fund to help build President Trump’s border wall. (Leer en español) https://www.univision.com/univision-news/latin-america/legal-battle-over-venezuelas-looted-billions-heats-up Since the United States initiated a coup attempt against Venezuela’s elected leftist government in January 2019, up to $24 billion worth of Venezuelan public assets have been seized by foreign countries, primarily by Washington and member states of the European Union. President Donald Trump’s administration has used at least $601 million of that looted Venezuelan money to fund construction of its border wall with Mexico, according to government documents first reviewed by Univision Univision reviewed US congressional records and court documents and found that the Trump administration tapped into $601 million of the Treasury Department’s “forfeiture fund” to supplement the wall constructio https://thegrayzone.com/2020/06/29/trump-stolen-venezuelan-money-border-wall-mexico/

Reason no-one is doing it is because hating Trump could always be swapped for worshipping something more sinister and idiotic .

We would have heard a similar story only if Russia extracted something like this from Ukraine or Libya .

Derer , says: July 8, 2020 at 6:10 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

I suggest you seek treatment for you pathological hate. Russia want to be a friend in peaceful coexistence but it is sinister players in Washington that constantly need/create enemies to build military industrial complexes instead of consumer goods which are supplied from China.

Curmudgeon , says: July 8, 2020 at 6:18 pm GMT
@Trinity

In Iceland she would not be especially good looking, just another face in the crowd.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 8, 2020 at 6:22 pm GMT

“Sorry if I misunderstood you.”

I have been a supported of the current executive before he considered running. And his choice to agree with the intel report and more was a fairly tough pill to swallow. As it turns it was but one of many.

No I found the intel dubious. And I think the executive could have challenged in a manner that did not call the CIA and other agencies DIA, etc. or damage his ability to curtail his policy agenda. But having signed — he essentially states Pres Putin and the Russians are active enemies of the US given that scenario

one would draw on our behavior in Afghanistan hen we supported the Taliban with weapons to kill Russian soldiers —-

tit for tat foreign policy is not new.

Wizard of Oz , says: July 8, 2020 at 6:32 pm GMT
@Trinity fought more effectively and efficiently than the novice American soldiers. Then there were technical factors which were naturally advantageous to the more experienced military. For example the famous 88mm anti-aircraft gin turned anti-tsnk gun was never matched by the Allies (I thin) and the German tactics for its use were also superior. Germany, though less than the Soviet Union had another advantage over Britain and France. It’s population went on growing fast for a generations beyond the end of high growth in Britain and, especially, France. For example there were 2 million Germans born in 1913 to provide young men for the army in the 30s.
Z-man , says: July 8, 2020 at 7:18 pm GMT
@Derer

Yes, as I’ve said repeatedly, the ‘sinister players’, the Judaic NEOCON cabal want to keep America and Russia apart mainly for their hate of Christianity and gentiles, and try to destroy them both.

Erzberger , says: July 8, 2020 at 7:54 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon uld be a return to what was indeed Hitler’s scheme of continental autarky and a more even distribution of wealth, and a democratic model much more in line with the Prussian model, the latter bearing significant resemblance with the Chinese Mandarin system. The Chinese Communists are really doing nothing different than the old emperors running a meritocracy rather than an idiocracy. Western democracies, esp the US, with their insane and horrendously expensive election circuses tend to achieve the latter. I hear Kanye West is running for president now. The problem with China is not Communism but their adoption of Western state-capitalism.
Buck Ransom , says: July 8, 2020 at 9:24 pm GMT
@Art ry in WW2.

I am sure President Putin would be delighted to draw international attention to this new symbol of a Christian resurgence in Russia. President Trump would appreciate the splendor of such a backdrop for his meeting with another major head of state. Many of the Evangelicals among Trumps’s base would be gobsmacked to learn that Mr. Putin is not running a godless, soulless Communist hellstate. And many of people in the US State Department and the rest of the Swamp would utterly sh*t their pants.

A win all around. Maybe the President will do it.

Ace , says: July 8, 2020 at 9:38 pm GMT
@annamaria

True dat. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the exceptionals.

And Cheney’s daughter burns the midnight oil in order to keep the pot boiling in Afghanistan. MUST have U.S. troops there to oppose “terrorists” with AKs.

mike99588 , says: July 8, 2020 at 9:55 pm GMT

NYT is a rental rag that always favored Soviets and now CCP, why cite it anymore?

The Russia distraction distracts from Piglosi, Feinstein, Biden, Bushes, congress and corps etc etc being in bed$ with China. With the side benefit of Russian alienation from the US driving Russian goods into the China slaughter house on the cheap.

Ace , says: July 8, 2020 at 10:08 pm GMT
@Derer pants over Assad’s or Gaddafi’s purported authoritarianisms like they’re skunk pie. Eeeww!

You’re right that we have lunatics in Washington but I don’t think “direct voting” is the answer. Devolution plus draconian anti-trust enforcement. crucifixion of the Antifa filth, massive deportations, ending black privilege, brutally honest debate over black failure, draconian anti-vote fraud operations, and naming and neutralizing the role and power of organized Jewry and its wealth seem more likely to get us back on track. Please be more creative then “majority rule.”

Ace , says: July 8, 2020 at 10:26 pm GMT
@Anon

Jesus. “Choke points” can be dealt with from afar. It takes a while to rebuild railroad bridges. The concept of the Russian and Iranian enemies has worn a little thin these last few days. It’s just assumed that Russia is a malignant force just as it’s universally assumed that “special sauce” is the way to go on McDonalds’ hamburgers. I accept neither proposition.

I want troops on the U.S. southern border not on the “flanks” of Iran or policing “transit corridors” here and there but that’s just me.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: July 8, 2020 at 10:41 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz a refuses to extradite a woman to Britain for actual homicide. Zero grounds to hold him.

From their political standpoint the safest way out is for Assange to simply die in the maximum-security prison, so the extradition proceedings can simply be dropped. All problems solved.

So, he is in actual fact in prison for life.

Never mind that Britain did something virtuous in the distant past. Today is today. And notice that serial murderers can be friendly and courteous between murders but that nice behaviour doesn’t exonerate them for the murders. Nazi Germany looks angelic relative to the Britain of today.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 8, 2020 at 11:13 pm GMT

“The Gulf of Tonkin “event” was a lie, so there’s that.”

No. It in reality, it was a series of confused messages from the patrol boat. But was used to support a defense of S. Vietnam — the matter is of no consequence. The US was going to defend S. Vietnamese sovereignty regardless of the Tonkin event.

geokat62 , says: July 8, 2020 at 11:38 pm GMT

Must watch interview…

DAVID VS. GOLIATH: GAB’S ANDREW TORBA TELLS RICK HIS BATTLE TO COMPETE WITH TWITTER

https://www.trunews.com/#/stream/david-vs-goliath-gab-s-andrew-torba-tells-rick-his-battle-to-compete-with-twitter

Description:

Today on TruNews Rick interviews Andrew Torba, the founder of Gab, a free speech alternative to the tyrants at Twitter. They discuss how the Silicon Valley elite use their satanic bias to silence opposition and have a mission to purge Christianity from their platforms.

anon [402] • Disclaimer , says: July 8, 2020 at 11:57 pm GMT

FYI while BLM and RG draw our attention and now RABAS have made all other conspiracies recede into Corona graveyard

( Russia gate and Russia Afghan Bounty American Solider )
Kushner stoke and his DNA repaired the monetary damages back at home of origin .

Israel lobby organizations such as the Zionist Organization of America ($2-5 million), Friends of the IDF ($2-5 million) and the Israeli American Council ($1-2 million) are grabbing huge 100% forgivable loans from the CARES Act PPP program.
According to SBA data released on Monday, Israeli’s Bank Leumi has doled out a quarter to a half billion dollars under the PPP program, despite being called out for operating in the occupied West Bank.
Leumi has given sweetheart deals to fellow Israeli companies Oran Safety Glass (which defrauded the US Army on bulletproof glass contracts) and Energix, which operates power plants in the occupied Golan Heights and West Bank.
This exchange took place today on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal.

This video clip with additional information is available on IRmep’s YouTube Channel.
Grant F. Smith is the author of the new book The Israel Lobby Enters State Government. He is director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy IRmep in Washington, D.C. which co-organizes IsraelLobbyCon each year at the National Press Club.

Patagonia Man , says: July 9, 2020 at 12:09 am GMT
@geokat62
– colonial expansion,
– rolling genocide of the Palestinian people, witness 2014 Operation Protective Edge,
– terrorist attacks of neighboring Arab/Muslim states – Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Occupied Territories, Iran & Syria;
– terrorist attacks on Western nations, incl. the UK, the US, & France (since its Parliament voted to recognize Palestine as a state in 2014), and
– sponsoring of terror organizations e.g, ISIS, to continue its proxy war on Syria.
– etc, etc

To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

Anon [377] • Disclaimer , says: July 9, 2020 at 12:45 am GMT
@Mefobills

Because Biblical word “sin” is not understood, it gives cover and sanction for creditors to run wild.

This truth cannot be stressed enough.
True meaning of Sin = Debt

Derer , says: July 9, 2020 at 2:09 am GMT
@Jake

In addition to Constantinople, years later defending Ottoman remnants in Bosnia and Kosovo against the Christians by “cigar” Clinton and warmonger Blair that introduced the Islamization of Europe.

Wizard of Oz , says: July 9, 2020 at 3:33 am GMT
@Erzberger e lines of making distinctions e.g. between deliberate murder of harmless civilians and forcing choices on them (starve Russian prisoners and ration food to mothers and children e.g.). Of course the choice to get rid of their government and stop the war is unrealistic even in the post Cold War world. What did sanctions on Iran produce?? Just civilian deaths.

** it is only recently that I discovered that it made a big contribution to diverting German effort from the Eastern Front though it is not surprising that Stalin thought the absence of a Second Front in France was meant to help the Germans savage the USSR.

Wizard of Oz , says: July 9, 2020 at 3:50 am GMT
@Patagonia Man he approx dozen Israeli dual citizens he alleges are in the Australian Parliament contrary to the provisions of the Australian constitution.

So, don’t encourage him Geo, by thanking him. That Israeli nonsense is enough to brand him as a nutter.

As to Quadrant, what does it matter that, in the 50s, and maybe till about 1970, it was given some financial support by the CIA? Really, what is the point in the 21st century? Does it matter to current affairs that Robert Maxwell owned the Daily Mirror till the 90s?

If I don’t reply to all the rubbish no one should infer the truth of anything Patagonia Man alleges.

anonymous [157] • Disclaimer , says: July 9, 2020 at 4:12 am GMT
@Z-man

Putin because he re-established Christian Orthodoxy as the de facto state religion of Mother Russia.

You make it sound as if Putin single-handedly guided “mother” Russia from godlessness, to true God-awareness. Lol!

Except, Christianity of all flavours will always remain, Pagan Polytheist Mangods-worship, or Hindooism-lite, or Godlessness.

anonymous [157] • Disclaimer , says: July 9, 2020 at 5:40 am GMT
@Mefobills

“Professor” Hudson sounds like a kook.

He takes various commandments of God and distills it into a silly… Debt = Sin. Indeed, it is true that one can take anything and make it fit their delusional way of thought. E.g. the 3 in 1, of the pagan Trinity.

Of course, that does not mean, Usury (extortionate moneylending) ≠ Sin, which it most certainly is.

The Ten Commandments were about debt? A silly interpretation. They are primarily about Monotheism and a righteous way-of-life, and refraining from usury is just one aspect of it.

Christianity got perverted? Yes, it most certainly is a pagan perversion of True Monotheism.

Alfred , says: July 9, 2020 at 5:47 am GMT
@Curmudgeon

In Iceland she would not be especially good looking, just another face in the crowd

Sorry to rain on the parade.

What Have We Won?—Number One For Chlamydia

Alfred , says: July 9, 2020 at 5:56 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

I suspect Assange had to be “put away” in case he leaked documents about the then forthcoming Coronascam. The timing is right.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: July 9, 2020 at 7:08 am GMT
@Patagonia Man

I don’t always agree with the wizard but your mad ad-hominen attack is beastly nonsense, Patagonia Slug.

Patagonia Man , says: July 9, 2020 at 7:19 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Forever the denialist, thanks for demonstrating the point.

annamaria , says: July 9, 2020 at 10:44 am GMT
@Erzberger

“Sure, Poland bears major responsibility for WW 2, and lending themselves to now hosting US nukes and troops to be moved over from Germany signals that they once again have not learned a thing from their past.”
— Stepping on rakes as a national pastime.

annamaria , says: July 9, 2020 at 10:59 am GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse an associated organisation whose stated objective is to ‘maximise support for the State of Israel within the British Liberal Democrat Party’…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Democrat_Friends_of_Israel
Both groups of “Friends of Israel” have been openly disloyal to the UK.
Both groups of “Friends of Israel ” have been actively promoting the rape and destruction of Syria and Libya. The protection and glorification of White Helmets’ murderous jihadis is a nice illustration. Patagonia Man , says: July 9, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT

@Ann Nonny Mouse

So what kind of self-righteousness is this? I said from my experience

When I want your opinion I’ll ask for it.

In future, don’t comment until you’re specifically addressed.

Franklin Ryckaert , says: July 9, 2020 at 1:17 pm GMT
@annamaria

What British politics urgently needs is a lobby Friends of Britain in all of its political parties.

Erzberger , says: July 9, 2020 at 2:07 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz will be as cruel as the Soviets. Were they wrong?

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-nazis-exploited-shermans-march-the-sea-25437

Spaight claims that drawing the war to the British isles was done in solidarity with the Soviets. This is nonsense but a timely propaganda move at a time when German defeat was assured. Stalin did no fall into that trap. He lknew about Operation Pike and Operation Impossible, and had zero reason to trust the British. Wikipedia has a page on either Operation

Erzberger , says: July 9, 2020 at 2:13 pm GMT
@Erzberger

correction: Operation Unthinkable

Erzberger , says: July 9, 2020 at 2:28 pm GMT
@annamaria

True. Victimhood is essential to Polish nationalism, and their last defense against becoming Europeans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_of_Europe#Historical_critics

Anon [288] • Disclaimer , says: July 9, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT
@Patagonia Man

Denialist? A careful textual analysis tells me you are saying WoZ denies what you assert, which is that there are about a dozen Israeli dual citizens in the Australian Parliament, contrary to law. Instead of coyly dancing around the issue what about meeting the challenge to name at least some?

Wizard of Oz , says: July 9, 2020 at 3:00 pm GMT
@Erzberger Thanks. Mind you I think the Blitz was pretty indiscriminate bombing before Britain was in a position to inflict much damage on Germany. I gather attacks on London from the start were a strategic error by Hitler because the Liluftwaffe should have kept up its attacks on Britisk airfields. Interesting that Albert Speer, in the “World at War” series, said that four more raids like the 1000 bomber raid on Hamburg (or maybe it was Cologne) would have finished the war. Why couldn’t Bomber Command do I it? Maybe it was because Eisenhower won the battle to have bombers diverted to bombing the Pas we Calais (mostly) and Normandie.
Erzberger , says: July 9, 2020 at 3:33 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

“Mind you I think the Blitz was pretty indiscriminate bombing before Britain was in a position to inflict much damage on Germany.”

Wrong.

BTW, the Blitz is a misnomer. Blitzkrieg is tactical air support for ground troops. Neither applies to the air attacks on German cities in May 1940, or the German retaliation, several months later, that we know as the Blitz.

Richard Overy though has argued that the German Blitz showed the British how it was done efficiently, so they improved their bombing strategy accordingly afterwards. Whatever

Z-man , says: July 9, 2020 at 5:45 pm GMT
@annamaria

— Stepping on rakes as a national pastime.

LOL!!! Good one.

[Jul 09, 2020] The racket of national security

Jul 09, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved , Jul 9 2020 15:59 utc | 8

Back in the CHOICES thread, we had discussion on the US bullying Iran, and the semantics of whether the US was engaging in "war" against Iran. I hope not to get caught up in those semantics again, but here are a couple of good pieces to show the situation.

The latest Renegade Inc episode interviews Gareth Porter, who draws from Smedley Butler and talks about the "racket" of the security state of the US, which acts only to perpetuate and extend itself, and to increase its funding by all means.

The racket of national security

The episode answers several questions about the US posture towards Iran. Porter supplies the history and background to illustrate the US anger for Iran. Sharmine Narwani makes an appearance also, and together they show why the Pentagon will never conduct acts of war against Iran that will provoke the kind of overt retaliation that Iran delivered by targeting the US bases this year.

The US will only conduct acts that Iran will not overtly respond to. It will escalate its theater right up to that red line, but if it crosses the line - as it did with killing Soleimani - it will be by miscalculation. The only purpose of the US security state is to escalate the threat level to keep the funding coming, and to leave no possible margin for de-funding by Congress. It's a racket, and the racket has swallowed all statecraft.

Once I suggested seriously that Ukraine could not be understood in terms of statecraft, but only in terms of thievery. It becomes increasingly clear that the tenets of organized crime are now the only way to parse US action.

~~

Iran meanwhile, lives by statecraft. It will always respond when that red line is crossed - always and without hesitation. My view is that Iran is continuously working for the total departure of the US from West Asia, as it said that it would in retribution for Soleimani. Much of what it does we don't see, but I note the "resistance" axis goes from strength to strength in solidarity. It was ready to erupt when Iran attacked the US base, but the US disengaged and this unified axis of several nations and forces stood down.

So the school of thought presented for example by Richard Steven Hack here, that the US will war on Iran for decades if it can, simply to feed the MIC, is correct. What's not correct is that the US can perform much in the way of military action against Iran.

We stumbled over the word "war" so perhaps we can talk about minor activities of warfare, which are not enough to bring the theater to full battle. All the nations in the region have tolerated US incursions because to fight them head on would provoke escalation that serves less purpose than living with them - there is a time for everything.

But we have to understand the red lines. And we have to understand that because we see nothing moving, it doesn't mean nothing is moving. Narwani makes some good points about that - and see her full interview on Renegade from last year for a good understanding of what Iran is as a nation and an adversary. It's clear that the Pentagon agrees with her.

As to the Resistance axis, this interview with Lebanese analyst Anees Naqqash is worth a quick read. It tells us much about Lebanon.

US should know 'Resistance' now controls all of West Asia: Naqqash

It is not the case that Iran is doing nothing in response to US warfare against it and its regional allies. The red flag is still flying, and the Iranians take it seriously.

[Jul 07, 2020] Mutiny on the Bounties by RAY McGOVERN

Highly recommended!
So they dusted of McFaul to provide the support for bounty provocation. I wonder whether McFaul one one of Epstein guests, or what ?
So who was the clone of Ciaramella this time? People want to know the hero
Notable quotes:
"... Not to doubt McFaul's ulterior motives; one must assume him to be an "honest man" -- however misguided, in my opinion. He seems to be a disciple of the James Clapper-Curtis LeMay-Joe McCarthy School of Russian Analysis. ..."
"... Clapper, a graduate summa cum laude , certainly had the Russians pegged! Clapper was allowed to stay as Barack Obama's director of national intelligence for three and a half years after perjuring himself in formal Senate testimony (on NSA's illegal eavesdropping). On May 28, 2017 Clapper told NBC's Chuck Todd about "the historical practices of the Russians, who typically, are almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique." ..."
"... As a finale, in full knowledge of Clapper's proclivities regarding Russia, Obama appointed him to prepare the evidence-impoverished, misnomered "Intelligence Community Assessment" claiming that Putin did all he could, including hacking the DNC, to help Trump get elected -- the most embarrassing such "intelligence assessment" I have seen in half a century . ..."
"... Does no one see the irony today in the Democrats' bashing Trump on Afghanistan, with the full support of the Establishment media? The inevitable defeat there is one of the few demonstrable disasters not attributable directly to Trump, but you would not know that from the media. Are the uncorroborated reports of Russian bounties to kill U.S. troops aimed at making it appear that Trump, unable to stand up to Putin, let the Russians drive the rest of U.S. troops out of Afghanistan? ..."
"... Does the current flap bespeak some kind of "Mutiny on the Bounties," so to speak, by a leaker aping Eric Chiaramella? Recall that the Democrats lionized the CIA official seconded to Trump's national security council as a "whistleblower" and proceeded to impeach Trump after Chiaramella leaked information on Trump's telephone call with the president of Ukraine. Far from being held to account, Chiaramella is probably expecting an influential job if his patron, Joe Biden, is elected president. Has there been another mutiny in Trump's White House? ..."
"... It is sad to have to remind folks 18 years later that the "intelligence" on WMD in Iraq was not "mistaken;" it was fraudulent from the get-go. The culprits were finally exposed but never held to account. ..."
"... Here's an assignment due on Monday. Read McFaul's oped carefully. It appears under the title: "Trump would do anything for Putin. No wonder he's ignoring the Russian bounties: Russia's pattern of hostility matches Trump's pattern of accommodation." ..."
"... Full assignment for Monday: Read carefully through each paragraph of McFaul's text and select which of his claims you would put into one or more of the three categories adduced by Sen. Rockefeller 12 years ago about WMD on Iraq. With particular attention to the evidence behind McFaul's claims, determine which of the claims is (a) "uncorroborated"; which (b) "contradicted"; and which (c) "non-existent;" or (d) all of the above. For extra credit, find one that is supported by plausible evidence. ..."
"... Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are both long-time members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), flagship of the globalist “liberal world order”. The CFR and its many interlocking affiliates, along with their media assets and frontmen in government, have dominated US policy since WW2. Most of the Fed chairmen and secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense and CIA have been CFR members, including Jerome Powell and Mark Esper. ..."
"... The major finance, energy, defense and media corporations are CFR sponsors, and several of their execs are members. David Rubenstein, billionaire founder of the notorious Carlyle Group, is the current CFR chairman. Laurence Fink, billionaire chairman of BlackRock, is a CFR director. See lists at the CFR website. ..."
"... “It is sad to have to remind folks 18 years later that the “intelligence” on WMD in Iraq was not “mistaken;” it was fraudulent from the get-go. The culprits were finally exposed but never held to account.” ..."
"... They are spoon fed those lies by our “intelligence” agencies. As CNN’s Jeff Zucker said, “We’re not investigators, we’re journalists”. Replace “journalists” with “toadies” or “shills” for our “intelligence” community and you’ve gotten to the truth of the matter. ..."
"... In the unhealthy society of Clintons, Obamas, Epstein, Mueller, Adelsons, Clapper, and Krystols, human dignity is a sin. ..."
"... Our institutions including journalism are not merely corrupt, they are degenerate. That is, the corruption is not occasional or the exception is is by design, desired and entirely normal. ..."
"... from Counterpunch.org : “Around 15,000 Soviet troops perished in the Afghan War between 1979 and 1989. The US funneled more than $20 billion to the Mujahideen and other anti-Soviet fighters over that same period. This works out to a “bounty” of $1.33 million for each Soviet soldier killed.” ..."
"... Yes, of course it is a well-known ‘fact’ that Putin has nothing better to do than destory American democracy, and I bet he has dreams about it too! But I am minded to think that if anybody has a penchant for destroying American democracy it is the powers that be in the US deep state, intelligence agencies, and zionist cliques controlling the President and Congress. ..."
"... Udo Ulfkotte was a German journalist. He wrote a sensational book about the practices he experienced of the CIA paying German journalists to publish certain stories. The book was a big best seller in Germany. Its English translation was suppressed for years, but I believe is now available. ..."
"... Gekaufte journalisten. Ulfkotte admitted he signed off on numerous articles that were prepared for him during his career. The last year’s of his life he changed his mores and advocated “better die in truth than live with lies”. ..."
Jul 03, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

RAY McGOVERN: Mutiny on the Bounties

Has there been another mutiny in Trump's White House, as Obama's former ambassador to Russia piles on the nonsense about Trump being in Putin's pocket?

By Ray McGovern
Special to Consortium News

C orporate media are binging on leaked Kool Aid not unlike the WMD concoction they offered 18 years ago to "justify" the U.S.-UK war of aggression on Iraq.

Now Michael McFaul, ambassador to Russia under President Obama, has been enlisted by The Washington Post 's editorial page honcho, Fred Hiatt, to draw on his expertise (read, incurable Russophobia) to help stick President Donald Trump back into "Putin's pocket." (This has become increasingly urgent as the canard of "Russiagate" -- including the linchpin claim that Russia hacked the DNC -- lies gasping for air.)

In an oped on Thursday McFaul presented a long list of Vladimir Putin's alleged crimes, offering a more ostensibly sophisticated version of amateur Russian specialist, Rep. Jason Crow's (D-CO) claim that: "Vladimir Putin wakes up every morning and goes to bed every night trying to figure out how to destroy American democracy."

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry with McFaul meeting Vladimir Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, on May 7, 2013. (State Department)

McFaul had -- well, let's call it an undistinguished career in Moscow. He arrived with a huge chip on his shoulder and proceeded to alienate just about all his hosts, save for the rabidly anti-Putin folks he openly and proudly cultivated. In a sense, McFaul became the epitome of what Henry Wooton described as the role of ambassador -- "an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country." What should not be so readily accepted is an ambassador who comes back home and just can't stop misleading.

Not to doubt McFaul's ulterior motives; one must assume him to be an "honest man" -- however misguided, in my opinion. He seems to be a disciple of the James Clapper-Curtis LeMay-Joe McCarthy School of Russian Analysis.

Clapper, a graduate summa cum laude , certainly had the Russians pegged! Clapper was allowed to stay as Barack Obama's director of national intelligence for three and a half years after perjuring himself in formal Senate testimony (on NSA's illegal eavesdropping). On May 28, 2017 Clapper told NBC's Chuck Todd about "the historical practices of the Russians, who typically, are almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/tcN_tWk089w?feature=oembed

As a finale, in full knowledge of Clapper's proclivities regarding Russia, Obama appointed him to prepare the evidence-impoverished, misnomered "Intelligence Community Assessment" claiming that Putin did all he could, including hacking the DNC, to help Trump get elected -- the most embarrassing such "intelligence assessment" I have seen in half a century .

Obama and the National Security State

I have asked myself if Obama also had earned some kind of degree from the Clapper/LeMay/McCarthy School, or whether he simply lacked the courage to challenge the pitiably self-serving "analysis" of the National Security State. Then I re-read "Obama Misses the Afghan Exit-Ramp" of June 24, 2010 and was reminded of how deferential Obama was to the generals and the intelligence gurus, and how unconscionable the generals were -- like their predecessors in Vietnam -- in lying about always seeing light at the end of the proverbial tunnel.

Thankfully, now ten years later, this is all documented in Craig Whitlock's, "The Afghanistan Papers: At War With the Truth." Corporate media, who played an essential role in that "war with the truth", have not given Whitlock's damning story the attention it should command (surprise, surprise!). In any case, it strains credulity to think that Obama was unaware he was being lied to on Afghanistan.

Some Questions

Clark Gable (l.) with Charles Laughton (r.) in Mutiny on the Bounty, 1935.

Does no one see the irony today in the Democrats' bashing Trump on Afghanistan, with the full support of the Establishment media? The inevitable defeat there is one of the few demonstrable disasters not attributable directly to Trump, but you would not know that from the media. Are the uncorroborated reports of Russian bounties to kill U.S. troops aimed at making it appear that Trump, unable to stand up to Putin, let the Russians drive the rest of U.S. troops out of Afghanistan?

Does the current flap bespeak some kind of "Mutiny on the Bounties," so to speak, by a leaker aping Eric Chiaramella? Recall that the Democrats lionized the CIA official seconded to Trump's national security council as a "whistleblower" and proceeded to impeach Trump after Chiaramella leaked information on Trump's telephone call with the president of Ukraine. Far from being held to account, Chiaramella is probably expecting an influential job if his patron, Joe Biden, is elected president. Has there been another mutiny in Trump's White House?

And what does one make of the spectacle of Crow teaming up with Rep. Liz Cheney (R, WY) to restrict Trump's planned pull-out of troops from Afghanistan, which The Los Angeles Times reports has now been blocked until after the election?

Hiatt & McFaul: Caveat Editor

And who published McFaul's oped? Fred Hiatt, Washington Post editorial page editor for the past 20 years, who has a long record of listening to the whispers of anonymous intelligence sources and submerging/drowning the subjunctive mood with flat fact. This was the case with the (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the U.S.-UK attack. Readers of the Post were sure there were tons of WMD in Iraq. That Hiatt has invited McFaul on stage should come as no surprise.

To be fair, Hiatt belatedly acknowledged that the Post should have been more circumspect in its confident claims about the WMD. "If you look at the editorials we write running up [to the war], we state as flat fact that he [Saddam Hussein] has weapons of mass destruction," Hiatt said in an interview with the Columbia Journalism Review . "If that's not true, it would have been better not to say it." [CJR, March/April 2004]

At this word of wisdom, Consortium News founder, the late Robert Parry, offered this comment: "Yes, that is a common principle of journalism, that if something isn't real, we're not supposed to confidently declare that it is." That Hiatt is still in that job speaks volumes.

'Uncorroborated, Contradicted, or Even Non-Existent'

It is sad to have to remind folks 18 years later that the "intelligence" on WMD in Iraq was not "mistaken;" it was fraudulent from the get-go. The culprits were finally exposed but never held to account.

Announcing on June 5, 2008, the bipartisan conclusions from a five-year study by the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Jay Rockefeller ( D-WV) said the attack on Iraq was launched "under false pretenses." He described the intelligence conjured up to "justify" war on Iraq as "uncorroborated, contradicted, or even non-existent."

Homework

Yogi Berra in 1956. (Wikipedia)

Here's an assignment due on Monday. Read McFaul's oped carefully. It appears under the title: "Trump would do anything for Putin. No wonder he's ignoring the Russian bounties: Russia's pattern of hostility matches Trump's pattern of accommodation."

And to give you a further taste, here is the first paragraph:

"Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have paid Taliban rebels in Afghanistan to kill U.S. soldiers. Having resulted in at least one American death, and maybe more, these Russian bounties reportedly produced the desired outcome. While deeply disturbing, this effort by Putin is not surprising: It follows a clear pattern of ignoring international norms, rules and laws -- and daring the United States to do anything about it."

Full assignment for Monday: Read carefully through each paragraph of McFaul's text and select which of his claims you would put into one or more of the three categories adduced by Sen. Rockefeller 12 years ago about WMD on Iraq. With particular attention to the evidence behind McFaul's claims, determine which of the claims is (a) "uncorroborated"; which (b) "contradicted"; and which (c) "non-existent;" or (d) all of the above. For extra credit, find one that is supported by plausible evidence.

Yogi Berra might be surprised to hear us keep quoting him with "Deja vu, all over again." Sorry, Yogi, that's what it is; you coined it.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. During his 27-year career as a CIA analyst, he prepared and briefed The President's Daily Brief for Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Tarus77 , July 6, 2020 at 14:25

Gad, one wonders if it can ever get much lower in the press and the answer is yes, it can and will go lower, i.e. the mcfaul/hiatt tag team. They are still plumbing for the lows.

The question becomes just how stupid these two are or how stupid do they believe the readership is to read and believe this garbage.

Voice from Europe , July 6, 2020 at 11:58

By now the Russia did it ! is in effect a joke in Russia. Economically, politically, geo strategically China and Asia and Africa have become more important and reliable partners of Russia than the USA. And Europe is also dropping fast on the trustworthy partners list…..

John , July 5, 2020 at 12:55

Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are both long-time members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), flagship of the globalist “liberal world order”. The CFR and its many interlocking affiliates, along with their media assets and frontmen in government, have dominated US policy since WW2. Most of the Fed chairmen and secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense and CIA have been CFR members, including Jerome Powell and Mark Esper.

The major finance, energy, defense and media corporations are CFR sponsors, and several of their execs are members. David Rubenstein, billionaire founder of the notorious Carlyle Group, is the current CFR chairman. Laurence Fink, billionaire chairman of BlackRock, is a CFR director. See lists at the CFR website.

Anna , July 6, 2020 at 09:38

Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are both very active promoters of hate crimes. Neither has any decency hence decency is allergic to war profiteers and opportunistic liars.

The poor USA; to descend to such a deep moral hole that both Michael McFaul and Fred Hiatt are still alive and prospering. Shamelessness and presstituting are paid well in the US.

Juan M Escobedo , July 5, 2020 at 11:35

Dems and Reps are already mad. You cannot destroy what does not exist; like Democracy in these United States. Nor God or Putin could. This has always being a fallacy. This is not a democracy; same thing with ”communist" China or the USSR .Those two were never socialist. There has never being a real Socialist or Communist country.

Guy , July 4, 2020 at 12:26

“It is sad to have to remind folks 18 years later that the “intelligence” on WMD in Iraq was not “mistaken;” it was fraudulent from the get-go. The culprits were finally exposed but never held to account.”

That statement goes to the crux of the matter.Why should journalists care about what is true or a lie in their reports ,they know they will never be held to account .They should be held to account through the court system . A lie by any journalist should be actionable by any court of law . The fear of jail time would sort out the scam journalists we presently have to endure .

As it is they have perverted the profession of journalism and it is the law of the jungle .No true democracy should put up with this. We are surrounded with lies that are generated by the very establishment that should protect it’s citizens from same .

Skip Scott , July 4, 2020 at 15:36

They are spoon fed those lies by our “intelligence” agencies. As CNN’s Jeff Zucker said, “We’re not investigators, we’re journalists”. Replace “journalists” with “toadies” or “shills” for our “intelligence” community and you’ve gotten to the truth of the matter.

Anna , July 6, 2020 at 09:50

The ‘journalists’ observe how things have been going on for Cheney the Traitor and Bush the lesser — nothing happened to the mega criminals. The hate-bursting and war-profiteering Cheney’s daughter has even squeezed into US Congress.

In a healthy society where human dignity is cherished, the Cheney family will be ostracized and the family name became a synonym for the word ‘traitor.’ In the unhealthy society of Clintons, Obamas, Epstein, Mueller, Adelsons, Clapper, and Krystols, human dignity is a sin.

Ricard Coleman , July 6, 2020 at 11:42

Our institutions including journalism are not merely corrupt, they are degenerate. That is, the corruption is not occasional or the exception is is by design, desired and entirely normal.

Stan W. , July 4, 2020 at 12:10

I’m still confident that Durham’s investigation will expose and successfully prosecute the maggots that infest our government.

Skip Scott , July 4, 2020 at 15:29

What is the basis for this confidence?

John Puma , July 4, 2020 at 12:03

Re: whether Obumma “had earned some kind of degree from the Clapper/LeMay/McCarthy School” of Russia Analytics.

It would be a worthy addition to his degree collection featuring that earned from the Neville Chamberlain Night School of Critical Political Negotiation.

Jeff Harrison , July 4, 2020 at 11:16

Hmmm. Lessee. The US attacks Afghanistan with about the same legitimacy that we had when we attacked Iraq and the Taliban are in charge. We oust the Taliban from power and put our own puppets in place. What idiot thinks that the Taliban are going to need a bounty to kill Americans?

Wendy LaRiviere , July 4, 2020 at 18:29

Jeff Harrison, I like your logic. Plus, I understand that far fewer Americans are being killed in Afghanistan than were under Obama’s administration.

AnneR , July 4, 2020 at 10:27

Frankly, I am sick to death of the unwarranted, indeed bestial Russophobia that is megaphoned minute by minute on NPR and the BBC World Service (only radio here since my husband died). If it isn’t this latest trumped up (ho ho) charge, there are repeated mentions, in passing, of course, of the Russiagate, hacking, Kremlin control of the Strumpet to back up the latest bunch of lies.

Doesn’t matter at *all* that Russiagate was debunked, that even Mueller couldn’t actually demonstrably pull the DNC/ruling elites rabbit out of the hat, that the impeachment of the Strumpet went nowhere. And it clearly – by its total absence on the above radio broadcasts – doesn’t matter one iota that the Pentagonal hasn’t gone along, that gaping holes in the confabulation are (and were) obvious to those who cared to think with half a mind awake and reflecting on past US ruling elite lies, untruths, obfuscations. Nope. Just repeat, repeat, repeat. Orwell would clap his hands (not because he agreed with the atrocious politics but the lesson is learnt).

Added to the whipped up anti-Russia, decidedly anti-Putin crapola – is of course the Russian peoples’ vote, decision making on their own country’s changes to the Basic Law (a form of Constitution). When the radio broadcasts the usual sickening anti-Russian/Putin propaganda regarding this vote immediately prior they would state that the changes would install Putin for many more years: no mention that he would have to be elected, i.e. voted by the populace into the presidency. (This was repeated ad infinitum without any elaboration.) No other proposed changes were mentioned – certainly not that the Duma would gain greater control over the governance of the country and over the president’s cabinet. I.e. that the popularly elected (ain’t that what we call democracy??) representatives in the Duma (parliament) would essentially have more power than the president.

But most significantly, to my mind, no one has (well of course not – this is Russia) raised the issue of the fact that it was the Russian people, the vox populi/hoi polloi, who have had some say in how they are to be governed, how their government will work for them. HOW much say have we had/do we have in how our government functions, works – let alone for us, the hoi polloi? When did we the citizenry last have a voting say on ANY sentence in the Constitution that governs us??? Ummm I do believe it was the creation of the wealthy British descended slave holding, real estate ethnic-cleansing lot who wrote and ratified the original document and the hardly dissimilar Congressional and state types who have over the years written and voted on various amendments. And it is the members of the upper classes in the Supreme Court who adjudicate on its application to various problems.

BUT We the hoi polloi have never, ever had a direct opportunity to individually vote for or against any single part of the Constitution which is supposed to be the “democratic” superstructure which governs us. Unlike the Russians a couple of days ago.

Richard Coleman , July 6, 2020 at 15:48

“HOW much say have we had/do we have in how our government functions, works…” See, that’s your mistake right there. WE don’t have a government. We need one, but we ain’t got one. THEY have a government which they let us go through the motions of electing. ‘Member back when Bernie was talking about a Political Revolution?

Here’s a little fact for you. The five most populous states have a total of 123,000,000 people. That’s 10 Senators. The five least populated states have a total of 3.5 million. That’s also 10 Senators. Democracy anyone?

vinnieoh , July 4, 2020 at 09:37

There have been three coup d’état within the US within the lifetimes of most that read these pages. The first was explained to us by Eisenhower only as he was exiting his time from the national stage; the MIC had co-opted our government. The second happened in 2000, with the putsch in Florida and then the adoption by the neocon cabal of Bush /Chaney of the PNAC blueprint “Strategies for Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (Defenses – hahahaha – shit!). The third happened late last year and early this year when the bottom-up grass-roots movement of progressivism was crushed by the DNC and the cold-warrior hack Biden was inserted as the champion of “the opposition party.”

And, make no mistake that Kamala Harris WILL be his running mate. It was always going to be Harris. It was to be Harris at the TOP of the ticket as the primaries began, but she wasn’t even placing in the top tier in any of the contests. However, the poohbahs and strategists of the DNC are nothing if not determined and consistent. If Biden should win, we should all start practicing now saying “President Harris” because that is what the future holds. For the DNC, she looks the part, she sounds the part, but more importantly she is the very definition of the status quo, corporate ass-kisser, MIC tool.

The professional political class have fully colluded to fatally cripple this democratic republic. “Democracy” is just a word they say like, “Where’s my kickback?” (excuse me – my “motivation”.) This bounty scam and the rehabilitation of GW Bush are nothing but a full blitzkrieg flanking of Trump on the right. And Trump of course is so far out of his depth that he actually believes that Israel is his friend. (A hint Donny: Israel is NO-ONE’S friend.)

What is most infuriating? hope-crushing? plain f$%&*#g scary? is that the majority of Americans from all quarters do not want any of what the professional political class keeps dumping on us. The very attempt at performing this upcoming election will finally and forever lay completely bare the collapse of a functioning government. It’s going to be very ugly, and it may very well be the end. Dog help us all.

Richard Coleman , July 6, 2020 at 15:51

Don’t you think that the assassination of JFK counts as a coup d’etat?

Zhu , July 7, 2020 at 02:10

Apres moi, le Deluge.

John Drake , July 7, 2020 at 11:25

Oh gosh how can you forget the Kennedy Assassination. Most people don’t realize he was had ordered the removal of a thousand advisors from Vietnam starting the process of completely cutting bait there, as he had in Laos and Cambodia. All of which made the generals apoplectic. The great secret about Vietnam-which Ellsberg discovered much latter, and mentioned in his book Secrets, another good read- was that every president had been warned it was likely futile. Kennedy was the only one who took that intelligence seriously-like it was actually intelligent intelligence.

Enter stage right Allen Dulles (fired CIA chief), the anti Castro Cubans, the Mafia and most important the MIC; exit Jack Kennedy.

Douglas, JFK why he died and why it matters is the best work on the subject. And no Oswald did not do it; it was a sniper team from different angles, but read the book it gets complicated.

Roger , July 4, 2020 at 09:11

from Counterpunch.org : “Around 15,000 Soviet troops perished in the Afghan War between 1979 and 1989. The US funneled more than $20 billion to the Mujahideen and other anti-Soviet fighters over that same period. This works out to a “bounty” of $1.33 million for each Soviet soldier killed.”

Skip Scott , July 4, 2020 at 08:35

I am wondering how Cheney and Crow can block Trump from withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan. Is Trump Commander in Chief, or not? How can two senators stop the Commander in Chief from commanding troop movements? I realize they control the budget, but aren’t they crossing into illegality by restricting Trump’s ability to “command”?

Toad Sprocket , July 4, 2020 at 16:49

Yeah, I imagine it’s illegal. Didn’t Lindsay Graham threaten the same thing when Trump was thinking of pulling troops/”advisers” from Syria? And other congress warmongers joined in though I don’t think any legislation was passed. They can’t be bothered to authorize the starts of wars but want to step in when someone tries to end them.

Oh, and Schumer on South Korea troops, I think that one did pass. Almost certainly illegal if it came down to it, but our government is of course lawless. And our courts full of judges who are bought off or moronic or both.

dean 1000 , July 4, 2020 at 06:52

The soft coup attempt continues Ray. More lies and bullshit. It may continue until election day. Will the media fess-up to its lies after the fact again?

Francis Lee , July 4, 2020 at 04:49

“Vladimir Putin wakes up every morning and goes to bed every night trying to figure out how to destroy American democracy.”

Yes, of course it is a well-known ‘fact’ that Putin has nothing better to do than destory American democracy, and I bet he has dreams about it too! But I am minded to think that if anybody has a penchant for destroying American democracy it is the powers that be in the US deep state, intelligence agencies, and zionist cliques controlling the President and Congress.

”Those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.”

The American establishment seems to be suffering from a bad case of ‘projection’ as psychiatrists call it. That is to say accusing others of what they are themselves actually doing.

The whole idiotic circus would be hilarious if it were not so serious.

Antonia Young , July 4, 2020 at 12:20

Putin’s (and by extension the Russian Federation’s) primary objective is international stability. “Destroying America, dividing Americans is the last thing he wants.) Putin learned many lessons during the break-up of the U.S.S.R. observing the carpet baggers/oligarchs/vultures who descended on the weak nation, absconding with it’s wealth and resources at mere fractions of their real value. The deep state’s worst fear is the co-operation btwn Putin and President Trump to make the world more peaceful, stable, co-operative and prosperous.

rosemerry , July 4, 2020 at 16:10

The whole conceited and arrogant “belief” that

  1. The USA has any resemblance to a democracy and
  2. Pres. Putin has nothing else to do but think how he could do a better job of showing the destructive and irresponsible behavior of the USA than its own leaders” and media can do with no help has no basis in reality.

If anything, Putin is such a stickler for international law, negotiations, avoidance of conflict that he is regarded by many as too Christian for this modern, individualistic, LBGTQ, ”nobody matters but me” worldview of the USA!

Steve Naidamast , July 5, 2020 at 19:54

“If the enemy is self destructing, let them continue to do so…”

Napoleon

Zhu , July 7, 2020 at 02:17

“zionist cliques”: Christian Zionist fighting Fundies, eager for the End of the World, the Second Coming of Jesus.

delia ruhe , July 4, 2020 at 01:09

Yup, we got a Bountygate. Since my early morning visit to the Foreign Policy site, the place has exploded with breathless articles on the dastardly Putin and the cowardly Trump, who has so far failed to hold Putin to account. Reminded me of a similar explosion there when Russiagate finally got the attention the Dems thought it deserved.

(Anyone think that the intel community pays a fee to each of the FP columnists whenever one of their a propaganda narratives needs a push to get it off the ground?)

JOHN CHUCKMAN , July 4, 2020 at 08:52

Udo Ulfkotte was a German journalist. He wrote a sensational book about the practices he experienced of the CIA paying German journalists to publish certain stories. The book was a big best seller in Germany. Its English translation was suppressed for years, but I believe is now available.

Susan Siens , July 5, 2020 at 16:30

Reply to John Chuckman: I’d love to read this book but it wasn’t available a few years ago when I looked. I’ll look again!

Voice from Europe , July 6, 2020 at 11:52

Gekaufte journalisten. Ulfkotte admitted he signed off on numerous articles that were prepared for him during his career. The last year’s of his life he changed his mores and advocated “better die in truth than live with lies”.

Richard A. , July 4, 2020 at 00:59

I remember the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour from decades ago. Real experts on Russia like Dimitri Simes and Stephen Cohen were the ones to appear on that NewsHour. The NewsHour of today rarely has experts on Russia, just experts on Russia bashing–like Michael McFaul. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Antonia Young , July 3, 2020 at 23:35

Thank you, Ray for your clarion voice in the midst of WMD-seventeen-point-oh. Will the American people have the wisdom to notice how many times we’re being fooled? And finally wake up and stop supporting these questionable news outlets? With appreciation for your excellent analysis, as usual. ~Tonia Young (Formerly with the Topanga Peace Alliance)

Blessthebeasts , July 4, 2020 at 11:55

The majority of Americans have a lot more to worry about than the latest nonsense about Russia. I think most people just tune it out.

The ones being fooled are the fools who have been lapping this crap up from the get go. The supposed educated class who think themselves superior and well informed because they read and listen to the propaganda of PBS, NPR, NYT etc.

They don’t seem to realize the ship is sinking while they’re playing these ridiculous games.

Susan Siens , July 5, 2020 at 16:34

The supposedly educated class, yes! It can be stunning how people believe anything they hear on PBS or NPR, and then they make fun of people who believe anything they hear on Fox News. What’s the difference? Both are propaganda tools.

And, yes, watch us go down in flames while so-called progressives boo-hoo about Trump thinking he’s above the law (like every other president before him). Our local “peace and justice” group sent me an email asking me to sign a petition supporting Robert Mueller. I was gobsmacked, and then I realized our local “peace and justice” group had been taken over by Democratic Party “resisters.” Jeezums, why is every word hijacked?

[Jul 07, 2020] War is no longer about winning. Endless conflict is the name of the game. Military defense contractors are the most influential of all lobbyists

Jul 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

450.org , Jul 7 2020 2:06 utc | 99

@96

War is no longer about winning. Endless conflict is the name of the game. Military defense contractors are the most influential of all lobbyists and so intertwined in government that it's truly & effectively fascist. Profit is the end, war is the means.

Jackrabbit , Jul 7 2020 2:28 utc | 102

Wait ... what?
<> <> <> <> <>

IMO Trump has started wars but the countries and peoples he picks on know that it's best not to respond too forcibly or they invite greater damage.

I'm surprised that moa commenters give any credence to the claims that portray Trump as peaceful/peace-loving. In addition to his belligerence, Empire front-man Trump has initiated a huge military build-up, ended long-standing peace treaties, and militarized space.

!!

Edward , Jul 7 2020 2:56 utc | 106

This is the standard Washington rhetoric that accompanies their coup attempts. It is a companion to the "moderate democracy" rhetoric about U.S. satellite governments like Saudi Arabia. The rhetoric tells you that these people have zero interest in democracy, honesty, or avoiding hypocrisy. Some of Bush's neocons are Biden Supporters; what a surprise.

Don Bacon , Jul 7 2020 3:13 utc | 108

@ Jackrabbit 102
re: Isn't USA effectively at war with Venezuela?. . .etc
Obviously you don't know jack about actual war, do you.
Or give us your creds?

Grieved , Jul 7 2020 4:28 utc | 109
I dropped back in to see what follows...imagine my deflation to find that people don't know what war is.

@108 Don Bacon

Precisely. No one who has ever experienced the tragedy of war will ever mistake the playground games of make-believe war with the real thing.

~~

That's the problem with the US administration, and its satraps and the many camp followers and court jesters who follow it. They don't know the difference between posturing war and waging war.

The difference is so profound that it calls for not only a new language but a new departure point of reference within one's soul even to begin to speak of such things.

The US will pursue the make-believe war it postures through in order to score points within its small group circle. But real war, should it ever come to touch it - and it will if it pursues its childishness too far - will shock it into total frozen fear the moment that it strikes.

Iran knew this, and had the human strength to test it and to prove it. Everything else, up to this point, was an accommodation by the world's nations to the posturing of the US for its own internal coherence. It was a matter of supporting the US ego rather than of being close to the event when that ego falls apart, with potentially explosive consequences.

But Iran had the strength of character to stand on its principles, and to proclaim its truth. And by the way, that stand is by no means done, despite what the trolls may suggest. Iran has barely begun its action to remove the US from Southwest Asia, and we will only see the footprints of its actions as we realize that the US has departed. And this will happen, regardless of the US narrative and its many parrots.

~~

I don't blame the US or any of its supporters for threatening war when all it really does is act as a nuisance and a spoiler in those few platforms left to it. Those it oppresses have so far mostly chosen to bear the insult rather than to make a fuss. But Iran has shown the way, and one should not expect many more of those oppressed to put up with the abuse from the US many more times.

What is clearly known is that the very last thing the US can do is go to war, in the real meaning of that term. The very last thing the US is capable of, is war. And the generals of all the nations of the world know this because they have seen the proof of it. Anyone who doesn't see the proof of it is behind the curve, and may well have license to comment here and elsewhere, but fortunately does not sit in the security councils of the nations of the world.

~~

If anyone wants to think that the US is "effectively" at war with another nation, then consider that Iran is absolutely "effectively" at war with the US, just as Hezbollah is beyond any doubt at war with Israel. And so what? When positions are "effectively" this or that, then they had better produce "effective" results. And it is only from these effective results that we can count the coup of the engagement. Hezbollah and Iran don't need to be told the difference between real attacks and propaganda attacks.

What they count is the real force.

Everything else is bluster. And I was 16 years old myself once, so in all humility I don't condemn this braggadocio, which I understand all too humanly.

But neither do I take it as real in the real world.

Don Bacon , Jul 7 2020 4:47 utc | 110
@ Grieved 109
Thanks for helping to deliver us from all that illusory make-believe on war from the deep thinkers who apparently man this place. And yes, Iran has shown the way, which includes its ability to put a serious hurt on US forces if attacked. We're talking about the possibility of lots of US dead bodies, military and dependents, men women and children, also sunken ships, and not just some supporting proxies and aerial bombing with the attendant publicity that suggests to some that genuine war exists, when it doesn't.
People need to get real.
Jackrabbit , Jul 7 2020 5:26 utc | 112

Trump is really no different than Clinton, GWBush, and Obama. Each a front-man for the Deep State/Empire. Each portrayed as well-meaning, peace-loving men that were FORCED! to war for all the right reasons. In that context, these Jedi mind-tricks fall flat:


!!
Mao , Jul 7 2020 5:52 utc | 113

With only four months left to the U.S. presidential elections, and the increasing likelihood of Donald Trump, the most pro-Israel President in history, losing, Israel has been trying to provoke Iran to start a war, so that it can drag the United State into it. This is not anything new. For over a decade Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying to force the United States to go to war with Iran, and Israel itself almost attacked Iran three times between 2010 and 2011. But the with events of the last several months darkening the prospects of a second Trump term, Israel feels a new urgency for a war with Iran.

For over two years Israel tried to provoke Iran by attacking Iranian-backed Shiite forces in Syria, but Iran has opted not to retaliate. Since the attacks did not provoke Iran to retaliate, and also failed to dislodge Iran's military advisers and the Shiite forces that it trained, armed, and dispatched to Syria, Israel has seemingly turned to attacking Iran directly within its borders.

The events of past two months in Iran are indicative of Israel's new push for war. These events include large-scale infernos, explosions, and cyberattacks, all believed to have been carried out by Israel and its Iranian proxies, the "fake opposition" which is the part of the opposition that supports economic sanctions and military attacks against Iran, and has even allied itself with small secessionist groups that carry out terrorist attacks inside Iran.

https://original.antiwar.com/sahimi/2020/07/05/israel-is-trying-to-provoke-iran-to-start-a-war/

Mao , Jul 7 2020 6:23 utc | 114

In this video, Prof. Wolff talks about the breakdown of the capitalist system and outlines 4 major problems that the US has been faced with without for quite some time with no solution in sight: climate change, capitalism's intrinsic instability, systemic racism inherited from slavery, and lastly the lack of mechanisms to manage viruses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HRWWRFyEc8

In this video, Prof. Wolff compares and contrasts the preparation for and management of COVID-19 with how the US has managed military preparedness and the handling of military confrontations and activities. It has succeeded at one and completely failed at the other. He explains why.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAo_QJAsOGg

AskProfWolff: How the Fed Serves Capitalism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reHa7VVnhT8

Richard Steven Hack , Jul 7 2020 6:36 utc | 115
Posted by: Grieved | Jul 7 2020 1:09 utc | 96 Prediction: The US may start a war but the US will not finish that war. Its opponent will end that war, by causing unacceptable losses to the US - something quite easily achieved, and already proved to the world by Iran in this very year of 2020.

I agree. The US can not defeat Iran, short of nuking Tehran, which is not in the cards for geopolitical reasons. However, the US can devastate much of Iran's civilian infrastructure, which, like most such infrastructures, can't run and hide. The US can also kill a million or two milllion Iranians, as it proved in Iraq.

All that will do, however, is merely guarantee that Iran will never surrender. Nor would Iran ever surrender in the first place. Which is why I tend to reference the upcoming war as the "New Thirty Years War". The clear example is the near twenty years we've spent in Afghanistan - which is vastly weaker than Iran. Each war - Vietnam, Afghanistan, and arguably Iraq - has lasted longer than the last and with failure as an outcome.

The US can keep attacking Iran from the air and sea for thirty years - but without ever defeating Iran. It will do so because the military-industrial complex will make profits every year from that war - and in the end, that's all that matters to the US (along with the

Only if the US tries a land invasion will the US lose a massive number of troops. But even that will come over time, albeit at a *much* higher rate than the US saw in either Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan. US annual casualties would probably be in the low to medium 5 digits per year, as opposed to the low 4 digits in most of those wars. In other words, four or five times the rate in Iraq. That's as compared with a hot war in North Korea which would see 50,000 US casualties in the first ninety days, or any war with China or Russia. See "United States military casualties of war" on Wikipedia. It's possible that casualties could rise to the level of WWI, if the war lasts five or ten years, or even WWII if it lasts twenty - or even higher if it lasts thirty.

Most people think the US will not try a land invasion. I've argued, however, that the *only* way to even attempt to prevent Iran from closing the Straits for the duration of the war will be for the US to put several score thousand Marines and US troops on Iran's shores to attempt to prevent launching of mines and anti-ship missiles. This would be difficult since Iran has a long Persian Gulf shoreline, Iran has fortified that shoreline, there are many places to launch weapons from that shoreline - and any such US troops would be subject to both conventional and guerrilla war by the Iranian military and perhaps a million or more Iranian Basij militia. Nonetheless, the US is likely to be dumb enough to try.

In any event, the US will eventually be forced to withdraw either because the US electorate would eventually tire of the war - although as Afghanistan proves, that could take a *very* long time, mostly depending on the casualty rate, however, as I indicateed - or because another "threat" takes precedence, which would likely mean either Russia or China.

"And the US will strain its mighty Wurlitzer to the utmost to declare victory as it retreats."

Yup. And the sad part is that the US electorate will probably believe that, then forget about the reality and be willing to commit to a new war within another ten years.

Jackrabbit , Jul 7 2020 6:36 utc | 116
Mao @Jul7 5:52 #113

increasing likelihood of Donald Trump, the most pro-Israel President in history, losing

1) The USA establishment are all pro-Israel.

2) Biden has proclaimed himself a Zionist.

3) In 2016 all the polls had Clinton ahead.

Fake populist outsiders (like Trump) have to be shown to defeat the establishment. That helps to sell them as being on the side of the people.

!!

Richard Steven Hack , Jul 7 2020 7:00 utc | 119
In addition to the above, the idea that because there's a difference between "war" and "conflicts before war" there is *no chance* of war is absurd.

Every war started with this sort of enmity between nations historically. As I've said before, with this level of enmity between the US and Iran, and arguably between the US and Russia, and the US and China, war is inevitable. With the latter two countries, such a war is likely to be nuclear - which is why it hasn't happened yet - that risk is *way* too high (although it can still happen if a miscalculation causes a conventional war, which then escalates into nuclear.)

A war with Iran doesn't have that risk. No nuclear power that I am aware of is going to enter the war on Iran's side and thus risk a nuclear war over Iran. Iran itself will not develop or use nuclear weapons. Israel *might* consider using nuclear weapons against Iran - that would be a*huge* mistake geopolitically and probably result in Israel's destruction by geopolitical means if not by military means. But neither Russia nor China are going to directly engage the US military to defend Iran. That would be stupid and putting their own national survival at risk for the benefit of another nation. As Percival Rose would say, "That ain't gonna happen."

The real problem for some people is cognitive dissonance. They can't emotionally accept the possibility of these wars occurring - so they don't. They are reduced to saying, "well, it hasn't happened...yet."

The "yet" is the operative term. There is no logical extension of that term to mean "never".

Jackrabbit , Jul 7 2020 7:03 utc | 120
Richard Steven Hack @Jul7 6:36 115

There are many other mistaken assumptions, such as:


!!
arby , Jul 7 2020 11:59 utc | 123

IMO, the word "WAR" means two sides are fighting.

What is plain to see is all of these "wars" are not wars but provocations, aggression from one side and bullying. In every case the other side does not want a war.

Interesting how the US has way upped its aggression on Venezuela without a peep from the people. This started off with some nonsense about an idiot named Guaido and is now full blown nastiness.

Digital Spartacus , Jul 7 2020 12:59 utc | 125

@120

Sadly they are not the only stooges. It beggars belief that people everywhere believe that they can elect someone to change the system in the country in which they reside. Political stripes have very little meaning as the differences are incremental at best. The bureaucracies necessary to keep the modern systems of governance afloat are staggeringly monolithic. Electing one individual, or party, or parties and presuming that the system will somehow be improved upon is a laughable fantasy. It leads to a continuous cycle of four years of initiatives to tear down the previous four years initiatives unless you're a second term government. But actual change is still the sole purview of the entrenched bureaucracy or "deep state" or whatever other label you prefer. To Jackrabbit's point, most decisions hinge on whether or not the bureaucracies in charge believe a war, a social change etc. can be implemented and a desired result achieved. It takes a finely developed sense of myopia to think that the only stooges are those of the political class. Says volumes about the people that put them there, and continues to suggest that they are electing "change".
As an aside, the Frank Zappa quote that "government is the entertainment division of the military industrial complex" remains potently poignant.

arby , Jul 7 2020 15:52 utc | 134

Calling what the US is doing to these countries "war" is like saying that Floyd was in a fight with the cop's knee.
Yes,there has been some very measured retaliation from some of the victims, but it amounts to Floyd saying he can't breathe.

PleaseBeleafMe , Jul 7 2020 16:11 utc | 135

@450 132
The provocations and responses of the formation of a war with Iran have been very interesting and I think that if Iran hadn't of shot down the Ukrainian airliner after their attack against the American base we may have already or continue to witness that war. As I see it there was a real hard on to go after Iran but word of the shoot down allowed the Don to pull back and let Iran suffer the black mark without escalation.
There are way too many itchy trigger fingers and pretexts for this and that can be easily engineered and sold to the masses. Helps Biden or whomever if he can blame the future cluster fuck on cleaning up donnies mess. I expect something expectedly unexpected in the coming months.

450.org , Jul 7 2020 16:59 utc | 139

@134

War is not a static proposition and its meaning and definition can and should change over time to fit the prevailing military strategies and economic paradigm of the day. We don't live and operate in an unassailable lexicon vacuum. War is not defined tautologically, meaning, war is not war. War is many things and can be fought on many dimensional fronts, meaning not just militarily.

Jackrabbit , Jul 7 2020 17:25 utc | 144

arby @Jul7 17:12 @141

I think war is a state of mind. That's why we talk about "the war on poverty" or a "propaganda war".

You might say that there is a "Cold War" but the number of acts of war is too numerous for that and targeted at multiple countries/peoples. It's more like a 'hybrid war' on everyone that opposes the New World Order that the AZ Empire seeks to impose on the planet.

Importantly, you can't prevent war if you only start thinking of it as 'war' when the shooting starts.

!!

[Jul 07, 2020] As for the timing of the likely pending Iran war,another consideration is the impact on financial markets.

Jul 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Schmoe , Jul 6 2020 3:27 utc | 85

As for the timing of the likely pending Iran war,another consideration is the impact on financial markets.

The market went into a mini panic last September when the Yemeni missiles hit the Saudi refineries because the Saudis withdrew ~$60n - $80b from repo markets. Some blame JP Morgan for that, but someone I know who works at the repo trading desk of the US branch of a large foreign bank was adamant it was the Saudi pullback and JP Morgan had nothing to do with it. I thought that the US withdrew Patriot batteries from the Gulf infrastructure in Saudi Arabia, that is an odd move given Iran could destroy those facilities.

[Jul 07, 2020] Saddam statue toppling vs toppling of statues in the USA

Jul 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

CitizenX , Jul 6 2020 18:49 utc | 114

..
"Three weeks into the war, Marine Sgt. Ed Chin got the order: Help the Iraqis celebrating in Baghdad's Firdos Square topple the statue of Saddam Hussein.

"My captain comes over and he's got like this package. He hands it to me and he's like, he tells me there's an American flag in there and when I get up there, you know, he's like, show the boys the colors," said Chin.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-decade-after-saddam-husseins-statue-falls-a-tale-of-two-memories/

I'll speak very slowly and simply just for you.

Are you seriously incapable of making a connection regarding the hypocrisy of the US Govt/US military wrapping an American Flag on the Saddam Statue and destroying it for a media photo op while cheering about it? And the condemnation of the US Govt declaring statues should not be destroyed?

Do you see no insanity regarding the US Regime illegally invading and destroying another Nation and its statues (war crime w/millions dead)? The very same Nation celebrating a "bad" Iraqi statue being destroyed is suddenly disgusted when its own statues are being destroyed by its own people?

My point is obvious if you can step back from your myopic view. The US is a mentally ill Nation ridden with hypocrisy. I personally do not put much merit into statues, cultural idolatry comes to mind, just as foolish as religious idolatry.

So what are your thoughts on the destruction of the Saddam statue sanctioned by the US govt and military?

dh , Jul 6 2020 21:40 utc | 125

@114 I expect V will be along at some point but here are my thoughts on the Saddam statue.....

The US is ridden with hypocrisy as you say ....no surprise there. The statue was actually pulled down by a rentamob of Iraqi Saddam haters while American troops high-fived each other.

They wouldn't see anything wrong with pulling the statue down because Saddam was a 'bad guy' and an American enemy.

Those same troops would probably not feel the same way about Confederate generals.....who just happened to be Americans who kept slaves and picked the losing side. They would be seen as major figures in American history.

That is how a lot of Americans would justify it. Of course it is rank hypocrisy..

[Jul 06, 2020] US claim of 'Russian Bounty' plot in Afghanistan is dubious and dangerous - The Grayzone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... the essential backdrop for the timing of this story. It really reveals how completely decayed mainstream media is as an institution, that none of these reporters protested the story, didn't see fit to do any independent investigation into it. At best they would print a Russian denial which counts for nothing in the US, or a Taliban denial which counts for nothing in the US. And then and this gets into the domestic political angle because so much of Russiagate, while it's been crafted by former or current intelligence officials, depends on the Democratic Party and it punditocracy, MSNBC and mainstream media as a projection megaphone, as its Mighty Wurlitzer. ..."
"... That took place in this case because, according to this story, Donald Trump had been briefed on Putin paying bounties to the Taliban and he chose to do nothing. Which, of course Trump denies, but that counts for nothing as well. But, again, there's been no independent confirmation of any of this. And now we get into the domestic part, which is that this new Republican anti-Trump operation, The Lincoln Project, had a flashy ad ready to go almost minutes after the story dropped. ..."
"... They're just, like, on meth at Steve Schmidt's political Batcave, just churning this material out. But I feel like they had an inkling, like this story was coming. It just the coordination and timing was impeccable. ..."
"... And The Lincoln Project is something that James Carville, the veteran Democratic consultant, has said is doing more than any Democrat or any Democratic consultant to elect Joe Biden. ..."
"... the Carter Administration, at the urging of national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski, had enacted what would become Operation Cyclone under Reagan, an arm-and-equip program to arm the Afghan mujahideen. The Saudis put up a matching fund which helped bring the so-called Services Bureau into the field where Osama bin Laden became a recruiter for international jihadists to join the battlefield. And, you know, the goal was, in the words of Brzezinski, as he later admitted to a French publication, was to force the Red Army, the Soviet Red Army, to intervene to protect the pro-Soviet government in Kabul, which they proceeded to do. ..."
"... What he means is by basically paying bounties, which the US was literally doing along with its Gulf allies, to exact the toll on the allies of Assad, Russia. So, let's just say it's true, according to your question, let's just say this is all true. It would be a retaliation for what the United States has done to Russia in areas where it was actually legally invited in by the governments in charge, either in Kabul or Damascus. And that's, I think, the kind of ironic subtext that can hardly be understated when you see someone like Dan Rather wag his finger at Putin for paying the Taliban as proxies. But, I mean, it's such a ridiculous story that it's just hard to even fathom that it's real. ..."
"... just kind of neocon resistance mind-explosion, where first John Bolton was hailed as this hero and truthteller about Trump. ..."
"... And then you have this and it, you know, today as you pointed out, Chuck Todd, "Chuck Toddler", welcomes on Meet the Press John Bolton as this wise voice to comment on Donald Trump's slavish devotion to Vladimir Putin and how we need to escalate. ..."
"... This is what Russiagate has done. It's taken one of the most Strangelovian, psychotic, dangerous, bloodthirsty, sadistic monsters in US foreign policy circles and turned him into a sober-minded, even heroic, truthteller. ..."
Jul 06, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

US claim of 'Russian Bounty' plot in Afghanistan is dubious and dangerous

Max Blumenthal breaks down the "Russian bounty" story's flaws and how it aims to prolong the war in Afghanistan -- and uses Russiagate tactics to continue pushing the Democratic Party to the right

Multiple US media outlets, citing anonymous intelligence officials, are claiming that Russia offered bounties to kill US soldiers in Afghanistan, and that President Trump has taken no action.

Others are contesting that claim. "Officials said there was disagreement among intelligence officials about the strength of the evidence about the suspected Russian plot," the New York Times reports. "Notably, the National Security Agency, which specializes in hacking and electronic surveillance, has been more skeptical."

"The constant flow of Russiagate disinformation into the bloodstream of the Democratic Party and its base is moving that party constantly to the right, while pushing the US deeper into this Cold War," Blumenthal says.

Guest: Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone and author of several books, including his latest "The Management of Savagery."

TRANSCRIPT

AARON MATÉ: Welcome to Pushback, I'm Aaron Maté. There is a new supposed Trump-Russia bombshell. The New York Times and other outlets reporting that Russia has been paying bounties to Afghan militants to kill US soldiers in Afghanistan. Trump and the White House were allegedly briefed on this information but have taken no action.

Now, the story has obvious holes, like many other Russiagate bombshells. It is sourced to anonymous intelligence officials. The New York Times says that the claim comes from Afghan detainees. And it also has some logical holes. The Taliban have been fighting the US and Afghanistan for nearly two decades and never needed Russian payments before to kill the Americans that they were fighting; [this] amongst other questions are raised about this story. But that has not stopped the usual chorus from whipping up a frenzy.

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: Vladimir Putin is offering bounties for the scalps of American soldiers in Afghanistan. Not only offering, offering money [to] the people who kill Americans, but some of the bounties that Putin has offered have been collected, meaning the Russians at least believe that their offering cash to kill Americans has actually worked to get some Americans killed.

FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Donald Trump has continued his embarrassing campaign of deference and debasing himself before Vladimir Putin. He had has [sic] this information according to The Times, and yet he offered to host Putin in the United States and sought to invite Russia to rejoin the G7. He's in his entire presidency has been a gift to Putin, but this is beyond the pale.

CHUCK TODD, NBC: Let me ask you this. Do you think that part of the that the president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election and he doesn't want to make him mad for 2020?

SENATE MINORITY LEADER CHUCK SCHUMER: I was not briefed on the Russian military intelligence, but it shows that we need in this coming defense bill, which we're debating this week, tough sanctions against Russia, which thus far Mitch McConnell has resisted.

Joining me now is Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone, author of The Management of Savagery . Max, welcome to Pushback. What is your reaction to this story?

MAX BLUMENTHAL: I mean, it just feels like so many other episodes that we've witnessed over the past three or four years, where American intelligence officials basically plant a story in one outlet, The New York Times , which functions as the media wing of the Central Intelligence Agency. Then no reporting takes place whatsoever, but six reporters, or three to six reporters are assigned to the piece to make it look like it was some last-minute scramble to confirm this bombshell story. And then the story is confirmed again by The Washington Post because their reporters, their three to six reporters in, you know, capitals around the world with different beats spoke to the same intelligence officials, or they were furnished different officials who fed them the same story. And, of course, the story advances a narrative that the United States is under siege by Russia and that we have to escalate against Russia just ahead of another peace summit or some kind of international dialogue.

This has sort of been the general framework for these Russiagate bombshells, and of course they can there's always an anti-Trump angle. And because, you know, liberal pundits and the, you know, Democratic Party operatives see this as a means to undermine Trump as the election heats up. They don't care if it's true or not. They don't care what the consequences are. They're just gonna completely roll with it. And it's really changed, I think, not just US foreign policy, but it's changed the Democratic Party in an almost irreversible way, to have these constant "quote-unquote" bombshells that are really generated by the Central Intelligence Agency and by other US intelligence operations in order to turn up the heat to crank up the Cold War, to use these different media organs which no longer believe in reporting, which see Operation Mockingbird as a kind of blueprint for how to do journalism, to turn them into keys on the CIA's Mighty Wurlitzer. That's what happened here.

AARON MATÉ: What do you make of the logic of this story? This idea that the Taliban would need Russian money to kill Americans when the Taliban's been fighting the US for nearly two decades now. And the sourcing for the story, the same old playbook: anonymous intelligence officials who are citing vague claims about apparently what was said by Afghan detainees.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: This story has, as I said, it relies on zero reporting. The only source is anonymous American intelligence officials. And I tweeted out a clip of a former CIA operations officer who managed the CIA's operation in Angola, when the US was actually fighting on the side of apartheid South Africa against a Marxist government that was backed up by Cuban troops. His name was John Stockwell. And Stockwell talked about how one-third of his covert operations staff were propagandists, and that they would feed imaginary stories about Cuban barbarism that were completely false to reporters who were either CIA assets directly or who were just unwitting dupes who would hang on a line waiting for American intelligence officials to feed them stories. And one out of every five stories was completely false, as Stockwell said. We could play some of that clip now; it's pretty remarkable to watch it in light of this latest fake bombshell.

JOHN STOCKWELL: Another thing is to disseminate propaganda to influence people's minds, and this is a major function of the CIA. And unfortunately, of course, it overlaps into the gathering of information. You, you have contact with a journalist, you will give him true stories, you'll get information from him, you'll also give him false stories.

OFF-CAMERA REPORTER: Can you do this with responsible reporters?

JOHN STOCKWELL: Yes, the Church Committee brought it out in 1975. And then Woodward and Bernstein put an article in Rolling Stone a couple of years later. Four hundred journalists cooperating with the CIA, including some of the biggest names in the business.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: So, basically, I mean, you get the flavor of what someone who was in the CIA at the height of the Cold War I mean, he did the same thing in Vietnam. And the playbook is absolutely the same today. These this story was dumped on Friday in The New York Times by "quote-unquote" American intelligence officials, as a breakthrough had been made in Afghan peace talks and a conference was finally set for Doha, Qatar, that would involve the Taliban, which had been seizing massive amounts of territory.

Now, it's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the Taliban had been fighting one of the most epic examples of an occupying army in modern history, just absolutely chewing away at one of the most powerful militaries in human history in their country for the last 19 years, without bounties from Vladimir Putin or private-hotdog-salesman-and-Saint-Petersburg-troll-farm-owner Yevgeny Prigozhin , who always comes up in these stories. It's always the hotdog guy who's doing everything bad from, like, you know, fake Facebook ads to poisoning Sergei Skripal or whatever.

But I just don't see where the Taliban needs encouragement from Putin to do that. It's their country. They want the US out and they have succeeded in seizing large amounts of territory. Donald Trump has come into office with a pledge to remove US troops from Afghanistan and ink this deal. And along comes this story as the peace process begins to advance.

And what is the end-result? We haven't gotten into the domestic politics yet, but the end-result is you have supposedly progressive senators like Chris Murphy of Connecticut attacking Trump for not fighting Russia in Afghanistan. I mean, they want a straight-up proxy war for not escalating. You have Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, someone who's aligned with the Democratic Party, who supported the war in Iraq and, you know, supports just endless war, demanding that the US turn up the heat not just in Afghanistan but in Syria. So, you know, the escalatory rhetoric is at a fever pitch right now, and it's obviously going to impact that peace conference.

Let's remember that three days before Trump's summit with Putin was when Mueller chose to release the indictment of the GRU agents for supposedly hacking the DNC servers. Let's remember that a day before the UN the United Nations Geneva peace talks opened on Syria in 2014 was when US intelligence chose to feed these shady Caesar photos, supposedly showing industrial slaughter of Syrian prisoners, to The New York Times in an investigation that had been funded by Qatar. Like, so many shady intelligence dumps have taken place ahead of peace summits to disrupt them, because the US doesn't feel like it has enough skin in the game or it just simply doesn't want peace in these areas.

So, that's what happened here. That's really, I think, the essential backdrop for the timing of this story. It really reveals how completely decayed mainstream media is as an institution, that none of these reporters protested the story, didn't see fit to do any independent investigation into it. At best they would print a Russian denial which counts for nothing in the US, or a Taliban denial which counts for nothing in the US. And then and this gets into the domestic political angle because so much of Russiagate, while it's been crafted by former or current intelligence officials, depends on the Democratic Party and it punditocracy, MSNBC and mainstream media as a projection megaphone, as its Mighty Wurlitzer.

That took place in this case because, according to this story, Donald Trump had been briefed on Putin paying bounties to the Taliban and he chose to do nothing. Which, of course Trump denies, but that counts for nothing as well. But, again, there's been no independent confirmation of any of this. And now we get into the domestic part, which is that this new Republican anti-Trump operation, The Lincoln Project, had a flashy ad ready to go almost minutes after the story dropped.

THE LINCOLN PROJECT AD: Now we know Vladimir Putin pays a bounty for the murder of American soldiers. Donald Trump knows, too, and does nothing. Putin pays the Taliban cash to slaughter our men and women in uniform and Trump is silent, weak, controlled. Instead of condemnation he insists Russia be treated as our equal.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: I mean, maybe they're just really good editors and brilliant politicians who work overtime. They're just, like, on meth at Steve Schmidt's political Batcave, just churning this material out. But I feel like they had an inkling, like this story was coming. It just the coordination and timing was impeccable.

And The Lincoln Project is something that James Carville, the veteran Democratic consultant, has said is doing more than any Democrat or any Democratic consultant to elect Joe Biden. They're always out there doing the hard work. Who are they? Well, Steve Schmidt is a former campaign manager for John McCain 2008. And you look at the various personnel affiliated with it, they're all McCain former McCain aides or people who worked on the Jeb and George W. Bush campaigns, going back to Texas and Florida. This is sort of the corporate wing of the Republican Party, the white-glove-country-club-patrician Republicans who are very pro-war, who hate Donald Trump.

And by doing this, by them really taking the lead on this attack, as you pointed out, Aaron, number one, they are sucking the oxygen out of the more progressive anti-Trump initiatives that are taking place, including in the streets of American cities. They're taking the wind out of anti-Trump more progressive anti-Trump critiques. For example, I think it's actually more powerful to attack Trump over the fact that he used, basically, chemical weapons on American peaceful protesters to do a fascistic photo-op. I don't know why there wasn't some call for congressional investigations on that. And they are getting skin in the game on the Biden campaign. It really feels to me like this Lincoln campaign operation, this moderate Republican operation which is also sort of a venue for neocons, will have more influence after events like this than the Bernie Sanders campaign, which has an enormous amount of delegates.

So, that's what I think the domestic repercussion is. It's just this constant it's the constant flow of Russiagate disinformation into the bloodstream of the Democratic Party and its base that's moving that party constantly to the right, while pushing the US deeper into this Cold War that only serves, you know, people who are associated with the national security state who need to justify their paycheck and the budget of the institutions that employ them.

AARON MATÉ: Let's assume for a second that the allegation is true, although, you know, you've laid out some of the reasons why it's not. Can you talk about the history here, starting with Afghanistan, something you cover a lot in your book, The Management of Savagery, where the US aim was to kill Russians, going right on through to Syria, where just recently the US envoy for the coalition against ISIS, James Jeffery, who handles Syria, said that his job now is to basically put the Russians in a quagmire in Syria.

JAMES JEFFREY: This isn't Afghanistan. This isn't Vietnam. This isn't a quagmire. My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: Yeah, I mean, it feels like a giant act of psychological and political projection to accuse Russia of using an Islamist militia in Afghanistan as a proxy against the US to bleed the US into leaving, because that's been the US playbook in Central Asia and the Middle East since at least 1979. I just tweeted a photo of Dan Rather in Afghanistan, just crossing the Pakistani border and going to meet with some of the Mujahideen in 1980. Dan Rather was panned in The New York in The Washington Post by Tom Toles [Tom Shales], who was the media critic at the time, as "Gunga Dan," because he was so gung-ho for the Afghan mujahideen. In his reports he would complain about how weak their weaponry was, you know, how they needed more how they needed more funding. I mean, you could call it bounties, but it was really just CIA funding.

DAN RATHER: These are the best weapons you have, huh? They only have about twenty rounds for this?

TRANSLATOR: That's all. They have twenty rounds. Yes, and they know that these are all old weapons and they really aren't up to doing anything to the Russian weaponry that's around. But that's all they have, and this is why they want help. And he is saying that America seems to be asleep. It doesn't seem to realize that if Afghanistan goes and the Russians go over to the Gulf, that in a very short time it's going to be the turn of the United States as well.

DAN RATHER: But I'm sure he knows that in Vietnam we got our fingers burned. Indeed, we got our whole hands burned when we tried to help in this kind of situation.

TRANSLATOR [translating to the Afghan man and then his reply]: Your hands were burned in Vietnam, but if you don't agree to help us, if you don't ally yourself with us, then all of you, your whole body will be burnt eventually, because there is no one in the world who can really fight and resist as well as the as much and as well as the Afghans are.

DAN RATHER: But no American mother wants to send her son to Afghanistan.

TRANSLATOR [translating to the Afghan man and then his reply]: We don't need anybody's soldiers here to help us, but we are being constantly accused that the Americans are helping us with weapons. What we need, actually, are the American weapons. We don't need or want American soldiers. We can do the fighting ourselves.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: And a year or several months before, the Carter Administration, at the urging of national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski, had enacted what would become Operation Cyclone under Reagan, an arm-and-equip program to arm the Afghan mujahideen. The Saudis put up a matching fund which helped bring the so-called Services Bureau into the field where Osama bin Laden became a recruiter for international jihadists to join the battlefield. And, you know, the goal was, in the words of Brzezinski, as he later admitted to a French publication, was to force the Red Army, the Soviet Red Army, to intervene to protect the pro-Soviet government in Kabul, which they proceeded to do.

And then with the introduction of the Stinger missile, the Afghan mujahideen, hailed as freedom fighters in Washington, were able to destroy Russian supply lines, exact a heavy toll, and forced the Red Army to leave in retreat. They helped create what's considered the Soviet Union's Vietnam.

So that was really but the blueprint for what Russian for what Russia is being accused of now, and that same model was transferred over to Syria. It was also actually proposed for Iraq in the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998. Then Senate Foreign Relations chair Jesse Helms actually said that the Afghan mujahideen should be our model for supporting the Iraqi resistance. So, this kind of proxy war was always on the table. Then the US did it in Syria, when one out of every $13 in the CIA budget went to arm the so-called "moderate rebels" in Syria, who we later found out were 31 flavors of jihadi, who were aligned with al-Qaeda's local affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra and helped give rise to ISIS. Michael Morell, I tweeted some video of him on Charlie Rose back in, I think, 2016. He's the former acting director for the CIA, longtime deputy director. He said, you know, the reason that we're in Syria, what we should be doing is causing Iran and Russia, the two allies of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, to pay a heavy price.

MICHAEL MORELL: We need to make the Iranians pay a price in Syria. We need to make the Russians pay a price. The other thing

CHARLIE ROSE: We make them pay the price by killing killing Russians?

MICHAEL MORELL: Yes.

CHARLIE ROSE: And killing Iranians.

MICHAEL MORELL: Yes, covertly. You don't tell the world about it, right? You don't stand up at the Pentagon and say we did this, right? But you make sure they know it in Moscow and Tehran.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: What he means is by basically paying bounties, which the US was literally doing along with its Gulf allies, to exact the toll on the allies of Assad, Russia. So, let's just say it's true, according to your question, let's just say this is all true. It would be a retaliation for what the United States has done to Russia in areas where it was actually legally invited in by the governments in charge, either in Kabul or Damascus. And that's, I think, the kind of ironic subtext that can hardly be understated when you see someone like Dan Rather wag his finger at Putin for paying the Taliban as proxies. But, I mean, it's such a ridiculous story that it's just hard to even fathom that it's real.

AARON MATÉ: Let me read Dan Rather's tweet, because it's so it speaks to just how pervasive Russiagate culture is now. People have learned absolutely nothing from it.

Rather says, "Reporters are trained to look for patterns that are suspicious, and time and again one stands out with Donald Trump. Why is he so slavishly devoted to Putin? There is a spectrum of possible answers ranging from craven to treasonous. One day I hope and suspect we will find out."

It's like he forgot, perhaps, that Robert Mueller and his team spent three years investigating this very issue and came up with absolutely nothing. But the narrative has taken hold, and it's, as you talked about before, it's been the narrative we've been presented as the vehicle for understanding and opposing Donald Trump, so it cannot be questioned. And now it's like it's a matter of, what else is there to find out about Trump and Russia after Robert Mueller and the US intelligence agencies looked for everything they could and found nothing? They're still presented as if it's some kind of mystery that has to be unraveled.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: And it was after, like, a week of just kind of neocon resistance mind-explosion, where first John Bolton was hailed as this hero and truthteller about Trump. Then Dick Cheney was welcomed into the resistance, you know, because he said, "Wear a mask." I mean, you know, his mask was strangely not spattered with the blood of Iraqi children. But, you know, it was just amazing like that. Of course, it was the Lincoln project who hijacked the minds of the resistance, but basically people who used to work on Cheney's campaign said, "Dick Cheney, welcome to the resistance." I mean, that was remarkable. And then you have this and it, you know, today as you pointed out, Chuck Todd, "Chuck Toddler", welcomes on Meet the Press John Bolton as this wise voice to comment on Donald Trump's slavish devotion to Vladimir Putin and how we need to escalate.

CHUCK TODD, NBC: Let me ask you this. Do you think that part of the that the president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election and he doesn't want to make him mad for 2020?

MAX BLUMENTHAL: I mean, just a few years ago, maybe it was two years ago, before Bolton was brought into the Trump NSC, he was considered just an absolute marginal crank who was a contributor to Fox News. He'd been forgotten. He was widely hated by Democrats. Now here he is as a sage voice to tell us how dangerous this moment is. And, you know, he's not being even brought on just to promote his book; he's being brought on as just a sober-minded foreign policy expert on Meet the Press . That's where we're at right now.

AARON MATÉ: Yeah, and when his critique of Trump is basically that Trump was not hawkish enough. Bolton's most the biggest critique Bolton has of Trump is, as he writes about in his book, is when Trump declined to bomb Iran after Iran shot down a drone over its territory. And Bolton said that to him was the most irrational thing he's ever seen a president do.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: Well, Bolton was mad that Trump confused body bags with missiles, because he said Trump thought that there would be 150 dead Iranians, and I said, "No, Donald, you're confused. It will be 150 missiles that we're firing into Iran." Like that's better! Like, "Oh, okay, that makes everything all right," that we fire a hundred missiles for one drone and maybe that wouldn't that kill possibly more than 150 people?

Well, in Bolton's world this was just another stupid move by Trump. If Bolton were, I mean, just, just watch all the interviews with Bolton. Watch him on The View where the only pushback he received was from Meghan McCain complaining that he ripped off a Hamilton song for his book The Room Where It Happened , and she asked, "Don't you have any apology to offer to Hamilton fans?" That was the pushback that Bolton received. Just watch all of these interviews with Bolton and try to find the pushback. It's not there. This is what Russiagate has done. It's taken one of the most Strangelovian, psychotic, dangerous, bloodthirsty, sadistic monsters in US foreign policy circles and turned him into a sober-minded, even heroic, truthteller.

AARON MATÉ: And inevitably the only long-term consequence that I can see here is ultimately helping Trump, because, if history is a pattern, these Russiagate supposed bombshells always either go nowhere or they get debunked. So, if this one gets forcefully debunked, because I think it's quite possible, because Trump has said that he was never briefed on this and they'll have to prove that he's lying, you know. It should be easy to do. Someone could come out and say that. If they can't prove that he's lying, then this one, I think, will blow up in their face. And all they will have done is, at a time when Trump is vulnerable over the pandemic with over a hundred thousand people dead on his watch, all these people did was ultimately try to bring the focus back to the same thing that failed for basically the entirety of Trump's presidency, which is Russiagate and Trump's supposed―and non-existent in reality―subservience to Vladimir Putin.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: But have you ever really confronted one of your liberal friends who maybe doesn't follow these stories as closely as you do? You know, well-intentioned liberal friend who just has this sense that Russia controls Trump, and asked them to really defend that and provide the receipts and really explain where the Trump administration has just handed the store to Russia? Because what we've seen is unprecedented since the height of the Cold War, an unprecedented deterioration of US-Russia relations with new sanctions on Russia every few months. You ask them to do that. They can't do it. It's just a sense they get, it's a feeling they get. And that's because these bombshells drop, they get reported on the front pages under banners of papers that declare that "democracy dies in darkness," whose brand is something that everybody trusts, The New York Times , The Washington Post , Woodward and Bernstein, and everybody repeats the story again and again and again. And then, if and when it gets debunked, discredited or just sort of disappears, a few days later everybody forgets about it. And those people who are not just, like, 24/7 media consumers but critical-minded media consumers, they're left with that sense that Russia actually controls us and that we must do something to escalate with Russia. So, that's the point of these: by the time the disinformation is discredited, the damage has already been done. And that same tactic was employed against Jeremy Corbyn in the UK, to the point where so many people were left with the sense that he must be an antisemite, although not one allegation was ever proven.

AARON MATÉ: Yeah, and now to the point where, in the Labour Party―we should touch on this for a second―where you had a Labour Party member retweet an article recently that mentioned some criticism of Israel and for that she was expelled from her position in the shadow cabinet.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: Yeah, well, you know, as a Jew I was really threatened by that retweet [laughter]. I don't know about you.

I mean, this is Rebecca Long Bailey. She's one of the few Corbynites left in a high position in Labour who hasn't been effectively burned at the stake for being a, you know, Jew hater who wants to throw us all in gas chambers because she retweets an interview with some celebrity I'd never heard of before, who didn't even say anything that extreme. But it really shows how the Thought Police have taken control of the Labour Party through Sir Keir Starmer, who is someone who has deep links to the national security state through the Crown Prosecution Service, which he used to head, where he was involved in the prosecution of Julian Assange. And he has worked with The Times of London, which is a, you know, favorite paper of the national security state and the MI5 in the UK, for planting stories against Jeremy Corbyn. He was intimately involved in that campaign, and now he's at the head of the Labour Party for a very good reason. I really would recommend everyone watching this, if you're interested more in who Keir Starmer really is, read "Five Questions for [New Labour Leader] Sir Keir Starmer" by Matt Kennard at The Grayzone. It really lays it out and shows you what's happening.

We're just in this kind of hyper-managed atmosphere, where everything feels so much more controlled than it's ever been. And even though every sane rational person that I know seems to understand what's happening, they feel like they're not allowed to say it, at least not in any official capacity.

AARON MATÉ: From the US to Britain, everything is being co-opted. In the US it's, you know, genuine resistance to Trump, in opposition to Trump, it gets co-opted by the right. Same thing in Britain. People get manipulated into believing that Jeremy Corbyn, this lifelong anti-racist is somehow an antisemite. It's all in the service of the same agenda, and I have to say we're one of the few outlets that are pushing back on it. Everyone else is getting swept up on it and it's a scary time.

We're gonna wrap. Max, your final comment.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: Well, yeah, we're pushing back. And I saw today Mint Press [News], which is another outlet that has pushed back, their Twitter account was just briefly removed for no reason, without explanation. Ollie Vargas, who's an independent journalist who's doing some of the most important work in the English language from Bolivia, reporting on the post-coup landscape and the repressive environment that's been created by the junta installed with US help under Jeanine Áñez, his account has been taken away on Twitter. The social media platforms are basically under the control of the national security state. There's been a merger between the national security state and Silicon Valley, and the space for these kinds of discussions is rapidly shrinking. So, I think, you know, it's more important than ever to support alternative media and also to really have a clear understanding of what's taking place. I'm really worried there just won't be any space for us to have these conversations in the near future.

AARON MATÉ: Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone, author of The Management of Savagery , thanks a lot.

MAX BLUMENTHAL: Thanks for having me.

[Jul 06, 2020] Bolton Changes Tune- Now Refuses To Answer 'Russian Bounties' Questions After Stoking The 'Scandal' -

Jul 06, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

By middle of last week we observed of the Russian bounties to kill American troops in Afghanistan story that "at this point this non-story looks to be dead by the weekend as it's already unraveled."

Indeed by Thursday and Friday, as more Congressional leaders received closed door intelligence briefings on the allegations which originated with an anonymously sourced NY Times report claiming Trump supposedly ignored the Russian op to target Americans, the very Democrat and Republican lawmakers previously hyping it as a 'major scandal' went conspicuously silent .

Recall too that John Bolton, busy with a media blitz promoting his book, emerged to strongly suggest he had personal knowledge that Trump was briefed on the matter . The former national security adviser called the Trump denial of being briefed "remarkable". Well, look who is now appearing to sing a different tune. A week ago Bolton was all too wiling to voluntarily say Trump had "likely" been briefed and that was a big scandal. The whole story was indeed dead by the weekend:

NOW PLAYING

Other reports said Bolton has been telling people he had personally briefed the president :

Former national security adviser John Bolton told colleagues that he personally briefed President Donald Trump about intelligence that Russia offered Afghan militants bounties to kill American troops , U.S. officials told the Associated Press .

Bolton briefed Trump on the matter in March of 2019, according to the report, a year earlier than previously reported by The New York Times . The information was also included in at least one presidential Daily Brief, according to the AP, CNN and The Times . The AP earlier reported that it was also included in a second presidential Daily Brief earlier this year and that current national security adviser Robert O'Brien discussed the matter with Trump.

His Sunday refusal to even address the question - again after he was all too willing to speak to the issue a week ago when it was driving headlines - speaks volumes.

Via The Daily Mail

Now that even The Washington Post awkwardly walked back the substance of much of its reporting on the 'Russian bounties' story, Bolton has conveniently gone silent .


[Jul 06, 2020] The "anti-antiwar left" is of course an oxymoron. In reality, they are neo-McCarthyites, neocons, and Israel-firsters

There is not much "real" left in the the USA. Usually what we see is just different flavors of far right and right.
Money quote: "Ah, for the good old days when lefties could be treated as a deluded minority rather than a vanguard party of globalist imperialists. pl"
Notable quotes:
"... As Johnstone recounts, after the Cold War liberals became bewitched by the prospect of waging wars for humanitarian ends. A generation of journalists and foreign policy experts including Samantha Power, Christiane Amanpour, Jamie Rubin, and Christopher Hitchens, would make the Balkans a proving ground for their liberal theories of preventative war, in the process throwing the ancient and venerable tradition of St. Augustine’s Just War theory on the trash heap and paving the way for what was to follow in the coming decades, including Iraq II, Libya, Syria and a global drone war and a “targeted” assassination program." ..."
"... In other words we are seeing the tight squeezing of the New Democrats (Wall-Street, Tech, humanitarian intervention) by the radical left (Green New Deal, UBI) and by the angry Trumpists. ..."
"... Samantha Power is Irish bred and London born. She was schooled in Dublin till her mother emigrated to the US. Christiane Amanpour is British-Iranian. As far as I can determine she never has had US citizenship. ..."
"... WTF were they smoking when they decided to promote war to secure human rights??? So why did we let these halfwits in the country? ..."
"... Kerry seems is the perfect example of Democrats’ hypocritical ‘opposition’ to pointless and futile wars. Not that anybody remembers, but it was the liberal Bill Clinton who went to war in Yugoslavia and defanged the anti-war wing of the party. After Clinton Democrats only raised their voices against Republican wars and now have taken to criticizing Trump for not being belligerent enough!!! ..."
"... The same white men who stood three years ago Charlottesville to prevent the toppling of statues could be the backbone of a new anti-war movement ..."
"... The New York Times is not revolutionary, not by a very long shot. Neither are all the big corporations and foundations who've donated generously to the cause of BLM. ..."
"... America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary putsch. About four years ago, the sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalisation were turfed out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist options. ..."
"... The essential idea is that neither the non Trump wing of the American establishment (more properly Global establishment still anchored tenuously in DC) nor the Trump wing want the voters to discuss the economy - it's too hot a subject. ..."
"... Way too hot since the financial crisis of 2007-08 followed the working class jobs overseas and south of the border in the 90s and inequality exceeded that of the gilded age. No. But they will discuss racism (and gender). It divides the country further than ever, deflects focus on wealth disparity (the establishment has no intention of ever equalizing wealth even a bit) and presto - gives corporate America and media a new policing tool in the form of mandatory workshops and summary job dismissals even more unsubstantiated than many of those with #MeToo. It enhances the academic totalitarians of political correctness with corporate / employer totalitarianism of "learn your inclusivity lessons reeducation camp" or else. Unions disappeared long ago and now this. ..."
"... Yes the stupidity is ominous. They act as though there is no potential for repurcussion. It's very peculiar. ..."
Jul 05, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

As Johnstone recounts, after the Cold War liberals became bewitched by the prospect of waging wars for humanitarian ends. A generation of journalists and foreign policy experts including Samantha Power, Christiane Amanpour, Jamie Rubin, and Christopher Hitchens, would make the Balkans a proving ground for their liberal theories of preventative war, in the process throwing the ancient and venerable tradition of St. Augustine’s Just War theory on the trash heap and paving the way for what was to follow in the coming decades, including Iraq II, Libya, Syria and a global drone war and a “targeted” assassination program."

Carden, https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/07/01/the-return-of-the-anti-antiwar-left

exiled off mainstreet , 04 July 2020 at 03:36 PM

This is a serious article addressing a serious problem. If the "left" sells out on war issues as they have done the last 20 years or so, there is no pushback against the permanent war system. Those one-time leftists who have sold out are no longer really leftists, especially once they are relying on the corrupt permanent spy state for their information and support.

Polish Janitor , 04 July 2020 at 04:05 PM

Col Lang,

Interesting and correct observation. Allow me to throw in my own two cents with regards to the rise of what is defined as the "anti-Anti War left". I should note that there are eerily similar parallels between the rise of the New Left in the 60s that was the mix of socialist democrats, sexual revolutionaries, flower-power hippies, anti-imperialist/anti-war activists, and identitarianists (Huey Netwon, Cesar Chavez, MLK) etc. and today's BLM, Antifa, 'woke' types, third-gen feminists, broke millennials.

While the former's rise in the Democratic Party led to the exodus of Neoconservatives (former Trotskyists, Socialist and Marxists) to the Conservative movement, the latter is also moving the New Democrats to the Right, but the problem is that the current Political Right is mostly controlled by the Trumpists so these New Democrat types (Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, Menendez, Biden etc.) are stuck between a hard place and a rock.

In other words we are seeing the tight squeezing of the New Democrats (Wall-Street, Tech, humanitarian intervention) by the radical left (Green New Deal, UBI) and by the angry Trumpists.

Just to give you one example, last week a prototype New Democrat and long time congressman (since 89) Elliot Engel of NY who fits well into this definition was defeated handily in the NY-16 primaries by the Democratic Socialists of America endorsed candidate, Jamal Bowman. Mr. Bowman, an African American is ideologically very similar to AOC, Tlaib, and Omar.

He won on a platform of foreign policy endorsed by the left-zionists (ex-labor zionists) against the likudnik right-wing zionist of Engles' which is very interesting since, Engel has been known for his hawkish views on foreign policy and extremely pro-Israel and chaired the House Foreign Affairs Committee recently.

Recently Sanders and the Democratic Socialists expressed their opposition to Bibi's planned annexation of West-bank and adjacent Palestinian enclaves and threatened to to cut-off the military aid to Israel if Bibi moved on with his plan.

Domestically, there are several seats up for re-election and especially two in Georgia and Arizona Senate whose ppointed Republican candidates are in very shaky grounds versus their democratic challengers. What is clear is that the New Democrat platforms are no longer popular by the Democratic base and given recent events, it can be safely said that either the most law and order and Trumpian candidates will win or the Democratic socialists endorsed ones. So another problem for the New Dems.

Judging by my observation, the current trend is the alliance between the NeverTrumpers (The Lincoln project, The Right Pac) like Bill Kristol and the Reagan-to-Bush-43-neoconservatives (most of whom were Reagan Democrats in the late 70s and 80s themselves so nothing new for them) to push Trump out of office in their view before the RNC in Aug and to make room for the New Democrats and also to restore their previous 20+ years of reigning over the Republican Party. If their plan becomes successful, in the post 2020 election we will see a political configuration resembling the 90s and early 2000s with one major difference which is the introduction of several, in my opinion less that 10 seats in the House reserved for the far-Left socialist Democrats.

And in terms of Foreign policy, everyone will get happy and the Blob/Borg think tank class in D.C. will see business as usual as the Democratic Socialists will be "persuaded" to team up with the New Democrats with regards to sending Troops to conduct humanitarian intervention abroad (i.e. the Powell Doctrine) in exchange for domestic welfare programs, the NeverTrumpers and the Republican hawks (Cotton, Graham, Rubio, Cruz, etc.) will have war plans already written for them at AEI, Hudson and Heritage that focuses on China with the help of the New Democrats and probably the Far-left.

Leith , 04 July 2020 at 05:28 PM

Samantha Power is Irish bred and London born. She was schooled in Dublin till her mother emigrated to the US. Christiane Amanpour is British-Iranian. As far as I can determine she never has had US citizenship. Christopher Hitchens is English born, never visited America unti he was 32. And even then kept his British citizenship for another 26 years, only becoming a US citizen in 2007. Probably to take advantage of favorable US income tax on his book earnings.

WTF were they smoking when they decided to promote war to secure human rights??? So why did we let these halfwits in the country?

Seems to me we are better off by letting in a few more Sikh farmers from India or more wannabee restaurant owners from Ethiopia. Or maybe even more wannabee bodega empresarios from south of our border.

JohnH , 04 July 2020 at 06:32 PM

Anyone remember John Kerry, who criticized the anti-war movement and enlisted and served in Vietnam, only to opportunistically turn against the war. As long as the winds blew anti-war, he continued to posture that way. Then he reversed course, maybe sensing an SOS opportunity, and voted for the War in Iraq, meanwhile posturing against it on the grounds that it wasn’t being fought right!

Kerry seems is the perfect example of Democrats’ hypocritical ‘opposition’ to pointless and futile wars. Not that anybody remembers, but it was the liberal Bill Clinton who went to war in Yugoslavia and defanged the anti-war wing of the party. After Clinton Democrats only raised their voices against Republican wars and now have taken to criticizing Trump for not being belligerent enough!!!

Outrage Beyond , 04 July 2020 at 08:16 PM

The "anti-antiwar left" is of course an oxymoron. In reality, they are neo-McCarthyites, neocons, and Israel-firsters. Nothing new. They were never leftists to begin with and certainly never will be.

To add onto the comments by Polish Janitor regarding Jamaal Bowman, I have this to say. Just like AOC, he'll cuck out to Israel. He'll take the money and he'll probably take that "educational" trip to Israel as well. While he's there, would anyone be surprised if he had a hot time with some honey pie and they got him on Kodak? They'll only drop hints about the stick, in the meantime, they'll be stuffing his face with carrots as he comes around to the Zionist agenda.

Vegetius , 05 July 2020 at 12:40 AM

@exiled off mainstreet

The same white men who stood three years ago Charlottesville to prevent the toppling of statues could be the backbone of a new anti-war movement, if only conservatives weren't afraid of being called 'racist' by people who hate them anyway.

Fourth and Long , 05 July 2020 at 04:56 PM

To better get one's bearings regarding what's going on I highly recommend this Spectator article to the committee. Although BLM and other nefarious types referred to as Antifa certainly do pass the anarchist test and Marxist test it's critical the committee understand that the whole thing is being managed by a wing of the establishment.

The New York Times is not revolutionary, not by a very long shot. Neither are all the big corporations and foundations who've donated generously to the cause of BLM.

Editorial talents at NYT instigated the wholesale rewriting of American history over a year ago with their fraudulent 1619 project which says American history began in that year with the importation of African slaves.

But it's real thesis is that the revolution of 1776 (an inspiration to people everywhere), was not undertaken to free the thirteen colonies from the tyranny of King George - no - it was done for the sole reason of perpetuation of slavery because Washington and other colonial land owners feared that the institution of slavery would be made illegal by their then British overlords. I kid you not.

The NY Times. Pure revisionism of the worst sort. But the ends which this revisionism serve, as do the subsequent BLM riots and mindless iconoclasms, are revealed in this piece:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-revolution-isnt-what-it-looks-like

(This Revolution isn't What it Looks Like). Here's a brief excerpt - it's a management device. Matt Taibbi has a treatment nearly as good but too diffuse and witty for these purposes, under the title "Year Zero" on his blog, but it is behind a paywall. Many illustrative exames though.

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/year-zero/

Spectator first few paragraphs.. Bear with this. What they're doing is designed to infuriate and disable critical understanding as they proceed to carry the day in real time.

QUOTE:

America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary putsch. About four years ago, the sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalisation were turfed out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist options.

This deposition explains the storm of unrest battering American cities from coast to coast and making waves in Europe as well. The storm’s ferocity — the looting, the mobs, the mass lawlessness, the zealous iconoclasm, the deranged slogans like #DefundPolice — terrifies ordinary Americans. Many conservatives, especially, believe they are facing a revolution targeting the very foundations of American order.

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Maoist or Marxist revolt, even if some protagonists spout hard-leftish rhetoric. Rather, what’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the neoliberal class — academe, media, large corporations, ‘experts’, Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.

They do not seek a radically new arrangement, but a return to the pre-Trump, pre-Brexit status quo ante which was working out very well for them. It was, of course, working out less well for the working class of all races, who bore the brunt of their preferred policy mix: open borders, free trade without limits, an aggressive cultural liberalism that corroded tradition and community, technocratic ‘global governance’ that neutered democracy and politics as such.

When national institutions bow to the street fighters’ demands, it tells us something else is going on

UNQUOTE

jerseycityjoan , 05 July 2020 at 05:32 PM

...Did you realize that the Black Lives Matter group only has 14 local chapters in America and 3 in Canada? I don't think there are many actual Antifa members out there either. Now of course a few determined troublemakers can cause a lot of problems but still I can't see how the country is in real danger.

Probably the real danger here is that these groups get moral support from nonradical people for radical actions and policies. Right now there are a lot more people against getting rid of the police than are for it. Now if that changed I would get worried. I have to admit that I don't like the fact that we do not know who's funding the radicals and that many are anonymous but I am not afraid of them. I can't imagine a situation in which they would win and we would lose over time.

Fourth and Long , 05 July 2020 at 06:23 PM

Colonel Lang,

No it doesn't, not that I know of. It was the brainchild of Nikole Hannah-Jones working since 2015 for the times, who received a 2020 Pulitzer prize for the project which initially was presented in the Times magazine for the 400th anniversary of 1619 when it is claimed that enslaved Africans first arrived to the American colonies. However it mushroomed into something much larger and won the award. It was to investigate the legacy of slavery but with its claim that the true founding of the United States was in 1619 rather than 1776, it drew criticism from several historians. The controversy was conducted in Politico and on the pages of the World Socialist Web Site. See here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_1619_Project

You will find links to several of the articles of the project, including: "America Wasn't a Democracy Until Black Americans Made It One", essay by Nikole Hannah-Jones and "American Capitalism Is Brutal. You Can Trace That to the Plantation", essay by Matthew Desmond.

I prefaced the intro to the Spectator article with mention of the Times award winning project because it is vital cultural- historical background to what's transpired since George Floyd incident of May 25.

My purpose was not to focus on that revisionist project though one may investigate it at leisure, but the reactionary establishment counter coup to the 2016 election of which the events of May 25 et seq are the most recent chapter - chapters one and two being Russiagate and impeachment.

Taibbi, in his latest which parallels the Spectator piece, does think to mention it. The essential idea is that neither the non Trump wing of the American establishment (more properly Global establishment still anchored tenuously in DC) nor the Trump wing want the voters to discuss the economy - it's too hot a subject.

Way too hot since the financial crisis of 2007-08 followed the working class jobs overseas and south of the border in the 90s and inequality exceeded that of the gilded age. No. But they will discuss racism (and gender). It divides the country further than ever, deflects focus on wealth disparity (the establishment has no intention of ever equalizing wealth even a bit) and presto - gives corporate America and media a new policing tool in the form of mandatory workshops and summary job dismissals even more unsubstantiated than many of those with #MeToo. It enhances the academic totalitarians of political correctness with corporate / employer totalitarianism of "learn your inclusivity lessons reeducation camp" or else. Unions disappeared long ago and now this.

From Taibbi:

It’s the Fourth of July, and revolution is in the air. Only in America would it look like this: an elite-sponsored Maoist revolt, couched as a Black liberation movement whose canonical texts are a corporate consultant’s white guilt self-help manual, and a New York Times series rewriting history to explain an election they called wrong.

Much of America has watched in quizzical silence in recent weeks as crowds declared war on an increasingly incoherent succession of historical symbols. Maybe you nodded as Confederate general Albert Pike was toppled or even when Christopher Columbus was beheaded, but it got a little weird when George Washington was emblazoned with “Fuck Cops” and set on fire, or when they went after Ulysses S. Grant, abolitionist Colonel Hans Christian Heg, “Forward,” (a seven-foot-tall female figure meant to symbolize progress), the Portland, Oregon “Elk statue,” or my personal favorite, the former slave Miguel de Cervantes, whose cheerful creations Don Quixote and Sancho Panza were apparently mistaken for reals and had their eyes lashed red in San Francisco.

Was a What the Fuck? too much to ask? It was! In the space of a few weeks the level of discourse in the news media dropped so low, the fear of being shamed as a deviationist so high, that most of the weirder incidents went uncovered. Leading press organs engaged in real-time Soviet-style airbrushing. Here’s how the Washington Post described a movement that targeted Spanish missionary Junipero Serra, Abraham Lincoln (a “single-handed symbol of white supremacy,” according to UW-Madison students), an apple cider press sculpture, abolitionist Mathias Baldwin, and the first all-Black volunteer regiment in the Civil War, among others:

Across the country, protesters have toppled statues of figures from America’s sordid past — including Confederate generals — as part of demonstrations against racism and police violence.

The New York Times, once the dictionary definition of “unprovocative,” suddenly reads like Pol Pot’s Sayings of Angkar. Heading into the Fourth of July weekend, the morning read for upscale white Manhattanites was denouncing Mount Rushmore, urging Black America to arm itself, and re-positioning America alongside more deserving historical parallels in a feature about caste systems:

turcopolier , 05 July 2020 at 06:57 PM

fourth and long

For 150 years the US treated its defeated internal enemy with respect in the interest of re-unification and reconciliation. Now that is gone destroyed by Marxist vanguard conspiratorial parties like antifa and BLM and the the power hungry Democrat Party pols who have made a deal with their soul mate extremists. Well, laissez les bon temps roulez!

Fourth and Long , 05 July 2020 at 07:55 PM

Colonel,

Yes the stupidity is ominous. They act as though there is no potential for repurcussion. It's very peculiar. Maybe they think oh well, there's been plenty of riots over the years. What ever happened? Didn't we get OJ freed? Didn't they pass civil rights legislation back in the day? And as for right now - aren't all the big people taking the knee - aren't corporations endorsing us? Isn't Twitter censoring in our favor? The mayor of New York City - wasn't he all set to paint a black lives matter mural onto 5th avenue opposite Trump tower before postponing it to paint one in Harlem instead?

Yes, all true. I don't think they've detected how furious people are getting with their behavior though. The tide is turning - CHAZ is gone, the conventions loom.

Long term I see nothing to be optimistic about. If Trump wins the counter coups will continue. If Biden, with a female minority VP who may become President -- good luck. Remember the Tea Party reaction ensuing on the heels of the first African American President? Reaction will be quite as bad at least with Trump, his family and his base still very much on the scene and infuriated.

But the oligarchs have seen their assets rise by hundreds of billions of dollars in a few short months. The surviving owners consolidate. People will be forced to work for peanuts. Evictions and repossessions are coming soon.

[Jul 06, 2020] Why is turkey even in Libya?

Jul 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mina , Jul 5 2020 16:55 utc | 14

Libya:

Last week Turkey brought two MIM-23 Hawk air defense systems to the al-Watiyah Airbase. Last night they were bombed by either French, UAE, Egyptian or Russian mercenary airplanes. Officially the LNA (Hafter) has taken responsibility for the bombing. Whoever did this had a message to Turkey: Stop trying to break our red lines.

James, "why is turkey even in libya?"
Because they had to get out and quick, upon order of NATO/EU, back in 2011 (+ get a tip for evacuating the other foreigners). They ve lost a lot in this:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-protests-turkey/turkish-businesses-looted-in-libya-turks-evacuated-idUSTRE71K2HJ20110221

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-02-23/turkey-mounts-biggest-evacuation-in-its-history-to-rescue-5-000-from-libya
(I remember reading much more than 25,000 workers, mainly well-paid engineers whose money back home was most welcome)
And there is that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_in_Libya

Egypt lost just as much or even more, they have ca 2-3 million workers there, mainly not higher scale jobs though

Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 5 2020 17:14 utc | 16

Thanks for the link to the Egypt/Libya article, b. It's a rare insight into the often-hidden complexities behind armed conflict. Thanks too for Caitlin J's opinion of AmeriKKKa's two Right-wing Crank parties. She makes it easier to laugh about their un-funny antics.

Slightly off topic, but I think Caitlin could be onto something worthwhile with her Utopia Prepper meme (whether she invented it or not). The way things are going, Hell could freeze over before sanity emerges in Western Political circles. Prompted by her optimism, I intend to devote an hour every Sunday afternoon to Utopia Prepping and contemplate the many potential delights which a mildly more Utopian world would facilitate. There's way too much negative thinking at present and it's NOT accidental. We'll never get to Utopia if we don't plan what we'll do when we arrive...

[Jul 06, 2020] Last week Turkey brought two MIM-23 Hawk air defense systems to the al-Watiyah Airbase. Last night they were bombed by either French, UAE, Egyptian or Russian mercenary airplanes

Jul 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Libya:

Last week Turkey brought two MIM-23 Hawk air defense systems to the al-Watiyah Airbase. Last night they were bombed by either French, UAE, Egyptian or Russian mercenary airplanes. Officially the LNA (Hafter) has taken responsibility for the bombing. Whoever did this had a message to Turkey: Stop trying to break our red lines.

[Jul 06, 2020] Provocation will eventuially make Iran deal dead, which is what the USA badly wants

Jul 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Deimetri , Jul 5 2020 19:53 utc | 32

Hi b,

What is your take on the rash of "accidents" that Iran has been suffering from, these past couple of weeks?

Et Tu , Jul 5 2020 23:07 utc | 56

@ Posted by: Deimetri | Jul 5 2020 19:53 utc | 32

Wanted to ask the same question, i am sure B will have something as soon as some facts are there to be dissected, seems for now that all we have to go by is the assumption it is either US or Israel dirty work, one that is hard to disagree with.

Iran will have to respond, 4 attacks in less than 2 weeks is really taking the piss and makes them look weak. Quite a reversal from the Iran that was seizing tankers, acting on its threats and dictating the tempo of escalation. Israel and US are only deterred by credible threats and the longer Iran waits, the more emboldened they will feel.

Perhaps Iran is more focused on investigations and searching through its own ranks for collaborators or traitors first, meaning it is still not sure who to hit back at. Is it the US or Israel, who is directly responsible for these attacks? What would be an appropriate response? Anything too overt could be counterproductive as there is no proof tying the explosions to anyone, much less anything concrete that Western media would publish that could justify Iran's actions.

Hezbollah has plenty of problems of its own as explained in B's Lebanon article... so not likely we'll see rocket showers on Israel any time soon on Iran's behalf. Seems those new tankers on the way to Venezuela could be targeted soon too... perhaps they are waiting for that as their pretext for escalation or retaliation?

Richard Steven Hack , Jul 6 2020 0:14 utc | 63

Posted by: Et Tu | Jul 5 2020 23:07 utc | 56

Iran will have to respond

I expect Iran to measure its response tit-for-tat. If these explosions are the result of computer intrusion, Iran will respond in cyberspace. If they are not - and I find it hard to believe they are, disrupting a centrifuge is one thing (and too clever by half), causing an explosion is another - then Iran or a proxy will have to respond in kind. As the article cited below states:


He said Israel was "bracing" for an Iranian response, likely via a cyberattack. In an April cyberattack attributed by western intelligence officials to Iran, an attempt was made to increase chlorine levels in water flowing to residential Israeli areas.

Probably BS by Israel and the US, but this sort of thing goes on all the time. Note that there was no explosions involved.

The problem is that covert operations require some planning, especially if hacking is involved. So Iran's response might be days, weeks or months delayed. Of course, it can respond more directly by using Iraqi Shia militias against US forces in Iraq, or allies like Hezbollah elsewhere. But that is a trap the US neocons have laid - anything Iran does can be used to justify further attacks. Even if Iran proves that these explosions were not accidents, they will not be believed. So anything Iran does which is not equally covert will be used to justify further aggression.

There really is no winning this game by Iran. Only if the US and Israel stops covert attacks - and that isn't going to happen.

Meanwhile, allegedly the EU has claimed Iran has now triggered the JCPOA dispute mechanism.

EU says Iran has triggered nuclear deal dispute mechanism

I don't know if this is true, but if so, it represents the final collapse of the JCPOA. The dispute mechanism has a specific time mechanism to which all parties must adhere. So within a short period of time, Iran will either be granted its sanctions relief as promised or the deal will end. The deal's snapback mechanism won't be applied, because Russia and China will veto that no matter the US does. The US has no standing, but will try anyway just for the propaganda value.

Once the JCPOA is finally declared dead, the US and Israel will escalate their aggression against Iran, because no one in the ignorant electorate in those countries will be told that the deal was ruined by Trump and the EU's spinelessness.

Without the JCPOA, the US can revert to the sort of warmongering it engaged in before the Iraq war - constantly escalating accusations that can never be proven false and an unending stream of propaganda justifying a war.

The *only* thing preventing an Iran war is Hezbollah's ability to derail the Israeli economy. The US and Israel have no choice but to find a solution to that problem. Whether they will succeed in that, and at what cost to Lebanon, is the question.

Historically, I don't think there has ever been this level of enmity between countries without a war resulting (other than between nuclear armed nations due to MAD.) It may take some years more to get the Iran war started, but it is inevitable.

And that recognition, contrary to Bagoom's claims, is *not* advocacy. An Iran war is going to be very bad for *everyone* except Israel, the neocons and the military-industrial complex.

[Jul 06, 2020] Third 'Mystery' Blast In Less Than A Week Rocks Iran Power Plant -

Notable quotes:
"... To review, starting over a week ago a massive explosion was observed lighting up the midnight sky outside Tehran, caught on film by local residents, which Iran's military dismissed as a gas leak explosion incident. But it was later revealed to have occurred at a ballistic missile development facility. ..."
"... And this past week, another reported "accident" occurred at Natanz nuclear complex. But that particular 'mystery' blast caused Iranian officials to lash out in anger Thursday, saying "hostile countries" like the US and Israel are near the point of crossing "red lines". Crucially, Iran also said there were no radioactive leaks as a result of the incident. ..."
Jul 06, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Third 'Mystery' Blast In Less Than A Week Rocks Iran Power Plant by Tyler Durden Sun, 07/05/2020 - 11:30 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

On Saturday an explosion ripped through a power plant in the Iranian city of Ahvaz, marking the third 'mystery' blast to hit the country in only under a week, and the fourth recently .

State media showed emergency crews on the scene of the daytime incident while a fire raged at the power plant. This followed days ago a huge blast which destroyed Sina hospital in northern Tehran, which killed 19 people and injured 14.

To review, starting over a week ago a massive explosion was observed lighting up the midnight sky outside Tehran, caught on film by local residents, which Iran's military dismissed as a gas leak explosion incident. But it was later revealed to have occurred at a ballistic missile development facility.

And this past week, another reported "accident" occurred at Natanz nuclear complex. But that particular 'mystery' blast caused Iranian officials to lash out in anger Thursday, saying "hostile countries" like the US and Israel are near the point of crossing "red lines". Crucially, Iran also said there were no radioactive leaks as a result of the incident.

Both US and Israeli media, including The New York Times and Times of Israel, have begun speculating that it could be part of a Mossad or CIA op to set back Iran's nuclear development .

The Jerusalem Post on Sunday asked in a headline and op-ed : Have four explosions pushed Iran farther away from a nuke?

Of the myriad fascinating questions surrounding the four recent, mysterious explosions in Iran, there is still one key issue that rises above the rest: Has any of this significantly distanced Iran further from a nuclear weapon?

The jury is still out, as there is so much that is unconfirmed. But to date, the early answer would need to be: probably not .

Since the IAEA's March report that the Islamic Republic crossed the threshold for having enough low-level enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb, the estimated time for Tehran to enrich enough of that uranium up to a weaponized level dropped from 12 months to as little as four months.

Most interestingly, an unnamed intelligence source said to be based in the Middle East told The New York Times this past week said of the mysterious incident at Natanz: "The blast was caused by an explosive device planted inside the facility."

The official added that the bombing "destroyed much of the aboveground parts of the facility where new centrifuges are balanced before they are put into operation."

Reports out of Iran's state media also suggest a possible cyber-attack, to which Tehran military officials say "they'll respond" if the attack did indeed originate from Iran's enemies like the US or Israel.

[Jul 06, 2020] Trump's two Russias confound coherent US policy

This is a neocon written article. Reader beware.
Trump as wolf in sheep's clothing in his policy toward Russia. Any person who can appoint Bolton as his national security advisor should be criminally prosecuted for criminal incompetence. To say nothing about Pompeo, Haley and many others. Such a peacenik, my ***
The USA foreign policy is not controlled by the President. It is controlled by the "Deep state"
Notable quotes:
"... The dizzying, often contradictory, paths followed by Trump on the one hand and his hawkish but constantly changing cast of national security aides on the other have created confusion in Congress and among allies and enemies alike. To an observer, Russia is at once a mortal enemy and a misunderstood friend in U.S. eyes. ..."
"... But Trump has defended his perspective on Russia, viewing it as a misunderstood potential friend, a valued World War II ally led by a wily, benevolent authoritarian who actually may share American values, like the importance of patriotism, family and religion. ..."
"... despite Trump's rhetoric, his administration has plowed ahead with some of the most significant actions against Russia by any recent administration. ..."
"... Dozens of Russian diplomats have been expelled, diplomatic missions closed, arms control treaties the Russians sought to preserve have been abandoned, weapons have been sold to Ukraine despite the impeachment allegations and the administration is engaged in a furious battle to prevent Russia from constructing a new gas pipeline that U.S. lawmakers from both parties believe will increase Europe's already unhealthy dependence on Russian energy. ..."
Jul 06, 2020 | apnews.com

When it comes to Russia, the Trump administration just can't seem to make up its mind.

For the past three years, the administration has careered between President Donald Trump's attempts to curry favor and friendship with Vladimir Putin and longstanding deep-seated concerns about Putin's intentions. As Trump has repeatedly and openly cozied up to Putin, his administration has imposed harsh and meaningful sanctions and penalties on Russia.

The dizzying, often contradictory, paths followed by Trump on the one hand and his hawkish but constantly changing cast of national security aides on the other have created confusion in Congress and among allies and enemies alike. To an observer, Russia is at once a mortal enemy and a misunderstood friend in U.S. eyes.

Even before Trump took office questions about Russia abounded. Now, nearing the end of his first term with a difficult reelection ahead , those questions have resurfaced with a vengeance. Intelligence suggesting Russia was encouraging attacks on U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan by putting bounties on their heads has thrust the matter into the heart of the 2020 campaign.

The White House says the intelligence wasn't confirmed or brought to Trump's attention, but his vast chorus of critics are skeptical and maintain the president should have been aware.

The reports have alarmed even pro-Trump Republicans who see Russia as a hostile global foe meddling with nefarious intent in Afghanistan, the Middle East, Ukraine and Georgia, a waning former superpower trying to regain its Soviet-era influence by subverting democracy in Europe and the United States with disinformation and election interference .

Trump's overtures to Putin have unsettled longstanding U.S. allies in Europe, including Britain, France and Germany, which have expressed concern about the U.S. commitment to the NATO alliance, which was forged to counter the Soviet threat, and robust democracy on the continent.

But Trump has defended his perspective on Russia, viewing it as a misunderstood potential friend, a valued World War II ally led by a wily, benevolent authoritarian who actually may share American values, like the importance of patriotism, family and religion.

Trump's approach to Russia was at center stage in the impeachment proceedings, when U.S. officials testified that the president demanded political favors from Ukraine in return for military assistance it needed to combat Russian aggression. But the issue ended up as a largely partisan exercise, with House Democrats voting to impeach Trump and Senate Republicans voting to acquit .

Within the Trump administration, the national security establishment appears torn between pursuing an arguably tough approach to Russia and pleasing the president. Insiders who have raised concern about Trump's approach to Russia -- including at least one of his national security advisers, defense secretaries and secretaries of state, but especially lower-level officials who spoke out during impeachment -- have nearly all been ousted from their positions.

Suspicions about Trump and Russia go back to his 2016 campaign. His appeal to Moscow to dig up his opponent's emails , his plaintive suggestions that Russia and the United States should be friends and a series of contacts between his advisers and Russians raised questions of impropriety that led to special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation . The investigation ultimately did not allege that anyone associated with the campaign illegally conspired with Russia.

Mueller, along with the U.S. intelligence community, did find that Russia interfered with the election, to sow chaos and also help Trump's campaign. But Trump has cast doubt on those findings, most memorably in a 2018 appearance on stage with Putin in Helsinki .

Yet despite Trump's rhetoric, his administration has plowed ahead with some of the most significant actions against Russia by any recent administration.

Dozens of Russian diplomats have been expelled, diplomatic missions closed, arms control treaties the Russians sought to preserve have been abandoned, weapons have been sold to Ukraine despite the impeachment allegations and the administration is engaged in a furious battle to prevent Russia from constructing a new gas pipeline that U.S. lawmakers from both parties believe will increase Europe's already unhealthy dependence on Russian energy.

At the same time, Trump has compounded the uncertainty by calling for the withdrawal or redeployment of U.S. troops from Germany, angrily deriding NATO allies for not meeting alliance defense spending commitments, and now apparently ignoring dire intelligence warnings that Russia was paying or wanted to pay elements of the Taliban to kill American forces in Afghanistan.

On top of that, even after the intelligence reports on the Afghanistan bounties circulated, he's expressed interest in inviting Putin back into the G-7 group of nations over the objections of the other members.

White House officials and die-hard Trump supporters have shrugged off the obvious inconsistencies, but they have been unable to staunch the swell of criticism and pointed demands for explanations as Russia, which has vexed American leaders for decades, delights in its ability to create chaos.

[Jul 05, 2020] The Baker of Maidan Square Serves Up Another Delicious Puffy Treat

Notable quotes:
"... is going to consume enough of America's time and energy – without, by any means, any assurances of success, especially if Loopy Orangeman serves another term in office at the helm of the drifting Death Star – that it will not be able to spare much energy for more fake rapprochement overtures to Russia ..."
"... I love it when they actually get caught in the act like this – that intercepted phone call between Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt did more damage to the US State-Department regime-change machine than ten years worth of complaining that the US meddles in other countries' electoral processes. ..."
"... the damage is mostly done, and it endures. ..."
Jul 05, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

The Baker
It's all a balancing act of time, temperature and ingredients. That's the secret to baking.

"The smell of good bread baking, like the sound of lightly-flowing water, is indescribable in its evocation of innocence and delight."

M.F.K. Fisher

"Anarchy is like custard cooking over a flame; it has to be constantly stirred or it sticks and gets heavy, like government."

Tom Robbins, from "Even Cowgirls Get the Blues"

Victoria Nuland has kept a comparatively low profile since her part in the still-unfolding grotesque failure to mastermind Ukraine, at America's intervention, into a 'prosperous western-leaning market democracy' at Europe's expense.

She made a cameo appearance, smiling and nodding and handing out bread and buns to the revolutionaries at the 'Euromaidan' on Kiev's Independence Square, and almost immediately thereafter was recorded in the act of colluding with United States Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt to hand-pick the incoming revolutionary government. The EU was a bunch of twittering incompetents who would never get anything done, so fuck them – America would show them how to grease the guillotine with the fat of tyrants.

Then she appeared in a Chevron-sponsored press conference for the National Press Club, at which she was a guest speaker, and announced that since 1991 the United States had invested $5 Billion in 'democracy promotion' in Ukraine.

I had to listen to nearly the whole speech to verify that fact was in there, through exhortations that the hand-picked-by-America revolutionary government constituted the 'principles and values that are the cornerstones of all free democracies', but when she got to the part about how she had personally 'witnessed the appalling violence when Yanukovich turned his riot police on demonstrators as they sang hymns and prayed for peace', my stomach revolted and I nearly blew chunks over my monitor. Dear God. I guess a saucepan for your head and a club studded with nails are important accessories for demonstrators these days when they know they're going to be singing hymns and praying for peace.

Anyway, shortly after that debacle, she shuffled off to her coffin full of graveyard dirt in the basement, and stayed away from sunlight. She only recently emerged, and the alert eye of reader rkka spotted her delightful piece for Foreign Affairs magazine, entitled "Pinning Down Putin; How a Confident America Should Deal With Russia" .

In fact, it's worth including rkka's take on it, upon having read it.

"She laments how Vladimir Putin has for twenty years repeatedly slapped away Uncle Sam's extended open hand, offered in the purest desire for friendship with Russia She does admit one US mistake, tearing up the ABM Treaty in 2002, but the rest of it is one long whine about Putin.

Her policy prescription: spend uncountable trillion$ the US has to borrow building up US military capability, unify all NATO allies to resist disinformation, hold up the renewal of the new START Treaty conditioned on Russian concessions on Russia's short & medium range nuclear strike systems & new conventional capabilities, forge a united NATO & EU front on Ukraine with the US participating in the negotiations, and then offer a future Russian government a return to non-substantive participation in Western institutions like the G-7 and NATO-Russia Council as well as a few miniscule economic inducements In other words, the same offer to Soviet/Russian leaders since Brezhnev: major substantive Soviet/Russian concessions in return for vague assurances of future Western goodwill."

https://c0.pubmine.com/sf/0.0.3/html/safeframe.html REPORT THIS AD

Having read the piece myself, I frankly doubt I can do any better than that, but I'd like to go over it anyway, because I would like to examine some aspects of it in considerably greater detail.

By way of introductory remarks, I should like to point out the comedic irony of Ms. Nuland's "Confident America" which is going to "pin down Putin" sharing page space with "America's Democratic Unraveling: Countries Fail the Same Way Businesses Do, Gradually and Then Suddenly. " It has apparently been some considerable time since Ms. Nuland looked out the window. Oh, the article itself is a complete crock, blaming America's descent into the maelstrom as a regrettable consequence of Trump's dictatorial rule, which is comparable to – if we indulge in any more irony, we are going to turn into broccoli – those of Hugo Chavez and Vladimir Putin. But few in the milieu of American politics could have failed to notice that an anarchist commune in Seattle has declared independence from America , and Washington State Governor Jay Inslee, whose spine is of purest tofu, has ceded control of a seven-block center of downtown Seattle to them. As if that were not enough, he has gotten involved in a Twitter flame war with that veteran Tweeter, Donald Trump, accusing him of being "totally incapable of governing".

Two incongruities here, which should inspire thought; one, what Ms. Nuland asserts is a 'confident' America is actually up to its nipples in domestic conflict. It should not, under the present circumstances, aspire to 'pin down' anyone stronger than Bernie Sanders. Two, where exactly is Ms. Nuland on this domestic revolt? I can remember a time when even if she was asleep, her spider-sense would have detected anyone whispering "independence", and she would have flown to the scene on her broom, if no faster transport was available, to distribute baked goods and encouragement. As it is, it looks as if nobody has noticed that the declarers of independence in Seattle embody the principles and values that are cornerstones of all free democracies.

Just before we leave the whole Black Lives Matter thing and move on with the subject article, I would like to note that protests around the world – Paris, Toronto, Berlin, London – involving thousands upon thousands of people express solidarity with the movement and global shock and dismay at the state of public order in the USA. America is in no position to be lecturing the world. About anything. If America still feels strong and confident, it might not have too solid a grasp on reality.

So, let's get to it.

The bullshit actually starts right at kickoff time, but I'll pass on Ms. Nuland's first paragraph of stage-setting musings. It's perfectly true that Russia is viewed from a variety of perspectives, and if she omits to mention the USA is as well, and is certainly not admired by all as a sterling example of global citizen, we'll put it down to artistic license. Let's get straight into her characterizations of fact.

Just before the jaw-dropping allegation that Putin has 'played a weak hand well' only because the USA and its allies have let him, she purports some facts; low oil prices, the coronavirus pandemic and Russians' 'growing sense of malaise' bring new risks for the Kremlin.

That so? I submit the American energy industry must be feeling a little malaise itself. Consider; Russia's budget balances with oil at around $40.00 a barrel . As of yesterday, West Texas Intermediate (WTI) was at $37.39, and Brent at $40.18, for future deliveries: the WTI figure for July, and Brent for August. Cheerful American sources have told us before now that America's break-even price is in the high 30's. That'd make it slightly under Russia's.

And I call bullshit. The current price is in the high 30's, and slightly better. But the US operational rig count, according to OilPrice.com , was 279 as of yesterday (199 oil, 78 gas), down from 969 this time a year ago. BP will write off $17.5 Billion in assets. Whiting Petroleum, Vista Proppants & Logistics LLC (a private equity-backed supplier of fracking sand), Extraction Oil & Gas, Diamond Offshore Drilling, Weatherford International and California Resources all declared bankruptcy, Weatherford International for the second time in a year. Chesapeake Energy is expected to join them this week. BP slashed 10,000 jobs, which was accompanied by similar cuts at Chevron. Royal Dutch Shell announced voluntary layoffs. The United States lost 100,000 jobs in the energy industry since February, about 45,000 of them in Texas. Massive pipeline company Enbridge announced its intention to concentrate its asset mix in future on natural gas and renewables. Quite the picture of despondency, I think you would have to agree.

Show me a similar picture of ruin in Russia.

Well, I'll tell you a measurable difference right off the top – Whiting Petroleum and Diamond Offshore Drilling, who recently declared bankruptcy, and Chesapeake Energy who is on the verge of doing so, all paid out millions in executive bonuses before going belly-up and waiting for the US government to print more money so it can bail them out. Meanwhile, in Russia, the state will take an extra $10 Billion in revenues from the oil companies , owing to the way they are taxed. This will be spent on state projects, part of a forecast $71 Billion in new spending, none of it borrowed. The Russian economy is forecast to contract by about 6% this year. The US economy expects an almost-identical contraction of about 5.7% over 2020, although the drop in the second quarter is expected to be about 40%.

The difference there is in the details. Russia is sitting on a half-trillion-dollar National Welfare fund , saved for emergencies like this, and has government debt equivalent to about 15% of GDP . The Fed in the USA is printing more than $2 Trillion in new money this quarter. To put that in perspective, it has only created about $8 Trillion in new money between 2008 and now. And it has a government debt equivalent to 106% of its GDP . In fact, there are credible indications that America is desperate to get more dollars into circulation in hopes of maintaining its status as the world's reserve currency.

Well, I went on about that for much longer than I meant to. Coronavirus. As of today, the United States has 115,980 deaths attributed to the novel coronavirus. The Russian Federation has 7,478. Washington's position on the per-capita discrepancy is that Russia must be lying about its deaths. At the same time, there is broad substantiation that the United States is deliberately overcounting its own deaths . Which is, not to put too fine a point on it, lying about your coronavirus deaths. Should Russia exaggerate its numbers, too, to make Washington happy? Both countries are carrying out extensive testing, and there is a pretty solid dataset emerging that a high number of people test positive and are completely unaware they have the virus, and are not bothered by it at all. Exaggerating the death count makes the virus appear to be much deadlier than it actually is. Who would benefit from that? Well

"Erroneous data unduly scare people about the risks of the disease. It keeps the country locked down longer than necessary, which destroys peoples' lives and livelihoods in many other ways. Exaggerated fears of the virus endanger lives by keeping people from obtaining treatment for other medical problems. It also makes it impossible to accurately compare policies across countries." Billboard calling Trump an 'idiot' removed from NJ town

Who wants to prolong the lockdown – the Kremlin? Or the Democrats, to increase frustration with Trump? Is it a coincidence that New York, an unassailable Democratic stronghold, admitted to exaggerating new active cases by 50% in April, by adding 3,700 additional people who were presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never tested positive? Here is a tip, completely free of obligation – take it or ignore it as you wish. Leave Trump unsupervised for five minutes without a ball gag and his thumbs tied together, and he will make an idiot of himself. You do not need to make up shit.

Russian malaise where Putin is concerned? Ah ha ha hahahaha. Putin's approval rating in Russia has never dipped below 60% . Obama's approval rating slid below 60% after only 6 months in office , and couldn't reach that altitude again without going on oxygen. Trump's started out below 50% and remained remarkably consistent, suggesting that both those who worship him and those who loathe him have not changed their minds at all. Which points to two fairly-obvious conclusions – a Trump electoral victory, and a continuing divided America.

Jeez; that's only one paragraph. This is going to be as long as The Satanic Verses – we'd better get a move on. What else you got, Ms. Nuland?

Whoever wins the upcoming US presidential election should try again with Putin, she says. You know something? I hope I am not jumping the gun here, but I'm going to mention now, when we've really just started, two things that are conspicuous by their absence in Ms. Nuland's piece – the return of Crimea to Ukraine's control, and the shooting down of MH-17. Not mentioned. At all. Yet on the occasion of both occurrences. the United States was in such a rage that it vowed it would carry out no negotiations with Russia until Crimea had been returned to Ukraine, and the shooting down of MH-17 was the trigger for sanctions by the USA and all its allies, many of whom had been quite reluctant before that. Actually, what America vowed was no relaxation of sanctions until Crimea was returned to Ukrainian control, but it's pretty hard to imagine any constructive negotiations between the two while the USA maintains its sanctions policy and bullies its allies not to weaken. Now that I think about it, the Nord Stream II pipeline was not mentioned, either, although the American position is that it must not be completed, and the USA will sanction any company which helps Russia do so as well as any international regulator who approves it for operation. Are these issues just the sort of thing that can be talked out by old friends? As if.

The new President (whom I think has a pretty good chance of being the old president, as in the current one), she says, should "resist Putin's attempts to cut off his population from the outside world and speak directly to the Russian people about the benefits of working together and the price they have paid for Putin's hard turn away from liberalism." The part about speaking directly to the Russian people sounds to me like an argument for the re-insertion of 'democracy-promoting' American NGO's to Russia. And it might even be that the USA is going to shoulder the burden of those agencies being forced to register as foreign agents, because it is a certainty they are not going to be given a free hand to proselytize as they once could. And, ummm what are these benefits of liberalism Ms. Nuland is hinting at? Because the last big blaze of liberalism in Russia was the 'reforms' of the 90's, when Jeffrey Sachs and the Harvard Boys brought their 'shock therapy' to Yeltsin's country . And it was a shock; not much doubt about that. Hyperinflation hit 2,500 percent, the life expectancy of Russian males fell by six years, many people had their life's savings wiped out, and a powerful cadre of oligarchs seized private control of what had been state assets, for pennies on the dollar. I think it is safe to say many, many Russians remember their introduction to liberalism , and are not particularly eager to renew their acquaintance. Does liberalism promise prosperity? It might, but they've heard that before. How does liberalism stack up against this wage growth under the current leadership?

Russia Average Monthly Wages

What did US wages look like over the same time period? I'm glad you asked.

United States Wages and Salaries Growth

Maybe someone should speak directly to the American people, and advise them what the United States government's hard turn away from liberalism has cost them.

Over the next two decades, Russians would steadily relinquish more and more of their rights -- freedom of expression and assembly, political pluralism, judicial fairness, and an open economy (all of which were then new, tenuous, and unevenly shared) -- in exchange for the stability of a strong state, a return to oil-fueled growth, and the prospect of middle-class prosperity.

Oh, oh. I see a problem right away. Article 29 of the Russian constitution. To wit, Paragraph 1;

Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought and speech.

And Paragraph 3;

No one may be coerced into expressing one's views and convictions or into renouncing them.

And Article 31;

Citizens of the Russian Federation shall have the right to gather peacefully, without weapons, and to hold meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets.

The west, and especially the USA, always makes a big deal about having to obtain a permit to hold a rally, march or demonstration. Do you have to do that to hold any of those events in New York? You sure do . Meanwhile, although the western press regularly squawks that the rights of Russians are being trampled upon by the oppressive government, how much of a lawyer would you have to be to get somebody off who genuinely and demonstrably did not violate the constitution?

And just, you know, while we're here perusing the Russian Constitution, take a look at Article 24, Paragraph 1.

It shall be forbidden to gather, store, use and disseminate information on the private life of any person without his/her consent.

Protections which are characterized more by their absence than their observance in the Land Of The Free.

Western governments generally looked the other way as Putin's methods for reestablishing control became increasingly Soviet during his first decade in power: closing down opposition newspapers and TV stations; jailing, exiling, or killing political and economic rivals; and reestablishing single-party dominance in the parliament and regional governments.

I do like to see a professional bullshitter spit on their hands and bear down. There is no evidence at all of Vladimir Putin killing political rivals, and jailing of oligarchs such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky was supported by the ECHR, in that it agreed he could not argue the charges against him were political simply because his being jailed was convenient for the government, while there was significant and verifiable evidence of criminal activity. Newspapers and TV stations start up and close down all the time, Not so much in the United States, of course, where media corporations went from 50 in 1983 to 6 in 2011 . In that year, those six companies controlled 90% of what Americans read, watched or listened to.

Say – you know what establishes single-party dominance in parliament and regional governments? Popularity. They have these things called advance polls – you probably even have them in your country – and the way it works is, surveys in advance of the vote are conducted and those surveyed tell pollsters who they plan to vote for. And that's how the vote comes out, time after time. If Putin is forecast to win with 72% of the vote in presidential elections, for example, the actual result is usually well within the margin of error. Show me any time when it was not. The USA does not like this, because it is somewhere between difficult and impossible to carry out regime change where the vote is not even close.

For the most part, the United States and its allies encouraged Russia in its pursuit of the third goal, bringing Moscow into the World Trade Organization and creating the G-8 and the NATO-Russia Council.

Gosh, that kind of smells like bullshit a little bit, too, because according to the World Security Network, the USA was the last major country to put up obstacles to Russian entry to the WTO. They actually say so, in so many words :

The United States is the last major country to put up obstacles to Russian entry to the WTO.

Not only that, Senator Bill Frist claimed that "Russia's disregard for the rule of law, human rights violations and other "anti-democratic" tendencies "color the position of the United States."

Human rights – really, Bill? Seriously? I know, let's have a quick geopolitics quiz. Who can think of a grotesque human-rights scandal that happened just two years before ol' Bill claimed to be all about human rights? Tick tick tick need a hint? Iraq. Tick tick tick .happened in a big prison run by the USA. Tick tick tick starts with 'Abu', and ends with 'Ghraib' . That's right, just two years before Bill Frist's soliloquy on the sanctity of human rights, American soldiers were piling naked Iraqi men into human pyramids, making them stand motionless on a box in the belief that if they moved they would be electrocuted, and leading them around on dog leashes while they were smeared with filth.

As if that were not hypocrisy enough, countries which appeared on various sanctimonious western lists of world's poorest and world's most oppressive countries had been WTO members in good standing since the mid-90's. Including the Arab monarchies, and I would have to really think about it if asked to name something less democratic than a country in which potential rulers are limited to sons of the same father. Feel free to help me out, Ms. Nuland.

Both Democratic and Republican presidents worked closely with U.S. allies to prevent Putin from reestablishing a Russian sphere of influence in eastern Europe and from vetoing the security arrangements of his neighbors. Here, a chasm soon opened between liberal democracies and the still very Soviet man leading Russia, especially on the subject of NATO enlargement. No matter how hard Washington and its allies tried to persuade Moscow that NATO was a purely defensive alliance that posed no threat to Russia, it continued to serve Putin's agenda to see Europe in zero-sum terms.

First of all, we might as well just say 'presidents', because on foreign policy and the use of military force there is virtually no difference between Republicans and Democrats. There's an illusion of choice, but it basically boils down to a Democratic preference for 'targeted strikes' such as Obama's 'drone wars', while Republicans like to roll in with the full enchilada and flatten the place. Any American born in the past 20 years has never known a time when the USA was not at war , regardless of who was president. Any American who was born after 1984 has seen America at war for at least half of his or her life.

NATO was formed to 'thwart the threat of Soviet expansion into Western Europe'. Russia formed the Warsaw Pact group in reaction to NATO admitting a rearmed West Germany into its ranks. That alliance was dissolved March 31st, 1991 . When the Warsaw Pact dissolved, considering that NATO incorporated all the non-Soviet Warsaw Pact countries despite western promises to advance no further eastward than Germany, NATO was essentially a military alliance in search of a mission. It messed about for awhile pretending it was needed to counter global terrorism, before focusing on reframing a generally-friendly Russia which was its partner in many international organizations as a sinister threat that required not only NATO readiness, but a lot more money plowed into it.

But few in Washington considered it an option to slam the door on the new democracies of central and eastern Europe, which had worked for years to meet NATO's rigorous admission standards and were now clamoring for membership.

As I pointed out 5 years ago , aspiring members could clamor for membership all they liked – knocking on the door doesn't mean a thing – you had to be invited, and by unanimous consent, in accordance with Article 10 of the NATO charter;

" The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession ."

The emphasis also notes that unanimous agreement is contingent on factors such as a straight-faced contention that admitting the member country will contribute to the collective security of the North Atlantic area. At the time it was admitted – by unanimous consent, apparently – Latvia had 1,250 soldiers and three tanks. None of which had sufficient amphibious capability to protect the North Atlantic; salt water is hard on tanks. That 'they followed us home, so we had to keep them' trope is popular with western diplomats, and they like to strum on it for all it's worth. Please note also to whom prospective applicants must direct their applications.

Moreover, it quickly emerged from polling in countries the United States wanted to see added to NATO that many of them were far more interested in joining the EU than NATO, and that their enthusiasm was mostly founded in optimism about economic advancement. They were far less inspired when questions got around to how willing they would be to contribute a sizable portion of their GDP to raising internal forces for NATO. The polling organization – the United States Information Agency (USIA) – claimed 83% support in Poland for joining NATO. But when the question, "Would you be willing to spend more money on the military in order to meet NATO standards?" was dropped into the mix, 74% said "No" against 16% "Yes".

Putin has always understood that a belt of increasingly democratic, prosperous states around Russia would pose a direct challenge to his leadership model and risk reinfecting his own people with democratic aspirations. This is why Putin was never going to take a "live and let live" approach to former Soviet lands and satellite states.

Russian opposition to NATO adding former Warsaw Pact and Soviet countries like beads on a rosary was confined to verbal objections, which were ignored. The United States continued to prod countries who had not yet applied, such as Ukraine and Georgia, announcing it intended to add them, and the only thing that stopped that from happening is language in the NATO charter which prohibits the acceptance of nations with ongoing territorial disputes. And this is what it looks like right now in the King of Democratic, Prosperous States. I don't think Putin would have too much difficulty persuading rational Russians that they don't want that kind of prosperity. And wasn't Ukraine supposed to be an example to Russians that would persuade them to accept western offers to make them prosperous, too, if they would only overthrow Putin? How's that working out? Let's look at average monthly wages, year-over-year, for the last 25 years.

Ukraine Average Monthly Wages YoY

Despite Putin's power moves abroad, 20 years of failing to invest in Russia's modernization may be catching up with him. In 2019, Russia's GDP growth was an anemic 1.3 percent. This year, the coronavirus pandemic and the free fall in oil prices could result in a significant economic contraction. International sanctions deter serious foreign investment in Russia from most countries except China. Putin's insistence on tight state control and on the renationalization of key sectors of the economy has suppressed innovation and diversification. Russia's roads, rails, schools, and hospitals are crumbling. Its citizens have grown restive as promised infrastructure spending never appears, and their taxes and the retirement age are going up.

Despite its galloping anti-Russian bias and propensity for quoting 'experts' whose only qualification is their acute Russophobia, The Moscow Times is forced to admit Russian government investment in infrastructure is huge; $96 Billion over 6 years. As Ms. Nuland was kind enough to point out, the country is under an intense sanctions regime by the United States which is aimed at making life sufficiently miserable for the Russian people that they will beg for American mercy. From Newsweek ;

"The measures under consideration in Congress -- known as the Defending American Security From Kremlin Aggression Act -- seek to deter further Russian interference in elections by effectively cutting off the country from the world economy."

And that was as punishment for alleged Russian interference in the American elections, which the Mueller investigation failed to substantiate just about as catastrophically as an attempt to prove cooked pasta is an effective substitute for steel.

This is the Moscow skyline. Looks quite the underdeveloped third-world shithole, doesn't it?

Last year, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave the United States a D+ grade for infrastructure. If you were awarded a D+ grade in Finding Your Way Home, how many times in a week do you think your mother would have to come and pick you up from somewhere that was not where you live? D+ is not a good grade. ASCE estimated the US government would have to spend $4.6 Trillion – with a 'T' – over the next decade, just to bring things up to acceptable.

Look, it's getting late, and we're going to have to wrap things up. I'd love to go on countering Ms. Nuland's arguments, but I think a fairly consistent pattern has been established here. Let it suffice to say that this objective

"The first order of business is to restore the unity and confidence of U.S. alliances in Europe and Asia and end the fratricidal rhetoric, punitive trade policies, and unilateralism of recent years"

is going to consume enough of America's time and energy – without, by any means, any assurances of success, especially if Loopy Orangeman serves another term in office at the helm of the drifting Death Star – that it will not be able to spare much energy for more fake rapprochement overtures to Russia.

Not very many in Russia are upset enough by American sanctions to solicit American nation-building expertise, while European nations just look at each other in stunned dismay at each new advance on American assholery.

If you were planning on handing out bread and muffins on Red Square, I wouldn't start laying in bulk flour just at this point.

MARK CHAPMAN July 2, 2020 at 8:41 am

I love it when they actually get caught in the act like this – that intercepted phone call between Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt did more damage to the US State-Department regime-change machine than ten years worth of complaining that the US meddles in other countries' electoral processes.

That GOLOS worker looks a right luvvie, too, just the type. Americans have meddled in foreign elections – directly or through their proxy NGO's – since time out of mind, but in the last decade, decade-and-a-half they have gotten lazy and so confident in the process that they just throw up a hand and say 'ballot-stuffing' and 'carousel voting', and then show a video clip of something that professes to be an example of the behavior they describe, and the average voter doesn't have a clue what he's seeing so he just nods and says 'I see'.

GOLOS could quickly claim that kid never worked for them, that he is an FSB plant coached to discredit an honest and non-partisan political observer, and that's probably what I would do if I were them. But the damage is mostly done, and it endures. They can show this clip next year, and the year after, and it'll still be effective proof of western meddling and an attempt to discredit the democratic process in Russia.

[Jul 05, 2020] Afghanistan and the Endless War Caucus by DANIEL LARISON

Looks like Liz Cheney words for Russians. Her action suggest growing alliance between Bush repoblicans and neolibral interventionaistsof the Democratic Party. The alliance directed against Trump.
Notable quotes:
"... As Boland explains, the amendment passed by the committee yesterday sets so many conditions on withdrawal that it makes it all but impossible to satisfy them: ..."
"... The longer that the U.S. stays at war in Afghanistan, the more incentives other states will have to make that continued presence more costly for the U.S. When the knee-jerk reaction in Washington to news of these bounties is to throw up obstacles to withdrawal, that gives other states another incentive to do more of this. ..."
"... Prolonging our involvement in the war amounts to playing into Moscow's hands. For all of their posturing about security and strength, hard-liners routinely support destructive and irrational policies that redound to the advantage of other states. This is still happening with the war in Afghanistan, and if these hard-liners get their way it will continue happening for many years to come. ..."
Jul 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The immediate response to a story that U.S. forces were being targeted is to keep fighting a losing conflict.

Barbara Boland reported yesterday on the House Armed Services Committee's vote to impede withdrawal of U.S. from Afghanistan:

The House Armed Services Committee voted Wednesday night to put roadblocks on President Donald Trump's vow to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, apparently in response to bombshell report published by The New York Times Friday that alleges Russia paid dollar bounties to the Taliban in Afghanistan to kill U.S troops.

It speaks volumes about Congress' abdication of its responsibilities that one of the few times that most members want to challenge the president over a war is when they think he might bring it to an end. Many of the members that want to block withdrawals from other countries have no problem when the president wants to use U.S. forces illegally and to keep them in other countries without authorization for years at a time. The role of hard-liner Liz Cheney in pushing the measure passed yesterday is a good example of what I mean. The hawkish outrage in Congress is only triggered when the president entertains the possibility of taking troops out of harm's way. When he takes reckless and illegal action that puts them at risk, as he did when he ordered the illegal assassination of Soleimani, the same members that are crying foul today applauded the action. As Boland explains, the amendment passed by the committee yesterday sets so many conditions on withdrawal that it makes it all but impossible to satisfy them:

Crow's amendment adds several layers of policy goals to the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, which has already stretched on for 19 years and cost over a trillion dollars. As made clear in the Afghanistan Papers, most of these policy goals were never the original intention of the mission in Afghanistan, and were haphazardly added after the defeat of al Qaeda. With no clear vision for what achieving these fuzzy goals would look like, the mission stretches on indefinitely, an unarticulated victory unachievable.

The immediate Congressional response to a story that U.S. forces were being targeted is to make it much more difficult to pull them out of a war that cannot be won. Congressional hawks bemoan "micromanaging" presidential decisions and mock the idea of having "535 commanders-in-chief," but when it comes to prolonging pointless wars they are only too happy to meddle and tie the president's hands. When it comes to defending Congress' proper role in matters of war, these members are typically on the other side of the argument. They are content to let the president get us into as many wars as he might want, but they are horrified at the thought that any of those wars might one day be concluded. Yesterday's vote confirmed that there is an endless war caucus in the House, and it is bipartisan.

The original reporting of the bounty story is questionable for the reasons that Boland has pointed out before, but for the sake of argument let's assume that Russia has been offering bounties on U.S. troops in Afghanistan. When the U.S. keeps its troops at war in a country for almost twenty years, it is setting them up as targets for other governments. Just as the U.S. has armed and supported forces hostile to Russia and its clients in Syria, it should not come as a shock when they do to the same elsewhere. If Russia has been doing this, refusing to withdraw U.S. forces ensures that they will continue to have someone that they can target.

The longer that the U.S. stays at war in Afghanistan, the more incentives other states will have to make that continued presence more costly for the U.S. When the knee-jerk reaction in Washington to news of these bounties is to throw up obstacles to withdrawal, that gives other states another incentive to do more of this.

Because the current state of debate about Russia is so toxic and irrational, our political leaders seem incapable of responding carefully to Russian actions. It doesn't seem to occur to the war hawks that Russia might prefer that the U.S. remains preoccupied and tied down in Afghanistan indefinitely.

Prolonging our involvement in the war amounts to playing into Moscow's hands. For all of their posturing about security and strength, hard-liners routinely support destructive and irrational policies that redound to the advantage of other states. This is still happening with the war in Afghanistan, and if these hard-liners get their way it will continue happening for many years to come.

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .

email

kouroi • a day ago

One needs to mention the democratic deficit in the US. All the members voting yes are representatives, they represent the people in their constituencies, and presumably vote for what the majority in those constituencies would want, or past promises.

Any poll shows that Americans would rather have the troops brought back home, thank you very much. But this is not what their representatives are voting for. Talk about democracy!

Fran Macadam • a day ago

For elite war profiteers and the politicians they own, the only war that is lost is one that ends. No lives matter.

chris chuba • a day ago

And what's the logic, if you make an accusation against someone you don't like it must be true. Okay well then let's drone strike Putin. If you are going to be Exceptional and consistent, Putin did everything Soleimani did so how can Liz Cotton argue for a different punishment?
1. Killed U.S. troops in a war zone, 2. planning attacks on U.S. troops.

The entire Russian military plans for attacks all the time just like ours does but the Neocons have declared that we are the only ones allowed to do that. Verdict, death penalty for Putin.

kouroi chris chuba • a day ago

If you have watched Oliver Stone's interview with Putin, it comes through that in fact there were at least three or four attempts to Putin's life...

William Toffan chris chuba • 21 hours ago

Death penalty for Putin = Death Penalty for continental USA.

RBH • 15 hours ago

So you can get into a war without Congressional approval, but you can't get out of one without Congressional approval. Gotcha.

Lavinia • 10 hours ago • edited

Interesting, well reasoned article as usual from Mr. Larison. However, I have to say that I don't see why Russia would want the US in Afghanistan indefinitely. In primis, they have a strategic partnership with China (even though we've got to see how Russia will behave now when there is the India-China rift), and China has been championing the idea of rebuilding the Silk Road (brilliant idea if you ask me) so in this sense it's more reasonable to assume that they might be aiming to get stability in the region rather than keep it in a state of unrest (as to be strategic partners you need to have some kind of common strategy, or at least not a completely different strategy). In 2018 they (Russia) actually were trying to organise a mediation process which would have the Afghan Gvt. and the Talibans discuss before the US would retire the troops, and it was very significative as they managed to get all the parties sitting around a table for the very first time (even the US participated as an observer).

Secondly, Russia also has pretty decent relations with Iran (at least according to Iranian press, which seems to be realistic as Russia is compliant to the JCPOA, is not aggressive towards them, and they're cooperating in the Astana process for a political solution for Syria, for example), and it wouldn't be so if Russia would pursue a policy which would aim to keep the US in the Middle East indefinitely, as Iran's WHOLE point is that they want the US out of the region, so if Russia would be trying to keep the US in the Middle East indefinitely, that would seriously upset Iran.

Thirdly, Russia is one of the founders of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which now includes most of the states in Central Asia, China, India and Pakistan. The association never made overt statements about their stance on the US's presence in the region; yet they've been hinting that they don't approve of it, which is reasonable, as it is very likely that those countries would all have different plans for the region, which might include some consideration for human and economic development rather than constant and never-ending militarisation (of course Pakistan would be problematic here, as the funds for the Afghan warlords get channeled through Pakistan, which receives a lot of US money, so I don't know how they're managing this issue).

Last but not least, I cannot logically believe that the Talibans, who've been coherent in their message since the late 70's ("we will fight to the death until the invaders are defeated and out of our national soil") would now need to be "convinced" by the Russians to defeat and chase out the invader. This is just NOT believable at all. Afghanistan is called the Graveyard of Empires for a reason, I would argue.

In any case I am pleased to see that at TAC you have been starting debunking the Russia-narrative, as it is very problematic - most media just systematically misrepresents Russia in order to justify aggressive military action (Europe, specifically Northern Europe, is doing this literally CONSTANTLY, I'm so over it, really). The misrepresentation of Russia as an aggressive wannabe-empire is a cornerstone of the pro-war narrative, so it is imperative to get some actual realism into that.

wynn • an hour ago • edited

As if the Afghan freedom fighters need additional incentive to eliminate the invaders? In case Amerikans don't know, Afghans, except those on the US payroll, intensely despise Amerika and its 'godless' ways. Amerikans forces have been sadistic, bombing Afghan weddings, funerals, etc.

Even if the Russians are providing bounties to the Afghans, to take out the invaders, don't the Amerikans remember the 80s when Washington (rightfully) supported the mujahedin with funds, arms, Stinger missiles, etc.? Again, the US is on shaky ground because of the neocons.

Afghanistan is known through the ages to be the graveyard of empires. They have done it on their own shedding blood, sweat, and tears. Also, the Afghan resistance have been principled about Amerikans getting out before making deals.

Blood Alcohol wynn • an hour ago

Same argument goes for the Iraqi people.

[Jul 05, 2020] Some Conspiracy Theories Are for Real by Philip Giraldi

Jul 05, 2020 | www.unz.com

What is the best way to debunk a conspiracy theory? Call it a conspiracy theory, a label which in and of itself implies disbelief. The only problem with that is there have been many actual conspiracies both historically and currently and many of them are not in the least theoretical in nature. Conspiracies of several kinds brought about American participation in both world wars. And however one feels about President Donald Trump, it must be conceded that he has been the victim of a number of conspiracies, first to deny him the GOP nomination, then to insure that he be defeated in the presidential election, and subsequently to completely delegitimize his presidency.

Prior to Trump there have been numerous conspiracy "theories," many of which have been quite plausible. The "suicide" of Defense Secretary James Forrestal comes to mind, followed by the assassination of John F. Kennedy, which has been credibly credited to both Cuba and Israel. And then there is 9/11, perhaps the greatest conspiracy theory of all. Israel clearly knew it was coming, witness the Five Dancing Shlomos cavorting and filming themselves in New Jersey as the twin towers went down. Also the Saudis might have played a role in funding and even directing the alleged hijackers. And we have also had the conspiracy by the neocons to fabricate information about Iraq's WMDs and the ongoing conspiracy by the same players to depict Iran as a threat to the United States.

Given the multiple crises currently being experienced in the United States it is perhaps inevitable that speculation about conspiracies is at its highest level ever. To the average American it is incomprehensible how the country has become so screwed up because the political and economic elite is fundamentally incompetent, so the search for a scapegoat must go on.

There are a number of conspiracy theories about the coronavirus currently making the rounds. Those libertarians and contrarians who choose to believe that the virus is actually a flu being exploited to strip them of their liberties are convinced that many in the government and media have conspired to sell what is essentially a fraud. One such snake oil salesman persists in using an analogy, that since more Americans are killed in automobile accidents than by the coronavirus it would be more appropriate to ban cars than to require the wearing of face masks.

Another theory making the rounds accuses Microsoft multi-billionaire Bill Gates of trying to take over the world's healthcare system through the introduction of a vaccine to control the coronavirus, which he presumably created in the first place. The fallacy in many of the virus "conspiracies" that relate to a totalitarian regime or a crazy billionaire using a faux disease to generate fear so as to gain control of the citizenry is that it gives far too much credit to any government's or individual's ability to pull off a fraud of that magnitude. It would require people a whole lot smarter than the tag team of Trump-Pompeo or even Gates to convince the world and thousands of doctors and scientists that they should lock down entire countries over something completely phony.

Other coronavirus theories include that the virus was developed in the U.S., was exported to China by a traitorous American scientist, weaponized in Wuhan and then unleashed on the West as part of a communist plot to destroy capitalism and democracy. That would mean that we are already at war with China, or at least we should be. Then there is the largely accepted theory that the virus was created in Wuhan and escaped from the lab. Since that time Beijing has been engaging in a cover-up, which is the conspiracy. It is a theme favored by the White House, which has not yet decided what to do about it beyond assigning funny "Yellow Peril" names to the disease so everyone in MAGA hats will have something to chuckle about leading up to the November election.

But all kidding aside, there are some conspiracy theories that are more worth considering than others. One would be the role of George Soros and the so-called Open Society Foundations that he controls and funds in the unrest that is sweeping across the United States. The allegations against Soros are admittedly thin on evidence, but conspiracy mongers would point out that that is the mark of a really well-planned conspiracy, similar to what the 89 year-old Hungarian Jewish billionaire has been engaging in for a long time. The current round of claims about Open Society and Soros have generated as many as 500,000 tweets a day as well as nearly 70,000 Facebook posts per month, mostly from political conservatives.

The allegations tend to fall into two broad categories . First, that Soros hires protester/thugs and transports them to demonstrations where they are supplied with bricks and incendiaries to turn the gatherings into riots. Second, that Open Society is funding and otherwise enabling the destabilizing flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

Soros and his supporters, many of whom are Jewish because they think they see anti-Semitism in the attacks on the Hungarian, claim to support democratization and free trade worldwide. He is, in effect, one of the world's leading globalists. Soros claims to be a "force for good" as the cliché goes, but is it completely credible that his $32 billion foundation does not operate behind the scenes to influence developments in ways that are certainly not democratic?

Indeed, Soros accumulated his vast fortune through vulture capitalism. He made over $1 billion in 1992 by selling short $10 billion in British pounds sterling, leading to the media dubbing him "the man who broke the bank of England." He has been accused of similar currency manipulation in both Europe and Asia. In 1999, New York Times economist Paul Krugman wrote of him that "Nobody who has read a business magazine in the last few years can be unaware that these days there really are investors who not only move money in anticipation of a currency crisis, but actually do their best to trigger that crisis for fun and profit."

Far from a passive bystander giving helpful advice to democracy groups, Soros was heavily involved with the restructuring of former communist regimes in eastern Europe and had a hand in the so-called Rose Revolution in Georgia in 2003 and the Maidan Revolution in Ukraine in 2014, both of which were supported by the U.S. government and were intended to threaten Russia's regional security.

Soros particularly hates President Vladimir Putin and Russia. He revealed that he is far from a benevolent figure fighting for justice in his March Financial Times op-ed (behind a pay wall) entitled "Europe Must Stand With Turkey Over Putin's War Crimes in Syria."

The op-ed is full of errors of fact and is basically a call for aggression against a Russia that he describes as engaged in bombing schools and hospitals. It starts with, "Since the beginning of its intervention in Syria in September 2015, Russia has not only sought to keep in place its most faithful Arab ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. It has also wanted to regain the regional and global influence that it lost since the fall of the Soviet Union." First of all, Russia did not "intervene" in Syria. It was invited there by the country's legitimate government to provide assistance against various groups, some of which were linked to al Qaeda and the Islamic State, that were seeking to overthrow President al-Assad.

And apart from Soros, few actual experts on Russia would claim that it is seeking to recreate the "influence" of the Soviet Union. Moscow does not have the resources to do so and has evinced no desire to pursue the sort of global agenda that was characteristic of the Soviet state.

There then follows a complete flight into hyperbole with: "Vladimir Putin has sought to use the turmoil in the Middle East to erase international norms and advances in international humanitarian law made since the second world war. In fact, creating the humanitarian disaster that has turned almost 6 million Syrians into refugees has not been a byproduct of the Russian president's strategy in Syria. It has been one of his central goals." Note that none of Soros's assertions are supported by fact.

The Soros op-ed also included a bit of reminiscence, describing how, "In 2014, I urged Europe to wake up to the threat that Russia was posing to its strategic interests." The op-ed reveals Soros as neither conciliatory nor "diplomatic," a clear sign that he picks his enemies based on ideological considerations that also drive his choices on how to frame his ventures. Given all of that, why is it unimaginable that George Soros is engaged in a conspiracy, that he is clandestinely behind at least some of the mayhem of Antifa and Black Lives Matter as well as the flood of illegal immigration that have together perhaps fatally destabilized the United States?

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.

Carlton Meyer , says: Website July 2, 2020 at 1:37 pm GMT

For those unfamiliar with the Soros/Israeli/CIA coup in the Republic of Georgia, here is a short video:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qC-xLCgbThM?feature=oembed

JasonT , says: July 2, 2020 at 1:42 pm GMT

...These, and Soros, are the front men. The real brains are hidden from sight.

A123 , says: July 2, 2020 at 2:50 pm GMT

One would be the role of George Soros and the so-called Open Society Foundations that he controls and funds in the unrest that is sweeping across the United States.

Reg Cæsar , says: July 2, 2020 at 3:22 pm GMT

Instead of fairly distributing the wealth created by globalisation, Soros argued, capitalism's "winners" failed to "compensate the losers", which led to a drastic increase in domestic inequality – and anger.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/jul/06/the-george-soros-philosophy-and-its-fatal-flaw

Sounds like many of the "populists" here.

Trinity , says: July 2, 2020 at 5:09 pm GMT

I know it is just a "conspiracy theory" that people like George Schwartz aka George (((Soros))) are funding these riots, but if this "conspiracy theory" were indeed true, why aren't Soros and his (((cohorts))) at least under investigation for treason and murder charges.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 2, 2020 at 6:35 pm GMT

"Sounds like many of the "populists" here."

I am not a populist. But the contention (s) you are referring to are no really the argument -- not by content.

The argument is that the suppose winners were and continue unfairly leverage the economic system with the help f government to avoid the consequences of their miscalculations, sometimes innocent, often careless and sometimes deliberate machinations.

That is quite a different argument than the winners should share more --

And as much as a capitalist as I am am -- I admit that there are goings on which violate the rules of capitalism as well as common decency.

UncommonGround , says: July 2, 2020 at 8:07 pm GMT

I didn't know that Soros could be so explicit about what he thinks about Putin and Syria and involve himself so concretely with such questions, about which he probably doesn't know very much (in the last times there have been very interesting articles about Syria, for instance, see links below).

Even though, I don't think that he has anything to do with BLM and the protests. Riots and revolts have happened other times without the coordination of people from outside. It happened in 1381 in England. A few years ago it happened in the UK and earlier it happened in the US, (I think when there was a blackout). Now it happened spontaneously in Stuttgart in Germany (apparently).

Why shouldn't people complain about the militarisation of the police which uses brutal methods to arrest people, a police which acts as if they had occupaied a country and had to contain a population of enemies?

The most recent conspiracy was the one to oust Corbyn (the text is relatively short):

The killing of Jeremy Corbyn
Peter Oborne and David Hearst

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/killing-jeremy-corbyn

The former Labour leader was the victim of a carefully planned and brutally executed political assassination

About Syria, an important text by an expert, long:

The Salafist Roots of the Syrian Uprising
by William Van Wagenen

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/the-salafist-roots-of-the-syrian-uprising/

Syria: Old Pretexts, New Sanctions, Still Counterproductive
by Bas Spliet

https://original.antiwar.com/Bas_Spliet/2020/06/18/syria-old-pretexts-new-sanctions-still-counterproductive/

Meena , says: July 3, 2020 at 11:25 pm GMT

" Wall Street Journal reported Friday that following the drone strike on Soleimani last week, Trump told unspecified associates "he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate."
http://www.commindreams.org

From any angle ,this will look like a conspiracy . But talking about it to portray the existential crisis of USA politics ,a science of checks and balances, media responsibility and the mechanism in place to make this sort of events to happen will be labeled as conspiracy theory .

What is this.?
1 Impeachable offense
2 who will raise the issue? Media, Congress, Government agencies and activist judges .
They don't why ?
3 Who will investigate ? Dept of Justice.
Why they don't ?

4 would it be a conspiracy theory had Trump not shared the quid pro quo? Absolutely .

5 who is keeping quiet on the initiation of war illegal war to gain personal favor by Trump and who is asking war on Iran ? Same gaggle of smiley faces – Bolton to Kristol to Cotton to Lindsey to Pelosi to Biden to Sherman Engle , Schumer , Cheney( the cow ) , sage Bush jr, Hillary and same gallery of rogues like NYT BBC CNN FOX MSNBC .

6 is there a possibility of a war initiated by Trump to make last ditch effort to win election? Yes.

Bolton recently and , Deniis Ross have suggested to Obama to get out of bad poll number before ,
Economist Rubiono has suggested before as was shared by zerohedge sometimes back.

7 Why does conspiracy theory keep on returning ? Because the first appearance is never pushed back exposed and vilified by any body .
8 How do one evaluate and understand the fate accompli ? They don't . They shrug and move on as they did after Suleimnai killing and wait for next disavowal of any "conspiracy theory before confidently shrugging off the fait accompli.

9 What do you call them? Zombie human slaving away their lives
to harakiri.

Geowhizz , says: July 4, 2020 at 4:12 am GMT

So Soros broke the pound back in the day. Why did MI6 not kill him?

Thomasina , says: July 4, 2020 at 9:33 am GMT

I've often wondered about Soros. Was he a wealthy man before he "broke the Bank of England"?

I've also wondered how it is possible that someone like Soros would have been allowed to break the Bank of England. Was it just a set-up to provide him with plausible funds in order to make him look legit?

He gets written up as some ideological billionaire who acts in accordance with his conscience, but to me he looks like he's working for the ruling elites and the CIA.

Truly benevolent people (which I'm sure Soros is not) don't go around causing the chaos he does.

Anon [413] Disclaimer , says: July 4, 2020 at 9:48 am GMT

There are many videos about Soros' purported influence on world events but very few books. An interesting one is "Soros rompiendo España" by an internationalist and academic of the Universidad Complutense of Madrid.

It badly needs an editor to make it less boring, but it traces and documents Soros financing and tactics in the case of Cataluña. Basically creating NGOs to mobilize civil society to a pitch, while providing content and tactics. Creating grass roots pressure to change policy and break up one of Europes oldest nation-states. Such a network has the advantage of flexibility, it can ebb and flow as required.

What is different from Europe's 19th Century instability? Well, that one's to ponder. But it seems to me it is:
1) independent of Perfidious Albion or any central government. Unless it's Bilderberg, of course.
2) requires no high level assassinations (king and prime minister of Italy, King and Queen of Serbia, multiple Habsburgs, etc). Orban and Salvini are alive and well. Trump will lose, but continue playing golf.
3) not about the self-determination of oppressed peoples, that is, not about nationhood.

There seem to be non-stop programming exercises to achieve and direct mass activism across the West: immigration into Europe and US, Cataluña protests, green St Greta protest, feminist protests, Covid confinement, BLM. These last four, in the past TWO years. The generational divide cemented during Covid is something to watch, I've seen videos in French and Spanish about the "life lessons" of the pandemic that seed this idea.

The next step in this Ordo ab Chaos stumps me.

UncommonGround , says: July 4, 2020 at 10:19 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz n't Stop Until They Get Their War With Iran

– Op-Ed: The neocons: They're back, and on Iran, they're uncompromising as ever

– The Neoconservative Obsession with Iran

– Is Tehran Back in the Crosshairs of the Neocon Crusade?

– Next Stop, Tehran: The Neoconservative Campaign for War in Iran

About the other theme you ask about, I don't believe that it's possible to investigate it properly, but anyway:

– 5 Israelis Detained for Puzzling Behavior' After WTC Tragedy (Yossi Melman, Haaretz)

– Five Israelis were seen filming as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 .. (the Herald)

Really No Shit , says: July 4, 2020 at 11:08 am GMT

Some say that Soros is a Rothschild agent, just as Wilbur Ross is claimed to be by others, and the Bank of England is most likely the Nathan Rothschild agent, therefore, a question arises: how can an operative of an outfit be the buster of that very outfit? It's like saying a pizza parlor owned by the mafia was cleaned out of pies by one of its very own goons.

[Jul 04, 2020] It's Time to Stop Defending the Status Quo of Foreign Policy Failure by Daniel L. Davis

Notable quotes:
"... These failures have not been merely "policy mistakes" but have had profound consequences for our country, both in terms of blood unnecessarily wasted and trillions of dollars irretrievably lost. The very last thing we should do is defend a failed status quo and subvert new thinking. McMaster does both in his essay. ..."
"... We had won all that was militarily winnable on the ground in Afghanistan by the summer of 2002 and we should have withdrawn. Instead, we have refused to accept reality for eighteen additional years and we have lost thousands of American service members and trillions of American tax dollars to finance permanent failure. ..."
"... our interests are far better served by being an exemplar to the world rather than trying to force it to behave a certain way. ..."
"... The time has come to admit our foreign policy theories of the past two decades have utterly failed in their objective. We have not been made safer because of them and the price continually imposed on our service members is unnecessary and unacceptably high. ..."
Jul 04, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

In February 1991 I fought as a green 2 nd Lieutenant under then-Captain H.R. McMaster, who would go on to win combat fame in 2005 Iraq and as Trump's National Security Advisor. I watched McMaster provide exceptional leadership of our unit prior to war and watched him perform brilliantly under fire during combat. It gives me no pleasure, therefore, to note that his most recent work in Foreign Affairs has to be one of the most flawed analyses I've ever seen.

McMaster's essay, " The Retrenchment Syndrome ," is an attempted take-down of a growing number of experts who argue American foreign policy has become addicted to the employment of military power. I, and other likeminded advocates, argue this military-first foreign policy does not increase America's security, but perversely undercuts it.

We advocate a foreign policy that elevates diplomacy, promotes the maintenance of a powerful military that can defend America globally, and seeks to expand U.S. economic opportunity abroad. This perspective takes the world as it is, soberly assesses America's policy successes and failures of the past decades, and recommends sane policies going forward that have the best chance to achieve outcomes beneficial to our country.

Adopting this new foreign policy mentality, however, requires an honest recognition that our existing approach -- especially since 9/11 -- has at times been catastrophically bad for America. The status quo has to be jettisoned for us to turn failure into success.

These failures have not been merely "policy mistakes" but have had profound consequences for our country, both in terms of blood unnecessarily wasted and trillions of dollars irretrievably lost. The very last thing we should do is defend a failed status quo and subvert new thinking. McMaster does both in his essay.

McMaster grievously mischaracterizes the positions of those who advocate for a sane, rational foreign policy. He tries to pin a pejorative moniker on restraint-oriented viewpoints via the term "retrenchment syndrome."

Advocates for a restrained foreign policy, he says, "subscribe to the romantic view that restraint abroad is almost always an unmitigated good." McMaster claims Obama's 2011 intervention in Libya failed not because it destabilized the country but because Washington didn't "shape Libya's political environment in the wake of Qaddafi's demise." And he claims Trump's desire to withdraw from Afghanistan "will allow the Taliban, al Qaeda, and various other jihadi terrorists to claim victory."

In other words, the only policy option is to keep doing what has manifestly failed for the past two decades. Just do it harder, faster, and deeper.

But the reality of the situation is rather different.

We had won all that was militarily winnable on the ground in Afghanistan by the summer of 2002 and we should have withdrawn. Instead, we have refused to accept reality for eighteen additional years and we have lost thousands of American service members and trillions of American tax dollars to finance permanent failure.

We should never have invaded Iraq in 2003. But once we realized the justification for the war had been wrong, we should have rapidly withdrawn our combat troops and diplomatically helped facilitate the establishment of an Iraqi-led state. Instead, we refused to acknowledge our mistake, fought a pointless eight-year insurgency, and then instead of allowing Iraq to solve its own problems when ISIS arose in 2014, unnecessarily went back to help Baghdad fight its battles.

Likewise, the U.S. continues to fight or support never-ending combat actions in Syria, Libya, Somalia, Niger, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and other lesser-known locations. There is no risk to American national security in any of these locations that engaging in routine and perpetual combat operations will solve.

Lastly, large portions of the American public -- and even greater percentages of service members who have served in forever-wars -- are against the continuation of these wars and do not believe they keep us safer. What would make the country more secure, however, is adopting a realistic foreign policy that recognizes the world as it truly is, acknowledges that the reason we maintain a world-class military is to deter our enemies without having to fight, and recognizing that our interests are far better served by being an exemplar to the world rather than trying to force it to behave a certain way.

The time has come to admit our foreign policy theories of the past two decades have utterly failed in their objective. We have not been made safer because of them and the price continually imposed on our service members is unnecessary and unacceptably high. It is time to abandon the status quo and adopt a new policy that is based on a realistic view of the world, an honest recognition of our genuinely powerful military, and realize that there are better ways to assure our security and prosperity.

Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who retired in 2015 after 21 years, including four combat deployments. Follow him @DanielLDavis1.

[Jul 03, 2020] I don't think we can assume that even now Trump actually has control of the FBI; it is still in hands of Obama faction

Highly recommended!
FBI does have strong levers on Trump. This is the essence of the "Deep State" concept -- intelligence agencies became unhinged and work as a powerful political actors.
Notable quotes:
"... Thank you Mina, yes that or the deep state throwing down the gauntlet. I don't think we can assume that Trump actually has control of the FBI. If he did he would likely have deep sixed the Democrazis through the Awan family spy and blackmail scam. But he didn't. They and Debbie Wasserman Shultz were protected/had dirt on DT. ..."
Jul 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
uncle tungsten , Jul 3 2020 7:08 utc | 107

Mina #101

Maxwell's arrest makes me wonder if it is not about Trump throwing down the gauntlet?

Thank you Mina, yes that or the deep state throwing down the gauntlet. I don't think we can assume that Trump actually has control of the FBI. If he did he would likely have deep sixed the Democrazis through the Awan family spy and blackmail scam. But he didn't. They and Debbie Wasserman Shultz were protected/had dirt on DT.

If the kiddy fiddlers get outed following Ghislaine dropping some of her likely thousands of hours of home movies then that includes Trump and Biden.

In the fetid atmosphere of accusations against pussy grabbers and finger f#ckers and hair sniffers neither could survive. The pack will run rabid.

Is there a woman in the house? Yes, they cried AND she has experience!! Plus the campaign will be televised and it would be a virtual campaign because Covid. No need to rig audience, the polls or the balllot.

[Jul 03, 2020] Podcast- Empire Has No Clothes, Episode 9, Foreign Policy Dissent Is Patriotic by DANIEL LARISON

Bolton is just "yet another MIC puppet", who has complete vacuum in his head as for morality and decency. In other words he is a typical Washington psychopath. Like many sociopaths he is a compulsive liar, undeniable careerist and self-promoter.
Jul 02, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

This week on Empire Has No Clothes, we spoke with Elizabeth Shackelford, a former Foreign Service Officer and author of The Dissent Channel: American Diplomacy in a Dishonest Age . Kelley Vlahos, Matt Purple and I talked about demoralization in the department, the reasons for her resignation, U.S. policy in South Sudan and Africa, and the need for greater accountability in our foreign policy. We also covered John Bolton's new book, his outdated foreign policy views, and whether anything he says can be trusted.

Listen to the episode in the player below, or click the links beneath it to subscribe using your favorite podcast app. If you like what you hear, please give us a rating or review on iTunes or Stitcher, which will really help us climb the rankings, allowing more people to find the show.

[Jul 03, 2020] The Iran Obsession Has Isolated the US

So former tank repairman decided again managed to make a make a mark in world diplomacy :-).
Notable quotes:
"... Mike Pompeo delivered an embarrassing, clownish performance at the U.N. on Tuesday, and his attempt to gain support for an open-ended conventional arms embargo on Iran was rejected the rest of the old P5+1: ..."
"... The Trump administration has abused our major European allies for years in its push to destroy the nuclear deal, and their governments have no patience with any more unilateral U.S. stunts. This is the result of two years of a destructive policy aimed solely at punishing Iran and its people. The administration's open contempt for international law and the interests of its allies has cost the U.S. their cooperation. ..."
"... Underscoring the absurdity of the Trump administration's arms embargo appeal were Pompeo's alarmist warnings that an end to the arms embargo would allow Iran to purchase advanced fighters that it would use to threaten Europe and India: ..."
"... This is a laughably unrealistic scenario. Even if Iran purchased advanced fighters, the last thing it would do is send them off on a suicide mission to bomb Italy or India. This shows how deeply irrational the Iran hawks' fearmongering is. Iran has already demonstrated an ability to launch precise attacks with drones and missiles in its immediate neighborhood, and it developed these capabilities while under the current embargo. ..."
"... The Secretary of State called on the U.N. to reject "extortion diplomacy." The best way to reject extortion diplomacy would be for them to reject the administration's desperate attempt to use America's position at the U.N. to attack international law. ..."
Jul 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Mike Pompeo delivered an embarrassing, clownish performance at the U.N. on Tuesday, and his attempt to gain support for an open-ended conventional arms embargo on Iran was rejected the rest of the old P5+1:

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called on Tuesday for an arms embargo on Iran to be extended indefinitely, but his appeal fell flat at the United Nations Security Council, where Russia and China rejected it outright and close allies of the United States were ambivalent.

The Trump administration is more isolated than ever in its Iran obsession. The ridiculous effort to invoke the so-called "snapback" provision of the JCPOA more than two years after reneging on the agreement met with failure, just as most observers predicted months ago when it was first floated as a possibility. As I said at the time, "The administration's latest destructive ploy won't find any support on the Security Council. There is nothing "intricate" about this idea. It is a crude, heavy-handed attempt to employ the JCPOA's own provisions to destroy it." It was never going to work because all of the other parties to the agreement want nothing to do with the administration's punitive approach, and U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA meant that it forfeited any rights it had when it was still part of the deal.

Opposition from Russia and China was a given, but the striking thing about the scene at the U.N. this week was that major U.S. allies joined them in rebuking the administration's obvious bad faith maneuver:

The pointedly critical tone of the debate saw Germany accusing Washington of violating international law by withdrawing from the nuclear pact, while Berlin aligned itself with China's claim that the United States has no right to reimpose U.N. sanctions on Iran.

The Trump administration has abused our major European allies for years in its push to destroy the nuclear deal, and their governments have no patience with any more unilateral U.S. stunts. This is the result of two years of a destructive policy aimed solely at punishing Iran and its people. The administration's open contempt for international law and the interests of its allies has cost the U.S. their cooperation.

Underscoring the absurdity of the Trump administration's arms embargo appeal were Pompeo's alarmist warnings that an end to the arms embargo would allow Iran to purchase advanced fighters that it would use to threaten Europe and India:

If you fail to act, Iran will be free to purchase Russian-made fighter jets that can strike up to a 3,000 kilometer radius, putting cities like Riyadh, New Delhi, Rome, and Warsaw in Iranian crosshairs.

This is a laughably unrealistic scenario. Even if Iran purchased advanced fighters, the last thing it would do is send them off on a suicide mission to bomb Italy or India. This shows how deeply irrational the Iran hawks' fearmongering is. Iran has already demonstrated an ability to launch precise attacks with drones and missiles in its immediate neighborhood, and it developed these capabilities while under the current embargo.

It has no need for expensive fighters, and it is not at all certain that their government would even be interested in acquiring them. Pompeo's presentation was a weak attempt to exaggerate the potential threat from a state that has very limited power projection, and he found no support because his serial fabrications about Iran have rendered everything he says to be worthless.

The same administration that wants to keep an arms embargo on Iran forever has no problem flooding the region with U.S.-made weapons and providing them to some of the worst governments in the world. It is these client states that are doing the most to destabilize other countries in the region right now. If the U.N. should be putting arms embargoes on any country, it should consider imposing them on Saudi Arabia and the UAE to limit their ability to wreak havoc on Yemen and Libya.

The Secretary of State called on the U.N. to reject "extortion diplomacy." The best way to reject extortion diplomacy would be for them to reject the administration's desperate attempt to use America's position at the U.N. to attack international law.

[Jul 03, 2020] Every American Should Watch Abby Martin's Afghanistan War Exposed- An Imperial Conspiracy

Jun 29, 2020 | www.mintpressnews.com

By MintPress News Desk

T he perpetual occupation of Afghanistan has become so normalized that it mostly serves as background noise to most Americans. It's even jokingly referred to as the "Forever War," accepted as just another constant reality. A soldier dies now and again, a couple of dozen civilians get killed in another bombing. It's never enough to stir the population to pressure Washington enough to stop it. And the endless war drags on.

From George W. Bush to Barack Obama, to Donald Trump, every U.S. president has promised to end the war. But their plans to bring the troops home inevitably require first sending more troops to the country. You can't look at all this rhetoric and reality and not conclude that the United States wants to stay in Afghanistan forever. And there is a reason, despite an unresolvable military quagmire, that the Empire won't let go of Afghanistan.

In this latest "Empire Files" documentary, journalist Abby Martin covers reveals the reality of America's Wars in Afghanistan, from the CIA construct of the 1980s through today's senseless stalemate. MintPress brings you documentary in its entirety, published with permission from filmmaker Abby Martin.

[Jul 03, 2020] FUCKUS banned Russia from the Olympics on a bogus state sponsored steroid scam, no reinstatement on horizon. FUCKUS kicked Russia out of the now G7 and imposed a trade embargo that destroyed a large commercial relationship w/Germany.

Notable quotes:
"... Some countries like Italy (maybe Germany) are warming to Russia a little bit but Russia has a long way to go just to get back to their pre-2014 status with Europe. That is 'tightening their grip?'. I know, this is how propagandists speak. ..."
Jul 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christian J. Chuba , Jul 3 2020 16:13 utc | 162

VK, re: Russia's grip on Europe is gradually tightening from the U.K.'s INDEPENDENT

It's behind a paywall but I read just enough to be curious as to how someone could possibly justify a clickbait title like that.

I suspect that the rest of the article is just going to recap Russia's alleged sins in order to fan hatred but how can someone objectively say that Russia is tightening its grip on Europe?

  1. FUCKUS banned Russia from the Olympics on a bogus state sponsored steroid scam, no reinstatement on horizon.
  2. FUCKUS kicked Russia out of the now G7 and imposed a trade embargo that destroyed a large commercial relationship w/Germany.

What is the 'overwhelming' evidence that the Russians poisoned the Skripal's, Novichok can be made by just about anyone.

Some countries like Italy (maybe Germany) are warming to Russia a little bit but Russia has a long way to go just to get back to their pre-2014 status with Europe. That is 'tightening their grip?'. I know, this is how propagandists speak.

[Jul 03, 2020] Dangerous Game - How the Wreckage of Russiagate Ignited a New Cold War by Kyle Anzalone and Will Porter

Jul 02, 2020 | libertarianinstitute.org

It's been nearly four years since the myth of Trump-Russia collusion made its debut in American politics, generating an endless stream of stories in the corporate press and hundreds of allegations of conspiracy from pundits and officials. But despite netting scores of embarrassing admissions, corrections, editor's notes and retractions in that time, the theory refuses to die.

Over the years, the highly elaborate "Russiagate" narrative has fallen away piece-by-piece. Claims about Donald Trump's various back channels to Moscow -- Carter Page , George Papadopoulos , Michael Flynn , Paul Manafort , Alfa Bank -- have each been thoroughly discredited. House Intelligence Committee transcripts released in May have revealed that nobody who asserted a Russian hack on Democratic computers, including the DNC's own cyber security firm , is able to produce evidence that it happened. In fact, it is now clear the entire investigation into the Trump campaign was without basis .

It was alleged that Moscow manipulated the president with " kompromat " and black mail, sold to the public in a " dossier " compiled by a former British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele. Working through a DC consulting firm , Steele was hired by Democrats to dig up dirt on Trump, gathering a litany of accusations that Steele's own primary source would later dismiss as "hearsay" and "rumor." Though the FBI was aware the dossier was little more than sloppy opposition research, the bureau nonetheless used it to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.

Even the claim that Russia helped Trump from afar, without direct coordination, has fallen flat on its face. The " troll farm " allegedly tapped by the Kremlin to wage a pro-Trump meme war -- the Internet Research Agency -- spent only $46,000 on Facebook ads, or around 0.05 percent of the $81 million budget of the Trump and Clinton campaigns. The vast majority of the IRA's ads had nothing to do with U.S. politics, and more than half of those that did were published after the election, having no impact on voters. The Department of Justice, moreover, has dropped its charges against the IRA's parent company, abandoning a major case resulting from Robert Mueller's special counsel probe.

Though few of its most diehard proponents would ever admit it, after four long years, the foundation of the Trump-Russia narrative has finally given way and its edifice has crumbled. The wreckage left behind will remain for some time to come, however, kicking off a new era of mainstream McCarthyism and setting the stage for the next Cold War.

It Didn't Start With Trump

The importance of Russiagate to U.S. foreign policy cannot be understated, but the road to hostilities with Moscow stretches far beyond the current administration. For thirty years, the United States has exploited its de facto victory in the first Cold War, interfering in Russian elections in the 1990s, aiding oligarchs as they looted the country into poverty, and orchestrating Color Revolutions in former Soviet states. NATO, meanwhile, has been enlarged up to Russia's border, despite American assurances the alliance wouldn't expand " one inch " eastward after the collapse of the USSR.

Unquestionably, from the fall of the Berlin Wall until the day Trump took office, the United States maintained an aggressive policy toward Moscow. But with the USSR wiped off the map and communism defeated for good, a sufficient pretext to rally the American public into another Cold War has been missing in the post-Soviet era. In the same 30-year period, moreover, Washington has pursued one disastrous diversion after another in the Middle East, leaving little space or interest for another round of brinkmanship with the Russians, who were relegated to little more than a talking point. That, however, has changed.

The Crisis They Needed

The Washington foreign policy establishment -- memorably dubbed " the Blob " by one Obama adviser -- was thrown into disarray by Trump's election win in the fall of 2016. In some ways, Trump stood out as the dove during the race, deeming "endless wars" in the Middle East a scam, calling for closer ties with Russia, and even questioning the usefulness of NATO. Sincere or not, Trump's campaign vows shocked the Beltway think tankers, journalists, and politicos whose worldviews (and salaries) rely on the maintenance of empire. Something had to be done.

In the summer of 2016, WikiLeaks published thousands of emails belonging to then-Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, her campaign manager, and the Democratic National Committee. Though damaging to Clinton, the leak became fodder for a powerful new attack on the president-to-be. Trump had worked in league with Moscow to throw the election, the story went, and the embarrassing email trove was stolen in a Russian hack, then passed to WikiLeaks to propel Trump's campaign.

By the time Trump took office, the narrative was in full swing. Pundits and politicians rushed to outdo one another in hysterically denouncing the supposed election-meddling, which was deemed the "political equivalent" of the 9/11 attacks , tantamount to Pearl Harbor , and akin to the Nazis' 1938 Kristallnacht pogrom. In lock-step with the U.S. intelligence community -- which soon issued a pair of reports endorsing the Russian hacking story -- the Blob quickly joined the cause, hoping to short-circuit any tinkering with NATO or rapprochement with Moscow under Trump.

The allegations soon broadened well beyond hacking. Russia had now waged war on American democracy itself, and "sowed discord" with misinformation online, all in direct collusion with the Trump campaign. Talking heads on cable news and former intelligence officials -- some of them playing both roles at once -- weaved a dramatic plot of conspiracy out of countless news reports, clinging to many of the "bombshell" stories long after their key claims were blown up .

A large segment of American society eagerly bought the fiction, refusing to believe that Trump, the game show host, could have defeated Clinton without assistance from a foreign power. For the first time since the fall of the USSR, rank-and-file Democrats and moderate progressives were aligned with some of the most vocal Russia hawks across the aisle, creating space for what many have called a " new Cold War. "

Stress Fractures

Under immense pressure and nonstop allegations, the candidate who shouted "America First" and slammed NATO as " obsolete " quickly adapted himself to the foreign policy consensus on the alliance, one of the first signs the Trump-Russia story was bearing fruit.

Demonstrating the Blob in action, during debate on the Senate floor over Montenegro's bid to join NATO in March 2017, the hawkish John McCain castigated Rand Paul for daring to oppose the measure, riding on anti-Russian sentiments stoked during the election to accuse him of "working for Vladimir Putin." With most lawmakers agreeing the expansion of NATO was needed to "push back" against Russia, the Senate approved the request nearly unanimously and Trump signed it without batting an eye -- perhaps seeing the attacks a veto would bring, even from his own party.

Allowing Montenegro -- a country that illustrates everything wrong with NATO -- to join the alliance may suggest Trump's criticisms were always empty talk, but the establishment's drive to constrain his foreign policy was undoubtedly having an effect. Just a few months later, the administration would put out its National Security Strategy , stressing the need to refocus U.S. military engagements from counter-terrorism in the Middle East to "great power competition" with Russia and China.

On another aspiring NATO member, Ukraine, the president was also hectored into reversing course under pressure from the Blob. During the 2016 race, the corporate press savaged the Trump campaign for working behind the scenes to " water down " the Republican Party platform after it opposed a pledge to arm Ukraine's post-coup government. That stance did not last long.

Though even Obama decided against arming the new government -- which his administration helped to install -- Trump reversed that move in late 2017, handing Kiev hundreds of Javelin anti-tank missiles. In an irony noticed by few , some of the arms went to open neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian military, who were integrated into the country's National Guard after leading street battles with security forces in the Obama-backed coup of 2014. Some of the very same Beltway critics slamming the president as a racist demanded he pass weapons to out-and-out white supremacists.

Ukraine's bid to join NATO has all but stalled under President Volodymyr Zelensky, but the country has nonetheless played an outsized role in American politics both before and after Trump took office. In the wake of Ukraine's 2014 U.S.-sponsored coup, "Russian aggression" became a favorite slogan in the American press, laying the ground for future allegations of election-meddling.

Weaponizing Ukraine

The drive for renewed hostilities with Moscow got underway well before Trump took the Oval Office, nurtured in its early stages under the Obama administration. Using Ukraine's revolution as a springboard, Obama launched a major rhetorical and policy offensive against Russia, casting it in the role of an aggressive , expansionist power.

Protests erupted in Ukraine in late 2013, following President Viktor Yanukovych's refusal to sign an association agreement with the European Union, preferring to keep closer ties with Russia. Demanding a deal with the EU and an end to government corruption, demonstrators -- including the above-mentioned neo-Nazis -- were soon in the streets clashing with security forces. Yanukovych was chased out of the country, and eventually out of power.

Through cut-out organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, the Obama administration poured millions of dollars into the Ukrainian opposition prior to the coup, training, organizing and funding activists. Dubbed the "Euromaidan Revolution," Yanukovych's ouster mirrored similar US-backed color coups before and since, with Uncle Sam riding on the back of legitimate grievances while positioning the most U.S.-friendly figures to take power afterward.

The coup set off serious unrest in Ukraine's Russian-speaking enclaves, the eastern Donbass region and the Crimean Peninsula to the south. In the Donbass, secessionist forces attempted their own revolution, prompting the new government in Kiev to launch a bloody "war on terror" that continues to this day. Though the separatists received some level of support from Moscow, Washington placed sole blame on the Russians for Ukraine's unrest, while the press breathlessly predicted an all-out invasion that never materialized.

In Crimea -- where Moscow has kept its Black Sea Fleet since the late 1700s -- Russia took a more forceful stance, seizing the territory to keep control of its long term naval base. The annexation was accomplished without bloodshed, and a referendum was held weeks later affirming that a large majority of Crimeans supported rejoining Russia, a sentiment western polling firms have since corroborated . Regardless, as in the Donbass, the move was labeled an invasion, eventually triggering a raft of sanctions from the U.S. and the EU (and more recently, from Trump himself ).

The media made no effort to see Russia's perspective on Crimea in the wake of the revolution -- imagining the U.S. response if the roles were reversed, for example -- and all but ignored the preferences of Crimeans. Instead, it spun a black-and-white story of "Russian aggression" in Ukraine. For the Blob, Moscow's actions there put Vladimir Putin on par with Adolf Hitler, driving a flood of frenzied press coverage not seen again until the 2016 election.

Succumbing to Hysteria

While Trump had already begun to cave to the onslaught of Russiagate in the early months of his presidency, a July 2018 meeting with Putin in Helsinki presented an opportunity to reverse course, offering a venue to hash out differences and plan for future cooperation. Trump's previous sit-downs with his Russian counterpart were largely uneventful, but widely portrayed as a meeting between master and puppet. At the Helsinki Summit, however, a meager gesture toward improved relations was met with a new level of hysterics.

Trump's refusal to interrogate Putin on his supposed election-hacking during a summit press conference was taken as irrefutable proof that the two were conspiring together. Former CIA Director John Brennan declared it an act of treason , while CNN gravely contemplated whether Putin's gift to Trump during the meetings -- a World Cup soccer ball -- was really a secret spying transmitter. By this point, Robert Mueller's special counsel probe was in full effect, lending official credibility to the collusion story and further emboldening the claims of conspiracy.

Though the summit did little to strengthen U.S.-Russia ties and Trump made no real effort to do so -- beyond resisting the calls to directly confront Putin -- it brought on some of the most extreme attacks yet, further ratcheting up the cost of rapprochement. The window of opportunity presented in Helsinki, while only cracked to begin with, was now firmly shut, with Trump as reluctant as ever to make good on his original policy platform.

Sanctions!

After taking a beating in Helsinki, the administration allowed tensions with Moscow to soar to new heights, more or less embracing the Blob's favored policies and often even outdoing the Obama government's hawkishness toward Russia in both rhetoric and action.

In March 2018, the poisoning of a former Russian spy living in the United Kingdom was blamed on Moscow in a highly elaborate storyline that ultimately fell apart (sound familiar?), but nonetheless triggered a wave of retaliation from western governments. In the largest diplomatic purge in US history, the Trump administration expelled 60 Russian officials in a period of two days, surpassing Obama's ejection of 35 diplomats in response to the election-meddling allegations.

Along with the purge, starting in spring 2018 and continuing to this day, Washington has unleashed round after round of new sanctions on Russia, including in response to " worldwide malign activity ," to penalize alleged election-meddling , for " destabilizing cyber activities ," retaliation for the UK spy poisoning , more cyber activity , more election-meddling -- the list keeps growing.

Though Trump had called to lift rather than impose penalties on Russia before taking office, worn down by endless negative press coverage and surrounded by a coterie of hawkish advisers, he was brought around on the merits of sanctions before long, and has used them liberally ever since.

Goodbye INF, RIP OST

By October 2018, Trump had largely abandoned any idea of improving the relationship with Russia and, in addition to the barrage of sanctions, began shredding a series of major treaties and arms control agreements. He started with the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which had eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons -- medium-range missiles -- and removed Europe as a theater for nuclear war.

At this point in Trump's tenure, super-hawk John Bolton had assumed the position of national security advisor, encouraging the president's worst instincts and using his newfound influence to convince Trump to ditch the INF treaty. Bolton -- who helped to detonate a number of arms control pacts in previous administrations -- argued that Russia's new short-range missile had violated the treaty. While there remains some dispute over the missile's true range and whether it actually breached the agreement, Washington failed to pursue available dispute mechanisms and ignored Russian offers for talks to resolve the spat.

After the U.S. officially scrapped the agreement, it quickly began testing formerly-banned munitions. Unlike the Russian missiles, which were only said to have a range overstepping the treaty by a few miles, the U.S. began testing nuclear-capable land-based cruise missiles expressly banned under the INF.

Next came the Open Skies Treaty (OST), an idea originally floated by President Eisenhower, but which wouldn't take shape until 1992, when an agreement was struck between NATO and former Warsaw Pact nations. The agreement now has over 30 members and allows each to arrange surveillance flights over other members' territory, an important confidence-building measure in the post-Soviet world.

Trump saw matters differently, however, and turned a minor dispute over Russia's implementation of the pact into a reason to discard it altogether, again egged on by militant advisers. In late May 2020, the president declared his intent to withdraw from the nearly 30-year-old agreement, proposing nothing to replace it.

Quid Pro Quo

With the DOJ's special counsel probe into Trump-Russia collusion coming up short on both smoking-gun evidence and relevant indictments, the president's enemies began searching for new angles of attack. Following a July 2019 phone call between Trump and his newly elected Ukrainian counterpart, they soon found one.

During the call , Trump urged Zelensky to investigate a computer server he believed to be linked to Russiagate, and to look into potential corruption and nepotism on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden, who played an active role in Ukraine following the Obama-backed coup.

Less than two months later, a " whistleblower " -- a CIA officer detailed to the White House, Eric Ciaramella -- came forward with an "urgent concern" that the president had abused his office on the July call. According to his complaint , Trump threatened to withhold U.S. military aid, as well as a face-to-face meeting with Zelensky, should Kiev fail to deliver the goods on Biden, who by that point was a major contender in the 2020 race.

The same players who peddled Russiagate seized on Ciaramella's account to manufacture a whole new scandal: "Ukrainegate." Failing to squeeze an impeachment out of the Mueller probe, the Democrats did just that with the Ukraine call, insisting Trump had committed grave offenses, again conspiring with a foreign leader to meddle in a U.S. election.

At a high point during the impeachment trial, an expert called to testify by the Democrats revived George W. Bush's "fight them over there" maxim to argue for U.S. arms transfers to Ukraine, citing the Russian menace. The effort was doomed from the start, however, with a GOP-controlled Senate never likely to convict and the evidence weak for a "quid pro quo" with Zelensky. Ukrainegate, like Russiagate before it, was a failure in its stated goal, yet both served to mark the administration with claims of foreign collusion and press for more hawkish policies toward Moscow.

The End of New START?

The Obama administration scored a rare diplomatic achievement with Russia in 2010, signing the New START Treaty, a continuation of the original Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty inked in the waning days of the Soviet Union. Like its first iteration, the agreement places a cap on the number of nuclear weapons and warheads deployed by each side. It featured a ten-year sunset clause, but included provisions to continue beyond its initial end date.

With the treaty set to expire in early 2021, it has become an increasingly hot topic throughout Trump's presidency. While Trump sold himself as an expert dealmaker on the campaign trail -- an artist , even -- his negotiation skills have shown lacking when it comes to working out a new deal with the Russians.

The administration has demanded that China be incorporated into any extended version of the treaty, calling on Russia to compel Beijing to the negotiating table and vastly complicating any prospect for a deal. With a nuclear arsenal around one-tenth the size of that of Russia or the U.S., China has refused to join the pact. Washington's intransigence on the issue has put the future of the treaty in limbo and largely left Russia without a negotiating partner.

A second Trump term would spell serious trouble for New START, having already shown willingness to shred the INF and Open Skies agreements. And with the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) already killed under the Bush administration, New START is one of the few remaining constraints on the planet's two largest nuclear arsenals.

Despite pursuing massive escalation with Moscow from 2018 onward, Trump-Russia conspiracy allegations never stopped pouring from newspapers and TV screens. For the Blob -- heavily invested in a narrative as fruitful as it was false -- Trump would forever be "Putin's puppet," regardless of the sanctions imposed, the landmark treaties incinerated or the deluge of warlike rhetoric.

Running for an Arms Race

As the Trump administration leads the country into the next Cold War, a renewed arms race is also in the making. The destruction of key arms control pacts by previous administrations has fed a proliferation powder keg, and the demise of New START could be the spark to set it off.

Following Bush Jr.'s termination of the ABM deal in 2002 -- wrecking a pact which placed limits on Russian and American missile defense systems to maintain the balance of mutually assured destruction -- Russia soon resumed funding for a number of strategic weapons projects, including its hypersonic missile. In his announcement of the new technology in 2018, Putin deemed the move a response to Washington's unilateral withdrawal from ABM, which also saw the U.S. develop new weapons .

Though he inked New START and campaigned on vows to pursue an end to the bomb, President Obama also helped to advance the arms build-up, embarking on a 30-year nuclear modernization project set to cost taxpayers $1.5 trillion. The Trump administration has embraced the initiative with open arms, even adding to it , as Moscow follows suit with upgrades to its own arsenal.

Moreover, Trump has opened a whole new battlefield with the creation of the US Space Force , escalated military deployments, ramped up war games targeting Russia and China and looked to reopen and expand Cold War-era bases.

In May, Trump's top arms control envoy promised to spend Russia and China into oblivion in the event of any future arms race, but one was already well underway. After withdrawing from INF, the administration began churning out previously banned nuclear-capable cruise missiles, while fielding an entire new class of low-yield nuclear weapons. Known as "tactical nukes," the smaller warheads lower the threshold for use, making nuclear conflict more likely. Meanwhile, the White House has also mulled a live bomb test -- America's first since 1992 -- though has apparently shelved the idea for now.

A Runaway Freight Train

As Trump approaches the end of his first term, the two major U.S. political parties have become locked in a permanent cycle of escalation, eternally compelled to prove who's the bigger hawk. The president put up mild resistance during his first months in office, but the relentless drumbeat of Russiagate successfully crushed any chances for improved ties with Moscow.

The Democrats refuse to give up on "Russian aggression" and see virtually no pushback from hawks across the aisle, while intelligence "leaks" continue to flow into the imperial press, fueling a whole new round of election-meddling allegations .

Likewise, Trump's campaign vows to revamp U.S.-Russian relations are long dead. His presidency counts among its accomplishments a pile of new sanctions, dozens of expelled diplomats and the demise of two major arms control treaties. For all his talk of getting along with Putin, Trump has failed to ink a single deal, de-escalate any of the ongoing strife over Syria, Ukraine or Libya, and been unable to arrange one state visit in Moscow or DC.

Nonetheless, Trump's every action is still interpreted through the lens of Russian collusion. After announcing a troop drawdown in Germany on June 5, reducing the U.S. presence by just one-third, the president was met with the now-typical swarm of baseless charges. MSNBC regular and retired general Barry McCaffrey dubbed the move "a gift to Russia," while GOP Rep. Liz Cheney said the meager troop movement placed the "cause of freedom in peril." Top Democrats in the House and Senate introduced bills to stop the withdrawal dead in its tracks, attributing the policy to Trump's "absurd affection for Vladimir Putin, a murderous dictator."

Starting as a dirty campaign trick to explain away the Democrats' election loss and jam up the new president, Russiagate is now a key driving force in the U.S. political establishment that will long outlive the age of Trump. After nearly four years, the bipartisan consensus on the need for Cold War is stronger than ever, and will endure regardless of who takes the Oval Office next.

[Jul 02, 2020] Bill Browder, a Billionaire accused of being a Fraud and Liar by John Ryan

Jul 02, 2020 | www.unz.com

William "Bill" Browder has been a figure of some prominence on the world scene for the past decade. A few months back, Der Spiegel published a major exposé on him and the case of Sergei Magnitsky but the mainstream media completely ignored this report and so aside from Germany few people are aware of Browder's background and the Magnitsky issue which resulted in sanctions on Russia.

Browder had gone to Moscow in 1996 to take advantage of the privatization of state companies by Russian President Boris Yeltsin. Browder founded Hermitage Capital Management, a Moscow investment firm registered in offshore Guernsey in the Channel Islands. For a time, it was the largest foreign investor in Russian securities. Hermitage Capital Management was rated as extremely successful after earning almost 3,000 percent in its operations between 1996 and December 2007.

During the corrupt Yeltsin years, with his business partner's US $25 million, Browder amassed a fortune . Profiting from the large-scale privatizations in Russia from 1996 to 2006 his Hermitage firm eventually grew to $4.5 billion .

When Browder encountered financial difficulties with Russian authorities he portrayed himself as an anti-corruption activist and became the driving force behind the Magnitsky Act, which resulted in economic sanctions aimed at Russian officials. However, an examination of Browder's record in Russia and his testimony in court cases reveals contradictions with his statements to the public and Congress, and raises questions about his motives in attacking corruption in Russia.

Although he has claimed that he was an 'activist shareholder' and campaigned for Russian companies to adopt Western-style governance, it has been reported that he cleverly destabilized companies he was targeting for takeover. Canadian blogger Mark Chapman has revealed that after Browder would buy a minority share in a company he would resort to lawsuits against this company through shell companies he controlled. This would destabilize the company with charges of corruption and insolvency. To prevent its collapse the Russian government would intervene by injecting capital into it, causing its stock market to rise -- with the result that Browder's profits would rise exponentially.

Later, through Browder's Russian-registered subsidiaries, his accountant Magnitsky acquired extra shares in Russian gas companies such as Surgutneftegaz, Rosneft and Gazprom. This procedure enabled Browder's companies to pay the residential tax rate of 5.5% instead of the 35% that foreigners would have to pay.

However, the procedure to bypass the Russian presidential decree that banned foreign companies and citizens from purchasing equities in Gazprom was an illegal act. Because of this and other suspected transgressions, Magnitsky was interrogated in 2006 and later in 2008. Initially he was interviewed as a suspect and then as an accused. He was then arrested and charged by Russian prosecutors with two counts of aggravated tax evasion committed in conspiracy with Bill Browder in respect of Dalnyaya Step and Saturn, two of Browder's shell companies to hold shares that he bought. Unfortunately, in 2009 Magnitsky died in pre-trial detention because of a failure by prison officials to provide prompt medical assistance.

Browder has challenged this account and for years he has maintained that Magnitsky's arrest and death were a targeted act of revenge by Russian authorities against a heroic anti-corruption activist.

It's only recently that Browder's position was challenged by the European Court of Human Rights who in its ruling on August 27, 2019 concluded that Magnitsky's "arrest was not arbitrary, and that it was based on reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence." And as such "The Russians had good reason to arrest Sergei Magnitsky for Hermitage tax evasion."

"The Court observes that the inquiry into alleged tax evasion, resulting in the criminal proceedings against Mr Magnitskiy, started in 2004, long before he complained that prosecuting officials had been involved in fraudulent acts."

Prior to Magnitsky's arrest, because of what Russia considered to be questionable activities, Browder had been refused entry to Russia in 2005. However, he did not take lightly his rebuff by the post-Yeltsin Russian government under Vladimir Putin. As succinctly expressed by Professor Halyna Mokrushyna at the University of Ottawa:

[Browder] began to engage in a worldwide campaign against the Russian authorities, accusing them of corruption and violation of human rights. The death of his accountant and auditor Sergei Magnitsky while in prison became the occasion for Browder to launch an international campaign presenting the death as a ruthless silencing of an anti-corruption whistleblower. But the case of Magnitsky is anything but.

Despite Brower's claims that Magnitsky died as a result of torture and beatings, authentic documents and testimonies show that Magnitsky died because of medical neglect – he was not provided adequate treatment for a gallstone condition. It was negligence typical at that time of prison bureaucracy, not a premeditated killing. Because of the resulting investigation, many high level functionaries in the prison system were fired or demoted.

For the past ten years Browder has maintained that Magnitsky was tortured and murdered by prison guards. Without any verifiable evidence he has asserted that Magnitsky was beaten to death by eight riot guards over 1 hour and 18 minutes. This was never corroborated by anybody, including by autopsy reports. It was even denied by Magnitsky's mother in a video interview.

Nevertheless, on the basis of his questionable beliefs, he has carried on a campaign to discredit and vilify Russia and its government and leaders.

In addition to the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights, Browder's basic underlying beliefs and assumptions are being seriously challenged. Very recently, on May 5, 2020, an American investigative journalist, Lucy Komisar, published an article with the heading Forensic photos of Magnitsky show no marks on torso :

On Fault Lines today I revealed that I have obtained never published forensic photos of the body of Sergei Magnitsky, William Browder's accountant, that show not a mark on his torso. Browder claims he was beaten to death by prison guards. Magnitsky died at 9:30pm Nov 16, 2009, and the photos were taken the next day.

Later in her report she states:

I noted on the broadcast that though the photos and documents are solid, several dozen U.S. media – both allegedly progressive and mainstream -- have refused to publish this information. And if that McCarthyite censorship continues, the result of rampant fear-inducing Russophobia, I will publish it and the evidence on this website.

Despite evidence such as this, till this day Browder maintains that Sergei Magnitsky was beaten to death with rubber batons. It's this narrative that has attracted the attention of the US Congress, members of parliament, diplomats and human rights activists. To further refute his account, a 2011 analysis by the Physicians for Human Rights International Forensics Program of documents provided by Browder found no evidence he was beaten to death.

In his writings, as supposed evidence, Browder provides links to two untranslated Russian documents. They were compiled immediately after Magnitsky died on November 16, 2009. Recent investigative research has revealed that one of these appears to be a forgery. The first document D309 states that shortly before Magnitsky's death: "Handcuffs were used in connection with the threat of committing an act of self-mutilation and suicide, and that the handcuffs were removed after thirty minutes." To further support this, a forensic review states that while in the prison hospital "Magnitsky exhibited behavior diagnosed as "acute psychosis" by Dr. A. V. Gaus at which point the doctor ordered Mr. Magnitsky to be restrained with handcuffs."

The second document D310 is identically worded to D309 except for a change in part of the preceding sentence. The sentence in D309 has the phrase " special means were" is changed in D310 to " a rubber baton was."

As such, while D309 is perfectly coherent, in D310 the reference to a rubber baton makes no sense whatsoever, given the title and text it shares with D309. This and other inconsistences, including signatures on these documents, make it apparent that D310 was copied from D309 and that D310 is a forgery. Furthermore, there is no logical reason for two almost identical reports to have been created, with only a slight difference in one sentence. There is no way of knowing who forged it and when, but this forged document forms a major basis for Browder's claim that Magnitsky was clubbed to death.

The fact that there is no credible evidence to indicate that Magnitsky was subjected to a baton attack, combined with forensic photos of Magnitsky's body shortly after death that show no marks on it, provides evidence that appears to repudiate Browder's decade-long assertions that Magnitsky was viciously murdered while in jail.

With evidence such as this, it repeatedly becomes clear that Browder's narrative contains mistakes and inconsistencies that distort the overall view of the events leading to Magnitsky's death.

Despite Magnitsky's death the case against him continued in Russia and he was found guilty of corruption in a posthumous trial. Actually, the trial's main purpose was to investigate alleged fraud by Bill Browder, but to proceed with this they had to include the accountant Magnitsky as well. The Russian court found both of them guilty of fraud. Afterwards, the case against Magnitsky was closed because of his death.

After Browder was refused entry to Russia in November of 2005, he launched a campaign insisting that his departure from Russia resulted from his anti-corruption activities. However, the real reason for the cancellation of his visa that he never mentions is that in 2003 a Russian provincial court had convicted Browder of evading $40 million in taxes. In addition, his illegal purchases of shares in Gazprom through the use of offshore shell companies were reportedly valued at another $30 million, bringing the total figure of tax evasion to $70 million.

It's after this that the Russian federal government next took up the case and initially went after Magnitsky, the accountant who carried out Browder's schemes.

But back in the USA Browder portrayed himself as the ultimate truth-teller, and embellished his tale by asserting that Sergei Magnitsky was a whistleblowing "tax lawyer," rather than one of Browder's accountants implicated in tax fraud. As his case got more involved, he presented a convoluted explanation that he was not responsible for bogus claims made by his companies. This is indeed an extremely complicated matter and as such only a summary of some of this will be presented.

The essence of the case is that in 2007 three shell companies that had once been owned by Browder were used to claim a $232 million tax refund based on trumped-up financial loses. Browder has stated that the companies were stolen from him, and that in a murky operation organized by a convicted fraudster, they were re-registered in the names of others. There is evidence however that Magnitsky and Browder may have been part of this convoluted scheme.

Browder's main company in Russia was Hermitage Capital Management, and associated with this firm were a large number of shell companies, some in the Russian republic of Kalmykia and some in the British Virgin Islands. A law firm in Moscow, Firestone Duncan, owned by Americans, did the legal work for Browder's Hermitage. Sergei Magnitsky was one of the accountants for Firestone Duncan and was assigned to work for Hermitage.

An accountant colleague of Magnitsky's at Firestone Duncan, Konstantin Ponomarev, was interviewed in 2017 by Lucy Komisar, an investigative journalist, who was doing research on Browder's operations in Russia. In the ensuing report on this , Komisar states:

"According to Ponomarev, the firm – and Magnitsky -- set up an offshore structure that Russian investigators would later say was used for tax evasion and illegal share purchases by Hermitage. . .

the structure helped Browder execute tax-evasion and illegal share purchase schemes.

"He said the holdings were layered to conceal ownership: The companies were "owned" by Cyprus shells Glendora and Kone, which, in turn, were "owned" by an HSBC Private Bank Guernsey Ltd trust. Ponomarev said the real owner was Browder's Hermitage Fund. He said the structure allowed money to move through Cyprus to Guernsey with little or no taxes paid along the way. Profits could get cashed out in Guernsey by investors of the Hermitage Fund and HSBC.

"Ponomarev said that in 1996, the firm developed for Browder 'a strategy of how to buy Gazprom shares in the local market, which was restricted for foreign investors.'"

In the course of their investigation, on June 2, 2007, Russian tax investigators raided the offices of Hermitage and Firestone Duncan. They seized Hermitage company documents, computers and corporate stamps and seals. They were looking for evidence to support Russian charges of tax evasion and illegal purchase of shares of Gazprom.

In a statement to US senators on July 27, 2017, Browder stated that Russian interior ministry officials "seized all the corporate documents connected to the investment holding companies of the funds that I advised. I didn't know the purpose of these raids so I hired the smartest Russian lawyer I knew, a 35-year-old named Sergei Magnitsky. I asked Sergei to investigate the purpose of the raids and try to stop whatever illegal plans these officials had."

Contrary to what Browder claims, Magnitsky had been his accountant for a decade. He had never acted as a lawyer, nor did he have the qualifications to do so. In fact in 2006 when questioned by Russian investigators, Magnitsky said he was an auditor on contract with Firestone Duncan. In Browder's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017 he claimed Magnitsky was his lawyer, but in 2015 in his testimony under oath in the US government's Prevezon case, Browder told a different story, as will now be related.

On Browder's initiative , in December 2012 he presented documents to the New York District Attorney alleging that a Russian company Prevezon had "benefitted from part of the $230 million dollar theft uncovered by Magnitsky and used those funds to buy a number of luxury apartments in Manhattan." In September 2013, the New York District Attorney's office filed money-laundering charges against Prevezon. The company hired high-profile New York-based lawyers to defend themselves against the accusations.

As reported by Der Spiegel , Browder would not voluntarily agree to testify in court so Prevezon's lawyers sent process servers to present him with a subpoena, which he refused to accept and was caught on video literally running away. In March 2015, the judge in the Prevezon case ruled that Browder would have to give testimony as part of pre-trial discovery. Later while in court and under oath and confronted with numerous documents, Browder was totally evasive. Lawyer Mark Cymrot spent six hours examining him, beginning with the following exchange:

Cymrot asked: Was Magnitsky a lawyer or a tax expert?

He was "acting in court representing me," Browder replied.

And he had a law degree in Russia?

"I'm not aware he did."

Did he go to law school?

"No."

How many times have you said Mr. Magnitsky is a lawyer? Fifty? A hundred? Two hundred?

"I don't know."

Have you ever told anybody that he didn't go to law school and didn't have a law degree?

"No."

Critically important, during the court case, the responsible U.S. investigator admitted during questioning that his findings were based exclusively on statements and documents from Browder and his team. Under oath, Browder was unable to explain how he and his people managed to track the flow of money and make the accusation against Prevezon. In his 2012 letter that launched the court case, Browder referred to "corrupt schemes" used by Prevezon, but when questioned under oath he admitted he didn't know of any. In fact, to almost every question put forth by Mark Cymrot, Browder replied that he didn't know or didn't remember.

The case finally ended in May 2017 when the two sides reached a settlement. Denis Katsyv, the company's sole shareholder, on a related matter agreed to pay nearly six million dollars to the US government, but would not have to admit any wrongdoing. Also the settlement contained an explicit mention that neither Katsyv nor his company Prevezon had anything to do with the Magnitsky case. Afterwards, one of Katsyv's, lawyers, Natalia Veselnitskaya, exclaimed: "For the first time, the U.S. recognized that the Russians were in the right!"

A major exposé of the Browder-Russia story is presented in a film that came out in June 2016 The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes by the well-known independent filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov . Reference to this film will be made later but to provide a summary of the Browder tax evasion case some critical information can be obtained from a report by Eric Zuesse , an investigative historian, who managed to get a private viewing of the film by the film's Production Manager.

In the film Nekrasov proceeds to unravel Browder's story, which was designed to conceal his own corporate responsibility for the criminal theft of the money. As Browder's widely accepted story collapses, Magnitsky is revealed not to be a whistleblower but a likely abettor to the fraud who died in prison not from an official assassination but from banal neglect of his medical condition. The film cleverly allows William Browder to self-destruct under the weight of his own lies and the contradictions in his story-telling at various times.

Following the raid by tax officials on the Moscow Hermitage office on June 2, 2007, nothing further on these matters was reported until April 9, 2008 when Ms Rimma Starlova, the figurehead director of the three supposedly stolen Browder shell companies, filed a criminal complaint with the Russian Interior Ministry in Kazan accusing representatives of Browder companies of the theft of state funds, i.e., $232 million in a tax-rebate fraud. Although Hermitage was aware of this report they kept quiet about it because they claimed it as a false accusation against themselves.

On September 23, 2008, there was a news report about a theft of USD 232 million from the Russian state treasury, and the police probe into it. On October 7, 2008, Magnitsky was questioned by tax investigators about the $232 million fraud because he was the accountant for Browder's companies.

The central issue was that during September of 2007 three of Browder's shell companies had changed owners and that afterwards fraud against Russian treasury had been conducted by the new owners of these companies.

According to Magnitsky the way that ownership changed was through powers of attorney. This is a matter that Browder never mentioned. The Nekrasov film shows a document: "Purchase agreement based on this power of attorney, Gasanov represents Glendora Holdings Ltd." Glendora Holdings is another shell company owned by Browder. This shows that Gasanov, the middleman, had the power of attorney connecting the new nominees to the real beneficiaries. However, Gasanov could not be questioned on whose orders he was doing this because shortly afterwards, he mysteriously died. No one proved that it was murder, but if that death was a coincidence, it wasn't the only one.

During September 2007 the three Hermitage shell companies, Rilend, Parfenion and Mahaon, were re-registered by Gasanov to a company called Pluton that was registered in Kazan, and owned by Viktor Markelov, a Russian citizen with a criminal record. Markelov through a series of sham arbitration judgments conducted fake lawsuits that demanded damages for alleged contract violations. Once the damages were paid, in December 2007 the companies filed for tax refunds that came to $232 million. These were taxes that had been paid by these companies in 2006.

On February 5, 2008 the Investigative Committee of the Russian General Prosecutor's Office opened a criminal case to investigate the fraud committed by Markelov and other individuals.

Markelov had hired a Moscow lawyer, Andrey Pavlov, to conduct these complex operations. Afterwards Pavlov was questioned by Russian authorities and revealed what had happened. Markelov was convicted and sentenced to five years for the scam . At his trial Markelov testified that he was not in possession of the $232 million tax refund and that he did not know the identity of the client who would benefit from the refund scheme. And till this day no one knows! However, Russian tax authorities suspect it is William Browder.

At his trial, Markelov testified that one of the people he worked with to secure the fraudulent tax refund was Sergei Leonidovich. Magnitsky's full name was Sergei Leonidovich Magnitsky. Also when questioned by the police, Markelov named Browder's associates Khairetdinov and Kleiner as people involved in the company's re-registration.

So this provides evidence that Magnitsky and Browder's other officials were involved in the re-registration scheme – which Browder later called theft. In his film Nekrasov states that Browder's team had set things up to look as if outsiders -- not Browder's team -- had transferred the assets.

According to Nekrasov's film documentation, Russian courts have established that it was the representatives of the Hermitage investment fund who had themselves voluntarily re-registered the Makhaon, Parfenion and Rilend companies in the name of other individuals, a fact that Mr Browder is seeking to conceal by shifting the blame, without any foundation, onto the law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation.

Indeed there is cause to be skeptical of the Browder narrative, and that the fraud was in fact concocted by Browder and his accountant Magnitsky. A Russian court has supported that alternative narrative, ruling in late December 2013 that Browder had deliberately bankrupted his company and engaged in tax evasion. On the basis of this he was sentenced to nine years prison in absentia.

In the meantime, over all these years, Browder has maintained and convinced the public at large that the $232 million fraud against the Russian treasury had been perpetrated by Magnitsky's interrogators and Russian police. With respect to the "theft" of his three companies (or "vehicles as he refers to them) on September 16, 2008 he stated on his Hermitage website : "The theft of the vehicles was only possible using the vehicles' original corporate documents seized by the Moscow Interior Ministry in its raid on Hermitage's law firm in Moscow on 4 June 2007."

As such, Browder is accusing Russian tax authorities and police for conducting this entire fraudulent operation.

In his film Nekrasov says that the Browder version is: "Yes, the crime took place [$232 million fraud against the public treasury but, according to Browder, actually against Browder's firm], but somebody else did it -- the police did it."

In this convoluted tale, it should be recalled that the fraud against the Russian treasury had first been reported to the police by Rimma Starlova on April 9, 2008. This had been recorded on the Hermitage website. In preparing the material for his film, Nekrasov noted that

"In March 2009, Starlova's report disappeared from Hermitage's website. . . . This is the same time that Magnitsky started to be treated as an analyst . . . who discovered the $232 million fraud. Thus the Magnitsky-the-whistleblower story was born, almost a year after the matter had been reported to the police."

Nekrasov's film also undermines the basis of Browder's case that Magnitsky had been killed by the police because he had accused two police officials, Karpov and Kuznetsov, but this is questionable since documents show Magnitsky had not accused anyone. As Nekrasov states in the film: "The problem is, he [Magnitsky] made no accusations. In that testimony, its record contains no accusations. Mr. Magnitsky did not actually testify against the two officers [Karpov and Kuznetsov]." So this factual evidence should destroy Browder's accusations.

It should be noted Magnitsky's original interview with authorities was as a suspect, not a whistleblower. Also contradicting Browder's claims, Nekrasov notes that Magnitsky does not even mention the names of the police officers in a key statement to authorities.

In his film Nekrasov includes an interview that he had with Browder regarding the issues about Magnitsky. Nekrasov confronts Browder with the core contradictions of his story. Incensed, Browder rises up and threatens the filmmaker:

" Anybody who says that Sergei Magnitsky didn't expose the crime before he was arrested is just trying to whitewash the Russian Government. Are you trying to say that Pavel Karpov is innocent? I'd really be careful about your going out and saying that Magnitsky wasn't a whistleblower. That's not going to do well for your credibility." Browder then walks off in a huff.

Nekrasov claims to be especially struck that the basis of Browder's case -- that Magnitsky had been killed by the police because he had accused two police officials, Karpov and Kuznetsov -- is a lie because there is documentary evidence that Magnitsky had not accused anyone.

Because of Browder's accusations, Nekrasov interviewed Pavel Karpov, the police officer who Browder accused of being involved in Magnitsky's alleged murder, despite the fact that Karpov was not on duty the day Magnitsky died.

Karpov presents Nekrasov with documents that Browder's case was built on. These original documents are actually fundamentally different from the way Browder had described them. This documentary evidence further exposes Browder's story for what it is.

Nekrasov asks Karpov why Browder wants to demonize him. Karpov explains that he had pursued Browder in 2004 for tax evasion, so that seems to be the reason why Browder smears him. And then Karpov says, "Having made billions here, Browder forgot to tell how he did it. So it suits him to pose as a victim. He is wanted here, but Interpol is not looking for him."

Afterwards in 2013, Karpov had tried to sue Browder for libel in a London court, but was not able to on the basis of procedural grounds since he was a resident of Russia and not the UK. However at the conclusion of the case, set out in his Judgment the presiding judge, Justice Simon, made some interesting comments.

"The causal link which one would expect from such a serious charge is wholly lacking; and nothing is said about torture or murder. In my view these are inadequate particulars to justify the charge that the Claimant was a primary or secondary party to Sergei Magnitsky's torture and murder, and that he would continue to commit or 'cause' murder, as pleaded in §60 of the Defence.

The Defendants have not come close to pleading facts which, if proved, would justify the sting of the libel."

In other words – in plain English – in the judge's view, Karpov was not in any sense party to Magnitsky's death, and Browder's claim that he was is not valid.

On the basis of the evidence that has been presented, it is undeniable that Browder's case appears to be a total misrepresentation, not only of Magnitsky's statements, but of just about everything else that's important in the case .

On a separate matter, on April 15, 2015 in a New York court case involving the US government and a Russian company, Previzon Holdings, Bill Browder had been ordered by a judge to give a deposition to Prevezon's lawyers.

Throughout this deposition, Browder (now under oath) contradicted virtually every aspect of his Magnitsky narrative and stated "I don't recall" when pressed about key portions of his narrative that he had previously repeated unabashedly in his testimonies to Congress and interviews with Western media. Browder "remembered nothing" and could not even deny asking Magnitsky to take responsibility for his (Browder's) crimes.

As a further example of Browder's dishonesty, in one of his publications, he shows a photo of an alleged employee of Browder's law firm, Firestone Duncan, named "Victor Poryugin" with vicious facial wounds from allegedly being tortured and beaten by police. However, the person shown was never with Browder's firm. Instead, this is a photo of "an American human rights campaigner beaten up during a street protest in 1961." It was Jim Zwerg, civil-rights demonstrator, during the 1960s, in the American South. Nekrasov was appalled and found it almost unimaginable that Browder would switch photos like that to demonize Russia and its police.

Browder was arrested by the Spanish police in June 2018. Even though Russia has on six occasions requested Browder's arrest through Interpol for tax fraud, the Spanish national police determined that Browder had been detained in error because the international warrant was no longer valid and released him.

A further matter that reflects on his character, William Browder, the American-born co-founder of Hermitage Capital Management is now a British citizen. The US taxes offshore earnings, but the UK does not. Highly likely because of this, in 1998 he gave up his American citizenship and became a British citizen and thereby has avoided paying US taxes on foreign investments. Nevertheless, he still has his family home in Princeton, NJ and also owns a $11 million dollar vacation home in Aspen, Colorado.

To put this in political context, Browder's narrative served a strong geopolitical purpose to demonize Russia at the dawn of the New Cold War. As such, Browder played a major role in this. In fact, the late celebrated American journalist Robert Parry thought that Browder single-handedly deserves much of the credit for the new Cold War.

Browder's campaign was so effective that in December 2012 he exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia, and as a result the US Congress passed a bipartisan bill, the Magnitsky Act, which was then signed by President Obama. U.S. Senators Ben Cardin and John McCain were instrumental in pushing through the Magnitsky Act, based on Browder's presentations.

However, key parts of the argument that passed into law in this act have been shown to be based on fraud and fabrication of 'evidence.' This bill blacklisted Russian officials who were accused of being involved in human-rights abuses.

In her analysis of the Magnitsky Act, Lucy Komisar, an investigative journalist, reveals a little known fact :

"A problem with the Magnitsky Act is that there is no due process. The targets are not told the evidence against them, they cannot challenge accusations or evidence in a court of law in order to get off the list. This "human rights law" violates the rule of law. There is an International Court with judges and lawyers to deal with human rights violators, but the US has not ratified its jurisdiction. Because it does not want to be subject to the rules it applies to others."

In 2017, Congress passed the Global Magnitsky Act, which enables the U.S. to impose sanctions against Russia for human rights violations worldwide.

In a move that history will show to be ill-advised, on October 18, 2017 Canada's Parliament and Senate unanimously approved Bill 226, a 'Magnitsky Act.' It mimics the US counterpart and targets Russia for further economic sanctions. Russia immediately denounced Canada's actions as being counter-productive, pointless and reprehensible. Actually an act of this type had been opposed by Stéphane Dion while he was Canada's minister of foreign affairs because he viewed it as a needless provocation against Russia. Dion also stated that adoption of a 'Magnitsky Act' would hurt the interests of Canadian businesses dealing with Russia and would thwart Canada's attempt's to normalize relations with Russia. However, Dion was replaced by Chrystia Freeland who immediately pushed this through. This is not surprising considering her well-documented Nazi family background and who is persona non grata in Russia.

A version of the Magnitsky Act was enacted in the UK and the Baltic republics in 1917.

In early 2020 a proposal to enact a version of the Magnitsky Act was presented to the Australian parliament and it is still under consideration. There has been considerable opposition to it including a detailed report by their Citizens Party, which exposes the full extent of Browder's fraud and chicanery.

The investigation into Browder's business activities in Russia is still an ongoing endeavour. On October 24, 2017 the

Russian Prosecutor General , Yuri Chaika, requested the US Attorney General Jeff Sessions to launch a probe into alleged tax evasion by Bill Browder, who in 2013 had already been sentenced in absentia to 9 years in prison in Russia for a similar crime.

Browder at that time was still being tried in Russia for suspected large-scale money laundering, also in absentia. Chaika added that Russian law enforcement possesses information that over $1 billion was illegally transferred from the country into structures connected with Bill Browder.

The Prosecutor General also asked Sessions to reconsider the Magnitsky Act. As he put it,

" from our standpoint, the act was adopted for no actual reason, while it was lobbied by people who had committed crimes in Russia. In our view, there are grounds to claim that this law lacks real foundation and that its passing was prompted by criminals' actions."

It's not known if Sessions ever responded to the Russian Prosecutor General. In any event, President Trump fired Attorney General Jeff Sessions on November 7, 2018. As such it's evident that Russia's concerns about Browder's dishonest activities are stymied.

Extensive reference has already been made to the film that came out in June 2016 The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes by the independent filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov . When Nekrasov started the film he had fully believed Browder's story but as he delved into what really happened, to his surprise, he discovered that the case documents and other incontrovertible facts revealed Browder to be a fraud and a liar. The ensuing film presents a powerful deconstruction of the Magnitsky myth, but because of Browder's political connections and threats of lawsuits, the film has been blacklisted in the entire "free world." So much for the "free world's" freedom of the press and media. This film is not available on YouTube.

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/oJsWUlkjN6Gf/

The documentary was set for a premiere at the European Parliament in Brussels in April 2016, but at the last moment – faced with Browder's legal threats – the parliamentarians cancelled the showing.

There were hopes to show the documentary to members of Congress but the offer was rebuffed. Despite the frantic attempts by Browder's lawyers to block this documentary film from being shown anywhere, Washington's Newseum, to its credit, had a one-time showing on June 13, 2016, including a question-and-answer session with Andrei Nekrasov, moderated by journalist Seymour Hersh. Except for that audience, the public of the United States and Europe has been essentially shielded from the documentary's discoveries, all the better for the Magnitsky myth to retain its power as a seminal propaganda moment of the New Cold War.

Nekrasov's powerful deconstruction of the Magnitsky myth – and the film's subsequent blacklisting throughout the "free world" – recall other instances in which the West's propaganda lines don't stand up to scrutiny, so censorship and ad hominem attacks become the weapons of choice to defend " perception management ."

Other than the New York Times that had a lukewarm review , the mainstream media condemned the film and its showing. As such, with the exception of that one audience, the public in the USA, Canada and Europe has been shielded from the documentary's discoveries. The censorship of this film has made it a good example of how political and legal pressure can effectively black out what we used to call "the other side of the story."

Andrei Nekrasov is still prepared to go to court to defend the findings of his film, but Bill Browder has refused to do this and simply keeps maligning the film and Mr. Nekrasov.

Recent Developments

Although for almost the past ten years Browder's self-serving story had been accepted almost worldwide and served to help vilify Russia, in the past few months there has been an awakening to the true state of affairs about Browder.

The first such article "The Case of Sergei Magnitsky: Questions Cloud Story Behind U.S. Sanctions" written by Benjamin Bidder, a German journalist, appeared on November 26, 2019 in Der Spiegel. At the outset Bidder states:

"Ten years after his death, inconsistencies in Magnitsky's story suggest he may not have been the hero many people -- and Western governments -- believed him to be. Did the perfidious conspiracy to murder Magnitsky ever really take place? Or is Browder a charlatan whose story the West was too eager to believe? The certainty surrounding the Magnitsky affair becomes muddled in the documents, particularly the clear division between good and evil. The Russian authorities' take is questionable, but so is everyone else's -- including Bill Browder's.

But with the Magnitsky sanctions, it could be that the activist Browder used a noble cause to manipulate Western governments."

In summation, the article raises serious questions about many aspects of Browder's account. It concluded that his narrative was riddled with lies and said Western nations have fallen for a "convenient" story made up by a "fraudster. "

The report provoked Browder's fury, and he swiftly filed a complaint against Der Spiegel with the German Press Council as well as a complaint to the editor of Der Spiegel .

On December 17, 2019 Der Spiegel responded : " Why DER SPIEGEL Stands Behind Its Magnitsky Reporting." In a lengthy detailed response the journal rejects all aspects of Browder's complaint. They point out the inconsistencies in Browder's version of events and demonstrate that he is unable to present sufficient proof for his claims. They state: We believe his complaint has no basis and would like to review why we have considerable doubts about Browder's story and why we felt it necessary to present those doubts publicly."

Their report is highly enlightening and will have long-term consequences. It is one of the best refutations of Browder's falsified accounts that led to the Magnitsky Act. It exposes Browder as a fraud and his Magnitsky story as a fake. Despite all this, this exposé was ignored in the mainstream media so most people are unaware of these revelations. A good review of it is presented by Lucy Komisar in her article The Der Spiegel exposé of Bill Browder, December 6, 2019.

The German Press Council rejected Browder's complaint against Der Spiegel in January 2020 but Browder did not disclose this so it became known only in early May. Lucy Komisar reported this on May 12 and the main points of the Council's rejection are presented in her account. Browder had complained that the article had serious factual errors. The Press Council stated that Browder's position lacks proof and there could be no objection to Der Spiegel's examination of events leading to Magnitsky's death. All other Browder objections were rejected as well. In summation the Council stated: "Overall, we could not find a violation of journalistic principles."

But the action of the press council has not been reported in the Canadian, U.S. or UK media. Nor was the November Der Spiegel report.

The German Press Council ruling follows a December 2019 Danish Press Board ruling against another Browder complaint over an article by a Danish financial news outlet, Finans.dk, on his tax evasion and invented Magnitsky story. Significantly, both the Danish and German cases involve mainstream media, which usually toe the US-UK-NATO strategic line against Russia, which Browder's story serves. And these press complaint rulings follow a September 2019 European Court of Human Rights ruling that there was credible evidence that Magnitsky and Browder were engaged in a conspiracy to commit tax fraud and that Magnitsky was rightfully charged.

In summation, for ten years or more, no one in the West ever seriously challenged Bill Browder's account of what happened to his "lawyer" Sergei Magnitsky and his stories of corruption and malfeasance in Russia. This is what allowed him to get such influence that the Magnitsky Act was passed, despite Russia's attempts to clarify matters.

But when pressure was exerted on Germany to install a Magnitsky Act, one of their most influential journals Der Spiegel published an investigative bombshell picking apart Browder's story about his auditor Sergei Magnitsky's death. Browder immediately lashed out at Der Spiegel , accusing it of "misrepresenting the facts." However, his outraged objections backfired and resulted in a further even more damaging Der Spiegel article and a rebuke from the German Press Council.

At long last, thanks to Der Spiegel , its investigative reports have effectively rejected and discredited Browder's claim that Magnitsky was a courageous whistleblower who exposed corruption in Russia and was mercilessly killed by authorities out of revenge.

Despite this important and significant course of events, because of its imbedded Russophobia, the mainstream media have completely ignored the Der Spiegel exposé and almost nowhere has this been reported. To some extent this is because Browder has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. Hence aside from people in Germany, this has been a non-event and the Browder hoax still prevails. Given this, it is important for us to publicize this revelation as best we can.

John Ryan, Ph.D. is a Retired Professor of Geography and Senior Scholar, University of Winnipeg The Untouchable Mr. Browder? The Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime. Israel Shamir Is Bill Browder the Most Dangerous Man in the World? The darling of the war party needs to answer some questions Philip Giraldi

Vuki , says: Show Comment July 1, 2020 at 10:44 pm GMT

John, great article but we know that what you call "large-scale privatizations in Russia " was a large scale robbery. Even Magnitsky's mother stated that Browder is a fraud. Mr. Nekrasov whose film has been banned in many countries due to Browder's legal challenges has a reputation as a Putin critic -- After interviewing Mr. Browder in 2010 Nekrasov says he set out to make a "Magnitsky the hero" film. But as filming proceeded he "began to have doubts". More accurate would be that he smelled a rat. John, I have read many of your articles you never disappoint with your research and evidence.
Neo-Socratic , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 5:26 am GMT
Outstanding article sir. I remember when Browder popped up in the news a couple of years ago and made TV appearances on all three big networks in the same day. I was astonished that this lowlife wielded such influence in America.

Total and absolute corruption just like Weimer.

TheTrumanShow , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 5:49 am GMT
" smelled a rat "

Indeed – and very likely more than one! It should be obvious that the ease with which Browder (a complete nonentity) was able to get away with what he got away with in Russia and remain a virtually untouchable, protected free man to this day, in spite of the very significant evidence against him, would very much seem to indicate that he, much like Paul Bremer later in Iraq, was a tool of higher powers.

No Friend Of The Devil , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 6:53 am GMT
Excellent article. There is a misperception that these pathological liars are believed, since their critics are silenced. It has been my experience that that is not the case. The pathological liars are not believed. They just keep lying, sabotaging, fining, legal system stalking, shouting down their oppenents, black listing those who doubt or know that they are lying as conspiracy theorists. I've been witnessing this for far to long. It is obviously not limited to the Magnitsky Act. This country is really nothing more than a sick joke at this point. These individuals do not behave like people. They behave like mercury poisoned monsters. Maybe they are. There is no logical excuse for this insanity. However, if they were mercury poisoned monsters, they would not all always have the same insane delusions. They are extremely corrupt sadistic terrorist criminal psychopaths that have destroyed America and the rest of the world too.

They are not The Resistance, they are The Persistence! Something has to be done about them. Freedom of the press does not give people the freedom to deliberately lie. You may doubt that, however, slander, libel, and defamation of charcter suits will prove you to be wrong, in addition to providing false information that endangers human life and national security, in the case of a non person like covid that is being used to deprive people of every liberty and rights that exists, including life. They are terrorists. They cannot claim to be news journalists or investigative reporters if they simply say whatever their advertisers or the government tells them to say. If they are unable to get to the bottom of the story, when so many in the alternative media are, then they are either unqualified to do their jobs, or are simply full of shit.

I really believe that the primary intention of covid and the response to it is to get people to voluntarily give up cell phones, particularly since 5-G is so hazardous. That way, the industries will never have to admit any wrong doing about the health hazards related to cell phones and Wi-Fi.That
is what I believe. Also, you can be damn sure that the government and corporations do not like the fact that they can be embarrassed by people that they cannot prevent from embarrassing them without being accused of human rights abuses like vault7 technology.

"Did they expect us to treat them with any respect?!" – Pink Floyd Fletcher Memorial Home For Incurable Tyants

Knowing them, they probably did!

Anon [268] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 7:23 am GMT
@Vuki I had at one time a copy of a book titled "The murder of Bill Browder" by an Eastern European journalist which I have, unfortunately, misplaced. As well as being an exposè of the nefarious Mr Browder it also exposes far more serious wrongdoing against him. This book has vanished from the Google search engine (I wonder why?) so if anyone can tell me where to get a copy i would really value it
FlintWheel4 , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 7:41 am GMT
An aptly titled must read:

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/harvard-boys-do-russia/

While most American's were distracted by the emerging World Wide Web, our elite were raping Russia. I'll say it again, America's "elite" raped Russia. In internet time twenty five years past puts you in prehistoric times. This is critical history that most of us missed, or more accurately wasn't available -- to the majority of us.

This was the Clinton era -- with just that you know this story can't be good. With Slick Willie's taste for skanks in a period where there is a story of beautiful impoverished young Russian women (teens likely) forming a line for one of our "elite" who was peeling off Benjamins for blowjobs in a club frequented by their foreign "advisors." Yep, I'm sure this was of no interest to William Jefferson Blythe III.

Harvard University was given a significant role in this "helping" of Russia (pardon the pun), due to the prestige of this institution, long-gone and unbeknownst to Russian elite, but hey they weren't "connected" yet. Geez, sorry about your luck. The Harvard you got was the Harvard we've been getting also, a race privileged hot bed for educating global "rapists" (or was that Brandeis University I'm thinking of?). Six of one

William Browder is a highly educated Jew (not certain about either) who's grandfather was Earl Browder, the former General Secretary of the CPUSA (that's the "Communist Party of the United States of America" for those of you who didn't know we had one). Bill Browder crowed about the irony in his grandfather being an activist for communism here in the U.S., while HE was an activist for capitalism in Russia! No, he was doing to Russia what Jews did to Russia when they hijacked the real Russian's revolution -- fucking them.

Billy Browder's book, "Red Notice," seems at first heartfelt story from a genuine American do-gooder. Oops! I missed the "A true story " tip-off. It's a self engrandizing fairy tale of a rapist's plea of innocence because "she didn't say NO."

There is MUCH more to this most interesting, world impacting historical event, that I believe is the most understated and least understood of the twentieth century, but that said, who fucked up? Certainly Yeltsin with his alcohol addled brain (likely rooted for by Russian Jews, who are the MOST notorious criminals world-wide) in trusting and believing America would help Russia! More significantly I feel America did, big-time, for acting so damn un-American. Unfortunately the America I'm dreaming of is as long-gone as Harvard and now, like Harvard has a Zionist occupied governance (if you didn't know what "ZOG" stood for). Come to think of it, we're acting much like Israel. God save America!

I can tell you one person who did not, Vladimir Ilyich Putin. Yeltsin threw Russia's doors open to the west and Putin slammed them shut. You can quibble about how he got and keeps his office, or how he enriched himself through the process, but he had a job to do and he did it well -- he saved Russia from what the west was going to continue doing to it. You may not agree with his ideology, but he is the most formidable leader the world has. I pray he leaves Russia and Russians in a better place than we're headed.

So, here we are today, where Trump is currently in the position to decide whether Russia should be invited to the next G-whatever summit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/us/politics/trump-g7-russia.html

I say we're damn lucky it isn't Putin deciding whether to include Trump and the U.S., as some day it very well may be.

P.S. This is a rant of mine burning a long time for a window. Thank you John Ryan. Thank you Billy Browder. Most of all, Thank YOU Mr. Unz!

UNZ has provided a platform for authors, journalists and "knowers" from all over the world. All converging on the same theme -- there is a "they" and there is a plan. This seeming runaway train has awakened plain folks with uncommon sense and giants of intellect alike. Kudos, Ron Unz.

GMC , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 8:48 am GMT
" The western Governments are easily moved or manipulated" and have been Gang Banged – time and time again by the corrupt mafia corporations, Zionists inc., and a dozen other international gangs that are in charge of things – today. Not to mention the corrupt, treasonist nationals that work for the Western Governments. Browder's Hermitage scam just shows how easily the US Gov and others are bought and paid for – that's why the true Magnitsky lie , has to be covered up , from the public. PS – notice all the tax money Browder skimmed off the US – very visible to anyone that can smell a Rat.
jsigur , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 9:24 am GMT
I became aware of the Browder case when known controlled asset, Brandon Martinez, used his claims as a refutation of Putin which he seemed unbelievably obsessed about.
As I perused you-tube for videos on Browder, I saw that he was welcomed into all approved western media to make his case with the questioners rarely going into the material to dispute his claims. I determined at that time that Browder was part of a deep state campaign to demonize Russia under Putin leadership.
It surprises me not to hear no MSM News organization will print these latest findings since in 2012 I realized the free world and press are anything but free and lie as much or more than the most demonized communist outlets.
Not mentioned in the article that I recall is the fact that Browder's dad was the head of the Communist party in the USA before and during WWII which should be enough by itself for a legitimate news outlet to scrutinize with great vigor any claims made by the man but then we know WWII was really a war against any country willing to exercise goyim rule independent of Jewish advisors and that the US was on the side of Jewish power in that war as much as all the other wars it has engaged in.
(Its interesting that my spell check keeps telling me that there is no such word as "goyem")
Parsnipitous , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 10:09 am GMT
"But when pressure was exerted on Germany to install a Magnitsky Act, one of their most influential journals "

Der Spiegel is known as a craven Atlanticist rag. Somebody high up – possibly as a snub to the Trump admin – must have provided ass cover for it to be upheld.

Chet Roman , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 11:40 am GMT
@Anon https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKillingOfWilliamBrowder_PrintLayout_6x9-1.pdf
Saggy , says: Website Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 12:27 pm GMT
@Vuki You can see the film here


https://www.bitchute.com/embed/oJsWUlkjN6Gf/

That Browder is a crook is not surprising, the revelation is the extent to which he is supported by the establishment.

annamaria , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 12:52 pm GMT
Bill Browder has been heavily supported by Ben Cardin, a prominent zionist in the US Congress.

Browder is a mega thief (he was also involved in several deaths-on-order) who owes everything to Cardin and other zionists from the Mega Group like Lex Wexner and similar criminals:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Cardin
https://www.mintpressnews.com/mega-group-maxwells-mossad-spy-story-jeffrey-epstein-scandal/261172/
https://www.globalresearch.ca/bill-browder-escapes-again/5642767

It is the same old story of subversion of the state by the moneyed and powerful Israel-firsters.

vot tak , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 2:39 pm GMT
Useful summary of browder's scam. The man managered to wield a great amount of influence in american/uk media and government, yet is only a minor player by western oligarch standards. For that he must have substantial backing. By whom?

Well he definitely is closely defended by these sources:

British Jewish businessman who challenged Putin is put on Interpol wanted list

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/british-jewish-businessman-who-challenged-putin-is-put-on-interpol-wanted-list-1.446467

Be careful of Putin, he is a true enemy of Jews

https://www.thejc.com/culture/books/be-careful-of-putin-he-is-a-true-enemy-of-jews-1.61745

Who has the power to control media and western governments to such a tight degree?

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 3:18 pm GMT
Bill Browder is a thief, a typical representative of a flock of Western vultures that landed in 1990s Russia to steal state assets. When his thievery was curbed by Putin, he got angry and vengeful, like a scorned lover. He manufactured and spread lies to whip up an anti-Putin campaign in the West. His "narrative" was eagerly supported by the neocons and other scum, as it was in line with their "narrative". Naturally, the first things about Browder any honest investigator or journalist would unearth were lies and fraud. Just as naturally, the scum and scum-controlled Western MSM keep spreading lies supporting their "narrative", and ignoring numerous facts that contradict it.
Alfred , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 3:31 pm GMT
There is an interesting connection between Bill Bowder, Robert Maxwell, Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and others. They are all members of "CLUB"

There are many more revealing articles on Martin Armstrong's blog. Browder is one of the biggest scumbags to ever walk on this earth. He is trying to start a war against Russia – because they took away some of the things he had stolen. An absolute arsehole.

Ghislaine Maxwell Arrested – Clinton's & Epstein's Lover | Armstrong Economics

Really No Shit , says: Show Comment July 2, 2020 at 3:55 pm GMT
Ben Cardin must feel like a schmuck given Ben Bidder's exposé in the Der Spiegel but having suborned the late drama queen Johnny McCain in supporting him in his efforts to protect a fellow tribesman, the noodge won't make any effort to rescind the illicit bill now that's the power of corruption!

[Jul 01, 2020] Three Glaring Problems with the Russian Taliban Bounty Story by Barbara Boland

Highly recommended!
This is an attempt to move Trump in the direction of more harsher politics toward Russia. So not Bolton's but Obama ears are protruding above this dirty provocation.
Notable quotes:
"... According to the anonymous sources that spoke with the paper's reporters, the White House and President Trump were briefed on a range of potential responses to Moscow's provocations, including sanctions, but the White House had authorized no further action. ..."
"... Bolton is one of the only sources named in the New York Times article. Currently on a book tour, Bolton has said that he witnessed foreign policy malfeasance by Trump that dwarfs the Ukraine scandal that was the subject of the House impeachment hearings. But Bolton's credibility has been called into question since he declined to appear before the House committee. ..."
"... "Who can forget how 'successful' interrogators can be in getting desired answers?" writes Ray McGovern, who served as a CIA analyst for 27 years. Under the CIA's "enhanced interrogation techniques," Khalid Sheik Mohammed famously made at least 31 confessions, many of which were completely false. ..."
"... This story is "WMD [all over] again," said McGovern, who in the 1980s chaired National Intelligence Estimates and prepared the President's Daily Brief. He believes the stories seek to preempt DOJ findings on the origins of the Russiagate probe. ..."
"... The bungled media response and resulting negative press could also lead Trump to contemplate harsher steps towards Russia in order to prove that he is "tough," which may have motivated the leakers. It's certainly a policy goal with which Bolton, one of the only named sources in the New York Times piece, wholeheartedly approves. ..."
"... Not only did CIA et al.'s leak get even with Trump for years of insults and ignoring their reports (Trump is politically wounded by this story), but it also achieved their primary objective of keeping Putin out of the G7 and muzzling Trump's threats to withdraw from NATO because Russia is our friend (well his, anyway). ..."
"... Point 4: the whole point of the Talibans is to fight to the death whichever country tries to control and invade Afghanistan. They didn't need the Russians to tell them to fight the US Army, did they? ..."
"... Point 5: Russia tried to organise a mediation process between the Afghan government and the Talibans already in 2018 - so why would they be at the same time trying to fuel the conflict? A stable Afghanistan is more convenient to them, given the geographical position of the country. ..."
"... As much as I love to see everyone pile on trump, this is another example of a really awful policy having bad outcomes. If Bush, Obama, trump, or anyone at the pentagon gave a crap about the troops, they wouldn't have kept them in Afghanistan and lied about the fact they were losing the whole time. ..."
"... the idea is stupid. Russia doesn't need to do anything to motivate Afghans to want to boot the invaders out of their country, and would want to attract negative attention in doing so. ..."
"... Contrast with the CIA motivations for this absurd narrative. Chuck Schumer famously commented that the intelligence agencies had ways of getting back at you, and it looks like you took the bait, hook, line and sinker. ..."
"... And a fourth CIA goal: it undermines Trump's relationship with the military. ..."
"... Having failed in its Russia "collusion" and "Russia stole the election" campaigns to oust Trump, this is just the latest effort by the Deep State and mass media to use unhinged Russophobia to try to boost Biden and damage Trump. ..."
"... The contemporary left hate Russia , because Russia is carving out it own sphere of influence and keeping the Americans out, because it saved Assad from the western backed sunni head choppers (that the left cheered on, as they killed native Orthodox, and Catholic Christians). The Contempary left hate Russia because it cracks down on LGBT propaganda, banned porn hub, and return property to the Church , which the leftist Bolsheviks stole, the Contempaty left hate Russia because it cracked down on it western backed oligarchs who plundered Russia in the 90's. ..."
Jul 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Bombshell report published by The New York Times Friday alleges that Russia paid dollar bounties to the Taliban in Afghanistan to kill U.S troops. Obscured by an extremely bungled White House press response, there are at least three serious flaws with the reporting.

The article alleges that GRU, a top-secret unit of Russian military intelligence, offered the bounty in payment for every U.S. soldier killed in Afghanistan, and that at least one member of the U.S. military was alleged to have been killed in exchange for the bounties. According to the paper, U.S. intelligence concluded months ago that the Russian unit involved in the bounties was also linked to poisonings, assassination attempts and other covert operations in Europe. The Times reports that United States intelligence officers and Special Operations forces in Afghanistan came to this conclusion about Russian bounties some time in 2019.

According to the anonymous sources that spoke with the paper's reporters, the White House and President Trump were briefed on a range of potential responses to Moscow's provocations, including sanctions, but the White House had authorized no further action.

Immediately after the news broke Friday, the Trump administration denied the report -- or rather, they denied that the President was briefed, depending on which of the frenetic, contradictory White House responses you read.

Traditionally, the President of the United States receives unconfirmed, and sometimes even raw intelligence, in the President's Daily Brief, or PDB. Trump notoriously does not read his PDB, according to reports.

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said in a statement Saturday night that neither Trump nor Vice President Pence "were ever briefed on any intelligence alleged by the New York Times in its reporting yesterday."

On Sunday night, Trump tweeted that not only was he not told about the alleged intelligence, but that it was not credible."Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible, and therefore did not report it to me or @VP" Pence, Trump wrote Sunday night on Twitter.

Ousted National Security Advisor John Bolton said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday that Trump was probably claiming ignorance in order to justify his administration's lack of response.

"He can disown everything if nobody ever told him about it," said Bolton.

Bolton is one of the only sources named in the New York Times article. Currently on a book tour, Bolton has said that he witnessed foreign policy malfeasance by Trump that dwarfs the Ukraine scandal that was the subject of the House impeachment hearings. But Bolton's credibility has been called into question since he declined to appear before the House committee.

The explanations for what exactly happened, and who was briefed, continued to shift Monday.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany followed Trump's blanket denial with a statement that the intelligence concerning Russian bounty information was "unconfirmed." She didn't say the intelligence wasn't credible, like Trump had said the day before, only that there was "no consensus" and that the "veracity of the underlying allegations continue to be evaluated," which happens to almost completely match the Sunday night statement from the White House's National Security Council.

Instead of saying that the sources for the Russian bounty story were not credible and the story was false, or likely false, McEnany then said that Trump had "not been briefed on the matter."

"He was not personally briefed on the matter," she said. "That is all I can share with you today."

It's difficult to see how the White House thought McEnany's statement would help, and a bungled press response like this is communications malpractice, according to sources who spoke to The American Conservative.

Let's take a deeper dive into some of the problems with the reporting here:

1. Anonymous U.S. and Taliban sources?

The Times article repeatedly cites unnamed "American intelligence officials." The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal articles "confirming" the original Times story merely restate the allegations of the anonymous officials, along with caveats like "if true" or "if confirmed."

Furthermore, the unnamed intelligence sources who spoke with the Times say that their assessment is based "on interrogations of captured Afghan militants and criminals."

That's a red flag, said John Kiriakou, a former analyst and case officer for the CIA who led the team that captured senior al-Qaeda member Abu Zubaydah in Pakistan in 2002. "When you capture a prisoner, and you're interrogating him, the prisoner is going to tell you what he thinks you want to hear," he said in an interview with The American Conservative . "There's no evidence here, there's no proof."

"Who can forget how 'successful' interrogators can be in getting desired answers?" writes Ray McGovern, who served as a CIA analyst for 27 years. Under the CIA's "enhanced interrogation techniques," Khalid Sheik Mohammed famously made at least 31 confessions, many of which were completely false.

Kiriakou believes that the sources behind the report hold important clues on how the government viewed its credibility.

"We don't know who the source is for this. We don't know if they've been vetted, polygraphed; were they a walk-in; were they a captured prisoner?"

If the sources were suspect, as they appear to be here, then Trump would not have been briefed on this at all.

With this story, it's important to start at the "intelligence collection," said Kiriakou. "This information appeared in the [CIA World Intelligence Review] Wire, which goes to hundreds of people inside the government, mostly at the State Department and the Pentagon. The most sensitive information isn't put in the Wire; it goes only in the PDB."

"If this was from a single source intelligence, it wouldn't have been briefed to Trump. It's not vetted, and it's not important enough. If you caught a Russian who said this, for example, that would make it important enough. But some Taliban detainees saying it to an interrogator, that does not rise to the threshold."

2. What purpose would bounties serve?

Everyone and their mother knows Trump wants to pull the troops out of Afghanistan, said Kiriakou.

"He ran on it and he has said it hundreds of times," he said. "So why would the Russians bother putting a bounty on U.S. troops if we're about to leave Afghanistan shortly anyway?"

That's leaving aside Russia's own experience with the futility of Afghanistan campaigns, learned during its grueling 9-year war there in the 1980s.

If this bounty campaign is real, it would not appear to be very effective, as only eight U.S. military members were killed in Afghanistan in 2020. The New York Times could not verify that even one U.S. military member was killed due to an alleged Russian bounty.

The Taliban denies it accepted bounties from Russian intelligence.

"These kinds of deals with the Russian intelligence agency are baseless -- our target killings and assassinations were ongoing in years before, and we did it on our own resources," Zabihullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban, told The New York Times . "That changed after our deal with the Americans, and their lives are secure and we don't attack them."

The Russian Embassy in the United States called the reporting "fake news."

While the Russians are ruthless, "it's hard to fathom what their motivations could be" here, said Paul Pillar, an academic and 28-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency, in an interview with The American Conservative. "What would they be retaliating for? Some use of force in Syria recently? I don't know. I can't string together a particular sequence that makes sense at this time. I'm not saying that to cast doubt on reports the Russians were doing this sort of thing."

3. Why is this story being leaked now?

According to U.S. officials quoted by the AP, top officials in the White House "were aware of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans" in early 2019. So why is this story just coming out now?

This story is "WMD [all over] again," said McGovern, who in the 1980s chaired National Intelligence Estimates and prepared the President's Daily Brief. He believes the stories seek to preempt DOJ findings on the origins of the Russiagate probe.

The NYT story serves to bolster the narrative that Trump sides with Russia, and against our intelligence community estimates and our own soldiers lives.

The stories "are likely to remain indelible in the minds of credulous Americans -- which seems to have been the main objective," writes McGovern. "There [Trump] goes again -- not believing our 'intelligence community; siding, rather, with Putin.'"

"I don't believe this story and I think it was leaked to embarrass the President," said Kiriakou. "Trump is on the ropes in the polls; Biden is ahead in all the battleground states."

If these anonymous sources had spoken up during the impeachment hearings, their statements could have changed history.

But the timing here, "kicking a man when he is down, is extremely like the Washington establishment. A leaked story like this now, embarrasses and weakens Trump," he said. "It was obvious that Trump would blow the media response, which he did."

The bungled media response and resulting negative press could also lead Trump to contemplate harsher steps towards Russia in order to prove that he is "tough," which may have motivated the leakers. It's certainly a policy goal with which Bolton, one of the only named sources in the New York Times piece, wholeheartedly approves.

Barbara Boland is TAC's foreign policy and national security reporter. Previously, she worked as an editor for the Washington Examiner and for CNS News. She is the author of Patton Uncovered , a book about General George Patton in World War II, and her work has appeared on Fox News, The Hill , UK Spectator , and elsewhere. Boland is a graduate from Immaculata University in Pennsylvania. Follow her on Twitter @BBatDC .

Tomonthebeach • 9 hours ago • edited

Caitlin Johnstone was the first journalist to question this NYT expose' several days ago in her blog. After looking into it, I had to agree with her that the story was junk reporting by a news source eager to stick it to Trump for his daily insults. NYT must love the irony of a "fake news" story catching fire and burning Trump politically. After all, paying people to kill their own enemies? That is a "tip," not a bounty. It is more of an intel footnote than the game-changer in international relations as asserted by Speaker Pelosi on TV as she grabbed her pearls beneath her stylish COVID mask.

I was surprised that Ms. Boland could not think of any motivation for leaking the story right now given recent grousing on the Hill about Trump's inviting Putin to G7 over the objections of Merkel and several other NATO heads of state. I even posted a congratulatory message in Defense One yesterday to the US Intel community for mission accomplished.

Not only did CIA et al.'s leak get even with Trump for years of insults and ignoring their reports (Trump is politically wounded by this story), but it also achieved their primary objective of keeping Putin out of the G7 and muzzling Trump's threats to withdraw from NATO because Russia is our friend (well his, anyway).

Connecticut Farmer Tomonthebeach • 3 hours ago

That "bounty" story never passed the smell test, even to my admittedly untrained nose. My real problem is that it's a story in the first place, given that Trump campaigned on a platform that included bringing the boys home from sand hills like Afghanistan; yet here we are, four years later, and we're still there.

Lavinia • 6 hours ago

Point 4: the whole point of the Talibans is to fight to the death whichever country tries to control and invade Afghanistan. They didn't need the Russians to tell them to fight the US Army, did they?

Point 5: Russia tried to organise a mediation process between the Afghan government and the Talibans already in 2018 - so why would they be at the same time trying to fuel the conflict? A stable Afghanistan is more convenient to them, given the geographical position of the country.

This whole story is completely ridiculous. Totally bogus.

Wally • 5 hours ago

As much as I love to see everyone pile on trump, this is another example of a really awful policy having bad outcomes. If Bush, Obama, trump, or anyone at the pentagon gave a crap about the troops, they wouldn't have kept them in Afghanistan and lied about the fact they were losing the whole time.

Of course people are trying to kill US military in Afghanistan. If I lived in Afghanistan, I'd probably hate them too. And let's not forget that just a few weeks ago the 82nd airborne was ready to kill American civilians in DC. The military is our enemy too!

If you are in the US military today, please quit.

https://www.washingtonpost....

Don't ever forget how they lied to us.

Feral Finster • 4 hours ago

Moreover, the idea is stupid. Russia doesn't need to do anything to motivate Afghans to want to boot the invaders out of their country, and would want to attract negative attention in doing so.

The purported bounty program doesn't help Russia, but the anonymous narrative does conveniently serve several CIA purposes:
1. It makes it harder to leave Afghanistan.
2. It keeps the cold war with Russia going along.
3. It damages Trump (whose relationship with the CIA is testy at best).

Then there's the question of how this supposed intelligence was gathered. The CIA tortures people, and there's no reason to believe that this was any different.

Feral Finster Sidney Caesar • 2 hours ago

1. Russia wants a stable Afghanistan. Not a base for jihadis.

2. The idea that Russia has to encourage Afghans to kill Invaders is a hoot. They don't ever do that on their own.

3. Not only do Afghans traditionally need no motivation to kill infidel foreign Invaders, but Russia would have to be incredibly stupid to bring more American enmity on itself.

Contrast with the CIA motivations for this absurd narrative. Chuck Schumer famously commented that the intelligence agencies had ways of getting back at you, and it looks like you took the bait, hook, line and sinker.

Either that, or you're just cynical. You'll espouse anything, however absurd and full of lies, as long as it damages Trump.

I detest Trump, but I am not a list.

Wally Feral Finster • 3 hours ago

I don't have a clue if this bounty story is correct, but I can imagine plenty of reasons why the Russians would do it. It's easy enough to believe it or believe it was cooked up by CIA as you suggest.

Feral Finster Feral Finster • 2 hours ago

And a fourth CIA goal: it undermines Trump's relationship with the military.

FND • 4 hours ago

There will be one of these BS blockbusters every few weeks until the election. There are legions of buried-in democrat political appointees that will continue to feed the DNC press. It will be non-stop. The DNC press is shredding the 1st amendment.

former-vet FND • 2 hours ago

Not shredding the First Amendment, just shining light on the pitfalls of a right to freedom of speech. There are others ramifications to free speech we consider social goods.

Kent FND • 2 hours ago

These aren't buried-in democrats. These people could care less which political party the President is a member of. They only care that the President does what they say. Political parties are just to bamboozle the rubes. They are the real power.

Connecticut Farmer • 4 hours ago

"U.S. Intelligence"-lol--a contradiction in terms. Just repeat three times: "George 'Slam Dunk' Tenet."

Sidney Caesar Connecticut Farmer • 3 hours ago

Tenet knew his role- he said what his superiors wanted to hear: https://www.motherjones.com... The Iraq debacle was a top-down con job.

Stephen R Gould • 3 hours ago • edited

The best defence that the WSJ and Fox News could muster was that the story wasn't confirmed as the NSA didn't have the same confidence in the assessment as the CIA. "Is there anything else to which you would wish to draw my attention?" "To the curious incident of the denial from the White House", "There was no denial from the White House". "That was the curious incident".

I note that Fox News had buried the story "below the scroll" on their home page - if they had though the story was fake, the headlines would be screaming at MSM.

maxsnafu • 3 hours ago

I was suspicious when I saw it originated in Walter Duranty's newspaper.

The Derp State • 3 hours ago

"What if Obama...." #4,267

former-vet • 2 hours ago • edited

Pravda was a far more honest and objective news source than The New York Times is. I say that as someone who read both for long periods of time. The Times is on par with the National Enquirer for credibility, with the latter at least being less propagandistic and agenda-driven.

SatirevFlesti • 2 hours ago

Having failed in its Russia "collusion" and "Russia stole the election" campaigns to oust Trump, this is just the latest effort by the Deep State and mass media to use unhinged Russophobia to try to boost Biden and damage Trump.

The extent to which the contemporary Left is driven by a level of Russophobia unseen even by the most stalwart anti-Communists on the Right during the Cold War is truly something to behold. I think at bottom it comes down to not liking Putin or Russia because they refuse to get on board with the Left's social agenda.

James SatirevFlesti • 2 hours ago • edited

The contemporary left hate Russia , because Russia is carving out it own sphere of influence and keeping the Americans out, because it saved Assad from the western backed sunni head choppers (that the left cheered on, as they killed native Orthodox, and Catholic Christians). The Contempary left hate Russia because it cracks down on LGBT propaganda, banned porn hub, and return property to the Church , which the leftist Bolsheviks stole, the Contempaty left hate Russia because it cracked down on it western backed oligarchs who plundered Russia in the 90's.

The Contempary left wants Russia to be Woke, Broke, Godless, and Gay.

The democrats are now the cheerleaders of the warfare -welfare state,, the marriage between the neolibs-neocons under the Democrat party to ensure that President Trump is defeated by the invade the world, invite the world crowd.

WilliamRD TheSnark • 44 minutes ago

"The Trumpies are right in that this was obviously a leak by the intel community designed to hurt Trump. But what do you expect...he has spent 4 years insulting and belittling them. They are going to get their pound of flesh."

Intel community was behind an attempted coup of Trump. He has good reason not to trust them and insulting is only natural. Hopefully John Durham will indict several of them

Kent • an hour ago

I honestly don't find "unnamed officials", the CIA, the NSA, the NYT, John Bolton, or President Trump to be credible sources.

Sidney Caesar Kent • an hour ago • edited

I've found myself to be the only honest and trustworthy person- everyone should just listen to me.

WilliamRD • 42 minutes ago • edited

Montage: Mainstream Media Hype About Russia Collusion https://twitter.com/ggreenw...

WilliamRD • 36 minutes ago

Russiagate's Last Gasp https://consortiumnews.com/...

phreethink • 20 minutes ago • edited

Interesting take. I certainly take anything anyone publishes based on anonymous sources with a big grain of salt, especially when it comes from the NYT...

[Jul 01, 2020] Control freaks that cannot even control their own criminal impulses!

Highly recommended!
Jul 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

No Friend Of The Devil , says:

Control freaks that cannot even control their own criminal impulses!

...They suffer from god-complexes, since they do not believe in God, they feel an obligation to act as God, and decide the fates of over 7 billion people, who would obviously be better off if the PICs were sent to the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants!

[Jul 01, 2020] Madcap Militarism- H.R. McMaster's Dishonest Attack on Restraint -

Notable quotes:
"... The purpose of McMaster's essay is to discredit "retrenchers" -- that's his term for anyone advocating restraint as an alternative to the madcap militarism that has characterized U.S. policy in recent decades. Substituting retrenchment for restraint is a bit like referring to conservatives as fascists or liberals as pinks : It reveals a preference for labeling rather than serious engagement. In short, it's a not very subtle smear, as indeed is the phrase madcap militarism. But, hey, I'm only playing by his rules. ..."
"... The militarization of American statecraft that followed the end of the Cold War produced results that were bad for the United States and bad for the world. If McMaster can't figure that out, then he's the one who is behind the times. ..."
"... While Hillary was very clear on her drive against Russia, Trump promised the opposite, so many people had hopes for something on that. Nevertheless, he also promised to go against China and JPCOA, which many people forgot or thought not likely. But lo and behold, with Trump we ended up having the worst of both worlds ..."
"... just because of Trump's rhetoric against military adventurism, I would have voted for him. I would have been wrong, so now I am now extremely weary of any promises on this direction, but still hoped for Tulsi... ..."
Jul 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Home / Articles / Realism & Restraint / Madcap Militarism: H.R. McMaster's Dishonest Attack On Restraint REALISM & RESTRAINT Madcap Militarism: H.R. McMaster's Dishonest Attack On Restraint

Anyone looking for new grand strategy won't find it in the retired general's latest 'think piece.' Gen. H.R. McMaster in 2013. By CSIS/Flickr

JUNE 29, 2020

|

12:01 AM

ANDREW J. BACEVICH

H.R. McMaster looks to be one of those old soldiers with an aversion to following Douglas MacArthur's advice to "just fade away."

The retired army three-star general who served an abbreviated term as national security adviser has a memoir due out in September. Perhaps in anticipation of its publication, he has now contributed a big think-piece to the new issue of Foreign Affairs. The essay is unlikely to help sell the book.

The purpose of McMaster's essay is to discredit "retrenchers" -- that's his term for anyone advocating restraint as an alternative to the madcap militarism that has characterized U.S. policy in recent decades. Substituting retrenchment for restraint is a bit like referring to conservatives as fascists or liberals as pinks : It reveals a preference for labeling rather than serious engagement. In short, it's a not very subtle smear, as indeed is the phrase madcap militarism. But, hey, I'm only playing by his rules.

Yet if not madcap militarism, what term or phrase accurately describes post-9/11 U.S. policy? McMaster never says. It's among the many matters that he passes over in silence. As a result, his essay amounts to little more than a dodge, carefully designed to ignore the void between what assertive "American global leadership" was supposed to accomplish back when we fancied ourselves the sole superpower and what actually ensued.

Here's what McMaster dislikes about restraint: It is based on "emotions" and a "romantic view" of the world rather than reason and analysis. It is synonymous with "disengagement" -- McMaster uses the terms interchangeably. "Retrenchers ignore the fact that the risks and costs of inaction are sometimes higher than those of engagement," which, of course, is not a fact, but an assertion dear to the hearts of interventionists. Retrenchers assume that the "vast oceans" separating the United States "from the rest of the world" will suffice to "keep Americans safe." They also believe that "an overly powerful United States is the principal cause of the world's problems." Perhaps worst of all, "retrenchers are out of step with history and way behind the times."

Forgive me for saying so, but there is a Trumpian quality to this line of argument: broad claims supported by virtually no substantiating evidence. Just as President Trump is adamant in refusing to fess up to mistakes in responding to Covid-19 -- "We've made every decision correctly" -- so too McMaster avoids reckoning with what actually happened when the never-retrench crowd was calling the shots in Washington and set out after 9/11 to transform the Greater Middle East.

What gives the game away is McMaster's apparent aversion to numbers. This is an essay devoid of stats. McMaster acknowledges the "visceral feelings of war weariness" felt by more than a few Americans. Yet he refrains from exploring the source of such feelings. So he does not mention casualties -- the number of Americans killed or wounded in our post-9/11 misadventures. He does not discuss how much those wars have cost , which, of course, spares him from considering how the trillions expended in Afghanistan and Iraq might have been better invested at home. He does not even reflect on the duration of those wars, which by itself suffices to reveal the epic failure of recent U.S. military policy. Instead, McMaster mocks what he calls the "new mantra" of "ending endless wars."

Well, if not endless, our recent wars have certainly dragged on for far longer than the proponents of those wars expected. Given the hundreds of billions funneled to the Pentagon each year -- another data point that McMaster chooses to overlook -- shouldn't Americans expect more positive outcomes? And, of course, we are still looking for the general who will make good on the oft-repeated promise of victory.

What is McMaster's alternative to restraint? Anyone looking for the outlines of a new grand strategy in step with history and keeping up with the times won't find it here. The best McMaster can come up with is to suggest that policymakers embrace "strategic empathy: an understanding of the ideology, emotions, and aspirations that drive and constrain other actors" -- a bit of advice likely to find favor with just about anyone apart from President Trump himself.

But strategic empathy is not a strategy; it's an attitude. By contrast, a policy of principled restraint does provide the basis for an alternative strategy, one that implies neither retrenchment nor disengagement. Indeed, restraint emphasizes engagement, albeit through other than military means.

Unless I missed it, McMaster's essay contains not a single reference to diplomacy, a revealing oversight. Let me amend that: A disregard for diplomacy may not be surprising in someone with decades of schooling in the arts of madcap militarism.

The militarization of American statecraft that followed the end of the Cold War produced results that were bad for the United States and bad for the world. If McMaster can't figure that out, then he's the one who is behind the times. Here's the truth: Those who support the principle of restraint believe in vigorous engagement, emphasizing diplomacy, trade, cultural exchange, and the promotion of global norms, with war as a last resort. Whether such an approach to policy is in or out of step with history, I leave for others to divine.

Andrew Bacevich, TAC's writer-at-large, is president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

kouroi • 2 days ago

Surveys show over and over that the Americans overwhelmingly share Dr. Bacevich's views. There was even hope that Trump will reign on the US military adventurism.

The fact that all this continues unabated and that the general is given space in the Foreign Affairs is in our face evidence of the glaring democratic deficit existent in the US, and that in fact democracy is nonexistent being long ago fully replaced by a de facto Oligarchy.

Doesn't matter what Dr. Bachevich writes or says or does. Unless and until the internal political issues in the US are not addressed, the world will suffer.

libertarianlwyr kouroi • 2 days ago

only idiots and fools were under any delusion that Trump would "reign in US military adventurism".

kouroi libertarianlwyr • 2 days ago

While Hillary was very clear on her drive against Russia, Trump promised the opposite, so many people had hopes for something on that. Nevertheless, he also promised to go against China and JPCOA, which many people forgot or thought not likely. But lo and behold, with Trump we ended up having the worst of both worlds...

and the tragedy is that even if Biden is elected, that direction will not be reversed, or not likely. While I cannot vote, just because of Trump's rhetoric against military adventurism, I would have voted for him. I would have been wrong, so now I am now extremely weary of any promises on this direction, but still hoped for Tulsi...

[Jul 01, 2020] Chagnon theorized that war, far from being the product of capitalist exploitation and colonization was in fact the true "state of nature."

Jul 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

Sean , says: June 30, 2020 at 12:58 pm GMT

There is no reason for US elite act as is being suggested, because the cake they get the lion's share of is growing and so even though inequality is growing, the economy is too and the common people are getting slightly better off.

If a country were in the hands of a tiny minority and they were to act in such a way and try steal all the wealth for themselves, then they would be overthrown by domestic enemies like Somoza was.

Chagnon theorized that war, far from being the product of capitalist exploitation and colonization was in fact the true "state of nature." He concluded that 1) "maximizing political and personal security was the overwhelming driving force in human social and cultural evolution," and 2) "warfare has been the most important single force shaping the evolution of political society in our species."

Everything in the last five years is a symptom of the US reacting to being bested by China.

I happen to think states that are even slightly nation-states have emergent qualities, like a nest of social insects that react as though there is central direction though none exists, and no state is closer to being alive than a democracy.

[Jul 01, 2020] Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia

Jul 01, 2020 | en.wikipedia.org

Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program to arm and finance the mujahideen (jihadists) in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989, prior to and during the military intervention by the USSR in support of its client, the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The mujahideen were also supported by Britain's MI6, who conducted separate covert actions. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups that were favored by the regime of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in neighboring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Marxist-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan regime since before the Soviet intervention.[1]

Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken.[2] Funding officially began with $695,000 in 1979,[3][4] was increased dramatically to $20–$30 million per year in 1980, and rose to $630 million per year in 1987,[1][5][6] described as the "biggest bequest to any Third World insurgency."[7] Funding continued (albeit reduced) after the 1989 Soviet withdrawal as the mujahideen continued to battle the forces of President Mohammad Najibullah's army during the Afghan Civil War (1989–1992).[8]

[Jul 01, 2020] Kosovo Indictment Proves Bill Clinton s Serbian War Atrocities - Defend Democracy Press by Jim Bovard

Notable quotes:
"... Clinton remains a hero in Kosovo where a statue of him was erected in the capital, Pristina. The Guardian newspaper noted that the statue showed Clinton "with a left hand raised, a typical gesture of a leader greeting the masses. In his right hand he is holding documents engraved with the date when NATO started the bombardment of Serbia, 24 March 1999." It would have been a more accurate representation to depict Clinton standing on a pile of corpses of the women, children, and others killed in the U.S. bombing campaign. ..."
"... Bill Clinton's 1999 bombing of Serbia was as big a fraud as George W. Bush's conning this nation into attacking Iraq. The fact that Clinton and other top U.S. government officials continued to glorify Hashim Thaci despite accusations of mass murder, torture, and body trafficking is another reminder of the venality of much of America's political elite. Will Americans again be gullible the next time that Washington policymakers and their media allies concoct bullshit pretexts to blow the hell out of some hapless foreign land? ..."
Jun 25, 2020 | www.defenddemocracy.press

President Bill Clinton's favorite freedom fighter just got indicted for mass murder, torture, kidnapping, and other crimes against humanity. In 1999, the Clinton administration launched a 78-day bombing campaign that killed up to 1500 civilians in Serbia and Kosovo in what the American media proudly portrayed as a crusade against ethnic bias. That war, like most of the pretenses of U.S. foreign policy, was always a sham.

Kosovo President Hashim Thaci was charged with ten counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity by an international tribunal in The Hague in the Netherlands. It charged Thaci and nine other men with "war crimes, including murder, enforced disappearance of persons, persecution, and torture." Thaci and the other charged suspects were accused of being "criminally responsible for nearly 100 murders" and the indictment involved "hundreds of known victims of Kosovo Albanian, Serb, Roma, and other ethnicities and include political opponents."

Hashim Thaci's tawdry career illustrates how anti-terrorism is a flag of convenience for Washington policymakers. Prior to becoming Kosovo's president, Thaci was the head of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), fighting to force Serbs out of Kosovo. In 1999, the Clinton administration designated the KLA as "freedom fighters" despite their horrific past and gave them massive aid. The previous year, the State Department condemned "terrorist action by the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army." The KLA was heavily involved in drug trafficking and had close to ties to Osama bin Laden.

But arming the KLA and bombing Serbia helped Clinton portray himself as a crusader against injustice and shift public attention after his impeachment trial. Clinton was aided by many shameless members of Congress anxious to sanctify U.S. killing. Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CN) whooped that the United States and the KLA "stand for the same values and principles. Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values." And since Clinton administration officials publicly compared Serb leader Slobodan Milošević to Hitler, every decent person was obliged to applaud the bombing campaign.

Both the Serbs and ethnic Albanians committed atrocities in the bitter strife in Kosovo. But to sanctify its bombing campaign, the Clinton administration waved a magic wand and made the KLA's atrocities disappear. British professor Philip Hammond noted that the 78-day bombing campaign "was not a purely military operation: NATO also destroyed what it called 'dual-use' targets, such as factories, city bridges, and even the main television building in downtown Belgrade, in an attempt to terrorize the country into surrender."

Read also: From the very beginning: Α conscious plan to destroy Greece!

NATO repeatedly dropped cluster bombs into marketplaces, hospitals, and other civilian areas. Cluster bombs are anti-personnel devices designed to be scattered across enemy troop formations. NATO dropped more than 1,300 cluster bombs on Serbia and Kosovo and each bomb contained 208 separate bomblets that floated to earth by parachute. Bomb experts estimated that more than 10,000 unexploded bomblets were scattered around the landscape when the bombing ended and maimed children long after the ceasefire.

In the final days of the bombing campaign, the Washington Post reported that "some presidential aides and friends are describing Kosovo in Churchillian tones, as Clinton's 'finest hour.'" The Post also reported that according to one Clinton friend "what Clinton believes were the unambiguously moral motives for NATO's intervention represented a chance to soothe regrets harbored in Clinton's own conscience The friend said Clinton has at times lamented that the generation before him was able to serve in a war with a plainly noble purpose, and he feels 'almost cheated' that 'when it was his turn he didn't have the chance to be part of a moral cause.'" By Clinton's standard, slaughtering Serbs was "close enough for government work" to a "moral cause."

Shortly after the end of the 1999 bombing campaign, Clinton enunciated what his aides labeled the Clinton doctrine: "Whether within or beyond the borders of a country, if the world community has the power to stop it, we ought to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing." In reality, the Clinton doctrine was that presidents are entitled to commence bombing foreign lands based on any brazen lie that the American media will regurgitate. In reality, the lesson from bombing Serbia is that American politicians merely need to publicly recite the word "genocide" to get a license to kill.

Read also: Derrière l'affaire Benalla, la banalisation de la violence policière

After the bombing ended, Clinton assured the Serbian people that the United States and NATO agreed to be peacekeepers only "with the understanding that they would protect Serbs as well as ethnic Albanians and that they would leave when peace took hold." In the subsequent months and years, American and NATO forces stood by as the KLA resumed its ethnic cleansing, slaughtering Serb civilians, bombing Serbian churches and oppressing any non-Muslims. Almost a quarter-million Serbs, Gypsies, Jews, and other minorities fled Kosovo after Mr. Clinton promised to protect them. By 2003, almost 70 percent of the Serbs living in Kosovo in 1999 had fled, and Kosovo was 95 percent ethnic Albanian.

But Thaci remained useful for U.S. policymakers. Even though he was widely condemned for oppression and corruption after taking power in Kosovo, Vice President Joe Biden hailed Thaci in 2010 as the "George Washington of Kosovo." A few months later, a Council of Europe report accused Thaci and KLA operatives of human organ trafficking. The Guardian noted that the report alleged that Thaci's inner circle "took captives across the border into Albania after the war, where a number of Serbs are said to have been murdered for their kidneys, which were sold on the black market." The report stated that when "transplant surgeons" were "ready to operate, the [Serbian] captives were brought out of the 'safe house' individually, summarily executed by a KLA gunman, and their corpses transported swiftly to the operating clinic."

Despite the body trafficking charge, Thaci was a star attendee at the annual Global Initiative conference by the Clinton Foundation in 2011, 2012, and 2013, where he posed for photos with Bill Clinton. Maybe that was a perk from the $50,000 a month lobbying contract that Thaci's regime signed with The Podesta Group, co-managed by future Hillary Clinton campaign manager John Podesta, as the Daily Caller reported.

Clinton remains a hero in Kosovo where a statue of him was erected in the capital, Pristina. The Guardian newspaper noted that the statue showed Clinton "with a left hand raised, a typical gesture of a leader greeting the masses. In his right hand he is holding documents engraved with the date when NATO started the bombardment of Serbia, 24 March 1999." It would have been a more accurate representation to depict Clinton standing on a pile of corpses of the women, children, and others killed in the U.S. bombing campaign.

In 2019, Bill Clinton and his fanatically pro-bombing former Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, visited Pristina, where they were "treated like rock stars" as they posed for photos with Thaci. Clinton declared, "I love this country and it will always be one of the greatest honors of my life to have stood with you against ethnic cleansing (by Serbian forces) and for freedom." Thaci awarded Clinton and Albright medals of freedom "for the liberty he brought to us and the peace to entire region." Albright has reinvented herself as a visionary warning against fascism in the Trump era. Actually, the only honorific that Albright deserves is "Butcher of Belgrade."

Clinton's war on Serbia was a Pandora's box from which the world still suffers. Because politicians and most of the media portrayed the war against Serbia as a moral triumph, it was easier for the Bush administration to justify attacking Iraq, for the Obama administration to bomb Libya, and for the Trump administration to repeatedly bomb Syria. All of those interventions sowed chaos that continues cursing the purported beneficiaries.

Bill Clinton's 1999 bombing of Serbia was as big a fraud as George W. Bush's conning this nation into attacking Iraq. The fact that Clinton and other top U.S. government officials continued to glorify Hashim Thaci despite accusations of mass murder, torture, and body trafficking is another reminder of the venality of much of America's political elite. Will Americans again be gullible the next time that Washington policymakers and their media allies concoct bullshit pretexts to blow the hell out of some hapless foreign land?

[Jun 30, 2020] Diaspora Communities- Influencing U.S. Foreign Policy - Wilson Center

Jun 30, 2020 | www.wilsoncenter.org

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. View our privacy policy .

ACCEPT Skip to main content CLOSE SEARCH SUPPORT Wilson Center SUPPORT MENU SHARE EVENT Diaspora Communities: Influencing U.S. Foreign Policy

Thomas Ambrosio, Assistant Professor of Political Science, North Dakota State University;Yossi Shain, Professor of Comparative Government and Diaspora Politics, Georgetown University DATE & TIME Jun. 23, 2003 3:00pm – 4:00pm EVENT SPONSORS Africa Program AFRICA PROGRAM Asia Program ASIA PROGRAM Middle East Program MIDDLE EAST PROGRAM DIASPORA COMMUNITIES: INFLUENCING U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

Thomas Ambrosio, Assistant Professor of Political Science, North Dakota State University and Yossi Shain, Professor of Comparative Government and Diaspora Politics, Georgetown University

In an age marked by the greater ease of communication and travel, recent research on ethnic groups and conflict has begun to examine the influence of diaspora groups. Of particular interest are their efforts to affect political environments in their "home" and host countries through their remittance of funds, lobbying and the dissemination of information. Dr. Thomas Ambrosio, Assistant Professor at North Dakota University presented material from his recent edited volume Ethnic Identity Groups and U.S. Foreign Policy. Commentary was provided by Yossi Shain, Professor at Georgetown and Tel Aviv Universities, author of "Marketing the American Creed Abroad: Diasporas in the U.S. and their Homelands" and a contributor to Ambrosio's book. The meeting marked what moderator Carla Koppell, Interim Director of the Wilson Center's Conflict Prevention Project called, "a relatively new area of analysis and dialogue for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars."

Ambrosio, stated that as we seek to understand diaspora groups and their influence on U.S. foreign policy, the question is not should ethnic groups influence foreign policy but how they effect foreign policy, what are their goals and why do they mobilize. He began his presentation by defining ethnic identity groups as "politically relevant social divisions based on a shared sense of cultural distinctiveness." This would include racial, religious, national and ethnic identities. Ethnic identity groups often form institutions that effect U.S. foreign policy or ethnic communities abroad, most commonly in the form of ethnic lobbies.

These ethnic lobbies seek to influence U.S. policy in three ways. First, by framing the issues "they help set the terms of debate" or "put items on the country's agenda." Second, they are a source of information and analysis that provide a great deal of information to members of Congress and serve as a resource for other branches of government and non-governmental organizations, and shaping general perspectives. Finally, ethnic group lobbies provide policy oversight. "They examine the policies of the U.S. government, propose policies, write letters and [are] involved in electioneering activities."

Ambrosio cautioned, that we must not believe that the effort by "ethnic groups to influence U.S. foreign policy is new." It has a long history but "has become increasingly active in recent years." To illustrate, he presented five periods of ethnic lobbying in the United States--Pre-WWI, WWI, Cold War, post-Cold war, and post-September 11.

Since before WWI, there has been a "steady rise in the number of ethnic groups in the U.S. mobilizing to influence the foreign policy process." Both the WWI and Cold War periods saw an explosion in the number of interest groups affecting domestic and foreign policy. According to Ambrosio, however, it was the post-Cold War period that gave way to a real increase in American multiculturalism. U.S. interests during this period were not clearly defined, and the Congress had more influence than the Executive Branch over policy-making. That balance of power according to Ambrosio allowed ethnic lobbying groups greater access to policy-makers and potential influence in policy formation. Since September 11 quite the opposite is true; there is a re-centralization of foreign policy in the White House. That re-centralization is restricting influence over policy.

Ambrosio concluded by suggesting several areas for future research. First, the question of the legitimacy of ethnic group influence on foreign policy deserves some attention. Second, more case study analysis is need. In Ambrosio's view, we need to look at specific groups, and why or how they influence policy. In particular, greater attention should be paid to the case of Muslim Americans. Third, is the need to examine the relationship between ethnic and non-ethnic interest groups. For instance, Ambrosio suggested that a comparison of the influence of "the Oil lobby versus the Armenian lobbies over the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan" could provide some interesting insights. Fourth, the reliance on natives for intelligence information should be examined more closely. In the case of Iraq, there is the question of "how Iraq exiles influence U.S. foreign policy." Finally, the export of American values must be better understood. Further research could help the U.S. government mobilize diaspora groups in the United States to deal with growing anti-Americanism throughout the world.

Shain, began by commenting that while the topic of diaspora group influence on U.S. foreign policy is important, "it is perhaps an overblown topic." He agreed with Ambrosio that the idea of transnational influence on U.S. foreign policy is not new. However, Shain contends that people have always been wary of such influences. The topic, according to Shain, became more salient in the 1990's with the end of the Cold War when the "us versus them posture was no longer in existence." It was also a time when more people began "shuttling back and forth," retaining greater ties to their home country. According to Professor Shain, the question is "who really speaks [in U.S. foreign policy]?" This was the period of increasing American multiculturalism; the identity of the U.S. itself was changing. As a result, attention to issues reflected the makeup of the U.S. For instance, before September 11, relations between the United States and Mexico in the age of NAFTA, had center stage.

Shain suggested that while ethnic Americans mobilize to influence U.S. foreign policy, their ability to do so is quite limited. Ethnic lobbies have more often been used to market American ideals in their home countries or to "democratize their countries of origin." When they do have influence, it has generally been at the electoral level in connection with a domestic issue, or when an issue is of little importance to the administration. Professor Shain continued contending that the influence of ethnic lobbies relies on their ability to advance a message that resonates with the American values and ideals. This is one reason he believes Arab-Americans have had difficulty influencing U.S. foreign policy; there is a perception that they are attempting to influence policy in ways that would be contrary to American values. When issues promoted by an ethnic lobby are priorities, and are in line with the administration, ethnic lobbies have the greatest influence in policy oversight.

According to Shain there are several issues that warrant future research and understanding. The first is to understand the explosion of Islam in the United States; rather than lobbying for national country interests, there is greater mobilization around religious beliefs. According to Shain, this has little to do with ethnic lobbies; rather it is a question of who is mobilizing communities. This is a difficult question to examine because, depending on the time period, different people will speak for a community. Another issue for further study involves tracking and better understanding economic influence. For example, donations for Israel at the same time support local organizations and Jewish-American issues; financial support drives diaspora politics. At the same time, many country economies depend on money sent from abroad; this gives diasporas a greater say in their "home" countries. "When you do any politics in Haiti, there is the 10th department... the 10th department is here. This is the community that can mobilize and has money."

The final issue for further study according to Shain is the concept of identity in America. While there is identity as an American, many still "retain some affinity and memories" of their home country. This is particularly galvanizing where there is still instability in the country of origin. Shain concluded that the subject of the influence of diaspora communities in the U.S. was most important in regard to identity in America. "Identity is critical for America because the American makeup has always been changing." "The market, democracy and human rights are much more on the minds of ethnic groups as they relate to their country of origin,"concluded Shain.

Carla Koppell, Conflict Prevention Project, Interim Director, 202-691-4083
Drafted by Channa Threat HOSTED BY Africa Program AFRICA PROGRAM

The Africa Program works to address the most critical issues facing Africa and U.S.-Africa relations, build mutually beneficial U.S.–Africa relations, and enhance knowledge and understanding about Africa in the United States. The Program achieves its mission through in-depth research and analyses, including our blog Africa Up Close, public discussion, working groups, and briefings that bring together policymakers, practitioners, and subject matter experts to analyze and offer practical options for tackling key challenges in Africa and in U.S.-Africa relations. Read more Asia Program ASIA PROGRAM

The Asia Program promotes policy debate and intellectual discussions on U.S. interests in the Asia-Pacific as well as political, economic, security, and social issues relating to the world's most populous and economically dynamic region. Read more Middle East Program MIDDLE EAST PROGRAM

The Wilson Center's Middle East Program serves as a crucial resource for the policymaking community and beyond, providing analyses and research that helps inform U.S. foreign policymaking, stimulates public debate, and expands knowledge about issues in the wider Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Read more TAGGED SERIES EVENT FEEDBACK

https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api2/anchor?ar=1&k=6LeDdekUAAAAAMiDvHxjEfgp-swTmnPTq6BGogo4&co=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cud2lsc29uY2VudGVyLm9yZzo0NDM.&hl=en&type=image&v=NMoy4HgGiLr5NAQaEQa2ho8X&theme=light&size=normal&cb=lz519vn6uwwo EXPLORE MORE BROWSE INSIGHTS & ANALYSIS PREVIOUS NEXT Matías Kulfas (Part 1) VIDEO ECONOMICS AND GLOBALIZATION Benjamin Gedan Interviews Argentina's Minister of Productive Development Matías Kulfas (Part 1) Desna Chernihiv players sit on a bench keeping a safe quarantine distance during the Ukrainian Premiere League game against Shakhtar at NSC Olympiyskyi stadium in Kyiv BLOG POST CORONAVIRUS Ukraine's Dilemma Amid the Pandemic: Depopulation and its Effects on the Ukrainian Economy By Mark Temnycky on June 23, 2020 The Expert Take ARTICLE ECONOMICS AND GLOBALIZATION The Future of the North American Workforce in a COVID-19 Scenario By Earl Anthony Wayne on June 22, 2020 Image - Argentina layoffs BLOG POST ECONOMICS AND GLOBALIZATION Default, the Day After By Aníbal Nicolás Saldías on June 19, 2020 Mexico, North America, and Workforce Development - Remarks by Earl Anthony Wayne to the American Chamber of Commerce in Mexico ARTICLE ECONOMICS AND GLOBALIZATION Mexico, North America, and Workforce Development - Remarks by Earl Anthony Wayne to the American Chamber of Commerce in Mexico By Earl Anthony Wayne on June 18, 2020 Beyond the COVD-19 Horizon PUBLICATION U.S. FOREIGN POLICY Beyond the COVID-19 Horizon US Security Starts in the Arctic THE HILL SECURITY AND DEFENSE US Security Starts in the Arctic Think 7 USA 2020: Report of the Think 7 Summit Report Cover Page PUBLICATION GLOBAL HEALTH Think 7 USA 2020: Report of the Think 7 Summit The panelists on the Zoom conference call. BLOG POST CORONAVIRUS Event Recap: Economic Implications of COVID-19 for South Asia By Lesley Lu on June 10, 2020 Americas 360 Logo AUDIO CORONAVIRUS Pandemic Politics in the Americas Line for bank supermarket in Rio de Janeiro Brazil BLOG POST ECONOMICS AND GLOBALIZATION Brazil's Post-Pandemic Economy By The Brazilian Report on June 5, 2020 Wilson Center

One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027

Visit the Wilson Center Phone: (202) 691-4000 Contact Us Sign up for email updates SUBMIT © 2020 The Wilson Center. All Rights Reserved

[Jun 29, 2020] Trump Is Losing The White Vote With Jared Kushner s Agenda by Washington Watcher II

Notable quotes:
"... Trump's problems among college-educated whites have drawn much attention during his presidency. What's new is declining support among non-college educated whites, where he holds only a 19-point lead. He won that demographic by 37 points in 2016. And his declining support among this key constituency is pronounced in six battleground states, with only 16 percent of non-college educated whites backing him. In October, his lead among them was 24 points. In 2016, Trump won these battleground voters by 26 points. ..."
Jun 29, 2020 | www.unz.com

White voters are turning away from President Trump. That assessment includes his invaluable working-class white base . But Trump has only himself and his campaign to blame for the bad news contained in the latest polls. While America burns, his campaign's only plan seems to be wooing black voters by tweeting that Joe Biden is the "real" racist. Trump seems unable to do anything about the riots or the devastation wrought by coronavirus . The latest poll numbers should knock some sense into the president. He seems to be responding a little lately, but he's going to lose the election if he sticks to Jared Kushner 's agenda and doesn't fight like the candidate we elected in 2016.

The latest polls from The New York Times poll lay bare the ugly truth.

Biden leads Trump among college-educated whites by 28 points [ Biden Takes Dominant Lead as Voters Reject Trump on Virus and Race , by Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin and Matt Stevens, June 24, 2020]. The former vice president leads Trump by double digits among all white voters in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, three states crucial to Trump's 2016 victory, yet he is down by double digits[ In Poll, Trump Falls Far Behind Biden in Six Key Battleground States , by Nate Cohn, June 25, 2020].The same poll puts Biden 14 points ahead of Trump nationwide: 50 percent to 36 percent. That figure is no outlier either. The latest polls from Fox News and Harvard-Harris put Biden 12 points ahead nationally. The Real Clear Politics average has Biden ahead by 9.4 points.

Trump's problems among college-educated whites have drawn much attention during his presidency. What's new is declining support among non-college educated whites, where he holds only a 19-point lead. He won that demographic by 37 points in 2016. And his declining support among this key constituency is pronounced in six battleground states, with only 16 percent of non-college educated whites backing him. In October, his lead among them was 24 points. In 2016, Trump won these battleground voters by 26 points.

Funny thing is, those voters aren't defecting to Biden's camp, either; their support for him has increased by just 1 since October. The Times describes them as " white voters with more conservative attitudes on racial issues," which likely means they think Trump has not delivered the promised nationalist agenda. One voter told the Times's Cohn he's disappointed with Trump 's not cracking down on the rioters and shutting down the economy because of the Chinese Virus pandemic. He'll still vote for Trump, but without much enthusiasm.

Older whites are also jumping ship. In six battleground states, Trump and Biden are about even among whites 65 or older. Trump won them by nearly 20 points in 2016. The Times attributes that decline to the president's coronavirus response and his "tone" [ Trump Faces Mounting Defections From a Once-Loyal Group: Older White Voters , by Alexander Burns and Katie Glueck, June 28, 2020].

The likely cause? The literal chaos they see on television. People are frightened by coronavirus , the riots, the Left's cultural revolution , and the crippled economy . They don't see Trump leading. Rioters tear down statues and attack our history with neither police action nor pushback. Crime is rising significantly . The media are hyping a second wave of coronavirus as Trump pushes for reopening the country. More than 47 million Americans have applied for unemployment since March 1 [ Another 1.48 million Americans file for unemployment benefits , by Heidi Chung, Yahoo Finance, June 25, 2020].

That picture of Trump's America hardly inspires confidence.

The only positive for Trump is that Biden has roughly the same non-white support that Hillary Clinton had in 2016 . But that's not exactly great news, either, given the campaign's focus on painting Biden as the "real" racist. The message is having zero effect on non-whites. The Times : Biden leads by 74 points among blacks and by 39 points among Hispanics [ Biden Takes Dominant Lead as Voters Reject Trump on Virus and Race , by Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin and Matt Stevens, June 24, 2020].

The black figure is particularly humiliating. Trump and his campaign flunkies can't stop talking about the great things Trump does for blacks. Record-low black unemployment ! Criminal justice reform ! Permanent funding for historically black colleges! And that non-stop message has only worsened since the Floyd hoax. "I think I've done more for the Black community than any other president," he told Fox News [ Trump suggests Lincoln's legacy is 'questionable,' brags about his own work for Black Americans , by Dan Mangan, CNBC, June 12, 2020].

A tweet from Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale last week illustrates the idiocy. Parscale attacked Biden for working with Strom Thurmond to impose harsh sentences on crack dealers. He claimed this legislation targeted blacks and Trump is fixing the "problem"

Brad Parscale ✔ @parscale

Biden once thanked segregationist Strom Thurmond for helping him pass crack cocaine laws targeting Black Americans.

Biden created the problem. @ RealDonaldTrump is fixing it.

The beginning of racial justice will be RETIRING Joe Biden from public life.

6,809 4:56 PM - Jun 22, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy
5,639 people are talking about this

Seriously, Brad?!

The problem is the crack dealers , not sending them to jail. It makes no sense for Trump to continue tweeting out LAW AND ORDER while his campaign manager calls law and order proposals racist.

Unhappily, Parscale is not alone. Official Republican and Trump campaign accounts regularly tweet cringeworthy statements about Confederate monuments and criminal justice reform.

Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022 ✔ @TrumpWarRoom

Joe Biden once called a Confederate heritage group 'fine people'

1,015 12:24 PM - Jun 19, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy
773 people are talking about this
GOP ✔ @GOP

Democrats seem to have forgotten that Pres. Trump has led the way on innovative criminal justice reform.

He signed the FIRST STEP Act & established the Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement & the Admin. of Justice -- which aims to improve relations between the public & police.

2,958 4:30 PM - Jun 20, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy
1,782 people are talking about this

Who, exactly, are these messages for? If they're intended to win the black vote, they're failing. If they're meant to soothe white suburbanite concerns about Trump's alleged "racism," they're failing. If they're meant to excite Trump's working class white base, again, they're failing.

Parscale set out the agenda for the Trump campaign in a January interview with Lou Dobbs: the economy and healthcare. When Dobbs asked about immigration, the campaign manager replied that they didn't need to worry about it because "we already have [immigration patriots as] voters." Other issues, he claimed, will bring in new voters.

Jared Kushner, Tucker Carlson has observed , has made the similar point that "our voters aren't going anywhere. The trailer parks are rock solid. What choice do they have? They've got to vote for us." [ Tucker Carlson: "No One Has More Contempt For Donald Trump's Voters Than Jared Kushner," by Ian Schwartz, Real Clear Politics , June 1, 2020]

The Son-in-Law in Chief might wish to consult the polling data to verify that claim.

Parscale is taking a lot of heat lately for the poor messaging and the Tulsa rally's underwhelming attendance . Reports suggest Parscale is on his way out as part of a major campaign shake-up. Maybe, but he's not the ultimate problem.

Jared Kushner and the Republican establishment are setting Trump's agenda and message, Parscale merely carries it out. And frighteningly, as Politico reported, Kushner "who effectively oversees the campaign from the White House, is expected to play an even more active role" [ Trump admits it: He's losing , by Alex Isenstadt, June 27, 2020].

We can only hope that isn't true, apropos of other reports say that Trump might sideline Kushner in response to the poor polling and [ After Tulsa Catastrophe, Parscale -- And Kushner -- Is At The Top Of Trump's Hit List , by Gabriel Sherman, Vanity Fair, June 22, 2020].

Given last week's extended and expanded his immigration moratorium to include most guest-worker visas, which Kushner strongly opposed, that seems quite possible. Trump also wants to crack down on the rioters and statue destroyers, while Kushner wants the president to focus more on police reforms and appeasing the rioters [ A serious divide exists among Trump advisers over how to address nights of protests and riots in US after Floyd's death , by Kaitlan Collins and Kevin Liptak, CNN, May 31, 2020].

Trump recently tweeted an ad that suggests he might ditch the awful messaging. It pins the current chaos on Democrats and the Left and states they want to burn America to the ground.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump 99.6K 5:47 PM - Jun 27, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy
82.4K people are talking about this

It's a powerful, take-no-prisoners video with the same message that helped Trump win in 2016 and might just re-energize his base in time for Election Day.

Yet tough talk alone won't win back Trump's base. He must act . Signs are improving there, too..

Over the weekend, he tweeted several wanted pictures of statue vandals. Four leftists were hit with federal charges for attacking the Andrew Jackson statue in DC [ Justice Department Charges 4 Over Attempt to Topple Andrew Jackson Statue In D.C. , by Jason Slotkin, NPR , June 28, 2020]. Putting left-wing criminals behind bars sends the right message and might stifle the unrest. And again, he's helping unemployed Americans with the immigration ban for the rest of the year. Nearly two-thirds of Americans support it, according to the latest polling.

Trump must show Americans that the Chinese Virus threat is decreasing, the economy is recovering, and law and order is being restored. Tweets about money for black colleges, Biden's tough-on-crime bills, and or his long-ago cooperation with "segregationists" won't do.

Trump must make this election about order versus chaos and put Democrats on the side of the rioters and the radicals in Antifa and Black Lives Matter.

That, and only that, will win the white vote.

Washington Watcher II [ Email him ] is an anonymous DC insider.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website June 29, 2020 at 4:15 am GMT

You guys at VDare are always very hopeful, and I like that. I've read of some of the moves that the President has made, such as the ones you state here (on immigration and some justice for Cult-Revolutionalists). However, these things never seem to be part of any coherent, consistent strategy of any sort.

Perhaps President Trump is not a strategist and can't think in that manner. He definitely has no specific principles or moral compass, or any kind of damn compass. This is why he listens to his son-in-law Kushner, who is out to destroy the country like the rest of them.

I agree with the one guy you mentioned (who replied to Mr. Cohn). There's no choice on who to vote for anyway, not matter how much Trump screws up. But then, all this happening is not going to be settled at the voting booth anyway

Trevor Blanc , says: June 29, 2020 at 4:26 am GMT

The White House is Israeli occupied territory. Get rid of Jar-Jar and the job of minding the goy-in-chief will just go to someone new.

jsinton , says: June 29, 2020 at 4:36 am GMT

Yeah, Trump comes off like a used car salesman with high pressure tactics. But who can vote for dugout Joe who hides in his basement avoiding complex questions? Apples Oranges ?

niteranger , says: June 29, 2020 at 4:48 am GMT

Trump is done. Kushner is nothing more than an Israeli plant. They know that Biden is just like Pelosi and she and Joe would kill every white person in America if Israel wanted. The entire Congress is owned by Israel. Trump is done. Obama's "Third Term" more accurately described as Coup d'etat setup with the Deep State and Obama's Jewish friends left from his administration destroyed Trump on the first day of his tenure.

Trump can't stop putting his foot in his mouth. He abandoned White America and no matter what he did for the Blacks including money for their universities made no difference. No matter how many jobs he created it didn't count because these mongrels don't want jobs they want free stuff. Obama did nothing for blacks except destroying many middle class blacks but it doesn't matter. Blacks are tribalistic gang bangers and as Obama their Lord taught them only see color.

Trump is done and so is America. The Jews always win no matter who is president. You better start arming yourself because you are not going to believe what is going to happen when Biden wins. In Washington D.C. today Blacks were rioting against Target because they call the police when blacks steal stuff. You can't make this up and the Jewish controlled media just laughs at us.

RichardTaylor , says: June 29, 2020 at 4:49 am GMT
@Achmed E. Newman

Ok, but what if Trump were to say Dems are the real racists ? Wouldn't that win the Black vote? Forgive me, gallows humor.

It's truly pathetic the people Trump surrounds himself with. His instincts always seemed good, but apparently he can't implement a damn thing. At least all this is showing conservatives how rotten the leadership of all their hallowed institutions are (FBI, military, police, etc).

Robert Dolan , says: June 29, 2020 at 4:57 am GMT

The kushner blame is bullshit.

Not that kushner isn't an asshole.

But that DT is the President.

Buck stops there.

[Jun 28, 2020] Russian position for Start talks: "We don't believe the US in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever".

Highly recommended!
Jun 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

START. Talks began in Vienna with a childish stunt by the American side . I wouldn't expect any results: the Americans are fatally deluded . As for the Russians: " We don't believe the U.S. in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever ".Russian has a word for that: недоговороспособны and it's characterised US behaviour since at least this event (in Obama's time). Can't make an agreement with them and, even if you do, they won't keep it.

[Jun 26, 2020] Gaslighting Nobody, The Blob Struggles for Primacy by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

Jun 24, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The national security elite now wants us to believe we are seeing things that aren't really there. 'Gaslight' lobbycard, from left, Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman, 1944. (Photo by LMPC via Getty Images)

Ten years ago, "restraint" was considered code for "isolationism" and its purveyors were treated with nominal attention and barely disguised condescension. Today, agitated national security elites who can no longer ignore the restrainers -- and the positive attention they're getting -- are trying to cut them down to size.

We saw this recently when Peter Feaver, Hal Brands, and William Imboden, who all made their mark promoting George W. Bush's war policies after 9/11, published "In Defense of the Blob" for Foreign Affairs in April. My own pushback received an attempted drubbing in The Washington Post by national security professor Daniel Drezner ( he of the Twitter fame ): "For one thing, her essay repeatedly contradicts itself. The Blob is an exclusive cabal, and yet Vlahos also says it's on the wane."

One can be both, Professor. As they say, Rome didn't fall in a day. What we are witnessing are individuals and institutions sensing existential vulnerabilities. The restrainers have found a nerve and the Blob is feeling the pinch. Now it's starting to throw its tremendous girth around.

The latest example is from Michael J. Mazarr, senior political scientist at the Rand Corporation, which since 1948 has essentially provided the brainpower behind the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. Mazarr published this voluminous warrant against restrainers in the most recent issue of The Washington Quarterly, which is run by the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University. Its editorial board reeks of the conventional internationalist thinking that has prevailed over the last 70 years.

In "Rethinking Restraint: Why It Fails in Practice," Mazarr insists that the critics have it all wrong: "American primacy" is way overstated and the U.S. has been more moderate in military interventions than it's given credit for. Moreover, he says, the restrainers divide current "US strategy into two broad caricatures -- primacy or liberal hegemony at one extreme, and restraint at the other. Such an approach overlooks a huge, untidy middle ground where the views of most US national security officials reside and where most US policies operate."

There is much to unpack in his nearly 10,000-word brief, and much to counter it. For example, Monica Duffy Toft has done incredible research into the history of U.S. interventions over the last 70 years, in part studying the number of times we've used force in response to incidents of foreign aggression. While the United States engaged in 46 military interventions from 1948 to 1991, from 1992 to 2017, that number increased fourfold to 188 (chart below). Kind of calls Mazarr's "frequent impulse to moderation" theory into question.

But I would like to zero in on the most infuriating charge, which mimics Drezner, Brands, Feaver, et al.: that the idea of a powerful, largely homogeneous foreign policy establishment dominating top levels of government, think tanks, media, and academia is really all in our heads. It's not real.

This weak attempt to gaslight the rest of us is an insult to George Cukor's 1944 Hollywood classic . It's unworthy. In the section "There is No Sinister National Security Elite," Mazarr turns to Stephen Walt (who wrote an entire book on the self-destructive Blob) and Andrew Bacevich (who has written that the ideology of American exceptionalism and primacy "serves the interests of those who created the national security state and those who still benefit from its continued existence"). This elite, both men charge, enjoy "status, influence, and considerable wealth" in return for supporting the consensus.

To this Mazarr contends, "Apart from collections of anecdotes, those convinced of the existence of such a homogenous elite offer no objective evidence -- such as surveys, interviews, or comprehensive literature reviews -- to back up these sweeping claims." Then failing to offer his own evidence, he argues:

on specific policy questions -- whether to go to war or conduct a humanitarian intervention, or what policy to adopt toward China or Cuba or Russia or Iran -- debates in Washington are deep, intense, and sometimes bitter. To take just a single example from recent history, the Obama administration's decision to endorse a surge in Afghanistan came only after extended deliberation and soul-searching, and it included a major, and highly controversial, element of restraint -- a very public deadline to begin a graduated withdrawal.

Let's go back to 2009, because some of us actually remember these "deep, intense, and sometimes bitter" times.

First, the only "bitter debates" were between the military, which wanted to "surge" 40,000 troops into Afghanistan in the first year of Obama's presidency, and the president, who had promised to bring the war to an end. After months, Obama "compromised" when in December 2009, he announced a plan for 30,000 new troops (which would bring the then-current number to 98,000) and a timetable for withdrawal of 18 months hence, which really pleased no one , not even the outlier restrainers, like Mazarr suggests.

In fact, restrainers knew the timetable was bunk, and it was. In 2011, there were still 100,000 troops on the ground. In fact, it didn't get down to pre-2009 levels until December 2013.

But let it be clear: the only contention in December 2009 was over the timetable (the hawks at the Heritage Foundation and AEI wanted an open-ended commitment) and whether the president should have been more deferential to his generals (General Stanley McCrystal had just been installed as commander in Afghanistan and the mainstream media was fawning ). Otherwise, every major think tank in town and national security pundit blasted out press releases and op-eds supporting the presidents strategy with varying degrees of enthusiasm. None, aside from the usual TAC suspects, raised a serious note against it. Examples:

John " Eating Soup with a Knife " Nagl, Center for a New American Security : "This strategy will protect the Afghan population with international forces now and build Afghan security forces that in time will allow an American drawdown–leaving behind a more capable Afghan government and a more secure region which no longer threatens the United States and our allies." Each of the CNAS fellows on this press release offer a variation on the same theme, with some more energetic than others. Ditto for this one from The Council on Foreign Relations .

Vanda Felhab-Brown, Brookings Institution : "there would have been no chance to turn the security situation around, take the momentum away from the Taliban, and hence, enable economic development and improvements in governance and rule of law, without the surge."

David Ignatius, The Washington Post : "Obama has made what I think is the right decision: The only viable 'exit strategy' from Afghanistan is one that starts with a bang -- by adding 30,000 more U.S. troops to secure the major population centers, so that control can be transferred to the Afghan army and police."

Ahead of Obama's decision (during the "bitter debate"), the Brookings Institution's Michael O'Hanlon, a fixture on The Washington Pos t op-ed pages and cable news shows -- was pushing for the maximum : "President Barack Obama should approve the full buildup his commanders are requesting, even as he also steels the nation for a difficult and uncertain mission ahead."

Meanwhile, all of the so-called progressive national security groups, including the Center for American Progress, Third Way, and the National Security Network, heralded Obama's plan as "a smarter, stronger strategy that stated clear objectives and is based on American security interests, namely preventing terrorist attacks."

"Counterintuitively," they said in a joint statement , "sending more troops will allow us to get out more quickly."

Anthony Cordesman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has always been a thoughtful skeptic, but he never fails to offer a hedge on whatever new plan comes down the pike. Here he is on Obama's surge , exemplifying how difficult it was/is for the establishment to just call a failure a failure:

The strategy President Obama has set forth in broad terms can still win if the Afghan government and Afghan forces become more effective, if NATO/ISAF national contingents provide more unity of effort, if aid donors focus on the fact that development cannot succeed unless the Afghan people see real progress where they live in the near future, and if the United States shows strategic patience and finally provides the resources necessary to win.

That's a lot of "ifs," but they provide amazing cover for those who don't want to admit the cause is lost -- or can't -- because their work depends on giving the military and State Department something to do. This is what happens when your think tank relies on government contracts and grants and arms industry money . According to The New York Times, major defense contractors Lockheed Martin and Boeing gave some $77 million to a dozen think tanks between 2010 and 2016.

They aren't getting the money to advocate that troops, contractors, NGO's, and diplomats come home and stay put. Money and agenda underwrites who is heading the think tanks, who speaks for the national security programs, and who populates conferences, book launches, speeches, and television appearances. Mazarr doesn't think this can be quantified but it's rather easy. Google "2009 Afghanistan conference/panel/speakers" and plenty of events come up. Pick any year, the results are predictable.

Here's a Brookings Panel in August 2009 , assessing the Afghanistan election, including Anthony Cordesman, Kimberly Kagan, and Michael O'Hanlon. Not a lot of "diversity" there. Here's a taste of the 2009 annual CNAS conference, which featured the usual suspects, including David Petraeus, Ambassador Nicholas Burns, and 1,400 people in attendance. Aside from Andrew " Skunk at the Garden Party " Bacevich, there was little to distinguish one world view from another among the panelists. (CNAS was originally founded in support of Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign; she spoke at the inaugural conference in 2007. Former president Michele Flournoy later landed in the E-Ring of the Pentagon.) Meanwhile, here's a Hudson Institute tribute to David Petraeus, attended by Scooter Libby, and a December 2009 Atlantic Council panel with -- you guessed it -- Kimberly Kagan and two military representatives thrown in to pump up McChrystal and NATO and staying the course.

On top of it all, these events and their people never failed to get the attention of the major corporate media, which just loved the idea of warrior-monk generals "liberating" Afghanistan through a "government in a box" counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy.

Honestly, thank goodness for Cato , which before the new Quincy Institute, was the only think tank to feature COIN critics like Colonel Gian Gentile , and not just as foils. The Center for the National Interest also harbored skeptics of the president's strategy. But they were outnumbered too.

This is what I want to convey. Mazarr boasts there is a galaxy of opinion today over U.S. policy in Iran, China, Russia, NATO. I would argue there is a narrow spectrum of technical and ideological disagreement in all these cases, but nowhere was it more important to have strong, competing voices than during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and there was none of that in any realistic sense of the word.

I challenge him and the others to take down the straw men and own the ecosystem to which they owe their success in Washington (Mazarr just published a piece called "Toward a New Theory of Power Projection" for goodness sake). Stop trying to pretend what is there isn't. Realists and restrainers are happy to debate the merits of our different approaches, but gaslighting is for nefarious lovers and we're no Ingrid Bergman. about the author

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC since 2007, focusing on national security, foreign policy, civil liberties and domestic politics. She served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News in Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also worked as a beat reporter at Bridge News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger, she got her start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.

[Jun 25, 2020] Pompeo's UN Move Against Iran Will Fail. Why Is He Still Pressing It

Jun 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Pompeo is suggesting that Iran will spend tens of millions on planes, fly them unopposed through the radar coverage of several countries, to let Iranian Kamikaze pilots crash them into some temple in Nepal.

This does not make any sense. No foreign politician will be impressed by this 'argument'. Pompeo's tweet is for consumption at home.

At the UN the U.S. is trying to get a new arms embargo resolution against Iran:

The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump introduced a long-awaited U.N. Security Council (UNSC) draft resolution extending an arms embargo on Iran that is due to expire in October, setting the stage for a great-power clash and likely veto in the U.N.'s principal security body, according to a copy of the draft obtained by Foreign Policy .
...
If passed, the resolution would fall under Chapter VII of the U.N. charter, making it legally binding and enforceable. But the U.S. measure, according to several U.N. Security Council diplomats, stands little chance of being adopted by the 15-nation council.
...
Some council diplomats and other nonproliferation experts see the U.S. move as a way to score political points at home , not to do anything about Iran's destabilizing activities in the region.

"The skeptic in me says that the objective of this exercise is to go through the arms embargo resolution, and when it fails, to use that as an excuse to get a snapback of the embargo, and if and when that fails too, to use as a political talking point in the election campaign ," said Mark Fitzpatrick, a former State Department nonproliferation official now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Since China and Russia are almost certain to ignore any U.N. arms embargo forced by U.S. maneuvers, the practical impact on Iran's ability to cause mischief will be minimal, he said.

"It's not actually about stopping any arms from China and Russia, it's about winning a political argument ," he said.

We explained that the U.S. does not have a 'snapback' option . Russia and China have also clarified that :

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the Chinese government's top diplomat, Wang Yi, both wrote to the 15-member council and U.N. chief Antonio Guterres as the United States threatens to spark a so-called sanctions snapback under the Iran nuclear deal, even though Washington quit the accord in 2018.

Lavrov wrote in the May 27 letter, made public this week, that the United States was being "ridiculous and irresponsible."

"This is absolutely unacceptable and serves only to recall the famous English proverb about having one's cake and eating it," Lavrov wrote.

Washington has threatened to trigger a return of U.N. sanctions on Iran if the Security Council does not extend an arms embargo due to expire in October under Tehran's deal with world powers to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons.
...
Lavrov cited a 1971 International Court of Justice opinion, which found that a fundamental principle governing international relationships was that "a party which disowns or does not fulfill its own obligations cannot be recognized as retaining the rights which it claims to derive from the relationship."

Despite the evident failure to convince others the U.S. continues make stupid arguments :

Russia and China will be isolated at the United Nations if they continue down the "road to dystopia" by blocking a U.S. bid to extend a weapons ban on Iran, U.S. Iran envoy Brian Hook told Reuters ahead of his formal pitch of the embargo to the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday.
...
"We see a widening gap between Russia and China and the international community," Hook said in an interview with Reuters on Tuesday evening.

The U.S. has left the JCPoA deal and can not claim a right under that deal to snap back the sanctions that the deal has lifted. It is the U.S. that is isolated. Even its allies do not support the attempt:

"We firmly believe that any unilateral attempt to trigger UN sanctions snapback would have serious adverse consequences in the UNSC," the foreign ministers of Britain, France, and Germany said in a statement on June 19. "We would not support such a decision which would be incompatible with our current efforts to preserve the JCPoA."

The Trump policy against Iran has failed. He has tried a 'maximum pressure' campaign to blackmail Iran into more concessions. But despite sanctions and economic problems caused by them Iran is not willing to talk with him. Its conditions for talks are clear :

"We have no problem with talks with the U.S., but only if Washington fulfils its obligations under the nuclear deal, apologies and compensates Tehran for its withdrawal from the 2015 deal," Rouhani said in a televised speech.

The U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, including the new sanctions against Syria under the 'Ceasar's Law', have been helping Iran to strengthen its position :

Iran is reaping huge benefits, including more robust allies and resistant strongholds as a result of the US's flawed Middle Eastern policies. Motivated by the threat of the implementation of "Caesar' Law", Iran has prepared a series of steps to sell its oil and finance its allies, bypassing depletion of its foreign currency reserves.

Iranian companies found in Syria a paradise for strategic investment and offered the needed alternative to a Syrian economy crippled by sanctions and nine years of war. Iran considers Syria a fertile ground to expand its commerce and business like never before.

With Iran's influence growing and Russia making inroads even with once staunch U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia it seems that real U.S. influence in the Middle East is on a decisive downturn.

Whatever Pompous Pompeo says or tweets will not change that. But there's a sucker born every minute. Some of those may still fall for the stuff he says.

---
Twice a year I ask readers of this blog to support my effort. Please consider contributing .

Posted by b on June 24, 2020 at 17:10 UTC | Permalink

[Jun 25, 2020] Obama also tried to milk the "Iran peace agreement" for public relations benefits but this couldn't cover his warmongering and war crimes

"Diplomacy is for suckers" only gets you so far.
Jun 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Jackrabbit , Jun 24 2020 23:27 utc | 21
David G @Jun24 22:55 #16
he only reason Obama undertook the JCPOA
Are you an Obama apologist?

Obama did the JCPOA because he was forced to. The Syrian War was taking longer than expected. The thinking in the early part of the war was that "the road to Tehran runs through Damascus".

In fact, JCPOA was so never ratified by US Congress. That's why Trump could so easily end US participation (as intended/expected). Iran has always been in the cross-hairs. The only question is one of timing.

Obama also tried to milk the "Iran peace agreement" for public relations benefits but this couldn't cover his warmongering and war crimes:


!!

[Jun 25, 2020] Former ambassador to Kiev Pyat was not a diplomat, he's a neocon monomaniac.

Jun 25, 2020 | www.unz.com

Vojkan , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 6:35 am GMT

@Wizard of Oz Geoffrey R.Pyatt:

In Greece, about tensions between Turkey and Greece caused by Turkish aggressiveness, ""If there were to be any sort of escalation, the only winner is our shared adversaries. The winner is Vladimir Putin [ ]"

or

https://orthodoxtimes.com/geoffrey-pyatt-russia-uses-the-church-to-foment-instability-and-undermine-democracy/

Before that in the Ukraine,

1/3 Debaltseve. We are confident these are Russian military, not separatist, systems pic.twitter.com/RLX3z8hQZn

-- Geoffrey Pyatt (@USAmbPyatt) February 14, 2015


https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-us-ambassador-pyatt-russia/27156953.html

Of course, he doesn't provide any evidence for what he claims, but hey, the US had a Secretary of State whose presentation of "evidence" at the UN the world will forever remember, so one can't expect higher standards from sycophants Americans make pass as diplomats.

He's not a diplomat, he's a monomaniac.

[Jun 24, 2020] Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades gas and oil; the USA converted Ukraine into a debt slave, sells Ukraine expensive weapons and cornered their energy industry; The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades – gas and oil. In a similar fashion, Russia is doing this with Belarus until the present time. Russia is the only possible consumer of what Ukraine used to manufacture – a market that has disappeared. Gas turbines used to be made in Ukraine. Now, this has moved to Russia. Of course, the skilled Ukrainians went to Russia with their know-how. ..."
"... To the best of my knowledge the USSR was the only empire that actually subsidized its colonies – Poland, East Germany, Ukraine etc. Russia is far better off without them. ..."
"... Ukrainian supermarkets are overflowing with French/German/Italian products. European supermarkets are devoid of Ukrainian products. ..."
Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Likbez, June 24, 2020 at 4:02 am GMT

@Mr. Hack

Only a complete and utter incompetent (or a rabid Ukrainian nationalist) can call Ukraine an independent state. It is de-facto a colony of the West. A debt slave.

I applaud the US response of supporting Ukraine's aspirations for a freer, more Western-oriented country and that it continues to support Ukraine's territorial interests over those of Russia's.

This was not about supporting Ukrainian aspirations for a freer, more Western-oriented country. It is about kicking out Russia from Ukrainian markets and plundering Ukraine all by themselves. Mainly by Germany and the USA -- to major players of Euromaydan color revolution. For Germans this is return to "Drang nach Osten" on a new level, on the level of neoliberal neocolonialism.

They used Western nationalists as their fifth column, but Western Ukrainian suffered from the results no less then people in Eastern Ukraine. Many now try to move to Kiev, Kiev region and further East in order to escape poverty and unemployment. Seasonal labor to Russia (mainly builders) diminished rapidly. Train communication now is blocked, and for Western Ukraine only Poland now represents a chance to earn money for the family to survive the winter.

For the USA this is first of all about selling Ukraine expensive weaponry, wasting precious Ukrainian resources on permanent hostility with Russia (with Donbas conflict as a real win to further the USA geopolitical ambitions -- in line with the "Full spectrum dominance" doctrine) , cornering Ukrainian energy market (uranium supplies for power stations, etc.), destruction, or buy-out of a few competing industries other than extracting industries and maquiladoras, getting better conditions for the EU exports and multinationals operating in Ukraine (and initially with plans for re-export products to Russia tax free) and increasing the country debt to "debt slave" level.

In other words this is a powerful kick in a chin by Obama to Putin. Not a knockdown, but very close.

For Ukraine first of all that means rapid accumulation of a huge external debt -- conditions of economic slavery, out of which there is no escape. Ukrainian people paid a very dear price for their Euromaydan illusions. They became mass slave labor in Poland. Prostitutes in Germany. Seasonal picker of fruits in some other EU countries (GB, France). A new European blacks, so to speak.

The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya. The currency dropped 300%, and 80% Ukrainians now live in abysmal poverty, while neoliberal oligarchs allied with the West continue to plunder the country. Gold reserves were moved to the USA.

If I had to choose between two colonizers, I probably would prefer Russians. They are still colonizers, but they are less ruthless and brutal colonizers.

Alfred , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 7:45 am GMT

@likbez If I had to choose between two colonizers, I probably would prefer Russians. They are still colonizers, but they are less ruthless and brutal colonizers.

I agree with 90% of what you wrote, but I would like to correct the above.

Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades – gas and oil. In a similar fashion, Russia is doing this with Belarus until the present time. Russia is the only possible consumer of what Ukraine used to manufacture – a market that has disappeared. Gas turbines used to be made in Ukraine. Now, this has moved to Russia. Of course, the skilled Ukrainians went to Russia with their know-how.

To the best of my knowledge the USSR was the only empire that actually subsidized its colonies – Poland, East Germany, Ukraine etc. Russia is far better off without them.

Ukrainian supermarkets are overflowing with French/German/Italian products. European supermarkets are devoid of Ukrainian products.

[Jun 24, 2020] There was a joke in Russia that for the coup in 2014 in Kiev Obama deserves a medal "For the liberation of Crimea" (there was a medal of this name in WWII)

Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT

Yes, Nudelman and her ilk are rabidly anti-Russian. But what they did in Ukraine revealed a very different thing: globohomo elites are mentally degenerate, they cannot foresee even immediate consequences of their moves.

There was a joke in Russia that for the coup in 2014 in Kiev Obama deserves a medal "For the liberation of Crimea" (there was a medal of this name in WWII). There was another joke, that Ukraine without Crimea is like a purebred stallion without balls.

Neocons planned to make Ukraine a battering rum against Russia. They did not understand that a log rotten through and through cannot serve as a battering ram. Now they are stuck with that wreck ("you break it – you own it" rule) and don't know what to do with it. Previous US administration and DNC big shots (Biden, Pelosi, Schiff, and Co) used it mostly as a rout of stealing US taxpayers' money. Current administration does not seem to have even this use for it. The US keeps proving the age-old wisdom that when you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere. Putin appears to have a huge stock of popcorn.

[Jun 24, 2020] Behind the veil of the protest movement, the war on the American people is gaining pace by Mike Whitney

Notable quotes:
"... It's because the Democrats think that kowtowing to BLM will give them the winning edge in the November balloting. That's what it's all about. That's why they draped themselves in Kente cloth and knelt for the cameras. They think their black constituents are too stupid to see through their groveling fakery. They think that blacks will forget that Joe Biden pushed through legislation "which eliminated parole for federal prisoners and limited the amount of time sentences could be reduced for good behavior." ..."
"... The stupidity of the Dems was shown this week when they agreed to three Biden/Trump debates. They should leave him in his basement and hope for the best. They feature political ads where Biden slurs his speech! These are professionals, so it tells me they spent all day and did 40 takes and this was the best he could do. The election will be great comedy, or perhaps ..."
"... Clinton is the best evidence that certain people agree to be blackmailed in exchange for power, as Andrew Anglin wrote this week. ..."
Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

"This is not a momentary civil disturbance. This is a serious, and highly organized political movement It is deep and profound and has vast political ambitions. It is insidious, it will grow. It's goal is to end liberal democracy and challenge western civilization itself. This is an ideological movement Even now, many of us pretend this is about police brutality. We think we can fix it by regulating chokeholds or spending more on de-escalation training. We're too literal and good-hearted to understand what's happening. But we have no idea what we are up against. ..These are not protests. This is a totalitarian political movement and someone needs to save the country from it." Tucker Carlson

Tucker Carlson is right, the protests and riots are not a momentary civil disturbance. They are an attack the Constitutional Republic itself, the heart and soul of American democracy. The Black Lives Matter protests are just the tip of the spear, they are an expression of public outrage that is guaranteed under the first amendment. But don't be deceived, there's more here than meets the eye. BLM is funded by foundations that seek to overthrow our present form of government and install an authoritarian regime guided by technocrats, oligarchs and corporatists all of who believe that Chinese-type despotism is far-more compatible with capitalism than "inefficient" democracy. The chaos in the streets is merely the beginning of an excruciating transition from one system to another. This is an excerpt from an article by F. William Engdahl at Global Research:

"By 2016, Black Lives Matter had established itself as a well-organized network .. That year the Ford Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy announced the formation of the Black-Led Movement Fund (BLMF), "a six-year pooled donor campaign aimed at raising $100 million for the Movement for Black Lives coalition" in which BLM was a central part. By then Soros foundations had already given some $33 million in grants to the Black Lives Matter movement .. ..

The BLMF identified itself as being created by top foundations including in addition to the Ford Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation and the Soros Open Society Foundations." ( "America's Own Color Revolution ", Global Research)

$100 million is alot of money. How has that funding helped BLM expand its presence in politics and social media? How many activists and paid employees operate within the network disseminating information, building new chapters, hosting community outreach programs, and fine-tuning an emergency notification system that allows them to put tens of thousands of activists on the streets in cities across the country at a moment's notice? Isn't that what we've seen for the last three weeks, throngs of angry protestors swarming in more than 400 cities across America all at the beck-and-call of a shadowy group whose political intentions are still not clear?

And what about the rioting, looting and arson that broke out in numerous cities following the protests? Was that part of the script too? Why haven't BLM leaders condemned the destruction of private property or offered a public apology for the downtown areas that have been turned into wastelands? In my own hometown of Seattle, the downtown corridor– which once featured Nordstrom, Pottery Barn and other upscale retail shops– is now a checkerboard of broken glass, plywood covers and empty streets all covered in a thick layer of garish spray-paint. The protest leaders said they wanted to draw attention to racial injustice and police brutality. Okay, but how does looting Nordstrom help to achieve that goal?

And what role have the Democrats played in protest movement?

They've been overwhelmingly supportive, that's for sure. In fact, I can't think of even one Democrat who's mentioned the violence, the looting or the toppling of statues. Why is that?

It's because the Democrats think that kowtowing to BLM will give them the winning edge in the November balloting. That's what it's all about. That's why they draped themselves in Kente cloth and knelt for the cameras. They think their black constituents are too stupid to see through their groveling fakery. They think that blacks will forget that Joe Biden pushed through legislation "which eliminated parole for federal prisoners and limited the amount of time sentences could be reduced for good behavior."

According to the Black Agenda Repor t: "Biden and (South Carolina's Strom) Thurmond joined hands to push 1986 and 1988 drug enforcement legislation that created the nefarious sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine as well as other draconian measures that implicate him as one of the initiators of what became mass incarceration. " Biden also spearheaded "the attacks on Anita Hill when she came forward to testify against the supreme court nominee Clarence Thomas". All told, Biden's record on race is much worse than Trump's despite the media's pathetic attempts to portray Trump as Adolph Hitler. It's just more bunkum from the dissembling media.

Bottom line: The Democrats think they can ride racial division and social unrest all the way to the White House. That's what they are betting on.

So, yes, the Dems are exploiting the protests for political advantage, but it goes much deeper than that. After all, we know from evidence that was uncovered during the Russiagate investigation, that DNC leaders are intimately linked to the Intel agencies, law enforcement (FBI), and the elite media. So it's not too much of a stretch to assume that these deep state agents and assets work together to shape the narrative that they think gives them the best chance of regaining power. Because, that's what this is really all about, power. Just as Russiagate was about power (removing the president using disinformation, spies, surveillance and other skulduggery.), and just as the Covid-19 fiasco was essentially about power (collapsing the economy while imposing medical martial law on the population.), so too, the BLM protest movement is also about power, the power to inflict massive damage on the country's main urban centers with the intention of destabilizing the government, restructuring the economy and paving the way for a Democratic victory in November. It's all about power, real, unalloyed political muscle.

Surprisingly, one of the best critiques of what is currently transpiring was written by Niles Niemuth at the World Socialist Web Site. Here's what he said about the widespread toppling of statues:

"The attacks on the monuments were pioneered by the increasingly frenzied attempt by the Democratic Party and the New York Times to racialize American history, to create a narrative in which the history of mankind is reduced to the history of racial struggle. This campaign has produced a pollution of democratic consciousness, which meshes entirely with the reactionary political interests driving it.

It is worth noting that the one institution seemingly immune from this purge is the Democratic Party, which served as the political wing of the Confederacy and, subsequently, the KKK.

This filthy historical legacy is matched only by the Democratic Party's contemporary record in supporting wars that, as a matter of fact, primarily targeted nonwhites. Democrats supported the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and under Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. The New York Times was a leading champion and propagandist for all of these war." ( "Hands off the monuments to Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant!, WSWS)

What the author is referring to is The 1619 Project, which is a racialized version of American history that was published by the Times on August 19, 2019. The deliberately-distorted version of history was cobbled together in anticipation of increasing social unrest and racial antagonism. The rioting, looting and vast destruction of America's urban core can all be traced back to a document that postulates that the country was founded on racial hatred and exploitation. In other words, The 1619 Project provides the perfect ideological justification for the chaos and violence that has torn the country apart for the last three weeks. This is an excerpt from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

"The essays featured in the magazine are organized around the central premise that all of American history is rooted in race hatred -- specifically, the uncontrollable hatred of "black people" by "white people." Hannah-Jones writes in the series' introduction: "Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country. "

This is a false and dangerous conception. DNA is a chemical molecule that contains the genetic code of living organisms and determines their physical characteristics and development . Hannah-Jones's reference to DNA is part of a growing tendency to derive racial antagonisms from innate biological processes .where does this racism come from? It is embedded, claims Hannah-Jones, in the historical DNA of American "white people." Thus, it must persist independently of any change in political or economic conditions .

. No doubt, the authors of The Project 1619 essays would deny that they are predicting race war, let alone justifying fascism. But ideas have a logic; and authors bear responsibility for the political conclusions and consequences of their false and misguided arguments." ("The New York Times's 1619 Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history", World Socialist Web Site)

Keep in mind, this essay in the WSWS was written a full year before BLM protests broke out across the country. Was Hannah-Jones enlisted to create a document that would provide the dry tinder for the massive and coordinated demonstrations that have left the country stunned and divided?

Probably, after all, (as noted above) the author's theory is that one race is genetically programed to exploit the other. ( "Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country. ") Well, if we assume that whites are genetically and irreversibly "racist", then we must also assume that the country that these whites founded is racist and evil. Thus, the only logical remedy for this situation, is to crush the white segment of the population, destroy their symbols, icons, and history, and replace the system of government with one that better reflects the values of the emerging non-Caucasian majority. Simply put, The Project 1619 creates the rationale for sustained civil unrest, deepening political polarization and violent revolution.

The 1619 Project is a calculated provocation meant to exacerbate racial animosities and pave the way to open conflagration. And it has succeeded beyond anyone's wildest imagination. The nation is split into warring camps while Washington has devolved into fratricidal warfare. Was that the objective, to destabilize the country in preparation for the dissolution of the current system followed by a fundamental restructuring of the government consistent with the identity politics lauded by the Democrats?

The Democrats, the Intel agencies and the media are all in bed together fomenting unrest with the intention of decimating the economy, crushing the emerging opposition and imposing their despotic one-party system on all of us. Here's a clip from a piece by Paul Craig Roberts that sums up the role of the New York Times in inciting race-based violence:

"The New York Times editorial board covers up the known indisputable truth with their anti-white "1619 project," an indoctrination program to inculcate hatred of white people in blacks and guilt in white people.

Why does the New York Times lie, brainwash blacks into hatred of whites, and attempt to brainwash whites into guilt for the creation of a New World labor force four centuries ago? Why do Americans tolerate the New York Times fomenting of racial hatred in a multicultural society?

The New York Times is a vile organization. The New York Times attempts to discredit the President of the United States and did all it could to frame him on false charges. The New York Times painted General Flynn, who honorably served the US, as a Russian agent and enabled General Flynn's frame-up on false and now dropped charges. The New York Times spews hatred of white people. And now the New York Times accuses the American military of celebrating white supremacism.

Does America have a worse enemy than the New York Times? The New York Times is clearly and intentionally making a multicultural America impossible . By threatening white people with the prospect of hate-driven racial violence, the New York Times editorial board is fomenting the rise of white supremacy." ( "The New York Times Editorial Board Is a Threat to Multicultural America ", The Unz Review)

The editors of the Times don't hate whites, they are merely attacking the growing number of disillusioned white working people who have left the Democratic party in frustration due to their globalist policies regarding trade, immigration, offshoring, outsourcing and the relentless hollowing out of the nation's industrial core . The Dems have abandoned these people altogether and –now that they realize they will never be able to lure them back into their camp– they've decided to wage a full-blown, scorched-earth, take-no-prisoners war on them. They've decided to crush them mercilessly and fill their ranks with multi-ethnic, bi-racial groups that will work for pennies on the dollar. (which will keep the Dems corporate supporters happy.) So, no, the Times does not hate white people. What they hate is the growing populist movement that derailed Hillary Clinton and put anti-globalist Trump in the White House. That's the real target of this operation, the disillusioned throng of working people who have washed their hands of the Democrats for good. Here's more background from Paul Craig Roberts:

"On August 12 Dean Baquet, executive editor of the New York Times, met with the Times' employees to refocus the Times' attack on Trump . The Times, Baquet said, is shifting from Trump-Russia to Trump's racism. The Times will spend the run-up to the 2020 presidential election building the Trump-is-a-racist narrative. Of course, if Trump is a racist it means that the people who elected him are also racists. Indeed, in Baquet's view, Americans have always been racist. To establish this narrative, the New York Times has launched the "1619 Project," the purpose of which is "to reframe the country's history."

According to the Washington Examiner, "The basic thrust of the 1619 Project is that everything in American history is explained by slavery and race. The message is woven throughout the first publication of the project, an entire edition of the Times magazine. It begins with an overview of race in America -- 'Our democracy's founding ideals were false when they were written. Black Americans have fought to make them true.'

The premise that America originated as a racist slave state is to be woven into all sections of the Times -- news, business, sports, travel, the entire newspaper. The project intends to take the "reframing" of the United States into the schools where white Americans are to be taught that they are racist descendants of slave holders. A participant in this brainwashing of whites, which will make whites guilty and defenseless, says "this project takes wing when young people are able to read this and understand the way that slavery has shaped their country's history." In other words, the New York Times intends to make slavery the ONLY explanation of America.

At the meeting of the executive editor of the New York Times with the Times' employees to refocus the Times' attack on President Trump, Baquet said: "Race in the next year is going to be a huge part of the American story." ( "Is White Genocide Possible? ", The Unz Review)

Repeat: "Race in the next year is going to be a huge part of the American story." Either Baquet has a crystal ball or he had a pretty good idea of the way in which the 1619 Project was going to be used . I suspect it was the latter.

For the last 3 and a half years, Democrats and the media have ridiculed anyone who opposes their globalist policies as racist, fascist, misogynist, homophobic, Bible-thumping, gun-toting, flag-waving, Nascar boosting, white nationalist "deplorables". Now they have decided to intensify the assault on mainly white working people by preemptively destroying the economy, destabilizing the country, and spreading terror far and wide. It's another vicious psy-ops campaign designed to thoroughly demoralize and humiliate the enemy who just happen to be the American people. Here's more form the WSWS:

" It is no coincidence that the promotion of this racial narrative of American history by the Times, the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party and the privileged upper-middle-class layers it represents, comes amid the growth of class struggle in the US and around the world.

The 1619 Project is one component of a deliberate effort to inject racial politics into the heart of the 2020 elections and foment divisions among the working class. The Democrats think it will be beneficial to shift their focus for the time being from the reactionary, militarist anti-Russia campaign to equally reactionary racial politics." (" The New York Times's 1619 Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history " WSWS)

Can you see how the protests are being used to promote the political objectives of elites operating behind the mask of "impartial" reporting? The scheming NY Times has replaced the enlightenment principles articulated in our founding documents with a sordid tale of racial hatred and oppression. The editors seek to eliminate everything we believe as Americans so they can brainwash us into believing that we are evil people deserving of humiliation, repudiation and punishment. Here's more from the same article:

"In the months preceding these events, the New York Times, speaking for dominant sections of the Democratic political establishment, launched an effort to discredit both the American Revolution and the Civil War. In the New York Times' 1619 Project, the American Revolution was presented as a war to defend slavery, and Abraham Lincoln was cast as a garden variety racist

The attacks on the monuments to these men were pioneered by the increasingly frenzied attempt by the Democratic Party and the New York Times to racialize American history, to create a narrative in which the history of mankind is reduced to the history of racial struggle . This campaign has produced a pollution of democratic consciousness, which meshes entirely with the reactionary political interests driving it." (" The New York Times's 1619 Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history" , WSWS)

Ideas have consequences, and the incendiary version of events disseminated by the Times has added fuel to a fire that's spread from one coast to the other. Given the damage that has been done to cities across the country, it would be nice to know how Dean Baquet knew that "race was going to play a huge part" in upcoming events? It's all very suspicious. Here's more:

" Given the 1619 Project's black nationalist narrative, it may appear surprising that nowhere in the issue do the names Malcolm X or Black Panthers appear. Unlike the black nationalists of the 1960s, Hannah-Jones does not condemn American imperialism. She boasts that "we [i.e. African-Americans] are the most likely of all racial groups to serve in the United States military," and celebrates the fact that "we" have fought "in every war this nation has waged." Hannah-Jones does not note this fact in a manner that is at all critical. She does not condemn the creation of a "volunteer" army whose recruiters prey on poverty-stricken minority youth. There is no indication that Hannah-Jones opposes the "War on Terror" and the brutal interventions in Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Syria -- all supported by the Times -- that have killed and made homeless upwards of 20 million people. On this issue, Hannah-Jones is remarkably "color-blind." She is unaware of, or simply indifferent to, the millions of "people of color" butchered and made refugees by the American war machine in the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa." (" The New York Times's 1619 Project: A racialist falsification of American and world histor y", WSWS)

So, black nationalists like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers are excluded from the The 1619 Project's narrative, but the author boasts that blacks "are the most likely of all racial groups to serve in the US military"?? How does that happen unless Hannah-Jones was coached by Democrat leaders about who should and shouldn't be included in the text? None of this passes the smell test. It all suggests that the storyline was shaped by people who had a specific goal in mind. That isn't history, it's fiction written by people who have an ax to grind. The Times even admitted as much in response to the blistering criticism by five of "the most widely read and respected authorities on US history." The New York Times Magazine editor in chief Jake Silverstein rejected the historians' objections saying:

"The project was intended to address the marginalization of African-American history in the telling of our national story and examine the legacy of slavery in contemporary American life. We are not ourselves historians, it is true. We are journalists, trained to look at current events and situations and ask the question: Why is this the way it is?"

WTF! "We are not ourselves historians"? That's the excuse?? Give me a break!

The truth is that there was never any attempt to provide an accurate account of events. From the very onset, the goal was to create a storyline that fit the politics, the politics of provocation, incitement, racial hatred, social unrest and violence. That's what the Times and their allies wanted, and that's what they got.

The Deep State Axis: CIA, DNC, NYT

The three-way alliance between the CIA, the Elite Media, and the Democratic leadership has clearly strengthened and grown since the failed Russiagate fiasco. All three parties were likely involved in the maniacal hyping of the faux-Covid pandemic which paved the way for Depression era unemployment, tens of thousands of bankrupt businesses and a sizable portion of the US population thrust into destitution. Now, these deep state loyalists are promoting a "falsified" race-based version of history that pits one group against the other while diverting attention from the deliberate destruction of the economy and the further consolidation of wealth in the hands of the 1 percent.

Behind the veil of the protest movement, the war on the American people is gaining pace.

SteveK9 , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:02 am GMT

Stopped reading the Times after the buildup to the Iraq War, when it was clear they were lying. Everyone please stop reading the Times, and in particular stop referring to what they are writing. Act like they don't exist. If enough do, they won't.
FB , says: Website Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 4:22 am GMT
Stopped reading when I got to 'Chinese despotism'

Whitney used to have something to say, but his scribblings now go straight to the bottom of the bird cage

Carlton Meyer , says: Website Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 4:22 am GMT
The stupidity of the Dems was shown this week when they agreed to three Biden/Trump debates. They should leave him in his basement and hope for the best. They feature political ads where Biden slurs his speech! These are professionals, so it tells me they spent all day and did 40 takes and this was the best he could do. The election will be great comedy, or perhaps

This is all planned. Biden will be forced to drop out and Bloomberg or even Clinton will arise.

vot tak , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 4:30 am GMT
"Tucker Carlson is right, the protests and riots are not a momentary civil disturbance. They are an attack the Constitutional Republic itself, the heart and soul of American democracy."

I am reminded of david horowitz and chrissy hitchens

And how they promoted Israeli interests after first pretending to be independent thinkers to gain creed for the switch. Standard zionazi-gay psywar tactic.

schnellandine , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 4:42 am GMT
@Carlton Meyer

The stupidity of the Dems was shown this week when they agreed to three Biden/Trump debates.

This is all planned. Biden will be forced to drop out and Bloomberg or even Clinton will arise.

Stupid and planned?

Clinton is the best evidence that certain people agree to be blackmailed in exchange for power, as Andrew Anglin wrote this week. Why should DNC care if Trump is 're-elected'? And if they don't care, who not take a stab at installing an intersectional DNC pinnacle fraudster via the griftiest, most insulting, infuriating way possible? They can't lose.

[Jun 24, 2020] A nice example of projection from Ms. Nuland

Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [661]

Nuland wrote that Russia did "violate arms control treaties, international law, the sovereignty of its neighbors, and the integrity of elections in the United States " But wait a minute, doesn't she really mean Israel, not Russia?

And in retrospect, America's penchant for throwing little countries against the wall has never worked all that well. I'm thinking Cuba, Vietnam, Somalia.

Good article, Mr. Giraldi.

BL , June 23, 2020 at 10:57 am GMT

@anon

" It is hard to imagine that any U.S. administration would tolerate a similar attempt by a foreign nation to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, particularly if it were backed by a $5 billion budget, "

We could chalk this up to a lack of imagination on the part of our intrepid former CIA scribbler, but anyone paying even cursory attention couldn't help but conclude that the Obama administration didn't just tolerate, it choreographed, a plot against Trump in league with foreign intelligence services.

... ... ...

AnonFromTN , June 23, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT
Yes, Nudelman and her ilk are rabidly anti-Russian. But what they did in Ukraine revealed a very different thing: globohomo elites are mentally degenerate, they cannot foresee even immediate consequences of their moves.

There was a joke in Russia that for the coup in 2014 in Kiev Obama deserves a medal "For the liberation of Crimea" (there was a medal of this name in WWII). There was another joke, that Ukraine without Crimea is like a purebred stallion without balls.

Neocons planned to make Ukraine a battering rum against Russia. They did not understand that a log rotten through and through cannot serve as a battering ram. Now they are stuck with that wreck ("you break it – you own it" rule) and don't know what to do with it. Previous US administration and DNC big shots (Biden, Pelosi, Schiff, and Co) used it mostly as a rout of stealing US taxpayers' money. Current administration does not seem to have even this use for it. The US keeps proving the age-old wisdom that when you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere. Putin appears to have a huge stock of popcorn.

anonymous [400] Disclaimer , June 23, 2020 at 2:52 pm GMT

So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance.

That's pretty much it, they just use different rhetoric to appeal to their constituencies. Might makes right; there is no other law beside bandit law. The Russians have been a barrier to the US being able to spread itself over the entire globe and rob everyone weaker than itself. The US was behind all these atrocious jihadi mercenaries even as it's pretended to be against them. The Russians stopped the US project of terror and overthrow in Syria and that's outraged the Americans who thought they could act as they pleased. Libya was destroyed by the wonderful, hip Obama who many stupid Americans still think was a nice person. But with Russia, they can huff and puff but can't blow their walls down. They have a military that can deter the Americans unlike all the other smaller victim states.

EliteCommInc. , June 23, 2020 at 3:33 pm GMT
"She accuses the Kremlin of having "seized" Crimea, but fails to see the heavy footprint of the U.S. military in Afghanistan and Iraq and as a regional enabler of Israeli and Saudi war crimes. One wonders if she is aware that Russia, which she sees as expansionistic, has only one overseas military base while the United States has more than a thousand."

I think this is a mistake. I think Miss Nuland knows exactly how large and intense the US ft print is and belies it should be larger and more intense. There are sincere people who believe that the US must as duty make the work safe for democracy even the means of getting there is any and everything bt democratic because in the long run -- the benefits will outweigh.

and as proof of er sincerity -- it's not just Russia (Though I understand why Dr. Giraldi would like to tackle one territorial issue at a time makes sense)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/21/china-adapting-and-improving-on-tactics-deployed-b/

peter mcloughlin , June 23, 2020 at 3:51 pm GMT
I agree that "backing Moscow into a corner with no way out" is a dangerous strategy. This is not the Cold War: in the Cold War the United States and USSR were able to keep peace, a balance of power, an equilibrium where neither side's vital interests were threatened. Russia had a buffer zone: not today. America was at the height of its global economic power: today it is being overtaken by China. In the Cold War the big powers avoided nuclear Armageddon – though at times appeared to come close – because they were able to. The misguided thinking today is: "we got through the Cold War we can get this". This is not a re-run of 1945-1991: it is the lead-in to the holocaust that period skillfully avoided.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
AnonFromTN , June 23, 2020 at 4:44 pm GMT
@GMC Let's give credit where credit is due. Yes, the Empire wanted to buy Ukraine, preferably on the cheap (considering that the goods were not of the first quality). But for the sale to proceed you need two sides. You need a fraudster and a sucker. You cannot consider morons who sold their would-be country for beads blameless. Not to mention that many local thugs got a cut. Smarter thieves took their loot and ran away, like Yats. Dumber and/or greedier ones, like Porky and Kolomoisky, remained and kept trying to steal more. The suckers (the rest of the population) are left holding the bag. Stupidity is always punished in the end, but not always so severely.
Kouros , June 23, 2020 at 5:34 pm GMT
American Oligarchy really wants to take over the Russian economy and assets (as well as China's and Iran's)
Alfred , June 23, 2020 at 5:53 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

I applaud the US response of supporting Ukraine's aspirations for a freer more Western oriented country

You are joking surely? The country is run by Jews from top to bottom – although Jews are 1% of the population. Since the Maidan putsch, there has only been a string of Jewish presidents and prime minsters. The guy responsible for investigating corruption was recently sacked and replaced by a Jew.

Post Maidan, 3 TV stations were shut in Kharkov alone. Everything is controlled and is lies. Journalists and politicians who don't do as they are told are shot. No one is arrested. The latest victim was an opposition politician who was executed by a shot in the head in his parliamentary office a few weeks ago. No Jew ever suffers such a fate.

He was not "found dead". He was killed by a bullet to the head.
It was not in "central Kyiv". It was in the parliament building.

Ukrainian lawmaker found dead in central Kyiv

Mefobills , June 23, 2020 at 6:51 pm GMT
Democracies don't reflect the will of the people:

Victoria Nuland recommends that "The challenge for the United States in 2021 will be to lead the democracies of the world in crafting a more effective approach to Russia -- one that builds on their strengths and puts stress on Putin where he is vulnerable, including among his own citizens." Interestingly, that might be regarded as seeking to interfere in the workings of a foreign government, reminiscent of the phony case made against Russia in 2016. And it is precisely what Nuland did in fact do in Ukraine

https://www.johnkaminski.org/index.php/essays-by-john-kaminiski-american-writer-and-critic/holocausting-humanity/91-the-true-nature-of-the-jew-scam

We live in the dark, convinced by our public media and our insincere leaders that we are heroes and freedom fighters. In reality the opposite is true: we are the plunderers, the ravagers, deceiving ourselves to do the dirty work of the manipulators who have twisted our minds with trinkets and false accounts of the people we kill and the countries we ruin in order to steal their treasures.

And the saddest part -- the punchline that proves how stupid we are -- is that we never profit from the invasions we are cynically ordered to conduct. The bounty always goes to the swindlers pulling the strings, and we, as the agents of banditry, time and again, are always left to suffer the same fate of the people we have robbed when we are robbed ourselves, of not only our treasures, but of our dignity, shortly before we are robbed of our lives.

It is the way history has always gone. The ignorant masses are persuaded to commit the crimes of the rich and as the unwitting perpetrators, we ultimately suffer the same fate as the victims, while the rich snicker in their palaces and plot their next swindle.

Rurik , June 23, 2020 at 9:55 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

How can the US "lead democracies" not being one of them?

didn't Vicky Nuland lead the Ukrainian democracy?

it isn't ridiculous, all it takes is shekels, as always, and an understanding of semantics. Words like 'democracy' are like 'liberated', or 'terrorists'.

The ZUS "liberated" Iraq from the "terrorists" who were ruling it, and imposed "democracy". Just like we "liberated" Germany, and "liberated" Libya, and so many other places, where the ZUS leads 'democracies'.

You see how easy it is, once you understand how to interpret the words they use?

America is helping to liberate Palestine from terrorists, so that the Palestinians can enjoy democracy.

Today the Crimea is suffering under a regime that seized her by aggression and force, and so America would like to liberate the people of Crimea, and lead them to democracy.

Guest0206 , June 24, 2020 at 2:37 am GMT
@AnonFromTN "Grabbing the Breadbasket of Europe The East-West competition over Ukraine involves the control of natural resources, including uranium and other minerals, as well as geopolitical issues such as Ukraine's membership in NATO. The stakes around Ukraine's vast agricultural sector, the world's third largest exporter of corn and fifth largest exporter of wheat,constitute a critical factor that has been often overlooked." Whereas Ukraine does not allow the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture,Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies. There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry. As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, "Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the "most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont."" https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OurBiz_Brief_Ukraine.pdf
likbez , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 4:02 am GMT
@Mr. Hack Only a complete and utter incompetent (or a rabid Ukrainian nationalist) can call Ukraine an independent state. It is de-facto a colony of the West. A debt slave.

I applaud the US response of supporting Ukraine's aspirations for a freer, more Western-oriented country and that it continues to support Ukraine's territorial interests over those of Russia's.

This was not about supporting Ukrainian aspirations for a freer, more Western-oriented country. It is about kicking out Russia from Ukrainian markets and plundering Ukraine all by themselves. Mainly by Germany and the USA -- to major players of Euromaydan color revolution. For Germans this is return to "Drang nach Osten" on a new level, on the level of neoliberal neocolonialism.

They used Western nationalists as their fifth column, but Western Ukrainian suffered from the results no less then people in Eastern Ukraine. Many now try to move to Kiev, Kiev region and further East in order to escape poverty and unemployment. Seasonal labor to Russia (mainly builders) diminished rapidly. Train communication now is blocked, and for Western Ukraine only Poland now represents a chance to earn money for the family to survive the winter.

For the USA this is first of all about selling Ukraine expensive weaponry, wasting precious Ukrainian resources on permanent hostility with Russia (with Donbas conflict as a real win to further the USA geopolitical ambitions -- in line with the "Full spectrum dominance" doctrine) , cornering Ukrainian energy market (uranium supplies for power stations, etc.), destruction, or buy-out of a few competing industries other than extracting industries and maquiladoras, getting better conditions for the EU exports and multinationals operating in Ukraine (and initially with plans for re-export products to Russia tax free) and increasing the country debt to "debt slave" level.

In other words this is a powerful kick in a chin by Obama to Putin. Not a knockdown, but very close.

For Ukraine first of all that means rapid accumulation of a huge external debt -- conditions of economic slavery, out of which there is no escape. Ukrainian people paid a very dear price for their Euromaydan illusions. They became mass slave labor in Poland. Prostitutes in Germany. Seasonal picker of fruits in some other EU countries (GB, France). A new European blacks, so to speak.

The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya. The currency dropped 300%, and 80% Ukrainians now live in abysmal poverty, while neoliberal oligarchs allied with the West continue to plunder the country. Gold reserves were moved to the USA.

If I had to choose between two colonizers, I probably would prefer Russians. They are still colonizers, but they are less ruthless and brutal colonizers.

[Jun 24, 2020] Nuland's views are, as stated in the article, dangerous fantasy-one could almost accuse her of having psychopathic voices in her head with respect to russia and putin.

Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Alfred , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT

The war against Russia has been going on for centuries. Nothing upsets these nutters more than the Russians insulating themselves from the mental virus that has proliferated in the West.

Just read the sour grapes of the usual suspects in this derogatory article. Similar in tone to the nonsense at the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014. Nothing amuses me more than to watch them vomiting on themselves in frustration.

Moscow, low-key consecration of Victory Cathedral; Catholics denied another church

Anon [233] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:06 am GMT
Nuland's views are, as stated in the article, dangerous fantasy-one could almost accuse her of having psychopathic voices in her head with respect to russia and putin.

It is indeed remarkable in a very bad way that this woman was close to the top level in state under obama but we can surely see her handiwork in the devastation of the Ukraine nation.

Chris Moore , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:34 am GMT
You forgot to mention that virtually all of the neocon/liberal interventionist "intellectuals"on your list identify as Jewish, which means they see themselves as having Hebrew backgrounds, which not only gives them an Israel First/Zionist orientation, but which means their hatred of "anti-Semitic" Russia is pathological and ancestral, which means their hatred of "anti-Semitic" Europeans is pathological and ancestral, which means their hatred of "anti-Semitic" white people is pathological and ancestral, which means their desire for nuclear war between whites is pathological and ancestral, which means they believe they can win a nuclear war (perhaps by sheltering in bunker state Israel) and emerge as the anointed "chosen" intellectual priest class of the world

So there is a kind of internal logic or rationalism to their insanity, in the same way that any insular, imperious elite suffering from megalomania and delusions of grandeur can develop internal, echo chamber "logic" that is (objectively) insane. The difference is, their insane "logic" is additionally sanctioned by their particular God or their particular History or their version of God/History.

Hence, with this cult, we not only get insular, echo-chamber imperialism, but we additionally get quasi-religious, messianic fanaticism that will view any nuclear war as pre-ordained fate in service of delivering the Chosen Ones to the world.

And half of America thinks Trump is nuts? It should look at the "intellectual Jews" it's so desperate to consign its fate to.

Mr. Hack , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:35 am GMT
Another critique of US foreign policy regarding Russia, all referenced under the famous "cookies and milk" response of Ms. Nuland in Kyiv. Lucky for Russia that she wasn't doling out scoops of ice cream instead?

For Nuland, the replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with the real enemy, Moscow, over Russia's attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.

I applaud the US response of supporting Ukraine's aspirations for a freer more Western oriented country and that it continues to support Ukraine's territorial interests over those of Russia's. It's time for the Giraldis and Cohens of the world to shed their Russian fig leaf covering and be exposed as the gutless appeasers that they really are.

Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:41 am GMT
Victoria Nuland (her family name formerly Nudelman) and her blood-thirsty, thieving zionist neocon buddies would love nothing more than to tear Russia apart and finish the rape and plunder of that country first begun under Russia's 'reformer' president, the idiot Yeltsin, wherein mostly jewish Russian and American oligarchs systematically stole what amounts to about $330 billion dollars of Russia's wealth.

That these zionist neocon murderers and thieves would put the world at risk to achieve their goals is no surprise, as one need only look at the 3,000+ innocent American lives, including many Jews, that were snuffed out on 9/11, all to set the stage for the US and allies' "War of Terror" against mainly the enemies of Israel, and to line the pockets of the ever-growing Military-Information-Security Complex. Innocent lives mean absolutely nothing to these monsters.

The campaign against Russia is simply another necessary link in the chain that binds the world to the PNAC vision of using the US and the West to establish and maintain what is essentially a Jewish supremacist movement that barely conceals itself and its nefarious agenda from the useful idiot goyim so necessary to carry forward the PNAC's plan for world domination. And the chubby little Ms Nudelman is just another tireless zionist mouthpiece for this ugly, obnoxious and risky agenda

chris , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:11 am GMT
A major indicator of how long-term foreign policy goals are actually set by the US was revealed when Obama declared Venezuela a threat to national security in 2015!
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-declares-venezuela-national-security-threat-imposes-sanctions

Venezuela? A threat to US national security?? Sounds completely absurd.

But if you consider your 'national security' being threatened whenever any scarce natural resources in the world are not in your or in your client states' posession, then anthing which interferes with that is a "threat!" Iran (before 2003), Iraq, and Russia certainly fit the bill of being enemies.

This explanation, for me, is much more realistic than to think the neocons are solely driven by cold war mentalities.

The neocons are particularly peeved at Russia because through their oligarchs, they had the crown jewels in their hand before Putin wrested it out. It was always clear from the beginning that the overthrow of the Ukraine government was always just a stepping stone to the overthrow of Putin in Russia.

Russia is truly the mother load, with control over its natural resources, you control China, undermine the Middle Eastern Arab states and if necessary control Europe financially. Besides the direct political control you then exercise, on an economic level, the productive people of the world Germany and China then work for you.

roonaldo , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:13 am GMT
Nuland and her ilk will be spewing their dangerous nonsense and banging the drums of war like homicidal energizer bunnies until hell freezes over. Meanwhile, "from Atlantic to Pacific, the insanity is terrific," as the nation devolves in an engineered mass hysteria. As things go down the tubes, the Empire will get ever more desperate, rather than easing back a bit on the throttle. With Donald Boy and Sec. of State "Plump-piehole" egging on Israeli expansionist dreams and drone-executing whomever they please–what could possibly go wrong? I'm waiting for one, just one, European power to call bullshit on the U.S. and put a stop to this madness. Fat chance of that.

I think we are in the Empire's desperation phase. The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) report that called for and got another Pearl Harbor also spoke affectionately of creating bioweapons to target any upstart nation encroaching on U.S. hegemony. If the bastards could get away with 9/11, a most obvious inside job, what's not to like about the disruption and confusion of bioweapons? The ruthless evil we are up against is truly staggering.

Rahan , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:41 am GMT
It would be super funny, if Russian, Chinese, Serbian, Sudanese, Afghani, and Iranian diplomats now went out en mass to give out cookies to the US rioters.

Taking PR pictures with the poor oppressed black looters and antifa trannies, lecturing Washington on human rights, and pledging support to the "moderate terrorists" i.e. the democrat mayors and governors who decide to not interfere with the looting and autonomous zones.

I think this would be the most epic troll ever. Especially if Venezuela then paraded some nervous spook and declared him the "legitimate president of the United States".

Or maybe, kek, just appoint Bernie the real president. "For two elections the corrupt system has denied this true hero his rightful position. Enough! We support the people's choice!" etc. Bernie would be all: "I don't know who these people are, honest," and they'd be: "stay strong, comrade, we shall help you in your fight to become a true people's president!"

Marshall Lentini , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:35 am GMT

Confronting Russia as some kind of ideological enemy is a never-ending process that leaves both sides poorer and less free.

Well said.

It's also really strange to portray Russia in this demonic fashion. When you see it up close, there are things you don't like or question, things that are bizarre, absurdly inefficient, and outright abhorrent, but it's far from the big threatening geopolitical beast they make it out to be. It's more of a joke which even Russians understand.

There's a phrase from the USSR that someone taught me – аналогов нет, "no analogues" or nothing comparable, referring to the quality of their military armaments, specifically rockets. Obvious nonsense pushed by the USSR to bolster faith in the populace, it lives on today in Kremlin propaganda, but is widely regarded as the bullshit it is, which is why videos containing the phrase itself are banned on YouTube Russia.

In short Russia, as a meme, is a "paper tiger" propped up largely by Washingtonian psychodrama and will-to-power. Washington doesn't want Russia out of Crimea because they love the Ukrainians; they want them out because Ukraine is a major destination for American corporate venality. Absent interference from Washington, the Kremlin might undertake some foreign adventures in neighboring countries, but for the most part would continue on its obvious path of "peacefully" melding with the Chinese economy, like everyone else.

There is no white nation free of the forces of decline set in motion by white success and the overall technological arc of history. "Russia" is nothing more than a scarecrow for the Washington establishment – which it could just as well drop, as they no longer need justifications or approval from the people – and signifies only a livid hunger for the last major market they've yet to absorb directly.

[Jun 24, 2020] Russia and US Zionists

Nuland demonstrates well intellectual degeneracy and neocons with this fixation of "Full Spectrum Dominance"
Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 12:02 pm GMT

@anonymous1963 I think they are still working together. We know that the Global Zionist bankers and Wall St. established the Bolshevik (Zionist) takeover. International Banker Jacob Schiff and one of Pres Wilson's Zionist handlers invested 20 million in the enterprise as confirmed by his great grandson, husband of Al Gore's daughter. The Zionists were setting everything up for the plunder while the whole Soviet system was a house of cards only propped up by constant massive agricultural, industrial and financial aid while the Amer. people were constantly told by the Zionist MSM about how powerful and dangerous they were.

That particular Hegelian Dialectic ruse has been phased out (Lenin said the USSR was a transition) as we moved on to "The War on Terror." Signing the Crimea over to the Ukraine by Breshnev in 1954 that had been under Russian control since before the U.S. was founded was part of the plan to set up future conflict. The Zionists always manufacture strife and conflict both at home and abroad. For the Zionists to stick their nose in the Ukraine that they already control by using their American shabbos goy satellite is to be expected.

Most people look at these staged events from a short term perspective. The Zionists are working years ahead to manage these crises. They will have to have a big one probably involving both Russia and China once they build up more militarily. That will most likely transition into the "global governance" that the Zioinist puppet politicians are always talking about.

Phipps , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 4:19 pm GMT
The Zionist in Nuland comes out when she mentions Russia cooperating with Iran in Syria. Like almost all Zionists in America, she views the world through Israeli eyes. Iran is Israel's arch-enemy. However, Iran is n threat to the American people. Any country or group that does not oppose Iran is hated by Zionists. Of course, the Zionist-owned media in America is not going to criticize Zionists for their Zionism. The Zionist-owned Trump and Congress make a bad situation worse Result? Wars for Israel.
geokat62 , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 5:12 pm GMT
I'd like to see someone try and refute this basic truth "White politicians represent Israel."

Normal White people have no power or representation in the US. Black politicians represent Blacks. Hispanic politicians represent Hispanics. White politicians represent Israel.

-- Ecorunner (@TreeRunner) June 24, 2020

[Jun 24, 2020] Yanukovich, corruption of the Ukraine military and Maydan color revolution

Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

GMC , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 6:43 am GMT

@Mr. Hack I ran across this info when I was reading and researching. It all dawned on me when in Crimea , where I was/am living. I had about a half dozen Ukie military friends, just around Caki, Krym – this was before – when it was Ukrainian and they spoke some english and me, some russian – so we could talk without difficulty. I was in the US Military 69 -71 so I was accepted and even today I am accepted , but by Russian military guys here- though not as much – lol. Anyways, when the base here was " trading hands " I asked to buy any left over kalishnakovs, that the Ukie guys may want to sell. These guys were so underpaid { 75 t0 130 bucks a month} I thought they would jump at the chance for a couple hundred buck trade. They didn't have enough weapons to even go around the base – Zip – they always depended on Sevastopol { Ru Navy/Marines }to defend Crimea. I asked if all the bases in Crimea had the same problem – they said everywhere in Ukraine ! Now, I know Ukies enough to know that when they de-armed – they didn't/ would never destroy any working weapons but they would sell them to anyone in the mid east , east Europe – etc. Why didn't President Yanuk. surround Kyiv with the military and stop the bus loads of paid rioters from west Ukraine { Azov battalion ] from comin in ? His military was corrupt, full of thieves like himself and pretty – non existant – just like the CIA likes. Game over for Ukraine. Spacibo Mr. H

[Jun 24, 2020] No Security Council resolution authorized aggression against Yugoslavia. NATO's Operation Allied Force lasted 78 days.

Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Robjil , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:21 pm GMT

@Druid55 That is the western MSM sugared up version of what happened in Yugoslavia. Western MSM learned their lesson about being truthful about war when US and friends were in Vietnam.

Lies and lies only come from western MSM these days so wars and regime change games can go on with anyone noticing or caring.

Western MSM notifies their puppet readers that all the US and friends does is "humanitarian" stuff these days. Most puppet readers lap up this junk.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/natos-rape-of-yugoslavia/5375189

March 24, 1999 will go down in history as a day of infamy. US-led NATO raped Yugoslavia. Doing so was its second major combat operation.

It was lawless aggression. No Security Council resolution authorized it. NATO's Operation Allied Force lasted 78 days.

Washington called it Operation Noble Anvil. Evil best describes it. On June 10, operations ended.

From March 1991 through mid-June 1999, Balkan wars raged. Yugoslavia "balkanized" into seven countries. They include Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia and Slovenia.

Enormous human suffering was inflicted. Washington bears most responsibility.

[Jun 24, 2020] War is the health of the state" is true only to a certain limit. After that the bankruptcy is looming

Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:21 pm GMT

"So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance. And, by either yardstick all-in-all, Trump looks pretty good, but there has nevertheless been a resurgence of neocon-think in his administration. "

This "just" in: "War is the health of the state" Randolph Bourne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randolph_Bourne

Agent76 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:22 pm GMT
Apr 27, 2017 This Is Already Putting an End to the Age of Globalization and Bankrupting the United States (2004)

For a major power, prosecution of any war that is not a defense of the homeland usually requires overseas military bases for strategic reasons. After the war is over, it is tempting for the victor to retain such bases and easy to find reasons to do so. February 26, 2015 The Neoconservative Threat To World Order

Scholars from Russia and from around the world, Russian government officials, and the Russian people seek an answer as to why Washington destroyed during the past year the friendly relations between America and Russia that President Reagan and President Gorbachev succeeded in establishing.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/26/neoconservative-threat-world-order-paul-craig-roberts/

[Jun 24, 2020] Why do our 'foreign interventionists,' our 'permanent war for globalist perpetual peace' crusaders, our Neocons, hate Russia so thoroughly and so centrally to their very beings?

Notable quotes:
"... First, our imperialists are the direct descendants intellectually, spiritually, and morally of the first WASP Empire, the first Anglo-Zionist Empire: the British Empire. And they have used their high IQs that are focused on grasping the One Ring to Rule Them All to locate where the Brit WASP Empire failed to achieve its goals, which allowed the collapse starting with World War 1. They are obsessed with that because they believe that if they can achieve what the Brit WASPs failed to achieve, then they can make the Anglo-Zionist Empire 2.0 as permanent as the Roman Empire – a Thousand Year Reich. ..."
"... And that is spiritually what all WASP imperialism, all Anglo-Zionist imperialism back to at least the Anglo-Saxon Puritans, is about: replacing the Roman Empire, which means replacing that which culturally led to, and was absolutely indispensable to, Christendom. ..."
"... Our 'foreign interventionists' have seen Russia under Putin rise from the ashes, and they intend to destroy Russia once and for all, so they then can reduce China and win The Great Game. And thus make Anglo-Zionist Empire greater than Roman Empire. ..."
"... The "foreign interventionists" want two things: Russia's mineral riches and its good gene pool (how do you think Middle Eastern Semites became blonde hair-blue eyed people who can easily blend into the West to undermine it from within in the first place to begin with?) ..."
Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Jake , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:18 pm GMT

Why do our 'foreign interventionists,' our 'permanent war for globalist perpetual peace' crusaders, our Neocons, hate Russia so thoroughly and so centrally to their very beings?

First, our imperialists are the direct descendants intellectually, spiritually, and morally of the first WASP Empire, the first Anglo-Zionist Empire: the British Empire. And they have used their high IQs that are focused on grasping the One Ring to Rule Them All to locate where the Brit WASP Empire failed to achieve its goals, which allowed the collapse starting with World War 1. They are obsessed with that because they believe that if they can achieve what the Brit WASPs failed to achieve, then they can make the Anglo-Zionist Empire 2.0 as permanent as the Roman Empire – a Thousand Year Reich.

And that is spiritually what all WASP imperialism, all Anglo-Zionist imperialism back to at least the Anglo-Saxon Puritans, is about: replacing the Roman Empire, which means replacing that which culturally led to, and was absolutely indispensable to, Christendom.

What they wish to redo and achieve that the Brit WASPs failed in is winning The Great Game: becoming total master of Eur-Asia. And that requires taking out Russia and China. In the 19th century, China was sicker than even the Ottoman Turkish Empire. To play the long game to destroy Russia, the Brit WASPs allied with the Turks to prevent Russia acting to push the Ottomans out of Europe. Brit WASP secret service in eastern Europe was focused on reducing Russia significantly right through the Bolshevik Revolution, even with Russia naively, stupidly allied with the British Empire in World War 1.

Our 'foreign interventionists' have seen Russia under Putin rise from the ashes, and they intend to destroy Russia once and for all, so they then can reduce China and win The Great Game. And thus make Anglo-Zionist Empire greater than Roman Empire.

Second, our Neocons are the spiritual and intellectual descendants not just of Trotskyites, but of all Russia-hating Jews with ties to Central and/or Eastern Europe. For them, Russia always is the evil that must be destroyed for the good of Jews.

Everything at its bedrock is about theology, is about the choice between Christ and Christendom or the Chaos of anti-Christendom.

Really No Shit , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:13 pm GMT
The "foreign interventionists" want two things: Russia's mineral riches and its good gene pool (how do you think Middle Eastern Semites became blonde hair-blue eyed people who can easily blend into the West to undermine it from within in the first place to begin with?)

And they won't stop until they get what they want, by hook or crook!

[Jun 23, 2020] Identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ( soft neoliberals ) to counter the defection of trade union members from the party

Highly recommended!
divide and conquer 1. To gain or maintain power by generating tension among others, especially those less powerful, so that they cannot unite in opposition.
Notable quotes:
"... In its most general form, identity politics involves (i) a claim that a particular group is not being treated fairly and (ii) a claim that members of that group should place political priority on the demand for fairer treatment. But "fairer" can mean lots of different things. I'm trying to think about this using contrasts between the set of terms in the post title. A lot of this is unoriginal, but I'm hoping I can say something new. ..."
"... The second problem is that neoliberals on right and left sometimes use identity as a shield to protect neoliberal policies. As one commentator has argued, "Without the bedrock of class politics, identity politics has become an agenda of inclusionary neoliberalism in which individuals can be accommodated but addressing structural inequalities cannot." What this means is that some neoliberals hold high the banner of inclusiveness on gender and race and thus claim to be progressive reformers, but they then turn a blind eye to systemic changes in politics and the economy. ..."
"... Critics argue that this is "neoliberal identity politics," and it gives its proponents the space to perpetuate the policies of deregulation, privatization, liberalization, and austerity. ..."
"... If we assume that identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ("soft neoliberals") many things became much more clear. Along with Neo-McCarthyism it represents a mechanism to compensate for the loss of their primary voting block: trade union members, who in 2016 "en mass" defected to Trump. ..."
Dec 28, 2019 | crookedtimber.org

likbez 12.27.19 at 10:21 pm

John,

I've been thinking about the various versions of and critiques of identity politics that are around at the moment. In its most general form, identity politics involves (i) a claim that a particular group is not being treated fairly and (ii) a claim that members of that group should place political priority on the demand for fairer treatment. But "fairer" can mean lots of different things. I'm trying to think about this using contrasts between the set of terms in the post title. A lot of this is unoriginal, but I'm hoping I can say something new.

You missed one important line of critique -- identity politics as a dirty political strategy of soft neoliberals.

See discussion of this issue by Professor Ganesh Sitaraman in his recent article (based on his excellent book The Great Democracy ) https://newrepublic.com/article/155970/collapse-neoliberalism

To be sure, race, gender, culture, and other aspects of social life have always been important to politics. But neoliberalism's radical individualism has increasingly raised two interlocking problems. First, when taken to an extreme, social fracturing into identity groups can be used to divide people and prevent the creation of a shared civic identity. Self-government requires uniting through our commonalities and aspiring to achieve a shared future.

When individuals fall back onto clans, tribes, and us-versus-them identities, the political community gets fragmented. It becomes harder for people to see each other as part of that same shared future.

Demagogues [more correctly neoliberals -- likbez] rely on this fracturing to inflame racial, nationalist, and religious antagonism, which only further fuels the divisions within society. Neoliberalism's war on "society," by pushing toward the privatization and marketization of everything, thus indirectly facilitates a retreat into tribalism that further undermines the preconditions for a free and democratic society.

The second problem is that neoliberals on right and left sometimes use identity as a shield to protect neoliberal policies. As one commentator has argued, "Without the bedrock of class politics, identity politics has become an agenda of inclusionary neoliberalism in which individuals can be accommodated but addressing structural inequalities cannot." What this means is that some neoliberals hold high the banner of inclusiveness on gender and race and thus claim to be progressive reformers, but they then turn a blind eye to systemic changes in politics and the economy.

Critics argue that this is "neoliberal identity politics," and it gives its proponents the space to perpetuate the policies of deregulation, privatization, liberalization, and austerity.

Of course, the result is to leave in place political and economic structures that harm the very groups that inclusionary neoliberals claim to support. The foreign policy adventures of the neoconservatives and liberal internationalists haven't fared much better than economic policy or cultural politics. The U.S. and its coalition partners have been bogged down in the war in Afghanistan for 18 years and counting. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq is a liberal democracy, nor did the attempt to establish democracy in Iraq lead to a domino effect that swept the Middle East and reformed its governments for the better. Instead, power in Iraq has shifted from American occupiers to sectarian militias, to the Iraqi government, to Islamic State terrorists, and back to the Iraqi government -- and more than 100,000 Iraqis are dead.

Or take the liberal internationalist 2011 intervention in Libya. The result was not a peaceful transition to stable democracy but instead civil war and instability, with thousands dead as the country splintered and portions were overrun by terrorist groups. On the grounds of democracy promotion, it is hard to say these interventions were a success. And for those motivated to expand human rights around the world, it is hard to justify these wars as humanitarian victories -- on the civilian death count alone.

Indeed, the central anchoring assumptions of the American foreign policy establishment have been proven wrong. Foreign policymakers largely assumed that all good things would go together -- democracy, markets, and human rights -- and so they thought opening China to trade would inexorably lead to it becoming a liberal democracy. They were wrong. They thought Russia would become liberal through swift democratization and privatization. They were wrong.

They thought globalization was inevitable and that ever-expanding trade liberalization was desirable even if the political system never corrected for trade's winners and losers. They were wrong. These aren't minor mistakes. And to be clear, Donald Trump had nothing to do with them. All of these failures were evident prior to the 2016 election.

If we assume that identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ("soft neoliberals") many things became much more clear. Along with Neo-McCarthyism it represents a mechanism to compensate for the loss of their primary voting block: trade union members, who in 2016 "en mass" defected to Trump.

Initially Clinton calculation was that trade union voters has nowhere to go anyways, and it was correct for first decade or so of his betrayal. But gradually trade union members and lower middle class started to leave Dems in droves (Demexit, compare with Brexit) and that where identity politics was invented to compensate for this loss.

So in addition to issues that you mention we also need to view the role of identity politics as the political strategy of the "soft neoliberals " directed at discrediting and the suppression of nationalism.

The resurgence of nationalism is the inevitable byproduct of the dominance of neoliberalism, resurgence which I think is capable to bury neoliberalism as it lost popular support (which now is limited to financial oligarchy and high income professional groups, such as we can find in corporate and military brass, (shrinking) IT sector, upper strata of academy, upper strata of medical professionals, etc)

That means that the structure of the current system isn't just flawed which imply that most problems are relatively minor and can be fixed by making some tweaks. It is unfixable, because the "Identity wars" reflect a deep moral contradictions within neoliberal ideology. And they can't be solved within this framework.

[Jun 23, 2020] John Bolton's Mission was to Destroy Donald Trump's Detente with North Korea

Jun 23, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

Bolton, of course, dismissed the entire concept of diplomacy from the very start. He never bought into the notion that North Korean officials could be talked to sensibly because they were, well, insane. Bolton's version of North Korea diplomacy was to tighten the economic screws, brandish the U.S. military, and wait until one of two things happened: 1) the Kim regime surrendered its entire nuclear weapons program like Libya's Muammar al-Qaddafi, or 2) the Kim regime continued to spur Washington's demands, in which the White House would have no option but to use U.S. military force. Bolton's record is analogous to a stereotypical linebacker on an obscene amount of steroids -- smash your opponent to pieces and don't think twice about it. Top Beauty Surgeon Says "Forget Facelifts, This at Home Tip is My #1 Wrinkle Red Del Mar Laboratories Dr: This May Be the Best CBD Ever for Arthritis, Aching Joints & Inflammation Mirror News Online Enlarged Prostate Gone - Just Do This Before Bed (Watch) Newhealthylife 3 Ways Your Cat Asks for Help Dr. Marty The content you see here is paid for by the advertiser or content provider whose link you click on, and is recommended to you by Revcontent. As the leading platform for native advertising and content recommendation, Revcontent uses interest based targeting to select content that we think will be of particular interest to you. We encourage you to view our Privacy Policy and your opt out options here . Got it, thanks! Remove Content Link?

Please choose a reason below:

Submit Cancel

The only problem: North Korea isn't some helpless punter with string bean arms and a lanky midsection. It's a nuclear weapons state fiercely proud of its independence and sovereignty, constantly on guard for the slightest threat from a foreign power, and cognizant of its weakened position relative to its neighbors. This is one of the prime reasons Bolton's obsession with the Libya-style North Korea deal, in which Pyongyang would theoretically discard its entire nuclear apparatus and allow U.S. weapons inspectors to take custody of its nuclear warheads before flying them back to the U.S. for destruction, was unworkable from the start. The Libya-model trumpeted by Bolton was a politically correct way of demanding Pyongyang's total surrender -- an extremely naive goal if there ever was one. When one remembers the fate of Qaddafi 8 years after he traded sanctions relief for his weapons of mass destruction -- the dictator was assaulted and humiliated before being executed in the desert -- even the word "Libya" is treated by the Kim dynasty as a threat to its existence. As Paul Pillar wrote in these pages more than two years ago, "Libya's experience does indeed weigh heavily on the thinking of North Korean officials, who have taken explicit notice of that experience, as a disincentive to reaching any deals with the United States about dismantling weapons programs."

One can certainly take issue with Trump's North Korea policy. Two years of personal diplomacy with Kim Jong-un have yet to result in the denuclearization Washington seeks (denuclearization is more of a slogan than a realistic objective at this point, anyway). But Trump's strategy aside, Bolton's alternative was worse. The president knew his former national security adviser's public insistence on the Libya model was dangerously inept. He had to walk back Bolton's comments weeks later to ensure the North Koreans didn't pull out of diplomacy before it got off the ground. Trump hasn't forgotten about the experience; on June 18, Trump tweeted that "Bolton's dumbest of all statements set us back very badly with North Korea, even now. I asked him, "what the hell were you thinking?"

[Jun 23, 2020] Chickenhawk B olton May Be a Beast, But He's Washington's Creature by Richard Hanania

Personally he is a bully and as such a coward: he can attack only a weaker opponent. His new book shows that however discredited and intellectually thin his foreign policy views are, they always rise to the top. To Bolton the country is simply a vehicle for smiting his enemies abroad.
Notable quotes:
"... Bolton's hawkishness is combined with an equally striking lack of originality. It is possible to be an unorthodox or partisan hawk, as we see in populists who want to get out of the Middle East but ramp up pressure on China, or Democrats who have a particular obsession with Russia. Bolton takes the most belligerent position on every issue without regards for partisanship or popularity, a level of consistency that would almost be honorable if it wasn't so frightening. No alliance or commitment is ever questioned, and neither, for that matter, is any rivalry. ..."
"... Bolton lacks any intellectual tradition or popular support base that he can call his own. Domestic political concerns are almost completely missing from his book, although we learn that he follows "Adam Smith on economics, Edmund Burke on society," is happy with Trump's judicial appointments, and favors legal, but not illegal, immigration. Other than these GOP clichés, there is virtually no commentary or concern about the state of American society or its trajectory. Unlike those who worry about how global empire affects the United States at home, to Bolton the country is simply a vehicle for smiting his enemies abroad. While Bolton's views have been called "nationalist" because he doesn't care about multilateralism, nation-building, or international law, I have never seen a nationalist that gives so little thought to his nation. ..."
"... Bolton recounts how his two top aides, Charles Kupperman and Mira Ricardel, had extensive experience working for Boeing. Patrick Shanahan similarly became acting Secretary of Defense after spending thirty years at that company, until he was replaced by Mark Esper, a Raytheon lobbyist. Why working for a company that manufactures aircraft and weapons prepares one for a job in foreign policy, the establishment has never felt the need to explain, any more than it needs to explain continuing Cold War-era military commitments three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union. ..."
"... The most important question raised by the career of John Bolton is how someone with his views has been able to achieve so much power. While Bolton gets much worse press and always goes a step too far even for most of the foreign policy establishment, in other ways he is all too typical. Take James Mattis, a foil for Bolton throughout much of the first half of the book. Although more popular in the media, the "warrior monk" slow-walked and obstructed attempts by the president to pull out of the Middle East, and after a career supporting many of the same wars and commitments as Bolton, now makes big bucks in the private sector, profiting off of his time in government. ..."
Jun 23, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir, John Bolton, Simon & Schuster, 592 pages

The release of John Bolton's book today has become a Washington cultural event, because he is, by all measures, Washington's creature.

Those who dislike the Trump administration have been pleased to find in The Room Where It Happened confirmation in much of what they already believed about the Ukraine scandal and the president's lack of capacity for the job. Some accusations in the book, such as the story about Trump seeking reelection help from China through American farm purchases, are new, and in an alternative universe could have formed the basis of a different, or if Bolton had his way, more comprehensive, impeachment inquiry.

While Bolton's book has been found politically useful by the president's detractors, the work is also important as a first-hand account from the top of the executive branch over a 19-month period, from April 2018 to September 2019. It also, mostly inadvertently, reveals much about official Washington, the incentive structures that politicians face, and the kind of person that is likely to succeed in that system. Bolton may be a biased self-promoter, but he is nonetheless a credible source, as his stories mostly involve conversations with other people who are free to eventually tell their own side. Moreover, the John Bolton of The Room Where It Happened is no different from the man we know from his three-decade career as a government official and public personality. No surprises here.

There are three ways to understand John Bolton. In increasing order of importance, they are intellectually, psychologically, and politically -- that is, as someone who is both a product of and antagonist to the foreign-policy establishment -- in many ways typical, and in others a detested outlier.

On the first of these, there simply isn't much there. Bolton takes the most hawkish position on every issue. He wants war with North Korea and Iran, and if he can't have that, he'll settle for destroying their economies and sabotaging any attempts by Trump to reach a deal with either country. He takes the maximalist positions on great powers like China and Russia, and third world states that pose no plausible threat like Cuba and Venezuela. At one point, he brags about State reversing "Obama's absurd conclusion that Cuban baseball was somehow independent of its government, thus in turn allowing Treasury to revoke the license allowing Major League Baseball to traffic in Cuban players." How this helps Americans or Cubans is left unexplained.

Bolton's hawkishness is combined with an equally striking lack of originality. It is possible to be an unorthodox or partisan hawk, as we see in populists who want to get out of the Middle East but ramp up pressure on China, or Democrats who have a particular obsession with Russia. Bolton takes the most belligerent position on every issue without regards for partisanship or popularity, a level of consistency that would almost be honorable if it wasn't so frightening. No alliance or commitment is ever questioned, and neither, for that matter, is any rivalry.

Anyone who picks up Bolton's over 500-page memoir hoping to find serious reflection on the philosophical basis of American foreign policy will be disappointed. The chapters are broken up by topic area, most beginning with a short background explainer on Bolton's views of the issue. In the chapter on Venezuela, we are told that overthrowing the government of that country is important because of "its Cuba connection and the openings it afforded Russia, China, and Iran." The continuing occupation of Afghanistan is necessary for preventing terrorists from establishing a base, and, in an argument I had not heard anywhere before, for "remaining vigilant against the nuclear-weapons programs in Iran on the west and Pakistan on the east." Iran needs to be deterred, though from what we are never told.

Bolton lacks any intellectual tradition or popular support base that he can call his own. Domestic political concerns are almost completely missing from his book, although we learn that he follows "Adam Smith on economics, Edmund Burke on society," is happy with Trump's judicial appointments, and favors legal, but not illegal, immigration. Other than these GOP clichés, there is virtually no commentary or concern about the state of American society or its trajectory. Unlike those who worry about how global empire affects the United States at home, to Bolton the country is simply a vehicle for smiting his enemies abroad. While Bolton's views have been called "nationalist" because he doesn't care about multilateralism, nation-building, or international law, I have never seen a nationalist that gives so little thought to his nation.

The more time one spends reading Bolton, the more one comes to the conclusion that the guy just likes to fight. In addition to seeking out and escalating foreign policy conflicts, he seems to relish going to war with the media and the rest of the Washington bureaucracy. His book begins with a quote from the Duke of Wellington rallying his troops at Waterloo: "Hard pounding, this, gentlemen. Let's see who will pound the longest." The back cover quotes the epilogue on his fight with the Trump administration, responding "game on" to attempts to stop publication. He takes a mischievous pride in recounting attacks from the media or foreign governments, such as when he was honored to hear that North Korea worried about his influence over the President. Bolton is too busy enjoying the fight, and as will be seen below, profiting from it, to reflect too carefully on what it's all for.

Bolton could be ignored if he were simply an odd figure without much power. Yet the man has been at the pinnacle of the GOP establishment for thirty years, serving appointed roles in every Republican president since Reagan. The story of how he got his job in the Trump administration is telling. According to Bolton's account, he was courted throughout the transition process and the early days of the administration by Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner, ironic considering the reputation of the former as a populist opposed to forever wars and the latter as a more liberal figure within the White House. Happy with his life outside government, Bolton would accept a position no lower than Secretary of State or National Security Advisor. Explaining his reluctance to enter government in a lower capacity, Bolton provides a list of his commitments at the time, including "Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute; Fox News contributor; a regular on the speaking circuit; of counsel at a major law firm; member of corporate boards; senior advisor to a global private-equity firm."

Clearly, being an advocate for policies that can destroy the lives of millions abroad, and a complete lack of experience in business, have proved no hindrance to Bolton's success in corporate America.

Bolton recounts how his two top aides, Charles Kupperman and Mira Ricardel, had extensive experience working for Boeing. Patrick Shanahan similarly became acting Secretary of Defense after spending thirty years at that company, until he was replaced by Mark Esper, a Raytheon lobbyist. Why working for a company that manufactures aircraft and weapons prepares one for a job in foreign policy, the establishment has never felt the need to explain, any more than it needs to explain continuing Cold War-era military commitments three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Ricardel resigned after a dispute over preparations for the First Lady's trip to Africa, an example of how too often in the Trump administration, nepotism and self-interest have been the only checks on bad policy or even greater corruption ("Melania's people are on the warpath," Trump is quoted as saying). Another is when Trump, according to Bolton, was less than vigorous in pursing destructive Iranian sanctions due to personal relationships with the leaders of China and Turkey. At the 2019 G7 summit, when Pompeo and Bolton try to get Benjamin Netanyahu to reach out to Trump to talk him out of meeting with the Iranian foreign minister, Jared prevents his call from going through on the grounds that a foreign government shouldn't be telling the President of the United States who to meet with.

The most important question raised by the career of John Bolton is how someone with his views has been able to achieve so much power. While Bolton gets much worse press and always goes a step too far even for most of the foreign policy establishment, in other ways he is all too typical. Take James Mattis, a foil for Bolton throughout much of the first half of the book. Although more popular in the media, the "warrior monk" slow-walked and obstructed attempts by the president to pull out of the Middle East, and after a career supporting many of the same wars and commitments as Bolton, now makes big bucks in the private sector, profiting off of his time in government.

In the coverage of Bolton, this is what should not be lost. The former National Security Advisor is the product of a system with its own internal logic. Largely discredited and intellectually hollow, and without broad popular support, it persists in its practices and beliefs because it has been extremely profitable for those involved. The most extreme hawks are simply symptoms of larger problems, with the flamboyant Bolton being much more like mainstream members of the foreign policy establishment than either side would like to admit.

Richard Hanania is a research fellow at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University.

Latest Articles Politics If John Roberts Isn't a Conservative, What is He, Exactly? The DACA ruling reveals the chief justice's willingness to trifle with the Constitution to serve his own ends, whatever they may be. Robert W. Merry June 23, 2020 Politics Why Conservative Fusionism Was Destined to Disintegrate We shouldn't confuse soldiers sharing a foxhole for Siamese twins. Tony Woodlief June 23, 2020 Politics Michael Pack Is Right To Rein In State-Funded Broadcasters Elections have consequences, and by any standard, VOA is no longer presenting the policies of the United States Arthur Bloom June 23, 2020 Arts & Letters TAC Bookshelf: What Made the Nazi Police Kill? Here's what TAC's writers and editors are reading this week. TAC Staff June 22, 2020 Politics So It Turns Out You're a Racist Left-wing wokeness has become the totalitarianism it purports to hate, where you're guilty unless you can 'prove' otherwise. Peter Van Buren June 22, 2020 Older Posts Recommended Politics So It Turns Out You're a Racist Left-wing wokeness has become the totalitarianism it purports to hate, where you're guilty unless you can 'prove' otherwise. Peter Van Buren June 22, 2020 Get our new Digital Edition Get a roundup of the most important and intriguing stories from around the world, delivered to your inbox every weekday. Subscribe 3 Ways to support the American Conservative 1. Make a Donation

[Jun 23, 2020] Victoria Nuland Alert by Philip Giraldi

Jun 23, 2020 | www.unz.com

https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/victoria-nuland-alert/ The Unz Review - Mobile The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media User Settings: Version? Social Media? Read Aloud w/ Show Word Counts No Video Autoplay No Infinite Scrolling
Save Cancel

Home
About
Settings Foreign Policy
Race/Ethnicity
Culture/Society Ideology
Economics
Arts/Letters Science
History
Forum Summary
Bloggers All Bloggers Steve Sailer's iSteve Blog Anatoly Karlin's Russian Reaction Blog Paul Kersey's SBPDL Blog The Audacious Epigone's HBD Blog Selected Tweeters
Columnists All Columnists Ron Unz Gilad Atzmon Robert Bonomo Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Stephen F. Cohen Jonathan Cook John Derbyshire Linh Dinh Guillaume Durocher Pepe Escobar Eamonn Fingleton Norman Finkelstein Philip Giraldi Paul Gottfried C.J. Hopkins Michael Hudson E. Michael Jones JayMan Trevor Lynch Michelle Malkin Eric Margolis Ilana Mercer Ron Paul James Petras Bonnie Faulkner Ted Rall Fred Reed Paul Craig Roberts The Saker Eric Striker Kevin Barrett Israel Shamir James Thompson Andre Vltchek Whitney Webb Mike Whitney Archived Columns Razib Khan Gustavo Arellano Alexander Cockburn Tom Engelhardt Sam Francis Peter Frost W. Patrick Lang Peter Lee Andrew Napolitano Robert Scheer Joseph Sobran Books
Podcasts
Popular PDF Archives
Banned Books
Announcements Articles
Authors
Comments More... Most Popular Current Digest College Data Summary
Categories
Bloggers Columnists
Articles
Authors Settings
About
More... Main Features Masthead Announcements Search Books Forum Podcasts Videos Periodicals Most Popular Current Digest Comment Archives College Data ← America's Recessional: Time to Bring ... Blogview Philip Giraldi Archive Blogview Philip Giraldi Archive Victoria Nuland Alert The foreign interventionists really hate Russia Philip Giraldi June 23, 2020 1,900 Words 148 Comments 147 New Reply Tweet Reddit Share Share Email Print More Listen ॥ ■ ► RSS Email This Page to Someone
Remember My Information


=> List of Bookmarks ◄ ► ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Add to Library Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Bookmark Toggle All ToC ▲ ▼ Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

It is difficult to find anything good to say about Donald Trump, but the reality is that he has not started any new wars, though he has come dangerously close in the cases of Venezuela and Iran and there would be considerable incentive in the next four months to begin something to bolster his "strong president" credentials and to serve as a distraction from coronavirus and black lives matter.

Be that as it may, Trump will have to run hard to catch up to the record set by his three predecessors Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Bush was an out-and-out neoconservative, or at least someone who was easily led, including in his administration Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, Reuel Gerecht, Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, Eliot Abrams, Dan Senor and Scooter Libby. He also had the misfortune of having to endure Vice President Dick Cheney, who thought he was actually the man in charge. All were hawks who believed that the United States had the right to do whatever it considered necessary to enhance its own security, to include invading other countries, which led to Afghanistan and Iraq, where the U.S. still has forces stationed nearly twenty years later.

Clinton and Obama were so-called liberal interventionists who sought to export something called democracy to other countries in an attempt to make them more like Peoria. Clinton bombed Afghanistan and Sudan as a diversion when the press somehow caught wind of his arrangement with Monica Lewinsky and Obama, aided by Mrs. Clinton, chose to destroy Libya. Obama was also the first president to set up a regular Tuesday morning session to review a list of American citizens who would benefit from being killed by drone.

So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance. And, by either yardstick all-in-all, Trump looks pretty good, but there has nevertheless been a resurgence of neocon-think in his administration. The America the exceptional mindset is best exemplified currently by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who personifies the belief that the United States is empowered by God to play only by its own rules when dealing with other nations. That would include following the advice that has been attributed to leading neocon Michael Ledeen, " Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business. "

One of the first families within the neocon/liberal interventionist firmament is the Kagans, Robert and Frederick. Frederick is a Senior Fellow at the neocon American Enterprise Institute and his wife Kimberly heads the bizarrely named Institute for the Study of War. Victoria Nuland, wife of Robert, is currently the Senior Counselor at the Albright Stonebridge Group and a Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. That means that Victoria aligns primarily as a liberal interventionist, as does her husband, who is also at Brookings. She is regarded as a protégé of Hillary Clinton and currently works with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who once declared that killing 500,000 Iraqi children using sanctions was "worth it." Nuland also has significant neocon connections through her having been a member of the staff assembled by Dick Cheney.

Nuland, many will recall, was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych in 2013-2014. Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became Prime Minister after a free election. Nuland, who was the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, provided open support to the Maidan Square demonstrators opposed to Yanukovych's government, to include media friendly appearances passing out cookies on the square to encourage the protesters.

Nuland openly sought regime change for Ukraine by brazenly supporting government opponents in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations. It is hard to imagine that any U.S. administration would tolerate a similar attempt by a foreign nation to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, particularly if it were backed by a $5 billion budget , but Washington has long believed in a global double standard for evaluating its own behavior.

Nuland is most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she and the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create in Ukraine. For Nuland, the replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with the real enemy, Moscow, over Russia's attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.

And make no mistake about Nuland's broader intention at that time to expand the conflict and directly confront Russia. In Senate testimony she cited how the administration was "providing support to other frontline states like Moldova and Georgia." Her use of the word "frontline" is suggestive.

Victoria Nuland was playing with fire. Russia, as the only nation with the military capability to destroy the U.S., was and is not a sideshow like Saddam Hussein's Iraq or the Taliban's Afghanistan. Backing Moscow into a corner with no way out by using threats and sanctions is not good policy. Washington has many excellent reasons to maintain a stable relationship with Moscow, including counter-terrorism efforts, and little to gain from moving in the opposite direction. Russia is not about to reconstitute the Warsaw Pact and there is no compelling reason to return to a Cold War footing by either arming Ukraine or permitting it to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Victoria Nuland has just written a long article for July/August issue of Foreign Affairs magazine on the proper way for the United States manage what she sees as the Russian "threat." It is entitled "How a Confident America Should Deal With Russia." Foreign Affairs , it should be observed, is an establishment house organ produced by the Council on Foreign Relations which provides a comfortable perch for both neocons and liberal interventionists.

Nuland's view is that the United States lost confidence in its own "ability to change the game" against Vladimir Putin, who has been able to play "a weak hand well because the United States and its allies have let him, allowing Russia to violate arms control treaties, international law, the sovereignty of its neighbors, and the integrity of elections in the United States and Europe Washington and its allies have forgotten the statecraft that won the Cold War and continued to yield results for many years after. That strategy required consistent U.S. leadership at the presidential level, unity with democratic allies and partners, and a shared resolve to deter and roll back dangerous behavior by the Kremlin. It also included incentives for Moscow to cooperate and, at times, direct appeals to the Russian people about the benefits of a better relationship. Yet that approach has fallen into disuse, even as Russia's threat to the liberal world has grown."

What Nuland writes would make perfect sense if one were to share her perception of Russia as a rogue state threatening the "liberal world." She sees Russian rearmament under Putin as a threat even though it was dwarfed by the spending of NATO and the U.S. She shares her fear that Putin might seek " reestablishing a Russian sphere of influence in eastern Europe and from vetoing the security arrangements of his neighbors. Here, a chasm soon opened between liberal democracies and the still very Soviet man leading Russia, especially on the subject of NATO enlargement. No matter how hard Washington and its allies tried to persuade Moscow that NATO was a purely defensive alliance that posed no threat to Russia, it continued to serve Putin's agenda to see Europe in zero-sum terms."

Nuland's view of NATO enlargement is so wide of the mark that it borders on being a fantasy. Of course, Russia would consider a military alliance on its doorstep to be a threat, particularly as a U.S. Administration had provided assurances that expansion would not take place. She goes on to suggest utter nonsense, that Putin's great fear over the NATO expansion derives from his having " always understood that a belt of increasingly democratic, prosperous states around Russia would pose a direct challenge to his leadership model and risk re-infecting his own people with democratic aspirations."

Nuland goes on and on in a similar vein, but her central theme is that Russia must be confronted to deter Vladimir Putin, a man that she clearly hates and depicts as if he were a comic book version of evil. Some of her analysis is ridiculous, as "Russian troops regularly test the few U.S. forces left in Syria to try to gain access to the country's oil fields and smuggling routes. If these U.S. troops left, nothing would prevent Moscow and Tehran from financing their operations with Syrian oil or smuggled drugs and weapons."

Like most zealots, Nuland is notably lacking in any sense of self-criticism. She conspired to overthrow a legitimately elected democratic government in Ukraine because it was considered too friendly to Russia. She accuses the Kremlin of having "seized" Crimea, but fails to see the heavy footprint of the U.S. military in Afghanistan and Iraq and as a regional enabler of Israeli and Saudi war crimes. One wonders if she is aware that Russia, which she sees as expansionistic, has only one overseas military base while the United States has more than a thousand.

Nuland clearly chooses not to notice the White House's threats against countries that do not toe the American line, most recently Iran and Venezuela, but increasingly also China on top of perennial enemy Russia. None of those nations threaten the United States and all the kinetic activity and warnings are forthcoming from a gentleman named Mike Pompeo, speaking from Washington, not from "undemocratic" leaders in the Kremlin, Tehran, Caracas or Beijing.

Victoria Nuland recommends that "The challenge for the United States in 2021 will be to lead the democracies of the world in crafting a more effective approach to Russia -- one that builds on their strengths and puts stress on Putin where he is vulnerable, including among his own citizens." Interestingly, that might be regarded as seeking to interfere in the workings of a foreign government, reminiscent of the phony case made against Russia in 2016. And it is precisely what Nuland did in fact do in Ukraine.

Nuland has a lot more to say in her article and those who are interested in the current state of interventionism in Washington should not ignore her. Confronting Russia as some kind of ideological enemy is a never-ending process that leaves both sides poorer and less free. It is appropriate for Moscow to have an interest in what goes on right on top of its border while the United States five thousand miles away and possessing both a vastly larger economy and armed forces can, one would think, relax a bit and unload the burden of being the world's self-appointed policeman.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

Carlton Meyer , says: Website Show Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:18 am GMT

This is a great overview, but Americans cannot understand these truths after hours of constant propaganda in our media. For example, Hillary Clinton and President Obama destroyed and looted Africa's most prosperous nation in 2011 that resulted in tens of thousands of deaths of innocents. This is not in dispute, it is just ignored despite daily stories about the chaos in Libya. Imagine if Black Lives Matters dared protest against this destruction and looting of Africa's wealthiest nation and demanded that Clinton and Obama be arrested for war crimes.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/n5Lh4HUyudk?feature=oembed

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:45 am GMT
Fact is that many leaders in history did solve the inside problems of their country by outside war.
There is certainly a bit of elevated temperature.
anon [437] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:47 am GMT
Thank you for another great article.

but
there is one thing

You wrote:

" It is hard to imagine that any U.S. administration would tolerate a similar attempt by a foreign nation to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, particularly if it were backed by a $5 billion budget, "

As you yourself have pointed out, more than once, in fact, there actually is a foreign country which, more than, interferes in U.S. domestic policy, some would estimate, effectively controls it, and foreign policy, as well.

While it would a bit of an effort to monetize the full amount spent on this effort, I personally would not be a bit surprised if it were significantly larger than $5 billion, and despite that, one could imagine, quite a bargain in terms of their ROI; it could in fact be considerably less than the overt transfer of sovereign U.S. wealth to that foreign government every year.

The past administrations, either every one, or almost every one, going back as far as Truman, certainly , but the trend was already well established during the puppet presidency of Woodrow Wilson.

I'd love to read your rejoinder.

onetribe
being blocked incorrectly from using my usual handle

Ultrafart the Brave , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:56 am GMT
@Carlton Meyer

Imagine if Black Lives Matters dared protest against this destruction and looting of Africa's wealthiest nation and demanded that Clinton and Obama be arrested for war crimes.

An admirable sentiment, except that the BLM movement appears to be little more than a vehicle for staged chaos nurtured behind the scenes by more war criminals with a hidden agenda.

And more's the pity, because there are hordes of high-ranking war criminals in the Exceptional Nation that richly deserve burning at the stake. In the Libyan context, Muammar Gaddafi was not only a great leader but also a good man, who was doing great things not only for his own people but also for the community of African nations.

If you're going to have a dictator, make sure you get a good one. Gaddafi was a good one.

Trump not so much, but Clinton was and is horrifically evil.

Alfred , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT
The war against Russia has been going on for centuries. Nothing upsets these nutters more than the Russians insulating themselves from the mental virus that has proliferated in the West.

Just read the sour grapes of the usual suspects in this derogatory article. Similar in tone to the nonsense at the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014. Nothing amuses me more than to watch them vomiting on themselves in frustration.

Moscow, low-key consecration of Victory Cathedral; Catholics denied another church

Anon [233] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:06 am GMT
Nuland's views are, as stated in the article, dangerous fantasy-one could almost accuse her of having psychopathic voices in her head with respect to russia and putin.

It is indeed remarkable in a very bad way that this woman was close to the top level in state under obama but we can surely see her handiwork in the devastation of the ukraine nation.

Biff , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:13 am GMT
@Carlton Meyer

Imagine if Black Lives Matters dared protest against this destruction and looting of Africa's wealthiest nation and demanded that Clinton and Obama be arrested for war crimes.

My imagination:
An agitator is planted inside BLM, and is armed and equipped to carry out a terrorist attack on the American people as false flag event – blows up a weight-watchers convention, next to a Wal-mart, and puts a half-a-dozen fat bodies into orbit circling the globe(celestial bodies). After said attack BLM is defunded, and disbanded(but the race war continues).

Chris Moore , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:34 am GMT
You forgot to mention that virtually all of the neocon/liberal interventionist "intellectuals"on your list identify as Jewish, which means they see themselves as having Hebrew backgrounds, which not only gives them an Israel First/Zionist orientation, but which means their hatred of "anti-Semitic" Russia is pathological and ancestral, which means their hatred of "anti-Semitic" Europeans is pathological and ancestral, which means their hatred of "anti-Semitic" white people is pathological and ancestral, which means their desire for nuclear war between whites is pathological and ancestral, which means they believe they can win a nuclear war (perhaps by sheltering in bunker state Israel) and emerge as the anointed "chosen" intellectual priest class of the world

So there is a kind of internal logic or rationalism to their insanity, in the same way that any insular, imperious elite suffering from megalomania and delusions of grandeur can develop internal, echo chamber "logic" that is (objectively) insane. The difference is, their insane "logic" is additionally sanctioned by their particular God or their particular History or their version of God/History.

Hence, with this cult, we not only get insular, echo-chamber imperialism, but we additionally get quasi-religious, messianic fanaticism that will view any nuclear war as pre-ordained fate in service of delivering the Chosen Ones to the world.

And half of America thinks Trump is nuts? It should look at the "intellectual Jews" it's so desperate to consign its fate to.

ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:35 am GMT
Posturing. What else can this be, coming from the lips of a Jewish woman? It all just sounds so ridiculous. What authority does she have? Only the threat of force, reckless force dispensed with abandon. That's not authority. It's insanity.
Mr. Hack , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:35 am GMT
Another critique of US foreign policy regarding Russia, all referenced under the famous "cookies and milk" response of Ms. Nuland in Kyiv. Lucky for Russia that she wasn't doling out scoops of ice cream instead?

For Nuland, the replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with the real enemy, Moscow, over Russia's attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.

I applaud the US response of supporting Ukraine's aspirations for a freer more Western oriented country and that it continues to support Ukraine's territorial interests over those of Russia's. It's time for the Giraldis and Cohens of the world to shed their Russian fig leaf covering and be exposed as the gutless appeasers that they really are.

Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:41 am GMT
Victoria Nuland (her family name formerly Nudelman) and her blood-thirsty, thieving zionist neocon buddies would love nothing more than to tear Russia apart and finish the rape and plunder of that country first begun under Russia's 'reformer' president, the idiot Yeltsin, wherein mostly jewish Russian and American oligarchs systematically stole what amounts to about $330 billion dollars of Russia's wealth.

That these zionist neocon murderers and thieves would put the world at risk to achieve their goals is no surprise, as one need only look at the 3,000+ innocent American lives, including many Jews, that were snuffed out on 9/11, all to set the stage for the US and allies' "War of Terror" against mainly the enemies of Israel, and to line the pockets of the ever-growing Military-Information-Security Complex. Innocent lives mean absolutely nothing to these monsters.

The campaign against Russia is simply another necessary link in the chain that binds the world to the PNAC vision of using the US and the West to establish and maintain what is essentially a Jewish supremacist movement that barely conceals itself and its nefarious agenda from the useful idiot goyim so necessary to carry forward the PNAC's plan for world domination. And the chubby little Ms Nudelman is just another tireless zionist mouthpiece for this ugly, obnoxious and risky agenda

Mr. Hack , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:47 am GMT
Giraldi would have us believe that it was all a US sponsored provocation, not the natural outcry of the Ukrainiain people seeking change from a thoroughly corrupt and authoritarian regime. Ms.Nuland's cookies must have tasted really good to get the massive outpouring of support in Kiev that demanded systemic change.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-nNFrvGOb9o?feature=oembed

chris , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:11 am GMT
A major indicator of how long-term foreign policy goals are actually set by the US was revealed when Obama declared Venezuela a threat to national security in 2015!
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-declares-venezuela-national-security-threat-imposes-sanctions

Venezuela? A threat to US national security?? Sounds completely absurd.

But if you consider your 'national security' being threatened whenever any scarce natural resources in the world are not in your or in your client states' posession, then anthing which interferes with that is a "threat!" Iran (before 2003), Iraq, and Russia certainly fit the bill of being enemies.

This explanation, for me, is much more realistic than to think the neocons are solely driven by cold war mentalities.

The neocons are particularly peeved at Russia because through their oligarchs, they had the crown jewels in their hand before Putin wrested it out. It was always clear from the beginning that the overthrow of the Ukraine government was always just a stepping stone to the overthrow of Putin in Russia.

Russia is truly the mother load, with control over its natural resources, you control China, undermine the Middle Eastern Arab states and if necessary control Europe financially. Besides the direct political control you then exercise, on an economic level, the productive people of the world Germany and China then work for you.

roonaldo , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:13 am GMT
Nuland and her ilk will be spewing their dangerous nonsense and banging the drums of war like homicidal energizer bunnies until hell freezes over. Meanwhile, "from Atlantic to Pacific, the insanity is terrific," as the nation devolves in an engineered mass hysteria. As things go down the tubes, the Empire will get ever more desperate, rather than easing back a bit on the throttle. With Donald Boy and Sec. of State "Plump-piehole" egging on Israeli expansionist dreams and drone-executing whomever they please–what could possibly go wrong? I'm waiting for one, just one, European power to call bullshit on the U.S. and put a stop to this madness. Fat chance of that.

I think we are in the Empire's desperation phase. The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) report that called for and got another Pearl Harbor also spoke affectionately of creating bioweapons to target any upstart nation encroaching on U.S. hegemony. If the bastards could get away with 9/11, a most obvious inside job, what's not to like about the disruption and confusion of bioweapons? The ruthless evil we are up against is truly staggering.

Rahan , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:41 am GMT
It would be super funny, if Russian, Chinese, Serbian, Sudanese, Afghani, and Iranian diplomats now went out en mass to give out cookies to the US rioters.

Taking PR pictures with the poor oppressed black looters and antifa trannies, lecturing Washington on human rights, and pledging support to the "moderate terrorists" i.e. the democrat mayors and governors who decide to not interfere with the looting and autonomous zones.

I think this would be the most epic troll ever. Especially if Venezuela then paraded some nervous spook and declared him the "legitimate president of the United States".

Or maybe, kek, just appoint Bernie the real president. "For two elections the corrupt system has denied this true hero his rightful position. Enough! We support the people's choice!" etc. Bernie would be all: "I don't know who these people are, honest," and they'd be: "stay strong, comrade, we shall help you in your fight to become a true people's president!"

Lot , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:55 am GMT
America's most pro-Israel President, the one who moved the embassy to Jerusalem and appointed a West Bank settler dude as ambassador, has both refrained from starting wars and is gradually bringing the troops home from Afghanistan, Germany, etc.

So much for the Jihadi/leftist smear that Israel's friends promote wars.

Trump: peace through strength and loyalty to America's true friends.

Marshall Lentini , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:35 am GMT

Confronting Russia as some kind of ideological enemy is a never-ending process that leaves both sides poorer and less free.

Well said.

It's also really strange to portray Russia in this demonic fashion. When you see it up close, there are things you don't like or question, things that are bizarre, absurdly inefficient, and outright abhorrent, but it's far from the big threatening geopolitical beast they make it out to be. It's more of a joke which even Russians understand.

There's a phrase from the USSR that someone taught me – аналогов нет, "no analogues" or nothing comparable, referring to the quality of their military armaments, specifically rockets. Obvious nonsense pushed by the USSR to bolster faith in the populace, it lives on today in Kremlin propaganda, but is widely regarded as the bullshit it is, which is why videos containing the phrase itself are banned on YouTube Russia.

In short Russia, as a meme, is a "paper tiger" propped up largely by Washingtonian psychodrama and will-to-power. Washington doesn't want Russia out of Crimea because they love the Ukrainians; they want them out because Ukraine is a major destination for American corporate venality. Absent interference from Washington, the Kremlin might undertake some foreign adventures in neighboring countries, but for the most part would continue on its obvious path of "peacefully" melding with the Chinese economy, like everyone else.

There is no white nation free of the forces of decline set in motion by white success and the overall technological arc of history. "Russia" is nothing more than a scarecrow for the Washington establishment – which it could just as well drop, as they no longer need justifications or approval from the people – and signifies only a livid hunger for the last major market they've yet to absorb directly.

restless94110 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:04 am GMT

It is difficult to find anything good to say about Donald Trump, but the reality is that he has not started any new wars, though

It is difficult to read past an opening sentence such as this one.

I have seen it constantly. I call it the "Back-handed Trump hating fool" approach. The many writers who employ this method in their articles appear to believe that they literally have to make it clear to their readers that of course they (the writers) think Trump is a moron/cad/crook/criminal/mentally ill, BUT!!!

Then they proceed with the rest of their article.

But don't you (the reader) dare think that they think anything good about Trump!

This is childish bullshit and am I the only one who is completely sick of it?

Hey, Phil, how about you leave out the stupid back-handed Trump hating nonsense? You don't need to write it, but if you do? Have your editors cut it from your writing. It just makes you look stupid, and many won't even continue reading your article. As they should. No one deserves to be read who would write such facile, petty nonsense.

Proud_Srbin , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:07 am GMT
ANY country, real or satelite which allows ""diplomats from 5-headed beast or anglo-terrorist and marauding alliance deserve extinction.
God Bless DPRK!
Bill Jones , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:30 am GMT
Petty typo
"Nuland, who is the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, "

"is" sb was (thank god)

I too find it appalling that these people move among us.

JWalters , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:39 am GMT
If we "follow the money", Hillary's campaign was financed by the Israelis. An honest post mortem on her loss would have focused attention on the huge influence of Israeli money on American elections. The faked focus on Russian "meddling" could have been to divert any talk of election "meddling" away from Israel's truly vast "meddling". (The Israelis routinely distract by accusing others of their own crimes.) The Israelis control both the DNC and the corporate media, so "Russiagate" could roll on virtually evidence-free. Fox was allowed to criticize the "Russiagate" attack on Trump, but only to keep the kabuki conflict boiling. Neither side ever mentioned Israel's "meddling", or in any way criticized Israel. To the contrary, Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity even agreed that Netanyahu would be a great American president. So why did Israeli asset John Bolton just attack Trump, after Trump has given Israel so much, including assassinating Soleimani? Maybe it's Trump's refusal to launch Israel's next war? Maybe they don't really trust Trump? Maybe because on 9/11 Trump said he didn't believe planes could have brought down the twin towers, and that explosives must have been involved? Could Trump be in a deadly dance with the Israelis, riding a tiger?
Anonymous [661] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:08 am GMT
Nuland wrote that Russia did "violate arms control treaties, international law, the sovereignty of its neighbors, and the integrity of elections in the United States " But wait a minute, doesn't she really mean Israel, not Russia?

And in retrospect, America's penchant for throwing little countries against the wall has never worked all that well. I'm thinking Cuba, Vietnam, Somalia.

Good article, Mr. Giraldi.

Larchmonter420 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT

Nuland, many will recall, was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych in 2013-2014. Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became Prime Minister after a free election.

Nuland might hate Russia, but Obama gave back Crimea to Russia the rightful owner on a Silver Platter. Russia has now easy access to Mediterranean Sea. Obama then invited Russia back to Syria, as the USSR was kicked out of Middle East by the Evil Kissinger after the Yom Kippur War ..

The rest is history. 20/20 is hindsight.

WHAT , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:21 am GMT
@Mr. Hack Exactly, it was a US financed provocation with a whole lot of extremely dumb stooges. Six years that have passed since prove it again and again, every day.

Whatever; "Ukraine" is not a state, "ukrainians" are not a people, "ukraininan" is just bastardized Russian/Polish mix, so to hell with this joke of a cuntry. Let Russia, Poland and Hungary partition it.

Robert Pinkerton , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:24 am GMT
A sub-set of our Jewish fellow Earth-walkers hates Russia, rodina and narod as ancestral heritage.

NATO should have been disbanded shortly after the Soviet Union fell, its bureaucrath given Certificates of Service and sent home.

Philip Giraldi , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:24 am GMT
@Bill Jones Thanks – corrected!
BL , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:57 am GMT
@anon

" It is hard to imagine that any U.S. administration would tolerate a similar attempt by a foreign nation to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, particularly if it were backed by a $5 billion budget, "

We could chalk this up to a lack of imagination on the part of our intrepid former CIA scribbler, but anyone paying even cursory attention couldn't help but conclude that the Obama administration didn't just tolerate, it choreographed, a plot against Trump in league with foreign intelligence services.

U.K., Ukraine, Italy, Australia, Russia, and, yes, Israel.

I'm confident that neither a lack of imagination or garden-variety ignorance explains Giraldi's narrative weaving. However open or obscured, staying on the remove Trump by any means necessary team remains the smart, if treasonous, play.

You'll note that Russia is included in this no doubt incomplete list. It really is a fool's errand to try to surmise for any of these foreign participants what of their actions were opportunism as opposed to resigned self-protectiveness,

But, make no mistake, every single one, foreign powers, whether allies or adversaries, and individuals and purportedly non-state entities, was promised goodies at the expense of the American national interest.

That's anyone's guess at this point. We know surveillance state bottom-feeder Glenn Simpson got at least $6M, and Stefan "Guttman" Halper about $1M. What do you think was promised to foreign powers for playing ball? In the case of Russia, unless I miss my mark, Nord Stream II was merely the down payment.

Maybe some day Giraldi will ask Brennan the contours of the deal he made Russia assistance in throwing the election to Hillary in March, 2016:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-cia/cia-boss-brennan-visited-moscow-in-early-march-interfax-idUSKCN0WU0S5

ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:05 am GMT
@chris

" Russia is truly the mother load, with control over its natural resources, you control China, undermine the Middle Eastern Arab states and if necessary control Europe financially. Besides the direct political control you then exercise, on an economic level, the productive people of the world Germany and China then work for you."

Hear, hear!

Fred777 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:10 am GMT
Hold fast Russia, the globalists have nothing good in store for you.
Hapalong Cassidy , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:11 am GMT
Given all that has happened this year, I can unequivocally say that any white person who joins the US military needs to have their head examined. And a US military bereft of white people would be pretty much useless.
red rider , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:18 am GMT
Clinton actually bombed Yugoslavia/Sebia as a diversion when the press somehow caught wind of his arrangement with Monica Lewinsky.
Z-man , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:23 am GMT
Philip said:

Bush was an out-and-out neoconservative, or at least someone who was easily led,

Ok but the main reason 'Dubbya' went into Eye-Raq is because he wanted to 'get' Saddam for having gone after 'Big Daddy' Bush I. The Neochoens provided the cover.

Bill Jones said:

I too find it appalling that these people move among us.

Yes but Nudelman is also a laughable character now who's shelf life has expired, I hope.

JoaoAlfaiate , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:48 am GMT
Hoping for Peoria but getting Minneapolis and Seattle.
rienzi , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:02 pm GMT
Ignoring all arguments about who is on the side of the angels here.

There are a lot of countries that could hurt us badly in a shooting war, but we would survive, and at the end of the day, they would not. However, there is one country, and only one, that could completely erase us in a few hours, and that is Russia.

Seems insanely suicidal to run around poking the bear with a stick at every possible opportunity.

anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:03 pm GMT
For the gullible fans of Mr. Trump, who want so fervently to believe that he's trying to change anything but the rhetoric:

When I searched to confirm the name of that "diplomat" standing next to Ms. Nuland, I learned from an official website that he remains employed as such, now the face of Uncle Sam in Greece.

Geoffrey R. Pyatt, a career member of the Foreign Service, class of Career Minister, was sworn in as the U.S. Ambassador to the Hellenic Republic in September 2016.

He served as U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine from 2013-2016, receiving the State Department's Robert Frasure Memorial Award in recognition of his commitment to peace and alleviation of human suffering in eastern Ukraine.

What should we expect of a President that would brag about luring an Iranian leader into a gangland hit with an invitation to discuss peace?

If you can't handle the truth, just hit the Troll or Disagree button.

Robjil , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:07 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack It is called fool's gold.

They were promised the EU or riches from the EU.

Yet, the leader of the coup Nuland said these immortal words to start her coup:

"F–k the EU"

Nuland knew the real deal.

She was creating a Zion colony in Ukraine and nothing more than that.

geokat62 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:13 pm GMT

All were hawks who believed that the United States had the right to do whatever it considered necessary to enhance its own security , to include invading other countries, which led to Afghanistan and Iraq, where the U.S. still has forces stationed nearly twenty years later.

Great article, Phil. May I recommend one minor edit:

All were hawks who believed that the United States had the right to do whatever it considered necessary to enhance the Jewish State's security, to include invading other countries, which led to Afghanistan and Iraq, where the U.S. still has forces stationed nearly twenty years later.

Realist , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:15 pm GMT

The foreign interventionists really hate Russia

Ya think??? Is this supposed to be newsy?

Realist , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:17 pm GMT
@Hapalong Cassidy

Given all that has happened this year, I can unequivocally say that any white person who joins the US military needs to have their head examined.

That has been the case for decades.

Jake , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:18 pm GMT
Why do our 'foreign interventionists,' our 'permanent war for globalist perpetual peace' crusaders, our Neocons, hate Russia so thoroughly and so centrally to their very beings?

First, our imperialists are the direct descendants intellectually, spiritually, and morally of the first WASP Empire, the first Anglo-Zionist Empire: the British Empire. And they have used their high IQs that are focused on grasping the One Ring to Rule Them All to locate where the Brit WASP Empire failed to achieve its goals, which allowed the collapse starting with World War 1. They are obsessed with that because they believe that if they can achieve what the Brit WASPs failed to achieve, then they can make the Anglo-Zionist Empire 2.0 as permanent as the Roman Empire – a Thousand Year Reich.

And that is spiritually what all WASP imperialism, all Anglo-Zionist imperialism back to at least the Anglo-Saxon Puritans, is about: replacing the Roman Empire, which means replacing that which culturally led to, and was absolutely indispensable to, Christendom.

What they wish to redo and achieve that the Brit WASPs failed in is winning The Great Game: becoming total master of Eur-Asia. And that requires taking out Russia and China. In the 19th century, China was sicker than even the Ottoman Turkish Empire. To play the long game to destroy Russia, the Brit WASPs allied with the Turks to prevent Russia acting to push the Ottomans out of Europe. Brit WASP secret service in eastern Europe was focused on reducing Russia significantly right through the Bolshevik Revolution, even with Russia naively, stupidly allied with the British Empire in World War 1.

Our 'foreign interventionists' have seen Russia under Putin rise from the ashes, and they intend to destroy Russia once and for all, so they then can reduce China and win The Great Game. And thus make Anglo-Zionist Empire greater than Roman Empire.

Second, our Neocons are the spiritual and intellectual descendants not just of Trotskyites, but of all Russia-hating Jews with ties to Central and/or Eastern Europe. For them, Russia always is the evil that must be destroyed for the good of Jews.

Everything at its bedrock is about theology, is about the choice between Christ and Christendom or the Chaos of anti-Christendom.

BL , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:22 pm GMT
@BL By the way, I will give you the commanding heights Sad Story in absurdly abridged form.

China won the post-Cold War period hands down. From Tiananmen Square to Ising power on the cusp of global hegemony in a quarter century. With the US paying the bill.

While there were clear indications to any honest observer years before, Snowden's coming out signaled the public next phase of a years long operation in which the USG built a global surveillance apparatus, including not the least of Americans, and then lost the whole shebang to Russia, China and God Knows Who Else.

My view then -- and I have seen nothing to even suggest my informed speculation was wrong -- was that the sky was the limit in terms of what the powers that be would gift in terms of the national interest to protect themselves from exposure and a reckoning.

I would like anyone who disagrees to otherwise explain how USG policy became one of driving China and Russia into a strategic alliance. To say nothing of putting obviously compromised individuals, foreign assets, like Brennan at the apex of power.

Obama was also the first president to set up a regular Tuesday morning session to review a list of American citizens who would benefit from being killed by drone.

Uh huh. Read the NYT article -- Obama is no angel, but Giraldi should explain why President Obama would set up, much less publicly reveal, weekly sessions in which both he and the office of the president are grossly debased by the Director of the CIA?

geokat62 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:34 pm GMT

Zionism is the Deep State – Rick Wiles

-- TruNews™ (@TruNews) June 22, 2020

Jake , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 12:52 pm GMT
In this article, this is the most important sentence in terms of showing how doomed America is: Obama was also the first president to set up a regular Tuesday morning session to review a list of American citizens who would benefit from being killed by drone.

The DOOM is that no Liberal can ever acknowledge that as something a liberal, a sacred black liberal at that, would do without being forced to do so by white conservatives.

That insanity lies at the heart of America and has since at least the Emancipation Proclamation. It means that it is totally impossible to have a halfway meaningful 'liberal' opposition to imperialism, because imperialism is always easily cast as doing good for the downtrodden blacks and/or browns and/or yellows and/or Jews and/or Moslems.

anon [319] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:00 pm GMT
Too late, too fat, & too ugly! Nuland already lost the beauty contest for Biden's ventriloquist to Avril Haines, She-wolf of the DO. The rectal feedings will continue till morale improves!
Really No Shit , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:13 pm GMT
The "foreign interventionists" want two things: Russia's mineral riches and its good gene pool (how do you think Middle Eastern Semites became blonde hair- blue eyed people who can easily blend into the West to undermine it from within in the first place to begin with?)

And they won't stop until they get what they want, by hook or crook!

Mr. Hack , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:36 pm GMT
@Robjil Nuland was about as interested in creating a "Zion colony" of Ukraine as Ron Unz (another Jew) is in creating one at this website!
Anonymous [112] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:41 pm GMT
Clinton and Obama were so-called liberal interventionists who sought to export something called democracy to other countries in an attempt to make them more like Peoria . . .

More like the Castro District or Seattle, in fact.

BuelahMan , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT
Vicky is a Dirty Woman:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/q67l4qPKbJ4?feature=oembed

A123 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT

So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance. And, by either yardstick all-in-all, Trump looks pretty good, but there has nevertheless been a resurgence of neocon-think in his administration.

Trump fired John Bolton. Pompeo is at most a shadow of Bolton. That is rather the opposite of resurgence. If the author could let go of his #NeverTrump bias he would be able to see that Trump has run the NeoCons out of the GOP.

Trump tried to remove troops from Syria and Afghanistan and ran into Deep State obstructionism.

The Globalists tried to trick Trump into a Syria expansion by creating a Turkey/Syria battle through areas controlled by U.S. Troops. Trump refused to be manipulated and pulled U.S. Troops out of the kill sack. Does anyone still believe that myth about 'protecting Syrian oil'? Only the mentally dim accepted that ludicrous cover story. It was flimsy excuse to relocate out of the Deep State trap.

Prior U.S. administrations created huge problems in the ME by toppling Saddam and emboldening Iran's theocracy. "Cut and Run" would guarantee a nuclear arms race in the region. Trump's containment of Iranian colonial expansionism is working, albeit slowly. The Rial continues to slide (now at ~200,000 to the USD). At some point, the Iranian people will choose to get rid of their failed leaders and rejoin civilized society. Until then Trump's containment is better than a Biden invasion.
_____

Trump has fundamentally reshaped the alignment of U.S. Politics. There is only one foreign interventionist party. The SJW Globalist DNC now owns both the NeoConDemocrats and the R2P crowd. The choice this November is clear:

-- Trump -- No New Foreign Wars
-- Biden -- Invasion of Ukraine, Iran, Libya, etc.

PEACE

Desert Fox , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:50 pm GMT
Nuland is just the tip of the iceberg in the ZUS government, which is infested with zionists and has been in every administation since Wilson, they are the cause of every war since WWI right down to the middle east and in the case of the middle east wars, the zionists and Israel used their attack on the WTC to push America into the slaughter house for the greater Israel project.

Read The Protocols of Zion and the book The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, there is laid out the zionist one world zionist government.

chris , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 1:53 pm GMT
@Rahan HAHAHA, I'm still laughing !!! That's friggin hilarious, Rahan!!!
Bernie the cowardly comrade
Bill Jones , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:00 pm GMT
@Larchmonter420 It is little noticed that those Countries consumed by the evil Soviet Union have fared much better in conserving their culture and sense of self, after they were upchucked in the early '90s, than the Champions of Democracy of the West have done under the freedom and tutelage bestowed by the US.
Funny dat.
chris , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:09 pm GMT
@Hapalong Cassidy yeah, white or straight; the worst is if you're both
AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT
Yes, Nudelman and her ilk are rabidly anti-Russian. But what they did in Ukraine revealed a very different thing: globohomo elites are mentally degenerate, they cannot foresee even immediate consequences of their moves. There was a joke in Russia that for the coup in 2014 in Kiev Obama deserves a medal "For the liberation of Crimea" (there was a medal of this name in WWII). There was another joke, that Ukraine without Crimea is like a purebred stallion without balls.

Neocons planned to make Ukraine a battering rum against Russia. They did not understand that a log rotten through and through cannot serve as a battering ram. Now they are stuck with that wreck ("you break it – you own it" rule) and don't know what to do with it. Previous US administration and DNC big shots (Biden, Pelosi, Schiff, and Co) used it mostly as a rout of stealing US taxpayers' money. Current administration does not seem to have even this use for it. The US keeps proving the age-old wisdom that when you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere. Putin appears to have a huge stock of popcorn.

Bill Jones , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:20 pm GMT
@BL Bezos has done extremely well for acting as China's proxy in destroying the US economy.
Give the man a medal:
onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:21 pm GMT
"So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance. And, by either yardstick all-in-all, Trump looks pretty good, but there has nevertheless been a resurgence of neocon-think in his administration. "

This "just" in: "War is the health of the state" Randolph Bourne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randolph_Bourne

Meaning, if you have governments in the first place, sooner or later, you will have war, either on the people inside a country [eg the war on drugs], or on citizens of another country, or both at the same time [i.e. what we have now].

Outside of complete dissolution of all states [ preferable in my opinion, but unlikely given the general mindset of the brainwashed masses worldwide], and given the systemic need of all states everywhere for evermore wars on their own, and on others populations, the only [ imperfect, and perhaps temporary], solution I see is to 95% downsize the federal government and restore the constitution and bill of rights and to thereby restrict the federal government to its original limits, and to even design new, more effective ways to prevent the federal governments further expansion beyond those original limits/chains.

"..the very idea of the State itself is poisonous, evil, and intrinsically destructive. But, like so many bad ideas, people have come to assume it's part of the cosmic firmament, when it's really just a monstrous scam.

It's a fraud, like your belief that you have a right to free speech because of the First Amendment, or a right to be armed because of the Second Amendment. No, you don't. The U.S. Constitution is just an arbitrary piece of paper entirely apart from the fact the whole thing is now just a dead letter. You have a right to free speech and to be armed because they're necessary parts of being a free person, not because of what a political document says.

Even though the essence of the State is coercion, people have been taught to love and respect it. Most people think of the State in the quaint light of a grade school civics book. They think it has something to do with "We the People" electing a Jimmy Stewart character to represent them.

That ideal has always been a pernicious fiction, because it idealizes, sanitizes, and legitimizes an intrinsically evil and destructive institution, which is based on force. As Mao once said, political power comes out of the barrel of a gun." Doug Casey
https://www.caseyresearch.com/daily-dispatch/doug-casey-the-deep-state-is-responsible-for-all-economic-turmoil/

Regards, onebornfree

Agent76 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:22 pm GMT
Apr 27, 2017 This Is Already Putting an End to the Age of Globalization and Bankrupting the United States (2004)

For a major power, prosecution of any war that is not a defense of the homeland usually requires overseas military bases for strategic reasons. After the war is over, it is tempting for the victor to retain such bases and easy to find reasons to do so.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/orBEdPe63v0?feature=oembed

February 26, 2015 The Neoconservative Threat To World Order

Scholars from Russia and from around the world, Russian government officials, and the Russian people seek an answer as to why Washington destroyed during the past year the friendly relations between America and Russia that President Reagan and President Gorbachev succeeded in establishing.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/26/neoconservative-threat-world-order-paul-craig-roberts/

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:25 pm GMT
@Bill Jones There is even funnier thing now with covid: the countries that do not toe the imperial line, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, are doing a lot better than imperial sidekicks like Brazil, Colombia, or Peru. Rephrasing old Russian saying, "tell me who is your friend, and I tell you how stupid you are".
chris , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:25 pm GMT
@Rahan To make the troll work even better, Venezuela could then send 20 guys in zodiacs to motor into DC and NY harbor to try to take over Dulles and LaGuardia airports, and when they got captured, they could just trade them for those 2 knuckleheads we sent down there. They could also claim that they're here to capture Trump; that might just get him handed over.

Rahan, you have to send your brilliant joke to CJ Hopkins and to Caitline Johnstone to get if more exposure.

Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:45 pm GMT
@anonymous You appear to be saying that a career diplomat who served in Ukraine when the US did or supported bad things there should not have been appointed as Ambassador to Greece. Is that a correct understanding of what you mean to convey? If so, how does this reflect on Trump when the appointment was made two months before he was elected?
JoaoAlfaiate , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:48 pm GMT
Before confronting the Russians, it might be a good idea to regain control of Minneapolis and Seattle ..
anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:52 pm GMT

So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance.

That's pretty much it, they just use different rhetoric to appeal to their constituencies. Might makes right; there is no other law beside bandit law. The Russians have been a barrier to the US being able to spread itself over the entire globe and rob everyone weaker than itself. The US was behind all these atrocious jihadi mercenaries even as it's pretended to be against them. The Russians stopped the US project of terror and overthrow in Syria and that's outraged the Americans who thought they could act as they pleased. Libya was destroyed by the wonderful, hip Obama who many stupid Americans still think was a nice person. But with Russia, they can huff and puff but can't blow their walls down. They have a military that can deter the Americans unlike all the other smaller victim states.

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:53 pm GMT
@onebornfree

Meaning, if you have governments in the first place, sooner or later, you will have war,

Funny, you sound like notorious Russian politician Zhirinovsky. He said: "there is no such thing as lasting peace, there is only prolonged armistice".

Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN The second joke should be withdrawn from active service. It is that of the naughty schoolboy who will say anything for a cheap laugh – in this case "balls. A well bred gelding will win races, be just as well fed and housed as the entire stallion and much more contentedly placid.
GMC , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 2:59 pm GMT
Right after those two Israeli puppets were dancing and talking on their open lined cell phones outside on Shitskyia St. in Kyiv, Ukraine, in front of the US Embassy, Ambassador Py Rat ended up going to the US Embassy in Greece, in order screw the Greek people some more, and Cookies Nuland ended up -- F n what's left of the island of Cyprus. US Embassies are nothin more than CIA offices and only idiots would leave them in their country.
Biff , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:20 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN Another Russian joke about Ukraine – that I will probably wreck but here goes:

How come you want to attack Donbass?

Because the Russians are there.

How come you don't actually attack Donbass?

Because the Russians are really there!

EliteCommInc. , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:33 pm GMT
"She accuses the Kremlin of having "seized" Crimea, but fails to see the heavy footprint of the U.S. military in Afghanistan and Iraq and as a regional enabler of Israeli and Saudi war crimes. One wonders if she is aware that Russia, which she sees as expansionistic, has only one overseas military base while the United States has more than a thousand."

I think this is a mistake. I think Miss Nuland knows exactly how large and intense the US ft print is and belies it should be larger and more intense. There are sincere people who believe that the US must as duty make the work safe for democracy even the means of getting there is any and everything bt democratic because in the long run -- the benefits will outweigh.

and as proof of er sincerity -- it's not just Russia (Though I understand why Dr. Giraldi would like to tackle one territorial issue at a time makes sense)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/21/china-adapting-and-improving-on-tactics-deployed-b/

Herald , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:34 pm GMT
@Chris Moore

And half of America thinks Trump is nuts? It should look at the "intellectual Jews" it's so desperate to consign its fate to.

Of course, it should look at them, that's what Trump seems to be doing.

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:44 pm GMT
@Biff I've heard another version of this.
Ukrainians are asked:
– If you believe that Crimea belongs to you, why don't you fight for it?
– We are not stupid, Russian troops are there.
– But you say that there are Russian troops in Donbass, yet you fight.
– That's what we say, but in Crimea there really are Russian troops.
Rahan , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:48 pm GMT
@chris
Thank you for the kind words, Chris,
You're very welcome to share the gist of the joke anywhere you like, and add to it whatever you think works:)
peter mcloughlin , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:51 pm GMT
I agree that "backing Moscow into a corner with no way out" is a dangerous strategy. This is not the Cold War: in the Cold War the United States and USSR were able to keep peace, a balance of power, an equilibrium where neither side's vital interests were threatened. Russia had a buffer zone: not today. America was at the height of its global economic power: today it is being overtaken by China. In the Cold War the big powers avoided nuclear Armageddon – though at times appeared to come close – because they were able to. The misguided thinking today is: "we got through the Cold War we can get this". This is not a re-run of 1945-1991: it is the lead-in to the holocaust that period skillfully avoided.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
GMC , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:54 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack I was in Ukraine and was a resident in 2008 even. Yanuk was a thief, but this was SOP in Kyiv – how do you think they all get rich ? Sure the people were protesting about corruption, but anyone who was really there know how easy it was to spread the riot when the western neo nazis are bussed in, the " cookies" end up being money paid to certain groups and out of work peasants. Yanuk was trying to short sell Ukraine's farmland etc. to many corporations and countries. He was taking money from Monsanto, Carghill, Dupont, John Deere/ Iowa Univ. and even China started to build a deep water port in Crimea , in order to grow on the 200,000 hectares they wanted to lease. Russia always gave the Ukies a decent loan or gaz price { esp. for Princess Jewish Tymoshenko who up the price for her takings }, not to mention the million or so that worked in Ru. A Perfect storm , for as far back as when , in 2005, Senator B Obama , brought 40 million in cash to Donetsk, in order to de- arm the Ukrainian military. This Maidan and Ukrainian plan was well planned – decade or two earlier – Pravda !
Herald , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 3:56 pm GMT
@Bill Jones China's proxy?
Shaman911 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:00 pm GMT
For one thing. PRESIDENTS of any country "DO NOT START WARS" It's always Jewish Bankers.
Nuland is Jewish so what else is there to talk about?
Alfa158 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:13 pm GMT
Mr. Giraldi ; do you think Vicky is angling for the Secretary of State position in the upcoming Biden administration?
Have you given any thought to who Biden will be told to select for the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and National Security Advisor slots where they will be leading the charge for war?
I think it is possible that Bolton may have been angling for one of those spots with his current book tour, but that has obviously blown up in his face.
Really No Shit , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:15 pm GMT
@BuelahMan Dirty Vicky wanted to do statuesque Julia you know where!
Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:41 pm GMT
@Anonymous I thought that bit was comic relief.
anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:42 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz OK, as you give off more than a whiff of effete hack yourself, I'll bite.*

Yes, that's what I mean to convey. It reflects on President Trump -- and, more particularly, his sham campaign rhetoric -- that the likes of Mr. Pyatt remain in place with another Exceptional! plaque on his lavish office.

Do you mean to convey that the President can't replace ambassadors at will, or that they have tenure?

-- --

*Before interacting with this "Wizard of Oz" character, be aware that he/she/they often draw other commenters in with questions and requests that are seldom resolved to his/her/their satisfaction, or with cryptic insinuations that distract discussion.

The same person also fuzzes up threads by pretending to be more than one commenter, the technique known as "sock puppetry." See under Mr. Derbyshire's February 15, 2019, article comment ## 28, 42, 43, 44, 68, 122, where he/she/they got sloppy also posting as "Anon[436]."

Among this website's oddest, sophisticatedly trollish commenters.

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:44 pm GMT
@GMC Let's give credit where credit is due. Yes, the Empire wanted to buy Ukraine, preferably on the cheap (considering that the goods were not of the first quality). But for the sale to proceed you need two sides. You need a fraudster and a sucker. You cannot consider morons who sold their would-be country for beads blameless. Not to mention that many local thugs got a cut. Smarter thieves took their loot and ran away, like Yats. Dumber and/or greedier ones, like Porky and Kolomoisky, remained and kept trying to steal more. The suckers (the rest of the population) are left holding the bag. Stupidity is always punished in the end, but not always so severely.
Mr. Hack , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:51 pm GMT
@GMC Although one has to be careful in dealing with the large multinationals, the only way to obtain large contracts is through cooperation with them. Opening things up and building ports would have resulted in large employment opportunities for the masses, adding some stability to the Ukrainian economy.

I'm not aware of Senator Obama's dealings in Donetsk to "de-arm the Ukrainian military". Please do tell me more.

Chris Moore , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 4:56 pm GMT
@Jake

Our 'foreign interventionists' have seen Russia under Putin rise from the ashes, and they intend to destroy Russia once and for all, so they then can reduce China and win The Great Game. And thus make Anglo-Zionist Empire greater than Roman Empire. Second, our Neocons are the spiritual and intellectual descendants not just of Trotskyites, but of all Russia-hating Jews with ties to Central and/or Eastern Europe. For them, Russia always is the evil that must be destroyed for the good of Jews.

So basically, they're Jewish parasites with delusions of grandeur who attached themselves to the British Empire and American Empire (destroying the US Constitution along the way), and are using its decaying WASP blood and treasure to set up an Anglo-Zionist Empire, which will then morph into a Zionist Empire, which will then move its headquarters to Israel, which will then fulfill "chosen" Zionist Jewish supremacist prophecy and theology of ruling the world.

In other words, they're not only parasites, but they're insane parasites. Really, could there be any other kind? The insanity is baked into the parasite.

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:00 pm GMT
@anonymous

What should we expect of a President that would brag about luring an Iranian leader into a gangland hit with an invitation to discuss peace?

I am confident that, in my lifetime, the truth about how that unfolded will never be known. The intel for the hit came from the Israelis through the same people that have been undermining him from Day 1. Did Trump actually know Soleimani was there on a peace mission? Did Trump know that an Iraqi leader would be with Solmeimani? Why would de-escalation of tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia be bad for Trump who has been avoiding staring wars? Was Mattis in on that game?

Once the hit was done, the rest is creating a narrative for diversion. It was a shit show, to be sure, but I suspect there is a lot more to this than what we are being fed.

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:01 pm GMT
' Michael Ledeen, "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business." '

Now, if that 'small, crappy little country' could be Israel, me 'n Mike could have a real meeting of minds.

but I suppose that's not what Mike meant.

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:06 pm GMT
' Backing Moscow into a corner with no way out by using threats and sanctions is not good policy '

That might well be, but maybe there is a way out.

Think maybe if Russia abandoned its support for a state in Syria and let Israel have her little way with the place that she might suddenly be left in peace?

Nahhh couldn't possibly be a connection. How could that influence our policy?

FLgeezer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:10 pm GMT
@anonymous >Among this website's oddest, sophisticatedly trollish commenters.

Agreed. I suggest he/she/it be referred to henceforth as the Wizard of Odds.

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:16 pm GMT
' Washington and its allies have forgotten the statecraft that won the Cold War '

This always happens with winners -- be they World War One generals or Cold Warriors.

If, due to other factors entirely, they happen to finally triumph, it all becomes attributed to their incredible genius.

The oddity is that the Soviet Union lasted as long as it did. It was a massively unattractive system with no natural constituency beyond its own bureaucrats. Yes, it had to be kept at bay, and we did do that -- but we basically merely watched while it collapsed under the weight of its own internal flaws.

Kouros , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:34 pm GMT
American Oligarchy really wants to take over the Russian economy and assets (as well as China's and Iran's)
Pat Kittle , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT

the advice that has been attributed to leading neocon Michael Ledeen, "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business."

Hmm Israel comes first to mind.

Hegar , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:44 pm GMT
Giraldi's first paragraph is spot on. But after corona dealing the economy a heavy blow, I don't think Trump will start a war before the election. I don't think he would have done that otherwise either, though there was some risk. Trump has caved numerous times, he is an idioht when it comes to hiring his enemies hoping to appease them, but there is no question that he opposes mass immigration and invasions.

I suppose most people here know this, but let's look at how many of the pro-war names mentioned belong to the 2.5 % "Chosen":

George Bush
Donald Rumsfeld
Hillary Clinton
Michael Ledeen (White, but studied history under *George Mosse, immigrated from Germany)
Reuel Gerecht
Dan Senor

*Richard Perle
*Paul Wolfowitz (The architect of the Afghan-Iraq invasions, who gathered support for them in Congress and organized the pro-war communication)
*Douglas Feith (would have been the Sec. of Defense if people hadn't objected too much, as he was infamous after the Iran-Contra affair)
*Eliot Abrams
*Lewish "Scooter" Libby of the dead eyes
*Robert Kagan
*Frederick Kagan
*Victoria Nuland
*Madeleine Albright (Half a million dead Iraqi children from starvation sanctions and bombing the infrastructure for twelve years was "worth it")

That's six Whites and nine Tribe.

If those nine hadn't existed millions would have been alive today, there would have been no flood of Somalis, Afghans, Iraqis and Syrians to Europe, and the U.S. and the Middle East would have been far better off.

Pat Kittle , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:48 pm GMT
@Colin Wright I just posted a similar comment, before I saw yours.

Plagiarism unintended!

Alfred , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:53 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack I applaud the US response of supporting Ukraine's aspirations for a freer more Western oriented country

You are joking surely? The country is run by Jews from top to bottom – although Jews are 1% of the population. Since the Maidan putsch, there has only been a string of Jewish presidents and prime minsters. The guy responsible for investigating corruption was recently sacked and replaced by a Jew.

Post Maidan, 3 TV stations were shut in Kharkov alone. Everything is controlled and is lies. Journalists and politicians who don't do as they are told are shot. No one is arrested. The latest victim was an opposition politician who was executed by a shot in the head in his parliamentary office a few weeks ago. No Jew ever suffers such a fate.

He was not "found dead". He was killed by a bullet to the head.
It was not in "central Kyiv". It was in the parliament building.

Ukrainian lawmaker found dead in central Kyiv

Rurik , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 5:57 pm GMT

Vice President Dick Cheney, who thought he was actually the man in charge.

he was

contrast the chimp sitting in that classroom for 20 something minutes, as our nation was under attack

with what Cheney was doing at the time..

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qjR0gGXV-04?feature=oembed

All were hawks who believed that the United States had the right to do whatever it considered necessary to enhance its own security,

I see Geo has already pointed out the obvious absurdity that any of these criminal were in the least bit worried bout US security. If anything, they were overtly sacrificing US security on behalf of an enemy state. Not sure why you write stuff like that Mr. G, unless you just expect people to ignore it as perfunctory tripe, but there are some, no doubt, who read those words and assume you are actually saying they care about the US. When you and I both know they don't.

Clinton and Obama were so-called liberal interventionists who sought to export something called democracy to other countries in an attempt to make them more like Peoria.

Nope.

They were and are both amoral, opportunistic zio-whores, whose only ideology is what's good for Clinton and Obama, respectively. Clinton didn't bomb Serbia out of some humanitarian love of freedom and democracy, and Obama didn't destroy Libya and Syria except to serve his zio-masters. Duh.

So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance. And, by either yardstick all-in-all, Trump looks pretty good,

I was telling my gal the other day, that Trump could be The One to End the Fed, by allowing Goldman Sachs and the rest of them to feast at the Treasury to their heart's content.

I reminded her of Jackson's quote about hurting ten thousand families, in order to save fifty thousand. And in a similar vein, Trump could be setting up the collapse of the ZUS economy, which will hurt hundreds of millions, but if he could collapse the dollar, he very well might save billions of people's lives.

"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out."
– Andrew Jackson (1767-1845)

Nuland is most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role

I beg to differ, Mr. G.

I would posit that her most famous utterings were when she imperiously demanded that "Yats is our guy". IOW, the way she was promoting "democracy" in Ukraine, was by corrupting the system with 5 billions of tax payer lucre- to the point where she, *personally* could decide who- (Jewish banker) would be president in a nation thousands of miles away. That's how the ZUS promotes "democracy" in foreign lands. (and, I suspect that it was the way that call was leaked, that is the fount of all the rage at Russia, for "Russian hacking', breaking long-standing diplomatic protocols against exposing other nation's treachery and corruption to the 'little people').

Nuland's view . Russia to violate arms control treaties, international law, the sovereignty of its neighbors, and the integrity of elections in the United States and Europe

for Nuland to talk about 'International law and the 'integrity of European elections'.. is like Jerry Sandusky lecturing people on child welfare.

That strategy required consistent U.S. leadership at the presidential level,

OK, so not only Nuland but also John Bolton is screeching that Trump is the disaster of our times.

Not since John McCain has a mad dog Zionist insider been so full of hate for Trump. Hmm..

as Russia's threat to the liberal world has grown."

the more she talks, the more I like Putin.

And it is precisely what Nuland did in fact do in Ukraine

.
they think chutzpah, (arr0gent contempt for decency and in-your-face hypocrisy), is a virtue.

All Americans and Europeans and everyone else, should see that Putin is the world's remaining statesman. We should all do everything we can to support Putin's earnest efforts to rein in the murderous, zio-glob menacing the planet today.

Thank you Mr. G. for exposing Nuland's treachery, hypocrisy and J-supremacist agenda.

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:33 pm GMT
@Pat Kittle ' Plagiarism unintended!'

Wouldn't it be more of a matter of great minds thinking alike?

Jake , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:33 pm GMT
@Chris Moore Archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell made alliance with Jewish bankers, then congregated in the Netherlands. The deal, which financially was necessary to him securing Puritan rule and to then wage more war against non-WASP natives of the British Isles, included Jews being allowed legally live in and own property in England, including to build a synagogue, with Jews exempted from all requirements that the Puritan government made on al natives of the British Isles.

Jews are not parasites on WASP culture. WASP culture is born of a Judaizing heresy, and Jews therefore have always been partners in WASP culture.

You need to spend a large amount of time learning the rise of Jews with the growth of the British Empire. Then put that with the rise of Jews as part of the American empire.

And then unless you are brain dead, you will see that WASP culture and Jews go together. Jews are not parasites on WASP culture. Jews and WASPs are symbiotic, at the expense of 90-95% of non-WASP whites.

Agent76 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:34 pm GMT
Jun 23, 2020 Online Event: U.S. Grand Strategy in the Middle East

While prominent voices in Washington have argued that U.S. interests in the Middle East are dwindling and will require the United States to "do less" there, Jake Sullivan argued in a recent Foreign Affairs article that the United States should be more ambitious using U.S. leverage and diplomacy to promote regional stability.

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:35 pm GMT
@Lot 'So much for the Jihadi/leftist smear that Israel's friends promote wars.'

Uh huh. Just look at how Trump has reached out to Iran.

and I notice that our troops are still in Syria.

not that any of this could conceivably lead to yet another war on behalf of Israel.

anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:38 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon Did you not hear the recording of President Trump's disgusting speech weeks later at a fundraiser, recounting the hit to his rapt backers? I'm pretty sure that it was posted in a comment to one of Dr. Giraldi's columns.

You might also want to review Linh Dinh's June 12, 2016 "Orlando Shooting Means Trump For President."

Voting for any of these Red/Blue characters merely moves the boot around on your face.

Mefobills , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:51 pm GMT
Democracies don't reflect the will of the people:

Victoria Nuland recommends that "The challenge for the United States in 2021 will be to lead the democracies of the world in crafting a more effective approach to Russia -- one that builds on their strengths and puts stress on Putin where he is vulnerable, including among his own citizens." Interestingly, that might be regarded as seeking to interfere in the workings of a foreign government, reminiscent of the phony case made against Russia in 2016. And it is precisely what Nuland did in fact do in Ukraine

https://www.johnkaminski.org/index.php/essays-by-john-kaminiski-american-writer-and-critic/holocausting-humanity/91-the-true-nature-of-the-jew-scam

We live in the dark, convinced by our public media and our insincere leaders that we are heroes and freedom fighters. In reality the opposite is true: we are the plunderers, the ravagers, deceiving ourselves to do the dirty work of the manipulators who have twisted our minds with trinkets and false accounts of the people we kill and the countries we ruin in order to steal their treasures.

And the saddest part -- the punchline that proves how stupid we are -- is that we never profit from the invasions we are cynically ordered to conduct. The bounty always goes to the swindlers pulling the strings, and we, as the agents of banditry, time and again, are always left to suffer the same fate of the people we have robbed when we are robbed ourselves, of not only our treasures, but of our dignity, shortly before we are robbed of our lives.

It is the way history has always gone. The ignorant masses are persuaded to commit the crimes of the rich and as the unwitting perpetrators, we ultimately suffer the same fate as the victims, while the rich snicker in their palaces and plot their next swindle.

Bill Jones , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 6:53 pm GMT
@Herald How much of Amazon's offering is Chinese sourced?

Who sells more Chinese goods than Bezos?

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 7:02 pm GMT
@Agent76 'While prominent voices in Washington have argued that U.S. interests in the Middle East are dwindling and will require the United States to "do less" there, Jake Sullivan argued in a recent Foreign Affairs article that the United States should be more ambitious using U.S. leverage and diplomacy to promote regional stability.'

I'm confused. Iraq is more stable for our intervention?

If we 'did less' in the Middle East, it could only promote regional stability.

Most of our actions there are pretty clearly calculated to promote instability, not stability. Promoting anarchy in Syria, baiting Iran into a war, acquiescing in a coup in Egypt, sanctioning Israel's continual bombing raids

geokat62 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 7:32 pm GMT
Anyone ever heard of Father Mordechi Martin? Neither did I, until I came across this explosive video

BANNED: How the Jews infiltrated the Vatican & changed the Catholic Church

https://www.goyimtv.com/view?v=2074240941

The late Michael Collins Piper hosts a call in program and his guest is Jim Condit Jr. The topic of conversation is Father Mordechi Martin, a Zionist spy who infiltrated and subverted the Catholic Church.

Unfortunately, it indeed seems that Jewish Supremacists have achieved full spectrum dominance.

anonymous [237] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 7:32 pm GMT
The first thing a confident America has got to do is top up that DO covert-ops slush fund:

https://www.madcowprod.com/2020/06/17/politics-contraband-gangster-planet/

Cuz, Oops. Big CIA profit center needs some business interruption insurance, huh?

Gee, I wonder who ratted them out?

slorter , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:07 pm GMT
Good article !
Druid55 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Mustapha Mond Only a few israelis died on 911. They didn't get the text that american jews got to stay away that day. This is admited!
The Alarmist , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:17 pm GMT

The challenge for the United States in 2021 will be to lead the democracies of the world .

The challenge will be to find any actual democracies of any import in the world, as the lamps go out across the whole planet.

Jake , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:20 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack US control of the Ukraine will mean that Jews will own almost all of it and the land will be flooded with blacks and Mohammedans, with gays made another sacred group.

Anglo-Zionist Empire does what Anglo-Zionist Empire does.

chris , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:30 pm GMT
@Rahan I laughed my ass off ! I'm still laughing

I passed your comment on to CJ Hopkins with link to the source. Maybe he can use it in his column. It needs a much greater audience than in the comment section here.

Yours is a fantastic troll, but there are others who've commented on the ironies in this context. This article for example: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/490539-looting-is-the-price-of-freedom-cynical/ There's enough trolling material in all these events to last us a lifetime.

WikiBlabs , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:50 pm GMT
@Chris Moore The public does not understand that the system is actually "two party tyranny". This system is designed to divide and conquer, and it works. Compound this with the fact that many people get their information from simply "googling" terms and phrases as opposed to actually digging deep and reading books and other sources for information. Combine this with the sad state of affairs in our public education system – where students are not taught to think or ask questions but to behave, conform, and memorize information. With regard to the methods being used in our foreign policy and now, subsequently, being used here to foment chaos, check out the following resource. You will see that what is going on is simply UCW – Unconventional Warfare, and we have perfected the technique abroad.

UNIDENTIFIED NEMESIS

geokat62 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 8:51 pm GMT
Breaking news

NEW: Alan Dershowitz's attorney confirms that his client has access to Virginia Giuffre's sealed depositions. Those depositions reveal that she was directed by Jeffrey Epstein to have sex with former Israeli PM Ehud Barak & Victoria's Secret's Les Wexner.

-- julie k. brown (@jkbjournalist) June 23, 2020

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:02 pm GMT
@The Alarmist How can the US "lead democracies" not being one of them? It's as ridiculous as me leading the elephants of the world.
potemkin villiage bank , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:12 pm GMT
@Fred777 The globalists should be castigated

then downtrodden and opressed

hanging is too good for them

Druid55 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:31 pm GMT
@red rider Serbia deserved it. They were conducting ethic cleansing with concentration camps, rape camps, etc
Vojkan , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:40 pm GMT
@Hegar That's three goyim and twelve "chosen". Ledeen (founder and former member of board of advisors of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs – doesn't look goy to me), Gerecht (Israelis say he's one of them) and Senor are Jewish.
Pat Kittle , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:41 pm GMT
@Colin Wright Well, at least we haven't been stampeded into mob psychosis.
Rurik , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 9:55 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

How can the US "lead democracies" not being one of them?

didn't Vicky Nuland lead the Ukrainian democracy?

it isn't ridiculous, all it takes is shekels, as always, and an understanding of semantics. Words like 'democracy' are like 'liberated', or 'terrorists'.

The ZUS "liberated" Iraq from the "terrorists" who were ruling it, and imposed "democracy". Just like we "liberated" Germany, and "liberated" Libya, and so many other places, where the ZUS leads 'democracies'.

You see how easy it is, once you understand how to interpret the words they use?

America is helping to liberate Palestine from terrorists, so that the Palestinians can enjoy democracy.

Today the Crimea is suffering under a regime that seized her by aggression and force, and so America would like to liberate the people of Crimea, and lead them to democracy.

mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:00 pm GMT
Jewmerica is controlled by Zionists and their operatives like Jew Nuland. Add Trump and Pence to the list too. The Presidency has been controlled by the Zionist Jews since Woodrow Wilson. Almost all of Congress is in the pocket of aIPAC and other Jew organizations. The Zionist Jews drive all the wars and conflicts, foment the false flags like the fake Floyd, Sandy Hook, Los Vegas etc. The Global Jew Bankers made immune from prosecution by our shabbos goy Congress have stolen trillions of the the country's wealth. First after 911 (also a false flag for Greater Israel) then with the bailouts for the super rich in 08 and now the monumental 6 trillion theft for their Wall St. buddies under cover of the fake Corona virus.

The goyim must be propagandized and the target demonized before the Israeli Foreign Legian (U.S. military) is sent in to force another extortion for the Jews. this is what they did twice to Germany and to Japan. Same thing in Iraq and Libya. The Zionists have so far failed in Syria and Iran. Even after getting Israel's best friend ever in the White House who abrogated our treaty with the Iranians and has lied constantly about both countries, launched rockets against the Syrians and accused Assad of gassing his own people.

The Zionsits cannot make progress without war, conflict and hatred. Once the goyim are whipped up with enough war sentiment against the Russians and Chinese and the two countries have built up sufficient military capability they will most likely join forces with a nuclear attack against Jewmerica. this will probably result in a stalemate that can then be used as a precursor to the global totalitarian NWO.

Haxo Angmark , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:08 pm GMT
@Shaman911 just for the record, it's Victoria

(((Nudelman))).

Rurik , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:09 pm GMT
@Druid55

Serbia deserved it. They were conducting ethic cleansing with concentration camps, rape camps, etc

idiocy

they were fighting some of the worst scum on the planet; KLA human and narco-traffickers attempting to murder enough Serbs so they could steal the ancient Serbian land of Kosovo. Zio-style – by terrorizing the legitimate inhabitants into fleeing for their lives- to they could simply steal the land for themselves.

The trial against Milosevic was a sham and a fraud. And Milosevic was humiliating the ICC in open court, so they poisoned/assassinated him in his cell.

But, I suppose the case could be made that if the Serbs deserved it, it was because they allowed the Albanians to immigrate into Kosovo in transformative numbers in the first place, and just as the Zi0s know, demographics = destiny.

The whites of South Africa made the same mistake. The whites of Europe are very busy also making the exact same mistake, just as they are in North America and Oceana.

One day they'll wake up, and discover that now they and they're children are now on the block, with their school girls being gang-raped wholesale and their lands taken from them, and like the Serbs, they'll say, 'golly, who'd have ever thunk that inviting in stone age invaders is of questionable prudence.

So yea, in that context, they did deserve it.

Currahee , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:10 pm GMT
@Anon "Victoria Nuland was born in Jewish family in 1961 to Sherwin B. Nuland, a distinguished surgeon, and Rhona McKhann." -Wickipedia

EVERY, SINGLE, TIME!

Robjil , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:21 pm GMT
@Druid55 That is the western MSM sugared up version of what happened in Yugoslavia. Western MSM learned their lesson about being truthful about war when US and friends were in Vietnam.

Lies and lies only come from western MSM these days so wars and regime change games can go on with anyone noticing or caring.

Western MSM notifies their puppet readers that all the US and friends does is "humanitarian" stuff these days. Most puppet readers lap up this junk.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/natos-rape-of-yugoslavia/5375189

March 24, 1999 will go down in history as a day of infamy. US-led NATO raped Yugoslavia. Doing so was its second major combat operation.

It was lawless aggression. No Security Council resolution authorized it. NATO's Operation Allied Force lasted 78 days.

Washington called it Operation Noble Anvil. Evil best describes it. On June 10, operations ended.

From March 1991 through mid-June 1999, Balkan wars raged. Yugoslavia "balkanized" into seven countries. They include Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia and Slovenia.

Enormous human suffering was inflicted. Washington bears most responsibility.

mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:23 pm GMT
@Druid55 More MSM Jew propaganda. The Zionists wanted this area to remain fractured and weak (Balkanized) so that the unified Yugoslavia could not oppose their plans. The Zionists intend to control pipelines running from Middle East into Europe. This would compete against Russia that now supplies most of the gas. All wars are about money, power and territory, this war was no exception. The Zionists need to control all energy sources and transportation routes in order to achieve hegemony.
AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:28 pm GMT
@Rurik Good explanation. Orwell called this "newspeak". That's now the language of libtards.
vot tak , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:53 pm GMT
"It is difficult to find anything good to say about Donald Trump, but the reality is that he has not started any new wars"

Agree with the first part, disagree with the second. The reasons israel's trump colonials have not started new militsry invasions are mainly two. The trump reime is in the middle of a military modernization. The american zionazi colony fell behind militarily as they ran proxy terrorists and drug mafia support/colonial policing ops. Fighting wars againat those who can actually hurt them back became obsolete, or so the "end of history" neocons figured. Now they are outclassed and they can't pick on someone capable of shooting back effectively.

As for the second part, the likud colonial trump regime is doing its best to attack zionazia"s rivals any way they can mimus actually sending in troops. Times have changed, the oligarchs do war by other means than troop invasion now. The economic, biological and psywar aspects are being used full tilt by israeloamerica. What they lack the means to do on the field of battle, israel's war criminals and quislings are more than making up for it by other means.

The trump quislings have vastly increased international strife across the board and are decidedly more war mongering than israel's previous american colonial governors.

Rurik , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 10:53 pm GMT
@mark tapley

The Zionists wanted this area to remain fractured and weak (Balkanized)

I agree with all your posts.

I'd just add to this one, that by bombing Serbia, (on behalf of Muslim invaders), they were accomplishing several things.. They were ending the post WWII International Laws against unilateral military might by strong nations against weaker ones in Europe. With that act, they declared with bombs that the ZUS is now The Unilateral Power, and that the International Laws against Aggressive War was now moot.

By bombing a White Christian nation on behalf of Islam, they were also tossing a bone to Islam, as a trade off for the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Who in our times is going to complain about bombing white people? And Muslims would cheer it.

Also, as ((Gen. Wesley Clark)) explained about his bombing campaign on Serbia:

"There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th-century idea and we are trying to transition it into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states."
– NATO's Supreme Commander, Gen. Wesley Clark

so there were myriad reasons for why ((they)) bombed Serbia into handing over its ancient and sacred lands.

mcohen , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:04 pm GMT
Passing out cookies.
Daisy cutters
So more with claymore
vot tak , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:08 pm GMT
"So the difference between neocons and liberal interventionists is one of style rather than substance."

It's neocons and neolibs, the "liberal interventionists" are as liberal as the neocons are conservative. Agree about the style and substance, though, think of the disgusting things as different/somewhat rivals management teams working for the same employer. Like the likud and labor political blocks in israel. Goals are the same, some differences in how to achieve them.

One sees this same phony duo-political scam across the capitalist "west" where right wing political parties dominate wholesale.

Rurik , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:19 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Orwell called this "newspeak". That's now the language of libtards.

thanks

and not just shitlibs, but across the entire length and breadth of our culture and society this Ministry of Truth-imposed doublethink masquerades as language intended to inform and explain, when it does the opposite.

George Will and Sean Hannity use newspeak with the same alacrity as Lawrence O'Donnell or Rachel Maddow. Israel has to defend itself. Putin's aggression and Russian meddling in our democracy.

'Quantitative easing' as a doubleplusgood expression for human history's most colossal case of mass-swindling the world has ever known.

it's everywhere, and the more it isn't noticed, the more sinister and diabolical it is.

It's like that Twilight Zone episode of the aliens that only wanted to 'serve man'.

'We're here to serve you'.

The writers of that episode certainly must have been thinking of a certain tribe of 'philanthropists' and owners of 'human rights' organizations.

celebrate diversity!

it's our greatest strength!

Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:23 pm GMT
@anonymous Thank you for clarifying that though you do not give any evidence beyond reason for suspicion about his role in Ukraine as to why this career diplomat should be sacked from his Ambassadorship to Greece.
vot tak , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2020 at 11:26 pm GMT
As for israel's nuland neanderthal*, this is a critter about as zionazi low as one can get. What she posits come directly from israel and its international domination freakshow. The critter is about as far right/neocon psychopathy as that subhuman element gets.

The use of these freaks by both american dem and rep colonial governorships shows how these are simply psywar front outfits pursuing the same goals for the zionazi master.

anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 12:24 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz My comment (#35) that you're typically and oh-so-diplomatically trying to obscure concerned the naïveté of those who think that Mr. Trump ever intended to (or could) effect any change in Uncle Sam's treatment of other countries.

But as to your concern for this "career diplomat," do you think he's too good to "be sacked" and have to work at an honest job?

Agent76 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 12:27 am GMT
@Colin Wright If a politicians lips are moving they are lying. This comes from the war parties think tank and everything they say is the total opposite every time. This group gives me great insight into thier plans and why I even bothered to share this here today. Thanks Wright!
mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 12:31 am GMT
@AnonFromTN Democracy is a subversive term used by the Zionists, MSM and many politicians as well as lots of other people that should know better. Democracy results in mob rule that will always lead to tyranny.

The word democracy does not occur in either the Declaration of Independence or it's companion document the Constitution. That is because the founders believed it to be the worst form of government. James Madison stated that democracies "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

It is no mistake that the word democracy is widely used. Democracies work in the Elites favor because they can steer the chaos then put their system in place when the democracy falls apart.

The founders established a system of sovereign states in a limited Republic of laws. That was the foundation of our success, not democracy.

Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 12:59 am GMT
@anonymous For an apprentice pedant you are not doing well. You seem to have overlooked Trump's very big changes in the treatment of one major foreign country, namely China.

And I am disappointed that you don't realise how much the US needs the institutional memory and the skills of career diplomats when so many ambassadorships are given to completely unqualified and unsuitable donors to the president's election campaign.

mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:01 am GMT
@Druid55 Hardly anyone died. No planes used and all accounted for. Social Security Death Register about the same as usual for that day in N.Y. Bodies "jumping" out were dummies. Another false flag for the Zionist agenda of wars for Israel.
Pat Kittle , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:11 am GMT
Jew supremacists like Nuland & her fellow (((treasonous war criminals))) care ultimately about expanding the domain of "Greater Israel."

Fomenting hostility (if not outright war) between the world's largest primarily White countries has always been what (((they))) do.

On the home front, Black Lives Matter terrorism would go nowhere without Jew supremacist organizing, funding, censoring, & intimidating. Not that the (((shysters))) actually give a damn about Blacks!

NAME the JEW!!

Pat Kittle , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:15 am GMT
@vot tak Please don't conflate Nazis with these Jews.

It's unfair to Nazis.

niteranger , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:25 am GMT
@Anon Nuland is a Jew. Nothing to see here. She is a nutbag who wants eternal war. Whatever Israel wants .Israel gets. Whether it's Obama destroying Libya or constant friction with Russia it's the Jewish control of everything.
Ryan2 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:36 am GMT
What does Victoria Nuland have to gain from all this?
Money? Really? Is she a true believer? Does she consider all this to be Patriotic?
showmethereal , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:51 am GMT
@Jake "Christ" said His kingdom was not of this world . So going back to Emperor Constantine – the western church has gotten it wrong.
mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:53 am GMT
@Jake Do you think the Catholics were any less likely to sell out? The Catholic Church was infiltrated by the cripto Jew Medicis with the placement of Leo X in 1513. The Founders of the Jesuit order were also cripto Jews.

The Jews have infiltrated all the governments of any consequence. Jewmerica has been so well infiltrated it would be more accurate to just term the situation an out in the open takeover. The Jews could have never made much headway without the shabbos goys helping them. The government of Jewmerica is full of traitors serving the Zionist Jew agenda.

vot tak , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 1:55 am GMT
@Pat Kittle Bum bandits are bum bandits.
mark tapley , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:14 am GMT
@Ryan2 She is a hard core Zionist Jew. She is in the clique with the most powerful criminal syndicate in existence. And they are winning. Some of them may actually believe that they are still the Chosen. Trump's Chabad Lubavich son-in-law and the Shiksa Princess are said to be disciples of Rabbi Schneerson who taught that we Gentiles were just here to "hew wood and fetch water" for the Jews. Judging from the words and deeds of the shabbos goy puppet actors like Trump, Pence, Pelosi and almost the entire congress along with most governors, an observer would think this is definitely true.
Pat Kittle , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:27 am GMT
@vot tak It's not that simple.

As you know, winners write history.

Jew supremacists won; Germany (& everyone else) lost.

If that wasn't the case, the world would know the Holocau$t mythology is an extortion racket, and we wouldn't be fighting the Jews' criminal wars for them to this day.

Hibernian , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:31 am GMT
@red rider The face that launched a thousand bombers.
Hibernian , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:33 am GMT
@geokat62 Malachi, not Mordechi.
Guest0206 , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:37 am GMT
@AnonFromTN "Grabbing the Breadbasket of Europe The East-West competition over Ukraine involves the control of natural resources, including uranium and other minerals, as well as geopolitical issues such as Ukraine's membership in NATO. The stakes around Ukraine's vast agricultural sector, the world's third largest exporter of corn and fifth largest exporter of wheat,constitute a critical factor that has been often overlooked." Whereas Ukraine does not allow the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture,Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies. There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry. As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, "Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the "most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont."" https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OurBiz_Brief_Ukraine.pdf
Regulo , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:40 am GMT
@Anon "Russia" is, for US intelligence ALSO code for "French". The propaganda against Russia during the cold war and beyond, also applies to "the French" [IMO].They both had a revolution , with world wide consequences , both have the same color flag[ the US propaganda says that Russia modeled their flag from the Netherland flag, but I suspect it is modeled from the French flag. The Americans cant be too blatant about it , but that is what is going on; anti Russia animus and propaganda is also anti French animus and propaganda. [ during the cold war, my French relative who had been a communist , went to Russia to see what it was like. She was disappointed .When she subsequently tried to visit my family here in the US, she was stopped art the airport and told she could not enter the US because she had been to Russia. This was the 1960's.Apparently this two countries and people were not polarized as the US and the soviets were. A kind of mutual respect or even admiration existed perhaps. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, but that has been my sense for decades. Nuland's anti European/ anti russian animus is not surprising; its rather ubiquitous in the US and when they say EU they have primarily in mind the French!
Guest0206 , says: Show Comment June 24, 2020 at 2:45 am GMT
@Druid55 Do not repeat the NATO propaganda.
See Michael Parenti's
"To Kill a Nation: The Attack on Yugoslavia"
Current Commenter

[Jun 23, 2020] Warmonger chameleon victoria Nuland is not that different from other neocons; the whole State Department is a neocon vipers nest

State Department was recently implicated is the attempt to run a false flag operation in Douma. If we add that the State Department is the key organization behind for color revolution against Trump that picture becomes even more disturbing. This is really a neocon vipers nest.
Jun 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

heretickle , 53 minutes ago link

(1) after all Geroge Herbert Walker Bush was a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(2) after all William Jefferson Clinton is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(3) after all George W Bush is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(4) after all **** Cheney is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(5) after all Barak Hussein Obama is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(6) after all Joe Biden is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(7) after all Hillary Clinton is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

(8) after all Victoria Nuland is a corrupt crook who stole the money from the AMERICAN people, just to enrich his family and lackeys, and is nothing but a blatant tyrant, who will not allow any real democratic election, nor any sort of real democratic political opposition.

We could go on for days

jeff montanye , 1 minute ago link

upvote for including chameleon victoria nuland. she works for democrats, republicans, the private sector. she's likud mossad 24/7.

[Jun 23, 2020] Roger Waters: Sheldon Adelson is 'puppet master' pulling Trump, Pompeo's strings by Stuart Winer

Notable quotes:
"... "Sheldon Adelson is the puppet master who is pulling the strings of Donald Trump, [Secretary of State] Mike Pompeo, and what's his name the ambassador, Greenberg, I think his name is," Waters said, and went on to describe Adelson as a "right-wing fascist racist bigot." ..."
"... Waters said Adelson, a major donor to Trump's Republican party and his election campaign, "believes that only Jews, only Jewish people, are completely human and everybody else on Earth is there to serve them." ..."
"... "Unfortunately this crazy, crazy, crazy guy is also incredibly rich and has the tiny little prick of Donald Trump in his pocket." ..."
Jun 21, 2020 | www.timesofisrael.com

By Stuart Winer 21 June 2020, 7:58 pm 15 Edit

Screen capture from video of Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters during an interview with Hamas-affiliated Shehab News Agency, June 20, 2020. (Twitter) Musician Roger Waters has said that US Jewish billionaire Sheldon Adelson is pulling the strings of the Trump administration, and claimed that Israel is training US police forces how to kill black people using the technique of kneeling on the necks of their victims, which he said was developed by the Israel Defense Forces as it "murders Palestinians."

Rogers, a co-founder of Pink Floyd and an outspoken critic of Israel who has been branded an anti-Semite by the ADL , told the Hamas terror group-affiliated Shehab News Agency on Saturday that Adelson believes only Jews are "completely human" and referred to US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman as "Greenberg."

Excerpts from the interview were published Sunday by the Washington-based Middle East Media Research Institute watchdog.

Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up

"Sheldon Adelson is the puppet master who is pulling the strings of Donald Trump, [Secretary of State] Mike Pompeo, and what's his name the ambassador, Greenberg, I think his name is," Waters said, and went on to describe Adelson as a "right-wing fascist racist bigot."

US President Donald Trump pats Las Vegas Sands Corporation Chief Executive and Republican mega donor Sheldon Adelson on the arm before speaking at the Israeli American Council National Summit in Hollywood, Florida, December 7, 2019. (Patrick Semansky/AP)

Waters said Adelson, a major donor to Trump's Republican party and his election campaign, "believes that only Jews, only Jewish people, are completely human and everybody else on Earth is there to serve them."

"I'm not saying Jewish people believe this; he does and he is pulling the strings," Waters continued, and claimed Adelson further believes that "everything will be good with the world if there is a Greater Israel which takes up the whole of historic Palestine and the Kingdom of Jordan."

"Unfortunately this crazy, crazy, crazy guy is also incredibly rich and has the tiny little prick of Donald Trump in his pocket."

Musician Roger Waters on Hamas-Affiliated News Agency: Crazy Puppet Master Adelson Has Donald Trump's Tiny Little Pr*ck in His Pocket; Israelis Teach U.S. Police How to Murder Blacks pic.twitter.com/0JUQuwsvhB

-- MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) June 21, 2020

Turning to the death of George Floyd, a black man who died in Minneapolis when a police officer kneeled on his neck after he was already in custody, Waters said it was "a technique invented by the IDF."

"The Israelis invented (the method), 'let's kill people by kneeling on their necks'," he claimed. "That is an Israeli technique taught to the militarized police forces of the USA by Israeli experts who the Americans have been flying over to the United States to teach them how to murder blacks because they've seen how efficient the Israelis have been at murdering Palestinians in the occupied territories by using those techniques, and they are proud of it. The Israelis are proud of it."

"Zionism is an ugly stain, and it needs to be gently removed by us," he said later during the interview.

Floyd's death prompted anti-racism protests across the US.

Bassist and vocalist Waters is known for publicly harassing artists scheduled to visit Israel or perform here. In 2013, the Anti-Defamation League branded Waters an anti-Semite, having previously defended him from that characterization.

Responding to comments Water made in an interview with Counterpunch magazine comparing Israeli treatment of the Palestinians to Nazi Germany, the ADL said "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories" have "seeped into the totality" of the former Pink Floyd frontman's views.

"Judging by his remarks, Roger Waters has absorbed classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, and these have now seeped into the totality of his views," Abraham H. Foxman, the then-National Director of the ADL, told The Times of Israel at the time. "His comments about Jews and Israel have gotten progressively worse over time. It started with anti-Israel invective, and has now morphed into conspiratorial anti-Semitism."

Added Foxman: "How sad that a creative genius could become so perverted by his own narrow-minded bigotry."

Stuart Winer is a breaking news editor at The Times of Israel.

[Jun 23, 2020] John Bolton Tells How Iran Hawks Set Up Trump's Syrian Kurdish Disaster

Notable quotes:
"... Bolton's account sheds light on how it happened: hawks in the administration, including Bolton himself, wanted U.S. forces in Syria fighting Russia and Iran. They saw the U.S.-Kurdish alliance against ISIS as a distraction -- and let the Turkish-Kurdish conflict fester until it spiralled out of control. ..."
Jun 23, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

The drama eventually ended with President Donald Trump pulling U.S. peacekeepers out of Syria -- and then sending them back in . One hundred thousand Syrian civilians were displaced by an advancing Turkish army, and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces turned to Russia for help. But U.S. forces never fully withdrew -- they are still stuck in Syria defending oil wells .

Bolton's account sheds light on how it happened: hawks in the administration, including Bolton himself, wanted U.S. forces in Syria fighting Russia and Iran. They saw the U.S.-Kurdish alliance against ISIS as a distraction -- and let the Turkish-Kurdish conflict fester until it spiralled out of control.

Pompeo issued a statement on Thursday night denouncing Bolton's entire book as "a number of lies, fully-spun half-truths, and outright falsehoods."

[Jun 22, 2020] MoA community discussion of Bolton book

Notable quotes:
"... let us not forget that bolton threatened a un officials kids because they guy wasn't going along with the iraq war propaganda. ..."
"... Close -- the threatened official was Jose Bustani, at that time (2002) the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)as he had been for five years. ..."
"... Bustani had been working to bring Iraq and Libya into the organization, which would have required those two countries to eliminate all of their chemical weapons. ..."
"... The US, though, had other ideas -- chiefly invading and destroying both of those nations, and when Bustani insisted on continuing his efforts then Bolton threatened Bustani's adult children. ..."
Jun 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

pretzelattack , Jun 17 2020 21:49 utc | 14

let us not forget that bolton threatened a un officials kids because they guy wasn't going along with the iraq war propaganda.

Duncan Idaho , Jun 17 2020 22:03 utc | 15

Only with Late Stage Capitalism could we have a vicious war criminal write a book criticizing a psychopathic sociopath.
Anonymous , Jun 17 2020 22:06 utc | 16
The political establishment in Canada appeared dismayed at the prospect of Bolton as National Security Adviser. See these interviews with Hill + Knowlton strategies Vice-chairman, Peter Donolo, from 2018:

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/video/there-s-risk-trump-s-actions-are-driving-the-u-s-into-a-recession-peter-donolo~1342264
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/video/trade-wars-easy-to-start-not-so-easy-to-finish-peter-donolo~1365104

So Bolton gets in, Meng Wangzhou is detained in Vancouver on the US request (that's another story), and in time, Canada appoints a new Ambassador to China - Mr. Dominic Barton.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominic_Barton

Then Bolton gets fired. 'Nuff said. Just to let everyone know that Bolton is well and truly hated, as a government official, in certain circles.

AntiSpin , Jun 17 2020 22:07 utc | 17
@ pretzelattack | Jun 17 2020 21:49 utc | 14

Close -- the threatened official was Jose Bustani, at that time (2002) the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)as he had been for five years.

Bustani had been working to bring Iraq and Libya into the organization, which would have required those two countries to eliminate all of their chemical weapons.

The US, though, had other ideas -- chiefly invading and destroying both of those nations, and when Bustani insisted on continuing his efforts then Bolton threatened Bustani's adult children.

Jpc , Jun 17 2020 22:32 utc | 18
Why was he appointment made in the first place anyone,?
Ian2 , Jun 17 2020 23:08 utc | 19
Jpc | Jun 17 2020 22:32 utc | 18:

My guess Trump went along with the tough guy image that Bolton projected in media and recommendations by others.

james , Jun 17 2020 23:13 utc | 20
let the lobbyists with the most money win... that's what defines the usa system, leadership and decision making process... no one in their right mind would support this doofus..
Jen , Jun 17 2020 23:40 utc | 21
At least the one saving grace about John Bolton's memoir is that it might be a tad closer to reality than Christopher Steele's infamous dossier and might prove valuable as a source of evidence in a court of law. Maybe Yosemite Sam himself should start quaking in his boots.
jen , Jun 17 2020 23:42 utc | 22
Jpc @ 18, Ian2 @ 19:

Personal interest on DJT's part? :-)

JC , Jun 17 2020 23:43 utc | 23
Posted by: Tower | Jun 17 2020 21:43 utc | 13

This is the most intelligent post so far.

Yes why not? If Obama awarded the Noble prize even before he begins serving his first term I can't see why Bolton not nominated now. America is a joke, not a banana republic. It deserves Obama, Trump, Bolton or Biden another stoopid joker.

Stoopid president elected by stoopid citizens

Don Bacon , Jun 17 2020 23:44 utc | 24
@ Jpc
When faced with Trump's behavior of employing warmongers, including several generals, some observers opined that Trump wanted people with contrasting opinions so that he could consider them and then say "no." He did more with Bolton eventually, sending him to Mongolia while he (Trump) went to Singapore (or somewhere over there).
A User , Jun 17 2020 23:47 utc | 25
re Ian2 | Jun 17 2020 23:08 utc | 19
who hazarded : My guess Trump went along with the tough guy image that Bolton projected in media and recommendations by others.
Not at all, if you go back to the earliest days of the orangeman's prezdency, you will see Trump resisted the efforts by Mercer & the zionist casino owner to give Bolton a gig.
He knew that shrub had problems with the boasts of Bolton and as his reputation was as an arsehole who sounded his own trumpet at his boss's expense orangeman refused for a long time. Trump believes the trump prezdency is about trump no one else.
Thing was at the time he was running for the prez gig trump was on his uppers, making a few dollars from his tv show, plus licensing other people's buildings by selling his name to be stuck on them. trump tower azerbnajan etc.
He put virtually none of his own money into the 'race' so when he won the people who had put up the dosh had power over him.
Bolton has always been an arse kisser to any zionist cause he suspects he can claw a penny outta, so he used the extreme loony end of the totally looney zionist spectrum to hook him (Bolton) up with a gig by pushing for him with trump.

It was always gonna end the way it did as Bolton is forever briefing the media against anyone who tried to resist his murderous fantasies. Trump is never gonna argue for any scheme that doesn't have lotsa dollars for him in it so he had plenty of run ins with Bolton who then went to his media mates & told tales.
When bolton was appointed orangey's stakes were at a really low ebb among DC warmongers, so he reluctantly took him on then spent the next 18 months getting rid of the grubby parasite.

div> Yosemite Sam did it better. I would prefer a Foghorn Leghorn-type character, for US diplomacy.

Posted by: Ribbit , Jun 18 2020 0:20 utc | 26

Yosemite Sam did it better. I would prefer a Foghorn Leghorn-type character, for US diplomacy.

Posted by: Ribbit | Jun 18 2020 0:20 utc | 26

Kristan hinton , Jun 18 2020 0:46 utc | 27
Real History: Candidate Trump praised Bolton and named him as THE number one Foreign Policy expert he (Trump) respected.

Imagine the mustachioed Mister Potatoe (sic) Head and zany highjinks!

Bolton and one of his first wives were regulars at Plato's Retreat for wife swapping orgies. The wife was not real keen on the behavior, but she allegedly found herself verbally and physically abused for objecting.

DannyC , Jun 18 2020 1:17 utc | 28
Trump is at fault for hiring him to appease the Zionist lobby. We all knew the guy was a warmonger and a scumbag. It's not a surprise. Trump surrounds himself with the worst people
jadan , Jun 18 2020 1:30 utc | 29
Did John Bolton put his personal interests above the will of congress in an attempt to extort the Ukrainian government? You're making a false equivalence. You seem to have a soft spot for Trump. Bolton is an in-your-face son of a bitch, but Trump, Trump is just human garbage.
Kay Fabe , Jun 18 2020 2:27 utc | 30
Pretty much a nothing burger if thats all he has got. Just a distraction. Trumps outrage just meant help Bolton sell some books. Lol. People are so easy to fool.

I still think Bolton managing the operations as COG in Cheneys old bunker. Coming out for a vacation while next phase is planned

Jackrabbit , Jun 18 2020 2:56 utc | 31
Kay Fabe @Jun18 2:27 #29
Pretty much a nothing burger if thats all he has got.

You underestimate the craftiness of this kayfabe.

The tiff with Bolton makes Trump look like a peace-loving moderate so that he's acceptable to Independent voters.

!!

Den lille abe , Jun 18 2020 3:03 utc | 32
Bolton is just another American arsehole. Nothing new. When they do not get their way, the y always turn on their superiors, or those in charge. Bolton is just another "Anhänger" personal gain is what motivates him.
He should have been a blot on his parents bedsheets or at least a forced abortion, but unfortunately that did not happen...
Piotr Berman , Jun 18 2020 3:53 utc | 33
The self-appointed Deep State has pretty much thwarted him (Trump) and his voters.

Posted by: bob sykes | Jun 17 2020 20:55 utc | 11

Trump thwarted Trump. Before he got elected, Trump mentioned his admiration of Bolton more than once. Voters of Trump elected a liar and an incoherent person -- at time, incomprehensible, a nice bonus. But it is worth noticing that Trump never liked being binded by agreement, like, say, an agreement to pay money back to creditors, or whatever international agreement would restrict USA from doing what they damn please.

Superficially, it is mysterious why Trump made an impression that he wants to negotiate with North Korea with some agreement at the end. Was he forced to make a mockery from the negotiation by someone sticking knife to his back?

Some may remember that Trump promised to abolish Affordable Care Act and replace it with "something marvelous". The latest version is that he will start thinking about it again after re-election. If you believe that...

Granted, Trump is more sane than Bolton, but just a bit, unlike Bolton he has some moments of lucidity.

In conclusion, I would advocate to vote for Biden. If you need a reason, that would be that Biden never tweets, or if he does, it is forgettable before the typing is done. Unlike the hideous Trumpian productions.

jason , Jun 18 2020 3:55 utc | 34
"men fit to be shaved," Tiberius, on Bolton and Friedman.

he is the best & brightest we have. when a dreadful mouth is called for. his insights into the Trump WH are probably as deep as his knowledge of VZ, Iran, Cuba, etc. he's a useful idiot, a willing fool. like Trump, he's the verbal equivalent of the cops on the street, in foreign "policy." another abusive father figure

reading the imperial steak turds - an American form of reading the tea leaves or goat livers or chicken flight or celestial what have you. an emperor craps out a big hairy one like Bolton and the priests and hierophants and lawyers and scribes come for a long, close up inspection and fact-gathering smell of another steaming pile of gmo-corn-and-downer-cow-fed, colon cancer causing, Kansas feed-lot raised, grade A Murkin BEEF. guess what they in their wisdom find? Trump stinks.

kiwiklown , Jun 18 2020 4:20 utc | 35
Scotch Bingeington @ 6 -- "Take a look at his face. It's obvious to me that even John Bolton does not enjoy being John Bolton. That mouth, it's drooping to an absurd degree. Comparable to Merkel's face, come to think of it.

At last, someone who notices physionomy!

That face drips with false modesty, kind of trying to make his face say, "... look at harmless old me..."

That walrus bushiness points at an attempt to hide, to camouflage his true thoughts, his malevolence.

That pretended stoop, with one hand clutching a sheaf of briefing papers, emulating the posture of deferential court clerks, speaks to a lifetime of a snake in the grass "fighting" from below for things important to himself.

But those of us who have been around the block a couple times will know to watch our backs around this type. Poisoned-tipped daggers are their fave weapons, and your backs are their fave "battle space". LOL

This statement by Jeffrey Sachs may as well also describe America's leadership crisis: "At the root of America's economic crisis lies a moral crisis: the decline of civic virtue among America's political and economic elite."

kiwiklown , Jun 18 2020 5:29 utc | 36
GeorgeV @ 8 -- "It's like standing on a street corner watching two prostitutes calling each other a whore! How low has the US sunk."

And the US "leadeship" sends these types out to lecture other peoples on "values"? on how to become "normal nations"? on how to "contain" old civilisations such as Iran, Russia, China?

It is axiomatic that the stupid do not know they are stupid. Same goes for morals. The immoral do not know they are immoral. Or, perhaps, as Phat Pomp-arse shows, they know they are immoral, but do not care. Which makes one rightly guess that people like Bolt-On and him must be depraved.

Yes, it may take centuries before the leadership in this depraved Exceptionally Indispensable Nation to become truly normal again.

snake , Jun 18 2020 5:38 utc | 37
Of course, Trump actually campaigned to leave Afghanistan and Syria, and he was elected to do so. The self-appointed Deep State has pretty much thwarted him and his voters. by: bob sykes 11

I wondered about He King claims that Trump actually attempted to do those awful things, . .. , I looked for evidence to prove the claim.. I asked just about every librarian I could find to please show me evidence that confirms the deep state over rode Mr. Trump's actual attempt to remove USA anything from Afghanistan and Syria. thus far, no confirming or supporting facts have been produced. to support such a claim. Mr. Trump could easily have tweeted to his supporters something to the effect that the damn military, CIA, homeland security, state department, foreign service, federal reserve, women's underwear association and smiley Joe's hamburger stand in fact every militant in the USA governed America were holding hands, locked in a conspiracy to block President Trumps attempt to remove USA anything from Afghanistan or Syria.. If Mr. Trump has asked for those things, they would have happened. The next day there would have been parties in the streets as the militant agency heads began rolling as Mr. Trump fired them each and everyone.. No firings happened, the party providers were disappointed, no troops, USA contractors or privatization pirates left any foreign place.. as far as I can tell. 500 + military bases still remain in Europe none have been abandoned.. and one was added in Israel. BTW i heard that Mr. Trump managed to get 17 trillion dollars into the hands of many who are contractors or suppliers to those foreign operations. I can't say I am against Trump, but i can ask you to show me some evidence to prove your claim.

Jackrabbit , Jun 18 2020 5:50 utc | 38
snake @Jun18 5:38 #36

As always, watch what they do, not what they say.

Trump is the Republican Obama. A faux populist 'insider' who pretends to be an 'outsider'.

Trump was selected to be the nationalist President that meets the challenge from Russia and China. And serves all the usual interests while doing so.

Americans fools keep electing these establishment stooges and then wonder why nothing seems to get any better.

!!

Mao , Jun 18 2020 6:25 utc | 39
Sack cartoon: Trump's 'swamp'

https://www.startribune.com/sack-cartoon-trump-s-swamp/401964365/

https://www.startribune.com/sack-cartoon-the-swamp/420668223/

Mao , Jun 18 2020 6:39 utc | 40
Trump searches for new slogan as he abandons Keep America Great amid George Floyd and covid turmoil

The president has taken to inserting the term 'Transition to Greatness' into his remarks. His 2016 slogan was 'Make America Great Again'. After election he polled audiences on whether to go with 'Keep America Great'. He told CPAC this year and said at the State of the Union 'The Best is Yet to Come'. Tweaks come as he trails Biden in new NBC and CNN polls, as the nation struggles with the coronavirus and protests over police violence.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8398993/Donald-Trump-searches-new-slogan-amid-cratering-polls-against-Joe-Biden.html

Mao , Jun 18 2020 6:44 utc | 41
Rudy W. Giuliani @RudyGiuliani

Ukrainian police seize $6 Million in bribes paid to kill the new case into crooked Burisma.

This money is a Followup to the multi-millions in bribes Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and President Poroshenko earned to leverage their offices to kill the original case.

All covered up!

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1273298170966159366

Ghost Ship , Jun 18 2020 7:28 utc | 42
Christian J. Chuba @ 3
goals that you consider important are different from personal interests.

What personal interests has Trump actually advanced during his time as president. Leaving out the fake allegations, I'm hard put to think of any. If you look at Trump's actual behaviour rather than his bullshit or the bullshit aimed at him, I'm also hard put to think of anything illegal he's done while in office that wasn't done by previous administrations.
Mao , Jun 18 2020 7:41 utc | 43
US President Donald Trump sought help from Xi Jinping to win the upcoming 2020 election, "pleading" with the Chinese president to boost imports of American agricultural products, according to a new book by former national security adviser John Bolton. The accusations were included in an excerpt from The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir, which is set to be released on June 23. Bolton also wrote that Trump demonstrated other "fundamentally unacceptable behaviour", including privately expressing support for China's mass interment of Uygur Muslims and other ethnic minority groups in Xinjiang.*This video has been updated to fix a spelling mistake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agk61kyDS1k

Yeah, Right , Jun 18 2020 8:35 utc | 44
@42 Mao I'm struggling to see how "pleading" with any country for it to purchase more US goods is "fundamentally unacceptable behaviour" from a US President.

Pleading to Xi for China to give, say, Israel preferential access to markets, sure.

Down South , Jun 18 2020 9:56 utc | 45
The Saker takes an interesting look at this "spontaneous or popular" revolt taking place in America

https://thesaker.is/what-kind-of-popular-revolution-is-this/#comments

Mao , Jun 18 2020 10:35 utc | 46
The Saker:

I have lived in the United States for a total of 24 years and I have witnessed many crises over this long period, but what is taking place today is truly unique and much more serious than any previous crisis I can recall. And to explain my point, I would like to begin by saying what I believe the riots we are seeing taking place in hundreds of US cities are not about. They are not about:

* Racism or "White privilege"
* Police violence
* Social alienation and despair
* Poverty
* Trump
* The liberals pouring fuel on social fires
* The infighting of the US elites/deep state

They are not about any of these because they encompass all of these issues, and more.

It is important to always keep in mind the distinction between the concepts of "cause" and "pretext". And while it is true that all the factors listed above are real (at least to some degree, and without looking at the distinction between cause and effect), none of them are the true cause of what we are witnessing. At most, the above are pretexts, triggers if you want, but the real cause of what is taking place today is the systemic collapse of the US society.

https://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-systemic-collapse-of-the-us-society-has-begun/

Steve , Jun 18 2020 10:57 utc | 47
The only time I'd be interested in anything Bolton had to say is if he were saying it from the docket at The Hague
Matt , Jun 18 2020 11:40 utc | 48
Don't really want to take sides between those two odious characters, but I think there's a difference in what the paper is saying.

One is about someone pursuing policy goals they favour, the other "personal interest". From what I have seen so far, Bolton's main definition of Trump's "personal interest" is his chances for re-election (rather than any personal business interest).

I think Bolton was happy for Trump to pursue the policy goals he favoured, at least when they coincided with Bolton's!

Tadlak Davidovitsh , Jun 18 2020 12:04 utc | 49
In modern Italy, mentioning Jupiter (Jove) and the ox (Bove) in the same sentence usually implies a demand that the two be treated the same.
450.org , Jun 18 2020 12:07 utc | 50
How many people have cashed in on Trump so far? Countless numbers of them. An ocean of them. Scathing books about Trump is one way to cash in on thr Trump effect, and the authors, many of whom don't even write the book themselves, get promoted and their books promoted in the mainstream media and elsewhere.

There is nothing new under the sun when it comes to Trump. We know everything there is to know about Trump. Some of us knew everything there was to know about him before he became POTUS. And yet, there he is, sitting like the Cheshire Cat in the Oval Office, untouchable and beyond reproach. Meanwhile, even more scathing books are in the pipeline because there's money, so much money, to be made don't you know.

Bolton is a shitbird every bit as much as Trump is and in fact an argument can be made Bolton is even worse and even more dangerous than Trump because if Bolton had his druthers, Iran would be a failed state right about now and America would be bogged down in a senseless money-making (for the defense contractors owned by the extractive wealthy elite) quagmire in Iran just as it was in Iraq and still is in Afghanistan.

Colbert is all into the Bolton book because he and his staff managed to secure an interview with Bolton. Bolton, of course, has agreed to this because it's a great way to promote his book to the likes of Cher who is the perfect example of the demographic Colbert caters to with his show. Some of the commercials during Colbert's show last night? One was an Old Navy commercial where they bragged about how they're giving to the poor. The family they used for the commercial, the recipients of this beneficence, was a black family. Biden is proud of Old Navy because don't you know, poor and black are one and the same. In otherwords, there are no poor people except black people. No, that's not racist. Not at all. Also, another commercial during Colbert's show was for the reopening of Las Vegas amidst the spreading pandemic. This is immediately after a segment where Colbert is decrying Republican governors for opening southern states too early. The hypocritical irony is so stark, you can cut it with a chainsaw.

kiwiklown , Jun 18 2020 12:24 utc | 51
Mao @ 45 quoting The Saker -- ".... the real cause of what is taking place today is the systemic collapse of the US society."

And the cause of American societal collapse has been corrupt US leadership.

In my 50 years of studying American society, I have learned to watch what US leaders do, not what they preach. More profitable is to look at what declassified US documents tell us about the truth, not what the presstitudes of the day pretend to dish up. Also, what other world leaders might, in a candid moment, tell us about America.

450.org , Jun 18 2020 12:30 utc | 52
@50
And the cause of American societal collapse has been corrupt US leadership.

I would argue that this is a symptom or a feature versus the root of the problem. Afterall, a system that allows for creeping entrenched endemic corruption, is a crappy system. It's the system that's the root of this and it's not just isolated to the United States. It's civilization itself that's the root and what enabled civilization -- the spirit in our genes as Reg asserts.

450.org , Jun 18 2020 12:47 utc | 53
@4
I'm fully expecting the Dem "left" to try and praise the monsterous Bolton for "going against Trump", as they did with war criminal Mad Dog Matis and Bush. Bolton has to be one of the most evil mass murders on the face of the Earth. The world will be an infinitely better place when he and his ilk like Netanyahu, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Chertoff..etc finally go back to hell.

I agree. They would, because they already have and continue to do so, coddle and provide apologia for any and all monsters who decry Trump. Hell, I'm convinced they would clamor for Derek Chauvin's exoneration if he vocally decried Trump. Chauvin would make the rounds on the media circuit excoriating Trump and telling the world, contritely of course, that it was Trump who made him do it and now he sees the error of his ways. He'd be on Morning Joe and Chris Cuomo's and Don Lemon's shows not to mention Ari Melber and Anderson Cooper and Lawrence O'Donnell. The conservatives and their networks, who have provided apologia for Chauvin thus far, would now be his worst enemy. Colbert and Kimmel would have him on and guffawing with him asking him how it felt to choke the life out of someone, laughing all the way so long as he hates Trump and tells the world how much he hates Trump.

This world is an insane asylum, especially America. All under the banner and aegis of progress. And to think, humanity wants to export this madness to space and the universe at large. Any intelligent life that would ever make its way to Planet Earth, if ever, would be well-advised to exterminate the species human before it spread its poison to the universe at large. Not that that is possible, but just in case the .000000000001% chance of that does miraculously manifest.

kiwiklown , Jun 18 2020 12:48 utc | 54
Mao @ 42

Concerning Trump "pleading" with Xi, it is only right for a leader to request others to buy more US farm produce. We have only Bolton's word that the request was a plea. We also have only Bolton's word that the request / plea was to seek "help from Xi Jinping to win the upcoming 2020 election". Too early to believe Bolton. Wait till we see the meeting transcripts.

Bolton also alleged that Trump exhibited "fundamentally unacceptable behaviour" concerning the Uygurs. Again, only Bolton's word. Even so, saying it is "unacceptable behavior" presumes that China does wrong to incarcerate Uygurs. If not, ie, China either does not incarcerate them, or if China has good moral grounds to do so, then Bolton is wrong to disagree with his boss for uttering the right sentiment. Judging by how the anglo-zios shout about China's "crime", I tend to think the opposite just might be the truth, and that says that Bolton is simply mudslinging to sell books; score brownie points with the anglo-zios, virtue-signalling for his next gig.

Sabine , Jun 18 2020 12:56 utc | 55
so is Trump or Biden the Yeltsin of the US? And who is gonna be the US version of Putin? Mr. Cotton from Arkansas?
vk , Jun 18 2020 13:00 utc | 56
The American people must decide if Trump is anti-China or Xi's bff. He can't be both at the same time.
murgen23 , Jun 18 2020 13:04 utc | 57
I don't see a contradiction with both sentences.

NYT writes Bolton direct US policy to fit his own political agenda,
while Bolton emphasizes Trump direct US policy in the way that pocket him most money.

Politician Bolton is consistent with his politician job (like it or not), Trump is corrupted.

This is how I understand.

450.org , Jun 18 2020 13:14 utc | 58
@56, I would argue that if one person could be both at the same time, that one person would be Donald Trump. He's already proven, like Chauncey Gardner, he can walk on water. Seriously, that excellent movie, Being There , starring the incomparable Peter Sellers, was about Donald Trump's ascension to the Oval Office.

There Are No Limits Except The Limits We Invent And Impose

augusto , Jun 18 2020 13:44 utc | 59
Using this 'quod licet jovi ...' the author apparently knows quite a bit of Latin, the dead language!
But seriously, the nomination of Bolton who had always behaved like 2nd rate advisor, a 3rd rate mcarthist cold warrior was a surprise to me. Such a short sighted heavily biased person could be, yes, chosen a Minister or advisor in a banana Republic but was picked up by the United states.
One can only conclude such a choice was driven by very specific interests of the deep state.They needed a bulldog and got it for one year and half and threw the stinky perro soon as the job was done.
BM , Jun 18 2020 14:05 utc | 60
And the cause of American societal collapse has been corrupt US leadership.
I would argue that this is a symptom or a feature versus the root of the problem.
Posted by: 450.org | Jun 18 2020 12:30 utc | 52

The primary cause of corrupt leadership is corrupt and corruption-accepting population.

Without a population that is fundamentally corrupt and immoral, corrupt leadership is unstable. Conversely - and this is important to recognise as the same phenomenon - democracy cannot exist if the population accepts and takes for granted corruption, as the two are mutually exclusive. In other words if you root out the corrupt leadership without dealing with the mentality of the population, the corruption will quickly come back and any democratic experiment will collapse very quickly.

There is one important qualifier - an overwhelming external influence (since WWII always the USA, either directly or as secondary effect) can leverage latent corruption so that it becomes more exaggerated than it normally would be.

Down South , Jun 18 2020 14:48 utc | 61
What is clear from only this account of the crucial role of big money foundations behind protest groups such as Black lives Matter is that there is a far more complex agenda driving the protests now destabilizing cities across America. The role of tax-exempt foundations tied to the fortunes of the greatest industrial and financial companies such as Rockefeller, Ford, Kellogg, Hewlett and Soros says that there is a far deeper and far more sinister agenda to current disturbances than spontaneous outrage would suggest.

https://m.journal-neo.org/2020/06/16/america-s-own-color-revolution/

michael888 , Jun 18 2020 15:53 utc | 62
Bolton pretended to be President, screwing up negotiations with his Libya Model talk, threatening Venezuela (and anywhere generally) and directing fleets all over the world (including Britain's to capture that Iranian oil tanker). Vindman revered "Ambassador" Bolton because he was keeping the Ukraine corruption in Americans (and Ukrainian Americans') hands, and daring the Russians to "start" WWIII. Bolton might have been a bit more bearable if he had ever been elected, but was happy to see him go. Trump seemed mystified by him.
juliania , Jun 18 2020 16:29 utc | 63
b has presented us (knowingly or not, but I wouldn't put it past him) with the Socratic question of the presumed identity between the morality of the State and personal morality, as best encountered in Plato's dialogue, 'The Republic' ['Politeia' in the Greek] That dialogue begins by examining personal morality, but changes to an examination of what would bring into being a perfect state. In doing the latter, however, it is how to create public spirited persons, in the best sense, which is the actual concern, and the conversation ranges far and wide, becoming more and more complex.

I've always thought that to consider the perfect state had to be an impossibility if the individual, the person him or herself isn't up to the task - and that is the point of the Politeia enterprise. Like the ongoing relay race on horseback that is happening at the same time in the Piraeus, the passing of the argument one person to another that happens in the dialogue demonstrates that what is most crucial for the state as well as for the individual is personal integrity.

I take as an example the message of Saker's essay, linked by Down South and commented on above by others. Saker is pointing out that the protests have been seized upon by the anti-Trumpists who have been disrupting things from the beginning of his administration. But he also says:

"My personal feeling is that Trump is too weak and too much of a coward to fight his political enemies"

Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? The discussion of different kinds of states, which we often have here pursued, or the discussion of what makes a person able to function in one or another state? I don't think Plato was saying that Greece had it made, that Greece needed to throw its weight around more to be great. He's pointing out that it had lost greatness, the same way every empire loses when it forgets that individual spark that is in a single person, his virtue. And the sad thing is it all comes down to the education of our young people in the values, the virtues that apply both to his own personal life and to the life of the state.

At its heart, the protests which are beginning, only beginning, and which are peaceful, may be politeia vs. republic, the 'polis' itself against 'things political'. A new and true enlightenment, multipolar.

karlof1 , Jun 18 2020 16:39 utc | 64
BM @60--

Corruption's been a fact of life in North America ever since it was "discovered." Bernard Bailyn captured it quite well in his The New England Merchants in the Seventeenth Century , that is during the very first stages of plantation, with most corruption taking place in Old England then exported to the West. Even the Founders were corrupt, although they didn't see themselves as such. Isn't Adam & Eve's corruption detailed in Genesis merely an indicator of a general human trait that needs to be managed via culture? That human culture has generally failed to contain and discipline corruption speaks volumes about both. John Dos Passos in his opus USA noted that everyone everywhere was on the "hustle"--from the hobo to the banker. "Every child gots to have its own" are some of the truest lyrics ever written. Will humanity ever transcend this major failure in its nature?

Allen Edmundson , Jun 18 2020 23:30 utc | 65
Who is behind the claim that China is imprisoning vast numbers of Uighurs in concentration camps and what evidence has been presented? See the Greyzone for its recent report on this.

Edmundson

Jpc , Jun 18 2020 23:39 utc | 66
Thanks to all of you for your insights on Bolton.
I still don't see anything to explain why he got a second gig in the Whitehouse.
Or anything that he did that enhanced US security long term.
And another guy who dodged active service.
Strange angry dude,!
Hoarsewhisperer , Jun 19 2020 14:47 utc | 67
Pat Lang believes that Bolton has breached a law requiring US Officials with access to Top Secret Stuff to submit personal memoirs for scrutiny before publishing. Col Lang is awaiting similar approval for a memoir of his own and thinks Bolton didn't bother waiting for the Official OK.
There's a diverse range of comments. Most commentators like the idea of Bolton being tossed in the slammer. Others speculate that as a Swamp Creature, Bolton will escape prosecution. It's interesting that no-one has asked to see the publisher's copy of the USG's signed & dated Approval To Publish document, relevant to Bolton's book.
arby , Jun 19 2020 19:34 utc | 68
Jut a little thread on Bolton and his book.

It is amazing the way these clowns sit around and talk about countries and people as if they were so much dirt. The arrogance and power is disgusting.

link

[Jun 22, 2020] Does John Bolton deserves a Nobel peace Price? In our perverted world why not.

Jun 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Tower , Jun 17 2020 21:43 utc | 13

It's just about time. John Bolton deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. At this point, why not?

JC , Jun 17 2020 23:43 utc | 23

Posted by: Tower | Jun 17 2020 21:43 utc | 13

This is the most intelligent post so far.

Yes why not? If Obama awarded the Noble prize even before he begins serving his first term I can't see why Bolton not nominated now. America is a joke, not a banana republic. It deserves Obama, Trump, Bolton or Biden another stoopid joker.

Stoopid president elected by stoopid citizens

[Jun 22, 2020] Boomerang returns: Trump is at fault for hiring Bolton to appease the Zionist lobby

Jun 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

DannyC , Jun 18 2020 1:17 utc | 28

Trump is at fault for hiring him to appease the Zionist lobby. We all knew the guy was a warmonger and a scumbag. It's not a surprise. Trump surrounds himself with the worst people

Piotr Berman , Jun 18 2020 3:53 utc | 33

The self-appointed Deep State has pretty much thwarted him (Trump) and his voters.

Posted by: bob sykes | Jun 17 2020 20:55 utc | 11

Trump thwarted Trump. Before he got elected, Trump mentioned his admiration of Bolton more than once. Voters of Trump elected a liar and an incoherent person -- at time, incomprehensible, a nice bonus. But it is worth noticing that Trump never liked being binded by agreement, like, say, an agreement to pay money back to creditors, or whatever international agreement would restrict USA from doing what they damn please.

Superficially, it is mysterious why Trump made an impression that he wants to negotiate with North Korea with some agreement at the end. Was he forced to make a mockery from the negotiation by someone sticking knife to his back?

Some may remember that Trump promised to abolish Affordable Care Act and replace it with "something marvelous". The latest version is that he will start thinking about it again after re-election. If you believe that...

Granted, Trump is more sane than Bolton, but just a bit, unlike Bolton he has some moments of lucidity.

In conclusion, I would advocate to vote for Biden. If you need a reason, that would be that Biden never tweets, or if he does, it is forgettable before the typing is done. Unlike the hideous Trumpian productions.

jason , Jun 18 2020 3:55 utc | 34

"men fit to be shaved," Tiberius, on Bolton and Friedman.

he is the best & brightest we have. when a dreadful mouth is called for. his insights into the Trump WH are probably as deep as his knowledge of VZ, Iran, Cuba, etc. he's a useful idiot, a willing fool. like Trump, he's the verbal equivalent of the cops on the street, in foreign "policy." another abusive father figure

reading the imperial steak turds - an American form of reading the tea leaves or goat livers or chicken flight or celestial what have you. an emperor craps out a big hairy one like Bolton and the priests and hierophants and lawyers and scribes come for a long, close up inspection and fact-gathering smell of another steaming pile of gmo-corn-and-downer-cow-fed, colon cancer causing, Kansas feed-lot raised, grade A Murkin BEEF. guess what they in their wisdom find? Trump stinks.

[Jun 21, 2020] Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace'.

Highly recommended!
Jun 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christian J. Chuba , Jun 21 2020 14:18 utc | 78

Re: the Nuremberg trials , I became fascinated by the writings of Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace' . This is when one country sets up an environment for war against another country. I'll grant you that this is vague but if this is applicable at all how is this not an accurate description of what we are doing against Iran and Venezuela?

In both cases, we are imposing a full trade embargo (not sanctions) on basic civilian necessities and infrastructures and threatening the use of military force. As for Iran, the sustained and unfair demonization of Iranians is preparing the U.S. public to accept a ruthless bombing campaign against them as long overdue. We are already attacking the civilian population of their allies in Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon.

How Ironic that the country that boasts that it won WW2 is now guilty of the very crimes that it condemned publicly in court.

[Jun 21, 2020] Leaker fell victim of the leak: The neocon-warhawk may not see a penny for his book as the PDf was leaked online

MIC eventually will pay this neocon prostitute for services, anyway
Jun 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
As Ben Garrison recent noted, in an interview Bolton stated that it was OK for the government agencies to lie to the American people if national security is at stake. And it always seems to be at stake for dominant men who want secrecy and power. Bolton is a dangerous liar and his anti-Trump screed cannot be trusted.

It's time to slam the book shut on Bolton.

[Jun 20, 2020] The symphony orchestra of Austin, Texas has fired their lead trombonist for politically incorrect Twit

People who post of Twitter are stupid by definition, but people who fire employees for posting on Twitter are trying to replicate excesses of Stalinism (and, in way, McCarthysm) on a farce level. As in Marx "history repeats: first as tragedy, the second as farce"
By classifying the (somewhat incorrect; Obama was elected not only because he was half black, but also because he was half--CIA ;-) Twit below as the cry "fire" in crowded theater, we really try to replay the atmosphere of Stalinist Russia on a new level.
Notable quotes:
"... Austin Symphony Trombonist Fired Over Racist Comments , The Violin Channel, June 1, 2020 ..."
Jun 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

Here's some darkness: the symphony orchestra of Austin, Texas has fired their lead trombonist. This is a white lady named Brenda Sansig Salas, 51 years old and a U.S. Army veteran. Austin Symphony Trombonist Fired Over Racist Comments , The Violin Channel, June 1, 2020 She'd been posting comments on social media. The comment that precipitated her firing was apparently this one:

The BLACKS are looting and destroying their environment. They deserve what they get.

Brenda Sansig Salas

Have you checked out the 1/2 black president swine flu H1N1, and EBOLA?

What has your 1/2 black president done for you??

The ONLY REASON he was elected was because he is 1/2 black.

People voted on racist principles, not on the real issues . The BLACKS are looting and destroying their environment. They deserve what
they get. Playing the RACE CARD IS RACIST.

Symphony orchestra spokes-critter Anthony Corroa [ Email him ]announced the firing of Ms. Salas in the dreary schoolmarmish jargon of corporate wokeness: This language is not reflective of who we are as an organization." And "there is no place for hate within our organization."

[Jun 20, 2020] Did George Floyd Die of a Drug Overdose, by John-Paul Leonard

Jun 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

"The centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world." -- W. B. Yeats, 1919

Truth is the first victim in politics. Factions and passions rule. Random facts are picked as weapons, no one thinks things through.

We need to understand the facts surrounding the death of George Floyd.
Many key facts are being ignored:

Floyd's blood tests showed a concentration of Fentanyl of about three times the fatal dose. Fentanyl is a dangerous opioid 50 times more potent than heroin. It has rapidly become the most common cause of death among drug addicts. The knee hold used by the police is not a choke hold, it does not impede breathing. It is a body restraint and is not known to have ever caused fatal injury. Floyd already began to complain "I can't breathe" a few minutes before the neck restraint was applied, while resisting the officers when they tried to get him into the squad car. Fentanyl affects the breathing, causing death by respiratory arrest. It was normal procedure to restrain Floyd because he was resisting arrest, probably in conjunction with excited delirium (EXD), an episode of violent agitation brought on by a drug overdose, typically brief and ending in death from cardiopulmonary arrest. The official autopsy did indeed give cardiopulmonary arrest as the cause of death, and stated that injuries he sustained during the arrest were not life-threatening. Videos of the arrest do not show police beating or striking Floyd, only calmly restraining him In one video Floyd is heard shouting and groaning loudly and incoherently while restrained on the ground, which appears to be a sign of the violent, shouting phase of EXD. His ability to resist four officers trying to get him into the squad car is typical of EXD cases. A short spurt of superhuman strength is a classic EXD symptom.

Minneapolis police officers have been charged with Floyd's murder. Yet all the evidence points to the fact that Floyd had taken a drug overdose so strong that his imminent death could hardly have been prevented. In all likelihood, the police were neither an intentional nor accidental cause of his death. These crucial facts have been completely ignored in the uproar.

It is widely believed that George Floyd died from a police officer's knee on his neck, whether due to asphyxiation or neck injury. That may be how it looks, to a naïve viewer. In reality, the county autopsy report says he died of a heart attack, [1] https://lawandcrime.com/george-floyd-death/authoriti...-here/ The full autopsy report was published here https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents...yd.pdf Diagnoses are summarized on pp. 1 and 2: I. The "blunt force injuries" are basically minor cuts and bruises: "cutaneous" injuries and contusions from handcuffing. II. Chronic conditions: Heart disease, hypertension and enlarged heart. These all tend to accelerate death from a drug overdose. They can also develop from long-term drug abuse. III. No injuries to the front of the neck or throat were found. This full 76-page report does not contain the word "homicide." and states that there were "no life-threatening injuries." Then how could they conclude it was homicide?

When scientists review scientific papers, they look primarily at the evidence, and give less weight to the conclusions, which are only the other fellow's opinions. To blindly follow "expert opinions" is the Authoritarian View of Knowledge. This is no real knowledge at all, because to assess whether an expert is always right, we would need infinite knowledge, and doubly so when experts disagree. Not thinking for oneself is not really thinking.

So let us stick to the evidence. The county's ambivalent autopsy also included the following hard facts: "Toxicology Findings: Blood samples collected at 9:00 p.m. on May 25th, before Floyd died, tested positive for the following: Fentanyl 11 ng/mL, Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL , Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 86 ng/mL of morphine," but draws no conclusions therefrom, noting only that "Quantities are given for those who are medically inclined."

Shouldn't we be so inclined? This fentanyl concentration, including its norfentanyl metabolite at its molecular weight, was 20.6 ng/mL That is over three times the lethal overdose, following earlier reports where the highest dose survived was 4.6 ng/mL. [2] https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/02/02/fentanyl-overdo...-10822 "The patients who were dead on arrival had gone into cardiac arrest due to blood concentrations of fentanyl that were much higher than what is administered therapeutically. " Patients who died in hospital had concentrations of 9.5 ng/mL to 13 ng/mL. See also note 13. In other studies of death from heroin and morphine, there were deaths from only 100 ng/ml of morphine and "all cases with a blood concentration of 200 ng/ml and more of free morphine displayed a fatal outcome." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11040428_Fa...rivers (Heroin quickly metabolizes into morphine.) Fentanyl is considered 100 times more potent than morphine. By this comparison, Floyd's blood fentanyl concentration could have been 10 times the fatal level. In addition his morphine concentration of 86 ng/mL would usually be fatal by itself.

Concentration levels are relative to the volume of blood, so are independent of body size.

If ever there was a leap before a look, we are in it now. Masses of people have become extremists, based on conclusions that are as false as they are hasty.

Regarding suffocation, the county medical examiner's report found "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation." [3] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/0...85002/ A report commissioned by the Floyd family stated that asphyxiation from sustained pressure was consistent with the evidence, but the author Michael Baden didn't have access to all the evidence, and chose not to endorse his opinion with the "expert opinion" label. Pressure applied to the side of the neck, as in this case, and not to the throat, has little or no effect on breathing. One can easily verify this oneself. [4] The knee on the neck is a body hold, not a chokehold or carotid restraint, which involves putting pressure precisely on both carotid arteries, located on either side of the throat. A carotid restraint is usually applied by an elbow, and causes the subject to pass out in as little as 15 seconds. Blocking the arteries does not stop the breathing or heartbeat (pulmonary or cardiac arrest), which Floyd suffered after being restrained for many minutes. Once pressure on the arteries is released, the subject normally regains consciousness quickly.

One difficulty is that there are public statements to the effect that the coroner ruled it a homicide, and the title of the autopsy report includes the term "neck compression." But the words "homicide," "restraint," "stress" or "compression" do not appear in the 20-page body of the report. References to the neck are few -- a couple minor abrasions, a contusion on the shoulder, and "The cervical spinal column is palpably stable and free of hemorrhage." It is as if the title was chosen in regard to what was expected or proposed, but which was never found, and the title was never updated. There seems to be no support at all in the report body for the report title, which reads, "Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."

The term "cause of death" does not appear. The words "death" and "fatal" only appear in this comment in the lab report: "Signs associated with fentanyl toxicity include severe respiratory depression, seizures, hypotension, coma and death . In fatalities from fentanyl, blood concentrations are variable and have been reported as low as 3 ng/mL." Floyd's fentanyl level was seven times higher.

If first impressions via the media fooled the coroner's office, until they examined the body, we too can be fooled at first, but change our opinion according to the evidence.

Excited Delirium Syndrome

An additional hypothesis involves Excited Delirium Syndrome (EXD), a symptom of drug overdose which sometimes appears in the final minutes preceding death. EXD typically results from fatal drug abuse, in past years from cocaine or crack, more recently from fentanyl, which is 50 times more potent than heroin. Especially dangerous are street drugs like meth, heroin or cocaine laced with fentanyl.

According to an article in the Western Journal of Emergency Medicine (WJEM), 2011: [5] https://westjem.com/articles/excited-delirium.html "Excited delirium (EXD) is characterized by agitation, aggression, acute distress and sudden death, often in the pre-hospital care setting. It is typically associated with the use of drugs. Subjects typically die from cardiopulmonary arrest all accounts describe almost the exact same sequence of events: delirium with agitation (fear, panic, shouting, violence and hyperactivity), sudden cessation of struggle, respiratory arrest and death ."

It appears that an EXD episode began when the officers tried to get Floyd into the squad car. He resisted, citing "claustrophobia" -- the onset of the fear and panic phase, and "I can't breathe" -- difficulty breathing due to fentanyl locking into the breathing receptors in the brain. (Classic symptoms of EXD are highlighted in bold.) He then exhibited unexpected strength from the adrenaline spike in successfully resisting the efforts of four officers to get him into the car. We may never know whether Floyd's agitation was caused purely from the EXD adrenaline spike, or if it was aggravated by police attempts to subdue him -- but a subject defying the efforts of multiple officers to subdue him is a very common theme.

When Chauvin pulled him out of the car he fell to the ground, perhaps due to disorientation and reduced coordination. Presumably this was when he injured his mouth and his nose started to bleed, and the police made the first call for paramedics.

While restrained on the ground, Floyd exhibited agitation ( shouting and hyperactivity, trying to move back and forth) for several minutes. There is one brief video at this point. One hears Floyd shouting very loudly, as in the agitated delirium phase -- it sounds like, "My face is stoned ah hah, ah haaa, ah please people, please, please let me stand, please, ah hah, ah haaa!" [6] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-video-appea...17476/ . In a few minutes this was followed by " sudden cessation of struggle, respiratory arrest and death, " shown in a later video, where he becomes exhausted, and had stopped breathing when the ambulance arrived. [7] https://www.facebook.com/darnellareallprettymarie/vi...61280/

It appears that disorientation had already set in when the store employees went to Floyd's car and asked him to return the cigarettes he had bought for a fake $20 bill. He refused, and they reported the incident to the police, saying that he appeared to be very intoxicated. He certainly must have been, or he would have either returned the cigarettes or left quickly to avoid arrest. Loss of judgment is a symptom of the syndrome; this includes futile efforts to resist arrest.

Police Intervention and Intentions

The EXD diagnosis is controversial and in some quarters is viewed as an alibi for police brutality. The WJEM authors note, "Since the victims frequently die while being restrained or in the custody of law enforcement, there has been speculation over the years of police brutality being the underlying cause. However, it is important to note that the vast majority of deaths occur suddenly prior to capture, in the emergency department (ED), or unwitnessed at home."

Regarding restraint, they note, "people experiencing EXD are highly agitated, violent, and show signs of unexpected strength, so it is not surprising that most require physical restraint. The prone maximal restraint position (PMRP, also known as "hobble" or "hogtie"), where the person's ankles and wrists are bound together behind their back, has been used extensively by field personnel. In far fewer cases, persons have been tied to a hospital gurney or manually held prone with knee pressure on the back or neck."

This latter position is what the accused officer Chauvin was applying, although at one point the team did consider using a hobble. Physical restraint of the subject has always been the classical procedure, to prevent the subject harming themselves or others. It has been proposed that restraint helps to forestall injury and death by conserving the subject's energy, but most experts believe that by leading to an intense struggle, it increases the likelihood of a fatal outcome.

Since knowingly using counterfeit currency is a fairly serious offense, the Minneapolis officers were required to arrest Floyd and try to bring him in. When he violently resisted, the optimal choice could have been to let him sit against a wall and guard him while calling an ambulance. To be able to quickly switch from law enforcement mode to emergency care mode requires training in recognizing the symptoms.

The charge sheet against Chauvin included this exchange between the two white officers on the squad: [8] https://www.startribune.com/protests-build-anew-afte...869672 ""I am worried about excited delirium or whatever," Lane said. "That's why we have him on his stomach," Chauvin said."

According to this dialogue, Chauvin was apparently was trying to follow the protocol recommended by WJEM. Since Floyd was on his stomach, Chauvin's knee pinned him at the side of his neck, and did not impede breathing. Commentators are referring to Chauvin "kneeling" on Floyd's neck, or resting his weight on it. From videos it is hard to gauge how much weight he applied, but the correct procedure is just enough to restrain movement, not to crush the person.

Chauvin and his team might not have done everything perfectly, but it is easy to underestimate the difficulty of police work, particularly in cases of resisting arrest, whether willfully or due to intoxication. If they had been clairvoyant clinicians, they would have called an ambulance the moment they saw him. Better training is needed. Was the police department then responsible? Might the department have given the needed training if the AMA had acknowledged the existence of the syndrome? This brings up a paradox: could police critics who deny the syndrome then bear part of the responsibility for the deaths they decry? The syndrome is being recognized by law enforcement after the fact. It needs to be recognized as it is happening.

The American College of Emergency Physicians' White Paper Report on Excited Delirium Syndrome (ACEP, 2009) [9] https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/media/publications/a...09.pdf See also the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court, "[t]he problems posed by, and thus the tactics to be employed against, an unarmed, emotionally distraught individual who is creating a disturbance or resisting arrest are ordinarily different from those involved in law enforcement efforts to subdue an armed and dangerous criminal who has recently committed a serious offense." in "Explaining the Unexplainable: Excited Delirium Syndrome and Its Impact on the Objective Reasonableness Standard for Allegations of Excessive Force," https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...ext=lj The first few pages relate a narrative similar to the Floyd case, involving multiple police subduing a violent EXD victim, who suddenly dies from exhaustion. A media uproar then arises against alleged police brutality. notes that "a law enforcement officer (LEO) is often present with a person suffering from ExDS because the situation at hand has degenerated to such a degree that someone has deemed it necessary to contact a person of authority to deal with it. LEOs are in the difficult and sometimes impossible position of having to recognize this as a medical emergency, attempting to control an irrational and physically resistive person, This already challenging situation has the potential for intense public scrutiny coupled with the expectation of a perfect outcome. Anything less creates a situation of potential public outrage. Unfortunately, this dangerous medical situation makes perfect outcomes difficult." In other words, officers need to be policemen, paramedics and public relations experts all at once.

With a fatal overdose there is no good outcome possible, but there is no way for police to foresee that. Sometimes EXD can last longer, and it is not always fatal. Perhaps the ACEP Task Force on EXD will update their report and provide guidelines to help police identify and deal with EXD while avoiding accusations of police brutality.

In one video [10] https://www.facebook.com/darnellareallprettymarie/vi...61280/ Chauvin continued to apply the neck restraint although bystanders repeatedly objected, and even after Floyd stopped moving. As Floyd became exhausted, it could have been reasonable to relax the restraint to see if it was really necessary. Chauvin didn't seem to respond to the bystanders to give a medical reason for the restraint. His actions were consistent with a belief that police should restrain the subject until medevacs arrive. Videos show the police focused on restraint, never beating or striking Floyd. The restraint and verbal exchanges with Floyd are also consistent with a belief that he was resisting arrest, by refusing to get in the squad car. When he said "I can't breathe," they responded "You're talking fine." When they said "Get in the car," he didn't agree to.

Subjects suffering from EXD usually resist arrest violently, which requires police to restrain them, but when police see signs of EXD, they also need to call an ambulance. It appears the police may have called for paramedics first when Floyd developed a nosebleed, then for an ambulance, which arrived after Floyd had stopped breathing. [11] From the incident report of the fire truck that was called to the scene, it appears that both police and bystanders called 911 for emergency medical services (EMS). The first call was Code 2, apparently for Floyd's nosebleed, which summoned a fire truck, followed by a more urgent code 3, which was said to bring an ambulance within six minutes. It appears the police called the ambulance when Floyd's breathing and heartbeat stopped. https://www.startribune.com/first-responders-worked-...06682/ "Floyd goes limp and appears to lose consciousness. Hennepin EMS then arrive six minutes after the distress call." The article refers to the incident report by the fire truck, http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/public/@mpd...80.pdf which has a note implying the first call to EMS was from police and another call came from bystanders: "No clear info on pt [patient] or location was given by either initial pd [police department] officers or bystanders." We need an incident report from the ambulance. .

Videos of EXD incidents generally show subjects violently resisting arrest, and requiring multiple officers to subdue them. There is one news clip about a police department that was trained to regard EXD as a medical and not a criminal issue, and avoid physical restraint as far as possible; the results are much better. [12] TV news clips showing police restraining subjects who are exhibiting EXD symptoms and violently resisting arrest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qCqjuqEWEc A TV news report and cellphone video on a more humane method of managing an EXD case, thanks to police training, putting safety of the subject and of bystanders first, rather than restraints. However, no details are given about the outcome or the drug dose. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qCqjuqEWEc

EXD seems to be the most likely reason why Floyd suddenly refused to get into the squad car, and began to shout and writhe on the ground. With or without EXD or police intervention, he was going to die quickly from fentanyl, short of immediate intensive care. A common treatment for EXD is sedation with drugs like ketamine. The usual antidote for fentanyl is naloxone. Higher levels of fentanyl may require intravenous naloxone for 24 hours or more.

Fentanyl is so deadly because it acts so fast and binds so tightly to dopamine receptors in the brain -- even those that control breathing, unlike other narcotics. [13] https://columnhealth.com/blog_posts/why-is-fentanyl-...erous/ . Deaths from fentanyl have skyrocketed in the last seven years. In one incident in California, superlethal fentanyl doses of 53 ng/mL were successfully reversed with intravenous naloxone. However, some patients were dead on arrival. https://www.drugs.com/illicit/fentanyl.html When Floyd complained "I can't breathe," although he was breathing, [14] Wikipedia has a detailed narrative of the incident here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_George_Floyd . Certain notes there support the thesis of fentanyl intoxication, and resisting arrest as part of an EXD syndrome. Floyd struggled with Lane before leaving his own vehicle, and again when Kueng, then all four officers, tried to get him into the squad car. Floyd already complained he couldn't breathe before they tried to get him into the police car, without any neck restraint, indicating the onset of respiratory depression from fentanyl. https://abcnews.go.com/US/george-floyd-protest-updat...038665 "They all tried to force Floyd into the backseat, during which time Floyd said he could not breathe, according to the complaint."

He also fell down twice, which could be seen either as a sign of intoxication or resisting arrest. The officers knew it was a drug overdose, as Thao told bystanders, "This is why you don't do drugs, kids." By the way, this Wikipedia article should be named "Death of George Floyd," as an accused is innocent until proven guilty. and then completely stopped breathing, this was the onset of respiratory arrest, which is how a fentanyl overdose kills.

While police work is needed to trace the source of these dangerous drugs, the problems of drug addiction and crime have deep causes and can only be contained, not solved, by the police. Whatever our society has been doing about these problems is not working.

Right now, our civilization risks being torn apart by the passions of extremism, due to a misunderstanding. Please share this analysis, as an appeal to return to reason.

Reviewer comment: "My first thought is why it has been left to you to figure this out, when we pay professional journalists to investigate these things, and why aren't the police and politicians telling us about this."

A good question which gives a clue to something I've been wondering about. When other commentators publish within hours, why does it take me a week or two to finish an article like this? Journalists are usually under a deadline to produce stories quickly, whereas it takes a lot of research and reflection to develop an original thesis into a fair and coherent explanation of events.

Everyone tends to have an agenda, and to look for facts to support it. Police brutality or looters running amok may be more newsworthy than a chronic problem like drug abuse. The best agenda now is to take a break to focus on facts, or else an "Excited Delirium" could become a contagion that engulfs our nation.

Part II. The Death of Tony Timpa

A highly pertinent question: Has there ever been a confirmed death from a knee hold before? Not finding any data by searching the Net, I posted the question on Quora. [15] https://www.quora.com/Has-there-ever-been-any-previo...ics-or One answer soon came.

A young white man died in Dallas a few years ago, after being restrained by the police with the knee on his back. My respondent believed he suffocated, but the actual autopsy said cardiac arrest due to cocaine, overdose EXD, and stress from restraint by police officers.

Tony Timpa had not only taken an overdose of cocaine, plus he was off his anti-schizophrenia medicine. Mental illness can also be a trigger for EXD, and according to the autopsy report, he displayed all the classic symptoms. The first phase, fear and panic, was fear of the onset of delirium itself -- he himself called 911 for help. By the time the police arrived, security guards had already handcuffed him to restrain him. He was incoherent, out of control, found lying on the ground, the typical EXD position. The police pinned him down with a knee on his back for 13 minutes, saying he was at risk of rolling into the roadway, and suddenly he was dead.

Tony Timpa died in 2016. The family got the run-around, [16] https://www.dallasnews.com/news/investigations/2019/...timpa/ and an autopsy was not released until 2019. The body cam footage was released, which showed the police behaving callously towards the subject. The officers were originally charged with homicide, but it was found they were not at fault, charges were dropped and they were reinstated. Timpa's case is very similar to Floyd case in many ways, and there are also many differences -- the starkest of course being the intensity of the public reaction.

Here is the text of the Timpa autopsy. [17] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6226349-SWIF...515249

Case: ME Page 7 of8

Timpa, Anthony Alan

Based on the case history and autopsy findings, it is my opinion that Anthony Alan Timpa, a 32-year-old white male, died as a result of sudden cardiac death due to the toxic effects of cocaine and physiologic stress associated with physical restraint.

Cardiac hypertrophy and bipolar disorder contributed to his death.

The mechanism of death in cases such as this is sometimes referred to as "excited delirium." Classically, people affected by EDS are witnessed to exhibit erratic or aggressive behavior, and will often "throw off" attempts at restraint, requiring multiple people to subdue them. The person will appear to calm down and will suddenly become unresponsive. Most cases are associated with drug intoxication and/or illness.

In this case, several factors likely contributed to the death. The surveillance and body cam footage and witness reports fit the classic scenario of excited delirium and cocaine use and illness (bipolar disorder) are common predisposing risk factors for EDS. Cocaine leads to increased heart rate and increased blood pressure, making a cardiac arrhythmia more likely. Due to his prone position and physical restraint by an officer, an element of mechanical or positional asphyxia cannot be ruled out (although he was seen to be yelling and fighting for the majority ofthe restraint). His enlarged heart size also put him at risk for sudden cardiac death.

Although the decedent only had superficial injuries, the manner of death will be ruled a homicide, as the stress of being restrained and extreme physical exertion contributed to his demise.

MANNER OF DEATH: Homicide

[Signatures and seals of medical examiners]

(Note that homicide is not the same as murder, it also includes unintentional or accidental actions contributing to death.)

Anthony Timpa autopsy p. 5, blood tests -- Cocaine and metabolites

Cocaine, 0.647 mg/L

Ecgonine Methyl Ester, 0.378 mg/L

Benzoylecgonine, 0.843 mg/L

The lethal dose of cocaine ranges from around 0.1 mg/L to 0.6 mg/L, according to different sources [18] http://www.forensicmed.co.uk/science/toxicology/cocaine/ , https://academic.oup.com/jat/article/38/1/46/831276

If we add the three numbers above for cocaine and metabolytes together it comes to about 18 mg/L. This is anywhere from 3 to 18 times the lethal dose. With such an overdose, plus being without his schizophrenia medication, Timpa had little if any chance of surviving.

Here's the Wikipedia entry on Timpa, part of a series on the Dallas police.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Police_Department#Killing_of_Tony_Timpa

"Killing of Tony Timpa [edit]

On August 10, 2016, Dallas Police killed Tony Timpa, a 32-year-old resident who had not taken his medication. Timpa was already handcuffed while a group of officers pressed his body into the ground while he squirmed. It took over three years for footage of the incident to be released. The footage contradicted claims by Dallas Police that Timpa was aggressive Criminal charges against three officers were dropped in March 2019 and officers returned to active duty."

Wikipedia doesn't even mention cocaine, although that was the main cause of death. Likewise, the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_George_Floyd makes no mention of a drug overdose or excited delirium. By entitling the articles "Killing" rather than "Death," Wikipedians appoint themselves as a court of law.

It must be observed that the Minneapolis officers acted with far more consideration towards Floyd than the treatment Timpa received in Dallas. The way the officers made fun of Timpa was a scandal. [19] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/01/us/tony-timpa-dal...m.html Then they were surprised when he suddenly died.

It is strange that George Floyd's case is taken as proof of systemic racism, when Tony Timpa got much worse treatment -- even though Timpa hadn't committed any crime, had no police record, and even called 911 himself.

Isn't it odd, when we have a problem in the United States of many shootings by -- and of -- the police, that such an uproar has arisen, over a case where the police actually had little or nothing to do with the man's demise?

The stress of restraint is most likely incidental. As reported by the WJEM, "Victims who do not immediately come to police attention are often found dead in the bathroom surrounded by wet towels and/or clothing and empty ice trays, apparently succumbing during failed attempts to rapidly cool down." Hyperthermia or high body temperature is a classic symptom of EXD. Enormous energy is released by an uncontrolled adrenaline spike. The heat also feeds delirium, which is a familiar symptom of high fever.

Normally, it's assumed that stress factors contribute to a heart attack, as medical examiners wrote in both the Floyd and Timpa cases. Yet the WJEM notes that "one important study found that only 18 of 214 individuals identified as having EXD died while being restrained or taken into custody." All victims died of cardiopulmonary arrest. Drug overdose and EXD are sufficient causes for this outcome.

Both Floyd and Timpa had taken overdoses at triple the lethal level. Enough drugs to kill them three times over. Yet you can only die once so how could the stress of restraint contribute more to their deaths? You can't contribute to a glass that's already full three times over. That is a little like saying that someone died because their parachute didn't open, and the weight of their backpack also contributed to the fall. But they die from the fall once they hit the ground, whether it's at 120 mph or 122 mph.

It's true, that in this analogy, the extra weight makes the jumper hit the ground a little sooner. Forcibly restraining the victim can cause them to struggle and consume energy more quickly, accelerating the burnout. Giving the subject a little space and empathy could help calm them. In this case, restraint might reduce energy loss. If that delays cardiac arrest until an ambulance arrives, the patient might be saved. Victims are less likely to struggle when strapped to a gurney than when held down by police. [20] "Probably negligible involvement of position in contribution of death in cases of excited delirium, although allowing patients to breathe effectively is obviously important." https://emergencymedicinecases.com/episode-3-excited...irium/

We can compare Excited Delirium to an explosion or a wildfire, that rapidly consumes all the energy in the body. The police try to contain the explosion by restraining it, but can one blame the firefighter for the fire? The explosion continues until all the fuel is gone. Then life's flame flickers out, and the drug-intoxicated body can not be resuscitated. [21] "According to Dr. Assaad Sayah, Chief of Emergency Medicine at Cambridge Health Alliance, Excited Delirium Syndrome can be best explained as a 'physical response to an actual psychological [or drug] problem resulting in their autonomic systems producing too much adrenaline.' Dr. Sayah analogizes it to 'having too much nitrous in a car; eventually the engine will blow up.' In most cases, the cause of death is either 'a heart attack or, less frequently, respiratory failure.' Dr. Vincent Di Maio estimated that Excited Delirium Syndrome kills 800 people every year in police altercations because the victims "are just overexciting [their] heart from the drugs and from the struggle.'" Op. cit. https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...ext=lj Presumably, the blood must be circulating in order for the antidote to neutralize the fentanyl.

In conclusion, excited delirium should be treated as a medical condition, at high risk of ending quickly in sudden death. An ambulance should be called immediately. Only the minimum necessary restraint should be applied. Police and paramedics should be trained in the symptoms and handling protocols.

It would be helpful if the AMA would recognize EXD as a real condition, rather than dismissing it as a cover story for police brutality. Ignorance of the symptoms can lead to unintentional cruelty by police, when they assume they are confronted by a typical case of a criminal violently resisting arrest, rather than a patient with a life-threatening intoxication.

Notes

[1] https://lawandcrime.com/george-floyd-death/authorities-just-released-george-floyds-complete-autopsy-report-read-it-here/ The full autopsy report was published here https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/Autopsy_2020-3700_Floyd.pdf Diagnoses are summarized on pp. 1 and 2: I. The "blunt force injuries" are basically minor cuts and bruises: "cutaneous" injuries and contusions from handcuffing. II. Chronic conditions: Heart disease, hypertension and enlarged heart. These all tend to accelerate death from a drug overdose. They can also develop from long-term drug abuse. III. No injuries to the front of the neck or throat were found. This full 76-page report does not contain the word "homicide."

[2] https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/02/02/fentanyl-overdose-dont-count-naloxone-save-you-10822 "The patients who were dead on arrival had gone into cardiac arrest due to blood concentrations of fentanyl that were much higher than what is administered therapeutically. " Patients who died in hospital had concentrations of 9.5 ng/mL to 13 ng/mL. See also note 13. In other studies of death from heroin and morphine, there were deaths from only 100 ng/ml of morphine and "all cases with a blood concentration of 200 ng/ml and more of free morphine displayed a fatal outcome." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11040428_Fatal_versus_non-fatal_heroin_overdose_Blood_morphine_concentrations_with_fatal_outcome_in_comparison_to_those_of_intoxicated_drivers (Heroin quickly metabolizes into morphine.) Fentanyl is considered 100 times more potent than morphine. By this comparison, Floyd's blood fentanyl concentration could have been 10 times the fatal level. In addition his morphine concentration of 86 ng/mL would usually be fatal by itself.
Concentration levels are relative to the volume of blood, so are independent of body size.

[3] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/01/george-floyd-independent-autopsy-findings-released-monday/5307185002/ A report commissioned by the Floyd family stated that asphyxiation from sustained pressure was consistent with the evidence, but the author Michael Baden didn't have access to all the evidence, and chose not to endorse his opinion with the "expert opinion" label.

[4] The knee on the neck is a body hold, not a chokehold or carotid restraint, which involves putting pressure precisely on both carotid arteries, located on either side of the throat. A carotid restraint is usually applied by an elbow, and causes the subject to pass out in as little as 15 seconds. Blocking the arteries does not stop the breathing or heartbeat (pulmonary or cardiac arrest), which Floyd suffered after being restrained for many minutes. Once pressure on the arteries is released, the subject normally regains consciousness quickly.

[5] https://westjem.com/articles/excited-delirium.html

[6] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-video-appears-show-george-floyd-ground-three-officers-n1217476/

[7] https://www.facebook.com/darnellareallprettymarie/videos/1425398217661280/

[8] https://www.startribune.com/protests-build-anew-after-fired-officer-charged-jailed/570869672

[9] https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/media/publications/acep_report_on_excited_delirium_syndrome_sept_2009.pdf See also the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court, "[t]he problems posed by, and thus the tactics to be employed against, an unarmed, emotionally distraught individual who is creating a disturbance or resisting arrest are ordinarily different from those involved in law enforcement efforts to subdue an armed and dangerous criminal who has recently committed a serious offense." in "Explaining the Unexplainable: Excited Delirium Syndrome and Its Impact on the Objective Reasonableness Standard for Allegations of Excessive Force," https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1379&context=lj The first few pages relate a narrative similar to the Floyd case, involving multiple police subduing a violent EXD victim, who suddenly dies from exhaustion. A media uproar then arises against alleged police brutality.

[10] https://www.facebook.com/darnellareallprettymarie/videos/1425398217661280/

[11] From the incident report of the fire truck that was called to the scene, it appears that both police and bystanders called 911 for emergency medical services (EMS). The first call was Code 2, apparently for Floyd's nosebleed, which summoned a fire truck, followed by a more urgent code 3, which was said to bring an ambulance within six minutes. It appears the police called the ambulance when Floyd's breathing and heartbeat stopped. https://www.startribune.com/first-responders-worked-nearly-an-hour-to-save-floyd-before-he-was-pronounced-dead/570806682/ "Floyd goes limp and appears to lose consciousness. Hennepin EMS then arrive six minutes after the distress call." The article refers to the incident report by the fire truck, http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/public/@mpd/documents/webcontent/wcmsp-224680.pdf which has a note implying the first call to EMS was from police and another call came from bystanders: "No clear info on pt [patient] or location was given by either initial pd [police department] officers or bystanders." We need an incident report from the ambulance.

[12] TV news clips showing police restraining subjects who are exhibiting EXD symptoms and violently resisting arrest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qCqjuqEWEc A TV news report and cellphone video on a more humane method of managing an EXD case, thanks to police training, putting safety of the subject and of bystanders first, rather than restraints. However, no details are given about the outcome or the drug dose. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qCqjuqEWEc

[13] https://columnhealth.com/blog_posts/why-is-fentanyl-so-dangerous/ . Deaths from fentanyl have skyrocketed in the last seven years. In one incident in California, superlethal fentanyl doses of 53 ng/mL were successfully reversed with intravenous naloxone. However, some patients were dead on arrival. https://www.drugs.com/illicit/fentanyl.html

[14] Wikipedia has a detailed narrative of the incident here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_George_Floyd . Certain notes there support the thesis of fentanyl intoxication, and resisting arrest as part of an EXD syndrome. Floyd struggled with Lane before leaving his own vehicle, and again when Kueng, then all four officers, tried to get him into the squad car. Floyd already complained he couldn't breathe before they tried to get him into the police car, without any neck restraint, indicating the onset of respiratory depression from fentanyl. https://abcnews.go.com/US/george-floyd-protest-updates-arrests-america-approaching-10000/story?id=71038665 "They all tried to force Floyd into the backseat, during which time Floyd said he could not breathe, according to the complaint."

He also fell down twice, which could be seen either as a sign of intoxication or resisting arrest. The officers knew it was a drug overdose, as Thao told bystanders, "This is why you don't do drugs, kids." By the way, this Wikipedia article should be named "Death of George Floyd," as an accused is innocent until proven guilty.

[15] https://www.quora.com/Has-there-ever-been-any-previous-confirmed-record-of-death-resulting-from-a-knee-hold-before-the-Floyd-Chauvin-case-Good-question-for-experts-on-forensics-death-in-custody-data-internet-sleuths-police-medics-or

[16] https://www.dallasnews.com/news/investigations/2019/08/02/police-responded-to-his-911-call-for-help-he-died-what-happened-to-tony-timpa/

[17] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6226349-SWIFS-Investigative-Narrative.html#document/p7/a515249

[18] http://www.forensicmed.co.uk/science/toxicology/cocaine/ , https://academic.oup.com/jat/article/38/1/46/831276

[19] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/01/us/tony-timpa-dallas-police-body-cam.html

[20] "Probably negligible involvement of position in contribution of death in cases of excited delirium, although allowing patients to breathe effectively is obviously important." https://emergencymedicinecases.com/episode-3-excited-delirium/

[21] "According to Dr. Assaad Sayah, Chief of Emergency Medicine at Cambridge Health Alliance, Excited Delirium Syndrome can be best explained as a 'physical response to an actual psychological [or drug] problem resulting in their autonomic systems producing too much adrenaline.' Dr. Sayah analogizes it to 'having too much nitrous in a car; eventually the engine will blow up.' In most cases, the cause of death is either 'a heart attack or, less frequently, respiratory failure.' Dr. Vincent Di Maio estimated that Excited Delirium Syndrome kills 800 people every year in police altercations because the victims "are just overexciting [their] heart from the drugs and from the struggle.'" Op. cit. https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1379&context=lj

Anon [223] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:11 am GMT

I think more likely he died of a Covid-19 induced heart attack. Heart disease is the #1 comorbidity of Covid19. Doctors have talked about patients of Covid19 dying of sudden heart attacks at a high rate. Floyd was Covid19 positive, and he also had heart disease and hypertension, the top two comorbidity of Covid19.
R.C. , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:12 am GMT
That is over three times the lethal overdose, following earlier reports where the highest dose survived was 4.6 ng/mL.
Good points. And before this, all we ever heard about was how deadly fentanyl is. It killed Tom Petty and is so potent, it killed him via skin absorption! Now, however, the Back Flow Media (BFM) ;-), has agendas to push and truth ain't one of them.
Unfortunately, those who need to learn these facts have no interest in truth. Logic, reason, common sense, and all such things are thrown out; instead, the mob controls based upon who yells the loudest, not who makes the most fact-based sense.
SOL , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:38 am GMT
Excellent work. Unfortunately, the revolutionaries exploiting his death don't care about the truth.
obwandiyag , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:55 am GMT
People don't riot over the specific police murder that sets it off. They riot because they are sick and tired of the ways cops treat them–one of the ways being to murder them. If you don't like the Floyd murder, I got a couple thousand other cop murders for ya, and I would like to see you write such a stirring defense of cop-killed bodies riddled with hundreds of rounds of automatic weapons fire. Including all the dead white people.
Anonymous [456] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:11 am GMT
No denying that Floyd was a thug. Neither would any amount of denying alter the fact that he died at the hand – rather the knee – of a racist cop. Get over it, supremacists.
Cranberries , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:16 am GMT

This fentanyl concentration, including its norfentanyl metabolite at its molecular weight, was 20.6 ng/mL

Might help for someone to explain this calculation, since simply summing the fentanyl and norfentanyl concentrations gives 16.6, not 20.6.

anonymous1963 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:29 am GMT
It really does not matter. The Jewish mainstream media has tried and convicted the officers. They will never get a fair trial and are screwed. Saint George will have to be avenged or there will be more riots, arson and looting which the same degenerate media will call "protests".
Franz , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:30 am GMT
So they could have left him alone and he would have died anyway, another statistic.

It does imply intrusive policing invites unintended consequences. For the counterfeit $20, a summons would have been sufficient. Then George could have crawled off, go home to Jesus, and we could have been spared the phoniest and most overblown freak show since the Fall of Babylon.

Let them patrol their own 'hoods and be done with all this.

Hang All Text Drivers , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:45 am GMT
@R.C. """"the mob controls based upon who yells the loudest, not who makes the most fact-based sense."""

Wrong – Yelling loud does not matter. If you are anti-white the press is on your side no matter how softly you speak.

Wuok , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:54 am GMT
But why he didn't die before the police placed his knee on his neck?
Thulean Friend , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:54 am GMT
Fentanyl Floyd was a drug peddler and a petty criminal who got caught in the act of selling drugs by patrolling police. Panicking, he swallowed his own stash and overdosed as a result. Now he is being retconned into a saint.
Robert Dolan , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:05 am GMT
I suspect the F killed the man, but you will never convince the negroes, and the Jmedia will never reveal the truth anyway.
Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:06 am GMT
At this point I think the universe is just trolling us for the fun of it.
Sean , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:10 am GMT
I think Floyd was being passive aggressive rather than resisting as such. What was done to him by Chaving was punishment out of frustration, but the duration was well outside normal practice.

Floyd already began to complain "I can't breathe" a few minutes before the neck restraint was applied,

That will be a dangerous argument for Chauvin's defence counsel to make to the court, because it will be opening the door to a telling counter argument: Floyd's breathing was restricted after he reported respiratory distress.

If it was a Fentanyl overdose they ought to have given him Narcan antidote, not put weight on his ribcage while he was face down and his hands cuffed behind him; a contributory cause according to the autopsy, which found wrist bruises.

Ficino , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:35 am GMT
@Anon There's no such thing as a heart attack induced by covid-19.
People who have been hospitalized for heart disease, and subsequently test positive for covid-19, don't usually die from the virus they die from their underlying heart disease condition.
Sparkylyle92 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:45 am GMT
I saw the video. Looked like just another hoax to me. Weight on his other knee, looking right at the camera while "killing" someone, yada yada. Officer Chauvin, fer Chrissake. Officer Racist would be too much even for stupid goyim. 8 minutes my ass. Aces and eights anyone? The point of this fentenyl dohicky is to pretend it really happened. Just another deep state psyop I say. But go ahead and argue about it. Makes it easier to steal 10 trillion from the US taxpayer.
Biff , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 7:01 am GMT
This guy is channeling Johnny Cochran. Yes, we know O.J. didn't do it either, because Nicole Brown was high on lethal amounts of cocaine, and Ron Goldman was mainlining deadly amounts of horse(heads almost fall off when this happens)

You see, the amount of imaginary fantasy is endless which feeds the inter-civilian war of people-against-people while the State remains blissfully secure knowing that those who control the media(narrative) will always win

Otherwise, yea, we get it, the police are always honest, justice is blind, your vote counts, your money is secure, god loves you, the vaccine is harmless, and your children are doing a great service by telling the government instructor(school teacher) that you smoke pot, so the state can seize everything you own.

ICANREAD , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 7:23 am GMT
Your underlying analysis is incorrect. People overdose at much higher levels and live through it. Maybe the cops should have been more interested in why he was presenting in an altered state and called an EMT, than carting him off to jail for a possible forged $20 bill.

See http://uthscsa.edu/ARTT/AddictionJC/2020-02-11-Sutter.pdf

The mean serum concentrations of fentanyl in their patients was (52.9 ng/mL) with a range of 7.9-162.3 ng/ml.

One of the 18 patients died in hospital. Five patients underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation, one required extracorporeal life support, three required intubation, and two received bag-valve-mask ventilation. One patient had recurrence of toxicity after 8 hours after naloxone discontinuation. Seventeen of 18 patients required boluses of naloxone, and four required prolonged naloxone infusions (26–39 hours). All 18 patients tested positive for fentanyl in the serum. Quantitative assays conducted in 13 of the sera revealed fentanyl concentrations of 7.9 to 162 ng/mL (mean = 52.9 ng/mL).

goldgettin , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 8:18 am GMT
The author starts one paragraph with "in conclusion", LOL again LOL
Once again missing the point,intentionally,misdirecting. It's a FALSE FLAG

Street theater duh, set up Fromthestart. Plandemic.Seriously,it creates jobs.
Liars oops I mean lawyers,oops I mean poly ticks,locally,nationally,
all the way to the jewdicial branch and congress and beyond.GET REAL.

It's far worse than that.An elder told me they don't believe in IQ.

The facts and investigations and evidence don't do nuffin after the incurred LOSS

of SO much time,money,energy,community,productivity,confidence,SANITY etc.

THIS is COUP and" it's no where near in conclusion." that's my comment,thanks
peace,love, life

RouterAl , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 8:29 am GMT
Excellent article which should be on the front page of every major paper in the USA. The part on the Excited Delirium Syndrome is new to me but it's interesting .It illustrates nicely this civil disorder has nothing to do with Mr Floyd. I just hope officer Chauvins defence team makes good use of this information.
As a retired pharmacist I'm surprised by the use of fentanyl as a drug of abuse. The therapeutic dose banding is very small, its very potent , it is a very short acting drug and it's a drug that only an anaesthetist should consider using or abusing. Its a very potent respiratory depressant that has a nasty habit of producing a delayed action hours after the affect has apparently worn off. Fentanyl also causes heart slowing and any anaesthetist would give other drugs to counter that effect to keep the patient under control.

Now lets look at the photo of other officers using the correct Israeli defence force pin down

Notice that the knee and leg not doing the pinning is not on the ground therefore all the weight of the body is brought to bear on the victims neck and the major blood vessels under the knee. Now look at officer Caulvin his right boot toe is on the ground along with his right knee. Try it yourselves on a pillow, you cannot bring any force to bear , at best you are holding someone with that pose. He also looks under no stress from Mr Floyd with his hold. At 5′ 8" I would be using the IDF method if I had to restrain Mr Floyd, but lets be honest I would avoid him full stop. There is also the fun part of trying to hit and subdue someone who thanks the the Fentanyl in his system would feel little pain.
This whole thing looks very suspicious to me , and the speed with which the thing went global even more suspicious. The speed that people appeared with expensive t-shirts and hoodies all bearing
"I cannot breath" printed on the front in many locations simultaneously along with the piles of bricks and attacks on statues has a pre-planned Soros and Antifa agenda all over it.

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 8:38 am GMT
I'm sure that the author of this article, who I assume isn't a drug addict, will be totally fine if a racist white thug in uniform with a history of murdering people knelt on his neck for nine minutes with its hands in its pockets. Yes, it was the drugs all along!
anon [161] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 8:41 am GMT

His ability to resist four officers trying to get him into the squad car is typical of EXD cases.

When did this happen, exactly? The security cam video show that two [2] officers succeeded to get Floyd into the back seat of the cruiser. Then, one officer pulled him out on the other side.

I've read plenty about ExD, and believe that Chauvin will make a successful defense. Your '4 men failed' spared me reading this long slog.

vot tak , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 8:55 am GMT
Gotta protect those israeli occupation troops at all costs and keep their colonial police state (that's the usa, neanderthals) a colonial police state. Should those dumb goy animals unite and force our quislings out, who knows what might befall our "sacred homeland".
animalogic , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 9:24 am GMT
Did drugs kill George Floyd ? Does it matter ?
This affair is one of public perception.
The perception IS that Chauvin used excessive force. The guy died after that "force" whether excessive or not. People, rightly or wrongly see cause & effect.
As for your points about overdose ? Fairly weak. Every minute that passes the likelihood of overdose decreases. Overdoses don't hide in your system for 20 minutes (excluding digestion or assimilation) & then jump out & shut down your heart.
Floyd may have appeared intoxicated, but he also appeared functional for a "normal" unstressful setting.
He sat down, handcuffed, against a wall for some minutes without "losing it".
Also interesting -- they had him in the police car -- then dragged him out for lack of compliance. Why ? Let him sit in the locked, secure police back seat, So he screams & makes a fuss ? Arrestees are known to do that. But no, they drag him out (still handcuffed) & THREE of them get on top of him: one on legs, one on the torso, & one on his neck. And stay that way for nearly 9 minutes. And its not like they don't know he's physically problematic -- they call the EMS early on.
Now lets imagine that you have a problem with your heart or breathing (he tells them numerous times about his breathing, not necessarily entirely from physical airway blockage, but from panic -- psychology rendering the act of breathing difficult )– would being pinned to the road by 3 burly men, one of them exerting some pressure on your neck not cause some degree of panic ? Could some people be near to literally shitting themselves from panic ? Would such fear & panic not be contraindicated in a man for whom you have already called the EMS ?
Funny thing, was I a police man I would have asked Floyd to sit in his car (yes, take his keys & guard him) while I had a look at this so-called counterfeit bill. I mean, that's the point isn't it ? this whole abortion rests on passing a dodgy $ 20. (Knowingly passing: I wonder how many shonky US bills there are out there millions ?).
So Floyd is probably a scumbag -- so ? The whole affair looks appalling. And that really IS the point here.
Anonymous [178] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 9:26 am GMT
"Systemic racism" is simply POC and non-European descended Whites saying that they cannot live in Western (or, indeed, industrial) society,
The POC are correct in this. Who, after all, is qualified to tell them that they are wrong? George Floyd was destroyed by "systemic racism" in the above sense. Even East Asians and South Asians with high enough IQ and sufficient emotional control to live in Western (industrial) society strongly condemn the lack of organization in such societies, and the absence of the protective social organizations (caste, a directive government/social organization) that are characteristic of their homelands. Middle Eastern Whites condemn the absence of the tribal / honor / religious system that characterizes their countries of origin.
POC and non-European descended Whites want Western ( industrial) society changed or destroyed for their benefit.
This is a serious and irresolvable conflict of interest, for the European descended Whites are just as unable to live in the home societies of various POC and non-European descended White groups as these groups are unable to live in Western (industrial) society.

Note that the above irresolvable conflict of interest is not ever discussed directly. This is characteristic of major irresolvable conflicts of interest. WW II is a good example of this (see the American Pravda articles, unz.com , for support of this assertion). All of the participants (except possibly Hitler, who apparently wanted a European Empire allied to the British Empire) thought it was "them or us" (hence the "unconditional surrender" demands from the Allies), and thus had strong reasons for fighting. These reasons were not used in propaganda by any side. Propaganda based on self interest of the "only one Empire will survive" type makes poor propaganda. So does propaganda based on what amounts to a multi-sided volkwandering ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswanderung ), which is what we seem to be entering into.

Good propaganda is smoke -- mythic appeals, but to a non-applicable myth, with irrelevant "proof". George Floyd is an example of how this is supposed to work.

The interesting thing about this situation is that it is the OC and non-European descended Whites are the ones insisting that they cannot live in the West / industrial civilization. Granted that the Left wing of the Democratic Party is the proximate cause of the current offensive, attempted Antifa leadership of the offensive has been largely repudiated or simply ignored by the various POC. Understanding the basics of this situation requires that the objections of the POC and non-European descended Whites be taken seriously and understood, as I have tried to do above.

gotmituns , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 9:34 am GMT
Doesn't matter what theniggerdied of. They're going to get the White guy no matter what.
Jud Jackson , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 9:49 am GMT
Fantastic Article!! I just hope the cop is acquitted.
Emily , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:03 am GMT
@Sean If it was a Fentanyl overdose they ought to have given him Narcan antidote,

Are you serious?
These cops meant to make an instant medical diagnosis.
Decide the problem and drug involved.
Produce an antidote.
And administer it.
What planet are you on?
And had they administered the wrong drug .?
They would be crucified as well.
Its hard to believe you can really believe that comment yourself.
Its sheer prejudice and blah for BLM.
And a grossly unfair accusation.

Moi , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:08 am GMT
@anonymous1963 Three points:

*Since the MSM and many of our leaders are in sync with BLM, we should just turn the country over to them since they've done a great job within their own "neighborhoods."

*It's pretty useless to say the MSM loves BLM. The MSM does what the folks who control/own it tell it to do.

*Per BLM's demand, cops should stop patrolling black neighborhoods and instead boost patrolling non-black neighborhoods to reduce crime there.

Anon4578 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:08 am GMT
Police were not arresting him for the counterfeit bill. If you pass a counterfeit bill you are interviewed by police so they can attempt to trace its origin.

Where did you get cash?

Where do you cash your checks?

Did you get this as change for a larger bill? Where?

He was detained because when they came up to him in the car he was obviously intoxicated and behind the wheel. Also rewatch the security tape and see the cop talks to him for 2 minutes and at one point is so worried by whatever Floyd was doing he unholstered his gun but didn't point it. Floyd also had no ID on him.

So it's a cascade of events that lead to his arrest. Police can't ID an intoxicated person behind the wheel of a car. Try to get him out of the car and he immediately starts resisting.

onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
@Sparkylyle92 " I saw the video. Looked like just another hoax to me"

Here's an excellent analysis of 3 of the alleged live, completely contradictory videos on this alleged event, which quite clearly show it to be hoax perpetrated via crisis actors, fake police and EMT's. :


https://www.bitchute.com/embed/OItT0WD55x0w/

Regards, onebornfree

steve K. , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
@Anonymous And what evidence do you have that Chauvin was racist? Is it because all white people are racist?
padre , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:33 am GMT
What's the difference, does it mean that police should continue with their practice, till they choke a healthy person?
Rich , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:45 am GMT
@Anonymous I'm curious about this "racist cop" trope that's become pretty common. Is it common for "racists" to be married to someone of another race as Chauvin is? I'd think a "racist" would favor a spouse of their own race, no? Seems to me, to you crazies on the left, Pale skin makes a person a "racist ". It's become a truth in America that the only definition of "racist" is White. The word is, therefore, meaningless. Floyd died because of his drug use and criminal activity. Not a knee on the back of his neck.
Moi , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:45 am GMT
@SOL I second that. Problem is there is no satisfying the BLM folks. They are suffering from PTSD because of our history of slavery. This is sort of like vets who have PTSD, but the key difference being vets actually participated in a war whereas no black living was a part of our history of slavery.

The solution is for the BLM and lgbtqi folks to join forces and put forth a black tranny candidate to solve all our problems.

journey80 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:57 am GMT
Why should we believe the "report"? why not believe our lying eyes? Who released this "report"? Where is an independent verification? I'll wait, thanks, for a report that has been released by an independent source that is confirmed by the family.
anon [392] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 10:58 am GMT
The ADL is the rabid hate group and a threat to society.
Contraviews , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:19 am GMT
If this is the case, if it is true the officers should have a very strong defence in court.
Emslander , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:25 am GMT

I'm sure that the author of this article, who I assume isn't a drug addict, will be totally fine if a racist white thug in uniform with a history of murdering people knelt on his neck for nine minutes with its hands in its pockets. Yes, it was the drugs all along!

When I see a comment like this on an article as closely reasoned and supported as this one, I wonder whether public schools teach the ability to read.

You can check my previous posts and see that these are precisely the points I made from a very casual glance at the autopsy report and a little knowledge of police motivations. That was right after the incident occurred. Videos and photos are very poor evidence because they only raise emotional response.

Thank you, Ron Unz, for being brave enough to publish this article.

anon [392] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:31 am GMT
@onebornfree ..hall of fame vs their sandy hoax
EliteCommInc. , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:40 am GMT
laughing.

I guess the defense is entitled to a defense. I guess that is the benefit of having two coroner's reports. The skill and advocacy of the police unions to manufacture alternative theories and creates smoke as defense is light years ahead of antifa, BLM or the KKKK.

Te problem with the the current system is not dug induced males sitting on their cars o falling asleep in drive thrus or jogging in around empty construction sites or waiting for tow trucks, or selling cigarettes, or avoiding creepy guys stalking the in apartment complexes, or sleeping in their beds or or walking with some white women --

It's the loss of credibility. The police unions can have the officers walk out as they ave routinely done as a means of black mail holding cities hostage, but at the end of the day, what technology is doing is unavailing a side of Wyatt Earp the public would rather not see even if they know what's up. It's the system in a manner of exposure unlike it's even been used to. It's the collapse of the arguments for invading countries that are not a threat. It's the collapse of the internal dialogues among the agencies in multiple arenas of government force. It's Ruby Ridge, It's Waco, It's Baltimore, It's Fergusaon. It's Oakland. It's Baton Rouge. It's New Jersey. It's . . . It's balloting were the 1 per-center is suddenly number one,. Utter nonsense such as written in the Fergason Report. It's nonsense such as the Ferguson Effect.It's a news system, that is serious doubt. It's bail out for WS, repeatedly and then throwing the payees f bail out out of works. It is stagnant wages. It's hiring and executive to make a serious shift ad the best he could do hire ore part time citizens and embrace more immigrants.

It's the system saying it's not the system. It;s loosening up credit for businesses and the rules for consumers tighter. It's watching something on film as it happens and then being told what you saw is not what happened.

It's the unmasking of tactics used by the system to shield itself from accountability. And perhaps worst of all, we believing what the system tells us because believing reality is just to tough a road to to travel. It is the system saying . . . it's not the system.

-- -- --

uhh No. I didn't believe there was a reason to invade Ira or Afghanistan or any of the subsequent intentions by the former Vietnam protester "we lost Vietnam" crowd as I am that Mr. Floyd died from a drug overdoese.

And none of the smoke and mirrors: that Pres Hussein was a bad person, that the Taliban were in on 9/11, that the family occupying Ruby Ridge were Nazis, Mr. Koresh was a demon, there's a Fergason Effect, that blacks are just bad innately and whites are angelic beings along with browns and yellows worthy of pass, or that IQ is destined by some unique, unknown and unseen genetic code, that the Russians sabotaged US elections, . . . or US lost Vietnam (no it did not). If I start buying onto the nonsense spouted as truth to escape accountability before you know it, I will start advocating that slaves were just immigrants coming the continent for better jobs and life.

And cows rally do jump over the moon.

Fred777 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:44 am GMT
@Moi BLM having PTSD over slavery would be like an Air Force veteran who served in the 1990s having PTSD over hitting Omaha Beach in the first wave.
Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:46 am GMT
@Sean Apart from Emily's point I note that you state that Chauvin constricted Floyd's breathing without evidence despite it not being accepted by the author of the article.
Z-man , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:47 am GMT
This proves, the sainthood of a very simian looking convicted criminal doped up coon, that you can fool some of the people all of the time. The Jooz are laughing all the way to the ban total control of the World.
Jim Bob Lassiter , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:47 am GMT
@obwandiyag Well let's have 'em (couple of thousand cop murders) . And don't forget to include Ruby Ridge and Waco, Texas.
Sick of Orcs , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:48 am GMT
Segregation worked. Hard to believe it's just sitting on the shelf, unused.

Access to Whites is not a right.

Jim Bob Lassiter , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:51 am GMT
@Anon4578 A passer of counterfeit bills is typically given an opportunity by the cheated merchant to make him whole before the cops are called. Saint George, for whatever reasons, didn't avail himself of the opportunity extended to him to do just that.
Jim Bob Lassiter , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:54 am GMT
@Wuok He prolly would have had they just left him alone. Then they'd be in jail for failure to render first aid. The rioting would have still happened. Heads or tails, you lose with niggers.
gotmituns , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 11:59 am GMT
@Rich Chauvin was probably a screaming liberal until he got involved with the chink. The thing about chinks is they're known to hate everyone equally who isn't a chink.
Steve in Greensboro , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:12 pm GMT
@Anonymous Did you read the article? Seems pretty convincing to me.
Felix Krull , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:21 pm GMT
It is strange that George Floyd's case is taken as proof of systemic racism, when Tony Timpa got much worse treatment -- even though Timpa hadn't committed any crime, had no police record, and even called 911 himself.

That is not strange. The reason BLM choose cases where the policeman only did their job is because otherwise, they'll risk seeing the policeman go to jail, and then there'd be no systemic racism to rail against. Only when you are sure the policeman will be exonerated in a court of law, can you rile the animals without risking the party coming to an end before the music even starts.

Redman , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:26 pm GMT
@Anonymous And proof of that racism would be what exactly?
DanFromCT , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:28 pm GMT
@RouterAl For the time being, an educated comment like yours gets a hearing, in contrast to the unreasoned moral posturing of so many others here. For so long as they can hide behind "good intentions," they can run from inconvenient facts. UR recently featured an article and comments on Dietrich Doerner's Logic of Failure , which says it best about these disgusting phonies who'd never dream of reexamining their positions based on the horrors they cause.

"In our political environment, it would seem, we are surrounded on all sides with good intentions. But the nurturing of good intentions is an utterly undemanding mental exercise, while drafting plans to realize those worthy goals is another matter. Moreover, it is far from clear whether "good intentions plus stupidity" or "evil intentions plus intelligence" have wrought more harm in the world. People with good intentions usually have few qualms about pursuing their goals. As a result, incompetence that would otherwise have remained harmless often becomes dangerous, especially as incompetent people with good intentions rarely suffer the qualms of conscience that sometimes inhibit the doings of competent people with bad intentions. The conviction that our intentions are unquestionably good may sanctify the most questionable means.

Excerpt From
The Logic Of Failure: Recognizing And Avoiding Error In Complex Situations
Dietrich Dorner
This material may be protected by copyright.

Redman , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:28 pm GMT
@Thulean Friend What exactly did happen to the white substance that clearly fell out of his left pocket while against the wall? Odd nobody mentions that.
wlindsaywheeler , says: Website Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:31 pm GMT
George killed himself. He took a lethal overdose of Fentanyl. The meth and the fentanyl combined cause delirium and heart problems. These two drugs caused what is called "Excited Delirium Syndrome" which is usually fatal.

https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2263095/

http://www.progressivepress.com/blog-entry/death-rides-fast-horse-black-life-shattered-dope

When the officers pulled him out of the Mercedes–he was already foaming at the mouth. These four officers need to be released and given their jobs back. Their arrests are just a lynch mob by the liberal establishment. George killed George. He gambled with his life, put himself in that position with allegedly passing counterfeit money. Furthermore, George was DWI; he was sitting in the drivers seat. Even though you are not driving, sitting in the driver's seat is DWI, Driving while impaired. Who needs to be arrested is the Drug Dealer that sold him the Fentanyl.

Moreover, Excited Delirium syndrome causes "Wooden Chest". That is what George was experiencing, His drug cocktail killed him.

annamaria , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:44 pm GMT
@R.C. Reality check for the "revolutionaries:"
https://www.hannenabintuherland.com/europa/whites-were-slaves-in-north-africa-before-blacks-were-slaves-new-world

1 million to 1.25 million Europeans were enslaved in North Africa, from the beginning of the 16th century to the middle of the 18th, by slave traders from Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli alone (these numbers do not include the European people who were enslaved by Morocco and by other raiders and traders of the Mediterranean Sea coast)

"From bases on the Barbary coast, North Africa, the Barbary pirates raided ships traveling through the Mediterranean and along the northern and western coasts of Africa, plundering their cargo and enslaving the people they captured."

From at least 1500, the pirates also conducted raids along seaside towns of Italy, Spain, France, England, the Netherlands and as far away as Iceland, capturing men, women and children.

On some occasions, settlements such as Baltimore, Ireland were abandoned following the raid, only being resettled many years later. Between 1609 and 1616, England alone had 466 merchant ships lost to Barbary pirates.

annamaria , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:49 pm GMT
@Anonymous Are you sure that you are not a racist or a progeny of racists?

As Confederate statues are torn down in the USA, one wonders: Are we going to ask Egypt to change its name, tear down its pyramids which were built by slaves too? And destroy mummies of pharaohs that had slaves?

Are the black tribes of Africa, the ones who sold the slaves they took from other tribes when at war and sold to the Arab slave traders, are we going to change the names of those African tribes too? And tear down the names of their leaders?

No comments? Here is more:

Regarding white slaves in Africa and black slaves in the New World, it is often overlooked that slaves were enslaved before they were bought and sold by Jews, Arabs, and Gentiles. The unasked question is: Who enslaved them?

Things that used to be true before political correctness set in: More whites were brought as slaves to North Africa than blacks brought as slaves to the United States.

https://www.hannenabintuherland.com/europa/whites-were-slaves-in-north-africa-before-blacks-were-slaves-new-world/

VinnyVette , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 12:49 pm GMT
All this obsessing over what pretty boy George died of is irrelevant. Cops putting their knee on the neck, the most vulnerable part of the human body is wrong period! No sympathy for the thug, he was a menace to society. What should be obsessed over is police culture has not been to "protect and serve" since at least the 70's. They see themselves as "at war" with the whole of society, from the suburban soccer mom to the ghetto thug.
It's widely known cops will take a routine traffic stop, and poke and prod at the driver to try to rile them up and get the person to react and give the cop an attitude to escalate the interaction into an altercation. In the suburbs, quiet rural areas it matters not. Race matters not. They'll pull this shit in the most docile neighborhoods, with the most docile of people, regardless of color.
I'm neither pro cop or anti cop, I see them as a necessary evil. They'd be a hell of alot less evil if reforms were made in their attitude toward the public at large, and if they were held accountable for all their various abuses of power. They also need their privileged status as some sort of exalted special class "above the public" obliterated! Cops on the whole are some of the most corrupt, anti social, sadistic people in society. I know many of them personally, both city and suburban.
As much as I dislike the rioting, looting, arson and chaos, I'm enjoying the karmic retribution the boys in blue in receiving.
JQ , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:00 pm GMT
@obwandiyag It could also be that a certain race is a bit more prone to get into drugs, crime, prostitution,
and so on. And truth to be told hard work is not in their DNA. As long as you keep
denying FACTS this will never end.

Canada has to bring thousands of Mexicans and Guatemalans to work on the farm fields,
while half of this people are on welfare, and when they do work they only want easy jobs,
bus drivers, taxi drivers, or for the governments where most of the time they just don't perform
as well. In the mean time people like me are being taxed close to 60% to pay for all these social programs which only benefits the laziest

Biff , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:06 pm GMT
@Rich

Is it common for "racists" to be married to someone of another race as Chauvin is?

Yes.

File that one under "dumb question" ..

171 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:07 pm GMT
Since when gross injustice against a once subdued person legitimate anti-humanity? That is how, to a naive person consumes daily propaganda by the usa government and their presstitute which reflect an appearance of "good america" while genuinely reflecting a clandestine disdain for what is right or such unjustified violence cloaked under the line of duty against the general population would not be so common in the touted "land of the free." The magnet (of the peaceful protesters from australia, to europe and latin america) is not to a "good free land of jewmerica" but to the missing and lack of legitimate Justice parroted along with the moral compass touted by the usa government and their law enforcement while the true reality of irrectitude makes itself apparent in videos such as the one of George floyd's unjustified assassination/murder, where unjustified violence is evident. Thus, with these uncensored videos by the peaceful population or general public of the usa, the truth did not remain hidden by manipulated narratives of the jew-owned presstitute and media in favor of the cia/usa government flavor of their wicked ideology preference while cloaked in sheep's clothing.

In conclusion, When an individual poses a serious threat to an officer or another individual, according to the National Institute of Justice, the "peace-officer" (as they are glorifyingly touted) is generally authorized by law to use lethal weapons (i.e., firearms) to protect himself or herself or others by stopping the individual's actions. You don't want to realize that there is IRREFUTABLY no serious threat nor danger to life once a person (of any color in handcuffs as the estate of George Floyd was and many others) is subdued. And, those marching (or rather peacefully protesting to show solidarity) in many other foreign nation states display how morally magnetic is the actual legitimate axiom of the interest of justice because that no democracy can exist unless each of its citizens is as capable of outrage at injustice to another as he is of outrage at unjustice to himself.

ploni almoni , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT
Calling all trolls: discuss this as if it were a real event to demoralize and confuse the public and prevent them from acting.
follyofwar , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:25 pm GMT
@Jud Jackson Could the authorities risk an acquittal? Or might Chauvin suffer the same fate as Epstein?
Truth3 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:32 pm GMT
Truth no longer matters to

Negroes.

Faggots.

Trannies.

Women.

Democrats.

It never mattered to Jews. Falsehood and Sophistry is their weapon of choice.

Tazer 2.0 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:34 pm GMT
I don't care so much for the cops since they would put you in a cage with these animals for thought crimes like posing the JQ and denying the Holycaust without any hesitation at all. They are paid mercs and sometimes they get burned. Similarly the light property damage incurred by corporate storefronts and reduction in quality of life for liberal urban dwellers is not at all a concern for me, and I honestly hope this goes on in perpetuity until the statistical reality of black crime is literally beaten into their skulls. As for George Floyd he will no longer be producing any more of his ilk. He was set to marry a lower class white woman and open an establishment eponymously named the Konvict Kitchen, all in defiance of the principles of nuptiality and common decency. The former enhances black criminality by combining pathological white genes from the classes which in Europe would have their breeding restricted by cultural and economic constraints but are allowed to flourish here generating trailer parks and white trash that with miscegenation and negrification are as much of a danger to society as the the African type they complement.

In any case having seen the footage from these events it strikes me that these cops are themselves very unintelligent. In the case of the Atlanta negro aptly named Rayshard they were inclined to play junior detective and gameshow host for upwards of 30 minutes when it was obvious that they should have immediately incapacitated the feral groid and dragged him away from a motor vehicle capable of causing far more damage than the plastic dart guns they ended up wrestling over. Instead they allowed the monkey to shuck and jive for what seemed like an hour repeating the same inane phrases over and over again. I would have been inclined to dump a mag in the baboon at the 2 minute mark. These two men were themselves products of negrification and no doubt they likened the ill-fated negro to their favorite afleets and sports stars they worship on TV, giving him chance after chance to behave like a human being with around a standard deviation more aptitude than they should have given him credit for. If they had a choice between the ineffective Taser device and a firearm they ended up using it would have gone better.

I think this country is screwed in the long run and I just hope it ends in fireworks. The long and inexorable drag into stupidity is maddening.

anon [427] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:41 pm GMT
I doubt anyone cares what he died from, they can just go "change" their signs to some guy in Georgia. They all look like hoaxes but they needed something for "change" to happen. Back to online petitions and countless fake hoaxes and more toppling anything whuhhh, and more historical revision to erase whuhhhh, can't even spell it anymore.
Who called the police on the martyrs? Why would a black person call the police on a black man asleep in the line at Wendy's in Georgia, when they could have just drove around him. Why have the white police bother him? It all just looks like more lefty "change" helped out by the good folks at Netflix or something.
JimDandy , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:41 pm GMT
@obwandiyag Yet they always seem to pick a loser. Funny, eh?

And how dare you bring WHITE victims into this?!!! This is about BLACK victims and WHITE oppressors. GOT IT?!

backup , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT
He also had sickle cell anemia. The coronary report mention a lot of "sickled" cells, but only postmortem. It is knows that sufferers of SCD show that kind of pattern: Death induces it. However, George Floyd was also COVID19 positive, and there are signs that COVID19 decreases Hemoglobin levels:

Primate models of Covid-19 (Munster 2020) and human Covid-19 patients have subnormal haemoglobin levels (Chen 2020). Clinical evaluationof almost 100 Wuhan patients reveals haemoglobin levels below the normal range in most patients as well as increased total bilirubin and elevated serum ferritin (Chen 2020). Hyperbilirubinemia is observed in acute porphyria (Sassa 2006) and would be consistent with ineffective erythropoiesis (Sulovska 2016) and rapid haemoglobin turnover.

https://osf.io/4wkfy/download/?format=pdf&usg=AOvVaw2aUKMUoT-E7lUm0WvwqQaj

People with SCD can suffer from other viruses causing anemia, without showing sickled cells:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle_cell_disease#Aplastic_crisis

Anonymous [208] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT
@ICANREAD They did call the EMTs. That's what they were waiting for. Maybe you shouldn't try to analyze the situation until after you learn what the situation involved?
JimDandy , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:48 pm GMT
@Wuok He was dying before he even left the car. He collapsed when they pulled him out of it. He collapsed after they helped him walk to the wall. He was complaining that he couldn't breathe before he had a knee on his neck. My sense was that when he saw the cops were coming for him, he swallowed his drugs. Pretty common.
Anon [375] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:52 pm GMT
@obwandiyag I basically agree.

This was also about the McMichael shooting. And the entire Trump presidency.

JimDandy , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 1:59 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc. And criminals who break into pregnant women's houses and jam guns into their pregnant guts really do get their just deserts when they hastily swallow all the drugs they were dealing to avoid going back to the joint.
EliteCommInc. , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:00 pm GMT
"It is strange that George Floyd's case is taken as proof of systemic racism, when Tony Timpa got much worse treatment -- even though Timpa hadn't committed any crime, had no police record, and even called 911 himself."

It would b strange if what you said was accurate.
enforcement, It is not singular artifact.

I is not any singular death, not even a group of deaths that are rare at the hands of police. It's the ten million plus arrests misdemeanors primarily that end with violence against unarmed citizens that are disproportionately used with respect to african americans it's the related history. It is the sentencing. It is the pea bargain system . . .

It's the crack vs regular cacaine narratives nonsense, it is the rhetorical dialogue -- it is not one single thing, but a compendium of constructs across the country over time.

Anon [375] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:01 pm GMT
@Anon It seems more likely that the heart attack came because the heart was overworked due to low blood-oxygen levels due to the sedated breathing from the opioid.
Sokrates , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:01 pm GMT
@animalogic Are you member of BLM?
Go tell these crap to a decent jury
chuckywiz , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:05 pm GMT
Such analysis is diversion from the main discussion. It does not matter if Floyd was on drugs or a criminal. Why was he treated brutally by the police. Too much power given to the law enforcement. And the bad apples always take advantage of it. Observe the way they walk. No sign of humility or being a servant of society or a protector.
Race riots yes. but so many whites and no African Americans are rioting, too. It is economic disparity and hopelessness, stupid, and that is what the pundits are avoiding purposely.
Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:13 pm GMT
Brilliant presentation.
I was arrested one time and was put into car. Interestingly enough I had difficulty breathing and I did not have any drugs in me.
I did ask officer to open window in the car but he did not. He did not care.
tradecraft46 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:18 pm GMT
Who cares, nits make lice .
Juckett , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:24 pm GMT
@SOL Exactly. They would not even spend the time to read this excellent example of actual journalism.
Their hatred blinds them to all facts.
Talking time is over. Balkanize the failed multi-cultural experiment. Ethnostate is NEEDED.
Separate from Hate.
Emily , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:25 pm GMT
Anyone else getting rather peed off by the huge donations to BLM, apparently about to flow in – as reparations for the proceeds from slavery by Briitish firms.
Seems to me these companies should be starting at home.
What about the proceeds from mills and factories here in England where the labour was little more than slavery.
Forced on the poor for pathetic and utterly meagre wages – amounting to slavery – as the option to the 'poor house'.
Children of seven working 12 hours a day for pennies.
Many dying and crippled by the machinery under which they had to scrabble.
I am sure there are millions – not least up north – who would very much like some recognition for the quite awful exploitation of their forebears.
Oops – sorry – they all have white faces and are not prepared to commit mayhem, arson and criminal damage to support any claim.
Time, maybe to start, it works.
Maybe we less than aristocratic English people should start a few demands in payment for the terrible conditions of the industrial 'revolution', for the Victorian slums, more appalling than black Americans ever endured.
You don't see the black Americans sporting rickets, TB, suffering starvation, diptheria and smallpox to mention a few.
Or kids forced up chimneys.
I wonder how Dickens would be feeling today – at Lloyds etc.
Disgusted and sick, I imagine.
Don't get me started on those 'pressed' into the navy .
fnn , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:33 pm GMT
@gotmituns I've read that's she's a Hmong. As dumb as the press is, I don't know how they could confuse Hmong and Chinese.
Emily , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:39 pm GMT
@chuckywiz Why was he treated brutally by the police.

Was he?
The autopsy doesn't appear to record 'brutal physical injury' of the kind you appear to claim .
Could you detail the evidence that demonstrates such 'brutality'
Restraint surely does not come into that category and there is no or very little indication on his neck or throat.
Clarify the facts, Chucky, so we can all see the cuts, bruises, abrasions
Perhaps you will also give us some information as to how you would have handled a very large such individual full of fentanyl and other substances .

Sean , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:44 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz The author of the article talks about the knee on Floyd's neck only. But while he may be correct, that knee was not the only thing going on. I am talking about the other things including Chauvin's other knee. Officer Lane seems to have diagnosed Floyd's medical status as one unlikely to stand up to the tender mercies being administered by Chauvin. Lane, the first cop to talk to Floyd, had immediately observed he had been foaming at the mouth. Later, once Chauvin got on top of Floyd, Lane suggested turning him face up, and said he was worried about EXD. Lane's partner complained and said 'don't do that' to Chauvin in relation to him kneeling on Floyd.

If a 300lb wrestler was to apply a tight bodylock (bear hug) and keep it on tight, breathing would halt and the one being bear hugged would quite likely die within 10 minutes. Floyd's breathing was constricted by his bulk and being put face down with cuffs pulling his arms against the side of his ribcage. The weight and duration of Chauvin's knee on Floyd's back surely is what tipped the balance and killed him. There is an ex cop and prison guard who admits he used to deliberately break the fingers of resisting convicts who points to the sun glasses perched on Chauvin's head and the casual placement of his hands while kneeling on Flyod as clear indications there was no meaningful resistance from him, see here .

It is not mere opinion that Floyd was not actively resisting arrest during the several minutes he had Chauvin on top of him, because officer Chauvin was recorded explaining the reason Floyd was being pinned down was he had not cooperated earlier , when they had tried to put him in the police car. Hence Chavin virtually admitted it was a was a physical punishment for previous non-cooperation, but in law Chavin is not permitted to use the restraint technique as a punitive measure, which he knew very well. Hence Chauvin was commiting a felony, wham, in the course of which someone died, bam. Wham bam: felony murder.

JimDandy , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
@chuckywiz Actually, this article touches on what you consider the "main discussion" when it assesses whether or not the cop was following procedure. Is the man being vilified as the worst person on earth just a guy who was doing the job he was taught to do? If you think the rules are wrong, you're free to work to change them. This cop will face an American court, not some post-revolutionary tribunal. The question is whether or not his trial will look more like the latter than the former.
Trinity , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:51 pm GMT
Hispanic cop in Georgia shoots and kills white guy who grabs Hispanic cop's taser = NO coverage by national media. Hell, I live in Georgia and I didn't even hear about this one.

White cop in Georgia shoots and kills black guy who grabs White cop's taser = NONSTOP 24/7 coverage by national media.

SHOULD THE MEDIA BE LABELED AS A HATE GROUP BY THE $PLC?

RobbieSmith , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:52 pm GMT
@Anonymous Yep. The more Blacks in a society, the less safe and prosperous it is.

This is not complicated; it's an IQ issue.

Google: National IQs

Notice a pattern?

[MORE]
• 108 Singapore
• 106 South Korea
• 105 Japan
• 105 China
• 102 Italy
• 101 Iceland
• 101 Mongolia
• 101 Switzerland
• 100 Austria
• 100 Luxembourg
• 100 Netherlands
• 100 Norway
• 100 United Kingdom
• 99 Belgium
• 99 Canada
• 99 Estonia
• 99 Finland
• 99 Germany
• 99 New Zealand

[snip]

• 70 Botswana
• 70 Rwanda
• 69 Burundi
• 69 Cote d'Ivoire
• 69 Ethiopia
• 69 Malawi
• 69 Niger
• 68 Angola
• 68 Chad
• 68 Djibouti
• 68 Somalia
• 68 Swaziland
• 67 Dominica
• 67 Guinea
• 67 Haiti
• 67 Liberia
• 66 Gambia
• 65 Congo
• 64 Cameroon
• 64 Gabon
• 64 Sierra Leone
• 64 Mozambique
• 59 Equatorial Guinea

Blacks can only achieve because they have White admixture or because they reside in White societies. Too few of them are smart enough to even build sufficient infrastructure in Africa to allow the Black intellectual elite to achieve.

Sub-Saharan Africans have never made a contribution to the world. If allowed to become too numerous they destroy previously-thriving and safe White cities.

This is why Blacks seethe with jealousy and hatred of Whites yet can't seem to stay away because they want what we create and maintain, no matter if they deserve it or not. They want our peaceful and clean neighborhoods, our law and order, our technology and science, our school systems, our inventions, the jobs we create, the food we grow, the transportation we invent, the entertainment we provide Blacks hate us but can't live without us. That's why they demand that we take care of them and give them special rights and privileges that we don't grant ourselves, just to compensate for their inability at living in a modern and technologically-advanced civilization.

Some groups succeed all the time, everywhere. Some have never succeeded anywhere.

Blacks are the oldest race, so they should be the most advanced race; but they never developed at all and had to be domesticated by Whites.

National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations:

https://www.academia.edu/18754731/National_IQs_calculated_and_validated_for_108_nations

https://mason.gmu.edu/~gjonesb/IQandNationalProductivity.pdf

RobbieSmith , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:54 pm GMT
@Sick of Orcs "Access to Whites is not a right."

Just week we had a White sub-Saharan African (Elon Musk) launch a spacecraft while Black sub-Saharan Africans destroyed several cities.

Name a civilization (or even a written language) ever created by Blacks.

Name a single contribution from sub-Saharan Africans to the world.

The simple fact is, everything Blacks have was given to them by Whites.

Blacks are the only race never to have civilized. They were removed from the jungle just 250 years ago.

Blacks can only achieve because they have White admixture or because they reside in White societies. Too few of them are smart enough to even build sufficient infrastructure in Africa to allow the Black intellectual elite to achieve.

RobbieSmith , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT
@annamaria "whites-were-slaves-in-north-africa-before-blacks-were-slaves-new-world"

Slavery was the best thing to happen to Blacks, it was essentially a rescue mission by a free cruise. Being a slave was actually a good career move for a Black African -- as it still would be today. An enslaved Black in any non-Black country has a higher standard of living than a free Black living among his own kind.

After defeating George Foreman for the heavyweight boxing title in Zaire (now Congo), Muhammad Ali returned to the United States where he was asked by a reporter, "Champ, what did you think of Africa?" Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat."

Blacks are incapable of creating a civilization of their own. Blacks can only achieve because they have White admixture or because they reside in White societies. Everything Blacks have was given to them by Whites.

anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 2:58 pm GMT
Criminally insane Floyd killed himself. His chosen lifestyle could only lead to a bad end sooner or later. He shouldn't even have been out on the street after his armed home invasion conviction. It was the misfortune of the police to have had to deal with this drugged-up thug at the point he was going to expire due to drugs and eroded health due to years long drug use. He was a large, tough looking criminal that one had to be careful in dealing with. This is the 'hero' of the moment, one of the scummiest people one could ever meet.
Herald , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:00 pm GMT
@Anon Get a big copper to put his weighted knee on your neck for 8 minutes or so and then report back and tell us how it was for you.
fnn , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:07 pm GMT
@chuckywiz The Jewish MSM always ignores non-black victims of police misconduct. They made a collective decision to do that following the mild uproar over Ruby Ridge and the Waco massacre of the Branch Davidians. Today the Narrative is all about white oppressors and black victims.

It is economic disparity and hopelessness, stupid, and that is what the pundits are avoiding purposely.

We can't read minds, so you could possibly be right. But in the visible world toppling statues of white men and various displays of guilt-mongering seem to be taking precedence over any racially neutral economic demands.

EoinW , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:17 pm GMT
Muddy the water. Now we know why they hate us. Now we know why posters at this site and Zero Hedge are considered white trash. Science is unacceptable when lefties use it to promote global warming or the Nazis use it to lock down our society, but when it can be manipulated to try and prove dirty cops innocent then it's okay. What's to conclude? Giant Echo Chamber! The Left has it to keep their ignorant followers in line. The Right has it as well. Everyone preaching to their audience and no one really worried too much about truth.

This is an excellent site. It's a shame that it feels a need to blame EVERYTHING on Jews or Socialists or whatever the rednecks have been brainwashed to fear. The site simply hurts its credibility doing this. Not much better than Left wing groups and that's one serious Freak Show!

Rurik , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
@obwandiyag

They riot because they are sick and tired of the ways cops treat them–

no, they're rioting because blacks and browns don't have academic and economic parity with whites, and the ((universities)) have instructed their charges that there's no such thing as racial differences, and so that means all the academic and economic discrepancies between white and black, and the over-representation of blacks in the criminal justice system, are all a direct consequence of lingering, "systemic" white racism in America.

That's why they're rioting. The Floyd death was simply the perfect metaphor for America's 'racism', crystalized down to nine minutes of video.

The video was simply the catalyst, for a mindset that's been foisted by the ((universities)) and ((media)) for many decades now.

We're seeing what they've wanted all along. White people transformed into Palestinians, treated as second class citizens. Affirmative action, and now free health care ONLY for blacks in Kentucky.

White people will pay the taxes, but not get the benefits, because they're racists and anti-Semites, and like the Palestinians (terrorists) they don't deserve any rights.

That's what this is all about. The 21st century is to be like the 20th, a Jewish supremacist orgy of racial hatred unleashed.

Ko , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
From what I understand, Fentanyl acts quickly and if he had 3x lethal dose in him, he would have died earlier.

I feel bad for the cops, trained by Israelis who routinely kill Palestinians and use the knee of the head move. Look here at pics:

https://insidearabia.com/israel-exports-its-brutal-police-training-to-the-us-and-it-shows/

I don't understand why they held him down so long. It seems as if they wanted to wait until the criminal stopped tensing himself, which could be an indicator of continued resistance. Maybe they felt if they eased up, he'd jump up and fight them as the guy in Atlanta did.

The Atlanta cops are going to get lynched. That's not justice.

Trinity , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:37 pm GMT
@RobbieSmith Ali spoke a lot of truth and the only reason the counterculture adopted him is because of his stance against "Whitey" or what they thought was his stance against "Whitey." I do not blame Ali for not wanting to fight for America in the Vietnam War. When Ali grew up, Blacks were indeed second class citizens, far from it now, they have their asses kissed 24/7. Ali was about Blacks pulling themselves up by the bootstraps, and was a hardcore SEPARATIST. Ali actually had more than a touch of Irish blood in him. I wish more Blacks did indeed belong to the NOI like Ali, I think we would have less crime and they would stay to themselves.
Anonymous [363] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:37 pm GMT
George Floyd was an unhealthy man. He wasn't an angel. He wasn't even a decent citizen. He was a piece of shit.

But he didn't die of an overdose.

He died from a cop burying his knee on his neck for almost 10 minutes. Already in horrible shape with breathing problems, his body wasn't able to handle it.

Floyd was pleading for him to get off his neck. He was asking for his mother. C'mon people. Chauvin was heartless and ignorant. All he had to do was get off Floyd's neck. He wasn't a threat.

Chauvin had a serious lapse in judgement. So did Floyd. He wouldn't have been in that position in the first place. We can always argue that Floyd was a piece of shit. Maybe he was, but he didn't have to die like that. Who in this comment section is so perfect to judge?

Chauvin has his own issues. He isn't a murderer either. Ignorant and callous, yes. Deserving of jail time. I don't think so. Therapy and retirement form the police force? Absolutely.

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:38 pm GMT
3 problems in US

1 Blacks can newer be civilized.
2 Blacks will never trust white people.
3 Whatever whites will do. Blacks will never be satisfied until they will have all and permanent administrative power.

Rurik , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:38 pm GMT
@EoinW

Nazis use it to lock down our society

what a lying POS you are

It was the liberal Democratic governors who were the worst 'lock-down' "Nazis", but to a dishonest, agenda-driven liar like you, the truth is only something to bastardize to your own hatred-consumed agenda.

EVERYTHING on Jews or Socialists or whatever the rednecks have been brainwashed to fear.

Yea, it's not like thousands of those rednecks haven't given their lives in the last two decades fighting the Eternal Wars for Israel, now is it? But that's a price we should all pay for what was done on (((9/11))), huh?

Dweezil the Weasel , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 3:45 pm GMT
The entire debate is moot at this point. Floyd is dead. The puppeteers have their "Crisis". The mob is still out there. Thought crime is the new passion. Negroes can do nothing wrong. When they do, it is my fault because I am white. Up is down, down is up, etc. The big question is what lies ahead.
This was all manufactured to cover the real truth about a collapsing economic system which will devastate nations and economies all over the world. When it hits(my bet is before 2021), nothing else will matter. Here in Amerika, the Sheeple, Normies, and Cucks will go bat-s ** t crazy. It will be Bosnia times Rwanda times Venezuela, times The Stand. Plan accordingly. Bleib ubrig. Proverbs 27:12.
Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT
All this hysteria over one dead black thug and utter silence about far more tragic/innocent victims(often at the hands of black thugs) suggest that the 'systemic racism' is in favor of blacks.

It's like US's favoritism for Zionists over Palestinians, Iranians, and Arabs.

We hear endless yammering about 'antisemitism' and 'white supremacism', but US is pathologically philosemitic and serving Jewish Supremacism 24/7.

BTW. it will be funny when a black guy wearing a Floyd t-shirt ends up dead at the hands of another black.

Trinity , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:11 pm GMT
@Anonymous IF this whole incident is REAL, and believe me, nowadays I have a hard time believing anything we see in the media or read is REAL, I have to say the cop was wrong and does deserve to do time. Whatever the guy died from, people in the crowd told Chauvin over and over that Floyd wasn't moving. The other cops should have pulled Chauvin off as well. The case in Atlanta is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, however. IMO, Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter and quite possibly second degree murder, but that one would be hard to prove. BUT the question must be ASKED ONCE AGAIN, how or why did it come to this, WHY didn't George Floyd COMPLY with officer's orders? Floyd would still be alive IF he had JUST COMPLIED with the cops. What is it about complying with an officer's orders do Blacks not understand? A couple months ago a man was killed right up the street from me because he attacked an officer with a knife. The officer responded to a domestic dispute and the man STUPIDLY charged an armed cop with a knife and was shot dead. White cop, and white perp so that was the end of story.
ruralguy , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:11 pm GMT
@Ficino Covid-19 attacks cells with ACE-2 enzyme receptors. They are present in the lungs, heart, intestine, blood vessels, and kidneys. Many people infected with Covid-19 suffer more damage in these organs than in the lungs. People think they will recover quickly from this virus like another cold (two of the cold strains are actually coronoviruses) or flu viruses, but it's damage to the organs is more severe. It leaves them vulnerable to next year's covid-20, where they will now have "preexisting health conditions."
Agent76 , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:12 pm GMT
It is and was Murder!

May 28, 2020 #GeorgeFloyd Before Being Killed At The Hands Of Police Talking About Street Violence Killings

Video of George Floyd Before being Killed talks about the violence on the streets.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/h7cmBW1QKlI?feature=oembed

May 27, 2020 New video shows Minneapolis police arrest of George Floyd before death

Four white officers involved in the death of George Floyd have been fired from the Minneapolis Police Department, but Mayor Jacob Frey is saying that one of the officers should be arrested for pressing his knee on Floyd's neck.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZWzkgKPZWcw?feature=oembed

FB , says: Website Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:15 pm GMT
@Jim Bob Lassiter

Well let's have 'em (couple of thousand cop murders) . And don't forget to include Ruby Ridge and Waco, Texas.

Police extrajudicial executions of civilians are over 1,000 EACH YEAR in the United States far more than any other country in the world

–The Counted

Also we learn from this 'article' that

Dr. Vincent Di Maio estimated that Excited Delirium Syndrome kills 800 people every year in police altercations because the victims "are just overexciting [their] heart from the drugs and from the struggle.

So that is nearly 2,000 civilians a year that die in interactions with police basically the Wild West

fnn , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:27 pm GMT
@EoinW

Muddy the water.

Talk about pure projection.

vot tak , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:29 pm GMT
@Biff I've known plenty of people over the years prejudiced against people of one race, but not another. Yes, it is common and is a dumb question.
JimDandy , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:30 pm GMT
@Agent76 Yelling and posting videos won't change the fact that you're wrong and have no valid counter-arguments to the ones presented in this article.

Thx.

Dieter Kief , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT
@DanFromCT

As a result, incompetence that would otherwise have remained harmless often becomes dangerous, especially as incompetent people with good intentions rarely suffer the qualms of conscience that sometimes inhibit the doings of competent people with bad intentions.

Good intentions were cobbling his way to disaster. – Old German saying. – I like Dietrich Doerner – as a social scientist and as a humble man (a Social Democratic leftie from the days before the left grew "regressive" (Dave Rubin).

George , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:40 pm GMT
Floyd's condition is irrelevant. If I have the facts straight Floyd was handcuffed and loaded inside the police car. For reasons that are unclear he ends up face down on the asphalt with 4 dudes sitting on top of him. For me, without an amazing explanation all four should never have been police officers. His death makes it worse but the inexplicable part is why he was on the pavement being crushed.
Hedd Mcnekk , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:42 pm GMT
@obwandiyag Are you really going to share "a couple thousand" murders by police with us? Ok, I'll bite. Send them to us in short installments of 3 or 4 hundred, just so we can keep up.
Anonymous [456] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:53 pm GMT
@annamaria Where did I even remotely insinuate anything about slavery in my post? Your sickness is part of the denial I was referring to.
Dan Kurt , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 4:57 pm GMT
@Cranberries RE: Might help for someone to explain this calculation, since simply summing the fentanyl and norfentanyl concentrations gives 16.6, not 20.6. Cranberries comment #6.

I read somewhere that another fentanyl moiety was also detected in George Floyd's autopsy blood. That may explain the discrepancy.

Dan Kurt

Enemy of Earth , says: Website Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:01 pm GMT
I really hate saying it but you could have a video of St.George shooting up minutes before his encounter with Minneapolis' finest and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. The Church of the Perpetually Aggrieved have their martyr and will not let trivial things like truth get in the way.

When I'm feeling particularly cynical and want to irritate the Missus I will say something like, "Yeah, that was pretty bad but he probably did something we don't know about. So it all evens out in the end."

Rich , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:01 pm GMT
@vot tak Oh "prejudiced " against a particular group, is that the same thing as "racist" now"? Does "racist " mean anything other than White? The word "prejudice " means to "pre-judge", what if someone judges a person or group after getting to know them very well? What if I find I love all people except Tibetans, am I a "racist "? For you kooks, I am if I'm White. So I guess that's a "dumb question", since I'm pretty Pale
Dieter Kief , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:02 pm GMT
@Emslander

Videos and photos are very poor evidence because they only raise an emotional response.

This is fact is usually overlooked. I still don't really grasp, why that is. But people seem to lack – media education, or self-reflective self-distancing concerning the difference between being an ey-witness and witnessing a video about an event. – Maybe Marshal McLuhan is one reason that the video-deception is not being noticed for what it is: a major source of self-deception because he made media-reflection trendy and at the same time clueless.

This seems at first sight like a rather dismal academic distinction – until it becomes crucial to make it, like in this case.

By now I might even be boring some readers of Unz.com by insisting on the following factual truth: Tom Wolfe showed in pristine detail, just how this video deception, as you might call it, works in his (sigh, I'll repeat this esthetic fact too now for the umpteenth time) – Tom Wolfe was able to show how this video-deception plays out in his excellent novel Back to Blood .

PS
It might be not accidental, that Tom Wolfe did have a close look at Marshal McLuhan's ideas and did write quite a bit about it, long before he started to work at Back to Blood . – Fruits take their time until they're ripe, it seems.

Rurik , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:05 pm GMT
@Trinity

What is it about complying with an officer's orders do Blacks not understand?

since I generally agree with you, and agree that this was likely staged, and that the other cops should have intervened, and that Chauvin was obviously guilty of a callous disregard for the man's life, (regardless of what he actually died of).. I agree with that all.

But I also understand why some people would try to flee the cops, (and being arrested and having your life destroyed). It's a risk some people are willing to take. Like the guy who was murdered by cop, lying in the snow (while being sadistically tortured by tazer). That sadistic bitch tortured him to death because he ran from her, and defied her 'authority'.

I've known of too many cops in my lifetime who're drunk on their authority (power), and I don't blame some people for running from them. If our laws say it's ok for cops to shoot such people, then so be it, but if they're not allowed to shoot suspects running away, then if that's murder, it's murder. No?

American cops are way too militarized and often murderous and unaccountable. Absofuckinglutely.

But the Jews are turning this into a racial issue for their own agenda, whatever that is at the moment. Perhaps simply as an amusement, to watch whitey squirm. (one of their favorite pastimes ; )

ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:08 pm GMT
@Steve in Greensboro Agree. Apparently many commenters can neither read nor reason from empirical evidence.
ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
I've never before seen such stupidity in the comments as is seen here today. Something strange is going on. Many of you didn't read the article but have strong opinions. This isn't typical of Unz readers. For some reason the Trolls are out in force on this one. Are you trying to destroy this website's credibility?
nokangaroos , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
@Emily In certain quarters first responders do carry naloxone injectors for that contingency – it takes half an hour of training.
Opioid LD50s are house numbers, but it´s a possibility.
Clearly no choking, but I wouldn´t rule out vagus shock.

Overall I´d say a measured exposé, but as many others already noted the question is moot now.

Johnny Smoggins , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:19 pm GMT
@Biff Given your confidence, can you tell us the exact number of "racists" married to people of other races in America?

Your response should be within 2% of the actual number, and please also provide proof of the "racism" on the part of the individual "racists" married to non Whites.

File that under "overconfident moron"

Bucky , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:28 pm GMT
It is possible that floyd died of a drug overdose.

Not long after the video of Floyd s death came out a journalist from the Atlantic tried to reenact it. He was unable to keep his balance for the amount of time.

This is possibly because the knee on the neck was not putting that much pressure on the neck. It is possible that it was it was an even stance and the knee was applying slight or no pressure.

Pop Warner , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:29 pm GMT
@obwandiyag They riot because the press whips them up into a frenzy. There is no shortage of blacks killed by police or whites killed by police but this incident was spread to the 4 channels blacks are capable of finding and drove them to riot.
If blacks don't like how cops treat them, then they should improve their savage behavior. Over half of all homicides, over a third of cop killers, the majority who shoot at police, and far more likely to resist arrest. When will blacks learn basic civilization, or do whites need to hold their hand yet again?
Hippopotamusdrome , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:29 pm GMT
@ICANREAD

Your underlying analysis is incorrect. People overdose at much higher levels and live through it.

Ok. Then you say:

One of the 18 patients died in hospital.

I don't know the point you're trying to make. Other than the author is correct.

Hippopotamusdrome , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:33 pm GMT
@anon

Then, one officer pulled him out on the other side.

I assaume because he demanded to be let out due to a medical emergency. "I can't breathe!". So they did and called an ambulance, which arrived a little later.

starthorn , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:42 pm GMT
Truth is the first victim of criminality. There, that's better.
Hippopotamusdrome , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 5:43 pm GMT
@backup

there are signs that COVID19 decreases Hemoglobin levels

LOL. As if COVID19 is real.

steinbergfeldwitzcohen , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:07 pm GMT
Facts:
1.Officer Derek Chauvin isn't in the video. The person purported to be Officer Chauvin is a different person and that is quite clear from examining stills from the video and comparing them to still photos of Officer Derek Chauvin.

2.One of the police vehicles had a licence plate that said 'POLICE'. This is absurd.

These are just two EXTREMELY obvious facts about the 'video' and there are dozens more fun facts about this incident that really no other conclusion is possible IF a person is observant AND honest about this video: it is a hoax. See: canucklaw.ca for an excellent and detailed breakdown.

Somehow, nearly everyone in 'professional media', aka as the presstitutes paid to lie by their jewish billionaire employers, accepts this obvious HOAX as though it is legit and beyond question.

Sounds familiar. Kind of like every mass shooting incident of the last 18 years which is to say, ever since the HOAX of 9/11 the Jew Spew Propaganda arm just can't stop 'reporting' on clearly faked events anytime they want to push the gun control issue, distract from another issue or, worse still, to manipulate low IQ ghetto thugs, communists and assorted snow-flakes into rioting which the Jew spew media then presents as 'peaceful protests'.
Anyone else sick of this never ending effort to manipulate the conversation away from the theft of Trillions of dollars being presided over by Zion Don, his underlings Mnuchin, Jared Kushner and the Federal Reserve Bank.

Last time I checked the unemployment number, that was previously 40 million, it seems to have inched up to nearly 50 million. I expect to see continued efforts, each more desperate than the last, as the elites fight for power, loot the treasury and race-bait. I don't know when but I expect that at some point, barring any corruption or treason trials. elites will start to be executed by vigilante groups. I just can't see these level of social pressure, outright criminality and outrageous propaganda continuing to grow before average people become frustrated and disenfranchised enough to act. Somewhere from among the silent majority of rational Americans I expect to see a response to the last 2 decades of 'Global War of Terror' insanity,financial looting of the present and future American people with a dash of race war tossed in as a further insult to reason.
It amazes me that a community of largely dysfunctional blacks -mostl net takers from the economic system-have the gall to use the term 'white privilege'. They don't pay taxes beyond basic consumption, cause endless problems, avoid the infantry in every war, and now want 'reparations' after leeching off whites for over 150 years. It never ceases to amaze me how effective propaganda is and how incredibly stupid the far left of the curve can be.

Wally , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:08 pm GMT
@obwandiyag said:
"People don't riot over the specific police murder that sets it off. They riot because they are sick and tired of the ways cops treat them–one of the ways being to murder them"

– Then Euro-whites should be the ones rioting.
– The number of Euro-whites killed by police are much, much higher than blacks, which is remarkable considering that blacks do the vast amount crime.
– It is whites who are targeted by blacks, the stats don't lie.
The Color of Crime : https://www.amren.com/the-color-of-crime/

– Tucker Carlson Breaks Down Every Police Shooting Of Unarmed Black Suspects In 2019: https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/03/tucker-carlson-police-shootings-genocide/
Police are more likely to shoot whites, not blacks : https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/13/why-a-massive-new-study-on-police-shootings-of-whites-and-blacks-is-so-controversial/?utm_term=.1db63f3f7797
Study Concludes White Police Officers Are Not More Likely To Shoot Black Citizens: https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/23/study-white-police-officers-not-likely-shoot-black-citizens/
Black Officers More Likely than White Officers to Shoot Suspects : http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/26/study-black-officers-more-likely-than-white-officers-to-shoot-suspects/
– There Is No Epidemic of Racist Police Shootings , By Heather Mac Donald: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/white-cops-dont-commit-more-shootings/

Trinity , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:17 pm GMT
@Rurik I agree with your post 100%. If Mr. Floyd had been White and the cops were White, this story wouldn't have been talked about outside of Minneapolis. Speaking of Minneapolis, notice the JEW MEDIA covered the story about the black thug throwing the white kid off a balcony in the Mall Of America for about 3 minutes, and no suggestions of race at all. Yep, I don't buy the Pawn Vanity narrative that 99% of cops are decent either. I can't think of any profession that could make that claim. I am watching the telly as I type this and now the natives are engaging in a multi-city "Juneteenth March." LMAO. I guess this will now become a national holiday. How anyone can be fooled by this anymore is beyond stupid. Take care, my friend and enjoy the comedy placed before us.
Bethany , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:25 pm GMT
I've been on Derek Chauvin's side from the beginning. I knew it was just a race thing that the media blew up and distorted, just like that kid wearing the MAGA cap with the native American in DC, whose name I forgot. I hope that Derek Chauvin will be found not guilty and will sue the mainstream media like that kid from Kentucky did. My only fear is that America is not an honest country anymore and even if it is so blatantly obvious that Chauvin is innocent, that they will have to find him guilty anyway.

I just can't stand it. I can't stand the thought of that happening. I mean, imagine that ultimatum . serve justice or risk a city burning down. How can the masses be so misinformed? Unaware and corrupted?

I took some notes today from E. Michael Jones, I watched his video, Sicut Judaeis Non, and I/we have to really let what he said sink into our beings, in order that we can resist it and not acquiesce. I can't go along with corruption and let injustice come to Derek Chauvin. The truth has to be told.

My notes from E. Michael Jones:

"Jewish identity is the rejection of logos- political, moral, economical"
"Modernization is about everyone becoming Jewish."
"We have internalized the commands of our Jewish oppressors."
"We have a Jewish superego."
"Break free from the control of Jews in our minds."

And recently I've been watching Yuri Benzmenov again, we really have to understand the deep psychological warfare, the hypnotic spell we've been under and break free from it.

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:38 pm GMT
@SOL What else is new? Repeat offender was a drug addict. Drug addict died of an overdose. People using lies about his death are not revolutionaries, they are just bandits, burglars and vandals.
Voltara , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:47 pm GMT
@anonymous1963 They'll get a fair trial and be found not guilty . setting off round #2 of rioting and looting a couple of weeks before the november election
Voltara , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:53 pm GMT
@Dan Kurt Hey Dan, I thiiiiink .. norfentanyl is a metabolite of fentanyl, which means it has been absorbed and processed by the body so the norfentanyl level would be indicative of a higher/additional level of fentanyl intake, which when calculated backwards implies 20.6 total
RobbieSmith , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:54 pm GMT
@Rurik "no, they're rioting because blacks and browns don't have academic and economic parity with whites, and the ((universities)) have instructed their charges that there's no such thing as racial differences, and so that means all the academic and economic discrepancies between white and black, and the over-representation of blacks in the criminal justice system, are all a direct consequence of lingering, "systemic" white racism in America."

The persistent so-called "achievement gap" reveals the same racial IQ hierarchy on standardized academic exams. The SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching, or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small -- on average, no more than about 20 points per section.

[MORE]
Even after decades of focused attention to the achievement gap, it has remained unchanged.

Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search and determined that scores on the SAT correlate so highly with IQ that they are described as a "thinly disguised" intelligence test.

ACT Scores by Race:

Year White Black Asian
2009 22.2 16.9 23.2
2010 22.3 16.9 23.4
2011 22.4 17.0 23.6
2012 22.4 17.0 23.6
2013 22.2 16.9 23.5
2014 22.3 17.0 23.5
2015 22.4 17.1 23.9
2016 22.2 17.0 24.0
2017 22.4 17.1 24.3
2018 22.2 16.9 24.5

Source: ACT, Inc.

~~~~~~~

Black-White SAT Score Gap by Year:

Year White Black Gap
1985 1038 839 199
1990 1031 849 185
1996 1052 857 195
2000 1060 859 201
2005 1061 863 197
2010 1063 855 208
2015 1047 846 201

The new SAT introduced in 2017 was "designed to inspire and increase access to college" by creating "a more equitable exam". The new SAT cannot be compared to previous results:

Year White Black Gap
2017 1118 941 177
2018 1123 946 177

The 2017 "college readiness" scores (ability to earn a C or higher in an entry-level course) showed the stark racial achievement gap; Asians scored 70% college readiness, Whites 59%, and Blacks only 20%.

(Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, College Board)

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

SAT scores are highly correlated to intelligence test scores. The SAT correlates with an IQ test at 0.86, almost the same as an IQ test correlates with itself. For this reason, we can very reliably take SAT scores and convert them to IQ scores.

Results of psycho-metric IQ and scholastic tests are highly correlated. Rindermann & Thompson (2013, p. 822)

In the 20 year period from 1994-2014 the Black-White difference increased on both the verbal and math SATs despite targeted efforts to close the race gap. On the reading test, it rose from .91 to .96 standard deviations. On the math test, it rose from .95 to 1.03 standard deviations.

In fact, the truncated nature of the SAT math score distribution suggests that these race gaps would be even larger given a harder exam with a bigger score variance. Note, for example, how the Black score distribution is cut off at the bottom while the Asian score distribution is cut off at the top. That suggests that a redesigned exam might feature even more pronounced race gaps.

Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:

15% = Black
24% = Non-White Hispanic
35% = Native American
53% = White
56% = Asian

Source: The College Board, 2014

PISA scores by race:

White Black Asian
531 433 525

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 2015

NAEP Report Card: Mathematics

"In 2019, there were no significant changes in score disparities compared to 2017 across most reported student groups in eighth-grade mathematics, with a few exceptions. For example, among racial/ethnic groups, the average mathematics score at grade 8 for White students was 32 points higher than the average score for their Black peers in 2019 and 24 points higher than the average mathematics score for eighth-grade Hispanic students. The 32-point White–Black score difference in 2019 was not significantly different from the 32-point score difference in 2017, the previous assessment year, nor the 33-point score gap in 1990, the first assessment year."

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/mathematics/nation/groups/?grade=8

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Blacks and Whites with Equal Educational Attainment Differ in Cognitive Ability

Black and White Americans with the same formal level of education differ significantly in their cognitive abilities. Specifically, within any given level of formal education Whites consistently outperform Blacks. Moreover, this effect is so strong that Blacks often underperform Whites who have lower levels of formal education than they do.

Consider the following data from the General Social Survey. This public data is frequently used in social science research and contains a test of verbal intelligence as well as measurements of participant's self-identified race and highest educational degree obtained. Verbal intelligence tests correlate at around .75 with full-scale IQ and so this data can also be taken as a fair measure of intelligence in general (Lynn, 1998). If we set the White mean score on this test to 100 and the standard deviation to 15, we can come up with an "IQ" style scale.

As can be seen, using this method Blacks with a graduate degree have a level of verbal intelligence indistinguishable from that of Whites with a junior college degree. Blacks with a four-year degree are roughly on par with Whites who never went to college at all.

IQ BY RACE AND HIGHEST DEGREE EARNED (1972 – 2014):

Highest Degree White IQ Black IQ Gap
High School Drop-out: 89 82 7
High School Diploma 98 90 8
Junior College Degree 102 95 7
Bachelor's Degree 108 100 8
Graduate Degree 113 102 11

This data is consistent with evidence from the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) which administered tests of cognitive ability to 26,000 US adults in 1992. These tests were designed to measure how well people could take information and use it in a way which would help them function in modern society.

Blacks are such poor academic achievers that the National Achievement Scholarship Program was created with lower standards for Black candidates only, instead of the National Merit Scholarship Program which is open to everyone else.

THE SMARTEST STUDENTS: The National Merit Scholarship Program was founded to identify and honor scholastically talented American youth and to encourage them to develop their abilities to the fullest.

BLACK STUDENTS ONLY: The National Achievement Scholarship Program was initiated specifically to identify academically promising Black American youth and encourage their pursuit of higher education.

They are both measured on the PSAT.

Minimum score for National Achievement: 190
Minimum score for National Merit: 220

Roughly, PSAT x 10 = SAT (out of 2400)

The U.S. government's PACE examination, given to 100,000 university graduates who are prospective professional or administrative civil-service employees each year, is passed with a score of 70 or above by 58% of the Whites who take it but by only 12% of the Blacks. Among top scorers the difference between Black and White performance is even more striking; 16% of the White applicants make scores of 90 or above, while only one-fifth of one percent of a Black applicants score as high as 90 -- a White-Black success ratio of 80/1. IQ differences become more pronounced with greater g-loading.

Bill Gates, after pulling philanthropic funding from Common Core, "When disaggregated by race, we see two Americas. One where White students perform along the lines of the best in the world with achievement comparable to countries like Finland and Korea. And another America, where Black and Latino students perform comparably to the students in the lowest performing OECD countries, such as Chile and Greece."

Blacks score so poorly on academic exams that colleges give them 230 "race bonus" SAT points to help them qualify for admission:

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-adv-asian-race-tutoring-20150222-story.html

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf

"Personal scores" are the new subterfuge for artificially assisting Blacks gain admission to universities. Asian-American applicants receive a 2 or better on the personal score more than 20% of the time only in the top academic index decile. By contrast, white applicants receive a 2 or better on the personal score more than 20% of the time in the top six deciles. Hispanics receive such personal scores more than 20% of the time in the top seven deciles, and Blacks receive such scores more than 20% of the time in the top eight deciles.

An otherwise identical applicant bearing an Asian male identity with a 25 percent chance of admission would have a 32 percent chance of admission if he were White, a 77 percent chance of admission if he were Hispanic, and a 95 percent chance of admission if he were Black.

RobbieSmith , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 6:58 pm GMT
@FB "Police extrajudicial executions of civilians are over 1,000 EACH YEAR in the United States far more than any other country in the world "

In 2016, the police fatally shot 233 Blacks, the vast majority armed and dangerous, according to the Washington Post. The paper categorized only 16 Black male victims of police shootings as "unarmed." That classification masks assaults against officers and violent resistance to arrest.

Contrary to the Black Lives Matter narrative, the police have much more to fear from Black males than Black males have to fear from the police. In 2015, a police officer was 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a Black male than an unarmed Black male was to be killed by a police officer.

From 1980 to 2013, there were 2,269 officers killed in felonious incidents, and 2,896 offenders. The racial breakdown of offenders over that 33-year period was 52% White, and 41% Black. So, the 13% total Black population in the U.S. commits 41% of police murders.

Further, Black males have made up 42% of all cop-killers over the last decade, though they are only 6 percent of the population. That 18.5 ratio undoubtedly worsened in 2016, in light of the 53 percent increase in gun murders of officers -- committed vastly and disproportionately by Black males.

Nine unarmed Blacks were killed by police in 2019 (seven of whom physically assaulted the officers), as opposed to 19 Whites, according to the Washington Post's database, but Blacks are much more likely to have police encounters than Whites. In an average year, about 49 people are killed by lightning in the US, according to the National Weather Service.

[MORE]
The Myth of Systemic Police Racism:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/wall-street-journal-op-ed-hold-officers-accountable-who-use-excessive-force-but-theres-no-evidence-of-widespread-racial-bias

An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force
https://scholar.harvard.edu/fryer/publications/empirical-analysis-racial-differences-police-use-force

Officer characteristics and racial disparities in fatal officer-involved shootings
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877

6 Facts From New Study Finding NO RACIAL BIAS Against Blacks In Police Shootings
https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-study-no-racial-bias-police-involved-shootings-james-barrett

Blacks should be shot more often, based on the number of crimes committed:
https://www.publicradiotulsa.org/post/tpd-major-police-shoot-black-americans-less-we-probably-ought

Every year, American police officers have about 370 million contacts with civilians. Most of the time nothing happens, but 12 to 13 million times a year, the police make an arrest. How often does this lead to the death of an unarmed Black person? We know the number thanks to a detailed Washington Post database of every killing by the police. What is your guess as to the number of unarmed Blacks killed by the police every year? One hundred? Three hundred? Last year, the figure was nine.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/

That number is going down, not up. In 2015, police killed 38 unarmed Blacks. In 2017, 21. What about White people? Last year, police killed 19 unarmed Whites, in addition to the 9 unarmed Blacks. We know the number of Black and White people arrested every year, so it is possible to make an interesting calculation. The chances of being unarmed, arrested, and then killed by the police are higher for Whites than for Blacks. For both races, it's very rare: One out of 292,000 arrests for Blacks, and out of 283,000 arrests for Whites.

Since 2015, when the Post began tracking these numbers, the police have killed about 1,000 people a year. Every year, about one quarter of them are Black. This is about twice their share of the population, which is 13 percent. Is this proof of police racism? No. The more likely explanation is that Blacks are more likely than Whites to act in violent, aggressive ways that give the police no choice but to shoot them. In 2018, the most recent year for which we have statistics, Blacks accounted for 37 percent of all arrests for violent crimes, 54 percent of all arrests for robbery, and 53 percent of arrests for murder. With so many Blacks involved in this kind of violent crime, that Blacks should account for 25 percent of the people killed by the police seem like a surprisingly low figure.

There is another perspective on police killings of civilians. Every year, criminals kill about 120 to 150 police officers. And we know from this FBI table that every year, on average, about 35 percent of officers are killed by Blacks. So, to repeat, Blacks are 13 percent of the population and account for 25 percent of the people killed by police. But if police were killing them in proportion to their threatening, violent, criminal behavior, they would be a greater percentage of the people killed by the police.

Beavertales , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 7:17 pm GMT
We know much about Officer Chauvin, but very little about Floyd.

Where did he get the drugs?

Was there any trace of it on him, in his car, his residence or the last places he visited?

What was he doing in the hours leading up to his arrest?

Were the people he was with also using?

What is his drug history?

There's a whole story here being concealed.

Patricus , says: Show Comment June 19, 2020 at 7:19 pm GMT
Thank you for a thoughtful article. This reinforces my original thought that we should wait for the results of the trial. Presumably the cop has a competent lawyer who will be able to review and present the comprehensive evidence to a jury. Ideally the prosecuting attorney will also be able to understand and present another side of the story. Ideally there will be a fair jury, not a howling lynch mob, and not a group of retired cops. This system is certainly imperfect but better than shoot from the hip opinions based on some seconds of video viewing.

[Jun 20, 2020] America's Recessional Time to Bring the Troops Home by Philip Giraldi

Jun 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

Two weeks ago a senior Trump Administration official revealed that the president had decided to withdraw 9,500 American soldiers from Germany and that the administration would also be capping total U.S. military presence in that country at 25,000, which might involve more cuts depending what is included in the numbers. The move was welcomed in some circles and strongly criticized in others, but many observers were also bemused by the announcement, noting that Donald Trump had previously ordered a reduction in force in Afghanistan and a complete withdrawal from Syria, neither of which has actually been achieved. In Syria, troops were only moved from the northern part of the country to the oil producing region in the south to protect the fields from seizure by ISIS, while in Afghanistan the nineteen-year-long training mission and infrastructure reconstruction continue.

In a somewhat related development, the Iraqi parliament has called for the removal of U.S. troops from the country, a demand that has been rejected by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Put it all together and it suggests that any announcement coming from the White House on ending America's useless wars should be regarded with some skepticism.

The United States has its nearly 35,000 military personnel remaining in Germany as its contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), founded in 1949 to counter Soviet forces in Eastern Europe in what was to become the Warsaw Pact. Both the Organization and Pact were ostensibly defensive alliances and the U.S. active participation was intended to demonstrate American resolve to come to the aid of Western Europe. Currently, 75 years after the end of World War II and thirty years after the fall of communist governments in Eastern Europe, NATO is an anachronism, kept going by the many statesmen and military establishments of the various countries that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Since the demise of the European communist regimes, NATO has found work in bombing Serbia, destroying Libya and in helping in the unending task to train an Afghan army.

In spite of the clearly diminished threat in Europe, NATO has expanded to 30 members, including most of the former communist states that made up the Warsaw Pact. The most recent acquisition was Montenegro in 2016, which contributed 2,400 soldiers to the NATO force. That expansion was carried out in spite of assurances given to the post-Soviet Russian government that military encroachment would not take place. Currently, NATO continues to focus on the threat from Moscow as its own viable raison d'être , with its deployments and training exercises often taking place right up against Russia's borders.

Few really believe that the Russia, which has a GDP only the size of Italy's, intends or is even capable of reestablishing anything like the old Soviet Union. But a vulnerable Russia is nevertheless interested in maintaining an old-fashioned sphere of influence around its borders, which explains the concern over developments in Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltic States.

Given the diminished threat level in Europe, the withdrawal of 9,500 soldiers should be welcomed by all parties. Trump has been sending the not unreasonable message that if the Europeans want more defense, they should pay for it themselves, though he has wrapped his proposal in his usual insulting and derogatory language. A wealthy Germany currently spends 1.1% of GDP on its military, far less than the 2% that NATO has declared to be a target to meet alliance commitments. That compares with the nearly 5% that the U.S. has been spending globally, inclusive of intelligence and national security costs.

Fair enough for burden sharing, but the European concern is more focused on how Trump does what he does. For example, he announced the downsizing without informing America's NATO partners. The Germans were surprised and pushed back immediately . Conservative politician Peter Beyer said "This is completely unacceptable, especially since nobody in Washington thought about informing its NATO ally Germany in advance," and German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas regretted the planned withdrawal, describing Berlin's relationship with the Washington as "complicated." Chancellor Angela Merkel was reportedly shocked.

The timing of the decision has also been questioned, with many observers believing that Trump deliberately staged the announcement to punish Merkel for refusing to attend a planned G-7 Summit in the U.S. that the president had been trying to arrange. Merkel argued that dealing with the consequences of the coronavirus made it difficult for her to leave home at the present time and the G-7 planning never got off the ground, which angered Trump, who wanted to demonstrate his global leadership in an election year.

Trump's behavior has real world consequences. The Canadians and Europeans regard him as a joke, but a dangerous joke due to his impulsive decision making. He cannot be trusted and when he says something he often contradicts himself on the next day. Arguably Donald Trump was elected president on the margin of difference provided by an anti-war vote after many Americans took seriously his pledge to end the burgeoning overseas wars and bring the soldiers home. It all may have been a lie even as he was saying it, but it was convincing at the time and a welcome antidote to Hillary the Hawk.

There will be costs associated with removing or relocating the troops in Germany, to include constructing new bases somewhere else, hopefully in the United States, but the realization that the soldiers are not really needed could lead to the downsizing of the U.S. military across the board. That would be strongly resisted by the Pentagon, the defense industries and Congress.

If Trump is serious about downsizing America's overseas commitments, the reduction in the German force is a good first step, even if it was done for the wrong reasons. It would be even better if he would force NATO into discussions about ending the alliance now that it is no longer needed, which would mean that the remaining American soldiers in Europe could come home.

The U.S. mission of global dominance has meant huge budget deficits and a national debt of $26 trillion, which is likely unsustainable. Germany and other European nations, by way of contrast, balance their government budgets every year. South Korea, which hosts 30,000 American soldiers, is wealthy and far more powerful than its northern neighbor. The continued occupation of Japan with 50,000 troops makes no sense even considering an increase in China's regional power. Overall, the United States continues to have 170,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines based overseas in 150 countries and its military budget exceeds one trillion dollars when everything is considered. The Iraq and Afghanistan Wars may have cost as much as seven trillion dollars given the fact that much of the money was borrowed and will have to be repaid with interest.

It is past time for Donald Trump to make a bold move because the Democrats won't have the backbone to rattle the status quo. End the foreign wars, shut down the overseas bases and bring the soldiers home. Spend tax dollars to improve the lives of Americans, not to fight wars for Saudis and Israelis. A simple formula for change, but sometimes simple is best.

[Jun 19, 2020] The USG' s definition of Dictator

Highly recommended!
Jun 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Cyndy Tyler L RNY • 8 hours ago

The USG' s definition of Dictator.

DICTATOR, Noun: Someone who does not let American CEOs dictate how their country is run

[Jun 19, 2020] Bolton should be arrested and charged with any of a number of possible crimes

Jun 19, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Security screening of manuscripts I t is the law in the United States that those who have had legal access to the secrets of the government must submit private manuscripts for removal of such secrets BEFORE they are published or even presented to a potential publisher. Every department of government has an office charged with such work.

I know this process well because my memoir "Tattoo" has been in the hands of the appropriate Defense Department office for nigh on six months. The book is long, and I was so unlucky as to have DoD shut down its auxiliary services during my wait. I have thought of withdrawing it from screening but, surprisingly, the screeners tell me it has some worth for those who will come after. So, I will wait.

All this applies to John Bolton, a career State Department man whose adult life has been soaked in government secrets. I first noticed Bolton as a glowering presence at briefings I gave to selected State Department people with regard to national command authority projects I was running. His attitude was consistent. If the idea was not his, it was simply wrong.

Bolton's "kiss and tell" book about Trump is IMO as much caused by wounded ego as a desire to make money. He submitted the book for security review to DoD and the CIA. Why not State? Ah, Pompeo would tear it to pieces. Bolton evidently grew impatient with the pace of clearance and decided to go ahead with publication without clearance

To do this is a felony. The release of the book today completes the elements of proof for the crime.

Bolton should be arrested and charged with any of a number of possible crimes. pl

Jack , 18 June 2020 at 11:56 AM

Sir,

Let's see what Trump does with Bolton now that he has committed a felony.

My bet is that other than crying on Twitter, he'll not do much. His previous actions/inactions on these matters show weakness.

In any case bitching on Twitter makes him look like an executive with poor hiring judgement as he was the one that hired him. Just like he hired Mattis and Kelly as well as Rosenstein and Wray.

Barbara Ann , 18 June 2020 at 12:03 PM
Bolton being successfully charged with violations associated with his sour grapes hit piece memoir is analogous to Al Capone finally going down for tax evasion. But if that's the way it goes I will not be sad.

Re "Tattoo", your Memorial Day "Ap Bu Nho" extract alone makes "some worth" an amusingly ludicrous understatement. I wish you luck with the censors & very much look forward to one day reading "Tattoo".

eakens , 18 June 2020 at 12:05 PM
Who can we rely on to uphold the rule of law anymore? It's starting to appear we are living in a failed state.
Artemesia , 18 June 2020 at 01:22 PM
AIS

He was a convert to the neocon faith early in life and all else was mischief.

Posted by: turcopolier | 18 June 2020 at 12:21 PM

"He was a convert - - -"
I was going to ask what went wrong with Bolton: was he dropped on his head as an infant? No father in the home? The Dulles brothers spent their childhoods being harangued by their bible-thumping Calvinist grandfather (reports Kinzer in his useful bio on the brothers).

In Jeff Engel's book about the decision-making behind G H W Bush's decision to wage war against Saddam re Kuwait, he recounts that an argument by Brent Scowcroft was significant, AND that "Scowcroft, who was very short," confronted taller-than-average Bush while knees-to-knees in an airplane.
Bolton is shorter than the average American male. Does he have 'short-person' compulsion to compensate?

People psychologize Trump constantly, usually from ignorance and malice. But something is very wrong with Bolton. Pompeo as well. What is it?
"What huge imago made a psychopathic god?" (Auden, Sept. 1939)

Polish Janitor , 18 June 2020 at 04:11 PM
Col Lang,

#1 I read this WaPo article that argued because the recent DOJ's lawsuit against the release of the book is based on "prior restraint on speech before it occurs", meaning the Trump administration cannot censor speech before it happens, therefore there is no 1st amendment breach against the Trump admin by Bolton. As the court elaborated in Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, prior restraints are "the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights" and "one of the most extraordinary remedies known to our jurisprudence."

#2 Bolton took all of his notes containing classified intelligence with him after he was fired and nobody took an issue. How is that possible?

#3 The Wapo article says his manuscript was reviewed for four months by one Ellen Knight, an official (doesn't mention which department) responsible for reviewing publishing material and she gave it the green light for publication on April 27th.

#4 During a press conference, Bill Barr gave an unusual take on Bolton's book as if he was giving publicity to the book. He said he had never seen a book being written on Trump with such pace and in such quick time and that it had a lot of sensitive information and stuff. It sounded really odd what Bill Barr said. I dunno maybe I am reading to much between the lines...

#5 With regards to Pompeo, back in September during a press conference at the State, when asked by a reporter about Bolton's firing I specifically remember watching him on TV giving a big meaningful chuckle and a smile... it was revealed later that they clearly did not get along with each other and Pompeo had complained on numerous times that Bolton as NSA, who does not have executive authorities, had been doing a lot of policy stuff and running his own show in shadow.

On a final note, I don't think Bolton is a neocon in the mold of Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Abrams, Kagan, Kristol etc...There is this long piece by New Yorker published last year that really gets into detail of how and why Bolton is not a neocon, but adheres to a more hawkish Jacksonian nationalism approach rather than the liberal idealism of arch neocons I mentioned above. However, he does have quite similar F.P. views with neocon oldies such as Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Jeane Kirkpatrick.

JohnH , 18 June 2020 at 04:39 PM
If Bolton does NOT get the book thrown at him, it will be pretty good evidence of the existence of the Deep State allowing those it favors to write their own rules. Of course, we already knew that after Clapper lied with impunity to Wyden when he was under oath.
TV , 18 June 2020 at 04:49 PM
He'll never be prosecuted and neither will Comey, Clapper and the rest of the swamp scum.
Strozk (lower on the food chain) might be the human sacrifice (with a sentence of "community service") but no one of any significance (or "royal" title) is ever prosecuted in the swamp.
Trump has tried, but his miserable lack of hiring experience and skill has not made a dent
Polish Janitor , 18 June 2020 at 04:53 PM
Artemisia,

I feel like I have a few words to say about Bolton if I may,

IMHO Bolton's view of the world is very dark and extremely Hobbesian. He is no slouch by any stretch of imagination, in fact he is extremely knowledgeable and masterful when it comes to policy-making and that basically how things are done in D.C. He has made a brand for himself as the most hawkish national security expert in all of America in my opinion. Honestly I cannot think of anyone else who espouses more hawkishness and zero diplomacy than Bolton, ever... maybe Tom Cotton or Liz Cheney but still not close. This is the reason why Trump hired him. In fact Trump did not want to hire him as the top brass in first place, citing his mustache as one reason that would not look good on TV and wanted to give him 2nd tier jobs at the State or as NSA early on, but Bolton refused. Trump, wanted to hire Bolton's "brand" not his policies or hawkishness to intimidate Nkorea, Iran, and China to force them come into making deals with him and him personally.

IMO Trump found out after the first Kim summit that Bolton was
such an ambitious and counterproductive foreign policy maker and one-man-team that if he allowed Bolton to get his way, there would be world war III (Trump's own words) and his most important promise to keep America out of forever wars which was his wining platform over neocons such as Hilary, Jeb and Rubio during 2016 election would disappear into thin air.

So, Trump found ways to check Bolton and keep him out of the loop in sensitive and crucial moments by Mattis, Kelly, Joe Dunford, Pompeo and even Melania (in the case of getting rid of Bolton's close confidant and neocon Mira Ricardel when she called for bombing Iranian forces back in September 2018 in respone to several rockets by iraqi militias hitting the ground close to the U.S. embassy in Baghdad), and even sent him to Mongolia last year on a goose chase to make an embarrassing example of him for undermining him (i.e. Trump's) authority in the case of sitting down with the Taliban in Camp David to discuss military pullout from Afghanistan back in Sep. whereas at the same time Pompeo was smart enough to tow the same line as Trump and survive.

I few years ago I came across this interesting but odd piece by B on the Moon of Alabama on Bolton. I honestly dunno what to make of it.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2006/02/a_glasshouse_in.html

ked , 18 June 2020 at 05:11 PM
The book is already released in the hundreds. It will be on-line soon enough regardless of the niceties of Barr's attempt to slam shut the barn door, or what the legal system does with Bolton going fwd.
Those close to Trump know his emotional state must be appeased or they will soon be departing - unless there's a DNA match.
Reaction to it will be a test of one's ability to distinguish Bolton from the events he describes & their veracity. Is there anything of Trump's statements & acts (released so far) that surprises anyone... that rings untrue?
Those ideologically (or religiously) dependent upon the Trump Phenomenon for validating their core beliefs will demonstrate how creative true believers can be when attached to a personality.
A.I.S. , 18 June 2020 at 05:34 PM
For what its worth I am looking forward to buying it, should scratch that Peter Scholl Latour itch.

Another thing is that I just dont get the Neocons.
Their politics are bad both from a Machieavellian (dilutes US forces, creates enemies, considerably restricts creative ways in which US power could be employed) and from a moral (obviously) point of view. I also dont get their power, stupid/evil tends to be competed out. Heck, even if they are stupid/evil but very good at beurocratic backbiting stuff, they are still supposedly disadvantadged against skilled beurocratic backbiters that arent stupid/evil (or at least only evil and not stupid).
Is it internal cohesion or a much higher degree of ruthlessness that maintains their position?

PB , 18 June 2020 at 07:05 PM
I've for many years thought that the Bolton problem was best solved with a speedy trial and a swift execution, with remains thrown overboard somewhere in the Indian ocean.
turcopolier , 18 June 2020 at 07:13 PM
polish janitor

He signed an oath to safeguard the secrecy of the information when "read on" for it and another such when he was "read off." The 1st Amendment does not come into it at all

[Jun 19, 2020] The Imperious Caesar Act Will Crush the Syrian People by Daniel Larison

Jun 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Broad and sweeping sanctions inevitably harm the entire population of a targeted country, and in many cases that is exactly what they are meant to do.

When they are joined to maximalist policy goals, they are guaranteed to fail according to the standards of their supporters. The ongoing failure of sanctions is then cited as a reason to expand them and make them even more obnoxious. A piece of sanctions legislation targeting Syria is a case in point. The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act has greatly expanded the scope and reach of U.S. sanctions on the Syrian economy, and the first sanctions authorized by the law come into force this week . That practically guarantees imposing further hardship and deprivation on a country that has already been ravaged by eight years of conflict. It is just the latest piece of evidence that the U.S. needs to renounce its use of broad sanctions.

In their recent analysis of the legislation, Basma Alloush and Alex Simon explain how the Caesar Act will likely stifle Syria's economic recovery, interfere with humanitarian relief and reconstruction efforts, and drive away businesses that might be willing to invest in the country. They emphasize the legislation's "vast scope" as a reason to fear that it will simply add to the burdens that the civilian population has had to bear:

Within that continuum, the Caesar Act's novelty lies in its vast scope. Previous measures have targeted a mix of individual actors and selected sectors, and have applied almost exclusively to Syrian and American entities. By contrast, the Caesar Act promises to slap so-called "secondary sanctions" onto businesses of any nationality that are found transacting with sanctioned actors in multiple sectors of Syria's economy -- notably energy and construction. As such, the bill aims to deepen Damascus' isolation by deterring investment by any businesses from Beirut to Dubai to Beijing.

Sanctions are not the primary cause of Syrians' hardships, and the Syrian government bears significant responsibility for the wreckage of the economy. Even so, further strangling the Syrian economy now will succeed only in starving the country of investment and commerce for no real purpose. Sanctions will fuel inflation and make even basic necessities unaffordable for millions of people. The U.S. can choose to assist the people of Syria, or it can choose to grind them down even more. The Caesar Act is the latter. The people of Syria are being made to suffer more in the vain attempt to weaken the Syrian government.

The Caesar Act's destructive effects won't be limited just to Syria, but are already spilling over into Lebanon:

The ramifications of Caesar are rippling through Beirut, where traders retain lucrative ties to Syrian officials that are barely keeping Lebanese state revenues ticking over.
"This is a disaster for the [Lebanese] government, said one Lebanese banker. "They will sanction Lebanese traders and banks. Our currency will plunge as far as theirs. One of the few places we can trade is Damascus. If that's shut down, we're doomed."

Like any other coercive intervention, sanctions have destabilizing, negative consequences for the targeted country and all of its neighbors.

The Syria example is a reminder that sanctions are easy to apply but remarkably difficult to remove later. It is politically advantageous for politicians to endorse sanctions bills because it allows them to claim that they are being "tough" on some despised foreign leader, and no one will hold them accountable for the destructive effects of sanctions in the years that follow. There is usually much more political risk in opposing sanctions or calling for their removal, because this is wrongly cast as "rewarding" another government's abuses. It is also often the case that sanctions legislation includes conditions for sanctions relief that are so ambitious and far-fetched that they will never be met. Alloush and Simon comment on some of the unrealistic conditions contained in the Caesar Act:

As a result, the Caesar Act's true force may lie less in its immediate impact and more in its long-term implications. The law's five-year sunset clause means that these measures are likely to stick until 2025 -- possibly longer. In principle, the president could suspend the sanctions sooner if Damascus and its allies fulfill a set of seven criteria. However, several requirements -- including "releasing all political prisoners" and "taking verifiable steps to establish meaningful accountability" -- are so unrealistic as to render this stipulation meaningless.

The U.S. tends to impose many overlapping and reinforcing sets of sanctions on the same governments, and that makes it even less likely that all sanctions on a government will ever be lifted. As a result, sanctions on another country become a permanent fixture of their economy, and the targeted government has no incentive to make any concessions on any issue. Writing at the Lawfare website, Edward Fishman makes an excellent observation about how sanctions pile up and then lead to effective policies of regime change:

The static nature of sanctions not only makes them toothless; it also produces harmful effects on U.S. policy. Because sanctions are rarely lifted, they tend to accumulate over time at a steady, if intermittent, pace. As sanctions snowball, so do their objectives, worsening the convoluted problem outlined above. The net result is that, almost by default, nearly every sanctions program eventually aims for regime change. (It's hardly surprising that one of the only times America has ended a sanctions program in recent history -- when President Obama did so with respect to Burma in 2016 -- came after Aung San Suu Kyi's National League of Democracy won a majority of seats in Burma's parliament.) With a tortuous web of sanctions and policy objectives, most adversary regimes rightly assess that the only way out of sanctions is to call it quits. But no government will commit political suicide to undo sanctions.

When the U.S. seeks major changes in regime behavior or the overthrow of the regime through sanctions, the policy is most likely to fail. But it will also necessarily harm the civilian population in the meantime. Fishman cuts to the heart of the matter:

Policymakers and experts need to disabuse themselves of shibboleths that sanctions are precisely targeted at government officials and spare civilian populations and accept that America's most ambitious sanctions programs aim to cause systemic economic damage -- which, by definition, is felt by most if not all members of society.

Sanctions advocates often cast themselves as supporters and allies of the people in the country whose economy they want to destroy. This has never been credible, and it is long past time that we stop tolerating these deceptions. If you seek to ruin another country's economy, you seek the ruin of the people living there. Sanctions advocates should be held responsible for the results of the policies they promote.

We have seen this story unfold many times over the last three decades. First, the U.S. imposes sanctions to punish a government for its behavior. Then the government's leadership and its cronies use the economic difficulties created by the sanctions to enrich themselves and buy loyalty by controlling access to limited goods. Legitimate commerce is strangled, smuggling flourishes, and the government and its cronies exploit that to their advantage as well. Meanwhile humanitarian organizations that try to help the people find themselves bogged down in paperwork and struggling to get the simplest items approved, and humanitarian relief ends up being delayed or blocked all together. Financial transactions with the outside world become all but impossible, and essential humanitarian goods can't be brought into the country. Collective punishment strikes down the poor and infirm, and it leaves the well-connected and corrupt to prosper. The Caesar Act sanctions seem very likely to repeat the same pattern. Alloush and Simon add:

The impact will go far beyond deterring individual companies, trickling down to ordinary Syrians seeking to get on with their lives. For instance, the Caesar Act targets Syria's construction sector, which has sparked concerns among aid organizations working to support small-scale infrastructural rehabilitation -- from fixing up damaged water networks to helping rebuild bombed-out schools or apartments.

The U.S. increasingly relies on a coercive policy that does a terrible job of advancing American interests, but it excels at impoverishing and killing ordinary people in many countries around the world. Economic sanctions have been a favorite tool for politicians and policymakers to use against many governments in response to a range of undesirable activities, because it seems to offer a low-cost option that allows the U.S. to "do something." The record clearly shows that they fail on their own terms, and they end up costing much more than their advocates will ever admit. It would be bad enough if this were simply a matter of repeating the same error over and over and never learning anything, but the consequences of sanctions have been devastating for millions and fatal for tens of thousands of people.

Hurting the weakest and most vulnerable people is what sanctions usually do. The broader the sanctions are, the more harm they do to innocent people. Instead of trying to "fix" or reform how the U.S. uses tools of economic warfare, our government should abandon the use of broad, sectoral sanctions entirely. Just as we have sought to limit and restrict the use of force to reduce the harm to civilians in warfare, we need to limit and restrict the use of economic coercion when it comes to sanctioning other governments. Rather than refining tools of collective punishment, the U.S. should stop trying to police the behavior of other states.

see more 0 0 • Reply • Share › Show more replies Load more comments Powered by Disqus Subscribe Add Disqus to your site Add Disqus Add Do Not Sell My Data

https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/iframe#origin=https%3A%2F%2Fdisqus.com&rpcToken=2110840747.2111878&clearCache=1

[Jun 18, 2020] Poor Johnny! What's sadder than being a crook, but an ineffective one? I think that's what he is. He may be infamous enough to be a household name, but he never really managed to make a career. Hardly ever did he stay on a job for more than 2 years

Jun 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

John , Jun 17 2020 19:24 utc | 4

I'm fully expecting the Dem "left" to try and praise the monsterous Bolton for "going against Trump", as they did with war criminal Mad Dog Matis and Bush. Bolton has to be one of the most evil mass murders on the face of the Earth. The world will be an infinitely better place when he and his ilk like Netanyahu, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Chertoff..etc finally go back to hell.

karlof1 , Jun 17 2020 19:33 utc | 5

Bolton deserves having a parasite named after him, if that.
Scotch Bingeington , Jun 17 2020 19:57 utc | 6
Poor Johnny! What's sadder than being a crook, but an ineffective one? I think that's what he is. He may be infamous enough to be a household name, but he never really managed to make a career. Hardly ever did he stay on a job for more than 2 years, before his fellow crooks deemed him unfit for his position, again and again. Says a lot.

I hope they will confiscate his book on some flimsy pretext, only to lose the piles of copies in storage, so they cannot possibly be released to bookstores again. Maybe some mice will make use of it to furnish their nests?

Take a look at his face. It's obvious to me that even John Bolton does not enjoy being John Bolton. That mouth, it's drooping to an absurd degree. Comparable to Merkel's face, come to think of it.

GeorgeV , Jun 17 2020 20:25 utc | 8
John Bolton's tell all book about his tenure with the Trump administration is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle burned. It is a fitting description of the leadership of the US government and it's capitol city as a den of backstabbing, corkscrewing and double dealing vipers. It's like standing on a street corner watching two prostitutes calling each other a whore! How low has the US sunk.
bob sykes , Jun 17 2020 20:55 utc | 11
Of course, Trump actually campaigned to leave Afghanistan and Syria, and he was elected to do so. The self-appointed Deep State has pretty much thwarted him and his voters.
uncle tungsten , Jun 17 2020 21:00 utc | 12
karlof1 #5
Blastocystis hominis could be renamed easily enough. It is a pain in the gut and arse.

I will not bother to read any more on Bolton the man is beneath contempt. b has said more than enough.

Tower , Jun 17 2020 21:43 utc | 13
It's just about time. John Bolton deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. At this point, why not?
pretzelattack , Jun 17 2020 21:49 utc | 14
let us not forget that bolton threatened a un officials kids because they guy wasn't going along with the iraq war propaganda.
Duncan Idaho , Jun 17 2020 22:03 utc | 15
Only with Late Stage Capitalism could we have a vicious war criminal write a book criticizing a psychopathic sociopath.
Anonymous , Jun 17 2020 22:06 utc | 16
The political establishment in Canada appeared dismayed at the prospect of Bolton as National Security Adviser. See these interviews with Hill + Knowlton strategies Vice-chairman, Peter Donolo, from 2018:

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/video/there-s-risk-trump-s-actions-are-driving-the-u-s-into-a-recession-peter-donolo~1342264
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/video/trade-wars-easy-to-start-not-so-easy-to-finish-peter-donolo~1365104

So Bolton gets in, Meng Wangzhou is detained in Vancouver on the US request (that's another story), and in time, Canada appoints a new Ambassador to China - Mr. Dominic Barton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominic_Barton
Then Bolton gets fired. 'Nuff said. Just to let everyone know that Bolton is well and truly hated, as a government official, in certain circles.

AntiSpin , Jun 17 2020 22:07 utc | 17
@ pretzelattack | Jun 17 2020 21:49 utc | 14

Close -- the threatened official was Jose Bustani, at that time (2002) the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)as he had been for five years.

Bustani had been working to bring Iraq and Libya into the organization, which would have required those two countries to eliminate all of their chemical weapons.

The US, though, had other ideas -- chiefly invading and destroying both of those nations, and when Bustani insisted on continuing his efforts then Bolton threatened Bustani's adult children.

james , Jun 17 2020 23:13 utc | 20
let the lobbyists with the most money win... that's what defines the usa system, leadership and decision making process... no one in their right mind would support this doofus..
Jen , Jun 17 2020 23:40 utc | 21
At least the one saving grace about John Bolton's memoir is that it might be a tad closer to reality than Christopher Steele's infamous dossier and might prove valuable as a source of evidence in a court of law. Maybe Yosemite Sam himself should start quaking in his boots.
Don Bacon , Jun 17 2020 23:44 utc | 24
@ Jpc
When faced with Trump's behavior of employing warmongers, including several generals, some observers opined that Trump wanted people with contrasting opinions so that he could consider them and then say "no." He did more with Bolton eventually, sending him to Mongolia while he (Trump) went to Singapore (or somewhere over there).
A User , Jun 17 2020 23:47 utc | 25
re Ian2 | Jun 17 2020 23:08 utc | 19
who hazarded : My guess Trump went along with the tough guy image that Bolton projected in media and recommendations by others.
Not at all, if you go back to the earliest days of the orangeman's prezdency, you will see Trump resisted the efforts by Mercer & the zionist casino owner to give Bolton a gig.
He knew that shrub had problems with the boasts of Bolton and as his reputation was as an arsehole who sounded his own trumpet at his boss's expense orangeman refused for a long time. Trump believes the trump prezdency is about trump no one else.
Thing was at the time he was running for the prez gig trump was on his uppers, making a few dollars from his tv show, plus licensing other people's buildings by selling his name to be stuck on them. trump tower azerbnajan etc.
He put virtually none of his own money into the 'race' so when he won the people who had put up the dosh had power over him.
Bolton has always been an arse kisser to any zionist cause he suspects he can claw a penny outta, so he used the extreme loony end of the totally looney zionist spectrum to hook him (Bolton) up with a gig by pushing for him with trump.

It was always gonna end the way it did as Bolton is forever briefing the media against anyone who tried to resist his murderous fantasies. Trump is never gonna argue for any scheme that doesn't have lotsa dollars for him in it so he had plenty of run ins with Bolton who then went to his media mates & told tales.
When bolton was appointed orangey's stakes were at a really low ebb among DC warmongers, so he reluctantly took him on then spent the next 18 months getting rid of the grubby parasite.

Kristan hinton , Jun 18 2020 0:46 utc | 26
Real History: Candidate Trump praised Bolton and named him as THE number one Foreign Policy expert he (Trump) respected.

Imagine the mustachioed Mister Potatoe (sic) Head and zany highjinks!

Bolton and one of his first wives were regulars at Plato's Retreat for wife swapping orgies. The wife was not real keen on the behavior, but she allegedly found herself verbally and physically abused for objecting.

DannyC , Jun 18 2020 1:17 utc | 27
Trump is at fault for hiring him to appease the Zionist lobby. We all knew the guy was a warmonger and a scumbag. It's not a surprise. Trump surrounds himself with the worst people

[Jun 17, 2020] Collusion with China, wanting to stay in office forever Leaked Bolton book excerpts cash in on anti-Trump frenzy

If we view Bolton as Adelson puppet, such a behaviour clearly does not make much sense. Or this is a single from Israel lobby to Trump "moor did his duty, moor can go"?
Notable quotes:
"... "a variety of instances when he sought to intervene in law enforcement matters for political reasons." ..."
"... "in effect, give personal favors to dictators he liked," ..."
"... "The pattern looked like obstruction of justice as a way of life, which we couldn't accept," ..."
"... "bombshells" ..."
"... "exactly the right thing to do." ..."
"... "systematic use of indoctrination camps, forced labor, and intrusive surveillance to eradicate the ethnic identity and religious beliefs of Uyghurs and other minorities in China." ..."
"... "Panda Hugger." ..."
"... The mustachioed warhawk had served as Trump's national security adviser from April 2018 to September 2019. While the exact reason for his firing was never revealed, Trump has since commented that Bolton was interfering with his peace initiatives and had "never seen a war he didn't like." ..."
"... Indeed, the "most irrational thing" Bolton accuses Trump of was to refuse to bomb Iran in June 2019, according to the New York Times excerpt. ..."
"... "soft on China" ..."
"... As for Trump supporters, many were indifferent about Bolton's betrayal, noting that Trump hired the neocon in the first place and kept him on for over a year, while ditching the faithful General Michael Flynn after less than two weeks on the job, following a FBI ambush and a Washington Post hit job. ..."
Jun 17, 2020 | www.rt.com
Former national security adviser John Bolton has leaked excerpts of his book to major newspapers, accusing President Donald Trump of colluding with leaders in China and Turkey, and obstruction of justice "as a way of life." Facing a DOJ lawsuit seeking to block the publication of his memoir for containing classified information, Bolton decided to go to the press, leaking parts of the book to the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday.

Breaking News: John Bolton says in his new book that the House should have investigated President Trump for potentially impeachable actions beyond Ukraine https://t.co/8lpd4xAzYu

-- The New York Times (@nytimes) June 17, 2020

Bolton famously refused to testify before the Democrat-led impeachment proceedings against Trump over his alleged abuse of power regarding Ukraine, but now claims that they should have expanded the probe to "a variety of instances when he sought to intervene in law enforcement matters for political reasons."

He accuses Trump of wanting to "in effect, give personal favors to dictators he liked," bringing up companies in China and Turkey as examples, according to the Times. "The pattern looked like obstruction of justice as a way of life, which we couldn't accept," the Times quotes him as saying.

One of the Bolton "bombshells" is that he sought China's purchase of US soybeans in order to get re-elected, during trade negotiations with President Xi Jinping.

SOYBEAN DIPLOMACY: The WSJ has published an excerpt of @AmbJohnBolton 's forthcoming book, revealing Trump-Xi conversation and how the American president pleaded his Chinese counterpart to buy U.S. soybeans so he could win farm states in the 2020 presidential elections | #OATT pic.twitter.com/XKAogLCCtN

-- Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) June 17, 2020

An excerpt in the Wall Street Journal has Trump telling Xi that – alleged – concentration camps for Uighur Muslims in China's Xinjiang province were "exactly the right thing to do." It also alleges that Trump did Xi a favor by relaxing US sanctions on ZTE, a Chinese telecom company.

WSJ excerpt of Bolton book has Trump & China bombshells. Trump told Xi building concentration camps for Muslims "was exactly the right thing to do." Trump pleaded w/ Xi to help him w/ re-election by making US farm product buys. And Trump helped Xi w/ ZTE. https://t.co/4CSflQQqcL

-- Edward Wong (@ewong) June 17, 2020

This comes as Trump signed into law the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2020, which mandates US sanctions against Chinese officials over "systematic use of indoctrination camps, forced labor, and intrusive surveillance to eradicate the ethnic identity and religious beliefs of Uyghurs and other minorities in China."

Another excerpt has Bolton referring to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin as a "Panda Hugger."

According to Bolton, Trump told Xi to "go ahead with building the camps" for imprisoned Uighurs.

-- Philip Wegmann (@PhilipWegmann) June 17, 2020

As another proof of Trump's perfidy, Bolton writes that the president told Xi that he would like to stay in office beyond the two terms the US Constitution would allow him. Bolton's one-time colleague Dinesh D'Souza commented that Bolton was unable to recognize a clear joke.

Really? This is it? John Bolton's smoking gun? Trump has been jokingly putting out memes about this for four years. This conversation, if it occurred at all, seems obviously jocular. Bolton, however, whom I knew quite well from AEI, doesn't have a jocular bone in his body pic.twitter.com/Qe8sXCAT58

-- Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) June 17, 2020

Trump has on more than one occasion shared a meme showing him staying in power forever, triggering Democrats into denouncing him as an aspiring dictator. Apparently, Bolton thought the same.

According to John Bolton posting this meme was an impeachable offense https://t.co/q2BHlfVTEu

-- Will Chamberlain 🇺🇸 (@willchamberlain) June 17, 2020

The mustachioed warhawk had served as Trump's national security adviser from April 2018 to September 2019. While the exact reason for his firing was never revealed, Trump has since commented that Bolton was interfering with his peace initiatives and had "never seen a war he didn't like."

Indeed, the "most irrational thing" Bolton accuses Trump of was to refuse to bomb Iran in June 2019, according to the New York Times excerpt.

Pretty telling that the episode which pissed off Bolton the most during his tenure was Trump calling off airstrikes which would have killed dozens of Iranian soldiers in June 2019 https://t.co/ruFSInj2Mu pic.twitter.com/5zO7UrxMTM

-- Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) June 17, 2020

Arguing that Trump is being "soft on China" and colluding with Xi also happens to be a Democratic Party strategy for the 2020 presidential election, outlined in April and reported by Axios.

While Democrats and the mainstream media welcomed Bolton's bombshells as validating their position on Trump, he is unlikely to become a #Resistance hero, simply because they still remember he refused to say these things under oath during the impeachment hearings, when they – in theory – could have bolstered their case for getting Trump out of office.

As for Trump supporters, many were indifferent about Bolton's betrayal, noting that Trump hired the neocon in the first place and kept him on for over a year, while ditching the faithful General Michael Flynn after less than two weeks on the job, following a FBI ambush and a Washington Post hit job.

Do I care that Bolton is stabbing Trump in the back? Not at all. General Flynn was NSA and Trump made his choices. Being outraged on behalf of a 70+ year old man who makes poor choices is well beyond my job description.

-- Blue Flu Cernovich (@Cernovich) June 17, 2020

[Jun 16, 2020] It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future (incorrectly attributed to Yogi Berra)

Jun 16, 2020 | carnegieendowment.org

... There are no signs that the [USA-Russia] relationship will improve in the near future.

[Jun 16, 2020] America's Supernational Sovereignty by Philip Giraldi

Jun 16, 2020 | www.unz.com

The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

HOME
ABOUT
SETTINGS FOREIGN POLICY
RACE/ETHNICITY
CULTURE/SOCIETY IDEOLOGY
ECONOMICS
ARTS/LETTERS SCIENCE
HISTORY
FORUM SUMMARY
BLOGGERS
COLUMNISTS BOOKS
PODCASTS
POPULAR PDF ARCHIVES
BANNED BOOKS
ANNOUNCEMENTS ARTICLES
AUTHORS
COMMENTS MORE... ← Washington Struggles to Manage the Cris... Blogview Philip Giraldi Archive America's Supernational Sovereignty Iran and Syria again on the receiving end of sanctions PHILIP GIRALDI JUNE 15, 2020 1,600 WORDS 85 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit Share Share Email Print More RSS

One of the most disturbing aspects of American foreign policy since 9/11 has been the assumption that decisions made by the United States are binding on the rest of the world, best exemplified by President George W. Bush's warning that "there was a new sheriff in town." Apart from time of war, no other nation has ever sought to prevent other nations from trading with each other, nor has any government sought to punish foreigners using sanctions with the cynical arrogance demonstrated by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The United States uniquely seeks to penalize other sovereign countries for alleged crimes that did not occur in the U.S. and that did not involve American citizens, while also insisting that all nations must comply with whatever penalties are meted out by Washington. At the same time, it demonstrates its own hypocrisy by claiming sovereign immunity whenever foreigners or even American citizens seek to use the courts to hold it accountable for its many crimes.

The conceit by the United States that it is the acknowledged judge, jury and executioner in policing the international community began in the post-World War 2 environment, when hubristic American presidents began referring to themselves as "leaders of the free world." This pretense received legislative and judicial backing with passage of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987 (ATA) as amended in 1992 plus subsequent related legislation, to include the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act of 2016 (JASTA). The body of legislation can be used to obtain civil judgments against alleged terrorists for attacks carried out anywhere in the world and can be employed to punish governments, international organizations and even corporations that are perceived to be supportive of terrorists, even indirectly or unknowingly. Plaintiffs are able to sue for injuries to their "person, property, or business" and have ten years to bring a claim.

Sometimes the connections and level of proof required by a U.S. court to take action are tenuous, and that is being polite. Suits currently can claim secondary liability for third parties, including banks and large corporations, under "material support" of terrorism statutes. This includes "aiding and abetting" liability as well as providing "services" to any group that the United States considers to be terrorist, even if the terrorist label is dubious and/or if that support is inadvertent.

The ability to sue in American courts for redress of either real or imaginary crimes has led to the creation of a lawfare culture in which lawyers representing a particular cause seek to bankrupt an opponent through both legal expenses and damages. To no one's surprise, Israel is a major litigator against entities that it disapproves of. The Israeli government has even created and supports an organization called Shurat HaDin, which describes on its website how it uses the law to bankrupt opponents.

The Federal Court for the Southern District of Manhattan has become the clearing house for suing the pants off of any number of foreign governments and individuals with virtually no requirement that the suit have any merit beyond claims of "terrorism." In February 2015, a lawsuit initiated by Shurat HaDin led to the conviction of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization of liability for terrorist attacks in Israel between 2000 and 2004. The New York Federal jury awarded damages of $218.5 million, but under a special feature of the Anti-Terrorism Act the award was automatically tripled to $655.5 million. Shurat HaDin claimed sanctimoniously that it was "bankrupting terror."

The most recent legal victory for Israel and its friends occurred in a federal district court in the District of Columbia on June 1 st , where Syria and Iran were held to be liable for the killing of American citizens in Palestinian terrorist attacks that have taken place in Israel. Judge Randolph D. Moss ruled that Americans wounded and killed in seven attacks carried out by Palestinians inside the Jewish state were eligible for damages from Iran and Syria because they provided "material support" to militant groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The court will at a future date determine the amount of the actual damages.

It should be observed that the alleged crime took place in a foreign country, Israel, and the attribution of blame came from Israeli official sources. Also, there was no actual evidence that Syria and Iran were in any way actively involved in planning or directly enabling the claimed attacks, which is why the expression "material support," which is extremely elastic, was used. In this case, both Damascus and Tehran are definitely guilty as charged in recognizing and having contact with the Palestinian resistance organizations though it has never been credibly asserted that they have any influence over their actions. Syria and Iran were, in fact, not represented in the proceedings, a normal practice as neither country has diplomatic representation in the U.S. and the chances of a fair hearing given the existing legislation have proven to be remote.

And one might well ask if the legislation can be used against Israel, with American citizens killed by the Israelis (Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan) being able to sue the Jewish state's government for compensation and damages. Nope. U.S. courts have ruled in similar cases that Israel's army and police are not terrorist organizations, nor do they materially support terrorists, so the United States' judicial system has no jurisdiction to try them. That result should surprise no one as the legislation was designed to specifically target Muslims and Muslim groups.

In any event, the current court ruling which might total hundreds of millions of dollars could prove to be difficult to collect due to the fact that both Syria and Iran have little in the way of remaining assets in the U.S. In previous similar suits, most notably in June 2017, a jury deliberated for one day before delivering a guilty verdict against two Iranian foundations for violation of U.S. sanctions, allowing a federal court to authorize the U.S. government seizure of a skyscraper in Midtown Manhattan. It was the largest terrorism-related civil forfeiture in United States history. The presiding judge decided to distribute proceeds from the building's sale, nearly $1 billion, to the families of victims of terrorism, including the September 11th attacks . The court ruled that Iran had some culpability for the 9/11 attacks solely based on its status as a State Department listed state sponsor of terrorism, even though the court could not demonstrate that Iran was in any way directly involved.

A second court case involved Syria, ruling that Damascus was liable for the targeting and killing of an American journalist who was in an active war zone covering the shelling of a rebel held area of Homs in 2012. The court awarded $302.5 million to the family of the journalist, Marie Colvin. In her ruling, Judge Amy Berman Jackson cited "Syria's longstanding policy of violence" seeking "to intimidate journalists" and "suppress dissent." A so-called human rights group funded by the U.S. and other governments called the Center for Justice and Accountability based its argument, as in the case of Iran, on relying on the designation of Damascus as a state sponsor of terrorism . The judge believed that the evidence presented was "credible and convincing."

Another American gift to international jurisprudence has been the Magnitsky Act of 2012, a product of the feel-good enthusiasm of the Barack Obama Administration. It was based on a narrative regarding what went on in Russia under the clueless Boris Yeltsin and his nationalist successor Vladimir Putin that was peddled by one Bill Browder, who many believe to have been a major player in the looting of the former Soviet Union. It was claimed by Browder and his accomplices in the media that the Russian government had been complicit in the arrest, torture and killing of one Sergei Magnitsky, an accountant turned whistleblower working for Browder. Almost every aspect of the story has been challenged, but it was completely bought into by the Congress and White House and led to sanctions on the Russians who were allegedly involved despite Moscow's complaints that the U.S. had no legal right to interfere in its internal affairs relating to a Russian citizen.

Worse still, the Magnitsky Act has been broadened and is now the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act of 2017. It is being used to sanction and otherwise punish alleged "human rights abusers" in other countries and has a very low bar for establishing credibility. It was most recently used in the Jamal Khashoggi case, in which the U.S. sanctioned the alleged killers of the Saudi dissident journalist even though no one had actually been arrested or convicted of any crime.

The long-established principle that Washington should respect the sovereignty of other states even when it disagrees with their internal or foreign policies has effectively been abandoned. And, as if things were not bad enough, some recent legislation virtually guarantees that in the near future the United States will be doing still more to interfere in and destabilize much of the world. Congress passed and President Trump has signed the Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act , which seeks to improve Washington's response to mass killings. The prevention of genocide and mass murder is now a part of American national security agenda. There will be a Mass Atrocity Task Force and State Department officers will receive training to sensitize them to impending genocide, though presumably the new program will not apply to the Palestinians as the law's namesake never was troubled by their suppression and killing by the state of Israel.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

AnonStarter , says: June 15, 2020 at 7:29 am GMT

Anagram Fun:

ShuratHaDin = I hand u trash

Sean , says: June 15, 2020 at 7:33 am GMT

Iranian explosively formed penetrator IED killed 196 U.S. troops and wounded getting on for a thousand in Iraq. What did they expect a pat on the back, America to forget all about it?

As her writing shows Marie Colvin was sympathetic to all civilians being targeted including Palestinian women being shot by Israeli backed militia snipers.

The long-established principle that Washington should respect the sovereignty of other states even when it disagrees with their internal or foreign policies has effectively been abandoned.

I think the Iranian government obviated any obligation for the US to abide by international law and conventions, by seizing US Embassy personnel and using them as hostages to influence US politics. Very successfully I might add. Iran only supports the Palestinians in order to mitigate Arab Sunni loathing for the Persian Shia. It is self interested, unlike Ms Colvin's reporting.

joe2.5 , says: June 15, 2020 at 10:55 am GMT

..in Iraq. What did they expect a pat on the back, America to forget all about it?

In Iraq, eh? Remind me, was Iraq in Ohio or Pennsylvania? Or some other state under US jurisdiction?

onebornfree , says: Website June 15, 2020 at 11:18 am GMT

" At the same time, it demonstrates its own hypocrisy by claiming sovereign immunity whenever foreigners or even American citizens seek to use the courts to hold it accountable for its many crimes ."

This is all no more than "par for the course" if you understand the true nature of all governments.

This "just" in:

"Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class." Albert J. Nock: https://mises.org/library/our-enemy-state-4

"Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be "reformed"or "improved",simply because of their innate criminal nature." Onebornfree: http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/

"Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure"
Robert LeFevere: https://mises.org/profile/robert-lefevre

"The state lies in all the tongues of good and evil, and whatever it says is lies, and whatever it has, it has stolen, everything it is, is false, it bites with stolen teeth, and it bites often, it is false down to its bowels."~ Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche,

If you never get to understand the true nature of all governments, then you are forever doomed to complain about what it does, seems to me, Mr Giraldi.

Regards, onebornfree

Christophe GJ , says: June 15, 2020 at 11:59 am GMT

Right now (today june 15) there is a strong diplomatic tension between France and the US. Pompeo is calling the International Court of Justice a "Kangaroo court". Speaking of Kangoroo courts, there is more than one around. Especially in the US. When you see the trap in which Bayer Deustchland has fallen in the US Or what Giraldi rightfully points
Don't know why the US elite is so enraged with almoste everyone. Maybe because they are the slaves of zionist billionaires. They are enraged because they are slaves.

Biff , says: June 15, 2020 at 12:35 pm GMT
@joe2.5

New rule:

Do not troll with Shithead Sean

JoaoAlfaiate , says: June 15, 2020 at 1:02 pm GMT

More on Elie and the Palestinians:

https://www.unz.com/article/elie-wiesel-conscience-of-mankind-and-saintly-humanitarian-or-liar-hypocrite-and-terrorist/

Roacheforque , says: Website June 15, 2020 at 1:03 pm GMT

Final grasps and misuse of power are probably fairly typical as an empire collapses. The right leadership could turn this ship around and head our nation toward the moral high ground.

But the political will to regain constitutional relevance and produce real leadership seems defeated.

-R

MarkU , says: June 15, 2020 at 1:06 pm GMT
@Sean ndreds, of thousands of Iranians over the following decades. What do the US and UK expect? a pat on the back, Iran to forget all about it?

The US also encouraged and supported Saddam Hussein in the Iran/Iraq war which led to the death of literally millions of Iranians. The US also shot down an Iranian passenger plane killing hundreds without even so much as an apology (they gave the captain of the ship involved a medal for it in fact)

My point is that you can't just start the clock (and the narrative) to suit yourself, you are being ignorant and/or dishonest to do so.

al Muqawama Local 12 , says: June 15, 2020 at 1:17 pm GMT

The word sovereignty in the title gets right to the crux of this issue. The whole world defined sovereignty by consensus at the UN World Summit. Sovereignty is responsibility. And what's responsibility? Formal commitment to the UN Charter, the Rome Statute, and core human rights instruments (the International Bill of Human Rights at a minimum.)

As always, the US signed with fingers crossed, interpreting the summit outcome in bad faith in breach of peremptory international norms. The US is the last holdout or throwback to the pre-modern concept of absolute sovereignty: arbitrary state power. Now if you look closely, the state organ that actually holds arbitrary power is CIA. That is disguised by lots of bribed and blackmailed functionaries and elected officials, but CIA murders them if they step out of line, not excepting puppet 'heads of state' like Kennedy, Ford and Reagan (sometimes they miss but they make their point.)

Now to the whole rest of the world, this CIA regime is not sovereign at all. Then what is it? It is a criminal enterprise based on impunity. The legal relationship between responsible sovereignty, absolute sovereignty, and impunity is very touchy to the CIA regime, which dispatched John Bolton to the UN over Congress' explicit refusal, if you remember. And why? What was Bolton sent to do? He obstructed the Summit Outcome Document with endless Neo-Soviet nyets, submitting 600 amendments until drafters removed the trigger word impunity from one paragraph.

This US totalitarian state considers that its arbitrary rule negates another universal world agreement, the Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Foreign Intervention, A/RES/20/2131, which is in fact state and federal common law in the US.

So how does this legal conundrum get resolved? When the time is right, Russia, China, and Iran point their missiles at a selection of defenseless US military assets and say, Go fuck yourself. It's what the Russians call coercion to peace. We the subject population need to prepare for this eventuality, because the current rebellion includes peace in its demands (ask BAP.) The basis of US impunity is arbitrary use of force at home and abroad. The human right to peace means capitulation for the CIA regime.

jconsley , says: June 15, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT
@Sean

The reply is pure, direct nonsense. Iran is correct in supporting the Palestinians. The United States supports the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. It supports apartheid and starving Palestinians.

jconsley , says: June 15, 2020 at 1:30 pm GMT

There is no need for moderation. Through U.S. tax dollars to Israel, it supports apartheid and the suffering of Palestinians who have had their land taken from them by the Israelis. Look at map of Palestine today.

Exile , says: June 15, 2020 at 2:55 pm GMT
@Sean tive and hews closely to Jewish interests as expressed & shaped by the Jewish-controlled American media.

The death of 34 servicemen on the USS Liberty is barely a footnote of history, and while the death of St. Floyd is tearing America apart, the brutal killing of American Rachel Corrie in Israel was the butt of jokes among Zionists in the American media.

After all, making some deaths more important than others is a Jewish specialty and control of the media means never having to say you're sorry – while others have to watch their step or face the wrath of the mob.

A123 , says: June 15, 2020 at 3:30 pm GMT
@Sean se they cannot control it. SJW Globalists hate Jewish Israel because they cannot control it.

Preposterous bloviation about the supremacy of supranational bodies is an easily penetrated cover story. The obvious TRUTH -- One religion is intentionally misusing bodies, like the UN/NWO, to assault Christians & Jews that it cannot control.

The U.S. must uphold its sovereign responsibility to oppose oppression and punish the murder of its citizens. If Soleimani wanted to live, he should not have senselessly butchered Americans.

PEACE

AnonStarter , says: June 15, 2020 at 4:38 pm GMT
@Biff

I can certainly understand that sentiment.

I mean, if I want to hear an apologist for the Israeli-American hegemon, I can just subscribe to cable.

But I wouldn't try to enforce any such "rule." Occasionally, he serves as a good foil.

Kouroi , says: June 15, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT
@Sean

The whole world knows that the US attack on Iraq was a war of aggression not condoned by the UN. Also, the US didn't hide its intentions and put Iran next on the list (the Axis of Terror ). Omitting these little details are very convenient indeed for it enables you to portray the US soldiers as blue eyed UN Peace Keepers attacked by the malignant theocratic regime, when in fact the opposite is true.

The Alarmist , says: June 15, 2020 at 7:14 pm GMT
@Sean but its status as a diplomatic mission may very well have been compromised by practises contrary to Article 41 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relation (Vienna 18 April 1961), in which case the Iranians should have simply asked the US staff to leave. but seizure by the students made that moot.

Think of it as the Iranian Lives Matter protest of 1979. Its a shame the criminals behind the current BLM and AntiFa movements aren't treated as harshly as we treat the Iranians, though now that AntiFa made the list, maybe someone can connect the dots to Soros and relieve him of a few billions.

Number Six , says: June 15, 2020 at 7:19 pm GMT

Isramerica Inc. ceased being a nation state when the Rothschild Reich conquered the American Republic in 1913 by establishing the Rothschild Reserve Bank. Give a Rothschild a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a Rothschild a bank and he can rob a country. What Rothschild Wants, Rothschild Gets. Rothschild wants his Central Banks in all Zionist Globalist international city states. Rothschild wants control of all Zionist Globalist Corporations. Bank of Isramerica,the City of Londonistan, Berlinks, Parisk, Zu Rich . Microsoft, Apple, Amazon all KNEEL before the Rothschild Royal Family of Black Lives Matter. Rothschild wanted WWI, WWII and now wants WWIII and a final solution to enslave the West, a ZODD. The Zionist Owned Digital Dollar to COVID 1984 track, trace and enslave all of Cattlekind. DOWN WITH BIG ZOG!

silviosilver , says: June 15, 2020 at 8:04 pm GMT
@A123

Sorry, no Christian of conscience has any business supporting a premier violator of human rights like the criminal state of Israel.

You're on your own, Shlomo.

anon [110] Disclaimer , says: June 15, 2020 at 8:38 pm GMT
@joe2.5 to support divestment from Iran-oriented investments, in favor or investment in Israel.
This has been the case at least since Bob Casey's campaign to unseat Rick Santorum (aka the
DumpRick campaign). Before Casey's win, he was taken to Israel by members of AIPAC, who returned him to US shores assured that "while Rick was good for Israel, Bob will be even moreso . . ."

Pennsylvania's Jewish governor, Jewish state's attorney, and Jewish transgender director of public health are combining their authorities to impose some of the most stringent, and fraudulent, sets of regulations on the people of Pennsylvania relative to the scamdemic.

A123 , says: June 15, 2020 at 9:05 pm GMT
@The Alarmist hypothetical:

-- Radical U.S. students seize the Iranian Mission to the UN, located in NYC.
-- They demand the turn over of Ayatollah Khameni for his war crimes against the Iranian people.
-- The Trump administration "To Protect Innocent Student Lives" refuses to intervene for ~444 days.

Under your rules, these U.S. Students would be 'private citizens'. Hypothetically, no violation of international law has occurred.

I suspect your hypertechnicality could lead to unintended, though currently hypotheical, outcomes.

PEACE

joe2.5 , says: June 15, 2020 at 9:11 pm GMT
@anon

Precisely. Being that what you said applies equally to all 50 states, non-voting territories, vassalages and messuages, the extraterritorial invasion of Iraq (or anywhere) is on behalf of the same owners of the country.

Anon [187] Disclaimer , says: June 15, 2020 at 9:21 pm GMT
@onebornfree

Dude, just move to Chaz already.

paranoid goy , says: Website June 15, 2020 at 9:36 pm GMT
@Sean

Ooh! Sean used the IED word! How sophisticated. IED, IED IED!!! Would it be better they used nice, professional ordinance, like the Yankees' depleted uranium? Yo' mama raised the afterbirth!
I am sure A123 is wallowing in a puddle of self-extracted sperm by now.
Cute, the previous article I read was about how Zion and its Undeclared Soviets in America plan to use force against the International Criminal Court. IED, I say.
Before Sean and A123 get together and breed more apologists for the satanic childfucking cacastocracy and their queen Hillary. (Deposed by reason of failing clone stability).

al Muqawama Local 12 , says: June 15, 2020 at 9:38 pm GMT

Now this is how R2P actually works.

The African Group (representing the 54 African countries in the United Nations) convened an "Urgent Debate" (technically equivalent to a special session) in the HRC on, basically, US killer cops – on the 17th, the fireworks to be broadcast/archived on http://webtv.un.org/
You can watch the US piss away its international standing.

Racial discrimination comes up of course, because Africans are extra touchy about pigs killing jigs for sport, but violent attacks on your human right of assembly is on the agenda too (UDHR Article 20, state and federal common law; ICCPR Article 21, equivalent to federal statute.) Urgent debate in this charter body mobilizes the treaty bodies and special procedures, which in turn supports propria motu ICC investigation of the US and its Izzie pig torture trainers.

US Human Rights Network*/ACLU ask:

"If you live the United States, please contact foreign embassies in Washington D.C. that are members of the UNHRC, especially U.S. allies, and urge them to support international accountability for police killings in the U.S.

And if you live outside the U.S., please contact your Foreign Ministry or your country's UN Mission in Geneva and let them know that you support the call made by families of victims of police killings in the United States and over 660 groups from 66 countries to mandate an independent Commission of Inquiry. This is the only credible accountability measure that can effectively respond to the current human rights crisis in the United States.

Go over the head of your horseshit government to the world.

*US Human Rights Network
http://www.ushrnetwork.org
[email protected]

paranoid goy , says: Website June 15, 2020 at 9:44 pm GMT
@A123

One day, A123, some sensible person will have the opportunity to take that PEACE emoticon and shove it up your smutty throat. My dog is flapping his hind leg at the joyful thought.
Also, you forget to mention the role your private international terrorist organisation, CIA played in every so-called 'incident' regarding Iran.
The greatest danger of BDS is is the defunding of satanic criminal networks such as USAID, CIA, MOSSAD etc. It's not like Israel has provinces full of industry to 'invest' in.

Antiwar7 , says: June 15, 2020 at 10:17 pm GMT
@Sean

You do know that blaming Iran for that is quite a stretch. The technology involved was not hard to acquire.

And what about the dozens of countries the US government has actively plunged into war, killing, maiming and destroying the lives of millions and millions of people? WTF about that?

AnonStarter , says: June 15, 2020 at 10:19 pm GMT

Mr. Giraldi provides some noteworthy examples of pro-Israel legislation, but the names could be tweaked a bit. Here's some proposed legislation that more honestly reflects the character of our vaunted solons

1. The Israeli Destruction, Invalidation, and Oppression Tenet, also known as IDIOT.

Once ratified, IDIOT would require a congressional representative's public proclamation of pride upon the occasion of any crime committed by Israel. Said proclamation must be no less than 500 words and preempt all other matters pending deliberation. Failure to persuade one's constituency of Israeli virtue warrants a donation of $250,000 to the incumbent's next election opponent.

2. Completing the Ruinous, Execrable Takeover by Israel Now, or CRETIN Act.

This law would defer all civil rights cases ordinarily brought before an American justice to a tribunal of members appointed and officiated by Alan Dershowitz. Appeals may be granted, subject to a display of fealty including, but not limited to, ceding custody of one's firstborn child.

3. The Doing Everything Israel Likes Act, hereinafter referenced as DEVIL.

Under this mandate, electronic bracelets such as those worn by felons subject to in-house arrest will be fastened to every member of congress, their voltage increased in direct correlation to the measure of their recalcitrance against Israel. Perceived acclimation to the accompanying pain will necessitate either castration or sale into slavery. Should the former consequence apply, the gelding will be permitted to preserve remnants of his manhood in a curio cabinet display set up for public viewing in the Capitol Rotunda.

joe2.5 , says: June 15, 2020 at 11:47 pm GMT
@A123

Only a Zionist would have the nerve to write such immortal nonsense while at the same time the assaults on the Russian and Venezuelan embassies, the invention of shadow governments in Venezuela and Bolivia and the Ukraine are occurring.

voicum , says: June 15, 2020 at 11:56 pm GMT
@joe2.5

Don't bother, Sean does not see that far

Biff , says: June 16, 2020 at 1:02 am GMT
@AnonStarter

But I wouldn't try to enforce any such "rule."

Obviously impossible. Look how many troll hits Sean got. People sure do like to make him happy.

Lot , says: June 16, 2020 at 1:23 am GMT

the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must

AnonStarter , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:13 am GMT
@Biff Would be nice, wouldn't it?

We have to account for the fact that there are younger people here, as well as those who have yet to understand the dynamics at play. We also have to give him credit where it's due: he knows how to elicit a response. Yet, in a forum of this nature, that's not too difficult when you're running interference for the powers that be. In that sense, he's no different than "Lot" or that other troll with a numeric handle.

His respondents don't imagine they're going to make him happy. Everybody just thinks they're gonna be the one to whack the mole.

Frankie P , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:15 am GMT

Hat tip to Mefobills.

The solution for the many ills facing the US. This solution WILL entail violence.

From the Byzantines, Ezra Pound derived his no-violent formula for controlling the Jews.
"The answer to the Jewish problem is simple," he said.
"Keep them out of banking, out of education, out of government."
And this is how simple it is.
There is no need to kill the Jews. In fact, every pogrom in history has played into their hands, and has in many instances been cleverly instigated by them.
Get the Jews out of banking and they cannot control the economic life of the community.
Get the Jews out of education and they can not pervert the minds of the young to their subversive doctrines.
Get the Jews out of government and they cannot betray the nation."

Art , says: June 16, 2020 at 5:57 am GMT
@Sean

Oh Sean -- - did you steal A123's Hasbara Central assigned talking points -- come on – be honest for once -- Art

p.s. You are such a stinker (smile).

James Reinhart , says: June 16, 2020 at 6:04 am GMT

THE US IS DEAD & WILL BE NOTHING AFTER THE DEATH OF THE PETRODOLLAR. After Bretton Woods, where the Jews used the US as they did in WWI, it can now be snuffed out as it has no assets, industry and has destroyed every entity of ecological protection and is the biggest user of geoengineering wiping out almost all life and that is the way the Elohim want it. Gomberg map is just a short version of the most valuable state in the world and it's in you damn dollar bill. Those little green nations are the owners of the earth and the top is where the ALL SEEING EYE IS. It's all a fraud but people are as stupid as animals and will deserve what is coming as the next pillar of the destruction of the US from St. John the Devine states. Then a new birth after the deaths of billions. These were put up in 1997 and in 1999, the messiah of Israel stated what would happen to the towers and is in STONE.

mark green , says: June 16, 2020 at 6:35 am GMT

Jewish cohesion, skill, tenacity, and purposefulness has imbued this tribe with unsurpassed status. And power.

International Jewry pilots world banking, orchestrates the manufacture of news and entertainment (and public opinion), while it oversees all US policies in areas that affect the standing of Israel or status of world Jewry. This is no small matter.

Inordinate Jewish power, and its distorting impact on international affairs, has become one of humanity's greatest trials. It is the grand conundrum that we lesser souls are not supposed to notice or ever complain about. This puts us on the road to ruin.

Art , says: June 16, 2020 at 6:43 am GMT
@A123

Hey A123 -- - I see where that little stinker Sean, stole your Hasbara Central talking points. So now all you can produce is this crap -- - I know – what is this world coming too? -- Art

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: June 16, 2020 at 6:49 am GMT
@joe2.5 by the KJV Bible as edited by Samuel Untermyer and his seven or more employees that Untermyer paid the known crook, the known fraudster C. I. Scofield to put his name on so it wouldn't look like a Jewish-edited New Testament edition. He, the worm A123, swoons with joy when the Jews vandalize Christian churches in greater Palestine and shoot Christians, which is happening all the time.

A real nasty piece of work he is, A123, and a real clueless immoral idiot. It's a pity he's too illiterate to read Ron Unz's Oddities Of The Jewish Religion. He'd soon learn how the Jews hate him.

Gorgeous George , says: June 16, 2020 at 6:55 am GMT

Judge jury and executioner. This is why this madness must end. When talking about systemic oppression it is solely outward towards other nations. Such brutality and arrogance. The worlds only chance is turning away from the dollar, Israel and the US.

Art , says: June 16, 2020 at 7:00 am GMT
@Lot

The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must

So Lot -- do you whistle that while you type? -- Art

p.s. Is that a new Jew anthem?

Colin Wright , says: Website June 16, 2020 at 7:47 am GMT
@Sean

'I think the Iranian government obviated any obligation for the US to abide by international law and conventions, by seizing US Embassy personnel and using them as hostages to influence US politics.'

That was over forty years ago. In 1985, what kind of behavior would you have advocated towards Germany?

Colin Wright , says: Website June 16, 2020 at 7:51 am GMT
@A123

' The U.S. must uphold its sovereign responsibility to oppose oppression and punish the murder of its citizens '

So your position is we should declare war on Israel?

Colin Wright , says: Website June 16, 2020 at 7:52 am GMT
@Lot

The mockery in your second image is in poor taste.

Sean , says: June 16, 2020 at 8:01 am GMT
@MarkU , to shooting down an airliner taking off from their own airport. Pauperised and paranoid, Iran is self destructing. They got a pass for limpet mine tanker attacks and drone destruction of a oil refineries in Saudi, so what did they do? Attack a US embassy in Iraq. That is great thinking if they intended to get Trump to use force as he has long been known to have been outraged by the hostage crisis of decades ago. Iran is helping Israel more than the Palestinians. One can only imagine what disaster the Iranian leadership would bring on their country if they had a thermonuclear weapon.
AnonStarter , says: June 16, 2020 at 8:29 am GMT
@AnonStarter

Additional Legislation Pending:

The "Gloat Over Your Broken Environment And Never Surrender" Act, or GOYBEANS Act.

If ratified, this bill would provide 666 million dollars annually for developing public school curricula in partnership with the ADL, SPLC, and NAMBLA. Proposed as a reformatory measure, the GOYBEANS Act was drafted in response to demands from the aforementioned organizations that school curricula be more inclusive of topics such as nurturing gender doubt, learning to properly hate, and the non-existence of Palestinians.

dimples , says: June 16, 2020 at 8:33 am GMT
@Frankie P

Times have moved on. Jews would need to be banned from the McMedia industrial complex, including newspapers, cinema, TV etc. A ban on political donations would obviously be also necessary. They should be free to worship Yahweh and themselves at length without causing harm to others.

Commentator Mike , says: June 16, 2020 at 8:38 am GMT

It should be a lesson learned for the rest of the world: don't keep any assests in the US, or the West for that matter. Isolate from the West, divest from the West, sanction and boycott the West, build your own institutions and link up only to non-Western countries. Don't even bother to visit the West, find other places to vacation in. Anyway the West is being ruined by your own immigrants, so why would you want to spend your holidays among them?

Ghali , says: June 16, 2020 at 8:58 am GMT

We live under a tyrannous U.S.-led Anglo-Zionist fascism which is committing heinous war crimes on behalf of the Jewish Israel and its Jewish supporters.
While there are some similarities between Anglo-Zionist fascism and German Fascism (Nazi Germany), Anglo-Zionist fascism is more injurious, more ruthless and more criminal than Germany under Adolph Hitler.

Icy Blast , says: June 16, 2020 at 9:19 am GMT
@A123

Please define the "Christian U.S." I await your response.

padre , says: June 16, 2020 at 9:21 am GMT
@Sean

It seems to me, you have no idea, what international law is!

animalogic , says: June 16, 2020 at 9:31 am GMT
@Frankie P

Perhaps add Media to that list of "thou shalt nots" ? (I'd expand "banking" to include the entire FIRE sector as well).

onebornfree , says: Website June 16, 2020 at 10:44 am GMT
@Anon aid to Mr Giraldi[post 4]: "If you never get to understand the true nature of all governments, then you are forever doomed to complain about what it does"

Most people [including, of course, all the commie idjuts in "CHAZ"] live in denial of the true nature of the government they complain about all the time, forever unable to see that the state is doing nothing more than being,er, "stately". It would appear that you are no different from them.

"The State Isn't Going Crazy; It's Going State": https://www.aier.org/article/the-state-isnt-going-crazy-its-going-state/

Regards, onebornfree

Herald , says: June 16, 2020 at 10:46 am GMT
@MarkU My point is that you can't just start the clock (and the narrative) to suit yourself, you are being ignorant and/or dishonest to do so.

You are partly right. However, Sean is far from ignorant, though his lack of ignorance is more than matched by his total lack of honesty. Both characteristics of a paid troll.

The zios must see UR, as a real threat to their mythical narrative, judging by the resources they put into defending the undefendable, always going to be an uphill mountain, even for the totally dishonest Sean and his cronies.

Guest0206 , says: June 16, 2020 at 10:46 am GMT
@Sean Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.

Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the self-emancipation of our time.

The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish manner, not only because he has acquired financial power, but also because, through him and also apart from him, money has become a world power and the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical spirit of the Christian nations.

The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the Christians have become Jews."

Moi , says: June 16, 2020 at 10:57 am GMT
@A123

And a bloody Shalom to you too.

chris , says: June 16, 2020 at 11:11 am GMT
@Roacheforque

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like even the best captain can right this Titanic anymore.

This is a fight to the finish; the left won't be satisfied with 'honorable mention' in this one.

The stuff right now is just the dress rehearsal, but if Trump wins in November it'll be war! (actually it's already started)

Truth3 , says: June 16, 2020 at 11:45 am GMT

Hypocrisy. Jewish in every way, because the Jews can best be defined as Pure Hypocrisy.

Jesus told them to their faces numerous times "Hypocrites!"

Jewish Hypocrisy is the greatest of sins, because it enables all of their criminal ways.

USA Jews manipulating the USA Government to embrace Hypocrisy dhould wake up every other citizen of the USA as to what Jews do to any Host country.

anoymous66666 , says: June 16, 2020 at 12:00 pm GMT

J
E
W

S
C
R
I
B
E
D

Robjil , says: June 16, 2020 at 12:04 pm GMT

Shurat HaDin claimed sanctimoniously that it was "bankrupting terror."

This Shurat HaDin is vulture capitalism for Israel interests. Paul Singer, a Jewish Zionist vulture capitalist, does it for Israel world wide.

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-4542838/How-vulture-lord-son-make-billions.html

Paul Singer's best known legal battle is a marathon campaign to force Argentina to pay out on bonds he bought at a knockdown price in 2001. He finally succeeded in getting a $2.4 billion payout last year. He has also been accused of profiting at the expense of other impoverished nations, namely Peru and Congo-Brazzaville, a West African country where most live in dire poverty. Singer acquired Congolese government debt though a Cayman Islands vehicle and set about clawing money back through the London courts in a campaign over several years, eventually winning £78 million.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/activist-investor-said-seeking-to-oust-twitter-chief-dorsey/

Singer works for Israel in his world wide looting.

Singer is also the founder of Start-Up Nation Central, a Tel Aviv-based non-profit that seeks to connect business and government leaders around the world with the Israeli people and technologies that can solve their most pressing challenges.

His most recent looting project is to get Twitter.

An activist investor known as a major Republican political supporter wants to wrest control of Twitter from co-founder and CEO Jack Dorsey, US media has reported.

Old and Grumpy , says: June 16, 2020 at 12:32 pm GMT
@Lot

Your map looks straight out of Halford MacKinder's strategy for getting control of his designated heartland. International banking owns both Russia and China. So it would seem the shining city is both antiquated and dangerous. Also it can neither control its borders and its cities . We really need to decommission the biological and nuclear weapons. Finally according to your logic dementia Biden is the appropriated president for a demented USA.

Widenose Privilege , says: June 16, 2020 at 12:33 pm GMT

The Nuremberg trials led to the creation of the International Criminal Court and jurisprudence in matters of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and wars of aggression.

Make laws for everyone and then find ways to get around those laws. It's a never ending Talmudic cycle.

Desert Fox , says: June 16, 2020 at 1:20 pm GMT

The foreign policy of the ZUS has been driven by the zionists since 1913 when they took over control of America with their privately owned FED and IRS and then came the wars and the attack on the USS Liberty and their attack on the WTC on 911, designed to plunge America into destroying the middle east for zionist Israel.

Read the book The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed and Blood in the Water by Joan Mellen, and the Protocols of Zion.

Number Six , says: June 16, 2020 at 1:47 pm GMT
@Guest0206

Christian Zionists are born again Jews. They crawl in the semitic swamp with the crucifiers and Christ deniers.

Meena , says: June 16, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT
@Sean hat Iran had no hand in US deaths in Iraq

2 Menachem Begin was frightened of being found out that his regime was conspiring against Carter's administration colluding with GOP agents hostage release . He even physically threatened Peres against trying anything on his own behind the knowledge of the Begin regime.

3 I read somewhere that during the very early period of the developing hostage situation Israeli operation inside Iran put the lives of the hostage at risk despite the people on the ground from US agency requesting the Israelis not to do .

WJ , says: June 16, 2020 at 2:21 pm GMT
@Sean

The US overthrew a democratically elected government and installed the torturing Shah.
The US precipitated the Iraq/Iran war and gave Iraq chemical weapons to kill Iranians.
Speaking of shooting down airliners , our fine USN shot an Iranian civilian airliner out of the sky in 1988 killing a few hundred people.
You think any Iranian is losing sleep over the killing of Americans in a country that the US illegally invaded and occupied?

Meena , says: June 16, 2020 at 2:44 pm GMT

Expressing many lies and sanitizng US 's dirty wars on Syria ,even ignoring it– here is NYTimes

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/15/world/middleeast/syria-economy-assad-makhlouf.html
"The United States will impose sweeping new sanctions this week that could target the businesspeople Mr. al-Assad needs to rebuild his shattered cities.
The Caesar Act, named after a Syrian police photographer who defected with photos of thousands of prisoners tortured and killed in Syrian custody, requires the United States president to sanction anyone who does business with or provides significant support to the Syrian government or its officials."-NYT

It has already imposed sanctions and has done repeatedly . Caesar's photo journalism was the playbook from Lantos Kuwait babies Curveball's begging for jail free asylum in US and from Wolfowitz lies that Saddam was behind 911.

Curmudgeon , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:09 pm GMT
@Frankie P

You have, in a nutshell, given the reason why the JewEssA declared Pound insane and had him locked up.
"Democracy is now currently defined in Europe as a 'country run by Jews,'"
"America is a lunatic asylum."
~ Ezra Pound

As an update, "the West" could be substituted for "Europe".

ivan , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:12 pm GMT
@Sean more damage on the US.

But the impulsive George Bush should not have dragged Iraq into another war, he lied his way into the war. A devout Methodist who is also a war criminal. And who do I see shuffling off in the left corner? Why its the international statesman Henry Kissinger, who advised the Americans that the Ayrabs would not respect anyone who raised the sword but would not bring it down.

But unlike others commenting here I agree that US Army owed Iran big time, for ambushing them when all they wanted was to pacify the Shiites and Sunnis and get the hell out.

BL , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT
@AnonStarter other . . .

Nonsense. Sovereign states use whatever tools are available to further their geopolitical objectives. To cite one of innumerable examples, China uses everything, including trade, against recognition of Taiwan.

I'm old fashioned, I think the USG should leverage its strengths in pursuit of its geopolitical objectives. Its current dominance of global finance definitely qualifies.

Giraldi has a soft spot for the Palestinians. Fair enough. Though he does them no favors by putting them in the same bucket as Iran in this context. Z-man , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:25 pm GMT

@Art

Art,
You didn't have to put a smile after your accurate Post Script!!! (Big grin)
Z-man

Curmudgeon , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
@WJ It is true that the US gave Iraq chemical weapons. However, the US had given Iran chemical weapons previously. As Stephen Pelletiere, who investigated Saddam's alleged gassing at Halajaba for the military, reported, cyanide gas was used to kill the Kurds. Cyanide gas was being used by Iran.

The reality is, and Mr. Giraldi seems reluctant to discuss, that the US (Israeli) strategy in the Middle East is one of perpetual chaos. If it became convenient tomorrow, Iran would be an "ally" and Saudi Arabia an "enemy". As long as the Eretz Yisroel project is active, that will always be the objective.

ANZ , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:31 pm GMT
@Frankie P

The Talmudic faction among them is a ticking time bomb. Why take the risk of keeping the latent virus in a country? Check out the role of the tribe when Moorish armies advanced on Toledo, Spain.

Jews have their own country now. They can non-violently be sent to live amongst their own kin and make their Jewtopia. That is an option that historically wasn't available but since 1948 it's been on the table.

vot tak , says: June 16, 2020 at 3:36 pm GMT

American "law" is a sick joke. The country was a "banana republic" before its zionazi colonization, what it is now is a fully colonized "banana republic" under full control of israeli oligarchical interests. I believe this full control was finalized in the quisling trump regime and that one of the major roles this regime has been tasked to accomplish was finalizing this zionazi/israeli full control. If not the major role they were tasked to accomplish. The slow boiled frog is now dead and fully cooked.

Ace , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:10 pm GMT
@Sean S. and its precious Operation Inherent Resolve have brought in weapons from Bulgaria, Libya, Jordan, Israel, and the U.S., inter alia, to trying to bring down Assad to the tune of some 500+K civilian deaths so I'm missing the point of your moral calculus here. Basically, we wage aggressive war causing massive casualties, destruction, and suffering but you highlight a particular weapon used against U.S. forces who brought the full panoply of surveillance platforms, armor, fighter bombers, artillery, electronic warfare, and infantry to bear in a war based on lies and stupidity. Ours.
geokat62 , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:18 pm GMT
@Art

So Lot -- do you whistle that while you type?

Do you think Lot and his co-religionists were so fond of this maxim during the Third Reich? They were whistling a different tune not so long ago.

According to this Orthodox Jew, the tune may soon change again

Jew warns other Jews to get out of New York before matters get worse from BLM unrest

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Alm_dnmHyR0?feature=oembed

mark green , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:28 pm GMT
@padre unded on fairness, the quest for justice, and equal treatment under law. A key objective would be advancing the common good. Zionism distorts these principles.

Lawfare uses concentrated Jewish wealth to assure that Israeli objectives become more equal under the US law. This subverts fairness as well as the Equal Treatment doctrine.

Organized Jewish cunning tosses aside the common good in favor of what's good for the Jews .

What we get in its place is a premeditated perversion of justice.

Ace , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:33 pm GMT
@al Muqawama Local 12 ier sovereign could claim total independence and freedom of action in international relations but his exercise of power was not necessarily whimsical, random, authoritarian, or illegal.

The globalist, open borders, progressive crowd work hard to paint "nationalism" as the supreme evil -- well, after advocacy of white interests -- but it is not the evil they try to make it out to be. As with the E.U., the silk drawer set proceeded to obliterate the nation state and its loathsome "nationalism" which is exactly the healthy antidote to their sought-after collectivist, multicultural nightmare.

Ace , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:37 pm GMT
@A123

Ah, the old "senseless butchery" ploy, 99. I saw it coming a mile away.

Z-man , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:44 pm GMT
@mark green n my illustrious (grin) career with a powerful government agency which was the Vatican City of government agencies back in the day (meaning once you were in you were in an untouchable club, 'a made man') I made my political opinions known to some extent. (Mistake) In the course of my meteoric rise as a junior executive (lol) I may have called out a Jew or two. Whell I was transferred from my cushy office job and put out in the field, like the Red Guards of the Cultural Revolution in CHY-NAH, (lol). It might have been for my calling out of a 'chosen'ite'.
Bill Jones , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:46 pm GMT
@Sean

Thanks for the laugh.

You really are stupid enough to believe that the Iranians were stupid enough to produce so called IED's with "Made in Iran" written on them in English?

Ludwig Watzal , says: Website June 16, 2020 at 4:48 pm GMT

Phil Geraldi demonstrates that the US justice system is a joke and a farce. The court's hand down verdicts like the courts in the former Soviet Union or North Korea do. The alleged support of terrorism by Iran and Syria doesn't hold water. It's purely political and has nothing to do with the rule of law. To argue that the State of Israel doesn't commit acts of terrorism is bananas. Miko Peled, who wrote "The General's Son" https://between-the-lines-ludwig-watzal.blogspot.com/2012/10/miko-peled-generals-son.html stated in a speech on 1 October 2012 in Seattle: The Israeli army is the "best trained, best equipped, best fed terrorist organization in the world." He continued saying: "Their entire purpose is terrorism." The Israeli army commits acts of terror daily against the occupied people of Palestine. Which Zionist law firm will take up their cases against the ruthless Zionist regime in Jerusalem?

A123 , says: June 16, 2020 at 4:55 pm GMT
@geokat62 "> Daily Caller
A123 , says: June 16, 2020 at 5:03 pm GMT
@Ace

Ah, the old "senseless butchery" ploy, 99. I saw it coming a mile away.

Islam does not have 99 ploys. It extremely simple blood cult. The Muslim play book has only 3:

-1- Jihad -- Senseless Butchering of _________ (Jews, Christians, the weak, the innocent )
-2- Taqiyya -- Lie about murders committed in the name of the Anti-Christ Muhammad
-3- Repeat -- Ploy #1 & Ploy #2

PEACE

Ace , says: June 16, 2020 at 5:42 pm GMT
@A123 Soleimani. Since when do garden-variety military tactics and weaponry amount to SB? I've seen a Muslim scientist who argued with some Muslim nut that the earth is in fact round. This despite the authoritative statement of the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia that the Koran says it's flat. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Forgive my obscure reference. "99" was the female lead in the amusing TV spy spoof, "Get Smart." Maxwell Smart always referred to her as "99." She must have been flattered as she later married him. In "real life" as we used to say. With considerable accuracy.

[Jun 14, 2020] Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 30 Years Unheeded

Highly recommended!
The national security establishment does represent the actual government of dual "double government". And it is not unaccountable to, and unsupervised by, the elected branches of government. Instead it controls them and is able to stage palace coups to remove "unacceptable" Presidents like was the case with JFK, Nixon and Trump.
For them is are occupied country and then behave like real occuplers.
Notable quotes:
"... In Trumpian fashion, Kirkpatrick then goes on to warn Americans about the danger of an unaccountable "deep state" in foreign policy that is immune to popular pressures. ..."
"... She says that, no, "it has become more important than ever that the experts who conduct foreign policy on our behalf be subject to the direction of and control of the people." ..."
"... She points out that because America had for much of the twentieth century assumed global responsibilities, our foreign policy elites had developed "distinctive views" that are different from those of the electorate. ..."
"... foreign policy elites "grew accustomed to thinking of the United States as having boundless resources and purposes . . . which transcended the preferences of voters and apparent American interests . . . and eventually developed a globalist attitude." ..."
"... In support of Kirkpatrick's concern, Tufts professor Michael Glennon has more recently argued that the national security establishment has now become so "distinctive" in their separation from our constitutional processes that they represent one wing of a now "double government" that is not unaccountable to, and unsupervised by, the popular branches of government. The Russiagate investigations and the attempt to disable the Trump presidency, aided by many in the establishment, would appear to confirm Kirkpatrick's warning that foreign policy elites want no part of the electoral preferences of voting Americans. ..."
"... Kirkpatrick died in 2006 and had, like many neoconservatives, evolved from a Humphrey Democrat into a member of the GOP establishment. With William Bennett and Jack Kemp, in 1993 she cofounded a neoconservative group, Empower America, which took a very aggressive stance against militant Islam after the 9/11 attacks. However, she was quite ambivalent about the invasion of Iraq and was quoted in The Economist ..."
Jun 14, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

Kirkpatrick's essay begins by insisting that, because of world events since 1939, America has given to foreign affairs "an unnatural focus." Now in 1990, she says, the nation can turn its attention to domestic concerns that are more important because "a good society is defined not by its foreign policy but its internal qualities . . . by the relations among its citizens, the kind of character nurtured, and the quality of life lived." She says unabashedly that "there is no mystical American 'mission' or purposes to be 'found' independently of the U.S. Constitution and government."

One cannot fail to notice that this perspective is precisely the opposite of George W. Bush's in his second inauguration. According to Bush, America's post –Cold War purpose was to follow our "deepest beliefs" by acting to "support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture." For three decades neoconservative foreign policy has revolved around "mystical" beliefs about America's mission in the world that are unmoored from the actual Constitution.

In Trumpian fashion, Kirkpatrick then goes on to warn Americans about the danger of an unaccountable "deep state" in foreign policy that is immune to popular pressures. She rejects emphatically the views of some elitists who argue that foreign policy is a uniquely esoteric and specialized discipline and must be cushioned from populism. She says that, no, "it has become more important than ever that the experts who conduct foreign policy on our behalf be subject to the direction of and control of the people."

She points out that because America had for much of the twentieth century assumed global responsibilities, our foreign policy elites had developed "distinctive views" that are different from those of the electorate. Again, in Trumpian fashion, she argued that foreign policy elites "grew accustomed to thinking of the United States as having boundless resources and purposes . . . which transcended the preferences of voters and apparent American interests . . . and eventually developed a globalist attitude."

In support of Kirkpatrick's concern, Tufts professor Michael Glennon has more recently argued that the national security establishment has now become so "distinctive" in their separation from our constitutional processes that they represent one wing of a now "double government" that is not unaccountable to, and unsupervised by, the popular branches of government. The Russiagate investigations and the attempt to disable the Trump presidency, aided by many in the establishment, would appear to confirm Kirkpatrick's warning that foreign policy elites want no part of the electoral preferences of voting Americans.

Kirkpatrick concludes her essay with thoughts on "What should we do?" and "What we should not do." Remarkably, her first recommendation is to negotiate better trade deals. These deals should give the U.S. "fair access" to foreign markets while offering "foreign businesses no better than fair access to U.S. markets." Next, she considered the promotion of democracy around the world and, on this subject, she took the John Quincy Adams position : that "Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be." However, she insisted: "it is not within the United States' power to democratize the world."

When Kirkpatrick goes on to discuss America's post –Cold War alliances, she makes clear that she is advocating, quite simply, an America First foreign policy. Regarding the future of the NATO alliance, a sacrosanct pillar of the American foreign policy establishment, she argued that "the United States should not try to manage the balance of power in Europe." Likewise, we should be humble about what we can accomplish in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union: "Any notion that the United States can manage the changes in that huge, multinational, developing society is grandiose." Finally, with regard to Asia: "Our concern with Japan should above all be with its trading practices vis-à-vis the United States. We should not spend money protecting an affluent Japan, though a continuing alliance is entirely appropriate."

She famously concludes her essay by making the plea for the United States to become "a normal country in a normal time" and "to give up the dubious benefits of superpower status and become again an unusually successful, open American republic."

Kirkpatrick became Ronald Reagan's United Nations ambassador because her 1979 article in Commentary , "Dictatorships and Double Standards," caught the eye of the future president. In that article, she sensibly points out that authoritarian governments that are allies of the United States should not be kicked to the curb because they are not free and open democracies. The path to democracy is a long and perilous one, and nations without republican traditions cannot be expected to make the transition overnight. Regarding the world's oldest democracy, she remarked: "In Britain, the road from the Magna Carta to the Act of Settlement, to the great Reform Bills of 1832, 1867, and 1885, took seven centuries to traverse."

While at the time neoconservatives opportunistically embraced her for this position as a tactic to fight the Cold War, the current foreign policy establishment would consider Kirkpatrick's argument to be beyond the bounds of decent conversation, as it would lend itself to an accommodation with authoritarian Russia as a counterweight to totalitarian China.

Kirkpatrick died in 2006 and had, like many neoconservatives, evolved from a Humphrey Democrat into a member of the GOP establishment. With William Bennett and Jack Kemp, in 1993 she cofounded a neoconservative group, Empower America, which took a very aggressive stance against militant Islam after the 9/11 attacks. However, she was quite ambivalent about the invasion of Iraq and was quoted in The Economist as saying that George W. Bush was "a bit too interventionist for my taste" and that Bush's brand of moral imperialism is not "taken seriously anywhere outside a few places in Washington, DC."

The fact that Kirkpatrick's recommendations in her 1990 essay coincide with some of Donald Trump's positions in the 2016 campaign (if not with many of his actual actions as president) make her views, ipso facto, not serious. The foreign policy establishment gives something like pariah status to arguments that we should negotiate better trade deals, reconsider our Cold War alliances and, most especially, subject American foreign policy to popular preferences. If she were alive today and were making the arguments she made in 1990, then she would be an outcast. That a formidable intellectual like Kirkpatrick would be dismissed in such a fashion is a sign of how obtuse our foreign policy debate has become.

William S. Smith is Senior Research Fellow and Managing Director of the Center for the Study of Statesmanship at The Catholic University of America. His recent book, Democracy and Imperialism , is from the University of Michigan Press. He studied political philosophy under Professor Jeane Kirkpatrick as an undergraduate at Georgetown University.

[Jun 14, 2020] As far as I know BLM is also dead silent on the black slave markets care of Obama and the EU in Libya.

Jun 14, 2020 | www.unz.com

AriusArmenian , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 13, 2020 at 6:54 pm GMT

@Ashino Wolf Sushanti As far as I know BLM is also dead silent on the black slave markets care of Obama and the EU in Libya.

There are also stories that money contributed to BLM will end up going to the DNC.

This is looking like another 1960's type insurrection that will end up the same way: it will be used by the rich and powerful elites (notice how the corporate controlled media has gone on one knee for BLM and has gone outright anti-white?), there will be a back lash that will crush it (right after the election), and its leaders will be either absorbed into the establishment or offed.

America looks like a hybrid of Stephen King, Brave New World, and 1984, and the rich and powerful US elites and intel agencies stroke it and love it. Notice that the US super rich have been raking it in since January 2020? While at the same time Trump is busy making the US a vassal state of Israel and accelerating the roll-out of Cold War v2 which is just fine with US elites that will not change with the election of moron Biden (if the people elect Biden they are electing his VP as Biden will not last long; he is a lot like Yeltsin that was pumped up on mental stimulants and nutriments to perform for short periods until the next treatment). What a country, what a ship of fools.

[Jun 14, 2020] Some Answers to the Mystery of the Missing Jews, by Carolyn Yeager and Wilhelm Kriessmann

Jun 14, 2020 | www.unz.com

Introduction: Questions about the official World War Two death figures increasingly mount. Where are the proofs for these numbers? Where are the bodies? Did people just vaporize into thin air–as some believe, going up in smoke through tall chimneys?

Two responsible figures have recently and publicly added their voices to the question of six million Poles murdered (ostensibly by Nazis) between 1939 and 1945.

One is the last communist head of state for Poland from 1985-90, Wojciech Jaruzelski. Speaking to a journalist for Izvestia (Russian daily newspaper), he said, rather tongue-in-cheek, that he cannot understand how the Polish population exploded between 1946 and 1970, and then leveled off to become stagnant from 1990 till today. He humorously remarked that there had to have been "a strong aphrodisiac" to lead to the birth of millions of new Poles because "in the grocery stores there had been only vinegar and millions had died even after the war."

The other is Dr. Otwald Mueller, a well-known German researcher, whose remarkable letter appeared on October 17, 2009 in two American German-language newspapers, the New Yorker Staatszeitung and the California Staatszeitung .

In his letter, Dr. Mueller discusses the six million figure that was widely reported during the September 1st, 2009 conference, held at Gdansk (Danzig), Poland, marking the 70 th Anniversary of the beginning of what was to expand into World War Two.

A translation of his letter appears below, followed by a survey of actual mass graves that have been found and excavated to date that physically reveal flesh-and-bone victims of WWII.

Dr. Mueller writes:

On the occasion of Poland's victory celebration at Danzig/Gdansk, September 1, 2009, you could read in the press the following statements:

1) Die Welt (German newspaper "The World"), September 2, 2009: "?beginning of WW II, 6 million victims in Poland, half of them Jews? ."

2) Daily Gazette (Schenectady, N.Y.), September 2, 2009: " .Poland alone lost 6 million citizens, half of them Jews?"

[The Associated Press (AP) supplies news to nearly all newspapers in the US. That means those news stories were published in nearly all US newspapers.]

3) Catalyst, Journal of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, Number 6, July-August 2009: "Six million Polish citizens were killed in the Holocaust – three million of them were Catholics".

An important chart

There exists an important Polish population chart. It marks a pre-war Polish population of 29.89 million people, and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million. The difference is of approximately 6 million, or 21% of the total population. The chart seems to prove the statement of "6 million" ? but, on the contrary, it contradicts it.

On page 413 of the book "Poland: It's People, It's Society, It's Culture" by Clifford Barnett, HRAF Press, New Haven, CT 1958, the following figures are marked at chart #1: For the year 1950, a population of 24,533,000; for the year 1955, a population of 27,544,000.

Where are the losses? They turned into gains, because –

For the years 1946 to 1950: a gain of 5.5%. For the years 1950 to 1955: a gain of 15.5%.

That shows in a significant way how Polish history – better Polish fairy tales – works.

Caption: (by author) Between 1931 and 1946 there is a large loss of population, which neatly adds up to six million Polish citizens, or 21%. We must keep in mind that 31% of Poland's population was of non-Polish origin � one million were German, as you can see from names of cities like Stettin, Gruenberg and Breslau. It also included 7 million Ukrainians, Belarusians, Lithuanians, and 3 million Jews. Even so, between the postwar years of 1946 to 1955, the lost population is gained back again – minus 2 million. By 1950, there is a gain of 908,000 in 4 years. And by 1955, an additional gain of 3,011,000 in 5 years! Can these be new births over deaths? No. They are more likely an "adjustment"- a more accurate accounting than was done before. This increase cannot be from Germans, Ukrainians or Lithuanians who returned to Poland, because Poland today is one of the most ethnically homogenous nations in the world. Are they not Poles, who either returned from the East, where they had fled, or never left?

Truth in regard to history
 The declaration by the chairman of the German-Polish Bishop's Conference on the occasion of the 70th Anniversary of the beginning of WW II states: "The church will definitely take steps against such inadequate handling of historical truth. We recommend and encourage an intensive dialog which always includes being ready to listen to the other side."

The German Bishop's conference unfortunately did not comply, so far, with its own directives. They did indeed "listen carefully" to their Polish partners and accepted all Polish historical interpretations without ever questioning or correcting. It is an outrageous way to violate historical truth when the author of that chart names the cities of Allenstein, Danzig, Koeslin, Stettin, Gruenberg, Breslau, Oppeln – in the provinces of East Prussia, Pommerania and Silesia – as "Polish cities."

The declaration of the bishop's conferences reads: "Seventy years ago, on September 1, 1939, German forces started their attack against Poland." (Tagespost, 27 August 2009, page 5) Thus the second world-war began. How truthful is that declaration? In reality, Stalin also started his attack against Poland with his Soviet Red Army on September 17, 1939. Hitler and Stalin together started a local war which ended after 6 weeks. Well, Stalin might have just said "Nyet" and Hitler would have stayed home. Stalin was not forced to sign a pact with Hitler. Stalin gained 51% of pre-war Poland.

One violates the truth in dealing with history when one identifies the Germans expelled from the German East provinces as "Polish victims."

The German Bishop's conference should consider it their task to urge the Polish Bishops to see that those Polish historical distortions are corrected.

In pre-war Poland, millions of Ukrainians, White Russians, Lithuanians, Ruthenians and others were living. How did they become Poles? No newspaper report tells the story.

April, 1920 – 22 years before Hitler [invaded the SU] – the Polish Army under Pilsudski started the victorious campaign against the Soviet Union.

On May 7, 1920, General Rydz-Smigly occupied Kiev.

At the peace treaty of Riga, March 21, 1921, Poland gained vast Ukrainian and White Russian territories with a population of about 11 million.

Did anyone have any doubts that the Soviet Union would sooner or later retake those regions? That happened in August 1939 with the Hitler-Stalin pact. Why did the bishops not mention that? Why did the German newspapers, so eagerly interested in historical truth, not report it? All the guilt is loaded on one side; the others carry no guilt at all.

Bush's America attacked Iraq on March 20, 2003. No Third World War started because no one wanted one.

Katyn

Up to June 7, 1943, the Wehrmacht excavated and identified, as well as possible, 4143 Polish officers murdered by the NKVD. (Louis Fitzgibbon: Katyn – A Crime without Parallel, Scribner's Sons, New York 1971)

If it were correct that 3 million Polish Catholics were murdered, as the Catalyst journal states, one must have found in Poland about 750 mass gravesites of the same size during the past 65 years (3,000,000 divided by 4000=750), each with circa 4000 dead. Or 1500 mass gravesites, each with 2000 corpses. It is not known if even one of those mass gravesites has been found. If they would have found only one, journalists from all over the world would have been invited to come and visit. All newspapers would have published terrible pictures and stories for weeks. But did we not indeed find one such gravesite – at Marienburg in East Prussia, now called Malbork by the Poles? Yes, but they were German deaths, and not Poles. Now, one can convincingly say that argument also contradicts the thesis of the 6 million.

A ray of hope on that topic

Maybe the search for historical truth progresses slowly. In the Maerkische Allgemeine Zeitung (German newspaper), August 28, 2009, one can read the following headline: "The numbers-to-date of victims are incorrect – 70 years after the start of the war, scientists are searching for facts." Warsaw: "The numbers of victims of WWII are to a great extent wrong. That is known among specialists and expert historians. Most of the figures are too high: 20 million deaths in the Soviet Union, 6 million deaths in Poland, 2 million among the German expellees. For political reasons, the numbers were increased after the war. Reparation negotiations were already carried on during the war. High loss numbers justified high reparations requests from the Germans–"today we know most of the figures entered into that game then are wrong " and: " the historian Mateusz Gniastowski came to the conclusion that the losses of ethnic Poles had to be corrected from 3 million to 1.5 million ."

Bartoszewski talks
 With the headline, "No restitution for Jewish property," the Junge Freiheit (German magazine) of 28 August, 2009, reports the following: "Wladyslaw Bartoszewski, ex-Polish secretary for foreign affairs, vehemently denied any restitution payments for Jewish properties by Poland."

Bartoszewski: "Of the 3.5 million Polish Jews, nearly 2 million lived in the Ukraine and White Russia of today." A very interesting statement – naturally, they became, in October 1939, Soviet citizens and were never again Polish citizens.

The consequence? Regardless what did happen to those people between 1939 and 1945 – whether they survived or were killed – they could not be counted as "Polish victims" but belong to the victim chart of the Soviet Union. Otherwise they are counted twice.

Final conclusion: According to the statement of Bartoszewski alone, the number of the alleged 6 million Polish losses must be reduced already by 3.5 million (1.5+2). The Poles have no right to count German, Jewish, Ukrainian losses as their own. The 6 million number of WW II Polish deaths do not comply with serious historiography. ~

1) Clifford Barnett: "Poland – its people – its society – its culture" HRAF Press. New Haven, Conn. Survey of World Cultures,1958

2) German-Polish declaration of the chairman of the Bishops Conference on occasion of the 70 th anniversary of the beginning of WWII. "The reconciliation between our nations is a gift." (Die Versoehnung zwischen unseren Nationen ist ein Geschenk). Die Tagespost, 27.6.2009. Page 5

3) Gerhard Frey: Antwort an Warschau (response to Warsaw} FZ – Verlag (publisher) 2009

4) Louis FitzGibbon: Katyn–A Crime without Parallel. Scribner's Sons, New York.1971

5) Maerkische Allgemeine ( a German newspaper w 29.8.2009; "Geschichte:Die bisherigen Opferzahlen sind falsch" (History: The present loss figures are wrong)

6) Junge Freiheit (Young Freedom): Keine Entschaedigung fuer juedisches vermoegen (No redemption for Jewish property) 28.8 2009

~End of translated letter ~

How many survivors are counted as both survivors and victims because of the chaotic movement of peoples, boundaries and rulership – giving inflated numbers of victims? This is a common error, which seems to be purposely overlooked.

We have a right to ask where are the remains of the three million Catholics murdered by the German Nazis. The only known mass grave of Poles was the work of the Soviet Red Army, led by the NKVD, in the Katyn Forest in Soviet Russia. Long blamed on Germany, the responsibility for this genocidal act is now placed where it belongs. Ironically, the only mass gravesites found on Polish territory have been of German civilians. There are not even any mass graves of Poles – Catholic or Jewish – on the grounds of the famous concentration camps. No buried ashes either.

Let's take a look at what mass gravesites have been found, and what they contain.

MASS GRAVES IN MARIENBURG CONTAIN GERMAN CIVILIANS

In the previously German city of Marienburg, now named Malbork, Polish workers digging a foundation for a future hotel across from the Marienburg Castle, in October 2008, came upon a mass of human bones and skeletons. By December, about 470 individuals had been found, none of whom could be identified. A German organization dedicated to caring for German war graves sent a representative to attend the digging. By April 2009, the number of dead had climbed to 2000. When further discoveries were ruled out, the dead totaled 2116: 1001 women, 381 men, 377 children and 357 not identified.

At Marienburg, a pit full of human bones, but "We aren't finding any personal objects, no glasses, no gold teeth and above all, no clothing," said Zbigniew Sawicki, Malbork archaeologist.

Other mass graves stemming from World War II have been found around Malbork. In 1996, 178 corpses were discovered on the grounds of Marienberg/Malbork Castle. In 2005, specialists exhumed the bones of 123 more, including five women and six children, from a trench. All are believed to be Germans.

In the case of this latest and largest mass grave (2008), no clothing, eye glasses or gold teeth were found. It thus appears that they were completely stripped before they were killed. The skeletons that were laying on top had bullet holes in their heads, indicating they may have dug the grave and put the dead in it before they themselves were added.

The Germans who did survive were forced to leave the city. The relevant authorities in the newly established Polish district announced proudly on November 3, 1947, that the Marienburg area was "almost 100 percent purged of Germans." (Spiegel, Jan. 23, 2009, "Death in Marienburg: Mystery Surrounds Mass Graves in Polish City.)

On August 17, 2009, 108 coffins with the remains of the 2116 victims of war atrocities which took place in Marienburg in early 1945, were buried elsewhere, at the Volksbund War Memorial Cemetery near the village of Neumarkt, close to the old Hansa city of Stettin, in former Pommerania. The highest dignitaries attending were the German ambassador to Poland and bishops from both nations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8202210.stm

NO CZECHS IN MASS GRAVES

Czechs have not claimed massacres from the war – other than the 173 men of the village of Lidice, who were executed for harboring the murderers of Reichs Protector for Bohemia-Moravia, Reinhard Heydrich, as an example to those who would cooperate with the Czech underground (considered by the Germans as an illegal terrorist organization).

Still, there was great desire to retaliate following the retreat of the German Wehrmacht and the arrival of the Soviet Red Army and NKVD. Postelberg/Polstoloprty and Saav/Zatec, two towns northwest of Prague, saw brutal massacres of at least 2,000 Sudeten Germans in the space of a few days in June 1945.

The largest mass grave contained 500 bodies and had been known since an inquiry into it in 1947. After that, in August 1947, other mass graves were secretly dug up and 763 bodies were removed and cremated. But there still remained more.

Meanwhile, documents in Postoloprty were classified as confidential and disappeared into Interior Ministry archives. Today, a majority of Czech residents in these towns admit the massacre, but do not want to talk about the case and oppose building any memorial structures at the gravesites. ( Der Spiegel , "Czech Town Divided over How to Commemorate 1945 Massacre," Hans Ulrich Stoldt, Nov. 4, 2009)

There was also the Bruenn/Brno Death March, which began late on the night of May 30, and the Aussig/Usti nad Labem Massacre on July 31, 1945–both majority German towns in the same area of Northwestern Bohemia. Basing their decision on the Potsdam Agreement, the Czech "National Committee of Brno" announced the expulsion of 20,000 ethnic Germans, mostly women, children and elderly (the adult men were all POW's), and forced them to march 56 kilometers south to the border of Austria. Once there, however, the Soviet authorities refused to allow them to cross, so they were marched back into internment. Many died and are buried along the way; up to 8000 perished in the terrible conditions before the survivors were released.

The Usti massacre was triggered by an explosion at an ammunition dump. Though the cause of the explosion had not been determined, ethnic Germans were beaten, bayonetted, shot or drowned in the Elbe River, where most still remain in their watery grave.

No mass graves of Jews have ever been found on Czech soil.

SLOVENIA: THE KILLING FIELD OF EUROPE

Over 100,000 people fell victim to summary executions on Slovenian soil immediately after the end of the second world war. These were suspected Nazi collaborators and opponents of communism – murdered by Tito's Yugoslav federal army or by Slovenian civil authorities and the Communist secret police, OZNA.

"The killings that took place here have no comparison in Europe. In two months after the war, more people were killed here than in the four years of war," said Joze Dezman , a historian who heads the government Commission for Concealed Mass Graves.

A task force of the police and state's prosecutor's office has exhumed 12 mass graves and filed two criminal complaints, with no indictments so far, according to the Slovenian Press Agency, March 20, 2008.

A particularly gruesome discovery was the mummified remains of approximately 300 pro-Nazi soldiers from Croatia and Slovenia in a mining shaft in Huda Jama.

"Gassed to death: 300 lime-covered victims of Yugoslavia's communist regime found in mass grave," by Graham Gurrin, 3-11-09, Mail Online, UK.

They are thought to have been killed with gas because there are no visible signs of wounds. Piles of military shoes were found at the entrance. "It seems that the victims had to undress and take off their shoes before they were killed," said Joze Balazic, of the Institute for Forensic Medicine in Ljubljana. The bodies were found in an underground passage some 400 meters from the cave entrance, in good condition because they had been covered in lime and the cave had been hermetically sealed with several walls of concrete separated by layers of barren soil. (Javno, 3-4-09, Translation: Karmen Horvat)

Photos: Unclothed skeletons wearing shoes appear to have died in agony in a mass grave in Huda Jama, Slovenia. Positions indicate there was movement before the victims expired (they were buried alive). ( photos no longer available )

THIS IS WHERE THE WAR WAS ENDING

Slovenia was part of the former Yugoslavia. Dezman said, "These killings took place in Slovenia because this is where the war was ending: this is where the iron curtain was anticipated, this is where refugees found themselves at the end of the war."

He also says that "due to the short time frame, the number of victims, the method of execution and their sheer extent, the reprisal killings of suspected Nazi collaborators and other opponents by Communist authorities in Slovenia could be compared to the biggest crimes of Communism, as well as Nazism, anywhere." (Slovenian Press Agency, March 20, 2008)

Another historian, university professor Mitja Ferenc , has unearthed more than 570 hidden grave sites from World War II. His digs have cracked a psychological barrier in Slovenia and sparked new political debate about the sins of that war, wherein thousands of Germans, Croatians and others on the losing side were killed.

In 1999 he found 1,179 skeletons in a trench near the city of Maribor, where a road by-pass was being constructed.

[The department of highways pressed to continue the road works, and the (left-wing) government in Ljubljana ?had no objections, although very likely, thousands of corpses were still hidden in the trench. Present investigations revealed that there are at least 15,000, possibly more than 20,000 corpses. The tank trench was suitable for mass killings, it was big enough to line up pow�s and civilians, shoot them with machine guns and cover the corpses with earth. Frankfurter Allgemaine, "Slovenia: Massacres after the War," by Karl-Peter Schwarz, 10-16-06. ]

Slovenian forensic experts investigate the site discovered in 1999 by Slovenian highway workers near Maribor, where 1,179 skeletons were found in a World War II-era trench. It's believed up to 20,000 are actually buried along this stretch of roadway.

In 2007 a new dig began nearby in the Tezno Forest – it's believed as many as 15,000 dead lie in this spot of timberland. Military gear indicates they were Croatians and Germans.

"My point is to find out what's out there. Without excavation, there is no way to know ," said Ferenc.

BRITISH DECEIT; STILL NO OFFER OF REGRET

The Queen pictured with Yugoslavian president Josip Tito, front left, in 1978 after hosting him at Buckingham Palace. Behind are Prime Minister Lord Cardiff and Prince Philip. Tito was supported by the British in the war, and its representatives turned thousands of fleeing German, Croat, Slovene and Cossack forces back to Tito's partisans in 1945, knowing they would be killed.

In May 1945, German troops and Croatians were trying to reach Austria in order to surrender to the British rather than Tito's brutal fighters. Tens of thousands of Slovenes, Serbs, Cossacks, Romanians and others joined the frantic flight.

Tamara Griesser-Pecar writes in A people divided. Slovenia 1941-1946. Occupation, Collaboration, Civil War, Revolution (Publisher: Boehlau Verlag, Wien 2003) that all Yugoslavs of German ethnic background were declared outlawed by the "Anti-Fascist Council of National Liberation of Yugoslavia" (AVNOJ). Those who survived the horror of the labor camps were expelled from the country.

She speaks of the 60,000 Croatian soldiers and civilians who were massacred on Slovenian soil. Thousands vanished, to be found in recent times as skeletons bound at the wrist with wires. Not all were German sympathizers, but Catholics and other anti-communists fighting what they considered a civil war.

There were also the 25,000 Cossacks and 2000 Domobranci Slovenians who were part of the German army retreating in early May to the valleys of Kaernten in southern Austria, where they surrendered to the British who, promising they were being sent to Italy, forced them into locked railroad cars that instead went directly to the waiting Soviets in Styria and the Tito partisans at the Austrian border–certain death at the hands of their enemies.

In the Gottschee Horn (Kocevski Rog), 12,000 Slovenians were murdered. In another pit near Ljubljana, Croatians and Cossacks had been murdered – German prisoners were forced to clean out this pit with a "horrible cadaverous smell" and thereafter were murdered themselves.

Mitja Ferenc said Yugoslavia's communist authorities persistently refused to acknowledge the executions had taken place and refused to tell relatives where the bodies were buried. For almost 50 years, people were not allowed to visit the graves. Many of them were destroyed by deliberate explosions or covered by waste. In some places, such as Celje, about 60 km (35 miles) east of Ljubljana, parts of towns were built on them.

"The evidence is being gathered but the fact is that most evidence has been systematically destroyed in the past ," Joze Dezman said.

Typifying the ongoing attitude of the communists is 85-year-old Janez Stanovnik, a partisan fighter as a teenager who held high government positions under communism.

"I'm not proud of what happened in May and June 1945, but I am proud of what the partisans did during the war," he said. "Is this really something another generation has to pay for – or see used for political capital?" (Chicago Tribune, "Wartime heroes, sinful secrets," Christine Spolar, Jan. 29, 2008)

IN UKRAINE, JEWS HUNT FOR BODIES

Sparked by all these discoveries, Jewish groups have undertaken to discover their own mass graves in the Ukraine and Russia, which they claim to be the "killing fields" of World War II.

But for all the hundreds of thousands of Jews who are claimed to have been murdered here by the Nazi Einsatzgruppen, no remains have shown up in any large numbers. [The Einsatzgruppen were special SS task forces whose job was to protect the German fighting forces from behind-the-front attacks by the local population and communist partisan fighters.]

But it is suspicious that little to no excavation is taking place to verify the number of bodies or to identify whether they are Jews or not, or how they were killed. The search parties and excavation teams are made up entirely of Jews, without government or neutral parties involved.

For instance, according to an article at Y-Net News, an Israel-based internet site, published Sept. 8, 2006, a secret private mission called "Kaddish for Ukraine's Jews," chaired by Yehuda Meshi Zahav, began looking for mass graves of Jews massacred during the Second World War. This mission was initiated by the Jewish Congress and French historian/priest Patrick DesBois (author of Holocaust by Bullets ), with the help and funding of the national holocaust museums in Paris and Washington D.C.

Around Sept. 1, 2006, this mission uncovered what they say are hundreds of Jewish skeletons in a Ukrainian forest next to the city of Lvov.

They say they used metal detectors to detect bullets. When the metal detectors went off, they began digging and, at two meters down, sculls and skeletons began to surface. They say they counted hundreds and most were children . They say they recovered German-manufactured bullets marked with the years 1939 and 1941.

This "find" has been widely publicized in world media as a "holocaust" mass grave, yet no tests have proven the remains to be Jewish, or the perpetrators to be Germans. It is assumed.

We know the Soviets killed thousands of Ukrainian and Polish anti-communist nationalists before retreating from this area in 1941. There were also terrible massacres of Poles by Ukrainians and Ukrainians by Poles before and especially during WWII (over the disputed region of Volhynia) 1 . After the war, there were fights between Ukrainians and Russians in the part of Ukraine that Russia got from Poland.

The Kaddish delegation has estimated that 1800 Jews were buried here–even though they did not excavate and count all the bones. The Ukrainian authorities have agreed to recognize the area as a Jewish burial site , which means the bones can stay where they are. The Kaddish delegation performed a religious ceremony and erected a memorial monument in a matter of two weeks after the announcement of the discovery was made! This kind of haste is usually the mark of a desire for non-investigation.

JEWS GET CONTROL OF ANOTHER GRAVESITE

Another site that has received a great deal of attention is Gvozdavka, a village in southern Ukraine, near Odessa, where another group of rabbis insist thousands of Jews are buried. It was found by chance in the spring of 2007 when workers digging to lay gas pipelines discovered human bones.

As soon as the bones were discovered, the Jewish community in Odessa requested the authorities to cease construction work.

Israeli rabbis "help" to excavate a mass grave they claim to have discovered in Ukraine. (Reuters photo)

According to a story in Haaretz, June 6, 2007, "Mass WWII-era Jewish grave found near Odessa," Rabbi Abraham Wolf announced that the authorities had also agreed to give the Jewish community ownership of the land so it could build a monument commemorating the victims.

Odessa chief rabbi Shlomo Baksht revealed their plans to fence off the site and erect a monument to the victims that same year!

In a follow-up story 8 days later in Haaretz (June 14, 2007, "Israeli Rabbis help excavate Holocaust-era mass grave" , it's reported that a dozen rabbis were on the scene – 3 of whom were Holocaust scholars from Israel, others from the U.S. – and "spent several hours hunting for bones, which they immediately shoveled back into the ground."

In the follow up article, it's reported that Vera Kryzhanivska, who heads the village council, said it would soon discuss a request to hand over control of the meadow to Jewish groups.

Some Jewish community leaders complained that villagers didn't show enough respect for the dead. "How could people just walk past the grave and do nothing?" said Ilia Levitas, the head of Ukraine's Jewish Council. "Where is their Christian mercy?"

* * *

Since these two finds in 2006 and 2007, there have been no more claims of mass graves of Jews. As we know, there are no substantial remains of either bodies or ashes discovered at the concentration camp sites of Treblinka, Belzec, Sorbibor, Chelmo or Auschwitz-Birkenau, all in Poland. The killing-by-bullets of Jews that supposedly took place in the Ukraine is not showing up in any new mass graves, even though Father Patrick DesBois continues to search. He finds a few bodies here and there.

What are we to think? When it comes to Germans and their allies massacred and thrown into pits, we have masses of evidence compiled by official government agencies, even when they are resistant to do so. When it comes to Poles, Ukrainians and other Slavic ethnic groups, we don't find them buried in mass graves by the Nazis. When it comes to Jews, we have only the word of Jewish delegations that thousands of Jews are buried in mass graves that they refuse to excavate.

As Mitja Ferenc, the Slovenian history professor, remarked of his own discoveries: "Without excavation, there is no way to know."~

1) "The Soviets, having enlarged Soviet Ukraine to the west, deported tens of thousands of the Volhynian elites, mostly Poles, to Siberia and Kazakhstan. These actions ceased only when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941." And "The 1943 decision of Ukrainian nationalists to cleanse (Volhynian Poles) was [ ] based upon news of the Soviet victory at Stalingrad" (with the expectation of the end of German occupation). "Ukrainian partisans killed about fifty thousand Volhynian Poles and forced tens of thousands more to flee in 1943." Later the Poles turned the tables on the Ukrainians. (From "The Causes of Ukrainian-Polish Ethnic Cleansing 1943," Timothy Snyder, Yale University, 2003)

Wally , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:51 am GMT

Well done, Carolyn Yeager.

– A classic example of what Carolyn Yeager writes about, here's all that was found at Sobibor, where 250,000 Jew remains are said to exist. Of these there is no proof of even the age of the skeletons, whether they were even Jews, whether they were even murdered. Yep, the "holocaust" narrative is that bogus.


– Sobibor, mass grave where 250,000 Jew remains are said to exist

much more at:
Simple question: What happened to the people who were sent to the camps?: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13204
and posted at: unz.com :
https://www.unz.com/article/babi-yar/ -- see my comment # 177
and:
https://www.unz.com/?s=graf&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally

And then there's this desperate tactic:

The Big False Excuse: 'excavation & exhumation of Jew remains "forbidden" / But they're not :
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6817

"Jewish Burial Law" as fake excuse' : https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8997

'First UK Burial for Holocaust Victims – No Autopsy': https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12231

No alleged human remains of millions in allegedly known locations to see, no 'holocaust'.

utu , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:25 am GMT
Lack of evidence is not the evidence of absence. Lack of Jewish mass graves which nobody is really looking for because it is not really permitted, ostensively for religion reasons, can not give the answer to the missing Jews providing that there is such a question. Jews are missing only in the Holocaust deniers' minds. Normal people will agree that the official number of 6,000,000 is might be too high and that rather three to four million Jews died during WWII and they are not missing because they are dead.

Mystery of the Missing Americans

There are 2.6M deaths per year in the US. 50% (1.3M) are cremated. 1/3 of ashes are buried at cemeteries, 1/3 are kept at home and 1/3 are scattered. This means that every year in the US ashes of 430k people are scattered into environment. The 1/3 kept at homes will be scattered into the environment sooner or later so the number of scattered ashes will be circa 800k per year. In 5 years it is 4M people. In 20 years it 16M people. In 40 years it is 32M people.

In last 40 years 32M people vanished w/o a trace. How would you go about proving it to Holocaust deniers that 32M people in American died and that they were not teleported to Venus? There are no graves. No exhumations. Nobody even try to find the answer. Wally of CODOH would not accept any documentation because he would claim it was forged. He would not accept any witness statement because he would claim that all so-called witnesses lie. The claim that 32M Americans in last 40 years died and were cremated can't be proven. Wally must be right that 32M of Americans were teleported to Venus.

Furthermore, can you imagine the absurdity of cremations? The conspirators want us to believe that they cremate the corpses while charging for shaving the corpses and applying make up and dressing them up in their Sunday's best. Why would they do it if they allegedly cremate the bodies and plan to throw away the ashes? That does not make sense. For some reason they want them bodies to look good on Venus.

Otoh the question of missing Germans or the question of atrocities committed against Germans can be
tackled by searching mass graves. There is no prohibition against excavating of non Jewish graves. For example why nobody tried to confirm James Bacque's hypothesis by searching sites of Eisenhower's POW camps in Germany? If one million or more died there, the graves should be easy to find. Say, 1,000 graves with 1,000 bodies each. Find at least one.

Al Liguori , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:26 am GMT
The Jews have a long Talmudic tradition of lying victimhood.

Consider the typically ridiculous self-reports of victimhood in tractate Gittin 57b of the Torah, the 4 BILLION (yes, BILLION) Jews killed by the Romans [Gittin 57b claims Vespasian killed "four hundred thousand myriads" = 400,000 x 10,000 = 4 BILLION] and the 64 MILLION Jewish children skewered and burned in scrolls by the Romans in one city alone [Gittin 58a claims "400 synagogues" each with "400 teachers" and "400 pupils" for each teacher" = 400 x 400 x 400 = 64 million]. http://www.halakhah.com/gittin/gittin_57.html#PARTb http://www.halakhah.com/gittin/gittin_58.html

Truly as Jesus said, children of the Father of Lies and Murder. John 8:44

Louis Hissink , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:35 am GMT
This article seems eerily similar to Gunnar Heinsohn's revision of 1st millennium history based on stratigraphy – no layers for a historical period of civilization, then that history is false or fake. 700 phantom years are missing and the collapse of the Roman period seems to thus have occurred circa 930 AD, and not 700 years before.

Given the sensitivity of the topic in this article, I limit comment to the idea that proscriptive dogma is invariably used to bury facts and to keep them buried. Whether proscriptive dogma is used in ignorance based on false beliefs, or is official policy remains moot. But propaganda 101 is to always accuse your opponents of your own crimes.

Without excavation we will indeed never know.

utu , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:41 am GMT
How many ethnic Poles died?

This Google translate from

"Juedische Allgemeine": the destruction of Poles as a nation was never planned
https://www.dw.com/pl/juedische-allgemeine-zagłada-polaków-jako-narodu-nigdy-nie-była-planowana/a-50041291
Lesser cites numbers given by historians Feliks Tych and Mateusz Gniazdowski, according to which in the occupied territories Germans murdered over 90 percent of Polish Jews and from five to seven percent of ethnic Poles. "In absolute numbers, they were three million Jews and about 1.4 million ethnic Poles," he writes. In 1947, at the behest of Jakub Berman, a member of the PZPR Central Committee Political Bureau, the number of victims "was arbitrarily rounded to 6 million or 22 percent of the pre-war population. The idea was that Polish Christians would not feel discriminated against as victims of Polish Jews. Berman also hoped that this operation would stop the venomous anti-Semitism in the country, "writes the author.

marylinm , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:17 am GMT
Got that, you killed nobody. You only brought democracy to every nation you invaded. But you killed my father, you bastards. F U, sickos.
Reger , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:29 am GMT
There are many geographical inaccuracies in this article – eg the author thinks that Bruenn is near Aussig. They seem to have a very sketchy understanding of the ethnic fabric of Eastern Europe both before and after WWII and I would therefore caution anyone to accept their findings or conclusions.
Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 7:08 am GMT
"When it comes to Jews, we have only the word of Jewish delegations that thousands of Jews are buried in mass graves that they refuse to excavate."

Well, story telling and theatrical exaggeration seems to be in their blood, especially the latter.

It's even commemorated in a song about their most important empire, Hollywood:

"Hooray for Hollywood! Where you're 'terrific' if you're even good . "

Take the exaggerations with a grain (or truckload) of salt, and let's all just pray the horrors visited upon the hapless Europeans (and everyone else) during WW2 are never repeated

GMC , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 8:42 am GMT
The War on Knowledge , Truth and Common Sense will go on until the honest researchers get finished with their work. But the Enemies, that wish No sharing of knowledge, truth etc. are many and work very hard at spreading the lies and cover-ups. If the bullets found in these trenches are known to be German made ,plus the date of origin, then maybe we could be told what Pharma company supplied the gaz for all the other proclaimed deaths – the dates and where the chemicals were produced , would be appreciated – also. I thought it was a very good article.
another anon , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:03 am GMT
This is the ultimate black pill

New piece! RT, follow and subscribe to my telegram! pic.twitter.com/ZvaKphmQhN

-- zillajinjer (@zillajinjer) June 11, 2020

Włodzimierz , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:05 am GMT
If it were correct that 3 million Polish Catholics were murdered, as the Catalyst journal states, one must have found in Poland about 750 mass gravesites of the same size during the past 65 years (3,000,000 divided by 4000=750), each with circa 4000 dead. Or 1500 mass gravesites, each with 2000 corpses.

It is not known if even one of those mass gravesites has been found

Really?

I have found one
http://lasszpegawski.pl/in-english/

At the end of 1944, the Germans, obliterating the crime, burned most of the corpses . In the Szpęgawski Forest, as many as 7,000 people could have died, approximately 2400 names were established. In the cemetery there are 32 mass graves in one complex and 7 graves 500-1000 m away.

White Monkey , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:06 am GMT
Slightly off topic,but also interesting:After the war,13.3 million Germans were deported from Poland,Chekoslovakia and Hungary,but only 7.3 million actually arrived in Germany,mostly women,children and old people.6 million Germans had disappeared.Many of those were sent to Russia for forced labour.
-first post-war German chancellor Konrad Adenauer in a speech in Bern,Switzerland,March 23,1949.
Phil the Fluter , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:12 am GMT
A very informative article. It increasingly looks as though a holocaust was perpetrated against the Germans and not the Jews.
Grahamsno(G64) , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:01 am GMT
This has to be one of the most risible, amateurish rubbish masquerading as Holocaust revisionism.

The title says -Some Answers to the Mystery of the "Missing Jews" – and whoa 3/4″s of the article is about post WW2 Communist atrocities, did you think that the Stalin & Beria combine would spare anybody associated with the Nazis when they swept East Europe? And the most Hilarious bit is that this dogs puke of an article completely ignores the AR camps, how can you give answers about the missing Jews while ignoring the AR camps.

Listen if you can't answer about what happened to those 'Missing Jews' of the AR camps kindly shut up.

Shame on you Ron for publishing such amateur Rubbish here, if you want to go full Revisionist publish Carlo Mattogno or Rudolf or some professional.

Anonymous [661] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:03 am GMT
"Jewish groups have undertaken to discover their own mass graves in the Ukraine and Russia, which they claim to be the "killing fields" of World War II."

What they're digging up is probably the remains of the millions of Ukrainians the Bolshevik Jews murdered through forced famine in 1932 and the millions of Russian Christians they slaughtered starting in 1917. Historical irony indeed.

There is no definitive history. More will come to light as research continues, or should I say as long as it is allowed to continue?

Truth3 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:09 am GMT
Jewish lies number in the trillions.

Jewish fraud is centered on six million.

padre , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:17 am GMT
In other words, Nazis were actually a good guys, while Soviet, Yugoslav communists were the villains?You are counting Poles, Jews and Checks, while forgetting to count all the others, like Gypsies, Russians, Serbs and other Slavs?
GeeBee , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:28 am GMT
What an extraordinary article. Why are these facts not generally known? Yes, I am joking. History is of course always written by the victors. And the Jews always seem to win
Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:56 am GMT
I don't understand why Jewish groups and their rabbis were given control of two mass grave sites. Did the civil authorities conspire with the Jews to pretend the bodies were of Jews?

Or did the civil authorities know that if bodies were found when laying a pipeline that they were certainly Jewish bodies?

Although mass graves of non-Jews were known to have been in those regions?

If skeletons are found I guess it's hard by examining them to know they were Jews. But why was it assumed that they were?

And when the Jews wanted the pipeline work stopped, I suppose it would have stopped simply because there were bodies there, whether Jewish or not.

I may have failed to understand the article. Or perhaps it omits relevant information.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:14 am GMT
@Wally Was it known that the bodies were of people who died during the war? That the skeletons were not centuries old?
HammerJack , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:15 am GMT
@utu

Furthermore, can you imagine the absurdity of cremations?

Indeed, you had better struggle mightily, because in the year 2020 we have learned that all of the crematories in Italy combined were unable to dispose of more than a few hundred bodies per week. Struggle!

Reger , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:16 am GMT
@Wally Here's a suggestion; if you like poetry and read German, try Gertrud Kolmar. If you like opera. read about Ottilie Metzger-Lattermann (one of the Kaiser's favorite singers). If you like classical music, follow the career of Viktor Ullmann. Just these three for a start so you can find out how peacefully they died. However, I have a strong feeling you would prefer to deal in millions (or the lack of) instead of individual fates.
Gordo , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:18 am GMT
It's now possible to determine quite closely ethnicity from a skeleton.

Possibly even use that to identify living relatives.

So many mysteries will yield to science over the next few years.

Dumbo , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:23 am GMT
But let's see, how many Germans died at the Dresden bombings? None, because we can't find their graves to count? The first victim of war is truth, numbers are almost always wrong or difficult to estimate. Propaganda from one side is no different than propaganda for the other side.
gfhändel , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:42 am GMT
Brno is on the opposite (southwestern) side of Czechia from Ústí nad Labem, in Moravia.
Hegar , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:47 am GMT
Thank you for this information. It is astonishing how much people aren't allowed to know. Mass graves of Germans murdered by the communists, and many tens of thousands of Slovenians, Croats and others who fought the communists. But socialist school teachers in Europe harp endlessly about "gassed Jews".

Jews get control of found graves and immediately erect fences and memorials, without excavation, declaring them Jews. "Proof that Jews were killed!" No mass graves of Jews ever found at any of the concentration camps. The "einsatzgruppen" have been blamed for killing Jews – of course the Jews hated them, as they were the ones tasked with beating down communist attacks on German forces behind the front army.

Unz Review should concentrate on these factual stories, rather than Marxist fantasies by people like "Eric Striker," who claims that "the Soviet Union would have worked if it had been Germans instead of Slavs," and constantly makes excuses for socialists while making sure you concentrate your anger about Black riots on conservatives. Unz Review should clean the ranks.

JohnPlywood , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:55 am GMT
@Reger This article (like the comment section) is full of retarded trash. The Holocaust happened, and the number of brutally murdered people has likely been officially under estimated, and the only people denying the Holocaust are those with a serious learning disability and poor attention span. I also suspect many of the people in the comment section (such as GeeBee) are coping Jewish individuals.
Emily , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 12:10 pm GMT
Not just the missing jewish remains – misleading and skewing.
There is another nasty double standard re the victims of the well known German and other nazi aligned Labour (concentration) camps.
How many on here have heard of Jasenovac?
It was a death camp – a real death camp.
So vile even the gestapo were sickened.
It was a Nazi Croatian mass murder camp where hundreds of thousands of allied Serbs, gypsies and others died, suffering appalling torture and murder.
The Serbs – who NATO/US/UK mass murdered and bombed back to the stonage some 25 years ago – died valiantly and like flies – tying up whole divisions of the Germans.
In gratitude and on behalf of the islamic fundamentalist Saudi leaning KLA we repaid this debt illegally attacked the Serbs – the only ethnic cleansing being some 700,000 Serb refugees driven from their ancestral homes in the Krajina (20,000 more murdered because they couldn't leave fast enough), over a quarter of a million of them out of their ancestral homeland of Kosovo and many from Bosnia and other parts.
700,000 who lost it all.
Reparations due I think.
All illegal and to give radical islam a base in Southern Europe and build a massive USA base – Camp Bondsteel.
Back to Jasenovac .
This was the most deadly and brutal camp of all.
Heard of it.
NO.
Few Jrewish victims so written out of history.
Just as have been the millions of non jews killed in the other camps.
The disabled etc – many catholics.
All written out as only Jews can be the victims.
Here are just a few of the links to Jasenovac.
And ask yourself why the silence on the suffering of the Serbians – huge numbers dying fighting for we the allies – not as some groups, not fighting at all but profiteering.
https://jasenovac.org/what-was-jasenovac/
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/jasenovac-the-forgotten-extermination-camp-of-the-balkans/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0252563/
So why the silence – only one holocaust allowed?.
And Serbs are not members of that club.
And how many know that the Serbs have been completely vindicated and Milosevic declared an innocent man of war crimes .
Murdered non the less in his prison
http://johnpilger.com/articles/provoking-nuclear-war-by-media
Commentator Mike , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 12:28 pm GMT
@HammerJack Italians must be incompetent. India cremates over six million each year.
Biff , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 12:37 pm GMT
@Dumbo

But let's see, how many Germans died at the Dresden bombings?

Funny you should ask. Encyclopedia Britannica says 135,000
https://www.britannica.com/event/bombing-of-Dresden

Wikipropaganda says 25,000 tops.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

My guess is all that got killed died.

maz10 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 12:40 pm GMT
Let me start with this:

One is the last communist head of state for Poland from 1985-90, Wojciech Jaruzelski. Speaking to a journalist of Izvestia (Russian daily newspaper), he said, rather tongue-in-cheek, that he cannot understand how the Polish population exploded between 1946 and 1970, and then leveled off to become stagnant from 1990 till today. He humorously remarked that there had to have been "a strong aphrodisiac" to lead to the birth of millions of new Poles because "in the grocery stores there had been only vinegar and millions had died even after the war."

What the late General is referring to is the common trope that during communism (actually socialism but I will leave that for another time) there was only 'musztarda i ocet' that is mustard and vinegar on store shelves. It was a common accusation against the system as a whole and Jaruzelski personally since he was an important part of the said system. On more than one occasion he defended himself and his times by pointing out – sometimes in a tongue-in -cheek fashion as in the quoted citation – that it could have not been so bad if Poland's population growth is anything to go by (he sometimes pointed out other advances but again I do not want to side-track here) as Poland indeed experienced a demographic explosion. Of course this resulted in many problems, for example despite a program of massive apartment block building – in virtually every Polish city and town you will see rows and rows of such apartment blocks standing – there was a chronic housing shortage.

Thus with citing Gen. Jaruzelski's remarks in the context of Polish and Jewish victims of German atrocities Ms. Yeager and her sidekick managed to make it to the very top of Unz review's comic relief category. My sincere congratulations.

That was the funny part and here comes the more serious one.

Namely Ms. Yeager and her sidekick were kind enough to write: 'The only known mass grave of Poles was the work of the Soviet Red Army, led by the NKVD, in the Katyn Forest in Soviet Russia.'

Let me just point out, that mass graves with Polish victims of German mass executions were located among other places at:

Palimiry, Las Sękocinski, Las kabacki, Laski and many, many others locations such as for example Ponary (outside of Poland's post WW II borders in present-day Lithuania).

I do not know if Ms. Yeager and her sidekick are that ignorant in regard to the topic they write about or if they deliberately lie, or alternatively there is some other explanation – that however is of secondary importance. What is of primary importance is that what they wrote is not factually correct.

One could go on dissecting Ms. Yeager's and her sidekick's writings however I have better things to do on Sunday. Yet the above should suffice to put parts of their 'work' into the category of comedies while others into that of falsities* – that in turn weighs heavily on what to make of the rest.

*With one caveat though: hundreds of years of Drang nach Osten were indeed reversed in a very short time at the end of WW II, sometimes in a brutal way. Thus there IS some truth in what Ms. Yeager and her sidekick produced, this being in the category of an exception which confirms the rule in regard to the rest.

GeeBee , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:00 pm GMT
@JohnPlywood What is a 'coping Jewish individual' exactly? You are of course at liberty to suspect me of being anything you like. But none of your suspecting will ever change me from being anything other than a proud, thoroughbred Yorkshire Anglo-Saxon, who can trace both parents' lines back for centuries with no trace of anything outside of our own fine, yeoman, Anglo-Saxon bloodline.

My admittedly unusual 'take' on twentieth-century history arose from making a closer study of it than I had hitherto stirred myself so to do, in the wake of having been obliged to take early retirement at a convenient moment, in that it coincided with the appearance of much hitherto unavailable information thanks to the burgeoning internet era. My prior studies had by no means been trivial: I had taken modules in both War Studies and International Affairs to degree standard while at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.

At all events, I believe my current position to reflect a good deal more of the truth than is contained in the 'official' history, and I can assure you that my epiphany in this regard occasioned me the very keenest mental anguish at first. Not to put too fine a point on it, I found my life-long beliefs turned upside down. Not at all a welcome development, but one that intellectual honesty compelled me to accept.

Anonymous [506] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:06 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse Don't be so cynical. Because the Jews acting collectively have never and can never do anything wrong, it follows that any criticism of their collective behavior anywhere and at any time, whether today or throughout history, is hate speech.

We also know from Freudian science that it arises from envy and that paranoid guilt-projection plays no part in their condemnation of the Other. Laws to that effect throughout Europe also provide scientific evidence that Jews never lie and, therefore, their narratives of events taking place outside the laws of nature and not subject to rules of logic or scientific method must be true.

So, Mr. Holocaust doubter, just maybe the rabbis, reaching into the pits, have discovered miraculously intact passports, photos, and birth certificates as before, using the forensic skills their agents displayed in the ashes of the Trade Center and Pentagon to locate paper miraculously immune from fire, water, and the forces of explosion sufficient to render concrete into dust.

Robjil , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:12 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse

And when the Jews wanted the pipeline work stopped, I suppose it would have stopped simply because there were bodies there, whether Jewish or not.

I may have failed to understand the article. Or perhaps it omits relevant information.

The omitted info is the following:

Ukraine is a US/Israel controlled nation since 2014.

Nuland's, a Jewish Zionist, world famous battle cry begin the Zionist coup and Zio rule of Ukraine with these infamous words "F–k the EU."Poroshenko the first president of this Zion colony was half Jewish.The second president Zelensky is Jewish.The Zionists in control of this US/Israel colony are even afraid Shabbos Goy to take the presidency of their new colony.

trickster , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:40 pm GMT
@HammerJack It is true that India cremates millions per year, that is their tradition. However to attend a Hindu cremation and to observe, really observe the logistics required to burn ONE body is to realize the impossibility of German logistics to effectively do away with 6 million in addition to fighting a war against multiple opponents.

One need not have a Doctorate in Maths. Just pick a modern City with 3 million inhabitants, visit it and drive around it extensively and now imagine you will completely decimate TWO (2) cities like it by killing and burning every single human being in them. The infrastructure, transportation, human resources and material logistics required for such a task are horrendous. At the same time you are fighting a major war against several nations, 2 with with almost unlimited manpower and industrial capacity. Toward the end of the war Germany was fighting on 3 fronts, being bombed to smithereens and also battling partisans in several countries AND also running their extermination program ??

It is one thing for 6 million families in India to cremate 6 million relatives. I find it hard to believe that the staff in all the concentration camps would be up to this numerical task AND make the bones and ashes of 6 million disappear completely.

I love a good ghost story but my powers of belief have their limit.

Saggy , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:42 pm GMT
@Grahamsno(G64)

Listen if you can't answer about what happened to those 'Missing Jews' of the AR camps kindly shut up.

We know what happened to the Jews in the AR camps, they were burned. And we have proof Action 1005 was led by Paul Blobel who confessed.

We even know how he did it from his confession https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/obliterating-the-traces-of-bodies-of-jews-killed-by-the-einsatzgruppen-june-1947

During my visit in August I myself observed the burning of bodies in a mass grave near Kiev. This grave was about 55 m. long, 3 m. wide and 2½ m. deep. After the top had been removed the bodies were covered with inflammable material and ignited. It took about two days until the grave burned down to the bottom. I myself observed that the fire had glowed down to the bottom. After that the grave was filled in and the traces were now practically obliterated.

The holohoax is a collection of preposterous lies see ..
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ul72dV4SbAoh/

trickster , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:44 pm GMT
@marylinm It is dangerous to not take your meds ! Sounds like you might need to increase the doseage. Please see your Doctor immediately.
peacewalker , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 1:51 pm GMT
I just don't know where to start. Whole "article" is such a BS. OK, let's start from beginning then:

Two responsible figures have recently and publicly added their voices to the question of six million Poles murdered (ostensibly by Nazis) between 1939 and 1945.

"One is the last communist head of state for Poland from 1985-90, Wojciech Jaruzelski ( )"

LOL.

General Wojciech Jaruzelski. Head of military junta that took over power from Party in 1982, responsible for murdering dozens of people. Cold blood mass murderer, aparatchik, liar and Soviet hardliner. Such a perfect "responsible figure"! And delicious cherry on top – he most likely was "wtornik" too (it's margin note, I can explain meaning of this term and whole story but only if somebody will be genuinly interested). During inteview with Soviet, communist, cenzored newspaper. Said something. Wow! Groundbreaking news. Let's rewrite all history books.

The other is Dr. Otwald Mueller, a well-known German researcher.

Right

Let's check this "researcher".

"Die Welt (German newspaper "The World"), September 2, 2009: "beginning of WW II, 6 million victims in Poland, half of them Jews ."

2) Daily Gazette (Schenectady, N.Y.), September 2, 2009: " .Poland alone lost 6 million citizens, half of them Jews" ( )

An important chart

There exists an important Polish population chart. It marks a pre-war Polish population of 29.89 million people, and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million."

SO HE IS WELL-KNOWN GERMAN RESERCHER?

And his scientic research regarding even basic facts are based on bloody TABLOIDS? GERMAN TABLOIDS? And he can not even "research" population chart for Poland?

ROTFL is not enough.

Are you mocking and insulting all Poles and Polish citizens who died during WWII? Or perhaps all world's scientists and reserchers including half-baked and fully stoned first year history course students? Do you think all your readers are complete idiots?

Facts: Republic of Poland population in 1938: Roughly 35 millions. NOT 29.89 millions. 35 MILLIONS.

Here any kind of discussion ends. I kindly ask all readers to check that one fact yourself. Find Poland population before WWII. Got it? Now ask yourself: do you like to be fooled like that? This "well-known German reasercher" (and Carolyn Yeager and Wilhelm Kriessmann who published such a BS) lied to you about most basic fact. Cause they think that you are absolute idiots. Are you?

Anyway. Just for fun let's verify very next "fact":

"There exists an important Polish population chart. It marks a pre-war Polish population of 29.89 million people, and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million. The difference is of approximately 6 million, or 21% of the total population. The chart seems to prove the statement of "6 million" but, on the contrary, it contradicts it."

"and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million".

True.

"The difference is of approximately 6 million, or 21% of the total population."

The difference is approx. 11 MILLIONS, or 33% of the total population.

And yes. It was that bad. One third of total population lost (notice: LOST! Not all died. Some publications did indicate that 6 millions died, it could be one of the reasons for possible confusion regarding subject, among others)

Source: As for official count and confirmation of data I recommend Nuremberg Trials protocols and final statements. It's all there. Again – if you are interested find exact relevant data yourself, source provided.

"That shows in a significant way how Polish history – better Polish fairy tales – works."

Yes. I do understand Otwald Mueller is absolutely hideous, abhorrent and disgusting person.
Not only liar, not only completely fake "researcher" and real Nazi comforter and backer but absolutely disgusting character too. No doubt about it. Still it's always good to know the true, whatever it is.

Let's "reserch" just next fact. That will be simply very next sentence.

"We must keep in mind that 31% of Poland's population was of non-Polish origin one million were German, as you can see from names of cities like Stettin, Gruenberg and Breslau."

We have to, we really have to keep in mind Otwald Muller is not only hideous person, liar and fake researcher but also complete idiot. We are talking absolute moron who is willing to lie about most basic facts, even when simpliest fact checking will expose him as a complete fraud.

Now, I do not know exact ethnic population of Poland in given time. I can easily check it but there is no point. Let's assume it was 31% of non-Polish, just for the sake of argument. And let's assume 1 million were Germans.

"as you can see from names of cities like Stettin, Gruenberg and Breslau"

German science at it finest.

1. STETTIN is GERMANIZED name for Polish name SZCZECIN, not the other way around.
2. Same story with Wroclaw (for short period of time known as Breslau).

Exposing this german moron (and those behind him) is like kicking a puppy. I am sure he is true vile character, he has very worst intentions for real victims of WWII and he is doing his best to cover German crimes of WWII.

Still exposing him does fell like kicking a puppy.

And I am not going to waste more time exposing more of this BS "letter" and BS "article anyway. Not unless somebody will be genuinly interested.

So one final note regarding lol very german cities of Stettin and Breslau:

My English isn't fluent so I explain it in simplest way I can. Szczecin is a name for settlement built/established by Slavs (Wkrzanie) in VII century. It is old city and old name. Yes, most of city dwellers were Germans from like XVI century to 1945. No it's not because this city was build by Germans. It was taken by Germans (not Germany, it was Hanza, lol, it's a long story, to cut it short – let's say Germans) centuries after it rose and they changed name only a bit, to make it easier to pronounce. Germans don't do SZ and CZ diphthtongs hence Stettin. It is as easy and simple.
BTW there is so much more to the story of Szczecin. Like city coat of arms ("Gryf" or "Gryfin", eng. Griffin) and the fact even when citizens were mostly Germans, for 500 years rulers where "Gryfici" native Poles of House of Griffin. Very old and noble family. House of Griffin ended in XVII century, natural causes.

Breslau. It's even funnier. Again. Breslau is germanized name for Polish city.

And again. Fascinating story but let's keep it short. First settlement then town, then city. Slavs, Poles, Poles. One of most important Polish cities. First name recorded?

Vuartizlau. 1133. In Thietmar's Chronicle.

Now if you are not familiar with Thietmar then just a brief: Thietmar of Merseburg, German, bishop, historician. Kudos to him for good effort in writing down city name as similar to way it was spoken as posssible. Vuartizlau gives a lot of hints regarding, well, many things.

Bardon Kaldian , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:01 pm GMT
@Emily Bullshit.

Serbian ideology is chock full of lies. For instance, lunatic Serbian ideologues (Milojević, Lukin Lazić, Pjanić Luković, Deretić), from the 1870s to the 2010s, have claimed that:

* Mesopotamians are actually Serbs
* Siberia got the name from Serbs (S-b-r..well, it's like S-r-b)
* half (at least) of Egyptian pharaohs & Roman emperors were Serbs
* Jesus was a Serb
* Homer, Aristotle etc. wrote in Serbian
* all Slavs are actually Serbs, as well Germans etc.
* all ancient civilizations, except yellow races (Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, Rome, Greece,..) were Serbian
* etc. etc.

As far as WW II is considered, official censuses from 1931. (the last census in Royalist Yugoslavia) and from 1948. (the first in Communist Yugoslavia) show that there are c. 700,000 more Serbs in all of Yugoslavia- and 3,500-14,000 less Croats, despite annexation of Croatian areas formerly held by Fascist Italy (Istria, Rijeka, 5 islands with exclusively Croatian population).

So, Serbs who are supposedly the greatest victims in ex-Yu WW II show a growth in absolute numbers by 700,000 & Croats who are supposedly perpetrators, or lesser victims- are diminished in absolute numbers by 14,000 (despite adding a significant Croatian-only territory)?

The whole Yugoslav & Serbian narrative about WW II is one big, fat lie.

Genrick Yagoda , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:09 pm GMT
@Włodzimierz

the Germans, obliterating the crime, burned most of the corpses.

There is the convergence of evidence again!

Jews (and Catholics) are inflammable!

It's shocking to me that we don't have hundreds of thousands of people bursting into flames on a daily basis.

Alfred , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:21 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse I don't understand why Jewish groups and their rabbis were given control of two mass grave sites. Did the civil authorities conspire with the Jews to pretend the bodies were of Jews?

Ukraine has a Jewish president and a Jewish prime minister. The current regime was installed following a coup organised by their Jewish cousins in the USA. Fewer than 1% of the population is Jewish – but this is a democratic government after all.

Politicians and journalists who don't toe the line are shot. The victims never seem to be Jewish. Here is the latest one only a few weeks ago – May 22. I doubt if it made the MSM anywhere.

Ukrainian lawmaker found dead in central Kyiv (Jewspeak)

He was not "found dead". He was executed with a bullet to the head.

It did not happen in "central Kyiv". It took place in his parliamentary office.

trickster , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:22 pm GMT
@padre Anyone who ever fought in a war will tell you there are no good guys, no side is right while the other is wrong. All war is atrocity on both sides sometimes deliberate sometimes just sheer revenge. To experience the reality of a battlefield, before, during and after is to try to survive under the most terrible conditions physically and emotionally intact.

As I tell any young man who would lend me an ear. There is no glory and honour in war. These are words the politicians use to provoke youth to wash their dirty laundry while they chill in nice comfortable and safe homes licking up the finest wines and foods. The youth get to eat any cheap shit they feed you, in a hole, with assorted vermin, without a bath or change of clothes for at times several days, most times defecating and peeing in your pants from necessity or sheer terror. Why nourish and nurture a man who may have a life expectancy of a few hours ?

I dont look at war movies. They are all bullshit. I passed the TV once when my son was looking at one such movie. The actors all look so clean and well groomed. An artillery shell landed and some of them somersaulted as if they had bounced on a trampoline and then landed all intact. That is Hollywood! The reality ? When a heavy shell lands among men they disappear. You might find a leg with the boot still attached. A discerning person may say "Yeah, that is Billy's leg. I remember because the boot had such and such a mark carved on it". But the rest of Billy is nowhere to be found. Its called "Missing in Action"

During and after a war, civilians may wax about humanity, peace and love and goodwill to all men, who was good and who were the criminal types but those classifications do not exist on a battlefield or in a war. Even God is nowhere in sight, what would he be doing there anyway ?

And if God has made himself scarce who or what is good and who and what is bad ?

Genrick Yagoda , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:24 pm GMT
@Saggy Once again, proof that Jews are inflammable!

If only we could find a way to burn dead Jews next to a flywheel, our energy problems would be solved.

Adam Smith , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:30 pm GMT
@utu

Normal people will agree that the official number of 6,000,000 is too high

Agree!

Anon [240] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:48 pm GMT
@utu

Lack of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Jews are missing only in the Holocaust deniers' minds.

Were there ever two better lines written to illustrate the hate that Jews have for non-Jews and the disrespect that Jews have for the minds of non-Jews?

"Keep searching goy, lack of evidence that you are a murderer does not mean that you are not"

"Lack of hard evidence of your crimes and our victimhood is only lack of evidence in your mind".

What a lunatic.

Completely representative of your people.

Wonder no longer why you people draw so much animosity.

Normal people will agree that the official number of 6,000,000 is might be too high and that rather three to four million Jews died during WWII and they are not missing because they are dead.

"Normal people will agree"

Who is this, a member of the special needs Hasbara team? Using condescending rhetoric that is so rudimentary and ineffective that it is given to the short bus participants to make noise? Is today also the field trip to the yeshiva, where you will read from the torah like a real Jewish boy?

No one "normal" would agree with your any of your self-interested logic after reading the lines that I prior highlighted. In fact, "normal people" would reflexively investigate the opposite position.

In fact, "normal" people would and do discount the entire story after it came out, as admitted by Jews themselves, that Simon Wiesenthal invented the additional 5 million non-Jewish dead for sympathy. And that lie was put forward as true for decades.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/remember-the-11-million-why-an-inflated-victims-tally-irks-holocaust-historians/

You people don't lose "part credit" or "part credibility" for that lie. You lose it all. And that's before we get to the rest of the proof against Holocaust logic.

You are inveterate liars, mass murderers, willing oppressors, and thieves.

Trinity , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:53 pm GMT
Even when Jews LIE it is only to bring joy into the world. Take one Herman Rosenblat who wrote, "Angel At The Fence," describing his time in a concentration camp during WWII. Good ole Herman was making the talk show circuit with his book and there were plans for a movie, UNTIL, it was found out that good ole Herman Rosenblat had made the whole story up, it was a LIE. The nice Jewish boy, Herman, had Doprah Pigfrey calling his book the greatest love story of all time. teehee. When caught in a LIE, Herman said he was only guilty of trying to bring joy into the world.

Jews are such a caring people. Jews are champions of human rights for everyone and they always seem to take joy in their role as their brother's keeper. Here was a Jewish man who did not seek fame nor money, no sir, his concern was bringing joy into the world through a book. Jews can teach humanity so much. Jews have suffered so much. And don't let Jewish power, money, and influence fool you, or their role in the pornography business or other seedy occupations, Jews are people of the Book, and the pillars of the community. Jews have championed the fight against White racism and civil rights for Blacks, they are tireless workers for truth, justice and the American Way just like Superman. Go Jews.

skrik , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:58 pm GMT
@maz10

exception which confirms the rule

Fallacious. Taurus excretus cerebus perplexus – and we all know which party throws most of the BS in the perverse hope of obfuscation – they just can't help themselves. Then see 33.Anonymous[506]. rgds

Bookish1 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 2:58 pm GMT
Keep in mind how many tons is 1,00,000 people. If the average weight of 1,000,000 people was 135 pounds then the total weight of that 1 million is 135,000,000 lbs. Divide that by the number of pounds in 1 ton which is 2,000lbs and you get 67,500 tons of human remains. Now how the hell do you hide that much human remains of one million people much less 6 million.
Anon [317] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
@utu Always remember that the other pertinent truth is that the Jews were guilty of everything that the Germans accused them of.

As is well-evidenced by what Jews support, control, and how they otherwise act as a political group today.

The Jews are no different than Al Qaeda. They merely work to hurt outsiders with lies about their identities and motivations, their control of the press, their influence on the culture, and their perfidious political actions once embedded in governments. Instead of with literal IEDs.

Jewish goals are parallel to the goals of Al Qaeda, with much better results.

That the Jewish and Islamic religions share virtually all of their theological DNA is not a coincidence.

Bookish1 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 3:08 pm GMT
@GeeBee True that jews always seem to win but the fact is they cant lose one major war or they are done forever. Israel cant lose one war or she is done. Arabs can lose 10 wars and the come back for another one someday. If Hitler would have won jews would have been done.
GMC , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 3:11 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse I know the place they are discussing and you have to remember Odecca has always been a heavy Jewish city. But only when it suits their best interests. In this case – getting more free land and calling out the Orthodox folks . Even goes back to the Khazarian/ Pecheneg times, when they chose to be Jews because the Ottomans in the south and the Rooskies in the north were pressing them to be either Islamic or Orthodox. Of course they chose the " chosen ones religion" for their slave trade and usury / theft trade. The normal Russians/Crimeans that I know that are jews are way cool folks – they even have family is Israel but no big ego. Just normal Russians.
Da's Reich , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 3:23 pm GMT
@Włodzimierz I read the link you provided,

Thats it? seriously?

Wally , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:01 pm GMT
@Ann Nonny Mouse said:
"Was it known that the bodies were of people who died during the war? That the skeletons were not centuries old?"

No.

That's what I meant when I said:

"Of these there is no proof of even the age of the skeletons, whether they were even Jews, whether they were even murdered. "

Best.

RT , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:25 pm GMT
@utu In justice, absence of evidence is absence of evidence and has been for thosand of years everywhere, except for ancient Egypt . If you cannot provide evidence, the accused is innocent. This is called presumption of innocence.
the shadow , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:27 pm GMT
@utu

Lack of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Very good thinking that adds up to nothing more than:

The original statement is that "absence of proof is not proof of absence," which simply means that a lack of proof for something doesn't, in and of itself, prove that the thing is false. But lack of evidence for something is most definitely evidence that the thing in question may be false, especially when there should be evidence for that thing.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=absence+of+evidence+is+not+proof&form=WNSGPH&qs=AS&cvid=8456f19bbf1f4cbc86d8334b0836c137&pq=absence+of+evidence&cc=US&setlang=en-US&PC=LCTS&nclid=1FD86AA1E9C61CF1E0ED02564AB0D376&ts=1592150685972&wsso=Moderate

But beyond the silly proof you offer that the absence of evidence is proof of presence, the answer to your question about how one would prove that those whose ashes disappeared had really died is easily answered by death certificates, cremation records, and evidence of funerals or memorial services that were held, and announcement about the death of the deceased.

But even your notion that the ashes of the holocaust victims would have been as scattered as would be the case of cremated remains scattered throughout the United Statges by relatives is absurd with rerspect to holocaust victims who were all allegedly killed in very confined geographic spaces and whose ashes the Germans certainly did not bother to scatter throughout Europe to hide them as your example of relatives scattering the ashes of relatives throughout the country would have them do.

That you would even provide this example to substantiate the holocauset reveals the absurdity of your claiming it happened as claimed. Had it happened on the scale claimed, there would be massive evidence of it just as the examples provided in the article about the mass graves of real victims that have been found.

Indeed, given the millions killed in the fighting on the Eastern Front there should be endless examples of mass graves first of the millions of Russians killed during the German advance the Germans almost certainly buried in mass graves as the Russians did likewise of the Germans killed during the Russian advance.

So where is the evidence?

An easy place to look as Babi Yar where 30,000 Jews were reportedly murdered in a very specific site. Why has no one looked to prove it with the evidence of the bodies?

Wally , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:32 pm GMT
@utu – You really should know what you're talking about before you speak.
Remember, it is your "Holocaust Industry" which claims that such immense human grave sites exist in known locations, not Revisionsts.

– Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the laughable 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

– The millions of other deaths you cite are not based upon the ridiculous "holocaust" claims of enormous numbers of people dying in highly centralized locations in which, again, the locations are supposedly known.

– As for military deaths, I remind that that there are cemeteries all over Europe.

– There have been many, many attempts to find the alleged huge mass graves in which many millions have been supposedly dumped. Those attempts failed miserably, as I demonstrated about Sobibor in the first comment in this thread.

Here's another of the many examples examples I can cite.
– !! Excavation Result: No Human Remains of alleged 34,000 Jews as claimed at Babi Yar !! In fact, no remains period. : https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11314
more examples here:
https://www.unz.com/?s=haimi&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally
and:
https://www.unz.com/?s=sturdy-colls&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally

– Of course, utu, you have been challenged at this site for proof of the scientifically impossible 'gas chambers' that you believe in.:
https://www.unz.com/?s=utu&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally

Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:39 pm GMT
@Reger You say "many geographical inaccuracies in this article" and you cite one. Indeed, the one you cite is an error – Bruenn/Brno is not in the "same area of Northwestern Bohemia" as is Aussig/Usti nad Labem. Brno is in the south.

I will correct this on my website, so thank you for bringing it to my attention. But it is certainly not weighty enough to undermine the rest of the article, which is based on newspaper accounts from the time. Since that time, no new diggings of any consequence have been undertaken. The will to do so, by those in authority, is not there.

Dumbo , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 4:46 pm GMT
@Bardon Kaldian Croat Ustaša killed thousand of Serbs, it's well documented, do you deny that?

This is supposedly from a Gestapo report, if true it's quite damning, it's not a source that would want to incriminate their own allies:

Increased activity of the bands [of rebels] is chiefly due to atrocities carried out by Ustaše units in Croatia against the Orthodox population. The Ustaše committed their deeds in a bestial manner not only against males of conscript age, but especially against helpless old people, women and children. The number of the Orthodox that the Croats have massacred and sadistically tortured to death is about three hundred thousand

(I have no dog in this fight, but have more sympathy for Serbs than for Croats because of the way the have been treated by the U.S. Empire recently).

Pop Warner , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:09 pm GMT
@Grahamsno(G64) The AR camps and complete lack of forensic evidence at each of them is mentioned. I can see why the focus is on Auschwitz because if Jews brought more attention to Treblinka it would be obvious how fake the whole thing is.
Włodzimierz , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:10 pm GMT
@Genrick Yagoda Dear Genrick

Do you really think German occupants did burn their own fellow citizens on polish soil in 1939?

What is written is completely unhistorical and untrue statement that nobody can find any polish citizens mass graves in Poland.

Authors did not check basic data like number of polish citizens before the war – almost 35 millions. But we can read in the article

It marks a pre-war Polish population of 29.89 million people .

What is the purpose of such obvious mistake/falsification?

maz10 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:14 pm GMT
@skrik Dear Sir, it is inappropriate to quote oneself they say thus I will refer you back to my original comment which you were kind enough to comment yourself. Sufficient to say I pointed out that Ms. Yeager and her sidekick made fools out of themselves with their choice of Gen. Jaruzelski's quote and have a nonchalant attitude towards facts when it comes to mass graves of German atrocities victims.

In this context I can not help but also to point out that it is not the first time Ms. Yeager wrote nonsense and not the first time to I call her out on that either.

Thus if anyone here is a peddler of taurus excretum it is Ms. Yeager who has a proven track record of being one.

For this reason when she occasionally gets something right it is similar to a broken clock showing the right time every twelve hours.

Dumbo , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
"Let the dead bury their dead". Instead of harping on such issues with a discussion that never ends and is rather pointless, Europeans would do better to focus on the future and reproduce more. Of course, "Holocaust denial" and similar speech criminalization laws would have to go too, it's time, soon there will be no survivors alive, and it will hopefully be forgotten like all wars. There's no need to keep talking about this things forever, let's forgive and forget, and think about the future. If Europe becomes majority African and Arab in the next 100 years, then what's the point of discussing what flavour of white killed which flavour of white? It won't matter anymore I mean non-whites are already toppling Churchill statues, and Churchill was until recently an "anti-fascist" and a hero of both leftists and neo-cons.
Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:16 pm GMT
@Louis Hissink

But propaganda 101 is to always accuse your opponents of your own crimes.

Thanks. This is the truest thing that can be said and should always be kept uppermost in mind when studying history.

Evidence for this truism can be found in the book Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau 1939-1945. https://www.amazon.com/dp/0803299087?tag=duckduckgo-ffnt-20&linkCode=osi&th=1&psc=1
and also
https://carolynyeager.net/wehrmacht-war-crimes-bureau-1939-1945-part-10
and
https://carolynyeager.net/wehrmacht-war-crimes-bureau-1939-1945-part-11

evidence_a_must , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:19 pm GMT
@JohnPlywood

".. .the only people denying the Holocaust are those with a serious learning disability and poor attention span .. ."

and those poor, deluded people who prefer to have evidence , and not just Hollywood films created by people with an agenda to push and a story to sell!

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:20 pm GMT
@Reger Individual fates?
Anything to do with the Hollow-co$t narrative is suspect. What kind of "death camps" have hospitals for internees? What kind of "death camps" have scrip for prisoners to spend at a canteen? What kind of "death camps" have orchestras and theaters for internees? Why would "death camps" record marriages and births? The Olympic size swimming pools and soccer fields for internees at "death camps" were there, obviously, as another form of mass murder by forcing the internees to swim until they drowned or run until they collapsed.
How about the individual fates of the women and children burned to death in the incendiary bombing of Hamburg and Dresden, or the deaths of 1600 civilians who drowned when the Ruhr Valley dams were bombed? More teenage girls named Anne died in one night of allied bombing than ever died in concentration camps.
To paraphrase David Irving, more people died in the back seat of Ted Kennedy's car than in homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. It is indeed, unfortunate that people died, but the Jewish "leadership" declared war on Germany in 1933. The deaths of the three people you named is on their hands for scheming against the legitimate government of Germany.
Włodzimierz , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:31 pm GMT
@Da's Reich Authors claimed they can not find any example of documented mass grave of polish citizens.

I don't think there is a big problem to find info about such topics if you need.

https://ipn.gov.pl/en/news/4230,The-world039s-largest-cemetery-of-the-clergy-Polish-clergy-in-KL-Dachau.html

You may visit Dachau and check on site.

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:32 pm GMT
@Dumbo According to Kurt Vonnegut, author of Slaughterhouse 5, and Victor Gregg, POWs who helped with the "clean up", a whole lot more than what has been estimated.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/15/bombing-dresden-war-crime

Curious that the fanatical record keeping Nazis have no record of the amount of coke needed to burn the numbers of alleged victims cremated at concentration camps. Meanwhile, the Soviet archives released camp records are in line with the Red Cross estimates and Bletchley Park transcripts. Obviously, they are all lying and Yad Vesham is correct.

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT
@maz10

(actually socialism but I will leave that for another time)

You wouldn't know what socialism was if it bit you in the arse. Your local co-op is socialist.

utu , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 5:41 pm GMT
@RT Grow up. You are not in the court. You are not even in the court of public opinion. You are among the Holocaust denial retards. You are one of them actually.
maz10 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:01 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon I beg your pardon? There is a good chance I have more first-hand experience with socialism (as Realsozialismus) then you have experience with anything at all.
Bardon Kaldian , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:12 pm GMT
@Dumbo Just a c-p for clueless people.

* during 1918-1939 period, Yugoslavia was basically a softer version of Greater Serbia, with all nations-except Slovenes- oppressed. Close to 400 Croats & ca. 2000 Muslims had been killed by Serbian paramilitaries & government forces during "peaceful" period in the 1920s & 1930s. The turning point was assassination of Croatian leader Stjepan Radić, a sort of Croatian Gandhi, by a Serb nationalist in Yugoslav parliament in 1928. This convinced some Croats that any Yugoslavia was insufferable, and the most influential among them was future Poglavnik/"Leader" Ante Pavelić, who emigrated & founded a revolutionary terrorist organization ustaše (ca. 200-300 people).

* after the collapse of Yugoslavia in the April war 1941, situation in Croatia & Bosnia and Herzegovina was something like a vacuum. No Croatian politician wanted to become the head of state patronized by Nazi German authorities, but at the same time there was a sense of jubilation: Croats got independent (in theory) country, after decades of Serbian oppression. In this vacuum, Pavelić was installed by Hitler and Mussolini as a kind of puppet. In this country, ca. 50-60% were Croats & more than 30% were Serbs (the rest were Bosnian Muslims, considered to be Croats).

* Pavelić assumed power on April the 10th 1941. But even a week before that, Serb paramilitaries had started killing Croats & some 200-400 people were killed in the interregnum. After he had been installed, Pavelić actually dissolved parliament & established a dictatorship; Croatia was crippled & many vital areas, especially in Dalmatia, were given to Mussolini's Italy. Also, he introduced racial laws for Jews & started to persecute Serbs- both as a revenge for their participation in royalist Yugoslavia period terror & their atrocities during interregnum. In next few months perhaps 5-20,000 Serbs were killed by ustaše in various areas of NDH/Independent State of Croatia.

Basically, it was a terrorist regime & most Croats disapproved of it, but were expecting to get rid of ustaše in some future & retain statehood under democratic circumstances. So, Croats wanted a truly independent country.

* Serbs, being persecuted (along with Jews & Gypsies) rebelled on a massive scale in the last quarter of 1941 & many areas of NDH had become virtually defunct. This resulted in further Pavelić's dependence to Hitler. On the other hand, communist partisans, led by a Croat, Josip Broz Tito, after their defeat in Serbia fled with remnants of their army to the NDH territory. There, they found refuge among Serbs, while many of them defected to royalist Četniks led by Serbian colonel Mihailović. Četniks had killed, during 1941, ca. 12-15,000 Muslim & Croat civilians, mostly in the eastern Bosnia regions.

From 1941-1945 there was a civil war in all of Yugoslavia, with various factions fighting for different aims. In Croatia, more Croats had been coming to partisans, especially after 1943 (fall of Italy) & thus partisans became a respectable force. For instance, Croatia had 5 partisan corpses (4 of them with clear Croatian majority), while Slovenia had 2, Bosnia & Herzegovina 2, Serbia proper 2 etc.

* in may 1945, war was over & partisans had won. But, in 2- 6 weeks after the end of war, they committed mass atrocities, killing ca. 80,000-130,000 Croatian soldiers & civilians, perhaps 10,000 Serbian Četniks & up to 4,000 Slovenian white guards.

Modern unbiased historical investigations have dispelled many myths, especially those re number of victims in Yugoslavia & NDH in particular. In sum, in all of Yugoslavia, ca. 500,000 Serbs had died unnatural deaths & this included some 300,000 Serbs in NDH. Of these, perhaps over 100,000 had been killed by ustaše, while others died of typhoid, were killed by Germans, Četniks etc. Among Croats, ca. 200- 250,000 died of unnatural causes, virtually all of them in NDH on various sides. Percentage-wise, the biggest losses were among Bosnian Muslims, over 80,000.

https://www.hercegbosna.org/STARO/engleski/download.html

For instance:

https://www.hercegbosna.org/STARO/download-eng/Zerjavic_manipulations.pdf

Vladimir Zerjavic- YUGOSLAVIA-MANIPULATIONS -WITH THE NUMBER OF SECOND WORLD WAR VICTIMS

https://www.hercegbosna.org/STARO/download-eng/Greater_Serbia.pdf

GREATER SERBIA: from Ideology to Aggression,

https://www.hercegbosna.org/STARO/download-eng/SE_Europe.pdf

An International Symposium: SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE 1918-1995

http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=D46A71C24EB2DFA356DF7B7DFF095E5F

War and Revolution in Yugoslavia, 1941-1945: Occupation and Collaboration – Jozo Tomasevich

http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=BC54C7CC4AD01FA7B4056FF06D130363

The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics – Ivo Banac

VICB3 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:18 pm GMT
@utu Bottom line is that the whole existing Jewish Holocaust narrative is not supported by the evidence. And any competent detective would spot the inconsistencies and contrary evidence in the overall narrative and conclude that either the witness is fabricating and embellishing what actually happened, or very simply is lying.

That's not the same thing as saying no Jews were killed in Europe, or that I'd want to be Jewish and in Europe in WWII. (Hell, I wouldn't have wanted to be anywhere in Europe during WWII period!) Rather, it's very clear that everybody was killing everybody else in those places and at that time based on ethnicity, nationality, politics, being on the losing side or what have you, including plain old greed, and that nobodies' hands were clean. Warfare will do that.

That, and the subsequent coverups, denials and spinmeistering over the years by all actors concerning massacres and reprisals, large scale thefts, organized starvations and ethnic cleansing are more over embarrassment and concerns about reputations than anything else. Likewise, the claiming of this, that or the other mass grave as your own is just as much about economic advantage and fortune seeking as it is about validation.

Enough! It was 80 odd years ago. Learn about what happened, all that happened and why, and to all peoples who were present, without favour given to an influential (for now) few. Resolve that it was monstrous for all, and resolve that it ought not to happen again. And then move on.

Just a thought.

VicB3

Fox , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:25 pm GMT
@peacewalker This sort of opinion is as childishly chauvinistic now as it was in 1850, 1920, 1939 and 1990. Did you know that Eastern Germany has been only given to the Poland for temporary administration by the Soviets? Notwithstanding the weird actions of the people in power in the FRG, Poland's borders are defined by international law by the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles to which Poland was a signatory party.
Alternate History , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:28 pm GMT
@utu Nice deflection, troll. People no longer believe the Red Cross account of 430k.
jbwilson24 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:39 pm GMT
@GMC " The normal Russians/Crimeans that I know that are jews are way cool folks – they even have family is Israel but no big ego. Just normal Russians."

Nonsense. Jews are not Russians, period. Different ethnic group, different loyalties. Given a brouhaha, you'll see which group they side with.

Bardon Kaldian , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:41 pm GMT
@VICB3

Bottom line is that the whole existing Jewish Holocaust narrative is not supported by the evidence. And any competent detective would spot the inconsistencies and contrary evidence in the overall narrative and conclude that either the witness is fabricating and embellishing what actually happened, or very simply is lying.

This is stupid. It is very easy to calculate upper & lower limits of losses of various European peoples during WW2, just by feeding the computer with pre-war & post-war census data and taking into account border changes.

True, some figures overlap & there is a significant standard deviation for some numbers. But, generally, overall picture is rather well established.

jbwilson24 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:47 pm GMT
@utu "Grow up. You are not in the court."

Nonsense, low IQ person. The burden of proof is on the person making the existential claim, not on the person questioning it. I suggest opening a basic critical thinking book at some point in your life.

Fact is that the evidence for the deliberate murder of 6,000,000 Jews is almost entirely missing, apart from 'confessions' obtained under torture and the claims of self-interested parties who stand something to gain.

Add to that any number of oddities.

– Official reports from the Red Army indicating that the area around Treblinka was pastoral and undisturbed, contrasting with eyewitness accounts (by Jews) of skulls being strewn everywhere.
– Red Cross records mentioning nothing of a mass murder campaign costing millions of lives.
– Putin's comments that the Soviets transferred millions of Jews out of Poland
– The number of compensation claims registered with the German government reaching the 4 million mark, when the Nazis estimated the total number of Jews in Nazi occupied territory was smaller than this.
– The physical impossibility of outdoor cremation of millions of people using barbeques made from train rails and stacks of wood (which magically worked, even in the snow and rain).
– The lack of cross examination at the Nuremburg tribunal.

It smells mightily of a Jewish fantasy enabling them to guilt trip the Germans, cover up British war crimes, and justify the theft of Arab land.

Rich , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 6:47 pm GMT
Obviously the holocaust must be fake or there wouldn't be laws against researching it, or disputing different aspects of it. Historical events that happened have no laws forbidding questioning or debating them. We can argue over how many died at Stalingrad, or in Hiroshima. We can question the number who starved in the Potato Famine, or from Smallpox in American Indian tribes. But one so-called "historical" event must never be questioned? Ridiculous. The fact that laws force one to believe in it, makes me doubt it completely.
Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 7:05 pm GMT
@Grahamsno(G64) I asked Ron Unz to put the title "Some Answers to the Mystery of the "Missing Jews" on the article; the original title is the sub-title you see here. I think it's perfectly justified – note the word "Some." Not 'The answer' or 'An answer', but only 'Some answers', which in retrospect over the last 10 years it does provide. If the communists murdered thousands and hundreds of thousands of Eastern European peoples, as you say, doesn't that impact the WWII death toll and the "missing jews"?

Holocaust believers like yourself have never been able to show the existence of the remains of those millions of bodies you say the German's killed. In light of that it's amazing anyone can still defend this cult of death.

That explains why you are reduced to personal insult, ad hominem and distractions like "what about the AR camps," instead of explaining why only Axis forces have been unearthed in mass graves since the war's end, and no Allied forces. That includes no Jews.

Also, FYI (and others), "Revisionism" is not something dictated from above by certain "professionals" but is individual works by individuals who study various aspects of history and put their work out there for scrutiny. Not something you are capable of appreciating, I know. So far, you have said nothing that debunks this article that is based on documented reality.

Amon , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 7:19 pm GMT
@utu

Jews are missing only in the Holocaust deniers' minds.

Jews historically have had no homeland and thus feel no attachment or sentimental value to the lands upon which they live. It is therefore not that hard to speculate that once news of the evil Nazis approaching reached them that they packed up and moved further east or west to avoid getting mixed up in the actual fighting.

We see this mentality at full effect even today when millions of whites and blacks are sent around the world to kill, maim and occupy foreign nations while the jews who profit from it all stay at home in their million dollar mansions and closed off ghettos demanding to be given the best of the special treatment for their eternal victimhood.

clay sucre , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 7:38 pm GMT
Lack of evidence is not evidence of abscence-but is rather objective evidence of the non-existence of such a claim or cause of which one has been supportive or others forced to accept as truth.
Art , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 7:47 pm GMT
@utu Grow up. You are not in the court. You are not even in the court of public opinion. You are among the Holocaust denial retards. You are one of them actually.

Poor little utu – is he a Jew terrorist – or one of the feeble-minded gentiles, who falls for the Stockholm Syndrome Jew victim "six-million" lie. He is clearly on the wrong side of history.

As is abundantly clear from this article and its comments – many if not most of central Europe's ethnic peoples experienced group murder. 55,000,000 people died during WWII. Jews where just one tribe of many.

Instead of forgiving and healing all – the Jews have grabbed all the sick "victimhood glory" for themselves and used it as a cudgel to do even more killing in the Middle East.

Maintaining the "six-million" lie has cost America its cohesion and Western idealism – we are divided today into identity groups warring with each other -- all to maintain terroristic Jew political control, aimed at sustaining the "six-million" lie. Anyone who dares to disagree with the Jew lie – is terrorized and ostracized from society.

So what is it for little utu – Jew terrorist or fool?

A fool can intellectually grow – a morally poor Jew who supports "the lie" is hopeless.

Anonymous [506] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 8:16 pm GMT
@Robjil Judging by the aggressive theft of Ukraine farmland for pennies on the dollar by Chabad, instrumentalized by Nuland's lackeys at the Dept of State, and the consequent dispossession of Ukrainian farm people à la Palestinians in Palestine, my guess is that Israel intends to use the Ukraine as the "breadbasket" of the JWO in Europe, just as a de-industrialized United States, with its white population exterminated, will become the JWOs breadbasket in the Western Hemisphere.
Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 8:16 pm GMT
Where did they go? They were never there in the first place. Part of the puzzle can be resolved here:

https://www.bjpa.org/content/upload/bjpa/dell/DellaPergola%20Some%20Fundamentals.pdf

His aggregate numbers (in Table 2 on p. 10) are consistent with the numbers from the Jewish Virtual Library. But what's curious are the numbers for Eastern Europe (i.e. Imperial Russia/Soviet Union and Poland primarily) The American population exploded between 1880 and 1939. That's the well-known turn-of-the century influx. It's safe to assume that about 5M of the American number was due to immigration (applying a reasonable 0.5% growth rate to the 1880 population), and that it was mainly from Eastern Europe. That would mean that the stock of Eastern European Jews grew from 5.7M in 1880 to about 8.2M+5M = 13.2M in 1939, an annualized growth rate of 1.4%. This is simply not believable, given the chaos afflicting Eastern Europe during this time period. If we apply the 0.9% growth rate claimed for world Jewish inter-war population by the JVL (probably high but not absurdly so) to the 5.7M Eastern European stock, and subtract off the 5M that emigrated to America, we get an Eastern European Jewish population in 1939 of around 4.7M, which is at least 3.5M less than commonly claimed. (It was probably even less than 4.7M, given emigration to Palestine.) World Jewish population in 1939 was probably around 16.7M-3.5M = 13.2M, not 16.7M, implying Jewish losses during the war of around 2.2M. This number is consistent with German documentation re. the AR camps, Auschwitz, and the EG shootings, as well as Red Cross documentation about the Western camps. It's highly likely that both the Soviet and Polish 1939 numbers were exaggerated by at least 1M each. The numbers for the eastern part of the old Austro-Hungarian empire should also be viewed skeptically. (The 1931 Polish census claiming over 3M Jews is well-known, but there was a 1921 census claiming 2M Jews; there is no way the Polish Jewish population grew at a 4% annualized rate in that decade.)

anarchyst , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 8:21 pm GMT
Hitting the holohoax (oops I mean "holocaust™") head-on doesn't work because of the jew-controlled media which has declared "holocaustianity™" to be the new worldwide "state religion" from which no dissension from its "orthodoxy" is permitted.
The only way to counter "holocaustianity™" is to point out the scientific and engineering impossibility of every "holocaust™" claim.
Let's look at a number of claims that have been made and have been ingrained in "holocaust™" orthodoxy:
-- using "bug spray" (Zyklon B) as an execution agent (ha ha)
-- "gas chambers" with ordinary wooden doors, not gas-tight doors
-- "gas chambers" with no means to ventilate the chambers after "operation"
-- "gas chamber" chimney not connected to anything
-- "blood spurting out of the ground" for weeks and months
-- "crematoria stacks with visible flames" (not possible) crematoria burn clean
-- "thousands of bodies cremated per day" (not possible)
-- "multiple bodies" in one "muffle" to "speed up" operations
-- "lampshades, soap and shrunken heads", oh my
-- "the ability to tell when jews are being cremated by the smell or color of smoke"
-- "claimed burial grounds not being permitted to be disturbed" per jewish "law"
NONE of these claims are possible or valid and can be easily debunked using sound scientific and engineering principles.
I have been thrown out (asked to leave) those "jewish freak shows" called "holocaust™"museums for merely attempting to point out these facts.
Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 8:29 pm GMT
@Genrick Yagoda

Once again, proof that Jews are inflammable!

Bodies decay fast and animals pick them off.

Look at nature. So many creatures but vanish without a trace. Animals come and eat them. Often, animals even grind and eat the bones.

Hyenas can crack elephant bones with their jaws.

It's been said the Great Leap killed tens of millions of Chinese. Them bodies disappeared real fast.

And many Civil War dead bodies and WWI dead bodies in the trenches just rotted in the fields.

Every year, tons of cows and pigs are killed. They are disposed of without a trace.

Art , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:02 pm GMT
@jbwilson24 It smells mightily of a Jewish fantasy enabling them to guilt trip the Germans, cover up British war crimes, and justify the theft of Arab land.

Say jbwilson24 -- did you kill any Jews -- I didn't!

Hmm -- then why are we being held guilty? 98% of everybody alive today was not even living during the war. Yet, the Jews act like we are ALL guilty for WWII.

Using a vile false guilt trip, the Jews have seized power over the West.

We are coming to understand this ploy – human nature does not like lies – it rebels.

p.s. Jew use of the Stockholm Syndrome, rules the West. (terror first – claim victimization second)

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:27 pm GMT
@Robjil And what about that yuletide girl? What she was a dogs pipi.
snag , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:27 pm GMT
Why do you write "Polish historical interpretations" knowing that after WWII this so called 'Polish' regime was infested by (appointed) Stalin Jews and few Polish commies with suspicious past? *

*During Poland's partition many Jews bought for cents on dollar or acquired (for snitching) names, estates and noble titles of Polish patriots shipped to Siberia.

Agent76 , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:32 pm GMT
Jan 30, 2016 Operation Reinhard: The Murder of Polish Jewry

How did the horror of the Nazi death camps evolve? Auschwitz didn't just sprout from the ground one day. There was an "evolution" of the murder machinery, and a cast of diabolical characters most people have never heard of.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/KQwjAF69SNk?feature=oembed

Feb 4, 2017 The rise of Hitler 1919-1929: revision for IGCSE & GCSE History exams

This revision podcast is relevant to both GCSE and IGCSE History students studying Nazi Germany.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/N7r6EIxkz30?feature=oembed

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:41 pm GMT
@trickster But than all Hitler was stupid, because he did not figure out that eventually will come to that.
All Germans were so stupid that they did not know that number of roads in Ukraine and Russia that in case of rain did not change to mud holes could be counted on fingers.
And even those were no match of via Apia of ancient Rome.
UncommonGround , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:47 pm GMT
@peacewalker Impressive your information about the origin of Stettin and Breslau. But as far as I can see through a fast look at wikipedia, what you say seems to be at least a bis misleading. The history seems to be quite complicated with really lot of changes. They say about Breslau that the "Wandalenstamm der Silinger" (a German tribe) settled there between the 4 and 5 Century and Slavs came about 1 or 2 centuries later. Much later there was a Polish domination. Breslau was destroyed by the Mongols in 1241 and after that rebuilt by German settlers. In 1261 Breslau received the right of cityship (? Stadtrecht) by the German city of Magdeburg. The history of Stettin is even more complicated, but wikipedia says that it was founded by the fusion of German and Polish settlements ("Die Stadt Stettin entstand aus einer pomoranischen und zwei benachbarten deutschen Siedlungen" = The city Stettin has originated from a pomoranian and two neighbour German settlements).
Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 9:48 pm GMT
@maz10

Let me just point out, that mass graves with Polish victims of German mass executions were located among other places at:
Palimiry [sic], Las Sękocinski, Las kabacki, Laski and many, many others locations such as for example Ponary (outside of Poland's post WW II borders in present-day Lithuania).

Why hasn't the general public heard of these incredible mass graves? Except for a little commotion at Palmiry and Ponary, they are Polish fiction. The Germans assembled an international team of experts to exhume the Katyn graves and publish their findings. The Poles kept their exhumations, if there were any, all in the family.

Palmiry massacre, Wiki – "After the war, the Polish Red Cross , supported by the Chief Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland (pretty sure this is Soviet), began the search and exhumation process in Palmiry. The work was carried out between 25 November and 6 December 1945, and later from 28 March until the first months of summer 1946. Thanks to Adam Herbański and his subordinates from the Polish Forest Service , who in the years of occupation were risking their own lives to mark the places of execution, Polish investigators were able to find 24 mass graves. More than 1700 corpses were exhumed, but only 576 of them were identified. Later Polish historians were able to identify the names of another 480 victims.[17][50] It is possible that some graves still lie undiscovered in the forest near Palmiry.[11]

Ponary massacre, Wiki – "The total number of victims by the end of 1944 was between 70,000 and 100,000. According to post-war exhumation by the forces of Soviet 2nd Belorussian Fron t the majority (50,000–70,000) of the victims were Polish and Lithuanian Jews from nearby Polish and Lithuanian cities, while the rest were primarily Poles (about 20,000) and Russians (about 8,000).[2]
(No more information on this Polish-created page about the exhumation/identification process. It goes straight to the more extensive commemoration/memorial monuments section.) Then ends with:
"The murders at Paneriai are currently being investigated by the Gdańsk branch of the Polish Institute of National Remembrance [1] and by the Genocide and Resistance Research Center of Lithuania .[27] The basic facts about memorial signs in the Paneriai memorial and the objects of the former mass murder site (killing pits, tranches, gates, paths, etc.) are now presented in the webpage created by the Vilna Gaon State Jewish Museum."

This why the general public doesn't know of these sites – they have not been legitimately vetted. Yale's Timothy Snyder is a big believer though.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:02 pm GMT
The sad thing is that the Final Solution to the Jewish problem has not yet been achieved.

I mean the problem of the presence of non-Jews in the world, a major problem for the Jews. Not finally solved yet, but getting close.

There have been some great achievements since earliest times. One was Moses's great success in tricking the stupid Midianites a number of times before finally exterminating them, as recounted between Exodus Ch. 2 and the end of Numbers. Another was Joshua bar Nun's fabulous achievement exterminating most of the Canaanites. For the time, the greatest achievement bar none!

But the great achievement of the Jewish Dark Age of 200–400 AD, the killing of 6 million Jews by the Jews, the 6 million Hellenistic Jews by the Talmudic Jews, outshines everything to date. Done at a time when the world population was tiny!

That must be done, the killing of non-Talmudic Jews must be done, as Maimonides wrote a few centuries later. But the best subsequent achievement seems to have been the killing of about a million non-Talmudic Jews in Iberia, greater Spain. Maybe fewer. Many escaped the peninsula. Many Karaites survived. Or some did, count unclear.

So far, at least till 1948, and since the Cyrene massacres of the 2nd century, stopped by the Romans, they have not had the power to kill non-Jews in any large numbers, could only encourage wars among them. And undermine their society with their lobbying skills and organized financing. But they are immensely powerful today in America and Europe. The Final Solution may be close.

anonlb , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:07 pm GMT
@Bardon Kaldian Serbian lies are only matched by coatian lies (jews/muslims lies are out of competition simple because they belive they can say anything to non-jew/non-muslim and do a right thing).
Serbian lies can't change fact that every single sentence from Bardon post is one big fat lie.
Hints: census from 1931 counted people by religion(ortodox, catolics, muslims, ), census from 1948 counted serbs, croats, slovenians, montenegrins, macedonians and 'minorities'. Muslims are counted as serbian or croatians. He can't even say those numbers for current croatian territory (hint: about 90k serbs less than ortodox and 300k croats more than catolics,despite 200k croats killed or expelled by comunists)
Counting persons with serious mental problems with zero influence as 'serbian ideologues' is just fun.
Wally , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:15 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon said:
"What kind of "death camps" have hospitals for internees? What kind of "death camps" have scrip for prisoners to spend at a canteen? What kind of "death camps" have orchestras and theaters for internees? Why would "death camps" record marriages and births? The Olympic size swimming pools and soccer fields for internees at "death camps""

– Here's more info. on the big one in the "holocaust"narrative, so called "death camp / extermination camp" Auschwitz

[MORE]

– An "extermination camp" where thousands of Jews chose to stay behind when the Germans left.
– An "extermination camp" where most of the inmates, more thousands, chose to leave WITH the Germans.
– An "extermination camp" where 1,500,000 human remains supposedly exist, but in fact no such remains exist.
– An "extermination camp" where many Jews gave birth.
– An "extermination camp" where the absurdly alleged homicidal 'gas chambers' could not have worked as alleged, as proven repeatedly, scientifically impossible.
– An "extermination camp" where fake 'gas chambers' were "reconstructed" AFTER THE WAR.
– An "extermination camp" where detailed aerial photos of the period show nothing that is alleged to have been happening.
– An "extermination camp" where there are even obvious, laughable attempts to tamper with aerial photos that make a mockery of the fake story.
see:
– Auschwitz war time aerial photos, tampered with to fit the fake story , ex.:
Drawn in 'Auschwitz Jews being marched to gas chambers', ON A ROOF . – An "extermination camp" where there are countless Jew "survivors", yet the fake narrative says 'the Germans tried to kill every Jew they could get their hands on.'
-An "extermination camp" where so called "survivors" say the most impossible and conflicting things that do not hold up to scrutiny, would be laughed out of a legit court of law.

the shadow , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:16 pm GMT
@Bardon Kaldian

This is stupid. It is very easy to calculate upper & lower limits of losses of various European peoples during WW2, just by feeding the computer with pre-war & post-war census data and taking into account border changes.

But it is precisely the border changes for those countries and population movements occurred within those areas that makes it difficult if not impossible to determine with any accuracy what population changes within the area those borders include at different times mean. It is, obvious, is ity not, that the "Poland" of 1939 is not the "Poland" of 1946, is it not? And that it's ridiculous to draw any DEFINITIVE conclusion based on the ethnic group distribution included within the boundaries of those "countries" between those periods, especially when Russians moved substsantial numbers out of the area they occupied from 1939 to 1941, and then Germans were moved out of areas that became Polich after WWII, etc., etc. and also moved people into and out of those areas when no one really knows the NUMBERS INVOLVED.

It's years ago since I lookeed at the numbers Hillsberg cited, but I remenber dismissing them at the time because they look conjectural at best.

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:20 pm GMT
@Carolyn Yeager There are two ancient Slavic tribes Czechs and Moravian s. Capital of Czechs is Praha (Prague)
Capitol of Moravian s is Brno. Slovaks at one time were part of Great Moravian empire.
Morava is east of Czechia, (As is its capital Brno, and not south as you claim.)
Slovakia is East of Moravia.
Morava is river and the tribe was named after river. River Morava joins Danjub
at Slovakia.
Wally , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:22 pm GMT
@peacewalker said:
"I just don't know where to start. Whole "article" is such a BS. OK, let's start from beginning then"

– Let's start with you actually reading the article.

– Then show us the millions upon millions of human remains that are said by those like you to be in specific, known locations.

– After that, tell us how the absurd 'Nazi gas chambers' supposedly worked.

– Your cited sources give no proof.

It's curious that people like yourself actually want the alleged millions to be dead.
You should be happy to hear that millions of your brethren were not murdered.

Petermx , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:24 pm GMT
"In the case of this latest and largest mass grave (2008), no clothing, eye glasses or gold teeth were found. It thus appears that they were completely stripped before they were killed." My German mother and her family began fleeing west in the last months of the war. They lived in the German city Brieg (now called Brzeg under Polish rule). It's close to the bigger city Breslau (now called Wroclaw under Polish rule). She was captured near Pilsen (known as Plzen under Czech rule). The Red Army arrived. My mother was part of a group of women being held and the women were forced to strip naked and they were humiliated. This is what my crying mother told me roughly about 40 years ago. She was not raped. She's gone now and despite this sad story was an upbeat and generally happy person. The Americans were also there. I believe they took the area first and then withdrew and turned the area over to the Russians and Czechs. My mother was able to escape and eventually settled in Bavaria for several years before moving to the USA. If there are numerous cases of victims being stripped, I wonder if this could be tied to a particular army or nationality. Or was it was done by more than one army or nationality?
Robjil , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:32 pm GMT
@Priss Factor None of these examples you stated are a mandatory religion.

The big 6 has replaced the sun as the center of the universe.

Most people on this planet want the sun back as the center of the universe.

Take that big 6 wall down.

Let the sun shine again on this planet.

Anon [264] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:40 pm GMT
Jewish Lightning Got All 6 Million – Case Closed
Reger , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:41 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon To my very point. You won't follow the suggestion I made. Much easier to deal in abstractions than reality, isn't it?
Reger , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 10:51 pm GMT
@the shadow I agree. From my reading the transfers of population for reasons of ethnicity, colonisation (eg of the Wartheland), slave labour, not to mention the theft of 'aryan' children from Poles made for total confusion at the end of the war. The stories of witnesses always mention fellow victims from all parts of Europe and people travelling in all directions.
Re the numbers I can only repeat the wise quip of Christopher Isherwood in an argument about the number of victims; he said to his opponent: 'What are you? In real estate?"
Incitatus , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:06 pm GMT
Well done, Carolyn.

Why not just say Mahatma Austrian Hitler left no victims, including 20s-30s-40s Germans (400,000 to 600,000 by most accounts, murdered by the NSDAP) and espouse, more important, Germans were the only victims in WW2? Go for it!

The NSDAP brought God to Austria, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, Memel, Denmark. Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, France, Netherlands, Greece, Yugoslavia, Crete, North Africa, USSR, etc.? Hitler was quite the evangelist. God (in that hymnal) is named Adolf. A deity without territorial aspirations but nonetheless great coincidental appetite and digestive ability. And with a post-war score to settle with German Churches.

"I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker" ("Ich gehe mit traumwandlerischer Sicherheit den Weg, den mich die Vorsehung gehen heißt") -Adolf Hitler 15 Mar 1936 Munich

He "sleepwalked" Germany into catastrophic World War, then attacked an ally in what became a winter campaign 1941-42 lacking winter uniforms and operational gear. Incompetence paramount. Nothing to do with Jews, though by all counts – as in Poland –many were murdered (sorry Carolyn).

"The war against Russia is an important chapter in the struggle for existence of the German nation. It is the old battle of the Germanic against the Slav peoples, of the defense of European culture against Moscovite-asiatic inundation, and the repulse of Jewish Bolshevism. The objective of this battle must be the destruction of present-day Russia and it must therefore be conducted with unprecedented severity. Every military action must be guided in planning and execution by an iron will to exterminate the enemy mercilessly and totally. In particular, no adherents of present Russian-Bloshevik system are to be spared."
– Generaloberst Erich Hoepner, Orders to 4th Panzer Group Commanders in advance of Barbarossa 2 May 1941 [Burleigh 'The Third Reich' p. 521]

A year later at Stalingrad 42-43, same problems, Hitler doubled-down plus some.

"The Führer commands that on entering the city the entire male population should be eliminated since Stalingrad, with its convinced Communist population of one million, is particularly dangerous."
– Adolf Hitler to Sixth Army 2 Sep 1942 [Beevor 'The Second World War' p.356]

Genocide? There you have cold hard fact.

There's more Carolyn. It's against Germans! 9 Nov 1942 Hitler orders 150,000 artillery and transport horses in Sixth Army be sent several hundred kilometers to the rear, ostensibly to save transporting fodder to the front. It deprives all unmotorized (75% of 6th Army forces) divisions of mobility. Ten days later Soviets launch "Operation Uranus', a 'Kesselschalcht' encirclement worthy of Bismarck and von Moltke.

By 23 Nov 1942 the Sixth Army is cut-off in pocket, destined to starve and freeze as Hitler orders "Sixth Army stand firm in spite of temporary encirclement". His solution to the crisis is to designate the Sixth Army "Fortress Stalingrad" and order (24 Nov) holding the front "whatever the circumstances". No clarity on food, munitions, medical care or strategic relief. None comes.

Germans knew better.

"I am beyond caring. Two of my brothers were sacrificed in Stalingrad and it was quite useless. And here we have the same."
–Soldat to SanUff [Senior Medical Officer] Walter Klein, Kampfgruppe Heintz, Field Dressing Station near St-Lô, Normandie 26 Jul 1944 [Beevor 'D-Day' p.353]

That's the legacy you (Ron and Carolyn) embrace? Good luck!

Bardon Kaldian , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:12 pm GMT
@anonlb Dumb (my advice- don't mess with someone who knows what he's talking about. You'll turn out to be a laughing stock ).

In 1931 census people were counted by religion & language. The South Slavic "language" was a bizarre official combination of the Slovene, Croat & Serbian (no one then, except Croatian linguist Stjepan Ivšić, had recognized Macedonian language). Other languages like Hungarian, German, Italian, Slovak, Czech, Albanian were clearly the languages of those peoples. So, one could clearly distinguish between Croats, Serbs, Bosnian Muslims .. by simply looking at their religion & mother tongue (in that case, weird "Sloveno-Croato-Serbian").

During the Communist census in 1948, people just said what they were, nationally. Catholics- if not Slovene speaking- were Croats; Orthodox were either Serbs, Montenegrins or Macedonians (there were preserved censuses from 1931, so one could monitor county fluctuations of population); BH Muslims were mostly "Yugoslavs undetermined" (some of them said they were either Croats or Serbs, due to political pressures, but in next 2-3 decades were simply written out of this census).

Also, there were tiny minorities of Catholic Serbs (ca. 8,800) and Orthodox Croats (9,300)- but they don't mean anything, in comparison with these millions.

So, if you try to argue, rather use convincing arguments than a hysterical blather.

Bardon Kaldian , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:16 pm GMT
@the shadow Virtually all modern works on victimology had taken into account borders shifts so that victims (or potential victims) couldn't be counted twice (or thrice). It is reflected even in such a wishy-washy source as Wikipedia.
Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:19 pm GMT
@Zarathustra

Morava is east of Czechia, (As is its capital Brno, and not south as you claim.)

The article is mentioning Czechoslovakia , not the Czech Republic (note the map), and only in relation to the treatment of its German citizens in 1945-6. There is nothing inaccurate in my comment that you're referring to; Brno is definitely in the south of the country compared to Usti.

Da's Reich , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:23 pm GMT
@Włodzimierz I read your link again,

I won't be bothering a third time,

the shadow , says: Show Comment June 14, 2020 at 11:53 pm GMT
@Bardon Kaldian And the evidence substantiating their degree of accuracy is what?
RT , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 12:00 am GMT
@utu We are in the court of History.
In the court of History the truth is always late, but always arrives.
Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 12:04 am GMT
@maz10 I'd doubt it. The biggest fraud about socialism was the promotion of Marxism (communism) as being socialism. I'm not saying Marx didn't have followers, but the majority of his contemporaries rejected his state owns all views as being totalitarian. Communism is the obverse side of the coin of finance capitalism. Both seek to concentrate wealth into the hands of a few – relatively speaking.

Clifford Douglas, who invented the Social Credit movement, worked closely with the Guild Socialists in Britain. While ultimately rejecting their views, he recognized that they weren't interested in state ownership, were not opposed to competition, but were opposed to finance controlling production and trade. By the way, Douglas was opposed to finance capitalism as well.

I repeat: your local co-op is socialist. Every member has an equal say through the single share allowed to be purchased; the board of directors is elected by the membership; the profits shared are based on your participation level; and it competes with privately owned businesses, including corporations.

Anonymous [352] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 12:28 am GMT
@utu Here is an excerpt (one of MANY) from the Jewish press showing that Jewish American groups have long tried to stop the U.S. Congress from recognizing the genocide committed against Christian Armenians by Turkey:

Every year on April 24, the day that Armenians commemorate the killings, a resolution calling for the use of the controversial term is proposed in Congress and then beaten back. Some Jewish groups claim credit for ensuring that such a resolution never passes.

Jewish advocacy groups, including the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, B'nai Brith and American Jewish Committee "have been working with the Turks on this issue" for more than 15 years, said Yola Habif Johnston, director for foundations and community outreach at Jinsa. "The Jewish lobby has quite actively supported Turkey in their efforts to prevent the so-called Armenian genocide resolution from passing," she said.

Showdown Set in 'Genocide' Debate
Rebecca Spence, The Jewish Daily Forward
Sept. 2, 2006

Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 12:36 am GMT
@Curmudgeon I think for you, any system you happen to like is socialist, and any system you don't like is non-socialist.
Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 12:41 am GMT
@peacewalker

1. STETTIN is GERMANIZED name for Polish name SZCZECIN, not the other way around.
2. Same story with Wroclaw (for short period of time known as Breslau).

What's your point?
New York was New Amsterdam before the British took over. Strasbourg was Strasburg before Louis XIV annexed Alsace and Lorraine. Istanbul was Constantinople before the Muslims decided to change the name. Novgorod was an East Norse settlement. At one time, the Baltic was a "Swedish lake" and Poland was occupied by the Swedes with a Swedish king sitting in Poland. In the mists of time, Jerusalem was Uru-shalem before the chosenites arrived from Yemen.
Borders and place names have changed through out the recorded history of mankind. Poland now claims famous Germans were Polish. Nikolaus Kopernikus, the famous German astronomer, is now called Mikolaj Kopernik. He lived in Thorn (now Torun'), never spoke a word of Polish, and published his works in Latin.

Here's a contemporary non German view of the situation in Poland at the start of the war:
https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/polandinside/pfi00.html

The Poles were happy to be Chamberlain's dupes in starting a war with Germany, and ramped it up with the ethnic cleansing of Germans in the German territories it occupied after the November 11, 1918 Armistice was signed. When war starts, no ones hands are clean, but the Poles, like the chosenites continue to play the victim.

James Reinhart , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 12:50 am GMT
For those that have looked at the movement of people from the late 20s to 1939, it would not stand up to a 10 minute audit. It is obvious to me, and written by H.G. Wells in his book "The Shape of Things to Come" that the Dazig corridor was built to start the war as Polish and Soviet troops, and it is well documented, were killing ethnic Germans since 1938. This was considered a brilliant move by Wells of the Wilson Administration who wiped out 60-70 million, no only due to war but the fact that it was the US out of Ft. Riley which is documented in the Wichita Observer to be the first place that ever ha this flu of which almost 10% died.

It is known that the US created the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks through NYC with Schiff, Baruch, Warburg, Kuhn, Loeb, Harriman and others) and also set up through the War Industries Board, by a Jewish Marrano named Samuel Bush to load the Lusitania up with "small" munitions of which Cunard was warned as were documents not to go on the ship as the US had been supplying the filth ridden UK with weapons but was all but defeated and Germany offered a peace plan that was beneficial to all. The Balfour Declaration, (Read "History of Zionism 1600-1918" by Nahum Sokolow and you will find in the forward that Arthur Balfour was also a Marrano which is pointed out specifically), was enough for the monied interests of the US to put America into war by lies. Benjamin Freedman's speech at the Willard hotel sums it up well.

The US, USSR, UK and China are all tied together and all are oligarch with a fraudulent opposition as one can figure out when reading "Red Symphony" of Rothschild. All nations are nothing more than corporations that have gone into receivership and are owned as assets just as recently stated by the central banks and the monetization of all creation. Those that have no reverence for all living things and respect for life or planet except for their love of money that their contempt for creation represents is now off the charts as all institutions are corrupt.

Bias of Priene – all men are wicked and most are evil. That was a statement of one of the greats, of the 7 sages and has now come to a point where all life may disappear in a few years through poisoning every aspect of life and the list is long, geoengineering, medicine/vaccine/pharmaceuticals, big ag, idiocy in programming – (listen to JFK condemn amusement and the need for a well informed society), no limits of committing atrocities to life itself as the web of life is hanging by a thread. Education, think tanks, NGOs, government leaders they all are evil and are backed up by a putrid judicial system.

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 1:15 am GMT
@Carolyn Yeager You are funny! And I do not need to take a look at the map. You do!

If you make a right angle triangle from Usti nad labem and Brno you do find out you will find out that distance from Usti to Brno is twice as long eastward than southward.
So you are in error.

Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 1:17 am GMT
@Włodzimierz

Authors claimed they can not find any example of documented mass grave of polish citizens.

What the authors said is, "The only known mass grave of Poles was the work of the Soviet Red Army, led by the NKVD, in the Katyn Forest in Soviet Russia. Long blamed on Germany, the responsibility for this genocidal act is now placed where it belongs. Ironically, the only mass gravesites found on Polish territory have been of German civilians."

What you provided in Comment 11 ( http://lasszpegawski.pl/in-english/%5D is not documented, it's only stories. Have these alleged graves been officially exhumed and the remains counted and examined? It doesn't say so.

This one at the INR about Dachau is another Polish nothing-burger. By putting forth these nonsense pages as evidence of the atrocities you claim, you only make yourself a laughing stock.

Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 1:22 am GMT
@Zarathustra And the second error. After Munich there was no more Czechoslovakia.
Slovakia did become independent.
karel , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 1:34 am GMT
@Petermx Strange story. Sorry to hear of your mother's humiliation but what you write makes no sense to me. What was your mother doing in Plzen at the end of the war? Captured by whom? There was no Red army in Plzen and American troops left in November 1945. If your mother was supposedly fleeing west then she would have landed in Dresden where most refugees from Wroclaw went but not in Plzen. Caroline Yeager and you have obvious deficiencies in geography, which is a strong indications that most of the stories, ventilated here, are simply made up.
Zarathustra , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 1:48 am GMT
@Curmudgeon Kopernik did not have a even a drop of German blood in him. And he was not an astronomer.
He was a polish monk. He did study the solar system as a hobby.
He was first who did claim that all planets rotate around the Sun.
Galileo did only confirm the Koperniks theory only one hundred years after .
Galileo did have already a telescope. Kopernik did not!
Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 1:56 am GMT
@Al Liguori If "60 myriad on 60 myriad" (your first link) is 600,000 squared, that is not a small number.

Thanks.

Anon [264] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 2:22 am GMT
@Reger You're suggesting readings of poetry & opera while accusing Curmudgeon of abstraction?

Let's play, 'Spot the Jew'!

Carolyn Yeager , says: Website Show Comment June 15, 2020 at 2:24 am GMT
@Petermx Thanks for sharing your story, Peter. There is nothing that moves me and shakes me up more than stories of the German expellees as they trudged and fled to the West in those terrible months. I'm so glad your mother made it and lived to have you, tell you her story, and have a good life. Such strength. I did some radio broadcasts with a certain Andreas Wesserle whose family left German Slovakia and reached Bavaria, where they suffered terrible living condition and had practically no food for several years. And they were better off than most!! The stories he tells are shocking.
You might enjoy hearing him tell of this time with his family; he is one of my favorite guests ever! So smart, and such a good storyteller!
https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-dr-andreas-wesserle-german-holocaust-1944-46
https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-devastated-germany-1946-52

I know the Americans were the first to reach Pilsen. And both they and the British felt they owed Uncle Joe practically anything he asked for! I don't know the answer to your question about stripping, but I think it was pretty common, in order to take all the valuables. Every piece of clothing was valuable in those times, plus eyeglasses, false teeth, anything like that.

Current Commenter

[Jun 13, 2020] Korea is just another distraction: false conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year

Highly recommended!
The saying "War is racket" means not only that conquered nations are loots, but the the USA taxpayers will be looted as well
Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Kay Fabe , Jun 13 2020 0:10 utc | 35
Just another distraction.

Heck US aircraft carriers used to visit HK quite often until recently, even after the hand over. They anchored in the harbor while thousands of sailors headed to the Wanchai bars, although after the hand over they anchored in a less visible part of the harbor. China didn't have a problem.

I doubt China sweats a couple of aircraft carriers when we have large bases in Japan and South Korea, not to mention Guam.

False conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year.

If the US were serious about confronting China there would be sanctions and not tariffs. China and US are partners. We sell them chips that they put in our electronics and sell to us, so we can spy on our people, and they test out our social control technology on their own people. They clothe us, sell cheap API's for drugs and they invest in treasuries and other US assets and we educate their young talent and give them access to our research and technology and fund some of their own research and share numerous patents

[Jun 13, 2020] Surprise, surprise. The Trump/Kim Jong-un love affair was about as long as one of Elizabeth Taylor's romances.

This "chest-thumping" is what passes for US "diplomacy" those days
Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
450.org , Jun 12 2020 18:31 utc | 9
Surprise, surprise. The Trump/Kim Jong-un love affair was about as long as one of Elizabeth Taylor's romances. Kim Jong-un wrote him beautiful letters and they fell in love, yet just as quickly they fell out of love. That's the way it is with Trump. He's a male version of Elizabeth Taylor. Melania was smart to renegotiate her prenup. It appears Kim Jong-un neglected to insist on a prenup.

They Were A Match Made In Heaven But Heaven Can Wait I Guess

[Jun 13, 2020] Note on Trump/Pompeo diplomacy of insults: Iran proved to be quite good at swapping insults with the USA and Iran's insults are usually funnier

Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hoarsewhisperer , Jun 12 2020 23:08 utc | 27

Since this nothing-burger appears to have kicked off with an article in the NYT, it looks to me as though someone reminded The Swamp that Iran hasn't been disarmed and is thus not the kind of soft target that can be pushed around with impunity by AmeriKKKa. Imo, Iran is a lot closer to the top of the Military Genius pecking order than AmeriKKKa. i.e. Iran has made it quite clear that "Israel" will cop the blowback if Iran is attacked, and has also demonstrated its ability to conduct high-precision strikes on US bases & bunkers in the region. Iran is also quite good at swapping insults with AmeriKKKa and Iran's insults are usually funnier than AmeriKKKa's...

Threatening North Korea probably seemed like a better/safer idea than threatening Iran but only until China's diplomatic comedians start ripping into AmeriKKKa's loud-mouthed dorks and daydreamers.

[Jun 13, 2020] North Korea is likely to time the announced tests in a way that creates maximum damage for Trump's reelection campaign.

Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit , Jun 12 2020 19:04 utc | 13

North Korea is likely to time the announced tests in a way that creates maximum damage for Trump's reelection campaign.

It matter little which flavor of the establishment a US President hails from.

All Presidents are portrayed as 'peacemakers'. Only peacemakers can claim to fight 'just' wars.

USA is effectively at war with Syria (via dubious legality of occupying Syrian oilfields), Venezuela (having seized Venezuelan State assets with the pretense that Juan Guaidó is the true head of State), and Yemen (via support for Saudi and UAE war on Yemen). And USA leads/forces its allies in a Cold War with Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Then there is the backstabbing of the Palestinians and the US-backed coup in Peru. Trump is merely spokesperson for all this belligerence. When he's gone, whether that occurs in 4 months or 4 years, TPTB/Deep State will turn the page and start again.

!!

Sakineh Bagoom , Jun 12 2020 19:06 utc | 14

The Korean Armistice Agreement was a ceasefire, but no peace treaty was ever signed. In effect the Korean war never ended.

DPRK will not give up her nukes, but that's not where its strength lies. Japan and South Korea are within range of regular ballistic missiles, where US personnel are just sitting duck. All this talk about nukes is hooey.

Aside from China, let's not forget Russia, which has a skin in this game. It has an 11 mile border, and 15 mile maritime border with DPRK. It will do it's utmost for North not become South.

DannyC , Jun 12 2020 20:26 utc | 18
Here's my 2 cents. North Korea should never denuclearize. The US is never going to remove itself from South Korea. The only reason it won't ever be attacked, is if the cost of attacking it is too great to justify. Timing this announcement to damage Trump isn't smart. Yes, Trump gets sabotaged by Pompeo, Bolton when he was around and many others, but at the end of the day the attack order is still his call and it's been obvious Trump doesn't want a war with them. He's mostly just bluffing with his threats towards others. If you get Biden in there, he won't be running the show. Youll have the Pentagon and the neoliberals in charge. They will be less tough talk on Twitter, but definitely more of a threat to start a major war
vk , Jun 12 2020 20:59 utc | 22
It's important to speculate that the relations between the USA and South Korea have their contradictions.

The South Korean elite certainly would like a complete victory over the North under their terms (unconditional surrender to the South). That would allow the dream scenario for South Korea: ransacking their infrastructure (by the chaebols ) and absorbing their 25 million population as cheap workforce.

The South Korean military would also love this scenario, as an enlarged Korea, bordering both China (in a very favorable terrain for a terrestrial invasion in collaboration with the Americans) and Russia, with 75 million inhabitants, could rival Japan as the favorite vassal of the USA in the northwestern Pacific. This would embolden the nationalists at home, open space to crush the center-left (social-democrats) and add fuel to the melting pot of East Asia.

A unified Korea under capitalist hegemony would also enable the Korean military to charge the Americans for much more money, military equipment and other infrastructure in exchange for keeping their occupation. It would also absorb the North's nuclear weapon technology, know-how and infrastructure, so it would automatically be a nuclear power. It could even rise above Japan in geopolitical importance in the American eyes for this reason - it could essentially be an Israel in East Asia, directly threatening China in the name of the USA.

For that reason I think the USA doesn't want a unified and strengthened Korea - even one unified under the South's terms.

The American are already bleeding money and resources on Israel, NATO, Japan and the already existing South Korea. To have another emboldened vassal would bleed the American fiscus even more.

Besides, the Americans see themselves as the owners of South Korea, in the sense that South Korea owes their own existence to American occupation. If the North is to fall, I don't think the USA will allow the South Korean bourgeoisie to simply grab the North Korean resources and nuclear know-how. I don't think they will make the same mistake they did with Germany (by allowing the Western elite to absorb the East entirely, which opened the gates to the creation of the EU and then to the German conquest of Central Europe).

My bet is the North resources would mainly fall to American capital if it was to be conquered. Maybe the American won't even allow a unified Korea - at least not de facto .

uncle tungsten , Jun 12 2020 22:48 utc | 26
Kim Jong Un is more than a match for the dope Trump and his class of '86 wargamers. With this particular agreement the USA confirmed in everyone's eyes that it remains incapable of making and keeping a deal between nations. It would have been cheap and easy for Trump to walk away with a deal to give himself security in his second term runup. He cheated, he lied, and he bragged and so now that very agreement is a lance that the North Korean people can torment and bleed Trump with for the next six months and more.

Let's be clear about how important and sane the original deal was: relax the oppressive sanctions, diminish nuclear threats, remove invasion threats in exchange for repatriated human remains, and NK to destroy its nuclear production facility. That ignorant Pompeo nixed the deal on his very next visit and proved to Kim on his first round with the USA that the president was a puppet and the USA incapable of being trusted.

It was easy, it was inexpensive, it was painless and the USA could not do it.

And so Trump handed a weapon to Kim to stab at him throughout his own re-election. No brains in Kushner or Ivanka's heads as they too have handed a golden opportunity to the North Korean fox. Fools all.


The North Koreans have only their liberty and nation to lose and they would not lose it back in the 1950's and they sure wont lose it now. All the more so to a scabrous pack of greedy Chaebol mafia from the south. Do not forget that the USA bombed the North Koreans continuously, almost every village was bombed in a free fire zone approach that was repeated in Vietnam a decade or so later. Koreans were slaughtered in their millions by this grubby little USA mendacity and it is remembered through the generations. Korea had only just repulsed the Japanese occupation. They remember - and they wont be suckered by some clown nation in the Pacific.

Don Bacon , Jun 12 2020 23:27 utc | 28
DPRK is an ally of both China and Russia, US enemies which are currently besting the US by undermining its influence. .. from the Senate 2021 proposed budget summary:
Two years ago, the National Defense Strategy (NDS) outlined our nation's preeminent challenge: strategic competition with authoritarian adversaries that stand firmly against our shared American values of freedom, democracy, and peace -- namely, China and Russia.These adversaries seek to shift the global order in their favor, at our expense. In pursuit of this goal, these nations have increased military and economic aggression, worked to develop advanced technologies, expanded their influence around the world, and undermined our own influence. . . here
Richard Steven Hack , Jun 12 2020 23:38 utc | 30
Posted by: vk | Jun 12 2020 17:54 utc | 7 use its 25 million inhabitants as a brand-new cheap labor resources with which the chaebols could start a new cycle of capitalist accumulation is closing.

Not to mention the estimated *6-10 trillion dollars* in natural resources that North Korea has.

North Korea Has Trillions of Dollars in Mineral Wealth

From another article: "An estimate from 2012 by a South Korean research institute values the North's mineral wealth at $10 trillion, 20-odd times larger than that of the South."

It's always about the money (and power).

/div>

/div

[Jun 12, 2020] Flynn Case 85 Lies, Contradictions, Oddities, Unusual Occurrences by Petr Svab

Highly recommended!
Jun 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times,

The case of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is inevitably heading toward its conclusion. While the presiding district judge, Emmet Sullivan , is trying to keep it going, there's only so much he can do, chiefly because there's nobody left to prosecute the case after the Department of Justice (DOJ) dropped it last month .

In the latest developments, the District of Columbia appeals court set a hearing in the case for tomorrow (June 12), while the DOJ's solicitor general himself, as well as five of his deputies, urged the court to order the lower-court judge to accept the case dismissal.

"I cannot overstate how big of a deal this is," commented appellate attorney John Reeves, former assistant Missouri attorney general, in a series of tweets on June 1 .

Personal involvement of the solicitor general "is highly unusual and rare," he said .

" Unusual " seems a fitting euphemism for the Flynn case, which has been filled with contradictions, falsehoods, apparent blunders, extraordinary moves, and strange coincidences.

The Epoch Times has so far counted 85 such instances.

Flynn, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency during the Obama administration and former national security adviser to President Donald Trump, pleaded guilty on Dec. 1, 2017, to one count of lying to FBI agents during a Jan. 24, 2017, interview.

The FBI officially opened an investigation on Flynn on Aug. 16, 2016, based on a suspicion that he "may wittingly or unwittingly be involved in activity on behalf of the Russian Federation which may constitute a federal crime or threat to the national security."

What activity? The case was opened under a broader investigation into whether the Trump 2016 presidential campaign conspired with Russia to steal emails from the Democratic National Committee and release them through Wikileaks.

Flynn was an adviser to the campaign at the time.

By its own admission, the FBI had little reason to suspect the campaign.

The bureau learned from the Australian government that its then-ambassador to the UK, Alexander Downer, spoke with Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos, who "suggested" that the campaign received "some kind of suggestion" that Russia could help it by anonymously releasing some information damaging to Trump's opponent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The FBI didn't know what Papadopoulos actually said or what he was talking about.

Officially, this information was used by the FBI to comb through its databases for information on people associated with the Trump campaign and open investigations on four individuals supposedly linked to Russia.

Because Flynn's paid speaking engagements in years past included some for Russian companies -- one for Kaspersky Lab and one for RT television in Moscow -- the FBI decided to open a counterintelligence investigation on the retired three-star general.

But the FBI seemed to have trouble getting its story straight.

1. Comey Contradiction

The FBI officially opened the four individual cases in mid-August 2016.

But former FBI Director James Comey testified to Congress that he was briefed already "at the end of July that the FBI had opened counterintelligence investigations of four individuals to see if there was a connection between any of those four and the Russian effort."

2. Unlikely Target

Suspecting a man with patriotic bona fides of Flynn's caliber of having colluded with Russia based on two speaking engagements seemed particularly unusual.

Flynn's command of military intelligence to aid American troops in combat has earned him great praise.

"Mike Flynn's impact on the nation's War on Terror probably trumps any other single person," wrote then-Brig. Gen. John Mulholland in Flynn's 2007 performance review .

Mulholland went as far as calling Flynn "easily the best intelligence professional of any service serving today."

Flynn was driven out of his post in 2014 after he repeatedly embarrassed President Barack Obama by insisting, contrary to the administration's official stance, that a resurgence of Islamic terrorism in the Middle East was imminent.

Two months after his resignation, the rise of ISIS proved him right.

3. A Name for the Spotlight

The Russia probe was titled "Crossfire Hurricane" (CH), and Flynn was given the code name "Crossfire Razor."

This was unusual, according to Marc Ruskin, a 27-year veteran of the FBI and an Epoch Times contributor.

Rank-and-file agents would never pick a name like this, he told The Epoch Times in a previous interview.

"They would mock it as being overly dramatic," he said.

4. Snooping During Briefing

The day after opening the Flynn case, the FBI participated in a strategic intelligence briefing given to Donald Trump and two of his advisers by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Because Flynn was to be present, the FBI took the extraordinary step of sending in supervisory special agent Joe Pientka to collect intel on Flynn for the investigation. Pientka was to assess Flynn's "overall mannerisms" and listen for "any kind of admission" that could be used by the bureau, the DOJ's inspector general (IG) said in a Dec. 9 report on the CH investigation ( pdf ).

The IG raised the question of whether snooping on officials the FBI is supposed to brief could have a "chilling effect" on any such intelligence briefings in the future.

5. Dossier Coincidence

The FBI directly targeted four Trump campaign aides, opening cases on three of them -- Papadopoulos, Carter Page, and Paul Manafort -- on Aug. 10, 2016. The IG never received an explanation for why the Flynn case was opened later. Incidentally, Page and Manafort had already been mentioned in the infamous Steele dossier since July 28, 2016. Flynn's name, however, was only mentioned in the dossier report dated Aug. 10, 2016.

The dossier, which drummed up unsubstantiated allegations of a Trump–Russia conspiracy, was being spread to the media, the FBI, the State Department, the DOJ, and Congress by operatives funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

The CH investigation team members at the FBI told the IG they only received the dossier in September 2016, but there are indications they may have been aware of it earlier .

6. Halper Coincidence

One of the CH case agents, Stephen Somma, happened to have a longstanding relationship with Stephan Halper, a Cambridge professor who was also a longtime political operative and FBI informant.

Somma and another agent met with Halper on Aug. 11, 2016, and learned that, in a stunning coincidence, Halper was already in contact with Page, had known Manafort for years, and "had been previously acquainted with Michael Flynn," the IG report said

The CH team "couldn't believe [their] luck," Somma told the IG.

7. Halper's Story

Halper was accused of spreading rumors, starting in late 2016, that Flynn had an affair with a Russian woman while visiting the UK in 2014 for a dinner hosted by the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar co-convened at the time by Halper.

An "established" FBI informant told the CH team that the woman jumped in a cab with Flynn after the dinner and joined him for a train ride to London ( pdf ).

The woman in question was Svetlana Lokhova, a Cambridge historian of Russian descent. She has denied the rumor, saying that she was picked up after the dinner by her husband .

She said Halper was the one spreading the rumor to the media and the FBI, even though he didn't actually attend the event. She unsuccessfully sued Halper for defamation in May 2019.

Somehow, Steele also became privy to the rumor and shared it with Adam Kramer , an aide to the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Kramer testified to Congress that he was in regular contact with Steele between Nov. 28, 2016, and early March 2017.

8. Unmasking

The names of Americans are normally masked -- that is, replaced with generic names -- in foreign intelligence reports. Many senior government officials have the authority to ask for names to be unmasked for various reasons, such as to understand the intelligence. There were dozens of unmasking requests for reports related to Flynn, between Nov. 8, 2016, and Jan. 31, 2017 ( pdf ). The number of unmasking requests has been described as alarming by some commentators, while others described it as routine.

9. Non-masking

There are also indications that Flynn's name was never masked in summaries or transcripts of his calls with then-Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak on Dec. 29, 2016, and in the following days. FBI leaders were distributing the documents to top Obama officials. Even President Barack Obama himself was briefed on them on or before Jan. 5, 2017.

10. Who Briefed Obama?

Comey testified to Congress that it was then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper who briefed Obama on the Flynn–Kislyak calls ( pdf ). Clapper, however, denied this to Congress.

11. 'Unusual'

Obama's national security adviser, Susan Rice, memorialized a Jan. 5, 2017, meeting with Obama, Comey, and then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates . Rice wrote in an email to herself that Obama asked Comey whether he should withhold any Russia-related information from the incoming administration and from Flynn in particular.

"Potentially," Comey replied, adding that "the level of communication" between Flynn and Kislyak was "unusual," she wrote . There's no indication Flynn was talking to Kislyak unusually often. He was at the time responsible for laying the groundwork for Trump's foreign relations as president and was frequently on the phone with foreign dignitaries.

12. Late Memo

Rice's memo itself is unusual. She emailed it to herself more than two weeks after the meeting took place, on the day of Trump's inauguration.

13. Strzok Intervention

On Jan. 4, the FBI was already in the process of closing Flynn's case. But the bureau's counterintelligence operations head at the time, Peter Strzok, scrambled to keep it open , noting that the "7th floor," meaning the FBI's top leadership, was involved.

14. McCabe–Comey Contradiction

Comey testified that he authorized the Flynn case "to be closed at the end of December, beginning of January."

But his then-deputy, Andrew McCabe, told Congress that they weren't in "the closing planning phase" at the time.

"I don't think a closure would have been soon," he said.

15. Shaky Theory

FBI documents and Comey's testimony indicate that the bureau kept the Flynn case open solely based on a legal theory that he may have violated the Logan Act, even though the DOJ made clear that such charges wouldn't pass muster in court -- nobody has ever been successfully prosecuted for a Logan Act violation and the government last tried in 1852.

The law prohibits private citizens from engaging in diplomacy on their own with countries the United States is in dispute with. Not only have questions been raised as to whether the law would pass today's constitutional scrutiny, which places greater emphasis on First Amendment protections, but also there's no indication the law was conceived to apply to a president-elect's incoming top adviser.

16. Call Leaks

In early January, information about Flynn's calls with Kislyak was leaked to then-Washington Post reporter Adam Entous. He said there was a discussion at the paper about what to do with the information, as it would have been expected of Flynn, given his position, to talk to Kislyak ( pdf ). In the end, the paper ran a column on Jan. 12 by David Ignatius speculating that Flynn may have violated the Logan Act if he discussed fresh sanctions imposed on Russia during the calls.

Obama imposed the sanctions on Russian entities, including its intelligence services, on Dec. 29, 2016. At the same time, he also expelled 35 Russian intelligence officers.

17. Denial

The calls "had nothing whatsoever to do with the sanctions," incoming Vice President Mike Pence told CBS News on Jan. 15, 2017, in an interview the network almost wholly dedicated to questions about Russia.

This wasn't completely true.

Kislyak did bring up the issue of sanctions during the call, though Flynn didn't engage him in a conversation on the topic.

Flynn raised the issue of the expulsions, which is technically a separate issue from sanctions, though both were announced at the same time. He asked for "cool heads to prevail" and for Russia to only respond reciprocally, as further escalation into a "tit for tat" could lead to the countries shutting down each other's embassies, complicating future diplomacy.

18. 'Blackmailable'

Yates said she wanted to inform Trump's White House about the Kislyak calls as Russia would know that what Pence said wasn't true and could thus blackmail Flynn with the information, according to an Aug. 15, 2017, FBI report from her interview with the Mueller team.

According to Ruskin, this was hardly a blackmail situation, which ordinarily involves serious compromising information, such as evidence of bribery or sexual misconduct.

Comey acknowledged to Congress in March 2017 that the idea that Flynn was compromised struck him "as a bit of a reach."

19. Comey Blocked Information

Despite issues with Yates's argument, informing the White House may have indeed cleared up the situation. However, Comey blocked it, saying it could have interfered with the investigation of Flynn -- despite that it appears there was nothing for the bureau to investigate. At that point, the DOJ already had disapproved of the Logan Act idea. In any case, the probe was supposed to be about Russian collusion. The bureau could have closed it and opened a new one on the Logan Act, if it indeed had had sufficient predication. But it never opened such an investigation, the DOJ noted in its motion to dismiss Flynn's case.

20. Another Comey–McCabe Contradiction

In the days before Jan. 24, 2017, top FBI officials were discussing plans to interview Flynn. Comey said the point of the interview was to find out why Flynn didn't tell Pence that sanctions were discussed during the call (even though Flynn wasn't actually the one talking about sanctions).

"My judgment was we could not close the investigation of Mr. Flynn without asking him what is the deal here. That was the purpose," Comey testified.

McCabe, however, told a different story when then-Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) asked him, "Was [Flynn] interviewed because the Vice President relied upon information from him in a national interview?"

"No. I don't remember that being a motivating factor behind the interview," McCabe said.

21. No Mention of Pence

During the interview, the agents didn't ask Flynn about what he did or didn't tell Pence -- an unusual approach if the point, as Comey said, was to find out why Flynn hadn't "been candid" with Pence. The FBI, in fact, had no idea what Flynn did or didn't tell Pence.

22. Slipped-In Warning

Agents regularly warn interviewees that lying to federal officers is a crime. Before the Flynn interview, however, McCabe's special counsel Lisa Page emailed another FBI lawyer asking how the warning should be given and whether there was a way "to just casually slip that in."

23. No Warning

In the end, the agents never gave Flynn any such warning.

24. 'Get Him to Lie Get Him Fired?'

The FBI officials agreed that the agents wouldn't show Flynn the transcripts of the calls. If he said something that diverged from them, they would ask again, slipping in some words from the transcript. If that didn't jog his memory, they were not to confront him about it.

On the day of the interview, then-FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap wrote a note saying he told other officials to "rethink" the approach.

"What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?" he wrote, noting, "We regularly show subjects evidence."

Apparently, his concerns were ignored.

25. Discouraging Having a Lawyer Present

On the day of the interview, McCabe spoke with Flynn on the phone to ask him for the interview. McCabe said he told Flynn he wanted the interview done "as quickly, quietly, and discreetly as possible." If Flynn wanted anybody to sit in, such as one of the White House lawyers, the DOJ would have to be involved, McCabe told him.

According to Ruskin, that was "egregious" behavior akin to discouraging a subject of an investigation from having a lawyer present for an interview.

26. No White House Notice

An FBI interview of a president's national security adviser is a big deal. Normally, it would warrant a back-and-forth between the White House and the bureau on the scope, content, purpose, and other parameters. Most likely, multiple White House lawyers would sit in.

Comey, however, said in a public forum that he just sent the agents in, taking advantage of the fact that it was "early enough" -- only four days after the inauguration.

27. No Notice Given to DOJ

According to Yates, Comey didn't consult the DOJ about his intention to interview Flynn, even though the department would usually be involved in such decisions.

28. Not Quite a Denial From Flynn

After the interview, in which Strzok and supervisory special agent Pientka extensively questioned Flynn about his conversations with Kislyak, Comey said that Flynn denied talking to the ambassador about the sanctions. But the agents' notes indicate that though Flynn denied it at first, he seemed unsure when the agents asked again.

"Not really. I don't remember. It wasn't, 'Don't do anything,'" he said, according to the notes.

Flynn said in a Jan. 29 declaration to the court that he still doesn't remember talking to Kislyak about sanctions.

"I told the agents that 'tit-for-tat' is a phrase I use, which suggests that the topic of sanctions could have been raised," he said .

29. UN Vote Denial

Based on the agent's notes, Flynn did deny asking for Russia to delay a U.N. vote in Israeli settlements. One of the call transcripts indicates he in fact made such a request.

Flynn told the agents he was calling multiple countries regarding the vote, but it was more an exercise of how quickly he could get foreign officials on the phone since there was no way the transition team could convince enough countries to actually change the outcome. Indeed, the vote passed with only the United States abstaining.

30. No Indication of Deception

The agents came back with the impression "that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying," according to Strzok.

Comey seemed on the fence.

"I don't know. I think there is an argument to be made that he lied. It is a close one," he testified.

31. Flynn Knew They Knew

According to McCabe, Flynn expressed awareness before the interview that the FBI knew exactly what he said during the Kislyak calls.

"You listen to everything they [Russian representatives] say," Flynn told him, according to McCabe's notes from that day.

32. Belated Report

The FBI interview summary, form FD-302, is required to be completed within five days of the interview. Flynn's, however, took more than two weeks.

33. Rewritten 302

Strzok texted Page on Feb. 10, 2017, he was "trying to not completely rewrite" the 302 "so as to save [redacted] voice." The redacted name was most likely Pientka's.

34. Missing Original

Flynn was ultimately provided two draft versions of the 302 -- one from Feb. 10, 2016, and one from the day after. But based on Strzok's texts, there should have been at least two draft versions produced on Feb. 10, 2016, or before.

In fact, Judge Sullivan said in a Dec. 17, 2018, minute order that the 302 "was drafted immediately after Mr. Flynn's FBI interview." It's not clear what the judge was basing this assertion on or what happened to the early draft.

Flynn's current attorney, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell , later said she'd found a witness who saw an earlier draft and that it said "that Flynn was honest with the agents and did not lie."

35. No Reinterview

It is common that when the FBI has questions after an interview about the candor of the subject, it would question the person again. But in this case, the FBI showed no interest in doing so.

36. Still Investigating What?

After the interview, Comey promptly agreed to Yates informing the White House about the call transcripts. Flynn was fired two weeks later. But, somehow, the investigation was still not over.

Comey said in his March 2, 2017, testimony that the bureau wasn't investigating any possible Logan Act violation by Flynn and wouldn't do so unless the DOJ directed it.

But he said the investigation was "obviously" still ongoing and "criminal in nature."

McCabe said that "even following the interview on the 24th, we had a lot of work left to do in that investigation."

By mid-February, the status of the probe wouldn't have "changed materially" in his belief, he said.

"Like we were pursuing phone records and toll records at that time," he said. "There were all kinds of really very basic foundational investigative activity that had to take place and we were committed to getting that done."

It's unclear what the point of the investigation was.

37. FARA Papers

Around Christmas 2016, Flynn found in the office of his defunct consultancy, Flynn Intel Group (FIG), a letter from the DOJ telling him he may need to file foreign lobbying disclosures under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

The DOJ's National Security Division (NSD) wanted to know about a job FIG did earlier that year for Turkish businessman Kamil Ekim Alptekin.

It should have been a routine procedure. Washington lobbyists commonly flunk FARA rules and the NSD usually just asks them to register retrospectively because FARA cases are difficult to prosecute. Flynn hired a team from Covington and Burling led by Robert Kelner, a "never-Trumper" and an expert on FARA, to prepare the paperwork.

This time, the NSD was unusually eager. Heather Hunt, then-FARA unit chief herself, was repeatedly prompting the lawyers to expeditiously file the papers.

"We've never seen her this engaged in any matter (ever)," Kelner noted in an email to his colleagues .

Even the DOJ's then-counterintelligence chief, David Laufman, got involved and personally questioned Covington on the FARA filings.

38. Comey Memo

Comey wrote in a personal memo that Trump told him in private in February 2017 that he hoped Comey could "let Flynn go." Trump denied saying that. Trump's lawyers have argued that the president didn't know at the time that Flynn was still under investigation .

Comey's leaking the content of this and other memos to the media served as a catalyst for then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointing former FBI head Robert Mueller as a special counsel to take over the CH probe.

39. Rosenstein's Scope Memo Still Alludes to Logan Act

Even though Comey said in March 2017 that the FBI wasn't investigating Flynn for a Logan Act violation, Mueller received in August 2017 a mandate from Rosenstein ( pdf ) to probe whether Flynn "committed a crime or crimes by engaging in conversations with Russian government officials during the period of the Trump transition." That appears to be an allusion to the Logan Act.

Rosenstein testified to Congress that he simply put in the scope of Mueller's mandate whatever the CH team was investigating at the time.

The scope memo also tasked Mueller with probing whether Flynn lied to the FBI during the interview, whether he failed to report foreign contacts or income on his national security disclosure forms, and whether the Turkey job by his firm meant that he "committed a crime or crimes by acting as an unregistered agent for the government of Turkey."

40. Lawyers Delay Informing Flynn?

By mid-August 2017, Covington learned that prosecutors were looking at Flynn's FARA filings. But the lawyers didn't inform Flynn until weeks later, according to his current lawyer, Powell.

41. Conflict of Interest

Convington faced a conflict of interest in Flynn's case, because it was in their interest to say any problems with the FARA papers were Flynn's fault, while it was in Flynn's interest to say the lawyers were responsible.

Covington and the Mueller team agreed the firm can continue to represent Flynn if they tell him about the conflict and he consents to it. Powell said the conflict was so serious bar rules required the lawyers to withdraw.

42. Lawyers Don't Take Responsibility

In Flynn's situation, it would have been the ethical thing to do for the lawyers to take responsibility for any problems with the FARA papers, according to Powell. But they didn't do that.

43. Lawyers Express Apprehension About Being Targeted Themselves

The Covington lawyers on several occasions expressed concern that Mueller may target them with a crime-fraud order, a measure that allows prosecutors to break through the attorney-client privilege if they get a judge to agree that the client was conferring with lawyers to further a crime or some misconduct. The lawyers were aware Mueller's team had already used the order against Manafort.

Facing a crime-fraud order would cause bad publicity for Covington, Powell noted. Leading Flynn into the plea allowed the firm to avoid it.

44. Perilous Interviews

In early November 2016, Mueller prosecutors, led by Brandon Van Grack, told Covington that Flynn was facing charges for lying to the FBI and lying on the FARA papers. They asked for Flynn's cooperation with the broader Russia probe, particularly regarding any communications he or other Trump people had with foreign officials.

Van Grack wanted Flynn to sit down for a series of interviews. He offered Flynn limited immunity, but acknowledged that Flynn could still be charged for lying during the interviews.

The lawyers noted that this could have been dangerous for Flynn, even if he was completely honest.

"To ask someone about meetings and calls during an incredibly busy period of his life as an evaluation of candor is not a particularly attractive option," Kelner told the prosecutors during a conference call ( pdf ).

Yet ultimately the Covington lawyers agreed to make Flynn available for the questioning.

45. Belated Consent

Covington only asked Flynn for consent with their conflict of interest in writing on Nov. 19, 2017, after Flynn had already been through two days of interviews with the prosecutors.

46. Wrong Standard

The consent request, sent via email, cited the wrong bar rule for handling of conflicts. The correct rule "creates a much lower threshold at which a lawyer must bow out," Powell said in a court filing.

47. Innocent but Guilty

The Covington lawyers repeatedly told the prosecutors that they didn't think Flynn was guilty of a felony. They were also told that Strzok and Pientka "saw no indication of deception" on Flynn's part and had the impression after the interview that he wasn't lying or didn't think he was lying. But the lawyers still convinced Flynn that he should plead guilty to the felony charge.

48. Threat to Son

According to Flynn's declaration, the Covington lawyers told him that if he didn't plead, the prosecutors would charge his son (who had a four-month-old baby at the time) with a FARA violation, because the son worked for Flynn's firm and was involved in the Turkey project. If he did plead, however, his son "would be left in peace," Flynn said.

The pressure campaign, it seems, was also reflected in media leaks.

"If the elder Flynn is willing to cooperate with investigators in order to help his son it could also change his own fate, potentially limiting any legal consequences," NBC News reported on Nov. 5, 2017, referring to "sources familiar with the investigation."

"To twist the father's arm with regard to his child is a pretty low thing to do," Ruskin commented.

49. 302 Not Shared

The prosecutors refused to share with Flynn the 302 from his January interview until shortly before he agreed to plead. Also, they only shared the final version of the report, which was significantly different from its previous drafts, Flynn later learned.

50. Strzok Texts Understatement

Shortly before Flynn signed his plea, the prosecutors disclosed to his lawyers that one of the agents who interviewed Flynn (Strzok) was being investigated by the IG for potential misconduct. They also disclosed that the agent expressed in electronic communications "a preference for one of the candidates for President."

This was far from covering the bombshell the Strzok texts actually were, Powell noted.

Strzok not only voiced preference for Clinton, but cursed at and repeatedly derided Trump. In one 2016 text, he argued that the FBI needed to take action akin to an "insurance policy" in case Trump won. Strzok later said he was referring to proceeding in the CH probe more aggressively out of a worry that Trump may interfere with it if elected.

51. Lawyers Never Told Flynn?

Flynn said the Convington lawyers never told him that the FBI agents didn't think he lied. Even after he specifically asked about the agents' impression, the lawyers didn't disclose the information and instead told him that "the agents stood by their statement."

"I then understood them to be telling me that the FBI agents believed that I had lied," Flynn said, explaining that had he known, he wouldn't have signed the plea.

52. Statement of Offense Inaccurate

As part of his statement of offense, Flynn affirmed that FIG's FARA papers contained three false statements and one omission. Yet, on all four points the statement of offense was inaccurate, Powell demonstrated ( pdf ).

"The prosecutors concocted the alleged 'false statements' by their own misrepresentations, deceit, and omissions," she said in a court filing ( pdf ).

The FARA papers were "substantially correct" and any deficiencies were the fault of Covington, she said.

53. Lawyers Knew

In an internal email three days before Flynn signed his plea, one of the Covington lawyers pointed out that some of the "false statements" attributed to Flynn in the statement of offense regarding the FARA filings were "contradicted by the caveats or qualifications in the filing."

It seems the lawyers failed to correct the issue, since the statement of offense remained inaccurate. They also never informed Flynn of the issue, according to Powell.

54. Judge Recusal

Flynn entered his plea on Dec. 1, 2017. Shortly after, the judge who accepted the plea, Rudolph Contreras, recused himself from the case. The apparent but undisclosed reason was likely his personal relationship with Strzok.

55. Strzok Texts Media Coincidence

While the IG had found Strzok's texts already in June 2017, their first disclosure in the media came from The Washington Post the day after Flynn entered his guilty plea. Powell noted how convenient the timing was for the prosecutors.

56. Side Deal

The prosecutors conveyed to Covington an "unofficial understanding" that they were "unlikely" to charge Flynn's son in light of Flynn's agreement to continue to cooperate with the Mueller probe, one of the lawyers said in an internal email.

Such an under-the-table deal is "unethical," Ruskin said.

57. Avoiding Giglio Disclosure

Another internal Covington email suggests the prosecutors intentionally kept the deal regarding Flynn's son unofficial to make future prosecutions easier.

"The government took pains not to give a promise to MTF [Michael T. Flynn] regarding Michael [Flynn] Jr., so as to limit how much of a 'benefit' it would have to disclose as part of its Giglio disclosures to any defendant against whom MTF may one day testify," the email reads.

"Giglio" refers to a 1972 Supreme Court opinion that requires prosecutors to disclose to the defense that a witness used by the prosecutors has been promised an escape from prosecution in exchange for cooperation.

58. Questionable Disclosures

After the case was assigned to Judge Sullivan, he entered an order for the DOJ to give Flynn all exculpatory information it had, as the judge does in all cases.

The prosecutors, however, weren't prompt in revealing the information. The Strzok texts, for instance, were only provided to Flynn after they were released publicly.

59. Business Partner Coincidence

One day before Flynn's sentencing hearing, his former business partner, Bijan Rafiekian, was charged with a failure to register as a foreign agent in relation to FIG's Turkey job.

Powell called it a "shot across the bow" which the Mueller team wanted to "leverage" against Flynn.

"Mr. Van Grack used the possibility of indicting Flynn in the Rafiekian case at the sentencing hearing to raise the specter of all the threats he had made to secure the plea a year earlier -- including the indictment of Mr. Flynn's son," she said in a court filing ( pdf ).

60. Judge Makes False Accusations, Backtracks

During a Dec. 18, 2018, sentencing hearing, Sullivan questioned the prosecutors about whether they considered charging Flynn with treason.

"Arguably, you sold your country out," he told Flynn, saying that he acted as an agent of Turkey while in the White House.

That was wrong on multiple levels. Not only does treason not apply to unregistered lobbying, but the Turkey job had virtually no impact on American interests. It prepared a plan to lobby for the extradition of an Islamic cleric, Fethullah Gülen, who lives in exile in the United States, and whom Ankara blamed for instigating a coup attempt in 2016. Almost none of the plan materialized. Most importantly, Flynn shuttered his firm shortly after the election to comply with Trump's promise of no lobbyists in his administration.

Sullivan corrected himself later in the hearing, but many media outlets still put his original remarks in headlines.

61. MSNBC Coincidence

While Sullivan's question about treason and his gaffe about the Turkey job seemed to come out of left field, they mirrored MSNBC talking points from days prior.

The day before Flynn's sentencing hearing, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow claimed Flynn and Rafiekian "disguised" the origins of payments for the Turkey job so they could "secretly work in the interest of a foreign country without anybody knowing it while they were also working high-level jobs in intelligence inside the U.S. government."

"Flynn really thought he could be a national security adviser, the national security adviser in the White House, and a secret foreign agent at the same time," Maddow said .

Three days before Flynn's sentencing hearing, Malcolm Nance, a counterterrorism commentator, said on MSNBC that Flynn "may have been one step away from treason" and "pulled back by cooperating" with Mueller.

62. Judge Fails to Satisfy Plea Rules

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure state in Rule 11 that "before entering judgment on a guilty plea, the court must determine that there is a factual basis for the plea."

As such, Sullivan was required to check that Flynn's alleged lies to the FBI were "material," meaning relevant enough to potentially affect an FBI investigation.

But the judge acknowledged during the sentencing hearing that he hadn't done so.

"It probably won't surprise you that I had many, many, many more questions. such as, you know, how the government's investigation was impeded? What was the material impact of the criminality? Things like that," he said at the conclusion of the hearing.

There's no indication Sullivan has asked those questions since.

63. Unacceptable Plea

Not only could Sullivan not have accepted Flynn's plea before determining materiality, there's evidence he was in fact required to refuse it.

Rule 11 requires the court to "determine that the plea is voluntary and did not result from force, threats, or promises (other than promises in a plea agreement)."

In Flynn's case, there actually was a threat and a promise left out of the deal -- the "unofficial understanding" that his son was "unlikely" to be charged if Flynn cooperated.

64. Lawyers Insisted Flynn 'Stay on the Path'

Before the sentencing hearing, the Covington lawyers told Flynn to "stay on the path" and to refuse if Sullivan offered him to take his plea back, Flynn said in his court declaration.

"If the judge offers you a chance to withdraw your plea, he is giving you the rope to hang yourself. Don't do it," the lawyers said, according to Powell.

65. Unprepared

Flynn said the lawyers only prepared him for a "simple hearing" and not for the extended questioning Sullivan engaged in.

"I was not prepared for this court's plea colloquy, much less to decide, on the spot, whether I should withdraw my plea, consult with independent counsel, or continue to follow my existing lawyers' advice," he said.

In the end, he affirmed his plea during the hearing.

66. Prosecutors Asked for False Testimony?

Flynn was expected to testify against Rafiekian in 2019, but when the moment was to come, prosecutors asked him to say that he signed FIG's FARA papers knowing there were lies in them. Flynn, who had already fired Convington and hired Powell by that point, refused. He said he only acknowledged in hindsight that the FARA papers were inaccurate, but didn't know it at the time.

67. Prosecutors Knew?

Powell has argued that the prosecutors knew they were asking for a false testimony. She filed with the court a draft of Flynn's statement of offense, which shows that the words "FLYNN then and there knew" (pertaining to the FARA registration) were cut from the final version.

Moreover, Powell submitted emails that indicate the words were cut by the prosecutors themselves after the Covington lawyers raised some objections to the draft.

68. Retaliation?

Flynn's refusal to say what prosecutors wanted angered Van Grack, contemporaneous notes show ( pdf ). Shortly after, prosecutors tried to label Flynn as a co-conspirator in the Rafiekian case and put Flynn's son on the list of witnesses for the prosecution. According to Powell, this was retaliation for Flynn's refusal to lie.

69. Rafiekian Case Collapses

Prosecutors in the Rafiekian case tried to argue that anybody who does something political at the request of a foreign official and fails to disclose it to the DOJ is an "agent of a foreign government" and can be put in prison for up to 10 years.

The presiding judge, Anthony Trenga, rejected the theory, ruling that an "agent" -- as used in that context -- needs to have a tighter relationship with the foreign government, a relationship that includes "the power of the principal to give directions and the duty of the agent to obey those directions."

Trenga ultimately tossed the case for a lack of evidence .

70. No Exculpatory Evidence?

Starting in August, Powell started to bombard the prosecutors with demands for exculpatory evidence she was convinced the DOJ possessed. But the prosecutors repeatedly claimed the government already provided all it had and had no more.

The main issue was, Powell noted, that the DOJ had a very narrow view of what is exculpatory.

"If something appears on its face to be favorable to the defense the government will claim it was said 'with a wink and a nod,' and therefore it showed the defendant's guilt after all," she complained in an Aug. 30, 2019, filing ( pdf ).

As it later turned out, the FBI was sitting on a number of documents favorable to the defense.

71. Contradicting Notes

When Flynn finally obtained the hand-written notes Strzok and Pientka took during the interview, it turned out they didn't quite match the final 302.

The 302, for instance, says that Flynn remembered making four to five phone calls to Kislyak on Dec. 29, 2016. Both sets of notes indicate that Flynn didn't remember that.

Also, the 302 says that Flynn denied that Kislyak got back to him with the Russian response a few days later. There's no mention of a Russian response in the notes.

72. Notes Mixup

It took the prosecutors until November 2019 to find out and tell Flynn that the notes they said belonged to Strzok were actually Pientka's and vice versa.

73. No Date, Name

The notes mixup wasn't that easy to spot because neither set of notes was signed or dated, even though they should have been, according to Powell.

74. Harsher Sentence

Since his sentencing hearing, Flynn was expected to receive a light sentence, possibly probation. In January 2020, however, the prosecutors indicated that Flynn should be treated more harshly because he reneged on his promise to cooperate on the Rafiekian case.

This was part of the retaliation for Flynn's refusal to lie for the prosecutors, according to Powell.

Shortly after that, Flynn asked the court to let him withdraw his plea.

75. Hint at Perjury

In February 2020, prosecutors asked for Sullivan to give them access to Flynn's communications with Covington.

Any limitation the court puts on how the attorney-client information can be used shouldn't "preclude the government from prosecuting the defendant for perjury if any information that he provided to counsel were proof of perjury in this proceeding," they said.

It's not clear what specifically they were referring to.

76. Thousands More Documents

In April, Covington told Flynn they found thousands more documents related to his case that they failed to give to Powell due to "an unintentional miscommunication involving the firm's information technology personnel."

77. Van Grack Out

On May 7, 2020, Van Grack withdrew from Flynn's case as well as others. The reason is not clear.

The same day, the DOJ moved to withdraw the Flynn case.

78. Judge Delays

A government motion to withdraw a case usually marks the end of the case. The court still needs to accept the motion, but there's not much it can do, since there's nobody left to prosecute the case.

Sullivan, however, didn't accept it.

79. Appointing Amicus

On May 13, 2020, Sullivan appointed former federal Judge John Gleeson as an amicus curiae (friend of court) "to present arguments in opposition to the government's Motion to Dismiss" as well as to "address" whether the court should make the defense explain why "Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury."

This was an unusual move. Amici are normally only appointed in civil or higher court cases. Powell has said Sullivan doesn't have authority to do so.

80. Another Washington Post Coincidence

Just two days earlier, Gleeson co-authored an op-ed in The Washington Post where he accused the DOJ of "impropriety," "corruption," and "improper political influence" for dropping the Flynn case.

81. More Delays

On May 19, 2020, Sullivan issued a scheduling order that set an oral argument for July 16, when third parties invited by the judge would get a chance to voice their opinions. As such, the judge set to prolong the case for about two more months and possibly beyond.

Meanwhile, Flynn sent a petition to the District of Columbia appeals court, asking it to order Sullivan to accept the case dismissal .

82. Order for Response

In a rare move , the appeals court ordered Sullivan to respond to Flynn's petition within 10 days. Usually, the court would appoint an amicus curiae to argue the case on behalf of the judge. Sometimes, the court would invite the judge to respond. Ordering a response is "very rare," Reeves commented.

83. Sullivan Lawyers Up

In another unusual turn of events, Sullivan hired highly-connected D.C. attorney Beth Wilkinson to respond to the appeals court on his behalf.

Wilkinson has in the past represented major corporations such as Pfizer, Microsoft, and Phillip Morris, as well as Hillary Clinton aides during the FBI's investigation of Clinton's use of a private email server. She also assisted then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in preparing his 2018 defense against a sexual assault allegation.

Wilkinson is married to CNN analyst David Gregory, the former host of the NBC News' "Meet the Press."

84. DOJ Brings Big Guns

In another unusual move, the DOJ's Solicitor General and five of his deputies responded to the appeals court in support of Flynn's petition. The Solicitor General usually argues cases on behalf of the DOJ before the Supreme Court. His personal involvement in an appeals court petition "is highly unusual and rare," Reeves said.

85. Short Notice

On June 2, 2020, the appeals court set a hearing in the case on June 12 , giving unusually short notice, Reeves noted.

"For non-lawyers, a ten day notice for oral argument may seem like a long time, but it isn't. It's an increidibly [sic] short amount of time," he said, noting that a call for a hearing "shows that the DC Circuit is gravely concerned about this matter."

[Jun 12, 2020] Russia, Russia, Russia - Obama Apparatchiks Blame Moscow For America's Riots

Jun 12, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Russia, Russia, Russia - Obama Apparatchiks Blame Moscow For America's Riots by Tyler Durden Thu, 06/11/2020 - 22:45 Authored by Phillip Giraldi via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

If one ventures into the vast wasteland of American television it is possible to miss the truly ridiculous content that is promoted as news by the major networks. One particular feature of media-speak in the United States is the tendency of the professional reporting punditry to go seeking for someone to blame every time some development rattles the National Security plus Wall Street bubble that we all unfortunately live in. The talking heads have to such an extent sold the conclusion that China deliberately released a lethal virus to destroy western democracies that no one objects when Beijing is elevated from being a commercial competitor and political adversary to an enemy of the United States. One sometimes even sees that it is all a communist plot. Likewise, the riots taking place all across the U.S. are being milked for what it's worth by the predominantly liberal media, both to influence this year's election and to demonstrate how much the news oligarchs really love black people.

As is often the case, there are a number of inconsistencies in the narrative. If one looks at the numerous photos of the protests in many parts of the country, it is clear that most of the demonstrators are white, not black, which might suggest that even if there are significant pockets of racism in the United States there is also a strong condemnation of that fact by many white people. And this in a country that elected a black man president not once, but twice, and that black president had a cabinet that included a large number of African-Americans.

Also, to further obfuscate any understanding of what might be taking place, the media and chattering class is obsessed with finding white supremacists as instigators of at least some of the actual violence. It would be a convenient explanation for the Social Justice Warriors that proliferate in the media, though it is supported currently by little actual evidence that anyone is exploiting right-wing groups.

Simultaneously, some on the right, to include the president, are blaming legitimately dubbed domestic terrorist group Antifa , which is perhaps more plausible, though again evidence of organized instigation appears to be on the thin side. Still another source of the mayhem apparently consists of some folks getting all excited by the turmoil and breaking windows and tossing Molotov cocktails, as did two upper middle class attorneys in Brooklyn last week.

Nevertheless, the search goes on for a guilty party. Explaining the demonstrations and riots as the result of the horrible killing of a black man by police which has revulsed both black and white Americans would be too simple to satisfy the convoluted yearnings of the likes of Wolf Blitzer and Rachel Maddow.

Which brings us to Russia. How convenient is it to fall back on Russia which, together with the Chinese, is reputedly already reported to be working hard to subvert the November U.S. election. And what better way to do just that than to call on one of the empty-heads of the Barack Obama administration, whose foreign policy achievements included the destruction of a prosperous Libya and the killing of four American diplomats in Benghazi, the initiation of kinetic hostilities with Syria, the failure to achieve a reset with Russia and the assassinations of American citizens overseas without any due process. But Obama sure did talk nice and seem pleasant unlike the current occupant of the White House.

The predictable Wolf Blitzer had a recent interview with perhaps the emptiest head of all the empowered women who virtually ran the Obama White House. Susan Rice was U.N. Ambassador and later National Security Advisor under Barack Obama. Before that she was a Clinton appointee who served as Undersecretary of State for African Affairs. She is reportedly currently being considered as a possible running mate for Joe Biden as she has all the necessary qualifications being a woman and black.

While Ambassador and National Security Advisor, Rice had the reputation of being extremely abrasive . She ran into trouble when she failed to be convincing in support of the Obama administration exculpatory narrative regarding what went wrong in Benghazi when the four Americans, to include the U.S. Ambassador, were killed.

In her interview with Blitzer, Rice said:

"We have peaceful protesters focused on the very real pain and disparities that we're all wrestling with that have to be addressed, and then we have extremists who've come to try to hijack those protests and turn them into something very different. And they're probably also, I would bet based on my experience, I'm not reading the intelligence these days, but based on my experience this is right out of the Russian playbook as well. I would not be surprised to learn that they have fomented some of these extremists on both sides using social media. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they are funding it in some way, shape, or form."

It should be noted that Rice, a devout Democrat apparatchik, produced no evidence whatsoever that the Russians were or have been involved in "fomenting" the reactions to the George Floyd demonstrations and riots beyond the fact that Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden all believe that Moscow is responsible for everything. Clinton in particular hopes that some day someone will actually believe her when she claims that she lost to Trump in 2016 due to Russia. Even Robert Mueller, he of the Russiagate Inquiry, could not come up with any real evidence suggesting that the relatively low intensity meddling in the election by the Kremlin had any real impact. Nor was there any suggestion that Moscow was actually colluding with the Trump campaign, nor with its appointees, to include National Security Advisor designate Michael Flynn.

Fortunately, no one took much notice of Rice based on her "experience," or her judgement insofar as she possesses that quality. Glenn Greenwald responded :

"This is fuxxing lunacy -- conspiratorial madness of the worst kind -- but it's delivered by a Serious Obama Official and a Respected Mainstream Newscaster so it's all fine This is Infowars-level junk. Should Twitter put a 'False' label on this? Or maybe a hammer and sickle emoji?"

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Maria Zakharova accurately described the Rice performance as a "perfect example of barefaced propaganda." She wrote on her Facebook page "Are you trying to play the Russia card again? You've been playing too long – come back to reality" instead of using "dirty methods of information manipulation" despite "having absolutely no facts to prove [the] allegations go out and face your people, look them in the eye and try telling them that they are being controlled by the Russians through YouTube and Facebook. And I will sit back and watch 'American exceptionalism' in action."

It should be assumed that the Republicans will be coming up with their own candidate for "fomenting" the riots and demonstrations. It already includes Antifa, of course, but is likely to somehow also involve the Chinese, who will undoubtedly be seen as destroying American democracy through the double whammy of a plague and race riots. Speaking at the White House, National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien warned about foreign incitement , including not only the Chinese, but also Iran and even Zimbabwe. And, oh yes, Russia.

One thing is for sure, no matter who is ultimately held accountable, no one in the Congress or White House will be taking the blame for anything.

[Jun 11, 2020] Asking Obama a question and expecting a truthful answer is like asking for ice water in hell. It's never gonna happen.

Notable quotes:
"... he has deceived the American public with his alleged good intentions to only want to take more rights away from us citizens! ..."
Jun 11, 2020 | www.youtube.com

William Albano , 3 weeks ago

General Flynn needs to sue for all the money he spent defending himself for this scam. Yet we had liar Adam Schiff lie daily nothing happens to that loser.

Red Wave Coffee , 3 weeks ago

This is another reason I dislike Obama so much; he has deceived the American public with his alleged good intentions to only want to take more rights away from us citizens!

Jo Anne Foster , 3 weeks ago

Obomber needs to be behind Prison walls. And all his cohorts.

[Jun 11, 2020] The color revolution against Trump including Flynn entrapment was all directed by President Obama -- Senator Rand Paul

Jun 11, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Rand Paul on heated Senate exchange with Dr. Fauci - YouTube

Ginette Jonas , 3 weeks ago

Asking Obama even under oath is a waste of breath. We all know he is a liar.

Matt B , 3 weeks ago

Asking obama a question and expecting a truthful answer is like asking for ice water in hell. It's never gonna happen.

[Jun 11, 2020] Brzezinski and the USA startagy of full spectrum dominance

Jun 11, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Vintage Red , Jun 11 2020 6:46 utc | 93

@occupatio | Jun 11 2020 5:19 utc | 89

Agree with your post but hope to deepen it -- this "geostrategy" goes way back before Brzezinski wrote about it in his The Grand Chessboard, or for that matter before Nixon's The Real War as well. Both followed in the footsteps of the US Admiral Alfred Mahan and the British strategist Halford Mackinder who laid the basis for this imperialist strategic vision of world domination over a century ago.

Mahan, author of The Influence of Sea Power upon History, in the late 1800s developed the worldview of seeing history as a series of confrontations between a Sea Power and a Land Power (Athens-Sparta, Rome-Carthage, Britain vs. a series of European Land Powers, etc.), paving the way for US "manifest destiny" to transcend North America to become truly global imperialism. One of Mahan's most famous concepts is that either the Land Power or Sea Power could win at any time, but that time was on the side of the Land Power since with more people and resources it could eventually just build a bigger navy than the Sea Power could match -- therefore the Sea Power had to go on an especially aggressive offensive early on to prevent this.

Mackinder in his 1904 presentation of The Geographical Pivot of History first developed the concept of the "world island" or "world continent" with its concentric "crescents". His most famous quote: "Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the World."

With the beginning of the "special relationship" between the US and UK after WW1 it was the easiest of mergers for these two imperialist strategic visions to join together. They've had various interpretations and refinements ever since, but Mahan and Mackinder are the originators of this "geostrategy" that predates the Cold War, WW2 and even WW1. That it predates the Russian and Chinese Revolutions indicates that it exists irrespective of ideology (thus the US's continued hostility to a non-subservient capitalist Russia), though anti-communism lends it an especially fevered tone, especially focused on China now.

At its outset this geostrategy was oriented toward European empires attempting to conquer the "heartland" or "pivot" to obtain the sheer imperial mass that would be needed for world conquest. But the Russian Revolution allowed the "heartland" to stand up as a Land Power in its own right, rapidly industrializing. Toward the end of his life Mackinder attempted to update his work, observing that if ever Eurasia were economically developed and spanned by rail and telecommunications lines from East Europe to the Pacific, this would result in a Land Power so vast -- with the majority of the world's people and resources -- that no Sea Power could conquer or even blockade it.

Sound familiar? For a number of reasons beyond our scope here the USSR fell and broke apart, but not before China could pick up that torch, rapidly industrialize itself and now bring forth the Belt and Road Initiative. Russia joining China in a strategic relationship that is for all intents and purposes an alliance (that the US brought on itself -- both Beijing and Moscow have read Mahan and Mackinder very thoroughly) is effectively Mackinder's nightmare made manifest. The antithesis of Manifest Destiny, LOL.

Nixon, Brzezinski and their wannabe successor Bannon are all simply continuing this more-than-century-old strategic tradition. But no "geostrategy" will save global capitalism from its own inner rot and sharpening contradictions, as the events of recent years have shown. This year especially recalls Lenin's observation that "There are decades where nothing happens, and weeks where decades happen."


[Jun 10, 2020] Who was this "black president"?

Jun 10, 2020 | www.unz.com

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website Show Comment June 10, 2020 at 5:31 am GMT

" .a white president and a black president both signed off on drone attacks "

Who was this "black president"? I'm only aware of Nobel Peace Prize "winner", destroyer of Libya, sponsor of jihadis in Syria and Nazis in Ukraine, genocidaire of Yemenis, and mass murderer extraordinaire Barack Hussein Obama, who, if being the child of a black father makes him "half-black", is, from being the child of a white mother, equally "half-white".

[Jun 10, 2020] Poland "Solidarity" and BLM

Jun 10, 2020 | www.unz.com

Miro23 , says: Show Comment June 10, 2020 at 5:04 am GMT

@Miro23

Problem here that the George Floyd protestors/rioters are a happy counter-cultural mix of SJW, young blacks and young whites – impossible to portray them as the white power KKK.

Same way that the Polish communist government couldn't effectively attack the Solidarity worker's uprising. Government propaganda was designed to attack capitalists, exploiters of the working class etc. which didn't make any sense against shipyard workers.

[Jun 10, 2020] The ruling class only needs one tactic: divide and rule. and blacks against whites is a perfect for them outcome of the Floygate

Notable quotes:
"... the media deserve no pity, they made their allegiances clear (for the millionth time) with Assange. ..."
Jun 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Rae , Jun 10 2020 20:48 utc | 28

The ruling class only needs one tactic: divide and rule.

But how do I try to explain that to a black 16 year old math student who has recently started looking at me with murder in his eyes? Everything i can think of just sounds like a cliche.

Also... the media deserve no pity, they made their allegiances clear (for the millionth time) with Assange.

[Jun 10, 2020] Problem here that the George Floyd protestors/rioters are a happy counter-cultural mix of SJW, young blacks and young whites impossible to portray them as the white power KKK

Jun 10, 2020 | www.unz.com

Miro23 , says: Show Comment June 10, 2020 at 4:43 am GMT

@TG

Anyone saying that this is class war, is simply hiding behind their white privilege and denying the essential RACISM of the United States. That's the corporate meme. And it's probably going to work.

Problem here that the George Floyd protestors/rioters are a happy counter-cultural mix of SJW, young blacks and young whites – impossible to portray them as the white power KKK

In fact the RACISM shield doesn't work. The ZioGlob are left exposed, and in my opinion they're scared by these protests. If they crack down with the national Guard or the military it only makes the situation worse. Things polarize, with them being further identified as a privileged exploitative elite.

Miro23 , says: Show Comment June 10, 2020 at 5:04 am GMT
@Miro23

Problem here that the George Floyd protestors/rioters are a happy counter-cultural mix of SJW, young blacks and young whites – impossible to portray them as the white power KKK.

Same way that the Polish communist government couldn't effectively attack the Solidarity worker's uprising. Government propaganda was designed to attack capitalists, exploiters of the working class etc. which didn't make any sense against shipyard workers.

[Jun 10, 2020] What is a Vassal State?

Jun 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christian J Chuba , Jun 10 2020 18:35 utc | 13

What is a Vassal State? ... visited a Neocon website putting on the warpaint against China and posters accused China of oppressing their vassal states and it got me thinking, what is a fair definition of a vassal state. This is what I came up with.

A Vassal state: Needs are subordinate to the wants of the master, not allowed to make their own choices, not allowed to leave the relationship on their own, they are expendable.

N. Korea, are they a vassal state of China? I don't see any of these attributes. N. Korea depends on China many times but the master state needs the vassal more than the vassal needs the master.

Iraq is a vassal state of the U.S. (I had many choices, too many) Recently, they needed a waiver from Pompeo to buy electricity from Iran, talk about humiliating. We ignored multiple requests to leave and threatened to impose a trade embargo and freeze their bank accounts if they pushed the issue but told they 'could' bring up the issue later. We them more than they need us for as long as we must have military bases close to Iran and the ability to kill Iraqis we don't like. If we leave, we will leave Iraq in ruins rather than allow them to have unfettered trade with Iran.

[Jun 10, 2020] A very interesting overview of what is happening in Libya

Jun 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

dh-mtl , Jun 10 2020 18:13 utc | 6

A very interesting overview of what is happening in Libya.

https://madamasr.com/en/2020/06/08/feature/politics/what-comes-after-the-collapse-of-haftars-western-campaign/

b might want to comment on the situation.

chet380 , Jun 10 2020 18:30 utc | 12

In Libya, as in Idlib, Turkish drones have caused very significant damage to tanks and artillery positions ... what is the defence?
Daniel , Jun 10 2020 19:22 utc | 20
@6 dh-mtl

Thanks for that link, a very interesting and detailed article. It seems Haftar is an erratic and unreliable character and the LNA's major foreign allies/sponsors, including Russia, make no secret of the fact that they basically consider him a temporary "necessary evil" until a more solid and reliable leader can be found.

[Jun 09, 2020] ISIS is a US-Israeli creation

Jun 09, 2020 | www.unz.com

Robjil , says: June 8, 2020 at 6:12 pm GMT

@barr ational interest in one of Untermeyer's pet projects -- the Zionist Movement."

Others have been even more explicit about the nature of Scofield's service to the Zionist agenda. In "Unjust War Theory: Christian Zionism and the Road to Jerusalem," Prof. David W. Lutz writes, "Untermeyer used Scofield, a Kansas City lawyer with no formal training in theology, to inject Zionist ideas into American Protestantism. Untermeyer and other wealthy and influential Zionists whom he introduced to Scofield promoted and funded the latter's career, including travel in Europe."

[Jun 08, 2020] The Systemic Collapse Of The US Society Has Begun by the Saker

In many way this is just a wishful thinking. Saker's hyperbolic rhetoric is just cheap propaganda and does not help to decifer the issues the USA faces!
Looks like Clinton wing of Dems is willing to burn their own house to get rid of Trump. "If I had to guess, I'd say it's the neoliberal, CIA-Obama faction vs. the Trump-Military faction, (Pompeo et al)" But why? Why Obamagate is picking up steam? Looks Barry CIA Obama is still a player. Is he also a reason we have senile Biden is the candidate for President on the Dem side? Are we seeing the power of a CIA community organizer, color-revolutionary pulling strings across multiple strata of society?
The current riots create pressure of Trump and attempt are made to use them as the third act of anti-Trump revolution but this clearly is nor a civil war. Like other protests before it (Civil rights marches, anti-Vietnam and Iraq wars, Occupy) little to no substantive changes have been introduced insofar as reining in of the war machine, the pursuit of social and economic justice (universal free education and health care, equal employment and housing opportunities, scaling down of the MIC and the Prison Industrial Complex, degrade Israel and Saudi lobbies, etc.
Jun 08, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
  1. Racism or "White privilege"
  2. Police violence
  3. Social alienation and despair
  4. Poverty
  5. Trump
  6. The liberals pouring fuel on social fires
  7. The infighting of the US elites/deep state

They are not about any of these because they encompass all of these issues, and more.

It is important to always keep in mind the distinction between the concepts of " cause " and "pretext". And while it is true that all the factors listed above are real (at least to some degree, and without looking at the distinction between cause and effect), none of them are the true cause of what we are witnessing. At most, the above are pretexts, triggers if you want, but the real cause of what is taking place today is the systemic collapse of the US society.

The next thing which we must also keep in mind is that evidence of correlation is not evidence of causality . Take, for example, this article from CNN entitled "US black-white inequality in 6 stark charts" which completely conflates the two concepts and which includes the following sentence (stress added) " Those disparities exist because of a long history of policies that excluded and exploited black Americans, said Valerie Wilson, director of the program on race, ethnicity and the economy at the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning group. " The word "because" clearly point to a causality, yet absolutely nothing in the article or data support this. The US media is chock-full of such conflations of correlation and causality, yet it is rarely denounced.

For a society, any society, to function a number of factors that make up the social contract need to be present. The exact list that make up these factors will depend on each individual country, but they would typically include some kind of social consensus, the acceptance by most people of the legitimacy of the government and its institutions, often a unifying ideology or, at least, common values, the presence of a stable middle-class, the reasonable hope for a functioning "social life", educational institutions etc. Finally, and cynically, it always helps the ruling elites if they can provide enough circuses (TV) and bread (food) to most citizens. This is even true of so-called authoritarian/totalitarian societies which, contrary to the liberal myth, typically do enjoy the support of a large segment of the population (if only because these regimes are often more capable of providing for the basic needs of society).

Right now, I would argue that the US government has almost completely lost its ability to deliver any of those factors, or act to repair the broken social contract. In fact, what we can observe is the exact opposite: the US society is highly divided, as is the US ruling class (which is even more important). Not only that, but ever since the election of Trump, all the vociferous Trump-haters have been undermining the legitimacy not only of Trump himself, but of the political system which made his election possible. I have been saying that for years: by saying "not my President" the Trump-haters have de-legitimized not only Trump personally, but also de-legitimized the Executive branch as such.

This is an absolutely amazing phenomenon: while for almost four years Trump has been destroying the US Empire externally, Trump-haters spent the same four years destroying the US from the inside! If we look past the (largely fictional) differences between the Republicrats and the Demolicans we can see that they operate like a demolition tag-team of sorts and while they hate each other with a passion, they both contribute to bringing down both the Empire and the United States. For anybody who has studied dialectics this would be very predictable but, alas, dialectics are not taught anymore, hence the stunned "deer in the headlights" look on the faces of most people today.

Finally, it is pretty clear that for all its disclaimers about supporting only the "peaceful protestors" and its condemnation of the "out of town looters", most of the US media (as well as the alt media) is completely unable to give a moral/ethical evaluation of what is taking place. What I mean by this is the following:

  1. obwandiyag says: Show Comment June 4, 2020 at 11:22 pm GMT Cops don't protect nothing but rich people's money. You been watching too much TV.

    And this ain't nothing. Nothing. Not compared to 1967-68.

    But you young people don't know nothing. Especially about history. So, no surprise there.

  1. Si1ver1ock says: Show Comment June 5, 2020 at 3:14 am GMT • 100 Words If I had to guess, I'd say it's the neoliberal, CIA-Obama faction vs the Trump-Military faction, (Pompeo et al)

    This came to a head just as Obama-gate was picking up steam. Obama is still a player. He is the reason we have Biden for President on the Dem side, for example.

    My guess is that you are seeing the power of a CIA community organizer, color-revolutionary, Jedi psyop master, pulling strings across multiple strata of society.

    Trump and Obama don't like each other for some reason.

  1. Just another serf says: Show Comment June 5, 2020 at 4:35 am GMT • 200 Words

    The Systemic Collapse of the US Society Has Begun

    Begun? It's been in process for many decades. It might have begun in the early 20th century. What's new here? Focusing on recent times, jobs disappeared in the 70's. Inflation exploded at the same time. Negro antagonism began in the 60's. Replacement of the white population accelerated in 1965 and continued relentlessly to the current moment.

    We are seeing the looting phase of the business known as the United States of America. Refer to an informative scene from the movie Goodfellas. The criminals got control of a business, looted it into bankruptcy and burned the place down. Except in this case there are no Italians involved. And you know who replaces them in our real life experience.

  1. Espinoza says: Show Comment June 5, 2020 at 6:44 am GMT It's controlled demolition. First unjustified lockdown. Then unjustified race riots. The deep state is intent on destroying Trump.

    If US is divided into mutually hostile territories, guess where the majority will go. That is right. They will go to white dominated areas as they do now to white dominated neighborhoods.

    Can no one stop the deep state?

  1. Brewer says: Show Comment June 5, 2020 at 7:17 am GMT • 100 Words Seen it all before. How short do memories have to be to forget Kent State, Rodney King, the Civil Rights protests of the sixties, Harlem riot of 1964, the Watts riot of 1965 et al ?

    America is and will remain a deeply disturbed society given that their entire philosophy, lifestyle and Politics is based on consumerism. Winners (no matter how unethical) are heroes, losers (no matter how unjustly) are despised.

    America will bump and grind on through bankruptcy, both morally and economically. It is the Judaic way.

    Simple fact is that most Americans are ignorant of History and are therefore condemned to go on repeating the past.

[Jun 08, 2020] Trump is completely right when he says Powell is an complete hack and fraud who helped scam the US people into the Iraq war

Jun 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mao , Jun 7 2020 21:28 utc | 34

Powell on Sunday aimed a broad critique at Trump's approach to the military, a foreign policy he said was causing "disdain" abroad, and a president he portrayed as trying to amass excessive power.

"We have a Constitution and we have to follow the Constitution, and the president has drifted away from it," Powell said. Trump also, he said, "lies about things."

Trump responded swiftly on Twitter, mocking Powell and calling the retired four-star general "a real stiff" who got the U.S. into wars after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S.

Colin Powell, a real stiff who was very responsible for getting us into the disastrous Middle East Wars, just announced he will be voting for another stiff, Sleepy Joe Biden. Didn't Powell say that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction?" They didn't, but off we went to WAR!

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 7, 2020

Kadath , Jun 7 2020 22:08 utc | 37

Credit when credit is due, Trump is completely right when he says Powell is an complete hack and fraud who helped scam the US people into the Iraq war. Years after his UN appearance Powell's own chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson, admitted that he and Powell knew that the fix was in to attack Iraq and the information they were presenting to the UN was falsified, i.e. they knowingly lied to the UN to start a war, a war crime (was of aggression)! Rather than do the honourable thing and resign in protest and go public with the truth they stayed quite and obey their illegal orders, presumably reasoning that a competently managed crime would be less damaging then an incompetently managed crime. As it turns out though, Powell was an utterly incompetent Secretary of State who was outmaneuvered at every stage of the conflict by the mad dog crazies in the administration that he thought he was controlling. in the end, all Powell's shameful behaviour accomplished was to destroy his honour and leave him forever known as a war criminal (even if the UN is too cowardly to charge him as such). So, seeing Powell and the lamestream media try to croon about him as some sort of moral authority is laughable and Trump is right to rub all of Powell's crimes right in his face.

Trisha , Jun 8 2020 0:16 utc | 46
Not to forget (as a Vietnam Vet, I can't) that Maj. Colin Powell - after a cursory investigation into the massacre at My Lai - drafted a response on Dec. 13, 1968 stating - among other lies - that "[it] is the fact that relations between Americal soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent" while denying any pattern of wrong-doing.

Powell was simply protecting other murderous gang members (especially his bosses) from justice, thus becoming another un-indicted accessory to murder. The gods are not interested in justice, though, and he roams free.

Sunny Runny Burger , Jun 8 2020 2:09 utc | 47
Wow I wish I had know that little tidbit back then when I watched the full uninterrupted UN broadcasts from the Security Council before the war. He pretty much managed to get the US a free pass with his testimony of lies. I believed him and so did a lot of other people. Now his whitewash of My Lai is even on his Wikipedia page. Thank you Trisha.

Several years earlier I got to know about My Lai during relatively brief military education (non-US but NATO) on the rules of the Geneva Convention, it was used as the prime example of when to resist and disobey unlawful orders (I have to wonder if it still is).

If there had been a free press they should have shouted this little fact at the top of their lungs while mocking the US, maybe someone somewhere did but I never heard any mention of it, not even from any of all the people I knew that were opposing the war and who never seemed to have anything substantive to say (a bit like BLM: who isn't against murder and particularly murder committed by "cops"? There's a serious communication problem going on).

I find this so strange that I'm starting to wonder if I have an extremely selective memory. Did anyone here learn about this at the time? Not counting anyone who already knew it well before that time.

[Jun 06, 2020] Anne Applebaum's 'Collaboration'

Notable quotes:
"... Anne Appelbaum is merely butthurt because her neocons don't have as much influence as she thinks they ought. ..."
"... Yeah, this is one of the fundamental problems with US politics as well as business: lack of long term thinking ..."
"... Larison regularly writes about how interventionists have their own inner ring and their own set of lies and shibboleths that they embrace and Applebaum is clearly one of their number. ..."
"... None of this is meant to defend Trump or his lackeys. She is largely right about them, but she is not as different In her thinking as she wants to think. ..."
"... Applebaum picks easy targets because she favors a different set of dishonest people. You are assuming I am a fan of those governments -- no, I just recognize cheap analogies when I see them. And Venezuela, however bad the regime, is there because it is a regime that the Beltway crowd wishes to overthrow. There are countless bad governments she could have mentioned otherwise. ..."
"... The fact is that some of her heroes, like Mitt Romney and John McCain, are part of the interventionist crowd that never saw a war it didn't want to jump into. Romney even defended waterboarding -- you can google that. Americans have the political memory of a mayfly, so perhaps don't remember that just 15 years ago people talked as though our torture policy was the slippery slope to fascism, but some of the people that favored torture and widespread government spying are now Resistance heroes. ..."
"... Her piece is a mainstream Beltway fairy tale about how we once had noble public servants with integrity and then Trump ruined everything. Trump is a disaster, but there is more than one way to be terrible. ..."
"... Applebaum's essay strikes me as Product. It is not interesting or sharply observed; there is nothing original here; the writing is boring and interchangeable with a million other writers for the Economist, The Atlantic, the New York Times, etc. ..."
"... This has been the problem with the " Resistance" all along. Much as I despise Trump and would never vote for him, the opposition to him was instantly hijacked by the people who supported endless war and gave us the free trade policies that destroyed millions of jobs. Worse, people who hate Trump ( and rightly so imo) feel obligated to praise any crappy dishonest self serving article that says Trump is a bad man. ..."
"... I consider Applebaum a prime exhibit in how adherence to ideology can make basically smart people stupid. ..."
"... "I would take the side of them ALL, and many others besides, before I would take the side of these Council on Foreign Relations ghouls like Applebaum, these sterile, soulless globalists and their lives that are 100% dedicated to manufacturing consent, being apologists for the most powerful regime in the world and for global finance, these Respectable Analysts and Experts who work hand in hand with the CIA and the Iraq War neocons and the like." ..."
"... He is not a reaction to the corruption of the elites but rather the living embodiment of it who was able to convince a lot of gullible people otherwise. ..."
"... One of the main problems with applebaum's article is that it does come too close to implying that republicans are vichy french partisans ..."
"... About poor Trump. He was bound to fail. A Julius Caesar, which was a military and political genius and an exceptionally accomplished individual, failed in his struggle against his own oligarchic class. Someone like Caesar in nowadays DC would end up being assassinated. With Trump we have a total circus created by the ruling Americans. ..."
"... "developing a feel for who is a fraud and a liar" -this is basically what I mean when I say that all politics is a clash of axioms and intuitions. It's seldom the "evidence" that is, the sterile "facts" which produce disagreement but that understanding behind those facts and which judges of them. ..."
"... I'll only say that she strikes me as being like Russian liberals, the running dogs and lackeys of the oligarchs who looted the country in the 90s, and who, to this day, in unguarded moments, aver that the reason Russia is not a "normal" country, ie., one where they rule, is because the Russian lumpenproles were not made to suffer *enough* during the 90s. ..."
"... Trump reached out to working class citizens while all the liberals or conservatives were peddling was, in was in the words of the honorable Elijah Muhammad; ..."Pie in the sky when you die by and by." ..."
"... Trump's "ideology" was standard Republican tax-cuts + angry tweets. Also he said Iraq War was a mistake - that's what Never Trumpers really hated. Media called him "presidential" when he ordered military strikes in Syria. That's what's good and normal for president. ..."
"... Applebaum is a globalist mouthpiece, whose husband is Polish politician that wants to sell out Polish freedom to the EU. ..."
"... Isn't she the same Anne Applebaum who was trying to give credence to the #RussiaGate farce that not just distracted Trump and the country from actual problems, but led to so much bad reactionary foreign policies? Like pushing Russia into the arms of China? No thanks. It's like getting a lesson in democracy from Iraq War propagandists. ..."
"... He described America's capital city, America's government, America's congressmen and senators -- all democratically elected and chosen by Americans, according to America's 227-year-old Constitution -- as an "establishment" that had profited at the expense of "the people." "Their victories have not been your victories," he said. "Their triumphs have not been your triumphs." ..."
"... Most Americans believe that. Eight-five percent of us believe it about Democrats and ninety percent of us believe it about Republicans. They have a rigged system where they decided which of themselves we get to choose between, incumbents are overwhelmingly favored over challengers, and somehow even when we get out to vote nothing much changes. ..."
"... Trump enunciated these commonly known truths, without any desire, intention, capacity, or plan to act on them. I have said what you wished to hear, isn't that enough? But, for all that we badly need Trump far removed from the levers of power, those statements remain true. ..."
Jun 06, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

nne Applebaum has a long Atlantic essay comparing Republican leaders who support Donald Trump to Eastern Europeans who collaborated with Soviet-sponsored regimes. She's not just anybody making these claims. She has written a number of books about the Soviet empire, including Iron Curtain , a great book about the Sovietization of Eastern Europe. I drew on it for my own forthcoming book, Live Not By Lies . Right or wrong, Anne Applebaum is an authority.

She begins by comparing two young German communists who were raised in Russia, in exiled communist families, and who returned to Soviet-controlled East Germany as members of the ruling elite. One became disillusioned and defected; the other became head of the Stasi. What made the difference? Closer to home, she talks about how both Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney had strongly denounced Donald Trump before the 2016 election. Graham ended up becoming one of Trump's strongest Senate supporters, while Romney is uniquely hated by the president. What accounts for the radically different outcomes?

Applebaum writes:

To the American reader, references to Vichy France, East Germany, fascists, and Communists may seem over-the-top, even ludicrous. But dig a little deeper, and the analogy makes sense. The point is not to compare Trump to Hitler or Stalin; the point is to compare the experiences of high-ranking members of the American Republican Party, especially those who work most closely with the White House, to the experiences of Frenchmen in 1940, or of East Germans in 1945, or of Czesław Miłosz in 1947. These are experiences of people who are forced to accept an alien ideology or a set of values that are in sharp conflict with their own.

Not even Trump's supporters can contest this analogy, because the imposition of an alien ideology is precisely what he was calling for all along. Trump's first statement as president, his inaugural address, was an unprecedented assault on American democracy and American values. Remember: He described America's capital city, America's government, America's congressmen and senators -- all democratically elected and chosen by Americans, according to America's 227-year-old Constitution -- as an "establishment" that had profited at the expense of "the people." "Their victories have not been your victories," he said. "Their triumphs have not been your triumphs." Trump was stating, as clearly as he possibly could, that a new set of values was now replacing the old, though of course the nature of those new values was not yet clear.

She goes on to detail the many ways the Trump administration has overturned the old order. She talks about how Trump began his administration by insisting on the truth of something that was easily proven to be a lie: the size of his inauguration crowd. This set a pattern:

These kinds of lies also have a way of building on one another. It takes time to persuade people to abandon their existing value systems. The process usually begins slowly, with small changes. Social scientists who have studied the erosion of values and the growth of corruption inside companies have found, for example, that "people are more likely to accept the unethical behavior of others if the behavior develops gradually (along a slippery slope) rather than occurring abruptly," according to a 2009 article in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. This happens, in part, because most people have a built-in vision of themselves as moral and honest, and that self-image is resistant to change. Once certain behaviors become "normal," then people stop seeing them as wrong.

This process happens in politics, too. In 1947, the Soviet military administrators in East Germany passed a regulation governing the activity of publishing houses and printers. The decree did not nationalize the printing presses; it merely demanded that their owners apply for licenses, and that they confine their work to books and pamphlets ordered by central planners. Imagine how a law like this -- which did not speak of arrests, let alone torture or the Gulag -- affected the owner of a printing press in Dresden, a responsible family man with two teenage children and a sickly wife. Following its passage, he had to make a series of seemingly insignificant choices. Would he apply for a license? Of course -- he needed it to earn money for his family. Would he agree to confine his business to material ordered by the central planners? Yes to that too -- what else was there to print?

After that, other compromises follow. Though he dislikes the Communists -- he just wants to stay out of politics -- he agrees to print the collected works of Stalin, because if he doesn't do it, others will. When he is asked by some disaffected friends to print a pamphlet critical of the regime, however, he refuses. Though he wouldn't go to jail for printing it, his children might not be admitted to university, and his wife might not get her medication; he has to think about their welfare. Meanwhile, all across East Germany, other owners of other printing presses are making similar decisions. And after a while -- without anyone being shot or arrested, without anyone feeling any particular pangs of conscience -- the only books left to read are the ones approved by the regime.

Keep this thought in mind for a minute. Let me say here that Applebaum's article is rather long, and I don't want to quote it at length. I think it's pretty devastating, though I don't agree with all of it (and will go into that a bit below). I do not at all think it's ridiculous or offensive for her to use the Soviet Bloc experience as a lens through which to understand what has been happening in America, politically, these past few years. For one, if I did, I would be a hypocrite. For another, it really does give her some deep insights. I'm not going to quote the parts of her piece that I agree with, because there's so much there. When I encourage you to read the whole thing, I mean it. It's really good, and I think she is mostly correct.

A note for those who are just coming to this post from Twitter. As longtime readers know, I was never for Trump, and withheld my vote in 2016, but I was so sick of the GOP Establishment that I did not identify as a Never Trumper. I was willing to give him a shot. I hate to say it, but the Never Trumpers have been mostly vindicated. This is not at all to say that I want the old GOP Establishment back -- I emphatically do not! -- but it turns out that character really does count. It is the Republican Party's tragedy that the person who broke the back of the dessicated and intellectually bankrupt old guard was an incompetent sleaze. But here we are. The one thing that makes me hopeful for conservative politics going forward is that after the catastrophe of Trump, there will be no return to the status quo. Was it worth the judges? If you had asked me in January, I would have said, "Maybe so." Now, in June, after the year we have had, and the way he has utterly failed to rise to the challenges, I would say not.

Back to Applebaum's essay. Here is one very small defense of GOP "collaborators," and why their situation is different from their would-be counterparts living under dictatorship. The Republican lawmakers who went along with Trump were responsible to their voters back home. If they had not supported Trump, they would have been primaried. It is true that a morally responsible GOP lawmaker would have sooner resigned, or face defeat, rather than seriously compromise his or her conscience. It does not absolve you to say, "Hey, I was just doing what my voters wanted me to do." Still, it's important to remember that if there is moral stain for having collaborated with Donald Trump, the stain is with voters too.

The part of her essay that hits home with me comes in a section in which Applebaum talks about the rationalizations collaborators use for standing with a political leader they know is bad news. This is the part:

My side might be flawed, but the political opposition is much worse. When Marshal Philippe Pétain, the leader of collaborationist France, took over the Vichy government, he did so in the name of the restoration of a France that he believed had been lost. Pétain had been a fierce critic of the French Republic, and once he was in control, he replaced its famous creed -- Liberté, égalité, fraternité , or "Liberty, equality, fraternity" -- with a different slogan: Travail, famille, patrie , or "Work, family, fatherland." Instead of the "false idea of the natural equality of man," he proposed bringing back "social hierarchy" -- order, tradition, and religion. Instead of accepting modernity, Pétain sought to turn back the clock.

By Pétain's reckoning, collaboration with the Germans was not merely an embarrassing necessity. It was crucial, because it gave patriots the ability to fight the real enemy: the French parliamentarians, socialists, anarchists, Jews, and other assorted leftists and democrats who, he believed, were undermining the nation, robbing it of its vitality, destroying its essence. "Rather Hitler than Blum," the saying went -- Blum having been France's socialist (and Jewish) prime minister in the late 1930s. One Vichy minister, Pierre Laval, famously declared that he hoped Germany would conquer all of Europe. Otherwise, he asserted, "Bolshevism would tomorrow establish itself everywhere."

To Americans, this kind of justification should sound very familiar; we have been hearing versions of it since 2016. The existential nature of the threat from "the left" has been spelled out many times. "Our liberal-left present reality and future direction is incompatible with human nature," wrote Michael Anton, in "The Flight 93 Election." The Fox News anchor Laura Ingraham has warned that "massive demographic changes" threaten us too: "In some parts of the country it does seem like the America that we know and love doesn't exist anymore." This is the Vichy logic: The nation is dead or dying -- so anything you can do to restore it is justified. Whatever criticisms might be made of Trump, whatever harm he has done to democracy and the rule of law, whatever corrupt deals he might make while in the White House -- all of these shrink in comparison to the horrific alternative: the liberalism, socialism, moral decadence, demographic change, and cultural degradation that would have been the inevitable result of Hillary Clinton's presidency.

Now, wait a minute. Let us note that this "Vichy logic" is exactly the logic feminists used to justify sticking with Bill Clinton (because Republicans might end abortion). And it's how practical politics works. Was it Vichy logic when Louisiana Republican voters in 1991 voted for the crook Edwin W. Edwards because his opponent David Duke was intolerable? I held my nose and voted for EWE, in violation of my conservative beliefs, because I could not bear to think that an unrepentant Klansman could become governor. I know conservatives who plan to vote for Biden this November, and are sick about it, because they cannot bear four more years of Trump.

How do you tell the difference between succumbing to "Vichy logic," and simply being realistic about the choices in front of you, and choosing the lesser of two evils? If the choice is between Hitler and liberalism, well, that's no choice at all. But Trump, however bad, isn't Hitler, or close to it, and it distorts the choice conservatives actually hd, and have, facing them regarding Trump and his opponents.

For Applebaum, the things liberals and progressives demand are normative. It really is true that with Democrats in power, pro-abortion extremism will be government policy. If you think abortion is the extermination of innocent life, then this is a very big deal. Liberals often mock religious conservatives over our concerns about how gay rights is eroding religious liberty, putting "religious liberty" in scare quotes, as if the concerns we have are fake. But they are real, and beyond that, every Democrat in Congress has come out for the Equality Act, which would write sexual orientation and gender identity into US civil rights law. Liberals understandably see this as just, and many have no comprehension of why conservatives disagree that homosexuality and transgenderism are the same thing as race. These are radical transformations of American law and culture.

Also with immigration: it is perfectly normal for a people to be concerned that immigration is changing the character of the culture in ways they don't like. The Democrats, broadly speaking, are for open borders -- and prior to Trump, the GOP was ineffective on the immigration issue. High rates of immigration change countries permanently. This may be a good thing, or a bad thing, or a mixed thing -- but it is a really big thing.

What bothers me about this aspect of Applebaum's argument is that she lacks any sympathy for the conservative point of view, in the sense that she doesn't appear to be aware of how radical the left has become on cultural issues. There seems to be no room in her moral imagination to understand how a conservative can despise Trump, but be so afraid of what the Democratic Party and the cultural left are bringing to the country that they would conclude voting for Trump is the lesser evil.

Moreover, Applebaum is a fine writer and an insightful thinker, but she is blind to how liberalism, in its current iteration, strikes many of us on the Right as inclining to soft totalitarianism. Applebaum is married to Radek Sikorski, a prominent Polish liberal, and is no doubt fiercely opposed to the views of the Polish politician Ryszard Legutko. But his book The Demon In Democracy explains this very well. Let me put it like this: she is blind to how establishment liberals like her collaborate with the illiberal left, and in so doing violate the principles they supposedly stand for.

The examples are legion, but I'll speak about them in the present moment. We are watching right now a fast-moving coup by the illiberal, identity-politics left of American institutions, aided and abetted by liberal establishmentarians who are too afraid to defend liberal principles. We have seen the collapse first on college campuses, where administrations have repeatedly surrendered to emotional demands of protesters. Here, from 2015, is Yale Prof. Nicholas Christakis trying to defend liberalism, using reason, against an illiberal mob. He stood alone. Yale's administration backed the mob. This is happening across academia, and long has been. It has ramped up massively in this past week. It's also happening in media, and in corporations. Race-conscious, identity-politics progressivism has finally displaced liberalism -- mostly because liberals of Applebaum's class lacked the courage to stand on principle.

It's easy for her to see the collaboration of the Republican leadership with the corrupt and illiberal Trump, but she's blind to the collaboration of her own class with the corruption of liberalism from the identity-politics left. I don't know Anne Applebaum, and will presume good faith on her part, so I suspect that she is honestly unaware of how ideological her own class is, and how frightening they are to a lot of conservative who have felt pushed by what she calls "Vichy logic" into supporting Trump, simply as self-protection.

Just this morning I heard from a reader who works inside an elite educational institution. Its students come from the ranks of the most well-off Americans. It is a liberal institution, in the best sense. It has not had racial problems. Yet its administration, undergoing the same moral panic that is sweeping the US ruling class now, is considering implementing a strict regimen of ideological education, under the guise of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. He worries about the future of the institution, and the corruption of its mission by identity politics. And he's right to worry.

Look at how it has corrupted The New York Times . From the transcript of the "town hall meeting" within the newspaper last fall, this question to executive editor Dean Baquet:

Staffer: Hello, I have another question about racism. I'm wondering to what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting. Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point, you know? Like these conversations about what is racist, what isn't racist. I just feel like racism is in everything. It should be considered in our science reporting, in our culture reporting, in our national reporting. And so, to me, it's less about the individual instances of racism, and sort of how we're thinking about racism and white supremacy as the foundation of all of the systems in the country. And I think particularly as we are launching a 1619 Project, I feel like that's going to open us up to even more criticism from people who are like, "OK, well you're saying this, and you're producing this big project about this. But are you guys actually considering this in your daily reporting?"

This should have been an easy question to answer, from the point of view of defending professional journalistic standard. Baquet waffled. Flash-forward to this week, and the shocking turmoil within the newspaper, the premier journalistic institution in America, over its publication of Sen. Tom Cotton's op-ed. The woke younger generation within the paper is in the process of overthrowing the older liberal generation. Baquet and the Times senior leadership are "collaborating," in the Applebaum sense, with leftists who have no respect for the liberal order. This kind of thing is happening in elite institutions -- academic, media, entertainment, corporate -- all over America. The George Floyd killing was the catalyst these radicals needed to consolidate what they have been doing for a very long time, thanks to the collaboration of the liberal establishment leadership.

To repeat: I think Applebaum's overall essay is mostly correct in her criticism of how GOP leaders have collaborated with Trump. The history of totalitarianism really is helpful in illuminating how this works. My objection is that she cannot see how her own left-liberal caste has been long doing the same thing with the illiberal, identity-politics left, and concealing from themselves the sellout of old-fashioned liberalism. My upcoming book Live Not By Lies talks about this. It's not going to be out until September; until then, read Legutko's Demon In Democracy , which explains this phenomenon well.

Anyway: read Applebaum's essay.

Feral Finster • 13 hours ago

Anne Appelbaum is merely butthurt because her neocons don't have as much influence as she thinks they ought.
Osse Feral Finster • 8 hours ago • edited
Yep. There are three components in her essay --

1. Lazy dumb historical analogies. Too much of that everywhere.

2. A defense of neocon foreign policy all wrapped up in the flag and presented as something that every rational decent person would support.

3. Legitimate criticisms of the dishonesty of Trump supporters. This is fine, but you can also get this everywhere. It doesn't have to be mixed in with parts 1 and 2.

Thomas Hobbes JonF311 • 7 hours ago
Instead of treating every election as if it's the Battle of the Ages and a loss will be a permanent result, maybe worry more about fixing what's broken on your side and coming up with a long term strategy for the next generation.

Yeah, this is one of the fundamental problems with US politics as well as business: lack of long term thinking. This is why conservatives have been losing the culture war. This also seems to be the view taken by the Chinese elites in terms of dealing with the US as I understand it. They plan for the long term and count on us being too distracted by the need for short term victories.

DavidBN • 13 hours ago
Let me put it like this: she is blind to how establishment liberals like her collaborate with the illiberal left, and in so doing violate the principles they supposedly stand for.

This is the heart of the issue. Appelbaum doesn't seem to realize that the illiberal left is coming for her next.

Osse • 13 hours ago • edited
I thought it was a terrible piece and in part because of her use of the foreign analogies. As you say, more or less, much of what she describes is normal politics, for bettter or worse. Sometimes people just pick what they think is the lesser evil. But she thinks it is worse with Trump. Fine, but she still doesn't need the East German comparison. It is my same criticism of your soft totalitarianism meme. It is simply a fact of human nature that most people are conformists and those who seek power or have power try to bully and discredit those who disagree with them and they will embrace lies that their chosen circle of people expect them to embrace. As I think you know, C.S. Lewis write about this a lot, calling it the desire to be part of The Inner Ring. It is a theme in some of his essays and a central plot element in That Hideous Strength.

You don't need to invoke East Germany or Vichy France or Venezuela. But of course notice that she picks easy targets, the countries or regimes her clique would agree are bad.

Larison regularly writes about how interventionists have their own inner ring and their own set of lies and shibboleths that they embrace and Applebaum is clearly one of their number.

None of this is meant to defend Trump or his lackeys. She is largely right about them, but she is not as different In her thinking as she wants to think.

JonF311 Osse • 9 hours ago
Ew: You don't need to invoke East Germany or Vichy France or Venezuela. But of course notice that she picks easy targets, the countries or regimes her clique would agree are bad.

Not just her clique-- pretty much all of us in 2020 find those regimes bad. Good grief, who's going to speak up for the Third Reich? If you want to make an argument that can be heard across the ideological spectrum you can't rely on examples that only resonate in some parts of it.

Osse JonF311 • 8 hours ago • edited
You are completely missing the point. Applebaum picks easy targets because she favors a different set of dishonest people. You are assuming I am a fan of those governments -- no, I just recognize cheap analogies when I see them. And Venezuela, however bad the regime, is there because it is a regime that the Beltway crowd wishes to overthrow. There are countless bad governments she could have mentioned otherwise.

The fact is that some of her heroes, like Mitt Romney and John McCain, are part of the interventionist crowd that never saw a war it didn't want to jump into. Romney even defended waterboarding -- you can google that. Americans have the political memory of a mayfly, so perhaps don't remember that just 15 years ago people talked as though our torture policy was the slippery slope to fascism, but some of the people that favored torture and widespread government spying are now Resistance heroes. There is an irony in people who claim to hate Trump's dishonesty basically whitewashing recent history for their own rhetorical purposes.

Her piece is a mainstream Beltway fairy tale about how we once had noble public servants with integrity and then Trump ruined everything. Trump is a disaster, but there is more than one way to be terrible.

Ted • 13 hours ago
We live in New York which, as you know, is still locked down. Yesterday my wife's stylist, Lori, came over to do her hair (and gave me a haircut, so I was able to shed the Albert Einstein look I've been burdened with). And naturally we talked about politics. And the three of us agreed. Trump is a buffoon and a liar, he had as bad a week as it's possible to imagine, but we really have no choice.

Because the other side wants to destroy us. The other side wants to turn this country into South Africa, and I'd have sit on the front porch with a shotgun across my knees waiting for the worst to happen. Did you read what Biden said about 10% to 15% of his fellow citizens? That'd be me, my wife and Lori. Anybody capable of consecutive thought could see that the "TNC" and Jamelle Bouie lines lead to nothing short of race war, and this past week they almost got it.

I haven't read the Applebaum essay, but if what she says about professional politicians (and jurists like Barr, let it be noted) is true, where does that leave the people who voted for him? We're all collaborationists?

I'm taking the day off and just watched Fearless Leader in the Rose Garden. You know the Democrats are cursing how good the numbers are, and, as Trump says, they're only going to get better. What happens if Biden wins? I'm sorry, I'll just have to bear with Anne Applebaum's disgust.

Matt in VA • 13 hours ago
Applebaum's essay strikes me as Product. It is not interesting or sharply observed; there is nothing original here; the writing is boring and interchangeable with a million other writers for the Economist, The Atlantic, the New York Times, etc.

All of this stuff has been said. It reminds me of how many Serious Books are 550 pages long when they could have been 15. Applebaum's writing is deadly dull, she has never come up with a striking sentence or telling detail in her life. Everything is cartoonish Nazis and Communists. Everything is Super Grandiose but in a dull safe bourgeois manner. Her writing is the equivalent of a million lanyard Northern Virginia McMansions--interchangeable, I Am An Important Person blandness and soullessness. She has no personality; she has no taste. There is nothing here but simultaneously hysterical and utterly empty and banal attempts to manipulate; no curiosity, no humbleness, no love, no individuality to it at all. There are no characters here; there are people who are functionaries with as much life, as much personality as the grim, joyless white-paper-producing think tanks they work for. Of course, all that soullessness and antiseptic Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval white-surfaces minimalism is about euphemizing the countless Iraq Wars and Color Revolutions these kinds of people are always promoting. The Applebaums of the world may not have been the ones who looted Russia after the fall of the USSR but they facilitated and covered it up and they do the same for what is happening in the USA today too. They are the ones who strip-mine nations and gut their middle classes and cultures for globalization.

What do you find "compelling" about this kind of writing? What is compelling about any of this kind of thing?

The protestors, the Black Lives Matter people out in the streets yelling and marching. Straight-up Communists distributing their literature and organizing. The people rioting and looting and setting fires. The cussed redneck hicks and yokels. Antifa. People who want to abolish the police. Actual local-level/city cops. QAnon people. Internet natzees. I would take the side of them ALL, and many others besides, before I would take the side of these Council on Foreign Relations ghouls like Applebaum, these sterile, soulless globalists and their lives that are 100% dedicated to manufacturing consent, being apologists for the most powerful regime in the world and for global finance, these Respectable Analysts and Experts who work hand in hand with the CIA and the Iraq War neocons and the like. Bring on the collapse of the "center"; bring on the burning down of police stations, bring it all on, before allowing these End of History demons to keep doing what they do.

Osse Matt in VA • 8 hours ago
This has been the problem with the " Resistance" all along. Much as I despise Trump and would never vote for him, the opposition to him was instantly hijacked by the people who supported endless war and gave us the free trade policies that destroyed millions of jobs. Worse, people who hate Trump ( and rightly so imo) feel obligated to praise any crappy dishonest self serving article that says Trump is a bad man.

In some cases, like Eastern Europe in 1944, people only have terrible choices. ( I can use stupid historical analogies too.). But when it comes to essay writing, we aren't even talking about voting the lesser evil. There simply is no reason to praise this worthless crap. Larison, for instance, has absolutely no problem criticizing Trump and he doesn't have to talk as though our foreign policy before him was run by public spirited citizens who had the interests of ordinary Americans in mind.

Civis Romanus Sum Matt in VA • 8 hours ago
I consider Applebaum a prime exhibit in how adherence to ideology can make basically smart people stupid. Your line "Applebaum's writing is deadly dull, she has never come up with a striking sentence or telling detail in her life" reminds me that her first published book was a travel book about Eastern Europe, and it was well-written and quite evocative, with an interesting style and observations. Almost nobody read this book, but it stands in stark contrast to her current heavy-duty political scribblings.
Treehugger Matt in VA • 7 hours ago
Thanks for taking the time to write this response -- a great contribution.

"I would take the side of them ALL, and many others besides, before I would take the side of these Council on Foreign Relations ghouls like Applebaum, these sterile, soulless globalists and their lives that are 100% dedicated to manufacturing consent, being apologists for the most powerful regime in the world and for global finance, these Respectable Analysts and Experts who work hand in hand with the CIA and the Iraq War neocons and the like."

1000 thumbs up.

I agree with every word (except for ACTUALLY burning things down ... let's stick with metaphorical. :-) )

KevinS Brian Paul • 8 hours ago
Trump is a rich Manhattan real estate mogul with his own Boeing 727....he IS part of the establishment. The hedge fund managers and Wall Street firms have done just fine under him. He is not a reaction to the corruption of the elites but rather the living embodiment of it who was able to convince a lot of gullible people otherwise.
Gregtown • 13 hours ago
Read an interesting observation the other day on a different website:
"I asked a co-woker who grew up in a communist country the difference between here and there. He says "Growing up in my country if you spoke bad of the government, one morning no one sees you again. Over here you have every right to protest and speak bad of the government but no one listens to you."
Matt in VA • 13 hours ago
Anne Applebaum has never written a single word in her life that suggested she had an ounce of sensitivity. Everything is determined by the needs of the bureaucracy or society of financiers/global capitalists/billionaire donors she is attached to at that particular time. The sentences one after another are the products of committee. There is no *soul* here. What is the point of being a Christian or indeed a person of any religion whatsoever other than perhaps Pharisaism, and trusting people like this? There is more humanity in Robespierre or Lenin.
Osse Matt in VA • 8 hours ago
A bit over the top, but yes, she is an apparatchik for the Beltway crowd.
Rob G • 13 hours ago
"My objection is that she cannot see how her own left-liberal caste has been long doing the same thing with the illiberal, identity-politics left, and concealing from themselves the sellout of old-fashioned liberalism."

This is exactly right. And it's not a simple matter of "both sides do it." It's the fact that both sides are unable to self-critique to the extent that they see the problem. Is it simply coincidence that both old-school liberals and traditional (i.e.,non-neocon and neo-lib) conservatives have been pushed to the margins of their respective parties? I think that those of us, left and right, who have moved from ideological to non-ideological iterations of their "sides" may be able to see this better than those that remain ideologically committed.

I believe that this is why Lasch is such a vital read. He remained a political and economic leftist even while leaning somewhat right socially, and was thus able to see a lot of this from the outside, so to speak,and call a spade a spade wherever he saw one. As I said the other day I'm currently re-reading The Revolt of the Elites , which he finished not long before he died, and which was published posthumously in 1995. It's amazing how accurate it was, and how prescient. And it's an excellent read for both left and right, as he had much to say to both sides. To both right and left partisans of good will, I say tolle lege. You won't regret it.

S. Patrick • 12 hours ago • edited
"What bothers me about this aspect of Applebaum's argument is that she lacks any sympathy for the conservative point of view, in the sense that she doesn't appear to be aware of how radical the left has become on cultural issues."

That's because she thinks you're the radical i.e those who wish continue to stand on the train tracks of modernity as it comes rushing towards you time after time no matter how many times the train hits you. Western European and Canadian and Mexican Tories have made their peace with modernity, she can't understand why those in the East and in America cannot do the same. To do otherwise is simply following in Petain's footstep's in her mind: "Pétain had been a fierce critic of the French Republic, and once he was in control, he replaced its famous creed -- Liberté, égalité, fraternité, or "Liberty, equality, fraternity" -- with a different slogan: Travail, famille, patrie, or "Work, family, fatherland." Instead of the "false idea of the natural equality of man," he proposed bringing back "social hierarchy" -- order, tradition, and religion. Instead of accepting modernity, Pétain sought to turn back the clock.

I would agree this example in comparison to Trump is a little overdone because the Hungarian Army has not taken control of the U.S. and has a fifth-column of traitors working for it to help them rule the country because they happen to agree with them ideologically. I remember Tom Fleming once saying only a truly evil person would wish a foreign power to conquer their land just to see policies it could not get enacted electorally be enacted at the barrel of a gun. I'm sure he had in mind those Leftists sympathizers to the Soviet Union but Petain is relevant to that argument as well - a man who saved his country at Verdun in 1916 basically gave up on it in 1940 because of socialism. He might as well have given up on the whole world and basically did. Bottom line is a LePen would be ruling France by now if it wasn't for Vichy because the French hard right is as tainted by their collaboration as the left was by its seeming sympathy with the Soviets or radical foreign communists.. Thank God for creating someone like DeGaulle.

You talk a lot about Franco in this regard (the best of bad options) but at least his rise to power came from a civil war, not from being implanted by conquering foreign power (although he was certainly aided in winning by those powers). The America Fist movement rose because of the belief that a foreign power (Great Britain) was using elites and propaganda to bring the U.S. into a World War for the second time in a row. The "Conservative Movement" rose in part because of a feeling, not just from intellectuals, that a foreign power (Soviet Union) was using elites and propaganda to subvert American democracy. Paleoconservatism rose as a train of thought and inellectual faction in the late 80s and early 90s because it was believed a foreign power (Israel) was using elites and propaganda to not only subvert democracy and also bring the U.S into war (Iraq). But the cycle can run the other way too it seems. Witness the Moonies control of certain right-wing foundations, publications and political organizations in Washington back in the 80s. Or the neo-Confederate tendency among certain factions of both the right and libertarians. And now, we have conservatives, who have no problem or feel a kinship to foreign entities like Russia or the current Polish or Hungarian governments or pro-Russian elements in Ukraine to the point they, at the very least, don't mind their assistance to undermine their political enemies.

Ultimately people's patriotism is going to be more powerful than people's ideology. One can think what they wish or call upon whatever policies suit them. But to ask for assistance from the outside in order to get it out of sympathy, well my friend the ground you tread on can easily sink beneath your feet if you do that.

Sede-diplomat S. Patrick • 8 hours ago
it's not apriori anti-patriotic to ask for foreign intervention into the politics of your own nation; it really all depends on how unpatriotic you view the other side to be (which is ultimately based on intuition/the faculty of understanding, and cannot be strictly proved); and how beholden you become to the foreigners -which is all a matter of detail. England did not become the slave of the Netherlands when William invaded, nor were the Irish wrong to request help from the French or Spanish. Franco received aid from Germany but the Spanish socialists received aid from the Soviet Union.

One of the main problems with applebaum's article is that it does come too close to implying that republicans are vichy french partisans. No republican or right-winger believes in replacing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness with "work, family, and fatherland" in the USA (except for me but then again, I'm not a registered republican). Additionally, as far as I know Vichy France was not fascist, just authoritarian. Summed up, her essay is just a lazy hit-piece with a varnish of "history" -perfect for the mass consumption of today's tasteless masses!

kouroi • 12 hours ago
Most managerial and "intellectuals" are working for those that control the state (economic, politic, security) and play on what pleases the hand that feeds... Anne Applebaum is not different. And I am saying most, because I am not considering Mr. Dreher in that category. He does honestly struggle like Jacob struggled with the angel before he became Israel (best rendition is by Thomas Mann in "Joseph and his brothers" and one of the best novels ever).

I am thinking of small prairie town, closed knit, but also very hard in its judgments about approved and disapproved behavior. That is soft totalitarianism and this is what is forced on us. The public opinion that embraces a certain set of ideas, while everything else is sinful. Such a mentality is of course illiberal. But then, liberalism itself doesn't have that great origins either: the enclosure of the commons (for the purported goal, disproved, of increasing productivity)...

Again, observed what is never addressed by the woke: class and inequality. Jesus was a socialist and had a beef against bankers. Something that we should always remember: https://www.nakedcapitalism...

About poor Trump. He was bound to fail. A Julius Caesar, which was a military and political genius and an exceptionally accomplished individual, failed in his struggle against his own oligarchic class. Someone like Caesar in nowadays DC would end up being assassinated. With Trump we have a total circus created by the ruling Americans.

Sancho • 12 hours ago
Rod,

Have you seen the recent piece from Katha Pollitt in "The Nation" about the sexual assault allegations against Biden? Here is the key passage:

"I would vote for Joe Biden even if I believed Reade's account...I would vote for Joe Biden if he boiled babies and ate them."

https://www.thenation.com/a...

She continues in this piece that in her view Trump is so bad that it justifies voting for Biden, irregardless of his flaws, even if they include sexual assault. I don't think Pollitt represents everyone on the left. However, she probably speaks for many on the left. The point of me raising this is to illustrate how many on the left are no different from those on the right. Both are willing put aside moral considerations to either support or oppose Trump because they are desperate for power and fear what the other side will do if they have power. It all speaks to how polarized our politics have become.

I should say as well that the comparisons to Hitler, Petain or Eastern European Communists are patently absurd. I find some of the lengths that educated people go to in making these extreme comparisons embarrassing. And yes, if Republican politicians who supported Trump have embraced a "Vichy logic," the same was true for feminists and their support of Bill Clinton. Let's not forget as well the Democrats have now run three candidates for president (Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden) who as a senator voted for the Iraq War. I remember during the George W. Bush years (a president that the left compared to Hitler) when that was actually a really bad thing. It was also interesting to see how silent much of the left became on war when Obama became president, even when he launched an unnecessary war in Libya. In other words, the things Appelbaum complains about with Republicans are actually pretty bipartisan.

Matt in VA • 12 hours ago
It's long -- LONG -- past time for the Respectable, Responsible Adults In the Room to start developing a feel for who is a fraud and a liar, whose words are bought and paid for by corrupt or at best non-neutral interests, who speaks "with authority" that is related far more to pedigree, credentialism, nepotism, and class than it is to real truth or honesty, who performs shallow and bloodless rituals of respectability that cover for massively destructive and destabilizing agendas.

I remember all the commenters on here who rushed to defend the truly awful/AWFL Michigan governor, Gretchen Whitmer, when I have criticized her in the past. Her handling of COVID has been a bogus show, motivated by owning the proles and racists, and she has done an about-face 360 now that something more sacred to affluent white female liberal cosmology has come along, disregarding HER OWN laws and restrictions because *she* values something else more. You do not have to hear or see people like her in action for too long before you can tell what's up; the problem is that so many people have no sensitivity, no discriminating taste, and many others, who I think *do* have this, have repressed it or let it atrophy in order to go along to get along.

All this talk about "character." What is Applebaum's "character"? She is a cipher for global capital, for unaccountable bureaucracies, for the political-legal-economic gears that grind through peoples, nations, countries, resource-extracting and Color-Revolutioning them. She is a sterile severe cold-as-ice reptilian Elite. Imagine her as depicted by Dickens or Shakespeare. Imagine Dickens or Shakespeare choosing to include her in something they wrote. We all know what it would look like.

Sede-diplomat Matt in VA • 8 hours ago
"developing a feel for who is a fraud and a liar" -this is basically what I mean when I say that all politics is a clash of axioms and intuitions. It's seldom the "evidence" that is, the sterile "facts" which produce disagreement but that understanding behind those facts and which judges of them.

And this understanding cannot actually be itself based on something external per se (facts), or else an infinite regress or vicious circle ensues, but has to come from within; from a process whereby one discovers their sleeping but innate ideas.

Ultimately the struggle of politics is a clash between people who are more awake to these innate ideas and those who are asleep or less awake.

Treehugger Matt in VA • 7 hours ago
Man, you're on fire here.

So many of the vaunted "literate" among us are uniquely ill-equipped (or unwilling) to bring honest, sensitive insight to the hour we're living in.

Barlaam of Weimerica • 12 hours ago
I have no more desire to hear from Anne Applebaum on any subject than I have the desire to hear from Bush the Lesser on any subject, or Bill Clinton. She is, however fine her prose may be (though I am not a fan), an apparatchik and apologist for a neoliberal, End of History order that has failed, and failed comprehensively, for the entirety of my adult life, and I'm 46. It is tedious to recite the catechism of its failures and crimes,

I'll only say that she strikes me as being like Russian liberals, the running dogs and lackeys of the oligarchs who looted the country in the 90s, and who, to this day, in unguarded moments, aver that the reason Russia is not a "normal" country, ie., one where they rule, is because the Russian lumpenproles were not made to suffer *enough* during the 90s.

Their schtick, and Applebaum's, combines the elitism of an Ayn Rand, the hauteur and pretension of a tenured academic, and the narcissism and preening condescension of cultural elites. The problem is always that people like her have too little power to impose their wills on the world, and the victims of her will too much power to resist that imposition. The Devil take her, and may her memory perish.

I have no need to choose between the dying liberal order and Trump, as I have no need to choose between Lucifer and Baphomet.

Al Bundy Barlaam of Weimerica • 8 hours ago
So just because neoliberals have been wrong about literally every single issue for the last three decades, you're saying we shouldn't listen to them?................Okay, fine I'll grant you that point. But if she's so wrong about everything, why is she a member of the globalist elite?
SatirevFlesti • 12 hours ago
" ...was an unprecedented assault on American democracy and American values. Remember: He described America's capital city, America's government, America's congressmen and senators -- all democratically elected and chosen by Americans, according to America's 227-year-old Constitution -- as an "establishment... "

Ah yes, it's always an "assault on democracy" when liberals lose a democratic election. And what's more predictable than an Establishment liberal denouncing ttacks on the Establishment that she and her friends nurture and prosper from. Do Applebaum and her ilk even realize how absurd they sound?

I'm glad I read Applebaum's book on the Gulag years before I knew anything else about her personally or her politics and take on more contemporary issues (I even assumed that she must be a conservative - after all, it was generally only conservatives who thought things like the Gulag and Communist crimes were worth investigating and writing about, while the Left generally ignored or made excuses for them). My stomach churns after a couple paragraphs of liberal Establishment self-righteousness that oozes from every page of her more recent journalistic forays.

I hope Poland is listening more to its Legutkos than its Applebaum-Sikorskis.

joeo • 12 hours ago • edited
Be it Applebaum or Dreher, what either refuses to discuss is class or wealth privilege. Trump reached out to working class citizens while all the liberals or conservatives were peddling was, in was in the words of the honorable Elijah Muhammad; ..."Pie in the sky when you die by and by."

My hopes was realized when the Bushes and Clinton were banished only to have that apparatchik in chief Joe Biden nominated. Applebaum is only trying to justify her sinecures. A real start to reform would be to end tax exempt status for all organizations and lift the cap on FICA taxes. I can only assume real reform is Pie in the Sky.

rieux joeo • 8 hours ago
Sure, and look at all the wealth, stability, and prosperity Trump has brought the working class. He is a real hero for the proletariat.
Rod Dreher Moderator Osse • 5 hours ago
She's a neoliberal to the fingertips.
Victor_the_thinker • 11 hours ago
" What bothers me about this aspect of Applebaum's argument is that she lacks any sympathy for the conservative point of view, in the sense that she doesn't appear to be aware of how radical the left has become on cultural issues."

I don't know if this is true of the author you quite but let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say you are correct about her. You do the exact same thing Rod. You are blind to the hard totalitarianism of the right we are witnessing as we speak. You don't speak out about all these cops running around DC with no identification at all. The only reason to have cops unidentified it to allow them to abuse people with impunity. You're quick to pump the breaks on things like the shooting of Arbery, calling for more information but when you see something you claim as an outrage on the left, you don't call for that same restraint.

This is a truism of right wing publications: complaining about ideological bias in mainstream media and universities is basically a full time job for conservatives. But there are zero conservative institutions which are set up in opposition to the mainstream ones that set out to actually be fair and balanced. Every single one of them, from the conservative colleges to the conservative media outlets are set up as biased to the extreme, far more extreme than any mainstream outlet or university. There is no Ross Douthat, David Brooks, Bret Stevens left wing equivalent on any conservative news platform of any note in America. Schools run by conservatives like Liberty University don't respect the right of students to speak freely. The school administration has veto power over the student news paper. And they also don't allow liberal groups on campus. Papers run by conservatives don't post articles written by AOC, unlike the NYT which just posted the Tom Cotton garbage article.

I won't deny for a second that big name universities and journalism has a liberal bias. But at least they hire people that YOU respect as representing your views like Ross Douthat. There isn't a white liberal, a black person, a non-Cuban Hispanic etc who represents the views of major factions of those groups on any conservative campus or conservative publication. And Fox News IS the mainstream media as well. It's bigger than any other cable outlet by far. It isn't some fringe place.

WokeJoke Victor_the_thinker • 8 hours ago
You just named three Obama loving white guys who may be conservative by New York standards ten years ago, but now worship at the feet of Big LGBT and think that illegal immigrants are our superiors. There are plenty of their opposite number with conservative publications.
Kessler • 11 hours ago
A reminder, that a week ago, you would be killing grandma, if you opened Churchers or went to do a cancer check-up. What norms? There are no norms. Do you honestly believe that any norm, any constitutional principle wouldn't be discarded tomorrow, if it got in a way of managerial classes wishes or ideology? Is there any empirical proof, that norms matter? Because there is a lot of it, that they don't.
Not even Trump's supporters can contest this analogy, because the imposition of an alien ideology is precisely what he was calling for all along.

Trump's "ideology" was standard Republican tax-cuts + angry tweets. Also he said Iraq War was a mistake - that's what Never Trumpers really hated. Media called him "presidential" when he ordered military strikes in Syria. That's what's good and normal for president.

He described America's capital city, America's government, America's congressmen and senators -- all democratically elected and chosen by Americans, according to America's 227-year-old Constitution -- as an "establishment" that had profited at the expense of "the people."

People thinking their politicians are corrupt and out to enrich themselves is apparently shocking to her. Amazing. Maybe she should watch "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington". Politicians get elected by saying that their opponents are corrupt and they'll fix stuff.

She talks about how Trump began his administration by insisting on the truth of something that was easily proven to be a lie: the size of his inauguration crowd.

Bush lied - people died. I'm old enough to remember, when US invaded Iraq over "weapons of mass destruction". But, sure, inaguration crowd size is so important.

There might be some insights in her article, but I just couldn't get through Pravda part of it.

Peter Jozsef Balogh • 11 hours ago
I have finally stopped considering AA's fanatic globalist opinion on populism/liberalism after her recent essay on Orbán in which she erred in about every statement she made, including the anticipated health crisis in Hungary due to Covid (whereas Hungary is amongst the best performers in controlling the epidemic), and Orbán's "coup d'état" (the Parliament discussed the cessation of the special legislation earlier this week. No "sorry" from AA, of course). The Atlantic
Elijah • 11 hours ago
I read the essay, and while she may well be an expert, it falls completely flat. I'm sorry, but the idea that figures of Trump's White House - who have complete free will - are eerily similar to political figures in Vichy or East Germany - who had guns to their heads, to some extent - is simply not on. Her entire argument derives from an analogy that is, in all frankness, nuts.

And as much as I have great disdain for many at National Review, as Ramesh Ponnuru points out, Applebaum's comparison of "Vichy apocalypticism" to the Barr/Pompeo/Pence trio is simply ridiculous.

It is not, in any sense of a realistic historical sense, "pretty devastating".

stephen pickard • 10 hours ago
One thing which occurs to me is that we forget that the SJWs are mainly younger people. And their wokeness is new to them. Because it is new to them, it must be new to everyone else.

Their warrior mentality is their first foire into politics. Once they start paying more taxes, they will become more conservative . At least that is what a neighbor told me when I was railing against the Vietnam war.

While I am not a conservative in today's us of the word, I am more balanced and fair in my overall political views than I was in my protest years. I found relevance in being against the establishment.

Heck I voted for Reagan. And I was good with Clinton being removed from office. The SJW will Peter out. And became wiser, just like Rod has. And everyone else who agrees with him. We are the establishment now.

What Applegate gets right, and what Rod gets wrong, is comparing Trump to anyone else. He is in a class of one. He is incomparable. The Republicans don't get that. This makes them think that they are being reasonable when they say"but Obama". Trump is that much of a failed human being.

Deoxy • 10 hours ago
"The point is not to compare Trump to Hitler or Stalin"

That would work better if people on the left hadn't spent so much time saying he (and every other Republican candidate for President since WWII were Hitler.

"The process usually begins slowly, with small changes. Social scientists who have studied the erosion of values and the growth of corruption inside companies have found, for example, that "people are more likely to accept the unethical behavior of others if the behavior develops gradually (along a slippery slope) rather than occurring abruptly," according to a 2009 article in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. This happens, in part, because most people have a built-in vision of themselves as moral and honest, and that self-image is resistant to change. Once certain behaviors become "normal," then people stop seeing them as wrong."

The process did begin slowly, with small changes. Trump is just the latest in a long line of ridiculous liars, and people are acting like he's so new and different... "Depends on what the meaning of IS is."

The Trump Presidency is the result of the process she's talking about, not the cause or start of it.

"It is true that a morally responsible GOP lawmaker would have sooner resigned, or face defeat, rather than seriously compromise his or her conscience"

Is that a joke? We've had a dearth of "morally responsible lawmakers" at the nationally level, in every party, for decades. Suddenly, we notice and talk about it?

You talked about explicitly scapegoating Trump for these riots in a recent post, but you and so many others have been scapegoating him for these kinds of things all along. The problems aren't new. He's just not putting the production values into the lies you are used to swallowing from the career politicians in every party.

"My objection is that she cannot see how her own left-liberal caste has been long doing the same thing with the illiberal, identity-politics left, and concealing from themselves the sellout of old-fashioned liberalism."

And my complaint about you would be very similar. The stuff you complain about regarding Trump is boringly normal (for politicians), and has been for *at least* 2 decades (and really, on most of it, for generations... or maybe forever).

Of course that doesn't make it good, or even OK. But where were these complaints all along?

Joe dadi • 10 hours ago
And then you got this: https://www.propublica.org/...
Gaius1Gracchus • 10 hours ago
Applebaum is a globalist mouthpiece, whose husband is Polish politician that wants to sell out Polish freedom to the EU.

This is all projection from her, as she and her liberal fellow travelers have been othering all those that oppose them and excusing the abuses of her own side for decades. Wasn't the white Democrat playbook before the Civil Rights Era about utilizing Southern bigots for political power?

The opposition to Trump is based upon policy, not personality. Any other Republican that attempted the same agenda would be demonized and attacked the same way. Again, Trump could act like Jeb and Anne Applebaum and her ilk would still be screaming "facism!"

How do we know it? Because they have been doing it since the 1940s.

The difference is that every other Republican would cave. Reagan caved and named Bush as his VP. He also caved and gave us amnesty. He caved as governor and legalized abortion.

When Trump wins reelection, these riots will look like a Sunday picnic. And it won't be organic, but pushed by the same folks as these.

Lonely_Hippo • 10 hours ago
Applebaum's story about publishing houses and printers in East Germany is vivid and moving. It distresses me, though, that she apparently cannot understand that, for many of us religious folks, there's an uncanny resemblance between the position of the East German publisher or printer and, say, the position of the Colorado baker who's being compelled to deliver messages he fundamentally opposes.

His bakery hasn't been nationalized; he tries to conduct his business according to his deeply held beliefs; he may even be "a responsible family man with two teenage children and a sickly wife." Eventually his refusal to comply will likely have repercussions on his family; if his children share his values (and maybe even if they don't), it seems increasingly likely that they will face difficulties in accessing the best schools and getting hired by the best companies. Even if Applebaum thinks the cases are distinguishable -- and they are in several respects, though they do rhyme -- does she not have enough empathy to understand why some folks might prefer the illiberalism of Donald Trump to the illiberalism of contemporary liberalism?

As to her concern about Trump calling out the establishment for serving their own interests rather than those of the American people, come on! It's the establishment that represents "American democracy and American values"? That would be news to many, many Americans, of all parties and none.

WokeJoke • 10 hours ago • edited
Is Anne Applebaum going to write about how one political party in this country overhyped a virus only for their own political benefit and to hurt their political opponents? And that this would have gone on for months if their dumber followers were not presented with a flimsy excuse to riot and loot?
Elisabeth in Canada • 9 hours ago
Applebaum's article is incorrect on so many fronts. Putting the word collaboration in quotation marks is correct. Applebaum starts with the definition "to help an enemy country or an occupying power." None of this is what's happening with the Republicans that she talks about in the article. Clearly Trump is not an enemy or part of an occupying power. Since she can't make her point about collaboration with that definition, she adds additional incorrect meanings to the definition: that collaboration "carries an implication of treason, betrayal of one's nation, of one's ideology, of one's morality, of one's values."

The use of the word collaboration is to pinpoint the "help" being given to a foreign occupying power," under which conditions we could possibly make judgements about treason and immorality. Without the foreign nation element, these additional characterisations are a separate issue. Applebaum also says "high ranking members of the American Republican Party....are people who are forced to accept an alien ideology or set of values." No. Presume they can resign at any time. She should have stuck with calling them "careerists," as she did earlier in the article.

Finally, her whole idea of using the Vichy or East German governments as "analogies" is completely erroneous, not withstanding that she agrees (?) Trump isn't Stalin or Hitler. But she wants us to think maybe Trump is in the same league "because the imposition of an alien ideology is precisely what he (Trump) was calling for all along." The case can't be made that an "alien" (whatever that is) ideology is analogous to an enemy occupying power. It just can't. Her article is more subversive and dangerous than those she's attempting to smear.

Bureaucrat • 8 hours ago
Isn't she the same Anne Applebaum who was trying to give credence to the #RussiaGate farce that not just distracted Trump and the country from actual problems, but led to so much bad reactionary foreign policies? Like pushing Russia into the arms of China? No thanks. It's like getting a lesson in democracy from Iraq War propagandists.
Brackto • 7 hours ago
"The Democrats, broadly speaking, are for open borders -- and prior to Trump, the GOP was ineffective on the immigration issue."

Yeah, that's true about the Democrats, but let's take a moment to remember how we got here. The Democrats used to be much more moderate on immigration. Many Democrats in congress, including Obama, Clinton, and Schumer voted for the initial creation of a border fence. Obama famously deported high numbers of illegal immigrants throughout his term.

What changed? Donald Trump happened. After a presidential campaign where Trump made anti-immigrant rhetoric a centerpiece, and, once in office, enacted pointlessly cruel policies just to signal that he was "getting tough" on immigration, any kind of immigration enforcement became anathema on the left. Now that leftward shift of the Democrats is being used to justify further support for Trump.

You can say the reason for the shift doesn't matter, but you should at least be mindful of how this feedback loop is working.

Siarlys Jenkins • 7 hours ago
He described America's capital city, America's government, America's congressmen and senators -- all democratically elected and chosen by Americans, according to America's 227-year-old Constitution -- as an "establishment" that had profited at the expense of "the people." "Their victories have not been your victories," he said. "Their triumphs have not been your triumphs."

Most Americans believe that. Eight-five percent of us believe it about Democrats and ninety percent of us believe it about Republicans. They have a rigged system where they decided which of themselves we get to choose between, incumbents are overwhelmingly favored over challengers, and somehow even when we get out to vote nothing much changes.

Trump enunciated these commonly known truths, without any desire, intention, capacity, or plan to act on them. I have said what you wished to hear, isn't that enough? But, for all that we badly need Trump far removed from the levers of power, those statements remain true.

[Jun 06, 2020] Spare Us Your 'Mad Dog' Mattis Worship by Andy Kroll

Jun 06, 2020 | www.rollingstone.com

James Mattis and other generals have sent the political class into delirium with their Trump criticism, but there are better voices for this moment than the authors of America's forever wars

Andy Kroll

Rolling Stone Washington bureau chief

@AndyKroll Follow ,

Here come the generals.

A procession of decorated former U.S. military leaders has spoken out in recent days to gravely denounce President Trump and his unmistakably authoritarian response to the demonstrations against police violence and racial injustice sparked by the death of George Floyd.

James Mattis, a retired Marine Corps four-star general, accused Trump of shredding the Constitution with the violent removal of protesters outside the White House so that Trump could stage a photo op. Mattis, who was Trump's first secretary of defense, said Americans were "witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership."

John Allen, a retired Marine Corps four-star general and former commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, warned that the "slide of the United States into illiberalism may well have begun on June 1, 2020," the day of Trump's crackdown and photo op. "Remember the date. It may well signal the beginning of the end of the American experiment."

Mike Mullen, a retired Navy admiral and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking military position in the country, penned an essay titled "I Cannot Remain Silent" in which he wrote that Trump's conduct "laid bare his disdain for the rights of peaceful protest in this country, gave succor to the leaders of other countries who take comfort in our domestic strife, and risked further politicizing the men and women of our armed forces."

[Jun 06, 2020] For more than two centuries, the country which calls itself the pinnacle of freedom, has been in fact the absolute opposite of that; the epicenter of brutality and terror

Jun 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mao , Jun 6 2020 10:00 utc | 120

"The World Cannot Breathe!" Squashed By The U.S. - A Country Built On Genocide And Slavery

More than two centuries of lies are now getting exposed. Bizarre tales about freedom and democracy are collapsing like houses of cards.

One man's death triggers an avalanche of rage in those who for years, decades and centuries, have been humiliated, ruined, and exterminated.

It always happens just like this throughout the history of humankind – one single death, one single "last drop", an occurrence that triggers an entire chain of events, and suddenly nothing is the same, anymore. Nothing can be the same. What seemed to be unimaginable just yesterday, becomes "the new normal" literally overnight.

*

For more than two centuries, the country which calls itself the pinnacle of freedom, has been in fact the absolute opposite of that; the epicenter of brutality and terror.

From its birth, in order to 'clear the space' for its brutal, ruthless European settlers, it systematically liquidated the local population of the continent, during what could easily be described as one of the more outrageous genocides in the human history.

When whites wanted land, they took it. In North America, or anywhere in the world. In what is now the United States of America, millions of "natives" were murdered, infected with deadly diseases on purpose, or exterminated in various different ways. The great majority of the original and rightful owners of the land, vanished. The rest were locked up in "reservations".

Simultaneously, the "Land Of The Free" thrived on slavery. European colonialist powers literally hunted down human beings all over the African continent, stuffing them, like animals, into ships, in order to satisfy demand for free labor on the plantations of North and South America. European colonialist, hand in hand, cooperated, in committing crimes, in all parts of the world.

What really is the United States? Is anyone asking, searching for its roots? What about this; a simple, honest answer: The United States is essentially the beefy offspring of European colonialist culture, of its exceptionalism, racism and barbarity.

Again, simple facts: huge parts of the United States were constructed on slavery. Slaves were humiliated, raped, tortured, murdered. Oh, what a monstrous way to write the first chapters of the country's history!

The United States, a country of liberty and freedom? For whom? Seriously! For Christian whites?

How twisted the narrative is! No wonder our humanity has become so perverse, so immoral, so lost and confused, after being shaped by a narrative which has been fabricated by a country that exterminated the great majority of its own native sons and daughters, while getting insanely rich thanks to unimaginable theft, mass-murder, slavery and later – the semi-slavery of the savage corporate dictatorship!

The endemic, institutionalized brutality at home eventually spilled over to all parts of the planet. Now, for many decades, the United Stated has treated the entire world as full of its personal multitude of slaves. What does it offer to all of us: constant wars, occupations, punitive expeditions, coups, regular assassinations of progressive leaders, as well as thorough corporate plunder. Hundreds of millions of people have been sacrificed on the grotesque U.S. altar of "freedom" and "democracy".

Freedom and democracy, really?

Or perhaps just genocide, slavery, fear and the violation of all those wonderful and natural human dreams, and of human dignity?

https://countercurrents.org/2020/06/the-world-cannot-breathe-squashed-by-the-u-s-a-country-built-on-genocide-and-slavery/

[Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable

Highly recommended!
Jun 26, 2019 | www.unz.com

...If you bomb Syria, do not admit you did it to install your puppet regime or to lay a pipeline. Say you did it to save the Aleppo kids gassed by Assad the Butcher. If you occupy Afghanistan, do not admit you make a handsome profit smuggling heroin; say you came to protect the women. If you want to put your people under total surveillance, say you did it to prevent hate groups target the powerless and diverse.

Remember: you do not need to ask children, women or immigrants whether they want your protection. If pushed, you can always find a few suitable profiles to look at the cameras and repeat a short text. With all my dislike for R2P (Responsibility to Protect) hypocrisy, I can't possibly blame the allegedly protected for the disaster caused by the unwanted protectors.

[Jun 03, 2020] Internet Users Who Call For Attacking Other Countries Will Now Be Enlisted In The Military Automatically

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... People who bravely post about how the U.S. needs to invade some country in the Middle East or Asia or outer space will get a pop-up notice indicating they've been enlisted in the military. A recruiter will then show up at their house and whisk them away to fight in the foreign war they wanted to happen so badly. ..."
Jun 22, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

interlocutor , Jun 21, 2019 6:13:43 PM | 186

The Babylon Bee: Report: Internet Users Who Call For Attacking Other Countries Will Now Be Enlisted In The Military Automatically

https://babylonbee.com/img/articles/article-4404-1.jpg

U.S. -- A new policy issued by the United States Department of Defense, in conjunction with online platforms like Twitter and Facebook, will automatically enlist you to fight in a foreign war if you post your support for attacking another country.

People who bravely post about how the U.S. needs to invade some country in the Middle East or Asia or outer space will get a pop-up notice indicating they've been enlisted in the military. A recruiter will then show up at their house and whisk them away to fight in the foreign war they wanted to happen so badly.

"Frankly, recruitment numbers are down, and we needed some way to find people who are really enthusiastic about fighting wars," said a DOD official. "Then it hit us like a drone strike: there are plenty of people who argue vehemently for foreign intervention. It doesn't matter what war we're trying to create: Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, China---these people are always reliable supporters of any invasion abroad. So why not get them there on the frontlines?"

"After all, we want people who are passionate about occupying foreign lands, not grunts who are just there for the paycheck," he added.

Strangely, as soon as the policy was implemented, 99% of saber-rattling suddenly ceased.

Note: The Babylon Bee is the world's best satire site, totally inerrant in all its truth claims. We write satire about Christian stuff, political stuff, and everyday life.

The Babylon Bee was created ex nihilo on the eighth day of the creation week, exactly 6,000 years ago. We have been the premier news source through every major world event, from the Tower of Babel and the Exodus to the Reformation and the War of 1812. We focus on just the facts, leaving spin and bias to other news sites like CNN and Fox News.

If you would like to complain about something on our site, take it up with God.

Unlike other satire sites, everything we post is 100% verified by Snopes.com.

[Jun 02, 2020] According to the standards set by the Trump administration when the Guaido coup first launched, the video footage of these protests is full justification for a foreign nation to directly intervene and remove Trump from office by force right now.

Trump's threat to deploy the military here is an excessive and dangerous one. Mark Perry reports on the reaction from military officers to the president's threat:
Jun 02, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Senior military officer on Trump statement: "So we're going to tell our soldiers that we're redeploying them from the Middle East to the midwest? What do we think they're going to say, 'yeah, sure, no problem?' Guess again."

-- Mark Perry (@markperrydc) June 2, 2020

Feral Finster • 35 minutes ago • edited

According to the standards set by the Trump administration when the Guaido coup first launched, the video footage of these protests is full justification for a foreign nation to directly intervene and remove Trump from office by force right now.

[Jun 02, 2020] An Arrested Middle East The 'New Strategy for Securing the Realm' (aka Isreal) Dissipates by Alastair Crooke

Flirtation with Muslim Brotherhood by Obama was very bad for the USA and the world, especially Syria.
Notable quotes:
"... "No one really knows the nature of the Brotherhood project: whether it is that of a sect, or if it is truly mainstream; and this opacity is giving rise to real fears. At times, the Brotherhood presents a pragmatic, even an uncomfortably accommodationist, face to the world, but other voices from the movement, more discretely evoke the air of something akin to the rhetoric of literal, intolerant and hegemonic Salafism. What is clear, however, is that the Brotherhood tone everywhere, is increasingly one of militant sectarian [i.e. Sunni] grievance." ..."
"... All these supposedly popular dynamics had become tools in the "fervour for the restitution of a Sunni regional primacy – even, perhaps, of hegemony – to be attained through fanning rising Sunni militancy and Salafist acculturation". Containing Iran, of course was a primary aim (encouraged, of course, by Washington). But these forces collectively comprised a project in which Gulf leaders managed and pulled the levers – and paid the bills too. ..."
"... The American, European and Gulf leaders (i.e. the gods) turned sharply away from the Muslim Brotherhood (Qatar was the exception) – and turned instead to ISIS and Al-Qaida. The 'gods' were set on making an example of a non-compliant Assad and increasingly, they looked to the latter – ISIS – to inject the required savagery to claw down Assad – in the face of the latter's tenacious fight-back. ..."
"... In any event, sentiment turned violently against the MB from many quarters. Secular Arab nationalists had always heartily detested the MB, and the al-Saud and Emirate leaderships similarly detested the Muslim Brotherhood (albeit for different reasons). ..."
"... But there was always a fundamental contradiction in the American flirtation with the Muslim Brotherhood: it was that Washington's objective was never regional reform – whether secular or Islamist; the aim always was to preserve a malleable status quo in the Middle East. ..."
"... U.S. neo-cons were then at the peak of their influence. Since 1996, they had insisted on unqualified U.S. support for the region's Kings and Emirs versus the Ba'athists and Islamists. It was they who won out easily – against CIA officers such as Graham Fuller – in the debate on whether or not to support any sort of 'Arab Awakening'. ..."
"... The U.S. sided with Saudi Arabia and UAE in mounting the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood President in Cairo. And still today, the U.S. and its European protégés support the UAE's Crown Prince in his vendetta war against Islamists everywhere, from the Horn of Africa to the Magreb – and against Turkey too, as the Muslim Brotherhood's 'mother-ship'. ..."
"... These 'policy papers' may have been the precursors, but in the final analysis, the 'block' simply is, and has been, Israel – both indirectly and directly. The Clean Break's full title was a New Strategy for Securing the Realm (i.e. Israel). It was a blueprint for underpinning Israel's security. Ditto for Wurmser's paper. ..."
"... In sum, either U.S. or Israeli fears, or U.S. concerns to appease domestic U.S. constituencies, lie at the bottom of this stasis: Israeli and the U.S. élites are wholly comfortable with this malleable status quo – and fear it changing in any way that they cannot control. No reform for the Middle East – only disruption. ..."
Jun 01, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

Some eight years ago, I wrote about the outbreak of popular stirring in the Middle East, then labelled the 'Arab Awakening'. Multiple popular discontents were welling: demands for radical change proliferated, but above all, there was anger – anger at mountainous inequalities in wealth; blatant injustices and political marginalisation; and at a corrupt and rapacious élite. The moment had seemed potent, but no change resulted. Why? And what are the portents, as the Corona era covers the region once again with dark clouds of economic gloom and renewed discontent?

The U.S. was conflicted, as these earlier rumblings of thunder spread from hilltop to hilltop. Some in the CIA, had perceived popular movements – such as the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) (although Islamist) as the useful solvent that could wash away lingering stale Ottoman residues, to usher in a shiny westernised modernity. Many over excited Europeans imagined (wrongly), that the popular Awakenings were made in their own image. They weren't.

The facile interpretation of the Awakening as a liberal democratic 'impulse' was at best, an exaggeration, if not a pure fantasy. I wrote then (in 2012): "What genuine popular impulse there was at the outset has now been subsumed, and absorbed into three major political projects associated, rather with a push to reassert [Sunni] primacy across the region: a Muslim Brotherhood project, a Saudi-Salafist project, and a militant Salafist project [which subsequently was to evolve into ISIS]".

The key early player was the Muslim Brotherhood. I wrote :

"No one really knows the nature of the Brotherhood project: whether it is that of a sect, or if it is truly mainstream; and this opacity is giving rise to real fears. At times, the Brotherhood presents a pragmatic, even an uncomfortably accommodationist, face to the world, but other voices from the movement, more discretely evoke the air of something akin to the rhetoric of literal, intolerant and hegemonic Salafism. What is clear, however, is that the Brotherhood tone everywhere, is increasingly one of militant sectarian [i.e. Sunni] grievance."

This was the common thread: All these supposedly popular dynamics had become tools in the "fervour for the restitution of a Sunni regional primacy – even, perhaps, of hegemony – to be attained through fanning rising Sunni militancy and Salafist acculturation". Containing Iran, of course was a primary aim (encouraged, of course, by Washington). But these forces collectively comprised a project in which Gulf leaders managed and pulled the levers – and paid the bills too.

And for an early instant, those in the U.S. who had bet on the Muslim Brotherhood, glimpsed victory. Egypt fell to the MB; Syria was subject to a full-spectrum 'war', and the Muslim Brotherhood openly expressed its objective to 'take' the Gulf, where it had long established covert cells and networks.

But it was overreach. The Muslim Brotherhood was, it seemed to interested parties, about to steal (like Prometheus), the fire which belonged exclusively to 'the gods'. Plus, the MB were revealing obvious flaws: Its leadership in Cairo was deeply unconvincing. In Syria, where the movement never had significant penetration (single digit percent support), it was being quickly displaced by war-experienced Salafists coming in from the war in Iraq.

The American, European and Gulf leaders (i.e. the gods) turned sharply away from the Muslim Brotherhood (Qatar was the exception) – and turned instead to ISIS and Al-Qaida. The 'gods' were set on making an example of a non-compliant Assad and increasingly, they looked to the latter – ISIS – to inject the required savagery to claw down Assad – in the face of the latter's tenacious fight-back.

In any event, sentiment turned violently against the MB from many quarters. Secular Arab nationalists had always heartily detested the MB, and the al-Saud and Emirate leaderships similarly detested the Muslim Brotherhood (albeit for different reasons).

But there was always a fundamental contradiction in the American flirtation with the Muslim Brotherhood: it was that Washington's objective was never regional reform – whether secular or Islamist; the aim always was to preserve a malleable status quo in the Middle East.

U.S. neo-cons were then at the peak of their influence. Since 1996, they had insisted on unqualified U.S. support for the region's Kings and Emirs versus the Ba'athists and Islamists. It was they who won out easily – against CIA officers such as Graham Fuller – in the debate on whether or not to support any sort of 'Arab Awakening'.

The U.S. sided with Saudi Arabia and UAE in mounting the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood President in Cairo. And still today, the U.S. and its European protégés support the UAE's Crown Prince in his vendetta war against Islamists everywhere, from the Horn of Africa to the Magreb – and against Turkey too, as the Muslim Brotherhood's 'mother-ship'.

This 'war on Islamists' has provided cover for the counter-revolutionary repression of any reform of the 'Arab System' – a rearguard Gulf action initially triggered by fears that any 'Awakening' might sweep away Gulf ruling families. Today, the UAE continues to try to seed compliant strongmen, General Sisi lookalikes, in states such as Libya and now Tunisia .

So, here we are. But, where are we going? And, above all, why no reform? Can this continue, or will the region explode under the effects of the Covid-triggered, recession?

No reform at all, for a full decade? What's the block? Well, in the first place, the background lies with those two key neo-con policy papers: the 1996 Clean Break , and David Wurmser's follow-on, Coping with Crumbling States. These two documents laid the basis for the U.S. (and Israeli) endorsement of Gulf States acting as 'policeman' and regional strongmen (a role that the UAE has taken to a new peak), managing any rumblings of dissent (such as in Libya).

These 'policy papers' may have been the precursors, but in the final analysis, the 'block' simply is, and has been, Israel – both indirectly and directly. The Clean Break's full title was a New Strategy for Securing the Realm (i.e. Israel). It was a blueprint for underpinning Israel's security. Ditto for Wurmser's paper.

In sum, either U.S. or Israeli fears, or U.S. concerns to appease domestic U.S. constituencies, lie at the bottom of this stasis: Israeli and the U.S. élites are wholly comfortable with this malleable status quo – and fear it changing in any way that they cannot control. No reform for the Middle East – only disruption.

Here is the point: There has been no reform, but there is a new dynamic at work. Power is an attribute that is based in deference and powerful illusion. So long as people are willing to defer to a leader; so long as people are persuaded by the illusion of power; so long as people fear – the leader leads. But should the illusion become evident as illusion, nothing easily can prop it up. Power is ephemeral; it dissipates like mountain mist. And the U.S. is losing it.

[Jun 02, 2020] So we're going to tell our soldiers that we're redeploying them from the Middle East to the midwest? What do we think they're going to say, 'yeah, sure, no problem?' Guess again."

Trump's threat to deploy the military here is an excessive and dangerous one. Mark Perry reports on the reaction from military officers to the president's threat:
Jun 02, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Senior military officer on Trump statement: "So we're going to tell our soldiers that we're redeploying them from the Middle East to the midwest? What do we think they're going to say, 'yeah, sure, no problem?' Guess again."

-- Mark Perry (@markperrydc) June 2, 2020

Earlier in the day yesterday, audio has leaked in which the Secretary of Defense referred to U.S. cities as the "battlespace." Separately, Sen. Tom Cotton was making vile remarks about using the military to give "no quarter" to looters. This is the language of militarism.

It is a consequence of decades of endless war and the government's tendency to rely on militarized options as their answer for every problem. Endless war has had a deeply corrosive effect on this country's political system: presidential overreach, the normalization of illegal uses of force, a lack of legal accountability for crimes committed in the wars, and a lack of political accountability for the leaders that continue to wage pointless and illegal wars. Now we see new abuses committed and encouraged by a lawless president, but this time it is Americans that are on the receiving end. Trump hasn't ended any of the foreign wars he inherited, and now it seems that he will use the military in an llegal mission here at home.

Megan S • an hour ago

The military is the only American institution that young people still have any real degree of faith in, it will be interesting to see the polls when this is all over with.

[Jun 02, 2020] Burn Amerikastan burn

Jun 02, 2020 | www.unz.com

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website Show Comment June 1, 2020 at 9:58 am GMT

Burn Amerikastan burn. It's beautiful watching you burn

You who had your knee on our necks and killed us as the world looked on.

You who broke into our countries on false pretences, you who killed wives in front of husbands, fathers in front of daughters, you who said it was your right to do so,

You who stole our resources, you who watched without words
You who claimed you were Exceptional
The world sees you for what you are
Now you burn.

Burn Amerikastan burn.

In the name of the children of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Donbass, Yemen, Afghanistan

Burn to ashes, Amerikastan.

Emily , says: Show Comment June 1, 2020 at 11:17 am GMT
@Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist You missed out the Serbs.
'Bombed back to the Stoneage' by direction of Bill Clinton and by the butcher of WACO.
Breaking international law by the stealing of Kosovo and handing it to a bunch of radical islamists – the KLA – thousands of whom have been fighting for ISIS.
Kosovo is Serbia.
They will get it back.
Ashino Wolf Sushanti , says: Show Comment June 1, 2020 at 1:26 pm GMT
Oh, dear poor USA..

Yet Meanwhile

Our Disaster – YEMEN !!

by Kathy Kelly / June 1st, 2020
https://dissidentvoice.org/2020/06/our-disaster/

[Hide MORE]
United Nations reports a death toll of 100,000 people!!!!!!!!!!!!! in that nation's ongoing war
Additional 131 ,000 people !!!!!!!!!!!! dying from hunger, disease and a lack of medical care.
Since then, 3.65 million people have been internally displaced
The worst cholera outbreak ever recorded has infected 2.26 million !!!!!! and cost nearly 4,000 lives (Even so this number is just the official account.)
Attacks on hospitals, clinics by Saudis & Co. have led to the closure of more than half of Yemen's prewar facilities.

The policies of the USA and much of the entire WEST are deeply implicated in Yemen's suffering, through the sale of billions of dollars in munitions to Saudi Arabia and other countries that have intervened in the civil war.

Harold Smith , says: Show Comment June 1, 2020 at 7:03 pm GMT

"If Trump sent in military troops on his own the press would call it unconstitutional."

Since when has the constitution or any law – or anyone citing them – been an obstacle to the evil orange clown?

If he can commit war crimes in Syria and illegally seize Syrian oilfields and seize Russian and Venezuelan diplomatic property, etc., he can send in military troops or whatever he feels like doing. He was accused of abusing his office and acquitted. He can do whatever he pleases.

[Jun 01, 2020] This is one war party -- war party, imperial party of militarism, conquest and killing of civilians

Highly recommended!
Jun 01, 2020 | www.antiwar.com

Antiwar.com contributing editor Danny Sjursen appeared for an extensive interview with Jimmy Dore:

https://youtu.be/VfmWC1bYUrc

[Jun 01, 2020] Obama adviser Susan Rice knows who's responsible for the George Floyd riots. You guessed right, it's RUSSIA!

In was not enough for Obama honchos to gaslight the while nation with Russiagate. They want more action ;-)
Jun 01, 2020 | www.rt.com

How original.

[Jun 01, 2020] Reminiscence of the Future... Non-Agreement Capable, Or Agreement Incapable, Or...

Jun 01, 2020 | smoothiex12.blogspot.com

Wednesday, July 10, 2019 Non-Agreement Capable, Or Agreement Incapable, Or... Agreement-unworthy, or.... I didn't find many English-language report on Putin's last week interview on this issue:

"You know, Obama is no longer president, but there are certain things we don't talk about publicly," Russia's state-run RIA Novosti news agency quoted Putin as saying to Stone. "In any case, I can say that our agreements reached in [a] telephone conversation were not fulfilled by the American side," Putin said, declining to go further into details.
We knew this all along, didn't we? It is not just about personalities, however repulsive in his narcissism and lack of statesmanship Obama was. It is systemic, no matter who comes to power to the Oval Office--it will make no difference. No difference, whatsoever. What is known as US power (political) elite has been on the downward spiral for some time and, in some sense, the whole Epstein affair with serious pedophilia charges, not to mention an unspeakable slap on the wrist in which this well-connected pervert was let go ten years ago, is just one of many indications of a complete moral and cognitive decomposition of this so called "elite" which continues to provide one after another specimens of human depravity. Remarkably, as much as I always feel nauseated when seeing GOPers, it is impossible to hide the fact that Epstein's clients in their majority are mostly associated with putrid creatures from the so called "left", with Bill Clinton featuring prominently in the company of this pervert.
There were some attempts to even conceive a possibility of somehow "progressives" and "conservatives" getting together in their condemnation of this heinous crime (yeah, yeah, I know, Presumption of Innocence).
Now back to Epstein. If we learn that he was actually running something called the "Lolita Express," that would be a signal that prosecutors have a lot of work to do, rounding up the pedophile joyriders. So it was interesting on July 6 to see Christine Pelosi, daughter of the House speaker, posting a stern tweet: "This Epstein case is horrific and the young women deserve justice. It is quite likely that some of our faves are implicated but we must follow the facts and let the chips fall where they may -- whether on Republicans or Democrats." So we can see: the younger Pelosi wants one standard -- a standard that applies to all.
Doesn't it sound wonderful, warm and fuzzy, or too good to be true? It sure does, because, as much as most American elite "conservatives" are not really conservatives, what passes as "progressive" in the United States is PRIMARILY based on sexual deviancy, including implicit promotion of pedophilia by "intellectual class", and "environmental" agenda, period! Everything else is secondary. Those who think that actual conservatism (not a caricature it is known in the United States) has anything to discuss with the so called "progressives"--they unwittingly support this very "progressive" cause which, in its very many manifestations, is a realization of the worst kind of suppression of many millennia old natural, including biological, order of things and, in the end, elimination of normality as such--a future even Orwell would have had difficulty describing.
Of course, Pinkerton gets some flashes of common sense, when states that:
Most likely, a true solution will have "conservative" elements, as in social and cultural norming, and "liberal" elements, as in higher taxes on city slickers coupled with conscious economic development for the proletarians and for the heartland. Only with these economic and governmental changes can we be sure that it's possible to have a nice life in Anytown, safely far away from beguiling pleasuredomes.
Well, he puts it very crudely, but I see where he is at least trying to get it from. I will add, until nation, as in American nation, recognizes itself as a nation, as people who have common history, culture and mission, thus, inevitably producing this aforementioned healthy social and cultural norming--no amount of wishful thinking or social-economic doctrine-mongering will help. There is no United States without European-keen, white Christian, heterosexual folk, both with acutely developed sense of both masculinity and femininity, period. But this is precisely the state of the affairs which American "progressives" are fighting against; this is the state of the affairs which they must destroy be that by imposition of suffocating political correctness, the insanity of multi-gender and LGBT totalitarianism, or by criminal opening of the borders to anyone, who, in the end, will vote for the Democratic Party. You cannot negotiate with such people. In the end, WHO is going to negotiate? A cowardly, utterly corrupt, current GOPers and geriatric remnants of Holy Reaganites? Really? Ask how many of them are Mossad assets and are in the pockets of rich Israeli-firsters and Gulfies?
True "Left" economics, which seeks more just distribution (not re-distribution) of wealth, based on a fusion of economic models and types of property, cannot exist within cultural liberal paradigm of "privileged" minorities, be them racial or sexual ones, aided by massive grievance-generating machine--it is not going to last. Both economic and social normality can exist ONLY within cohesive nation and that, due to activity on both nominal sides (in reality it is the same) of American political spectrum, has been utterly destroyed. The mechanism of this destruction is rather simple and it comes down, in the end, to the, pardon my French, number of ass-holes populating unit-volume (density, that is) of political space in America. It goes without saying that such a density in the US reached deadly toxic levels, and Russiagate coup, Epstein's Affair, or the parade of POTUSes with the maturity levels of high school kids are just numerous partial manifestations of what one can characterize as the end of the rope. After all, who would be making any agreements with representatives of the system which is rotting and decomposing?
Paul Craig Roberts penned today a good piece: The Obituary for Western Civilization Can Now be Written . I have to disagree somewhat with PCR's one assertion:
Europeans Are as Dumbshit as Americans
I would pause a little here. Yes and no. Here is Colonel Wilkerson who talks about both wealth (starts roughly at 14:00) and about other very important strategic and operational fact: overwhelming majority of weapons on hands today are among those who either support Trump openly or simply had it with system in general.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kZA2yIFkhKg/0.jpg
And here is the issue: my bets are on people with military backgrounds, who had first hand experience with military organization (standard manuals, combat manuals et al) and have operational and command experience in their conflict with American Social Justice Warriors (you know--"progressives") and other openly terrorist "progressive" organizations such as Antifa. At least ruined Portland started to do something about it . Is there any real left left in the US? And I don't mean this a-hole Bernie Sanders.

And here is my rephrasing of Tolstoy's conclusion to War and Peace: there are too many ass-holes in American politics today , very many of them being so called "progressives" . This number must be reduced by all legal means today, and if American ass-holes can work together terrorizing majority of good, not ass-hole people, what's precluding those good people to work together? Nothing, except for the rotting corpse of GOP which had audacity to call itself "conservative". If not, all is lost and we do not want to live in the world which will come. And the guns will start speaking.

 UPDATE : 07/11/19

Oh goody, do they read me or is it one of those moments when, in Lenin's description of Revolutionary Situation, economic slogans transform into political ones? Evidently Catholic Conservative Michael Warren speaks in unison with Lenin and me, with both me and Warren certainly not being Marxists or "communists". Here is what Warren has to say today:

Whew. Now I get why people become communists. Not the new-wave, gender-fluid, pink-haired Trots, of course. Nor the new far Left, which condemns child predators like Epstein out one side of its mouth while demanding sympathy for pedophiles out the other. No: I mean the old-fashioned, blue-collar, square-jawed Stalinists. I mean the guy with eight fingers and 12 kids who saw photos of the annual Manhattan debutantes' ball, felt the rumble in his stomach, and figured he may as well eat the rich. Of course, we know where that leads us. For two centuries, conservatives have tried to dampen the passions that led France to cannibalize herself circa 1789. Nevertheless, those passions weren't illegitimate -- they were just misdirected. Only an Englishman like Edmund Burke could have referred to the reign of Louis XIV as "the age of chivalry." Joseph de Maistre spoke for real French conservatives when he said the decadent, feckless aristocracy deserved to be guillotined. The problem is, Maistre argued, there was no one more suitable to succeed them.
It is a very loaded statement. It is also not an incorrect one. It is also relevant to what I preach for years, decades really, that history of the so called "communism" in USSR was a conservative history--a transition from depravity and corruption of Russian Imperial "elites" to what resulted in the mutated nationalism of sorts in late 1930s and led to the defeat of Nazism, historically unprecedented restoration of the destroyed country and then breaking out into space. But that is a separate story--in USSR, as it is the case in Russia today, sexual perversion and deviancy are not looked at lightly. Nor are, in general, "liberal values" which are precisely designed to end up with the legitimization of pedophilia--a long held, and hidden, desire of Western "elites" . Guess why such an obsession with, realistically, literary mediocrity of Nabokov's Lolita by Western moneyed and "intellectual" class. Who in their own mind, unless one is a forensic psychiatrist or detective, would be interested in such a topic, not to mention writing a book on it, not to mention a variety of Hollywood and, in general, Western cinematography artsy class making scores of Lolita movies? Each time I read Lolita, in both Russian and English, I felt an urgent desire to take a shower after reading this concoction. I guess, I am not "sophisticated" enough to recognize appeals of this type of "art". As Warren notes:
Yes: those passions are legitimate. We should feel contempt for our leaders when we discover that two presidents cavorted with Epstein, almost certainly aware that he preyed on minors. We should feel disgust at the mere possibility that Pope Francis rehabilitated Theodore McCarrick. And we should be furious that these injustices haven't even come close to being properly redressed. This is how revolutions are born. America is reaching the point where, 200 years ago, a couple French peasants begin eyeing the Bastille. The question is, can conservatives channel that outrage into serious reform before it's too late? Can we call out the fetid, decadent elites within our own ranks ? Are we prepared to hold our own "faves" to account -- even Trump himself? Alas, it's only a matter of time until we find out.
In this, I, essentially an atheist, and a conservative Catholic, are speaking in the same voice.

[May 31, 2020] We Are Combat Vets, and We Want America to Reboot Memorial Day by Matthew Hoh and Danny Sjursen

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In recent years, U.S. troops were killed not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also Syria, Kenya, Somalia, Yemen, and Niger. Few Americans could locate these countries on a map; fewer knew its soldiers fought there. Additionally, Pentagon pilots and proxies killed people in Libya, Pakistan, and elsewhere in West Africa without losing a single soldier. ..."
"... The campaigns in Somalia and Yemen best expose the absurd casualty inequity of modern American warfare. In the former, only a few U.S. service members have been killed in an 18-year intervention. Conversely, hundreds of thousands of Somalis died or were displaced as a direct or indirect result (an exacerbated famine , for example) of a largely U.S.-catalyzed war. In Yemen, just one American soldier died in combat, compared to more than 100,000 locals -- including 85,000 children starved to death -- in a terror campaign the Saudis couldn't wage without U.S. complicity . ..."
"... With unemployment sky-rocketing to Great Depression rates, and income inequality at Gilded Age levels , both holidays now "celebrate" egregious blood and treasure disparity. For example, sifting through the Department of Labor's statistics reveals that some 8,000 contractors have been killed in America's war zones. That outnumbers U.S. military fatalities. Since Washington has progressively privatized and outsourced its wars, perhaps Americans should also observe a Mercenary Memorial Day. ..."
"... Faced with unrecognizable brands of war, most people substitute nostalgia and myth. Grappling with war's reality has implications that are too disturbing. Far simpler and more satisfying is to commemorate long past sacrifices at Normandy and Iwo Jima, rather than more confounding losses in Niger and Iraq. The temptation persists even as the last World War II veterans pass; old notions of what combat is ..."
"... The United States has lost its ethical and strategic way. Riddled with a virus that has now killed more Americans than the Revolutionary, Mexican, Spanish, Indian, Philippine, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Iraq, and Afghan Wars combined , this nation requires serious soul-searching. Reimagining its bookended summer celebrations might be a good start; but it won't be easy. ..."
May 25, 2020 | www.motherjones.com

Pandemic or no, resilient Americans will celebrate Memorial Day together. Be it through Zoom or spaced six feet apart from ten or less loved ones at backyard cookouts, folks will find a way. In these peculiar gatherings, is it still considered cynical to wonder if people will spare much actual thought for American soldiers still dying abroad -- or question the utility of America's forever wars? Etiquette aside, we think it's obscene not to.

Just as the coronavirus has exposed systemic rot, this moment also reveals how obsolete common conceptions of U.S. warfare truly are -- raising core questions about the holiday devoted to its sacrifices. The truth is that today's " way of war " is so abstract, distant, and short on (at least American) casualties as to be nearly invisible to the public. With little to show for it, Washington still directs bloody global campaigns, killing thousands of locals. America has no space on its calendar to memorialize these victims: even the children among them.

"Just as the coronavirus exposed much internal systemic rot, this moment also reveals how obsolete common conceptions of U.S. warfare truly are."

Eighteen years ago, as a cadet and young marine officer, we celebrated the first post-9/11 Memorial Day -- both brimming with enthusiasm for the wars we knew lay ahead. In the intervening decades, for individual yet strikingly similar reasons, we ultimately chose paths of dissent. Since then, we've penned critical editorials around Memorial Days. These challenged the wars' prospects , questioned the efficacy of the volunteer military, and encouraged citizens to honor the fallen by creating fewer of them.

Little has changed, except how America fights. But that's the point: outsourcing combat to machines, mercenaries, and militias rendered war so opaque that Washington wages it absent public oversight or awareness -- and empathy. That's the formula for forever war.

In recent years, U.S. troops were killed not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also Syria, Kenya, Somalia, Yemen, and Niger. Few Americans could locate these countries on a map; fewer knew its soldiers fought there. Additionally, Pentagon pilots and proxies killed people in Libya, Pakistan, and elsewhere in West Africa without losing a single soldier.

The campaigns in Somalia and Yemen best expose the absurd casualty inequity of modern American warfare. In the former, only a few U.S. service members have been killed in an 18-year intervention. Conversely, hundreds of thousands of Somalis died or were displaced as a direct or indirect result (an exacerbated famine , for example) of a largely U.S.-catalyzed war. In Yemen, just one American soldier died in combat, compared to more than 100,000 locals -- including 85,000 children starved to death -- in a terror campaign the Saudis couldn't wage without U.S. complicity .

No one wants to see American troops killed, but a death disparity so stark stretches classic definitions of combat. Yet for locals, it likely feels a whole lot like "real" war on the business end of U.S. bombs and bullets.

So this year, given the stark reality that even a deadly pandemic -- and pleas for global ceasefire -- hasn't slowed Washington's war machine, it's reasonable to question the very concept of Memorial Day. There are also important parallels with Labor Day -- the holiday bookend to today's seasonal kick off. Just as memorializing America's obscenely lopsided battle deaths is increasingly indecent, a federal holiday devoted to a labor movement the government has aggressively eviscerated is deeply troubling.

With unemployment sky-rocketing to Great Depression rates, and income inequality at Gilded Age levels , both holidays now "celebrate" egregious blood and treasure disparity. For example, sifting through the Department of Labor's statistics reveals that some 8,000 contractors have been killed in America's war zones. That outnumbers U.S. military fatalities. Since Washington has progressively privatized and outsourced its wars, perhaps Americans should also observe a Mercenary Memorial Day.

Widening the aperture unveils thousands more "non-combat" -- but war-related -- uniformed deaths in desperate need of memorializing. From 2006-2018 alone , 3,540 active-duty service members took their own lives -- just a fraction of the 15-20 daily veteran suicides -- and another 640 died in accidents involving substance-abuse. Each death is unique, but studies demonstrate that the combined effects of PTSD and moral injury -- these wars' " signature wound " -- contributed to this massive loss of life. On a personal level, at least four soldiers under our commands took their own lives, as have several friends. These are real folks who left behind real loved ones.

Faced with unrecognizable brands of war, most people substitute nostalgia and myth. Grappling with war's reality has implications that are too disturbing. Far simpler and more satisfying is to commemorate long past sacrifices at Normandy and Iwo Jima, rather than more confounding losses in Niger and Iraq. The temptation persists even as the last World War II veterans pass; old notions of what combat is die with them.

The United States has lost its ethical and strategic way. Riddled with a virus that has now killed more Americans than the Revolutionary, Mexican, Spanish, Indian, Philippine, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Iraq, and Afghan Wars combined , this nation requires serious soul-searching. Reimagining its bookended summer celebrations might be a good start; but it won't be easy.

In a new take on an old tradition, perhaps it's proper to not only pack away the whites, but don black as a memorial to a republic in peril.

Matthew Hoh is a member of the advisory boards of Expose Facts, Veterans For Peace and World Beyond War. He previously served in Iraq with a State Department team and with the U.S. Marines. He is a Senior Fellow with the Center for International Policy.

Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer and contributing editor at antiwar.com . He served combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at West Point. He is the author of a memoir of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge .

[May 31, 2020] On the meaning of the term Russiagate

May 31, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

  1. likbez , May 31, 2020 2:03 am

    Anybody who uses the term "Russiagate" seriously and not to recognize the actual and serious Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election in support of Trump is not to be taken remotely seriously.

    Russiagate is a valid and IMHO very useful political discourse term which has two intersecting meanings:

    1. Obamagate : Attempt of a certain political forces around Clintons and Obama with the support of intelligence agencies to stage a "color revolution" against Trump, using there full control of MSM as air superiority factor. With the main goal is the return to "classic neoliberalism" (neoliberal globalization uber alles) mode

    Which Trump rejected during his election campaign painting him as a threat to certain powerful neoliberal forces which include but not limited to Silicon Valley moguls (note bad relations of Trump and Bezos), some part of Wall street financial oligarchy, and most MSMs honchos.

    2. Neo-McCarthyism campaign unleashed by Obama administration with the goal to whitewash Hillary fiasco and to preserve the current leadership of the Democratic Party.

    That led to complete deterioration of relations between the USA and Russia and increase of chances of military conflict between two. Add to this consistent attempts of Trump to make China an enemy and politicize the process of economic disengagement between the two countries and you understand the level of danger. .

    When a senior Russian official implicitly calls the USA a rogue state and Trump administration -- gangsters on international arena, that a very bad sign. See

    https://nationalinterest.org/feature/russian-deputy-foreign-minister-sergei-ryabkov-%E2%80%9Cwe-have-no-trust-no-confidence-whatsoever%E2%80%9D

    But then again, it may well be so that the current Republican administration will in effect become a line in history in which a considerable number of useful international instruments were abrogated and that America exited them in the anticipation that this approach would serve U.S. interests better. Having said that, I will never say or never suggest that it was for us -- at least in the mid-2010s -- better with the previous administration.

    It was under the previous Obama administration that endless rounds of sanctions were imposed upon Russia. That was continued under Trump. The pretext for that policy is totally rejected by Russia as an invalid and illegal one. The previous administration, weeks before it departed, stole Russian property that was protected by diplomatic immunity, and we are still deprived of this property by the Trump administration. We have sent 350 diplomatic notes to both the Obama and the Trump administrations demanding the return of this property, only to see an endless series of rejections. It is one of the most vivid and obvious examples of where we are in our relationship.

    There is no such thing as "which administration is better for Russia in the U.S.?" Both are bad, and this is our conclusion after more than a decade of talking to Washington on different topics.

    Heilbrunn: Given the dire situation you portray, do you believe that America has become a rogue state?

    Ryabkov: I wouldn't say so, that's not our conclusion. But the U.S. is clearly an entity that stands for itself, one that creates uncertainty for the world. America is a source of trouble for many international actors. They are trying to find ways to protect and defend themselves from this malign and malicious policy of America that many of the people around the world believe should come to an end, hopefully in the near future.

    What I can't understand is this stupid jingoism, kind of "cult of death" among the US neocons, who personally are utter chickenhawks, but still from their comfortable offices write dangerous warmongering nonsense. Without understanding possible longer term consequences.

    Of course, MIC money does not smell, but some enthusiasts in blogs do it even without proper remuneration

[May 30, 2020] More On "Obamagate!"

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In any case it looks like Flynn helped to avoid "boxing in" the new administration after the expulsion of Russian diplomats by the lame duck President? . That does not help Trump one bit, because first of all he is incompetent, and secondly he was instantly cooped by neocons, but still ..."
"... The key question here is whether Obama administration has motives to set a trap for Flynn now can be answered positively. If this was an entrapment then this is clearly a criminal offense and Strzok, Comey and possibly Brennan and Clapper, are clearly in hot water. ..."
May 30, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

likbez , May 29, 2020 11:29 pm

The transcript of Flynn call to Ambassador Kislyak was declassified and released.

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05-29%20ODNI%20to%20CEG%20RHJ%20%28Flynn%20Transcripts%29.pdf

One plausible hypothesis is that Obama administration decided to revenge Flynn maneuver to foil Obama last move -- the expulsion of Russian diplomats, which stated neo-McCarthyism campaign in the USA. He explicitly asked Russians not to retaliate and I would understand why Obama did not like this move.

In any case it looks like Flynn helped to avoid "boxing in" the new administration after the expulsion of Russian diplomats by the lame duck President? . That does not help Trump one bit, because first of all he is incompetent, and secondly he was instantly cooped by neocons, but still

The key question here is whether Obama administration has motives to set a trap for Flynn now can be answered positively. If this was an entrapment then this is clearly a criminal offense and Strzok, Comey and possibly Brennan and Clapper, are clearly in hot water.

See

https://mobile.twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1266483118099378176

[May 30, 2020] Cutting our excessive defense budget post-COVID-19 will be difficult. Here's how to do it by Gordon Adams

Sound like wishful thinking. Looks like cutting US military budget is impossible as "Full spectrum Dominance" doctrine is still in place and neocons are at the helm of the USA foreign policy. COVID-19 or not COVID-19.
May 29, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

The other day an aerospace industry analyst asked me whether I thought the defense budget would start to go down, courtesy of the huge cost of dealing with the pandemic and the massive deficits the nation faces. I said it was unlikely and he agreed.

This is not the conventional wisdom in DC. Some national security analysts and advocates for higher defense budgets have warned that the defense budget is now under siege . Critics of the Pentagon and its spending are equally convinced that the pandemic opens the door to necessary, deep, sensible cuts in defense in order to fund the mountain of debt and take care of pressing needs for income, employment, health care, global warming, and other major threats to the well-being of Americans.

Whatever the nation's strategy, critics argue, the pandemic has changed the face of the threat to America. COVID-19 is an invisible, lethal threat to human security, a viral neutron bomb that spares buildings but kills their occupants.

Congress has appropriated more than 20 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, so far, to cope with this threat. Additional funds for the military, ironically, have become a "rounding error" in this spending -- little more than $10 billion of the more than $4 trillion appropriated to date. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper warned about the likelihood of defense cuts and wanted more funds for the Pentagon, but Rep. Adam Smith, Chair of the House Armed Services Committee said there was no way defense would get more funds through the pandemic bills.

So it looks bad for defense, and good for the advocates of cuts. But not so fast. Yes, it is true; history shows that defense budgets do decline. It happens, predictably, when we get out of a war – World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War. Even when we left Iraq in 2011, the budget went down.

There is a secret ingredient in defense budget reductions: they seem to happen, as well, when the politics of deficit reduction appear. Defense also declined after Korea because a fiscal conservative, Eisenhower, was in office, with five virtual stars on his shoulders, making it possible to put a lid on the budgetary appetites of the services.

In fact, in 1985, well before the end of the Cold War, Congress, focused on the deficit, passed the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act, which was then was reinforced in the 1990 Budget Enforcement Act that set hard spending limits on domestic and defense spending. It had to cover both parts of discretionary spending or Congress could not agree. It was 17 years before the defense budget began to rise .

Put the end of war together with a dollop of deficit reduction and defense budgets will go down. They become the caboose, rather than the engine, of the budgetary train. But beware of what you ask for. The price of constraints on defense has been constraints on domestic spending, as the nation has learned over the past three decades. In fact, the Budget Control Act of 2011 constrained domestic spending, while allowing defense to escape almost unscathed, thanks to war supplementals.

When attention shifts to debates over priorities and deficits, it opens the door to a real discussion about defense. But they do not ensure cuts. While the military services may not see their appetite for real growth of 3-5 percent fulfilled, it is unlikely to decline very much.

There is a floor under the defense budget. But you need to change the level of analysis to see it and look at who actually makes defense budget decisions and why they make the decisions they do. It's about something I called the "Iron Triangle."

We all like to think that strategy drives defense budgets. For the most part, however, defense decisions are made inside a political system involving constant, relatively closed interaction between the military services, the Congress, and the community and industry beneficiaries of defense spending.

In outline, budget planners in the military services start with last year's budget and graft on new funds, rarely giving up a program, a mission, or part of the force. This dynamic points the budgets upwards over time. Secretaries and under-secretaries work to add preferences and projects, like national missile defense, to the services' budget plans. On top of that, presidents have made promises, adding such things as bomber funds (Reagan) and space forces (Trump) the services do not want.

Then there is the second leg of the triangle: Congress. For all their efforts to cut Pentagon waste, progressive members do not drive defense decisions in the Congress. The defense authorizers and appropriators do. The associated committees are dominated by defense spending advocates, deeply interested in the outcomes, encouraged by industry campaign contributions and community lobbying. These outside interests are the third leg of the triangle. Contracts and community-based impacts give them a deep stake in the outcomes.

This system is not a conspiracy; it is a visible part of American politics, similar in shape to the players in farm price supports or health care policy. But it is a system that operates somewhat separately from and parallel to the politics of deficit reduction and has a major impact on the content and levels of the defense budget. And its work bakes a kind of sclerosis into efforts to have a broader debate over spending priorities.

The politics of the Iron Triangle will set limits on the defense budget debate making deep cuts unlikely. So what might be the options to end-run this system? Politics, of course. If the advocates of deeper defense reductions want to change America's spending and budgeting priorities, they will need to join forces with advocates of a "new, new deal" in America -- one that would put priority on the national health system, infrastructure investment, climate change, immigration, and educational reform. Only a very large, very deep coalition has a chance of overcoming the inertia imposed by the Iron Triangle.

And that coalition will need to focus on Joe Biden. The president is the key actor here, particularly at the start of an administration. As Bill Clinton learned, the first months are critical to changing overall budget priorities, before the departments, including Defense, can begin the Iron Triangle dance.

Even then, major cuts in defense budgets are an uphill fight. The opening for a broader priorities debate has been provided by the COVID-19 pandemic. The outcome depends significantly on bringing this kind of focus to actions over the next seven months.

[May 30, 2020] Imperialism undercuts democracy by furthering inequalities among its citizens: Corruption becomes endemic, not only abroad but at home.

May 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Norogene , May 29 2020 23:02 utc | 115

lysias @ 109
... Here is a fine quote from Wolin's book (page 264) which illustrates the point (please excuse the length of this quote):

A twofold moral might be drawn from the experience of Athens: that it is self-subverting for democracy to subordinate its egalitarian convictions to the pursuit of expansive politics with its corollaries of conquest and domination and the power relationships they introduce. Few care to argue that, in political terms, democracy at home is advanced or improved by conquest abroad.

As Athens showed and the United States of the twenty-first century confirmed, imperialism undercuts democracy by furthering inequalities among its citizens. Resources that might be used to improve health care, education, and environmental protection are instead directed to defense spending, which, by far, con- sumes the largest percentage of the nation's annual budget. Moreover, the sheer size and complexity of imperial power and the expanded role of the military make it difficult to impose fiscal discipline and accountability. Corruption becomes endemic, not only abroad but at home. The most dangerous type of corruption for a democracy is measured not in monetary terms alone but in the kind of ruthless power relations it fosters in domestic politics. As many observers have noted, politics has become a blood sport with partisanship and ideological fidelity as the hallmarks. A partisan judiciary is openly declared to be a major priority of a political party; the efforts to consolidate executive power and to relegate Congress to a supporting role are to some important degree the retrojection inwards of the imperial thrust.

Second, if Athens was the first historical instance of a confrontation between democracy and elitism, that experience suggests that there is no simple recipe for resolving the tensions between them. Political elites were a persistent, if uneasy and contested, feature of Athenian democracy and a significant factor in both its expansion and its demise. In the eyes of contemporary observers, such as Thucydides, as well as later historians, the advancement of Athenian hegemony de- pended upon a public-spirited, able elite at the helm and a demos will- ing to accept leadership. Conversely, the downfall of Athens was attributed to the wiles and vainglory of leaders who managed to whip up popular support for ill-conceived adventures. As the war dragged on and frustration grew, domestic politics became more embittered and fractious: members of the elite competed to outbid each other by pro\posing ever wilder schemes of conquest.

In two attempts (411–410 and 404–403) elites, abetted by the Spartans, succeeded in temporarily abolishing democracy and installing rule by the Few.

...and while I am at it: lysias @ 106

Let's deconstruct what you've said. Even if he resisted arrest (by what degree was he resisting?) that is not cause for applying deadly force on someone. Clearly he was restrained and was going no where. Furthermore, the application of restraint should be one that ought not induce death in someone with a previous health condition. By your rationale, you have no business of walking the streets if you are not an able-bodied person and that death by restraint by a police officer is excusable if you happen to be in bad health.

Although you don't explicitly say it, somehow it feels like you are saying that he had it coming to him when you write "Floyd had a lengthy criminal record." Does that mean just because he had a lengthy record he deserved to be roughed up like that? This sounds like victim blaming, which is something commonly done in this country to continue to oppress people who have no power.

[May 30, 2020] The arseholes arguing for getting into conflicts do so only for the opportunities for personal benefit conflicts create

May 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

A User , May 30 2020 3:47 utc | 160

re Norogene | May 30 2020 3:09 utc | 155
"But, of course, you need to protect your country which means maintaining a defense force. " Yet I cannot think of a single instance of a conflict amerika has gotten into that wasn't a case of amerika kicking off the action with some particularly egregious act.

eg On the instances I have raised this with amerikans, many have told me they consider Pearl Harbour to be an instance of amerika being the innocent party, they had no idea that FDR had instigated a blockade of Japan long before which was starving Japanese people or that Pearl Harbour wasn't amerikan soil, it was an illegally occupied nation and the Japanese attack had been careful to only bomb and strafe the occupying force.

No nation needs a defense force if the true will of the citizens of a country was what steered that nation, since as you said, most humans the world over prefer to live and let live.

When I worked as a public servant it took me about 5 seconds to suss that those bureaucrats promoting change didn't have a real interest in change apart from the opportunity for promotion change can promote.

This is equally true of war, the arseholes arguing for getting into conflicts do so only for the opportunities for personal benefit conflicts create. Since no war has ever advantaged the masses it is safe to say left up to the people, no wars would always be their first preference.

[May 29, 2020] Who Are the Secret Puppet-Masters Behind Trump's War on Iran?

May 29, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies Posted on May 29, 2020 May 28, 2020 On May 6th, President Trump vetoed a war powers bill specifying that he must ask Congress for authorization to use military force against Iran. Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign of deadly sanctions and threats of war against Iran has seen no let-up, even as the U.S., Iran and the whole world desperately need to set aside our conflicts to face down the common danger of the Covid-19 pandemic.

So what is it about Iran that makes it such a target of hostility for Trump and the neocons? There are many repressive regimes in the world, and many of them are close US allies, so this policy is clearly not based on an objective assessment that Iran is more repressive than Egypt, Saudi Arabia or other monarchies in the Persian Gulf.

The Trump administration claims that its "maximum pressure" sanctions and threats of war against Iran are based on the danger that Iran will develop nuclear weapons. But after decades of inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and despite the US's politicization of the IAEA, the Agency has repeatedly confirmed that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program.

If Iran ever did any preliminary research on nuclear weapons, it was probably during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, when the US and its allies helped Iraq to make and use chemical weapons that killed up to 100,000 Iranians. A 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate , the IAEA's 2015 " Final Assessment on Past and Present Outstanding Issues" and decades of IAEA inspections have examined and resolved every scrap of false evidence of a nuclear weapons program presented or fabricated by the CIA and its allies.

If, despite all the evidence, US policymakers still fear that Iran could develop nuclear weapons, then adhering to the Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA), keeping Iran inside the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and ensuring ongoing access by IAEA inspectors would provide greater security than abandoning the deal.

As with Bush's false WMD claims about Iraq in 2003, Trump's real goal is not nuclear non-proliferation but regime change. After 40 years of failed sanctions and hostility, Trump and a cabal of US warhawks still cling to the vain hope that a tanking economy and widespread suffering in Iran will lead to a popular uprising or make it vulnerable to another U.S.-backed coup or invasion.

United Against a Nuclear Iran and the Counter Extremism Project

One of the key organizations promoting and pushing hostility towards Iran is a shadowy group called United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI). Founded in 2008, it was expanded and reorganized in 2014 under the umbrella of the Counter Extremism Project United (CEPU) to broaden its attacks on Iran and divert US policymakers' attention away from the role of Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other US allies in spreading violence, extremism and chaos in the greater Middle East.

UANI acts as a private enforcer of US sanctions by keeping a " business registry " of hundreds of companies all over the world – from Adidas to Zurich Financial Services – that trade with or are considering trading with Iran. UANI hounds these companies by naming and shaming them, issuing reports for the media, and urging the Office of Foreign Assets Control to impose fines and sanctions. It also keeps a checklist of companies that have signed a declaration certifying they do not conduct business in or with Iran.

Proving how little they care about the Iranian people, UANI even targets pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical-device corporations – including Bayer , Merck , Pfizer , Eli Lilly , and Abbott Laboratories – that have been granted special US humanitarian aid licenses.

Where does UANI get its funds?

UANI was founded by three former US officials, Dennis Ross, Richard Holbrooke and Mark Wallace. In 2013, it still had a modest budget of $1.7 million, nearly 80% coming from two Jewish-American billionaires with strong ties to Israel and the Republican Party: $843,000 from precious metals investor Thomas Kaplan and $500,000 from casino owner Sheldon Adelson . Wallace and other UANI staff have also worked for Kaplan's investment firms, and he remains a key funder and advocate for UANI and its affiliated groups.

In 2014, UANI split into two entities: the original UANI and the Green Light Project, which does business as the Counter Extremism Project. Both entities are under the umbrella of and funded by a third, Counter Extremism Project United (CEPU). This permits the organization to brand its fundraising as being for the Counter Extremism Project, even though it still regrants a third of its funds to UANI.

CEO Mark Wallace, Executive Director David Ibsen and other staff work for all three groups in their shared offices in Grand Central Tower in New York. In 2018, Wallace drew a combined salary of $750,000 from all three entities, while Ibsen's combined salary was $512,126.

In recent years, the revenues for the umbrella group, CEPU, have mushroomed, reaching $22 million in 2017. CEPU is secretive about the sources of this money. But investigative journalist Eli Clifton , who starting looking into UANI in 2014 when it was sued for defamation by a Greek ship owner it accused of violating sanctions on Iran, has found evidence suggesting financial ties with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

That is certainly what hacked emails between CEPU staff, an Emirati official and a Saudi lobbyist imply. In September 2014, CEPU's president Frances Townsend emailed the UAE Ambassador to the US to solicit the UAE's support and propose that it host and fund a CEPU forum in Abu Dhabi.

Four months later, Townsend emailed again to thank him , writing, "And many thanks for your and Richard Mintz' (UAE lobbyist) ongoing support of the CEP effort!" UANI fundraiser Thomas Kaplan has formed a close relationship with Emirati ruler Bin Zayed, and visited the UAE at least 24 times. In 2019, he gushed to an interviewer that the UAE and its despotic rulers "are my closest partners in more parts of my life than anyone else other than my wife."

Another email from Saudi lobbyist and former Senator Norm Coleman to the Emirati Ambassador about CEPU's tax status implied that the Saudis and Emiratis were both involved in its funding, which would mean that CEPU may be violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act by failing to register as a Saudi or Emirati agent in the US

Ben Freeman of the Center for International Policy has documented the dangerously unaccountable and covert expansion of the influence of foreign governments and military-industrial interests over US foreign policy in recent years, in which registered lobbyists are only the "tip of the iceberg" when it comes to foreign influence. Eli Clifton calls UANI, "a fantastic case study and maybe a microcosm of the ways in which American foreign policy is actually influenced and implemented."

CEPU and UANI's staff and advisory boards are stocked with Republicans, neoconservatives and warhawks, many of whom earn lavish salaries and consulting fees. In the two years before President Trump appointed John Bolton as his National Security Advisor, CEPU paid Bolton $240,000 in consulting fees. Bolton, who openly advocates war with Iran, was instrumental in getting the Trump administration to withdraw from the nuclear deal.

UANI also enlists Democrats to try to give the group broader, bipartisan credibility. The chair of UANI's board is former Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman, who was known as the most pro-Zionist member of the Senate. A more moderate Democrat on UANI's board is former New Mexico governor and UN ambassador Bill Richardson.

Norman Roule, a CIA veteran who was the National Intelligence Manager for Iran throughout the Obama administration was paid $366,000 in consulting fees by CEPU in 2018. Soon after the brutal Saudi assassination of journalist Jamal Khassoghi, Roule and UANI fundraiser Thomas Kaplan met with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman in Saudi Arabia, and Roule then played a leading role in articles and on the talk-show circuit whitewashing Bin Salman's repression and talking up his superficial "reforms" of Saudi society.

More recently, amid a growing outcry from Congress, the UN and the European Union to ease US sanctions on Iran during the pandemic, UANI chairman Joe Lieberman, CEPU president Frances Townsend and CEO Mark Wallace signed a letter to Trump that falsely claimed, "US sanctions neither prevent nor target the supply of food, medicine or medical devices to Iran," and begged him not to relax his murderous sanctions because of COVID-19. This was too much for Norman Roule, who tossed out his UANI script and told the Nation , "the international community should do everything it can to enable the Iranian people to obtain access to medical supplies and equipment."

Two Israeli shell companies to whom CEPU and UANI have paid millions of dollars in "consulting fees" raise even more troubling questions. CEPU has paid over $500,000 to Darlink, located near Tel Aviv, while UANI paid at least $1.5 million to Grove Business Consulting in Hod Hasharon, about 10% of its revenues from 2016 to 2018. Neither firm seems to really exist, but Grove's address on UANI's IRS filings appears in the Panama Papers as that of Dr. Gideon Ginossar, an officer of an offshore company registered in the British Virgin Islands that defaulted on its creditors in 2010.

Selling a Corrupted Picture to US Policymakers

UANI's parent group, Counter Extremism Project United, presents itself as dedicated to countering all forms of extremism. But in practice, it is predictably selective in its targets, demonizing Iran and its allies while turning a blind eye to other countries with more credible links to extremism and terrorism.

UANI supports accusations by Trump and US warhawks that Iran is "the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism," based mainly on its support for the Lebanese Shiite political party Hezbollah, whose militia defends southern Lebanon against Israel and fights in Syria as an ally of the government.

But Iran placed UANI on its own list of terrorist groups in 2019 after Mark Wallace and UANI hosted a meeting at the Roosevelt Hotel in New York that was mainly attended by supporters of the Mujahedin-e-Kalqh (MEK). The MEK is a group that the US government itself listed as a terrorist organization until 2012 and which is still committed to the violent overthrow of the government in Iran – preferably by persuading the US and its allies to do it for them. UANI tried to distance itself from the meeting after the fact, but the published program listed UANI as the event organizer.

On the other hand, there are two countries where CEPU and UANI seem strangely unable to find any links to extremism or terrorism at all, and they are the very countries that appear to be funding their operations, lavish salaries and shadowy "consulting fees": Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Many Americans are still demanding a public investigation into Saudi Arabia's role in the crimes of September 11th. In a court case against Saudi Arabia brought by 9/11 victims' families, the FBI recently revealed that a Saudi Embassy official , Mussaed Ahmed al-Jarrah, provided crucial support to two of the hijackers. Brett Eagleson, a spokesman for the families whose father was killed on September 11th, told Yahoo News , "(This) demonstrates there was a hierarchy of command that's coming from the Saudi Embassy to the Ministry of Islamic Affairs [in Los Angeles] to the hijackers."

The global spread of the Wahhabi version of Islam that unleashed and fueled Al Qaeda, ISIS and other violent Muslim extremist groups has been driven primarily by Saudi Arabia, which has built and funded Wahhabi schools and mosques all over the world. That includes the King Fahd Mosque in Los Angeles that the two 9/11 hijackers attended.

It is also well documented that Saudi Arabia has been the largest funder and arms supplier for the Al Qaeda-led forces that have destroyed Syria since 2011, including CIA-brokered shipments of thousands of tons of weapons from Benghazi in Libya and at least eight countries in Eastern Europe. The UAE also supplied arms funding to Al Qaeda-allied rebels in Syria between 2012 and 2016, and the Saudi and UAE roles have now been reversed in Libya, where the UAE is the main supplier of thousands of tons of weapons to General Haftar's rebel forces. In Yemen, both the Saudis and Emiratis have committed war crimes . The Saudi and Emirati air forces have bombed schools, clinics, weddings and school buses, while the Emiratis tortured detainees in 18 secret prisons in Yemen.

But United Against a Nuclear Iran and Counter Extremism Project have redacted all of this from the one-sided worldview they offer to US policymakers and the American corporate media. While they demonize Iran, Qatar, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood as extremists and terrorists, they depict Saudi Arabia and the UAE exclusively as victims of terrorism and allies in U.S.-led "counterterrorism" campaigns, never as sponsors of extremism and terrorism or perpetrators of war crimes.

The message of these groups dedicated to "countering extremism" is clear and none too subtle: Saudi Arabia and the UAE are always US allies and victims of extremism, never a problem or a source of danger, violence or chaos. The country we should all be worrying about is – you guessed it – Iran. You couldn't pay for propaganda like this! But on the other hand, if you're Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates and you have greedy, corrupt Americans knocking on your door eager to sell their loyalty, maybe you can.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace , and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran . Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq .

[May 29, 2020] A huge portion of the Pentagon's budget goes toward preparing for war with China -- and, frankly, provoking war as well.

May 29, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

Despite the economic ravages of the pandemic, the Pentagon continues to demand the lion's share of the U.S. budget. It wants another $705 billion for 2021, after increasing its budget by 20 percent between 2016 and 2020.

This appalling waste of government resources has already caused long-term damage to the economic competitiveness of the United States. But it's all the money the Pentagon is spending on "deterring China" that might prove more devastating in the short term.

The U.S. Navy announced this month that it was sending its entire forward-deployed sub fleet on "contingency response operations" as a warning to China. Last month, the U.S. Navy Expeditionary Strike Group sailed into the South China Sea to support Malaysia's oil exploration in an area that China claims. Aside from the reality that oil exploration makes no economic sense at a time of record low oil prices, the United States should be helping the countries bordering the South China Sea come to a fair resolution of their disputes, not throwing more armaments at the problem.

There's also heightened risk of confrontation in the Taiwan Strait, the East China Sea, and even in outer space . A huge portion of the Pentagon's budget goes toward preparing for war with China -- and, frankly, provoking war as well.

What does this all have to do with the Great Disentanglement?

The close economic ties between the United States and China have always represented a significant constraint on military confrontation. Surely the two countries would not risk grievous economic harm by coming to blows. Economic cooperation also provides multiple channels for resolving conflicts and communicating discontent. The United States and Soviet Union never had that kind of buffer.

If the Great Disentanglement goes forward, however, then the two countries have less to lose economically in a military confrontation. Trading partners, of course, sometimes go to war with one another. But as the data demonstrates , more trade generally translates into less war.

There are lots and lots of problems in the U.S.-China economic relationship. But they pale in comparison to World War III.

John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy In Focus , where this article originally appeared.

[May 28, 2020] The US-based Center For Public Integrity seems to be the parent of the UK government's Integrity Initiative boondoggle

May 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

guidoamm , May 28 2020 7:05 utc | 60

Center For Public Integrity

Funding
The Center for Public Integrity has received contributions from a number of left-leaning foundation funders including the Ford Foundation, Omidyar Network Fund, Foundation to Promote Open Society, Knight Foundation, and MacArthur Foundation.[3] The foundation has stated that it no longer accepts corporate gifts, but it takes money from the private foundations of many of the richest Americans including actor Leonardo DiCaprio.

Seems to be the parent of the UK government's Integrity Initiative boondoggle

[May 28, 2020] US Public Remain the Tacit Accomplice in America's Dead End Wars Common Dreams Views by Andrew Bacevich

May 25, 2020 | www.commondreams.org
by Los Angeles Times US Public Remain the Tacit Accomplice in America's Dead End Wars Honor the fallen, but not every war they were sent to fight by Andrew Bacevich 19 Comments A U.S. soldier fires an anti-tank rocket during a live-fire exercise in Zabul province, Afghanistan, in July 2010. (Photo: U.S. Army /flickr/cc) Not least among the victims claimed by the coronavirus pandemic was a poetry recital that was to have occurred in March at a theater in downtown Boston.

I had been invited to read aloud a poem, and I chose "On a Soldier Fallen in the Philippines," written in 1899 by William Vaughn Moody (1869-1910). You are unlikely to have heard of the poet or his composition. Great literature, it is not. Yet its message is memorable.

The subject of Moody's poem is death, a matter today much on all our minds. It recounts the coming home of a nameless American soldier, killed in the conflict commonly but misleadingly known as the Philippine Insurrection.

In 1898, U.S. troops landed in Manila to oust the Spanish overlords who had ruled the Philippines for more than three centuries. They accomplished this mission with the dispatch that a later generation of U.S. forces demonstrated in ousting regimes in Kabul and Baghdad. Yet as was the case with the Afghanistan and Iraq wars of our own day, real victory proved elusive.

Back in Washington, President McKinley decided that having liberated the Philippines, the United States would now keep them. The entire archipelago of several thousand islands was to become an American colony.

McKinley's decision met with immediate disfavor among Filipinos. To oust the foreign occupiers, they mounted an armed resistance. A vicious conflict ensued, one that ultimately took the lives of 4,200 American soldiers and at least 200,000 Filipinos. In the end, however, the United States prevailed.

Denying Filipino independence was the cause for which the subject of Moody's poem died.

Long since forgotten by Americans, the war to pacify the Philippines generated in its day great controversy. Moody's poem is an artifact of that controversy. In it, he chastises those who perform the rituals of honoring the fallen while refusing to acknowledge the dubious nature of the cause for which they fought. "Toll! Let the great bells toll," he writes,

Till the clashing air is dim,
Did we wrong this parted soul?
We will make it up to him.
Toll! Let him never guess
What work we sent him to.
Laurel, laurel, yes.
He did what we bade him do.
Praise, and never a whispered hint
but the fight he fought was good;

In actuality, the fight was anything but good. It was ill-advised and resulted in great evil. "On a Soldier Fallen in the Philippines" expresses a demand for reckoning with that evil. Americans of Moody's generation rejected that demand, just as Americans today balk at reckoning with the consequences of our own ill-advised wars.

Yet the imperative persists. "O banners, banners here," Moody concludes,

That he doubt not nor misgive!
That he heed not from the tomb
The evil days draw near
When the nation robed in gloom
With its faithless past shall strive.
Let him never dream that his bullet's scream
went wide of its island mark,
Home to the heart of his darling land
where she stumbled and sinned in the dark.

At the end of the 19th century, the United States stumbled and sinned in the dark by waging a misbegotten campaign to advance nakedly imperial ambitions. At the beginning of the 21st century, new wars became the basis of comparable sin. The war of Moody's time and the wars of our own have almost nothing in common except this: In each instance, through their passivity disguised as patriotism, the American people became tacitly complicit in wrongdoing committed in their name.

It is no doubt too glib by half to claim that today, besieged by a virus, we are reaping the consequences caused by our refusal to reckon with past sins. Yet it is not too glib to argue that the need for such a reckoning remains. Have we wronged the departed souls of those who died -- indeed, are still dying -- in Afghanistan and Iraq? The question cries out for an answer. In our cacophonous age, it just might be that we will find that answer in poetry.

Andrew Bacevich Andrew J. Bacevich , a professor of history and international relations at Boston University, is the author of America's War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History , which has just been published by Random House. He is also editor of the book, The Short American Century (Harvard Univ. Press) , and author of several others, including: Breach of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country (American Empire Project) ; Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War , The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War , The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism (American Empire Project) , and The Long War: A New History of U.S. National Security Policy Since World War II . © 2019 Los Angeles Times

[May 26, 2020] News Stories Avoid Naming Israel by Philip Giraldi

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In reality, the part left out of the story is that the phone call to Kislyak on December 22, 2016, was made by Flynn at the direction of Jared Kushner, who in turn had been approached by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu had learned that the Obama Administrating was going to abstain on a United Nations vote condemning the Israeli settlements policy, meaning that for the first time in years a U.N. resolution critical of Israel would pass without drawing a U.S. veto. Kushner, acting for Netanyahu, asked Flynn to contact each delegate from the various countries on the Security Council to delay or kill the resolution. Flynn agreed to do so, which included a call to the Russians. Kislyak took the call but did not agree to veto Security Council Resolution 2334, which passed unanimously on December 23 rd . ..."
"... The phone call made at the request of Israel was neither benign nor ethical as the Barack Administration was still in power and managing the nation's foreign policy. At the time, son-in-law Jared Kushner was Trump's point man on the Middle East. He and his family have extensive ties both to Israel and to Netanyahu personally, to include Netanyahu's staying at the Kushner family home in New York. The Kushner Family Foundation has funded some of Israel's illegal settlements and also a number of conservative political groups in that country. Jared has served as a director of that foundation and it is reported that he failed to disclose the relationship when he filled out his background investigation sheet for a security clearance. All of which suggests that if you are looking for possible foreign government collusion with the incoming Trumpsters, look no further. ..."
"... And it should be observed that the Israelis were not exactly shy about their disapproval of Obama and their willingness to express their views to the incoming Trump. Kushner went far beyond merely disagreeing over an aspect of foreign policy as he was actively trying to clandestinely subvert and reverse a decision made by his own legally constituted government. His closeness to Netanyahu made him, in intelligence terms, a quite likely Israeli government agent of influence, even if he didn't quite see himself that way. ..."
"... Kushner's actions, as well as those of Flynn, would most certainly have been covered by the Logan Act of 1799, which bars private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments on behalf of the United States and also could be construed as a "conspiracy against the United States." But in spite of all that the investigation went after Flynn instead of Kushner. As Kushner is Jewish and certainly could be accused of dual loyalty in extremis , that part of the story obviously makes many in the U.S. Establishment and media uncomfortable, so it was and continues to be both ignored and expunged from the record as quickly as possible. ..."
May 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

There are two stories that seem to have been under-reported in the past couple of weeks. The first involves Michael Flynn's dealings with the Russian United Nations Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. And the second describes yet another bit of espionage conducted by a foreign country directed against the United States. Both stories involve the State of Israel.

The bigger story is, of course, the dismissal by Attorney General William Barr of the criminal charges against former National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn based on malfeasance by the FBI investigators. The curious aspect of the story as it is being related by the mainstream media is that it repeatedly refers to Flynn as having unauthorized contacts with the Russian Ambassador and then having lied about it. The implication is that there was something decidedly shady about Flynn talking to the Russians and that the Russians were up to something.

In reality, the part left out of the story is that the phone call to Kislyak on December 22, 2016, was made by Flynn at the direction of Jared Kushner, who in turn had been approached by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu had learned that the Obama Administrating was going to abstain on a United Nations vote condemning the Israeli settlements policy, meaning that for the first time in years a U.N. resolution critical of Israel would pass without drawing a U.S. veto. Kushner, acting for Netanyahu, asked Flynn to contact each delegate from the various countries on the Security Council to delay or kill the resolution. Flynn agreed to do so, which included a call to the Russians. Kislyak took the call but did not agree to veto Security Council Resolution 2334, which passed unanimously on December 23 rd .

In taking the phone calls from a soon-to-be senior American official who would within weeks be part of a new administration in Washington, the Russians did nothing wrong, but the media is acting like there was some kind of Kremlin conspiracy seeking to undermine U.S. democracy. It would not be inappropriate to have some conversations with an incoming government team and Kislyak also did nothing that might be regarded as particularly responsive to Team Trump overtures since he voted contrary to Flynn's request.

The phone call made at the request of Israel was neither benign nor ethical as the Barack Administration was still in power and managing the nation's foreign policy. At the time, son-in-law Jared Kushner was Trump's point man on the Middle East. He and his family have extensive ties both to Israel and to Netanyahu personally, to include Netanyahu's staying at the Kushner family home in New York. The Kushner Family Foundation has funded some of Israel's illegal settlements and also a number of conservative political groups in that country. Jared has served as a director of that foundation and it is reported that he failed to disclose the relationship when he filled out his background investigation sheet for a security clearance. All of which suggests that if you are looking for possible foreign government collusion with the incoming Trumpsters, look no further.

And it should be observed that the Israelis were not exactly shy about their disapproval of Obama and their willingness to express their views to the incoming Trump. Kushner went far beyond merely disagreeing over an aspect of foreign policy as he was actively trying to clandestinely subvert and reverse a decision made by his own legally constituted government. His closeness to Netanyahu made him, in intelligence terms, a quite likely Israeli government agent of influence, even if he didn't quite see himself that way.

Kushner's actions, as well as those of Flynn, would most certainly have been covered by the Logan Act of 1799, which bars private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments on behalf of the United States and also could be construed as a "conspiracy against the United States." But in spite of all that the investigation went after Flynn instead of Kushner. As Kushner is Jewish and certainly could be accused of dual loyalty in extremis , that part of the story obviously makes many in the U.S. Establishment and media uncomfortable, so it was and continues to be both ignored and expunged from the record as quickly as possible.

The second story , which has basically been made to disappear, relates to spying by Israel against critics in the United States. The revelation that Israel was again using its telecommunications skills to spy on foreigners came from an Oakland California federal court lawsuit initiated by Facebook (FB) against the Israeli surveillance technology company NSO Group. FB claimed that NSO has been using servers located in the United States to infect with spyware hundreds of smartphones being used by attorneys, journalists, human rights activists, critics of Israel and even of government officials. NSO allegedly used WhatsApp, a messaging app owned by FB, to hack into the phones and install malware that would enable the company to monitor what was going on with the devices. It did so by employing networks of remote servers located in California to enter the accounts.

NSO has inevitably claimed that they do indeed provide spyware, but that it is sold to clients who themselves operate it with the "advice and technical support to assist customers in setting up" but it also promotes its products as being "used to stop terrorism, curb violent crime, and save lives." It also asserts that its software cannot be used against U.S. phone numbers.

Facebook, which did its own extensive research into NSO activity, alleges that NSO rented a Los Angeles-based server from a U.S. company called QuadraNet that it then used to launch 720 hacks on smartphones and other devices. It further claims in the court filing that the company reverse-engineering WhatsApp, using an program that it developed to access WhatsApp's servers and deploy "its spyware against approximately 1,400 targets" before " covertly transmit[ting] malicious code through WhatsApp servers and inject[ing]" spyware into telephones without the knowledge of the owners."

The filing goes on to assert that the "Defendants had no authority to access WhatsApp's servers with an imposter program, manipulate network settings, and commandeer the servers to attack WhatsApp users. That invasion of WhatsApp's servers and users' devices constitutes unlawful computer hacking."

NSO, which is largely staffed by former (sic) Israeli intelligence officers, had previously been in the news for its proprietary spyware known as Pegasus, which "can gather information about a mobile phone's location, access its camera, microphone and internal hard drive, and covertly record emails, phone calls and text messages." Pegasus was reportedly used in the killing of Saudi dissident journalist Adnan Kashoggi in Istanbul last year and it has more recently been suggested as a resource for tracking coronavirus distance violators. Outside experts have accused the company of selling its technology and expertise to countries that have used it to spy on dissidents, journalists and other critics.

Israel routinely exploits the access provided by its telecommunications industry to spy on the host countries where those companies operate. The companies themselves report regularly back to Mossad contacts and the technology they provide routinely has a "backdoor" for secretly accessing the information accessible through the software. In fact, Israel conducts espionage and influence operations both directly and through proxies against the United States more aggressively than any other "friendly" country, which once upon a time included being able to tap into the "secure" White House phones used by Bill Clinton to speak with Monica Lewinsky.

Last September, it was revealed that the placement of technical surveillance devices by Israel in Washington D.C. was clearly intended to target cellphone communications to and from the Trump White House. As the president frequently chats with top aides and friends on non-secure phones, the operation sought to pick up conversations involving Trump with the expectation that the security-averse president would say things off the record that might be considered top secret.

A Politico report detailed how "miniature surveillance devices" referred to as "Stingrays" were used to imitate regular cell phone towers to fool phones being used nearby into providing information on their locations and identities. According to the article, the devices are referred to by technicians as "international mobile subscriber identity-catchers or IMSI-catchers, they also can capture the contents of calls and data use."

Over one year ago, government security agencies discovered the electronic footprints that indicated the presence of the surveillance devices near the White House. Forensic analysis involved dismantling the devices to let them "tell you a little about their history, where the parts and pieces come from, how old are they, who had access to them, and that will help get you to what the origins are." One source observed afterwards that "It was pretty clear that the Israelis were responsible."

So two significant stories currently making the rounds have been bowdlerized and disappeared to make the Israeli role in manipulating and spying against the United States go away. They are only two of many stories framed by a Zionist dominated media to control the narrative in a way favorable to the Jewish state. One would think that having a president of the United States who is the most pro-Israel ever, which is saying a great deal in and of itself, would be enough, but unfortunately when dealing with folks like Benjamin Netanyahu there can never be any restraint when dealing with the "useful idiots" in Washington.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[May 26, 2020] Mike Pompeo is the number one evangelist of Trumpism in the world by Michael H Fuchs

Notable quotes:
"... Pompeo's penchant for undermining America's credibility is top-notch. ..."
May 25, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

When it comes to foreign policy, Pompeo's penchant for undermining America's credibility is top-notch

'Pompeo is a natural Trumpist.' Donald Trump's disdain for the people, country and values his office is supposed to represent is unmatched in recent memory. And he has found in the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo , a kindred spirit who has embraced his role as Trumpism's number one proselytizer to the world.

Pompeo doesn't wield nearly as much power or have the jurisdiction to inflict damage on as wide a range of issues as the president. He's not as crass or erratic as Trump, and his Twitter feed seems dedicated more to childish mockery than outright attacks. But when it comes to foreign policy, Pompeo's penchant for undermining America's credibility is top-notch.

At Pompeo's recommendation, Trump fired the state department's inspector general, who is supposed to be an independent investigator charged with looking into potential wrongdoing inside the department. Steve Linick was just the latest in a series of inspectors general across the government that Trump had fired in an attempt to hide the misconduct of his administration – but it also shone a spotlight on how Pompeo has undermined his agency.

Watchdog was investigating Pompeo for arms deal and staff misuse before firing

According to news reports, Pompeo was being investigated by the inspector general for bypassing Congress and possibly breaking the law in sending weapons to Saudi Arabia, even though his own department and the rest of the US government advised against the decision. He was also supposedly organizing fancy dinners – paid for by taxpayers – with influential businesspeople and TV personalities that seemed geared more towards supporting Pompeo's political career than advancing US foreign policy goals. And he was reportedly being scrutinized for using department personnel to conduct personal business, such as getting dry cleaning and walking his dog.

But these revelations merely reaffirm a pattern of activities by Pompeo unbecoming of the nation's top diplomat. When the House of Representatives was in the process of impeaching Trump over his attempt to extort Ukraine for personal political purposes – an act that Pompeo was aware of – Pompeo defended Trump while throwing under the bus career state department officials, like the ousted US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who spoke out. Pompeo has regularly ignored Congress, withholding documents from lawmakers – including during the Ukraine impeachment investigation – and refusing to appear for testimony. In 2019, the IG released a report detailing political retaliation against career state department officials being perpetrated by Trump officials. And Pompeo has spent considerable time traveling to Kansas and conducting media interviews there, fueling speculation that he has been using his position to tee up a run for the Senate, a violation of the Hatch Act.

Pompeo is a natural Trumpist. In her fantastic profile of the secretary of state, Susan Glasser notes of his first congressional race: "Pompeo ran a nasty race against the Democrat, an Indian-American state legislator named Raj Goyle, who, unlike Pompeo, had grown up in Wichita. Pompeo's campaign tweeted praise for an article calling Goyle a 'turban topper', and a supporter bought billboards urging residents to 'Vote American – Vote Pompeo'."

... ... ...

Facebook Twitter Pinterest 'Trump is undermining American leadership in incalculable ways, and Pompeo has weaponized the state department on the president's behalf.' Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

Next to Trump's assault on US values, Pompeo's role as top Trump lackey may seem insignificant. But the secretary of state is often the most senior US official that other countries and publics hear from on any number of issues. Even with Trump in the Oval Office, a secretary of state that was committed to the constitution - not Trump - would at least be able to fight for the values that US foreign policy should embody, and shield the department's day-to-day business from Trump's outbursts.

The work that department professionals conduct around the world – helping American citizens abroad get home in the early days of the pandemic or coordinating assistance to other countries to cope with the coronavirus – is vital to American national security, and at the core of the image that America projects abroad.

Trump is undermining American leadership in incalculable ways, and Pompeo has weaponized the state department on his behalf

... ... ...

[May 26, 2020] Afghanistan's insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan's ISI

May 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , May 26 2020 17:41 utc | 1

The New York Times has a 4,000 words long piece about the war on Afghanistan. It tries to explain why the Taliban won the war.

How the Taliban Outlasted a Superpower: Tenacity and Carnage

It is also a remarkable attempt to ignore the factual history:

[The Taliban] have outlasted a superpower through nearly 19 years of grinding war. And dozens of interviews with Taliban officials and fighters in three countries, as well as with Afghan and Western officials, illuminated the melding of old and new approaches and generations that helped them do it.

After 2001, the Taliban reorganized as a decentralized network of fighters and low-level commanders empowered to recruit and find resources locally while the senior leadership remained sheltered in neighboring Pakistan.

That is simply wrong. Between the end of 2001 and 2007 there were no Taliban. The movement had dissolved.

The author later acknowledges that there were no Taliban activity throughout those years. But the narrative is again skewed:

Many Taliban commanders interviewed for this article said that in the initial months after the invasion, they could scarcely even dream of a day they might be able to fight off the U.S. military. But that changed once their leadership regrouped in safe havens provided by Pakistan's military -- even as the Pakistanis were receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid.

From that safety, the Taliban planned a longer war of attrition against U.S. and NATO troops. Starting with more serious territorial assaults in 2007, the insurgents revived and refined an old blueprint the United States had funded against the Soviets in the same mountains and terrain -- but now it was deployed against the American military.

Even before the U.S. invaded Afghanistan the Taliban had recognized that they lacked the capability to run a country. They had managed to make Afghanistan somewhat secure. The warlords who had fought each other after the Soviet draw down were suppressed and the streets were again safe. But there was no development, no real education or health system and no money to create them.

When the U.S. invaded the Taliban dispersed. On December 5 2001 Taliban leader Mullah Omar resigned and went into hiding within Afghanistan. For one day the Taliban defense minister Mullah Obaidullah became the new leader. From the The Secret Life of Mullah Omar by Bette Dam:

The next day, Mullah Obaidullah drove up north to Kandahar's Shah Wali Kot district to meet with Karzai and his supporters. In what has become known as the "Shah Wali Kot Agreement", Mullah Obaidullah and the Taliban agreed to lay down their arms and retire to their homes or join the government. The movement effectively disbanded itself. Karzai agreed, and in a media appearance the next day, he announced that while al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were the enemies of Afghanistan, the Taliban were sons of the soil and would effectively receive amnesty. For the moment, the war was over.

The Taliban fighters went back to their home villages and families. Most stayed in Afghanistan. Some of the leaders and elder members went back to the tribal regions of Pakistan where their families had been living as refugees since the Soviet invasion in 1979.

The Taliban did not plan a longer war of attrition - at least not between 2001 and 2006. The movement had simply ended to exist.

The big question is then why it came back but the New York Times has little to say about that:

From the start, the insurgents seized on the corruption and abuses of the Afghan government put in place by the United States, and cast themselves as arbiters of justice and Afghan tradition -- a powerful part of their continued appeal with many rural Afghans in particular. With the United States mostly distracted with the war in Iraq, the insurgency widened its ambitions and territory.

No, the 'corruption and abuses of the Afghan government' were not the reason the Taliban were reestablished. It were the abuses of the U.S. occupation that recreated them. The publicly announced amnesty Karzai and Mullah Obaidullah had agreed upon, was ignored by the U.S. commanders and politicians.

The CIA captured random Afghans as 'Taliban' and brutally tortured them - some to death. U.S. Special Forces randomly raided private homes and bombed whole villages to rubble. The brutal warlords, which the Taliban had suppressed, were put back into power. When they wanted to grab a piece of land they told their U.S. handlers that the owner was a 'Taliban'. The U.S. troops would then removed that person one way or the other. The behavior of the occupiers was an affront to every Afghan.

By 2007 Mullah Omar and his helper Jabbar Omari were hiding in Siuray, a district around twenty miles southeast of Qalat. A large U.S. base was nearby. Bette Dam writes of the people's mood:

As the population turned against the government due to its corruption and American atrocities, they began to offer food and clothing to the house-hold for Jabbar Omari and his mysterious friend.

It was the absurd stupidity and brutality with which the U.S. occupied the country that gave Afghans the motive to again fight against an occupier or at least to support such a fight.

At the same time the Pakistani military had come to fear a permanent U.S. presence in its backyard. It connected the retired Taliban elders with its sponsors in the Gulf region and organized the logistics for a new insurgency. The Taliban movement was reestablished with new leadership but under the old name.

The old tribal command networks where again activates and the ranks were filled with newly disgruntled Afghans. From that point on it was only a question of time until the U.S. would have to leave just like the Soviets and Brits had to do before them.

By December 2001 the war against the Taliban had ended. During the following five years the U.S. fought against an imaginary enemy that no longer existed. It was this war on the wider population that by 2007 created a new insurgency that adopted the old name.

A piece that claims to explain why the Taliban have won the war but ignores the crucial period between 2001 and 2007 misses the most important point that made the Taliban victory possible.

The will of the Afghan people to liberate their country from a foreign occupation. Thanks b for doing a good job in restating the record. IMO, the Outlaw US Empire followed the same MO as it did in Korea, Vietnam, and the Philippines well before them all, all of which were based on the White Supremacist Settler credo underlying the culture of the US military that was just called out--again-- in this very powerful NY Times Editorial , and Iraq was no different either. The contrast between the Editorial Board and its Newsroom writers is quite stark when their products are compared--one lies about recent history while the other attempts to educate more fully about the very sordid past of the most revered federal government institution.

Don Bacon , May 26 2020 18:03 utc | 3

Bombing civilians is recruiting more enemies. Also, in this mistaken adventure the US has been stupidly allied with and funding the neighboring country (Pakistan) which is supporting the people (Taliban) who are killing Americans.

General McChrystal's Report to President Obama, Aug 30, 2009:

'Afghanistan's insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan. . .and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan's ISI [Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence ]. . . .Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan, including significant efforts and financial investment. In addition, the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian. While Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India." . . .Simply put, Pakistan didn't want to be in an Indian sandwich with its mortal enemy on two sides.

President Obama was then in the process of more than tripling the US military strength in Afghanistan, sending 70,000 more troops to that graveyard of empires (UK, Russia). Three months later, December 1, 2009 at West Point, Obama gave a rah-rah speech to cadets including: . . ."Third, we will act with the full recognition that our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan."

LuBa , May 26 2020 19:56 utc | 6
This article wants on purpose link taliban to Pakistan..there is no connection between Talibans and yanks backed Pakistani militias..and there is no pakistani talibans..they want to hide the truth confusing the people but the truth is that the violent and illegal occupation of Afghanistan created a strong resistance in an already strong population.The puppet-method didn't work there and this article is the last (I hope) attempt to give a false narrative of the events.18 years of war for nothing..what the empire has gained from this war?nothing.
arby , May 26 2020 20:03 utc | 7
LuBa--
"what the empire has gained from this war?nothing"

Hmmm, not sure about that. First of all it has kept Russia out of Afghanistan, and somewhere I read that Afghanistan is very central to controlling Eurasia.

I'm pretty sure that attacking Afghanistan was planned before 911 as well, so there must be some reason for that.

Jen , May 26 2020 20:18 utc | 8
The writer of that NYT piece, Mujib Mashal, studied history (presumably the history of Afghanistan and western and southern Asia) at Columbia University - O'Bomber's alma mater, I believe - and in-between working as an NYT intern in Kabul and his current senior correspondent role, worked for a time with Al Jazeera in Doha. One wonders how much effort Mashal and other NYT writers with similar backgrounds put into reordering reality to fit whatever fairy-tale narratives they were taught at Columbia University.

The underlying aim in MM's hit-piece must surely be to set up Pakistan as a target for criticism. Some sort of narrative arc leading to removing Imran Khan as Prime Minister there can't be too far away.

uncle tungsten , May 26 2020 21:02 utc | 10
Michael Hastings was a real journalist. His demolition of McChrystal the goof US war criminal should be read again and again. Vale brave journalist.
vato , May 26 2020 21:44 utc | 13
Soviet invasion? The Soviet-Afghan Friendship Treaty signed in December 1978 permitted - inter alia - military assistance and advice to the Afghani government if requested. Saying the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan is like saying Russia invaded Syria.
Sakineh Bagoom , May 26 2020 21:46 utc | 14
Opium production is now seven-fold since the arrival of the empire. It is afflicting Afghanistan and neighboring countries with addiction all the while paying for CIA operations.
Mission Accomplished.

Let's not forget the MOAB, we are told was detonated over -- caves?

cirsium , May 26 2020 22:01 utc | 15
@LuBa, May 26
what the empire has gained from this war?nothing.

Millions of dollars earned off-the-books from drug trafficking plus enough product to carry out narco-aggression against Iran, Russia, China and the 'stans is nothing?

bevin , May 26 2020 22:03 utc | 16
Superb.
The relationship with Pakistan has two aspects : the borders between the countries, imposed by the British, make no sense, dividing the Pashtun people artificially. The second is that the US has long used Pakistan as a pawn in the region. This goes back to the foundation of the country in 1948 and malign US influence in Pakistan has been the major factor in the country's problems. It is a reminder that there are no known limits to the hypocrisy of the people running the USA that the links between the Taliban, nurtured under US sponsorship in Pakistan which was used as a secure base beyond Kabul's writ, and Pakistan are attributed to Pakistan's initiative.
Another matter which one supposes that the New York Times neglected to mention is that under US sponsorship since 2001 the Heroin industry, reduced almost to nothing by the Taliban government has ballooned into the proportions we have grown to expect where US influence is established. Besides the corpses of those bombed, tortured and shot to death by the imperialist armies there are millions of victims of the drug trades, ranging from those killed by death squads in the producing countries, and those in, for example Colombia and Honduras, victimised by narco governments to the millions of addicts around the world.
Part of the truth of Afghanistan is that the US and its allies have been protecting the criminal narcotics trade in order to employ its profits for their own evil purposes.
Gerhard , May 26 2020 22:12 utc | 17
Hello!

Please allow to add to b 's very good overview another subject: drug planting, producing and dealing in Afghanistan. The Taliban first were against drugs (religious reasons), but when they saw that the people were exhausted by the Americans and their corrupt Afghan friends, and had no more income, they allowed the farmers to plant opium poppy for the EXPORT. Soon they also realized the profits for themselves (to change into weapons). And so it happened that Afghanistan became a major producer for the world market. It's an open question (at least for me) how much international networks with connections to US-people and US-institutions (like CIA) are involved in this drug dealing business originating in Afghanistan.

arby | 7 wrote:

I'm pretty sure that attacking Afghanistan was planned before 911 as well, so there must be some reason for that.

Interesting question (more see below)! A few days ago I made some research to a parallel problem: was "homeland security" also in the development before 9/11? Parallel to the war against Afghanistan another war was started: against the American people. Under the roof of 'Homeland Security' in the interior; parallel zu 'National Security' as a topic in foreign politics. Bush jun. appointed Tom Ridge within 28 days, did they have some plans before? I found some remarks in Edward LIPTON's book, Homeland Security Office (2002), indicating plannings as early as Dec. 2000 and Jan. 2001. Please also remember that there were anthrax mailings parallel to 9/11. Please remember that Homeland Security Act has some paragraphs about defense against bioweapon attacks and has some paragraphs about vaccine, too. Please remember that early plannings of homeland security had also controlling american people with the help of lockdowns. That trail was followed during the next years in 'hidden' further plannings as You may find them here:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article209776.html

https://www.voltairenet.org/article209808.html

And that all now will be further developed into future as outlined here:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article210000.html

Next interesting question: when did THEY begin to focus on the twin towers? WTC area was public property and administration. Very profitable. Then SIVLERSTEIN bought the WTC7 ground and started to built and rented it, among others, to CIA. And then THEY were looking just out of the window to see the twin towers. And then these very pofitable buildings were privatized - why? And they were insured. That privatization was a very dramatic poker which was won by SILVERSTEIN, too. Why? Some 'renovation' had to be done of course when SILVERSTEIN took over the property. I remember that companies included were overseen by one of the Bush sons (Jebb?), and so on ...

Back to the questions about planning of War against Afghanistan. There should be documents available (foreign policy planning & military planning) because the background primarily was (according to my estimation) geopolitical. But there is a greater framework within which the war against terrorism has to be seen. On the day after 9/11 a document was published for the first time which had been collected under Bush Sen. in the 1980s: 'Report of the Vice President's Task Force on Combatting Terrorism'. It says that terrorism follows overpopulation in undeveloped countries. So we are here within the idea of depopulation, and realizing that we can look on the Bill & Melinda Gates' Charitable Works as a far more human version. For further reading three LINKs are given below.

Concluding, I would like to say: unterstanding and commenting the past doesn't help much. THEY are acting and THEY are planning, day by day. Things only will change if 'we' are planning and acting, too. And if 'we' want a better world our instruments must be better than THEIRs.

Kind regards, Gerhard (Germany)


Regarding DEPOPULATION:

https://www.population-security.org (look also into INTRO)

https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture/books/book-review-empty-planet-explores-the-world-s-next-biggest-population-threat-1.848236 (opposite perspective but the same thinking; pure academic stuff)
~~~~~~~
The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies (hrsg. von Donald Bloxham, A. Dirk Moses)

karlof1 , May 26 2020 22:26 utc | 18
Et Tu @12--

The New York Times occasionally publishes something worthy of reading. One such item I linked to @ 1 above.

DeQuincey , May 27 2020 0:57 utc | 21
vato 13 wrote
Soviet invasion? The Soviet-Afghan Friendship Treaty signed in December 1978 permitted - inter alia - military assistance and advice to the Afghani government if requested. Saying the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan is like saying Russia invaded Syria.

Treaty of friendship, good-neighbourliness and co operation. Signed at Moscow on 5 December 1978

b fix the error in your report please.

Richard Steven Hack , May 27 2020 1:34 utc | 22
Posted by: arby | May 26 2020 20:03 utc | 7 I'm pretty sure that attacking Afghanistan was planned before 911 as well, so there must be some reason for that.

It's called 1) oil pipeline, and 2) heroin for the CIA to finance their "black black" operations. That's not a typo: there are "black budget" operations not identified in the Federal budget - and "black black" operations that are financed outside the Federal budget. No one knows how much that is.

The "official" Black Budget operations are described in a Harvard University document as:


On March 18, 2019 the Office the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), announced its request for the largest sum ever, $62.8 billion, for funding U.S. intelligence operations in Fiscal Year (FY) 2020.1This request spans the classified funding from more than a dozen agencies that make up the National Intelligence Program (NIP).2 The U.S. Government spends these funds on data collection, counterintelligence, and covert action.3 The DNI also requested $21.2 billion for FY 2019 for the Military Intelligence Program (MIP) devoted to intelligence activity in support of U.S. military operations.4 For FY2020, it is likely to request a similar figure, for a total estimated request of approximately $85 billion for the "Black Budget," t he U.S. Government's secret military and intelligence expenditures.

Interesting article here that shows how some of this has been done in Asia, Saudi Arabia, Central America, etc.

CIA Funding: Never Constrained by its Congressional Budget
https://whowhatwhy.org/2014/12/12/cia-funding-never-constrained-congressional-budget/

And from The Intercept - another clear example:

The U.S. Quietly Released Afghanistan's "Biggest Drug Kingpin" From Prison. Did He Cut a Deal?
https://theintercept.com/2018/05/01/haji-juma-khan-afghanistan-drug-trafficking-cia-dea/


Before his arrest, the alleged drug trafficker worked with the CIA and the DEA, received payments from the government, and, at one point, visited Washington and New York on the DEA's dime. ,/BLOCKQUOTE

From the Federation of American Scientists:

A Tangled Web: A History of CIA Complicity in Drug International Trafficking
https://fas.org/irp/congress/1998_cr/980507-l.htm

[May 26, 2020] Zionists Have Feelings Too by Philip Giraldi

May 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

The new Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has apparently learned how to behave from the Corbyn experience. He has been crawling on his belly to Jewish interests ever since he took over and has even submitted to the counseling provided by the government's "Independent Adviser on Antisemitism," a special interests office not too dissimilar to the abomination at the U.S. State Department where Elan Carr is the Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating anti-Semitism.

The adviser, Lord Mann, who like Carr is of course Jewish, has now insisted to Starmer that the use of words like ''Zionist'' or ''Zionism'' in a critical context must be regarded as anti-Semitism if Starmer wants to establish what he refers to as "comprehensive anti-racism" within the Labour Party. Mann wants to confront what he refers to as "anti-Jewish racism" in Britain, saying that "the thing Keir Starmer has to do is stick with the clear definition of antisemitism, and not waver from that. The second thing he should do if he wants to really imbed comprehensive anti-racism including antisemitism across the Labour Party – then the use of the words Zionist or Zionism as a term of hatred, abuse, of contempt, as a negative term – that should outlawed in the party."

Perhaps not surprisingly Lord Mann's comments came during an online discussion with the Antisemitism Policy Trust's director Danny Stone, one of the major components of Israel's powerful U.K. Jewish/Zionist Lobby. A majority of British Members of Parliament of both parties are registered supporters of "Friends of Israel" associations, another indication of how Jewish power is manifest in Britain and of how spineless the country's politicians have become.

Mann added: "If he does that, it gives him [Starmer] the tools to clear out those who choose to be antisemitic, rather than those who do so purely through their ignorance as opposed to their calculated behavior. I think he is seeing tackling antisemitism as one of those things that will be shown to mark that he is a leader."

So, in Britain you are still presumably free to criticize Zionism, but not Israelis, as long as you do not use the word itself. If you do use it in a critical way you will be one of those presumably who will be "cleared out [of the Labour Party] for choosing to be antisemitic." Do not be alarmed if similar nonsense takes hold in the United States, where already criticism of Israel, such as it is, eschews the word Jewish in any context. Fearful of retribution that can include loss of employment as happened to Rick Sanchez at CNN, the few who are bold enough to criticize Israel regularly employ generic euphemisms like the "Israel Lobby" or "Zionism," ignoring the fact that what drives the process is ethno- or religious based. However one chooses to obfuscate it, the power of Israel in the United States is undeniably based on Jewish money, media control and easy access to politicians. When the friends of Israel in America follow the British lead and figure out that the word Zionist has become pejorative they too will no doubt move to make it unacceptable in polite discourse in the media and elsewhere. Then many critics of the Jewish state will have no vocabulary left to use, nowhere to go, as in Britain, and that is surely the intention.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[May 25, 2020] The extent of the incompetence involved in the USA accessment of the USSR just befor the collapse

May 25, 2020 | irrussianality.wordpress.com
  1. davidhabakkuk says: May 25, 2020 at 12:22 pm The kind of view of the end of the Cold War which underpins Billingslea's notion that the United States can spend Russia and China into 'oblivion' is that championed by people who totally failed to anticipate what happened in the Soviet Union in the 'Eighties, and have not seen this fact as reason for rethinking the assumptions that caused them to get things so radically wrong.

    The extent of the incompetence involved is vividly apparent in the collection of documents from the American and Soviet sides published by the 'National Security Archive' in January 2017, under the title 'The Last Superpower Summits.'

    (See https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-01-23/last-superpower-summits

    Particularly revealing, to my mind, is Document 12, the transcript of the closed-door testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee by the top three CIA analysts of the Soviet Union, Doug MacEachin, Robert Blackwell, and Paul Ericson, at the precise moment, in December 1988, when Gorbachev announced his 500,000 troop cut at the U.N.

    The editors comment:

    'And MacEachin offers a true confession in an extraordinary passage that demonstrates how prior assumptions about Soviet behavior, rather than actual intelligence data points, actually drove intelligence findings: "Now, we spend megadollars studying political instability in various places around the world, but we never really looked at the Soviet Union as a political entity in which there were factors building which could lead to the kind of – at least the initiation of political transformation that we seem to see. It does not exist to my knowledge. Moreover, had it existed inside the government, we never would have been able to publish it anyway, quite frankly. And had we done so, people would have been calling for my head. And I wouldn't have published it. In all honesty, had we said a week ago that Gorbachev might come to the UN and offer a unilateral cut of 500,000 in the military, we would have been told we were crazy. We had a difficult enough time getting air space for the prospect of some unilateral cuts of 50 to 60,000."

    Actually, it was quite possible to do much better, without spending 'megadollars', if one simply went to the Chatham House Library and/or the London Library and looked at what competent analysts, like those working for the Foreign Policy Studies Program then run by the late, great John Steinbruner at Brookings – a very different place then from now.

    Among those he employed were two of the best former intelligence analysts of Soviet military strategy: Ambassador Raymond Garthoff and Commander Michael MccGwire, R.N., to give them their titles when in government service.

    These has devoted a great deal of effort to explaining that Professor Richard Pipes of Harvard, a key influence in creating the 'groupthink' MacEachin described, had missed a crucial transition away from nuclear war planning to conventional 'deep operations' in the late 'Sixties and 'Seventies.

    Inturn, this led Garthoff and MccGwire to grasp that the Gorbachev-era 'new thinkers' had decided that the conventional 'deep operations' posture in turn needed to be abandoned. For a summary of the latter's arguments, see article entitled 'Rethinking War: The Soviets and European Security', published in the Spring 1988 edition of the 'Brookings Review', available on the 'Unz Review' site.

    (See https://www.unz.com/print/BrookingsRev-1988q2-00003/ .)

    Also associated with Brookings at the time was the Duke University Sovietologist Jerry Hough, who had read his way through the writings of academics in the institutes associated with the Academy of Sciences on development economics, and talked extensively to many of their authors.

    In the 'Conclusion' to his 1986 study, 'The Struggle for the Third World: Soviet Debates and American Options', Hough wrote:

    'Or what is one to say about the argument – now very widely accepted – among Soviet economists – that countries with "capitalist-oriented" economies in the third world have a natural tendency to grow more rapidly than countries with a "socialist orientation" because well-rounded development seems to be dependent on foreign investment and integration into the world market? A quarter of a century ago, let alone in the Stalin period, it was just as widely accepted that integration into the capitalist world economy doomed a third world country to slow, deformed growth and that foreign investment exploited a local economy.'

    One thing one could say is that this recognition that fundamental premises of the Marxist-Leninist view of the world had turned out wrong was simple an acknowledgement of the ways that the world had changed. And that view of the world had defined the political framework in which Soviet contingency planning for war had developed.

    Central to this had been the premise of a 'natural' teleology of history towards socialism, with the risk of war in the international system arising from the attempts of the 'imperialist' powers to resist this.

    So there were profound pressures, which really were not simply created by the Reagan military build-up and SDI, for radical changes in the Soviet security posture. Questions were obviously raised, however, as to whether these – together with radical domestic reform – would defuse Western hostility.

    Fascinating here is Document 11, a memo to Gorbachev from a key advisor, Georgy Arbatov, the director of the 'Institute for U.S.A. and Canada' from the previous June. This sets the plan for the 500,000 troop reduction in the context both of the wider conception of liquidating the capability for large-scale offensive operations described MccGwire, and also of the perceived importance of breaking the 'image of the enemy' in the West.

    While both Gorbachev, and Arbatov, were widely perceived in the West as engaged in a particularly dangerous 'active measures' campaign, it is striking how closely the thinking set out in the memo echoes that the latter had articulated the previous December in a letter to the 'New York Times', in response to a column by William Safire.

    (See https://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/08/opinion/l-it-takes-two-to-make-a-cold-war-963287.html .)

    Headlined 'It Takes Two to Make a Cold War', it expresses key assumptions underlying the 'new thinking.' Two crucial paragraphs:

    'If the Soviet Union should accept the proposed rules of the game and devotedly continue the cold war, then, of course, sooner or later, the whole thing would end in a calamity. But at least Mr. Safire's plan would work. The only problem I see here is that the Soviet Union will not pick up the challenge and accept the proposed rules of the game. And then Americans would find themselves in exactly the same position Mr. Safire and his ilk, as he himself writes, are finding themselves in now: history would pass them by, and years from now they would be "regarded as foot-draggers and sourpusses," because almost no one in the world is willing to play the games of the American right. Least of all, the Soviet Union.

    'And here we have a "secret weapon" that will work almost regardless of the American response e would deprive America of The Enemy. And how would you justify without it the military expenditures that bleed the American economy white, a policy that draws America into dangerous adventures overseas and drives wedges between the United States and its allies, not to mention the loss of American influence on neutral countries? Wouldn't such a policy in the absence of The Enemy put America in the position of an outcast in the international community?'

    There was however another question which was raised by the patent bankrupcy of Marxism-Leninism, which bore very directly upon what Arbatov, in his memorandum to Gorbachev.

    If one accepted that Soviet-style economics had led to a dead end, and that integration into the U.S. dominated global economic order was the road to successful development, questions obviously arose about not simply about how far, and how rapidly, one should attempt to dismantle not simply the command economy.

    But they also arose about whether it was prudent to dismantle the authoritarian political system with which it was associated, at the same time.

    In a lecture given in 2010, entitled 'The Cold War: A View from Russia', the historian Vladimir O. Pechatnov, himself a product of Arbatov's institute, would provide a vivid picture of the disillusion felt by 'liberalising' intellectuals within the Soviet apparatus, like himself.

    (See http://jhss-khazar.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/01.pdf .)

    However, he also made the – rather interesting – suggestion that, had logic of central arguments by George F. Kennan, the figure generally, if in my own view somewhat misleadingly, regarded as the principal architect of post-war American strategy, actually pointed rather decisively away from the assumption that a rapid dismantling of the authoritarian system was wise.

    And Pechatnov pointed to the very ambivalent implications of the view of the latent instability of Soviet society expressed in Kennan's famous July 1947 'X-article':

    'So, if Communist Party is incapacitated, the Soviet Russia, I quote, "would almost overnight turn from one of the mightiest into one of the weakest and miserable nations of the world "). Had Gorbachev read Kennan and realized this causal connection (as Deng and his colleagues most definitely had), he might have thought twice before abruptly terminating the Communist monopoly on power.'

    What is involved here is a rather fundamental fact – that in their more optimistic assumptions, people like Arbatov and Gorbachev turned out to be simply wrong.

    Crucially, rather than marginalising people like Pipes, and Safire, and Billingslea, an effect of the retreat and collapse of Soviet power was to convince a very substantial part of what had been the 'Peace Movement' coalition that their erstwhile opponents had been vindicated.

    However, the enthusiasm of people like Billingslea for a retry of the supposed successful 'Reagan recipe' brings another irony.

    As to SDI, it was well-known at the time that it could easily be countered, at relatively low cost, with 'asymetric' measures.

    This is well brought out in Garthoff's discussion in his 2001 Memoir 'A Journey through the Cold War: A Memoir of Containment and Coexistence' (see p. 356.) For a more recent discussion, in the light of declassified materials, which reaches the same conclusion, see a piece in the 'Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists' by Pavel Podvig from April 2013, entitled 'Shooting down the Star Wars myth' at

    https://thebulletin.org/2013/04/shooting-down-the-star-wars-myth-2/

    And if one bothers to follow the way that arguments have been developing outside the 'bubble' in which most inhabitants of Washington D.C., and London exist, it is evident that people in Moscow, and Beijing, have thought about the lessons of this history. Those who think that they are going to be suckered into an arms race that the United States can win are quite patently delusional.

[May 24, 2020] Just take a look at the progressive schooling of 'diplomats' who end up in American ambassadorial and consular posts. Where do they come from? The Heritage Institute, Legatum, the American Enterprise Institute, and various other America-Triumphant think tanks

May 24, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman May 24, 2020 at 9:17 am

Just take a look at the progressive schooling of 'diplomats' who end up in American ambassadorial and consular posts. Where do they come from? The Heritage Institute, Legatum, the American Enterprise Institute, and various other America-Triumphant think tanks. Look at Michael McFaul, and his absurd just-a-ole-homeboy-who-loves-Russia video he put out before taking up his official duties in Moscow. And he barely had the dust of New York off his shoes before he was huddling with the Russian opposition. I don't know why Russia even affects to be surprised by their attitudes.

[May 24, 2020] FBI Document Reveals That Without Direct Israeli 'Intervention' Trump Would Have Lost 2016 Election

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The explicit reference to Jerusalem appears later in the same document , in the context of communication between Stone and his unnamed contact in the Israeli capital. "On or about August 12, 2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "Roger, hello from Jerusalem. Any progress? He is going to be defeated unless we intervene. We have critical intell. The key is in your hands! Back in the US next week. How is your Pneumonia? Thank you. STONE replied, "I am well. Matters complicated. Pondering. R" The "he" is an apparent reference to Trump. ..."
"... Referring to the Israeli mentions in a report on the documents late Tuesday, the US website Politico noted: "The newly revealed messages often raise more questions than answers. They show Stone in touch with seemingly high-ranking Israeli officials attempting to arrange meetings with Trump during the heat of the 2016 campaign." ..."
"... Of course, this story is seen as a positive development from the Israeli (and evangelical) perspective because a Trump presidency was an essential part fulfilling an aggressive Zionist "wish list" which included moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, annexing the Golan Heights and the West Bank, and perhaps a major move against Iran in the second term. ..."
"... This story also explains why the jewish-controlled press saturated the airwaves with fake stories of "Russian" intervention in the election -- and why we will be seeing similar non-stop stories of "Chinese" intervention in the upcoming 2020 election in November. ..."
"... And Netanyahu hasn't wasted a second of Trump's presidency in expanding Israel's power, territory and influence. As one Jewish media pundit claimed , Donald Trump has been " the greatest president for Jews and for Israel in the history of the world." Trump has even bragged that he is so popular among Israelis that they would elect him Prime Minister if he ran. ..."
May 24, 2020 | christiansfortruth.com

According to recently released FBI documents, Donald Trump's longtime confidant, Roger Stone, who was convicted last year in Robert Mueller's investigation into ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, was in contact with one or more apparently well-connected Israelis at the height of the 2016 US presidential campaign, one of whom warned Stone that Trump was "going to be defeated" unless Israel intervened in the election :

The exchange between Stone and this Jerusalem-based contact appears in FBI documents made public on Tuesday. The documents -- FBI affidavits submitted to obtain search warrants in the criminal investigation into Stone -- were released following a court case brought by The Associated Press and other media organizations.

A longtime adviser to Trump, Stone officially worked on the 2016 presidential campaign until August 2015, when he said he left and Trump said he was fired. However he continued to communicate with the campaign, according to Mueller's investigation.

The FBI material, which is heavily redacted, includes one explicit reference to Israel and one to Jerusalem, and a series of references to a minister, a cabinet minister, a "minister without portfolio in the cabinet dealing with issues concerning defense and foreign affairs," the PM, and the Prime Minister . In all these references the names and countries of the minister and prime minister are redacted.

Benjamin Netanyahu was Israel's prime minister in 2016 , and the Israeli government included a minister without portfolio, Tzachi Hanegbi, appointed in May with responsibility for defense and foreign affairs. One reference to the unnamed PM in the material reads as follows:

"On or about June 28, 2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "RETURNING TO DC AFTER URGENT CONSULTATIONS WITH PM IN ROME. MUST MEET WITH YOU WED. EVE AND WITH DJ TRUMP THURSDAY IN NYC."

Netanyahu made a state visit to Italy at the end of June 2016 .

The explicit reference to Israel appears early in the text of a May 2018 affidavit by an FBI agent in support of an application for a search warrant, and relates to communication between Stone and Jerome Corsi, an American author, commentator and conspiracy theorist. " On August 20, 2016, CORSI told STONE that they needed to meet with [NAME REDACTED] to determine "what if anything Israel plans to do in Oct," the affidavit states .

The explicit reference to Jerusalem appears later in the same document , in the context of communication between Stone and his unnamed contact in the Israeli capital. "On or about August 12, 2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "Roger, hello from Jerusalem. Any progress? He is going to be defeated unless we intervene. We have critical intell. The key is in your hands! Back in the US next week. How is your Pneumonia? Thank you. STONE replied, "I am well. Matters complicated. Pondering. R" The "he" is an apparent reference to Trump.

The redacted material features numerous references to an "October surprise," apparently relating to a document dump by Wikileaks' Julian Assange, intended to harm Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and salvage Trump's .

Referring to the Israeli mentions in a report on the documents late Tuesday, the US website Politico noted: "The newly revealed messages often raise more questions than answers. They show Stone in touch with seemingly high-ranking Israeli officials attempting to arrange meetings with Trump during the heat of the 2016 campaign."

Mueller's investigation identified significant contact during the 2016 campaign between Trump associates and Russians, but did not allege a criminal conspiracy to tip the outcome of the presidential election.

This story first appeared last month, at the height of the COVID-19 plandemic, which conveniently and not coincidentally allowed all the mainstream media in America to ignore it.

Of course, this story is seen as a positive development from the Israeli (and evangelical) perspective because a Trump presidency was an essential part fulfilling an aggressive Zionist "wish list" which included moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, annexing the Golan Heights and the West Bank, and perhaps a major move against Iran in the second term.

This story also explains why the jewish-controlled press saturated the airwaves with fake stories of "Russian" intervention in the election -- and why we will be seeing similar non-stop stories of "Chinese" intervention in the upcoming 2020 election in November.

We can only guess what further information about Israel's involvement in the election was redacted from this FBI document, but there can be little doubt that the orders to help Trump win came from the very top -- from Netanyahu himself.

And Netanyahu hasn't wasted a second of Trump's presidency in expanding Israel's power, territory and influence. As one Jewish media pundit claimed , Donald Trump has been " the greatest president for Jews and for Israel in the history of the world." Trump has even bragged that he is so popular among Israelis that they would elect him Prime Minister if he ran.

And even if the brain-dead American public found out about this Israeli intervention (i.e., "subversion of our democracy"), they would probably just shrug it off -- after all, Israel is our "most trusted friend and ally," goyim .

[May 24, 2020] Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training

Highly recommended!
I wouldn't hold my breath for the slightest change in that status quo any time soon.
May 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 12:34 pm GMT

Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training

Seems rather typical of those making policy, not knowing much about the area they're assigned to. If a person did know Arabic and had an understanding of the culture they wouldn't get hired as they'd be viewed with suspicion, suspected of being sympathetic to Middle Easterners. How and why these neocons can come back into government is puzzling and one wonders who within the establishment is backing them. Judging by the quotes her father certainly seems deranged and not someone to be allowed anywhere near any policy making positions.
Flynn also seems to be a dolt what with his 'worldwide war against radical Islam'. Someone should clue him in that much of this radical Islam has been created and stoked by the US who hyped up radical Islam, recruiting and arming them to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. Bin Laden was there, remember? Flynn, a general, is unaware of this? Islamic jihadists are America's Foreign Legion and have been used all over the Muslim world, most recently in Syria. Does this portend war with Iran? Possibly, but perhaps Trump wouldn't want to go it alone but would want the financial support of other countries. They've probably war-gamed it to death and found it to be a loser.

[May 24, 2020] Wouldn't it be more useful to allocate $ 250,000 to save someone's lives instead of "Exposing Russian Health Disinformation"

$250K can buy a lot of masks, probably over million ;-)
May 24, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

moscowexile May 24, 2020 at 4:10 am

Have they nothing better to do than peddle their Russophobia?

Wouldn't it be more useful to allocate $ 250,000 to save someone's lives, @StateDept ? Instead of "Exposing Russian Health Disinformation"
➡️ https://t.co/Hv3CydUgBX

📸 Medical aid 🇷🇺✈️🇺🇸 in NYC and Moscow pic.twitter.com/BVFxDVJJAH

-- Russia in USA 🇷🇺 (@RusEmbUSA) May 23, 2020

[May 24, 2020] About Pompeo threat to cut Australia from the fives eyes intelligence flows

From MoA comment 57: "Warmongering shit bags endlessly flatulent about their moral superiority while threatening to nuke nations on the other side of the globe daily. ... the greatness of the US consists of how gullible its hyper-exploited populace has been to a long series of Donald Trumps who use the resources of the land and people for competitive violence against other nations. the world heaves a collective hallelujah that this bullshit is about to end. "
Notable quotes:
"... Lets reverse that point, shall we. There is a US spy base in Australia at a place called Pine Gap. Without it being operational the USA would lose its 3 dimensional vision across the planet. ..."
"... This Bannon/Trump bluster is weak as p!ss as 'sharing intelligence' is the cornerstone of the five eyes perversion that gives the USA some superiority in intelligence matters. So if sharing intelligence were withdrawn by the USA with Australia it would have meaningless consequences. ..."
"... Pompeo is blathering bullsh!t and he knows it and we all know it ..."
May 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , May 25 2020 0:44 utc | 56

vk #4
Pompeo Warns US May Stop Sharing Intelligence With Australia Over Victoria Inking Deal With China's BRI

The battle for Australia's soul has begun.

Lets reverse that point, shall we. There is a US spy base in Australia at a place called Pine Gap. Without it being operational the USA would lose its 3 dimensional vision across the planet.

This Bannon/Trump bluster is weak as p!ss as 'sharing intelligence' is the cornerstone of the five eyes perversion that gives the USA some superiority in intelligence matters. So if sharing intelligence were withdrawn by the USA with Australia it would have meaningless consequences.

On the other hand if Australia ceased its intelligence sharing and shut down all the data traffic out of Australia - the USA would go ballistic. Not that the Oz government would ever do such a thing being a craven water carrier for the new world order etc...

Pompeo is blathering bullsh!t and he knows it and we all know it. Odd that you would reiterate his brainless threat vk.

[May 24, 2020] FBI Document Reveals That Without Direct Israeli 'Intervention' Trump Would Have Lost 2016 Election

May 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mao , May 24 2020 20:56 utc | 30

FBI Document Reveals That Without Direct Israeli 'Intervention' Trump Would Have Lost 2016 Election

https://christiansfortruth.com/fbi-document-reveals-that-without-direct-israeli-intervention-trump-would-not-have-won-2016-election/

[May 24, 2020] Trial by Blockhead by Mark Chapman

Notable quotes:
"... Enter the Buk system, with the 9K37 SA-11 missile. It's got the range, it's got the altitude, the Russians have it in active service. Oooo problem. It's got the range, but only if it was fired from inside Ukraine. ..."
"... Anyway, back to the Buk system. And not a moment before time, either – I just re-read that sanctimonious stab above, again; " having armed the militants without due thought as to the consequences " What, exactly, is the ridiculous nature of the accusation being presented here? That the Russians gave an anti-aircraft system to the 'militants' without considering they might use it to shoot down an aircraft? How did they not see that coming? The Ukrainian Army shot down a civilian airliner in October of 2001 , and lied about it for as long as it could – interestingly, it took place during joint Ukrainian-Russian air defense exercises on the Crimean peninsula, and Russia tried hard to avoid assigning blame to Ukraine, while at least one Israeli television station claimed the Russians had shot down their own aircraft. This disaster and subsequent lying did not prevent the USA from giving the Javelin missile to Ukraine – did it not occur to them that they might use it to shoot tanks? No due thought to the consequences, obviously. ..."
"... The Buk air-defense system normally consists of at least 4 TELAR launchers , each with 4 missiles on the launch rails, a self-propelled acquisition radar designated by NATO nomenclature as Snow Drift (the radar on the nose of the TELAR unit itself is designated Fire Dome), and a self-propelled command post, for a minimum of 6 vehicles. Also usually part of the system is a mobile crane, to reload the launchers. If you were going to supply an air-defense system to militant rebels, why wouldn't you give them the whole system? In a pinch, you might be able to get away without the command post vehicle, although it is the station that collates all the input from the sensors and makes the decision to assign targets for acquisition, tracking and engagement. If you didn't give them the crane vehicle, and perhaps a logistics truck with some reloads, they would be limited to the missiles that came already mounted – once those were fired, they'd have to abandon the system, because they couldn't reload it. Seems a little wasteful, don't you think? ..."
"... I'm going a little further with my inexpert opinion, to say that the Buk system was selected as the 'murder weapon', because it provides a limited autonomous capability. To be clear, the Fire Dome radar on the nose of the TELAR does have a limited search capability, and once the radar is locked on to a target, the TELAR vehicle is completely autonomous. The purpose of the surveillance radar is to detect the target from far beyond the Fire Dome's range, assign it to a TELAR and thereby direct it to the elevation and bearing of the target so that the TELAR's radar knows exactly where to look, and continue to update its position until the TELAR to which it was assigned has locked on to the target. ..."
"... The Fire Dome radar mounted on the TELAR can search a 120-degree sector in 4 seconds, at an elevation of 6 to 7 degrees. Its search function is maximized for defense against ground attack aircraft, and a single launcher is not looking at 240 degrees of potential air threat axis during each sweep. It is not looking high enough to see an airliner at 30,000 ft+. More importantly for a system which was not designed to shoot down helpless airliners, it leaves two-thirds of a circle unobserved all the time it is searching for a target. And the Russians provided this to the 'militants' for air defense? They should be shot. ..."
"... There is no telling what kind of ordnance might be found in the wreckage itself, as the Ukrainian Army continued to shell the site for days after the crash; doubtless various artillery shells could be found at the crash site, as well, but it would be quite a leap of faith to suggest a Boeing 777 was shot down by artillery. What you would not find is pieces of the SAM that shot it down. ..."
"... Nor is that by any means all. The Dutch investigation which concluded with the preliminary report implied that nothing of any investigative value was found on the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) or the Flight Data Recorder (FDR). Nothing to indicate what might have happened to the aircraft – just that it was flying along, and suddenly it wasn't. How likely is that? No transcript was provided, and I guess that would be expected if there was no information at all. Funny how often that happens with Malaysian airliners; they really need to look at their quality control. Oh; except they don't build the aircraft. Boeing does. I could see there not being any information after the plane began to break up, because both the CVR and the FDR are in the tail , and that broke off before the fuselage hit. But the microphones are in the ceiling of the cockpit and in the microphone and earpiece of the pilots' headsets, which they wear at all times while in flight. The last audio claimed to have been recorded was a course alteration sent by Ukrainian ATC. ..."
"... According to the Malaysian government, there was an early plan by NATO for a military operation involving some 9000 troops to 'secure the crash site', which was forestalled by a covert Malaysian operation which recovered the 'black boxes' and blocked the plan. I have to say that given the many, many other unorthodox and bizarre happenings in the conduct of what was supposed to be a transparent and impartial international investigation, it's getting so nothing much is unbelievable. The Malaysian Prime Minister went on record as believing that the western powers had already concluded that Russia was responsible, and were mostly just going through the motions of investigating. ..."
"... The telephone recordings presented by the SBU as demonstrating Russian culpability were analyzed by OG IT Forensic Services, a Malaysian firm specializing in forensic analysis of audio, video and digital materials for court proceedings, which concluded the recordings were cut, edited and fabricated . Yet they are relied upon as important evidence of guilt by the Dutch and the JIT. ..."
May 24, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

>Uncle Volodya says, "We become slaves the moment we hand the keys to the definition of reality entirely over to someone else, whether it is a business, an economic theory, a political party, the White House, Newsworld or CNN."

"The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan."

– Adolf Hitler

We're going to do something just a bit different today; the event I want to talk about is current – in the future, actually – but the reference which is the subject of the discussion is almost a year old. and the event it discusses is coming up to its sixth anniversary. The past event was the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17 over Ukraine, the future event is the trial in absentia of persons accused by the west of having perpetrated that disaster, and the reference is this piece, by Mark Galeotti, for the Moscow Times: "Russia's Roadmap Out of the MH17 Crisis" .

You all know Mr. Galeotti, I'm sure. Here's his bio, for Amazon:

"Professor Mark Galeotti is a senior researcher at UMV, the Institute of International Relations Prague, and coordinator of its Centre for European Security. Formerly, he was Professor of Global Affairs at New York University and head of History at Keele University. Educated at Cambridge University and the LSE, he is a specialist in modern Russian politics and security and transnational organized crime. And he writes other things for fun, too "

Yes, yes, he certainly does, as you will see. But this bio is extremely modest, albeit he most likely wrote it himself. Mr. Galeotti also authored an excellent blog, In Moscow's Shadows , which was once a go-to reference for crime and legal issues in Russia, a subject in which he seems very well-informed. The blog is still active, although he seems mostly to use it now to advertise podcasts and sell books. That's understandable – it's evident from the blur of titles appended to his name that he's a very busy man. Always has been, really; either as a student or an educator. He also speaks with confidence on the details of military affairs and equipment despite never having been in the military or studied engineering; his education has pretty much all been in history, law or political science.

I know what you will say – many of the greatest reference works on pivotal battles, overall military campaigns and affairs were written by those who had no personal military experience themselves. Mr. Galeotti studied under Dominic Lieven, whose "Russia Against Napoleon" was perhaps the greatest work of military history, rich with detail and insight, that I have ever read. It won him the Wolfson prize for History for 2010, a well-deserved honour. Yet so far as I could make out, Mr. Lieven never served a day in uniform, and if you handed him an AK-47 and said "Here; field-strip this", your likely response would be a blank look. He most certainly was not a witness to the subject military campaign. No; his epic work on Napoleon's invasion of Russia was informed by research, reading the accounts of others who were there at the time, poring over reams of old documents and matching references to get the best picture we have been afforded to date of Napoleon's ignominious defeat through a combination of imperial overreach, a poor grasp of logistics and, most of all, resistance by an adversary who refused to be drawn into playing to Napoleon's strength – the decisive, crushing battle in which the enemy could not retreat, and in which Napoleon would commit all the reserves and crush his enemy to dust.

So it is perfectly possible for an inquisitive mind with no military experience to put together an excellent reference on military happenings which already took place, even if the owner of that mind was not present for the actual event. Given human nature and the capabilities afforded by modern military equipment, it is even possible to forecast future military events with a fair degree of accuracy, going merely by political ambitions and enabling factors, without any personal military experience. After all, the decision-makers who give the orders that send their military forces into battle are often not military men themselves.

Returning for a moment to Mr. Galeotti, it is quite believable that an author with no military background could compose such works as "Armies of the Russian-Ukrainian War" , although there is no serious evidence that Russia is a part of such a conflict in any real military strength. You could write such a book entirely from media references and documentation, which in this case would come almost entirely from the side which claims it is under constant attack by the other – Ukraine. Likewise "Kulikovo 1380; the Battle that Made Russia" . None of us were around in 1380, so we all have to go by historical references, and whoever collects them all into a book first is likely to be regarded as an expert.

No, it's more when we get into how stuff works that I have an issue with it. Like " Spetsnaz: Russia's Special Forces ". Or " The Modern Russian Army ". I'm kind of skeptical about how someone could claim to know the actual internal workings of either organization simply from reading about them in popular references, considering that more than half the material on Russia written in English in western references is rubbish heavily influenced by politics and policy. We would not have to look very far to find examples in which ridiculous overconfidence by one side that it had the other side's number resulted in a horrible surprise. In fact, we would not have to look very far to find an example of this particular author confidently averring to know something inside-out, only to find that version of reality could not be sustained . And I would no more turn to a Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Institute of International Relations Prague for expert analysis of the "Combat Vehicles of Russia's Special Forces" than I would ask a house painter to cut my hair. Unless I see some recollections of a college-age Galeotti tinkering with drivetrains and differentials until the sun went down from a pure love of mechanics, I am going to go ahead and assume that he knows what the vast majority of us knows about military vehicles – he could pick one out of a lineup which included a melon, a goat and an Armored Personnel Carrier, and if it had a flat tire he could probably fix it given time and the essential equipment.

Just before we move on, the future event: the MH-17 'trial' has been postponed until June 8th , to give defense attorneys more time to prepare after the amazingly fortuitous capture of a 'key witness' in Eastern Ukraine. I'm not going to elaborate here on what a kicking-the-can-down-the-road crock this is; we'll pick that up later. The whole MH-17 'investigation' has been such a ridiculous exercise in funneling the pursuit to a single inescapable conclusion – that Russia shot it down – irrespective of how many points have to be bent to fit the curve that no matter how it comes out, it will stand as perhaps the greatest example of absurd western self-justification ever recorded.

There are a couple of ways of solving a mystery crime. One is to collect evidence, and follow where it takes you. Another is to decide who you want to have been responsible, and then construct a sequence of events in which they might have done it. To do that, especially in this case, we will have to throw out a few assumptions, such as all that stuff about means, motive and opportunity. In the absence of a believable scenario, that is. Let's look at what we have, and what we need, and see how we get from there to here.

First, we need for Ukraine not to have been responsible. That's going to be awkward, because it looks as if the aircraft was shot down by a missile, but the missile had to have come from inside Ukraine, because the aircraft was too far from the nearest point in Russia at the moment it was stricken for the missile to have come from there. But we need Russia to have been responsible, and not Ukraine. Therefore we need a sequence of events in which a Russian missile launcher capable of shooting down an airliner at cruising altitude was inside Ukraine, in a position from which it could have taken the shot.

You know what? We are going to have to look at means, motive and opportunity, just for a second. My purpose in doing so is to illustrate just how improbable the western narrative is, starting from square one. The coup in Ukraine – and anyone who believes it was a 'grass-roots revolution' might as well stop reading right here, because we are going to just get further apart in our impressions of events – followed by the triumphant promise from the revolutionaries to repeal Yanukovych's language laws and make Ukrainian the law of the land touched off the return of Crimea to its ancestral home in the Russian Federation. Crimea was about 65% ethnic Russian by population at the time, and only about 15% Ukrainian, and Crimea had made several attempts to break free of Ukraine before that yet for some reason the west refused steadfastly to accept the results of a referendum which voted in favour of Crimea becoming a part of the Russian Federation, as if it were more believable that a huge ethnic-Russian majority preferred to learn Ukrainian and be governed by Kiev.

Be that as it may, Washington reacted very angrily; much more so than Europe, considering the distance between the United States and Ukraine versus its proximity to Europe. Perhaps that is owed simply to Washington's assumption that every corner of the world looks to it for leadership, and that it must have a position ready on any given situation, regardless how distant. So Washington insisted there must be sanctions against Russia, for stealing Crimea from its rightful owner, Ukraine. We're not really going to get into struggles for freedom and the right to self-determination right now, except to state that the USA considers nothing more important in some cases, while in others it is completely irrelevant. Washington demanded sanctions but much of Europe was reluctant .

"It is notoriously difficult to secure EU agreement on sanctions anywhere because they require unanimity from the 28 member states. There were wide differences over the numbers of Russians and Crimeans to be punished, with countries such as Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria and Spain reluctant to penalise Moscow for fear of closing down channels of dialogue. The 21 named were on an original list that ran to about 120 people Expanding the numbers on the sanctions list is almost certain to be discussed at the EU summit on Thursday and Friday. Some EU states are torn about taking punitive measures against Russia for fear of undoing years of patient attempts to establish closer ties with Moscow as well as increase trade. The EU has already suspended talks with Russia on an economic pact and a visa agreement The German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said any measure must leave "ways and possibilities open to prevent a further escalation that could lead to the division of Europe" .

The original list of those to be sanctioned was 120 people. The haggling reduced that to 21. Only 7 of those were Russians. Putin was not included. That was pretty plainly not the United Front That Speaks With One Voice that Washington had envisioned, and the notion that Europe would buy into sanctions that might really do some damage to Russia, albeit there would be economic costs to Europe as well, was a dim prospect.

Gosh – you know what we need? An atrocity which can be quickly tied to Russia, and which will so appall the EU member states that resistance to far-reaching sanctions will collapse. That's called 'motive'. It's just not a motive for Russia. Having just gone far out on a limb and taken back Crimea, to the obvious and vocal fury of the United States, it is a bit of a stretch that Russia was looking for what else it could do that would stir up the world against it.

Means, now. That presents its own dilemma. Because Russia could have shot down an airliner from its own territory. Just not with the weapon chosen. The S-400 could have done it; it has the range, easily. But if you were setting up a scenario in which something happened that you wanted to blame on Russia, but they didn't really do it, you must have the weapon to do it yourself, or access to it. By any reasonable construct, Ukraine must be a suspect as well – there was a hot war going on in Ukraine, Ukraine controlled both the airspace and the aircraft that was lost, and the aircraft was lost over Ukrainian territory. But Ukraine doesn't have the S-400. You could use a variety of western systems, but it would quickly be established that the plane was shot down with a weapon that Russia does not have. In order for the narrative to be believable, Russia must have the weapon – but if it wasn't Russia, then whoever did it must have the weapon, too.

Enter the Buk system, with the 9K37 SA-11 missile. It's got the range, it's got the altitude, the Russians have it in active service. Oooo problem. It's got the range, but only if it was fired from inside Ukraine.

Which brings us back to Mr. Galeotti, an expert in Russian combat systems; enough of an expert to write books on them, anyway. And he plainly believes it was an SA-11 missile fired from a single Buk TELAR (Transporter/Erector/Launcher and Radar) which brought down the Boeing; he says that's what the evidence demonstrates, although by this time (2019) most of the world has backed away from saying Putin showed up with no shirt on to close the firing switch personally (cue the instant British-press screaming headlines before the dust had even settled, "PUTIN'S MISSILE!!!" "PUTIN KILLED MY SON!!!"). Now the story is that the disgraceful deed was done by 'Ukrainian anti-government militants', using a weapon supplied by Russia.

"In this context, a full reversal of policy seems near-enough impossible. The evidence suggests that while the fateful missile was fired by Ukrainian anti-government militants, it was supplied by the Russian 53rd Air Defense Brigade under orders from Moscow and in a process managed by Russian military intelligence.

To admit this would not only be to acknowledge a share in the unlawful killing of 298 innocents, but also an unpicking of the whole Kremlin narrative over the Donbass. It would mean admitting to having been an active participant in this bloody compound of civil war and foreign intervention, to having armed the militants without due thought as to the consequences, and to having lied to the world and the Russian people for half a decade."

We don't really have the scope in this piece to broaden the discussion to Russia's probable actual involvement. Suffice it to say that despite non-stop allegations by Poroshenko throughout his presidency of entire battalions of active-service Russian Army soldiers inside Ukraine, zero evidence has ever been provided of any such presence, although there have been some clumsy attempts to fabricate it . To argue that the Russian Army has been trying to overrun Ukraine for six years now, but has been unable to do so because of the combat prowess of the Ukrainian Army is to imply a belief in leprechauns. This is only my own inexpert opinion, but it seems likely to me the complete extent of Russia's involvement, militarily, is the minimum which prevents Eastern Ukraine from being overrun by the Ukrainian military, and including the rebel areas' own far-from-inconsequential military forces. I'm always ready to entertain competing theories, though; be sure to bring your evidence. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Constitution prohibits using the country's military forces against its own citizens. The logic of 'Have cake, and eat it" cannot apply here – either the Ukrainian state is in direct and obvious violation of its own constitution or the people of the breakaway regions are not Ukrainian citizens.

Anyway, back to the Buk system. And not a moment before time, either – I just re-read that sanctimonious stab above, again; " having armed the militants without due thought as to the consequences " What, exactly, is the ridiculous nature of the accusation being presented here? That the Russians gave an anti-aircraft system to the 'militants' without considering they might use it to shoot down an aircraft? How did they not see that coming? The Ukrainian Army shot down a civilian airliner in October of 2001 , and lied about it for as long as it could – interestingly, it took place during joint Ukrainian-Russian air defense exercises on the Crimean peninsula, and Russia tried hard to avoid assigning blame to Ukraine, while at least one Israeli television station claimed the Russians had shot down their own aircraft. This disaster and subsequent lying did not prevent the USA from giving the Javelin missile to Ukraine – did it not occur to them that they might use it to shoot tanks? No due thought to the consequences, obviously.

The Buk air-defense system normally consists of at least 4 TELAR launchers , each with 4 missiles on the launch rails, a self-propelled acquisition radar designated by NATO nomenclature as Snow Drift (the radar on the nose of the TELAR unit itself is designated Fire Dome), and a self-propelled command post, for a minimum of 6 vehicles. Also usually part of the system is a mobile crane, to reload the launchers. If you were going to supply an air-defense system to militant rebels, why wouldn't you give them the whole system? In a pinch, you might be able to get away without the command post vehicle, although it is the station that collates all the input from the sensors and makes the decision to assign targets for acquisition, tracking and engagement. If you didn't give them the crane vehicle, and perhaps a logistics truck with some reloads, they would be limited to the missiles that came already mounted – once those were fired, they'd have to abandon the system, because they couldn't reload it. Seems a little wasteful, don't you think?

What about the acquisition radar? Because acquiring targets is all about scanning capability and situational awareness. We're going to assume for a moment that you don't use an air defense system exclusively to hunt for airliners, but that you want to defend yourself against ground-attack aircraft like the Sukhoi SU-25. Because, when you think about it, who is more likely to be trying to kill you ? A Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777, or an SU-25? The latter is not quite as fast as an airliner at its cruising height of 30,000 ft+, but it is very agile and will be nearly down in the treetops if it is attacking you. You need to be able to search all around, all the time.

That's where the acquisition radar comes in. A centimetric waveband search radar, the Snow Drift (called the 9S18M1 by its designer) has 360-degree coverage and from 0 to 40 degrees of height in a 6-second sweep in anti-aircraft mode, with a 160 km detection range, obviously dependent on target altitude. An airliner, being a large target not attempting to evade detection, and at a high altitude, would quite possibly be detected at the maximum range of which the system is capable. But then the operators would certainly know it was an airliner. And the narrative says whoever shot it down probably did so by accident.

Maybe if it was his first day on the job. Let's talk for a minute about air-defense deconfliction. It would be nice if your Command parked you somewhere that there was nothing around you but enemies. Well, not as nice as parking you across the street from a pulled-pork barbecue joint with strippers and cold beer, but from a defense standpoint, it'd be nice to know that anything you detected, you could shoot. Know something? It's never like that. Your own aircraft are flying around as if they didn't even know you are dangerous, and as everyone now knows, civilian airliners continue their transport enterprises irrespective of war except in rare instances in which high-flying aircraft have been shot down by long-range missiles. That rarely happens. Why? Because an aircraft flying a steady course, at 30,000 ft+ and not descending, is no threat to you on the ground. From that altitude it can't even see you in the ground clutter, and it'd be quite a bombardier that could hit a target the size of a two-car garage with a bomb dropped from 30,000 ft while flying at 400 knots.

And unless you are an idiot, you know it is an airliner. When you are deployed into the field in an air-defense role, you know where the commercial airlanes are that are going to be active. You know what a commercial-aviation profile looks like – aircraft at 30,000 ft+ altitude, flying at ≥400 knots on a steady course, squawking Mode 3 and Charlie = airliner. Might as well take a moment here to talk about IFF ; Identification Friend or Foe. This is a coded pulse signal transmitted by all commercial aircraft whenever they are in flight unless their equipment is non-functional, and you are not allowed to take off with it in that state. Mode C provides the aircraft's altitude, taken automatically from its barometric altimeter. All modern air search radars have IFF capability, and a dashed line just below the raw video of the air track can be interrogated with a light-pen to provide the readout. You already know how high the plane is if you have a solid radar track, but Mode C provides a confirmation.

Military aircraft have IFF transponders, too; in fact, most of the modes are reserved for military use. But military aircraft often turn off their IFF equipment, because it provides a giveaway who and where they are. In Ukraine, which uses mostly Soviet military aircraft, both sides are capable of reading each other's IFF, so all the more reason not to transmit. Foreign nations typically cannot read each other's IFF except for the modes which are for both military and civilian use, other than those nations who are allies. Anyway, the point I wanted to make is that the Snow Drift acquisition radar has IFF, and if it detected an airliner-like target at 160 km., the operator would have that much more time to interrogate it and determine it was an airliner. Just to reiterate, the western narrative holds that the destruction of the airliner was a mistake.

I'm going a little further with my inexpert opinion, to say that the Buk system was selected as the 'murder weapon', because it provides a limited autonomous capability. To be clear, the Fire Dome radar on the nose of the TELAR does have a limited search capability, and once the radar is locked on to a target, the TELAR vehicle is completely autonomous. The purpose of the surveillance radar is to detect the target from far beyond the Fire Dome's range, assign it to a TELAR and thereby direct it to the elevation and bearing of the target so that the TELAR's radar knows exactly where to look, and continue to update its position until the TELAR to which it was assigned has locked on to the target.

That autonomous capability is probably what made it attractive to those building the scenario; consider. A complete Buk system of 6, maybe 7 vehicles could hardly get all the way inside Ukraine to the firing position without being noticed and perhaps recorded. But perhaps a single TELAR could do it. The aircraft could be shot down by an SA-11 missile and blamed on Russia – Ukraine has access to plenty of SA-11's. But it is a weapon in the Russian active-service inventory. Further, Galeotti's commitment to the allegation that the single TELAR was provided by Russia's 53rd Air Defense Brigade tells us he supports the crackpot narrative offered by Bellingcat, the loopy citizen-journalist website headed by failed financial clerk Eliot Higgins. Bellingcat claims the Buk TELAR was trucked into Ukraine on the back of a flatbed, took the shot that slew MH-17, and was immediately withdrawn back to Russia.

Ummm .how was that an accident? The Russians gave the Ukrainian militants a single launcher with no crane or reload missiles, so it was limited to a maximum of four shots. Its ability to defend itself from ground attack was almost nil, since the design purpose of mounting a Fire Dome radar on each TELAR is not to make the launcher units autonomous; it is to permit concurrent engagements by several launchers, all coordinated by the acquisition radar and command post. Without a radar of its own on the launcher, the firing unit would have to wait until each engagement was completed before it could switch to a new target, but with a fire-control guidance radar on each TELAR, multiple targets can be assigned to multiple launchers, while the search radar limits itself to acquisition and target assignment.

The Fire Dome radar mounted on the TELAR can search a 120-degree sector in 4 seconds, at an elevation of 6 to 7 degrees. Its search function is maximized for defense against ground attack aircraft, and a single launcher is not looking at 240 degrees of potential air threat axis during each sweep. It is not looking high enough to see an airliner at 30,000 ft+. More importantly for a system which was not designed to shoot down helpless airliners, it leaves two-thirds of a circle unobserved all the time it is searching for a target. And the Russians provided this to the 'militants' for air defense? They should be shot.

A single TELAR with no reloads and no acquisition radar would have to be looking directly at the target when it was activated in order to even see it; it takes 15 seconds for the launcher to swing into line and elevation even when that information is transmitted to it from the acquisition radar. It takes 4 seconds for a scan to be completed when there is a whole two-thirds of a circle that it is not even looking at, and you have to manually force it to search above 7 degrees because it is not designed to shoot down airliners. All this time, the target is crossing the acquisition scope at 400 knots+. Fire Dome has integrated IFF, so if it did by some miracle pick up an airliner in its search, the operator would know from transmitted IFF that he was looking at an airliner. A single TELAR with no reload capability sent on an air-defense mission would have its ass ripped in half by ground-attack aircraft that it never saw – if the autonomous capability is so good, why don't the Ukrainians use them as a single unit? Think of how much air-defense coverage they could provide! Do you see the Ukrainian air-defense units employing the Buk that way? Never. Not once. Four TELARS, acquisition radar vehicle, command vehicle, just the way the system was designed to operate.

Just because it has a limited capability to function in a given capacity should not suggest you would employ it that way. You can use a hockey stick to turn off the bedroom light, and you won't even have to get out of bed. Would you do that? I hope not.

A one-third effective capacity in the air defense role together with the covert delivery and immediate withdrawal suggests that the Russians provided the 'militants' with a single TELAR for the express purpose of shooting down a defenseless airliner. Except nobody is saying that. It was a mistake. Well, except for Head of the Security Service of Ukraine Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, who claimed "Terrorists and militants have planned a cynical terrorist attack on a civilian aircraft Aeroflot AFL-2074 Moscow-Larnaka that was flying at that time above the territory of Ukraine." He further claimed that this was motivated by a desire to 'justify an invasion'. I'm pretty sure if any western authority could prove anything even close to that, we would not have had to wait 6 years for a trial.

Which brings us to the covert delivery and extraction. As part of his personal investigation, Max van der Werff drove the route Bellingcat claimed was the extraction route by which the single TELAR, on its flatbed, was returned to Russia. He verified that there is a highway overpass on the route which is too low for a load that tall to pass underneath. When he pointed this out to Higgins, he was told there is a bypass spur which goes around it, which would allow the flatbed to regain the road beyond without having gone through the overpass. Max drew his attention to the concrete barriers which blocked that road at the top of the hill, and which locals claimed had been in place long before the destruction of MH-17. And that was the end of that conversation. I cannot say enough about the quality of Max's work and his diligent, patient dissection of the evidence . His diagrams of the entry and egress routes as provided by Bellingcat illustrate how little sense they make. It was imperative the guilty Russians get the fuck out of Dodge with the greatest possible dispatch so they drove 100 kilometers out of their way? Don't even terrorist murderers have GPS now?

Similarly, the simpleminded flailing of the Ukrainian investigators suggests they do not even have much of a grasp of how Surface-To-Air missiles work. In excited posts like this one , the BBC discloses that an exhaust vent from the tail section of a 'Buk missile' (the missile is actually the SA-11, while Buk is the entire system) was found in the wreckage of the crashed plane, while this one even shows terminally-stunned head prosecutor Fred Westerbeke standing next to what is allegedly part of the rocket body of an SA-11, including legible inventory markings, also 'found at the crash scene'.

Do tell.

Let me review for you how an SA-11 missile shoots down an aircraft. Does it pierce it like a harpoon, blow up in a thunderous explosion, and ride the doomed aircraft down to the crash site? It certainly does not. The missile blasts out of the launcher and flies to the target via semiactive homing, which means it has an onboard seeker that updates the missile trajectory, while the radar on the launcher also communicates with it and the missile and the target are brought together in intercept. When the proximity fuse of the missile – this is the important part – senses that the missile's warhead is close to the target, the internal explosive detonates, and a shower of prefragmented shrapnel pierces the area of the plane near where the missile detonated, usually the front, because the missile is constantly adjusting to make sure it stays with the target until intercept.

MH-17 traveled on, mostly intact, for miles before it crashed into the ground; the crash site was some 13 miles from where the plane was hit. The missile self-destructed miles away from the crash site, and the only parts of it which accompanied the plane to its impact point were the shrapnel bits of the exploded warhead. The body of the missile, together with the exhaust vent, fell back to the ground somewhere quite close to where the plane was hit, not where it fell. Once the missile's fuel is exhausted, either because it ran out or because it was consumed in the explosion triggered by the proximity fuse, the missile parts do not fly around in formation, seeking out the wreckage and coming gently to rest in it where they can later be found by investigators. I don't know how many times I have to say this, because this is certainly not the first, but there would not be any missile parts in the wreckage of MH-17 because the missile would have blown up in front of the plane without ever touching it. The missile does not hit the plane. The pieces of the warhead do. But reality has to take a back seat to making out an airtight case.

There is no telling what kind of ordnance might be found in the wreckage itself, as the Ukrainian Army continued to shell the site for days after the crash; doubtless various artillery shells could be found at the crash site, as well, but it would be quite a leap of faith to suggest a Boeing 777 was shot down by artillery. What you would not find is pieces of the SAM that shot it down.

Several witnesses claimed to have seen an SU-25 near the plane before it exploded. They quite possibly did – the Ukrainian Air Force was observed to be using civilian airliners as cover to allow them to get close to Eastern-Ukrainian villages which might be protected by hand-held launchers known as MANPADS (for Man-Portable Air Defense System), reasoning the defenders would not shoot if they were afraid they might hit a civil aircraft. Once they were close enough to the village or other target to make an attack run, they would then return to the vicinity of the airliner for protection while withdrawing; the rebel side complained about this illegal and immoral practice a month before the destruction of MH-17. But there is no evidence I am aware of linking the destruction of MH-17 to an attack by aircraft.

It may no longer be possible to look at the shooting-down of the Malaysian Boeing objectively; the event has become a partisan rush to judgment which was rendered immediately, after which an investigation began which plainly had as its goal proving the accusations already made. Means and motive clearly favour the accusers rather than the accused, and opportunity is mostly irrelevant as a consideration. Ukraine obviously had to be a suspect – the destruction of the aircraft occurred over Ukraine while Ukraine was in control of it and the airspace in which it traveled. Yet Ukraine was allowed to lead the investigation, and to gather and safeguard evidence, while the owner of the aircraft – Malaysia – was excluded until the investigation had been in progress for four months. Russia was not allowed any part in it save to yield whatever evidence the investigators demanded, while all its theories were widely mocked. Demonstrations set up by Almaz-Antey, the designers and builders of the SA-11, were unattended by any investigating nation – small wonder they do not have Clue One how the missile works, and believe they are going to find big chunks of it in the wreckage, perhaps with Putin's passport stuck to one of them. If any of these conditions prevailed in an investigation which favoured Russia, NATO would scream as if it were being run over with spiked wheels – if the Boeing had been shot down over Russia, who thinks Russia would have been heading the investigation, and custodian of the evidence?

Nor is that by any means all. The Dutch investigation which concluded with the preliminary report implied that nothing of any investigative value was found on the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) or the Flight Data Recorder (FDR). Nothing to indicate what might have happened to the aircraft – just that it was flying along, and suddenly it wasn't. How likely is that? No transcript was provided, and I guess that would be expected if there was no information at all. Funny how often that happens with Malaysian airliners; they really need to look at their quality control. Oh; except they don't build the aircraft. Boeing does. I could see there not being any information after the plane began to break up, because both the CVR and the FDR are in the tail , and that broke off before the fuselage hit. But the microphones are in the ceiling of the cockpit and in the microphone and earpiece of the pilots' headsets, which they wear at all times while in flight. The last audio claimed to have been recorded was a course alteration sent by Ukrainian ATC.

According to the Malaysian government, there was an early plan by NATO for a military operation involving some 9000 troops to 'secure the crash site', which was forestalled by a covert Malaysian operation which recovered the 'black boxes' and blocked the plan. I have to say that given the many, many other unorthodox and bizarre happenings in the conduct of what was supposed to be a transparent and impartial international investigation, it's getting so nothing much is unbelievable. The Malaysian Prime Minister went on record as believing that the western powers had already concluded that Russia was responsible, and were mostly just going through the motions of investigating.

The telephone recordings presented by the SBU as demonstrating Russian culpability were analyzed by OG IT Forensic Services, a Malaysian firm specializing in forensic analysis of audio, video and digital materials for court proceedings, which concluded the recordings were cut, edited and fabricated . Yet they are relied upon as important evidence of guilt by the Dutch and the JIT.

The conduct of the investigation has been all the way across town from transparent, and in fact seems to represent a clique of cronies getting their heads together to attempt nailing down a consistent narrative, which is in the judgment of forensic professionals based upon clumsy fabrications. The investigators plainly have no understanding of how the weapons systems involved perform, or they would not claim confidently to have discovered pieces of the very missile that destroyed the plane in the wreckage of it. But rather than take an objective look at how this flailing is perceived, they continue to rely on momentum and the appearance of getting things done while being scrupulously impartial, all the while that more mountains of evidence are collected, which they cannot disclose to the public, although it is all right to let the prime suspect keep it safe under wraps.

Make of that what you will.

" Bullshit is unavoidable whenever circumstances require someone to talk without knowing what he is talking about. Thus the production of bullshit is stimulated whenever a person's obligations or opportunities to speak about some topic exceed his knowledge of the facts that are relevant to that topic. "

-Harry G. Frankfurt

[May 24, 2020] William Kristol, the Flaming Neocon, Is Looking To Reinvent Himself as a Dissenter by Bill Hughes

This is all noise. Kristol is a MIC prostitute and as such he can't attack Trump who gave MIC and Israel all what they want
Notable quotes:
"... "A 'Neocon' is neither new or conservative, but old as Babylon and evil as Hell." – Edward Abbey ..."
"... Being an unrepentant Neocon, such as William (Bill) Kristol, means never having to say you're sorry. To qualify, you need to be an ideologue, who also has paid no price for recklessly cheerleading 4,488 U.S. troops to their deaths in the illegal and immoral Iraq War, plus another 32,223 who were seriously wounded (2003-2011). ..."
"... For years, we've heard Kristol on the TV/Cable/Network shows making outrageous statements, like this one: "The war in Iraq could have terrifically good effects throughout the Middle East." (09/18/2001). ..."
"... There was also no mention by the reporter of the possible real reasons that Kristol was dumping on Trump. One could be that during the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump had trashed Kristol's and the Neocons' support of the Iraq War. ..."
"... And, also Trump has indicated he doesn't have any plans to reignite another of Kristol's favorites schemes – "a Cold War with Russia." These are just two of the reasons the "Neocons, like Kristol, can't stomach Trump," according to the commentator, JP Sottile, of Consortium News. ..."
"... During last year's Democratic presidential primary, Kristol took a swipe at the candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and posted a tweet that said: "#Never Sanders." The popular antiwar candidate responded to Kristol: "Have you apologized to the nation for your foolish advocacy of the Iraq War? I make no apologies for opposing it." Sanders then added this zinger: "I will do everything in my power to prevent a war with Iran." ..."
"... The Neocon replied: "I will defend my views on Iraq as you defend yours." Sen. Sanders underscored how Kristol had called for regime change in Iraq as early at 1998; and that Kristol also predicted the conflict would last "only two months;" and that he had repeatedly argued for the Bush-Cheney Gang to send in more troops. As early at 2006, Kristol was urging the US to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, asking, "Why wait?" ..."
"... In a way, Kristol reminded me, in a physical sense, of the late actor Peter Lorre. Whether Kristol has a "Little Man (Napoleon) Complex," or not, I will leave to the experts in the field. All I know for sure is that he's a relentlessly angry, pusher of costly and unnecessary wars. ..."
"... Here is another gem from Kristol: "The first two battles of this new era are now over. The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably." (April 28, 2003) And, then there is this whopper from the slippery Neocon: "The Iraqi elections of Jan. 30, 2005 could be a key moment perhaps the key moment so far in vindicating the 'Bush/Cheney Doctrine' as the right response to 9/11." (March 7, 2005) ..."
May 24, 2020 | original.antiwar.com
"A 'Neocon' is neither new or conservative, but old as Babylon and evil as Hell." – Edward Abbey

Being an unrepentant Neocon, such as William (Bill) Kristol, means never having to say you're sorry. To qualify, you need to be an ideologue, who also has paid no price for recklessly cheerleading 4,488 U.S. troops to their deaths in the illegal and immoral Iraq War, plus another 32,223 who were seriously wounded (2003-2011).

It also helps to have a significant media platform and not to give a good hoot about how many innocent Iraqis died via the U.S.-led invasion and/or the occupation of that country. (Try an estimated 655,000.)

By the way, false prophet, Kristol: Our troops found "No" Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

Let me formally introduce – William Kristol, age 67, out of New York City, now Northern Virginia, warmonger extraordinaire, ultra-conservative, and currently editor at large of Bulwark magazine.

For years, we've heard Kristol on the TV/Cable/Network shows making outrageous statements, like this one: "The war in Iraq could have terrifically good effects throughout the Middle East." (09/18/2001).

The other day, May 20, 2020, Kristol was the subject of a puff piece profile in the Washington Post , by reporter KK Ottesen. The article made no mention of Kristol's disgusting role in promoting the Iraq War. Instead, he was given the opportunity to rip President Donald Trump on how he has been mismanaging the coronavirus crisis. (Well, heck, everybody knows that.)

There was also no mention by the reporter of the possible real reasons that Kristol was dumping on Trump. One could be that during the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump had trashed Kristol's and the Neocons' support of the Iraq War.

And, also Trump has indicated he doesn't have any plans to reignite another of Kristol's favorites schemes – "a Cold War with Russia." These are just two of the reasons the "Neocons, like Kristol, can't stomach Trump," according to the commentator, JP Sottile, of Consortium News.

The idea that Kristol is some kind of genuine dissenter and is opposing Trump because he's concerned about the quality of his leadership is pure nonsense. The Washington Post allowed Kristol to use the paper for this dubious exercise and it has no one to blame but itself.

During last year's Democratic presidential primary, Kristol took a swipe at the candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and posted a tweet that said: "#Never Sanders." The popular antiwar candidate responded to Kristol: "Have you apologized to the nation for your foolish advocacy of the Iraq War? I make no apologies for opposing it." Sanders then added this zinger: "I will do everything in my power to prevent a war with Iran."

The Neocon replied: "I will defend my views on Iraq as you defend yours." Sen. Sanders underscored how Kristol had called for regime change in Iraq as early at 1998; and that Kristol also predicted the conflict would last "only two months;" and that he had repeatedly argued for the Bush-Cheney Gang to send in more troops. As early at 2006, Kristol was urging the US to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, asking, "Why wait?"

Flashback: The first time I laid eyes on the cunning Neocon, Kristol was at a pro-Iraq War rally held on the National Mall, on April 12, 2003, in Washington, D.C., G. Gordon Liddy and the late, ex-U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN) were there, along with some other Right Wing types.

What was really weird about the whole affair was the appearance of that so-called comedian, Ben Stein. He showed up on a huge video screen endorsing the war. It should have had "a warning label" on it!

I recall a lady in the modest crowd of about fifty at that event saying of Kristol: "Oh, look how small he is!" She was right. Kristol is, indeed, on the very short side. I'd say that he comes in at about 5 ft. 4 or 5 inches. It seems that, as a result of his tiny body frame, his head appears more massive than it really is. The rally was boring. I didn't stay long.

In a way, Kristol reminded me, in a physical sense, of the late actor Peter Lorre. Whether Kristol has a "Little Man (Napoleon) Complex," or not, I will leave to the experts in the field. All I know for sure is that he's a relentlessly angry, pusher of costly and unnecessary wars.

(During the Iraq War, there were countless protest actions mounted by ten of thousands of splendid antiwar activists across the country. Many of them were held on the National Mall, and other sites in our nation's capital.)

Here is another gem from Kristol: "The first two battles of this new era are now over. The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably." (April 28, 2003) And, then there is this whopper from the slippery Neocon: "The Iraqi elections of Jan. 30, 2005 could be a key moment perhaps the key moment so far in vindicating the 'Bush/Cheney Doctrine' as the right response to 9/11." (March 7, 2005)

Of course, it wouldn't be fair to leave out this one from Kristol: "It is much more likely that the situation in Iraq will stay more or less the same, or improve, in either case, Republicans will benefit from being the party of victory." (Nov. 30, 2005)

As a result of an onslaught of Kristol's articles and media appearances in support of the Iraq invasion, the Washington Post 's Richard Cohen dubbed the conflict: "Kristol's War!" Right on, Mr. Cohen.

The estimated cost of the Iraq War to the U.S. taxpayers runs to a high of around $1.7 trillion!

If Kristol has any regrets with respect to his amoral advocacy for the Iraq War (which was launched by the Bush-Cheney Gang based on a pack of rotten lies) and/or about the staggering US casualties in Iraq, I have never heard him express them.

If Kristol has any empathy for the innocent Iraqi dead and wounded, the Iraqi women and children who have suffered and are continuing to suffer from that conflict, along with the tens of thousands of Iraqi homes that have been destroyed, and also for those 3.8 million Iraqis made into refugees, then he's kept those kinds of feelings to himself.

(The other amazing thing about Kristol is how he's repeatedly able to get his distorted views on our televisions and in our newspapers. It's like he has to only press a button and there he is. It is all so – Orwellian!)

In any event, when the name of William Kristol, the Neocon, is mentioned, I think callous indifference to human life and suffering.

The next time the Neocon Kristol visits the Arlington National Cemetery, over in Virginia, to honor our Iraqi War dead, will be his FIRST! Despite all of the above, he continues to argue for a U.S.-led attack on Iran. Kristol insists: "Invading Iran is not a bad idea!"

If warmongering isn't a Hate Crime and/or a Hate Speech, then maybe it should be. (Peace Movement, please copy.) That would give the heartless Kristol something to think about when he advocates for the launching of yet another monstrosity, like the Iraq War.

Bill Hughes is an attorney, author, actor and photographer. His latest book is Byline Baltimore . Contact the author. Reprinted from the Baltimore Post-Examiner with the author's permission.

[May 24, 2020] Because the fight between Trump and his Democrat enemies was an internal battle among big Jews, usurers against Zionists.

May 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

sarz , says: Show Comment

Anon [348] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 4:50 am GMT
Here's the best scenario: Trump wins re-election, and gives the neocons what they've been egging for all along – WWIII, simultaneous war on all fronts, with Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine, China, Russia, Venezuela. Let's see the empire stretched so thin it eventually craters and goes bankrupt. The only way to save America is for it to die in its present form. When the country is completely bankrupt, when the people are so sick of war, then maybe, just maybe, we will wise up, rise up and do a Mussolini on all the neocons who've been killing this country from within since the days of Woodrow Wilson.
anon [161] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 11:13 am GMT
@UncommonGround Joshua Landis:

Top Biden advisor says Democrats will continue Trump's policy in Syria.

Tony Blinken says Biden would:
– Keep US troops in Syria
– Deny Assad oil
– Keep Idlib for rebels
– Refuse to negotiate w Damascus until US "effectuates more positive outcome"

BannedHipster , says: Website Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 1:14 pm GMT
Donald Trump's father and grandfather were connected to Jewish organized crime. Donald Trump first got big on Twitter promoting the "birther" conspiracy theories about Obama which Trump was getting from the Israeli Jew Orly Taitz. These conspiracy theories were designed to demonize Obama for trying to end the sanctions on Iran and prevent a war.

Zionist Jews were quite aware that Donald Trump was their guy – he has always been consistently popular in Israel. Zionist Jews knew that Donald Trump could give them everything they wanted: takeover all of Jerusalem, annex the Golan Heights, and eventually annex Palestine and ethnically cleanse the Palestinians – all going on right now with the support of Trump and Jared Kushner's hand-picked Mike Pompeo.

Hey, Trump fans – Trump DID in fact "drain the swamp." He (well, Jared Kushner) fired anyone who dared to oppose anything Israel wanted and replaced them with yes-men Zionist flunkies.

How much longer till the MAGA-tard realize they were tricked?

BannedHipster , says: Website Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 1:32 pm GMT
@sarz @sarz

This is almost certainly false and confusing the issue:

" In 1927 Frederick Trump was one of seven people in KKK cap and gown arrested in a near riot."

Donald Trump's father was arrested during a riot at a Klan rally – but he almost certainly wasn't "in KKK cap and gown" – it's far more likely he was the one rioting AGAINST the Klan, as a member of the Jewish "Anti-fascist" terrorist group, which was a Jewish Communist group then in the early stages.

Trump's uncle was a member of a Jewish fraternity and often claimed that his father was Jewish, but that is probably false. Trump's grandfather supposedly owned brothels. Consider: what kind of people own brothels, houses of prostitution, basically, human trafficking? Organized crime.

Trump isn't Jewish, Trump's father wasn't Jewish and neither was his grandfather. What Trump and his family is, is non-Jewish members of Jewish organized crime.

Why confuse the issue? Half of Trump's children and grandchildren are now either Jewish, Israelis, or married to Jews and Israelis.

Trump and his entire family going back to his grandfather, are shabbos goyim.

[May 24, 2020] Trump is mostly concerned with giving handouts to the MIC because he thinks "the economy" is based on jobs in the MIC since that is what they tell him is where US manufacturing is now based

May 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Piotr Berman , May 23 2020 19:01 utc | 7

Trump is mostly concerned with giving handouts to the MIC because he thinks "the economy" is based on jobs in the MIC since that is what they tell him is where US manufacturing is now based.
Posted by: Kali | May 23 2020 18:16 utc | 2

To a degree, it is true. However, the problem with MIC as an economic stimulant is rather pitiful multiplier effect. For starters, the costs are hopelessly bloated. Under rather watchful Putin, Russia does its piece of arms race at a very small fraction of American costs. By the same token, pro-economy effects of arms spending in USA are seriously diluted -- the spending is surely there, but the extend of activity is debatable For example, in aerospace, there is a big potential for civilian applications of technologies developed for the military. Scant evidence in Boeing that should be a prime beneficiary. The fabled toilet seat (that cost many thousands of dollars) similarly failed to find civilian applications. Civilians inclined to overpriced toilets, like Mr. Trump himself, rely on low-tech methods like gold-plating.

A wider problem is shared by entire GOP: aversion to any government programs, and least of all industry promoting programs, that could benefit ordinary citizens. This is the exclusive domain of the free market! Once you refuse to consider that, only MIC remains, plus some boondogles like interstate highways. Heaven forfend to improve public transit or to repair almost-proverbial crumbling dams and bridges.

Charles D , May 23 2020 19:19 utc | 11

We have to ask cui bono - who benefits from a new nuclear arms race? General Electric, Boeing, Honeywell International, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman et al. No one else really. Since these corporations also own the Congress and have zillions to fund Trump's re-election, they will probably get the go-ahead to spend the rest of the world into oblivion.
vk , May 23 2020 19:42 utc | 12
Apart from the obvious fact that the MIC is the only viable engine of propulsion of the American "real economy" (a.k.a. "manufacturing"), there's the more macabre fact that, if we take Trump's administration first military papers into consideration, it seems there's a growing coterie inside the Pentagon and the WH that firmly believes MAD can be broken vis-a-vis China.

Hence the "Prompt Global Strike" doctrine (which is taking form with the commission of the new B-21 "Raider" strategic bomber, won by Northrop Grumman), the rise of the concept of "tactical nukes" (hence the extinction of the START, and the Incirlik Base imbroglio post failed coup against Erdogan) and, most importantly, the new doctrine of "bringing manufacture back".

The USA is suffering from a structural valorization problem. The only way out is finding new vital space through which it can initiate a new cycle of valorization. The only significant vital space to be carved out in the 21st Century is China, with its 600 million-sized middle class (the world's largest middle class, therefore the world's largest potential consumer market). It won two decades with the opening of the ex-Soviet vital space, but it was depleted in the 2000s, finally exploding in 2006-2008.

How many decades does the Americans think they can earn by a hypothetical unilateral destruction of China?

DontBelieveEitherPr , May 23 2020 19:58 utc | 15
Having a treaty that limits power (in this case nuclear) on the same level for the US and any other country is simply totally against the ideology of US Superority/Exeptionalism.
That seems to be the driving (psychological and ideological) factor behind this charade.
And like this sick ideology always ends: It too will backfire.

@gepay: another problem is people that disagree with Bernhard on COVID, but then use this disagreement to not read his artciles anymore.
So many people only want to read what they want to hear, and run away at the first real different view.
The narcissism, that our neoliberal societies inducded in its people the last decade shows.. And seeing both sides and everything in between is not possible anymore for a majority it seems.
And living in a bubble is so comforting and easy in todays world. On MSM and on Alt Media alike.

bevin , May 23 2020 20:33 utc | 19
"...that may well fit Trump's plans of pushing all arms control regimes into oblivion."
It's not just arms control regimes, as the WHO business showed. This is the Roy Cohn agenda showing up again- the old GOP objection to the UN and all other international organisations. It is pure ideology-the US has gained immensely from dominating the organisations of which it is a part, leaving them makes no sense at all.

As to 'spending China to oblivion". This only works when every Pentagon dollar spent forces China or Russia to spend a dollar themselves. In such a contest the richest country wins. But that only works in the context of pre-nuclear warfare. With the nuclear deterrent it becomes possible to opt out of all the money wasting nonsense represented by the Pentagon budget, sit back and say, as the Chinese diplomat evidently did, "Just try it."
Which adds up to the conclusion that it is wholly irrational of the United States to denounce treaties designed to reduce the likelihood of nuclear weapons being used: it is to the advantage of Washington that other powers, potential rivals, are forced to build up conventional forces because they are bound by treaty not to rely on nuclear weapons.
So, again: pure ideology designed for domestic consumption and advanced by the most reactionary elements in American society- the Jesse Helms good ol' boys who make the neo-cons look almost human.

Piotr Berman , May 23 2020 20:38 utc | 21
He likes economic war (against everybody), they want actual war. Laguerre | May 23 2020 20:17 utc

Trump has a primitive mercantile mind. There is nothing inherently wrong about mercantilism, but a primitive version of anything tends to be mediocre at best. Thus he loves war that give profit, like Yemen where natives are bombed with expensive products made in USA (and unfortunately, also UK, France etc., but the bulk goes to USA). Then he loves wars the he thinks will give profit, like "keeping oil fields in Syria". Some people told him that oil fields are profitable (although they can go bankrupt just like casinos).

Privately, I think that Trump wanted to make a war with Iran, but the generals explained him what kind of disaster that would be.

One difference is that Democrats are aligned with uber Zionist of slightly less rabid variety than Republicans. A bit like black bears vs grizzlies. Unfortunately, like in the animal kingdom, when the push comes to shove, black bears defer to grizzlies, so on the side of Palestinians etc. there is no difference.

Jen , May 23 2020 21:17 utc | 24
Billingslea's "spending ... into oblivion" statement reflects the belief, still widespread among US neocon political / military elites, that the Soviet Union was brought down and destroyed by its attempts to keep up with US military spending throughout the 1980s. This alone tells us how steeped in past fantasy the entire US political and military establishment must be. Compared to Rip van Winkle, these people are comatose.

Spending the enemy into oblivion may be "tried and true" practice but only when the enemy is much poorer than yourself in arms production and in one type of weapons manufacture. That certainly does not apply to either Russia or China these days. Both nations think more strategically and do not waste precious resources in parading and projecting military power abroad, or rely almost exclusively on old, decaying technologies and a narrow mindset obsessed with always being top dog in everything.

[May 24, 2020] As its own infrastructure has been laid waste by the COLLASSAL MONEY PIT that is the Pentagon, its flagrant use of the most valuable energy commodity, oil, to maintain some 4000 bases worldwide, this rickety over-extended upside down version of old Anglo-Dutch trading empires, will finally collapse

Kissinger laid out the transition plan in 2014 in his WSJ Op-Ed: Henry Kissinger on the Assembly of a New World Order . USA Deep State are not the complete idiots that some want to make them seem.
China is still very vulnerable and the USA has multiple levers to force it to suffer.
May 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Kurt Zumdieck , May 22 2020 18:24 utc | 4
If Washington lured the Soviet Union into it's demise in Afghanistan, which left that minor empire in shambles - socially, militarily, economically - it was the nuclear conflagration at Chernobyl that put the corpse in the ground.....

(Watch the GREAT HBO five-part tragedy on it and you will see that the brutally heroic response of the Soviets, that saved the Western World at least temporarily, but is the portrait of self-sacrifice)

What was lost in the Soviets fumbling immediate post-explosion cover-up was the trust of their Eastern European satellite countries. That doomed that empire. So much military might was given up in Afghanistan, then on Chernobyl, it was not clear if the Soviets had the wherewithal to put down the rebellions that spread from Czechoslovakia to East Germany and beyond.

Covid-19 will do the same to the American Empire.

As its own infrastructure has been laid waste by the COLLASSAL MONEY PIT that is the Pentagon, its flagrant use of the most valuable energy commodity, oil, to maintain some 4000 bases worldwide, this rickety over-extended upside down version of old Anglo-Dutch trading empires, will finally collapse.

Loss of trust by the many craven satellites, in America's fractured response, to Covid-19 will put the final nail in its coffin.

A hot-shooting War may come next, but the empire cannot win it.

William Gruff , May 23 2020 14:25 utc | 79

"I will believe my eyes." --oldhippie @76

It would be nice if that were so, but it is very unlikely.

"So tired of reading propaganda."

Is that why you regurgitate it onto forums? Kinda like purging the system, eh?

If you are going to be judging China's economic health by their pollution levels then in the future you will find yourself convinced that they have never recovered, even when it becomes inescapably obvious that they have. The fact is that China's pollution levels are never going back to 2019 levels, but that has nothing to do with their economic health.

It really never ceases to amaze me how deeply rooted and pervasive the delusions and sense of exceptionality is in America. It is woven into the thinking, from the lowest levels to the very top of their thoughts, of even the very most intelligent Americans. It is apparently a phenomenon that operates at an even deeper level than mass media brainwashing, as it seems it was just as much a problem in every empire in history. That is, I am sure citizens of the Roman Empire had the same blinding biases embedded deep below their consciousness. I guess Marx was entirely correct to say that consciousness arises from material conditions, and being citizen of an empire must be one of those material conditions that gives rise to this all-pervasive and unconscious sense of exceptionality.

oldhippie , May 23 2020 11:47 utc | 71
Go over to EOSDIS Worldview and take a look at satellite photos of China. Simple toggle in lower left hand corner will take you to photos of same day, earlier years. Or any day in satellite record.

The skies over China are clear. Chinese industry is not back at work. It may be that China at 50% or even at 20% is a manufacturing powerhouse compared to a crumbling US. But until China is back at work the thread so far is about the historical situation six months ago.

Xi used to do elaborately staged state appearances with well planned camera angles, fabulous lighting, pomp and circumstance. He enjoyed the trappings of power and knew how to use the trappings of power. Hasn't done that kind of state appearance since January.

Paul , May 23 2020 12:47 utc | 72
The Empire has no respect for international agreements, laws or anything that interferes with maintaining US global hegemony.
lizzie dw , May 23 2020 12:55 utc | 73
China and the US are so different. The citizens of China cannot vote. The population's movements are micromanaged by the government. This is not the case here (yet). And I hope it is never the case. I agree with the premise that there are those in our government who are living in a dream of the past and that is over, unless we want to destroy the world. But China's government is so repressive. The rules must be obeyed. We seem to be compliant so far of some of our government officials stepping over the bounds allowed by our Constitution, due to the fear of C-19 engendered by the deep state (aka the bsmsm). But we will not do that forever and our government cannot just start shooting big crowds of us as they can and have done in China. Theirs is all top down rule, which is not the case here. Also, although it is probably heretical to say this I am glad that the US has many cases of C-19. We will eventually get herd immunity. IMO, China can lock down as many millions of citizens as they wish; they cannot stop this virus and as time goes by they will have as many deaths and as many cases as everybody else. Well, that is off the topic of the article. In the end I agree that we are fighting weird battles we can never win and we citizens need to keep informing our government employees that we just want to trade and make money, not threaten companies and countries and lose money.

[May 23, 2020] Leading Neocon Directs Pentagon Middle East Planning, by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... The GWOT was promoted with brain-dead expressions like "there's a new sheriff in town" which, after the destruction of large parts of the Middle East and Central Asia, later morphed into the matrix of the God-awful belief that something called "American Exceptionalism" existed. ..."
"... Secretary of State Mike Pompeo puts it another way, that the U.S. is a "force for good," but it was former Secretary Madeleine Albright who expressed the fantasy best , stating that " if we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us." ..."
"... One aspect of the American heavy footprint that is little noted is the ruin of many formerly functioning countries that it brings with it. Iraq and Libya might have been dictatorships before the U.S. intervened, but they gave their people a higher standard of living and more security than has been the case ever since. ..."
"... Libya, destroyed by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, had the highest standard of living in Africa. Iraq is currently one of the world's most corrupt countries, so corrupt that there have been massive street demonstrations recently against the government's inability to do anything good for the its own people. Electricity and water supplies are, for example, less reliable than before the U.S. intervened seventeen years ago. ..."
"... The failures of the American foreign policy since George W. Bush have been accredited to the so-called neoconservatives, who successfully hijacked the Bush presidency. Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, Scooter Libby and the merry crowd at the American Enterprise Institute had a major ally in Vice President Dick Cheney and were pretty much able to run wild, creating a casus belli for invading Iraq that was largely fabricated and which was completely against actual U.S. interests in the region. Apparently no one ever told Wolfie that Iraq was the Arab bulwark against Iranian ambitions and that Tehran would be the only major beneficiary in taking down Saddam Hussein. Since Iraq, the chameleonlike neocons have had a prominent voice in the mainstream media and have also played major roles in the shaping the foreign and national security policies of the presidencies that have followed George W. Bush. ..."
"... The $20 billion disbursed during the 15-month proconsulship of the CPA came from frozen and seized Iraqi assets held in the U.S. Most of the money was in the form of cash, flown into Iraq on C-130s in huge plastic shrink-wrapped pallets holding 40 "cashpaks," each cashpak having $1.6 million in $100 bills. Twelve billion dollars moved that way between May 2003 and June 2004, drawn from the Iraqi accounts administered by the New York Federal Reserve Bank. The $100 bills weighed an estimated 363 tons. ..."
"... Once in Iraq, there was virtually no accountability over how the money was spent. There was also considerable money "off the books," including as much as $4 billion from illegal oil exports. Thus, the country was awash in unaccountable cash. British sources report that the CPA contracts that were not handed out to cronies were sold to the highest bidder, with bribes as high as $300,000 being demanded for particularly lucrative reconstruction contracts. The contracts were especially attractive because no work or results were necessarily expected in return. ..."
"... Many of its staff, like Michael Fleischer, were selected for their political affiliations rather than their knowledge of the jobs they were supposed to perform and many of them were not surprisingly neocons. One of them has now resurfaced in a top Pentagon position. She is Simone Ledeen , daughter of leading neoconservative Michael Ledeen. Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training, she nevertheless became in 2003 a senior advisor for northern Iraq at the Ministry of Finance in Baghdad. ..."
"... Simone has now been appointed deputy assistant secretary of defense (DASD) for the Middle East, which is the principal position for shaping Pentagon policy for that region. ..."
"... Apparently Simone's gene pool makes her qualified to lead the Pentagon into the Middle East, where she no doubt has views that make her compatible with the Trump/Pompeo current spin on the Iranian threat. The neocon Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) gushed "Simone Ledeen has worked at the Pentagon & Treasury and at a major bank. Exactly what we should want for such a position." Of course, FDD, the leading advocate of war with Iran, also wants someone who will green light destroying the Persians. ..."
May 23, 2020 | www.unz.com

The Global War on Terror or GWOT was declared in the wake of 9/11 by President George W. Bush. It basically committed the United States to work to eliminate all "terrorist" groups worldwide, whether or not the countries being targeted agreed that they were beset by terrorists and whether or not they welcomed U.S. "help." The GWOT was promoted with brain-dead expressions like "there's a new sheriff in town" which, after the destruction of large parts of the Middle East and Central Asia, later morphed into the matrix of the God-awful belief that something called "American Exceptionalism" existed.

With a national election lurking on the horizon we will no doubt be hearing more about Exceptionalism from various candidates seeking to support the premise that the United States can interfere in every country on the planet because it is, as the expression goes, exceptional. That is generally how Donald Trump and hardline Republicans see the world, that sovereignty exercised by foreign governments is and should be limited by the reach of the U.S. military. Surrounding a competitor with military bases and warships is a concept that many in Washington are currently trying to sell regarding a suitable response to the Chinese economic and political challenge.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo puts it another way, that the U.S. is a "force for good," but it was former Secretary Madeleine Albright who expressed the fantasy best , stating that " if we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us." She also said that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children through U.S. imposed sanctions was " a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it." That is the basic credo of the liberal interventionists. Either way, the U.S. gets to make the decisions over life and death, which, since the GWOT began, have destroyed or otherwise compromised the lives of millions of people, mostly concentrated in Asia.

One aspect of the American heavy footprint that is little noted is the ruin of many formerly functioning countries that it brings with it. Iraq and Libya might have been dictatorships before the U.S. intervened, but they gave their people a higher standard of living and more security than has been the case ever since.

Libya, destroyed by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, had the highest standard of living in Africa. Iraq is currently one of the world's most corrupt countries, so corrupt that there have been massive street demonstrations recently against the government's inability to do anything good for the its own people. Electricity and water supplies are, for example, less reliable than before the U.S. intervened seventeen years ago.

Add Afghanistan to the "most corrupt" list after 19 years of American tutelage and one comes up with a perfect trifecta of countries that have been ruined. In a more rational world, one might have hoped that at least one American politician might have stood up and admitted that we have screwed up royally and it is beyond time to close the overseas bases and bring our troops home. Well, actually one did so in explicit terms, but that was Tulsi Gabbard and she was marginalized as soon as she started her run. Alluding to how Washington's gift to the world has been corruption would be to implicitly deny American Exceptionalism, which is a no-no.

The failures of the American foreign policy since George W. Bush have been accredited to the so-called neoconservatives, who successfully hijacked the Bush presidency. Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, Scooter Libby and the merry crowd at the American Enterprise Institute had a major ally in Vice President Dick Cheney and were pretty much able to run wild, creating a casus belli for invading Iraq that was largely fabricated and which was completely against actual U.S. interests in the region. Apparently no one ever told Wolfie that Iraq was the Arab bulwark against Iranian ambitions and that Tehran would be the only major beneficiary in taking down Saddam Hussein. Since Iraq, the chameleonlike neocons have had a prominent voice in the mainstream media and have also played major roles in the shaping the foreign and national security policies of the presidencies that have followed George W. Bush.

Ironically, neocons mostly were critics of Donald Trump the candidate because he talked "nonsense" about ending "useless wars" but they have been trickling back into his administration since he has made it clear that he is not about to end anything and might in fact be planning to attack Iran and maybe even Venezuela. The thought of new wars, particularly against Israel's enemy Iran, makes neocons salivate.

The disastrous American occupation of Iraq from 2003-2004 was mismanaged by something called the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), which might have been the most corrupt quasi-government body to be seen in recent history. At least $20 billion that belonged to the Iraqi people was wasted, together with hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Exactly how many billions of additional dollars were squandered, stolen, given away, or simply lost will never be known because the deliberate decision by the CPA not to meter oil exports means that no one will ever know how much revenue was generated during 2003 and 2004.

Some of the corruption grew out of the misguided neoconservative agenda for Iraq, which meant that a serious reconstruction effort came second to doling out the spoils to the war's most fervent supporters. The CPA brought in scores of bright, young true believers who were nearly universally unqualified. Many were recruited through the Heritage Foundation or American Enterprise Institute websites, where they had posted their résumés. They were paid six-figure salaries out of Iraqi funds, and most served in 90-day rotations before returning home with their war stories. One such volunteer was former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer's older brother Michael who, though utterly unqualified, was named director of private-sector development for all of Iraq.

The $20 billion disbursed during the 15-month proconsulship of the CPA came from frozen and seized Iraqi assets held in the U.S. Most of the money was in the form of cash, flown into Iraq on C-130s in huge plastic shrink-wrapped pallets holding 40 "cashpaks," each cashpak having $1.6 million in $100 bills. Twelve billion dollars moved that way between May 2003 and June 2004, drawn from the Iraqi accounts administered by the New York Federal Reserve Bank. The $100 bills weighed an estimated 363 tons.

Once in Iraq, there was virtually no accountability over how the money was spent. There was also considerable money "off the books," including as much as $4 billion from illegal oil exports. Thus, the country was awash in unaccountable cash. British sources report that the CPA contracts that were not handed out to cronies were sold to the highest bidder, with bribes as high as $300,000 being demanded for particularly lucrative reconstruction contracts. The contracts were especially attractive because no work or results were necessarily expected in return.

Many of its staff, like Michael Fleischer, were selected for their political affiliations rather than their knowledge of the jobs they were supposed to perform and many of them were not surprisingly neocons. One of them has now resurfaced in a top Pentagon position. She is Simone Ledeen , daughter of leading neoconservative Michael Ledeen. Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training, she nevertheless became in 2003 a senior advisor for northern Iraq at the Ministry of Finance in Baghdad.

Simone has now been appointed deputy assistant secretary of defense (DASD) for the Middle East, which is the principal position for shaping Pentagon policy for that region. Post 9/11, Ledeen's leading neocon father Michael was the source of the expressions "creative destruction" and "total war" as relating to the Muslim Middle East, where "civilian lives cannot be the total war's first priority The purpose of total war is to permanently force your will onto another people." He is also a noted Iranophobe, blaming numerous terrorist acts on that country even when such claims were ridiculous. He might also have been involved in the generation in Italy of the fabricated Iraq Niger uranium documents that contributed greatly to the march to war with Saddam.

Apparently Simone's gene pool makes her qualified to lead the Pentagon into the Middle East, where she no doubt has views that make her compatible with the Trump/Pompeo current spin on the Iranian threat. The neocon Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) gushed "Simone Ledeen has worked at the Pentagon & Treasury and at a major bank. Exactly what we should want for such a position." Of course, FDD, the leading advocate of war with Iran, also wants someone who will green light destroying the Persians.

Ledeen, a Brandeis graduate with an MBA from an Italian university, worked in and out of government in various advisory capacities before joining Standard Chartered Bank. One of her more interesting roles was as an advisor to General Michael Flynn in Afghanistan at a time when Flynn was collaborating with her father on a book that eventually came out in 2016 entitled The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and its Allies. The book asserts that there is a global war going on in which "We face a working coalition that extends from North Korea and China to Russia, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela and Nicaragua." The book predictably claims that Iran is at the center of what is an anti-American alliance.

The extent to which Simone has absorbed her father's views and agrees with them can, of course, be questioned, but her appointment is yet another indication, together with the jobs previously given to John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Elliot Abrams , that the Trump Administration is intent on pursuing a hardline aggressive policy in the Middle East and elsewhere. It is also an unfortunate indication that the neoconservatives, pronounced dead after the election of Trump, are back and resuming their drive to obtain the positions of power that will permit endless war, starting with Iran.

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.

Beavertales , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:31 pm GMT

'Maximum Pressure' is being exerted on Trump.

How was he leveraged to order the assassination of Iran's general Qasem Soleimani?

It's all about manufacturing new threats to his presidency, and then offering to switch them off when he trades something the neocons want. The politics of extortion.

KA , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:35 pm GMT
If "??Operation Iraqi Freedom"? may accurately be regarded as Wolfowitz's War in its conception, then the aftermath of the war should be viewed as the Kissinger-Feith Occupation" and continuation of illegal sanctions by "Democrat, Bill Clinton, and his meretricious Middle East foreign policy team of Samuel "Sandy" Berger, Madeleine "??it's worth it"? Albright, Dennis Ross, and Australian import, Martin Indyk. " but it was "
Kissinger's partner and frontman in Baghdad, Paul "??Jerry"? Bremer, which has effectively destroyed Iraq as a nation-state, " and But within weeks of the invasion, Garner's tenure as head of the post-war planning office was over: he was replaced by Paul Bremer, a terrorism expert and protege of Henry Kissinger. Bremer immediately countermanded all three of Garner's "musts". [My emphasis.] When, eventually, Garner confronted Rumsfeld, telling him: "There is still time to rectify this," Rumsfeld refused to do so. And who was assisting Dr. Kissinger to program the new U.S. proconsul in Baghdad? Who was Paul Bremer's primary contact at the Pentagon, overseeing the occupation from Washington, with the blessing of Don Rumsfeld? None other than the award winning hyperZionist zealot, Douglas "clean break" Feith, the man who had advised Likud icon, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to attack Iraq, Syria and Lebanon in 1996 and tear up the Oslo "peace process ". Feith is a protege of Richard Perle. Feith is on the Advisory Board of JINSA ,. Feith is a face card in the deck of the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, headquartered in Jerusalem. The law office he founded in 1986, Feith & Zell, is based in Israel, catering to Jewish-American "??settlers"? on the West Bank. "

https://www.takimag.com/article/the_kissinger_connection/

KA , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT
If nothing else, Bob Woodward's last fat book on Iraq, State of Denial, has performed a valuable public service by ejecting the furtive Kissinger from the shadows. Woodward reports that vice president Dick Cheney confided to him (Woodward) in the summer of 2005: "I probably talk to Henry Kissinger more than I talk to anybody else. He just comes by and I guess at least once a month, Scooter [Libby] and I sit down with him." [Page 406.] Woodward goes on to state: "The president also met privately with Kissinger every couple of months, making the former secretary the most regular and frequent outside adviser to Bush on foreign affairs." https://www.takimag.com/article/the_kissinger_connection/

We know who did what ,when and how .

Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:30 pm GMT
Regarding Madeleine Albright: "She also said that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children through U.S. imposed sanctions was " a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it." That is the basic credo of the liberal interventionists."

I think 'liberal interventionist' is a bit too weak for the 'lovely' Ms Albright and her (in)famous quote.

Instead, let's try, "That is the basic credo of psychopathically sadistic zionist monsters who exquisitely enjoy the thought of Arab children dying agonizingly slow deaths of preventable diseases and starvation."

Ah, yes. That's a much more accurate assessment of the situation ..

Meena , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 3:20 am GMT
Nixon is recorded as saying, "Any settlement will have to be imposed by both the US and the Soviet Union". Yet, as he had told the Russian ambassador to Washington, "I don't want to anger the American Jews who hold important positions in the press, radio and television".

The Jewish lobby has enormous influence on Congress. Nixon wanted to wait until he had won his reelection and concluded the withdrawal of US forces from Vietnam and then he could face down the Jewish lobby. Later he told the ambassador, "I will deliver the Israelis".

In one of his final acts in office, he ordered a complete cutoff of assistance to Israel. It was not to be.

Watergate consumed his presidency. https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/21/a-machiavellian-us-in-the-middle-east/

Was this Watergate a payback? Carter lost. So did Bush Sr and Kennedys died .

[May 23, 2020] With a national election lurking on the horizon we will no doubt be hearing more about Exceptionalism from various candidates seeking to support the premise that the United States can interfere in every country on the planet because it is, as the expression goes, exceptional.

May 23, 2020 | www.unz.com

Realist , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 12: 22 pm GMT

With a national election lurking on the horizon we will no doubt be hearing more about Exceptionalism from various candidates seeking to support the premise that the United States can interfere in every country on the planet because it is, as the expression goes, exceptional.

That is correct and that is because it works the majority of Americans are stupid.
Do you see a solution suggested here?

Realist , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 12:27 pm GMT

It is also an unfortunate indication that the neoconservatives, pronounced dead after the election of Trump, are back and resuming their drive to obtain the positions of power that will permit endless war, starting with Iran.

The neocons never went anywhere. Trump is a minion of the Deep State and staffs his administration accordingly.

Realist , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 12:32 pm GMT
@BL

My point is simple and ineluctable, whatever our demerits, our great republic is supposed to weed out psychopaths like Brennan long before they get as close as he has to destroying the whole shebang.

Never happens all administrations are full of psychopaths.

Hiram of Tyre , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 1:19 pm GMT
Frankly nothing new. Every Empire sought to rule the world and committed a long list of atrocities in the process. "The empire on which the sun never sets", in reference to the British Empire (the one currently still ruling the world), comes from Xerxes' "We shall extend the Persian territory as far as God's heaven reaches. The sun will then shine on no land beyond our borders." as he invaded Greece.

That said, a word on the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski Doctrine and their Pentagon world map would be on point here

[May 22, 2020] No US president who can withdraw the USA from the Forever Wars

Highly recommended!
But may be coronavirus can. Although Perfumed Princes of Pentagon and MIC with it neocon fifth column will fiercely resist.
May 22, 2020 | www.unz.com

Nikolai Vladivostok , says: Website Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 6:21 am GMT

I've long since concluded, there is no president who can withdraw the US from the Forever Wars. Obama couldn't. Trump can't. Biden/Harris/Oprah/Gabbard/Pence won't.

There are a half-dozen permanent US policies that Americans don't get to vote on, and the Permawar is one of them.

Anon [151] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 6:36 am GMT
My God, Buchanan, I am staggered by the arrogance of this column. Where in the name of all that's holy did you ever get the idea that America has the right to impose on anyone, from Afghans through to Venezuelans, your (perceived) systems of thought, values and democracy? How many American soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan can even speak the local language? Understand the local customs? None!!! They swan around in their sunglasses and battle gear thinking that they are they return of the Terminator and wander why the locals absolutely hate their collective guts! It's time that you collectively learned that America is NOT the world's sheriff and that, as Benjamin Franklin said "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still".
animalogic , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 7:00 am GMT
Pat is not entirely wrong -- he hints at the explanation for failure:
"As imperialists, we Americans are conspicuous failures.

Moreover, with us, the national interest inevitably asserts itself."
As Imperialists there has never been anything but the (Elite) "national interest".
In short, these so called "losing" wars have been wars of aggression -- ie "bad" wars. All Pat's talk of conversion, democracy etc is just so much nonsense.

swamped , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 8:14 am GMT
"While we can defeat our enemies in the air and on the seas and in cyberspace, we cannot persuade them to embrace secular democracy and its values any more than we can convert them to Christianity" although they might be better persuaded to convert to Christianity – traditional Christianity – than to embrace secular democracy and its "values".

Why would anyone want to embrace homosexuality, transgenderism, rad-feminism, opioids, prozac, inequality, broken homes, mass shootings, mountainous debt, corrupt media, puppet politicians & the rest of the filth & perversion that passes for "values" in secular democracies like America or Western Europe?

Indeed, why would anyone in these decadent countries even want to defend these venal "values", let alone try to spread them around the world like the Chinese plague?
No, "they are not trying to change us" but maybe they should.

Donald Duck , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 10:07 am GMT
As the British and French ultimately found out it costs more to run an empire than to loot it. So the long retreat ensues. One would have thought that the Americans might have learned this from history, but no! After all they were "the exceptional people, they stood taller than the others and saw further." Errrm, no they didn't. Like their forbears they got bogged down as well getting into debt which was only bailed out by their insistence that they would not convert the dollar into gold.

Human nature and stupidity has got a long track-record and it isn't going to end anytime soon.

paranoid goy , says: Website Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 12:30 pm GMT
The writer, and most commenters' are still under the erroneous belief that AMerica goes to war in places then AMerica wins or loses or wastes lives or kill children. This is the saddest part of the Yankee war machine: Americans joining the Army because they think theya re joining the fight to defend the American Dream.

You-all are corporate gunmonkeys, fighting and killing and burning and bombing, not in the name of freedom or apple pie, but in the name of Gulf Oil, Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, JPMorgan, Monsanto, PHBBillington, whatever Devil Rumsfeld calls his sack of shit these days .

America has not won any war anywhere, even their civil war was mostly just clearing the land for the banks. That is because it is not America at war, she just supplies the cannon fodder. And cannons. And radiactive scrapmetal to make bullets to mow down women and children in the name of Investor Confidence.
But then, that is what your Zionist bible tells you to do, isn't it?

Realist , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 1:26 pm GMT

What Does Winning Mean in a Forever War?

Winning a war is not in the interest of the Deep State. Being at war makes the Deep State more wealthy and powerful not winning at war.

Realist , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 1:30 pm GMT
@Anon

I just don't think the US has the immoral fortitude to engage in genocide, so it's hopeless trying to "win."

If by the US you mean most of the people you may be right. But the people in the US have no say in the actions of the US government which is controlled by psychopaths.

anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 1:49 pm GMT
Afghanistan is hardly even a country as the average American might define one. There's really nothing to "win"; we only occupy. The infrastructure is primitive so it's not cost effective to try to take whatever natural resources they may have, if any, so there's nothing they have that we want. The Taliban were not "ousted". In the face of massive firepower they split up and scattered; they're still there. After all, the US has been negotiating with them for a peace deal of some sort hasn't it? "Democracy crusades" is just a propaganda fig leaf to bamboozle stupid Americans. It's amazing that there's people who actually believe stuff like that but PT Barnum had it right. "Eventually, we give up and go home". That's because they live there and we don't. "They apparently have an inexhaustible supply of volunteers" willing to fight and die. They don't want foreign robo-soldiers pointing guns at them in their own country. We have our own version, it's called "Remember the Alamo", men who stood their ground against the odds.
Amerimutt Golems , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 2:03 pm GMT
@Anon

If a country is not willing to do that, and I would hope the United States is not willing to do that, then they (we) should go home and leave the Afghans to murder each other without our assistance. If they return to supporting terrorism or go whole hog in producing opium, perhaps the US should decapitate their entire government and let the next batch of losers give governing a try. I just don't think the US has the immoral fortitude to engage in genocide, so it's hopeless trying to "win."

The growth in opium cultivation correlates with CIA activities in the area and the $3 billion from American taxpayers which financed Mujahideen 'terrorism' against the Russians and their local proxies just to avenge the fall of Saigon.

In 1980 Afghanistan accounted for about only 5% of total world heroin production. This was mainly for the local market and neighbor Iran.

That is how you get forever wars.

Rurik , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 3:04 pm GMT

They refuse to surrender and submit because it is their beliefs, their values, their faith, their traditions, their tribe, their God, their culture, their civilization, their honor that they believe they are fighting for in what is, after all, their land, not ours.

If I may..

another way of looking at this, and I feel a profound respect for the Afghans, and only wish we were made of the same mettle. If only ((they)) could say of us..

They refuse to surrender and submit because it is their beliefs, their values, their faith, their traditions, their tribe, their God, their culture, their civilization, their honor that they believe they are fighting for in what is, after all, their land, not (((ours)))).

They are not trying to change ((((us. We))) are trying to change them. And they wish to remain who they are.

IOW, we white Westerners, have proved willing to surrender and submit to all of it. Without nary a peep of protest. Even as ((they)) send us around the globe to kill people like these Afghans, for being slightly inconvenient to their agenda. [And so the CIA can reconstitute its global heroin trafficking operation$.]

If only history would look back on this epic moment, at the last Death throes of the West, and say of whitey, that he refused to surrender his values and faith and traditions and tribe and God, and culture and civilization and honor.. to ((those)) who would pervert his values, and mock his faith, and trash his traditions, and exterminate his tribe, while mocking his God, and poisoning his culture, and destroying his civilization and all because at the end of the day, he had no honor.

These men may be backwater, illiterate villagers,

but at least they have enough mettle and honor, to tell the Beast that they would rather die killing as many of the Beast's stupid goons as they're able, than ever sacrifice their sacred honor- or lands or sovereignty, or the destinies of their children – over to the fiend, which is more than I can say for Western "man".

They are not trying to change us. We are trying to change them. And they wish to remain who they are.

Would that the Swedish people had a Nano-shred of the blood-honor of an Afghan, Barbara Spectre would be pounding sand.

Historically, the Afghans are fundamentalist, tribal and impervious to foreign intervention.

Obviously, there is a great deal we need to learn from them.

What will the Taliban do when we leave?

They will not give up their dream of again ruling the Afghan nation and people. And they will fight until they have achieved that goal and their idea of victory: dominance.

Um.. Pat. Whose land is it anyways? Is it such a horror that Afghans should be dominant in Afghanistan ?

The Taliban was welcomed into most of the regions it governed, because they drove out local war lords who often treated the villager's children as their sex toys, and the foreign (CIA) opioid growers and traffickers. And it was the Taliban that put an end to all of that. They're harsh, but they're effective, and that is their land, not ours.

Also, the Taliban offered to turn over Osama Bin Laden, if the West could provide a shred of proof that he had anything whatsoever to do with 9/11. (he didn't ; ) But the West had zero proof, (as the FBI admits to this day), that they have zero proof that ties Bin Laden to 9/11.

And n0w that we all know 9/11 was an Israeli false flag, intended to use the American military as their bitch, to burn down 'seven nations in five years' .. that the Jewish supremacists wanted destroyed, our whole pretext for being over there has been a sham from day one. Duh.
.
.
.
.
I remember long ago when I had a subscription to National Geographic and this photo came out, I cut the picture out, and stuck it somewhere to look at- it was so visceral and haunting.

Leave them alone. I don't care how many Jews at the WSJ demand whitey has to stay and die for Israel. (Afghanistan is on Iran's border, and that's why we have to stay, to menace all those anti-Semites over there, trying to gas all the Jews and make soap).

Good on Trump for calling out the ((WSJ)).

follyofwar , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 3:42 pm GMT
@paranoid goy I very much doubt if many are joining the military to "defend the American Dream." Most are more practical and are joining to escape poverty, even if it might cost them their lives. Recruiters will now be inundated with volunteers since there are no jobs in the covid depression.
Exile , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 4:15 pm GMT
If the neo-con clown car Trump has permitted to run foreign policy since his election gets us into a war with Iran and/or Venezuela before November, will Pat still be stumping for him, or will we see the return of non-election-year Pat?
VinnyVette , says: Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 4:46 pm GMT
Excellent question Pat! Unfortunately there is no answer, we've been at "forever war" seemingly forever, and the whole point as Eisenhower so preciently warned us is THE objective.
Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment May 22, 2020 at 5:36 pm GMT
It's not 'forever war'. It is Empire. Empire exists to continue and expand. War is about win or lose. Empire is about keep and dominate.

US wars are not to win and then depart. It is to keep occupying and controlling.

And US is rich enough to buy off the local elites as collaborators forever.

Marshal Marlow , says: Show Comment May 23, 2020 at 1:56 am GMT
@Anon

If they return to supporting terrorism

The thing is that the Afghan government wasn't supporting terrorism. Rather, it had no on-going control anywhere except the cities, which made the tribal areas useful hideouts / bases for a raft of groups.

I well remember the prelude to the invasion where the US was demanding that its government (which merely happened to be Taliban that year) hand over OBL in 72hrs. The truth was that the US knew Afghanistan didn't have the capability to do that and it merely wanted to use OBL as an excuse to invade and continue the encirclement of the old soviet states.

[May 22, 2020] The CIA's Murderous Practices, Disinformation Campaigns, and Interference in Other Countries Shape the World Order and U.S. Politics by Glenn Greenwald

Notable quotes:
"... Democrats, early in Trump's presidency, saw clearly that the CIA had become one of Trump's most devoted enemies, and thus began viewing them as a valuable ally. Leading out-of-power Democratic foreign policy elites from the Obama administration and Clinton campaign joined forces not only with Bush/Cheney neocons but also former CIA officials to create new foreign policy advocacy groups designed to malign and undermine Trump and promote hawkish confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia. Meanwhile, other ex-CIA and Homeland Security officials, such as John Brennan and James Clapper, became beloved liberal celebrities by being hired by MSNBC and CNN to deliver liberal-pleasing anti-Trump messaging that, on a virtually daily basis, masqueraded as news . ..."
"... the current function ..."
May 22, 2020 | theintercept.com

In his extraordinary election-advocating op-ed, Hayden, Bush/Cheney's CIA chief, candidly explained the reasons for the CIA's antipathy for Trump: namely, the GOP candidate's stated opposition to allowing CIA regime change efforts in Syria to expand as well as his opposition to arming Ukrainians with lethal weapons to fight Russia (supposedly "pro-Putin" positions which, we are now all supposed to forget, Obama largely shared ). As has been true since President Harry Truman's creation of the CIA after World War II, interfering in other countries and dictating or changing their governments -- through campaigns of mass murder, military coups, arming guerrilla groups, the abolition of democracy, systemic disinformation, and the imposition of savage despots -- is regarded as a divine right, inherent to American exceptionalism. Anyone who questions that or, worse, opposes it and seeks to impede it (as the CIA perceived Trump was) is of suspect loyalties at best.

The CIA's antipathy toward Trump continued after his election victory. The agency became the primary vector for anonymous illegal leaks designed to depict Trump as a Kremlin agent and/or blackmail victim. It worked to ensure the leak of the Steele dossier that clouded at least the first two years of Trump's presidency. It drove the scam Russiagate conspiracy theories. And before Trump was even inaugurated, open warfare erupted between the president-elect and the agency to the point where Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer explicitly warned Trump on the Rachel Maddow Show that he was risking full-on subversion of his presidency by the agency:

This turned out to be one of the most prescient and important (and creepy) statements of the Trump presidency: from Chuck Schumer to Rachel Maddow - in early January, 2017, before Trump was even inaugurated: pic.twitter.com/TUaYkksILG

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 8, 2019
Democrats, early in Trump's presidency, saw clearly that the CIA had become one of Trump's most devoted enemies, and thus began viewing them as a valuable ally. Leading out-of-power Democratic foreign policy elites from the Obama administration and Clinton campaign joined forces not only with Bush/Cheney neocons but also former CIA officials to create new foreign policy advocacy groups designed to malign and undermine Trump and promote hawkish confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia. Meanwhile, other ex-CIA and Homeland Security officials, such as John Brennan and James Clapper, became beloved liberal celebrities by being hired by MSNBC and CNN to deliver liberal-pleasing anti-Trump messaging that, on a virtually daily basis, masqueraded as news .

The all-consuming Russiagate narrative that dominated the first three years of Trump's presidency further served to elevate the CIA as a noble and admirable institution while whitewashing its grotesque history. Liberal conventional wisdom held that Russian Facebook ads, Twitter bots and the hacking and release of authentic, incriminating DNC emails was some sort of unprecedented, off-the-charts, out-of-the-ordinary crime-of-the-century attack, with several leading Democrats (including Hillary Clinton) actually comparing it to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor . The level of historical ignorance and/or jingostic American exceptionalism necessary to believe this is impossible to describe. Compared to what the CIA has done to dozens of other countries since the end of World War II, and what it continues to do , watching Americans cast Russian interference in the 2016 election through online bots and email hacking (even if one believes every claim made about it) as some sort of unique and unprecedented crime against democracy is staggering. Set against what the CIA has done and continues to do to "interfere" in the domestic affairs of other countries -- including Russia -- the 2016 election was, at most, par for the course for international affairs and, more accurately, a trivial and ordinary act in the context of CIA interference. This propaganda was sustainable because the recent history and the current function of the CIA has largely been suppressed. Thankfully, a just-released book by journalist Vincent Bevins -- who spent years as a foreign correspondent covering two countries still marred by brutal CIA interference: Brazil for the Los Angeles Times and Indonesia for the Washington Post -- provides one of the best, most informative and most illuminating histories yet of this agency and the way it has shaped the actual, rather than the propagandistic, U.S. role in the world.

Entitled "The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World," the book primarily documents the indescribably horrific campaigns of mass murder and genocide the CIA sponsored in Indonesia as an instrument for destroying a nonaligned movement of nations who would be loyal to neither Washington nor Moscow. Critically, Bevins documents how the chilling success of that morally grotesque campaign led to its being barely discussed in U.S. discourse, but then also serving as the foundation and model for clandestine CIA interference campaigns in multiple other countries from Guatemala, Chile, and Brazil to the Philippines, Vietnam, and Central America: the Jakarta Method.

Our newest episode of SYSTEM UPDATE, which debuts today at 2:00 p.m. on The Intercept's YouTube channel , is devoted to a discussion of why this history is so vital: not just for understanding the current international political order but also for distinguishing between fact and fiction in our contemporary political discourse. In addition to my own observations on this topic, I speak to Bevins about his book, about what the CIA really is and how it has shaped the world we still inhabit, and why a genuine understanding of both international and domestic politics is impossible without a clear grasp on this story.

[May 22, 2020] Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history that was past. His policy was to foster friendly relations on equal terms with all parts of the world, regardless of ideological differences. I think that Putin's concept of a multipolar world is similar. It is clearly a concept that horrifies the exceptionalists

Notable quotes:
"... Mr. de Gaulle like other "leaders" of colonial powers did understand that the moment of overt coercive relations of colonialism had passed and that colonialism to remain qualitatively the same, required covert coercive relations facilitated by the complicity of local "elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest. ..."
May 22, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

Herman , May 17, 2020 at 09:00

Interesting comparison between the aspirations of De Gaulle and Putin.

"Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history that was past. His policy was to foster friendly relations on equal terms with all parts of the world, regardless of ideological differences. I think that Putin's concept of a multipolar world is similar. It is clearly a concept that horrifies the exceptionalists."

Agree with Johnstone.

OlyaPola , May 19, 2020 at 11:55

"Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history that was past. "

Mr. de Gaulle like other "leaders" of colonial powers did understand that the moment of overt coercive relations of colonialism had passed and that colonialism to remain qualitatively the same, required covert coercive relations facilitated by the complicity of local "elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest.

The exceptions to such strategies lay within constructs of settler colonialism which were addressed primarily through warfare – "The United States of America", Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia, Indonesia, Algeria, Kenya, Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola refer – to facilitate such future strategies.

"I think that Putin's concept of a multipolar world is similar."

As outlined elsewhere the concept of a multi-polar world is not synonymous with the concept of colonialism except for the colonialists who consistently seek to encourage such conflation through myths of we-are-all-in-this-togetherness.

[May 21, 2020] The 'Clean Break' Doctrine OffGuardian

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm ..."
"... "the right to plunder anything one can get their hands on" ..."
"... "the UK and France in March 2011 which led the international community to support an intervention in Libya to protect civilians from forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi" ..."
May 21, 2020 | off-guardian.org

n 1996 a task force, led by Richard Perle, produced a policy document titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Benjamin Netanyahu, who was then in his first term as Prime Minister of Israel, as a how-to manual on approaching regime change in the Middle East and for the destruction of the Oslo Accords.

The "Clean Break" policy document outlined these goals:

Ending Yasser Arafat's and the Palestinian Authority's political influence, by blaming them for acts of Palestinian terrorism Inducing the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. Launching war against Syria after Saddam's regime is disposed of. Followed by military action against Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.

"Clean Break" was also in direct opposition to the Oslo Accords, to which Netanyahu was very much itching to obliterate. The Oslo II Accord was signed just the year before, on September 28th 1995, in Taba, Egypt.

During the Oslo Accord peace process, Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu accused Rabin's government of being "removed from Jewish tradition and Jewish values." Rallies organised by the Likud and other right-wing fundamentalist groups featured depictions of Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform or in the crosshairs of a gun.

In July 1995, Netanyahu went so far as to lead a mock funeral procession for Rabin, featuring a coffin and hangman's noose.

The Oslo Accords was the initiation of a process which was to lead to a peace treaty based on the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, and at fulfilling the "right of the Palestinian people to self-determination." If such a peace treaty were to occur, with the United States backing, it would have prevented much of the mayhem that has occurred since.

However, the central person to ensuring this process, Yitzak Rabin, was assassinated just a month and a half after the signing of the Oslo II Accord, on November 4th, 1995. Netanyahu became prime minister of Israel seven months later. "Clean Break" was produced the following year.

On November 6th, 2000 in the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin, who was the chief negotiator of the Oslo peace accords, warned those Israelis who argued that it was impossible to make peace with the Palestinians:

Zionism was founded in order to save Jews from persecution and anti-Semitism, and not in order to offer them a Jewish Sparta or – God forbid – a new Massada."

On Oct. 5, 2003, for the first time in 30 years, Israel launched bombing raids against Syria, targeting a purported "Palestinian terrorist camp" inside Syrian territory. Washington stood by and did nothing to prevent further escalation.

"Clean Break" was officially launched in March 2003 with the war against Iraq, under the pretence of "The War on Terror". The real agenda was a western-backed list of regime changes in the Middle East to fit the plans of the United Kingdom, the U.S. and Israel.

However, the affair is much more complicated than that with each player holding their own "idea" of what the "plan" is. Before we can fully appreciate such a scope, we must first understand what was Sykes-Picot and how did it shape today's world mayhem.

Arabian Nights

WWI was to officially start July 28th 1914, almost immediately following the Balkan wars (1912-1913) which had greatly weakened the Ottoman Empire.

Never one to miss an opportunity when smelling fresh blood, the British were very keen on acquiring what they saw as strategic territories for the taking under the justification of being in war-time, which in the language of geopolitics translates to "the right to plunder anything one can get their hands on" .

The brilliance of Britain's plan to garner these new territories was not to fight the Ottoman Empire directly but rather, to invoke an internal rebellion from within. These Arab territories would be encouraged by Britain to rebel for their independence from the Ottoman Empire and that Britain would support them in this cause.

These Arab territories were thus led to believe that they were fighting for their own freedom when, in fact, they were fighting for British and secondarily French colonial interests.

In order for all Arab leaders to sign on to the idea of rebelling against the Ottoman Sultan, there needed to be a viable leader that was Arab, for they certainly would not agree to rebel at the behest of Britain.

Lord Kitchener, the butcher of Sudan, was to be at the helm of this operation as Britain's Minister of War. Kitchener's choice for Arab leadership was the scion of the Hashemite dynasty, Hussein ibn Ali, known as the Sherif of Mecca who ruled the region of Hejaz under the Ottoman Sultan.

Hardinge of the British India Office disagreed with this choice and wanted Wahhabite Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud instead, however, Lord Kitchener overruled this stating that their intelligence revealed that more Arabs would follow Hussein.

Since the Young Turk Revolution which seized power of the Ottoman government in 1908, Hussein was very aware that his dynasty was in no way guaranteed and thus he was open to Britain's invitation to crown him King of the Arab kingdom.

Kitchener wrote to one of Hussein's sons, Abdallah, as reassurance of Britain's support:

If the Arab nation assist England in this war that has been forced upon us by Turkey, England will guarantee that no internal intervention take place in Arabia, and will give Arabs every assistance against foreign aggression."

Sir Henry McMahon who was the British High Commissioner to Egypt, would have several correspondences with Sherif Hussein between July 1915 to March 1916 to convince Hussein to lead the rebellion for the "independence" of the Arab states.

However, in a private letter to India's Viceroy Charles Hardinge sent on December 4th, 1915, McMahon expressed a rather different view of what the future of Arabia would be, contrary to what he had led Sherif Hussein to believe:

[I do not take] the idea of a future strong united independent Arab State too seriously the conditions of Arabia do not and will not for a very long time to come, lend themselves to such a thing."

Such a view meant that Arabia would be subject to Britain's heavy-handed "advising" in all its affairs, whether it sought it or not.

In the meantime, Sherif Hussein was receiving dispatches issued by the British Cairo office to the effect that the Arabs of Palestine, Syria, and Mesopotamia (Iraq) would be given independence guaranteed by Britain, if they rose up against the Ottoman Empire.

The French were understandably suspicious of Britain's plans for these Arab territories. The French viewed Palestine, Lebanon and Syria as intrinsically belonging to France, based on French conquests during the Crusades and their "protection" of the Catholic populations in the region.

Hussein was adamant that Beirut and Aleppo were to be given independence and completely rejected French presence in Arabia. Britain was also not content to give the French all the concessions they demanded as their "intrinsic" colonial rights.

Enter Sykes and Picot.

... ... ...

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s violent confrontations between Jews and Arabs took place in Palestine costing hundreds of lives. In 1936 a major Arab revolt occurred over 7 months, until diplomatic efforts involving other Arab countries led to a ceasefire.

In 1937, a British Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by William Peel concluded that Palestine had two distinct societies with irreconcilable political demands, thus making it necessary to partition the land.

The Arab Higher Committee refused Peel's "prescription" and the revolt broke out again. This time, Britain responded with a devastatingly heavy hand. Roughly 5,000 Arabs were killed by the British armed forces and police. Following the riots, the British mandate government dissolved the Arab Higher Committee and declared it an illegal body.

In response to the revolt, the British government issued the White Paper of 1939, which stated that Palestine should be a bi-national state, inhabited by both Arabs and Jews.

Due to the international unpopularity of the mandate including within Britain itself, it was organised such that the United Nations would take responsibility for the British initiative and adopted the resolution to partition Palestine on November 29th, 1947.

Britain would announce its termination of its Mandate for Palestine on May 15th, 1948 after the State of Israel declared its independence on May 14th, 1948.

A New Strategy for Securing Whose Realm?

Despite what its title would have you believe, "Clean Break" is neither a "new strategy" nor meant for "securing" anything. It is also not the brainchild of fanatical neo-conservatives: Dick Cheney and Richard Perle, nor even that of crazed end-of-days fundamentalist Benjamin Netanyahu, but rather has the very distinct and lingering odour of the British Empire.

"Clean Break" is a continuation of Britain's geopolitical game, and just as it used France during the Sykes-Picot days it is using the United States and Israel.

The role Israel has found itself playing in the Middle East could not exist if it were not for over 30 years of direct British occupation in Palestine and its direct responsibility for the construction of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which set a course for destruction and endless war in this region long before Israel ever existed.

It was also Britain who officially launched operation "Clean Break" by directly and fraudulently instigating an illegal war against Iraq to which the Chilcot Inquiry, aka Iraq Inquiry , released 7 years later, attests to.

This was done by the dubious reporting by British Intelligence setting the pretext for the U.S.' ultimate invasion into Iraq based off of fraudulent and forged evidence provided by GCHQ, unleashing the "War on Terror", aka "Clean Break" outline for regime change in the Middle East.

In addition, the Libyan invasion in 2011 was also found to be unlawfully instigated by Britain.

In a report published by the British Foreign Affairs Committee in September 2016, it was concluded that it was "the UK and France in March 2011 which led the international community to support an intervention in Libya to protect civilians from forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi" .

The report concluded that the Libyan intervention was based on false pretence provided by British Intelligence and recklessly promoted by the British government.

If this were not enough, British Intelligence has also been caught behind the orchestrations of Russia-Gate and the Skripal affair .

Therefore, though the U.S. and Israeli military have done a good job at stealing the show, and though they certainly believe themselves to be the head of the show, the reality is that this age of empire is distinctly British and anyone who plays into this game will ultimately be playing for said interests, whether they are aware of it or not.

Originally published by Strategic Culture

Almondson ,

Yossi B said:

Zionism was founded in order to save Jews from persecution and anti-Semitism

Ever heard of Dumbo? He's a flying elephant.

The crusade in the ME will continue, with Israel the top dog until America's military support is no longer there. Even without the Israeli eastern european invaders, the area is primed for perpetual tribal warfare because the masses are driven by tribalist doctrines and warped metaphysics dictated by insane and inhumane parasites (priests). It is the epicenter of a spiritual plague that has infected most of the planet.

paul ,

There is complete continuity between the activities of Zionist controlled western countries and those of the present day.

In the 1930s, there were about 300,000 adult Palestinian males. Over 10% were killed, imprisoned and tortured or driven into exile. 100,000 British troops were sent to Palestine to destroy completely Palestinian political and military organisations. Wingate set up the Jew terror gangs who were given free rein to murder, rape and burn, in preparation for the complete ethnic cleansing of the country.

We see the same ruthless, genocidal brutality on an even greater scale in the present day, serving exactly the same interests. Nothing has ever come of trying to negotiate with the Zionists and their western stooges – just further disasters. It is only resolute and uncompromising resistance that has ever achieved anything. Hezbollah kicking their Zionist arses out of Lebanon in 2000 and keeping them out in 2006. Had they not done so, Lebanon would still be under Zionist occupation and covered with their filthy illegal settlements.

They have never stopped and they never will. The objective is to create a vast Zionist empire comprising the whole of Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, and parts of Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. This plan has never changed and it never will. The Zionist thieves will shortly steal what little is left of Palestine. But the thieving will not end there. It will just move on to neighbouring countries.

The prime reason they have been able to get away with this is not their control of British and US golems. It is by playing the old, dirty colonial games of divide and rule, with the Quisling stooge dictators serving their interests. They have always been able to set Sunni against Shia, and different factions against others. The dumb Arabs fall for it every time. Their latest intrigues are directed at the destruction of Iran, the next victim on their target list after Iraq, Libya and Syria. And the Quisling dictators of Saudi Arabia are openly agitating for this and offering to pay for all of it. Syria sent troops to join the US invasion of Iraq in 1991, though Iraqi troops fought and died in Syria in 1973 against Israel. Egypt allows Israel to use its airspace to carry out the genocidal terror bombing of Gaza.

All this is contemptible enough and fits into racist stereotypes of Arabs as stupid, irrational, corrupt, easily bought, violent and treacherous. This of course does not apply to the populations of those countries, but it is a legitimate assessment of their Quisling dictators, with a (very) few honourable exceptions.

Seamus Padraig ,

Of course, Arab rulers who don't tow the Zionist line generally get overthrown, don't they? And that usually requires the efforts/intervention of FUKUS, doesn't it? So you can't really pretend that 'Arab stupidity' is the main factor.

Richard Le Sarc ,

The fact that, as the Yesha Council of Rabbis and Torah Sages declared in 2006, as Israel was bombing Lebanon 'back to the Stone Age', under Talmudic Judaism, killing civilians is not just permissible, but a mitzvah, or good deed, explains Zionist behaviour. Other doctrines allow an entire 'city' eg Gaza, to be devastated for the 'crimes' of a few, and children, even babies, to be killed if they would grow up to 'oppose the Jews'. Dare mention these FACTS, seen everyday in Israeli barbarity, and the 'antisemitism' slurs flow, as ever.

Julia ,

" is that this age of empire is distinctly British"

.it takes some balls to make such an absurd statement and still expect to be taken seriously. The US of course with its 800 military bases around the world and gifts of 40 billion a year to Israel has no opinion on the future of the Middle East. You would have us believe that they are just humble onlookers, as a small bankrupt country tells them what to do. We are being told that the CIA, the most formidable spy agency and manipulator of countries in history, sits quietly by as the British and Israel tells the US what to do.
Absurd isn't it., Clearly the truth is that Israel is just another military base for the US in the Middle East, easily the most important geopolitical region in the world. They fund it, arm it, and protect it from all attacks, Israel does as it is told by the US for the most part despite the pantomime on the surface.
Many on the far right like to hide US interests behind a wall of antisemitism that likes to paint 'the jews' as an all powerful enemy but this is just cover for Israel's real geopolitical roll as a US puppet.
Time and time again all we are seeing is attempt to write the US, the largest empire in the history out of the news and out of the history books, like it is some invisible benign force that has not interests, no control and does noting to forward it's interests and it's empire.

''To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise."

I don't know about you, but I'm not 10 years old and I know I am looking at Empire and it's power being flexed every day in every part do the world, especial in the parts of the world that it funds with trillions of dollars.

Julia ,

" is that this age of empire is distinctly British"

.it takes some balls to make such an absurd statement and still expect to be taken seriously. The US of course with its 800 military bases around the world and gifts of 40 billion a year to Israel has no opinion on the future of the Middle East. You would have us believe that they are just humble onlookers, as a small bankrupt country tells them what to do. We are being told that the CIA, the most formidable spy agency and manipulator of countries in history, sits quietly by as the British and Israel tells the US what to do.
Absurd isn't it., Clearly the truth is that Israel is just another military base for the US in the Middle East, easily the most important geopolitical region in the world. They fund it, arm it, and protect it from all attacks, Israel does as it is told by the US for the most part despite the pantomime on the surface.
Many on the far right like to hide US interests behind a wall of antisemitism that likes to paint 'the jews' as an all powerful enemy but this is just cover for Israel's real geopolitical roll as a US puppet.
Time and time again all we are seeing is attempt to write the US, the largest empire in the history out of the news and out of the history books, like it is some invisible benign force that has not interests, no control and does noting to forward it's interests and it's empire.

''To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise."

I don't know about you, but I'm not 10 years old and I know I am looking at Empire and it's power being flexed every day in every part do the world, especial in the parts of the world that it funds with trillions of dollars.

Richard Le Sarc ,

The antithesis of the truth. It is US politicians who flock to AIPAC's meeting every year to pledge UNDYING fealty to Israel, not Israeli politicians pledging loyalty to the USA. It is Israeli and dual loyalty Jewish oligarchs funding BOTH US parties, it is US politicians throwing themselves to the ground in adulation when Bibi the war criminal addresses the Congress with undisguised contempt, not Israeli politicians groveling to the USA. The master-servant relationship is undisguised.

Pyewacket ,

In Daniel Yergin's The Prize, a history of the Oil industry, he provides another interesting angle to explain British interest in the region. He states that at that time, Churchill realised that a fighting Navy powered by Coal, was not nearly as good or efficient as one using Oil as a fuel, and that securing supplies of the stuff was the best way forward to protect the Empire.

BigB ,

Yergin would be right. The precursor of the First World War was a technological arms race and accelerated 'scientific' perfection of arsenals – particularly naval – in the service of imperialism. British and German imperialism. The full story involves the Berlin to Cairo railway and the resource grab that went with it. I'm a bit sketchy on the details now: but Churchill had a prominent role, rising to First Lord of the Admiralty.

Docherty and Macgregor have exposed the hidden history. F W Engdahl has written about WW1 being the first oil war.

Andreas Schlüter ,

And don´t forget which of the US Military command regions into which the US Military divided the WHOLE World is named "US CENTCOM"!
„One Thing Must be Clear to the World: The US Power Elite Regards the Whole Globe as Their Colony!": https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/10/26/one-thing-must-be-clear-to-the-world-the-us-power-elite-regards-the-whole-globe-as-their-colony/

Antonym ,

In 1996 a task force, led by Richard Perle, produced a policy document titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Benjamin Netanyahu

No source link for this!

By the way 1996 was during the Clinton administration. Warren Christopher was secretary of state and John Deutch was the Director of Central Intelligence . George Tenet was appointed the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence in July 1995. After John Deutch's abrupt resignation in December 1996, Tenet served as acting director.

Reg ,

Here you go, sonny boy

http://www.dougfeith.com/docs/Clean_Break.pdf

Richard Le Sarc ,

Antsie, what are you going to deny next? The USS Liberty? Deir Yassin? The Lavon Affair? Sabra, Shatilla? Qana (twice)? The Five Celebrating Israelis on 9/11?Does not impress.

[May 21, 2020] The neoliberal globalization myth fostered the delusion of labour in which Western societies could prosper from the ideas and computer startups, while the dirty work of actually making things is left to low-wage countries. One result: a drastic shortage of face masks

Notable quotes:
"... In France, confinement has been generally well accepted as necessary, but that does not mean people are content with the government -- on the contrary. Every evening at eight, people go to their windows to cheer for health workers and others doing essential tasks, but the applause is not for President Macron. ..."
"... What we have witnessed is the failure of what used to be one of the very best public health services in the world. It has been degraded by years of cost-cutting. In recent years, the number of hospital beds per capita has declined steadily. Many hospitals have been shut down and those that remain are drastically understaffed. Public hospital facilities have been reduced to a state of perpetual saturation, so that when a new epidemic comes along, on top of all the other usual illnesses, there is simply not the capacity to deal with it all at once. ..."
"... The neoliberal globalization myth fostered the delusion that advanced Western societies could prosper from their superior brains, thanks to ideas and computer startups, while the dirty work of actually making things is left to low-wage countries. One result: a drastic shortage of face masks. The government let a factory that produced masks and other surgical equipment be sold off and shut down. Having outsourced its textile industry, France had no immediate way to produce the masks it needed. ..."
"... In late March, French media reported that a large stock of masks ordered and paid for by the southeastern region of France was virtually hijacked on the tarmac of a Chinese airport by Americans, who tripled the price and had the cargo flown to the United States. There are also reports of Polish and Czech airport authorities intercepting Chinese or Russian shipments of masks intended for hard-hit Italy and keeping them for their own use. ..."
"... The Covid–19 crisis makes it just that much clearer that the European Union is no more than a complex economic arrangement, with neither the sentiment nor the popular leaders that hold together a nation. For a generation, schools, media, politicians have instilled the belief that the "nation" is an obsolete entity. But in a crisis, people find that they are in France, or Germany, or Italy, or Belgium -- but not in "Europe." The European Union is structured to care about trade, investment, competition, debt, economic growth. Public health is merely an economic indicator. For decades, the European Commission has put irresistible pressure on nations to reduce the costs of their public health facilities in order to open competition for contracts to the private sector -- which is international by nature. ..."
"... Scapegoating China may seem the way to try to hold the declining Western world together, even as Europeans' long-standing admiration for America turns to dismay. ..."
"... The countries that have suffered most from the epidemic are among the most indebted of the EU member states, starting with Italy. The economic damage from the lockdown obliges them to borrow further. As their debt increases, so do interest rates charged by commercial banks. They turned to the EU for help, for instance by issuing eurobonds that would share the debt at lower interest rates. This has increased tension between debtor countries in the south and creditor countries in the north, which said nein . Countries in the eurozone cannot borrow from the European Central Bank as the U.S. Treasury borrows from the Fed. And their own national central banks take orders from the ECB, which controls the euro. ..."
"... The great irony is that "a common currency" was conceived by its sponsors as the key to European unity. On the contrary, the euro has a polarizing effect -- with Greece at the bottom and Germany at the top. And Italy sinking. But Italy is much bigger than Greece and won't go quietly. ..."
"... A major paradox is that the left and the Yellow Vests call for economic and social policies that are impossible under EU rules, and yet many on the left shy away from even thinking of leaving the EU. For over a generation, the French left has made an imaginary "social Europe" the center of its utopian ambitions. ..."
"... Russia is a living part of European history and culture. Its exclusion is totally unnatural and artificial. Brzezinski [the late Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Carter administration's national security adviser] spelled it out in The Great Chessboard : The U.S. maintains world hegemony by keeping the Eurasian landmass divided. ..."
"... But this policy can be seen to be inherited from the British. It was Churchill who proclaimed -- in fact welcomed -- the Iron Curtain that kept continental Europe divided. In retrospect, the Cold War was basically part of the divide-and-rule strategy, since it persists with greater intensity than ever after its ostensible cause -- the Communist threat -- is long gone. ..."
"... The whole Ukrainian operation of 2014 [the U.S.–cultivated coup in Kyiv, February 2014] was lavishly financed and stimulated by the United States in order to create a new conflict with Russia. Joe Biden has been the Deep State's main front man in turning Ukraine into an American satellite, used as a battering ram to weaken Russia and destroy its natural trade and cultural relations with Western Europe. ..."
"... I think France is likelier than Germany to break with the U.S.–imposed Russophobia simply because, thanks to de Gaulle, France is not quite as thoroughly under U.S. occupation. Moreover, friendship with Russia is a traditional French balance against German domination -- which is currently being felt and resented. ..."
"... "Decades of indoctrination in the ideology of "Europe" has instilled the belief that the nation-state is a bad thing of the past. The result is that people raised in the European Union faith tend to regard any suggestion of return to national sovereignty as a fatal step toward fascism. This fear of contagion from "the right" is an obstacle to clear analysis which weakens the left and favors the right, which dares be patriotic." ..."
"... Since WWII the US has itself been occupied by tyrants, using Russophobia to demand power as fake defenders. ..."
"... " French philosophy .By constantly attacking, deconstructing, and denouncing every remnant of human "power" they could spot, the intellectual rebels left the power of "the markets" unimpeded, and did nothing to stand in the way of the expansion of U.S. military power all around the world " ..."
"... From her groundbreaking work on the NATO empire's sickening war on sovereign Serbia, the dead end of identity politics and trans bathroom debates, to her critique of unfettered immigration and open borders, and her dismissal of the absurd Russsiagate baloney, better than anyone else, Johnstone has kept her intellect carefully honed to the real genuine kitchen table bread and butter issues that truly matter. She recognized before most of the world's scholars the perils of rampant inequality and saw the writing on the wall as to where this grotesque economic system is taking us all: down a dystopian slope into penury and police-state heavy-handedness, with millions unable to come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or dental bill. ..."
"... The mask competition and fiasco shows the importance of a country simply making things in their own country, not on the other side of the world, it's not nationalism it's just a better way to logistically deliver reliable products to the citizens. ..."
"... Some hold that they never departed, but mutated tools including CFA zones and "intelligence" relations in furtherance of "changing" to remain qualitatively the same. Just as "The United States of America" is a system of coercive relations not synonymous with the political geographical area designated "The United States of America", the colonialism of former and present "colonial powers" continues to exist, since the "independence" of the colonised was always, and continues to be, framed within linear systems of coercive relations, facilitated by the complicity of "local elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest, and the acquiescence of "local others" for myriad reasons. ..."
"... After reading Circle in the Darkness, I have ordered and am now reading her books on Hillary Clinton (Queen of Chaos) and the Yugoslav wars (Fool's Crusade), which are very worthwhile and important. I would recommend that her many articles over the years, appearing in such publications such as In These Times, Counterpunch and Consortium News, be reprinted and published together as an anthology. Through Circle in the Darkness, we have Diana Johnstone's "Life", but it would be good also to have her "Letters". ..."
"... Mr. de Gaulle like other "leaders" of colonial powers did understand that the moment of overt coercive relations of colonialism had passed and that colonialism to remain qualitatively the same, required covert coercive relations facilitated by the complicity of local "elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest. ..."
May 21, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

In France, confinement has been generally well accepted as necessary, but that does not mean people are content with the government -- on the contrary. Every evening at eight, people go to their windows to cheer for health workers and others doing essential tasks, but the applause is not for President Macron.

Macron and his government are criticized for hesitating too long to confine the population, for vacillating about the need for masks and tests, or about when or how much to end the confinement. Their confusion and indecision at least defend them from the wild accusation of having staged the whole thing in order to lock up the population.

What we have witnessed is the failure of what used to be one of the very best public health services in the world. It has been degraded by years of cost-cutting. In recent years, the number of hospital beds per capita has declined steadily. Many hospitals have been shut down and those that remain are drastically understaffed. Public hospital facilities have been reduced to a state of perpetual saturation, so that when a new epidemic comes along, on top of all the other usual illnesses, there is simply not the capacity to deal with it all at once.

The neoliberal globalization myth fostered the delusion that advanced Western societies could prosper from their superior brains, thanks to ideas and computer startups, while the dirty work of actually making things is left to low-wage countries. One result: a drastic shortage of face masks. The government let a factory that produced masks and other surgical equipment be sold off and shut down. Having outsourced its textile industry, France had no immediate way to produce the masks it needed.

Meanwhile, in early April, Vietnam donated hundreds of thousands of antimicrobial face masks to European countries and is producing them by the million. Employing tests and selective isolation, Vietnam has fought off the epidemic with only a few hundred cases and no deaths.

You must have thoughts as to the question of Western unity in response to Covid–19.

In late March, French media reported that a large stock of masks ordered and paid for by the southeastern region of France was virtually hijacked on the tarmac of a Chinese airport by Americans, who tripled the price and had the cargo flown to the United States. There are also reports of Polish and Czech airport authorities intercepting Chinese or Russian shipments of masks intended for hard-hit Italy and keeping them for their own use.

The absence of European solidarity has been shockingly clear. Better-equipped Germany banned exports of masks to Italy. In the depth of its crisis, Italy found that the German and Dutch governments were mainly concerned with making sure Italy pays its debts. Meanwhile, a team of Chinese experts arrived in Rome to help Italy with its Covid–19 crisis, displaying a banner reading "We are waves of the same sea, leaves of the same tree, flowers of the same garden." The European institutions lack such humanistic poetry. Their founding value is not solidarity but the neoliberal principle of "free unimpeded competition."

How do you think this reflects on the European Union?

The Covid–19 crisis makes it just that much clearer that the European Union is no more than a complex economic arrangement, with neither the sentiment nor the popular leaders that hold together a nation. For a generation, schools, media, politicians have instilled the belief that the "nation" is an obsolete entity. But in a crisis, people find that they are in France, or Germany, or Italy, or Belgium -- but not in "Europe." The European Union is structured to care about trade, investment, competition, debt, economic growth. Public health is merely an economic indicator. For decades, the European Commission has put irresistible pressure on nations to reduce the costs of their public health facilities in order to open competition for contracts to the private sector -- which is international by nature.

Globalization has hastened the spread of the pandemic, but it has not strengthened internationalist solidarity. Initial gratitude for Chinese aid is being brutally opposed by European Atlanticists. In early May, Mathias Döpfner, CEO of the Springer publishing giant, bluntly called on Germany to ally with the U.S. -- against China. Scapegoating China may seem the way to try to hold the declining Western world together, even as Europeans' long-standing admiration for America turns to dismay.

Meanwhile, relations between EU member states have never been worse. In Italy and to a greater extent in France, the coronavirus crisis has enforced growing disillusion with the European Union and an ill-defined desire to restore national sovereignty.

Corollary question: What are the prospects that Europe will produce leaders capable of seizing that right moment, that assertion of independence? What do you reckon such leaders would be like?

The EU is likely to be a central issue in the near future, but this issue can be exploited in very different ways, depending on which leaders get hold of it. The coronavirus crisis has intensified the centrifugal forces already undermining the European Union. The countries that have suffered most from the epidemic are among the most indebted of the EU member states, starting with Italy. The economic damage from the lockdown obliges them to borrow further. As their debt increases, so do interest rates charged by commercial banks. They turned to the EU for help, for instance by issuing eurobonds that would share the debt at lower interest rates. This has increased tension between debtor countries in the south and creditor countries in the north, which said nein . Countries in the eurozone cannot borrow from the European Central Bank as the U.S. Treasury borrows from the Fed. And their own national central banks take orders from the ECB, which controls the euro.

What does the crisis mean for the euro? I confess I've lost faith in this project, given how disadvantaged it leaves the nations on the Continent's southern rim.

The great irony is that "a common currency" was conceived by its sponsors as the key to European unity. On the contrary, the euro has a polarizing effect -- with Greece at the bottom and Germany at the top. And Italy sinking. But Italy is much bigger than Greece and won't go quietly.

The German constitutional court in Karlsruhe recently issued a long judgment making it clear who is boss. It recalled and insisted that Germany agreed to the euro only on the grounds that the main mission of the European Central Bank was to fight inflation, and that it could not directly finance member states. If these rules were not followed, the Bundesbank, the German central bank, would be obliged to pull out of the ECB. And since the Bundesbank is the ECB's main creditor, that is that. There can be no generous financial help to troubled governments within the eurozone. Period.

Is there a possibility of disintegration here?

The idea of leaving the EU is most developed in France. The Union Populaire Républicaine, founded in 2007 by former senior functionary François Asselineau, calls for France to leave the euro, the European Union, and NATO.

The party has been a didactic success, spreading its ideas and attracting around 20,000 active militants without scoring any electoral success. A main argument for leaving the EU is to escape from the constraints of EU competition rules in order to protect its vital industry, agriculture, and above all its public services.

A major paradox is that the left and the Yellow Vests call for economic and social policies that are impossible under EU rules, and yet many on the left shy away from even thinking of leaving the EU. For over a generation, the French left has made an imaginary "social Europe" the center of its utopian ambitions.

" Europe" as an idea or an ideal, you mean.

Decades of indoctrination in the ideology of "Europe" has instilled the belief that the nation-state is a bad thing of the past. The result is that people raised in the European Union faith tend to regard any suggestion of return to national sovereignty as a fatal step toward fascism. This fear of contagion from "the right" is an obstacle to clear analysis which weakens the left and favors the right, which dares be patriotic.

Two and a half months of coronavirus crisis have brought to light a factor that makes any predictions about future leaders even more problematic. That factor is a widespread distrust and rejection of all established authority. This makes rational political programs extremely difficult, because rejection of one authority implies acceptance of another. For instance, the way to liberate public services and pharmaceuticals from the distortions of the profit motive is nationalization. If you distrust the power of one as much as the other, there is nowhere to go.

Such radical distrust can be explained by two main factors -- the inevitable feeling of helplessness in our technologically advanced world, combined with the deliberate and even transparent lies on the part of mainstream politicians and media. But it sets the stage for the emergence of manipulated saviors or opportunistic charlatans every bit as deceptive as the leaders we already have, or even more so. I hope these irrational tendencies are less pronounced in France than in some other countries.

I'm eager to talk about Russia. There are signs that relations with Russia are another source of European dissatisfaction as "junior partners" within the U.S.–led Atlantic alliance. Macron is outspoken on this point, "junior partners" being his phrase. The Germans -- business people, some senior officials in government -- are quite plainly restive.

Russia is a living part of European history and culture. Its exclusion is totally unnatural and artificial. Brzezinski [the late Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Carter administration's national security adviser] spelled it out in The Great Chessboard : The U.S. maintains world hegemony by keeping the Eurasian landmass divided.

But this policy can be seen to be inherited from the British. It was Churchill who proclaimed -- in fact welcomed -- the Iron Curtain that kept continental Europe divided. In retrospect, the Cold War was basically part of the divide-and-rule strategy, since it persists with greater intensity than ever after its ostensible cause -- the Communist threat -- is long gone.

I hadn't put our current circumstance in this context. US-backed, violent coup in Ukraine, 2014.

The whole Ukrainian operation of 2014 [the U.S.–cultivated coup in Kyiv, February 2014] was lavishly financed and stimulated by the United States in order to create a new conflict with Russia. Joe Biden has been the Deep State's main front man in turning Ukraine into an American satellite, used as a battering ram to weaken Russia and destroy its natural trade and cultural relations with Western Europe.

U.S. sanctions are particularly contrary to German business interests, and NATO's aggressive gestures put Germany on the front lines of an eventual war.

But Germany has been an occupied country -- militarily and politically -- for 75 years, and I suspect that many German political leaders (usually vetted by Washington) have learned to fit their projects into U.S. policies. I think that under the cover of Atlantic loyalty, there are some frustrated imperialists lurking in the German establishment, who think they can use Washington's Russophobia as an instrument to make a comeback as a world military power.

But I also think that the political debate in Germany is overwhelmingly hypocritical, with concrete aims veiled by fake issues such as human rights and, of course, devotion to Israel.

We should remember that the U.S. does not merely use its allies -- its allies, or rather their leaders, figure they are using the U.S. for some purposes of their own.

What about what the French have been saying since the G–7 session in Biarritz two years ago, that Europe should forge its own relations with Russia according to Europe's interests, not America's?

At G7 Summit in Biarritz, France, Aug. 26, 2019. (White House)

I think France is likelier than Germany to break with the U.S.–imposed Russophobia simply because, thanks to de Gaulle, France is not quite as thoroughly under U.S. occupation. Moreover, friendship with Russia is a traditional French balance against German domination -- which is currently being felt and resented.

Stepping back for a broader look, do you think Europe's position on the western flank of the Eurasian landmass will inevitably shape its position with regard not only to Russia but also China? To put this another way, is Europe destined to become an independent pole of power in the course of this century, standing between West and East?

At present, what we have standing between West and East is not Europe but Russia, and what matters is which way Russia leans. Including Russia, Europe might become an independent pole of power. The U.S. is currently doing everything to prevent this. But there is a school of strategic thought in Washington which considers this a mistake, because it pushes Russia into the arms of China. This school is in the ascendant with the campaign to denounce China as responsible for the pandemic. As mentioned, the Atlanticists in Europe are leaping into the anti–China propaganda battle. But they are not displaying any particular affection for Russia, which shows no sign of sacrificing its partnership with China for the unreliable Europeans.

If Russia were allowed to become a friendly bridge between China and Europe, the U.S. would be obliged to abandon its pretensions of world hegemony. But we are far from that peaceful prospect.

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is "Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century" (Yale). Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via his Patreon site .

Josep , May 19, 2020 at 02:04

It recalled and insisted that Germany agreed to the euro only on the grounds that the main mission of the European Central Bank was to fight inflation, and that it could not directly finance member states.

I once read a comment elsewhere saying that, back in 1989, both Britain (under Margaret Thatcher) and the US objected to German reunification. Since they could not stop the reunification, they insisted that Germany accept the incoming euro. A heap of German university professors jumped up and protested, knowing fully well what the game was: namely the creation of a banker's empire in Europe controlled by private bankers.

Thorben Sunkimat , May 20, 2020 at 13:45

France and Britain rejected the german reunification. The americans were supportive, even though they had their demands. Mainly privatisation of german public utilities. After agreeing to those demands the americans persuaded the british and pressured the french who agreed to german reunification after germany agreed to the euro.

So why did france want the euro?

The German central bank crashed the European economy after reunification with high interest rates. This was because of above average growth rates mainly in Eastern Germany. Main function of the Bundesbank is to keep inflation low, which is more important to them than anything else. Since Germany's D Mark was the leading currency in Europe the rest of Europe had to heighten their interest rates too, witch lead to great economic problems within Europe. Including France.

OlyaPola , May 21, 2020 at 05:30

"namely the creation of a banker's empire in Europe controlled by private bankers."

Resort to binaries (controlled/not controlled) is a practice of self-imposed blindness. In any interactive system no absolutes exist only analogues of varying assays since "control" is limited and variable. In respect of what became the German Empire this relationship predated and facilitated the German Empire through financing the war with Denmark in 1864 courtesy of the arrangements between Mr. von Bismark and Mr. Bleichroder. The assay of "control of bankers" has varied/increased subsequently but never attained the absolute.

It is true that finance capital perceived and continues to perceive the European Union as an opportunity to increase their assay of "control" – the Austrian banks in conjunction with German bank assigning a level of priority to resurrecting spheres of influence existing prior to 1918 and until 1945.

One of the joint projects at a level of planning in the early 1990's was development of the Danube and its hinterland from Regensburg to Cerna Voda/Constanta in Romania but this was delayed in the hope of curtailment by some when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999 (Serbia not being the only target – so much for honesty-amongst-theives.)

This project was resurrected in a limited form primarily downstream from Vidin/Calafat from 2015 onwards given that some states of the former Yugoslavia were not members of the European Union and some were within spheres of influence of "The United States of America".

As to France, "Vichy" and Europa also facilitated the resurrection of finance capital and increase in its assay of control after the 1930's, some of the practices of the 1940's still being subject to dispute in France.

mkb29 , May 18, 2020 at 16:33

I've always admired Diana Johnstone's clear headed analyses of world/European/U.S./ China/Israel-Palestine/Russia/ interactions and the motivation of its "players". She has given some credence to what as been known as French rationalism and enlightenment. (Albeit as an American expat) Think Descartes, Diderot, Sartre , and She loves France in her own rationalist-humanist way.

Linda J , May 18, 2020 at 13:21

I have admired Ms. Johnstone's work for quite awhile. This enlightening interview spurs me to get a copy of the book and to contribute to Consortium News.

Others may be interested in the two-part video discovered yesterday featuring Douglas Valentine's analysis of the CIA's corporate backers and their global choke-hold on governments and their influencers in every region of the world.

Part 1
see:youtu(dot)be/cP15Ehx1yvI

Part 2
see:youtu(dot)be/IYvvEn_N1sE

worldblee , May 18, 2020 at 12:26

Not many have the long distance perspective on the world, let alone Europe, that Diana Johnstone has. Great interview!

Drew Hunkins , May 18, 2020 at 11:03

"Decades of indoctrination in the ideology of "Europe" has instilled the belief that the nation-state is a bad thing of the past. The result is that people raised in the European Union faith tend to regard any suggestion of return to national sovereignty as a fatal step toward fascism. This fear of contagion from "the right" is an obstacle to clear analysis which weakens the left and favors the right, which dares be patriotic."

Bingo! A marvelous point indeed! Quick little example -- Bernard Sanders should have worn an American flag pin on his suit during the 2020 Dem primary campaign.

chris , May 18, 2020 at 04:46

A very good analysis. As an American who has relocated to Spain several years ago, I am always disappointed that discussions of European politics always assume that Europe ends at the Pyrenees. Admittedly, Spanish politics is very complicated and confusing. Forty years of an unreconstructed dictatorship have left their mark, but the country´s socialist, communist and anarchic currents never went away. I like to say that the country is very conservative, but at least the population is aware of what is going on.

Perhaps what Ms. Johnston says about the French being just worn out, with no stomach for more violent conflict also applies to the Spanish since their great ideological struggle is more recent. The American influence during the Transition (which changed little – as the expression goes: The same dog but with a different collar) was very strong, and remains so. Even so, there is popular support for foreign and domestic policies independent of American and neoliberal control, but by and large the political and economic powers are not on board. I do not think Spain is willing to make a break alone, but would align itself with an European shift away from American control.

As Ms. Johnston says, Europe currently lacks leaders willing to take the plunge, but we will see what the coming year brings.

Sam F , May 17, 2020 at 17:45

Thank you Diana, these are valuable insights. Since WWII the US has itself been occupied by tyrants, using Russophobia to demand power as fake defenders.

1. Waving the flag and praising the lord on mass media, claiming concern with human rights and "Israel"; while
2. Subverting the Constitution with large scale bribery, surveillance, and genocides, all business as usual nowadays.
In the US, the form of government has become bribery and marketing lies; it truly knows no other way.

It may be better that Russia and China keep their distance from the US and maybe even the EU:
1. The US and EU would have to produce what they consume, eventually empowering workers;
2. Neither the US nor EU are a political or economic model for anyone, and should be ignored;
3. Neither the US nor EU produces much that Russia and China cannot, by investing more in cars and soybeans.

It will be best for the EU if it also rejects the US and its "neolib" economic and political tyranny mechanisms:
1. Alliance with Russia and China will cause substantial gains in stability and economic strength;
2. Forcing the US to abandon its "pretensions of world hegemony" will soon yield more peaceful prospects; and
3. Isolating the US will force it to improve its utterly corrupt government and society, maybe 40 to 60 years hence.

Drew Hunkins , May 17, 2020 at 15:40

" French philosophy .By constantly attacking, deconstructing, and denouncing every remnant of human "power" they could spot, the intellectual rebels left the power of "the markets" unimpeded, and did nothing to stand in the way of the expansion of U.S. military power all around the world "

Brilliant. Exactly right. This was the progenitor to our contemporary I.D. politics which seems to be solely obsessed with vocabulary, semantics and non-economic cultural issues while rarely having a critique of corporate capitalism, militarism, massive inequality and Zionism. And it almost never advocates for robust economic populist proposals like Med4All, U.B.I., debt jubilee, and the fight for $15.

Drew Hunkins , May 17, 2020 at 15:10

The book is phenomenal. I posted a customer review over on Amazon for this stupendous work. Below is a copy of my review:

(5 stars) One of the most important intellects pens her magisterial lasting legacy
Reviewed in the United States on March 31, 2020

Johnstone's been an idol of mine ever since I started reading her in the 1990s. She's clearly proved her worthiness over the decades by bucking the mainstream trend of apologetics for corporate capitalism, neoliberalism, globalism and imperialistic militarism her entire career and this astonishing memoir details it all in what will likely be the finest book of 2020 and perhaps the entire decade.

Her writing style is beyond superb, her grasp of the overarching politico-socio-economic issues that have rocked the world over the past 60 years is as astute and spot-on as you will find from any global thinker. She's right up there with Michael Parenti, James Petras, John Pilger and Noam Chomsky as seminal figures who have documented and brought light to tens of thousands (millions?) of people across the globe via their writings, interviews and speaking engagements.

Johnstone has never been one to shy away from controversial topics and issues. Why? Simple, she has the facts and truth on her side, she always has. Circle in the Darkness proves all this and more, she marshals the documentation and lays it out as an exquisite gift for struggling working people around the world.

From her groundbreaking work on the NATO empire's sickening war on sovereign Serbia, the dead end of identity politics and trans bathroom debates, to her critique of unfettered immigration and open borders, and her dismissal of the absurd Russsiagate baloney, better than anyone else, Johnstone has kept her intellect carefully honed to the real genuine kitchen table bread and butter issues that truly matter. She recognized before most of the world's scholars the perils of rampant inequality and saw the writing on the wall as to where this grotesque economic system is taking us all: down a dystopian slope into penury and police-state heavy-handedness, with millions unable to come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or dental bill.

Whenever she comes out with a new article or essay I immediately drop everything and devour it, often reading it twice to let her wisdom really soak in. So too Circle of Darkness is an extremely well written beautiful work that will scream out to be re-read every few years by those with a hunger to know exactly what was going on since the Korean War era through today regarding liberal thought, neocon and neoliberal dominance with its capitalist global hegemony and the take over of Western governments by the parasitic financial elite.

There will never be another Diana Johnstone. Circle in the Darkness will stand as her lasting legacy to all of us.

Bob Van Noy , May 17, 2020 at 14:43

"As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it" ~Albert Einstein

Many Thanks CN, Patrick Lawrence, and Joe Lauria. Once again I must commend CN for picking just the appropriate response to our contemporary dilemma.

The quote above leads Diana Johnstone's new book and succinctly describes both the universe and our contemporary experience with our digital age. President Kennedy and Charles de Gaulle of France would agree that colonialism was past and that a new world (geopolitical) approach would become necessary, but that philosophy would put them against some great local and world powers. Each of them necessarily had different approaches as to how this might be accomplished. They were never allowed to present their specific proposals on a world stage. Let's hope a wiser population will once again "see" this possibility and find a way to resolve it

Aaron , May 17, 2020 at 14:18

Well over the span of all of those decades, the consistent, inexorable theme seems to be a trend of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, a small number of individuals, not really states, gaining wealth and power, so everybody else fights over the crumbs, blaming this or that party, alliance, event or whatever, but behind it all there are two flower gardens, indeed the rich are all flowers of their golden garden, and the poor are all flowers of their garden.

It's like the Europeans and the 99 percent in America have all fallen for the myth of the American dream, that if we are just allowed more free, unfettered economic opportunity, it's just up to us to pick ourselves up by the bootstraps and become a billionaire.

The mask competition and fiasco shows the importance of a country simply making things in their own country, not on the other side of the world, it's not nationalism it's just a better way to logistically deliver reliable products to the citizens.

AnneR , May 17, 2020 at 13:42

Regarding French colonialism – as I recall the French were especially brutal in their forced withdrawal from Algeria, both toward Algerians in their homeland and to Algerians within France itself.

And the French were hardly willing, non-violent colonialists when being fought by the Vietnamese who wanted to be free of them (quite rightly so).

As for the French in Sub-Saharan Africa – they have yet to truly give up on their presumed right to have troops within these countries. They did not depart any of their colonies happily, willingly – like every other colonial power, including the UK.

And, as for WWII – she seems, in her reminiscences, to have mislaid Vichy France, the Velodrome roundups of French Jews, and so on ..

Ms Johnstone clearly has been looking backwards with rose-tinted specs on when it comes to France.

Randal Marlin , May 18, 2020 at 13:00

There may be some truth to AnneR's claim that Ms Johnstone has been looking with rose-tinted specs when it comes to France, but it is highly misleading for her to talk about "the French" regarding Algeria. I spent 1963-64 in Aix-en-Provence teaching at the Institute for American Universities and talked with some of the "pieds-noirs," (French born in Algeria).

After French President Charles de Gaulle decided to relinquish French control over Algeria, having previously reassured the colonial population that "Je vous ai compris" ("I have understood you"), there followed death threats to many French colonizers who had to flee Algeria immediately within 24 hours or get their throats slit – "La valise ou le cercueil" (the suitcase or the coffin).

In the fall of 1961, I saw Parisian police stations with machine-gun armed men behind concrete barriers, as an invasion by the colonial French paratroopers against mainland France was expected. The "Organisation Armée Secrète," OAS, (Secret Armed Organization) of the colonial powers, threatened at the time to invade Paris.

As an aside, giving a sense of the anger and passion involved, when the death of John F.Kennedy in November 1963 was announced in the historic, right-wing café in Aix, Les Deux Garçons, a huge cheer went up when the media announcer proclaimed "Le Président est assassinée. Only, that was because they thought de Gaulle was the president in question. A huge disappointment when they heard it was President Kennedy. To get a sense of the whole situation regarding France and Algeria I recommend Alistair Horne's "A Savage War of Peace."

OlyaPola , May 19, 2020 at 11:23

"They did not depart any of their colonies happily"

Some hold that they never departed, but mutated tools including CFA zones and "intelligence" relations in furtherance of "changing" to remain qualitatively the same. Just as "The United States of America" is a system of coercive relations not synonymous with the political geographical area designated "The United States of America", the colonialism of former and present "colonial powers" continues to exist, since the "independence" of the colonised was always, and continues to be, framed within linear systems of coercive relations, facilitated by the complicity of "local elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest, and the acquiescence of "local others" for myriad reasons.

Despite the "best" efforts of the opponents and partly in consequence of the opponents' complicity, the PRC and the Russian Federation like "The United States of America" are not synonymous with the political geographical areas designated as "The People's Republic of China and The Russian Federation", are in lateral process of transcending linear systems of coercive relations and hence pose existential threats to "The United States of America".

The opponents are not complete fools but the drowning tend to act precipitously including flailing out whilst drowning; encouraging some to dispense with rose- tinted glasses, despite such accessories being quite fashionable and fetching.

OlyaPola , May 20, 2020 at 04:32

" .. their colonies "

Perception of and practice of social relations are not wholly synonymous. A construct whose founding myths included liberty, egality and fraternity – property being discarded at the last moment since it was judged too provocative – experienced/experiences ideological/perceptual oxymorons in regard to its colonial relations, which were addressed in part by rendering their "colonies" department of France thereby facilitating increased perceptual dissonance.

Like many, Randal Marlin draws attention below to the perceptions and practices of the pied-noir, but omits to address the perceptions and practices of the harkis whom were also immersed in the proselytised notion of departmental France, and to some degree continue to be.

This understanding continues to inform the practices and problems of the French state.

Lolita , May 17, 2020 at 12:05

The analysis is very much inspired from "Comprendre l'Empire" by Alain Soral.

Dave , May 17, 2020 at 11:27

Do not fail to read this interview in its entirety. Ms Johnstone analyzes and describes many issues of national and global importance from the perspective of an USA expat who has spent most of her career in the pursuit of what may be termed disinterested journalism. Whether one agrees or disagrees in whole or in part the perspectives she presents, particularly those which pertain to the demise (hopefully) of the American Empire are worthy of perusal.

Remember that this is not a polemic; it's a memoir of a lifetime devoted to reporting and analyzing and discussion of most of the significant issues confronting global and national politics and their social ramifications. And a big thanks to Patrick Lawrence and Consortium News for posting the interview.

PEG , May 17, 2020 at 09:11

Diana Johnstone is one of the most intelligent, clear-minded and honest observers of international politics today, and her book "Circle in the Darkness" – which expands on the topics and insights touched on in this interview – is certainly among the best and most compelling books I have ever read, putting the events of the last 75 years into objective context and focus (normally something which only historians can do, if at all, generations after the fact).

After reading Circle in the Darkness, I have ordered and am now reading her books on Hillary Clinton (Queen of Chaos) and the Yugoslav wars (Fool's Crusade), which are very worthwhile and important. I would recommend that her many articles over the years, appearing in such publications such as In These Times, Counterpunch and Consortium News, be reprinted and published together as an anthology. Through Circle in the Darkness, we have Diana Johnstone's "Life", but it would be good also to have her "Letters".

Herman , May 17, 2020 at 09:00

Interesting comparison between the aspirations of De Gaulle and Putin.

"Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history that was past. His policy was to foster friendly relations on equal terms with all parts of the world, regardless of ideological differences. I think that Putin's concept of a multipolar world is similar. It is clearly a concept that horrifies the exceptionalists."

Agree with Johnstone.

OlyaPola , May 19, 2020 at 11:55

"Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history that was past. "

Mr. de Gaulle like other "leaders" of colonial powers did understand that the moment of overt coercive relations of colonialism had passed and that colonialism to remain qualitatively the same, required covert coercive relations facilitated by the complicity of local "elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest.

The exceptions to such strategies lay within constructs of settler colonialism which were addressed primarily through warfare – "The United States of America", Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia, Indonesia, Algeria, Kenya, Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola refer – to facilitate such future strategies.

"I think that Putin's concept of a multipolar world is similar."

As outlined elsewhere the concept of a multi-polar world is not synonymous with the concept of colonialism except for the colonialists who consistently seek to encourage such conflation through myths of we-are-all-in-this-togetherness.

[May 20, 2020] The American Mission and the Evil Empire The Crusade for a Free Russia Since 1881 by Foglesong

Highly recommended!
Paperback: 364 pages Publisher: Cambridge University Press; 1 edition (October 15, 2007)
"Foglesong's book provides a panoramic view of American popular attitudes toward Russia, one that is illustrated with many arresting cartoons and magazine covers. It should provoke a wider debate about the rationality of evaluating Russia with reference to an idealized view of the United States, as well as the deeper sources of this tendency." -Deborah Welch Larson, H-Diplo
"In the 21st century, the American debate on the prospects of modernizing Russia and on the Americans' role in this process is still going strong even though it began more than a century ago. This is why David Foglesong's book aimed at elucidating the mechanisms of misrepresentations which threaten both Russian-American relations and the world security as a whole is of equal importance for the academic community and for the policy makers in both Russia and the United States."
-Victoria Zhuravleva, H-Diplo
"Foglesong demonstrates that powerful Americans have again and again seen the possibility, even necessity, of spreading the word to Russia, and then, when Russia fails to transform itself into something resembling the US, have recoiled and condemned Russia's perfidious national character or its leaders-most recently Putin. The author's singular achievement is to show that well before the cold war, Russia served as America's dark double, an object of wishful thinking, condescension and self-righteousness in a quest for American purpose-without much to show for such efforts inside Russia. The author thereby places in context the cold war, when pamphleteers like William F Buckley Jr and politicians like Ronald Reagan pushed a crusade to revitalise the American spirit. Russia then was a threat but also a means to America's end (some fixed on a rollback of the alleged Soviet "spawn" inside the US-the welfare state-while others, after the Vietnam debacle, wanted to restore "faith in the United States as a virtuous nation with a unique historical mission"). Foglesong's exposé of Americans' "heady sense of their country's unique blessings" helps make sense of the giddiness, followed by rank disillusionment, vis-...-vis the post-Soviet Russia of the 1990s and 2000s." -Stephen Kotkin, Prospect Magazine -Stephen Kotkin, Prospect Magazine
Notable quotes:
"... For example, Foglesong argued that "a vital factor in the revival of the crusade in the 1970s was the need to expunge doubts about American virtue instilled by the Vietnam War, revelations about CIA covert actions, and the Watergate scandal." ..."
"... By tracing American representations of Russia over the last 130 years, Foglesong illuminated three of the strongest notions that have informed American attitudes toward Russia: (1) a messianic faith that America could inspire sweeping overnight transformation from autocracy to democracy; (2) a notion that despite historic differences, Russia and America are very much akin, so that Russia, more than any other country, is America's "dark double;" (3) an extreme antipathy to "evil" leaders who Americans blame for thwarting what they believe to be the natural triumph of the American mission. These expectations and emotions continue to effect how American journalists and politicians write and talk about Russia. "My hope," Foglesong concluded, "is that by seeing how these attitudes have distorted American views of Russia for more than a century, we may begin to be able to escape their grip." ..."
"... The usefulness of Russia as bogeyman for all that is wrong in the world - a contrasting foil to the virtues of "us" - has defined this relationship ever since the first democratic stirrings in Russia following the Emancipation of '61. In this it followed Britain, who'd long demonized Russia since imperial rivalries over the Crimea. ..."
"... This trope was also successful for reactionaries in blocking progressive legislation at home. Ronald Reagan was perhaps the most successful in this linkmanship: "socialized medicine" was the first step to the gulags. ..."
"... T he flak over Pus*y Riot following this book's publication - while ignoring the crucifixion of the Dixie Chicks - demonstrates the double standard is too convenient to be allowed to wither. The empire must always be evil, precisely because it reflects our own image like a Buddhist truth mirror. ..."
May 20, 2020 | www.amazon.com

"By 1905," Foglesong stated, "this fundamental reorientation of American views of Russia had set up a historical pattern in which missionary zeal and messianic euphoria would be followed by disenchantment and embittered denunciation of Russia's evil and oppressive rulers." The first cycle, according to Foglesong, culminated in 1905, when the October Manifesto, perceived initially by Americans as a transformation to democracy, gave way to a violent socialist revolt. Foglesong observed similar cycles of euphoria to despair during the collapse of the tsarist government in 1917, during the partial religious revival of World War II, and during the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s

Crucial to Foglesong's analysis was how these cycles coincided with a contemporaneous need to deflect attention away from America's own blemishes and enhance America's claim to its global mission.

For example, Foglesong argued that "a vital factor in the revival of the crusade in the 1970s was the need to expunge doubts about American virtue instilled by the Vietnam War, revelations about CIA covert actions, and the Watergate scandal."

By tracing American representations of Russia over the last 130 years, Foglesong illuminated three of the strongest notions that have informed American attitudes toward Russia: (1) a messianic faith that America could inspire sweeping overnight transformation from autocracy to democracy; (2) a notion that despite historic differences, Russia and America are very much akin, so that Russia, more than any other country, is America's "dark double;" (3) an extreme antipathy to "evil" leaders who Americans blame for thwarting what they believe to be the natural triumph of the American mission. These expectations and emotions continue to effect how American journalists and politicians write and talk about Russia. "My hope," Foglesong concluded, "is that by seeing how these attitudes have distorted American views of Russia for more than a century, we may begin to be able to escape their grip."

The Adventures of Straw Man Reviewed in the United States on September 27, 2013 This has been the essential function of US Russia policy, as David Foglesong shows in his century-long tour.

The usefulness of Russia as bogeyman for all that is wrong in the world - a contrasting foil to the virtues of "us" - has defined this relationship ever since the first democratic stirrings in Russia following the Emancipation of '61. In this it followed Britain, who'd long demonized Russia since imperial rivalries over the Crimea.

This trope was also successful for reactionaries in blocking progressive legislation at home. Ronald Reagan was perhaps the most successful in this linkmanship: "socialized medicine" was the first step to the gulags.

The crusade against US civil rights - of which Reagan was also a part in his early career - as Communist-inspired tinkering with the Constitution was much less successful. His support for free trade unions in the Soviet Bloc while crushing them at home underscored the irony.

But Foglesong is much too generous in evaluating Reagan's human decency as a policy motive. Reagan pursued his grand rollback strategy by any means necessary, mixing hard tactics (contras, death-squad funding, mujahadin, Star Wars) with soft (democracy-enhancement, human rights, meeting with Gorbachev). Solidarity activists in Poland might remember his crusading fondly; survivors of the Salvadoran civil war will not.

The "crisis" with the Putin regime currently empowered shows the missionary impulse yet alive: projecting one's reforming instincts upon others rather than at home. T he flak over Pus*y Riot following this book's publication - while ignoring the crucifixion of the Dixie Chicks - demonstrates the double standard is too convenient to be allowed to wither. The empire must always be evil, precisely because it reflects our own image like a Buddhist truth mirror.

I do find it puzzling that Foglesong made no mention of Maurice Hindus, the prolific popular "explainer" of Russia in over a dozen mid-century books; and the notorious defector Victor Kravchenko and his best-selling memoir of the 1940s (ghost-written by Eugene Lyons, another popular anti-Soviet scribe). Both were much more influential in the public and political mind than many of the more obscure missionary authors Foglesong does cite. Nevertheless, Foglesong has offered a generous helping of cultural/political history that shows no signs of growing stale.

>

indah nuritasari , Reviewed in the United States on October 24, 2012

A Good Book About America and The Cold War

This book tells a fascinating story of American efforts to liberate and remake Russia since the 1880s. It starts with the story of Tsar Alexander II's asasination on March 1, 1881 and how James William Buel, a Missoury Journalist wrote it in his book "Russian Nihilism and Exile Life in Siberia."

The story continues until The Reagan era and "the Evil Empire," 1981-1989.

This book is very interesting and useful for history lovers, students, journalists, or general public. Here you can find all the "dark and exciting stuff" about the cold war, including the involvement of the journalists, political activists, diplomats, and even engineers.

It is really helpful for me as a new immigrant in the US to help me understand the US position and role in the Cold War Era. The language used in this book, though, is " kind of dry". A little editing for the next edition could be really helpful!!

[May 20, 2020] Newly Revealed Texts Show Strzok, Page Altered Flynn Interview Notes

Highly recommended!
Yes it was a perjury trap. Typical fbi thug behavior
Apr 30, 2020 | www.newsmax.com

Yet another bombshell development emerged Thursday in the case of former National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn: the release of additional exculpatory evidence FBI officials had withheld from the courts and the defense for three years.

Crucially, this includes evidence that the Bureau's official "302 report" filed by the lead agent who interviewed Flynn was edited multiple times, including by an official who never participated in the interview.

Thursday's revelations come on top of yesterday's disclosures indicating an apparent attempt by FBI officials to trap Flynn into committing a criminal offense during an interview.

The new revelation could prove even more significant: In addition to the apparently calculated effort to get Flynn to commit perjury or obstruction, top FBI figures, including FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, repeatedly altered the "302 report" that was filed after the Flynn interview.

That interview was conducted under highly unusual circumstances. Ordinarily, an FBI interview of a top West Wing official would be requested through the White House Counsel's office, and would be conducted in the presence of legal counsel representing the official being interviewed.

That did not occur in the case of the FBI's interview with Flynn, and Comey later stated that under "a more organized administration" he "probably wouldn't have gotten away with it."

Initially, when the lead FBI agent handling the case was asked whether Flynn lied during the interview, he stated that he did not believe so.

But over the coming days Strzok and Page would edit and revise the agent's 302 report repeatedly, according to a document providing text messages between FBI officials that the defense counsel finally received this week.

Prosecutors and investigators are required to turn over information that might tend to indicate a suspect's innocence to the defense counsel prior to trial and sentencing. Most legal analysts would consider the information withheld from Flynn's legal team potentially exculpatory.

An inside source familiar with efforts to defend Gen. Flynn tells Newsmax an unadulterated, original 302 document exists that was created by the lead agent from his notes of the interview with Flynn.

Jonathan Turley, the George Washington University law professor who testified before the House during President Trump's impeachment, wrote Thursday the decision to keep the case open occurred when "Special counsel Robert Mueller decided to bring the dubious charge."

In a column posted on TheHill.com on Thursday, Turley said the case against Flynn should be dismissed. "Justice demands a dismissal of his prosecution," he wrote.

At the time Flynn was being prosecuted, Mueller was seeking evidence the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 campaign.

Critics say he was prosecuting Flynn to get him to turn state's witness against Trump, but the general never implicated him.

Mueller eventually determined there was no evidence of a Russian-collusion conspiracy. But by then Flynn, under intense financial pressure from the prosecution and buckling under the threat that his son could be drawn into a legal quagmire, had pled guilty to one count of lying to the FBI.

He has since requested to withdraw that plea, and he is awaiting sentencing.

President Trump weighed in on the controversial case Thursday morning tweeting, "What happened to General Michael Flynn, a war hero, should never be allowed to happen to a citizen of the United States again!"

Later the president told reporters he believes Flynn is "in the process of being exonerated."

Former New York City Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik reacted strongly on Thursday to the news FBI officials to altered a 302 report and reopened the case when the initial analysis indicated no crime had been committed.

Kerik told Newsmax Thursday that if evidence or records had been unduly altered under his watch as police commissioner, he would have referred the matter to the district attorney for possible prosecution.

"They intentionally went back and doctored the original 302," he said. "That's because they were not looking for the truth.

"They were looking for a mechanism to trap Gen. Flynn, to prosecute him, to get him fired in order to go after the president. That was their motive, that was their agenda. It's absolutely clear at this point they were not looking for the truth."

Kerik added, "This was done at the highest levels of the FBI. At the most senior level of the FBI, they falsified records, they suppressed evidence.

"This is irresponsible, it's outrageous They used and abused their authority to deprive Gen. Flynn of his constitutional right to freedom," he said.

According to the source, as supported by text messages also obtained by Newsmax, Stzrok, who also participated in the Flynn interview, rewrote the 302 extensively -- although a text message from him stated he tried not to "completely re-write it so as to save [redacted] voice," presumably a reference to the lead agent who originally wrote it.

Stzrok then shared the document with a "pissed off" Page, who had not participated in the interview, and who revised it significantly again, according to the Newsmax source.

The objective of the interview was to probe whether Flynn had violated the Logan Act, an 18th-century statute that has never been used in any criminal conviction. The Act makes it a crime for a U.S. citizens to interfere with the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. Many legal scholars find the law to be unconstitutional.

The documents received by Newsmax indicate the case had virtually been closed – suggesting the lead agent was satisfied no crime had been committed -- prior to it being reopened by the direct intervention of Strzok and Page.

The documents, for example, show the probe of Flynn was about to be put to bed when the lead agent received a text from Strzok stating, "Hey, if you haven't closed [the case], don't do so yet."

Apparently, Page was pleasantly surprised to find the matter had not yet been closed.

On Feb. 10, 2017, Page texted Strzok, "This document pisses me off. You didn't even attempt to make this cogent and readable? This is lazy work on your part."

Strzok replied, "Lisa you didn't see it before my edits that went into what I sent you. I was 1) trying to completely re-write the thing so as to save [the lead agent's] voice and 2) get it out to you for general review and comment in anticipation of needing it soon."

Wednesday's revelation included notes of a meeting conducted a short time after the 2016 election between FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. The notes stated, "What is our goal? Truth and admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?"

The notes were written by then-FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap.

[May 20, 2020] McGovern Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over by Ray McGovern

Highly recommended!
It is not. Forces behind Russiagate are intact and still have the same agenda. CrowdStrike was just a tool. As long as Full Spectrum Dominance dourine is alive, Russiagate will flourish in one form or another
Notable quotes:
"... The need for a scapegoat to blame for Hillary Clinton's snatching defeat out of the jaws victory also played a role; as did the need for the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT) to keep front and center in the minds of Americans the alleged multifaceted threat coming from an "aggressive" Russia. (Recall that John McCain called the, now disproven , "Russian hacking" of the DNC emails an "act of war.") ..."
"... Though the corporate media is trying to bury it, the Russiagate narrative has in the past few weeks finally collapsed with the revelation that CrowdStrike had no evidence Russia took anything from the DNC servers and that the FBI set a perjury trap for Gen. Michael Flynn. There was already the previous government finding that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia and the indictment of a Russian troll farm that supposedly was destroying American democracy with $100,000 in Facebook ads was dropped after the St. Petersburg defendants sought discovery. ..."
"... Given the diffident attitude the Security State plotters adopted regarding hiding their tracks, Durham's challenge, with subpoena power, is not as formidable as were he, for example, investigating a Mafia family. ..."
"... Meanwhile, the corporate media have all been singing from the same sheet since Trump had the audacity a week ago to coin yet another "-gate" -- this time "Obamagate." Leading the apoplectic reaction in corporate media, Saturday's Washington Post offered a pot-calling-the-kettle-black pronouncement by its editorial board entitled "The absurd cynicism of 'Obamagate"? ..."
"... So if we dug in and found large payments from George Soros or Mrs Clinton to these 'journalists', what crime could they be accused of? No crimes, I don't think. ..."
"... There never was anything to Russiagate. It was always just politics. I knew that from the beginning. There was, however, a lot of something to the torture scandal. Obama said "We are not going to look back." And now Gina Haspel, one of the chief torturers, partly responsible for destroying the torture tapes, despite a court order to preserve them, is now head of the CIA. ..."
"... Drain the Swamp my ***. He's started by firing all the IG's? Trump "looking back," not forward. He could start by investigating Gina Haspel. ..."
"... For example, Foglesong argued that "a vital factor in the revival of the crusade in the 1970s was the need to expunge doubts about American virtue instilled by the Vietnam War, revelations about CIA covert actions, and the Watergate scandal." ..."
"... By tracing American representations of Russia over the last 130 years, Foglesong illuminated three of the strongest notions that have informed American attitudes toward Russia: (1) a messianic faith that America could inspire sweeping overnight transformation from autocracy to democracy; (2) a notion that despite historic differences, Russia and America are very much akin, so that Russia, more than any other country, is America's "dark double;" (3) an extreme antipathy to "evil" leaders who Americans blame for thwarting what they believe to be the natural triumph of the American mission. These expectations and emotions continue to effect how American journalists and politicians write and talk about Russia. "My hope," Foglesong concluded, "is that by seeing how these attitudes have distorted American views of Russia for more than a century, we may begin to be able to escape their grip." ..."
May 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Ray McGovern via ConsortiumNews.com,

Seldom mentioned among the motives behind the persistent drumming on alleged Russian interference was an over-arching need to help the Security State hide their tracks.

The need for a scapegoat to blame for Hillary Clinton's snatching defeat out of the jaws victory also played a role; as did the need for the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT) to keep front and center in the minds of Americans the alleged multifaceted threat coming from an "aggressive" Russia. (Recall that John McCain called the, now disproven , "Russian hacking" of the DNC emails an "act of war.")

But that was then. This is now.

Though the corporate media is trying to bury it, the Russiagate narrative has in the past few weeks finally collapsed with the revelation that CrowdStrike had no evidence Russia took anything from the DNC servers and that the FBI set a perjury trap for Gen. Michael Flynn. There was already the previous government finding that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia and the indictment of a Russian troll farm that supposedly was destroying American democracy with $100,000 in Facebook ads was dropped after the St. Petersburg defendants sought discovery.

All that's left is to discover how this all happened.

Attorney General William Barr, and U.S. Attorney John Durham, whom Barr commissioned to investigate this whole sordid mess seem intent on getting to the bottom of it. The possibility that Trump will not chicken out this time, and rather will challenge the Security State looms large since he felt personally under attack.

Writing on the Wall

Given the diffident attitude the Security State plotters adopted regarding hiding their tracks, Durham's challenge, with subpoena power, is not as formidable as were he, for example, investigating a Mafia family.

Plus, former NSA Director Adm. Michael S. Rogers reportedly is cooperating. The handwriting is on the wall. It remains to be seen what kind of role in the scandal Barack Obama may have played.

But former directors James Comey, James Clapper, and John Brennan, captains of Obama's Security State, can take little solace from Barr's remarks Monday to a reporter who asked about Trump's recent claims that top officials of the Obama administration, including the former president had committed crimes. Barr replied:

"As to President Obama and Vice President Biden, whatever their level of involvement, based on the information I have today, I don't expect Mr. Durham's work will lead to a criminal investigation of either man. Our concerns over potential criminality is focused on others."

In a more ominous vein, Barr gratuitously added that law enforcement and intelligence officials were involved in "a false and utterly baseless Russian collusion narrative against the president. It was a grave injustice, and it was unprecedented in American history."

Meanwhile, the corporate media have all been singing from the same sheet since Trump had the audacity a week ago to coin yet another "-gate" -- this time "Obamagate." Leading the apoplectic reaction in corporate media, Saturday's Washington Post offered a pot-calling-the-kettle-black pronouncement by its editorial board entitled "The absurd cynicism of 'Obamagate"?

The outrage voiced by the Post called to mind disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok's indignant response to criticism of the FBI by candidate Trump, in a Oct. 20, 2016 text exchange with FBI attorney Lisa Page:

Strzok: I am riled up. Trump is a f***ing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer.

Strzok -- I CAN'T PULL AWAY, WHAT THE F**K HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY

Page -- I don't know. But we'll get it back. We're America. We rock.

Strzok -- Donald just said "bad hombres"

Strzok -- Trump just said what the FBI did is disgraceful.

Less vitriolic, but incisive commentary came from widely respected author and lawyer Glenn Greenwald on May 14, four days after Trump coined "Obamagate": ( See "System Update with Glenn Greenwald -- The Sham Prosecution of Michael Flynn").

For a shorter, equally instructive video of Greenwald on the broader issue of Russia-gate, see this clip from a March 2019 Democracy Now! -sponsored debate he had with David Cay Johnston titled, "As Mueller Finds No Collusion, Did Press Overhype Russiagate? Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston":

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qdYw6jk3TTA

(The entire debate is worth listening to). I found one of the comments below the Democracy Now! video as big as a bummer as the commentator did:

"I think this is one of the most depressing parts about the whole situation. In their dogmatic pushing for this false narrative, the Russiagaters might have guaranteed Trump a second term. They have done more damage to our democracy than Russia ever has done and will do ." (From "Clamity2007")

In any case, Johnston, undaunted by his embarrassment at the hands of Greenwald, is still at it, and so is the avuncular Frank Rich -- both of them some 20 years older than Greenwald and set in their evidence-impoverished, media-indoctrinated ways.

... ... ...

Uncle Frank, 40 seconds ago

So if we dug in and found large payments from George Soros or Mrs Clinton to these 'journalists', what crime could they be accused of? No crimes, I don't think.

But when journalists are revealed to be issuing paid-for propaganda/lies mixed with their own internal opinions, and their publisher allows it to be presented as if it were reporting rather than opinion, said writers, editors, and publishers are relegated to obscurity and derision.

Their work will never be taken seriously again by anyone who wasn't already brain-washed.

They don't get that, I guess.

QABubba, 47 minutes ago (Edited)

There never was anything to Russiagate. It was always just politics. I knew that from the beginning. There was, however, a lot of something to the torture scandal. Obama said "We are not going to look back." And now Gina Haspel, one of the chief torturers, partly responsible for destroying the torture tapes, despite a court order to preserve them, is now head of the CIA.

General Flynn was so involved with Turkey he should have been registered as a foreign agent.

And as I have said before, the real crime was laundering Russian Mafia/Heroin money through Deutsche Bank into New York real estate. It is curious that Turkey is also a huge transport spot for heroin into the EU. And France and other EU nations have a migrant population that lives off the drug trade.

Drain the Swamp my ***. He's started by firing all the IG's? Trump "looking back," not forward. He could start by investigating Gina Haspel.

1911A1, 55 minutes ago

Operation Mockingbird

The MSM disinformation campaign with consistent common talking points is not difficult to see with a little discernment. The bigger question is has this happened organically or is there a larger agency manipulating the public discourse?

Question_Mark, 43 minutes ago

4AM secure drop from Senior Executive Services ( SES ) is a threat to our democracy.

Our greatest responsibility is to serve our [insert name of community here] community.

1surrounded2, 1 hour ago

" It remains to be seen what kind of role in the scandal Barack Obama may have played. "

Come on, Ray, I know you are not that stupid, but you ARE that libtarded.

Obama's very obvious role in all of this: KINGPIN .

Moribundus, 3 hours ago

Amazon.com The American Mission and the 'Evil Empire' The Crusade for a Free Russia Since 1881 (8580000721935) Foglesong,

"By 1905," Foglesong stated, "this fundamental reorientation of American views of Russia had set up a historical pattern in which missionary zeal and messianic euphoria would be followed by disenchantment and embittered denunciation of Russia's evil and oppressive rulers." The first cycle, according to Foglesong, culminated in 1905, when the October Manifesto, perceived initially by Americans as a transformation to democracy, gave way to a violent socialist revolt. Foglesong observed similar cycles of euphoria to despair during the collapse of the tsarist government in 1917, during the partial religious revival of World War II, and during the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s

Crucial to Foglesong's analysis was how these cycles coincided with a contemporaneous need to deflect attention away from America's own blemishes and enhance America's claim to its global mission.

For example, Foglesong argued that "a vital factor in the revival of the crusade in the 1970s was the need to expunge doubts about American virtue instilled by the Vietnam War, revelations about CIA covert actions, and the Watergate scandal."

By tracing American representations of Russia over the last 130 years, Foglesong illuminated three of the strongest notions that have informed American attitudes toward Russia: (1) a messianic faith that America could inspire sweeping overnight transformation from autocracy to democracy; (2) a notion that despite historic differences, Russia and America are very much akin, so that Russia, more than any other country, is America's "dark double;" (3) an extreme antipathy to "evil" leaders who Americans blame for thwarting what they believe to be the natural triumph of the American mission. These expectations and emotions continue to effect how American journalists and politicians write and talk about Russia. "My hope," Foglesong concluded, "is that by seeing how these attitudes have distorted American views of Russia for more than a century, we may begin to be able to escape their grip."

Moribundus, 3 hours ago

America's imperialism rules: Never to admit a fault or wrong; never to accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time; blame that enemy for everything that goes wrong; take advantage of every opportunity to raise a political whirlwind.

Kidbuck, 5 hours ago

Trump hasn't engaged in a fight in his life. He's a sissy at heart wants to negotiate. He can't even do that right. He's caved on nearly every campaign promise he made. The only thing his administration fights for is their salary and their retirement. Hillary still waddles free and farts in his general direction.

ChaoKrungThep, 4 hours ago

Trump the Mafia punk, like his dad, and draft dodger like his German grand dad. Barr, old CIA asset from the Clinton-Mena coke smuggling op. This crappy crew is running their masters' game in front of the redneck rabble who are dumber than their mutts.

Save_America1st, 9 hours ago

Geez...how far behind can most of these assholes be after all these years????

For one...there was no "Russia-gate". It was all a hoax from the beginning, and anyone with a few functioning brain cells knew that from the start.

And as of about 3 years ago we have all known this as "Obamagate" for the most part...we all knew the corruption of the hoax totally led up to O-Scumbag.

And now as of the recent disclosures it is a total fact.

Haven't most of you been watching Dan Bongino for over 2 years now and haven't you read his books? Haven't you been reading Sarah Carter and John Soloman among others for nearly 3 years now???

Surely, you haven't been just sitting around sucking leftist media **** for over 3 years, right???????? I'm sure you haven't.

So why is this article even necessary on ZeroHedge?????

We already knew and have known the truth since before even the 2016 election. Drop it.

Posa, 9 hours ago

So funny. The 85 Year old "American century' is palpably disintegrating before our very eyes. In particular the Deep State permanent bureaucracy is completely untethered and facing what seems to be a Great Reckoning in the form of Barr- Durham. Cognitve Derangement prevails in the press and spills overto the body politic. The country teeters a slo-mo Civil War. Meanwhile, The dollar is disintegrating and we seem to face an economic abyss, the Terminal Depression. Real "last Days of Rome" stuff.

BaNNeD oN THe RuN, 5 hours ago (Edited)

The Israeli dual citizens like Adelson and Mercer bought the Presidency.

Mossad was the organization handling the mole Seth Rich.

Blaming Russia also worked for those 2 groups because it deflected attention away from (((them))).

Ray McGovern, being ex-intel, must know this to be true.

LetThemEatRand, 11 hours ago

Russiagate. The supposed target of said coup d'etat just Presided over the largest bailout of banks ever by a factor of five or more. Trump supporters are asleep for the bailout, Trump haters are asleep for the bailout. Let's fight about transgender bathrooms and Russiagate, shall we?

yojimbo, 8 hours ago

I glance at the MSM, so here is a Guardian article along strongly TDS lines https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/19/will-donald-trump-end-up-in-prison-arwa-mahdawi

It's projection again, implying Obama gate is fake, like Russiagate actually was.. Tough to even want to get through!

[May 20, 2020] Russiagate skunk Evelyn Farkas is emotionally exhausted by correct claims that she blatantly lied to Mika Brzezinski

Was it Crowdstrike that had shown her the forensics data? This McCarthyist dog just keeps lying and keeps digging. The Obama administration was as shameless as they were crooked.
"They all sound like kids that got caught raiding the cookie jar making up wild tales of innocence with cookie crumbs all over their faces."
Notable quotes:
"... Opening your eyes wider while speaking doesn't make you look more intense, credible, and believable... ..."
"... (((They))) are taught from birth to "lie to, cheat, rob, enslave, and kill, with impunity" all Americans they call "Goyim, a mindless herd of cattle, sub-human animals." ..."
"... Ah Evelyn, Evelyn! You're just an exposed resistance tool HRC campaign hack doubling downer unemployed TDS afflicted congress woman wannabe who has no shame no principals and no alibi. Lots of love and kisses to Bezos/WaPo for letting them share your pain with us. Here at the disinfo clearinghouse you couldn't get elected dog catcher. ..."
May 18, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

...Meanwhile, Poor Evelyn's campaign staff has become " emotionally exhausted " after her Facebook, Twitter and Instagram accounts have been "overwhelmed with a stream of vile, vulgar and sometimes violent messages" in response to the plethora of conservative outlets which have called her out for Russia malarkey.

There is evidence that Russian actors are contributing to these attacks. The same day that right-wing pundits began pumping accusations, newly created Russian Twitter accounts picked them up. Within a day, Russian " disinformation clearinghouses " posted versions of the story . Many of the Twitter accounts boosting attacks have posted in unison, a sign of inauthentic social media behavior.

We assume Zero Hedge is included in said ' disinformation clearinghouses ' Farkas fails to expound on.

She closes by defiantly claiming "I wasn't silenced in 2017, and I won't be silenced now."

No Evelyn, nobody is silencing you. You're being called out for your role in the perhaps the largest, most divisive hoax in US history - which was based on faulty intelligence that includes CrowdStrike admitting they had no proof of that Russia exfiltrated DNC emails, and Christopher Steele's absurd dossier based on his 'Russian sources.'

MrAToZ, 1 minute ago

What's with the bug eyes on these crooks?

Kurpak, 27 seconds ago

Opening your eyes wider while speaking doesn't make you look more intense, credible, and believable...

It makes you look ******* insane.

iAmerican10, 8 minutes ago (Edited)

(((They))) are taught from birth to "lie to, cheat, rob, enslave, and kill, with impunity" all Americans they call "Goyim, a mindless herd of cattle, sub-human animals."

... ... ...

otschelnik, 35 minutes ago

Ah Evelyn, Evelyn! You're just an exposed resistance tool HRC campaign hack doubling downer unemployed TDS afflicted congress woman wannabe who has no shame no principals and no alibi. Lots of love and kisses to Bezos/WaPo for letting them share your pain with us. Here at the disinfo clearinghouse you couldn't get elected dog catcher.

[May 20, 2020] No More Mr.Clean - Inside The Scandal-Free Years Of Obama's Presidency

May 20, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

For years former President Obama remained more or less off the grid. It could be argued that it is not uncommon for an ex-president to stay out of the limelight. Several Presidents have done this even claiming it was for the good of the country and in an effort not to interfere with the country moving forward. Obama has recently reemerged and injected himself into the public spotlight, at times taking aim at President Trump and the way his administration is handling various situations. It is not surprising that President Trump is not pleased.

While our memory has a way of removing rough edges from events we should not try to whitewash the past and rewrite history to present a different picture of what really happened. Because of the stark contrast in the demeanor and style of Trump and Obama, the media has "photo shopped" reality. Obama has been painted as, a thoughtful, intelligent, capable man full of hope and able to bring us together. He did, after all, bring America's economy back from the brink of disaster following the Great Recession. Trump, on the other hand, is often portrayed as a divisive, dishonest, braggart, and a buffoon. The fact is during Obama's time as President the country suffered scandal upon scandal upon scandal, it might be fair to say we had "scandals galore."

Mosul, Reduced To Rubble On Obama's Watch

And then, there was Mosul. The destruction of Mosul and the many lives lost there stand as a monument of Obama's failings. We should not forget that during Obama's watch the once-proud Iraqi city of Mosul was reduced to rubble. This was done as a coalition of anti-ISIS forces try to retake the city. The very roots of ISIS were fed by America and its botched policies. The saying, "never throw stones if you live in a glass house" would lead people to think Obama should have remained in the shadows.

Looking back, there were so many, big and small scandals such as the fast and furious, the operation that sent guns into the hands of drug gangs in Mexico, they became difficult to track. In Las Vegas, the GSA went on a spending spree. A large number of sexual assaults occurring in the military. Solyndra which should be placed in the dictionary and defined as "what happens when politicians and bureaucrats play businessman with taxpayer money" failed. The CIA had a "prostitutes fiasco" in South America. Fisker Automotive failed, this deal reeked of government cronyism and waste. Add to this what looked like a "Benghazi coverup" (including the way it was handled in the second presidential debate) add the DOJ doing an over the top and wiretapping the Associated Press.

Trump Will Leave None Of This Unaddressed

We should not forget some of the following if truth be told. The resurfacing of Mr. Obama and images of him opining with his chin tilted slightly upward motivated me to look back at some posts written during his time as President. Remember, because of his persona, a degree of optimism was in the air as he took office, across the world many people saw him as the answer to taking the whole world forward. Below are a few of those with links to the original as well as a few other comments on what history has revealed as major policy blunders flowing from his time in office.

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/04/fisker-automotive-another-government.html

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2012/04/gsa-las-vegas-scandle-spending-run.html

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/02/solyndra-report-posted-little-late.html

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2012/05/secret-service-sex-scandal.html

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/05/scandal-upon-scandal-upon-scandal.html

Other major faux-pas, blunders or missteps of the Obama administration include;

To say we were awash in scandals during the Obama era is an understatement, fortunately for Obama, most Americans have the attention span of a gnat .

To be clear, not everyone will agree with what I have listed as "faux-pas, blunders or missteps" but some will. Time tends to reveal whether the decisions we make are great, good, so-so, or were horribly wrong. If you feel this post was overly biased, unto you I say, sorry, sorry, sorry.

In an effort to be transparent I confess I'm not a fan of either of these men and to be fair this post is not a critique of Trump's time in office. While some people may try or continue to paint Obama as Mr. Clean, a closer look at history rapidly dispels that image.

[May 19, 2020] America: "We demand an coronavirus origin investigation, but the investigators must agree on the outcome that we specify before they begin investigating!"

Highly recommended!
May 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

William Gruff , May 18 2020 15:40 utc | 13

America: "We demand an investigation, but the investigators must agree on the outcome that we specify before they begin investigating!"

Why not? It works for gas attacks, chemical weapons poisoning, and airliner shoot downs, so why not biological weapons attacks too?

[May 19, 2020] Russophobia in the Age of Donald Trump

Highly recommended!
Russiaphobia as a pathological reaction on the deep crisis of neoliberalism
Notable quotes:
"... The described lack of confidence was reflected in the exaggerated fear that Russia was capable of destroying the West's values. However, Russia and Putin were neither omnipresent nor threatening to destroy the United States' political system. ..."
"... Russia's basic motives remain defensive even when the Kremlin relies on assertive tactics. Russia's assertiveness, even in cyberspace, is of a reactive nature and is a response to US policies. ..."
"... Rather than fighting a full-scale information war with the West, Russia seeks to increase its status and strengthen its bargaining position in relations with the United States. 68 The Kremlin has been proposing to negotiate rules of cooperation in the cyber area since early in the twenty-first century. Motivated by an insistence on "cyber-sovereignty," Russia regularly proposes resolutions at the United Nations to prohibit "information aggression," In a 2011 letter to the United Nations General Assembly, Russia proposed an "International Code of Conduct for Information Security," stipulating that states subscribing to the code would pledge to "not use information and communications technologies and other information and communications networks to interfere with the internal affairs of other states or with the aim of undermining their political, economic and social stability." 69 ..."
"... Overall, what the Kremlin challenges is the United States' post–Cold War behavior that undermines Russia's status as a great power. Although Russia is not in a position to directly challenge the United States and the US-centered international order, the Kremlin hopes to gain external recognition as a great power by relying on low-cost methods and revealing the vulnerability of Western nations. Russia's capabilities and presence in global cyber and media space are limited, and the Kremlin is motivated by asymmetric deployment of its media, information, and cyber power. ..."
May 19, 2020 | www.oxfordscholarship.com
Chapter:
(p.81) 5 Russophobia in the Age of Donald Trump
Source:
The Dark Double
Author(s):
Andrei P. Tsygankov
Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/oso/9780190919337.003.0005

Abstract and Keywords

The chapter extends the argument about media and value conflict between Russia and the United States to the age of Donald Trump. The new value conflict is assessed as especially acute and exacerbated by the US partisan divide. The Russia issue became central because it reflected both political partisanship and the growing value division between Trump voters and the liberal establishment. In addition to explaining the new wave of American Russophobia, the chapter analyzes Russia's own role and motives. The media are likely to continue the ideological and largely negative coverage of Russia, especially if Washington and Moscow fail to develop a pragmatic form of cooperation.

Keywords: Russia, Trump, US elections, narrative of collusion, partisan divide

This chapter addresses the new development in the US media perception of the Russian threat following the election of Donald Trump as the United States' president. The election revealed that US national values could no longer be viewed as predominantly liberal and favoring the global promotion of democracy, as supported by Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. During and after the election, the liberal media sought to present Moscow as not only favoring Trump but being responsible for his election and even ruling on behalf of the Kremlin. Those committed to a liberal worldview led the way in criticizing Russia and Putin for assaulting liberal democratic values globally and inside the United States. This chapter argues that the Russia issue became so central in the new internal divide because it reflects both political partisanship and the growing division between the values of Trump voters and those of the liberal establishment. The domestic political struggle has exacerbated the divide. Russia's otherness, again, has highlighted values of "freedom," seeking to preserve the confidence of the liberal self. (p.82)

The Narrative of Trump's "Collusion" with Russia

During the US presidential election campaign, American media developed yet another perception of Russia as reflected in the narrative of Trump's collusion with the Kremlin. 1 Having originated in liberal media and building on the previous perceptions of neo-Soviet autocracy and foreign threat, the new perception of Russia was that of the enemy that won the war against the United States. By electing the Kremlin's favored candidate, America was defeated by Russia. As a CNN columnist wrote, "The Russians really are here, infiltrating every corner of the country, with the single goal of disrupting the American way of life." 2 The two assumptions behind the new media narrative were that Putin was an enemy and that Trump was compromised by Putin. The inevitable conclusion was that Trump could not be a patriot and potentially was a traitor prepared to act against US interests.

The new narrative was assisted by the fact that Trump presented a radically different perspective on Russia than Clinton and the US establishment. The American political class had been in agreement that Russia displayed an aggressive foreign policy seeking to destroy the US-centered international order. Influential politicians, both Republicans and Democrats, commonly referred to Russian president Putin as an extremely dangerous KGB spy with no soul. Instead, Trump saw Russia's international interests as not fundamentally different from America's. He advocated that the United States to find a way to align its policies and priorities in defeating terrorism in the Middle East -- a goal that Russia shared -- with the Kremlin's. Trump promised to form new alliances to "unite the civilized world against Radical Islamic Terrorism" and to eradicate it "completely from the face of the Earth." 3 He hinted that he was prepared to revisit the thorny issues of Western sanctions against (p.83) the Russian economy and the recognition of Crimea as a part of Russia. Trump never commented on Russia's political system but expressed his admiration for Putin's leadership and high level of domestic support. 4

Capitalizing on the difference between Trump's views and those of the Democratic Party nominee, Hillary Clinton, the liberal media referred to Trump as the Kremlin-compromised candidate. Commentators and columnists with the New York Times , such as Paul Krugman, referred to Trump as the "Siberian" candidate. 5 Commentators and pundits, including those with academic and political credentials, developed the theory that the United States was under attack. The former ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, wrote in the Washington Post that Russia had attacked "our sovereignty" and continued to "watch us do nothing" because of the partisan divide. He compared the Kremlin's actions with Pearl Harbor or 9/11 and warned that Russia was likely to perform repeat assaults in 2018 and 2020. 6 The historian Timothy Snyder went further, comparing the election of Trump to a loss of war, which Snyder said was the basic aim of the enemy. Writing in the New York Daily News , he asserted, "We no longer need to wonder what it would be like to lose a war on our own territory. We just lost one to Russia, and the consequence was the election of Donald Trump." 7

The election of Trump prompted the liberal media to discuss Russia-related fears. The leading theory was that Trump would now compromise America's interests and rule the country on behalf of Putin. Thomas Friedman of the New York Times called for actions against Russia and praised "patriotic" Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham for being tough on Trump. 8 MSNBC host Rachel Maddow asked whether Trump was actually under Putin's control. Citing Trump's views and his associates' travel to Moscow, she told viewers, "We are also starting to see (p.84) what may be signs of continuing [Russian] influence in our country, not just during the campaign but during the administration -- basically, signs of what could be a continuing operation." 9 Another New York Times columnist, Nicholas Kristof, published a column titled "There's a Smell of Treason in the Air," arguing that the FBI's investigation of the Trump presidential campaign's collusion "with a foreign power so as to win an election" was an investigation of whether such collusion "would amount to treason." 10 Responding to Trump's statement that his phone was tapped during the election campaign, the Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum tweeted that "Trump's insane 'GCHQ tapped my phone' theory came from . . . Moscow." McFaul and many others then endorsed and retweeted the message. 11

To many within the US media, Trump's lack of interest in promoting global institutions and his publicly expressed doubts that the Kremlin was behind cyberattacks on the Democratic National Committee (DNC) served to exacerbate the problem. Several intelligence leaks to the press and investigations by Congress and the FBI contributed to the image of a president who was not motivated by US interests. The US intelligence report on Russia's alleged hacking of the US electoral system released on January 8, 2017, served to consolidate the image of Russia as an enemy. Leaks to the press have continued throughout Trump's presidency. Someone in the administration informed the press that Trump called Putin to congratulate him on his victory in elections on March 18, 2018, despite Trump's advisers' warning against making such a call. 12

In the meantime, investigations of Trump's alleged "collusion" with Russia were failing to produce substantive evidence. Facts that some associates of Trump sought to meet or met with members of Russia's government did not lead to evidence of sustained contacts or collaboration. It was not proven that the Kremlin's "black dossier" on Trump compiled by British intelligence officer (p.85) Christopher Steele and leaked to CNN was truthful. Russian activity on American social networks such as Facebook and Twitter was not found to be conclusive in determining outcomes of the elections. 13 In February 2018, a year after launching investigation, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted thirteen Russian nationals for allegedly interfering in the US 2016 presidential elections, yet their connection to Putin or Trump was not established. On March 12, 2018, Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr stated that he had not yet seen any evidence of collusion. 14 Representative Mike Conaway, the Republican leading the Russia investigation, announced the end of the committee's probe of Russian meddling in the election. 15

Trump was also not acting toward Russia in the way the US media expected. His views largely reflected those of the military and national security establishment and disappointed some of his supporters. 16 The US National Security Strategy and new Defense Strategy presented Russia as a leading security threat, alongside China, Iran, and North Korea. The president made it clear that he wanted to engage in tough bargaining with Russia by insisting on American terms. 17 Instead of improving ties with Russia, let alone acting on behalf of the Kremlin, Trump contributed to new crises in bilateral relations that had to do with the two sides' principally different perceptions. While the Kremlin expected Washington to normalize relations, the United States assumed Russia's weakness and expected it to comply with Washington's priorities regarding the Middle East, Ukraine, and Afghanistan and nuclear and cyber issues. 18 Trump also authorized the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats in US history and ordered several missile strikes against Assad's Russia-supported positions in Syria, each time provoking a crisis in relations with Moscow. Even Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, whom Rachel Maddow suspected of being appointed on Putin's advice to "weaken" the State Department and "bleed out" (p.86) the FBI, 19 was replaced by John Bolton. The latter's foreign policy reputation was that of a hawk, including on Russia. 20

Responding to these developments, the media focused on fears of being attacked by the Kremlin and on Trump not doing enough to protect the country. These fears went beyond the alleged cyber interference in the US presidential elections and included infiltration of American media and social networks and attacks on congressional elections and the country's most sensitive infrastructure, such as electric grids, water-processing plants, banking networks, and transportation facilities. In order to prevent such developments, media commentators and editorial writers recommended additional pressures on the Kremlin and counteroffensive operations. 21 One commentator recommended, as the best defense from Russia's plans to interfere with another election in the United States, launching a cyberattack on Russia's own presidential elections in March 2018, to "disrupt the stability of Vladimir Putin's regime." 22 A New York Times editorial summarized the mood by challenging President Trump to confront Russia further: "If Mr. Trump isn't Mr. Putin's lackey, it's past time for him to prove it." 23 The burden of proof was now on Trump's shoulders.

Opposition to the "Collusion" Narrative

In contrast to highly critical views of Russia in the dominant media, conservative, libertarian, and progressive sources offered different assessments. Initially, opposition to the collusion narrative came from the alternative media, yet gradually -- in response to scant evidence of Trump's collusion -- it incorporated voices within the mainstream.

The conservative media did not support the view that Russia "stole" elections and presented Trump as a patriot who wanted to make America great rather than develop "cozy" relationships with (p.87) the Kremlin. Writing in the American Interest , Walter Russell Mead argued that Trump aimed to demonstrate the United States' superiority by capitalizing on its military and technological advantages. He did not sound like a Russian mole. Challenging the liberal media, the author called for "an intellectually solvent and emotionally stable press" and wrote that "if President Trump really is a Putin pawn, his foreign policy will start looking much more like Barack Obama's." 24 Instead of viewing Trump as compromised by the Kremlin, sources such Breitbart and Fox News attributed the blame to the deep state, "the complex of bureaucrats, technocrats, and plutocrats," including the intelligence agencies, that seeks to "derail, or at least to de-legitimize, the Trump presidency" by engaging in accusations and smear campaigns. 25

Echoing Trump's own views, some conservatives expressed their admiration for Putin as a dynamic leader superior to Obama. In particular, they praised Putin for his ability to defend Russia's "traditional values" and great-power status. 26 Neoconservative and paleoconservative publications like the National Review , the Weekly Standard, Human Events Online , and others critiqued Obama's "feckless foreign policy," characterized by "fruitless accommodationism," contrasting it with Putin's skilled and calculative geopolitical "game of chess." 27 A Washington Post / ABC News poll revealed that among Republicans, 75% approved of Trump's approach on Russia relative; 40% of all respondents approved. 28 This did not mean that conservatives and Republicans were "infiltrated" by the Kremlin. Mutual Russian and American conservative influences were limited and nonstructured. 29 The approval of Putin as a leader by American conservatives meant that they shared a certain commonality of ideas and were equally critical of liberal media and globalization. 30

Progressive and libertarian media also did not support the narrative of collusion. Gary Leupp at CounterPunch found the (p.88) narrative to be serving the purpose of reviving and even intensifying "Cold War-era Russophobia," with Russia being an "adversary" "only in that it opposes the expansion of NATO, especially to include Ukraine and Georgia." 31 Justin Raimondo at Antiwar.com questioned the narrative by pointing to Russia's bellicose rhetoric in response to Trump's actions. 32 Glenn Greenwald and Zaid Jilani at Intercept reminded readers that, overall, Trump proved to be far more confrontational toward Russia than Obama, thereby endangering America. 33 In particular Trump severed diplomatic ties with Russia, armed Ukraine, appointed anti-Russia hawks, such as ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, National Security Advisor John Bolton, and Secretary of State Michal Pompeo to key foreign policy positions, antagonized Russia's Iranian allies, and imposed tough sanctions against Russian business with ties to the Kremlin. 34

The dominant liberal media ignored opposing perspectives or presented them as compromised by Russia. For instance, in amplifying the view that Putin "stole" the elections, the Washington Post sought to discredit alternative sources of news and commentaries as infiltrated by the Kremlin's propaganda. On November 24, 2016, the newspaper published an interview with the executive director of a new website, PropOrNot, who preferred to remain anonymous, and claimed that the Russian government circulated pro-Trump articles before the election. Without providing evidence on explaining its methodology, the group identified more than two hundred websites that published or echoed Russian propaganda, including WikiLeaks and the Drudge Report , left-wing websites such as CounterPunch, Truthout, Black Agenda Report, Truthdig , and Naked Capitalism , as well as libertarian venues such as Antiwar.com and the Ron Paul Institute. 35 Another mainstream liberal outlet, CNN, warned the American people to be vigilant against the Kremlin's alleged efforts to spread propaganda: "Enormous numbers of (p.89) Americans are not only failing to fight back, they are also unwitting collaborators -- reading, retweeting, sharing and reacting to Russian propaganda and provocations every day." 36

However, voices of dissent were now heard even in the mainstream media. Masha Gessen of the New Yorker said that Trump's tweet about Robert Mueller's indictments and Moscow's "laughing its ass off" was "unusually (perhaps accidentally) accurate." 37 She pointed out that Russians of all ideological convictions "are remarkably united in finding the American obsession with Russian meddling to be ridiculous." 38 The editor of the influential Politico , Blake Hounshell, confessed that he was a Russiagate skeptic because even though "Trump was all too happy to collude with Putin," Mueller's team never found a "smoking gun." 39 In reviewing the book on Russia's role in the 2016 election Russian Roulette , veteran New York Times reporter Steven Lee Myers noted that the Kremlin's meddling "simply exploited the vulgarity already plaguing American political campaigns" and that the veracity of many accusations remained unclear. 40

Explaining Russophobia

The high-intensity Russophobia within the American media, overblown even by the standards of previous threat narratives, could no longer be explained by differences in national values or by bilateral tensions. The new fear of Russia also reflected domestic political polarization and growing national unease over America's identity and future direction.

The narrative of collusion in the media was symptomatic of America's declining confidence in its own values. Until the intervention in Iraq in 2004, optimism and a sense of confidence prevailed in American social attitudes, having survived even the terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001. The (p.90) country's economy was growing and its position in the world was not challenged. However, the disastrous war in Iraq, the global financial crisis of 2008, and Russia's intervention in Georgia in August 2008 changed that. US leadership could no longer inspire the same respect, and a growing number of countries viewed it as a threat to world peace. 41 Internally, the United States was increasingly divided. Following presidential elections in November 2016, 77% of Americans perceived their country as "greatly divided on the most important values." 42 The value divide had been expressed in partisanship and political polarization long before the 2016 presidential elections. 43 The Russia issue deepened this divide. According to a poll taken in October 2017, 63% of Democrats, but just 38% of Republicans, viewed "Russia's power and influence" as a major threat to the well-being of the United States. 44

During the US 2016 presidential elections, Russia emerged as a convenient way to accentuate differences between Democratic and Republican candidates, which in previous elections were never as pronounced or defining. The new elections deepened the partisan divide because of extreme differences between the two main candidates, particularly on Russia. Donald Trump positioned himself as a radical populist promising to transform US foreign policy and "drain the swamp" in Washington. His position on Russia seemed unusual because, by election time, the Kremlin had challenged the United States' position in the world by annexing Crimea, supporting Ukrainian separatism, and possibly hacking the DNC site.

The Russian issue assisted Clinton in stressing her differences from Trump. Soon after it became known that DNC servers were hacked, she embraced the view that Russia was behind the cyberattacks. She accused Russia of "trying to wreak havoc" in the United States and threatened retaliation. 45 In his turn, Trump used Russia to challenge Clinton's commitment to national security (p.91) and ability to serve as commander in chief. In particular, he drew public attention to the FBI investigation into Clinton's use of a private server for professional correspondence, and even noted sarcastically that the Russians should find thirty thousand missing emails belonging to her. The latter was interpreted by many in liberal media and political circles as a sign of Trump's being unpatriotic. 46 Clinton capitalized on this interpretation. She referred to the issue of hacking as the most important one throughout the campaign and challenged Trump to agree with assessments of intelligence agencies that cyberattacks were ordered by the Kremlin. She questioned Trump's commitments to US national security and accused him of being a "puppet" for President Putin. 47 Following Trump's victory, Clinton told donors that her loss should be partly attributed to Putin and the election hacks directed by him. 48

Clinton's arguments fitted with the overall narrative embraced by the mainstream media since roughly 2005 characterizing Russia as abusive and aggressive. Clinton viewed Russia as an oppressive autocratic power that was aggressive abroad to compensate for domestic weaknesses. Previously, in her book Hard Choices , then-secretary of state Clinton described Putin as "thin-skinned and autocratic, resenting criticism and eventually cracking down on dissent and debate." 49 This view was shared by President Obama, who publicly referred to Russia as a "regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors not out of strength but out of weakness." 50 During the election's campaign, Clinton argued that the United States should challenge Russia by imposing a no-fly zone in Syria with the objective of removing Assad from power, strengthening sanctions against the Russian economy, and providing lethal weapons to Ukraine in order to contain the potential threat of Russia's military invasion.

Following the elections, the partisan divide deepened, with liberal establishment attacking the "unpatriotic" Trump. Having (p.92) lost the election, Clinton partly attributed Trump's victory to the role of Russia and advocated an investigation into Trump's ties to Russia. In February 2017 the Clinton-influenced Center for American Progress brought on a former State Department official to run a new Moscow Project. 51 As acknowledged by the New Yorker , members of the Clinton inner circle believed that the Obama administration deliberately downplayed DNC hacking by the Kremlin. "We understand the bind they were in," one of Clinton's senior advisers said. "But what if Barack Obama had gone to the Oval Office, or the East Room of the White House, and said, 'I'm speaking to you tonight to inform you that the United States is under attack . . .' A large majority of Americans would have sat up and taken notice . . . it is bewildering -- it is baffling -- it is hard to make sense of why this was not a five-alarm fire in the White House." 52

In addition to Clinton, many other members of the Washington establishment, including some Republicans, spread the narrative of Russia "attacking" America. Republican politicians who viewed Clinton's defeat and the hacking attacks in military terms included those of chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee John McCain, who stated, "When you attack a country, it's an act of war," 53 and former vice president Dick Cheney, who called Russia's alleged interference in the US election "a very serious effort made by Mr. Putin" that "in some quarters that would be considered an act of war." 54 A number of Democrats also engaged in the rhetoric of war, likening the Russian "attack," as Senator Ben Cardin did, to a "political Pearl Harbor." 55

Rumors and leaks, possibly by members of US intelligence agencies, 56 and activities of liberal groups that sought to discredit Trump contributed to the Russophobia. In addition to the DNC hacking accusations, many fears of Russia in the media were based on the assumption that contacts, let alone cooperation with the (p.93) Kremlin, was unpatriotic and implied potentially "compromising" behavior: praise of Putin as a leader, possible business dealings with Russian "oligarchs," and meetings with Russian officials such Ambassador Sergei Kislyak. 57

There were therefore two sides to the Russia story in the US liberal media -- rational and emotional. The rational side had to do with calculations by Clinton-affiliated circles and anti-Russian groups pooling their resources to undermine Trump and his plans to improve relations with Russia. Among others, these resources included dominance within the liberal media and leaks by the intelligence community. The emotional side was revealed by the liberal elites' values and ability to promote fears of Russia within the US political class and the general public. Popular emotions of fear and frustration with Russia already existed in the public space due to the old Cold War memories, as well as disturbing post–Cold War developments that included wars in Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine. In part because of these memories, factions such as those associated with Clinton were successful in evoking in the public liberal mind what historian Richard Hofstadter called the "paranoid style" or "the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy." 58 Mobilized by liberal media to pressure Trump, these emotions became an independent factor in the political struggle inside Washington. The public display of fear and frustration with Russia and Trump could only be sustained by a constant supply of new "suspicious" developments and intense discussion by the media.

Russia's Role and Motives

Russia's "attacking" America and Trump's "colluding" with the Kremlin remained poorly substantiated. Taken together, the DNC hacking, Trump's and Putin's mutual praise, and Trump associates' (p.94) contacts with Russian officials implied Kremlin infiltration of the United States' internal politics. Yet viewed separately, each was questionable and unproven. Some of these points could have also been made about Hillary Clinton, who had ties to Russian -- not to mention Saudi Arabian -- business circles and Ukrainian politicians. 59 Political views cannot be counted as evidence. Contacts with Russian officials could have been legitimate exchanges of views about two countries' interests and potential cooperation. Even the CIA- and the FBI-endorsed conclusion that Russia attacked the DNC servers was questioned by some observers on the grounds that forensic evidence was lacking and that it relied too much on findings by one cybersecurity company. 60 In general, discussion of Russia in the US media lacked nuances and a sense of proportion. As Jesse Walker, an editor at Reason magazine and author of The United States of Paranoia , pointed out,

There's a difference between thinking that Moscow may have hacked the Democratic National Committee and thinking that Moscow actually hacked the election, between thinking the president may have Russian conflicts of interest and thinking he's a Russian puppet . . . when someone like the New York Times columnist Paul Krugman declares that Putin "installed" Donald Trump as president, he's moving out of the realm of plausible plots and into the world of fantasy. Similarly, Clinton's warning that Trump could be Putin's "puppet" leaped from an imaginable idea, that Putin wanted to help her rival, to the much more dubious notion that Putin thought he could control the impulsive Trump. (Trump barely seems capable of controlling himself.) 61

The loose and politically tendentious nature of discussions, circulation of questionable leaks and dossiers complied by unidentified (p.95) individuals, and lack of serious evidence led a number of observers to conclude that the Russia story was more about stopping Trump than about Russia. The Russian scandal was symptomatic of the poisonous state of bilateral relations that Democrats exploited for the purpose of derailing Trump. US-Russia relations became a hostage of partisan domestic politics. As one liberal and tough critic of Putin wrote, Democratic lawmakers' rhetoric of war in connection with the 2016 elections "places Republicans -- who often characterize themselves as more hawkish on Russia and defense -- in a bind as they try to defend to the new administration's strategy towards Moscow." 62 Another observer noted that Russiagate performed "a critical function for Trump's political foes," allowing "them to oppose Trump while obscuring key areas where they either share his priorities or have no viable alternative." 63

The described lack of confidence was reflected in the exaggerated fear that Russia was capable of destroying the West's values. However, Russia and Putin were neither omnipresent nor threatening to destroy the United States' political system. A number of analysts, such as Mark Schrad, identified fears of Russia as "increasingly hysterical fantasies" and argued that Russia was not a global menace. 64 If the Kremlin was indeed behind the cyberattacks, it was not for the reasons commonly broached. Rather than trying to subvert the US system, it sought to defend its own system against what it perceived as a US policy of changing regimes and meddling in Russia's internal affairs. The United States has a long history of covert activities in foreign countries. 65 Washington's establishment has never followed the advice given by prominent American statesmen such as George Kennan to let Russians "be Russians" and "work out their internal problems in their own manner." 66 Instead, the United States assumes that America defines the rules and boundaries of proper behavior in international politics, while others must simply follow the rules.

(p.96) Russia's basic motives remain defensive even when the Kremlin relies on assertive tactics. Russia's assertiveness, even in cyberspace, is of a reactive nature and is a response to US policies. Experts observe that Russia's conception of cyber and other informational power serves the overall purpose of protecting national sovereignty from encroachments by the United States. 67 Rather than fighting a full-scale information war with the West, Russia seeks to increase its status and strengthen its bargaining position in relations with the United States. 68 The Kremlin has been proposing to negotiate rules of cooperation in the cyber area since early in the twenty-first century. Motivated by an insistence on "cyber-sovereignty," Russia regularly proposes resolutions at the United Nations to prohibit "information aggression," In a 2011 letter to the United Nations General Assembly, Russia proposed an "International Code of Conduct for Information Security," stipulating that states subscribing to the code would pledge to "not use information and communications technologies and other information and communications networks to interfere with the internal affairs of other states or with the aim of undermining their political, economic and social stability." 69

Overall, what the Kremlin challenges is the United States' post–Cold War behavior that undermines Russia's status as a great power. Although Russia is not in a position to directly challenge the United States and the US-centered international order, the Kremlin hopes to gain external recognition as a great power by relying on low-cost methods and revealing the vulnerability of Western nations. Russia's capabilities and presence in global cyber and media space are limited, and the Kremlin is motivated by asymmetric deployment of its media, information, and cyber power.

[May 19, 2020] New Documents From the Sham Prosecution of Gen. Michael Flynn Also Reveal Broad Corruption in the Russiagate Investigations by Glenn Greenwald

This is about intelligence agencies becaming a powerful by shadow political force, much like STASI. This not about corruption per se, but about perusing of political goals by dirty means. So it is closer to sedition then to corruption.
Notable quotes:
"... there was no valid reason for the FBI to have interrogated Flynn about his conversations with Kislyak in the first place. There is nothing remotely untoward or unusual -- let alone criminal -- about an incoming senior national security official, three weeks away from taking over, reaching out to a counterpart in a foreign government to try to tamp down tensions. As the Washington Post put it , "it would not be uncommon for incoming administrations to interface with foreign governments with whom they will soon have to work." ..."
"... there was also massive corruption on the part of the investigators themselves, exploiting and abusing their vast and invasive investigative and prosecutorial powers for ideological goals, political subterfuge, election manipulation, and personal vendettas ..."
"... To begin with, cable and other news outlets that employed former Obama-era intelligence operatives, generals, and prosecutors to disseminate every Russiagate conspiracy theory they could find -- virtually always without any dissent or even questioning -- have barely acknowledged these explosive new documents. ..."
"... But the most critical reason to delve deeply into this case is that it reveals one the most dangerous abuses of power a democracy can suffer: The powers of the CIA, FBI, and NSA were blatantly and repeatedly abused to manipulate election outcomes and achieve political advantage. ..."
"... Flynn is a right-wing, hawkish general whose views on the so-called war on terror are ones utterly anathema to my own beliefs. That does not make his prosecution justified. One's views of Flynn personally or his politics (or those of the Trump administration generally) should have absolutely no bearing on one's assessment of the justifiability of what the U.S. government did to him here -- any more than one has to like the political views of the detainees at Guantanamo to find their treatment abusive and illegal , or any more than one has to agree with the views of people who are being censured in order to defend their right of free expression . ..."
"... As the journalist Aaron Maté demonstrated when he brilliantly challenged The Guardian's Luke Harding about his bestselling book claiming to prove collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia -- one of the few times a Russiagate conspiracy advocate was forced to confront a knowledgeable critic -- those claims often cannot survive even minimal critical scrutiny. That's why media outlets have insulated these conspiracy theory advocates, as well as their audiences, from any dissent or even critical questioning. ..."
May 14, 2020 | theintercept.com
Gen. Michael Flynn, President Obama's former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and President Donald Trump's former national security adviser, pleaded guilty on December 1, 2017, to a single count of lying to the FBI about two conversations he had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak while Flynn served as a Trump transition team official (Flynn was never charged for any matters relating to his relationship with the Turkish government). As part of the plea deal, special counsel Robert Mueller recommended no jail time for Flynn , and the plea agreement also seemingly put an end to threats from the Mueller team to prosecute Flynn's son.

Last Thursday, the Justice Department filed a motion seeking to dismiss the prosecution of Flynn based, in part, on newly discovered documents revealing that the conduct of the FBI, under the leadership of Director James Comey and his now-disgraced Deputy Andrew McCabe (who himself was forced to leave the Bureau after being caught lying to agents ), was improper and motivated by corrupt objectives. That motion prompted histrionic howls of outrage from the same political officials and their media allies who have spent the last three years pushing maximalist Russiagate conspiracy theories.

But the prosecution of Flynn -- for allegedly lying to the FBI when he denied in a January 24 interrogation that he had discussed with Kislyak on December 29 the new sanctions and expulsions imposed on Russia by the Obama administration -- was always odd for a number of reasons. To begin with, the FBI agents who questioned Flynn said afterward that they did not believe he was lying (as CNN reported in February 2017: "the FBI interviewers believed Flynn was cooperative and provided truthful answers. Although Flynn didn't remember all of what he talked about, they don't believe he was intentionally misleading them, the officials say"). For that reason, CNN said, "the FBI is not expected to pursue any charges against" him.

More importantly, there was no valid reason for the FBI to have interrogated Flynn about his conversations with Kislyak in the first place. There is nothing remotely untoward or unusual -- let alone criminal -- about an incoming senior national security official, three weeks away from taking over, reaching out to a counterpart in a foreign government to try to tamp down tensions. As the Washington Post put it , "it would not be uncommon for incoming administrations to interface with foreign governments with whom they will soon have to work." What newly released documents over the last month reveal is what has been generally evident for the last three years: The powers of the security state agencies -- particularly the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and the DOJ -- were systematically abused as part of the 2016 election and then afterward for political rather than legal ends.

While there was obviously deceit and corruption on the part of some Trump officials in lying to Russiagate investigators and otherwise engaging in depressingly common D.C. lobbyist corruption , there was also massive corruption on the part of the investigators themselves, exploiting and abusing their vast and invasive investigative and prosecutorial powers for ideological goals, political subterfuge, election manipulation, and personal vendettas . The former category (corruption by Trump officials) has received a tidal wave of endless media attention, while the latter (corruption and abuse of power by those investigating them) has received almost none.

For numerous reasons, it is vital to fully examine with as much clarity as possible the abuse of power that drove the prosecution of Flynn. To begin with, cable and other news outlets that employed former Obama-era intelligence operatives, generals, and prosecutors to disseminate every Russiagate conspiracy theory they could find -- virtually always without any dissent or even questioning -- have barely acknowledged these explosive new documents.

More disturbingly, liberals and Democrats -- as part of their movement toward venerating these security state agencies -- have completely jettisoned long-standing, core principles about the criminal justice system, including questioning whether lying to the FBI should be a crime at all and recognizing that innocent people are often forced to plead guilty -- in order to justify both the Flynn prosecution and the broader Mueller probe.

But the most critical reason to delve deeply into this case is that it reveals one the most dangerous abuses of power a democracy can suffer: The powers of the CIA, FBI, and NSA were blatantly and repeatedly abused to manipulate election outcomes and achieve political advantage. In other words, we know now that these agencies did exactly what Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer warned they would do to Trump when he appeared on Rachel Maddow's MSNBC program shortly before Trump's inauguration:

This turned out to be one of the most prescient and important (and creepy) statements of the Trump presidency: from Chuck Schumer to Rachel Maddow - in early January, 2017, before Trump was even inaugurated: pic.twitter.com/TUaYkksILG

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 8, 2019
Because U.S. politics is now discussed far more as tests of tribal loyalty ("Whose side are you on?") than actual ideological or even political beliefs ("Which policies do you favor or oppose?"), it is very difficult to persuade people to separate their personal or political views of Flynn ("Do you like him or not?") from the question of whether the U.S. government abused its power in gravely dangerous ways to prosecute him.

Flynn is a right-wing, hawkish general whose views on the so-called war on terror are ones utterly anathema to my own beliefs. That does not make his prosecution justified. One's views of Flynn personally or his politics (or those of the Trump administration generally) should have absolutely no bearing on one's assessment of the justifiability of what the U.S. government did to him here -- any more than one has to like the political views of the detainees at Guantanamo to find their treatment abusive and illegal , or any more than one has to agree with the views of people who are being censured in order to defend their right of free expression .

The ability to distinguish between ideological questions from evidentiary questions is vital for rational discourse to be possible, yet has been all but eliminated at the altar of tribal fealty. That is why evidentiary questions completely devoid of ideological belief -- such as whether one found the Russiagate conspiracy theories supported by convincing evidence -- have been treated not as evidentiary matters but as tribal ones: to be affiliated with the left (an ideological characterization), one must affirm belief in those conspiracy theories even if one does not find the evidence in support of them actually compelling. The conflation of ideological and evidentiary questions, and the substitution of substantive political debates with tests of tribal loyalty, are indescribably corrosive to our public discourse.

As a result, whether one is now deemed on the right or left has almost nothing to do with actual political beliefs about policy questions and everything to do with one's willingness to serve the interests of one team or another. With the warped formula in place, U.S. politics has been depoliticized , stripped of any meaningful ideological debates in lieu of mindless team loyalty oaths on non-ideological questions.

Our newest SYSTEM UPDATE episode, debuting today, is devoted to enabling as clear and objective an examination as possible of the abuses that drove the Flynn prosecution -- including these critical, newly declassified documents -- as well the broader Russiagate investigations of which it was a part. These abuses have received far too little attention from the vast majority of the U.S. media that simply excludes any questioning or dissent of their prevailing narratives about all of these matters.

Notably, we invited several of the cable stars and security state agents who have been pushing these conspiracy theories for years to appear on the program for a civil discussion, but none were willing to do so -- because they are so accustomed to being able to spout these theories on MSNBC, CNN, and in newspapers without ever being meaningfully challenged. Regardless of one's views on these scandals, it is unhealthy in the extreme for any media to insulate themselves from a diversity of views.

As the journalist Aaron Maté demonstrated when he brilliantly challenged The Guardian's Luke Harding about his bestselling book claiming to prove collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia -- one of the few times a Russiagate conspiracy advocate was forced to confront a knowledgeable critic -- those claims often cannot survive even minimal critical scrutiny. That's why media outlets have insulated these conspiracy theory advocates, as well as their audiences, from any dissent or even critical questioning.

Today's SYSTEM UPDATE episode, which we believe provides the most comprehensive examination to date of these new documents relating to the Flynn prosecution and how this case relates to the broader Russiagate investigative abuses, can be viewed above or on The Intercept's YouTube channel .

[May 19, 2020] NYT Critique of Ronan Farrow Describes Pathology of "Resistance Journalism"

This is about control of MSM by intelligence agencies, not so much about corruption of individual journalists. Journalist became like in the USSR "Soldiers of the Party" -- well paid propagandist of particular, supplied to them talking points.
Notable quotes:
"... encouraged and incentivized ..."
"... for each segment ..."
May 19, 2020 | theintercept.com

What is particularly valuable about Smith's article is its perfect description of a media sickness borne of the Trump era that is rapidly corroding journalistic integrity and justifiably destroying trust in news outlets. Smith aptly dubs this pathology "resistance journalism," by which he means that journalists are now not only free, but encouraged and incentivized , to say or publish anything they want, no matter how reckless and fact-free, provided their target is someone sufficiently disliked in mainstream liberal media venues and/or on social media:

[Farrow's] work, though, reveals the weakness of a kind of resistance journalism that has thrived in the age of Donald Trump: That if reporters swim ably along with the tides of social media and produce damaging reporting about public figures most disliked by the loudest voices, the old rules of fairness and open-mindedness can seem more like impediments than essential journalistic imperatives.

That can be a dangerous approach, particularly in a moment when the idea of truth and a shared set of facts is under assault.

In assailing Farrow for peddling unproven conspiracy theories, Smith argues that such journalistic practices are particularly dangerous in an era where conspiracy theories are increasingly commonplace. Yet unlike most journalists with a mainstream platform, Smith emphasizes that conspiracy theories are commonly used not only by Trump and his movement (conspiracy theories which are quickly debunked by most of the mainstream media), but are also commonly deployed by Trump's enemies, whose reliance on conspiracy theories is virtually never denounced by journalists because mainstream news outlets themselves play a key role in peddling them:

We are living in an era of conspiracies and dangerous untruths -- many pushed by President Trump, but others hyped by his enemies -- that have lured ordinary Americans into passionately believing wild and unfounded theories and fiercely rejecting evidence to the contrary. The best reporting tries to capture the most attainable version of the truth, with clarity and humility about what we don't know. Instead, Mr. Farrow told us what we wanted to believe about the way power works, and now, it seems, he and his publicity team are not even pretending to know if it's true.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected , and one could argue even in the months leading up to his election, journalistic standards have been consciously jettisoned when it comes to reporting on public figures who, in Smith's words, are "most disliked by the loudest voices," particularly when such reporting "swim[s] ably along with the tides of social media." Put another way: As long the targets of one's conspiracy theories and attacks are regarded as villains by the guardians of mainstream liberal social media circles, journalists reap endless career rewards for publishing unvetted and unproven -- even false -- attacks on such people, while never suffering any negative consequences when their stories are exposed as shabby frauds.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/OOhRRr6c1wA?autoplay=0&rel=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Ftheintercept.com&widgetid=1 infiltrated and taken over the U.S. government through sexual and financial blackmail leverage over Trump and used it to dictate U.S. policy; Trump officials conspired with the Kremlin to interfere in the 2016 election; Russia was attacking the U.S. by hacking its electricity grid , recruiting journalists to serve as clandestine Kremlin messengers , and plotting to cut off heat to Americans in winter. Mainstream media debacles -- all in service of promoting the same set of conspiracy theories against Trump -- are literally too numerous to count, requiring one to select the worst offenses as illustrative .

Glenn Beck 2009 + Maddow 2019 is the greatest crossover event in history pic.twitter.com/D1NElGBq3U

-- Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) January 31, 2019
In March of last year, Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi -- writing under the headline "It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD" -- compared the prevailing media climate since 2016 to that which prevailed in 2002 and 2003 regarding the invasion of Iraq and the so-called war on terror: little to no dissent permitted, skeptics of media-endorsed orthodoxies shunned and excluded, and worst of all, the very journalists who were most wrong in peddling false conspiracy theories were exactly those who ended up most rewarded on the ground that even though they spread falsehoods, they did so for the right cause.

Under that warped rubric -- in which spreading falsehoods is commendable as long as it was done to harm the evildoers -- the New Yorker's Jeffrey Goldberg, one of the most damaging endorsers of false conspiracy theories about Iraq , rose to become editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, while two of the most deceitful Bush-era neocons, Bush/Cheney speechwriter David Frum and supreme propagandist Bill Kristol, have reprised their role as leading propagandists and conspiracy theorists -- only this time aimed against the GOP president instead of on his behalf -- and thus have become beloved liberal media icons. The communications director for both the Bush/Cheney campaign and its White House, Nicole Wallace, is one of the most popular liberal cable hosts from her MSNBC perch.

Join Our Newsletter Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you. I'm in Exactly the same journalism-destroying dynamic is driving the post-Russiagate media landscape. There is literally no accountability for the journalists and news outlets that spread falsehoods in their pages, on their airwaves, and through their viral social media postings. The Washington Post's media columnist Erik Wemple has been one of the very few journalists devoted to holding these myth-peddlers accountable -- recounting how one of the most reckless Russigate conspiracy maximialists, Natasha Bertrand, became an overnight social media and journalism star by peddling discredited conspiratorial trash (she was notably hired by Jeffrey Goldberg to cover Russigate for The Atlantic); MSNBC's Rachel Maddow spent three years hyping conspiratorial junk with no need even to retract any of it; and Mother Jones' David Corn played a crucial, decisively un-journalistic role in mainstreaming the lies of the Steele dossier all with zero effect on his journalistic status, other than to enrich him through a predictably bestselling book that peddled those unhinged conspiracies further.

Wemple's post-Russiagate series has established him as a commendable, often-lone voice trying -- with futility -- to bring some accountability to U.S. journalism for the systemic media failures of the past three years. The reason that's futile is exactly what Smith described in his column on Farrow: In "resistance journalism," facts and truth are completely dispensable -- indeed, dispensing with them is rewarded -- provided "reporters swim ably along with the tides of social media and produce damaging reporting about public figures most disliked by the loudest voices."

That describes perfectly the journalists who were defined, and enriched, by years of Russiagate deceit masquerading as reporting. By far the easiest path to career success over the last three years -- booming ratings, lucrative book sales, exploding social media followings, career rehabilitation even for the most discredited D.C. operatives -- was to feed establishment liberals an endless diet of fearmongering and inflammatory conspiracies about Drumpf and his White House. Whether it was true or supported by basic journalistic standards was completely irrelevant. Responsible reporting was simply was not a metric used to assess its worth.

It was one thing for activists, charlatans, and con artists to exploit fears of Trump for material gain: that, by definition, is what such people do. But it was another thing entirely for journalists to succumb to all the low-hanging career rewards available to them by throwing all journalistic standards into the trash bin in exchange for a star turn as a #Resistance icon. That , as Smith aptly describes, is what "Resistance Journalism" is, and it's hard to identify anything more toxic to our public discourse.

Perhaps the single most shameful and journalism-destroying episode in all of this -- an obviously difficult title to bestow -- was when a national security blogger, Marcy Wheeler, violated long-standing norms and ethical standards of journalism by announcing in 2018 that she had voluntarily turned in her own source to the FBI, claiming she did so because her still-unnamed source "had played a significant role in the Russian election attack on the US" and because her life was endangered by her brave decision to stop being a blogger and become an armchair cop by pleading with the FBI and the Mueller team to let her work with them. In her blog post announcing what she did, she claimed she was going public with her treachery because her life was in danger, and this way everyone would know the real reason if "someone releases stolen information about me or knocks me off tomorrow."

To say that Wheeler's actions are a grotesque violation of journalistic ethics is to radically understate the case. Journalists are expected to protect their sources' identities from the FBI even if they receive a subpoena and a court order compelling its disclosure; we're expected to go to prison before we comply with FBI attempts to uncover our source's identity. But here, the FBI did not try to compel Wheeler to tell them anything; they displayed no interest in her as she desperately tried to chase them down.

By all appearances, Wheeler had to beg the FBI to pay attention to her because they treated her like the sort of unstable, unhinged, unwell, delusional obsessive who, believing they have uncovered some intricate conspiracy, relentlessly harass and bombard journalists with their bizarre theories until they finally prattle to themselves for all of eternity in the spam filter of our email inboxes. The claim that she was in possession of some sort of explosive and damning information that would blow the Mueller investigation wide open was laughable. In her post, she claimed she "always planned to disclose this when this person's role was publicly revealed," but to date -- almost two years later -- she has never revealed "this person's" identity because, from all appearances, the Mueller report never relied on Wheeler's intrepid reporting or her supposedly red-hot secrets.

Like so many other Russiagate obsessives who turned into social media and MSNBC/CNN #Resistance stars, Wheeler was living a wild, self-serving fantasy, a Cold War Tom Clancy suspense film that she invented in her head and then cast herself as the heroine: a crusading investigative dot-connecter uncovering dangerous, hidden conspiracies perpetrated by dangerous, hidden Cold War-style villains (Putin) to the point where her own life was endangered by her bravery. It was a sad joke, a depressing spectacle of psycho-drama, but one that could have had grave consequences for the person she voluntarily ratted out to the FBI. Whatever else is true, this episode inflicted grave damage on American journalism by having mainstream, Russia-obsessed journalists not denounce her for her egregious violation of journalistic ethics but celebrate her for turning journalism on its head.

Why? Because, as Smith said in his Farrow article, she was "swim[ing] ably along with the tides of social media and produc[ing] damaging reporting about public figures most disliked by the loudest voices" and thus "the old rules of fairness and open-mindedness [were] more like impediments than essential journalistic imperatives." Margaret Sullivan, the former New York Times public editor and now the Washington Post's otherwise reliably commendable media reporter, celebrated Wheeler's bizarre behavior under the headline: "A journalist's conscience leads her to reveal her source to the FBI."

Despite acknowledging that "in their reporting, journalists talk to criminals all the time and don't turn them in" and that "it's pretty much an inviolable rule of journalism: Protect your sources," Sullivan heralded Wheeler's ethically repugnant and journalism-eroding violation of those principles. "It's not hard to see that her decision was a careful and principled one," Sullivan proclaimed.

She even endorsed Wheeler's cringe-inducing, self-glorifying claims about her life being endangered by invoking long-standard Cold War clichés about the treachery of the Russkies ("Overly dramatic? Not really. The Russians do have a penchant for disposing of people they find threatening."). The English language is insufficient to convey the madness required to believe that the Kremlin wanted to kill Marcy Wheeler because her blogging was getting Too Close to The Truth, but in the fevered swamps of resistance journalism, literally no claim was too unhinged to be embraced provided that it fed the social media #Resistance masses.

Sullivan's article quoted no critics of Wheeler's incredibly controversial behavior -- no need to: She was on the right side of social media reaction. And Sullivan never bothered to return to wonder why her prediction -- "Wheeler hasn't named the source publicly, though his name may soon be known to all who are following the Mueller investigation" -- never materialized. Both CNN and, incredibly, the Columbia Journalism Review published similarly sympathetic accounts of Wheeler's desperate attempts to turn over her source to the FBI and then cosplay as though she were some sort of insider in the Mueller investigation. The most menacing attribute of what Smith calls "Resistance Journalism" is that it permits and tolerates no dissent and questioning: perhaps the single most destructive path journalism can take. It has been well-documented that MSNBC and CNN spent three years peddling all sorts of ultimately discredited Russiagate conspiracy theories by excluding from their airwaves anyone who dissented from or even questioned those conspiracies. Instead, they relied upon an increasingly homogenized army of former security state agents from the CIA, FBI, and NSA to propound, in unison, all sorts of claims about Trump and Russia that turned out to be false, and peppered their panels of "analysts" with journalists whose career skyrocketed exclusively by pushing maximalist Russiagate claims, often by relying on the same intelligence officials these cable outlets sat them next to.

That NBC & MSNBC hired as a "news analyst" John Brennan - who ran the CIA when the Trump/Russia investigation began & was a key player in the news he was shaping as a paid colleague of their reporters - is a huge ethical breach. And it produced this: pic.twitter.com/nPlaq5YVxf

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 2, 2019
This trend -- whereby diversity of opinion and dissent from orthodoxies are excluded from media discourse -- is worsening rapidly due to two major factors. The first is that cable news programs are constructed to feed their audiences only self-affirming narratives that vindicate partisan loyalties. One liberal cable host told me that they receive ratings not for each show but for each segment , and they can see the ratings drop off -- the remotes clicking away -- if they put on the air anyone who criticizes the party to which that outlet is devoted (Democrats in the case of MSNBC and CNN, the GOP in the case of Fox).

But there's another more recent and probably more dissent-quashing development: the disappearance of media jobs. Mass layoffs were already common in online journalism and local newspapers prior to the coronavirus pandemic , and have now turned into an industrywide massacre . With young journalists watching jobs disappearing en masse, the last thing they are going to want to do is question or challenge prevailing orthodoxies within their news outlet or, using Smith's "Resistance Journalism" formulation, to "swim against the tides of social media" or question the evidence amassed against those "most disliked by the loudest voices."

Affirming those orthodoxies can be career-promoting, while questioning them can be job-destroying. Consider the powerful incentives journalists face in an industry where jobs are disappearing so rapidly one can barely keep count. During Russiagate, I often heard from young journalists at large media outlets who expressed varying degrees of support for and agreement with the skepticism which I and a handful of other journalists were expressing, but they felt constrained to do so themselves, for good reason. They watched the reprisals and shunning doled out even to journalists with a long record of journalistic accomplishments and job security for the crime of Russiagate skepticism, such as Taibbi (similar to the way MSNBC fired Phil Donahue in 2002 for opposing the invasion of Iraq), and they know journalists with less stature and security than Taibbi could not risk incurring that collective wrath.

All professions and institutions suffer when a herd, groupthink mentality and the banning of dissent prevail. But few activities are corroded from such a pathology more than journalism is, which has as its core function skepticism and questioning of pieties. Journalism quickly transforms into a sickly, limp version of itself when it itself wages war on the virtues of dissent and airing a wide range of perspectives.

I do not know how valid are Smith's critiques of Farrow's journalism. But what I know for certain is that Smith's broader diagnosis of "Resistance Journalism" is dead-on, and the harms it is causing are deep and enduring. When journalists know they will thrive by affirming pleasing falsehoods, and suffer when they insist on unpopular truths, journalism not only loses its societal value but becomes just another instrument for societal manipulation, deceit, and coercion.

[May 19, 2020] Beyond BuzzFeed: The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing U.S. Media Failures on the Trump-Russia Story by Glenn Greenwald

Images removed
Those are far from failures, those were successful disinformation/propaganda operations conducted with a certain goal -- remove Trump -- which demonstrate the level of intelligence agencies control of the MSM. In other words those are parts of a bigger intelligence operation -- the color revolution against Trump led most probably by Obama and Brennan.
Now we know that Obama played an important role in Russiagate media hysteria and, most porbably, in planning and executing the operation to entrap Flynn.
Notable quotes:
"... They are listed in reverse order, as measured by the magnitude of the embarrassment, the hysteria they generated on social media and cable news, the level of journalistic recklessness that produced them, and the amount of damage and danger they caused ..."
"... Note that all of these "errors" go only in one direction: namely, exaggerating the grave threat posed by Moscow and the Trump circle's connection to it. It's inevitable that media outlets will make mistakes on complex stories. If that's being done in good faith, one would expect the errors would be roughly 50/50 in terms of the agenda served by the false stories. That is most definitely not the case here. Just as was true in 2002 and 2003, when the media clearly wanted to exaggerate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and thus all of its "errors" went in that direction, virtually all of its major "errors" in this story are devoted to the same agenda and script: ..."
"... Crowdstrike, the firm hired by the DNC, claimed they had evidence that Russia hacked Ukrainian artillery apps; they then retracted it . ..."
"... The U.S. media and Democrats spent six months claiming that all "17 intelligence agencies" agreed Russia was behind the hacks; the NYT finally retracted that in June, 2017: "The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies -- the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community." ..."
"... Widespread government and media claims that accused Russian agent Maria Butina offered "sex for favors" were totally false (and scurrilous). ..."
Jan 20, 2019 | theintercept.com
BuzzFeed was once notorious for traffic-generating "listicles," but has since become an impressive outlet for deep investigative journalism under editor-in-chief Ben Smith. That outlet was prominently in the news this week thanks to its "bombshell" story about President Trump and Michael Cohen: a story that, like so many others of its kind, blew up in its face , this time when the typically mute Robert Mueller's office took the extremely rare step to label its key claims "inaccurate."

But in homage to BuzzFeed's past viral glory, following are the top ten worst media failures in two-plus-years of Trump/Russia reporting. They are listed in reverse order, as measured by the magnitude of the embarrassment, the hysteria they generated on social media and cable news, the level of journalistic recklessness that produced them, and the amount of damage and danger they caused. This list was extremely difficult to compile in part because news outlets (particularly CNN and MSNBC) often delete from the internet the video segments of their most embarrassing moments. Even more challenging was the fact that the number of worthy nominees is so large that highly meritorious entrees had to be excluded, but are acknowledged at the end with (dis)honorable mention status.

Note that all of these "errors" go only in one direction: namely, exaggerating the grave threat posed by Moscow and the Trump circle's connection to it. It's inevitable that media outlets will make mistakes on complex stories. If that's being done in good faith, one would expect the errors would be roughly 50/50 in terms of the agenda served by the false stories. That is most definitely not the case here. Just as was true in 2002 and 2003, when the media clearly wanted to exaggerate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and thus all of its "errors" went in that direction, virtually all of its major "errors" in this story are devoted to the same agenda and script:

10. RT Hacked Into and Took Over C-SPAN (Fortune)

On June 12, 2017, Fortune claimed that RT had hacked into and taken over C-SPAN and that C-SPAN "confirmed" it had been hacked. The whole story was false:

C-SPAN Confirms It Was Briefly Hacked by Russian News Site https://t.co/NUFD662FMz pic.twitter.com/POstGFzvNE

-- Fortune Tech (@FortuneTech) January 12, 2017

Kremlin-funded Russian news network RT interrupted C-SPAN's online feed for about ten minutes Thursday afternoon https://t.co/Z25LqoCW2H

-- New York Magazine (@NYMag) January 12, 2017

Holy shit. Russia state propaganda (RT) "hacked" into C-SPAN feed and took over for a good 40 seconds today? In middle of live broadcast. https://t.co/pwWYFoDGDU

-- Isaac Saul (@Ike_Saul) January 12, 2017

RT America ominously takes over C-SPAN feed for ten minutes @tommyxtopher reviews today's events for #shareblue https://t.co/uiiU5awSMs

-- Leah McElrath (@leahmcelrath) January 12, 2017

After investigation, C-SPAN has concluded that the RT interruption was not the result of a hack, but rather routing error.

-- ErikWemple (@ErikWemple) January 18, 2017
9. Russian Hackers Invaded the U.S. Electricity Grid to Deny Vermonters Heat During the Winter (WashPost)

On December 30, 2016, the Washington Post reported that "Russian hackers penetrated the U.S. electricity grid through a utility in Vermont," causing predictable outrage and panic, along with threats from U.S. political leaders. But then they kept diluting the story with editor's notes – to admit that the malware was found on a laptop not connected to the U.S. electric grid at all – until finally acknowledging, days later, that the whole story was false, since the malware had nothing to do with Russia or with the U.S. electric grid:

Breaking: Russian hackers penetrated U.S. electricity grid through a utility in Vermont https://t.co/LED11lL7ej

-- The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) December 31, 2016

NEW: "One of the world's leading thugs, [Putin] has been attempting to hack our electric grid," says VT Gov. Shumlin https://t.co/YgdtT4JrlX pic.twitter.com/AU0ZQjT3aO

-- ABC News (@ABC) December 31, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/embed/9ktNVW_TblI?autoplay=0&rel=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Ftheintercept.com&widgetid=1

Washington Post retracts story about Russian hack at Vermont utility https://t.co/JX9l0926Uj via @nypost

-- Kerry Picket (@KerryPicket) January 1, 2017
8. A New, Deranged, Anonymous Group Declares Mainstream Political Sites on the Left and Right to be Russian Propaganda Outlets and WashPost Touts its Report to Claim Massive Kremlin Infiltration of the Internet (WashPost)

On November 24, 2016, the Washington Post published one of the most inflammatory, sensationalistic stories to date about Russian infiltration into U.S. politics using social media, accusing "more than 200 websites" of being "routine peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans." It added: "stories planted or promoted by the disinformation campaign [on Facebook] were viewed more than 213 million times."

Unfortunately for the paper, those statistics were provided by a new, anonymous group that reached these conclusions by classifying long-time, well-known sites – from the Drudge Report to Clinton-critical left-wing websites such as Truthout, Black Agenda Report, Truthdig, and Naked Capitalism, as well as libertarian venues such as Antiwar.com and the Ron Paul Institute. – as "Russian propaganda outlets," producing one of the longest Editor's Note in memory appended to the top of the article (but not until two weeks later , long after the story was mindlessly spread all throughout the media ecosystem):

Russian propaganda effort helped spread fake news during election, say independent researchers https://t.co/3ETVXWw16Q

-- Marty Baron (@PostBaron) November 25, 2016

Just want to note I hadn't heard of Propornot before the WP piece and never gave permission to them to call Bellingcat "allies" https://t.co/jQKnWzjrBR

-- Eliot Higgins (@EliotHiggins) November 25, 2016

Marty, I would like to more about PropOrNot, "experts" cited in the article. Their website provides little in the way of ID. https://t.co/ZiK8pKzUwx

-- Jack Shafer (@jackshafer) November 25, 2016
7. Trump Aide Anthony Scaramucci is Involved in a Russian Hedge Fund Under Senate Investigation (CNN)

On June 22, 2017, CNN reported that Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci was involved with the Russian Direct Investment Fund, under Senate investigation. He was not. CNN retracted the story and forced the three reporters who published it to leave the network. 6. Russia Attacked U.S. "Diplomats" (i.e. Spies) at the Cuban Embassy Using a Super-Sophisticated Sonic Microwave Weapon (NBC/MSNBC/CIA)

On September 11, 2017, NBC News and MSNBC spread all over its airwaves a claim from its notorious CIA puppet Ken Dilanian that Russia was behind a series of dastardly attacks on U.S. personnel at the Embassy in Cuba using a sonic or microwave weapon so sophisticated and cunning that Pentagon and CIA scientists had no idea what to make of it.

But then teams of neurologists began calling into doubt that these personnel had suffered any brain injuries at all – that instead they appear to have experienced collective psychosomatic symptoms – and then biologists published findings that the "strange sounds" the U.S. "diplomats" reported hearing were identical to those emitted by a common Caribbean male cricket during mating season.

An @NBCNews exclusive: After more than a year of mystery, Russia is the main suspect in the sonic attacks that sickened 26 U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials in Cuba. @MitchellReports has the latest. pic.twitter.com/NEI9PJ9CpD

-- TODAY (@TODAYshow) September 11, 2018

Wow >> U.S. has signals intelligence linking the sonic attacks on Americans in Cuba and China to *Russia* https://t.co/FbNla0vu9W

-- Andrew Desiderio (@desiderioDC) September 11, 2018

Following NBC report about sonic attacks, @SenCoryGardner renews calls for declaring Russia a state sponsor of terror https://t.co/wrnubfecom

-- Niels Lesniewski (@nielslesniewski) September 11, 2018

5. Trump Created a Secret Internet Server to Covertly Communicate with a Russian Bank (Slate)

Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank. pic.twitter.com/8f8n9xMzUU

-- Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 1, 2016

It's time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia. https://t.co/D8oSmyVAR4 pic.twitter.com/07dRyEmPjX

-- Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 31, 2016
4. Paul Manafort Visited Julian Assange Three Times in the Ecuadorian Embassy and Nobody Noticed (Guardian/Luke Harding)

On November 27, 2018, the Guardian published a major "bombshell" that Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had somehow managed to sneak inside one of the world's most surveilled buildings, the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, and visit Julian Assange on three different occasions. Cable and online commentators exploded.

Seven weeks later, no other media outlet has confirmed this ; no video or photographic evidence has emerged; the Guardian refuses to answer any questions; its leading editors have virtually gone into hiding; other media outlets have expressed serious doubts about its veracity; and an Ecuadorian official who worked at the embassy has called the story a complete fake:

Paul Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and visited around the time he joined Trump's campaign, the Guardian has been told. https://t.co/Fc2BVmXipk

-- Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) November 27, 2018

The sourcing on this is a bit thin, or at least obscured. But it's the ultimate Whoa If True. It's...ballgame if true.

-- Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 27, 2018

https://www.youtube.com/embed/4A2cuuRK2NU?autoplay=0&rel=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Ftheintercept.com&widgetid=7

The Guardian reports that Paul Manafort visited Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, the same month that Manafort joined Donald Trump's presidential campaign in 2016, a meeting that could carry vast implications for the Russia investigation https://t.co/pYawnv4MHH

-- Los Angeles Times (@latimes) November 27, 2018
3. CNN Explicitly Lied About Lanny Davis Being Its Source – For a Story Whose Substance Was Also False: Cohen Would Testify that Trump Knew in Advance About the Trump Tower Meeting (CNN)

On July 27, 2018, CNN published a blockbuster story : that Michael Cohen was prepared to tell Robert Mueller that President Trump knew in advanced about the Trump Tower meeting. There were, however, two problems with this story: first, CNN got caught blatantly lying when its reporters claimed that "contacted by CNN, one of Cohen's attorneys, Lanny Davis, declined to comment" (in fact, Davis was one of CNN's key sources, if not its only source, for this story), and second, numerous other outlets retracted the story after the source, Davis, admitted it was a lie. CNN, however, to this date has refused to do either: 2. Robert Mueller Possesses Internal Emails and Witness Interviews Proving Trump Directed Cohen to Lie to Congress (BuzzFeed)

BREAKING: President Trump personally directed his longtime attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about negotiations to build a Trump Tower in Moscow in order to obscure his involvement. https://t.co/BEoMKiDypn

-- BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) January 18, 2019

BOOM! https://t.co/QDkUMaEa7M pic.twitter.com/9kcZZ8m1gt

-- Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) January 18, 2019

The allegation that the President of the United States may have suborned perjury before our committee in an effort to curtail the investigation and cover up his business dealings with Russia is among the most serious to date. We will do what's necessary to find out if it's true. https://t.co/GljBAFqOjh

-- Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) January 18, 2019

If the @BuzzFeed story is true, President Trump must resign or be impeached.

-- Joaquin Castro (@JoaquinCastrotx) January 18, 2019

Listen, if Mueller does have multiple sources confirming Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress, then we need to know this ASAP. Mueller shouldn't end his inquiry, but it's about time for him to show Congress his cards before it's too late for us to act. https://t.co/ekG5VSBS8G

-- Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) January 18, 2019

UPDATE: A spokesperson for the special counsel is disputing BuzzFeed News' report. https://t.co/BEoMKiDypn pic.twitter.com/GWWfGtyhaE

-- BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) January 19, 2019

To those trying to parse the Mueller statement: it's a straight-up denial. Maybe Buzzfeed can prove they are right, maybe Mueller can prove them wrong. But it's an emphatic denial https://t.co/EI1J7XLCJe

-- Devlin Barrett (@DevlinBarrett) January 19, 2019

. @Isikoff : "There were red flags about the BuzzFeed story from the get-go." Notes it was inconsistent with Cohen's guilty plea when he said he made false statements about Trump Tower to Congress to be "consistent" with Trump, not at his direction. pic.twitter.com/tgDg6SNPpG

-- David Rutz (@DavidRutz) January 19, 2019

We at The Post also had riffs on the story our reporters hadn't confirmed. One noted Fox downplayed it; another said it "if true, looks to be the most damning to date for Trump." The industry needs to think deeply on how to cover others' reporting we can't confirm independently. https://t.co/afzG5B8LAP

-- Matt Zapotosky (@mattzap) January 19, 2019

Washington Post says Mueller's denial of BuzzFeed News article is aimed at the full story: "Mueller's denial, according to people familiar with the matter, aims to make clear that none of those statements in the story are accurate."
https://t.co/ene0yqe1mK

-- andrew kaczynski (@KFILE) January 19, 2019

If you're one of the people tempted to believe the self-evidently laughable claim that there's something "vague" or unclear about Mueller's statement, or that it just seeks to quibble with a few semantic trivialities, read this @WashPost story about this https://t.co/0io99LyATS pic.twitter.com/ca1TwPR3Og

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 19, 2019

You can spend hours parsing the Carr statement, but given how unusual it is for any DOJ office to issue this sort of on the record denial, let alone this office, suspect it means the story's core contention that they have evidence Trump told Cohen to lie is fundamentally wrong.

-- Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) January 19, 2019

New York Times throws a bit of cold water on BuzzFeed's explosive -- and now seriously challenged -- report that Trump instructed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress: https://t.co/9N7MiHs7et pic.twitter.com/7FJFT9D8fW

-- ErikWemple (@ErikWemple) January 19, 2019

I can't speak to Buzzfeed's sourcing, but, for what it's worth, I declined to run with parts of the narrative they conveyed based on a source central to the story repeatedly disputing the idea that Trump directly issued orders of that kind.

-- Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) January 19, 2019

FWIW in all our reporting I haven't found any in the Trump Org that have met with or been interviewed by Mueller. https://t.co/U4eV1MZc8p

-- John Santucci (@Santucci) January 18, 2019
1. Donald Trump Jr. Was Offered Advanced Access to the WikiLeaks Email Archive (CNN/MSNBC)

The morning of December 9, 2017, launched one of the most humiliating spectacles in the history of the U.S. media. With a tone so grave and bombastic that it is impossible to overstate, CNN went on the air and announced a major exclusive: Donald Trump, Jr. was offered by email advanced access to the trove of DNC and Podesta emails published by WikiLeaks – meaning before those emails were made public. Within an hour, MSNBC's Ken Dilanian, using a tone somehow even more unhinged, purported to have "independently confirmed" this mammoth, blockbuster scoop, which, they said, would have been the smoking gun showing collusion between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over the hacked emails (while the YouTube clips have been removed, you can still watch one of the amazing MSNBC videos here ).

There was, alas, just one small problem with this massive, blockbuster story: it was totally and completely false. The email which Trump, Jr. received that directed him to the WikiLeaks archive was sent after WikiLeaks published it online for the whole world to see, not before. Rather than some super secretive operative giving Trump, Jr. advanced access, as both CNN and MSNBC told the public for hours they had confirmed, it was instead just some totally pedestrian message from a random member of the public suggesting Trump, Jr. review documents the whole world was already talking about. All of the anonymous sources CNN and MSNBC cited somehow all got the date of the email wrong.

To date, when asked how they both could have gotten such a massive story so completely wrong in the same way, both CNN and MSNBC have adopted the posture of the CIA by maintaining complete silence and refusing to explain how it could possibly be that all of their "multiple, independent sources" got the date wrong on the email in the same way, to be as incriminating – and false – as possible. Nor, needless to say, will they identify their sources who, in concert, fed them such inflammatory and utterly false information.

Sadly, CNN and MSNBC have deleted most traces of the most humiliating videos from the internet, including demanding that YouTube remove copies. But enough survives to document just what a monumental, horrifying, and utterly inexcusable debacle this was. Particularly amazing is the clip of the CNN reporter (see below) having to admit the error for the first time, as he awkwardly struggles to pretend that it's not the massive, horrific debacle that it so obviously is:

Knowingly soliciting or receiving anything of value from a foreign national for campaign purposes violates the Federal Election Campaign Act. If it's worth over $2,000 then penalties include fines & IMPRISONMENT. @DonaldJTrumpJr may be in bigly trouble. #FridayFeeling https://t.co/dRz6Ph17Er

-- Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) December 8, 2017

boom https://t.co/9RPPltRq8k pic.twitter.com/eyYHkOMEPi

-- Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) December 8, 2017

CNN is leading the way in bashing BuzzFeed but it's worth remembering CNN had a humiliation at least as big & bad: when they yelled that Trump Jr. had advanced access to the WL archive (!): all based on a wrong date. They removed all the segments from YouTube, but this remains: pic.twitter.com/0jiA50aIku

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 19, 2019

Dishonorable Mention:

[May 18, 2020] Trump Fires State's IG to Protect Pompeo from Investigation

May 18, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Yhe president announced on Friday that he was firing Steve Linick, the State Department's Inspector General. One possible reason that Linick was removed may have been that he was conducting an investigation into the bogus emergency declaration that the administration used to expedite arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE last year:

House Democrats have discovered that the fired IG had mostly completed an investigation into Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's widely criticized decision to skirt Congress with an emergency declaration to approve billions of dollars in arms sales to Saudi Arabia last year, aides on the Foreign Affairs Committee tell me.

"I have learned that there may be another reason for Mr. Linick's firing," Rep. Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.), the chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement sent to me. "His office was investigating -- at my request -- Trump's phony declaration of an emergency so he could send weapons to Saudi Arabia."

If Linick was investigating the bogus emergency declaration, he would have come across reporting that showed how a former Raytheon lobbyist serving at the department was instrumental in pushing through the plan to expedite arms sales that benefited his old employer. He would have discovered that there was no genuine emergency that justified going around Congress. Once his investigation was concluded, it would have found that the emergency declaration was made in bad faith and that the law was abused so that the administration could proceed with arms sales that Congress opposed.

Another reason for the firing was to protect Mike Pompeo from an investigation into the Secretary's abuses of government resources for personal purposes:

The State Department inspector general fired by President Trump was looking into allegations that a staffer for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was performing domestic errands and chores such as handling dry cleaning, walking the family dog and making restaurant reservations, said a congressional official familiar with the matter.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman and the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee released a statement immediately on Friday objecting to Linick's firing and suggesting that it might be an illegal act of retaliation. There will now be a Congressional investigation into the circumstances surrounding Linick's firing. If Trump hoped to reduce the scrutiny on Pompeo by getting rid of Linick, he will be disappointed. It remains to be seen how much of a price Pompeo will pay for this, but the price is likely higher now than it would have been if he hadn't pushed for removing the inspector general.

Pompeo reportedly recommended Linick's removal. This is not the first time that Pompeo has been accused of misusing government resources. There was a report last summer that a whistleblower alleged that Pompeo and his wife were using Diplomatic Security agents as their personal errand boys:

Democrats on a key House congressional committee are investigating allegations from a whistleblower within the State Department about Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his family's use of taxpayer-funded Diplomatic Security -- prompting agents to lament they are at times viewed as "UberEats with guns".

Congressional investigators, who asked for the committee not to be named as they carry out their inquiries, tell CNN that a State Department whistleblower has raised multiple issues over a period of months, about special agents being asked to carry out some questionable tasks for the Pompeo family.

Pompeo has also repeatedly used government resources for domestic travel that seems to have more to do with advancing the Secretary's political ambitions in Kansas. There has been widespread speculation that he has used official trips in an attempt to lay the groundwork for a possible Senate campaign . If so, it would be a flagrant violation of the Hatch Act. That prompted a call for a special counsel investigation into Pompeo's travel. If Pompeo and his wife have been using a political appointee as a gofer, that would be more of the same abusive behavior.

Linick has previously clashed with other Trump administration officials at State. Last year, he released a damning report on Brian Hook over his treatment of Sahar Nowrouzzadeh, the Iranian-American official who was apparently targeted for political retaliation because of her policy views and ethnic background. The fired inspector general was well-respected at the department, and his firing at Pompeo's urging will likely cause further demoralization at a department that has already been run into the ground under the Secretary's dismal leadership.

The Secretary of State seems to think that government funds and personnel are at his disposal for his personal errands and political activities. Linick was doing exactly what an inspector general is supposed to be doing by investigating the allegations against him, and then he was conveniently fired on Pompeo's recommendation. You could hardly ask for a more straightforward case of a corrupt official using his influence to remove the person responsible for scrutinizing his conduct. If Linick was also fired because he was in the process of exposing the administration's dishonest push for more arms sales to the Saudi coalition, that makes his removal all the more outrageous and sinister.

JMWB • an hour ago

Mike Pompeo is a Tea Party darling. The Tea Party's motto should be : Austerity, fiscal responsibility, and integrity for Thee, but not for Me.
Feral Finster JMWB • 33 minutes ago
Mike Pompeo's idea of austerity is only a double order of french fries.

[May 18, 2020] About Evelyn Farkas political activity

May 18, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Dr Anon 36 minutes ago

Another woman who should be at home taking care of her husband, home and children.

mtumba, 29 minutes ago

What the **** do you have against husbands and children?

rockstone, 44 minutes ago

She closes by defiantly claiming "I wasn't silenced in 2017, and I won't be silenced now."

By all means Evelyn, keep talking. Especially after your lawyers tell you to shut up.

[May 18, 2020] Head of the Hydra The Rise of Robert Kadlec by Whitney Webb

Notable quotes:
"... William C. Patrick III would also become involved the FBI's Amerithrax investigation, even though he was initially suspected of involvement in the attacks. However, after having passed a lie detector test, he was added to the FBI's "inner circle" of technical advisors on the Amerithrax case, despite the fact that Patrick's protege , Stephen Hatfill, was the FBI's top suspect at the time. Hatfill was later cleared of wrongdoing and the FBI eventually blamed a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Ivins for the crime, hiding a "mountain" of evidence exonerating Ivins to do so, according to the FBI's former lead investigator. ..."
"... That same year, Hatfill offered Patrick another consulting job at SAIC and commissioned Patrick to perform a study describing "a fictional terrorist attack in which an envelope containing weapons-grade anthrax is opened in an office." The Baltimore Sun would later report that Patrick's study for SAIC discussed the "danger of anthrax spores spreading through the air and the requirements for decontamination after various kinds of attacks" as well as how many grams of anthrax would need to be placed within a standard business envelope in order to conduct such an attack. ..."
"... In addition, the FBI's supposed "smoking gun" used to link Bruce Ivins' to the anthrax attacks was the fact that a flask in Ivins' lab labeled RMR-1029 was determined to be its "parent" strain. Yet, it would later be revealed that portions of RMR-1029 had been sent by Ivins to Battelle's Ohio facility prior to the anthrax attacks. An analysis of the water used to make the anthrax also revealed that the anthrax spores had been created in the northeastern United States and follow-up analyses narrowed down the only possible sources as coming from one of three labs: Fort Detrick, a lab at the University of Scranton, or Battelle's West Jefferson facility. ..."
"... After Ivins' untimely "suicide" in 2008, Department of Justice civil attorneys would publicly challenge the FBI's assertions that Ivins had been the culprit and instead "suggested that a private laboratory in Ohio" managed by Battelle "could have been involved in the attacks." ..."
"... As previously noted in Part II of this series, BioPort was set to lose its contract for anthrax vaccine entirely in August 2001 and the entirety of its anthrax vaccine business was rescued by the 2001 anthrax attacks, which saw concerns over BioPort's corruption replaced with fervent demands for more of its anthrax vaccine. ..."
"... Of course, at the time, the only government known to be genetically engineering a pathogen was the U.S., as reported by the New York Times ' Judith Miller . Miller reported in October 2001 that the Pentagon, in the wake of the anthrax attacks, had approved "a project to make a potentially more potent form of anthrax bacteria" through genetic modification, a project that would be conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute. ..."
"... This was the continuation of the project, which had involved William Patrick and Ken Alibek, and the Pentagon moved to restart it after the attacks, though it is unclear if either Patrick or Alibek continued to work on the subsequent iteration of Battelle's efforts to produce a more virulent strain of anthrax. That project was paused a month prior when Miller and other journalists disclosed the existence of the program in an article published on September 4, 2001. ..."
May 18, 2020 | www.unz.com

A POWERFUL NETWORK OF POLITICAL OPERATIVES, A GLOBAL VACCINE MAFIA AND THEIR MAN IN WASHINGTON.

Last Friday, a group of Democratic Senators " demanded " that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) Robert Kadlec, "accurately disclose all his personal, financial and political ties in light of new reporting that he had failed to do so previously" after it was revealed that he had failed to note all "potential conflicts of interest" on his nomination paperwork.

The report in question, published last Monday by The Washington Post , detailed the ties of Kadlec to a man named Fuad El-Hibri, the founder of a "life sciences" company first known as BioPort and now called Emergent Biosolutions. Kadlec had previously disclosed his ties to El-Hibri and Emergent Biosolutions for a separate nomination years prior, but had failed to do so when nominated to head ASPR.

Though The Post does note Kadlec's recent failure to disclose these connections, the article largely sanitizes Kadlec's earlier yet crucial history and even obfuscates the full extent of his ties to the BioPort founder, among other glaring omissions. In reality, Kadlec has much more than his ties to El-Hibri looming large as "potential conflict of interests," as his decades-long career in shaping U.S. "biodefense" policy was directly enabled by his deep ties to intelligence, Big Pharma, the Pentagon and a host of corrupt yet powerful characters.

Thanks to a long and deliberate process to introduce biodefense policy, driven by Robert Kadlec and his sponsors, $7 billion dollars-worth of federally-owned vaccines, antidotes and medicines – held in strategically arranged repositories across the country in case of a health emergency – are now in the hands of one single individual. Those repositories, which compose the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS), are the exclusive domain of HHS' ASPR, a post created under Kadlec's watchful eye and tailored over the years to meet his very specific requirements.

From this perch, Robert Kadlec has final say on where the stockpile's contents are sourced, as well as how, when and where they are deployed. He is the sole source procurer of medical material and pharmaceuticals, making him the best friend of Big Pharma and other healthcare industry giants who have been in his ear every step of the way.

Kadlec assures us, however, that the fact that he now holds the very office he worked so long to create is merely a coincidence. "My participation in the ASPR project began at that time when I was working for the chairman of the Subcommittee on Bioterrorism and Public Health Preparedness The bill was made law and the ASPR was created. It just was a coincidence that, 12 or 14 years later, I was asked to become the ASPR," Kadlec stated in 2018.

It was all a random twist of fate, Kadlec asserts, that saw him occupy ASPR at this crucial moment in U.S. history. Indeed, with the country now in the middle of a WHO-declared coronavirus pandemic, Kadlec now has full control over the far-reaching "emergency" powers of that very office, bestowed upon him by the very law that he had written.

The story of how a former USAF flight surgeon came to have the exclusive dealer license over the single biggest stash of drugs in the history of the world is as disturbing as it is significant in light of current events, particularly given that Kadlec now leads the coronavirus response for all of HHS. Yet, Kadlec's rise to power is not a case of an evil mastermind conquering a uniquely vulnerable point of the nation's resources. Instead, it is a case of a man deeply enmeshed in the world of intelligence, military intelligence and corporate corruption dutifully fulfilling the vision of his friends in high places and behind closed doors.

In this third installment of " Engineering Contagion: Amerithrax, Coronavirus and the Rise of the Biotech-Industrial Complex ," Kadlec is shown to hail from a tight-knit group of "bioterror alarmists" in government and the private sector who gained prominence thanks to their penchant for imagining the most horrific, yet fictitious scenarios that inspired fear among Presidents, top politicians and the American public. Among those fictitious scenarios was the "Dark Winter" exercise discussed in Part I .

Some of these alarmists, among them "cold warriors" from Fort Detrick's days of openly developing offensive weapons, would engage in unsettling anthrax experiments and studies while developing suspect ties in 2000 to a company called BioPort. As noted in Part II of this series, BioPort stood to lose everything in early September 2001 due to controversy over its anthrax vaccine. Of course, the 2001 anthrax attacks that followed shortly thereafter would change everything, not just for BioPort, but U.S. biodefense policy. With the stage set, Kadlec would quickly spring into action, guiding major policy changes on the heels of subsequent major events and disasters, culminating in his crowning as King of the stockpile.

THE ACCIDENTAL MADMAN

Robert Kadlec describes himself as having been an "accidental tourist" regarding his introduction to biological warfare. An Air Force physician who had specialized in tropical diseases, Kadlec would later say his interest in the field began when he was assigned to be a special assistant for Chemical and Biological Warfare to the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), advising then-head of Special Operations Command Maj. Gen. Wayne Downing, on the eve of the first Gulf War.

Kadlec would later state that he had witnessed firsthand how the military, immediately prior to the Gulf War, had "lacked the necessary protective equipment, detectors, and medical countermeasures including vaccines and antibiotics against the immediate threats posed by Iraq," allegedly prompting him to want to better U.S. biodefense efforts.

While holding this post at JSOC, Kadlec was privy to the advice of William C. Patrick III , a veteran of the U.S.' bioweapons program who had developed the U.S.' method for weaponizing anthrax and held no less than five classified patents related to the toxin's use in warfare. Patrick, who had left government service in 1986 to become a consultant, advised the Pentagon -- then headed by Dick Cheney -- that the risk of a biological weapons attack by Iraq, particularly anthrax, was high. Patrick's warning prompted the U.S. military to vaccinate tens of thousands of its troops using the controversial anthrax vaccine "anthrax vaccine adsorbed (AVA)." Kadlec would personally inject AVA into around 800 members of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Kadlec would later note in Congressional testimony that no definitive proof of an alleged Iraqi biological weapons program was found during the war or afterwards, but nevertheless claimed elsewhere that "the Iraqis later admitted they had procured large quantities of a biological agents-anthrax and botulism toxin," suggesting that Patrick's warnings had had some basis in reality.

However, Kadlec failed to point out that these anthrax and botulism samples had been sold, with the U.S. government's full approval, to Iraq's Ministry of Education by a U.S. private non-profit called the American Type Culture Collection. Donald Rumsfeld, who was then an envoy for the Reagan administration and running a pharmaceutical company later sold to Monsanto, would also be involved in the shipment of these samples to Iraq.

Following the war, American microbiologist Joshua Lederberg was tasked by the Pentagon to head the investigation into "Gulf War Syndrome," a phenomenon that studies later linked to the adverse effects of the anthrax vaccine. Lederberg's task force argued that evidence regarding an association between the symptomology and the anthrax vaccine was insufficient. However, he would later come under fire after it was reported that he sat on the board of the American Type Culture Collection, the very company that had shipped anthrax to Iraq's government between 1985 and 1989 with the U.S. government's blessing. Lederberg later admitted that the investigation he led had not spent enough "time and effort digging out the details". The taskforce's findings were later harshly criticized by the Government Accountability Office.

Dr. Lederberg would prove to be an early, if not seminal, influence on Robert Kadlec's outlook regarding the subject of biowarfare. The Nobel Laureate and long-time president of Rockefeller University was one of the fathers of bioterror alarmism in the United States, alongside William C. Patrick III and other members of a tight-knit group of "cold warrior" microbiologists. Kadlec and Lederberg would go on to collaborate on several books and policy studies throughout the late 1990s and into 2001.

Years later, at a Congressional hearing, Kadlec would say that Lederberg's words "resonate constantly with me and serve as a practical warning." Aside from Lederberg, Kadlec was also writing numerous books and articles with Randall Larsen, who would later hire the Medical doctor to teach "military strategy and operations" at the National War College, where Larsen's close friend – William C. Patrick III – also taught .

A POISONED OASIS

Many of Kadlec's bioterror ravings have been preserved in 25-year old textbooks, like a U.S. Air War College textbook entitled " Battlefield of the Future " where Kadlec calls on the government to create a massive stockpile of drugs and vaccines to protect the population from a biological weapons attack, particularly anthrax or smallpox. In one chapter, Kadlec argued that stockpiles of necessary antibiotics, immunoglobulins and vaccines would have to be procured, maintained, and be readily available to administer within hours."

Kadlec's views on the matter at the time of writing were greatly influenced by his first tour as a UNSCOM weapons inspector in Iraq in 1994, where he was accompanied by William Patrick, among others. Kadlec would later return to Iraq in the same capacity in 1996 and 1998 in search of Iraq's alleged stores of weaponized anthrax that Patrick had been so sure were there, but had never materialized.

After three visits, Kadlec would later confess that, despite what Kadlec called "the most intrusive inspection and monitoring regime ever conceived and implemented" by the UN, the UNSCOM weapons inspectors, including himself and William Patrick, "failed to uncover any irrefutable evidence of an offensive BW program." Kadlec would later return to Iraq on two separate occasions following the 2003 U.S. invasion of country, again finding no proof of the program's existence.

By 1995, Kadlec was already imbued with the bioweapons alarmism that had been championed by Lederberg and Patrick. That year, he fleshed out several "illustrative scenarios" regarding the use of "biological economic warfare" against the United States. One of these fictional scenarios, titled "Corn Terrorism," involves China planning "an act of agricultural terrorism" by clandestinely spraying corn seed blight over the Midwest using commercial airliners. The result of the "Corn Terrorism" scenario is that "China gains significant corn market share and tens of billions [of] dollars of additional profits from their crop," while the U.S. sees its corn crop obliterated, causing food prices to rise and the U.S. to import corn. Another scenario, entitled "That's a 'Lousy' Wine," involves "disgruntled European winemakers" covertly releasing grape lice they have hidden in cans of paté to target California wine producers.

Around this same time, in 1994, the relatively young Congressional Office of Technology Assessment or OTA , which informed policy decisions around questions of technological and scientific complexity on matters of national security, was cut by the new Republican majority that took both houses in the pivotal 1994 midterms elections. At the time of its defunding, Lederberg sat on the OTA's Technology Assessment Advisory Council (OTA-TAAC), along with pharma industry insiders from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly Research Labs and pre-merger Smith-Kline, and chaired one of its last study panels.

In OTA's place, an independent, non-profit entity called The Potomac Institute for Policy Studies (PIPS) was co-founded by Special Consultant to President H.W. Bush's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) and a former CIA program monitor, Michael S. Swetnam, who was reportedly " tasked with profiling Osama Bin Laden before the September 11th attacks were enacted ."

The defunding of the OTA and subsequent creation of PIPS transferred policy-making on what are, perhaps, the most sensitive issues of national security away from Congress and into a private foundation teeming with operators from the vast underbelly of the military industrial complex (MIC). Former military officers, DARPA scientists , NASA policy experts, FBI agents, CIA operatives and defense contractors like Northrop Grumman can all be found on their member rolls and in their boardrooms.

PIPS and its sponsors would shadow Robert Kadlec's career in government from the very beginning and remain in close proximity to him today. One PIPS-linked individual would work particularly closely with Kadlec, Tevi Troy – a senior fellow at PIPS and an adjunct fellow at the much more polished Hudson Institute, itself a major funder of PIPS. Troy has long been integral in shaping Kadlec's biodefense policy agenda, which would remain conspicuously static and unchanging throughout the career he was just beginning.

POX AMERICANA

By 1996, talks had begun within military leadership regarding what would become the Pentagon's mandatory anthrax vaccination program, a policy tirelessly promoted by Joshua Lederberg, who was involved in "investigating" the links between the anthrax vaccine and Gulf War Syndrome. The private talks took place in parallel with a public push to bring biological warfare to the forefront of American public consciousness. One particularly egregious example occurred when then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen went on ABC News with a five-pound bag of sugar, stating that "this amount of anthrax could be spread over a city -- let's say the size of Washington. It would destroy at least half the population of that city."

At the same time, Joshua Lederberg was also advocating for the stockpiling of a smallpox vaccine, which the U.S. military also took to heart, giving a company called DynPort an exclusive multi-million dollar contract to produce a new smallpox vaccine in 1997. Soon after, BioPort, DynPort's sister company , was formed and would soon come to monopolize the production of that vaccine.

By the time BioPort (now known as Emergent Biosolutions) had controversially gained control over this lucrative Pentagon contract in 1998, then-President Bill Clinton was publicly warning that the U.S. must "confront the new hazards of biological and chemical weapons," adding that Saddam Hussein specifically was "developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them." However, there was no intelligence to back up these claims, especially after the failed attempts by weapon inspectors, like Robert Kadlec and William Patrick, to find any evidence of an Iraqi biological weapons program.

Despite the lack of evidence regarding Iraq's alleged "WMD" programs, Clinton's concern over a biological weapons threat was said to have been the result of his reading of "The Cobra Event", a novel about how a genetically-modified pathogen called "brainpox" ravages New York City. The novel's author, Richard Preston, had been advised on biowarfare and genetically-modified pathogens by none other than William Patrick. Patrick, then an adviser to the CIA, FBI and military intelligence, also participated in closed door meetings with Clinton on biological weapons, claiming that their use was inevitable and that the deadliest of pathogens could easily be made in a "terrorist's garage."

It is also likely that Clinton's alarmism over biological and chemical weapons had been informed, in part, by a roundtable hosted at the White House on April 10, 1998. This " White House Roundtable on Genetic Engineering and Biological Weapons ," included a group of "outside experts" spear-headed by Joshua Lederberg and included several other bioterror alarmists, such as: Jerome Hauer, then-serving as Director of New York City's Office of Emergency Management (who also was advised by William Patrick III) and Thomas Monath, a vaccine industry executive and chief science advisor to CIA director George Tenet.

Discussed in-depth at the roundtable were "both the opportunities and the national security challenges posed by genetic engineering and biotechnology" as well as "classified material relating to threat assessments and how the United States responds to particular scenarios."

Robert Kadlec, despite being a Republican, remains very fond of Bill Clinton, perhaps because the former president was so attentive to the dire predictions of the "biodefense experts" who shadowed Kadlec's own career. Kadlec credits the former president with doing a "lot of good things" and making important contributions to the advancement of the biotech industrial complex's policy agenda.

Clinton would issue several executive orders and Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs) during this period, such as PDD-62, which specifically addressed preparations for a "WMD" attack on the U.S. and called for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), then-led by Donna Shalala, to lead the national response to a WMD attack. Fortuitously for Kadlec, PDD-62 also called for the construction of a national stockpile of vaccines, antibiotics and other medical supplies.

At the time, Kadlec was already evangelizing the public about a seemingly imminent, doomsday anthrax attack he was certain would strike at any second. As quoted in a 1998 article from the Vancouver Sun , Kadlec speculated:

"If several kilograms of an agent like anthrax were disseminated in New York City today, conservative estimates put the number [of] deaths occurring in the first few days at 400,000. Thousands of others would be at risk of dying within several days if proper antibiotics and vaccination were not started immediately. Millions of others would be fearful of being exposed and seek or demand medical care as well. Beyond the immediate health implications of such an act, the potential panic and civil unrest would create an equally large response."

Kadlec's doomsday speculations about biological weapons attacks had caught the attention of Randall Larsen, the then-director of the National War College's Department of Military Strategy and Operations, who hired Kadlec because he "had become convinced that the most serious threat to national security was not Russian or Chinese missiles, but a pandemic – either man-made or naturally occurring." Soon after, Kadlec and Larsen would collaborate closely , co-authoring several studies together.

Meanwhile, their colleague at the National War College, William Patrick III was simultaneously working for the U.S. military and intelligence contractor, the Battelle Memorial Institute, where he was secretly developing a genetically-modified, more potent form of anthrax for a classified Pentagon program.

THE BIOTERROR INTELLIGENTSIA

A year after hiring Robert Kadlec to teach at the National War College, Randall Larsen was also involved in the creation of a new organization called the ANSER Institute for Homeland Security (ANSER-IHS), and served as its director. This Institute for Homeland Security, first initiated and funded in October 1999, was an extension of the ANSER Institute, which itself had been spun off from the RAND Corporation in the late 1950s. The RAND Corporation is a national security-focused "think tank" with long-standing ties to the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and the Carnegie Corporation.

ANSER's expansion through ANSER-IHS was foreshadowed by the entry of "homeland defense" into popular political discourse within the Washington Beltway. The term is alleged to have first originated from a National Defense Panel report submitted in 1997 and is credited to Defense Panel member and former CIA officer with ties to the agency's Phoenix program, Richard Armitage. Armitage was part of the group known as the " Vulcans ," who advised George W. Bush on foreign policy matters prior to the 2000 presidential election.

As journalist Margie Burns pointed out in a 2002 article , the need for "homeland defense" as a major focus of U.S. government policy, including the push to create a new "homeland security" agency, was dramatically amplified following its alleged coining by Armitage in 1997. This was thanks, in part, to a web of media outlets owned by South Korean cult leader and CIA asset Sun Myong Moon, including the Washington Times, Insight Magazine and UPI , all of which published numerous articles penned by ANSER analysts or that heavily cited ANSER reports and employees regarding the need for a greatly expanded "homeland security" apparatus.

One such article, published by Insight Magazine in May 2001 and entitled " Preparing for the Next Pearl Harbor ," heavily cites ANSER and its Institute for Homeland Security as being among "the nation's top experts" in warning that a terrorist attack on the U.S. mainland was imminent. It also stated that "the first responders on tomorrow's battlefield won't be soldiers, but city ambulance workers and small-town firefighters."

ANSER-IHS was created at the behest of ANSER's CEO , Dr. Ruth David, who became ANSER's top executive after leaving a lengthy career at the CIA, where she had served as the agency's Deputy Director for Science and Technology. On ANSER-IHS's board at the time, alongside David, were Joshua Lederberg and Dr. Tara O'Toole, then-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Bio-defense Studies who would later co-write the Dark Winter exercise .

Though first created in 1999, ANSER-IHS did not officially launch until April 2001. That same month, Robert Kadlec, at the National War College, sponsored the paper " A Micro-threat with Macro-Impact: The Bio-Threat and the Need for a National Bio-Defense Security Strategy ." That paper starts by citing several former CIA officials as well as Dr. O'Toole (who now works for the CIA's venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel) as proof that a bioterrorist attack is "perhaps the greatest threat the U.S. faces in the next century" and that such an attack would inevitably target "Americans on American soil."

This Kadlec-sponsored report also called for the creation of the National Homeland Security Agency (NHSA), the framework for which was contained in H.R. 1158, introduced a month prior in March 2001. The paper urged that the creation of this new cabinet-level agency be enacted "quickly, so the resulting single executive agent (identified from here on as the NHSA) can begin its critical work." It also argued that this agency include "a deputy director position specifically responsible for preparing and responding to a bio-attack."

Other measures recommended in the paper included greatly expanding the national defense stockpile; creating a national disease reporting system; and the creation of real-time, automated bio-threat detectors. The latter would be initiated soon after the publication of this paper, resulting in the controversial Biological Aerosol Sentry and Information Systems (BASIS). BASIS was discussed in Part I of this series, particularly its role in "induc[ing] the very panic and social disruption it is intended to thwart" during and after the 2001 anthrax attacks that would occur months later. BASIS was developed largely by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, whose national security fellow – former Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) director Jay Davis, was then-chairman of ANSER's board of directors.

Also notable is the fact that Kadlec's April 2001 report cites the largely discredited yet still influential Ken Alibek on several occasions, including his allegation that anyone with internet access and a few bucks could produce and unleash weapons-grade anthrax with ease. Some of the nation's top anthrax experts would discredit this claim, with the exception of William C. Patrick III.

This is likely because it was Patrick who had been asked by the CIA to "vet" Alibek after he had first defected from the Soviet Union 1992, making Patrick responsible for determining the credibility of Alibek's controversial claims, including his incorrect assertions that Saddam Hussein had overseen a massive biological weapons program. Regarding their meeting, Patrick would later say "I won't say we fell in love, but we gained an immediate respect for one another."

At the time of Alibek's defection, Robert Kadlec – who had been assigned to the Pentagon's Office of the Secretary of Defense for Counter-proliferation policy after the Gulf War – would later recall during 2014 Congressional testimony having "witnessed the efforts to ascertain the truth behind the former Soviet Union's BW [biological weapons] effort" that had intimately involved Alibek and Patrick. Kadlec would also note that "the fate of these agents [related to the Soviet Union's BW program] and associated weapons," including those described by Alibek, "was never satisfactorily resolved."

Alibek's shocking yet dubious claims were often used and promoted by Joshua Lederberg (who had debriefed other Soviet bioweapons researchers after their defections), Patrick and others to support their favored "biodefense" policies as well as the need for "defensive" bioweapons research, including clandestine efforts to genetically-engineer anthrax on which Patrick and Alibek would later collaborate.

SETTING THE WHEELS IN MOTION

Just a few months before ANSER-IHS' "official" launch, another organization with a related focus was launched -- the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI). Created by media mogul Ted Turner and former Senator Sam Nunn in January 2001, NTI aimed not only to "reduce the threat" posed by nuclear weapons, but also chemical and biological weapons.

In announcing NTI's formation on CNN , the network Turner had founded, Nunn stated that while "nuclear weapons pose the gigantic danger, but biological and chemical weapons are the most likely to be used. And there are thousands of scientists in the former Soviet Union that know how to make these weapons, including chemical, biological and nuclear, but don't know how to feed their families." Nunn continued, stating that NTI hoped "to begin to help, some hope for gainful employment for people that we don't want to end up making chemical and biological and nuclear weapons in other parts of the world." NTI's mission in this regard likely came as welcome news to Joshua Lederberg, who had long advocated that the U.S. offer employment to bioweapons researchers from the former Soviet Union to prevent their employ by "rogue regimes."

Alongside Nunn and Tuner on NTI's board was William Perry, a former Secretary of Defense; former Senator Dick Lugar, for whom the alleged U.S. bioweapons lab in Georgia is named; and Margaret Hamburg, who was NTI's Vice President overseeing its work on biological weapons. Margaret Hamburg's father, David Hamburg, a long-time president of the Carnegie Corporation, was also an advisor and "distinguished fellow" at NTI. David Hamburg was a longtime close advisor , associate , and friend of Joshua Lederberg.

Both Sam Nunn and Margaret Hamburg of NTI, as well as top officials from ANSER, would come together in June 2001 to participate in an exercise simulating a bioweapons attack called "Dark Winter." Nunn would play the role of president in the exercise and Hamburg played the head of HHS in the fictional scenario. Jerome Hauer, then-managing director of the intelligence-linked outfit Kroll Inc. and a Vice President at the military-intelligence contractor Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC), played the head of FEMA.

The Dark Winter exercise itself was largely written by Tara O'Toole (ANSER-IHS board member) and Thomas Inglesby of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Bio-defense Studies as well as Randall Larsen of ANSER-IHS. Robert Kadlec also participated in the creation of the script and appears in the fictional, scripted news clips used in the exercise.

As detailed in Part I of this series, the Dark Winter exercise eerily predicted many aspects of what would follow just months later during the 2001 anthrax attacks, including predictions that threatening letters would be sent to members of the press with the promise of biological weapons attacks involving anthrax. Dark Winter also provided the initial narrative for the 2001 anthrax attacks, which held that Iraq and Al Qaeda had been jointly responsible. However, soon after the attacks, evidence quickly pointed to the anthrax having originated from a domestic source linked to military experiments. In addition, several Dark Winter participants and authors either had apparent foreknowledge of those attacks (especially Jerome Hauer) and/or were involved in the FBI controversial investigation into the attacks (including Robert Kadlec).

On the day of September 11, 2001, Kadlec and Randall Larsen were set to begin co-teaching a course on "Homeland Security" at the National War College. It's course syllabus draws from quotes on the imminent threat of bioterrorism from Joshua Lederberg as well as Dark Winter participant and former CIA director James Woolsey, who called a biological weapons attack "the single most dangerous threat to U.S. national security in the foreseeable future."

The course was also set to include its own lengthy use of the Dark Winter exercise, where students would re-enact the June 2001 exercise as part of an end-of-semester research project. However, given the events that took place on September 11, 2001, Kadlec never went on to teach that course, as he instead went to the Pentagon to focus on the "bio-terror threat" in the weeks that preceded the 2001 anthrax attacks.

THE AFTER (ANTHRAX) PARTY

Immediately after the events of September 11, 2001, Kadlec became a special advisor on biological warfare to then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz. In the days that followed, Rumsfeld openly and publicly stated that he expected America's enemies, specifically Saddam Hussein, to aid unspecified terrorist groups in obtaining chemical and biological weapons, a narrative that was analogous to that used in the Dark Winter exercise that Kadlec had helped create.

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Dark Winter's other co-authors -- Randall Larsen, Tara O'Toole and Thomas Inglesby -- personally briefed Dick Cheney on Dark Winter, at a time when Cheney and his staff had been warned by another Dark Winter figure, Jerome Hauer, to take the antibiotic Cipro to prevent anthrax infection. It is unknown how many members of the administration were taking Cipro and for how long.

Hauer, along with James Woolsey and New York Times reporter Judith Miller (who also attended Dark Winter), would spend the weeks between 9/11 and the public disclosure of the anthrax attacks making numerous media appearances (and, in Miller's case, writing dozens of reports) regarding the use of anthrax as a biological weapon. Members of the controversial think thank the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which included Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld among its ranks, also warned that a biological weapons attack was set to follow on the heels of 9/11. These included Richard Perle, then advising the Rumsfeld-led Pentagon, and Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard .

One would think that all of these well-timed warnings would have left this clique of government insiders the least surprised once the anthrax attacks were publicly disclosed on October 4, 2001. However, despite constantly warning of doomsday anthrax attack scenarios for a decade and advising the Pentagon on this very threat immediately beginning just weeks prior, Robert Kadlec would subsequently claim to have yelled, "You gotta be sh*ttin' me!" when he first learned of the attacks.

Another pre-attack anthrax prophet, Judith Miller, would recall becoming distraught and despondent upon receiving a letter that appeared to contain anthrax. Her first reaction was to call William C. Patrick III, who calmed her down and told her that the anthrax powder contained in the letter "was most likely a hoax." Indeed, Patrick would prove correct in his analysis as the powder in the letter Miller had opened was, in fact, harmless.

Kadlec quickly began contributing to the FBI's controversial investigation into the attacks, known by its case name "Amerithrax." Kadlec was tasked with following up on the alleged presence of bentonite in the anthrax used in the attacks. Bentonite was never actually found in any of the anthrax samples tested by the FBI, but claims that it had been found were used to link the anthrax used in the attacks to Iraq's alleged use of bentonite in its biological weapons program, the very existence of which still lacked conclusive evidence.

This erroneous claim was first mentioned to Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz by Peter Jahrling, a Fort Detrick scientist, who claimed during a briefings that the spores "appeared to have been treated" with a "particular chemical additive" resembling bentonite. Jahrling then added that Iraq's government had used bentonite to "suspiciously" produce bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), a "nonlethal cousin" of anthrax widely used in agriculture. "Everyone grabbed on to that," Kadlec would later remember of Jahrling's haphazard link between bentonite and a harmless, distant cousin of anthrax.

Tasked by Wolfowitz with shoring up evidence for the bentonite "smoking gun," Kadlec would contact a Navy scientist that had accompanied him and William Patrick to Iraq in their unsuccessful efforts to find proof of Iraq's biological weapons back in 1994, James Burans. Burans was unconvinced of the bentonite connection and other government scientists soon agreed.

Nonetheless, media outlets continued to play up the bentonite-anthrax claim as proving Iraq's role in the anthrax attacks, despite findings to the contrary. By late October 2001, one nationwide poll found that 74% of respondents wanted the U.S. to take military action against Iraq, despite a lack of evidence connecting the country to either 9/11 or the anthrax attacks. A month later, Rumsfeld would draw up plans in consultation with Wolfowitz regarding justifications for initiating war with Iraq, including discovering links between Saddam Hussein and the anthrax attacks and initiating disputes with Iraq over WMD inspections.

While the Kadlec-advised Pentagon was seeking to link the anthrax attacks to Iraq, the NTI – headed by Dark Winter "president" Sam Nunn – kicked its agenda into over-drive, earmarking "$2.4 million in initial grants to finance scientific collaboration with scientists who once worked in the former Soviet Union's covert biological weapons program." NTI also set aside millions more for transforming former Soviet Union bioweapons labs into "vaccine production facilities" and "helping identify Western drug companies willing to work with former Soviet bioweaponeers on commercial ventures."

CLOSED DOOR INVESTIGATION

William C. Patrick III would also become involved the FBI's Amerithrax investigation, even though he was initially suspected of involvement in the attacks. However, after having passed a lie detector test, he was added to the FBI's "inner circle" of technical advisors on the Amerithrax case, despite the fact that Patrick's protege , Stephen Hatfill, was the FBI's top suspect at the time. Hatfill was later cleared of wrongdoing and the FBI eventually blamed a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Ivins for the crime, hiding a "mountain" of evidence exonerating Ivins to do so, according to the FBI's former lead investigator.

In the 1990s, Patrick had told associates of his desire to find someone who would carry on his work, eventually finding this person in Stephen Hatfill. Hatfill and Patrick's friendship was close, with one bioterror expert calling them "like father and son." Hatfill traveled together often and, on occasion, Hatfill would drive Patrick to his consulting jobs at the military and intelligence contractor SAIC. In 1999, Patrick would return the favor by helping Hatfill score a job at SAIC. A year later, Jerome Hauer, a friend to both Hatfill and Patrick, would join SAIC as a Vice President.

That same year, Hatfill offered Patrick another consulting job at SAIC and commissioned Patrick to perform a study describing "a fictional terrorist attack in which an envelope containing weapons-grade anthrax is opened in an office." The Baltimore Sun would later report that Patrick's study for SAIC discussed the "danger of anthrax spores spreading through the air and the requirements for decontamination after various kinds of attacks" as well as how many grams of anthrax would need to be placed within a standard business envelope in order to conduct such an attack.

Patrick's involvement in this SAIC study is particularly interesting given that he was also involved in another project involving anthrax at the time, this one managed by Battelle Memorial Institute. In 1997, the Pentagon created plans to genetically engineer a more potent variety of anthrax, spurred by the work of Russian scientists who had recently published a study that found that a genetically engineered strain of anthrax was resistant to the standard anthrax vaccine, at least in animal studies.

The stated goal of the Pentagon's plan, per a 2001 report in The New York Times , was "to see if the [anthrax] vaccine the United States intends to supply to its armed forces is effective against that strain." Battelle's facility at West Jefferson, Ohio was contracted by the Pentagon to create the genetically-modified anthrax, a task that was overseen by Battelle's then-program manager for all things bioweapons, Ken Alibek. A 1998 article in the New Yorker noted that William Patrick, also a consultant for Battelle and Alibek's "close friend," was working with Alibek on a project involving anthrax at the time. It would later be revealed that access to the very anthrax strain used in the attacks, the Ames strain, was controlled by Battelle.

In addition, the FBI's supposed "smoking gun" used to link Bruce Ivins' to the anthrax attacks was the fact that a flask in Ivins' lab labeled RMR-1029 was determined to be its "parent" strain. Yet, it would later be revealed that portions of RMR-1029 had been sent by Ivins to Battelle's Ohio facility prior to the anthrax attacks. An analysis of the water used to make the anthrax also revealed that the anthrax spores had been created in the northeastern United States and follow-up analyses narrowed down the only possible sources as coming from one of three labs: Fort Detrick, a lab at the University of Scranton, or Battelle's West Jefferson facility.

After Ivins' untimely "suicide" in 2008, Department of Justice civil attorneys would publicly challenge the FBI's assertions that Ivins had been the culprit and instead "suggested that a private laboratory in Ohio" managed by Battelle "could have been involved in the attacks."

Patrick's work with Battelle on creating a more potent form of anthrax, as well as his work with SAIC in studying the effect of anthrax sent through the mail, began around the same time that BioPort had secured a monopoly over the production of the anthrax vaccine, recently made mandatory for all U.S. troops by the Pentagon. As detailed in Part II of this series, BioPort's facility that produced its anthrax vaccine was, at the time, rife with problems and had lost its license to operate. Despite the Pentagon having given BioPort millions to use for renovations of the factory, much of that money instead went towards senior management bonuses and redecorating executive offices. Millions more simply "disappeared."

In 2000, not long after receiving its first Pentagon bail-out, BioPort contracted none other than Battelle Memorial Institute. The deal gave Battelle "immediate exposure to the vaccine" it was using in connection with the genetically-modified anthrax program that involved both Alibek and Patrick. That program then began using the BioPort-manufactured vaccine in tests at its West Jefferson facility. At the time, Battelle was also lending "technical expertise" to BioPort and hired 12 workers to send to BioPort's troubled Michigan facility "to keep the operation running."

At the time, a BioPort spokeswomen stated "We have a relationship with Battelle to extend our reach for people we are trying to attract for critical positions on our technical side. They're also assisting with our potency testing as really sort of a backup. They're validating our potency tests." Reports on the BioPort-Battelle contract stated that the terms of their agreement were not publicly disclosed, but also noted that the two companies had "previously worked together on an unsuccessful bid to make other vaccines for the government."

As previously noted in Part II of this series, BioPort was set to lose its contract for anthrax vaccine entirely in August 2001 and the entirety of its anthrax vaccine business was rescued by the 2001 anthrax attacks, which saw concerns over BioPort's corruption replaced with fervent demands for more of its anthrax vaccine.

RUMSFELD SAVES BIOPORT

One of the post-attack advocates for salvaging the BioPort anthrax vaccine contract was Donald Rumsfeld, who stated after the attacks that, "We're going to try to save it, and try to fashion some sort of an arrangement whereby we give one more crack at getting the job done with that outfit [BioPort]. It's the only outfit in this country that has anything under way, and it's not very well under way, as you point out."

While Rumsfeld and others worked to salvage the troubled BioPort-anthrax vaccine deal, another recurrent figure in this sordid saga, Jerome Hauer, would also play a key role in pushing for increased purchases of BioPort's most lucrative and most controversial product. In addition to being managing director of Kroll Inc. and a Vice President at SAIC, Hauer was also a national security advisor to HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson on September 11, 2001. It was also this same day that Hauer would also tell top administration officials to take Cipro to prevent anthrax infection.

Hauer played a key role advising HHS leadership as the anthrax attacks unfolded. After the attacks, Hauer pushed Thompson to create the Office of Public Health Preparedness (OPHP) within HHS, which was created later that year. It was first headed by D.A. Henderson, a close associate of Joshua Lederberg and the original founder of the Johns Hopkins Working Group on Civilian Biodefense, which included Jerome Hauer and Henderson's protege Tara O'Toole. Hauer himself would come to replace Henderson as OPHP just a few months later.

Subsequent legislation, shaped in part by Robert Kadlec, would see OPHP give way to the position of Assistant Secretary for Public Health Emergency Preparedness (ASPHEP), a position Hauer would also fill. Hauer would use this post to push for the stockpiling of vaccines, including BioPort's anthrax vaccine. Hauer and his deputy, William Raub, would then help push the Pentagon to restart vaccinating the troops, despite long-standing concerns over the vaccine's safety. Soon after leaving HHS in 2004, Hauer would quickly be added to the board of directors of BioPort under its new name Emergent Biosolutions, a post he still holds today.

ALL SYSTEMS GO

In the aftermath of the anthrax attacks, Robert Kadlec's doomsday predictions for bioterror incidents went into over-drive. "It's not your mother's smallpox," Kadlec would tell the LA Times in late October 2001, "It's an F-17 Stealth fighter – it's designed to be undetectable and to kill. We are flubbing our efforts at biodefense. We don't think of this as a weapon – we look naively at this as a disease." As the article notes, this "stealth fighter" strain of smallpox did not exist. Instead, Kadlec – who now had Rumsfeld's ear on issues of biodefense – expected that such a strain might soon be genetically engineered.

Of course, at the time, the only government known to be genetically engineering a pathogen was the U.S., as reported by the New York Times ' Judith Miller . Miller reported in October 2001 that the Pentagon, in the wake of the anthrax attacks, had approved "a project to make a potentially more potent form of anthrax bacteria" through genetic modification, a project that would be conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute.

This was the continuation of the project, which had involved William Patrick and Ken Alibek, and the Pentagon moved to restart it after the attacks, though it is unclear if either Patrick or Alibek continued to work on the subsequent iteration of Battelle's efforts to produce a more virulent strain of anthrax. That project was paused a month prior when Miller and other journalists disclosed the existence of the program in an article published on September 4, 2001.

After news broke of the Pentagon's plans to again begin developing more potent anthrax strains, accusations were made that the U.S. was violating the bioweapons convention. However, the U.S. narrowly avoided having to admit it had violated the convention given that, just one month after the Dark Winter exercise in July 2001, the U.S. had rejected an agreement that would have enforced its ban on biological weapons.

The New York Times noted specifically that the genetically-modified anthrax experiments being performed by Battelle's West Jefferson facility were a "significant reason" behind the Bush administration's decision to reject the draft agreement and the U.S. government had argued at the time that "unlimited visits to pharmaceutical or defense installations by foreign inspectors could be used to gather strategic or commercial intelligence." Of course, one of those "pharmaceutical or defense installations" was ultimately the source of the anthrax used in the attacks.

THE GROUNDWORK

On the heels of the chaos of late 2001, Kadlec's vision for U.S. biodefense policy was rapidly coming to fruition before his very eyes. The first enabling statute for the SNS was the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness Act of 2002, largely motivated by the anthrax attacks, which directed the Secretary of HHS to maintain a " Strategic National Stockpile (SNS)." The legislation had been the direct result of a process begun years earlier when Congress earmarked funding for the CDC to stockpile pharmaceuticals in 1998. The program was originally called the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile (NPS) program.

Kadlec's role in directing subsequent developments in the SNS and other related legislative developments was considerable given that, in 2002, he became director for biodefense on the recently created Homeland Security Council. His work on the council, which he left in 2005, resulted in the Bush administration's "National Biodefense Policy for the 21st Century," which unsurprisingly echoed the recommendations of the paper Kadlec had sponsored at the National War College.

On March 1, 2003, the NPS became the Strategic National Stockpile program and was managed jointly by DHS and HHS after George W. Bush issued Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-5). Two days before, Secretary of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge and then Secretary of HHS Tommy Thompson had presented the Project BioShield Act to Congress. It was a sweeping piece of legislation that established what would become a government money teller-window for Big Pharma, called the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), among other entities and powers, not least of which was moving control of the SNS away from DHS and closer to HHS.

Soon after BioShield was signed into law, BioPort/Emergent BioSolutions co-founded a lobby group called the Alliance for Biosecurity as part of its strategy to easily secure lucrative BioShield contracts. That lobby group saw Emergent BioSolutions join forces with the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Biosecurity, which was then-led by Tara O'Toole and advised by Randall Larsen.

With this framework in place, the Kadlec-drafted National Biodefense Policy for the 21st Century was used as the framework for Bush's Homeland Security Presidential Directive 10 ( HSPD-10 ), which further expanded BioShield, the SNS and other controversial programs. Project BioShield was made law in 2004 and, one year later, Kadlec joined Senator Richard Burr's subcommittee on bioterrorism and public health. There, Kadlec served as staff director on the committee that drafted the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA), containing the specific policy directives for the roll out of Project BioShield and creating Kadlec's future position at HHS.

PAHPA was passed the following year in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and established the statutory relationship between the various agencies enacted or included in the BioShield legislation . This includes delegating to the newly creation position of HHS Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) to "exercise the responsibilities and authorities of the Secretary [of HHS] with respect to the coordination of "the stockpile and to oversee the advanced research and development of medical counter-measures funded by BARDA, but conducted by Big Pharma. ASPR was also given the leadership role in directing HHS' response to a national health emergency.

Serving alongside Kadlec in the White House throughout this entire process was Tevi Troy, a Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy; a role which made him the White House's lead adviser on health care, labor, education and other issues with a special focus on crisis management . Troy, who had come up through the department of labor as deputy assistant for policy was already a Senior fellow at both the Hudson Institute and its satellite think tank, the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies (PIPS), where the real policy development work was undertaken.

Both Troy and Kadlec would exit the administration at the end of Bush's first term and not return until the latter half of his second term. In the meantime, the wheels had been set in motion with the passing of Project BioShield and PAHPA and, soon after their passage, panic over a "Bird flu" outbreak began, which had spread first in 33 cities in Vietnam and then led to an outbreak of the poultry-killing disease that affected all of Eurasia, Africa and the Middle East. The outbreak sparked panic in the U.S. in late 2005, thanks in large part to over-the-top warnings made by Tommy Thompson's successor as head of HHS, Michael Leavitt.

Despite the fact that Leavitt's claims were wildly inaccurate, some administration officials benefited financially from the fear-mongering, such as Donald Rumsfeld, whose stock holdings in the pharmaceutical company Gilead netted him $5 million once the scare had ended. Part of the reason for Gilead's jump in profitability resulted from the decision of the Pentagon and other U.S. government agencies to stockpile 80 million doses of Tamiflu, a drug promoted to treat the Bird Flu that was originally developed by Gilead. Rumsfeld had been the top executive at Gilead before joining the George W. Bush administration. Aside from those who benefited monetarily, the Bird Flu scare also gave a considerable boost to the biodefense "stockpile" agenda that Kadlec and other insiders supported.

Kadlec would return to the White House as Special Assistant for Homeland Security and Senior Director for Biological Defense Policy in 2007 to further solidify his eventual grip on the Strategic National Stockpile and the office of ASPR, along with his Hudson Institute/PIPS sidekick, Tevi Troy, concurrently appointed Deputy Director of HHS. This put Troy in charge of implementing the very policies enshrined in PAHPA and the departmental changes enacted as part of Project BioShield.

The Bush administration came to its inevitable conclusion as Barack Obama was elected and sworn in, early 2009. Kadlec and Troy, once again, left their government posts and disappeared into their private sector lairs. But, that same year, the first practice run for Kadlec's freshly retrofitted SNS took place when the "Swine Flu" (H1N1) pandemic triggered its "largest deployment" ever, distributing nearly 13 million antiviral regimens, as well as medical equipment and other drugs nationally and internationally in conjunction with BARDA . Gilead (and Rumsfeld) again profited handsomely, as did other large pharmaceutical companies, which were eager to restock the SNS after its large-scale deployment.

The virus' origins have been a matter of controversy for several years, alternatively identified as having sprung from pigs in Mexico or Asia. One of the last studies conducted in 2016 claims to have definitively traced the source to hogs in Mexico. Regardless of its true origins, interested observers were able to glean vital data from the exercise to prepare for the "next one."

TROY'S HORSES

Departing HHS Deputy Director Tevi Troy soon took a gig as a high-powered lobbyist for the JUUL e-cigarette company , which had run into some regulatory barriers as a result of the Tobacco Control Act, which had just been signed by then-President Obama. Margaret Hamburg, founding member of the NTI, was then Commissioner of the FDA and stalled enforcement of the new regulations; a tacit non-enforcement policy had persisted at the FDA until the recent vaping flavor ban, which followed renewed health concerns raised by a 2018 NIH report .

Why a former HHS official would take up the mantle to promote the use of a product known to be injurious to health can be answered by looking at Dr. Troy's close links with PIPS and the Hudson Institute. Couched in free-market rhetoric, these institutions are vehicles for the policy initiatives their billionaire funders want to see implemented, with its subsidiary think tanks, like PIPS, serving as satellites orbiting closer to the center of power.

As an adjunct fellow of the Hudson Institute and senior fellow at PIPS, Tevi Troy appears to play a pivotal role coordinating between the two. The Hudson Institute was founded in 1961 by former RAND military strategist, systems theorist and Dr. Strangelove inspiration Herman Kahn. After Kahn's passing in 1983, the Institute was "heavily recruited" by the Lilly Endowment – the largest private foundation in the United States , by far – and became a magnet for the same radical conservative billionaire networks that patronize it today.

Among its biggest donors are familiar names like Microsoft, Lockheed Martin Corporation, The Charles Koch Foundation, Boeing and Emergent BioSolutions. In 2004, Lilly Endowment returned to Washington D.C., announcing it would " return to its roots of national security and foreign policy " as a result of the war on terror becoming an "overarching national concern".

PIPS and the Hudson Institute would come to play a central role in Kadlec's upcoming efforts to make biodefense a national priority with him at the helm of a vastly expanded office of ASPR. But, it would be a few years yet. Meanwhile, there was more to be done in the area of legislation, not to mention private enterprise.

Building on all previous versions of Kadlec's original PAHPA, the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act (PAHPRA) of 2013 established two more instruments that strengthened his ultimate goal. First, the PHEMCE Strategy and Implementation Plan (SIP) was codified into law, which formalized the original legislation's ties to the budget office and secondly, it streamlined the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) facility for the FDA to fast-track drug approvals.

SHOW ME THE MONEY

Soon upon returning to the private sector, Robert Kadlec helped found a new company in 2012 called "East West Protection," which develops and delivers "integrated all-hazards preparedness and response systems for communities and sovereign nations." The company also "advises communities and countries on issues related to the threat of weapons of mass destruction and natural pandemics."

Kadlec formed the company with W. Craig Vanderwagen, the first HHS ASPR after the post's creation had been largely orchestrated by Kadlec. The other co-founder of East West Protection was Fuad El-Hibri, the founder of BioPort/Emergent Biosolutions, who had just stepped down as Emergent's CEO earlier that year.

El-Hibri has numerous business connections to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, where he and his father, Ibrahim El-Hibri, had once sold stockpiles of anthrax vaccine to the Saudi government for an exorbitant price per dose. East West Protection chased after the opportunity to fit the Kingdom with a custom-built biodefense system, but ultimately failed to finalize the deal despite El-Hibri's connections. Instead, East West Protection sold its products to a handful of U.S. states.

Kadlec was the firm's director from its founding until at least 2015 , later selling his stake in the company to El-Hibri. Upon being nominated to serve as ASPR in the Trump administration, Kadlec failed to disclose his ties to East West Protection and El-Hibri and he has since claimed to only have been involved in the founding of the firm, despite evidence to the contrary .

Robert Kadlec's forays into the private sector during this period went far beyond East West Protection. Kadlec's consultancy firm, RPK Consulting, netted him in $451,000 in 2014 alone, where he directly advised Emergent Biosolutions as well as other pharmaceutical companies like Bavarian Nordic. Kadlec was also a consultant to military and intelligence contractors, such as the DARPA-backed firm Invincea and NSA contractor Scitor, which was recently acquired by SAIC.

Kadlec's consulting work for intelligence-linked companies earned him the praises of spooks turned entreprenuers, including Steve Cash – a former CIA officer and founder of Deck Prism , itself a consultancy firm that retained Kadlec. Cash recently told The Washington Post that "Everybody loves Dr. Bob [Kadlec]," adding that he was a "national treasure."

ON BIOWARFARE'S EVE

Kadlec had certainly been accumulating a treasure chest of power aided by some very cozy relationships in the consulting business and, by now, the stage had been set for a big push to create an official body within the halls of the legislature; an embedded consultancy firm, of sorts, to promote the designs of the biowarfare clique.

That year, Robert Kadlec put together a Blue Ribbon Study Panel sponsored jointly by the Hudson Institute and a PIPS subsidiary institution called the Inter-University Center for Terrorism Studies ( IUCTS ), managed by Dr. Yonah Alexander. Kadlec's Blue Ribbon Panel was chaired by Senator Joe Lieberman and included the indispensable input of Tom Daschle, Donna Shalala and other members of the biowarfare policy club.

The study panel issued a report in late 2015 entitled " A National Blueprint for Biodefense " calling for 33 specific initiatives, such as the creation of a " biodefense hospital system " and implementing a "military-civilian collaboration for biodefense." In addition, the panel recommended that the office of the Vice President lead a White House "Coordination Council" to oversee and guide biodefense policy.

An official body called the Bipartisan Commission on Biodefense would be formed shortly thereafter with all the Blue Ribbon Panel members and many others like Commission co-chair Tom Ridge and, perhaps unsurprisingly, Tevi Troy and Yonah Alexander, who serve as Ex-officio members. Alongside them is Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former Chief of Staff to Dick Cheney and Senior Vice President of the Hudson Institute, which also happens to be the fiscal sponsor of the Commission.

In the acknowledgements , the panel's 2015 report includes an homage to Robert Kadlec to whom they bestow credit for the achievement, which only "exists because of the foresight, forbearance, and perpetual optimism of Dr. Robert Kadlec. Bob understood that as much progress as had been made in the national effort to prevent and prepare for biological threats, it is not yet enough. He knew that with the right impetus, we could do much more, and he envisioned this Panel as a means to that end. We are glad he did."

Kadlec mounted this last offensive while serving as Deputy Staff Director for Senator Richard Burr's Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a position he would hold until the eve of Donald Trump's election in 2016. Trump would then nominate him to the office of the ASPR and Kadlec would be confirmed in early August of the following year.

Only one piece of the puzzle was left, but it wouldn't be very long before Robert Kadlec would become the biggest capo of them all with a subtle change that was introduced in the 2018 PAHPRA :

Title III – Sec 301

1) DELEGATION TO ASPR. -- Subsection (a)(1) of section 319F–2 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d–6b) is amended by striking ''in collaboration with the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention'' and inserting ''acting through the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response.''

[May 17, 2020] 'Zombie Neocon': How This Iran Contra Architect Is Leading Trump Policy

May 17, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Hawk Elliot Abrams, reborn as a U.S. envoy, is at the spear point of recent aggressive moves in Venezuela. US Special Representative for Venezuela Elliot Abrams addresses the Atlantic Council on the future of Venezuela in Washington, DC, on April 25, 2019. (Photo credit NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)

May 14, 2020

|

12:01 am

Barbara Boland As we await answers on who funded the plot to use a handful of mercenaries and ex-Green Berets to oust Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro , it's worth taking a closer look at the man behind regime change policy, the special envoy on Venezuela, Elliott Abrams.

Called the "neocon zombie" by officials at the State Department, Abrams is known as an operator who doesn't let anything stand in his way. He has a long history of pursuing disastrous policies in government.

"Everything Abrams is doing now is the same thing he was doing during the Reagan administration. He's very adept at manipulating the levers of power without a lot of oversight," a former senior official at the State Department told The American Conservative. The official added that Abrams is "singularly focused" on pursuing regime change in Venezuela.

A little background on Abrams: when he served as Reagan's assistant secretary of state for human rights, he concealed a massacre of a thousand men, women, and children by U.S.-funded death squads in El Salvador. He was also involved in the Iran Contra scandal, helping to secure covert funding for Contra rebels in Nicaragua in violation of laws passed by Congress. In 1991, he pled guilty to lying to Congress about the America's role in those two fiascos -- twice.

But then-president George H.W. Bush pardoned Abrams. He went on to support "measures to scuttle the Latin American peace process launched by the Costa Rican president, Óscar Arias" and use "the agency's money to unseat the Sandinistas in Nicaragua's 1990 general elections," according to Brian D'Haeseleer.

Under President George W. Bush, Abrams promoted regime change in Iraq.

Abrams was initially blocked from joining the Trump administration on account of a Never Trump op-ed he'd penned. But Secretary of State Mike Pompeo succeeded in bringing him onboard last year, despite his history of support for disastrous regime change policies.

It's no surprise that with Abrams at the helm, U.S. rhetoric and actions towards Venezuela are constantly "escalating," Dr. Alejandro Velasco, associate professor of Modern Latin America at New York University, said an interview with TAC.

In just the last month, Washington has placed bounties on the heads of President Nicolás Maduro and a dozen current and former Venezuelan officials. The U.S. also deployed the largest fleet ever to the Southern Hemisphere.

Meanwhile, Abrams announced the " Democratic Transition Framework for Venezuela ," which calls on Maduro's government to embrace a power-sharing deal. The plan doesn't explain how Venezuelan leaders with bounties on their heads are supposed to come to the table and negotiate with Juan Guaido, whom the U.S. recognizes as Venezuela's legitimate leader. Abrams has also said that the U.S. does not support a coup.

A few days after recommending a power-sharing arrangement, and 18 years after the U.S. backed a putsch against Hugo Chavez, Abrams warned that if Maduro resisted the organization of a "transitional government," his departure would be far more "dangerous and abrupt." To many, Abrams' aggressive rhetoric against Maduro made it sound like the U.S. was "effectively threatening him with another assassination attempt," like the one Washington had "tacitly supported" in 2018.

Two weeks after Abrams' warning, Operation Gideon began. Jordan Goudreau, an American citizen, former Green Beret, and three-time Bronze Star recipient for bravery in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with Javier Nieto, a retired Venezuelan military captain, posted a video from an undisclosed location saying they had launched an attack that was meant to begin a rebellion that would lead to Maduro's arrest and the installation of Juan Guaido.

In a public relations coup for Maduro, the plot was quickly foiled. Given that American citizens were involved and have produced a contract allegedly signed by Guaido, the incident has severely harmed the reputations of both the U.S. and the Venezuelan opposition.

Both President Trump and Pompeo have denied that the U.S. had any "direct" involvement with Goudreau's plot.

However, the Trump administration has given billions of dollars from USAID to Venezuela, and that money is largely untraceable due to concerns about outing supporters of Guaido.

"With all the cash and arms sloshing around in Venezuela," it is not hard to imagine how U.S. funding could inadvertently wind up supporting something like this, said Velasco.

There are other signs that the U.S. may have been more involved in the plot than they are saying publicly.

For one, American mercenaries don't carry passports identifying themselves as American nor do they return to the U.S. where they can be brought up on charges for their work, said Sean McFate, professor of war and strategy at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service and the National Defense University.

In order to sell weapons or training to another nation, it is necessary to receive permission from the State Department. It's unclear whether Goudreau and his band did so. But Goudreau's social media posts look like a pretty "clear cut" violation of the International Convention Against the Recruitment, Financing and Training of Mercenaries and the U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR) said Peter Singer, a senior fellow at New America.

We know that months before the fated coup, the CIA met with Goudreau in Jamaica and allegedly warned him off the project. According to the AP, Goudreau is now under investigation for arms trafficking . Members of Congress have asked the State Department what they knew of Goudreau's plans. Given the illegal nature of the supposedly unauthorized project, it's very strange that the ringleader is at present in Florida, talking to the press and posting on social media.

Besides that warning, it seems no one in government tried to stop this calamitous operation.

And it's not just regime change. Last year, Abrams advocated granting special immigration status for the 70,000 Venezuelans residing illegally in the U.S. as a way to "pressure Maduro" even though Trump ran on the promise to severely limit the number of people granted Temporary Protected Status.

It was in pursuit of special status for Venezuelans that Abrams showed himself to be "incredibly pompous, bull-headed, and willing to destroy anyone who opposes him, in a personal way, including by trashing their reputations in the media," another senior State Department official told TAC. Abrams is not above hiding policy options he doesn't like and offering only those he favors to Pompeo to present to Trump, sources said.

Abrams ultimately prevailed and Venezuelans received refugee status from the Trump administration, despite the fact that it betrayed Trump's campaign promises.

According to Velasco, there are some people in the administration who believe that Venezuelans are the "new Cubans" -- that they will become a solid, loyal Republican vote in the swing state of Florida if they're granted special status. They also believe that Venezuelan expats want to see the U.S. remove Maduro. There are "many Cold Warriors" who believe all it will take is a "little push" for Venezuelans to rise up and take out Maduro, said Velasco.

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment on whether Abrams is pursuing a military confrontation in Venezuela.

"Cold Warrior" beliefs are dangerous. While "Operation Gideon" was especially clownish, had it been more sophisticated, it could have easily sparked a world war. The Russians, Iranians, and Chinese are all operating in Venezuela.

That specter is even more concerning now that Russia's Foreign Minister Lavrov has said that Russian special services are on standby to help Venezuela's investigation of the mercenaries. about the author Barbara Boland is TAC's foreign policy and national security reporter. Previously, she worked as an editor for the Washington Examiner and for CNS News. She is the author of Patton Uncovered , a book about General George Patton in World War II, and her work has appeared on Fox News, The Hill , UK Spectator , and elsewhere. Boland is a graduate from Immaculata University in Pennsylvania. Follow her on Twitter @BBatDC .

[May 17, 2020] Rising Star The Making of Barack Obama by David Garrow

May 17, 2020 | www.amazon.com

An Unconventional Life Unfolds Reviewed in the United States on April 20, 2018 Verified Purchase

In the interest of full disclosure, I am writing this review before having finished the book. I've had the book for almost a year, but have only recently dared look through it. It is massive. I bought the book because I have never believed in Obama, I always thought he was the personification of the empty suit: lots of talk, little accomplishment. I finally turned to this book when I realized I had been confused about when Obama had been a community organizer. I thought it had been after Harvard Law, but he actually worked for a couple of years before attending law school. Having checked out some of the later events, I ran across his former girlfriend's asssertion that in 1986 he decided he was born to be President. This sent me to the beginning of the book to try to find out how that happened. (Or even if it did.) I'm not there yet, but I do have a handle on how the book was written and why it's so massive.

Obama's supposed autobiographies have been pretty well debunked as "historical fiction." They were not concerned with facts. Garrow's book is an antidote to the pretty fictional accounts Obama has used to his advantage, and Garrow has made every effort to nail down as many facts as possible. He not only has the facts, he interviews the participants, seeks out multiple sources, and even checks the newspapers of the day when necessary. This makes for a lot of verification of even the most insignificant details. But then again, we now have the details of Obama's life, maybe more than we may have wanted. Garrow does not provide analysis. He is concerned with the facts and only the facts as he's been able to verify them. But Barack's has been an unusual life, and so maybe the details count.

Barack's Kenyan father came from a tribe that recognizes multiple wives. He left a first wife in Kenya and married at least once in the US to Barack's mother. The marriage was at his grandfather's insistence. They never lived together. In fact, Barack's mother never lived with either of her husbands until she eventually followed the 2nd to Indonesia. But as long as she was in Hawaii, she lived with her parents. The only exception was that about a month after Barack's birth, she took her baby back to Washington State, where she had grown up, and she lived there for the following year, while Barack's father was in Hawaii. As soon as he left to attend Harvard, she returned to Hawaii with the baby and moved back in with her parents. It is so unusual for a first time mother to move that far away from her own mother. Most first time mothers are uncertain and anxious about taking care of a new baby.

I am struck that, once in Indonesia, Barack never picked up the language. By the 4th grade, he was having trouble communicating with friends his own age. I thought that odd. When I was 6, my family moved to northern Italy in June. In September, I was enrolled in the 1st grade of an Italian school. By December, I could speak & write Italian. (Writing Italian is pretty easy - it is spelled as it sounds.) My parents were never fluent and I was the family interpreter during our three year stay there. But, given my own experience, I found it very odd that Barack never learned Indonesian. He was there at the time to do so. God knows, I've failed to learn any other language as an adult! You gotta do it as a kid for it to be painless.

Barack's mother was unhappy with her 2nd husband when she perceived that he was becoming a successful businessman. Most wives appreciate success. It generally comes with more money. But that is not how Barack's mother viewed it.

Garrow confirms that Barack's grandfather's good friend in Hawaii was indeed an active Communist with an extensive FBI dossier. The FBI was watching him, but never accused him of espionage. Oahu is known for its naval bases, so I wondered. Garrow makes no mention of the grandfather being a Communist, so we can assume that there is no verification of that. Just that the two men were pretty close friends.

Being one of the few people who recognized Bill Ayres name when he appeared as a neighbor & friend of the Obamas in Chicago, I looked up some of the Ayres association. Apparently, Obama met Valerie Jarrett through the Ayres, who were close friends of her parents, and her parents were on the left politically.

I am intrigued by this biography of our most opaque president. I'm not sure I'll make it through the w-h-o-l-e book. But I do think that Obama's life was unusual enough to warrant care that incidents are not taken out of context, so I might struggle through to the end. I'm not sure how long that will take me. But I'm retired now, so perhaps this can be my retirement project!

Book Reviewer , Reviewed in the United States on July 15, 2017

A Brilliant Sorrowful Book!

This book is brilliant because it was written by an author, David Garrow, who's not only mastered the art of beautiful prose but also possesses unparalleled skills in researching his subjects (which is why he won the Pulitzer for 'Bearing the Cross', the bio of Martin Luther King, Jr.). Alas, this book is also sorrowful because it is clear Garrow began his biography of Barack Hussein Obama honestly believing in the hope and change his subject promised - only to be bitterly disappointed by the man his research ultimately uncovered. As 'Rising Star' describes it, Obama began his life in Chicago as an idealistic community organizer whose ambition was to change the world. Alas, this ambition was not realized when he failed to secure any funding (a failure that would sadly be repeated again and again). Undeterred, Obama simply shifted his focus to public office and prepared to run for the Illinois state legislature. That position, he felt sure, would give him the funds he needed to make his dreams come true. But there was a problem. The voters in Obama's district were black - and he wasn't. That is, he was not perceived by them as such and, to be honest, Barack had never thought of himself as black either. Up until the moment he first ran for public office, Barack had never defined himself along racial lines but instead along emotional ones - that of a lost child abandoned by his father and mother. By and large, Barack's life had been devoid of black associations. He had next to no black friends growing up in Hawaii; in college he'd persisted in avoiding black friendships, teachers and the black movement as a whole. The black persona was simply not how he defined himself - but it would have to be if he hoped to achieve public office in Chicago. What to do? Well, the solution which all of Barack's advisers gave was for him to marry a woman who WAS black. Thus, Barack abandoned the beautiful half-white, half-Japanese woman, Sheila Miyoshi Jager, whom he'd been living with for nearly two years in Chicago (and whom he'd originally intended to marry) and instead proposed marriage to Michelle Robinson. It was a political move which Barack would pay bitterly for.

Michelle was not interested in politics, she hated it. What she loved was money. However, in the beginning of their marriage she grudgingly acquiesced to Barack's low-paying position with the Illinois State legislature because Michelle herself was earning a six-figure salary at Sidley Austin. But then suddenly, mysteriously, Michelle left the firm AND forfeited her law license (after barely 3 years of practice) to take a public job which paid barely one-third of her old income. She was not pleased about this and immediately demanded that her husband leave politics and get a job at a prestigious law firm that would bring in the salary she craved. Barack balked at that and instead began working three jobs at once (state legislature, law school professor and lawyer) to bring in the money. But it wasn't enough for her. He then tried to placate her by promising her they would get rich from his book 'Dreams Of My Father' (which Garrow takes great pains to insist was NOT written with the help of Bill Ayers). Alas, the book was a flop. Michelle's anger at her husband's failure to make money provoked countless arguments between the two of them; fights which she had no qualms displaying in public, humiliating Barack constantly in front of friends and strangers. At this point, Barack bargained desperately with Michelle to allow him to run for U.S. Representative; surely this would bring in the funds she craved. Alas, he not only badly lost the election but plunged into debt up to his ears. Barack had truly hit bottom. And then? Suddenly money began pouring in for him.

Garrow gives no explanation as to why, he merely describes how Barack for the first time in his life was in charge of the allocation of millions of dollars in public funds which he began distributing as political patronage right and left. Shortly afterwards, Barack announced he would run for the United States Senate, a hugely expensive venture. But once again, he mysteriously came into possession of huge sums of money which would more than pay for that run. His fortunes had changed, he was no longer the penniless spouse Michelle had sneered at. Alas - and this is where the sorrow enters Garrow's writing - Barack himself had changed as well. He was no longer the idealistic community organizer of the past, no longer the fun-loving and outgoing person he'd once been. Instead, he was a cold, withdrawn individual who distanced himself from his old friends, abandoned his old alliances, displayed loyalty to no one but Michelle (and Valerie Jarrett). Garrow never puts it into words but it's clear nonetheless; Barack had sold out.

Needless to say, the Leftist establishment does NOT view Garrow's book kindly. It's bad enough 'Rising Star' uncovers Obama's failures, it's worse that Garrow's astounding research is so precise, so accurate it's impossible to disprove his revelations of those failures. It's no comfort to Obama's disillusioned followers that Garrow is as upset as they. I'm certain in my heart he would have given anything to have come up with a different conclusion for his subject. Alas, however, Garrow is a prisoner of his phenomenal skills as a researcher and his own honesty. The result is a brilliant sorrowful book on a man who ultimately betrayed the hope he had promised to the world - and himself.

[May 17, 2020] The dark side of Obama's 'Rising Star' exposed

May 17, 2020 | www.youtube.com

God's Warrior , 3 weeks ago

44, the biggest fraudulent, groomed 'president' in USA history. Imagine if legal citizens knew the TRUTH about corruption within the political arena? Thank you, @TuckerCarlson

[May 17, 2020] Papa Adelson s Emerging Tawdry Ties to the CIA by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

Notable quotes:
"... What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson bankrolling President Trump's 2016 election, leading to big payoffs for him in U.S.-Israeli policy and his own people (John Bolton), nested in the inner sanctum? What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson influencing U.S. trade policy in China, mostly because of his titanic casino interests in Macau? ..."
"... How about a Sheldon Adelson providing his elite security team as an interlocutor for covert, illegal CIA operations overseas. ..."
"... If you are still not persuaded, recall that Adelson was accused of working with the CIA at his casinos in Macau, providing a recruiting ground for agents so they could spy on Beijing. This was back in 2015, long before Trump's entrance onto the scene. ..."
"... Read the whole thing. Considering the powerful role Adelson has played in the White House it is worth taking seriously, whether you think Assange is deserves one's sympathy or not. ..."
May 15, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Papa Adelson's Emerging Tawdry Ties to the CIA

New evidence shows nexus between the casino magnate's elite security team and U.S. targeting of Julian Assange. Chairman and chief executive officer of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation Sheldon Adelson arrives ahead of the inauguration of the US embassy in Jerusalem on May 14, 2018. (Photo credit should read MENAHEM KAHANA/AFP via Getty Images)

What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson bankrolling President Trump's 2016 election, leading to big payoffs for him in U.S.-Israeli policy and his own people (John Bolton), nested in the inner sanctum? What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson influencing U.S. trade policy in China, mostly because of his titanic casino interests in Macau?

How about a Sheldon Adelson providing his elite security team as an interlocutor for covert, illegal CIA operations overseas.

Sounds like a bad spy thriller but read this impressive deep dive by Max Blumenthal at The Grayzone this morning. It's a stomach turner as well as a page turner.

We reported here back in December that a Spanish company, UC Global, hired to provide security for the Ecuadorian embassy in London, was reportedly pulling double duty for the CIA by installing a separate surveillance system in the building that streamed and recorded Assange, his lawyers, and his visitors in every room, including the bathroom. This is clearly a breach of international law, specifically on the inviolability of diplomatic premises . The Grayzone has since obtained more court records and conducted numerous witness interviews that establish how insidious this spy operation was, and how close Adelson's massive private security apparatus was to it.

At the embassy, visitors' phones were seized by UC Global guards, with passwords, SIM cards and International Mobile Equipment Identity numbers copied. Embassy officials and at least one U.S. congressman were also secretly surveilled. More:

The ongoing investigation detailed black operations ranging from snooping on the Wikileaks founder's private conversations to fishing a diaper from an embassy trash can in order to determine if the feces inside it belonged to his son. According to witness statements obtained by The Grayzone, weeks after Morales proposed breaking into the office of Assange's lead counsel, the office was burglarized. The witnesses also detailed a proposal to kidnap or poison Assange. A police raid at the home of Morales netted two handguns with their serial numbers filed off along with stacks of cash.

One source close to the investigation told The Grayzone an Ecuadorian official was robbed at gunpoint while carrying private information pertaining to a plan to secure diplomatic immunity for Assange.

Throughout the black operations campaign, US intelligence appears to have worked through Adelson's Las Vegas Sands, a company that had previously served as an alleged front for a CIA blackmail operation several years earlier. The operations formally began once Adelson's hand-picked presidential candidate, Donald Trump, entered the White House in January 2017.

The center of this tawdry tale is a status-seeking mercenary (Morales) who was clearly bedazzled to be working in "the first division," which is what he told his team after a trip to a security expo in Las Vegas in 2016.

Morales had just signed on to guard Queen Miri , the $70 million yacht belonging to one of the most high profile casino tycoons in Vegas: ultra-Zionist billionaire and Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson.

This brought Morales into contact with Israeli-American named Zohar Lahav, "who personally recruited Morales, then managed the relationship between the Spanish security contractor and Sands on a routine basis. After their first meeting in Vegas, the two security professionals became close friends, visiting each other overseas and speaking frequently," according to Blumenthal.

During the spying operation, Lahav worked directly under Brian Nagel, the Director of Global Security for Las Vegas Sands. A former associate director of the US Secret Service and cyber-security expert, Nagel was officially commended by the CIA following successful collaborations with federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

After the election in 2016, newly inaugurated President Trump appointed Mike Pomeo his CIA chief. At this point Pompeo, as you remember, clearly made Assange a target for termination . The security scheme at the embassy, according to Blumenthal, kicked in from there. With meticulous reporting, including a ton of witness testimony from former UC Global employees who saw what Morales was doing as not only illegal, but selling "all the information to the enemy, the U.S.," Blumenthal pieces together a convincing case that Morales was working on behalf of the CIA with the elite Sands' security apparatus not only as the go-between, but the expert assist.

Today, Morales faces criminal charges ranging from violations of Assange's privacy and the secrecy of his client-attorney privileges, as well as misappropriation, bribing a government official, and money laundering. Morales has denied the charges.

If you are still not persuaded, recall that Adelson was accused of working with the CIA at his casinos in Macau, providing a recruiting ground for agents so they could spy on Beijing. This was back in 2015, long before Trump's entrance onto the scene.

Read the whole thing. Considering the powerful role Adelson has played in the White House it is worth taking seriously, whether you think Assange is deserves one's sympathy or not.

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC since 2007, focusing on national security, foreign policy, civil liberties and domestic politics. She served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News in Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also worked as a beat reporter at Bridge News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger, she got her start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.

J Villain • 2 days ago

Doesn't matter. Like Jeffery Epstein, Adelson is protected. Also the US doesn't recognize international law even exists.

I have long suspected that US tax money is sent to Israel, part of that is funnelled off and laundered through Adelson's casinos and then used to buy influence in the US both directly but also through super pacs to make sure the US money to Israel never stops. No one in Washington wants to put a stop to it because every one is getting paid.

William Burns J Villain • a day ago
Right now, I wouldn't say being "protected like Jeffrey Epstein" would really make anyone all that safe.
J Villain J Villain • 16 hours ago • edited
Just to follow up on this. While there are millions of unemployed Americans, many of who can't pay their bills. The top priority over in the senate is giving Israel $38B so every one can get paid by AIPAC in time for the elections.

https://israelpalestinenews...
https://www.congress.gov/bi...

This is while Israel is preparing to seize the rest of Palestine which will then require another massive US tax payer funded hand out to build infrastructure and put military forces in there.

Blood Alcohol • a day ago
"I'm Shocked, SHOCKED To Find There's Gambling Going On In Here!" And add to that, Spying by Israel. You know the usual.

[May 17, 2020] Flynn - Perjury Emmet Sullivan Doubles Down By Walrus

Notable quotes:
"... Sydney Powell can only appeal the conduct of the Judge. This serves as a nice distraction from the unconstitutional conduct of the Obama administration in wiretapping political opponents; as well as multiple members of Congress ..."
"... We do know Rosenstein appointed Mueller as SC to investigate Flynn, among other things. ..."
"... And we now know there was no predicate for any of the Mueller SCO appointment; thus, Rosenstein, too: what was he doing? ..."
"... We do know that at some point after Bill Barr was confirmed as AG last year, that he began to investigate outing of Flynn and release of classified information, that is, actual crimes. ..."
"... And we know Obama is an enemy of Flynn. If the CIA never took any steps, prior to the Barr confirmation as AG -- and I have no way of knowing whether they did or did not, viz. the Flynn outing and leak of classified information, ---what, if any, might or should be, if any, the consequences of that? And, ditto the DOJ. ..."
"... It appear this judge want to protect the likes of Obama, and Yates, and the long list of villains whose mission remain: Destroy Flynn at all costs. ..."
"... General Flynn's original law team belonged to Covington & Burling. That's where Eric Holder made partner. Since his time as Attorney General, Holder has returned to that law firm. Like Fred said, they sandbagged the case. ..."
"... Flynn swore before two judges under penalty of perjury that he lied to the FBI. He then swore that he didn't lie to the FBI when he asked to withdraw his guilty plea. There's the conundrum. If we had the transcript of the Flynn-Kislyak conversations, we would know the answer to one of your questions. We could compare that to his guilty plea. We would then know if the prosecution's case was false. In that case both the prosecution and Flynn would be liable for perjuring themselves. It would also constitute prosecutorial misconduct IMO. Barr is doing Flynn a disservice by not releasing those transcripts. ..."
"... So all those mass incarcerated black men who pled guilty are really guilty because prosecutorial misconduct and defective legal advice neither happen to them nor are mitigating when a plea of guilty is made? "swore before two judges under penalty of perjury" The DOJ dropped the charges, it is up to the to prosecute for the new accusation that pleading guilty was actually perjury. Good luck at a jury trial with that. ..."
"... It seems to be a last minute desperation play by Sullivan to keep Obama out of the frying pan. ..."
"... Just today, the neocon-infested Washington Post ran an editorial, apparently by one of their DNC-affiliated writers, which attempted to jape the whole Obamagate narrative through a paroxysm of superlatives, mocking it as some gigantic and wholly imaginary conspiracy. This effort reminded me of their similar jocularity phase relative to Trump during the 2016 primary season. ..."
"... I suspect the reality is just the sleazy truth of Obama being just as much of a crooked bastard as Bush. The Obama gang, of course, is desperate to prevent the tarnishing of Saint Barry ..."
"... When Judge Sullivan said three days ago that he was going to make a schedule for outside persons and organizations to file written arguments, it was essentially an invitation for arguments against the government's request to dismiss the case. I started to put together an article about that brazen move. ..."
May 17, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Walrus

Firstly, Larry Johnson and Robert Willmann know more about this case than I do. It now appears, if this report today is to be believed, that Emmett Sullivan is now inclined to charge General Flynn with contempt of court and perjury. I have to ask; for what? This is Kafkaesque.

For agreeing to a plea deal that Flynn knew was false? For failing to plead innocence? For reversing his plea when it was demonstrated that the prosecution case against him was utterly untrue and corrupt?

"Judge", I use the term loosely, Sullivan seems to be so ensnared in the coils of judicial procedure that he has forgotten that truth and justice matter. That is the nicest construct I can put on it. I think it's time for Sidney Powell to rip this judge to shreds. I await Larry and Roberts comments.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/federal-judge-orders-arguments-on-whether-michael-flynn-should-be-jailed-for-perjury/

Fred , 14 May 2020 at 12:00 PM

Walrus,

Flynn was told by his lawyers from Covington & Burling that he was guilty. Covington & Burling were not only wrong they made no effort to get the exculpatory evidence and purposely withheld what evidence they did possess - repeatedly - from Flynn's new lawyer.

But then that has already been reported on publicly and discussed here. Perhaps your memory is faulty.

Sydney Powell can only appeal the conduct of the Judge. This serves as a nice distraction from the unconstitutional conduct of the Obama administration in wiretapping political opponents; as well as multiple members of Congress, multiple governors and state health officials in response to China's biological attack against the US and Western nations.

walrus , 14 May 2020 at 12:13 PM
Fred,

Yes, I agree with you. Sullivan trying to charge Flynn with perjury and contempt of court is a deliberate distraction. I would have thought the people who should be charged are the ones who constructed and prosecuted the bogus charge in the first place.

turcopolier , 14 May 2020 at 12:17 PM
walrus

Sullivan is in no sense an unbiased jurist.

Deap , 14 May 2020 at 12:32 PM
How many defendants automatically claim they are "not guilty, your honor" when asked to enter their plea, even when there is still gunpowder on their hands?

Do they also get charged with perjury after their guilt is established, beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of their peers? You lied to the court - you said you were innocent. Double time in the slammer for you.

Defendant statements of either their own guilt or innocence should be "privileged" and therefore not actionable. Those statements are fundamental to our trust in our judicial system, and should never later be claimed perjury or false statements if the defendant changes their mind or a jury makes their ultimate finding.

Jim , 14 May 2020 at 12:34 PM
Thank you Larry and Walrus.

Although different people at different times, and different circumstances: a comparison.

Then CIA Agent Valerie Plame outing [she is currently a Democrat candidate for a New Mexico congressional seat].

And, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn [NSA-designee] outing.

Outing, that is: leaking their identities, by government officials[s], to . . . .and release of classified information.

How do the actions taken by government compare and contrast, at the time of outing/leaking crimes.

1] Both leaks went to the Washington Post.

2] Substance of the Plame and Flynn leaks related to . . .

WAP published Plame's identity, July 14, 2003. George Bush the younger, then president. Robert David Sanders "Bob" Novak put his name to this at WAP. [Her husband, Joseph C. Wilson 4th, "What I Didn't Find in Africa", in The New York Times, July 6, 2003, disputed Bush/Cheney administration claims, their claims of WMD in Iraq.]

WAP published Flynn's identify, Jan. 12, 2017. Barack Obama, then president. David Reynolds Ignatius put his name to it at WAP. Flynn disputed Obama administration "facts" about their Syrian war in particular, and more generally, in west Asia/near East/middle east.]

3] Investigation at the time or no investigation at the time.

Executive Order 12333 of Dec. 4, 1981 requires actions on such matters.

In the Plame matter, the CIA, on July 24, 2003 made a phone call to the DOJ about this, according to the CIA. They followed this up with a July 30, 2003 letter.

Government records show "on 24 July 2003, a CIA attorney left a phone message for the Chief of the Counterespionage Section of DoJ noting concerns with recent articles on this subject and stating that the CIA would forward a written crimes report pending the outcome of a review of the articles by subject matter experts. By letter dated 30 July 2003, the CIA reported to the Criminal Division of DoJ a possible violation of criminal law concerning the unauthorized disclosure of classified information. The letter also informed DoJ that the CIA's Office of Security had opened an investigation into this matter. This letter was sent again to DoJ by facsimile on 5 September 2003."

[[ see: https://web.archive.org/web/20060705062919/http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/plame.cia.letter.pdf ">http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/plame.cia.letter.pdf">https://web.archive.org/web/20060705062919/http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/plame.cia.letter.pdf ]]

Sept. 30, 2003, Bush famously stated, viz. the identities of the leaker[s]: "I want to know who it is ... and if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of."

Dec. 30, 2003 a Special Counsel was also appointed to investigate the Plame matter, as well.

Then AG John Ashcroft recused himself and thus declined to make this SC appointment.

Patrick Fitzgerald was named the Special Counsel by then Deputy AG James Comey.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We know many more details now about the Plame matter, than about what, if any, investigation may, or may not have, begun, at the time of the Flynn outing and release of classified information.

What we do know, so far, about the Flynn matter is that, at the time, there was no attempt -- or at least, we don't know if there was -- any attempt from the Flynn outing on Jan. 12, 2017, to Jan. 20 of that year, when Obama was still president:
a] if the CIA asked for an investigation
b] if then AG Lynch did
c] if DAG at the time Yates did
d] if Obama did

We also don't know if, beginning Jan. 20
a] if then acting AG Yates did
b] if President Trump did
c] if the CIA did

Once Jeff Sessions was confirmed as AG, we don't know if he did, nor do we know if DAG Rod Rosenstein did.

Nor do we know if the CIA did.

We do know Rosenstein appointed Mueller as SC to investigate Flynn, among other things.

And we now know there was no predicate for any of the Mueller SCO appointment; thus, Rosenstein, too: what was he doing?

We do know that at some point after Bill Barr was confirmed as AG last year, that he began to investigate outing of Flynn and release of classified information, that is, actual crimes.

It is a fair question to ask when he actually began investigation on the Flynn outing, and leaking of classified material related to that.

And to ask when, or if, the CIA, since Jan. 20, 2017, ever did.

We do know there were many public enemies of Flynn at highest levels of DOJ, FBI, CIA, and the office Clapper was in charge of at the time, Director of National Intelligence.

And we know Obama is an enemy of Flynn. If the CIA never took any steps, prior to the Barr confirmation as AG -- and I have no way of knowing whether they did or did not, viz. the Flynn outing and leak of classified information, ---what, if any, might or should be, if any, the consequences of that? And, ditto the DOJ.

As an aside: Judge Emmett Sullivan's ongoing tomfoolery and slapdash in the Flynn criminal case puts in relief, sharp relief, just how upside down this entire issue has become.

It appear this judge want to protect the likes of Obama, and Yates, and the long list of villains whose mission remain: Destroy Flynn at all costs.


-30-

Mark K Logan , 14 May 2020 at 12:43 PM
Walrus,

Flynn's guilty plea being sworn to under penalty of perjury is no small matter, and the DOJs actions have been, in total, extremely odd.

It may be unwise to read too much into this at this point. The DOJ has wasted a couple of years and no doubt millions of dollars worth of the court's time. Sullivan is providing a platform wherein the DOJ will have to fully explain itself in this matter. Both past and present DOJs, that is.

Keith Harbaugh , 14 May 2020 at 12:49 PM
What is most relevant here is: What did Flynn know at the time he pled guilty, and what was his state of mind at that time.

I give links to two copies of the "Declaration of Michael T. Flynn", which addresses those issues, together with some discussion by me, here:
http://kwhmediawatch.blogspot.com/2020/05/what-media-wont-tell-you-about-flynn.html

As a general observation, there has been a tidal wave of criticism in American media over the DOJ dropping the charges against Flynn.

I have made an attempt to follow what the American MSM are saying about this, and the hostility to both Flynn and Barr is just overwhelming.
Surely that overwhelming media opinion had an effect on Judge Sullivan's bad decision.

Bill H , 14 May 2020 at 01:01 PM
Perhaps I'm missing something. I know the FBI can listen in on phone calls made to foreign nationals, but how can the FBI legally listen in on phone calls made by the NSC Director of the President-Elect, regardless of who he is talking to?
FakeBot , 14 May 2020 at 01:12 PM
General Flynn's original law team belonged to Covington & Burling. That's where Eric Holder made partner. Since his time as Attorney General, Holder has returned to that law firm. Like Fred said, they sandbagged the case.
turcopolier , 14 May 2020 at 01:45 PM
BillH

The intercept by NSA or CIA would be legal because of Kisliak's nationality.

akaPatience , 14 May 2020 at 01:48 PM
My husband's default TV channel is MSNBC, programming which I often overhear. A fair-minded observer can't help but notice that Obama apologists only mention that Flynn plead guilty twice. They NEVER emphasize the beyond-mitigating aspects of the matter, e.g., that his counsel at the time (which was a law firm also employing former Obama AG Eric Holder) was either incompetent or purposefully negligent in advising him to do so. Nor do they mention that Flynn was threatened with the prospect of his son being prosecuted using rarely-enforced FARA laws. The apologists also fail to remind their audiences that the FBI investigation of Flynn was about to be closed -- much less do they report that he was NEVER charged with perjury in the first place!

The convenient and expedient failure to fully inform people has become typical among the MSM/Democrats/NeverTrumpers, et al. Their efforts to misinform, to perpetuate ignorance, continue to play out not only in the entire Obamagate scandal but it seems also when it comes to COVID-19 policy. No wonder zombie-themed entertainment is so popular in recent years. SMFH...

The Twisted Genius , 14 May 2020 at 01:50 PM
Jim,

Flynn wasn't outed. He was a widely known public figure for years. Trump and Pence announced Flynn lied to them and the FBI when he was fired. I'm not if this was mentioned in the press before Trump's announcement.

The Twisted Genius , 14 May 2020 at 02:10 PM
Walrus,

Flynn swore before two judges under penalty of perjury that he lied to the FBI. He then swore that he didn't lie to the FBI when he asked to withdraw his guilty plea. There's the conundrum. If we had the transcript of the Flynn-Kislyak conversations, we would know the answer to one of your questions. We could compare that to his guilty plea. We would then know if the prosecution's case was false. In that case both the prosecution and Flynn would be liable for perjuring themselves. It would also constitute prosecutorial misconduct IMO. Barr is doing Flynn a disservice by not releasing those transcripts.

walrus , 14 May 2020 at 04:59 PM
TTG, there is this legal thing called the litigation privilege that, I think, covers what an accused can say in a trial. Plenty of people plead guilty to charges that they know to be false without the slightest demur by anyone..

Furthermore, Flynn may have become convinced by his lawyers that he had, in effect lied to the FBI. In addition, since he was not under oath or cautioned by the FBI at the time, even if he deliberately did lie for perhaps political or strategic reasons how is that a crime? People lie to people all the time.

To put that another way, is telling a female FBI agent "I'll still respect you in the morning" going to get you 20 years?

Fred , 14 May 2020 at 05:03 PM
TTG,

So all those mass incarcerated black men who pled guilty are really guilty because prosecutorial misconduct and defective legal advice neither happen to them nor are mitigating when a plea of guilty is made? "swore before two judges under penalty of perjury" The DOJ dropped the charges, it is up to the to prosecute for the new accusation that pleading guilty was actually perjury. Good luck at a jury trial with that.

Mark,

"Sullivan is providing a platform wherein the DOJ will have to fully explain itself in this matter."

So he is willfully refusing to dismiss the case so the DOJ can give him an explanation - other than the one they already gave him in the motion to dismiss? Justice Sullivan, on behalf of the Judiciary, is now taking it upon itself to determine what the executive branch of government was thinking in this case? To get that explanation he has appointed a former member of the judiciary, one who had previously worked side by side with Andrew Weissman. No bias there. You don't need to be a lawyer to see how ludicrous the suggestion and the judges actions appear.

TV , 14 May 2020 at 05:28 PM
Sullivan, like most of the Federal judiciary, is just another swamp creature.
He apparently slept through the class in law school where they said that the state has to prosecute the case, a judge can't - even as much as he may want to.
Jim , 14 May 2020 at 05:35 PM
The issue is both: the criminal leak of classified information; and the criminal outing -- the identity of Flynn -- related to classified information leak. Those are indissolubly linked.

The issue is also this, thanks to Judge Emmett Gilbert & Sullivan, who wrote May 13, 2020:

"ORDERED that amicus curiae shall address whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury. . . and any other applicable statutes, rules, or controlling law."

Who would be charging Flynn with "criminal contempt for perjury"? And/Or, "and any other applicable statutes, rules, or controlling law"?

Perhaps Gilbert & Sullivan will keep the case open until after the November presidential election, or the November 2024 election, or the next one, so that another DOJ -- not headed by Bill Barr -- can so charge Flynn.

Or perhaps Gilbert & Sullivan is inviting Congress to name a Special Prosecutor.

Who might that be? James Comey? Andrew Weissmann? Sally Yates?

After all, how dare anyone expose Barry as anything but "the scandal free" administration. This is Gilbert & Sullivan's motive, as I see it, my opinion, based on what I have seen so far: To protect Barry, among others. And do that via keeping alive a prosecution of Flynn, based on DOJ/FBI/CIA skullduggery. [Another theory is the judge wants to throw the book at Covington for misconduct; perhaps both or one or the other are at play, I don't have the evidence at this time to clearly say.]

As for Trump and Pence, that is grist for another mill.

For all we know, Trump and Pence may have wanted Flynn gone and they did not care how it was done. And they did not want their finger prints on it; and for all we know, Trump and Pence were not opposed to the Mueller SC appointment.

These are also things we actually just don't have clear answers to, just yet.

But that sideshow is irrelevant to this legal proceeding/circus per the May 13 order.

However, it may [or may not] be relevant to whether or not Trump and Pence actually wanted Flynn gone – using the "Flynn lied" as an excuse to be rid of him.

Pence, at the time, had no business speaking about what was essentially classified information, at the time, by the way; he did, on national TV, and Flynn was the patsy.

Did Trump and Pence, and their administration, sit on their hands as well, and do nothing about the criminal leak of classified information linked to the outing of Flynn?

Claiming he lied could suggest they also were not interested in the crime of leaking classified information and his outing.

At least Bush said or claimed to wanted to get to the bottom of the Plame matter. Did Trump and Pence, at the time?

And if they did want to get to the bottom of it, I would like to see evidence that they did so, and/or evidence that they were thwarted in doing so.

Surely, Trump and Pence can argue this was why they were not opposed to Mueller appointment.

We don't know all the contents of the scope memo Rosenstein wrote, as the boss of Mueller, -- whether or not investigation of the criminal leak and outing of Flynn was or was not part of Mueller's scope of work.

We don't know because chunks of scope memo are still redacted and not available to the public.

Presumably, AG Barr is investigation this; he came back on the scene last year.

What happened before him, going back to Jan. 20, 2017? And, what happened from Jan. 12 to Jan. 2020, with respect to the Obama administration, on this crime?

Did anyone, prior to Barr, do anything, or try to do anything?

If this was not part of Rosenstein's scope memo to Mueller, what can one conclude?
-30-

Bobo , 14 May 2020 at 05:58 PM
In recent years we have seen numerous individuals released from jail due to their innocence being found by DNA and other scientific processes. A good number of those individuals had plead guilty. In the Sullivan courtroom Flynn plead quietly twice (once to Sullivan the other to Contreras) but now pleads innocent and the government has decided to drop the case. But Judge Sullivan now questions what to do with Flynn and is asking for help from the legal community to determine what to do. It has become a circus or Sullivan wants his pound of flesh. Time will tell but if it is not to the benefit of Flynn then it's off to the Appeals Court where it will be justly determined.
After insinuating that Flynn was a traitor this Judge should drop the case quickly but no he wants make himself like a bigger Idiot.
The Twisted Genius , 14 May 2020 at 07:36 PM
Walrus,

Flynn's case never went to trial. It went straight to a guilty plea and was awaiting the sentencing phase. If the DOJ dropped charges before this guilty plea or at any time during a trial, I doubt we would be in this mess. What Flynn signed onto is straightforward. I don't know if this litigation privilege would apply to this Defendant's Acceptance.

"The preceding statement is a summary, made for the purpose of providing the Court with a factual basis for my guilty plea to the charge against me. It does not include all of the facts known to me regarding this offense. I make this statement knowingly and voluntarily and because I am, in fact, guilty o f the crime charged. No threats have been made to me nor am I under the influence o f anything that could impede my ability to understand this Statement o f the Offense fully."
"I have read every word of this Statement of the Offense, or have had it read to me. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, after consulting with my attorneys, I agree and stipulate to this Statement of the Offense, and declare under penalty of perjury that it is true and correct."

blue peacock , 14 May 2020 at 09:23 PM
Sullivan is addressing the guilty plea by Flynn and his subsequent withdrawal of that plea. creating the charge of perjury to the court.

Barr is opening up the DOJ to prosecutorial misconduct if the reason for the withdrawal is exculpatory information that was not provided defendant prior to his guilty plea.

Sullivan is exploiting this discrepancy. I am neither a legal expert nor lawyer so will stand corrected.

Vegetius , 14 May 2020 at 10:29 PM
Down with the kritarchy!
Outrage Beyond , 14 May 2020 at 11:51 PM
It seems to be a last minute desperation play by Sullivan to keep Obama out of the frying pan.

Just today, the neocon-infested Washington Post ran an editorial, apparently by one of their DNC-affiliated writers, which attempted to jape the whole Obamagate narrative through a paroxysm of superlatives, mocking it as some gigantic and wholly imaginary conspiracy. This effort reminded me of their similar jocularity phase relative to Trump during the 2016 primary season.

I suspect the reality is just the sleazy truth of Obama being just as much of a crooked bastard as Bush. The Obama gang, of course, is desperate to prevent the tarnishing of Saint Barry.

If Flynn does get off in the end, might he sue Obama and at some point depose him? An interesting thought experiment.

Jack , 15 May 2020 at 12:46 AM
From the Twitter-in-Chief:
Where is the 302? It is missing. Was it stolen or destroyed? General Flynn is being persecuted! #OBAMAGATE

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1261138690929295361?s=21

I find this hilarious. It is like POTUS is a helpless bystander. Does he not realize it is his DOJ that has "stolen or destroyed" the 302? Does he not know that he can declassify all of "Obamagate"?

Or is his intent to just troll everyone?

And what about him throwing Flynn to the hyenas by firing him?

robt willmann , 15 May 2020 at 09:37 AM
Walrus,

When Judge Sullivan said three days ago that he was going to make a schedule for outside persons and organizations to file written arguments, it was essentially an invitation for arguments against the government's request to dismiss the case. I started to put together an article about that brazen move.

Now Sullivan has abandoned that move and has exposed himself as an advocate singularly against the defendant Flynn, which of course is not his role. His order of Wednesday, 13 May, appointed John Gleeson, a former federal judge in the Eastern District of New York, to present arguments against the motion to dismiss Flynn's case and whether Flynn should be the subject of a proceeding for criminal contempt of court for perjury.

Judge Sullivan's new order indicates that he has improperly invested his ego in the case, and that something is likely going on behind the curtain.

JerseyJeffersonian , 15 May 2020 at 12:36 PM
Jack,

With all that is emerging from the recent releases of sworn testimony from various actors surrounding the Flynn case, and the Russiagate hoohaw exposing the motivations of these individuals, can it be doubted that given the depth of the duplicity on exhibit here that it is entirely possible (indeed, likely) that something as incriminating as the "missing" 302 was destroyed to cover the tracks?

Although some of the principals left of their own volition, and others were removed through being fired, it is clear that others acted as "stay behind" forces of the Deep State to continue the coup from inside the DOJ, FBI, and IC. Under these circumstances, it is not at all clear that President Trump was (and is now) substantially in command of these agencies. Incriminating documents and recordings may well have been preemptively destroyed on the sayso of the "stay behind" plotters still in high positions, so calls for declassification of already disappeared evidence would be futile.

No, it doesn't look good that Flynn was fired, but at the time, and with what was known at that time , and given Flynn's plea, what could be expected? Now that things have subsequently been revealed, it looks like a bad call; hindsight is, as the saying has it, 20/20.

[May 17, 2020] Obamagate Shows Biden Is Inadequate in Challenging Trump by Paul Antonopoulos

Notable quotes:
"... The majority of U.S. media will most likely try and find appropriate excuses so they can minimize Obama's role in these scandals. It is completely clear that the battle over who will be in the White House in the next four years is now taking focus on the Obama era as of opposed to Trump's mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic that has claimed the lives of over 80,000 Americans and infected more than 1.3 million people. ..."
"... With endless tweets by Donald Trump dedicated to Obama over the past few days, it is as if the presidential battle in November will be fought between him and Obama, and not Democrat сandidate Joe Biden . ..."
"... It is likely Obama is becoming more public as Trump's opponent Biden is proving inadequate and incapable of defeating Trump ..."
"... Trump also retweeted statements from CIA agent Buck Sexton, in which he accused Obama of sabotaging the Trump administration in the first days of his term. Sexton also called former FBI Director Andrew McCabe "a dishonorable partisan scumbag who has done incalculable damage to the reputation of the FBI and should be sitting in a cell for lying under oath" ..."
"... As for the affair with the secret operation of selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, journalists of Forbes in 2011 wondered whether that operation would become Obama's "Watergate," ..."
May 17, 2020 | astutenews.com

May 16, 2020

Source: InfoBrics Former U.S. President Barack Obama is coming under increasing pressure, led by what President Donald Trump is calling "Obamagate." This comes as Mexico has requested to finally clarify the affair with the secret sale of American weapons to Mexican drug cartels. Mexico is asking for the case to be clarified after almost ten years.

In this secret operation conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, weapons from the U.S. were sold to Mexican drug cartels. The U.S. claimed that about 2,000 automatic weapons were sold to Mexicans so that the Barack Obama administration could follow their path to the drug cartels. Instead, these weapons were used in massacres. Mexican authorities are now seeking answers from the United States.

In addition to selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, Obama is responsible for a lot of global upheaval on the world stage – primarily the so-called "Arab Spring" that should be more accurately described as the "Arab Winter" as it brought death and destruction across the Arab world.

The sale of these weapons to Mexican drug cartels is another ugly legacy of Obama's rule that liberals like to view as one of the best periods of American history. Let's not forget that in 2009 Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for his apparent "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people."

The majority of U.S. media will most likely try and find appropriate excuses so they can minimize Obama's role in these scandals. It is completely clear that the battle over who will be in the White House in the next four years is now taking focus on the Obama era as of opposed to Trump's mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic that has claimed the lives of over 80,000 Americans and infected more than 1.3 million people.

With endless tweets by Donald Trump dedicated to Obama over the past few days, it is as if the presidential battle in November will be fought between him and Obama, and not Democrat сandidate Joe Biden .

The reason for Trump's many tweets against the former president was because of Obama's private conversation that was leaked to the public in which he criticized the suspension of the investigation against Trump's former national security adviser Michael Flynn , while he called Trump's fight against the coronavirus epidemic a "chaotic disaster."

The American president started tweeting on the morning of May 10 and stopped late in the evening, making over a hundred tweets against Obama. This exchange between Obama and Trump is not common in American politics as former presidents usually do not interfere in the politics of their successors. However, there are suggestions that Obama still has connections to the deep state and is actively undermining Trump.

Obama, who openly admitted he would remain active in politics and wished he could contend for a third term, could be exerting influence through Hillary Clinton and Biden. It is likely Obama is becoming more public as Trump's opponent Biden is proving inadequate and incapable of defeating Trump.

The battle between Obama and Trump started with the announcement that the Ministry of Justice is terminating the investigation against former Trump's national security adviser Michael Flynn. Flynn, who was probably the shortest-serving national security adviser in history, was sacked at the beginning of his term on charges of lying to Vice President Mike Pence about talks with the Russian ambassador to Washington. His removal triggered a chain of failed investigations and campaigns against Trump and his alleged links to Russian interference during the U.S. presidential election, which also ended in a failed impeachment.

In private conversations that leaked to the public, Obama described Flynn's acquittal as a threat to the rule of law.

Trump also retweeted statements from CIA agent Buck Sexton, in which he accused Obama of sabotaging the Trump administration in the first days of his term. Sexton also called former FBI Director Andrew McCabe "a dishonorable partisan scumbag who has done incalculable damage to the reputation of the FBI and should be sitting in a cell for lying under oath"

Trump then continued with accusations on Twitter and said that Obama committed "the biggest political crime in American history, by far!" and ended briefly with "Obamagate."

As for the affair with the secret operation of selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, journalists of Forbes in 2011 wondered whether that operation would become Obama's "Watergate," and it appears that it very well could be. Obama's attempts to smear Trump has not only backfired, but it could have very serious legal ramifications against him and others in his administration.

[May 17, 2020] Why U.S. Must Be Prosecuted for Its War Crimes Against Iraq by Eric Zuesse

May 16, 2020 | astutenews.com
The reason why the U.S. Government must be prosecuted for its war-crimes against Iraq is that they are so horrific and there are so many of them, and international law crumbles until they become prosecuted and severely punished for what they did. We therefore now have internationally a lawless world (or "World Order") in which "Might makes right," and in which there is really no effective international law, at all. This is merely gangster "law," ruling on an international level. It is what Hitler and his Axis of fascist imperialists had imposed upon the world until the Allies -- U.S. under FDR, UK under Churchill, and U.S.S.R. under Stalin -- defeated it, and established the United Nations. Furthermore, America's leaders deceived the American public into perpetrating this invasion and occupation, of a foreign country (Iraq) that had never threatened the United States; and, so, this invasion and subsequent military occupation constitutes the very epitome of "aggressive war" -- unwarranted and illegal international aggression. (Hitler, similarly to George W. Bush, would never have been able to obtain the support of his people to invade if he had not lied, or "deceived," them, into invading and militarily occupying foreign countries that had never threatened Germany, such as Belgium, Poland and Czechoslovakia. This -- Hitler's lie-based aggressions -- was the core of what the Nazis were hung for, and yet America now does it.)

As Peter Dyer wrote in 2006, about "Iraq & the Nuremberg Precedent" :

Invoking the precedent set by the United States and its allies at the Nuremberg trial in 1946, there can be no doubt that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a war of aggression. There was no imminent threat to U.S. security nor to the security of the world. The invasion violated the U.N. Charter as well as U.N. Security Council Resolution #1441.

The Nuremberg precedent calls for no less than the arrest and prosecution of those individuals responsible for the invasion of Iraq, beginning with President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleez[z]a Rice, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

Take, for example, Condoleezza Rice, who famously warned "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." (That warning was one of the most effective lies in order to deceive the American public into invading Iraq, because President Bush had had no real evidence, at all, that there still remained any WMD in Iraq after the U.N. had destroyed them all, and left Iraq in 1998 -- and he knew this; he was informed of this; he knew that he had no real evidence, at all: he offered none; it was all mere lies .)

So, the Nuremberg precedent definitely does apply against George W, Bush and his partners-in-crime, just as it did against Hitler and his henchmen and allies.

The seriousness of this international war crime is not as severe as those of the Nazis were, but nonetheless is comparable to it .

On 15 March 2018, Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J.S. Davies headlined at Alternet "The Staggering Death Toll in Iraq" and wrote that "our calculations, using the best information available, show a catastrophic estimate of 2.4 million Iraqi deaths since the 2003 invasion," and linked to solid evidence, backing up their estimate.

On 6 February 2020, BusinessInsider bannered "US taxpayers have reportedly paid an average of $8,000 each and over $2 trillion total for the Iraq war alone" , and linked to the academic analysis that supported this estimate. The U.S. regime's invasive war, which the Bush gang perpetrated against Iraq, was also a crime against the American people (though Iraqis suffered far more from it than we did).

On 29 September 2015, I headlined "GALLUP: 'Iraqis Are the Saddest & One of the Angriest Populations in the World'," and linked to Gallup's survey of 1,000 individuals in each of 148 countries around the world, which found that Iraq had the highest "Negative Experience Score." That score includes "sadness," "physical pain," "anger," and other types of misery -- and Iraq, after America's invasion, has scored the highest in the entire world, on it, and in the following years has likewise scored at or near the highest on "Negative Experience Score." For example: in the latest, the 2019, Gallup "Global Emotions Report" , Iraq scores fourth from the top on "Negative Experience Score," after (in order from the worst) Chad, Niger, and Sierra Leone. (Gallup has been doing these surveys ever since 2005, but the first one that was published under that title was the 2015 report, which summarized the 2014 surveys' findings.) Of course, prior to America's invasion, there had been America's 1990 war against Iraq and the U.S. regime's leadership and imposition of U.N. sanctions (which likewise were based largely on U.S.-regime-backed lies , though not totally on lies like the 2003 invasion was), which caused massive misery in that country; and, therefore, not all of the misery in Iraq which showed up in the 2015 Global Emotions Report was due to only the 2003 invasion and subsequent military occupation of that country. But almost all of it was, and is. And all of it was based on America's rulers lying to the public in order to win the public's acceptance of their evil plans and invasions against a country that had never posed any threat whatsoever to Americans -- people residing in America . Furthermore, it is also perhaps relevant that the 2012 "World Happiness Report" shows Iraq at the very bottom of the list of countries (on page 55 of that report) regarding "Average Net Affect by Country," meaning that Iraqis were the most zombified of all 156 nationalities surveyed. Other traumatized countries were immediately above Iraq on that list. On "Average Negative Affect," only "Palestinian Territories" scored higher than Iraq (page 52). After America's invasion based entirely on lies, Iraq is a wrecked country, which still remains under the U.S. regime's boot, as the following will document:

Bush's successors, Obama and Trump, failed to press for Bush's trial on these vast crimes, even though the American people had ourselves become enormously victimized by them, though far less so than Iraqis were. Instead, Bush's successors have become accessories after the fact, by this failure to press for prosecution of him and his henchmen regarding this grave matter. In fact, the "Defense One" site bannered on 26 September 2018, "US Official: We May Cut Support for Iraq If New Government Seats Pro-Iran Politicians" , and opened with "The Trump administration may decrease U.S. military support or other assistance to Iraq if its new government puts Iranian-aligned politicians in any 'significant positions of responsibility,' a senior administration official told reporters late last week." The way that the U.S. regime has brought 'democracy' to Iraq is by threatening to withdraw its protection of the stooge-rulers that it had helped to place into power there, unless those stooges do the U.S. dictators' bidding, against Iraq's neighbor Iran. This specific American dictator, Trump, is demanding that majority-Shiite Iraq be run by stooges who favor, instead, America's fundamentalist-Sunni allies, such as the Saud family who own Saudi Arabia and who hate and loathe Shiites and Iran. The U.S. dictatorship insists that Iraq, which the U.S. conquered, serve America's anti-Shiite and anti-Iranian policy-objectives. "The U.S. threat, to withhold aid if Iran-aligned politicians occupy any ministerial position, is an escalation of Washington's demands on Baghdad." The article went on to quote a "senior administration official" as asserting that, "if Iran exerts a tremendous amount of influence, or a significant amount of influence over the Iraqi government, it's going to be difficult for us to continue to invest." Get the euphemisms there! This article said that "the Trump administration has made constraining Iran's influence in the region a cornerstone of their foreign policy." So, this hostility toward Iran must be reflected in Iraq's policies, too. It's not enough that Trump wants to destroy Iran like Bush has destroyed Iraq; Trump demands that Iraq participate in that crime, against Iraq's own neighbor. This article said that, "There have also been protests against 'U.S. meddling' in the formation of a new Iraqi government, singling out Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk for working to prevent parties close to Iran from obtaining power." McGurk is the rabidly neconservative former high G.W. Bush Administration official, and higher Obama Administration official, who remained as Trump's top official on his policy to force Iraq to cooperate with America's efforts to conquer Iran. Trump's evil is Obama's evil, and is Bush's evil. It is bipartisan evil, no matter which Party is in power. Though Trump doesn't like either the Bushes or Obamas, all of them are in the same evil policy-boat. America's Deep State remains the same, no matter whom it places into the position of nominal power. The regime remains the same, regardless.

On April 29th, the whistleblowing former UK Ambassador Craig Murray wrote :

Nobody knows how many people died as a result of the UK/US Coalition of Death led destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and, by proxy, Syria and Yemen. Nobody even knows how many people western forces themselves killed directly. That is a huge number, but still under 10% of the total. To add to that you have to add those who died in subsequent conflict engendered by the forced dismantling of the state the West disapproved of. Some were killed by western proxies, some by anti-western forces, and some just by those reverting to ancient tribal hostility and battle for resources into which the country had been regressed by bombing.

You then have to add all those who died directly as a result of the destruction of national infrastructure. Iraq lost in the destruction 60% of its potable drinking water, 75% of its medical facilities and 80% of its electricity. This caused millions of deaths, as did displacement. We are only of course talking about deaths, not maiming.

UK's Prime Minister Tony Blair should hang with the U.S. gang, but who is calling for this? How much longer will the necessary prosecutions wait? Till after these international war-criminals have all gone honored to their graves?

Although the International Criminal Court considered and dismissed possible criminal charges against Tony Blair's UK Government regarding the invasion and military occupation of Iraq, the actual crime, of invading and militarily occupying a country which had posed no threat to the national security of the invader, was ignored, and the conclusion was that "the situation did not appear to meet the required threshold of the Statute" (which was only "Willful killing or inhuman treatment of civilians" and which ignored the real crime, which was "aggressive war" or "the crime of aggression" -- the crime for which Nazis had been hanged at Nuremberg). Furthermore, no charges whatsoever against the U.S. Government (the world's most frequent and most heinous violator of international law) were considered. In other words: the International Criminal Court is subordinate to, instead of applicable to, the U.S. regime. Just like Adolf Hitler had repeatedly made clear that, to him, all nations except Germany were dispensable and only Germany wasn't, Barack Obama repeatedly said that "The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation" , which likewise means that every other nation is "dispensable." The criminal International Criminal Court accepts this, and yet expects to be respected.

The U.S. regime did "regime change" to Iraq in 2003, and to Ukraine in 2014 , and tried to do it to Syria since 2009 , and to Yemen since 2015, and to Venezuela since 2012, and to Iran since 2017 -- just to mention some of the examples. And, though the Nuremberg precedent certainly applies, it's not enforced. In principle, then, Hitler has posthumously won WW II.

Hitler must be smiling, now. FDR must be rolling in his grave.

The only way to address this problem, if there won't be prosecutions against the 'duly elected' (Deep-State-approved and enabled) national leaders and appointees, would be governmental seizure and nationalization of the assets that are outright owned or else controlled by America's Deep State. Ultimately, the Government-officials who are s'elected' and appointed to run the American Government have been and are representing not the American people but instead represent the billionaires who fund those officials' and former officials' careers . In a democracy, those individuals -- the financial enablers of those politicians' s'electoral' success -- would be dispossessed of all their assets, and then prosecuted for the crimes that were perpetrated by the public officials whom they had participated in (significantly funded and propagandized for) placing into power. (For example, both Parties' Presidential nominees are unqualified to serve in any public office in a democracy.)

Democracy cannot function with a systematically lied-to public . Nor can it function if the responsible governmental officials are effectively immune from prosecution for their 'legal' crimes, or if the financial string-pullers behind the scenes can safely pull those strings. In America right now, both of those conditions pertain, and, as a result, democracy is impossible . There are only two ways to address this problem, and one of them would start by prosecuting George W. Bush.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity .

[May 16, 2020] A model democrat

Highly recommended!
May 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Absaalookemensch , 1 week ago

Adam Schiff is a model Democrat. He has no integrity, decency, honesty. He's a model Democrat.

[May 16, 2020] No One Should Be Missing Kissinger

May 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Thomas Meaney debunks the myth of Henry Kissinger:

Since leaving office, too, Kissinger has rarely challenged consensus, let alone offered the kind of inconvenient assessments that characterized the later career of George Kennan, who warned President Clinton against NATO expansion after the Soviet Union's collapse. It is instructive to measure Kissinger's instincts against those of a true realist, such as the University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer. As the Cold War ended, Mearsheimer was so committed to the "balance of power" principle that he made the striking suggestion of allowing nuclear proliferation in a unified Germany and throughout Eastern Europe. Kissinger, unable to see beyond the horizon of the Cold War, could not imagine any other purpose for American power than the pursuit of global supremacy.

Although he has criticized the interventionism of neoconservatives, there is scarcely a U.S. military adventure, from Panama to Iraq, that has not met with his approval. In all his meditations on world order, he has not thought about how contingent and unforeseen America's rise as global superpower actually was. Nothing in the country's republican tradition prior to the Second World War demanded it.

The contrast between the worldviews and careers of Kennan and Kissinger is instructive, and it helps to explain why the Washington foreign policy consensus has gotten so many things wrong over the decades. Meaney mentions that as early as 1965 Kissinger was privately admitting that the war in Vietnam was unwinnable, but publicly he supported it and went on to preside over its continuation and escalation for many years. During the same period, Kennan spoke out against the war, and urged full withdrawal. Kennan famously said:

There is more respect to be won in the opinion of this world by a resolute and courageous liquidation of unsound positions than by the most stubborn pursuit of extravagant or unpromising objectives.

Kissinger insisted on just the opposite: that the cynical and stubborn pursuit of extravagant and unpromising objectives was necessary to prove American resolve. Kissinger couldn't have been more wrong, as subsequent events showed beyond any doubt, but his profound wrongness had little or no effect on his standing in the U.S. It is no accident that Kissinger has repeatedly endorsed pursuing such objectives up to and including the invasion of Iraq. The blunders that Kennan warned against and correctly foresaw would be costly and wasteful are the same ones that Kissinger approved and defended.

Our government usually listens to and employs the Kissingers to make our foreign policy, and it ignores and marginalizes the Kennans once they start saying inconvenient things. Kissinger had great success in advancing himself, and he has continued to be a fixture in the foreign policy establishment almost fifty years after he last served in government, because he knows how to provide arguments that lend legitimacy to dubious and aggressive policies. He made bogus claims about "credibility" in the '60s that helped to perpetuate one war, and later generations of hawks have used the same claims to justify involvement in new ones. Despite all the evidence that his "credibility" arguments were nonsense, Kissinger's reputation has bizarrely continued to improve over time.

Meaney also compares Kissinger with Hans Morgenthau:

Like Kissinger, Morgenthau had become well known with a popular book about foreign policy, "Politics Among Nations" (1948). And he shared Kissinger's belief that foreign policy could not be left to technocrats with flowcharts and statistics. But, unlike Kissinger, Morgenthau was unwilling to sacrifice his realist principles for political influence [bold mine-DL]. In the mid-sixties, working as a consultant for the Johnson Administration, he was publicly critical of the Vietnam War, which he believed jeopardized America's status as a great power, and Johnson had him fired.

The different responses to Vietnam are telling. Kennan and Morgenthau could see very clearly that U.S. intervention was unnecessary and senseless, and they said as much. Kissinger could see the same thing, but he pretended otherwise to gain influence. U.S. foreign policy then and later would have benefited greatly from having more honest assessments of irresponsible policies and fewer cynical endorsements of unnecessary wars. If we are to learn anything from Kissinger's example, it is that we should strive to be as unlike him as we can be.

kouroi • 4 days ago

Yeah, right. It will only get worse.

See Orwell's 1984 in full swing: How US erases history of WWII and the Soviet Union's overwhelming contribution to defeating Hitler's Germany.
https://www.rt.com/news/488...
https://www.rt.com/news/488...
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/48...

Also, it is worth mentioning the Soviet diplomacy's response to Keenan's Long Telegram, for parity:
http://www-personal.umd.umi...

While Mr. Larison has to / must continue his excellent work as a chronicler of US imperial madness, his and his peers' advice will continue to be ignored (ideally this advice would not even exist and no record of it would pass beyond government doors or "respectable" opinionators because TINA) regardless of public opinion pools and election promises and voting results.

Only a US societal quasi collapse, or the establishment of US as an endemic source of Covid-19 (or similar diseases), or Saudis selling their oil for other currencies beside US dollars, or a faster rising of ocean levels, or a full blown and rapid economic war and disengagement with China will potentially re-balance things. But it might be too late, and the US would have by then forgotten how to use certain intellectual tools the way Australian Aborigines and Tasmanians have forgotten to make and use bows and arrows.

Tim Chapman kouroi • 4 days ago
It's amusingly daft to describe the US as having engaged in imperial madness, but ludicrous to assert that Australian Aborigines ever used bows and arrows.
Feral Finster Tim Chapman • 4 days ago
The United States acts and talks like an empire, or need I trot out that quote fromt hat Bush-era apparatchik again?

And talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. If Kouroi used the term "boomerangs" instead of "bows and arrows", would that make you happy?

Tim • 4 days ago
Thanks for that. I have always had a vague awareness that HK was a problematic factor, but, being preoccupied with the daily grind, never scrutinized the record much. This short comparative piece is good for clarity. Perhaps the saddest thing of all, though, is that after all these decades, the HK perspective has become accepted by the Neo- factions (cons? libs? does it matter?) as a default position. Makes US seem like we're in the thrall of a military-industrial complex or something.
Mark Pietrzyk • 4 days ago • edited
In defense of Kissinger, he was skeptical of the expansion of NATO to the Baltic states and was much more open to diplomacy with Russia than most hawks in the GOP. But you're right that too often Kissinger was afraid to make waves by opposing military interventions. https://www.washingtonpost....
DUNK Mark Pietrzyk • 4 days ago
Henry Kissinger called US soldiers "dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy" and he's been advising Trump since 2016.
Bag Man • 4 days ago
Kissinger is an example that this old adage is true. "Only the Good Die Young". The devil is waiting for him. Kissinger is responsible for murdering and torturing many.
TheSnark • 4 days ago • edited
Kissinger was a brilliant historian and diplomat, with deep insights into how the world works. However he was also a careerist who was willing to bend his views to achieve and stay in power. For better or worse, he shaped US foreign policy for many years, and strongly influenced it for many more.

Kennan was also a brilliant historian and diplomat, who had a huge impact on US policy with his Long Telegram. But once the policy was accepted, he had little influence over its long-term implementation because he refused to compromise and work with (manipulate?) lesser beings.

And today, our foreign policy is run by people who know little of the world and none of its history, and could care less. But they are great at PR and political manipulation. I'll take either Kissinger or Kennan over any of them. Whatever their flaws, at least they knew what they were talking about

Connecticut Farmer TheSnark • 2 days ago
You are correct in your description of Kissinger as a "careerist". Unfortunately, unlike Kissinger George Kennan never became SoS, so he never had the president's
"ear." Some would argue that Truman should have picked him over Dean Acheson to succeed George Marshall. One can only wonder how history would have panned out.
=marco01= • 4 days ago • edited
....as early as 1965 Kissinger was privately admitting that the war in Vietnam was unwinnable, but publicly he supported it and went on to preside over its continuation and escalation for many years.

How could he stubbornly persist knowing that every day Americans were losing their lives - for years. This guy must be a sociopath.

=marco01= • 4 days ago • edited
....as early as 1965 Kissinger was privately admitting that the war in Vietnam was unwinnable, but publicly he supported it and went on to preside over its continuation and escalation for many years.

How could he stubbornly persist knowing that every day Americans were losing their lives - for years. This guy must be a sociopath.

[May 15, 2020] "We lied, we cheated, we stole", version 2.0

May 15, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

WHY IS THE US IN SYRIA?

Washington longer bothers to prettify – the boot is straight to the face. ISIS?

Forget ISIS says Jeffrey : " My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians ".

An amazing confession, in the same class as " We lied, we cheated, we stole ".

[May 14, 2020] NYT Falsely Blames Russia For Cyberattack Committed By British Hacker

Chancellor Angela Merkel that stupid? "Chancellor Angela Merkel used strong words on Wednesday condemning an "outrageous" cyberattack by Russia's foreign intelligence service on the German Parliament, her personal email account included. Russia, she said, was pursuing "a strategy of hybrid warfare."
Notable quotes:
"... That alleged attack happened in 2015. The attribution to Russia is as shoddy as all attributions of cyberattacks are. ..."
"... Intelligence officials had long suspected Russian operatives were behind the attack, but they took five years to collect the evidence, which was presented in a report given to Ms. Merkel's office just last week. ..."
"... This is really funny because we recently learned that the company which investigated the alleged DNC intrusion, CrowdStrike, had found no evidence , as in zero, that a Russian hacker group had targeted the DNC or that DNC emails were exfiltrated over the Internet: ..."
"... CrowdStrike, the private cyber-security firm that first accused Russia of hacking Democratic Party emails and served as a critical source for U.S. intelligence officials in the years-long Trump-Russia probe, acknowledged to Congress more than two years ago that it had no concrete evidence that Russian hackers stole emails from the Democratic National Committee's server. ..."
"... The DNC emails were most likely stolen by its local network administrator, Seth Rich , who provided them to Wikileaks before he was killed in a suspicious 'robbery' during which nothing was taken. ..."
"... The whole attribution of case of the stolen DNC emails to Russia is based on exactly nothing but intelligence rumors and CrowdStrike claims for which it had no evidence. As there is no evidence at all that the DNC was attacked by a Russian cybergroup what does that mean for the attribution of the attack on the German Bundestag to the very same group? ..."
May 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

The New York Times continues its anti-Russia campaign with a report about an old cyberattack on German parliament which also targeted the parliament office of Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Merkel Is 'Outraged' by Russian Hack but Struggling to Respond
Patience with President Vladimir Putin is running thin in Berlin. But Germany needs Russia's help on several geopolitical fronts from Syria to Ukraine.

NYT Berlin correspondent Katrin Bennhold writes:

Chancellor Angela Merkel used strong words on Wednesday condemning an "outrageous" cyberattack by Russia's foreign intelligence service on the German Parliament, her personal email account included. Russia, she said, was pursuing "a strategy of hybrid warfare."

But asked how Berlin intended to deal with recent revelations implicating the Russians, Ms. Merkel was less forthcoming.

"We always reserve the right to take measures," she said in Parliament, then immediately added, "Nevertheless, I will continue to strive for a good relationship with Russia, because I believe that there is every reason to always continue these diplomatic efforts."

That alleged attack happened in 2015. The attribution to Russia is as shoddy as all attributions of cyberattacks are.

Intelligence officials had long suspected Russian operatives were behind the attack, but they took five years to collect the evidence, which was presented in a report given to Ms. Merkel's office just last week.

Officials say the report traced the attack to the same Russian hacker group that targeted the Democratic Party during the U.S. presidential election campaign in 2016.

This is really funny because we recently learned that the company which investigated the alleged DNC intrusion, CrowdStrike, had found no evidence , as in zero, that a Russian hacker group had targeted the DNC or that DNC emails were exfiltrated over the Internet:

CrowdStrike, the private cyber-security firm that first accused Russia of hacking Democratic Party emails and served as a critical source for U.S. intelligence officials in the years-long Trump-Russia probe, acknowledged to Congress more than two years ago that it had no concrete evidence that Russian hackers stole emails from the Democratic National Committee's server.
...
[CrowdStrike President Shawn] Henry personally led the remediation and forensics analysis of the DNC server after being warned of a breach in late April 2016; his work was paid for by the DNC, which refused to turn over its server to the FBI. Asked for the date when alleged Russian hackers stole data from the DNC server, Henry testified that CrowdStrike did not in fact know if such a theft occurred at all : "We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated," Henry said.

The DNC emails were most likely stolen by its local network administrator, Seth Rich , who provided them to Wikileaks before he was killed in a suspicious 'robbery' during which nothing was taken.

The whole attribution of case of the stolen DNC emails to Russia is based on exactly nothing but intelligence rumors and CrowdStrike claims for which it had no evidence. As there is no evidence at all that the DNC was attacked by a Russian cybergroup what does that mean for the attribution of the attack on the German Bundestag to the very same group?

While the NYT also mentions that NSA actually snooped on Merkel's private phonecalls it tries to keep the spotlight on Russia:

As such, Germany's democracy has been a target of very different kinds of Russian intelligence operations, officials say. In December 2016, 900,000 Germans lost access to internet and telephone services following a cyberattack traced to Russia.

bigger

Ahem. No!

That mass attack on internet home routers, which by the way happened in November 2016 not in December, was done with the Mirai worm :

More than 900,000 customers of German ISP Deutsche Telekom (DT) were knocked offline this week after their Internet routers got infected by a new variant of a computer worm known as Mirai. The malware wriggled inside the routers via a newly discovered vulnerability in a feature that allows ISPs to remotely upgrade the firmware on the devices. But the new Mirai malware turns that feature off once it infests a device, complicating DT's cleanup and restoration efforts.
...
This new variant of Mirai builds on malware source code released at the end of September . That leak came a little more a week after a botnet based on Mirai was used in a record-sized attack that caused KrebsOnSecurity to go offline for several days . Since then, dozens of new Mirai botnets have emerged , all competing for a finite pool of vulnerable IoT systems that can be infected.

The attack has not been attributed to Russia but to a British man who offered attacks as a service. He was arrested in February 2017:

A 29-year-old man has been arrested at Luton airport by the UK's National Crime Agency (NCA) in connection with a massive internet attack that disrupted telephone, television and internet services in Germany last November. As regular readers of We Live Security will recall, over 900,000 Deutsche Telekom broadband customers were knocked offline last November as an alleged attempt was made to hijack their routers into a destructive botnet.
...
The NCA arrested the British man under a European Arrest Warrant issued by Germany's Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) who have described the attack as a threat to Germany's national communication infrastructure.

According to German prosecutors, the British man allegedly offered to sell access to the botnet on the computer underground. Agencies are planning to extradite the man to Germany, where – if convicted – he could face up to ten years imprisonment.

The British man, one Daniel Kaye, plead guilty in court and was sentenced to 18 month imprisonment :

During the trial, Daniel admitted that he never intended for the routers to cease functioning. He only wanted to silently control them so he can use them as part of a DDoS botnet to increase his botnet firepower. As discussed earlier he also confessed being paid by competitors to takedown Lonestar.

In Aug 2017 Daniel was extradited back to the UK to face extortion charges after attempting to blackmail Lloyds and Barclays banks. According to press reports, he asked the Lloyds to pay about £75,000 in bitcoins for the attack to be called off.

The Mirai attack is widely known to have been attributed to Kaye. The case has been discussed at length . IT security journalist Brian Krebs, who's site was also attacked by a Mirai bot net, has written several stories about it. It was never 'traced to Russia' or attributed it to anyone else but Daniel Kaye.

Besides that Kennhold writes of "Russia's foreign intelligence service, known as the G.R.U.". The real Russian foreign intelligence services is the SVR. The military intelligence agency of Russia was once called GRU but has been renamed to GU.

The New York Times just made up the claim about Russia hacking in Germany from absolutely nothing. The whole piece was published without even the most basic research and fact checking.

It seems that for the Times anything can be blamed on Russia completely independent of what the actually facts say.

Posted by b on May 14, 2020 at 14:38 UTC | Permalink

J Swift , May 14 2020 15:05 utc | 1

Good article!

Along the same lines, it always bothered me that among all the (mostly contrived) arguments about who might have been responsible for the alleged "hacking" of DNC as well as Clinton's emails, we never heard mentioned one single time the one third party that we absolutely KNOW had intercepted and collected all of those emails--the NSA! Never a peep about how US intelligence services could be tempted to mischief when in possession of everyone's sensitive, personal information.

Petri Krohn , May 14 2020 15:26 utc | 2
The "Fancy Bear" group (also knowns as advanced persistent threat 28) that is claimed to be behind the hacks is likely little more than the collection of hacking tools shared on the open and hidden parts of RuNet or Russian-speaking Internet. Many of these Russian-speaking hackers are actually Ukrainians .

Some of the Russian hackers also worked for the FSB, like the members of Shaltai Boltai group that were later arrested for treason. George Eliason claims Shaltai Boltai actually worked for Ukrainians. For a short version of the story read this:

Cyberanalyst George Eliason Claims that the "Fancy Bear" Who Hacked the DNC Server is Ukrainian Intelligence – In League with the Atlantic Council and Crowdstrike

Cyberanalyst George Eliason has written some intriguing blogs recently claiming that the "Fancy Bear" which hacked the DNC server in mid-2016 was in fact a branch of Ukrainian intelligence linked to the Atlantic Council and Crowdstrike. I invite you to have a go at one of his recent essays...

Patrick Armstrong , May 14 2020 15:27 utc | 3 Wow! You've done it again. I was just writing my Sitrep and thinking what an amazing coincidence it is that, just as the Russian pipelaying ship arrived to finish Nord Stream, Merkel is told that them nasty Russkies are doing nasty things. I come here and you've already solved it. Yet another scoop. Congratulations.
Brendan , May 14 2020 15:41 utc | 4
The NYT has removed that sentence about the attack on internet/phone access:

"Correction: May 14, 2020

An earlier version of this article incorrectly attributed responsibility for a 2016 cyberattack in which 900,000 Germans lost access to internet and telephone services. The attack was carried out by a British citizen, not Russia. The article also misstated when the attack took place. It was in November, not December. The sentence has been removed from the article. "

That was there for at least 13 hours from yesterday evening onwards. The page was archived this morning though before that edit:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200513221700/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/world/europe/merkel-russia-cyberattack.html

Norwegian , May 14 2020 15:45 utc | 5
From this we can learn that anything can be blamed by MSM, completely independent of what the facts are. It is not limited to allegations related to Russia or China, but any and all claims by MSM that have no direct reference to provable fact.
james , May 14 2020 15:45 utc | 6
great coverage b... thank you... facts don't matter.. what matters is taking down any positive image of russia, or better - putting up a constantly negative one... of this the intel and usa msm are consistent... the sad reality is a lot of people will believe this bullshit too...

i was just reading paul robinsons blog last night - #DEMOCRACY RIP AND THE NARCISSISM OF RUSSIAGATE .. even paul is starting to getting pissed off on the insanity of the media towards russia which is rare from what i have read from him!

@ 3 patrick armstrong.. keep up the good work!! thanks for your work..

Brendan , May 14 2020 15:48 utc | 7
OK I don't know how to fix the formatting in my last link but you can look up https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/world/europe/merkel-russia-cyberattack.html on https://web.archive.org for 10:46 May 14 2020
m droy , May 14 2020 15:51 utc | 8
There is already a correction made to the DT attack - someone reads MofA! Shame they don't get more of their new interpretation form here.

Whole piece reads here like it started as a Merkel gets close to Russia piece, shown around to colleagues and politicians for feedback, and a ton of fake "why Merkel actually hates the Russians" nonsense was added in.

After all pretty much everyone has tapped Merkel's phone by now.

tucenz , May 14 2020 16:22 utc | 9
Fairy tales told by Danny Kaye....

[May 13, 2020] Dramatic change of direction for Syrian envoy

Highly recommended!
This is MIGA in action...
Notable quotes:
"... former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell admitted in a TV interview he views that the US should be in the business of "killing Russians and Iranians covertly" ). ..."
"... Ironically, Jeffrey's official title has been Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIL, but apparently the mission is now to essentially "give the Russians hell". His comments were made Tuesday during a video conference hosted by the neocon Hudson Institute : ..."
"... He also emphasized that the Syrian state would continue to be squeezed into submission as part of long-term US efforts (going back to at least 2011) to legitimize a Syria government in exile of sorts. This after the Trump administration recently piled new sanctions on Damascus. As University of Oklahoma professor and expert on the region Joshua Landis summarized of Jeffrey's remarks: "He pledged that the United States will continue to deny Syria - international funding, reconstruction, oil, banking, agriculture & recognition of government." ..."
May 13, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Washington now says it's all about defeating the Russians . While it's not the first time this has been thrown around in policy circles (recall that a year after Russia's 2015 entry into Syria at Assad's invitation, former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell admitted in a TV interview he views that the US should be in the business of "killing Russians and Iranians covertly" ).

And now the top US special envoy to region, James Jeffrey, has this to say on US troops in Syria :

"My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians."

Ironically, Jeffrey's official title has been Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIL, but apparently the mission is now to essentially "give the Russians hell". His comments were made Tuesday during a video conference hosted by the neocon Hudson Institute :

Asked why the American public should tolerate US involvement in Syria, Special Envoy James Jeffrey points out the small US footprint in the fight against ISIS. "This isn't Afghanistan. This isn't Vietnam. This isn't a quagmire. My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians."

He also emphasized that the Syrian state would continue to be squeezed into submission as part of long-term US efforts (going back to at least 2011) to legitimize a Syria government in exile of sorts. This after the Trump administration recently piled new sanctions on Damascus. As University of Oklahoma professor and expert on the region Joshua Landis summarized of Jeffrey's remarks: "He pledged that the United States will continue to deny Syria - international funding, reconstruction, oil, banking, agriculture & recognition of government."

"My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians."

Special US envoy to Syria - James Jeffery

He pledged that the United States will continue to deny Syria - international funding, reconstruction, oil, banking, agriculture & recognition of government. https://t.co/MSAkQqAmdh

-- Joshua Landis (@joshua_landis) May 12, 2020

But no doubt both Putin and Assad have understood Washington's real proxy war interests all along, which is why last year Russia delivered it's lethal S-300 into the hands of Assad (and amid constant Israeli attacks). But no doubt both Putin and Assad have understood Washington's real proxy war interests all along, which is why last year Russia delivered it's lethal S-300 into the hands of Assad (and amid constant Israeli attacks).

As for oil, currently Damascus is well supplied by the Iranians, eager to dump their stock in fuel-starved Syria amid the global glut. Trump has previously voiced that part of US troops "securing the oil fields" is to keep them out of the hands of Russia and Iran.

* * *

Recall the CIA's 2016 admission of what's really going on in terms of US action in Syria:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/OJ3fTFHQ0KA

[May 13, 2020] From RussiaGate To ObamaGate The End Of Boomerville by Tom Luongo

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... it's clear that Obama was always the vector through which the entire investigation into Donald Trump pointed. He's the only one with the power to have marshaled the forces arrayed against Trump for the past four years. ..."
"... What's clear now is the President Obama's administration was regularly engaged in illegally using NSA database access to spy on Americans and political opponents . This operation pre-dates Trump by a few years ..."
"... On April 18, 2016, following the preliminary audit results, Director Rogers shut down all FBI contractor access to the database after he learned FISA-702 "about"(17) and "to/from"(16) search queries were being done without authorization ..."
"... And that's when everything changed. Because at that point, having lost access Obama's spy team needed another way into the NSA database. Enter Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele and the ridiculous dossier used to issue FISA warrants on Carter Page and all the rest of it. ..."
"... Obama is guilty of the highest crimes a President can be guilty of, utilizing Federal law enforcement and intelligence services to spy on a political opponent during an election. This is after eight years of ruinous wars, coups both successful and not, drone-striking U.S. citizens and generally carrying on like the vandal he is. ..."
"... Obama's people have been covering for him for nearly four years now. They have been exposed as bald-faced liars by the transcripts of their impeachment testimonies to Adam Schiff and the House Intelligence Committee. ..."
"... Now that the heat is rising and the apparatus they used to control turns its attention to what they did, enough of them will roll over and give Attorney General William Barr what he wants. ..."
"... And here we are coming into the home stretch and the bitter end is staring these people in the face. They've lost all credibility, corrupted whole swaths of the Federal government beyond recognition and activated every resource they have in the media and the chattering classes to make manifest a bald-faced lie. And it didn't work. Now the desperation sets in. The exoneration of Gen. Michael Flynn, the release of the transcripts and conflicting stories told by John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey and the rest all point to something beyond sinister. ..."
"... You can smell the fear now. From Bill Kristol to John Brennan they can see the end of their project, whether it was for a New American Neocon Century or just the cynical push for a transnational oligarchy based around the European Union, their Utopian dreams have run into the immovable object of a people refusing to believe their lies anymore. ..."
May 13, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, 'n Guns blog,

From the beginning of the story RussiaGate was always about Barack Obama . I didn't always see it that way, certainly. My seething hatred for all things Hillary Clinton is a powerful blind spot I admit to freely.

But, it's clear that Obama was always the vector through which the entire investigation into Donald Trump pointed. He's the only one with the power to have marshaled the forces arrayed against Trump for the past four years.

We've known this for a couple of years now but there were a seemingly endless series of distractions put in place to obfuscate the truth...

Donald Trump was not a Russian agent.

What's clear now is the President Obama's administration was regularly engaged in illegally using NSA database access to spy on Americans and political opponents . This operation pre-dates Trump by a few years.

It was de rigeur by the time the election cycle ramped up in 2016. The timing of events is during that time period paints a very damning picture. This article from Zerohedge by way of Conservative Treehouse lays out the timing, the activities and the shifts in the narrative that implicate Obama beyond any doubt.

On April 18, 2016, following the preliminary audit results, Director Rogers shut down all FBI contractor access to the database after he learned FISA-702 "about"(17) and "to/from"(16) search queries were being done without authorization. Thus begins the first discovery of a much bigger background story.

And that's when everything changed. Because at that point, having lost access Obama's spy team needed another way into the NSA database. Enter Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele and the ridiculous dossier used to issue FISA warrants on Carter Page and all the rest of it.

The details are all there for anyone with eyes willing to see, the question is whether anyone deep in the throes of Trump Derangement Syndrome will take their eyes off the shadow play in front of them long enough to look.

I'm not holding my breath.

Obama is guilty of the highest crimes a President can be guilty of, utilizing Federal law enforcement and intelligence services to spy on a political opponent during an election. This is after eight years of ruinous wars, coups both successful and not, drone-striking U.S. citizens and generally carrying on like the vandal he is.

OBAMAGATE! pic.twitter.com/pFbb6hgDhF

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 12, 2020

... ... ...

These people obviously missed the key point about Goebbels' Big Lie theory of propaganda. For it to work there has to be a nugget of truth to wrap the lie in before you can repeat it endlessly to make it real. And that's why RussiaGate is dead. Long live ObamaGate.

Obama's people have been covering for him for nearly four years now. They have been exposed as bald-faced liars by the transcripts of their impeachment testimonies to Adam Schiff and the House Intelligence Committee.

None of them were willing to testify under oath, and be guilty of perjury, to the effect that Trump was colluding with the Russians. But, they'd say it on TV, Twitter and anywhere else they could to attack Trump with patent nonsense.

Now that the heat is rising and the apparatus they used to control turns its attention to what they did, enough of them will roll over and give Attorney General William Barr what he wants. Some of them will fall on their sword for Obama.

But I don't think Trump will be satisfied with that. He has to know that Obama is the key to truly draining the Swamp if that is, in fact, his goal. Because if he doesn't attack Obama now, Obama will be formidable in October. Both men are fighting for their lives at this point.

Trump was supposed to roll over and play nice. But Pat Buchanan rightly had him pegged at the beginning of this back in January of 2017, saying that Trump wasn't like Nixon, he wouldn't walk away to protect the office of the Presidency. He would fight to the bitter end because that's who he is.

And here we are coming into the home stretch and the bitter end is staring these people in the face. They've lost all credibility, corrupted whole swaths of the Federal government beyond recognition and activated every resource they have in the media and the chattering classes to make manifest a bald-faced lie. And it didn't work. Now the desperation sets in. The exoneration of Gen. Michael Flynn, the release of the transcripts and conflicting stories told by John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey and the rest all point to something beyond sinister.

You can smell the fear now. From Bill Kristol to John Brennan they can see the end of their project, whether it was for a New American Neocon Century or just the cynical push for a transnational oligarchy based around the European Union, their Utopian dreams have run into the immovable object of a people refusing to believe their lies anymore.

... ... ...

* * *

Join My Patreon if you no longer want to live in Boomerville. Install the Brave Browser if you want to help others escape it.

[May 13, 2020] John Brennan Concealed 'High-Quality' Intelligence That Russia Wanted Hillary Clinton To Win Report

Notable quotes:
"... House Intelligence Committee staff told me that after an exhaustive investigation reviewing intelligence and interviewing intelligence officers, they found that Brennan suppressed high-quality intelligence suggesting that Putin actually wanted the more predictable and malleable Clinton to win the 2016 election . ..."
"... Instead, the Brennan team included low-quality intelligence that failed to meet intelligence community standards to support the political claim that Russian officials wanted Trump to win, House Intelligence Committee staff revealed. They said that CIA analysts also objected to including that flawed, substandard information in the assessment. ..."
"... Fox 's Henry said that he has obtained independent confirmation of the pro-Clinton Russia claim made by Fleitz . ..."
"... Brennan's concealment of this key information was yet another link in the chain of the Obama administration's plot to smear Donald Trump as a Russian asset - a hoax supported by the Clinton-funded Steele dossier, which the FBI knew was Russian disinformation (or, more likely, Steele's Russophobic fantasies) before they used it as a predicate to spy on Trump aide Carter Page during the 2016 election. ..."
May 13, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
Former CIA director John Brennan suppressed intelligence which indicated that Russia wanted Hillary Clinton to win because "she was a known quantity," vs. the unpredictable Donald Trump, according to Fox News ' Ed Henry.

During a Tuesday night discussion with Tucker Carlson, Henry said that Brennan "also had intel saying, actually, Russia wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she was a known quantity, she had been secretary of state, and Vladimir Putin's team thought she was more malleable, while candidate Donald Trump was unpredictable."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xWSWdS8rILs

Perhaps Russian President Vladimir Putin has fond memories of the time Bill Clinton hung out at his 'private homestead' during the same trip where he collected a $500,000 payday for a speech at a Moscow bank, right before the Uranium One deal was approved.

And as Breitbart 's Joel Pollak notes, Henry's claim backs up a similar allegation by former National Security Council chief of staff Fred Fleitz , who said on April 22:

House Intelligence Committee staff told me that after an exhaustive investigation reviewing intelligence and interviewing intelligence officers, they found that Brennan suppressed high-quality intelligence suggesting that Putin actually wanted the more predictable and malleable Clinton to win the 2016 election .

Instead, the Brennan team included low-quality intelligence that failed to meet intelligence community standards to support the political claim that Russian officials wanted Trump to win, House Intelligence Committee staff revealed. They said that CIA analysts also objected to including that flawed, substandard information in the assessment.

Fox 's Henry said that he has obtained independent confirmation of the pro-Clinton Russia claim made by Fleitz .

Brennan's concealment of this key information was yet another link in the chain of the Obama administration's plot to smear Donald Trump as a Russian asset - a hoax supported by the Clinton-funded Steele dossier, which the FBI knew was Russian disinformation (or, more likely, Steele's Russophobic fantasies) before they used it as a predicate to spy on Trump aide Carter Page during the 2016 election.

And now, Brennan is a contributor on MSNBC. How fitting.

[May 12, 2020] Israel To Annex the United States by Philip Giraldi

In reality this is vice versa -- Israel is a kind of unrecognized US state with multiple and outrageous special privileges
May 12, 2020 | www.unz.com

Over the past three years Donald J. Trump has delivered on his promise to be the "best friend in Washington that Israel has ever had."

...That Trump was willing to highlight and promote a major pander to the Israel Lobby on the very day he was inaugurated is more than just telling, it is bizarre.

Wally , says: Show Comment May 11, 2020 at 11:40 pm GMT

Joe Biden:

"You don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist – I am a Zionist, My Name is Joe Biden, and Everybody Knows I Love Israel."

geokat62 , says: Show Comment May 12, 2020 at 2:24 am GMT

Israel to Annex the United States

It was already de facto all that remains is de jure !

[May 12, 2020] Obama was the first president in US history to be at war for every single day of his eight year presidency.

May 12, 2020 | www.unz.com

Wally , says: Show Comment May 12, 2020 at 3:08 pm GMT

@JoaoAlfaiate – You mean the Syria where US troops sent by Obama are being withdrawn by Trump.
– What Syrian oil has Trump stolen? None.

FYI:
– Obama was the first president in US history to be at war for every single day of his eight year presidency.
– Obama approved military action in seven countries, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria and Yemen as well as special operations on a smaller scale all over the globe.

recommended:
Obama's Horrible Record: 'Obama on Mount Rushmore: Move Over Guys, Room for One More Con Artist'
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/12/phil-giraldi/obama-on-mount-rushmore-move-over-guys-room-for-one-more-con-artist/

[May 11, 2020] Lee Zeldin Adam Schiff 'should resign today' for role in Russia investigation by Dominick Mastrangelo

Highly recommended!
Looks like Obama was the head of this gaslighing operation, not Schiff...
May 11, 2020 | www.washingtonexaminer.com
R ep. Lee Zeldin demanded that Rep. Adam Schiff be stripped of his post as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and resign because of his role in the Russia investigation.

"Adam Schiff should not be the chair of the House Intelligence Committee. His gavel should be removed. He should be censured. He should resign," Zeldin said Monday on Fox News. "There's a lot that should happen, but Nancy Pelosi isn't going to punish Adam Schiff. In fact, that's the reason why he has the gavel in the first place."

Republicans have been critical of Schiff in recent weeks after reports suggested that Schiff was trying to block the release of some of the transcripts of the investigation's 53 witness interviews.

Some of the transcripts were eventually released and undercut claims used by Democrats to push for impeachment.

"He's the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, which became the House Impeachment Committee because of the way he writes these fairy-tale parodies," Zeldin said.

The Republican from New York suggested that Schiff and Democrats who impeached Trump and tried to remove him from office were aided by friends in the media.

"It's actually one that the Democrats reward. It's one that the media rewards," Zeldin said. "So, I'm not going to expect any repercussions even though he should resign today."

https://embed.air.tv/v1/iframe/oJNk_yRyQ5G9DqCdGyOLTQ?organization=MoTlAWfQQXyEPg6AYxEZSw

[May 11, 2020] McCarthy: It would be 'profoundly crazy if Obama wasn't in on Flynn case'

Highly recommended!
Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show
And persecution of Flynn might be continuation of Obama action to destroy him after he criticized Obama foreign policy.
May 11, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Travis Moorman , 3 hours ago

It would be even more scary if Obama wasn't in on it.

LostInPA , 3 hours ago

Yates is up to her eyeballs in this coup attempt. She's trying to CYA like Rice. They going to jail.

[May 11, 2020] the pro-NATO propagandists often exploit the so-called 'Russian threat' concept; however, this merely provides a cover for their aggressive actions to silence and discredit opposing opinions and sources of information they deem to be counter to their own interests.

May 11, 2020 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [208] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 11, 2020 at 10:43 am GMT

To achieve their goals, the pro-NATO propagandists often exploit the so-called 'Russian threat' concept; however, this merely provides a cover for their aggressive actions to silence and discredit opposing opinions and sources of information they deem to be counter to their own interests.

The reason behind their activity is simple – they must justify their existence in reports to their sponsors. They are constantly and fiercely working to engineer 'successful actions' regardless of their validity. In order to continue securing funding to expose and defeat an imaginary enemy, they must create imaginary victories, irrespective of reality.

Uh, the author obviously knows better so why promote this narrative? These operatives are not going after "wrong", or "invalid" targets to justify their funding. They're specifically hired to do what they're doing now.

[May 11, 2020] Tucker: Adam Schiff should resign

This is nationwide gaslighting by Clinton gang of neoliberals who attempted coup d'état, and Adam Schiff was just one of the key figures in this coupe d'état, king of modern Joe McCarthy able and willing to destroy a person using false evidence
What is interesting is that Tucker attacked Republicans for aiding and abetting the coup d'état against Trump
May 11, 2020 | www.youtube.com

RionE23 , 2 days ago

I'm sick of politicians getting a free pass by "resigning" no, they break the law they go to jail.. just like the rest of us.

shannon11590 , 1 day ago

Adam Schiff simply needs to be criminally prosecuted and imprisoned for the countless number of criminal acts that he committed while in Congress.

[May 11, 2020] Durham Supercharges Investigation With Elite Prosecutors To Review 'Witch Hunt'

Notable quotes:
"... "This is one particular episode, but we view it as part of a number of related acts ... and we're looking at the whole pattern of conduct," Barr added, saying that they're investigating actions taken before "and after ... the election." ..."
"... And according to Fox' s source, Durham is investigating a "pattern of conduct" which includes lying to the FISA court to obtain warrants to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page . ..."
"... "Barr talks to Durham every day," a source recently told Fox News . " The president has been briefed that the case is being pursued, and it's serious. " ..."
"... " It was a very dangerous situation what they did ," Trump said during an interview with "Fox & Friends" Friday. " These are dirty politicians and dirty cops and some horrible people and hopefully they're going to pay a big price in the not too distant future. ..."
"... Durham's probe is expected to wrap up by the end of the summer. Right as Trump is expected to face off against Joe Biden - who was VP while most of this was going on . ..."
May 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
John Durham has supercharged his review into the origins of the Russiagate hoax orchestrated by the Obama administration during and after the 2016 US election - adding additional top prosecutors to explore different components of the original probe, according to Fox News .

Durham, the U.S. Attorney for Connecticut tasked with by Attorney General Bill Barr with investigating the actions taken against the Trump team, has tapped Jeff Jensen - U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri who had been investigating the Michael Flynn case. Also added to the team is interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Timothy Shea, according to Fox 's sources.

" They farmed the investigation out because it is too much for Durham and he didn't want to be distracted ," said one source, adding "He's going full throttle, and they're looking at everything. "

Word of Durham's beefed-up team comes amid worsening tensions between the Trump administration and congressional Democrats, who have been making the case that the Justice Department's reviews have become politicized given the decision last week to drop the Flynn case - a move which House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) called "outrageous."

" The evidence against General Flynn is overwhelming ," said Nadler - who probably wasn't referring to handwritten notes by one of the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn which exposed their perjury trap . Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his perfectly legal communications with a Russian ambassador - a plea he made while under severe financial strain due to legal expenses, and to save his son from the FBI 'witch hunt.' Flynn would later withdraw his plea as evidence mounted that he was set up.

The DOJ determined that the bureau's 2017 Flynn interview -- which formed the basis for his guilty plea of lying to investigators -- was "conducted without any legitimate investigative basis."

Breadcrumbs were being dropped in the days preceding the decision that his case could be reconsidered. Documents unsealed the prior week by the Justice Department revealed agents discussed their motivations for interviewing him in the Russia probe – questioning whether they wanted to "get him to lie" so he'd be fired or prosecuted, or get him to admit wrongdoing. Flynn allies howled over the revelations, arguing that he essentially had been set up in a perjury trap. In that interview, Flynn did not admit wrongdoing and instead was accused of lying about his contacts with the then-Russian ambassador – to which he pleaded guilty. - Fox News

Jensen, the U.S. attorney now working with Durham, was reportedly the one who recommended dropping the Flynn case to Barr.

Barr speaks

When asked whether he thought the FBI conspired against Flynn, Barr told CBS News on Thursday "I think, you know, that's a question that really has to wait [for] an analysis of all the different episodes that occurred through the summer of 2016 and the first several months of President Trump's administration," adding that Durham is "still looking at all of this."

"This is one particular episode, but we view it as part of a number of related acts ... and we're looking at the whole pattern of conduct," Barr added, saying that they're investigating actions taken before "and after ... the election."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/g_OeiKXr0WE

And according to Fox' s source, Durham is investigating a "pattern of conduct" which includes lying to the FISA court to obtain warrants to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page .

President Trump has long-referred to the investigation as a "witch hunt" - which Barr and Durham are now untangling.

"Barr talks to Durham every day," a source recently told Fox News . " The president has been briefed that the case is being pursued, and it's serious. "

President Trump on Friday offered a vague, but ominous, warning as the Durham probe proceeds.

" It was a very dangerous situation what they did ," Trump said during an interview with "Fox & Friends" Friday. " These are dirty politicians and dirty cops and some horrible people and hopefully they're going to pay a big price in the not too distant future. "

Trump was specifically reacting to newly released transcripts of interviews from the House Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation that revealed top Obama officials acknowledged they knew of no "empirical evidence" of a conspiracy despite their concerns and suspicions. - Fox News

Durham's probe is expected to wrap up by the end of the summer. Right as Trump is expected to face off against Joe Biden - who was VP while most of this was going on .

[May 10, 2020] Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security by Kevin R. Brock

Highly recommended!
This was a coup d'état and it has little to do with the protection of Oabama policies, but a lot with protection of Clinton clan to which Obama belongs.
FBI investigators were corrupt and acted as a political police
Notable quotes:
"... Heavily redacted FBI documents that have been released indicate Flynn was one of several Trump campaign members who merited their own subfile investigation under the larger, now infamous " Crossfire Hurricane " debacle. Flynn even got his own cool codename -- "Crossfire Razor." (No, the FBI isn't usually that absurd. But absurdity colored that entire period of time.) ..."
"... FBI documents show that a Foreign Agent Registration Act ( FARA ) case was opened against Flynn. The stated reasons, in rank order, for initiating the investigation were that he was a member of the Trump campaign; he had "ties" to various Russian state-affiliated entities; he traveled to Russia; and he had a high-level top-secret clearance -- for which, by the way, he was polygraphed regularly to determine if he was a spy. ..."
"... None of the listed reasons is unusual activity for the kind of positions he held. Overall it is pretty thin justification for investigating an American citizen. Yet, most chillingly, the Crossfire Hurricane team stated it was investigating Flynn "specifically" because he was "an adviser to then Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump for foreign policy issues." ..."
"... Kevin R. Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI, was an FBI special agent for 24 years and principal deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). He is a founder and principal of NewStreet Global Solutions , which consults with private companies and public safety agencies on strategic mission technologies. ..."
May 10, 2020 | thehill.com
investigation of Michael Flynn , the more it appears he was targeted precisely because, as the national security adviser to the incoming Trump administration, he signaled that the new administration might undo Obama administration policies -- which is kind of what the American people voted for in 2016.

Some will say that Gen. Flynn was investigated for legitimate criminal or national security reasons. Yet, the FBI's ultimate interview of Flynn addressed none of the grounds that the FBI used to open the original case against him. For those of us who have run FBI investigations, that is more than odd.

Heavily redacted FBI documents that have been released indicate Flynn was one of several Trump campaign members who merited their own subfile investigation under the larger, now infamous " Crossfire Hurricane " debacle. Flynn even got his own cool codename -- "Crossfire Razor." (No, the FBI isn't usually that absurd. But absurdity colored that entire period of time.)

For the record, Flynn clearly exercised poor judgment as a result of being interviewed by the FBI. The larger question is whether the team under then-Director James Comey had a legitimate basis to conduct the interview at all.

FBI documents show that a Foreign Agent Registration Act ( FARA ) case was opened against Flynn. The stated reasons, in rank order, for initiating the investigation were that he was a member of the Trump campaign; he had "ties" to various Russian state-affiliated entities; he traveled to Russia; and he had a high-level top-secret clearance -- for which, by the way, he was polygraphed regularly to determine if he was a spy.

None of the listed reasons is unusual activity for the kind of positions he held. Overall it is pretty thin justification for investigating an American citizen. Yet, most chillingly, the Crossfire Hurricane team stated it was investigating Flynn "specifically" because he was "an adviser to then Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump for foreign policy issues."

Let me be clear: That is not a legitimate justification to investigate an American citizen.

There is a theme that runs through the entire Crossfire Hurricane disaster, which has been publicly articulated by Comey and his deputy director, Andrew McCabe : They saw themselves as stalwarts in the breach defending America from a presidential candidate who they believed was an agent of Russia .

... ... ...

Kevin R. Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI, was an FBI special agent for 24 years and principal deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). He is a founder and principal of NewStreet Global Solutions , which consults with private companies and public safety agencies on strategic mission technologies.

[May 10, 2020] Does Obama now feels his potential liability for staging coup d' tat and gaslighting the whole nation?

Highly recommended!
All-in-all Obama was a CIA sponsored fraud: In 2008 I posted at another blog this: "Obama is a fraud and my view does not hang on the controversial birther movement. " From whence he came? He made a speech at the Democratic National Convention; 3 years in the Senate, then runs to occupy the White House. The media puff pieces. "Hope and Change, Yes, We Can" Watch for the broken promises."
Notable quotes:
"... Now why is Obama against General Flynn? Hmmm. Good question. Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security? LINK ..."
"... Gen. Flynn: Obama Administration made a "wilful decision" to support Sunni extremists (a Jihadi proxy army) against Assad . This directly contradicts the phony narrative of Obama as peace-loving black man (as certified by his Nobel Prize!). ..."
"... In 2008 I posted at another blog this: "Obama is a fraud and my view does not hang on the controversial birther movement. " From whence he came? He made a speech at the Democratic National Convention; 3 years in the Senate, then runs to occupy the White House. The media puff pieces. "Hope and Change, Yes, We Can" Watch for the broken promises." ..."
May 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Prof K , May 10 2020 16:05 utc | 9

Posted by: Prof K | May 10 2020 16:05 utc | 9

Obama weighed in this week...on Flynn. Why?

What is he trying to preempt?

He only steps in at critical moments to stop something, as he did before SC to block Bernie.

Now this. How does it relate to Russiagate and his potential liability?

Likklemore , May 10 2020 17:08 utc | 18

@ ProfK 9

Whether or not General Flynn is loathed or liked, there is Supreme Court decisions setting precedence for dropping a case when found to be wrapped in prosecutorial misdeeds:

As for the first 'black' president out from the shadows;

Obama, the petit constitutional law scholar, signed the NDAA National Defence Authorization Act which allows imprisonment of Americans forever has no standing to claim the "rule of law is at risk" and he may want to call Eric Holder.

Certified Hypocrite.

Now why is Obama against General Flynn? Hmmm. Good question. Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security? LINK

Jackrabbit , May 10 2020 17:31 utc | 19
Likklemore @ May10 17:08
Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security?

Gen. Flynn: Obama Administration made a "wilful decision" to support Sunni extremists (a Jihadi proxy army) against Assad . This directly contradicts the phony narrative of Obama as peace-loving black man (as certified by his Nobel Prize!).

!!

Likklemore , May 10 2020 18:11 utc | 22
@ Jackrabbit 19

Thanks for that additional link. And that's why Obama could not standby with Flynn in the NSA role. Recall Hillary's on Trump- "if he is elected we'll hang" (paraphrased)

In 2008 I posted at another blog this: "Obama is a fraud and my view does not hang on the controversial birther movement. " From whence he came? He made a speech at the Democratic National Convention; 3 years in the Senate, then runs to occupy the White House. The media puff pieces. "Hope and Change, Yes, We Can" Watch for the broken promises."

Fast Forward to 2011 he signs NDAA. "How Obama disappointed the world." Der Spiegel had such an article 9 Aug.2011. But he was re-(S)-elected.

[May 10, 2020] Obama cabal of color revolution plotters

May 10, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

And you have to ask yourself one question. They all stuck with the same exact propaganda, the same exact his information, that the Trump administration, that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia, even though they had no evidence whatsoever, and they manufactured that evidence against the president."

"And this is why all of them need to be investigated" explained Carter.

[May 10, 2020] What did Obama know, and when did he know it

FBI under Obama acted as Gestapo -- the political police. Obama looks now especially bad and probably should be prosecuted for the attempt to stage coup d'état against legitimately elected president. His CIA connections need to investigated and prosecuted too, and first of all Brennan.
Notable quotes:
"... Yates, who was briefly the acting attorney general during the early days of the Trump administration before getting fired, also laid out how in the ensuing days, Comey kept the FBI's actions cloaked in secrecy and repeatedly rebuffed her suggestions that the incoming Trump team be made aware of the Flynn recordings. ..."
"... "One thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yate s," Attorney General William Barr said during a Thursday interview with CBS News. "Deputy Attorney General Yates, I've disagreed with her about a couple of things, but, you know, here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice. She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration, and they should go and tell the White House about their findings And, you know, Director Comey ran around that." ..."
"... Obama asked Yates and Comey to stay behind when the meeting concluded. ..."
"... Obama "started by saying that he had 'learned of the information about Flynn' and his conversation with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak," Yates said, according to the notes. "Obama specified he did not want any additional information on the matter but was seeking information on whether the White House should be treating Flynn any differently." washington examiner ..."
"... Obama did not want any additional information on the matter? Careful CYA. From the account of this meeting it is clear that Obama and Biden knew that Comey was intent on pursuing Flynn. If that is so, then subsequent events indicate that Obama did not act to stop Comey, and since Comey was hiding his effort against Flynn from main Justice, it must be that someone on high was encouraging him. Now, who would that be? pl ..."
"... All this was known in DC for the past few years. Everyone on the HSPCI knew what the closed door testimony was. Clapper was categorical that there was "no empirical evidence of collusion". The Crowdstrike CEO was categorical that he had no definitive evidence that the Russians exfiltrated data from the DNC servers. Yet Schiff, Clapper, Brennan and all the media hacks were on TV every night screaming Russia! Russia! and Collusion! Collusion! ..."
"... I'm revealing my age by using this expression from the Watergate era, but "what did Obama, Biden and Comey know, and when did they know it?" ..."
"... So Obama used Yates to go after Flynn. They have really worked a number on Flynn to discredit him, and it almost worked. Now it would appear their scheme is starting to unravel a bit. ..."
"... Is Obama being thrown under the bus here? Are Comey and Yates (or others) trying to cover their asses now that Flynn is free? Did Trump and his allies always know this and waited for the right moment to reveal it for better effect? The game is at hand. ..."
"... Brennan was encouraging Comey. I just learned something recently. Brennan spent time in Indonesia around the same time that Obama's mother lived there. It has been reported that Obama and Brennan had a fairly close relationship. I wonder how long they have known each other. ..."
"... I did see a clip of Matt Gaetz calling out Ryan and Trey Gowdy from preventing them from issuing subpoenas. Why do you think the Republican leadership in the House and Senate did not want to investigate? ..."
May 09, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

" Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told special counsel Robert Mueller's team that she first learned the FBI possessed and was investigating recordings of Flynn's late 2016 conversations with a Russian envoy following a Jan. 5, 2017, national security meeting at the White House. It wasn't Comey who told her, but former President Barack Obama.

Yates, who was briefly the acting attorney general during the early days of the Trump administration before getting fired, also laid out how in the ensuing days, Comey kept the FBI's actions cloaked in secrecy and repeatedly rebuffed her suggestions that the incoming Trump team be made aware of the Flynn recordings.

These revelations appear in declassified FBI interview notes of the Mueller team's conversation with Yates in August 2017, highlighted by the Justice Department on Thursday as U.S. Attorney for D.C. Timothy Shea moved to drop its criminal charges against Flynn.

"One thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yate s," Attorney General William Barr said during a Thursday interview with CBS News. "Deputy Attorney General Yates, I've disagreed with her about a couple of things, but, you know, here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice. She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration, and they should go and tell the White House about their findings And, you know, Director Comey ran around that."

Yates told Mueller's team she first learned of the Flynn recordings following a White House meeting about the Intelligence Community Assessment attended by Yates, Comey, Vice President Joe Biden , then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-national security adviser Susan Rice, and others. Obama asked Yates and Comey to stay behind when the meeting concluded.

Obama "started by saying that he had 'learned of the information about Flynn' and his conversation with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak," Yates said, according to the notes. "Obama specified he did not want any additional information on the matter but was seeking information on whether the White House should be treating Flynn any differently." washington examiner

-------------

Obama did not want any additional information on the matter? Careful CYA. From the account of this meeting it is clear that Obama and Biden knew that Comey was intent on pursuing Flynn. If that is so, then subsequent events indicate that Obama did not act to stop Comey, and since Comey was hiding his effort against Flynn from main Justice, it must be that someone on high was encouraging him. Now, who would that be? pl

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/sally-yates-learned-of-flynn-targeting-from-obama-as-comey-kept-her-in-the-dark-declassified-documents-show

Jack , 09 May 2020 at 12:40 PM

Sir

All this was known in DC for the past few years. Everyone on the HSPCI knew what the closed door testimony was. Clapper was categorical that there was "no empirical evidence of collusion". The Crowdstrike CEO was categorical that he had no definitive evidence that the Russians exfiltrated data from the DNC servers. Yet Schiff, Clapper, Brennan and all the media hacks were on TV every night screaming Russia! Russia! and Collusion! Collusion!

Devin Nunes was spot on and correct that there was an attempted coup. All the media and even many Republicans called him a conspiracy theorist.

SST maintaining its glorious tradition was spot on in its analysis with the limited data available that there was a coup and the traitors were not those in the Trump campaign but the leadership in law enforcement and intelligence. A big shoutout to you, Larry and David Habakkuk.

Trump himself was like deer caught in the headlights. Furiously tweeting but not doing much of anything else while his own nominees at the DOJ and FBI were plotting and acting to destroy his presidency. Devin Nunes imploring him to declassify and expose all the evidence from the FISA applications, the 302s, the internal communications among the plotters including the prolific FBI lovers. He still hasn't.

What happens next? Will the whole coup be exposed in its entirety? Will anyone be held to account?

If Trump doesn't care enough even when his ass was being fried to disclose all the evidence with the stroke of his pen and if all he cares is to tweet "witch-hunt" and "Drain the Swamp", how realistic is it that any of the coup plotters will be tried for treason?

Deap , 09 May 2020 at 01:01 PM
Barry was doing his usual thing, the signature move of his entire political career: .... voting "present". His CYA equivalent of no comment.

Plausible deniability was a high art form for Barry. Where was Barry Soetoro between 16:00 and 22:00 on Sept 11, 2012? We still do not know.

Jim Henely , 09 May 2020 at 01:07 PM
I'm revealing my age by using this expression from the Watergate era, but "what did Obama, Biden and Comey know, and when did they know it?"
RussianBot , 09 May 2020 at 01:40 PM
So Obama used Yates to go after Flynn. They have really worked a number on Flynn to discredit him, and it almost worked. Now it would appear their scheme is starting to unravel a bit.

Is Obama being thrown under the bus here? Are Comey and Yates (or others) trying to cover their asses now that Flynn is free? Did Trump and his allies always know this and waited for the right moment to reveal it for better effect? The game is at hand.

Yahoo released a leaked call today of Obama criticizing Trump's response over coronavirus. Here's the big headline Yahoo is running:

Exclusive: Obama says in private call that 'rule of law is at risk' in Michael Flynn case

https://news.yahoo.com/obama-irule-of-law-michael-flynn-case-014121045.html

The Flynn case was invoked by Obama as a principal reason that his former administration officials needed to make sure former Vice President Joe Biden wins the November election against President Trump. "So I am hoping that all of you feel the same sense of urgency that I do," he said. "Whenever I campaign, I've always said, 'Ah, this is the most important election.' Especially obviously when I was on the ballot, that always feels like it's the most important election. This one -- I'm not on the ballot -- but I am pretty darn invested. We got to make this happen."
Obama misstated the charge to which Flynn had previously pleaded guilty. He was charged with false statements to the FBI, not perjury.

Misstated seems like a stretch. The call sounds scripted and I suspect the leak was deliberate.

Keith Harbaugh , 09 May 2020 at 02:12 PM
Sundance covered in great detail the context in which that 2017-01-05 meeting occurred:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/05/01/why-was-flynn-targeted-a-timeline-review-of-the-three-phases/

A YouTube video of Barry's cry of dismay (and fear) over the dismissal of charges against Flynn is here:
https://youtu.be/tbQ8P3GhD-c

EmJay72159508 , 09 May 2020 at 04:50 PM
Brennan was encouraging Comey. I just learned something recently. Brennan spent time in Indonesia around the same time that Obama's mother lived there. It has been reported that Obama and Brennan had a fairly close relationship. I wonder how long they have known each other.
JMH , 09 May 2020 at 04:58 PM
Keith Harbaugh,

O'Biden's Dad just wheeled around the corner in a wood paneled station wagon and dressed down the neighborhood kids who took O'Biden's ball. A humiliating experience for O'Biden who sits in the passenger seat as a mere spectator.

Keith Harbaugh , 09 May 2020 at 07:35 PM
Sundance just posted an astoundingly detailed account of
how illegal surveillance was conducted by unauthorized FBI-contractors
while the GOP was sorting out the candidates for its 2016 presidential nomination:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/05/09/why-is-obama-panicking-now-the-importance-of-understanding-political-surveillance-in-the-era-of-president-obama/

The open question is: Just who were those contractors?
Surely that is known to some, and is significant to current politically-charged inquiries.
Just why that information has not become public is a good question.
Can anyone provide a reliable source for that information?

Jack , 09 May 2020 at 09:30 PM
It is unsurprising @realDonaldTrump enjoys wallowing in his fetid self-indulgence, but I find it surreal that so many other government officials encourage his ignorance, incompetence, & destructive behavior.

BTW, history will be written by the righteous, not by his lickspittle.

https://twitter.com/johnbrennan/status/1259191320515616770?s=21

Is Brennan always like this? His tweets seem unhinged.

Fred , 09 May 2020 at 09:55 PM
"Deputy Attorney General Yates"

She served as Acting AG, accepting the post when Trump was inaugurated. What did she tell him about his whole affair? Was the opposition to the EO 13769 just an excuse to have herself fired so she would not have to either perjure herself or reveal the truth to Trump?

Jack,
"All this was known in DC for the past few years."

You left out that Paul Ryan was Speaker of the House because the Republicans were in the majority then and the HPSCI under his term as speaker did not subpoena a very large group of people, didn't ask relevant questions, didn't release information to the public and thus ensuring the left took over the House after the 2016 elections.

JerseyJeffersonian , 09 May 2020 at 10:33 PM
I, too, coincidentally just concluded a close reading of the Conservative Tree House post that Mr. Harbaugh just recommended. It is, indeed, well worth such a close reading. There have been various puzzling things along the way these last few years for which this post provides explanations. Of particular utility, is its inclusion of a timeline of the arc of the episodes of illegal government surveillance that began (?) with the IRS spying of 2012, and how - and why - it evolved from that episode into the massive abuses of the FISA process of which we are becoming increasingly aware as revelations are forthcoming.

CTH's work is superb, but I do want to say that I am also supremely grateful for all of the good work and analysis from Larry Johnson, and other contributors, as well as for the trenchant comments of Col. Lang. Multivalent sources of information, analysis, and comment provide one with the parallax requisite to understanding this web of perfidy. My gratitude also is owing to all of you Members of the Committee of Correspondence, each of whom brings personal observations and insights to bear, always much to my benefit.

Jack , 10 May 2020 at 03:51 AM
Fred,

I did see a clip of Matt Gaetz calling out Ryan and Trey Gowdy from preventing them from issuing subpoenas. Why do you think the Republican leadership in the House and Senate did not want to investigate?

Jim , 10 May 2020 at 05:42 AM
["One thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yates," Attorney General William Barr said during a Thursday interview with CBS News. "Deputy Attorney General Yates, I've disagreed with her about a couple of things, but, you know, here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice. She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration, and they should go and tell the White House about their findings And, you know, Director Comey ran around that."]

++++++++++++

This is fascinating because: this, what Barr is discussing, on national TV, . . . this particular dimension, this Yates/Comey playing hide the bacon has nothing at all to do with actual Brady material in the Lt. Gen. Flynn case.

Barr is referring to the Special Counsel Mueller Office's interview with Yates on Aug. 15, 2017, entered into the system three weeks later. Her interview occurred more than two months prior to Flynn's coerced guilty plea.

This SCO document was released to the court May 7 as exhibit 4 attached to the DOJ motion to end the prosecution of Flynn. It was produced in line with request by defense for Brady material.

What Barr forgets to say is: This SCO interview of Yates shows that Comey and Yates talked on the phone -- prior to -- the notorious Jan. 24, 2017 FBI interview of Flynn.

"Comey . . . informed her that two agents were on their way to interview Flynn at the White House," the SCO said, according to the new court filing.

Yates took no action, -- she did nothing to order Comey to abort this soon-to-happen FBI interview of Flynn, this SCO interview of her shows.

She was Comey's boss, the Acting Attorney General, at the time.

It shows that she was upset precisely because she wanted the FBI to coordinate with the DOJ -- on getting Flynn screwed -- even suggesting, she told the SCO, that consideration that Flynn be recorded, instead of memorialized using standard 302 form – in-writing-only.

Yates wanted Flynn fired, she told the SCO.

Yates apparently was unable on her own to figure out, as the AG, the FBI and DOJ -- none of them had any predicate, no "materiality," nothing "tethered" to any crime, as there was no crime. And if she did not know these basic facts, had no awareness of them, then: why was she the AG in the first place?

And what did Yates glean, right after this Jan. 24 interview of Flynn?

"Yates received a brief readout of the interview the night it happened, and a longer readout the following day," which begs the question of why the original 302 of this was never produced by the DOJ, to the defense; and also, why Covington law firm never asked to see this before allowing Flynn to make his plea.

"Yates did not speak to the interviewing agents herself, but understood from others that their assessment was that Flynn showed no 'tells' of lying," the SCO report says.

Based on her personal preference, rather than DOJ norms, she went to the White House, and her expectation was they would fire Flynn. I fail to see how this nonsense by Yates seem to escape Barr's notice. Or, is something else also going on?

She personally went to the White House, and her smear campaign against Flynn began, went on and on and on, even after she was fired after being Acting AG for just ten days.

In her brief stint as Acting AG: Yates refused to tell the White House Counsel if Flynn was being investigated, when the WHC asked her, directly, about this, according to what she told the SCO. Can't blame this fact on the unctuous Comey.

She did tell the SCO that she wanted the WHC to know Flynn had been interviewed by the FBI – and that she had concerns about Flynn, and she said those concerns related to the Logan Act. Yates told SCO her concerns were because of the Logan Act, and that she expressed this to the White House.

The Washington Examiner reporting that "It wasn't Comey who told her, but former President Barack Obama" -- about the Flynn-Kislyak phone call --- this is interesting, very interesting, if true, assuming Yates was telling the SCO the truth. This is what she claims in her August 2017 interview with SCO.

But this bit of information is hardly Brady material [how is whether Obama or Comey told her materially germane to the Flynn case, viz. Brady material?].

The question the SCO should have been concerned about is: who actually leaked the transcript of the Flynn-Kislyak telephone call to the media?

Is this a serious crime? Or is this OK?

We still do not know this answer, and AG Barr has not told us. Nor has his boss, Trump.

It is interesting that Barr chose to highlight that Comey went around Yates' back in Comey ordering FBI to interview Flynn, but not that Yates knew of the Flynn interview before it went down, and sat on her arse about it.

In fairness to Comey, they were, as the FB of Investigations, conducting the investigation, which is their job, however rogue this FBI's I actually was, targeting Flynn.

The Flynn-Kislyak telephone call, occurring late December of 2016, was reported by the Washington Post on Jan. 12, 2017, eight days before Trump was sworn in.

And who leaked this, has anyone been prosecuted, will anyone be?

Obama still president, Loretta Lynch still AG, Yates still Deputy AG, Comey FBI director, McCabe Deputy FBI director, etc.

Starting Jan. 20 and for ten days, Yates was the AG. She appeared bent on destroying Flynn, and did nothing that I know of to prosecute who leaked the Flynn-Kislyak telephone call to WAPO. Did someone on high perhaps ask her not to?

Nor was Comey and McCabe investigating this as best I can tell. Yet this was an actual, clear cut crime we all saw, plain as day. Or maybe this is OK? Was someone on high asking them not to?

I watched Barr say, during his interview with CBS news, [following the May 7 release of documents to the court]: "One thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yates," Barr told Catherine Herridge.

And my first thought was: why is Barr doing an apparent CYA for Yates?

What office might she want to be running for in the future; is she a cooperating witness in the wider Durham probe, why is Yates being portrayed as someone other than what she was: A leader in the effort to destroy Michael Flynn.

She was the AG, and she failed to hold Comey accountable at the time; this is a fact, apparently, that reflects poorly on her.

She told the White House -- as best she could -- that Flynn was a piece of dung, and told the SCO, in their interview of her, that she expected the White House to fire Flynn. This reflects poorly on her.

And threatened Logan Act prosecution of Flynn to the White house. This reflects poorly on her.

She smeared Flynn in a CNN interview on May 16, the day before Mueller was appointed. This reflects poorly on her.

Well, who leaked the Flynn-Kislyak telephone call, and did Yates act on that?

Folks that "should have known better" -- far and wide, smeared Flynn, justified the lawlessness against him; one of many examples, titled: "Leaking Flynn's name to the press was illegal, but utterly justified" published by TheHill.com.

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/319955-yes-leaking-flynns-name-to-press-was-illegal-but

She wasn't the only one, but Yates was smack dab in the middle of enabling and perpetuating a long-running smear campaign against Flynn, to destroy him by any means necessary. This reflects poorly on her.

Why is Barr carrying water for her.

As for Obama, he did nothing to stop Comey in 2016 when Comey announced he was exonerating Clinton. Nor did AG Lynch, even though that is not the function of the FBI -- an act of insubordination, by the way, for which Rosenstein officially fired him in May 2017, which set, somehow, in motion the Mueller SC appointment by Rosenstein.

If Comey is such a rogue, and Barr is now claiming Yates tried to do the right thing, in spite of Comey, then why didn't Yates fire Comey Jan. 24 right on the spot? And end the fiasco right then and there?

In her May 16, 2017 CNN interview she only has kind words to say about him.

AS for who on high was encouraging Comey's extra legal free-lancing in the Clinton and Flynn matters is a pertinent question.

Who were the enablers, in other words?

Barr appears to imply Comey did it all on his own, which is not entirely accurate. Perhaps this also implies that Durham will prosecute Comey? I don't know if anyone will be prosecuted at all. Time will tell.

It is clear Comey's enablers would, by rank, have been, viz. the Clinton matter: Obama and Lynch.

In the Flynn matter: Trump and Yates.

Simple logic dictates that: if Main Justice was "not in the loop" then, for Clinton matter, this means Obama was enabling Comey to exonerate her; and also dictate that, for Flynn, that Trump was the one "on high" enabling Comey.

If there are others on high, they were not in the chain of command as I understand the current US Government structure.
-30-

Fred , 10 May 2020 at 09:19 AM
Jack,

"Never Trump".

Jim,

You seem to think Trump was informed of all the relevant information about the FBI's conduct during his first ten days in office. Because Barr, being appointed AG two years after these events, has yet to indict anyone in the case, Trump was actually enabling Yates in destroying Flynn? Neither appear to be logical conclusions to me.

Bobo , 10 May 2020 at 09:50 AM
So on a December 29, 2016 The Obama administration placed sanctions on Russia that evolved to Flynn, at the instruction of the incoming Trump administration, contacting the Russian ambassador requesting that they not retaliate or heighten the situation.

On January 5th Ms. Yates learned from Obama of the Flynn intervention.

Rather than contact Trump directly Obama went along with the Comey Logan Act thoughts.

The decision to enact sanctions obviously involved State, CIA, DNI and FBI but why not Justice or did it. But why was the incoming Trump administration not consulted.

There was only one Machiavellian thinker in that group and it wasn't the idiot who got his panties all twisted up.

[May 10, 2020] Russiagate has been an obvious coup attempt from the beginning, and several attempts have followed...

The genius of Russiagate is that it managed to gaslight the whole nation
May 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
jinn , May 10 2020 15:20 utc | 5
Russiagate has been an obvious coup attempt from the beginning, and several attempts have followed...
__________________________________________________

That is not at all obvious.
Russiagate was obviously designed to look like a coup attempt, but you have to be extremely gullible to believe any of it is real.

The recent Flynn bruhaha is a perfect example of the phoniness surrounding Russiagate.

The FBI investigators that interviewed Flynn believed he had not been deceptive and any fool who was paying attention at the time believed he was not guilty because 2 weeks before that FBI interview the news media had reported that the phone call with Kislyak had been recorded by the FBI and that there was nothing improper or illegal that would motivate Flynn to lie about his talk with Kislyak. The story that Flynn lied to the FBI is unbelievable on its face.

Don't blame the FBI for creating this fake story. Trump is the one and only one that created the fake Flynn-lied-to-the-FBI story, Before Trump created the phony story that Flynn had lied to the FBI nobody else had at that time believed Flynn lied to the FBI.
But once Trump had created the phony story that Flynn lied to the FBI then all the gullible morons started to believe the phony story. And even Flynn himself goes along with Trump's phony story because he is a good soldier that follows command.

Trump says he fired Flynn for lying to the FBI

Before Comey's testimony to Congress that suggested that Trump was twisting Comey's arm to let Flynn go for lying to the FBI no one had ever said that Flynn lied to the FBI. That story was created by Trump and reported by Comey.
And then Mueller and Flynn and Comey all helped Trump foist that phony story that Flynn lied to the FBI onto the public.

The implication of Comey's testimony to Congress was that in order to get Flynn off a charge of Lying to the FBI Trump first tried to cajole Comey to go easy on Flynn and when that did not work Trump fired Comey.
The problem with that whole BS story is that the crux of it (that Flynn lied to the FBI) never happened. It was entirely invented by Trump to make it look like Trump was engaged in mortal combat with the deep state. But it was all staged and fake (i.e. Kayfabe)

jinn , May 10 2020 15:42 utc | 7

Russigate falls apart:

_______________________________________________
Well duh....

Russiagate was designed to fall apart.

It was obvious all along that all the stories that came out in the Mueller Report were badly written sit-com material - the script for a comic soap opera. And they were all scripted to fall apart when examined closely.

What I could never figure out was what this guy Mueller was going to say when he was dragged in front of Congress and required to answer tough questions about all the garbage he had produced. I thought for sure that for Mueller the jig would be up there was no way the farce would not be revealed for all to see.

And then it happened. Mueller testified and it turned out Mueller could not remember any of it.

Senator: Did you say XYZ?
Mueller: Is that in the report??
Senator: yes it is.
Mueller: Then it is true.

Making Mueller Senile and unable to remember anything was brilliant - pure genius. The rest of the Russiagate script was mediocre at best.

Jackrabbit , May 10 2020 17:01 utc | 16
bevin @ May 10 16:41

It was a transparently false narrative designed, by the most incompetent election campaign team in history ...

Occam's razor says Hillary threw the election. No seasoned politician would make the mistakes that she made - especially when they yearn to make history (as the first woman president) and the entire establishment (left and right) is counting on them to win.

Believing what is evidently incredible has long been a test of loyalty ...

And you prove your loyalty with the belief that Hillary lost because of an "incompetent election campaign".

!!

[May 08, 2020] Navy Captain Brett Crozier vs Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy seal who was clearly guilty of murder in Afghanistan

May 08, 2020 | www.unz.com

Appealing to his base of support, Trump has notoriously pardoned Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy seal who was clearly guilty of murder in Afghanistan, and even met with him afterwards in the White House. Regarding Gallagher, Senate Armed Services Committee Democrat Jack Reed of Rhode Island said in a November that "The White House's handling of this matter erodes the basic command structure of the military and the basic function of the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Trump is now meddling in the treatment of Navy Captain Brett Crozier, who was relieved of his command after he went public with complains about the spread of coronavirus on his ship. In early April the president said "I may just get involved." In the military services such interference even has a name, "undue command influence." Clearly, the White House is seeking to squeeze every bit of political advantage it can from the Crozier story.

Congressman Smith has also described the situation in a colorful fashion as "The president has made it clear as far as he is concerned the single most important attribute that anybody in the federal government can have is a willingness to kiss the president's ass as often as possible" which "undermines your ability to be competent, to make decisions based on what is the right thing to do as opposed to what is going to feed the president's limitless ego."

To be sure, Donald Trump is not about to change and if he is re-elected one can only expect four more years of the same, but public confidence in government can only be maintained if there is at least some belief that decision making is a rational process. Trump has clearly turned that axiom on its head in his tendency to blame other parts of the government for what are manifestly his own failings. His characterization of senior officials, many of whom he himself appointed, as "losers" casts the entire government in a bad light. Whether the strategy of divide and conquer within one's own administration will work out for Trump will certainly be decided in November.

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.

[May 08, 2020] US Envoy: Russia Likely More Flexible On Syria as War Drags On . Says Russia not getting a military victory in Syria

May 08, 2020 | news.antiwar.com

Jason Ditz Posted on May 7, 2020 May 7, 2020 Categories News Tags Russia , Syria , Trump

US envoy on the Syrian conflict James Jeffrey said on Thursday that the US expects Russia to be increasingly willing to cooperate with the US on the future of Syria, saying he believes Russia is getting frustrated with President Assad .

Jeffrey cited Russian media coverage as showing indication of more flexibility on Syria's post-war constitutional committee, saying that " it's very clear at this point to Russia that they're not going to get a military victory. "

That would broadly depend on how Russia is calculating victory. The Assad government has survived the war, which is certainly something that many didn't expect earlier in the conflict. What Syria will look like in the long run ultimately depends on the new constitution.

Which is where the US and Russia split is coming from. The US has insisted any post-war scenario would mandate full regime change, forbidding Assad and others from ever running for office. Russia, however, has said such details should be left up to Syria's voters.

Jeffrey's comments suggest that the US is still holding out for better terms. This may also put the continued US involvement in Syria, which President Trump insists is just about oil, in a different context, one keeping the US in the conversation at the UN for when the war finally ends.

[May 08, 2020] Avaaz and We came, we saw, he died (cackle)... Assad must go... Promoting chaos....Cui bono?

Notable quotes:
"... Avaaz supported the establishment of a no-fly zone over Libya, which led to the military intervention in the country in 2011. It was criticized for its pro-intervention stance in the media and blogs. [17] ..."
"... Avaaz supported the civil uprising preceding the Syrian Civil War . This included sending $1.5 million of Internet communications equipment to protesters, and training activists. Later it used smuggling routes to send over $2 million of medical equipment into rebel-held areas of Syria. It also smuggled 34 international journalists into Syria. [10] [18] ..."
"... Yes, pilgrims, my professional deformation leads me to find pattern where there may be none. ..."
"... It would be logical for there to exist connective tissue that relates the Sorosistas, The Clintonistas, the media freaks, Tom Perez' DNC, ..."
"... And then, there is Neil Ferguson the British epidemiologist who sold #10 on the idea of a national lock-down that looks to destroy the UK economy and political system. Antonia Staats his married mistress is a major figure in AVAAZ. He broke curfew twice to get a little bit of that. Coincidence? ..."
"... Even a small amount of google searching suggests that Avaaz is simply another Zionist-funded pro-Israel controlled opposition cutout type of organization. Funded by Zionist George Soros. Main honcho Ricken Patel is associated with Zionist lobby group J Street. ..."
"... Per the commentary above, supported the regime change operation in Syria (a longstanding Zionist goal, refer to the Clean Break plan.) ..."
"... What pillow talk went on between AVAAZ agent Antonia Staats and her Imperial College of London paramour Neil Ferguson right before he briefed Trump/Pence on their corona "we are all gonna die" projections. ..."
May 08, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Avaaz claims to unite practical idealists from around the world. [8] Director Ricken Patel said in 2011, "We have no ideology per se. Our mission is to close the gap between the world we have and the world most people everywhere want. Idealists of the world unite!" [12] In practice , Avaaz often supports causes considered progressive, such as calling for global action on climate change , challenging Monsanto, and building greater global support for refugees. [13] [14] [15]

During the 2009 Iranian presidential election protests , Avaaz set up Internet proxy servers to allow protesters to upload videos onto public websites. [16]

Avaaz supported the establishment of a no-fly zone over Libya, which led to the military intervention in the country in 2011. It was criticized for its pro-intervention stance in the media and blogs. [17]

Avaaz supported the civil uprising preceding the Syrian Civil War . This included sending $1.5 million of Internet communications equipment to protesters, and training activists. Later it used smuggling routes to send over $2 million of medical equipment into rebel-held areas of Syria. It also smuggled 34 international journalists into Syria. [10] [18] Avaaz coordinated the evacuation of wounded British photographer Paul Conroy from Homs . Thirteen Syrian activists died during the evacuation operation. [10] [19] Some senior members of other non-governmental organizations working in the Middle East have criticized Avaaz for taking sides in a civil war. [16] As of November 2016, Avaaz continues campaigning for no-fly zones over Syria in general and specifically Aleppo . (Gen. Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States, has said that establishing a no-fly zone means going to war against Syria and Russia. [20] ) It has received criticism from parts of the political blogosphere and has a single digit percentage of its users opposing the petitions, with a number of users ultimately leaving the network. The Avaaz team responded to this criticism by issuing two statements defending their decision to campaign. wiki

----------------

Yes, pilgrims, my professional deformation leads me to find pattern where there may be none. BUT, OTOH, there may BE a pattern. It would be logical for there to exist connective tissue that relates the Sorosistas, The Clintonistas, the media freaks, Tom Perez' DNC, etc., etc., ad nauseam. ...

And then, there is Neil Ferguson the British epidemiologist who sold #10 on the idea of a national lock-down that looks to destroy the UK economy and political system. Antonia Staats his married mistress is a major figure in AVAAZ. He broke curfew twice to get a little bit of that. Coincidence? pl

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avaaz

Outrage Beyond , 07 May 2020 at 06:41 PM

Even a small amount of google searching suggests that Avaaz is simply another Zionist-funded pro-Israel controlled opposition cutout type of organization. Funded by Zionist George Soros. Main honcho Ricken Patel is associated with Zionist lobby group J Street.

Per the commentary above, supported the regime change operation in Syria (a longstanding Zionist goal, refer to the Clean Break plan.)

Bottom line: not a leftist organization. Faux leftist, controlled opposition, Zionist. Neocons are probably delighted with Avaaz.

Deap , 07 May 2020 at 06:46 PM
It was a ground hog day nightmare when I read the AVAAZ website and found all the "progressive" chestnuts, alive, well and kicking into high gear. This AVAAZ agenda fuels the politics in my state, California, so I know each element well plus how each of of them has failed us so badly. They all teeter on OPM, which the state wide corona shut down has decimated.

What pillow talk went on between AVAAZ agent Antonia Staats and her Imperial College of London paramour Neil Ferguson right before he briefed Trump/Pence on their corona "we are all gonna die" projections.

It all happened so fast - from runs on toilet paper in Australia reported on March 2 to global shutdown on March 16 due to this Imperial College model in just two weeks. Who and what communication network was behind this radical global shift that generated virtually no push back? The message quickly became one case of corona and we are all gonna die. How did that find such a willing audience?

I keep hearing that same echo in my nightmares, never let a crisis go to waste - now with this very distinct German accent on the face of a red-lipped blonde. Too weird to see this AVAAZ "global" network is so darn interested in over-turning a US Supreme Court Citizens United ruling - the old Hilary Clinton rallying cry. What is with that - they care in Malaysia?

Thank you for sunshining this very curious operation and its all too familiar cast of known characters lurking in its history, shadows, funding and leadership circle. Injecting them with Lysol is the better plan.

It is one thing to sic Barr-Durham on US government operations, but who can even explore let alone touch the world of global NGO's.

It does explain where a lot of the Bernie Sanders fervor comes from and how it sustains this energy despite defeat in the US election polls. The AVAAZ agenda winning the hearts and minds of many young people around the world. It will be their world to inherit, if they go down this path; not ours. God speed to all of them. Namaste. Dahl and naan for everyone.

Deap , 07 May 2020 at 07:04 PM
A little internet search also questions if AVAAZ is an intelligence community funded operation, linking key Obama administration players.

Good indoor fun during our national lockdowns - track AVAAZ in all its permutations and recurrent players. Samantha Powers and her hundreds of FISA unmasking requests comes to mind as well as her role in the AVAAZ games played in Syria.

Some AVAAZ fodder from a random internet search: Tinfoil hat fun times - keep digging.

......."Curiously, however, the absence of routine information on the Avaaz website -- board of directors, contact information, etc. -- raises the possibility that the organization is one of innumerable such groups created around the world by intelligence organizations with secret funding to advance hidden agendas.

This was the gist of a 2012 column by Global Research columnist Susanne Posel, headlined Avaaz: The Lobbyist that Masquerades as Online Activism. She alleged that Avaaz purports to be a global avenue for dissent, but channels reform energies on the most sensitive issues into such pro-U.S. positions as support for Israel and the Free Syrian Army......."

turcopolier , 07 May 2020 at 07:11 PM
AVAAZ

It is interesting that AVAAZ stopped accepting foundation and corporate money years ago. So, where do they get their money?

Harlan Easley , 07 May 2020 at 08:06 PM
Looking at him and her. She is out of his league. He is beta soy boy material.

You're probably right.

Fred , 07 May 2020 at 08:16 PM
Deap,

"Who and what communication network ..." ... " but who can even explore let alone touch the world of global NGO's."

Have you noticed how fast Project Veritas gets shut down, how Twitter, FB, etc silence any effective opposition to the message of the left?

"It is one thing to sic Barr-Durham on US government operations,..."
Perhaps now that FlynnFlu is evaporating in the disinfecting sunlight some sunshine should be applied to the H1B visa holders at the aformentioned social media companies and add in Google, Bing, Oath etc. and see how many Communist operatives are there, in addition to "essential employee" non-citizen lefty's pushing the anti-American propaganda. A dinner invitation to Jeff Bezos and his paramore might provide some interesting conversation on just who at Amazon might be involved in the same type of anti-western operations; compare their corporate response to distribution operations in the US vs. France as an example.
https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1143127502895898625
Furthermore, observe the Google leadership team discussion of the 2016 elections.
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-google-leaderships-dismayed-reaction-to-trump-election/
Minute 12:30 CFO Ruth Porat
Minute 27:00 Q&A Sergey Brin response on matching donations to employee causes.
Make sure to watch minute 52 on H1B visa holders. With 30,000,000 unemployed Americans just how many of those visas does Google need now? (I don't recall any organization telling China they need open borders immigration since thier hispanic/african/caucasian population percentages are effectively zero, so we might wonder who has been behind that message for the past few decades and why it is only directed at Western democracies).
And the inevitable campaign against "low information" voters and "fake news". I wonder what their take on Russian election interference is now? (Russia cyber trolling! minute 54:44.)

56:20 The inevitable arc of "progress". Make sure you join the fight for Hilary's values. That's the actual corporate leadership message. See the final round of applause at 1:01. Our new overlords know best. Too bad they don't own a mirror, or an ability to reflect on why someone can see the same data and come to a different conclusion of than these experts.

That's just a scratch on the surface. How much money flowed through the Clinton Global Initiative, which NGOs got some cleansed proceeds, which elections were influenced, professors and research sponsored, local communities "organzied". There's plenty to look at and "Isreal, Soros, Zionists" are the least of it.

J , 07 May 2020 at 09:48 PM
State sponsorship?
james , 07 May 2020 at 11:04 PM
avaaz always struck me like some intel agency psyc op... maybe israel like the poster outrage beyond implies.. either way - one could read stay away based on everything about them..
eakens , 08 May 2020 at 01:26 AM
Avaaz means change in Farsi. Interesting.
LondonBob , 08 May 2020 at 03:31 AM
A friend of a friend is a research scientist at Imperial in biology, he is as lefty as they get and I think would be happy to falsify his research to serve his political goals. Besides Imperial is a hard science uni, UCL is top in the University of London for medicine.

Soros and his organisations should be made persona non grata, as the Russians and Hungarians have. Extraordinary his influence in the EU, he has picked up where the Soviet Union left off, funding every organisation that demoralises society, from gay rights to immigration promotion to ethnic lobbies, even in Eastern European countries where there are no minorities.

CK , 08 May 2020 at 08:34 AM
An unusual thing happens once; it could be happenstance.
The thing happens again; it is Reconnaissance.
The thing happens yet again; it is war.
turcopolier , 08 May 2020 at 08:59 AM
J

That is for us to learn.

A. Pols , 08 May 2020 at 09:17 AM
We came, we saw, he died (cackle)... Assad must go...
Promoting chaos....Cui bono?
BABAK MAKKINEJAD , 08 May 2020 at 09:33 AM
eaken

Avaaz means "song" in Persian.

Diana Croissant , 08 May 2020 at 09:35 AM
The one woman standing up to a pompous judge who has called her "selfish" for wanting to earn the money it takes to feed her child is the heroine of this week's news.

Hers is the story of our Democratic Republic, born in the Age of Reason. Voltaire's Candide comes to the best conclusion for the way our elected representatives should make decisions: what works best to help INDIVIDUALS tend their own gardens is the form of government we should pursue.

It's true that young people have hearts and good intentions, but older people in most cases have brains and understand human nature better.

This older person--even when she was young--always distrusted a popular uprising or growing movement.

And if Obama and Hillary are for it, I know I am against it. (That's a more specific life lesson I've learned.)

[May 07, 2020] Media Malpractice Is Criminalizing Better Relations With Russia by Stephen F. Cohen

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The foundational accusation of Russiagate was, and remains, charges that Russian President Putin ordered the hacking of DNC e-mails and their public dissemination through WikiLeaks in order to benefit Donald Trump and undermine Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, and that Trump and/or his associates colluded with the Kremlin in this "attack on American democracy." As no actual evidence for these allegations has been produced after nearly a year and a half of media and government investigations, we are left with Russiagate without Russia. ..."
"... This is unprecedented, preposterous, and dangerous, potentially more so than even McCarthy's search for "Communist" connections. It would suggest, for example, that scores of American corporations doing business in Russia today are engaged in criminal enterprise. ..."
"... Russiagate began sometime prior to June 2016, not after the presidential election in November, as is often said, as an anti-Trump political project. ..."
"... Leaving aside possible financial improprieties on the part of General Flynn, his persecution and subsequent prosecution is highly indicative. Flynn pled guilty to having lied to the FBI about his communications with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, on behalf of the incoming Trump administration, discussions that unavoidably included some references, however vague, to sanctions imposed on Russia by President Obama in December 2016, just before leaving office. ..."
"... Those sanctions were highly unusual-last-minute, unprecedented in their seizure of Russian property in the United States, and including a reckless veiled threat of unspecified cyber attacks on Russia. ..."
"... Finally, and similarly, Cohen points out, there is the ongoing effort by the political-media establishment to drive Secretary of State Tillerson from office and replace him with a fully neocon, anti-Russian, anti-détente head of the State Department. ..."
Dec 13, 2017 | thenation.com

Cohen offers the following general observations, which form the basis of the discussion:

  • The foundational accusation of Russiagate was, and remains, charges that Russian President Putin ordered the hacking of DNC e-mails and their public dissemination through WikiLeaks in order to benefit Donald Trump and undermine Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, and that Trump and/or his associates colluded with the Kremlin in this "attack on American democracy." As no actual evidence for these allegations has been produced after nearly a year and a half of media and government investigations, we are left with Russiagate without Russia. (An apt formulation perhaps first coined in an e-mail exchange by Nation writer James Carden.) Special counsel Mueller has produced four indictments: against Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump's short-lived national-security adviser, and George Papadopolous, a lowly and inconsequential Trump "adviser," for lying to the FBI; and against Paul Manafort and his partner Rick Gates for financial improprieties. None of these charges has anything to do with improper collusion with Russia, except for the wrongful insinuations against Flynn. Instead, the several investigations, desperate to find actual evidence of collusion, have spread to "contacts with Russia"-political, financial, social, etc.-on the part of a growing number of people, often going back many years before anyone imagined Trump as a presidential candidate. The resulting implication is that these "contacts" were criminal or potentially so.

    This is unprecedented, preposterous, and dangerous, potentially more so than even McCarthy's search for "Communist" connections. It would suggest, for example, that scores of American corporations doing business in Russia today are engaged in criminal enterprise. More to the point, advisers to US policy-makers and even media commentators on Russia must have many and various contacts with Russia if they are to understand anything about the dynamics of Kremlin policy-making. Cohen himself, to take an individual example, was an adviser to two (unsuccessful) presidential campaigns, which considered his wide-ranging and longstanding "contacts" with Russia to be an important credential, as did the one sitting president he advised. To suggest that such contacts are in any way criminal is to slur hundreds of reputations and to leave US policy-makers with advisers laden with ideology and no actual expertise. It is also to suggest that any quest for better relations with Russia, or détente, is somehow suspicious, illegitimate, or impossible, as expressed recently by Andrew Weiss in The Wall Street Journal and by The Washington Post, in an editorial. This is one reason Cohen, in a previous Batchelor broadcast and commentary, argued that Russiagate and its promoters have become the gravest threat to American national security.

  • Russiagate began sometime prior to June 2016, not after the presidential election in November, as is often said, as an anti-Trump political project. (Exactly why, how, and by whom remain unclear, and herein lies the real significance of the largely bogus "Dossier" and the still murky role of top US intel officials in the creation of that document.) That said, Cohen continues, the mainstream American media have been largely responsible for inflating, perpetuating, and sustaining the sham Russiagate as the real political crisis it has become, arguably the greatest in modern American presidential and thus institutional political history. The media have done this by increasingly betraying their own professed standards of verified news reporting and balanced coverage, even resorting to tacit forms of censorship by systematically excluding dissenting reporting and opinions. (For inventories of recent examples, see Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept and Joe Lauria at Consortium News. Anyone interested in exposures of such truly "fake news" should visit these two sites regularly, the latter the product of the inestimable veteran journalist Robert Parry.) Still worse, this mainstream malpractice has spread to some alternative-media publications once prized for their journalistic standards, where expressed disdain for "evidence" and "proof" in favor of allegations without any actual facts can sometimes be found. Nor are these practices merely the ordinary occasional mishaps of professional journalism. As Greenwald points out, all of the now retracted stories, whether by print media or cable television, were zealous promotions of Russiagate and virulently anti-Trump. They, too, are examples of Russiagate without Russia.

  • Leaving aside possible financial improprieties on the part of General Flynn, his persecution and subsequent prosecution is highly indicative. Flynn pled guilty to having lied to the FBI about his communications with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, on behalf of the incoming Trump administration, discussions that unavoidably included some references, however vague, to sanctions imposed on Russia by President Obama in December 2016, just before leaving office.

    Those sanctions were highly unusual-last-minute, unprecedented in their seizure of Russian property in the United States, and including a reckless veiled threat of unspecified cyber attacks on Russia. They gave the impression that Obama wanted to make even more difficult Trump's professed goal of improving relations with Moscow.

    Still more, Obama's specified reason was not Russian behavior in Ukraine or Syria, as is commonly thought, but Russiagate-that is, Putin's "attack on American democracy," which Obama's intel chiefs had evidently persuaded him was an entirely authentic allegation. (Or which Obama, who regarded Trump's victory over his designated successor, Hillary Clinton, as a personal rebuff, was eager to believe.) But Flynn's discussions with the Russian ambassador-as well as other Trump representatives' efforts to open "back-channel" communications with Moscow–were anything but a crime. As Cohen pointed out in another previous commentary, there were so many precedents of such overtures on behalf of presidents-elect, it was considered a normal, even necessary practice, if only to ask Moscow not to make relations worse before the new president had a chance to review the relationship. When Henry Kissinger did this on behalf of President-elect Nixon, his boss instructed him to keep the communication entirely confidential, not to inform any other members of the incoming administration. Presumably Flynn was similarly secretive, thereby misinforming Vice President Pence and finding himself trapped-or possibly entrapped-between loyalty to his president and an FBI agent. Flynn no doubt would have been especially guarded with a representative of the FBI, knowing as he did the role of Obama's Intel bosses in Russiagate prior to the election and which had escalated after Trump's surprise victory. In any event, to the extent that Flynn encouraged Moscow not to reply in kind immediately to Obama's highly provocative sanctions, he performed a service to US national security, not a crime. And, assuming that Flynn was acting on the instructions of his president-elect, so did Trump. Still more, if Flynn "colluded" in any way, it was with Israel, not Russia, having been asked by that government to dissuade countries from voting for an impending anti-Israel UN resolution.

  • Finally, and similarly, Cohen points out, there is the ongoing effort by the political-media establishment to drive Secretary of State Tillerson from office and replace him with a fully neocon, anti-Russian, anti-détente head of the State Department. Tillerson was an admirable appointee by Trump-widely experienced in world affairs, a tested negotiator, a mature and practical-minded man. Originally, his role as the CEO of Exxon Mobil who had negotiated and enacted an immensely profitable and strategically important energy-extraction deal with the Kremlin earned him the slur of being "Putin's pal." This preposterous allegation has since given way to charges that he is slowly restructuring, and trimming, the long bloated and mostly inept State Department, as indeed he should do. Numerous former diplomats closely associated with Hillary Clinton have raced to influential op-ed pages to denounce Tillerson's undermining of this purportedly glorious frontline institution of American national security. Many news reports, commentaries, and editorials have been in the same vein. But who can recall, Cohen asks, a major diplomatic triumph by the State Department or a secretary of state in recent years? The answer might be the Obama administration's multinational agreement with Iran to curb its nuclear-weapons potential, but that was due no less to Russia's president and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which provided essential guarantees to the sides involved. Forgotten, meanwhile, are the more than 50 career State Department officials who publicly protested-in the spirit of DOD-Obama's rare attempt to cooperate with Moscow in Syria. Call it by what it was: the sabotaging of a president by his own State Department. In this spirit, there are a flurry of leaked stories that Tillerson will soon resign or be ousted. Meanwhile, however, he carries on. The ever-looming menace of Russiagate compels him to issue wildly exaggerated indictments of Russian behavior while, at the same time, calling for a "productive new relationship" with Moscow, in which he clearly believes. (And which, if left unencumbered, he might achieve.) Evidently, he has established a "productive" working relationship with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, the two of them having just announced North Korea's readiness to engage in negotiations with the United States and other governments involved in the current crisis.

    Tillerson's fate, Cohen concludes, will tell us much about the number-one foreign-policy question confronting America: cooperation or escalating conflict with the other nuclear superpower, a détente-like diminishing of the new Cold War or the growing risks that it will become hot war. Politics and policy should never be over-personalized; larger factors are always involved. But in these unprecedented times, Tillerson may be the last man standing who represents the possibility of some kind of détente. Apart, that is, from President Trump himself, loathe him or not. Or to put the issue differently: Will Russiagate continue to gravely endanger American national security?

    Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. A Nation contributing editor, his most recent book, War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate, is available in paperback and in an ebook edition. His weekly conversations with the host of The John Batchelor Show, now in their seventh year, are available at www.thenation.com.

    • [May 07, 2020] The 'Blob' Strikes Back by Daniel Larison

    Notable quotes:
    "... If America's adversaries were made of strawmen, the defenders of the foreign policy "Blob" would have a foolproof strategy for defeating them. Unfortunately, a recent defense of the U.S. foreign policy establishment's record is no more successful than the policies that its authors have supported. ..."
    "... The authors of the FA piece want to identify the "Blob" with expert knowledge, but many of the loudest critics of the "Blob" find fault with it because so many policy debates are not informed by genuine country or regional expertise. ..."
    May 07, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Realism & Restraint The 'Blob' Strikes Back

    A recent defense of the foreign policy establishment is no more successful than the policies its authors supported.

    If America's adversaries were made of strawmen, the defenders of the foreign policy "Blob" would have a foolproof strategy for defeating them. Unfortunately, a recent defense of the U.S. foreign policy establishment's record is no more successful than the policies that its authors have supported.

    Writing for the Foreign Affairs website last week, Hal Brands, Peter Feaver, and Will Inboden attempt to rebut critics of the so-called "Blob," but in their attempt they demonstrate many of the very flaws in analysis and inability to admit error that their critics have pointed out over the years. The real record of the U.S. foreign policy establishment over the last thirty years has been much less impressive than its defenders claim, and it has helped to create many more avoidable calamities than they admit.

    The authors of the FA piece want to identify the "Blob" with expert knowledge, but many of the loudest critics of the "Blob" find fault with it because so many policy debates are not informed by genuine country or regional expertise. Think back to the Iraq war debate. On the pro-war side, there were legions of pundits and politicians that knew little or nothing about Iraq and the surrounding region. The few historians and specialists they could find to promote the war were extreme ideologues. On the opposing side, you had the vast majority of regional experts and trained officials at the State Department. The U.S. invaded Iraq despite the overwhelming consensus among people that knew the country and region best that it would be a disaster. War supporters had no use for that expertise because it did not line up with what they wanted to do. The "Blob" prevailed by overruling and ignoring the experts.

    Many prominent foreign policy professionals from both parties jumped on the pro-war bandwagon because they weren't terribly interested in what the experts had to say and because backing military action to exercise American "leadership" is what these people usually do. Even those that didn't really believe the case for war said nothing because it was politically safer for them to conform. We have seen this happen many other times. The conventional view endorsed by the "Blob" often has nothing to do with expert knowledge, and it frequently flies in the face of that expertise.

    It would help to start with accurate definitions. What do critics of U.S. foreign policy mean when we talk about the "Blob"? The term refers in part to the tendency towards groupthink, aggression, and interference in other countries' affairs among foreign policy pundits and think tankers. It is a criticism of the reflexive bias towards "action," which almost always involves advocacy for military options, and the disparagement of diplomatic engagement that usually goes with it. Members of the "Blob" promote and claim to believe in a number of far-fetched myths about "credibility" and America's "indispensable" role in the world that provide ready-made justifications for sanctioning and bombing a long list of other countries. They usually twist themselves into knots to avoid acknowledging U.S. responsibility for the consequences of our government's actions, but they are the first to decry American "inaction" when something unfortunate beyond our control happens on the other side of the world. If one or more of those things describes you, you might be part of the "Blob."

    One of the biggest failings of the "Blob" is its resistance to learning and reevaluating core assumptions. This is one reason why the U.S. keeps making similar mistakes decade after decade. The "Blob" not only spreads dangerous myths, but it clings to them all the more desperately when those myths are discredited by experience. The U.S. can destabilize entire regions for decades, but they will continue to insist that the U.S. military presence is "stabilizing" and cannot end. U.S. interventions consistently leave countries in worse shape than they were in before the U.S. intervened, but that does not lessen their eagerness for the next intervention.

    The authors allow that the "Blob" makes mistakes, but asserts that it "learns from them and changes course." That is simply not true. The only learning that does seem to take place concerns how some of the same awful policies get labeled. Advocates for regime change usually avoid using that phrase now, but they still demand regime change in substance. Supporters of illegal warfare still advocate for illegal war, but now they call it "restoring deterrence." Aggressive U.S. policies have predictably led to hostile responses from other states, but the "Blob" doesn't acknowledge the U.S. role in provoking the responses.

    When presented with evidence of groupthink, the authors relabel it as "the wisdom of professional crowds." When presented with the familiar litany of U.S. foreign policy failures, they claim that the record is actually successful. When presented with the record of near-constant use of force since the end of the Cold War, they declare that the U.S. "hardly ran amok in search of monsters to destroy," and then rattle off a list of countries that the U.S. didn't attack. You could hardly ask for more of a self-parody of what critics call the "Blob" than boasting about all of the places that the U.S. could have invaded but didn't. Look at all that restraint! This is akin to defending an arsonist by pointing to all of the buildings that he didn't set on fire.

    Perhaps biggest flaw in the defense of the "Blob" is the very American-centric habit of taking credit for all positive post-Cold War developments around the world:

    In short, after 1989, the deep global engagement favored by the Blob kept the world moving forward on a generally positive track, rather than regressing to the historical mean of tyranny, depression, and war.

    How much did post-Cold War U.S. actions contribute to this outcome? Isn't it likely that much of the world would have been "moving forward" as it did with or without the U.S.? In other words, how much can the U.S. really take credit for the successes of other nations after the end of the Cold War? To make the balance come out in their favor, the authors need to claim that the U.S. deserves credit for almost all of it, but that hardly seems credible.

    One of the unintentionally funniest parts of the "Blob" defense is the claim that there is accountability for failure:

    The American foreign policy establishment, finally, is generally more pragmatic than ideological. It values prudence and security over novelty and creativity. It knows that thinking outside the box may be useful in testing policy assumptions, but the box is usually there for a reason, and so reflexively embracing the far-out option is dangerous. Its members have made many mistakes, individually and collectively, but several features of the system enforce accountability over time. Foreign policy failures, for example, are politically toxic and often spur positive change.

    This is a bold claim to make when the complete lack of accountability is one of the most distinctive features of the "Blob." Not only do many of the same failed policies continue on for decades, but many of the same people that advocated for failed and disastrous policies in the past keep resurfacing to advocate for new ones. Foreign policy failures should be toxic, but for some reason they never seem to do any harm to the people responsible for them. There is almost no political or professional price to be paid for being consistently, horribly wrong about foreign policy. One reason for this is the network of institutions that employ former government officials so that people responsible for bad policies never go away. Another is the reluctance of "Blob" members to enforce accountability among themselves. So long as someone sticks with the consensus view of the U.S. role in the world, there is virtually nothing that he or she can do to be expelled from the polite company of the foreign policy establishment. Stray outside of the narrow confines of that consensus, however, and you will quickly find yourself persona non grata.

    The weakest part of their argument is the attempt to conflate other critics of the "Blob" with the Trump administration's open hostility to expertise:

    How about the critics' third argument, that escaping the influence of the Blob would make American policy more effective and the country more secure? As it happens, a real-time test of that proposition has been running for over three years.

    This not the first time that defenders of conventional foreign policy have tried to blur the lines between Trump and some of his staunchest non-interventionist and realist critics, and it is no more convincing now than it was before. Trump has not governed as a conventional foreign policy president, but neither has he seriously challenged most of the conventional U.S. role in the world. Trump has left us with the worst of both worlds in which a largely Blobby foreign policy has been executed by inexperienced and ignorant officials. When critics attack the "Blob," we are objecting to the failure to rely on expertise in making policy. The choice does not have to be between Blobby stagnation and Trumpian incompetence, but it is unsurprising that defenders of the discredited "Blob" want to keep it that way. about the author Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter . email

    Dodo • 11 hours ago

    Trump and his team have destroyed US foreign relations. They bully allies and boast to Americans as their "success".

    Americans believe the nonsense - US helped allies before so now they must sacrifice for US causes without asking any compensation support them with full heart.

    Even worse, some even believe the worthless Republican's "American value" is what allies should sacrifice for. Sorry, they need genuine silver and gold, not your worthless "value".

    Of course, veteran of US diplomats feel sad that the alliance structure built up is destroyed.

    Alex (the one that likes Ike) Dodo • 10 hours ago
    Don't be silly. There was nothing to destroy yet before Trump and his team entered their offices, due to the destruction thereof having been already brought about by the said "veteran diplomats".
    Alex (the one that likes Ike) • 9 hours ago
    Jumpin' Jehoshaphat. In their feeble, piteous attempts of relabeling they seem to have forgotten the ancient arcane art of rebranding. Just read it (bold mine):
    the wisdom of professional crowds


    Oxymoronic, right? Well, frankly, I'm not sure about "oxy".

    chris chuba • 8 hours ago
    The Blob remains in power because the biggest cost of their failures is born by countries we don't really care about, a small number of volunteer military men, and money that we borrow. The Blob will remain in power until we squander most of our collective power and we can no longer inflict their will on others and we become increasingly irrelevant. Until then it will be very painful to watch.

    Which brings me to the Coronavirus outbreak. It easily penetrated our shores and we are by any honest measure the world leader in number of deaths and economic devastation despite the fact that the first outbreak did not reach New York until March 1 from Europe. Our response? We closed travel from the EU on March 15, our Defense establishment convinced every MSM outlet that Russia, China, and Iran was waging and information war against the U.S. falsely claiming that we mishandled the situation (we are good a deceiving ourselves, aren't we), we are gearing up for a Cold War against China, but we were able to get the Blue Angels to fly over 5 cities on a days notice. Is it too late to take the blue pill?

    Vhailor chris chuba • 3 hours ago
    You are right regarding the Blob - I would add that most (if not all) of them have zero skin in the game and I bet that neither of those chickenhawks served in the military.
    Feral Finster • 7 hours ago
    The War on Iraq provides a most instructive example. Those in foreign policy circles who knowingly lied, those who knowingly parroted conscious lies, none of these people paid any price for their lies, not personal or professional. Instead, they were rewarded for being loyal accomplices.

    Those who called out the lies were cast into outer darkness.

    Unless and until those responsible for the stupid wars pay a very real and very personal price for their crimes, nothing will change. For sociopaths learn only from reward and punishment, but they do learn.

    Mick Price • 6 hours ago
    Trump's foreign policy, while based on almost complete ignorance, was light-years ahead of the blob. In fact the worst of his actions were when he actually believed the blob and/or did what they wanted. I mean really he hasn't started a war, he actually threatened to withdraw from Europe if they don't pay for the protection, which at best means NATO is toast and at worst means the yanks don't subsidize the europeans. What's so bad about his foreign policy.
    marku52 Mick Price • 6 hours ago
    Well, endorsing very visible assassination as a foreign policy tool is one that will rebound badly some day. And he was proud of that one.
    Feral Finster Mick Price • 5 hours ago
    Trump has used his veto power three times already - twice to stop US involvement in the genocidal war on Yemen, and again today to prevent him from making war on Iran.

    Meanwhile, Trump has failed twice to pull out of Syria. What a pathetic weaking cuck he is!

    blimbax • 5 hours ago
    That picture reminds me of a line up, except usually at a line up there is only one truly guilty party.

    Few photographs better symbolize the problem with American foreign policy. At least Colin Powell showed some redemptive recognition of failure, at least at one time.

    EdMan • 35 minutes ago
    I want to push back on the the notion that the State Dept. were on the right side of history regarding the decision to invade Iraq. Many of those opposed to the war were still in favor of maintaining the embargo and no-fly zones against Iraq into perpetuity. If the war's supporters were wrong in proposing a bad solution, many of their opponents were wrong in offering no solution at all.

    Except the status quo.

    In fact, this is "The Blob" - the defenders of the status quo, more than anything else. As Larison observed, the few historians and specialists who supported the Iraq invasion were extreme ideologues. At the same time, many of them weren't.

    [May 07, 2020] Angry Bear " "cannot remember a single International Crisis in which the United States had no global presence at all"

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Anne Applebaum is a bitter neocon. She is furious that people no longer read the Washington Post as the authoritative voice of US foreign policy. She has apparently made a tidy fortune warning us that the Russians are coming, but she wants even more. The Washington Post still views her as an expert, but the American people, as she herself complains, are no longer interested in her worn-out fantasies. She is buried in defense industry funded think tanks and she does the bidding of her masters. Every intelligent American reader should ridicule her as the propagandist she is. ..."
    "... "McMaster's dangerous China hawkishness calls to mind something that Jim Mattis said about him regarding a different issue when they served together in the Trump administration: "Oh my God, that moron is going to get us all killed." His aggressiveness towards China is not driven by an assessment of the threat from China, but comes from his tendency to advocate for aggressive measures everywhere." ..."
    "... The country which spends over trillion dollars on "defense" is by definition an imperial country and its foreign policy priorities are not that difficult to discern. ..."
    "... And due to well fed MIC which maintains an army of lobbyists and along with FIRE sector controls Capitol Hill this is a Catch 22 situation (we can't abandon neocon Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine and can't continue as it will bankrupt the country) which might not end well for the country. ..."
    "... Note how unprepared the country was to COVID-19 epidemic. Zero strategic thinking as if the next epidemic was not in the cards at least since swine fly ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic_in_the_United_States ). ..."
    "... Some experts now claim that this is criminal incompetence on the part of Trump administration. "So, what does it mean to let thousands die by negligence, omission, failure to act, in a legal sense under international law?" asked Gonsalves, an assistant professor of epidemiology of microbial diseases at the Yale School of Public Health, in a tweet Wednesday morning. https://twitter.com/gregggonsalves/status/1257988303443431425 ..."
    "... Please note that Trump campaigned in 2016 on the idea of disengagement from foreign wars and abandoning the global neoliberal empire built by his predecessors as well as halting neoliberal globalization. ..."
    "... And what we got? We got this warmonger McMaster, bombing Syria on false flag chemical attack pretext, conflict with Russia over North Stream II and Ukraine, and the assassination of Soleimani. Such a bait and switch. ..."
    May 07, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    likbez , May 6, 2020 11:53 pm

    Hi run75441,

    I do not share your enthusiasm about those two authors.

    Anne Applebaum is married to "Full spectrum Dominance doctrine". Like any neocon she a regular well-paid MIC prostitute

    http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2017/may/08/neocon-anne-applebaum-give-me-money-to-fight-russian-disinformation/

    Neocon Anne Applebaum has never seen a bed she did not expect to find an evil Russian lurking beneath. More than a quarter of a century after the end of the Cold War, she cannot let go of that hysterical feeling that, "The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming!" In screeching screed after screeching screech, Applebaum is, like most neocons, a one trick pony: the US government needs to spend more money to counter the threat of the month. Usually it's Russia or Putin. But it can also be China, Iran, Assad, Gaddafi, Saddam, etc.

    Nothing new, nothing interesting.

    Anne Applebaum is a bitter neocon. She is furious that people no longer read the Washington Post as the authoritative voice of US foreign policy. She has apparently made a tidy fortune warning us that the Russians are coming, but she wants even more. The Washington Post still views her as an expert, but the American people, as she herself complains, are no longer interested in her worn-out fantasies. She is buried in defense industry funded think tanks and she does the bidding of her masters. Every intelligent American reader should ridicule her as the propagandist she is.

    As for McMaster paper see Daniel Larison take on the subject in his brilliant post "McMaster and the Myths of Empire" https://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/mcmaster-and-the-myths-of-empire/

    Here is what he said:

    "McMaster's dangerous China hawkishness calls to mind something that Jim Mattis said about him regarding a different issue when they served together in the Trump administration: "Oh my God, that moron is going to get us all killed." His aggressiveness towards China is not driven by an assessment of the threat from China, but comes from his tendency to advocate for aggressive measures everywhere."

    And as a China scholar McMaster is not the best choice either:

    McMaster uses the same "paper tiger image" to portray China as an unstoppable aggressor that can nonetheless be stopped at minimal risk.

    I have heard from other colleagues that several CN scholars met w/ McMaster before he wrote this (while working on his book) and corrected him on many issues. He apparently ignored all of their views. This is what we face people: a simple, deceptive narrative is more seductive.

    -- Michael

    likbez, May 7, 2020 6:22 pm

    The main thrust here is the US abandoning the world to China and a much weaker Russia. I am calling for the US to play a much broader role in the world as it has economic and strategic value

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. This is definitely above my pay grade, but the problem that I see here is that it is very unclear where "a much broader role in the world" ends and where "imperial overstretch" starts.

    The country which spends over trillion dollars on "defense" is by definition an imperial country and its foreign policy priorities are not that difficult to discern.

    And due to well fed MIC which maintains an army of lobbyists and along with FIRE sector controls Capitol Hill this is a Catch 22 situation (we can't abandon neocon Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine and can't continue as it will bankrupt the country) which might not end well for the country.

    Note how unprepared the country was to COVID-19 epidemic. Zero strategic thinking as if the next epidemic was not in the cards at least since swine fly ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic_in_the_United_States ).

    Some experts now claim that this is criminal incompetence on the part of Trump administration. "So, what does it mean to let thousands die by negligence, omission, failure to act, in a legal sense under international law?" asked Gonsalves, an assistant professor of epidemiology of microbial diseases at the Yale School of Public Health, in a tweet Wednesday morning. https://twitter.com/gregggonsalves/status/1257988303443431425

    Please note that Trump campaigned in 2016 on the idea of disengagement from foreign wars and abandoning the global neoliberal empire built by his predecessors as well as halting neoliberal globalization. That's how he got anti-war independents to vote for him.

    And what we got? We got this warmonger McMaster, bombing Syria on false flag chemical attack pretext, conflict with Russia over North Stream II and Ukraine, and the assassination of Soleimani. Such a bait and switch.

    [May 07, 2020] MIC prostitute

    Notable quotes:
    "... Neocon Anne Applebaum has never seen a bed she did not expect to find an evil Russian lurking beneath. More than a quarter of a century after the end of the Cold War, she cannot let go of that hysterical feeling that, "The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming!" In screeching screed after screeching screech , Applebaum is, like most neocons, a one trick pony: the US government needs to spend more money to counter the threat of the month. Usually it's Russia or Putin. But it can also be China, Iran, Assad, Gaddafi, Saddam, etc. ..."
    "... Anne Applebaum is a bitter neocon. She is furious that people no longer read the Washington Post as the authoritative voice of US foreign policy. She has apparently made a tidy fortune warning us that the Russians are coming, but she wants even more. The Washington Post still views her as an expert, but the American people, as she herself complains, are no longer interested in her worn-out fantasies. She is buried in defense industry funded think tanks and she does the bidding of her masters. Every intelligent American reader should ridicule her as the propagandist she is. ..."
    May 08, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    Anne Applebaum: Give Me Money to Fight 'Russian Disinformation'! Daniel McAdams Monday May 8, 2017

    Neocon Anne Applebaum has never seen a bed she did not expect to find an evil Russian lurking beneath. More than a quarter of a century after the end of the Cold War, she cannot let go of that hysterical feeling that, "The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming!" In screeching screed after screeching screech , Applebaum is, like most neocons, a one trick pony: the US government needs to spend more money to counter the threat of the month. Usually it's Russia or Putin. But it can also be China, Iran, Assad, Gaddafi, Saddam, etc.

    There is no doubt that Applebaum is a true believer that Putin wants to destroy our democratic institutions, but there is also a more pedestrian way to understand her endless obsession: it pays well to hype up big threats. In fact, according to a mandatory Polish government disclosure (her husband was Polish defense and foreign minister before being forced out in disgrace after an eavesdropping scandal), Applebaum has made out like a bandit for a humble journalist and think-tanker.

    As I wrote when her scandal broke:

    Interestingly, Applebaum demands transparency for everyone else while rejecting it for herself. A recent mandatory income declaration of her husband to the Polish government shows that her income has skyrocketed from $20,000 in 2011 to more than $800,000 in 2013. No explanation was given for this massive influx of cash, though several ventures in which she has a part are tied to CIA and National Endowment for Democracy-affiliated organizations. Could Applebaum be one of those well-paid propagandists about whom she complains so violently?
    Applebaum's latest Washington Post column is about...you guessed it: the danger of Russian disinformation! Here is a synopsis of Applebaum's latest Cold War 2.0 propaganda piece from this weekend:

    1) The mainstream media has taken a beating. The old business model is no longer working. There are too many new sources of information available, which makes it harder for people to judge the accuracy of what they read.

    My comment: Indeed, the US mainstream media no longer controls what we see, read, and think. Applebaum cannot stand that there are websites challenging the central neoconservative foreign policy paradigm. She hates organizations like the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (she even blocked us on Twitter!).

    She longs for the days when you could only pick up a Washington Post or a New York Times and had no chance of discovering opposing opinions.

    In other words, Anne Applebaum misses the Soviet-style monochrome media that she pretends to despise so much.

    2) As a result of mainstream media outlets like the Washington Post losing their monopoly over shaping foreign policy opinion, as she writes: "authoritarian regimes, led by Russia but closely followed by China, have begun investing heavily in the production of alternatives."

    My comment: Applebaum is saying here that it's all our fault that the Russians are coming because as soon as the Internet and alternative news and analysis sites offered a point of view different from Applebaum's neocons, we played into the hands of the Russians by ignoring the Washington Post and turning to alternatives. If we had only kept our faith in the neocon worldview, the Russians would not be set to take us over.

    3) This new Cold War is even worse than the old Cold War! Unlike back then, in the new Cold War, as Applebaum writes, "Russia does not seek to promote itself, but rather to undermine the institutions of the West, often using discordant messages."

    My comment: Anne Applebaum offers no evidence or even clues to back her claim. But what she is saying is that by allowing voices to be heard that run counter to the Washington Post and neocon foreign policy paradigm, Russian-funded outlets like RT are seeking to sow "confusion" among Western listeners and viewers. Applebaum does not want us to be "confused" by messages that run counter to the neocon view of a US empire fighting endless wars against manufactured enemies. We would be far less "confused" if we would all just read Anne Applebaum and stop questioning the neocons!

    4) Don't worry, this effort to sow confusion is being countered.

    Applebaum writes:

    Some countries are waking up to this, especially those that have been hardest hit. The invasion, occupation and dismemberment of Ukraine in 2014 was preceded by a highly effective propaganda blitz that fomented confusion in Russian-speaking areas and blinded both Ukrainians and Westerners to what was really going on. In response, Ukrainian organizations such as StopFake began to expose and ridicule Russian propaganda.
    My comment: She does not explain exactly what that "propaganda blitz" looked like. Was it the release of the tape of Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland plotting the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Kiev? Well, according to Applebaum, at least the noble, independent NGOs are spontaneously springing up across Europe to counter this Russian propaganda blitz!

    Except for one problem: The "StopFake" organization that she praises is not a grassroots Ukrainian organization as she would have us believe. In fact it's a George Soros astroturf organization, funded by his International Renaissance Foundation . In other words, "StopFake" is fake.

    5) In fact, when it comes to funding, Anne Applebaum knows which side of her bread is buttered. As the Washington Post notes in the article's byline: "Anne Applebaum, a Post columnist, and Edward Lucas, a senior editor at the Economist, are this week launching a counter-disinformation initiative at the Center for European Policy Analysis, where they are, respectively, senior vice president and senior adjunct fellow."

    My comment: Who funds the (Washington, D.C.-based) Center for European Policy Analysis? The United States Department of Defense and a handful of US defense contractors!

    From their own website :

    Recent donors to CEPA include:

    Bell Helicopter
    Boeing
    Chevron Corporation
    FireEye
    Lockheed Martin Corporation
    New Vista Partners
    Raytheon Company
    Sikorsky Aircraft
    Textron Systems
    The East Tennessee Foundation
    The Hirsch Family Foundation
    The Hungarian Initiatives Foundation
    The International Visegrad Fund
    The Poses Family Foundation
    The Smith Richardson Foundation
    U.S. Department of Defense

    There are one or two surprises on the above list. The Hungarian government of Viktor Orban has been quite cautious about following the neocon line that any resistance to massive refugee inflows from the Middle East are signs of unforgivable xenophobia and that Russia and Putin must be resisted at all costs. In fact, Orban's opposition in Hungary is furious that he is not following the Russia-bashing neocon line. So why is the Hungarian government-funded Hungarian Initiatives Foundation backing Anne Applebaum's neocon initiative to demonize Russia? Good question. Maybe Fidesz supporters will want to ask their government why their tax money is going to such a worthless, anti-Fidesz cause.

    6) And again on funding, we come to the crux of Anne Applebaum's problem: the US government does not spend nearly enough money creating its own propaganda to counter what she claims is Russian propaganda. They are outspending us and outmaneuvering us!

    She writes:

    There is no modern equivalent to the U.S. Information Agency , an organization dedicated to coping with Soviet propaganda and disinformation during the Cold War. Although there has been some extra funding for U.S.-backed foreign broadcasters such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty , they cannot provide a complete response.
    My comment: But that's not really true, is it? The idea that the US government is pinching propaganda pennies while the Russians are going in for the whole fake news hog is not backed up by those pernicious little things called facts. In fact, the Russian government spent around $300 million on RT in 2016. Compare that with the US propaganda arm, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, whose 2017 budget runs to $777.8 million dollars, or more than two and a half that of RT. And Congress just gave the green light to another $100 million to "counter Russian influence" in its stop-gap omnibus budget. We are out-spending them three-to-one. So why are we still "losing"?

    Anne Applebaum is a bitter neocon. She is furious that people no longer read the Washington Post as the authoritative voice of US foreign policy. She has apparently made a tidy fortune warning us that the Russians are coming, but she wants even more. The Washington Post still views her as an expert, but the American people, as she herself complains, are no longer interested in her worn-out fantasies. She is buried in defense industry funded think tanks and she does the bidding of her masters. Every intelligent American reader should ridicule her as the propagandist she is.

    As for Russian "propaganda," like everything else in that vast cornucopia now thankfully available for our consumption, we should read all we can while keeping our wits about us. There is no one authoritative, unbiased source of information. That we do know. But we also know that we are far more able to think for ourselves now that the neocon gatekeepers like Anne Applebaum have been defeated in the marketplace of ideas.

    Copyright © 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given. Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

    Related

    [May 07, 2020] Is "raptuted" Pompeo functionally illiterate?

    May 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , May 5 2020 22:22 utc | 29

    Haven't heard from Iranian FM Zarif in awhile. Here he is calling Pompeo illiterate or so it seems:

    ".@SecPompeo pretends UNSCR 2231 is independent from #JCPOA.

    "He should READ 2231.

    "JCPOA is PART of 2231. That's why it's 104 pages -- & why he's not read it.

    "2231 for Dummies:

    "-It would NOT EXIST w/o JCPOA

    "-US violated it & prevented others from complying

    "-US has NO standing."

    [May 07, 2020] A Peek On The Situation In And Around Syria

    May 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    JC , May 7 2020 17:53 utc | 1

    The recent financial turbulence in the oil markets and the global depression will have a large impact on the conflicts in the Middle East.

    Iraq:

    Last night the Iraqi parliament elected a new prime minister. Mustafa al-Kadhimi is seen as a technocrat with a good track record and politically neutral to all sides. His cabinet includes a number of experienced people who are known for effective work.

    Astonishingly both, the U.S. and Iran, have supported Kadhimi.

    Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 1:09 UTC · May 7, 2020

    Great to speak today with new Iraqi PrimeMinister Mustafa al-Kadhimi. Now comes the urgent, hard work of implementing the reforms demanded by the Iraqi people. I pledged to help him deliver on his bold agenda for the sake of the Iraqi people.

    Javad Zarif @JZarif - 9:56 AM · May 7, 2020

    Congratulations to Prime Minister @MAKadhimi, his Cabinet, the Parliament and most importantly the people of Iraq for success in forming a new Government.

    Iran always stands with the Iraqi people and their choice of administration.

    Kadhimi has lots of work waiting for him. The low oil price means that Iraq's budget will have a huge deficit. It will have to borrow a lot of money most likely from the IMF. The money may come with U.S. conditions.

    There has recently been a wave a small ISIS attacks. The Jihadis were equipped with night vision devises. There is strong suspicion that the U.S. is again using ISIS to pressure the government.

    The U.S. wants Iraq to take a position against Iran and the Iraqi militia which Iran sponsors. But Kadhimi can not do that without losing support in the parliament. Iraq also depends on Iranian energy.

    Syria:

    The military situation in Syria has changed little. The ceasefire in Idleb governorate seems to hold. Russian and Turkish troops patrol on parts of the M4 highway after Turkey had some harsh exchanges with the Jihadis from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham who had tried to prevent the patrols. Turkey will have to get rid of the Jihadis, who have led the war against Syria from its very beginning, one way or another .

    Throughout the last months Russian foreign policy grandees and oligarchs had published essays that argued that the Syrian government had to look more at the economic situation in Syria, which is very bad, instead of pushing for military solutions. It was not fully clear what they were aiming at.

    Then a conflict between President Assad and Syria's prime oligarch Rami Makhlouf broke into the open. Danni Makki digs into the whole saga . Makhlouf is a maternal cousin of Assad. Whoever wanted to do business in Syria during the war had to go through him. He sponsored his own militia and charity. Makhlouf, the richest man in Syria and owner of Syriatel and lots of other companies, has now been pushed aside. But he is fighting back.

    Makhlouf has little chance to win. In 2017 the Jabar brothers, also oligarchs with their own militia, were also getting too interested in their personal profits and power. Riam Dalati tells their story and how they were unceremoniously moved aside.

    Assad's position is now stronger then ever and Russian companies will now be happy to do business in Syria without a Mr. Five Percent in between.

    Libya:

    Turkey, working together with Qatar, has hired some 10,000 Syrian 'rebels' to fight in Libya on the side of the Government of National Accord and its Jihadi militias. The GNA troops have been trounced by the Libyan National Army under General Haftar. Turkey has also send its own troops with Turkish made drones to attack Haftar's position. But most of the drones were shot down immediately. The UAE, which supports Haftar's LNA, has now send 6 Mirage fighter jets to Egypt and uses them to bomb GNA and Turkish positions in Tripoli and Misrata.

    The 'rebels' Turkey hired have taken a lot of casualties but have not the received their promised money. That news has reached Idleb were further recruitment efforts by Turkey now fail to gain traction .

    Turkey:

    The Turkish Lira continues to fall. The Central Bank, under control of wannabe Sultan Erdogan, had spend more than $25 billion to prevent the Lira from breaking the barrier of 7 Lira per U.S. Dollar. It is now at 7.2 Lira/US$ and sinking further. The 44 year old Turkish Finance Minister Berat Albayrak is Erdogan's son in law and unqualified for the job . The Fed has rejected a request from Turkey for a swap agreement that would have provided the country with more U.S. dollar. Those are urgently needed :

    S&P Global estimated on Wednesday that Turkey's economy needs to refinance close to $168 billion over the next 12 months. That equates to 24% of the country's GDP.

    The record-low lira makes it more costly for the country's government and companies to pay back their dollar-denominated debt. That $168 billion of short-term external debt and only $85 billion in gross FX reserves means the so-called "coverage ratio" is only around 50%, one of the lowest of any emerging- market economy.

    Erdogan can (again) ask the Emir of Qatar to step in but the sum he needs is larger than what Qatar might be willing or able to provide. That leaves the IMF has the only way out. But after previous IMF loans to Turkey and the harsh austerity measures that came with them any talk of IMF loans in Turkey are political poison and a sure way to lose elections.

    Erdogan will have to cut his losses in Libya and Syria as these conflicts have become economically unsustainable.

    Lebanon:

    The Ponzi scheme the Central Bank of Lebanon had used for 30 years to bind the Lebanese Pound to the U.S. Dollar has finally fallen apart. Within months the pound fell from 1.500 per US$ to now below 4.000 per US$. Everybody who had money in a Lebanese bank has lost most of it. Lebanon's riches of the last 30 years are gone. The country needs a new business model which will be difficult to find. Ehsani explains how it came to this.

    Saudi Arabia:

    Today the U.S. announced that it is removing its Patriot missiles from the country. Two fighter squadrons in the area will also leave. The U.S. navy will recall some ships from the Persian Gulf region. In early April Trump had threatened the Saudis with such measures if they would fail to reduce their oil output and to thereby raise the global oil price. Some output was reduced but the old price is falling further for a lack of demand.

    Without U.S. protection a further Saudi war against the Houthi in Yemen will become untenable .

    All the above countries are also massively affected from the current pandemic. This probably less from death in their relatively young populations than from the economic consequences that will lead to more poverty and hunger.

    If there is a winner of all these crises in the region it is Iran.

    Posted by b on May 7, 2020 at 17:40 UTC | Permalink Thanks b hope you are correct "Makhlouf, the richest man in Syria and owner of Syriatel and lots of other companies" out of the pic... it remind me of Indonesia's Suharto mister 10%

    Likklemore , May 7 2020 18:54 utc | 9

    thanks b for revisiting a crucial area pushed off the pages by corona crisis.

    [..] "The U.S. wants Iraq to take a position against Iran and the Iraqi militia which Iran sponsors. But Kadhimi can not do that without losing support in the parliament. Iraq also depends on Iranian energy." [.]

    as usual the U.S. displays its convoluted geopolitics. Repeatedly continues to grant month to month waivers to Iraq for purchase of Iran electricity and gas while at the same time wanting Iraq to take a position against Iran.
    Exceptional idiots attempting to insert barriers between neighbours.

    May 6, 2020. WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The United States will grant a 120-day waiver for Iraq to continue importing electricity from Iran to help the new Iraqi government succeed, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the newly installed Iraqi prime minister.

    "In support of the new government the United States will move forward with a 120-day electricity waiver as a display of our desire to help provide the right conditions for success," the State Department said in a statement on a call between Pompeo and Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi.

    Washington had repeatedly extended the exemption for Baghdad to use crucial Iranian energy supplies for its power grid for periods of 90 or 120 days, [.]

    Michael Droy , May 7 2020 19:04 utc | 10
    Is Trump pulling protection from Saudi because they pump too much oil?
    Or simply because they can't pay the protection money no matter how much they pump?
    Stonebird , May 7 2020 19:11 utc | 11
    Excellent b. If there is one common thread going through all these, it is - If you don't have the money - you can't fight wars.

    With the double whammy of low oil pries and stalled economies we are going to see a lot of changes. I would like it to be less combat, but I fear it more likely to be undisciplined militants and troops who prey even more on local populations.
    -------

    One you could add to the above list is is the worsening situation on the Yemini island of Socotra (Houthis v US and SA, v UAE etc.) A disaster because of it's unique flora.

    and;
    (US Near Iran )
    - Two US jet fighter squadrons also have left the re­gion.
    - US will con­sider a re­duc­tion of the U.S. Navy presence in the Per­sian Gulf.
    - US officials say that Tehran no longer poses immediate threat against Saudi Arabia.

    Horatio , May 7 2020 19:12 utc | 12
    The United States and Turkey have a lot in common. Both countries are led by narcissistic and incompetent clowns nepotistically driving their countries off the proverbial cliff. Both geniuses concocted half baked colonial plans, and felt they could just grab other people property (think Venezuela, Syrian, Libyan oil) in total impunity. Soon enough, Sultan Erdogan will get his first bankruptcy star to match cretin Orange in business failure department.
    bevin , May 7 2020 19:17 utc | 13
    "..all of these tin pot dictatorship oil rich countries are really a sick bunch.... i guess it is the byproduct off having too much money and not enough brains..james@ 3
    karlofi beat me to it james - or were you referring to Alberta?
    DontBelieveEitherPr. , May 7 2020 19:56 utc | 18

    Nice Sitrep as usual.

    Some points:
    -Elijah is seeing the ISIS surge as bigger an more threatening as you. He mentioned the US just cut their intelligence sharing with Iraq when ISIS went on the offensive. PMU is mobilized, but without the intelligence from drones etc. Iraq is sadly blinded to a big extent.
    With ISIS being so well outfitted, using effective strategies, and giving PMU high casualties, this may well become the start of something very ugly. Iraq will win, but casualties in human life and economic damage plus panic on top of Corona will still be a hellish combination.

    -That Turkey will have to end its ottoman ambitions because of economic, has been said since many years. And politically it is at least equally untenable.
    Erdogan lives from his economic policy, but in the last years also from the semi-fashistic mixture of Turkish ultra-nationalism and Islamic Sunni "values" (MB style).

    He can take the IMF money and then just paint the blame on the evil western countries. But leaving Syrian territory believing to be Turkish heartland, or giving up North Syria as buffer zone against PKK would NEVER the excuseable. NEVER. Not for his voters, OR 85% of Turks, who overwhelmingly support one brand or another of Turkish Ultra Nationalism (with the Sunni Islamic ideology also supported by most).

    This mindset can not be rationalized looking through rational eyes, but it has its own kind of logic.

    And giving up even an inch of belived "Turkish soil" is not even an option for the huge majority. Be that "Turkish soil" Turkish or Syrian, or Iraq, or Greek.

    Brendan , May 7 2020 20:09 utc | 19
    It's only a few months since Trump repeatedly declared his ownership of the oil fields in north-east Syria:

    We kept the oil. I kept the oil. (...) we kept the oil. (...) we have the oil
    https://no.usembassy.gov/remarks-by-president-trump-and-nato-secretary-general-stoltenberg-after-11-meeting/

    That's not very much to boast about these days, now that oil prices are a lot less than what they were back then.

    Brendan , May 7 2020 20:14 utc | 20
    If there is a winner of all these crises in the region it is Iran.

    Yup, always, at least for the Iranian government, if not for most Iranians. And it doesn't even have to try to win - it just has to sit back and watch Washington and its puppets acting like idiots and handing victory to Teheran.

    Lurk , May 7 2020 20:21 utc | 21
    If Pompeo is so happy about the new iraqi PM, does that mean that John Bolton knows where Mustafa al-Kadhimi's children live?

    There is activity in Syria on some fronts.

    In the northeastern desert, ISIS hideouts are getting cleaned up slowly. ISIS had an easy time while the action was going on around Idlib, but now they are getting their fair share of attention. Quite possibly the resurgence in Iraq is related to this. I hope that a joint syrian, iraqi, russian and iranian effort will seriously clean out the last bits of the black plague.

    At the same time, Syria is about to root out some stay-behind Al Qaida and ISIS clusters in southern Daraa. That region was pacified by agreement a few years ago and the factions that only pretended to agree have now shown their hand. Spring time weeding time.

    I am not sure that LNA is really successful against Erdogan's brotherhood proxies in western Lybia. If GNA manages to capture the airbase in the west, that would be a very big setback for Hafter.

    H.Schmatz , May 7 2020 22:02 utc | 26
    I had to come back up to see who has written the article from RIAC, which I had not payed attention to at first, to test that it was not written by the SOHR or the Syrian opposition.

    For that travel we, and above all the Syrian people and legitimate government, did not need so many saddlebags...

    For to go now surrendering to the "recommendations" of the US, the IMF and the EU, Assad could have surrendered the country at the very first moment, as he probably was offered.

    That Syria has its own problems with its own oligarchs, is what? A discovery by these thinking brains of the Valdai Club? This guy has probaly gone bald behind his ear after the effort. Why does he not mention as a solution for the reconstruction of Syria the need of the US leaving the oil fields which it has been exploting?

    The oligarchy is very much the most accute problem everywhere, starting with Russia, still not free from that lacra dating the "reform" of the USSR, through its willing demolition, a problem the Coronavirus pandemic has not made but putting in everybody´s sight.

    Because, who are the remaining wealth of the nations being transferred to, in face of the collapse ( willing/planned, or not, I will put my hand on the fire for the first case...since this all resembles way too much the demolition of the USSR, this smells of rat all the way.. ) of the capitalist system?

    We have the German government bailing out Lufthansa under the exigence by its owners of that rescue being under no conditions. the same happens in the US with Boeing and the fracking industry..

    In Spain we have open the economy for the big business already just after Easter, under directive of the Banco de Santander in Spain, permanent guest at the Bliderberg Group meetings.... Some countries in the EU have established there will be no rescue for big corporations who evade taxes through tax havens in the EU, but we, for what it seems, are going to rescue ´em all...

    Taking a look at the state of certain EU banks previous to the pandemic, one gets the real picture on that some were going to collapse with or without Coronavirus anyway.

    Most of the population in the world is facing unemployment, misery, and highly likely hunger, and then, it is Syria who need to ongo reforms, or Lebanon for that matter?. The Lebanese Central Bank belongs to the West Banking System, as all the rest of the Central Banks. The Lebanese government ahs been ALWAYS occupied by West and Saudi puppets, just until recently, when Hezbollah and other representatives of the Lebanese people entered the government, jut when the West decided to bankrupt Lebanon.....

    All Mediterranean countries were making a living of tourism, as they own enough historical sites and good weather to offer this kind of services in the international labor order. But, why tourism was wiped out? Most probably to turn the fortunes of some in Syria and Lebanon, and also, by passing, in the EU.....

    Some were having trouble with the Brexit´s bill, the sanitzing of their biggest banks, and the growing contestation in the streets, what better way to revive themselves and their industries than ruining some southern pigs to then indebt them for the centuries to come as they did with Greece? Curiously, or not so, these are the same actors hoping to take a piece of the cake in Syria and Lebanon and allied in the US coalition...

    Some were losing the war on Syria, the Chinese were willing to invest there, and make her, along with Pakistán, part of the B&R initiative, which would had seen a flourishing Syria and also Pakistán. Instead you have the Chinese economy paralized and the chains of distriution cut off, becuase of the Coronavirus. Terrorism is being pushed against Pakistán and also, as the recent incident with some "afghans" in the border, towards Iran, all aimed at definitely destabilishing the zone and giving the shot of grace to the Chinese initiative.

    The thing is that we all need way too postponed reforms everywhere, so as to not being continuously robbed, and in a cheeky big way every ten years or so. i
    In fact, what we need is a world wide socialist revolution ( never the time was so propice, since when the same illnesses, and I am not talking here about the Covid-19, were affecting us all at unison...? ) and dust off the guillotines...We could start with all those idle people talking heads "thinking" at the clubs of the rich, like the Valdai Club, the Bilderberg Club, the Davos Summit.....and so on...those who never get untidy by any shake of "destiny"... then follow with parasitic politicians, bought and receiving direct orders from these clubs, make the great cleaning, disinfecting it all...

    When the 2008 crisis was starting to hit in Spain, and things started to paint gloom, I was learning a langauge with a charming group of colleagues. One of my peers, a woman with the voice and face of a little girl, a very good person, said once that in face of not being payed she will be willing to go out in the streets with the sawed-off shotgun...
    Of course, she was joking....although, was she really doing it? Do not think, this was not marginal people, but what you would call middle class...

    https://twitter.com/LOQUEDIGAELFMI/status/1258350041749741568

    https://twitter.com/LOQUEDIGAELFMI/status/1258343649793974273

    https://twitter.com/LOQUEDIGAELFMI/status/1258025529770467328

    Walter , May 7 2020 23:34 utc | 27
    @ H. Schmatz 26. "The oligarchy is very much the most accute problem everywhere, starting with Russia, still not free from that lacra dating the "reform" of the USSR, through its willing demolition, a problem the Coronavirus pandemic has not made but putting in everybody´s sight."

    Yes that's true, USSR was "gamed" and so are we being gamed.

    ... ... ..

    james , May 8 2020 1:38 utc | 29
    @ 7 karlof1... i am aware of that, but the money and support qatar are providing turkey is part of turkeys problem as i see it - that is one of the oil rich tin pot dictatorships i was thinking of when i said that... i hope oil stays really low and shuts down the tar sands in alberta permanently... i see oil tutures are putting on a pretty good showing since the beginning of may... the link on oligarch Rami Makhlouf is pretty fascinating...

    i am curious how iraq gets out from under usa servitude...it seems they can be manipulated easily as they are so vulnerable financially... the usa put them in this position for the very reason the usa continues to be in iraq with no interest in leaving.. they will continue to cultivate isis and iraq needs to figure out a way to get rid of them..

    james , May 8 2020 1:41 utc | 30
    @ 13 bevin... i think b was writing an article on the middle east and i happened to note qatar and uaes direct involvement in the libya dynamic.. i was referring to those tin pot dictatorships... but hey - if you want to talk about alberta and canada here - go for it, lol.. i suppose it depends on ones perspective how much of a difference there really is in all this oil money-rape...
    Jen , May 8 2020 1:51 utc | 31
    "... Throughout the last months Russian foreign policy grandees and oligarchs had published essays that argued that the Syrian government had to look more at the economic situation in Syria, which is very bad, instead of pushing for military solutions. It was not fully clear what they were aiming at ..."

    When the partners of the Russian International Affairs Council, on whose platform Aleksandr Aksenenok wrote the article from which B draws the above quote, include such luminaries as the Rand Corporation (itself funded by various beloved US government agencies like the Pentagon and DHS among assorted others), the Carngegie Endowment for International Peace and Voice of America, what these Russian government flunkies and handmaidens of oligarchs like Mikhail Khodorkovsky are advocating for Syria is a neoliberal economic regime that will push the country back into the precarious state it was in before 2011 when the Assad government was persuaded to adopt neoliberal "reforms" that had the effect of alienating people in those parts of Syria that rapidly came under ISIS domination, through the privatisation of natural resources. Doubtless Rami Makhlouf and his family must have benefited from such "reforms".

    There is the possibility that the West may see in Makhlouf the Syrian equivalent of a Khodorkovsky, and Makhlouf might play up to the West to get support. Who thinks the West might be stupid enough to throw its weight behind Makhlouf and drum him up as the legitimate successor to Assad, the worthy Syrian equivalent of ... erm, Venezuela's shining knight in armour Juan Guaido???

    [May 07, 2020] Bolton and the culture of corruption and intimidation

    May 07, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Sam 12123 , says: Show Comment May 6, 2020 at 8:39 pm GMT

    The OPCW is claimed to be an independent agency but we know that it suppressed the results of its own engineers when it reported that the Syrian government was responsible for the alleged chemical attack in Douma. The former head of the agency has publicly asserted that when John Bolton demanded that he step down, he added, "We know where your children live." The US has a history of corruption and intimidation. Any investigation would result in finding China responsible just as Russia was found to be responsible for the airliner that was shot down over Ukraine.

    [May 06, 2020] Michael Flynn Did Not Lie, He Was Framed by The FBI by Larry C Johnson

    Notable quotes:
    "... In 2010, Flynn co-authored an important analysis, Fixing Intel: A Blueprint for Making Intelligence Relevant in Afghanistan . Flynn's key conclusion warned that the U.S. intelligence effort in Afghanistan was failing: ..."
    "... The paper argues that because the United States has focused the overwhelming majority of collection efforts and analytical brainpower on insurgent groups, our intelligence apparatus still finds itself unable to answer fundamental questions about the environment in which we operate and the people we are trying to protect and persuade. ..."
    "... lambasted American intelligence performance in Afghanistan. . . [It] pulled no punches, using words like "marginally relevant," "ignorant," "hazy," and "incurious" to describe U.S. intelligence work in Afghanistan in a scathing fashion. ..."
    "... During 2012-2013, DIA provided honest, objective analysis about the success of the Syrian Army in fighting against ISIS and Al Qaeda. If you go back and look at the media reporting at the time, there were dire reports claiming that the rebels were on the verge of ousting Syrian leader Assad and sweeping to power. Members of Congress, such as Senators McCain and Graham, were busy cheerleading the Syrian rebels progress. ..."
    "... Few knew at the time that the CIA was running a massive arms and training program to support some of the Syrian rebels. ..."
    "... This earned Michael Flynn the lasting enmity of DNI Director Jim Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan. Flynn would not play ball in down playing the jihadist threat in Syria. If you recall, President Obama referred to ISIS as the "junior varsity" during a January 2014 interview with the New Yorker: ..."
    "... "The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn't make them Kobe Bryant," Obama said, resorting to an uncharacteristically flip analogy. "I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian. ..."
    "... His refusal to downplay the ISIS threat was on of the contributing factors that led Obama to fire Flynn, who left the DIA position in August 2014. ..."
    "... Michael Flynn did not go quietly into retirement. He became a vocal critic of Obama's failed policies in the Middle East ..."
    "... This made him a target of both Clapper and Brennan. When Brennan put together a CIA Task Force in the late summer of 2015, I believe that one of the targets of the intelligence collection from that effort was Michael Flynn. By March of 2016, Flynn was squarely in the crosshairs of the Obama political/intelligence hit squad : ..."
    "... Flynn, who was forced out of his post as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in August 2014 after clashing with other senior officials, has said that "political correctness" has prevented the U.S. from confronting violent extremism, which he sees as a "cancerous idea that exists inside of the Islamic religion." Flynn has authored a forthcoming book that argues the U.S. government "has concealed the actions of terrorists like [Osama] bin Laden and groups like ISIS, and the role of Iran in the rise of radical Islam " ..."
    "... But that did not stop Jim Comey and his cronies from stepping up their efforts to find something they could use to charge and prosecute Flynn. Text messages from Peter Strzok to the author of the memo recommending the case be closed show that Strzok begged to keep the investigation open and cited "7th Floor" interest as justification. The 7th Floor of the FBI is where Jim Comey and Andy McCabe were located. ..."
    "... Who authorized that collection of those conversations? Flynn was the acting National Security Advisor to President elect Donald Trump. Listening in on such a phone call was a pure act of domestic espionage against a political opponent of Obama. There was no justification to UNMASK General Flynn. But that is exactly what the FBI did. ..."
    "... If and that's a big IF, somehow these scumbags (Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Strzok, et. al) ever got to a courtroom, they'd be facing - in DC - a jury of 12 Trump-haters and an Obama judge;see Roger Stone's trial. ..."
    "... Excellent summary. Yes, Flynn was scapegoated and dragged through the mud for embarrassing his "betters" with the truth. He made mistakes and was naive himself, but he did the right thing exposing their plan to arm and support a jihadi takeover of Syria and Iraq. The plan was to let them takeover and then take the "JV team" out. ..."
    "... They didn't want to send too many more troops to war. Americans had grown weary due to Bush's madness, so they used jihadis to carry out their plan in the Middle East and North Africa, to fill in the void ..."
    "... It was very naive policy making and in the end Obama grew paranoid he was being screwed like Carter, that Benghazi was going to be turned into another Iranian hostage-like situation. It's a curious thing that Obama warned Trump of Flynn. In Obama's mind, Flynn was part of a conspiracy to screw him for choosing to back "Syrian and Libyan farmers" over American troops. That this was the US military brass showing him who's really boss and that they were trying to embarrass him. In reality, he made a bad policy decision based on failure to understand the region. His failures to under these people, exactly as Flynn warned, precipitated these failures. ..."
    "... Trump showed a lot of promise that these circumstances would change for the better. Sadly, he has performed no better. Netanyahu and Pompeo are so far up his ass that they are now his ventriloquists. Obama should have warned him of those two instead. ..."
    "... ...We see the same thing has evolved in the American Empire. If you take time to read up on the Flynn case or the much larger plot around it, you see a large cast of people with one thing in common. They all live together as a social class. Some were having sex with one another. Others had been friends since college. Others developed their relationships when they came to Washington. All of these social relationships transcend the formal positions and titles of the people... ..."
    "... At that time of the Syria events, it appeared one of the biggest names in the background pushing for more support for Syrian "rebels", was the shadowy activist group AVAAZ. ..."
    "... Now comes the present day kicker, the mistress Antonia Staats of the recently fired UK "expert" Neil Ferguson that caused our global shut down with his wildly inaccurate corona death count numbers, works for US based AVAAZ. Did she have any influence over his draconian pronouncements based up on her known AVAAZ activism? ..."
    "... Is AVAAZ just one more name for Bernnan's CIA, not like unlike CNN? Should these dots be connected or just discarded as one more right-wing wacko conspiracy theory. ..."
    "... Thanks for the excellent summary of how Flynn became "persona non grata" to various powers in the IC. But there is another powerful group in Washington whose fervent enmity he drew: the Democratic establishment. See: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/how-mike-flynn-became-americas-angriest-general-214362 ..."
    "... Adding to my comment just above, my personal feeling on why there was such a push to find something to prosecute Flynn over was as a direct response to Flynn's leading of chants to "lock her up." "What goes around comes around" seems to be an operative policy for some in Washington. I can't help but believe that is what drove DOJ's otherwise inexplicable drive to find something to prosecute Flynn over. ..."
    May 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Two and one-half years ago, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller unveiled charges against Michael Flynn for "lying to Federal agents." At the time I gave Mueller the benefit of the doubt and assumed, incorrectly, that the investigation was fair and honest. We now know without any doubt that the so-called investigation of Michael Flynn was frame-up. It was a punishment in search of a crime and ultimately led the FBI to manufacture a crime in order to take out Michael Flynn and damage the fledgling Presidency of Donald Trump.

    It is important to understand the lack of proper foundation to investigate Michael Flynn as a collaborator with Russia as part of some bizarre plot to steal the 2016 Presidential election for Donald Trump.

    Flynn was perceived as a threat to the CIA and refused to cook the intelligence for the Obama Administration while he was Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

    In 2010, Flynn co-authored an important analysis, Fixing Intel: A Blueprint for Making Intelligence Relevant in Afghanistan . Flynn's key conclusion warned that the U.S. intelligence effort in Afghanistan was failing:

    The paper argues that because the United States has focused the overwhelming majority of collection efforts and analytical brainpower on insurgent groups, our intelligence apparatus still finds itself unable to answer fundamental questions about the environment in which we operate and the people we are trying to protect and persuade.

    Flynn's work did not sit well with Jim Clapper and John Brennan. John Schindler, a rabid anti-Trumper, wrote a hit piece on Flynn in December 2017, that highlights the Deep State anger at Flynn. Schindler characterizes Flynn's work in unflattering terms and claims that Flynn :

    lambasted American intelligence performance in Afghanistan. . . [It] pulled no punches, using words like "marginally relevant," "ignorant," "hazy," and "incurious" to describe U.S. intelligence work in Afghanistan in a scathing fashion.

    Flynn's honesty in that assessment did not derail his next promotion -- he was sworn in as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in July 2012. Once in that position he refused to cook the intelligence. I saw this firsthand (at the time I had access to the classified intelligence analysis by DIA with respect to the war in Syria). During 2012-2013, DIA provided honest, objective analysis about the success of the Syrian Army in fighting against ISIS and Al Qaeda. If you go back and look at the media reporting at the time, there were dire reports claiming that the rebels were on the verge of ousting Syrian leader Assad and sweeping to power. Members of Congress, such as Senators McCain and Graham, were busy cheerleading the Syrian rebels progress.

    Few knew at the time that the CIA was running a massive arms and training program to support some of the Syrian rebels. The program was a failure and the attack on the CIA base in Benghazi, Libya came close to exposing the covert effort. What the media was not reporting is that the rebels the U.S. backed were inept. The only rebels achieving some success were the radical jihadists aligned with ISIS and elements of Al Qaeda (e.g. Al Nusra).

    This earned Michael Flynn the lasting enmity of DNI Director Jim Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan. Flynn would not play ball in down playing the jihadist threat in Syria. If you recall, President Obama referred to ISIS as the "junior varsity" during a January 2014 interview with the New Yorker:

    "The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn't make them Kobe Bryant," Obama said, resorting to an uncharacteristically flip analogy. "I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.

    But that was not the story that Flynn's DIA was telling. His refusal to downplay the ISIS threat was on of the contributing factors that led Obama to fire Flynn, who left the DIA position in August 2014.

    Michael Flynn did not go quietly into retirement. He became a vocal critic of Obama's failed policies in the Middle East :

    Since taking off his uniform last August, Flynn, 56, has been in the vanguard of those criticizing the president's policies in the Middle East, speaking out at venues ranging from congressional hearings and trade association banquets to appearances on Fox News, CNN, Sky News Arabia, and Japanese television, targeting the Iranian nuclear deal, the weakness of the U.S. response to the Islamic State, and the Obama administration's refusal to call America's enemies in the Middle East "Islamic militants."

    This made him a target of both Clapper and Brennan. When Brennan put together a CIA Task Force in the late summer of 2015, I believe that one of the targets of the intelligence collection from that effort was Michael Flynn. By March of 2016, Flynn was squarely in the crosshairs of the Obama political/intelligence hit squad :

    They question why the retired general, who has earned criticism for his leadership style but has generally been regarded as a well-intentioned professional, would assist a candidate who has called for military actions that would constitute war crimes.

    "I think Flynn and Trump are two peas in a pod," one former senior U.S. intelligence official who knows Flynn told The Daily Beast. "They have this naïve notion that yelling at people will just solve problems."

    Flynn, who was forced out of his post as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in August 2014 after clashing with other senior officials, has said that "political correctness" has prevented the U.S. from confronting violent extremism, which he sees as a "cancerous idea that exists inside of the Islamic religion." Flynn has authored a forthcoming book that argues the U.S. government "has concealed the actions of terrorists like [Osama] bin Laden and groups like ISIS, and the role of Iran in the rise of radical Islam "

    His co-author, Michael Ledeen, is a neoconservative author and policy analyst who was involved in the Iran-Contra Affair.

    Thanks to the document release on 30 April, 2020, we know that the FBI opened an unsuccessful investigation of Flynn. Here are the key points from the memo recommending the investigation be closed:

    The FBI memo concludes:

    the absence of any derogatory information or lead information from these logical sources reduced the number of investigative avenues and techniques to pursue. . . . The FBI is closing this investigation.

    But that did not stop Jim Comey and his cronies from stepping up their efforts to find something they could use to charge and prosecute Flynn. Text messages from Peter Strzok to the author of the memo recommending the case be closed show that Strzok begged to keep the investigation open and cited "7th Floor" interest as justification. The 7th Floor of the FBI is where Jim Comey and Andy McCabe were located.

    They decided to pursue two lines of attack. First, to go after Flynn for allegedly failing to register as a "Foreign Agent" because of a report his consulting firm prepared on a Turk living in the United States that Turkey named as a "terrorist." Second, the FBI had in hand the transcript of Flynn's conversations with Russia's Ambassador and wanted to entrap him into lying about those conversations.

    Who authorized that collection of those conversations? Flynn was the acting National Security Advisor to President elect Donald Trump. Listening in on such a phone call was a pure act of domestic espionage against a political opponent of Obama. There was no justification to UNMASK General Flynn. But that is exactly what the FBI did.

    The news of Mike Flynn's plea agreement in late 2017 with special prosecutor Robert Mueller was trumpeted on the media as if Flynn admitted to killing Kennedy or having unprotected sex with Vladimir Putin. But read the actual indictment and the accompanying agreement.

    Here is the chronology of Michael Flynn's entirely appropriate actions as the National Security Advisor to President-elect Donald Trump. This is not what an agent of Russia would do. This is what the National Security Advisor to an incoming President would do.

    On this same day, President-elect Trump spoke with Egyptian leader Sisi, who agreed to withdraw the resolution ( link ).

    [I would note that there is nothing illegal or wrong about any of this. Quite an appropriate action, in fact, for an incoming President. Moreover, if Trump and the Russians had been conspiring before the November election, why would Trump and team even need to persuade the Russian Ambassador to do the biding of Trump on this issue?]

    After his phone call with the Russian Ambassador, FLYNN spoke with senior members of the Presidential Transition Team about FLYNN's conversations with the Russian Ambassador regarding the U.S. Sanctions and Russia's decision not to escalate the situation.

    Michael Flynn's contact with the Russian Government and other members of the UN Security Council in the month preceding Trump's inauguration was appropriate and normal. He did nothing wrong. But President Obama's henchmen, including James Comey, John Brennan, Jim Clapper and Susan Rice were out for blood and relied on the FBI to stick the shiv into General Flynn's belly.

    That travesty of justice is being methodically and systematically revealed in the documents delivered to the Flynn defense team thanks to the efforts of Attorney General William Barr. Barr is relying on the US Attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri (EDMO) to review the case and provide Brady material to the Flynn defense team. This is by the book. Doing it this way provides the legal foundation for future prosecution of the FBI and prosecutors who abused the General Flynn's rights and violated the Constitution. Stay tuned.

    Terence Gore , 06 May 2020 at 10:03 AM

    All true in my book but it would be very hard to prosecute and get convictions as the defense would be "We were working in the best interests of the US against the dastardly Russkies"

    At least half the country believes it goes the Russians interfered materially in the 2016 election. 2018 poll

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/18/poll-russia-meddling-election-mueller-investigation-730529

    Ray - SoCal , 06 May 2020 at 10:43 AM
    Great analysis, your article added a lot of context on why Flynn was targeted. What a horrible thing to do to a person. http://meaninginhistory.blogspot.com/ that has been doing A+ work on the Flynn set up, linked to you.
    TV , 06 May 2020 at 11:34 AM
    If and that's a big IF, somehow these scumbags (Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Strzok, et. al) ever got to a courtroom, they'd be facing -
    in DC - a jury of 12 Trump-haters and an Obama judge;see Roger Stone's trial.

    Bottom line: Until the swamp is drained and then burned (meaning all SES and over a certain GS level bureaucrats gone), we will continue to live under the thumbs of this corrupt "ruling class." And getting rid of all these people wouldn't make much of a difference to most Americans; witness the notorious "shutdowns" in recent years.

    RussianBot , 06 May 2020 at 12:00 PM
    Excellent summary. Yes, Flynn was scapegoated and dragged through the mud for embarrassing his "betters" with the truth. He made mistakes and was naive himself, but he did the right thing exposing their plan to arm and support a jihadi takeover of Syria and Iraq. The plan was to let them takeover and then take the "JV team" out.

    They didn't want to send too many more troops to war. Americans had grown weary due to Bush's madness, so they used jihadis to carry out their plan in the Middle East and North Africa, to fill in the void while they could before Russia remained weak and China yet to fully emerge, to checkmate the grand chessboard Zbigniew wrote of while the US held unchallenged supremacy.

    Obama was very naive about what Muslims are really like in some of those parts. It's best to liken them to Comanches. He bought into the Zbigniew/Neocon belief that they'll just be another Taliban, but ask any Afghan who managed to escape the country at the time and they'll tell you these guys are all devils, djinns.

    It was very naive policy making and in the end Obama grew paranoid he was being screwed like Carter, that Benghazi was going to be turned into another Iranian hostage-like situation. It's a curious thing that Obama warned Trump of Flynn. In Obama's mind, Flynn was part of a conspiracy to screw him for choosing to back "Syrian and Libyan farmers" over American troops. That this was the US military brass showing him who's really boss and that they were trying to embarrass him. In reality, he made a bad policy decision based on failure to understand the region. His failures to under these people, exactly as Flynn warned, precipitated these failures.

    Obama made a lot of mistakes, but thankfully he didn't make it worse by invading in spite of his red line. I have to credit him that much, but his failures in Libya and Syria are on par with Bush's failures in Afghanistan and Iraq. Disastrous doesn't even begin to describe these failures.

    Trump showed a lot of promise that these circumstances would change for the better. Sadly, he has performed no better. Netanyahu and Pompeo are so far up his ass that they are now his ventriloquists. Obama should have warned him of those two instead.

    Fred , 06 May 2020 at 01:07 PM
    Walrus,

    "... internal investigation unit". If I run the IG and change the definition of "whistle blower" to allow hearsay evidence that is not admissible as evidence in any court in the Western world that still makes it okay to use hearsay, right? Of course it does. You forgot about Horowitz and his IG report already, you guys must really be getting desperate. Thanks for the laugh.

    JerseyJeffersonian , 06 May 2020 at 01:24 PM
    TV,

    As much as I would love to see this "ruling class" brought low, by which I mean burnt to the ground, we face the problem of The Ruling System, outlined in this post on the Z-Man blog: http://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=20405 A little snippet from the post:

    ...We see the same thing has evolved in the American Empire. If you take time to read up on the Flynn case or the much larger plot around it, you see a large cast of people with one thing in common. They all live together as a social class. Some were having sex with one another. Others had been friends since college. Others developed their relationships when they came to Washington. All of these social relationships transcend the formal positions and titles of the people...

    Z-Man examines this in various historical settings, Versailles, Communist Russia, before arriving at The Swamp. Interesting angle.

    Deap , 06 May 2020 at 01:58 PM
    Small world, speaking of Seymour Hersh's lengthy CIA gun-running to Syria expose in "The Red Line and Rat Line", that all his prior media connections refused to publish at the time (Benghazi-Obama days), until it finally appeared in the London Review of Books- or something like that.

    At that time of the Syria events, it appeared one of the biggest names in the background pushing for more support for Syrian "rebels", was the shadowy activist group AVAAZ.

    Now comes the present day kicker, the mistress Antonia Staats of the recently fired UK "expert" Neil Ferguson that caused our global shut down with his wildly inaccurate corona death count numbers, works for US based AVAAZ. Did she have any influence over his draconian pronouncements based up on her known AVAAZ activism?

    Who was it that says there are no coincidences? Long time since I saw any media attention given to AVAAZ, nor any final answers why the CIA was running such a big operation in Benghazi in 2012. However, all the same names and players still swirling around gives one pause.

    Is AVAAZ just one more name for Bernnan's CIA, not like unlike CNN? Should these dots be connected or just discarded as one more right-wing wacko conspiracy theory.

    Keith Harbaugh , 06 May 2020 at 02:27 PM
    Thanks for the excellent summary of how Flynn became "persona non grata" to various powers in the IC. But there is another powerful group in Washington whose fervent enmity he drew: the Democratic establishment. See: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/how-mike-flynn-became-americas-angriest-general-214362
    Keith Harbaugh , 06 May 2020 at 02:54 PM
    Adding to my comment just above, my personal feeling on why there was such a push to find something to prosecute Flynn over was as a direct response to Flynn's leading of chants to "lock her up." "What goes around comes around" seems to be an operative policy for some in Washington. I can't help but believe that is what drove DOJ's otherwise inexplicable drive to find something to prosecute Flynn over.
    jjc , 06 May 2020 at 04:05 PM
    Not yet confirmed, but it appears almost certain that Strzok's predicate for keeping the Flynn file open relied entirely on the Logan Act.
    Jim , 06 May 2020 at 05:03 PM
    AVAAZ pushed FaceBook and Zuckerberg to ban about half of FB content on novel coronavirus, starting last month, Politico gleefully reported. [Two medical doctors in California 'out of step' with the diktats of some medical cartel's message, among those FB canceled, for example.]

    AVAAZ, which pushed regime change in Syria, no fly zone in Libya, spews hatred of Russia, etc. is alive and well, working hard at increasing online censorship.

    Their clicktivism business model and lock downs go hand in hand.

    [[Avaaz discovered that over 40 percent of the coronavirus-related misinformation it found on Facebook. . .]]

    [[Avaaz said that these fake social media posts -- everything from advice about bogus medical remedies for the virus to claims that minority groups were less susceptible to infection -- had been shared, collectively, 1.7 million times on Facebook in six languages]]

    [[Avaaz tracked 104 claims debunked by fact-checkers to see how quickly they were removed from the platform]]

    https://www.politico.eu/article/facebook-avaaz-covid19-coronavirus-misinformation-fake-news/


    -30-

    Keith Harbaugh , 06 May 2020 at 05:46 PM
    Acting DNI Grenell wants to release some transcripts; HPSCI Chairman Schiff wants to keep them under wraps. Sundance discusses the situation here: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/05/06/forced-tran+sparency-odni-richard-grenell-reminds-adam-schiff-he-can-release-transcripts/
    walrus , 06 May 2020 at 07:10 PM
    Fred,

    " If I run the IG and change the definition of "whistle blower" to allow hearsay evidence that is not admissible as evidence in any court in the Western world that still makes it okay to use hearsay, right? Of course it does. You forgot about Horowitz and his IG report already, you guys must really be getting desperate. Thanks for the laugh."

    No laughing matter. The IG position is obviously politicized. It may be a surprise to you, but many police forces have an internal investigation unit that has extremely wide powers that. go far beyond those available in ordinary investigation. The staff of such units are a rare and disliked breed and the units are managed by the natural enemies of the police - criminal lawyers.

    Given that I've seen what these units do here, I am surprised that Strzok, Page and others were not apprehended and charged very quickly.

    Deap , 06 May 2020 at 07:24 PM
    Jim, thank you for the further AVAAZ info. Call me gob-smacked. Hope the investigative media picks up this thread. Seymour Hersh, are you listening? AVAAZ felt sinister during the Benghazi days - also reacll some connections with Samantha Power and Susan Rice - Barry's Girls.

    Maybe mistress Antonia Staats was on a mission; and not just being a scofflaw mistress? In fact is she trying out to be the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E Bond Girl?

    Fred , 06 May 2020 at 08:31 PM
    Walrus,

    IG's are no surprise to me nor the politicalization, such as Baltimore and Chicago, cities run by the same political party for decades. Or the "intelligence community" IG, who changed to rules to allow the scam of Schiff's supersecret whistleblower fraud to go forward. But then you probably forgot that guy like you did Horowitz.

    "I am surprised that Strzok, Page and others were not apprehended and charged ...." Larry insists that will happen. I'm not holding my breath.

    [May 06, 2020] McMaster and the Myths of Empire by Daniel Larison

    Notable quotes:
    "... Myths of Empire ..."
    May 06, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    | Ethan Paul dismantles H.R. McMaster's "analysis" of the Chinese government and shows how McMaster abuses the idea of strategic empathy for his own ends:

    But the reality is that McMaster, and others committed to great power competition, is actually playing the role of Johnson and McNamara. This shines through clearest in McMaster's selective, and ultimately flawed, application of strategic empathy.

    Just as Johnson and McNamara used the Joint Chiefs as political props, soliciting their advice or endorsement only when it could legitimize policy conclusions they had already come to, McMaster uses strategic empathy as a symbolic exercise in self-validation. By conceiving of China's perspective solely in terms of its tumultuous history and the Communist Party's pathological pursuit of power and control, McMaster presents only those biproducts of strategic empathy that confirm his policy conclusions (i.e. an intuitive grasp of China's apparent drive to reassert itself as the "Middle Kingdom" at the expense of the United States).

    McMaster calls for "strategic empathy" in understanding how the Chinese government sees the world, but he then stacks the deck by asserting that the government in question sees the world in exactly the way that China hawks want to believe that they see it. That suggests that McMaster wasn't trying terribly hard to see the world as they do. McMaster's article has been likened to Kennan's seminal article on Soviet foreign policy at the start of the Cold War, but the comparison only serves to highlight how lacking McMaster's argument is and how inappropriate a similar containment strategy would be today. Where Kennan rooted his analysis of Soviet conduct in a lifetime of expertise in Russian history and language and his experience as a diplomat in Moscow, McMaster bases his assessment of Chinese conduct on one visit to Beijing, a superficial survey of Chinese history, and some boilerplate ideological claims about communism. McMaster's article prompted some strong criticism along these lines when it came out:

    I have heard from other colleagues that several CN scholars met w/ McMaster before he wrote this (while working on his book) and corrected him on many issues. He apparently ignored all of their views. This is what we face people: a simple, deceptive narrative is more seductive.

    -- Michael D. Swaine (@Dalzell60) April 20, 2020

    McMaster's narrative is all the more deceptive because he claims to want to understand the official Chinese government view, but he just substitutes the standard hawkish caricature. Near the end of the article, he asserts, "Without effective pushback from the United States and like-minded nations, China will become even more aggressive in promoting its statist economy and authoritarian political model." It is possible that this could happen, but McMaster treats it as a given without offering much proof that this is so. McMaster makes a mistake common to China hawks that assumes that every other great power must have the same missionary, world-spanning goals that they have. Suppose instead that the Chinese government is not interested in that, but has a more limited strategy aimed at securing itself and establishing itself as the leading power in its region.

    Paul does a fine job of using McMaster's earlier work on the Vietnam War to expose the flaws in his thinking about China. McMaster has often been praised for his criticism of the military's top leaders over their role in running the war in Vietnam, but this usually overlooks that McMaster was really arguing for a much more aggressive war effort. He faulted the Joint Chiefs for "dereliction" because they didn't insist on escalation. Paul observes:

    McMaster's tale of Vietnam is, counterintuitively, one of enduring confidence in the U.S.'s ability to do good in the world and conquer all potential challengers, if only it finds the will to overcome the temptations of political cowardice and stamp out bureaucratic ineptitude. This same message runs through McMaster's tale about China: "If we compete aggressively," and "no longer adhere to a view of China based mainly on Western aspirations," McMaster says, "we have reason for confidence."

    McMaster would have the U.S. view China in the worst possible light as an implacable adversary. Following this recommendation will guarantee decades of heightened tensions and increased risks of conflict. McMaster's dangerous China hawkishness calls to mind something that Jim Mattis said about him regarding a different issue when they served together in the Trump administration: "Oh my God, that moron is going to get us all killed." His aggressiveness towards China is not driven by an assessment of the threat from China, but comes from his tendency to advocate for aggressive measures everywhere.

    As Paul notes, McMaster is minimizing the dangers and risks that his preferred policy of confrontation entails. In that respect, he is making the same error that American leaders made in Vietnam:

    Like Johnson and McNamara before him, McMaster is misleading both the public and himself about the costs, consequences, and likelihood for success of the path he is committed to pursuing, and in so doing is laying the groundwork for yet another national tragedy.

    McMaster's China argument is reminiscent of other arguments made by imperialists in the past, and he relies on many of the same shoddy assumptions that they did. Like British Russophobes in the mid-19th century, McMaster decided on a policy of aggressive containment and then searched for rationalizations that might justify it. Jack Snyder described this in his classic study Myths of Empire thirty years ago:

    Russia is portrayed as a unitary, rational actor with unlimited aims of conquest, but fortunately averse to risk and weak if stopped soon enough. (p. 168)

    McMaster uses the same "paper tiger image" to portray China as an unstoppable aggressor that can nonetheless be stopped at minimal risk. He wants us to believe that China is at once implacable but easily deterred, insatiable but quick to back off under pressure. We have seen the same contradictory arguments from hawks on other issues, but it is particularly dangerous to promote such a misleading image of a nuclear-armed major power. about the author Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .

    [May 05, 2020] UK government experince with the White Helmets and the Skripal affair definitly halps in anti-china propaganda.

    Highly recommended!
    May 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    begob , May 5 2020 2:08 utc | 114

    In the UK, looks like Tom Tugendhat, chair of the foreign affairs committee, is spreading the China-did-it propaganda, after his comments on the BBC last week. He can file it alongside his promotion of the White Helmets and the Skripal affair.

    [May 05, 2020] Could there be a more obvious demonstration that the man is FULL OF SHIT??

    Notable quotes:
    "... The bungling, toxic incompetence of this administration is quite something to behold. Wow... ..."
    May 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    farm ecologist , May 4 2020 18:53 utc | 4

    RADDATZ: Do you believe it was manmade or genetically modified?

    POMPEO: Look, the best experts so far seem to think it was manmade. I have no reason to disbelieve that at this point.

    RADDATZ: Your -- your Office of the DNI says the consensus, the scientific consensus was not manmade or genetically modified.

    POMPEO: That's right. I -- I -- I agree with that. Yes. I've -- I've seen their analysis. I've seen the summary that you saw that was released publicly. I have no reason to doubt that that is accurate at this point.

    To summarize: Pompeo does not doubt that the virus has been genetically modified, but he also does not doubt that is has not been genetically modified.

    Could there be a more obvious demonstration that the man is FULL OF SHIT??

    Jpc , May 4 2020 19:13 utc | 8

    To Farm ecologist.

    You are totally on the money. How or why is he in this job?
    It's demented!

    Sol Invictus , May 4 2020 19:16 utc | 12
    Those incompetent neo-confederates leading america into oblivion will jumble strategic defeats with winning. So much for accountability, hard work and personal responsability... Seems they can't compete fairly without superior military variable of adjustment and threat of violence against adversaries. Orange springs eternal and their great white hope has now adopted a paralizing rhetoric of victimization - republican lawmakers follow suit and are going so far as invoking a western bid for monetary reparations from Chinese depredations. # the art of winnig for maggots, derp.
    Daniel , May 4 2020 20:56 utc | 34
    The bungling, toxic incompetence of this administration is quite something to behold. Wow...

    [May 05, 2020] 50 Years Of Unhinged, Televised Presidential Warmongering by Jim Bovard

    Notable quotes:
    "... Presidential determinations based on secret (and often false) information were sufficient to legally absolve any killings or calamities abroad. ..."
    "... In 1999, Clinton unilaterally attacked Serbia, killing up to 1,500 Serb civilians in a 78 day bombing campaign justified to force the Serb government to embrace human rights and ethnic tolerance. Serbia had taken no aggression against the United States, but that did not deter Clinton from bombing Serb marketplaces, hospitals, factories, bridges, and the nation's largest television station (which was supposedly guilty of broadcasting anti-NATO propaganda). The House of Representatives took a vote and failed to support Clinton's war effort, and 31 congressmen sued Clinton for violating the War Powers Act. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit after deciding that the congressmen did not have legal standing to sue. Most of the U.S. media ignored dead Serb women and children and instead portrayed the bombing as a triumph of American benevolence. ..."
    "... In 2011, Obama decided to bomb Libya because the U.S. disapproved of its ruler, Muammar Gaddafi. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton notified Congress that the White House "would forge ahead with military action in Libya even if Congress passed a resolution constraining the mission." Plagiarizing the Bush administration, the Obama administration indicated that congressional restraints would be "an unconstitutional encroachment on executive power." ..."
    May 03, 2020 | libertarianinstitute.org
    Fifty years ago, President Richard Nixon popped up on national television on a Thursday night to proudly announce that he invaded Cambodia. At that time, Nixon was selling himself as a peacemaker, promising to withdraw U.S. troops from the Vietnam War. But after the sixth time that Nixon watched the movie "Patton," he was overwhelmed by martial fervor and could not resist sending U.S. troops crashing into another nation.

    Presidents had announced military action prior to Nixon's Cambodia surprise but there was a surreal element to Nixon's declaration that helped launch a new era of presidential grandstanding. Ever since then, presidents have routinely gone on television to announce foreign attacks that almost always provoke widespread applause -- at least initially.

    Back in 1970, congressional Democrats were outraged and denounced Nixon for launching an illegal war. In his televised speech, Nixon also warned that "the forces of totalitarianism and anarchy will threaten free nations and free institutions throughout the world." Four days after Nixon's speech, Ohio National Guard troops suppressed the anarchist threat by gunning down thirteen antiwar protestors and bystanders on the campus of Kent State University, leaving four students dead.

    Three years after Nixon's surprise invasion, Congress passed the War Powers Act which required the president to get authorization from Congress after committing U.S. troops to any combat situation that lasted more than 60 days. Congress was seeking to check out-of-control presidential war-making. But the law has failed to deter U.S. attacks abroad in the subsequent decades.

    In 1998, President Bill Clinton launched a missile strike against Sudan after U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by terrorists. The U.S. government never produced any evidence linking the targets in Sudan to the terrorist attacks. The owners of the El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries plant -- the largest pharmaceutical factory in East Africa -- sued for compensation after Clinton's attack demolished their facility. Eleven years later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit effectively dismissed the case: "President Clinton, in his capacity as commander in chief, fired missiles at a target of his choosing to pursue a military objective he had determined was in the national interest. Under the Constitution, this decision is immune from judicial review." Presidential determinations based on secret (and often false) information were sufficient to legally absolve any killings or calamities abroad.

    In 1999, Clinton unilaterally attacked Serbia, killing up to 1,500 Serb civilians in a 78 day bombing campaign justified to force the Serb government to embrace human rights and ethnic tolerance. Serbia had taken no aggression against the United States, but that did not deter Clinton from bombing Serb marketplaces, hospitals, factories, bridges, and the nation's largest television station (which was supposedly guilty of broadcasting anti-NATO propaganda). The House of Representatives took a vote and failed to support Clinton's war effort, and 31 congressmen sued Clinton for violating the War Powers Act. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit after deciding that the congressmen did not have legal standing to sue. Most of the U.S. media ignored dead Serb women and children and instead portrayed the bombing as a triumph of American benevolence.

    After the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush acted entitled to attack anywhere to "rid the world of evil." Congress speedily passed an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) which the Bush administration and subsequent presidents have asserted authorizes U.S. attacks on bad guys on any square mile on earth. Congressional and judicial restraints on Bush administration killing and torturing were practically nonexistent.

    Bush's excesses spurred a brief resurgence of antiwar protests which largely vanished after the election of President Barack Obama, who quickly received a Nobel Peace Prize after taking office. That honorific did not dissuade Obama from bombing seven nations, often based on secret evidence accompanied by false denials of the civilian casualties inflicted by American bombings of weddings and other bad photo ops.

    In 2011, Obama decided to bomb Libya because the U.S. disapproved of its ruler, Muammar Gaddafi. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton notified Congress that the White House "would forge ahead with military action in Libya even if Congress passed a resolution constraining the mission." Plagiarizing the Bush administration, the Obama administration indicated that congressional restraints would be "an unconstitutional encroachment on executive power." Obama "had the constitutional authority" to attack Libya "because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest," according to the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Yale professor Bruce Ackerman lamented that "history will say that the War Powers Act was condemned to a quiet death by a president who had solemnly pledged, on the campaign trail, to put an end to indiscriminate warmaking."

    On the campaign trail in 2016, Donald Trump denounced his opponent as "Trigger Happy Hillary" for her enthusiasm for foreign warring. But shortly after taking office, Trump reaped his greatest inside-the-Beltway applause for launching cruise missile strikes against the Syrian government after allegations the Assad regime had used chemical weapons.

    The following year, the Trump administration joined France and Britain in bombing Syria after another alleged chemical weapons attack. Several officials with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons leaked information showing that the chemical weapons accusations against the Syria government were false or contrived but that was irrelevant to the legality of the U.S. attack.

    Why? Because the Justice Department ruled that President Trump could "lawfully" attack Syria "because he had reasonably determined that the use of force would be in the national interest." That legal vindication for attacking Syria cited a Justice Department analysis on Cambodia from 1970 that stated that presidents could engage U.S. forces in hostilities abroad based on a "long continued practice on the part of the Executive, acquiesced in by the Congress." The Justice Department stressed that "no U.S. airplanes crossed into Syrian air-space" and that "the actual attack lasted only a few minutes." So the bombs didn't count? If a foreign government used the same argument to shrug off a few missiles launched at Washington D.C., no one in America would be swayed that the foreign regime had not committed an act of war. But it's different when the U.S. president orders killings.

    In the decades since Nixon's Cambodia speech, presidents have avoided repeating his reference to America being perceived as "a pitiful, helpless giant." But too many presidents have repeated his refrain that failing to bomb abroad would mean that "our will and character" were tested and failed. Unfortunately, the anniversary of Nixon's invasion of Cambodia passed with little or no recognition that the unchecked power of American presidents remains a grave threat to world peace.

    About Jim Bovard Jim Bovard is the author of Public Policy Hooligan (2012), Attention Deficit Democracy (2006), Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (1994), and 7 other books. He is a member of the USA Today Board of Contributors and has also written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Playboy, Washington Post, and other publications. His articles have been publicly denounced by the chief of the FBI, the Postmaster General, the Secretary of HUD, and the heads of the DEA, FEMA, and EEOC and numerous federal agencies.

    [May 05, 2020] Five eyes, the anglosphere intel and propaganda warriors are the best in the world

    Notable quotes:
    "... When the people who made fake claims about Iraq's WMD, about Russiagate, about Iran's danger, are claiming that the thing isn't manmade, then either it's not manmade or it's US-made and the claim is a lie (what we expect from US intelligence agencies) and a cover-up. ..."
    May 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , May 4 2020 20:57 utc | 35

    In many Ways, Trump reminds me of a Hitler/Stalin admirer. He demands certain results; if you don't supply them, at least Trump will just fire you instead of having you shot or sent to the Gulag -- Evidence of the many IG firings as this article notes .

    The daily lies and bald-faced propaganda is at the point where many are aware but still all too many remain oblivious or are Brown Shirts in all but outward appearance. Pompeo would be a perfect example of a clone if Hitler had a PR spokesperson spewing lies daily for the press & public to digest without any thinking. Imagine Hitler with Twitter.

    None of the above is meant to denigrate; rather, it's to put them into proper perspective. I invite barflies to click here and just look at the headlines of the posted news items--that site's biggest failing was to omit similar criticism of Obama, Clinton, and D-Party pukes in general, although that doesn't render today's headlines false.

    Will the coming Great Depression 2.0 be global or confined to NATO nations? As with the first Great Depression, it will be restricted to being Trans-Atlantic for that's where the dollar zone and Neoliberalism overlap. The emerging dollar-free Eurasian trade zone

    Peter AU1 , May 4 2020 21:32 utc | 42

    karlof1

    Many of Goering's quotes are very accurate as to human nature. US took in Nazi and Japanese scientists. It wouldn't have left the propaganda behind. Goering's quote about taking people to war - nazi's were obviously very good at it as the Germans fought until the very end. US peasants will likely do the same.

    Peter AU1 , May 4 2020 21:51 utc | 47
    The anti China crap filling the MSM is anglosphere in origin. Five eyes, the anglosphere intel and propaganda warriors will be in it up to their eyeballs.
    Clueless Joe , May 4 2020 21:52 utc | 48
    When the people who made fake claims about Iraq's WMD, about Russiagate, about Iran's danger, are claiming that the thing isn't manmade, then either it's not manmade or it's US-made and the claim is a lie (what we expect from US intelligence agencies) and a cover-up. That said, odds are on the former, as far as I'm concerned. The absolutely sure thing is that it's not the Chinese who crafted it.
    H.Schmatz , May 4 2020 22:05 utc | 49
    @Posted by: Clueless Joe | May 4 2020 21:52 utc | 48

    Indeed, this is the pattern, as happened with Skripals and Litvinenko, must be an anglo thing.

    "The best defesne is a good attack"

    [May 05, 2020] Is War With China Inevitable

    Dec 13, 2013 | www.zerohedge.com
    Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog ,

    As a general rule, extreme economic decline is almost always followed by extreme international conflict. Sometimes, these disasters can be attributed to the human survival imperative and the desire to accumulate resources during crisis. But most often, war amid fiscal distress is usually a means for the political and financial elite to distract the masses away from their empty wallets and empty stomachs.

    War galvanizes societies, usually under false pretenses . I'm not talking about superficial "police actions" or absurd crusades to "spread democracy" to Third World enclaves that don't want it. No, I'm talking about REAL war: war that threatens the fabric of a culture, war that tumbles violently across people's doorsteps. The reality of near-total annihilation is what oligarchs use to avoid blame for economic distress while molding nations and populations.

    Because of the very predictable correlation between financial catastrophe and military conflagration, it makes quite a bit of sense for Americans today to be concerned. Never before in history has our country been so close to full-spectrum economic collapse, the kind that kills currencies and simultaneously plunges hundreds of millions of people into poverty. It is a collapse that has progressed thanks to the deliberate efforts of international financiers and central banks. It only follows that the mind-boggling scale of the situation would "require" a grand distraction to match.

    It is difficult to predict what form this distraction will take and where it will begin, primarily because the elites have so many options. The Mideast is certainly an ever-looming possibility. Iran is a viable catalyst. Syria is not entirely off the table. Saudi Arabia and Israel are now essentially working together, forming a strange alliance that could promise considerable turmoil -- even without the aid of the United States. Plenty of Americans still fear the Al Qaeda bogeyman, and a terrorist attack is not hard to fabricate. However, when I look at the shift of economic power and military deployment, the potential danger areas appear to be growing not only in the dry deserts of Syria and Iran, but also in the politically volatile waters of the East China Sea.

    China is THE key to any outright implosion of the U.S. monetary system. Other countries, like Saudi Arabia, may play a part; but ultimately it will be China that deals the decisive blow against the dollar's world reserve status. China's dollar and Treasury bond holdings could be used as a weapon to trigger a global sell-off of dollar-denominated assets. China has stopped future increases of dollar forex holdings, and has cut the use of the dollar in bilateral trade agreements with multiple countries. Oil-producing nations are shifting alliances to China because it is now the world's largest consumer of petroleum. And, China has clearly been preparing for this eventuality for years. So, given these circumstances, how can the U.S. government conceive of confrontation with the East? Challenging one's creditors to a duel does not usually end well. At the very least, it would be economic suicide. But perhaps that is the point. Perhaps America is meant to make this seemingly idiotic leap.

    Here are just some of the signs of a buildup to conflict...

    Currency Wars And Shooting Wars

    In March 2009, U.S. military and intelligence officials gathered to participate in a simulated war game , a hypothetical economic struggle between the United States and China.

    The conclusions of the war game were ominous. The participants determined that there was no way for the United States to win in an economic battle with China. The Chinese had a counterstrategy to every U.S. effort and an ace up their sleeve – namely, their U.S. dollar reserves, which they could use as a monetary neutron bomb, a chain reaction that would result in the abandonment of the dollar by exporters around the world . They also found that China has been quietly accumulating hard assets (including land and gold) across globe, using sovereign wealth funds, government-controlled front companies, and private equity funds to make the purchases. China could use these tangible assets as a hedge to protect against the eventual devaluation of its U.S. dollar and Treasury holdings, meaning the losses on its remaining U.S. financial investments was acceptable should it decide to crush the dollar.

    The natural response of those skeptical of the war game and its findings is to claim that the American military would be the ultimate trump card and probable response to a Chinese economic threat. Of course, China's relationship with Russia suggests a possible alliance against such an action and would definitely negate the use of nuclear weapons (unless the elites plan nuclear Armageddon). That said, it is highly likely that the U.S. government would respond with military action to a Chinese dollar dump, not unlike Germany's rise to militarization and totalitarianism after the hyperinflationary implosion of the mark. The idea that anyone except the internationalists could "win" such a venture, though, is foolish.

    I would suggest that this may actually be the plan of globalists in the United States and their counterparts in Asia and Europe. China's rise to financial prominence is not due to its economic prowess. In fact, China is ripe with poor fiscal judgment calls and infrastructure projects that have gone nowhere. But what China does have on its side are massive capital inflows from global banks and corporations, mainly based in the United States and the European Union. And, it has help in the spread of its currency (the Yuan) from entities like JPMorgan Chase and Co. The International Monetary Fund is seeking to include China in its global basket currency, the SDR, which would give China even more leverage to use in breaking the dollar's reserve status. Corporate financiers and central bankers have made it more than possible for China to kill the dollar , which they openly suggest is a "good thing."

    Is it possible that the war game scenarios carried out by the Pentagon and elitist think-tanks like the RAND Corporation were not meant to prevent a war with China, but to ensure one takes place?

    The Senkaku Islands

    Every terrible war has a trigger point, an event that history books later claim "started it all." For the Spanish-American War, it was the bombing of the USS Maine. For World War I it was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. For U.S. involvement in World War I, it was the sinking of the Lusitania by a German U-Boat. For U.S. involvement in World War II, it was the attack on Pearl Harbor. For Vietnam, it was the Gulf of Tonkin Incident (I recommend readers look into the hidden history behind all of these events). While the initial outbreak of war always appears to be spontaneous, the reality is that most wars are planned far in advance.

    As evidence indicates, China has been deliberately positioned to levy an economic blow against the United States. Our government is fully aware what the results of that attack will be, considering they have gamed the scenario multiple times. And, by RAND Corporation's own admission, China and the United States have been preparing for physical confrontation for some time, centered on the concept of pre-emptive strikes . Meaning, the response both sides have exclusively trained for in the event of confrontation is to attack the other first!

    The seemingly simple and petty dispute over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea actually provides a perfect environment for the pre-emptive powder keg to explode.

    China has recently declared an "air defense zone" that extends over the islands, which Japan has already claimed as its own. China, South Korea and the United States have all moved to defy this defense zone. South Korea has even extended its own air defense zone to overlap China's .

    China has responded with warnings that its military aircraft will now monitor the region and demands that other nations provide it with civilian airline flight paths. China has also stated that it plans to create MORE arbitrary defense zones in the near future.

    The U.S. government under Barack Obama has long planned a military shift into the Pacific, which is meant specifically to counter China's increased presence. It's almost as if the White House knew a confrontation was coming .

    The shift is now accelerating due to the Senkaku situation, as the U.S. transfers submarine-hunting jets to Japan while pledging full support for Japan should war ignite.

    And most recently, the Japanese press has suggested that war between the two countries could erupt as early as January .

    China, with its limited navy, has focused more of its energy and funding into advanced missile technologies -- including "ship killers," which fly too low and fast to be detected with current radar. This is the same strategy of cheap compact precision warfare being adopted by countries like Syria and Iran, and it is designed specifically to disrupt tradition American military tactics.

    Currently, very little diplomatic headway has been made or attempted in regards to the Senkaku Islands. The culmination of various ingredients so far makes for a sour stew.

    All that is required now is that one trigger event -- that one ironic "twist of fate" that mainstream historians love so much, the spark that lights the fuse. China could suddenly sell a mass quantity of U.S. Treasuries, perhaps in response to the renewed debt debate next spring. The United States could use pre-emption to take down a Chinese military plane or submarine. A random missile could destroy a passenger airliner traveling through the defense zone, and both sides could blame each other. The point is nothing good could come from the escalation over Senkaku.

    Why Is War Useful?

    What could possibly be gained by fomenting a war between the United States and China? What could possibly be gained by throwing America's economy, the supposed "goose that lays the golden eggs", to the fiscal wolves? As stated earlier, distraction is paramount, and fear is valuable political and social capital.

    Global financiers created the circumstances that have led to America's probable economic demise, but they don't want to be blamed for it. War provides the perfect cover for monetary collapse, and a war with China might become the cover to end all covers. The resulting fiscal damage and the terror Americans would face could be overwhelming. Activists who question the legitimacy of the U.S. government and its actions, once considered champions of free speech, could easily be labeled "treasonous" during wartime by authorities and the frightened masses. (If the government is willing to use the Internal Revenue Service against us today, just think about who it will send after us during the chaos of a losing war tomorrow.) A lockdown of civil liberties could be instituted behind the fog of this national panic.

    Primarily, war tends to influence the masses to agree to more centralization, to relinquish their rights in the name of the "greater good", and to accept less transparency in government and more power in the hands of fewer people. Most important, though, is war's usefulness as a philosophical manipulation after the dust has settled.

    After nearly every war of the 20 th and 21 st century, the subsequent propaganda implies one message in particular: National sovereignty, or nationalism, is the cause of all our problems. The establishment then claims that there is only one solution that will solve these problems: globalization. This article by Andrew Hunter , the chairman of the Australian Fabian Society, is exactly the kind of narrative I expect to hear if conflict arises between the United States and China.

    National identity and sovereignty are the scapegoats, and the Fabians (globalist propagandists) are quick to point a finger. Their assertion is that nation states should no longer exist, borders should be erased and a one-world economic system and government should be founded. Only then will war and financial strife end. Who will be in charge of this interdependent one world utopia? I'll give you three guesses...

    The Fabians, of course, make no mention of global bankers and their instigation of nearly every war and depression for the past 100 years; and these are invariably the same people that will end up in positions of authority if globalization comes to fruition. What the majority of people do not yet understand is that globalists have no loyalties to any particular country, and they are perfectly willing to sacrifice governments, economies, even entire cultures, in the pursuit of their "ideal society". "Order out of chaos" is their motto, after all. The bottom line is that a war between China and the United States will not be caused by national sovereignty. Rather, it will be caused by elitists looking for a way to END national sovereignty. That's why such a hypothetical conflict, a conflict that has been gamed by think tanks for years, is likely to be forced into reality.

    [May 04, 2020] Pompeo believes coronavirus was 'man-made,' also agrees with intelligence that it was not

    Notable quotes:
    "... "The best experts so far seem to think it was man-made. I don't have reason to disbelieve them at this point," ..."
    "... "I don't believe the virus was man-made." ..."
    May 04, 2020 | www.rt.com

    In his rush to accuse Beijing of unleashing the scourge of Covid-19 on an unsuspecting world, the US Secretary of State said the coronavirus was man-made, before making a U-turn without even blinking. "The best experts so far seem to think it was man-made. I don't have reason to disbelieve them at this point," Mike Pompeo told ABC's 'This Week' when asked about a statement from the US intelligence community that unequivocally said the opposite.

    Host Martha Raddatz twice asked Pompeo to clarify whether his view differed from that of American intelligence, and he voiced his total support for the spies – though he stopped short of actually saying "I don't believe the virus was man-made."

    See also : 'We lied, we cheated, we stole' Pompeo offers honest, if disturbing admission about CIA activity , Apr 29, 2019

    [May 04, 2020] There is a disconnect between what average people feel as threats to their security and what the Beltway does

    May 04, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    "There is a disconnect between what average people feel as threats to their security and what the Beltway does," said Khanna, "I don't dismiss traditional challenges. Obviously you have Russian aggression in Ukraine and Georgia, and Russian election interference. Obviously, you have the rise of China authoritarian capitalism and their foray into Africa and their potential disruption of the navigation of the seas."

    Khanna said his constituents understand the challenges posed by Russia and China, but they want the country to balance these priorities against the need to prepare for future pandemics, the effects of climate change and the risks posed by cyberattacks and emerging technologies.

    For years, the former threats have dominated American national security strategy - and federal spending priorities. "We have a $740 billion Pentagon budget," Khanna said. "That's $130 billion more than where Obama had it. To put that into context, that $130 billion could triple the NIH budget" and boost funds for the CDC and FEMA.

    "In other words, if Trump had put that money into our public health, we would not have had this pandemic to the extent that we have," he continued. "We would have had testing earlier. We possibly could have had a faster track to a cure or to a vaccine."

    Concern over this programmatic imbalance could also dog passage of the upcoming National Defense Authorization Act. Khanna said that progressives are likely to withhold support if the bill does not "show very compelling reasons" spending increases are tied directly to fighting the coronavirus pandemic. Asked if he thought moderate Democrats could join with Republicans to force the bill through the House, Khanna replied that he was "not dismissing" the possibility but warned that they would be "writing off a lot of the progressive base and the independent base."

    Khanna says that he has learned from last year, when all the measures passed by the House were stripped out in conference with the Republican-controlled Senate. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on us. We're not going to pass a bill without an iron commitment that they're going to keep some of those top priorities." Included in his list are prohibitions for any unauthorized war with North Korea and with Iran, both passed last year by the House and stripped by the Senate.

    Khanna hopes the House will serve as a proving ground for new ideas about the relationship between military spending and the nation's safety. "We need to have a new approach to national security in the 21st century," he said. "We need people in our generation who are not derivative thinkers, recycling what they learned from the Cold War, but who are willing to be original."

    "I don't underestimate the status quo," Khanna concluded. "We can be optimistic and then end up defaulting to the same thinking and same people. But I'm hopeful that this crisis really will make us re-examine some of these questions."

    "That's our challenge."

    The entire interview with Rep. Khanna is available here on Press The Button starting at 10pm tonight.

    Joe Cirincione is the president and Zack Brown a policy associate at Ploughshares Fund, a global security foundation.

    [May 04, 2020] Masks Over Missiles New Rules for Pentagon Funding Could Mean No New ICBMs The National Interest

    May 04, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    Representative Ro Khanna (D.-CA) recently laid down some new rules for the Pentagon budget: Fund public health over weapons; freeze defense programs at current levels; resist Senate pressure to cave on House priorities; and develop a "modern, expansive definition of national security that includes the risk of pandemics and climate change." High on his list of possible cuts are the massive increases for new nuclear weapons proposed by President Donald Trump, including a freeze on the new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

    High on his list of possible cuts are the massive increases for new nuclear weapons proposed by President Donald Trump, including a freeze on the new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). He will also press for sound national security policies to be included in the annual Pentagon spending bill and for the House leadership to defend these priorities.

    "One place we're looking is to limit the modernization of ICBMs," he said in an interview on the national security podcast, Press The Button . Instead, Khanna wants Congress to "put that money into coronavirus research, or vaccine research, or developing manufacturing capacity for masks. I think those types of red lines are not only possible but would be politically very popular."

    Khanna's views carry great weight with his colleagues and within national security circles. Serving his second term in the House, he is the first vice-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus , a member of the House Armed Services Committee , and was co-chair for Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign.

    His opposition to the new missile comes just weeks after the U.S. Air Force announced it seeks to accelerate the missile program marked by cost overruns and a controversial bidding process that left Northrop Grumman as the sole contractor. The new missile could cost as much as $150 billion . Air Force program managers are speeding "to get things awarded on contract as quickly as possible," noted budget expert Todd Harrison, "so that becomes harder to reverse if there's a new administration."

    Khanna called the land-based leg of the nuclear triad "one of the greatest threats of nuclear war," noting that former Secretary of Defense James Mattis once testified to their "false alarm danger." He said he is working with another former defense secretary, William Perry, who has termed these missiles "some of the most dangerous weapons in the world," and called for their phase-out.

    Khanna's new rules could thwart the furious lobbying by defense contractors for billions of dollars in the next COVID aid package. He says these funds should be put into more critical areas and that defense contractors should get "not a dime." "We should not be increasing funding for industries that don't need it, that aren't critical to coronavirus, that aren't critical to our national security, that are just going to the defense industrial base," Khanna said. "It's just not the priority right now."

    Khanna picked up some heavyweight support for this position when Rep. Adam Smith (D.-WA), the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, announced last Wednesday that he, too, was opposed to new funds for defense contractors.

    "The defense [budget] last year was $738 billion," said Smith. "I'm not saying that there aren't needs within the Department of Defense, I'm saying they have a lot of money and ought to spend that money to meet those needs." A letter by 62 national organizations to the House leadership last week also opposed any additional funds to the Pentagon this year.

    This opposition by a leader of the Progressive Caucus and by the highest-ranking national security Democrat in Congress, moreover, comes amid growing calls for a fundamental rethink of U.S. national security in response to the pandemic.

    ... ... ...

    For years, the former threats have dominated American national security strategy - and federal spending priorities. "We have a $740 billion Pentagon budget," Khanna said. "That's $130 billion more than where Obama had it. To put that into context, that $130 billion could triple the NIH budget" and boost funds for the CDC and FEMA.

    "In other words, if Trump had put that money into our public health, we would not have had this pandemic to the extent that we have," he continued. "We would have had testing earlier. We possibly could have had a faster track to a cure or to a vaccine."

    Concern over this programmatic imbalance could also dog passage of the upcoming National Defense Authorization Act. Khanna said that progressives are likely to withhold support if the bill does not "show very compelling reasons" spending increases are tied directly to fighting the coronavirus pandemic. Asked if he thought moderate Democrats could join with Republicans to force the bill through the House, Khanna replied that he was "not dismissing" the possibility but warned that they would be "writing off a lot of the progressive base and the independent base."

    Khanna says that he has learned from last year, when all the measures passed by the House were stripped out in conference with the Republican-controlled Senate. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on us. We're not going to pass a bill without an iron commitment that they're going to keep some of those top priorities." Included in his list are prohibitions for any unauthorized war with North Korea and with Iran, both passed last year by the House and stripped by the Senate.

    Khanna hopes the House will serve as a proving ground for new ideas about the relationship between military spending and the nation's safety. "We need to have a new approach to national security in the 21st century," he said. "We need people in our generation who are not derivative thinkers, recycling what they learned from the Cold War, but who are willing to be original."

    "I don't underestimate the status quo," Khanna concluded. "We can be optimistic and then end up defaulting to the same thinking and same people. But I'm hopeful that this crisis really will make us re-examine some of these questions."

    "That's our challenge."

    The entire interview with Rep. Khanna is available here on Press The Button starting at 10pm tonight.

    [May 03, 2020] Obama's Muslim Brotherhood Strategy, the 'War' Against Jihadism, and Russia's Syria Intervention Parts 1 and 2 Russian Eu

    May 03, 2020 | gordonhahn.com

    by Gordon M. Hahn

    Part 1: The Obama Administration and the Muslim Brotherhood at Home

    Introduction

    Under a misguided illusion that Islamists can be regarded as moderates worthy of partnership with democracies and other civilized states in the war against jihadism, the Barack Obama administration has undertaken a series high-stakes, ideologically-driven and naive policy gambits driven by the U.S. president's dangerous sympathy for Islam. In and of itself such a sympathy is not necessarily a problem if it is moderate and indirectly influences a few, non-strategic policies. However, when it becomes the ideological foundation for U.S. foreign policy and strategy across the Muslim world, it is downright dangerous and a potentially catastrophic miscalculation. The upshot of Obama's miscalculation has been the simultaneous destabilization of whole regions of the world, the weakening of key allies, the alienation of potential ones, and the possibility that for the first time since World War Two the West and Eurasia will be riven by violence, terrorism and war.

    The catastrophic failure of Obama's pro-Islamic foreign policy is shaping the perceptions and calculus of friends, enemies, foes, and 'frenemies' alike. For great powers, his policies offer risks and opportunities but, more importantly, they demand a complete re-thinking of what U.S. foreign policy goals are and a rapid policy response to the picture that comes out of such re-thinking. This has become especially true when it comes to the single great power the expanse of which stretches along the most of the Muslim world's northern periphery – Russia. Therefore, Moscow is in the grips of a major revamping and reinvigoration of its foreign policy activity along its southern periphery. In each case the need to do so can be reasonably argue to have been necessitated by American mistakes and failures–from South and Central Asia in the east to North Africa in the west.

    Here I will focus on the most recent cases of the Arab Spring and demonstrate that the Obama administration has attempted to make alliances with Islamists as a buffer against global jihadism and a battering ram for destroying secular authoritarian regimes in the Muslim world despised by many liberals and the left, despite their use as a bulwark against radical political Islam. In three key cases of the so-called Arab Spring–Egypt, Libya, and Syria–the Obama administration has supported the radical global Islamist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). The Egyptian case is well-known and will not be discussed here.

    The pro-MB policy has been a fundamental miscalculation for several reasons. First, it assumed that democratic, moderately Islamic states led by the MB would follow secular authoritarian regimes. Instead, as the short-lived MB regime in Egypt demonstrated, an Islamist MB regime is no better and likely much worse than secular, even military-led regimes. The rise of Islamist authoritarianism after the fall of secular regimes is even better demonstrated by the upper hand that jihadist totalitarian groups have in the chaos of post-secular regimes across those parts of the Muslim world thrown into chaos with the help of U.S. policy.

    Second, it assumed an impermeable line between the global Islamist revolutionary movement, led by groups such as the MB and Hizb ut-Tahrir Islami (HTI), and the global jihadi revolutionary movement, led by the Islamic State or IS (ISIS, ISIL, Daesh) and Al Qa`ida (AQ). The former type of group is often a half-way house for radicalized Muslims heading towards the path of jihad. Like their jihadi counterparts, the MB and other radical Islamist revolutionary groups favor a global caliphate based on the rule of Shariah law. The difference lies in the strategies and tactics for getting there. By backing the MB, the U.S. facilitated jihadi agitation and propaganda, recruiting, and arms acquisition fueling the global jihadi revolutionary movement.

    Part 1: The Obama Administration and the Muslim Brotherhood at Home

    There is a logic President Obama's policy bias in favor of the MB. President Obama's biographical and radical leftist background lends him a great pro-Muslim feeling that often attains absurd proportions. After all, he spent many of his most formative childhood years in Indonesia, went to a madrassah school there, and stated in his autobiography that the most beautiful sound he ever heard is the Islamic azan or call to prayer. The president apparently believes that Islam and Muslims have been an instrumental part of America since its founding. In his 2009 Cairo speech, which the administration claimed sparked the MB-led Egyptian revolution that overthrew Hosni Mubarak in September 2012, President Obama claimed to "know" that "Islam has always been a part of America's story" (www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-cairo-university-6-04-09). In a 2010 speech marking the end of Ramadan, Obama asserted: "Islam has always been part of America" (www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/08/11/statement-president-occasion-ramadan). In February 2015 he stated: "Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding" ( http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/obama-islam-has-been-woven-fabric-our-country-its-founding ). In short, President Obama has a bias in favor of Islam–indeed, a hyper-empathy that goes over the line into fantasy. Given these realities, it might be expected that this sentiment would be reflected in the American President's foreign policy. In fact, it is.

    There is now a boat load of evidence that the Obama administration has brought in officials and advisors from radical Muslim circles–in particular those from groups fronting for, or tied to the MB–who espouse Islamist, anti-semitic, and anti-American points of view similar to those MB proposes. Until Hillary Clinton's resignation as US Secretary of State, MB links connected two high-ranking Obama administration officials: Clinton's chief of staff Huma Abedin and current special assistant to the National Security Council Chief of Staff for the military's Islamic chaplain program Mehdi K. Alhassani. The specific link is the Muslim World League (MWL), indicted for financing Al Qa`ida (AQ) front groups. MWL successor groups have been officially designated terrorist organizations by both the State Department and the United Nations (Aaron Klein, "White House aide linked to al-Qaida funder," Counter Jihad Report , 9 May 2014, http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/mehdi-k-alhassani/ ).

    A link between these two and MB is the Muslim Student Association (MSA) with branches in hundreds of universities across America. The nationwide umbrella organization MSA has extensive proven ties to the MB ("The Muslim Students Association and and the Jihadi Network," Terrorism Awareness Project, 2008 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/MSA%20and%20Jihad%20Network%20v5b-1.pdf ). The MSA's official anthem restates MB's credo:

    Allah is our objective

    The Prophet is our leader

    The Quran is our law

    Jihad is our way

    Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

    Abedin served on the board of the MSA at George Washington University in 1997 ( http://shoebat.com/2014/05/03/distribution-list-smoking-gun-benghazi-email-included-muslim-brotherhood-agent/ ). The GWU MSA was founded by Muslim Brotherhood activists with start-up funding provided by the Saudi Arabian charity the Muslim World League or MWL founded in Mecca in 1962. From 2005 to 2006 Alhassani was the GWU MSA's president (Aaron Klein, "White House aide linked to al-Qaida funder," Counter Jihad Report , 9 May 2014, http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/mehdi-k-alhassani/ ). In 2001 AQ in the Arabian Peninsula's American leader Anwar al-Awlaki, who inspired Fort Hood jihadist Nidal Malik Hasan, became the chaplain for the GWU MSA chapter ( http://shoebat.com/2014/05/03/distribution-list-smoking-gun-benghazi-email-included-muslim-brotherhood-agent/ ).

    Huma worked with Abdullah Omar Naseef on the editorial board of her father's Saudi-financed think tank, the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA). Huma was there from 2002-2008, and Naseef was there from December 2002 – December 2003. Naseef left the JMMA editorial board at a time when various charities led by Naseef's MWL were declared illegal terrorism fronts worldwide, including by the U.S. and U.N. Naseef is still the MWL's secretary-general. Huma's mother, Saleha, is the editor of the IMMA's Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA), the publication of Syed's institute ( http://shoebat.com/2014/05/03/distribution-list-smoking-gun-benghazi-email-included-muslim-brotherhood-agent/ ). Its latest issue (Vol. 35, Issue 4, 2015) features the lead article "Muslims in Western Media: New Zealand Newspapers' Construction of 2006 Terror Plot at Heathrow Airport and Beyond," a study of alleged Islamophobia, in which the institute specializes ( www.tandfonline.com/toc/cjmm20/current ). Saleha Abedin is also a MWL representative.

    The MWL and its various offshoots, including the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) and Al Haramain, have been accused of having terrorist ties. Al Haramain was declared a terror-financing front organization by the U.S. and U.N. with direct ties to Osama bin Laden and banned both in the U.S. and worldwide. The Anti-Defamation League accuses the MWL of proselytizing a "fundamentalist interpretation of Islam around the world through a large network of charities and affiliated organizations" and notes that "several of its affiliated groups and individuals have been linked to terror-related activity." In 2003, U.S. News and World Report documented "a blizzard of Wahhabist literature" accompanied MWL's donations ( http://shoebat.com/2014/05/03/distribution-list-smoking-gun-benghazi-email-included-muslim-brotherhood-agent/ ).

    Both Abedin and Alhassani were links in the Obama's administration's strategic communications (propaganda) operation to pin the 11 September 2012 Bengazi attack that killed the US ambassador to Libya and three CIA operatives on an Internet film instead of an AQ affiliate's attack. In an email obtained under a Judicial Watch lawsuit sent to Alhassani and other officials from Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser for strategic communication sent an email to Alhassani and several other administration officials three days after the three days after the Benghazi attack indicating the need to "underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy." Another email indicates that US Ambassador to the UN Susana Rice was prepped on the Saturday before her Sunday tour of talk shows where she repeated the video story and other elements cantained in the email's talking points (See p. 14 of the PDF of several documents at, http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1919_production-4-17-14.pdf#page=14 ).

    An Egyptian newspaper claimed in December 2012 that six Muslims in particular have direct ties to the MB or are even MB members. Four are adiminstration officials or semi-officials, and three of these deserve scrutiny: assistant secretary for policy development at the Homeland Security Department (HSD) Arif Alikhan; HSD Advisory Council member Mohammed Elibiary; and U.S. special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference Rashad Hussain ( www.investigativeproject.org/3608/dawud-walid-the-quran-and-jews and Ahmed Shawki, "A man and 6 of the Brotherhood in the White House!," Rose El-Youssef, 22 December 2012, www.rosa-magazine.com/News/3444/%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%84%D9%886-%D8%A5%D8%AE%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B6 ). To be sure, the Egyptian article appears to be overstated in claiming these persons' MB membership. The piece was likely part of a strategic communications operation carried out by opponents of the MB regime that overthrew Mubarak and backed the post-MB Egyptian government of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi counter-revolution. Nevertheless, the Obama administration's appointment of these officials or plenipotentiaries as well as several other Muslim-American leaders -- in particular, Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) president Imam Mohamed Magid and and Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) co-founder Salam al-Marayati -- is disturbing given their indirect MB associations and MB-like Islamist political and theological views.

    The biggest knock against DHS assistant secretary for policy development Arif Alikhan has been the endorsement by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) of his appointment. CAIR has defended terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah as liberation movements. It also was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hamas terrorism funding case, and several of its former officials have been convicted of terrorism-related charges. A lesser rap is that Alikhan attended a fundraiser for the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) just days before his appointment. MPAC has a similar history of defending Hamas ( http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/07/new-dhs-official-linked-to-muslim-public-affairs-council-which-calls-hizballah-a-liberation-movement ). The Egyptian publication claimed that Alikhan is a founder of the World Islamic Organization (WIO), which it characterizes as a Brotherhood "subsidiary" ( www.investigativeproject.org/3869/egyptian-magazine-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates# ). These indictments of Alikhan seem less than convincing as evidence of MB ties.

    Much more disturbing was the appointment in 2010 to the DHS Advisory Council (HSAC) member of Mohammed Elibiary, released from his position in September 2014 amidst reports of a coverup involving his misuse of secret documents ( http://freebeacon.com/issues/controversial-dhs-adviser-let-go-amid-allegations-of-cover-up/ ). Before his HSAC appointment Elibiary was known to have publicly praised the MB's leading philosopher Sayyid Qutb, the leader of Iran's Islamist revolution Ayatollah Khomeini, and a radical New York imam Siraj Wahhaj, who was an unindicted co-conspiratr in the World Trade bombing case and was a defense character witness for the jihadist 'Blind Sheikh' Omar Abdel Rahman ( www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/mohamed-elibiary-homeland-security/ and www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/712.pdf ).

    While on the HSAC Elibiary was caught having tweeted that it is "onevitable that the caliphate returns" ( http://freebeacon.com/national-security/senior-dhs-adviser-brags-inevitable-that-caliphate-returns/ ). His tweets were later used by ISIL for propaganda and recruitment purposes ( http://freebeacon.com/national-security/isil-celebrates-dhs-advisers-anti-american-tweets-on-return-of-caliphate/ ). Echoing his appointer, Pressident Obama, Elibiary claimed in November 2013 that America is "an Islamic country with an Islamically compliant constitution" and that the Muslim Brotherhood poses no threat to the U.S. ( http://freebeacon.com/national-security/dhs-adviser-tweets-america-an-islamic-country/ ).

    The funding for Elibiary's own community organizing activity has been shrouded in secrecy. He is co-founder, president and CEO of the Freedom and Justice Foundation (FJF), founded in November 2002 "to promote government relations and "interfaith community relations for the organized Texas Muslim community." The IRS revoked the FJF's nonprofit status in May 2010 for failure to file the requisite forms that would have revealed its source of funding. Moreover, his FJF has never filed a Texas Franchise Tax Public Information Report. He also has ties to CAIR. The North Texas Islamic Council (NTIC) or Texas Islamic Council (TIC) is a FJF affiliate, and Elibiary is a registered NTIV agent for the NTIC. One of the NTIC's directors is H. Mustafaa Carroll, who is the executive director of CAIR's Houston chapter. Elibiary has described the writings of Qutb, the chief ideologist of the MB and a major source for global Islamist and jihadist revolutionaries alike, as having ""the potential for a strong spiritual rebirth that's truly ecumenical allowing all faiths practiced in America to enrich us and motivate us to serve God better by serving our fellow man more" ( www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/712.pdf ).

    According to an investigation by the Washington Free Beacon, Elibiary was at the center of a scandal involving the "inappropriate disclosure of sensitive law enforcement documents" resulting from his access to DHS's secure HS-SLIC system, according to a DHS letter. The case has been "shrouded in mystery, with various officials providing unclear and at times contradictory answers about whether DHS ever properly investigated." The allegation was that Elibiary "inappropriately accessed classified documents from a secure site and may have attempted to pass them to reporters." As part of his role on the HSAC, Elibiary "was provided access to a network containing sensitive but unclassified information," according to the July 2014 DHS letter U.S. congressman Louis Gohmert (Republican from Texas). DHS claimed that its 2011 investigation "found no credible information" that Elibiary "disclosed or sought to disclose 'For Official Use Only' information to members of the media." Nor did DHS "find any indication that he sought to disclose any other internal OHS [Office of Homeland Security] information to anyone apart from official use of information within the scope of his role for the Homeland Security Advisory Council," according to the letter states.

    However, DHS's denials are contradicted by documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which indicate that there was never a proper investigation into Elibiary's actions. In a September 2013 letter DHS informed Judicial Watch in fact that it could not find investigation records connected to the matter. This conflicting information suggests a cover up of the fact that there was no investigation, as congressman Gohmert notes, and that Elibiary was let go from the HSAC to lock in the cover up. Terrorism expert Patrick Poole concluded that any DHS investigation that might have occurred was "phony," since it failed to contact him and his source, which led to the first public allegations of Elibiary's misuse of documents. "(W)hen DHS couldn't provide a single email or document in response to the Judicial Watch FOIA to prove this investigation ever took place, the jig was up," Poole noted ( http://freebeacon.com/issues/controversial-dhs-adviser-let-go-amid-allegations-of-cover-up/ ; see also www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/mohamed-elibiary-homeland-security/ ).

    President Obama's originally appointed Rashad Hussain as his special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). In February 2015 Hussain was promoted to the position of director of the U.S. State Department's Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications (www.jewsnews.co.il/2015/02/26/obama-appoints-muslim-brotherhood-linked-muslim-to-head-center-for-strategic-counterterrorism-communications/). Hussain previously served on Critical Islamic Reflections program organizing committee with the founder of Zaytuna College, Imam Zaid Shakir ( http://www.yale.edu/cir/2004/about.html ). Shakir's co-founder is Hamza Yusuf, who has said that jihadist Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, convicted in the Al Qa`ida conspiracy to bomb New York landmarks in the 1990s, was tried unjustly ( www.investigativeproject.org/2778/ipt-profiles-hamza-yusuf ).

    Speaking at a MSA conference in 2004 Hussain condemned the U.S. Justice Department for "politically motivated persecutions" in prosecuting the soon-to-be convicted terrorism supporter Sami Al-Arian, a University of South Florida computer engineering professor. He also called the legal process "sad commentary on our legal system," "a travesty of justice," and "atrocious" (www.politico.com/story/2010/02/islam-envoy-retreats-on-terror-talk-033210#ixzz0g5R9A5gl). One wonders what legal system Hussain would prefer to the American system of justice. In 2006 the good professor pleaded guilty to one count of "(c)onspiracy to make or receive contributions of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian jihadist organization, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a U.S. State Department 'Specially Designated Terrorist organization'" and was sentenced to 57 months in prison (www.investigativeproject.org/profile/100/sami-al-arian). The judge in the case said there was evidence that Al-Arian served on PIJ's governing board. Al-Arian successfully had lied about his ties to the terrorist group for ten years. For his part, Hussain lied in 2006 about the fact that he made the noted 2004 remarks condemning the Justice Department for 'persecutions', only to be forced to admit he had lied after being subjected to media scrutiny in the wake of his appointment. (www.investigativeproject.org/1809/how-are-these-not-considered-lies). According to the watchdog group Global Mulsim Brotherhood Watch, Hussain has a long record of attending MB-tied conferences, including a May 2009 conference organized by MB-tied groups like the MSA (www.globalmbwatch.com/2010/02/20/breaking-news-rashad-hussain-admits-making-controversial-comments-and-asking-for-deletion/).

    In addition such to appointments, Obama administration grant-giving has rewarded radical Muslims, including open anti-Semites. Director of the Michigan branch of MB front group CAIR, Dawud Walid, has traveled abroad at least twice on U.S State Department funds, using a 2010 trip to Mali to criticize America's treatment of Muslims after 9/11. But it gets worse. In a 25 May 2012 sermon at the Islamic Organization of North America mosque in Warren, Michigan, Walid asked rhetorically: "Who are those who incurred the wrath of Allah?" Walid answered: "They are the Jews, they are the Jews." He also has stated: "One of the greatest social ills facing American today is Islamophobia, and anti-Muslim bigotry. And if you trace the organizations and the main advocates and activists in Islamophobia in America, you will see that all those organizations are pro-Israeli occupation organizations and activists." Walid's anti-American bias is reflected in his view that the 2009 shooting death of a Detroit imam was unjust, despite the imam's refusal of police orders to lay down his weapon and surrender and his fire at police first ( www.investigativeproject.org/3608/dawud-walid-the-quran-and-jews ).

    Obama's ties to Muslims with anti-American and radical leanings predate his election to the presidency. The Obama campaign's Muslim outreach adviser Mazen Asbahi was forced to resign in August 2008 after Wall Street Journal article unmasked his indirect radical and MB ties. In 2000, Asbahi served on the board of the Islamic investment fund Allied Assets Advisors Fund (AAAF), a Delaware-registered trust. Asbahi also has been a frequent speaker before several U.S.-based groups that scholars associate with the MB. AAAF is a subsidiary of the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), which receives funding from the government of Saudi Arabia and holds the title to many U.S. mosques in the U.S. NAIT promotes fundamentalist Islam compatible with both the ideology of MB and Saudi Arabian Wahhabism. Other AAAF board members at the time included one Jamal Sayid, the imam at a fundamentalist mosque in Illinois the Bridgeview Mosque in Bridgeview, Ill., outside Chicago. Sayid served on the AAAF board until 2005. The Justice Department designated the imam an unindicted co-conspirator in a 2007 racketeering trial of several alleged Hamas fund-raisers, which ended in a mistrial. Sayid has been identified as a leading Hamas member in numerous news reports since 1993. (www.wsj.com/articles/SB121797906741214995 and http://www.globalmbwatch.com/2008/08/06/breaking-news-obama-advisor-resigns-after-wall-street-journal-report/ ). Asbahi reportedly has connections to two other MB-linked organizations, the Institute For Social Policy And Understanding and SA Consulting. One of the latter's three managers is Omer Totonji, the apparent son of Iraqi-born U.S. Muslim Brotherhood founder Ahmed Totonji (www.globalmbwatch.com/2008/08/01/breaking-news-obama-top-muslim-adviser-part-of-two-more-organizations-tied-to-us-muslim-brotherhood/).

    The White House's 'go to' imam is Mahomed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), to which Asbahi also has ties (www.globalmbwatch.com/2008/08/01/breaking-news-obama-top-muslim-adviser-part-of-two-more-organizations-tied-to-us-muslim-brotherhood/). Although Magid has been involved in outreach to Jews at the US Holocaust Museum and the gay community, he has also awarded an American Muslim who has verbally attacked Jews on an Islamist ideo-theological basis. Magid is often invited to attend administration speeches on US Middle East policy at the State Department, has advised the FBI and the Justice Department to criminalize defamation of Islam, and is a member of the Department of Homeland Security's Countering Violent Extremism Working Group. He also advises other federal agencies. In 2012 Magid's ISNA organized a "Diversity Forum" at which Magid gave a diversity award to CAIR Michigan branch director Dawud Walid, just weeks after Walid's sermon at the Islamic Organization of America (IOA) mosque in Warren, Michigan, in which he claimed Jews had incurred the wrath of Allah (www.investigativeproject.org/3608/dawud-walid-the-quran-and-jews and https://pjmedia.com/blog/obamas-shariah-czar-mohamed-magid-hands-diversity-award-to-jew-hater-dawud-walid ).

    Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) co-founder and director Salam al-Marayati is a frequent White House visitor and administration consultant (www.mpac.org/programs/government-relations.php). Marayati has said that Israel should have been added to the "suspect list" for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks ( http://theblacksphere.net/2013/04/devout-muslims-in-key-positions-in-the-white-house/ ). MPAC has stated Muslims should be "confronting a nation of cowards," speaking of the United States in the words of former U.S. Attorney General ( www.mpac.org/programs/government-relations/ferguson-confronting-a-nation-of-cowards.php ). Marayati's MPAC spokeswoman in 2007, one Edina Lekovic, was editor of Al-Talib: The Muslim News Magazine at UCLA , for its July 1999 issue which praised Osama bin Laden as a "glorious mujahed" and in 2007 lied on national television about it, for which she was later fully exposed by Investigative Project director Stephen Emerson (www.investigativeproject.org/293/ms-lekovica-dozen-printing-mistakes). By the early 2000s, if not much during Ms Lekovic's years at UCLA, the UCLA MSA was engaged in Islamist and anti-Semitic propaganda and agitation, including support for the publication (www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/MSA%20and%20Jihad%20Network%20v5b-1.pdf). CAIR was affiliated with the university paper, with its southern California chapter's director sitting on Al-Talib 's editorial board (www.investigativeproject.org/271/mpac-cair-and-praising-osama-bin-laden). The UCLA MSA was also intimately involved with the newspaper's publishing and protest activity attacking Jews (www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/MSA%20and%20Jihad%20Network%20v5b-1.pdf and www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/06/cairs-legal-tribulations ).

    Given all of the above, it is certainly not unreasonable to suspect that President Obama's Cairo speech was intended to lend support to the world's most powerful MB branch -- that in Egypt. The Obama administration's warm support for Egypt's MB-led revolution and short-lived regime and cold shoulder to Gen. Sisi's government is well-known and speaks for itself.

    Part 2: The Obama Administration and the MB Abroad

    Abroad, President Obama's sympathy for semi-Islamist, MB-like elements at home was soon reflected in his foreign policy. In 2011 Obama issued a secret directive called Presidential Study Directive-11, or PSD-11, which, according to the Washington Times, outlined a strategy for backing the Muslim Brotherhood across the Middle East as a strategy for supporting reform and blocking jihadism's advances in the region ( https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/3/inside-the-ring-muslim-brotherhood-has-obamas-secr/ ).

    It appears to have been the foundation of the Obama administration's overall strategy in the Middle East and North Africa and the war against jihadism. It would be evident in the administration's policy failures in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, and Syria. Those failures would influence U.S. relations with allies and competitors, especially the other major powers in the region – Russia and Turkey – putting them on a collision course as they attempted a region in free-fall collapse as a result, for the most part, of American policies.

    Egypt

    The Obama administration first encouraged the MB-led overthrow of Hosni Mubarak's secular Arab nationalist regime in Egypt, and then openly supported the new MB 'democracy.' Thus, the U.S. was backing the overthrow of the leader who had repressed the MB in the wake of the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in October 1981, in which the some MB members were involved but not the main actors. Thus, President Obama invited MB leader and new Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi to the White House, a strong endorsement from any U.S. president. After President Obama's November 2012 meeting with the MB's now Egyptian President Morsi, Obama told his aides that he "sensed an engineer's precision with surprisingly little ideology" (www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/world/middleeast/egypt-leader-and-obama-forge-link-in-gaza-deal.html?pagewanted=1&_r=4&src=un&feedurl=http:/json8.nytimes.com/pages/world/middleeast/index.jsonp&pagewanted=all&). This was at a time when the Israeli incursion in Gaza was at its peak and Egyptian MB officials were issuing the most harsh and sometimes jihadist and racist statements in relation to Israel and Jews. Just days before Obama met with Morsi, the latter declared in Cairo's Al-Azhar mosque: "The leaders of Egypt are enraged and are moving to prevent the aggression on the people of Palestine in Gaza. We in Egypt stand with Gaza," he said. "[W]e are with them in one trench, that he who hits them, hits us; that this blood which flows from their children, it, it is like the blood flowing from the bodies of our children and our sons, may this never happen." At the same time, the chairman of Morsi's Freedom and Justice Party, Saad Katatni was making threats of jihad against Israel: "We are with you (Gaza) in your jihad. We have come here to send a message from here to the Zionist entity, to the Zionist enemy. And we say to them, Egypt is no longer. Egypt is no longer after the revolution a strategic treasure for you. Egypt was and still is a strategic treasury for our brothers in Palestine; a strategic treasure for Gaza; a strategic treasure for all the oppressed" (www.investigativeproject.org/3827/obama-administration-oversells-morsi).

    MB officials and its official website in fact issued a series of anti-Semitic and jihadi calls. During one MB-organized protest at the time, preacher Muhammad Ragab called on Muslims "to raise the banner of jihad against the tyrannical, invading and wicked sons of apes and pigs [i.e., the Jews], and to unite against the enemies of Allah." MB website articles described "Zionists" as "apes and pigs," "scum of the earth," "prophet murderers," or "infidels." For example, MB General Guide Dr. Muhammad Badi issued various jihidist and anti-Semitic calls and motifs, including a quote of the hadith of "the rocks and the trees" – a well-known Islamic antisemitic motif–also found in Hamas's founding charter–according to which the Muslims will fight and kill the Jews before the Day of Judgment. The MB also repeatedly thanked God for the deaths of Israeli civilians during the killed by rockets (www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/6836.htm).

    The Obama administration has never criticized the Egyptian MB or any other MB branch for pro-Hamas and pro-jihad rhetoric whether from Morsi, Katatni, or their 'ikhwan' associates. In addition, he nor any U.S. official ever threatened sanctions as the new MB regime allowed Islamist elements to attack Coptic Christians, and he was reluctant to support the overthrow of the MB regime and the return to power of the now military-backed Arab nationalist rule under Gen. Sisi.

    Indeed, when confronted by a journalist on the issue, then State Department spokeswoman and architect of State's remarkably similarly failed Ukraine policy, Victoria Nuland responded: "Well, I'm obviously not, from this podium, going to characterize the Egyptian view, nor am I going to speak for them and characterize our private diplomatic conversations. We all agree on the need to de-escalate this conflict, and the question is for everybody to use their influence that they have to try to get there" (www.investigativeproject.org/3827/obama-administration-oversells-morsi). This pro-MB policy orientation was mirrored in the events in Libya and elsewhere that soon followed.

    Libya

    The administration then directly intervened to overthrow Muammar Qaddafi regime in Libya–another country with a considerable MB presence–in violation of a UN resolution limiting NATO action to establishing a no-fly zone backed by Russia by its abstention in the UN Security Council vote. The overthrow of Qaddafi first led to minimal change after elections and eventually anarchy and a civil war, which rages to this day. The parliamentary elections of July 2012 saw National Transition Council president Mustafa Abdul Jalil's party take the most votes, but Jalil represented limited change having been the economic advisor of Qaddafi's son. The elections also provided an opening for the MB, which finished in second place. But these elections failed in strengthening regime or consolidating democracy, and the country soon melted down into civil war, with jihadi elements supplementing the Islamist trend represented by the MB.

    The Obama administration pattern of supporting MB and, unwittingly through it, jihadi elements such as AQ first emerged in Libya in 2011. In the words of the Citizens' Commission on Benghazi (CCB) -- founded in September 2013 and including among its members former US Congressman Peter Hoekstra and numerous former CIA and military officers -- the Obama administration "switched sides in the war on terrorism" ( www.aim.org/benghazi/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CCB-Interim-Report-4-22-2014.pdf ). CCB member and former CIA officer Clare Lopez concludes that "the Qaddafi opposition was led by the Muslim Brotherhood and the fighting militia was dominated by al-Qaida. That's who we helped" ( http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/mustafa-abdul-jalil/ ).

    A December 2015 FOIA release of emails of then U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton show that from the outset of protests in Libya the Obama administration was aware of AQ's presence in the U.S. backed opposition and anti-Qaddafi rebels' war crimes and had sent special ops trainers inside Libya from nearly the start of the protests, and concerned regarding oil access for Western firms, Qaddafi's gold and silver reserves and his plans for a gold-backed currency that might weaken Western currencies. Thus, Clinton's unofficial advisor and envoy to the region, Sidney Blumenthal refers in one email to "an extremely sensitive source" who confirmed that British, French, and Egyptian special ops forces were training the Libyan rebels along the Egyptian-Libyan border and in Benghazi's suburbs within a month of the first ant-Qaddafi protests which began in Benghazi in mid-February 2011. By March 27 what was repeatedly being referred to as a popular revolt involved foreign agents "overseeing the transfer of weapons and supplies to the rebels" of the National Libyan Council (NLC) opposition front, including "a seemingly endless supply of AK47 assault rifles and ammunition." Blumenthal then notes that "radical/terrorist groups such as the Libyan Fighting Groups and Al Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) are infiltrating the NLC and its military command." Moreover, Blumenthal reported to her that "one rebel commander stated that his troops continue to summarily execute all foreign mercenaries captured in the fighting." The commander was using a label–'foreign mercenaries'–used by opposition forces for the black Libyans favored under his regime and apparently was not referring to the Western special forces training and backing the rebels, whose atrocities of Libyan blacks were well-documented at the time by human rights groups the U.S. government often cites. Furthermore, Blumenthal states that the stories of Qaddafi's forces engaging in mass rape and his distributing Viagra to encourage them were only rumors, and yet these rumors became a charge leveled officially by Clinton in a State Department statement, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice at the UN itself, and numerous Western officials and media. The claims were shown in July 2011 by Amnesty International to have been very likely false and initiated by the rebels ( www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/06/new-hillary-emails-reveal-true-motive-for-libya-intervention/ with links to original sources). The above-mentioned CCB investigation, based on interviews with sources in U.S. intelligence agencies and the military, concludes that the U.S. facilitated delivery of weapons and military support to Libyan rebels from the MB who were linked to AQ, including the AQ cell that undertook the Bengazi consulate attack that killed U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens and three CIA operatives.( www.aim.org/benghazi/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CCB-Interim-Report-4-22-2014.pdf ).

    A New York Times investigation confirms the interpretation supported by the recently disclosed documents and CCB investigation. Secretary of State Clinton, whose ear Huma Abedin had, provided the pivotal support convincing the president first to back a UN resolution on a no-fly zone and disabling Qaddafi's command and control. Clinton also led the push inside the administration to upgrade from that policy to one of pursuing a rebel victory and a strategy of letting its allies supply weapons to the rebels and knowingly and willfully exceed the UN resolution's legal writ. Almost immediately after the UN resolution's adoption and well before Qadaffi was killed, the U.S. was providing assistance that went far beyond that necessary to secure a no-fly zone. According to former CIA Director, General David Petraeus, the United States was then already providing "a continuing supply of precision munitions, combat search and, and surveillance." Throughout spring 2011, the Obama administration looked the other way as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates supplied the rebels with lethal weapons, according to the Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others, and Clinton knew and was ostensibly "concerned that Qatar, in particular, was sending arms only to militias from the city of Misurata and select Islamist brigades." The State Department's Libya policy adviser Daniel Shapiro acknowledged to the NYT that the goal no longer was enforcing a no-fly zone but "winning" and "winning quickly enough," the latter goal perhaps connected with U.S. domestic politics and the presidential election little more than a year away. US State Department's Policy Planning Director Anne-Marie Slaughter confirmed in the NYT article that the U.S. "did not try to protect civilians on Qaddafi's side" (Jo Becker and Scott Shane, "The Libya Gamble, Part 1: Hillary Clinton's 'Soft Power' and a Dictator's Fall," New York Times , 27 February 2016, www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html?emc=edit_th_20160228&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=59962778&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New%20Campaign&utm_term=%2ASituation%20Report&_r=0).

    Clinton was unusually interested–on "the activist side"–in having the U.S. take part, if a clandestine part in the supply of weapons to "secular" Libyan rebels "to counter Qatar" and the threat of lost influence. However, senior military officials, such as NATO's supreme allied commander, Adm. James G. Stavridis and Obama's national security adviser Tom Donilon warned that there were signs, "flickers." of Al Qaeda within the opposition and the administration would not be able to ensure that weapons would not fall into Islamist extremists's hands. This was a 'flicker' of the tragedies in Benghazi and Syria yet to come(Becker and Scott Shane, "The Libya Gamble, Part 1: Hillary Clinton's 'Soft Power' and a Dictator's Fall").

    The CCB and the NYT also concluded that Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had communicated to the U.S. his willingness to resign and depart from Libya and that the U.S. facilitated the delivery of arms to Libyan MB rebels tied to AQ in the person of its North African affiliate, AQ in Maghreb or AQIM. Moreover, the investigation found that the U.S. ignored Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi's called for a truce and expressed a readiness to abdicate shortly after the 2011 Libyan revolt began but was ignored or rebuffed by U.S. officials leading to "extensive loss of life (including four Americans), chaos, and detrimental outcomes for U.S. national security objectives across the region" ( www.aim.org/benghazi/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CCB-Interim-Report-4-22-2014.pdf ). There was another plan supported by State Department policy planning director Slaughter to have Qaddafi step down in favor of one his sons, but this was also rejected by Clinton in favor of supporting the rebels to victory and violating international law established by the UN resolution (Becker and Scott Shane, "The Libya Gamble, Part 1: Hillary Clinton's 'Soft Power' and a Dictator's Fall").

    The CCB's broader conclusions about the Islamist revolution in U.S. counter-jihadism policy is backed up by revelations from other newly disclosed documents regarding the debacle in Syria. The Obama administration's MB policy in Libya–which was already getting out of control and would turn Libya into a failed state, a jihadi and in particular IS stronghold, and a main source of Europe's refugee deluge–would be applied to Syria as well with even more disastrous results. Documents show that the U.S. administration was well aware that no later than October 2012 weapons of the formerly Qaddafi-led Lybian army were being sent from Libyan MB and AQ rebels to the increasingly jhadist-dominated Syrian opposition.

    Obama, the MB, and Jihadists in Syria

    When the Syrian revolt began in Daraa on March 18, 2011, the Syrian MB only existed abroad, having been exiled by Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's father and predecessor. However, its support abroad translated into strength in the original opposition alliance, the Syrian National Council (Oct. 2, 2011-Nov. 11, 2012) or SNC, backed and 'weaponized,' literally speaking, by the West, Turkey, and the Arabs. Turkey and Qatar sponsored the Syrian MB's strong representation on the SNC, though traditionally different Syrian MB factions have had ties in Saudi Arabia and Iraq as well and more radical Salafists were stronger at home in 2011-2013 in contrast to the MB's dominance in Syria from 1979-1982 (www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2014/01/syria-muslim-brotherhood-past-present.html#). At a conference hosted by Turkey in Istanbul in October 2011, the Syrian MB became a co-founder of the SNC, which it came to dominate politically if not numerically ( http://carnegieendowment.org/syriaincrisis/?fa=48370 ). Exiled Syrian MB members comprise a quarter of the SNC's 310 members, and the MB constitutes the most cohesive, well-organized and influential bloc within the SNC. Moreover, another Islamist group within the SNC, the 'Group of 74' consists of former MB members ( http://carnegieendowment.org/syriaincrisis/?fa=48370 ; http://carnegie-mec.org/publications/?fa=48334 ; and www.stratfor.com/sample/analysis/more-divisions-among-syrian-opposition ).

    The MB is far more clever and deceptive than some other Islamist and all jihadist groups. It attempts to portray a moderate face and join alliances that function as fronts for its activity and vehicles for its rise to power. Thus, the SNC platform professed the goal of creating a full-fledged democracy, with full individual and groups rights and freedoms, elections, and the separation of powers ( http://carnegieendowment.org/syriaincrisis/?fa=48370 ). It also allowed more moderate SNC leaders to assume the mantle of leadership to present a moderate face to foreign sponsors. This is openly acknowledged by MB leaders in the SNC. Former Muslim Brotherhood leader Ali Sadr el-Din Bayanouni, the SNC's fourth most powerful leader, stated that SNC Chairman Burhan Ghalioun was chosen because he "is accepted in the West and at home and, to prevent the regime from capitalizing on the presence of an Islamist at the top of the SNC" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk6KTU1zoTE ). In 2012 liberal members began resigning from the council precisely because they saw it functioning as a liberal front for the MB ( http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/03/14/200546.html ). One of the SNC's few secular members claimed in February 2012 that more than half of the council consisted of Islamists ( http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-syria-opposition-idUKTRE81G0VM20120217 ).

    The SNC joined the National Coalition for Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces when the coalition was founded in November 2012 but withdrew from it in January 2014 when the latter agreed to enter into talks on a ceasefire and peaceful transition sponsored by the West and Russia in Geneva. By then both the council and the coalition had been long overtaken by the Al-Qa`ida-tied Jabhat al-Nusrah and other such groups as well as by the Islamic State (IS). The National Council is also heavily influenced by the MB. Its first president (November 2012-April 2103), Moaz al-Khatib, was the former imam of the historical Sunni Umayyad Mosque, a converted Christian church which houses the remains of St. John the Baptist and is situated in the heart of old Damascus. One of his two vice presidents was Suheir Atassi, ostensibly a secularist, and Khatib has at times promised equal rights for Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, Christians and Kurds alike, prompting optimism in the West at the time that he could be a strong counter to the growing jihadization of the Free Syria Army (FSA). However, Katib is a MB sympathizer if not clandestine operative, a declared follower of the MB's chief theologian Yusuf al-Qardawi, whom he calls "our great imam." In accordance with Islamist taqqiya -- the right to lie to non-Muslims in order to further the Islamic cause -- when communicating in Arabic, Katib's statements become more radical. He has supported the establishment of a Shariah-law based stated and his Darbuna.net website has included articles, including some of his own, which express anti-Semitic, anti-Western, and anti-Shia views ( http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/11/14/islamist-in-chief/ ). Moreover, Katib has demonstrated just how much the differences between Islamist groups such as the MB and jihadists groups like AQ and IS are differences over strategy and tactics, not the goal of restoring the caliphate and globalizing radical Islamic influence if not rule. He has also called on the U.S. to reconsider its 2012 decision to declare the AQ-allied Jabhat al-Nusrah as a terrorist organization, refusing to denounce JN and emphasizing its value as an ally in the struggle against the Assad regime (www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2012/1212/For-newly-recognized-Syrian-rebel-coalition-a-first-dispute-with-US-video and http://www.sharnoffsglobalviews.com/assad-opposition-094/ ).

    It is important to remember that the dividing lines between secular and Islamist groups such as the MB and even moreso those between Islamist groups like the MB and jihadi groups like AQ and IS on the ground in Syria are fluid and porous. The events in Libya demonstrated the dangers of these intersections, and now failed results would be repeated inside the Syria opposition with support for 'moderates' and Islamists leading to support for jihadists.

    Recently disclosed U.S. government documents reveal the extent to which -- already by at least mid-2012 -- the Obama administration along with its European and Sunni allies were supplying financial, weapons, and training support to the SNC in its efforts to overthrow the Baathist and Alawite-led regime of Bashar al-Assad. Moreover, the documents show that the weapons were not only going to the MB-dominated SNC but also to the Al Qa`ida (AQ) Iraqi affiliate, the forerunner to ISIS. In fact, an August 2012 Defense Department/Defense Information Agency (DIA) document, which would have been based on data from the preceding months up to a year before mid-2012, emphasized that Salafists, in particular MB and AQ's affiliate in Iraq 'Al Qaida in Iraq' or AQI already dominated the Syrian opposition forces. The same document undermines the neo-con argument that if the U.S. had intervened in Syria early on– say, in 2011 -- there would have been little opportunity for jihadi groups like AQI and IS to dominate the forces fighting the Assad regime. But already in early 2012 if not sooner, elements from AQ's group in the region, AQI, immediately moved from Iraq to back the opposition in Syria, AQI already had been present in Syria for years as part of its operations in Iraq. Moreover, its strongholds were in the eastern regions of Iraq, and the religious and tribal leaders there came out strongly in support for the opposition to Syria's secular regime ( www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf ). Therefore, AQI would have had no trouble recruiting for the fight against Assad regardless of Western actions. One needs only recall the already existing AQI presence and the open desert terrain and porous border between western Iraq and eastern Syria.

    One DoD/DIA document states that weapons were being sent from the port of Bengazi, Libya to the ports of Banias and Borj Islam in Syria beginning from October 2011–that is, before the SNC was even founded, meaning Western support actually began quite early on (www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-1-3-2-3-from-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812/). The document is heavily redacted (blacked out) and does not indicate who organized the weapons shipments. However, the detailed knowledge of the reasons why specific ports were selected and specific ships used suggests that U.S. intelligence, likely the CIA, organized the shipments. The document states: " The Syrian ports were chosen due to the small amount of cargo traffic transiting these two ports. The ships used to transport the weapons were medium-sized and able to hold 10 or less shipping containers of cargo " ( www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-1-3-2-3-from-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812/ ). This shows that U.S. intelligence was already on the ground before October 2011. Moreover, this demonstrates that early Western actions in the form of supplying weapons especially, only strengthened AQI's recruitment and development potential both in Iraq and Syria, helping to produce the Islamic State. I include extended excerpts from the most relevant newly released documents at the end of this article. One document warned of "dire consequences," most of which are blacked out, but one potential consequence is not redacted: the "renewing facilitation of terrorist elements from all over the Arab world entering into Iraqi Arena" ( www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf ).

    The interpretation that the Obama administration intentionally or unintentionally aided and abetted AQ and the rise of its successor organization ISIS (IS) is supported by the U.S. administration's second-ranking official. On 2 October 2015 U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden let the cat out of the big when he was asked the question–"In retrospect do you believe the United States should have acted earlier in Syria, and if not why is now the right moment?"– at the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Biden answered:

    The answer is 'no' for 2 reasons. One, the idea of identifying a moderate middle has been a chase America has been engaged in for a long time. We Americans think in every country in transition there is a Thomas Jefferson hiding beside some rock – or a James Madison beyond one sand dune. The fact of the matter is the ability to identify a moderate middle in Syria was – there was no moderate middle because the moderate middle are made up of shopkeepers, not soldiers – they are made up of people who in fact have ordinary elements of the middle class of that country. And what happened was – and history will record this because I'm finding that former administration officials, as soon as they leave write books which I think is inappropriate, but anyway, (laughs) no I'm serious – I do think it's inappropriate at least , you know, give the guy a chance to get out of office. And what my constant cry was that our biggest problem is our allies – our allies in the region were our largest problem in Syria. The Turks were great friends – and I have the greatest relationship with Erdogan, which I just spent a lot of time with – the Saudis, the Emiratis, etc. What were they doing? They were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war, what did they do? They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad except that the people who were being supplied were Al Nusra and Al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world . Now you think I'm exaggerating – take a look. Where did all of this go? So now what's happening? All of a sudden everybody's awakened because this outfit called ISIL which was Al Qaeda in Iraq, which when they were essentially thrown out of Iraq, found open space in territory in eastern Syria, work with Al Nusra who we declared a terrorist group early on and we could not convince our colleagues to stop supplying them. So what happened? Now all of a sudden – I don't want to be too facetious – but they had seen the Lord. Now we have – the President's been able to put together a coalition of our Sunni neighbors ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrXkm4FImvc&feature=youtu.be&t=1h31m57s ).

    This illegal activity is at least one if not the main reason behind the Obama administration's deception of the American people regarding the murder of US ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three CIA agents in September 2012 in Benghazi. Indeed, the above-mentioned document and other recently released DoD documents confirm that within hours of the attack, the entire US government, including those who were at the forefront in claiming the incident was a political demonstration that took place in reaction to a film denigrating Islam–President Barack Obama, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and US National Security advisor (then US rep to the UN) Susan Rice–was in fact a carefully planned terrorist attack carried out by an AQ affiliate in Libya and facilitated by the U.S. president's favorite Islamist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, which was also dominant within the 'moderate' wing of the Syrian opposition and Free Syrian Army. Indeed, the recent congressional hearings into the Benghazi terrorist attack demonstrated that within a day of the attack Clinton told her daughter and the Egyptian ambassador to the US that it was a terrorist attack carried out by a AQ affiliate as described in the document not by a 'demonstration' protesting film as she told the American people and the relatives of the the CIA agents killed in the attack.

    At the same time, the military and intelligence communities are in virtual mutiny over the Obama administration's failure to recognize the growing IS and overall jihadi threat and the risk of growing that threat by continuing the failed MB and other policies the administration pursues in the MENA region. The military's policy revolt underscores the fact and gravity of the policy to supply weapons to Syria's MB- and eventually jihadist-infested 'moderate' opposition to the Assad regime. In a January 2016 London Review of Books article, investigative journalist Seymour M. Hersh uncovered major dissent and opposition within the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) over Obama's policy of supplying weapons to MB elements in Syria. Hersh found: "Barack Obama's repeated insistence that Bashar al-Assad must leave office – and that there are 'moderate' rebel groups in Syria capable of defeating him" – has in recent years provoked quiet dissent, and even overt opposition, among some of the most senior officers on the Pentagon's Joint Staff. Moreover, the Pentagon critics' opposition centered on the administration's unwarranted "fixation on Assad's primary ally, Vladimir Putin." Another less likely accurate aspect of their critique holds that "Obama is captive to Cold War thinking about Russia and China, and hasn't adjusted his stance on Syria to the fact both countries share Washington's anxiety about the spread of terrorism in and beyond Syria; like Washington, they believe that Islamic State must be stopped" ( www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military ).

    In my view, Obama is captive to anything but 'Cold War thinking.' Rather, he is willing prisoner of his excessive sympathy for Islam, to his MB strategy, and to his perhaps/perhaps not unconscious association of Putin with the dreaded Republican and conservative white male so detested by the Democratic Party and American left from which the president hails. That association has been unintentionally reinforced by Putin's attempt to wear the mantle of defender of traditional values, Christianity and, as strange as it may seem to come, Western civilization. However, Hersh's other findings are well-taken.

    According to Hersh, the top brass's resistance began in summer of 2013–more than a year since the CIA, the UK, Saudi Arabia and Qatar began to ship guns and goods from Libya via Turkey and sea to Syria for Assad's toppling. A joint JCS-DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) "highly classified," "all-source" intelligence estimate foresaw that the Assad regime's fall would bring chaos and very possibly Syria's takeover by jihadists was occurring in much of Libya. Hersh's source, a former JCS senior adviser, said the report "took a dim view of the Obama administration's insistence on continuing to finance and arm the so-called moderate rebel groups." The assessment designated Turkey a "major impediment" to the policy since Ankara had "co-opted" the "covert US programme to arm and support the moderate rebels fighting Assad," which "had morphed into an across-the-board technical, arms and logistical programme for all of the opposition, including Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State." Moderates had "evaporated" and the Free Syrian Army was "a rump group stationed at an airbase in Turkey." The estimate concluded, according to Hersh and his source, that "there was no viable 'moderate' opposition to Assad, and the US was arming extremists" ( www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military ).

    DIA Director (2012-14) Lieutenant General Michael Flynn confirmed that his agency had sent a steady stream of warnings to the "civilian leadership" about the "dire consequences of toppling Assad" and the jihadists' control of the opposition. Turkey was not working hard enough to stem the flow of foreign fighters and weapons across its border and "was looking the other way when it came to the growth of the Islamic State inside Syria," Flynn says. "If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic" Flynn told Hersh. But the DIA's analysis, he says, "got enormous pushback" from the Obama administration: "I felt that they did not want to hear the truth." Hersh's former JCS adviser concurred, saying: "Our policy of arming the opposition to Assad was unsuccessful and actually having a negative impact." "The Joint Chiefs believed that Assad should not be replaced by fundamentalists. The administration's policy was contradictory. They wanted Assad to go but the opposition was dominated by extremists. So who was going to replace him? To say Assad's got to go is fine, but if you follow that through – therefore anyone is better. It's the 'anybody else is better' issue that the JCS had with Obama's policy" ( www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military ).

    In September 2015 more than 50 intelligence analysts at the U.S. military's Central Command lodged a formal complaint that their reports on IS and AQ affiliate 'Jabhat al-Nusrah' or JN–some of which were briefed to the president–were being altered inappropriately by senior Pentagon officials. In some cases, "key elements of intelligence reports were removed" in order to alter their thrust. The CENTCOMM analysts' complaint was sent in July to the Defense Department and sparked a DoD inspector general's investigation (www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/exclusive-50-spies-say-isis-intelligence-was-cooked.html). This was likely done in response to explicit requests or at least implicit signaling coming from White House officials on what and what is not politically correct in the president's mind. Thus, the analysts' complaint alleges that the reports were altered to depict the jihadi groups as weaker than analysts had assessed in an attempt by CENTCOM officials to adhere to the Obama administration's line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and JN (www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/exclusive-50-spies-say-isis-intelligence-was-cooked.html). This would correlate with the motive behind the Bengazi coverup as well, as the terrorist attack occurred at the peak of the 2012 presidential campaign when the president was stumping on slogans that he had destroyed AQ.

    Perhaps in response to the growing tensions, President Obama threw the intelligence agencies under the bus in September 2014 days after the US authorized itself to begin bombing Syria. He claimed that it was the intelligence agencies who "underestimated what was taking place in Syria" – a euphemism for the growing power of IS. He did this in August (www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/08/09/statement-president-iraq) and again in September ( http://thehill.com/policy/defense/219123-obama-intel-underestimated-isis and http://time.com/3442254/obama-u-s-intelligence-isis/ ). In turn, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives has begun an investigation and hearings on the intel redactions (www.nationalreview.com/article/424000/house-investigates-alleged-doctoring-isis-intel-joel-gehrke), and Obama's former DIA chief, General Michael Flynn, has urged that the investigation begin "at the top" ( http://hotair.com/archives/2015/11/24/former-obama-dia-chief-intel-probe-should-focus-on-white-house/ and http://thehill.com/policy/defense/219123-obama-intel-underestimated-isis ).

    But matters in the Obama administration are even worse. After illegally running guns to AQ and then IS and thereby strengthening history's greatest terrorist threat emanating from a non-state actor, the administration facilitated IS's financing by failing to bomb both the IS-controlled oil wells and the hundred-long truck convoys that transported the oil to market across the open desert in open daylight. Although in October 2014 a U.S. State Department, deputy assistant secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Julieta Valls Noyes, claimed the sale of IS fuel was one of the US's "principal concerns" and air strikes against them were "a viable option", nothing was ever done (www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/war-on-isis-us-planning-to-bomb-oil-pipelines-to-halt-jihadists-funding-9813980.html). According to former Obama administration CIA director Mike Morell's statement on November 24th, the administration refused to bomb oil wells which IS took control of because of the potential environmental damage ( www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/11/25/obamas-former-cia-director-reveals-real-reason-admin-declined-to-hit-islamic-state-oil-wells/ ).

    One reason claimed for not attacking the truck convoys was that the drivers of the trucks ferrying oil from Mosul, Iraq to the Turkish border for sale–more about NATO member Turkey's role below–were not IS members but rather civilians. Only after Russia's military intervention and bombing of the IS oil convoys, along with France's doing the same after the November 13th Paris attacks, did the U.S. carry out its first sorties against the IS oil convoys on 17 November 2015. In advance of the first U.S. attack on the convoys, U.S. forces dropped leaflets warning the truck drivers (and any mujahedin accompanying them) of the impending raid ( www.wsj.com/articles/french-airstrikes-in-syria-may-have-missed-islamic-state-1447685772 ). It remains unclear how the U.S. knew the drivers were not IS members, whether this is in fact true, whether this necessarily exonerates them, and whether it is possible to defeat an extremist insurgency under such legal structures.

    However, the perfidy of Obama's MB policy was far greater than simply the usual political correctness and naivete`of the president and his milieu or the resulting policy failures in Egypt, Libya Syria and Iraq. By looking the other way and even facilitating the flow of weapons to rebels, the Obama administration was flirting with violating U.S. anti-terrorism laws. The administration persisted in funneling arms to MB and other 'moderate' elements, when it was obvious to any moderately informed analyst that it would be impossible to control the flow of weapons in the murky circles and dark networks essence of frequently intersecting Islamist and jihadist organizations.

    The administration's main partner in this gambit–NATO member Turkey–would raise similar and even more troubling issues.

    Part 3: Obama's America, Erdogan's Turkey and the 'War Against' Jihadism in Syria and Iraq is forthcoming later in March .

    [May 03, 2020] Never in my country: COVID-19 and American exceptionalism by Jeanne Morefield

    Notable quotes:
    "... Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the "Third World." ..."
    "... In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70 nations – more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases, listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military personnel working in approximately 160 countries. This is a globe-spanning military and security apparatus organized into regional commands that resemble the "proconsuls of the Roman empire and the governors-general of the British." In other words, this apparatus is built not for deterrence, but for primacy. ..."
    "... The U.S.'s global primacy emerged from the wreckage of World War II when the United States stepped into the shoes vacated by European empires. Throughout the Cold War, and in the name of supporting "free peoples," the sprawling American security apparatus helped ensure that 300 years of imperial resource extraction and wealth distribution – from what was then called the Third World to the First – remained undisturbed, despite decolonization. ..."
    "... In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget and over half of all discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit. ..."
    "... Foreign policy is routinely the last issue Americans consider when they vote for presidents even though the president has more discretionary power over foreign policy than any other area of American politics. Thus, despite its size, impact, and expense, the world's military hegemon exists somewhere on the periphery of most Americans' self-understanding, as though, like the sun, it can't be looked upon directly for fear of blindness. ..."
    "... The shock of discovering that our healthcare system is so quickly overwhelmed should automatically trigger broader conversations about spending priorities that entail deep and sustained cuts in an engorged security budget whose sole purpose is the maintenance of primacy. And yet, not only has this not happened, $10.5 billion of the coronavirus aid package has been earmarked for the Pentagon, with $2.4 billion of that channeled to the "defense industrial base." Of the $500 billion aimed at corporate America, $17.5 billion is set aside "for businesses critical to maintaining national security" such as aerospace. ..."
    "... To make matters worse, our blindness to this bloated security complex makes it frighteningly easy for champions of American primacy to sound the alarm when they even suspect a dip in funding might be forthcoming. Indeed, before most of us had even glanced at the details of the coronavirus bill, foreign policy hawks were already issuing dark prediction s about the impact of still-imaginary cuts in the security budget on the U.S.'s "ability to strike any target on the planet in response to hostile actions by any actor" – as if that ability already did not exist many times over. ..."
    Apr 07, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    This March, as COVID-19's capacity to overwhelm the American healthcare system was becoming obvious, experts marveled at the scenario unfolding before their eyes. "We have Third World countries who are better equipped than we are now in Seattle," noted one healthcare professional, her words echoed just a few days later by a shocked doctor in New York who described "a third-world country type of scenario." Donald Trump could similarly only grasp what was happening through the same comparison. "I have seen things that I've never seen before," he said . "I mean I've seen them, but I've seen them on television and faraway lands, never in my country."

    At the same time, regardless of the fact that "Third World" terminology is outdated and confusing, Trump's inept handling of the pandemic has itself elicited more than one "banana republic" analogy, reflecting already well-worn, bipartisan comparisons of Trump to a " third world dictator " (never mind that dictators and authoritarians have never been confined solely to lower income countries).

    And yet, while such comparisons provoke predictably nativist outrage from the right, what is absent from any of these responses to the situation is a sense of reflection or humility about the "Third World" comparison itself. The doctor in New York who finds himself caught in a "third world" scenario and the political commentators outraged when Trump behaves "like a third world dictator" uniformly express themselves in terms of incredulous wonderment. One never hears the potential second half of this comparison: "I am now experiencing what it is like to live in a country that resembles the kind of nation upon whom the United States regularly imposes broken economies and corrupt leaders."

    Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the "Third World."

    In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70 nations – more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases, listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military personnel working in approximately 160 countries. This is a globe-spanning military and security apparatus organized into regional commands that resemble the "proconsuls of the Roman empire and the governors-general of the British." In other words, this apparatus is built not for deterrence, but for primacy.

    The U.S.'s global primacy emerged from the wreckage of World War II when the United States stepped into the shoes vacated by European empires. Throughout the Cold War, and in the name of supporting "free peoples," the sprawling American security apparatus helped ensure that 300 years of imperial resource extraction and wealth distribution – from what was then called the Third World to the First – remained undisturbed, despite decolonization.

    Since then, the United States has overthrown or attempted to overthrow the governments of approximately 50 countries, many of which (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and Chile) had elected leaders willing to nationalize their natural resources and industries. Often these interventions took the form of covert operations. Less frequently, the United States went to war to achieve these same ends (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq).

    In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget and over half of all discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit.

    Trump's claim that Obama had "hollowed out" defense spending was not only grossly untrue, it masked the consistency of the security budget's metastasizing growth since the Vietnam War, regardless of who sits in the White House. At $738 billion dollars, Trump's security budget was passed in December with the overwhelming support of House Democrats.

    And yet, from the perspective of public discourse in this country, our globe-spanning, resource-draining military and security apparatus exists in an entirely parallel universe to the one most Americans experience on a daily level. Occasionally, we wake up to the idea of this parallel universe but only when the United States is involved in visible military actions. The rest of the time, Americans leave thinking about international politics – and the deaths, for instance, of 2.5 million Iraqis since 2003 – to the legions of policy analysts and Pentagon employees who largely accept American military primacy as an "article of faith," as Professor of International Security and Strategy at the University of Birmingham Patrick Porter has said .

    Foreign policy is routinely the last issue Americans consider when they vote for presidents even though the president has more discretionary power over foreign policy than any other area of American politics. Thus, despite its size, impact, and expense, the world's military hegemon exists somewhere on the periphery of most Americans' self-understanding, as though, like the sun, it can't be looked upon directly for fear of blindness.

    Why is our avoidance of the U.S.'s weighty impact on the world a problem in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic? Most obviously, the fact that our massive security budget has gone so long without being widely questioned means that one of the soundest courses of action for the U.S. during this crisis remains resolutely out of sight.

    The shock of discovering that our healthcare system is so quickly overwhelmed should automatically trigger broader conversations about spending priorities that entail deep and sustained cuts in an engorged security budget whose sole purpose is the maintenance of primacy. And yet, not only has this not happened, $10.5 billion of the coronavirus aid package has been earmarked for the Pentagon, with $2.4 billion of that channeled to the "defense industrial base." Of the $500 billion aimed at corporate America, $17.5 billion is set aside "for businesses critical to maintaining national security" such as aerospace.

    To make matters worse, our blindness to this bloated security complex makes it frighteningly easy for champions of American primacy to sound the alarm when they even suspect a dip in funding might be forthcoming. Indeed, before most of us had even glanced at the details of the coronavirus bill, foreign policy hawks were already issuing dark prediction s about the impact of still-imaginary cuts in the security budget on the U.S.'s "ability to strike any target on the planet in response to hostile actions by any actor" – as if that ability already did not exist many times over.

    On a more existential level, a country that is collectively engaged in unseeing its own global power cannot help but fail to make connections between that power and domestic politics, particularly when a little of the outside world seeps in. For instance, because most Americans are unaware of their government's sponsorship of fundamentalist Islamic groups in the Middle East throughout the Cold War, 9/11 can only ever appear to have come from nowhere, or because Muslims hate our way of life.

    This "how did we get here?" attitude replicates itself at every level of political life making it profoundly difficult for Americans to see the impact of their nation on the rest of the world, and the blowback from that impact on the United States itself. Right now, the outsized influence of American foreign policy is already encouraging the spread of coronavirus itself as U.S. imposed sanctions on Iran severely hamper that country's ability to respond to the virus at home and virtually guarantee its spread throughout the region.

    Closer to home, our shock at the healthcare system's inept response to the pandemic masks the relationship between the U.S.'s imposition of free-market totalitarianism on countries throughout the Global South and the impact of free-market totalitarianism on our own welfare state .

    Likewise, it is more than karmic comeuppance that the President of the United States now resembles the self-serving authoritarians the U.S. forced on so many formerly colonized nations. The modes of militarized policing American security experts exported to those authoritarian regimes also contributed , on a policy level, to both the rise of militarized policing in American cities and the rise of mass incarceration in the 1980s and 90s. Both of these phenomena played a significant role in radicalizing Trump's white nationalist base and decreasing their tolerance for democracy.

    Most importantly, because the U.S. is blind to its power abroad, it cannot help but turn that blindness on itself. This means that even during a pandemic when America's exceptionalism – our lack of national healthcare – has profoundly negative consequences on the population, the idea of looking to the rest of the world for solutions remains unthinkable.

    Senator Bernie Sanders' reasonable suggestion that the U.S., like Denmark, should nationalize its healthcare system is dismissed as the fanciful pipe dream of an aging socialist rather than an obvious solution to a human problem embraced by nearly every other nation in the world. The Seattle healthcare professional who expressed shock that even "Third World countries" are "better equipped" than we are to confront COVID-19 betrays a stunning ignorance of the diversity of healthcare systems within developing countries. Cuba, for instance, has responded to this crisis with an efficiency and humanity that puts the U.S. to shame.

    Indeed, the U.S. is only beginning to feel the full impact of COVID-19's explosive confrontation with our exceptionalism: if the unemployment rate really does reach 32 percent, as has been predicted, millions of people will not only lose their jobs but their health insurance as well. In the middle of a pandemic.

    Over 150 years apart, political commentators Edmund Burke and Aimé Césaire referred to this blindness as the byproduct of imperialism. Both used the exact same language to describe it; as a "gangrene" that "poisons" the colonizing body politic. From their different historical perspectives, Burke and Césaire observed how colonization boomerangs back on colonial society itself, causing irreversible damage to nations that consider themselves humane and enlightened, drawing them deeper into denial and self-delusion.

    Perhaps right now there is a chance that COVID-19 – an actual, not metaphorical contagion – can have the opposite effect on the U.S. by opening our eyes to the things that go unseen. Perhaps the shock of recognizing the U.S. itself is less developed than our imagined "Third World" might prompt Americans to tear our eyes away from ourselves and look toward the actual world outside our borders for examples of the kinds of political, economic, and social solidarity necessary to fight the spread of Coronavirus. And perhaps moving beyond shock and incredulity to genuine recognition and empathy with people whose economies and democracies have been decimated by American hegemony might begin the process of reckoning with the costs of that hegemony, not just in "faraway lands" but at home. In our country.

    [May 02, 2020] The RD-180, sanctions and the relations between Russia and the USA

    May 02, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Uncle Volodya says, "Ignorance is always correctable. But what shall we do if we take ignorance to be knowledge?"

    "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

    ― Issac Asimov

    There's a prejudice against making fun of the mad that spans all cultures, all ethnicities; mock the mentally ill at your peril, for some fair-minded citizen will surely intervene. Possibly many, enough to make you take to your heels, because those who were born without the ability to reason, or had it and lost it, are perhaps God's most innocent children. There are few compensations for being born half-a-bubble off plumb, but one of them is anti-mockery armor. Having a laugh at the expense of the lunatic is bad form; something only dicks do, because it's cheap and easy.

    That's what must be preventing Dmitry Rogozin from roaring with laughter; from falling helplessly to his knees and collapsing, wheezing, onto his side. If someone smart says something stupid, they are fair game. But laughing when someone whose openly-stated beliefs suggest they are suffering from dementia is inappropriate. His dilemma is both obvious, and acute – what to do?

    First, some background; who is Dmitry Rogozin? A former Deputy Prime Minister in charge of the Russian Federation's defense industries, he also served as his country's Ambassador to NATO. He has degrees in philosophy and technology, and currently serves as the Russian Federation's Special Representative on Missile Defense. He is also the Director of Roscosmos, the Russian state's Space Industry. Some have talked him up as a possible replacement for Vladimir Putin, as President of the Russian Federation, but it is in his latter capacity, head of Roscosmos, that we are most interested today. He knows more about rockets than that they are pointy at one end and have fire at the other, if you get my drift.

    A bit more background, and then I promise we can begin to tie things together; I think I can also promise you are going to laugh. Not because you're a dick. But I think you will find you do have to kind of snicker. Just be careful who hears you, okay? It's not as much of an insult if people don't know.

    Most who have any understanding of space or rockets or satellites have heard of the RD-180 . But in case there are some readers who have never heard of it, it is the Russian Federation's workhorse rocket engine. Its first flight was 20 years ago, but it was built on the shoulders of the RD-170 , which has been in service since 1985, making it a Soviet project. The RD-180 is essentially a two-combustion-chamber RD-170, which has four and remains the most powerful rocket engine in the world. The RD-180 is used by the United States in its Atlas space vehicles.

    For some time, that was a fairly comfortable arrangement. The USA made fun of Russia whenever it wanted to feel superior, just as it's always done, and made the occasional ideological stab at 'establishing freedom and democracy' by changing out its leader, but the Russian people were not particularly cooperative, and there were some problems getting a credible 'liberal opposition' started; even now, the best candidate still seems to be Alexey Navalny, who is kind of the granite canoe of opposition figures – not particularly well-known, nasty rather than compelling, spiteful as a balked four-year-old.

    But then American ideologues in the US Department of State decided the time was ripe for a coup in Ukraine, and almost overnight, the United States and Russia were overt enemies. The United States, under Barack Obama, imposed sanctions designed to wreck the Russian economy , in the hope that despairing Russians would throw Putin out of office. America's European allies went along for the ride, and trade between Russia and its former trade partners and associates in Europe and the USA mostly dried up.

    Not rocket engines, though. America made an exception for those, and continued to buy and stockpile RD-180's. The very suggestion that RD-180 engines might go on the sanctions list – US Federal Claims Court Judge Susan Braden postulated that funds used to purchase rocket engines might end up in Rogozin's pocket (he being head of the Space Program, and all), and he was under US sanctions – moved the Commander of the United States Air Force's Space and Missile Systems Center to note that without RD-180 engines, the Atlas program would have to be grounded .

    All this is by way of highlighting a certain vulnerability. Of course, observers remarked, the United States is a major technological power – it could easily produce such engines itself. So, why didn't it, inquiring minds wanted to know.

    Enter United Launch Alliance (ULA) CEO Tony Bruno, with what reporters described as a 'novel explanation'. Thanks much for the link, Patient Observer. The United States buys United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno.Russian rocket engines to subsidize the Russian space industry , so that fired rocket scientists will not pack up the wife and kiddies and their few pitiful belongings, and depart for Iran or North Korea. You know; countries that really hate the United States. I swear I am not making that up. Look:

    "The United States is buying Russian rocket engines not because of any problems with its domestic engine engineering programmes, but to subsidize Russian rocket scientists and to prevent them from seeking employment in Iran or North Korea, United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno has intimated.

    "The [US government] asked us to buy [Russian engines] at the end of the Cold War in order to keep the Russian Rocket Scientists from ending up in North Korea and Iran," Bruno tweeted, responding to a question about what motivates ULA to continue buying the Russian-made RD-180s."

    Sadly, I had no Rogozin-like qualms about being thought a dick. I snorted what I was drinking (chocolate milk, I think) all over my hand, and gurgled with mirth for a good 20 seconds. Holy Moley – what a retarded explanation! How long did he grope for that, spluttering like Joe Biden trying to remember what office he is currently running for? Jeebus Cripes, the United States has no control at all over what rocket scientists are paid in the Russian Federation – what do they imagine prevents Putin The Diktator from just pocketing all the money himself, or spending it on sticky buns to feed to Rogozin, and throwing a few fish heads to the rocket scientists? Do they really believe some sort of symbiotic relationship exists between Russia's rocket scientists and the US Treasury Department? Really ? Have things actually gotten that far down the road to Simple? I tell you, I kind of felt a little sorry for Tony 'Lightning Rod' Bruno. But more sorry for his family, who has to go out and find him when he's wandering in the park with no pants on again, you know. Humanitarian concerns.

    So I started doing a little digging. And right away, I made a couple of discoveries that made my synapses frizzle. One, the United States has a license to manufacture the RD-180 engine domestically . And apparently can't.

    "Under RD AMROSS, Pratt & Whitney is licensed to produce the RD-180 in the United States. Originally, production of the RD-180 in the US was scheduled to begin in 2008, but this did not happen. According to a 2005 GAO Assessment of Selected Major Weapon Programs, Pratt & Whitney planned to start building the engine in the United States with a first military launch by 2012. This, too, did not happen. In 2014, the Defense Department estimated that it would require approximately $1 billion and five years to begin US domestic manufacture of the RD-180 engine."

    It's only Wiki, but the references bear it out, such as the GAO's " Defense Acquisitions: Assessment of Selected Major Weapons Programs "; you want page 65.

    Well, no wonder! It's a lot cheaper to slip some bucks to starving Russian rocket scientists than spend a Billion simoleons on a Pratt & Whitney program that will take five years (!!!) minimum to set up before it even starts producing an engine the Russians have been making for 20 years, and gave Pratt & Whitney the plans for. Seen in that light, it makes a weird kind of sense, dunnit? Minus the altruism and violins, of course.

    Right about then, I made a second discovery that shook the fuzz off my fundament. Tony Bruno did not make that shit up . No, indeedy. It would have been simpler, and I have to say a bit more comforting, to assume Tony Bruno is the locus of American retardation. But he isn't; the poor bastard was just repeating an American doctrinal political talking-point. Behold !

    "When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989, the US government worried about the possible consequences of lots of Russian rocket designers getting fired. What if they ended up working for regimes like Iran or North Korea?"

    Pretty much word-for-word what poor Tony Bruno said. And that was posted 5 years ago.

    But who cares, right? Just some wiggy space-nerd site.

    Oh, but wait. Look at his reference . It's from NASA. And it does indeed include the paragraph he quoted.

    "Moreover, several on the Space Council, as well as others in the Bush Administration, saw another reason to engage the post-Soviets in a cooperative space venture: as a way to help hold the Russian nation together at a time when the Russian economy was faltering and its society was reeling. In the words of Brian Dailey, Albrecht's sucessor, "If we did not do something in this time of social chaos in Russia, then there would be potentially a hemorrhaging of technology 'away from Russia' to countries who may not have a more peaceful intention behind the use of those technologies."

    I'm not sure how reliable that is – the Americans still insist, in it, that they landed on the moon, and it points out that Dan Quayle was head of the National Space Council, dear Lord, have mercy. But it's NASA! There was apparently a school of thought, prevalent in American politics, that America had to support the Russian economy , for fear of its technological proteges high-siding it for Dangerville. Neither North Korea or Iran are mentioned by name, but they would certainly be easy to infer from the description.

    So we could draw one of two conclusions; either (1) Obama was a witless tool who did not read that historical imperative (probably had his nose in a healthy-greens cookbook, some shit like that) and blundered ahead with a plan to wreck the Russian economy, loosing a torrent of Russian rocket scientists into a cynical Murka-hatin' world, or (2) Obama was a genius who applied sanctions with a surgeon's delicacy, avoiding sanctions on the Russian space program. Although he did apply sanctions directly on its..umm director. Okay, let's go with (1).

    Anyway, it's kind of odd, I guess you'd say, to hear that same Brian Dailey, he who blubbered sympathetically (or so history records) "We have to do something in this time of social chaos in Russia" say this:

    "The meeting was actually more or less a signing ceremony, a large event, so to speak, but it was one that was obviously going to be reaching into some very hard winds that would prevent us from really moving forward. That's a rather obtuse way of saying that we were having serious problems with the Russians. They wanted a lot of money for doing these things. They wanted to charge us a lot of money to hook up, and we didn't believe that since this was a government-to-government activity, that money should be appropriately involved, and it was the intention of the two Presidents to put something together that would be funded by their respective governments rather than us trying to fund something for Russia."

    Say what? You had to do something for the Russian economy without money? Tell me more.

    " At that point, Dan had got very upset with the Russians and proceeded to tell them that we were not going to do business with Semenov directly, but our opposite number was Yuri Koptev, and that he ought to start learning how to work with U.S. industry, and that we were not going to pay for this particular activity and we were not going to be blackmailed into paying them, so to speak, and insisted that this be taken off the table and we proceed to find ways of making this happen, not ways to slow it down or charge us for any kind of cooperative activities like this. "

    This all had to do with cooperation on some sort of docking system for the Mir Space Station, nothing to do with the RD-180, but I think you can see why I would be a bit skeptical regarding Project Payola for the Russian rocket scientists.

    You might be getting a tingly feeling – call it a suspicion – that the USA is kind of pulling our leg on the idea that it can make a superior multi-chamber rocket engine any time it feels like it, and is just buying the RD-180 on long-ago government orders to cut the Russians a break. You might suspect the RD-180 is actually a pretty good engine, but the United States can't make it for that kind of money, and perhaps can't make it at all. I know! Let's ask United Launch Alliance , that company that Tony Bruno is the CEO of.

    "The Atlas launch vehicle's main booster engine, the RD-180, has demonstrated consistent performance with predictable environments over the past decade. The RD-180 has substantially contributed to the established a record of high reliability on Atlas launch vehicles since its debut on the Atlas III in May of 2000."

    You don't say. Tell me more.

    "In the early 1990s the closed cycle, LOx rich, staged combustion technology rumored to exist in Russia was originally sought out by General Dynamics because engines of this kind would be able to provide a dramatic performance increase over available U.S. rocket technology. Unlike its rocket building counterparts in the United States, Europe, China, and Japan, Russia was able to master a unique LOx rich closed cycle combustion technology which delivered a 25% performance increase."

    But but I read the George H.W. Bush administration urged America to buy Russian rocket engines because they heard a rumor there was a suitcase sale on at the Energomash company store. And that, you know, the scientists might be planning a little trip.

    "NPO Energomash, the leading designer of engines in Russia, had gone through hundreds of designs, each an improvement on the last, to harness the power of LOx rich combustion. This required a very careful approach to how the fuel is burned in the preburner so that the temperature field is uniform. It also required improvements in materials and production techniques. They found a way to take the chamber pressures to new limits while protecting the internal components from fire risks. This required a new class of high temperature resistant stainless steel invented to cope with the risks of the LOx rich environment."

    Oh, seriously, c'mon – is it as good as all that?

    "The demonstrated performance established during this process was beyond anything achieved in the United States. The RD-180 reaches chamber pressures up to 3,722psia which was more than double the chamber pressures achieved by comparable U.S. engines. Exposure to Russian design philosophy and the success of a high performance engine made U.S. engine designers question their own methods. This dual sided cross-cultural engineering approach which has persisted through the life of the RD-180 program adds depth to the understanding of engine capability and operational characteristics."

    Okay, thanks, company that Tony Bruno is the CEO of. Good to know it wasn't just charity.

    [May 02, 2020] EU should consider 'flexible' Russia sanctions

    May 02, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    et Al April 28, 2020 at 10:18 am

    I'm posting this for entertainment purposes:

    Euractiv: EU should consider 'flexible' Russia sanctions over Ukraine: report
    https://www.euractiv.com/section/europe-s-east/news/eu-should-consider-flexible-russia-sanctions-over-ukraine-report/

    The EU should reconsider its 'all or nothing' approach on sanctions imposed on Russia for its role in the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine, as well as its annexation of Crimea, a new report from the International Crisis Group suggests. The Brussels-based think tank calls for the easing of certain sanctions in exchange for Russian progress towards peace in Ukraine.

    "Inflexible sanctions are less likely to change behaviour," said Olga Oliker, Europe and Central Asia programme director. "Because of that, we urge considering an approach that would allow for the lifting of some sanctions in exchange for some progress, with a clear intent to reverse that rollback of sanctions if the progress itself is reversed."

    .A major roadblock in the implementation of the Minsk deal has been the sequence of events supposed to bring an end to the conflict that has so far claimed more than 13,000 lives.

    Kyiv wants to first regain control over its border with Russia before local elections in the war-torn region can be held, while Moscow believes that elections must come first
    ####

    Door. Horse. Barn. Bolted.

    The Intentional Critics Grope is yet again a $/€ short in the reality department.

    You would think the Editor Gotev (the last two paras by him) would mention that the Minsk agreement clearly states elections come first and that Kiev has singularly refuse the other conditions of the agreement, but that really would be asking too much. From a professional journalist.

    It's the same shit we got with the US-North Korea 4 point nuclear agreement where de-nuclearization of the region is the final stage yet it didn't take Washington and ball-licking corporate media to parrot 'denuclearization' as the first point as suddently decided by the Ovum Orifice.*

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework

    Mark Chapman April 28, 2020 at 1:24 pm
    They try it on again about every six months, just to see if the Russian negotiators have changed and if the new ones are dimwitted. I'm sure it is crystal clear to the Kremlin that if it gave Ukraine back exclusive control of the border, it would (a) call up troops and set up a cordon to make it impossible for eastern Ukraine to be reinforced, and (b) launch an all-out military push to re-take the breakaway regions. The west would then shout "Safe!!!", and the game would be over – Ukraine is (almost) whole again, praise Jeebus. There would be a propaganda storm that Russia was 'trying to meddle in the peace process' while Kuh-yiv rooted out and either imprisoned or executed all the 'rebel' leaders, and the west – probably the USA – would provide 'peacekeepers' to give Ukraine time to restore its complete control over the DNR and LPR. Then, presto! no elections required, we are all happy Ukrainians!

    They knew 'inflexible sanctions were less likely to change behaviors' when they first agreed to impose them – but they were showing their belly to Washington, and don't know how to stop now. Serves them right if they are losing revenue and market share.

    Mark Chapman April 29, 2020 at 8:42 am
    I don't think Russia is very interested, beyond polite diplomatic raising of the eyebrows, in relaxing of sanctions under conditions the EU is careful to highlight could be reapplied in a trice, as soon as anyone was upset with Russia's performance. Because that moment would be literally only a moment away. The UK can be counted on to register blistering outrage at the drop of a hat, and while its influence on the EU will soon be limited, dogs-in-the-manger like Poland can always be relied upon to throw themselves about in an ecstasy of victimhood. It would be impossible to set up any sort of dependable supply chain, as the interval between orders would never be known with any degree of certainty. Fuck the EU. Russia is better off to press on as it has been doing. The EU has to buy oil and gas from Russia because the logistics and price of American supplies make them economically non-competitive, and best to just leave it there. The EU will bitch, but it will continue to buy, whereas any other commerce would be subject to theatrical hissy fits.

    [May 02, 2020] For brevity, I always post that our IC (Intelligence Community) is masterful in shaping U.S. public opinion and causing problems for targeted countries but terrible in collecting and analyzing Intel that would benefit the U.S. The truth of course, is more complicated.

    Notable quotes:
    "... The person trying to tell the truth is forced to defend, 'Communist China' (Tom Cotton thinks that is one word), Russia, or Iran and to the U.S. public this is toxic. ..."
    "... Someday it just won't matter anymore. We will have deceived ourselves for so long that we have squandered so much of our power that no one will pay attention to us. ..."
    "... Intelligence is a rare commodity in American politics and diplomacy even more elusive so the consequences of malicious rumours are never weighed nor assessed ..."
    "... Intelligence is a rare commodity in American politics and diplomacy even more elusive so the consequences of malicious rumours are never weighed nor assessed ..."
    May 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Christian J Chuba , May 1 2020 13:17 utc | 9

    Spy vs Spy

    For brevity, I always post that our IC (Intelligence Community) is masterful in shaping U.S. public opinion and causing problems for targeted countries but terrible in collecting and analyzing Intel that would benefit the U.S. The truth of course, is more complicated.

    There is a remnant that is doing their jobs properly but is shut out from higher level offices. But I cannot give long disclaimers at the start of my posts, (I'm not talking about the men and women ...) where 50 words later I finally start to make my point. It's boring, sounds insincere, and defensive.

    This is yet another effective defense mechanism that protects the troublemakers in our IC bureaucracy.
    1. The person trying to tell the truth is forced to defend, 'Communist China' (Tom Cotton thinks that is one word), Russia, or Iran and to the U.S. public this is toxic.

    2. These rogues get to use the remaining good people as human shields.

    3. They know their customers, it gives the politicians a way to turn themselves into wartime leaders rather than having to answer for their shortcomings.

    Someday it just won't matter anymore. We will have deceived ourselves for so long that we have squandered so much of our power that no one will pay attention to us.

    /div> Intelligence is a rare commodity in American politics and diplomacy even more elusive so the consequences of malicious rumours are never weighed nor assessed . The American public are easily enough fooled being constantly fed a racist diet, especially Sinophobia, Russophopia and Iranophobia and the drumbeats for war, financial or military, are easily banged to raise the public's blood pressure....but what about the consequences? America can win neither, even with he assistance of a few vassal states. What happens if, and when, normal service is resumed? If they managed to succeed with any of their hair-brained ideas, what are the consequences for American companies in China, rare earth minerals, the IT industries etc etc. Guard your words wisely for they can never be retracted.

    Posted by: Séamus Ó Néill , May 1 2020 13:46 utc | 13

    Intelligence is a rare commodity in American politics and diplomacy even more elusive so the consequences of malicious rumours are never weighed nor assessed . The American public are easily enough fooled being constantly fed a racist diet, especially Sinophobia, Russophopia and Iranophobia and the drumbeats for war, financial or military, are easily banged to raise the public's blood pressure....but what about the consequences? America can win neither, even with he assistance of a few vassal states. What happens if, and when, normal service is resumed? If they managed to succeed with any of their hair-brained ideas, what are the consequences for American companies in China, rare earth minerals, the IT industries etc etc. Guard your words wisely for they can never be retracted.

    Posted by: Séamus Ó Néill | May 1 2020 13:46 utc | 13

    dan of steele , May 1 2020 14:32 utc | 23
    GeorgeV

    I think there is very good intelligence in the US. so much data is collected and there are many analysts to go over the data and present their forecasts. The World Factbook is an example of collected intelligence made available to the unwashed masses.

    what you are thinking is that this information should be used to your benefit. that is where it goes wrong. the big players are able to access and exploit that mass of data and use it to their benefit.

    Billmon used to say that this is a feature, not a bug.

    Piero Colombo , May 1 2020 15:08 utc | 28
    s @19

    "Not precluded" are also a Fort Detrick origin and contagion taken to Wuhan by the US military, staying at a hotel where most of the first cluster of patients was identified. So why wouldn't you always mention both in the same breath?

    concerned , May 1 2020 15:27 utc | 31
    First hollywood movie I am aware of that deals with pandemics and has Fort Detrick front and center was "Outbreak" 1995. In this film, the "Expert" played by D. Huffman uncovers a plot by a rogue 2 star general sitting on the serum from another outbreak years ago, and how he witheld this information and the serum to "protect their bioweapon". There is also a very overt background sub-plot about Dod and CDC being at odds.

    DoD is not listed in the credits for Outbreak. Many of the scenes are supposed to take place in CDC and Fort Detrick.

    --

    Last hollywood movie was "Contagion" 2011. In this film, which pretty much anticipates Covid-19 madness but with an actually scary virus, the "Expert" in charge tells the DHS man that "Nature has already weaponized them!".

    So this lie about the little bitty part "function gain" man-made mutations being the critical bit for "weaponizing" viruses is turned on its head. It was "Nature" after all. A wet market, you know.

    Contagion does list DoD in its credits. Vincent C. Oglivie as US DoD Liason and Project Officer.

    Just some 'fun' trivia for us to while away our lives. Remember that consipirational thought is abberational thought. Have a shot of Victory Gin and relex!

    md , May 1 2020 15:34 utc | 32
    Ten questions the US needs to answer
    https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesDaily/posts/3243339602384501

    [May 01, 2020] The Blob Attacks Gaslighting or Just Gasbagging by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

    Apr 30, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    It's always fun to see the Washington foreign policy and Nat-Sec establishment get up on its hind legs at their critics. It doesn't happen often, and when it does it's usually when someone has touched a raw nerve, penetrating the bubble, if only momentarily. One time that comes to mind is when TAC's Andrew Bacevich -- he's really good at this -- called out elite bubble denizens Peter Feaver and Hal Brands for what he said was "close to being a McCarthyite smear" against realist thinkers in a Commentary piece entitled, "Saving Realism from the So-Called Realists."

    The two men (Feaver cut his teeth in George W. Bush's National Security Council during the height of the Iraq War; Brands is an academic with a perch at the neoconservative AEI) implored TAC to publish a response, writing: "The stakes of debates about American grand strategy are high, and so it is entirely proper that these debates be conducted with passion and intensity. But it is equally vital that they be conducted without resort to the sort of baseless ad hominem attacks that impede intellectual discourse rather than encouraging it."

    Hrumph. It is not surprising now that both Feaver and Brands (joined by William Inboden, also in Bush's wartime NSC), are at it again, this time with a longer treatise in Foreign Affairs , entitled, "In Defense of the Blob ." The last four years have been rough for the establishment. President Trump, after running on a platform of getting out of endless wars, is a Jacksonian who refuses to hide his contempt for this entrenched policy class and all of their attending courtiers and courtesans, most of whom are leftovers from the Obama, Bush and even Clinton Administrations. Their "accumulated" knowledge means nothing to this president, as he has plowed his own mercurial course in North Korea, Syria, Iran and the Middle East.

    If that wasn't bad enough, Trump's rip in the Washington Blob's time-space-continuum has allowed realists and restrainers to quantum leap into the space like no other administration before. Suddenly, conservatives of all stripes are talking TAC's language. Money is pouring into colleges and think tanks now, all with the goal of pursuing approaches outside the status quo of hyper-militarization and American hegemony. The wars have been largely maligned as failures of the two previous administrations and their "experts." The Quincy Institute, populated by scholars from both the Right and Left, has risen up to directly challenge the idea of a necessary militarized "liberal world order" to secure peace across the globe.

    "In Defense of the Blob" is filled with so many straw men, lies, and misdirections that the only takeaway is that we must have hit one hell of a nerve this time. The authors' peculiar attempt to gaslight their critics, suggesting that we are seeing things that aren't there, is weak. Like:

    Blob theorists view the establishment as a club of like-minded elite insiders who control everything, take care of one another, and brush off challenges to conventional wisdom. In reality, the United States actually has a healthy marketplace of foreign policy ideas. Discussion over American foreign policy is loud, contentious, diverse, and generally pragmatic -- and as a result, the nation gets the opportunity to learn from its mistakes, build on its successes, and improve its performance over time.

    No, no, and no. As a reporter in this ecosystem for more years than I care to admit, I can say with absolute certainty the reality is the opposite. The major policy think tanks in Washington are rife with three sources of funding: government, private defense companies, and very wealthy neoliberal and neoconservative foundations ( think Carnegie on the left , Scaife on the right ). The National Security and "Grand Strategy" programs at elite schools are no different. They all have one thing in common: the status quo. As a result, the output is hardly dynamic, it's little more than dogmatic, conventional thinking about world problems that keep bureaucrats in jobs and always meddling, the military amped up with more hammers and nails to hit, and politicians (and attending administrative class) favorable to either or both of these goals in Washington, preferably in power.

    This is a closed club that offers only gradations of diversity just like Democrats and Republicans during the war: No one argued about "liberating" Iraq, only about the tactics. That was why it was so easy for Hillary Clinton's Nat Sec team in-waiting to create the Center for a New American Security in 2008 and transition to an Obama think tank shop in 2009. Plug and play one for the other, counterinsurgency under Bush? Meh. Under Obama? Let's do this! They all had a plan for staying in Afghanistan, and they made sure we were, until this day.

    This doesn't even include the orbit of research centers like RAND and the Center for Naval Analysis, which actually get government funding to churn out reports and white papers, teach officer classes, lead war gaming, and put on conferences. Do you really think they call for less funding, killing programs, eliminating lily pads, or egads, pulling out of entrenched strategic relationships that might not make sense anymore? Never. The same players get the contracts and produce just what the government wants to hear, so they can get more money. If they don't get contracts they don't survive. It's how the swamp works.

    As for it being a cabal? This ecosystem -- the Blob -- is a revolving door of sameness, a multigenerational in-crowd of status-driven groupthink inhabiting a deep state that is both physical and of the mind. It's a lifestyle, and a class. To get anywhere in it, you not only have to have the right pedigree, but the right way of thinking. Ask anyone who has attempted to break in with the "wrong credentials," or marched off the reservation in the early years of Iraq only to be flung to the professional margins. Conference panels, sanctioned academic journals, all run by the same crowd. Check the Council on Foreign Relations yearbook, you'll catch the drift. You can be a neocon, you can be a "humanitarian" interventionist, but a skeptic of American exceptionalism and its role in leading the post-WWII international system? Ghosted.

    The worst element of the Feaver/Brands/Inboden protest is not so much their pathetic attempt to suggest that sure, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya "were misconceived and mishandled," but they were "no worse" than failures in the preceding decades, like the "bloody stalemate in Korea," or "catastrophic war in Vietnam." (This completely denies that the same consensus thinking has been leading our global and military policies for the last 75 years, therefore the same people who blundered us into Vietnam were also responsible for backing the contras in Nicaragua, and then blowing up wedding parties in Pakistan three decades later).

    No, the worst is the straw man they present when they suggest that "scrapping professionalism for amateurism would be a disaster." No one has ever suggested that was on offer. If anything, there has been every attempt, by TAC and the aforementioned new movements, to shift new voices -- academics, military strategists, politicians, policy wonks and journalists -- who represent fresh, outside thinking into the forefront, at the levers of power, to make a difference. People like Andrew Bacevich, Stephen Walt, Doug Macgregor, Chris Preble, Mike Desch, are hardly lightweights, but to the Borg, they are antibodies, therefore amateurs.

    But Bacevich, Walt, et. al, did not keep their mouths shut or try to obfuscate the truth during 18 years of failure in Afghanistan. That was left to the friends and colleagues of our esteemed Feaver, Brands, and Inboden. They cannot deny the Blob's sins because it's all in black & white in the Afghanistan Papers . That's what has really hit a nerve, the raw exposure. Still, they cry, the Blob is "not the problem," but the "solution." We think not. And we think they protest too much.

    Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is Executive Editor of TAC . Follow her on Twitter @Vlahos_at_TAC

    kouroi • a day ago

    Three comments:
    1. Great article.
    2. When the world will see the back of US troops out of Afghanistan, the way the USSR troops pulled out, then I'll say that Trump really is different.
    3. "As a reporter in this ecosystem for more years than I care to admit". Actually, it doesn't show...
    Kent TheSnark • 11 hours ago
    Most Russians would say that US foreign policy had nothing to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union. So while not being a failure, it wasn't in any way a victory either. And Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait after that country began side drilling into Iraqi reserves and stealing them. Hussein complained bitterly to the international community, and invaded only after nothing was done. How was our attack a good thing? We could of just forced the Kuwaiti's to stop stealing Iraqi oil.
    kouroi TheSnark • 9 hours ago • edited
    Now wait a minute. The thing is that several narratives could be constructed here. You have the narrative that you are constructing here (to which usually one starts with the glorious beginning of how the US defeated the the evil Nazi Germany).

    The Cold War I and now the Cold War II is fundamentally the war between the idea that private property is paramount and the idea that commons/socialized property under the aegis of the state (preferably the nation state) is preferable. And from this perspective the Korean war was a draw and Vietnam war was a defeat for the Mammon. Cuba is also a shining example of the crappy US politics. Then you have the Pinochet dictatorship, installation of the Shah in 1953, Lumumba's killing and all kind of other shenanigans (i.e. Operation Gladius in Italy/Europe, etc.).

    And I wouldn't call the Yugoslav war a high mark either.

    The containment strategy worked initially because all the socialist countries started from the rubble of WWII, with minimal industrial base and massive population losses. The stupidity of the containment strategy is brought to light by the evolution of Vietnam after the war. Things are getting more and more relaxed there. Even Keenan admitted that this containment thing was/is fundamentally problematic.

    Now Cold War II (started by Obama with the TPP that had as its main pillar the destruction/privatization [for funny US money] of China's SOE) is being pursued as a continuation of the same basic idea driving CWI, but also because the technological genie was freed from its bottle. The ugly truth is that the US is really not that good at real, real competition (see the history of how inefficient and incapable of technological advancement the US Steel industry is compared with European Steel Industry; but fundamentally this is a disease of monopolies). US benefited tremendously of the European conflicts with a massive influx of educated people (i.e. check Einstein) and it still benefits from all the foreign graduate students (lots of Chinese) that are for research based academia the the main workhorses. The way medical research cannot be done without the lab mice, same research in general cannot be conducted without the graduate students.

    So, the fact that the US cannot withstand real, real competition (especially after the hollowing out of the industrial base due to finacialization), really scares the hell out of ruling elites. So all kind of malevolent narratives of the Manichean sorts are spun out and fed to hoi polloi.

    It is obviously that you and I live in parallel universes though...

    kouroi kouroi • 3 hours ago
    Concerning the lack of US competitive prowess and bullying approaches (beside NS2, or punishing buyers of Russian weapons), fresh from the news:

    "Moscow is studying a report published by the US Department of Energy (DOE), which mentions Washington's intention to squeeze Russia out of nuclear technology markets, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

    "We are currently studying the report of the working group on nuclear fuel published by the US Department of Energy. A significant part of the report is devoted to pushing Russia and China from the international market for goods and services related to nuclear energy. Moreover, there is every reason to believe that not only subsidies of the relevant US industries will be used, but also non-economic methods", the ministry said, responding to a request for a comment on the report.

    In particular, the report outlines a possible strategy of seeking the "adaptation" of national legislation of some countries in order to ensure the privileged position of US suppliers with the active participation of Washington, the ministry said. "There is nothing new here", it added.

    Over the past decade, Washington has paid very little attention to the development of its own nuclear energy, and therefore lags behind leaders in most areas, from uranium mining to the construction of nuclear reactors and spent nuclear fuel management, the ministry added.

    "Now the US authorities apparently intend to improve the situation", it suggested, adding that this requires significant financial investments.

    In order to achieve it, it is necessary to occupy a significant share of the international nuclear energy market, and the US administration is well aware that it is impossible to do this through fair competition in an acceptable time because of the lag, the ministry said.

    "Therefore, Washington intends to use non-economic leverage. Such actions by the United States raise the question of what the principles of free trade advocated by Washington stand for and whether, in principle, one should adhere to any rules in relations with a state that itself does not comply with any rules and changes them in a way that is beneficial for it at the moment", it concluded.

    On 23 April, the US Department of Energy released a report from a nuclear fuel working group, established by President Donald Trump in July, to "outline a strategy to restore American nuclear energy leadership", according to the DOE's statement."

    Tradcon • 20 hours ago • edited
    Its always funny how the "experts" and "professionals" are those who want to uphold the status quo. If you hold the opposite view you're a "amateur" or "demagogue".

    "What makes you more of an expert than them?"
    "I pushed for and oversaw three wars! I have far more experience!"

    Excellent article.

    EdMan • 20 hours ago
    "The National Security and 'Grand Strategy' programs at elite schools are no different."

    I absolutely loved this bit because it's so true. Thank God for Kelley pointing this out. It's indicative of the broader malaise in higher education; they've become centers for political indoctrination. If you look at the people that comprise the faculty at these schools, many of them are establishment heavyweights; Eliot A. Cohen, arch-neoconservative, is Dean of the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, for example, and served in the Bush administration. By comparison, Stephen Walt has never served in any administration.

    These schools charge unbelievable amounts of money to churn out more Eliot Cohens, more Samantha Powers, etc. Even the military officers who take a turn in policymaking circles or serve on a staff somewhere are staunch defenders of the institutions. In fact, the total lack of intellectual diversity is downright disturbing; it's like brainwashing.

    Worst of all? The folks who aren't establishment but still have representation in policymaking circles are all hardliners! Think Frank Gaffney, Fred Fleitz, so on.

    Bankotsu • 18 hours ago • edited
    These people from the blob can't even get real jobs in private sector.

    They are unemployable.

    They have zero employment skills.

    Kent Bankotsu • 14 hours ago
    Depends on whether you consider 100% government financed companies like Lockheed Martin to be private sector.
    Alex (the one that likes Ike) • 13 hours ago
    Courtiers and courtesans. That's rich.

    On the other hand, though, historically courtiers themselves led their troops on the battlefield and considered it a question of honor for one or both of their oldest sons pursuing a military career, while Renaissance courtesans were among the most intellectual and educated women of their epoch. Neither is true for blobsters and blobstresses.

    LFM Alex (the one that likes Ike) • 5 hours ago
    In French and (I think) most other romance languages, the words for courtier and courtesan are the same. Something to think about.
    Gio Con • 9 hours ago
    When the voices against US hegemony and permanent war are loud and taken seriously, then we can hope for change. But if the same underlying assumptions about the need for military aggression to "promote democracy," and the targeting of Russia and China as convenient enemies, are transferred to the "new thinkers," then nothing will change. The question is, can an aggressive capitalist system, dependent on unlimited growth, survive in a peaceful world?
    Gio Con • 9 hours ago
    When the voices against US hegemony and permanent war are loud and taken seriously, then we can hope for change. But if the same underlying assumptions about the need for military aggression to "promote democracy," and the targeting of Russia and China as convenient enemies, are transferred to the "new thinkers," then nothing will change. The question is, can an aggressive capitalist system, dependent on unlimited growth, survive in a peaceful world?
    Feral Finster • 9 hours ago
    Let's not kid ourselves. Trump has proven too weak and easily manipulated to even pull a few troops out of Syria.
    Notfor Yu • 4 hours ago
    The Bush era foreign policy model is over, its a failed policy and everyone knows it. Obama didn't have a foreign policy other than appeasement and capitulation.

    Trump has a new model, treat foreign policy more like business. Negotiate as is done in business, the goal is to get what you want and if the other guy gets something he wants than fine.

    Of course the Trump approach derails the entire US State Dept, security council, and all the media talking heads, so they will oppose it.

    kouroi Notfor Yu • 3 hours ago
    Not really true. Trump seems to have a zero sum approach to business, a win/lose attitude rather than win/win or only some win on the parties. The exit from JPCOA and the maximalist approach to Iran, the way Austria-Hungary approached Serbia in August 1918, is actual Trump attitude.

    [May 01, 2020] 22 years ago Madeleine Albright declared the United States to be the "indispensable nation": "If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us."

    Notable quotes:
    "... Albright's original statement was an aggressive assertion that America was both extraordinarily powerful and unusually farsighted, and that legitimized the frequent U.S. recourse to using force. ..."
    "... After two decades of calamitous failures that have highlighted our weaknesses and foolishness, even she can't muster up the old enthusiasm that she once had. No one could look back at the last 20 years of U.S. foreign policy and still honestly say that "we see further" into the future than others. ..."
    Apr 30, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Originally from: It Took COVID To Expose the Fraud of 'American Exceptionalism' The American Conservative by Daniel Larison

    ... ... ...

    It was 22 years ago when then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright publicly declared the United States to be the "indispensable nation": "If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us."

    In a recent interview with The New York T imes, Albright sounded much less sure of her old position: "There's nothing in the definition of indispensable that says "alone." It means that the United States needs to be engaged with its partners. And people's backgrounds make a difference." Albright's original statement was an aggressive assertion that America was both extraordinarily powerful and unusually farsighted, and that legitimized the frequent U.S. recourse to using force.

    After two decades of calamitous failures that have highlighted our weaknesses and foolishness, even she can't muster up the old enthusiasm that she once had. No one could look back at the last 20 years of U.S. foreign policy and still honestly say that "we see further" into the future than others. Not only are we no better than other countries at anticipating and preparing for future dangers, but judging from the country's lack of preparedness for a pandemic we are actually far behind many of the countries that we have presumed to "lead." It is impossible to square our official self-congratulatory rhetoric with the reality of a government that is incapable of protecting its citizens from disaster.

    [May 01, 2020] Coutriers and coutisans vs neocon blobsters and blobstresses in State Department and elsewhere

    Blobsters are simply prostitute to the military industrial complex. No honesty, no courage required (Courage is replaced with arrogance in most cases.) Pompeo is a vivid example of this creatures of Washington swamp.
    Notable quotes:
    "... historically courtiers themselves led their troops on the battlefield and considered it a question of honor for one or both of their oldest sons pursuing a military career, while Renaissance courtesans were among the most intellectual and educated women of their epoch. Neither is true for blobsters and blobstresses. ..."
    "... In French and (I think) most other romance languages, the words for courtier and courtesan are the same. Something to think about. ..."
    May 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Alex (the one that likes Ike) • 13 hours ago

    Courtiers and courtesans. That's rich.

    On the other hand, though, historically courtiers themselves led their troops on the battlefield and considered it a question of honor for one or both of their oldest sons pursuing a military career, while Renaissance courtesans were among the most intellectual and educated women of their epoch. Neither is true for blobsters and blobstresses.

    LFM Alex (the one that likes Ike) • 5 hours ago
    In French and (I think) most other romance languages, the words for courtier and courtesan are the same. Something to think about.

    [May 01, 2020] American exceptionalism marriage to "Full spectrum Dominance" doctrine proved to be especially toxic: neocons were so preoccupied with remaking the world they failed to see that our country was falling apart

    May 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    The heart of the American exceptionalism in question is American hubris. It is based on the assumption that we are better than the rest of the world, and that this superiority both entitles and obligates us to take on an outsized role in the world.

    In our current foreign policy debates, the phrase "American exceptionalism" has served as a shorthand for justifying and celebrating U.S. dominance, and when necessary it has served as a blanket excuse for U.S. wrongdoing. Seongjong Song defined it in an 2015 article for The Korean Journal of International Studies this way: "American exceptionalism is the belief that the US is "qualitatively different" from all other nations." In practice, that has meant that the U.S. does not consider itself to be bound by the same rules that apply to other states, and it reserves the right to interfere whenever and wherever it wishes.

    American exceptionalism has been used in our political debates as an ideological purity test to determine whether certain political leaders are sufficiently supportive of an activist and interventionist foreign policy. The main purpose of invoking American exceptionalism in foreign policy debate has been to denigrate less hawkish policy views as unpatriotic and beyond the pale. The phrase was often used as a partisan cudgel in the previous decade as the Obama administration's critics tried to cast doubt on the former president's acceptance of this idea, but in the years since then it has become a rallying point for devotees of U.S. primacy regardless of party. There was an explosion in the use of the phrase in just the first few years of the 2010s compared with the previous decades. Song cited a study that showed this massive increase:

    Exceptionalist discourse is on the rise in American politics. Terrence McCoy (2012) found that the term "American exceptionalism" appeared in US publications 457 times between 1980 and 2000, climbing to 2,558 times in the 2000s and 4,172 times in 2010-12.

    The more that U.S. policies have proved "American exceptionalism" to be a pernicious myth at odds with reality, the more we have heard the phrase used to defend those policies. Republican hawks began the decade by accusing Obama of not believing in this "exceptionalism," and some Democratic hawks closed it out by "reclaiming" the idea on behalf of their own discredited foreign policy vision. There may be differences in emphasis between the two camps, but there is a consensus that the U.S. has special rights and privileges that other nations cannot have. That has translated into waging unnecessary wars, assuming excessive overseas burdens, and trampling on the rights of other states, and all the while congratulating ourselves on how virtuous we are for doing all of it.

    The contemporary version of American exceptionalism is tied up inextricably with the belief that the U.S. is the "indispensable nation." According to this view, without U.S. "leadership" other countries will be unable or unwilling to respond to major international problems and threats. We have seen just how divorced from reality that belief is in just the last few months. There has been no meaningful U.S. leadership in response to the pandemic, but for the most part our allies have managed on their own fairly well. In the absence of U.S. "leadership," many other countries have demonstrated that they haven't really needed the U.S. Our "indispensability" is a story that we like to tell ourselves, but it isn't true. Not only are we no longer indispensable, but as Micah Zenko pointed out many years ago, we never were.

    Vhailor • 2 days ago

    We would do well if we put away this boastful fantasy and learned how to live like a normal nation.

    You won't. It always takes a humiliating military defeat or a societal collapse to reevalute such myths.

    Megan S Vhailor • a day ago
    What has been the history of this country since the end of the cold war aside from humiliating military defeats and societal collapse?
    Vhailor Megan S • a day ago
    The numerous foreign misadventures of the US military since 1989 are far from a humiliating military defeat, they are more of an embarassment for the ruling elites. Take for example Afganistan - how many soldiers did the US army lose there in 18 years? 2500? That's nothing compared to the strength and resources available to the Pentagon.

    Societal collapse? I admit the living standards of the average working class Joe fell dramatically compared to the 90's, but you are far from a societal collapse. It won't happen as long as the US Dollar is the world currency. Believe me :)

    Gary Sellars Vhailor • a day ago • edited
    The dollars days are numbered. You can't degrade a fiat currency by endless printing with reckless abandon and expect that the other nations of the planet will retain any trust that the scrip will remain a reliable store of value.

    BTW Afghanistan is an unmitigated DISASTER. The "hyperpower" cannot impose its will on one of the most backward and impoverised nations on the planet. Heck the Soviets did better in their day, and they had to face a billion-dollar-a-year foreign-backed insurgency funded by US & Saudi, and backed to the hilt by Pakistan. By comparison, the Taliban have NO allies and no foreign funding, yet try as they might, neither the US nor its feckless puppet regime in Kabul can succeed in grinding them down.

    Feral Finster Gary Sellars • a day ago
    Were to God that you are correct.
    Inn caritas Vhailor • a day ago
    If I were a statistical man, I'd wager that civil war within the decade is highly unlikely if the current trajectory of US society continues
    Inn caritas Inn caritas • a day ago
    Highly likely*
    Vhailor Inn caritas • a day ago
    Hmmm... I wouldn't. Who would fight whom? Or would it be a free for all Mad Max style?

    You Americans have this weird fascination with the apocalyptic. Seriously, just look at your movies - each year Hollywood dishes out at least half a dozen blockbusters dealing with societal collapse - be it due to an alien invasion, zombie plague, impact event or something else...

    I admit, you have problems. The middle class is getting poorer each year, mass imigration from the southern side of your continent is tearing apart the social fabric and your elite got richer and more arrogant sice they embraced globalisation in the 90's. But this doesn't mean that the country is heading towards a civil war.

    Inn caritas Vhailor • a day ago
    Well .... I'm not even American so I feel I can look at this somewhat More objectively than a hardcore blue or red stater. Still hard to tell whether covid will put a wrench in the trajectory or accelerate it. And if you want apocalypticism, go see Rod.
    Gio Con Vhailor • a day ago
    Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan -- how many more humiliating military defeats will it take for Americans to realize that they are anything but exceptional?
    ZizaNiam Gio Con • a day ago • edited
    Americans view killing foreign men, women, and children as a successful endeavor of their efforts to fight for freedom. American also are not bothered if their soldiers torture and rape foreign men, women and children. So these wars are not seen as failures but successes, even if actual geopolitical goals are not realized.
    Gutbomb Vhailor • a day ago
    "You won't. It always takes a humiliating military defeat or a societal collapse to reevalute such myths."

    I would go a bit further and say that Americans won't reevaluate those myths until they personally feel the pain from those things and they blame their pain on the government that caused them. So much of our current policies are guided by the principal of making sure that Americans do not feel the pain of their government's actions. We eliminated the draft so most Americans have no skin in the game regarding military conflicts (not to mention no war taxes, no goods rationing, etc.). We have come to expect bottomless economic "stimulus," borrowed from our children's future labor, so we feel minimal pain from the poor preparation for the pandemic. Bread and circuses have proven to be powerful manipulation tools indeed.

    Fazal Majid • 2 days ago • edited
    The US is remarkably insular, in large part because it is a mostly self-sufficient (or used to be) nation-continent, but the hubristic idea of exceptionalism also makes us resistant to good ideas invented elsewhere.

    As concerns COVID-19, I have a number of physicians in my family, and it's only on March 16th that they awakened to the crisis, a week after France officially announced it was going into lockdown or after London basically became a ghost town. One of them even took her kids to Disneyland around that time, something that seemed the height of irresponsibility to us at the time. Thus obliviousness is not just a feature of the Trump administration. The lone exception is tech companies, perhaps because they are more globalized than most, but the Washington policy navel-gazing circle-jerk is mostly oblivious to the West Coast.

    Now the idea that some crises can only be solved with US leadership is not without merit. Just because we cannot solve all doesn't mean there aren't some important categories where our military might and logistic prowess carry the day. That COVID-19 would prove to be an especially tough challenge for the US was entirely predictable. From our fractured decision-making due to federalism, our abysmally inefficient health-care system with its huge swathes of uninsured, our ideology of free market solutions to everything, and our polarized and ineffectual legislature, made this crisis almost tailor-made to expose the fault-lines in our brittle society in the worst possible light.

    I don't think we need to ape the Chinese, but certainly we need to look outward for a change, shed our not-invented-here mentality and look at how South Korea or New Zealand succeeded where we failed, despite having a fraction of our resources.

    Augustine Fazal Majid • 9 hours ago • edited
    What military might which has not been able to win any war that it started ever? What logistic prowess that cannot make PPEs for at least the healthcare workers, not to mention toilet paper for the people?
    t44s • 2 days ago
    excellent article Daniel! My thoughts exactly!
    Jeffrey Groom • 2 days ago
    Great article Daniel.
    Wally • 2 days ago
    I would love to see all our political leaders (and their media friends) respond to the observations by Mr. Bacevich and Mr. Larison. Of course, I agree with both of them. Perhaps this economic crisis combined with the pandemic will finally break america. It's a shame it has come to this. Must we endure economic collapse, starvation, and the corruption / looting by the wealthy in order to finally stop caring about imaginary threats half way around the world? I suspect the answer is yes. Americans will never abandon their arrogance until they are laid low by something.
    Feral Finster Wally • a day ago
    "A wolf, meeting with a Lamb astray from the fold, resolved not to lay violent hands on him, but to find some plea to justify to the Lamb the Wolf's right to eat him. He thus addressed him: "Sirrah, last year you grossly insulted me."

    "Indeed," bleated the Lamb in a mournful tone of voice, "I was not then born."

    Then said the Wolf, "You feed in my pasture."

    "No, good sir," replied the Lamb, "I have not yet tasted grass."

    Again said the Wolf, "You drink of my well."

    "No," exclaimed the Lamb, "I never yet drank water, for as yet my mother's milk is both food and drink to me."
    Upon which the Wolf seized him and ate him up, saying, "Well! I won't remain supperless, even though you refute every one of my imputations."

    Moral: The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny."

    **************************

    For a few more years, the US will have absolute power over other people and we will use that power in an absolutely corrupt way at the behest of our overlords in Riyadh and Jerusalem. When retribution finally comes our way, no one will shed a tear for us.

    Nor should they, for we do evil.

    Sidney Caesar Wally • a day ago
    I'd endorse restoring civics classes in American schools, with a reading list comprised of Daniel Larison, Andrew Bacevich, and Noam Chomsky.
    JoeBu • 2 days ago • edited
    How long will it take and how bad will it get?

    The Qianlong Emperor dismissed Lord Macartney's trade mission in 1792 because the celestial kingdom had no need for the manufacturers of barbarians.

    China then got whooped in the first Opium War in 1841. It continued to rot for +100 years.

    China had a major exceptionalism problem which hamstrung reform efforts for a century. Some of it is still ongoing (another topic).

    I'm trying to figure out what psychological decompensation will look like and how long it will last.

    Kent JoeBu • 2 days ago
    The US has long been a myth-making factory for the population. The average American has a pretty rough life. Generally strapped with debt (mortgage, cars), working a dead-end job with little protection should you lose it. But people are tribal and can get their sense of self-worth from the tribe. So to be constantly told you are "exceptional" and part of the "greatest nation the world has ever known" can cover up a lot of pain in real life. See New England Patriots fans or LSU Tigers fans.

    So while being so exceptional, you get to spend hours trying to figure out which Obamacare policy won't cost so much that it takes up all of your extra monthly cash while simultaneously leaving you thousands in debt if you actually needed to use it.

    JoeBu Kent • 2 days ago • edited
    Agree. So decompensation. Is it an opportunity to right the ship or does it get real ugly?
    Kent JoeBu • a day ago • edited
    I tend to think the psychological decomposition is on-going. Americans know that something is terribly wrong, but they can't seem to put their collective finger on it. The Trump vote was a big signal that folks know something is wrong. The hope was that Trump could fix it, but he just knew something was wrong too. He didn't know how to fix it, but at least he is willing to talk about it.

    But I don't see how you right the ship. What's wrong is that what got us to be a wealthy powerful country today isn't what is going to keep us that way going forward. That's very hard for people at all levels of society to understand and accept.

    So I expect a continued devolution. Where it gets increasingly "real ugly" for a lot of people, while a lot of us continue to do fairly well. You have to have a lot of hope your kids can make it too.

    Feral Finster Kent • a day ago
    Americans know that something is terribly wrong and getting worse by the day and by the crisis, but they seems to think that tribal solutions are the answer.
    JoeBu Feral Finster • a day ago
    Agree.

    America, as a society, has high functioning autism.

    Something is wrong but in good times, it can really outperform and faults can be overlooked.

    But when its routine is disrupted, it will have meltdowns and tantrums.

    Feral Finster JoeBu • 9 hours ago
    Empires tend to do that, especially as they find that they are no longer as omnipotent as they think they are, or as they once were.
    JoeBu Kent • a day ago
    Decompensation cratered China for over a century.

    Modernity should speed up this cycle, no?

    Russia cratered for a decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It has moderately recovered. Not so great but not 100 years.

    kouroi Kent • a day ago
    So true. An eye opening set of essays goes to the hart of this: Deer Hunting with Jesus: Dispatches from America's Class War Paperback by Joe Bageant.

    However, that book hasn't received the same fame and traction as this other one (and I am looking at you TAC and Rod Dreher as well): Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis by J. D. Vance and this is because in the first the author focuses on the system as the one that produces certain results while on the other the author puts more weight on individual choices, the darling idea of conservatives, the lifting oneself by bootstraps, the American success story of rags to riches...

    Feral Finster JoeBu • a day ago
    Opium is not native to China. The reason that the British pushed opium on China, in spite of the strenuous objections of the Chinese governments and officials of the time, is because before the Opium Wars, trade with China was causing a worldwide shortage of silver. Silver was about the only thing that non-Chinese had that Chinese wanted. Until opium.

    In fact, at least one Chinse official wrote Queen Victoria a letter to the effect that opium is forbidden in Great Britain, so why are you trying to push it on us here?

    EliteCommInc. • 2 days ago
    "The coronavirus pandemic is a curse. It should also serve as an opportunity, Americans at long last realizing that they are not God's agents. Out of suffering and loss, humility and self-awareness might emerge. We can only hope."

    Laugh. ohhh you guys need to stop. The virus is not an indication that God is denying an exceptional role for the US. A star athlete is exceptional and may even be fascinating. However,

    the reality remains that in order to stay exceptional, fascinating and "indispensable" ---- there are things that athelete must do and and there are things that athelete must avoid doing.

    We have engaged in a lot of things we should avoid and neglected some matters that would be helpful in maintaining our own health and care --- damaging our exceptional performance.

    Jesse Owens and the Bolt, Usain bolt don't participate in every event and they don't run in every race all the time . . .

    It simply is unsustainable.

    I of course reject all the whining bout how we, the US, are not exceptional --- and while dispensable, or value on the planet remains vital.

    kouroi EliteCommInc. • a day ago
    "value"? more like "impact"... and "vital"? For about 100 years China was an object of history rather than subject, no biggie. The World would need a breather with a bit of hiatus concerning the US.
    Wally EliteCommInc. • a day ago
    If the virus is not gods curse then the equally foolish notion that Americans are gods agents ought to be rejected as well. I think you have misunderstood the context of the reference to gods.
    =marco01= EliteCommInc. • a day ago
    The virus is not an indication that God is denying an exceptional role for the US.

    But a natural disaster striking a blue state, that totally is an indication God is punishing them for their degeneracy.

    EmpireLoyalist • 2 days ago
    Two constitutional amendment movements must come out of this crisis:
    1) Large metropolitan areas must be detached from the states in which they reside. It is beyond tragic to see civilised people, with deep roots and traditional values, come under the tyranny of brutal marxist regimes - as we see in so many places from Virginia to NY to Pennsylvania to Illinois. We have giant colonies of government dependents and cube-dwellers, which are being used by the Left as vote plantations. The governments they produce are then inflicted on normal decent innocent people who just happen to live within the same state lines. This can't be allowed to continue.
    2) Anybody (like Bill Gates) who engages in planning or promoting policies that would treat humans as livestock (e.g., by tracking them with implanted micro-chips) should be charged with crimes against humanity.
    It would be an uphill battle to achieve these goals, but if we do not start right away, the next crisis could be used by the Left to impose their sick vicious perverted social engineering programme - which would mean the end of human civilisation and of the human race as we know it.
    Doug Fister EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    wow, what a deranged, reality-free comment.
    Freespeak EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    Whoa amazing, this is like unreasoning.
    gnt EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    Who would want to implant chips in people who willingly pay hundreds of dollars for a portable device that facilitates tracking the owner?

    As far as separating metropolitan areas from surrounding rural areas, it would exacerbate a problem that is already developing. The structure of Congress is already weighted toward rural states. Anything that increases that advantage will mean that more people are governed by fewer people. That's not going to make the US a more stable country.

    Awake and Uttering a Song EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    View Hide
    EmpireLoyalist EmpireLoyalist • a day ago • edited
    The readership of TAC are predominantly committed Leftists.
    This comment appears to have touched a nerve.
    These measures would impede implementation of The Agenda.
    Excellent.
    Sidney Caesar EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    While there are certainly leftists (like myself) among TAC readership, the thing that distinguishes most TAC readers from folks like yourself is that we reside on the left side of the sanity/insanity divide.
    EmpireLoyalist Sidney Caesar • a day ago
    The commenters here seem to feel these two ideas are crazy:
    1) Civilised people should not be placed under the power of people they view as primitive bloodthirsty degenerates.
    2) Human beings should not be treated as livestock - tracked and managed by a post-human ruling class.
    If The Left believes these ideas are insane, we have a big problem.
    That is confirmation that the chasm between Western Civilisation and the marxist ideology is absolutely unbridgeable. There is zero overlap - zero common ground. [In fact, the two are so far apart that one can't see the other with a telescope on a clear day.]
    We need to be moving toward some form of separation - whether that means a peaceful partition like the Soviet Union in the early nineties, a loose confederation like the British Commonwealth, or maybe a defence/foreign policy alliance based on the NATO model.
    Sidney Caesar EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    Ideas are just ideas.
    It's the people with those ideas who are crazy.
    EmpireLoyalist Sidney Caesar • a day ago
    "Sane people have crazy ideas. Crazy people have sane ideas."
    It's gonna be tough to sell that one.
    Are you really just saying that we should submit to an insane ideology because the people promoting it are just the coolest, most fabulous people ever?
    The normal humans are not buying that garbage.
    That's why marxism always turns to extreme violence.
    Socialism cannot compete, so it must conquer. It cannot persuade, so it must coerce and terrorise.
    gnt EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    Have you not noticed that we seem to be doing our fair share of conquering, coercing and terrorizing in the last 40 years?
    Ruth Harris EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    Probably the difference is in who either side defines as "primitive bloodthirsty degenerates" and "a post-human ruling class."
    gnt EmpireLoyalist • a day ago
    Every time I see the "the Left" used as the subject of a sentence, it always seems to follow that the writer does not know what he's talking about, and probably does not know any actual leftists who think or do what the writer is claiming they think or do. When you build straw men from information you get on Fox News, you're not likely to get much more than ill-founded generalizations.
    Gutbomb gnt • a day ago
    Any time you see a comment that repeats "the Left/Liberals/Democrats believe X" and "the Right/Conservatives/Republicans believe Y" you can bet that it will not be insightful.

    [Apr 30, 2020] Pompeo's Cynical Attack on the Nuclear Deal by Daniel Larison

    Apr 27, 2020 | www.antiwar.com

    Originally appeared at The American Conservative .

    The Trump administration has been desperately trying to kill the nuclear deal for the last two years after reneging on it. Now they will try to kill it by pretending to be part of it again:

    Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is preparing a legal argument that the United States remains a participant in the Iran nuclear accord that President Trump has renounced, part of an intricate strategy to pressure the United Nations Security Council to extend an arms embargo on Tehran or see far more stringent sanctions reimposed on the country.

    The administration's latest destructive ploy won't find any support on the Security Council. There is nothing "intricate" about this idea. It is a crude, heavy-handed attempt to employ the JCPOA's own provisions to destroy it. It is just the latest in a series of administration moves that tries to have things both ways. They want to renege on U.S. commitments while still refusing to allow Iran to benefit from the agreement, and they ultimately hope to make things difficult enough for Iran that their government chooses to give up on the agreement. It reeks of bad faith and contempt for international law, and all other governments will be able to see right through it. Some of our European allies have already said as much:

    European diplomats who have learned of the effort maintain that Mr. Trump and Mr. Pompeo are selectively choosing whether they are still in the agreement to fit their agenda.

    It is significant that the Trump administration feels compelled to go through this charade after telling everyone for years that the U.S. is no longer in the deal. Until now, Trump administration officials have been unwavering in saying that the U.S. is out of the deal and can't be considered a participant in it:

    Can't wait to see the tortured memo out of State/L claiming that somehow the U.S. is still a participant in the JCPOA. The May 8, 2018 announcement is literally titled "Ceasing U.S. Participation in the JCPOA ." https://t.co/I5t8LaC7dN

    -- Richard Johnson (@johnsonrc01) April 26, 2020

    [Apr 29, 2020] Trump, despite pretty slick deception during his election campaign, is an typical imperialist and rabid militarist. His administration continuredand in some areas exceeded the hostility of Obama couse against Russia

    Highly recommended!
    One of trademarks of Trump administration is his that he despises international law and relies on "might makes right" principle all the time. In a way he is a one trick pony, typical unhinged bully.
    In a way Pompeo is the fact of Trump administration foreign policy, and it is not pretty
    Apr 29, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Passer by , Apr 29 2020 17:32 utc | 7
    It is mostly, though not only, Trump related or libertarian pseudo "alt media" behind "just the flu" theories or "China unleashed virus to attack US".

    There is a small military/zionist cabal at the White House that is pushing for that information war in order to prop up the dying US empire as well as US oligarhic business interests, and to secure Trump reelection prospects.

    It is enough to see how Zerohedge have been turned into full blown imperialist media with many "evil China" outbursts every day.

    Beware of Trumptards infiltrating alt media to prop up the dying US Empire and its business interests.

    Trump is the biggest US imperialist for the last 30 years. He made a good job at deceiving many anti-system voices.

    His WTO attacks are too part of US efforts to take over the organisation. His has no problem with international institutions as long as they are US empire controlled (such as OPCW, WADA, etc.)

    Trump-tards and related libertarians (Zerohedge etc.) made their choice on the side of global US imperialism (driven by their hidden racism, hence the evil "chinks" making a good enemy) and are now the enemy of the multipolar world.

    Trump is scum. He turned on Russia and Assange after he got into the White House and did far more against Russia than even Obama. I say that as someone who initially made the mistake to support him.

    [Apr 28, 2020] Background reading on Pompeo and his mafia

    Apr 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Stonebird , Apr 27 2020 19:17 utc | 28

    Background reading on Pompeo and his mafia.

    This is part of Tom's description of the Article on Pompeo, Esper and the gang of 1986 (west pointers). They are well embedded.
    In fact, one class from West Point, that of 1986, from which both Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo graduated, is essentially everywhere in a distinctly militarized (if still officially civilian) and wildly hawkish Washington in the Trumpian moment.

    In case you missed it the first time, I repeat this link from the beginning of April,

    http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176686/tomgram%3A_danny_sjursen%2C_trump%27s_own_military_mafia_/

    -----------------
    Red Ryder | Apr 27 2020 17:07 utc | 14

    One addition there. The EU lost "market share" in Iran due to US sanctions. (As they did with Russia). What they would like to do is to get it back. (France was one of the bigger losers)

    Yeah, Right , Apr 27 2020 22:48 utc | 45

    "Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is preparing a legal argument"...

    Oh, a LEGAL argument? In that case the articles of the Vienna Convention On The Law Of Treaties is going to be our friend.

    Article 31(b) prohibits any legal argument that leads to a result that "is manifestly absurd or unreasonable".

    Granted that the JCPOA is not a treaty, as such. But it is an international agreement, and that nobody disputes.

    Just as nobody disputes that the Vienna Convention is the codification of what had hitherto been accepted as International Customary Law.

    LEGALLY-speaking - as we are, apparently - Pompous has handed his lawyers a task that they would call "a hopeless brief".

    Dick , Apr 27 2020 23:08 utc | 47
    The US is very good at making enemies and loosing friends, simply due to their treatment of other nations in the same manner they treat their domestic population.
    Arch , Apr 28 2020 5:12 utc | 61
    @jiri #75

    The United States announced its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the "Iran nuclear deal" or the "Iran deal", on May 8, 2018.

    This document discusses the legal rationale for the US withdrawal from tje JCPOA in detail:


    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R44761.pdf

    Since when does announcing your "withdrawal" from a contract NOT mean "leaving the agreement" ?

    Mina , Apr 28 2020 11:19 utc | 73
    https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/04/27/pompeo-gantz-and-the-end-of-the-two-state-solution/

    [Apr 28, 2020] MoA - To Finally Kill The Nuclear Deal With Iran The U.S. Will Try To Rejoin It

    Notable quotes:
    "... I guess when an administration has shown over and over again that it does not respect, international law, domestic law, the US constitution, logic, meaning or the English Language then it can say anything and do anything. ..."
    "... The power of the United States is rapidly fading. The country is on the eve of a massive social crisis, as its ruling class fails even to understand the extent of the system's failure. ..."
    "... Israel is nobody's real need. Zionism is a philosophical oddity stranded by the tides of history, a mid Victorian nonsense entirely composed of racism and silly ideas about human inequality. ..."
    Apr 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Mµ , Apr 27 2020 16:54 utc | 9

    !! a "deal" with "Not Agreement-Capable" entity.

    ... is that akin to the portion of a George Carlin comedy sketch ?

    "From 1778 to 1871, the United States government
    entered into more than 500 treaties with
    the Native American tribes;
    all of these treaties have since been violated
    in some way or outright broken by the US government,
    while at least one treaty was violated
    or broken by Native American tribes."

    Red Ryder , Apr 27 2020 17:07 utc | 11

    The EU rapprochement with Iran is all about the huge market the EU wants. Their interest in the JCPOA was always about Iran developing, and the EU benefiting for its trade and investment potential.

    Crippling Iran again with snapback sanctions certainly would end Iran-EU relations for a decade or longer.

    With the EU economy in the toilet due to the pandemic, now more than ever the EU needs Iran free of sanctions, not laden with crippling new ones.

    Only one country benefits from the economic strangulation of Iran--Israel.

    Huginn , Apr 27 2020 17:16 utc | 12
    In these times of memory holes, sometimes it pays to remember:
    As much as I'd like to be optimistic that justice might actually be served for both Epstein and his myriad clients/co-conspirators, I think the powers-that-be will again squash this - or liquidate Epstein - before things get out of hand for them.

    The American justice system has been corrupted in much the same way the political system has been, and it's primary objective is to protect the rulers from the common folk, not to actually deliver true justice.

    I'll watch with anticipation, but I haven't had any satisfaction from either a political or justice perspective since at least the 2000 coup d'etat, so I won't hold my breath this time.

    Does this seem precient?

    Peter AU1 , Apr 27 2020 17:17 utc | 13
    Glasshopper

    You have got to be a paid to be putting to be putting that shit up here. US doesn't accept peace deals.

    Nathan Mulcahy , Apr 27 2020 17:22 utc | 14
    Economist Michael Hudson explains how American imperialism has created a global free lunch, where the US makes foreign countries pay for its wars, and even their own military occupation.

    https://moderaterebels.com/transcript-economics-american-imperialism-michael-hudson/

    Stonebird , Apr 27 2020 19:17 utc | 28
    Background reading on Pompeo and his mafia.

    This is part of Tom's description of the Article on Pompeo, Esper and the gang of 1986 (west pointers). They are well embedded.
    In fact, one class from West Point, that of 1986, from which both Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo graduated, is essentially everywhere in a distinctly militarized (if still officially civilian) and wildly hawkish Washington in the Trumpian moment.
    In case you missed it the first time, I repeat this link from the beginning of April,
    http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176686/tomgram%3A_danny_sjursen%2C_trump%27s_own_military_mafia_/

    -----------------
    Red Ryder | Apr 27 2020 17:07 utc | 14

    One addition there. The EU lost "market share" in Iran due to US sanctions. (As they did with Russia). What they would like to do is to get it back. (France was one of the bigger losers)

    El Cid , Apr 27 2020 19:24 utc | 29
    Before any aggression, the United States want Iran to be hermetically sealed with sanction just like Iraq was before our invasion. Everybody knows the US's intentions because we've seen it before. There will be NO domestic support for war on Iran as Americans die due to no public healthcare and massive unemployment and poverty. Iran and the Middle East view a war on Iran as an Israeli wet dream. Israel is viewed as the intellectual author of aggression against Iran, and Iran will respond appropriately. So, is AIPAC willing to get Israel destroyed? Is AIPAC on a suicide mission? Looks that way.
    Noah Way , Apr 27 2020 19:38 utc | 33
    @ #8 Grasshopper

    Israel and Saudi Arabia are de facto allies aiming to carve up the entire Middle East between them. Forget about Sunni / Shia / Hebrew, that is a manufactured excuse to war for resources (oil first, then water).

    Proof? Mutual "enemies" (oil-rich Iran and Syria, which is the nexus for pipelines) and mutual ally (Uncle Sam). Also not a single complaint from Israel over the $100b US-Saudi Arms deal. As to Palestine, that is a human rights issue and has no weight because water is not recognized as a strategic resource (yet).

    RT , Apr 27 2020 19:56 utc | 35
    I guess when an administration has shown over and over again that it does not respect, international law, domestic law, the US constitution, logic, meaning or the English Language then it can say anything and do anything.
    bevin , Apr 27 2020 20:11 utc | 38
    "The Iranians are not helping the Palestinians one iota. They are splitting the opposition."
    Glasshopper@29

    Whoever has been helping Hezbollah has been helping the Palestinians. And whoever has been holding Syria together, despite the pressure of the imperialists and their sunni-state puppets, has also been helping the Palestinians by bringing some kind of balance into regional power calculations.

    It is imperative that Iran continues not only to provide political support to the Palestinian cause but to democratise the Gulf, to the extent of bringing about the demise of the autocracies, and the Arabian world generally.

    Israel has already exerted its maximum influence. The power of the United States is rapidly fading. The country is on the eve of a massive social crisis, as its ruling class fails even to understand the extent of the system's failure. (There will be no war to divert attention from the crisis.) And Israel will be left to solve its own problems as its 'allies' find themselves increasingly pre-occupied with real problems.

    Supporting Israel and building it up as an imperialist base has been part of an era in which the empire was hegemonic and thus able to define international events in terms of domestic politics.

    That era has ended. The USA is still powerful but it is no longer anything more than one of the major participants in geopolitical competition. Even to maintain its position it is going to have to do, what other powers have done and concentrate its resources on its real needs.

    Israel is nobody's real need. Zionism is a philosophical oddity stranded by the tides of history, a mid Victorian nonsense entirely composed of racism and silly ideas about human inequality. Israel has one choice, to divest itself of its fascist government and its fascistic culture and seek accommodation within the neighbourhood or to wither away as its population emigrates leaving only the committed fascists to play with Armageddon.

    Long before that happens the imperialists will have taken its weapons away from it.

    It may very well be the case that the ordinary Iranian is no more committed to fighting on behalf of Palestinians than the average American is committed to risking all, or anything, for the sake of Israel. But Iran's commitment to Palestine is a powerful political statement and one that counters the divisive tactics of the wahhabis and their imperial friends. Iran has taken up the mantle that Nasser briefly wore, in the vanguard of a muslim and Arab nationalist movement. This makes it very difficult for the sunni tyrants actually to commit forces to defend Israel or attack Iran. Their duplicity is a measure of their own weakness.

    Does anyone imagine that the pro-Israeli policies pursued by the Sauds are actually popular? The Gulf and Saudi policies of sucking up to Israel are far more damaging to them than Iran's stance is to it.

    Arch , Apr 28 2020 5:12 utc | 61
    @jiri #75

    The United States announced its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the "Iran nuclear deal" or the "Iran deal", on May 8, 2018.

    This document discusses the legal rationale for the US withdrawal from tje JCPOA in detail:


    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R44761.pdf

    Since when does announcing your "withdrawal" from a contract NOT mean "leaving the agreement" ?

    Piotr Berman , Apr 28 2020 6:26 utc | 65
    Iran should sign a peace deal with the Israelis.
    Posted by: Glasshopper | Apr 27 2020 16:42 utc | 8

    Some people should stick to what they do well, like hopping on glass. A simple observation: peace deal with "the Israelis" is not possible. Gulfie princes tried. No cigar. They genuinely tried to be nice with Israel, out of "anti-Semitic delusion that Jews control USA". I conjecture that Glasshopper made a similar assumption -- why would Iran consider a "peace deal with the Israelis" if its direct conflict is with USA (and the Gulfies)? How it would help them unless "Jews control USA"?

    As a mental experiment, let Grasshopper sketch a putative "deal with Israelis". Kushner plan?

    Yeah, Right , Apr 28 2020 6:36 utc | 66
    @70 BraveNewWorld, you haven't added up the numbers correctly. Take China, Russia and Iran out of the equation leaves you with five (including the EU as a whole, which is not a given). Take the USA out as well and it doesn't matter how sycophantic the Europeans are, Pompeo can only muster four votes.

    And he needs five to refer the issue to the UNSC.

    That's why Pompous wants to waddle his way back in: no matter which way he looks at this, without the USA sitting at the table he is one-short.

    John Bolton, the gift that keeps giving.....

    Yeah, Right , Apr 28 2020 7:12 utc | 67
    Actually, I've just read the JCPOA and UNSC Resolution 2231 and neither has any mention of a "majority vote" requirement for a referral to the UNSC for a vote on "snapping back" sanctions. It appears that any one JCPOA participant can refer the issue of alleged non-compliance to the UNSC, provided that they first exhaust the Joint Commission dispute mechanism.

    But I do note this in the JCPOA (my bold): "Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, as described above, including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA , the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting"

    Seems to me that there is a procedural "out" there for the UN Secretariat i.e. it may use that highlighted section to decide that the participant is a vexatious litigant whose participation in the Joint Commission was not in good faith, ergo, the UN can refuse to even take receipt of the complaint.

    Everything else then becomes moot.

    The USA would raise merry-hell, sure, it would. But that would be no more outrageous a ploy by the UN than was the USA's own argument that it can have its cake and eat it too.

    After all, if a participant to the JCPOA referred its complaint to the UNSC without first going through the Joint Commission then it is a given that the UNSC is under no obligation to receive that complaint. No question.

    So why can't the UNSC also refuse to accept a complaint when it is clear that the complainant has not gone through the Joint Commission process in "good faith"?

    One for the lawyers and ambassadors to argue, I would suggest, but it is not a given that the USA can ram this through even if everyone were to agree that it were still a participant in the JCPOA.

    Yeah, Right , Apr 28 2020 7:50 utc | 68
    @61 Arch: "This document discusses the legal rationale for the US withdrawal from tje JCPOA in detail"

    Arch, the crux of that CRS legal paper boils down to this:
    .."under current domestic law, the President may possess authority to terminate U.S. participation in the JCPOA and to re-impose U.S. sanctions on Iran, either through executive order or by declining to renew statutory waivers"..

    All the other fluff in that paper is inconsequential compared to this question posed by that quote: can the US claim to be half-pregnant?

    I suspect not.

    Note that at the time the CRS paper was written (May 2018) it did have a valid point i.e. while Trump *had* refused to re-certify Iranian compliance, he had *not* reimposed US sanctions on Iran, and so the CRS paper could credibly argue that Trump wasn't pregnant, he just talking dirty to the Congress.

    But that was then, and this is now, and - as b points out - Executive Order 13846 is the smoking gun because in it Trump is OFFICIALLY stating that he has decided to " cease the participation of the United States in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ".

    That EO is clearly the killing blow to Pompeo's nonsense, and even the CRS legal paper you linked to would agree.

    Zeug , Apr 28 2020 12:29 utc | 74
    As I see it, the historical problem with European fascism has been that when push comes to shove the knife comes out and its either give in to enforced collaboration or take a stabbing, it's your choice. Even if that means helping murder millions of your neighbours or being murdered. As Celan said "Der Tod ist ein Meister aus Deutschland."

    The US has been enforcing a morally sanitised Disney Adult version of this old world order since at least the 2003 Supreme Crime of Aggression against Iraq. Sooner or later as this global pandemic, political, and financial crisis unfolds, the US leaders will be forced to choose whether or not the UN is a viable vehicle through which to continue the elite lunatic project for planetary full spectrum dominance of 21st C financial and military affairs.

    So I reckon the Pentagon at some point either gets to finally execute the long awaited 'Operation Conquer Persia' or the politicians and their chickenhawk ideologues will back off again and continue the death by a thousand cuts of the last 40 years. I'd probably bet the latter but that's the trouble with genuine psychopaths, push comes to shove they will go for it if they think they'll get away with it.

    This last 2 decades has been like watching a reality TV series about a fat drunken psychopath with a bloody knife going around and stabbing people at a party, but now the psycho is starting to stagger and everyone in the house is watchful trying to keep their distance. House rules are that anyone starts an actual fight to the death with the psycho then everyone dies!

    I more or less trust that if we ever get there, a multipolar world order won't collapse into outright fascism but we're closer to collapse every year, especially from this year on, and most especially in the Persian Gulf.

    jared , Apr 28 2020 12:44 utc | 75
    In current US political system, it is not necessary to propose a valid claim, or proposal or argument - they intend to act from a position of authority. They know where you live.

    [Apr 28, 2020] To end endless wars, I support 75% military spending cuts

    This amount of money would end COVID-19 epidemic really quickly
    Apr 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    blues , Apr 26 2020 21:26 utc | 31
    Howie Hawkins -- Peace and Freedom Party 2020

    I am a retired Teamster in Syracuse, New York, who joined the civil rights, antiwar, and environmental movements as a teenager in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1960s. In 1984, I co-founded the Green Party. In 2010, I was the first U.S. candidate to campaign for a Green New Deal in the first of three campaigns for New York governor that won Green Party ballot lines.

    To end the climate crisis, I have detailed an Ecosocialist Green New Deal to create 38 million new jobs, 100% clean energy, and zero carbon emissions by 2030.

    To end poverty and economic insecurity, I propose an Economic Bill of Rights: job guarantee, guaranteed minimum income, affordable housing, improved Medicare for all, tuition-free public education pre–K to college, and secure retirement by doubling Social Security.

    To end endless wars, I support 75% military spending cuts, U.S. troops home, diplomacy, international law, human rights, and a Global Green New Deal.

    To end the new nuclear arms race, I favor no first use, minimum credible deterrent, and ratification of the new Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty.

    I support unions, $20 minimum wage, worker co-ops, public banks, public energy, public railroads, progressive taxation, net neutrality, internet privacy, ending mass surveillance, no nukes, no fracking, abortion rights, student and medical debt relief, decriminalizing drugs, ending mass incarceration, police under community control, immigrant amnesty, African-American reparations, Indian and Mexican-American treaty rights, whistleblower and political prisoner pardons, and presidential elections by National Popular Vote using Ranked-Choice Voting. [Ranked Choice Voting is a huge fraud -- which many well-meaning people fall for]
    // ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    So --

    HowieHawkins20 -- Account suspended -- Twitter suspends accounts which violate the Twitter Rules

    You catching on yet?

    [Apr 27, 2020] Pompeo is steering the US Department of State into becoming arm of the Central Intelligence Agency

    Apr 27, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , Apr 26 2020 23:02 utc | 37

    The gloves are now off as China has called out Pompeo quite correctly saying, "Pompeo an enemy to world peace" --and we ought to expect more disruptions here at MoA. Here's just one of several slaps in Pompeo's face:

    "The former top intelligence official is steering the US Department of State into becoming the Central Intelligence Agency. He is playing with fire, making the 21st century an era of major power confrontation and undermining the foundations for peace. Despite being the chief diplomat of the US, he totally betrayed the basic responsibility with which he is entrusted to promote international understanding. He has become the enemy of world peace."

    What's most unfortunate is few seem to consult Global Times , as I was rather surprised this major editorial wasn't already linked. Here's yet another slap:

    "Geopolitics cannot dominate the world anymore. Pompeo and his like are desperately pulling the world backwards. They are unable to handle a diverse and complicated new century and so they attempt to resume the Cold War. They can only 'realize their ambition' in polarized confrontation."

    And that clearly wasn't enough as yet another slap's delivered in the closing two sentences:

    "Lies may fulfill Pompeo's personal ambition, but they will never accomplish the US dreams to be "great again." Pompeo is not only a figure harmful to world peace, but also should be listed as the worst US secretary of state in its history."

    Hmm... Don't know if he qualifies as "worst" yet as he must still top Ms. Clinton, but she certainly didn't treat China as has Pompeo.

    [Apr 27, 2020] For Clinton wing of Dems the question is: Why win and get the blame, when one can loose, blame the others, and still get the money?

    For neoliberal Dems win is continued access to Wall Street money.
    Notable quotes:
    "... If the Democrats want to win (which is not a foregone conclusion), then they need to structure the primaries around the swing states. ..."
    "... What's needed is a clear definition of "win." ..."
    Apr 27, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Bill Carson , April 26, 2020 at 2:15 pm

    Yep. The Southern firewall is such an absurd phenomenon. Use a bunch of states that will not influence the general election to winnow the candidates in the primary election.

    Same thing in reverse with California -- IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT SANDERS WON CALIFORNIA because California is going to vote blue in the fall.

    If the Democrats want to win (which is not a foregone conclusion), then they need to structure the primaries around the swing states.

    Synoia , April 26, 2020 at 2:41 pm

    If the Democrats want to win

    And there's the rub. Why win and get the blame, when one can loose, blame the others, and still get the money?

    What's needed is a clear definition of "win."

    [Apr 27, 2020] Adolph Reed was clearly referring to Obama way back in 1997, but Booker fit most of the description of a "new black" politician.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Booker played a character (they all do, but some are polished versions of themselves) for so long, I'm not sure he is real. He played Obama, the servant of the men in suits, before Obama but less cool. ..."
    Apr 27, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    NotTimothyGeithner , April 26, 2020 at 1:16 pm

    Booker played a character (they all do, but some are polished versions of themselves) for so long, I'm not sure he is real. He played Obama, the servant of the men in suits, before Obama but less cool. I haven't watched "Streetfight" in ages, but he had the vibe of a Booker T Washington follower if there was more than a character there.

    Adolph Reed was clearly referring to Obama way back in 1997, but Booker fit most of the description of a "new black" politician.

    [Apr 26, 2020] Militarization in a Time of Pandemic Crisis by Henry Giroux and Ourania Filippakou

    Apr 24, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    We live at a time when the terrors of life suggests the world has descended into darkness. The COVID-19 crisis has created a dystopian nightmare which floods our screens and media with images of fear. Bodies, doorknobs, cardboard packages, plastic bags, and the breath we exhale and anything else that offers the virus a resting place is comparable to a bomb ready to explode resulting in massive suffering and untold deaths. We can no longer shake hands, embrace our friends, use public transportation, sit in a coffee shop, or walk down the street without experiencing real anxiety and fear. We are told by politicians, media pundits, and others that everyday life has taken on the character of a war zone.

    The metaphor of war has a deep sense of urgency and has a long rhetorical history in times of crisis. Militarization has become a central feature of the pandemic age and points to the dominance of warlike values in society. More specifically, Michael Geyer defines it as the 'contradictory and tense social process in which civil society organizes itself for the production of violence' (Geyer, 1989: 9). Geyer was writing about the militarization of Europe between 1914-1945, but his description seems even more relevant today. This is clear in the way right-wing politicians such as Trump promote the increasing militarization of language, public spaces, and bodies. Terms such as 'war footing', 'mounting an assault', and 'rallying the troops' have been normalized in the face of the pandemic crisis. At the same time, the language of war privileges the proliferation of surveillance capitalism, the defense of borders, and the suspension of civil liberties.

    As the virus brings the engines of capitalism to a halt, the discourse of war takes on a new significance as a medical term that highlights the struggles to grapple with underfunded public health care systems, the lack of resources for testing, the surge towards downward mobility, expanding unemployment and the ongoing, heart-wrenching, efforts to provide protective essentials for front line and emergency workers. At the heart of this epic tragedy is an understated political struggle to reverse and amend decades of a war waged by neoliberal capitalism against the welfare state, essential social provisions, public goods, and the social contract. The failure of this oppressive death-dealing form of casino capitalism can be heard as Arundhati Roy observes in:

    the stories of overwhelmed hospitals in the US, of underpaid, overworked nurses having to make masks out of garbage bin liners and old raincoats, risking everything to bring succor to the sick. About states being forced to bid against each other for ventilators, about doctors' dilemmas over which patient should get one and which left to die.

    The language of war is used by the mandarins of power to both address the indiscriminate viral pandemic that has brought capitalism to its knees and to reinforce and expand the political formations and global financial system that are incapable of dealing with the pandemic. Rather than using rage, emotion, and fear to sharpen our understanding of the conditions that abetted this global plague and what it might mean to address it and prevent it in the future, the ruling elite in a number of right wing countries such as the U.S. and Brazil use the discourse of war either to remove such questions from public debate or dismisses them as acts of bad faith in a time of crisis. Amartya Sen is right in arguing that '[o]vercoming a pandemic may look like fighting a war, but the real need is far from that'.

    Instead the language of war creates an echo chamber produced in both the highest circles of power and the right-wing cultural apparatuses that serve to turn trauma, exhaustion, and mourning into a fog of conspiracy theories, state repression, and a deepening abyss of darkness that ' serves the ends of those in power' . Edward Snowden is right in warning that governments will use the pandemic crisis to expand their attack on civil liberties, roll back constitutional rights, repress dissent and create what he calls an ' architecture of oppression' . He writes :

    As authoritarianism spreads, as emergency laws proliferate, as we sacrifice our rights, we also sacrifice our capability to arrest the slide into a less liberal and less free world. Do you truly believe that when the first wave, this second wave, the 16th wave of the coronavirus is a long-forgotten memory, that these capabilities will not be kept? That these datasets will not be kept? No matter how it is being used, what' is being built is the architecture of oppression.

    There is no doubt that the Covid-19 crisis will test the limits of democracy worldwide. Right-wing movements, neo-Nazis, authoritarian politicians, religious fundamentalists and a host of other extremists are energized by what Slavoj Zizek calls the 'ideological viruses [lying] dormant in our societies'. These include closing of borders, the quarantining of so-called enemies, the claim that undocumented immigrants spread the virus, the demand for increased police power, and the rush by religious fundamentalists to relegate women to the home to assume their 'traditional' gendered role.

    On the economic level and under the cover of fear, the U.S. in particular, is transferring what Jonathan Cook refers to as:

    huge sums of public money to the biggest corporations. Politicians controlled by big business and media owned by big business are pushing through this corporate robbery without scrutiny – and for reasons that should be self-explanatory. They know our attention is too overwhelmed by the virus for us to assess intentionally mystifying arguments about the supposed economic benefits, about yet more illusory trickle-down.

    This constitutes a politics of 'opportunistic authoritarianism' and is already in play in a number of countries that are using the cover of enforcing public health measures to enforce a range of anti-democratic policies and wave of repression. The pandemic has made clear that market mechanisms cannot address the depth and scope of the current crisis. The failure of neoliberalism not only reveals a profound sense of despair and moral void at the heart of casino capitalism, but also makes clear that the spell of neoliberalism is broken and as such is in the midst of a legitimation crisis. The coronavirus pandemic has both made clear that the neoliberal notion that all problems are a matter of individual responsibility and that each of us are defined exclusively by our self-interest has completely broken down as the effects of neoliberalism's failure to deal with the pandemic unfold in shortages in crucial medical equipment, lack of testing, and failed public health services, largely due to austerity measures.

    One consequence the failed neoliberal state is an uptake in levels of oppression in order to prevent the emergence of massive protests movements and radical forms of collective resistance. The suspension of civil rights, repression of dissent, upending of constitutional liberties, and the massive use of state surveillance in the service of anti-democratic ends has become normalized. Many of the countries driven by austerity policies and a culture of cruelty are using the pandemic crisis as a way shaping their modes of governance by drawing from what activist Ejeris Dixon calls elements of a ' fascist emergency playbook' . These include :

    Use the emergency to restrict civil liberties -- particularly rights regarding movement, protest, freedom of the press, a right to a trial and freedom to gather. Use the emergency to suspend governmental institutions, consolidate power, reduce institutional checks and balances, and reduce access to elections and other forms of participatory governance. Promote a sense of fear and individual helplessness, particularly in relationship to the state, to reduce outcry and to create a culture where people consent to the power of the fascist state; Replace democratic institutions with autocratic institutions using the emergency as justification. Create scapegoats for the emergency, such as immigrants, people of color, disabled people, ethnic and religious minorities, to distract public attention away from the failures of the state and the loss of civil liberties .

    The evidence for the spread of this ideological virus and its apparatuses and polices of repression are no longer simply dormant fears of those fearful of the rise of authoritarian movements and modes of governance. For instance, Viktor Orbán, Hungary's prime minister passed a bill that gave him 'sweeping emergency powers for an indefinite period of time .The measures were invoked as part of the government's response to the global pandemic'. What is becoming obvious is that the pandemic crisis produces mass anxiety that enables governments to turn a medical crisis into a political opportunity for leaders across the globe to push through dictatorial powers with little resistance.

    For instance, as Selam Gebrekidan observes : 'In Britain, ministers have what a critic called 'eye-watering' power to detain people and close borders. Israel's prime minister has shut down courts and begun an intrusive surveillance of citizens. Chile has sent the military to public squares once occupied by protesters. Bolivia has postponed elections'. In the Philippines, President Rodrigo Duterte, who has flagrantly violated civil rights in the past, was given emergency powers by the congress. Under the cloak of invoking public health measures because of the threat posed by the coronavirus plague, China has broken up protests in Hong Kong and arrested many of its leaders. In the United States, Trump's Justice Department has asked Congress 'for the ability to ask chief judges to detain people indefinitely without trial during emergencies -- part of a push for new powers that comes as the coronavirus spreads through the United States'.

    In the U.S. Trump blames the media for spreading fake news about the virus, attacks reporters who ask critical questions, packs the courts with federal sycophants, dehumanizes undocumented immigrants by labeling them as carriers of the virus, and claims that he has 'total authority' to reopen the economy, however dangerous the policy, in the face of the coronavirus pandemic. In this instance, Trump markets fear to endorse elements of white supremacy, ultra-nationalism, and social cleansing while unleashing the mobilizing passions of fascism. He supports voter suppression and has publicly stated that making it easier to vote for many Americans such as blacks and other minorities of color would mean 'you would never have a Republican elected in this country again'. In the midst of economic hardships and widespread suffering due to the raging pandemic, Trump has tapped into a combination of fear and a cathartic cruelty while emboldening a savage lawlessness aimed at the most vulnerable populations. How else to explain his calling the coronavirus the ' Chinese virus' , regardless of the violence it enables by right wingers against Asian-Americans, or his call to reopen the economy to hastily knowing that thousands could die as a result, mostly the elderly, poor, and other vulnerable.

    Militarizing the Media and the Politics of Pandemic Pedagogy

    In the age of the pandemic, culture has been militarized. Donald Trump and the right-wing media in the United States have both politicized and weaponized the coronavirus pandemic. They have weaponized it by using a state of emergency to promote Trump's political attacks on critics, the press, journalists, and politicians who have questioned his bungling response to the pandemic crisis. They have politicized it by introducing a series of policies under the rubric of a state of exception that diverts bailout money to the ruling elite, militarizes public space, increases the power of the police, wages attacks on undocumented immigrants as a public health threat, and promotes voter suppression. In addition Trump has further strengthened the surveillance state, fired public servants for participating in the impeachment process, and initially claimed that the virus was a hoax perpetuated by the media and Democrats who were trying to undermine Trump's re-election.

    Trump's language of dehumanization coupled with his appalling ignorance and toxic incompetence appears as a perfect fit for the media spectacle that he has made a central feature of his presidency. Trump's 'anti-intellectualism has been simmering in the United States for decades and has now fully boiled over' and when incorporated as a central feature of the right-wing social media becomes 'a tremendously successful tool of hegemonic control, manipulation, and false consciousness'. Trump's apocalyptic rhetoric appears to match the tenor of the moment as there is a surge in right-wing extremism, anti-Semitism, explosive racism, and a culture of lies, immediacy, and cruelty. What we are witnessing as the pandemic intensifies in the United States, and in some other countries across the globe, is the increasing threat of authoritarian regimes that both use the media to normalize their actions and wage war against dissidents and others struggling to preserve democratic ideas and principles.

    Given his experience in the realms of Reality TV and celebrity culture, Trump is driven by mutually reinforcing registers of spectacular fits of self-promotion, joy in producing troves of Orwellian doublespeak, and the ratings his media coverage receives. One of the insults he throws out at reporters in his coronavirus briefings is that their networks have low ratings as if that is a measure of the relevance of the question being asked. Unlike any other president, Trump has used the mainstream media and social media to mobilize his followers, attack his enemies, and produce a twitter universe of misinformation, lies, and civic illiteracy. He has championed the right-wing media by both echoing their positions on a number of issues and using them to air his own. The conservative media such as Fox News has been enormously complicitous in justifying Trump's call for the Justice Department to dig up dirt on his political rivals, including the impeachable offense of extorting the Ukrainian government through the promise to withhold military aid if they did not launch an investigation into his political rival, Joe Biden. Moreover, they have supported his instigation of armed rebellions via his tweets urging his followers to liberate Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia by refusing to comply with stay-at-home orders and social distancing restrictions . Ironically, he is urging anti-social distancing protests that violate his own federal guidelines.

    Trump has used the police powers of the state, especially ICE to round up children and separate them from their parents at the border. Placing loyalty above expertise, he surrounds himself with incompetent sycophants, and makes policy decisions from his gut, often in opposition to the advice of public health experts. All of this is echoed and supported by the conservative and right wing eco-system, especially Fox News, Breitbart News, and what appears to be a legion of right wing commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, who falsely claimed the virus is a common cold and Laura Ingraham, who deceitfully compared Covid-19 to the flu. Fox News not only produced conspiracy theories such as the claim the virus was the product of the 'deep state' and was being used by Democrats to prevent Trump from being re-elected, it also produced misinformation about the virus and represented what 74 journalism professors and leading journalists described as ' a danger to public health' . Like most authoritarians, Trump does everything to control the truth by flooding the media with lies, denouncing scientific evidence, and critical judgment as fake news. The latter is a direct attack on the free press, critical journalists, and the notion that the search for the truth is crucial to any valid and shared notion of citizenship.

    The crisis of politics is now matched by a mainstream and corporate controlled digital media and screen culture that revels in political theater, embraces ignorance, fractured narratives, and racial hysteria (cf. Butsch, 2019). In addition, it authorizes and produces a culture of sensationalism designed to increase ratings and profits at the expense of truth. As a disimagination machine and form of pandemic pedagogy, it undermines a complex rendering of social problems and suppresses a culture of dissent and informed judgments. This pandemic pedagogy functions so as to shape human agency, desire, and modes of identification both in the logic of consumerism while privileging a hyper form of masculinity and legitimating a friend/enemy distinction. We live in an age in which theater and the spectacle of performance empty politics of any moral substance and contribute to the revival of an updated version of fascist politics. Thoughtlessness has become a national ideal as the corporate controlled media mirror the Trump administration demand that reality be echoed rather than be analyzed, interrogated and critically comprehended. Politics is now leaden with bombast, words strung together to shock, numb the mind, and images overwrought with self-serving sense of riotousness and anger. Trump shamelessly reinforces such a politics by showing propaganda videos at presidential news conferences.

    What is distinct about this historical period, especially under the Trump regime, is what Susan Sontag has called a form of aesthetic fascism with its contempt of 'all that is reflective, critical, and pluralistic'. One distinctive element of the current moment is the rise of what we call hard and soft disimagination machines. The hard disimagination machines, such as Fox News, conservative talk radio, and Breitbart media, function as overt and unapologetic propaganda machines that trade in nativism, misrepresentations, and racist hysteria, all wrapped in the cloak of a regressive view of patriotism.

    As Joel Bleifuss points out , Fox News , in particular, is 'blatant in its contempt for the truth, and engages nightly in the 'ritual of burying the truth in 'memory holes' and spinning a new version of reality [that keeps] the spirit of 1984 alive and well . This, the most-watched cable news network, functions in its fealty to Trump like a real-world Ministry of Truth from George Orwell's 1984 , where bureaucrats 'rectify' the historical record to conform to Big Brother's decrees'. Trump's fascist politics and fantasies of racial purity could not succeed without the disimagination machines, pedagogical apparatuses, and the practitioners needed to make his 'vision not merely real but grotesquely normal'. What Trump makes clear is that the weaponization of language into a discourse of racism and hate is deeply indebted to a politics of forgetting and is a crucial tool in the battle to undermine historical consciousness and memory itself.

    The soft disimagination machines or liberal mainstream media such as NBC Nightly News, MSNBC, and the established press function largely to cater to Trump's Twitter universe, celebrity culture, and the cut throat ethos of the market, all the while isolating social issues, individualizing social problems, and making the workings of power superficially visible. This is obvious in their mainstream's continuous coverage of his daily press briefings, which as Oscar Zambrano puts it 'is like watching a disease in progress that is infecting us all: a parallel to coronavirus' (Zambrano, 2020). Unfortunately, high ratings are more important than refusing to participate in Trump disinformation spectacles. Politics as a spectacle saturates the senses with noise, cheap melodrama, lies, and buffoonery. This is not to suggest that the spectacle that now shapes politics as pure theater is meant merely to entertain and distract.

    On the contrary, the current spectacle, most recently evident in the midst of the coronavirus crisis functions as a war machine, functioning largely to nurture the notion of war as a permanent social relation, the primary organizing principle of society and politics merely one of its means or guises. War has now become the operative and defining feature of language and the matrix for all relations of power.

    The militarization of the media, and culture itself, now function as a form of social and historical amnesia. That is, in both form and content it separates the past from a politics that in its current form has turned deadly in its attack on the values and institutions crucial to a functioning democracy. In this instance, echoes of a fascist past remain hidden, invisible beneath the histrionic shouting and disinformation campaigns that rail against alleged 'enemies of the state' and 'fake news', which is a euphemism for dissent, holding power accountable, and an oppositional media. A flair for the overly dramatic eliminates the distinction between fact and fiction, lies and the truth.

    Under such circumstances, the spectacle of militarization functions as part of a culture of distraction, division, and fragmentation, all the while refusing to pose the question of how the United States shares elements of a fascist politics that connects it to a number of other authoritarian countries such as Brazil, Turkey, Hungary, and Poland. All of these countries in the midst of the pandemic have embraced a form of fascist aesthetics and politics that combines a cruel culture of neoliberal austerity with the discourses of hate, nativism, and state repression. The militarization of culture and the media in its current forms can only appeal to the state of exception, death, and war. Under such circumstances, the relationship between civil liberties and democracy, politics and death, and justice and injustice is lost. War should be a source of alarm, not pride , and its linguistic repositories should be actively demilitarized.

    Conclusion

    Under the Trump regime, historical amnesia is used as a weapon of (mis)education, politics, and power and is waged primarily through the militarization and weaponization of the media. This constitutes a form of pandemic pedagogy -- a pedagogical virus that erodes the modes of agency, values, and civic institutions central to a robust democracy. The notion that the past is a burden that must be forgotten is a center piece of authoritarian regimes, one that allows public memory to wither and the threads of fascism to become normalized. While some critics eschew the comparison of Trump with the Nazi era, it is crucial to recognize the alarming signs in this administration that echo a fascist politics of the past. As Jonathan Freedland points out , 'the signs are there, if only we can bear to look'. Rejecting the Trump-Nazi comparison makes it easier to believe that we have nothing to learn from history and to take comfort in the assumption that it cannot happen once again. Democracy cannot survive if it ignores the lessons of the past, reduces education to mass conformity, celebrates civic illiteracy, and makes consumerism the only obligation of citizenship. Max Horkheimer added a more specific register to the relationship between fascism and capitalism in his comment 'If you don't want to talk about capitalism then you had better keep quiet about fascism.'

    The lessons to be learned from the pandemic crisis have to exceed making visible the lies, misinformation, and corruption at the heart of the Trump regime. Such an approach fails to address the most serious of Trump's crimes. Moreover, it fails to examine a number of political threads that together constitute elements common to a global crisis in the age of the pandemic. The global response to the pandemic crisis by a number of authoritarian states when viewed as part of a broader crisis of democracy needs to be analyzed by connecting ideological, economic, and cultural threads that weave through often isolated issues such as white nationalism, the rise of a Republican Party dominated by right-wing extremists, the collapse of the two party system, and the ascent of a corporate controlled media as a disimagination machine and the proliferation of corrosive systems of power and dehumanization.

    Crucial to any politics of resistance is the necessity to take seriously the notion that education is central to politics itself, and that social problems have to be critically understood before people can act as a force for empowerment and liberation. This suggests analyzing Trump's use of politics as a militarized spectacle not in isolation from the larger social totality -- as simply one of incompetence, for instance- but as part of a more comprehensive political project in which updated forms of authoritarianism and contemporary versions of fascism are being mobilized and gaining traction both in the United States and across the globe. Federico Mayor, the former director general of UNESCO once stated that 'You cannot expect anything from uneducated citizens except unstable democracy'. In the current historical moment and age of Trump, it might be more appropriate to say that what can be expected from a society in which ignorance is a virtue and civic literacy and education are viewed as a liability, one cannot expect anything but fascism.

    The pandemic crisis should be a rallying cry to create massive collective resistance against both the Republican and Democratic Parties and the naked brutality of the political and economic system they have supported since the 1970s. That is, the criminogenic response to the crisis on the part of the Trump administration should become a call to arms, if not a model on a global level, for a massive protest movement that moves beyond the ritual of trying Trump and other authoritarian politicians for an abuse of power. Instead, such a movement should become a call to put on trial a capitalist system while fighting for structural and ideological reforms that will usher in a radical and socialist democracy worthy of the struggle.

    What is crucial to remember is no democracy cannot survive without an informed citizenry. Moreover, solidarity among individuals cannot be assumed and must fought for as part of a wider struggle to break down the walls ideological and material repression that isolate, depoliticize, and pit individuals and groups against each other. Community and a robust public sphere cannot be built on the bonds of shared fears, isolation, and oppression. Authoritarian governments will work to contain both any semblance of democratic politics and any attempts at large scale transformations of society. Power lies in more than understanding and the ability to disrupt, it also lies in a vision of a future that does not imitate the present and the courage to collectively struggle to bring a radical democratic socialist vision into fruition.

    References.

    Butsch, R. (2019). Screen Culture: A Global History . London: Polity.

    Geyer, M. (1989). 'The Militarization of Europe, 1914-1945', in J. R. Gillis (ed) Militarization of the Western World . New Brunswick: NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Zambrano. O. (2020). Personal correspondence. March 20.

    This article first appeared on E-International Relations . Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Henry Giroux – Ourania Filippakou Henry A. Giroux currently holds the McMaster University Chair for Scholarship in the Public Interest in the English and Cultural Studies Department and is the Paulo Freire Distinguished Scholar in Critical Pedagogy. His most recent books include American Nightmare: Facing the Challenge of Fascism (City Lights, 2018), On Critical Pedagogy , 2nd edition (Bloomsbury, 2020); The Terror of the Unforeseen (Los Angeles Review of books, 2019), and Neoliberalism's War on Higher Education , 2nd edition (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2020). Ourania Filippakou is Reader and Director of Teaching and Learning in the Department of Education at Brunel University London. Her most recent book, co-authored with Ted Tapper, is ' Creating the Future? The 1960s New English Universities ' (Dordrecht: Springer, 2019). Her forthcoming books are: 'Higher education and the Crisis of Europe' (2021) and 'Restructuring Knowledge in Higher Education' (with Ted Tapper) both to be published by Routledge. She is co-editor of the British Educational Research Journal

    [Apr 25, 2020] Did This Virus Come From a Lab? Maybe Not But It Exposes the Threat of a Biowarfare Arms Race by Sam Husseini

    Highly recommended!
    Apr 25, 2020 | salon.com

    Dangerous pathogens are captured in the wild and made deadlier in government biowarfare labs. Did that happen here?

    There has been no scientific finding that the novel coronavirus was bioengineered, but its origins are not entirely clear. Deadly pathogens discovered in the wild are sometimes studied in labs – and sometimes made more dangerous. That possibility, and other plausible scenarios, have been incorrectly dismissed in remarks by some scientists and government officials, and in the coverage of most major media outlets.

    Regardless of the source of this pandemic, there is considerable documentation that a global biological arms race going on outside of public view could produce even more deadly pandemics in the future.

    While much of the media and political establishment have minimized the threat from such lab work, some hawks on the American right like Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark ., have singled out Chinese biodefense researchers as uniquely dangerous.

    But there is every indication that U.S. lab work is every bit as threatening as that in Chinese labs. American labs also operate in secret, and are also known to be accident-prone .

    The current dynamics of the biological arms race have been driven by US government decisions that extend back decades. In December 2009, Reuters reported that the Obama administration was refusing even to negotiate the possible monitoring of biological weapons.

    Much of the left in the US now appears unwilling to scrutinize the origin of the pandemic – or the wider issue of biowarfare – perhaps because portions of the anti-Chinese right have been so vocal in making unfounded allegations.

    Governments that participate in such biological weapon research generally distinguish between "biowarfare" and "biodefense," as if to paint such "defense" programs as necessary. But this is rhetorical sleight-of-hand; the two concepts are largely indistinguishable.

    "Biodefense" implies tacit biowarfare, breeding more dangerous pathogens for the alleged purpose of finding a way to fight them. While this work appears to have succeeded in creating deadly and infectious agents, including deadlier flu strains, such "defense" research is impotent in its ability to defend us from this pandemic.

    The legal scholar who drafted the main US law on the subject, Francis Boyle, warned in his 2005 book " Biowarfare and Terrorism " that an "illegal biological arms race with potentially catastrophic consequences" was underway, largely driven by the US government.

    For years, many scientists have raised concerns regarding bioweapons/biodefense lab work, and specifically about the fact that huge increases in funding have taken place since 9/11. This was especially true after the anthrax-by-mail attacks that killed five people in the weeks after 9/11, which the FBI ultimately blamed on a US government biodefense scientist. A 2013 study found that biodefense funding since 2001 had totaled at least $78 billion , and more has surely been spent since then. This has led to a proliferation of laboratories , scientists and new organisms, effectively setting off a biological arms race.

    Following the Ebola outbreak in west Africa in 2014, the US government paused funding for what are known as "gain-of-function" research on certain organisms. This work actually seeks to make deadly pathogens deadlier, in some cases making pathogens airborne that previously were not. With little notice outside the field, the pause on such research was lifted in late 2017 .

    During this pause, exceptions for funding were made for dangerous gain-of-function lab work. This included work jointly done by US scientists from the University of North Carolina, Harvard and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This work – which had funding from USAID and EcoHealth Alliance not originally acknowledged – was published in 2015 in Nature Medicine .

    A different Nature Medicine article about the origin of the current pandemic, authored by five scientists and published on March 17, has been touted by major media outlet and some officials – including current National Institutes of Health director Francis Collins – as definitively disproving a lab origin for the novel coronavirus. That journal article, titled "The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2," stated unequivocally: "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus." This is a subtly misleading sentence. While the scientists state that there is no known laboratory "signature" in the SARS-Cov-2 RNA, their argument fails to take account of other lab methods that could have created coronavirus mutations without leaving such a signature.

    Indeed, there is also the question of conflict of interest in the Nature Medicine article. Some of the authors of that article, as well as a February 2020 Lancet letter condemning "conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin" – which seemed calculated to minimize outside scrutiny of biodefense lab work – have troubling ties to the biodefense complex, as well as to the US government. Notably, neither of these articles makes clear that a virus can have a natural origin and then be captured and studied in a controlled laboratory setting before being let loose, either intentionally or accidentally – which is clearly a possibility in the case of the coronavirus.

    Facts as "rumors"

    This reporter raised questions about the subject at a news conference with a Center for Disease Control (CDC) representative at the now-shuttered National Press Club on Feb. 11. I asked if it was a "complete coincidence" that the pandemic had started in Wuhan, the only place in China with a declared biosafety level 4 (BSL4) laboratory. BSL4 laboratories have the most stringent safety mechanisms, but handle the most deadly pathogens. As I mentioned, it was odd that the ostensible origin of the novel coronavirus was bat caves in Yunnan province – more than 1,000 miles from Wuhan. I noted that "gain-of-function" lab work can results in more deadly pathogens, and that major labs, including some in the US, have had accidental releases .

    CDC Principal Deputy Director Anne Schuchat said that based on the information she had seen, the virus was of "zoonotic origin." She also stated, regarding gain-of-function lab work, that it is important to "protect researchers and their laboratory workers as well as the community around them and that we use science for the benefit of people."

    I followed up by asking whether an alleged natural origin did not preclude the possibility that this virus came through a lab, since a lab could have acquired a bat virus and been working on it. Schuchat replied to the assembled journalists that "it is very common for rumors to emerge that can take on life of their own," but did not directly answer the question. She noted that in the 2014 Ebola outbreak some observers had pointed to nearby labs as the possible cause, claiming this "was a key rumor that had to be overcome in order to help control the outbreak." She reiterated: "So based on everything that I know right now, I can tell you the circumstances of the origin really look like animals-to-human. But your question, I heard."

    This is no rumor. It's a fact: Labs work with dangerous pathogens. The US and China each have dual-use biowarfare/biodefense programs. China has major facilities at Wuhan – a biosafety level 4 lab and a biosafety level 2 lab. There are leaks from labs. (See " Preventing a Biological Arms Race ," MIT Press, 1990, edited by Susan Wright; also, a partial review in Journal of International Law from October 1992.)

    Much of the discussion of this deadly serious subject is marred with snark that avoids or dodges the "gain-of-function" question. ABC ran a story on March 27 titled "Sorry, Conspiracy Theorists. Study Concludes COVID-19 'Is Not a Laboratory Construct.'" That story did not address the possibility that the virus could have been found in the wild, studied in a lab and then released.

    On March 21, USA Today published a piece headlined "Fact Check: Did the Coronavirus Originate In a Chinese Laboratory?" – and rated it "FALSE."

    That USA Today story relied on the Washington Post, which published a widely cited article on Feb. 17 headlined, "Tom Cotton keeps repeating a coronavirus conspiracy theory that was already debunked." That article quoted public comments from Rutgers University professor of chemical biology Richard Ebright, but out of context and only in part. Specifically, the story quoted from Ebright's tweet that the coronavirus was not an "engineered bioweapon." In fact, his full quote included the clarification that the virus could have " entered human population through lab accident ." (An email requesting clarification sent to Post reporter Paulina Firozi was met with silence.)

    Bioengineered ≠ From a lab

    Other pieces in the Post since then ( some heavily sourced to US government officials ) have conveyed Ebright's thinking, but it gets worse. In a private exchange, Ebright – who, again, has said clearly that the novel coronavirus was not technically bioengineered using known coronavirus sequences – stated that other forms of lab manipulation could have been responsible for the current pandemic. This runs counter to much reporting, which is perhaps too scientifically illiterate to perceive the difference.

    In response to the suggestion that the novel coronavirus could have come about through various methods besides bioengineering – made by Dr. Meryl Nass , who has done groundbreaking work on biowarfare – Ebright responded in an email:

    The genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 has no signatures of human manipulation.

    This rules out the kinds of gain-of-function (GoF) research that leave signatures of human manipulation in genome sequences (e.g., use of recombinant DNA methods to construct chimeric viruses), but does not rule out kinds of GoF research that do not leave signatures (e.g., serial passage in animals). [emphasis added]

    Very easy to imagine the equivalent of the Fouchier's "10 passages in ferrets" with H5N1 influenza virus, but, in this case, with 10 passages in non-human primates with bat coronavirus RaTG13 or bat coronavirus KP876546.

    That last paragraph is very important. It refers to virologist Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, who performed research on intentionally increasing rates of viral mutation rate by spreading a virus from one animal to another in a sequence. The New York Times wrote about this in an editorial in January 2012, warning of "An Engineered Doomsday."

    "Now scientists financed by the National Institutes of Health" have created a "virus that could kill tens or hundreds of millions of people" if it escaped confinement, the Times wrote. The story continued:

    Working with ferrets, the animal that is most like humans in responding to influenza, the researchers found that a mere five genetic mutations allowed the virus to spread through the air from one ferret to another while maintaining its lethality. A separate study at the University of Wisconsin, about which little is known publicly, produced a virus that is thought to be less virulent.

    The word "engineering" in the New York Times headline is technically incorrect, since passing a virus through animals is not "genetic engineering." This same distinction has hindered some from understanding the possible origins of the current pandemic.

    Fouchier's flu work, in which an H5N1 virus was made more virulent by transmitting it repeatedly between individual ferrets, briefly sent shockwaves through the media. "Locked up in the bowels of the medical faculty building here and accessible to only a handful of scientists lies a man-made flu virus that could change world history if it were ever set free," wrote Science magazine in 2011 in a story titled "Scientists Brace for Media Storm Around Controversial Flu Studies." It continues:

    The virus is an H5N1 avian influenza strain that has been genetically altered and is now easily transmissible between ferrets, the animals that most closely mimic the human response to flu. Scientists believe it's likely that the pathogen, if it emerged in nature or were released, would trigger an influenza pandemic, quite possibly with many millions of deaths.

    In a 17th floor office in the same building, virologist Ron Fouchier of Erasmus Medical Center calmly explains why his team created what he says is "probably one of the most dangerous viruses you can make" – and why he wants to publish a paper describing how they did it. Fouchier is also bracing for a media storm. After he talked to ScienceInsider yesterday, he had an appointment with an institutional press officer to chart a communication strategy.

    Fouchier's paper is one of two studies that have triggered an intense debate about the limits of scientific freedom and that could portend changes in the way U.S. researchers handle so-called dual-use research: studies that have a potential public health benefit but could also be useful for nefarious purposes like biowarfare or bioterrorism.

    Despite objections, Fouchier's article was published by Science in June 2012 . Titled "Airborne Transmission of Influenza A/H5N1 Virus Between Ferrets," it summarized how Fouchier's research team made the pathogen more virulent:

    Highly pathogenic avian influenza A/H5N1 virus can cause morbidity and mortality in humans but thus far has not acquired the ability to be transmitted by aerosol or respiratory droplet ("airborne transmission") between humans. To address the concern that the virus could acquire this ability under natural conditions, we genetically modified A/H5N1 virus by site-directed mutagenesis and subsequent serial passage in ferrets. The genetically modified A/H5N1 virus acquired mutations during passage in ferrets, ultimately becoming airborne transmissible in ferrets.

    In other words, Fouchier's research took a flu virus that did not exhibit airborne transmission, then infected a number of ferrets until it mutated to the point that it was transmissible by air.

    In that same year, 2012, a similar study by Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin was published in Nature :

    Highly pathogenic avian H5N1 influenza A viruses occasionally infect humans, but currently do not transmit efficiently among humans. Here we assess the molecular changes that would allow a virus to be transmissible among mammals. We identified a virus with four mutations and the remaining seven gene segments from a 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus – that was capable of droplet transmission in a ferret model.

    In 2014, Marc Lipsitch of Harvard and Alison P. Galvani of Yale wrote regarding Fouchier and Kawaoka's work :

    Recent experiments that create novel, highly virulent and transmissible pathogens against which there is no human immunity are unethical they impose a risk of accidental and deliberate release that, if it led to extensive spread of the new agent, could cost many lives. While such a release is unlikely in a specific laboratory conducting research under strict biosafety procedures, even a low likelihood should be taken seriously, given the scale of destruction if such an unlikely event were to occur. Furthermore, the likelihood of risk is multiplied as the number of laboratories conducting such research increases around the globe.

    Given this risk, ethical principles, such as those embodied in the Nuremberg Code , dictate that such experiments would be permissible only if they provide humanitarian benefits commensurate with the risk, and if these benefits cannot be achieved by less risky means.

    We argue that the two main benefits claimed for these experiments – improved vaccine design and improved interpretation of surveillance – are unlikely to be achieved by the creation of potential pandemic pathogens (PPP), often termed "gain-of-function" (GOF) experiments.

    There may be a widespread notion that there is scientific consensus that the pandemic did not come out of a lab. But in fact many of the most knowledgeable scientists in the field are notably silent. This includes Lipsitch at Harvard, Jonathan A. King at MIT and many others.

    Just last year, Lynn Klotz of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation wrote a paper in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists entitled "Human Error in High-biocontainment Labs: A Likely Pandemic Threat." Wrote Klotz:

    Incidents causing potential exposures to pathogens occur frequently in the high security laboratories often known by their acronyms, BSL3 (Biosafety Level 3) and BSL4. Lab incidents that lead to undetected or unreported laboratory-acquired infections can lead to the release of a disease into the community outside the lab; lab workers with such infections will leave work carrying the pathogen with them. If the agent involved were a potential pandemic pathogen, such a community release could lead to a worldwide pandemic with many fatalities. Of greatest concern is a release of a lab-created, mammalian-airborne- transmissible, highly pathogenic avian influenza virus, such as the airborne-transmissible H5N1 viruses created in the laboratories of Ron Fouchier in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka in Madison, Wisconsin.

    "Crazy, dangerous"

    Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois , has condemned Fouchier, Kawaoka and others – including at least one of the authors of the recent Nature Medicine article in the strongest terms, calling such work a "criminal enterprise." While Boyle has been embroiled in numerous controversies, he's been especially dismissed by many on this issue. The "fact-checking" website Snopes has described him as "a lawyer with no formal training in virology" – without noting that he wrote the relevant U.S. law.

    As Boyle said in 2015 :

    Since September 11, 2001, we have spent around $100 billion on biological warfare. Effectively we now have an Offensive Biological Warfare Industry in this country that violates the Biological Weapons Convention and my Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 .

    The law Boyle drafted states: "Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both. There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section committed by or against a national of the United States."

    Boyle also warned:

    Russia and China have undoubtedly reached the same conclusions I have derived from the same open and public sources, and have responded in kind. So what the world now witnesses is an all-out offensive biological warfare arms race among the major military powers of the world: United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, Israel, inter alia.

    We have reconstructed the Offensive Biological Warfare Industry that we had deployed in this county before its prohibition by the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, described by Seymour Hersh in his groundbreaking expose " Chemical and Biological Warfare: America's Hidden Arsenal ." (1968)

    Boyle now states that he has been "blackballed" in the media on this issue, despite his having written the relevant statute. The group he worked with on the law, the Council for Responsible Genetics, went under several years ago, making Boyle's views against "biodefense" even more marginal as government money for dual use work poured into the field and critics within the scientific community have fallen silent. In turn, his denunciations have grown more sweeping.

    In the 1990 book " Preventing a Biological Arms Race ," scholar Susan Wright argued that current laws regarding bioweapons were insufficient, as there were "projects in which offensive and defensive aspects can be distinguished only by claimed motive." Boyle notes, correctly, that current law he drafted does not make an exception for "defensive" work, but only for "prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes."

    While Boyle is particularly vociferous in his condemnations, he is not alone. There has been irregular, but occasional media attention to this threat. The Guardian ran a piece in 2014, " Scientists condemn 'crazy, dangerous' creation of deadly airborne flu virus ," after Kawaoka created a life-threatening virus that "closely resembles the 1918 Spanish flu strain that killed an estimated 50m people":

    "The work they are doing is absolutely crazy. The whole thing is exceedingly dangerous," said Lord May, the former president of the Royal Society and one time chief science adviser to the UK government. "Yes, there is a danger, but it's not arising from the viruses out there in the animals, it's arising from the labs of grossly ambitious people."

    Boyle's charges beginning early this year that the coronavirus was bioengineered – allegations recently mirrored by French virologist and Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier – have not been corroborated by any publicly produced findings of any US scientist. Boyle even charges that scientists like Ebright, who is at Rutgers, are compromised because the university got a biosafety level 3 lab in 2017 – though Ebright is perhaps the most vocal eminent critic of this research, among US scientists. These and other controversies aside, Boyle's concerns about the dangers of biowarfare are legitimate; indeed, Ebright shares them.

    Some of the most vocal voices to discuss the origins of the novel coronavirus have been eager to minimize the dangers of lab work, or have focused almost exclusively on "wet markets" or "exotic" animals as the likely cause.

    The media celebrated Laurie Garrett, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author and former senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, when she declared on Twitter on March 3 (in a since-deleted tweet) that the origin of the pandemic was discovered: "It's pangolins. #COVID19 Researchers studied lung tissue from 12 of the scaled mammals that were illegally trafficked in Asia and found #SARSCoV2 in 3. The animals were found in Guangxi, China. Another virus+ smuggled sample found in Guangzhou."

    She was swiftly corrected by Ebright: "Arrant nonsense. Did you even read the paper? Reported pangolin coronavirus is not SARS-CoV-2 and is not even particularly close to SARS-CoV-2. Bat coronavirus RaTG13 is much closer to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% identical) than reported pangolin coronavirus (92.4% identical)." He added: "No reason to invoke pangolin as intermediate. When A is much closer than B to C, in the absence of additional data, there is no rational basis to favor pathway A>B>C over pathway A>C." When someone asked what Garrett was saying, Ebright responded : "She is saying she is scientifically illiterate."

    The following day, Garrett corrected herself ( without acknowledging Ebright ): "I blew it on the #Pangolins paper, & then took a few hours break from Twitter. It did NOT prove the species = source of #SARSCoV2. There's a torrent of critique now, deservedly denouncing me & my posting. A lot of the critique is super-informative so leaving it all up 4 while."

    At least one Chinese government official has responded to the allegation that the labs in Wuhan could be the source for the pandemic by alleging that perhaps the US is responsible instead. In American mainstream media, that has been reflexively treated as even more ridiculous than the original allegation that the virus could have come from a lab.

    Obviously the Chinese government's allegations should not be taken at face value, but neither should US government claims – especially considering that US government labs were the apparent source for the anthrax attacks in 2001 . Those attacks sent panic through the US and shut down Congress, allowing the Bush administration to enact the PATRIOT Act and ramp up the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Indeed, in October 2001, media darlings like Richard Butler and Andrew Sullivan propagandized for war with Iraq because of the anthrax attacks. (Neither Iraq nor al-Qaida was involved.)

    The 2001 anthrax attacks also provided much of the pretext for the surge in biolab spending since then, even though they apparently originated in a US or U.S.-allied lab. Indeed, those attacks remain shrouded in mystery .

    The US government has also come up with elaborate cover stories to distract from its bioweapons work. For instance, the US government infamously claimed the 1953 death of Frank Olson, a scientist at Fort Detrick, Maryland, was an LSD experiment gone wrong; it now appears to have been an execution to cover up for US biological warfare.

    Regardless of the cause of the current pandemic, these biowarfare/biodefense labs need far more scrutiny. The call to shut them down by Boyle and others needs to be clearly heard – and light must be shone on precisely what research is being conducted.

    The secrecy of these labs may prevent us ever knowing with certainty the origins of the current pandemic. What we do know is this kind of lab work comes with real dangers. One might make a comparison to climate change: We cannot attribute an individual hurricane to man-made climate disruption, yet science tells us that human activity makes stronger hurricanes more likely. That brings us back to the imperative to cease the kinds of activities that produce such dangers in the first place.

    If that doesn't happen, the people of the planet will be at the mercy of the machinations and mistakes of state actors who are playing with fire for their geopolitical interests.

    Sam Husseini is senior analyst at the Institute for Public Accuracy . He's also set up VotePact.org – which helps break out of the two party bind. His latest personal writings are at http://husseini.posthaven.com/ and tweets at http://twitter.com/samhusseini . Reprinted from Salon with permission.

    [Apr 24, 2020] Please Tell the Establishment That U.S. Hegemony is Over by Daniel Larison

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The truth is that decline was never a choice, but the U.S. can decide how it can respond to it. We can continue chasing after the vanished, empty glory of the "unipolar moment" with bromides of American exceptionalism. We can continue to delude ourselves into thinking that military might can make up for all our other weaknesses. Or we can choose to adapt to a changed world by prudently husbanding our resources and putting them to uses more productive than policing the world. ..."
    "... Exit From Hegemony: The Unraveling of the American Global Order ..."
    Apr 23, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    |

    More than 10 years ago, the columnist Charles Krauthammer asserted that American "decline is a choice," and argued tendentiously that Barack Obama had chosen it. Yet looking back over the last decade, it has become increasingly obvious that this decline has occurred irrespective of what political leaders in Washington want.

    The truth is that decline was never a choice, but the U.S. can decide how it can respond to it. We can continue chasing after the vanished, empty glory of the "unipolar moment" with bromides of American exceptionalism. We can continue to delude ourselves into thinking that military might can make up for all our other weaknesses. Or we can choose to adapt to a changed world by prudently husbanding our resources and putting them to uses more productive than policing the world.

    There was a brief period during the 1990s and early 2000s when the U.S. could claim to be the world's hegemonic power. America had no near-peer rivals; it was at the height of its influence across most of the globe. That status, however, was always a transitory one, and was lost quickly thanks to self-inflicted wounds in Iraq and the natural growth of other powers that began to compete for influence. While America remains the most powerful state in the world, it no longer dominates as it did 20 years ago. And there can be no recapturing what was lost.

    Alexander Cooley and Dan Nexon explore these matters in their new book, Exit From Hegemony: The Unraveling of the American Global Order . They make a strong case for distinguishing between the old hegemonic order and the larger international order of which it is a part. As they put it, "global international order is not synonymous with American hegemony." They also make careful distinctions between the different components of what is often simply called the "liberal international order": political liberalism, economic liberalism, and liberal intergovernmentalism. The first involves the protection of rights, the second open economic exchange, and the third the form of international order that recognizes legally equal sovereign states. Cooley and Nexon note that both critics and defenders of the "liberal international order" tend to assume that all three come as a "package deal," but point out that these parts do not necessarily reinforce each other and do not have to coexist.

    While the authors are quite critical of Trump's foreign policy, they don't pin the decline of the old order solely on him. They argue that hegemonic unraveling takes place when the hegemon loses its monopoly over patronage and "more states can compete when it comes to providing economic, security, diplomatic, and other goods." The U.S. has been losing ground for the better part of the last 20 years, much of it unavoidable as other states grew wealthier and sought to wield greater influence. The authors make a persuasive case that the "exit" from hegemony is already taking place and has been for some time.

    Many defenders of U.S. hegemony insist that the "liberal international order" depends on it. That has never made much sense. For one, the continued maintenance of American hegemony frequently conflicts with the rules of international order. The hegemon reserves the right to interfere anywhere it wants, and tramples on the sovereignty and legal rights of other states as it sees fit. In practice, the U.S. has frequently acted as more of a rogue in its efforts to "enforce" order than many of the states it likes to condemn. The most vocal defenders of U.S. hegemony are unsurprisingly some of the biggest opponents of international law -- at least when it gets in their way. Cooley and Nexon make a very important observation related to this in their discussion of the role of revisionist powers in the world today:

    But the key point is that we need to be extremely careful that we don't conflate "revisionism" with opposition to the United States. The desire to undermine hegemony and replace it with a multipolar system entails revisionism with respect to the distribution of power, but it may or may not be revisionist with respect to various elements of international architecture or infrastructure.

    The core of the book is a survey of three different sources for the unraveling of U.S. hegemony: major powers, weaker states, and transnational "counter-order" movements. Cooley and Nexon trace how Russia and China have become increasingly effective at wielding influence over many smaller states through patronage and the creation of parallel institutions and projects such as the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). They discuss a number of weaker states that have begun hedging their bets by seeking patronage from these major powers as well as the U.S. Where once America had a "near monopoly" on such patronage, this has ceased to be the case. They also track the role of "counter-order" movements, especially nationalist and populist groups, in bringing pressure to bear on their national governments and cooperating across borders to challenge international institutions. Finally, they spell out how the U.S. itself has contributed to the erosion of its own position through reckless policies dating back at least to the invasion of Iraq.

    The conventional response to the unraveling of America's hegemony here at home has been either a retreat into nostalgia with simplistic paeans to the wonders of the "liberal international order" that ignore the failures of that earlier era or an intensified commitment to hard-power dominance in the form of ever-increasing military budgets (or some combination of the two). Cooley and Nexon contend that the Trump administration has opted for the second of these responses. Citing the president's emphasis on maintaining military dominance and his support for exorbitant military spending, they say "it suggests an approach to hegemony more dependent upon military instruments, and thus on the ability (and willingness) of the United States to continue extremely high defense spending. It depends on the wager that the United States both can and should substitute raw military power for its hegemonic infrastructure." That not only points to what Barry Posen has called "illiberal hegemony," but also leads to a foreign policy that is even more militarized and unchecked by international law.

    Cooley and Nexon make a compelling observation about how Trump's demand for more allied military spending differs from normal calls for burden-sharing. Normally, burden-sharing advocates call on allies to spend more so the U.S. can spend less. But that isn't Trump's position at all. His administration pressures allied governments to increase their spending, while showing no desire to curtail the Pentagon budget:

    Retrenchment entails some combination of shedding international security commitments and shifting defense burdens onto allies and partners. This allows the retrenching power, in principle, to redirect military spending toward domestic priorities, particularly those critical to long-term productivity and economic growth. In the current American context, this means making long-overdue investments in transportation infrastructure, increasing educational spending to develop human capital, and ramping up support for research and development. This rationale makes substantially less sense if retrenchment policies do not produce reductions in defense spending–which is why Trump's aggressive, public, and coercive push for burden sharing seems odd. Recall that Trump and his supporters want, and have already implemented, increases in the military budget. There is no indication that the Trump administration would change defense spending if, for example, Germany or South Korea increased their own military spending or more heavily subsidized American bases.

    The coronavirus pandemic has exposed how misguided our priorities as a nation have been. There is now a chance to change course, but that will require our leaders to shift their thinking. U.S. hegemony is already on its way out; now Americans need to decide what our role in the world will look like afterwards. Warmed-over platitudes about "leadership" won't suffice and throwing more money at the Pentagon is a dead end. The way forward is a strategy of retrenchment, restraint, and renewal.

    Tradcon • 2 days ago

    They can't possibly grapple with the fact that they were wrong and that their policies were catastrophic failures in almost every regard.
    Kessler Tradcon • 2 days ago
    Yeah. US just happened to decline, a completely natural process, some universal constant, like gravity of which we have no control.

    No. A decadent US population, informed by clueless media, put in charge incompetent and self-serving leaders, who made a series of very poor choices for the nation, but financially beneficial for themselves.

    HenionJD Kessler • a day ago • edited
    And thus our betrayed America's version of the White Man's Burden. It's sad to think our children having to endure living in a world where they aren't called to die in God-forsaken hellholes for reasons that have nothing to do with this nation's core principles. Sad!
    AlexanderHistory X Kessler • a day ago
    Lol. Sort of. Except the very oligarchs you speak of, on both sides, set the stage for all of it.
    This is the inevitable result of voting as a right, ans they knew it. Universal suffrage is a tool of control, not liberty.
    MPC AlexanderHistory X • a day ago
    The oligarchs are really just like other Americans, who got their hands on a whole lot of money. I have no doubt the rest of the population would behave like oligarchs if given the same resources.
    JonF311 AlexanderHistory X • a day ago
    We don't have universal suffrage and voting is no where named as a right in the Constitution. The most it has to say is that voting can not be denied to people based on their membership in certain classes, nor limited based on the payment of a tax.
    Meddersville • 2 days ago
    "it has become increasingly obvious that this decline has occurred irrespective of what political leaders in Washington want."

    It isn't "irrespective of". It is because of what they wanted. They wanted and aggressively pushed for US foreign policy to serve the narrow regional interests of client states like Israel and Saudi Arabia. They got what they wanted, in spades, and now America's geopolitical and economic fortunes are in a tail-spin.

    If America had ignored these people, with their stupid interventionism, their almost blatant service of foreign interests by demanding "no daylight" with "allies" who did nothing but suck our blood, we would have been far better off. We would have been far better able to anticipate, prepare for, and respond to the pandemic. It's impossible not to think ruefully of the trillions we wasted on Middle East wars and other interventions, money now so badly needed here at home.

    Jason Kennedy • 2 days ago
    The US will pursue a similar path to Israel. Advantage is relative. Rather than repair the US economy it is simpler to destroy those of one's rivals. I see war as the only attractive option for the US elite as that is the only area where they still enjoy clear superiority (or believe they do, same thing policy-wise.)
    Kathleen King • a day ago
    Cooley and Nevon's book appears to be a good read - I will put it on my 'to read so buy' book list. China is the next hegemon - this is inevitable due to design. As time goes by during this 'coronavirus pandemic' I have been waiting to hear a politician, any politician, assert that they will support legislation to require 'essential supply lines' to be returned to the U.S. Aside from 'murmurs', not a 'lucid' peep. Just 'sue china' legislation, or smoke and mirrors blame on those within the U.S. via the media or politicians. This is just embarrassing and surreal.

    The priority should be to bring these supply lines back to the U.S. [i.e., medical]. Too hell if I am going to be forced to pay for 'Obamacare' or 'Medicare For All' like a Russian Serf, to the Corporations [vassals] of China [Tatars] - enforced by their 'Eunuchs', greedy politicians in Washington. {Eunuchs were castrated lackies of Emperors]. Yet Chinese slave labour on these medical products, including pharmaceutical ingredients, and precious metals for parts for the Department of Defense, keep profit margins very high.

    Because of their cowardice one must ask: Why increase defense spending on any project - or be concerned with Iran or Venezuela or Russia or keeping NATO afloat? Allowing China to continue to be the 'sole source' provider of essential goods is just asking for another scenario like the one before us. If so, I am convinced that my country is nothing more than a 'dead carcass' being ripped apart by 'Corporate Vassals of China'. This, of course, includes the Tech Companies as well.

    Bankotsu Kathleen King • a day ago • edited
    China won't be next hegemon. It has no ambition to be one.
    joeo Bankotsu • a day ago
    Are Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Australia and India aware of this?
    Bankotsu joeo • a day ago
    Time will tell.
    Feral Finster joeo • a day ago • edited
    China does not have ideal geography to be world hegemon.

    For one thing, it is too easy to prevent any ships from leaving the South China Sea.

    The fact that China has not gone to war with anyone since 1953, except for two sharp but short border conflicts in 1962 and 1979, should tell you something. Contrast with the peace-loving liberal democracy of the United States.

    J Villain joeo • a day ago
    You mean the counties that have signed numerous trade and defence agreements with China?
    Comicus Bankotsu • 20 hours ago
    China has seen the cost we've paid. I don't think they see the value.
    dstraws Kathleen King • a day ago
    The answer of course is a functional international system--environmental protection, world health, a transparent financial system, world court, and policing. All agreed on by at least the major players which makes it costly for others not to participate.
    Kathleen King dstraws • a day ago
    With good reason many 'mistrust' this int'l system given the threat to sovereignty of a country, most importantly the freedom of its citizens. An int'l system is asymmetrical, a radical 're-distribution' program that preys on citizens of the 'pseudo-wealthy' west. The United States will be, post-Corona Virus, potentially $30T in debt. Yet they contribute the most to the WHO. The largest contribution to the UN comes from the United States. This fact seems to rebut your 'costly for others not to participate'.

    The Paris Agreement, like the UN and WHO, will rely on most of the funds coming from the U.S. and redistributed to other countries. And this will further destroy the standard of living in this country to the degree of crashing the economy. The expected Utopian Outcome for this so-called 'One-World' order will be a great disappointment to those that advocate for it. Because, after all, it is nothing more than a Utopian dream gambling on the cohesive nature of different demographic groups combined with significant reduction in freedoms for all - based on flawed models, including so-called 'man made global warming' models. To define the Demographic is use in the context of my response: does not = race; it equals culture. Right now this is being demonstrated in the super state of the EU. There can be no harmony in a world like this. It is like forcing a 'square peg' into a 'round hole'.

    And who are these major players? The Eunuch Politicians in Washington and Western Europe? What are their priorities? Their wallets or their constituents? And I do not mean in a parental way. That is not the role of government.

    Jim Chilton • a day ago
    Viewed from a global perspective at this time, there is a decline in American power and influence, but the vanity of politicians prevents them from seeing it and they don't want to let go.

    The British government makes the same mistakes as it clings to an imaginary "prestige" as a world power - a power that vanished in 1914.

    Lars • a day ago
    We don't have to collapse like the Western Roman Empire; we can adjust like the Byzantine Empire and stay around a thousand years longer.
    Lee • a day ago
    After Eden was removed as PM post-Suez the new PM Harold McMillan came in and was honest with the British ppl in explaining their new role in the world, just 10-15 years after the triumph of WW2 a UK Prime Minister had the courage to tell the British people that they were no longer at the top table, that the age of Empire was over and to put in place the policies required to remove the burden of empire from Britain and adjust to its new role in the world. Do you see an American politician with the capability to tell some uncomfortable home truths to the American people and still win an election?
    joeo Lee • a day ago
    i think that is why voters elected Trump. The citizens of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin have lived the decline of the United States. At least under trump there have been no new wars but the withdrawal from Iraq, Afghanistan NATO, Japan, Korea needs to occur with the Military-Industrial-Media Complex kicking and screaming.with each step. Also ending sanctions on Iran, Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela.
    WolfNippleChips joeo • a day ago
    We are in Japan because it allows us to patrol the sea lanes which is vital for our economy and it gives us a large force ready to respond in case of Chinese or North Korean aggression. The Status of Forces Agreement and other treaties with Japan stipulate what percentage of costs are born by Japan.
    joeo WolfNippleChips • a day ago
    Allowing Japan to destroy consumer electronics, damage steel and automotive is vital to our economy? Could we not patrol the sea lanes if we wanted to from Guam? Is not freedom of the sea just as vital to Japan, Europe and India? How is China or North Korea the aggressor when Japan, Korea and Taiwan have been client states of China with the US thousands of miles away?
    Imperialism has bankrupt the United States just as it did Europe. The time has come to end these treaties.
    MPC joeo • a day ago
    Ultra protectionism, retreat to our island and no one can find us, 'make America great again' I dare say, thinking is naive and unrealistic.

    America wil be poorer, weaker, and more vulnerable if it tried to only make its own goods and had to rely on only its own labor. Trade is profit and profit is the ability to develop, build, and defend what we have. Where do the profits go is the question. Who loses in the trade is another question. Does the benefit from the former outweigh the latter?

    I don't see Japanese trade as making much of a dent in employment rates. The profits go to the Japanese state and industry, who are important counterweights to Chinese ambitions in Asia, a mutual interest. So, the costs are few, and the profits are used in significant measure to mutual benefit.

    The liberal hegemon is dead, yes our imperialism is dead even if it doesn't know it, but it is essential to remain strategically involved in the world around us. Even if we stop playing the game, the world around us does not. Did Russia have the luxury of turning into a turtle after the Cold War? No. Nations, which are all wolves, smell weakness. Yet the Trumpian right wants to hide, put its finger in its ear, and pretend that everything will be fine it seems.

    Lee joeo • 16 hours ago
    What are these withdrawals from Iraq & Afghanistan you speak of? They just have not happened, like not even a little bit, so tired of people pushing this completely false narrative as if it is true, just maddening. A democracy cannot function if people exist in their own worlds with their own facts that are just not true
    David Naas • a day ago
    The Brits after WW2 offer a lesson here. Hurt badly by WW1, their whole system began teetering as that illusion of the "natural superiority" of the British took massive hits in the various colonies of the Empire. By exposing the ordinariness of the administrators and soldiers, it encouraged revolt (see Gandhi in India). But WW2 arguably devastated the UK. It's "win" over Germany was Pyrrhic, as it needed both the USSR and the USA , and each took a chunk of prestige and of the "hegemon". George VI recognized this, and British politicians encouraged the shift from Empire to Commonwealth. (Which, if they had never involved themselves in the EU beyond trade and had kept up the Commonwealth as it was intended, would have been a better path than what they did, IMHO.) Nevertheless, they handled it better than I think we will.

    As Jefferson said, "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none."

    But to get there, we have a lot of nonsense -- damned nonsense - - to overcome.

    John Achterhof • a day ago
    Excellent review and outlook on an encouraging transition from the compulsion of hegemony within a generally agreeable paradigm of economic liberalism (rules-based international markets).
    john • a day ago
    Well this present regime is actively smashing "international organizations" constructed largely by the Americans after WW2. This makes it even easier for the Chinese to fill the vacuum we have created. It would be better to hold them in a Western biased "international organization"
    engineerscotty • a day ago
    Would be nice if there were no global hegemon, actually.
    NoNonsensingPlease engineerscotty • a day ago
    All indications are that ship has sailed. Will there be hegemons? Yes, but more than one. The US will not be the only hegemon and the COVID-19 helped the world see the emperor has no clothes.
    MPC engineerscotty • a day ago
    I think that's the likely course, unless the US remains especially incompetent in ensuring that China isn't the one cleaning up at all the empire liquidation sales.

    No nation should be entrusted with anything like the power the US has had.

    WolfNippleChips • a day ago
    Until they start shooting down our airliners, sinking our cruise ships, attacking our Naval Bases, and invading their neighbors and committing genocide against people of other races and religions.

    Then, the doves will wake up and realize that the Big Stick is what kept us safe afterall.

    MPC WolfNippleChips • a day ago
    Yes, we need the Big Stick.

    We just need a rethinking of strategy, since we're just hitting ourselves with it right now.

    Some people feel inclined to toss away the stick to prevent the foolish use of it.

    chris chuba WolfNippleChips • a day ago
    You mean fight people who actually threaten us rather than attack people because we dream up scenarios where it's possible or we just don't like them? I'll take that over preemptive genocide.

    If we focused on actual defense 9/11 would not have happened. We ignored Al Qaeda despite the fact the bombed us multiple times because we were too busy bombing Serbia, blowing up their TV stations and expanding NATO to gobble up former Russian Republics.

    Feral Finster • a day ago
    "Liberal international order" my royal Irish @ss.

    The United States routinely ignores any international laws, whenever it sees fit. Anyway, the idea that United States hegemony is obligatory because muh international order is an argument from consequences.

    AlexanderHistory X • a day ago
    Lol, America Is what's in the rear view, not just our status as the sole superpower.
    People better get ready, this empire is getting ready to collapse.
    NoNonsensingPlease AlexanderHistory X • a day ago
    Surely the shortest live empire in history.
    JonF311 NoNonsensingPlease • a day ago
    Alexander's barely outlived his brief life.
    M Orban AlexanderHistory X • a day ago
    You wouldn't be the first one to say that...
    MPC AlexanderHistory X • a day ago
    Meh, people better get ready, we're getting ready to muddle along for the next several decades.

    The American state is way too tasty a prize. No one is going to dismantle it, and people will unite against any threat that has the potential to. Eventually someone will figure out a Bernie/Trump fusion and that person will be our Peron or Putin. Radical leftists will be crushed by the police if they try anything, and the white nationalists will all be in prison.

    We're somewhere between Argentina and Russia heading forward.

    MPC • a day ago
    Sell the empire. Ignore the Middle East outside of the oil trade lanes. Reorient our trade networks on SE Asia, India, and Latin America - no more feeding China. End of hostile moves towards Russia - let Europe reconcile with Russia. Fully support multipolar world order.

    Militarily we don't need the plodding battleship of a force we have now. No need to occupy whole countries with 'boots on the ground'. Maintain top notch special forces, advisor and coordination programs with allies, and anything useful for blowing up Chinese force projection especially the PLA navy. Subs and missiles.

    Platonist_82 MPC • 21 hours ago • edited
    Lots of good ideas here. Would trading with India involve a "reorient[ation]?" (I don't know.) That is to say, would still trading with India mean that we have to maintain our current naval position, or would that still be consistent with some sort of drawdown? Or are you saying that since India is not a hostile force, we would not have to worry about it? Or does is that problem met with the "anything useful for blowing up Chinese force projection especially the PLA navy. Subs and missiles." Conceivably, China could increase its presence in the Indian Ocean to create problems, no? Overall, agree with a lot of it--I'm just curious about the logistics.
    MPC Platonist_82 • 15 hours ago
    India in the longer term could ostensibly do much of what China does for us now trade wise. Needs to finish developing its infrastructure and its manufacturing tech. SE Asia and Mexico are closer short term.

    I think due to the commercial value of the seas our navy is our most cost effective means of force projection. Patrolling the Persian Gulf means we have our thumb on the number one petroleum artery. I would focus more on cost effective means to deny China (and Chinese trade) access to the seas in the event of tension. Carriers are expensive targets when subs and strategic missile emplacements can inspire even more fear due to unpredictability. But yes we still need bases and partnerships throughout the Indian and Pacific Oceans. China can roam around in peacetime as it wishes, what matters is that it stays totally bottled up in port, along with its maritime trade, in a conflict.

    Allow these places to run up trade surpluses with us rather than China.

    Platonist_82 • a day ago • edited
    I think Mr. Larison is on the right track. However, even if the logic of abandoning the Liberal International Order (LIO) is accepted--and the LIO most certainly should be abandoned--the entire story or narrative of post-World War II America narrative must be either abandoned or refashioned. It seems that the LIO functions as some sort of purpose for American citizens, and a higher-level theology for those who work in the United States Government, especially those who are involved in foreign policy making. Countering or reshaping the narrative of United States foreign policy and its link with domestic policy will be a challenge, but one that needs to be taken up, and taken up successfully. In personal conversations with those who support the LIO, they seem to take [my] criticisms of the LIO as some sort of ad hominem attack. This reaction is obviously illogical, but it is one that those who see the wisdom of abandoning the LIO must tactically and tactfully counter. Regrettably, supporting the LIO is conflated with being an American, or conflated with the raison d'etre of the existence of the United States. Many think the abandonment of the LIO cannot rationally be replaced and will necessarily be replaced with some sort of nihilism or the most cynical form of "realism," of which they mistakenly believe they possess understanding. For a start, reforming the educational system, insofar as it not already dominated by incorrect-but-fashionable far-leftist ideas that advocate a narrative of American history and purpose as false as it is pernicious, would seem to necessary. Many children grow into adulthood falsely thinking maintaining the LIO is their responsibility. It is, at root, a theological sickness.
    MidnightDancer • 9 hours ago
    It is very difficult for me to see the U.S. changing course anytime soon. Neoliberal globalists, political, and financial, are in control.
    Tony • 7 hours ago
    I hope it is over. To hell with the Europeans who have made a national sport of mocking Americans and all things America, while we risk nuclear war on their behalf. Let them face Putin and the Islamic invasion on their own - those problems are Europe's, not ours.
    Frank Blangeard • 7 hours ago
    The United States is ramping up for the "Great Final War' with both Russia and China. Throw in Iran, Syria, North Korea etc. as an afterthought. The U.S. will bring the temple down on itself rather than give up the goal of 'Full Spectrum Dominance'.that it has been pursuing since the end of WWII.
    Anti_Govt_Rebel • 5 hours ago
    Alexander Cooley and Dan Nexon may think the glory days are coming to an end, but I don't think Trump and the neocons got the memo yet. I see no evidence of any intent to change.
    Matthew W. Hall • 13 minutes ago
    There is no "international order." That's just rhetoric that is useful for certain economic interests. A world without american hegemony will be divided and filled with conflict. Globalization can't work politically.

    [Apr 24, 2020] Creating the enemies they need: US militarism's strange bedfellows by Danny Sjursen

    Apr 23, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    Listen to America's imperial proconsuls long enough and they often let slip something approaching truth -- perhaps exceptionalist confession is more accurate. Take Admiral Craig S. Faller, commander of U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), with responsibility for all of Latin America. Just before the COVID-19 crisis shifted into full gear, on March 11 he testified before the House Armed Services Committee and admitted , "There will be an increase in the U.S. military presence in the hemisphere later this year." Naturally, admiral, but why?

    Well, if one can push past the standard, mindless military dialectics -- i.e. "bad guys" -- the admiral posits a ready justification: Russia and (most especially) China. With his early career molded in the last, triumphalist Reagan-era Cold War, Faller may be a true believer in new dichotomies that must feel like coming home for the 1983 Naval Academy graduate. Before the committee, he described China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela as "malign state actors" who constitute "a vicious circle of threats." Faller is right about the circle, but it is his own country that produces it.

    These are strange bedfellows, no matter how hard a criminally ahistorical White House and Pentagon try to sell such disparate nations as naturally allied antagonists. A few of these countries have tortured recent pasts, and three of them are several thousand miles from the very hemisphere they ostensibly contest. The truth is that it's U.S. imperialism, intransigence, and hyper-intervention -- anywhere and everywhere -- that links these historically and geopolitically unnatural partners together. This holds true both in policy and imagination. In the Corona Age, the Trump team -- anti-interventionist populist campaign rhetoric aside -- have outed themselves as pandemic-opportunists and gleeful slaves to the " New Cold War ."

    Today, Washington sets policies that consistently make mountains out of "malign" molehills, and quite literally construct the Orwellian enemies it needs. It's hardly anything new. From Reagan's "confederation of terrorist states" in a new "international Murder Inc." and Bush II's "axis of evil," to Trump's (or actually John Bolton's ) recent "troika of tyranny," the utility of the nuance-absent idiom is clear: manufacture public fear, demonize opponents, and link the otherwise unlinked. Only there's a catch: Decry a concocted connection often enough and one drives inorganic rivals into each other's arms.

    Exhibit A is East Asia. China and Russia are hardly historically simpatico. During the Cold War, the Sino-Soviet split put the lie to communism as mythical monolith and resulted in a shooting war along the immense border between them. Furthermore, Beijing -- the rising regional power -- won't forever acquiesce to the archaic imperial boundaries, especially as a demographic tipping point nears whereby Russia's scant Siberian population is overrun by Chinese migrants. And Putin knows it.

    Luckily for Vlad, U.S. demonization of China and Uncle Sam's insistence on perpetual preeminence in the Western Pacific places that impending conflict on ice as Xi Jinping seeks out Moscow as an ally of convenience. Remove the American challenge, as the East-West Center's Denny Roy recently wrote , and "the primary strategic motivation for Sino-Russian cooperation would fade," and relations return to "their historically more normal adversarial character."

    Back in Latin America, Washington inverts the spatial relationship, but adheres to the formula of countering -- and creating -- " imagined communities " of distant enemy "alliances." Though neither Russia or China (and certainly not Iran) have any meaningful military presence, Admiral Faller sees these nefarious ghosts behind every palm tree in his area of responsibility. Their essential crime: trading with and recognizing regimes Washington doesn't particularly care for in Cuba, Nicaragua, or Venezuela. The SOUTHCOM chief spoke of how "Russia once again projected power in our neighborhood ," and that his "aha moment" this past year was "the extent to which China is aggressively pursuing their interests right here in our neighborhood ." (emphases added)

    That's some fascinating language. As was Faller's reference to Chinese regional loans as "predatory financing." Pot meet kettle! Surely, even the " company man " admiral must know that his own navy right now -- as always -- cruises warships through the disputed South China Sea, and that Washington has long set the gold standard in predatory loans through the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. Besides, even assume that, say, Russia is wrong to back what Faller had the temerity to label the "former Maduro regime," in Venezuela, what of Washington's support for Bolivia's military coup-installed extremists in Bolivia, and of the right-wing strongman Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil?

    Faller's "neighborhood" fallacy illustrates an American hypocrisy without recognizable bounds. How instructive -- and disturbing -- it is to hear a purportedly educated four-star flag officer peddle foolish binaries and prattle on in such coarse platitudes. The ease with which this nonsense passes public and congressional muster is surely symptomatic of an obtuse U.S. militarist disease. For if the admiral counts as one of those (establishment darling) " adults " in the Trumpian room, then the republic is in even bigger trouble than many thought. Either way, it's high time to recognize Faller and his ilk for what they usually are: staggeringly "small" thinkers without an inkling of strategic imagination.

    It is, however, regarding Iran that the U.S. makes the bed for the most absurd of fellows. Trump's withdrawal from a functioning nuclear deal, and recent off-the-rails escalations , accomplish little more than driving Tehran into Russia's arms. Incidentally, these are decidedly unnatural friends, seeing as they fought repeated wars over the last few centuries, Moscow occupied northern Iran after World War II, and their respective contours of regional influence have long been contested.

    Furthermore, it was U.S. complicity in the Saudi terror war on Yemen that deepened ties between the Houthis and a Tehran that had hardly given them much thought previously. Not only were Iranian military and religious (the two peoples actually follow different strands of Shia Islam) ties initially exaggerated , but the sequence of increased support is usually confused. Serious support from Tehran postdated the Saudi assaults.

    Lastly, Trump's seemingly self-sabotaging actions decisively empower the very hardliners in Tehran whom they purport to loathe. Rather than encourage nascent moderates like President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, The Donald's unnecessary pugnacity led to conservative legislative victories in Tehran, and so increased the popularity of the Supreme Leader that Iranian people are apt to believe the ayatollah's insane COVID-conspiracy theories.

    If the rank absurdity of today's U.S. military posturing, and its outcomes, tend to confuse, it is important to remember that Trump's audience is us -- the public and the media that serves it -- not Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, or even Ayatollah Khomeini. After all, not even Trump (I think?) believes the "harassing" Iranian speedboats in the Persian Gulf, that he just ordered the navy to "to shoot down and destroy" if they misbehave, are headed for Baltimore. Should Washington's policies appear incoherent, and consequently near masochistic, well, that might be precisely the point, or, conversely (if unsatisfyingly), all there actually is to say about that.

    If the ultimate goal, as I'm increasingly persuaded, is simply to manufacture the enemy coalitions necessary to frighten (thus discipline) the people and ensure endless profits for the military-industrial complex that funds the resultant buildup -- well, then, Mr. Trump's policies are far more lucid and effective than they're usually credited to be.

    On the other hand, if chaos and contingency reign -- as they often have -- in Washington, then U.S. foreign policy represents nothing less than counter-productivity incarnate. Lord only knows which is worse.

    [Apr 24, 2020] Trump's Own Military Mafia by Maj. Danny Sjursen

    Apr 10, 2020 | original.antiwar.com
    Originally posted at TomDispatch .

    I'm sure you still remember them. The president regularly called them " my generals ." They were, he claimed , from "central casting" and there were three of them: retired Marine Corps General John Kelly, who was first appointed secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and then White House chief of staff; Army Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, who became the president's national security advisor; and last (but hardly least) retired Marine Corps General James Mattis, whom Trump particularly adored for his nickname " Mad Dog " and appointed as secretary of defense. Of him, the president said, "If I'm doing a movie, I pick you, General Mattis, who's doing really well."

    They were referred to in Washington and in the media more generally as " the adults in the room ," indicating what most observers (as well as insiders) seemed to think about the president – that he was, in effect, the impulsive, unpredictable, self-obsessed toddler in that same room. All of them had been commanders in the very conflicts that Donald Trump had labeled " ridiculous Endless Wars " and were distinctly hawkish and uncritical of those same wars (like the rest of the U.S. high command). It was even rumored that, as "adults," Kelly and Mattis had made a private pact not to be out of the country at the same time for fear of what might happen in their absence. By the end of 2018, of course, all three were gone. "My generals" were no more, but the toddler remained.

    As TomDispatch regular , West Point graduate (class of 2005), and retired Army Major Danny Sjursen explains in remarkable detail today, while the president finally tossed "his" generals in the nearest trash can, the "adults" (and you do have to keep that word in quotation marks) didn't, in fact, leave the toddler alone in the Oval Office. They simply militarized and demilitarized at the same time. In fact, one class from West Point, that of 1986, from which both Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo graduated, is essentially everywhere in a distinctly militarized (if still officially civilian) and wildly hawkish Washington in the Trumpian moment. ~ Tom

    "Courage Never Quits"? : The Price of Power and West Point's Class of 1986

    By Danny Sjursen

    Every West Point class votes on an official motto. Most are then inscribed on their class rings. Hence, the pejorative West Point label " ring knocker ." (As legend has it, at military meetings a West Pointer "need only knock his large ring on the table and all Pointers present are obliged to rally to his point of view.") Last August, the class of 2023 announced theirs: "Freedom Is Not Free." Mine from the class of 2005 was "Keeping Freedom Alive." Each class takes pride in its motto and, at least theoretically, aspires to live according to its sentiments, while championing the accomplishments of fellow graduates.

    But some cohorts do stand out. Take the class of 1986 (" Courage Never Quits "). As it happens, both Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are members of that very class, as are a surprisingly wide range of influential leaders in Congress, corporate America, the Pentagon, the defense industry, lobbying firms, Big Pharma , high-end financial services , and even security-consulting firms. Still, given their striking hawkishness on the subject of American war-making, Esper and Pompeo rise above the rest. Even in a pandemic, they are as good as their class motto. When it comes to this country's wars, neither of them ever quits.

    Once upon a time, retired Lieutenant General Douglas Lute (Class of '75), a former US Ambassador to NATO and a senior commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, taught both Esper and Pompeo in his West Point social sciences class. However, it was Pompeo, the class of '86 valedictorian, whom Lute singled out for praise, remembering him as "a very strong student – fastidious, deliberate." Of course, as the Afghanistan Papers, released by the Washington Post late last year, so starkly revealed , Lute told an interviewer that, like so many US officials, he "didn't have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking in Afghanistan." Though at one point he was President George W. Bush's "Afghan war czar ," the general never expressed such doubts publicly and his record of dissent is hardly an impressive one. Still, on one point at least, Lute was on target: Esper and Pompeo are smart and that's what worries me (as in the phrase "too smart for their own good").

    Esper, a former Raytheon lobbyist, had particularly hawkish views on Russia and China before he ever took over at the Pentagon and he wasn't alone when it came to the urge to continue America's wars. Pompeo, then a congressman, exhibited a striking pre-Trump-era foreign policy pugnacity , particularly vis-à-vis the Islamic world . It has since solidified into a veritable obsession with toppling the Iranian regime.

    Their militarized obsessions have recently taken striking form in two ways: the secretary of defense instructed US commanders to prepare plans to escalate combat against Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, an order the mission's senior leader there, Lieutenant General Robert "Pat" White, reportedly resisted; meanwhile, the secretary of state evidently is eager to convince President Trump to use the Covid-19 pandemic, now devastating Iran, to bomb that country and further strangle it with sanctions. Worse yet, Pompeo might be just cunning enough to convince his ill-informed, insecure boss (so open to clever flattery) that war is the answer.

    The militarism of both men matters greatly, but they hardly pilot the ship of state alone, any more than Trump does (whatever he thinks). Would that it were the case. Sadly, even if voters threw them all out, the disease runs much deeper than them. Enter the rest of the illustrative class of '86.

    As it happens, Pompeo's and Esper's classmates permeate the deeper structure of imperial America . And let's admit it, they are, by the numbers, an impressive crew. As another '86 alumnus, Congressman Mark Green (R-TN), bragged on the House floor in 2019, "My class [has] produced 18 general officers 22-plus presidents and CEOs of major corporations two state legislators [and] three judges," as well as "at least four deans and chancellors of universities." He closed his remarks by exclaiming, "Courage never quits, '86!"

    However, for all his gushing, Green's list conceals much. It illuminates neither the mechanics nor the motives of his illustrious classmates; that is, what they're actually doing and why. Many are key players in a corporate-military machine bent on, and reliant on, endless war for profit and professional advancement. A brief look at key '86ers offers insight into President Dwight D. Eisenhower's military-industrial complex in 2020 – and it should take your breath away.

    The West Point Mafia

    The core group of '86 grads cheekily refer to themselves as "the West Point mafia." And for some, that's an uplifting thought. Take Joe DePinto, CEO of 7-Eleven. He says that he's "someone who sleeps better at night knowing that those guys are in the positions they're in." Of course, he's an '86 grad, too .

    Back when I called the academy home, we branded such self-important cadets " toolbags ." More than a decade later, when I taught there, I found my students still using the term. Face facts, however: those "toolbags," thick as thieves today, now run the show in Washington (and despite their busy schedules, they still find time to socialize as a group).

    Given Donald Trump's shady past – one doesn't build an Atlantic City casino-and-hotel empire without " mobbing-it-up " – that Mafia moniker is actually fitting. So perhaps it's worth thinking of Mike Pompeo as the president's latest consigliere . And since gangsters rarely countenance a challenge without striking back, Lieutenant General White should watch his back after his prudent attempt to stop the further escalation of America's wars in Iraq and Iran in the midst of a deadly global pandemic. Worse yet for him, he's not a West Pointer (though he did, oddly enough, earn his Army commission on the very day that class of '86 graduated). White's once promising career is unlikely to be long for this world.

    In addition to Esper and Pompeo, other Class of '86 alums serve in key executive branch roles. They include the vice chief of staff of the Army General Joseph Martin, the director of the Army National Guard, the commander of NATO's Allied Land Command, the deputy commanding general of Army Forces Command, and the deputy commanding general of Army Cyber Command. Civilian-side classmates in the Pentagon serve as: deputy assistant secretary of the Army for installations, energy, and environment; a civilian aide to the secretary of the Army; and the director of stabilization and peace operations policy for the secretary of defense. These Pentagon career civil servants aren't, strictly speaking, part of the "Mafia" itself, but two Pompeo loyalists are indeed charter members.

    Pompeo brought Ulrich Brechbuhl and Brian Butalao, two of his closest cadet friends, in from the corporate world. The three of them had, at one point, served as CEO, CFO, and COO of Thayer Aerospace, named for the " father" of West Point, Colonel Sylvanus Thayer, and started with Koch Industries seed money . Among other things, that corporation sold the Pentagon military aircraft components.

    Brechbuhl and Butalao were given senior positions at the CIA when Pompeo was its director. Currently, Brechbuhl is the State Department's counselor (and reportedly Pompeo's de facto chief of staff), while Butalao serves as under secretary for management. According to his official bio, Butalao is responsible "for managing the State Department on a day-to-day basis and [serving as its] Chief Operating Officer." Funny, that was his exact position under Pompeo at that aerospace company.

    Still, this Mafia trio can't run the show by themselves. The national security structure's tentacles are so much longer than that. They reach all the way to K Street and Capitol Hill.

    From Congress to K Street: The Enablers

    Before Trump tapped Pompeo to head the CIA and then the State Department, he represented Wichita, Kansas, home to Koch Industries, in the House of Representatives. In fact, Pompeo rode his ample funding from the political action committee of the billionaire Koch brothers straight to the Hill. So linked was he to those fraternal right-wing energy tycoons and so protective of their interests that he was dubbed "the congressman from Koch." The relationship was mutually beneficial. Pompeo's selection as secretary of state solidified the previously strained relationship of the brothers with President Trump.

    The '86 Mafia's current congressional heavyweight, however, is Mark Green. An early Trump supporter, he regularly tried to shield the president from impeachment as a minority member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee. The Tennessee congressman nearly became Trump's secretary of the Army, but ultimately withdrew his nomination because of controversies that included sponsoring gender-discriminatory bills and commenting that "transgender is a disease."

    Legislators like Green, in turn, take their foreign-policy marching orders from the military's corporate suppliers. Among those, Esper, of course, represents the gold standard when it comes to " revolving-door " defense lobbying. Just before ascending the Pentagon summit, pressed by Senator Elizabeth Warren during his confirmation hearings, he patently refused to "recuse himself from all matters related to" Raytheon, his former employer and the nation's third-largest defense contractor. (And that was even before its recent merger with United Technologies Corporation, which once employed another Esper classmate as a senior vice president.) Incidentally, one of Raytheon's " biggest franchises " is the Patriot missile defense system, the very weapon being rushed to Iraq as I write, ostensibly as a check on Pompeo's favored villain, Iran.

    Less well known is the handiwork of another '86 grad, longtime lobbyist and CNN paid contributor David Urban, who first met the president in 2012 and still recalls how "we clicked immediately." The consummate Washington insider, he backed Trump "when nobody else thought he stood a chance" and in 2016 was his senior campaign adviser in the pivotal swing state of Pennsylvania.

    Esper and Urban have been close for more than 30 years. As cadets, they served in the same unit during the Persian Gulf War. It was Urban who introduced Esper to his wife. Both later graced the Hill 's list of Washington's top lobbyists. Since 2002, Urban has been a partner and is now president of a consulting giant, the American Continental Group. Among its clients : Raytheon and 7-Eleven.

    It's hard to overstate Urban's role. He seems to have landed Pompeo and Esper their jobs in the Trump administration and was a key go-between in marrying class of '86 backbenchers and moneymen to that bridegroom of our moment, The Donald.

    Greasing the Machine: The Moneymen

    Another '86er also passed through that famed military-industrial revolving door. Retired Colonel Dan Sauter left his position as chief of staff of the 32nd Army Air and Missile Defense Command for one at giant weapons maker Lockheed Martin as business developer for the very systems his old unit employed. Since May 2019, he's directed Lockheed's $1.5 billion Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program in Saudi Arabia. Lockheed's THAAD systems have streamed into that country to protect the Kingdom, even as Pompeo continually threatens Iran.

    If such corporate figures are doing the selling, it's the Pentagon, naturally, that's doing the buying. Luckily, there are '86 alumni in key positions on the purchasing end as well, including a retired brigadier general who now serves as the Pentagon's principal adviser to the under secretary for acquisition, technology, and logistics.

    Finally, there are other key consultants linked to the military-industrial complex who are also graduates of the class of '86. They include a senior vice president of Hillwood – a massive domestic and international real estate development company, chaired by Ross Perot, Jr. – formerly a consultant to the government of the United Arab Emirates. The Emiratis are US allies in the fight against Pompeo's Iranian nemesis and, in 2019, awarded Raytheon a $1.5 billion contract to supply key components for its air force missile launchers.

    Another classmate is a managing partner for Patriot Strategies, which consults for corporations and the government but also separately lands hefty defense contracts itself. His previous " ventures " included "work in telecommunications in the Middle East and technical security upgrades at US embassies worldwide."

    Yet another grad , Rick Minicozzi, is the founder and CEO of Thayer Leader Development Group (TLDG), which prides itself on "building" corporate leaders. TLDG clients include: 7-Eleven, Cardinal Glass, EMCOR, and Mercedes-Benz. All either have or had '86ers at the helm. The company's CEO also owns the Thayer Hotel located right on West Point's grounds, which hosts many of the company's lectures and other events. Then there's the retired colonel who, like me, taught on the West Point history faculty. He's now the CEO of Battlefield Leadership , which helps corporate leaders "learn from the past" in order to "prepare for an ever-changing business landscape."

    A Class-wide Conflict of Interest

    Don't for a moment think these are all "bad" people. That's not faintly my point. One prominent '86 grad, for instance, is Lieutenant General Eric Wesley, the deputy of Army Futures Command. He was my brigade commander at Fort Riley, Kansas, in 2009 and I found him competent, exceptionally empathetic, and a decidedly decent man, which is probably true of plenty of '86ers.

    So what exactly is my point here? I'm not for a second charging conspiracy or even criminal corruption. The lion's share of what all these figures do is perfectly legal. In reality, the way the class of '86 has permeated the power structure only reflects the nature of the carefully crafted , distinctly undemocratic systems through which the military-industrial complex and our political world operate by design. Most of what they do couldn't, in fact, be more legal in a world of never-ending American wars and national security budgets that eternally go through the roof . After all, if any of these figures had acted in anything but a perfectly legal fashion, they might have run into a classmate of theirs who recently led the FBI's corruption unit in New Jersey – before, that is, he retired and became CEO of a global security consulting firm . (Sound familiar?)

    And that's my point, really. We have a system in Washington that couldn't be more lawful and yet, by any definition, the class of '86 represents one giant conflict of interest (and they don't stand alone). Alums from that year are now ensconced in every level of the national security state: from the White House to the Pentagon to Congress to K Street to corporate boardrooms. And they have both power and a deep stake, financial or otherwise, in maintaining or expanding the (forever) warfare state.

    They benefit from America's permanent military mobilization, its never-ending economic war-footing , and all that comes with it. Ironically, this will inevitably include the blood of future West Point graduates, doomed to serve in their hopeless crusades. Think of it all as a macabre inversion of their class motto in which it's not their courage but that of younger graduates sent off to this country's hopeless wars that they will never allow to "quit."

    Speaking of true courage, lately the only exemplar we've had of it in those wars is General "Pat" White. It seems that he, at least, refused to kiss the proverbial rings of those Mafia men of '86.

    But of course, he's not part of their "family," is he?

    Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer and contributing editor at Antiwar.com . His work has appeared in the NY Times, LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Popular Resistance, and Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War is now available for pre-order . Sjursen was recently selected as a 2019-20 Lannan Foundation Cultural Freedom Fellow . Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet . Visit his professional website for contact info, to schedule speeches or media appearances, and access to his past work.

    Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook . Check out the newest Dispatch Books, John Feffer's new dystopian novel (the second in the Splinterlands series) Frostlands , Beverly Gologorsky's novel Every Body Has a Story , and Tom Engelhardt's A Nation Unmade by War , as well as Alfred McCoy's In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power and John Dower's The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II .

    Copyright 2020 Danny Sjursen

    [Apr 24, 2020] The Still Exceptional Empires: Neo-Imperialism, Franco-American Style by Maj. Danny Sjursen

    Apr 20, 2020 | original.antiwar.com
    Everyone has heard, ad nauseam, about the " Special Relationship " between the United States and Britain. Accordingly, the few Americans who dare identify their country as an empire – past or present – tend to analogize with the British model. While the similarities between Washington and London-style imperialism are manifold – along with the distinct differences – in other important ways, the more appropriate parallel is with France. For the French, unlike the Brits (for the most part), and like modern Americans (in a more indirect way), imagined their colonial subjects as vital, moldable constituents (if rarely citizens) of a grand francophone project for good.

    I know, I know, the French and Americans can't stand each other, right? Well, sure, theirs has been a contentious relationship for centuries – politically, culturally, you name it. True enough, but lest we forget that the U.S. formed in opposition to British Empire, and – though rarely mentioned in the dominant memories of American Revolutionary triumphalism – the colonists' military victory would've been far more difficult (if not impossible) without French intervention on their behalf.

    No doubt, the relationship between the US and its first, and longest, ally has been filled with ups and downs: one thinks of the Quasi-War (1798), FDR-Charles De Gaulle world war drama , Paris' semi-" withdrawal " from NATO (1966), and, of course, the Iraq War dispute-" freedom fries " charade (2003), for starters. Still, in key ways, I'd submit that it is precisely because the French and American models of governance and global policy have so much in common that they – like rival siblings – so often squabble.

    Peas in an Exceptional Pod of Delusion

    While all historical analogizing must proceed cautiously – and with recognition of the limits of deduction – the broad similarities are staggering. It is the very grandiose idealism – and consequent universalism – in the wake of their inextricably connected revolutions, that has set the French and American hegemons (and empires) apart. While the American variety has tended more towards (at least an aspirational) multiculturalism than that of the French, both post-revolutionary nations have been certain of – and applied – the necessary and proper exportability of their universally "positive" cultural-political systems.

    Indeed, in spite of their rather different ( theoretical ) approaches to internal immigrants, with some far-right wing exceptions , to be French or American – rather uniquely – has been as much idea as nationality. There have, of course, been both positive and negative applications inherent to this notion. One common output has been a common dedication to the nebulous canard of national "greatness." Indeed, Donald Trump – and Ronald Reagan before him – can be said to have channeled none other than Charles De Gaulle, who wrote in his war memoirs, way back in 1954, that "France cannot be France without greatness."

    Consequently, by extension, there have been (necessarily) tragic consequences for the millions of victims of an imperialism that assumes not only metropole superiority, but that inside every Algerian (or Afghan) is a Frenchman (or American) waiting to be unzipped . Such is the logical conclusion of exceptionalism – that most treacherous of all imperial brands.

    There are more specific Franco-American likenesses worth noting as well. Despite the cozy rhetoric of US multiculturalism and France's assimilation, both states ultimately adhere to a notion that national values – however vaguely framed – heat their respective citizen melting pots. And both fill their prisons with the detritus of that program's historical failures. By now, the reality, and broad contours of, America's world- record mass incarceration – particularly of black and brown bodies are widely reported. Less well known, but of a piece with the US model, is that by 2003, France's Muslims accounted for seven percent of the population but 70 to 80 percent of its prisoners.

    Furthermore, both have lengthy records of post-colonial and neo-imperial adventurism across far-flung swathes of the the globe. In fact, American and French wars have been the West's bloodiest since 1945, and also often complimentary – whereby, for example, Washington quite literally took up Paris' mantle in Vietnam. Furthermore, even today, France – though it pales in comparison to America's veritable " empire of bases " – maintains perhaps the world's second largest network of overseas military footholds. That deployment and intervention bonanza has all "blown back" at the French and American homelands, as both have been targeted – recently at two of the highest Western rates – by transnational (or foreign-influenced) "terrorists" from the very regions where they most often militarily intervene.

    Joint Exhibit Africa

    Lastly, and most relevant to the current moment, both Paris and Washington have had a tragic tortured relationship with – and become the favorite targets of – the more violent flavors of political Islam. Of late, for the Americans, and more longstanding for the French, that has particularly been the case in Africa. The truth is there are only two countries which station – and unleash – significant numbers of troops in Africa today: France and the United States.

    The post-colonial pervasiveness of the French presence in Africa was itself exceptional – at least until the United States truly got in the game in a more overt post-9/11 way. As late as 1990, France had troops stationed in a remarkable 22 African countries. Even the once great British Empire's postcolonial role paled in comparison. Furthermore, in a tactic the U.S. would later – and continue to – make its own, France signed military defense pacts with 27 African states during the period 1961-92, including with three former British, and a few Belgian, colonies. Paris also spearheaded three further tactics common to Washington throughout and beyond the decolonization and Cold War eras: fomenting coups, empowering dictators, and " dancing " with heinous (sometimes genocidal) monsters. In several repulsive cases, some combination of all three were waged as joint Franco-American exercises.

    Paris and Washington "Behind the Scenes"

    Since the end of the Second World War, when a defeated France sought to regain the physical space, and glory, of its empire – most of which was in Africa – it unleashed its external intelligence service, then known as the SDECE , first to stifle colonial nationalism, and then, begrudgingly, to sustain real power over the newly independent states. Whereas the equivalent US CIA spent the Cold War working behind the scenes to counter even the whiff of Soviet influence, the SDECE was more concerned with stifling any true hints of economic or political autonomy in its former domains. Nonetheless, not always, but more often than not, Paris' and Washington's goals were symbiotic.

    In the period after the " Year of Africa " – when 14 French (and 17 total) colonies gained independence – the SDECE (after 1981 known as the DGSE) instigated several coups , and been implicated in more than a few presidential assassinations. In more farcical cases – take the Central African Republic (CAR) – the SDECE even planned coups against leaders it had previously "couped" into office in the first place. The losers were always the common people, mind you, and it should thus come as little surprise that France was drawn back into the CAR over this past decade in response to spiraling religious and ethnic conflict. Naturally, the CIA played the same game all over the continent – toppling a few governments of its own and planning to assassinate prime Minister Patrice Lumumba of the Congo – but for the most part, Paris guarded its "special," depraved, role in Francophone West and Central Africa.

    During the Cold War, and – albeit with some different motives – ever since, Franco-American intel and diplomatic services have gleefully backed any strongman willing to support Western goals or oppose the West's (perceived) external enemies. The outcomes have repeatedly been tragic. Both Washington and Paris helped install and then backed Zaire's (Congo's) brutal dictator Mobutu Sese Seko's vicious 35 year reign – the French to the bitter end, even after the US cut him lose after he'd outlived his Cold War usefulness. Paris even ran one final covert operation – which included three fighter aircraft and European mercenaries – in an unsuccessful attempt to stem the rebel tide in 1997. Previously, France installed and/or backed dictators who banned political parties, and tortured or murdered opponents in Cameroon, Niger, Chad, and the Central African Republic, among others.

    In the particularly odious case of Chad, Paris and Washington alternately worked at cross or joint purposes to back one authoritarian thug after another. Both the SDECE and CIA funneled cash and weapons to a slew of leaders who exploited and widened ethnic and religious (Muslim north vs. Christian and animist south) conflicts and waged war on their own people. Much of this unfolded in the name of a lengthy proxy war with Libya's Ghadafi regime – which France would take a leading role in toppling along with the US in 2011 – that ultimately destabilized the entire North African region. The unintended perils of backing military strongmen was on stark display again recently when a U.S.-trained captain led a 2012 coup in Mali which drew both American and French troops back into a prolonged indecisive intervention.

    The rarely recounted record of French support for African monsters – usually vicious rebel groups – is exceptionally hideous. For starters, Paris backed Biafran separatists in Nigeria's bloody civil war (1967-70) with 350 tons of weapons, and was the prime backer of the Rwandan Hutu regime – and its later rebel manifestations in the extended Congo civil wars (1996-2003) – that perpetrated the worst genocide (1994) since the Nazi Holocaust. If the US didn't always side with France in these cases, it scantly opposed the macabre missions.

    The Franco-American (Exceptionalist) Forever War Curse

    In Africa, both France's (since 1960) and America's (after 2001) foreign policy has been veritably defined by hyper-interventionism, and low-intensity forever wars. The French have militarily intervened no less than 50 times – in at least 13 countries – since official decolonization. It has waged its own lengthy or seemingly forever wars in Chad (1968-75, 77-80 83-84), Ivory Coast (2002-present), and Mali . (2013-present) In Chad, the US has recently taken the baton from France and continues to bolster a regime ranked by Transparency International in 2010 as the sixth most corrupt on earth.

    Indeed, today the French and American militaries are engaged in a joint adventure chasing Islamist "terror" ghosts across Francophone West and Central Africa. According to AFRICOM's own internal documents , the US military now has "enduring" "footprints" in six, and "non-enduring" presence in four, former French colonies in the region. Taking that incestuous overlap a step further, Washington and Paris are together simultaneously engaged in active operations in four of those countries, and jointly station troops in at least two others . Britain, by contrast, has troops in only four African countries in any abiding sense, and is far less active in combat. While hardly any Americans – and to a lesser extent Frenchmen – can locate, or in certain cases pronounce, Djibouti, Gabon, Niger, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Chad, Tunisia, Mali, or Cameroon, the stark fact is that both countries are meddling, and often at war, in each of those distant locales.

    American and French soldiers, alike, continue to die in these, at best, tangential hot spots in the name of domestic populations that don't give a damn and hardly take any notice. In Africa, at least (though not the Middle East), French military losses have been even higher than American casualties. Since 2013, 30 French troops have died in Mali alone. For all that cost in French blood and treasure – more than $750 million annually – the Sahel is even today " slipping out of control ." The same could be said of the American investment – ample billions spent and thousands of troops extensively deployed in some 15 countries as of 2019 – in Africa since 9/11.

    The result of all this has been a joint Franco-American counter-productivity crisis both for the region and homeland security. The blowback synergy is perhaps best illustrated in the linked Libyan-Mali debacle, especially since Paris and Washington (along with London) shamelessly masked an outright (Ghadafi) regime change in Tripoli under the guise of the UN's Responsibility to Protect (R2P) concept.

    From 2007-08, US special forces inserted themselves and assisted the Malian government in its decidedly local ethnic fight with Tuareg separatists in the country's north. Simultaneously, US trained and backed forces in nearby Niger committed atrocities against fellow Tuareg civilians – which only added to their ethnic grievances. Then, that temporarily tamped-down insurgency exploded when it was bolstered in 2012 by fighters and weapons which flooded south from the chaos induced by NATO's 2011 regime change war in Libya. A year later, the French army was back in its former colony. They've yet to leave.

    So, essentially, France – through its earlier colonial divide and rule policies – and the US, by militarily meddling and choosing sides in local matters (and catalyzing instability in Libya), created the Tuareg "problem" in Mali (and Niger) that both Western powers then intervened in, and are still trying, to solve.

    Taking stock of this recent U.S.-backed Francophone African history repeated as farce , one is reminded of the rejoinder of a long dead French Algerian settler philosopher: "Each act of repression each act of police torture has deepened the despair and violence of those subjected [and] in this way given birth to terrorists who in turn have given birth to more police." Or, one might add in the contemporary African context: more French and American soldiers .

    The Questions We (Both) Dare Not Ask

    In another absurd commonality, the French and Americans have come to uncritically accept the inevitability of interminable warfare in Africa without asking why. Neither Paris nor Washington has much bothered to self-pose the salient question at hand: Why has violent Islamism exploded in Africa (or the Mideast, for that matter); and why now ? It certainly can't be as simple as the Bush-era trope : "They hate us for our freedoms."

    If that were the case, one would expect the jihadi wave sooner, since, after all, French and American democracy – such as it is – is far older than the post-colonial, or post-9/11 eras. See, but there's the rub: exceptional entities don't trouble themselves with such questions; that sort of doubt or reflection wouldn't occur to a universalist policymaker in Paris or Washington.

    Naturally, if French or American leaders had lowered themselves to such base (you know, human) levels, and even deigned to touch a toe in some self-awareness waters, a few inconvenient causation explanations might ripple outward. Like that, perhaps, the spread of Islamist "terror" has deep roots in the phenomena of colonization, decolonization, neo-colonialism and global-financial debt-imperialism . And that there is a proven counterproductive relationship between the level of foreign troop deployments and overall violence in Africa – I.e. more French Foreign Legionnaires, and more (disturbingly similar) American " Praetorians " of the special operations command, has only sent regional jihadism skyrocketing.

    Finally, there's the minor matter that the " Washington consensus " response – through influence over IMF and World Bank policies – to the post-1973 oil shocks and free-fall of global commodity prices, didn't (and wasn't designed) to stop the number of Global Southerners living on less than a dollar a day rising from 70 to 290 million by 1998. In the face of such poverty, locals can be forgiven for their sneaking suspicion that both the Declarations of Independence, and of the Rights of Man , offer rather paltry answers. Now, whether the West, however constructed, bears all the blame for that might be debatable; but through African eyes, what's certain is the recent infusion of Franco-American troops and corporations is not seen as a net positive for the people. Jihadis may be monsters – and we must admit they often are – but at least they are African (or Arab) monsters.

    To distant, exceptionalist ears in the comfort of the White House (or the Élysée Palace ), such sentiments seem resoundingly blasphemous. The cultural and political universalism of American or French "values" – even if neither society ever manages to internally agree about what those are – seem a given. To reject Washingtonian or Parisian liberty largesse is seen as almost proof-positive that intransigent Africans were communists – or now "terrorists" – after all. Furthermore, the unsophisticated locals must've been put up to it by "real" enemies: the Soviets (pre-1991), or today, obviously the Chinese. According to this prevailing logic, more's the reason to flood the region with ample troops and around and around we go.

    Passing the Torch?

    Today, and quite historically , both the French and Americans simplify a gray, complex world to their own – and global peoples' – detriment. Elizabeth Schmidt's two recent exhaustive studies of foreign interventions in Africa – during and since the Cold War – concluded that such actions "tended to exacerbate rather than alleviate African conflicts." Consider that a scholarly understatement. In the case of exponentially increased US military involvement since the founding of AFRICOM, credible recent analyses demonstrate how strikingly counterproductive such missions have been on the continent.

    When it comes to the discrete – and often joint – French and American interventions in Africa these days, sequence and timing matter. Until 2007, the generally limited US military actions on the continent fell under the responsibility of United States European Command (EUCOM) – which in addition to countering the Russian Bear, had jurisdiction over 43 (what were seen as) backwater sub-Saharan African countries. When it came to actual troop "boots-on-the-ground," France was still the military meddler extraordinaire. All that changed, slowly after 9/11, and with immediacy when President Bush announced the creation of the Pentagon's new Africa Command (AFRICOM) in 2007.

    This was the pivotal moment, a changing of the economic and military neo-imperial guard of sorts. It is unlikely coincidental that the permanent US military presence became official at almost precisely the tipping point moment (2008) when China eclipsed France as Africa's largest trading partner. Indeed, the ostensible "threat" of the Chinese Dragon – despite it still having just one base there – as much as "terrorism," has easily replaced the convenient canard of Soviet infusion as the justification for perpetual US military intervention in Africa. In the futile and inessential attempt to "defeat" Islamist jihadism and exclude China, France is now the junior – but essential, given its existing local "knowledge" and neocolonial relationships – partner on the continent.

    With respect to Paris' incessant and indecisive warfare – and ineffective strategy – in Africa, Hannah Armstrong, of the International Crisis Group, lamented that "In the same way that French reality TV and pop music is 15 years behind the US, French counterterrorism mimics US counterterrorism of 15 years ago." That may be strictly accurate with respect to the recent failures in the Sahel that she analyzed – but widen the lens a bit, and it becomes clear Armstrong has it backwards. Historically, since 1960, the French have tried it all before; Uncle Sam was often behind (or backing) them, then (as in Vietnam) willingly took the torch, and now fails where Paris already has.

    In Africa, given that most of the current fighting is in the Francophone sphere upon which Paris – uniquely among former European imperialists – has maintained an historic politico-military-economic post-colonial grip, it is worth asking just who is using who in the relationship.

    In other words, qui ( really ) bono?

    Author's Note: As some readers may have noticed, I have (accidentally) embarked on a sort of informal empire-analogy series, with a particularly African-inflection. In case you've missed them, check out the links below to the previous articles (in a variety of outlets) on contemporary American connections to past and present empires:

    Danny Sjursen is a retired US Army officer and contributing editor at Antiwar.com His work has appeared in the NY Times, LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Popular Resistance, and Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War is now available for pre-order . Sjursen was recently selected as a 2019-20 Lannan Foundation Cultural Freedom Fellow . Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet . Visit his professional website for contact info, to schedule speeches or media appearances, and access to his past work.

    Copyright 2020 Danny Sjursen

    [Apr 24, 2020] They can top off the national reserves on the cheap and profit when their war sends prices up again

    Apr 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Zengine3 , Apr 23 2020 18:03 utc | 30

    If ever there was a time, it's now. Oil has bottomed out. They can top off the national reserves on the cheap and profit when their war sends prices up again. Maybe it's why The Orange Goober has ordered the Navy to "shoot down" any Iranian boats that harass/approach/rudely gesture at US ships.

    Musburger , Apr 23 2020 18:08 utc | 31

    @30

    Scott Ritter thinks this is quite possible.
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/486598-trump-iran-war-oil/

    Tuyzentfloot , Apr 23 2020 18:23 utc | 36
    Ritter's article worries me. There is now a sales argument for war: "don't worry about oil prices going sky high, Iran can't use that weapon against us now!".
    LOL , Apr 23 2020 18:38 utc | 38
    You over excitable little Iran war-monkeys really should take time out of your busy war-monkey daily-schedules to learn something about the topography of Iran and it's defensive and offensive military capabilities.

    It would certainly save everyone else from having to listen to you being wrong yet again.

    karlof1 , Apr 23 2020 18:53 utc | 39
    dh @34--

    You're on the right track. There's a huge supply glut as all forms of storage are mostly filled as proven by the negative WTI pricing. Global demand is still being destroyed. War in the Persian Gulf region will further destroy demand; and since very little oil's being shipped from there, the supply glut won't be used up anytime soon--certainly not quickly enough to see a sharp rebound in oil price. The crucial point is domestic US refineries have cut back their runs as their margins are even thinner than before, plus demand destruction is still occurring, thus the domestic storage glut. The wife and I jested last night if we only had a rail spur we could order up a couple of tank cars full of unleaded at the current very distressed price and be set for a longtime.

    As The Saker notes in his latest , Trump must make the voting public look everywhere except at him and Congress, the bellowing at Iran being part of that entire theatre. Yes, a mistake could have very negative consequences for the USN and all US assets in the region as well as Occupied Palestine--the overall underlying dynamic hasn't changed since Trump broke the Iran Nuclear Treaty. Too add further insult to Trump and Pompeo, Iran's doing a much better job at containing COVID-19 than the Outlaw US Empire :

    "The US pandemic death toll is this week heading above 50,000 compared with Iran's figure of 5,300. Considering the respective population numbers of 330 and 80 million that suggests Iran is doing a much better job at containing the virus. On a per-capita basis, according to publicly available data, Iran's mortality rate is less than half that of the US.

    "This is while the US has sanctioned Iran to the hilt. American sanctions – arguably illegal under international law – have hit Iran's ability to import medical supplies to cope with COVID-19 and other fatal diseases, yet Iran through its own resources is evidently managing the crisis much better than the US."

    As with the Tar Baby, the more wrestling the Outlaw US Empire does the weaker it gets.

    Zengine3 , Apr 23 2020 18:55 utc | 40
    @LOLtroll

    They can't invade. That's your own moronic straw-man. And yes, it would further cut supply and prices would go up. The current bottom is due to overproduction but so long as civilization cranks along the oil gets used eventually.

    [Apr 22, 2020] Especially as the insane neoliberal economy we live in, we are ruled by a group of kleptocrats and vicious stooges. Which make allegations against Biden deserving a closer look but that does not make them automatically credible

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The Progressive ..."
    Apr 22, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    "Evidence" means testimony, writings, material objects, or other things presented to the senses that are offered to prove the existence or nonexistence of a fact. -- California Evidence Code sec 140

    JTMcPhee , April 21, 2020 at 6:19 pm

    ... ... ...

    Even the NYT acknowledged (before it erased the text in its story on Reade that noted there were no other sexual misconduct charges pending against him other than that long history of assaults and sniffing and hands-on, text removed by the Times at the instance of the Biden campaign staff?

    Here's the original text: " The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, beyond the hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable." Waiting for the apologists to tell us why the edit to remove the last clause starting "beyond " is just "Good journalism."

    He and Trump are bad examples of the male part of the species. Nothing to choose that I can see, other than who among the people that revise those bribes to them will be the first in line at the MMT watering hole

    just_kate , April 21, 2020 at 8:54 pm

    i had a lengthy discussion about this with my brother and sil, it came down to her saying I DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT re bidens history of being a ttl letch plus possible rapist and my brother questioning what is obvious discomfort in multiple video evidence.

    They said defeating trump was paramount to anything against biden. i simply give up at this point.

    cm , April 21, 2020 at 3:28 pm

    No mention of Brett Kavanaugh or Christine Blasey Ford in the article

    michael99 , April 21, 2020 at 6:30 pm

    The Heart-Wrenching Trauma of the Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh Hearings
    It's difficult. It hurts. It's unfair. But women will keep telling our stories.
    By Joan Walsh
    September 28, 2018

    lyman alpha blob , April 21, 2020 at 5:46 pm

    Lots of partisan hackery and TDS going around in the last few years in once respectable lefty publications. Mother Jones has gone completely to hell rather than raising any, as was once their mission statement. I haven't read the Nation as much in recent years – I let my subscription lapse a while ago as I found I just couldn't keep up with reading it. Coincidentally I think that was about the time I started reading NC. The Nation has a history of sheepdogging lefties to rally behind bad Dem candidates, which was another reason I didn't feel bad letting my subscription go.

    I do still have my subscription to Harper's but they were getting on my nerves quite a bit to the point I considered cancelling them too. Rebecca Solnit wrote some truly cringe-worthy editorials for them after Trump's election. They seem to have removed her from writing the main editorial so maybe I wasn't the only one who felt she left a little to be desired. I'm quite fond of the newer woman they have doing editorials, Lionel Shriver. She seems like she'd fit in quite well here!

    sierra7 , April 21, 2020 at 3:39 pm

    I left (pun intended) the Nation pub in the dust way back in the 1990's and buried it post 9/11. Used to be a real good alternative press pub 30-40 years ago. Somewhere along the line it lost it's way and joined the wishy-washy "gatekeeper' society of "approved news."
    RIP

    urblintz , April 21, 2020 at 3:33 pm

    Joan Walsh is a partisan fraud and The Nation's worst hire since . forever.

    Olga , April 21, 2020 at 8:09 pm

    The Nation was a sanity saviour back in late 70s and through 1980s; then something happened. Not clear when or what, but I know I let my subscription lapse. Tried again later, but it was never the same. It's mostly unbearable now, except for Stephen Cohen. Walsh has been in the unbearable category for many years now.

    Voltaire Jr. , April 21, 2020 at 10:08 pm

    Subscribed to The Nation and The Progressive in 1971. Read and learned for a decade or so, moved on. Also read every Henry George book I could.

    marku52 , April 21, 2020 at 3:59 pm

    Leonard Pitts just had an editorial in my local paper where he opined that even if Biden had sexually assaulted Reade, it didn't really matter because we had to vote against Trump.

    I wrote this in reply:
    So Leonard Pitts thinks that Biden's alleged sexual attack on Tara Reade isn't disqualifying, even if true. Strange, he didn't think that way about Brett Kavanagh. I didn't want to attack the columnist as a hypocrite without being sure, so I looked it up. Here is what he wrote:

    "It's a confluence of facts that speak painfully and pointedly to just how unseriously America takes men's predations against women. You might disagree, noting that the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked Ford to testify. But if history is any guide, that will prove to be a mere formality – a sop to appearances – before the committee recommends confirmation."

    Looks very much like "Well, It's excusable when our guys do it."

    Not to me.

    ( Here is the link to his first opinion piece)
    https://www.pressherald.com/2018/09/19/leonard-pitts-fairness-statute-has-not-run-out-on-allegations-against-kavanaugh/#

    jo6pac , April 21, 2020 at 4:32 pm

    The late Alexzander Cockburn would be most proud of this take down of joan walsh.

    I don't read the nation and I'm sorry that LP feels that way.

    Thanks Lambert and NC

    I'll be voting Green again without Bernie in the race.

    Reply ↓

    Watt4Bob , April 21, 2020 at 4:34 pm

    So disappointing.

    It was the Nation that helped wake me politically back in the early 1970s with their reporting on the Chilean coup, and later, the murder of Orlando Letelier, and Ronnie Moffet .

    Arguably, the first state-sponsored international terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

    It has has since morphed into cat box liner.

    Am I wrong to blame Katrina vanden Heuvel?

    kirk seidenbecker , April 21, 2020 at 5:43 pm

    Excuse me if this is a repeat –

    https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/04/evaluating-tara-reades-claims

    Reply ↓

    OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL , April 21, 2020 at 5:46 pm

    Always had a crush on K v d Heuvel. (How's that for an opening to a post about misogyny and sexual misconduct)?

    But can't we disqualify Joe! as the craven proponent of the worst neo-lib policies that got us exactly where we are today? Or, in polite company, ask politely whether he is even in a mental state to hand over the keys to the to the family car, let alone the nuclear football?

    Let's take the Id out of IdPol, I don't care if the candidate has green skin and three eyes if the policies they would enact come within smelling distance of benefiting the 99% (or more precisely in Joe's case within hair smelling distance).

    We can use his personal conduct as a component in our judgement but pleeease can we focus on the stuff that would actually affect our lives. In his case, for the absolute worse.

    (Note: I sincerely doubt whether Joe is currently allowed to drive a car, please oh please Mr.God-Yahweh-Mohammed-Buddha-Obama can we not let him drive a nation).

    [Apr 21, 2020] Ukrainegate partially paralyzed Trump administration and probably without it Trump would act quicker and more decisively

    Apr 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    RationalRabbit , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:57 pm GMT

    @Anonymous

    There was nothing illegal in the Ukraine call, therefore no need for the IG to report it. And until someone got a bee under their bonnet, 2nd hand information did not legally qualify as "whistle-blowing" but someone changed the reporting form (a piece of paper not a law of Congress) to hide that little problem.

    Exactly. Yes, Trump put people in in charge who wouldn't try to sabotage his agenda – how awful. Trump also put people in charge to stop the corruption and money laundering of the Obama appointees. For example, EPA funneling money to environmental groups by settling instead of fighting lawsuits and then these environmental groups taking that settlement money and funneling it back to Obama and the Democrats.

    The people elected Trump not any of these technocrats. Philip Giraldi seems to be applauding their subversion of the Republic.

    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:51 pm GMT
    Agreed. Trump is awful.

    But I can't help thinking that it's payback time for those who wasted Americans' time and mental energy on the impeachment circus. Anyone who advanced the "get rid of Trump" agenda should have expected to get canned down the road if the game plan didn't work out.

    the idea of Israeli companies feeding at the trough is stomach-churning. Again, those who do not like this picture maybe should have considered that trying to cut trump off at the knees and breaking a whole bunch of rules to do so might have blowback in the future. And, there doesn't seem to be anyone in congress with the stomach or cojones or even conviction to end the Zionist chumming.

    Who in Congress is standing up for the interests of Americans as against those of rich Israeli entrepreneurs who are taking this country for a ride?

    I don't give a flying eff about anyone who participated in the "Get Trump" theatrics. Or about anyone who gave Obama a pass of the same s -- that Trump does.

    The show is all ending very badly for the American people, and the world.

    Bizarro World Observer , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:03 pm GMT
    @Anonymous True enough, but neocons -- or neo-Trots, which is more accurate -- are not loyal to Trump, or anyone else except each other and Israel. And they are certainly not populists, patriots, or nationalists.

    Trump has hired a bunch of fifth columnists, who will stab him in the back at every opportunity.

    TG , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:03 pm GMT
    Well, yes and no.

    If anything, the greatest failing of Trump was that, after he took office, he surrounded himself with advisors who were opposed to his agenda – and the agenda that the American people elected him to enact.

    It is true, government officials should not be personally loyal to the president. But they should dutifully try to enact his policies, or else resign in protest. To do less is to subvert democracy (or at least, whatever is left of it). Although it must be admitted Trump is increasingly doing the worst of both worlds: surrounding himself with hostile officials for things the people want (like no more pointless foreign wars), and surrounding himself with sycophants when its for crony capitalism

    As far as stopping immigration being unconstitutional, with respect, unconstitutional is whatever 500 billionaires don't want. So you see, separating the alleged children of people illegally crossing the border from their parents is clearly unconstitutional, but separating people convicted of any other crime from their children is perfectly OK. Because the rich want cheap labor.

    But if the rich no longer need massive immigration to lower wages – which may be the case for the near future – then the rich will no longer care about 'immigrants.' Indeed, if illegal immigration hurt the profits of the rich, it would be legal to machine gun migrants at the border – in fact, it would then be unconstitutional not to!

    Sob Sob Sobbity Sob , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:59 pm GMT
    The Obama-Trump continuities you cite are very relevant here. Both heads of state behave as figureheads, knuckling under to permit continued CIA impunity (Obama w.r.t. widespread and systematic torture and murder and aggression, Trump w.r.t. ARCA.) They behave identically in terms of abuse of function and trading in influence, subjecting all regulators to industry control.

    The only difference between Obama and Trump is their inside v. outside strategy. Obama was third-generation dynastic CIA nomenklatura, and after his early misstep of promising to obey the supreme law of the land on torture, Obama took CIA direction without demur, up to and including the crime of aggression of TIMBER SYCAMORE. Trump, by contrast, follows the Nixon template, attempting to replace CIA focal points surrounding him with "loyalists." When Nixon did it, CIA cadres leveled the same charge. But Nixon put Schlesinger in as DCI to extract the crown jewels and shitcan a bunch of the worst criminals. Carter took the outsider's path too.

    Nixon was purged in the CIA's bloodless Watergate coup; Carter was ousted by CIA's October Surprise. We should consider whether COVID-19 collateral damage will be used to discredit Trump, who evidently has less workplace discretion than a McDonald's fry cook. At a key juncture of the outbreak CIA frogmarched Trump through the synthetic crisis of the Soleimani assassination.

    So of course the government is criminal. It was chartered as a criminal enterprise at inception in Sction 202, 73 years ago. In the resulting kleptocracy, IGs perform a superfluous function. And every CIA inspector general is paid specifically to be a criminal scumbag. The IG reviewing CIA's most open-and-shut crime against humanity, its torture gulag, criticized it because it didn't work, intently ignoring the supreme law of the land that says nothing justifies torture.

    So let's not get all verklempt about some IGs. IGs are nothing but a Gehlen-type apparat generating legal pretexts for manifestly illegal acts. Fuck em if they can't take a joke.

    [Apr 21, 2020] A Government Against the People by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... To be sure, Trump has good reason to hate the intelligence and national security community, which utterly rejected his candidacy and plotted to destroy both his campaign and, even after he was elected, his presidency ..."
    "... While it is not unusual for presidents to surround themselves with devoted yes-men, as Trump does with his spectacularly unqualified son-in-law Jared Kushner, his administration is nevertheless unusual in its tendency to apply an absolute loyalty litmus test to nearly everyone surrounding the president ..."
    "... Most damaging to consumer interests, the rot has also affected the so-called regulatory agencies that are supposed to monitor the potentially illegal activities of corporations and industries to protect the public. As University of Chicago economist George Stigler several times predicted, under both Obama and Trump advocates of ostensibly "regulated" corporations have taken over every U.S. federal regulatory agency . The captured U.S. government regulators now represent the interests of the corporations, not the public. This is more like government by a criminal oligarchy rather than of, by and for The People. ..."
    Apr 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    The 24/7 intensified media coverage of the coronavirus story has meant that other news has either been ignored or relegated to the back pages, never to be seen again. The Middle East has been on a boil but coverage of the Trump administration's latest moves against Iran has been so insignificant as to be invisible. Meanwhile closer to home, the declaration by the ubiquitous Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that current president of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro is a drug trafficker did generate somewhat of a ripple, as did dispatch of warships to the Caribbean to intercept the alleged drugs, but that story also died.

    Of more interest perhaps is the tale of the continued purge of government officials, referred to as "draining the swamp," by President Donald Trump as it could conceivably have long-term impact on how policy is shaped in Washington. Prior to the virus partial lockdown, some of the impending shakeup within the intelligence community (IC) and Pentagon were commented on in the media, but developments since that time have been less reported, even when several inspectors-general were removed.

    To be sure, Trump has good reason to hate the intelligence and national security community, which utterly rejected his candidacy and plotted to destroy both his campaign and, even after he was elected, his presidency. Whether one argues that what took place was due to a "Deep state" or Establishment conspiracy or rather just based on personal ambition by key players, the reality was that a number of top officials seem to have forgotten the oaths they swore to the constitution when it came to Donald Trump.

    Be that as it may, beyond the musical chairs that have characterized the senior level appointments in the first three years of the Trump administration, there has been a concerted effort to remove "disloyal" members of the intelligence community, with disloyal generally being the label applied to holdovers from the Bush and Obama administrations. The February appointment of U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard "Ric" Grenell as interim Director of National Intelligence (DNI), a position that he will hold simultaneously with his ambassadorship, has been criticized from all sides due to his inexperience, history of bad judgement and partisanship. The White House is now claiming that he will be replaced by Texas Congressman John Ratcliffe after the interim appointment is completed.

    Criticism of Grenell for his clearly evident deficiencies misses the point, however, as he is not in place to do anything constructive. He has already initiated a purge of federal employees in the White House and national security apparatus considered to be insufficiently loyal, an effort which has been supported by National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Many career officers have been sent back to their home agencies while the new appointees are being drawn from the pool of neoconservatives that proliferated in the George W. Bush administration. Admittedly some prominent neocons like Bill Kristol have disqualified themselves for service with the new regime due to their vitriolic criticism of Trump the candidate, but many others have managed to remain politically viable by keeping their mouths shut during the 2016 campaign. To no one's surprise, many of the new employees being brought in are being carefully vetted to make sure that they are passionate supporters of Israel.

    While it is not unusual for presidents to surround themselves with devoted yes-men, as Trump does with his spectacularly unqualified son-in-law Jared Kushner, his administration is nevertheless unusual in its tendency to apply an absolute loyalty litmus test to nearly everyone surrounding the president, even several layers down into the administration where employees are frequently apolitical. As the Trump White House has not been renowned for its adroit policies and forward thinking, the loss of expertise will be hardly noticeable, but there will certainly be a reduction in challenges to group think while replacing officials in the law enforcement and inspector general communities will mean that there will be no one in a high enough position to impede or check presidential misbehavior. Instead, high officials will be principally tasked with coming up with rationalizations to excuse what the White House does.

    ... ... ...

    Subsequent to the defenestration of Atkinson, Trump went after another inspector general Glenn Fine, who was principal deputy IG at the Pentagon and had been charged with heading the panel of inspectors that would have oversight responsibility to certify the proper implementation of the $2.2 trillion dollar coronavirus relief package. As has been noted in the media, there was particular concern regarding the lack of transparency regarding the $500 billion Exchange Stabilizing Fund (ESF) that had been set aside to make loans to corporations and other large companies while the really urgently needed Small Business Loan allocation has been failing to work at all except for Israeli companies that have lined up for the loans. The risk that the ESF would become a slush fund for companies favored by the White House was real, and several investigative reports observed that Trump business interests might also directly benefit from the way it was drafted.

    Four days after the firing of Atkinson, Fine also was let go to be replaced by the EPA inspector general Sean O'Donnell, who is considered a Trump loyalist. On the previous day the tweeter-in-chief came down on yet another IG, the woman responsible for Health and Human Services Christi Grimm, who had issued a report stating that the her department had found "severe" shortages of virus testing material at hospitals and "widespread" shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers. Trump quipped to reporters "Where did he come from, the inspector general. What's his name?"

    On the following day, Trump unleashed the tweet machine, asking "Why didn't the I.G., who spent 8 years with the Obama Administration (Did she Report on the failed H1N1 Swine Flu debacle where 17,000 people died?), want to talk to the Admirals, Generals, V.P. & others in charge, before doing her report. Another Fake Dossier!"

    A comment about foxes taking over the hen house would not be amiss and one might also note that the swamp is far from drained. A concerted effort is clearly underway to purge anyone from the upper echelons of the U.S. government who in any way contradicts what is coming out of the White House. Inspectors general who are tasked with looking into malfeasance are receiving the message that if they want to stay employed, they have to toe the presidential line, even as it seemingly whimsically changes day by day. And then there is the irony of the heads at major agencies like Environmental Protection now being committed to not enforcing existing environmental regulations at all.

    Most damaging to consumer interests, the rot has also affected the so-called regulatory agencies that are supposed to monitor the potentially illegal activities of corporations and industries to protect the public. As University of Chicago economist George Stigler several times predicted, under both Obama and Trump advocates of ostensibly "regulated" corporations have taken over every U.S. federal regulatory agency . The captured U.S. government regulators now represent the interests of the corporations, not the public. This is more like government by a criminal oligarchy rather than of, by and for The People.

    Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

    Exile , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:28 am GMT

    I yield to no one in my contempt for the fraud-failure of God Emperor Bush III but the author has to be aware that talk of "impeachable" offenses is meaningless in American politics.

    There has never been and never will be an impeachment effort that's not primarily political rather than process-motivated. It's an up-or-down vote based on a partisan head-counting and opportunism and public dissatisfaction. All the Article-this-and-that is Magic Paper Talmudry.

    Trump is a somewhat rogueish, somewhat rival Don and faction-head in the same criminal (((Commission))) that's been running America for well over a century. He's Jon Gotti to their Carlo Gambino, and his gauche nouveaux-elite style offends the sensibilities of the more snobbish Davoise, but he's just angling for a seat at the table and a cut of the spoils, not a return of power to the people.

    Impeachment would serve no purpose but what we've seen so far with Russiagate, etc.. – a sideshow distraction from the real backroom, long-knife action going down, ala the "settling scores" montage in Godfather III.

    Getaclue , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:48 am GMT
    "To be sure, Trump has good reason to hate the intelligence and national security community, which utterly rejected his candidacy and plotted to destroy both his campaign and, even after he was elected, his presidency." -- Yes to this. This is OBVIOUS to all but the dullest rubes or those who are in on it and trying to escape what they tried to do in attempting to over throw the US Government. The rest?

    Once you have this stated– that an actual Coup which was certainly plotted/sprung by the last occupant of the Presidency along with Clinton, Brennan, Comey, and many other NWO Globalists throughout the Government (FBI, CIA, DOJ ) and outside of it (the Globalist NWO MEDIA) the rest is drivel -- they tried to take him out–JFK they used a bullet, here not yet– so to say he shouldn't put in people he absolutely trusts at this time into any position he can? Are you kidding or what? You can't be serious– I've actually had someone try and kill me they were quite serious about it– my reaction after was not anything like what I see you suggesting or mirrored in your "analysis". This is how the CIA "counsels" in response to a murderous Coup -- an attempt to overthrow the duly elected Government?

    How do you overreact to a group of the most powerful people in the World getting together to try to murder you? That's your argument basically– he's over reacting to that? He shouldn't have "Loyalists". He needs to work with these other people -- the ones who want to murder him -- keep some of those "non-Loyalists" on board who time after time have plotted against him in every way possible during the last nearly 4 years?

    You seem to be one strange dude from my life's vantage point any way, what a perspective .Maybe you would actually deal with people of this magnitude trying to destroy you in the way you state but no sane/fairly intelligent person would -- I can't get past you have that sentence in there and then follow it with all the rest -- you seem to live in some alternate reality where when someone tries to murder you the right reaction is to blow it off and work with them– give them another few shots at you– say what? You learned this from your years at the CIA– this is how they train/advise things like this should be dealt with up at Langley? Or is it just wishful thinking on your part that they get another shot at him?

    mark green , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:33 am GMT

    While it is not unusual for presidents to surround themselves with devoted yes-men, as Trump does with his spectacularly unqualified son-in-law Jared Kushner, his administration is nevertheless unusual in its tendency to apply an absolute loyalty litmus test to nearly everyone surrounding the president

    True enough. Trump has also injected into Washington his own nest of swamp creatures and Wall St. bigwigs. However it is also true that Trump has been under unrelenting attack since the day he announced his candidacy. This is not fair. With the possible exception of Nixon, I've never seen a more ruthless campaign by political insiders to demean a public figure.

    But to whom must Trump show ceaseless and attentive loyalty to?–no matter what?

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-days-remembrance-victims-holocaust-2020/

    chris , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:51 am GMT
    @onebornfree Absolutely!

    I can't get too worked up about the firing of the prison guards; I rather enjoy the charade.

    The real problem is that: 'It's the system, stupid!' and no amount of tinkering or puting the 'right' people in these positions will ever do anything more than just changing the illusion that something is being done.

    It reminds me a little of that late Soviet Union film "Burned by the Sun" about Stalin's purges of the criminals that had ridden his coat tails to power. Try as the movie makers did, I could not and would not feel an ounce of sorrow for those (these) scumbags who had wielded immoral, arbitrary, and disproportionate power over their subjects.

    gotmituns , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:17 am GMT
    The government has been against the people for my entire lifetime (I'm an old man now). One of the only glimmers of light in that time, JFK was snuffed out. After all, who did he think he was, trying to stop the elites from having their war in Vietnam?
    Z-man , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:24 am GMT
    He (Trump) should have purged all of the Obama appointees on day one.
    The Vindman twins are a perfect example of the Deep State.
    While I can understand your loathing of Trump's middle East policies, I do also, what he has blatantley done vis a vis the Zionist Entity is very little different than what slick Obama did under the table, outside of the Iran deal.
    And to tell you the truth, as much as I loathe Israel the Iran deal was definitely flawed and should have been more advantageous to America and the West. Iran should have seen the advantages of totally relinquishing nuclear weapons even with mad Zionists in their neighborhood. They could have still kept their ballistic missiles, sans nuclear tips.
    Realist , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:31 am GMT
    @Getaclue The idea that Trump is fighting the Deep State is ludacris this is a charade if the Deep State didn't want Trump to be President he wouldn't be. Trump is a Deep State minion. No matter the existential threat to the US the 1% get richer and the 99% get poorer.
    Realist , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:40 am GMT
    @Z-man

    He (Trump) should have purged all of the Obama appointees on day one.

    That supposes that Trump is not a Deep Stater as was Obama this is a poor supposition.

    Iran should have seen the advantages of totally relinquishing nuclear weapons even with mad Zionists in their neighborhood. They could have still kept their ballistic missiles, sans nuclear tips.

    Ballistic missiles, sans nuclear tips are useless. Did anybody care when North Korea had ballistic missiles before they had something worthwhile to put on the tip? Hell no.

    fatmanscoop , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:29 pm GMT
    Trump has had two open coup attempts in three years, and a constant barrage of leaks etc. His purges are clearly at least three years too late.

    Also, to an outsider, it's strange how some right-wing American journalists write in a way which indicates that they have faith in the due process, checks-and-balances etc afforded by the American system. I don't understand how any American right-winger could maintain their faith in the U.S. political system, it seems corrupt approaching the point that it is beyond-repair.

    A123 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:51 pm GMT
    Barack Hussein was Against The People

    Trump's MAGA For The People efforts, must take steps to undo the damage done by the prior criminal admistration.

    Here is an detailed explanation of how Barack Hussein intentionally undermined the rule of law:(1)

    Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it. The DOJ is telling the court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains "sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause" to approve the application. The DOJ is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.

    However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:

    DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority. That's the motive.

    In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller's poisoned fruit.

    If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there's a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.

    I am not sure why Giraldi is defending Barack Hussein and Hillary Clinton's behaviour & staff choices. All rational human beings see the damage that Hillary created at the State Department.

    PEACE
    _______

    (1) https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/17/declassified-doj-letter-to-fisa-court-highlights-severe-institutional-corruption-doj-blames-fbi-for-spygate/

    [Apr 21, 2020] American Pravda Our Coronavirus Catastrophe as Biowarfare Blowback by Ron Unz

    Apr 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-coronavirus-catastrophe-as-biowarfare-blowback/ The Unz Review - Mobile The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media User Settings: Version? Social Media? Read Aloud w/ Show Word Counts No Video Autoplay No Infinite Scrolling
    Save Cancel

    Home
    About
    Settings Foreign Policy
    Race/Ethnicity
    Culture/Society Ideology
    Economics
    Arts/Letters Science
    History
    Forum Summary
    Bloggers All Bloggers Steve Sailer's iSteve Blog Anatoly Karlin's Russian Reaction Blog Paul Kersey's SBPDL Blog The Audacious Epigone's HBD Blog Selected Tweeters
    Columnists All Columnists Ron Unz Gilad Atzmon Robert Bonomo Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Stephen F. Cohen Jonathan Cook John Derbyshire Linh Dinh Guillaume Durocher Pepe Escobar Eamonn Fingleton Norman Finkelstein Philip Giraldi Paul Gottfried C.J. Hopkins Michael Hudson E. Michael Jones JayMan Trevor Lynch Michelle Malkin Eric Margolis Ilana Mercer Ron Paul James Petras Bonnie Faulkner Ted Rall Fred Reed Paul Craig Roberts The Saker Eric Striker Kevin Barrett Israel Shamir James Thompson Andre Vltchek Whitney Webb Mike Whitney Archived Columns Razib Khan Gustavo Arellano Alexander Cockburn Tom Engelhardt Sam Francis Peter Frost W. Patrick Lang Peter Lee Andrew Napolitano Robert Scheer Joseph Sobran Books
    Videos
    Podcasts PDF Archives
    Banned Books
    Announcements Articles
    Authors
    Comments More... Most Popular Current Digest College Data Summary
    Categories
    Bloggers Columnists
    Articles
    Authors Settings
    About
    More... Main Features Masthead Announcements Search Books Forum Podcasts Videos Periodicals Most Popular Current Digest Comment Archives College Data ← The Government Employee Who May Have Sa... Blogview Ron Unz Archive Blogview Ron Unz Archive American Pravda: Our Coronavirus Catastrophe as Biowarfare Blowback? Ron Unz April 21, 2020 7,400 Words 222 Comments Reply Email This Page to Someone
    Remember My Information


    => List of Bookmarks ◄ ► ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Bookmark Toggle All ToC ▲ ▼ Add to Library Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

    Nearly 30,000 Americans have died from the coronavirus during the last two weeks, and by some estimates this is a substantial under-count, while the death-toll continues to rapidly mount. Meanwhile, measures to control the spread of this deadly infection have already cost 22 million Americans their jobs, an unprecedented economic collapse that has pushed our unemployment rates to Great Depression levels. Our country is facing a crisis as grave as almost any in our national history.

    For many weeks President Trump and his political allies had regularly dismissed or minimized this terrible health threat, and suddenly now faced with such a manifest disaster, they have naturally begun seeking other culprits to blame.

    The obvious choice is China, where the global epidemic first began in late 2019. Over the last week or two our media has been increasingly filled with accusations that the dishonesty and incompetence of the Chinese government played a major role in producing our own health catastrophe.

    Even more serious charges are also being raised, with senior government officials informing the media that they suspect that the Covid-19 virus was developed in a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan and then carelessly released upon a vulnerable world. Such "conspiracy theories" were once confined to the extreme political fringe of the Internet, but they are now found in the respectable pages of my morning New York Times and Wall Street Journal.

    Whether plausible or not, such accusations carry the gravest international implications, and there are growing demands that China financially compensate our country for its trillions of dollars in economic losses. A new global Cold War along both political and economic lines may soon be at hand.

    I have no personal expertise in biowarfare technology, nor access to the secret American intelligence reports that seem to have been taken seriously by our most elite national newspapers. But I do think that a careful exploration of previous Sino-American clashes over the last couple of decades may provide some useful insight into the relative credibility of those two governments as well as that of our own media.

    During the late 1990s, America seemed to reach the peak of its global power and prosperity, basking in the aftermath of its historic victory in the long Cold War, while ordinary Americans greatly benefited from the record-long economic expansion of that decade. A huge Tech Boom was at its height, and Islamic terrorism seemed a vague and distant thing, almost entirely confined to Hollywood movies. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the possibility of large scale war seemed to have dissipated so political leaders boasted of the "peace dividend" that citizens were starting to enjoy as our huge military forces, built up over nearly a half-century, were downsized amid sweeping cuts in the bloated defense budget. America was finally returning to a regular peacetime economy, with the benefits apparent to everyone.

    At the time, I was overwhelmingly focused on domestic political issues, so I only paid slight attention to our one small military operation of that period, the 1999 NATO air war against Serbia, intended to safeguard the Kosovo Albanians from ethnic cleansing and massacre, a Clinton Administration project that I fully endorsed.

    Although our limited bombing campaign seemed quite successful and soon forced the Serbs to the bargaining table, the short war did include one very embarrassing mishap. The use of old maps had led to a targeting error that caused one of our smart bombs to accidentally strike the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, killing three members of its delegation and wounding dozens more. The Chinese were outraged by this incident, and their propaganda organs began claiming that the attack had been deliberate, a reckless accusation that obviously made no logical sense.

    In those days I watched the PBS Newshour every night, and was I shocked to see their U.S. Ambassador raise those absurd charges with host Jim Lehrer, whose disbelief matched my own. But when I considered that the Chinese government was still stubbornly denying the reality of its massacre of the protesting students in Tiananmen Square a decade earlier, I concluded that unreasonable behavior by PRC officials was only to be expected. Indeed, there was even some speculation that China was cynically milking the unfortunate accident for domestic reasons, hoping to stoke the sort of jingoist anti-Americanism among the Chinese people that would finally help bind the social wounds of that 1989 outrage.

    Such at least were my thoughts on that matter more than two decades ago. But in the years that followed, my understanding of the world and of many pivotal events of modern history underwent the sweeping transformations that I have described in my American Pravda series . And some of my 1990s assumptions were among them.

    Consider, for example, the Tiananmen Square Massacre, which every June 6th still evokes an annual wave of harsh condemnations in the news and opinion pages of our leading national newspapers. I had never originally doubted those facts, but a year or two ago I happened to come across a short article by journalist Jay Matthews entitled "The Myth of Tiananmen" that completely upended that apparent reality.

    According to Matthews the infamous massacre had likely never happened, but was merely a media artifact produced by confused Western reporters and dishonest propaganda, a mistaken belief that had quickly become embedded in our standard media storyline, endlessly repeated by so many ignorant journalists that they all eventually believed it to be true. Instead, as near as could be determined, the protesting students had all left Tiananmen Square peacefully, just as the Chinese government had always maintained. Indeed, leading newspapers such as the New York Times and the Washington Post had occasionally acknowledged these facts over the years, but usually buried those scanty admissions so deep in their stories that few ever noticed. Meanwhile, the bulk of the mainstream media had fallen for an apparent hoax.

    ORDER IT NOW

    Matthews himself had been the Beijing Bureau Chief of the Washington Post , personally covering the protests at the time, and his article appeared in the Columbia Journalism Review , our most prestigious venue for media criticism. This authoritative analysis containing such explosive conclusions was first published in 1998, and I find it difficult to believe that many reporters or editors covering China have remained ignorant of this information, yet the impact has been absolutely nil. For over twenty years virtually every mainstream media account I have read has continued to promote the Tiananmen Square Massacre Hoax, usually implicitly but sometimes explicitly.

    Even more remarkable were the discoveries I made regarding our supposedly accidental bombing of the Chinese Embassy in 1999. Not long after launching this website, I added former Asia Times contributor Peter Lee as a columnist, incorporating his China Matters blogsite archives that stretched back for a decade. He soon published a 7,000 word article on the Belgrade Embassy bombing, representing a compilation of material already contained in a half-dozen previous pieces he'd written on that subject from 2007 onward. To my considerable surprise, he provided a great deal of persuasive evidence that the American attack on the Chinese embassy had indeed been deliberate, just as China had always claimed.

    According to Lee, Beijing had allowed its embassy to be used as a site for secure radio transmission facilities by the Serbian military, whose own communications network was a primary target of NATO airstrikes. Meanwhile, Serbian air defenses had shot down an advanced American F-117A fighter, whose top-secret stealth technology was a crucial U.S. military secret. Portions of that enormously valuable wreckage were carefully gathered by the grateful Serbs, who delivered it to the Chinese for temporary storage at their embassy prior to transport back home. This vital technological acquisition later allowed China to deploy its own J20 stealth fighter in early 2011, many years sooner than American military analysts had believed possible.

    Based upon this analysis, Lee argued that the Chinese embassy was attacked in order to destroy the Serbian retransmission facilities located there, while punishing the Chinese for allowing such use. There were also widespread rumors in China that another motive had been an unsuccessful attempt to destroy the stealth debris stored within. Later Congressional testimony revealed that the among all the hundreds of NATO airstrikes, the attack on the Chinese embassy was the only one directly ordered by the CIA, a highly-suspicious detail.

    I was only slightly familiar with Lee's work, and under normal circumstances I would have been very cautious in accepting his remarkable claims against the contrary position universally held by all our own elite media outlets. But the sources he cited completely shifted that balance.

    Although the American media dominates the English-language world, many British publications also possess a strong global reputation, and since they are often much less in thrall to our own national security state, they have sometimes covered important stories that were ignored here. And in this case, the Sunday Observer published a remarkable expose in October 1999, citing several NATO military and intelligence sources who fully confirmed the deliberate nature of the American bombing of the Chinese embassy, with a US colonel even reportedly boasting that their smartbomb had hit the exact room intended.

    This important story was immediately summarized in the Guardian , a sister publication, and also covered by the rival Times of London and many of the world's other most prestigious publications, but encountered an absolute wall of silence in our own country. Such a bizarre divergence on a story of global strategic importance -- a deliberate and deadly US attack against Chinese diplomatic territory -- drew the attention of FAIR, a leading American media watchdog group, which published an initial critique and a subsequent follow-up . These two pieces totaled some 3,000 words, and effectively summarized both the overwhelming evidence of the facts and also the heavy international coverage, while reporting the weak excuses made by top American editors to explain their continuing silence. Based upon these articles, I consider the matter settled.

    Few Americans remember our 1999 attack upon the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, and if not for the annual waving of a bloody June 6th flag by our ignorant and disingenuous media, the "Tiananmen Square Massacre" would also have long since faded from memory. Neither of these events has much direct importance today, at least for our own citizens. But the broader media implications of these examples do seem quite significant.

    These incidents represented two of the most serious flashpoints between the Chinese and American governments during the last thirty-odd years. In both cases the claims of the Chinese government were entirely correct, although they were denied by our own top political leaders and dismissed or ridiculed by virtually our entire mainstream media. Moreover, within a few months or a year the true facts became known to many journalists, even being reported in fully respectable venues. But that reality was still completely ignored and suppressed for decades, so that today almost no American whose information comes from our regular media would even be aware of it. Indeed, since many younger journalists draw their knowledge of the world from these same elite media sources, I suspect that many of them have never learned what their predecessors knew but dared not mention.

    Most leading Chinese media outlets are owned or controlled by the Chinese government, and they tend to broadly follow the government line. Leading American media outlets have a corporate ownership structure and often boast of their fierce independence; but on many crucial matters, I think the actual reality is not so very different from that in China.

    I tend to doubt that Chinese leaders have any overwhelming commitment to the truth, and the reasons for their greater veracity are probably practical ones. American news and entertainment completely dominate the global media landscape and they face no significant domestic rival. So China recognizes that it is vastly outmatched in any propaganda conflict, and as the far weaker party must necessarily try to stick closer to the truth, lest its lies be immediately exposed. Meanwhile, America's overwhelming control over global information may inspire considerable hubris, with the government sometimes promoting the most outrageous and ridiculous falsehoods in the confident belief that a supportive American media will cover for any mistakes.

    These considerations should be kept in mind as we attempt to sift the accounts of our often unreliable and dishonest media in hopes of extracting the true circumstances of the current coronavirus epidemic. Unlike careful historical studies, we are working in real-time and our analysis is greatly hindered by the ongoing fog of war, so that any conclusions are necessarily very preliminary ones. But given the high stakes, such an attempt seems warranted.

    When my morning newspapers first began mentioning the appearance of a mysterious new illness in China during mid-January, I paid little attention, absorbed as I was in the aftermath of our sudden assassination of Iran's top military leader and the dangerous possibility of a yet another Middle Eastern war. But the reports persisted and grew, with deaths occurring and evidence growing that the viral disease could be transmitted between humans. China's early conventional efforts seemed unsuccessful in halting the spread of the disease.

    Then on Jan. 23rd and after only 17 deaths, the Chinese government took the astonishing step of locking down and quarantining the entire 11 million inhabitants of the city of Wuhan, a story that drew worldwide attention. They soon extended this policy to the 60 million Chinese of Hubei province, and not longer afterward shut down their entire national economy and confined 700 million Chinese to their homes, a public health measure probably a thousand times larger than anything previously undertaken in human history. So either the China's leadership had suddenly gone insane, or they regarded this new virus as an absolutely deadly national threat, one that needed to be controlled at any possible cost.

    Given these dramatic Chinese actions and the international headlines that they generated, the current accusations by Trump Administration officials that China had attempted to minimize or conceal the serious nature of the disease outbreak is so ludicrous as to defy rationality. In any event, the record shows that on December 31st, the Chinese had already alerted the World Health Organization to the strange new illness, and Chinese scientists published the entire genome of the virus on Jan. 12th, allowing diagnostic tests to be produced worldwide.

    Unlike other nations, China had received no advance warning of the nature or existence of the deadly new disease, and therefore faced unique obstacles. But their government implemented public health control measures unprecedented in the history of the world and managed to almost completely eradicate the disease with merely the loss of a few thousand lives. Meanwhile, many other Western countries such as the US, Italy, Spain, France, and Britain dawdled for months and ignored the potential threat, and have now suffered well over 100,000 dead as a consequence, with the toll still rapidly mounting. For any of these nations or their media organs to criticize China for its ineffectiveness or slow response represents an absolute inversion of reality.

    Some governments took full advantage of the early warning and scientific information provided by China. Although nearby East Asian nations such as South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore had been at greatest risk and were among the first infected, their competent and energetic responses allowed them to almost completely suppress any major outbreak, and they have suffered minimal fatalities. But America and several European countries avoiding adopting these same early measures such as widespread testing, quarantine, and contact-tracing, and have paid a terrible price for their insouciance.

    A few weeks ago British Prime Minister Boris Johnson boldly declared that his own disease strategy for Britain was based upon rapidly achieving "herd immunity" -- essentially encouraging the bulk of his citizens to become infected -- then quickly backed away after his desperate advisors recognized that the result might entail a million or more British deaths.

    By any reasonable measure, the response to this global health crisis by China and most East Asian countries has been absolutely exemplary, while that of many Western countries has been equally disastrous. Maintaining reasonable public health has been a basic function of governments since the days of the city-states of Sumeria, and the sheer and total incompetence of America and most of its European vassals has been breathtaking. If the Western media attempts to pretend otherwise, it will permanently forfeit whatever remaining international credibility it still possesses.

    I do not think these particular facts are much disputed except among the most blinkered partisans, and the Trump Administration probably recognizes the hopelessness of arguing otherwise. This probably explains its recent shift towards a far more explosive and controversial narrative, namely claiming that Covid-19 may have been the product of Chinese research into deadly viruses at a Wuhan laboratory, which suggests that the blood of hundreds of thousands or millions of victims around the world will be on Chinese hands. Dramatic accusations backed by overwhelming international media power may deeply resonate across the globe.

    News reports appearing in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times have been reasonably consistent. Senior Trump Administration officials have pointed to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a leading Chinese biolab, as the possible source of the infection, with the deadly virus having been accidentally released, subsequently spreading first throughout China and later worldwide. Trump himself has publicly voiced similar suspicions, as did Secretary of State and former CIA Director Mike Pompeo in a FoxNews interview. Private lawsuits against China in the multi-trillion-dollar range have already been filed by rightwing activists and Republican senators Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham have raised similar governmental demands.

    I obviously have no personal access to the classified intelligence reports that have been the basis of these charges by Trump, Pompeo, and other top administration officials. But in reading these recent news accounts, I noticed something rather odd.

    ORDER IT NOW

    Back in January, few Americans were paying much attention to the early reports of an unusual disease outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan, which was hardly a household name. Instead, overwhelming political attention was focused on the battle over Trump's impeachment and the aftermath of our dangerous military confrontation with Iran. But towards the end of that month, I discovered that the fringes of the Internet were awash with claims that the disease was caused by a Chinese bioweapon accidentally released from that same Wuhan laboratory, with former Trump advisor Steve Bannon and ZeroHedge , a popular right-wing conspiracy-website, playing leading roles in advancing the theory. Indeed, the stories became so widespread in those ideological circles that Sen. Tom Cotton, a leading Republican Neocon, began promoting them on Twitter and FoxNews, thereby provoking an article in the NYT on those "fringe conspiracy theories."

    I suspect that it may be more than purely coincidental that the biowarfare theories which erupted in such concerted fashion on small political websites and Social Media accounts back in January so closely match those now publicly advocated by top Trump Administration officials and supposedly based upon our most secure intelligence sources. Perhaps a few intrepid citizen-activists managed to replicate the findings of our multi-billion-dollar intelligence apparatus, and did so in days while the latter required weeks or months. But a more likely scenario is that the wave of January speculation was driven by private leaks and "guidance" provided by exactly the same elements that today are very publicly leveling similar charges in the elite media. Initially promoting controversial theories in less mainstream outlets has long been a fairly standard intelligence practice.

    Regardless of the origins of the idea, does it seem plausible that the coronavirus outbreak might have originated as an accidental leak from that Chinese laboratory? I am not privy to the security procedures of Chinese government facilities, but applying a little common sense may shed some light on that question.

    Although the coronavirus is only moderately lethal, apparently having a fatality rate of 1% or less, it is extremely contagious, including during an extended pre-symptomatic period and also among asymptomatic carriers. Thus, portions of the US and Europe are now suffering heavy casualties, while the policies adopted to control the spread have devastated their national economies. Although the virus is unlikely to kill more than a small sliver of our population, we have seen to our dismay how a major outbreak can so easily wreck our entire economic life.

    During January, the journalists reporting on China's mushrooming health crisis regularly emphasized that the mysterious new viral outbreak had occurred at the worst possible place and time, appearing in the major transport hub of Wuhan just prior to the Lunar New Year holiday, when hundreds of millions of Chinese would normally travel to their distant family homes for the celebration, thereby potentially spreading the disease to all parts of the country and producing a permanent, uncontrollable epidemic. The Chinese government avoided that grim fate by the unprecedented decision to shut down its entire national economy and confine 700 million Chinese to their own homes for many weeks. But the outcome seems to have been a very near thing, and if Wuhan had remained open for just a few days longer, China might easily have suffered long-term economic and social devastation.

    The timing of an accidental laboratory release would obviously be entirely random. Yet the outbreak seems to have begun during the precise period of time most likely to damage China, the worst possible ten-day or perhaps thirty-day window. As I noted in January, I saw no solid evidence that the coronavirus was a bioweapon, but if it were, the timing of the release seemed very unlikely to have been accidental.

    If the virus was released intentionally, the context and motive for such a biowarfare attack against China could not be more obvious. Although our disingenuous media continues to pretend otherwise, the size of China's economy surpassed that of our own several years ago, and has continued to grow much more rapidly. Chinese companies have also taken the lead in several crucial technologies, with Huawei becoming the world's leading telecommunications equipment manufacturer and dominating the important 5G market. China's sweeping Belt and Road Initiative has threatened to reorient global trade around an interconnected Eurasian landmass, greatly diminishing the leverage of America's own control over the seas. I have closely followed China for over forty years, and the trend-lines have never been more apparent. Back in 2012, I published an article bearing the provocative title "China's Rise, America's Fall?" and since then I have seen no reason to reassess my verdict.

    China's Rise, America's Fall Which superpower is more threatened by its "extractive elites"? Ron Unz • The American Conservative, April 17, 2012 • 7,000 Words

    For three generations following the end of World War II, America had stood as the world's supreme economic and technological power, while the collapse of the Soviet Union thirty years ago left us as the sole remaining superpower, facing no conceivable military rival. A growing sense that we were rapidly losing that unchallenged position had certainly inspired the anti-China rhetoric of many senior figures in the Trump Administration, who launched a major trade war soon after coming into office. The increasing misery and growing impoverishment of large sections of the American population naturally left these voters searching for a convenient scapegoat, and the prosperous, rising Chinese made a perfect target.

    Despite America's growing economic conflict with China over the last couple of years, I had never considered the possibility that matters might take a military turn. The Chinese had long ago deployed advanced intermediate range missiles that many believed could easily sink our carriers in the region, and they had also generally improved their conventional military deterrent. Moreover, China was on quite good terms with Russia, which itself had been the target of intense American hostility for several years; and Russia's new suite of revolutionary hypersonic missiles had drastically reduced any American strategic advantage. Thus, a conventional war against China seemed an absolutely hopeless undertaking, while China's outstanding businessmen and engineers were steadily gaining ground against America's decaying and heavily-financialized economic system.

    Under these difficult circumstances, an American biowarfare attack against China might have seemed the only remaining card to play in hopes of maintaining American supremacy. Plausible deniability would minimize the risk of any direct Chinese retaliation, and if successful, the terrible blow inflicted to China's economy would set it back for many years, perhaps even destabilizing its social and political system. Using alternative media to immediately promote theories that the coronavirus outbreak was the result of a leak from a Chinese biowarfare lab was a natural means of preempting any later Chinese accusations along similar lines, thereby allowing America to win the international propaganda war before China had even begun to play.

    A decision by elements of our national security establishment to wage biological warfare in hopes of maintaining American world power would certainly have been an extremely reckless act, but extreme recklessness has become a regular aspect of American behavior since 2001, especially under the Trump Administration. Just a year earlier we had kidnapped the daughter of Huawei's founder and chairman, who also served as CFO and ranked as one of China's most top executives, while at the beginning of January we suddenly assassinated Iran's top military leader.

    These were the thoughts that entered my mind during the last week of January once I discovered the widely circulating theories suggesting that China's massive disease epidemic had been the self-inflicted consequence of its own biowarfare research. I saw no solid evidence that the coronavirus was a bioweapon, but if it were, China was surely the innocent victim of the attack, presumably carried out by elements of the American national security establishment.

    Soon afterward, someone brought to my attention a very long article by an American ex-pat living in China who called himself "Metallicman" and held a wide range of eccentric and implausible beliefs. I have long recognized that flawed individuals can often serve as the vessels of important information otherwise unavailable, and this case constituted a perfect example. His piece denounced the outbreak as a likely American biowarfare attack, and provided a great wealth of factual material I had not previously considered. Since he authorized republication elsewhere I did so, and his 15,000 word analysis , although somewhat raw and unpolished, began attracting an enormous amount of readership on our website, probably being one of the very first English-language pieces to suggest that the mysterious new disease was an American bioweapon. Many of his arguments appeared doubtful to me or have been obviated by later developments, but several seemed quite telling.

    He pointed out that during the previous two years, the Chinese economy had already suffered serious blows from other mysterious new diseases, although these had targeted farm animals rather than people. During 2018 a new Avian Flu virus had swept the country, eliminating large portions of China's poultry industry, and during 2019 the Swine Flu viral epidemic had devastated China's pig farms, destroying 40% of the nation's primary domestic source of meat, with widespread claims that the latter disease was being spread by mysterious small drones. My morning newspapers had hardly ignored these important business stories, noting that the sudden collapse of much of China's domestic food production might prove a huge boon to American farm exports at the height of our trade conflict, but I had never considered the obvious implications. So for three years in a row, China had been severely impacted by strange new viral diseases, though only the most recent had been deadly to humans. This evidence was merely circumstantial, but the pattern seemed highly suspicious.

    The writer also noted that shortly before the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, that city had hosted 300 visiting American military officers, who came to participate in the 2019 Military World Games , an absolutely remarkable coincidence of timing. As I pointed out at the time, how would Americans react if 300 Chinese military officers had paid an extended visit to Chicago, and soon afterward a mysterious and deadly epidemic had suddenly broken out in that city? Once again, the evidence was merely circumstantial but certainly raised dark suspicions.

    Scientific investigation of the coronavirus had already pointed to its origins in a bat virus, leading to widespread media speculation that bats sold as food in the Wuhan open markets had been the original disease vector. Meanwhile, the orchestrated waves of anti-China accusations had emphasized Chinese laboratory research on that same viral source. But we soon published a lengthy article by investigative journalist Whitney Webb providing copious evidence of America's own enormous biowarfare research efforts, which had similarly focused for years on bat viruses. Webb was then associated with MintPress News , but that publication had strangely declined to publish her important piece, perhaps skittish about the grave suspicions it directed towards the US government on so momentous an issue. So without the benefit of our platform, her major contribution to the public debate might have attracted relatively little readership.

    Around the same time, I noted another extremely strange coincidence that failed to attract any interest from our somnolent national media. Although his name had meant nothing to me, in late January my morning newspapers carried major stories on the sudden arrest of Prof. Charles Lieber, one of Harvard University's top scientists and Chairman of its Chemistry Department, sometimes characterized as a potential future Nobel Laureate.

    The circumstances of that case seemed utterly bizarre to me. Like numerous other prominent American academics, Lieber had had decades of close research ties with China, holding joint appointments and receiving substantial funding for his work. But now he was accused of financial reporting violations in the disclosure portions of his government grant applications -- the most obscure sort of offense -- and on the basis of those accusations, he was seized by the FBI in an early-morning raid on his suburban Lexington home and dragged off in shackles, potentially facing years of federal imprisonment.

    Such government action against an academic seemed almost without precedent. During the height of the Cold War, numerous American scientists and technicians were rightfully accused of having stolen our nuclear weapons secrets for delivery to Stalin, yet I had never heard of any of them treated in so harsh a manner, let alone a scholar of Prof. Lieber's stature, who was merely charged with technical disclosure violations. Indeed, this incident recalled accounts of NKVD raids during the Soviet purges of the 1930s.

    ORDER IT NOW

    Although Lieber was described as a chemistry professor, a few seconds of Googling revealed that some of his most important work had been in virology, including technology for the detection of viruses. So a massive and deadly new viral epidemic had broken out in China and almost simultaneously, a top American scholar with close Chinese ties and expertise in viruses was suddenly arrested by the federal government, yet no one in the media expressed any curiosity at a possible connection between these two events.

    I think we can safely assume that Lieber's arrest by the FBI had been prompted by the concurrent coronavirus epidemic, but anything more is mere speculation. Those now accusing China of having created the coronavirus might surely suggest that our intelligence agencies discovered that the Harvard professor had been personally involved with that deadly research. But I think a far more likely possibility is that Lieber began to wonder whether the epidemic in China might not be the result of an American biowarfare attack, and was perhaps a little too free in voicing his suspicions, thereby drawing the wrath of our national security establishment. Inflicting such extremely harsh treatment upon a top Harvard scientist would greatly intimidate all of his lesser colleagues elsewhere, who would surely now think twice before broaching certain controversial theories to any journalist.

    By the end of January, our webzine had published a dozen articles and posts on the coronavirus outbreak, then added many more by the middle of February. These pieces totaled tens of thousands of words and attracted a half million words of comments, probably representing the primary English-language source for a particular perspective on the deadly epidemic, with this material eventually drawing many hundreds of thousands of pageviews. A few weeks later, the Chinese government began gingerly raising the possibility that the coronavirus may have been brought to Wuhan by the 300 American military officers visiting that city, and was fiercely attacked by the Trump Administration for spreading anti-American propaganda. But I strongly suspect that the Chinese had gotten that idea from our own publication.

    As the coronavirus gradually began to spread beyond China's own borders, another development occurred that greatly multiplied my suspicions. Most of these early cases had occurred exactly where one might expect, among the East Asian countries bordering China. But by late February Iran had become the second epicenter of the global outbreak. Even more surprisingly, its political elites had been especially hard-hit, with a full 10% of the entire Iranian parliament soon infected and at least a dozen of its officials and politicians dying of the disease, including some who were quite senior . Indeed, Neocon activists on Twitter began gleefully noting that their hatred Iranian enemies were now dropping like flies.

    Let us consider the implications of these facts. Across the entire world the only political elites that have yet suffered any significant human losses have been those of Iran, and they died at a very early stage, before significant outbreaks had even occurred almost anywhere else in the world outside China. Thus, we have America assassinating Iran's top military commander on Jan. 2nd and then just a few weeks later large portions of the Iranian ruling elites became infected by a mysterious and deadly new virus, with many of them soon dying as a consequence. Could any rational individual possibly regard this as a mere coincidence?

    Biological warfare is a highly technical subject, and those possessing such expertise are unlikely to candidly report their classified research activities in the pages of our major newspapers, perhaps even less so after Prof. Lieber was dragged off to prison in chains. My own knowledge is nil. But in mid-March I came across several extremely long and detailed comments on the coronavirus outbreak that had been posted on a small website by an individual calling himself "OldMicrobiologist" and who claimed to be a retired forty-year veteran of American biodefense. The style and details of his material struck me as quite credible, and after a little further investigation I concluded that there was a high likelihood his background was exactly as he had described. I made arrangements to republish his comments in the form of a 3,400 word article , which soon attracted a great deal of traffic and 80,000 words of further comments.

    Although the writer emphasized the lack of any hard evidence, he said that his experience led him to strongly suspect that the coronavirus outbreak was indeed an American biowarfare attack against China, probably carried out by agents brought into that country under cover of the Military Games held at Wuhan in late October, the sort of sabotage operation our intelligence agencies had sometimes undertaken elsewhere. One important point he made was that high lethality was often counter-productive in a bioweapon since debilitating or hospitalizing large numbers of individuals may impose far greater economic costs on a country than a biological agent which simply inflicts an equal number of deaths. In his words "a high communicability, low lethality disease is perfect for ruining an economy," suggesting that the apparent characteristics of the coronavirus were close to optimal in this regard. Those so interested should read his analysis and judge for themselves his possible credibility and persuasiveness.

    Was coronavirus a Biowarfare Attack Against China? OldMicrobiologist • March 13, 2020 • 3,400 Words

    One intriguing aspect of the situation was that almost from the first moment that reports of the strange new epidemic in China reached the international media, a large and orchestrated campaign had been launched on numerous websites and Social Media platforms to identify the cause as a Chinese bioweapon carelessly released in its own country. Meanwhile, the far more plausible hypothesis that China was the victim rather than the perpetrator had received virtually no organized support anywhere, and only began to take shape as I gradually located and republished relevant material, usually drawn from very obscure quarters and often anonymously authored. So it seemed that only the side hostile to China was waging an active information war. The outbreak of the disease and the nearly simultaneous launch of such a major propaganda campaign may not necessarily prove that an actual biowarfare attack had occurred, but I do think it tends to support such a theory.

    When considering the hypothesis of an American biowarfare attack, certain natural objections come to mind. The major drawback to biological warfare has always been the obvious fact that the self-replicating agents employed will not respect national borders, thus raising the serious risk that the disease might eventually return to the land of its origin and inflict substantial casualties. For this reason, it seems very doubtful that any rational and half-competent American leadership would have unleashed the coronavirus against China.

    But as we see absolutely demonstrated in our daily news headlines, America's current government is grotesquely and manifestly incompetent , more incompetent than one could almost possibly imagine, with tens of thousands of Americans having now already paid with their lives for such extreme incompetence. Rationality and competence are obviously nowhere to be found among the Deep State Neocons that President Donald Trump has appointed to so many crucial positions throughout our national security apparatus.

    Moreover, the extremely lackadaisical notion that a massive coronavirus outbreak in China would never spread back to America might have seemed plausible to individuals who carelessly assumed that past historical analogies would continue to apply. As I wrote a few weeks ago:

    Reasonable people have suggested that if the coronavirus was a bioweapon deployed by elements of the American national security apparatus against China (and Iran), it's difficult to imagine why the they didn't assume it would naturally leak back in the US and start a huge pandemic here, as is currently happening.

    The most obvious answer is that they were stupid and incompetent, but here's another point to consider

    In late 2002 there was the outbreak of SARS in China, a related virus but that was far more deadly and somewhat different in other characteristics. The virus killed hundreds of Chinese and spread into a few other countries before it was controlled and stamped out. The impact on the US and Europe was negligible, with just a small scattering of cases and only a death or two.

    So if American biowarfare analysts were considering a coronavirus attack against China, isn't it quite possible they would have said to themselves that since SARS never significantly leaked back into the US or Europe, we'd similarly remain insulated from the coronavirus? Obviously, such an analysis was foolish and mistaken, but would it have seemed so implausible at the time?

    As some must have surely noticed, I have deliberately avoided investigating any of the scientific details of the coronavirus. In principle, an objective and accurate analysis of the characteristics and structure of the virus might help suggest whether it was entirely natural or rather the product of a research laboratory, and in the latter case, perhaps whether the likely source was China, America, or some third country.

    But we are dealing with a cataclysmic world event and those questions obviously have enormous political ramifications, so the entire subject is shrouded by a thick fog of complex propaganda, with numerous conflicting claims being advanced by interested parties. I have no background in microbiology let alone biological warfare, so I would be hopelessly adrift in evaluating such conflicting scientific and technical claims. I suspect that this is equally true of the overwhelming majority of other observers as well, although committed partisans are loathe to admit that fact, and will eagerly seize upon any scientific argument that supports their preferred position while rejecting those that contradict it.

    Therefore, by necessity, my own focus is on evidence that can at least be understood by every layman, if not necessarily always accepted. And I believe that the simple juxtaposition of several recent disclosures in the mainstream media leads to a rather telling conclusion.

    For obvious reasons, the Trump Administration has become very eager to emphasize the early missteps and delays in the Chinese reaction to the viral outbreak in Wuhan, and has presumably encouraged our media outlets to direct their focus in that direction.

    As an example of this, the Associated Press Investigative Unit recently published a rather detailed analysis of those early events purportedly based upon confidential Chinese documents. Provocatively entitled "China Didn't Warn Public of Likely Pandemic for 6 Key Days" , the piece was widely distributed, running in abridged form in the NYT and elsewhere. According to this reconstruction, the Chinese government first became aware of the seriousness of this public health crisis on Jan. 14th, but delayed taking any major action until Jan. 20th, a period of time during which the number of infections greatly multiplied.

    Last month, a team of five WSJ reporters produced a very detailed and thorough 4,400 word analysis of the same period, and the NYT has published a helpful timeline of those early events as well. Although there may be some differences of emphasis or minor disagreements, all these American media sources agree that Chinese officials first became aware of the serious viral outbreak in Wuhan in early to mid-January, with the first known death occurring on Jan. 11th, and finally implemented major new public health measures later that same month. No one has apparently disputed these basic facts.

    But with the horrific consequences of our own later governmental inaction being obvious, sources within our intelligence agencies have sought to demonstrate that they were not the ones asleep at the switch. Earlier this month, an ABC News story cited four separate government sources to reveal that as far back as late November, a special medical intelligence unit within our Defense Intelligence Agency had produced a report revealing than an out-of-control disease epidemic was occurring in the Wuhan area of China, and widely distributed that document throughout the top ranks of our government, warning that steps should be taken to protect US forces based in Asia. After the story aired, a Pentagon spokesman officially denied the existence of that November report, while various other top level government and intelligence officials refused to comment. But a few days later, Israeli television revealed that in November American intelligence had indeed shared such a report on the Wuhan disease outbreak with its NATO and Israeli allies, thus seeming to independently confirm the complete accuracy of the original ABC story and its several government sources.

    ORDER IT NOW

    It therefore appears that elements of the Defense Intelligence Agency were aware of the deadly viral outbreak in Wuhan more than a month before any officials in the Chinese government itself. Unless our intelligence agencies have pioneered the technology of precognition, I think this may have happened for the same reason that arsonists have the earliest knowledge of future fires.

    Back in February, before a single American had died from the disease, I wrote my own overview of the possible course of events, and I would still stand by it today:

    Consider a particularly ironic outcome of this situation, not particularly likely but certainly possible

    Everyone knows that America's ruling elites are criminal, crazy, and also extremely incompetent.

    So perhaps the coronavirus outbreak was indeed a deliberate biowarfare attack against China, hitting that nation just before Lunar New Year, the worst possible time to produce a permanent nationwide pandemic. However, the PRC responded with remarkable speed and efficiency, implementing by far the largest quarantine in human history, and the deadly disease now seems to be in decline there.

    Meanwhile, the disease naturally leaks back into the US, and despite all the advance warning, our totally incompetent government mismanages the situation, producing a huge national health disaster, and the collapse of our economy and decrepit political system.

    As I said, not particularly likely, but certainly a very fitting end to the American Empire

    Related Reading:

    The Myth of Tiananmen by Jay Matthews China's Rise, America's Fall Was Coronavirus a Biowarfare Attack Against China? by OldMicrobiologist Bats, Gene Editing and Bioweapons: Recent Darpa Experiments Raise Concerns Amid Coronavirus Outbreak by Whitney Webb How It All Began: the Belgrade Embassy Bombing by Peter Lee

    Ozymandias , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:43 am GMT

    But their government implemented public health control measures unprecedented in the history of the world and managed to almost completely eradicate the disease with merely the loss of a few thousand lives

    And if you can't trust China's numbers, who can you trust?

    The timing of an accidental laboratory release would obviously be entirely random. Yet the outbreak seems to have begun during precise period of time most likely to damage China

    It almost sounds like putting a virus lab in the middle of twelve million people was a bad idea.

    Lol. I can't believe you're doubling down on this jackassery.

    Otto von Komsmark , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:07 am GMT
    Ron Unz has done it again!! Good job, I've always thought the standard "Wuhan lab leak" theory seemed flawed
    Otto von Komsmark , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:10 am GMT
    Mr Unz, also have you read David Cole's theory on this (at TakiMag)? I know you and him got in blog beef a couple years ago over your Pravda article on Holocaust, but his theory also criticized the Wuhan "lab leak" and believes the wet markets originated the virus while the state lab was trying to cover up the "natural market" zoonotic mess. Would be fun to (again) watch you 2 debate notes.
    Tor597 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:13 am GMT
    If I had told you a year ago that Iran would have its top General assassinated and then its country decimated by a viral infection, that China would be a world pariah with calls for trillion in reparations, that Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela would have a bounty on his head for lol being involved in the cocaine trade, and that Kim Jong Un would be dead who do you think would be the architect of this future?

    Chinese elites or American ones?

    American neocons are literally getting everything they want.

    You can look at all of the damage to the American economy relative to China, but who is really being hurt in America? Regular Americans are being hurt. But the elites are getting bailed out and will buy US assets for pennies on the dollar.

    Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:19 am GMT
    "When considering the hypothesis of an American biowarfare attack, certain natural objections come to mind. The major drawback to biological warfare has always been the obvious fact that the self-replicating agents employed are not prone to respect national borders, raising the serious risk that the disease might eventually return to the land of its origin and inflict substantial casualties. For this reason, it seems quite doubtful that any rational and half-competent American leadership would have unleashed the coronavirus against China."

    Unless, of course, those in power knew exactly what that 'blowback' would entail, as they had modeled it over and over, for years, maybe decades.

    They would be in a position to crash the stock market (and get out at the very top), assure a new alliance between the Federal Reserve and the US Treasury (allowing the elites to use the American taxpayers to fund their losses indefinitely), destroy the middle and lower classes through government ordered 'lockdowns' (driving down wages yet again, and making Americans frightened, unemployed and angry, and thereby easily mislead like in the 9/11 aftermath), create a world political environment allowing medical tyranny to make universal yearly vaccines and mandatory microchipping of everyone acceptable to the masses (ala Bill Gates/Tony Fauci/WHO and their Pig Pharma vaccine brigade), drop the price of oil indefinitely to fatally weaken Iran, hurt Russia and allow our predator capitalist banks to scoop up the failing US shale oil industry for pennies (which they are fully preparing to do), and ultimately allow the elites to perfectly time the inevitable deflation of the world's derivatives bubble, further sending the commoners into complete panic mode (and making their primal fears easily directed against the Western world's now common enemy, the Red Yellow Hordes.)

    Doesn't sound very 'incompetent' to me. Sounds like utterly evil, but undeniably brilliant, military-economic planning. And it is looking like they may pull this one off, just like 9/11, and get the scared and terminally gullible Western plebes on board for their own further destruction economically, politically, and very possibly physically.

    End Result: the PTB get to blame China for everything; make China foot the bill (or else); and when China balks, prepare the West's gullible, easily controlled citizens for military conflict if the Chinese don't roll over and cough up to the West's satisfaction.

    Incompetence?

    Sure looks to me like a neoliberal zionist-neocon elitist wet dream come true ..

    Ozymandias , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:26 am GMT
    @Otto von Komsmark If you believe that the virus originated in a wet market, what's your theory on why China immediately allowed wet markets to open back up (albeit with guards posted to prevent pics). Are they just exceptionally slow learners or do they realize that the wet market theory was always bogus?
    swamped , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:39 am GMT
    " the Chinese government began gingerly raising the possibility that the coronavirus may have been brought to Wuhan by the 300 American military officers visiting that city, and was fiercely attacked by the Trump Administration for spreading anti-American propaganda. But I strongly suspect that the Chinese had gotten that idea from our own publication" not at all improbable since said publication has a very deep current of slavish devotion to the Chinese state; such that one might even strongly suspect that the publication is getting its ideas from the Chinese totalitarians as much as the other way round. But since 'false flag' theories are another popular concept in such discussions, it might be conceivable that the human rights regime in Beijing deliberately released the mystery bug in China & Iran first, in order to throw suspicion on the U.S. The Chinese & Iranian tallies so far have been surprisingly low despite starting there earlier, so if they're not suppressing the facts, maybe they knew what to expect & were prepared. And the brunt of it would then be borne by their Western 'adversaries'. Not to mention, that the Chinese despots could reinforce their iron grip on Chinese society with their customary contempt for civil liberties. China's "current government is grotesquely and manifestly" incompatible with personal freedom, more incompatible than "one could almost possibly imagine", with tens of millions of Uighurs, Tibetans, dissidents, workers having now already paid with their lives & freedom for such extreme incompatibility.
    "Rationality and competence are obviously nowhere to be found among the Deep State Neocons that President Donald Trump has appointed to so many crucial positions throughout our national security apparatus" and certainly rationality, competence, humanity are never to be found among Neo-cons anywhere. The President has been wise to largely ignore them. If Trump had been President in '99, it's very likely that the absolutely unnecessary, devastating war on Serbia by Hillary & Bill – based on deliberate lies – would never have gotten off the ground.
    President Trump now faces the daunting dilemma of how to protect the society while at the same time not displaying the same disdain for political & civic freedom that is the hallmark of the CCP. An end to America Empire would be a good thing – the President knows that, as he again reiterated the trillions misspent in the M.E. at his daily press conference today – but this isn't the way to do it. Only a Chinese communist or fellow traveler could believe that.
    Jim Jatras , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:43 am GMT
    "At the time, I was overwhelmingly focused on domestic political issues, so I only paid slight attention to our one small military operation of those years, the 1999 NATO air war against Serbia, intended to safeguard the Bosnian Muslims from ethnic cleansing and massacre, a Clinton Administration project that I fully endorsed." And why should one believe our government and media about "safeguard(ing) the Bosnian Muslims from ethnic cleansing and massacre" any more than one should believe their other lies?
    TG , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:44 am GMT
    For most of this post, I can't say one way or the other. I personally think this was either the result of the so-called "wet-markets" in China – long known to be the primary source of the annual flu epidemics (why the heck haven't they been shut down??) or a criminally NEGLIGENT release from a research lab.

    But.

    "China recognizes that it is vastly outmatched in any propaganda conflict, and so as the far weaker party must necessarily try to stick closer to the truth, lest its lies be immediately exposed. Meanwhile, America's overwhelming control over information may lead to considerable hubris, with the government sometimes promoting the most outrageous and ridiculous falsehoods in the confident belief that a supportive American media will cover for any mistakes."

    OUCH! Good one. Nicely said.

    CanSpeccy , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:48 am GMT

    Nearly 30,000 Americans have died from the coronavirus during the last two weeks, and by some estimates this is a substantial under-count

    Quoted numbers of deaths are as unreliable as the number of infections.

    Cause of death as stated in a death certificate is often, and even usually, wrong, and during an epidemic caused by a virus that induces respiratory difficulty it is likely that virtually all deaths due to respiratory dysfunction will be attributed to the virus without confirmatory evidence.

    Furthermore, virtually all deaths of persons testing positive for covid19 will be attributed to the virus even though the deceased may have had multiple other diseases, any one of which could have been the cause of death.

    But as this epidemic is shaping up, it is likely that the estimated death toll will be comparable to that of the seasonal flu in a bad year. Herd immunity is likely now widespread, so the thing should fizzle out soon, with or without continued population incarceration.

    Tor597 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:50 am GMT
    Unz, just wanted to say that it has been quite a ride to read this blog during the outbreak.

    Stuff we talked about 2 months ago is starting to trickle out into the mainstream with the appropriate spin of course.

    There really is no other place where alternative views such as your get a proper viewing.

    CanSpeccy , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:03 am GMT

    Boris Johnson boldly declared that his own coronavirus plan for Britain was based upon rapidly achieving "herd immunity" -- essentially encouraging the bulk of his citizens to become infected -- then quickly backed away after his desperate advisors recognized that the result might entail a million or more British deaths.

    LOL. Neil Ferguson an Imperial College epidemiologist with an awesomely bad track record in predicting the course of epidemics, made some such prediction which he soon modified to a very much smaller number – 20,000 I believe, a number not yet reached.

    In fact, the original plan was abandoned for fear that unrestricted spread of the virus would result in a concentration of infections, which at the peak, would overload hospitals by that minority of cases requiring hospital treatment.

    Getaclue , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT
    @Ozymandias Seems they could and did: https://fromrome.info/2020/03/26/rai-in-2015-reported-that-the-chinese-had-developed-covid-19/

    https://fromrome.info/2020/03/17/multiple-studies-point-to-chinese-biowarfare-lab-in-wuhan-as-designer-of-covid-19/

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/update-dr-shi-zhengli-ran-coronavirus-research-wuhan-us-project-shut-dhs-2014-risky-prior-leak-killed-researcher/

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/france-also-involved-wuhan-coronavirus-facility-awarded-bat-doctor-shi-high-level-french-civil-medal/

    Not just NWO ChiCom China of course– they're just the tool, the NWO "Elites"/Globalists, who shipped USA Manufacturing to China and destroyed the Middle Class in the USA etc., have made China the "Model" for us all -- "Social Credit Scores" for the Peons, an authoritarian "Party" of "Elites" with all power, Peons having to get a "green" signal on their cell phones every time they go outside . -- NWO Globalist "Elites" actually running the CVirus show/"Production"/911 "Event" Part 2 -- "Invisible Terrorists Forever"– meanwhile most "journalists" are cheering the loss of freedoms and anyone who points out what is going on wants to "kill Grandma" is "Selfish" it's all about on a Junior High School level but after getting away with 911 Demolition anyone not a rube, grifter/or in on it knew they'd be back to finish it off– and so they are here with the Plandemic:
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/elite-covid-19-coup-against-terrified-humanity-resisting-powerfully/5709479

    Side note: Interesting the Mainslime Media is not all over China's Racism towards Blacks as evidenced in their Ad here against "Diversity" and "Race Mixing"– they aren't kidding! Seems ChiComs can do what YT could never .: https://twitter.com/sadir_Palwan/status/1250570077163925509

    All of it laid out on the Walls of the creepy NWO/Masonic Denver Airport: https://thechive.com/2012/03/08/something-is-rotten-in-the-denver-airport-25-photos/

    Rothschild Magazine too: https://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/order-out-of-chaos-how-the-elites-plans-were-foretold-in-popular-culture/

    anon [257] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:10 am GMT
    Grossly unfair to blame the Trump administration for the depredations of the deep state.
    Hippopotamusdrome , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:17 am GMT

    "The Myth of Tiananmen"

    .

    Nanjing anti-African protests

    The Nanjing protests were groundbreaking dissidence for China and went from solely expressing concern about alleged [sic] improprieties by African men to increasingly calling for democracy or human rights. They were paralleled by burgeoning demonstrations in other cities during the period between the Nanjing and the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, with some elements of the original protests that started in Nanjing still evident in Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, such as banners proclaiming "Stop Taking Advantage of Chinese Women" even though the vast majority of African students had left the country by that point.

    Jeremygg5 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:28 am GMT
    @Ozymandias

    And if you can't trust China's numbers, who can you trust?

    It's very true that China's numbers is perhaps the best numbers that you could trust.

    Moritz Kraemer, a scholar at Oxford University who is leading a team of researchers in mapping the global spread of the coronavirus, says China's data "provided incredible detail," including a patient's age, sex, travel history and history of chronic disease, as well as where the case was reported, and the dates of the onset of symptoms, hospitalization and confirmation of infection.
    The United States, he said, "has been slow in collecting data in a systematic way.". The article not only showing the chaotic situation in different states, but highlights the limited information shared with scientific community.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/us/coronavirus-data-privacy.html

    The WHO too only had high praises for China's transparency and efficiency.

    The only parties challenging these are Trump, Mike Pompeo, and the US Intelligence. Make a pick who to trust.

    CanSpeccy , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:28 am GMT

    But in mid-March I came across several extremely long and detailed comments on the coronavirus outbreak that had been posted on a small website by an individual calling himself "OldMicrobiologist" and who claimed to be a retired forty-year veteran of American biodefense. The style and details of his material struck me as quite credible, and after a little further investigation I concluded that there was a high likelihood that his background was exactly as he had described. I made arrangements to republish his comments in the form of a 3,400 word article, which soon attracted a great deal of traffic and 80,000 words of further comments.

    Although the writer said that he had absolutely no proof, he said that his experience led him to strongly suspect that the coronavirus outbreak was indeed an American biowarfare attack against China, probably carried out by agents brought into that country under cover of the Military Games held at Wuhan in late October, the sort of sabotage operation our intelligence agencies had sometimes undertaken elsewhere.

    Oh God, that crap again. Some geezer who may or may not have any relevant expertise, had a suspicion, but absolutely no proof, of a goofy theory that to launch a biowarfare attack on China the US Government had the brilliant idea of having the agent released by a contingent of 300 American soldiers participating in the international military games held in Wuhan, China.

    Is that a stupid idea, or what?

    And anyhow, there is evidence just published in the Proceedings of the US National Academy of Sciences that the viral epidemic in China did not begin in Wuhan and, furthermore, it began earlier than originally believed, i.e., before the Military Games.

    But we are dealing with a cataclysmic world event

    Not really. Just a new disease out of China, one of many from China since the year dot, which has a lethality comparable to the seasonal flu. The event is cataclysmic only because of the economic consequences of the public policy response in most Western states, though not Sweden.

    nsa , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:29 am GMT
    @Ozymandias Hey Ozy, The Australians claimed to have suffered only 120 wu-wu virus deaths total. The South Koreans claim only 250 wu-wu deaths total. In Ozy world, are they liars too along with the Chinese? Or is it possible they have a functional public health system and moderately competent politicians who decided to fix the wu-wu virus problem .instead of playing golf and bullshitting the public for six weeks. The wu-wu virus death total in the essential exceptional nation is now 42,000 and rising. No other country is even close. It's like Trumpie heard the experts advise "fatten the curve" instead of "flatten the curve".
    Anonymous [886] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:36 am GMT
    So, you "fully endorsed" Clinton Administration 1999 NATO air war against Serbia, and you don't even know that it wasn't "intended to safeguard the Bosnian Muslims from ethnic cleansing and massacre",
    because war in Bosnia was already done long before 1999 (war finished in 1995).
    Hail , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:38 am GMT

    the Tiananmen Square Massacre Hoax

    a year or two ago I happened to come across a short article by journalist Jay Matthews entitled "The Myth of Tiananmen" that completely upended that apparent reality.

    According to Matthews the infamous massacre had likely never happened, but was merely a media artifact produced by confused Western reporters and dishonest propaganda, a mistaken belief that had quickly become embedded in our standard media storyline, endlessly repeated by so many ignorant journalists that they all eventually believed it to be true.

    the protesting students had all left Tiananmen Square peacefully, just as the Chinese government had always maintained.

    the bulk of the mainstream media had fallen for an apparent hoax.

    This is like saying the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre was a hoax because most of the deaths occurred overnight, past midnight, no longer St. Bartholomew's Day, ergo "the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre" was a Hoax. Throwing the baby out with a technicality.

    Checking the Jay Matthews story, I see this:

    Hundreds of people, most of them workers and passersby, did die that night, but in a different place and under different circumstances.

    The Chinese government estimates more than 300 fatalities. Western estimates are somewhat higher. Many victims were shot by soldiers on stretches of Changan Jie, the Avenue of Eternal Peace, about a mile west of the square, and in scattered confrontations in other parts of the city

    thordaddy , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:42 am GMT
    And now back to the local scene There is no "there" there .
    Nils , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:45 am GMT
    Many things to discuss

    Regarding SARS inability to spread further, that's why the glycoprotein 120 was added: it's an external protein they borrowed from HIV and CRISPR'd onto the Covid-19.

    Interesting enough by including this mechanism in the novel virus they have perhaps laid the ground for future AIDS type syndromes in those who get the virus or some variant of it. That's another topic deserving it's own crowd funded public research.

    Much of the suddenly far reaching effects of this novel virus derive from the advent of CRISP technology and the ability to fuse different parts of virus into one. Of course, zoonotic transmission still needs to occur hence all the special grants to Wuhan Institute and North Carolina in doing this type of research, going out and collecting the special virus out of bat shit 600 miles away from Wuhan in caves in remote China, and feeding it to pigs and chimps who die and the process is repeated until a stable virus is developed.

    Interesting enough Dr Fauci is an expert on HIV and specifically glycoprotein 120. He's worked to run private trial tests while working in the government probably for his Fort Detrick buddies.

    Everyone reading this article and still intrigued for more information out to check out two key players that researching the origins of the virus and it's likely bioengineered origins:

    George Webb on YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/NdMt8bHfQKM?feature=oembed

    Dr. Paul Cottrell on YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/x9_gY43iIns?feature=oembed

    This virus has links to Fauci, research at Fort Detrick, as well as research carried out in North Carolina and Wuhan that was paid for by grants from Fauci while running major government groups.

    It appears part of this operation utilized the NATO transport network for transporting deadly diseases and nuclear material. In fact, one such courier was in Wuhan as an American cyclist for the military games

    But I digress.

    The blowback part Ron mentions being the consequence of stupidity from the government are possible but I think unlikely. If you follow parallel developments in geopolitics and, specifically, finance (not withstanding all of Bill Gates work with companies to have a vaccine ready to go ), you'll see perhaps the makings of a grand conspiracy to (1) cement the strength of the dollar and (2) sequester Chinese economic growth and power all at once.

    For this to work most of the government would not know what's going on and that probably includes Trump. Plus, what better way to hide culpability than to inflict a wound on yourself?

    For links to articles discussing this topic see below:

    https://thesaker.is/strengthening-the-us-dollar-comments-on-ramin-mazaheri/

    Mike-SMO , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:45 am GMT
    Everyone is enjoying the screaming and paranoia but China (East Asia) has been producing new and "wonderful" diseases for several thousand years. They used to have bacterial variations but in the last few centuries have moved to designer viruses.

    South China has wall-to-wall rice paddies where wild and migratory animals feed, drink and sh*t with farm animals under the care of a billion or so humans with primitive concepts of sanitation and minimal, to no, modern healthcare, so "rare" or "unlikely" bug mutations and species "jumps" are just a matter of time. The wild birds of China Summer in Siberia and Alaska with all the other birds of the world. The "Real" Globalism ..

    The appearance of Corona variants in Kazhakstan, Iran, the Gulf States, and Israeli ckickens, or the appearance of "pig flu" in Mexico, or the Spanish Flu (1918?) in Kansas, all under major bird migratory routes, should not be too much of a surprise. Even if a US, UN or Chinese agency finds it. Be aware that this used to happen before Boeing and AirBus joined the game.

    Be careful cleaning the poop off your windshield and/or yard furniture.

    Damn flying dinosaurs are dangerous. If you find some poop with a "made in China" label, call the authorities. They will love the warning about the poison from a flying Chinese Communist dragon.

    Anonymous [785] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:45 am GMT
    Tl;dr

    The coronavirus is serial! Thooper serial! Look at all these in depth political analyses and ignore the facts in plain view!

    Blowback is a particularly telling choice of word, since I remember Noam Chomsky using the same term. He used it to add weight to the official 9/11 story by claiming the events were a direct result of US foreign policy, which re-enforced the Muslim terrorist angle and stopped people from looking for the real culprits.

    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:58 am GMT
    Ron, when exactly did you republish the Metallicman's blog? The following seems to imply that it was in late January:

    These were the thoughts that came to mind during the last week of January ..

    At that point, .a very long article by an American ex-pat living in China who called himself "Metallicman" .

    and the date under the title is January 27 but the first comment was on February 14.

    Anon [605] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:59 am GMT
    Another great installment in the American Pravda series. I use to work in the federal government and always wondered why employees of the Nationals Archives* needed a top secret U.S. government clearance and why employees of Presidential libraries needed to have the same security clearance as a nuclear submarine commander (top secret- sensitive compartmented information). What secrets could there possibly be from 60 years ago?? Then it dawned on me that it could never be known by the general public how their country behaves toward other countries and why and how we go to war. We would lose all faith in our government.

    I have only one small correction:

    [Charles Lieber] was seized by the FBI in an early-morning raid on his Cambridge home and dragged off in shackles, potentially facing decades of federal imprisonment.

    He lives in a wooded suburban neighborhood in Lexington, MA, not in the city of Cambridge.

    * https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/565429100

    Vaterland , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:04 am GMT
    On the one hand a bio-warfare attack on China is something I can absolutely see the American elites post 9/11 do. Their track-record speaks for itself.

    There have also been significant shifts in Europe's alignment, on which US global dominance critically depends: the continuation of Northstream 2 against the explicit wishes of the Americans, 5 G expansion and Huawei cooperation in the European market, plans of replacing NATO with a European army (talks on the fringe of the right about a defense pact with Russia), the Belt and Road trillion dollar project which has its better European name as "The New Silk Road". Eurasian integration goes directly against the global dominance strategy of the US Empire. Europe is also now caught between an intense and visible propaganda warfare of the USA and China/Russia.

    And there were also the proxy-war in Ukraine and the refugee crisis: the latter at minimum a fallout of US-Israeli wars in the Middle East and the Zionist assault against Libya; yet not unlikely itself a direct assault against Europe. And not only Willy Wimmer, closest adviser to our old chancellor Helmut Kohl, strongly suspected as much already back in 2015. Wimmer had been part of several war games in Langley in his time in the German government, quite clearly reasoning that in modern warfare you cannot initiate a conflict without knowing where the refugees will go – it is part of the planning process.

    There also exists this paper:
    https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/strategic-engineered-migration-weapon-war

    On the other hand we must recognize the long term and massive investments of for example Blackrock and Vanguard into China; the ambitions to liberalize Chinese society and further open their economy for foreign, especially US investments; the attempts of Zionism to set up shop in China; the key role of Israel in the Belt and Road project and the admiration the Chinese have for Jews and their material success.

    If it was a bio-warfare attack and if the ambition is to lock the USA and China in a new Cold War with potential proxy wars, then Americas financial and Jewish elite, which so very much dominate the deep state neocons, must be of the opinion that their profits will not be affected by it.

    And if it was the long-term plan of Zionism and much of Americas financial, largely Jewish, elite to shift their power-base from the USA which they have effectively subjugated to the less secured China, then a bio-warfare attack would hardly be a smart move to keep the transition as quiet as possible.

    Seraphim , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:04 am GMT
    @if American biowarfare analysts were considering a coronavirus attack against China, isn't it quite possible they would have said to themselves that since SARS never significantly leaked back into the US or Europe, we'd similarly remain insulated from the coronavirus? Obviously, such an analysis was foolish and mistaken, but would it have seemed so implausible at the time?

    Albert Einstein: "Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results".
    Moreover, in establishing whether a crime was committed, the criminal investigation has to establish first that there was a motive, the means and the opportunity to commit the crime. All these criteria are satisfied in this case pointing to a biological attack against China and its allies.
    The possibility of biowarfare (and its desirability) was unequivocally formulated in September 2000 when the 'Project for the New American Century' released "Rebuilding America's Defenses", a report that promotes "the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces." The report also states, "advanced forms of biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool".
    The first bioweapons research program was initiated in America by Sir Frederick Banting with corporate sponsorship in 1940.
    From Wikipedia (no secrets): In 1942 "U.S. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson requested that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) undertake consideration of U.S. biological warfare. In response the NAS formed a committee, the War Bureau of Consultants (WBC), which issued a report on the subject in February 1942.The report, among other items, recommended the research and development of an offensive biological weapons program.
    The British, and the research undertaken by the WBC, pressured the U.S. to begin biological weapons research and development and in November 1942 U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt officially approved an American biological weapons program. In response to the information provided by the WBC, Roosevelt ordered Stimson to form the War Research Service (WRS). Established within the Federal Security Agency, the WRS' stated purpose was to promote "public security and health", but, in reality, the WRS was tasked with coordinating and supervising the U.S. biological warfare program. In the spring of 1943 the U.S. Army Biological Warfare Laboratories were established at Fort (then Camp) Detrick in Maryland".
    The Chinese read their James Bond: "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action".

    Christopher Marlowe , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:05 am GMT
    It doesn't make sense to me that the US would fly drones over chinese pig farms half way around the world in order to infect half the pigs in China with African swine flu.
    Smithfield is the largest producer of pork in the US. Smithfield is owned by a Chinese firm. So China is making up for their lack of domestic pork by buying their own US pork. How would this risky venture benefit the US? Yet this was the accusation labelled against the US by many Chinese. With zero proof.

    The timing of this pandemic is very beneficial to the deep state, and the MSM is hyping the heck out of it; and the CDC et al are pumping up the numbers to make it seems as bad as possible. It's like they WANT a global pandemic. To crash the market and make DJT look bad? That is what the Biden for drooling pres campaign videos are hyping already.

    If there is a germ war going on, it is China doing it to its communist shit-hole self. I don't know why anybody trades with them. The Chinese state literally kills Uyghurs and Falun Gong and steals their organs, but they have favored nation trading status? wtf

    Octavian , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:12 am GMT
    Interesting take.

    It is fairly congruent with my own writeup from a few weeks back. Although I did not go so far as to definitively endorse any particular theory. The idea of this all being an American strike on China is the interesting hypothesis to me and fits my understanding of how America's geopolitical toolbox might work best. There is also a case to be made that the blowback stateside is a feature not a bug.

    The United States could come out ahead in terms of the great game with China. But only if it can play its cards correctly.

    Ultimately, what enough people think about this whole situation is what will define outcomes and right now things are on track for the bulk of the Chinese population to think that this is an American attack and for a significant number of Americans to believe that this is either accidental or deliberate Chinese action.

    I think those popular attitudes are very valuable to their respective governments.

    It's not helpful to onshore blame.

    Thanks for another engaging article!

    anon [227] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:14 am GMT
    Devil's advocacy is always an important intellectual activity, but you seemed to have pretty much pointed out the hole in your grand theory yourself.

    If we're going to imagine the US gov't apparatus is competent enough to start the virus in China, one would have to presume (if their collective IQ's approach anywhere near 90) that they would also set up for the contingency that it might come to the US too.

    Imagining otherwise is akin to thinking the US top brass have the intelligence of some of those bonehead crooks who sometimes make the news for their stupid (and funny) attempts at crime. The US top brass might be dumb, but c'mon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn5CvDgaZSc

    Miro23 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:20 am GMT

    I think we can safely assume that Lieber's arrest by the FBI had been prompted by the coronavirus epidemic, but anything more is mere speculation. Those now accusing China of having created the coronavirus might surely suggest that our intelligence agencies discovered that the Harvard professor had been personally involved with that deadly research. But I think a far more likely possibility is that Lieber began to wonder whether the epidemic in China might not be the result of an American biowarfare attack, and was perhaps a little too free in voicing his suspicions, thereby drawing the wrath of our national security establishment.

    Or alternatively, who would a laboratory whistleblower turn to other than a respected Harvard professor, who would understand the technical aspects, and who he may actually already have known and trusted?

    Thus, we have America assassinating Iran's top military commander on Jan. 2nd and then just a few weeks later large portions of the Iran's ruling elites became infected by a mysterious and deadly new virus, with many of them soon dying as a consequence. Could any rational individual possibly regard this as a mere coincidence?

    An irresistible add-on like Larry Silverstein's extra insurance cover and payout.

    One intriguing aspect of the situation was that almost from the first moment that reports of the strange new epidemic in China reached the international media, a large and orchestrated campaign had been launched on numerous websites and Social Media to identify the cause as a Chinese bioweapon carelessly released in its own country.

    Again similar to 9/11 with an instant media explanation trumpeted around the world (no investigation necessary).

    It therefore appears that elements of the Defense Intelligence Agency were aware of the deadly viral outbreak in Wuhan more than a month before any officials in the Chinese government itself. Unless our intelligence agencies have pioneered the technology of precognition, I think this may have happened for the same reason that arsonists have the earliest knowledge of future fires.

    Agreed – they really messed it up – and it would be a world class irony if it was their own virus that wrecks the US economy.

    mike99588 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:34 am GMT
    The Chinese embassy in Serbia is an interesting side story. However, as much as I disagreed with why we were there, another Clinton abuse of office, China was apparently participating as a combatant providing crucial signals support to the Serbian military. Topped off by handling sensitive F117 residuals that we wanted destroyed. Or perhaps only some of US, given various conflicts of interests in both Clinton globalism and sharing/planned obsolescence by arms makers .

    CV19
    The "US did it" is a possibility that certainly should be addressed in the continuum of many possibilities. I certainly would look for linkages between BHO administration/Gates/academia/DeepGreen/China. China certainly does not act innocent, covering up the early patients' stories and physical evidence a la our JFK scale.

    As for US incompetence, the globalist media favors CCP; liberalism; Big Tech; Big Medicine; the Democratic Party; along with the O/Clintonista FDA and CDC, have done everything possible to hamstring accurate CV19 information amongst the citizenry, and specifically against Trump. Huge TDS.

    Months of near total shutdown on IV vitamin C, bowel tolerance dosing of vitamin C, high dose vitamin D, quercetin and orthomolecular cocktails for prophylaxis and treatment. As well as censorship and savage attacks on people trying to evolve the HCQ+AZM+zinc cocktail.

    antitermite , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:35 am GMT
    A few loose thoughts, firstly that China accusation is one of the most egregious exhibitions of chutzpah by the western government & media.
    Trial by media, if you will.
    We now have ignoramuses spouting that "China has exterminated 21 million virus carriers" despite rational economic explanation of the phenomenon https://www.tweaktown.com/news/71555/21-million-chinese-phone-users-vanished-not-attributed-to-coronavirus/index.html

    Prof Lieber's greatest "crime" is probably because he is responsible for saving untold numbers of potential infectees, at least in the early stages
    https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2004/10/sensor-detects-identifies-single-viruses/
    ie his work on virus detection & identification is why the Chinese government was able to deal with the pandemic so quickly & effectively.

    A bioweapon does Not have to have a high bodycount to work as intended; weapons of mass destruction – even nukes (despite western brainwashing that they "ended WWII") – have very few military applications and primarily target civilians.
    Their main effect is disruption & demoralisation; in this Covid-19 has succeeded beyond possible expectations.

    The USA has patents for coronaviruses going back to 2003, post-SARS:
    https://patents.google.com/patent/US7220852B1/en
    https://patents.google.com/patent/US10130701B2/en
    https://patents.justia.com/patent/10130701
    Whilst these are Not the Covid-19 variant, it goes to show that they can indeed be vat-grown.
    Even should the current coronavirus be a natural mutation, it can still be weaponised.
    Many of the most fearsome pathogens such as smallpox, anthrax and the bubonic plague are also natural-born killers. Supposedly they have been eradicated from the face of the planet, safely existing only in military laboratories around the globe, for research purposes of course.

    The circumstantial evidence that Cov19 is a bioattack is enormous, and the likelihood of US origin is pretty damning. The US government will be desperate to point fingers everywhere else, and is using the tried&tested trial by media +obfuscation, rather than logic and reasoning.
    If hard proof of US culpability manifests then the appropriate level of China's response will be "nuclear" (I don't mean actual nukes, but something like dumping US treasury bonds).

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:54 am GMT

    Meanwhile, the disease naturally leaks back into the US

    How?

    Is there specific information tracing this "leak" to China?

    Is it possible -- is it even conceivable -- that the same logic that you detailed to tip the scales in favor of US biowarfare against China can also suggest that the bioweapon did not "naturally leak" into the US but was deliberately deployed against the people of the United States?

    Follow the money: the goal of (speculated) biowar against China was, as you wrote, not to kill but to economically devastate a formidable competitor-turned-adversary (same thing the US has been doing to Iran by sanctions since at least 1995 with Clinton's executive order, made permanent by the D'Amato Iran Libya Sanctions Act).

    The goal of biowar against the people of the USA is to cripple the economy, to Weimarize American commerce and enable those left standing to scoop up the life's work and investment of millions of entrepreneurs for pennies on the dollar, with the added travesty that those left standing are supplied with dollars by the very taxpayers whose assets are being snapped up!

    Gaius Gracchus , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 6:59 am GMT
    The Chinese government lied and continues to lie about the virus.

    The Wuhan leadership knew in mid December and arrested doctors who leaked the info and destroyed lab records.

    Xi likely knew no later than January 1.

    There are thousands of wet markets in southern China and SE Asia, but only the one a short walk from the Wuhan Institute of Virology allegedly was the source.

    Chinese researchers worked in America to develop this exact virus, adding HIV to SARS, and left in 2015 to work in Wuhan.

    Chinese national was arrested in 2018 in Detroit while carrying live SARS and MERS viruses.

    Chinese scientists working in Canada were kicked out in 2019 for shipping stolen biological material to Wuhan.

    It was developed in the lab, but I suspect the release was accidental. The cover up and letting the virus spread around the world was intentional.

    Xi is fighting to maintain power. He might not succeed

    The US government did fund the research of those Chinese researchers at UNC. They continued to fund them in China.

    China's economy had already stalled. Then it lost the trade war. Banks were failing. Foreign companies were moving out. Xi used the opportunity of the virus to avoid the disaster of economic collapse and to hurt the rest of the world after the Century of Humiliation, China would rather take the rest of the world down rather than go down alone.

    Daniel Rich , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:01 am GMT
    @ Ron Unz,

    Although nearby East Asian nations such as South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore had been at greatest risk and were among the first infected, their competent and energetic responses .

    Japan's reaction to the Corona virus is/was not competent and energetic, unless you want to count the way how the Japanese government dealt with the cruise ship 'Diamond Princess' as a resounding success. Send army recruits without protection to the ship, start with 10 patients, quarantine the entire ship, end up with 765 infected individuals, and then send people [tourists] home. I live on one of the 4 big islands and there is no lock down here. Below is a picture I took just now [what they refer to as a Junior High School], Tuesday, 21 April, 2020 ~16:00 P.M. fro the window of my apartment.

    Judge for yourself.

    No masks. No distance. No governmental guidance. Japan is run by bureaucrats and it shows.

    Thanks for the article. It was a pleasure to read.

    Hail , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:07 am GMT

    According to this reconstruction, the Chinese government first became aware of the seriousness of this public health crisis on Jan. 14th, but delayed taking any major action until Jan. 20th, a period of time during which the number of infections greatly multiplied.

    This also fits in with an alternative explanation, which is admittedly wild but which I would say is considerably less wild than the bioweapon-blowback theory:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/for-want-of-a-nail/#comment-3847340

    J.Ross has proposed [ ] this whole thing may be a Chinese Communist Party 'Hoax,' in the sense that while the 'new' virus is real (there are always 'new viruses'), the reaction was at least 1000x what was necessary to deal with a bad flu strain and that China played it up to scare people, especially the US. China's actions (mass shutdown) triggered a series of events that scared everyone. But none of the data we have corroborate the Mass Killer Apocalypse Virus fears. So what was this?

    [MORE]

    [This] theory would have it that the CCP's sudden about-face on The New Virus -- a literally overnight about-face [Jan. 20] from "not a big deal" to "shut down a region with 60 million people, cue the Virus Apocalypse Movie film reels and the hazmat suits" -- was a calculated bid to hurt the US and to hurt Western economies. By the time of the unexpected about-face, they had 100% certainty it had spread to the US and elsewhere, AND that these countries had the kind of media that would go into hysteria mode AND had the technological capacity to do "testing."

    This theory would attribute to the CCP a calculated bid to create a false virus panic with plausible deniability ("so sorry! we didn't have the data! it was early; we reacted the best we could; and hey even the highly-neutral WHO are calling us heroes") which would scare people and trigger a series of events that throw the US and its satellites in Western Europe into chaos, making the latter easier pickings for Belt & Road and Huawi colonization, etc.; countries dazed by a mass-hysteria-recession are suddenly beggars, not choosers.

    The Chinese Communist Party's calculation would have been, on that fateful 'about-face' evening, that the West was much less ready to handle a panic than Communist China would be. It was a risk to them but it worked.

    If this theory is right, in fact, the CCP succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. A case of the dog finally catching the car bumper; what the heck now? The results for China's regime itself are unclear, given that the cynical triggering of mass-hysteria-recessions in major trading partners equates to a drought that sinks all boats.

    The alternative, and many would say more plausible theory, is that the Chinese Communist Party panicked, too, and reacted highly irrationally, taking a sledgehammer to a handful of mosquitoes and then salting the earth where the flattened bodies of the mosquitoes landed. Or a synthesis of the two may be true. It's hard to disentangle motivations. But the unexplained 'about-face' is real and needs explanation.

    Thulean Friend , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:20 am GMT
    In the end, does it matter? Even if we take the more innocuous version at face value: the virus had nothing to do with bioweapons and simply mutated naturally from bats to humans, the response of the West has been utterly atrocious either way.

    We're now seeing a Yellow Peril 2.0 campaign ramped up at astonishing speed. The so-called "liberal class", posturing as tolerant and sophisticated, is now trying to run on Trump's right flank on China. Joe Biden's campaign ads on China are Cold War-style cariactures.

    I've been seeing the consequences play out even in neutral places. I frequent quite a few technology-related subreddits and the unmitigated hatred of China is truly a sight to be hold. Even the most tangential topics get hijacked by zealots. For all the talk about how the media's power is supposedly dimishing, the cattle is still very much influenced by what the MSM tells them to think.

    On a related note, I find this article to be great: https://thegrayzone.com/2020/04/20/trump-media-chinese-lab-coronavirus-conspiracy/

    I hope Unz can syndicate some stories from The Grayzone, which I find to be the only publication on the left which isn't in thrall with the DNC. Even Democracy Now! and Jacobin are pushing state department scare stories on China. The total collapse of the American left over the last 10-15 years is a greatly undertold story.

    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:23 am GMT
    The alleged report by National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI) is the most damning piece of evidence if the report does exist. Here is the official denial:

    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/pentagon-bashes-bombshell-abc-report-denies-u-s-intel-identified-coronavirus-threat-in-november/
    Colonel R. Shane Day, a medical doctor and director of the NCMI, issued a rare public statement to deny the existence of the report.

    "As a matter of practice, the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters," Day said. "However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists."

    So we are in the "Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied." territory.

    What is important is not that Channel 12 (in Israel) followed the ABC article but that it added an extra bit of information which was not in the original ABC article that the report was passed to Israel and that the IDF held a first discussion about it still in November.

    Fooling some ABC reporter by offering her Trump damaging leak that Trump knew but did nothing could be easy but getting a confirmation from Israel where presumably sources in the IDF had to be involved it does not seem as a simple get Trump operation.

    Pft , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:25 am GMT
    I don't think people understand the extent of collaboration between US and China including Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) , It actually goes back to the early 1980's with cooperation between USAMIID and WIV on Hanta Viruses. More recently extensive collaboration between China and US on gain of function studies and virus hunting, especially with corona viruses from bats. Ralph Baric UNC and Shih Zhengli from Wuhan have published papers together . Funding of joint studies from USAMIID, NIAID, DARPA. NIH, etc. George Gao the Director of Chinese CDC participated in the Event 201 simulation. There are many more ties. Google Wuhan Biolake -a lot of global biotech companies there.

    I dont think anyone can know the extent of the disease in China. After all a super spreading virus from as early as November circulating in heavily polluted Wuhan, a city more populated than NYC , which was also a major domestic and international transportation hub with millions leaving the city for other destinations in China and internationally in the weeks before Wuhan was locked down just before the New Year when everything shuts down for 2 weeks anyways. And yet the disease only spreads to Europe and US but not to any degree outside Hubei province? Not believable.

    And as for US deaths from COVID-19 being undercounted. Where is the evidence for that. CDC has basically informed everyone to count a case as COVID based on suspicions (no positive test needed). If a heart disease patient of 80 years old has a heart attack while also having pneumonia its COVID-19. And those tests, they haven't been validated. There are many different tests. We don't know the specificity of any of them. Very likely there are many false positives. Also if a hospital can collect more money from medicare with a covid-19 diagnosis, guess whats going to be diagnosed more often.

    So I am skeptical.

    Now 30,000 deaths attributed to covid in 2 weeks is a lot. In a normal 2 week period there would be 110,000 total deaths. So have there been 140,000 deaths in total, or just 110, 000 deaths with 30, 000 called Covid deaths? I dont know.

    I actually expect more deaths than normal even without covid. Suicides. More deaths from heart attacks and stroke due to financial stress and people delaying treatment out of fear of getting the virus. More cancer deaths for same reason. Increased alcoholism and obesity should trigger more deaths in the next few months.

    One has to consider this an event on an international scale on a par with 9/11 in magnitude and impact on freedoms. Curious how WHO declares pandemic on 3/11. Coincidence I guess.

    Lot of players in the Virus Industrial Complex stand to make a lot of money in coming years as a result. The Globalists will push through digital ID and mandatory vaccination for international travelers if not everyone and the Global Health Security Alliance (GHSA) will be strengthened. The right will get tighter immigration controls and more bailouts for Big Business. The left gets a taste of universal income and perhaps medicare for all (2009 pandemic helped get Obamacare approved). And the technocrats will get more toys for the Surveillance and Tracking Industry with Big Data monitoring all the chipped individuals health among other things. Cashless society to minimize virus spread pushed through so all transactions can be logged. Everyone wins but the little guy.

    And you can bet the Greenies will capitalize on this

    Since the Virus Industrial Complex took over the Public Health Agencies in the 1970's we have had endless Virus Scares, Swine Flu in 1976, Hepatitis B (1978) , AIDS in 1980,
    MS-ME/CFS outbreaks (1984), HPV/Cervical Cancer (1984), HHV-6 (1986) , SARS (2003) , Bird Flu (2005), Swine Flu (2009) , MERs (2012) Zika (2014) Measles (2014) Ebola (2015) and now COVID-2019

    See a pattern here?

    We got virus finders/makers in academia and security /military agencies in the interest of biowarfare defense and science working with vaccine and drug companies who receive funds to develop treatments for these newly found/made viruses, in some cases before any human has been infected. Reminds me of the time when those working for anti-virus software companies were suspected of generating computer viruses to sell more software and be fastest to provide the patch (since they created the virus). In any case, certainly a lot of interlocking conflict of interests among members of the Virus Industrial Complex.

    BPVegas , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:25 am GMT
    The United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) of Ft. Detrick fame has been partnered with the Wuhan Virlogy Lab since 1981. The Wuhan Lab has also been partnered with college basketball powerhouse Duke University. Check out the Lab's website. This facilityis a diagnostic lab not a bioweapons lab. The USA has bioweapons labs located on the Chinese and Russian borders in Kazakhstan. Oh what a tangled web we weave .
    Ilya G Poimandres , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:25 am GMT
    Excellent summary of the anectodal evidence.

    I just want to say that we need to distinguish between conspiracy theory and conspiracy hypothesis.

    The out of Wuhan lab is a conspiracy hypothesis, or much closer to it. There is no plausible benefit to the Chinese, and saying 'a disgruntled employee may have dun it to get at dem dictators' is just speculation in the sky.

    On the other hand the anectodal evidence for it being US action – the obvious benefit, the time and place of the outbreak, the military games team, the precognition, as well as how the CDC is not tracing patient zero in the US (if it was in China in Nov, surely it could have been in the US then too, and then the whole propaganda story falls apart).. Even the US crying wolf again, after so many times, is almost enough for me.

    They are all anecdotal of course, but perfectly in line with the MO and historical practice of the US government.

    I now thank my friends when they call me a conspiracy theorist loon, as I point out that Russiagate, Skripal, and so many of the government lines are pure conspiracy hypotheses – one step further away from Kansas than my take!

    The Real and Original David , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:29 am GMT
    Ron here reveals himself as a paid agent of the Chinese government.

    One of many China shills who are popping up in "alt media" as well as the MSM.

    Disappointing, but as they say, never trust a Jew.

    refl , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:37 am GMT
    Thanks for this first attempt to dig through the growing tale of corona. However, as we are still in the fog of war, there can be no more then a preliminary assessment.

    My take is still that Corona is far less of a threat then commonly believed, and that it has been deliberately saddled with diverse agendas, so in any countries the leadership have no interest in telling the truth.
    1) I think there is sufficient proof that need not be repeated, and
    2) it is better for everyones' mental health not to believe in killer viruses that force us to abdicate even our most basic freedoms.

    I believe that either a) the Chinese leadership thought that they were being attacked and undertook their lockdown in good faith, or b) they played an outright GAMBIT to force western countries into their own, more economically damaging lockdowns. The clue would be that China is so strong that it can weather the blow, while Europe and to a lesser extend the US cannot.

    The director of the Chinese CDC, Dr Gao was part of Event 201 and studied in Oxford. Are there dual loyalties in China? And then, in which direction?
    Possibly, something minor was indeed released as a bioweapon, before, calculably, western government incompetence and hysteria took over. I also believe that Israel used corona as a screen for biowarfare-targeted killings in Iran, whose case is definitely a story apart.
    The Russian lockdown can be explained by the serious assumption that if they did not lock down they would be accused as the authors of a biowarfare attack on the US. At this point, antirussian hostility in the West is so severe that they had to comply!

    The coordinated actions across opposed political systems CAN be explained, and it does not take a nutter to do it.

    Now, let's see, if this comment gets through.

    no bat soup for you , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:42 am GMT
    and the hong kong flu, the asian flu, SARS classic, H5N1?

    think horses not zebras ron. densely populated country with disgusting and satanic dietary practices.

    maybe a country where people eat dogs should be dusted with anthrax.

    Mary Marianne , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:43 am GMT
    Excellent analysis on the workings of American propaganda and disinformation war in the context of COVID-19.
    John Wear , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:47 am GMT
    Dr. Andrew Kaufman, MD says there is no proven test for COVID-19. The PCR test given only tests for genetic material and not for the COVID-19 virus. Dr. Kaufman's interview is at
    https://truthcomestolight.com/2020/04/10/dr-andy-kaufman-on-understanding-what-the-covid-19-tests-are-all-about-why-the-lockdown-has-nothing-to-do-with-a-pandemic/ .
    Biff , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:48 am GMT
    The majority of the American public still believe that a small group of Islamic fundamentalists wielding only box cutters atomized the World Trade Center into dust – in a cartoonish act of sorcery. If the lie is so big it has to become believable – that amount of cognitive dissonance is simply just too much to bear. An already duped population of such magnitude doesn't have much of a chance of coming out of this kind of stupor, especially under the bubble of the most powerful propaganda machine in the history of propaganda, therefore, I don't think this story is going to go anywhere.
    Casual Observer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:49 am GMT
    Hi Ron! Your article for me is a breath of fresh air! Amidst what you accurately call the fog of war it has been very hard to discern precisely what is going on in regards to this virus situation. It's been extremely difficult to assert the "truth" or the "red pill" as some call it when it comes to this pandemic. For that reason in fact, I would caution everyone that cares about having a well calibrated "perception" sensor to tread with extreme caution when it comes to this topic, as there isn't nearly enough evidence in any direction to assume one theory over another. Faithfully adopting any one theory at the moment can only lead you to become the equivalent of a 9/11 truther (the kind that obsesses about missiles, physics, instead of the paper trail leading directly to Israel and Saudi Arabia).

    Having said that there are just too many statistical improbabilities to simply brush aside the Bioweapon possibility. I know quite a few influential figures in the alternative media have unequivocally rejected all Bioweapon theories (specially the theory that the US/Israel could ever conspire to spread a bioweapon) which is why I am very glad to see someone of your Intellectual authority provide a credible well thought-out case supporting this increasingly unpopular position (even in alternative circles). I get it, there is ZERO evidence to show the US/Israel or even China are behind covid-19. But there is equally ZERO evidence to support the official story (which is completely ridiculous until they provide more details) about the guy that supposedly ate the covid bat.

    With that disclaimer I will freely speculate below but keep in mind this is all conjecture:

    1. Anyone that claims is "impossible" for the US to let lose a bioweapon that would destroy the US economy and kill Americans for the sake of hurting their "perceived" enemies more needs to seriously examine EVERYTHING we know about the rulers of the American empire. The first obvious question is who exactly rules the American empire? Are they righteous rulers that make decisions based on what is best for the American people? The answer to this question is a clear and resounding NO. The rulers of America follow a religion that states anyone that is not part of their tribe is "cattle" and dispensable. On this grounds alone the Rulers of America would have very little issue releasing a virus that kills (mostly) "cattle" Americans. And then comes to "why would they tank their own economy" objection. To this objection I'll simply point out that AMERICA IS RULED through financial coercion. A crisis is very good for the rulers of America because they get to FURTHER consolidate their power over America. Gaining more power over America, hurting your geopolitical rivals and ultimately using the panic and confusion to pass draconian and more authoritarian rules are all INCENTIVES for American elites to release a bioweapon.

    Lastly, to everyone that says it's impossible for the American elites to tank their economy and/or kill Americans in order to achieve a political objective has forgotten about 9/11! Our current rulers in Tel-Aviv paid a few saudi mercenaries to fly two airplanes into the twin towers to kill a few thousands of people in order to go to war! Of course the atrocity does not end there. A lot more Americans died as consequence of 9/11, even more were affected economically and even a lot more lost civil liberties and standing in American society. Right then and there you have a blatant and relatively recent event that almost word for word matches the consequences of this virus. Considering this as a possible escalation of tactics by the US/Israel against their enemies is a possibility. The US did drop the nuke of an innocent, already defeated enemy. What makes anyone so sure this is beyond their "moral code"

    2.China decides to strongly stick by Iran, suddenly the Hong Kong protest springs out of control, 50 percent of their pork is wiped out by a weird disease and now of course, the mother of all "unforeseen" events kick starts a cascade of negative consequences for China.

    This is by far the most alarming set of "coincidences" of all. I remember last year reading the Iran-China saga, as the Chinese refused to stop buying Iranian oil even as Japan stopped buying oil after a Japanese tanker "coincidentally" was hit by a bomb in the Persian gulf. Soon enough (if I am recalling correctly) a strange disease wipes out 50% of Chinese pork causing possible food insecurity. Then came the Hong Kong riots that although started for very legit reasons by the people of Hong Kong, soon enough had full on CIA spooks speaking in the US congress, attacking people on the streets of Hong Kong! Lastly against all odds these horrible events are somewhat weathered China and suddenly we have a pandemic that not only damages China in the world stage, but serves as the perfect excuse to possibly sanction, attack and possibly destabilize china.

    Maybe I am completely paranoid or skeptical, but what are the chances of such a string of events? Is there some data I am not privy to that can explain some of these coincidences? Is there something to Chinese cultural norms that could explain these strange viruses literally wrecking their economy and political stability? What are the chances all of these viruses occur in a very short period and their severity and consequences directly correlated to China's defiance of US orthodoxy on Iran/US hegemony?

    Unlike some people here, I do not share the opinion that the Chinese government is some sort of Angel or ideological ally. They are a government that ultimately acts on it's interests and it's full of flaws (including exerting degrees of tyranny on their own people). Having said that you don't have to be a communist to notice how strange this sequence of events truly is. Bad things keep happening to China as it opposes US Hegemony. It might even be statistically impossible for some of these things to happen by "chance", but maybe China is just really unlucky, right?

    Other Side , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 7:57 am GMT
    " 1999 NATO air war against Serbia to protect Bosnian muslims "

    It was actually war over Kosovo albanians .

    Sean , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:02 am GMT

    But I do think that a careful exploration of previous Sino-American clashes over the last couple of decades may provide some useful insight into the relative credibility of those two governments as well as that of our own media.

    During the Korean war, China used their Cats Paw North to invade the South then the Chinese army intervened under the pretense of being volunteers. Although Chinese ground troops were not directly involved, Vietnam was otherwise a rerun of Korea with China not only defeating the US but forcing it to cease isolating China. Carter issued a presidential order for officials to aid Chinese growth., and within a few decades as the internal unrest Western pundits predicted failed to amount to much, it became obvious that China's growth was at the expense of the workers of the US made jobless and suffering deaths of despair not least by illegal synthetic opioids from China. But then, by the begining of new millennium all manufacturing was in China, including the burgeoning fortunes of the already wealthy, who rose on a high tide of inequality. If history was any guide a new Gilded Age must end with a visit from the Four Horsemen. Pressaged by the appearance of the SARS-CoV virus eighteen years before, SARS-CoV-2 appears likely to end China's run of successes, because of the disruption it has caused to the US.

    "The closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2 is a bat virus named RaTG13, "However, RaTG13 was sampled from a different province of China (Yunnan) to where COVID-19 first appeared and the level of genome sequence divergence between SARS-CoV-2 and RaTG13 is equivalent to an average of 50 years (and at least 20 years) of evolutionary change."

    The important thing about the SARS-CoV-2 virus is not its lethality, which is about an order of magnitude less than the original SARS-CoV of 2002, but rather SARS-CoV-2's extreme transmissibility which is two orders of magnitude greater than its predecessor's. Anthony Fauci warned the incoming US government administration in January 2017 of a newly mutated coronavirus with extreme transmissibility and, apart from the greatly reduced lethality of the massively more contagious SARS-CoV-2 virus, that is exactly what happened.

    Unlike other nations, China had had no advance warning of the nature or existence of the deadly new disease, and therefore faced unique obstacles.

    They had the WHO and Fauci's public statements. Much more usefully China had the 2002 epidemic, caused by SARS-CoV which originated in China that year. In Singapore, there were 238 cases and 33 deaths from the SARS outbreak, in 2015 the worlds largest MERS-CoV outbreak occurred in South Korea, and only the other year Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said it was only a matter of time before Singapore had its first MERS-CoV case, so they had to be well prepared. These countries were all set up and waiting to eradicate a disease just like COVID-19.

    A decision by elements of our national security establishment to wage biological warfare in hopes of maintaining American world power would certainly have been an extremely reckless act

    Excuse me? With the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus having a puny death rate yet colossal infectiousness a centralised authoritarian state like China would be relatively speaking best able to suppress it. A bioweapon would be tested on Whites as well as Chinese before being released. There is no way in Hell that they would not understand that releasing the SARS-CoV-2 virus in China would result in it sweeping through the US.

    thotmonger , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:10 am GMT
    If an "out-of-control disease epidemic occurring in the Wuhan area" back in November 2019 was the same corona virus, then toss the idea it was intentionally timed to mess with the Chinese New Year in 2020. But then figure the deaths in China have been greatly under reported. Furthermore, China may well have allowed carriers to travel abroad, especially to USA once the outbreak was well under way.

    However, as regards the whole biocrime aspect of the corona virus pandemic we really cannot rely much on either US government/media or the Chinese. And if it was a bioweapon, who among "us" would be so keen to target Iran where over ten percent of their parliament got sick very early on? That is an Israel First kind of agenda. Or maybe it was Japan? Good investigators keep an open mind.

    Note (This is not a subject change) Over the last several decades the American public health system has regularly failed to adequately warn our citizens about the causes and risks of numerous epidemics that have claimed many millions of lives. Or were all sugar drenched foods advertised as "Fat Free" really a "healthy choice"? So I do not quite understand why Ron Unz considers the corona virus the one instance of stellar government incompetence, as if to imply the current lock down has not nearly severe enough?!? Thank god he did not invoke the party line panacea of the Gates vaccine!

    Meanwhile, what about Kushner's fast tracking mass surveillance? Will it only be temporary? Will it only be used for containing CV19? Ha. Let's all step in the van with the nice man who will give us a teddy bear

    On top of this alleged biocrime, examples are abounding where the opportunists are eager to grab more power, and make killings of a sort, not least of which are the banks, Wall Street and the war mongers.

    Remember, the farther the tide goes out, bigger the tsunami that charges back in.

    dimples , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:15 am GMT
    I don't buy it. If the US was going to go to the extreme length of releasing a highly contagious virus into the territory of its new Deep State certified arch-enemy China, the risk of contagioning yourself is extremely high. Especially with global trade and travel as it is these days. Preparations would have been made in advance to make sure it would not blow back by putting appropriate people and methods in place. Its too easy to blame incompetence for this oversight.

    If you're looking for plotters, look no further than Wall St. They are making out like bandits in the latest bailout.

    The_seventh_shape , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:26 am GMT
    The chronology is indeed telling. Strange that the MSM never thought to ask how the DIA could have known such a thing.

    Let's hope this teaches the deep state not to fool around with viruses anymore.

    dimples , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:27 am GMT
    @dimples Unless of course the blow back is a feature and not a bug, which it must be admitted, it usually is. If the US economy takes an enormous hit due to blow back, which it has, then China is set up as the next ultra-bad guy to replace Russia, Russia Russia!. It then becomes the new fixation of the Deep State's wet dreams, a new Cold War where plenty of money goes down the toilet into the MIC's pockets and plenty of opportunity for the heroic Special Ops types to keep the Hollywood grist mill grinding.
    threestars , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:32 am GMT
    This is by far the most one-sided and far-fetching article I've read in the American Pravda series. Very disappointing, to say the least.

    For example, Mr. Unz linked the below article about Tiananmen square:

    https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_myth_of_tiananmen.php

    The original source went to great lengths to make it clear a massacre did in fact occur that night/morning, only it was taking place in other areas of Beijing and the victims were mostly protesting workers, not students. (At least 300 of them, by Chinese official figures.) A person reading Unz's summary will come out believing this did not take place, although the Chinese themselves don't really deny it did.

    Pheasant , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:42 am GMT
    'Zerohedge a popular right-wing conspiracy website'

    How dissapointing Ron Unz.

    You should consider what people say about this website.

    dimples , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:43 am GMT
    @dimples This is a reasonable view in my opinion. If you look at previous US false flag events, they come at periods when new directions are needed to perpetuate the US war machine's supposed usefulness. The 1990 Gulf War was clearly a set up that came just as the old Cold War was ending and prepared the way for 911 and the Iraq War, which capitalized on the US bases that had been set up during the Gulf War.

    Currently the Russia, Russia Russia! narrative is petering out. The US Deep State wants to perpetuate it but the Euros don't really want a war with Russia, a huge market for them. So continuation of Russia Russia Russia! risks a split with the Euros.

    But China, a nice new up and coming enemy there. Yum yum. So Covid-19 could be a US false flag effort in that direction it has to be admitted. Damage to US economy? Who cares, the Deep State doesn't. Its immune, rolling as it does in government loot.

    interesting , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:49 am GMT
    My issue with the 'it's not china's fault"argument revolves around the secrecy in the beginning. And then the arrests of those sounding the alarm inside China. One would think that if this was from elsewhere the CCP would be screeching bloody murder from day one NOT trying to downplay it and outright lie about it. Didn't China use the same playbook with SARS? Silence and then misdirection.

    my .02

    Ghali , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 8:51 am GMT
    The actual number is 43000 dead Americans. The China narrative lacks hard evidence. There is mounting evidence that COVID-19 pandemic originated in the U.S. and may have been a terror attack perpetuated by the U.S., which is pursuing a massive expansion of biological weapons program. According to scholar Kevin Barrett: "It also may be a coincidence that the primary U.S. bioweapons lab, Fort Detrick, was shut down in summer 2019 over fears that weaponized pathogens might escape. It may be a coincidence that absurdly under-performing U.S. military athletes came to Wuhan for the World Military Games in October and have since been accused by China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs of being the source of the COVID-19 pandemic. It may be a coincidence that at the same time those 'athletes' were in Wuhan, the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, and other Establishment titans were hosting a pandemic simulation called Event 201".

    Furthermore, "It may be purely coincidental that the virus appeared in Wuhan, home of China's biggest biodefense laboratory, and China's biggest transportation hub, just in time for the Chinese New Year, when most Chinese travel to visit relatives. Likewise, it could be coincidental that the real-life COVID-19 pandemic almost perfectly mimics Lockstep, the Rockefeller Foundation's recipe for a global police state emerging on the back of a coronavirus-style pandemic", added Kevin Barrett. The U.S. regime unleashed this disease on the world, and the U.S. regime has to be held accountable.

    JEinCA , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:07 am GMT
    Mr. Unz my fellow Californian,

    Your suspicions on this matter echo my own. I remember the Russian Government warning a few years back that Western NGO's inside Russia had been discovered to be collecting DNA samples of Russian citizens and that it was the opinion of the Russian Intelligence Services that this information was being collected ny Western Intelligence Services for the purpose of future biological warfare. When this outbreak in China made international news I remembered the warning from the Russian Government. Then came the outbreak in Iran that killed many Iranian political figures. Quite a damned coincidence if there ever was one?

    If you ever run for state or national office and are on the ballot (or not) herr in California you have my vote.

    Veritas vos Liberabit!

    Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:11 am GMT
    @Ozymandias You're totally right!

    Look at a very partial list of the Chinese history of lying, almost by habit, just in the last two decades alone!

    China lied in 1999 about "massacres" committed by Serbia and bombed Belgrade to set up the narcomafia organ-smuggling so called state of "Kosovo".

    China lied about Saddam Hussein having WMDs and invaded Iraq in 2003.

    China lied about "imminent massacres" and "Viagra rape" in Libya in 2011, and deliberately misused a UN Security Council resolution to bomb and destroy that country and hand it over to slave trading jihadi headchopper gangs.

    China lied about Syria using chemical weapons from 2013 onwards, armed and trained and financed terrorist gangs, conducted missile strikes on the country, and continues to occupy and steal oil from East Syria.

    China organised a blatant Nazi coup in Ukraine in 2014 and lied about it being a "popular democratic revolution".

    China murdered Iran's top general Qassem Soleimani in 2020 and lied about him being about to conduct terrorist attacks when he was actually on a peace mission.

    With just this partial list of Chinese lies in the last two decades alone, who would believe anything China has to say?!?!?

    animalogic , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:30 am GMT
    Interesting article.
    Especially, interesting for me, the aggressive arrest of a Harvard Prof' of chemistry for technical irregularities in Grant paperwork, coincidentally at the time the virus emerges. (we assume he personally wrote up those applications ? Imagine if everyone who had written up a Grant application, which contained an error or two, in the US were to be dragged off in chains by the FBI ? )
    And also interesting the Belgrade Chinese embassy attack -- Mr Unz's materials put it in a totally new perspective for me.
    Google , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:36 am GMT
    I suspect US gov been planning this attack for years. SARS outbreak in 2003, I suspect, was a test, to test Chinese gov's response to bio attack. Note that SARS virus and the current covid-19 virus aren't that different to be considered different viruses, hence covid-19 also known as SARS-2. But the difference, SARS-1 had "kill switch", it wouldn't be able to infect humans after a while.

    During 2003 SARS, China acted swiftly causing the virus to be contained within China and according to US gov simulation, covid-19 should've been the same, contained within China. But China didn't act as swiftly as expected, causing the virus leaking back to US, this is why US gov is furious, had China acted earlier, the virus wouldn't travel back to US.

    The killing of Iranian general, it wasn't act of recklessness, it was diversion, so that the Iran gov would be occupied by it while ignoring coronavirus spreading silently in their country.

    Anonymous [499] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:39 am GMT
    Ron, my friend (sort of), if you think you have trouble now what with COVID-1, impending national bankruptcy, and a general flow of information that seems to have been some of the most creative fiction in our lives, just wait until you manage to invite China into US civil disputes. Our present difficulties are as nothing compared difficulties subsequent to direct Chinese involvement in civil matters.
    Historically, third party intervention quite often leads to foreign domination. Examples: US in Afghanistan, US in Iraq (twice). Both time, native citizens thought it a great idea to invite the US in.
    And why do I say this? Well, you're presenting China as morally wronged. In your frame of reference, that's an absolute, more important than anything else. But it's not the only interpretation. Perhaps China committed an act of war by giving tactical help to the Serbs. Perhaps that violation became severe when China gathered F117A wreckage. Perhaps China is lucky that bombing the embassy was all that happened, and we are all lucky that things did not escalate. This is actually less of a fantasy than your account, which is at best a bit one sided, almost a "point and sputter".

    In the US, such accounts are the precursor to advocacy. You should consider carefully the consequences of advocacy in this case.

    Anonymous [362] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:43 am GMT
    America was finally returning to a regular peacetime economy, with the benefits apparent to

    the everyone

    everyone

    China seemed unsuccessful in its initial efforts to halt the spread of the disease using convention methods.

    conventional

    the response to this global health crisis of by China and most East Asian countries

    by

    Jason Crew , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:46 am GMT
    While I think the first part of the article is very interesting, and I acknowledge the theoretical benefits that could exist from the US using COVID as a bioweapon, I find the argument unpersuasive for the following reasons:

    Obvious blowback : If the US infected China with a highly spreadable disease, why did we not put in more aggressive measures to stop it from spreading in the US? Otherwise, what's the point of hurting your enemy if you also get hurt? If the US was going to attack China with a bioweapon, why would they not engineer a genetic/ethnic bioweapon that targeted Han Chinese, as oppose one that could also kill everyone? Seeing the economic damage this has done to us, it seems unlikely that such a contagious weapon would be the one an actor would pick, as it would risk damaging their own homeland.

    China has always been a hotbed of disease : A third of China's history has them facing an epidemic of some sort. The 1957 "Asian flu" , 1968 "Hong Kong flu" and 1977 "Russian flu" all started in China. The black death probably started in China. Seems far more likely that recent disease outbreaks are part of a historic trend, or gross Chinese conditions, rather than a bioweapon attack.

    Ayatollah Smith , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:47 am GMT
    On April 11, 2020, Gilad Atzmon published here an excellent article titled "A Viral Pandemic or A Crime Scene?", in which he suggests circumstances have now created 'a paradigm change' in the perception of the current viral pandemic.

    https://www.unz.com/gatzmon/a-viral-pandemic-or-a-crime-scene/

    He states: "Since we do not know its provenance, we should treat the current epidemic as a potentially criminal act as well as a medical event. We must begin the search for the perpetrators who may be at the centre of this possible crime of global genocidal proportions." I concur.

    All Americans (and others) who believe in China's culpability for the emergence of this virus, should welcome such an investigation. And Mr. Pompeo, who so firmly plants the full responsibility on China's doorstep, would receive vindication of his claims. I believe that the governments and the people of China, Italy, Spain, France, and Iran, especially would like to know the results of such a criminal investigation.

    All nations of the world should band together now, and proceed jointly with this endeavor. It needn't be approached with presumption of cause or intent, but simply to uncover the entire truth of this event. That will be sufficient, and it is possible the results of this worldwide investigation will prompt others into similar past events which have to date gone unquestioned and unexamined.

    I believe there are yet many truths about COVID-19 (and many other epidemics) still to emerge. Perhaps one of the many people with personal knowledge of the source and method of distribution will be sufficiently brave to come forward, perhaps another Edward Snowdon or Chelsea Manning. We will then see how truly the US treasures its whistle-blowers.

    **

    The US needs to answer this question: HOW could US 'intelligence sources' possibly have known in November – or even October – of a potential pandemic of COVID-19 that would erupt – specifically in Wuhan – two months later? (Or that was already erupting in Wuhan at the time, unbeknownst to the Chinese?). I believe the entire world would demand the answer to this.

    **

    In early March the US government declared as classified all COVID-19 information, with all communication to be rerouted through the White House and coordinated with NSC officials. Only specified individuals with security clearance are permitted to attend secret meetings, with no mobile phones or computers allowed. Excluded staff members claimed they were told virus information was classified "because it had to do with China". The US needs to explain the need for such extreme secrecy (while condemning China for lack of transparency), and how coping with a domestic virus epidemic would involve China.

    China, Italy, and several other nations in Asia and Europe have documented proof that COVID-19 was circulating in their populations for several months before the outbreak in Wuhan. And there are many, many reports, including from physicians, that infections in the US were occurring as early as September, of 2019. These claims are too numerous, too detailed, and too similar to be ignored. Japanese TV and press documented that Japanese tourists returning from Hawaii were coming home infected with COVID-19 in September.

    Why was Dr. Helen Chu issued a threatening "cease and desist" order to stop testing nasal swabs her flu research team had taken in Washington State from October 2019 onward? The only possible result would be to prevent the knowledge emerging that the virus had already been circulating months earlier. As a rule, the reason we don't ask a question privately is because we already know the answer, and the reason we don't ask the question publicly is because we don't want anyone else to know the answer.

    The US government needs to address the now-certain existence of the virus being widespread in America and much of the world from September, 2019.

    Z-man , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:54 am GMT
    Your globalists and anti American tendencies come out in the first part and the last few paragraphs of your piece. I didn't read most of the rest of your long winded article.
    Bottom line, the Chinks infected the world whether by incompetence or deliberately. They then intimidated the world with their economic might and with the help of their lackeys in the WHO and the PC/shit lib elite in the West to keep the flow of infected people to keep coming into the West. Italy is the tragic example but you can include the rest of the West including America where that old bag Nancy Pe-lousy was celebrating in China Town in late February.
    They, the PRC, should be made to pay reparations.
    NoLock , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:56 am GMT
    Not to dismiss Ron Unz's reasoning outright, but it has been claimed that the virus cannot be the product of direct genomic manipulation.

    That's barring any breakthrough in genomic manipulation techniques, a breakthrough that would have to be kept secret. What these scientists have said is that publicly available techniques would have left traces in the viruses genome. They claim that any such traces are absent from the virus's genome.

    If that holds up, then the only remaining possibility would be a virus that was bred. It could have been bred by taking the bat virus and passing it through other types of animals, selecting for increased virulence. It has been claimed that ferrets would fit the bill since they have the same ACE2 receptor as humans. Ferrets are easy to handle under laboratory conditions.

    If the US deep state did something like this, then their reasoning would have to be on what lines? "Let's take this virus that we have bred to dock very easily onto the human ACE2 receptor and set it loose on the Chinese. The virus will devastate them will they still be able to contain it – so that there won't be too much blow back."

    Maybe they misjudged the product of their virus enhancement effort. Still, it needs be kept in mind what presuppositions have to be put in place for the blow back theory to work.

    Godfree Roberts , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:56 am GMT

    I tend to doubt that Chinese leaders have any overwhelming commitment to the truth, and the reasons for their greater veracity are probably practical ones.

    Their reasons are extremely practical:

    1. In the absence of national elections they are free to make realistic promises. Since they have kept every promise they've made to date they have an investment in staying honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-year_plans_of_China ,

    2. In the absence of factions like our Republicans and Democrats, there's no-one to blame or pass the buck to, nor lie competitively, nor attack proposed or existing policies. There's no 'them,' there's only 'us.'

    3. The Chinese have always been willing to make sacrifices now for benefits later, which incentivizes being honest up front.

    4. Telling the truth is cheaper in the long run, which is one reason China has the cheapest government on earth.

    5. People are much more willing to cooperate with truth-tellers. Governing is infernally difficult and being truthful makes it vastly easier.

    6. Straight talk, especially from leaders, is attractive (Trump's appeal to his base is that he occasionally blurts out something true). Asked on TV how it felt to be President, Xi said, "People who have little experience with power–those who are far from it–tend to regard politics as mysterious and exciting. But I look past the superficialities, the power, the flowers, the glory, the applause. I see the detention houses, the fickleness of human relationships. I understand politics on a deeper level." Imagine an American politician talking like that.

    7. Smart people tell the truth more often than dumb people. People out of their intellectual and experiential depth, which our politicians usually are, tend to lie. The average IQ of China's top 5,000 political leaders is 140 and all of them have 25 years successful governing experience. They're professionals who are less likely to lie than your brain surgeon.

    [MORE]
    hs4691506 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 9:57 am GMT
    @Otto von Komsmark I've read the Chinese are proud that they'll "eat everything under the sun". China is a very old culture. People might have differing opinions, but I think it strange that now we have all these cross-overs from the animal kingdom.
    hs4691506 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:02 am GMT
    @animalogic I think it was Zero-hedge that said the professor lied about his Chinese funding, making him in effect an agent of China. That's not some burocratic form error.
    I think the article is a good summary but the author is also guilty of embellishment. For example, he used the word "concerted" at least twice, when he has no proof of that.
    Anonymous [108] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:02 am GMT
    Having grown up with in the University of Chicago South Side Chicago neighborhood , then lived in racial, criminal, immigration anarchy New York City 1985-91
    , I m rarely if ever surprised about national or international events. The seemingly incomprehensible views and policies of American, diaspora, Neo Conservative, Hollywood,Wall Street Jews makes sense in awful ways:

    They hate us – want us replaced

    Madeline Albright (How did this ugly woman from Central Europe get to be USA Secretary of State? Why did she demand bombing the sh&$ out of the Serbs to creat a Muslim beach head in Central Europe ? What is she ? Catholic? Episcopalian Christian? Oh she s Jewish again but wants to convert to Islam to protest President Trump s proposed Muslim immigration plan).

    I look at this Chinese Kung Flu Coronavirus and just note how sensible nationalist governments/societies in Japan, Taiwan, Hungary, Slovakia and of course Israel handle it:

    Strict, zero tolerance immigration, student visas from Coronavirus plague infected areas – also no millions of Muslim young male migrants.

    Pretty much no one in these sensible nationalist societies care if Jews at the SPLC, The Atlantic Magazine, or National Review, CPAC or the Wall Street Journal scream that they are:

    RACISTS
    FASCISTS
    NAZIS

    It s probably too late in my life to try to learn Hungarian or Japanese.

    But I think I/we should all try to learn translations of :

    "Shut up Jews"

    "Support Israel the homeland of the Jews so go home"

    Life isn t complicated .

    It s the same with terrible Black AA ga g murders in my Chicago . same with TB, bubonic plague heroin addicts street people in LA's Skid Row, Gypsy no go places in Romania or France.

    Life isn t complicated .

    brabantian , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:20 am GMT
    From Ron Unz's article linked above on the Canadian kidnapping of the Huawei billionaire's daughter, Ron himself said something which points to the perhaps deeper truth here

    In that piece our host Ron suggested that the clear best course for China, was to put the squeeze on USA Jewish billionaire and political king-maker Sheldon Adelson, the big political funder of Trump and US Republicans etc Adelson being the casino king of Macau who earns most of his billions there under Chinese authority, Adelson being able to get the Huawei exec released with just a phone call to Trump, if Chinese would just walk into Sheldon's casinos and threaten shutdown

    China never moved to touch Sheldon's businesses in China, and as I said at the time, this is because of the deeper frightening truth, that the big powers tend to work together behind the scenes, even whilst in public disputes, like high school football teams in rivalry

    Chinese media accuse the US of creating a bio-weapon, US media accuses China of the same, the classic rivalry of Orwell's 1984

    Both governments share motives of culling pensioners as covid-19 does; distracting from incipient collapse of excessive economic debt; establishing greater elite surveillance and control; and enabling elites to buy and own ever larger sectors of global economic life; in other words the classic 'NWO' of conspiracy talk.

    Half a century ago, Antony Sutton proved that 1940s-1970s USA had been transmitting tech to the old Soviet Union (often via Israel), to create the 'Best Enemy Money Can Buy' the Cold War was essentially fake, and Putin came out of that, and continues trading favours with the USA Putin doesn't question 9-11, USA doesn't question false flags in Chechnya etc

    Sites like the 'Secret Life of Jews in China' show how European Jews were part of China's Mao revolution, even becoming politburo members Chabad centres abound in China despite few nominal Jews there, linking hotlines to Jared Kushner's Chabad centre in DC and 'Putin's rabbi' Berel Lazar in Moscow

    One has to go one level above the US vs China mudslinging, and consider it is all likely as fake and staged as was US-Soviet rivalry China and the USA may well be working together on covid

    --

    The idea that Covid-19 was a bio-weapon deployed in China by the US visitors to the late 2019 military games, was promoted early on by Veterans Today (VT) where Unz's Kevin Barrett hails from. VT is a website widely-read by world governments, despite its partly kooky and ridiculous articles about space aliens etc

    Gordon Duff, co-chief of VT, said out loud in a radio interview – where he also outed himself with a chuckle as a 'self-hating Jew' – that 30% of the material on his site is intentionally false and ridiculous, as the price he must pay for publishing true 'intel drops' without getting shut down / murdered by the US gov't in intel-speak, this is called 'poisoning the well', you publish the most damning truths on self-discrediting sites like VT or David Icke, where the typical reader easily dismisses truth because it's published next to articles about space alien lizards ruling planet earth

    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:22 am GMT
    @Mustapha Mond Yes, what if the chief objective was not to hurt China by disrupting its society and economy but to make the whole world angry with China. Ron Unz article is the voice crying out in the desert which will not stop the tsunami of memes: WuFlu , China did it , China must pay for our suffering We must punish China. that has been whipped up from the very beginning and only will be getting loader and stronger.

    Some of the things you list are to benefit the insiders. No little thing that could bring profit will be left to chance. It is just like when World Trade Center being transferred from Port Authority before 9/11. Was it critical to the operation? Could they get the terror event if WTC was not owned by Larry Silverstein? Yes, they could but few extra bucks could have been made with Larry Silverstein being the front man. Or just when American troops were entering Bagdad, who and when organized special outfits who systematically were visiting Bagdad museum and looting it according to the shopping list?

    Ron Unz is underestimating their evil and abilities.

    anon [146] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:22 am GMT
    @Ozymandias If "they" were going to do such a thing, how would they go about it, and what would have been their thinking?

    Deliberately engineered biological agents can often be detected by careful analysis of the pathogen's genome. Bioinformatic programs can detect odd sequences that shouldn't belong; the chances of a purely natural explanation for the inclusion of some sequences are rare, for instance. Let's say I wanted to create a super virus capable of destroying humanity. One obvious way to do this would be to take viral sequences from certain dangerous pathogens and combine them into one. That might do the job, but obviously there is a risk that comes along with doing with that: current sequencing and bioinformatic techniques may quickly discover such an act and invite retaliation by the victim. " That shouldn't be there! " If half of China started dying of a mysterious virus composed of sequences from various unrelated viruses, then obviously there is an attack underway because the chances of such elements coming together in nature is very low, practically zero. A response would likely follow in short order.

    Is there a way around this? Maybe.

    There are several odd things about Sars2 (Covid-19) that I haven't seen before: 1) it spreads in contravention to how -- some -- previous viruses we've dealt with in recent memory have spread. Specifically, there are a higher-than-expected number of cases are transmitted before the patient become symptomatic with this virus. This is why initial airport screenings failed to stop the virus from entering the United States, aside from lax screening*. In the past, most of these viruses like MERS and SARS weren't particularly contagious when the infected carriers were asymptomatic, so simply checking their body temperature with a thermometer and following up with contact tracing was enough to stop the spread. 2) unlike both SARS and MERS, this virus is remarkably contagious for a novel pathogen, even moreso than the flu 3) this virus may have a very long asymptomatic phase, up to two weeks in some people. One explanation is that something similar is true of other viruses that cause the common cold and the flu but we haven't really noticed it before because those viruses are comparatively less lethal. If you believe in a conspiracy, on the other hand, this would be a feature deliberately engineered to ensure maximum transmission.

    Elements of the conspiracy:

    1. This outbreak happened just before Donald Trump's reelection campaign got underway and during crucial trade negotiations. Maybe they wanted to put pressure on the Chinese government to increase Trump's chances of getting reelected. His approval ratings according to 538 have been stuck in the low to mid 40s for essentially his entire presidency. He needs a consistent approval rating above 47% or so to ensure a high chance of reelection.

    2. This happened just after a failed Hong Kong color revolution by youthful protestors. Many of the signs held by protesters included the kinds of things a boomer FBI agent might think would curry favor with the 4chan crowd -- pepe the frog, various slogans. It failed, in part, because that crowd didn't buy it. Hong Kong protestors were relentlessly mocked on some alt-right websites as morons wanting to deliver their people the "freedom" enjoyed by the West: dozens of genders, speech laws, feminism The case of a Canadian waxing salon being forced to wax a male-to-female transgendered person's genitals was prominently used to mock Hong Kong protesters demanding Western freedom.

    Conspiracy:

    The CIA may have bred a virus to be easily transmissible but much less lethal than the original SARS virus that made the headlines years ago. They may have expected the virus to spread quickly in China and panic the Chinese population, undermining faith in the government so the CIA could once again try to overthrow their rival. They never expected it to come back on them.

    If one were going to create a viral agent guaranteed to escape detection as an artificial construction, one might do the following: take a known virus indigenous to the targeted area and breed it in animals native to the area (bats) so that it spreads undetected until symptoms present while having a traceable lineage when examined with bioinformatic software / select it against human tissue samples in vitro so that in infects human cells easily.

    The former technique might leave behind a tale tell signature: the virus has a long incubation time within the host. Why? Well, some animals have lower resting body temperatures than humans. This can affect which pathogens are able to infect them. Pathogens that have evolved to replicate at one temperature may not replicate very well under another one. Animals like opossums and hibernating bats are less likely to die from rabies infection, for instance, because they have lower body temperatures, among other factors. Humans and dogs are not so lucky because both have higher body temperatures where the virus can replicate more easily. It's sort of strange how SARS2 (Covid-19) takes so long to clear in some patients -- up to two weeks or more. Maybe this occurs because, despite being able to easily infect human cells, it replicates poorly at first because it is adapted to bats, which often have a lower resting body temperature. Although, it is possible this could occur naturally as well.

    The latter can be done by infecting cell cultures in dishes and examining which cultures became infected and to what degree. This can be done by measuring viral titers -- dilute extracted cell culture liquid, filter out cells and bacteria, apply diluted mixes to new cultures, examine results, selected superior viral lines for continued manipulation. There are lots of ways to set this up. Maybe you tag your viral proteins with a florescent protein and examine after some period of time; the more virus that is being made, the stronger the signal. Select that particular culture and continue.

    Point: there are lots of ways to do this, some pretty simple (but probably expensive, dangerous, and time-consuming nonetheless -- which is why dumb Middle Eastern terrorists haven't tried it so far). The important thing is that such a set up would avoid including obviously unnatural elements that could never be explained by random chance -- the inclusion of sequences from other viruses, for example. This might come off looking natural, even if remaining mysterious to the outside observer.

    *The American government was warned about this virus but didn't take it seriously. Explanation 1: Trump and his advisers are greedy imbeciles (more likely). Explanation 2: the American government didn't expect this to be a big deal because they created it to be less lethal than previous viruses, perhaps not understanding that a lower death rate over a larger population would result in higher casualties (less likely).

    Americans arriving at JFK from locked-down Italy are shocked by the lack of US screening for coronavirus

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8098819/Americans-arriving-JFK-Milan-say-SHOCKED-no-screening-coronavirus.html

    Trump allegedly asked Fauci if officials could let coronavirus 'wash over' US

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/492390-wapo-trump-allegedly-asked-fauci-if-officials-could-let-coronavirus

    Points against this theory:

    1) Trump is a loudmouth and a braggart. If he knew ANYTHING about this, he probably would have let it slip by now. Elements of the British government have had to restrict some information they share with the Americans for fear that Trump would leak it to his friends during his then regular discussions with people over unsecured lines. Would the CIA really do something extraordinary like this without his knowledge?

    Points in favor:

    1) The UK, a country that often works with the Americans to do nefarious things, didn't take this very seriously, either. They acted as if they didn't expect this to be a big deal. Other countries that usually don't work that closely with US intelligence to the same degree, have taken Covid-19 seriously even if they have failed to contain it. Although, this is probably wrong. The nations that have dealt best with this are the ones that have had lots of previous experience with similar viruses and whose populations are naturally more inclined to work together.

    2) The timing and location of the viral outbreak. Isn't Wuhan a major transportation hub?

    FB , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:26 am GMT
    Excellent piece by Ron Unz

    One thing I notice is how crisply written this is, compared to the very dense, plodding style that characterizes much of his previous work

    A very good overview of the situation and a thoughtful analysis of the finger pointing that's going on

    Regardless of whether the lock down measures have been an overreaction or not, most reasonable people will realize that we may never know what might have been, had we not locked down

    Would the health system have been able to cope ?

    What would happen when hospitals are overwhelmed by serious respiratory cases ?

    China's very forceful reaction now looks absolutely brilliant

    That extremely energetic reaction also hints that the Chinese leadership may have suspected an attack

    Been_there_done_that , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:26 am GMT

    ". ..the current accusations by Trump Administration officials that China had attempted to minimize or conceal the serious nature of the disease outbreak is so ludicrous as to defy rationality. "

    This assertion is absolutely untrue, as most readers who have followed this story early on will know. You conspicuously left out of your conspiratorial musings the news of the "whistleblower" Wi Leniang, the 34-year old ophthalmologist who had worked at Wuhan Central Hospital, and had already alerted his colleagues late last year about a suspicious viral outbreak, for which he was subsequently arrested and punished by authorities. Millions of people in China are familiar with his tragic story – he eventually died.

    On January 9 the World Health Organization released the following press statement, providing sufficient information that would have warranted or obliged the authorities to have immediately closed the Wuhan airport and train station to prevent the contagious spread of the virus to other regions of the world through unwittingly infected carriers.

    https://www.who.int/china/news/detail/09-01-2020-who-statement-regarding-cluster-of-pneumonia-cases-in-wuhan-china

    Instead, authorities waited two entire weeks before closing the Wuhan airport, during which time the virus spread inevitably to other countries through the many international passenger flights. According to military game theory, such inaction would surely benefit China, which could better deal with an outbreak, whereas most other countries would suffer more severely in comparison. For this reason, regardless whether the release of the presumably engineered virus was released intentionally or accidentally, the Chine government is culpable for having allowed the pandemic to evolve. So at least in this particular case the allegations of the Trump administration are correct.

    Your narrative omitted these indisputable facts, which you then denigrated as " so ludicrous as to defy rationality ", yet after a Communist Party meeting in mid-February, some of those responsible for having minimized or concealed the serious nature of the outbreak were officially "demoted" (received a slap on the wrist):

    https://www.businessinsider.com/international/analysis-china-hubei-officials-sacked-xi-jinping-protected-2020-2/

    Those who praise China's alleged competence in the matter have a dilemma to deal with. Either the authorities are competent, in which case they effectively waged biological warfare against the rest of the world (using incompetence as plausible deniability of intent) in order for their economy to come out ahead, comparatively, in the long run, compared to a situation where only their own economy would have suffered by effective early containment measures; or else they were indeed incompetent, that an accidental release from one of their labs in Wuhan becomes even more plausible than it already is. Either way, the focus of inquiry must remain on China, rather than conducting an exercise in reflexive exoneration. Fantastical insinuations pointing the finger elsewhere, for which no strong evidence has been presented, are just a distraction.

    Accidental releases have been known to occur, but apparently only the level-4 lab in Wuhan was known to have been working on enhancing those bat-based viruses with gain of function properties and chimeric qualities.

    Your entire conjecture about the strong likelihood of US culpability essentially rests almost entirely on the vague notion of " extreme recklessness ", which in such dangerous matters, as the release of deadly viruses, appears to be significantly less likely, from an analytical perspective, than an accidental release from a biological lab in Wuhan.

    Michael888 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:28 am GMT
    While your lengthy article shows the possibility that the virus originated in the US and was spread intentionally, with a lot of trust developed by our own Dr. Fauci of the NIAID and $37 million in grants (long before Trump) to study bat coronaviruses in collaboration with China, I think you are missing one important feature.
    Trump and his neocon clown car are loathed by the Intelligence Agencies. Unlike Obama, who loved to have the CIA "playing" in his sanctioned, National Emergencies countries (Yemen, Libya, Venezuela, Ukraine, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Burundi), backing coups in Egypt, Honduras and the big one, Ukraine, and delighting in droning and expanding Bush's two wars into 7 or 11, depending on how you count, Trump for all his idiotic saber rattling has started no wars; Bolivia is his only coup, Nicaragua his only war-like National Emergency. You may have missed the events of Russiagate and Ukrainegate, built on incompetent spycraft, and an impeachment started by a CIA "whistleblower", but to give Trump credit for something as devious as an obvious CIA op (by your own speculations) seems disingenuous. Much more likely the CIA (whose hubris and incompetence rivals Trump's) likely were running this operation from at least when the first bat coronavirus grants were sent to Wuhan (2011? 2015? I've read both). My guess is the CIA did not even share their brilliant idea with the loathsome Trump, as he would have likely squashed it as he finally did with John Bolton's out-of-control machinations. I think the CIA sees the spectacular failure of their operation as a chance to embarrass and likely overthrow Trump. If they had destroyed the Chinese economy, they would have taken full credit, as it is, they look masterful in re-establishing the Establishment, and ridding themselves of a non-supportive Trump.
    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:29 am GMT
    Coronavirus catastrophe? Even though the CDC has been accused of exaggerating the number of deaths from the Coronavirus by allowing doctors to assume , without testing ,someone died from it, the number of deaths are not alarming . According to the CDC's provisional statistics posted on April 20,2020 , from February 1 to April 18 ,2020 there were only 15,252 deaths from the Coronavirus out of a total of 603,184 deaths from all causes ,in a US population of 327,167,434 . For the one week ending April 11 there were 5483 COVID-19 deaths and for the one week ending April 18th there were only 568 deaths . cdc.gov . Deaths from the Coronavirus appear to be on the decline in mid-April ,just as they often do in a typical flu season as Spring returns in the Northern hemisphere. As a number of doctors have observed the lockdowns, social distancing and unemployment resulting from the draconian measures taken by Governors across the US are leading to an unprecedented number of cases of depression and suicides.
    It is well established,that people who are depressed end up with many types of illnesses due to their compromised immune systems .
    The tragedy of the Coronavirus pandemic is ,that as more and more circumstantial evidence comes to light ,it was an engineered crisis or ,as some investigators have termed it ,a planned-demic see, for example, "How to create a fake pandemic"jamesfetzer.org.
    Concerned Citizen , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:41 am GMT
    Deep and enduring thanks to Ron Unz and his team for this site, an oasis of common sense in a desert of nonsense.

    Regarding:

    "So if American bio warfare analysts were considering a corona virus attack against China, isn't it quite possible they would have said to themselves that since SARS never significantly leaked back into the US or Europe, we'd similarly remain insulated from the corona virus? Obviously, such an analysis was foolish and mistaken, but would it have seemed so implausible at the time?"

    There might be another possibility. That being that the American plans you outline were formulated and carried out by the deepest, eternally-entrenched portions of the American security state and that "senior administration officials" were simply never consulted about bio warfare efforts against China. Very possibly including those earlier events noted, aimed at Chinese agricultural interests.

    Two birds with one stone would be the result: 1) China is (theoretically) taken down by orders of magnitude; 2) That usurping outsider, the ever-disruptive President Trump exits in January, as no incumbent would be judged to have a 2% chance of withstanding the hurricane of events tied to the pandemic's arrival in America.

    All the better, then, to allow Trump and other leading American politicians to convincingly lead the chorus against China, and all done with never any possibility of a leak from any political "source" about anything pertaining to the background and planning of the operation.

    Implications of such a possibility are too monstrous to consider, so am certain this assertion can't be true. Right?

    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:42 am GMT
    @Hail " this whole thing may be a Chinese Communist Party 'Hoax,' in the sense that while the 'new' virus is real (there are always 'new viruses'), the reaction was at least 1000x what was necessary to deal " – The reality parsing by the hoaxers always lead to the discovery of more hoaxes. Check with your guru Kunt Wiitkowski if he was not the one who advised Chines how to pull off the hoax. Didn't he tell them that only 10,000 would have die?
    hs4691506 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:49 am GMT
    @swamped I, too, doubt that Trump would have been aware of what was going on, this would have been an operation that was kicked off now because if Trump gets re-elected, he'll hopefully clean house, and all that preparation would have been for nothing.

    That having been said what's your explanation why Trump did bring a lot of neocons on board, who effectively blocked him. If he really wanted to placate the democrats, there would have surely been hawks who weren't as dangerous as, e.g. Bolton.

    Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:50 am GMT
    @Jim Jatras He said back then he thought that. Hasn't expressed his current view. None of us knew back then that the US was dumping pure U238 on Yugoslavia making large parts uninhabitable for a thousand years.
    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:53 am GMT
    @refl Ron, we need a new button: Hoaxer
    Ayatollah Smith , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:54 am GMT
    20.Hail says:

    "Checking the Jay Matthews story, I see this: Hundreds of people, most of them workers and passersby, did die that night, but in a different place and under different circumstances."

    There is much that Jay Matthews didn't say. Read this:

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/tiananmen-square-the-failure-of-an-american-instigated-1989-color-revolution/5690061

    29.Christopher Marlowe says:

    "Smithfield is owned by a Chinese firm."

    It is not. Shuanghui International Holdings Limited, now known as W-H Group, is a private company based in Hong Kong that holds a majority of shares in China's largest meat processor, Shuanghui Foods. The fact that it is based in Hong Kong does not make it "Chinese" in any sense. It is a totally foreign-owned company. The ownership of W-H is mostly American, not Chinese, and Smithfield was involved with the company. It was a complicated kind of reverse takeover, but nothing much of substance changed.

    It is the largest pork company in the world, number one in China, the U.S. and much of Europe.

    And the effect of the swine flu was to shift production and sales from Shuanghui China to Smithfield in the US.

    Sean , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:55 am GMT

    China's sweeping Belt and Road Initiative has threatened to reorient global trade around an interconnected Eurasian landmass

    By the time of the Antonine Plague of 165 to 180 AD (which surely inspired Aurelius's stoicism, and may have killed Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus) direct trading links between China and Rome had been established. On March 2019 Italy was the first G-7 country in Europe to become a member in the Chinese Belt and Road project . Did that globalisation reproduced the same pandemic-friendly environment that had decimated Ancient Rome, which rivaled China in population at the time of the Roman diplomatic mission from Marcus Aurelius to the Han Court in 166 AD?

    Given these dramatic Chinese actions and the international headlines that they generated, the current accusations by Trump Administration officials that China had attempted to minimize or conceal the serious nature of the disease outbreak is so ludicrous as to defy rationality.

    Hardly, because intent is irrelevant. Not discharging their duty to inform the international community in a timely manner of COVID-19 being extremely infectious and not massively exaggerating the infection to death ratio and duping the WHO and modelers like Imperial College into accepting terrifying but bogus infection to death ratios of 1 to 3 0r 4% as Dr. John Ioannidis says in an update ( HERE ) means quite simply that China must never ever be relied on again. Next time, and there probably is going to be another such novel coronavirus at some point in the future, China might overcompensate and downplay something extremely dangerous.

    Lieber had had decades of close research ties with China, holding joint appointments and receiving substantial funding for his work. But now he was accused of financial reporting violations in the disclosure portions of his government grant applications -- the most obscure sort of offense -- and on the basis of those accusations, he was seized by the FBI in an early-morning raid on his Cambridge home and dragged off in shackles, potentially facing decades of federal imprisonment.

    AS I understand it the case against him was precipitated by indications that he was taking money from the Chinese Government and lying to Federal investigators about it while getting $18 million from the Defence Department. He was not a virologist, unlike professor Montagnier who co-discovered HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) and received a Nobel prize. He says the SARS-CoV-2 virus is an artificial laboratory created pathogen, which has fragments of–surprise, surprise–HIV in it. He wants his expertise to be relevant to what everyone is currently obsessed with. But life in this crazy old world is not like that. Unless you are Ioannidis.

    Parfois1 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 10:57 am GMT
    In the early days of the CoV-19 discussion here, a solid body of commenters suggested the strong likelihood of being a US biological attack on China on the basis of its propensity for aggression towards its designated "enemies" by the only method of causing substantial damage to a powerful rival's economy under the cover of plausible deniability. Considering the inevitable demise of the US as the only superpower, it is not beyond the ruling cabal's remit to conceive such schemes to thwart the Chinese economic ascendancy. Yes, the initial suspicions of foul-play were reputational (the US habit of resorting to heinous crimes against other nations) and strategically connected as well (the only way to damage a strong opponent short of an all-out nuclear conflagration with uncertain outcome ).

    On the other hand, there were a series of "coincidences" widely discussed here that started giving credence to a full-blown plan of biological attack aimed at the Chinese population by engineering a virus capable to discriminating the target victims. This has been partialled discounted, but not completely until the full sequence of CoV-19 evolution is mapped. Meanwhile, the official narrative has switched to the rejection of the theory of a man-made virus to the "accidental" release by the Wuhan lab, in my view to deflect any effort to research the source of the virus and reinforce the tale of Chinese negligence. But the trouble is that there are many virologists now busy debunking that too and asserting that CoV-19 is unnatural.

    I have come across a report on Australian Media Centre where the evolutionary virologist Edward Holmes of the University of Sydney reveals that "the level of genome sequence divergence between CoV-19 and the closest known bat relative in nature is equivalent to 50 years of natural evolutionary change, which suggests that CoV-19 is a synthetic creation in a lab either by insertion of suitable genetic material or, alternatively, growing different cultures in a laboratory with cells with the human ACE2 receptor. This process involves the gradual adaptations to bind the virus with the human receptor by "training" the virus to seek an efficient method of binding by natural random mutations until one progeny hits the jackpot. Although this process does not require insertions by extraneous genetic material (not strict engineering) because the virus itself produces the required adaptations, it is notheless a human interference with the natural world by breeding something for a, obviously, nefarious purpose. The great advantage of this process is to disguise the fact that it is a contrived lab creation.

    There are many historically significant events the truth of which will remain hidden for a time. But this case involves a strong player (China) and it will – as wel las many outraged scientists worldwide – leave no stone unturned to reveal the unfathomable depth of the US's den of iniquity.

    anon [300] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:02 am GMT
    @CanSpeccy

    But as this epidemic is shaping up, it is likely that the estimated death toll will be comparable to that of the seasonal flu in a bad year.

    That's not correct -- at all. Our hospital system in major cities like New York are NEVER brought to the brink with seasonal flu. The likely number of deaths from Covid-19 has already exceeded the number of deaths estimated from seasonal flu over the past 6 of 10 years -- in just over six weeks. And that's under unprecedented quarantine.

    Quoted numbers of deaths are as unreliable as the number of infections.

    Numbers do not need to be 100% "reliable" in this case. Many of those who have died have done so in hospital where they have been tested. We can also measure the baseline death rate in NYC. When we do, we find a tremendous daily increase far and above anything caused since 9/11. Clearly, there is something going around that city that is killing lots of people. No flu in recent memory has done that.

    Cause of death as stated in a death certificate is often, and even usually, wrong, and during an epidemic caused by a virus that induces respiratory difficulty it is likely that virtually all deaths due to respiratory dysfunction will be attributed to the virus without confirmatory evidence.

    This kind of flawed logic could be used to dismiss virtually any epidemic. At some point the number of deaths is so high that no counter argument could reasonably be believed. We've already reached that point. There are only so many respiratory deaths that occur over any time period. Even if we moved 100% from other categories over to Covid-19 we would still find peculiarities in the data.

    Deaths in New York City Are More Than Double the Usual Total

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/10/upshot/coronavirus-deaths-new-york-city.html

    Furthermore, virtually all deaths of persons testing positive for covid19 will be attributed to the virus even though the deceased may have had multiple other diseases, any one of which could have been the cause of death.

    That's certainly only going to be minor contributory factor. Huge numbers of people above the average baseline don't just magically drop dead from other causes all at the same time. If someone gets Covid-19 and dies, it is reasonable to assume it was the proximate cause in the majority of cases. Only so many people die from X at any one time. If twice that number start dying all at the same time, there is a problem.

    "Herd immunity is likely now widespread, so the thing should fizzle out soon, with or without continued population incarceration."

    Please do not comment on things you clearly don't understand. It is estimated that no more than a few percent of the American population has been exposed to Sars2 (Covid-19). Herd immunity requires some high multiple of that number. We are nowhere near herd immunity. You don't even know what that means in all likelihood.

    Seraphim , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:07 am GMT
    @nsa Whom to believe? Australia had, as per today 21.04.2020, 6,642 cases and 71 dead. Seventy-one, not 120. South Korea on the 18.04. only 232.
    Anon [323] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:12 am GMT
    Professor Luc Montagnier, Who Won Nobel Prize For Codiscovering AIDS Virus, has said COVID-19's HIV "strains" could be put there in the virus's RNA only by human expert intervention in a laboratory.
    The excerpt from the French TV program where he said it can be found on YouTube.

    What's "funny" is the way most USA, or, how should we say?, USA-close, media reports the fact, starting from misleading headers (headers which, as usual for the USA and, how should we say?, USA-close media, are all clones, with tiny changes from one to the other).

    Professor Luc Montagnier, Who Won Nobel Prize For Codiscovering AIDS Virus, Says Coronavirus Was Man-Made In Wuhan Lab.

    This, when the professor clearly stated he is only a scientist, and he only wanted to relate facts that many other research groups have found but have been left unsaid due to enormous pressure, and he stated equally clearly that it is not his knowledge, duty, competence, will, to give opinions on who did it, where, why.

    Jim Christian , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:15 am GMT
    @Godfree Roberts

    The average IQ of China's top 5,000 political leaders is 140

    Have not most of the all-time Evil Greats been brilliant? We have them, Russia has them. How is China having them unique? If Ron's suspicions over this are close to true and even if not, we already have volumes of evidence in so many other situations proving we have brilliant evil-doers aplenty on the U.S. side in any case.

    The rest of your points are agreeable to me. But every time I've hung my hat on the 'brilliant' high-I.Q.-types I'm always disappointed. They test well but in command of things they bring us wars and now this. The medical people are high-I.Q. as hell, they've vacuumed up half our GDP and research dollars for 100 years now and it's their job to have had this in hand. Like our high-I.Q. generals and admirals the past 75 years, they're losing another war for us. The high IQ sorts in finance are another group. We're a nation in serious decline and from where I sit, the high-IQs are merely managing said decline.

    High I.Q.s just don't cut it from where I sit. Could be jealousy. My IQ is some where between a pineapple and radish, a yam maybe..

    Ber , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:22 am GMT
    @no bat soup for you There is so much talk about Chinese will eat just about anything but there is usually no focus on other people in the world for doing similar things.

    The Chinese eat bamboo rats, the French and Belgiums eat rats too – besides snails. Some people in Asian countries eat cats and dogs, the Swiss by the thousands, eat cats and dogs. The members of Explorers' Club in New York eat just about anything as well. But to top it all, there is even have a cannibal club in LA that specializes in eating human flesh.

    http://www.cannibalclub.org/

    Home page: Specializing in the preparation of human meat, Cannibal Club brings the cutting edge of experimental cuisine to the refined palates of L.A.'s cultural elite. Our master chefs hail from around the world for the opportunity to practice their craft free of compromise and unbounded by convention.
    Our exclusive clientele includes noted filmmakers, intellectuals, and celebrities who have embraced the Enlightenment ideals of free expression and rationalism. On event nights, avant-garde performance artists, celebrated literary figures, and ground-breaking musicians entertain our guests.
    At Cannibal Club, we celebrate artistic excellence as the natural and inevitable expression of the unbridled human spirit.

    Now just listen to their music:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/epoHB_yZ1uU?feature=oembed

    skeptik23 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:25 am GMT
    Brilliant work I have been researching everything I can find, while placing the totality of events in the context of US IC/DS ops The "botched biowarfare" attack fits the data the best by far. Thanks for this report.
    Anon [262] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:30 am GMT
    @Been_there_done_that

    Those who praise China's alleged competence in the matter have a dilemma to deal with. Either the authorities are competent

    There is no "dilemma." They detected an outbreak and dealt with it competently. Your government run by a reality show host didn't. It's as simple as that. You can deflect all you want, but it really boils down to that.

    in which case they effectively waged biological warfare against the rest of the world

    Nothing the Chinese did forced other countries to keep their borders open. Several countries like Israel closed them before Donald Trump did. Nothing China did forced Trump into not taking this seriously until it was too late.

    [MORE]

    Trump calls coronavirus Democrats' 'new hoax'

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-calls-coronavirus-democrats-new-hoax-n1145721

    "It's going to disappear. One day it's like a miracle, it will disappear," Trump told attendees at an African American History Month reception in the White House Cabinet Room. The World Health Organization says the virus has "pandemic potential" and medical experts have warned it will spread in the US. The President added that "from our shores, you know, it could get worse before it gets better. Could maybe go away. We'll see what happens. Nobody really knows."

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/27/politics/trump-coronavirus-disappear/index.html

    Trump allegedly asked Fauci if officials could let coronavirus 'wash over' US

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/492390-wapo-trump-allegedly-asked-fauci-if-officials-could-let-coronavirus

    In Trump's 'LIBERATE' tweets, extremists see a call to arms

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-trump-s-liberate-tweets-extremists-see-a-call-to-arms/ar-BB12NQ0h

    Stimulus checks to bear Trump's name in unprecedented move

    https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Stimulus-checks-to-bear-Trump-s-name-in-15202400.php

    'God help us': Americans horrified after Trump names Jared and Ivanka to his 'Council to Re-open America'

    https://www.rawstory.com/2020/04/god-help-us-americans-horrified-after-trump-names-jared-and-ivanka-to-his-council-to-re-open-america/

    Trump threatens India 'retaliation' over unproven drug

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-52180660

    US 'wasted' months before preparing for coronavirus pandemic

    A review of federal purchasing contracts by The Associated Press shows federal agencies largely waited until mid-March to begin placing bulk orders of N95 respirator masks, mechanical ventilators and other equipment needed by front-line health care workers.

    https://apnews.com/090600c299a8cf07f5b44d92534856bc

    'I felt I had a moral obligation': Tucker Carlson crashed Mar-a-Lago party to talk with Trump about the coronavirus

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/i-felt-i-had-a-moral-obligation-tucker-carlson-crashed-mar-a-lago-party-to-talk-with-trump-about-the-coronavirus

    Truthseeker56890 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:30 am GMT
    2 Phylogenetic studies have been done to suggest America was the source of the virus.

    This study suggests that Type A strain the earliest type of the SARS-COV2, was mostly found in the US. While in China it was mostly type B, another strain mutated from Type A.
    https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/04/07/2004999117

    This study suggests there are 2 sources of spread, however in countries from Brazil, Italy, Australia, Sweden and South Korea , some cases are tie to the US cluster but not to China. So this suggest some cases were directly spread from the US. Japan commented it was from the US because they had the virus from traveling to Hawaii and they never went to China.
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.09.034942v1

    here in this video presentation some arguments that supports the US had this virus in between August 2019 and Jan 2020.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/3J6zm6zgah0?feature=oembed

    A possible scenario is they developed a few Sars-Cov2 bio-weapon strains the B and C strains from the A strain. They wanted to find a vaccine for it before they can be deployed, but in developing the vaccine they leaked the A type out into the US. They had to make a decision, let the public know about it or cover it up and release the B and C strain without the vaccine. I think they did the latter.
    But you be the judge, we need more transparency from the CDC and more research before any conclusions can be made.

    Truth3 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:38 am GMT
    Once again Mr. Unz unleashes a Tour de Force upon the Global Power Liars.

    Well done, Sir. Truth wins in the end.

    dimples , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:41 am GMT
    @dimples Of course I completely failed to mention in the above comment that it's the War on Terror that's coming to a close. Russia Russia Russia! has been an attempt to fill the gap but its not going anywhere due to opposition from the Euros.

    The slow US reaction to the virus could therefore seen not as incompetence but a deliberate process of sowing more destruction, thus more China-hate later, ie its part of the plot. Also the virus is not too deadly, just enough to create a big scare and over-reaction amongst the authorities and public.

    dimples , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:52 am GMT
    @Mustapha Mond Yes IF there is a conspiracy that would be it. I have also come to this conclusion in other comments but you have described it much better than myself.
    anon [215] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:54 am GMT
    @Christopher Marlowe The flying drones over pig farms is nonsense from Metallicman, who is a controlled-opp deep asset that speaks 80-90% truth and 10-20% lies.

    I tried looking into the flying drones a bit, but couldn't confirm any of it.

    Half Back , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 11:55 am GMT
    @Ayatollah Smith I want to add Trump's early response to the corona virus shows Trumps and American duplicity. I used to watch a TV show 'Lie to me' with actor Tim Roth. Anyway people give away all kind of knowledge when they communicate. So my take that Trump's call that it's like a bad flu or it's nothing to worry about, reveals knowledge that it is American attack and that he (Trump) worries if it gets 'out' that the trump administration is culpable, so he tries to downplay corona virus and his own role in it!
    "
    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:01 pm GMT

    Blow back

    The first thought comes to mind .
    Its a feature , not a bug.

    OOps, several posters already noted it.

    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
    To recap ..

    The Who test.. ..

    Who's the motive ?

    Who benefits ?

    Who's the means ?

    Who's a seventy years old track record of extreme malfeasance against China ?

    Who's a track record of using bioweapons on friends and foe, including its own citizens ?

    Who's a track record of committing FF , including many cases against China ?
    [TAM, Tibet, Xinjiang, HK, Mh370, INdon genocide 1965,
    ..]
    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

    Occams Razor .

    There's a serial arsonist in town, he has been caught setting fire to John's house dozens of times in the past few months.

    JOhn's house caught fire last night

    Who's the first suspect to haul in for interrogation ?

    Elementary, Watson.
    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -

    Last but not least.

    Mathematics doesnt cheat

    Ian Flaming's fundamental law of prob .
    Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, thrice ..

    How many 'coincidences' occur in the Wuhan caper. ?

    -- -- -- -- -- -- –
    Conclusion.

    Whichever way you look at it,

    Logic, Circumstantial evidences and Mathematics all points to
    We know who.

    Donald A Thomson , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:15 pm GMT
    @swamped The high casualties in the NATO countries are due to their own reluctance to do anything for so long. Look at the total number that have been infected and the current new infection rates in South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. South Korea prepared better than anybody but was cursed with a Christian sect that also had churches in Wuhan. They stayed close together for a long time in their churches to increase community feeling and, since God was looking after their health, were reluctant to admit to being ill. Yet South Korea shits on every NATO country in fighting COVID-19. So do Australia and New Zealand in spite of their extremely poor use of the 2 months warning provided by China and the DNA sequence of the virus provided by China on 12th of January, 2020. As soon as the Chinese methods were applied, the same success with humans was achieved. Now the NATO countries are aping China too, they are starting to have the same human success. They will continue with success as long as they continue aping. The Yanks are losers like other NATO members because they didn't bother to ape until they were heavily infected. I stress that Australia and New Zealand did very badly (only about 10 times better than the USA but 4 times worse than China who we should have beaten easily) because they were slow to ape. We only look wonderful when compared with NATO. Actually, we also do about 5 times better than Iran too. Even with sanctions crippling their response, Iran has done twice as well as the US losers. When it becomes a matter of drug and vaccine development where the USA has real strengths, I expect the USA to do as well as China but it's a low tech battle right now and the Yank boys haven't done well against the Chinese or Iranian men in that competition. Who would expect them to? [email protected]
    Vojkan , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:19 pm GMT
    @Godfree Roberts The reasons you enumerate apply to individual people, they don't apply to governments. It is true that a rational individual should prefer truth because truth is mostly self-sufficient while lies need to be reasserted permanently. The rationality of truth vs lies is very much like the rationality of well-designed software vs badly designed software. Good design as truth demands less maintenance. The problem is that it doesn't keep programmers busy and it doesn't justify budgets. A government, the "deep state" moreover, need to keep maintenance costs high to perpetrate themselves.
    The crucial question very few seem to be asking is the question of motive. Many commenters here project on the Chinese their own traits. The problem is that what can be said of Western elites can't be said of Chinese elites because the Chinese have different motives altogether. There's one motive they didn't have, to provoke a crisis. Viruses don't hop out of labs by accident any more than gold hops out of Fort Knox. One has to bring them out and the Chinese had no reason to do it.
    Regarding the US on the other hand, though I disagree with Ron Unz's assertion that this particular US administration is more reckless and less competent than those that preceded it, seen from abroad it just appears as less hypocrite, to keep the story short I'll just say that hubris tends to cloud judgment and that desperate times ask for desperate measures.
    Anonymous [538] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:23 pm GMT
    Sounds entirely plausible, and, to be parsimonious, even probable. The last element to make it feasible was leaving Trump entirely out of the loop. He still won't have a clue if he's standing in the dock at the Hague years from now. Everything he will ever know about this fiasco will be from light reading material they allow him in his cell.

    The Deep State made the right bet when they decided late in the race to hack the election in favor of the Donald rather than the Queen of Warmongers. Nobody would ever expect the self-described peace candidate to escalate the ongoing hybrid wars to germ warfare. (Though maybe the use of chemical weapons by America's proxies in Syria should have been a hint.) Now the world knows, the Satanists in charge of Washington will stop at nothing.

    Quintus , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:23 pm GMT
    @Mustapha Mond I 100% agree with you, Mustapha Mond. Much as I admire Ron for in so many ways for his other topnotch contributions and running this site, one of the very best news sites IMO, the evidence at hand does not suggest incompetence on the part of the US government and the deep state behind it: it's definitely an Atlanticist plandemic. Godfree Roberts showed that many steps the Trump administration took the past two years were meant to pave the way for enabling the government to play the "we didn't see this coming" card, just as with 9/11:

    https://medium.com/@godfree/the-data-are-more-than-just-wrong-these-questions-illuminate-what-we-dont-know-about-the-data-f117681068f1

    Not mentioned in Roberts' piece is the US's PREDICT biological outbreak program, conveniently shut down in October 2019:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/25/health/predict-usaid-viruses.html

    At the same time, the US Health Dept was running Crimson Contagion in the first half of 2019, simulating a deadly flu pandemic starting in China (as I recall). Even the US Naval War College ran a pandemic simulation causing respiratory failure:

    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/04/01/naval-war-college-ran-pandemic-war-game-2019-conclusions-were-eerie.html

    Everyone knows about Event 201 at this point, in October 2019, sponsored by the Gates Foundation, Bloomberg via Johns Hopkins, and the World Economic Forum, simulating specifically a coronavirus pandemic. What are the odds that the organizers of Event 201 were just lucky in picking a coronavirus, knowing there are 150 other virus families, besides coronaviruses (e.g. rhinoviruses, adenoviruses, etc.):

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_virus_families_and_subfamilies

    That's a 1/151 chance! Lucky bastards! Present at Event 201 were recycled players involved in the 9/11 anthrax attack simulation 'Dark Winter', such as Thomas Inglesby, as documented by Whitney Webb. Not to mention the 2011 movie 'Contagion', involving a flu-like pandemic originating in China (Hong Kong),transmitted from bats to humans in an unsanitary environment!!! Another financial reset was also long overdue, as Greg Mannarino and others have pointed out: the coronavirus cover was too perfect of a tool for deflecting the guilt from the Fed and the banksters; killing many birds with one stone, the virus is also a 2) powerful psy-op hurting China's image in the world, 3) further delivering a strong blow to its export-driven economy; 4) it sets the stage for the cashless society ("dirty bills not accepted here!"), the advent of digital currencies and 5) top-down surveillance.

    Astuteobservor II , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:29 pm GMT
    @Jeremygg5 You take a retarded sub human too seriously. Using logic and reason will get you no where.

    It is regretful that a sub human took the first comment spot. It will attract more of it's type.

    Astuteobservor II , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:37 pm GMT
    @Vaterland If we go along on that theory of yours, it would all make sense if China said no to the transition.

    Why would the current Chinese elites share their country and power with outsiders? That makes no sense for the elites of China.

    Astuteobservor II , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:39 pm GMT
    @Octavian That reads like the perfect scenario for cold war 2.0 or the last hot war on earth.
    anon [114] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:45 pm GMT

    So either the China's leadership had suddenly gone insane, or they regarded this new virus as an absolutely deadly national threat, one that needed to be controlled at any possible cost.

    Those are not the only choices, Ron.

    Here is another one for you:

    – CCP knew this virus had a low fatality rate;

    – CCP were aware of recent (DoD iirc) readiness assessments noting that US had specific vulnerability to a pandemic;

    – CCP was aware that the captive Chinese people were alrady subject to 'herd control' infrastructure whereas the US population still enjoyed human rights;

    – CCP decided to sow confusion about the infection. ("We can do this, but their society will fall apart Comrades!")

    – The West initially chose to ignore this. Then the Corporate Press "International" decided to put psyops pressure to force US and UK to do a 180 u-turn. This due to a single lousy non-peer-reviewed paper at the Imperial College.

    Must read writeup on Imperial College and their hysterical white paper : https://www.voltairenet.org/article209749.html

    --

    Some other considerations that can inform the above are (a) the attitude of CCP towards 'world government' institutions, and (b) their relationship with WHO, in particular.

    So option 3, Mr. Unz:

    CCP used the (controlled?) exposure of a virus ("17") to put into motion a psychological operation to sow confusion and panic in US (based on our own published findings on readiness) that seems to have other participants in the Globalist crowd institutions. The primary target was USA, but NATO as well.

    Btw, Mr. Unz, that ex-CIA psyops writer you host on your site (Giraldi) keeps censoring my comments on his propaganda pieces. Why do allow them a platform and also permit them to censor rebuttals? Hopefully you will prevent UNZ Review from becoming UNZ Pravda.

    Anonymous [395] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:45 pm GMT
    Ron, you need to rewrite this essay. If minor websites carry articles blaming China the presumption is these articles are falsifications seeded by Trump, but if wildly sensationalist Chinese propaganda pieces come from unknown sources like OldMicrobiologist or Metallicman then they're reliable? Wow is all I can say.

    Suggesting Lieber's creds set him above espionage and bio sabotage against the United States is the best you can do? Your overwrought defense of this man is telling, given his "assistants" are provably Chinese bio espionage agents and he secretly agreed to take a post as director of the Wuhan lab.

    In the same vein, did you know that the Johns Hopkins' inflammatory "dashboard" world map seen and used everywhere was developed by a 30-year-old Chinese "student," Ensheng Dong, working for Johns Hopkins? Using Edward Tufte's "Lie Factor" for evaluating the exaggeration of a graphical representation relative to the underlying data puts the Johns Hopkins map so far in the lie category as to warrant an FBI investigation of Johns Hopkins and its employees for causing irreparable economic and societal harm to the United States. In an NPR puff piece gushing over the map's creators, "all sitting around a table sipping lattes," Dong is quoted as saying it's like showing blood everywhere. That's quite accurate from the proud creator considering the irreparable harm that map has been in large part responsible for creating.

    https://www.npr.org/2020/04/13/833073670/mapping-covid-19-millions-rely-on-online-tracker-of-cases-worldwide

    Gorgeous George , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:55 pm GMT
    One correction for the beginning of the article. The 1999 bombing campaign against Yugoslavia wasn't directed against Bosnian Serbs. That was the 1995 campaign and had nothing to do with the Chinese Embassy being hit. It seems that you simply got the 1995 NATO bombing of Bosnian Serbs (entirely in Bosnia) and the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro – when the Chinese (brand new) embassy was hit) mixed up.

    Interesting thing – the Japanese current embassy is on the exact grounds where the Chinese one used to be. I find some funny symbolism in that.

    Max Powers , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 12:56 pm GMT
    @Jim Jatras Yep. Unz lost me with that comment. And very sloppy by his high standards. The NATO 1999 bombings were to support the Albanians in Kosovo – not the Bosnian muslims. I suggest Ron does some homework on the whole Yugo Wars period. Maybe even back to ottoman times.
    Gorgeous George , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:03 pm GMT
    @Anonymous I think that he obviously got the two NATO bombing campaigns mixed up.
    NATO bombed Bosnian Serbs (entirely in Bosnia) in 1995 to protect its interests under the guise of protecting Bosnian muslims. This is what Unz supports.
    NATO bombed Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) in 1999 when the Chinese embassy was hit.

    Let's not make the comments spiral off into the Serbia/NATO conflict details. The point of the entire mention of the bombing is that there is sincere indication that the US hit the Chinese embassy on purpose. That much was clear since day 1 as the embassy was a brand new building and you couldn't mistake it for a previous occupant or anything of the sort. It was a message to China.

    UK , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:03 pm GMT
    @swamped While I don't agree that China would have done this on purpose as I am generally doubtful of all similar theories, it would nonetheless also explain why China banned all movement to the rest of China from Wuhan while not only allowing the Wuhan infected to infiltrate the West but actually vociferously and ubiquitously complaining about Western racists for thinking about not allowing them in.
    Biff , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:11 pm GMT
    @hs4691506

    I think it was Zero-hedge that said the professor lied about his Chinese funding, making him in effect an agent of China.

    You need to understand the system in place. The book Three Felonies a Day outlines the how, but does't really cover the why, and there lies the devil in the details. When they want you, all they have to do is pour over your life' details, and they will find something nefarious as a tool to put you in stern and squeeze.
    There is million different details and forms to fill out when securing foreign funds for a university; most of the rules and the process is ad hoc, and more often a lot of it is ignored, and of course – certain countries have certain rules. The good professor didn't do anything that was completely out of the norm. It's nearly impossible in this society to be crime free – by design.

    Think of all the people near Trump during his Russian Collusion investigation that went to jail or indicted – most if not all were dragged in on the many petty illegalities that plague our legal system for a reason. Illegalities that on a normal day most people ignore until it is politically expedient for the authorities to use them.
    This is how a Police State operates.

    You don't have to believe me; just ask Tommy Chong, Martha Stewart, etc .

    UK , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:12 pm GMT
    @Ber You think there is a restaurant serving human flesh in Los Angeles? You are an abject moron.
    Really No Shit , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:15 pm GMT
    Et tu, Brute? You're worried more about the Chinese embassy in Belgrade and Bosnian Muslims than the destruction of that great Christian Serbia by the Clintons & cabal shame!
    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:15 pm GMT
    According to Matthews the infamous massacre had likely never happened

    In the mid 1990s, I worked with a man of Chinese ancestry in New York named Henry Sun. Henry had been in Beijing at Tiananmen Square. He had been shot. What happened afterward was that he was treated by doctors for the bullet wound, and they had coded the illness as some sort of cancer, so that it would not be obvious that he was a dissident and so be arrested.

    Now, I cannot say that someone was killed. I can say that personal testament to me from a credible witness indicates bullets were flying, and one struck him. Maybe that's not a massacre, by whatever means that word is defined. But it wasn't a Chinese tea ceremony.

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:19 pm GMT
    I am a retired attorney and I am heartened to see that some attorneys, namely David Helm in Michigan and Lindy Urso in Connecticut ,are beginning to file lawsuits to revoke unlawful and unconstitutional Executive"Coronavirus" Orders issued by the Governors of the States of Michigan and Connecticut. I have long maintained that almost every Executive Order issued by State Governors are revocable as they are based on a lie, promoted by the WHO and the CDC ,that there is a Coronavirus pandemic and an international public health emergency .
    Rafael Martorell , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:21 pm GMT
    everything China have and everything USA has been lost was done with the complicity and personal gain of 99% of the usa elite,political class,including CIA,etc and even the likes of Michael Jordan.
    Anonymous [235] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:26 pm GMT
    Another great article.

    Whoever decides to believe this embarrassingly transparent anti-China propaganda is stupidly siding with Soros and his Global Deep State golems. This will be the latest IQ test for those who struggled with all the previous ones (incubator babies, Iraqi WMDs, Quaddafi's Viagra, Hillary's electability, Russiagate etc.).

    George Soros: China Is a 'Mortal Enemy' of the West

    FBI, DOJ Say China Is America's Greatest Threat

    Godfree Roberts , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT
    @Jim Christian High IQ is just an entry level requirement. They have 300,000 folks with 160 IQ, so 140 is not that exceptional.

    New recruits' first posting is 5 years in the poorest village in the country. They 'graduate' after they've raised everyone's incomes by 50%. Then the career path gets really steep.

    The people who are visible to us have been so thoroughly scrutinized that it's almost painful to contemplate. Here's Zhao Bing Bing[1], a mid-level Liaoning[2] Province official talking about her mid-level, provincial promotion to Daniel Bell:

    [MORE]

    I was promoted in 2004 through my department's internal competition (30 percent on written exam results, 30 percent on interviews and public speaking, 30 percent on public opinion of my work and 10 percent on education, seniority and my current position) and became the youngest deputy division chief. In 2009, Liaoning Province (pop. 44 million), announced in the national media an open selection of officials. Sixty candidates met the qualifications, the top five of whom were invited for further interviews. Based on their test scores (40 percent) and interview results (60 percent), the top three were then appraised. The Liaoning Province Organizational Department sent four appraisers who spent a whole day checking my previous records. Eighty of my colleagues were asked to vote–more than thirty of whom were asked to talk with the appraisers about my merits and shortcomings–and they submitted the appraisal result to the provincial Standing Committee of the CCP for review.

    In principle, the person who scored the highest and whose appraisals were not problematic would be promoted. However, because my university major, work experience and previous performance were the best fit for the position, I was finally appointed department chief of the Liaoning Provincial Foreign Affairs Office even though my overall score was second best [the government discriminates positively in promoting women–ed]. Before the official appointment there was a seven-day public notice period during which anybody could report to the organization department concerns about my promotion. I didn't spend any money during my three promotions; all I did was study and work hard and do my best to be a good person.

    In 2013, thanks to an exchange program, I worked temporarily in the CCP International Department. The system of temporary exchanges offers opportunities to learn about different issues in different regions and areas like government sectors and SOEs. In a famous quote Chairman Mao said, "Once the political lines have been clearly defined the decisive factor will be the cadres [trained specialists]." So the CCP highly values organizational construction and the selection and appointment of specialists. There is a special department managing this work, The Organization Department, established in 1924 and Mao was its first leader..The department is mainly responsible for the macro management of the leaders and the staff (team building), including the management system, regulations and laws, human resource system reforms -- planning, research and direction, as well as proposing suggestions on the leadership change and the (re)appointment of cadres. In addition, it has the responsibilities of training and supervising cadres. The cadre selection criteria are: a person must have 'both ability and moral integrity and the latter should be prioritized'. The evaluation of moral integrity focuses mostly on loyalty to the Party, service to the people, self-discipline and integrity. Based on different levels and positions, the emphases of evaluation are also different. For intermediate and senior officials, emphasis is on their persistence in faith and ideals, political stance and coordination with the central Party. High-level cadres are measured against great politicians and, among them, experience in multiple positions is very important.

    Fans follow the careers of one-thousand top politicians online[3] and they are impressive, as President Donald Trump[4] observed, "Their leaders are much smarter than our leaders. It's like taking the New England Patriots and Tom Brady and have them play your high school football team. That's the difference between China's leaders and our leaders".

    Today's leaders began their careers in the 1960s as manual laborers in dirt-poor villages and won promotions by raising village incomes by fifty percent. As they rose, they spent sabbaticals on the lake-studded campus of The Academy of Governance where they met the world's leading thinkers, critiqued legislation and earned PhDs. They now run huge provinces, Fortune 500 corporations, universities, space programs and, of course, government departments and the Peoples Daily reords their progress under headlines like, "How Rural Poverty Criteria Affects Mayoral Promotions."

    
    [1] Daniel Bell and Zhao Bing Bing, The China Model.
    [2] Liaoning (pop. 45 million) is a northeastern Chinese province bordering North Korea and the Yellow Sea.
    [3] The Committee https://macropolo.org/the-committee/
    [4] Donald Trump says Tom Brady and the Patriots are just like China. Boston.com . By Steve Silva July 6, 2015

    Johnny Walker Read , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT
    Thank God this "scamdemic" was not planned long ago and shown to us through predictive programming
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=187&v=5krD8zJ6-bY&feature=emb_logo
    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:28 pm GMT
    @anon There is on little problem with your hasbara. Those great strategic planners in China of yours forgot about one little thing that the West has 100% dominance over China in the soft power of creating global narratives with which it will turn China into a pariah nation in the eyes of everybody, a nation that everybody hates.
    Biff , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:32 pm GMT
    @TG

    I personally think this was either the result of the so-called "wet-markets" in China – long known to be the primary source of the annual flu epidemics

    I've been going to markets in Asia all my adult life and suddenly they are both the source of flu epidemics and "wet".
    Unless it is raining the second one makes everything seem so ridiculous.

    (why the heck haven't they been shut down??)

    Because people would starve?

    Try throwing some blame(buying food makes you sick!) at your big box corporate food monopolies and try to shut them down – take a guess at what might happen?

    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:34 pm GMT
    @Anonymous Is that you, John "WE KNOW WHERE YOUR KIDS LIVE" Bolton?
    anon [114] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT
    "hasbara"

    Your Mama , you purveyour of ad-homs.

    "the West has 100% dominance over China in the soft power of creating global narratives"

    Oh, really, "the West"? Last I checked there was a war in "The West" between two camps of elites of "The West" for our public consumption.

    "a nation that everybody hates"

    No, that would be your Mama's "homeland", Israel.

    Emslander , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:47 pm GMT
    @Tor597 Except, it would be helpful if Ron placed somewhere prominantly on the home page that he is a card-carrying member of the "Resistance" against Trump, which this article finally reveals full blast.
    Polymath , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:48 pm GMT
    Too much attention here on things which could have other explanations and too little attention on the real puzzles and on those things which science can definitely settle.

    (1) It is solvable, and it will be solved, where and when were the first cases of the infection among the general public outside China. Almost everything else depends on that.
    (2) It is almost inconceivable that American agencies who had been plotting this would run it by Trump for approval first. It seems much more likely that the anonymously sourced report that our agencies knew about this in November is some kind of ass-covering to shift blame to Trump, whom these same agencies have been trying to take down for 4 years; which doesn't help us discern whether they were also responsible for the pathogen in the first place, it's consistent either way.
    (3) The genome has been out there long enough, with no one pointing out inconsistencies that have held up to scrutiny, that "wild", "escaped from a lab", and "was evolved in a lab" all look much more likely than "was designed directly by RNA editing".
    (4) China's behavior is much more consistent with accidental than with intentional release. They've obviously lied about the death toll and didn't feel obliged to prevent their people from traveling abroad, but ordinary Communist wickedness explains that.
    (5) Travel between China and Iran and Italy explains the early prevalence there sufficiently, presuming genomic data we don't yet have will confirm this.

    Conclusion: Too early to get locked in to origin theories, the usual suspects are taking advantage in the same way they would whether or not it was an intentional release. THIS WILL ALL BE CLARIFIED BY TESTING OF OLD TISSUE SAMPLES so I'm going to wait and see what those results say. The reports of early COVID outside China have not been confirmed, but come from researchers WITH REAL NAMES, so it WILL get figured out one way or the other and I'm holding my fire until then.

    P.S. Lieber is clearly a weird loose end that needs to be tied up. Is anyone trying to interview him?

    glib , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:49 pm GMT
    Let's see. Here in the USA covid hit later, at a time when people have the lowest seasonal vitamin D (a major immune system hormone, with the population being 90%+ deficient). A fraction of the population being hit particularly hard has dark skin, further reducing the vit. D levels. That same fraction is over-represented among those who have metabolic syndrome (diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and the like), and that is related to all manners of immune system degradation. Then we have a medical system which looks only for profitable magic bullets, instead of trying a variety of cheap methods, each of which can increase the recovery rate by tens of percent.

    Finally we have lots and lots of nursing homes, unlike China. And a majority (more than 50%) of deaths comes from those places in Europe. Data from Italy suggests that privately run nursing homes are correlated with increased mortality, although it could just be extreme air pollution and/or other environmental factors. Data from Scandinavia suggest that nursing home size matters too, the smaller the better.

    Why should one be surprised that this thing is hitting harder in the West?

    onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:53 pm GMT
    R.Unz:"By any reasonable measure, the response to this global health crisis by China and most East Asian countries has been absolutely exemplary,"

    Your transparent, never ending shilling for the murderous CCP is becoming more and more obvious, at least to myself. I'm starting to believe that this site is nothing more than a thinly disguised Chinese government propaganda outlet.

    As in other recent threads, you fully endorse the CCP's criminal actions: lockdowns of [reportedly] 700 million Chinese citizens; literal lockdowns with citizens locked, even having their front doors welded shut by the "authorities",for weeks. The idiotic [unless deliberate], Chinese "solution" has probably already killed 1000's, if not 10's or 100's of thousands there via starvation alone, and the economic devastation caused in China will likely kill millions more Chinese in the years to come.

    But that is all "exemplary" in your opinion, right? "To make an omelette you have to break a few eggs", right?

    R.Unz:"Everyone knows that America's ruling elites are criminal, crazy, and also extremely incompetent."

    Of course! "Everyone knows" that! [I wish].

    What you [and some of them] don't know [or won't admit to themselves] is that this is no less true of the Chinese government, or of any other government, for that matter.

    Reality fact: "Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be "reformed"or "improved",simply because of their innate criminal nature." onebornfree

    Which means that believing/trusting official stories and figures doled out by competing criminal power structures, about _anything_, let alone actually supporting/promoting their idiotic and criminal acts [eg the Chinese, US and elsewhere lockdowns"], is a mugs game for useful idiots, nothing more. And yet, that is what you continue to consistently indulge yourself in here.

    And so it goes No Regards, onebornfree

    St-Germain , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:55 pm GMT
    Thanks for the excellent wrapup, Ron Unz. Your cui bono approach works like a super-chloroquine dose to zap the anti-China virus now spreading from U.S. legacy media. What passes for news media here in Europe is no better. But apparently there are islands of sanity outside the Western imperial heartland. If you read French, you may find it encouraging to read some real journalism on the source of the carona plandemic here from darkest Africa:

    https://www.sunuker.com/actualite/international/coronavirus-des-preuves-que-le-covid-19-trouverait-son-origine-aux-etats-unis/

    It even includes U.S. sources like Dr. Daniel Lucey who apparently can't get a word in edgewise in the American press.

    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:55 pm GMT
    The same mendacious MSM that for three years howled at the moon that Putin had stolen the 2016 election for Trump is now barking like a mad dog about Covid being some kind of 21st Century version of the Black Death.

    Never mind that to get to the current figure of around 42,000 deaths, the CDC has been juicing the total number of dead by adding in those who died from a heart attack or stroke or some other medical complication, there was fear to be spread and by G-d, they were doing to scare the hell out of Americans, just like they did in the years after the Israeli masterminded 9/11 false flag.

    Like Mr. Atzmon has pointed out, the 2017-18 flu season was much deadlier, yet there was no lock-downs, quarantines and a complete gutting of the US–and the worlds–economy.

    The following may sound like a description of the current Novel Coronavirus pandemic: "The season began with an increase of illness in November; high activity occurred during January and February, and then illness continued through the end of March." You guessed right, this is not the description of the current global Corona pandemic but actually how CNN described the outbreak of influenza in America in September 2018.
    Does it take a genius to figure out that the American 2017-18 influenza outbreak was pretty 'similar' to the current Novel Coronavirus epidemic?

    The first question that comes to mind is why didn't America lock itself down amidst its catastrophic 2017-18 influenza as it has now? One may wonder why the CDC didn't react to the 'severity' of the outbreak that was at least three times as lethal as the current Novel Coronavirus health crisis?

    https://gilad.online/writings/2020/4/20/is-amnesia-a-symptom-of-covid-19

    The Deep State thugs who are actually in charge of the US have some devious plan in mind with this Covid hysteria.
    Maybe they wanted to see how quickly Americans would give up their Bill of Rights. Or maybe they wanted to cover up the multi-trillion dollar bailout of those TBTF banks that we bailed out in 2009?

    Or maybe this the test run for their next batch of weaponized flu, the one that will get many killed and have people lining up for Mr. Know-it-all Bill Gates RFID chipped flu vaccine.

    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:55 pm GMT
    @Anonymous Another explanation

    The actual reason for the bombing was meant to cover-up NATO war crimes that were taking place almost daily, and the Chinese listening post located in the corner of the embassy that was bombed were intercepting orders issued by NATO which clearly revealed those crimes. The Chinese needed to be silenced and their operations ended, no matter the fallout.

    https://www.voltairenet.org/article177116.html

    In case you'r wondering what kind of war crimes your dear leaders were trying to cover up

    https://web.archive.org/web/20120115150147/http://home.windstream.net/dwrighsr/a3820cf4d2861.html

    Turk 152 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 1:56 pm GMT
    My immediate gut reaction upon seeing the cartoon character version of a Muslim terrorist, Osama Bin Laden, was this is a fake designed to play on US xenophobia. He was obviously made for TV audiences.

    I assumed after Skripal and the endless Assad gas arracks, that our ruling elite have just become lazy and couldn't even be bothered to create a plausible story to cover up their crimes, because the public is so stupid. How long did it take to determine it was a fraud, a weekend of casual reading?

    Putting a mob style hit on Venezuala's President confirmed that they could care less what the Hoi Poloi think of them.

    If this is a US caper, it is the either the most ridicoulosly stupid one imaginable, or the most well thought out one in a very long time.

    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:03 pm GMT
    I had not connected the intelligence reports (recently spilled out of the Deep State) with the obvious. Thanks, Ron, for pointing out that it's hard to imagine how the NSA/CIA/whoever-collecting-part-of-the-85bln-we-spend-on-intelligence could report on this in November when the sources from which they would have derived that information (the Chinese government itself) didn't know until December 31st, or shortly before that date when they reported to the WHO.

    Someone, in covering up for blowing the response to the virus, really dropped the ball.

    JQ , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:09 pm GMT
    Ill leave it at this :
    davidgmillsatty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:15 pm GMT
    Scientists from the UK have a recent paper on the mutations of Corona-19.

    Here is part of the abstract:

    In a phylogenetic network analysis of 160 complete human severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) genomes, we find three central variants distinguished by amino acid changes, which we have named A, B, and C, with A being the ancestral type according to the bat outgroup coronavirus. The A and C types are found in significant proportions outside East Asia, that is, in Europeans and Americans. In contrast, the B type is the most common type in East Asia, and its ancestral genome appears not to have spread outside East Asia without first mutating into derived B types, pointing to founder effects or immunological or environmental resistance against this type outside Asia.

    And here are the findings in diagram form:

    https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/04/07/2004999117

    I think these findings throw lots of water on any bioweapon claims. But others may differ in their opinions.

    It definitely does indicate that the virus did not come from a Wuhan lab or the Wuhan wet market. It originated in Southern China where most people knowledgeable about bat viruses expect bat viruses to originate.

    Rafael Martorell , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:15 pm GMT
    you are mistakenly assuming and given for granted that this epidemic is much more lethat than others,that the total closure is beneficial and not harmfull,that is the solution ,you are deciding who to try to save regardless of the millions of victims of this economic harakiri,and there are many epidemiologists who disagree with you.
    journey80 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:15 pm GMT
    "COVID-19" testing in the U.S. is unverified, developed by the CDC. Which should tell you what you need to know about its credibility.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/has-covid-19-testing-made-the-problem-worse-confusion-regarding-the-true-health-impacts/5709323

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:17 pm GMT
    Post-Corona, there seems to be a lot of wannabes angling for one of Ron's coveted golden showers, I mean stars.
    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:18 pm GMT
    One more thought: The US has over 25 bio-warfare labs that are located next door to Russia and China that have been called out before for their sloppy or maybe deliberate release of pathogens.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-biological-warfare-program-in-the-spotlight-again/5654064

    How many of those kind of labs does Russia or China have in Mexico or Canada?

    None that I'm aware of.

    Like the old saying goes: "Admit nothing, Deny everything and Make counter-accusations." Sounds like Humpty Trumpty's Covid blame-shifting plan.

    Ozymandias , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:29 pm GMT
    @Jeremygg5

    The WHO too only had high praises for China's transparency and efficiency.

    Would that be the same WHO that said chinese disease was not communicable between humans and that we should keep letting infected people into the country? That's who we should trust? Or should we trust the communist government that shut down domestic travel to and from Wuhan, because they were trying to protect the rest of THEIR country, while still allowing international travel, because they wanted the rest of the planet infected?

    This virus may or may not have been engineered, and may have come from the lab or the wet market. These things are debatable. But what is absolutely not debatable is that once the virus was loose, China choose to DELIBERATELY infect the rest of the world. These are people whose numbers we should trust?

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:30 pm GMT
    @Ozymandias " Lol. I can't believe you're doubling down on this jackassery."

    Once you realize that the alt-right is a limited hangout, it makes perfect sense.

    Jus' Sayin'... , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:30 pm GMT
    @hs4691506

    " I think it strange that now we have all these cross-overs from the animal kingdom."

    In actuality, we've regularly had these crossovers and almost all seem to emanate from somewhere in China, e.g.,

    1889–1890 Asian or Russian Flu Pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1889%E2%80%931890_flu_pandemic

    1918-1919 "Spanish" Flu Pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Hypotheses_about_the_source Despite the name the most likely theory is that this pathogen, an H1N1 virus, originated in China and mutated to become highly lethal in Europe or European-settled countries as a result of WW I. S

    1957-1958 Asian Flu Pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957%E2%80%9358_influenza_pandemic

    1968-1969 Hong Kong Flu Pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_flu

    2002-2004 SARS outbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome

    2009-2010 Swine Flu Pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic A new strain of the H1N1 virus type that was responsible for the 1918-1919 Pandemic

    Robert White , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:33 pm GMT
    Taking a scientific approach to American deep state biowarfare attack on China's Wuhan district is telling in so far as Americans literally control tertiary education throughout the entire world via funding in the trillions.

    If the deep state wants to eliminate academics it can do so with merely a phone call to Law Enforcement branches at a moments notice so that research & hard drives can be confiscated and destroyed early on in investigations.

    Once the media & journalistic propaganda arms of state get hold of the official talking points to be disseminated the end game zero sum result is usually exactly what the state arms of propaganda have wanted all along.

    To be frank, I am an Intel thinker and am well aware of the details of the CIA led biowarfare attack on China, but attaining the required data in empirical form via Requests for Information from government is NOT going to ever yield synthesis required for scientific peer-review research.

    Bottom line is that the CIA had one CIA Agent/Operative deploy the nCov-19 in late October as the USA Military contingent was departing Wuhan district. The operative deployed the bioweapon via glass ampule smashed onto the ground to the entrance way for the Wuhan restaurant district near to the Wuhan Wet Market. Moreover, his CIA handler gave him the protocol & instruction on deployment of the bioweapon back in the United States of America long before the actual deployment.

    Lastly, Fort Detrick scientists developed the Chimera super-spreading viral pathogenicity with a herd of pigs in the USA before hand in around 2012. Logistics of setting up the Wuhan BSL-4 laboratory scientists for the false flag event of biowarfare were dependent upon academic arrests before hand so that deflection & impression management for governance would clearly be able to utilize plausible deniability where required.

    In sum, as one acutely aware of the bioterrorism that the United States of America has unleashed on the world covertly I, for one, can assure all that the US Deep State knowingly unleashed nCov-19 to undermine China's meteoric rise in the financial world due to America's incompetence writ large across the board since the Great Financial Crisis revealed that America is swimming naked and their Emperor is wearing no clothes to reveal his infinitesimally small Johnson in contradistinction to President Johnson's Johnson which was historically infamous.

    P.S. The USA Deep State can get in line to lick my balls in deference to my superior intellect.

    Thank you, thank you very much!

    RW

    anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:33 pm GMT
    First, can researchers take a look at this virus and determine with certainty whether it was artificially concocted in a lab or if it simply evolved out in the open? If so then that would help focus the discussion. If not then things will remain opaque.
    The Iranian government outbreak is strange but then people congregating with each other, like at ski resorts, pass it to each other. If it was a US biowarfare attack then how did US agents get access to them? They wouldn't have the cover of some delegation to an event such as military games. But what was the effect on Iran? Zero. Some top leaders got sick and some older members died. They have replacements and the government continues without missing a beat. This idea that an ideal bioweapon would be highly contagious with a low lethal rate so as to tie up resources and halt the economy sounds good but in practice it's hardly more than harassment. It slowed up the Chinese economy but that's a temporary blip and they're back now. The US and other countries are hardest hit economically. Many businesses will never recover. This is self-inflicted. The lethality of this virus looks to be increasingly lower and lower each time one looks despite all the Chicken Littles who were screaming that the sky was about to fall. Was there a purpose for that?
    The Wuhan outbreak coincided with the military games but things happen at random times as it is. People were crowded in there. The various plagues and viruses have been going from East to West for a very long time now. The problem is that currently there are many who have an interest in lying and misdirecting things which further muddy the waters.
    Astuteobservor II , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:36 pm GMT
    @Emslander What is crazy and funny is that supposed trump supporters thinks China would shrink it's economy by 6.8% for the first quarter of 2020 to help Trump's opposition.

    The same supposed supporters don't even realized that the best way for trump to win the next election is to stamp out this damn virus asap. Denying is not going to work. Testing n quarantine combo is what would work. It is why trump changed his tune.

    Dumbasses. Crazy n stupid.

    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:42 pm GMT
    Who's a track record of extreme malfeasance against China, since ww2 ?

    1950 Korean war,
    1959 Tibet,
    1962 Indo./sino war,
    1965 [[[CIA/MI5]]] INdon genocide on ethnic Chinese.
    1989 TAM,
    1998 Indon pogrom , mass rapes on ethnic Chinese
    1999 BOmbing of Chinese embassy in ex Yugo,
    2001 Hainan spy plane, Chinese pilot died.
    2003 SARS1,
    2008 Tibet riots,
    2009 Xinjiang bloodbath,
    2013 Bird flu H7N9 , Asia pivot
    2014 Xinjiang, HK, Mh370, bubonic plague, Ebola, Dengue,
    2018 bird flu, H7N9
    2019 HK, Xinjiang, swine flu, army worms,
    2020 SARS2, H5N1, locusts .

    All biowarfare attacks highlighted.

    refl , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:43 pm GMT
    @Vaterland

    And there were also the proxy-war in Ukraine and the refugee crisis: the latter at minimum a fallout of US-Israeli wars in the Middle East and the Zionist assault against Libya; yet not unlikely itself a direct assault against Europe. And not only Willy Wimmer, closest adviser to our old chancellor Helmut Kohl, strongly suspected as much already back in 2015.

    Thanks for that context. It is exactly what I am trying to call attention to the whole time. Regardless, how much reality there is to Corona, my issue is the overall timing in the geopolitical context, with Europe being torn apart between the Angloamericans and China / Russia on the other side. That was the agenda anyway, so how is it possible that this threat appears at this very moment?

    It can be said that had Corona not happened, the powers to be would have needed to invent it.

    Else, in skimming the comments, I find that until now (with some 140 comments) there are hardly any discussions, but everyone pushing their own narratives.
    Mabe, it is possible to get away from the question, how and if Corona is deadly to the context that is developing. I have to admit that I did not take Corona serious enough from the start, not as an illness, but as a fundamental threat to our societies. In that sense, it is indeed a war.

    Jus' Sayin'... , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
    @hs4691506 There was also some evidence that Chinese researchers under his supervision had smuggled samples of his work out of their labs and back to China. Chinese researchers, working in the USA and Canada, have a history of smuggling viral and other lab samples back ti China. It's part of a much larger pattern of Chinese espionage and intellectual theft.

    A search on DuckDuckGo.Com using the following search string, "chinese scientists smuggling viral samples", turns up a lot of useful information on smuggling of viral and other biological samples. (I no longer trust Google. DuckDuckGo is less censored and does not track its users)

    Similar searches using the strings "chinese intellectual theft" and "chinese scientific espionage" will provide a broader picture.

    BTW, I believe that Israel and the USA have both been conducting research into potential bio-weapons. I would not be surprised if the Chinese got a leg up on such research by espionage targeting both countries. Of the three, the USA's research is probably the most benign/least vicious. I suspect that the Israelis have been ruthlessly researching and developing biological weapons, just as they did nuclear and chemical weapons. The Chinese have probably been doing bio-weapons research just as ruthlessly. The biggest concern with the Chinese is that, compared against Israel and the USA, their lab safety, security and containment procedures are lax to an obscenely dangerous degree. One can only hope that after the Wuhan outbreak, this attitude, if not the Chinese bio-weapons research, will change.

    Hang em high , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:53 pm GMT
    This is a model opening argument for an ICC bill of indictment against the CIA command structure. The bird's-eye view is exactly right – all of CIA's gravest crimes have been most evident not at the detailed technical level but at the organizational level. CIA can shred all the MIPRs and RFPs and after-action reports they want, but the proof of all CIA crime is public information about the actions of CIA focal points in government. (Incidentally, one example you don't mention is official obstruction, including CDC, of Helen Chu's coronavirus testing. That would have shown that COVID-19 was far too widespread for a single introduction from Wuhan. Another example is the series of airport clusterfucks that muddled US haplotypes when Chinese researchers noted that they point to US origins.)

    The presumption of incompetence probably has its own CIA memo analogous to 1035-960. If they can get you to tacitly assume that CIA works in the national interest, but ineptly, then you misinterpret everything. CIA is a criminal enterprise with ongoing profit centers that fund opportunistic crimes from asset-stripping to aggression.

    When you're using a banned biological weapon, domestic casualties confer important benefits:

    First, damage to the US can help obfuscate attribution. Philip Giraldi articulates that line in its clearest form, Why would the government shoot itself in the foot like that?

    Second, US contagion offers a pretext for domestic repression: house arrest; overt contact chaining illegally undertaken by NSA for decades; forcible derogation of your rights of assembly and association.

    Third, US economic devastation is used as a pretext for looting the fisc on an unprecedented scale. Blackrock now performs central planning on behalf of the Fed, forcing the state to guarantee a overwhelming volume of worthless and fraudulent securities.

    Illegal warfare that is difficult to attribute has one intractable problem. It's a sneak attack in breach of the Hague Convention Relative to the Opening of Hostilities. That convention was the legal justification for the first use of nuclear weapons. So if Russia and China nuke the beltway into a sinkhole of molten basalt, that's only fair.

    If it is established that COVID-19 is a banned biological weapon, this is self-evidently the gravest crime in world history. The attack manifestly constituted aggression with an absolutely indiscriminate weapon. It defies considerations of proportionality with unknown global effects. The Nazi regime was extirpated for much less.

    The evidence is very close to probative, and mounting.

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/04/18/breaking-exclusive-cias-covid-19-weaponization-program-outed-in-long-buried-ny-times-expose/

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/04/18/the-pentagon-bio-weapons/

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/04/18/pravda-us-army-created-covid-19-in-2015-research-proofs-or-debunking-you-pick/

    https://www.nature.com/articles/274334a0

    https://www.unz.com/wwebb/all-roads-lead-to-dark-winter/

    https://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:56 pm GMT
    Apr 16, 2020 Corona Virus, Economic & Social Collapse: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

    Corona Virus, Economic & Social Collapse: Bankruptcy, Debt & Poverty.

    [MORE]

    Apr 4, 2020 ΝYC-ΙCU DR unknowingly describes the EFFECTS of 60GHz on patients.

    Mar 16, 2020 CONFIRMED! 5G Forced Installation In Schools Nationwide During COVID-19 Lockdown

    Guys, you need to get involved and do anything you can to spread this information.

    AriusArmenian , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:56 pm GMT
    @Tor597 I couldn't say it any better than Tor597.
    Americans are not capable of even thinking that their elites could be so evil.
    Robert Snefjella , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 2:58 pm GMT
    There is the question of natural vs artificial origin of the novel corona virus, and from my layman's research and considerations it seems increasingly that an artificial origin is extremely likely. The pertinent technology is now widely available, there has been a massive ongoing effort in the field since the 2nd WW, and many researchers and knowledgeable people are drawing the conclusion of likely artificial origin: So, for example, George Webb's work, or the Czech scientist Dr.Sona Pekova, PhD, who near the end of the video linked to describes the virus in such a way as to indicate a great likelihood of artificial creation.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmL7okhbVzU&feature=youtu.be

    There are many possible perpetrators. And a few likely suspects.

    The ultimate health implications of the new virus are impossible to say with certainty at this point: For example, Paul Craig Roberts' website's latest title is "Bad News From the Virus if Correct", with the point being that there are now known to be a lot of different strains with presumably different potential for harm, but there may be many more not recognized.

    There are additional contextual considerations that will have consequences which are anyone's guess. So for example, last year saw many widespread agricultural catastrophes and difficulties which were usually weather related. If the weather continues to be uncooperative, in conjunction with food production and transportation problems related to the virus, in conjunction with the African Swine Flu disaster, then human health and food security, and thus health, on a large scale may be affected.

    Another contextual consideration is the recent rapid and accelerating deployment of 5G technology, which many are concerned can make life more vulnerable to health problems. It may just be coincidental, but worth noting, that tiny San Marino, enclosed by Italy, boasted of being the European leader in the rollout of 5G technology, and is now the world leader in corona virus deaths per million, by a long shot (San Marino with 1179 deaths per million as of today compared to second place Spain with 455 per million, and yes, Spain has been among the most ambitious countries in rolling out 5G in many cities. And Wuhan was the very poster 'child' of 5G. Just saying.)

    Shutting down the world economy seems rather dire. But it may just be the impetus for a radical rethink of the basic structure and design of the global economic system.

    The global paradigm which in economic terms might be described as globalism, or 'when private corporations rule the world', or neo-liberalism, or plutocracy running amuck, or grasping for 'global government', or the aftermath of the chimera of 'full spectrum domination', or in the wreckage of Rockefeller's and Kissinger's et al wet dream, or democracy spurned, is now inescapably obviously retarded, dysfunctional: a fundamental design flaw if you want humanity and Earth to thrive. In short, the culture of deception.

    Someone has suggested as symptomatic of our present predicament a cartoon featuring Fauci with his bio-weapon declaring this as 'the age of the Ork', with crazed Bill Gates as Gollum wielding a syringe and gleefully chortling 'my precious!'.

    The local, one's back yard, the decentralized, the careful common sense community, the regional, and the actually democratic national, with the public interest protected by the public, and much honest discourse, as one basic design alternative.

    vot tak , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:00 pm GMT
    Useful article by Unz which connects the dots well. One important dot which is missing, though, in his analysis of the psywar promoting propaganda that the virus leaked out of a lab in Wuhan, and is a Chinese biowarfare agent, is that this psywar originated with an israeli military-intelligence operative. One dany shoham. This individual was also deeply involved in the "iraq has wmds" psywar operation at the beginning of the century. More on that dot and how it connects to the others, later.

    A few days ago I wrote this about how the israeloamericans are framing their psywar campaign against China:

    The israeloamericans are working on a several level strategy which includes back-ups in my opinion. The israeloamericans are trying to cover all the bases at once.

    So they claim China created the virus in a lab, in case it gets out it was lab created, meaning israel or the usa created it in a lab. The israeloamericans claim the virus leaked out of the Wuhan lab in case evidence is found that israeloamerica deliberately planted the virus in Wuhan or it spread from a source in the usa through some other vector. The israeloamericans claim China mislead the world about the virus so people wont notice the reality that China has successfully thwarted the virus, while trump & co. have continued making it worse. The claptrap about China under reporting victims is a variation of the latter tactic. And so on.

    Is what is being reported in the following article "damage control"?

    Neither 'lab' nor 'wet market'? Covid-19 outbreak started months EARLIER and NOT in Wuhan, ongoing Cambridge study indicates

    https://www.rt.com/news/486194-study-coronavirus-southern-china/

    Another vector in the israeloamerican preemptive strategy? Now that research is showing the virus may have been infecting people earlier and neither a market in Wuhan, or even Wuhan itself, may be where it originated?

    With regard to western response to the pandemic, especially american, the delay in israel's trump colonial regime's containment response to the virus tells me they deliberately wanted the virus to spread across the country and cause the ruckus it is now causing. The question is why israel had them do this.*

    * Compare the israeli response, IE: strong proactive containment strategy, to the weak responses in most zionazi colonies. It is clear there is an actual strategy underlying this difference. And it entails more than israel being sacrosanct.

    Keep in mind that trump, and his corrupt regime, are israel's property. More specifically, they tepresent the israeli likud freakshow (netanyahoo and related subhuman garbage). Most of what trump says and the policies his regime follow, originate from tel aviv. Trump's cowardly "blame China" campaign, duplicated by the zionazi western media (commonly misnamed the msm) is israeli psywar.

    davidgmillsatty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:00 pm GMT
    @onebornfree See my post at 135 regarding three different variants: A, B and C. The most prevalent in Asia is B and the most prevalent variants in Europe and the US are A and C. So it could also be that A and C variants are more virulent than B.
    Felix Culpa , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
    "By any reasonable measure, the response to this global health crisis by China and most East Asian countries has been absolutely exemplary, while that of many Western countries has been equally disastrous. Maintaining reasonable public health has been a basic function of governments since the days of the city-states of Sumeria, and the sheer and total incompetence of America and most of its European vassals has been breathtaking. If the Western media attempts to pretend otherwise, it will permanently forfeit whatever remaining international credibility it still possesses."

    So saying, Ron Unz forfeits whatever credibility he might have retained by now acknowledging the data emerged from "the fog of war" he found himself pronouncing in a month or more ago.

    Like Unz, and after examining the relevant Chinese data, epidemiologists Knut Wittkowski( almost a month ago) saluted the Asian approach to handling the novel virus threat.

    Unlike Unz, Wittkowski revealed that what was salutary was the Chinese government's allowing the populace to gain herd immunity before instituting any lockdown measures. (rendering the lockdown measures a mystery from a scientific point of view).

    So, and according to Wittkowski- a man with credentials relevant to this story, yet completely ignored by Unz' investigative article- the incompetence of Western governments cited by Unz is the clean reverse of what he claims: it is the incompetence of ignoring what the competent Chinese did not ignore, namely, the sound scientific counsel to allow the virus to spread, granting the herd immunity to the populace which protects the elderly and fragile self-quarantining until that immunity is gained.

    Anon [312] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
    @TG There's 3 possibilities:

    1) Virus is US bioweapon attack on China
    2) Virus is China's own bioweapon accident
    3) Virus happened in nature, and everybody is trying to profit off the crisis or contain/direct the damage to their own interests.

    That's 66% percent chance it's an accident.

    Government in power were sane enough to avoid nuclear war as recently as 40 years ago. Why would they be crazier today? Biowarfare is Mutually Assured Destruction, too. If people can model this away, please provide a link.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:08 pm GMT
    @swamped You are cognitively blind to the obvious -- the ZUSA has become ZUSSR (minus excellent Soviet educational system). Before lamenting "Chinese despots" and "their contempt for civil liberties," think for a moment about the fate of Assange (why he is in a high-security prison?) and about the Banksters on the march (the financialization of the US economy).

    What is the state of "liberties" in the US and the UK? -- Gay parades. Quantitative Easings for eternity.
    Why some 1000 American military bases encircle the globe? Why 25 American biofare laboratories reside in Europe? You are cheerleading for Cheneys and Rubins (read General Smedley Butler). https://fas.org/man/smedley.htm
    http://armswatch.com/the-pentagon-bio-weapons/?__cf_chl_jschl_tk_

    Libya used to be a prosperous state with universal healthcare and excellent educational opportunities. Enter the "non-totalitarian" and "non-despotic" deciders to bring in "liberties." First, the US/NATO expropriated Libyan gold, and then a regular business of "liberation" took place: since the "non-totalitarian" and "non-despotic" liberators entered Libya, a civil war commenced, the healthcare and educational systems have collapsed and slave markets sprang.

    Or perhaps you are proud of freedom of information in the US?

    This important story was immediately summarized in many of the world's other most prestigious publications, but encountered an absolute wall of silence in our own country.

    How much trillions have been disappeared by the Pentagon? -- 21 (twenty-one). A lot of money that could be used for initiating great national projects of all kinds.
    Why the US industries have been relocated to China? -- Because this is what US corporations demanded and got. What deciders want, they get. Read General Smedley Butler, again.

    httpx://dilyana.bg/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/1.png

    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:09 pm GMT
    @anon Another problem with your imagination is that it doesnt pass the Who Test kit

    Nobody has produced a smoking gun.
    Its all about probability.

    By all indications,
    A FUKUS FF is the most likely .
    Your CON theory reeks of the classic western projection..

    Bandits crying robbery

    James Scott , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT
    @Tor597 Yes Ron's tribe is doing great because of this.
    MLK , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:18 pm GMT
    @Otto von Komsmark

    For many weeks President Trump and his political allies had regularly dismissed or minimized this terrible health threat, and suddenly now faced with such a manifest disaster, they have naturally begun seeking other culprits to blame.

    I stopped reading after this childish fib.

    Si1ver1ock , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:20 pm GMT
    I'm a little worried about The Unz Review. This pandemic is already being used to consolidate the economy and The Powers That Be are likely to use it to settle scores and purge dissident voices.

    TruthDig is down and other media is likely to go down soon as ad revenue collapses. I would have advised ad revenue from foreign sources like Aeroflot (and others outside the U.S. Oligarchy), but airlines are collapsing and international travel is likely to be down for a while.

    Maybe just open a Patreon Account and put a link in the sidebar.

    It may be a good time to be extra cautious and gird your loins as they say.

    Jake , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:20 pm GMT
    Whatever anyone may make of Unz's assessment, I think everyone not insane or evil or mindlessly jingoistic should agree with this: "Everyone knows that America's ruling elites are criminal, crazy, and also extremely incompetent."

    By the way – I hope Unz has changed his mind about the bombing of Serbia. Anytime Neocons assert the need to use violence to help Moslems, the reasonable man smells not a rat, but a million putrid rats.

    Tor597 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:23 pm GMT
    @Pheasant Zerohedge used to be libertarian and antiestablishment but something changed and they are now right wing neocons.
    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I would not be surprised if the Chinese got a leg up on such research by espionage targeting both countries. [SIC]
    Of the three, the USA's research is probably the most benign/least vicious [ SIC ]

    ROFLAMO

    How fucking old are you kid ?

    Back to your Harry Potter forchrissake
    This is an adult site.
    Do you want me to inform your mom ?

    Jake , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT
    @Tor597 Correct. The Elites of the Anglo-Zionist Empire will get richer from all this, while the white American middle and working classes will get poorer.

    Much the same will happen in the UK and France and other European nations.

    RT , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:24 pm GMT
    This and many other analyses focus primarily on governments, USA government, Chinese communistic government etc. and their past misadventures as proofs for their involvement or not involvement in the current disaster. I would like to see at least one extensive analyse of possible involvement of the nongovernment governments. Their interests and gains from this situation. Regards!
    Tor597 , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
    @Jason Crew If the US had come away with minimal damage there would not be the outrage required to go to war with China.

    So America had to be infected and the pain had to be real.

    Also, while main Street Americans are feeling the pain, the elites have been bailed out and will buy assets on pennies to the dollar.

    There was a bubble that had to pop anyways, this way the elites get bailed out. Remember how many CEOs retired just before this hit?

    davidgmillsatty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:31 pm GMT
    Cambridge geneticist discusses the three strains of Coronavirus:
    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:32 pm GMT
    @Felix Culpa Another victim of Knut Wittkowski.
    Ano0nymous , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:33 pm GMT
    @denk Not the "war crimes" bit again. Look, the whole operation was one big war crime, and that according to the US Secretary of State. Same with Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq -- overthrow of another state for no compelling reason. So what? War is war, and China can either participate or not. If it participate, it can expect to become part of the general destruction.
    Analogy -- if somebody is in your house and gets violent, that's a crime. You are legally able to protect yourself. If the person starts to run, you can't shoot she/he/it because she/he/it is no longer a threat. Sure, the other she/he/it started the crime, but that doesn't mean you can commit a crime of your own (shooting somebody when she/he/it isn't an immediate threat). Should she/he/it turn around and start returning fire, well, it just might be that she/he/it is legally doing so.

    So enough of this "you stepped on a crack and so you've transgressed the law in one particular, so you are absolutely condemned" stuff. You want to play that game, people get tired of it, and it has a bad endgame. Try playing it on COVID-19. COVID-19 might listen to you and depart. Go, use your moral authority and save us all.

    FLgeezer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:40 pm GMT
    Never let a crisis go to waste. The following borders on the hilarious and the propaganda never ends.

    https://www.local10.com/news/world/2020/04/21/israeli-survivors-remember-holocaust-amid-virus-quarantine/

    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:47 pm GMT

    "..if a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be."

    http://tjrs.monticello.org/letter/327

    From a Thomas Jefferson letter to Charles Yancey.

    Since the Israeli masterminded 9/11 false flag, the MSM has told us a gazillion lies about what DID NOT happen that day.
    When those lies started losing luster, we were told Bin Laden was killed, but they offered no proof, other than "Trust Us.'

    Then we started getting lies about ISIS, DAESH, al Nusra etc, that they were even worse than al CIA Duh, when in fact, they were started, funded, paid, protected and give air cover by the US/Israel and the Kingdom of Head Choppers.

    Now the same MSM is braying that Covid will be the end of the world, unless we give up our freedoms?

    Bull. We're being lied to again and the sad part is, many are falling for this latest line of horse apples.

    In Coronavirus We Trust: Medical Surveillance State For A Gov That's Experimented On You 239 Times

    https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/daily-wrap-up/coronavirus-we-trust-medical-surveillance-state-for-gov-thats-experimented-on-you-239-times/

    Aleksander , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:47 pm GMT
    When are people going to realize that the mandatory vaccine is ready NOW – Gates, Fauci, Davos, the oligarchs, and the usual suspects just needed to lay the groundwork. It's ready to go now. Doesn't take much of a gedanken experiment to see the end-game here.
    Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:50 pm GMT
    @utu "Yes, what if the chief objective was not to hurt China by disrupting its society and economy but to make the whole world angry with China."

    If the planning was like 9/11, then both of these objectives would have been carefully scrutinized and maximized.

    Bear in mind something, please: who says these bastards are finished unleashing designer bugs?

    Would it not be wisest for these evil geniuses to keep the bugs coming, intensifying the impact so that the continuously simmering anger of the increasingly desperate masses can be directed to boil over at the Chinese menace when the 'elites' deem it necessary and proper. And with exploding unemployment numbers, especially among the young, and no real short term job or career prospects, these psychopathic 'elites' have a ready-made source for boots on the ground, should that be mandated.

    Of course, I hope all this turns out to not be the case. But if 9/11 was any indication, these bastards will be brazen and shamelessly murderous.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:53 pm GMT
    This site's credibility is going down faster than the financial markets. It's only good for entertainment value at this stage.
    follyofwar , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:59 pm GMT
    @Max Powers When you said that Ron Unz lost you with his defense of NATO in the unnecessary Serbian war, I hope that you read the rest of the article rather than stopping there. I, too, smelled a Bill Clinton obfuscation at the time, as I always do when any US president sends our troops to war. I'm a little surprised that Mr. Unz didn't.

    However, I respect his honesty, and he more than redeemed himself in the rest of his well-researched and well-written article. It did much to bolster my belief that the CIA/Neocons are behind it. Although, discounting the unfairly derided Beltway outsider Mr. Trump, I've never considered the likes of such people as West Point grad SOS Pompeo as being incompetent. To paraphrase the former CIA head: "we lie, we cheat, we steal."

    annamaria , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 3:59 pm GMT
    @Hail The 9/11 beats it.
    Weston Waroda , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:00 pm GMT

    But America and several European countries avoiding adopting these same early measures such as widespread testing, quarantine, and contact-tracing, and have paid a terrible price for their insouciance.

    For someone ordinarily quite careful in your use of terminology, you conflate the term quarantine with lockdown. This is usually being done these days in the media to make a lockdown seem less unreasonable to the insouciant public. Properly a quarantine is the isolation of the sick to prevent the spread of contagion to the healthy public. What we have are lockdowns, restricting the free movement of the healthy population. These have been resorted to out of the desire "to do something," but unfortunately as you must know, there is absolutely no empirical evidence that lockdowns do any good when all is said and done, and they do considerable economic harm. Sweden used a relaxed social distancing approach without a lockdown, and their mortality rate is currently less than that of most countries that resorting to this authoritarian approach.

    Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:01 pm GMT
    @Quintus "Another financial reset was also long overdue, as Greg Mannarino and others have pointed out: the coronavirus cover was too perfect of a tool for deflecting the guilt from the Fed and the banksters; killing many birds with one stone, the virus is also a 2) powerful psy-op hurting China's image in the world, 3) further delivering a strong blow to its export-driven economy; 4) it sets the stage for the cashless society ("dirty bills not accepted here!"), the advent of digital currencies and 5) top-down surveillance."

    Exactly!

    This planned-demic is like a Timex watch for the PTB: the gift that keeps on giving.

    You are spot-on when you say that digital currencies and top-down surveillance will be enabled by this oh-so-convenient viral pandemic.

    Like I said, it's a neoliberal zionist-neocon elitist's wet dream come true, maybe even more than 9/11 was.

    I guess we all get to watch, wait and see what happens next .

    Si1ver1ock , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:14 pm GMT
    One thing I have been waiting for is confirmation that HIV is somehow involved in the virus, making it a chimera and tipping the scale towards bioweapon.
    Greg the American , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:19 pm GMT
    @anon If Trump was in on it, he didn't do much of a job making himself a hero, several missteps are noticeable in the view of 20/20 hindsight, even if he intentionally wanted to crash the economy he would have scripted it better.
    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:19 pm GMT
    @Ano0nymous I've difficulty reading your incoherent rant, but this one sticks out

    overthrow of another state for no compelling reason. So what? War is war

    Enuff said.

    No more comment.

    36 ulster , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:19 pm GMT
    @MLK Unz.com seems to be less a blog than an online asylum; Ron and most of the KrazyKommentariat have really flipped their tinfoil Trilbys this time. This site is worse than Infowars is reputed to be–yet utterly without the entertainment value. You wonder why Pat Buchanan, Steve Sailer and Bertie Woostershire continue to post on this site. And, yes, why I bother to comment.
    Mustapha Mond , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:23 pm GMT
    @Tor597 "Zerohedge used to be libertarian and antiestablishment but something changed and they are now right wing neocons."

    Their true colors are emerging for all to see.

    I recognized early on what exactly Zerohedge was about: sayanim-directed, intelligently controlled opposition. Very intelligently controlled, I should say.

    Or as I call it, "Zio-hedge".

    The trick is to give lots of good analysis and establish credibility, and then on the absolutely critical issues, subtly reinforce the neocon narrative. Then, slowly over time, not so subtly. Then, when the moment is ripe, openly and strongly support the neocon narrative. Again, a very intelligent and effective technique.

    Sadly, we are now at the point of "openly" reinforcing the neocon narrative ..

    Anon [223] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:24 pm GMT
    Ron,
    Your article is very good! Thank you for shedding some light on this issue

    I would like to summarize a rebuttal to some of the points expressed in this article

    However, your chart depicting America and China economic trends is statistically misleading

    America started from a much higher bar than China, and it is harder for richer countries to grow. Furthermore, an additional dollar in per capita GDP for America is a less % growth than it would be for China.

    Here is the GDP per capita growth from the World Bank for America vs China.

    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=US-CN

    Hardly, what your graph shows at all. In fact, this shows America adding more in Per capita GDP in real terms than China over the last thirty years.

    It seems the issue is that you are thinking that China's exponential growth will continue till the point where it strongly surpasses the USA, like the Coronavirus's growth, but countries don't work like that. Unless you want to believe there was some policy reason for why Japan went from 10% to 1% growth in ten years.

    Second, with respect to the domestic impoverishment of America, I think you are mistaken here. Most of those who are impoverished in America are immigrants and Black people, one group because of their recent arrival and location in America's most expensive cities. The other group because of their lack of time preference, so they don't save.

    America has a higher household savings rate than all of Western Europe and Japan.
    Per the OCED:
    https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-savings.htm#indicator-chart

    The US has three times the savings rate of Japan!

    Additionally, the US has ten times the household disposable income of China as of last year, though this may change with the coronavirus:
    https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-disposable-income.htm
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/278698/annual-per-capita-income-of-households-in-china/

    Additionally, How did China identify the virus so quickly? It is fairly hard to tell, even from those who died. According your own article, China shut down when they had 11 deaths, and sequenced the genome when they had even less. That has never happened before, and I feel that is suspicious to me. The offical Chinese narrative is that the Wuhan Goverment dropped the ball, so how did they catch the disease so early?

    Rahan , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:24 pm GMT
    An article by Mr. Unz is always worth the wait and then the read, no matter if I agree a 100%, 60%, or even just 20% with what has been written.

    A real delight, and a sort of Christmasy feeling. Which is a very important psychological boost for the likes of me in such weird, weird times. Thanks!

    denk , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:29 pm GMT
    USAF excercise before 911
    http://911blogger.com/news/2015-09-17/air-defense-exercise-month-911-was-based-around-osama-bin-laden-carrying-out-aerial-attack-washington//

    UK/France War game before Libya invasion,
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/when-war-games-go-live-staging-a-humanitarian-war-against-southland/24351?print=1

    A Haiti Disaster Relief Scenario Tested by US Military One Day Before the Earthquake
    Humanitarian excercise before Haiti quake
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/a-haiti-disaster-relief-scenario-was-envisaged-by-the-us-military-one-day-before-the-earthquake/17122

    Crimson [sic] Contagion,
    An year long excercise on pandemic from Red China prior to CV 19

    Another 'excercise' turning live ???

    MacOisdealbh , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:29 pm GMT
    The Winnipeg lab lead scientist, a Dr Plummer, dropped dead in Nigeria in early March.
    He more than likely added the HIV 1 content to the Wu V to allow it to spread since he had the MERS variant from 2014 on.
    His lab then had Wuhan Scientists escorted out by RCMP last summer.
    No info as to why was offered, and Plummer was buddies with the Harvard prof, and both were recipients of Epstien the rapists financial support.
    Ron always goes to the edge, but never ever steps off!!
    Epstein should be brought up, he gave many millions to the Harvard and MIT people for virus development!! Cui bono Ron, cui bono, by deception, make war!!!
    Anthony Aaron , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:33 pm GMT
    Not sure what to make of Mr. Unz's piece here -- there's a lot of room for any number of suspects to emerge as the guilty party here

    One of the earliest questions I had was just how did this virus get into Iran -- which naturally begs the question of who has the most visible and ongoing hatred of Iran -- other than israel -- and their stooge, the United States.

    The Newsweek article cited here about the class action lawsuits even mentions one of the plaintiff attorneys: "But Klayman claimed he has "whistleblowers with firsthand knowledge" of China's involvement in the viral outbreak who are currently residing in Israel and the United States and who can help substantiate this charge." So just who is it among 'whistleblowers' that reside in israel and in the United States (likely dual citizenship folks) -- other than israeli nationals?

    And, from this article: "But by late February Iran had become the second epicenter of the global outbreak. Even more surprisingly, its political elites had been especially hard-hit, with a full 10% of the entire Iranian parliament soon infected and at least a dozen of its officials and politicians dying of the disease, including some who were quite senior.

    " Across the entire world the only political elites that have yet suffered any significant human losses have been those of Iran, and they died at a very early stage, before significant outbreaks had even occurred almost anywhere else in the world outside China. Thus, we have America assassinating Iran's top military commander on Jan. 2nd and then just a few weeks later large portions of the Iranian ruling elites became infected by a mysterious and deadly new virus, with many of them soon dying as a consequence. Could any rational individual possibly regard this as a mere coincidence?"

    Even allowing for Iran's involvement by the chinese in its BRI -- how can anyone explain the virus so quickly targeting the elites in Iran's ruling class -- certainly they don't hang around with the chinese in Iran or elsewhere, do they?

    ld , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:36 pm GMT
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist Your list is too small. I laugh at these comments regarding China's lies and crimes. Americans are surely the most gullible people on the planet. They know their corrupt government steals and lies to them daily yet they can still be manipulated to jump on the bandwagon of blame and hate towards anyone at anytime with a few inciteful articles from the media.
    let me add to your list [MORE]
    MLK
    JFK
    Ruby
    USS Liberty
    911
    Venezuela
    Honduras
    Haiiti
    Hiroshima
    Vietnam
    Syria
    Palestine
    Russia
    Ukraine
    Libya
    Epstein
    Afghanistan
    32 Trillion dollars missing from the pentagone
    All Presidential Elections

    Hiding their own crimes against humanity, their government drug trade/sex trade/ chemical and biowarfare against poor countries.
    The US of Israel so exceptional.

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:44 pm GMT
    @Mustapha Mond Agreed . Like 9/11 there is plenty of evidence in the predictive programming/revelation of the method/social conditioning that the Coronavirus pandemic was many years in the making see, for example : "WTF? Olympic Opening Ceremony 2012-NHS" YouTube . Yes, the London 2012 Olympic Games opening ceremony revealed part of the plot of the Coronavirus plandemic. I was expecting that something like this was going to happen ,but figured the cabal/cult/globalists/freemasons wouldn't try to pull it off until Americans were disarmed but , when you have total control of the media , it is easy to create hysteria and brainwash the public into believing that the Coronavirus, which is probably no more than the flu ,is the plague and will wipeout mankind unless everyone is locked-down . As another commenter has noted ,they probably could not have pulled off the international Coronavirus psyop 10 to 20 years ago because they did not have control and ownership of the worldwide massmedia . septemberclues.info has a good, short essay on "The central role of the news media on 9/11." Unless you stop relying on news from NPR, MSNBC, New York Times , Washington Post, Fox News , CBS , NBC ,etc,etc you will remain brainwashed and unable to understand that we are living through a planned-demic with a frightening agenda .
    Chet Roman , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:44 pm GMT
    @anon "Please do not comment on things you clearly don't understand. It is estimated that no more than a few percent of the American population has been exposed to Sars2 (Covid-19)."

    The key word is "estimated". No one knows (not even you) the actual number of exposed Americans to the Wuhan virus. There have been some small random samples done by Dr.Bhattacharya that indicate that there is actually a large number of Americans that have been infected but are asymptomatic and that the final mortality rate will be closer to the annual flu or 0.1% to 0.2% instead of the guesstimate of 3%. The early studies are too small to think they are representative of the nation but the results indicate that larger studies are necessary in order to support nationwide policies, which are currently being made on hunches not science. About 60,000 to 80,000 died of the flu during the 2017 season when vaccines were available, so a large number of deaths during the flu season are not unusual and never required closing down the economy.

    [MORE]
    Gov. Cuomo was screaming at the top of his lungs that he needed tens of thousands of ventilators, thousands are now sitting in his warehouses unused. So much for estimates. Most of the early estimates were wrong by exaggerating the death rate, which turned out to be only a guess rather than based upon science.

    The CDC has been derelict in its duties over the years and has been giving poor advice. There are other experts in the field that have alternative views that are being ignored or dismissed and should at least be considered.

    Prof. Johan Giesecke
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=bfN2JWifLCY&feature=emb_logo

    Dr. John Ioannidis

    Dr. Jay Bhattacharya

    anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:50 pm GMT
    @Ayatollah Smith I have been reading much about Covid-19, but am waiting for anyone, in or out of government, trying to blame China and/or exonerate Uncle Sam to deal with a particular point that anyone can easily appreciate using only a timeline:

    The US needs to answer this question: HOW could US 'intelligence sources' possibly have known in November – or even October – of a potential pandemic of COVID-19 that would erupt – specifically in Wuhan – two months later? (Or that was already erupting in Wuhan at the time, unbeknownst to the Chinese?). I believe the entire world would demand the answer to this.

    So far, nothing. No refutation, no rationalization, just silence. Like WTC-7, is this Achilles' heel from which the Establishment can only limp away?

    I don't know who, what, when, where, or why this infection(s) began. But I'm certain that anyone dodging that particular question wants me not to.

    MLK , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:52 pm GMT
    @36 ulster Yeah . . .

    In 2016, when I finally cancelled by NYT subscription, I was asked why I was doing so. I explained that I didn't like having my intelligence systematically insulted.

    Like, I think, most UR readers, I'm game for pretty much anything as a general proposition.

    But poor Ron couldn't make it more than 100 words into a droning 7,400 words with discrediting himself.

    anonymous [206] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 4:55 pm GMT
    When CIA whacked JFK, the whole world outside the US iron curtain knew, but too bad. When CIA blew up OKC, the whole world knew, but hey, it's their business. When CIA knocked down the WTC, on the second try, and blew up the Pentagon a bit to start a war, the whole world knew, but Russia was tits-up, unable to do anything about it.

    This is different. CIA's illegal germ warfare is a maleficium, in legal doctrine going back to Grotius. CIA wronged the whole world, and the whole world has a joint obligation to hold CIA responsible. Russia and China made a missile gap for real, so now they can do it.

    This is war. This is the very beginning of the world war that will end the CIA regime:

    https://tass.com/world/1146127

    Gina's gonna swing for this.

    Anon [223] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:00 pm GMT
    @Anon One problem with the chart that can be fixed to make it more representative is that the two countries should start from the same base of comparison. If you use two different bases, then you get the wrong comparison.
    For instance, if you measured the US from China's base in 1980, the US added 40k in per capita gdp in the 40 years, reflecting a 4000% increase from China base in contrast to the 1400% increase that China had.
    If you use the same base, then America is what looks like a superior country.
    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:00 pm GMT
    @Mustapha Mond ZH isn't the only site whose true colors are showing
    annamaria , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:04 pm GMT
    @antitermite Unbelievable. A truly gifted researcher destroyed on the totally idiotic charges:

    Charles M. Lieber (born 1959) is an American chemist and pioneer in nanoscience and nanotechnology. In 2011, Lieber was named by Thomson Reuters as the leading chemist in the world for the decade 2000-2010 based on the impact of his scientific publications. He is known for his contributions to the synthesis, assembly and characterization of nanoscale materials and nanodevices, the application of nanoelectronic devices in biology, and as a mentor to numerous leaders in nanoscience.

    Awards:
    Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology (2001)
    MRS [Material Research Society] Medal (2002)
    ACS Award in the Chemistry of Materials (2004)
    NBIC Research Excellence Award in Nanotechnology, University of Pennsylvania (2007)
    Inorganic Nanoscience Award, ACS Division of Inorganic Chemistry (2009)
    Fred Kavli Distinguished Lectureship in Nanoscience, Materials Research Society (2010)
    Wolf Prize in Chemistry (2012)
    Nano Research Award, Tsinghua University Press/Springer (2013)
    IEEE Nanotechnology Pioneer Award (2013)
    Willard Gibbs Medal Award (2013)
    MRS Von Hippel Award (2016)
    Remsen Award (2016)
    NIH Director's Pioneer Award (2017 and 2008)
    John Gamble Kirkwood Award, Yale University (2018)
    Welch Award in Chemistry (2019)

    On January 28, 2020, Lieber was arrested on charges of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Defense and to Harvard investigators regarding his participation in China's Thousand Talents Program According to the Department of Justice's charging document, there are two counts of alleged crime committed by Lieber. The DOJ believes Lieber's statement was false

    Alleged counts. The DOJ believes . Yet the DOJ never tried to arrest Madam Ghislaine Maxwell whose crimes have been confirmed unequivocally. Any news of the arrest of Mossad-connected Mr. Lauder who stole American technologies? https://www.newcoldwar.org/mega-group-maxwells-and-mossad-the-spy-story-at-the-heart-of-the-jeffrey-epstein-scandal/

    As if deciders have decided that Charles Lieber knew too much to believe in their profitable fables.

    MarkinLA , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:06 pm GMT
    The only way "the US government did it" makes sense is if this was happening this coming November after Trump has been reelected. If the Deep State did it without Trump's approval, somebody will talk just like John Soloman claims FBI agents told him of the Russiagate conspiracy at the FBI while it was getting underway. Somebody would have alerted somebody loyal to Trump what was being planned. Remember Trump had to give the order to kill that Iranian general. The Deep State (full of Israel's toadies) didn't even do that on their own.

    Of course, there is an answer for everything. It even makes more sense for Trump to do it now so he can fix it. The Deep State did it but Trump now has to cover for them or risk the world finding out how incompetent he is.

    Rahan , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:07 pm GMT
    Concerning "wet markets", I'd just like to add that 99% of those are normal "butcher's markets" with lamb, beef, pork, chickens, and sea produce, and 1%, in specific parts of the country, selling all the Cthulhu fhtagn stuff.

    So China reopening some wet markets now is an argument neither for, nor against the zootropic theory. Because I'm pretty sure they're reopening the "lamb and chicken" wet markets, not the "H.R.Giger's nightmares" ones, such as the one in Wuhan that is one of the three possible origins.

    1) Wuhan wet market
    2) Wuhan lab
    3) Wuhan based foreign troops taking part in the military Olympics

    Has to be one of those three. Maybe the third was even accidental, but

    Johnny Walker Read , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:12 pm GMT
    Dr Andrew Kaufman exposing the 'Covid-19' magic trick – the sleight of hand that transformed society
    Happy Tapir , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
    There's some interesting information in the article for sure, but it seems to me that if the US were to perform clandestine bio weapons attacks on another country, the Middle East and Russia would surely be the primary targets. We rely on China for a lot of things, such as virtually all the goods sold at Walmart and China owns a great deal of our debt, so it would seem to me a financially strong China is in our interest.

    Moreover, plagues and epidemics, especially coronaviruses, have started in the far east as long as can be remembered.

    Trinity , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
    @Anonymous This is about the most common sense post I have read on this site. SPOT ON. OUR current problems in regards to immigration, racial issues, Black criminality, and this (((virus))) can all be traced to one group for the most part. Btw, I was in NYC about the same time perion in '83-'87 and haven't been back since, but from what I understand, it is far worse today. I actually didn't find it that bad back then even though crime and drugs were out of control. Probably because I was a twenty-something and having fun.

    Anyhow, as you said, WHY in the hell do ANY Americans, much less White Americans ALLOW RACIST JEWISH SUPREMACIST organizations have so much power over them. It isn't as if the ADL or $PLC try and hide their hatred for Whites. I would have no problem for any organization whether it be Black, Jewish or Hispanic fighting against racism, but lets face it, these organizations aren't fighting against racism, they main goal is to take away the rights of Whites or demonize WHITES ONLY.

    "Life isn't complicated." And this (((virus))) isn't either. This shit was MANUFACTURED and we can only guess by whom and what their future intentions are down the road. As usual the usual suspects have already pretty much revealed themselves to anyone out there really watching. For the WILLFULLY ignorant ostriches and chinadidit people, well, they must like be lorded over by a tiny group of people who don't give two shits about them or their children.

    Joey Pastrami , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:16 pm GMT
    @Thulean Friend

    the response of the West has been utterly atrocious either way.

    What do you people wish happened -- Trump-issued national lockdown order back in January? Why do the death counts need to be artificially inflated if this virus is as deadly as the media says?

    Joey Pastrami , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:17 pm GMT
    The American media is run by jews. It's amazing how the great counter-semite, Ron Unz, seems to be unaware of this fact.
    annamaria , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:19 pm GMT
    @Gaius Gracchus The US intelligence services knew about the virus in the middle of November 2019 (before Chinese) and alerted Israel, NATO, and the US government about the "emerging disease in Wuhan." https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-alerted-israel-nato-to-disease-outbreak-in-china-in-november-report/

    The US had the epidemics of a similar 'lung virus' (vaping disease) in January 2019 (a year before the announcement of the epidemic by Chinese). https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Pages/VapingIllness.aspx

    These injuries often seem like pneumonia, but they are not caused by an infectious disease, and they do not improve with antibiotics. Respiratory symptoms reported include: shortness of breath, chest pain, pain on breathing, and cough. Other symptoms reported by many patients include: fever, chills, nausea, weight loss, vomiting, diarrhea, or abdominal pain.

    Fuerchtegott , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:21 pm GMT

    Whether plausible or not, such accusations carry the gravest international implications, and there are growing demands that China financially compensate our country for its trillions of dollars in economic losses.

    Aren't you comdedians Trillions deep in debt by the Chinese?
    Since you'd never pay back anyway, they are in the face saving position to grant you very generous debt forgiveness.

    utu , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:22 pm GMT
    @Anon "Unless you want to believe there was some policy reason for why Japan went from 10% to 1% growth in ten years." – Absolutely, result of policy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaza_Accord

    And China has the highest saving in terms of percent of their disposable income

    follyofwar , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:25 pm GMT
    @Mustapha Mond Not to mention, Mr. Brave New World (how appropriate your name is), it fits in nicely with Bill Gates' plan for a massive reduction in world population. What freedom-loving young proles will want to form families and bring children into such a dystopia? Already, US whites are well below replacement rate and dropping. As of 2018 it was 1.73 babies per woman, 16% below replacement rate, the lowest rate ever recorded. Asian Americans are even lower at 1.525 (per the World Atlas).
    Rafael Martorell , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:25 pm GMT
    @Chet Roman there things that are kmown:the almost universal economic damage that stopping the economy,as if it were a ball game,would bring,guaranteed
    obwandiyag , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:27 pm GMT
    @Ozymandias Just as I have been saying for a long time now, all you China-did-its are quarter-a-post troll farm trolls.

    China-did-it trolls agree implicitly with our owners, and yet act like, ooh, they're big radicals. You hapless trolls.

    Morton's toes , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:28 pm GMT
    We all have one hand tied behind our back. There is nobody that I know of presenting information from inside the border of China to compare with Ronald Unz and his collaborators at unz.com . I have seen exactly one document in the last two years. It was a post on medium.com which purportedly was written by a Chinese ex-pat graduate student in British Columbia with google earth images analyzed to show the proliferation of concentration camps in Xinjiang for the retention of young male uyghurs.

    Every single time I saw this document referenced on the internet it was followed up within an hour by a shower of posts from all over the place that it was CIA fake news.

    Basically at most we know about 1/2 and it is tough to know what to do with that.

    Ilya G Poimandres , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:28 pm GMT
    @36 ulster Because articles with stated evidence linked to articles/research/legislation where it is taken from (unlike the MSM, that links nothing other than its own circle-jerk), and some implicit acceptance that the reader should have the freedom to decide for themselves – rather than being spoonfed 'truths' agreed upon somewhere 'up high' – offers people enough respect to allow them to accept that the webzine is not an ideological printout, but a spectrum of ideas, to be evaluated by the reader. This is a contract with consideration.

    We have no truths from our elected leaders, or their stenographers in the MSM though.

    When Trump says 'blame China', most of us see a bankruptcy merchant peddling a lie to weasel out and default on 1 trn $$ (Martyanov said it first methinks!) – cause that's what he does, and that's what he knows.

    Unz offers a fairly balanced approach to conspiracy theory – not conspiracy hypothesis. Ain't seen any article on some dude claiming he got anal probed by little green men without any even anecdotal evidence.

    This place debates the smoke, often without the fire. But it's a good start to some explanation for some fire. Much of the rest of the net doesn't look at the smoke, but instead distracts its audience with some other eye candy.

    But hey, is it fair to complain – some people enjoy WWE!

    Felix Culpa , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:29 pm GMT
    @utu There's nothing like attacking the person (Wittkowski himself) in place of his point ( herd immunity already gained by Asians before lockdown) to demonstrate your bona fides.

    Thanks for your back-handed admittal that you can't rebut his conclusion.

    obwandiyag , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:29 pm GMT
    I have been trying to get this across for an age. It's very simple. Anybody who says China did it is suspect. Not only does the import of their message suggest that the China-did-its are ruling-class-hired trolls, the trolly smartass tone suggests it, not to mention the illiteracy.
    anon [414] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 21, 2020 at 5:33 pm GMT
    @Other Side "The drastic changes in the Balkans in the 1990s and the disintegration of Yugoslavia in particular have resulted in a large number of publications attempting to explain the break-up of this country and the political developments in the Balkans. Some of these publications deal partly with the local Muslims who were engaged in the Balkan conflicts but, with some exceptions, they are focused mainly on recent developments, with less attention paid to the historical contexts in which the Muslim nationalist movements were shaped. Although religion played a more important role in the nation-building process of the Bosnian Muslims than in that of the Albanians, there are very few studies that examine the reasons for this and the impact of Islam on the Muslim nationalist movements in historical perspective. The following article examines from a comparative perspective the role of Islam in the Bosnian Muslim and Albanian national movements from the Ottoman period up to the end of the Cold War. The Sunni Muslims of Bosnia and the Albanians, who are divided into three religions and a variety of sects, present contrasting societal structures for the analysis of different aspects of Islam."
    Would you like to read the rest of this article
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233460310_The_Bosnian_Muslims_and_Albanians_Islam_and_nationalism

    More reading
    "Immediately after the fall of communism in Albania in 1991, Arab Islamic fundamentalists infiltrated the mosques in the country, which is 70 percent Muslim. The interlopers represented the Saudi Wahhabis and the Egyptian disciples of today's al Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri. In spring 1999, a dozen of Al-Zawahiri's acolytes, known as the "Albanian Returnees," were deported from the eastern Adriatic republic to Egypt, tried, and sentenced to death or extended prison terms for terrorism. The "Returnees" had been told by their "sheikhs" to stay in Albania and avoid going to Kosovo, where NATO military forces were, by that time, thick on the ground. But Albania booted them out with alacrity. Evidence in the case of the "Albanian Returnees" proved extremely important in tracing the evolution of al Qaeda's Egyptian predecessors."

    https://www.islamicpluralism.org/2033/arabs-iranians-and-turks-vs-balkan-muslims

    we were all so suckered.

    Current Commenter

    [Apr 21, 2020] Obama was third-generation dynastic CIA nomenklatura

    Apr 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Sob Sob Sobbity Sob , says:

    The only difference between Obama and Trump is their inside v. outside strategy. Obama was third-generation dynastic CIA nomenklatura, and after his early misstep of promising to obey the supreme law of the land on torture, Obama took CIA direction without demur, up to and including the crime of aggression of TIMBER SYCAMORE.

    Trump, by contrast, follows the Nixon template, attempting to replace CIA focal points surrounding himself with “loyalists.”

    When Nixon did it, CIA cadres leveled the same charge.

    But Nixon put Schlesinger in as DCI to extract the crown jewels and shitcan a bunch of the worst criminals. Carter took the outsider’s path too.

    Nixon was purged in the CIA’s bloodless Watergate coup; Carter was ousted by CIA’s October Surprise. We should consider whether COVID-19 collateral damage will be used to discredit Trump, who evidently has less workplace discretion than a McDonald’s fry cook. At a key juncture of the outbreak CIA frogmarched Trump through the synthetic crisis of the Soleimani assassination.

    So of course the government is criminal. It was chartered as a criminal enterprise at inception in Sction 202, 73 years ago. In the resulting kleptocracy, IGs perform a superfluous function. And every CIA inspector general is paid specifically to be a criminal scumbag. The IG reviewing CIA’s most open-and-shut crime against humanity, its torture gulag, criticized it because it didn’t work, intently ignoring the supreme law of the land that says nothing justifies torture.

    So let’s not get all verklempt about some IGs. IGs are nothing but a Gehlen-type apparatus generating legal pretexts for manifestly illegal acts. Fuck em if they can’t take a joke.

    [Apr 21, 2020] What Will Be America's Mission in the World by Patrick J. Buchanan

    Patrick forgot that Full spectrum Dominance is still the driving force of the USA foreign policy. And that will not change. So this is just a wishful thinking.
    Apr 21, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    And after persevering for four decades, we prevailed.

    What, then, did we do with our epochal victory?

    We alienated Russia by moving our NATO military alliance into the Baltic and Black Seas. We launched bloody, costly crusades for democracy in the Middle East that, invariably, failed. We exported a huge slice of our manufacturing capacity and economic independence to a coddled China.

    Historically, blunders of such magnitude have undone great powers.

    Even before COVID-19, Americans had begun to realize the folly of decades of mindless interventionism over matters irrelevant to our vital interests. "Unsustainable" was the word commonly associated with our foreign policy.

    But if our foreign policy was unsustainable during President Trump's economic boom, with unemployment at record lows and a bull market to rival the Roaring '20s, can an interventionist foreign policy be sustained after the losses of this major depression we have induced to kill the pandemic?

    If the Democrats win in November, we know their priorities: national health insurance, carbon taxes, the Green New Deal, open borders, amnesty, reparations and wealth redistribution to reduce social and economic inequality -- an agenda costing trillions of dollars.

    And Democrats will be looking at the defense budget as a slush fund to finance this new progressive era.

    If the Republicans win, given the influence of hawks and neocons among the party elite, interventionism may get another run in the yard.

    Having been exposed as naive beyond belief for their indulgence of China from the Bush I days to 2016, some Republicans are looking to make amends by casting China in the Soviet role in Cold War II.

    There is talk on Capitol Hill of refusing to pay off U.S. bonds that Beijing holds and of suing China for the damages done by the coronavirus, as China failed to alert the world the pathogen was loose.

    Americans should think long and hard before defaulting on U.S. government debt and consider the consequences if we open a door to claims against sovereign nations for past sins.

    Iraq was invaded in 2003 to force it to give up illicit weapons of mass destruction it did not have. Baghdad could have a case in international court against America for the unprovoked war waged against that country.

    While the U.S. appears determined to bring back manufacturing -- especially of products critical to the health, safety and defense of our nation -- there seems to be no stomach among the public for a war with China.

    But again, with the democracy crusades now repudiated, what is America's cause, what is America's mission in the world?

    ... ... ...

    To borrow from the title of historian Walter A. McDougall's classic work, America's future is as a promised land, not a crusader state.

    Patrick J. Buchanan is co-founder of TAC and the author of Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.

    [Apr 19, 2020] Who Is Really in Control of US Foreign Policy by Timothy Alexander Guzman

    Notable quotes:
    "... Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschild once said "I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the British Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply." ..."
    "... Unfortunately that system of control is evident in today's society. Special interests have been behind every US president including Trump. ..."
    "... Trump is following his marching orders to big oil interests including his authorized theft of Syrian oil. ..."
    "... Trump has given more support to Israel than any of his predecessors, which to the Pentagon is another important agenda. Israel is an important US ally in the Middle East besides Saudi Arabia. ..."
    "... Trump first trip as President was to Saudi Arabia to sell more weapons, which is business as usual for the arms industry. ..."
    "... "We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn't be involved with" ..."
    "... "these events send a strong signal to the illegitimate regimes in Venezuela and Nicaragua that democracy and the will of the people will always prevail." ..."
    "... 'War is a Racket.' ..."
    "... "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents" ..."
    "... "This conjunction, of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry, is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government. We recognise the imperative need for this development, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes." ..."
    "... (who was the emperor's private army by default is similar to Presidents relationship with the Military-Industrial Complex) ..."
    "... "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces" ..."
    "... "For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. ..."
    "... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match." ..."
    "... " tightly knit, highly efficient machine " ..."
    "... 'The World According to Jesse' ..."
    "... TruTV's 'Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura' ..."
    "... "About a month after I was elected governor, I was requested into the basement of the capital to be interviewed by 23 members of the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA, they were very formal, there was governor, sir and all that, but they put me in a chair and they were in a big half-moon around me, and I said to them, look before I answer any of your questions, I want to know what are you doing here? because in the CIA mission statement, it says that they are not operational inside the United States of America. Well, they wouldn't really give me an answer on that and then I said I want to go around the room and I want each one of you to tell me your name and what you do, half of them wouldn't. Now isn't that bizarre, I'm the governor and these guys wouldn't answer questions from me. Then they started questioning me and it was all about how I got elected. You know what was the most bizarre thing about it was? There was every array of person you could imagine, young people, old people, all nationalities and that's what really got to me. These were people you would see every day. They look like your neighbors." ..."
    "... Presidents come and go, and even the parties in power change, but the main political direction does not change, That's why, in the grand scheme of things, we don't care who's the head of the United States, we know more or less what's going to happen. And so, in this regard, even if we wanted to, it wouldn't make sense for us to interfere ..."
    "... Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his blog, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. ..."
    Feb 22, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca
    First published on January 2, 2020

    Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschild once said "I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the British Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply."

    Unfortunately that system of control is evident in today's society. Special interests have been behind every US president including Trump.

    Trump is following his marching orders to big oil interests including his authorized theft of Syrian oil.

    Trump has given more support to Israel than any of his predecessors, which to the Pentagon is another important agenda. Israel is an important US ally in the Middle East besides Saudi Arabia.

    Trump first trip as President was to Saudi Arabia to sell more weapons, which is business as usual for the arms industry.

    There is a power structure that sets the rules of the game in Washington. The Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) has an agenda and that is war. A US led war in the Middle East with Iran is increasingly coming close to reality. It would affect Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians.

    At some point, the war will reach Latin America targeting Venezuela because of its oil reserves since Trump likes the "oil". As of now, Bolivia, Chile and Ecuador are in chaos due to new US-backed fascistic governments that re-established neoliberal economic policies which will lead to the impoverishment of the masses.

    The U.S. military has over 800 bases ranging from torture sites to drone hubs in over 70 countries. US tensions are more intense that in any period of time with Iran, Syria and Hezbollah as Trump signed off on a new defense budget worth $738 billion including funds for his new Space Force. Despite the fact that the Democrats are still angry over their election defeat to Trump and are still pushing the Russia collusion hoax and now the farcical impeachment scandal, but when it comes to foreign policy, both Democrats and Republicans are unified with the same war agenda. The Trump administration continues its regime change operations despite the fact that Trump said no more regime change wars when he was a candidate in 2016. "We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn't be involved with"

    Fast-forward to 2019, Trump's CIA and others from his administration such as Eliot Abrams, a Reagan-era neocon was given the green-light to conduct another regime change operation with a nobody named Juan Guaido leading the Venezuelan opposition against the Maduro government which failed. Bolivia on the other hand was a success for Washington which was planned the day Evo Morales was elected President of Bolivia and was allied with Washington's adversaries in Latin America including Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Brazil (before Balsonaro of course). Trump continued the pentagon's agenda when he praised the new fascist Bolivian regime who forced Morales from power with Washington's approval of course. Trump even threatened Nicaragua and Venezuela with new attempts of regime change when he said that "these events send a strong signal to the illegitimate regimes in Venezuela and Nicaragua that democracy and the will of the people will always prevail." In other words, Trump is not in charge.

    US Presidents do have some room to make decisions concerning domestic issues such as taxes or healthcare, but when it comes to foreign policy, its a different story. It's not a conspiracy theory.

    Soleimani's Assassination: An Act of Psychological Warfare

    Many people in power has told the world who is really in charge from politicians, Wall Street bankers to military generals. In a 1935 speech by a Marine General Smedley titled 'War is a Racket.'

    A veteran in the Spanish-American War who rose through the ranks during the course of his career. From 1898 until his retirement in 1931 he was part of numerous interventions all around the world. Butler was also the most decorated Marine ever with two Medals of Honor added to his resume. He said the following:

    "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents"

    He was correct. General Butler could have given notorious gangsters such as Al Capone a few lessons in how to run a business empire. Then in 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower made it clear who had the real power inside Washington in a farewell address he gave to the American public. Eisenhower issued a stark warning on the dangers of the MIC posed to humanity.

    Here is a part of the speech:

    "This conjunction, of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry, is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government. We recognise the imperative need for this development, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes."

    Eisenhower seemed like he was not in agreement with the deep state's decision to drop the atomic bombs during World War II, perhaps he was cornered by the growing power of the deep state. A comparison between the Roman Empire and America today is uncanny. In Rome for example, choosing an emperor was made difficult by the ruling elite, political debates dominated how new emperors were selected by old emperors, the senate, those who were influential and the Praetorian Guard which is today's version of the Military-Industrial Complex. The political and industrial heavyweights and its intelligence agencies select the best two candidates from the only two political parties who are bought and paid for by corporate and political interests make the important decisions. The Praetorian Guard (who was the emperor's private army by default is similar to Presidents relationship with the Military-Industrial Complex) had dominated the election process for the next century or so resulting in targeted assassinations of several emperors they did not want in power before Rome's collapse. They were assassinations and attempted assassinations on US presidents resulting in four deaths, the most notable assassination in the 20th century was President John F. Kennedy who wanted to "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces" gave a speech on April 27th, 1961 at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City, many believe, including myself, that it was the speech that eventually got him killed:

    "For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

    Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match."

    The " tightly knit, highly efficient machine " Kennedy spoke about directs U.S. presidents to authorize wars or a covert operations to topple foreign governments. Kennedy exposed that fact and followed that same fate as those emperors in Rome. Even in Domestic politics, the U.S. government deep state apparatus is in control as the former Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura , who is also a former Navy Seal, actor and professional wrestler who now has his own show on RT news called 'The World According to Jesse' admitted on TruTV's 'Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura' on how the CIA interrogated him shortly after he became governor:

    "About a month after I was elected governor, I was requested into the basement of the capital to be interviewed by 23 members of the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA, they were very formal, there was governor, sir and all that, but they put me in a chair and they were in a big half-moon around me, and I said to them, look before I answer any of your questions, I want to know what are you doing here? because in the CIA mission statement, it says that they are not operational inside the United States of America. Well, they wouldn't really give me an answer on that and then I said I want to go around the room and I want each one of you to tell me your name and what you do, half of them wouldn't. Now isn't that bizarre, I'm the governor and these guys wouldn't answer questions from me. Then they started questioning me and it was all about how I got elected. You know what was the most bizarre thing about it was? There was every array of person you could imagine, young people, old people, all nationalities and that's what really got to me. These were people you would see every day. They look like your neighbors."

    The US president including all elected congress members are all bought and paid for by the arms industry, major corporations, bankers, Big Pharma, Big Oil, the media and a handful of lobbyists with the Israel lobby being the most powerful. Trump is no exception. He will follow the road given to him by those who are in charge and he will continue the path to a world war, an agenda that been long in the making. One of America's favorite enemies, Russian President Vladimir Putin was interviewed by Megan Kelly of NBC news in 2017 and was asked about the so-called Russian collusion conspiracy theory and he said the following:

    Presidents come and go, and even the parties in power change, but the main political direction does not change, That's why, in the grand scheme of things, we don't care who's the head of the United States, we know more or less what's going to happen. And so, in this regard, even if we wanted to, it wouldn't make sense for us to interfere

    Whether Trump wants war or even peace, it won't matter, he will do the right thing, for the deep state that is.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his blog, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

    [Apr 19, 2020] Will COVID-19 Retire the World's Policeman

    Looks like wishful thinking... The neoliberal elite is desperate, and when they get desperate they play dirty
    Apr 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    The Roosevelt has been ravaged by the coronavirus. As of Tuesday, 589 cases of COVID-19 were reported from a crew of 4,800. Four thousand sailors in Guam are in various stages of a 14-day isolation period in hotels and spare rooms across the island.

    But it is not just the Roosevelt. Every U.S. warship -- carriers, cruisers, frigates, destroyers, subs -- has cramped quarters conducive to the spread of the coronavirus.

    How many of these vessels will soon be doubling as hospital ships?

    The same question might also be asked of the U.S. Army and Marine barracks in South Korea, Japan, Australia and Okinawa.

    There are allegations that the coronavirus did not originate in the Wuhan "wet market" where bats are sold for food but instead escaped through a horrible blunder in a Chinese bioweapons laboratory a few miles away.

    Whatever the truth, the Wuhan virus appears to have become the most effective means of disabling U.S. hard and soft power that we have encountered in many a decade.

    Of those 10,000 Peace Corp volunteers, and scores of thousands of other Americans who have been repatriated home, how many of these "soft power" soldiers will be going back after they have been out of their host country for 18 months?

    Will this pandemic prove the decisive factor in America's retreat from global hegemony?

    With the U.S. budget deficit for 2020 originally set at $1 trillion, now triple that, there is going to be a hard reckoning for the allocation of our diminished resources after the nation reopens.

    And policing the planet is likely to be seen as yesterday's priority, and a primary candidate for discard.

    Clyde Schechter • a day ago

    Well, if the epidemic does lead to a more restrained foreign policy, that would be the silver lining in this awfully dark cloud. It might well end up saving more lives than are lost in the epidemic, too.

    [Apr 17, 2020] One can wonder who is really a terrorist.

    Apr 17, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    alaff , Apr 15 2020 20:34 utc | 44

    Interesting (though, not surprising) news from the Russian MoD:

    On the night of 13-14 April 2020, a group of illegal armed groups trained at the United States Armed Forces base in the "Rukban" camp area attempted to withdraw from et-Tanf zone.

    The militants intended to surrender to government forces and return to peaceful life. On the border of the 55-kilometre security zone, the group was attacked by a group of radical armed gang "commandos of the revolution" - "Magavir Al-Saura," controlled by the United States.

    As a result of the fighting, the militants lost three pickup trucks. 27 people managed to escape and are currently in Palmira under guard of Syrian governmental forces. They handed over dozens of small arms, among them grenade-launchers and heavy machine guns, including Western made.

    According to the testimony passed to the government by the illegal armed group members, the weapons and cars "pickup" were provided to them by the Americans. Trainers from the United States trained them to sabotage oil and gas and transport infrastructure, as well as to organize terrorist acts in territory controlled by Syrian government forces .

    One can wonder who is really a terrorist.

    Phil , Apr 15 2020 23:22 utc | 75

    Posted by: vk | Apr 15 2020 19:30 utc | 24

    Perpetrators of recent terrorist attacks in Damascus confess details of recruitment

    may be similar or identical to your Sputnik link.

    [Apr 15, 2020] Mossad False Flag Attacks on Jews by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Plot to Destroy America ..."
    "... The recent tale of Israeli-American Michael Kadar, who has been credited with many of early 2017's nearly two thousand bomb scares targeting Jewish community centers and synagogues worldwide, is illustrative. ..."
    "... The court in Tel Aviv convicted Kadar on counts including "extortion, disseminating hoaxes in order to spread panic, money laundering and computer hacking over bomb and shooting threats against community centers, schools, shopping malls, police stations, airlines, and airports in North America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Norway and Denmark." It claimed that "As a result of 142 telephone calls to airports and airlines, in which he said bombs had been planted in passenger planes or they would come under attack, aircraft were forced to make emergency landings and fighter planes were scrambled." ..."
    "... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
    Apr 15, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Even though distracted by the havoc resulting from the coronavirus, the United States and much of Europe is engaged in a frenzied search for anti-Semitism and anti-Semites so that what the media and chattering class are regarding as the greatest of all crimes and criminals can finally be extirpated completely. To be sure, there have recently been some horrific instances of ethnically or religiously motivated attacks on synagogues and individual Jews, but, as is often the case, however, quite a lot of the story is either pure spin or politically motivated. A Jewish student walking on a college campus who walks by protesters objecting to Israel's behavior can claim to feel threatened and the incident is recorded as anti-Semitism, for example, and slurs written on the sides of buildings or grave stones, not necessarily the work of Jew-haters, are similarly categorized. In one case in Israel in 2017, the two street swastika artists were Jews.

    Weaponizing one point of view inevitably limits the ability of contrary views to be heard. The downside is, of course, that the frenzy that has resulted in the criminalization of free expression relating in any but a positive way to the activity of Jewish groups. It has also included the acceptance of the dishonest definition that any criticism of Israel is ipso facto anti-Semitism, giving that nation a carte blanche in terms of its brutal treatment of its neighbors and even of its non-Jewish citizens.

    Jewish dominated Hollywood and the entertainment media have helped to create the anti-Semitism frenzy and continue to give the public regular doses of the holocaust story. Currently there are a number of television shows that depict in one form or another the persecution of Jews. Hunters on Amazon is about Jewish Americans tracking and killing suspected former Nazis living in New York City in the 1970s. The Plot to Destroy America on HBO is a retro history tale about how a Charles Lindbergh/Henry Ford regime installs a fascist government in the 1930s. One critic describes the televisual revenge feast "as one paranoid Jewish fantasy after another advocating murder as the solution to what they perceive as the problem of anti-Semitism."

    But, as always, nothing is quite so simple as such a black and white portrayal where there are evil Nazis and Jewish victims who are always justified when they seek revenge. First of all, as has been demonstrated , many recent so-called anti-Semitic attacks on Jews involve easily recognizable Hasidic Jews and are actually based on community tensions as established neighborhoods are experiencing dramatic changes with the newcomers using pressure tactics to force out existing residents. And after the Hasidim take over a town or neighborhood, they defund local schools to support their own private academies and frequently engage in large scale welfare and other social services fraud to permit them to spend all their days studying the Talmud, which, inter alia teaches that gentiles are no better than beasts fit only to serve Jews.

    The recent concentration of coronavirus in Orthodox neighborhoods in New York as well as the eruption of measles cases last year have been attributed to the unwillingness of some conservative Jews to submit to vaccinations and normal hygienic practices. They also have persisted in illegal large gatherings at weddings and religious ceremonies, spreading the coronavirus within their own communities and also to outsiders with whom they have contact.

    Regularly exposing anti-Semitism is regarded as a good thing by many Jewish groups because the state of perpetual victimization that it supports enables them to obtain special benefits that might otherwise be considered excessive in a pluralistic democracy. Holocaust education in schools is now mandatory in many jurisdictions and more than 90% of discretionary Department of Homeland Security funding goes to Jewish organizations. Jewish organizations are now lining up to get what they choose to believe is their share of Coronavirus emergency funding.

    Claims of increasing anti-Semitism, and the citation of the so-called holocaust, are like having a perpetual money machine that regularly disgorges reparations from the Europeans as well as billions of dollars per year from the U.S. Treasury. Holocaust and anti-Semitism manufactured guilt are undoubtedly contributing factors to the subservient relationship that the United States enjoys with the state of Israel, most recently manifested in the U.S. Department of Defense's gift of one million surgical masks to the Israel Defense Force in spite of there being a shortage of the masks in the United States (note how the story was edited after it first appeared by the Jerusalem Post to conceal the U.S. role but it still has the original email address and the photo cites the Department of Defense).

    And then there is the issue of Jewish power, which is discussed regularly by Jews themselves but is verboten to gentiles. Jews wield hugely disproportionate power in all the Anglophone states as well as in France and parts of Eastern Europe and even in Latin America. If anti-Semitism is as rampant as has often been claimed it is odd that there are so many Jews prominent in politics and the professions, most especially financial services and the media. Either anti-Semitism is not really "surging" or the actual anti-Semities have proven to be particularly incompetent in making their case.

    Further muddying the waters, there have been a number of instances in which Jews have themselves been responsible for what have been claimed to be anti-Semitic incidents. There has also been credible speculation that some of the incidents have been false flags staged by the Israeli government itself, presumably acting through its intelligence services. The objective would be to create sympathy among the public in Europe and the U.S. for Israel and to encourage diaspora emigration to the Jewish state. The recent tale of Israeli-American Michael Kadar, who has been credited with many of early 2017's nearly two thousand bomb scares targeting Jewish community centers and synagogues worldwide, is illustrative.

    Kadar, who holds both Israeli and American nationality, was arrested in Ashkelon Israel on March 2017 by Israeli police in response to the investigation carried out by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Kadar's American address was in New Lenox Illinois but he actually resided in Israel. Kadar's defense was that he had a brain tumor that caused autism and was not responsible for his actions, but he was found to be fit for trial and was sentenced to 10 years in prison in June 2017. He was apparently subsequently quietly released from prison and returned to Illinois in mid-2018. In August 2019 he was arrested for violation of parole on a firearms and drugs offense.

    The court in Tel Aviv convicted Kadar on counts including "extortion, disseminating hoaxes in order to spread panic, money laundering and computer hacking over bomb and shooting threats against community centers, schools, shopping malls, police stations, airlines, and airports in North America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Norway and Denmark." It claimed that "As a result of 142 telephone calls to airports and airlines, in which he said bombs had been planted in passenger planes or they would come under attack, aircraft were forced to make emergency landings and fighter planes were scrambled."

    It was also claimed by the court that Kadar had gotten involved with the so-called restricted access "dark web" to make threats for money. He reportedly earned $240,000 equivalent worth of the digital currency Bitcoin. Kadar has reportedly refused to reveal the password to his Bitcoin wallet and its value is believed to have increased to more than $1 million.

    The tale borders on the bizarre and right from the beginning there were many inconsistencies in both the Department of Justice case and in terms of Kadar's biography and vital statistics. After his arrest and conviction, many of his public, private and social networking records were either deleted or changed, suggesting that a high-level cover-up was underway.

    Most significant, the criminal complaint against Kadar included details of the phone calls that were not at all consistent with the case that he had acted alone. The threats were made using what is referred to as spoofing telephone services, used by marketers to hide the caller's true number and identify, but the three cell phone numbers identified by the Department of Justice to make the spoofed calls were all U.S.-based and one of them was linked to a Jewish Chabad religious leader and one to the Church of Scientology's counter-intelligence chief in California. In addition, some of the calls were made when Kadar was in transit between Illinois and Israel, suggesting that he had not initiated the calls.

    DOJ's criminal complaint also included information that the threat caller was a woman who had "a distinct speech impediment." Michael Kadar's mother has a distinct speech impediment. Oddly enough she has not been identified in any public documents and the Israelis claimed that Michael was disguising his voice, but she is believed to be Dr. Tamar Kadar, who resided in Ashkelon at the same address as Michael. Dr. Kadar is a chemical weapons researcher at the Mossad-linked Israel Institute for Biological Research ("IIBR").

    Michael appears to have U.S. birthright citizenship because he was born in Bethesda in 1990 while his mother was a visiting researcher at the U.S. Army Military Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID). While Dr. Kadar was at USAMRIID, anthrax went missing from the Army's lab and may have been subsequently used in the 2001 anthrax letter attacks inside the U.S., which resulted in the deaths of five people. The FBI subsequently accused two USAMRIID researchers of the theft, but one was exonerated and the other committed suicide, closing the investigation.

    So, there are some interesting issues raised by the Michael Kadar case. First of all, he appears to have been the fall guy for what may have been a Mossad directed false-flag operation actually run by his mother, who is herself an expert on biological weapons and works at an Israeli intelligence lab. Second, the objective of the operation may have been to create an impression that anti-Semitism is dramatically increasing, which ipso facto generates a positive perception of Israel and encourages foreign Jews to emigrate to the Jewish state. And third, there appears to have been a cover-up orchestrated by the Israeli and U.S. governments, evident in the disappearance of both official and non-official records, while Michael has been quietly released from prison and is enjoying his payoff of one million dollars in bitcoins. As always, whenever something involves promoting the interests of the state of Israel, the deeper one digs the more sordid the tale becomes.

    Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

    niteranger , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 5:17 am GMT

    Good piece of work Dr. Giraldi. A few things about this case of the Kadars. Basically Israel refused to cooperate with the FBI at the beginning and resisted giving up the kid. Furthermore, the FBI was told to "back off" by higher ups in the agency and let Israel handle it. So the results are what you would expect with a false flag.

    The anthrax case still has legs. Bruce Irvins was the microbiologist at Detrick you are referring to. He was never charged and they never proved he was involved and the FBI could not place him in any of the spots they wanted. He had some issues and the FBI gang banged him looking for a patsy. Dr. Hatfill was the "original" Person of Interest whom the Jewish controlled media followed around and they ruined his life. He sued the FBI and won a lot of money.

    The FBI appeared to intentionally mess up the anthrax samples. Reviews by the National Academy of Science rocked the idiots at the FBI and they concluded Irvins was not involved. The real kicker to all of this is that the FBI leader of the investigation was Robert Mueller! The same Mueller who spent almost 3 years chasing Russian spies well knowing that it was lie.

    And finally who sealed the files so no one could ever come up with the real perpetrators ..Obama!

    Antares , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 8:45 am GMT
    Antisemitism is pro-Israel, the Nazis included (shipping jews to Palestine).

    For some reason I know exactly what a neonazi looks like, how he behaves, how he talks, how he thinks and even how he feels. But I never met one. Where does this 'knowledge' come from?

    I happen to remember some television that I have seen as a child. Most people don't and are living in a fantasy world with fantasy enemies and fantasy friends and take it for reality.

    Been_there_done_that , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 9:49 am GMT

    "Further muddying the waters, there have been a number of instances in which Jews have themselves been responsible for what have been claimed to be anti-Semitic incidents."

    There have been so many such incidents over the years that when a synagogue or cemetery gets spray-painted with swastikas, the default presumption for any subsequent investigation is automatically "inside-job".

    The stereotypical perpetrator would tend to be a deranged student residing at the campus Hillel House, majoring in film studies or some other flakey college program.

    Years ago there was a case of a San Francisco synagogue on fire. After the arsonist, a Jew, was caught and confessed, the tenor of the response was that one had to feel sorry for him because he needed help.

    In light of such incidents there has even been a visual meme out there: Hey Rabbi Watcha Doin'?! (See Google Images)

    Getting a patsy to do the dirty work is significantly more effective in provoking outrage and sympathy. Though last year's attack on a synagogue in Halle, Germany, during Yom Kippur services in early October was highly suspicious, media reports managed to suppress those aspects and instead generated a victimhood-card bonanza that lasted for weeks.

    The German population was easily bamboozled. Prominent Jewish representatives publicly demanded more stringent laws against "anti-semitism", as recently re-defined, and parliamentarians duly obliged.

    News that had not been much reported about, but was circulating at the outset in alternative media:

    • Mentally deranged perpetrator, who had shared his views on an Internet chat group, expressed his desire to attack Muslims and Antifa.

    • Anonymous "handler / minder" in California offered to pay him half a bitcoin to redirect his attack toward the synagogue instead.

    • Synagogue had just recently been equipped with elaborate security system installed by Israeli company to withstand shooting and bombing attacks.

    • Local police, which normally would provide security outside, during holiday services, were conspicuously absent during that time, and slow to respond (likely stand-down orders from above).

    • Perpetrator filmed his rampage, which he broadcast in real-time as a live stream video online (wanting to emulate an earlier attack in New Zealand), enabling his handlers to monitor the shooting spree while in progress.

    • After his mission failed, frustrated perpetrator "spilled the beans" in real-time and cussed out the Californian bitcoin payer, who had apparently set him up to be framed, as probably being a Jew.

    Of course, by design, the securely locked synagogue door easily withstood the shooting attack with multiple exterior bullet holes into its wooden exterior. Everybody in the world probably saw that part.

    Robert Pinkerton , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 11:05 am GMT
    Pressure of an external enemy reinforces group cohesion.

    In Roman antiquity the Main Enemy was Carthage. Once it was destroyed, fissures in Roman social cohesion became canyons.

    niente , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 12:57 pm GMT
    I was born in Argentina, 1950. There was a populist nationalist government then, strongly disliked by the US. It included a whole spectrum, right to left. It assisted together with the Vatican the rescuing of Nazi criminals that settled in the country. There was an antisemitic movement headed by a provocateur, Juan Guillermo Kelly for name. Jews emigrated to Israel. In the 80s he made public he was a Mossad agent
    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 1:13 pm GMT
    ... get the book By Way of Deception by former Mossad officer Victor Ostrosky, it can be had on amazon.
    Jake , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 1:35 pm GMT
    @vot tak How can Jews be a 'colonial occupation force' in any nation that is English-speaking and has not totally rejected the political and cultural heritage of WASP Empire?

    Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. When the Anglo-Saxon Puritans won their revolution, they cemented Modern English culture as one twined with Jewish ideas and ideals. Archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell cemented that doubly by allying with Jewish bankers on the Continent. From the mid-1600s, Jews have been the defining bankers of English Empire, of WASP Empire. And bankers are always the opposite of outsiders. Bankers own and eventually come to control fully.

    Anglo-Zionist Empire has existed since at least Oliver Cromwell.

    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 1:59 pm GMT
    As in the case of the Mossad asset Jeff Epstein, who was running a child-rape assembly line on his 'Orgy Island' and on his 'Lolita Express,' to ensnare weakling politicians, video-taping them in the process of raping young girls–and boys–then use that to blackmail them into becoming an enthusiastic supporter of Israel, the one lead that was never pursued was, "How many other Epstein's are out there, doing their slimy business for Israel?"

    The same could be asked of this 'Mikey' Kadar terrorist, who I'm sure has plenty of accomplices world-wide, still phoning in threats or maybe spray-painting Jew cemeteries with the dreaded Nazi Swastika.

    This terrorist does about one year in prison, then is set free and off to the USA he runs? If his name had been Mohammed or he was a skin-headed nationalist, he'd be in prison for the rest of his life, but since he's from that class of those Chosen by G-d, he gets a pass.

    geokat62 , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 2:24 pm GMT
    @niente

    There was an antisemitic movement headed by a provocateur, Juan Guillermo Kelly

    Very interesting information. I did a quick search and the only info I found was this wiki entry in Spanish.

    I used google translate to convert to English.

    Do you have any sources that confirm his alleged affiliation with Mossad?

    [Hide MORE]

    From a young age he was a member of the Nationalist Liberation Alliance. Until then, it was led by Juan Queraltó and had a clear anti-Semitic profile that Kelly fought against. The group went on to become a shock force of Peronism.

    During the bombing of Plaza de Mayo, when a group of military personnel opposed to the government of Juan Domingo Perón attempted to assassinate him and carry out a coup d'état, several squadrons of aircraft belonging to Naval Aviation, bombarded and machine-gunned them with anti-aircraft ammunition, Plaza de Mayo and the Casa Rosada, as well as the CGT building, Kelly, aided by the Nationalist Liberation Alliance, dueled with the Marines responsible for the attack. [2]

    After the self-proclaimed liberating revolution dictatorship was established, after a bombardment of the headquarters of his organization, located in San Martín and Corrientes Avenue in Buenos Aires. On September 21, the coup armed forces received from Córdoba the order to eliminate that focus of resistance in the heart of the city of Buenos Aires and advanced on it with cannons and two Sherman tanks, sending an emissary to surrender. The cannons and tanks fired and some fifty men, led by Guillermo Patricio Kelly, surrendered. Those who remained inside died under the rubble of the three-story building, destroyed with gunshots. The number of deaths that some raise to more than 400 is unknown. [3] After that, he was arrested by the dictatorship and transferred to the Río Gallegos prison, where one night in 1957 he starred in a film escape along with John William Cooke, Jorge Antonio and Héctor Cámpora and other political prisoners managed to escape, after which he applied for political asylum in Chile, but this was denied. When he was about to be sent to Argentina, he escaped again, this time dressed as a woman, [required appointment] to Venezuela where Perón was. When he left Chile for Caracas, he used a new identity: he was "Doctor Vargas, psychoanalyst".

    When on January 26, 1958, the newspaper El Nacional titled "Perón led the repression against the Venezuelan people," he identified him, along with Kelly, as "National Security torture consultants" and published Perón's fraternal letters to the head of that body.

    When the revolution broke out in Venezuela, Perón was another of the insurgents' objectives, along with his collaborators, among whom was Kelly, and they had to take refuge in the Embassy of the Dominican Republic. Outside, more than a thousand people were shaking the entrance gate. They had already been locked up for two days, and people were still outside. All the Argentines looked askance at Kelly. "They are going to kill us all because of this one," they growled. There were several who wanted to kick him out and someone raised the motion: to vote if he should withdraw. It was not necessary: ​​Kelly decided to face up. He only asked for two conditions: that he be given a pair of dark glasses and a hat. He also asked for silver. When he walked out of the embassy and mixed with the crowd, no one could recognize him. In the midst of the seizure, Kelly made contact with two CIA agents: -- The Communists are going to enter the embassy and they are going to kill Perón. And if they kill him, the entire continent is communicated – he warned them. Finally, the United States prepared to rescue him, interceding with the revolutionary government to clear the area and facilitate his departure to the Dominican Republic. [4]

    Kelly was stoned from the Caracas airport, obtained refuge in Haiti and, after a turbulent stay in which he was imprisoned, [5] crossed the border to the Dominican Republic, where he remained for a few days. He returned to Argentina in 1958 with the passport that he stole from Roberto Galán and after six months he was arrested and transferred again to the Ushuaia prison. [6]

    Throughout his life he was imprisoned for almost eight years. In 1966 he occupied the headquarters of the PJ National Coordinating Board for a few hours, from where he launched a violent proclamation against union leader Augusto Vandor. [appointment required]

    In 1981, in the midst of a military dictatorship, he denounced the theft of $ 60 million from Argentina, 10% of that debt belonging to General Suárez Mason, considering him a "murderer of the people." According to Kelly, Mason is involved in the YPF emptying in the 1980s. He also said that the military man worked as a mercenary training mercenary troops to fight in the Caribbean, which received money from the Nord high command, who was accused of murdering the brother and two nephews of former President Arturo Frondizi. Also involved in this robbery was former judge Pedro Narvaez who fled to Rio de Janeiro and then to Spain. [7] [8]

    In 1983, he gained notoriety after formulating a series of complaints related to the P-2 Lodge, the YPF dismissal and the murder of Fernando Branca, in addition to filing a criminal complaint against Emilio Massera. Shortly thereafter, in August of that year, Kelly was kidnapped and severely beaten by a gang led by Aníbal Gordon, who claimed to have acted on the orders of the last military dictator Reynaldo Bignone and the Army Corps I.

    In 1991, during the presidency of Carlos Menem, he was the host of an ATC program called Sin Concesiones, in which he maintained that it would reveal "where the children of the ´Noble Ladies´ come from", alluding to the children adopted by the director from the Clarín newspaper, Ernestina Herrera de Noble. After a meeting between Herrera de Noble, Héctor Magnetto and Carlos Menem held at the Quinta de Olivos on Thursday, May 2, 1991, Clarín and the government agreed on Kelly's air release at ATC in exchange for the air output of the program of the journalist Liliana López Foresi, Magazine 13, Journalism with an opinion, in which Menem was severely criticized. [9] [10] [11] [12]

    On the subject of Herrera de Noble's children, Kelly wrote a book published by Arkel Publishing in 1993 titled Noble: Imperio Corrupto. Only 200 copies were published, although the author gave several of them to public libraries in the United States. [13]

    He died on July 1, 2005 at 8:30 am, a victim of terminal cancer at the German Hospital in the City of Buenos Aires. [14] [15]

    https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillermo_Kelly

    Richard B , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 2:35 pm GMT
    @Colin Wright

    Informative piece.

    Very much so. Because it helps direct our attention to something very important.

    Though they're good at infiltration, subversion, betrayal, destruction and death, they're no good at social-managment.

    Who's "they"?

    I refer to them as Jewish Supremacy Inc. (JSI).

    It's a distinction worth making because it separates them from Jews who don't hate Whites and aren't obsessed with being Jewish.

    They're out there, however small their numbers might be.

    After all, Gilad Atzmon's not the only one.

    It's also worth pointing out that JSI gets lots of help from three other groups who aren't Jewish at all. In fact they're White.

    1. the cynical, self-centered whores of opportunity who will do anything to protect their own materialistic, narcissistic trough.

    2. the incurably gullible, pathologically naive Whites from Left-wingy Multi-Culties to Right-wing Christian Zionists.

    3. the perfectly indifferent who walk around with that stroked out look on their face from watching too much ESPN and Pornhub.

    The rest of us are freedom-lovers, or TUR readers/commenters or potential TUR readers/commenters.

    Meaning they'd be open to what the actual readers/commenters have to say and won't fly off the handle with a knee-jerk reaction before springing into fight or flight mode.

    In short, this boils down to a battle of

    Dogma versus Pragma

    .

    What's the difference?

    Pragma is open to exposing its ideas to a process of continuous feedback and correction for the purpose of improving the quality of its social-management

    And Dogma isn't.

    Trinity , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 2:59 pm GMT
    Excuse me, but this is comical. There is no other group in America and the entire West who are more protected and more privileged than Jews. While White Gentiles are routinely attacked, beaten to a pulp, raped, and brutally murdered by Blacks, Hispanics, Pakis, Arabs, in Europe and America, just for having the temerity to walk outside in countries built by their White ancestors. How does a painted swastika equate with rape-torture murders of the Christian-Newsom Knoxville Horror? And if you think the Christian-Newsom murders are a rare crime in America, you are living under a rock. And lest we forget the Christian-Newsom Murders nor the Wichita Massacre murders were labeled "hate crimes." Despite thousands upon thousands of Black on White and other nonwhite on White attacks, rapes, murders in this country, you can bet the house that no one in Washington has voiced concerns over the violence being perpetrated on White Gentiles daily in America. America is indeed a racist country and Whites experience that racism every single day.

    Remember a couple years ago when someone was calling bomb threats to Jewish Community Centers? Remember that they found out it was some Jewish guy in a Tel Aviv basement calling in the bomb threats. Of course at first the (((media))) went through their spiel about how anti-Semitism was on the rise in America, and then once we all found out that the perpetrator was a Jewish guy in Israel, ( I believe a dual citizen at that) the (((media))) dropped this case quicker than you could claim some NY/NJ rabbis were selling body organs.

    Most of these hate crime HOAXES are simply Jews and/or Blacks drawing swastikas, hanging a nooses in a locker, or some other ridiculous and downright childish act that in no way even if done by a White racist who hates Jews and Blacks, equates to a Mississippi girl named Jessica Chambers being burned alive, a 12 year old white male being burned alive with a blow torch by an adult black female in Texas, etc., etc. The fact of the matter is that "hate crimes" against nonwhites and Jews are downright rare in America, ( not talking about HOAXES here) and there is no way that a crayon drawing of a swastika or hanging a noose in someone's locker can be linked as the same as someone dying a horrific and brutal death like the White victims I listed. IF we lived in a TRULY just and decent country, EVERYONE out there, regardless of color, creed or religion would recognize that we need to stop all the hate and violence directed at White Gentiles before moving on to worrying about crayon drawings.

    Trinity , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 3:18 pm GMT
    Remember when Noel Ignatiev the Jewish professor stated we need to "abolish Whiteness?" Now imagine a White professor stating that we need to "abolish Jewishness in America?" Can you imagine what would have happened to that guy? Is it possible for a Jew in America/Canada or Europe to be fired from his or here job for making racist or inflammatory remarks about Whites?
    TGD , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 3:22 pm GMT
    The story of Michael Kadar is reminiscent of the tale of another criminal young male with dual Israeli US citizenship, Samuel Sheinbein.

    Sheinbein and a colleague murdered, dismembered and burnt a fellow high school classmate, the hispanic Fredo Enrique Tello, Jr., in September, 1997. Sheinbein fled to Israel and in a long drawn out court battle, Sheinbein's requested extradition to the State of Maryland to stand trial was refused by Israel's supreme court.

    You can read the whole sordid story in Wikipedia including how Sheinbaum was killed in a shootout with the guards who were escorting him from one prison to another.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Sheinbein

    Wally , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 3:50 pm GMT
    @Been_there_done_that A must see:
    Fake Hate Crimes: a database of hate crime hoaxes in the USA :
    http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/

    plus:
    -Mural of Tina Turner is defaced with a red swastika outside a North Carolina record store .. Who benefits? : https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7830579/Tina-Turner-mural-defaced-North-Carolina-record-store.html
    – Jewish suspects arrested over swastika graffiti on synagogues : http://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-suspects-arrested-over-swastika-graffiti-on-synagogues/
    – Poorly Drawn Swastikas Spray-Painted On Monument In Milwaukee : https://www.prisonplanet.com/fake-hate-trump-rules-poorly-drawn-swastikas-spray-painted-on-monument-in-milwaukee.html
    – Jew arrested for dozens of fake 'hate crimes': http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/23/israeli-jew-19-arrested-antisemitic-hate-crime-hoax-spree/
    – Man Caught Spray Painting Swastika On College Campus Is Black : http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/16/man-caught-spray-painting-swastika-on-college-campus-is-black-report-says/
    – Staged Jew bomb hoaxes: http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-files-massive-indictment-against-jcc-bomb-hoaxer-for-thousands-of-counts-of-threats-extortion-fraud/
    – another staged 'hate crime' / 'Neo-Nazi' Graffiti Found In Brooklyn Synagogue – Suspect is Black leftist https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12101
    – Fake Hate? 'Trump Rules' & Poorly Drawn Swastikas Spray-Painted On Monument In Milwaukee
    https://www.prisonplanet.com/fake-hate-trump-rules-poorly-drawn-swastikas-spray-painted-on-monument-in-milwaukee.html
    – Jewish suspects arrested over swastika graffiti on synagogues : http://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-suspects-arrested-over-swastika-graffiti-on-synagogues/

    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment April 14, 2020 at 4:39 pm GMT
    @Jake Here we go with the WASP thing again. A minority of descendants of the Angles were Puritans, and even fewer Saxons were Puritans. There were also Norse Puritans, Norman Puritans and Briton Puritans. All Puritans were minorities. Many "Protestant" Churches, including the Anglican Church, considered Puritans dissenters, verging on heretics, and not really Protestants beyond protesting the Church of Rome. Knox's Presbyterians had a lot in common with Puritans as did Dutch Protestants, and there were a lot of Dutch who moved to East Anglia. Some became Puritans. It's silly to refer to it at it being "Anglo-Saxon Puritans" as not all were Angles or Saxons. They were Puritans who happened to be Angles, Saxons and others. WASP is even sillier. Are there Brown, Yellow, or Red Anglo-Saxons?

    Cromwell seized power because the Stuarts were unpopular for many reasons, and as with every revolution, a minority with zealotry seizes power from an apathetic majority. Sure he turned to the Jewish Amsterdam bankers, who were already funding the Dutch Empire, including New Amsterdam, but who else would have helped? The Puritans were vehemently anti Catholic and would have never turned there. They were also vehemently anti-Muslim, so the Ottomans were out. The Jews were it by elimination.

    As for the culture. The culture of the elite is seldom the culture of the general population.

    The "Anglo-Saxons" were more than happy to restore the Stuarts after Cromwell, as long as they were Protestants. The installation of King Billy, replacing James, was due to James having converted to Catholicism and the fear of his imposing it on the country.

    It was under William and Mary that the newly, created by Parliament, Bank of England was taken over by Jewish bankers. The same minority Puritan Parliament that restored the Stuarts and sponsored the overthrow of James.

    [Apr 13, 2020] Biden? Seriously ? by Andrew Levine

    A lot of illusions. Democratic Party is a party of neoliberal billionaires and want to remains this way. They will never reform. They are a part of Pepsi-Cola scam -- the party duopoly in the USA.
    In ancient Greek dramas, a deus ex machina would sometimes be enacted; a god, wheeled in on a mechanical contraption, would appear upon the stage and go on to set an otherwise intractable situation right.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The Republican Party was already unspeakably odious before Trump waddled into the scene, but, by giving a large and growing segment of its base – its mainly male, mainly rural, mainly geezerly, poorly educated, socially dislocated and economically stressed component -- permission to give their most noxious impulses free rein, Trump has turned the Republican Party into a personality cult for him to manipulate as he sees fit. ..."
    "... Meanwhile, playing on their rank opportunism and mindless disregard of values and principles, he has brought the God Squad, rightwing Christian evangelicals and their Jewish counterparts, into the Trumpian fold, along with many of the most base and shamelessly venal plutocrats and plutocrat wannabes in creation. ..."
    "... Biden is a doofus who, even in his prime, could actually make the Clintons look good. That was surely one of the reasons why Barack Obama picked him to be his running mate; the future President Drone and Deporter-in-Chief, anticipating taking up where Bill Clinton left off, wanted to look good too. ..."
    "... ["Kakistocracy," for those who still don't know, is an old word that has lately become timely. It means: rule of the worst, the most vile, corrupt, and incompetent.] ..."
    "... One would think that mainstream Democrats would have learned something from 2016 about the wisdom of fielding a stalwart of the ancien régime , a "moderate" -- she called herself a "progressive pragmatist" – against a buffoonish, sociopathic liar, a reality TV conman, who promises "to drain the swamp." ..."
    "... There is a certain irony in what Democrats are now saying about that prospect, now that, barring a miracle, Biden is the presumptive nominee. They are saying just what people were saying about Trump when his more thoughtful supporters were starting to anticipate and then to experience voters' remorse – that, however awful he may be, however much out of his depth in the Oval Office, "the adults in the room" will be there to keep him in line. ..."
    "... By almost any relevant standard, Franken was a far better Senator than Biden or, for that matter, than nearly every other Democratic Senator, Gillibrand included. By almost any relevant standard, Biden, even in his prime, was a dunce. But no matter. Anything for banality's sake; anything not to field a candidate worth supporting. ..."
    "... In ancient Greek dramas, a deus ex machina would sometimes be enacted; a god, wheeled in on a mechanical contraption, would appear upon the stage and go on to set an otherwise intractable situation right. ..."
    "... Obama's Original Sin, and also Eric Holder's, was to let the war criminals in the upper echelon of the Bush administration off scot-free. I fear that just as Trump takes his cues from Fox News, Biden will be taking his from what Obama did a dozen years ago. ..."
    "... Back then, Obama said that he wanted "to look forward," to let bygones be bygone. Because that is precisely what he did, the Bush-Cheney perpetual war regime became his own. It is still with us too, and Biden is no doubt itching to take up where his Best Friend Forever left off. ..."
    "... Were that to come to pass, the countless, legally actionable crimes that Trump and his kakistocratic minions have committed, now including the depraved indifference to human life and the menace to public health that Trump has been exhibiting daily since the corvid-19 crisis broke, would go unpunished, setting an even worse precedent than the one set by Obama. ..."
    Apr 13, 2020 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    Donald Trump is a paradoxical creature. On the one hand, he resembles nothing so much as a dumbass teenage boy, and, on the other, a barfly, long in the tooth and good for nothing but mouthing off.

    This from an obese septuagenarian who doesn't drink and who, unlike Richard Nixon, his only near rival in political depravity, is as unconflicted and intellectually shallow as they come.

    Nixon was good at many things. In politics, Trump is good at only two.

    One is using corporate media to his own advantage. To be sure, Trump has Fox News and talk radio, propaganda assets Nixon could hardly have dreamed of, in his pocket, but they were in place, dumbing down and otherwise doing harm, long before he came onto the scene. What Trump has managed to do is to get the ostensibly respectable cable networks, CNN and MSNBC, to offer him their platforms for free.

    This, as much as Hillary Clinton's politics and her failures as a candidate, helped him get elected in 2016. It is helping him stay afloat now, even as the utter incompetence of his handling of the on-going covid-19 crisis that he did so much to exacerbate becomes stunningly clear to anyone not hellbent on denying the obvious.

    CNN's and MSNBC's hatred of the Donald is as palpable as it is justified, and yet he plays them like a fiddle.

    The other thing he is good at is turning the GOP into an instrument of his will.

    The Republican Party was already unspeakably odious before Trump waddled into the scene, but, by giving a large and growing segment of its base – its mainly male, mainly rural, mainly geezerly, poorly educated, socially dislocated and economically stressed component -- permission to give their most noxious impulses free rein, Trump has turned the Republican Party into a personality cult for him to manipulate as he sees fit.

    Meanwhile, playing on their rank opportunism and mindless disregard of values and principles, he has brought the God Squad, rightwing Christian evangelicals and their Jewish counterparts, into the Trumpian fold, along with many of the most base and shamelessly venal plutocrats and plutocrat wannabes in creation.

    And what does the other duopoly party offer in response? Joe Biden. Seriously.

    Biden is a doofus who, even in his prime, could actually make the Clintons look good. That was surely one of the reasons why Barack Obama picked him to be his running mate; the future President Drone and Deporter-in-Chief, anticipating taking up where Bill Clinton left off, wanted to look good too.

    Another reason was to reassure Wall Street. They had already vetted him out the wazoo, but with serious money involved, they were still a tad worried. Team Obama therefore felt it expedient to set their minds at ease. Biden on the ticket would seal the deal.

    In those bygone days of yesteryear, Democratic Party honchos still knew what they had to do to win elections that weren't handed to them on a silver platter. Where, then, are they now, those savvy Party grandees? And why don't their paymasters intervene? Why are they being so stupid?

    Whatever the answer, it hasn't made them too stupid to hold onto their power.

    Sad to say, though, that they were still clever enough to realize that Sanders, and maybe Elizabeth Warren as well, were everything they didn't want Obama to be. And so, aided and abetted by CNN and MSNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, NPR and the whole motley mess of "liberal" corporate media, they quashed their candidacies well.

    Sadder still, after the powers that be pulled off the South Carolina and Super Tuesday fiascos and then promptly got the other "moderates" to throw in the towel all at once, it became clear that the old régime would win again.

    All doubts about that ended when the pandemic made door to door canvassing, rallies and nearly all the other usual forms of electoral politicking impossible. Almost overnight, the only two candidates in the Democratic field worth taking seriously had no chance at all of making the Democratic Party anything more than a lesser evil. The bad guys had won.

    But still the question remains: why are the winners being so stupid?

    Even if all they want is a colorless stooge whose only virtue is that he is not Trump, or Pence or any of the other kakistocrats in the Trumpian fold, surely they could at least do better than taking on the Trumpian juggernaut with a second-rate dodo leading the charge.

    ["Kakistocracy," for those who still don't know, is an old word that has lately become timely. It means: rule of the worst, the most vile, corrupt, and incompetent.]

    In a saner political environment, or even in the one we knew before Clinton, the Queen of Ineptitude, blew a sure thing in 2016, Trump and his minions could be counted on to defeat themselves.

    In the actual world, the chances are good that this will still be the case. Corporate media give Trump precious airtime, but they also display his and his administration's mind-boggling awfulness day by day.

    With the economy collapsing and the corpses piling high, and with rural America about to feel the pain along with the urban centers, it is hard to imagine that at least some of the lost souls in the Trump cult won't see the light and defect.

    But Democrats these days are born to lose; it might as well be in their genes.

    Therefore, like the Wall Street financiers in 2008 whose minds were set at ease when Obama put Biden on the ticket, voters who get what Trump is about could still use some reassurance.

    Trump may advertise his awfulness with every breath he takes, but with our electoral institutions being what they are, and with his base still standing by their man, the chances that Democrats will blow it again can seem greater than trivial.

    One would think that mainstream Democrats would have learned something from 2016 about the wisdom of fielding a stalwart of the ancien régime , a "moderate" -- she called herself a "progressive pragmatist" – against a buffoonish, sociopathic liar, a reality TV conman, who promises "to drain the swamp."

    But leave it to Democrats and Democratic voters to draw precisely the wrong lesson from that debacle. Leave it to them to field a candidate who is even worse than Clinton this time around.

    Needless to say, better a President Biden than a President Trump; better by far. But even befuddled moderates should be able to figure out that a Biden presidency will be a disaster in its own right.

    There is a certain irony in what Democrats are now saying about that prospect, now that, barring a miracle, Biden is the presumptive nominee. They are saying just what people were saying about Trump when his more thoughtful supporters were starting to anticipate and then to experience voters' remorse – that, however awful he may be, however much out of his depth in the Oval Office, "the adults in the room" will be there to keep him in line.

    That by running Biden, they are squandering an historically unprecedent opportunity to make basic, urgently needed, structural changes in the economy and society, and to transform the Democratic Party, presently part of the problem, into a force for genuine progressive change, at least to the extent that it was in the more radical phases of the New Deal and then later before the Vietnam War undid the Great Society, doesn't seem to matter to a large segment of the Democratic electorate – not yet, anyway.

    If they have qualms, they comfort themselves by telling themselves that, unlike Trump, Biden will appoint good people to run the show. And when that thought doesn't quite suffice, the default position seems to be that at least he, like Obama, will be a No Drama president, which is, they claim, just what the country now needs.

    These wrong-headed but cheery bromides are not entirely without merit.

    With Trump gone and Democrats eager to take over from the kakistocrats he empowered, the national government probably will become not exactly "great again," it never was even close to that, but at least not stunningly abominable.

    And although Biden, unlike Sanders and Warren, has hardly comported himself in a way that suggests competency or, for that matter, a fully functional mind, and although Andrew Cuomo and other governors have far outshined him since the corvid-19 plague erupted, at least he is not a narcissist, a sociopath, or a barely constrainable maniac.

    But what's wrong with Democrats? Why don't they dump him while they still can?

    Even Kirstin Gillibrand, scourge of womanizers who like Al Franken couldn't keep his hands enough to himself, seems OK with Joe, notwithstanding the fact that he is credibly accused of having done far worse than Franken ever did.

    By almost any relevant standard, Franken was a far better Senator than Biden or, for that matter, than nearly every other Democratic Senator, Gillibrand included. By almost any relevant standard, Biden, even in his prime, was a dunce. But no matter. Anything for banality's sake; anything not to field a candidate worth supporting.

    And at a time when "the homeland," as we now call it, is facing a crisis the likes of which has not been seen on these shores for more than a hundred years, how can it still be that, for so many Democratic voters, it is practically axiomatic that only a paragon of banality can defeat the most inept and villainous president that the United States has ever had to endure?

    The Democratic establishment is incapable of redemption. They have demonstrated time and again that they will do anything to maintain their own power, and the power of the forces they represent. That would be the obscenely rich; the beneficiaries of an increasingly inegalitarian distribution of income and wealth that, regardless the intentions of a few kindly billionaires, puts nearly everything on earth that is worth saving in mortal jeopardy.

    But Trump is their enemy too. They could at least stop helping him out to the extent that they are.

    Lately, for whatever it's worth, Democratic Party honchos have been floating the idea of running Warren for Vice President. I suspect that they are just blowing air, and I would be surprised and more than a little disappointed in her if she would go along with that; I'd expect her to have more integrity. But some good come of that possibility.

    After all, while there is death and the twenty-fifth amendment there is hope. Not much, though; not anyway in this "one nation under (Mike Pence's) God."

    I, for one, have been waiting for nearly four years for cholesterol and a sedentary lifestyle to relieve us of the clear and present danger we face. Now there is the corona virus as well. But here we are. I would say, though, that were the Donald to follow the lead of his British counterpart and soul-mate, Boris Johnson, and then go one step beyond, I might almost start believing in that (alleged) divinity.

    In ancient Greek dramas, a deus ex machina would sometimes be enacted; a god, wheeled in on a mechanical contraption, would appear upon the stage and go on to set an otherwise intractable situation right.

    It is too late now for Sanders and probably for Warren as well, even if she does become Biden's running mate. It probably always was; the fix was in too deep. What those two wanted to do was obviously better than any of the moderates' nostrums. But the dodos calling the shots would not abide Democrats doing the right thing or even some pale semblance of it. Those bastardly dodos won.

    But, even if only out of self-interest, and also in order to make the demise of Trump and Trumpism more likely than it already is, they surely ought to be able to bring themselves to pull off something like a deus ex machina trick -- by dumping the doofus for another "moderate," one less retrograde, less risible, and less likely to inspire potential anti-Trump voters to stay home.

    They could put Biden back out to pasture where he so plainly belongs. As Trump might say "what have they got to lose?" Of course, when Trump says it, the answer is always "everything." In this case, it would be "nothing at all."

    But I wouldn't hold my breath. It is more likely by many orders of magnitude that we will have a Clintonesque, Obama-inflected, déja vu all over again in our future.

    But even with the Forces of Darkness running the Democratic show, the forty or fifty percent of Democratic voters who favored Sanders or Warren still have leverage over where the Democratic Party goes.

    They could and should use it to push Biden and the Democratic Party establishment as far to the left as they can.

    They should also insist on at least two things.

    The first is obviously in the interest of all Democrats, the ones who are, for whatever reason, still wedded to the status quo. as well as those who understand the need to transform the lesser evil party fundamentally.

    That would be to defeat Republican efforts at voter suppression. It is plain as can be – so plain that even Trump has said as much – that if the black, brown, and youth votes are not suppressed, Republicans would have hardly any chance of electing anybody, much less Trump himself.

    Anyone paying attention to the April 7 primary election in Wisconsin, conducted at great peril to voters in the midst of the covid-19 pandemic, could hardly fail to understand how important this is.

    Republican lawmakers in the heavily gerrymandered and therefore Republican led Wisconsin state legislature, and so-called "conservative" but actually radical rightwing Republican judges in the Wisconsin and then the U.S. Supreme Courts put peoples', mainly black and brown peoples', lives at risk in order to secure the electoral victory of one Dan Kelly, a retrograde state Supreme Court Justice whom they can count on to ease their way.

    In light of that, who knows what mischief Trump and the cult around him have in store for November. The problem is especially acute now that, thanks to the machinations of Mitch McConnell, arguably the most malign figure in the entire Trumpian firmament, the judicial system is so profoundly compromised.

    Congressional Democrats must therefore, first and foremost, guarantee the right to vote for everybody eligible to vote. This means, among other things, making voting by mail an option that even troglodyte Republican judges cannot refuse to honor.

    Surely, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and the other party leaders can do that much.

    If they have the sense they were born with, they will do everything in their power to make the November election a referendum on Trump. If it is, Trump will surely lose.

    On the other hand, if it devolves into a choice between him and Biden, Trump will only just probably lose, the probability depending on how the corovid-19 virus is doing by then, the state of the economy, and the extent to which the good citizens of the United States of Amnesia keep in mind even just a tiny fraction of all the harm that the Trump presidency has done.

    In any event, the less Biden is exposed to the public, the more he stays bunkered down in Wilmington or wherever he has been hiding out, the better. The more voters see him as the only feasible alternative to Trump, the more electable he will be. The more they reflect on his merits, the more reason there is for concern.

    The other "non-negotiable demand" should be to insist on holding Trump and his factotums accountable. That will require riding herd over the doofus because, having attached himself to Obama's "legacy," letting it all go has become his default position.

    Obama's Original Sin, and also Eric Holder's, was to let the war criminals in the upper echelon of the Bush administration off scot-free. I fear that just as Trump takes his cues from Fox News, Biden will be taking his from what Obama did a dozen years ago.

    Back then, Obama said that he wanted "to look forward," to let bygones be bygone. Because that is precisely what he did, the Bush-Cheney perpetual war regime became his own. It is still with us too, and Biden is no doubt itching to take up where his Best Friend Forever left off.

    Does anyone doubt that, left to his own devices, a President Biden would repeat Obama's and Holden's mistake? Banality and the absence of drama are his trump card, after all; letting bygones be bygone is his thing.

    Were that to come to pass, the countless, legally actionable crimes that Trump and his kakistocratic minions have committed, now including the depraved indifference to human life and the menace to public health that Trump has been exhibiting daily since the corvid-19 crisis broke, would go unpunished, setting an even worse precedent than the one set by Obama.

    When that comes back to haunt us, as it surely will with Biden continuing the political line that made Trumpism all but inevitable, it won't be pretty. With the bar now set so low, the next demagogue in the Trumpian role is likely to be a lot smarter and more capable than Trump, and therefore a lot more dangerous.

    Surely, even the "moderates" in the House and Senate Democratic caucuses could at least force the dodo they are inflicting upon us to pre-commit, as it were, not to stoop so low as to give get-out-of-jail-free cards to the likes of Trump, his family and inner circle, and the most criminal of the base and servile sycophants he has inflicted upon us.

    The judgment of history is sure, but it is inevitably slow in coming, and the time for guarantees that Trump et. al . will be held to account, just as soon as Trump vacates the premises at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, is now.

    If a Democratic president isn't good even for that, then, when the judgment of history comes down on the Democratic Party establishment too, as it surely will, they will have a lot more to answer for than squandering a chance to make up for the neoliberal turn their party has been on since the Jimmy Carter days, and for all the many other post-Watergate ways that it has been making life better for the rich and heinous and worse for the working class.

    ANDREW LEVINE is the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What's Wrong With the Opium of the People . He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). - " Source "

    [Apr 11, 2020] 'Never in my country': COVID-19 and American exceptionalism by Jeanne Morefield

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the "Third World." ..."
    "... In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70 nations – more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases, listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military personnel working in approximately 160 countries. ..."
    "... Since then, the United States has overthrown or attempted to overthrow the governments of approximately 50 countries, many of which (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and Chile) had elected leaders willing to nationalize their natural resources and industries. Often these interventions took the form of covert operations. Less frequently, the United States went to war to achieve these same ends (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq). ..."
    "... In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget and over half of all discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit. ..."
    Apr 07, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    This March, as COVID-19's capacity to overwhelm the American healthcare system was becoming obvious, experts marveled at the scenario unfolding before their eyes. "We have Third World countries who are better equipped than we are now in Seattle," noted one healthcare professional, her words echoed just a few days later by a shocked doctor in New York who described "a third-world country type of scenario." Donald Trump could similarly only grasp what was happening through the same comparison. "I have seen things that I've never seen before," he said . "I mean I've seen them, but I've seen them on television and faraway lands, never in my country."

    At the same time, regardless of the fact that "Third World" terminology is outdated and confusing, Trump's inept handling of the pandemic has itself elicited more than one "banana republic" analogy, reflecting already well-worn, bipartisan comparisons of Trump to a " third world dictator " (never mind that dictators and authoritarians have never been confined solely to lower income countries).

    And yet, while such comparisons provoke predictably nativist outrage from the right, what is absent from any of these responses to the situation is a sense of reflection or humility about the "Third World" comparison itself. The doctor in New York who finds himself caught in a "third world" scenario and the political commentators outraged when Trump behaves "like a third world dictator" uniformly express themselves in terms of incredulous wonderment. One never hears the potential second half of this comparison: "I am now experiencing what it is like to live in a country that resembles the kind of nation upon whom the United States regularly imposes broken economies and corrupt leaders."

    Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the "Third World."

    In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70 nations – more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases, listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military personnel working in approximately 160 countries. This is a globe-spanning military and security apparatus organized into regional commands that resemble the "proconsuls of the Roman empire and the governors-general of the British." In other words, this apparatus is built not for deterrence, but for primacy.

    The U.S.'s global primacy emerged from the wreckage of World War II when the United States stepped into the shoes vacated by European empires. Throughout the Cold War, and in the name of supporting "free peoples," the sprawling American security apparatus helped ensure that 300 years of imperial resource extraction and wealth distribution – from what was then called the Third World to the First – remained undisturbed, despite decolonization.

    Since then, the United States has overthrown or attempted to overthrow the governments of approximately 50 countries, many of which (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and Chile) had elected leaders willing to nationalize their natural resources and industries. Often these interventions took the form of covert operations. Less frequently, the United States went to war to achieve these same ends (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq).

    In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget and over half of all discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit.

    Trump's claim that Obama had "hollowed out" defense spending was not only grossly untrue, it masked the consistency of the security budget's metastasizing growth since the Vietnam War, regardless of who sits in the White House. At $738 billion dollars, Trump's security budget was passed in December with the overwhelming support of House Democrats.

    And yet, from the perspective of public discourse in this country, our globe-spanning, resource-draining military and security apparatus exists in an entirely parallel universe to the one most Americans experience on a daily level. Occasionally, we wake up to the idea of this parallel universe but only when the United States is involved in visible military actions. The rest of the time, Americans leave thinking about international politics – and the deaths, for instance, of 2.5 million Iraqis since 2003 – to the legions of policy analysts and Pentagon employees who largely accept American military primacy as an "article of faith," as Professor of International Security and Strategy at the University of Birmingham Patrick Porter has said .

    Foreign policy is routinely the last issue Americans consider when they vote for presidents even though the president has more discretionary power over foreign policy than any other area of American politics. Thus, despite its size, impact, and expense, the world's military hegemon exists somewhere on the periphery of most Americans' self-understanding, as though, like the sun, it can't be looked upon directly for fear of blindness.

    Why is our avoidance of the U.S.'s weighty impact on the world a problem in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic? Most obviously, the fact that our massive security budget has gone so long without being widely questioned means that one of the soundest courses of action for the U.S. during this crisis remains resolutely out of sight.

    The shock of discovering that our healthcare system is so quickly overwhelmed should automatically trigger broader conversations about spending priorities that entail deep and sustained cuts in an engorged security budget whose sole purpose is the maintenance of primacy. And yet, not only has this not happened, $10.5 billion of the coronavirus aid package has been earmarked for the Pentagon, with $2.4 billion of that channeled to the "defense industrial base." Of the $500 billion aimed at corporate America, $17.5 billion is set aside "for businesses critical to maintaining national security" such as aerospace.

    To make matters worse, our blindness to this bloated security complex makes it frighteningly easy for champions of American primacy to sound the alarm when they even suspect a dip in funding might be forthcoming. Indeed, before most of us had even glanced at the details of the coronavirus bill, foreign policy hawks were already issuing dark prediction s about the impact of still-imaginary cuts in the security budget on the U.S.'s "ability to strike any target on the planet in response to hostile actions by any actor" – as if that ability already did not exist many times over.

    On a more existential level, a country that is collectively engaged in unseeing its own global power cannot help but fail to make connections between that power and domestic politics, particularly when a little of the outside world seeps in. For instance, because most Americans are unaware of their government's sponsorship of fundamentalist Islamic groups in the Middle East throughout the Cold War, 9/11 can only ever appear to have come from nowhere, or because Muslims hate our way of life.

    This "how did we get here?" attitude replicates itself at every level of political life making it profoundly difficult for Americans to see the impact of their nation on the rest of the world, and the blowback from that impact on the United States itself. Right now, the outsized influence of American foreign policy is already encouraging the spread of coronavirus itself as U.S. imposed sanctions on Iran severely hamper that country's ability to respond to the virus at home and virtually guarantee its spread throughout the region.

    Closer to home, our shock at the healthcare system's inept response to the pandemic masks the relationship between the U.S.'s imposition of free-market totalitarianism on countries throughout the Global South and the impact of free-market totalitarianism on our own welfare state .

    Likewise, it is more than karmic comeuppance that the President of the United States now resembles the self-serving authoritarians the U.S. forced on so many formerly colonized nations. The modes of militarized policing American security experts exported to those authoritarian regimes also contributed , on a policy level, to both the rise of militarized policing in American cities and the rise of mass incarceration in the 1980s and 90s. Both of these phenomena played a significant role in radicalizing Trump's white nationalist base and decreasing their tolerance for democracy.

    Most importantly, because the U.S. is blind to its power abroad, it cannot help but turn that blindness on itself. This means that even during a pandemic when America's exceptionalism – our lack of national healthcare – has profoundly negative consequences on the population, the idea of looking to the rest of the world for solutions remains unthinkable.

    Senator Bernie Sanders' reasonable suggestion that the U.S., like Denmark, should nationalize its healthcare system is dismissed as the fanciful pipe dream of an aging socialist rather than an obvious solution to a human problem embraced by nearly every other nation in the world. The Seattle healthcare professional who expressed shock that even "Third World countries" are "better equipped" than we are to confront COVID-19 betrays a stunning ignorance of the diversity of healthcare systems within developing countries. Cuba, for instance, has responded to this crisis with an efficiency and humanity that puts the U.S. to shame.

    Indeed, the U.S. is only beginning to feel the full impact of COVID-19's explosive confrontation with our exceptionalism: if the unemployment rate really does reach 32 percent, as has been predicted, millions of people will not only lose their jobs but their health insurance as well. In the middle of a pandemic.

    Over 150 years apart, political commentators Edmund Burke and Aimé Césaire referred to this blindness as the byproduct of imperialism. Both used the exact same language to describe it; as a "gangrene" that "poisons" the colonizing body politic. From their different historical perspectives, Burke and Césaire observed how colonization boomerangs back on colonial society itself, causing irreversible damage to nations that consider themselves humane and enlightened, drawing them deeper into denial and self-delusion.

    Perhaps right now there is a chance that COVID-19 – an actual, not metaphorical contagion – can have the opposite effect on the U.S. by opening our eyes to the things that go unseen. Perhaps the shock of recognizing the U.S. itself is less developed than our imagined "Third World" might prompt Americans to tear our eyes away from ourselves and look toward the actual world outside our borders for examples of the kinds of political, economic, and social solidarity necessary to fight the spread of Coronavirus. And perhaps moving beyond shock and incredulity to genuine recognition and empathy with people whose economies and democracies have been decimated by American hegemony might begin the process of reckoning with the costs of that hegemony, not just in "faraway lands" but at home. In our country.

    [Apr 11, 2020] Hamish de Bretton-Gordon

    An interesting connection between Skripal false flag and Syria false flag.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Main Stream Media ..."
    "... "The same people who assured you Saddam Hussein had WMDs now assure you Russian 'Novichok' nerve agents are being wielded by Vladimir Putin to attack people on British soil." [4] ..."
    Apr 11, 2020 | sunray22b.net

    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon is the pretentious name used by a fellow who seems to have been a lieutenant colonel in the British Army and a chemical weapons expert. He has access to the media and markets the Party Line . Whose? The Foreign Office's version of truth, one that denies the very active role of the Israel Lobby in using American forces to make war in the Middle East.

    de Bretton Gordon's public position is that chemical weapons are nasty dangerous things being used by Bashar al Assad , the president of Syria to attack innocent civilians. Before believing this story look at what Seymour Hersh has to say; that the Syria Gas Attack Carried Out By America .

    ... ... ...

    Civilians were under fire, he went on. He failed to mention that Al-Nusra might be holding them as human shields, as they did in Eastern Aleppo. The Syrian army liberated that area in December twenty-sixteen.

    The UNHCR tweeted in October last year : 'After years of darkness, city of # Aleppo is lit at night, we hope that # Syrians find light at the end of the tunnel finally # SupportSyrians '

    We ran a report on Aleppo's liberation at the time .

    For the first time in five years the city's Christians were able to celebrate Christmas free from constant bombardment from the Al-Nusra terrorists in the east.
    Celebrating Christmas in Aleppo December 2016.
    Celebrating Christmas in Aleppo December 2016.

    The US and UK Governments and the mainstream media hated the liberation of Eastern Aleppo. They will equally bewail the liberation of Eastern Ghouta, when it comes.

    Indeed, during the BBC interview, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon came across as nothing more than a UK government sock-puppet. He confirmed this when he commended what he said were 'the peace talks in Geneva'. We shall come to that below.

    Doctors Under Fire
    Mr David Nott is a respected surgeon but blames 'Assad' for everything.

    Mr David Nott is a respected surgeon but blames 'Assad' for everything.

    But what of this man, and what of 'Doctors Under Fire'? Well, the latter has apparently just two members, De Bretton Gordon and one David Nott, a surgeon who has been in war-torn areas. Mr Nott similarly finds no good word to say about the Syrian government.

    Oddly, in a video on Vimeo from 2016 he says Doctors Under Fire will be a charity. The Charity Commission has no record of it, nor of 'Medics under Fire' which is what the Doctors Under Fire website is called. When you go to the website , at this time of writing, you're invited to a rally on 7th May. On further investigation, that is 7th May 2016. Their website is two years out of date. Of course hospitals should not be attacked in war zones, but the Doctors Under Fire platform gives Messrs De B-G and Nott credibility to advance another agenda.

    Hospital bombing scam
    Furthermore, this astonishing video collated all the times the 'last hospital' in eastern Aleppo was put out of action by 'Syrian regime airstrikes'. Can you guess how many it was? And how do the mainstream media source their footage of sick children, hospitals, and dare we add, 'doctors under fire'? They are entirely dependent on the terrorists. No western journalist can venture into their areas. Why? For fear of being kidnapped and held for ransom by the very people they champion.

    De Bretton Gordon also claimed on the BBC a hospital in eastern Ghouta had been hit. That was why they gave him a platform under his 'Doctors Under Fire' persona. But again, it was second-hand terrorist propaganda. Here, the impressive 'Off-Guardian' website exposes the Syrian totem head of the 'White Helmets', which was a British Foreign Office creation, as we investigated here . This relentless tugging at western heart-strings is a scam and the msm [ Main Stream Media ] know it.

    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon SecureBio spun off from Hamish De Bretton-Gordon's time in the British Army

    SecureBio spun off from Hamish De Bretton-Gordon's time in the British Army

    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon is a retired Colonel with an OBE. He commanded NATO's Rapid Reaction Chemical Biological Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Battalion. He ran a company called SecureBio with, we read on this 'military speakers' website , 'an impressive list of blue chip clients globally.' However, Companies House says SecureBio resolved to go into liquidation in June 2015.

    The Colonel now apparently works for a company which makes breathing masks, Avon Protection . His LinkedIn profile claims he is 'Managing Director CBRN' of Avon, despite not actually being a director. He also claims still to be director of SecureBio. He does not mention that company was dissolved in August 2017 with debts over £715,000.

    Call for France to drop bombs on Syria

    De Bretton-Gordon has teamed up with Avon Protection which makes breathing masks.

    De Bretton-Gordon teamed up with Avon in 2014 . Avon then took over the SecureBio name in June 2015 as SecureBio Ltd shut down. Avon did not take over SecureBio Ltd's large debts.

    De Bretton-Gordon no longer has any connection with military field-work. Nevertheless, he has continued access to the world's media when subjects like Syria and alleged chemical weapons come up.

    Securebio's YouTube channel is still online and has a number of videos of the colonel calling for 'safe havens' for terrorists. He has appeared frequently on Sunni-Muslim Qatar's Al Jazeera TV channel.

    And as this Guardian opinion piece shows , he is not slow to blame 'Assad' and 'Putin' for each and every alleged chemical attack, just as the UK Foreign Office would want him to do. In this belligerent BBC article he even calls on France to declare war by dropping bombs on Syria.

    Geneva vs Astana Peace Talks

    Finally, why did the Colonel's promotion of the Geneva peace talks raise the alarm? Because this is a UK-driven political view. In reality the Geneva talks stalled in February twenty-seventeen. The Kurds took against the inconsequential opposition in exile pompously called the High Negotiations Committee.

    The Geneva talks finally collapsed in November when the Syrians would not agree to President Assad stepping aside, a key, but stupid, UK and US demand. The Guardian's highly-respected Patrick Wintour says the talks De Bretton Gordon extols are 'perilously shorn of credibility'.

    Meanwhile, the real peace talks, unmentioned by the Colonel, have been held in Astana, capital of Kazakhstan. They are brokered by Russia, so the UK wants them to fail. But the UN's Staffan de Mistura says the Astana talks are making small but 'clear progress' to reducing violence in Syria. They have now moved to Sochi on the Black Sea and we need to pray for them.

    Terrorists should lay down their arms

    Make no mistake, the UK government helped start the dreadful civil war in Syria . Even now its tame media pundits cannot bear the idea that the Islamic terrorists we assisted are mercifully losing.

    They need to lay down their arms. But don't expect the Colonel to agree. The Bible says in Psalm 120:7:

    I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war.

    Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon will keep ringing the UK Government bell. A knighthood cannot be far away. But we must take what he and the rest of the BBC's pro-Foreign Office pundits say with a very large pinch of salt.

    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon ex Wikispooks
    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (born September 1963) is a chemical weapons expert and chief operating officer of SecureBio Limited . He was formerly a British Army officer for 23 years and Commanding Officer of the UK's Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Regiment and NATO 's Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion. [1]

    De Bretton-Gordon is Managing Director CBRN at Avon Protection , the recognised global market leader in respiratory protection system technology specialising primarily in Military, Law Enforcement, Firefighting, and Industrial. [2]

    Novichok nerve agent
    On 4 March 2018, a Russian double agent Sergei Skripal was reported to have been poisoned in Salisbury with a nerve agent which British authorities identified as Novichok . Theresa May told Parliament that she held Russia responsible for Skripal's attempted murder.

    According to Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, Novichok was allegedly developed in the Soviet Union at a laboratory complex in Shikhany, in central Russia. Vil Mirzayanov , a Russian chemist involved in the development of Novichok, who later defected to the United States , said the Novichok was tested at Nukus, in Uzbekistan . [3]

    Former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray , who visited the site at Nukus, said it had been dismantled with US help. He is among those advocating scepticism about the UK placing blame on Russia for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal. In a blog post, Murray wrote:

    "The same people who assured you Saddam Hussein had WMDs now assure you Russian 'Novichok' nerve agents are being wielded by Vladimir Putin to attack people on British soil." [4]
    Deployments
    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon's operational deployments included the 1st Gulf War , Cyprus , Bosnia , Kosovo , Iraq (multiple tours) and Afghanistan (2 tours) and has been in Syria & Iraq frequently in the last 3 years. This considerable experience in the field places Hamish de Bretton-Gordon as one of the world's leading and most current experts in chemical and biological counter terrorism and warfare.

    De Bretton-Gordon is a visiting lecturer in disaster management at Bournemouth University . [5]

    Doctors Under Fire
    In December 2017, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon and fellow director David Nott of Doctors Under Fire highlighted the case of seven children with curable cancer who were said to be dying in Ghouta, Syria, for want of drugs and nourishment. They claimed Union of Syrian Medical Care and Relief Organisations (UOSSM) hospitals in Ghouta were on their knees with very few medicines left, and that kind words for the dying children were the only palliative care available. [6]
    UNQUOTE
    This Christian has been abused; he does not approve of Homosexuality or abortion. In other words, he is not a heretic.

    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon ex Wiki
    Hamish de Bretton-Gordon     OBE (born September 1963) is a chemical weapons expert and chief operating officer of SecureBio Limited. He was formerly a British Army officer for 23 years and commanding officer of the UK's CBRN Regiment and NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion . [1] He is a visiting lecturer in disaster management at Bournemouth University . [2] He attended Tonbridge School and has a degree in agriculture from the University of Reading (1987).

    Joint Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment ex Wiki
     A temporary formation that has been and gone.

    Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defence Battalion
     A NATO outfit.

    Al-Nusra Front ex Wiki
    Al-Nusra Front or Jabhat al-Nusra ( Arabic : جبهة النصرة ‎), known as the Jabhat Fateh al-Sham ( Arabic : جبهة فتح الشام ‎, transliteration : Jabhat Fataḥ al-Šām ) after July 2016, and also described as al-Qaeda in Syria or al-Qaeda in the Levant, [34] [35] is a Salafist jihadist organization fighting against Syrian government forces in the Syrian Civil War , with the aim of establishing an Islamic state in the country. [36] The group announced its formation on 23 January 2012. [37]

    The United States designated Jabhat al-Nusra as a foreign terrorist organization, followed by the United Nations Security Council and many other countries. [38] It was the official Syrian branch of al-Qaeda until July 2016, when it ostensibly split. [39] [40]

    In early 2015, the group became one of the major components of the powerful jihadist joint operations room named the Army of Conquest , which took over large territories in Northwestern Syria . It also operates in neighbouring Lebanon . [41] In November 2012, The Washington Post described al-Nusra as the most successful arm of the rebel forces. [[42]

    In July 2016, al-Nusra formally separated from al-Qaeda and re-branded as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham ("Front for the Conquest of the Levant"). [39]

    On 28 January 2017, following violent clashes with Ahrar al-Sham and other rebel groups, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham merged with four other groups to become Their al-Sham .

    Al-Qaeda ex Wiki
    Al-Qaeda ( / æ l ˈ k aɪ d ə , ˌ æ l k ɑː ˈ iː d ə / ; Arabic : القاعدة ‎ al-qāʿidah , IPA: [ælqɑːʕɪdɐ] , translation: "The Base", "The Foundation" or " The Fundament " and alternatively spelled al-Qaida, al-Qæda and sometimes al-Qa'ida) is a militant Sunni Islamist multi-national organization founded in 1988 [31] by Osama bin Laden , Abdullah Azzam , [32] and several other Arab volunteers who fought against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s. [6]

    Christian Voice ex Wiki
    Christian Voice (CV) is a Christian advocacy group based in the United Kingdom . [1] Its stated objective is "to uphold Christianity as the Faith of the United Kingdom, to be a voice for Biblical values in law and public policy, and to defend and support traditional family life." [2] It is independent of religious, denominational, or political parties. [3]

    CV is led by Stephen Green, with Lord Ashburn as its patron. [3] Green is the group's spokesperson, producing scores of press releases from 2005 to 2010. According to Green, Christian Voice had in excess of 600 members in 2005. [4]

    The group has been criticised for its positions. David Peel, leader of the United Reformed Church called Christian Voice "a disgrace" [4] and described their "claim to represent Christians" in the UK as "absurd". [[5]

    Leadership
    Stephen Green
    The leader, and sole staff member, of Christian Voice is Stephen Green [6] , a former Chairman of the Conservative Family Campaign, who attends an Assemblies of God Church. In the early 1990s, Green was a prominent campaigner against homosexuality through the Conservative Family Campaign, and wrote a book called The Sexual Dead-End .

    In January 2011, Green's former wife, Caroline Green, accused him of repeatedly physically assaulting her and their children, including one incident where he allegedly beat her with a weapon until she bled, and another in which their son allegedly required hospital treatment after having been beaten with a piece of wood. The couple subsequently divorced. [7] Stating that the article was "highly defamatory" and calling it a "catalogue of smears and distortions stitched together," Green denied some of the allegations. On his blog he wrote: [8]

    I sincerely tried to lead my marriage and household in a loving and responsible way, and one which was faithful to the Lord.

    ... ... ...

    https://ww.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/08/will-chemical-weapons-attacks-like-douma-fail-punish-assad-crimes/

    Medics Under Fire - com

    Medics Under Fire - org
    Anti-Syrian government [ of 2016 ]
    The repeated targeting of healthcare workers and hospitals by the Russian and Syrian governments are war crimes. We call on you to give Syria's heroic healthcare workers and the communities they serve a zone free from bombing to ensure their protection. The international community has agreed the bombs need to stop. The resolutions are in place. They simply need to be enforced.

    Secure Bio Limited ex Companies House
    Registered office address
    Bell Advisory, Tenth Floor 3 Hardman Street, Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3H
    Company status
    Dissolved
    Dissolved on
    17 August 2017
    Company type
    Private limited Company
    Incorporated on
    29 June 2011
    Last accounts made up to 31 December 2013
    Nature of business (SIC)
    82990 - Other business support service activities not elsewhere classified

    Appointment of Hamish De Bretton-Gordon as a director View PDF Appointment of Hamish De Bretton-Gordon as a director - link opens in a new window - 3 pages (3 pages)
    05 Sep 2011 Appointment of Andrew Duckworth as a director View PDF Appointment of Andrew Duckworth as a director - link opens in a new window - 3 pages (3 pages)
    29 Jun 2011 Termination of appointment of Yomtov Jacobs as a director

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5589207/Syrian-government-intensifies-offensive-against-rebel-stronghold-Eastern-Ghouta.html awful innit?

    Syrian activists and doctors being trained to combat chemical attacks - Allegation Made By Bretton Gordon
     More Quislinggraph , more propaganda.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/08/dozens-reported-dead-chemical-attack-insyria-us-blames-russia/
     Believe it if you want.

    [Apr 10, 2020] US Department of Defense give 1 million masks to IDF for coronavirus use

    From comments: "Of course, Israel is the Pentagons biggest ally in keeping the military budget up. "
    Apr 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Brendan , Apr 8 2020 8:49 utc | 5
    April 7: Hospitals say feds are seizing masks and other coronavirus supplies without a word

    bigger

    April 8: US Department of Defense give 1 million masks to IDF for coronavirus use


    bigger

    Posted by b on April 8, 2020 at 7:43 UTC | Permalink

    The Jpost article that b links to says that a million masks from China (donated by the US Department of Defense) arrived in Tel Aviv on Tuesday night. But Israel should have already had two million masks if this report from last weekend is correct:
    The shipment will include two million masks, landing in Israel on Monday morning,
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-april-4-2020/

    So that appears to be three million masks from China, plus those seized from American hospitals. Or are they fiddling the figures and pretending that those seized masks were legally purchased in China?

    Brendan , Apr 8 2020 9:53 utc | 8

    It appears that Mossad and others have recently acquired about two surgical masks per Israeli:

    "5 April 2020,
    (...)Last week, the Health Ministry said that security services and government ministries had managed to obtain 27 ventilators and a hoard of other medical equipment from abroad.

    Hebrew media reported that the Mossad intelligence service, which has been tasked with securing medical equipment from abroad from unspecified countries amid worldwide shortages, helped obtain 25,000 N95 respiratory masks , 20,000 virus test kits, 10 million surgical masks , and 700 overalls for ambulance workers who usually carry out the initial testing for the virus.

    It was the third such shipment by the Mossad over the past few weeks, aimed at addressing shortages in Israel."
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/with-11-planes-israel-airlifts-huge-quantities-of-medical-equipment-from-china/

    Mao , Apr 8 2020 9:58 utc | 9
    Pompeo: "America remains the world's leading light of humanitarian goodness."

    https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1247559857206628354

    Emily , Apr 8 2020 10:12 utc | 11
    One million masks for the IDF.
    Eat your heart out US Theodore Roosevelt and Guam.
    US sailors right at the bottom of the Pentagon's priorities, thats for sure.
    American military?.
    Have one duty - die as required for Israel.
    Including death by coronavirus by looks of things.....
    More fool them.
    Richard Steven Hack , Apr 8 2020 10:13 utc | 12
    Bloody hell. The Pentagon procures a million masks from China, then gives them to Israel - when US doctors are running low in almost every city - not to mention that the military itself has soaring coronavirus cases it can't handle.

    You gotta know some rich Jewish corporate billionaire was behind that crap and Kushner was just the conduit to get Trump to agree to it - probably in exchange for a big donation to Trump's campaign.

    If there was ever a country that deserved to be on the end of a US bombing campaign - it's Israel - a racist, fanatical. colonialist, fascist, illegal terrorist state. Zionists - the biggest scumbags on the planet. But instead the US bombs everyone else Israel doesn't like.

    But cheer up. Israel is a doomed nation. There is no way they can continue their path forever, historically speaking. I suspect they won't exist within another fifty years. They'll either be annihilated by their own nuclear weapons, or transformed into a bi-national state that is no longer primarily Jewish. And I don't particularly care which.

    Mao , Apr 8 2020 12:41 utc | 17
    The U.S. government's efforts to clean up Cold War-era waste from nuclear research and bomb making at federal sites around the country has lumbered along for decades, often at a pace that watchdogs and other critics say threatens public health and the environment.

    Now, fallout from the global coronavirus pandemic is resulting in more challenges as the nation's only underground repository for nuclear waste finished ramping down operations Wednesday to keep workers safe.

    Over more than 20 years, tons of waste have been stashed deep in the salt caverns that make up the southern New Mexico site. Until recently, several shipments a week of special boxes and barrels packed with lab coats, rubber gloves, tools and debris contaminated with plutonium and other radioactive elements were being trucked to the remote facility from South Carolina, Idaho and other spots.

    That's all but grinding to a halt.

    Shipments to the desert outpost will be limited for the foreseeable future while work at the country's national laboratories and defense sites shift to only those operations considered "mission critical."

    Officials at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant warned state regulators in a letter Tuesday that more time would be needed for inspections and audits and that work would be curtailed or shifts would be staggered to ensure workers keep their distance from one another.

    https://apnews.com/36eec1b19f113b62fa94f2f0388e240d

    Ghost Ship , Apr 8 2020 12:41 utc | 18
    ... ... ...

    BTW, the Al Quds Post (aka Jerusalem Post to Zionists) has changed the headline on that article to "Israel brings 1 million masks from China for IDF soldiers" Looks like the "New York Purchasing and Logistics Division" is part of the Israeli Ministry Of War All The Time. So the original was a nice story but fake news. Since there was no correction attached to the new version, it could be that Washington/Tel Aviv reckoned that this was a step to far even for Trump and the new version is the fake news.

    Willy2 , Apr 8 2020 12:45 utc | 20
    - This news simply confirms again that the US, under Trump, has become more corrupt. But this is a development that already started years, decades ago before Trump became president.
    William Gruff , Apr 8 2020 13:00 utc | 22
    Willy2 @20

    I think the possibility should be considered that Trump just made preexisting corruption more visible rather than adding significantly to it. There are elaborate protocols and circuitous speech that professional politicians learn to use to obfuscate the corruption and make their own participation in that corruption seem not only acceptable but necessary or even in the public interest. Trump is either ignorant of these protocols or he just doesn't care.

    vk , Apr 8 2020 13:26 utc | 24
    This is not surprising at all. Israel's economy is completely dependent on American constant aid:

    All is not what it seems: Israeli economy's relative success based on massive direct aid from the US and donations from the Jewish diaspora

    Even with all this help (of which most go to the military sector), the Isreali economy can barely keep itself afloat:

    [...] inequality of income and wealth is huge in Israel, the second worst in the 36 nation OECD group. The relative poverty rate for Haredim and Arabs (25% of the population) is near 50%, and even for other Israelis, it is higher than the OECD average. The gap in median wage levels from skilled to unskilled; from Haredim/Arabs to others is huge - and yet the former will constitute 50% of the population by 2060.

    And this mask fiasco is the lesser problem for the American working class right now. A significant portion of its people is going hungry . That magic USD 1,200 check is not coming soon:

    "the checks are not in the mail."

    And the problem isn't just in the USA. The periphery of Western Civilization is also going to suffer:

    Germany and France: the sharpest contractions in national output for 75 years.

    Germany's economy will shrink almost 10 per cent in the three months to June, according to the country's top economic research institutes, the sharpest decline since quarterly national accounts began in 1970 and double the size of the biggest drop in the 2008 financial crisis.

    The shutdown of vast swaths of economic activity to contain the spread of the pandemic is knocking 1.5 percentage points off French growth for every two weeks that it continues, the Banque de France warned on Wednesday.

    After more than three weeks in lockdown, French economic output is expected to have fallen by the sharpest rate since the second world war, the central bank said, forecasting that gross domestic product contracted 6 per cent in the first three months of the year.


    jared , Apr 8 2020 13:41 utc | 26
    However, to the matter of Israel and the virus:
    I thought they were having strangely little impact from virus.

    Anyway, this is all very revealing.

    You know how people always question:
    Why did that woman remain in that abusive relationship?

    Nathan Mulcahy , Apr 8 2020 14:18 utc | 29
    "US Department of Defense give 1 million masks to IDF for coronavirus use"

    MIGA

    Phryne's frock , Apr 8 2020 14:23 utc | 31
    Get everyone you know to read "Against Our Better Judgment" by Alison Weir. Absolutely the best short, supereasy read to open eyes of those who are unaware that they are unaware, I promise. If you can afford to, buy copies to give away.
    red1chief , Apr 8 2020 14:34 utc | 32
    Very brief, "b", but one of your best posts. This is an unmitigated outrage. The arrogance of the ruling class knows no bounds, and they are acting with impunity. Seems the ruling class doesn't even care anymore how widely known it is that the US has little sovereignty.
    Circe , Apr 8 2020 14:41 utc | 35
    Is Trump charging for the masks or are they an added bonus to the 4 billion Israel already gets annually?

    In 2018 Trump cut all aid to UNRWA destined for Palestine.

    Screw Trump. Palestinians have started producing their own masks; up to 50,000 per day as well as protective gowns.

    [Apr 08, 2020] Feudal Japan Edo and the US Empire by Hiroyuki Hamada

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... "Representative democracy" ..."
    "... "people should be shaking up a little" ..."
    Apr 08, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    After the warlord period of the 15th century, Japan was united by a few families then by a shogun family. The period is called the Edo period. They disarmed civilians and established a mild caste system.

    The country was closed except for a few ports controlled by the central government, travel restrictions were put in place and certain technological developments were prohibited.

    The period also had an interesting feature called sankinkoutai .

    It forced regional leaders to march across the country in formal costumes along with their armies in order to alternate their residences between their home regions and the capital of the feudal Japan, Edo. It also forced leaders' wives and family members to remain in Edo at all time. It was an elaborate system to keep the hierarchical structure intact.

    The reign lasted a few centuries with no conflicts within the land until the US forced to open Japan in order to use its ports for whaling business. I've been suspecting that the aim of some people among the ruling class circle is to establish such a closed hierarchical system which can function in a "sustainable" manner. But of course it is not exactly a system of equality and sharing as it would be advertised.

    The notion of "sustainable" is also very much questionable as we see blatant lies hidden behind carbon trade schemes, nuclear energy, "humanitarian" colonialism rampant in Africa and other areas and so on.

    I mentioned about the special feature, sankinkoutai , since I see an interesting parallel between it and "representative democracy" within the capitalist West today. Of course, we don't have such an obvious requirement among us, but similar dynamics occur within our capitalist framework. Our thoughts and activities are always subservient to the moneyed transactions guided by the economic networks.

    Our economic restrictions can force us to make decisions to do away with our needs -- we might abandon our skills, interests, friendships, life styles, philosophies, ideologies, community obligations and so on.

    In fact, some of us are forced to live on streets, die of treatable illness, suffer under heavy debt and so on as we struggle. In a way, we surrender our basic needs as hostages to the system just as the Japanese regional leaders had to leave their family members under the watch of the Shogun family. Moreover, the more our thoughts differ from that of neoliberal capitalist framework, the more we must put our efforts in adjusting to it. Some of us might be labeled as "dissidents", and such a label can create obstacles in our social activities.

    This functions similar to the fact that Japanese feudal regional leaders who were further away from the capital geographically had to put more efforts in marching across the country, requiring them to expend more resources. In a capitalist system, this occurs economically as well -- those who are already oppressed by the economic strife must spend more resources to conform to the draconian measures to survive.

    Now, one might wonder why regional leaders had subjected themselves to such an inhumane scheme. The march across the country was considered as a show of strength and authority -- it was a proud moment to put on their costume to show off. The populations across the country were forced to respect this process with reverence and awe. There were strict regulations regarding how to treat such marches.

    This situation can be compared to our political process -- Presidential election in particular, in which our powers and interests are put in the corporate political framework to be shaped, tweaked and distorted. Sanctioned by capitalist mandates and agendas, political candidates march across the nation while people proudly cheer their favorite ones. The more complacent to the capitalist framework the candidates are, the more lavish the marches. This forces the contents of political discourse to remain within the capitalist framework while excluding candidates and their supporters whose ideas are not subservient to it.

    "Representative democracy" within a capitalist framework can be one of the most strong ways to install values, beliefs and norms of the ruling class into minds of the people whose interests can be significantly curtailed by those ideas. All this can be achieved in the name of "democracy", "free election" and so on.

    Since people's minds and their collective mode of operations are deeply indoctrinated to be a part of the capitalist structure, any crisis would strengthen the fundamental integrity of the structure. I heard a Trump supporter saying that "people should be shaking up a little" . That's actually a very appropriate description. You shake their ground, people try to hold onto whatever they think is a solid structure. Some of us might, however, try to hold onto a Marxist perspective for example.

    That, of course, provokes triggering reactions by those who go along with the capitalist framework, because they are particularly threatened, sensing that their entire belief system might fall. Examination of facts and contexts during the time of crisis can generate divisions and opportunities to control and moderate opposing views.

    Capitalist institutions are dominated by this mentality which might explain the extremely quick mobilization of the draconian restrictions and the demand for more restrictions during the time of "crisis". Economic incentives, as well as self-preservation within the system, force people to engage actively in unquestioning manner.

    For example, we have observed concerted efforts in mobilizing media, government agencies, legal system and so on to "combat" "drug issues", "inner-city violence" and so on which has led to mass incarceration, police killings and "gentrification" of primarily minority communities.

    Needless to say, 9/11 has created enormous momentum of colonial wars against middle eastern countries. No major media outlets or politicians questioned blatant lies surrounding WMD claim against Iraq for example. As a result, many countries were destroyed while one out of a hundred people on the planet became refugees. Draconian regulations became normal, racism and xenophobia among people intensified and the term "global surveillance" became a household term.

    This situation requires further examination since there are a few layers which must be identified.

    First, we must recognize that there is an industry that commodifies "dissenting voices". The people who engage in this have no intention of examining the exploitive mechanism of capitalist hierarchy. Some of them typically chose topics of government wrongdoings in contexts of fascist ideologies (jews are taking over the world, for example), space aliens and so on. The angles are calibrated to keep serious inquiries away but they nonetheless garner major followings.

    When certain topics fall into their hands, discussing them can become tediously unproductive as it prompts a label "conspiracy". It also contributes in herding dissidents toward fascist ideology while keeping them away from understanding actual social structure.

    The second point is related to the first, when the topic enters the realm of "conspiracy", and when we lose means to confirm facts, many of us experience cognitive dissonance. The unspoken fear of the system becomes bigger than any of the topics at hand, and some of us shut down our thought process. As a result, we are left with hopelessness, cynicism and complacency. This is a major tool of the system of extortion. It makes some of us say "if there is a President who tries to overthrow capitalism, he or she will be assassinated".

    Such a statement illustrates the fact that understanding of the violent system, fear and complacency can firmly exist in people's minds without openly admitting to it.

    Third, aside from the unspoken fear toward the destructive system, there is also unspoken recognition that the system is inherently unsustainable to itself and to its environment. The cultish faith in capitalist framework is upheld by myths of white supremacy, American exceptionalism and most of all by our structural participation to it.

    Any cult with an unsustainable trajectory eventually faces its doomsday phase. It desires a demise of everything, which allows cultists to avoid facing the nature of the cult. It allows them to fantasize a rebirth. This, in turn, allows the system to utilize a catastrophic crisis as a springboard to shift its course while implementing draconian measures to prop itself up. "The time of survival" normalizes the atrocity of structural violence in reinforcing the hierarchical order, while those with relative social privilege secretly rejoice the arrival of "the end".

    Any of those three dynamics can be actively utilized by those who are determined to manipulate and control the population.

    Now, there is another interesting coincidence with the Japanese history. The title Shogun had been a figurehead status given by the imperial family of Japan long before the Edo period. Shogun is a short version of Seiitaishogun, which can be translated as Commander-in-Chief of the Expeditionary Force Against the Barbarians. The title indicates the nature of the trajectory more bluntly than the US presidency which is also Commander in Chief–which has engaged in numerous colonial expeditions over the generations.

    But as I mentioned above, the Edo period was not a time of fighting "barbarians", it was a time of a closed feudal system and its hierarchy was strictly controlled by its customs and regulations. The current trajectory of our time prompts one to suspect that the inevitable path to be a similar one.

    Our thoughts and ideas have been already controlled by capitalist framework for generations. We knowingly and unknowingly participate in this hostage taking extortion structure. While shaken by crisis after crisis, we have gone through waves of changes, which have implemented rigid social restrictions against our ability to see through lies and rise above the feudal order of money and violence.

    I must say that I do understand that above discussion is very much generalized. One can certainly argue against validity of the parallel based on historical facts and contexts. Some might also argue that Edo period to be far more humane on some regards, in terms of how people related to their natural surroundings, or the system being actually sustainable, for instance. But I believe that my main points still stand as valid and worthy of serious considerations.

    Also, it is not my intention to label, demean and demonize policy makers of our time in cynical manner. My intention is to put the matter as a topic of discussion among those who are concerned in a constructive manner. The comparison was used as a device for us to step back from our time and space in evaluating our species' path today.

    Doctortrinate ,

    there's no doubt -- the game has many strings to its bow, not helped by the peoples alacrity of contribution -- notably, when called to Vote.

    Generations through generation, used and abused, oppressed and distressed, and still they returned to the spiders labyrinth to sustain the fabric of its future slaves to it's design, expanding the web, sanctioning Its cause all the while, to a degeneration of theirs.

    Example after example of the corruption, deviance, distortions and exploitation, and again they return, depersonalized by repetition saturation, caught in a Stockholm syndrome victim captor beguilement of slavery Is freedom -- and what of this latest attack, the warring virus -- will the mass of unhinged automotons view it as another rescue -- condemning us "all" to a big tech digitally enslaved end.

    Or, will they finally, Wake Up and see the light ?

    Charlotte Russe ,

    "The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate there's been over 30 million cases of influenza during America's flu season, which began in September 2019, with a death toll exceeding 20,000." It must be noted, that in 2018 45 million were infected with the flu in the US, and there were 80,000 deaths. As of this moment, the World-O-Meter cites 338,999 cases of Covid-19 in the US with 9,687 deaths. This mortality rate indicates the deaths resulting from COVID-19 could be much "lower" than those resulting from the 2018 flu where the touted vaccine did NOT work.

    I think it's safe to say, we'll trully never know the source of Covid-19. We can only speculate. It could have been transmitted from bats in a Wuhan wet market, or it could have leaked out of a military lab. What can be definitely said, is that the panic associated with the pandemic benefitted the rulers of ALL major capitalist dictatorships.

    Fascist nation-states like China and Russia are grasping for a chance to make new friends in high places as a way to replace the numero-uno superpower. And while China and Russia are attempting to build new alliances the infighting persists within the EU. In the end, it makes no difference which member of this sinister trio becomes the "big macher"– the working-class, middle-class, and the working-poor will remain victims of exploitative leeches.

    Simply put, a landlord might sell his property to a new owner, but the occupying tenant will still be required to pay rent, and might actually see an increase in their monthly fee. It's like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

    Worldwide every country is "infected" with a bunch of crumb-bum leaders. A crisis intensifies their lechery. This is especially the case for those who have very little. We see this constantly, every time there's an ecological disaster whether it's a flood, hurricane, earthquake, typhoon, etc Disasters always wipeout the most vulnerable. These populations possess fewer resources, hence fewer options. This has been the case for time and immemorial. We're just more cognizant every time a disaster occurs because of surveillance technology and globalization.

    The real question which needs to be explored is why does the human species remain so flawed. Human nature has not evolved in thousands of years. The same brutish sociopathic tendencies which existed 10,000 years ago exist today. Perhaps Homo sapiens, are in an evolutionary quagmire where only the "dung and malarkey" are allowed to rise to the top.

    Whatever the case may be, billions are organized by various forms of "muck authority" who yield significantly more power than 15th Century Edo feudal lords. In addition, if the entire worldwide capitalist system collapsed 90 percent of the world's population would perish. The sustenance of billions are too intertwined within the capitalist resource system. Interestingly enough, primitive societies (if any are left) and survivalists might be the small remainders of a civilization which became too big for its breaches.

    So what are the options you might be thinking, since many of us never bothered to hone those imperative life saving survival skills. The only answer is "reform." Groups with shared interests need to organize and mobilize. Peaceful, but tenaciously protests could force concessions without alienating the remaining population. This could be done. It happened in the 1930's and the outcome of mass demonstrations lead to the New Deal. It's something to think about, once the world stops self-isolating. The options are limited -- the path either leads to neo-feudalism or barbarism. Unless of course, someone can figure out how to eliminate the sociopathic gene within the human species.

    Rhys Jaggar ,

    I think I can answer this question: the fact is that when a leader rules by fear, power and crushing dissent, only those displaying similar characteristics will thrive under them.

    Back when the human condition was rather tenuous and being eaten by big predators a significant possibility, the traits selected for were ruthless killing, hunting and, in the case of males, winning the right to breed. There were no 11 pluses for selecting breeders, rather punch ups, elimination of rivals and the like. The females were selected for childbearing capabilities, since giving birth was one of the most hazardous activities a female would undertake. They were not selected for religious evolution, nor for philosophical insight.

    As a result, the hierarchies of human society grew around those more primitive traits and, by and large, remain there, albeit diluted down somewhat.

    But thuggery, chicaneries, spying and lying are still the traits most valued in a dog-eat-dog world. Insight can be stolen, bled dry and then dumped.

    Who needs a brain when you can steal someone else's ey?

    Charlotte Ruse ,

    To put it simply, deviant ruthless behavior is baked into the cake.

    [Apr 08, 2020] What Virus? Military Asks Whopping $20B to 'Deter Chinese Aggression'

    Notable quotes:
    "... " ​T​ he operational dilemmas faced by Indo-Pacific Command demand urgent attention. In order to make American investments in advanced fighters, attack submarines, or breakthroughs in military technology meaningful (in other words, to deter or win a conflict), there must be urgent investment in runways, fuel and munitions storage, theater missile defenses, and command and control architecture to enable U.S. forces in a fight across the Pacific's vast exterior lines. ​"​ ..."
    Apr 08, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    'Number one priority' is a $1.5 billion, 360-degree persistent and integrated air defense ring around Guam​.

    ... ... ...

    ​Arguing in favor of the PDI i n a recent op-ed , ​former Pacific policy official for the DoD ​ Randall Schriver ​ ​ and Eric Sayers, ​former​ special assistant to the commander of INDOPACOM, ​wrote:

    " ​T​ he operational dilemmas faced by Indo-Pacific Command demand urgent attention. In order to make American investments in advanced fighters, attack submarines, or breakthroughs in military technology meaningful (in other words, to deter or win a conflict), there must be urgent investment in runways, fuel and munitions storage, theater missile defenses, and command and control architecture to enable U.S. forces in a fight across the Pacific's vast exterior lines. ​"​

    john • a day ago

    Well the Pentagon sees that the checkbooks are open, Look if those pencil necked doctors can get 2trillion for a case of the sniffles, we ought to be able to get 2 billion to face down the Chicoms!

    [Apr 08, 2020] About neoliberalization of China and Russia

    Apr 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    King Lear , Apr 8 2020 19:14 utc | 56

    VK #2
    Yet you are fooled by the phony Socialism of "Red" China, which is really Neoliberalism in disguise (I highly doubt Marx, Lenin, Stalin, or even the confused, Pro-U$ Mao would believe Sweatshops, Stock Exchanges, and Billionaires represents the Socialist model of production). I agree with you that Bernie Sanders is a gutless fraud and faux Socialist (he's merely a Centre-Left Social Democrat yet he portrayed his movement as some sort of "Revolution", LOL), who sadly represents the best you would ever get in the White House, in the sense that at least he wouldn't have started any new wars, wouldn't have given any tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy, and wouldn't have outsourced any more jobs in new free trade agreements (these are the reasons I would have held my nose and voted for him if he had been nominated, despite my much more Leftist beliefs).

    However, I believe it smells of intense hypocrisy to call out Bernie Sanders as faux Socialism (he is), while simultaneously bowing at the alter of Xi Jinping thought, which along with being yet another form of faux Socialism like Bernies Social Democracy, isn't just due to the naivety of believing that the phony Liberal Democratic process (in Marxist terms the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie), can actually achieve meaningful reforms for the Working class and not just pacify them. In reality, it represents something much more devious, a country that had a Communist Revolution and established a Planned Socialist economic system, yet decided to sell out its citizens for an alliance with the U$ and massive wealth for the Communist Party leadership, who proceeded to turn their formerly Socialist country into a Neoliberal, Neocolonial, Sweatshop, that by giving 15 Trillion dollars in surplus value to Wall Street is one of the biggest sponsors of U$ Imperialism (remember, according to Lenin Imperialism is not just launching Wars against small countries, but includes when Western Corporation exploit third world populations for massive super profits through resource extraction and cheap labor sweatshops). In reality their are only two countries today (Cuba and North Korea) that are in the Socialist mode of production according to the Marxist-Leninist definition, sadly their used to be many more (the USSR, the other Eastern Bloc countries, Maoist China, etc.) which all succumb to Capitalist counterrevolution (the USSR and the other Eastern Bloc countries etc.), or the ruling Communist Party embracing such extreme revisionism that over time they basically restored the Capitalist mode of production and Dictatorship of the Proletariat, in all but name only. The reason for both of these tragic events was the fact that due to a long-term revisionist trend after the death of Stalin and Maos ridiculous Sino-Soviet split, the leadership of these countries became corrupted by the desire for the U$-style "Good life" of mass consumerism and hedonistic materialism (not Dialectical Materialism), thus proving that the real threat to Socialism is the Neoliberal culture of decedent consumerism which corrupt the leadership and enchants the masses of nations around the world.

    [Apr 07, 2020] Three big claims of 'Russian disinformation' and 'Russian trolls/bots' on social media.

    Apr 07, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    John A , April 7, 2020 at 04:09

    Over the last week, there have, to my knowledge, been three big claims of 'Russian disinformation' and 'Russian trolls/bots' on social media.
    1. Last week, Russian equipment and support sent to Italy to help fight Covid-19. Nato stenographers claim and spread the disinformation that '80% of the equipment was useless', citing one anonymous source. Total lies.

    2. Swedish minister claims social media campaign against a 5G network in Sweden is run by russian trolls. Turns out it is a 64 year old grandmother living in Stockholm who is behind the campaign.

    3. Yesterday afternoon, russia media report, according to a National Health Service source, Boris Johnson is on a ventilator in hospital. Utter nonsense say MSM, Russian disinformation. Overnight headlines in British media – Boris in intensive care.

    The western media are so totally venally corrupt in serving the 1% yet get found out in their lies time after time and yet carry on. I try to read as many different media as possible, but have no doubt, which are more credible, and it aint NATO stenographers

    AnneR , April 7, 2020 at 14:33

    Yes, John A. Truly there is something warped about the western ruling elites' mindset. But I guess they have to have a bugaboo and Russia (then China, sometimes Iran and others) is the primary, western created, go-to one. Even among those who did not grow up, or were only young, during the cold war.

    I am only thankful that, despite my father's Tory politics (all but regarding the land, which he believed should be nationalized and 50 acres given to every male [well, he was sexist]; an curious, decidedly not Tory viewpoint) the USSR as was then never was on either his or my mother's agenda. Indeed, we used to watch with much pleasure the Red Army choir, once we got a television (not till 1958, when I was 10), which toured the UK, I *think*

    No ducking under school desks. Nor any other weird thing

    [Apr 06, 2020] Enshrining God in the Constitution Robespierre's Great Idea by Laurent Guyénot

    Apr 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    https://www.unz.com/article/enshrining-god-in-the-constitution-robespierres-great-idea/ The Unz Review - Mobile The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media User Settings: Version? Social Media? Read Aloud w/ Show Word Counts No Video Autoplay No Infinite Scrolling
    Save Cancel

    ← Karl Marx and Jewish Power Laurent Guyénot Archive Laurent Guyénot Archive Enshrining God in the Constitution: Robespierre's Great Idea Laurent Guyénot April 5, 2020 6,300 Words 55 Comments Reply Listen ॥ ■ ► RSS

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df3c11b77055359c%26domain%3Dwww.unz.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.unz.com%252Ff372a136e825a48%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=75&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Farticle%2Fenshrining-god-in-the-constitution-robespierres-great-idea%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&show_faces=false&width=90

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df31ccb1ef3c31f4%26domain%3Dwww.unz.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.unz.com%252Ff372a136e825a48%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Farticle%2Fenshrining-god-in-the-constitution-robespierres-great-idea%2F&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&type=button Email This Page to Someone
    Remember My Information


    => Table of Contents Options

    List of Bookmarks
    ◄ ► Bookmark ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Toggle All ToC ▲ ▼ Add to Library Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

    I've heard that, as part of new amendments to the Russian Constitution, President Putin proposes to include the Russian people's "faith in God," and a definition of marriage as a "union of a man and a woman." I'm a bit skeptical about the news, but if true, I think it's a great idea. If voted in the upcoming referendum, it would consecrate the civilizational schism that is likely to define the history of our civilization in the coming century: in the West, the post-modernist project of liberating man from his human nature, to produce an uprooted, transgendered, upgraded man, Homo Deus . In the East, the choice of honoring and protecting our spiritual and anthropological roots, to produce the genuine thing: Mars and Venus, virile men and feminine women grateful to their Creator for each other, reveling in their fertile complementarity.

    Needless to say, the proposal has the support of Moscow Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, but also of Muslim leader Talgat Tadzhuddin. The idea is to transcend particular creeds and churches. More surprisingly, Communist Party boss Gennady Zyuganov raises no objection.

    As a country that was still officially Marxist-Leninist thirty years ago, Russia has come a long way. America too, for that matter. Interestingly, God is not mentioned in the American Constitution, although he is ubiquitous on dollar bills (think of Jesus being handed a dollar bill instead of a Roman denarius in Matthew 22!).

    Other proposed amendments, such as banning foreign citizenships and bank accounts for state officials, have obvious practical advantages, and are so sensible that they raise little discussion. By contrast, adding God into the constitution is highly and purely symbolic. Some will argue that it will have no real consequence. It all depends on the power we attribute to symbols. I would think that such a collective proclamation by the Russian people would have a strong impact, both on Russian self-consciousness, and as a message to the West. It could also lead to real changes, in academia, for example: I can't wait for the day when Intelligent Design research will be funded in Russian universities, rather than censored as it is in the U.S. (watch Ben Stein's documentary Expelled: No Intelligent Allowed ).

    What are the arguments for enshrining God in the Constitution? That is one of the most important questions in political science that you can think of. This will come as a surprise to many, but the man who has thought the deepest on this question is perhaps Maximilien Robespierre (1758-1794). On May 7, 1794, he had the Convention decreed, with a view to inscribing it in the French Constitution, that, "the French people recognize the existence of the Supreme Being and the immortality of the soul." On June 8, he presided over a national holiday dedicated to the Divine Creator. It was a great success, both in Paris and in the provinces. Robespierre was then immensely popular, but his career would end fifty days later when he was arrested, silenced by a gunshot through his jaw, and executed the next day without trial, together with his brother Augustin and twenty-one of his friends, followed the next two days by eighty-three of his supporters, their bodies and heads thrown into a mass grave, with lime spread on them so as to leave no trace. In the aftermath of their coup, Robespierre's assassins crushed demonstrations of mourning for the Incorruptible, and launched a press campaign against him that basically continues to this day.

    There is a great deal of misunderstanding about Robespierre and his "religious policy." For that reason, I thought that the Russian constitutional debate would be a good opportunity -- or a pretext -- for some reappraisal of a great man unfairly vilified, and thereby a case study in the transformation of a vanquished hero into a monster by state propaganda. But the main purpose of this article is to present Robespierre's ideas on the relationship between religion and politics, which I find stimulating and pertinent for our time -- and, I expect, unfamiliar to most.

    Robespierre was the heir and probably the most articulate advocate of a long tradition of thinkers who equally disliked religious dogmatism and atheism, not only as too narrow for their own minds, but as harmful to society. In his view, both were symmetrical forms of fanaticism. He would not be the last to think along this line. Thomas Jefferson once wrote to John Adams : "Indeed I think that every Christian sect gives a great handle to Atheism by their general dogma that, without a revelation, there would not be sufficient proof of the being of a god." There is much truth in this statement. But the principle of authoritative revelation is not the main factor involved in the development of Western atheism, I think. The content of the revelation is critical. I believe that modern atheism is, to a great extent, a reaction to the disgusting character presented as "God" in the Old Testament. Yahweh's obscenity has ultimately ruined God's reputation. Voltaire, that old anti-Semite , ridiculed Christianity by quoting almost exclusively the Old Testament. Still today, Darwinian high priest Richard Dawkins can only make his atheism sound plausible by first professing, correctly:

    "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." [1] Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion, Houghton Mifflin, 2006, p. 51.

    In his speech on "the relations of religious and moral ideas with republican principles," read at the Convention six weeks before his death, Robespierre said:

    "I know of nothing so close to atheism as the religion that [the priests] have made: by disfiguring the Supreme Being, they have destroyed him as much as it was in them; [ ] the priests created a god in their image; they made him jealous, temperamental, greedy, cruel, relentless."

    (That judgment is partially inexact: the cruel God of the Old Testament may have been used by priests as a means of social control, but he had been created by the Levites long before. Robespierre had no clue about the Jewish Question.)

    ORDER IT NOW

    Let's start with a clarification: Today's French traditionalist Catholics insist that Robespierre's "Être Suprême" has nothing to do with their God, and they pretend that it has Freemasonic overtones. They even confuse it with the deification of Reason , a cult that Robespierre execrated and combatted. So let's set the record straight: There is no evidence that Robespierre was ever a Freemason. He borrowed the expression "Supreme Being" from Rousseau, who never was a Freemason either. It had been used since the Renaissance and was of common usage. Even the very royalist, Catholic and counter-revolutionary Joseph de Maître begins his Considerations on France (1797) with the sentence: "We are all attached to the throne of the Supreme Being by a flexible chain, which retains us without enslaving us." François René de Chateaubriand, who also hated Robespierre, used repeatedly the phrase "Supreme Being" in his apology of Catholicism, Le Génie du christianisme (1799). Therefore, there is no reason to consider that, in Robespierre's speeches, "Supreme Being" meant anything else than God. His suggestion to engrave in the Constitution that the French people have "faith in the Supreme Being" is equivalent to Putin's proposal.

    Putin has the support of the Patriarch whereas Robespierre was anathemized by the Pope, you may object. But here is the heart of the matter: Russian orthodoxy is, fundamentally, a national religion, and today more than ever, with the canonization of the martyred Romanovs. The main reason why Roman Catholicism was unacceptable for Robespierre was that it meant loyalty to a foreign power. Yet contrary to the common image, Robespierre did not seek to ban Catholicism, he only required that French bishops and priests swear loyalty to the French State, rather than to the Roman Pope. That was pretty much what every French monarch had tried and failed to do since Philipp the Fair. As we shall see, Robespierre actually opposed the "dechristianization" campaign of the Enragés , and denounced them as the useful idiots or willing accomplices of the counter-revolutionaries.

    There are two other differences between Robespierre's and Putin's proposals. Robespierre saw the traditional family as the basic cell of a healthy society, but almost everyone did, then. Stipulating that marriage can only join a man and a woman would have been as superfluous as affirming that 1 plus 1 make 2.

    The second difference is that Robespierre wanted to mention the immortality of the soul next to the existence of God. "Immortality of the soul" may have sounded to most of Robespierre's contemporaries a straightforward concept. But today, the formulation would beg too many metaphysical questions: What's a soul? Do animals have one? Is it individual or collective, or both? Where does it go? Does immortal means eternal? etc. And that other question: if every human being has an immortal soul, at what stage of its development does the fetus get one? I'm not saying it would be a bad thing, but bringing up the issue in the constitutional referendum could be very divisive.

    The making of a monster

    In the standard textbook history of the French Revolution, Robespierre is portrayed as a fanatic and megalomaniac dictator, and he is blamed for the Great Terror that sent approximately 17,000 people to the guillotine in the six weeks preceding his demise. Ever since Jules Michelet, who fashioned our roman national , the figure of Robespierre has served to embody all the evils of the French Revolution, exactly like Philippe Pétain for World War II. While Danton has boulevards in his name and is celebrated by Hollywood, Robespierre is the usual bad guy.

    However, there have always been a minority of historians (informed by the Société des Études Robespierristes founded by Robert Mathiez in 1907) to challenge the black legend, and there are still politicians occasionally honoring him ( Jean-Luc Mélenchon ). The most recent positive reappraisal of Robespierre is appropriately subtitled: La Fabrication d'un Monstre . [2] Jean-Clément Martin, Robespierre, la fabrication d'un monstre, Perrin, 2016. Other recent French historians who have drawn a rather positive image of Robespierre include Jean-Philippe Domecq, Robespierre, dernier temps , Folio/Histoire, 2011 and Cécile Obligi, Robespierre. La probité révoltante, Belin, 2012. In English language, that revisionist trend is represented by David P. Jordan's The Revolutionary Career of Maximilien Robespierre (Free Press, 2013). Chapter 1 begins like this:

    "As Robespierre lay on a table in the antechamber of the Committee of Public Safety, drifting in and out of consciousness, his ball-shattered jaw bound up with a bandage, his triumphant enemies, in another room of the Tuileries palace, were creating the monster who would soon pass into historical legend. This Robespierre, created by using materials scavenged from old calumny, damaging anecdote, and sometimes sheer malicious invention, was one of the founding acts of a new revolutionary government. The Thermidorians -- thus have Robespierre's conquerors and successors been dubbed -- sought not only to justify their coup d'état of July 1794 (the month of Thermidor in the revolutionary calendar) but to evade the opprobrium they shared with Robespierre and his comrades for deeds done during the agonizing crisis the previous year, during the Terror. The vengeful malice of the Thermidorians was partly successful: their caricature of Robespierre has proved durable."

    Robespierre was primarily a man of words, in a time when eloquence was a political act, when speeches could change the opinion of deputies, and sometimes even win a whole assembly. He was a great writer and a great orator. Not even his ennemies doubted the sincerity of his passionate defense of the poor and downtrodden: "That man will go far -- he believes everything he says," Mirabeau once remarked. His speeches, delivered at the Jacobin Club or at the Convention, were printed and widely distributed, and had a huge echo all over France.

    In the spring of 1793, he reluctantly joined the Comité de salut public (Committee of Public Safety), a revolutionary tribunal responsible for sending conspirators against the new Republic to their death, at a time when the Republic was at war against Austria, Prussia, Spain and England. Robespierre's responsibility in the Great Terror that marked the last two months of the Committee is a debated subject, but it is admitted that he was absent from Committee meetings, probably sick, during its last six weeks of work.

    In his final speech to the Convention, just before being arrested, Robespierre denounced a plot to lose him by spilling blood on his behalf. He claimed that his enemies, in order to rally enough deputies against him, had circulated fake lists of suspects allegedly written by himself, and spread the rumor that he was preparing a major purge, when in fact he wanted to end the Terror. Napoleon Bonaparte later confirmed this accusation, and believed that "Robespierre was the real scapegoat for the Revolution." Alphonse de Lamartine, who wrote a Histoire des Girondins in eight volumes, also came to the realization that Robespierre's enemies "covered him, for forty days, with the blood they shed to disgrace him." [3] Jean-Philippe Domecq, Robespierre, dernier temps , Folio/Histoire, 2011, p. 27-30 Simultaneously, they created the golden legend of Danton, in reality a disgusting money-grubber.

    Danton (1759-1794)

    I will not delve deeper into Robespierre's biography; I just wanted to point out that his standard portrayal is the product of an elaborate and massive propaganda operation by those who overthrew him. I will now focus of his religious views, which are generally underrated, although, from his own testimony, they determined his political views. [4] My presentation owes a lot to Henri Guillemin, Robespierre, Politique et mystique, Seuil, 1987.

    Robespierre did not view religion as a purely private matter. He believed that the idea of God is an indispensable foundation for public morality, and should be taught in schools and celebrated publicly. "The idea of the Supreme Being and of the immortality of the soul is a constant reminder of justice; therefore, it is social and republican."

    Robespierre's ideas were elaborated from those of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whom he held as the greatest "tutor of the human race." Rousseau's "natural religion" was itself not a new idea. Let me sketch a brief history of that tradition, before coming back to Robespierre.

    Natural religion ORDER IT NOW

    If we define "natural religion" as the claim that belief in God and in the afterlife is sufficiently founded on reason and experience, then it is as old as Plato, and probably much older. If we define it additionally as a rebellion against the authority of Christian scriptures and dogmas, then it seems to have been around as long as Christianity. Proofs are hard to find for the Middle Ages, when monks had a quasi monopoly on writing. But from the end of the twelfth century, there is enough evidence of forms of religious beliefs independent and sometimes incompatible with Christian doctrine. I have analyzed some of this evidence in my book La Mort féerique: Anthropologie du merveilleux (XIIe-XVe siècles) , a rewriting of my doctoral thesis. We know for example that the court of the famous Frederick II Hohenstaufen (1194-1250) was replete with scholars and noblemen whose religious views were inspired by classical philosophy, and who resented Catholic intolerance. Pope Gregory IX, founder of the Inquisition, made the following accusation against Frederick: "Openly, this king of pestilence notably affirmed -- to use his own words -- that the whole world was duped by three impostors: Jesus Christ, Moses and Muhammad." [5] Quoted in Ernst Kantorowicz, L'empereur Frédéric II , Gallimard, 1987 (1 st German ed. 1927), pp. 451-452. The accusation is plausible. Having been raised in multicultural Sicily in the company of Jewish, Muslim and Christian scholars, he had reflected on the problems caused by the very notion of revelation.

    Frederick was a polymath scientist, a polyglot, an outstanding diplomat (he conquered Jerusalem without shedding a drop of blood), and an enlightened lawmaker. He was "the Wonder of the World" ( Stupor Mundi ), the most prestigious and powerful prince of his age. Yet the pope prevailed over him, and pursued his descendants with insatiable hatred, until his lineage was eradicated, and his name covered with calumny. Nevertheless, his memory would be cherished by some of the best minds throughout the thirteenth centuries. Dante's treaty De Monarchia (1313) is believed to be a defense of Frederick's project (on Dante and the Fedeli d'Amore, you may want to read the relevant section of my article "The Crucifixion of the Goddess" ).

    Frederick's amazing Castel del Monte, in Southern Italy

    With the growing power of the Inquisition, overt advocacy of natural religion became impossible. That is when we start hearing of secret circles of intellectuals. The rediscovery of the ancient Greeks and Romans also provided a relatively safe cover for expressing unchristian views on God and the afterlife, and I believe that apocryphal forgeries are more numerous than generally acknowledged. The great Petrarch (1304-1374) may have forged rather than discovered the letters of Cicero that became the blueprint for his own humanism. [6] Jerry Brotton, The Renaissance Bazaar: From the Silk Road to Michelangelo, Oxford UP, 2010, pp. 66-67.

    In the next century, the printing press and the Reformation provided an unprecedented window of tolerance, especially in the Netherlands. Erasmus of Rotterdam (1469–1536) approached natural religion as the common denominator of all faiths, and the means of overcoming religious wars. His friend Thomas More imagined in his Utopia , or the best form of government (1516), an ideal world where people hold a variety of opinions on religious questions, but "all agree in this: that they think there is one Supreme Being that made and governs the world." The public cult is for this Supreme Being alone, while "every sect performs those rites that are peculiar to it in their private houses."

    Then came John Locke, with his Letter Concerning Toleration, first published in Latin in 1689. Locke went further than Erasmus in declaring immoral any doctrine professing that good people are damned if they do not believe in this or that dogma. Churches who require loyalty to a foreign power should also be banished, for by tolerating them, the magistrate "would give way to the settling of a foreign jurisdiction in his own country and suffer his own people to be listed, as it were, for soldiers against his own Government." That concerns Roman Catholicism, of course, but also Islam:

    "It is ridiculous for any one to profess himself to be a Mahometan only in his religion, but in everything else a faithful subject to a Christian magistrate, whilst at the same time he acknowledges himself bound to yield blind obedience to the Mufti of Constantinople, who himself is entirely obedient to the Ottoman Emperor and frames the feigned oracles of that religion according to his pleasure."

    Locke deemed atheism as immoral and socially corrosive as papism: "those are not at all to be tolerated who deny the being of a God. Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist." For Anthony Collins (1676-1729), a friend of Locke,

    "Ignorance is the foundation of Atheism , and Free-Thinking the Cure of it. And thus tho it should be allow'd, that some Men by Free-Thinking may become Atheists yet they will ever be fewer in number if Free-Thinking were permitted, than if it were restrain'd." ( A Discourse of Freethinking , 1713)

    In the eighteenth century, it was still risky to profess openly such ideas. Locke had to print his book anonymously in Amsterdam. David Hume published his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion anonymously and posthumously in 1779. Secret societies were still necessary for intellectuals to discuss safely on these matters. Irish philosopher John Toland (1670-1722) wrote in his Pantheisticon :

    "The Philosophers therefore, and other well-wishers to mankind in most nations, were constrain'd by this holy tyranny to make use of a twofold doctrine; the one Popular, accommodated to the Prejudices of the vulgar, and to the receiv'd Customs or Religions: the other Philosophical, conformable to the nature of things, and consequently to Truth; which, with doors fast shut and under all other precautions, they communicated only to friends of known probity, prudence, and capacity. These they generally call'd the Exoteric and Esoteric , or the External and Internal Doctrines. " [7] Quoted in Jan Assmann, Religio Duplex: How the Enlightenment Reinvented Egyptian Religion, Polity Press, 2014, p. 59.

    Toland's Pantheisticon describes the rules and rites of a society of enlightened thinkers who meet secretly to discuss philosophy and search for metaphysical truths. Such clubs provided the first basis of Freemasonry. [8] Albert Lantoine, Un précurseur de la franc-maçonnerie. John Toland (1670–1722) , suivi de la traduction française du Pantheisticon de John Toland, Éditions E. Nourry, 1927. Because they also attracted Marrano crypto-Jews, and because of the strong Judeophilia among British aristocrats at that time, Jewish lore and kabbalistic mumbo-jumbo were transplanted into the rituals of the Grand Lodge of England from 1723. But that is another story.

    Rousseau

    Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) gave the notion of "natural religion" a wide audience by his literary genius. His religious conception is exposed in the " Profession of Faith of the Savoyard Vicar", a section of Book IV of the Émile , which caused the book to be banned in Paris and Geneva, and publicly burned in 1762. Rousseau gives there an exposé of "theism or natural religion, which Christians pretend to confound with atheism or irreligion, its exact opposite." Rousseau declares having no need for religious books, since Nature is a more useful book for discovering God;

    "if I use my reason, if I cultivate it, if I employ rightly the innate faculties which God bestows upon me, I shall learn by myself to know and love him, to love his works, to will what he wills, and to fulfill all my duties upon earth, that I may please him. What more can all human learning teach me?"

    Catholic dogmas are a useless and even poisonous jumble, Rousseau writes in his Letters Written from the Mountain (1764):

    "For how can the mystery of the Trinity, for example, contribute to the good constitution of the State? In what way will its members be better Citizens when they have rejected the merit of good works? And what does the dogma of original sin have to do with the good of civil society? Although true Christianity is an institution of peace, who does not see that dogmatic or theological Christianity, by the multitude and obscurity of its dogmas and above all by the obligation to accept them, is a permanent battlefield between men."

    Rousseau devotes the last chapter of The Social Contract (1762) to "civil religion". Like Locke, he condemns as contrary to public peace churches professing intolerance, because: "It is impossible to live at peace with those we regard as damned." Therefore, "whoever dares to say 'Outside the Church is no salvation', ought to be driven from the State."

    ORDER IT NOW

    Rousseau first proceeded to show that "the law of Christianity at bottom does more harm than good by weakening instead of strengthening the constitution of the State." Christianity, even at its best, is too focused on individual salvation. Rousseau sees God as more fully manifested in human societies than in holy hermits. Here is a sample of Rousseau's proposal:

    "it matters very much to the community that each citizen should have a religion that will make him love his duty; but the dogmas of that religion concern the State and its members only so far as they have reference to morality and to the duties which he who professes them is bound to do to others. Each man may have, over and above, what opinions he pleases, without it being the Sovereign's business to take cognisance of them; for, as the Sovereign has no authority in the other world, whatever the lot of its subjects may be in the life to come, that is not its business, provided they are good citizens in this life.

    There is therefore a purely civil profession of faith of which the Sovereign should fix the articles, not exactly as religious dogmas, but as social sentiments without which a man cannot be a good citizen or a faithful subject. [ ]

    The dogmas of civil religion ought to be few, simple, and exactly worded, without explanation or commentary. The existence of a mighty, intelligent and beneficent Divinity, possessed of foresight and providence, the life to come, the happiness of the just, the punishment of the wicked, the sanctity of the social contract and the laws: these are its positive dogmas. Its negative dogmas I confine to one, intolerance, which is a part of the cults we have rejected."

    Rousseau uses here the word "dogmas", but for him, neither the existence of God or the immortality of the soul are based on revelation; they are proven by observation and introspection. His argument for God's existence in Émile sounds surprisingly similar to the modern argument for Intelligent Design :

    "Those who deny the unity of intention which manifests itself in the reports of all the parts of this great whole, however much they cover their gibberish with abstractions, coordinations, general principles, emblematic terms; whatever they do, it is impossible for me to conceive of a system of beings so constantly ordered, that I do not conceive of an intelligence which orders it. It does not depend on me to believe that passive and dead matter could have produced living and feeling beings, [ ], that what does not think could have produced thinking beings."

    Robespierre

    In a speech he had printed in April 1791, Robespierre thanked the "eternal Providence" who called on the French, "alone since the origin of the world, to restore on earth the empire of Justice and Liberty." In March 1792, the president of the Legislative Assembly Élie Guadet opposed the sending to the patriotic societies of an address of Robespierre, on the pretext that he had used the word "Providence" too many times:

    "I admit that, seeing no sense in this idea, I would never have thought that a man who worked with so much courage, for three years, to pull the people out of the slavery of despotism, could contribute to put them back under the slavery of superstition."

    Robespierre responded:

    "Superstition, it is true, is one of the supports of despotism, but it is not inducing citizens in superstition to pronounce the name of the Divinity. [ ] I, myself, support these eternal principles on which human weakness leans to rise up toward virtue. It is not a vain language in my mouth, any more than in that of all the illustrious men who had no less moral, to believe in the existence of God. / Yes, invoking the Providence and expressing the idea of the Eternal Being who influences essentially the destinies of nations, and who seems to me to watch over the French revolution in a very special way, is not an idea too haphazard, but a feeling of my heart, a feeling which [ ] has always sustained me. Alone with my soul, how could I have sufficed for struggles which are beyond human strength, if I had not raised my soul to God?" [9] Auguste Valmorel, Œuvres de Robespierre, 1867 (sur fr.wikisource.org), p. 71.

    Robespierre castigated the irreligion that prevailed in the aristocracy and the high clergy, with bishops like Talleyrand openly boasting of lying every Sunday. A gap had widened between the clerical hierarchy and the country priests. Among the latter, many were responsible for drafting the peasants' cahiers de doléances . The counter-revolutionary bishop Charles de Coucy, of La Rochelle, said in 1797 that the Revolution was "started by the bad priests." [10] Henri Guillemin, Robespierre, Politique et mystique, Seuil, 1987, p. 351. For Robespierre, they were the "good priests" whom the people of the countryside needed.

    Robespierre was inflexible against the priests who submitted to the pope by refusing to take an oath on the Civil Constitution (voted July 12, 1790). But he also opposed, until his last breath, any plan to abolish the funds allocated to Catholic worship under the same Civil Constitution. He also opposed, but in vain, the new Republican calendar , with its ten-day week aimed at "suppressing Sunday," by the admission of its inventor Charles-Gilbert Romme.

    Robespierre's worst enemies were the militant atheists, the Enragés like Pierre-Gaspard Chaumette or Jacques-René Hébert, who unleashed the movement for dechristianization in November 1793, and started closing the churches in Paris or transforming them into "Temples of Reason", with the slogan "death is an eternal sleep" posted on the gates of cemeteries. Robespierre condemned "those men who have no other merit than that of adorning themselves with an anti-religious zeal," and who "throw trouble and discord among us" (Club des Jacobins, November 21 1793). In his speech to the National Convention of December 5, 1793, he accused the dechristianizers of acting secretly for the counter-revolution. Indeed, "hostile foreign powers support the dechristianization of France as a policy pushing rural France into conflict with the Republic for religious reasons and thus recruiting armies against the Republic in Vendée and in Belgium." By exploiting the violence of militant atheist extremists, these foreign powers have two aims: "the first to recruit the Vendée, to alienate the peoples of the French nation and to use philosophy for the destruction of freedom; the second, to disturb public tranquility in the interior, and to distract all minds, when it is necessary to collect them to lay the unshakable foundations of the Revolution."

    Again in his "Report against Philosophism and for the Freedom of Worship" (November 21, 1793), Robespierre again castigated the grotesque cults of Reason instituted in churches by atheist fanatics:

    "By what right do they come to disturb the freedom of worship, in the name of freedom, and attack fanaticism with a new fanaticism? By what right do they degenerate the solemn tributes paid to pure truth, in eternal and ridiculous pranks? Why should they be allowed to play with the dignity of the people in this way, and to tie the bells of madness to the very scepter of philosophy?"

    The Convention, he says, intends "to maintain freedom of cult, which it has proclaimed, while repressing all those who abuse it to disturb public order." He declares that those who "persecute the peaceful ministers of cult" will be punished severely.

    "There are men who, [ ] on the pretext of destroying superstition, want to make a kind of religion of atheism itself. Any philosopher, any individual can adopt whatever religious opinion he likes. Anyone who wants to make it a crime is a fool; but the public figure, but the legislator would be a hundred times more foolish who would adopt such a system. The National Convention abhors it. The Convention is not a book writer, an author of metaphysical systems, it is a political and popular body, responsible for ensuring respect, not only for the rights, but for the character of the French people. It was not in vain that it proclaimed the Declaration of Human Rights [August 26, 1789] in the presence of the Supreme Being [mentioned in the preamble]!

    It may be said that I am a narrow mind, a man of prejudice; what do I know, a fanatic. I have already said that I speak neither as an individual nor as a systematic philosopher, but as a representative of the people. Atheism is aristocratic; the idea of a Great Being who watches over oppressed innocence and punishes triumphant crime, is popular. [ ] This feeling is engraved in all sensitive and pure hearts; it always animates the most magnanimous defenders of freedom. [ ] I repeat: we have no other fanaticism to fear than that of immoral men, bribed by foreign courts to awaken fanaticism, and to give our revolution the veneer of immorality, which is the character of our cowardly and fierce enemies."

    The Robespierrists overcame the Hebertists. After having failed in a project of insurrection against the Convention, Chaumette was arrested, tried and executed for "conspiracy against the Republic" and for "having sought to annihilate any kind of morality, erase any idea of divinity and found the French government on atheism." In May 1794, Robespierre ordered to erase the mention "Temple of Reason" (or any similar denomination) from the portico of the churches and to engrave instead: "the French people recognize the existence of the Supreme Being and the immortality of the soul."

    Robespierre justified his opposition to dechristianization and his religion policy in his last great speech, "on the relations of religious and moral ideas with republican principles" (May 7, 1794), the most important text of Robespierre on that question. [11] A translation of this speech can be found in P. H. Beik (eds), The French Revolution: The Documentary History of Western Civilization. Palgrave Macmillan, 1970, but I have translated directly from the French.

    "Any institution, any doctrine which consoles and lifts souls must be welcomed; reject all that tend to degrade and corrupt them. Revive, exalt all generous feelings and all the great moral ideas that others wanted to extinguish; bring together by the charm of friendship and by the bond of virtue the men whom others wanted to divide. Who then gave you the mission to announce to the people that the Divinity does not exist, O you who are passionate about this arid doctrine, and who are never passionate about the homeland? What advantage do you find in persuading man that a blind force presides over his destinies and strikes crime and virtue at random; that his soul is only a light breath that dies out at the gates of the tomb?

    Will the idea of ​​his nothingness inspire him with purer and higher feelings than that of his immortality? Will it inspire him more respect for his fellow men and for himself, more devotion to the fatherland, more courage to brave tyranny, more contempt for death or for voluptuousness? You who regret a virtuous friend, you like to think that the most beautiful part of himself has escaped death! You who weep over the coffin of a son or a wife, are you comforted by him who tells you that there is nothing left of them but a vile dust? [ ] Miserable sophist! by what right do you come to snatch from innocence the scepter of reason to put it back in the hands of crime, throw a funeral veil over nature, add despair to misfortune, make vice rejoice, and virtue saddened, degrade humanity? [ ]

    Let us attach morality to eternal and sacred bases; let us inspire in man this religious respect for man, this deep feeling of his duties, which is the only guarantee of social happiness; let us nourish it with all our institutions; let public education be mainly directed towards this goal."

    ORDER IT NOW

    On June 8, the resounding success of the Fête de l'Être Suprême consecrated Robespierre's victory. In a show staged by the painter David, a gigantic statue representing Atheism was burnt, and the effigy of Wisdom revealed. Hymns to the deity were sung. But priests and references to Catholicism were absent. On this day, Robespierre declared , the Supreme Being, "sees an entire nation that is combating all the oppressors of humankind, suspend the course of its heroic labors in order to raise its thoughts and its vows towards the Great Being who gave it the mission to undertake it and the strength to execute it."

    "He created men to mutually assist and love each other, and to arrive at happiness by the path of virtue. It is He who placed remorse and fear in the breast of the triumphant oppressor, and calm and pride in the heart of the innocent oppressed. It is He who forces the just man to hate the wicked, and the wicked to respect the just man. It is He who adorned the face of beauty with modesty, so as to make it even more beautiful. It is He who makes maternal entrails palpitate with tenderness and joy. It is He who bathes with delicious tears the eyes of a son pressed against his mother's breast. It is He who silences the most imperious and tender passions before the sublime love of the fatherland. It is He who covered nature with charms, riches and majesty. All that is good is His work, or is Him. Evil belongs to the depraved man who oppresses or allows his like to be oppressed. The author of nature ties together all mortals in an immense chain of love and felicity."

    Generally speaking, the cult of the Supreme Being was enthusiastically received in most regions of France. The French people were tired of the civil war and eager to be reconciled under the auspices of God. Unfortunately, two days later, the Law of the "22 Prairial" (June 10, 1794) accelerated the trials of the suspects of conspiracy against the Republic, and opened the brief period of what will be called the Great Terror.

    Robespierre's religious policy weighed heavily on the motivations of the Thermidorians' plot against him. They accused him of aspiring to the office of Grand Pontiff.

    On the day before his death (July 28, 1794), at age 36, Robespierre declared :

    "O Frenchmen! O my countrymen! Let not your enemies, with their desolating doctrines, degrade your souls, and enervate your virtues! No, Chaumette, no! Death is not 'an eternal sleep!' Citizens! Erase from the tomb that motto, engraved by sacrilegious hands, which spreads over all nature a funereal crape, takes from oppressed innocence its support, and affronts the beneficent dispensation of death! Inscribe rather thereon these words: 'Death is the commencement of immortality!'"

    Laurent Guyénot, Ph.D., has recently edited some of his Unz Review articles in book form, under the title Our God is Your God Too, But He Has Chosen Us: Essays on Jewish Power . He is also the author of From Yahweh to Zion: Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land Clash of Civilizations , 2018, and JFK-9/11: 50 years of Deep State , Progressive Press, 2014.

    Notes

    [1] Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion, Houghton Mifflin, 2006, p. 51.

    [2] Jean-Clément Martin, Robespierre, la fabrication d'un monstre, Perrin, 2016. Other recent French historians who have drawn a rather positive image of Robespierre include Jean-Philippe Domecq, Robespierre, dernier temps , Folio/Histoire, 2011 and Cécile Obligi, Robespierre. La probité révoltante, Belin, 2012.

    [3] Jean-Philippe Domecq, Robespierre, dernier temps , Folio/Histoire, 2011, p. 27-30

    [4] My presentation owes a lot to Henri Guillemin, Robespierre, Politique et mystique, Seuil, 1987.

    [5] Quoted in Ernst Kantorowicz, L'empereur Frédéric II , Gallimard, 1987 (1 st German ed. 1927), pp. 451-452.

    [6] Jerry Brotton, The Renaissance Bazaar: From the Silk Road to Michelangelo, Oxford UP, 2010, pp. 66-67.

    [7] Quoted in Jan Assmann, Religio Duplex: How the Enlightenment Reinvented Egyptian Religion, Polity Press, 2014, p. 59.

    [8] Albert Lantoine, Un précurseur de la franc-maçonnerie. John Toland (1670–1722) , suivi de la traduction française du Pantheisticon de John Toland, Éditions E. Nourry, 1927.

    [9] Auguste Valmorel, Œuvres de Robespierre, 1867 (sur fr.wikisource.org), p. 71.

    [10] Henri Guillemin, Robespierre, Politique et mystique, Seuil, 1987, p. 351.

    [11] A translation of this speech can be found in P. H. Beik (eds), The French Revolution: The Documentary History of Western Civilization. Palgrave Macmillan, 1970, but I have translated directly from the French.

    gsjackson , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:47 am GMT

    Rurik, call your office. The other day when you got schooled (along with me) by a Frenchman on the French Revolution, you tried to grasp on to a last punitive straw -- well, maybe Robespierre at least deserved the blade. As if on cue, LG here with more schooling.
    obwandiyag , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:56 am GMT
    Guillotines and our owners go together like a horse and carriage.
    AnonStarter , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:59 am GMT
    Thank you for providing further insight into the religious sentiment of Robespierre.

    While the American Constitution itself does not include explicit mention of God, every U.S. State Constitution certainly does .

    "It is impossible to live at peace with those we regard as damned."

    In any event, better not to pretend to know.

    There is much to be said for religious tradition in which humility before God prevents one from assuming his salvation is assured. Such a disposition facilitates dealing humanely and equitably with others, even those outside his own faith community.

    Reg Cæsar , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:17 am GMT

    Rousseau

    One of the (many) surprising revelations in Pamela Druckerman's Bringing Up Bébé is that of French parents and educators drawing quite conservative views and practices from Rousseau. To us Anglo-Saxons, our disagreements about the man are over whether his radicalism is good or bad, not whether it exists at all.

    And what does the dogma of original sin have to do with the good of civil society?

    Just about everything. It's probably the most useful of the Christian doctrines to outsiders.

    I knew a Midwestern Lutheran woman who spent decades teaching in the scruffier public schools of Los Angeles County, which suffered from high turnover in staff. Though of Scandinavian background and quite progressive on most things, this lady insisted that the single most reliable indicator that a teacher would survive in the blackboard jungle was a strong belief in original sin. One is prepared for the worst.

    anon [359] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:17 am GMT
    Another excellent essay by M. Guyenot. I recommend his From Yahweh to Zionism to all.

    " I believe that modern atheism is, to a great extent, a reaction to the disgusting character presented as "God" in the Old Testament."

    Indeed. George Bernard Shaw observed this in the Preface to his Back to Methuselah. Darwinism conquered the popular mind, not just biologists, because the people sought relief from the constant surveillance of the Calvinist God. It was only later -- too late -- when they discovered what else they had thrown away. Hence Shaw and Bergson's "Vitalism" and later "Intelligent Design."

    The attempt to navigate between Biblical religion and atheistic Science reminds me of the suggestion by religious scholar Arthur Versluis and others that there is a third path -- Hermeticism -- that crops up periodically in the Western tradition -- basing belief in God, immortality and higher dimensions not in Hebrew fairy tales, nor limiting experience to the level of everyday materialism.

    Change that Matters , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 7:26 am GMT
    I enjoyed this very much. Thank you.
    Ghali , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 8:19 am GMT
    There is something unique about the French. They love to exaggerate (always in a positive way) their bloody and criminal history. Robespierre was a terrorist.
    Global Navigator , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 9:13 am GMT
    Hello Laurent,
    Very much appreciated your article and your other articles . And thank you for mentioning my movie: Expelled. I was one of the Producers. We certainly appreciated Ben's contribution
    brabantian , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 10:01 am GMT
    Some nice historical work from Dr Laurent Guyénot above

    Quite right too to denounce the Abrahamic 'God' as un ugly, terrorising, in fact demonic figure 'eternal torture hell' is one of the most evil notions ever invented

    And tho we all need spirituality – having a 'god-shaped hole' otherwise in our lives

    What needs to be understood is that Deism-type views are not sustainable, not genuinely transmissable to succeeding generations

    Note that all these deists, essentially exist in a one-generation-only space of rejecting their childhood religion, intellectualising a less brutal form of it but then it fades away, there are few adherents which continue only a stream of similar people, rejecting their childhood religion and staying in the deist or unitarian half-way house for only their own lives

    Faith cannot thrive without ritual, ceremony, practice in fact more important than ideas

    E.g., Japan is full of shinto – buddhist rituals, lovingly maintained it is not an issue whether one truly 'believes' in the goddesses and gods etc the practices yet sustain for thousands of years

    Deism fades and becomes dusty books on the shelf

    Jewish writer Marcus Eli Ravage said the biggest crime of Jews was wiping out local indigenous pagan religions, replacing them with Christian and Islamic i.e. judaic fabrications, and supplanting paganism with Jewish lore in its place, shoving Jewish tales into our brains

    But paganism in the west is also a sorry-ass affair, as far as we know, with disgusting animal sacrifices etc, and big deficiencies in thought and practice

    The unique thing from ancient India, is the truly unique wonderful yoga meditation etc traditions offering direct experience of the divine, spiritual ecstasies accessible at almost any time for those of us who enter into these realms

    In the West, the south and east asian traditions have slight echoes in stoicism, but in general we are missing something precious, however deep we dig into what is left of paganism that was not burned by the abrahamic fanatics

    Ancient India's most beloved story, the Bhagavad-Gita, in 10 minutes – God stops time itself, to explain to a troubled warrior what life is all about 'Whoever thinks he can truly kill, or be killed, is under an illusion – no one truly dies the divine is already within you there are many paths to more fully re-join with that divinity the question now is just what is the right course, what is your duty So be brave, and Fight! Have no fear '

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/CJ205esn7qE?feature=oembed

    Anonymous [661] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 11:06 am GMT
    I found this article quite interesting. The book never seems to be closed on Robespierre and Rousseau, and for good reason, as the clash of ideas presented here continues to this day.
    mcohen , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 11:24 am GMT
    Is that so .did he say that.you mean like human sacrifice to the corn god.atzec relegion was bad for the heart.on the other hand a little african vodoo is a danger to the health of chickens in general.

    More squat than squawk

    "Jewish writer Marcus Eli Ravage said the biggest crime of Jews was wiping out local indigenous pagan religions, replacing them with Christian and Islamic i.e. judaic fabrications, and supplanting paganism with Jewish lore in its place, shoving Jewish tales into our brains"

    It was a good article otherwise.

    gotmituns , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 11:58 am GMT
    I have nothing against god. I just think my ancestors in those dark forests of northern Europe shouldn't have been burdened with Christianity.
    Jake , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 12:37 pm GMT
    @gsjackson LG is just another old Revolutionary whose ideas always lead to some form of The Terror. He is no better than those Russians who felt that if only they removed the Tsar, and rejected a Constitutional monarch, that fairness would reign.

    Robespierre may not have been quite as monstrous as those who took him down, but he was nonetheless a monster whose works served Satan.

    It is either Christ and Christendom or some form of revolutionary chaos. If Russia is moving toward reviving Christendom, then Russia will save the civilization. If Russia is moving to promote more gnosticism, more hermeticism, more freemason tolerance of anything that claims some nebulous faith in some type creator, then Russia promotes what is necessary for the Hell hole that devours us today.

    Clyde Wilson , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 12:38 pm GMT
    The Confederate States constitution includes God in the preamble
    Jake , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 12:43 pm GMT
    @Ghali French revolutionaries who wish to pretend that they their favorite revolutionary butchers were actually good guys love to praise French revolution.

    Either France begins to recreate Christendom and become once again Eldest Daughter of the Church, or France will die a suicide.

    The universalist unitarians that Guyenot lauds who then rule what once was France will be Mohammedan, and their bankers will be Jewish.

    Seraphim , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 12:52 pm GMT
    Robespierre 'reluctantly' joining the 'Comité de salut public'? He was the first to propose the establishment of a 'Revolutionary Tribunal that had to deal with the "traitors" and "enemies of the people" in August 1792. The Tribunal was re-established by Danton and Robespierre in October 1793 and Robespierre was its principal purveyor. He was the father of 'La Terreur'. The imposition of his ridiculous 'Cult of the Supreme Being' coincides with the peak of Terror (when he was personally responsible for nearly 800 executions a month) and the reason of his demise. People did not appreciate it and Robespierre's answer was to draft a new list of public enemies who would be sent before the tribunal and executed and passing the infamous Law of 22 Prairial. That was too much even for the other revolutionary criminals.
    In essence he was as anti-Christian as his mentors Rousseau, Voltaire, as all the sacred monsters of the 'Enlightnment' and his enemies the atheists. He was really the 'Executioner of the Vendee'. You won't expect (I hope) anyone to take someone like Melenchon seriously.
    Was he a mason? Maybe not, with a 'party card', so to speak, but he wallowed in the Masonic cesspool that engulfed France in the 18th century. His grand father was a mason ("his father, who died in Germany, was of English origin; this may explain the shade of Puritanism in his character", if you believe Lamartine). There is little doubt that he met Adam Weishaupt, therefore an 'Illuminatus' and a fanatical one at that.
    Maybe he was a tragic figure, "overwhelmed by a political blindness that bordered on the pathetic or madness, he refused to understand that he lived in a time other than that of the Roman Republic", but no less sinister ('There was softness, but of a sinister character', again if you believe Lamartine). An "autistic" that drifted slowly but surely towards the "crime against humanity" that he would have surely committed if the technical resources of the 18th century had allowed mass exterminations"(Joël Schmidt, Robespierre, 2011, p. 229-230).
    anon [358] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 12:52 pm GMT

    Therefore, there is no reason to consider that, in Robespierre's speeches, "Supreme Being" meant anything else than God.

    The fact remains he did not simply use the word "God". The French language does have a word for 'it'. From a theological point of view, he is also asserting a 'continum' of "being" with a "supreme" being on the tippy top of the ("not masonic!!!!") pyramid.

    Mick Jagger gathers no mosque , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT
    What's a soul? Do animals have one?

    That which is created by God and is the animating principle of
    Men
    Animals
    Vegetables

    No, Robespierre did not have the same idea of God as did the Faithful but this incessant attempt to rewrite history is not surprising but it should be noted that what it really is is projection by an atheist author who is always searching for "proof" that will justify his refusal to accept God as He revealed Himself to us.

    Said otherwise, he has an endless series of authorities which he has replaced God with

    Now he certainly is not fooling those have the Faith once delivered and I doubt he has fooled himself, which is why he is always rabbiting on about this bll shite

    Saggy , says: Website Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:22 pm GMT
    While the article's criticisms of dogmatic religion are valid, the notion of a non-dogmatic 'supreme being' and the rest is pure malarkey, to wit .

    The dogmas of civil religion ought to be few, simple, and exactly worded, without explanation or commentary. The existence of a mighty, intelligent and beneficent Divinity, possessed of foresight and providence, the life to come, the happiness of the just, the punishment of the wicked, the sanctity of the social contract and the laws:

    Here is the reality, if there is a 'God' or 'supreme being' he is murderous and wicked beyond belief, as he/she/it has created a world populated by creatures that survive by eating each other, literally. We live in a sort of hell, and the fact that we have tried to create a world based on kindness and justice is a tribute to the human race, and certainly not to any supreme being.

    RVBlake , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:25 pm GMT
    Fascinating article, Monsieur.
    Athletic and Whitesplosive , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:32 pm GMT
    He shared the primary trait of atheism (as does the author of this piece seemingly), which is a revulsion towards the concept of personal moral duties and judgment. They want an all-powerful being to relieve them of their existential angst (for hardcore atheists, "reason" and "progress" fill this role), but one that also doesn't particularly care for how his creation operates and isn't judgmental, therefore all things which the atheist can rationalize as 'harmless' are permitted (sexual perversion, homosexuality, usury, occassionally murdering political opponents, and of course perverting worship of the almighty toward the whims of the state). It's not disgust with God in the old testament which leads to criticism, it's the atheist's own bad character which leads them to soothe their conscience with a bad-faith criticism of scripture (this libel is of course both faulty of content and circular, in that Christian morals are the basis of the criticism which flow from the same God they supposedly criticize).

    The eternally pathetic Dawkins says that from his misreading of scripture he finds Yahweh a racist, misogynistic homophobe. What else need be said in support of Yahweh's good character? In the western world, these are the words that professional mediocrities like Dawkins use to describe anyone of any moral worth at all.

    Moi , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:36 pm GMT
    @brabantian Nonsense!
    Athletic and Whitesplosive , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:37 pm GMT
    @Saggy So sayeth the eternal mediocrity. Just because you're a loser, that doesn't make the world hell, there's still time to reform.

    And I would take some small effort to address your idiot logic, but bad faith arguments aren't worthy of serious response.

    Moi , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:40 pm GMT
    @Jake No such person as a Mohammedan.
    Mick Jagger gathers no mosque , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 1:53 pm GMT
    @Clyde Wilson Dear Mr. Wilson. "Hilary is a museum quality Yankee?"

    Are you the author of that great quote and numerous books and articles?

    If you are, God Bless you Sir. I have read your work for a LONG time at Chronicles, in books, at The Abbeyville Institute etc.

    You are national treasure and it is a crime against culture that you are not prompted as are the cultural cranks and commie creeps most American get their ideas from.

    anon [358] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 2:04 pm GMT
    @Mick Jagger gathers no mosque

    this incessant attempt to rewrite history

    We disagree on this. IMHO the author is ' writing ' history. Here is trying to whitewash the fact that "Orthodox Christian" Putin is pushing the "Supreme Being" line (even though all major recognized religions in Russia in fact call 'it' God), lest the captive humanity analysing the entrails of the ruling classes' maneuvers catch a hint of the unity of ideological purpose of the ruling classes worldwide .

    Digital Samizdat , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
    Another ringer from Laurent!

    A fascinating take on Robespierre. I, too, was always taught that he was some kind of Mason whose 'Supreme Being' was just some kind of personification of Cartesian reason. But if your account of his beliefs here is accurate, then I would have to say he was a much more substantial figure than I initially suspected.

    One thing that really shines through in your essay is how very patriotic Robespierre was. I daresay, had the Papacy been French, he might well have remained a traditional Catholic!

    "The Thermidorians -- thus have Robespierre's conquerors and successors been dubbed -- sought not only to justify their coup d'état of July 1794 (the month of Thermidor in the revolutionary calendar) but to evade the opprobrium they shared with Robespierre and his comrades for deeds done during the agonizing crisis the previous year, during the Terror. The vengeful malice of the Thermidorians was partly successful: their caricature of Robespierre has proved durable."

    Very much like what Krushchev and, in their own way, the Trotskyites did to Stalin after his death as well. And of course, virtually everyone's still doing it to Hitler.

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT
    Feb 2, 2020 Head Of The Russian Orthodox Church Proposes To Mention GOD in New Constitution!

    He thinks the mention would be appreciated by all faiths alike.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/qnVVJHFyUHc?feature=oembed

    Lockean Proviso , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 3:23 pm GMT
    @brabantian

    'eternal torture hell' is one of the most evil notions ever invented

    It was invented by the Catholic church. Fortunately, thanks to Reformation's products of literacy for us rabble, bibles in the vernacular languages, and individual free will, we can see the lies of the Great Whore for ourselves.

    "The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:20

    As for God in the constitution, it's the thin end of the wedge towards theocracy- a goal that the Vatican has been sharpening its knives for for a long time. The papacy abhors separation of church and state.

    Alden , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 3:35 pm GMT
    @Jake Having had easy access to 3 of the greatest university libraries in the USA and being able to read French pretty well, I'm an amateur historian very familiar with the despicable land and property grab known as the French Revolution.

    I'm not going to bother to refute this author's outright lies. Too much trouble and can't be bothered to cite the books, except for Abbe Burrel's , Simon Schema's somebody last name Batz, and Renee Boudereau's memoirs.

    If you live in Los Angeles and can read French, you can go to the rare book section of Loyola university library in Westchester near the airport and read Renee Boudereau's memoirs. It's easy to read, short simple factual sentences like Camus.

    BTW, it was a death penalty offense just to be a catholic priest or nun in France during the worst of the French Revolution. Not spying for England, not active in the counter revolution, not even saying mass, marrying and baptizing, just being a catholic priest or nun.

    Little known fact. The Devil's Island penal colony was created by the French revolutionaries for catholic priests. The sight of gray haired parish priests and nuns who ran the local hospital before the revolutionaries closed it lined up to be guillotined caused counter revolutionary sentiment.

    So the less radical revolutionaries created the penal colonies of Devil's Island as a way to get rid of the priests without the public spectacle of beheading the headmaster of the local high schools , and hospital administrators.

    Confiscation of church property meant closing every hospital, orphanage, mental health asylum and most of the schools in France for years. Storming of the Bastille to " free" the prisoners. 7 prisoners , everyone a severely sick dangerous mental patient sent there because all the insane asylums, all of which were run by the church were closed.

    Closing the high schools really pissed off the upper bourgeoisie because that's where their sons and daughters learned the skills needed to remain in the upper bourgeoisie

    What a crock of lies and propaganda.

    Who gives a rat's ass about some homocidal maniac's constitution that was only in effect for a few months anyway before his government was overthrown with another round of executions?

    I once counted the number of governments France had between 1789 and 1816. I think maybe 8 different forms of government.

    If the rest of this writer's articles are as false wrong and just plain ignorant as this one, nothing he writes is to be believed.

    At least it's not some kind of quadruple exponent new math about the Chinese Plague killing off half the population of the earth.

    Anon [804] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 3:59 pm GMT
    So Robespierre was fighting against the atheists. Good. And his "Etre Supreme" wasn't another Freemason humanism. Fine.
    But unlike Putin who only wants to enshrine the Russians "faith in god" in the constitution, Robespierre wanted "the priests who submitted to the pope" to take an oath on the Civil Constitution. That was a very bad idea, even if the pope was a foreigner. Putin doesn't try to officially mix in the church's business, he just want to make sure the atheists/masonics zionists/communists from the West won't be allowed to take power again in Russia. States shouldn't officially pretend to mix in church's organization.
    And while Robespierre didn't try to repel the official masonic "Droits de l'homme" religion which teaches that human beings are God, Putin is just doing it by officially putting God above men, and he is damn right.
    Montefrío , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:11 pm GMT
    The West and its metaphysically impoverished societies would do well to consider Zen (Chán) , an atheistic philosophy that is transcendent and moral without concepts of eternal reward or punishment, without scriptures, without a priestly caste, without "worship". It simply states that the simultaneity between mind and Mind is all that IS . Once this is internalized, one continues daily life as before, but with a deeper understanding of it without anxiety, without unbalanced desires but with with a sense of wonder at all that unfolds in the course of time, including one's own death, the time of transition.

    Living in the West, as I do, I see no need to criticize the dominant religious beliefs however incomprehensible I might find them. I live in what once was Christendom, honoring and respecting the moral and ethical beliefs and customs of these societies, now sickeningly secularized to the degree that natural law is openly and approvingly flouted. The metaphysics of Zen is quite simple in theory, but requires self-discipline to put into practice. Self-discipline seems to be something the consumerist societies of the West have forgotten.

    Ship Track , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:18 pm GMT
    @Seraphim

    "There is little doubt that he met Adam Weishaupt, therefore an 'Illuminatus' and a fanatical one at that."

    All this blather about "supreme being" does sound awfully Masonic, but I believe far more in judging people by their actions than by their words, likely because of numerous painful experiences dealing with lawyers and especially jewish lawyers who will say anything they think can get away with.

    romar , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:30 pm GMT
    Thanks for this very interesting discussion.
    As for this comment "More surprisingly, Communist Party boss Gennady Zyuganov raises no objection", the late Yvan Blot offered a fascinating tableau of Zyuganov the communist and man of faith: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-mcp3WF-Cg&list=PL8nCjSDFd70kS8t1W5pNRoiIgPal-lyc0&index=2&t=0s – from 51:30.
    Elmer's Washable School Glue , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:32 pm GMT
    @Lockean Proviso

    As for God in the constitution, it's the thin end of the wedge towards theocracy- a goal that the Vatican has been sharpening its knives for for a long time. The papacy abhors separation of church and state.

    Imagine unironically believing "seperation of church and state" is a real thing. An official religion is a prerequisite for the existence of governmnt.

    Fortunately, thanks to Reformation's products of literacy for us rabble, bibles in the vernacular languages, and individual free will, we can see the lies of the Great Whore for ourselves.

    Do you know literally anything about theology? Orthodox and Catholic christians believe in the concept free will, it is Protestants (not all sects but some) that reject it. Get a clue.

    Saggy , says: Website Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT
    There is no question that Putin has a very cozy relationship with Chabad, For a different perspective of Putin's changes to the Russian Constitution see
    PUTIN TO ADD NOAHIDE LAW TO RUSSIAN CONSTITUTION
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/B8MQ4lHsxwg/
    Dumb4asterisks , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 4:59 pm GMT
    My terribly simplistic understanding of Laurent's rather long and certainly scholarly exposition, is that he feels that for the sake of science and the adults we can declare Santa dead, but please not make any attempt upon His life for the sake of the children and Christmas.
    Robjil , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:06 pm GMT
    @Lockean Proviso In ancient Egypt, people who did bad deeds were punished in the afterlife. A deceased person, goes before a scale of justice. His/her heart is weighed against a feather. He/she is asked 42 divine principles. If the deceased heart weights too much with too many bad deeds, it is devoured by Ammit.

    The idea of punishment for bad deeds is a very old concept for humanity. It needs to come back for the warmongering neocons and regime changers of our day.

    Here is how the deceased goes to the scale of justice. The 42 divine principles, good deeds, decides the deceased's fate.

    http://maatlaws.blogspot.com/

    In Spellbook/Chapter 30B of The Papyrus of Ani titled "Chapter for Not Letting Ani's Heart Create Opposition Against Him, in the Gods' Domain," we find a petitioner of ma'at (justice/truth) before the scales of justice (iconography ma'at/goddess maat). Anubis, the setter of the scales, has placed the petitioner's heart-soul (Ka) on one side of the scale, its counter-weight is the feather of truth (Shu). The Spellbook/Chapter for Not Letting Ani's Heart Create Opposition Against Him in the Gods' Domain is where the petitioner must pronounce, and his/her weighted heart/soul (Ka) will reveal the truth or non-truth of each affirmative of the 42 pronouncements.

    Here is Ammit who devours the doers of bad deeds.

    http://www.kemet.org/taxonomy/term/128

    (Am-mut) – "Dead-Swallower" Stationed just to the side of the scales in the Hall of Double Truth [see Ma'at], Ammit's function is to await the postmortem judgment of a soul (envisioned as the deceased's heart being weighed on a scale against the feather of Ma'at) and then, if the soul fails the test, Ammit snatches up the heart and devours it, causing the soul to cease to exist. As the ultimate punishment of the wicked, Ammit is depicted as a hideous composite of the animals Kemet's people feared most: crocodile snout and head, feline claws and front, and a hippopotamus body and back legs. Ammit is also sometimes referred to as "Great of Death," and papyri depict Her patiently watching Yinepu weighing a man's heart against the feather of Ma'at.

    Ram , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT
    Good for Russia.
    MikeatMikedotMike , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:49 pm GMT
    This has been a very refreshing article for several reasons that should be obvious. I look forward to reading more of this kind in the future.

    "If voted in the upcoming referendum, it would consecrate the civilizational schism that is likely to define the history of our civilization in the coming century: in the West, the post-modernist project of liberating man from his human nature, to produce an uprooted, transgendered, upgraded man, Homo Deus. In the East, the choice of honoring and protecting our spiritual and anthropological roots, to produce the genuine thing: Mars and Venus, virile men and feminine women grateful to their Creator for each other, reveling in their fertile complementarity."

    I'm not sure I've read a more succinct summary of what is happening to our civilization.

    DM , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:54 pm GMT
    @Lockean Proviso Rev 20:11-15

    Hell is hardly an invention of the Catholic Church – it is found in King James, Douay and Orthodox Bibles:

    "And I saw a great white throne and one sitting upon it, from whose face the earth and heaven fled away: and there was no place found for them And I saw the dead, great and small, standing in the presence of the throne. And the books were opened: and another book was opened, which was the book of life. And the dead were judged by those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it: and death and hell gave up their dead that were in them. And they were judged, every one according to their works. And hell and death were cast into the pool of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the pool of fire.

    Robjil , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 5:58 pm GMT
    @Saggy It is not as "cozy" as in the US congress and in the ZUS empire. Chabbad does not have as much "fun" in Russia as in the ZUS empire.

    https://www.jta.org/2018/02/01/global/u-s-born-rabbi-called-extremist-kicked-out-of-russia

    For the eighth time over the past decade, Russian authorities told a foreign Chabad rabbi living in Russia to leave the country.

    Josef Marozof, a New York native who began working 12 years ago for Chabad in the city of Ulyanovsk, 400 miles east of Moscow, was ordered earlier this week to leave because the FSB security service said he had been involved in unspecified "extremist behavior."

    Alden , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 6:05 pm GMT
    Two old French proverbs are applicable here.

    First, there are 3 sides to every story, his, hers and the truth.

    Second, don't listen to what he says, watch what he does.

    Castro, Lyndon Johnson, Hildabeast, the Civil Rights For all but Whites laws, , Mao, Lenin Stalin Trotsky, Pelosi, every liberal do gooder idealist like Robespierre and the rest talk do gooderism while we watch them looting, confiscating and slaughtering.

    Author reminds me of all the dumb naive liberal American and European soi disant idiot intellectual visionary do gooders who visited Russia during the 1939s and came back with glowing reports of the wonderful society of the future.

    John Howard , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 6:32 pm GMT
    @Athletic and Whitesplosive Athletic and Whitesplosive wrote the following falsehood:

    " atheism , which is a revulsion towards the concept of personal moral duties and judgment."

    That is exactly the opposite of the truth. For openers, atheisim is merely the lack of a particular superstition. Secondly, most atheists believe that morality and truth are so important that they deserve a better foundation than a bunch of ancient Jewish superstitions taken on faith.

    Those old superstitions were designed to promote faith (believe what you are told to believe) and self-sacrifice (don't defend yourself) because they make people easier to rob and rule.

    Anon [237] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 6:35 pm GMT
    The only thing that enshrining a vague-God in the constitution would accomplish is the Tribe eventually twisting the meaning to meet the definition and needs of whatever demon they worship.

    Propose to enshrine the specific Indo-European God in Constitutions and then we have something to talk about.

    Alden , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 6:45 pm GMT
    @Anon The civil constitution Robespierre demanded priests take an oath to with the death penalty if they didn't lasted less than a year. The author is writing about a constitution that lasted less than a year.

    I think it was 6 governments between 1789 and 1800 and more after 1800 each with its own written or implied constitution.

    Why not just write an article that it's good the new Russian constitution will mention God?

    Instead of bringing in this ridiculous conventional version of the French Revolution? I assume he's trying to impress us with his scholarly knowledge, but he sure hasn't impressed me with his fantasies about Robespierre.

    Reg Cæsar , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 6:46 pm GMT
    @Moi

    No such person as a Mohammedan.

    That's like saying there is no such person as a Lutheran, or a Calvinist, or a Maoist. A Mohammedan has much in common with all three. If anything, his prophet was a blend of all three founders, with a fair bit of Joseph Smith, Napoleon, and Hitler to boot.

    Reg Cæsar , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 6:52 pm GMT
    @Mick Jagger gathers no mosque

    "Hilary is a museum quality Yankee?"

    If you mean Hillary, she has no more Yankee blood than does Donald Trump, and less than Obama's 1%. She also supports income taxation and the New Deal. (As does much of the so-called "alt-right.") No Yankee, she.

    Eating pie for breakfast isn't enough.

    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 7:01 pm GMT
    Bring back the old pagan gods.
    Dennis Dale , says: Website Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 7:18 pm GMT

    I can't wait for the day when Intelligent Design research will be funded in Russian universities, rather than censored as it is in the U.S. (watch Ben Stein's documentary Expelled: No Intelligent Allowed).

    I was enjoying the walk you were leading me on until I stepped in this dog shit. I'm sure the rest of the journey was fascinating. But I avoid crazy as a rule.

    S , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 8:18 pm GMT
    @Alden The one's who managed to make their way back were the lucky ones. Thousands didn't, either being executed, or Gulaged, where they indeed 'found work', but, not of the type they were counting on.

    The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin's Russia by Tim Tzouliadis is a 2008 book published by Penguin Books. It tells the story of thousands of Americans who immigrated to the Soviet Union in the 1930s. The vast majority of these Americans were executed or sent to the Gulag by Joseph Stalin's government.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forsaken:_An_American_Tragedy_in_Stalin's_Russia

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3171446-the-forsaken

    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 8:29 pm GMT
    @Dennis Dale I agree. If people want to dabble in Intelligent Design, fine. But it has no place in real science.
    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 8:31 pm GMT
    What does it matter what Robespierre thought or whether he was good or bad?

    Why should our values be a matter of revering certain individuals? That's cult of personality, or idolatry.

    Ship Track , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 9:01 pm GMT
    In a related revisionist hangout, Robert Sepehr has long been exposing ancient masonic secrets, his videos just keep getting better. here is his channel.

    A recent video is Who created the Bible

    Hibernian , says: Show Comment April 6, 2020 at 9:10 pm GMT
    @John Howard Those superstitions sustained many generations through many trials and tribulations. Science, industry, and affluence tempt people to believe they don't need God, then in time of trouble they rediscover Him.
    Current Commenter

    [Apr 06, 2020] Pompeo problem: how to continue to bully when the bullied can very effectively shoot back?

    Apr 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bemildred , Apr 6 2020 15:25 utc | 187

    Posted by: Walter | Apr 6 2020 15:03 utc | 185

    Re: Pompeo and his West Point clique and their associates, I have not spent much time on it, didn't seem like a useful or entertaining thing to do, but my impression is they have lots of plans and very little grasp of what is required to carry them out. (One thinks of Modi here.) This has been ongoing since the Iranians shot our fancy drone down there last year. The first shot across the bow. We are now withdrawing from Syria, Iraq & Afghanistan, however haltingly, as it has dawned on the commanders on the ground there how exposed they really are to Iranian fire, and that of their allies. Israel seems to be struggling with the same problem, how to continue to bully when the bullied can very effectively shoot back?

    Many unseemly things being said about Crozier and the Teddy R. situation too. Lot's of heat, very little light. Trump says there is light at the end of the tunnel, I seem to remember that from somewhere in the past. I think that's about where we are again.

    [Apr 05, 2020] Esper tone deafness: a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities of military industrial complex

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Modernizing our strategic nuclear forces is a top priority for the @DeptofDefense and the @POTUS to protect the American people and our allies. ..."
    "... As a pandemic ravages the nation, a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities ..."
    Apr 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    b on April 5, 2020 at 14:28 UTC | Permalink

    Tone deafness: @EsperDoD @EsperDoD - 16:09 UTC 4 Apr 2020

    Modernizing our strategic nuclear forces is a top priority for the @DeptofDefense and the @POTUS to protect the American people and our allies.
    Kingston Reif @KingstonAReif - 18:29 UTC - Apr 4 2020
    As a pandemic ravages the nation, a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities.

    Initial FY 2021 budget requests for:

    [Apr 05, 2020] More like intel agency ass covering or gross incompetancy of Trump administration?

    Apr 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    bevin , Apr 2 2020 16:32 utc | 8

    Philip Giraldi knows who to blame:
    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/04/02/another-expensive-war-another-intelligence-failure/

    "...the intelligence agencies were warning about information derived from medical sources in China that suggested viruses were developing that might become a pandemic, but the politicians, most particularly those in the White House, chose to take no action. He writes that " the Trump administration has cumulatively failed, both in taking seriously the specific, repeated intelligence community warnings about a coronavirus outbreak and in vigorously pursuing the nationwide response initiatives commensurate with the predicted threat. The federal government alone has the resources and authorities to lead the relevant public and private stakeholders to confront the foreseeable harms posed by the virus. Unfortunately, Trump officials made a series of judgments (minimizing the hazards of COVID-19) and decisions (refusing to act with the urgency required) that have needlessly made Americans far less safe."


    "The article cites evidence that the intelligence community was collecting disturbing information on possibly developing pathogens in China and was, as early as January, preparing analytical reports that detailed just what was happening while also providing insights into how devastating the global proliferation of a highly contagious and potential lethal virus might be. One might say that the intel guys called it right, but were ignored by the White House, which, per Zenko, acted with "unprecedented indifference, even willful negligence...."

    c1ue , Apr 2 2020 18:32 utc | 36

    @bevin #8
    In January? Really? Seems like the highly paid and budgeted intelligence agencies should be able to do a better job of predicting the nCOV threat before China instituted a shutdown on January 23 due to its view that nCOV was a problem.

    Frankly, seems more like intel agency ass covering than anything else.

    [Apr 05, 2020] The ability to create infinite money provides those in charge with almost infinite power; digital fiat currency provides the banksters with the ability to manipulate/rig all markets, fund endless war (see All Wars are Bankers Wars), control the media and educational systems, etc etc.

    Apr 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Perimetr , Apr 5 2020 16:47 utc | 20

    RE: John Merryman | Apr 5 2020 15:47 utc | 14

    You entirely miss the point that the "money" you describe is fiat currency, mostly in digital form, which is entirely under the control of the Central Banks that have the ability to create infinite amounts of it . Digital/paper fiat has no intrinsic value, it is fungible by decree, because governments require that you accept this "legal tender" for goods and services.

    The ability to create infinite money provides those in charge with almost infinite power; digital fiat currency provides the banksters with the ability to manipulate/rig all markets, fund endless war (see All Wars are Bankers Wars ), control the media and educational systems, etc etc. That is the hidden function of Central Banks. As a famous Rothschild once said, "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws"

    The COVID-19 pandemic very conveniently happened to come along at a time when the credit markets were imploding, requiring the exponential growth of the fiat currencies (which had reached the end of their always limited life-spans and had entered into a crack-up boom). What a great excuse to openly move into producing trillions and trillions of dollars (much, much more to come). In the US, the Treasury has essentially merged with the Federal Reserve; the "bail outs" will be used to provide endless interest free money to the banks, which will then loan the money to the small businesses (at 5.75% interest) being destroyed by the shutdowns. See, the system is working!

    The banks HAD to move into an exponential growth phase of its currencies in order to prevent the collapse of the Western financial system. The growth of fiat/debt-based currency is now similar to the exponential growth of the coronavirus. This is a hyperinflationary event that will lead to the abandonment of the dollar as the global reserve currency.

    [Apr 05, 2020] US sidestepped OWN SANCTIONS against Russia to save American lives from Covid-19... If only it cared as much about Iranian live

    Notable quotes:
    "... "It's like being on eBay" ..."
    "... "They big-footed us" ..."
    "... "We're going broke." ..."
    "... "We're on our own." ..."
    "... "viable" ..."
    "... "money laundering" ..."
    "... "propaganda ploy." ..."
    Apr 03, 2020 | www.rt.com

    US sidestepped OWN SANCTIONS against Russia to save American lives from Covid-19... If only it cared as much about Iranian lives

    Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf's staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf's staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector.

    Russian plane with medical aid unloaded at JFK airport, United States, New York City © Ruptly Follow RT on

    When it comes to saving American lives, sanctions are not an obstacle to the provision of life-saving medical equipment. Ramping up sanctions on struggling Iran is okay however – which goes to show the US price tag on human life. It was a sight that warmed the heart of even the most cynical American opponent of Vladimir Putin's Russia -- a giant An-124 aircraft, loaded with boxes of desperately needed medical supplies, being offloaded at JFK Airport. When President Trump spoke on the phone with his Russian counterpart on March 31, he mentioned America's need for life-saving medical supplies, including ventilators and personal protective equipment. Two days later the AN-124 arrived in New York.

    As the aircraft was being unloaded, however, it became clear that at least some of the equipment being offloaded had been delivered in violation of existing US sanctions. Boxes clearly marked as containing Aventa-M ventilators, produced by the Ural Instrument Engineering Plant (UPZ), could be seen. For weeks now President Trump has made an issue about the need for ventilators in the US to provide life-saving care for stricken Americans.

    There was just one problem -- the manufacturer of the Aventa-M, UPZ, is a subsidiary of Concern Radio-Electronic Technologies (KRET) which, along with its parent holding company ROSTEC, has been under US sanctions since 2014. Complicating matters further is the fact that the shipment of medical supplies was paid in part by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), a Russian sovereign wealth fund which, like ROSTEC, was placed on the US lending blacklist in 2014 following Russia's intervention in Crimea. Half of the Russian aid shipment was paid for by the US State Department, and the other half by RDIF.

    Read more Russian declaration aimed at stopping sanctions amid coronavirus crisis REJECTED at UN General Assembly

    According to a State Department spokesperson, the sanctions against RDIF do not apply to purchases of medical equipment. KRET, however, is in the strictest SDN (Specially Designated Persons) sanctions list , which means US citizens and permanent residents are prohibited from doing business with it. So while the letter of the sanctions may not have been violated, the spirit certainly has been.

    One only need talk to the embattled Governor of New York State, Andrew Cuomo, to understand the difficulty in trying to purchase much-needed medical equipment during a global pandemic where everyone else is trying to do the same. New York has been competing with several other states to purchase much-needed ventilators from China. "It's like being on eBay" , Cuomo recently told the press, with 50 states bidding against one another, driving the price up. The issue became even more complicated when the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, entered the bidding war. "They big-footed us" , Cuomo said, driving the price per ventilator up to $25,000. "We're going broke."

    Cuomo estimates that New York will need upwards of 40,000 ventilators to be able to handle the influx of stricken patients when the outbreak hits its peak. At the moment, New York has 17,000 ventilators available -- including 2,500 on order from China -- and Cuomo doesn't expect any more. "We're on our own." Plans are in place to begin imposing a triage system to prioritize ventilator availability if and when the current stockpile is exhausted. These plans include the issuance of an emergency waiver that permits health care providers to take a patient off a ventilator to make it available for another patient deemed to be more "viable" -- that is, who has a greater expectation of surviving the disease.

    Cuomo's predicament is being played out around the world, in places like Italy, Spain -- and Iran, where the outbreak of coronavirus has hit particularly hard. The difference, however, is that while the US, Italy and Spain are able to scour the global market in search of life-saving medical supplies, Iran is not. US sanctions targeting the Iranian financial system, ostensibly imposed to prevent "money laundering" by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command, which has been heavily sanctioned by the US over the years, have made it virtually impossible for Iran to pay for humanitarian supplies needed to fight the coronavirus outbreak.

    Also on rt.com 'This is NUTS!' Russiagaters see red over Putin's planeload of corona-aid for Trump, queue to look gift-horse in mouth

    As bad as it is for Governor Cuomo, at least he can enter a bidding war for medical supplies. Iran can't even get its foot in the door, and it is costing lives. Making matters worse, at a time when the international community is pleading for the US to ease sanctions so Iran can better cope with an outbreak that is taking a life every ten minutes, the US instead doubled down, further tightening its death grip on the Iranian economy.

    The global coronavirus pandemic will eventually end, and when it does there will be an accounting for how nations behaved. Nations like Russia and China have been repeatedly vilified in the US media for any number of reasons -- even the Russian aid shipment containing the sanctioned ventilators has been dismissed as a "propaganda ploy." What, then, do you call the US' blatant disregard for select human lives?

    The callous indifference displayed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other officials to the suffering of the Iranian people by increasing sanctions at a time when the situation cries out for them to be lifted in order to save lives, when contrasted to the ease in which US sanctions on Russia are ignored when life-saving medical equipment is needed, drives home the point that, as far as the US is concerned, human life only matters when it is an American one. That might play well among American voters (it shouldn't), but for the rest of the world it is a clear sign that hypocrisy, not humanitarianism, is the word that will define the US going forward.

    EDITOR'S NOTE: A previous version of this article erroneously stated that entering a financial relationship with RDIF is prosecutable under the US sanctions regime. In reality, RDIF is under sectoral sanctions that only apply to certain interactions, which, according to a State Department spokesperson, do not include purchases of medical equipment. The article has been changed accordingly.

    Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

    [Apr 04, 2020] America, We Have To End The Wars Now by Scott Horton

    Apr 03, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
    Authored by Scott Horton via The Libertarian Institute,

    Can anyone think what our society might have spent six and a half trillion dollars on instead of 20 years of war in the Middle East for nothing? How about the trillion dollars per year we keep spending on the military on top of that?

    Invading, dominating and remaking the Arab world to serve the interests of the American empire and the state of Greater Israel sounds downright quaint at this point. Iraq War II, as Senator Bernie Sanders said in the debate a few weeks ago, while letting Joe Biden, one of its primary proponents , off the hook for it, was "a long time ago." Actually, Senator, we still have troops there fighting Iraq War III 1/2 against what's left of the ISIS insurgency, and our current government continues to threaten the launch of Iraq War IV against the very parties we fought the last two wars for . This would almost certainly then lead to war with Iran.

    The U.S.A. still has soldiers, marines and CIA spies in Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Mali, Tunisia, Niger, Nigeria, Chad and only God and Nick Turse know where else.

    Worst of all , America under President Donald Trump is still "leading from behind" in the war in Yemen Barack Obama started in conspiracy with Saudi then-Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman back in 2015. This war is nothing less than a deliberate genocide .

    It is a medieval-style siege campaign against the civilian population of the country. The war has killed more than a quarter of a million innocent people in the last five years, including at least 85,000 children under five years old. And, almost unbelievably, this war is being fought on behalf of the American people's enemies, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula ( AQAP ).

    These are the same guys that bombed the USS Cole in the port of Aden in 2000, helped to coordinate the September 11th attack , tried to blow up a plane over Detroit with the underpants bomb on Christmas Day 2009, tried to blow up another plane with a package bomb and launched the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, France since then. In fact, CENTCOM was helping the Houthi regime in the capital of Sana'a target and kill AQAP as late as January 2015, just two months before Obama stabbed them in the back and took al Qaeda's side against them. So the war is genocide and treason .

    As Senator Rand Paul once explained to Neil Cavuto on Fox News back before he decided to become virtually silent on the matter, if the U.S.-Saudi-UAE alliance were to succeed in driving the Houthi regime from power in the capital city, they could end up being replaced by AQAP or the local Muslim Brotherhood group, al-Islah. There is zero chance that the stated goal of the war, the re-installation of former dictator Mansur Hadi on the throne, could ever succeed. And yet the war rages on. President Trump says he's doing it for the money . That's right . And he's just recently sent the Marines to intervene in the war on behalf of our enemy-allies too.

    We still have troops in Germany in the name of keeping Russia out 30 years after the end of the Cold War and dissolution of the Soviet Empire, even though Germany is clearly not afraid of Russia at all, and are instead more worried that the U.S. and its newer allies are going to get them into a fight they do not want. The Germans prefer to "get along with Russia," and buy natural gas from them, while Trump's government does everything in its power to prevent it .

    America has expanded our NATO military alliance right up to Russia's western border and continues to threaten to include Ukraine and former-Soviet Georgia in the pact right up to the present day. As the world's worst hawks and Russiagate Hoax accusers have admitted , Trump has been by far the worst anti-Russia president since the end of the last Cold War.

    Obama may have hired a bunch of Hitler-loving Nazis to overthrow the government of Ukraine for him back in 2014, but at least he was too afraid to send them weapons, something Trump has done enthusiastically , even though he was actually impeached by the Democrats for moving a little too slowly on one of the shipments.

    We still have troops in South Korea to protect against the North, even though in economic and conventional terms the South overmatches the North by orders of magnitude . Communism really doesn't work . And the only reason the North even decided to make nukes is because George W. Bush put a gun to their head and essentially made them do it . But as Cato's Doug Bandow says , we don't even need a new deal. The U.S. could just forget about North Korea and it wouldn't make any difference to our security at all.

    And now China. Does anyone outside of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps really care whether the entire Pacific Ocean is an American lake or only 95% of it ? The "threat" of Chinese dominance in their own part of the world exists only in the heads of hawkish American policy wonks and the Taiwanese, who should have been told a long time ago that they are on their own and that there's no way in the world the American people or government are willing to trade Los Angeles and San Francisco for Taipei.

    Perhaps without the U.S. superpower standing behind them, Taiwanese leaders would be more inclined to seek a peaceful settlement with Beijing. If not, that's their problem. Not one American in a million is willing to sacrifice their own home town in a nuclear war with China over an island that means nothing to them. Nor should they. Nor should our government even dream they have the authority to hand out such dangerous war guarantees to any other country in such a reckless fashion.

    And that's it. There are no other powers anywhere in the world. Certainly there are none who threaten the American people. Our government claims they are keeping the peace, but there are approximately two million Arabs and Pashtuns who would disagree except that they've already been killed in our recent wars and so are unavailable for comment.

    The George W. Bush and Barack Obama eras are long over. We near the end, or half-way point , of the Trump years, and yet our former leaders' wars rage on .

    Enough already. It is time to end the war on terrorism and end the rest of the American empire as well . As our dear recently departed friend Jon Basil Utley learned from his professor Carroll Quigley , World Empire is the last stage of a civilization before it dies . That is the tragedy. The hope is that we can learn from history and preserve what's left of our republic and the freedom that made it great in the first place, by abandoning our overseas "commitments" and husbanding our resources so that we may pass down a legacy of liberty to our children.

    The danger to humanity represented by the Coronavirus plague has, by stark relief, exposed just how unnecessary and therefore criminal this entire imperial project has been . We could have quit the empire 30 years ago when the Cold War ended, if not long before.

    We could have a perfectly normal and peaceful relationship with Iraq, Iran, Syria, Korea, Russia, China, Yemen and any of the other nations our government likes to pretend threaten us. And when it comes to our differences, we would then be in the position to kill them with kindness and generosity, leading the world to liberty the only way we truly can, voluntarily, on the global free market of ideas and results .

    That is what the world needs and the legacy the American people deserve.

    [Apr 04, 2020] It doesn't seem to matter how much the US hoses the EU they'll still fall in lockstep when Trump says "jump"

    Apr 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Tobi , Apr 4 2020 0:26 utc | 103

    Posted by: Likklemore | 94

    It doesn't seem to matter how much the US hoses the EU they'll still fall in lockstep when Trump says "jump".

    Russian declaration aimed at stopping sanctions amid coronavirus crisis REJECTED at UN General Assembly

    A User , Apr 4 2020 1:22 utc | 108

    I realise few will since amerikans are 100% exceptionalist right up to their last breath but please read the best article by far on masks & respirators cleaning issues esp such ones as 'steam' cleaning are on this link I posted earlier.

    It is written by Dr John Campbell who has been writing on this virus for several months. My brother the retired journo recommended him to me in early February, so naturally I have been assiduous in ignoring the bloke for that reason, combined with the fact Campbell is an englander, but he has put together an excellent piece on masks & respirators, one which uses y'know those pesky fact things to support his statements about assorted items efficacy, longevity and ability to be cleaned. With respirators 95% & above he recommends having several and rotating them so that they cop 4-5 days down time which should be enough time for the virus to kark it of its own accord.

    I don't believe for a moment that will stop the continual spouting of uninformed claptrap, but I tried.

    [Apr 01, 2020] For just $27K USD you can see John Bolton's relatives in natural environment

    Apr 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Piotr Berman , Mar 31 2020 17:22 utc | 151

    Given some time and currency, I guess Morocco would offer more value for money if you want some exotic customs and landscapes. If you have more money, you could spend them on a carbon-free cruise with stunning vistas and off-the-beaten route: North Pole on board of nuclear-powered ice breaker! It is wise to have swimming costume (a pool is on board, heated, I presume) and sensible apparel -- enough for normal winter (in Moscow). The number of places is below 150, with a little hospital on board too. In the latest ads I read about discounts, but the deal was that you can pay in rubbles with prices below the rubble plunged by 25%, still, for 27 k USD you can see John Bolton's relatives in natural environment (like mommy walrus taking care of youngsters), polar bears, seals, and landscapes of Franz Josef Land. Helicopter rides included. You can also take a plunge into the arctic water -- with safety precautions .

    [Mar 30, 2020] Pompeo as a sign of more serious problem with the US military

    Mar 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bemildred , Mar 29 2020 18:13 utc | 23

    Posted by: Noirette | Mar 29 2020 17:09 utc | 13

    I think you have the main danger (some nitwit using a "small nuke") to try to make a point about right.

    Other than that, the impression I get from Pompeo and his ilk is that the main thing is having someone to threaten and abuse to show "leadership" and "manhood", at least one shitty little country we can still throw up against the wall and slap around to show we mean business. Dangerous times for Nicaragua.

    Neither he nor his other West Point friends seems to have much clue about military affairs either, which is strange. I mean we've always had our George Armstrong Custers, but they didn't run things. Now they seem to have some sort of cult mentality. One is reminded of the French before WWI: "De L'audace, Encore De L'audace, Et Toujours De L'audace ..." and we know how that worked out.

    [Mar 29, 2020] United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had a slip of the tongue while addressing the American people from the White House when he stated that COVID-19 is a live military exercise.

    Mar 29, 2020 | twitter.com

    "This is not about retribution," Pompeo explained. "This matter is going forward -- we are in a live exercise here to get this right."

    @realDonaldTrump is mad that the deep state took control through Continuity of Government, there has been a coup? pic.twitter.com/GcrjNNvVsc #Covid_19 #CoronavirusPandemic #MartialLaw

    -- Shepard Ambellas (@ShepardAmbellas) March 21, 2020

    With a disgusted look on his face, President Trump replied: "You should have let us know."

    Military Exercise meaning (from Wikipedia): "A military exercise or war game is the employment of military resources in training for military operations, either exploring the effects of warfare or testing strategies without actual combat. This also serves the purpose of ensuring the combat readiness of garrisoned or deployable forces prior to deployment from a home base."

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/3Qscuw_3aUk

    What is actually going on here? Does the White House care to explain?

    *Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    Featured image is from Gage Skidmore CC BY 2.0

    [Mar 29, 2020] The essence of Trump's psychology is that he likes to dominate people. He accomplishes this by hiring incompetent psychopaths

    Mar 29, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Timothy Hagios , Mar 28 2020 18:14 utc | 44

    The essence of Trump's psychology is that he likes to dominate people. He accomplishes this by hiring incompetent psychopaths who make him legitimately look good by comparison. This is why he's constantly overruling their worst plans. But once every so often, his incompetent underlings convince him to do something exceptionally stupid. This is because occasionally going along with them allows him to feel like a wise, discerning ruler who occasionally follows his advisors' guidance and occasionally overrules them.

    [Mar 26, 2020] Pompeo is on record having said that our government "lies, cheats, and steals" in order to accomplish its anti-Christian objectives.

    Mar 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Sokrates , says: Show Comment March 25, 2020 at 11:54 am GMT

    @37 Yesterday I went to Home Depot to buy some water tubing for my ice-maker.

    I noticed all doors were blocked with a tape, except one with at least 25 people waiting to get in and a female employee holding a sign "the line starts here".

    I ask the lady what was all about and she said because of the virus etc.

    I said to her "You must be kidding" and I start going back to my car.

    Some old lady from the line waiting to get in she scream to me something about "we protect ourselves" and similar nonsense.

    I turn around and I said to her: Quit watching TV you idiot. They rob your money on broad daylight and send your kids to die fighting israels enemies.

    RichardTaylor , says: Show Comment March 25, 2020 at 12:01 pm GMT
    The overreaction to the virus makes no sense. Is something being hidden from us? The freak out over this virus – to the tune of $trillions – is all out of proportion.

    2.8 million Americans die every year. Why the obsession with this one virus which may kill in the thousands?

    Something is off. But Trump should have known early if there was some other hidden danger. If there is some hidden suspicion by the people obsessing over this, please share it!

    [Mar 26, 2020] The face of Trump in foreign policy is Pompeo and it is wicked, ungly face of a gangster

    Yet another Gofgather
    Notable quotes:
    "... The more I watch these moves by Pompeo the more sympathetic I become to the most sinister theories about COVID-19, its origins and its launch around the world. Read Pepe Escobar's latest to get an idea of how dark and twisted this tale could be . ..."
    March 24, 2020 < Older
    No Respite for the Wicked, Pompeo Unleashed Written by Tom Luongo Tuesday

    There are few things in this life that make me more sick to my stomach than watching Secretary of State Mike Pompeo talking. He truly is one of the evilest men I've ever had the displeasure of covering.

    Into the insanity of the over-reaction to the COVID-19 outbreak, Pompeo wasted no time ramping up sanctions on firms doing any business with Iran, one of the countries worse-hit by this virus to date.

    It's a seemingly endless refrain, everyday, more sanctions on Chinese, Swiss and South African firms for having the temerity in these deflating times to buy oil from someone Pompeo and his gang of heartless psychopaths disapprove of.

    This goes far beyond just the oil industry. Even though I'm well aware that Russia's crashing the price of oil was itself a hybrid war attack on US capital markets. One that has had, to date, devastating effect.

    While Pompeo mouths the words publicly that humanitarian aid is exempted from sanctions on Iran, the US is pursuing immense pressure on companies to not do so anyway while the State Dept. bureaucracy takes its sweet time processing waiver applications.

    Pompeo and his ilk only think in terms of civilizational warfare. They have become so subsumed by their big war for the moral high ground to prove American exceptionalism that they have lost any shred of humanity they may have ever had.

    Because for Pompeo in times like these to stick to his talking points and for his office to continue excising Iran from the global economy when we're supposed to be coming together to fight a global pandemic is the height of soullessness.

    And it speaks to the much bigger problem that infects all of our political thinking. There comes a moment when politics and gaining political advantage have to take a back seat to doing the right thing.

    I've actually seen moments of that impulse from the Democratic leadership in the US Will wonders never cease?!

    Thinking only in Manichean terms of good vs. evil and dehumanizing your opponents is actually costlier than reversing course right now. Because honey is always better at attracting flies than vinegar.

    But, unfortunately, that is not the character of the Trump administration.

    It can only think in terms of direct leverage and opportunity to hold onto what they think they've achieved. So, until President Trump is no longer consumed with coordinating efforts to control COVID-19 Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper are in charge of foreign policy. They will continue the playbook that has been well established.

    Maximum pressure on Iran, hurt China any way they can, hold onto what they have in Syria, stay in Iraq.

    To that end Iraqi President Barham Salei nominated Pompeo's best choice to replace Prime Minister Adil Abdel Mahdi to throw Iraq's future into complete turmoil. According to Elijah Magnier, Adnan al-Zarfi is a US asset through and through .

    And this looks like Pompeo's Hail Mary to retain US legal presence in Iraq after the Iraqi parliament adopted a measure to demand withdrawal of US troops from the country. Airstrikes against US bases in Iraq continue on a near daily basis and there have been reports of US base closures and redeployments at the same time.

    This move looks like desperation by Pompeo et.al. to finally separate the Hashd al-Shaabi from Iraq's official military. So that airstrikes against them can be carried out under the definition of 'fighting Iranian terrorism.'

    As Magnier points out in the article above if al-Zarfi puts a government together the war in Iraq will expand just as the US is losing further control in Syria after Turkish President Erdogan's disastrous attempt to remake the front in Idlib. That ended with his effective surrender to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    The more I watch these moves by Pompeo the more sympathetic I become to the most sinister theories about COVID-19, its origins and its launch around the world. Read Pepe Escobar's latest to get an idea of how dark and twisted this tale could be .

    It is sad that, to me, I see no reason to doubt Pompeo and his ilk in the US government wouldn't do something like that to spark political and social upheaval in those places most targeted by US hybrid war tactics.

    But, at the same time, I can see the other side of it, a vicious strike back by China against its tormentors. And China's government does itself, in my mind, no favors threatening to withhold drug precursors and having officials run their mouths giving Americans the excuse they need to validate Trump and Pompeo's divisive rhetoric.

    Remaining on the fence about this issue isn't my normal style. But everyone is dirty here and the reality may well be this is a natural event terrible people on both sides are exploiting.

    And I can only go by what people do rather than what they say to assess the situation. Trump tries to buy exclusive right to a potential COVID-19 vaccine from a German firm and his administration slow-walks aid to Iran.

    China sends aid to Iran and Italy by the container full. Is that to salve their conscience over its initial suppression of information about the virus? Good question. But no one covers themselves in glory by using the confusion and distraction to attempt further regime change and step up war-footing during a public health crisis, manufactured or otherwise.

    While Pompeo unctuously talks the talk of compassion and charity, he cannot bring himself to actually walk the walk. Because he is a despicable, bile-filled man of uncommon depravity. His prosecuting a hybrid war during a public health crisis speaks to no other conclusion about him.

    It's clear to me that nothing has changed at the top of Trump's administration. I expect COVID-19 will not be a disaster for Trump and the US. It can handle this. But the lack of humanity shown by its diplomatic corps ensures that in the long run the US will be left to fend for itself when the next crisis hits.

    Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .

    Related

    [Mar 24, 2020] Welcome to Sweatshop Amerika! by Mike Whitney

    Mar 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

    The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media User Settings: Version? Social Media? Read Aloud w/ Show Word Counts No Video Autoplay No Infinite Scrolling
    Save Cancel

    ← The Fed Reopens Its Landfill for Distre... Blogview Mike Whitney Archive Blogview Mike Whitney Archive Welcome to Sweatshop Amerika! The next bailout will be our last Mike Whitney March 22, 2020 1,400 Words 75 Comments Reply Listen ॥ ■ ► RSS

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Dfc5d67b42fdea1%26domain%3Dwww.unz.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.unz.com%252Ff2a236aa7e5ff%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=75&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fmwhitney%2Fwelcome-to-sweatshop-amerika-the-next-bailout-will-be-our-last%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&show_faces=false&width=90

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df39e8abf781c17%26domain%3Dwww.unz.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.unz.com%252Ff2a236aa7e5ff%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fmwhitney%2Fwelcome-to-sweatshop-amerika-the-next-bailout-will-be-our-last%2F&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&type=button Email This Page to Someone
    Remember My Information


    => List of Bookmarks ◄ ► ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter Add to Library Toggle All
    Bookmark ToC ▲ ▼ Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

    Imagine if the congress approved a measure to form a public-private partnership between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve. Can you imagine that?

    Now imagine if a panicky and ill-informed Congress gave the Fed a blank check to bail out all of its crooked crony corporate and Wall Street friends, allowing the Fed to provide more than $4.5 trillion to underwater corporations that ripped off Mom and Pop investors by selling them bonds that were used to goose their stock prices so fatcat CEOs could make off like bandits. Imagine if all that red ink from private actors was piled onto the national debt pushing long-term interest rates into the stratosphere while crushing small businesses, households and ordinary working people.

    Now try to imagine the impact this would have on the nation's future. Imagine if the Central Bank was given the green-light to devour the Treasury, control the country's "purse strings", and use nation's taxing authority to shore up its trillions in ultra-risky leveraged bets, its opaque financially-engineered ponzi-instruments, and its massive speculative debts that have gone pear-shaped leaving a gaping black hole on its balance sheet?

    Well, you won't have to imagine this scenario for much longer, because the reality is nearly at hand. You see, the traitorous, dumbshit nincompoops in Congress are just a hairs-breadth away from abdicating congress's crucial power of the purse, which is not only their greatest strength, but also allows the congress to reign in abuses of executive power by controlling the flow of funding. The power of the purse is the supreme power of government which is why the founders entrusted it to the people's elected representatives in congress. Now these imbeciles are deciding whether to hand over that authority to a privately-owned banking cartel that has greatly expanded the chasm between rich and poor, incentivized destructive speculation on an industrial scale, and repeatedly inflated behemoth asset-price bubbles that have inevitably blown up sending stocks and the real economy into freefall. The idea of merging the Fed and the Treasury first appeared in its raw form in an article by former Fed chairman Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen in the Financial Times. Here's a short excerpt from the piece:

    "The Fed could ask Congress for the authority to buy limited amounts of investment-grade corporate debt The Fed's intervention could help restart that part of the corporate debt market, which is under significant stress. Such a programme would have to be carefully calibrated to minimize the credit risk taken by the Fed while still providing needed liquidity to an essential market." ( Financial Times )

    The Fed is not allowed to buy corporate debt, because it is not within its mandate of "price stability and full employment". It's also not allowed to arbitrarily intervene in the markets to pick winners and losers, nor is it allowed to bailout poorly-managed crybaby corporations who were gaming the system to their own advantage when the whole deal blew up in their faces. That's their problem, not the Fed's and not the American taxpayer's.

    But notice how Bernanke emphasizes how "Such a programme would have to be carefully calibrated to minimize the credit risk taken by the Fed". Why do you think he said that?

    He said it because he anticipates an arrangement where the new Treasury-Fed combo could buy up to "$4.5 trillion of corporate debt" (according to Marketwatch and BofA). And the way this will work, is the Fed will select the bonds that will be purchased and the credit risk will be heaped onto the US Treasury. Apparently Bernanke and Yellen think this is a "fair" arrangement, but others might differ on that point.

    Keep in mind, that in the last week alone, investors pulled a record $107 billion out of corporate bonds which is a market which has been in a deep-freeze for nearly a month. The only activity is the steady surge of redemptions by frantic investors who want to get their money back before the listing ship heads for Davey Jones locker. This is the market that Bernanke wants the American people to bail out mainly because he doesn't want to submerge the Fed's balance sheet in red ink. He wants to find a sucker who will take the loss instead. That's where Uncle Sam comes in, he's the target of this subterfuge. This same theme pops up in a piece in the Wall Street Journal. Check it out:

    "At least Treasury has come around to realizing it needs a facility to provide liquidity for companies. But as we write this, Mr. Mnuchin was still insisting that Treasury have control of most of the money to be able to ladle out directly to companies it wants to help. This is a recipe for picking winners and losers, and thus for bitter political fights and months of ugly headlines charging favoritism. The far better answer is for Treasury to use money from Congress to replenish the Exchange Stabilization Fund to back the Fed in creating a facility or special-purpose vehicles under Section 13(3) to lend the money to all comers. "( "Leaderless on the Econom" , Wall Street Journal)

    I can hardly believe the author is bold enough to say this right to our faces. Read it carefully: They are saying "We want your money, but not your advice. The Fed will choose who gets the cash and who doesn't. Just put your trillions on the counter and get the hell out."

    Isn't that what they're saying? Of course it is. And the rest of the article is even more arrogant:

    "The Fed can charge a non-concessionary rate, but the vehicles should be open to those who think they need the money, not merely to those Treasury decides are worthy." (Huh? So the Treasury should have no say so in who gets taxpayer money??) The looming liquidity crisis is simply too great for that kind of bureaucratic, politicized decision-making. (Wall Street Journal)

    Get it? In other words, the folks at Treasury are just too stupid or too prejudiced to understand the subtleties of a bigass bailout like this. Is that arrogance or what?

    This is the contempt these people have for you and me and everyone else who isn't a part of their elitist gaggle of reprobates. Here's a clip from another article at the WSJ that helps to show how the financial media is pushing this gigantic handout to corporate America:.

    "The Federal Reserve, Treasury Department and banking regulators deserve congratulations for their bold, necessary actions to provide liquidity to the U.S. financial system amid the coronavirus crisis. But more remains to be done. We thus recommend: (1) immediate congressional action . to authorize the Treasury to use the Exchange Stabilization Fund to guarantee prime money-market funds, (2) regulatory action to effect temporary reductions in bank capital and liquidity requirements (NOTE–So now the banks don't need to hold capital against their loans?) .. additional Fed lending to banks and nonbanks .(Note -by "nonbanks", does the author mean underwater hedge funds?)

    We recommend that the Fed take further actions as lender of last resort. First, it should re-establish the Term Auction Facility, used in the 2008 crisis, allowing depository institutions to borrow against a broad range of collateral at an auction price (Note–They want to drop the requirement for good Triple A collateral.) Second, it should consider further exercising its Section 13(3) authority to provide additional liquidity to nonbanks, potentially including purchases of corporate debt through a special-purpose vehicle" ( "Do More to Avert a Liquidity Crisis" , Wall Street Journal )

    This isn't a bailout, it's a joke, and there's no way Congress should approve these measures, particularly the merging of the US Treasury with the cutthroat Fed. That's a prescription for disaster! The Fed needs to be abolished not embraced as a state institution. It's madness!

    And look how the author wants to set up an special-purpose vehicle (SPV) so the accounting chicanery can be kept off the books which means the public won't know how much money is being flushed down the toilet trying to resuscitate these insolvent corporations whose executives are still living high on the hog on the money they stole from credulous investors. This whole scam stinks to high heaven!

    Meanwhile America's working people will get a whopping $1,000 bucks to tide them over until the debts pile up to the rafters and they're forced to rob the neighborhood 7-11 to feed the kids. How fair is that?

    And don't kid yourself: This isn't a bailout, it's the elitist's political agenda aimed at creating a permanent underclass who'll work for peanuts just to eek out a living.

    Welcome to Sweatshop Amerika!

    anachronism , says: Show Comment March 23, 2020 at 5:03 am GMT

    In 2008-2009, the Federal Reserve bailed out the global banking system to the tune of $16 Trillion. But American citizens were left to pay usurious rates of interest on $1 Trillion of credit card debt. And American students had lost years of economic opportunity but their $1 Trillion dollars of debt could not be discharged through bankruptcy.

    This time the banks should stand behind the debtors at the government troth.

    anachronism , says: Show Comment March 23, 2020 at 5:06 am GMT
    It's hard to understand how holiday cruise shipping can be regarded as an essential business.

    It is almost as hard to understand why a "Globalist Enterprise" should be spared its fate through the generosity of of one country. Even harder to understand, why would that one country should bail out a business, which had employed both tax-avoidance schemes as well as strategy import substitution and foreign investment to improve its profits at the expense of that country.

    Nationalism is better that globalism. The current crisis was not caused by globalism; but globalism has drained from our country the means to respond to the crisis with the medicines and equipment that would reduce its severity.

    Not a single cent of government aid should go toward a person or an entity outside the United States and it territories. Conditions should be placed upon such aid, so that the companies receiving it, must domesticate their supply chains, and must produce and develop their products within the United States.

    Kim , says: Show Comment March 23, 2020 at 5:38 am GMT
    @anachronism Make the universities discharge the student debt. It was their scam all along. They can begin by retrenching their schools of the humanities and at least halving their administrative staff. And end building and sports programs. The fat hangs heavy on that particular pig.
    anachronism , says: Show Comment March 23, 2020 at 7:19 am GMT
    @Kim I agree with you up to a point.

    The student and the university should share responsibility equally. In the future, the institution should be made a co-signor on any student loan; and the obligation to repay the loan should be joint and several for both the institution and the student.

    Bankruptcy provides the ex-student with the chance to start over and to escape the burden; but not without consequences. This will discourage the ex-student, who is doing well financially and has the means to service the debt, from just walking away.

    [Mar 22, 2020] Opinion - A Tale of Two Foreign Policies The Train-Wreck Abroad Is Bipartisan by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... It is widely believed that the abrupt withdrawal of candidates Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg on the eve of Super Tuesday that targeted Sanders was arranged through an intervention by ex-President Barack Obama who made a plea in support of "party unity," offering the two a significant quid pro quo down the road if they were willing to leave the race and throw their support to Biden, which they dutifully did ..."
    "... Trump might be described as both paranoid and narcissistic, meaning that he sees himself as surrounded by enemies and that the enemies are out to get him personally. When he is criticized, he either ridicules the source or does something impulsive to deflect what is being said. He attacked Syria twice based on false claims about the use of chemical weapons when a consensus developed in the media and in congress that he was being "weak" in the Middle East. Those attacks were war crimes as Syria was not threatening the United States. ..."
    "... Biden is on a different track in that he is an establishment hawk. As head of the Senate Foreign Affairs committee back in 2002-2003 he green lighted George W. Bush's plan to attack Iraq. Beyond that, he cheer-leaded the effort from the Democratic Party benches, helping to create a consensus both in Washington and in the media that Saddam Hussein was a threat that had to be dealt with. He should have known better as he was privy to intelligence that was suggesting that the Iraqis were no threat at all. He did not moderate his tune on Iraq until after 2005, when the expected slam-dunk quick victory got very messy. ..."
    "... Biden was also certainly privy to the decision making by President Barack Obama, which include the destruction of Libya and the killing of American citizens by drone. Whether he actively supported those policies is unknown, but he has never been challenged on them. What is clear is that he did not object to them, another sign of his willingness to go along with the establishment, a tendency which will undoubtedly continue if he is elected president. ..."
    Mar 22, 2020 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    Now that the Democratic Party has apparently succeeded in getting rid of the only two voices among its presidential candidates that actually deviated from the establishment consensus, it appears that Joe Biden will be running against Donald Trump in November. To be sure, Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard are still hanging on, but the fix was in and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) made sure that Sanders would be given the death blow on Super Tuesday while Gabbard would be blocked from participating in any of the late term debates.

    It is widely believed that the abrupt withdrawal of candidates Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg on the eve of Super Tuesday that targeted Sanders was arranged through an intervention by ex-President Barack Obama who made a plea in support of "party unity," offering the two a significant quid pro quo down the road if they were willing to leave the race and throw their support to Biden, which they dutifully did. Rumor has it that Klobuchar might well wind up as Biden's vice president. An alternative tale is that it was a much more threatening "offer that couldn't be refused" coming from the Clintons.

    ... ... ...

    Both Trump and Biden might reasonably described as Zionists, Trump by virtue of the made-in-Israel foreign policy positions he has delivered on since his election, and Biden by word and deed during his entire time in politics. When Biden encountered Sarah Palin in 2008 in the vice-presidential debate, he and Palin sought to outdo each other in enthusing over how much they love the Jewish state. Biden has said that "I am a Zionist. You don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist" and also, ridiculously, "Were there not an Israel, the U.S. would have to invent one. We will never abandon Israel -- out of our own self-interest. [It] is the best $3 billion investment we make." Biden has been a regular feature speaker at the annual AIPAC summit in Washington.

    Trump might be described as both paranoid and narcissistic, meaning that he sees himself as surrounded by enemies and that the enemies are out to get him personally. When he is criticized, he either ridicules the source or does something impulsive to deflect what is being said. He attacked Syria twice based on false claims about the use of chemical weapons when a consensus developed in the media and in congress that he was being "weak" in the Middle East. Those attacks were war crimes as Syria was not threatening the United States.

    Trump similarly reversed himself on withdrawing from Syria when he ran into criticism of the move and his plan to extricate the United States from Afghanistan, if it develops at all, could easily be subjected to similar revision. Trump is not really the man who as a candidate indicated that he was seriously looking for a way out of America's endless and pointless wars, no matter what his supporters continue to assert.

    Biden is on a different track in that he is an establishment hawk. As head of the Senate Foreign Affairs committee back in 2002-2003 he green lighted George W. Bush's plan to attack Iraq. Beyond that, he cheer-leaded the effort from the Democratic Party benches, helping to create a consensus both in Washington and in the media that Saddam Hussein was a threat that had to be dealt with. He should have known better as he was privy to intelligence that was suggesting that the Iraqis were no threat at all. He did not moderate his tune on Iraq until after 2005, when the expected slam-dunk quick victory got very messy.

    Biden was also certainly privy to the decision making by President Barack Obama, which include the destruction of Libya and the killing of American citizens by drone. Whether he actively supported those policies is unknown, but he has never been challenged on them. What is clear is that he did not object to them, another sign of his willingness to go along with the establishment, a tendency which will undoubtedly continue if he is elected president.

    And Biden's foreign policy reminiscences are is subject to what appear to be memory losses or inability to articulate, illustrated by a whole series of faux pas during the campaign. He has a number of times told a tale of his heroism in Afghanistan that is complete fiction , similar to Hillary Clinton's lying claims of courage under fire in Bosnia.

    So, we have a president in place who takes foreign policy personally in that his first thoughts are "how does it make me look?" and a prospective challenger who appears to be suffering from initial stages of dementia and who has always been relied upon to support the establishment line, whatever it might be. Though Trump is the more dangerous of the two as he is both unpredictable and irrational, the likelihood is that Biden will be guided by the Clintons and Obamas. To put it another way, no matter who is president the likelihood that the United States will change direction to get away from its interventionism and bullying on a global scale is virtually nonexistent. At least until the money runs out. Or to express it as a friend of mine does, "No matter who is elected we Americans wind up getting John McCain." Goodnight America!

    Philip Giraldi Ph.D., Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. A former CIA Case Officer and Army Intelligence Officer who spent twenty years overseas in Europe and the Middle East working terrorism cases. He holds a BA with honors from the University of Chicago and an MA and PhD in Modern History from the University of London. " Source "

    [Mar 21, 2020] When reading any article concerning current events (ie. Ukraine, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or Coronavirus) consider how the The Seven Principles of Propaganda may apply

    Highly recommended!
    Mar 22, 2020 | https://www.moonofalabama.org

    Dick | Mar 22 2020 0:48 utc | 66

    When reading any article concerning current events (ie. Ukraine, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or Coronavirus) consider how the The Seven Principles of Propaganda may apply. (repost):

    1. Avoid abstract ideas - appeal to the emotions. When we think emotionally, we are more prone to be irrational and less critical in our thinking. I can remember several instances where this has been employed by the US to prepare the public with a justification of their actions. Here are four examples:

      The Invasion of Grenada during the Reagan administration was said to be necessary to rescue American students being held hostage by Grenadian coup authorities after a coup that overthrew the government. I had a friend in the 82nd airborne division that participated in the rescue. He told me the students said they were hiding in the school to avoid the fighting by the US military, and had never been threatened by any Grenadian authority and were only hiding in the school to avoid all the fighting. Film of the actual rescue broadcast on the mainstream media was taken out of context; the students were never in danger.

      The invasion of Panama in the late 80's was supposedly to capture the dictator Manual Noriega for international crimes related to drugs and weapons. I remember a headline covered by all the media where a Navy lieutenant and his wife were detained by the police. His wife was sexually assaulted while in custody, according to the story. Unfortunately, it never happened. It was intended to get the public emotionally involved to support the action.

      The invasion of Iraq in the early 90's was preceded by a speech by a girl describing the Iraqi army throwing babies out of incubators so the equipment could be transferred to Iraq. It turns out the girl was the daughter of one of the Kuwait's ruling sheiks and the event never occurred. However, it served its purpose by getting the American public involved emotionally supporting the war.

      During the build up to the bombing campaign by NATO against Libya, a woman entered a hotel where reporters were staying claiming she was raped by several police officers of the Gaddafi security services. The report was carried by most media outlets as representative of the brutality of the Gaddafi regime. I was not able to verify if this story was true or not, but it fits the usual method employed to gain public support through propaganda for military interventions.

      The greatest emotion in us is fear and fear is used extensively to make us think irrationally. I remember growing up during the cold war having the fear of nuclear war or 'The Russians are coming!' After the cold war without an obvious enemy, it was Al Qaeda even before 911, so we had 'Al Qaeda is coming!' Now we have 'ISIS is coming!' with media blasting us with terrorist fears. Whenever I hear a government promoting an emotional issue or fear mongering, I ignore them knowing there is a hidden Truth behind the issue.

    2. Constantly repeat just a few ideas. Use stereotyped phrases. This could be stated more plainly as 'Keep it simple, stupid!' The most notorious use of this technique recently was the Bush administration. Everyone can remember 'We must fight them over there rather than over here' or my favourite 'They hate us for our freedoms'. Neither of these phrases made any rational sense despite 911. The last thing Muslims in the Middle East care about is American's freedoms, maybe it was all the bombs the US was dropping on them.
    3. Give only one side of the argument and obscure history. Watching mainstream media in the US, you can see all the news is biased to the American view as an example. This is prevalent within Australian commercial media and newspapers giving only a western view, but fortunately, we have the SBS and the ABC that are very good, certainly not perfect, at providing both sides of a story. In addition, any historical perspective is ignored keeping the citizenry focused on the here and now. Can any of you remember any news organisation giving an in depth history of Ukraine or Palestine? I cannot.
    4. Demonize the enemy or pick out one special "enemy" for special vilification. This is obvious in politics where politicians continuously criticise their opponents. Of course, demonization is more productively applied to international figures or nations such as Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Gaddafi in Libya, Assad in Syria, the Taliban and just recently Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine, Crimea and Syria. It establishes a negative emotional view of either a nation (i.e. Iran) or a known figure (i.e. Putin) making us again think emotionally, rather than rationally, making it easier to promote evil acts upon a nation or a known figure. Certainly some of these groups or individuals were less than benign, but not necessarily demons as depicted in the west.
    5. Appear humanitarian in work and motivations. The US has used this technique often to validate foreign interventions or ongoing conflicts where the term 'Right to Protect' is used for justification. Everyone should remember the many stories about the abuse of women in Afghanistan or Saddam Hussein's supposed brutality toward his people. The recent attack on Syria by the US, UK, and France was depicted as an Humanitarian intervention by the UK Government, which was far from the truth. One thing that always amazes me is when the US sends humanitarian aid to a country it is accompanied by the US military. In Haiti some years back, the US sent troops with no other country doing so. The recent Ebola outbreak in Africa saw US troops sent to the area. How are troops going to fight a medical outbreak? No doubt, they are there for other reasons.

    6. Obscure one's economic interests. Who believes the invasion of Iraq was for weapons of mass destruction? Or the constant threats against Iran are for their nuclear program? Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and no one has presented firm evidence Iran intends to produce nuclear weapons. The West has been interfering in the Middle East since the British in the late 19th century. It is all about oil and the control over the resources. In fact, if one researches the cause of wars over the last hundred years, you will always find economics was a major component driving the rush to war for most of them.

    7. Monopolize the flow of information. This is the most important principle and mainly entails setting the narrative by which all subsequent events can be based upon or interpreted in such a way as to reinforce the narrative. The narrative does not need to be true; in fact, it can be anything that suits the monopoliser as long as it is based loosely on some event. It is critical to have at least majority control of media and the ability to control the message so the flow of information is consistent with the narrative. This has been played out on mainstream media concerning the Ukrainian conflict, Syrian conflict, and the Skirpal affair. Just over the last couple of years, we have all been subjected to propaganda in one form or another. Remember the US wanting to bomb Syria because of the sarin gas attack, it was later determined to be false (see Seymour Hersh 'Whose Sarin'). The shoot down of MH17 was immediately blamed on Russia by the west without any convincing proof (setting the narrative). It amazes me just how fast the story died after the initial saturation in the media. When I awoke that morning in July, I heard on the news PM Tony Abbot blaming Russia for the incident only hours afterward. How could he know Russia shot down the plane? The investigation into the incident had not even begun, so I suspect he was singing from the West's hymnbook in a standard setting the narrative scenario.

    [Mar 21, 2020] The New Dark Age

    Notable quotes:
    "... Voltaire Network ..."
    "... the Iranian population is the world's most lung-weakest. Almost all men over the age of sixty suffer from the after-effects of the US combat gases used by the Iraqi army during the First Gulf War (1980-88), as did the Germans and the French after the First World War. Any traveller to Iran has been struck by the number of serious lung ailments. ..."
    "... The Diamond Princess is an Israeli-American ship, owned by Micky Arison, brother of Shari Arison, the richest woman in Israel. The Arisons are turning this incident into a public relations operation. The Trump administration and several other countries airlifted their nationals to be quarantined at home. The international press devoted its headlines to this story. Referring to the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-1919, it asserts that the epidemic could spread throughout the world and potentially threaten the human species with extinction [ 2 ]. This apocalyptic hypothesis, not based on any facts, will nevertheless become the word of the Gospel. ..."
    "... It is not known at this time whether tycoons deliberately spread panic about Covid-19, making this vulgar epidemic seem like the "end of the world". However, one distortion after another, governments have become involved. Of course, it is no longer a question of selling advertising screens by frightening people, but of dominating populations by exploiting this fear. ..."
    "... Let us remember that never in history has the confinement of a healthy population been used to fight a disease. Above all, let us remember that this epidemic will have no significant consequences in terms of mortality. ..."
    "... The two governments panic their populations by distributing unnecessary instructions disavowed by infectious diseases doctors: they encourage people to wear gloves and masks in all circumstances and to keep at least one metre away from any other human being. ..."
    "... It is too early to say what real goal the Conte and Macron governments are pursuing. The only thing that is certain is that it is not a question of fighting Covid-19. ..."
    Mar 21, 2020 | williambowles.info

    Covid-19: propaganda and manipulation by Thierry Meyssan March 21, 2020 21 March 2020 -- Voltaire Network

    Returning to the Covid-19 epidemic and the way governments are reacting to it, Thierry Meyssan stresses that the authoritarian decisions of Italy and France have no medical justification. They contradict the observations of the best infectiologists and the instructions of the World Health Organization.

    The Chinese Prime Minister, Li Keqiang, came to lead the operations in Wuhan and restore the "celestial mandate" on January 27, 2020.

    On November 17, 2019, the first case of a person infected with Covid-19 was diagnosed in Hubei Province, China. Initially, doctors tried to communicate the seriousness of the disease, but clashed with regional authorities. It was only when the number of cases increased and the population saw the seriousness of the disease that the central government intervened.

    This epidemic is not statistically significant. It kills very few people, although those it does kill experience terrible respiratory distress.

    Since ancient times, in Chinese culture, Heaven has given a mandate to the Emperor to govern his subjects [ 1 ]. When he withdraws it, a disaster strikes the country: epidemic, earthquake, etc. Although we are in modern times, President XI felt threatened by the mismanagement of the Hubei regional government. The Council of State therefore took matters into its own hands. It forced the population of Hubei's capital, Wuhan, to remain confined to their homes. Within days, it built hospitals; sent teams to each house to take the temperature of each inhabitant; took all potentially infected people to hospitals for testing; treated those infected with chloroquine phosphate and sent others home; and treated the critically ill with recombinant interferon Alfa 2B (IFNrec) for resuscitation. This vast operation had no public health necessity, other than to prove that the Communist Party still has the heavenly mandate.

    During a press conference on Covid-19, the Iranian Deputy Minister of Health, Iraj Harirchi, appeared contaminated.

    Propagation in Iran

    The epidemic spreads from China to Iran in mid-February 2020. These two countries have been closely linked since ancient times. They share many common cultural elements. However, the Iranian population is the world's most lung-weakest. Almost all men over the age of sixty suffer from the after-effects of the US combat gases used by the Iraqi army during the First Gulf War (1980-88), as did the Germans and the French after the First World War. Any traveller to Iran has been struck by the number of serious lung ailments.

    When air pollution in Tehran increased beyond what they could bear, schools and government offices were closed and half of the families moved to the countryside with their grandparents. This has been happening several times a year for thirty-five years and seems normal.

    The government and parliament are almost exclusively composed of veterans of the Iraq-Iran war, that is, people who are extremely fragile in relation to Covid-19. So when these groups were infected, many personalities developed the disease.

    In view of the US sanctions, no Western bank covers the transport of medicines. Iran found itself unable to treat the infected and care for the sick until the UAE broke the embargo and sent two planes of medical equipment.

    People who would not suffer in the other country died from the first coughs due to the wounds in their lungs. As usual, the government closed schools. In addition, it deprogrammed several cultural and sporting events, but did not ban pilgrimages. Some areas have closed hotels to prevent the movement of sick people who can no longer find hospitals close to their homes.

    Quarantine in Japan

    On February 4, 2020, a passenger on the US cruise ship Diamond Princess was diagnosed ill from the Covid-19 and ten passengers were infected. The Japanese Minister of Health, Katsunobu Kato, then imposed a two-week quarantine on the ship in Yokohama in order to prevent the contagion from spreading to his country. In the end, out of the 3,711 people on board, the vast majority of whom are over 70 years old, there would be 7 deaths.

    The Diamond Princess is an Israeli-American ship, owned by Micky Arison, brother of Shari Arison, the richest woman in Israel. The Arisons are turning this incident into a public relations operation. The Trump administration and several other countries airlifted their nationals to be quarantined at home. The international press devoted its headlines to this story. Referring to the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-1919, it asserts that the epidemic could spread throughout the world and potentially threaten the human species with extinction [ 2 ]. This apocalyptic hypothesis, not based on any facts, will nevertheless become the word of the Gospel.

    We remember that in 1898, William Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, in order to increase the sales of their daily newspapers, published false information in order to deliberately provoke a war between the United States and the Spanish colony of Cuba. This was the beginning of "yellow journalism" (publishing anything to make money). Today it is called "fake news".

    It is not known at this time whether tycoons deliberately spread panic about Covid-19, making this vulgar epidemic seem like the "end of the world". However, one distortion after another, governments have become involved. Of course, it is no longer a question of selling advertising screens by frightening people, but of dominating populations by exploiting this fear.

    For the WHO Director, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, China and South Korea have set an example by generalising screening tests; a way of saying that the Italian and French methods are medical nonsense.

    WHO intervention

    The World Health Organization (WHO), which monitored the entire operation, noted the spread of the disease outside China. On February 11th and 12th, it organized a global forum on research and innovation on the epidemic in Geneva. At the forum, WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called in very measured terms for global collaboration [ 3 ].

    In all of its messages, the WHO stressed : the low demographic impact of the epidemic; the futility of border closures; the ineffectiveness of wearing gloves, masks (except for health care workers) and certain "barrier measures" (for example, the distance of one metre only makes sense with infected people, but not with healthy people); the need to raise the level of hygiene, including hand washing, water disinfection and increased ventilation of confined spaces. Finally, use disposable tissues or, failing that, sneeze into your elbow.

    However, the WHO is not a medical organization, but a United Nations agency dealing with health issues. Its officials, even if they are doctors, are also and above all politicians. It cannot therefore denounce the abuses of certain states. Furthermore, since the controversy over the H1N1 epidemic, the WHO must publicly justify all its recommendations. In 2009, it was accused of having let itself be swayed by the interests of big pharmaceutical companies and of having hastily sounded the alarm in a disproportionate manner [ 4 ]. This time it used the word "pandemic" only as a last resort, on March 12th, four months later.

    At the Franco-Italian summit in Naples on February 27, the French and Italian presidents, Giuseppe Conte and Emmanuel Macron, announced that they would react together to the pandemic.

    Instrumentation in Italy and France

    Modern propaganda should not be limited to the publication of false news as the United Kingdom did to convince its people to enter the First World War, but should also be used in the same way as Germany did to convince its people to fight in the Second World War. The recipe is always the same: to exert psychological pressure to induce subjects to voluntarily practice acts that they know are useless, but which will lead them to lie [ 5 ]. For example, in 2001, it was common knowledge that those accused of hijacking planes on 9/11 were not on the passenger boarding lists. Yet, in shock, most accepted without question the inane accusations made by FBI Director Robert Muller against "19 hijackers". Or, as is well known, President Hussein's Iraq had only old Soviet Scud launchers with a range of up to 700 kilometers, but many Americans caulked the windows and doors of their homes to protect themselves from the deadly gases with which the evil dictator was going to attack America. This time, in the case of the Covid-19, it is the voluntary confinement in the home that forces the person who accepts it to convince himself of the veracity of the threat.

    Let us remember that never in history has the confinement of a healthy population been used to fight a disease. Above all, let us remember that this epidemic will have no significant consequences in terms of mortality.

    In Italy, the first step was to isolate the contaminated regions according to the principle of quarantine, and then to isolate all citizens from each other, which follows a different logic.

    According to the President of the Italian Council, Giuseppe Conte, and the French President, Emmanuel Macron, the aim of confining the entire population at home is not to overcome the epidemic, but to spread it out over time so that the sick do not arrive at the same time in hospitals and saturate them. In other words, it is not a medical measure, but an exclusively administrative one. It will not reduce the number of infected people, but will postpone it in time.

    In order to convince the Italians and the French of the merits of their decision, Presidents Conte and Macron first enlisted the support of committees of scientific experts. While these committees had no objection to people staying at home, they had no objection to people going about their business. Then Chairs Conte and Macron made it mandatory to have an official form to go for a walk. This document on the letterheads of the respective ministries of the interior is drawn up on honour and is not subject to any checks or sanctions.

    The two governments panic their populations by distributing unnecessary instructions disavowed by infectious diseases doctors: they encourage people to wear gloves and masks in all circumstances and to keep at least one metre away from any other human being.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/8L6ehRif-v8?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    The French "reference daily" (sic) Le Monde, Facebook France and the French Ministry of Health undertook to censor a video of Professor Didier Raoult, one of the world's most renowned infectiologists, because by announcing the existence of a proven drug in China against Covid-19, he highlighted the lack of a medical basis for the measures taken by President Macron [ 6 ].

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/n4J8kydOvbc?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    It is too early to say what real goal the Conte and Macron governments are pursuing. The only thing that is certain is that it is not a question of fighting Covid-19.

    Thierry Meyssan

    Translation

    Pete Kimberley

    [ 1 ] The Mandate of Heaven and The Great Ming Code, Jiang Yonglin, University of Washington Press (2011).

    [ 2 ] Human Extinction and the Pandemic Imaginary, Christos Lynteris, Routledge (2020).

    [ 3 ] " Nouveau coronavirus : solidarité, collaboration et mesures d'urgence au niveau mondial s'imposent ", Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Organisation mondiale de la Santé, 11 février 2020.

    [ 4 ] Pandemics, Science and Policy. H1N1 and the World Health Organization, Sudeepa Abeysinghe, Plagrave Macmillan (2015).

    [ 5 ] " The techniques of modern military propaganda ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 18 May 2016.

    [ 6 ] " "La chloroquine guérit le Covid-19" : Didier Raoult, l'infectiologue qui aurait le remède au coronavirus ", Étienne Campion, Marianne, 19 mars 2020.

    [Mar 20, 2020] That "beyond dispute" phrase is what retards like Mike Pompeo use to try to shut down a discussion in which he's getting his fat ass kicked.

    Mar 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Twodees Partain , says: Show Comment March 20, 2020 at 3:02 am GMT

    @SBaker "It's beyond dispute that the novel coronavirus officially known as COVID-19originated in Wuhan, China."

    No, it's being disputed every day. That "beyond dispute" phrase is what retards like Mike Pompeo use to try to shut down a discussion in which he's getting his fat ass kicked.

    [Mar 20, 2020] Pompeo myth that USA and the West were unprepared because China withheld information about the virus.

    Mar 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    occupatio , Mar 19 2020 20:16 utc | 161

    @b Another myth to add to your collection ...

    ... that USA and the West were unprepared because China withheld information about the virus.

    Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 19 2020 18:20 utc | 106

    The "Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on COVID-19" states that China transparently reported the identification of virus to the WHO and the international community on January 3rd, and a WHO investigative team was invited to Wuhan a week after that.

    From January 3rd, 2020, information on COVID-19 cases has been reported to WHO daily.

    On January 7th, full genome sequences of the new virus were shared with WHO and the international community immediately after the pathogen was identified.

    On January 10th, an expert group involving Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese technical experts and a World Health Organization team was invited to visit Wuhan.

    From page 31 of:
    https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf

    [Mar 20, 2020] On the psychology of Full Spectrum Dominance

    Mar 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Richard B says: Show Comment March 20, 2020 at 2:06 am GMT 700 Words @Kevin Barrett Does anyone ever really win a trade war?

    I don't mean Argentina vs China, or anything like that.

    I mean where both sides have a lot of money, or power, or both.

    Today's coronavirus black swan, like 9/11, has all the characteristics of a trauma-based mass-mind-control op.

    Not only do I agree, but I think it's so obvious that it's exasperating that, after all we've been through, it even needs to be pointed out. But it does.

    It has already been used to demonize China in the same way 9/11 was used to demonize Islam: Just as we were supposed to hate the crazy suicidal Muslims yearning for harems of afterlife virgins, we are now supposed to feel disgust for Chinese slurpers of bat soup.

    Here I respectfully disagree.

    What Jewish Supremacy Inc. did after September 11th was,

    1. Blame Islam
    2. Shame Americans* for Blaming Islam

    A better example of control through crazy-making would be impossible to imagine.

    And it's exactly what they're doing now.

    1. Blame China
    2. Shame Americans for Blaming China

    *or anyone else who refused or refuses to bow before the alter of Politically Correct Identity Politics (two tools essential to Full Spectrum Dominance).

    As we have already seen, the consequences are immense.

    Because if that kind of crazy-making is effective it's totally demoralizing. As learned helplessness sets in people won't even defend themselves. As happened in Italy, and not just Italy.

    But there are other discernible patterns well worth pointing out.

    1. Destroy The Evidence
    2. Control The Narrative
    3. Enforce The Law (on anyone looking for evidence to question the narrative)

    Victimize – Blame Victim – Play Victim

    Demonize Dissent and Pathologize Opposition

    And all ending in what I've come to call the Supremacist Waltz

    What makes a supremacist is not just making claims ("Our Superiority Is Absolute", or "We are the Chosen") or demands. No. It's that they have the power to effectuate the demands that support their claims.

    And what are the demands they have the power to effectuate?

    1. to be placed above criticism
    2. loved unconditionally
    3. blindly obeyed

    It's The Rule of Man over The Rule of Law

    It's a Culture of Blind Obedience over a Culture of Individual Conscience

    It's Tyranny over Freedom

    Hence The Great Replacement, accompanied by chants and taunts like "We Will Replace You!"

    In other words, Full Spectrum Dominance.

    But, there's a snake in this garden.

    The kind of power they're interested in is fundamentally destablizing.

    All top down authoritarian power destablizes social-institutions.

    From the point of view of cultural history this is exactly why cultures emerged in the Western world that promoted democratic forms of governance. Because authoritarians cultures are ultimately so extraordinarily destructive and unsustainable. Like this one is. Isn't it obvious?

    And, from the point of view of the bottom line, prolonged and profound social instability disrupts and even halts economic activity.

    When that happens there's no alternative.

    This is why civilization itself was created. Because any civilization's primary objective is and must be the circumnavigation of the use of force.

    This is why what we're really witnessing is nothing less than

    The Pyrrhic Victory of Jewish Supremacy Inc.

    Because JSI's rise to power has been in direct proportion to the collapse of the very social-institutions that power controls. Pride Before The Fall, indeed.

    And the reason is easy to see and devoid of any complexity or glamour.

    JSI is no good at social-management.

    And make no mistake about it, social-management is at its core an adaptational strategy, as are our social-institutions.

    So, if we blow this, we're in no position to laugh at the dinosaurs for getting themselves extinct.

    After all, they lasted a lot longer than we have so far.

    Assuming the human race has a chance (in itself rather doubtful) perhaps its time to turn their words against them and say,

    Treason Against Jewish Supremacy Inc. Is Loyalty To Humanity

    Do we really need to ask them for permission to care about our children's future?

    [Mar 19, 2020] US imposes sanctions against #Iran after offering to help with #Coronavirus outbreak

    Mar 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , Mar 18 2020 18:28 utc | 53

    This might soon become the global rallying cry :

    "USA is the greatest enemy of humanity - I hope they will pay for that:

    "US imposes sanctions against #Iran after offering to help with #Coronavirus outbreak"

    The situation has now gone well beyond immorality and into the realm of EVIL--an EVIL that's Bipartisan, shared by Ds and Rs alike.

    bevin , Mar 18 2020 18:33 utc | 54

    Miss Lacy and Arby both draw our attention to the obscenity of the US using this crisis in order to put pressure on governments that it dislikes by cutting off medicine and other resources.

    Among the places where people are currently dying in large numbers because Washington chooses that they should are Cuba-under an oil embargo-, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Iran.

    Those who cannot bring themselves to believe that government could be so evil as to deploy a virus as a weapon to weaken another state, only have to look at what is happening today: Venezuela desperately needs funds, much of its foreign exchange having been seized illegally by the US and its satellites, in order to weather the pandemic.

    Anyone supporting such a policy, condoning the killing of vulnerable people to embarrass another state, is an accessory to murder.

    farm ecologist , Mar 18 2020 19:40 utc | 67
    Re., IMF refuses emergency funds to Venezuela

    Posted by: arby | Mar 18 2020 14:32 utc | 11
    Posted by: Miss Lacy | Mar 18 2020 18:15 utc | 50
    Posted by: bevin | Mar 18 2020 18:33 utc | 55

    Anyone supporting such a policy, condoning the killing of vulnerable people to embarrass another state, is an accessory to murder.

    Although many argue that the foreign policies of the US government don't really reflect the views and desires of ordinary citizens, the comments in the Fox News report on this story suggest otherwise (caveat - be prepared to be appalled).

    https://www.foxnews.com/world/venezuela-asks-imf-for-massive-emergency-loan-to-fight-coronavirus


    [Mar 17, 2020] Russia Strikes Back Where It Hurts American Oil by Scott Ritter

    Mar 17, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    R ussia and Saudi Arabia are engaged in an oil price war that has sent shockwaves around the world, causing the price of oil to tumble and threatening the financial stability, and even viability, of major international oil companies.

    On the surface, this conflict appears to be a fight between two of the world's largest producers of oil over market share. This may, in fact, be the motive driving Saudi Arabia, which reacted to Russia's refusal to reduce its level of oil production by slashing the price it charged per barrel of oil and threatening to increase its oil production, thereby flooding the global market with cheap oil in an effort to attract customers away from competitors.

    Russia's motives appear to be far different -- its target isn't Saudi Arabia, but rather American shale oil. After absorbing American sanctions that targeted the Russian energy sector, and working with global partners (including Saudi Arabia) to keep oil prices stable by reducing oil production even as the United States increased the amount of shale oil it sold on the world market, Russia had had enough. The advent of the Coronavirus global pandemic had significantly reduced the demand for oil around the world, stressing the American shale producers. Russia had been preparing for the eventuality of oil-based economic warfare with the United States. With U.S. shale producers knocked back on their heels, Russia viewed the time as being ripe to strike back. Russia's goal is simple: to make American shale oil producers " share the pain ".

    The United States has been slapping sanctions on Russia for more than six years, ever since Russia took control (and later annexed) the Crimean Peninsula and threw its weight behind Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine. The first sanctions were issued on March 6, 2014, through Executive Order 13660 , targeting "persons who have asserted governmental authority in the Crimean region without the authorization of the Government of Ukraine that undermine democratic processes and institutions in Ukraine; threaten its peace, security, stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity; and contribute to the misappropriation of its assets."

    The most recent round of sanctions was announced by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on February 18, 2020, by sanctioning Rosneft Trading S.A., a Swiss-incorporated, Russian-owned oil brokerage firm, for operating in Venezuela's oil sector. The U.S. also recently targeted the Russian Nord Stream 2 and Turk Stream gas pipeline projects.

    Russia had been signaling its displeasure over U.S. sanctions from the very beginning. In July 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that U.S. sanctions were "driving into a corner" relations between the two countries, threatening the "the long-term national interests of the U.S. government and people." Russia opted to ride out U.S. sanctions, in hopes that there might be a change of administrations following the 2016 U.S. Presidential elections. Russian President Vladimir Putin made it clear that he hoped the U.S. might elect someone whose policies would be more friendly toward Russia, and that once the field of candidates narrowed down to a choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Putin favored Trump .

    "Yes, I did," Putin remarked after the election, during a joint press conference with President Trump following a summit in Helsinki in July 2018. "Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal."

    Putin's comments only reinforced the opinions of those who embraced allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election as fact and concluded that Putin had some sort of hold over Trump. Trump's continuous praise of Putin's leadership style only reinforced these concerns.

    Even before he was inaugurated, Trump singled out Putin's refusal to respond in kind to President Obama's levying of sanctions based upon the assessment of the U.S. intelligence community that Russia had interfered in the election. "Great move on delay (by V. Putin) – I always knew he was very smart!" Trump Tweeted . Trump viewed the Obama sanctions as an effort to sabotage any chance of a Trump administration repairing relations with Russia, and interpreted Putin's refusal to engage, despite being pressured to do so by the Russian Parliament and Foreign Ministry, as a recognition of the same.

    This sense of providing political space in the face of domestic pressure worked both ways. In January 2018, Putin tried to shield his relationship with President Trump by calling the release of a list containing some 200 names of persons close to the Russian government by the U.S. Treasury Department as a hostile and "stupid" move .

    "Ordinary Russian citizens, employees and entire industries are behind each of those people and companies," Putin remarked. "So all 146 million people have essentially been put on this list. What is the point of this? I don't understand."

    From the Russian perspective, the list highlighted the reality that the U.S. viewed the entire Russian government as an enemy and is a byproduct of the "political paranoia" on the part of U.S. lawmakers. The consequences of this, senior Russian officials warned, "will be toxic and undermine prospects for cooperation for years ahead."

    While President Trump entered office fully intending to " get along with Russia ," including the possibility of relaxing the Obama-era sanctions , the reality of U.S.-Russian relations, especially as viewed from Congress, has been the strengthening of the Obama sanctions regime. These sanctions, strengthened over time by new measures signed off by Trump, have had a negative impact on the Russian economy, slowing growth and driving away foreign investment .

    While Putin continued to show constraint in the face of these mounting sanctions, the recent targeting of Russia's energy sector represented a bridge too far. When Saudi pressure to cut oil production rates coincided with a global reduction in the demand for oil brought on by the Coronavirus crisis, Russia struck.

    The timing of the Russian action is curious, especially given the amount of speculation that there was some sort of personal relationship between Trump and Putin that the Russian leader sought to preserve and carry over into a potential second term. But Putin had, for some time now, been signaling that his patience with Trump had run its course. When speaking to the press in June 2019 about the state of U.S.-Russian relations, Putin noted that "They (our relations) are going downhill, they are getting worse and worse," adding that "The current [i.e., Trump] administration has approved, in my opinion, several dozen decisions on sanctions against Russia in recent years."

    By launching an oil price war on the eve of the American Presidential campaign season, Putin has sent as strong a signal as possible that he no longer views Trump as an asset, if in fact he ever did. Putin had hoped Trump could usher in positive change in the trajectory of relations between the two nations; this clearly had not happened. Instead, in the words of close Putin ally Igor Sechin , the chief executive of Russian oil giant Rosneft, the U.S. was using its considerable energy resources as a political weapon, ushering in an era of "power colonialism" that sought to expand U.S. oil production and market share at the expense of other nations.

    From Russia's perspective, the growth in U.S. oil production -- which doubled in output from 2011 until 2019 -- and the emergence of the U.S. as a net exporter of oil, was directly linked to the suppression of oil export capability in nations such as Venezuela and Iran through the imposition of sanctions. While this could be tolerated when the target was a third party, once the U.S. set its sanctioning practices on Russian energy, the die was cast.

    If the goal of the Russian-driven price war is to make U.S. shale companies "share the pain," they have already succeeded. A similar price war, initiated by Saudi Arabia in 2014 for the express purpose of suppressing U.S. shale oil production, failed, but only because investors were willing to prop up the stricken shale producers with massive loans and infusion of capital. For shale oil producers, who use an expensive methodology of extraction known as "fracking," to be economically viable, the breakeven price of oil per barrel needs to be between $40 and $60 dollars. This was the price range the Saudi's were hoping to sustain when they proposed the cuts in oil production that Russia rejected.

    The U.S. shale oil producers, saddled by massive debt and high operational expenses, will suffer greatly in any sustained oil price war. Already, with the price of oil down to below $35 per barrel, there is talk of bankruptcy and massive job layoffs -- none of which bode well for Trump in the coming election.

    It's clear that Russia has no intention of backing off anytime soon. According to the Russian Finance Ministry , said on Russia could weather oil prices of $25-30 per barrel for between six and ten years. One thing is for certain -- U.S. shale oil companies cannot.

    In a sign that the Trump administration might be waking up to the reality of the predicament it faces, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin quietly met with Russia's Ambassador to the U.S., Anatoly Antonov. According to a read out from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the two discussed economic sanctions, the Venezuelan economy, and the potential for "trade and investment." Mnuchin, the Russians noted, emphasized the "importance of orderly energy markets."

    Russia is unlikely to fold anytime soon. As Admiral Josh Painter, a character in Tom Clancy's "The Hunt for Red October," famously said , "Russians don't take a dump without a plan."

    Russia didn't enter its current course of action on a whim. Its goals are clearly stated -- to defeat U.S. shale oil -- and the costs of this effort, both economically and politically (up to and including having Trump lose the 2020 Presidential election) have all been calculated and considered in advance. The Russian Bear can only be toyed with for so long without generating a response. We now know what that response is; when the Empire strikes back, it hits hard.

    Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of several books, including his forthcoming, Scorpion King: America's Embrace of Nuclear Weapons From FDR to Trump (2020).

    [Mar 15, 2020] Free Syrian Army Deserter Reveals How the U.S. Sent Fighters to Idlib to Carry Out Sabotage and Intimidate the Population

    Mar 15, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    ak74 , Mar 15 2020 1:17 utc | 59

    Free Syrian Army Deserter Reveals How the U.S. Sent Fighters to Idlib to Carry Out Sabotage and Intimidate the Population
    https://syria360.wordpress.com/2020/03/14/free-syrian-army-deserter-reveals-how-the-u-s-sent-fighters-to-idlib-to-carry-out-sabotage-and-intimidate-the-population/

    [Mar 15, 2020] US seeking to carve out Sunni state as its influence in Iraq wanes: Wehrmacht occupying Ukraine vs US occupying Iraq.

    Mar 15, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Kali , Mar 14 2020 18:26 utc | 18

    The neocons trying to control Trump are going to have a hard time this year because of the election. Trump knows his people voted for him because of his promises to get the troops back home. Of course the neocons want to build up more and more troops in Iraq or even split Iraq into 3 different countries. The Iraqi and Iranian leaders with the Syrians to a lesser degree will try to take advantage of Trump's dilemma. The Kurds are involved also. This is all explored by Pam Ho How Much Do You Suck (To lose a popularity contest with Saddam Hussein)

    Willy2 , Mar 14 2020 18:32 utc | 19

    - The US knows it "influence" is waning and tries to "carve out" a sunni "rump state" in North-West Iraq. First the US fights ISIS in that same area/region from the year 2014 onwards and now they are supposed to fight in FAVOUR of the sunnis/ISIS ?

    "US seeking to carve out Sunni state as its influence in Iraq wanes"

    https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-seeking-carve-out-sunni-state-its-influence-iraq-wanes

    - Some politicians are recognizing that the killing of Qassam Sulemani has weakened the US position in the Middle East.

    "Killing Soleimani made US 'weaker' in Middle East, US senator says".

    https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/killing-soleimani-made-us-weaker-middle-east-us-senator-says

    arata , Mar 14 2020 19:37 utc | 29
    General McKenzie said they have bombed a civilian air port in Karbala was a right decision, Iraqi police force who were killed, they shouldn't be there!
    See the video 13:00 onward.
    Peter AU1 , Mar 14 2020 19:50 utc | 32
    arata 29
    Rueters had a piece on it which I linked in the last Iraq thread. Total yank arrogance and exceptionalism.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-usa-iran-retaliation-mi/iraq-condemns-u-s-air-strikes-warns-of-consequences-idUSKBN2101AD?il=0
    ""These locations that we struck are clear locations of terrorist bases," said Marine General Kenneth McKenzie, head of the U.S. military's Central Command.

    "If Iraqis were there and if Iraqi military forces were there, I would say it's probably not a good idea to position yourself with Kataib Hezbollah in the wake of a strike that killed Americans and coalition members," he told a Pentagon news briefing."

    dltravers , Mar 14 2020 21:40 utc | 40
    Despite Trump the Iraq policy transcends his administration and will continue in some form in the future. There will be a continued presence in some form and in some part of the country. Our beloved ally in the region demands our presence.

    They smartly keep the presence small with no draft remembering that is what took them out of Nam. An angry draft worthy populace, a counter culture disillusioned with the murder of their liberal anti war leadership by the state, and ample media coverage of the war carnage.

    All of that is long gone, and even with the age of internet reporting the populace has been bought off with entertainment, amazon, porn, and bullshit.

    Abe , Mar 15 2020 0:39 utc | 54
    @43

    Parallel is IMO very interesting, Wehrmacht occupying Ukraine and US occupying Iraq. In both cases there was minority that welcomed occupier with open arms, wanting to oppress majority of own country folks due to earlier grievances. In both cases, invader didn't want to bother with using that minority to own goals, as they saw them all as inferior race. And invader was in both cases more interested in conquering more powerful neighbor to the east.

    Irony is that, if Nazi Germany/US didn't look at Ukraine/Iraq people as inferior race they could use them for own goal to fight Russia/Iran. But, dumb as they are, they stuck all those Ukrainians into camps(lot of them sympathizers to Germany/rabidly against Russia)/ disbanding ex. Saddam's army and made kernel of future anti US force into region, not to mention Kurdish question.


    Peter AU1 , Mar 15 2020 0:39 utc | 55
    53 Snake put up a link back up the thread.
    https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/03/14/620858/Iraq-military-demands-foreign-forces-swiftly-withdraw-following-US-air-raids
    "Iraqi lawmakers unanimously approved a bill on January 5, demanding the withdrawal of all foreign military forces..."

    "Later on January 9, former Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi called on the United States to dispatch a delegation to Baghdad tasked with formulating a mechanism for the move.

    According to a statement released by his office at the time, Abdul-Mahdi "requested that delegates be sent to Iraq to set the mechanisms to implement the parliament's decision for the secure withdrawal of (foreign) forces from Iraq" in a phone call with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo."

    US in response moved to a few bases they intended to occupy and give the two finger salute to Iraq. Trump threatened sanctions and theft of Iraq's oil money which is in the US. Pentagon now moving patriots in.

    Jackrabbit , Mar 15 2020 2:43 utc | 69
    Question to b @53: ... it was a non-binding resolution.

    It's "non-binding" on USA only because the Prime Minister conducts foreign policy and there's no current written basing agreement between Iraq and USA that can be terminated. The resolution demands that the Prime Minister arrange for the departure of US troops.

    The resolution is binding on the Prime Minister because it was a valid vote in accordance with Iraqi Parliamentary procedure.

    USA refused to discuss leaving Iraq and claimed that the Parliamentary vote was "non-binding" because it was unrepresentative (USA got their Sunni and Kurd sympathizers to boycott the vote). But Parliament still had a quorum, so the vote is legal and binding.

    <> <> <> <> <> <>

    Is it enforceable?

    USA/NATO are very unlikely to leaving willingly. We are seeing the start of a civil war in Iraq because most Sunnis and Kurds support USA/NATO remaining while Shia want USA/NATO to leave.

    !!

    james , Mar 15 2020 2:36 utc | 67
    just start with the first lie and go from their... usa / uk lied the world into going to war on iraq... and from their the lies just keep on getting stacked.. if you can't acknowledge the first lie, you probably are incapable of recognizing all the other lies that have been thrown on the same bullshit pile... one big pile of lies and bullshite - a specialty of the exceptional country..
    james , Mar 15 2020 2:25 utc | 65
    @ 63 question.. you like this usa style bullshit that buys politicians in iraq and when that doesn't work, they go on to the next attempt at installing a politician willing to agree to their bullshite? interesting bullshit concept of democracy if you ask me... everything has a price tag and honour is something you can pick up at the grocery store... right..

    [Mar 13, 2020] Daffy Duck. cartoon was made in 1953 and like many Looney Tune cartoon's, they are an extreme parody of life. It dawned on me that this cartoon is an almost perfect description of US Military policy and action.

    Highly recommended!
    Mar 13, 2020 | thesaker.is

    Vaughan on March 12, 2020 , · at 7:43 pm EST/EDT

    Recently, I was watching the old Looney Tunes Cartoons with my Grandchild and we were watching, "Duck Dodges in the 21st and a Half Century"
    I don't know if you've watched this cartoon starring Daffy Duck. You can view it here
    https://vimeo.com/76668594

    This cartoon was made in 1953 and like many Looney Tune cartoon's, they are an extreme parody of life. But while watching this cartoon, it dawned on me that this cartoon is an almost perfect description of US Military policy and action.
    I could write an article on this but I think we'll leave it as a note with a snide laugh to be had by all.

    Patricia Ormsby on March 12, 2020 , · at 8:16 pm EST/EDT
    Laughter is one of the best medicines. Thank you for this!

    [Mar 12, 2020] How 'Bernie Bros' Were Invented, Then Smeared as Sexist, Racist and unAmerican as Borscht by Jonathan Cook

    Looks like DNC run a pretty sophisticated smear campaign against Sanders ...
    Notable quotes:
    "... It really isn't about who the candidates are – hurtful as that may sound to some in our identity-saturated times. It is about what the candidate might try to do once in office. In truth, the very fact that nowadays we are allowed to focus on identity to our heart's content should be warning enough that the establishment is only too keen for us to exhaust our energies in promoting divisions based on those identities ..."
    "... The Republican and Democratic leaderships are there to ensure that, before a candidate gets selected to compete in the parties' name, he or she has proven they are power-friendly. Two candidates, each vetted for obedience to power. ..."
    Mar 12, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    The Democratic presidential nomination race is a fascinating case study in how power works – not least, because the Democratic party leaders are visibly contriving to impose one candidate, Joe Biden, as the party's nominee, even as it becomes clear that he is no longer mentally equipped to run a local table tennis club let alone the world's most powerful nation.

    Biden's campaign is a reminder that power is indivisible. Donald Trump or Joe Biden for president – it doesn't matter to the power-establishment. An egomaniacal man-child (Trump), representing the billionaires, or an elder suffering rapid neurological degeneration (Biden), representing the billionaires, are equally useful to power. A woman will do too, or a person of colour. The establishment is no longer worried about who stands on stage – so long as that person is not a Bernie Sanders in the US, or a Jeremy Corbyn in the UK.

    It really isn't about who the candidates are – hurtful as that may sound to some in our identity-saturated times. It is about what the candidate might try to do once in office. In truth, the very fact that nowadays we are allowed to focus on identity to our heart's content should be warning enough that the establishment is only too keen for us to exhaust our energies in promoting divisions based on those identities. What concerns it far more is that we might overcome those divisions and unify against it, withdrawing our consent from an establishment committed to endless asset-stripping of our societies and the planet.

    Neither Biden nor Trump will obstruct the establishment, because they are at its very heart. The Republican and Democratic leaderships are there to ensure that, before a candidate gets selected to compete in the parties' name, he or she has proven they are power-friendly. Two candidates, each vetted for obedience to power.

    Although a pretty face or a way with words are desirable, incapacity and incompetence are no barrier to qualifying, as the two white men groomed by their respective parties demonstrate. Both have proved they will favour the establishment, both will pursue near-enough the same policies , both are committed to the status quo, both have demonstrated their indifference to the future of life on Earth. What separates the candidates is not real substance, but presentation styles – the creation of the appearance of difference, of choice.

    Policing the debate

    The subtle dynamics of how the Democratic nomination race is being rigged are interesting. Especially revealing are the ways the Democratic leadership protects establishment power by policing the terms of debate: what can be said, and what can be thought; who gets to speak and whose voices are misrepresented or demonised. Manipulation of language is key.

    As I pointed out in my previous post , the establishment's power derives from its invisibility. Scrutiny is kryptonite to power.

    The only way we can interrogate power is through language, and the only way we can communicate our conclusions to others is through words – as I am doing right now. And therefore our strength – our ability to awaken ourselves from the trance of power – must be subverted by the establishment, transformed into our Achilles' heel, a weakness.

    The treatment of Bernie Sanders and his supporters by the Democratic establishment – and those who eagerly repeat its talking points – neatly illustrates how this can be done in manifold ways.

    Remember this all started back in 2016, when Sanders committed the unforgivable sin of challenging the Democratic leadership's right simply to anoint Hillary Clinton as the party's presidential candidate. In those days, the fault line was obvious and neat: Bernie was a man, Clinton a woman. She would be the first woman president. The only party members who might wish to deny her that historic moment, and back Sanders instead, had to be misogynist men. They were supposedly venting their anti-women grudge against Clinton, who in turn was presented to women as a symbol of their oppression by men.

    And so was born a meme: the "Bernie Bros". It rapidly became shorthand for suggesting – contrary to all evidence – that Sanders' candidacy appealed chiefly to angry, entitled white men. In fact, as Sanders' 2020 run has amply demonstrated, support for him has been more diverse than for the many other Democratic candidates who sought the nomination.

    So important what @ewarren is saying to @maddow about the dangerous, threatening, ugly faction among the Bernie supporters. Sanders either cannot or will not control them. pic.twitter.com/LYDXlLJ7bi

    -- Mia Farrow (@MiaFarrow) March 6, 2020

    How contrived the 2016 identity-fuelled contest was should have been clear, had anyone been allowed to point that fact out. This wasn't really about the Democratic leadership respecting Clinton's identity as a woman. It was about them paying lip service to her identity as a woman, while actually promoting her because she was a reliable warmonger and Wall Street functionary . She was useful to power.

    If the debate had really been driven by identity politics, Sanders had a winning card too: he is Jewish. That meant he could be the United States' first Jewish president. In a fair identity fight, it would have been a draw between the two. The decision about who should represent the Democratic party would then have had to be decided based on policies, not identity. But party leaders did not want Clinton's actual policies, or her political history, being put under the microscope for very obvious reasons.

    Weaponisation of identity

    The weaponisation of identity politics is even more transparent in 2020. Sanders is still Jewish, but his main opponent, Joe Biden, really is simply a privileged white man. Were the Clinton format to be followed again by Democratic officials, Sanders would enjoy an identity politics trump card. And yet Sanders is still being presented as just another white male candidate , no different from Biden.

    (We could take this argument even further and note that the other candidate who no one, least of all the Democratic leadership, ever mentions as still in the race is Tulsi Gabbard, a woman of colour. The Democratic party has worked hard to make her as invisible as possible in the primaries because, of all the candidates, she is the most vocal and articulate opponent of foreign wars. That has deprived her of the chance to raise funds and win delegates.)

    . @DanaPerino I'm not quite sure why you're telling FOX viewers that Elizabeth Warren is the last female candidate in the Dem primary. Is it because you believe a fake indigenous woman of color is "real" and the real indigenous woman of color in this race is fake? pic.twitter.com/VKCxy2JzFe

    -- Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) March 3, 2020

    Sanders' Jewish identity isn't celebrated because he isn't useful to the power-establishment. What's far more important to them – and should be to us too – are his policies, which might limit their power to wage war, exploit workers and trash the planet.

    But it is not just that Democratic Party leaders are ignoring Sanders' Jewish identity. They are also again actively using identity politics against him, and in many different ways.

    The 'black' establishment?

    Bernie Sanders' supporters have been complaining for some time – based on mounting evidence – that the Democratic leadership is far from neutral between Sanders and Biden. Because it has a vested interest in the outcome, and because it is the part of the power-establishment, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is exercising its influence in favour of Biden. And because power prefers darkness, the DNC is doing its best to exercise that power behind the scenes, out of sight – at least, unseen by those who still rely on the "mainstream" corporate media, which is also part of the power-establishment. As should be clear to anyone watching, the nomination proceedings are being controlled to give Biden every advantage and to obstruct Sanders.

    But the Democratic leadership is not only dismissing out of hand these very justified complaints from Bernie Sanders' supporters but also turning these complaints against them, as further evidence of their – and his – illegitimacy. A new way of doing this emerged in the immediate wake of Biden winning South Carolina on the back of strong support from older black voters – Biden's first state win and a launchpad for his Super Tuesday bid a few days later.

    It was given perfect expression from Symone Sanders, who despite her surname is actually a senior adviser to Biden's campaign. She is also black. This is what she wrote: "People who keep referring to Black voters as 'the establishment' are tone deaf and have obviously learned nothing."

    People who keep referring to Black voters as "the establishment" are tone deaf and have obviously learned nothing.

    -- Symone D. Sanders (@SymoneDSanders) March 3, 2020

    Her reference to generic "people" was understood precisely by both sides of the debate as code for those "Bernie Bros". Now, it seems, Bernie Sanders' supporters are not simply misogynists, they are potential recruits to the Ku Klux Klan.

    The tweet went viral, even though in the fiercely contested back-and-forth below her tweet no one could produce a single example of anyone actually saying anything like the sentiment ascribed by Symone Sanders to "Bernie Bros". But then, tackling bigotry was not her real goal. This wasn't meant to be a reflection on a real-world talking-point by Bernie supporters. It was high-level gaslighting by a senior Democratic party official of the party's own voters.

    Survival of the fittest smear

    What Symone Sanders was really trying to do was conceal power – the fact that the DNC is seeking to impose its chosen candidate on party members. As occurred during the confected women-men, Clinton vs "Bernie Bros" confrontation, Symone Sanders was field-testing a similar narrative management tool as part of the establishment's efforts to hone it for improved effect. The establishment has learnt – through a kind of survival of the fittest smear – that divide-and-rule identity politics is the perfect way to shield its influence as it favours a status-quo candidate (Biden or Clinton) over a candidate seen as a threat to its power (Sanders).

    In her tweet, Symone Sanders showed exactly how the power elite seeks to obscure its toxic role in our societies. She neatly conflated "the establishment" – of which she is a very small, but well-paid component – with ordinary "black voters". Her message is this: should you try to criticise the establishment (which has inordinate power to damage lives and destroy the planet) we will demonise you, making it seem that you are really attacking black people (who in the vast majority of cases – though Symone Sanders is a notable exception – wield no power at all).

    Symone Sanders has recruited her own blackness and South Carolina's "black voters" as a ring of steel to protect the establishment. Cynically, she has turned poor black people, as well as the tens of thousands of people (presumably black and white) who liked her tweet, into human shields for the establishment.

    It sounds a lot uglier put like that. But it has rapidly become a Biden talking-point, as we can see here:

    NEW: @JoeBiden responds to @berniesanders saying the "establishment" is trying to defeat him.

    "The establishment are all those hardworking, middle class people, those African Americans they are the establishment!" @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/43Q2Nci5sS

    -- Bo Erickson CBS (@BoKnowsNews) March 4, 2020

    The DNC's wider strategy is to confer on Biden exclusive rights to speak for black voters (despite his inglorious record on civil rights issues) and, further, to strip Sanders and his senior black advisers of any right to do so. When Sanders protests about this, or about racist behaviour from the Biden camp, Biden's supporters come out in force and often abusively, though of course no one is upbraiding them for their ugly, violent language. Here is the famous former tennis player Martina Navratilova showing that maybe we should be talking about "Biden Bros":

    Sanders is starting to really piss me off. Just shut this kind of crap down and debate the issues. This is not it.

    -- Martina Navratilova (@Martina) March 6, 2020

    Being unkind to billionaires

    This kind of special pleading by the establishment for the establishment – using those sections of it, such as Symone Sanders, that can tap into the identity politics zeitgeist – is far more common than you might imagine. The approach is being constantly refined, often using social media as the ultimate focus group. Symone Sanders' successful conflation of the establishment with "black voters" follows earlier, clumsier efforts by the establishment to protect its interests against Sanders that proved far less effective.

    Billionaires should not exist. https://t.co/hgR6CeFvLa

    -- Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 24, 2019

    Remember how last autumn the billionaire-owned corporate media tried to tell us that it was unkind to criticise billionaires – that they had feelings too and that speaking harshly about them was "dehumanising". Again it was aimed at Sanders, who had just commented that in a properly ordered world billionaires simply wouldn't exist. It was an obvious point: allowing a handful of people to control almost all the planet's wealth was not only depriving the rest of us of that wealth (and harming the planet) but it gave those few billionaires way too much power. They could buy all the media, our channels of communication, and most of the politicians to ringfence their financial interests, gradually eroding even the most minimal democratic protections.

    That campaign died a quick death because few of us are actually brainwashed enough to accept the idea that a handful of billionaires share an identity that needs protecting – from us! Most of us are still connected enough to the real world to understand that billionaires are more than capable of looking out for their own interests, without our helping them by imposing on ourselves a vow of silence.

    But one cannot fault the power-establishment for being constantly inventive in the search for new ways to stifle our criticisms of the way it unilaterally exercises its power. The Democratic nomination race is testing such ingenuity to the limits. Here's a new rule against "hateful conduct" on Twitter, where Biden's neurological deficit is being subjected to much critical scrutiny through the sharing of dozens of videos of embarrassing Biden "senior moments".

    Twitter expanding its hateful conduct rules "to include language that dehumanizes on the basis of age, disability or disease." https://t.co/KmWGaNAG9Z

    -- Ben Collins (@oneunderscore__) March 5, 2020

    Yes, disability and age are identities too. And so, on the pretext of protecting and respecting those identities, social media can now be scrubbed of anything and anyone trying to highlight the mental deficiencies of an old man who might soon be given the nuclear codes and would be responsible for waging wars in the name of Americans. Twitter is full of comments denouncing as "ableist" anyone who tries to highlight how the Democratic leadership is foisting a cognitively challenged Biden on to the party.

    Maybe the Dem insiders are all wrong, but it's true that they are saying it. Some are saying it out loud, including Castro at the debate and Booker here: https://t.co/0lbi7RFRqG

    -- Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) March 6, 2020

    Russian 'agents' and 'assets'

    None of this is to overlook the fact that another variation of identity politics has been weaponised against Sanders: that of failing to be an "American" patriot. Again illustrating how closely the Democratic and Republican leaderships' interests align, the question of who is a patriot – and who is really working for the "Russians" – has been at the heart of both parties' campaigns, though for different reasons.

    Trump has been subjected to endless, evidence-free claims that he is a secret "Russian agent" in a concerted effort to control his original isolationist foreign policy impulses that might have stripped the establishment – and its military-industrial wing – of the right to wage wars of aggression, and revive the Cold War, wherever it believes a profit can be made under cover of "humanitarian intervention". Trump partly inoculated himself against these criticisms, at least among supporters, with his "Make America Great Again" slogan, and partly by learning – painfully for such an egotist – that his presidential role was to rubber-stamp decisions made elsewhere about waging wars and projecting US power.

    I'm just amazed by this tweet, which has been tweeted plenty. Did @_nalexander and all the people liking this not know that Mueller laid out in the indictments of a number of Russians and in his report their help on social media to Sanders and Trump. Help Sanders has acknowledged https://t.co/vuc0lmvvKP

    -- Neera Tanden (@neeratanden) December 8, 2019

    Bernie Sanders has faced similar smear efforts by the establishment, including by the DNC's last failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton – in his case, painting him as a "Russian asset". ("Asset" is a way to suggest collusion with the Kremlin based on even more flimsy evidence than is needed to accuse someone of being an agent.) In fact, in a world where identity politics wasn't simply a tool to be weaponised by the establishment, there would be real trepidation about engaging in this kind of invective against a Jewish socialist.

    One of the far-right's favourite antisemitic tropes – promoted ever since the publication of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion more than 100 years ago – is that Jewish "Bolsheviks" are involved in an international conspiracy to subvert the countries they live in. We have reached the point now that the corporate media are happy to recycle evidence-free claims, cited by the Washington Post, from anonymous "US officials" and US intelligence agencies reinventing a US version of the Protocols against Sanders. And these smears have elicited not a word of criticism from the Democratic leadership nor from the usual antisemitism watchdogs that are so ready to let rip over the slightest signs of what they claim to be antisemitism on the left.

    But the urgency of dealing with Sanders may be the reason normal conventions have been discarded. Sanders isn't a loud-mouth egotist like Trump. A vote for Trump is a vote for the establishment, if for one of its number who pretends to be against the establishment. Trump has been largely tamed in time for a second term. By contrast, Sanders, like Corbyn in the UK, is more dangerous because he may resist the efforts to domesticate him, and because if he is allowed any significant measure of political success – such as becoming a candidate for president – it may inspire others to follow in his footsteps. The system might start to throw up more anomalies, more AOCs and more Ilhan Omars.

    So Sanders is now being cast, like Trump, as a puppet of the Kremlin, not a true American. And because he made the serious mistake of indulging the "Russiagate" smears when they were used against Trump, Sanders now has little defence against their redeployment against him. And given that, by the impoverished standards of US political culture, he is considered an extreme leftist, it has been easy to conflate his democratic socialism with Communism, and then conflate his supposed Communism with acting on behalf of the Kremlin (which, of course, ignores the fact that Russia long ago abandoned Communism).

    Sen. Bernie Sanders: "Let me tell this to Putin -- the American people, whether Republicans, Democrats, independents are sick and tired of seeing Russia and other countries interfering in our elections." pic.twitter.com/ejcP7YVFlt

    -- The Hill (@thehill) February 21, 2020

    Antisemitism smear at the ready

    There is a final use of weaponised identity politics that the Democratic establishment would dearly love to use against Sanders, if they need to and can get away with it. It is the most toxic brand – and therefore the most effective – of the identity-based smears, and it has been extensively field-tested in the UK against Jeremy Corbyn to great success. The DNC would like to denounce Sanders as an antisemite.

    In fact, only one thing has held them back till now: the fact that Sanders is Jewish. That may not prove an insuperable obstacle, but it does make it much harder to make the accusation look credible. The other identity-based smears had been a second-best, a make-do until a way could be found to unleash the antisemitism smear.

    The establishment has been testing the waters with implied accusations of antisemitism against Sanders for a while, but their chances were given a fillip recently when Sanders refused to participate in the annual jamboree of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a prominent lobby group whose primary mission is to ringfence Israel from criticism in the US. Both the Republican and Democratic establishments turn out in force to the AIPAC conference, and in the past the event has attracted keynote speeches from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

    But Sanders has refused to attend for decades and maintained that stance this month, even though he is a candidate for the Democratic nomination. In the last primaries debate, Sanders justified his decision by rightly calling Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu a "racist" and by describing AIPAC as providing a platform "for leaders who express bigotry and oppose basic Palestinian rights".

    Trump's Vice-President, Mike Pence, responded that Sanders supported "Israel's enemies" and, if elected, would be the "most anti-Israel president in the history of this nation" – all coded suggestions that Sanders is antisemitic.

    But that's Mike Pence. More useful criticism came from billionaire Mike Bloomberg, who is himself Jewish and was until last week posing as a Democrat to try to win the party's nomination. Bloomberg accused Sanders of using dehumanising language against a bunch of inclusive identities that, he improbably suggested, AIPAC represents. He claimed :

    "This is a gathering of 20,000 Israel supporters of every religious denomination, ethnicity, faith, color, sexual identity and political party. Calling it a racist platform is an attempt to discredit those voices, intimidate people from coming here, and weaken the US-Israel relationship."

    Where might this head? At the AIPAC conference last week we were given a foretaste. Ephraim Mirvis, the chief rabbi of the UK and a friend to Conservative government leader Boris Johnson, was warmly greeted by delegates, including leading members of the Democratic establishment. He boasted that he and other Jewish leaders in the UK had managed to damage Jeremy Corbyn's electoral chances by suggesting that he was an antisemite over his support, like Sanders, for Palestinian rights.

    His own treatment of Corbyn, he argued, offered a model for US Jewish organisations to replicate against any leadership contender who might pose similar trouble for Israel, leaving it for his audience to pick up the not-so-subtle hint about who needed to be subjected to character assassination.

    WATCH: "Today I issue a call to the Jews of America, please take a leaf out of our book and please speak with one voice."

    The Chief Rabbi speaking to the 18,000 delegates gathered at the @AIPAC General Session at their Policy Conference in Washington DC pic.twitter.com/BOkan9RA2O

    -- Chief Rabbi Mirvis (@chiefrabbi) March 3, 2020

    Establishment playbook

    For anyone who isn't wilfully blind, the last few months have exposed the establishment playbook: it will use identity politics to divide those who might otherwise find a united voice and a common cause.

    There is nothing wrong with celebrating one's identity, especially if it is under threat, maligned or marginalised. But having an attachment to an identity is no excuse for allowing it to be coopted by billionaires, by the powerful, by nuclear-armed states oppressing other people, by political parties or by the corporate media, so that they can weaponise it to prevent the weak, the poor, the marginalised from being represented.

    It is time for us to wake up to the tricks, the deceptions, the manipulations of the strong that exploit our weaknesses – and make us yet weaker still. It's time to stop being a patsy for the establishment. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Jonathan Cook

    Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are " Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and " Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair " (Zed Books). His website is http://www.jonathan-cook.net/

    [Mar 12, 2020] US now openly admits its goal in Syria is to make it 'difficult' for Moscow and Damascus to defeat terrorists

    Notable quotes:
    "... The State Department's special envoy for Syria has just admitted that the US aims to defend jihadist militants in Idlib against 'Russian aggression,' proving once again that the swamp in Foggy Bottom is alive and well ..."
    "... "are out to get a military victory in all of Syria," ..."
    "... Our goal is to make it very difficult for them to do that by a variety of diplomatic, military, and other actions. ..."
    "... "in a very savage military way" ..."
    "... "a favorite tactic of the Syrian regime in making advances." ..."
    "... "a complication" ..."
    "... "three million-plus innocent civilians, the majority of whom are women and children," ..."
    "... "Russian aggression" ..."
    "... I think you can forget ground troops. Turkey has demonstrated ably that it and its opposition forces are more than capable of holding ground on their own. ..."
    "... "Idlib province seems to be a magnet for terrorist groups, especially because it is an ungoverned space in many ways," ..."
    "... "There are [a] variety of groups there -- all of them are a nuisance, a menace and a threat to hundreds of thousands of civilians who are just trying to make it through the winter." ..."
    "... "endless wars" ..."
    Mar 12, 2020 | www.rt.com

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/482787-syria-us-troops-terrorists/

    The State Department's special envoy for Syria has just admitted that the US aims to defend jihadist militants in Idlib against 'Russian aggression,' proving once again that the swamp in Foggy Bottom is alive and well . Russia and the Syrian government "are out to get a military victory in all of Syria," Ambassador James Jeffrey told reporters on a conference call out of Brussels on Tuesday.

    Our goal is to make it very difficult for them to do that by a variety of diplomatic, military, and other actions.

    To illustrate these methods, Jeffrey cited the US threat to respond "in a very savage military way" against any chemical attacks, which he described as "a favorite tactic of the Syrian regime in making advances." This is factually untrue, since the alleged attacks always happen after Syrian Army victories, as a pretext for US intervention.

    Jeffrey also noted that there are US and coalition troops in parts of Syria – officially there to fight Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS), but in actuality "guarding" the oil fields. He tellingly described their presence as "a complication" for the Syrian government.

    Also on rt.com US exploring NATO aid for Turkey in Idlib, says sanctions could be applied if Russia or Syria violate ceasefire – reports

    Jeffrey and US ambassador to Turkey David Satterfield were in Brussels after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's visit, to discuss ways the US and NATO can help Ankara protect its pet militants in their last remaining redoubt – Syria's Idlib province.

    But while Satterfield described Idlib as containing "three million-plus innocent civilians, the majority of whom are women and children," and accused "Russian aggression" of seeking to displace them, listen to how Jeffrey chose to describe the situation, when asked by a CNN reporter if NATO was considering sending in ground troops:

    I think you can forget ground troops. Turkey has demonstrated ably that it and its opposition forces are more than capable of holding ground on their own.

    This is either appallingly ignorant or downright delusional, as the Syrian army had successfully rolled up the Turkish-backed militants and the ceasefire Ankara agreed to in Moscow last week confirmed that.

    Résumé par dates clés de l'opération de l'armée syrienne dans la région d' #Idlib jusqu'à l'accord de cessez-le-feu négocié par la #Russie et la #Turquie (phase 1 : 6 mai - 31 août 2019 ; phase 2 : 19 déc 2019 - 6 mars 2020) pic.twitter.com/FcNWUThWBa

    -- Syria Intelligence (@syriaintel) March 8, 2020

    The real revelation here is that the militants are described as Turkey's "opposition." Contrast this with the words of Colonel Myles Caggins, spokesman for the anti-ISIS coalition's military arm, just three weeks ago:

    "Idlib province seems to be a magnet for terrorist groups, especially because it is an ungoverned space in many ways," Caggins told Sky News. "There are [a] variety of groups there -- all of them are a nuisance, a menace and a threat to hundreds of thousands of civilians who are just trying to make it through the winter."

    Read more Idlib is a 'magnet for terrorist groups', says US military spokesman -- contradicting MSM narrative on Syria

    Bear in mind that Jeffrey doubles as Washington's special envoy to the coalition against IS, that infamous Schroedinger entity that either doesn't exist any more – when US President Donald Trump seeks to claim victory against the self-proclaimed caliphate – or is about to make a resurgence big time and requires US military presence in perpetuity to prevent that, as the State Department and the Pentagon prefer to see it.

    Needless to say, this entrenched insistence on legacy policies doesn't do much for Trump's promise to pull out US troops from "endless wars" in the Middle East.

    Neither Jeffrey nor Satterfield, nor any of the reporters asking them questions, mentioned even once the existence of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – the latest incarnation of the notorious Al-Nusra, an Al-Qaeda affiliate whose fighters dominate the ranks of the militants in Idlib. Listening to them, one might think it doesn't exist!

    Jeffrey and Satterfield openly admit that an outright Syrian victory over these terrorists would deny the "international community" – as they style the US and its allies – the leverage to insist on regime change in Damascus. Which is incredibly rich in irony given that the sole legal pretext on which the US has any troops in Syria, in open violation of international law, is a congressional authorization to use force against... Al-Qaeda.

    Nebojsa Malic is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Twitter @NebojsaMalic

    [Mar 11, 2020] US now openly admits its goal in Syria is to make it 'difficult' for Moscow and Damascus to defeat terrorists

    Notable quotes:
    "... The State Department's special envoy for Syria has just admitted that the US aims to defend jihadist militants in Idlib against 'Russian aggression,' proving once again that the swamp in Foggy Bottom is alive and well ..."
    "... "are out to get a military victory in all of Syria," ..."
    "... Our goal is to make it very difficult for them to do that by a variety of diplomatic, military, and other actions. ..."
    "... "in a very savage military way" ..."
    "... "a favorite tactic of the Syrian regime in making advances." ..."
    "... "a complication" ..."
    "... "three million-plus innocent civilians, the majority of whom are women and children," ..."
    "... "Russian aggression" ..."
    "... I think you can forget ground troops. Turkey has demonstrated ably that it and its opposition forces are more than capable of holding ground on their own. ..."
    "... "Idlib province seems to be a magnet for terrorist groups, especially because it is an ungoverned space in many ways," ..."
    "... "There are [a] variety of groups there -- all of them are a nuisance, a menace and a threat to hundreds of thousands of civilians who are just trying to make it through the winter." ..."
    "... "endless wars" ..."
    Mar 11, 2020 | www.rt.com

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/482787-syria-us-troops-terrorists/

    The State Department's special envoy for Syria has just admitted that the US aims to defend jihadist militants in Idlib against 'Russian aggression,' proving once again that the swamp in Foggy Bottom is alive and well . Russia and the Syrian government "are out to get a military victory in all of Syria," Ambassador James Jeffrey told reporters on a conference call out of Brussels on Tuesday.

    Our goal is to make it very difficult for them to do that by a variety of diplomatic, military, and other actions.

    To illustrate these methods, Jeffrey cited the US threat to respond "in a very savage military way" against any chemical attacks, which he described as "a favorite tactic of the Syrian regime in making advances." This is factually untrue, since the alleged attacks always happen after Syrian Army victories, as a pretext for US intervention.

    Jeffrey also noted that there are US and coalition troops in parts of Syria – officially there to fight Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS), but in actuality "guarding" the oil fields. He tellingly described their presence as "a complication" for the Syrian government.

    Also on rt.com US exploring NATO aid for Turkey in Idlib, says sanctions could be applied if Russia or Syria violate ceasefire – reports

    Jeffrey and US ambassador to Turkey David Satterfield were in Brussels after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's visit, to discuss ways the US and NATO can help Ankara protect its pet militants in their last remaining redoubt – Syria's Idlib province.

    But while Satterfield described Idlib as containing "three million-plus innocent civilians, the majority of whom are women and children," and accused "Russian aggression" of seeking to displace them, listen to how Jeffrey chose to describe the situation, when asked by a CNN reporter if NATO was considering sending in ground troops:

    I think you can forget ground troops. Turkey has demonstrated ably that it and its opposition forces are more than capable of holding ground on their own.

    This is either appallingly ignorant or downright delusional, as the Syrian army had successfully rolled up the Turkish-backed militants and the ceasefire Ankara agreed to in Moscow last week confirmed that.

    Résumé par dates clés de l'opération de l'armée syrienne dans la région d' #Idlib jusqu'à l'accord de cessez-le-feu négocié par la #Russie et la #Turquie (phase 1 : 6 mai - 31 août 2019 ; phase 2 : 19 déc 2019 - 6 mars 2020) pic.twitter.com/FcNWUThWBa

    -- Syria Intelligence (@syriaintel) March 8, 2020

    The real revelation here is that the militants are described as Turkey's "opposition." Contrast this with the words of Colonel Myles Caggins, spokesman for the anti-ISIS coalition's military arm, just three weeks ago:

    "Idlib province seems to be a magnet for terrorist groups, especially because it is an ungoverned space in many ways," Caggins told Sky News. "There are [a] variety of groups there -- all of them are a nuisance, a menace and a threat to hundreds of thousands of civilians who are just trying to make it through the winter."

    Read more Idlib is a 'magnet for terrorist groups', says US military spokesman -- contradicting MSM narrative on Syria

    Bear in mind that Jeffrey doubles as Washington's special envoy to the coalition against IS, that infamous Schroedinger entity that either doesn't exist any more – when US President Donald Trump seeks to claim victory against the self-proclaimed caliphate – or is about to make a resurgence big time and requires US military presence in perpetuity to prevent that, as the State Department and the Pentagon prefer to see it.

    Needless to say, this entrenched insistence on legacy policies doesn't do much for Trump's promise to pull out US troops from "endless wars" in the Middle East.

    Neither Jeffrey nor Satterfield, nor any of the reporters asking them questions, mentioned even once the existence of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – the latest incarnation of the notorious Al-Nusra, an Al-Qaeda affiliate whose fighters dominate the ranks of the militants in Idlib. Listening to them, one might think it doesn't exist!

    Jeffrey and Satterfield openly admit that an outright Syrian victory over these terrorists would deny the "international community" – as they style the US and its allies – the leverage to insist on regime change in Damascus. Which is incredibly rich in irony given that the sole legal pretext on which the US has any troops in Syria, in open violation of international law, is a congressional authorization to use force against... Al-Qaeda.

    Nebojsa Malic is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Twitter @NebojsaMalic

    [Mar 11, 2020] The web site with the communiques of Islamist political groups in Syria and Iraq, particularly those affiliated with Sunni jihadism like ISIS and AQ

    Religious fundamentalists in full grace on the WEB.
    Mar 11, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Daniel , Mar 10 2020 20:58 utc | 27

    Thought I'd share the website http://www.aymennjawad.org/ as it might be of interest to people who post on/read this blog.

    I came across this website during the height of the ISIS rampage. It's by a guy named Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi who specializes in translating into English the communiques of Islamist political groups in Syria and Iraq, particularly those affiliated with Sunni jihadism like ISIS and AQ.

    He also sometimes interviews non jihadist groups, like the Iraqi Hashd al Sha'abi, and civilians who live in the conflict zones.

    I am not sure who his sponsors are but he seems to be associated with the International Crisis Group. It's a good site for getting the perspective of the "other side" in their own words. There doesn't seem to be a propagandistic angle or hidden agenda, at least not overtly.

    @Daniel #27:
    Thought I'd share the website http://www.aymennjawad.org/ as it might be of interest to people who post on/read this blog.

    Thank you. It really is an interesting and useful site. For example, if one's relatives, friends, co-workers or acquaintances start the "democratic activists" lament again, one can send them a link to this article:

    Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham's Abu Abdullah al-Shami on Meeting Western Analysts
    March 10, 2020

    Not too long ago the leadership of Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)- the main insurgent faction in northwest Syria- held meetings with Patrick Haenni and Dareen Khalifa, two monstrous analysts from the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and International Crisis Group respectively.
    …
    Whatever one thinks of Shami's general portrayal of continuity in positions with the original Jabhat al-Nusra (for one thing, it was not very plausible to imagine a meeting with Western think-tanks in the days of Jabhat al-Nusra), there are some important insights to draw here. For instance, the insistence on Shari'a as the sole reference authority is consistent with the reaffirmation of HTS principles by Abu al-Fatah al-Farghali (an Egyptian Shari'i official in the group), who made clear the group rejects democracy and secularism (contrary to those who imagine HTS is going in a more 'secular' and 'nationalist' direction).
    …

    Or to this article:

    "Oh People of al-Sham: Be Steadfast, Be Steadfast"- New Speech by Sheikh Abu Himam al-Shami of Hurras al-Din
    March 9, 2020

    …
    - The battle in Syria is one of the monotheist mujahideen against the idolater enemies. There is a great international disbeliever/apostate conspiracy against the jihad in Syria. The people of al-Sham and the mujahid factions need to beware of this conspiracy and avoid falling into the trap of losing their decision-making to malign actors.

    - The people of al-Sham and the mujahideen need to be steadfast and endure and remember that tribulation of the believers is something by which God tests His servants and distinguishes the truly faithful.

    - The mujahideen should pursue guerrilla warfare against the enemy and do all they can from various tactics to terrorize the enemy. They should not despair despite their poverty and hardship.

    - The youth of the Islamic Ummah should support the jihad in Syria.

    - Please God, destroy Assad, his followers, the Jews, Christians, Shi'a and other enemies of the religion.
    …

    Posted by: S | Mar 11 2020 9:59 utc | 89

    [Mar 09, 2020] COVID-19 burst the asset price bubble. In a new low, Pompeo passes buck to Beijing

    Mar 09, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    CitizenX , Mar 9 2020 2:58 utc | 57

    "Perhaps this will finally burst the out-of-control asset price bubble and drop-kick the Outlaw US Empire's economy into the sewer as the much lower price will rapidly slow the recycling of what remains of the petrodollar. Looks like Trump's reelection push just fell into a massive sinkhole as the economy will tank."

    Posted by: karlof1 | Mar 9 2020 1:29 utc | 49
    ....

    Call me crazy- but this Virus provides great cover as to why the economy plummets, the Murikan sheeple will eat it up. Prepare for the double media blitz on the virus AND the economy tanking as its result.

    Don't worry...just continue to go shopping and take those selfies.

    vk , Mar 9 2020 3:37 utc | 60

    Pompeo accuses China of giving "imperfect data" on COVID-19, blame it for US failure in containing the virus:

    In new low, Pompeo passes buck to Beijing

    It will be hard for the American people to swallow that one. From day 1 I've read a lot of "articles" and "papers" from know-it-all Western doctors and researchers from commenters here in this blog, all of them claiming to have very precise and definitive data on what was happening. A lot of bombastic conclusions I've read here (including one that claimed R0 was through the roof - it's funny how the R0 is being played down after it begun to infect the West; suddenly, it's all just a stronger cold...).

    And that's just here, in MoA's comment section. Imagine what was being published in the Western MSM. I wouldn't be surprised there was a lot of rednecks popping their beers celebrating the fall of China already.

    --//--

    China to back global virus fight with production boost

    Since China allegedly had a lot of idle industrial capacity - that is, if we take the Western MSM theories seriously (including the fabled "ghost towns" stories) - then boosting production wouldn't be a problem to China.

    Disclaimer: it's normal for any kind of economy - socialist or capitalist - to have a certain percentage of idle capacity. That's necessary in order to insure the economy against unexpected oscillations in demand and to give space of maneuvre for future technological progress. Indeed, that was one of the USSR's mistakes with its economy: they instinctly thought unemployment should be zero, and waste should also be zero, so they planned in a way all the factories always sought to operate at 100% capacity. That became a problem when better machines and better methods were invented, since the factory manager wouldn't want to stop production so that his factory would fall behind the other factories in the five-year plan's goals. So, yes, China indeed has idle capacity - but it is mainly proposital, not a failure of its socialist planning.

    --//--

    ... ... ...

    vk , Mar 9 2020 3:56 utc | 61
    This is important. The only reason I didn't comment about it is I hadn't the data:

    Follow the money: Understanding China's battle against COVID-19

    By the latest count, in addition to yuan loans worth 113 billion U.S. dollars granted by financial institutions and more than 70 billion U.S. dollars paid out by insurance companies, the Chinese government has allocated about 13 billion U.S. dollars to counter fallout from the outbreak.

    The numbers could look abstract. However, breaking the data down reveals how the money is being carefully targeted. The government is allocating the money based on a thorough evaluation of the system's strengths.

    ...

    Local governments are equipped with more local knowledge that allows them to surgically support key manufacturers or producers that are struggling.

    Together, they have borne the bulk of the financial responsibility with an allocation of equivalently more than nine billion U.S. dollars. It is carefully targeted, divided into hundreds of thousands of individual grants that are tailor-made by and for each county, town, city and business.

    This is the mark of a socialist system.

    The affected capitalist countries will simply use monetary devices (so the private sector can offset the losses) and burn their own reserves with non-profitable palliatives such as masks, tests, other quarantine infrastructure etc.

    Pft , Mar 9 2020 4:44 utc | 64
    Sounds like US socialism. Basically corporate socialism. Loans are just dollars created out of thin air, same as in US. Insurance payouts come from premiums, nothing socialist about that, pure capitalism. Government hand outs to provinces, cities, state owned corporations,well all of these are run by the party elite, its called pork. US handed out a lot of pork during the last financial crisis. None of it trickled down to the little people. I doubt it does in China either.

    All crisis are opportunities for the elite to get richer. Those Biolake firms in Wuhan will make out like bandits. Chinese firms will double the price of API's sold to India and US. China will knock out the small farmer in the wake of concurrent chicken and swine flu so the big enterprises take over, a mimicry of the US practice over the last century. China tech firms will double up on surveillance apps, censoring tools, surveillance and toughen up social credit restrictions. 5G will allow China to experiment with nanobots to monitor citizens health from afar (thanks to Harvards Dr Leiber).

    Oh yes, socialism with Chinese characteristics is a technocratic capitalists dream. Thats why the West has never imposed sanctions on China since welcoming them to the global elites club. Sanctions are reserved for those with true socialism, especially those who preach equality and god forbid, democracy.

    uncle tungsten , Mar 9 2020 8:35 utc | 83

    CitizenX #57

    Call me crazy- but this Virus provides great cover as to why the economy plummets, the Murikan sheeple will eat it up. Prepare for the double media blitz on the virus AND the economy tanking as its result.


    Don't forget the Russians.. They have to be to blame. See they just kept the price of oil low so now the rest of the world gets gas cheaper than the USA. The USA motorist now has to bail out the dopey frackers and shale oil ponzis.

    Global envy will eat murica. Maybe they will just pull out all their troops and go home. ;)

    [Mar 09, 2020] Don't Expect a Democratic President to Roll Back Trump's Policies by Robert Fisk America's health care, its poor, its black and Hispanic minorities and the contest between

    Notable quotes:
    "... Faced with Zionism at its most aggressive, most US presidents tend to mellow, discovering long-standing friendships among those who most infuriate them. But Sanders has talked of Palestinian suffering and dignity on numerous occasions – which neither Biden nor Warren have yet chosen to do on the campaign – and his contention that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) promotes "bigotry" aroused perhaps too much fury from the pro-Israeli lobby group ..."
    "... Its boss, Howard Kohr, is well aware that neither Sanders nor Warren – nor, apparently, Biden, though we'll see about this -- had any interest in attending this year's AIPAC conference. His latest remarks, clearly directed at the man who could be America's first Jewish president, are worthy of serious examin ..."
    "... Robert Fisk writes for the Independent , where this column originally appeared. ..."
    Mar 09, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders don't amount to a hill of beans in the Middle East .

    And many American voters – save for pro-Israeli lobbyists, liberal Jewish groups and disparate Muslim organisations – don't care a hill of beans about the fears of Israel and the Arabs. But both Muslims and Jews in the region have been carefully studying what the three remaining Democrat contenders have said about two-state solutions, Israeli colonies in the West Bank and the US embassy, currently in Jerusalem courtesy of Donald Trump. It's time we did the same.

    First of all, despair all ye who think the Democrats are going to reverse Trump's disastrous transfer of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Those who believe that a Democrat president will simply roll back on Trump's disastrous policies – not just over the embassy but anywhere else in the Middle East – had better shake off their illusions. History doesn't go backwards. None of the Democratic candidates would commit to reversing Trump's embassy decision when asked; only Sanders spoke vaguely of returning it to Tel Aviv. The rest chickened out by suggesting, rather outrageously, that the existence of the embassy in Jerusalem would become part of future Israeli-Palestinian negotiations – something which was never part of the original Oslo negotiations nor any UN resolution.

    Elizabeth Warren announced in the South Carolina debate last month that the decision should be left up to "Israel and Palestine" – presumably suggesting that the 'capital' of a two-state solution was up to them, even though Bibi Netanyahu believes it's all wrapped up – Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, full stop. And "Palestine", Warren should have been aware, doesn't as a state actually exist.

    "But it's not up to us to determine what the terms of a two-state solution are," quoth she. " The best way to do that is to encourage the parties to get to the negotiating table themselves." Repeatedly asked if she would move the embassy back to Tel Aviv, Warren equally repeatedly said that "we should let the parties determine the capital." Later she rather eerily referred to "capitals" – without explaining if she was thinking of a Palestinian "capital" in the village of Abu Dis, the grim little solution that Madeleine Albright half-heartedly supported two decades ago.

    Sanders, of course, captured the imagination and fury of Arabs and Israelis (and Israel's supposed friends in America) by his characterisation of Netanyahu as a "reactionary racist" – a description he may now choose to soften. Faced with Zionism at its most aggressive, most US presidents tend to mellow, discovering long-standing friendships among those who most infuriate them. But Sanders has talked of Palestinian suffering and dignity on numerous occasions – which neither Biden nor Warren have yet chosen to do on the campaign – and his contention that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) promotes "bigotry" aroused perhaps too much fury from the pro-Israeli lobby group .

    Its boss, Howard Kohr, is well aware that neither Sanders nor Warren – nor, apparently, Biden, though we'll see about this -- had any interest in attending this year's AIPAC conference. His latest remarks, clearly directed at the man who could be America's first Jewish president, are worthy of serious examin ation. "A growing and highly vocal and energised part of the electorate fundamentally rejects the value of the US-Israeli alliance," he said. " The leaders of this movement say they support Israel's right to defend herself. But every time Israel exercises that right, they condemn Israel."

    Kohr wasn't referring here to BDS, the boycott, divest and sanctions movement which does frighten Israeli leaders, but the increasingly worried men and women in America – young Jewish liberals prominent among them – who are disgusted by the suffering faced by the Palestinians in Gaza. Unafraid of Sanders' unwise use of the word "socialism" – which used to be quite acceptable in Israel many years ago – they are searching, I suspect, for a morality in international politics which the US regularly suspends when confronted by Israel's colonial project in the West Bank.

    "Israel cannot afford false friends," Kohr continued in a very clear assault on Sanders' condemnation of the Israeli government and its now yet-again elected prime minister, an attack he described as "demonising Israel". Last spring, Kohr spoke of the "intense hatred" of Israel which, he contended, was moving from the margins to the centre of US politics. " Israel has been able to count on its friendship with the United States," he now says.

    But George W Bush and Obama "each understood that America's commitment to Israel's safety must be consistent, it must be unequivocal [sic], and it must be dependable." In reality – a quality often lost in any discussion of US-Israeli relations in Washington – Obama was angered by Netanyahu's constant interference in US politics, his lone appeals to Congress over the president's head and his absolute refusal to postpone or close down or abandon the steady theft of Palestinian Arab land for Jewish colonies between Jerusalem and the Jordan river. Kohr's reference to the necessity of America's "unequivocal" support is not quite what he meant.

    The correct word – had he dared to say it – would have been "uncritical". And Sanders is not uncritical. In the strait-jacket, fearful debates which pass for serious television discussion in the United States, condemnation of Israel and its grotesque occupation of another people's land – if not splashed with accusations of antisemitism – is regarded as off-limits, unacceptable, even immoral.

    Sanders has broken this silly convention. And thus he must be dismissed as a "socialist' (this is partly his fault, of course) and a "radical", a word which my elderly Dad would probably have interpreted as a 'Bolshie'. Sanders is not a Bolshevik – though he sometimes looks like one when he's on the stump – and his real threat to Israel is that in the eyes of his supporters, he is honest, and seen to be honest. The fact that Sanders is Jewish and represents the bravest of America's liberal Jewish community is all the more frightening to Israel's right-wing supporters.

    And so we come to Joe Biden, a man whom Netanyahu used to run rings around when Biden was Obama's vice president. In 2010, the Netanyahu government blithely announced 1,600 new settlement houses on occupied Palestinian land shortly after Biden's arrival on an official visit to Israel. Huffily arriving 90 minutes late for dinner with Netanyahu, Biden condemned the decision – and said no more. Four years later, addressing the Saban Forum, part of the right-wing Brookings Institute, Biden spent much time condemning Iran, praising Obama's $17 billion financial support for Israel's military – which he calculated at $8.5 million a day – and referring obliquely to the grave reservations which the Obama administration had about Israel as "tactical disagreements", "tactical divides", "normal disagreements" and "different perspectives".

    Only at the very end of his 2014 peroration did Biden mildly condemn "expanding settlement activity and construction and the demolition of homes of attackers [sic]" as "counterproductive". He referred to "terrorist" attacks by Palestinians and "vigilante attacks" by Jewish settlers. And that's pretty much what we can expect of a Biden presidency.

    He might, conceivably, try to roll back Trump's destruction of the Iranian nuclear agreement into which Obama put so much energy – but just as he will not commit himself to reversing Trump's decision on the US embassy transfer to Jerusalem, he's likely to search for another nuclear agreement to take the place of the Obama one – which, in his perverse and hopeless way, is what Trump has been suggesting.

    The trouble is that while former Democrat candidates are now ganging up to destroy Sanders' chances of nomination – along with a significant portion of the US "liberal" press – Trump, barring a virus-induced economic collapse, is unlikely to spend much time worrying about a Biden candidacy.

    Just as they prefer a "safe pair of hands" to protect the party, so the Democrat elite and the "old" liberals fear the moral crusade upon which Sanders might embark – about health and human rights just as much as the Middle East. Better to avoid conflict with Israel, too. And that was Hilary Clinton's policy, wasn't it? And that's how Sanders went off the rails in the last presidential election, finally asking his supporters to give their vote to Hillary, as they shouted: "No! No! No!" Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Robert Fisk

    Robert Fisk writes for the Independent , where this column originally appeared.

    [Mar 09, 2020] In the end, Ankara knew that Russia also did not want a direct conflict with Turkey and would not bring the matter to a break

    Mar 09, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    A User , Mar 9 2020 1:30 utc | 50

    re alaff | Mar 8 2020 23:57 utc | 43

    I read Rostislav Ishchenko's puff piece about how well Russia had done in the negotiations with Turkey, yet as suspected couldn't find one example of wins for the Syrian administration.
    We are told "Russia showed tremendous indifference to the Turkish threats"
    &
    "Turkey gave too much, even for its current (far from brilliant) position."
    But no evidence is supplied to support either broad but utterly flimsy statement
    Joint Turko-Russian patrols on the M4 means two things detrimental to Syria, it is the perfect excuse for Turkey to keep troops inside Syria's borders and, it makes it impossible for Syria to reclaim it's highway.

    The most accurate statement I found in the article was:
    "In the end, Ankara knew that Russia also did not want a direct conflict with Turkey and would not bring the matter to a break."
    Many people who like to maintain the self-delusion that Russia is a non-interventionist state, will disagree but rather than argue in circles I say 'let's check out the state of play at the end of August, when if Russia hadn't backed down the Syrian government would have won back total control of M4 & M5 as well as the administration of all major population centers in the Idlib Governorate.

    It always saddens me when humans rightly swear off one brand of propaganda only to lap up the same type of tosh generated by the original brand's major competitor.
    They all lie this is evidenced by simply swapping the placename's in Ishchenko's article for those of a state amerika has invaded by stealth, say Colombia with FARQ as the enemy protagonist. Do that and the article reads like a b grade NYT pile of steaming tosh, full of historical analogies which have little relevance other than a vain attempt to boost the author's credentials.
    It makes me mad because it has become obvious that Syria isn't ever going to completely recover it's territory.

    Maximus , Mar 9 2020 1:38 utc | 51

    Turkey still playing games?? posted at Syrian perspective blog: RUSSIAN "CHOPPER" GOT IN THE WAY OF THE TURKISH F-16 IN SYRIAN IDLIB
    Lajoie Parrot
    "Russian aviation using an electronic warfare system (EW) prevented the Turkish F-16 fighter from shooting down the Syrian fighter-bomber Su-22 in the sky over Idlib province. The incident occurred on March 4, and now it became known that Russian reconnaissance aircraft equipped with the Il-22PP Porubshchik jamming system helped to get away from the Turkish missile to the Syrian Air Force combat vehicle.
    Over the past few days, Syrian aircraft have been repeatedly attacked by Turkish forces. In particular, a combat training L-39 was recently shot down, before which the Turkish Air Force destroyed two Syrian Su-24 bombers. All three combat vehicles of the Arab Republic were hit after the Turkish Army launched Operation Spring Shield in Syrian Idlib on March 1. Earlier, several unsuccessful attempts were made to shoot down Russian bombers from man-made anti-aircraft missile systems (MANPADS) FIM-92 Stinger American-made.
    The situation is complicated by the fact that attacks, as military experts note, are carried out by Turkish F-16s with long-range AIM-120 air-to-air missiles (up to 105 km range), and the target is guided by a Boeing early warning and control reconnaissance aircraft 737AEW & C Turkish Air Force (equipped with electronic warfare, which includes the system of optoelectronic counteraction AN / AAQ-24 (V) "Nemesis"). It is important to note that Turkish fighters conducted operations on Idlib without entering Syrian airspace, thus avoiding getting into the affected area air defense systems from the Russian Khmeimim air base, since Moscow had previously warned Ankara that it did not guarantee the safety of Turkish aviation in the sky of the northwestern ATS region.
    However, a recent incident showed that in this case, the Russian Aerospace Forces and the Syrian Air Force have prepared countermeasures. The Syrian Su-22 last Wednesday, March 4, was able to escape from the AIM-120 rocket, launched by the Turkish F-16. According to military experts, such a maneuver was made possible thanks to the Russian integrated reconnaissance aircraft Tu-214R. "Syrian troops, with the support of the Russian air forces, responded to the insidious strategy of Turkey with deterrence tactics. Russia has significantly increased its EW forces in the region. First of all, due to the Tu-214 and Il-22PP, which were able to not only detect the approaching Turkish F-16s, but also warn Syrian fighters, "writes the Chinese news portal Sina.
    The Russian "Logger" also disrupted the tactical network Link 16, which made the Turkish Boeing 737AEW & C useless in monitoring the terrain and warning strike fighters. In fact, experts say that Moscow, having not entered into an open confrontation with Ankara, competently neutralized the Turkish Air Force in the region, which again realized that they could neither control the airspace over Idlib nor provide support to their ground forces and allied fighters.
    "The Russian air forces continue to provide air support to the Syrian government forces, thereby condemning the Turks and their allied gangs to failure. A vivid example of this is the restoration of Syrian army control over the city of Sarakib," notes Sina."
    [note that this may now be altered by the agreement reached in Moscow under the new ROE, which prevent the Turk turd from any hostile act against Russian assets, no matter where initiated. Maybe.] ... numbers of missiles doesn't matter if you have effective/electronic warfare capabilities that enable setting missile neutralization fields (fry all the electronics in the missile/plane/ship etc) ...which is what Russia has - quality beats quantity any day... Got that Uncle Sam and friends?

    [Mar 09, 2020] Idlib: Undeclared War

    Mar 09, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    S , Mar 9 2020 9:55 utc | 87

    ANNA-News has released a new 44-minute documentary Idlib: Undeclared War .

    As usual, there are two versions available:

    1. Russian version in high quality (1080p);
    2. Russian version with English subtitles in low quality (720p, but feels like 480p).

    [Mar 09, 2020] U.S. Foreign Policy and the Return to Normalcy

    Notable quotes:
    "... The "normalcy" to which Biden would return the U.S. is rather different. There would be a restoration of sorts, but the restoration would be that of the bankrupt bipartisan foreign policy consensus, among other things. As Emma Ashford suggested in a recent discussion , Biden's foreign policy could be described as "Make American Exceptionalism Great Again." ..."
    "... Biden's rhetoric is full of the tired boilerplate rhetoric about U.S. global leadership. Biden's new article for Foreign Affairs includes quite a bit of this: ..."
    "... As president, I will take immediate steps to renew U.S. democracy and alliances, protect the United States' economic future, and once more have America lead the world. This is not a moment for fear. This is the time to tap the strength and audacity that took us to victory in two world wars and brought down the Iron Curtain. ..."
    "... basically, a Biden foreign policy would be "Obama but worse" https://t.co/wIZwch5Bmk ..."
    "... Inasmuch as Biden is much more comfortable with the nostrums of the foreign policy establishment and with their assumptions about the U.S. role in the world than Obama was, that seems like the right conclusion. A foreign policy that is like Obama's but more conventional probably doesn't sound that bad, but we should remember that this is the same foreign policy that left the U.S. engaged in more than one illegal war and normalized illegal warfare without Congressional authorization. ..."
    "... Returning to an era of "normalcy" characterized by repeated policy failures, lack of accountability, and open-ended warfare is not the kind of restoration that Americans need. It might be good enough to win the election, but it isn't going to fix what ails U.S. foreign policy. ..."
    "... I hope that Sanders really takes it to Biden on the horrendous failures of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy, particularly the wrecking of Libya, Syria, and Yemen, the sheer scale of human misery that Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Biden caused, including unleashing millions of terrified refugees into Europe. I find Sanders' dalliance with communist dictatorships during the Cold War disgusting, but Biden's responsibility for implementing the Obama/Clinton foreign policy horrors is far worse. ..."
    "... Unfortunately, most voters don't seem to care much about foreign policy--which is really outrageous considering it is the area in which Presidents have the greatest latitude to act unilaterally. But that is the world we live in. ..."
    "... Even if he does publicly recant it, my view is that talk is cheap. Politicians will say what they think the voters want to hear. It doesn't mean they'll do it. ..."
    "... Wasn't Biden the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the person that maybe has done more than VP Dick C. in 2002 to start and legitimize the Iraq war? ..."
    "... Bottom line is Biden is fraud and everything he and his handlers say or write must be viewed as such. ..."
    Mar 09, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    oe Biden's candidacy is defined by the idea that he will "restore" things to the way they were four years ago and that he will preside over a "return to normalcy" after the Trump years. The phrase "return to normalcy" has been linked to the Biden campaign for the better part of the last year. TAC 's Curt Mills commented on this after Biden's recent primary wins:

    Biden then, not Trump, would be the candidate of the centennial. Like Warren Harding, he promises a return to normalcy.

    The Harding comparison is quite useful because it shows how Biden's "return to normalcy" will be quite different from the one Harding proposed a century ago. Harding contrasted normalcy with "nostrums." This was a shot at the ideological fantasies of the Wilson era and the upheaval that had come with U.S. entry into WWI. This is the full quote :

    America's present need is not heroics, but healing; not nostrums, but normalcy; not revolution, but restoration; not agitation, but adjustment; not surgery, but serenity; not the dramatic, but the dispassionate; not experiment, but equipoise; not submergence in internationality, but sustainment in triumphant nationality.

    The "normalcy" to which Biden would return the U.S. is rather different. There would be a restoration of sorts, but the restoration would be that of the bankrupt bipartisan foreign policy consensus, among other things. As Emma Ashford suggested in a recent discussion , Biden's foreign policy could be described as "Make American Exceptionalism Great Again."

    Where Harding's "normalcy" represented the repudiation of Wilsonian fantasies, Biden's would be an attempt to revive them at least in part. Harding contrasted "normalcy" with Wilson's "nostrums," but Biden's rhetoric is full of the tired boilerplate rhetoric about U.S. global leadership. Biden's new article for Foreign Affairs includes quite a bit of this:

    As president, I will take immediate steps to renew U.S. democracy and alliances, protect the United States' economic future, and once more have America lead the world. This is not a moment for fear. This is the time to tap the strength and audacity that took us to victory in two world wars and brought down the Iron Curtain.

    The Cold War ended thirty years ago, and it is telling that Biden does not point to any victories for the U.S. in the decades that have followed. Proponents of U.S. global "leadership" have to keep reaching farther and farther back in time to recall a time when U.S. "leadership" was successful, and they have remarkably little to say about the thirty years when they have been running things. That is what they want to "restore," but it's not clear why Americans should want to go back to a status quo ante that produced such staggering and costly failures as the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Like the early 19th century Bourbon restoration, it would be a return to power for those who had learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

    John Carl Baker comments on an op-ed co-authored last year by Robert Kagan and Anthony Blinken. Blinken is now Biden's main foreign policy adviser, and that leads Baker to draw this conclusion:

    So basically, a Biden foreign policy would be "Obama but worse" https://t.co/wIZwch5Bmk

    -- John Carl Baker (@johncarlbaker) March 7, 2020

    Inasmuch as Biden is much more comfortable with the nostrums of the foreign policy establishment and with their assumptions about the U.S. role in the world than Obama was, that seems like the right conclusion. A foreign policy that is like Obama's but more conventional probably doesn't sound that bad, but we should remember that this is the same foreign policy that left the U.S. engaged in more than one illegal war and normalized illegal warfare without Congressional authorization.

    Returning to an era of "normalcy" characterized by repeated policy failures, lack of accountability, and open-ended warfare is not the kind of restoration that Americans need. It might be good enough to win the election, but it isn't going to fix what ails U.S. foreign policy.

    Gaithers • a day ago

    "Return to normalcy" better not mean squandering any more blood or money on the Middle East. If that's what he has in mind, Biden can forget my vote.
    Ellerton • a day ago
    I hope that Sanders really takes it to Biden on the horrendous failures of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy, particularly the wrecking of Libya, Syria, and Yemen, the sheer scale of human misery that Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Biden caused, including unleashing millions of terrified refugees into Europe. I find Sanders' dalliance with communist dictatorships during the Cold War disgusting, but Biden's responsibility for implementing the Obama/Clinton foreign policy horrors is far worse.

    I'm one of those poor saps who was taken in by Trump in 2016, and I want a Democrat I can vote for. I can't see voting for someone with Biden's appalling foreign policy record. If he doesn't recant it publicly and convincingly then he will likely lose to Trump.

    Clyde Schechter Ellerton • a day ago
    "If he doesn't recant it publicly and convincingly then he will likely lose to Trump."

    I don't know about that. Unfortunately, most voters don't seem to care much about foreign policy--which is really outrageous considering it is the area in which Presidents have the greatest latitude to act unilaterally. But that is the world we live in.

    Even if he does publicly recant it, my view is that talk is cheap. Politicians will say what they think the voters want to hear. It doesn't mean they'll do it. The only recantation I would find somewhat persuasive (I don't think anything would "convince" me) is if he were to state that he will appoint somebody like Sanders or Rand Paul as secretary of State and someone like Tulsi Gabbard as secretary of Defense, and staff his national security council by recruiting from the Quincy Institute. (To actually capture my vote would require additional personnel commitments, such as Elizabeth Warren for secretary of the Treasury--but that's off topic for this thread.)

    Right now, I would vote for Sanders if he gets the nomination and doesn't do something between now and November to alienate me. If Biden is the nominee, barring something really drastic, I'll do my usual and find a third party candidate to vote for.

    kouroi • a day ago
    Wasn't Biden the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the person that maybe has done more than VP Dick C. in 2002 to start and legitimize the Iraq war? Just accusing Biden of voting for the Iraq war is nothing. About 70 other senators have voted for it. Biden was the legislative Architect that paved the way for the Iraq War, and in my books (keeping the UN Charter as the legal standard), he is a War Criminal.
    Alan Vanneman • a day ago
    I realize that almost everything Biden has to say about foreign policy is abysmal, and both Sanders and Warren were much better, but neither were electable (and both were abysmal on domestic policy and trade policy). Biden may be banal, but he is not vicious, as Trump so clearly is.

    Furthermore, I think the otherwise estimable Mr. Larison fails to realize that the general public does set some vague parameters for what is and what is not acceptable foreign policy, though often without knowing it. I think it quite likely that Donald Trump will "abandon" Afghanistan, just as Max Boot et al. fear, and no one who can't name the Acela stops between New York and DC will care. Trump, when he isn't assassinating people, is much less aggressive than the Obama/Clinton administration. Although he talks about regime change, he doesn't follow through. He can be talked out of withdrawing troops, but so far hasn't tried sending them in. Early in his administration he was widely praised for firing Tomahawk missiles into Syria. Why hasn't he done it again? There is nothing Trump likes so much as praise. Why abandon what seemed like a sure-fire applause line?

    cka2nd Alan Vanneman • a day ago
    We have four years of polling saying that Sanders could beat Trump. Not every single poll, but a great majority of them.
    kouroi Alan Vanneman • 12 hours ago
    The "electability" concept is something mostly constructed by the media. Only a very small percentage of voters come in direct contact and hear and observe the candidates. The very brief TV debates, much choreographed and controlled are no good. As such, media starts and keeps repeating this notion of electability.

    As a person, presence, message, I think the most charismatic individual to show up for this presidential cycle is Tulsi Gabbard. Her showing is off the charts compared with everyone else. Beside her anti regime change message (she is not necessarily anti-war), her charisma is such a threat that she had to be excluded from the consciousness and awareness of people. And what was implanted in people's mind is that she is an Assad apologist and that she met with the blood thirsty Assad.

    Mark Krvavica • a day ago
    I enjoy some good nostalgia, but it has no place in foreign policy.
    Taras77 • a day ago
    Good article! Bottom line is Biden is fraud and everything he and his handlers say or write must be viewed as such.
    NGPM • 19 hours ago
    How about restoration of the "normalcy" of bipartisan consensus on "comprehensive immigration reform" AKA a general amnesty which will likely benefit some 25 to 35 million illegal aliens plus their descendants, in practice?

    It doesn't seem to make much sense harping about restoring sanity to American foreign policy when America might not even exist in 20 years.

    [Mar 07, 2020] Note of Trump deals: they are not worth paper they are printed on

    Mar 07, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    False Solace , March 6, 2020 at 5:04 pm

    Well they signed the agreement with the Taliban and two days later the DOD was bombing them again so who knows what happens there.

    Trump has declared all sorts of deals that ultimately turned into puffs of smoke -- the non-deal with North Korea comes to mind. I consider pulling out of the TPP and tariffs against China more indicative of bucking the consensus, but those can be reversed by Trump or any other president whenever they feel like it.

    [Mar 06, 2020] The Swiss Propaganda Research Group (SPR) on syria war

    Mar 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Ashino Wolf Sushanti , Mar 6 2020 13:34 utc | 56

    The Swiss Propaganda Research Group (SPR)
    https://swprs.org/

    Understanding the geopolitical and psychological war against Syria.
    Published: March 2020; Languages: DE, EN, NO

    The Syria Deception -- a position paper by the Swiss Propaganda Research group
    https://swprs.org/the-syria-deception/
    or
    https://www.greanvillepost.com/2020/03/04/the-syria-deception-a-position

    -paper-by-the-swiss-propaganda-research-group/


    Contrary to the depiction in Western media, the Syria war is not a civil war. This is because the initiators, financiers and a large part of the anti-government fighters come from abroad.


    Nor is the Syria war a religious war, for Syria was and still is one of the most

    secular countries in the region, and the Syrian army, like its direct opponents,
    is itself mainly composed of Sunnis.

    But the Syria war is also not a pipeline war, as some critics suspected, because

    the allegedly competing gas pipeline projects never existed to begin with, as even the Syrian president confirmed.

    Instead, the Syria war is a war of conquest and regime change, which developed

    into a geopolitical proxy war between NATO states on one side – especially the

    US, Great Britain and France – and Russia, Iran, and China on the other side.

    [Mar 05, 2020] US to Give Turkey Ammunition for Syria's Idlib by Jason Ditz

    Notable quotes:
    "... It comes as US Ambassador to the UN Kelly Craft visited northern Syria to meet with White Helmets, and to pledge US aid money to them for the humanitarian crisis there. ..."
    "... Officials are keen to make the humanitarian crisis wholly Syria's fault, and support for Turkey's war there as having humanitarian intentions, though specifically Turkey is looking to reinstall Islamist rebels into the area just so Syria won't have it. ..."
    Mar 03, 2020 | news.antiwar.com
    While Defense Secretary Mark Esper says the US has no interest in reentering the Syrian War to back Turkey, the White House says that the US is willing to provide military aid to Turkey for the fight , including a recently committed influx of ammunition.

    The State Department downplayed the comments, made by US Special Envoy James Jeffrey, saying that they weren't really new policy, but rather that he just stated the policy as it already existed.

    It comes as US Ambassador to the UN Kelly Craft visited northern Syria to meet with White Helmets, and to pledge US aid money to them for the humanitarian crisis there.

    Officials are keen to make the humanitarian crisis wholly Syria's fault, and support for Turkey's war there as having humanitarian intentions, though specifically Turkey is looking to reinstall Islamist rebels into the area just so Syria won't have it.

    [Mar 04, 2020] Why Are We Being Charged? Surprise Bills From Coronavirus Testing Spark Calls for Government to Cover All Costs by Jake Johnson

    Highly recommended!
    Notes of disaster capitalism in action...
    Notable quotes:
    "... The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is not billing patients for coronavirus testing, according to Business Insider . "But there are other charges you might have to pay, depending on your insurance plan, or lack thereof," Business Insider noted. "A hospital stay in itself could be costly and you would likely have to pay for tests for other viruses or conditions." ..."
    "... Congress needs to immediately pass a bill appropriating funding to cover 100% of the cost of all coronavirus testing & care within the United States. We will not have a chance at containing it otherwise. @tedlieu - as my rep, can you please ensure this is brought up? ..."
    "... In the case of the Wucinskis, Kliff reported that "the ambulance company that transported [them] charged the family $2,598 for taking them to the hospital." ..."
    "... Last week, the Miami Herald reported that Osmel Martinez Azcue "received a notice from his insurance company about a claim for $3,270" after he visited a local hospital fearing that he contracted coronavirus during a work trip to China. ..."
    "... Did anyone expect the unconscionable greed of capitalism to cease when a public health crisis emerges? This is just testing for the virus, wait until a vaccine has been developed so expensive that the majority of the US populace can not afford it at all and people are dropping like flies. Wall Street, never-the-less, will continue to have its heydays ..."
    "... The very idea that the defense and "Homeland" security budgets are bloated and additional funding approved year after year but the citizens of this country are not afforded 100% health coverage In a time of global health crisis that could become a pandemic. ..."
    Mar 03, 2020 | www.commondreams.org

    "Huge surprise medical bills [are] going to make sure people with symptoms don't get tested. That is bad for everyone." by Jake Johnson, staff writer Public health advocates, experts, and others are demanding that the federal government cover coronavirus testing and all related costs after several reports detailed how Americans in recent weeks have been saddled with exorbitant bills following medical evaluations.

    Sarah Kliff of the New York Times reported Saturday that Pennsylvania native Frank Wucinski "found a pile of medical bills" totaling $3,918 waiting for him and his three-year-old daughter after they were released from government-mandated quarantine at Marine Corps Air Station in Miramar, California.

    "My question is why are we being charged for these stays, if they were mandatory and we had no choice in the matter?" asked Wucinski, who was evacuated by the U.S. government last month from Wuhan, China, the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak.

    "I assumed it was all being paid for," Wucinski told the Times . "We didn't have a choice. When the bills showed up, it was just a pit in my stomach, like, 'How do I pay for this?'"

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is not billing patients for coronavirus testing, according to Business Insider . "But there are other charges you might have to pay, depending on your insurance plan, or lack thereof," Business Insider noted. "A hospital stay in itself could be costly and you would likely have to pay for tests for other viruses or conditions."

    Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University, told the Times that

    "the most important rule of public health is to gain the cooperation of the population."

    "There are legal, moral, and public health reasons not to charge the patients,"

    Gostin said.

    Congress needs to immediately pass a bill appropriating funding to cover 100% of the cost of all coronavirus testing & care within the United States. We will not have a chance at containing it otherwise. @tedlieu - as my rep, can you please ensure this is brought up?

    -- William LeGate (@williamlegate) March 2, 2020

    In the case of the Wucinskis, Kliff reported that "the ambulance company that transported [them] charged the family $2,598 for taking them to the hospital."

    "An additional $90 in charges came from radiologists who read the patients' X-ray scans and do not work for the hospital," Kliff noted.

    The CDC declined to respond when Kliff asked whether the federal government would cover the costs for patients like the Wucinskis.

    The Intercept 's Robert Mackey wrote last Friday that the Wucinskis' situation spotlights "how the American government's response to a public health emergency, like trying to contain a potential coronavirus epidemic, could be handicapped by relying on a system built around private hospitals and for-profit health insurance providers."

    We should be doing everything we can to encourage people with #COVIDー19 symptoms to come forward. Huge surprise medical bills is going to make sure people with symptoms don't get tested. That is bad for everyone, regardless of if you are insured. https://t.co/KOUKTSFVzD

    -- Saikat Chakrabarti (@saikatc) March 1, 2020

    Play this tape to the end and you find people not going to the hospital even if they're really sick. The federal government needs to announce that they'll pay for all of these bills https://t.co/HfyBFBXhja

    Last week, the Miami Herald reported that Osmel Martinez Azcue "received a notice from his insurance company about a claim for $3,270" after he visited a local hospital fearing that he contracted coronavirus during a work trip to China.

    "He went to Jackson Memorial Hospital, where he said he was placed in a closed-off room," according to the Herald . "Nurses in protective white suits sprayed some kind of disinfectant smoke under the door before entering, Azcue said. Then hospital staff members told him he'd need a CT scan to screen for coronavirus, but Azcue said he asked for a flu test first."

    Azcue tested positive for the flu and was discharged. "Azcue's experience shows the potential cost of testing for a disease that epidemiologists fear may develop into a public health crisis in the U.S.," the Herald noted.

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, highlighted Azcue's case in a tweet last Friday.

    "The coronavirus reminds us that we are all in this together," Sanders wrote. "We cannot allow Americans to skip doctor's visits over outrageous bills. Everyone should get the medical care they need without opening their wallet -- as a matter of justice and public health."

    Last week, as Common Dreams reported , Sanders argued that the coronavirus outbreak demonstrates the urgent need for Medicare for All.

    The coronavirus reminds us that we are all in this together. We cannot allow Americans to skip doctor's visits over outrageous bills.

    Everyone should get the medical care they need without opening their wallet -- as a matter of justice and public health. https://t.co/c4WQMDESHU

    -- Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) February 28, 2020

    The number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. surged by more than two dozen over the weekend, bringing the total to 89 as the Trump administration continues to publicly downplay the severity of the outbreak.

    Dr. Matt McCarthy, a staff physician at NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital, said in an appearance on CNBC 's "Squawk Box" Monday morning that testing for the coronavirus is still not widely available.

    "Before I came here this morning, I was in the emergency room seeing patients," McCarthy said. "I still do not have a rapid diagnostic test available to me."

    "I'm here to tell you, right now, at one of the busiest hospitals in the country, I don't have it at my finger tips," added McCarthy. "I still have to make my case, plead to test people. This is not good. We know that there are 88 cases in the United States. There are going to be hundreds by middle of week. There's going to be thousands by next week. And this is a testing issue."

    Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

    Harry_Pjotr 13h

    Did anyone expect the unconscionable greed of capitalism to cease when a public health crisis emerges? This is just testing for the virus, wait until a vaccine has been developed so expensive that the majority of the US populace can not afford it at all and people are dropping like flies. Wall Street, never-the-less, will continue to have its heydays

    Smerl fern 12h

    A wall street bank or private predator may own your emergency room. A surprise bill may await your emergency treatment above insurance payments or in some instances all of the bill.

    An effort was made recently in congress to stop surprise billings but enough dems joined repubs to kill it. More important to keep campaign dollars flowing than keep people alive. fern Smerl 12h I know emergency rooms are being purchased by organizations like Tenet (because they are some of the most expensive levels of care) and M.D.s provided by large agencies. I'm not as up on this as I should be but a friend of mine tells me that some of this is illegal. I have received bills that were later discharged by challenge. This is worth investigating further. Atlas oldie 11h Hmmmm A virus that overwhelmingly kills the elderly and/or those with pre-exisitng conditions.

    Sounds like a medical insurance companies wet dream. As well as .gov social security/medicare wet dream.

    Just sayin'

    Ticki 11h

    The very idea that the defense and "Homeland" security budgets are bloated and additional funding approved year after year but the citizens of this country are not afforded 100% health coverage In a time of global health crisis that could become a pandemic. And as has been stated, the unconscionable idea suggested that a possible vaccine (a long way away or perhaps not developed at all) might not be affordable to the workers who pay the taxes that fund the government? That's insane.

    leftonadoorstep 11h

    Another example of "American Exceptionalism." China doesn't charge its coronavirus patients, neither does South Korea. I guess they are simply backward countries.

    Barton 11h

    I own my own home after years of hard work paying it off. It's the only thing of value, besides my old truck, that I have. If I get the virus, I will stay home and try to treat it the best I can. I can't afford to go to the hospital and pay thousands in medical bills, with the chance that they'll come after my possessions. America, the land of the _______. Fill in the blank. (Hint: it's no longer free).

    fern 1 Barton 11h

    There are other ways to protect your home. Homesteading or living trust. I'm not good at this but I know there are ways to do it. Hopefully, it would never come to that but outcomes are not certain even with treatment in this case.

    Giovanna-Lepore oldie 11h

    As someone who lost a mother at 5 years old I can sympathize with your grief in losing a daughter-in-law and especially seeing her four children orphaned. However, I think you miss the point here: This is about we becoming a society invested in each others welfare and not a company town that commodifies everything including the health and well being of us all.

    fern 1 Giovanna-Lepore 11h

    I'm going by: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/1129/text

    As a revision it is better but flawed. It is a cost containment bill based on the same research as the republican plan with global budgets and block grants.

    Edited: I encourage you to read this:
    -ttps://www.rand.org/blog/2018/10/misconceptions-about-medicare-for-all.html Giovanna-Lepore 10h oldie:

    Part D

    Higher education is not free but they do need to become free for the students and payed by us as a society.

    Part D is a scam, a Republican scam also supported by corporate democrats because of its profit motive and its privatization

    Medicare only covers 80% and does not cover eye and dental care and older folks especially need these services. Medicaid helps but there are limits and one cannot necessarily use it where one needs to go. Expanded, Improved Medicare For All is a vast improvement. because it covers everyone in one big pool and, therefore, much more dignified than the rob Paul to pay peter system we have.

    Social Security too can be improved. Why should it simply be based on the income of the person which means that a person working in a low paying job in a capitalist system gone wild with greed will often work until they die.

    Pell grants can be eliminated when we have what the French have: publicly supported education for everyone.

    The demise of unions certainly did not help but it was part of the long strategy of the Right to privatize everything to the enrichment of the few.

    Yunzer SuspiraDeProfundis 10h

    Thank goodness for the "/s". Poe's Law you know

    The overall competence that Canada is handling this outbreak, compared to the USA, is stark. First world (Canada) versus third-world (USA). Testing is practically available for free, to any suspect person, sick or not, as Toronto alone can run 1000 tests a day and have results in 4 hours. That is far more than all the US's capacity for 330 million people.

    I wonder how long before Canada closes its borders to USAns? Me and my wife (both in a vulnerable age/medical group) should seriously consider fleeing to my brother's place in Toronto as the first announced cases in Pittsburgh are probably only days away. What about our poor cat though? We could try to smuggle her across the border, but she is a loud and talkative kitty

    Greenwich 10h

    Don't want to discourage anyone from any protective measures – but the "low down" from my veggie store today was that a lot of health professionals shop there and they think it's being hyped by media. Did get this from my NJ Sen. Menendez –

    Center for Disease and Control and Prevention (CDC)

    There is currently no vaccine to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The best way to prevent illness is to avoid being exposed to this virus. However, everyday preventive actions can help prevent the spread of respiratory diseases:

    • Wash your hands often
    • Avoid close contact with people who are sick.
    • Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth.
    • Stay home when you are sick.
    • Cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue, then throw the tissue in the trash.
    • For more information : htps://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/prevention-treatment.html
    • How it spreads : The virus is thought to spread mainly from person-to-person. It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes, but this is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads. [Read more.]
      https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/transmission.html )
    • Symptoms : For confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, reported illnesses have ranged from mild symptoms to severe illness and death. Symptoms can include fever, cough, and shortness of breath.
    Seeker 9h Greenwich:

    Don't want to discourage anyone from any protective measures – but the "low down" from my veggie store today was that a lot of health professionals shop there and they think it's being hyped by media.

    I agree it is being hyped by the media to the point of being fear mongering. At the same time it is being ignored by the administration to such an extent that really little almost nothing is being done. At some point the two together will create an even bigger problem.

    It is like the old adage: "Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you." Each over/under reach in considering the reality of the situation has its own problem, which multiply when combined. Every morning when I wake up I say a little atheistic prayer to myself before I get out of bed: "Another day and for better or worse...".

    Seeker 8h

    Well, two reported here in Florida tonight. One in my county, one in the county next door. And more of the "we already knew, but told you late". One person checked into the hospital on Wednesday. We hear it Monday night. Both were ignored far a long time it seems, and 84 in particular are being watched (roommates, friends, hospital workers not alerted for several days, the usual). But no one knows every place they had been since becoming infected.

    Oh, and they have tested a handful of people. No worry?

    I can't see anyway that this level of incompetency is an accident. Spring break is just starting usually a 100's of thousand tourist bonanza.

    So the question is do they want to kill us, or just keep us in fear?

    I think the later. But the end result is a crap shoot. So once again, it is a gamble with our lives.

    Archie1954 7h

    The business of America is business. Sometimes that can go too far and this is one of those times. Making money from the loss, distress, harm and suffering of others is perverse beyond belief.

    [Mar 04, 2020] The Syria Deception by Mark Taliano

    Mar 04, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

    What is the Syria war about?

    Contrary to the depiction in Western media, the Syria war is not a civil war. This is because the initiators, financiers and a large part of the anti-government fighters come from abroad .

    Nor is the Syria war a religious war, for Syria was and still is one of the most secular countries in the region, and the Syrian army – like its direct opponents – is itself mainly composed of Sunnis.

    But the Syria war is also not a pipeline war, as some critics suspected, because the allegedly competing gas pipeline projects never existed to begin with, as even the Syrian president confirmed .

    Instead, the Syria war is a war of conquest and regime change , which developed into a geopolitical proxy war between NATO states on one side – especially the US, Great Britain and France – and Russia, Iran, and China on the other side.

    In fact, already since the 1940s the US has repeatedly attempted to install a pro-Western government in Syria, such as in 1949, 1956, 1957, after 1980 and after 2003, but without success so far. This makes Syria – since the fall of Libya – the last Mediterranean country independent of NATO.

    Thus, in the course of the „Arab Spring" of 2011, NATO and its allies, especially Israel and the Gulf States, decided to try again. To this end, politically and economically motivated protests in Syria were used and were quickly escalated into an armed conflict.

    NATO's original strategy of 2011 was based on the Afghanistan war of the 1980s and aimed at conquering Syria mainly through positively portrayed Islamist militias (so-called „rebels"). This did not succeed, however, because the militias lacked an air force and anti-aircraft missiles.

    Hence from 2013 onwards, various poison gas attacks were staged in order to be able to deploy the NATO air force as part of a „humanitarian intervention" similar to the earlier wars against Libya and Yugoslavia. But this did not succeed either, mainly because Russia and China blocked a UN mandate.

    As of 2014, therefore, additional but negatively portrayed Islamist militias („terrorists") were covertly established in Syria and Iraq via NATO partners Turkey and Jordan, secretly supplied with weapons and vehicles and indirectly financed by oil exports via the Turkish Ceyhan terminal.

    ISIS: Supply and export routes through NATO partners Turkey and Jordan (ISW / Atlantic, 2015)

    Media-effective atrocity propaganda and mysterious „terrorist attacks" in Europe and the US then offered the opportunity to intervene in Syria using the NATO air force even without a UN mandate – ostensibly to fight the „terrorists", but in reality still to conquer Syria and topple its government.

    This plan failed again, however, as Russia also used the presence of the „terrorists" in autumn 2015 as a justification for direct military intervention and was now able to attack both the „terrorists" and parts of NATO's „rebels" while simultaneously securing the Syrian airspace to a large extent.

    By the end of 2016, the Syrian army thus succeeded in recapturing the city of Aleppo.

    From 2016 onwards, NATO therefore switched back to positively portrayed but now Kurdish-led militias (the SDF) in order to still have unassailable ground forces available and to conquer the Syrian territory held by the previously established „terrorists" before Syria and Russia could do so themselves.

    This led to a kind of „race" to conquer cities such as Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor in 2017 and to a temporary division of Syria along the Euphrates river into a (largely) Syrian-controlled West and a Kurdish (or rather American) controlled East (see map below).

    This move, however, brought NATO into conflict with its key member Turkey, because Turkey did not accept a Kurdish-controlled territory on its southern border. As a result, the NATO alliance became increasingly divided from 2018 onwards.

    Turkey now fought the Kurds in northern Syria and at the same time supported the remaining Islamists in the north-western province of Idlib against the Syrian army, while the Americans eventually withdrew to the eastern Syrian oil fields in order to retain a political bargaining chip.

    While Turkey supported Islamists in northern Syria, Israel more or less covertly supplied Islamists in southern Syria and at the same time fought Iranian and Lebanese (Hezbollah) units with air strikes, though without lasting success: the militias in southern Syria had to surrender in 2018.

    Ultimately, some NATO members tried to use a confrontation between the Turkish and Syrian armies in the province of Idlib as a last option to escalate the war. In addition to the situation in Idlib, the issues of the occupied territories in the north and east of Syria remain to be resolved, too.

    Russia, for its part, has tried to draw Turkey out of the NATO alliance and onto its own side as far as possible. Modern Turkey, however, is pursuing a rather far-reaching geopolitical strategy of its own, which is also increasingly clashing with Russian interests in the Middle East and Central Asia.

    As part of this geopolitical strategy, Turkey in 2015 and 2020 even used the so-called "weapon of mass migration" , which may serve to destabilize both Syria (so-called strategic depopulation ) and Europe, as well as to extort financial, political or military support from the European Union.

    Syria: The situation in February 2020

    What role did the Western media play in this war?

    The task of NATO-compliant media was to portray the war against Syria as a „civil war", the Islamist „rebels" positively, the Islamist „terrorists" and the Syrian government negatively, the alleged „poison gas attacks" credibly and the NATO intervention consequently as legitimate.

    An important tool for this media strategy were the numerous Western-sponsored „media centres" , „activist groups" , „Twitter girls" , „human rights observatories" and the like, which provided Western news agencies and media with the desired images and information.

    Since 2019, NATO-compliant media moreover had to conceal or discredit various leaks and whistleblowers that began to prove the covert Western arms deliveries to the Islamist „rebels" and „terrorists" as well as the staged „poison gas attacks" .

    But if even the „terrorists" in Syria were demonstrably established and equipped by NATO states, what role then did the mysterious „caliph of terror" Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi play? He possibly played a similar role as his direct predecessor , Omar al-Baghdadi – who was a phantom .

    Thanks to new communication technologies and on-site sources, the Syria war was also the first war about which independent media could report almost in real-time and thus for the first time significantly influenced the public perception of events – a potentially historic change.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    All images in this article are from SPR

    Order Mark Taliano's Book "Voices from Syria" directly from Global Research.

    Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes the mainstream media narratives on Syria.

    [Mar 04, 2020] Trump Slams 'SPOILER' Elizabeth Warren For Sinking Sanders

    A pretty sharp political thinking from the President
    Mar 04, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    The Democrat establishment came together and crushed Bernie Sanders, AGAIN! Even the fact that Elizabeth Warren stayed in the race was devastating to Bernie and allowed Sleepy Joe to unthinkably win Massachusetts. It was a perfect storm, with many good states remaining for Joe!

    -- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2020

    20 minutes later, Trump tweeted that it was " So selfish for Elizabeth Warren to stay in the race ," as she has "Zero chance of even coming close to winning, but hurts Bernie badly."

    "So much for their wonderful liberal friendship. Will he ever speak to her again? She cost him Massachusetts (and came in third), he shouldn't!"

    So selfish for Elizabeth Warren to stay in the race. She has Zero chance of even coming close to winning, but hurts Bernie badly. So much for their wonderful liberal friendship. Will he ever speak to her again? She cost him Massachusetts (and came in third), he shouldn't!

    -- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2020

    Three hours later, Trump tweeted: " Wow! If Elizabeth Warren wasn't in the race, Bernie Sanders would have EASILY won Massachusetts, Minnesota and Texas , not to mention various other states. Our modern day Pocahontas won't go down in history as a winner, but she may very well go down as the all time great SPOILER! "

    Wow! If Elizabeth Warren wasn't in the race, Bernie Sanders would have EASILY won Massachusetts, Minnesota and Texas, not to mention various other states. Our modern day Pocahontas won't go down in history as a winner, but she may very well go down as the all time great SPOILER!

    -- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2020

    [Mar 03, 2020] "Predatory capitalism", which clearly describes what neoliberalism is.

    Highly recommended!
    Mar 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    chu teh , Mar 4 2020 0:50 utc | 80

    Tonymike | Mar 3 2020 18:08 utc | 26

    re ... Your house foreclosed upon by shady bank: naked capitalism, .0001% paid on interest savings: naked capitalism, poor wages: naked capitalism, dangerous workplace: naked capitalism, etc. ...

    "naked capitalism" is not a clear description. Consider using "predatory capitalism", which clearly describes what it is.

    Here's the Wiki dictionary definition:

    Predatory--

    1. relating to or denoting an animal or animals preying naturally on others.
    synonyms: predacious, carnivorous, hunting, raptorial, ravening;
    Example: "predatory birds".

    2. seeking to exploit or oppress others.
    synonyms: exploitative, wolfish, rapacious, greedy, acquisitive, avaricious
    Example: "I could see a predatory gleam in his eyes"

    Note where the word comes from:
    The Latin "praedator", in English meaning "plunderer".

    And "plunderer" helps the reader understand and perhaps recognize what is happening.

    Every plunderer understands.

    [Mar 03, 2020] In October 2018, Turkey and Russia signed an agreement in Astana to establish a de-confliction zone along the Damascus-Aleppo (M5) and Aleppo-Latakia (M4) highways. It was agreed that all belligerents would withdraw and render the roads accessible to civilian traffic and foreign jihadists leave Syria

    Mar 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DontBelieveEitherPr. , Mar 1 2020 21:02 utc | 31

    To those idiots here calling critque on Putins descion "anti-Putin troll": Please add Elijah J. Magnier and the Syrian and Iranian command and even Russian military commanders the same:

    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/03/01/erdogan-idlib-is-mine/

    A significant development took place in Syria on Friday. A Russian attack on a Turkish convoy in Idlib in north-west Syria killed 36 Turkish soldiers and officers. In retaliation, Turkey launched an unprecedented armed drone attack that lasted several hours and resulted in the killing and wounding of over 150 Syrian officers and soldiers and their allies of Hezbollah and the Fatimiy'oun. The Turkish drones destroyed dozens of tanks and rocket launchers deployed by the Syrian Army along the front line. Russia ceased air support for Syria and its allies demanded from Russia an explanation for the lack of coordination of its unilateral stoppage of air support, allowing the Turkish drones to kill so many Syrian Army and allied forces. What happened, why, and what will be the consequences?

    In October 2018, Turkey and Russia signed an agreement in Astana to establish a de-confliction zone along the Damascus-Aleppo (M5) and Aleppo-Latakia (M4) highways. It was agreed that all belligerents would withdraw and render the roads accessible to civilian traffic. Moreover, it was decided to end the presence of all jihadists, including the Tajik, Turkistan, Uighur and all other foreign fighters present in Idlib alongside Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (former ISIS, former al-Qaeda in Syria), Hurras al-Din (al-Qaeda in Syria), and Ahrar al-Sham with their foreign fighters and all "non-moderate" rebels. Last year, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham took full control of Idlib and its rural area under the watchful eyes of Turkey.

    Over a year later, the Turkish commitment to end the presence of jihadists and to open the M5 and M4 had not been respected. The Syrian Army and its allies, along with Russia, agreed to impose the Astana agreement by force. In a few weeks, the jihadists defence line crumbled under heavy Russian bombing. According to field commanders, the jihadists left fewer than 100 men in every village, who withdrew under the heavy bombing and preferred to leave rather than be surrounded by the Syrian Army and their fast advance.

    Turkey, according to the military commanders in Syria, saw the withdrawal of jihadists and decided to move thousands of troops into Syria to lead a counter-attack against the Syrian Army and its allies. This action made it impossible for Russia to distinguish between jihadists and the Turkish Army. Moreover, Turkey refrained from informing Russia – as it had agreed to according to the deconfliction agreement between Russia and Turkey – about the position of its regular forces. This was when Russia bombed a convoy killing 36 Turkish officers along with 17 jihadists who were present together with the Turkish Army.

    According to decision-maker sources in Syria, the Russian Air Force was not aware of the presence of the Turkish convoy when it was almost decimated in Idlib. The Turkish command has supplied Turkish vehicles and deployed thousands of Turkish soldiers with the jihadists. "It almost appears that Turkish President Recep Tayyeb Erdogan wanted this high number of Turkish casualties to stop the successful and rapid attack of the Syria army on Idlib front, and to curtail the fast withdrawal of jihadists."

    According to the sources, Russia was surprised by the number of Turkish soldiers killed and declared a unilateral ceasefire to calm down the front and de-escalate. Moscow ordered its military operational room in Syria to stop the military push and halt the attack on rural Idlib. Engaging in a war against Turkey is not part of President Putin's plans in Syria. Russia thought it the right time to quieten the front and allow Erdogan to lick his wounds.

    This Russian wishful thinking did not correspond to Turkish intentions and plans in Syria. Turkey moved its military command and control base on the borders with Syria to direct attacks against the Syrian Army and its allies. Turkish armed drones mounted an unprecedented organised drone attack lasting several hours, destroying the entire Syrian defence line on the M5 and M4 and undermining the effectiveness of the Syrian Army, equipped and trained by Russia. Furthermore, Iran had informed Turkey of the presence of its forces and allied forces along the Syrian Army, and asked Turkey to stop the attack to avoid casualties. Turkey, which maintains over 2000 officers and soldiers in 14 observation locations that are today under Syrian Army control, ignored the Iranian request and bombed Iranian HQ and that of its allies, including a military field hospital killing 30 (9 Hezbollah and 21 Fatimiyoun) and tens of the Syrian army officers. The Turkish attack wounded more than 150 soldiers of the Syrian Army and their allies.
    Turkish backed jihadists and foreign fighters preparing an attack against the Syrian Army position around Idlib.

    It was now clear that Russia, Iran and its allies had misunderstood President Erdogan: Turkey is in the battle of Idlib to defend what Erdogan considers Turkish territory (Idlib). That is the meaning of the Turkish message, based on the behaviour and deployment of the Turkish Army along with the jihadists. Damascus and its allies consider that Russia made a mistake in not preventing the Turkish drones from attacking Syrian-controlled territory in Idlib. Moreover, Russia made another grave mistake in not warning its allies that the political leadership in Moscow had declared a one-sided ceasefire, exposing partners in the battlefield and denying them air cover.

    This is not the first time Russia has stopped a battle in the middle of its course in Syria. It happened before at al-Ghouta, east Aleppo, el-Eiss, al-Badiya and Deir-ezzour. It was Russia who asked the Syrian Army and its allies to prepare for the M5 and M4 battle. Militarily speaking, such an attack cannot be halted unless a ceasefire is agreed to on all fronts by all parties. The unilateral ceasefire was a severe mistake because Russia neither anticipated the Turkish reaction nor did it allow the Syrian Army and its allies to equip themselves with air defence systems. Moreover, while Turkey was bombing the Syrian Army and its allies for several hours, it took many hours for Russian commanders to convince Moscow to intervene and ask Turkey to stop the bombing.

    The military command of Syria and its allies believe that Turkey could now feel encouraged to repeat such an attack by Russian hesitation to stand against it. Thus Syria, Iran and allies have decided to secure air coverage for their forces spread over Idlib and to make sure they have independent protection even if Russia were to promise – according to the source – to lead a future attack and recover total air control.

    It is understandable that Russia is not in Syria to trigger a war against NATO member Turkey. However, NATO is not in a position to support Turkey because Turkey is occupying Syrian soil. Nevertheless, the war in Syria has shown how little the rule of law is respected by the West. A possible US intervention is not excluded with the goal of spoiling Russia, Iran and Syria's victory and their plans to liberate the Levant from jihadists and to unite the country. Possible US intervention is a source of concern to Russia and Iran, particularly when President Erdogan keeps asking for US direct intervention, a 30 km no-fly-zone, a buffer zone along the borders with Syria, US Patriot interception missiles to confront the Russian air force, and a protection for internally displaced Syrian refugees (at the same time as he organises their departure to Europe).

    Moscow maintains good commercial and energy ties with Turkey, and President Putin is not in Syria to start a new war with Syria's enemies Turkey, the US and Israel, notwithstanding the importance of the Levant for Russia's air force (Hmeymeem airbase) and navy (Tartous naval base).

    The options are limited: either Russia agrees to support the preparation of the inevitable Syrian counter-attack in the coming days and before a Putin-Erdogan summit, or the situation in Idlib will hibernate and remain static until jihadists attack Aleppo again in the next 6-7 months.

    uncle tungsten , Mar 1 2020 21:48 utc | 36

    DontBelieveEitherPr. #31
    The options are limited: either Russia agrees to support the preparation of the inevitable Syrian counter-attack in the coming days and before a Putin-Erdogan summit, or the situation in Idlib will hibernate and remain static until jihadists attack Aleppo again in the next 6-7 months.

    Magnier may be correct but one dimensional. Whatever, but methinks he ignores the Iranian position in this battle. The confidence of all the Middle Eastern allies including Syia must be seriously shaken at the Russian mistake (if there was one). That will generate a new battle command structure and Russia might have to work much harder and smarter to maintain its friends.

    There may well be shared responsibility in that neither Syria or Russian forces thought Erdoghan would use attack drones instead of reconnaissance drones. I am gobsmacked that any one would make that mistake when dealing with Erdoghan. He is a repeat offender.

    Zico , Mar 1 2020 21:53 utc | 38
    Russia's policy of pleasing everyone will end in a disaster. They're trying to please Erdogan, Assad and Bibi all at the same time on different levels.

    My hunch is that Russia sees Iran and Inranian influenc in Syria as a potential problem for them in future and wants them out. Hence the double game being played in partnership with Erdogan and Bibi. Much like what happened in Aleppo(Russia stopped providing air support) before it was re-captured by Syrian army and Iranian backed fighters, Russia will be sidelined in Idlib and the resistance axis will have to go it alone.

    They "helped" get rid of Suleimani, who they saw as an obstacle to their plans in Syria.. Funny enough, it was Suleimani who brought the Russians into the war. Before that, they're hanging out in their bases and issueing useless statements about dialogue with fsa etc etc.

    Ghost Ship , Mar 2 2020 0:05 utc | 45
    I wonder if the unilateral ceasefire by Russia was intended to allow Erdogan the chance to back off from making further mistakes in Syria. Now that he's rejected that opportunity and the Turkey/jihadists appear to have launched a drone attack on Hmymim air base, I suspect the ceasefire just ended. Now Putin has political cover for the onslaught that's going to hit the jihadists.
    uncle tungsten , Mar 2 2020 1:27 utc | 55
    Syrian counter force is assembling, Russia is participating in air cover.

    Y.N.M.S. is not a bad site for immediate info here but he does sleep at night Syria time. Solidly backs Assad, the SAA and allied forces.

    uncle tungsten , Mar 2 2020 3:06 utc | 66
    @dennis #20
    Erdogan isn't doing anything, anyone who understands Turkey's historical behavior would be shocked by.

    Turkey wants to make a place for itself - it, like Iran, shares a general religion with the Middle East but is both ethnically and religiously different.

    Unlike Iran or Saudi Arabia, Turkey doesn't have oil to speak of. But it does have a prime geopolitical position between the Middle East, Central Asia, Russia and Europe.

    Turkey has historically played the fan dancer between whatever factions seek to extend/maintain power across these borderland regions.

    Let's not forget, Turkey shot down a Russian plane not so long ago. While Turkey craves US and EU money (and still hosts Incirlik), at the same time, it has other opportunities including Qatari and Israeli gas; Russian gas cartel/Turk Stream, pipelines for gas and oil from Central Asia. On top of this, Turkey has a severe Kurd problem (large minority that is out-reproducing the natives) and an ambiguous religious position (doesn't possess a holy site for either Shi'a or Sunni).

    Bad luck for Syrian terrorists fighting for Erdoghan and GNA forces in Libya
    Lindsey Snell @LindseySnell
    ·
    5h
    In accordance with the MoU signed in Damascus, the first group of captured Syrian mercenaries will be deported soon. When I mentioned this development to a Hamza Division fighter today, he was dumbfounded. This possibility never occurred to them, and it's terrifying.
    Quote Tweet
    M.LNA
    @LNA2019M
    · 11h
    Parts of the agreement signed with the Syrian government are full Intelligence cooperation in the fields of military and counter #Terrorism and transferring all captured Syrian mercenary #terrorists to the Syrian authorities after being questioned in #libya
    #HoR #LNA #Syria

    There goes Erdoghan's strategy to shift the jihadis away from Turkey via Libya. He had better hope the Yemen channel remains open. It would be nice to see him stew in his own juice.

    c1ue , Mar 2 2020 2:38 utc | 60

    No one should be surprised by Turkey switching positioning with the breezes.

    [Mar 03, 2020] Neoliberals curse

    Mar 03, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    It took a rabid nationalist like Donald Trump to end the war in Afghanistan , whereas faithful neoliberal Barack Obama kept the war around because it provided "markets" for weapons corporations.

    [Mar 03, 2020] The USA policy is to destroy Iran for the crime of existence.

    Mar 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Trailer Trash , Mar 2 2020 17:53 utc | 97

    >Bernie Sanders will also restore the JCPOA

    This is like a new gangster who takes control of a neighborhood and reduces the required weekly protection payment. Hurray For Less Extortion!

    Hey Bernie, how about throw away the JCPOA, restore normal diplomatic and commercial relations, and apologize for 40 years of economic warfare?

    But that will never happen, because the Dummycrat policy is to destroy Iran for the crime of existence. How is it the Bernie people don't notice that Bernie always caucuses with the Dummycrats in Congress and is running on the Dummycrat ticket? We are supposed to believe that someone elected on the Dummycrat ticket won't follow Dummycrat party polices?

    Russ , Mar 2 2020 17:59 utc | 99

    "Bernie Sanders will also restore the JCPOA"

    He must think the Iranians are really stupid if he thinks he can get them to fall for that one again.

    fnord , Mar 2 2020 18:18 utc | 101
    @Trailer Trash, 97
    We are supposed to believe that someone elected on the Dummycrat ticket won't follow Dummycrat party polices?

    The way American electoral politics works, Sanders doesn't really have a choice except to try and steal the Democratic party's ballot line. An independent bid would split the left vote and make it impossible to win the general election, which is winner take all.

    At least that's what his supporters say. I think there's a grain of truth there. If Bernie wants to win, and not merely be a protest candidate, he has to take the ballot line of the party with the most left-wing voters, and that's not the Republican party.

    [Mar 02, 2020] In October 2018, Turkey and Russia signed an agreement in Astana to establish a de-confliction zone along the Damascus-Aleppo (M5) and Aleppo-Latakia (M4) highways. It was agreed that all belligerents would withdraw and render the roads accessible to civilian traffic and foreign jihadists leave Syria

    Mar 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DontBelieveEitherPr. , Mar 1 2020 21:02 utc | 31

    To those idiots here calling critque on Putins descion "anti-Putin troll": Please add Elijah J. Magnier and the Syrian and Iranian command and even Russian military commanders the same:

    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/03/01/erdogan-idlib-is-mine/

    A significant development took place in Syria on Friday. A Russian attack on a Turkish convoy in Idlib in north-west Syria killed 36 Turkish soldiers and officers. In retaliation, Turkey launched an unprecedented armed drone attack that lasted several hours and resulted in the killing and wounding of over 150 Syrian officers and soldiers and their allies of Hezbollah and the Fatimiy'oun. The Turkish drones destroyed dozens of tanks and rocket launchers deployed by the Syrian Army along the front line. Russia ceased air support for Syria and its allies demanded from Russia an explanation for the lack of coordination of its unilateral stoppage of air support, allowing the Turkish drones to kill so many Syrian Army and allied forces. What happened, why, and what will be the consequences?

    In October 2018, Turkey and Russia signed an agreement in Astana to establish a de-confliction zone along the Damascus-Aleppo (M5) and Aleppo-Latakia (M4) highways. It was agreed that all belligerents would withdraw and render the roads accessible to civilian traffic. Moreover, it was decided to end the presence of all jihadists, including the Tajik, Turkistan, Uighur and all other foreign fighters present in Idlib alongside Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (former ISIS, former al-Qaeda in Syria), Hurras al-Din (al-Qaeda in Syria), and Ahrar al-Sham with their foreign fighters and all "non-moderate" rebels. Last year, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham took full control of Idlib and its rural area under the watchful eyes of Turkey.

    Over a year later, the Turkish commitment to end the presence of jihadists and to open the M5 and M4 had not been respected. The Syrian Army and its allies, along with Russia, agreed to impose the Astana agreement by force. In a few weeks, the jihadists defence line crumbled under heavy Russian bombing. According to field commanders, the jihadists left fewer than 100 men in every village, who withdrew under the heavy bombing and preferred to leave rather than be surrounded by the Syrian Army and their fast advance.

    Turkey, according to the military commanders in Syria, saw the withdrawal of jihadists and decided to move thousands of troops into Syria to lead a counter-attack against the Syrian Army and its allies. This action made it impossible for Russia to distinguish between jihadists and the Turkish Army. Moreover, Turkey refrained from informing Russia – as it had agreed to according to the deconfliction agreement between Russia and Turkey – about the position of its regular forces. This was when Russia bombed a convoy killing 36 Turkish officers along with 17 jihadists who were present together with the Turkish Army.

    According to decision-maker sources in Syria, the Russian Air Force was not aware of the presence of the Turkish convoy when it was almost decimated in Idlib. The Turkish command has supplied Turkish vehicles and deployed thousands of Turkish soldiers with the jihadists. "It almost appears that Turkish President Recep Tayyeb Erdogan wanted this high number of Turkish casualties to stop the successful and rapid attack of the Syria army on Idlib front, and to curtail the fast withdrawal of jihadists."

    According to the sources, Russia was surprised by the number of Turkish soldiers killed and declared a unilateral ceasefire to calm down the front and de-escalate. Moscow ordered its military operational room in Syria to stop the military push and halt the attack on rural Idlib. Engaging in a war against Turkey is not part of President Putin's plans in Syria. Russia thought it the right time to quieten the front and allow Erdogan to lick his wounds.

    This Russian wishful thinking did not correspond to Turkish intentions and plans in Syria. Turkey moved its military command and control base on the borders with Syria to direct attacks against the Syrian Army and its allies. Turkish armed drones mounted an unprecedented organised drone attack lasting several hours, destroying the entire Syrian defence line on the M5 and M4 and undermining the effectiveness of the Syrian Army, equipped and trained by Russia. Furthermore, Iran had informed Turkey of the presence of its forces and allied forces along the Syrian Army, and asked Turkey to stop the attack to avoid casualties. Turkey, which maintains over 2000 officers and soldiers in 14 observation locations that are today under Syrian Army control, ignored the Iranian request and bombed Iranian HQ and that of its allies, including a military field hospital killing 30 (9 Hezbollah and 21 Fatimiyoun) and tens of the Syrian army officers. The Turkish attack wounded more than 150 soldiers of the Syrian Army and their allies.
    Turkish backed jihadists and foreign fighters preparing an attack against the Syrian Army position around Idlib.

    It was now clear that Russia, Iran and its allies had misunderstood President Erdogan: Turkey is in the battle of Idlib to defend what Erdogan considers Turkish territory (Idlib). That is the meaning of the Turkish message, based on the behaviour and deployment of the Turkish Army along with the jihadists. Damascus and its allies consider that Russia made a mistake in not preventing the Turkish drones from attacking Syrian-controlled territory in Idlib. Moreover, Russia made another grave mistake in not warning its allies that the political leadership in Moscow had declared a one-sided ceasefire, exposing partners in the battlefield and denying them air cover.

    This is not the first time Russia has stopped a battle in the middle of its course in Syria. It happened before at al-Ghouta, east Aleppo, el-Eiss, al-Badiya and Deir-ezzour. It was Russia who asked the Syrian Army and its allies to prepare for the M5 and M4 battle. Militarily speaking, such an attack cannot be halted unless a ceasefire is agreed to on all fronts by all parties. The unilateral ceasefire was a severe mistake because Russia neither anticipated the Turkish reaction nor did it allow the Syrian Army and its allies to equip themselves with air defence systems. Moreover, while Turkey was bombing the Syrian Army and its allies for several hours, it took many hours for Russian commanders to convince Moscow to intervene and ask Turkey to stop the bombing.

    The military command of Syria and its allies believe that Turkey could now feel encouraged to repeat such an attack by Russian hesitation to stand against it. Thus Syria, Iran and allies have decided to secure air coverage for their forces spread over Idlib and to make sure they have independent protection even if Russia were to promise – according to the source – to lead a future attack and recover total air control.

    It is understandable that Russia is not in Syria to trigger a war against NATO member Turkey. However, NATO is not in a position to support Turkey because Turkey is occupying Syrian soil. Nevertheless, the war in Syria has shown how little the rule of law is respected by the West. A possible US intervention is not excluded with the goal of spoiling Russia, Iran and Syria's victory and their plans to liberate the Levant from jihadists and to unite the country. Possible US intervention is a source of concern to Russia and Iran, particularly when President Erdogan keeps asking for US direct intervention, a 30 km no-fly-zone, a buffer zone along the borders with Syria, US Patriot interception missiles to confront the Russian air force, and a protection for internally displaced Syrian refugees (at the same time as he organises their departure to Europe).

    Moscow maintains good commercial and energy ties with Turkey, and President Putin is not in Syria to start a new war with Syria's enemies Turkey, the US and Israel, notwithstanding the importance of the Levant for Russia's air force (Hmeymeem airbase) and navy (Tartous naval base).

    The options are limited: either Russia agrees to support the preparation of the inevitable Syrian counter-attack in the coming days and before a Putin-Erdogan summit, or the situation in Idlib will hibernate and remain static until jihadists attack Aleppo again in the next 6-7 months.

    [Mar 02, 2020] Truthdig

    Mar 02, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

    Feb 24, 2020 Print Bookmark Opinion | TD originals The Zionist Colonization of Palestine comments

    Mr. Fish / Truthdig
    The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not the product of ancient ethnic hatreds. It is the tragic clash between two peoples with claims to the same land. It is a manufactured conflict, the outcome of a 100-year-old colonial occupation by Zionists and later Israel, backed by the British, the United States and other major imperial powers. This project is about the ongoing seizure of Palestinian land by the colonizers. It is about the rendering of the Palestinians as non-people, writing them out of the historical narrative as if they never existed and denying them basic human rights. Yet to state these incontrovertible facts of Jewish colonization -- supported by innumerable official reports and public and private communiques and statements, along with historical records and events -- sees Israel's defenders level charges of anti-Semitism and racism.

    Rashid Khalidi , the Edward Said professor of modern Arab studies at Columbia University, in his book " The Hundred Years' War on Palestine : A History of Settler Colonization and Resistance, 1917-2017" has meticulously documented this long project of colonization of Palestine. His exhaustive research, which includes internal, private communications between the early Zionists and Israeli leadership, leaves no doubt that the Jewish colonizers were acutely aware from the start that the Palestinian people had to be subjugated and removed to create the Jewish state. The Jewish leadership was also acutely aware that its intentions had to be masked behind euphemisms, the patina of biblical legitimacy by Jews to a land that had been Muslim since the seventh century, platitudes about human and democratic rights, the supposed benefits of colonization to the colonized and a mendacious call for democracy and peaceful co-existence with those targeted for destruction.

    "This is a unique colonialism that we've been subjected to where they have no use for us," Khalidi quotes Said as having written. "The best Palestinian for them," Said wrote, "is either dead or gone. It's not that they want to exploit us, or that they need to keep us there in the way of Algeria or South Africa as a subclass."

    Zionism was birthed from the evils of anti-Semitism. It was a response to the discrimination and violence inflicted on Jews, especially during the savage pogroms in Russia and Eastern Europe in the late 19th century and early 20th century that left thousands dead. The Zionist leader Theodor Herzl in 1896 published "Der Judenstaat," or "The Jewish State," in which he warned that Jews were not safe in Europe, a warning that within a few decades proved terrifyingly prescient with the rise of German fascism.

    Britain's support of a Jewish homeland was always colored by anti-Semitism. The 1917 decision by the British Cabinet, as stated in the Balfour Declaration , to support "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" was a principal part of a misguided endeavor based on anti-Semitic tropes. It was undertaken by the ruling British elites to unite "international Jewry" -- including officials of Jewish descent in senior positions in the new Bolshevik state in Russia -- behind Britain's flagging military campaign in World War I. The British leaders were convinced that Jews secretly controlled the U.S. financial system. American Jews, once promised a homeland in Palestine, would, they thought, bring the United States into the war and help finance the war effort. To add to these bizarre anti-Semitic canards, the British believed that Jews and Dönmes -- or "crypto-Jews" whose ancestors had converted to Christianity but who continued to practice the rituals of Judaism in secret -- controlled the Turkish government. If the Zionists were given a homeland in Palestine, the British believed, the Jews and Dönmes would turn on the Turkish regime, which was allied with Germany in the war, and the Turkish government would collapse. World Jewry, the British were convinced, was the key to winning the war.

    "With 'Great Jewry' against us," warned Britain's Sir Mark Sykes , who with the French diplomat François Georges-Picot created the secret treaty that carved up the Ottoman Empire between Britain and France, there would be no possibility of victory. Zionism, Sykes said, was a powerful global subterranean force that was "atmospheric, international, cosmopolitan, subconscious and unwritten, nay often unspoken."

    The British elites, including Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour , also believed that Jews could never be assimilated in British society and it was better for them to emigrate. It is telling that the only Jewish member of Prime Minister David Lloyd George's government, Edwin Montagu, vehemently opposed the Balfour Declaration. He argued that it would encourage states to expel its Jews. "Palestine will become the world's ghetto," he warned.

    This turned out to be the case after World War II when hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees, many rendered stateless, had nowhere to go but Palestine. Often, their communities had been destroyed during the war or their homes and land had been confiscated. Those Jews who returned to countries like Poland found they had nowhere to live and were often victims of discrimination as well as postwar anti-Semitic attacks and even massacres.

    The European powers dealt with the Jewish refugee crisis by shipping victims of the Holocaust to the Middle East. So, while leading Zionists understood that they had to uproot and displace Arabs to establish a homeland, they were also acutely aware that they were not wanted in the countries from which they had fled or been expelled. The Zionists and their supporters may have mouthed slogans such as "a land without a people for a people without a land" in speaking of Palestine, but, as the political philosopher Hannah Arendt observed, European powers were attempting to deal with the crime carried out against Jews in Europe by committing another crime, one against Palestinians. It was a recipe for endless conflict, especially since giving the Palestinians under occupation full democratic rights would risk loss of control of Israel by the Jews.

    Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the godfather of the right-wing ideology that has dominated Israel since 1977, an ideology openly embraced by Prime Ministers Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu, wrote bluntly in 1923: "Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonized. That is what the Arabs in Palestine are doing, and what they will persist in doing as long as there remains a solitary spark of hope that they will be able to prevent the transformation of 'Palestine' into the 'Land of Israel.' "

    This kind of public honesty, Khalidi notes, was rare among leading Zionists. Most of the Zionist leaders "protested the innocent purity of their aims and deceived their Western listeners, and perhaps themselves, with fairy tales about their benign intentions toward the Arab inhabitants of Palestine," he writes. The Zionists -- in a situation similar to that of today's supporters of Israel -- were aware it would be fatal to acknowledge that the creation of a Jewish homeland required the expulsion of the Arab majority. Such an admission would cause the colonizers to lose the world's sympathy. But among themselves the Zionists clearly understood that the use of armed force against the Arab majority was essential for the colonial project to succeed. "Zionist colonization can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population -- behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach," Jabotinsky wrote.

    The Jewish colonizers knew they needed an imperial patron to succeed and survive. Their first patron was Britain, which sent 100,000 troops to crush the Palestinian revolt of the 1930s and armed and trained Jewish militias known as the Haganah. The savage repression of that revolt included wholesale executions and aerial bombardment and left 10% of the adult male Arab population killed, wounded, imprisoned or exiled. The Zionists' second patron became the United States, which now, generations later, provides more than $3 billion a year to Israel. Israel, despite the myth of self-reliance it peddles about itself, would not be able to maintain its Palestinian colonies but for its imperial benefactors. This is why the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement frightens Israel. It is also why I support the BDS movement.

    The early Zionists bought up huge tracts of fertile Palestinian land and drove out the indigenous inhabitants. They subsidized European Jewish settlers sent to Palestine, where 94% of the inhabitants were Arabs. They created organizations such as the Jewish Colonization Association, later called the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, to administer the Zionist project.

    But, as Khalidi writes, "once colonialism took on a bad odor in the post-World War II era of decolonization, the colonial origins and practice of Zionism and Israel were whitewashed and conveniently forgotten in Israel and the West. In fact, Zionism -- for two decades the coddled step-child of British colonialism -- rebranded itself as an anticolonial movement."

    "Today, the conflict that was engendered by this classic nineteenth-century European colonial venture in a non-European land, supported from 1917 onward by the greatest Western imperial power of its age, is rarely described in such unvarnished terms," Khalidi writes. "Indeed, those who analyze not only Israeli settlement efforts in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, but the entire Zionist enterprise from the perspective of its colonial settler origins and nature are often vilified. Many cannot accept the contradiction inherent in the idea that although Zionism undoubtedly succeeded in creating a thriving national entity in Israel, its roots are as a colonial settler project (as are those of other modern countries: the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Nor can they accept that it would not have succeeded but for the support of the great imperial powers, Britain and later the United States. Zionism, therefore, could be and was both a national and a colonial settler movement at one and the same time."

    One of the central tenets of the Zionist and Israeli colonization is the denial of an authentic, independent Palestinian identity. During the British control of Palestine, the population was officially divided between Jews and "non-Jews." "There were no such thing as Palestinians they did not exist," onetime Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir quipped. This erasure, which requires an egregious act of historical amnesia, is what the Israeli sociologist Baruch Kimmerling called the "politicide" of the Palestinian people. Khalidi writes, "The surest way to eradicate a people's right to their land is to deny their historical connection to it."

    The creation of the state of Israel on May 15, 1948, was achieved by the Haganah and other Jewish groups through the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians and massacres that spread terror among the Palestinian population. The Haganah, trained and armed by the British, swiftly seized most of Palestine. It emptied West Jerusalem and cities such as Haifa and Jaffa, along with numerous towns and villages, of their Arab inhabitants. Palestinians call this moment in their history the Nakba, or the Catastrophe.

    "By the summer of 1949, the Palestinian polity had been devastated and most of its society uprooted," Khalidi writes. "Some 80 percent of the Arab population of the territory that at war's end became the new state of Israel had been forced from their homes and lost their lands and property. At least 720,000 of the 1.3 million Palestinians were made refugees. Thanks to this violent transformation, Israel controlled 78 percent of the territory of former Mandatory Palestine, and now ruled over the 160,000 Palestinian Arabs who had been able to remain, barely one-fifth of the prewar Arab population."

    Since 1948, Palestinians have heroically mounted one resistance effort after another, all unleashing disproportionate Israeli reprisals and a demonization of the Palestinians as terrorists. But this resistance has also forced the world to recognize the presence of Palestinians, despite the feverish efforts of Israel, the United States and many Arab regimes to remove them from historical consciousness. The repeated revolts, as Said noted, gave the Palestinians the right to tell their own story, the "permission to narrate."

    The colonial project has poisoned Israel, as feared by its most prescient leaders, including Moshe Dayan and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was assassinated by a right-wing Jewish extremist in 1995. Israel is an apartheid state that rivals and often surpasses the onetime savagery and racism of apartheid South Africa. Its democracy -- which was always exclusively for Jews -- has been hijacked by extremists, including current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who have implemented racial laws that were once championed mainly by marginalized fanatics such as Meir Kahane . The Israeli public is infected with racism. "Death to Arabs" is a popular chant at Israeli soccer matches. Jewish mobs and vigilantes, including thugs from right-wing youth groups such as Im Tirtzu, carry out indiscriminate acts of vandalism and violence against dissidents, Palestinians, Israeli Arabs and the hapless African immigrants who live crammed into the slums of Tel Aviv. Israel has promulgated a series of discriminatory laws against non-Jews that eerily resemble the racist Nuremberg Laws that disenfranchised Jews in Nazi Germany. The Communities Acceptance Law permits exclusively Jewish towns in Israel's Galilee region to bar applicants for residency on the basis of "suitability to the community's fundamental outlook." The late Uri Avnery, a left-wing politician and journalist, wrote that "Israel's very existence is threatened by fascism."

    In recent years, up to 1 million Israelis have left to live in the United States , many of them among Israel's most enlightened and educated citizens. Within Israel, human rights campaigners, intellectuals and journalists -- Israeli and Palestinian -- have found themselves vilified as traitors in government-sponsored smear campaigns, placed under state surveillance and subjected to arbitrary arrests. The Israeli educational system, starting in primary school, is an indoctrination machine for the military. The Israeli army periodically unleashes massive assaults with its air force, artillery and mechanized units on the largely defenseless 1.85 million Palestinians in Gaza, resulting in thousands of Palestinian dead and wounded. Israel runs the Saharonim detention camp in the Negev Desert, one of the largest detention centers in the world, where African immigrants can be held for up to three years without trial.

    The great Jewish scholar Yeshayahu Leibowitz, whom Isaiah Berlin called "the conscience of Israel," saw the mortal danger to Israel of its colonial project. He warned that if Israel did not separate church and state and end its colonial occupation of the Palestinians it would give rise to a corrupt rabbinate that would warp Judaism into a fascistic cult. "Religious nationalism is to religion what National Socialism was to socialism," said Leibowitz, who died in 1994. He saw that the blind veneration of the military, especially after the 1967 war in which Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem, would result in the degeneration of the Jewish society and the death of democracy.

    "Our situation will deteriorate to that of a second Vietnam [a reference to the war waged by the United States in the 1970s], to a war in constant escalation without prospect of ultimate resolution," Leibowitz wrote. He foresaw that "the Arabs would be the working people and the Jews the administrators, inspectors, officials, and police -- mainly secret police. A state ruling a hostile population of 1.5 million to 2 million foreigners would necessarily become a secret-police state, with all that this implies for education, free speech and democratic institutions. The corruption characteristic of every colonial regime would also prevail in the State of Israel. The administration would have to suppress Arab insurgency on the one hand and acquire Arab Quislings on the other. There is also good reason to fear that the Israel Defense Force, which has been until now a people's army, would, as a result of being transformed into an army of occupation, degenerate, and its commanders, who will have become military governors, resemble their colleagues in other nations."

    The Zionists could never have colonized the Palestinians without the backing of Western imperial powers whose motives were tainted by anti-Semitism. Many of the Jews who fled to Israel would not have done so but for the virulent European anti-Semitism that by the end of World War II saw 6 million Jews murdered. Israel was all that many impoverished and stateless survivors, robbed of their national rights, communities, homes and often most of their relatives, had left. It became the tragic fate of the Palestinians, who had no role in the European pogroms or the Holocaust, to be sacrificed on the altar of hate.

    [Mar 02, 2020] It appears the US-Taliban interim peace arrangement has hit a snag:

    Mar 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Mar 1 2020 20:58 utc | 30

    appears the US-Taliban interim peace arrangement has hit a snag:

    Afghan President Ashraf Ghani rejects Taliban prisoner release under U.S deal


    Afghan President Ashraf Ghani rejected on Sunday a Taliban demand for the release of 5,000 prisoners as a condition for talks with Afghanistan's government and civilians – included in a deal between the United States and the Islamist militants.

    "The government of Afghanistan has made no commitment to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners," Ghani told reporters in Kabul, a day after the deal was signed in Qatar to start a political settlement aimed at ending the United States' longest war.[.]

    was the Afghan government not a party to the negotiations? Strange!

    [Mar 02, 2020] The myth of the mujaheddin victory over the Soviets

    It was a stalemate, in which Afghan government held power over central towns and mujahidins over part of provinces. Neither can defeat each other. This stalemate was ruptured by the collapse of the USSR.
    Mar 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Ghost Ship , Mar 1 2020 18:54 utc | 17
    Afghanistan
    Now that the Americans have been defeated in Afghanistan perhaps they'll go back with a more critical eye to look at what happened in the Afghan-Soviet war against the mujaheddin. The Soviet Union decided to withdraw because it had reached a stalemate but the communist government managed to soldier on for three more years, and it was the collapse of the Soviet Union for financial reasons that resulted in funds being cutoff to the communist government that in turn led to the collapse of the government, so the Soviet Union was not brought down/defeated by the mujaheddin.
    Will coronavirus lead to the collapse of the Washington establishment? I don't know if it will but the descendants of the mujaheddin will no doubt claim responsibility for the defeat of the United States if it occurs.
    Yet again, Washington demonstrates that it doesn't really understand war.

    [Mar 01, 2020] That the whistleblower works for the CIA is a matter of public record, not some conspiracy theory

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Democrats did not want Adam Schiff to have to answer questions about the whistleblower, and they don't want the whistleblower's identity to be officially revealed. Such things do not contribute to the greatest cause of our time, the destruction of Donald Trump. ..."
    "... The whole point of having the House impeachment investigation proceed from the House Intelligence Committee, headed by Adam Schiff, was to send the signal that Trump is unacceptable to the nefarious powers that make up the Deep State, especially the intelligence agencies, especially the CIA. ..."
    "... What a world, then, when OP Democrats are cheering on John Bolton, hoping again for a savior to their sacred resistance cause, and meanwhile they aren't too excited about Rand Paul's intervention. For sure, it is a sign that a "resistance" isn't real when it needs a savior; it's not as if the French Resistance sat back waiting for Gen. de Gaulle. In any case, in the procession of horrible reactionary figures that Democrats have embraced, Bolton is probably the worst, and that's saying quite a lot. ..."
    "... People are even talking about "getting used to accepting the help of the CIA with the impeachment," and the like. (I realize I'm being repetitious here, but this stuff blows my mind, it is so disturbing.) At least they are recognizing the reality -- at least partially; that's something. But then what they do with this recognition is something that requires epic levels of TDS -- and, somehow, a great deal of the Left is going down this path. ..."
    "... The USA Deep State is a Five Eyes partner and as such Trump must be given the proverbial boot for being an uneducated boor lacking political gravitas & business gravitas with his narcissistic Smoot-Hawley II 2019 trade wars. Screw the confidence man-in-chief. He is a liability for the USA and global business. Trump is not an asset. ..."
    "... Almost as a by product of his 2016 victory, Trump showed up the MSM hacks for what they were, lying, partisan shills utterly lacking in any integrity and credibility. The same applies to the intrigues and corruption of the Dirty Cops and Spookocracy. They had to come out from behind the curtain and reveal themselves as the dirty, lying, seditious, treasonous, rabid criminal scum they are. The true nature of the State standing in the spotlight for all the world to see. This cannot be undone. ..."
    Mar 01, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    First , the whistleblower was ruled out as a possible witness -- this was essentially done behind the scenes, and in reality can be called a Deep State operation, though one exposed to some extent by Rand Paul. This has nothing to do with protecting the whistleblower or upholding the whistleblower statute, but instead with the fact that the whistleblower was a CIA plant in the White House.

    That the whistleblower works for the CIA is a matter of public record, not some conspiracy theory. Furthermore, for some time before the impeachment proceedings began, the whistleblower had been coordinating his efforts to undermine Trump with the head of the House Intelligence Committee, who happens to be Adam Schiff. It is possible that the connections with Schiff go even further or deeper. Obviously the Democrats do not want these things exposed.

    ... ... ...

    In this regard, there was a very special moment on January 29, when Chief Justice John Roberts refused to allow the reading of a question from Sen. Rand Paul that identified the alleged whistleblower. Paul then held a press conference in which he read his question.

    The question was directed at Adam Schiff, who claims not to have communicated with the whistleblower, despite much evidence to the contrary. (Further details can be read at here .) A propos of what I was just saying, Paul is described in the Politico article as "a longtime antagonist of Republican leaders." Excellent, good on you, Rand Paul.

    Whether this was a case of unintended consequences or not, one could say that this episode fed into the case against calling witnesses -- certainly the Democrats should not have been allowed to call witnesses if the Republicans could not call the whistleblower. But clearly this point is completely lost on those working in terms of the moving line of bullshit.

    One would think that Democrats would be happy with a Republican Senator who antagonizes leaders of his own party, but of course Rand Paul's effort only led to further "outrage" on the part of Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.

    The Democrats did not want Adam Schiff to have to answer questions about the whistleblower, and they don't want the whistleblower's identity to be officially revealed. Such things do not contribute to the greatest cause of our time, the destruction of Donald Trump.

    However, you see, there is a complementary purpose at work here, too. The whole point of having the House impeachment investigation proceed from the House Intelligence Committee, headed by Adam Schiff, was to send the signal that Trump is unacceptable to the nefarious powers that make up the Deep State, especially the intelligence agencies, especially the CIA.

    The only way these machinations can be combatted is to pull the curtain back further -- but the Republicans do not want this any more than the Democrats do, with a few possible exceptions such as Rand Paul. (As the Politico article states, Paul was chastised publicly by McConnell for submitting his question in the first place, and for criticizing Roberts in the press conference.)

    What a world, then, when OP Democrats are cheering on John Bolton, hoping again for a savior to their sacred resistance cause, and meanwhile they aren't too excited about Rand Paul's intervention. For sure, it is a sign that a "resistance" isn't real when it needs a savior; it's not as if the French Resistance sat back waiting for Gen. de Gaulle. In any case, in the procession of horrible reactionary figures that Democrats have embraced, Bolton is probably the worst, and that's saying quite a lot.

    ... ... ...

    Now we are at a moment when "the Left" is recognizing the role that the CIA and the rest of the "intelligence community" is played in the impeachment nonsense. This "Left" was already on board for the "impeachment process" itself, perhaps at moments with caveats about "not leaving everything up to the Democrats," "not just relying on the Democrats," but still accepting their assigned role as cheerleaders and self-important internet commentators. (And, sure, maybe that's all I am, too -- but the inability to distinguish form from content is one of the main problems of the existing Left.)

    Now, though, people on the Left are trying to get comfortable with, and trying to explain to themselves how they can get comfortable with, the obvious role of the "intelligence community" (with, in my view, the CIA in the leading role, but of course I'm not privy to the inner workings of this scene) in the impeachment process and other efforts to take down Trump's presidency.

    People are even talking about "getting used to accepting the help of the CIA with the impeachment," and the like. (I realize I'm being repetitious here, but this stuff blows my mind, it is so disturbing.) At least they are recognizing the reality -- at least partially; that's something. But then what they do with this recognition is something that requires epic levels of TDS -- and, somehow, a great deal of the Left is going down this path.

    They might think about the "help" that the CIA gave to the military in Bolivia to remove Evo Morales from office. They might think about the picture of Donald Trump that they find necessary to paint to justify what they are willing to swallow to remove him from office. They might think about the fact that ordinary Democrats are fine with this role for the CIA, and that Adam Schiff and others routinely offer the criticism/condemnation of Donald Trump that he doesn't accept the findings of the CIA or the rest of the intelligence agencies at face value.

    The moment for the Left, what calls itself and thinks of itself as that, to break with this lunacy has passed some time ago, but let us take this moment, of "accepting the help of the CIA, because Trump," as truly marking a point of no return.

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    The USA Deep State is a Five Eyes partner and as such Trump must be given the proverbial boot for being an uneducated boor lacking political gravitas & business gravitas with his narcissistic Smoot-Hawley II 2019 trade wars. Screw the confidence man-in-chief. He is a liability for the USA and global business. Trump is not an asset.

    paul ,

    Trump, Sanders and Corbyn were all in their own way agents of creative destruction. Trump tapped into the popular discontent of millions of Americans who realised that the system no longer even pretended to work in their interests, and were not prepared to be diverted down the Identity Politics Rabbit Hole.

    The Deep State was outraged that he had disrupted their programme by stealing Clinton's seat in the game of Musical Chairs. Being the most corrupt, dishonest and mendacious political candidate in all US history (despite some pretty stiff opposition) was supposed to be outweighed by her having a vagina. The Deplorables failed to sign up for the programme.

    Almost as a by product of his 2016 victory, Trump showed up the MSM hacks for what they were, lying, partisan shills utterly lacking in any integrity and credibility. The same applies to the intrigues and corruption of the Dirty Cops and Spookocracy. They had to come out from behind the curtain and reveal themselves as the dirty, lying, seditious, treasonous, rabid criminal scum they are. The true nature of the State standing in the spotlight for all the world to see. This cannot be undone.

    For all his pandering to Adelson and the Zionist Mafia, for all his Gives to Netanyahu, Trump has failed to deliver on the Big Ticket Items. Syria was supposed to have been invaded by now, with Hillary cackling demonically over Assad's death as she did over Gaddafi, and rapidly moving on to the main event with Iran. They will not forgive him for this.

    They realise they are under severe time pressure. It took them a century to gain their stranglehold over America, and this is a wasting asset. America is in terminal decline, and may soon be unable to fulfil its ordained role as dumb goy muscle serving Zionist interests. And the parasite will find it difficult to find a replacement host.

    George Mc ,

    Haven't you just agreed with him here?

    He thinks the left died in the 1960s, over a half century ago. It's pretty simple to identify a leftist: anti-imperialist/ anti-capitalist. The Democrats are imperialists. People who vote for the Democrats and Republicans are imperialists. This article is a confused mess, that's my whole point;)

    If the Democrats and Republicans (and those who vote for them) are imperialists (which they are) then the left are indeed dead – at least as far as political representation goes.

    Koba ,

    He's sent more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan he staged several coups in Latin America and wanted to take out the dprk and thier nukes and wants to bomb Iran! Winding down?!

    sharon marlowe ,

    First, an attempted assassination-by-drone on President Maduro of Venezuela happened. Then Trump dropped the largest conventional bomb on Afghanistan, with a mile-wide radius. Then Trump named Juan Guido as the new President of Venezuela in an overt coup. Then he bombed Syria over a fake chemical weapons claim. He bombed it before even an investigation was launched. Then the Trump regime orchestrated a military coup in Bolivia. Then he claimed that he was pulling out of Syria, but instead sent U.S. troops to take over Syrian oil fields. trump then assassinated Gen. Solemeni. Then he claimed that he will leave Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government, the Iraqi government asked the U.S. to leave, and Trump rejected the request. The Trump regime has tried orchestrating a coup in Iran, and a coup in Hong Kong. He expelled Russian diplomats en masse for the Skripal incident in England, before an investigation. He has sanctioned Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, and Venezuela. He has bombed Yemen, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Those are the things I'm aware of, but what else Trump has done in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and South America you can research if you wish. And now, the claim of leaving Afghanistan is as ridiculous as when he claimed to be leaving Syria and Iraq.

    Dungroanin ,

    Yeah yeah and 'he' gave Maduro 7 days to let their kid takeover in Venezuela! And built a wall. And got rid of obamacare and started a nuke war with Rocketman and and and ...

    sharon marlowe ,

    There were at least nine people killed when Trump bombed Douma.

    Only a psychopath would kill people because one of its spy drones was shot down. You don't get points for considering killing people for it and then changing your mind.

    People should get over Hillary and pay attention to what Trump has been doing. Why even mention what Hillary would have done in Syria, then proceed to be an apologist for what Trump has done around the world in just three years? Trump has been quite a prolific imperialist in such a short time. A second term could well put him above Bush and Obama as the 21st century's most horrible leaders on earth.

    Dungroanin ,

    ...If you think that the potus is the omnipotent ruler of everything he certainly seems to be having some problems with his minions in the CIA, NSA, FBI..State Dept etc.

    Savorywill ,

    Yes, what you say is right. However, he did warn both the Syrian and Russian military of the attack in the first instance, so no casualties, and in the second attack, he announced that the missiles had been launched before they hit the target, again resulting in no casualties. When the US drone was shot down by an Iranian missile, he considered retaliation. But, when advised of likely casualties, he called it off saying that human lives are more valuable than the cost of the drone. Yes, he did authorize the assassination of the Iranian general, and that was very bad. His claims that the general had organized the placement of roadside bombs that had killed US soldiers rings rather hollow, considering those shouldn't have been in Iraq in the first place.

    I am definitely not stating that he is perfect and doesn't do objectionable things. And he has authorized US forces to control the oil wells, which is against international law, but at least US soldiers are not actively engaged in fighting the Syrian government, something Hillary set in motion. However, the military does comprise a huge percentage of the US economy and there have to be reasons, and enemies, to justify its existence, so his situation as president must be very difficult, not a job I would want, that is for sure.

    The potus is best described (by Assad actually) as a CEO of a board of directors appointed by the shareholders who collectively determine their OWN interests.

    Your gaslighting ain't succeeding round here – Regime! So desperate, so so sad 🤣

    [Mar 01, 2020] Gina Haspel? She is probably equally good with a handgun, an ice pick and a pair of pliers.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Is she effective? What has she done to make her a spy mastermind? She is obviously a torturer, but is that a qualification in any way useful to be a intelligence agency boss? ..."
    "... The outcomes of incompetence and malicious intent are sometimes indistinguishable from one another. ..."
    Jan 16, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    fajensen , , January 14, 2020 at 11:13 am

    Gina Haspel? She is probably equally good with a handgun, an ice pick and a pair of pliers.

    curious euro , , January 14, 2020 at 11:49 am

    Is she effective? What has she done to make her a spy mastermind? She is obviously a torturer, but is that a qualification in any way useful to be a intelligence agency boss?

    I have the suspicion Haspel was elevated to their office by threatening "I know where all the bodies are buried (literally) and if you don't make me boss, I will tell". Blackmail can helping a career lots if successful.

    Thuto , , January 14, 2020 at 11:18 am

    The outcomes of incompetence and malicious intent are sometimes indistinguishable from one another. With the people Trump has surrounded himself with, horrible, nasty outcomes are par for the course because these guys are both incompetent and chock full of malicious intent. Instead of draining the swamp, he's gone and filled it with psychotic sociopaths.

    [Feb 29, 2020] A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change"

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... the American-led takedown of the post-World War II international system has shattered long-standing rules and norms of behavior. ..."
    "... The combination of disorder at home and abroad is spawning changes that are increasingly disadvantageous to the United States. With Congress having essentially walked off the job, there is a need for America's universities to provide the information and analysis of international best practices that the political system does not. ..."
    Feb 29, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    likbez , February 29, 2020 7:38 pm

    A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvILLCbOFo4

    I think this would be very informative for anybody seriously interested in the USA foreign policy. Listening to him is so sad to realize that instead of person of his caliber we have Pompous Pompeo, who forever is frozen on the level of a tank repair mechanical engineer, as the Secretary of State.

    Published on Feb 24, 2020

    In the United States and other democracies, political and economic systems still work in theory, but not in practice. Meanwhile, the American-led takedown of the post-World War II international system has shattered long-standing rules and norms of behavior.

    The combination of disorder at home and abroad is spawning changes that are increasingly disadvantageous to the United States. With Congress having essentially walked off the job, there is a need for America's universities to provide the information and analysis of international best practices that the political system does not.

    Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. is a senior fellow at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, ambassador to Saudi Arabia (during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm), acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and Chargé d'affaires at both Bangkok and Beijing. He began his diplomatic career in India but specialized in Chinese affairs. (He was the principal American interpreter during President Nixon's visit to Beijing in 1972.)

    Ambassador Freeman is a much sought-after public speaker (see http://chasfreeman.net ) and the author of several well-received books on statecraft and diplomacy. His most recent book, America's Continuing Misadventures in the Middle East was published in May 2016. Interesting Times: China, America, and the Shifting Balance of Prestige, appeared in March 2013. America's Misadventures in the Middle East came out in 2010, as did the most recent revision of The Diplomat's Dictionary, the companion volume to Arts of Power: Statecraft and Diplomacy. He was the editor of the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on "diplomacy."

    Chas Freeman studied at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and in Taiwan, and earned an AB magna cum laude from Yale University as well as a JD from the Harvard Law School.

    He chairs Projects International, Inc., a Washington-based firm that for more than three decades has helped its American and foreign clients create ventures across borders, facilitating their establishment of new businesses through the design, negotiation, capitalization, and implementation of greenfield investments, mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, franchises, one-off transactions, sales and agencies in other countries.

    He is the author of several books including the most recent

    Interesting times: China, America, and the shifting balance of prestige (2013)

    [Feb 29, 2020] Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who s Really In Charge Of The US Military by Cynthia Chung

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Thus, it should be no surprise to anyone in the world at this point in history, that the CIA holds no allegiance to any country. And it can be hardly expected that a President, who is actively under attack from all sides within his own country, is in a position to hold the CIA accountable for its past and future crimes ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Cynthia Chung via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    "There is a kind of character in thy life, That to the observer doth thy history, fully unfold."

    – William Shakespeare

    Once again we find ourselves in a situation of crisis, where the entire world holds its breath all at once and can only wait to see whether this volatile black cloud floating amongst us will breakout into a thunderstorm of nuclear war or harmlessly pass us by. The majority in the world seem to have the impression that this destructive fate totters back and forth at the whim of one man. It is only normal then, that during such times of crisis, we find ourselves trying to analyze and predict the thoughts and motives of just this one person. The assassination of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, a true hero for his fellow countrymen and undeniably an essential key figure in combating terrorism in Southwest Asia, was a terrible crime, an abhorrently repugnant provocation. It was meant to cause an apoplectic fervour, it was meant to make us who desire peace, lose our minds in indignation. And therefore, that is exactly what we should not do.

    In order to assess such situations, we cannot lose sight of the whole picture, and righteous indignation unfortunately causes the opposite to occur. Our focus becomes narrower and narrower to the point where we can only see or react moment to moment with what is right in front of our face. We are reduced to an obsession of twitter feeds, news blips and the doublespeak of 'official government statements'.

    Thus, before we may find firm ground to stand on regarding the situation of today, we must first have an understanding as to what caused the United States to enter into an endless campaign of regime-change warfare after WWII, or as former Chief of Special Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff Col. Prouty stated, three decades of the Indochina war.

    An Internal Shifting of Chess Pieces in the Shadows

    It is interesting timing that on Sept 2, 1945, the very day that WWII ended, Ho Chi Minh would announce the independence of Indochina. That on the very day that one of the most destructive wars to ever occur in history ended, another long war was declared at its doorstep. Churchill would announce his "Iron Curtain" against communism on March 5th, 1946, and there was no turning back at that point. The world had a mere 6 months to recover before it would be embroiled in another terrible war, except for the French, who would go to war against the Viet Minh opponents in French Indochina only days after WWII was over.

    In a previous paper I wrote titled "On Churchill's Sinews of Peace" , I went over a major re-organisation of the American government and its foreign intelligence bureau on the onset of Truman's de facto presidency. Recall that there was an attempted military coup d'état, which was exposed by General Butler in a public address in 1933, against the Presidency of FDR who was only inaugurated that year. One could say that there was a very marked disapproval from shadowy corners for how Roosevelt would organise the government.

    One key element to this reorganisation under Truman was the dismantling of the previously existing foreign intelligence bureau that was formed by FDR, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) on Sept 20, 1945 only two weeks after WWII was officially declared over. The OSS would be replaced by the CIA officially on Sept 18, 1947, with two years of an American intelligence purge and the internal shifting of chess pieces in the shadows. In addition, de-facto President Truman would also found the United States National Security Council on Sept 18, 1947, the same day he founded the CIA. The NSC was a council whose intended function was to serve as the President's principal arm for coordinating national security, foreign policies and policies among various government agencies.

    In Col. Prouty's book he states,

    " In 1955, I was designated to establish an office of special operations in compliance with National Security Council (NSC) Directive #5412 of March 15, 1954. This NSC Directive for the first time in the history of the United States defined covert operations and assigned that role to the Central Intelligence Agency to perform such missions , provided they had been directed to do so by the NSC, and further ordered active-duty Armed Forces personnel to avoid such operations. At the same time, the Armed Forces were directed to "provide the military support of the clandestine operations of the CIA" as an official function . "

    What this meant, was that there was to be an intermarriage of the foreign intelligence bureau with the military, and that the foreign intelligence bureau would act as top dog in the relationship, only taking orders from the NSC. Though the NSC includes the President, as we will see, the President is very far from being in the position of determining the NSC's policies.

    An Inheritance of Secret Wars

    " There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare. "

    – Sun Tzu

    On January 20th, 1961, John F. Kennedy was inaugurated as President of the United States. Along with inheriting the responsibility of the welfare of the country and its people, he was to also inherit a secret war with communist Cuba run by the CIA.

    JFK was disliked from the onset by the CIA and certain corridors of the Pentagon, they knew where he stood on foreign matters and that it would be in direct conflict for what they had been working towards for nearly 15 years. Kennedy would inherit the CIA secret operation against Cuba, which Prouty confirms in his book, was quietly upgraded by the CIA from the Eisenhower administration's March 1960 approval of a modest Cuban-exile support program (which included small air drop and over-the-beach operations) to a 3,000 man invasion brigade just before Kennedy entered office.

    This was a massive change in plans that was determined by neither President Eisenhower, who warned at the end of his term of the military industrial complex as a loose cannon, nor President Kennedy, but rather the foreign intelligence bureau who has never been subject to election or judgement by the people. It shows the level of hostility that Kennedy encountered as soon as he entered office, and the limitations of a President's power when he does not hold support from these intelligence and military quarters.

    Within three months into JFK's term, Operation Bay of Pigs (April 17th to 20th 1961) was scheduled. As the popular revisionist history goes; JFK refused to provide air cover for the exiled Cuban brigade and the land invasion was a calamitous failure and a decisive victory for Castro's Cuba. It was indeed an embarrassment for President Kennedy who had to take public responsibility for the failure, however, it was not an embarrassment because of his questionable competence as a leader. It was an embarrassment because, had he not taken public responsibility, he would have had to explain the real reason why it failed. That the CIA and military were against him and that he did not have control over them. If Kennedy were to admit such a thing, he would have lost all credibility as a President in his own country and internationally, and would have put the people of the United States in immediate danger amidst a Cold War.

    What really occurred was that there was a cancellation of the essential pre-dawn airstrike, by the Cuban Exile Brigade bombers from Nicaragua, to destroy Castro's last three combat jets. This airstrike was ordered by Kennedy himself. Kennedy was always against an American invasion of Cuba, and striking Castro's last jets by the Cuban Exile Brigade would have limited Castro's threat, without the U.S. directly supporting a regime change operation within Cuba. This went fully against the CIA's plan for Cuba.

    Kennedy's order for the airstrike on Castro's jets would be cancelled by Special Assistant for National Security Affairs McGeorge Bundy, four hours before the Exile Brigade's B-26s were to take off from Nicaragua, Kennedy was not brought into this decision. In addition, the Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles, the man in charge of the Bay of Pigs operation was unbelievably out of the country on the day of the landings.

    Col. Prouty, who was Chief of Special Operations during this time, elaborates on this situation:

    " Everyone connected with the planning of the Bay of Pigs invasion knew that the policy dictated by NSC 5412, positively prohibited the utilization of active-duty military personnel in covert operations. At no time was an "air cover" position written into the official invasion plan The "air cover" story that has been created is incorrect. "

    As a result, JFK who well understood the source of this fiasco, set up a Cuban Study Group the day after and charged it with the responsibility of determining the cause for the failure of the operation. The study group, consisting of Allen Dulles, Gen. Maxwell Taylor, Adm. Arleigh Burke and Attorney General Robert Kennedy (the only member JFK could trust), concluded that the failure was due to Bundy's telephone call to General Cabell (who was also CIA Deputy Director) that cancelled the President's air strike order.

    Kennedy had them.

    Humiliatingly, CIA Director Allen Dulles was part of formulating the conclusion that the Bay of Pigs op was a failure because of the CIA's intervention into the President's orders. This allowed for Kennedy to issue the National Security Action Memorandum #55 on June 28th, 1961, which began the process of changing the responsibility from the CIA to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As Prouty states,

    " When fully implemented, as Kennedy had planned, after his reelection in 1964, it would have taken the CIA out of the covert operation business. This proved to be one of the first nails in John F. Kennedy's coffin. "

    If this was not enough of a slap in the face to the CIA, Kennedy forced the resignation of CIA Director Allen Dulles, CIA Deputy Director for Plans Richard M. Bissell Jr. and CIA Deputy Director Charles Cabell.

    In Oct 1962, Kennedy was informed that Cuba had offensive Soviet missiles 90 miles from American shores. Soviet ships with more missiles were on their way towards Cuba but ended up turning around last minute. Rumours started to abound that JFK had cut a secret deal with Russian Premier Khrushchev, which was that the U.S. would not invade Cuba if the Soviets withdrew their missiles. Criticisms of JFK being soft on communism began to stir.

    NSAM #263, closely overseen by Kennedy, was released on Oct 11th, 1963, and outlined a policy decision " to withdraw 1,000 military personnel [from Vietnam] by the end of 1963 " and further stated that " It should be possible to withdraw the bulk of U.S. personnel [including the CIA and military] by 1965. " The Armed Forces newspaper Stars and Stripes had the headline U.S. TROOPS SEEN OUT OF VIET BY '65. Kennedy was winning the game and the American people.

    This was to be the final nail in Kennedy's coffin.

    Kennedy was brutally shot down only one month later, on Nov, 22nd 1963. His death should not just be seen as a tragic loss but, more importantly, it should be recognised for the successful military coup d'état that it was and is . The CIA showed what lengths it was ready to go to if a President stood in its way. (For more information on this coup refer to District Attorney of New Orleans at the time, Jim Garrison's book . And the excellently researched Oliver Stone movie "JFK")

    Through the Looking Glass

    On Nov. 26th 1963, a full four days after Kennedy's murder, de facto President Johnson signed NSAM #273 to begin the change of Kennedy's policy under #263. And on March 4th, 1964, Johnson signed NSAM #288 that marked the full escalation of the Vietnam War and involved 2,709,918 Americans directly serving in Vietnam, with 9,087,000 serving with the U.S. Armed Forces during this period.

    The Vietnam War, or more accurately the Indochina War, would continue for another 12 years after Kennedy's death, lasting a total of 20 years for Americans.

    Scattered black ops wars continued, but the next large scale-never ending war that would involve the world would begin full force on Sept 11, 2001 under the laughable title War on Terror, which is basically another Iron Curtain, a continuation of a 74 year Cold War. A war that is not meant to end until the ultimate regime changes are accomplished and the world sees the toppling of Russia and China. Iraq was destined for invasion long before the vague Gulf War of 1990 and even before Saddam Hussein was being backed by the Americans in the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s. Iran already suffered a CIA backed regime change in 1979.

    It had been understood far in advance by the CIA and US military that the toppling of sovereignty in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran needed to occur before Russia and China could be taken over. Such war tactics were formulaic after 3 decades of counterinsurgency against the CIA fueled "communist-insurgency" of Indochina. This is how today's terrorist-inspired insurgency functions, as a perfect CIA formula for an endless bloodbath.

    Former CIA Deputy Director (2010-2013) Michael Morell, who was supporting Hillary Clinton during the presidential election campaign and vehemently against the election of Trump, whom he claimed was being manipulated by Putin, said in a 2016 interview with Charlie Rose that Russians and Iranians in Syria should be killed covertly to 'pay the price' .

    Therefore, when a drone stroke occurs assassinating an Iranian Maj. Gen., even if the U.S. President takes onus on it, I would not be so quick as to believe that that is necessarily the case, or the full story. Just as I would not take the statements of President Rouhani accepting responsibility for the Iranian military shooting down 'by accident' the Boeing 737-800 plane which contained 176 civilians, who were mostly Iranian, as something that can be relegated to criminal negligence, but rather that there is very likely something else going on here.

    I would also not be quick to dismiss the timely release, or better described as leaked, draft letter from the US Command in Baghdad to the Iraqi government that suggests a removal of American forces from the country. Its timing certainly puts the President in a compromised situation. Though the decision to keep the American forces within Iraq or not is hardly a simple matter that the President alone can determine. In fact there is no reason why, after reviewing the case of JFK, we should think such a thing.

    One could speculate that the President was set up, with the official designation of the IRGC as "terrorist" occurring in April 2019 by the US State Department, a decision that was strongly supported by both Bolton and Pompeo, who were both members of the NSC at the time. This made it legal for a US military drone strike to occur against Soleimani under the 2001 AUMF, where the US military can attack any armed group deemed to be a terrorist threat. Both Bolton and Pompeo made no secret that they were overjoyed by Soleimani's assassination and Bolton went so far as to tweet "Hope this is the first step to regime change in Tehran." Bolton has also made it no secret that he is eager to testify against Trump in his possible impeachment trial.

    Former CIA Director Mike Pompeo was recorded at an unknown conference recently, but judging from the gross laughter of the audience it consists of wannabe CIA agents, where he admits that though West Points' cadet motto is "You will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do.", his training under the CIA was the very opposite, stating " I was the CIA Director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. It was like we had entire training courses. (long pause) It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment. "

    Thus, it should be no surprise to anyone in the world at this point in history, that the CIA holds no allegiance to any country. And it can be hardly expected that a President, who is actively under attack from all sides within his own country, is in a position to hold the CIA accountable for its past and future crimes .

    Tags Politics War Conflict

    ThomasChase1776 , 3 minutes ago link

    General Smedley Butler had an answer. Read his book.

    https://www.americanswhotellthetruth.org/portraits/major-general-smedley-butler

    Is-Be , 8 minutes ago link

    Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, a true hero for his fellow countrymen

    All his countrymen?

    Element , 15 minutes ago link

    Who's Really In Charge Of The US Military? - Cynthia Chung via The Strategic Culture Foundation

    Donald Trump, you stupid time-wasting twat .

    ThomasChase1776 , 5 minutes ago link

    LOL. That's a good one.

    Assuming Trump is doing what he said he would, why isn't our military guarding our border?
    Why hasn't our military left the middle east already?

    Who really runs our government?

    InTheLandOfTheBlind , 1 hour ago link

    As much as I hate the CIA, mi6 had more of hand in overthrowing iran than Langley did

    ThomasChase1776 , 4 minutes ago link

    Is that supposed to be an excuse?

    GRDguy , 1 hour ago link

    ". . . the CIA holds no allegiance to any country." But they sure kiss the *** of the financial sociopaths who write their paychecks and finance the black ops.

    ThomasChase1776 , 4 minutes ago link

    and Mossad

    Slaytheist , 1 hour ago link

    Does this bitch not know that the CIA is the currency mafia police....ffs, that's a **** ton of words.

    oneno , 1 hour ago link

    She knows ...

    SRV , 1 hour ago link

    Fletcher Prouty's book The Secret Team is a must read... he was on the inside and watched the formation of the permanent team established in the late 50s that assumed the power of the president.

    JFK fought that team...

    cynicalskeptic , 1 hour ago link

    Look at who the OSS recruited - Ivy League Skull and Bones types from rich families that made their fortunes in often questionable ventures.

    If you're the patriarch of some super wealthy family wouldn't you be thrilled to have younger family members working for the nation's intelligence agencies? Sort of the ultimate in 'inside information'. Plus these families had experience in things like drug smuggling, human trafficking and anything else you can imagine..... While the Brits started the opium trade with China, Americans jumped right in bringing opium from Turkey.

    Didn't take long before the now CIA became owned by the families whose members staffed it.

    InTheLandOfTheBlind , 43 minutes ago link

    Again ignoring the British influence. The CIA does not have a monopoly on intelligence

    Spiritual Anunnaki , 2 hours ago link

    One major aspect pertaining American involvment in Veitnam was something like 90% of the rubber produced Globally came from the region.

    It is more diverse now, being 3rd, with the association revealing that in 2017, Vietnam earned US$2.3 billion from export of 1.4 million tonnes of natural rubber, up 36% in value and 11.4% in volume year on year.

    Haboob , 2 hours ago link

    Fighting for rubber monopoly in Vietnam,fighting for oil monopoly in the middle east.

    That's life.

    Benito_Camela , 1 hour ago link

    Gunboat diplomacy is nothing new. War is and always has been a racket.

    InTheLandOfTheBlind , 38 minutes ago link

    Unfortunately it is a winning racket.

    Art_Vandelay , 2 hours ago link

    Betrayals, secrets, tyranny? Who's in charge? **** Cheney & Co.

    Benito_Camela , 1 hour ago link

    Mike Pimpeo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPt-zXn05ac

    InTheLandOfTheBlind , 36 minutes ago link

    The British crown

    Kan , 2 hours ago link

    Rockfellers formed the OSS then the CIA which is the brute force for the CFR which they also run and own. The bankers run y our country and bought and blackmailed all your politicians... Only buttplug and pedo's get to be in charge now folks.... and some 9th circle witches of course...

    TeethVillage88s , 1 hour ago link

    OSS & CIA were formed from Ivy League Schools/Uni's... who turned out to be Traitors to England & USSR... Same today I

    [Feb 29, 2020] Rand Paul says he will oppose John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani for Secretary of State

    Notable quotes:
    "... "Bolton is a longtime member of the failed Washington elite that Trump vowed to oppose, hell-bent on repeating virtually every foreign policy mistake the U.S. has made in the last 15 years - particularly those Trump promised to avoid as president," ..."
    "... "It's important that someone who was an unrepentant advocate for the Iraq War, who didn't learn the lessons of the Iraq War, shouldn't be the secretary of state for a president who says Iraq was ..."
    Nov 20, 2016 | rare.us

    Senator Rand Paul said Tuesday in an op-ed for Rare that he would oppose President-elect Donald Trump's rumored selection of former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton as Secretary of State.

    "Bolton is a longtime member of the failed Washington elite that Trump vowed to oppose, hell-bent on repeating virtually every foreign policy mistake the U.S. has made in the last 15 years - particularly those Trump promised to avoid as president,"

    Paul wrote citing U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya that Trump has criticized but that Bolton strongly advocated.

    Reports since have indicated that former New York City mayor and loyal Trump ally, Rudy Giuliani is being considered for the post.

    The Washington Post's David Weigel reports , "Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a newly reelected member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said this morning that he was inclined to oppose either former U.N. ambassador John Bolton or former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani if they were nominated for secretary of state."

    "It's important that someone who was an unrepentant advocate for the Iraq War, who didn't learn the lessons of the Iraq War, shouldn't be the secretary of state for a president who says Iraq was a big lesson," Paul told the Post. "Trump said that a thousand times. It would be a huge mistake for him to give over his foreign policy to someone who [supported the war]. I mean, you could not find more unrepentant advocates of regime change."

    Related: Rand Paul: Will Donald Trump betray voters by hiring John Bolton?

    [Feb 29, 2020] Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon Adelson, together put over $250 million in pro-Trump political money. In return, they want war with Iran

    Notable quotes:
    "... Know what this called. Extortion .Same as Zelensky and Ukraine ..but it is going to end badly, it has to. ..."
    Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    mcohen , says: December 21, 2019 at 6:09 am GMT

    @NoseytheDuke Lol.the fact that you looked and missed it.The devil is in the details.Joyce wrote.Mark green cheered on.I called bullshit

    "Although Singer was initially anti-Trump, and although Trump once attacked Singer for his pro-immigration politics ("Paul Singer represents amnesty and he represents illegal immigration pouring into the country"), Trump is now essentially funded by three Jews -- Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon Adelson, together accounting for over $250 million in pro-Trump political money. In return, they want war with Iran"

    Know what this called. Extortion .Same as Zelensky and Ukraine ..but it is going to end badly, it has to.

    [Feb 29, 2020] Trump Shows Himself a Better Friend of Zionists Than Even Truman

    Dec 15, 2019 | www.truthdig.com

    tex • 8 hours ago ,

    Don't be so quick on the "allegations of anti-Semitism against Democratic members of Congress have done no lasting damage." I've observed an increasing number of Jewish leaders recommending a further look at their support of Democrats & others recommending a switch to the R's. Rabbis from GA to a deep blue northern state have made such suggestions.

    Now we have NYC's Roger L. Simon, Dartmouth, Yale, Novelist, screenwriter, who "experienced a political transformation in which he felt alienated from what he saw as the excesses of the Left." On 12/12 Simon wrote "Trump Shows Himself a Better Friend to the Jews Than Even Truman."

    Excerpt:
    "Most Republican presidents were better than the Democrats, although the Jews vote Democratic, one of the more perplexing ironies of our time. It's almost, though not quite, like blacks voting Democratic, although Democratic policies have helped to eviscerate the black family. Jews, at least, have done well, but in spite of, not because of, Democratic policies."

    Various pro-Jew stuff "and finally, [Trump's] new adaptation of the Civil Rights Act to include the Jews. [which is criticized]. Do Jews deserve to be covered by a civil rights act? [Hitler certainly thought not]. He just wanted them dead. Trump clearly wants them to live. And thrive. Maybe it's because he has Jewish grandchildren. Who knows? But every Jew in America should thank him for it. Unfortunately, they don't. Far from it. And that's, as Trump himself would say, sad."

    Realize that colleges discriminate against Jews. Standards are higher for their admission to top US Universities as well as for Asians (Asians are suing & I love it). Left leaning US universities, & most big ones are, are anti-Jewish while supporting Muslim Student Associations behaving badly, including driving Jewish speakers from Campus.

    A former anti-Trump Jewish neighbor has shifted to the extent he now says he likes most of what Trump has done but complains Trump is not refined – Trump talks like a construction worker. He's not committed to vote for Trump, but to tease him, I'm getting him a "Trump 2020" Star of David Yarmulke for Xmas (He doesn't do Xmas, just a gift to a friend). Far better way to influence than the Liberals apply to the rest of us. Antifa winning friends & converts?

    The success of Jews & Asians in America makes a lie of "white privilege." Asians & Jews on average both do much better economically than white non-Jews. Calculations based on white's not including Jews shows "white privilege" ain't as advantageous as presented. Our nation's 2 poorest areas are one black & one white.

    Yet, the liberal beatdown of whites continues against those "deplorable" and poor "smelly Walmart shoppers" who voted for Trump. Liberal University Profs demand REQUIRED "white folks bad" courses & several Universities already do that. US universities, America's forced "Reeducation camps."

    An OK white law student was kicked out of law school for posting a "It's OK to be white" sign. For liberal universities, it ain't OK to be white – shame on you for being born. It ain't OK to be Jewish. It ain't OK to be Asian.

    VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATS YOU WRETCHED WHITES! JEWS! ASIANS! Fess up your sins!

    How dumb? Even our black citizens are turning away in increasing numbers. By no means a majority, but a trend. Dems/Libs bring it on themselves with all their identity politics & unrestrained hate of those unlike them.

    Whiterules tex • 2 hours ago • edited ,

    Excellent take down of cultural Marxism

    [Feb 29, 2020] Learning Nothing From the Ghost of Congress Past by Andrew J. Bacevich

    The USA is an imperial country. And wars is how empire is sustained and expanded. Bacevich does not even mention this fact.
    Notable quotes:
    "... While perfunctory congressional hearings may yet occur, a meaningful response -- one that would demand accountability, for example -- is about as likely as a bipartisan resolution to the impeachment crisis. ..."
    "... This implicit willingness to write off a costly, unwinnable, and arguably unnecessary war should itself prompt sober reflection. What we have here is a demonstration of how pervasive and deeply rooted American militarism has become. ..."
    "... we have become a nation given to misusing military power, abusing American soldiers, and averting our gaze from the results. ..."
    "... The impeachment hearings were probably the reason the WaPo published when it did. After all, the article tells us little that any semi-sentient observer hasn't known for over a decade now. ..."
    "... Then, today, we have another American trooper killed in Afghanistan, with many Afghans. Then, we have Trump, jutting his jaw out, as usual, to show how tough he is and...by golly, how tough America is. How patriotic! Damn it! Rah rah. He pardons and receives a war criminal at the white house, one of those Seals that murdered Afghans. ..."
    "... By military standards, there is supposed to be rules of engagement and punishment for outright breaking of such rules. But no, Trump is one ignorant, cold dude and the misery in numerous US invaded nations means nothing to this bum with a title and money ..."
    "... Were our senior government leaders more familiar with military service, especially as front line soldiers, they might have been less inclined to dawdle in these matters, agree with obfuscated results for political reasons, and waste so much effort. ..."
    Dec 23, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    The Afghanistan Papers could have been the start of redemption, but it's all been subsumed by impeachment and an uninterested public.

    ....

    While perfunctory congressional hearings may yet occur, a meaningful response -- one that would demand accountability, for example -- is about as likely as a bipartisan resolution to the impeachment crisis.

    This implicit willingness to write off a costly, unwinnable, and arguably unnecessary war should itself prompt sober reflection. What we have here is a demonstration of how pervasive and deeply rooted American militarism has become.

    Take seriously the speechifying heard on the floor of the House of Representatives in recent days and you'll be reassured that the United States remains a nation of laws, with Democrats and Republicans alike affirming their determination to defend our democracy and preserve the Constitution, even while disagreeing on what that might require at present.

    Take seriously the contents of the Afghanistan Papers and you'll reach a different conclusion: we have become a nation given to misusing military power, abusing American soldiers, and averting our gaze from the results. U.S. military expenditures and the Pentagon's array of foreign bases far exceed those of any other nation on the planet. In our willingness to use force, we (along with Israel) lead the pack. Putative adversaries such as China and Russia are models of self-restraint by comparison. And when it comes to cumulative body count, the United States is in a league of its own.

    Yet since the end of the Cold War and especially since 9/11, U.S. forces have rarely accomplished the purposes for which they are committed, the Pentagon concealing failure by downsizing its purposes. Afghanistan offers a good example. What began as Operation Enduring Freedom has become in all but name Operation Decent Interval, the aim being to disengage in a manner that will appear responsible, if only for a few years until the bottom falls out.

    So the real significance of the Post 's Afghanistan Papers is this: t hey invite Americans to contemplate a particularly vivid example what our misplaced infatuation with military power produces. Sadly, it appears evident that we will refuse the invitation. Don't blame Trump for this particular example of Washington's egregious irresponsibility.

    Andrew Bacevich is president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. His new book, The Age of Illusions: How America Squandered Its Cold War Victory , will be published next month.

    Sid Finster • a day ago
    The impeachment hearings were probably the reason the WaPo published when it did. After all, the article tells us little that any semi-sentient observer hasn't known for over a decade now.

    Anyway, nobody likes a bipartisan fiasco that cannot be neatly blamed on Team R (or Team D).

    John Achterhof Sid Finster • 12 hours ago
    Just give credit where it is due: the Post's reporting on the Afghanistan Papers is journalism at its very best.
    Fayez Abedaziz • 21 hours ago
    Then, today, we have another American trooper killed in Afghanistan, with many Afghans. Then, we have Trump, jutting his jaw out, as usual, to show how tough he is and...by golly, how tough America is. How patriotic! Damn it! Rah rah. He pardons and receives a war criminal at the white house, one of those Seals that murdered Afghans.

    By military standards, there is supposed to be rules of engagement and punishment for outright breaking of such rules. But no, Trump is one ignorant, cold dude and the misery in numerous US invaded nations means nothing to this bum with a title and money. What a joke this nations foreign policy is and the ignorant, don't care American people have become. Like never before. There were years when people actually talked about subjects. Not now, if you mention the weather they cower and look pained. The old days really were better.

    One example aside from the above: compare President Kennedy to Trump. What a riot...

    polistra24 • 21 hours ago
    Well, these documents are highly unsurprising. Everybody has known the facts for a long time. Everybody also knows that the US "government" will not change its ways. Its sole purpose and mission is to obliterate everything except Israel, and these documents are evidence of massive SUCCESS in its mission, not evidence of failure.
    Richard • 13 hours ago
    When the troops start to mutiny, the war will end.
    Marcus • 9 hours ago
    Were our senior government leaders more familiar with military service, especially as front line soldiers, they might have been less inclined to dawdle in these matters, agree with obfuscated results for political reasons, and waste so much effort.

    This is also to say that misleading documents and briefings from the military about progress in Afghanistan, while contemptible, did not cause the strategic failure. Contemporary reports from the press and other agencies indicated the effort was not working out plainly to anyone who wanted to pay attention. Our political leaders chose to ignore the truth for political gain.

    A more realistic temperament chastened by experience would have been more inclined to criticize and make corrections, and summon the courage to cut our losses rather than crow ignominiously about "cutting and running." Few such temperaments, it seems at least, make it to the top thee days.

    [Feb 29, 2020] Pompeo lies and smokescreen

    Pompeo has just four terms in the House of Representives befor getting postions of Director of CIA (whichsuggests previous involvement with CIA) and then paradoxically the head of the State Department, He retired from the alry in the rank of comptain and never participated in any battles. He serves only in Germany, and this can be classified as a chickenhawk. He never performed any dyplomatic duries in hs life and a large part of his adult life (1998-2006) was a greddy military contractor.
    Jan 07, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

    UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-Judicial Executions Agnes Callamard tweeted,

    #Pentagon statement on targeted killing of #suleimani :

    1. It mentions that it aimed at "deterring future Iranian attack plans". This however is very vague. Future is not the same as imminent which is the time based test required under international law. (1)

    -- Agnes Callamard (@AgnesCallamard) January 3, 2020

    2. Overall, the statement places far greater emphasis on past activities and violations allegedly commuted by Suleimani. As such the killing appears far more retaliatory for past acts than anticipatory for imminent self defense.

    -- Agnes Callamard (@AgnesCallamard) January 3, 2020

    3. The notion that Suleimani was "actively developing plans" is curious both from a semantic and military standpoint. Is it sufficient to meet the test of mecessity and proportionality?

    -- Agnes Callamard (@AgnesCallamard) January 3, 2020

    4. The statement fails to mention the other individuals killed alongside Suleimani. Collateral? Probably. Unlawful. Absolutely.

    -- Agnes Callamard (@AgnesCallamard) January 3, 2020

    [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change

    Highly recommended!
    I think everybody should listen the initial 47 minutes
    Notable quotes:
    "... Wanted to add that the malaise that is gripping the U.S. institutions is completely visible, it is not the opaque and obsequies portrait drawn by the punditry, news organizations, and elites. Seems most obvious to those of us outside the beltway that can clearly delineate between the failure of DC and the projections and marketing to the population that passes as wonky prose. Stupidity lacks the clarity, but brings the temerity making the facade not so subtle. ..."
    "... Literally the only endorsement I've heard of Tulsi Gabbard - and a strikingly convincing one ..."
    "... Isn't it just a question of the profits in the military business? ..."
    Feb 24, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    https://youtu.be/mvILLCbOFo4

    In the United States and other democracies, political and economic systems still work in theory, but not in practice. Meanwhile, the American-led takedown of the post-World War II international system has shattered long-standing rules and norms of behavior. The combination of disorder at home and abroad is spawning changes that are increasingly disadvantageous to the United States. With Congress having essentially walked off the job, there is a need for America's universities to provide the information and analysis of international best practices that the political system does not.

    Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. is a senior fellow at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, ambassador to Saudi Arabia (during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm), acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and Chargé d'affaires at both Bangkok and Beijing. He began his diplomatic career in India but specialized in Chinese affairs. (He was the principal American interpreter during President Nixon's visit to Beijing in 1972.)

    Ambassador Freeman is a much sought-after public speaker (see http://chasfreeman.net ) and the author of several well-received books on statecraft and diplomacy. His most recent book, America's Continuing Misadventures in the Middle East was published in May 2016. Interesting Times: China, America, and the Shifting Balance of Prestige, appeared in March 2013. America's Misadventures in the Middle East came out in 2010, as did the most recent revision of The Diplomat's Dictionary, the companion volume to Arts of Power: Statecraft and Diplomacy. He was the editor of the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on "diplomacy."

    Chas Freeman studied at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and in Taiwan, and earned an AB magna cum laude from Yale University as well as a JD from the Harvard Law School. He chairs Projects International, Inc., a Washington-based firm that for more than three decades has helped its American and foreign clients create ventures across borders, facilitating their establishment of new businesses through the design, negotiation, capitalization, and implementation of greenfield investments, mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, franchises, one-off transactions, sales and agencies in other countries.

    Trade Prosper , 3 days ago (edited)

    Well worth the watch and hope more see it, especially the presentation in the initial 47 minutes. We Americans take our deficits and the $ as the reserve currency far too lightly.

    strezztechnoid , 2 days ago

    Wanted to add that the malaise that is gripping the U.S. institutions is completely visible, it is not the opaque and obsequies portrait drawn by the punditry, news organizations, and elites. Seems most obvious to those of us outside the beltway that can clearly delineate between the failure of DC and the projections and marketing to the population that passes as wonky prose. Stupidity lacks the clarity, but brings the temerity making the facade not so subtle.

    yes it's me , 3 days ago

    Literally the only endorsement I've heard of Tulsi Gabbard - and a strikingly convincing one

    Bob Trajkoski , 3 days ago

    Way the US is Warmongering state and threat to humanity, on the planet.? Nukes in the hand's of gangsters

    strezztechnoid , 2 days ago (edited)

    No, not mercenaries, this is a protection racket. The U.N. address in late 2018 by the President (the laughter spoke volumes) was about as insightful as a "goodfellas" scene where the shakedown of the little guy is highlighted. It was the speeches by other countries at the meeting that was most informative.

    A definitive pullback from U.S. hegemony was palpable, real, and un-moderated. Large and small countries all expressed an unwillingness to be held under the thumb of the global bully. This is the result of having an over abundance of a particle within D.C.; not the electron, photon, or neutron...but the moron.

    Frank , 3 days ago

    Aura of imperial purpose.

    Dan Good , 7 hours ago

    Isn't it just a question of the profits in the military business?

    [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change

    Highly recommended!
    I think everybody should listen the initial 47 minutes
    Notable quotes:
    "... Wanted to add that the malaise that is gripping the U.S. institutions is completely visible, it is not the opaque and obsequies portrait drawn by the punditry, news organizations, and elites. Seems most obvious to those of us outside the beltway that can clearly delineate between the failure of DC and the projections and marketing to the population that passes as wonky prose. Stupidity lacks the clarity, but brings the temerity making the facade not so subtle. ..."
    "... Literally the only endorsement I've heard of Tulsi Gabbard - and a strikingly convincing one ..."
    "... Isn't it just a question of the profits in the military business? ..."
    Feb 24, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    https://youtu.be/mvILLCbOFo4

    In the United States and other democracies, political and economic systems still work in theory, but not in practice. Meanwhile, the American-led takedown of the post-World War II international system has shattered long-standing rules and norms of behavior. The combination of disorder at home and abroad is spawning changes that are increasingly disadvantageous to the United States. With Congress having essentially walked off the job, there is a need for America's universities to provide the information and analysis of international best practices that the political system does not.

    Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. is a senior fellow at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, ambassador to Saudi Arabia (during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm), acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and Chargé d'affaires at both Bangkok and Beijing. He began his diplomatic career in India but specialized in Chinese affairs. (He was the principal American interpreter during President Nixon's visit to Beijing in 1972.)

    Ambassador Freeman is a much sought-after public speaker (see http://chasfreeman.net ) and the author of several well-received books on statecraft and diplomacy. His most recent book, America's Continuing Misadventures in the Middle East was published in May 2016. Interesting Times: China, America, and the Shifting Balance of Prestige, appeared in March 2013. America's Misadventures in the Middle East came out in 2010, as did the most recent revision of The Diplomat's Dictionary, the companion volume to Arts of Power: Statecraft and Diplomacy. He was the editor of the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on "diplomacy."

    Chas Freeman studied at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and in Taiwan, and earned an AB magna cum laude from Yale University as well as a JD from the Harvard Law School. He chairs Projects International, Inc., a Washington-based firm that for more than three decades has helped its American and foreign clients create ventures across borders, facilitating their establishment of new businesses through the design, negotiation, capitalization, and implementation of greenfield investments, mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, franchises, one-off transactions, sales and agencies in other countries.

    Trade Prosper , 3 days ago (edited)

    Well worth the watch and hope more see it, especially the presentation in the initial 47 minutes. We Americans take our deficits and the $ as the reserve currency far too lightly.

    strezztechnoid , 2 days ago

    Wanted to add that the malaise that is gripping the U.S. institutions is completely visible, it is not the opaque and obsequies portrait drawn by the punditry, news organizations, and elites. Seems most obvious to those of us outside the beltway that can clearly delineate between the failure of DC and the projections and marketing to the population that passes as wonky prose. Stupidity lacks the clarity, but brings the temerity making the facade not so subtle.

    yes it's me , 3 days ago

    Literally the only endorsement I've heard of Tulsi Gabbard - and a strikingly convincing one

    Bob Trajkoski , 3 days ago

    Way the US is Warmongering state and threat to humanity, on the planet.? Nukes in the hand's of gangsters

    strezztechnoid , 2 days ago (edited)

    No, not mercenaries, this is a protection racket. The U.N. address in late 2018 by the President (the laughter spoke volumes) was about as insightful as a "goodfellas" scene where the shakedown of the little guy is highlighted. It was the speeches by other countries at the meeting that was most informative.

    A definitive pullback from U.S. hegemony was palpable, real, and un-moderated. Large and small countries all expressed an unwillingness to be held under the thumb of the global bully. This is the result of having an over abundance of a particle within D.C.; not the electron, photon, or neutron...but the moron.

    Frank , 3 days ago

    Aura of imperial purpose.

    Dan Good , 7 hours ago

    Isn't it just a question of the profits in the military business?

    [Feb 28, 2020] The jihadis have managed to retake Saraqib and cut the M5 afters days of relentless and costly attacks

    Feb 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    This back and forth on the battlefield is to be expected, especially with the direct support provided by Turkey to the jihadis. However something changed today. Russian and Syrian air attacks have increased with devastating results. Wild reports of a strike on a Turkish convoy and/or positions with up to a hundred dead Turkish soldiers are flashing across social media.

    Up to this point Turkish casualties have been a few here and a few there every day. This is a direct threat to Erdogan's authority. Twitter has been shut down within Turkey to hide the news.

    Turkish-Russian talks to redefine the Idlib deescalation zone have ended in failure. Erdogan has told all jihadis to be prepared to go for broke and has declared all Syria to be a target of the Grand Sultan's wrath.

    Putin has told Erdogan that his presence on any Syrian territory is temporary. All Syria will be ruled from Damascus.

    Christian J Chuba , 28 February 2020 at 08:18 AM

    I hope that the SAA withdrawal is in line with what they learned about conserving strength. For this style of fighting I bet the SAA is better at it than the Turks.

    CNN

    CNN was practically in tears over the 'Syrian regime's attack' that killed 33 Turkish soldiers, that both of them are in Syria is an unimportant detail. They then went on a long segue over the Russians systematically bombing civilian targets in Idlib and showed footage of a family living in a cave where the mothers have to keep watch at night to prevent scorpions and snakes from attacking their children. The correspondent was in Istanbul so she was relying on the usual suspects.

    I don't know if the footage was fake but according to our MSM militaries other than Russia, Iran, and Syria have mastered the art of non-disruptive advances to the degree that the U.S. likes them.

    turcopolier , 28 February 2020 at 09:00 AM
    All

    IMO there is little chance that Trump will establish a no-fly zone in Idlib. Milley will be making it clear to him that to do so is commit the US to fighting Russia. A declaration of a no-fly zone, like a naval blockade, is an act of war which has to be enforced to have any meaning. Russia is still a nuclear power. Trump has a lot on his plate nd will not add something like this to his burden of risk. IMO Erdogan will back away after he loses some more people. As I had previously written the lack of actual combat experience and repeated political purges of the Turkish officer corps have made the TSK an easy mark for a small but very experienced SAA.

    JJackson , 28 February 2020 at 09:46 AM
    White Helmets appeal for help from world powers in Syria's Idlib
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-51642406/white-helmets-appeal-for-help-from-world-powers-in-syria-s-idlib

    The White helmets are hurting and begging for help, with a little assistance from the BBC.

    Vegetius , 28 February 2020 at 09:50 AM
    If NATO is too feeble to defend Europe's borders from an Islamic invasion, Putin should to step in.

    Russia should simply assume Greece's debt and pay it over time with higher gas rates charged to western Europe. Then fly in the necessary men an material. Maybe call for Orthodox volunteers from Serbia and the Donbass and call it a coalition.

    How many battalions would it take to close Greece's land border with Turkey?

    Leith , 28 February 2020 at 10:26 AM
    Erdodog knows he will be toast if he retaliates on Russians. So he is now taking out his wrath on the Kurds and their SDF allies near Tel Rifaat in the northern Aleppo Shabha Canton. The Turks are heavily bombing (and shelling) there at Maranaz, Milkiyah, Alaqsah, Samouqa, Sheikh 'Isa, al Shabah Dam, Hassiya, Dayr Jamal, Ziarah, Kafr Naya, Sheikh Hilal, and Umm Hosh. Plus south of there they are bombing the Shiite cities of Nubl and Zahraa.

    I saw a single report from the STEP news agency that Russian and US Chiefs of Staff were meeting. But have not seen any verification of that in US news or in RT.

    Andrei Martyanov , 28 February 2020 at 12:03 PM
    If NATO is too feeble to defend Europe's borders from an Islamic invasion, Putin should to step in.

    Why? It is Europe's business and responsibility. No foot of Russian servicemen should step on European soil ever. Europe should enjoy its policies to the fullest--it is not Russia's business. Europe got exactly what it wanted and, frankly, deserved. In fact, the calls for Iron Curtain with Europe are stronger and stronger in Russia and I am not embellishing or exaggerating. Never in my life did I think that overwhelming majority of Russians would look at Europe with disdain and contempt, but this is precisely a mood in Russia. It also explains why increasing number of West Europeans (not least of them Germans) choose to immigrate to Russia.

    Sam Iam , 28 February 2020 at 12:36 PM
    Andrei,

    Like it or not, Russia IS a European power, and by definition impossible to not step its foot in European affairs. If you really believe that, than all military to military exchanges with Belarus should also cease.

    Saying that, I do agree with you that Russia should not assume more risk by getting in the way of a EU collapse. Only after Greece comes to its senses and realizes that the EU (bureaucracy) does not care about its plight as the Sultan directs more migrants its way, should Greece seek Russian assistance, at which point Putin should think long and hard whether its worth it on condition of Greece also leaving the hapless NATO organization.

    Just my two cents.

    Andrei Martyanov , 28 February 2020 at 01:38 PM
    Like it or not, Russia IS a European power, and by definition impossible to not step its foot in European affairs. If you really believe that, than all military to military exchanges with Belarus should also cease.

    Russia has zero obligations to Europe other than economic contractual obligations and referendum on April 22 (funny, B-day of Lenin, coincidence?)for amendments to Constitution WILL solidify primacy of Russian Law over any international obligations. Those amendments are accepted having primarily EU in mind. Belarus is a completely different case, since it is the same, in fact, even stronger connection to Russia than that of Canada's to US. But even here, Russia stopped being charitable (finally) for the benefit of Lukashenko's cottage industry and it is conceivable, albeit not as probable as was the case with Ukraine, that some sort of "color revolution" is possible there. Culturally, Russia has increasingly less and less in common with modern Europe. Here is an exhibit A.

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/481934-greta-thunberg-bristol-coronavirus/

    One doesn't talk with this people, one builds fortifications and cordon sanitaire. This is the future of Europe. Or, if any resistance arises--other extremum. Either way--it is not good.

    [Feb 28, 2020] Russia s Relationship With China Is Growing Despite Setbacks by Lyle J. Goldstein ,

    Highly recommended!
    Feb 23, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    Russia has closed major border crossings with China across the Far East due to the rapid spread of coronavirus. That constitutes a significant blow to a trading relationship that had only just begun to fully blossom. The closures come just as new auto and rail bridges spanning the Amur River are finally reaching completion.

    The primary line of debate among Russia-China relations analysts is whether the "rapprochement" is robust and tending toward even a genuine alliance or whether it is weak and has little to show for decades of cooperation other than a few rhetorical flourishes. After all, the skeptics note, if this bilateral relationship is so robust, then why did it take so long to get those bridges built?

    The China-Russia trading relationship does indeed remain underdeveloped and will evidently face additional headwinds in the near future (along with all of China's trading relationships, so it seems). But the importance of security ties can hardly be disputed, especially if one takes the long view. Could China have fought the United States to a stalemate in the Korean War without Soviet military assistance? Not a chance. More recently, Russia's sale of high-tech air and naval weaponry during the 1990s and 2000s created a solid foundation for today's muscle-bound dragon with both claws (DF-26) and sharp fangs (e.g. YJ-18). But will it go further?

    A tantalizing hint was offered by Russian president Vladimir Putin at the Valdai Conference in early October 2019. During his remarks, he dropped the following bombshell: "I probably won't open a big secret. It'll become clear anyhow. We are now helping our Chinese partners to create a missile attack warning system. This is a very serious thing, which will increase the defense capability of the People's Republic of China in a fundamental way. Because now only the USA and Russia have such a system [Большой тайны, наверно, не открою. Все равно это станет ясно. Мы сейчас помогаем нашим китайским партнерам создать систему СПРН – систему предупреждения о ракетном нападении. Это очень серьезная вещь, которая капитальным, кардинальным образом повысит обороноспособность Китайской Народной Республики. Потому что сейчас такую систему имеют только США и Россия]." This seemingly major step forward in Russia-China military cooperation demands greater scrutiny. It also provides an interesting opportunity to gauge opinion among Russian strategists regarding the long-term viability of a close military partnership with the Middle Kingdom.

    One impressively comprehensive Russian appraisal begins by stating that "Russia had to look for various options for answering Washington's actions" to withdraw from the INF Treaty. The same article notes somewhat ominously that the United States is preparing in case of "accidental nuclear war with Russia." Employing the Russian acronym "SPRN" literally "warning systems against rocket attack [системы предупреждения о ракетном нападении]" for early warning system, this assessment also makes the important point that Russia's SPRN has only recently completed a long process of upgrades meant to fill "gaps [разрывы]" caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union, when key facilities for early warning were located in non-Russian parts of the USSR.

    The article quotes one Moscow defense expert, Igor Korotchenko [Игор Коротченко], as offering the following assessment: "This is really a huge contribution of Russia to strategic stability, since China receives a powerful tool in order not to become a victim of the first disarming blow from the United States." Another Russian expert, Konstantin Sivkov [Константин Сивков], maintained that this move would enhance "global stability" but also articulated some concern with respect to Russia's long-term interests. "When China has at its disposal all the technologies that Russia has at its disposal, or creates similar ones, it will cease to need Russia as a defender," Sivkov said. "And this could adversely affect Russian-Chinese relations." Korotchenko, however, is more bullish on the long-term prospects for the defense relationship with Beijing. He underlined the commercial prospects for Russian companies, and added that the early warning initiative will "contribute to the further rapprochement of Russia and China, building a common security policy [поспособствует дальнейшему сближению России и Китая, выстраиванию общей политики в области безопасности]."

    That's an interesting disagreement among Russian security specialists, for sure, but another rather significant observation regarding these developments was offered in this same article by the former deputy commander of Russia's air defense command, Alexander Luzan [Александр Лузан]. He contends that Russia will benefit from the enhanced cooperation with Beijing on an early warning. Luzan explains that the ground components of Russia's SPRN are comprised of []long range "Voronezh" [Воронеж] radars that can see out four thousand to six thousand kilometers to detect ICBM launches. Short-range "Sunflower [Подсолнухи]" radars are more suitable for warning of short-range launches, but also offer ship-detection capabilities. Directly reflecting on operational advantages for the Russian military, Luzan observes: "Vladivostok and Primorye are protected here, but there is nothing 'in depth.' We once tried to deploy our facilities in Mongolia, but it didn't work out very well. Therefore, if the Chinese close this 'tongue,' it will be very important for Russia [Владивосток и Приморье у нас защищены, а 'в глубину' там ничего нет. Мы когда-то в Монголии пытались разместить свои комплексы, но не очень получилось. Потому если китайцы этот 'язычок' закроют, то для России это будет очень важно]." Again citing this Russian general, the article states that "a unified information space is created and data is exchanged with Chinese radars, [and therefore] 'the security of our country from the east will be even better.'"

    Such interpretations are generally in accord with the analysis of Vladimir Petrovsky [Владимир Петровский,], a senior fellow and military specialist at Moscow's Institute of the Far East of the Russian Academy of Sciences. This analyst writes that many believe that Putin's announcement of this strategic cooperation initiative at Valdai signals that "the military alliance between Russia and China . . . has finally become real." Petrovsky also notes that other specialists have begun to speculate on the meaning of a "retaliatory strike" under such circumstances, wherein the early warning is relayed by a third country. He quotes the Russian president (speaking at Valdai) further on the matter of motives for new missile deployments in the Asia-Pacific region: "we suddenly heard from the American military that the first step in this direction would be taken just in Asia. But that step also impacts on us, because we need to understand: where in Asia, will Russian territory be endangered or not? By the way, it's immediately clear what was the root cause of the exit: not Russia and not mythical violations of the [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] Treaty by us. If they are going to put [U.S. missiles] in Asia, then Asia is the primary reason for withdrawing from this Treaty [вдруг услышали от американских военных, что первый шаг в этом направлении будет сделан как раз в Азии. Но он и нас затрагивает, потому что надо понять: где в Азии, будет доставать это российскую территорию или нет? Кстати говоря, сразу понятно, что было первопричиной выхода: не Россия и не мифические нарушения нами Договора. Если они собираются ставить в Азии, то Азия и является первопричиной выхода из этого Договора]." In other words, Putin's announcement of this initiative to accelerate military cooperation with China is intended, in part, as a response to the United States' move to exit the INF accord.

    Strongly hinting that Beijing might well gain access to Russian early-warning radars based in the Arctic, Petrovsky observes, "Taking into account geography, it is quite possible to develop protocols for the exchange of data between national SPRN." He further contends that this early warning cooperation will be "mutually beneficial and not without compensation [эта помощь -- взаимовыгодная и небезвозмездная]." This military expert explains that China still can learn from Russian radar proficiency, but also implies that the Russian side may gain some advantages from China's evident prowess in microelectronics, for example. Moreover, he suggests, "a possible Chinese satellite constellation could be a good addition to Russian orbital facilities." Still, Petrovsky concludes that Russia and China "are not creating a military-political alliance. It is rather a matter of coordinating the military policies." Playing down the significance of this new initiative, this specialist also notes that Russia and China have been holding annual ballistic missile defense command and staff exercises for about a decade already.

    [Feb 27, 2020] Qasem Soleimani - Wikipedia

    Jan 06, 2020 | en.wikipedia.org

    Orchestration of military escalation in 2015 In 2015, Soleimani started to gather support from various sources in order to combat the newly resurgent ISIL and rebel groups which were both successful in taking large swathes of territory away from Assad's forces. He was reportedly the main architect of the joint intervention involving Russia as a new partner with Assad and Hezbollah. In 2015, Soleimani started to gather support from various sources in order to combat the newly resurgent ISIL and rebel groups which were both successful in taking large swathes of territory away from Assad's forces. He was reportedly the main architect of the joint intervention involving Russia as a new partner with Assad and Hezbollah. [47] [48] [49] [50]

    According to Reuters, at a meeting in Moscow in July, Soleimani unfurled a map of Syria to explain to his Russian hosts how a series of defeats for President Bashar al-Assad could be turned into victory – with Russia's help. Qasem Soleimani's visit to Moscow was the first step in planning for a Russian military intervention that has reshaped the Syrian war and forged a new According to Reuters, at a meeting in Moscow in July, Soleimani unfurled a map of Syria to explain to his Russian hosts how a series of defeats for President Bashar al-Assad could be turned into victory – with Russia's help. Qasem Soleimani's visit to Moscow was the first step in planning for a Russian military intervention that has reshaped the Syrian war and forged a new According to Reuters, at a meeting in Moscow in July, Soleimani unfurled a map of Syria to explain to his Russian hosts how a series of defeats for President Bashar al-Assad could be turned into victory – with Russia's help.

    Qasem Soleimani's visit to Moscow was the first step in planning for a Russian military intervention that has reshaped the Syrian war and forged a new Iran–Russia alliance in support of the Syrian (and Iraqi) governments. Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei also sent a senior envoy to Moscow to meet President Vladimir Putin. "Putin reportedly told [a senior Iranian envoy] 'Okay we will intervene. Send Qassem Soleimani.'" General Soleimani went to explain the map of the theatre and coordinate the strategic escalation of military forces in Syria. [49]

    Operations in Aleppo
    Map of the 2015 Aleppo offensives. [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56]

    Soleimani had a decisive impact on the theater of operations, which led to a strong advance in southern Aleppo with the government and allied forces re-capturing two military bases and dozens of towns and villages in a matter of weeks. There was also a series of major advances towards Kuweiris air-base to the north-east. [57] By mid-November, the Syrian army and its allies had gained ground in southern areas of Aleppo Governorate, capturing numerous rebel strongholds. Soleimani was reported to have personally led the drive deep into the southern Aleppo countryside where many towns and villages fell into government hands. He reportedly commanded the Syrian Arab Army's 4th Mechanized Division, Hezbollah, Harakat Al-Nujaba (Iraqi), Kata'ib Hezbollah (Iraqi), Liwaa Abu Fadl Al-Abbas (Iraqi), and Firqa Fatayyemoun (Afghan/Iranian volunteers). [58]

    In early February 2016, backed by Russian and Syrian air force airstrikes, the 4th Mechanized Division – in close coordination with Hezbollah, the National Defense Forces (NDF), Kata'eb Hezbollah, and Harakat Al-Nujaba – launched an offensive in Aleppo Governorate's northern countryside, [59] which eventually broke the three-year siege of Nubl and Al-Zahraa and cut off the rebels' main supply route from Turkey. According to a senior, non-Syrian security source close to Damascus, Iranian fighters played a crucial role in the conflict. "Qassem Soleimani is there in the same area", he said. [60] In December 2016, new photos emerged of Soleimani at the Citadel of Aleppo , though the exact date of the photos is unknown. [61] [62]

    ... ... ...

    In 2014, Qasem Soleimani was in the Iraqi city of Amirli , to work with the Iraqi forces to push back militants from ISIL. [68] [69] According to the Los Angeles Times , which reported that Amirli was the first town to successfully withstand an ISIS invasion, it was secured thanks to "an unusual partnership of Iraqi and Kurdish soldiers, Iranian-backed Shiite militias and U.S. warplanes". The U.S. acted as a force multiplier for a number of Iranian-backed armed groups – at the same time that was present on the battlefield. [70] [71] Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani prays in the Syrian desert during a local pro-government offensive in 2017

    A senior Iraqi official told the BBC that when the city of Mosul fell, the rapid reaction of Iran, rather than American bombing, was what prevented a more widespread collapse. [11] Qasem Soleimani also seems to have been instrumental in planning the operation to relieve Amirli in Saladin Governorate, where ISIL had laid siege to an important city. [66] In fact the Quds force operatives under Soleimani's command seem to have been deeply involved with not only the Iraqi army and Shi'ite militias but also the Kurdish in the Battle of Amirli , [72] not only providing liaisons for intelligence-sharing but also the supply of arms and munitions in addition to "providing expertise". [73]

    In the operation to liberate Jurf Al Sakhar , he was reportedly "present on the battlefield". Some Shia militia commanders described Soleimani as "fearless" – one pointing out that the Iranian general never wears a flak jacket , even on the front lines. [74]

    In November 2014, Shi'ite and Kurdish forces under Soleimani's command pushed ISIS out of Iraqi villages of Jalawla and Saadia, in the Diyala Governorate . [67]

    Soleimani was also intimately involved in the planning and execution of the operation to liberate Tikrit . [75] [76]

    Soleimani played an integral role in the organisation and planning of the crucial operation to retake the city of Tikrit in Iraq from ISIS. The city of Tikrit rests on the left bank of the Tigris river and is the largest and most important city between Baghdad and Mosul, giving it a high strategic value. The city fell to ISIS during 2014 when ISIS made immense gains in northern and central Iraq. After its capture, ISIL's massacre at Camp Speicher led to 1,600 to 1,700 deaths of Iraqi Army cadets and soldiers. After months of careful preparation and intelligence gathering an offensive to encircle and capture Tikrit was launched in early March 2015. [76]

    [Feb 27, 2020] A Foreign Policy 'Consensus' Imposed from Above by Daniel Larison

    Feb 27, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    ark Hannah observes that a bipartisan foreign policy consensus stifles legitimate debate and that it is antithetical to democratic politics:

    In 1948, after bowing out of a bid to defeat Democratic President Harry Truman, Sen. Arthur Vandenberg (R-Mich.) declared, "We must stop politics at the water's edge." In other words, we should confine our disagreements to domestic policy and project unity to our foreign friends and foes. But that unity was merely a product of the geopolitical realities at the dawn of the Cold War. More often, an elite consensus feeds stale policy, allows bad ideas to go unchallenged and narrows the range of new proposals welcomed as legitimate. There's a word that describes a politically powerful person making a high-minded exhortation to "stop politics." That word is not "democracy."

    There is no tradition of -- nor enduring allegiance to -- bipartisan consensus in America's international relations. Nor should there be.

    Americans have always been divided on foreign policy questions, and it is only when there is a sufficiently grave external threat or there is a concerted effort to impose a particular view that those divisions recede temporarily. These divisions will always resurface because our country is too large and too diverse for our population to reach a settled consensus for very long. When there is a consensus among politicians and foreign policy professionals, it masks these divisions and frequently fails to represent the views of large numbers of Americans. The existence of such a consensus is not a case of politics "stopping at the water's edge." It is the establishment of a particular set of assumptions about U.S. power and its role in the world that define the boundaries of what is acceptable in foreign policy debate.

    The bipartisan consensus that most of our political leaders subscribe to and reinforce is made first in Washington and then handed down to the country. It has been and continues to be very much a top-down process in which the public is offered a limited menu of options, and they are then told that even most of those options are unworkable. Once they are created, consensus views become excessively rigid, and the policies informed by them lag behind changing circumstances. That produces inadequate and unrealistic policies because new and unconventional ideas are discouraged or dismissed out of hand because they do not follow consensus assumptions. Like any working set of ideas, consensus views may start out being timely and appropriate for their circumstances, but when they settle and harden into an idol they become an impediment to informed and effective policymaking.

    For example, the goal of North Korea policy across multiple administrations was to prevent North Korea from obtaining nuclear weapons and then to pressure North Korea into giving up the weapons that it had obtained. Perversely, the first policy contributed directly to its own failure by driving North Korea to leave the Non-Proliferation Treaty and to test its first nuclear device, and then the last two administrations have tried in vain to reverse that outcome. North Korea's denuclearization has been a consistent U.S. goal under presidents from both parties, but repeated failure has not yet forced our leaders to adapt and try something else. Everything else related to North Korea has been held hostage to this wild goose chase of seeking complete denuclearization that will never happen. The bipartisan consensus doesn't just enshrine mistaken assumptions as wisdom, but it actively fights against those that try to make the consensus more responsive to contemporary realities.

    Defenders of the bipartisan consensus discourage and penalize analysts and writers that diverge too much from it on the assumption that the consensus is somehow integral to maintaining U.S. security. Instead of recognizing the rigidity of the consensus as a weakness that leads to repeated failures, defenders of the consensus see rejection of consensus assumptions as the real danger. This is what leads to ritual denunciations of "isolationists" and "appeasement" and "being soft" on this or that government. Adherence to consensus assumptions also means never having to say you're sorry for any costly policy failures that they produce. One reason why there is no real accountability in foreign policy is that adherents of the bipartisan consensus never penalize their own for causing debacles overseas, so that even the authors of the greatest crimes and blunders are gradually rehabilitated and feted as wise men and women. When so many of the same people with the same assumptions are permitted to set policy, we should expect to see one failure after another, and sure enough that is what we have had for decades.

    One of the things that many advocates of restraint have talked about in recent years is the need to democratize U.S. foreign policy. That not only means holding the government accountable for what it does and insisting on Congress' role in matters of war, but it also means accepting a much wider range of views on how the U.S. should be acting in the world. It would mean actually forging a consensus that is much more representative of what Americans want our government to be doing in the world.

    Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC, where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, World Politics Review, Politico Magazine, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .

    [Feb 27, 2020] The Obama Administration Wrecked Libya for a Generation by Doug Bandow

    Jan 10, 2020 | The American Conservative
    Foreign Affairs

    'We came, we saw, he died' -- Hillary Clinton smirked when she said it. She had no idea how many people that would apply to. A fighter loyal to the Libyan internationally-recognised Government of National Accord (GNA) fires a heavy machine gun. (MAHMUD TURKIA/AFP via Getty Images)

    Libya's ongoing destruction belongs to Hillary Clinton more than anyone else. It was she who pushed President Barack Obama to launch his splendid little war, backing the overthrow of Moammar Gaddafi in the name of protecting Libya's civilians. When later asked about Gaddafi's death, she cackled and exclaimed: "We came, we saw, he died."

    Alas, his was not the last death in that conflict, which has flared anew, turning Libya into a real-life Game of Thrones . An artificial country already suffering from deep regional divisions, Libya has been further torn apart by political and religious differences. One commander fighting on behalf of the Government of National Accord (GNA), Salem Bin Ismail, told the BBC: "We have had chaos since 2011."

    Arrayed against the weak unity government is the former Gaddafi general, U.S. citizen, and one-time CIA adjunct Khalifa Haftar. For years, the two sides have appeared to be in relative military balance, but a who's who of meddlesome outsiders has turned the conflict into an international affair. The latest playbook features Egypt, France, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Russia supporting Haftar, while Italy, Qatar, and Turkey are with the unity government.

    In April, Haftar launched an offensive to seize Tripoli. It faltered until Russian mercenaries made an appearance in September, bringing Haftar to the gates of Tripoli. He apparently is also employing Sudanese mercenaries, though not with their nation's backing. Now Turkey plans to introduce troops to bolster the official government.

    Washington's position is at best confused. It officially recognizes the GNA. When Haftar started his offensive, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a statement urging "the immediate halt to these military operations." However, President Donald Trump then initiated a friendly phone call to Haftar "to discuss ongoing counterterrorism efforts and the need to achieve peace and stability in Libya," according to the White House. More incongruously, "The president recognized Field Marshal Haftar's significant role in fighting terrorism and securing Libya's oil resources, and the two discussed a shared vision for Libya's transition to a stable, democratic political system." The State Department recently urged both sides to step back. However, Haftar continues to advance, and just days ago captured the coastal city of Sirte.

    In recent years, Libya had been of little concern to the U.S. It was an oil producer, but Gaddafi had as much incentive to sell the oil as did King Idris I, whom Gaddafi and other members of the "Free Officers Movement" ousted. Gaddafi carefully balanced interests in Libya's complex tribal society and kept the military weak over fears of another coup. He was a geopolitical troublemaker, supporting a variety of insurgent and terrorist groups. But he steadily lost influence, alienating virtually every African and Middle Eastern government.

    Of greatest concern to Washington, Libyan agents organized terrorist attacks against the U.S. -- bombing an American airliner and a Berlin disco frequented by American soldiers -- leading to economic sanctions and military retaliation. However, those days were long over by 2011. Eight years before, in the aftermath of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Gaddafi repudiated terrorism and ended his missile and nuclear programs in a deal with the U.S. and Europe. He was feted in European capitals. His government served as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council from 2008 to 2009. American officials congratulated him for his assistance against terrorism and discussed possible assistance in return. All seemed forgiven.

    Then in 2011, the Arab Spring engulfed Libya, as people rose against Gaddafi's rule. He responded with force to reestablish control. However, Western advocates of regime change warned that genocide was possible and pushed for intervention under United Nations auspices. In explaining his decision to intervene, Obama stated: "We knew that if we waited one more day, Benghazi could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world." Russia and China went along with a resolution authorizing "all necessary measures to prevent the killing of civilians."

    In fact, the fears were fraudulent. Gaddafi was no angel, but he hadn't targeted civilians, and his florid rhetoric, cited by critics, only attacked those who had taken up arms. He even promised amnesty to those who abandoned their weapons. With no civilians to protect, NATO, led by the U.S., bombed Libyan government forces and installations and backed the insurgents' offensive. It was not a humanitarian intervention, but a lengthy, costly, low-tech, regime-change war, mostly at Libyan expense. Obama claimed: "We had a unique ability to stop the violence." Instead his administration ensured that the initial civil war would drag on for months -- and the larger struggle ultimately for years.

    On October 20, 2011, Gaddafi was discovered hiding in a culvert in Sirte. He was beaten, sodomized with a bayonet, shot, and killed. That essentially ended the first phase of the extended Libyan civil war. Gaddafi had done much to earn his fate, but his death led to an entirely new set of problems.

    A low level insurgency continued, led by former Gaddafi followers. Proposals either to disband militia forces or integrate them into the National Transitional Council (NTC) military went unfulfilled, and this developed into the conflict's second phase. Elections delivered fragmented results, as ideological, religious, and other divisions ran deep. Militias were accused of misusing government funds, employing violence, and kidnapping and assassinating their opponents. Islamist groups increasingly attempted to impose religious rule. Violence and insecurity worsened.

    In February 2014, Haftar challenged the General National Congress (GNC). Hostilities broadly evolved between the GNC/GNA, backed by several militias, which controlled Tripoli and much of the country's west, and the Tobruk-based House of Representatives, which was supported by Haftar and his Libyan National Army. Multiple domestic factions, forces, and militias also were involved. Among them was the Islamic State, which murdered Egyptian Coptic (Christian) laborers.

    The African Union and the United Nations promoted various peace initiatives. However, other governments fueled hostilities. Most notable now is the potential entry of Turkish troops.

    In mid-December, Turkey's parliament approved an agreement to provide equipment, military training, technical aid, and intelligence. (The Erdogan government also controversially set maritime boundaries with Libya that conflict with other claims, most notably from Cyprus, Egypt, Greece, and Israel.) Ankara introduced some members of the dwindling Syrian insurgents once aligned against the Assad regime to Libya and raised the possibility of adding its "quick reaction force" to the fight.

    At the end of last month, the Erdogan government introduced, and parliament approved, legislation to authorize the deployment of combat forces. President Erdogan criticized nations that backed a "putschist general" and "warlord" and promised to support the GNA "much more effectively." While noting that Turkey doesn't "go where we are not invited" (except, apparently, Syria), Erdogan added that "since now there is an invitation [from the GNA], we will accept it."

    But Haftar refused to back down. Last week, he called on "men and women, soldiers and civilians, to defend our land and our honor." He continued: "We accept the challenge and declare jihad and a call to arms."

    Turkish legislator Ismet Yilmaz supported the intervention and warned that the conflict might "spread instability to Turkey." More likely the intervention is a grab for energy, since Ankara has devoted significant resources of late to exploring the Eastern Mediterranean for oil and gas. Libya has oil deposits, of course, which could be exploited under a friendly government. Perhaps most important, Ankara wants to ensure that its interests are respected in the Eastern Mediterranean.

    However, direct intervention is an extraordinarily dangerous step. It puts Turkey in the line of fire, as in Syria. Ankara's forces could clash with those of Russia, which maintains the merest veneer of deniability over its role in Libya. And other powers -- Egypt, perhaps, or the UAE -- might ramp up their involvement in an effort to thwart Erdogan's plans.

    In response, the U.S. attempted to warn Turkey against intervening. "External military intervention threatens prospects for resolving the conflict," said State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus with no hint of irony. Congress might go further: some of its members have already proposed sanctioning Russia for the introduction of mercenaries, and Ankara has few friends left on Capitol Hill. Nevertheless it is rather late for Washington to cry foul. Its claim to essentially a monopoly on Mideast meddling can only be seen as risible by other powers.

    The Arab League has also criticized "foreign interference." In a resolution passed in late December, the group expressed "serious concern over the military escalation further aggravating the situation in Libya and which threatens the security and stability of neighboring countries and the entire region." However, Arab League is no less hypocritical. Egypt, the UAE, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, all deeply involved in the conflict, are members of the league. And no one would be surprised if some or all of them decided to expand their participation in the fighting. Egyptian president Abdel Fatah al-Sisi insisted: "We will not allow anyone to control Libya. It is a matter of Egyptian national security."

    Although the fighting is less intense than in, say, Syria, combat has gone high-tech. According to the Washington Post : "Eight months into Libya's worst spasm of violence in eight years, the conflict is being fought increasingly by weaponized drones." ISIS is one of the few beneficiaries of these years of fighting. GNA-allied militias that once cooperated with the U.S. and other states in counterterrorism are now focused on Haftar, allowing militants to revive, set up desert camps, and organize attacks. Washington still employs drones, but they rely on accurate intelligence, best gathered on the ground, and even then well-directed hits are no substitute for local ground operations.

    The losers are the Libyan people. The fighting has resulted in thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of refugees. Divisions, even among tribes, are growing. The future looks ever dimmer. Fathi Bashagha, the GNA interior minister, lamented: "Every day we are burying young people who should be helping us build Libya." Absent a major change, many more will be buried in the future.

    Yet the air of unreality surrounding the conflict remains. In late December, President Trump met with al-Sisi and, according to the White House, the two "rejected foreign exploitation and agreed that parties must take urgent steps to resolve the conflict before Libyans lose control to foreign actors." However, the latter already happened -- nine years ago when America first intervened.

    The Obama administration did not plan to ruin Libya for a generation. But its decision to take on another people's fight has resulted in catastrophe. Hillary Clinton's malignant gift keeps on giving. Such is the cost of America's promiscuous war-making.

    Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He is a former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan and the author of several books, including Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire .

    [Feb 27, 2020] Geraldo Rivera: "Don't For A Minute" Cheer Killing Of Iranian General; "What We Have Unleashed?"

    In view of event of Jan 7 it looks like Geraldo Rivera had the point. He beautifully cut the neocon jerk by reminding him the role of the US intelligence agencies in unleashing Iraq war
    Jan 02, 2020 | www.realclearpolitics.com

    FOX News correspondent Geraldo Rivera debated "Fox & Friends" hosts Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy Friday about the assassination of Iranian special forces General Qassim al Soleimani in Iraq, warning of dire consequences if Iran chooses to retaliate and telling Kilmeade: "You, like Lindsey Graham, have never met a war you didn't like."

    "Your arrogance is exactly what's wrong with the region," Geraldo said. "You're not a front-line fighter that has to go back into Iraq again."

    GERALDO RIVERA: We thought that when the de-escalation at the embassy happened a couple of days ago that was the end of this chapter. The U.S., with it's firmness, had won the victory. It wasn't going to be Benghazi, it wasn't going to be Tehran from 1980. We won that technical victory.

    Now we have taken this huge military escalation. Now I fear the worst. You're going to see the U.S. markets go crazy today. You're going to see the price of oil spiking today. This is a very, very big deal.

    BRIAN KILMEADE: I don't know if you heard, this isn't about his resume of blood and death, it was about what was next. That's what you're missing.

    STEVE DOOCY: According to the Secretary of Defense.

    GERALDO RIVERA: By what credible source can you predict what the next Iranian move will be?

    BRIAN KILMEADE: Secretary fo State and American intelligence provided that material.

    GERALDO RIVERA: They've been excellent. They've been excellent, the U.S. intelligence has been excellent since 2003 when we invaded Iraq, disrupted the entire region for no real reason. Don't for a minute start cheering this on, what we have done, what we have unleashed --

    BRIAN KILMEADE: I will cheer it on. I am elated.

    GERALDO RIVERA: Then you, like Lindsey Graham, have never met a war you didn't like.

    BRIAN KILMEADE: That is not true, and don't even say that.

    GERALDO RIVERA: If President Trump wanted a de-escalation --

    BRIAN KILMEADE: Let them kill us for another 15 years?

    GERALDO RIVERA: If President Trump wanted a de-escalation and to bring our troops home--

    BRIAN KILMEADE: What about the 700 Americans who are dead, should they not be happy?

    GERALDO RIVERA: What about the tens of thousands of Iraqis who have died since 2003? You have to start seeing. What the hell are we doing in Baghdad in the first place? Why are we there?

    BRIAN KILMEADE: So you're blaming President Bush for the maniacal killing of Saddam Hussein?

    GERALDO RIVERA: I am blaming President Bush in 2003 for the fake weapons of mass destruction that never existed and the con-job that drove us into that war.

    [Feb 26, 2020] A serious US politician has to demonstrate a large capacity for betrayal.

    Highly recommended!
    Feb 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Levtraro , says: Show Comment February 25, 2020 at 6:52 pm GMT

    I suspect his open-borders advocacy and Russia-bashing too are lies; these are lines of defence against internal forces. It makes sense for him to take those positions while he seeks the nomination. If he gets it, he can betray those positions. A serious politician has to demonstrate a large capacity for betrayal. At the end of the day, he is a hardened politician like the rest.

    [Feb 26, 2020] Why Trump will win

    Feb 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Kooshy , Feb 26 2020 21:32 utc | 51

    "This discussion is frankly irrelevant. Trump is assured of re-selection because he's appeased the only two constituencies that matter: the military industrial complex and the zionist lobby. "

    No you forgot the other constituencies that will vote for him. Namely the dumb ass stupid rednecks , and the as stupid evangelist.

    [Feb 25, 2020] It will be hard for Russia to bring anything in if Turkey shuts down the Bosphorus and the US shuts down the eastern skies of Syria I think.

    Feb 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    paul , Feb 23 2020 17:55 utc | 31

    I'm glad to have been wrong - so far - it seems - about Russia backing off when the Turkish forces and proxies went on the attack. It seems that after the initial Turkish advance, Russia entered the battle and drove the attackers back. Erdogan seems to have gotten the message that Russia wasn't going to abandon Syria to his tenderness. Turkey seems to be sending mixed messages now; continuing bluster and talk of talking. Turkey also seems to be bringing in a lot more weaponry, as if preparing to escalate. Is Russia ready for this? It will be hard for Russia to bring anything in if Turkey shuts down the Bosphorus and the US shuts down the eastern skies of Syria I think.

    Blue Dotterel , Feb 23 2020 18:06 utc | 33

    Paul, if Turkey shuts down the straits, it will be tantamount to a declaration of war. Would Erdoğan want that? Would NATO want that? It would quickly lead to WWIII.

    [Feb 25, 2020] How John Bolton and a Phony Script Brought Us to the Brink of War by Scott Ritter

    Bolton is a typical "Full Spectrum Dominance" hawk, a breed of chickenhawks that recently proliferated in Washinton corridors of power and which are fed by MIC.
    Notable quotes:
    "... the way the IRGC came to be designated as an FTO is itself predicated on a lie. ..."
    "... The person responsible for this lie is President Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton, who while in that position oversaw National Security Council (NSC) interagency policy coordination meetings at the White House for the purpose of formulating a unified government position on Iran. Bolton had stacked the NSC staff with hardliners who were pushing for a strong stance. But representatives from the Department of Defense often pushed back . During such meetings, the Pentagon officials argued that the IRGC was "a state entity" (albeit a "bad" one), and that if the U.S. were to designate it as a terrorist group, there was nothing to stop Iran from responding by designating U.S. military personnel or CIA officers as terrorists. ..."
    "... The memoranda on these meetings, consisting of summaries of the various positions put forward, were doctored by the NSC to make it appear as if the Pentagon agreed with its proposed policy. The Defense Department complained to the NSC that the memoranda produced from these meetings were "largely incorrect and inaccurate" -- "essentially fiction," a former Pentagon official claimed. ..."
    "... This was a direct result of the bureaucratic dishonesty of John Bolton. Such dishonesty led to a series of policy decisions that gave a green light to use military force against IRGC targets throughout the Middle East. ..."
    Feb 25, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    President Trump's decision to assassinate Qassem Soleimani back in January took the United States to the brink of war with Iran.

    Trump and his advisors contend that Soleimani's death was necessary to protect American lives, pointing to a continuum of events that began on December 27, when a rocket attack on an American base in Iraq killed a civilian translator. That in turn prompted U.S. airstrikes against a pro-Iranian militia, Khati'ab Hezbollah, which America blamed for the attack. Khati'ab Hezbollah then stormed the U.S. embassy in Baghdad in protest. This reportedly triggered the assassination of Soleimani and a subsequent Iranian retaliatory missile strike on an American base in Iraq. The logic of this continuum appears consistent except for one important fact -- it is all predicated on a lie.

    On the night of December 27, a pickup truck modified to carry a launchpad capable of firing 36 107mm Russian-made rockets was used in an attack on a U.S. military compound located at the K-1 Airbase in Iraq's Kirkuk Province. A total of 20 rockets were loaded onto the vehicle, but only 14 were fired. Some of the rockets struck an ammunition dump on the base, setting off a series of secondary explosions. When the smoke and dust cleared, a civilian interpreter was dead and several other personnel , including four American servicemen and two Iraqi military, were wounded. The attack appeared timed to disrupt a major Iraqi military operation targeting insurgents affiliated with ISIS.

    The area around K-1 is populated by Sunni Arabs, and has long been considered a bastion of ISIS ideology, even if the organization itself was declared defeated inside Iraq back in 2017 by then-prime minister Haider al Abadi. The Iraqi counterterrorism forces based at K-1 consider the area around the base an ISIS sanctuary so dangerous that they only enter in large numbers.

    For their part, the Iraqis had been warning their U.S. counterparts for more than a month that ISIS was planning attacks on K-1. One such report, delivered on November 6, using intelligence dating back to October, was quite specific: "ISIS terrorists have endeavored to target K-1 base in Kirkuk district by indirect fire (Katyusha rockets)."

    Another report, dated December 25, warned that ISIS was attempting to seize territory to the northeast of K-1. The Iraqis were so concerned that on December 27, the day of the attack, they requested that the U.S. keep functional its tethered aerostat-based Persistent Threat Detection System (PTSD) -- a high-tech reconnaissance balloon equipped with multi-mission sensors to provide long endurance intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR) and communications in support of U.S. and Iraqi forces.

    Instead, the U.S. took the PTSD down for maintenance, allowing the attackers to approach unobserved.

    The Iraqi military officials at K-1 immediately suspected ISIS as the culprit behind the attack. Their logic was twofold. First, ISIS had been engaged in nearly daily attacks in the area for over a year, launching rockets, firing small arms, and planting roadside bombs. Second, according to the Iraqis , "The villages near here are Turkmen and Arab. There is sympathy with Daesh [i.e., ISIS] there."

    As transparent as the Iraqis had been with the U.S. about their belief that ISIS was behind the attack, the U.S. was equally opaque with the Iraqis regarding whom it believed was the culprit. The U.S. took custody of the rocket launcher, all surviving ordnance, and all warhead fragments from the scene.

    U.S. intelligence analysts viewed the attack on K-1 as part of a continuum of attacks against U.S. bases in Iraq since early November 2019. The first attack took place on November 9, against the joint U.S.-Iraqi base at Qayarrah , and was very similar to the one that occurred against K-1 -- some 31 107mm rockets were fired from a pickup truck modified to carry a rocket launchpad. As with K-1, the forces located in Qayarrah were engaged in ongoing operations targeting ISIS, and the territory around the base was considered sympathetic to ISIS. The Iraqi government attributed the attack to unspecified "terrorist" groups.

    The U.S., however, attributed the attacks to Khati'ab Hezbollah, a Shia militia incorporated with the Popular Mobilization Organization (PMO), a pro-Iranian umbrella organization that had been incorporated into the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. The PMO blamed the U.S. for a series of drone strikes against its facilities throughout the summer of 2019. The feeling among the American analysts was that the PMO attacked the bases as a form of retaliation.

    The U.S. launched a series of airstrikes against Khati'ab Hezbollah bases and command posts in Iraq and Syria on December 29, near the Iraqi city of al-Qaim. These attacks were carried out unilaterally, without any effort to coordinate with America's Iraqi counterparts or seek approval from the Iraqi government.

    Khati'ab Hezbollah units had seized al-Qaim from ISIS in November 2017, and then crossed into Syria, where they defeated ISIS fighters dug in around the Syrian town of al-Bukamal. They were continuing to secure this strategic border crossing when they were bombed on December 29.

    Left unsaid by the U.S. was the fact that the al-Bukamal-al Qaim border crossing was seen as a crucial "land bridge," connecting Iran with Syria via Iraq. Throughout the summer of 2019, the U.S. had been watching as Iranian engineers, working with Khati'ab Hezbollah, constructed a sprawling base that straddled both Iraq and Syria. It was this base, and not Khati'ab Hezbollah per se, that was the reason for the American airstrike. The objective in this attack was to degrade Iranian capability in the region; the K-1 attack was just an excuse, one based on the lie that Khati'ab Hezbollah, and not ISIS, had carried it out.

    The U.S. had long condemned what it called Iran's "malign intentions" when it came to its activities in Iraq and Syria. But there is a world of difference between employing tools of diplomacy to counter Iranian regional actions and going kinetic. One of the reasons the U.S. has been able to justify attacking Iranian-affiliated targets, such as the al-Bukamal-al-Qaim complex and Qassem Soleimani, is that the Iranian entity associated with both -- the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC -- has been designated by the U.S. as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), and as such military attacks against it are seen as an extension of the ongoing war on terror. Yet the way the IRGC came to be designated as an FTO is itself predicated on a lie.

    The person responsible for this lie is President Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton, who while in that position oversaw National Security Council (NSC) interagency policy coordination meetings at the White House for the purpose of formulating a unified government position on Iran. Bolton had stacked the NSC staff with hardliners who were pushing for a strong stance. But representatives from the Department of Defense often pushed back . During such meetings, the Pentagon officials argued that the IRGC was "a state entity" (albeit a "bad" one), and that if the U.S. were to designate it as a terrorist group, there was nothing to stop Iran from responding by designating U.S. military personnel or CIA officers as terrorists.

    The memoranda on these meetings, consisting of summaries of the various positions put forward, were doctored by the NSC to make it appear as if the Pentagon agreed with its proposed policy. The Defense Department complained to the NSC that the memoranda produced from these meetings were "largely incorrect and inaccurate" -- "essentially fiction," a former Pentagon official claimed.

    After the Pentagon "informally" requested that the NSC change the memoranda to accurately reflect its position, and were denied, the issue was bumped up to Undersecretary of Defense John Rood. He then formally requested that the memoranda be corrected. Such a request was unprecedented in recent memory, a former official noted. Regardless, the NSC did not budge, and the original memoranda remained as the official records of the meetings in question.

    President Trump designated the IRGC a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) in April 2018.

    This was a direct result of the bureaucratic dishonesty of John Bolton. Such dishonesty led to a series of policy decisions that gave a green light to use military force against IRGC targets throughout the Middle East. The rocket attack against K-1 was attributed to an Iranian proxy -- Khati'ab Hezbollah -- even though there was reason to believe the attack was carried out by ISIS. This was a cover so IRGC-affiliated facilities in al-Bakumal and al-Qaim, which had nothing to do with the attack, could be bombed. Everything to do with Iran's alleged "malign intent." The U.S. embassy was then attacked. Soleimani killed. The American base at al-Assad was bombarded by Iranian missiles. America and Iran were on the brink of war.

    All because of a lie.

    Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of several books, most recently, Deal of the Century: How Iran Blocked the West's Road to War (2018).

    [Feb 25, 2020] A Worthless 'New Deal' from the Iran Hawks

    So Menendez survived as MIC stooge. Nice.
    Iran hawks never talk about diplomacy except as a way to discredit it.
    Notable quotes:
    "... And even if Iran were to accept and proceed comply in good faith, just as Iran complied scrupulously with the JCPOA, what's to prevent any US administration from tearing up that "new deal" and demanding more? ..."
    Feb 25, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    |

    10:03 am

    Daniel Larison Two Iran hawks from the Senate, Bob Menendez and Lindse Graham, are proposing a "new deal" that is guaranteed to be a non-starter with Iran:

    Essentially, their idea is that the United States would offer a new nuclear deal to both Iran and the gulf states at the same time. The first part would be an agreement to ensure that Iran and the gulf states have access to nuclear fuel for civilian energy purposes, guaranteed by the international community in perpetuity. In exchange, both Iran and the gulf states would swear off nuclear fuel enrichment inside their own countries forever.

    Iran is never going to accept any agreement that requires them to give up domestic enrichment. As far as they are concerned, they are entitled to this under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and they regard it as a matter of their national rights that they keep it. Insisting on "zero enrichment" is what made it impossible to reach an agreement with Iran for the better part of a decade, and it was only when the Obama administration understood this and compromised to allow Iran to enrich under tight restrictions that the negotiations could move forward. Demanding "zero enrichment" today in 2020 amounts to rejecting that compromise and returning to a bankrupt approach that drove Iran to build tens of thousands of centrifuges. As a proposal for negotiations, it is dead on arrival, and Menendez and Graham must know that. Iran hawks never talk about diplomacy except as a way to discredit it. They want to make a bogus offer in the hopes that it will be rejected so that they can use the rejection to justify more aggressive measures.

    The identity of the authors of the plan is a giveaway that the offer is not a serious diplomatic proposal. Graham is one of the most incorrigible hard-liners on Iran, and Menendez is probably the most hawkish Democratic senator in office today. Among other things, Menendez has been a booster of the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), the deranged cult of Iranian exiles that has been buying the support of American politicians and officials for years. Graham has never seen a diplomatic agreement that he didn't want to destroy. When hard-liners talk about making a "deal," they always mean that they want to demand the other side's surrender.

    Another giveaway that this is not a serious proposal is the fact that they want this imaginary agreement submitted as a treaty:

    That final deal would be designated as a treaty, ratified by the U.S. Senate, to give Iran confidence that a new president won't just pull out (like President Trump did on President Barack Obama's nuclear deal).

    This is silly for many reasons. The Senate doesn't ratify treaties nowadays, so any "new deal" submitted as a treaty would never be ratified. As the current president has shown, it doesn't matter if a treaty has been ratified by the Senate. Presidents can and do withdraw from ratified treaties if they want to, and the fact that it is a ratified treaty doesn't prevent them from doing this. Bush pulled out of the ABM Treaty, which was ratified 88-2 in 1972. Trump withdrew from the INF Treaty just last year. The INF Treaty had been ratified with a 93-5 vote. The hawkish complaint that the JCPOA wasn't submitted as a treaty was, as usual, made in bad faith. There was no chance that the JCPOA would have been ratified, and even if it had been that ratification would not have protected it from being tossed aside by Trump. Insisting on making any new agreement a treaty is just another way of announcing that they have no interest in a diplomatic solution.

    Menendez and Graham want to make the obstacles to diplomacy so great that negotiations between the U.S. and Iran can't resume. It isn't a serious proposal, and it shouldn't be taken seriously.

    Feral Finster • 5 hours ago

    And even if Iran were to accept and proceed comply in good faith, just as Iran complied scrupulously with the JCPOA, what's to prevent any US administration from tearing up that "new deal" and demanding more?

    [Feb 24, 2020] Creating the Corporate Coup

    Notable quotes:
    "... Although corporations are legally a person (see history below), they are in fact an entity. The sole goal of that entity is profit. There is no corporate conscience. ..."
    "... Perhaps it would be useful to look at the nature of our global expansion. The global expanse of US military bases is well-known, but its actual territorial empire is largely hidden. The true map of America is not taught in our schools. Abby Martin interviews history Professor Daniel Immerwahr about his new book, ' How To Hide An Empire ,' where he documents the story of our "Greater United States." This is worth the 40 minute watch...I learned several new things. One more long clip. However this one is fine to just listen to as you do things. This is a wonderful interview with Noam Chomsky. The man exudes wisdom. ..."
    "... The oligarchy has been with us since perhaps the tribal origins of our species, but the corporation is a newer phenomenon. A faceless, soulless profit machine. Ironically it is the 14th amendment which is used to justify corporate person-hood. ..."
    "... Corporations aren't specifically mentioned in the 14th Amendment, or anywhere else in the Constitution. But going back to the earliest years of the republic, when the Bank of the United States brought the first corporate rights case before the Supreme Court, U.S. corporations have sought many of the same rights guaranteed to individuals, including the rights to own property, enter into contracts, and to sue and be sued just like individuals. ..."
    "... But it wasn't until the 1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road that the Court appeared to grant a corporation the same rights as an individual under the 14th Amendment ..."
    "... The United States is home to five of the world's 10 largest defense contractors, and American companies account for 57 percent of total arms sales by the world's 100 largest defense contractors, based on SIPRI data. Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, the largest defense contractor in the world, is estimated to have had $44.9 billion in arms sales in 2017 through deals with governments all over the world. The company drew public scrutiny after a bomb it sold to Saudi Arabia was dropped on a school bus in Yemen, killing 40 boys and 11 adults. Lockheed's revenue from the U.S. government alone is well more than the total annual budgets of the IRS and the Environmental Protection Agency, combined. ..."
    "... http://news.nidokidos.org/military-spending-20-companies-profiting-the-m... For a list of the 20 companies profiting most off war... https://themindunleashed.com/2019/03/20-companies-profiting-war.html ..."
    "... Capitalism, militarism and imperialism are disastrously intertwined ..."
    "... Corporations are Religions Yes they are. They have ethics, goals, and priests. They have a god who determines everything "The Invisible Hand". They believe themselves to be superior to the state. They have cult garb, or are we not going to pretend that there's corporate dress codes, right down to the things you can wear on special days of the week. They determine what you can eat, drink and read. If you say something wrong, they feel within their rights to punish you because they OWN the medium that you used to spread ideas. OF course they don't own your thoughts... those belong to the OTHER god. ..."
    Dec 09, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

    Chris Hedges often says "The corporate coup is complete". Sadly I think he is correct. So this week I thought it might be interesting to explore the techniques which are used here at home and abroad. The oligarchs' corporate control is global, but different strategies are employed in various scenarios. Just thinking about the recent regime changes promoted by the US in this hemisphere...

    The US doesn't even lie about past coups. They recently released a report about the 1953 CIA led coup against Iran detailing the strategies. Here at home it is a compliant media and a new array of corporate laws designed to protect and further enrich that spell the corporate capture of our culture and society. So let's begin by looking at the nature of corporations...

    The following 2.5 hour documentary from 2004 features commentary from Chris, Noam, Naomi, and many others you know. It has some great old footage. It is best watched on a television so you have a bigger screen. (This clip is on the encore+ youtube channel and does have commercials which you can skip after 5 seconds)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpQYsk-8dWg

    Based on Joel Bakan's bestseller The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power , this 26-award-winning documentary explores a corporation's inner workings, curious history, controversial impacts and possible futures.

    One hundred and fifty years ago, a corporation was a relatively insignificant entity. Today, it is a vivid, dramatic, and pervasive presence in all our lives. Like the Church, the Monarchy and the Communist Party in other times and places, a corporation is today's dominant institution.

    Charting the rise of such an institution aimed at achieving specific economic goals, the documentary also recounts victories against this apparently invincible force.

    Although corporations are legally a person (see history below), they are in fact an entity. The sole goal of that entity is profit. There is no corporate conscience. Some of the CEO's in the film discuss how all the people in the corporations are against pollution and so on, but by law stockholder profit must be the objective. Now these entities are global operations with no loyalty to their country of origin.

    Perhaps it would be useful to look at the nature of our global expansion. The global expanse of US military bases is well-known, but its actual territorial empire is largely hidden. The true map of America is not taught in our schools. Abby Martin interviews history Professor Daniel Immerwahr about his new book, ' How To Hide An Empire ,' where he documents the story of our "Greater United States." This is worth the 40 minute watch...I learned several new things. One more long clip. However this one is fine to just listen to as you do things. This is a wonderful interview with Noam Chomsky. The man exudes wisdom.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuVqfKYbGvE (2 hour 5 min)

    So much of this conversation touches on today's topic of our corporate capture. Amy interviewed Ed Snowden this week... (video or text)

    This is a system, the first system in history, that bore witness to everything. Every border you crossed, every purchase you make, every call you dial, every cell phone tower you pass, friends you keep, article you write, site you visit and subject line you type was now in the hands of a system whose reach is unlimited but whose safeguards were not. And I felt, despite what the law said, that this was something that the public ought to know.

    https://www.democracynow.org/2019/12/5/edward_snowden_amy_goodman_interv...

    The oligarchy has been with us since perhaps the tribal origins of our species, but the corporation is a newer phenomenon. A faceless, soulless profit machine. Ironically it is the 14th amendment which is used to justify corporate person-hood.

    Corporations aren't specifically mentioned in the 14th Amendment, or anywhere else in the Constitution. But going back to the earliest years of the republic, when the Bank of the United States brought the first corporate rights case before the Supreme Court, U.S. corporations have sought many of the same rights guaranteed to individuals, including the rights to own property, enter into contracts, and to sue and be sued just like individuals.

    But it wasn't until the 1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road that the Court appeared to grant a corporation the same rights as an individual under the 14th Amendment

    https://www.history.com/news/14th-amendment-corporate-personhood-made-co...

    More recently in 2010 (Citizens United v. FEC): In the run up to the 2008 election, the Federal Elections Commission blocked the conservative nonprofit Citizens United from airing a film about Hillary Clinton based on a law barring companies from using their funds for "electioneering communications" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. The organization sued, arguing that, because people's campaign donations are a protected form of speech (see Buckley v. Valeo) and corporations and people enjoy the same legal rights, the government can't limit a corporation's independent political donations. The Supreme Court agreed. The Citizens United ruling may be the most sweeping expansion of corporate personhood to date.
    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/how-supreme-court-turned-co...

    Do they really believe this is how we think?

    More than just using the courts, corporations are knee deep in creating favorable laws, not just by lobbying, but by actually writing legislation to feed the politicians that they own and control, especially at the state level.

    Through ALEC, Global Corporations Are Scheming to Rewrite YOUR Rights and Boost THEIR Revenue. Through the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council, global corporations and state politicians vote behind closed doors to try to rewrite state laws that govern your rights. These so-called "model bills" reach into almost every area of American life and often directly benefit huge corporations.

    In ALEC's own words, corporations have "a VOICE and a VOTE" on specific changes to the law that are then proposed in your state. DO YOU? Numerous resources to help us expose ALEC are provided below. We have also created links to detailed discussions of key issues...

    https://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

    Here's an attempt by a local station to tell the story of a Georgia session of legislators and ALEC lobbyists. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3yIbxydlHY (6 min)

    There is very little effort to hide the blatant corruption. People seem to accept this behavior as business as usual, after all it is.

    Part of the current ALEC legislative agenda involves stifling protests.

    I think it started in Texas...

    A bill making its way through the Texas legislature would make protesting pipelines a third-degree felony, the same as attempted murder.
    H.B. 3557, which is under consideration in the state Senate after passing the state House earlier this month, ups penalties for interfering in energy infrastructure construction by making the protests a felony. Sentences would range from two to 10 years.

    https://www.ecowatch.com/texas-bill-pipeline-protests-felony-2637605986....
    It is now law. Other states are following suit...

    Lawmakers in Wisconsin introduced a bill on September 5 designed to chill protests around oil and gas pipelines and other energy infrastructure in the state by imposing harsh criminal penalties for trespassing on or damaging the property of a broad range of "energy providers."

    Senate Bill 386 echoes similar "critical infrastructure protection" model bills pushed out by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the Council of State Governments over the last two years to prevent future protests like the one against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    https://www.exposedbycmd.org/2019/09/16/wisconsin-legislators-seek-crimi...

    These activities are taking place in most states...especially red ones like mine.

    When TPTB use government to play chess with the countries of the world havoc ensues...

    Abby and Mike were on Chris' show yesterday talking about Gaza and the US/Israeli effort at genocide. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcsEYRt_jGY (28 min)

    And Chris was on the evening RT news this week discussing how the US empire is striking back against leaders who help their own people rather than our global corporations.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1P5G9S8flnY (6.5 min)

    Lee Camp and Ben Norton also discussed how the US wants to own South America. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLETst107M0 (1st 22 min)

    This excellent article tells the story well...

    Financially, the cost of these wars is immense: more than $6 trillion dollars. The cost of these wars is just one element of the $1.2 trillion the US government spends annually on wars and war making. Half of each dollar paid in federal income tax goes towards some form or consequence of war . While the results of such spending are not hard to foresee or understand: a cyclical and dependent relationship between the Pentagon, weapons industry and Congress, the creation of a whole new class of worker and wealth distribution is not so understood or noticed, but exists and is especially malignant.

    This is a ghastly redistribution of wealth, perhaps unlike any known in modern human history, certainly not in American history. As taxpayers send trillions to Washington. DC, that money flows to the men and women that remotely oversee, manage and staff the wars that kill and destroy millions of lives overseas and at home. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees and civilian contractors servicing the wars take home six figure annual salaries allowing them second homes, luxury cars and plastic surgery, while veterans put guns in their mouths, refugees die in capsized boats and as many as four million nameless souls scream silently in death.

    These AUMFs (Authorization for Use of Military Force) and the wars have provided tens of thousands of recruits to international terror groups; mass profits to the weapons industry and those that service it; promotions to generals and admirals, with corporate board seats upon retirement ; and a perpetual and endless supply of bloody shirts for politicians to wave via an unquestioning and obsequious corporate media to stoke compliant anger and malleable fear. What is hard to imagine, impossible even, is anyone else who has benefited from these wars.

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/12/06/authorizations-for-madness-the-e...

    The United States is home to five of the world's 10 largest defense contractors, and American companies account for 57 percent of total arms sales by the world's 100 largest defense contractors, based on SIPRI data. Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, the largest defense contractor in the world, is estimated to have had $44.9 billion in arms sales in 2017 through deals with governments all over the world. The company drew public scrutiny after a bomb it sold to Saudi Arabia was dropped on a school bus in Yemen, killing 40 boys and 11 adults. Lockheed's revenue from the U.S. government alone is well more than the total annual budgets of the IRS and the Environmental Protection Agency, combined.

    http://news.nidokidos.org/military-spending-20-companies-profiting-the-m... For a list of the 20 companies profiting most off war... https://themindunleashed.com/2019/03/20-companies-profiting-war.html

    The obvious industry which was not included nor considered is the fossil fuel industry. Here's another example of mutual corporate interests.

    "Capitalism, militarism and imperialism are disastrously intertwined with the fossil fuel economy .A globalized economy predicated on growth at any social or environmental costs, carbon dependent international trade, the limitless extraction of natural resources, and a view of citizens as nothing more than consumers cannot be the basis for tackling climate change .Little wonder then that the elites have nothing to offer beyond continued militarisation and trust in techno-fixes."

    -- Nick Buxton and Ben Hayes
    https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/07/05/doubling-down-the-military-big-b...

    The US military is one of the largest consumers and emitters of carbon-dioxide equivalent (CO2e) in history, according to an independent analysis of global fuel-buying practices of a "virtually unresearched" government agency.
    If the US military were its own country, it would rank 47th between Peru and Portugal in terms of annual fuel purchases, totaling almost 270,000 barrels of oil bought every day in 2017. In particular, the Air Force is the largest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions and bought $4.9 billion of fuel in 2017 – nearly double that of the Navy ($2.8 billion).

    https://www.iflscience.com/environment/us-military-ranks-higher-in-green...

    The fossil fuel giants even try to control the climate talks...

    Oil and gas groups were accused Saturday of seeking to influence climate talks in Madrid by paying millions in sponsorship and sending dozens of lobbyists to delay what scientists say is a necessary and rapid cut in fossil fuel use.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/12/fossil-fuel-groups-destroying-climate-t...

    The corporations are so entwined that it is difficult to tell where they begin and end. There's the unity of private prisons and the war machine. And it's a global scheme...this example from the UK.

    One thing is clear: the prison industrial complex and the global war machine are intimately connected. This summer's prison strike that began in the United States and spread to other countries was the largest in history. It shows more than ever that prisoners are resisting this penal regime, often at great risk to themselves. The battle to end prison slavery continues.

    https://corporatewatch.org/poppies-prison-labour-and-the-war-machine/

    Then there was the corporate tax give away...

    The 2017 tax bill cut taxes for most Americans, including the middle class, but it heavily benefits the wealthy and corporations . It slashed the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, and its treatment of "pass-through" entities -- companies organized as sole proprietorships, partnerships, LLCs, or S corporations -- will translate to an estimated $17 billion in tax savings for millionaires this year. American corporations are showering their shareholders with stock buybacks, thanks in part to their tax savings.

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/18/18146253/tax-cuts-and...

    Even Robert Jackson Jr., commissioner at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Appointed to the SEC in 2017 by President Donald Trump. Confirmed in January 2018 sees the corporate cuts as absurd.

    "We have been to the movie of tax cuts and buybacks before, in the Republican administration during the George W. Bush era. We enacted a quite substantial tax cut during that period. And studies after that showed very clearly that most corporations use the funds from that tax cut for buybacks. And here's the kicker. That particular tax cut actually required that companies deploy the capital for capital expenditures, wage increases and investments in their people. Yet studies showed that, in fact, the companies use them for buybacks. So we've been to this movie before. And what you're describing to me, that corporations turned around and took the Trump tax cut and didn't use it in investing in their people or in infrastructure, but instead for other purposes, shouldn't surprise anybody at all."

    https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2019/11/18/corporations-stock-buybacks-sec-...

    So the corporations grow larger, wealthier, more powerful, buying evermore legislative influence along the way. They have crept into almost every aspect of our lives. Some doctors are beginning to see the influence of big pharma and other corporate interests are effecting the current practice of medicine.

    Gary Fettke is a doctor from Tasmania who has been targeted for promoting a high fat low carb diet...threatened with losing his medical qualifications. He doesn't pull punches in this presentation discussing the corporate control of big ag/food and big pharma on medical practice and education. (27 min)

    Comments

    detroitmechworks on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 8:28am

    Corporations are Religions Yes they are. They have ethics, goals, and priests. They have a god who determines everything "The Invisible Hand". They believe themselves to be superior to the state. They have cult garb, or are we not going to pretend that there's corporate dress codes, right down to the things you can wear on special days of the week. They determine what you can eat, drink and read. If you say something wrong, they feel within their rights to punish you because they OWN the medium that you used to spread ideas. OF course they don't own your thoughts... those belong to the OTHER god.

    At least the crazy made up gods that I listen to don't usually fuck over other human beings for a goddamn percentage. ON the other hand, if a corporation can make a profit, it's REQUIRED to fuck you over. To do otherwise would be against it's morals. Which it does have, trust us... OH, and corporations get to make fun of your beliefs, but you CANNOT make fun of theirs. Because that would be heresy against logic and reason.

    www.youtube.com/embed/uGDA0Hecw1k?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 8:37am
    yes indeed, they are superior to the state...

    @detroitmechworks

    In the film Secret State they (fossil fuel) admit it. Here's the trailer...(1.5 min)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCYjbux_dCM

    You can watch the series if anyone has an interest. Start here...there are about 6 episodes.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aeZT6IXCUg (42 min)

    Good spy thriller.

    Nice to see you around the site again. Thanks for visiting this piece.

    QMS on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 8:39am
    A recent front page item

    In a local newspaper showed a couple coming out of a Wal-Mart with their carts piled high with big boxed foreign junk, then shown cramming their SUV full of said junk. The headline read "Crazy Busy". It pretty much summed up what is wrong with the American consumer culture. The next day's big headline spotlighted our senator's picture affixed to a LARGE headline boasting "$22 Billion Submarine Contract Awarded". A good example of of what is wrong with the american war economy.

    Thank you for your compilation Lookout! If we can get beyond the headlines, working at grass root and local solutions, maybe even underground revolution, there may be hope for us. Barter for a better future.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:06am
    Let's hope we trade up for something better

    @QMS

    My buddies always say about their mayor..."There's no way we will trade down after this election...but then we do." Perhaps it is true for more than just their town.

    The line running in my head is..."What if they gave a war and nobody came". I want to expand it to..."What if they made cheap junk no one really wanted and nobody bought it". Or substitute junk food for cheap junk, or...

    My point in today's conclusion is much as I try to walk away from corporate culture/control, I really can't totally escape...but at least I spend most of my time in the open, breathing clean air, surrounded by forest. We do what we can.

    Onward through the fog...

    Raggedy Ann on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 8:58am
    Good Sunday morning, Lookout ~~

    Consumerism in our society is a plague, a disease perpetrated upon us by our corporate lords. It has taken over everything about being an American.

    I think the youth are catching on, as they are thrifting more, but they don't understand about food, and that's the rub. Our youth will be more unhealthy until they understand what corporations are doing to us through food addictions.

    We're expecting rain today for most of the day and actually it's just started. The person who will drill our well came by yesterday and figured out some details. We are behind two other wells, so it will probably be the holiday week when it happens - we'll see. I can wait til January and hope we do.

    Have a lovely Sunday, everyone!

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:10am
    best of luck with your well!

    @Raggedy Ann

    That's an exciting project. Keep us posted. I hope y'all have a great holiday break. Enjoy your time....the most valuable thing we have!

    davidgmillsatty on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:09am
    The main reason I am not enamored with Sander's economic

    Ideas is that new deal of FDR's day had corporate opponents far different than those of today. Sanders does not seem to understand that the corporations of yesterday, and what worked against them, will not work against the corporations of today. In the early part of the 20th century, corporations were still primarily domestic and local often with charters from the state where they conducted their primary business, many times all of their business.

    Regulation and unions were reasonable anti-dotes to the abuses of these local and domestic corporations. The state still had some semblance of control over them.

    But today corporations are global. They have no allegiance to, or concern for the domestic economy or local people. They do not fear of any anti-dotes that worked for years against domestic or local corporations. Global corporations just leave and go elsewhere if they don't like the domestic or local situation if they have not managed to completely take over the government.

    There is only one reason to incorporate in the first place. That is for the owner(s) of the business to avoid personal liability or responsibility. The majority of people never understand this idea. Corporate owners are the people who are the genuine personal responsibility avoiders. Not the poor. The only antidote to corporations these days is the total demise of the corporation and its similar business entities that dodge personal responsibility. And the state must refuse to allow any such entities to do business. It is the only way forward. Otherwise nation states will give way to corporate states. Corporate governance is the new feudalism from which the old feudalism morphed.

    Sanders isn't going to advocate doing away with corporate entities or other similar business entities. Nor will any of the Democratic contenders. They all require corporations to rail against as the basis for their political policy.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:19am
    corporate power is formative

    @davidgmillsatty

    ...and I've always wondered just how Bernie would dismantle them. However like the impotence of the impeachment, is the impotence of the primary process.

    When the DNC was sued after 2016, they were exonerated based on the ruling they were a private entity entitled to make rules as the wanted. The primary is so obviously rigged I can almost guarantee Bernie will not be allowed the nomination, so the question to how he would change corporate control is really moot.

    Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

    davidgmillsatty on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 10:56am
    Sanders Winning the Nomination

    @Lookout I probably could get on board with a Sanders campaign if he would run as an Independent. But it is really hard to get on board with him as a Democrat. If he loses the nomination, he will probably not run as an Independent once again. Once he bailed on an Independent run last time, I and many others bailed on him. I would support his Independent candidacy just to screw with the Electoral College. I thought last time an independent candidacy might have thrown the election to the House of Representatives. I could see a Democratically controlled House voting for him over Trump in a three way EC split if the Democratic candidate took low EC numbers.

    But he is so afraid of being tarred with the Nader moniker.

    What I said many times on websites last election is that an EC vote is very similar to a Parliamentary Election. And that would be an interesting change for sure. It would also be a means of having the popular vote winner restored if there is a big enough margin in the House. And what would be equally cool is that the Senate picks the VP. So you could have President and VP from different parties.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 10:32am
    in some alternate universe...

    @davidgmillsatty

    if Bernie got the nomination, I would vote for him, especially in this imaginary world, if Tulsi was his running mate. Then there the question about your vote being counted? We'll just have to see what we see and make judgements based on outcomes, IMO.

    #4.1 I probably could get on board with a Sanders campaign if he would run as an Independent. But it is really hard to get on board with him as a Democrat. If he loses the nomination, he will probably not run as an Independent once again. Once he bailed on an Independent run last time, I and many others bailed on him. I would support his Independent candidacy just to screw with the Electoral College. I thought last time an independent candidacy might have thrown the election to the House of Representatives. I could see a Democratically controlled House voting for him over Trump in a three way EC split if the Democratic candidate took low EC numbers.

    But he is so afraid of being tarred with the Nader moniker.

    What I said many times on websites last election is that an EC vote is very similar to a Parliamentary Election. And that would be an interesting change for sure. It would also be a means of having the popular vote winner restored if there is a big enough margin in the House. And what would be equally cool is that the Senate picks the VP. So you could have President and VP from different parties.

    davidgmillsatty on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 11:01am
    The more I think about this

    @Lookout The only way the Democrats might beat Trump is to have Sanders run as an Independent and prevent Trump from reaching 270. That is a far better way to beat Trump than impeachment. Would the house vote for the Democrat or an Independent? I guess it would depend on how Sanders did in the popular vote and EC against his Democratic rival.

    #4.1.1
    if Bernie got the nomination, I would vote for him, especially in this imaginary world, if Tulsi was his running mate. Then there the question about your vote being counted? We'll just have to see what we see and make judgements based on outcomes, IMO.

    TheOtherMaven on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 2:06pm
    And who that rival was!

    @davidgmillsatty @davidgmillsatty

    If it was Hillary "Dewey Cheatem & Howe" Clinton, all bets are off.

    #4.1.1.1 The only way the Democrats might beat Trump is to have Sanders run as an Independent and prevent Trump from reaching 270. That is a far better way to beat Trump than impeachment. Would the house vote for the Democrat or an Independent? I guess it would depend on how Sanders did in the popular vote and EC against his Democratic rival.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 2:48pm
    The $hill was on Howard Stern this week...

    @TheOtherMaven

    //www.youtube.com/embed/LhxMvmX9WlA?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 3:18pm
    Howard effin Stern indeed

    @Lookout

    Good lord.that she did that is unbelievable. Great point. Boycott Fox News, but go on Stern's show. It's going to be fun to watch how much lower she falls.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 3:30pm
    The depth of her corruption is unfathomable

    @snoopydawg

    AE maybe be correct that they will pull her from behind the curtain and anoint her to run again. But I sure hope not!

    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 3:31pm
    More lying about Bernie not supporting Hillary

    @Lookout

    MSNBC invited on two former Hillary Clinton aides to criticize Bernie Sanders for taking a "long time to get out of the race" and that he didn't do "enough" campaigning for her in 2016. pic.twitter.com/6Vsqo0DKZI

    -- Ibrahim (@ibrahimpols) December 8, 2019

    Come on Bernie call this crap out.

    davidgmillsatty on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 6:08pm
    The Way that would work in the House of Reps

    @TheOtherMaven They have to choose from actual EC vote getters. So if she is not the candidate she could not win.

    Having Sanders run as an Independent and Warren or Biden run as a Democrat would be a much better strategy to ensure a Trump loss in the House. Of course it might take some coordination as in asking the voters to vote for the candidate who has the best chance of beating Trump in certain states. But voters could probably figure that out.

    Or a candidate could just withdraw from a state in which the other candidate had a better chance of beating Trump.

    QMS on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:27am
    Dig it

    @irishking @irishking
    What to do?Dance in the streets! //www.youtube.com/embed/9KhbM2mqhCQ

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:27am
    Do you think the bear went over the mountain...

    @irishking

    refers to RUSSIA!!! (Just joking) Thanks for the song. Here's one from 1929 back atcha! Thanks for the visit. //www.youtube.com/embed/pDOwDi2jlk0

    jakkalbessie on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 10:15am
    So much to think about

    Lookout as usual you have done an excellent job of giving me a lot of articles to read and think about this next week.

    Of course I need to be loading my car and shutting this place down as I head to the Texas hill country. Will look for an article about Kinder Morgan and small communities that are fighting the pipeline through their towns. The read was a little hopeful.

    Watching the weather and it looks like sunshine and clear skies as I travel. Thanks for all your work in putting this together.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 10:27am
    My buddy JU Lee wrote a song...

    @jakkalbessie

    I like to travel on the old roads.

    There's not a youtube, but the chorus goes:

    I like to travel on the old roads
    I like the way it makes me feel
    No destination just the old roads
    Somehow it helps the heart to heal.

    I hope your road trip is a good one. The less busy tracks are almost meditative....soaking in scenery as the world passes by.

    Have fun and be careful.

    Lookout as usual you have done an excellent job of giving me a lot of articles to read and think about this next week.

    Of course I need to be loading my car and shutting this place down as I head to the Texas hill country. Will look for an article about Kinder Morgan and small communities that are fighting the pipeline through their towns. The read was a little hopeful.

    Watching the weather and it looks like sunshine and clear skies as I travel. Thanks for all your work in putting this together.

    ggersh on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 11:06am
    Nice work Lookout

    Here are a couple of links to how free markets help in the corporate takeover. Amazon a corp that has only made a profit by never paying taxes and accounting fraud. It became a trillion dollar corp through the use of monopoly money(stock) it's nothing but the perfect example of todays "unicorn" corp, i.e. worth what it is w/out ever making a penny

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 11:26am
    The free market created the private prison industry too

    @ggersh

    Not so free really is it? Amazon is certainly a monster...now hosting the CIA/MIC cloud as well as owning the WaPo.

    Snode on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 11:45am
    Corporations are not people

    Corporations can live far beyond a persons lifespan. Corporations can commit homicide and escape execution and justice. Unfortunately, unions are just as likely to be on the corporations side to get jobs and wages, and bust heads if anything interferes with that.

    If we protest we've seen the police ready to use deadly force at the drop of a hat, and get away with it. We get to vote on candidates that some political club chose for us, and have little incentive to work for the 99%. The gov. has amassed so much information on us we can't even fathom its depth. We have nowhere left, no unexplored lands out of reach of the government. We think we own things, but if you think you own a home, see how long it is before the gov. confiscates it if you don't pay your property taxes.

    If I were younger, or a young person asked what to do, I would say.... learn some skill that would make you attractive for emigrating to another country, because the US looks like it's over. It's people are only here to be exploited. And if Bernie were to become president I hope he gets a food taster.

    Lily O Lady on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 1:27pm
    Corporations are worldwide entities now. No where to

    @Snode

    run to. No where to hide. As in the U.K., corporations are seeking to to dismantle the NHS and turn it into a for-profit system like ours. Even as the gilllet-jaune protesters risk life and limb, Macron seeks to install true neoliberalism in France. And the beat goes on.

    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 5:41pm
    Yep you nailed it

    @Snode

    Corporations can live far beyond a persons lifespan. Corporations can commit homicide and escape execution and justice.

    Look at what chevron did to people in Borapol. I'm sure I spelled this wrong but hopefully people will know what I'm talking about. They killed lots of people and poisoned their land for decades and the fight over it is still going on. How many decades more will chevron get to skirt justice? Banks continue to commit fraud and they only get little fines that don't do jack to keep them from doing it again. Even cities are screwing people. Owe a few dollars on your property taxes and they will take your home and sell it for pennies on the dollar. How in hell can it be legal to charge people over 600% interest? What happened to usury rules if that's the correct term.

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 5:51pm
    They've done it all over the world...

    @snoopydawg

    The International Court of Justice at The Hague ruled last week that a prior ruling by an Ecuadorean court that fined Chevron $9.5 billion in 2011 should be upheld, according to teleSUR, a Latin American news agency. Texaco, which is currently a part of Chevron, is responsible for what is considered one of the world's largest environmental disasters while it drilled for oil in the Ecuadorian rainforest from 1964 to 1990.
    https://www.ecowatch.com/will-chevron-and-exxon-ever-be-held-responsible...

    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 7:13pm
    It's just unbelievable that they can still dodge responsibilit

    @Lookout

    for decades of polluting and killing.

    The legal battle has been tied up in the courts for years. Ecuador's highest court finally upheld the ruling in January 2014, but Chevron refused to pay.

    This is another thing that corporations get away with. Contaminating land and then just walking away from it. How many superfund sites have we had to pay for instead of the ones who created the mess. Just declared bankruptcy and walked away. Corporations are people? Fine then they should be held as accountable as the people in the lower classes. Fat chance though right?

    Lily O Lady on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 6:01pm
    Union Carbide India was responsible for the Bopal disaster.
    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 7:16pm
    Thanks for the save

    @Lily O Lady

    Weren't people killed by a gas cloud released from the plant? I read something recently that said the case is still going through the courts. How much money have they spent trying not to spend more?

    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 12:27pm
    7 year old concerned about the Uighers

    //www.youtube.com/embed/wGq0xVh6UJw?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 12:36pm
    The comments are supportive of Tulsi

    @snoopydawg

    ....and no I had not seen that clip. Tulsi impresses me in many ways and the manner in which she treats this child is an example.

    Especially as compared to Joe ByeDone's adolescent behavior...

    //www.youtube.com/embed/mKV0oAPENdg?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

    snoopydawg on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 1:09pm
    Ugh

    @Lookout @Lookout

    Byedone just needs to pack it in and drop out already. Today he was defending the republican party after someone said something about them needing to go away. Joe said that we need another party so one does not get more power than the other. Yeah right, Joe. It's not like the Pubs are already weilding power they don't have and them dems cowering and supporting them.

    Newsweek reporter quit after being censored on the OPCW story.

    I have collected evidence of how they suppressed the story in addition to evidence from another case where info inconvenient to US govt was removed, though it was factually correct.

    -- Tareq Haddad (@Tareq_Haddad) December 7, 2019

    ANd great news for Max Bluementhal!!

    BREAKING: The US government has DROPPED ITS BOGUS CASE against me and @NotConq .

    I was hauled out of my house by a team of cops, jailed for two days, and maliciously defamed due to the lies of the US-backed Venezuelan opposition.

    I plan to seek justice. https://t.co/Wm7Yl8cL2T

    -- Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) December 7, 2019

    Thanks for the wound up, LO. Lots of great stuff here to go back and digest.

    #9

    ....and no I had not seen that clip. Tulsi impresses me in many ways and the manner in which she treats this child is an example.

    Especially as compared to Joe ByeDone's adolescent behavior...

    

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 1:22pm
    Glad to see Max vindicated

    @snoopydawg

    ...thanks for the news.

    Caity had a nice piece on Consortiumnews on the newsweek story...
    https://consortiumnews.com/2019/12/08/journalist-newsweek-suppressed-opc...

    Lily O Lady on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 1:44pm
    Bipartisanship is big now. It's how politicians hide their dirty dealings.

    @snoopydawg

    First frustrate us with gridlock. Then pass bills benefiting the corporate overlords. Then leading up to elections pass bills like the one against animal cruelty (who doesn't love kitties and puppies?), or propose a bill to consider regulating cosmetics. This second bipartisan effort is glaringly cynical since no one apparently knows what is in beauty products. Sanders must have politicians worried for them to attempt something which has managed to go unregulated for so long.

    All this bipartisanship is not even up to the level of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It's more like wiping at them with a dirty rag while the ship of state continues to sink. While animal cruelty and cosmetic safety are important issues, they pale in comparison to the systemic ills America suffers. Our fearless leaders will continue to scratch the surface while corruption and business as usual continue to fester. These bipartisan laws may look good on a politician's resume, but they won't really help the 99%.

    CB on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 5:35pm
    Looks like the PTB are starting to crank up

    @snoopydawg
    the propaganda to give NATO a raison d'être for a pivot to China. This will be doomed to complete failure just as the Russian pivot has.

    But Putin and Xi Jinping are both much too skilled and intelligent to defeat. American WWE trash talkers are completely outclassed by an 8th dan in judo paired with a Sun Tzu scholar.

    Tomoe nage - use your opponent's weight and aggression against him.

    "If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected ."
    ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

    Thank you Barack and Hillary...

    CB on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 9:39pm
    Neither Russia nor China want the US or US$ to collapse too quickly. It would be devastating for the entire world if it happened suddenly.

    @Lookout
    What they want is a controlled collapse. If they can get the US to continue to overspend on war mongering rather than programs of social uplift the country will rot from the inside.

    "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Meanwhile, back in the Motherland: //www.youtube.com/embed/acPgB_rhdfA

    Lookout on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 3:25pm
    corporate corruption is low fanging fruit

    @Pluto's Republic

    So much more to say really. Had to stop somewhere but as you know the corruption runs deep and is intermixed with the CIA/FBI/MIC corporate government under which we live.

    On we go as best we can!

    There is great dignity in the objective truth. Perhaps because it never flows through the contaminated minds of the unworthy.

    smiley7 on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 7:43pm
    Excellent Watch, Lookout,

    Corporate charters were initially meant to be for the public good if i'm not mistaken in recall, it was a trade-off for their privilege to exist. Maybe a movement political leader could highlight this and move the pendulum back to accountability.

    Had a conversation with good friend today, a 3M rep, and he was griping about his competitor's shady marketing product practices apparently lying to manufacturers about the grades and contents of their competing products.

    smiley7 on Sun, 12/08/2019 - 7:53pm
    A timely piece to go with your conversation of today:

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/07/kochland-review-koch-bro...

    Battle of Blair... on Mon, 12/09/2019 - 8:37am
    I want that flag.

    Where can I buy that flag? I will raise it and sing the corporate anthem

    "God bless Generica.
    Land that is owned.
    By the wealthy, unhealthy
    As that might be for those being pwnd.

    From the Walmart to McDonalds to the corner Dominooooos.
    God Bless Generica
    My high rent home.

    [Feb 24, 2020] Missiles Attack on Al Assad Base was a message: Iran is No Paper Tiger

    Feb 24, 2020 | www.winterwatch.net

    Although Trump decided to call this as "Iran standing down," analysts on both sides can work the calculus of this test run. I have been suggesting that Iran's cheaper technology is quite effective and an advantage near their "home court."

    Read "The Van Riper Gambit: Iran Scores Against Expensive High-Tech US Gadgetry"

    The Iranians used a third- or fourth-generation Fateh 110, which was generally given a range of 300 km. But the Al Assad base is 370 km from the border, so it seems the Iranians squeezed out some extra range. The fourth generation Fateh 100 carries a 650 kg warhead. Iran certainly has missiles with more punch. The Quim 1 is essentially a similar missile.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/63ehLAg7mSU

    Iran showed that it can put most of Iraq in range of these low-cost missiles should it become a battleground. The Al Assad base is large and target-rich.

    Leaked pictures taken by a Puerto Rican soldier of the damage to the Al-Asad US airbase in Iraq, after being hit by Iranian missiles.

    The Pentagon have told soldiers not to film the damage. #NoWarWithIran #Iran pic.twitter.com/Kl4WF6tmy0

    -- Ian56 (@Ian56789) January 9, 2020

    Meanwhile, Russia offered Iraq its state-of-the-art S-400 air defense to defend its air space.

    Besides the added range, the accuracy looks impressive.

    "Some of the locations struck look like the missiles hit dead center," said David Schmerler, an analyst with the Middlebury Institute.

    Numbers and production information relating to the Fateh 110 are currently uncertain, yet Iranian media sources claim that facilities have been created to mass produce the weapon.

    Michael Elleman, director of the Nonproliferation and Nuclear Policy Programme at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, estimates that Iran has numbers "in the high hundreds" of the Fateh-110.

    Our takeaway is that this night demonstration is hardly a dud and will give Americans some pause. It shows this key base at Al Assad will be vulnerable. If one night Iran threw a hundred of these missiles up and aimed them at personnel, things could get ugly fast.

    Observers are asking "where was the Patriot defense missile?" The problem is economic. The cost of each missile is $2.75 million. A Rand study estimated that a Patriot will need three rounds to take down basic short-range ballistic missiles like the Fateh-110. That's 30 times more than the cost of Fateh. Iran would hope the Patriot is wasted on Fatehs and Quims, and they would gladly run that kind of cost-benefit math all over the region.

    "For the time being, the Americans have been given a slap, revenge is a different issue," Iran's Fars News Agency quotes Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as saying Wednesday. "Military moves like this are not enough. The Americans' corruption-stirring presence will come to an end."

    Winter Watch Takeaway

    U.S. vulnerability at Al Assad has now been well demonstrated. If anything -- especially as more sanctions are being slapped on -- the War Party in Iran will be emboldened to run with their advantages and do so well before more American troops and aircraft build up in the theater.

    [Feb 24, 2020] Bush Family s Project Hammer

    Notable quotes:
    "... Deanna Spingola's articles are copyrighted but may be republished, reposted, or emailed. However, the person or organization must not charge for subscriptions or advertising. The article must be copied intact and full credit given. Deanna's web site address must also be included. ..."
    Dec 15, 2019 | www.spingola.com

    The Bush Family's Project Hammer
    By Deanna Spingola
    Edited by Ken Freeland
    February 7, 2010

    Join Email List to receive notification of new Spingola articles

    Hammering the USSR's Economy

    In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union. Those resources would subsequently be turned over to international bankers and corporations. On November 1, 2001, the second operative in the Bush regime, President George W. Bush, issued Executive Order 13233 on the basis of "national security" and concealed the records of past presidents, especially his father's spurious activities during 1990 and 1991. Consequently, those records are no longer accessible to the public. [1] The Russian coup plot was discussed in June 1991 when Yeltsin visited with Bush in conjunction with his visit to the United States. On that same visit, Yeltsin met discreetly with Gerald Corrigan, the chairman of the New York Federal Reserve. [2]

    Because of numerous Presidential Executive Orders, the ethically questionable Project Hammer was deemed legal. Many of Reagan's executive orders were actually authored by Vice President Bush or his legal associates, and it is possible that Project Hammer was created by Reagan's CIA Director, William Casey, who had directed OSS operations through Alan Dulles in Europe during World War II. Prior to his OSS affiliation, Casey worked for the Board of Economic Warfare which allegedly targeted "Hitler's economic jugular." [3] Allen Dulles, brother of John Foster Dulles, was the Director of the CIA (1953-1961). He was a senior partner at the Wall Street firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, which represented the Rockefeller Empire and other mammoth trusts, corporations and cartels.

    Project Hammer was staffed with CIA operatives and others associated with the National Security apparatus. Covert channels were already in place as a result of other illegal Bush activities. Thus, it was a given (1) that the project would use secret, illegal funds for unapproved covert operations, and (2) that the American public and Congress would not be informed about the illegal actions perpetrated in foreign countries. The first objective was allegedly to crush Communism, a growing political philosophy and social movement that was initially funded by the usual group of international bankers who now supported their demise. To this end, the "Vulcans," under George H. W. Bush, waged war against the Soviet Union. [4]

    The Return of the Vulcans

    In their reincarnation in the administration of George W. Bush, the Vulcans functioned as a supposedly benign group, led by Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) member Condoleezza Rice, who attempted to augment and compensate for the Bush's lack of experience and education concerning foreign policy during his presidential campaign. Rice had been President George H. W. Bush's Soviet and East European Affairs Advisor in the National Security Council during the Soviet Union's dissolution and during the German reunification (July 1, 1990). The resurrected Vulcan group included Richard Armitage, Robert Blackwill, Stephen Hadley, Richard Perle, Rabbi Dov S. Zakheim, Robert Zoellick and Paul Wolfowitz. Other key campaign figures included Dick Cheney, George P. Shultz and Colin Powell, all influential but not actually a part of the Vulcan Group. All of these people, associated with the George H. W. Bush administration, returned to powerful, strategic positions in George W. Bush's administration.

    Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz have been accused of being agents for the Israeli government. Investigations by Congress and the FBI have substantiated those allegations. Zakheim and his family were heavily involved in Yeshivat Sha'alvim, an educational organization in which students are taught to render absolute commitment to the State of Israel. [5]

    Many of these individuals were also members of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) which was established in the spring of 1997 with the intention of promoting American Global leadership at any cost. The chairman and co-founder was William Kristol, son of Irving Kristol (CFR), considered the godfather of neo-conservatism which promotes the ideas of Max Shachtman and Leo Strauss, a noted Zionist and professor of political science at the University of Chicago. Kristol's co-founder was Robert W. Kagan (CFR). Kristol is also the editor and co-founder, along with John Podhoretz, of the Weekly Standard Magazine , established September 17, 1995 and owned by Rupert Murdoch until August 2009. This "conservative" magazine is edited by William Kristol and Fred Barnes and promotes Middle East warfare and a huge military budget, a mentality that infects the most popular "conservative" talk show radio hosts. Kristol is a trustee for the Manhattan Institute which was founded by CIA Director William Casey and was staffed with former CIA officers.

    The Vulcans had almost limitless financing from a cache known by several names – the Black Eagle Trust, the Marcos gold, Yamashita's Gold, the Golden Lily Treasure, or the Durham Trust. Japan, under Emperor Hirohito, appointed a brother, Prince Chichibu, to head Golden Lily, established in November 1937 before Japan's infamous Rape of Nanking , to accompany and follow the military. The Golden Lily operation carried out massive plunder throughout Asia and included an army of jewelers, financial experts and smelters. [6] The Japanese were allegedly very organized and methodical. After the Allied blockade, Golden Lily headquarters were moved from Singapore to Manila where 175 storage sites were built by slave laborers and POWs. Billions of dollars worth of gold and other plundered treasures were stockpiled in these underground caverns, some of which were dis covered by the notorious Cold Warrior, Edward G. Lansdale who directed the recovery of some of the vaults. Truman and subsequent presidents, without congressional knowledge, have used those resources to finance the CIA's chaotic clandestine activities throughout the world. Much of the Middle East chaos is financed by those pillaged funds. A tiny portion of that treasure was the source of Ferdinand Marcos' vast wealth. Marcos worked with the CIA for decades using Golden Lily funds to bribe nations to support the Vietnam War. In return, Marcos was allowed to sell over $1 trillion in gold through Australian brokers. [7]

    In July 1944, the leaders of forty-four nations met at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire to plan the post-war economy and to discuss organizing a global political action fund which would use the Black Eagle Trust ostensibly to fight communism, bribe political leaders, enhance the treasuries of U.S. allies, and manipulate elections in foreign countries and other unconstitutional covert operations. Certainly, those politicos who managed the funds also received financial benefits. This trust was headed by Secretary of War Henry Stimson, assisted by John J. McCloy (later head of the World Bank) and Robert Lovett (later Secretary of Defense) and consultant Robert B. Anderson (later Secretary of the Treasury). [8] Anderson later operated the Commercial Exchange Bank of Anguilla in the British West Indies and was convicted of running illegal offshore banking operations and tax evasion. Investors lost about $4.4 million. Consequently, he was sent to prison for a token amount of time, one month. He was also under house arrest for five years. He could have received a ten-year sentence but Judge Palmieri considered Anderson's "distinguished service" to the country in the "top levels of Government." [9]

    Between 1945 and 1947 huge quantities of gold and platinum were deposited in prominent banks throughout the world. These deposits came to be known as the Black Eagle Trust. Swiss banks, because of their neutrality, were pivotal in maintaining these funds. These funds were allocated to fighting communism and paying bribes and fixing elections in places like Italy, Greece, and Japan. [10] Stimson and McCloy, both retired from government service, continued their involvement in the management of the Black Eagle Trust. Robert B. Anderson, who toured the treasure sites with Douglas MacArthur, set up the Black Eagle Trust and later became a member of Eisenhower's cabinet. [11] In order to maintain secrecy about the Trust, Washington officials insisted that the Japanese did not plunder the countries they invaded. Japanese officials who wanted to divulge the facts were imprisoned or murdered in a way that made it look like suicide, a common CIA tactic. [12] The Germans paid reparations to thousands of victims while the Japanese paid next to nothing. Military leaders who opposed foreign policies that embraced exploitation of third world countries were suicided or died from mysterious causes, which includes individuals such as George S. Patton, Smedley D. Butler and James V. Forrestal.

    The Vulcan's effort to crush Communism and end the Cold War was largely funded by that Japanese plunder. The Vulcans were resurrected when George W. Bush was installed as president in 2000, facilitated by election maneuvers, probably lots of payoffs, and Jeb Bush's purge of Florida voters. They conducted other illegal operations, like securities fraud and money laundering. This entailed murder and false imprisonment to prevent penitent participants from divulging the activities of the group. During the process of accomplishing the main objective of destroying the Soviet Union, the operatives made massive profits. In September 1991, George H. W. Bush and Alan Greenspan, both Pilgrims Society members, financed $240 billion in illegal bonds to economically decimate the Soviet Union and bring Soviet oil and gas resources under the control of Western investors, backed by the Black Eagle Trust and supported later by Putin who for the right price purged certain oligarchs. The $240 billion in illegal bonds were apparently replaced with Treasury notes backed by U.S. taxpayers. [13] To conceal the clearance of $240 billion in securities, the Federal Reserve, within two months, increased the money supply to pre-9/11 numbers which resulted in the American taxpayer refinancing the $240 billion. [14]

    The Takeover of Russia's Oil Industry

    BP Amoco became the largest foreign direct investor in Russia in 1997 when it paid a half-billion dollars to buy a 10 percent stake in the Russian oil conglomerate Sidanko. Then in 1999, Tyumen Oil bought Sidanko's prize unit, Chernogorneft which allegedly made BP Amoco's investment worthless. Tyumen offered to cooperate with BP Amoco on the development of Chernogorneft but BP Amoco was not interested. [15] In October 1998, Halliburton Energy Services had entered into an agreement with Moscow-based Tyumen Oil Company (TNK). Their efforts were focused on the four western Siberia fields, the first one being the Samotlorskoye field. [16] TNK has proven oil reserves of 4.3 billion barrels and possibly as many as 6.1 billion barrels, with crude oil production and refining capabilities of 420,000 barrels/day and 230,000 barrels/day, respectively. TNK markets gasoline through 400 retail outlets. [17] In 2002 Halliburton and Sibneft, Russia's fifth largest crude oil producer, signed an agreement. Sibneft will use Halliburton's new technologies to improve well construction and processing while Halliburton directs all project management. [18]

    Tyumenskaya Neftyanaya Kompaniya (Tyumen Oil Company) was established in 1995 by government decree. It is now TNK-BP, the leading Russian oil company and ranks among the top ten privately owned oil companies worldwide in terms of crude oil production. The company, formed in 2003, resulted from the merger of BP's Russian oil and gas assets and the oil and gas assets of Alfa, Access/Renova group (AAR). BP and AAR each own fifty percent of TNK-BP. The shareholders of TNK-BP own almost fifty percent of Slavneft, a vertically integrated Russian oil company. [19] This transaction was the biggest in Russian corporate history and was managed by Vladimir Lechtman, the Moscow partner for Jones Day, a global law firm with thirty offices and 2,200 lawyers worldwide. TNK-BP, Russia's second-largest oil company employs almost 100,000 people and operates in Samotlor. [20]

    Reportedly, Putin was financially rewarded by the collaborators and was happy to purge some annoying industrialists who stood in the way. Mikhail Khodorkovsky was the manager of Yukos, the company that he built into Russia's second-largest oil company after acquiring it for $168 million when his Bank MENATEP, the first privately owned but notoriously corrupt bank since 1917 and wiped out in August 1998, purchased it through a controversial government privatization auction in 1995. MENATEP was named as a defendant in the Avisma lawsuit which was filed on August 19, 1999. [21] The bank may have facilitated the large-scale theft of Soviet Treasury funds before and following the USSR's collapse in 1991. [22] His company had borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars from western banks. [23] He was arrested on October 25, 2003 and sentenced in June 2005 to eight years on fraud and tax evasion charges. He was allegedly targeted as a political enemy by President Vladimir Putin who went after other big business owners who apparently made money by acquiring states assets. Yukos was sold piecemeal to pay off $28 billion in back tax charges. Yukos was seized and given to Rosneft. [24]

    When Khodorkovsky was arrested, his secretive business arrangement with the Rothschild family was exposed as Jacob Rothschild assumed Khodorkovsky's 26% control of Yukos while Khodorkovsky's directorial seat on the Yukos board went to Edgar Ortiz, a former Halliburton vice president during Dick Cheney's reign as CEO at Halliburton. Cheney, as President and CEO of Halliburton, automatically had an association with the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR) . [25] In November 1997, Dick Cheney, in anticipation of imminent events, had appointed Edgar Ortiz as president of Halliburton Energy Services, their global division. [26]

    The Yukos Oil Company merged with the smaller Sibneft Oil Company on October 3, 2003 which created Russia's largest oil and gas business and the world's fourth-largest private oil company. [27] On May 11, 2007 Halliburton announced they had made an agreement with the Tyumen State Oil and Gas University to open a new employee-training center in Russia to grow their business in that country and in the surrounding region. They are currently training students from five countries, Kazakhstan, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia and the United Kingdom. [28] Halliburton was awarded a $33 million contract by TNK-BP to provide oil field services to develop the Ust-Vakh field in Western Siberia. [29]

    September 11 – Black Op Cover-up

    Three top securities brokers had offices in the World Trade Center, Cantor Fitzgerald, Euro Brokers and Garbon Inter Capital. Flight 11 struck just under the floors where Cantor Fitzgerald was located. Cantor Fitzgerald, with possible connections to the U.S. Intelligence apparatus, was America's biggest securities broker and apparently the main target. Within minutes, an explosion in the North Tower's vacant 23 rd floor, right under the offices of the FBI and Garbon Inter Capital on the 25 th floor caused a huge fire from the 22 nd through the 25 th floors. At the same time, there was an explosion in the basement of the North Tower. [30] A vault in the North Tower basement held less than $1 billion in gold, much of which was reportedly moved before 9/11. However, the government had hundreds of billions of dollars of securities which were summarily destroyed. The Federal Reserve, untouched by the crisis at its downtown offices (as they had everything backed up to a remote location), assumed emergency powers that afternoon. The $240 billion in securities were electronically cleared. [31] Then, at 9:03, Flight 175 slammed into the 78 th floor of the South Tower just below the 84 th floor where Euro Brokers were located. [32] Brian Clark, the manager at Euro Brokers, heard numerous explosions, apparently unrelated to what he referred to as the oxygen-starved fire caused by the plane crash.

    The September 11 attacks related to the financial improprieties during the preceding ten years which spurred at least nine federal investigations which were initiated in 1997-1998, about the same time that Osama bin Laden, after twenty years as a CIA asset, announced a fatwa against the U.S. The records of many of those investigations were held in the Buildings Six and Seven and on the 23 rd floor of the North Tower. Those investigations were sure to reveal the black Eagle Trust shenanigans. [33] Building Seven, not hit by a plane, collapsed at 5:20:33 p.m. but was vacated as early as 9:00 when evacuees claimed to see dead bodies and sporadic fires within the building.

    By 2008 and even earlier the covert securities were worth trillions. The securities used to decimate the Soviets and end the Cold War were stored in certain broker's vaults in the World Trade Center where they were destroyed on September 11, 2001. They would have come due for settlement and clearing on September 12, 2001. [34] The federal agency investigating these bonds, the Office of Naval Intelligence was in the section of the Pentagon that was destroyed on September 11. Renovations at the Pentagon were due to be completed on September 16, 2001. However, the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), the entity that often monitors war games, was hurriedly moved. If they were monitoring the simultaneous war games that morning, they would have realized that the games were used as a distraction from the actual assault. Whatever hit the pentagon struck the Navy Command Center and the offices of the Chief of Naval Operations Intelligence Plot (CNO-IP). [35] There were 125 fatalities in the Pentagon, thirty-one percent of them were people who worked in the Naval Command Center, the location of the Office of Naval Intelligence. Thirty-nine of the forty people who worked in the Office of Naval Intelligence died . [36]

    On September 10, 2001 Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon couldn't account for $2.3 trillion, "We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible." [37] It was forgotten the following morning. Accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts who were in the section of the Pentagon being renovated met their unexpected deaths. The destruction of accounting facts and figures will prevent discovery of where that money went. I am quite certain someone knows where it is. Certainly this is not merely gross incompetence but private seizure of public funds. [38] At the time Rabbi Dov Zakheim was chief-financial officer for the Department of Defense. [39] In 1993, Zakheim worked for SPS International, part of System Planning Corporation, a defense contractor. His firm's subsidiary, Tridata Corporation directed the investigation of the first "terrorist" attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. [40]

    Certain National Security officials who had participated in the Cold War victory in 1991 thus comprised the collateral damage of the Cold War. They, along with hundreds of innocent people were in the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. Their deaths were presumably required to conceal the existence of the Black Eagle Trust, along with the numerous illegal activities it had funded for over 50 years. This massive destruction, and the lost lives, constitutes a massive cover-up and continued lawlessness by the brotherhood of death, Skull and Bones, and their accomplices, the Enterprise. [41] The Enterprise was established in the 1980s as a covert fascist Cold Warriors faction working with other groups like Halliburton's private security forces and the Moonies. Citibank is connected to the Enterprise, along with all the CIA front banks, Nugen Hand and BCCI.

    Double Dipping

    Alvin B. "Buzzy" Krongard was elected Chief Executive Officer of Alexander Brown and Sons in 1991 and Chairman of the Board in 1994. Bankers Trust purchased Alexander Brown and Sons in 1997 to form BT Alex Brown. Krongard relinquished his investments in Alex Brown to Banker's Trust as part of the merger. He became Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust where he personally interacted with wealthy clients who were intimately linked to drug money laundering. After a year of possible networking, Krongard joined (or as Michael Ruppert suggests, rejoined ) the CIA in 1998 where his friend, Director George Tenet, concentrated his skills on private banking ventures within the elite moneyed community. Senate investigations verify that private banking firms frequently engage in money laundering from illicit drugs and corporate crime operations. [42] On January 28, 2000 the Reginald Howe and GATA Lawsuit was filed which accused certain U.S. bullion banks of illegally dumping U.S. Treasury gold on the market. The lawsuit named Deutsche bank Alex Brown, the U.S. Treasury, Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve, and Citibank, Chase, as defendants. Gerald Corrigan was accused of having private knowledge of the scheme. [43] Krongard became the Executive Director of the CIA, essentially the Chief Operating Officer, and the number three man on March 16, 2001. Krongard, while at the CIA, arranged for Blackwater's Erik Prince to get his first contract with the U.S. government, and later joined its board.

    Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert, estimated that more than $100 million in illegal transactions appeared to have rushed through the WTC computers before and during the disaster on September 11, 2001. A Deutsche Bank employee verified that approximately five minutes before the first plane hit the tower that the Deutsche Bank computer system in their WTC office was seized by an outside, unknown entity. Every single file was swiftly uploaded to an unidentified locality. This employee escaped from the building, but lost many of his friends. He knew, from his position in the company, that Alex Brown, the Deutsche Bank subsidiary participated in insider trading. Senator Carl Levin claimed that Alex Brown was just one of twenty prominent U.S. banks associated with money laundering. [44]

    Andreas von Bülow, a Social Democratic Party member of the German parliament (1969-1994), was on the parliamentary committee on intelligence services, a group that has access to classified information. Von Bülow was also a member of the Schalck-Golodkowski investigation committee which investigates white-collar crime. He has estimated that inside trader profits surrounding 9/11 totaled approximately $15 billion. Von Bülow told The Daily Telegraph "If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars." Further, he said, "They have hidden behind a veil of secrecy and destroyed the evidence they invented the story of 19 Muslims working within Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda in order to hide the truth of their own covert operation." He also said, "I'm convinced that the US apparatus must have played a role and my theory is backed up by the [Washington] government's refusal to present any proof whatsoever of what happened." [45]

    On September 26, CBS reported that the amount was more than $100 million and that seven countries were investigating the irregular trades. Two newspapers, Reuters and the New York Times, and other mainstream media reported that the CIA regularly monitors extraordinary trades and economic irregularities to ascertain possible criminal activities or financial assaults. In fact, the CIA uses specialized software, PROMIS, to scrutinize trades. [46]

    Numerous researchers believe, with justification, that the transactions in the financial markets are indicative of foreknowledge of the events of 9/11, the attacks on the twin towers and the pentagon. One of the trades, for $2.5 million, a pittance compared to the total, went unclaimed. Alex Brown, once managed by Krongard, was the firm that placed the put options on United Airlines stock. President Bush awarded Krongard by appointing him as CIA Executive Director in 2004. [47]

    Between September 6 and 7, 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange received purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines and only 396 call options. If 4,000 of those options were purchased by people with foreknowledge, they would have accrued about $5 million. On September 10, the Chicago exchange received 4,516 put options on American Airlines compared to 748 calls. The implications are that some insiders might profit by about $4 million. These two incidents were wholly irregular and at least six times higher than normal. [48]

    Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Company, who occupied floors 43-46, 56, 59-74 of the World Trade Center, Tower 2, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday. This compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley's share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million. The U.S. government never again mentioned the trade irregularities after October 12, 2001. [49] Catastrophic events serve two purposes for the top criminal element in society – the perpetrators seize resources while their legislative accomplices impose burdensome restrictions on the citizens to make them more submissive and silent.

    [1] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E.P. Heidner, pp. 4-5
    [2] Ibid, p. 20
    [3] Ibid, pp. 4-5
    [4] Ibid
    [5] September 11 Commission Report by E. P. Heidner, 2008, p. 108
    [6] Gold Warriors, America's Secret Recovery of Yamashita's Gold by Sterling and Peggy Seagrave, Verso Publishing, 2003, pp. 32-43
    [7] Ibid, pp. 318
    [8] Ibid, pp. 14-15
    [9] Ex-Treasury Chief Gets 1-Month Term in Bank Fraud Case by Frank J. Prial, New York Times, June 28, 1987
    [10] Gold Warriors, America's Secret Recovery of Yamashita's Gold by Sterling and Peggy Seagrave, Verso Publishing, 2003, p. 5
    [11] Ibid, p. 98
    [12] Ibid, p. 102
    [13] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E. P. Heidner, pp. 4-6
    [14] Ibid, p. 29
    [15] Tyumen Oil of Russia Seeks Links to Old Foes After Winning Fight By Neela Banerjee, New York Times, December 2, 1999
    [16] Halliburton Energy Services Enters Into Alliance Agreement With Tyumen Oil Company, Press Release, October 15, 1998, http://www.halliburton.com/news/archive/1998/hesnws_101598.jsp
    [17] Ibid
    [18] Halliburton Press Release, Halliburton And Russian Oil Company Sibneft Sign Framework Agreement, February 7, 2002, http://www.halliburton.com/news/archive/2002/corpnws_020702.jsp
    [19] TNK-BP, Our company, http://www.tnk-bp.com/company/
    [20] Russia's largest field is far from depleted By Jerome R. Corsi, Word Net Daily, November 04, 2005, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47219
    [21] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E.P. Heidner, p. 28
    [22] Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky, Source Watch, http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mikhail_B._Khodorkovsky
    [23] Russia's Ruling Robbers by Mark Ames, Consortium News, March 11, 1999, http://www.consortiumnews.com/1999/c031199a.html
    [24] "Sovest" Group Campaign for Granting Political Prisoner Status to Mikhail Khodorkovsky, February 7, 2008
    [25] Halliburton Man to Sub for Khodorkovsky, Simon Ostrovsky, Moscow Times, April 30, 2004 as noted in the September 11 Commission Report, p. 233; See also Arrested Oil Tycoon Passed Shares to Banker, Washington Times, November 2, 2003
    [26] Halliburton Press Release, Ortiz Named President Of Halliburton Energy Services, November 19, 1997, http://www.halliburton.com/news/archive/1997/hesnws_111997.jsp
    [27] Russia: Yukos-Sibneft union forms world's No. 4 oil producer, Global Finance, Jun 2003, http://mikhail_khodorkovsky_society.blogspot.com/
    [28] Halliburton Opens Russia Training Center, International Business Times, May 11, 2007, http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20070511/halliburton-training.htm
    [29] Halliburton gets Russia work, Oil Daily, January 26, 2006, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-5579583_ITM
    [30] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E. P. Heidner, p. 2
    [31] Ibid, p. 29
    [32] Ibid, pp. 2
    [33] Ibid, p. 28-29
    [34] "Sioux City, Iowa, July 25, 2005 TomFlocco.com , According to leaked documents from an intelligence file obtained through a military source in the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), on or about September 12, 1991 non-performing and unauthorized gold-backed debt instruments were used to purchase ten-year "Brady" bonds. The bonds in turn were illegally employed as collateral to borrow $240 billion--120 in Japanese Yen and 120 in
    Deutsch Marks--exchanged for U.S. currency under false pretenses; or counterfeit and unlawful conversion of collateral against which an unlimited amount of money could be created in derivatives and debt instruments " from Cash payoffs, bonds and murder linked to White House 9/11 finance, Tom Flocco, tomflocco.com
    [35] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E.P. Heidner, p. 45
    [36] Ibid, p. 2
    [37] Rumsfeld's comments were on the Department of defense web site but have been understandably removed, http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010910-secdef.ht
    [38] The War On Waste Defense Department Cannot Account For 25% Of Funds -- $2.3 Trillion, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml
    [39] September 11 Commission Report by E. P. Heidner, 2008, p. 108
    [40] Following Zakheim and Pentagon Trillions to Israel and 9-11By Jerry Mazza, July 31, 2006, http://www.rense.com/general75/latest.htm
    [41] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E. P. Heidner, p. 6
    [42] Crossing the Rubicon, the Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael C. Ruppert, New Society Publishers, Canada, 2004, p. 56
    [43] Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 by E. P. Heidner, p. 28
    [44] Crossing the Rubicon, the Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael C. Ruppert, New Society Publishers, Canada, 2004, pp. 243-247
    [45] USA staged 9/11 Attacks, German best-seller by Kate Connolly, National Post & London Telegraph, November 20, 2003
    [46] Crossing the Rubicon, the Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael C. Ruppert, New Society Publishers, Canada, 2004, pp. 243-247
    [47] Ibid, pp. 243-247
    [48] Ibid, pp. 243-247
    [49] Ibid, pp. 243-247

    Comments: deannaATspingola.email
    To avoid attracting spam email robots, email addresses on this site are written with AT in place of the usual symbol. Replace AT with the correct symbol to get a valid address.

    Back To Political Points

    © Deanna Spingola 2010 - All rights reserved

    Deanna Spingola's articles are copyrighted but may be republished, reposted, or emailed. However, the person or organization must not charge for subscriptions or advertising. The article must be copied intact and full credit given. Deanna's web site address must also be included.

    [Feb 24, 2020] US Intel Briefer Who Gave Overblown Russian Interference Assessment Has Reputation For Hyperbole

    This is not "the reputation for hyperbole". This is attempt to defend the interests of MIC, including the interests of intelligence agencies themselves in view of deteriorating financial position of the USA. And first of all the level of the current funding. Like was the case in 2016 elections, the intelligence agencies and first of all CIA should now be considered as the third party participating in the 2020 election which attempts to be the kingmaker. They are interested in continuing and intensifying the Cold War 2, as it secured funding for them and MIC (of this they are essential part)
    Notable quotes:
    "... The official, Shelby Pierson, "appears to have overstated the intelligence community's formal assessment of Russian interference in the 2020 election, omitting important nuance during a briefing with lawmakers earlier this month," according to CNN . ..."
    "... " The intelligence doesn't say that ," one senior national security official told CNN. "A more reasonable interpretation of the intelligence is not that they have a preference, it's a step short of that. It's more that they understand the President is someone they can work with, he's a dealmaker." - CNN ..."
    "... To recap - Pierson told the House Intelligence Committee a lie , which was promptly leaked to the press - ostensibly by Democrats on the committee, and it's just now getting walked back with far less attention than the original 'bombshell' headline received. ..."
    "... No biggie... the media just ran with hysteria for 3 years as gospel accusing people of treason ..."
    "... Well guess what? It turns out the media and the DNC were the ones working for Russia, executing their long standing goal to create chaos better than Russia could have ever dreamed of. https://t.co/PhrJiES9ui ..."
    Feb 24, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    The US intelligence community's top election security official who appears to have overstated Russian interference in the 2020 election has a history of hyperbole - described by the Wall Street Journal as "a reputation for being injudicious with her words."

    The official, Shelby Pierson, "appears to have overstated the intelligence community's formal assessment of Russian interference in the 2020 election, omitting important nuance during a briefing with lawmakers earlier this month," according to CNN .

    The official, Shelby Pierson, told lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee that Russia is interfering in the 2020 election with the goal of helping President Donald Trump get reelected .

    The US intelligence community has assessed that Russia is interfering in the 2020 election and has separately assessed that Russia views Trump as a leader they can work with. But the US does not have evidence that Russia's interference this cycle is aimed at reelecting Trump , the officials said.

    " The intelligence doesn't say that ," one senior national security official told CNN. "A more reasonable interpretation of the intelligence is not that they have a preference, it's a step short of that. It's more that they understand the President is someone they can work with, he's a dealmaker." - CNN

    Pierson was reportedly peppered with questions from the House Intelligence Committee, which 'caused her to overstep and assert that Russia has a preference for Trump to be reelected,' according to the report. CNN notes that one intelligence official said that her characterization was "misleading," while a national security official said she failed to provide the "nuance" required to put the US intelligence conclusions in proper context.

    To recap - Pierson told the House Intelligence Committee a lie , which was promptly leaked to the press - ostensibly by Democrats on the committee, and it's just now getting walked back with far less attention than the original 'bombshell' headline received.

    Sound familiar?

    No biggie... the media just ran with hysteria for 3 years as gospel accusing people of treason

    Well guess what? It turns out the media and the DNC were the ones working for Russia, executing their long standing goal to create chaos better than Russia could have ever dreamed of. https://t.co/PhrJiES9ui

    -- Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) February 24, 2020

    [Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime

    Highly recommended!
    Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    4 hours ago

    Is America a 'regime'?

    In the language of the American Oligarchy and it's tame and owned presstitutes on the MSM, any country targeted for destabilisation, destruction and rape – either because it doesn't do what America tells it do (Russia), because it has rich natural resources or has a 'socialist' state (Venezuela) or because lunatic neo-cons and even more lunatic Christian Evangelicals (hoping to provoke The End Times ) want it to happen (Syria and Iran) – is first labelled as a 'regime'.

    That's because the word 'regime' is associated with dictatorships and human rights abuses and establishing a non-compliant country as a 'regime' is the US government's and MSM's first step at manufacturing public consent for that country's destruction.

    Unfortunately if you sit back and talk a cool-headed, factual look at actions and attitudes that we're told constitute a regime then you have to conclude that America itself is 'a regime'.

    So, here's why America is a regime:

    4 hours ago

    America's Military is Killing – Americans!

    In 2018, Republicans (AND Democrats) voted to cut $23 billion dollars from the budget for food stamps (42 million Americans currently receive them).

    Fats forward to 21 December 2019 and Donald Trump signed off on a US defense budget of a mind boggling $738 billion dollars.

    To put that in context  --  the annual US government Education budget is sround $68 billion dollars.

    Did you get that  --  $738 billion on defense, $68 billion on education?

    That means the government spends more than ten times on preparations to kill people than it does on preparing children for life in the adult world.

    Wow!

    How ******* psychotic and death-affirming is that? It gets even worse when you consider that that $716 billion dollars is only the headline figure – it doesn't include whatever the Deep State siphons away into black-ops and kick backs. And .America's military isn't even very good – it's hasn't 'won' a conflict since the second world war, it's proud (and horrifically expensive) aircraft carriers have been rendered obsolete by Chinese and Russian hypersonic missiles and its 'cutting edge' weapons are so good (not) that everyone wants to buy the cheaper and better Russian versions: classic example – the F-35 jet program will screw $1.5 TRILLION (yes, TRILLION) dollars out of US taxpayers but but it's a piece of **** plane that doesn't work properly which the Russians laughingly refer to as 'a flying piano'.

    In contrast to America's free money for the military industrial complex defense budget, China spends $165 billion and Russia spends $61 billion on defense and I don't see anyone attacking them (well, except America, that is be it only by proxy for now).

    Or, put things another way. The United Kingdom spent £110 billion on it's National Health Service in 2017. That means, if you get sick in England, you can see a doctor for free. If you need drugs you pay a prescription charge of around $11.50(nothing, if unemployed, a child or elderly), whatever the market price of the drugs. If you need to see a consultant or medical specialist, you'll see one for free. If you need an operation, you'll get one for free. If you need on-going care for a chronic illness, you'll get it for free.

    Fully socialised, free at the point of access, healthcare for all. How good is that?

    US citizens could have that, too.

    Allowing for the US's larger population, the UK National Health Service transplanted to America could cost about $650 billion a year. That would still leave $66 billion dollars left over from the proposed defense budget of $716 billion to finance weapons of death and destruction   --  more than those 'evil Ruskies' spend.

    The US has now been at war, somewhere in the world (i.e in someone elses' country where the US doesn't have any business being) continuously for 28 years. Those 28 years have coincided with (for the 'ordinary people', anyway) declining living standards, declining real wages, increased police violence, more repression and surveillance, declining lifespans, declining educational and health outcomes, more every day misery in other words, America's military is killing Americans. Oh, and millions of people in far away countries (although, obviously, those deaths are in far away countries and they are of brown-skinned people so they don't really count, do they?).

    Time for a change, perhaps?

    [Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen

    Here's a link to a free online copy of War is a Racket if anyone wants to read it. It's a short read. Pretty good too. https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
    From comments (Is the USA government now a "regime"): In 2018, Republicans (AND Democrats) voted to cut $23 billion dollars from the budget for food stamps (42 million Americans currently receive them). Regimes disobey international law. Like America's habit of blowing up wedding parties with drones or the illegal presence of its troops in Syria, Iraq and God knows where else. Regimes carry out illegal assassination programs – I need say no more here than Qasem Soleimani. Regimes use their economic power to bully and impose their will – sanctioning countries even when they know those sanctions will, for example, be responsible for the death of 500,000 Iraqi children (the 'price worth paying', remember?). Regimes renege on international treaties – like Iran nuclear treaty, for example. Regimes imprison and hound whistle-blowers – like Chelsea manning and Julian Assange. Regimes imprison people. America is the world leader in incarceration. It has 2.2 million people in its prisons (more than China which has 5 times the US's population), that's 25% of the world's prison population for 5% of the world's population, Why does America need so many prisoners? Because it has a massive, prison-based, slave labour business that is hugely profitable for the oligarchy.
    Regimes censor free speech. Just recently, we've seen numerous non-narrative following journalists and organisations kicked off numerous social media platforms. I didn't see lots of US senators standing up and saying 'I disagree completely with what you say but I will fight to the death to preserve your right to say it'. Did you?
    Regimes are ruled by cliques. I don't need to tell you that America is kakistocratic Oligarchy ruled by a tiny group of evil, rich, Old Men, do I?
    Regimes keep bad company. Their allies are other 'regimes', and they're often lumped together by using another favourite presstitute term – 'axis of evil'. America has its own little axis of evil. It's two main allies are Saudi Arabia – a homophobic, women hating, head chopping, terrorist financing state currently engaged in a war of genocide (assisted by the US) in Yemen – and the racist, genocidal undeclared nuclear power state of Israel.
    Regimes commit human rights abuses. Here we could talk about…ooh…let's think. Last year's treatment of child refugees from Latin America, the execution of African Americans for 'walking whilst black' by America's militarized, criminal police force or the millions of dollars in cash and property seized from entirely innocent Americans by that same police force under 'civil forfeiture' laws or maybe we could mention huge American corporations getting tax refunds whilst ordinary Americans can't afford decent, effective healthcare.
    Regimes finance terrorism. Mmmm….just like America financed terrorists to help destroy Syria and Libya and invested $5 billion dollars to install another regime – the one of anti-Semites and Nazis in Ukraine…
    Highly recommended!
    Some comments edited for clarity...
    Notable quotes:
    "... But after retirement, Smedley Butler changed his tune. ..."
    "... "I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service... And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers." ..."
    "... Smedley Butler's Marine Corps and the military of his day was, in certain ways, a different sort of organization than today's highly professionalized armed forces. History rarely repeats itself, not in a literal sense anyway. Still, there are some disturbing similarities between the careers of Butler and today's generation of forever-war fighters. All of them served repeated tours of duty in (mostly) unsanctioned wars around the world. Butler's conflicts may have stretched west from Haiti across the oceans to China, whereas today's generals mostly lead missions from West Africa east to Central Asia, but both sets of conflicts seemed perpetual in their day and were motivated by barely concealed economic and imperial interests. ..."
    "... When Smedley Butler retired in 1931, he was one of three Marine Corps major generals holding a rank just below that of only the Marine commandant and the Army chief of staff. Today, with about 900 generals and admirals currently serving on active duty, including 24 major generals in the Marine Corps alone, and with scores of flag officers retiring annually, not a single one has offered genuine public opposition to almost 19 years worth of ill-advised, remarkably unsuccessful American wars . As for the most senior officers, the 40 four-star generals and admirals whose vocal antimilitarism might make the biggest splash, there are more of them today than there were even at the height of the Vietnam War, although the active military is now about half the size it was then. Adulated as many of them may be, however, not one qualifies as a public critic of today's failing wars. ..."
    "... The big three are Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson ; Vietnam veteran and onetime West Point history instructor, retired Colonel Andrew Bacevich ; and Iraq veteran and Afghan War whistleblower , retired Lieutenant Colonel Danny Davis . All three have proven to be genuine public servants, poignant voices, and -- on some level -- cherished personal mentors. For better or worse, however, none carry the potential clout of a retired senior theater commander or prominent four-star general offering the same critiques. ..."
    "... Consider it an irony of sorts that this system first received criticism in our era of forever wars when General David Petraeus, then commanding the highly publicized " surge " in Iraq, had to leave that theater of war in 2007 to serve as the chair of that selection committee. The reason: he wanted to ensure that a twice passed-over colonel, a protégé of his -- future Trump National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster -- earned his star. ..."
    "... At the roots of this system lay the obsession of the American officer corps with " professionalization " after the Vietnam War debacle. This first manifested itself in a decision to ditch the citizen-soldier tradition, end the draft, and create an "all-volunteer force." The elimination of conscription, as predicted by critics at the time, created an ever-growing civil-military divide, even as it increased public apathy regarding America's wars by erasing whatever " skin in the game " most citizens had. ..."
    "... One group of generals, however, reportedly now does have it out for President Trump -- but not because they're opposed to endless war. Rather, they reportedly think that The Donald doesn't "listen enough to military advice" on, you know, how to wage war forever and a day. ..."
    "... That beast, first identified by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, is now on steroids as American commanders in retirement regularly move directly from the military onto the boards of the giant defense contractors, a reality which only contributes to the dearth of Butlers in the military retiree community. For all the corruption of his time, the Pentagon didn't yet exist and the path from the military to, say, United Fruit Company, Standard Oil, or other typical corporate giants of that moment had yet to be normalized for retiring generals and admirals. Imagine what Butler would have had to say about the modern phenomenon of the " revolving door " in Washington. ..."
    "... Today, generals don't seem to have a thought of their own even in retirement. And more's the pity... ..."
    "... Am I the only one to notice that Hollywood and it's film distributors have gone full bore on "war" productions, glorifying these historical events while using poetic license to rewrite history. Prepping the numbheads. ..."
    "... Forget rank. As Mr Sjursen implies, dissidents are no longer allowed in the higher ranks. "They" made sure to fix this as Mr Butler had too much of a mind of his own (US education system also programmed against creative, charismatic thinkers, btw). ..."
    "... Today, the "Masters of the Permawars" refer to the international extortion, MIC, racket as "Defending American Interests"! .....With never any explanation to the public/American taxpayer just what "American Interests" the incredible expenditures of American lives, blood, and treasure are being defended! ..."
    "... "The Americans follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." - Jospeh Goebbels ..."
    "... The greatest anti-imperialist of our times is Michael Parenti: ..."
    "... The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power. ..."
    "... If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort. ..."
    Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Danny Sjursen via TomDispatch.com,

    There once lived an odd little man - five feet nine inches tall and barely 140 pounds sopping wet - who rocked the lecture circuit and the nation itself. For all but a few activist insiders and scholars, U.S. Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler is now lost to history. Yet more than a century ago, this strange contradiction of a man would become a national war hero, celebrated in pulp adventure novels, and then, 30 years later, as one of this country's most prominent antiwar and anti-imperialist dissidents.

    Raised in West Chester, Pennsylvania, and educated in Quaker (pacifist) schools, the son of an influential congressman, he would end up serving in nearly all of America's " Banana Wars " from 1898 to 1931. Wounded in combat and a rare recipient of two Congressional Medals of Honor, he would retire as the youngest, most decorated major general in the Marines.

    A teenage officer and a certified hero during an international intervention in the Chinese Boxer Rebellion of 1900, he would later become a constabulary leader of the Haitian gendarme, the police chief of Philadelphia (while on an approved absence from the military), and a proponent of Marine Corps football. In more standard fashion, he would serve in battle as well as in what might today be labeled peacekeeping , counterinsurgency , and advise-and-assist missions in Cuba, China, the Philippines, Panama, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, France, and China (again). While he showed early signs of skepticism about some of those imperial campaigns or, as they were sardonically called by critics at the time, " Dollar Diplomacy " operations -- that is, military campaigns waged on behalf of U.S. corporate business interests -- until he retired he remained the prototypical loyal Marine.

    But after retirement, Smedley Butler changed his tune. He began to blast the imperialist foreign policy and interventionist bullying in which he'd only recently played such a prominent part. Eventually, in 1935 during the Great Depression, in what became a classic passage in his memoir, which he titled "War Is a Racket," he wrote:

    "I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service... And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."

    Seemingly overnight, the famous war hero transformed himself into an equally acclaimed antiwar speaker and activist in a politically turbulent era. Those were, admittedly, uncommonly anti-interventionist years, in which veterans and politicians alike promoted what (for America, at least) had been fringe ideas. This was, after all, the height of what later pro-war interventionists would pejoratively label American " isolationism ."

    Nonetheless, Butler was unique (for that moment and certainly for our own) in his unapologetic amenability to left-wing domestic politics and materialist critiques of American militarism. In the last years of his life, he would face increasing criticism from his former admirer, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the military establishment, and the interventionist press. This was particularly true after Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany invaded Poland and later France. Given the severity of the Nazi threat to mankind, hindsight undoubtedly proved Butler's virulent opposition to U.S. intervention in World War II wrong.

    Nevertheless, the long-term erasure of his decade of antiwar and anti-imperialist activism and the assumption that all his assertions were irrelevant has proven historically deeply misguided. In the wake of America's brief but bloody entry into the First World War, the skepticism of Butler (and a significant part of an entire generation of veterans) about intervention in a new European bloodbath should have been understandable. Above all, however, his critique of American militarism of an earlier imperial era in the Pacific and in Latin America remains prescient and all too timely today, especially coming as it did from one of the most decorated and high-ranking general officers of his time. (In the era of the never-ending war on terror, such a phenomenon is quite literally inconceivable.)

    Smedley Butler's Marine Corps and the military of his day was, in certain ways, a different sort of organization than today's highly professionalized armed forces. History rarely repeats itself, not in a literal sense anyway. Still, there are some disturbing similarities between the careers of Butler and today's generation of forever-war fighters. All of them served repeated tours of duty in (mostly) unsanctioned wars around the world. Butler's conflicts may have stretched west from Haiti across the oceans to China, whereas today's generals mostly lead missions from West Africa east to Central Asia, but both sets of conflicts seemed perpetual in their day and were motivated by barely concealed economic and imperial interests.

    Nonetheless, whereas this country's imperial campaigns of the first third of the twentieth century generated a Smedley Butler, the hyper-interventionism of the first decades of this century hasn't produced a single even faintly comparable figure. Not one. Zero. Zilch. Why that is matters and illustrates much about the U.S. military establishment and contemporary national culture, none of it particularly encouraging.

    Why No Antiwar Generals

    When Smedley Butler retired in 1931, he was one of three Marine Corps major generals holding a rank just below that of only the Marine commandant and the Army chief of staff. Today, with about 900 generals and admirals currently serving on active duty, including 24 major generals in the Marine Corps alone, and with scores of flag officers retiring annually, not a single one has offered genuine public opposition to almost 19 years worth of ill-advised, remarkably unsuccessful American wars . As for the most senior officers, the 40 four-star generals and admirals whose vocal antimilitarism might make the biggest splash, there are more of them today than there were even at the height of the Vietnam War, although the active military is now about half the size it was then. Adulated as many of them may be, however, not one qualifies as a public critic of today's failing wars.

    Instead, the principal patriotic dissent against those terror wars has come from retired colonels, lieutenant colonels, and occasionally more junior officers (like me), as well as enlisted service members. Not that there are many of us to speak of either. I consider it disturbing (and so should you) that I personally know just about every one of the retired military figures who has spoken out against America's forever wars.

    The big three are Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson ; Vietnam veteran and onetime West Point history instructor, retired Colonel Andrew Bacevich ; and Iraq veteran and Afghan War whistleblower , retired Lieutenant Colonel Danny Davis . All three have proven to be genuine public servants, poignant voices, and -- on some level -- cherished personal mentors. For better or worse, however, none carry the potential clout of a retired senior theater commander or prominent four-star general offering the same critiques.

    Something must account for veteran dissenters topping out at the level of colonel. Obviously, there are personal reasons why individual officers chose early retirement or didn't make general or admiral. Still, the system for selecting flag officers should raise at least a few questions when it comes to the lack of antiwar voices among retired commanders. In fact, a selection committee of top generals and admirals is appointed each year to choose the next colonels to earn their first star. And perhaps you won't be surprised to learn that, according to numerous reports , "the members of this board are inclined, if not explicitly motivated, to seek candidates in their own image -- officers whose careers look like theirs." At a minimal level, such a system is hardly built to foster free thinkers, no less breed potential dissidents.

    Consider it an irony of sorts that this system first received criticism in our era of forever wars when General David Petraeus, then commanding the highly publicized " surge " in Iraq, had to leave that theater of war in 2007 to serve as the chair of that selection committee. The reason: he wanted to ensure that a twice passed-over colonel, a protégé of his -- future Trump National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster -- earned his star.

    Mainstream national security analysts reported on this affair at the time as if it were a major scandal, since most of them were convinced that Petraeus and his vaunted counterinsurgency or " COINdinista " protégés and their " new " war-fighting doctrine had the magic touch that would turn around the failing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, Petraeus tried to apply those very tactics twice -- once in each country -- as did acolytes of his later, and you know the results of that.

    But here's the point: it took an eleventh-hour intervention by America's most acclaimed general of that moment to get new stars handed out to prominent colonels who had, until then, been stonewalled by Cold War-bred flag officers because they were promoting different (but also strangely familiar) tactics in this country's wars. Imagine, then, how likely it would be for such a leadership system to produce genuine dissenters with stars of any serious sort, no less a crew of future Smedley Butlers.

    At the roots of this system lay the obsession of the American officer corps with " professionalization " after the Vietnam War debacle. This first manifested itself in a decision to ditch the citizen-soldier tradition, end the draft, and create an "all-volunteer force." The elimination of conscription, as predicted by critics at the time, created an ever-growing civil-military divide, even as it increased public apathy regarding America's wars by erasing whatever " skin in the game " most citizens had.

    More than just helping to squelch civilian antiwar activism, though, the professionalization of the military, and of the officer corps in particular, ensured that any future Smedley Butlers would be left in the dust (or in retirement at the level of lieutenant colonel or colonel) by a system geared to producing faux warrior-monks. Typical of such figures is current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Mark Milley. He may speak gruffly and look like a man with a head of his own, but typically he's turned out to be just another yes-man for another war-power -hungry president.

    One group of generals, however, reportedly now does have it out for President Trump -- but not because they're opposed to endless war. Rather, they reportedly think that The Donald doesn't "listen enough to military advice" on, you know, how to wage war forever and a day.

    What Would Smedley Butler Think Today?

    In his years of retirement, Smedley Butler regularly focused on the economic component of America's imperial war policies. He saw clearly that the conflicts he had fought in, the elections he had helped rig, the coups he had supported, and the constabularies he had formed and empowered in faraway lands had all served the interests of U.S. corporate investors. Though less overtly the case today, this still remains a reality in America's post-9/11 conflicts, even on occasion embarrassingly so (as when the Iraqi ministry of oil was essentially the only public building protected by American troops as looters tore apart the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, in the post-invasion chaos of April 2003). Mostly, however, such influence plays out far more subtly than that, both abroad and here at home where those wars help maintain the record profits of the top weapons makers of the military-industrial complex.

    That beast, first identified by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, is now on steroids as American commanders in retirement regularly move directly from the military onto the boards of the giant defense contractors, a reality which only contributes to the dearth of Butlers in the military retiree community. For all the corruption of his time, the Pentagon didn't yet exist and the path from the military to, say, United Fruit Company, Standard Oil, or other typical corporate giants of that moment had yet to be normalized for retiring generals and admirals. Imagine what Butler would have had to say about the modern phenomenon of the " revolving door " in Washington.

    Of course, he served in a very different moment, one in which military funding and troop levels were still contested in Congress. As a longtime critic of capitalist excesses who wrote for leftist publications and supported the Socialist Party candidate in the 1936 presidential elections, Butler would have found today's nearly trillion-dollar annual defense budgets beyond belief. What the grizzled former Marine long ago identified as a treacherous nexus between warfare and capital "in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives" seems to have reached its natural end point in the twenty-first century. Case in point: the record (and still rising ) "defense" spending of the present moment, including -- to please a president -- the creation of a whole new military service aimed at the full-scale militarization of space .

    Sadly enough, in the age of Trump, as numerous polls demonstrate, the U.S. military is the only public institution Americans still truly trust. Under the circumstances, how useful it would be to have a high-ranking, highly decorated, charismatic retired general in the Butler mold galvanize an apathetic public around those forever wars of ours. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that is practically nil, given the military system of our moment.

    Of course, Butler didn't exactly end his life triumphantly. In late May 1940, having lost 25 pounds due to illness and exhaustion -- and demonized as a leftist, isolationist crank but still maintaining a whirlwind speaking schedule -- he checked himself into the Philadelphia Navy Yard Hospital for a "rest." He died there, probably of some sort of cancer, four weeks later. Working himself to death in his 10-year retirement and second career as a born-again antiwar activist, however, might just have constituted the very best service that the two-time Medal of Honor winner could have given the nation he loved to the very end.

    Someone of his credibility, character, and candor is needed more than ever today. Unfortunately, this military generation is unlikely to produce such a figure. In retirement, Butler himself boldly confessed that, "like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical..."

    Today, generals don't seem to have a thought of their own even in retirement. And more's the pity...

    2 minutes ago
    Am I the only one to notice that Hollywood and it's film distributors have gone full bore on "war" productions, glorifying these historical events while using poetic license to rewrite history. Prepping the numbheads.
    14 minutes ago
    TULSI GABBARD.

    Forget rank. As Mr Sjursen implies, dissidents are no longer allowed in the higher ranks. "They" made sure to fix this as Mr Butler had too much of a mind of his own (US education system also programmed against creative, charismatic thinkers, btw).

    The US Space Force has been created as part of a plan to disclose the deep state's Secret Space Program (SSP), which has been active for decades, and which has utilized, and repressed, advanced technologies that would provide free, unlimited renewable energy, and thus eliminate hunger and poverty on a planetary scale.

    14 minutes ago
    14 minutes ago

    ALL wars are EVIL. Period .

    29 minutes ago

    Sadly enough, in the age of Trump, as numerous polls demonstrate, the U.S. military is the only public institution Americans still truly trust. Under the circumstances, how useful it would be to have a high-ranking, highly decorated, charismatic retired general in the Butler mold galvanize an apathetic public around those forever wars of ours. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that is practically nil, given the military system of our moment.

    This is why I feel an oath keeping constitutionally oriented American general is what we need in power, clear out all 545 criminals in office now, review their finances (and most of them will roll over on the others) and punish accordingly, then the lobbyist, how many of them worked against the country? You know what we do with those.

    And then, finally, Hollywood, oh yes I long to see that **** hole burn with everyone in it.

    30 minutes ago
    Republicrat: the two faces of the moar war whore.
    32 minutes ago

    Given the severity of the Nazi threat to mankind

    Do tell, from what I've read the Nazis were really only a threat to a few groups, the rest of us didn't need to worry.

    35 minutes ago
    Today, the "Masters of the Permawars" refer to the international extortion, MIC, racket as "Defending American Interests"! .....With never any explanation to the public/American taxpayer just what "American Interests" the incredible expenditures of American lives, blood, and treasure are being defended!

    Why are we sending our children out into the hellholes of the world to be maimed and killed in the fauxjew banksters' quest for world domination.

    How stupid can we be!

    41 minutes ago
    (Edited) "Smedley Butler"... The last time the UCMJ was actually used before being permanently turned into a "door stop"!
    49 minutes ago
    He was correct about our staying out of WWII. Which, BTW, would have never happened if we had stayed out of WWI.
    22 minutes ago
    (Edited) Both wars were about the international fauxjew imposition of debt-money central bankstering.

    Both wars were promulgated by the Financial oligarchyof New York. The communist Red Army of Russia was funded and supplied by the Financial oligarchyof New York. It was American Financial oligarchythat built the Russian Red Army that vexed the world and created the Cold War. How many hundreds of millions of goyim were sacrificed to create both the Russian and the Chinese Satanic behemoths.......and the communist horror that is now embedded in American academia, publishing, American politics, so-called news, entertainment, The worldwide Catholic religion, the Pentagon, and the American deep state.......and more!

    How stupid can we be. Every generation has the be dragged, kicking and screaming, out of the eternal maw of historical ignorance to avoid falling back into the myriad dark hellholes of history. As we all should know, people who forget their own history are doomed to repeat it.

    53 minutes ago
    Today's General is a robot with with a DNA.
    54 minutes ago
    All the General Staff is a bunch of #asskissinglittlechickenshits
    57 minutes ago
    want to stop senseless Empire wars>>well do this

    War = jobs and profit..we get work "THEY" get the profit.. If we taxed all war related profit at 99% how many wars would our rulers start? 1 hour ago

    Here is a simple straightforward trading maxim that might apply here: if it works or is working keep doing it, but if it doesn't work or stops working, then STOP doing it. There are plenty of people, now poorer, for not adhering to that simple principle. Where is the Taxpayer's return on investment from the Combat taking place on their behalf around the globe? 'Nuff said - it isn't working. It is making a microscopic few richer & all others poorer so STOP doing it. 36 seconds ago We don't have to look far to figure out who they are that are getting rich off the fauxjew permawars.

    How can we be so stupid???

    1 hour ago

    See also:

    TULSI GABBARD

    1 hour ago

    The main reason you don't see the generals criticizing is that the current crop have not been in actual long term direct combat with the enemy and have mostly been bureaucratic paper pushers.

    Take the Marine Major General who is the current commander of CENTCOM. By the time he got into the Iraq/Afghanistan war he was already a Lieutenant Colonel and far removed from direct action.

    He was only there on and off for a few years. Here are some of his other career highlights aft as they appear on his official bio:

    In short, these top guys aren't warriors they're bureaucrats so why would we expect them to be honest brokers of the truth?

    51 minutes ago

    are U saying Chesty Puller he's NOT? 1 hour ago
    (Edited) The purpose of war is to ensure that the Federal Reserve Note remains the world reserve paper currency of choice by keeping it relevant and in demand across the globe by forcing pesky energy producing nations to trade with it exclusively.

    It is a 49 year old policy created by the private owners of quasi public institutions called central banks to ensure they remain the Wizards of Oz doing gods work conjuring magic paper into existence with a secret spell known as issuing credit.

    How else is a technologically advanced society of billions of people supposed to function w/out this divinely inspired paper?

    1 hour ago

    Goebbels in "Churchill's Lie Factory" where he said: "The Americans follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." - Jospeh Goebbels, "Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik," 12. january 1941, Die Zeit ohne Beispiel

    1 hour ago

    The greatest anti-imperialist of our times is Michael Parenti:

    Imperialism has been the most powerful force in world history over the last four or five centuries, carving up whole continents while oppressing indigenous peoples and obliterating entire civilizations. Yet, it is seldom accorded any serious attention by our academics, media commentators, and political leaders. When not ignored outright, the subject of imperialism has been sanitized, so that empires become "commonwealths," and colonies become "territories" or "dominions" (or, as in the case of Puerto Rico, "commonwealths" too). Imperialist military interventions become matters of "national defense," "national security," and maintaining "stability" in one or another region. In this book I want to look at imperialism for what it really is.

    https://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/imperialism.html

    49 minutes ago
    "Imperialism has been the most powerful force in world history over the last four or five centuries, carving up whole continents while oppressing indigenous peoples and obliterating entire civilizations. Yet, it is seldom accorded any serious attention by our academics, media commentators, and political leaders."

    Why would it when they who control academia, media and most of our politicians are our enemies.

    1 hour ago

    "The big three are Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson ; ..."

    Yep, Wilkerson, who leaked Valerie Plame's name, not that it was a leak, to Novak, and then stood by to watch the grand jury fry Scooter Libby. Wilkerson, that paragon of moral rectitude. Wilkerson the silent, that *******.

    sheesh,

    1 hour ago
    (Edited)

    " A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

    James Madison Friday June 29, 1787

    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_629.asp

    "What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789])

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs6.html

    1 hour ago

    A particularly pernicious example of intra-European imperialism was the Nazi aggression during World War II, which gave the German business cartels and the Nazi state an opportunity to plunder the resources and exploit the labor of occupied Europe, including the slave labor of concentration camps. - M. PARENTI, Against empire

    See Alexander Parvus

    1 hour ago

    Collapse is the cure. It's too far gone.

    1 hour ago

    Russia Wants to 'Jam' F-22 and F-35s in the Middle East: Report

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-wants-jam-f-22-and-f-35s-middle-east-report-121041

    1 hour ago

    ZH retards think that the American mic is bad and all other mics are good or don't exist. That's the power of brainwashing. Humans understand that war in general is bad, but humans are becoming increasingly rare in this world.

    1 hour ago

    The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.

    If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort.

    https://truthout.org/articles/the-dangers-of-american-fascism/

    2 hours ago
    The swamp is bigger than the military alone. Substitute Bureaucrat, Statesman, or Beltway Bandit for General and Colonel in your writing above and you've got a whole new article to post that is just as true.
    2 hours ago
    (Edited) War = jobs and profit..we get work "THEY" get the profit..If we taxed all war related profit at 99% how many wars would our rulers start?
    2 hours ago [edited for clarity]
    War is a racket. And nobody loves a racket more than Financial oligarchy. Americans come close though, that's why Financial oligarchy use them to project their own rackets and provide protection reprisals.

    [Feb 23, 2020] Viva #MIGA

    Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    14 minutes ago

    [Feb 23, 2020] If you fire 70% of the admirals and generals you will increase the military capabilities of the US military by 40 percent

    Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    3 hours ago (Edited)

    If you fire 70% of the admirals and generals you will increase the military capabilities of the US military by 40%.

    They are incompetent hacks who are better on their knees in front of the MIC and Congress then they are on any battlefield.

    At least during WWII we had less of them and no one was hesitant to fire at least some of them for incompetence. I say sum of them because many of the war hero generals needed to be removed including Bradly, Eisenhower, Halsey, Nimitz, and even MacArthur.

    But today, no one gets fired for anything.

    Literally they have a special class of MBA's being generals and and strategic thinkers and it has turned out to be a disaster for the military and the US.

    An example by way of analogy is look at Boeing. How much better would Boeing be if they fired all the MBA's and replaced them with engineers who loved air planes. Boeing would make a lot less profit but its planes would be the best in the world.

    [Feb 23, 2020] The shortage of manpower in the US army can be compensated by giving people like Professor of identity studies Karlan M16 and sending then into trenches to fight Iranians

    Dec 04, 2019 |

    [Feb 23, 2020] Did not Pompous Pompeo accidentally found a good method to ensure vassals compliance?

    Notable quotes:
    "... He is making the USA a laughing stock, very threatening for sure, but he is a laughing stock and he perfectly sets up the scenario to ridicule his mongrel stupid president. ..."
    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Piotr Berman , Feb 11 2020 23:08 utc | 26

    On the big issue though I cant help seeing Pontious Pompeo as hurling himself about the globe tilting at windmills. He is making the USA a laughing stock, very threatening for sure, but he is a laughing stock and he perfectly sets up the scenario to ridicule his mongrel stupid president.

    uncle tungsten | Feb 11 2020 22:52 utc | 30

    Isn't it a good method? This way, the vassals can comply with a smile.

    [Feb 23, 2020] The US Is World Leader In Bio-Weapons Research, Production, Use Against Mankind

    This is mostly fear mongering as an affective bioengineered virus will create a pandemic, but the truth is that Anthrax false flag attack after 9/11 was not an accident...
    Trump administration beahaves like a completely lawless gang (stealing Syrian oil is one example. Killing Soleimani is another ) , as for its behaviour on international arena, but I do not believe they go that far. Even for for such "ruptured" gangster as Pompeo
    Notable quotes:
    "... Consider that a deadly virus created by the U.S. and used against another country was found out and verified, and in retaliation, that country or others decided to strike back with other toxic agents against America. Where would this end, and over time, how many billions could be affected in such a scenario? ..."
    "... "In vast laboratories in the Ministry of Peace, and in experimental stations, teams of experts are indefatigably at work searching for new and deadlier gases; or for soluble poisons capable of being produced in such quantities as to destroy the vegetation of whole continents; or for breeds of disease germs immunised against all possible antibodies." ..."
    "... Additional notes: here , here , here , here , here and here . ..."
    Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    ... ... ...

    Interestingly, in the past, U.S. universities and NGOs went to China specifically to do illegal biological experimentation, and this was so egregious to Chinese officials, that forcible removal of these people was the result. Harvard University, one of the major players in this scandal, stole the DNA samples of hundreds of thousands of Chinese citizens, left China with those samples, and continued illegal bio-research in the U.S. It is thought that the U.S. military, which puts a completely different spin on the conversation, had commissioned the research in China at the time. This is more than suspicious.

    The U.S. has, according to this article at Global Research , had a massive biological warfare program since at least the early 1940s, but has used toxic agents against this country and others since the 1860s . This is no secret, regardless of the propaganda spread by the government and its partners in criminal bio-weapon research and production.

    As of 1999, the U.S. government had deployed its Chemical and Biological Weapons (CBW) arsenal against the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Vietnam, China, North Korea, Laos, Cambodia, Cuba, Haitian boat people, and our neighbor Canada according to this article at Counter Punch . Of course, U.S. citizens have been used as guinea pigs many times as well, and exposed to toxic germ agents and deadly chemicals by government.

    Keep in mind that this is a short list, as the U.S. is well known for also using proxies to spread its toxic chemicals and germ agents, such as happened in Iraq and Syria. Since 1999 there have been continued incidences of several different viruses, most of which are presumed to be manmade , including the current Coronavirus that is affecting China today.

    There is also much evidence of the research and development of race-specific bio-warfare agents. This is very troubling. One would think, given the idiotic race arguments by post-modern Marxists, that this would consume the mainstream news, and any participants in these atrocious race-specific poisons would be outed at every level. That is not happening, but I believe it is due to obvious reasons, including government cover-up, hypocrisy at all levels, and leftist agenda driven objectives that would not gain ground with the exposure of this government-funded anti-race science.

    I will say that it is not just the U.S. that is developing and producing bio-warfare agents and viruses, but many developed countries around the globe do so as well. But the United States, as is the case in every area of war and killing, is by far the world leader in its inhuman desire to be able to kill entire populations through biological and chemical warfare means. Because these agents are extremely dangerous and uncontrollable, and can spread wildly, the risk to not only isolated populations, but also the entire world is evident. Consider that a deadly virus created by the U.S. and used against another country was found out and verified, and in retaliation, that country or others decided to strike back with other toxic agents against America. Where would this end, and over time, how many billions could be affected in such a scenario?

    All indications point to the fact that the most toxic, poisonous, and deadly viruses ever known are being created in labs around the world. In the U.S. think of Fort Detrick, Maryland, Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, Horn Island, Mississippi, Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, Vigo Ordinance Plant, Indiana, and many others. Think of the fascist partnerships between this government and the pharmaceutical industry. Think of the U.S. military installations positioned all around the globe. Nothing good can come from this, as it is not about finding cures for disease, or about discovering vaccines, but is done for one reason only, and that is for the purpose of bio-warfare for mass killing.

    The drive to find biological weapons that will sicken and kill millions at a time is not only a travesty, but is beyond evil. This power is held by the few, but the potential victims of this madness include everyone on earth. How can such insanity at this level be allowed to continue? If any issue could ever unite the masses, governments participating in biological and germ warfare, race-specific killing, and creating viruses with the potential to affect disease and death worldwide, should cause many to stand together against it. The first step is to expose that governments, the most likely culprit being the U.S. government, are planting these viruses purposely to cause great harm. Once that is proven, the unbelievable risk to all will be known, and then people everywhere should put their divisiveness aside, stand together, and stop this assault on mankind.

    "In vast laboratories in the Ministry of Peace, and in experimental stations, teams of experts are indefatigably at work searching for new and deadlier gases; or for soluble poisons capable of being produced in such quantities as to destroy the vegetation of whole continents; or for breeds of disease germs immunised against all possible antibodies." ~ George Orwell – 1984

    Additional notes: here , here , here , here , here and here .

    [Feb 23, 2020] Sick trash by PaulR

    Notable quotes:
    "... In 2017, a woman working with frontline families told me why she didn't want reintegration. 'These [the population of rebel-held Donbass] are people with a minimum level of human development, people raised by their TVs. Okay, so we live together, then what? We're trying to build a completely new society.' ..."
    "... And there once again you have it – one of the primary causes of the war in Ukraine: the contempt with which the post-Maidan government and its activist supporters regard a significant portion of their fellow citizens, the 'sick trash' of Donbass with their 'minimum level of human development'. ..."
    Feb 18, 2020 | irrussianality.wordpress.com

    I'd never heard of the Euro-Atlantic Security Leadership Group (EASLG) until today, even though it turns out that one of its members has the office next door to mine. Its website says that it seeks to respond to the challenge of East-West tensions by convening 'former and current officials and experts from a group of Euro-Atlantic states and the European union to test ideas and develop proposals for improving security in areas of existential common interest'. It hopes thereby to 'generate trust through dialogue.'

    It's hard to object to any of this, but its latest statement , entitled 'Twelve Steps Toward Greater Security in Ukraine and the Euro-Atlantic Region', doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. The 'twelve steps' the EASLG proposes to improve security in Eastern Ukraine are generally pretty uninspiring, being largely of the 'set up a working group to explore' variety, or of such a vaguely aspirational nature as to be almost worthless (e.g. 'Advance reconstruction of Donbas An essential first step is to conduct a credible needs assessment for the Donbas region to inform a strategy for its social-economic recovery.' Sounds nice, but in reality doesn't amount to a hill of beans).

    For the most part, these proposals attempt to treat the symptoms of the war in Ukraine without addressing the root causes. In a sense, that's fine, as symptoms need treating, but it's sticking plaster when the patient needs some invasive surgery. At the end of its statement, though, the EASLG does go one step further with 'Step 12: Launch a new national dialogue about identity', saying:

    A new, inclusive national dialogue across Ukraine is desirable and could be launched as soon as possible. Efforts should be made to engage with perspectives from Ukraine's neighbors, especially Poland, Hungary, and Russia. This dialogue should address themes of history and national memory, language, identity, and minority experience. It should include tolerance and respect for ethnic and religious minorities in order to increase engagement, inclusiveness, and social cohesion.

    This is admirably trendy and woke, but in the Ukrainian context somewhat explosive, as it implicitly challenges the identity politics of the post-Maidan regime. Unsurprisingly, it's gone down like a lead balloon in Kiev. The notorious website Mirotvorets even went so far as to add former German ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger to its blacklist of enemies of Ukraine for having had the temerity to sign the EASLG statement and thus 'taking part in Russia's propaganda events aimed against Ukraine.' Katherine Quinn-Judge of the International Crisis Group commented on Twitter, 'As the idea of dialogue becomes more mainstream, backlash to the concept grows fiercer.' 'In Ukraine, prominent pro-Western politicians, civic activists, and media, have called Step 12 "a provocation" and "dangerous",' she added

    Quinn-Judge comes across as generally sympathetic to the Ukrainian narrative about the war in Donbass, endorsing the idea that it's largely a product of 'Russian aggression'. But she also recognizes that the war has an internal, social dimension which the Ukrainian government and its elite-level supporters refuse to acknowledge. Consequently, they also reject any sort of dialogue, either with Russia or with the rebels in Donbass. As Quinn-Judge notes in another Tweet:

    An advisor to one of Ukraine's most powerful pol[itician]s told us recently of his concern about talk of dialogue in international and domestic circles. 'We have all long ago agreed among ourselves. We need to return our territory, and then work with that sick – sick – population.'

    This isn't an isolated example. Quinn-Judge follows up with a couple more similar statements:

    Social resentments underpin some opposition to disengagement, for example. An activist in [government-controlled] Shchastye told me recently that she feared disengagement and the reopening of the bridge linking the isolated town to [rebel-held] Luhansk: 'I don't want all that trash coming over here.'

    In 2017, a woman working with frontline families told me why she didn't want reintegration. 'These [the population of rebel-held Donbass] are people with a minimum level of human development, people raised by their TVs. Okay, so we live together, then what? We're trying to build a completely new society.'

    And there once again you have it – one of the primary causes of the war in Ukraine: the contempt with which the post-Maidan government and its activist supporters regard a significant portion of their fellow citizens, the 'sick trash' of Donbass with their 'minimum level of human development'. You can fiddle with treating Donbass' symptoms as much as you like, à la EASLG, but unless you tackle this fundamental problem, the disease will keep on ravaging the subject for a long time to come. In due course, I suggest, the only realistic cure will be to remove the patient entirely from the cause of infection.

    Mao Cheng Ji says: February 18, 2020 at 5:02 pm Yeah, but that's just their standard narrative.

    See here, for example:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/uNupUPjLdUI?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    And it's been there, either officially or beneath the surface, since forever. Since the Habsburgs, probably, when it was first introduced in Ruthenia.

    Guest says: February 21, 2020 at 5:27 am

    This person speaks so casually of genocide!!!

    It's disgusting that such people have been empowered and such ideas are mainstream.
    Calling people sick trash is the start on the road to genocide

    Mao Cheng Ji says: February 22, 2020 at 1:46 pm

    He's still there, working. Popular journalist and blogger.

    dewittbourchier says: February 18, 2020 at 6:01 pm
    All that you have described above is very sad, but not very surprising – which is itself very sad. I think Patrick Armstrong is right that a lot of the reason Ukraine is not and has never been a functional polity is because much if not most of the population cannot accept that the right side won WWII.
    Mikhail says: February 18, 2020 at 10:15 pm

    Hypocritically denounces the USSR, while seeking that entity's Communist created/inherited boundaries

    akarlin says: February 18, 2020 at 6:48 pm

    Contempt and loathing towards the Donbass is a pretty popular feeling amongst Ukrainian svidomy. E.g., one of the two regular pro-Ukrainian commenters on my blog.

    To his credit, he supports severing the Donbass from Ukraine (as one would a gangrenous limb – his metaphor) as opposed to trying to claw it back. Which is an internally consistent position.

    Mikhail says: February 18, 2020 at 10:13 pm

    Same guy who doesn't consider Yanukovych as having been overthrown under coup like circumstances, while downplaying Poland's past subjugation of Rus territory.

    Lyttenburgh says: February 19, 2020 at 8:18 pm

    In Part I and II we saw how much truth is there in Herr Karlin's claim of being a model of the rrrracially purrrre Rrrrrrrussian plus some personal views.

    Part III (this one) gives a peek into his cultural and upbringing limits, which "qualify" him as an expert of all things Russian, who speaks on behalf of the People and the Country.

    Exhibit "A"

    " I left when I was six, in 1994 , so I'm not really the best person to ask this question of – it should probably be directed to my parents, or even better, the Russian government at the time which had for all intents and purposes ceased paying academics their salaries.

    I went to California for higher education and because its beaches and mountains made for a nice change from the bleakness of Lancashire.

    I returned to Russia because if I like Putler so much, why don't I go back there? Okay, less flippancy. I am Russian, I do not feel like a foreigner here, I like living in Moscow, added bonus is that I get much higher quality of life for the buck than in California ."

    Exhibit "B"

    "I never went to school, don't have any experience with writing in Russian, and have been overexposed to Anglo culture , so yes, it's no surprise that my texts will sound strange."

    Vladimir says: February 20, 2020 at 8:46 am

    The Russian branch of Carnegie Endowment did a piece on this issue. It mostly fits your ideas, but the author suggests it was a compromise, short-term solution – what steps can be taken right now, without crossing red lines of either side – but compromise is unwelcome among both parties. The official Russian reaction was quite cold too.

    "Удаленные 12 шагов. Почему в Мюнхене испугались собственных предложений по Донбассу"
    https://carnegie.ru/commentary/81093

    Mikhail says: February 20, 2020 at 4:54 pm

    Upon a quick perusal of the website of the org at issue, Alexey Arbatov and Susan Eisenhower have some kind of affiliation with it, thus maybe explaining the compromise approach you mention.

    This matter brings to mind Trump saying one thing during his presidential bid – only to then bring in people in key positions who don't agree with what he campaigned on.

    In terms of credentials and name status, the likes of Rand Paul, Tulsi Gabbard, Stephen Cohen and Jim Jatras, are needed in Trump's admin for the purpose of having a more balanced foreign policy approach that conforms with US interests (not to be necessarily confused with what neocons and neolibs favor).

    Instead, Trump has been top heavy with geopolitical thinking opposites. He possibly thought that having them in would take some of the criticism away from him.

    The arguably ideal admin has both sides of an issue well represented, with the president intelligently deciding what's best.

    Guest says: February 21, 2020 at 5:23 am

    On the BBC and on other media there are films of Ukrainians attacking a bus with people evacuated from China. These people even wanted to burn down the hospital where the peoplew were taken (along with other unrelated patients)

    This is a sign of a degraded society – attacking people who may or may not be ill!!!

    Ukraine will eventually break up
    The nationalist agenda is just degrading the society.

    -The economy is failing
    -People who can, are leaving
    -The elected government has no control over the violent people who take to the streets

    It's clear Zelensky is a puppet no different to Poroshenko – this destroys the idea that democracy is a good thing.

    It's very sad that the EU and the Americans under Obama – empowered these decisive elements and then blame Russia.

    Crimea did the right thing leaving Ukraine – Donbass hopefully will follow.

    Lyttenburgh says: February 21, 2020 at 11:16 am

    "And there once again you have it – one of the primary causes of the war in Ukraine: the contempt with which the post-Maidan government and its activist supporters regard a significant portion of their fellow citizens, the 'sick trash' of Donbass"

    [ ]

    Only them?

    [ ]

    Yesterday marks yet another milestone on the Ukrainian glorious шлях перемог and long and arduous return to the Family of the European Nations. The Civil Society ™ of the Ukraine rose as one in the mighty CoronavirusMaidan, against the jackbooted goons of the crypto-Napoleon (and agent of Putin) Zelensky. Best people from Poltava oblast' (whose ancestors without doubt, welcomed Swedish Euro-integrators in 1709) and, most important of all, from the Best (Western) Ukrajina, who 6 years ago made the Revolution of Dignity in Kiev the reality and whom pan Poroshenko called the best part of the Nation, said their firm "Геть вiд Москви!"

    to their fellow Ukrainian citizens, evacuated from Wuhan province in China

    The Net is choke full of vivid, memorable videos, showing that 6 years after Maidan, the Ukraine now constitute a unified, эдiна та соборна country. You all, no doubt, already watched these clips, where a brave middle-aged gentleman from the Western Ukraine, racially pure Ukr, proves his mental acuity by deducing, that crypto-tyrant (and "не лох") Zelensky wants to settle evacuees in his pristine oblast out of vengeance, because the Best Ukrajina didn't vote for him during the election. Or a clip about a brave woman from Poltava oblast, suggesting to relocate the Trojan-horse "fellow countrymen" to Chernobol's Zone. Or even the witty comments and suggestions by the paragons of the Ukrainian Civil Society, " волонтэры ":


    Shy and conscientious members of the Ukrainian (national!) intelligentsia had their instincts aligned rrrrrright. When they learned about that their hospital will be the one receiving the evacuees from Wuhan, the entire medical personell of that Poltava oblast medical facility rose to their feet and sang "Shenya vmerla". Democracy and localism proved once again the strongest suit of the pro-European Ukraine, with Ternopol's oblast regional council voting to accept the official statement to the crypto-tyrant Zelensky, which calls attempts to place evacuees on their Holy land "an act of Genocide of the Ukrainian People" (c)

    Just the headlines .

    [ ]

    That's absolutely "normal", predictable reaction of the "racially pure Ukrainians" to their own fellow citizens. Now, Professor, are you insisting on seeking or even expecting "compromise" with them ? What to do, if after all these years, there is no such thing as the united Ukrainian political nation?

    Like Like Reply

    Lyttenburgh says: February 21, 2020 at 2:12 pm

    "Ukraine's democracy is flourishing like never before due to the tireless efforts of grassroots, pro-democracy, civil-society groups. Many Ukrainians say their country is now firmly set on an irreversible, pro-Western trajectory. Moreover, the country has also undertaken a top-to-bottom cultural, economic, and political divorce from its former Soviet overlord.

    Today, Ukraine is a democratic success story in the making, despite Russia's best efforts to the contrary."
    – Nolan Peterson, a former special operations pilot and a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, is The Daily Signal's foreign correspondent based in Ukraine

    International recognition of the fact:

    [Feb 23, 2020] General Butler speeches

    Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    3 hours ago

    No link to one of his speeches or book. Worth your time.

    9 minute video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3_EXqJ8f-0

    Full audio book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26O-2SVcrw0

    4 hours ago

    This article fails to mention his most important contribution . He tipped off Roosevelt that a fascist plot was being prepared to take over the American government "

    The Wall Street Putsch, as it's known today, was a plot by a group of right-wing financiers.

    "They thought that they could convince Roosevelt, because he was of their, the patrician class, they thought that they could convince Roosevelt to relinquish power to basically a fascist, military-type government," Denton says.

    4 hours ago

    The US foreign policy was never about Spreading Democracy, it's always about elevating the dictator we can do business with.

    Always.

    4 hours ago

    Surprisingly, Butlers book The Plot to Seize the White House, where a cabal of bankers sought to use Butler as a front man to oust FDR getS little to no notice.

    [Feb 22, 2020] The Red Thread A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy by Diana West

    Highly recommended!
    She does not use the term neoliberalism but she provide interesting perspective about connection of neoliberalism and Trotskyism. It is amazing fact that most of them seriously studied communist ideology at universities.
    Trotskyites are never constrained by morality and they are obsessed with raw power (especially political power) and forceful transformation of the society. They are for global dominance so they were early adherents of "Full spectrum Dominance" doctirne approporitated later be US neocons. Their Dream -- global run from Washington neoliberal empire is a mirror of the dream of Trotskyites of global communist empire run from Moscow (Trotsky "Permanent war" till the total victory of communism idea)
    Inability to understand that neoliberal is undermines Diana West thinking, but still she is a good researcher and she managed to reveal some interesting facts and tendencies. She intuitively understand that both are globalist ideologies, but that about all she managed to understand. Bad for former DIA specialist on the USSR and former colleague of Colonel Lang (see Sic Semper Tyrannis)
    It is funny that Sanders is being accused of being a 'self-identified' socialist, while neoliberal elite is shoulder-deep in socialism for the 1% and enjoy almost unlimited access to free Fed funds.
    Feb 22, 2020 | www.amazon.com

    Boston Bill , March 23, 2019

    Programs, programs, get your program here.

    I received my copy just a few days before the Mueller investigation closed shop. There is an old saying "You can't tell the players without a program." As the aftermath of the Mueller investigation begins, you need this book. Some pundits and observers of the political scene have observed that the Mueller investigation didn't come about because of any real concern about "Trump Russia collusion," it was manufactured to protect the deep state from a non-political interloper. That's the case Diana West makes and does it with her exceptional knowledge of the Cold War and the current jihad wars. Not to mention her deadly aim with her rhetorical darts.

    Erving L. Briggs , April 2, 2019
    History Repeats

    The Red Thread by Diana West
    Diana states, "the anti-Trump conspiracy is not about Democrats and Republicans. It is not about the ebb and flow of political power, lawfully and peacefully transferred. It is about globalists and nationalists, just as the president says. They are locked in the old and continuous Communist/anti-Communist struggle, and fighting to the end, whether We, the anti-Communists, recognize it or not."

    Diana traces the Red Thread running through the swamp, she names names and relates the history of the Red players. She asks the questions, Why? Why so many Soviet-style acts of deception perpetrated from inside the federal government against the American electoral process? Why so many uncorroborated dossiers of Russian provenance influencing our politics? Why such a tangle of communist and socialist roots in the anti-Trump conspiracy?
    In this book, these questions will be answered.

    If you have read her book "American Betrayal," I'm sure you will have a good idea about what is going on. I did. I just didn't know the major players and the red history behind each of them.

    The book is very interesting and short, only 104 pages, but it is not finished yet. Easy to read but very disturbing to know the length and width of the swamp, the depth, we may not know for a long time. I do feel better knowing that there are people like Diana uncovering and shining a light into the darkness. Get the book, we all need to know why this is happening and who the enemies are behind it. Our freedom depends on it.

    [Feb 22, 2020] The Coming Constitutional Crisis Over Iran

    Feb 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Sakineh Bagoom , Feb 22 2020 2:35 utc | 73

    Sorry OT.
    Great read, by professor Bruce Ackerman.
    Had to share. Amazingly succinct.
    The Coming Constitutional Crisis Over Iran
    https://prospect.org/justice/trump-pelosi-coming-constitutional-crisis-over-iran/

    [Feb 21, 2020] Russia is playing the White Knight saving nations from marauding hordes

    Feb 21, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    VietnamVet February 20, 2020 at 5:02 am

    This article is war porn that assumes controlling oil fields is power. Instead Russia is playing the White Knight saving nations from marauding hordes. NBC News is twisting itself into tighter knots over Syria retaking Idlib Province back from the rebels. Turkey is threatening to send in its Army.

    Strategically a full-blown war between a NATO member Turkey and Russian ally Syria would surpass the adverse effects of the quarantine of China or the rising temperatures that are sliding huge glaciers off of Western Antarctica into the sea (if the war engulfs Europe). The USA remains today in Syria and Iraq to control their oil fields since to Donald Trump it means more money for the USA. Actually, America's position there is militarily untenable. Both countries want the US gone. Iran's precision conventional ballistic missiles have mutually assured destruction with Israel and Saudi Arabia and can destroy US bases there at will.

    When the Wuhan coronavirus engulfs the West, killing the elderly and the ill, for-profit healthcare will be overwhelmed. With nothing to sell, the global economy stops dead. There will be a glut of oil and natural gas. If they still have money, the trip to the grocery store will be Russian Roulette for senior citizens hoping there will be food to live for another month and not get viral pneumonia. The Doomsday Clock will be at midnight. American troops will have to find their way home. The forever wars and neoliberalism died with globalism.

    The Rev Kev February 20, 2020 at 6:25 am

    This article sounds like the Russians have just started to go into Iraq but they were there before the invasion nearly twenty years ago. In fact, in 2007 the US tried to get the Iraqis to void a contract the Iraqis had with Russia for the massive West Qurna oil field but that failed as the Iraqis would have been on the hook for all $13 billion in debt they owed Russia and the US would not help. But there is a military aspect to being rich in resources – there always is – and for Iraq it is particularly acute.

    The Middle East is a rough neighbourhood and any country there has to be strong enough to defend itself or else be vulnerable. After the invasion the Coalition tried to organize Iraq so that they had no military but the Iraqi resistance put aid to that idea. But what would make the Iraqis think hard was when ISIS was marching on Baghdad. The US refused to use its air power to stop them and refused the Iraqis the use of pilots & paid-for aircraft training in Texas until the government would fulfill a laundry list of demands. It was the Russians – and the Iranians -that sent military equipment and specialists that helped stop ISIS before they got to Baghdad.

    More recently the Iraqis had to buy Russian tanks to fight ISIS as the American tanks they had purchased were being deliberately not being serviced until the Iraqis fulfilled an American demand. There is a shift now to buy Russian equipment because of American fickleness with military gear. If that was not enough, the US has never gotten Iraqi electricity production back to pre-war levles in spite of billions spent. To add insult to injury, Trump demanded recently that Iraq hand over half of Iraqi oil production to repair the electrical grid with of course no guarantees that they would ever do the work.

    So the long and the short is that there is no trust with the US and Russia is seen as a more reliable partner – as is China – and that there is no net benefit with going to the US. And you never know if a second-term Trump might not seize the Iraqi oil fields if he felt he could get away with it. It is a matter of being reliable-capable and it seems that the Russians are proving themselves that, hence their success here. Reliability is vital and cannot be replaced.

    Polar Socialist February 20, 2020 at 7:36 am

    Russia has been using soft power in Middle East ever since Peter the Great started fighting the Ottomans. Ever since the western powers (read: great Britain) always came to the rescue of turks if Russia had military success, so they seriously used the other alternative: economical, diplomatic and cultural influence in arab countries.
    During the cold war they supported any regime in Middle East opposed to US-Israeli influence (or downright aggression).
    After the cold war the Russian foreign minister, later prime minister Primakov, was an Arabist by training and personally knew almost every principal actor in Middle East. He is presumed to be the architect of the current Russian policy (which is a continuation of the old Soviet policy, which was based on the old Russian Empire policy).
    It's a long, long history of using culture, diplomacy, economical help and weapon sales to have influence in an area important to the Russian security in their southern sphere.

    Norb February 20, 2020 at 8:23 am

    The US pats itself on the back and always talks about being the worlds "policeman". The American elite also want it both ways too- to bemoan having to do the police work in the first place, while also endlessly stressing that the world would go to pieces if her armed forces were not in foreign lands. Make up your mind please.

    It would be very ironic if Russia proves to truly be an effective world "policeman"- as seems more evidently to be the case.

    Propaganda aside, who brings more stability and peace.

    In one respect, the war profiteers are the least of the problem. If Space Force and Nuclear rearmament are just more money boondoggles, while tragic, still survivable. If there is a faction that actually believes in this stuff as a viable national policy for defense- and offense- then when reality hits the road as the saying goes, the American psyche might not survive the impact, let alone the rest of the world.

    Americans are shielded from the horrors of war to the nations detriment.

    Kiers February 20, 2020 at 11:09 am

    You guys are NOT thinking venally nor strategically enough. The US powers that be, love to put on this news story of foreign powers eating US cake. It's simply not credible imho. Post Iraq war in 2003, "W" bush played the same "eating our cake" story out about China taking Iraq oil for example. There are definitely other arrangements in place beneath the surface we are never told. Iraq is now US piggbank. It can trade that asset as it desires, sadly. Stories like this are just smoke.

    John Wright February 20, 2020 at 11:29 am

    I am struck by the size of the Russian investment ($20 billion) while the USA has "invested" nearly 6 trillion (300x) as much in war expenditure in the region.

    And this has the Russians bettering the USA in Iraq with their relatively small strategic investment.

    Maybe it is long overdue for the USA political class to reassess how it spends its citizens' resources in the Middle East.

    But I'm not expecting that to occur.

    [Feb 20, 2020] Will the 2020 Candidates End Our Pointless Wars by Doug Bandow

    Notable quotes:
    "... We are imperially overstretched and The Blob refuses to see it. Will the next president? ..."
    "... The cost of Washington's endless wars fall most heavily on those who suffer under American bombs and drones. Yet the plight of foreigners is rarely mentioned. When asked about a half million Iraqi babies killed by American economic sanctions, then-UN ambassador Madeleine Albright famously replied: "We think the price is worth it." ..."
    "... That was characteristic of Washington's overwhelming hubris. Members of "the Blob," as America's foreign policy elite has been called, believe they are uniquely qualified to run the world. Only they can predict the future, assess humanity's needs, develop solutions. And anyone who resists their dictates deserves his or her terrible fate. ..."
    "... The Iraq Body Count has documented between 184,868 and 207,759 deaths in Iraq, but many killings in such a conflict go unreported. IBC suggested doubling its estimate to get a more accurate figure. Even that may be too few. A couple respected though contested surveys figure civilian deaths could top a million. The University of Michigan's Juan Cole defended the methodology: "I believe very large numbers of Iraqi families quietly bury their dead without telling the government of all people anything about it. Another large number of those killed is dumped in the Tigris river by their killers. Not to mention that for substantial periods of time since 2003 it has been dangerous in about half the country just to move around, much less to move around with dead bodies." ..."
    "... Nor do casualties stop there. On top of those killed directly, noted the Watson Institute, "War deaths from malnutrition, and a damaged health system and environment likely far outnumber deaths from combat." For instance, in Yemen, the number of civilian dead due to famine, 85,000 by one count, vastly exceeds the number killed in the conflict, perhaps 12,000. A million people are thought to have suffered from cholera, resulting from the destruction of the country's commercial, health, social, and transportation infrastructure. Most of the damage has come from airstrikes by the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which are backed by U.S. intelligence, munitions, and formerly refueling. ..."
    Feb 20, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    We are imperially overstretched and The Blob refuses to see it. Will the next president?

    The cost of Washington's endless wars fall most heavily on those who suffer under American bombs and drones. Yet the plight of foreigners is rarely mentioned. When asked about a half million Iraqi babies killed by American economic sanctions, then-UN ambassador Madeleine Albright famously replied: "We think the price is worth it."

    That was characteristic of Washington's overwhelming hubris. Members of "the Blob," as America's foreign policy elite has been called, believe they are uniquely qualified to run the world. Only they can predict the future, assess humanity's needs, develop solutions. And anyone who resists their dictates deserves his or her terrible fate.

    No doubt, foreign policy sometimes presents difficult choices. For instance, in World War II, the U.S. backed tyrannical Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union against monstrous Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany. During the Cold War, Washington allied with a variety of authoritarian regimes.

    There was a logic to such decisions. However, those choices also left many policymakers with moral qualms. Such self-doubt seems to be almost completely absent from the Blob today. Who among advocates of the Iraq War have acknowledged the horrors they loosed upon the people of Iraq and its surrounding nations? Most resist taking any responsibility.

    First, they simply deny that America is at war. President Barack Obama tried to avoid invoking the War Powers Act in Libya by arguing that the conflict did not qualify since Americans weren't doing the shooting. However, Defense Secretary Bob Gates admitted that the Libyans being targeted probably thought Washington was at war. And the consequences of that conflict were significant: violent chaos that continues to this day. Moreover, the precedent of taking out a leader who voluntarily surrendered his missile and nuclear programs could discourage future dictators from disarming.

    Today some war enthusiasts deny that Americans are really fighting in the multiple conflicts in which they are engaged. Marc Thiessen, a speechwriter for President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, whose tenures were defined by the disastrous Iraq War, denounced the very concept of endless wars as a "canard." Yet casualties, though lower than before, continue with regularity in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.

    More importantly, the risks of much larger conflict are real. American troops in Iraq have to confront Iranian-backed militias, and a recent round of mutual retaliation risked a full-blown conflict. The Pentagon has maintained forces in Syria for potential use against -- depending on who claims to be directing U.S. policy -- the Islamic State, and, without legal authority, the Damascus government, Iran, Turkey, and even Moscow. American and Russian troops recently confronted each other over Syrian oilfields that President Donald Trump ordered seized -- illegally. The potential for a much broader conflict remains serious.

    Second, Washington's permanent War Party dismisses the harm their wars have caused. After the Obama administration headed to Libya and joined Saudi Arabia's war on Yemen, Samantha Power, perhaps the most visible advocate of supposedly humanitarian war-making, complained that Americans were discouraged by the Iraqi imbroglio: "I think there is too much of, 'Oh, look, this is what intervention has wrought' one has to be careful about overdrawing lessons."

    The last two decades of war have had catastrophic consequences. The official costs are high enough, with the Pentagon having spent $1.55 trillion in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to the Congressional Research Service. A few billion dollars have gone into the anti-ISIS campaign in Iraq and Syria. Over $113 billion more has been spent on reconstruction in Afghanistan alone, though with little success, according to multiple reports from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

    And these figures dramatically underestimate the total financial cost. Noted Brown University's Watson Institute: "Through Fiscal Year 2020, the United States federal government has spent or obligated $6.4 trillion dollars on the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. This figure includes: direct Congressional war appropriations; war-related increases to the Pentagon base budget; veterans care and disability; increases in the homeland security budget; interest payments on direct war borrowing; foreign assistance spending; and estimated future obligations for veterans' care." Not included are macroeconomic costs due to the massive misallocation of valuable resources.

    More important has been the human cost. CRS reported about 7,000 dead and 53,000 wounded among U.S. service personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq. The split by conflict was 38 percent/62 percent, respectively. Nearly 400 American military members have died elsewhere since 9/11. A million or more -- the latest available figures are years out of date -- disability claims have been filed by U.S. personnel. Suicide rates among the 2.7 million who have served in either Afghanistan or Iran are higher than among the civilian population.

    Also significant are casualties among U.S. contractors: 3,400 dead and 39,000 wounded. However, the Pentagon's figures may be incomplete: the Watson Institute, with its Cost of War Project, figures the number of contractor deaths to be more than 8,000, higher than the number of dead uniformed personnel. Reliance on contractors may be controversial, but they essentially represent the U.S. government. The death of a contractor in Iraq triggered Washington's strike on an Iranian-backed militia, which almost sparked war between Tehran and Washington. Several hundred allied military personnel also have died, along with an estimated 110,000 local military and police.

    Worse has been the civilian toll in those nations that Washington purports to be saving. American policymakers rarely speak of this cost. After all, they believe "the price is worth it," to quote Albright. As of November, figured the Watson Institute, 335,000 civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, and Yemen had died in conflicts featuring U.S. military operations. Unfortunately, these numbers are low, perhaps dramatically so.

    The Iraq Body Count has documented between 184,868 and 207,759 deaths in Iraq, but many killings in such a conflict go unreported. IBC suggested doubling its estimate to get a more accurate figure. Even that may be too few. A couple respected though contested surveys figure civilian deaths could top a million. The University of Michigan's Juan Cole defended the methodology: "I believe very large numbers of Iraqi families quietly bury their dead without telling the government of all people anything about it. Another large number of those killed is dumped in the Tigris river by their killers. Not to mention that for substantial periods of time since 2003 it has been dangerous in about half the country just to move around, much less to move around with dead bodies."

    Nor do casualties stop there. On top of those killed directly, noted the Watson Institute, "War deaths from malnutrition, and a damaged health system and environment likely far outnumber deaths from combat." For instance, in Yemen, the number of civilian dead due to famine, 85,000 by one count, vastly exceeds the number killed in the conflict, perhaps 12,000. A million people are thought to have suffered from cholera, resulting from the destruction of the country's commercial, health, social, and transportation infrastructure. Most of the damage has come from airstrikes by the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which are backed by U.S. intelligence, munitions, and formerly refueling.

    Explained the Watson Institute: "People living in the war zones have been killed in their homes, in markets, and on roadways. They have been killed by bombs, bullets, fire, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and drones. Civilians die at checkpoints, as they are run off the road by military vehicles, when they step on a mine or cluster bomb, as they collect wood or tend to their fields, and when they are kidnapped and executed for purposes of revenge or intimidation. They are killed by the United States, by its allies, and by insurgents and sectarians in the civil wars spawned by the invasions."

    War is not always avoidable. But since the end of the Cold War, every conflict started by the U.S. has been one of choice. America only ever had a serious interest at stake in Afghanistan -- to destroy al-Qaeda after 9/11 and punish the Taliban government. In that case, however, the U.S. mission should have ended by early 2002, not carried on for nearly two decades.

    American policymakers should stop treating war as a first resort, a panacea for international conflict and tragedy. Washington is filled with ivory tower warriors. Their supposedly best intentions have spread chaos and death around the globe. What think this year's presidential candidates?

    Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan. He is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire . He is currently scholar-in-residence with the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney.

    [Feb 18, 2020] The West "Weeps" for What It Has Sowed by Stormy

    Feb 16, 2020 | angrybearblog.com
    At the Munich Security Conference the U.S. and its allies had no idea of how to handle China, a problem of their greed and stupidity. The West is divided, confused. What to do about Huawei? Really, what to do with China?

    So when Mike Pompeo proclaimed "we are winning," the largely European audience was silent and worried in what sense "we" existed longer.
    In the meantime, Europe, including the U.K, finds itself in a mincer between the U.S. and China

    Unfortunately for us. China has followed the U.S. playbook and has outplayed the West, especially the U.S.

    Walter Rostow of the Johnson administration, an avid anti-communist, wrote the playbook: How can an undeveloped nation take its place among the leaders of the world.

    The answer : Industrialize as rapidly as possible. Do whatever it takes. China did just that.

    In its five year plans, China acknowledged its debt to Rostow and started to industrialize. While I have described this process many years ago, I again outline it briefly here.

    First : China entered the W.T.O. Bill Clinton and Congress were accommodating and instrumental:

    Last fall, as all of you know, the United States signed an agreement to bring China into the W.T.O, on terms that will open its markets to American products and investments.
    Bill Clinton speaking before Congress, March 9, 1998

    Second : China offered dirt cheap labor, labor that had no effective right to bargain
    Third : China did not require a company to obey any environmental regulations.
    Fourth : China often offered a ten-year grace period without any taxation. If there were taxes they were less than those on its own indigenous firms.
    Fifth : China manipulated its currency, making products cheaper to make but getting higher profits in the West.

    The net resul t: Massive trade imbalance in favor of China. CEOs and their henchmen made enormous profits. Devastated American workers were told to go to school, to work harder, to make themselves invaluable to their companies. A cruel joke.

    In droves, Western companies outsourced to China, emptying one factory after another. Anything that could be outsourced was outsourced. China, of course, was not the sole beneficiary of U.S. foolishness. India, Mexico, Vietnam wherever environmental standards were non-existent, wherever workers had no effective rights these were the third world countries the U.S. used. The health and safety of third world workers was of no concern. They were many–and they were expendable.

    U.S. companies were so profitable that special arrangements were made to repatriate those profits back to the states: pennies on the dollar. Many billionaires should really be thanking China.

    Americans were considered only consumers/ The more they consumed, the richer the rich became. Credit was made easy. George Bush's answer to 911 was: Go out and shop.+

    Between The Financial Modernization Act of 1999 and Free trade insanity, the working class of American faced the crash of 2008.

    China became the factory of the world, not through automation, but through dirt cheap labor. China poisoned its atmosphere and polluted its water. Face masks were everywhere. Nonetheless, China had become undeniable economic power, challenging the U.S.

    At the same time, China educated great numbers of engineers, inventors, and scientists. Huwaii became the problem really, Huwaii is just an emblem of it.

    The U.S. in its greed had became lazy. It poured money into weapons. The U.S. decided to build a space force. U.S. bullied countries with foolish sanctions if those countries did not make their billionaire class more profitable. Sanctions instead of competition became last gasp, the last grasp at profit. Flabby and greedy, the U.S.is no longer competitive. It has become just a bully, a threat to everyone.

    Trump, of course, played both sides of the problem. He railed against the outsourcing, but has done little to correct it, giving instead massive tax breaks to the wealthy, gutting environmental regulations laying waste to everything he touches. Pelosi and Schumer pretend to care, but they have nothing to offer. Like Trump, they worry about China. Like Trump, they have no answer, except for more wars and more sanctions.

    Hillary and Bill should take a bow. They began this debacle. Once things were made in the U.S.A. Go to any Walmart store and read the label: Made in China.

    Pelosi and the free trade Democrats should take a bow as should all the Republicans. All of them should hold hands, give each other a quick hug and smile. They and their friends are rich.

    To China belongs the future.

    Terry , February 16, 2020 8:27 pm

    Economics 101 says trade benefits all participants. The problem is not China but the United States. The oligarchs have sucked up all the benefits of trade and have bought the government to keep the good times going. Obama played along unlike FDR with the result that the oligarchs came out stronger than ever while everyone else had a second rate rather than a third rate health care system which Trump and the GOP are struggling to return to a third rate system. You can blame China or the "laziness " of Americans, but the real problem is the moneyed class who do not give a crap about the country or its citizens but only how to hang onto their privileged existence. I hate to even think it but I do not see this thing ending peacefully.

    MARK LOHR , February 16, 2020 8:27 pm

    And in turn funding China's considerable, unabated, and ongoing military expansion.
    The screws are turning; the noose tightening.
    That Western governments of all leanings have not counter-vailed for many decades now is a tale of enormous short-sightedness and cultural hubris.

    davebarnes , February 16, 2020 9:24 pm

    Didn't I read the same thing about Japan 20+ years ago?

    MARK LOHR , February 16, 2020 10:50 pm

    Yes. And to be sure, China faces all the limits inherent to a totalitarian system. However, unlike Japan, they have remilitarized and have demonstrated expansionist goals – artificial island military outposts, Belt and Road, etc.
    Besides stealing/extorting etc our IP.

    doug higgins , February 17, 2020 1:00 am

    Mark,
    Where do you get your information? China has one military base outside its borders. The U.S. has over 800. China does not pour its money into a military budge; the U.S. does.

    Try the actual facts, for a change.

    likbez , February 17, 2020 9:34 am

    To China belongs the future.

    I think it is too early to write down the USA. Historically the USA proved to be highly adaptable society (look at the New Deal). And I think that still there is a chance that it might be capable of jumping the sinking ship of neoliberalism. Although I have problems with Sanders's economic program, Sanders's victory might be instrumental for that change.

    China adopted neoliberalism, much like the USA. It was just lucky to be on the receiving end of the outflow of the capital from the USA. It has a more competent leadership and avoided the fate of the USSR for which the attempt to the adoption of neoliberalism ( aka Perestroika ) proved to be fatal.

    I suspect that the main problem for China is that Neoliberalism, as a social system, is incompatible with the rule of the Communist Party.

    Fundamentally what China has now is a variation of the Soviet "New Economic Policy" (NEP) invented by Bolsheviks after the Civil War in Russia, and while providing a rapid economic development, China has all the problems that are known for this policy.

    One is the endemic corruption of state officials due to the inability of capital to rise above a certain level of political influence and systematic attempts to buy this influence.

    That necessitates periodic campaigns against corruption and purges/jailing of officials, which does not solve the fundamental problem which is systemic.

    The other problem is that the Communist Party is such mode degrades into something like amorphous "holding company" staff for the country (managing state tier in the two tie economy -- state capitalism at the top; neoliberalism at the middle and the bottom)

    Which necessitates the rule of a strong leader, the Father of the Nation, who is capable to conduct purges and hold the Party together by suppressing the appetite of local Party functionaries using brutal repressions. But the Party functionaries understand that they no longer conduct Marxist policies, and that undermines morale. That they are essentially renegades, and that creates a huge stimulus for "make money fast" behavior and illicit self-enrichment.

    Which paradoxically necessitate the hostility with the USA as the mean to cement the Party and suppress the dissent. So not only the USA neocons and MIC are interested in China, China, China (and/or Russia, Russia, Russia) bogeyman.

    That also creates for Chinese senior Communist Party leadership an incentive at some point to implement "Stalin-style solution" to the problems with New Economic Policy.

    So it looks like Neo-McCarthyism in the USA has a long and prosperous future, as both sides are interested in its continuation 🙂

    BTW another example of NEP as a policy was Tito Yugoslavia, which no longer exists.

    Yet another example was Gorbachov's "Perestroika," which logically led to the dissolution of the USSR. With the subjective factor of the total incompetence of Gorbachov as a leader -- with some analogies as for this level of incompetence with Trump.

    As well as general "simplification," and degeneration of Politburo similar to what we observe with the USA Congress now: the USSR in the 1980th has become a gerontocracy.

    But the major factor was that the top KGB officials and several members of Politburo, including Gorbachov, became turncoats and changed sides attempting to change the system to neoliberalism, which was at the time on the assent; Russia always picks the worst possible time for the social change 😉

    While neoliberalism is definitely in decline and its ideology is discredited, I still think there are fundamental problems in tis interaction with the Communist Party rule, that might eventually cause the social crisis for China.

    But only time will tell

    BTW Professor Stephen Cohen books contain very interesting information about NEP, Russia adoption of neoliberalism (and related dissolution of the USSR) and Russia social development in general

    [Feb 18, 2020] Escobar It's Time To Reclaim Syria's Road To Recovery by Pepe Escobar

    Feb 17, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

    Erdogan de facto supports al-Qaeda remnants while facing either humiliating retreat from or total war against Syria

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan, neo-Ottoman extraordinaire, is not exactly inclined to commit seppuku , the Japanese act of ritual suicide.

    But if not through the perspective of neo-Ottomanism, how to explain the fact he is de facto supporting al-Qaeda remnants in Syria while facing two unsavory options – a humiliating retreat from or total war against the Syrian Arab Army?

    Everything about the slowly evolving, messy chessboard in Idlib hinges on highways: the imperative for the government in Damascus to control both the M5 highway between Damascus and Aleppo and the M4 highway between Latakia and Aleppo. Fully reclaiming these two crucial axes will finally turbo-charge the ailing Syrian economy.

    Very few players nowadays remember the all-important Sochi memorandum of understanding signed between Russia and Turkey in September 2018.

    The Western spin was always about whether Damascus would comply. Nonsense. In the memorandum, Ankara guaranteed protection of civilian traffic on both highways. It's Ankara that is not complying, not only in terms of ensuring that "radical terrorist groups" are out of the demilitarized zone, but especially on point number 8:

    "In the interests of ensuring free movement of local residents and goods, as well as restoring trade and economic ties, transit traffic along the routes M4 (Aleppo-Latakia) and M5 (Aleppo-Hama) will be restored before the end of 2018."

    Vast stretches of Idlib are in fact under the yoke of Hayat Tahrir al Shams (HTS), shorthand for al-Qaeda in Syria. Or "moderate rebels," as they are known inside the Beltway – even though the United States government itself brands it as a terror organization.

    For all practical purposes, the Erdogan system is supporting and weaponizing HTS in Idlib. When the SAA reacts against HTS's attacks, Erdogan goes ballistic and threatens war.

    The West uncritically buys Ankara propaganda. How dare the "Assad regime" take back the M5, which "had been under rebel control since 2012"? Erdogan is lauded for warning "Iran and Russia to end the support for the Assad regime." NATO invariably condemns "attacks on Turkish troops."

    The official Ankara explanation for the Turkish presence in Idlib hinges on bringing reinforcements to "observation posts." Nonsense. These posts are not meant to go away. On top of it, Ankara demands that the SAA should retreat to the positions it held months ago – away from Idlib.

    There's no way Damascus will "comply" because these Turkish troops are a de facto occupation body-protecting "moderate rebels" fighting for "democracy" who were decisively excluded by Moscow – and even Ankara – from the Sochi memorandum. One can't make this stuff up.

    Got airpower, will travel

    Now let's look at the facts on the ground – and in the skies. Moscow and Damascus control the airspace over Idlib. Su-34 jets patrol all of northwest Syrian territory. Moscow has warships – crammed with cruise missiles – deployed in the Eastern Mediterranean.

    The whole SAA offensive for these past few months to liberate national territory has been a graphic demonstration of top Russian intel – planning, execution, logistics.

    What's being set up is a classic cauldron – a Southwest Asia replica of the cauldron in Donbass in 2014 that destroyed Kiev's army. The SAA is encircling the Turks from the north, east and south. There will be only one way out for the Turks: the border crossing at Bab al-Hawa. Back to Turkey.

    Facing certified disaster, no wonder Erdogan had to talk "de-escalation" with Putin on Tuesday. The red lines, from Moscow's side, are immutable: the highways will be liberated (according to the Sochi agreement). The neo-Ottoman sultan can't afford a war with Russia. So, yes: he's bluffing .

    But why is he bluffing? There are three main possibilities.

    1. Washington is forcing him to, pledging full support to "our NATO ally."
    2. The Turkish Armed Forces cannot afford to lose face.
    3. The "moderate rebels" don't give a damn about Ankara.

    Option 1 seems the most plausible – even as Erdogan is being actually forced to directly confront a Moscow with which he has signed extremely important economic/energy contracts. Erdogan may not be a General Zhukov, but he knows that a bunch of jihadis and only 6,000 demoralized Turkish soldiers stand no chance against the SAA and Russian airpower.

    It's enlightening to compare the current Turkish predicament with the Turk/Free Syrian Army (FSA) proxy gang alliance when they were fighting the Kurds in Afrin.

    Ankara then had control of the skies and enormous artillery advantage – from their side of the border. Now Syria/Russia rules the skies and Turkish artillery simply cannot get into Idlib. Not to mention that supply lines are dreadful.

    Neo-Ottomanism, revisited

    So what is Erdogan up to? What's happening is Erdogan's Muslim Brotherhood network is now managing Idlib on the ground – a fascinating repositioning gambit able to ensure that Erdogan remains a strongman with whom Bashar al-Assad will have to talk business when the right time comes.

    Erdogan's partial endgame will be to "sell" to Assad that ultimately he was responsible for getting rid of the HTS/FSA jihadi nebulae. Meanwhile, circus prevails – or, rather, a lousy opera, with Erdogan once again relishing playing the bad guy. He knows Damascus has all but won a vicious nine-year proxy war – and is reclaiming all of its sovereign territory. There's no turning back.

    And that brings us to the complex dynamics of the Turkish-Iranian puzzle. One should always remember that both are members of the Astana peace process, alongside Russia. On Syria, Tehran supported Damascus from the start while Ankara bet on – and weaponized – the "democratic freedom fighter" jihadi nebulae.

    From the 16th century to the 19th, Shi'ite Iran and the Sunni Ottoman empire were engaged in non-stop mutual containment. And under the banner of Islam, Turkey de facto ruled over the Arab world.

    Jump cut, in the 21st century, to Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, who codified neo-Ottomanism. Davutoglu came up with the idea that eastern Anatolia did not end with the borders with Armenia and Iran but extended to the western coast of the Caspian Sea. And he also came up with the idea that eastern Anatolia did not end at the borders with Iraq and Syria – but extended all the way to Mosul.

    Essentially, Davutoglu argued that the Middle East had to be Turkey's backyard. And Syria would be the golden gate through which Turkey would "recover" the Middle East.

    All these elaborate plans now lie in dust. The Big Picture, of course, remains: the US determined by all means necessary to prevent Eurasian unity, and the Russia-China strategic partnership from having access to maritime routes, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean through Syria via Iran.

    The micro-picture is way more prosaic. It comes down to Erdogan making sure his occupying troops do not get routed by Assad's army. How the mighty (neo-Ottoman) have fallen.

    [Feb 16, 2020] Pompeo's Empty Boasting in Munich

    These demented human beings are miserable, self seeking failures by any measurement of dignity. In a way they are possessed with "Full Spectrum Dominance" delution.
    Feb 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    tone-deaf, arrogant speech in Munich this weekend in which he proclaimed that "the West is winning." In the most hypocritical and absurd section of the speech, Pompeo railed against other states' violations of sovereignty:

    Look, this matters. This matters because assaults on sovereignty destabilize. Assaults on sovereignty impoverish. Assaults on sovereignty enslave. Assaults on sovereignty are, indeed, assaults on the very freedom that anchors the Western ideal.

    Trump administration officials like talking about the importance of sovereignty almost as much as they enjoy trampling on the sovereignty of other states. The problem with Pompeo's sovereignty talk is that the U.S. obviously doesn't respect the sovereignty of many countries, and almost every criticism that he levels against someone else can be turned around against the U.S. The U.S. daily violates Syrian sovereignty with an illegal military presence. U.S. forces remain in Iraq against the wishes of the Iraqi government, and our military has repeatedly carried out attacks inside Iraq over their government's objections in just the last two months. The Trump administration respects sovereignty and territorial integrity so much that it has endorsed illegal Israeli annexation of Syrian territory and it has given a green light to more annexations in the future. It is now supporting an illegal Turkish incursion into Syria.

    Pompeo said at one point:

    Respect for sovereignty of nations is a secret of and central to our success. The West is winning.

    As we look back on the record of how the U.S. and our allies have behaved over the last 30 years, respect for other nations' sovereignty is not what we see. On the contrary, there has been a series of unnecessary and sometimes illegal wars that the U.S. and its allies have waged either to overthrow a foreign government, or to take sides in an internal conflict, or both. The U.S. and our allies and the other countries certainly would have been better off if that hadn't happened. Our recent record is nothing to boast about. It is typical of Pompeo that he celebrates successes where there aren't any. He says that "the West is winning," but what exactly have we won? The U.S. is still involved in multiple desultory conflicts, and relations with many of our most important allies are more strained than at any time since the start of the Iraq war. If "the West is winning," what would repeated failures look like?

    Pompeo calls out economic coercion as one of the harmful things that other states do, but he is part of an administration that has used economic warfare more than anyone else against more targets than ever before. If the U.S. refrained from using economic coercion as one of its main tools in trying to compel other states to do what Washington wants, the attacks on other states' use of economic coercion might carry some weight. As things stand, Pompeo's words are just so much wind.

    The theme of Pompeo's speech is refuting criticism from allies about how the U.S. is conducting its foreign policy, but I doubt that many Europeans in the audience were reassured by his hectoring, triumphalist tone. It doesn't help when he is accusing many of our allies of being fools and dupes:

    When so-called Iranian moderates play the victim, remember their assassination and terror campaigns against innocent Iranian civilians and right here on European soil itself.

    When Russia suggests that Nord Stream 2 is purely a commercial endeavor, don't be fooled. Consider the deprivations caused in the winters of 2006 and 2008 and 2009 and 2015.

    When Huawei executives show up at your door, they say you'll lose out if you don't buy in. Don't believe the hype.

    Needless to say, many of our European allies have very different views on all of these issues, and berating their position isn't going to make them agree with the Trump administration's unreasonable demands. Pompeo wants to tout the virtues of sovereignty, but as soon as our allies take decisions that displease him and Trump he castigates them for it. Respecting the sovereignty and independence of other states includes respecting their right to make decisions on policy that our government doesn't like. Of course, Pompeo would rather have our allies behave like vassals and expects other partners to obey as if they are colonies. Behind all the sovereignty rhetoric is an unmistakable desire to dictate terms and force others to do the administration's bidding. The countries that are on the receiving end of this insufferable arrogance can see through Pompeo's words. All three of those issues touch on areas where the U.S. insists that our allies abandon their own interests because Washington tells them to. That is exactly the sort of heavy-handed "leadership" that our allies resent, and Pompeo's speech will just remind them why they hate it.

    [Feb 16, 2020] Ultimately, a soldier would be diagnosed with a concussion because the soldier (who has financial benefits to gain) says so, and a physician does not dispute it.

    Feb 16, 2020 | www.unz.com

    The Scalpel , says: Website Show Comment February 13, 2020 at 7:04 am GMT

    I posted this on an earlier thread, but it is relevant here.

    I have been a working full time in Emergency Medicine for over 20 years. I was a "Flight Surgeon" in the Army. Soldiers are notorious for playing up any combat related injury in order to qualify for disability and the financial benefits that flow from being categorized as being disabled. As far as we know, the most serious claimed injuries were "concussions." As a practicing specialist in Emergency Medicine, I can explain that the diagnosis of "concussion" means, by definition, that no abnormality is seen on CT scanning of the brain. The diagnosis is made based on the injured person's purely subjective complaints, i.e. whatever the allegedly injured person says. If the allegedly injured person says the right things, then a physician may call the symptoms that of a concussion.

    So, ultimately, a soldier would be diagnosed with a concussion because the soldier (who has financial benefits to gain) says so, and a physician does not dispute it.

    I have seen hundreds if not thousands of diagnoses of "concussion". That diagnosis does not have to be supported by any specific findings or even a proper understanding of the diagnosis. It simply has to be entered in the record by a licensed physician. Once that diagnosis is on the medical record, it is up to subsequent providers to refute that diagnosis if they desire to do so.

    This is something subsequent providers are very unlikely to want to dedicate the time and effort required to accomplish. There is usually no financial or professional incentive to do so – often the opposite. There is no specific test to definitively say one way or the other if a person had a "concussion". Like PTSD it is a "functional" diagnosis based mainly on subjective symptoms and not objective test results. This is not to say such things do not exist. They do exist. It is only to say that they can be faked or misinterpreted and that will happen if there is a financial incentive to do so.

    Intelligent Dasein , says: Show Comment February 13, 2020 at 3:26 pm GMT
    @The Scalpel I'm sure your assessment is accurate, and is symptomatic of a much more general problem affecting the axis of medicine, insurance, pharma, and state pension systems (military or civilian), not to mention all corporations and agencies to various degrees.

    When doctors' medical opinions are considered sacrosanct and sufficient to secure payouts, excuse time off from work, and add one's name to the list of medically "made men," they are certain to be pursued like bounty on the high seas. No small number of doctors are content to play along with this system, as it secures a steady stream of income for them as well. Foreign doctors, who are often perfectly comfortable with graft and fraud, are especially bad in this regard.

    Employers are left with no recourse except to eat the cost of malingering employees and ever swelling pension rolls, which no employeer can long afford at the micro level and which society itself cannot afford at the macro level.

    Another complicating factor is added by the cultural obsession with business efficiency. When the VA scandal broke in 2014, a lot of people were upset by the thought that veterans were receiving shoddy care and insisted that "more must be done," not realizing that this very insistance was at the root of the problem. I said at the time that the real lesson here was that the VA had been "Six-Sigma'ed" by incompetent management who demanded faster claims processing and unrealistic expenditure reductions.

    These schizophrenic cultural trends -- viz. , on the one hand, greater and greater demands for doles by an aging and sickening population; and, on the other hand, the feckless attempts to mitigate the very real unaffordability of this by an oligarchic business philosophy that knows only how to downsize, offshore, and automate based on a naive reliance on the dubious benefits of technology -- are going to culminate in an epic breakdown of social functioning over the next decade.

    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment February 13, 2020 at 7:19 pm GMT
    @The Scalpel Perhaps you need to return to medical school for a refresher. A "concussion" may, or may not, be seen as an abnormality, usually subdural haematoma, on a CT scan. The reason for requesting the CT scan would be from the patient reported complaints, but also from the objective medical examination for things like pupils and reaction. Radiation is not good for you. If you are ordering CT scans before examination, you've got it backwards.
    Max Payne , says: Show Comment February 13, 2020 at 10:37 pm GMT
    There are no causalities you guys over estimate the steadfastness of the US military.

    Purple heart = disability cheque.

    No one can disprove a concussion.

    And that's the real embarrassment that the Pentagon is trying to hide.

    These guys (US forces) teach other how to fake PTSD to get on disability. I've seen it countless times in Western armed forces. Its how I know Iran will never be invaded or even bombed back to the stone age. You have to have balls for that and clearly the West and Israel have none. (Bush invaded Iraq on the premise of an empty vial; the Iranian counterattack was a legit no-shit missile attack on US forces and . NOTHING HAPPENED).

    As for reality I have colleagues who are so disconnected from international politics that reality (past their 9-5 job) means nothing. Reality won't kick in until it comes home to bite them in the ass. It's that simple. A programmer who does nothing for 10 years but play games and write software, what does he care about causalities in Iraq? Seriously. For him that was a 20 second twitter feed which entertained him on his way to work and that's it.

    GuestAug , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 12:10 am GMT
    This should be no surprise. "The first causality of [any] war is the truth."
    The Scalpel , says: Website Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 3:12 am GMT
    @Curmudgeon Perhaps you have heard the old proverb, "It is best to keep your mouth shut and have people suspect you are ignorant, than to open it and prove to people that you are ignorant"

    A subdural hematoma is (let me say this slowly for you) a sudural hematoma. A concussion is (again slowly) a concussion. They are two separate diagnoses.

    Concussion: ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code S06.0
    Traumatic Subdural Hematoma: ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code S06.5X0A

    Pretty good chance you don't know what these codes mean. If not, there is this thing called Google. Look it up.

    "things like pupils and reaction"

    WTF? I think you might be trying to describe testing for pupils being reactive to light (the normal state of affairs.) Abnormally reactive pupils are not required for the diagnosis of concussion and, in fact, are not usually present.

    Radiation is not good for you. If you are ordering CT scans before examination, you've got it backwards.

    That, in fact, is all true. What is not true is that I made any sort of suggestion at all to order tests before an exam. You need to lay off the hash pipe.

    FYI:

    Concussion: A concussion is a type of brain injury. It is a short loss of normal brain function in response to a head injury. Concussions are a common type of sports injury. You can also suffer from one if you suffer a blow to the head or hit your head after a fall. After a concussion, you may have a

    headache or neck pain. You may also experience nausea, ringing in your ears, dizziness, or tiredness. You may feel dazed or not your normal self

    for several days or weeks after the injury.

    https://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/Codes/S00-T88/S00-S09/S06/S06.0-

    All these symptoms are subjective, i.e. they are basically what the patient reports – truthfully or not.

    FWIW, I have found the most reliable symptom in diagnosing concussion is short term memory loss. The patient asks the same question over and over as if he never got an answer.

    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 8:14 pm GMT
    @The Scalpel I'm well aware of what a CT is, I was doing them more than 40 years ago, likely before you were in med school. I know what a concussion is, I've had one, and went through the examination. If you actually read my response, I did not say that every concussion resulted in a subdural haematoma.
    Patient reaction includes memory loss. Dizziness is what a patient reports. Of course what patients report is subjective, just as pain tolerance is, but it doesn't invalidate them.
    The Scalpel , says: Website Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 8:47 pm GMT
    I never said or implied that you did not know what a CT scan is. I think I get it now. You really are a curmudgeon (as in elderly) and your cognitive abilities are flagging. I am sorry for being rude earlier. As you may recall, the point being made was that a simple concussion is not visible on CT scan. A subdural hematoma is visible – as well as many other traumatic brain injuries, . A concussion is not visible. Subjective complaints are not invalid. They are as honest as the person making the complaint.
    Buck Ransom , says: Show Comment February 16, 2020 at 3:36 pm GMT
    @The Scalpel Are you suggesting that The Greatest Fighting Force in the Galaxy in All of History, the military of the world's Exceptional Nation, is riddled with grifters?

    [Feb 16, 2020] Presidential Election Politics are Damaging U.S. Foreign Policy by Robert E. Hunter

    Actions of Trump are dictated by his handlers. He is just a marionette.
    Notable quotes:
    "... wealth on tap. ..."
    "... There's more than an echo of McCartthism in this -- policies are championed to further the business and ideological interests of powerful individuals that don't necessarily reflect the priorities and interests of the country as a whole. People, often those who really should know better, then bandwaggon on those policies, not only to avoid being labeled unpatriotic but to also prove that they're just as or even more patriotic than the people originally promulgating them. We've seen this time and again, probably the most egregious recent example being the miasma of lies that were used to invade Iraq. Its a mindset that might appear to work but I believe that its ultimately a road to nowhere. ..."
    Feb 05, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    During every presidential election cycle, pundits argue that foreign policy will play a decisive role. Every time -- at least in my experience of 14 election cycles, nine in campaigns -- they have been proved wrong. This year will almost surely be no different.

    On the hustings, presidential candidates rarely get questions from voters on foreign policy. However, during the televised debates , journalist-questioners looking to make news quiz candidates on what they might do in thus-and-so circumstance, although they can't possibly know until faced in the Oval Office with real-world choices.

    Election Campaign Damage: Israel and Palestine

    By contrast, presidential campaigns often have a serious impact on U.S. national security interests. This year, three foreign policy issues tightly linked to U.S. domestic politics stand out. First, last week, Trump joined with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House to launch the " deal of the century " on Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. The deal is so one-sided as to be risible and is " dead on arrival." It's good politics for Trump with U.S. constituencies that are strongly pro-Israel, though with less impact with American Jews (most of whom are almost certain to vote for the Democratic nominee) than with many American evangelicals.

    But does it matter that, with Trump's proposal, the United States has abandoned any pretense of being an " honest broker" in the Middle East? To be sure, keen observers rightly note that most Arab governments give no more than ritual support to the Palestinian cause. Many have joined Israel in seeing Iran as their common enemy, and the Palestinians be damned.

    But most Arab leaders still must look over their shoulders: can they be sure that their populations will forget about the Palestinians' decades-long perception of humiliation by Israel, the United States, and most Arab leaders? Thus, to guard against giving a hostage to fortune, both the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIG) have formally rejected the Trump plan.

    Still, a third Palestinian Intifada (or "uprising") has so far not started. But these are early days. In any event, U.S. chances of promoting stability in the region have been seriously damaged.

    Damage: Iran

    More consequential is the standoff between the Trump administration and Iran ' s clerical leadership, with the U.S. being egged on by regional partners. Trump probably does not want an open war with Iran. But heightened tensions raise doubts that either Trump or the Iranians can control the pattern of escalation/de-escalation. Little would be needed to spark a major conflict, even by accident. After the United States assassinated Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, Iran responded only by launching pin-prick missile attacks against two Iraqi airbases used by the U.S. military, with advanced warning to keep from killing Americans. Trump -- and the world -- might not be so lucky next time.

    It takes strong nerves to bet that the Trump administration ' s " maximum pressure" strategy against Iran will remain controlled , much less that Iran will accede to U.S. demands before negotiations even begin. Meanwhile, following Trump ' s amazing folly two years ago of withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which effectively trammeled any chance that Iran could get nuclear weapons for at least a decade, Iran is now ramping up its nuclear activities. Given that Trump has pledged that " Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon," at some point a " red line" can get crossed, not just in politics-driven perceptions but in reality. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo still has on the table 12 demands that Iran must meet before any negotiations can begin. No country will accept unconditional surrender as the opening bid for talking.

    Several of the Democratic candidates for president, while deeply concerned about Iran's behavior, oppose the Trump-Pompeo approach, with all of the risks of open conflict. Amid deep unease on Capitol Hill, the Democratic-controlled House has voted to repeal the 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), originally the legal basis for the invasion of Iraq, and to prevent funding of military action against Iran without congressional authorization. (Yet neither House bill has much chance of passing the Republican-controlled Senate.) But these concerns could be swept aside if an incident in the Persian Gulf region led to Americans getting killed, provoking a national outcry. So long as Trump favors confrontation with Iran over any consideration of compromise or conciliation, the dangers will continue. "Hair trigger" continues to be an apt metaphor.

    Damage: The Democrats on Russia

    It's not just the White House that is doing serious damage to U.S. interests abroad during this year's election campaign. Of even greater consequence (absent a new Middle East war) is the U.S. relationship with Russia. It's currently unthinkable that Washington will try to move beyond the status quo, even if Russian President Vladimir Putin were prepared to do so. Even before Trump was inaugurated, many Democrats began calling for his impeachment . Leading Democrats laid Hillary Clinton ' s defeat at the feet of Russian interference in the U.S. election -- a claim that stretched credulity past the breaking point. Further, as Democrats looked for grounds to impeach Trump (or at least terminally to reduce his reelection chances), the " Russia factor" was the best cudgel available. Charges included the notion that " Putin has something on Trump," which presumes he would sell out the nation ' s security for a mess of pottage.

    All this domestic politicking ignores a geopolitical fact: while the Soviet Union lost the Cold War and, for some time thereafter, Russia could be dismissed, it was always certain that it would again become a significant power, at least in Europe. Thus, even before the Berlin Wall fell, President George H. W. Bush proposed creating a " Europe whole and free" and at peace. Bill Clinton built on what Bush began. Both understood that a renascent Russia could embrace revanchism, and for several years their efforts seemed to have a chance of succeeding.

    Then the effort went off the rails. Putin took power in Russia, which made cooperation with the West difficult if not impossible. He worked to consolidate his domestic position, in part by alleging that the West was " disrespecting" Russia and trying to encircle it. For its part, the U.S. played into the Putin narrative by abandoning the Bush-Clinton vision of taking legitimate Russian interests into account in fashioning European security arrangements. The breaking point came in 2014, when Russia seized Crimea and sent " little green men" to fight in some other parts of Ukraine. The West necessarily responded, with economic sanctions and NATO's buildup of " trip wire" forces in Central Europe.

    But despite the ensuing standoff, the critical requirement remains: the United States has to acknowledge Russia's inevitable rise as a major power while also impressing on Putin the need to trim his ambitions, if he is to avoid a new era of Russian isolation. There is also serious business that the two countries need to pursue, including strategic arms control, the Middle East (especially Iran), and climate change. Despite deep disagreements, including over Ukraine and parts of Central Europe, the U.S. needs to engage in serious discussions with Russia, which means the renewal of diplomacy which has been in the deep freeze for years.

    All of this has been put in pawn by the role that the "Russia factor" has been permitted to play in American presidential politics, especially by Democrats. Longer-term U.S. interests are suffering, along with those of the European allies and Middle East partners. The task has been made even more difficult by those U.S. politicians, think tanks , and journalists who prefer to resurrect the term "cold war" rather than clearly examining the nation's strategic needs because of the blinkers imposed by domestic politics. Open discussion about alternatives in dealing with Russia is thus stifled, at serious cost to the United States and others.

    In all three of these areas, the U.S. is paying a high price in terms of its national interests to the games political leaders, both Republicans and Democrats, are playing. Great efforts will be needed to dig out of this mess, beginning with U.S. willingness to do so. Leaders elsewhere must also be prepared to join in -- far from a sure thing! Unfortunately, there is currently little hope that, at least in the three critical areas discussed above, pursuit of U.S. interests abroad will prevail over today's parochial domestic politics. David G. Horsman You apparently do not appreciate these sociopaths live for this crap. It keeps their juices flowing. Cackling Killary may yet get on Stop and Frisk your Bloomer's ticket and be VP. For a price of course.
    This is a fantasy. Once fascism gets established it is nearly impossible to stop it if history teaches us anything.
    Pseudo-religious talk about Karma is very reminiscent of the decent Christians comforting themselves that all those badies will be punished in hell for an eternity. IE. Because they won't be in this life.
    It's a way of coping with total defeat after 50 years of neoliberalcon supremacy and proto fascism. After a 100 year war on labour.

    It's already over. What do think this is? France 🇫🇷 ?

    I don't fight fascism because I believe we will win. It's because they are fascist. And we know who has all the guns. Gezzah Potts How many human beings have now died as a result of the draconian sanctions unleashed on the Venezuelan people by this rogue terrorist state?
    I also wonder how the people of Detroit are faring considering 33.4% live below the poverty line, or in Cleveland where 35% live in poverty.
    And yet Trump brags of defending 'American liberty' (oxymoron) by spending $2.2 trillion dollars in maintaining the hegemony of this debauched Empire.
    Yet, in the land of the free (another oxymoron) vast swathes of people live in poverty – or live in their cars, or in the burgeoning tent cities.
    How's the water in Flint? Is it still undrinkable?
    As if any of the creatures in Washington care about any of this. Anything to maintain control over much of the Planet. Tim Jenkins And with the highest incarcerated prison population and highest record in private prison profits in California, most recent, it seems the solution to corporate 'societal' wealth is to have 50,000 homeless on the streets in L.A. , just 'hanging' around, the corner . . .

    wealth on tap.

    (datsa' rap trap 😉 ) 5 0 Reply Feb 16, 2020 9:24 AM Gezzah Potts Gezzah Potts Just watched John Pilger's searing documentary 'The Dirty War On The NHS' which included segments on the wondrously caring and compassionate US 'health system' in places like Chicago and such quaint notions as 'patient dumping' where, to further save costs, and make more billions $$$$ – patients are evicted from hospitals early and dumped at homeless shelters.
    My god, the barbarians are not just at the gate. They're already inside the building.
    These completely dehumanised psychopathic neoliberal ideologues who only care about money and profits.
    More and more for us and all you useless eaters can just fuck off and die.
    That's the mentality. It's so sick.
    No, that wasn't a pun. It is truly sick how warped society has become. Seamus Padraig

    Despite the turmoil Trump has experienced since 2016, it has been his karmic responsibility to grow from those challenges, to use each obstacle as a path to align with a higher vibration and become a more conscious person, fully aware of his global responsibility to humanity – that has not appeared to have happened.

    What appears to have happened is that Trump finally caved in to the Deep State, and that's why things are going better for him. I am starting to suspect we may see a war against Iran in Term II.

    Pelosi and the Dems have also created 'bad' karma with their own abuse of power; they too will reap the results of their own behavior.

    What they're gonna reap is more Trump after next November! Martin Usher There's more than an echo of McCartthism in this -- policies are championed to further the business and ideological interests of powerful individuals that don't necessarily reflect the priorities and interests of the country as a whole. People, often those who really should know better, then bandwaggon on those policies, not only to avoid being labeled unpatriotic but to also prove that they're just as or even more patriotic than the people originally promulgating them. We've seen this time and again, probably the most egregious recent example being the miasma of lies that were used to invade Iraq. Its a mindset that might appear to work but I believe that its ultimately a road to nowhere.

    I'm less concerned about the current emphasis on military spending than I would have been in the past because I sincerely doubt the ability of the US to carry through on these plans. The writing's been on the wall for some time and they can certainly spend the money but the chronic shortage of engineering talent, the systematic shortchanging of education and our steady erosion of manufacturing knowhow will limit our ability to turn political wishful thinking into reality. Sure, we'll still be able to produce boutique products, eye-wateringly expensive munitions that we can use to intimidate people who can't shoot back, but we're already in an era where serious cost overruns and performance deficiencies are the rule rather than the exception. This problem has been brewing for a generation or more and it will take a generation or more to fix it. Unfortunately our politicians are still living in the reflected glory of past empires, they seem to be unable to recognize that WW2 was 75 years ago, so I expect we'll stumble along business as usual alienating more and more people until all we have left are those we can buy with our increasingly useless dollars.

    [Feb 16, 2020] The highwater mark in SEAsia was the helicopters evacuating the last invaders from Saigon. The highwater mark in the ME is going to be similar scenes in Iraq.

    Feb 16, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Dungroanin ,

    It seems that history is about to repeat. The highwater mark in SEAsia was the helicopters evacuating the last invaders from Saigon. The highwater mark in the ME is going to be similar scenes in Iraq.

    A final warning has been issued to US troops there – 40 days after Soleimanis assassination – the Resistance is ready to move, an irresistible force about to meet a not so immovable object.

    Along with Idlib and Allepo its been amazing start to 2020. And its not even spring!

    [Feb 16, 2020] Looking at various indices like median household income and average wage, it seems as if living standards in Russia are substantially below western European levels and even slightly below central Europe

    Feb 16, 2020 | www.quora.com

    Likbez,

    Looking at various indices like median household income and average wage, it seems as if living standards in Russia are substantially below western European levels and even slightly below central Europe. (Estonia and Poland are consistently slightly higher, Hungary often a bit lower.) Compared to China, going by the same sources and others, Russian wages are roughly twice as high as China's

    That creates separatist movements within the country, including Islamist movements in Muslim-dominated regions.

    So their posture is strictly defensive, and probably is not much more than a mild defensive reaction to "Full-spectrum Dominance" doctrine and the aggressive foreign policy conducted by the USA neocons (which totally dominate NSC and the State Department, as we saw from Ukrainegate testimonies)

    The USA coup d'état in Ukraine actually have a blowback for the USA -- it neutralized influence and political status of Russia neoliberal fifth column (neoliberal compradors), and if not Putin (who is paradoxically a pro-Western neoliberal; although of "national neoliberalism" flavor similar to Trumpism ) some of them probably would be now hanging from the lamp posts. They are really hated by population after hardships, comparable with WWII hardships, imposed on ordinary Russian during Western-enforced neoliberalization under marionette Yeltsin government and attempt to grab Russian resources for pennies on a dollar. "Marshall plan" for Russia instead of economic rape would be a much better policy.

    I think Obama-Nuland plot to turn Ukraine into the USA vassal state was yet another very dangerous move, which hurts the USA national security and greatly increased chances of military confrontation with Russia (aka mutual annihilation)

    It was worse then a crime, it was a blunder. And now the USA needs to support this vassal with money we do not have.

    The role of NSC in militarizing the USA foreign policy is such that it neutralizes any impulses of any US administration (if we assume they exist) to improve relations with Russia.

    Neoliberal Dems now is a second war party which bet on neo-McCarthyism to weaken Trump. They went into the complete status of psychosis in this area. I view it as a psychotic reaction to the first signs of the collapse of the USA-centered global neoliberal empire (which will happen anyway independently of Russian moves)

    That's actually a very dangerous situation indeed, and I am really afraid that the person who will replace Putin will not have Putin steel nerves, diplomatic talent, and the affinity with the West. Then what ? another Sarajevo and another war?

    With warmongering "raptured" crazies like Mike, "we killed up to 200 Russians" Pompeo, the situation can really become explosive like before WWI. Again, after Putin leaves the political scene, the Sarajevo incident is easy to stage, especially with such incompetent marionette of the military-industrial complex like Trump at the helm.

    I believe antagonizing Russia was a reckless, very damaging to the USA interest move, the move initiated by Clinton administration and supported by all subsequent administration as weakening and possibly dismembering Russia is one of the key aspect of Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine. . And we will pay a huge price for this policy.

    See also Professor Stephen Cohen books on the subject.

    Barkley Rosser February 16, 2020 9:19 pm

    JimH,

    Why do you pose this as antagonizing either Russsia or Iran? They are somewhat allied, so in fact antagonizing Iran as we are doing also antagonizes Russia.

    Likbez,

    The relative economic position of Russia in terms of median income is no different today than it was 30 years ago before Yeltsin, except for the rise of China. It was behind the European nations to its west, both those that were under its domination and those that were not, and it still is. So no big deal.

    And somehow you have this fantasy that if it were not for Obama-Nuland, Ukrainians would just loooove to be under Russian domination. f you think this, you ser both foolish and very ignorant.

    likbez February 16, 2020 10:30 pm

    And somehow you have this fantasy that if it were not for Obama-Nuland, Ukrainians would just loooove to be under Russian domination. f you think this, you ser both foolish and very ignorant.

    I might well be foolish and ignorant (I am far from being the specialist in the region), but I suspect Ukrainians do prefer the exchange rate ~8.5 hrivnas to a dollar (before the coup) to the current 25 hrivnas to a dollar.

    Especially taking into account stagnant salaries and actual parity of prices in dollars for many types of food (especially meat), industrial products, and services between the USA and Ukraine.

    I recently talked with one Ukrainian woman who told me that the "bribe" (unofficial payments due to low salaries for doctors and nurses in state clinics) for the child delivery was $1000 in Kiev in 2014 and she gave birth exactly at the time when hrivna jumped from 8.5 to over 20 per dollar. That was a tragedy for her and her family.

    And please remember that the average SS pension in Ukraine is around 1500 hrivna a month (~ $60). So to me, it is completely unclear how pensioners can survive at all while the government is buying super expensive American weapons "to defend the country from Russian aggression."

    I would strongly recommend you to read the recent Consortium news story https://consortiumnews.com/2020/02/14/understanding-the-ukraine-story/

    [Feb 16, 2020] Imperialism and Liberation in the Middle East Feb 14, 2020 Written by P l Steigan, translated by Terje Maloy

    Notable quotes:
    "... Imperialism – the highest stage of capitalism ..."
    "... Without the natives' consent and without the neighbouring countries approval, Moroccans, Somalis, and later Afghans and Syrians, found home in the EU thanks to madame Merkel. ..."
    "... How ligitimate is that? ..."
    Feb 16, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    At the moment, the United States has great difficulty in retaining its hegemony in the Middle East. Its troops have been declared unwanted in Iraq; and in Syria, the US and their foreign legion of terrorists lose terrain and positions every month. The US has responded to this with a significant escalation, by deploying more troops and by constant threats against Iran. At the same time, we have seen strong protest movements in Lebanon, Iraq and Iran.

    When millions of Iraqi took to the streets recently, their main slogan was "THE UNITED STATES OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST!"

    How should one analyze this?

    Obviously, there are a lot of social tensions in the Middle East – class based, ethnic, religious and cultural. The region is a patchwork of conflicts and tensions that not only goes back hundreds of years, but even a few thousand.

    There are always many reasons to rebel against a corrupt upper class, anywhere in the world. But no rebellion can succeed if it is not based on a realistic and thorough analysis of the specific conditions in the individual country and region.

    Just as in Africa, the borders in the Middle East are arbitrarily drawn. They are the product of the manipulations of imperialist powers, and only to a lesser extent products of what the peoples themselves have wanted.

    During the era of decolonization, there was a strong, secular pan-Arab movement that wanted to create a unified Arab world. This movement was influenced by the nationalist and socialist ideas that had strong popular support at the time.

    King Abdallah I of Jordan envisaged a kingdom that would consist of Jordan, Palestine and Syria. Egypt and Syria briefly established a union called the United Arab Republic . Gaddafi wanted to unite Libya, Syria and Egypt in a federation of Arab republics .

    In 1958, a quickly dissolved confederation was established between Jordan and Iraq, called the Arab Federation . All these efforts were transient. What remains is the Arab League, which is, after all, not a state federation and not an alliance. And then of course we have the demand for a Kurdish state, or something similar consisting of one or more Kurdish mini-states.

    Still, the most divisive product of the First World War was the establishment of the state of Israel on Palestinian soil. During the First World War, Britain's Foreign Minister Arthur Balfour issued what became known as the Balfour Declaration , which " view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."

    But what is the basis for all these attempts at creating states? What are the prerequisites for success or failure?

    The imperialist powers divide the world according to the power relations between them

    Lenin gave the best and most durable explanation for this, in his essay Imperialism – the highest stage of capitalism . There, he explained five basic features of the era of imperialism:

    The concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; The merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this "finance capital", of a financial oligarchy; The export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; The formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves; The territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed.

    But Lenin also pointed out that capitalist countries are developing unevenly, not least because of the uneven development of productive forces in the various capitalist countries.

    After a while, there arises a discrepancy between how the world is divided and the relative strength of the imperialist powers. This disparity will eventually force through a redistribution, a new division of the world based on the new relationship of strength. And, as Lenin states :

    The question is: what means other than war could there be under capitalism to overcome the disparity between the development of productive forces and the accumulation of capital on the one side, and the division of colonies and spheres of influence for finance capital on the other?"

    The two world wars were wars that arose because of unevenness in the power relationships between the imperialist powers. The British Empire was past its heyday and British capitalism lagged behind in the competition. The United States and Germany were the great powers that had the largest industrial and technological growth, and eventually this misalignment exploded. Not once, but twice.

    Versailles and Yalta

    The victors of the First World War divided the world between themselves at the expense of the losers. The main losers were Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia (the Soviet Union) and the Ottoman Empire. This division was drawn up in the Versailles treaty and the following minor treaties.

    Europe after the Versailles Treaties (Wikipedia)

    This map shows how the Ottoman Empire was partitioned:

    At the end of World War II, the victorious superpowers met in the city of Yalta on the Crimean peninsula in the Soviet Union. Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin made an agreement on how Europe should be divided following Germany's imminent defeat. This map shows how it was envisaged and the two blocs that emerged and became the foundation for the Cold War.

    Note that Yugoslavia, created after Versailles in 1919, was maintained and consolidated as "a country between the blocs". So it is a country that carries in itself the heritage of both the Versailles- and Yalta agreements.

    The fateful change of era when the Soviet Union fell

    In the era of imperialism, there has always been a struggle between various great powers. The battle has been about markets, access to cheap labor, raw materials, energy, transport routes and military control. And the imperialist countries divide the world between themselves according to their strength. But the imperialist powers are developing unevenly.

    If a power collapses or loses control over some areas, rivals will compete to fill the void. Imperialism follows the principle that Aristotle in his Physics called horror vacui – the fear of empty space.

    And that was what happened when the Soviet Union lost the Cold War. In 1991, the Soviet Union ceased to exist, and soon the Eastern bloc was also history. And thus the balance was broken, the one that had maintained the old order. And now a huge area was available for re-division. The weakened Russia barely managed to preserve its own territory, and not at all the area that just before was controlled by the Soviet Union.

    Never has a so large area been open for redivision. It was the result of two horrible world wars that anew was up for grabs. It could not but lead to war." Pål Steigan, 1999

    "Never has a so large area been open for re-division. It was the result of two horrible world wars that anew was up for grabs. It could not but lead to war." Map: Countries either part of the Soviet Union, Eastern Bloc or non-aligned (Yugoslavia)

    When the Soviet Union disintegrated, both the Yalta and Versailles agreements in reality collapsed, and opened up the way for a fierce race to control this geopolitical empty space.

    This laid the foundation for the American Geostrategy for Eurasia , which concentrated on securing control over the vast Eurasian continent. It is this struggle for redistribution in favor of the United States that has been the basis for most wars since 1990: Somalia, the Iraq wars, the Balkan wars, Libya, Ukraine, and Syria.

    The United States has been aggressively spearheading this, and the process to expand NATO eastward and create regime changes in the form of so-called "color revolutions" has been part of this struggle. The coup in Kiev, the transformation of Ukraine into an American colony with Nazi elements, and the war in Donbass are also part of this picture. This war will not stop until Russia is conquered and dismembered, or Russia has put an end to the US offensive.

    So, to recapitulate: Because the world is already divided between imperialist powers and there are no new colonies to conquer, the great powers can only fight for redistribution. What creates the basis and possibilities for a new division is the uneven development of capitalism. The forces that are developing faster economically and technologically will demand bigger markets, more raw materials, more strategic control.

    The results of two terrible wars are again up for grabs

    World War I caused perhaps 20 million deaths , as well as at least as many wounded. World War II caused around 72 million deaths . These are approximate numbers, and there is still controversy around the exact figures, but we are talking about this order of magnitude.

    The two world wars that ended with the Versailles and Yalta treaties thus caused just below 100 million dead, as well as an incredible number of other suffering and losses.

    Since 1991, a low-intensity "world war" has been fought, especially by the US, to conquer "the void". Donald Trump recently stated that the United States have waged wars based on lies, which have cost $ 8 trillion ($ 8,000 billion) and millions of people's lives. So the United States' new distribution of the spoils has not happened peacefully.

    "The Rebellion against Sykes-Picot"

    In the debate around the situation in the Middle East, certain people that would like to appear leftist, radical and anti-imperialist say that it is time to rebel against the artificial boundaries drawn by the Sykes-Picot and Versailles treaties. And certainly these borders are artificial and imperialist. But how leftist and anti-imperialist is it to fight for these boundaries to be revised now?

    In reality, it is the United States and Israel that are fighting for a redistribution of the Middle East. This is the basis underlying Donald Trump's "Deal of the Century", which aims to bury Palestine forever, and it is stated outright in the new US strategy for partitioning Iraq.

    Again, this is just an updated version of the Zionist Yinon plan that aimed to cantonize the entire Middle East, with the aim that Israel should have no real opponents and would be able to dominate the entire region and possibly create a Greater Israel.

    It is not the anti-imperialists that are leading the way to overhaul the imperialist borders from 1919. It is the imperialists. To achieve this, they can often exploit movements that are initially popular or national, but which then only become tools and proxies in a greater game.

    This has happened so many times in history that it can hardly be counted.

    Hitler's Germany exploited Croatian nationalism by using the Ustaša gangs as proxies. From 1929 to 1945, they killed hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Jews and Roma people. And their ideological and political descendants carried out an extremely brutal ethnic cleansing of the Krajina area and forced out more than 200,000 Serbs in their so-called Operation Storm in 1995.

    Hitler also used the extreme Ukrainian nationalists of Stepan Bandera's OUN, and after Bandera's death, the CIA continued to use them as a fifth column against the Soviet Union.

    The US low-intensity war against Iraq, from the Gulf War in 1991 to the Iraq War in 2003, helped divide the country into enclaves. Iraqi Kurdistan achieved autonomy in the oil-rich north with the help of a US "no-fly zone". The United States thus created a quasi-state that was their tool in Iraq.

    Undoubtedly, the Kurds in Iraq had been oppressed under Saddam Hussein. But also undoubtedly, their Iraqi "Kurdistan" became a client state under the thumb of United States. And there is also no doubt that the no-fly zones were illegal, as UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali admitted in a conversation with John Pilger .

    And now the United States is still using the Kurds in Northern Iraq in its plan to divide Iraq into three parts. To that end, they are building the world's largest consulate in Erbil. What they are planning to do, is simply "creating a country".

    As is well known, the United States also uses the Kurds in Syria as a pretext to keep 27 percent of the country occupied. It does not help how much the Kurdish militias SDF and PYD invoke democracy, feminism and communalism; they have ended up pleading for the United States to maintain the occupation of Northeast Syria.

    Preparations for a New World War

    Israel and the US are preparing for war against Iran. In this fight, they will develop as much "progressive" rhetoric as is required to fool people. Real dissatisfaction in the area, which there is every reason to have, will be magnified and blown out of all proportion. "Social movements" will be equipped with the latest news in the Israeli and US "riot kits" and receive training and logistics support, in addition to plenty of cold hard cash.

    There may be good reasons to revise the 1919 borders, but in today's situation, such a move will quickly trigger a major war. Some say that the Kurds are entitled to their own state, and maybe so. The question is ultimately decided by everyone else, except the Kurds themselves.

    The problem is that in today's geopolitical situation, creating a unified Kurdistan will require that "one" defeats Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. It's hard to see how that can happen without their allies, not least Russia and China, being drawn into the conflict.

    And then we have a new world war on our hands. And in that case, we are not talking about 100 million killed, but maybe ten times as much, or the collapse of civilization as we know it. The Kurdish question is not worth that much.

    This does not mean that one should not fight against oppression and injustice, be it social and national. One certainly should. But you have to realize that revising the map of the Middle East is a very dangerous plan and that you run the risk of ending up in very dangerous company. The alternative to this is to support a political struggle that undermines the hegemony of the United States and Israel and thereby creates better conditions for future struggles.

    It is nothing new that small nations rely on geopolitical situations to achieve some form of national independence. This was the case, for example, for my home country Norway. It was France's defeat in the Napoleonic War that caused Denmark to lose the province of Norway to Sweden in 1814, but at the same time it created space for a separate Norwegian constitution and internal self rule.

    All honor to the Norwegian founding fathers of 1814, but this was decided on the battlefields in Europe. And again, it was Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War that laid the geopolitical foundation for the dissolution of the forced union with Sweden almost a hundred years later, in 1905. (This is very schematically presented and there are many more details, but there is no doubt that Russia's loss of most of its fleet in the Far East had created a power vacuum in the west, which was exploitable.)

    Therefore, the best thing to do now is not to support the fragmentation of states, but to support a united front to drive the United States out of the Middle East. The Million Man March in Baghdad got the ball rolling. There is every reason to build up even more strength behind it. Only when the United States is out, will the peoples and countries in the region be able to arrive at peaceful agreements between themselves, which will enable a better future to be developed.

    And in this context, it is an advantage that China develops the "Silk Road" (aka Belt and Road Initiative), not because China is any nobler than other major powers, but because this project, at least in the current situation, is non-sectarian, non-exclusive and genuinely multilateral. The alternative to a monopolistic rule by the United States, with a world police under Washington's control, is a multipolar world. It grows as we speak.

    The days of the Empire are numbered. What this will look like in 20 or 50 years, remains to be seen.

    This article is Creative Commons 4.0. Pål Steigan is a Norwegian veteran journalist and activist, presently editor of the independent news site Steigan.no . Translated by Terje Maloy. Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest WhatsApp vKontakte Email Filed under: 20th Century , historical perspectives , latest Tagged with: Croatia , Egypt , historical perspectives , imperialism , Israel , Jordan , Lenin , Middle East , Pal Steigan , Palestine , russia , Saudi Arabia , Stepan Bandera , Terje Maloy , ukraine , WWII can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

    OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

    Connect with Connect with Subscribe newest oldest most voted Notify of

    George Mc ,

    Off topic – but there's nowhere else to put this at the moment:

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/feb/16/fran-unsworth-bbc-election-coverge-licence-fee

    The BBC was taken aback by leftwing attacks on its general election coverage

    No idea what they are talking about. They patiently explained that Corbyn was Hitler. What more could they do?

    Dungroanin ,

    Ok roll up the sleeves, time to concentrate. I've had enough of being baited as a judae- phobe.

    The 'Balfour Declaration' – he didn't write it and it was a contract published in the newspapers within hours of it being inveigled.

    Ready?

    'Balfour and Lloyd George would have been happy with an unvarnished endorsement of Zionism. The text that the foreign secretary agreed in August was largely written by Weizmann and his colleagues:

    "His Majesty's Government accept the principle that Palestine should be reconstituted as the national home of the Jewish people and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object and will be ready to consider any suggestions on the subject which the Zionist Organisation may desire to lay before them."

    Got that – AUGUST?

    Dungroanin ,


    The leading figure in that drama was a charismatic chemistry professor from Manchester, Chaim Weizmann – with his domed head, goatee beard and fierce intellect. Weizmann had gained an entrée into political circles thanks to CP Scott, the illustrious editor of the Manchester Guardian, and had then sold his Zionist project to government leaders, including David Lloyd George when he was chancellor of the exchequer.

    Dungroanin ,

    Author(s)
    Walter Rothschild, Arthur Balfour, Leo Amery, Lord Milner

    Signatories
    Arthur James Balfour

    Recipient
    Walter Rothschild

    Dungroanin ,

    'In due course the blunt phrase about Palestine being "reconstituted as the national home of the Jewish people" was toned down into "the establishment of a home for the Jewish people in Palestine" – a more ambiguous formulation which sidestepped for the moment the idea of a Jewish state. '

    Dungroanin ,

    'Edwin Montagu, newly appointed as secretary of state for India, was only the third practising Jew to hold cabinet office. Whereas his cousin, Herbert Samuel (who in 1920 would become the first high commissioner of Palestine) was a keen supporter of Zionism, Montagu was an "assimilationist" – one who believed that being Jewish was a matter of religion not ethnicity. His position was summed up in the cabinet minutes:

    Mr Montagu urged strong objections to any declaration in which it was stated that Palestine was the "national home" of the Jewish people. He regarded the Jews as a religious community and himself as a Jewish Englishman '

    Dungroanin ,

    'Montagu considered the proposed Declaration a blatantly anti-Semitic document and claimed that "most English-born Jews were opposed to Zionism", which he said was being pushed mainly by "foreign-born Jews" such as Weizmann, who was born in what is now Belarus.'

    Dungroanin ,

    The other critic of the proposed Declaration was Lord Curzon, a former viceroy of India, who therefore viewed Palestine within the geopolitics of Asia. A grandee who traced his lineage back to the Norman Conquest, Curzon loftily informed colleagues that the Promised Land was not exactly flowing with milk and honey, but nor was it an empty, uninhabited space.

    According to the cabinet minutes, "Lord Curzon urged strong objections upon practical grounds. He stated, from his recollection of Palestine, that the country was, for the most part, barren and desolate a less propitious seat for the future Jewish race could not be imagined."

    And, he asked, "how was it proposed to get rid of the existing majority of Mussulman [Muslim] inhabitants and to introduce the Jews in their place?"

    Dungroanin ,

    Sorry for the length of this bit – but it only makes sense in the whole:

    'Between them, Curzon and Montagu had temporarily slowed the Zionist bandwagon. Lord Milner, another member of the war cabinet, hastily added two conditions to the proposed draft, in order to address the two men's respective concerns. The vague phrase about the rights of the "existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" hints at how little the government knew or cared about those who constituted roughly 90 per cent of the population of what they, too, regarded as their homeland.

    After trying out the new version on a few eminent Jews, both of Zionist and accommodationist persuasions, and also securing a firm endorsement from America's President Woodrow Wilson, Lloyd George and Balfour took the issue back to the war cabinet on 31 October. By now the strident Montagu had left for India, and on this occasion Balfour, who could often be moody and detached, led from the front, brushing aside the objections that had been raised and reasserting the propaganda imperative. According to the cabinet minutes, he stated firmly: "The vast majority of Jews in Russia and America, as, indeed, all over the world, now appeared to be favourable to Zionism. If we could make a declaration favourable to such an ideal, we should be able to carry on extremely useful propaganda both in Russia and America."

    This was standard cabinet tactics: a strong lead from a minister supported by the PM, daring his colleagues to argue back. And this time Curzon did not, though he did make another telling comment. He "attached great importance to the necessity of retaining the Christian and Moslem Holy Places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem". If this were done, Curzon added, he "did not see how the Jewish people could have a political capital in Palestine".'

    Dungroanin ,

    Dates again crucial and the smoking gun:

    'securing a firm endorsement from America's President Woodrow Wilson, Lloyd George and Balfour took the issue back to the war cabinet on 31 October.'

    Dungroanin ,

    The two conditions had bought off the two main critics. That was all that seemed to matter, even though the reference to the "rights of the existing non-Jewish communities" stood in potential conflict with the first two clauses about the British supporting and using their "best endeavours" for the "establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people".

    Dungroanin ,

    There is MORE but I'll pause and see how many are really interested in FACTS, as opposed to invented History, Economics and Capital instead of the only real human motivations of the ages – Money and Power.

    George Mc ,

    the only real human motivations of the ages – Money and Power.

    If this is true then we are all doomed.

    Dungroanin ,

    Not if we are aware of it George.

    Dungroanin ,

    Ok a summary fom Brittanica:

    'Balfour Declaration Quick Facts

    The Balfour Declaration, issued through the continued efforts of Chaim Weizmann and Nahum Sokolow, Zionist leaders in London, fell short of the expectations of the Zionists, who had asked for the reconstitution of Palestine as "the" Jewish national home. The declaration specifically stipulated that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." The document, however, said nothing of the political or national rights of these communities and did not refer to them by name. Nevertheless, the declaration aroused enthusiastic hopes among Zionists and seemed the fulfillment of the aims of the World Zionist Organization (see Zionism).

    The British government hoped that the declaration would rally Jewish opinion, especially in the United States, to the side of the Allied powers against the Central Powers during World War I (1914–18). They hoped also that the settlement in Palestine of a pro-British Jewish population might help to protect the approaches to the Suez Canal in neighbouring Egypt and thus ensure a vital communication route to British colonial possessions in India.

    The Balfour Declaration was endorsed by the principal Allied powers and was included in the British mandate over Palestine, formally approved by the newly created League of Nations on July 24, 1922.

    In May 1939 the British government altered its policy in a White Paper recommending a limit of 75,000 further immigrants and an end to immigration by 1944, unless the resident Palestinian Arabs of the region consented to further immigration.

    Zionists condemned the new policy, accusing Britain of favouring the Arabs. This point was made moot by the outbreak of World War II (1939–45) and the founding of the State of Israel in 1948.'

    Dungroanin ,

    But what about the timing?

    Well there are twin tracks, here is the first.

    'But talking about the return of the Jews to the land of Israel was only meaningful because that land seemed up for grabs after the Ottoman Empire sided with Germany in 1914. For Britain, France and Russia – though primarily focused on Europe – war against a declining power long dubbed the "Sick Man of Europe" opened up the prospect of vast gains in the Levant and the Middle East.

    The Ottoman army, however, proved no walkover. In 1915 it threatened the Suez Canal, Britain's imperial artery to India, and then repulsed landings by British empire and French forces on the Dardanelles at Gallipoli. Although Baghdad fell in March 1917, two British assaults on Gaza that spring were humiliatingly driven back, with heavy losses. Deadlock in the desert added to Whitehall's list of woes.

    In this prescribed narrative of remembrance for 1914-18, what happened outside the Western Front has been almost entirely obscured. The British army's "Historical Lessons, Warfare Branch" has published in-house a fascinating volume of essays about what it tellingly entitles "The Forgotten Fronts of the First World War" – with superb maps and illustrations. The collection covers not only Palestine and Mesopotamia (roughly modern-day Iraq and Kuwait), but also Italy, Africa, Russia, Turkey and the Pacific – indeed much of the world – but sadly it is not currently available to the public. '

    Dungroanin ,

    The second track is the 'money' track and what everything is about and why we live in such a miasma of blatant lies.

    IT can only make sense by asking questions such as :

    Can we follow the money?

    When was the Fed set up? Why? By whom?
    How much money did it lend &
    to whom?

    When was the first world war started?

    When did US declare war?

    When did US troops arrive in numbers to enter that war?

    What happened in Russia at the same time?

    And in Mesopotamia?

    How did it end?

    How did it fail to end?

    What happened to the contract?

    Etc.

    I have attempted to research and answer some of these already above.

    Next I will attempt to walk the other track but be warned that opens more ancient tracks.

    Dungroanin ,

    'On 2 November, Balfour sent his letter to Lord Rothschild.

    7 November, Lenin and the Bolsheviks had seized power in Petrograd. ransacked the Tsarist archives, they published juicy extracts from the "secret treaties" that the Allied powers had made among themselves in 1915-16 to divide the spoils of victory.
    The same day the Ottoman Seventh and Eighth Armies evacuated the town of Gaza

    9 November Letter published in Times.

    Mid November – The Bolsheviks did not discover that the British were also playing footsie with the Turks. In the middle of November 1917, secret meetings took place with Ottoman dissidents in Greece and Switzerland about trying to arrange an armistice in the Near East. The war cabinet recognised that, as bait, it might have to let the Ottomans keep parts of their empire in the region, or at least retain some appearance of control. When Curzon got wind of this, he was incensed: "Almost in the same week that we have pledged ourselves, if successful, to secure Palestine as a national home for the Jewish people, are we to contemplate leaving the Turkish flag flying over Jerusalem?"

    End November. The Manchester Guardian's correspondent in Petrograd, Morgan Philips Price, was able to examine the key documents overnight, and his scoop was published by the paper at the end of November. It revealed to the world, among other things, that the British also had an understanding with the French – the Sykes-Picot agreement of January 1916 – to carve up the Near East between them once the Ottoman empire had been defeated. In this, Palestine was slated for some kind of international condominium – not the British protectorate envisaged in the Balfour Declaration.

    11 December Allenby formally entered Jerusalem. '

    So just a few loose ends left to tie up anyone actually want to go there?

    George Mc ,

    No.

    Dungroanin ,

    🤣

    Dungroanin ,

    Ok on the back stretch:

    https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/feds_formative_years

    The paramount goal of the Fed's founders was to eliminate banking panics, but it was not the only goal. The founders also sought to increase the amount of international trade financed by US banks and to expand the use of the dollar internationally. By 1913 the United States had the world's largest economy, but only a small fraction of US exports and imports were financed by American banks. Instead, most exports and imports were financed by bankers' acceptances drawn on European banks in foreign currencies. (Bankers' acceptances are a type of financial contract used for making payments in the future, for example, upon delivery of goods or services. Bankers' acceptances are drawn on and guaranteed, i.e., "accepted," by a bank.) The Federal Reserve Act allowed national banks to issue bankers' acceptances and open foreign branches, which greatly expanded their ability to finance international transactions Further the Act authorized the Reserve Banks to purchase acceptances in the open market to ensure a liquid market for them, thereby spurring growth of that market.

    President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act on December 23, 1913.

    The task of determining the specific number of districts, district boundaries, and which cities would have Reserve Banks was assigned to a Reserve Bank Organization Committee.

    On April 2, 1914, the Committee announced that twelve Federal Reserve districts would be formed, identified the boundaries of those districts, and named the cities that would have Reserve Banks.1 The Banks were quickly organized, officers and staff were hired, and boards of directors appointed. The Banks opened for business on November 16, 1914.
    ..

    The Federal Reserve Act addressed perceived shortcomings by creating a new national currency -- Federal Reserve notes -- and requiring members of the Federal Reserve System to hold reserve balances with their local Federal Reserve Banks.

    World War I began in Europe in August 1914, before the Federal Reserve Banks had opened for business. The war had a profound impact on the US banking system and economy, as well as on the Federal Reserve.

    War disrupted European financial markets and reduced the supply of trade credit offered by European banks, providing US banks with an opening. Low US interest rates, abundant reserves, and new authority to issue trade acceptances enabled American banks to finance a growing share of world trade.

    Dungroanin ,

    So the denouement :

    It appears that the 'first world war' was designed to diminish European banks and boost the US banks.

    However the fuller history of the US bankers is worth knowing- the Jekyll Islanders story is widely publicised.

    Into this time track enters the Balfour Declaration addressed to Lord Rothschild, steered by Milner (heir to Rhodes empire building and the old EIC), approved by the potus Wilson (another hireling) that finally sent US troops to overwhelm the Germans, while the great gamers took out the Romanovs and the Ottoman Empire.
    -- --

    When we try to understand such facts and timelines and are attacked as Judaeo-phobes, because we identify Bankers and Robber Barons, it becomes even clearer how deep and wide they have controlled history and it has NOTHING to do with RELIGION (except perhaps Ludism). Nothing to do with Judaism (except perhaps Old Jewry in the City, but Lombard Street was most powerful!) and EVERYTHING to do with POWER and it's representation MONEY. The obscuring of that through various Economic theories including Marxism is the work of the same old bastards who are responsible for all our current malaises.

    Thankyou and good evening, if anyone made it this far!

    😉

    George Mc ,

    Well OK Dunnie, let's say I go along with you and assume that all the shit we are facing has nothing to do with religion or all that "Marxian porridge" (as Guido Giacomo Preparata called it). The question is: What do we do about it?

    Speaking of GGP , it seems to me that you and him have much in common. He also goes on about "Power" but seems to be on the verge of referring this "Power" to mystical entities in a disconcertingly Ickean manoeuvre. Not that I'm attibuting such a thing to yourself. (No irony intended.)

    Dungroanin ,

    George – i don't want you or anyone to just go along with me.

    I want everyone to make their minds up on FACTS. That is the only way humanity has actually progressed by inventing the only self correcting philosophical system and method of the ages that goes beyond 'personal responsibility teligions' – SCIENTIFIC METHOD – that takes away arbitrary power to rule, from these that inhabit the top of the human pyramid by virtue of being born there and having control over the money and so the power to remain in these positions, which does not benefit the totality of humanity or all life on Earth.

    I am not a messiah, I am angry as fuck and I am not going to sit around enjoying whatever soma has been handed to us to keep compliant and leave this Planet worse than I found it. That is the scientific conclusion I have reached.

    I suppose some proto buddhist / zoroastrianism / animalist / Shinto / Jain & Quakers seek religious truth in inner experience, and place great reliance on conscience as the basis of morality.

    I suppose Ghandi's non-violence rebellion against Imperialists is a model as are various peasants revolts – the Russian / Chinese / Korean / Vietnamese couldn't have survived without the literal grassroots!
    ..

    As for Guido Giacomo Preparata that you have introduced to me – i had nevet heard of him before this morning – my first take on him is that he seems to have arrived at similar conclusions by similar methodology. He seems to have a lot of formal education and a enviable career so far – i'll have to look into him further but the interview that i just read seems to indicate concurrence with what i said above. I see no Ickean references – please give a link.

    -- -

    As a observation do you not find it funny that there is not a single objection to the verity of the facts which I have presented above?

    Good luck George if you are a real seeker of truth. If not insta-karma awaits.

    George Mc ,

    The Preparata statement I was referring to is in this interview:

    https://www.larsschall.com/2012/06/10/the-business-as-usual-behind-the-slaughter/

    The statement itself is this:

    Power is a purely human suggestion. Suggested by whom? That is the question. The NSDAP thus appeared to have been a front for some kind of nebula of Austro-German magi, dark initiates, and troubling literati (Dietrich Eckhart comes to mind), with very plausible extra-Teutonic ramifications of which we know next to nothing. Hitler came to be inducted in a lodge of this network, endowed as he seemed with a supernatural gift of inflaming oratory.

    This is a theme that I am still studying, but from what I gathered, the adepts of the Thule Gesellschaft communed around the belief of being the blood heirs of a breed that seeks redemption / salvation / metempsychosis in some kind of eighth realm away from this earth, which is the shoddy creation of a lesser God -- the archangel of the Hebrews, Jehovah. It all sounds positively insane to post-modern ears, but it should be taken very seriously, I think.

    Admittedly it isn't quite interdimensional reptiles but there is a distinct metaphysical flavour there.

    I wouldn't go along with everything Preparata says but he is a wonderful writer and I have bought almost everything I can find by him. His "biggie" is "Conjuring Hitler". It was Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed that brought GGP to my attention via that book.

    milosevic ,

    images on this website look terrible, with very little colour. the problem seems to be caused by this rule, from the file "OffGstyle.css":

    .content-wrap-spp img {

    filter: sepia(20%) saturate(30%);

    }

    Open ,

    This sepia effect usually works well with Off-Guardian articles, but with these maps in today's article it is definitely terrible. Why have maps if they don't want to show them clearly?
    (any extra steps for the user to see the pictures clearly is not the answer)

    Another area neglected on this website is crediting photos. The majority of images carry no atribution/credit, despite it [crediting photos] is the best ethical practice even for public domain pictures. I wish Admin gets expert advice on this.

    Open ,

    Look at the language used by the americans:

    On feb. 12 [2020], Coalition forces, conducting a patrol near Qamishli, Syria , encountered a checkpoint occupied by pro-Syrian .. forces .

    So, the supremacist unites states' army has found that Syrian forces are occupying Syrian land .. wow wow wow .. according to this logic, Russian forces are occupying Russian land. Iranian forces are occupying Iranian land (how dare they?!). But american forces are not occupying any land, and Israel is not occupying Palestinian and Syrian lands.

    This language needs to be known more widely.

    Open ,

    The americans always use the term 'Coalition forces' when they talk about their illegal presence in Syria. I tried to search online for what countries are in this coalition. I recall I was able to find that in the past, but now, it seems this information is being pushed under wrap.

    What are they afraid of? What are they hiding?

    Joe ,

    Just bring about the end of "Israel" and there'll be peace in the Middle East, and probably in the wider world, too.

    Open ,

    Ending the Israeli project is certainly a step in the right direction to improve global stability. However, alone, it will not bring about peace because the British/Five-Eyes/Washington's doctrine of spreading disorder and chaos permeates (saturates) the planet.

    In fact, current disorders are the results of convergence of Israeli interests with those of Western White Supremacy's* resolve to dominate, erh, eveything.

    * Western White Supremacy can also be called Western White Idiocy and Bigotry.

    Israel manipulates the West's political and military might. The West also uses Israel to spread Chaos and Disorder.

    Antonym ,

    Right, back to the good old peace of the graveyard inspired by Mohamed's male sex riot ideology and plunder legitimization before the Westerners showed up with their superior (arms) tech legitimization for their plunder.
    Before Israel's 1947 creation the world was a bed of roses .

    Open ,

    "srael's 1947 creation"

    Without the natives' consent and without the neighbouring countries approval, Ukranians and Germans, and later South Americans, found home in the Middle East.

    How ligitimate is that?

    Antonym ,

    Without the natives' consent and without the neighbouring countries approval, Moroccans, Somalis, and later Afghans and Syrians, found home in the EU thanks to madame Merkel.

    How ligitimate is that?

    Open ,

    "Moroccans, Somalis, and later Afghans and Syrians .. etc.."

    Do these comments reflect the Zionists' perspective? This is important because they prove that the whole existence of Israel is based on total fabrication and lies.

    Maggie ,

    Did you have to practice at being THAT stupid! Or did they lobotomise you in Langley?
    Somalis, Afghans, Syrians would not have had any cause to leave their homeland had it not been for your employers the CIA/MOSSAD facilitating the raping and pillaging of their homes by the Oil Magnates, leaving them starving and desolate.
    https://www.hiiraan.com/op2/2007/may/somalia_the_other_hidden_war_for_oil.aspx
    and where does our Aid money go?

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/5OInaYenHkU?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
    But of course Antonym, if you were in their situation, you would just stick it out?
    Shame on you .

    To those who care, read "The confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins" to understand how this corrupt system is conducted.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Its 'creation' in blood, murder, rape and terror, in a great ethnic cleansing-the sign of things to come, ceaselessly, for seventy years and ongoing.

    paul ,

    Ask the people in Gaza about the Zionist "peace of the graveyard."

    Antonym ,

    Gaza before 2005 was relatively peaceful + prosperous. After the Israeli withdrawal the inhabitants messed up their own economy but kept on making lots of babies just like before.
    Quite the opposite of a graveyard or a Warsaw ghetto or a Dachau.

    George Mc ,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza

    Despite the disengagement, the United Nations, international human rights organisations and most legal scholars regard the Gaza Strip to still be under military occupation by Israel, though this is disputed by Israel and other legal scholars. Following the withdrawal, Israel has continued to maintain direct external control over Gaza and indirect control over life within Gaza: it controls Gaza's air and maritime space, and six of Gaza's seven land crossings, it maintains a no-go buffer zone within the territory, and controls the Palestinian population registry, and Gaza remains dependent on Israel for its water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities.

    Interesting definition of "withdrawal". It's amazing those Gazans even managed to have babies!

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    You would have made a grand Nazi, Antsie-cripes, you have!

    paul ,

    Gaza was, and is, a huge Zionist concentration camp hermetically sealed off from the outside world and blockaded just like the Warsaw Ghetto. With Zionist thugs and kiddie killers shooting hundreds of kids in the head for the fun of it with British sniper rifles and dum dum bullets, and periodically dropping 20,000 tons of bombs at a time on it, a higher explosive yield than Hiroshima. With parties of Jews going along to hold barbecues and picnics to watch all the fun. Nice people, those chosen folk.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    I rather think that Epstein, Weinstein, Moonves and all those orthodox and ultra-orthodox who are such prolific patrons of the sex industry in Israel, know a bit about 'male sex riot ideology', Antsie.

    Dungroanin ,

    Pathetic.
    'Nandy won a major boost when members of the Labour affiliate Jewish Labour Movement gave her their backing after a hustings, saying she understood the need to change the party's culture.'
    From the Groaniad

    How many members? How many by denomination?

    As for the Balfour Contract there were actual English Jewish establishment figures against its premise. Actual imperial servants. The declaration was a stitch up by the new banking powers in the US which then sent in the yanks to stop the Germans in 1917.

    History is rewritten daily to memory hole such facts.

    Capricornia Man ,

    The 'Jewish Labour Movement' is so Jewish that most of its members are not Jewish. And it is so Labour-affiliated that it did not support Labour in the December general election. But it has no shortage of money. It exists solely to prosecute the interests of a foreign power. Much the same could be said for any politician who accepts its endorsement.

    Rhys Jaggar ,

    Given that Jews are vastly outnumbered by non Jews, the simplest way to stop Jewish manipulation of politics is to form a party from which Jews are specifically banned.

    You will not propose any policies harming Jews in any way, you will just make it clear that this is a party free from any Jewish influence in its constitution.

    If Jews cannot accept that, then they are utterly racist and must be dealt with without sensibility.

    Maggie ,

    A better solution Rhys would be to form a party that denies all and any dual citizens
    That way all the Zionists would be barred.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Full public financing of political parties would end Zionist control.

    paul ,

    Thornberry has just thrown in the towel.
    She will now have more time to "get down on her hands and knees" and "beg forgiveness" from the Board of Deputies.
    Those good little Shabbos are so easily trained.

    Dungroanin ,

    BoD's??? Another random organisation!

    Who are they? Who do they represent? How many people? Which people? How did they get elected? How can they be fired?

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    The next world war has already started, with the bio-warfare atttack on China aka Covid19.

    lundiel ,

    Why no comment on the government reshuffle? I don't agree with the Indian middle-class uplifting but totally agree with neutering the ultra-conservative treasury.

    Maggie ,

    I think it's a case of who gives a fck. We now know that our elections are rigged, and so there is no point in us being involved. My family and I all realised and voted for the last time.
    They are all bloody crap actors reading their scripts and playing their parts, whilst the never changing suits in the background pull the strings.
    I had to explain to my 10 year old Grandson how politics work, and he said "Why doesn't anyone know the names of, or see the suits?"
    What I want to know is why no-one ever asks this question or demands an answer?

    tonyopmoc ,

    Completely Brilliant Article, but it is Valentines Day, so as I am 66 years old, and in love with my wife (nearly 40 years together = LOVE), I wrote this in response to Craig Murray, who has banned me again.

    It may be off topic for him, but it ain't off topic for me. I am still in Love.

    "Churchill's mental deterioration from syphilis – which the Eton and Oxford ."

    Never had it, and she didn't either. We were young and in love, but we didn't know, if either of us had sex before, but I had a spotty dick, and went to the VD clinic. I had a blood test, and they gave me some zinc cream.

    She also had the same thing, and showed her Mum.

    We were both completely innocent, and had a sexually transmitted disease called Thrush. It is relatively harmless, but can also give you a sore throat.

    We both laughed at each other, and nearly got married.

    Natural Yoghurt, is completely brilliant at preventing it.

    Far better than Canestan.

    Happy Valentines Day, for Everyone still In Love.

    Let us all look forwad to a Brighter Day for our Grandchildren.

    Tony

    Loverat ,

    Hey Tony

    Dont worry. Craig Murray might not like you but I do. Your stories, here and elsewhere have entertained me for many years.

    Mind you, if I were your other half I would have chucked you years ago.

    paul ,

    Tell him how much you like haggis and tossing your caber.

    Dungroanin ,

    Without Stalins say so Poland would not have had its borders at the end of ww2.
    Also,
    On these maps just off the right hand edges is missing Afghanistan.. which the imperialists invaded in 2002 as the Taliban wiped out the opium crops. Back to full production immediately after invasion and 18 years later secret negotiations to hand over to Taliban while leaving 8,000 CUA troops delivering the huge cash crop.

    binra ,

    Seeking possession and control – in competition with those you see as seeking to dispossess and control or deny you – is the identity or belief in 'kill or be killed'.
    This belief overrides and subordinates others – such as to subsume all else to such private agenda that will seek alliance against common threat but only as a shifting strategy of possession and control.

    One of the things about this 'game' of power struggle, is that it loses any sense of WHY – and so it is a driven mind or dictate of power or possession for it own sake that cannot really ENJOY or HAVE and share what it Has. The image of the hungry ghost comes to mind here. It will never have enough until you are dead – and even then will offer you torment beyond the grave.

    Until this mindset is recognised and released as an 'insanity' it operates as accepted currency of exchange, and maps our a world of its own conflicting and conflicted meanings.

    The willingness to destroy or kill, deny or undermine and invalidate others in order to GET for a private agenda set over the whole instead of finding balance within the whole – is destructive to life, no matter how ingenious the thinking that frames it to seem to be progressive, protective, or in fact powerful.
    But in our collective alignment and allegiance with such a way of thinking and identifying – we all give power to the destructive – as if to protect the life that it gives us.

    The hungry ghost is also in the mass population when separated from their land and lives to seek connection or meaning in proffered 'products and services' instead of creating out of our own lives. Products and services that operate a hidden agenda of possession and control or market and mind capture under threat of fear of pain of loss in losing even the little that we have.

    Having – on a spiritual level is our being – and not a matter of stuffing a hole.
    Madness that can no longer mask as anything else is all about – and brings a choice to conscious awareness as to whether to persist in it or decide to find another way of seeing and being.

    This is not to say there is no place to call upon or seek to limit people in positions of trust from serving an unjust outcome by calling for transparency and accountability – but not to wait on that or make that the be all and end all.

    If there is another way and a better way than war masking in and misusing and thus corrupting anything and everything, then it has to be lived one to another.

    Everyone seeks a better experience – but many seek it in a negative framing. Negative in the sense of self-lack seeking power in the terms of its current identity. Evils work their own destruction, but find sustainability in selling destructive agenda or toxic debt as ingeniously complex instruments of deceit – by which the targeted buyer believes they have or shall save their 'self' or add to their 'self' rather than growing hollow to a driven mindset of reactive fear-addiction.

    I don't need to 'tell this to those who refuse to listen' – but I share it with any moment of a willingness to listen. In the final analysis, we are the ones who live the result of choices in our lives, whatever the times and conditions.

    The 'repackaging' of reality to self-deceit, is not new but part of the human mind and experience throughout history. The evil changes forms – as if the good has and shall triumph. But truth undoes illusion by being accepted. It doesn't war on illusion and thus make it real – and remain truth.

    Judgement divides to rule.
    Discernment arises from the unwillingness to division.
    One is set apart from and over life as the invocation of an alien will, dealing death, and the other as the will of true desire revealed.

    The idea of independent autonomy is relative to a limited sphere of responsibilities in the world.
    The idea of living our own life is an alignment within the same for others and the freedom to do so cannot take from others without becoming possessed by our denials, debts and transgressions – no less so in the driven mind of ingeniously repackaged and wilfully defended narrative identity.

    In our own experience, this is not a matter of applied analysis, so much as awareness or space in which to seek and find truth in some willingness of recognition and acceptance or choice, while the triggering or baiting to madness is loud or compelling as the dictate of fear seeking protection and grievance seeking retribution – as if these give freedom and power rather than locking into a fear-framed limitation as substitution for life set in defiance and refusal to look on or share in truth – and so to such a one, war is truth, and love is weakness to exploit, use and weaponise for getting.

    paul ,

    If you look at the proposed new map of the Middle East, it mirrors Kushner's Deal Of The Century for Palestine – because it has the same Zionist authorship.
    The same old dirty Zionist games of divide and rule – break up countries in the region into tiny defenceless little statelets setting different ethnic and religious groups at each others' throats, so that they can rule the roost and steal whatever they wish.
    You see this in the past and the recent past. The way Lebanon was torn away from Syria. Or Kuwait from Iraq. Or the Ruritanian petty Gulf dictatorships like Bahrain, Qatar, Dubai.
    Trump was being honest for the first time in his miserable life when he said none of these satellites and satraps would last a fortnight if they were not propped up by the US.

    paul ,

    George Galloway described the whole region as a flock of sheep surrounded by ravenous wolves.

    At the same time, there is more than a grain of truth in the Zionists' contention that the people of the region are to some extent the authors of their own misfortune.

    They always fall for the divide-and-rule games of outside powers, Britain, America, Israel, who invade, bomb, slaughter, humiliate and exploit them. If they had been united, Israel would not have been created. Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, would not have been destroyed and bombed back to the Stone Age. These countries would be genuinely independent and at peace.

    When I speak to ordinary moslems, it is surprising and depressing to see how much visceral hatred they express for Shia moslems. They seem blind to the way they are being manipulated to serve outside interests.

    So we see moslem Saudi Arabia trying to incite America and Israel to destroy Iran, and offering to pay for the whole cost of the war. Or S. Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, UAE et al, in bed with Israel, paying billions to bankroll the terrorist head choppers in Syria. Or Egypt, which does not even protest, let alone lift a finger, when Israeli aircraft use its air space to carpet bomb Gaza. Or going further back in history, when countries like Egypt and Syria sent troops to join the 1991 US invasion of Iraq. Even though Iraq had sent its forces to the Golan Heights in 1973 to fight and die to prevent Syria being overrun by Israel. How contemptible is all that? Yet those are just a few of many examples of all the backstabbing that has occurred over the years. If these people don't respect themselves, why should anybody else?

    paul ,

    And this has been going on for hundreds of years.
    1096 marked the beginning of The Crusades, a disaster for the region on a par with the creation of Israel.
    At that time, London was a little village of 25,000. Baghdad and Alexandria and Cordoba were sophisticated modern cities with populations of hundreds of thousands. They dismissed the Crusaders as mere bandits who would do some looting, steal some cattle, and go home. But 3 years later Jerusalem had been conquered and its inhabitants slaughtered, the start of a 200 year disaster for the region. How? Why?
    Because the Arabs were so busy fighting a civil war at the time they barely noticed the foreign invaders. The old, old story. Civil war between Sunnis and Shias.

    One day, they will wake up and realise that they have to hang together, or hang separately.
    But I wouldn't hold your breath.
    There seems to be an endless supply of quisling stooge dictators ready to do the bidding of hostile outside powers. The Mubaraks, the Sisis, the King Abdullahs, the Sinioras, the MBS's, to name but a few.
    Conforming to all the worst stereotypes about Arabs and moslems.
    You could argue that they deserve all they get, when they are ever ready to bend over and drop their trousers.
    Is it really any surprise that they have been invaded, slaughtered, bombed back to the Stone Age, robbed, exploited and humiliated from time immemorial.
    Maybe one day they will discover an ounce of dignity and self respect. Who knows?

    Maggie ,

    "1096 marked the beginning of The Crusades, a disaster for the region on a par with the creation of Israel.
    At that time, London was a little village of 25,000. Baghdad and Alexandria and Cordoba were sophisticated modern cities with populations of hundreds of thousands. They dismissed the Crusaders as mere bandits who would do some looting, steal some cattle, and go home. But 3 years later Jerusalem had been conquered and its inhabitants slaughtered, the start of a 200 year disaster for the region. How? Why?"
    Because despite the mendacious lies that are told about Muslims, they are tolerant and forgiving. They believe in one God, and live exemplary modest, generous lives in the belief that they will enter in to the kingdom of heaven.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/_2LEgowbzSc?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGz6nrWTsEI

    And these are the people we are being encouraged to hate and fear? To enable the neo cons to invade and destroy everything in their path to get their oil.

    Hundreds of millions of Muslims the world over 'live in democracies' of some shape or form, from Indonesia to Malaysia to Pakistan to Lebanon to Tunisia to Turkey. Tens of millions of Muslims' live in -- and participate in' -- Western democratic societies. The country that is on course to have the biggest Muslim population in the world in the next couple of decades is India, which also happens to be the world's biggest democracy. Yet a persistent pernicious narrative exists, particularly in the West, that Islam and democracy are incompatible. Islam is often associated with dictatorship, totalitarianism, and a lack of freedom, and many "well paid" analysts and pundits claim that Muslims are philosophically opposed to the idea of democracy .

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    'Democracy' as practised in the neo-liberal capitalist West, is a nullity, a fiction, a smoke-screen behind which the one and only power, that of the rich owners of the economy, acts alone.

    Gall ,

    I know. These Zionist morons droning on about how violent Islam is as religion yet ignoring the fact that the Bible is based on the God of Abraham granting them Canaan (like Trump giving the Israelis the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank) and urging them to commit complete and utter genocidal annihilation of the inhabitants by not leaving a single living thing breathing.

    No violence there folks. Nope. The book of love my ass!

    paul ,

    Their God was a demented estate agent, rather like Trump or Kushner.

    Gall ,

    Personally I believe that the chapters of the bible were written after their genocidal blood lust simply to justify their despicable acts. Claiming that God made 'em do it.

    Loverat ,

    My experience of muslims in the UK is many express support for the Palestinians but don't identify or understand those states which still speak up for their rights, Syria, Iran and a few others.

    Sadly like the general UK population they have been exposed to propaganda which excuses evil and mass murder carried out by Saudi Arabia and their lackeys and Israel. This is changing however. People are gradually waking up. Muslims and the general UK public if they really knew the extent of this would be out demonstrating on the streets.

    The realisation these policies have exposed all of us to nuclear wipe out in seconds should be enough motivation for any normal person.
    The wipe out or (preferably) demonstrations will happen. Just a question of when. You can see why the establishment and people like Higgins, Lucas and York are so active recently. These idiots, blinded by their pay checks can't see the harm they are causing through their irresponsible lies even to their own families. Perhaps they all have nuclear shelters in their back garden.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Saudi Arabia is NOT 'Moslem'. It is Wahhabist, a genocide cult created by doenmeh, ie crypto-Jewish followers of the failed 17th century Messiah, Sabbatai Zevi, which is homicidally opposed to all Moslems but fellow Wahhabists.

    milosevic ,

    I thought it was created by the British Empire, in order to provide reliable stooges and puppet regimes.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    What people must realise is that,for the Zionassty secular and Talmudic religious leaderships, by far the dominant forces in Israel and among many of the Diaspora sayanim, the drive to create 'Eretz Yisrael', '..from the Nile to the Euphrates' (and some include the Arabian Peninsula as well), is a real, religious, ambition-indeed an obligation. With the alliance with the 'Christian Zionist' lunatics in the USA, the fate of humanity is in the hands of the Evil Brain Dead.

    BigB ,

    I despair. This is why there is 'No Deal For Nature' because the hegemonic cultural movement is to extend cultural hegemony over nature. We cannot seem to help it or stop ourselves. Do we suppose a glossy website will change that? Or empty sloganneering subvertisements? Or waiving placards outside banks? Or some other futile conscience salving symbolic gesture?

    No, we have to subvert the cultural hegemony over nature at every point at every chance. Which is thankless because cultural normativity is ubiquitous. And it's killing us. And BRI is the very antithesis of alternative an eternal return into the cultural consumerism and commodification that is the global hegemony at least at an elite level. And we are among that elite – in terms of consumption and pollution. We are the problem. If we seek to extend or preserve our own Eurocentric priviliges and consumptions we can only do so by extracting evermore global resources and maldeveloping the Rest. Which is also what Samir Amin said: following Wallerstein's World Systems Theory.

    The progressive packaging of all our sins and transferring them to something called 'American Imperialism' is nothing less than mass psychological transference to a Fetish. By which we maintain autonomy from any blame in the ecological disaster we are co-creating. Which is why it is a powerful cultural narrative constructivism. 'We' do not have to reform: the scapegoated Otherised 'they' do. Whilst we all sit smugly in our inauthentic imaginary autonomy: the ecological destruction caused entirely by our collectivist consumption carries on. 'They' have to clean up 'their' act – not us. 'We' align with the 'counter-hegemonic alliance': the alternative BRI. 'We' are so bourgeois and progressive in our invented independence and totally aligned with the destructive forces of capitalist endocolonised culture because of our own internalised screening discourse. Which is why there is #NoDealForNature. 'We' don't actually give a flying fuck not beyond some hollow totemic gestures in transference of our own responsibility.

    'We' are pushing for the financialisation of nature: as the teleology of our particular complicit cultural narratives. It's not just 'them'. Supply and demand are dialectically exponential. Who is demanding less, more fairly distributed North to South? Exponential expansionism via BRI is no more alternative than colonising the Moon or Mars. For nature to have a deal: we have to stop demanding growth. And in doing that: become self-responsible right through to the narratives we produce. For which every person in the global consumer bourgeoisie – that's us – will have to change their imperatives from culture to nature. Which means a new naturalised culture: not just complicitly advocating the 'same old, same old' exponential expansionism of the extractivist commodification of every last standing resource. Under the guise of new narrative constructions like this. That's not progress: it's capitalist propaganda and personal self-propaganda. We are among the consumer elite. Which is driving the financialisation and commodification of everything. For us.

    #NoDealForNature until we take full and honest self-responsibility to create one with our every enaction including speech-enactivism.

    Gall ,

    I'm sure Thomas Robert Malthus and Charles Darwin are smiling upon you my child from their very special place in hell.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Charles Darwin? What on Earth are you on about?

    Gall ,

    Ever heard of social Darwinism? This is how the elite justify genocide and theft of resources. It is one of the basics of Neoliberalism.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Darwin had NOTHING to do with 'social Darwinism'. It's like blaming Jesus for the KKK.

    Gall ,

    Uh huh:

    "With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

    The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage."
    ― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man

    BigB ,

    Every appraisal from a cultural POV extends the cultural hegemony over nature – with no exceptions. If we do not address the false dichotomy of culture and nature – and invert the privileged status of cultural domination over nature – this never changes. If nothing changes its going to be a very short century the last in the history of culture.

    I'm expressing my own private POV with the intention of at least highlighting the issue of only ever expressing the distorted cultural-centric POV. It would be nice if we could all agree to do something other than waste our privileged status and access to resources for other than meaningless sarcasm. It's not like we'd all benefit from a change in POV and the entailed potential in a change of course that can only happen if we think of nature first, is it? 😉

    Gall ,

    The only thing I don't like about the environmentally "woke" is that many are easily manipulated by the neoliberal elite. Greta is a perfect example.

    That is they go after the little guy while the Military and big industry continue to pollute unhampered.

    George Mc ,

    I despair.

    Well that's what you do.

    Dungroanin ,

    The M5 highway is secured. Allepo access points too and Idlib is surrounded- where are the US backed /Saudi paid / Tukish passport holding Uighars and various Turkmen proxy jihadist anti Chinese / anti Russian, Central asian caliphate establishing mercenaries supposed to go now??

    Pompeo is buzzing around Africa now like a blue bottomed cadaverous fly, non-stop buzzing from piles of shot, trying to find them homes – no Libya doesn't want anymore of them, nor the UAE and Saudis, or Turks maybe dump them in Canada with all these ex Ukrainian still nazis? Its a big country nobody will know!
    Or bring them to the US and give them a ticker tape parade?

    Or let them surrender and have them testify as to how the fuck they let themselves be bought for $$$$ maybe just fry them with the low yield nuke and blame Assad for it!

    Dumbass yanks, fukus, 5+1 eyed gollum and Nutty- 'it's the Belgian airforce bombing Russian weapons in Syria' -yahoo!

    Up-Pompeos farce and buzzing is about to sizzle in the blue light of death for dumbfuck poison spreading flies.

    normal wisdom ,

    so much disrespect here hare here.

    these takfiri these giants these beards are hero

    of the oded yinon plan

    they raped murdered and stole
    dustified atomised the syriana so
    is rael can become real

    the red heffers have been cloned the temple will grow

    the semites must leave for norway,sweden wales scotland and detroit
    already

    the khazar ashkanazim need the land returned to it's true owners from the turkic russio steppe

    tonight back to back i watch reality
    fiddler on the roof and exodus and schindlers lists.
    i watch bbc simon scharmas new rabbi revised history of mighty israel.
    every day it grows massive every day hezbollah become weak husk

    shirley you can sea more that

    my life already

    Francis Lee ,

    Very interesting and informative article. Lenin's 5 conditions of the imperialism of his time have been matched by similar conditions in our own time, as listed by the Egyptian Marxist, Samir Amin. These conditions being as follows.

    1. Control of technology.

    2. Access to natural resources.

    3. Finance.

    4. Global media.

    5. The means of mass destruction.

    Only by overturning these monopolies can real progress be made. Easily said. But a life and death struggle for humanity.

    The collapse of the Soviet Union opened up the space for increased penetration of Europe to the East by the US and its West European allies in NATO. At that time the subaltern US powers in Europe were the UK and West Germany, as it then was. There was a semblance of sovereignty in France under De Gaulle, but this has since disappeared. Europe as a whole is now occupied and controlled by the US which has used EU/NATO bloc to push right up to the Russian border. Most, if not all, the non-sovereign quasi states, in Europe, particularly Eastern Europe, are Quisling-Petainist puppet regimes regardless of whether they are inside our outside of the EU. (I say 'states' but of course if a country is not sovereign it cannot be a 'state' in the full meaning of the word).

    A political, social and economic crisis in Europe seems to be taking taking shape. Perhaps the key problem, particularly Eastern Europe, has been depopulation. There is not one European state in which fertility (replacement) rates has reached 2.1 children. Western European imperial states have to large degree been able to counter-act this tendency by immigration from their former colonies, particularly the UK and France. But this has not been possible in states such as Sweden and Germany where the migration of non-christian guest workers from Turkey to Germany and Islamic refugees
    from the middle-east hot-spots have had a free passage to Sweden. This has become a serious social and economic problem; a problem resulting from a neoliberal open borders policy. The fact of the matter is that radically different cultures will tend to clash. Thank you Mr Soros.

    British immigration policy was successful in so far as immigrants from the Caribbean were English speakers, they were also protestant Christians, and the culture was not very different from the UK. Later immigration from the Indian sub-continent and Indian settled East Africa were generally professional and middle-class business people. Again English speakers. Assimilation of these newcomers was not unduly difficult.

    However it wouldn't be exaggerating to say that Eastern Europe is facing a demographic disaster. This particular zone is literally bleeding people. Ukraine for example has lost 10 million people since 1990. Every month it is estimated that 100,000 Ukrainians leave the country, usually for good. In terms of migration – no-one wants to go to Eastern Europe, but everyone wants to leave, asap. This process is complemented by low birth rates, and high death rates. These are un-developing states in an un-developing world. But now we have new kids on the bloc. A counter-hegemonic alliance. No guesses who.

    BigB ,

    Rubbish. There is no 'counter-hegemonic alliance' to humanities rapacious demand for fossil fuels and ecological resources. Where are the material consumption resources for BRI coming from – the Moon, Mars? Passing asteroids? Or from the Earth?

    When its gone: its gone. Russia and China provide absolutely no alternative to this. China's consumption alone is driving us over the brink. To which the real alternative is a complicit silence. As we all align with culture-centric capitalist views: there is no naturalistic 'counter-hegemonic alliance'. Just some hunters in the Amazon we are having shot right now so we can have the privilige of extending cultural hegemony over nature.

    When it's gone: it's gone. And so will we be too. Probably as we are still praising the wonders of the 'counter-hegemonic alliance' that killed us.

    Gall ,

    Actually there is a naturalistic alliance forming but it seems you haven't been paying attention because you seem stuck in some Malthusian mind set. In order to defeat capitalism you have to defeat Globalism so you first have to eliminate the Anglo-American Hegemony and get back to a multipolar world.

    Ranting on about like Gretchen doesn't do any good.

    BigB ,

    Resources are finite and thermodynamics exist. These are the ineliminable, indisputable, and rock solid epistemology of the Earth System. Everything else is metaphysics – literally 'beyond nature; beyond physics'. Or, as it is more commonly known – economics. The imaginary epistemology of political economics and political theory. 'Theory' is the non-scientific sense of unfounded opinion and non-sense. A philosophical truth-theory that is not and cannot ever be true. Hypothetical non-sense.

    I get my information from a wide range of sources that realise these foundational predicates. That is: a foundational set of beliefs that require no underpinning. I can only paraphrase Eddington on thermodynamics: "if your theory is found to be against the second law I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation."

    Which is to say all modern political theory and economics – and by extension all opinions based on its internalisation – is the product of vivid and unfounded imagination. To which a naturalised epistemology is the only remedy.

    There are lots of people working on the problem: but not in the political sphere. Which is why we are stuck in a hallucinated metaphysical political-economic theatre of the absurd and absolutised cultural non-sense. Which is not beyond anyone to rectify: if and when we accept the limitations of the physical-material Earth System. And apply them to our thinking.

    #NoDealForNature until we accept that the thermodynamics of depletion naturally limit growth. Anything anyone says to the contrary should be treated with scepticism and cause a collapse into deepest humiliation of any rational thinker.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    'Depopulation' is only a problem if you believe in the capitalist cancer cult of infinite growth on a finite planet, ie black magic. If you value Life on Earth, and its continuance, human depopulation is necessary. Best done slowly and humanely, by redistributing the wealth stolen by the capitalist parasites. The process seen in the Baltics and Ukraine is the capitalist way, cruel and inhumane. Even worse is planned for the Africans, south Asians and Chinese etc.

    Gall ,

    They don't for a minute believe in "infinite growth". They believe in the "bottom line","instant gratification" and "primitive accumulation". "Infinite growth" is a sales pitch that they use to sell the unwary on their rapaciousness. That is all. If they actually believed in "infinite growth" they've be investing in renewable resources not fracking, strip mining and other environmentally unfriendly practices.

    Gall ,

    The problem for Imperialists is that they only know how to plunder, rape and destroy thus all their weaponry and tactics is used for aggression they know nothing about actual defense which is their weak point. General George C Custer found this out some time back and so did Trump just recently when the American were assaulted by a barrage of missiles they couldn't stop.

    Iran, Russia and China have one of the most advanced arsenal of defensive weapons ever developed such as the S- series of air defense system that can turn a Tomahawk attack into a turkey shoot. What was it? I think it was 100 Tomahawks fired on Syria after that false flag chemical attack and only 15 or so got through and this was the earlier version of the S missile defense S-300. They've already developed 500 which practically makes them impervious and is a true iron dome compared the iron sieve that the Israelis got for free during GW1 and then repackaged and sold back to the US Military for 15B with very few improvements except maybe for a pretty blue bow.

    Not only that but they can return fire with hypersonic weapons that are unstoppable and can turn a base or Aircraft Carrier into a floating pinnate.

    lundiel ,

    Very well presented. Excellent article.

    Gall ,

    Actually the US proudly waving the banner of the East India Company is following in the footsteps of the deceased British Empire into the boneyard of empires which is Afghanistan. Iraq, Syria and Ukraine are just side shows. America can not escape history no matter what it does now since its days of empire are now numbered. Just as they were for the late unlamented Soviet Union.

    The "New American Century" is ending preemptively early like Hitler's "Thousand Year Reich" and we can all breath a sigh of relief when it does.

    Frank ,

    The only thing that will get the bastard yanks out of the middle east is dead Americans.

    Lots and lots of dead Americans.

    Enough dead Americans to make the braindead jingoistic American masses notice.

    Enough dead Americans to touch every family that produces grunts that serve their criminal state by raping and pillaging foreign countries.

    Enough dead Americans to make dumbfuck Americans who say, 'Thank you for your service" squirm in literal pain at the words.

    Dungroanin ,

    They got brain damage in their bunkers in the best US base in the ME from just a handful of Kinetic energy missiles.

    Their low yield nuke is their response.

    The Israelis keep prodding the Bear – they even targeted a Russian Pantir system in Syria!

    I suppose only a downing or infact destroying on the ground of a squadron of useless F35's with a threat to escalate into a full blown mobilisation is ever going to stop these imperialist chancers. Or a fully coordinated assassination campaign of the leads and their heirs as they frolic on their superyachts and space stations and secret Tracey islands.

    And they can pay their taxes in full.

    The Third world war is already fought – this really is a world war rather than some Anglo Imperialist bankers playing king of the castle – and they have LOST – the Empire is dead.

    Long live the new Empire – the first not beholden to the bankers.

    wardropper ,

    Even with a new empire, our godless world would soon enough breed another generation of bankers to which we would be beholden.
    That's what the fundamentally dishonest people in any society do.
    Something wrong? Oh, well, we'll form a committee to discuss it, and in future we will look into creating a banking system which will enable us pay ourselves high wages for our invaluable contribution to human evolution.
    It's MORALITY which is lacking today, not more legislation or a new constitution.

    Gall ,

    All one has to do is move off the centralized banking system developed and controlled by the Rothschilds that is totally based on creating finance out of thin air and return to a commodity based currency (not gold!!) that represents actual value like scrip or wampum or barter and the bankers will eventually starve.

    Actually this system is starting to take hold in the US to a small extend to avoid the depredations of the IRS since Tax is based mostly on currency.

    Stop using fiat currency and the problem's solved.

    After WW II the French didn't have a press to press Francs so their standard of exchange became cigarettes and chocolate. It worked quite well until the presses started churning out paper again.

    wardropper ,

    My fear is that without the Rothschilds, some other over-ambitious family would simply step in and fill their shoes. It's the motivation to be greedy and wicked which needs addressing. How that would be done, of course, I have no idea.

    Gall ,

    This is only if you embrace the concept of centralized banking and the "magic" of compound interest. Current "banking" is all smoke and mirrors that favors the parasite who lives on the production of others through what is called "unearned income".

    wardropper ,

    I agree. But how to stop it?

    Gall ,

    Ignore the bastards instead. Just go off the grid.

    wardropper ,

    I can't deny the wisdom in that.

    Dungroanin ,

    The Red Shield ancient silk road trader and slaving company employees are only a family as say the Vatican is a family

    wardropper ,

    I know, but "only a family" with the wealth to buy whole nations
    I find that very unsettling, to say the least.

    Dungroanin ,

    Indeed but there is always hope as the poet saw – THEY are the few, we are many.

    Gall ,

    Actually the Israelis are going a little slower now that isolated reports indicate that those flying turkeys AKA F-35s are getting popped out of the skies of Syria by antiquated Soviet SAMs. Of course there is no mention of this in the Mainstream Press. Just like there wasn't a word of a IDF General and his staff taken out by a shoulder launched RPG fired by Hezbollah in retaliation for attacking their media center in Beirut.

    Antonym ,

    Anybody who believes that the Israeli tail wags the US mil-ind. complex dog is contributing to the Jewish superiority myth.

    Ken ,

    They're not superior, but they do wag the US MIC dog in and ebb-and-flow kind of way. That 9/11 thing was quite the wag. Read Christopher Bollyn and study other aspects of the event if you're not sure of this.

    Antonym ,

    Langley and Riyadh love you; you fell for their ploy. See: Tel Aviv is much worse them.
    The CIA/FBI failure explained.

    The Mossad loves you too: for keeping mum on this Entebbe Mach 2.0 on their familiar New York crap they got huge US support in the ME.
    Makes them look invincible too as a bonus .

    5 dancing guys was all the proof needed – cheapest op in history.

    Ken ,

    "5 dancing guys was all the proof needed – cheapest op in history"

    Oh please, that was such a minor bit of evidence of any Zionist/Israeli involvement, which spanned nearly every facet of the event and its aftermath.

    The list of false flagging Zionist Jews in love with you is too long to list.

    Gall ,

    Oh please. What about the close to 200 Israelis who were arrested that day? Not to mention the helpful warning by Odigo which was only given to citizens of Israel?

    Also one has to act who benefitted? Definitely not the Saudis or the Americans leaving Sharon who was trying to suppress a Palestinian uprising that he arrogantly started.

    Speaking of your friendly five doing a fiddler on the roof on top of an Urban Moving Van that just happened to owned by another Israeli who fled the country. Didn't they say something stupid when arrested like "we are not your problem. It's the Palestinians who are your problem!"?

    A pathetic frame up attempt but a frame none the less. Speaking of frame ups wasn't Fat Katz at SiteIntel (propaganda) who posted some stock footage of Palestinians celebrating which has been proven to be false since the only people who seem to celebrating that day was your friends the Dancing Israelis which doesn't prove their mental superiority at all but their arrogant stupidity,

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    The three, the USA, Saudi Arabia and the USA, are allies in destruction-the Real Axis of Evil. The dominant force, these days, given the control of the USA by Israel First Fifth Columnists, in the MSM, political 'contributions', the financial Moloch etc, is most certainly the Zionassties. Why don't you, like so many other Zionassties, glory in your power, Antsie. Nobody believes your ritual denials.

    Gall ,

    They don't really wag the dog by themselves. They have a lot of help from the Stand with Israel brain dead Christian Zionists who like Israelis consider themselves the chosen ones as well.

    Ken ,

    @Gall Yep! I had a long time friend who went Pentecostal and we drifted apart but still kept in touch. I lost him completely just after telling him that Israelis played a big part in 9/11.

    Gall ,

    Chuck Baldwin and a few other it seems have seen the light and are now questioning their colleagues undying support of Israel. Maybe you could show this article to your friend who seems enthralled by the terrorist snake er I mean state:
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/02/13/emperor-trump/

    Ken ,

    Thanks for that article. Were I ever able to get it in front of my estranged friend, it would make his head explode and kill him. Baldwin does seem to nail it. Chuck for president! I came across this rather intersting piece on 9/11 while at VT for your article.
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/02/10/9-11-the-bottom-line-an-open-letter-to-all-researchers/

    Gall ,

    Yes that pretty much sums up how 9/11 was carried on. Both Heinz Pommer and VT have done some excellent research based on facts not fantasy.

    As far as your friend and many Christian Zionists in general. They seem to live in some alternative universe and dislike being confused by such irrelevant things as facts.

    binra ,

    It is a story that can be told in some detail – but when you say myth do you actually mean fallacy – ie – are you saying that Jewish power doesn't exercise considerable influence – if not control over US social and political and corporate development across of broad spectrum of leverages?

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Yes-all those addresses of Congress, by Bibi, where the Congress critters compete to display the most extreme groveling and adulation, are just the natural expression of reverence and awe at his semi-Divine moral excellence. Denying the undeniable is SOP for Zionassties.

    normal wisdom ,

    what jews?
    i do not see any jews
    just a sea of khazar ashkanazim pirates
    a kaballa talmudick race trick
    a crime syndicate pretending to be semite
    jew is just the cover
    init

    [Feb 16, 2020] On American exceptionalism : America IS exceptional in many ways -- but exceptional does NOT always mean better

    Feb 16, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    jackiebass , February 11, 2020 at 7:40 am

    This isn't something new. The American people have been fed propaganda for decades to make them believe America was exceptional. It was the bed rock of our Imperialism. If you lookout at measures of well being, America was always down on the list in every category. About the only thing we led in was military spending. American exceptionalism was used as a tool to justify our bad behavior all over the planet. Our government is the biggest terror organization on the planet. We have killed or injured millions of people. All in the name of spreading democracy, something we actually don't have.

    eg , February 11, 2020 at 1:21 pm

    America IS exceptional in many ways -- but exceptional does NOT always mean better

    [Feb 16, 2020] Developing Countries Showing America Up

    Feb 11, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    A cynical school of thought holds that one reason America makes borders so unpleasant is to deter US citizens from traveling so as to preserve our sense of exceptionalism in the face of countervailing evidence. For instance, one colleague, a former city planner, came back from a vacation in the south of France and raved about how terrific the roads were. The Gilet Janues would assure him that in rural areas, they were neglected, but my contact's point was that even in affluent parts of the US, you couldn't find ones on a par with the ones he drove on his holiday. And I suspect that even the roads that are impediments to safe, fast driving in the depopulating parts of France are still better than those in Michigan .

    But America is slipping even further. It used to be that it would come up short in infrastructure and social well being indicators compared to most European countries. We now have readers who are looking at what they see in the better parts of the developing world and are finding America coming up short.

    Costa Rica has admittedly long been depicted as the Switzerland of Central America. It has become more and more popular with expats for at least the last 15 years. I visited there briefly on a client project in 1997. While the downtown section of San José looked worn, even there, the people on the street were neatly if modestly dressed. And when you went out to the suburbs, the country looked comfortable to prosperous, and it seemed as if citizens made an effort to keep their neighborhoods well kept, even in non-tourist sections. Oh, and the food was terrific, particularly the fish.

    A more recent sighting from Eureka Springs:

    Just returned from deep southern rural Costa Rica to rural N.W. Arkansas. Peace and quiet almost everywhere I go now. Unless it's my own noise (music) which could not bother another.

    The entire trip was quite the reminder of just how third world we the peeps are nowadays.

    Internet was so much better there. No satellite dishes, except as modifications to them for use as roadside trash receptacles. Still no rural wired net in the U.S.. Cell signals were strong everywhere, yet I never saw people glued to a phone.

    Public trans, brand new buses all up and down the countryside. Even many miles down dirt roads. Fantastic bus stops. No such thing as public transit in rural U.S.

    A lot of people drive efficient 150cc motorcycles. The large bus stops seem intentionally oversized by design to co-serve as a place to pull under during rain. How civilized.

    Grocery stores with real food everywhere. No chain stores best I can tell. Unless in larger cities. And a shockingly smaller amount of trash packaging. I would say for the same amount of weekly grocery consumption I generate at least three if not five times more trash in the U.S. Seemingly every few hundred people, never more than a mile, usually much less, have a store with produce and meats. I'm seven miles from a dollar store, two more miles to actual groceries. About the same population density in both places.

    And then there is health care for all vs give me all you got, we don't give a fk.

    Don't know but would wager their water tests much better across the board as well. Nobody consumes plastic water bottles. Even very remote beaches had little shards of plastic all along the water line though. No escaping it.

    Schools did not look like prison at all. Kids were kids, with cookie stands, a work ethic, bicycles, laughter, no apparent phones, lots of soccer, some dirt on their fingers and toes. And laughter.

    Poor to middle working class people did not look miserable, unhealthy, guarded and or afraid.

    The chickens, dogs and cats were abundant though not overly so, well fed, healthy, roaming free.

    Police were calm, not dressed to kill with body language fitting the peace officer description. CR has no military.

    We have a choice and we are making so many bad ones. I feel like so many of my fellow US citizens don't get this fact. And it's a shortcoming of Sanders types by failing to paint this vision/picture. Even they are trapped in the downward spiral, knowing no other way from experience.

    And Expat2uruguay seems to have adapted well to her big relocation. Ironically her big lament seems to be the cuisine isn't terribly inspired and fish is hard to come by, but other advantages of living there seem to more than make up for it. From a recent report:

    Since relocating to Uruguay I was diagnosed with Stage 2B breast cancer. There was no bill whatsoever for the surgery. The entire cost of my entire treatment, including my monthly membership fee of $60 a month, was under $2,700.

    That total includes 16 months of the monthly fee and all of my treatments, including six months of chemotherapy, 6 weeks of daily radiation, co-pays for medications and tests, $7 co-pays for doctor visits, and additional testing and consultation for heart damage caused by the chemotherapy. I also had a couple of problems during the chemotherapy that required visits to the emergency room, a four day hospital stay because of ultra-low defenses, and consultation in my home a couple times. They did a really good job, and they're very good at cancer treatment here.

    But the very best thing about Uruguay is the peacefulness, the tranquility, the laid-back approach to life. My stress levels are way down from when I lived in the US.

    Several factors are likely at work. One is, as we've pointed out from the very outset of this site, that unequal societies are unhappy and unhealthy societies. Even those at the top pay a longevity cost due to having shallower social networks, having a nagging awareness that most if not all of their supposed friends would dump them if they took a serious income hit (can't mix with the same crowd if you can't fly private class, can't support the right charities, can't throw posh parties) and having to think about or even building panic rooms.

    Another is the precarity even at high but below top 1% levels: job insecurity, the difficulty of getting kids into good colleges and then paying for it when they do, along with attempting to save enough for retirement. Even with steering clear of costly divorces and medical emergencies, the supposed basics of a middle or upper middle income lifestyle add up in light of escalating medical, education, and housing costs. And then some feel they are entitled to or need to give their kids perks in line with their self image of their status, like fancy vacations.

    And we don't need to elaborate on how hard it is for people who are struggling to get by. But it's not hard to see that the status and sometimes money anxiety at the top too readily translates into abuses of those further down the food chain to buck up their faltering sense of power and self worth. Anglo-style capitalism is often mean-spirited and that tendency seems particularly strong now.

    Specifically, which developing countries that readers know well give the US a lifestyle run for the money? And I don't mean for for US expats bearing strong dollars but for ordinary people. And where do they fall short?

    PlutoniumKun , February 11, 2020 at 6:32 am

    Just some observations:

    You need to be cautious sometimes in interpreting how life is in other countries. I've known people who moved to very orderly, prosperous countries like Japan, South Korea, Germany, Austria etc., and loved the first year or so and would rave about it, but would gradually become, if not disenchanted, but a little more aware as they became familiar of negative undercurrents – there always seems to be a price to be paid for having a very law abiding, neat orderly society. Likewise, moving to poorer, but more cheerful countries like Thailand or the Philippines, or perhaps Portugal/Greece also (for those people willing to learn the language and go deeper into the society, there is a downward curve as they discover the downside to the laid back attitudes and constant sunshine.

    There is also the simple advantage of laggards – they can learn from other countries mistakes and skip a generation of technology. I recall foreign visitors to Ireland in the early 1990's raving about how good the phone system was. There was no magic to it – Ireland simply had fallen well behind, but invested in what was then the most up to date proven digital system in the late 1980's, without having to go through the process of an incremental upgrade. You find this in a lot of developing countries – I remember being amazed when travelling in Tibet about 15 years ago that there was near perfect mobile phone signals even in very remote areas. It was simply that it was cheaper for the Chinese to extend mobile masts before land lines, so it made sense to roll out a remote network, when in other more 'advanced' nations your signal died as soon as you hit some hills. Sometimes, economically, there is an advantage to just using old established infrastrure (decades old airports, etc), which function adequately, rather than spending billions on brand new facilities which can only be built with significant opportunity cost.

    Anyway, having said all that, as a regular visitor to the US I've frequently been struck by just how poor the infrastructure can be, even in high tech places like New York. I don't think the trek out to JFK from Manhattan would be considered acceptable in any other major world city. And poor areas of the US do have a sort of shabbiness you don't see even in many countries that are unambiguously much poorer (much of Asia, for example). J.K Galbraith of course explained the reason for all this many decades ago when he wrote about private splendour and public squalor.

    a different chris , February 11, 2020 at 12:05 pm

    >and loved the first year or so and would rave about it, but would gradually become, if not disenchanted, but a little more aware

    There's a rule of thumb for this, you must know as any expat will rattle it off for you:

    1) The first year you love it beyond all words
    2) The second year you hate everything with the heat of a thousand suns.
    3) The third year on, it's just where you live.

    The Rev Kev , February 11, 2020 at 6:43 pm

    After WW2, Australia encouraged British people to emigrate out to here. It was called the Ten Pond Pom scheme as these emigrants would pay ten pounds but if they did not like it could return home while paying their own fares. But they had to be here a minimum of two years in order to get a ticket home free.

    The British picked up a reputation as whingers as they said that this was not how things were done in England or that is not what we believe back home. Come the two year mark, many left to go back to the UK as they thought the place would be just like England but with more sun.

    Funny thing was a very large section of them would after returning home start to remember why they left post-war Britain. Then they would work hard to save up their money to pay the full fare out to Australia for themselves and their families. The numbers were large enough to be a noticeable phenomena.

    jrkrideau , February 13, 2020 at 5:52 pm

    In Canada in the 1979's it was called the ten thousand pound cure -- it cost about 10,000b quid to return to the UK and come back to Canada.

    Yves Smith Post author , February 12, 2020 at 4:47 am

    I very much liked Sydney the two years I lived there. But I didn't succeed in getting permanent residence, so perhaps I had not quite settled psychologically.

    Plus Australia and Canada are American-tolerant and require less adaptation than any other countries.

    vlade , February 12, 2020 at 6:31 am

    Not my experience (and I lived in four different countries on average 10 years each, and spent enough time in a couple of others to know more than a "tourist") – for me, it's always "place where you live" with advantages and disadvantages. Each place I lived in was special in its own way – and had some significant problems (often well hidden from an occasional traveller).

    What I did see and considered interesting is that after the fall of communist regimes quite a few emigrants went home – and about half of those emigrated again within few years.

    thene , February 11, 2020 at 4:42 pm

    The 'advantage of laggards' is fairly well documented in the history of technology and especially of telecoms. If something sort of works where you are, you tend to keep using it, while laggards who never got the last generation of tech might pick up a cheaper-better-faster option that doesn't rely on existing infrastructure.

    Do you remember the transitions from 1G to 2G to 3G cellphones? How that might have affected you depends on where you were based at the time; basically America did terribly with 2G infrastructure and adoption (remember when Americans had to pay for inbound calls??) whereas Europe handled it much better and thus gave birth to the SMS cultural/linguistic explosion, but then America's bad experience with 2G spurred them to embrace 3G.

    Electronic health records are another example the US began adoption a long, long time ago – the most dominant US health records provider (Epic) was founded in the 1970s, and this is part of why the US has the worst electronic health records in the world. I was at a digital health event a few years ago where someone explained to the audience how EHR works in Zambia, and that it was stunningly superior to any American system.

    And people get REALLY confused about this. They assume that because a country is 'developed' or 'hi tech' it must have some kind of first-mover advantage, whereas in many cases existing infrastructure forms a stultifying status quo that impedes further development. It's really hard to get your average American to accept that the countries in Asia that they like to look down upon have much better internet/telecoms and industrial tech than America does. I am forever fascinated to watch this technological leapfrogging happen, and I live in hope that the renewables boom leads to a wave of tech we haven't yet dreamed of emerging in Africa & other places that aren't yet choked by an anticompetitive status quo.

    Michael , February 11, 2020 at 6:56 am

    A big reason I've been living in Europe these last 25 years is because of my experience traveling in Andalucía while living a comfortable life with a well-paying job in Silicon Valley. While not developing world by any common definition, this area is and was relatively poor and unemployment hovered around 20% unemployment and yet somehow people were always out enjoying the evening at bars (not to get drunk, but simply to socialize). Little evidence of homelessness. I lived in Spain for a number of years after/because of that experience. A friend from the US who frequently travels to Spain for work confirms he's never seen such road quality even in the poorest regions. I can attest that, for health care, I never saw a bill. The one time I ventured out of the gov network for a 2nd opinion from a private neurologist, the private expert confirmed the gov't doctor's diagnosis – in fact they knew each other and each respected the other's work.

    Ignacio , February 11, 2020 at 8:37 am

    Just hope you to enjoy it! I can endorse all that you wrote. This is not to say there are of course lot of problems and things badly done. There is in place a push for privatization like elsewhere in the EU. I knew the guy that many years ago was responsible for developing infrastructure foe primary attention in health care in Andalusia and they did a good job.

    PlutoniumKun , February 11, 2020 at 9:33 am

    Perhaps you can confirm this, but a doctor friend who briefly worked in Spain told me that the reason healthcare in Andalucia is so good is that it is in effect subsidised by northern European retirees. German and Dutch systems are happy to pay (lower) Andalucian prices for retired people in the South of Spain, while the local system uses the money to make a better system for everyone. I've never heard any traveller I know say anything bad about southern Spanish health care.

    Ignacio , February 11, 2020 at 10:54 am

    I don't know about this. In the early 80s, with good old days PSOE governing, is when the primary attention was designed and it was done quite well. That is what I can say first hand because I met people involved and heard good critics by outsiders. When you have public servants who are capable and want to do things correctly

    Calvin , February 11, 2020 at 1:20 pm

    When I'm told "I haven't met my deductible or that a procedure isn't covered" I get down on my knees and thank God I'm an American.
    This is what freedom feels like!

    Burns , February 11, 2020 at 7:31 am

    Taiwan. Cost.of living is generally cheap unless you're buying property, which can get pricey. But, rent is generally low, food is very low and mostly healthy (they dont put much sugar in their stuff compared to America), healthcare isn't free for non-citz but still stupid cheap compared to America and top quality, crime is very low (second lowest crime rate in the world after Japan) and you get to experience real Chinese culture instead of PRC propaganda. I could go on but those are the highlights for me. I view it as a truly civilized society, although it no doubt has it's own problems. I encourage everyone i know to visit.

    PlutoniumKun , February 11, 2020 at 9:39 am

    I cycled a little around Taiwan 10 years ago – it is a very well functioning country, very safe and friendly with quite a distinct culture somewhere between China and Japan (lots of Japanese retirees go to Taiwan). Public transport is excellent, the cities have good facilities and there are lovely surf beaches in the south – the mountains are amazing, especially when you have cheap hot spring resorts everywhere.

    The only negative is that probably because of their history many Taiwanese are super sensitive of anything that could be construed as criticism (even jokes). Oh, and that the towns and cities are incredibly ugly, even by most Asian standards. So much was just thrown up during the years of expansion, it will take a generation or two to make things a little better.

    They do have some infrastructure problems though, mainly because of their location right in the path of some of the worst storms the Pacific can throw at any island – entire main roads get completely washed away very regularly.

    thene , February 11, 2020 at 4:45 pm

    It's not the Japanese retirees, it's the history of Japanese colonial occupation.

    Much love to Taiwan. Really hope to spend more time there in the future.

    Lindsay Berge , February 11, 2020 at 7:42 pm

    The National Palace Museum is one of the great cultural treasures of the world and better than the British Museum in my opinion. A must see option for anyone visiting Taipei.

    Stratophile , February 14, 2020 at 3:29 am

    Burns:

    I've been here for 30 years. Your broad strokes are largely correct but leave out a lot of fine detail. One small point is sugar:

    Taiwanese puts TONS of sugar in drinks -- coffee, tea, all the traditional summer drinks, snacks/chips of any kind. When you go to a 500cc place for a drink, they even have a chart so you can choose how much sugar you want -- regular (= high), medium, and low (30% of the normal).

    Coffee or tea at 7-11 and Family Mart is always powdered and includes powdered creamer and sugar.

    As for food, Taiwanese LOVE garlic and leeks and are not averse to throwing in a lot of salt. Not to mention the cooking oil -- lard or vegetable -- that remains on anything that's been stir fried.

    And Taiwanese LOVE deep fried food, traditional as well as MacDonald's.

    As for "real Chinese culture," watch out for that since many Taiwanese do NOT consider themselves Chinese, and many Chinese (PRC) and overseas Chinese look down on Taiwanese as somewhat low class.

    jackiebass , February 11, 2020 at 7:40 am

    This isn't something new. The American people have been fed propaganda for decades to make them believe America was exceptional. It was the bed rock of our Imperialism. If you lookout at measures of well being, America was always down on the list in every category. About the only thing we led in was military spending. American exceptionalism was used as a tool to justify our bad behavior all over the planet. Our government is the biggest terror organization on the planet. We have killed or injured millions of people. All in the name of spreading democracy, something we actually don't have.

    eg , February 11, 2020 at 1:21 pm

    America IS exceptional in many ways -- but exceptional does NOT always mean better

    a different chris , February 11, 2020 at 8:12 am

    >America makes borders so unpleasant is to deter US citizens from traveling

    And if you do escape, and if you do bring back stories of how much better so many things are in said other country, you are lectured to as how the US "protects their freedom" and if it wasn't for the fruits of your labor being mostly directed into trying to get the F35 to work that other country* would certainly have already been completely overrun by Communists! So shutupshutupshutup.

    *which is generally described as "ungrateful".

    Colonel Smithers , February 11, 2020 at 9:44 am

    An American friend and former colleague, now a UK citizen and regulator, amused us with a story of how she was harangued at JFK for no longer living in the US when she began travelling on her UK passport.

    Ignacio , February 11, 2020 at 11:04 am

    A friend of mine, a business man, has always problems at JFK because his surname coincides with that of a Colombian drug dealer. He is always directed to a room and stays there for hours until they let him free (always equals two times to my knowledge).

    Colonel Smithers , February 11, 2020 at 11:33 am

    Thank you, Ignacio.

    My Sevillana BFF, now based in NYC, has the same problem. Apparently her name is the most common for mules.

    thene , February 11, 2020 at 4:51 pm

    Oh gosh, that happened to my spouse once at an airport in the UK – he shares a surname with a Middle Eastern political leader.

    BlueMoose , February 11, 2020 at 4:29 pm

    My wife and I got lectured several years ago coming through Atlanta from Europe to visit family in the states by the homeland Security agent. My wife hadn't renewed her green card and was travelling on her Canadian passport. She has Polish/Canadian citizenship. I had to really bite down hard on my lip during the lecture because I did not want to miss our connecting flight. I told the agent since we were not planning to move back to the US, there was no need to waste so much money on renewing the card. Finally, I asked: are Canadian passport holders still allowed to enter the country? And if so, can we go now?

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 6:02 pm

    The worst border crossings are always upon entering the States. The pointless shouting and general vacuousness of the security – certain indications that you're back among the Free – are comical to a point, until one sees how intimidated the Fins or whoever you flew in with are by this uncivilized chaos. I've apologized more than once on behalf of my country to a nice, non-English speaking non-terrorist being pointlessly harrassed by 'security'.

    Kaleberg , February 11, 2020 at 8:32 pm

    US Customs were always terrible. When I was a kid, we'd go down to the recently named JFK airport and watch the customs lines from the glassed in gallery above. I remember one agent finding some liqueur chocolates and jumping up and down on them. I didn't know adults did stuff like that.

    Bern , February 15, 2020 at 2:04 pm

    Alternate experience mine:
    While in Lebanon and Syria in 2004, bought a kilo of zatar, had it wrapped in multiple layers of plastic to preserve it, stuffed it in luggage and forgot about it. Upon returning to the states, went thru customs in SF. Agent said "what ya got in the bags?" We said "nothin". He said "open up anyway" so I did. When he got to the bottom and found the (forgotten) spice he pulled it out and looked at me, and I laughed, and told him what it was. He said "Yeah, whatever", put it back in the bag and sent us on our way

    Oh , February 11, 2020 at 11:13 am

    I grimace when I hear that we are part of a "free world". Ever since 9/11 there have so many curbs on our freedom and the mass surveillance by the 3 letter agencies and corporations make a mockery of the term.

    oaf , February 11, 2020 at 8:19 am

    Thank you for publishing this delightful article. What a shame that most U.S citizens get their conceptualization of the rest of the world from MSM. A friend lived and worked in various parts of Africa for years; he told me that when he announced plans to return *home*, his African companions asked him "why? its SO DANGEROUS THERE!!!"
    My sister's companion-with family in Israel- describes our local ( in upper Northeast U.S.) hospitals as: like something from a 3rd world country
    There is nothing like immersion to generate understanding and appreciation for other places, people, and lifestyles.

    eg , February 11, 2020 at 1:25 pm

    I had drinks with a US professor from Iowa last week and he expressed how surprised and impressed he was with Canadians' interest in and knowledge of US and world affairs. I gave him a version of Trudeau pere's line -- "when you are the mouse sleeping alongside an elephant, it behooves you to pay attention to every twitch "

    LifelongLib , February 11, 2020 at 1:50 pm

    Many years ago a public radio station here in Hawaii would broadcast a Canadian radio show "As It Happens". I was struck that the host could (say) mention the name of a politician or government official and just assume that the audience knew who they were. Of course I don't know who the target audience in Canada would have been, but very few broadcasts in the U.S. can count on their audience being that well informed

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 4:04 pm

    Other countries have to pay attention to what goes on in the USA, as the saying goes, when the USA sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. I recall being impressed in Jamaica with how knowledgeable some local people were about world events, people were pretty up-to-date about African politics, US politics, etc.

    sporble , February 11, 2020 at 8:46 am

    Berlin, Germany – not exactly developing world. Met a German woman while backpacking in SE Asia in '95, came here in '96, been here ever since, got German citizenship (along with US) in 2017.

    Berlin is a bit like NYC in that each city is special, and neither is a particularly representative sample of what the rest of the country is like. So with that caveat: The stress level here seems much lower than in the US; there's great public transport, perhaps the world's strongest privacy and employee-rights laws and not much fear of violence (from fellow citizens or police). And there is no reason for anyone to lack health insurance: everything is covered, with extremely small out-of-pocket expenses and health care is excellent.

    That said, neoliberalism's ravages can be felt here, too: wages have been stagnant for 20+ yrs and German politicians are obsessed with "das schwarze Null" (literally, "the black zero"; i.e. "being in the black" or "getting out of the red"). Rents have skyrocketed and not nearly enough affordable/govt housing has been built in the past 20+ yrs.

    Among the people I know/deal with, precarity seems basically non-existent, perhaps as a result of everyone knowing that govt welfare/etc. – from which people can live without fear of homelessness, losing their health insurance or going hungry – is available as a last resort, though the housing situation is getting quite precarious.

    All in all, I'm very happy and grateful to be able to live here. As a freelancer, I don't benefit from it, but I still think vacation policy here is fantastic: all employees get at least 4 wks off in total (everyone I know gets at least 5 wks) + each employee is entitled to take a 3-wk-long vacation.

    Misery , February 12, 2020 at 2:32 am

    Unfortunately, there is enough misery in Germany to even have a weekly tv-series about it Armut in Deutschland = Poverty in Germany divided in the all too common categories: Old people poverty, Child poverty, Working poor etc.

    Another thought, when discussing poverty it is really important to consider that the psychology (seeing that you cannot afford anything) and physiology (not affording good food so you get fat from salt, fat, sugar-based food from Lidl) of poverty is relative: you compare yourself with the people that you are surrounded by and purchasing power is relative to the country where you live.

    https://www.zdf.de/doku-wissen/kinderarmut-in-deutschland-126.html

    oliverks , February 11, 2020 at 8:50 am

    I was in a very non touristy part of Jamaica last year. The roads were pretty poor, with sections washed out. I would say the overall quality of roads was lower than the USA. In fact they were so bad, bit of plastic started falling off my rented car.

    However, people were much happier. Just for starters, the rental agency was completely fine with a few bits of plastic that shook loose. No problem!

    The food was fantastic, and inexpensive. The market in the local town just sold meat without any refrigeration. This is Jamaica, it was hot. Yet the market smelled fresh, the meat looked amazing, it was clean. Everything just moves so quickly there seems to be no time for stuff to go off. The veggies were amazing and plentiful.

    The school children seemed to wear uniforms. They hung out together. They socialized and talked and well seemed like children. Engaged and full of life.

    There was a funeral in a building near by us, and they chanted and sung all night until sun up. That meant it was a little loud (as out place didn't have any glass in the windows). It was sometime haunting, sometimes joyful, but people really celebrated the life that had passed.

    The younger people, say less than 30, were all very tall. It seems like nutrition and health must have improved a lot over the last 30-40 years, as the old were much shorter.
    So I wouldn't call it first world by any stretch, but you could do much much worse in many parts of the USA.

    Ignacio , February 11, 2020 at 11:18 am

    I witnessed a funeral in Belize and was similar experience. On the other side of the road some guys having fun playing soccer barefooted. Mosquitoes make Belize the hell if not in the shore where wind keeps them apart.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 3:16 pm

    I spent a lot of time in Jamaica in the late 80s and early 90s. It was life-changing for me in that I was not a particularly happy person at that time, and it was the first time I had spent time in a so-called 3rd world or developing country. I met people in Jamaica who had nothing compared to most Americans, but they were happier than I was. This even though I was on top of the food chain, being a white American male. It made me rethink a lot of stuff. I agree about the food there, I loved it, and the people too.

    There is a dark side to Jamaica however, which you will come upon if you stay there for a longer amount of time. I don't know what part of JA you were in, perhaps a small town or in the countryside? It can be very pleasant in the country, but I spent a lot of time in Kingston, and there is some of the worst poverty in the hemisphere there. Better than Haiti and some other places, but still pretty harsh. Lots of unwed teenage pregnancies (younger teens), with the fathers MIA. A lot of homophobia and macho attitudes. Politics can become violent. There are also some serious environmental issues, and climate change will not be kind to the West Indies.

    oliverks , February 11, 2020 at 5:15 pm

    I was vacationing and stayed in the blue mountains away from Kingston or tourists. I have heard Kingston can be rough, and crime can be a problem in other big cities. The biggest touristy place we spent any time in was Port Antonio, and I never felt unsafe or threatened there. I didn't even see that many tourists there but we were off season.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 7:23 pm

    Port Antonio is very nice, I stayed there for a few days. It's not all built-up like Montego Bay and Negril, etc.

    carl , February 11, 2020 at 8:50 am

    I have a passing familiarity with Colombia of late. Although the minimum wage is low, employers are required to provide such benefits as vacation, sick leave and payments into the pension system. In addition, workers are eligible to visit special holiday facilities for recreation and relaxation. Unlike in my US city, in which public transportation is infrequent and inconvenient, Medellin has an overhead heavy rail system. There is a public healthcare system, which is good at covering basic needs, and a private one which, while less affordable for ordinary people, is of European standards of quality. Although admittedly the country has been wracked by violence in past years and there's still much inequality, people are happy and friendly.
    Note: my Colombian in the family approved this message.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 3:53 pm

    I have a friend (not a wealthy person by any means) who lives in Lima Peru with his Peruvian wife and their young daughter, and he loves it there.

    carl , February 11, 2020 at 6:08 pm

    Peru is an amazing country: beautiful scenery, amazing food, inexpensive, and nice people. I sprained my ankle last year in Lima and deliberately found the most expensive clinic in Lima to treat it. English-speaking doctor, full x-rays, medication and foot bandage put on by the doctor herself. Total: $200 US.
    Pro tip: get your prescription glasses in Arrequipa. There's at least 500 optical stores in the historic center. Super cheap.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 7:25 pm

    I have another friend who relocated to Ecuador along with his girlfriend. He's a retired optometrist and gives away hundreds of reading glasses to the locals, who much appreciate them.

    tegnost , February 11, 2020 at 8:50 am

    Regarding highway infra, in the PNW at least any new improved road gets tolled so that it is actually made for the people who can pay the tolls. I'm certain this makes zero tax amazon happy
    Oh Look!
    https://thetollroads.com/help/faq/469

    two tiered society Interstates limited to self driving delivery/important people in 3 2

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 3:51 pm

    The interstate toll lanes on I-405 are terribly undemocratic. Regular working commuters who can't afford the toll passes are forced into three over-crowded lanes, while in the two left toll lanes the BMW & Lexus drivers zip on by. I'm guessing a bunch of the wealthy tech people east of Lake Washington used their clout to get that accomplished.

    Ford Prefect , February 11, 2020 at 8:58 am

    I spent some time in Costa Rica. Everybody seemed quite happy. The impression that I had was its government actually liked its people and was not afraid of them. The people seemed to return the sentiment.

    There may be a lesson in that for the US.

    carl , February 11, 2020 at 9:58 am

    Costa Rica has the highest level of education and lowest birthrate in Central America; no standing military since 1948. Not a cheap country to live in anymore, compared to the rest of Central and South America, and rampant theft problems (probably because of very light penalties for such), but on the whole, you could do a lot worse.

    Colonel Smithers , February 11, 2020 at 9:42 am

    Mauritius, whence my parents came, is worth considering. The standard of living is good for most people, especially if qualified or with particular manual skills. The average salary is nearing USD12k pa.

    Public services are well funded by the government and free at the point of delivery.

    It's interesting to observe how many migrants who are not francophone and do not specialise in the island's four pillars, financial services, textiles / light manufacturing, tourism and agriculture (including power generation by sugar mills) are now making the island their home, not just for a secondment of some years. I have come across Italian jockeys and tilers, doctors and teachers, IT specialists, hotel managers and other staff from around the world.

    There's a good mix of accommodation. One need not live in a gated community. These were in the main designed to part South Africans and even French from their money, a ploy that appears to be working such is the amount of construction that would not look out of place in the south of France or US sun belt. The island is safe.

    Myjobs.mu lists vacancies.

    The Rev Kev has visited the island and can provide further insight.

    oliverks , February 11, 2020 at 10:46 am

    Myjobs.mu doesn't seem to be working for me. Are you sure that's the correct address

    Oliver

    Colonel Smithers , February 11, 2020 at 11:34 am

    Thank you, Oliver.

    My mistake. It's https://www.myjob.mu/ .

    Colonel Smithers , February 11, 2020 at 12:41 pm

    Thank you, Oliver.

    It's myjob.mu. My mistake earlier.

    The Rev Kev , February 12, 2020 at 2:35 am

    Thank you for the shout out Colonel. I must admit that I visited Mauritius during my salad years some forty years ago so I will try to recreate my impressions from that distant era. After spending several weeks in the waning apartheid days of South Africa, I found Mauritius exotic to say the least. Whereas the cultural boundaries of SA were fairly firm, I found Mauritius to have a kaleidoscope of different cultural elements such as English, French, Indian and Creole and you would never know what part you would encounter next. The parts I saw in my brief time were of great beauty and I remember thinking that it would take months to explore all the different parts there.

    Colonel Smithers , February 12, 2020 at 6:37 am

    Thank you, Kev.

    You should return and compare how things have changed. Also, please visit Rodrigues, the one of the world's least known islands and a delight.

    The island really took off in the 1980s, once the generation that led the island to independence was turfed out in a landslide and the IMF bitter medicine of 1979 had been overcome.

    The island has become more cosmopolitan since. One example is the 10K plus South Africans on the island. Afrikaans is often spoken on the west coast.

    Unfortunately, the environmental decay is also plain for all to see.

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 11:58 am

    Tho easily discernable, I hesitate a bit to name what has become the truest home I've known, as I can recall what Prague was like 20 years ago compared to the mini-Paris it became after tourists got ahold of it (major crime increase, higher costs of living, general succumbing to the european monoculture, as has happened throughout europe).

    In any event, life is better (to my taste) outside NATO-aligned countries & the Schengen zone. Glad that the military jets I hear and see are Russian, as is the base. I was stunned when first arriving to see children happy, safe, walking the streets of their city without a need for adult accompaniment. In fact, the children and elderly people here restore my faith in humanity. When the initial newness wears off after a year or so, it just gets better in terms of comprehending the culture and enjoying the people, along with seeing the problems more clearly. I lived for extended periods in Germany, Portugal, Denmark too, enjoyed each place (far and away higher quality of genuine living than in the US), but indeed there is a certain pretension to false happiness there, no need for that here, as the wheels came off long ago, thus humor, family, friendship and other pillars for endurance are stronger, softer, more genuine.

    On occasion, I've done some teaching here (ain't never been no trust-fund traveler, pshaw!), and students (good Syrians and Iranians in the mix with the sweet locals) are shocked when I answer their questions honestly about how America treats its elderly, how much education costs, gun violence, police brutality, the general state of the family, etc.

    There is a difficulty in getting paid fairly, tho that's largely nothing new comparatively. One must write or edit an article or 2 each month for a company based outside the local economy if one hopes to sustain oneself; I've been fortunate in this regard. An average person here relies on their family; all work together to survive. Conditions can be spartan (tho again, compared to what?), but the things that make one endure and appreciate the substance of life are in no short supply.

    And the food is off the charts – affordable and healthy, as it should be everywhere.

    Literature and traditional music are living currency here, as is respect in general. May it always be so.

    deplorado , February 11, 2020 at 2:47 pm

    Armenia?

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 5:06 pm

    Chishte (correct).

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 3:56 pm

    I'm curious as to your feelings about Portugal, as we have considered it as a place to live. I've had a lot of friends visit, but don't know anyone who has lived there for an extended period.

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 5:49 pm

    My feelings of profound love for Portugal and the Portuguese are of course difficult to summarize, but suffice to say I preferred it to Germany or Denmark, tho it didn't quite suit me as well as Armenia does. The primary ways I relate to a country initially are through its literary and musical traditions, and the Portuguese soul's expressions are deeply beautiful, poetic, and retained.

    I spent two years there, in Sintra and in Porto. Sintra is paradisiacal, Porto a hidden gem becoming increasingly well-known. Drawbacks for me were the same as in all Europe: a political bent toward following their NATO masters/western propaganda/Hollywood, and, on the street level, more crime (tho not too bad) and agressive drug dealers, things you just don't see in Yerevan (and used to not see in Prague). But on the whole, many friends became like family there, it's less expensive than the mainstream hubs of Europe, and the Moorish impact, coupled with modern migration from north Africa, results in a vivacity and a fluid, positive moroseness I'd not experienced before. The microclimates are dynamically diverse and well worth experiencing. Certain flowers and mountain mists never evaporate from the mind.

    Plenty of retirees from wealthier countries set themselves up there quite comfortably, but those people are rarely part of my experience.

    Ignacio , February 12, 2020 at 5:25 am

    Same feelings here! When you compare Portuguese and Spanish the biggest difference you find, apart from language is in politeness.

    hoki haya , February 12, 2020 at 6:16 am

    Having a decent grasp of Spanish, I was surprised it lent itself to a less intuitive grasp of Portuguese than I imagined it would. Both languages are beautiful, with Portuguese being softer in an expressively melodic way.

    And yes, I agree, the politeness, dignity, ease-in-the-body qualities found in people there is, in my experience, second only to the grace that operates as the norm for conduct here in Armenia. Many similarities between the two – the unbreakable importance of the family, the style and role of humor, the rightful place literature and music inhabit in one's soul and disposition, etc. My Portuguese friends felt at home here, as if meeting heretofore unknown cousins for the first time.

    Nothing against Spain, tho – it was my first love and destination. Catalonia. But yes, in general, interactions were more formal and businesslike there, less relaxed than when inside the generous, creative calm (including explosive boisterousness!) of Portuguese.

    carl , February 11, 2020 at 6:11 pm

    We visited the southern coast of Portugal last year to explore the idea of moving there. It was not a success: too many Brit expats, more expensive than we'd been told, and the real estate market is completely crazy. The country itself merits a look.

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 7:00 pm

    Indeed, the Alentejo has become overblown, party central, prime strips for the elite, etc. If one can brave the less glamorous climes, such as Sintra's winters of cold rain and bonechilling fog, there are delicacies to be enjoyed at half the cost, in the north as well. I look forward to returning many times.

    I'm recalling Jerez, now, up-north mountain-land with its own unique mythology, where local drivers (on fine if narrow roads) have more frequent trouble encountering a bull or flocks upon flocks of chickens than oncoming automotive traffic. I think one bull drove us backward for half a kilometer.

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 7:10 pm

    *geres, not jerez, tho they sound nearly the same.

    Calvin , February 11, 2020 at 1:10 pm

    "They hate us for our freedoms" ; to be strip searched at the airport, toasted with the skin cancer X-ray machine, have our devices downloaded, license plates scanned on the way home, the data sold to an advertiser, to have to pay mandatory fraudulent medical "insurance," borrow money at 29% to pay for medical needs, lose our homes to other scams, have to compete in the job market with imported peons, that we subsidize with tax dollars, then see over half of our tax dollars go to losing wars and to subsidize billion dollar corporations and then be told it's to protect us against the "terrorists".

    Still a pretty good country and the only one we have, so it's worth fighting for.

    Expat2Uruguay , February 11, 2020 at 1:33 pm

    I have lived in Uruguay for 4 years now. The things that are much better here than in California are public transportation, internet service, culture, and small business penetration. I can walk a half a block to a small store that's open several hours a day. I can walk 4 blocks to a store that's open 12 hours a day. I can walk ten blocks to a full-on mall with a large grocery store. There's also one or more bakeries, butchers, vegetable sellers, hardware stores, barbers/hair stylists, and restaurants galore within a quarter-mile radius. And I live in a quiet neighborhood! Oh, there are also three fantastic beaches within a 20 minute walk of my house. I love my location!

    Society here is very laid-back, parents are indulgent of their children and it is legal to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana in the public places and streets, But don't drink and drive, there is no legal limit, aka zero tolerance. Yet culture is vibrant here. There's an excellent music scene with lots of low-cost or free live music. Jazz, blues, and electronica are surprisingly popular. There are people who play music on the bus for donations, and not just guitar players, but also saxophone players, operatic singers, rappers, violinists, and accordion players. There are people that meet weekly in the downtown area to dance tango on the sidewalk. There are almost weekly practices all over the city of Candombe, which involves large groups of synchronized dancers and drummers parading through the streets for an hour or two. There are so many beautiful parks large and small all over the city where lovers kiss, families play and groups of friends drink mate or beer and often smoke marijuana. There are 50 museums in Montevideo, and at least 35 of them are free. The ones that cost money are less than $10 and usually include a tour. There are ballets, symphonies and lots of theaters, all of which are very inexpensive. They love sports here and are quite interested in maintaining physical fitness. Lots of soccer balls getting kicked, volleyball games on the beach and bicyclist and runners on the Rambla. The Rambla! It's a UNESCO world heritage site that goes for 20 miles along the beach, a wide paved Boardwalk that is very popular when the weather is nice, especially during sunsets. Full disclosure, the beach is for a river, a really huge river – You can't even see the other side. On the other side of the river is Buenos Aires, just in case you get a hankering for a big city. Or you could travel a few hours to Punta Del Este, playground of the Rich and Famous.

    But Uruguay is relatively expensive, the most expensive country in South America. This is not a place where you're going to come and live like a king among the peasants. The prices in restaurants and grocery stores are similar to the prices I paid in Sacramento, California. But the wages here are much less. So this is a good place if you can get your income from somewhere else As a retired person or a remote teleworker. But, oddly, even though the locals here struggle with the difference between wages and prices, it's quite common for them to have second houses along the coast that they go to during their frequent vacations. It's also typical to employ a house cleaner.

    Uruguay is a small country, with three million people and half of them live in the capital city of Montevideo. Because of this, nearly everyone here knows everyone else. Uruguay is the safest country in South America with the largest middle class and least income inequality, along with being the most stable economically and politically. People here enjoy discussing politics, and voting in elections is mandatory. But what about the downsides? There are some. First off, you're not going to be able to order a bunch of stuff on Amazon. In fact, you're going to have to give up on finding many of the spices and foods and little trinkets that you're used to acquiring in the US. Consumers beware! Also, flights back to the US or destinations outside of South America are very expensive. And, because it's so laid back, it's difficult to find good workers on household projects or to get good service in a restaurant or at a public counter. You just have to be really patient. Finally, the sidewalks are a mess! Since each resident is responsible for the sidewalk in front of their own house or business, sometimes they can get be a bit dangerous if you don't watch your step. You wouldn't want to scoot around on one of those elderly mobility scooters here! And then there's the dog poop and the trash Oh, well, no place is perfect!

    I'm sorry, this is so long, I usually don't talk much about my life here, especially on Facebook, because I don't want to cause resentment and look like I'm bragging, but today I'm making an exception, obviously.
    (By the way, I'm happy to host visitors, In fact, I let couchsurfers stay in my home for free.)

    Expat2Uruguay , February 11, 2020 at 1:39 pm

    Wow, apparently I spent two hours writing that!

    EMtz , February 11, 2020 at 2:10 pm

    Thank you!

    Lorenzo , February 11, 2020 at 5:29 pm

    thank you. I visited for vacations once as a teen, I hope I can spend more time there in the future. All the best from Buenos Aires :)

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 7:04 pm

    Thank you Very much for taking time to share this detailed, valuable account, and all respect to your journey.

    EMtz , February 11, 2020 at 2:03 pm

    Central México. Year 4. In spite of the crime I like it here and would not go back to the US. The culture is rich and deep, and the aesthetic is quite refined. The food! The amazing natural beauty. And the colors! And the biodiversity! There is a balanced perspective on life, not the despair or rage that increasingly underly US culture. I live simply and modestly, and find my Social Security can almost pay all of my monthly expenses. My stress levels have dropped tremendously and my BP is at levels I haven't seen in 40 years. Quite honestly, I'm ramping up my Spanish so I can pass my citizenship test and may renounce my US citizenship because I am fed up with having my hard earned $$ underwrite corporate welfare and killing people. I've embraced México as my home and am grateful to have been welcomed in return. Coming here is far and away one of the best things I've ever done.

    PuntaPete , February 11, 2020 at 2:49 pm

    After his famous rant about people coming to the U.S. from "shit-hole" countries in Africa and other developing countries, Trump asked why more people from, say Norway, were not emigrating to the U.S. I may have missed it, but I don't remember any politician or anyone with a public voice telling him, "Look, Mr. President, compared to the other two dozen or so advanced industrial countries the United States is a shit-hole country".

    Acacia , February 11, 2020 at 5:36 pm

    As I started reading this article, Trump's comment applied to the US was my first thought.

    deplorado , February 11, 2020 at 3:25 pm

    Bulgaria, observations from one of the two big cities on the Black Sea coast:
    – excellent bus service across the city, from airport to industrial zone; articulated airconditioned busses, everyone uses them, young people read books while riding, space for mothers to latch strollers, doors are wide and steps low so mothers in fact prefer the bus to using personal vehicle
    – municipal children's kitchen: delivers free to a local distribution booth 2 meals 5 times a week at very low cost by local standards, or free for families with large number of children 1-3yrs. The meals are home-cooked level, tasty and healthy, delivered in your own glassware (like used pickle jars for example – simple!) – so no throwaway plastic. Ive tried private kitchens, quality was lower and cost 2-3 times higher
    – a very large city park along the beach starting just off downtown – one of the best things in the whole country actually: it's everyone's family playground – old and young, there is a new public pool, carnival booths, restaurants, fish stands, icecream stands, open air theater, public hall overlooking the beach, restaurant and club on the beach – for the wide public, not exclusive, in the evening young and old dress up and take walks leasurely and just talk and hang out
    – the city is dense and everything is walking distance, within a 20 min walk you will pass by every service that a life needs, from a hospital to police to stadium and trainstation and cobler, not to mention stores and restaurants

    Downsides:
    – like Uruguay and other similarly positioned countries, incomes of working people are generally low for the local living costs. However most people own a home (I think ~80% or even more) – and with low birthrates many inherit more than one funcitonal home – so that helps a lot. For someone on a US SS check, average I think ~$1300 a month, is plenty for TWO. Local professionals earning the equivalent of $40-50k a year, especially a 2 such income households, live a higher and less stressful standard of living than any tech professional I know in coastal US (not to mention 4 weeks mandatory paid time off).

    – lots of professionals – doctors particularly – leave for Western EU countries where they earn more, particularly specialists; for GP's though, staying can be much better as they still make a decent living and only refer people for anything more serious than a cold

    In general, I think Bulgaria is good for retired expats if you pick a good spot like the city I described, unless you have a serious health issue which requires specialists, and those may not be available in Bulgaria. But even for things like stents, even cardiac surgery, MRI scans, those are done now and by doctors who specialized or were educated in the UK, Germany or the like – so the issue is more general infrastructure and availability, rather than quality (cost is a fraction of US costs, even paying out of pocket)

    hoki haya , February 11, 2020 at 7:24 pm

    Appreciate this account. The 'bus-culture' sounds similar to Yerevan's; it makes public transport truly a pleasurable part of one's day (tho we do have the dreaded, indefatigable marshrutkas – are they used in Bulgaria?).

    The municipal children's kitchen! I wonder why there isn't something comparable here, tho I've seen scant evidence of anyone going hungry. One always shares with one's neighbors: part of the built-in, practiced and practical ethic.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 3:35 pm

    I was pretty impressed with the infrastructure I saw in China 20 years ago. Brand-new airports and train stations, good new highways mostly, although I saw some failed projects on the island of Hainan, where the roads were like a bad roller coaster, it seemed like a proper bed was not laid down before paving. (I was told that the guys who built those roads had skimmed off the highway budget to line their own pockets, and were later shot for doing so.)

    Malaysia looked good too when we were there for 10 days, and inexpensive. Most Malaysians speak English which is nice for visitors, and they have one of the best retirement visa progams.

    Thailand's infrastructure is getting better all the time, we were there for more of 2012, and the way you could cheaply get around Bangkok amazed me. A city of 11,000,000 people, but most of the public transport was very well integrated – airports, buses, elevated rail and subways all connect with each other.

    What struck me about most of the "developing" nations I've visited was that the quality of life seemed higher than the US, as far as access to good food, general happiness of the people, and access to decent health care, especially in Malaysia and Thailand. I saw some eye specialists in Thailand and was very impressed with them. We ate from street vendors all the time in Thailand and were never sick from the food, which was remarkably fresh. The air pollution in Chiang Mai and Bangkok is a problem however.

    We are seriously considering leaving the USA should things go badly in the upcoming election, we're considering Mexico, Ecuador etc and also SE Asia, although the latter is awfully far from friends and family.

    ObjectiveFunction , February 11, 2020 at 3:55 pm

    Very interesting topic, but it's also very large so the below comments are brief and therefore overgeneralized, apols in advance. My own area is Southeast Asia, where I've lived for much of the last 30 years, but I get the sense that the below obtains in much of the world .

    1. (Caucasian) expats remain a privileged class, even in Singapore which is now significantly more advanced than the US across the board, economically and socially. On the other hand, you're a guest in all these countries, there on sufferance. Any rights of property or residency you may enjoy largely come via your employer/business, or from a local spouse. While this may seem trite, it's important: an expat life just isn't that of the locals, even Westernized local elites, and even when you're married in and living simply as some retirees do.

    2. ASEAN countries are all *very* unequal societies by Western standards/ideals. Even Singapore, which provides excellent public services to all citizens, also relies heavily on a low cost migrant labor force (on weekends you see Tamil laborers in the parks flirting with Filipina housemaids). These migrants make far better money than at home and thus remain docile, but also have no path at all to residency status unless they can marry in. Foreign helpers are also becoming common in Thailand.

    3. In the other countries, as a local friend put it, 'either you have servants (5 – 15%) or you are one (the rest)'. Having a maid/cook and in trafficky places a driver/errand boy gives a family a fundamentally different daily life not comparable to the modern West. Labor laws are rarely enforced on locals (expats need to take care, you are sheep for shearing)

    4. Most non-Western societies assume that successful individuals in all classes subsidize their less successful relatives, via remittance or inheritance. State safety nets consist of primary education and basic health care, which are basically free but very patchy in covering special needs (that's cash).

    5. As in the West, a stable income is as or more important than a high income; it's hard to put down roots or plan for the future without that. In most of ASEAN, c.USD 3500 a month still buys a comfortable life for a family: a townhouse with aircon, a number of motorbikes and many of the same Chinese consumer gadgets Americans have, as well as the aforementioned domestic servants. But, see next .

    6. To me, social mobility appears quite low. It's hard for the broad peasant/servant class to ascend to the middle class, even via police or military. Foreign workers support their extended families and build a house in their home village; they rarely start their own businesses with savings.
    Again, overgeneralizing but it seems most of the ASEAN 'middle class' (the 5-15% PMC) are (grand)children of:
    (a) the officials who took over from the colonialists, or (b) mercantile families, predominantly ethnic Chinese.
    Thus, that 10% also draws on some kind of inherited income / family support on top of their salaries to maintain their lifestyles, cover emergencies and ensure their own kids can obtain the needed credentials to keep themselves in the PMC.

    Anyway, I hope this is useful context for this rich topic. Again, a broad brush, YMMV.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 4:27 pm

    In most of ASEAN, c.USD 3500 a month still buys a comfortable life for a family

    Very comfortable, I'm sure. $42k a year is more that millions of Americans earn. Singapore is probably the most expensive SE Asian country.

    What struck me about living and travelling in SE Asia was realizing how Americans are being ripped off in comparison to many other parts of the world. In Chiang Mai, we were paying $200 a month for a clean studio apartment with no real kitchen (rent included decent internet and all utilities), $20 a month for cell phone service, and about $20 a day on eating out (for two people). Transportation was also inexpensive. After seven months of living so cheaply, when we came back to the US it felt like we were hemorrhaging money as soon as we hit the airport.

    oliverks , February 11, 2020 at 5:34 pm

    My wife is refusing to buy anything right now. We got back from staying in Europe and she is shocked at how expensive everything is here. For us it started at the Hilton in the airport as we had a very early departure time to flyout. It was a splash of cold water.

    lordkoos , February 11, 2020 at 7:19 pm

    Yep. I have a musician friend who did an artist-in-residence gig for 6 months in Germany with his wife & two kids joining him. He said the same thing (they live in NYC). He also said not only were groceries cheaper, they were better quality as well.

    Anon1 , February 11, 2020 at 4:32 pm

    The article is about developing countries and France is developed, not developing. Weather has huge impact on roads and comparing roads in south of France to Michigan is not a fair comparison. I have driven through France extensively and the roads are good but parts of the US and Canada has much better roads. I would say Arizona or Utah has waaaaaay better roads than any part of France, especially the north.

    Harbottle Grimstone , February 11, 2020 at 4:43 pm

    Operant word: "developing". AKA a region experiencing the upswing. Shiny new industries, new infrastructure, new institutions. Growth. All nations have a finite socio-political lifespan before re-configuration; the US is no exception. Idealism's parametric in America-2020 is at a nadir compared to the fire-eyed certainty of magistrates in Colonial America-1620. The waterwheel of fortune is philosophy's consolation: rise-up on its spokes if you like but do not complain when you plunge back down into the depths. The tragedy is also the hope: bad times always pass, as do the good times. Rinse-repeat-return to the wilderness. -- Answering the question, Ahmedabad, Gujurat has great food but prohibits alcohol.

    Edward , February 11, 2020 at 6:26 pm

    This country has spent its productive energy producing MBA's who specialize in sucking money from people. It has a political system based on bribery and is no longer a "nation of laws". Given the non-response to the 2008 crash, the surprise may be it is not in worse shape.

    Costa Rica is the one country in South/Central America that was spared CIA "help", presumably because they don't have a military. This is what South America would look like if the U.S. left them alone.

    The U.S. probably has the solutions to its problems, but people with solutions, such as college professors, are excluded from government decision making. In my experience, average people tend to be smarter then the geniuses on the boob tube and in Washington.

    I don't know what the big problem is with public colleges. You can get a good education at a public college.

    Another Anon , February 11, 2020 at 7:29 pm

    Is there anyone here who has anything to say about living in Chile ? I visited Chile back in 2007 and enjoyed myself. I spent most of my time in Santiago
    and was impressed by it being clean, a nice subway
    and interesting architecture.

    Norbert Wiener , February 11, 2020 at 9:26 pm

    Great thread.

    I am three years into my escape from the US. 50 countries of wandering in three years. I cannot, for the life of me, imagine why I would go back to the open-air prison of the US.

    Quality of life in places as diverse as Plovdiv, Bulgaria; Penang, Malaysia; Brno, Czechia; Kanazawa, Japan; Kunming, China; are literally off the charts for half the cost.

    The other thing I'd add: the wife and I made $480k per year in our last few years. A decent middle-class income in Manhattan.

    After taxes and various contributions to Fed-pumped Ponzis and 'healthcare' our net take home was around $240k per year.

    All so we could be good goys and pay another 5k a month for a shitty 1-bedroom condo with hollow doors and ride a piss-smelling subway up to offices we sat in meetings for 6 of our 10 daily hours and then fake pointless outrage over whatever new political offense the dear leaders had perpetrated over $17 cocktails and then come home and fall asleep to Netflix and sleeping pills.

    Outside the US, we've maxed our income to 220k total (all untaxed), so we're only down 20k or so from our Manhattan highs. And we can do this from anywhere we have an internet connection. We interact with locals. We eat staggeringly good food. When we get bored we hop a plane and fly somewhere new.

    I'm 40. Maybe at 50 this will all grow tiring, but I doubt it.

    oliverks , February 12, 2020 at 2:31 am

    I assume Norbert Wiener is your "nom de plume" or are you related to the Norbert Wiener?

    This is what we are finding. You can go to almost anywhere out of America and live for much less with much better food, life style, and people seem much better adjusted. Hell even London seems cheap in many ways when you consider the quality of what you are getting.

    [Feb 16, 2020] The Koch-Soros Quincy Project: A Train Wreck Of Neocon And 'Humanitarian' Interventionists by Daniel McAdams

    Feb 15, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Daniel McAdams via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

    Those hoping the non-interventionist cause would be given some real muscle if a couple of oligarchs who've made fortunes from global interventionism team up and pump millions into Washington think tanks will be sorely disappointed by the train wreck that is the Koch/Soros alliance.

    The result thus far has not been a tectonic shift in favor of a new direction, with new faces and new ideas, but rather an opportunity for these same old Washington think tanks, now flush with even more money, to re-brand their pet interventionisms as "restraint."

    The flagship of this new alliance, the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, was sold as an earth-shattering breakthrough - an "odd couple" of "left-wing" Soros and "right-wing" Koch boldly tossing differences aside to join together and "end the endless wars."

    That organization is now up and running and it isn't pretty.

    To begin with, the whole premise is deeply flawed. George Soros is no "left-winger" and Koch is no "right-winger." It's false marketing, like the claim that drinking Diet Coke will make you skinny. Both are globalist oligarchs who continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to create the kind of world where the elites govern with no accountability except to themselves, and " the interagency ," rather than an elected President of the US, makes US foreign policy.

    As libertarian intellectual Tom Woods once famously quipped , "No matter whom you vote for, you always wind up getting John McCain." That is exactly the world Koch and Soros want. It's a world of Davos with fangs, not Mainstreet, USA.

    A 'New Vision'?

    Anyone doubting that Quincy is just a mass re-branding effort for the same failed foreign policies of the past two decades need look no further than that organization's first big public event , a February 26th conference with Foreign Policy Magazine, to explore "A New Vision for America in the World."

    Like pouring old wine into new bottles, this "new vision" is being presented by the very same people and institutions who gave us the "old vision" - you know, the one they pretend to oppose.

    How should anyone interested in restraining foreign policy - let alone actual non-interventionism - react to the kick-off presentation of the Quincy Institute's conference, "Perspective on U.S. Global Leadership in the 21st Century," going to disgraced US General David Petraeus?

    Petraeus is, among many other things, an architect of the disastrous and failed "surge" policy in Iraq. He is still convinced (at least as of a few years ago) that " we won " in Iraq...but that we dare not end the occupation lest we lose what we "won." How's that for "restraint"?

    While head of the CIA, he teamed up with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to develop and push the brilliant idea of directly and overtly training and equipping al-Qaeda and other jihadists to overthrow the secular government of Bashar Assad. How's that for "restraint"?

    When a tape leaked of Fox News contributor Kathleen T. McFarland meeting with Petraeus at the behest of then-Fox Chairman Roger Ailes to convince him to run for US president, Petraeus told her that the CIA in his view is "a national asset...a treasure." He then went on to speak favorably of the CIA's role in Libya.

    But the absurdity of leading the conference with such an unreconstructed warmongering interventionist is only the beginning of the trip down the Quincy conference rabbit hole.

    Rogues' Gallery of Washington's Worst

    Shortly following the disgraced general is a senior official from the German Marshal Fund , Julianne Smith, to give us "A New Vision for America's Role in the World." Her organization, readers will recall, is responsible for some of the most egregious warmongering propaganda.

    The German Marshal Fund launched and funds the Alliance for Securing Democracy , an organization led by such notable proponents of "restraint" as neoconservative icon William Kristol, John McCain Institute head David Kramer, Michael " Trump is an agent of Putin " Morell, and, among others, the guy who made millions out of scaring the hell out of Americans, former Homeland-Security-chief-turned-airport-scanner-salesman Michael Chertoff.

    The Alliance for Securing Democracy was responsible for the discredited "Hamilton 68 Dashboard," a magic tool they claimed would seek and destroy "Russian bots" in the social media. After the propaganda value of such a farce had been reaped, Alliance fellow Clint Watts admitted the whole thing was bogus .

    Moving along, so as not to cherry pick the atrocities in this conference, moderating the section on the Middle East is one "scholar," Mehdi Hasan, who actually sent a letter to Facebook demanding that the social media company censor more political speech! He has attacked what he calls "free speech fundamentalists."

    Joining the "Regional Spotlight: Asia-Pacific" is Patrick Cronin of the thoroughly - and proudly - neoconservative Hudson Institute. Cronin's entire professional career consists of position after position at the center of Washington's various "regime change" factories. From a directorial position at the mis-named US Institute for Peace to "third-ranking position" at the US Agency for International Development to "senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the [ neoconservative ] Center for a New American Security." This is a voice of "restraint"?

    Later, the segment on "Ending Endless War" features at least two speakers who absolutely oppose the idea. Rosa Brooks, Senior Fellow at the "liberal interventionist" New America Foundation, wrote not long ago that, "There's No Such Thing as Peacetime." In the article she argued the benefits of "abandon[ing] the effort to draw increasingly arbitrary lines between peacetime and wartime and instead focus[ing] on developing institutions and norms capable of protecting rights and rule-of-law values at all times." In other words, war is endless so man up and get used to it.

    This may be the key for how you end endless war. Just stop calling it "war."

    Brooks' fellow panelist, Tom Wright, hails from the epicenter of liberal interventionism, the Brookings Institution, where he is director of the "Center on the United States and Europe." Brookings loves "humanitarian interventions" and has published pieces attempting to convince us that the attack on Libya was not a mistake .

    Wright himself is featured in the current edition of the Council on Foreign Relations' publication Foreign Affairs arguing that old interventionist shibboleth that the disaster in Iraq was not caused by the US invasion, but rather by Obama's withdrawal.

    This Quincy Institute champion of "restraint" concludes his latest piece arguing that:

    Now is not the time for a revolution in U.S. strategy. The United States should continue to play a leading role as a security provider in global affairs.

    How revolutionary!

    The moderator of that final panel in the upcoming Quincy Institute first conference is Loren DeJonge Schulman, a deputy director at the above-named Center for a New American Security. Before joining that neoconservative think tank, Schulman served as Senior Advisor to National Security Advisor Susan Rice! Among her other international crimes, readers will recall that Rice was a chief architect of the US attack on Libya.

    Schulman's entire career is, again, in the service of, alternatively, the war machine and the regime change machine.

    The Quincy Institute's first big event, which it bills as a showcase for a new foreign policy of "restraint," is in fact just another gathering of Washington's usual warmongers, neocons, and " humanitarian " interventionists.

    Quincy has been received with gushing praise from people who should know better . Any of those gushers who look at this first Quincy conference and continue to maintain that a revolution in foreign policy is afoot are either lying to us or lying to themselves.

    But Wait...There's More!

    Sadly, the fallout extends beyond just this particular new institute and this particular event.

    Those who continue to push the claim that Koch and Soros are changing their spots and now supporting restraint and non-interventionism should be made to explain why the most egregiously warmongering and interventionist organizations are finding themselves on the receiving end of oligarch largese.

    Just days ago a glowing article in Politico detailed the recipients of millions of Koch dollars to promote "restraint." Who is leading the Koch brigades in the battle for a non-interventionist, "restrained" foreign policy?

    Politico reveals:

    Libertarian business tycoon Charles Koch is handing out $10 million in new grants to promote voices of military restraint at American think tanks, part of a growing effort by Koch to change the U.S. foreign policy conversation.

    The grants, details of which were shared exclusively with POLITICO, are being split among four institutions: the Atlantic Council ; the Center for the National Interest; the Chicago Council on Global Affairs; and the RAND Corporation.

    The Atlantic Council has been pushing US foreign policy toward war with Russia for years, pumping endless false propaganda and neocon lies to fuel the idea that Russia is engaged in an "asymmetric battle" against the US, that the mess in Ukraine was the result of a Russian out-of-the-blue invasion rather than an Obama Administration coup d'etat , that Russia threw the elections to Putin's agent Trump, and that Moscow is seeking to to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

    The Atlantic Council's " Disinfo Portal ," a self-described "one-stop interactive online portal and guide to the Kremlin's information war," is raw, overt war propaganda. It is precisely the kind of war propaganda that has fueled three years of mass hysteria called "Russiagate," which though proven definitively to be an utter fraud, continues to animate most of Washington's thinking on the Left and Right to this day.

    The Atlantic Council, through something it calls a " Digital Forensic Research Lab ," works with giant social media outlets to identify and ban any independent or alternative news outlets who deviate from the view that the US is besieged by enemies, from Syria to Iran to Russia to China and beyond, and that therefore it must continue spending a trillion dollars per year to maintain its role as the unipolar hyperpower. Thus, the Atlantic Council - a US government funded entity - colludes with social media to silence any deviation from US government approved foreign policy positions.

    And these are the kinds of organizations that Koch and Soros claim are going to save us from Washington's interventionist foreign policy?

    Equally upsetting is the "collateral damage" that the Koch/Soros alliance and its love child Quincy hath wrought. To see once-vibrant and reliably non-interventionist upstarts like The American Conservative Magazine (TAC) lured away from the vision of its founders, Pat Buchanan and Taki Theodoracopulos, to slip into the warm Hegelian embrace of well-funded compromise is truly heartbreaking. It is to witness the soiling of that once-brave publication's vindication for being right about Iraq War 2.0 while virtually all of Washington was wrong.

    Incidentally, and to add insult to injury, it is precisely these kinds of Washington institutions who most viciously attacked TAC in those days who now find themselves trusted partners and even "expert" sources !

    TAC! Beware! It's not too late to wake up and smell the deception!

    How to End Endless Wars (The Easy Way)

    If a Soros-Koch alliance was actually interested in ending endless US wars and re-orienting our currently hyper-interventionist foreign policy toward "restraint," it would simply announce that not another penny in campaign contributions would go to any candidate for House, Senate, or President who did not vow publicly in writing to vote against or veto any legislation that did not reduce military spending, that imposed sanctions overseas, that threatened governments overseas, that appropriated funds in secret or overtly to destabilize or overthrow governments overseas, or that sent foreign "aid" to any government overseas.

    It would cost pennies to make such an announcement and stick to it, and the result would be a massive shift in the American body politic toward what the current alliance advertises itself as promoting.

    But Koch/Soros don't really want to end endless US interventions overseas. They want to fund the same old think tanks who are responsible for the disaster that is US foreign policy, re-brand interventionism as non-interventionism, and hope none of us rubes in flyover country notices.

    To paraphrase what Pat Buchanan said about Democrats in his historic 1992 convention speech, the whitewashing of Washington's most egregiously interventionist institutions and experts as "restrained" non-interventionists is "the greatest single exhibition of cross-dressing in American political history."

    [Feb 15, 2020] Shifting narrative: Trump administration now Justifies Killing Soleimani for Past Actions, not Imminent Threat by Dave DeCamp

    Notable quotes:
    "... Although the memo says one purpose of the action was to "deter Iran from conducting or supporting further attacks against United States forces," it does not cite any specific threats. Both President Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the killing was done to prevent imminent attacks and led on like they had the intelligence to prove it. ..."
    "... The New York Times recently reported that Iraqi military and intelligence officials believe the December 27 th rocket attack that killed a US contractor was likely carried out by ISIS, not the Shi'ite militia the US blamed and retaliated against. This attack led to a series of provocations that resulted in the assassination of Soleimani. Iraqi officials do not have proof that ISIS carried out the attack, but this possibility makes the US justification for killing Soleimani even more flimsy. ..."
    "... Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) responded to the White House's memo in a statement on Friday, "The administration's explanation in this report makes no mention of any imminent threat and shows that the justification the president offered to the American people was false, plain and simple." ..."
    Feb 14, 2020 | news.antiwar.com

    The White House released a memo on Friday to Congress justifying the assassination of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani. Despite earlier claims from the administration of Soleimani and his Quds Force planning imminent attacks on US personnel in the region, the memo uses past actions as the justification for the killing.

    The memo says President Trump ordered the assassination on January 2nd "in response to an escalating series of attacks in preceding months by Iran and Iran-backed militias on United States forces and interests in the Middle East region."

    Although the memo says one purpose of the action was to "deter Iran from conducting or supporting further attacks against United States forces," it does not cite any specific threats. Both President Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the killing was done to prevent imminent attacks and led on like they had the intelligence to prove it.

    The New York Times recently reported that Iraqi military and intelligence officials believe the December 27 th rocket attack that killed a US contractor was likely carried out by ISIS, not the Shi'ite militia the US blamed and retaliated against. This attack led to a series of provocations that resulted in the assassination of Soleimani. Iraqi officials do not have proof that ISIS carried out the attack, but this possibility makes the US justification for killing Soleimani even more flimsy.

    Lawmakers from both parties criticized Trump for killing Iran's top general without congressional approval. The memo argues that Trump had authority to order the attack under Article II of the US Constitution, and under the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq (2002 AUMF).

    Congress is taking measures to limit Trump's ability to wage war with Iran. The Senate passed the Iran War Powers Resolution on Thursday, and the House voted to repeal the 2002 AUMF in January.

    Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) responded to the White House's memo in a statement on Friday, "The administration's explanation in this report makes no mention of any imminent threat and shows that the justification the president offered to the American people was false, plain and simple."

    [Feb 15, 2020] Escobar The Siren Call Of A System Leader by Pepe Escobar

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

    A considerable spectrum of the liberal West takes the American interpretation of what civilization consists of to be something like an immutable law of nature. But what if this interpretation is on the verge of an irreparable breakdown?

    Michael Vlahos has argued that the US is not a mere nation-state but a "system leader" – "a civilizational power like Rome, Byzantium, and the Ottoman Empire." And, we should add, China – which he did not mention. The system leader is "a universalistic identity framework tied to a state. This vantage is helpful because the United States clearly owns this identity framework today."

    Intel stalwart Alastair Crooke, in a searing essay, digs deeper into how this "civilizational vision" was "forcefully unfurled across the globe" as the inevitable, American manifest destiny: not only politically – including all the accouterments of Western individualism and neo-liberalism, but coupled with "the metaphysics of Judeo-Christianity, too".

    Crooke also notes how deeply ingrained the notion that victory in the Cold War "spectacularly affirmed" the superiority of the US civilizational vision among the US elite.

    Well, the post-modern tragedy – from the point of view of US elites – is that soon this may not be the case anymore. The vicious civil war engulfing Washington for the past three years – with the whole world as stunned spectators – has just accelerated the malaise.

    Remember Pax Mongolica

    It's sobering to consider that Pax Americana may be destined to a shorter historical existence than Pax Mongolica – established after Genghis Khan, the head of a nomad nation, went about conquering the world.

    Genghis first invested in a trade offensive to take over the Silk Roads, crushing the Kara-Kitais in Eastern Turkestan, conquering Islamic Khorezm, and annexing Bukhara, Samarkand, Bactria, Khorasan and Afghanistan. The Mongols reached the outskirts of Vienna in 1241 and the Adriatic Sea one year after.

    The superpower of the time extended from the Pacific to the Adriatic. We can barely imagine the shock for Western Christendom. Pope Gregory X was itching to know who these conquerors of the world were, and could be Christianized?

    In parallel, only a victory by the Egyptian Mamluks in Galilee in 1260 saved Islam from being annexed to Pax Mongolica.

    Pax Mongolica – a single, organized, efficient, tolerant power – coincided historically with the Golden Age of the Silk Roads. Kublai Khan – who lorded over Marco Polo – wanted to be more Chinese than the Chinese themselves. He wanted to prove that nomad conquerors turned sedentary could learn the rules of administration, commerce, literature and even navigation.

    Yet when Kublai Khan died, the empire fragmented into rival khanates. Islam profited. Everything changed. A century later, the Mongols from China, Persia, Russia and Central Asia had nothing to do with their ancestors on horseback.

    A jump cut to the young 21st century shows that the initiative, historically, is once again on the side of China, across the Heartland and lining up the Rimland. World-changing, game-changing enterprises don't originate in the West anymore – as has been the case from the 16th century up to the late 20th century.

    For all the vicious wishful thinking that coronavirus will derail the "Chinese century", which will actually be the Eurasian Century, and amid the myopic tsunami of New Silk Roads demonization, it's always easy to forget that implementation of myriad projects has not even started.

    It should be in 2021 that all those corridors and axes of continental development pick up speed across Southeast Asia, the Indian Ocean, Central Asia, Southwest Asia, Russia and Europe, in parallel with the Maritime Silk Road configuring a true Eurasian string of pearls from Dalian to Piraeus, Trieste, Venice, Genoa, Hamburg and Rotterdam.

    For the first time in two millennia, China is able to combine the dynamism of political and economic expansion both on the continental and maritime realms, something that the state did not experience since the short expeditionary stretch led by Admiral Zheng He in the Indian Ocean in the early 15th century. Eurasia, in the recent past, was under Western and Soviet colonization. Now it's going all-out multipolar – a series of complex, evolving permutations led by Russia-China-Iran-Turkey-India-Pakistan-Kazakhstan.

    Every player has no illusions about the "system leader" obsessions: to prevent Eurasia from uniting under one power – or coalition such as the Russia-China strategic partnership; ensure that Europe remains under US hegemony; prevent Southwest Asia – or the "Greater Middle East" – from being linked to Eurasian powers; and prevent by all means that Russia-China have unimpeded access to maritime lanes and trade corridors.

    The message from Iran

    In the meantime, a sneaking suspicion creeps in – that Iran's game plan, in an echo of Donbass in 2014, may be about sucking US neocons into a trademark Russian cauldron in case the regime-change obsession is turbocharged.

    There is a serious possibility that under maximum pressure Tehran might eventually abandon the JCPOA for good, as well as the NPT, thus openly inviting a US attack.

    As it stands, Tehran has sent two very clear messages. The accuracy of the missile attack on the US Ayn Al-Asad base in Iraq, replying to the targeted assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani, means that any branch of the vast US network of bases is now vulnerable.

    And the fog of non-denial denials surrounding the downing of the CIA Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) – essentially an aerial spook shop – in Ghazni, Afghanistan also carries a message.

    CIA icon Mike d'Andrea, known as 'Ayatollah Mike', The Undertaker, the Dark Prince, or all of the above, may or may not have been on board. Irrespective of the fact that no US government source will ever confirm or deny that Ayatollah Mike is dead or alive, or even that he exists at all, the message remains the same: your soldiers and spooks are also vulnerable.

    Since Pearl Harbor, no nation has dared to stare down the system leader so blatantly, as Iran did in Iraq. Vlahos mentioned something I saw for myself in 2003, how "young American soldiers referred to Iraqis as 'Indians', as though Mesopotamia were the Wild West". Mesopotamia was one the crucial cradles of civilization as we know it. Well, in the end, that $2 trillion spent to bomb Iraq into democracy did no favors to the civilizational vision of the 'system leader'.

    The Sirens and La Dolce Vita

    Now let's add aesthetics to our "civilizational" politics. Every time I visit Venice – which in itself is a living metaphor for both the flimsiness of empires and the Decline of the West – I retrace selected steps in The Cantos , Ezra Pound's epic masterpiece.

    Last December, after many years, I went back to the church of Santa Maria dei Miracoli, also known as "The jewel box", which plays a starring role in The Cantos. As I arrived I told the custodian signora that I had come for "The Sirens". With a knowing smirk, she lighted my way along the nave to the central staircase. And there they were, sculpted on pillars on both sides of a balcony: "Crystal columns, acanthus, sirens in the pillar head", as we read in Canto 20.

    These sirens were sculpted by Tullio and Antonio Lombardo, sons of Pietro Lombardo, Venetian masters of the late 15th and early 16th century – "and Tullio Romano carved the sirens, as the old custode says: so that since then no one has been able to carve them for the jewel box, Santa Maria dei Miracoli", as we read in Canto 76.

    Well, Pound misnamed the creator of the sirens, but, that's not the point. The point is how Pound saw the sirens as the epitome of a strong culture – "the perception of a whole age, of whole congeries and sequence of causes, went into an assemblage of detail, whereof it would be impossible to speak in terms of magnitude", as Pound wrote in Guide to Kulchur .

    As much as his beloved masterpieces by Giovanni Bellini and Piero della Francesca, Pound fully grasped how these sirens were the antithesis of usura – or the "art" of lending money at exorbitant interest rates, which not only deprives a culture of the best of art, as Pound describes it, but is also one of the pillars for the total financialization and marketization of life itself, a process that Pound brilliantly foresaw, when he wrote in Hugh Selwyn Mauberley that, "all things are a flowing, Sage Heracleitus says; But a tawdry cheapness, shall reign throughout our days."

    La Dolce Vita will turn 60 in 2020. Much as Pound's sirens, Fellini's now mythological tour de force in Rome is like a black and white celluloid palimpsest of a bygone era, the birth of the Swingin' Sixties. Marcello (Marcello Mastroianni) and Maddalena (Anouk Aimee), impossibly cool and chic, are like the Last Woman and the Last Man before the deluge of "tawdry cheapness". In the end, Fellini shows us Marcello despairing at the ugliness and, yes, cheapness intruding in his beautiful mini-universe – the lineaments of the trash culture fabricated and sold by the 'system leader' about to engulf us all.

    Pound was a human, all too human American maverick of unbridled classical genius. The 'system leader' misinterpreted him; treated him as a traitor; caged him in Pisa; and dispatched him to a mental hospital in the US. I still wonder whether he may have seen and appreciated La Dolce Vita during the 1960s, before he died in Venice in 1972. After all, there was a little cinema within walking distance of the house in Calle Querini where he lived with Olga Rudge.

    "Marcello!" We're still haunted by Anita Ekberg's iconic siren call, half-immersed in the Fontana di Trevi. Today, still hostages of the crumbling civilizational vision of the 'system leader', at best we barely muster, as TS Eliot memorably wrote, a "backward half-look, over the shoulder, towards the primitive terror."

    [Feb 15, 2020] US Strategy in Syria: 'Create Quagmires Until We Get What We Want by Jason Ditz

    Aug 31, 2018 | news.antiwar.com
    In seeking to control post-war Syria, US determined to keep war going ,

    In 2013, top Obama Administration officials described their policy in the Syrian War as one of keeping the war going. The administration wanted a big seat at the table for a political settlement, which officials clarified meant ensuring that the war kept going so that there was never a clear victor .

    The Trump Administration seems to be slipping into that same destructive set of priorities in Syria. The Washington Post this week quoted an unnamed Administration official as saying that "right now, our job is to help create quagmires [for Russia and the Syrian regime] until we get what we want."

    As ever, hat the US really wants is to have a dominant position in post-war negotiations, so they can dictate the form that post-war Syria takes. This means ensuring that the Syrian government doesn't win the war outright.

    That's not as realistic as it once was, with the Assad government, backed by Russia, having retaken virtually all of the rebel-held territory except for a far north bastion in Idlib, dominated by al-Qaeda. This means the US now has to save al-Qaeda to keep the war going, which if we're being honest has been a recurring undercurrent in US policy in Syria for years.

    It is this desire that has the US repeatedly threatening Syria and warning them not to attack Idlib. It is this desire that is sparking almost daily US threats to intervene militarily if the Idlib offensive involves chemical weapons. Most importantly, it is this desire that has Russia very much believing media reports that the rebels could "stage" a fake chemical attack just to suck the US into the war, and be fairly confident it would work.

    The US is, after all, constantly talking about an imminent chemical attack despite there being no reason to think Syria is poised to launch one. At times, US officials have privately conceded that there is no sign Syria is making any moves to even ready such weapons for the offensive. Yet several times a week, the US issues statements with allegations of a chemical plot featuring prominently, setting the stage for a reaction.

    The Syrian War has been nearing its endgame for months now, with Israeli officials conceding it is all but over as far as they are concerned (while vowing not to honor any post-war deals ). When a war is lost and a plan has failed, however, the US government is often the last to know, and that has them determined to drag the war on as long as possible.

    [Feb 15, 2020] US Officials Feel 'Challenged' by Russia in Northeast Syria by Jason Ditz

    Notable quotes:
    "... The challenges appear to be largely of America's own making, with troops going on patrol into the area finding themselves having run-ins with Russian troops. The Pentagon says Russia is violating a pledge to keep US and Russian troops apart, but with Trump arguing the US is only there for the oil, it's not clear that there's a reason for the US troops to go on walkabouts in the Turkish-controlled border region, where Russian troops are known to be. ..."
    "... Since the US is militarily hostile toward the Syrian government much of the time, it's not surprising they'd call Russia to help them protect their checkpoint. These potential flashpoints are likely to continue so long as the US keeps its troops, uninvited, in Syria, and the Pentagon is clearly determined to blame Russia whenever anything happens. ..."
    Feb 14, 2020 | news.antiwar.com

    Run-ins with Russian troops increasingly common in the area ,

    The 500 US ground troops that remain in Syria, according to President Trump purely to control the oil, are finding themselves less and less welcome in Syria's northeast, and officials are presenting Russia as presenting them a constant set of challenges to stay .

    The challenges appear to be largely of America's own making, with troops going on patrol into the area finding themselves having run-ins with Russian troops. The Pentagon says Russia is violating a pledge to keep US and Russian troops apart, but with Trump arguing the US is only there for the oil, it's not clear that there's a reason for the US troops to go on walkabouts in the Turkish-controlled border region, where Russian troops are known to be.

    The most recent problem was in the city of Qamishli, where a US patrol happened on a Syrian government checkpoint. They weren't welcome, unsurprisingly, and locals started mocking the US troops, and some threw stones. This pretty quickly escalated into a small arms exchange, with the US killing one civilian.

    Russians were present for the incident, and documented it, adding to the embarrassment. The US troops shooting the civilian was the embarrassing thing, however, just to be clear. That Russia was there is a secondary matter, and this clearly wasn't Russia's fault.

    Since the US is militarily hostile toward the Syrian government much of the time, it's not surprising they'd call Russia to help them protect their checkpoint. These potential flashpoints are likely to continue so long as the US keeps its troops, uninvited, in Syria, and the Pentagon is clearly determined to blame Russia whenever anything happens.

    [Feb 15, 2020] "Syrian Army in full control of Aleppo-Damascus Highway for first time 8 years" - TTG - Sic Semper Tyrannis

    Feb 15, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    "Syrian Army in full control of Aleppo-Damascus Highway for first time 8 years" - TTG
    BEIRUT, LEBANON (12:10 P.M.) – The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) is officially in full control of the Aleppo-Damascus Highway (M-5) after eight years of battle. The Syrian Army said they captured the last points along the highway on Tuesday evening, when their forces took control of the strategic town of Khan Al-'Assal and the nearby Rashiddeen 4 sector in southwestern Aleppo.

    According to the Syrian Army, their forces were able to achieve this imperative victory after capturing several important sites in eastern Idlib, including the cities of Saraqib and Ma'arat Al-Nu'man. While the Aleppo-Damascus Highway is under their control, the roadway will not likely be reopened to the public until the Syrian Army pushes west towards the Turkish border.

    The reason for this is due to the fact that the jihadist rebels of Hay'at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) and their allies from the Turkish-backed National Liberation Front (NLF) still maintain a presence along the western part of the Aleppo-Damascus Highway. Furthermore, there are still grave concerns of a potential large-scale Turkish military offensive to reclaim the areas lost by the jihadist rebels over the last few weeks. (AMN)

    -- -- -- --

    A lot went on in the last week to get to this point. I and other observers saw this clearing of the M5 as the objective of this phase of operation Idlib Dawn. The SAA is still on the offensive and may be aiming for more. One thing is for certain. The jihadis are having their asses handed to them.

    Let's look at the SAA's progress in maps. I wish I could make one of those animated battlefield maps like the American Battlefield Trust created for many of our Civil War battles, but that's beyond my reach. You'll have to settle for this series of borrowed maps along with my comments. Most of the recent action took place well north of Saraqib and Idlib. The 25th Special operations Division continued to move north along the M5 forcing the jihadis east of that highway to retreat to avoid encirclement. The 25th linked up with the Republican Guard near Al Barfoum and Zerbeh along the M5 on 8 February. At that point, the 25th did the unexpected. They struck northwest from ICARDA agricultural research station towards Kafr Aleppo.

    The axis of this advance took the high ground in the middle of the Idlib plain. It appeared the 25th was heading towards Kafr Nouran, Al Atarib and the Bab al Hawa Highway, Turkey's main supply route to Idlib.

    However, the 25th surprised everyone and pivoted northward Arnaz and the Highway 60 cutting that road on 12 February.


    Perhaps we shouldn't have been too surprised. Just prior to this pivot, the Russian and Syrian Aerospace Forces conducted heavy strikes against jihadist forces in the path of the 25th.

    Meanwhile, Erdogan continued pouring in additional troops and equipment and threatening massive retaliation against the SAA. They established several new "observation posts" at Al Atarib and other points along the Bab al Hawa Highway leading to Idlib. The Turks and the SAA traded artillery strikes and more Turkish casualties were shipped back north of the border. Finally, on 10 February the jihadis began launching several counterattacks armed with Turkish equipment and supported by Turkish artillery.

    The counterattack towards Saraqib began with a jihadi VBIED which was stopped by SAA fire before it could reach its target. The counterattack did not get far. Reports indicate the SAA was alerted to the impending attack by Russian reconnaissance aircraft. The SAA targeted the jihadis with BM-27 Uragan and BM-30 Smerch rocket launchers. Of the 80 attacking jihadists, 60 were killed and the rest wounded. Eight vehicles including Turkish supplied armored vehicles were destroyed. Infantry is the queen of battle. Artillery is the king of battle. And the king always puts it where the queen wants it.

    The jihadists launched two other counterattacks towards 25th Division positions at Kafr Aleppo and Arnaz on 12 February. Both attacks were turned back in a matter of hours. The 25th immediately went on the offensive and captured two more towns. It seems the SAA has learned to consolidate on the objective and then some. The jihadists failed to initiate another counterattack after these defeats until today. They tried again on the Kafr Halab/Kafr Aleppo front with the same results - over 100 dead jihadis and dozens of vehicles including at least four Turkish supplied APCs turned into smoking hulks. All this was done in an effort to secure the Bab al Hawa-Idlib road, an LOC critical to Erdogan's and the jihadists' desire to retain Idlib.

    The 25th did not stop there. They took the Regiment 46 installation today on the way to Atarib on the Bab al Hawa Highway. A Turkish unit was surrounded at Regiment 46


    Things have also gone well on the Aleppo front. The 4th Armored Division steadily marched westward pushing the jihadis out of Aleppo's suburbs in spite of the jihadis' extensive tunnels and well prepared fortifications.


    It now appears another front has opened from the YPG and SAA held territory northwest of Aleppo pushing south into jihadi held territory. This is certainly not tank country, but it is also not fortified built up areas of the west Aleppo suburbs. If this push south is successful and the 25th captures Atarib and continues north, the jihadis will be encircled or forced to retreat. They will be far removed from Aleppo and pushed towards the Turkish border of Hatay. The map below shows a possible scenario, not actual progress.

    Erdogan's Ottoman dreams for Idlib will have to be rethought. My guess is that Erdogan regrets sending those 3,000 plus jihadi fighters to Libya. They were probably some of his better fighters. Well, life's a bitch Tayyip.

    TTG

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-in-full-control-of-aleppo-damascus-highway-for-first-time-8-years/

    james , 14 February 2020 at 02:56 PM

    great overview ttg.. thank you..

    " Finally, on 10 February the jihadis began launching several counterattacks armed with Turkish equipment and supported by Turkish artillery."

    i guess that's why the pompous one was throwing all his support towards turkey the past few days..

    elaine , 14 February 2020 at 04:36 PM
    Arwa Damon of CNN reported on children freezing to death in refugee
    camps in Idlib. Apparently the temp has fallen below freezing &
    some of the kids didn't have shoes or coats.

    So many factions fighting in an area sounds like hell on earth for
    civilians.

    CNN also showed a small U.S. contingent in the midst of the chaos
    however I didn't understand where they were or their mission.

    Barbara Ann , 14 February 2020 at 04:52 PM
    Another great update, thanks TTG.

    I really get the feeling we are watching history in the making as the SAA & friends carve a swathe through what remains of occupied Idlib. I am sure the outcome will prove to be a great turning point in the balance of power in the ME. This makes it all the more fascinating, from the safe spectator's standpoint.

    I wonder if we should see it as encouraging that the TSK has not directly engaged the SAA again, since the exchange of fire a few days ago that you describe. Perhaps this is the calm before the storm. I'd like to think Erdogan has carefully weighed the risks of going to war over the bones of his ancestors. However, I'm not at all sure that the rational actor model can accurately forecast the actions of a neo-Ottoman fantasist. We shall soon see I guess.

    turcopolier , 14 February 2020 at 04:56 PM
    all
    It remains to be seen of Pompeo and the other Ziocons can push turkey into war against Syria.
    Barbara Ann , 14 February 2020 at 05:47 PM
    On the subject of Pompeo's efforts to goad Turkey into war, has the State Dept. scrubbed the designation of HTS from its website?

    Here is an archive of the designation of HTS as an alias of al-Nusrah Front - note the date.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20180602153815/https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/05/282880.htm ">https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/05/282880.htm">https://web.archive.org/web/20180602153815/https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/05/282880.htm

    And here is the list of press releases by the Office of the Spokesperson covering the same period.

    The link was live a few weeks ago, as I saw it myself. Nusrah is still on the FTO list, but if I'm not mistaken, this looks like an attempt to whitewash HTS.

    Elora Danan , 14 February 2020 at 05:56 PM
    Erdogan will be pushed to whatever by whoever, since he is spending way too much a money he really has not in his overarching campaigns through the Mediterranean...

    Como turco en la neblina

    Why this behavior? Why does the Turkish government agree with Russia and Syria and very few days later it fails to fulfill its obligations? The answers must be sought in the internal situation of Turkey; and above all to the growing opposition that is maintaining the Turkish social democracy that has led to the fact that in the last elections the Erdogan party has lost nothing less than the mayor of Istanbul (formerly Constantinople) .

    But there is also another reason of enormous weight in Turkey that is the situation of its economy. Turkey has a huge financial deficit caused by the "Ottoman" dreams of Erdogan, who tries to get out of his isolation, through large military expenses that are not justified, since Turkey is under the umbrella of NATO, and maintains the largest army within that organization, with an impossible cost to cope with. The Turkish industry is very late, and its manufacturing methods are not competitive, making its costs unassuming.(...)


    Elora Danan , 14 February 2020 at 05:59 PM
    What do you think, TTG, Pat, pilgrims, of the death menaces denounced by Russian Ambassador to Turkey received through "social media"?
    JohninMK , 14 February 2020 at 06:00 PM
    The moves by the SAA in our last diagram are, as you say, not in tank country. It is rugged mountains currently in the middle of winter. The SAAs best chance is that the militants are on the run with few supplies pre-positioned in the area as they would probably not have been expecting to have to defend it yet. Whilst they think that the best thing to do is to keep on moving west, before they get slaughtered. A problem might be that I read somewhere that there are a lot of Uygurs there who will martyr themselves.

    A long and costly operation doesn't seem to be in the SAA plans currently.

    prawnik , 14 February 2020 at 06:41 PM
    Gank 'em all, SAA!

    No doubt Pompeo and his merry band of neocons are whispering something like "you can't let this Assad guy do that to you! You know what you gotta do? You gotta stand up for yourself, you gotta go on the attack! What are you, chicken?" in Erdogan's ear.

    turcopolier , 14 February 2020 at 08:09 PM
    johninMK

    IMO there is at least a 50% chance that jihadi resistance will collapse in Idlib Province if the pursuit is pressed hard enough.

    Morongobill , 15 February 2020 at 09:56 AM
    The way the SAA is killing jihadists, a hundred here etc, perhaps they'll rid the Turks of all of them. Maybe Erdogan is smart like a fox.

    [Feb 15, 2020] US assassinated Suleimani to quash Iran s talks with Gulf monarchies by Bill Van Auken

    Feb 15, 2020 | www.wsws.org

    The Trump administration ordered the January 3 assassination of Major General Qassem Suleimani, one of Iran's most senior officials, not because he posed some "imminent threat," but rather in a calculated bid to disrupt Tehran's attempts to reach an accommodation with Washington's allies in the region.

    This is the inescapable conclusion flowing from a report published Thursday in the New York Times , citing unnamed senior officials from the US, Iran and other countries in the Middle East.

    It recounts the arrival last September in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates, of a plane carrying senior Iranian officials for talks aimed at achieving a bilateral peace agreement between the two countries.

    The trip came in the context of a steady sharpening of US-Iranian tensions as a result of Trump's abrogation of the Iranian nuclear agreement in 2018 along with the imposition of a punishing sanctions regime tantamount to a state of war. This was followed by a major escalation of the US military presence in the region a year later.

    While the US dispatched an aircraft carrier strike group and a B-52-led bomber task force to the region in May of last year, the same month saw the use of limpet mines to damage four oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic "chokepoint" through which 20 percent of the world's oil is shipped.

    In June of last year, the Iranians downed a US Navy spy drone over the same area, with the Trump White House first ordering and then calling off retaliatory air strikes against Iran. And in September, Saudi oil installations came under a devastating attack from drones and cruise missiles.

    Washington blamed both the attacks on the oil tankers and the strike against the Saudi oil installations -- for which the Houthi rebels in Yemen claimed responsibility -- on Iran, charges that Tehran denied.

    As early as last August, there were reports indicating concerns within Washington that the UAE was veering away from the anti-Iran front that the US has attempted to cobble together, based upon Israel and the Gulf oil sheikdoms. The Emirates' coast guard had signed a maritime security agreement with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and the UAE had clashed openly with Saudi Arabia over the control of southern Yemen's port city of Aden. At the time, the Washington Post warned that the UAE "is breaking ranks with Washington, calling into question how reliable an ally it would be in the event of a war between the United States and Iran."

    According to the Times report, the meeting with the Iranian delegation in Abu Dhabi, which had been kept secret from Washington, "set off alarms inside the White House ... A united front against Iran -- carefully built by the Trump administration over more than two years -- seemed to be crumbling."

    Both the Emirati monarchy and its counterpart in Saudi Arabia had become increasingly distrustful of Washington's Iran policy and concerned that they would find themselves on the frontline of any confrontation without any guarantee of the US defending them.

    Saudi Arabia also began a secret diplomatic approach to Tehran, using the Iraqi and Pakistani governments as intermediaries. Suleimani played the central role in organizing the talks with both Gulf kingdoms, the Times reports.

    In October, according to the report, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo flew to Tel Aviv for a meeting with Yossi Cohen, the chief of Mossad, who warned him that "Iran was achieving its primary goal: to break up the anti-Iran alliance."

    Last month's assassination of General Suleimani was initially defended by Trump and administration officials as a preemptive strike aimed at foiling supposedly "imminent" attacks on US personnel or interests in the Middle East. This pretext soon fell apart, however, and the US president and his aides fell back to justifying the extra-judicial murder of a senior state official as revenge for his support for Shia militias that resisted the US occupation of Iraq 15 years earlier and retaliation for a missile strike that killed an American military contractor last December.

    That strike was launched against a military base housing American troops in the northern Iraqi province of Kirkuk. Iraqi security officials have since contradicted the US claim that an Iranian-backed Shia militia was responsible for the attack. They have pointed out that the missiles were launched from a predominantly Sunni area where the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is active, and that Iraqi intelligence had warned US forces in November and December that ISIS was preparing to target the base.

    The US responded to the missile strike on the base in Iraq by targeting Iraqi Shia militia positions on the Syria-Iraq border, killing 25 members of the Kataib Hezbollah militia. The attack provoked an angry demonstration that laid siege to the US embassy in Baghdad on December 31.

    Two days later, a US Reaper drone fired missiles into a convoy at Baghdad International Airport, killing Suleimani along with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a central leader of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces, the coalition of militias that constitutes an arm of Iraq's security forces, as well as eight others.

    In the wake of the drone assassinations, US Secretary of State Pompeo sarcastically told the media: "Is there any history that would indicate that it was remotely possible that this kind gentleman, this diplomat of great order -- Qassem Suleimani -- had traveled to Baghdad for the idea of conducting a peace mission? We know that wasn't true."

    As the Times report indicates, that was precisely what Suleimani was doing in Baghdad, the US knew it and that is why it assassinated him. Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi said at the time that General Suleimani had flown into the country, on a commercial flight and using his diplomatic passport, for the express purpose of delivering an Iranian response to a message from Saudi Arabia as part of talks aimed at de-escalating tensions.

    The more that emerges about the assassination of Suleimani, the more the abject criminality of his murder becomes clear. It was carried out neither as a reckless act of revenge nor to ward off unspecified attacks. Rather, it was a calculated act of imperialist terror designed to disrupt talks aimed at defusing tensions in the Persian Gulf and to convince the wavering Gulf monarchies that Washington is prepared to go to war against Iran.

    This is the policy not merely of the Trump administration. Among the most significant moments in Trump's State of the Union address earlier this month was the standing ovation by Democratic lawmakers as he gloated over the murder of Suleimani, a war crime.

    The resort to such criminal actions is a measure of the extreme crisis of a capitalist system that threatens to drag humanity into a new world war.

    [Feb 14, 2020] Is Apartheid the Inevitable Outcome of Zionism? by Henry Siegman

    Highly recommended!
    Actually any supremacist ideology produces something like an apartheid regime for other nationalities.
    The current situation looks like a dead end with little chances of reconciliation, especially after recent killing of protesters by Israel army/snipers. But in general, it is iether a two state solution of equal rights for Palestinians and Jews in the same state. The elements of theocratic state should be eliminated and right wing parties outlawed as neofascist parties which threatens democracy.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The peace process and the two-state solution failed because America -- the only country on which Israel could count on for generous diplomatic, military and economic support, and therefore the only country that has the necessary leverage to influence Israel's policies -- allowed it to fail. Consequently, most Israelis, including many belonging to the Blue/White party, headed by General Benny Gantz, oppose granting any future Palestinian entity the most basic features of sovereignty, including control of its own borders. Gantz refused to form a unity government with the Likud because of Netanyahu's indictment for multiple crimes, not because of differences over peace policy. What doubts anyone might have had on this subject were removed when Gantz just announced that he embraces Netanyahu's intention to annex the Jordan Valley to Israel. ..."
    Jan 22, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    The threat of a new war with Iran that might have replicated what has been the worst disaster in the history of America's international misadventures -- George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq based on fabricated lies -- sucked the air out of all other international diplomatic activity, not least of what used to be called the Middle East peace process.

    Yet the failure of the peace process has not been the consequence of recent mindless and destructive actions by Donald Trump and of the clownish shenanigans of his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who was charged with helping Israeli hardliners in nailing down permanently the Palestinian occupation. For all the damage they caused (mainly to Palestinians), prospects for a two-state solution actually ended during President Barack Obama's administration, despite Secretary of State John Kerry's energetic efforts to renew the stalled negotiations. They were not resumed because Obama, like his predecessors, failed to take the tough measures that were necessary to overcome Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's determination to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state, notwithstanding his pledge in his Bar-Ilan speech of 2009 to implement the agreements of the Oslo accords.

    Yes, Obama and Kerry did warn that Israel's continued occupation might lead to an Israeli apartheid regime. But knowing how deeply the accusation of an incipient Israeli apartheid could anger right-wingers in Israel and in the U.S., they repeatedly followed that warning with the assurance that "America will always have Israel's back." It was the sequence of this two-part statement that convinced Netanyahu that AIPAC had succeeded in getting American presidents to protect Israel's impunity. Had Obama and Kerry reversed that sequence, first noting that the U.S. had always had Israel's back, and then warning that Israel is now on the verge of trading its democracy for apartheid, the warning might have had quite different implications for Israel's government.

    The peace process and the two-state solution failed because America -- the only country on which Israel could count on for generous diplomatic, military and economic support, and therefore the only country that has the necessary leverage to influence Israel's policies -- allowed it to fail. Consequently, most Israelis, including many belonging to the Blue/White party, headed by General Benny Gantz, oppose granting any future Palestinian entity the most basic features of sovereignty, including control of its own borders. Gantz refused to form a unity government with the Likud because of Netanyahu's indictment for multiple crimes, not because of differences over peace policy. What doubts anyone might have had on this subject were removed when Gantz just announced that he embraces Netanyahu's intention to annex the Jordan Valley to Israel.

    For the Palestinians, territory is the most critical of the final status issues. The current internationally recognized borders that separate Israel and the Occupied Territories reduced the territory originally assigned to Palestinians in the U.N. Partition Plan of 1947 from roughly half of Palestine to 22 percent. Israel, which was assigned originally roughly the other half of Palestine, now has 78 percent, not including Palestinian territory Israel has confiscated for its illegal settlements.

    No present or prospective Palestinian leadership will accept any further reduction of territory from their promised state. Given the territory they already lost in 1947, and again in 1949, and given Israel's refusal to accept the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel, is it really reasonable to expect Palestinians to give up any further territory? Where else other than the West Bank could Palestine refugees return to?

    The one-state solution that is preferred by many Israelis is essentially a continuation of the present de facto apartheid. It is not the one-state alternative any Palestinian would accept. Repeated polling has shown that a majority of Jewish Israelis are unprepared to grant equal rights to Palestinians in a one-state arrangement. This opposition is unsurprising, for the inclusion in Israel's body politic of West Bank and Gaza Palestinians would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state, for Israel's non-Jewish citizens would then outnumber its Jewish ones, and may already do so. Of course, Israel could contrive a non-voting status for the West Bank's Palestinians, something many Jewish Israelis and political parties actually advocate, but that would not deceive anyone. It would mean the formal end of Israel's democracy.

    The foregoing notwithstanding, I have long maintained that if Israel were compelled to choose between one state that grants full equality to Palestinians now under occupation and two states that conform substantially to existing agreements and international law, and no other options were available to it, the majority of Israelis would opt for two states. Why? Because as noted above, the overwhelming majority of Israelis oppose any arrangement that might produce a Palestinian majority with the same rights Israeli Jewish citizens enjoy. Of course, Israel has never been compelled to make such a choice, nor will they be compelled to do so by the international community.

    However, they could be compelled to do so by the Palestinians, but only if Palestinians were finally to expel their current leadership and choose a more honest and courageous one. That new leadership would have to shut down the Palestinian Authority, which its present leaders allowed Israel to portray as an arrangement that places Palestinians on the path to statehood, of course in some undefined future. Israel has deliberately perpetuated that myth to conceal its real intention to keep the current occupation unchanged. The new Palestinian leadership would have to declare that since Israel has denied them their own state and established a one-state reality, Palestinians will no longer deny that reality. Consequently, the national struggle will now be for full citizenship in the one state that Israel has forced them into. I have argued for the past two decades that the one-state option is far more likely to open a path to a two-state solution, however counter intuitive that may seem to be. Palestinians rejected it categorically from the outset, but younger Palestinians have come around to accepting it -- even preferring it to the two-state model.

    Unlike the struggle for a two-state solution, a goal that has so easily been manipulated by Israel to mean whatever serves their real goal of preventing such an outcome -- and also so easily allowed international actors to pretend they have not given up their efforts to achieve that outcome, an anti-apartheid struggle does not lend itself to such deceptions. South Africa has taught the world too well what apartheid looks like, as well as how the international community could deal with it. Of course, South Africa has also shown how long and bloody a struggle against apartheid can be, and the terrible price paid by the victims of such a regime. But Palestinians already live in such a regime, and have for long been paying a terrible price for their subjugation.

    Yet deeper and more troubling questions are raised by the choices that now face Israel, including whether the original idea of the Zionist movement of a state that is both Jewish and democratic is not deeply oxymoronic, a question that not only Israelis but Jews outside of Israel must address. That question is underscored by the challenges to India's democracy posed by its prime minister's decision to turn his country into a Hindu nation. It is a question that did not escape some of the founders of the Zionist movement, who argued that Zionism should define the state as Jewish only in its ethnic and secular cultural dimensions. But that this is not how Jewish identity is treated in Israel is undeniable.

    Imagine if Israel's laws defining national identity and citizenship, as recently reformulated by Israel's Knesset, were adopted by the U.S. Congress or by other Western democratic countries, and if Christianity in its "cultural dimensions" were declared to be their national identity, with citizenship also granted by conversion to the dominant religion, as is now the case in Israel, where arrangements for Jewish religious conversions are part of the Prime Minister's office.

    Is this not what America's founders, and the waves of immigrants, including European Jews, sought to escape from? And how would Jews react today to legislation in the U.S. Congress that would explicitly seek to maintain the majority status of Christians in the U.S.? Are Jews to take pride in a Jewish state that adopts citizenship requirements that mirror those advocated by white Christian supremacists? These supremacists have already proclaimed jubilantly that Israel's policies vindicate the ones they have long been advocating.

    It is true, of course, that for some Jews, aware of the history of anti-Semitism that has spanned the ages, and especially the Holocaust, Zionism's contradictions with democratic principles are an unpleasant but inescapable dilemma they can live with. As a survivor of the Holocaust, I can understand that. But I also understand that the likely consequences of these contradictions are not benign, and can yield their own terrible outcomes, particularly when they lead to the dalliances by the prime minister of a Jewish state with right-wing racist and xenophobic heads of state and of political parties that have fascist and anti-Semitic parentage.

    Legislation proposed in the U.S. Congress and by Trump, and recently celebrated by his son-in-law Kushner in a New York Times op-ed, proposing that criticism of Zionism be outlawed as antisemitism , would be laughable, were it not so clearly -- and outrageously -- intended to deny freedom of speech on this subject. Yet laughable it is, for its first target would have to be Jews -- not liberal left-wingers but the most Orthodox Jews, known as Haredim, in Israel and in America.

    At the very inception of the Zionist movement 150 years ago, not only the Haredim but the overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jewry everywhere was opposed to Zionism, which it considered to be a Jewish heresy, not only because the Zionists were mostly secularists, but because of an oath taken by Jewish leaders after the destruction of the Second Temple following their exile from Palestine, that Jews would not reestablish a Jewish kingdom except following the messianic era. Zionism was also bitterly opposed by much of the world's Jewish Reform movement, many of whose leaders insisted that Jewishness is a religion, not a political identity.

    Much of Orthodox Jewry did not end its opposition to Zionism until after the war of 1967, but many if not most Haredis continue to oppose Zionism as heresy. Most of its members refuse to serve in Israel's military, to celebrate Israel's Independence Day, sing its national anthem, and do not allow prayers in their synagogues for the wellbeing of Israel's political leaders. Trump, Kushner, and the U.S. Congress would have to arrest them as anti-Semites.

    I have no doubt that Trump's rage at the Jewish chairmen of the two Congressional committees that led the procedures for his impeachment will sooner or later explode in anti-Semitic expletives. The only reason it has not done so yet is because of Trump's fear of jeopardizing Evangelical support and Sheldon Adelson's mega bucks. After all, Trump already told us that the neo-Nazi rioters in Charlottesville declaiming "Jews will not replace us" included "very fine people." Netanyahu never criticized Trump's statement, for he too does not want to jeopardize certain relationships, namely the "very fine people" he has embraced -- leaders in Hungary, Poland, Austria, Italy, Brazil, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere.

    If Trump's son-in-law is searching for anti-Semites, he should have been told they are far closer at hand than in America's schools, for they are ensconced in the White House. They are also to be found in Jerusalem where they are being accorded honors by Netanyahu. The anti-Semitic dog whistling contained in Trump's attacks on the two Jewish congressmen were not misunderstood by his hardcore supporters -- who now include the entire leadership of the Republican party -- who Trump needs to take him to victory in the coming presidential elections, or to keep him in the White House were he to lose those elections.

    If apartheid is coming (or has come) out of Zion, it should not shock that what may come out of Washington is a repeat by Trump's Republican shock troops of what occurred in Berlin in 1933, when the Bundestag was taken over by the Nazi party and ended Germany's democracy.

    [Feb 14, 2020] More Lies on Iran The White House Just Can t Help Itself as New Facts Emerge by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... It soon emerged that the Iranian was in fact in Baghdad to discuss with the Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi a plan that might lead to the de-escalation of the ongoing conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a meeting that the White House apparently knew about may even have approved. If that is so, events as they unfolded suggest that the US government might have encouraged Soleimani to make his trip so he could be set up and killed. Donald Trump later dismissed the lack of any corroboration of the tale of "imminent threat" being peddled by Pompeo, stating that it didn't really matter as Soleimani was a terrorist who deserved to die. ..."
    "... It now appears that the original death of the American contractor that sparked the tit-for-tat conflict was not carried out by Kata'ib Hezbollah at all. An Iraqi Army investigative team has gathered convincing evidence that it was an attack staged by Islamic State. In fact, the Iraqi government has demonstrated that Kata'ib Hezbollah has had no presence in Kirkuk province, where the attack took place, since 2014. It is a heavily Sunni area where Shi'a are not welcome and is instead relatively hospitable to all-Sunni IS. It was, in fact, one of the original breeding grounds for what was to become ISIS. ..."
    Feb 14, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Admittedly the news cycle in the United States seldom runs longer than twenty-four hours, but that should not serve as an excuse when a major story that contradicts what the Trump Administration has been claiming appears and suddenly dies. The public that actually follows the news might recall a little more than one month ago the United States assassinated a senior Iranian official named Qassem Soleimani. Openly killing someone in the government of a country with which one is not at war is, to say the least, unusual, particularly when the crime is carried out in yet another country with which both the perpetrator and the victim have friendly relations. The justification provided by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, speaking for the administration, was that Soleimani was in Iraq planning an "imminent" mass killing of Americans, for which no additional evidence was provided at that time or since.

    It soon emerged that the Iranian was in fact in Baghdad to discuss with the Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi a plan that might lead to the de-escalation of the ongoing conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a meeting that the White House apparently knew about may even have approved. If that is so, events as they unfolded suggest that the US government might have encouraged Soleimani to make his trip so he could be set up and killed. Donald Trump later dismissed the lack of any corroboration of the tale of "imminent threat" being peddled by Pompeo, stating that it didn't really matter as Soleimani was a terrorist who deserved to die.

    The incident that started the killing cycle that eventually included Soleimani consisted of a December 27th attack on a US base in Iraq in which four American soldiers and two Iraqis were wounded while one US contractor, an Iraqi-born translator, was killed. The United States immediately blamed Iran, claiming that it had been carried out by an Iranian supported Shi'ite militia called Kata'ib Hezbollah. It provided no evidence for that claim and retaliated by striking a Kata'ib base, killing 25 Iraqis who were in the field fighting the remnants of Islamic State (IS). The militiamen had been incorporated into the Iraqi Army and this disproportionate response led to riots outside the US Embassy in Baghdad, which were also blamed on Iran by the US There then followed the assassinations of Soleimani and nine senior Iraqi militia officers. Iran retaliated when it fired missiles at American forces , injuring more than one hundred soldiers, and then mistakenly shot down a passenger jet , killing an additional 176 people. As a consequence due to the killing by the US of 34 Iraqis in the two incidents, the Iraqi Parliament also voted to expel all American troops.

    It now appears that the original death of the American contractor that sparked the tit-for-tat conflict was not carried out by Kata'ib Hezbollah at all. An Iraqi Army investigative team has gathered convincing evidence that it was an attack staged by Islamic State. In fact, the Iraqi government has demonstrated that Kata'ib Hezbollah has had no presence in Kirkuk province, where the attack took place, since 2014. It is a heavily Sunni area where Shi'a are not welcome and is instead relatively hospitable to all-Sunni IS. It was, in fact, one of the original breeding grounds for what was to become ISIS.

    This new development was reported in the New York Times in an article that was headlined "Was US Wrong About Attack That Nearly Started a War With Iran? Iraqi military and intelligence officials have raised doubts about who fired the rockets that started a dangerous spiral of events." In spite of the sensational nature of the report it generally was ignored in television news and in other mainstream media outlets, letting the Trump administration get away with yet another big lie, one that could easily have led to a war with Iran.

    Iraqi investigators found and identified the abandoned white Kia pickup with an improvised Katyusha rocket launcher in the vehicle's bed that was used to stage the attack. It was discovered down a desert road within range of the K-1 joint Iraqi-American base that was hit by at least ten missiles in December, most of which struck the American area.

    There is no direct evidence tying the attack to any particular party and the improvised KIA truck is used by all sides in the regional fighting, but the Iraqi officials point to the undisputed fact that it was the Islamic State that had carried out three separate attacks near the base over the 10 days preceding December 27th. And there are reports that IS has been increasingly active in Kirkuk Province during the past year, carrying out near daily attacks with improvised roadside bombs and ambushes using small arms. There had, in fact, been reports from Iraqi intelligence that were shared with the American command warning that there might be an IS attack on K-1 itself, which is an Iraqi air base in that is shared with US forces.

    The intelligence on the attack has been shared with American investigators, who have also examined the pick-up truck. The Times reports that the US command in Iraq continue to insist that the attack was carried out by Kata'ib based on information, including claimed communications intercepts, that it refuses to make public. The US forces may not have shared the intelligence they have with the Iraqis due to concerns that it would be leaked to Iran, but senior Iraqi military officers are nevertheless perplexed by the reticence to confide in an ally.

    If the Iraqi investigation of the facts around the December attack on K-1 is reliable, the Donald Trump administration's reckless actions in Iraq in late December and early January cannot be justified. Worse still, it would appear that the White House was looking for an excuse to attack and kill a senior Iranian official to send some kind of message, a provocation that could easily have resulted in a war that would benefit no one. To be sure, the Trump administration has lied about developments in the Middle East so many times that it can no longer be trusted. Unfortunately, demanding any accountability from the Trump team would require a Congress that is willing to shoulder its responsibility for truth in government backed up by a media that is willing to take on an administration that regularly punishes anyone or any entity that dares to challenge it

    That is the unfortunate reality in America today.


    AnonStarter , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 12:25 am GMT

    Well, the 9/11 Commission lied about Israeli involvement, Israeli neocons lied America into Iraq, and Netanyahu lied about Iranian nukes, so this latest news is just par for the course.
    KA , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 12:59 am GMT
    @04398436986 lets stay focused.

    Pompeo had evidence of immediate catastrophic attack. That turned out to be a lie and plain BS.
    Why should we believe Pompeo or White House or intelligence about the situation developing around 27-29 Dec ? Is it because it's USA who is saying so?

    anonymous [307] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:12 am GMT
    [it would appear that the White House was looking for an excuse to attack and kill a senior Iranian official to send some kind of message, a provocation that could easily have resulted in a war that would benefit no one.]

    The Jewish mafia stooge and fifth column, Trump, is a war criminal and an ASSASSIN.

    ... ... ...

    melpol , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:13 am GMT
    War with Iran is off the table. Carpet bombing Iran would lead to the destruction of Israel and its nuclear facility...
    Sean , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 2:23 am GMT

    Worse still, it would appear that the White House was looking for an excuse to attack and kill a senior Iranian official to send some kind of message, a provocation that could easily have resulted in a war that would benefit no one.

    Soleimani was a soldier involved in covert operations, Iran's most celebrated hero, and had been featured in the Iraq media as the target of multiple Western assassination attempts. He did not have diplomatic status.

    As it happens Iran did not declare war on America and America did not declare war on Iran. If Americans soldiers killed in Iraq should not have been there in the first place, then the same goes for an Iranian soldier killed there too.

    KA , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 2:30 am GMT
    @04398436986 There is western assertion and western assertion only that Iran influences Iraqi administration and intelligence . It can be a projection from a failing America . It can be also a valid possibility .

    But lying is America's alter ego . It comes easily and as default explanation even when admitting truth would do a better job .

    Now let's focus on ISIS 's claims . Why is Ametica not taking it ( claim of ISIS) as truth and fact when USA has for last 19 years has jailed , bombed, attacked mentally retarded , caves and countries because somebody has pledged allegiance to Al Quida or to ISIS!!!

    It seems neither truth nor lies , but what suits a particular psychopath at a particular time – that becomes USA's report ( kind of unassigned sex – neither truth nor lies – take your pick and find the toilet to flush it down memory hole) – so Pompeo lies to nation hoping no one in administration will ask . When administrative staff gets interested to know the truth , Pompeo tells them to suck it up , move on and get ready to explain the next batch of reality manufactured by a regime and well trained by philosopher Karl Rove

    AnonStarter , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 4:06 am GMT
    @04398436986 conspiracy mongers

    To what "conspiracy" are you referring? It's a well established fact that your ilk was, at the very least, aware that the 9/11 attacks would occur and celebrated them in broad daylight. No conspiracy theory needed. Mossad ordnance experts were living practically next door to the hijackers. Well established fact.

    It's also undeniable that the 9/11 Commission airbrushed Israeli involvement from their report. No conspiracy theory there, either.

    Same goes for Israeli neocons and their media mandarins using "faulty intel" to get their war in Iraq. "Clean Break"? "Rebuilding America's Defenses"? Openly written and published. Judith Miller's lies? Also no conspiracy.

    And Israel's own intelligence directors were undermining Netanyahu's lies on Iran. Not a conspiracy in sight.

    contemplating the outcome of normal everyday competition, influenced by good & bad luck, is just too much truth for some psychological makeups

    That's one of the lamest attempts at deflection I've seen thus far, and I've seen quite a few here.

    Those who deny the official version of 9/11 are in the majority now:

    https://www.livescience.com/56479-americans-believe-conspiracy-theories.html

    We've reached critical mass. Clearly, that's just too much truth for your psychological makeup. Were we really that worthy of ignoring, your people wouldn't be working 24/7/365 to peddle your malarkey in fora of this variety.

    JUSA , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 5:23 am GMT
    I have thought that Trump's true impeachable crime was the illegal assassination of a foreign general who was not in combat. Pence should also be impeached for the botched coup in Venezuela. That was true embarrassment bringing that "El Presidente" that no one recognizes to the SOTU.

    USA is basically JU-S-A now, Jews own and run this country from top to bottom, side to side, and because of it, pretty much run the world. China-Russia-Iran form their new "Axis of Evil" to be brought in line. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the Covid-19 is a bioweapon, except not one created by China. Israel has been working on an ethnic based bioweapon for years. US sent 172 military "athletes" to the Military World Games in Wuhan in October, 2019, two weeks before the first case of coronavirus appeared. Almost too coincidental.

    animalogic , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 6:20 am GMT
    @Sean He wasn't there as a soldier -- he was there in a diplomatic role. (regardless of his official "status"). It also appears he was lured there with intent to assaninate.
    Your last para is not only terrible logic but ignores the point of the article. Iran likely was not responsible for the US deaths. Even had it been responsible it would still not legitimate such a baldly criminal action.
    Sean , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 6:29 am GMT
    @JUSA

    [I]illegal assassination of a foreign general who was not in combat

    Lawful combat according to the Geneva Convention in which war is openly declared and fought between two countries each of which have regular uniformed forces that do all the actual fighting is an extremely rare thing. It is all proxy forces, deniability and asymmetric warfare in which one side (the stronger) is attacked by phantom combatants.

    The Israeli PM publically alluded to the fact that Soleimani had almost been killed in the Mossad operation to kill Imad Mughniyeh a decade ago. The Iranian public knew that Soleimani had narrowly escaped death from Israeli drones, because Soleimani appeared on Iranian TV in October and told the story. A plot kill him by at a memorial service in Iran was supposedly foiled. He came from Lebanon by way of Syria into Iraq as if none of this had happened. Trump had sacked Bolton and failed to react to the drone attack on Saudi oil.

    Iran seems to have thought that refusal to actually fight in the type of war that the international conventions were designed to regulate is a licence to exert pressure by launch attacks without being targeted oneself. Now do they understand.

    Ace , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 8:41 am GMT
    @Sean American troops invaded Iraq under false pretenses, killed thousands, and caused great destruction. Chaos and vengeful Sunnis spilled over into Syria where the US proceeded to grovel before the terrorists we fret about. Soleimani was effective in organizing resistance in Iraq and Syria and was in both countries with the blessing of their governments.

    How you get Soleimani shouldn't be there out of that I have no idea.

    Zen , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 12:04 pm GMT
    @04398436986 Yet you ignore that the Neocons have lied about virtually every cause if war ever. Lied about Iraq, North Korea and Iran nuclear info actions, about chem weapons in Syria, lied about Kosovo, lied about Libya, lied about Benghazi, lied about Venezuela. So Whom I gonna believe, no government, but a Neocon led one least of all
    Vojkan , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:05 pm GMT
    @Sean American soldiers went there uninvited. Soleimani went there because he was invited. That makes a hell of a difference.
    Robjil , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:05 pm GMT
    It is common knowledge that ISIS is a US/Israeli creation. ISIS is the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service. Thus, the US/Israel staged the attack on the US base on 12.27.2019.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-is-a-us-israeli-creation-top-ten-indications/5518627

    ISIS is a US-Israeli Creation: Indication #2: ISIS Never Attacks Israel

    It is more than highly strange and suspicious that ISIS never attacks Israel – it is another indication that ISIS is controlled by Israel. If ISIS were a genuine and independent uprising that was not covertly orchestrated by the US and Israel, why would they not try to attack the Zionist regime, which has attacked almost of all of its Muslim neighbors ever since its inception in 1948? Israel has attacked Egypt, Syria and Lebanon, and of course has decimated Palestine. It has systemically tried to divide and conquer its Arab neighbors. It continually complains of Islamic terrorism. Yet, when ISIS comes on the scene as the bloody and barbaric king of Islamic terrorism, it finds no fault with Israel and sees no reason to target a regime which has perpetrated massive injustice against Muslims? This stretches credibility to a snapping point.

    ISIS and Israel don't attack each other – they help each other. Israel was treating ISIS soldiers and other anti-Assad rebels in its hospitals! Mortal enemies or best of friends?

    Coward Corps , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:07 pm GMT
    The MQ-9 pilot and sensor operator will be looking over their shoulders for a long time. They're as famous as Soleimani. Their command chain is well known too, hide though they might far away.

    And who briefed the president that terror Tuesday? The murder program isn't Air Force.

    Eek , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:25 pm GMT
    Hey now, you learn to put the best gloss on things when your troops are pathetic little timmies scared of rocks and 12-year olds. Bunch of pussies.

    https://southfront.org/dumbfucks-russian-troops-react-to-us-forces-using-firearms-against-syrian-villagers/

    The IRGC is going to make mincemeat of these chumps.

    Moi , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:36 pm GMT
    @anonymous The kind of crap Trump pulled in the assassination of Soleimani is what he should be impeached about–not the piss-ant stuff about Hunter Biden's job in the Ukaranian gas company and his pappy's role in it.
    Sick of Orcs , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:49 pm GMT
    We're really benefitting, carrying water for (((our greatest ally.)))
    Really No Shit , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 1:59 pm GMT
    Iraq an ally of the United States! Is it some kind of a joke? How can a master and slave be equal? We, the big dog want their oil and the tail that wags us, Israel, want all Muslims pacified and the Congress, which is us wether we like or not, compliant out of financial fears. Unless we curb our own greedy appetite for fossil fuels and at the same time tell an ally, which Israel is by being equal in a sense that it can get away with murder and not a pip is raised, to limit its ambition, nothing is going to be done to improve the situation. Until then it's an exercise in futility, at best!
    anonymous [307] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 2:46 pm GMT
    @Ozymandias You are so ignorant.

    Iran has NO choice but to defend itself from the savages. It has not been Iran that invaded US, but US with a plan that design years before 9/11 invaded many countries. Remember: seven countries in five years. Soleimani was a wise man working towards peace by creating options for Iran to defend itself. Iran is not the aggressor, but US -Israel-UK are the aggressor for centuries now. Is this so difficult to understand. 9/11 was staged by US/Israel killing 3000 Christians to implement their criminal plan.

    Soleimani, was on a peace mission, where was assassinated by Trump, an Israeli firster and a fifth column and the baby killer Netanyahu. Is this difficult to understand by the Trump worshiper, a traitor.

    Now, Khamenie is saying the same thing: "Iran should be strong in military warfare and sciences to prevent war and maintain PEACE.

    Only ignorant, arrogant, and racists don't understand this fact and refuse to understand how the victims have been pushed to defend themselves.

    The Assassin at the black house should receive the same fate in order to bring the peace.

    anonymous [307] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 2:48 pm GMT
    @Moi I totally agree with you. Both parties are a fifth column and criminals.
    Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT
    When does Amerikastan *not* lie about anything? If an Amerikastani tells you the sun rises in the east, you're probably on Venus, where it rises in the west.
    DaveE , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
    I think this article is getting close to the truth, that this whole operation was and is an ISIS (meaning Israeli Secret Intelligence Service) affair designed to pit America against the zionists' most formidable enemy thus far, Iran.

    I'm of the opinion that Trump did not order the hit on Soleimani, but was forced to take credit for it, if he didn't want to forfeit any chance of being reelected this year. The same ISIS (Israeli) forces that did the hit also orchestrated the "retaliation" that Mr. Giraldi so heroically documents in this piece.

    As usual, this is looking more and more like a zionist /jewish false flag attack on the Muslim world, with the real dirty-work to be done by the American military.

    Ahoy , says: Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 3:17 pm GMT
    The dealer in the M.E. poker game is Putin. This is what drives the very elite crazy. How could this have happened? We had conquered Russia in 1917.

    Well, you must have made a small mistake along the way. Trumpstein can't save you. Soon the dollar won't have any value. There is nothing behind it.

    The new policeman in the M.E. will be Iran. The legacy of Lawrence of Arabia has died long time ago.

    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment February 14, 2020 at 3:33 pm GMT

    It soon emerged that the Iranian was in fact in Baghdad to discuss with the Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi a plan that might lead to the de-escalation of the ongoing conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a meeting that the White House apparently knew about may even have approved.

    It's now obvious that the slumlord son-in-law Jared Kushner is really running the USA's ME policy.
    Kushner is not only a dear friend of at-large war criminal Bibi Nuttyahoo, he also belongs to the Judaic religious cult of Chabad Lubavitcher, whom make the war-loving Christian Evangelicals almost look sane. Chabad also prays for some kind of Armageddon to bring forth their Messiah, just like the Evangelicals.

    One can tell by Kushner's nasty comments he makes about Arabs/Persians and Palestinians in particular, that he loathes and despises those people and has an idiotic ear to cry into in the malignant form of Zion Don, AKA President Trump.

    It's been said that Kushner is also a Mossad agent or asset, which is a good guess, since that agency has been placing their agents into the WH since at least the days of Clinton, who had Rahm Emmanuel to whisper hate into his ear.

    That the Iranian General Soleimani was lured into Iraq so the WH could murder the man probably most responsible for halting the terrorist activities of the heart-eating, head-chopping US/Israel/KSA creation ISIS brings to mind the motto of the Israeli version of the CIA, the Mossad.

    "By way of deception thou shalt make war."

    Between Trump's incompetence, his vanity–and yes, his stupidity– and his appointing Swamp creatures into his cabinet and allowing Jared to run the ME show, Trump is showing himself to be a worse choice than Hillary.
    If that maniac gets another 4 years, humanity is doomed. Or at least the USA for sure will perish.

    [Feb 14, 2020] Damage: The Democrats on Russia

    Full spectrum Dominance doctrine leaves no space for Russia. It needs to become a vassal or disappear in timi, dependents of the West statelests.
    Feb 05, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    Extracted from Presidential Election Politics are Damaging U.S. Foreign Policy Written by
    Robert E. Hunter

    It's not just the White House that is doing serious damage to U.S. interests abroad during this year's election campaign. Of even greater consequence (absent a new Middle East war) is the U.S. relationship with Russia. It's currently unthinkable that Washington will try to move beyond the status quo, even if Russian President Vladimir Putin were prepared to do so. Even before Trump was inaugurated, many Democrats began calling for his impeachment . Leading Democrats laid Hillary Clinton ' s defeat at the feet of Russian interference in the U.S. election -- a claim that stretched credulity past the breaking point. Further, as Democrats looked for grounds to impeach Trump (or at least terminally to reduce his reelection chances), the " Russia factor" was the best cudgel available. Charges included the notion that " Putin has something on Trump," which presumes he would sell out the nation ' s security for a mess of pottage.

    All this domestic politicking ignores a geopolitical fact: while the Soviet Union lost the Cold War and, for some time thereafter, Russia could be dismissed, it was always certain that it would again become a significant power, at least in Europe. Thus, even before the Berlin Wall fell, President George H. W. Bush proposed creating a " Europe whole and free" and at peace. Bill Clinton built on what Bush began. Both understood that a renascent Russia could embrace revanchism, and for several years their efforts seemed to have a chance of succeeding.

    Then the effort went off the rails. Putin took power in Russia, which made cooperation with the West difficult if not impossible. He worked to consolidate his domestic position, in part by alleging that the West was " disrespecting" Russia and trying to encircle it. For its part, the U.S. played into the Putin narrative by abandoning the Bush-Clinton vision of taking legitimate Russian interests into account in fashioning European security arrangements. The breaking point came in 2014, when Russia seized Crimea and sent " little green men" to fight in some other parts of Ukraine. The West necessarily responded, with economic sanctions and NATO's buildup of " trip wire" forces in Central Europe.

    But despite the ensuing standoff, the critical requirement remains: the United States has to acknowledge Russia's inevitable rise as a major power while also impressing on Putin the need to trim his ambitions, if he is to avoid a new era of Russian isolation. There is also serious business that the two countries need to pursue, including strategic arms control, the Middle East (especially Iran), and climate change. Despite deep disagreements, including over Ukraine and parts of Central Europe, the U.S. needs to engage in serious discussions with Russia, which means the renewal of diplomacy which has been in the deep freeze for years.

    All of this has been put in pawn by the role that the "Russia factor" has been permitted to play in American presidential politics, especially by Democrats. Longer-term U.S. interests are suffering, along with those of the European allies and Middle East partners. The task has been made even more difficult by those U.S. politicians, think tanks , and journalists who prefer to resurrect the term "cold war" rather than clearly examining the nation's strategic needs because of the blinkers imposed by domestic politics. Open discussion about alternatives in dealing with Russia is thus stifled, at serious cost to the United States and others.

    In all three of these areas, the U.S. is paying a high price in terms of its national interests to the games political leaders, both Republicans and Democrats, are playing. Great efforts will be needed to dig out of this mess, beginning with U.S. willingness to do so. Leaders elsewhere must also be prepared to join in -- far from a sure thing! Unfortunately, there is currently little hope that, at least in the three critical areas discussed above, pursuit of U.S. interests abroad will prevail over today's parochial domestic politics.

    [Feb 14, 2020] Points for discussion: not necessarily my positions by Colonel Lang

    Militarism is destroying the USA economy and well-being of the population.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Candidate Trump said he was for a restoration of Glass-Steagal banking laws and he'd be wise to move on that before a 2008 style collapse hits again. ..."
    "... Hillary is the single most prominent example of a class of Democratic apparatchiks who make an excellent living (mis)representing the interests of working Americans and shaking down corporate America using their political clout. It is a matter of shame for America that in her and her husbands careers in "public service" they have amassed a $150mn fortune. ..."
    Feb 14, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    2. The young people who favor policies like "Medicare for all" are ignorant of economics and do not grasp the fact that they would end by paying a great deal of taxes for that policy.

    ... ... ...

    3. Democratic Party policy toward Trump is designed to prevent him governing.

    4. The Democrats are seeking a new issue (anything will do) over which to impeach Trump again.

    ... ... ...

    6. Trump's foreign policy in the ME is ignorant of anything but Zionist desires and ambitions.

    7. In any deal with the Taliban the present Afghan government will inevitably be defeated and destroyed in the aftermath.

    8. US ground forces are too large. We should adopt a foreign policy that will permit the maintenance of smaller ground forces.

    9. Hillary has been behind much of the political devilment in the last three years and is scheming and hoping for a deadlocked convention in which she will be nominated by acclamation.

    10. Trump will wisely offer Tulsi Gabbard a job in his next administration. pl div

    Vegetius , 13 February 2020 at 11:24 AM

    All good except #6 precludes #10, unless it was a bad faith offer.

    I don't think the ZioCons will tolerate Trump offering Gabbard anything, even if he could ever get over her accurately describing him as the Saudis' bitch.

    Jack , 13 February 2020 at 11:33 AM
    Sir

    Trump is very astute. He gets it. Bloomberg is going to buy the nomination with the full backing of the Deep State/Wall St wing.

    Mini Mike is a 5'4" mass of dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians. No boxes please. He hates Crazy Bernie and will, with enough money, possibly stop him. Bernie's people will go nuts!

    https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1227946304057364481?s=21

    Laura Wilson , 13 February 2020 at 11:42 AM
    6-8 You are so correct. The question is: how will this affect our national interest over the next 5-10 years? Will it matter to us?

    I don't know and can't visualize the consequences very well. I assume the Muslim world will be arrayed against us for the foreseeable future. How dangerous is that to our own safety?

    Dennis Daulton , 13 February 2020 at 11:47 AM
    With the fed now pumping upwards to 120 billion a day in the repo overnight loans market to keep the biggest banks solvent, I wouldn't be so confident about the health of the economy.

    Candidate Trump said he was for a restoration of Glass-Steagal banking laws and he'd be wise to move on that before a 2008 style collapse hits again.

    Trumps emphasis on a blue collar boom and an NASA moon landing will be how the US economy remains strong not bailing out too big to fail Wall Street bank.

    Dennis Daulton , 13 February 2020 at 11:47 AM Harry , 13 February 2020 at 12:27 PM
    Re point 2. We are already paying for health insurance. At least I am. It costs me $26k per year to health insure my family.

    All other countries with socialize healthcare systems spend a lower proportion of their GDP on healthcare and almost all have better health outcomes for their populations. The proportion less can be as much as half the percentage of GDP the US spends on healthcare.

    Taxes may well go up. Healthcare costs will go down for most people. And for those whose healthcare is paid by their employers, the costs to the employers would go down too, meaning that wages could go up to offset (or more than offset) the additional taxes.

    ambrit , 13 February 2020 at 12:34 PM
    Sir;
    I have been advocating point #9 for a year now. Few understand the monstrous ambition contained by HRH HRC. (Her Royal Highness Hillary Rodham Clinton.)
    The Clinton foundation basically took over the Democrat National Committee, (an avowedly private organization,) in 2016.

    See: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41850797

    One does not generally purchase a new toy without wanting to play with it. Clinton's 'toy' is the DNC. What is the primary purpose of the DNC? To run a political party. The primary functions of a political party, at least today's versions of political parties, are to secure power for the leadership of the party and 'compensation' for the efforts of the nomenklaturas.

    Harry , 13 February 2020 at 12:45 PM
    The economy is bad for most of the young and some of the old. This can be inferred by the rise in 2nd and 3rd jobs among the workforce.

    2 I have already addressed.

    I think points 3 and 4 are obviously true. Im not sure if it is the Dems leading the charge or the neocons. But a group is attempting to block Trumps efforts to govern.

    I am a Sanders supporter. I believe that 5 is partially correct. Sanders wishes to remove the free market operating in certain key areas - most obviously Healthcare. I do not think you are right about Warren. I think she is seeking progressive votes, but has no intention of delivering.

    I think 6 is obviously true, although I also think Trumps instinct lead him to wish to withdraw troops. He is no match for the "Borg".

    7 is also clearly true.

    8 is also clearly true.

    9. I would modify this. Hillary is the single most prominent example of a class of Democratic apparatchiks who make an excellent living (mis)representing the interests of working Americans and shaking down corporate America using their political clout. It is a matter of shame for America that in her and her husbands careers in "public service" they have amassed a $150mn fortune.

    10. I doubt it but wouldnt it be fun!

    FWLIW.

    Keith Harbaugh , 13 February 2020 at 12:47 PM
    While I once read Michael Scheuer's blog for his wisdom on his areas of specialty (some examples of that wisdom concerning Afghanistan, excerpted from his books, are collected at: "Afghanistan: Michael Scheuer's View" )

    I was turned off by what seemed to be his appeals in his blog for violence against those whom he sees as America's internal enemies. However, reading Col. Lang's point 7 above, which echoes what Scheuer said in his 2004 book Imperial Hubris (e.g., this ), prompted me to check out what he is currently saying. One quote from his current blog I think will interest both Col. Lang and the CIA veteran Larry Johnson. Scheuer wrote:

    The current CIA Director [ Gina Haspel ] is one of the officers I worked with, and she, almost single-handedly, helped CIA's bin Laden unit destroy an al-Qaeda organization in Eurasia . I have always admired her greatly for her brains, personal courage, and for never, in my experience, flinching from truth and duty.
    I have no idea of the veracity of that, but I certainly do respect MS for his knowledge of the CIA, the Muslims, and Afghanistan. Surely MS knows of what he speaks in this instance. I think his recommendation is worth noting.
    Keith Harbaugh , 13 February 2020 at 12:47 PM plantman , 13 February 2020 at 01:23 PM
    You seem to be saying that "Medicare for all" is pie in the sky and can't work economically. But how do you explain the fact that all the EU democracies, the UK, Canada etc can provide full health care, but the richest country in the world can't?

    Government-funded health care would put more cash in the average guy's pocket which he would spend on consumption which would strengthen the economy. It's a "win win" solution. When I was in business, I never minded paying for health care, but monthly payments have ballooned to the point that it's out of reach for many people. I hope you agree with me that health care has gone from being a vital service to an extortion racket.

    Sometimes government can do some good. They could start by creating a system that's either affordable or puts the screws to the health care Mafia.

    These people are bloodsuckers!

    plantman , 13 February 2020 at 01:23 PM

    Andrei Martyanov , 13 February 2020 at 01:43 PM

    All good, except pp.1 since the actual industrial output contracts (4 consecutive annual contractions) and manufacturing is even worse--6 consecutive annual contractions.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/industrial-production

    Most "jobs" created are mostly part-time retail jobs due to season. Boeing situation devastated a contractor and supply chain with massive layoffs (e.g. Spirit Wichita laid-off the third of its labor force)--and those are REAL jobs. The rest--subscribe completely. Albeit, something has to be done with healthcare. What? I don't know.

    jsn , 13 February 2020 at 01:46 PM
    1. Yes!

    2. My wife and I, in the US private sector now, pay $12,000 a year out of pocket before we get any "coverage" at all from the Denial of Care industry. I'm 57, young people get even less for their money and will continue to vote for change until something gets better for them. Medicare and the VA already provide over one third of US actual medical care and do it for a fraction of what the Denial of Care industry does it for. It would be hilarious if Trump took up M4A and ran on it: he could probably implement it, which he was in favor of back when he was a private business man because the rent extractions of the Denial of Care industry make US labor uncompetitive against the rest of the world. The MED IC is in the tank for the Dem party and doing all it can to stop M4A.

    4. Which would make sense if the Dems were interested in governing, but if Obama proved anything it is that all the Dems want to do is say, "those mean, evil Republicans won't let us do anything." Which is to say the current configuration of politics and economy are working just fine for the Dem apparatchiks who's main function is to fleece guys like Bloomberg.

    5. There are a world of economic models between our NeoLiberal (see Slobodian's "The Globalists") hyper extractive capitalism and a Leninist command economy, it's straw-manning to call AOC, Sanders and even Warren Leninists when they are all somewhere to the right of Eisenhower and Nixon.

    6. Yes!

    7. Seems likely.

    8. Yes and they shouldn't be deployed to create chaotic ground conditions to facilitate looting by Globalist Multinationals.

    9. 4 more years!!

    10. Wouldn't it be nice.

    Harlan Easley , 13 February 2020 at 01:55 PM
    Number 9. The Eve-Devil whose sole ambition is to destroy Planet Earth.
    turcopolier , 13 February 2020 at 02:43 PM
    jsn "when they are all somewhere to the right of Eisenhower and Nixon." Hey! I remember Eisenhower and Nixon and you are completely full of it about them. Both of them were centrists.
    turcopolier , 13 February 2020 at 02:43 PM

    turcopolier , 13 February 2020 at 02:43 PM

    /div

    [Feb 14, 2020] Trump s foreign policy in the ME is ignorant of anything but Zionist desires and ambitions.

    Feb 14, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Not directly related to any of these points, but important in the mix, is the relation of both parties to AIPAC. People don't want a government whose first priority is Israel.

    The first meaningful push back against AIPAC (long overdue) was by a Minnesota Democrat, Betty McCollum, yesterday. A letter worth reading: https://mccollum.house.gov/media/press-releases/mccollum-statement-hate-speech-makes-aipac-hate-group

    [Feb 14, 2020] The Right-Wing Pro-Israel, Evangelical Agenda has Taken Over Trump's Middle East Policy

    Notable quotes:
    "... Until recently, President Donald Trump's pro-Israel policy was centered on taking steps related to fulfilling campaign promises and strengthening his standing domestically with his evangelical base. Chief among these steps was his decision to pull out of the nuclear accord with Iran, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and at the same time announcing moving the American embassy to Jerusalem). Trump also signed a presidential proclamation recognizing "Israeli sovereignty" over the Golan Heights. ..."
    "... By deciding to carry out this assassination operation, Trump has brought his pro-Israel policy to an entirely new, and dangerous level. ..."
    "... Israel may have found in the Trump administration the perfect ally when it comes to the demonization of Iran and the groups it supports. ..."
    Feb 14, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    Until recently, President Donald Trump's pro-Israel policy was centered on taking steps related to fulfilling campaign promises and strengthening his standing domestically with his evangelical base. Chief among these steps was his decision to pull out of the nuclear accord with Iran, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and at the same time announcing moving the American embassy to Jerusalem). Trump also signed a presidential proclamation recognizing "Israeli sovereignty" over the Golan Heights.

    All of this has changed, however, with the assassination of the commander of the Quds Force in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) General Qassem Soleimani and the deputy head of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), Abu Mehdi Al-Muhandis.

    By deciding to carry out this assassination operation, Trump has brought his pro-Israel policy to an entirely new, and dangerous level.

    Targeting the IRGC and PMF: An Israeli policy

    It is worth remembering that Israel set the precedent for carrying out lethal operations in Iraq by targeting elements of the IRGC and the PMF.

    Israel began these operations last year, with the first taking place on July 19 near the Iraqi town of Amerli. Iranian media later reported that senior IRGC commander Abu Alfazl Sarabian had died in the attack.

    Another Israeli attack on August 25 led to the death of a senior PMF commander in the Iraqi town of Al-Qaim near the border with Syria, while 21 PMF members were killed in an Israeli operation near the city of Hit in Iraq's Anbar province on September 20.

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even admitted that Israel was behind these attacks.

    "We are working against Iranian consolidation in Iraq as well [as in Syria]" remarked Netanyahu on August 22.

    Trump administration officials adopt the Israel line of demonizing Iran

    The Israeli fingerprints on U.S. policy could also be seen in the apparent stances taken by U.S. officials following the assassination of Soleimani and Al-Muhandis.

    According to the New York Times , Trump administration officials have compared the assassination of Soleimani to the killing of former ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. Such a comparison is no doubt to Israel's liking.

    Not only has Israel long sought to equate the IRGC and its allies, including the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Iraqi PMF, with terrorist groups like al-Qaida and ISIS, it has even described the latter groups as being the lesser of the two evils.

    According to sources in Washington, one of the most common complaints made by visiting Israeli officials over the past years was that the U.S. was focusing too much on fighting Sunni Jihadist groups (al-Qaida, ISIS, etc.) and not enough on fighting Iran and its network of allies.

    Israel's former ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren referred to this dynamic in an interview with the Jerusalem Post back in September 2013, where he summed up the Israeli policy regarding Syria. "The initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted (President) Bashar Assad to go" he stated, further adding; "we always preferred the bad guys who weren't back by Iran (al-Qaida affiliates) to the bad guys who were backed by Iran".

    For his part, former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon referred to an " axis of evil ' comprising Iran, Syria, and Lebanon.

    Yaalon made those remarks during a meeting with former chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey in August 2013, underscoring that this "axis of evil" must not emerge victorious in Syria.

    Israel may have found in the Trump administration the perfect ally when it comes to the demonization of Iran and the groups it supports.

    Hard-core evangelicals like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence have a strong ideological affinity for Israel and its anti-Iranian agenda.

    During a Senate hearing last April, Pompeo repeated the long-debunked claim that Iran and al-Qaida have cooperated for years. "There is no doubt there is a connection between the Islamic Republic of Iran and al-Qaida. Period, full stop," Pompeo asserted.

    Pence, meanwhile, has even gone so far as to claim that Soleimani was involved with 9/11 . Following the assassination, Pence tweeted that Soleimani had "assisted in the clandestine travel of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States."

    American troops in danger as a result of the Israeli evangelical agenda

    With the assassination of Soleimani and Al-Muhandes, Israel and its Christian evangelical allies in Washington appear to have succeeded more than any time before in steering Trump's foreign policy. Their success, however, may have placed U.S. troops in the region in grave danger.

    In a speech commemorating the death of Soleimani and Al-Muhandes, the leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah warned that retaliation would be aimed at U.S. military assets.

    In remarks which brought back the memories of the 1983 attacks on the Marine Barracks in Beirut, Nasrallah suggested that the U.S. military presence in the region would become a target for suicide bombers.

    "The suicide attackers who forced the Americans to leave our region in the past are still here today and in far greater numbers," Nasrallah asserted.

    [Feb 14, 2020] Erdogan has requested NATO via Trump to help him

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Taffyboy , Feb 12 2020 17:48 utc | 34

    That rat Erdogan has requested NATO via Trump to help him. Looks like that rotten no good for nothing skunk is going all in. Let us see if his grunts can match the battle hardened Syrians. My vote is for the Syrians.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/erdogan-ready-hit-assad-forces-anywhere-us-vows-full-support-our-nato-ally

    Virgile , Feb 12 2020 17:51 utc | 35

    "The civilians are suffering because of provocations in Idlib de-escalation zone by the terrorist groups that use 'live shield' against the Syrian government forces. The situation is exacerbated by the arrival of weapons and ammunition in the de-escalation zone via the Syrian-Turkish border, as well as the arrival of Turkish armoured vehicles and troops in the province of Idlib," the Russian ministry said in a press release.

    "The real reason of the crisis in Idlib de-escalation zone is, unfortunately, the failure of our Turkish colleagues to adhere to their commitments on separating moderate opposition fighters from terrorists of Jabhat Nusra (banned in Russia) and Hurras ad-Din (linked to Al Qaeda, which is banned in Russia)," the press release read.

    https://sputniknews.com/world/202002121078294391-kremlin-refutes-claims-that-syrian-army-attacked-civilians-in-idlib/

    ARN , Feb 12 2020 20:56 utc | 62
    Look like Erdo get even more from US for scalation..
    https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200212-us-treasury-lifts-sanctions-off-turkey-ministries/
    Bruce , Feb 12 2020 19:56 utc | 53
    @b

    "Meanwhile, Turkish suppliers complained about difficulties sending tomatoes to Russia, said Ahmet Hamdi Gyrdogan, head of the Union of East Black Sea Exporters.

    This is notable, since one of the sanctions Russia imposed on Turkey over the downing of the Russian Su-24 back in 2015, was related to tomatoes and they're a big part of Ankara-Moscow agricultural trade.

    "We are ready to supply our products to Russia instead of the Chinese, which it has now abandoned because of the coronavirus. However, unfortunately, our historical friendship with Russia due to events in Syria, and especially in Idlib, is under great pressure, relations are deteriorating. Now we can't send tomatoes to Russia: they say that the quota has ended. < > I hope that the leadership of Russia and Turkey will be able to act on the basis of common sense," a source of RIA said.

    According to him, exporters requested an additional quota from the Russian side, but so far no answer has been received, and the delivered goods are being returned back."
    https://southfront.org/u-s-nato-rush-to-add-fuel-to-fire-of-idlib-conflict/

    Precisely as you predicted. Better tomatoes than bodies. My hat is off to you and to VVP.

    Miss Lacy , Feb 12 2020 20:03 utc | 54
    Yes, turkey has been helping izzyhell to stolen oil for a very very long time. Remember Erdogan's son and the conveys of oil trucks? A very nasty viper is Erdogan. Does anyone else think he just set up Putie big time??? I'm referring to taffyboy's link at #34... syria and libya too. Pompeous must be dancing on his desk.

    [Feb 14, 2020] The Syrian Government and its armed forces have finally taken control and regained control of the M5 highway joining Damascus, the capitol, to the south with the major industrial city of Aleppo in the north

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    uncle tungsten , Feb 13 2020 8:52 utc | 140

    The Syrian Government and its armed forces have finally taken control and regained control of the M5 highway joining Damascus, the capitol, to the south with the major industrial city of Aleppo in the north. They have achieved what Turkey lacked the will and capacity to achieve.

    Syrian soldiers and their leader President Assad have demonstrated their capacity to defend their country against huge malign odds. With any sense Turkey will withdraw its lunatic interference and work with regional governments to eliminate the jihadis and resettle the refugees currently in Turkey. I wont hold my breath but that would be the sane way out of its self created dilemma.

    Finally Aleppo city is free from murderous jihadis at its doorstep. Thanks to Russia and Syria working together and their regional allies.

    [Feb 14, 2020] Seems like Uncle Sam is making himself popular again during a clash with local militias in Qamishli

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Vato , Feb 12 2020 15:24 utc | 14

    Seems like Uncle Sam is making himself popular again during a clash with local militias in Qamishli

    Mao , Feb 13 2020 7:34 utc | 131

    Posted by: Vato | Feb 12 2020 15:24 utc | 14

    Seems like Uncle Sam is making himself popular again during a clash with local militias in Qamishli

    A Syrian was killed and another was wounded when government supporters attacked American troops and tried to block their way as their convoy drove through an army checkpoint in northeastern Syria, prompting a rare clash, state media and activists reported.

    https://apnews.com/5af57c4ce873b35c22ceb7360f9323ee

    snake , Feb 13 2020 10:58 utc | 146
    the link itself
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/02/12/usaf-f15-attacks-syrian-army-checkpoint-after-russians-save-us-column-from-angry-kurds/ <===the same link as amended for the bar ===>
    Russia stops Syria so USA can get safely home
    Maybe we now know Putin's position in Syria < == he is going to help the oil companies divide up Syria.

    On the issue of Bernie.. might as well put Miss Julia my first grade teacher into the paint deceiving white house.. the problem Bernie cannot solve, is keeping the USA from using America and Americans to make the USA great. The USA has destroyed America, does not matter who has been elected its more of the same, just a different clown in a different clown suit.

    Bernie cannot overcome the make the USA great syndrome he does understand the problem is how to return America to its Greatness, but he does not have the moxey it takes to deal with the mobster community? His legs will be broken before he gets installed. Even so no body is going to defeat the electoral college system, and Bernie ain't on the approved list.

    alaff , Feb 13 2020 11:28 utc | 148
    Yesterday's briefing by the Russian Defense Ministry:

    At 10:30 a.m. on February 12, 2020, at a checkpoint near Kharbat Khamo, located east of Qamyshlia, al-Hasakah province, a unit of the Syrian Arab Republic stopped a convoy of the US Armed Forces deviating from the route. There was a conflict between US troops and the local civilians, as a result of which the US military opened fire on civilians. One local resident was injured. Another, a 14-year-old boy, Faisal Khalid Muhammad, died. Only through the efforts of the Russian servicemen who arrived at the scene of the incident, it was possible to prevent a further escalation of the conflict with local residents and to ensure the exit of the US Armed Forces column in the direction of the base point in the area of the KhImo, al-Hasakah province.

    Amid the general hype, the US military shot and killed a 14-year-old child in Syria. A simple, insignificant, unimportant incident.
    I doubt that CNN will talk about it in prime time.

    [Feb 14, 2020] Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Abbas Mousavi warned on Wednesday that Iran's response to any Israeli aggression against its interests in the region or in Syria will be "crushing."

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    psychohistorian , Feb 13 2020 5:14 utc | 120

    Below is another short Xinhuanet posting about current political posturing and threats in the ME

    "
    TEHRAN, Feb. 12 (Xinhua) -- Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Abbas Mousavi warned on Wednesday that Iran's response to any Israeli aggression against its interests in the region or in Syria will be "crushing."

    Mousavi said over the past 70 years Israel has resorted to violence to occupy Palestine and target its neighboring countries.

    Iran's presence in Syria has been at invitation with the aim of fighting terrorism, the spokesman added.

    "Our country will not hesitate to protect its interests in Syria or in the region and will defend its national security," he noted, vowing "decisive and crushing response to any aggression or stupid act of Israel against its interests."
    "

    Sitting here on the West coast of North America all I can do is wish them well in working out the 70+ years of jamming the Occupied Palestine/Israel state into the middle of the ME...and then occupying more and into Syria....

    And once again let me close by noting that the above is a proxy part of the current civilization war about public/private global finance in the social contract.....socialism or barbarism

    [Feb 14, 2020] Deadly 'Occupation' Video Shows Moment Syrian Villagers Open Fire On US Patrol

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Deadly 'Occupation': Video Shows Moment Syrian Villagers Open Fire On US Patrol by Tyler Durden Wed, 02/12/2020 - 15:20

    Via Al-Masdar News,

    A new video from the Al-Qamishli countryside was released this afternoon following a skirmish between the U.S. Armed Forces and residents of the Syrian village of Khirbat Amo , east of Qamishli in Syria's northeast.

    According to a report from the Al-Hasakah Governorate, the residents of Khirbat Amo attempted to block the U.S. Armed Forces from bypassing a checkpoint belonging to the National Defense Forces (NDF) in the southern countryside of Al-Qamishli.

    Below is the video of the gunfire exchange from Khirbat Amo on Wednesday:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/rMnyzjDButw

    As a result of this obstruction, two U.S. military vehicles had to be towed from the area after they became stuck in the grass.

    The incident also prompted false reports of airstrikes, which were said to have been carried out by the U.S. Coalition on the Syrian military's positions in Khirbat Amo on Wednesday.

    The Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) said at least one resident of Khirbat Amo was wounded during the brief exchange . This was later updated to one civilian killed by U.S. gunfire, according to ABC News .

    AP photo of the aftermath of the deadly shootout, which left one Syrian civilian dead.

    The U.S. Coalition confirmed the dangerous and rare incident:

    "After Coalition troops issued a series of warnings and de-escalation attempts, the patrol came under small arms fire from unknown individuals. In self-defense, Coalition troops returned fire," an official statement by U.S. spokesman Col. Myles B. Caggins III said.

    Coalition statement on the incident in Qamishli earlier today

    * Came under fire from unknown individuals near a SAA checkpoint

    * U.S troops fired backed

    * Nothing on injuries

    * Convoy returned to base

    * Why is the U.S military passing though Syrian army checkpoints? pic.twitter.com/kIMIvqeEHe

    -- Danny Makki (@Dannymakkisyria) February 12, 2020

    "The situation was de-escalated and is under investigation," the statement added.

    Pro-Syrian government media sources said the villagers were outraged over an earlier skirmish that resulted in the death of a 14-year old from the town, though this is yet to be confirmed.

    Locals opning fire at US military vehciles in Khirbat Amo in northern al-Hasakah today. Earlier US forces hadkilled a 14 year old teenager from the town. pic.twitter.com/fTA5NxrCMr

    -- Within Syria (@WithinSyriaBlog) February 12, 2020

    The U.S. Coalition spokesperson later reported that one U.S. soldier suffered a superficial wound and was allowed to return to active duty following the incident.

    * * *

    Other local videos emerged on Arabic social media Wednesday, showing villagers confronting American troops as 'occupiers'.

    "What are you doing in our country?" the local Syrian man asks while approaching the US convoy.

    [Feb 14, 2020] On Afghanistan deal from NEO

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    uncle tungsten , Feb 13 2020 3:25 utc | 113

    On Afghanistan from NEO
    However, according to some reports, the United States and the Taliban have recently managed to define the main terms of a future peace deal:

    - The Taliban guarantee that they will not allow international terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda (banned in Russia) to use Afghanistan as a training ground for attacks abroad;

    – The US must withdraw its troops from the country. In particular, the terms include the following:
    About 5,000 US soldiers are expected to be withdrawn immediately after the peace deal is signed, and the remaining troops will leave the country within the next two years;

    – Against the backdrop of an indefinite truce in Afghanistan, the conflicting parties should begin an internal political dialogue.


    The Taliban must be naive not to insist on a total cessation to military air assaults and reconnaissance. There is no way the USA will stop bombing Afghanistan into the stone age - because it can AND good live training for its murderous home pilots.


    And then the predictable USA treachery and ingredient to walk back the treaty:

    The Kabul government, however, is not taking part in those talks at the insistence of the Taliban, which considers the current official government to be a puppet. But the US is in favor of Kabul reaffirming its commitment to the peace terms, because otherwise the last condition of the agreement will not be fulfilled.

    [Feb 14, 2020] An unusually well written piece on the US leaving Afghanistan.

    Feb 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    J Swift , Feb 12 2020 18:05 utc | 38

    I guess most of these open threads are going to gravitate to electoral politics--tis the season--but before it gets lost I did want to share what I thought was an unusually well written piece on the US leaving Afghanistan.

    The author doesn't just go on a diatribe of criticism of the US, although obviously he feels the US needs to be leaving--the sooner the better, and likely will eventually be leaving whether it wants to or not. But he points out several "tells" related to just how serious the US might be any time it starts talking about leaving, or indeed starts leaving. I would highly recommend reading this article. Really thought provoking.

    https://theduran.com/getting-out/

    AntiSpin , Feb 12 2020 19:21 utc | 49

    @ J Swift | Feb 12 2020 18:05 utc | 38

    Thanks much for this link --
    https://theduran.com/getting-out/

    A very hard-hitting exposé of the US combination of criminality and blundering in Afghanistan, and what seems to be a comprehensive and completely rational plan for getting out of that country under the best possible terms for the people of that country, and for the people of the US.

    Not so good for the US military and civilian satraps who are tearing things up, and raking it in.

    Tough.

    [Feb 10, 2020] How Low Can Israelis Go - Sputnik International

    Feb 10, 2020 | sputniknews.com

    How Low Can Israelis Go? © Sputnik / MArina Lystseva Columnists 11:52 GMT 08.02.2020 Get short URL by Finian Cunningham 17 105 3 Subscribe https://cdn1.img.sputniknews.com/images/107568/96/1075689687.jpg Sputnik International https://cdn2.img.sputniknews.com/i/logo.png Finian Cunningham. Sputnik International https://sputniknews.com/columnists/202002081078260458-how-low-can-israelis-go/ Not only is Israel bombing neighboring Syria in acts of aggression, the Israeli air force is compounding its criminality by using civilian airliners as cover for their assaults. That's the assessment from Russia's Ministry of Defense which says flight data shows that an air raid by four Israeli F-16 warplanes this week near Damascus deliberately put in danger a civilian airliner with 172 passengers onboard.

    Russian MOD spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said the Israeli jets effectively hid behind the radar signal of an Airbus A-320 as it approached Damascus international airport in order to launch airstrikes on targets near the Syrian capital.

    It was only due to the skill of the Syrian air defense operators that the passenger plane was correctly identified and escorted out of the firing line. The aircraft was diverted to a safe landing at the Russian air base at Hmeymim further north at Latakia.

    Israel has a cynical policy of neither confirming or denying its forces are conducting offensive operations. So, its side of the story remains ambiguous. However, Israeli commanders have admitted previously to carrying out hundreds of airstrikes on Syrian territory over the past two years.

    Russian military spokesman Konashenkov said what happened this week was a "typical" ploy used during recent Israeli air raid maneuvers. He said the Israeli air force was knowingly putting civilians in danger as a "shield" for their offensive operation.

    The implications are appalling. Not only is Israel violating international law and Syrian sovereignty by carrying out acts of aggression with airstrikes, the Jewish state is also using civilian aircraft as de facto hostages in mid-air. It appears that the nefarious calculation at work by the Israelis is that they are betting the Syrian air defense systems will refrain from taking defensive action so as to avoid civilian casualties. The Israelis are thus able to freely launch their illegal airstrikes while using human shields in the air.

    This is by no means the first time the Israelis have used such a dastardly ploy. Russia claims that in the recent past other civilian airliners have been similarly exploited by Israeli warplanes to enable strikes on Syria.

    Also, in September 2018, Moscow accused Israel of deliberately putting a Russian reconnaissance plane in danger which led to the death of 15 crew. On that occasion, Israeli F-16s are believed to have knowingly flown behind the radar signal of an IL-20 aircraft as it approached Hmeymim air base and then fired off missiles at Syrian territory. Syrian air defenses mistook the IL-20 for an enemy target and shot down the recon plane with tragic results.

    Israel denied on that occasion that it was using the Russian spy plane as a decoy. The Israelis sought to blame the Syrians for incompetent defense operations. Moscow, however, was having none of the Israeli excuses and condemned Tel Aviv for sacrificing Russian lives. Russia then responded by upgrading allied Syrian air defenses with the S-300 system .

    Perhaps that S-300 upgrade was a factor in why the civilian airliner escaped this week from accidental shoot-down by Syrian air defense.

    In any case, what needs to be called out is the absolute disgraceful behavior of Israel. It has no right to launch airstrikes on Syria in the first place. Countless such attacks have occurred over recent years. Israeli claims about hitting "Iranian targets" within Syria are null and void and indefensible under international law. Israeli strikes are acts of aggression, plain and simple.

    As if that it is not bad enough, now we see Israel using civilian airliners in a cowardly and wicked way as a form of protection so that its warplanes can commit their crimes of aggression.

    If any other state were to do this, the Western media would be heaping endless vilification upon it. Any other state would be globally condemned as a rogue, terrorist pariah. The United Nations would be inundated with resolutions to impose severe sanctions.

    The double standards with which, say Iran, is treated is dumbfounding.

    Another astounding hypocrisy is the way Syria is sanctioned left, right and center by the European Union. The war-torn Arab country is unable to import vital medicines because of EU sanctions . Yet the EU does nothing to reprimand Israel for brazen violations of international law.

    The question of "how low can you go?" does not just apply to Israel, but also to the Western news media and Israel's international political supporters, chiefly the American government.

    Russia might also rethink its position vis-a-vis Israel the next time Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants a reception in Moscow.

    Until Israel begins to abide by international law, it should be treated with a cold shoulder. The despicable event this week of endangering a civilian airliner should be seen as the last straw for indulging Israel as if it is a normal state.

    [Feb 10, 2020] Trump lost anti-war republicans and independents; he now might lose the elections

    Feb 10, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Caroline Dorminey and Sumaya Malas do an excellent job of making the case for extending New START:

    One of the most critical arms control agreements, the New Strategic Reduction Arms Treaty (New START), will disappear soon if leaders do not step up to save it. New START imposes limits on the world's two largest nuclear arsenals, Russia and the United States, and remains one of the last arms control agreements still in effect. Those limits expire in exactly one year from Wednesday, and without it, both stockpiles will be unconstrained for the first time in decades.

    Democrats in Congress already express consistent support for the extension of New START, turning the issue into a Democratic Party agenda item. But today's hyper-partisan landscape need not dictate that arms control must become solely a Democratic priority. Especially when the treaty in question still works, provides an important limit on Russian nuclear weapons, and ultimately increases our national security.

    Dorminey and Malas are right that there should be broad support for extending the treaty. The treaty's ratification was frequently described as a "no-brainer" win for U.S. national security when it was being debated ten years ago, and the treaty's extension is likewise obviously desirable for both countries. The trouble is that the Trump administration doesn't judge this treaty or any other international agreement on the merits, and only a few of the Republicans that voted to ratify the treaty are still in office. Trump and his advisers have been following the lead of anti-arms control ideologues for years. That is why the president seized on violations of the INF Treaty as an excuse to get rid of that treaty instead of working to resolve the dispute with Russia, and that is why he expressed his willingness to pull out of the Open Skies Treaty. Trump has encountered no resistance from the GOP as he goes on a treaty-killing spree, because by and large the modern Republican Party couldn't care less about arms control.

    Like these hard-liners, Trump doesn't think there is such a thing as a "win-win" agreement with another government, and for that he reason he won't support any treaty that imposes the same restrictions on both parties. We can see that the administration isn't serious about extending the treaty when we look at the far-fetched demands they insist on adding to the existing treaty. These additional demands are meant to serve as a smokescreen so that the administration can let the treaty die, and the administration is just stalling for time until the expiration occurs. The Russian government has said many times that it is ready and willing to accept an extension of the treaty without any conditions, and the U.S. response has been to let them eat static.

    It would be ideal if Trump suddenly changed his position on all this and just extended the treaty, but all signs point in the opposite direction. What we need to start thinking about is what the next administration is going to have to do to rebuild the arms control architecture that this administration has demolished. There will be almost no time for the next president to extend the treaty next year, so it needs to be a top priority. If New START lapses, the U.S. and Russia would have to negotiate a new treaty to replace it, and in the current political climate the odds that the Senate would ratify an arms control treaty (or any treaty) are not good. It would be much easier and wiser to keep the current treaty alive, but we need to start preparing for the consequences of Trump's unwillingness to do that.

    [Feb 10, 2020] Stench of Netanyahu in attack on K-1 base near Kirkuk: Did Washington Use a False Pretext for Its Recent Escalation in Iraq?

    Notable quotes:
    "... New York Times's ..."
    Feb 08, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    In a key piece of actual extensive, on-the-ground reporting , the New York Times's Alissa Rubin has raised serious questions about the official US account of who it was that attacked the K-1 base near Kirkuk, in eastern Iraq, on December 27. The United States almost immediately accused the Iran-backed Ketaib Hizbullah (KH) militia of responsibility. But Rubin quotes by name Brig. General Ahmed Adnan, the chief of intelligence for the Iraqi federal police at the same base, as saying, "All the indications are that it was Daesh" -- that is, ISIS.

    She also presents considerable further detailed reporting on the matter. And she notes that though U.S. investigators claim to have evidence about KH's responsibility for the attack, they have presented none of it publicly. Nor have they shared it with the Iraqi government.

    KH is a paramilitary organization that operates under the command of the Iraqi military and has been deeply involved in the anti-ISIS campaigns throughout the country.

    The December 27 attack killed one Iraqi-American contractor and was cited by the Trump administration as reason to launch a large-scale attack on five KH bases some 400 miles to the west which killed around 50 KH fighters. Outraged KH fighters then mobbed the US embassy in Baghdad, breaking through an outside perimeter on its large campus, but causing no casualties. On January 2, Pres. Trump decided to escalate again, ordering the assassination of Iran's Gen. Qasem Soleimani and bringing the region and the world close to a massive shooting war.

    The new evidence presented by Rubin makes it look as if Trump and his advisors had previously decided on a broad-scale plan to attack Iran's very influential allies in Iraq and were waiting for a triggering event– any triggering event!– to use as a pretext to launch it. The attack against the K-1 base presented them with that trigger, even though they have not been able to present any evidence that it was KH that undertook it.

    This playbook looks very similar to the one that Ariel Sharon, who was Israel's Defense Minister in summer 1982, used to launch his wide attack against the PLO's presence in Lebanon in June that year. The "trigger" Sharon used to launch his long-prepared attack was the serious (but not fatal) wounding of Israel's ambassador in London, Shlomo Argov, which the Israeli government immediately blamed on the PLO.

    Regarding London in 1982, as regarding K-1 last December, the actual identity of the assailant(s) was misreported by the government that used it as a trigger for escalation. In London, the police fairly speedily established that it was not the PLO but operatives of an anti-PLO group headed by a man called Abu Nidal who had attacked Argov. But by the time they had discovered and publicized that fact, Israeli tanks were already deep inside Lebanon.

    The parallels and connections between the two cases go further. If, as now seems likely, the authors of the K-1 attack were indeed Da'esh, then they succeeded brilliantly in triggering a bitter fight between two substantial forces in the coalition that had been fighting against them in Iraq. Regarding the 1982 London attack, its authors also succeeded brilliantly in triggering a lethal conflict between two forces (one substantial, one far less so) that were both engaged in bitter combat against Abu Nidal's networks.

    Worth noting: Abu Nidal's main backer, throughout his whole campaign against the PLO, was Saddam Hussein's brutal government in Iraq. (The London assailants deposited their weapons in the Iraqi embassy after completing the attack.) Many senior strategists and planners for ISIS in Iraq were diehard remnants of Saddam's formerly intimidating security forces.

    Also worth noting: Three months in to Sharon's massive 1982 invasion of Lebanon, it seemed to have successfully reached its goals of expelling the PLO's fighting forces from Lebanon and installing a strongly pro-Israeli government there. But over the longer haul, the invasion looked much less successful. The lengthy Israeli occupation of south Lebanon that followed 1982 served to incubate the birth and growth of the (pro-Iranian) Hizbullah there. Today, Hizbullah is a strong political movement inside Lebanon that commands a very capable fighting force that expelled Israel's last presence from Lebanon in 2000, rebuffed a subsequent Israeli invasion of the country six years later, and still exerts considerable deterrent power against Israel today

    Very few people in Israel today judge the 1982 invasion of Lebanon to have been a wise move. How will the historians of the future view Trump's decision to launch his big escalation against Iran's allies in Iraq, presumably as part of his "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran?

    This article has been republished with permission from Just World News .

    [Feb 09, 2020] The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani

    Highly recommended!
    Looks like the end of Full Spectrum Dominance the the USA enjoyed since 1991. Alliance of Iran, Russia and China (with Turkey and Pakistan as two possible members) is serious military competitor and while the USA has its set of trump cards, the military victory against such an alliance no longer guaranteed.
    Jan 09, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Days after the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani, new and important information is coming to light from a speech given by the Iraqi prime minister. The story behind Soleimani's assassination seems to go much deeper than what has thus far been reported, involving Saudi Arabia and China as well the US dollar's role as the global reserve currency .

    The Iraqi prime minister, Adil Abdul-Mahdi, has revealed details of his interactions with Trump in the weeks leading up to Soleimani's assassination in a speech to the Iraqi parliament. He tried to explain several times on live television how Washington had been browbeating him and other Iraqi members of parliament to toe the American line, even threatening to engage in false-flag sniper shootings of both protesters and security personnel in order to inflame the situation, recalling similar modi operandi seen in Cairo in 2009, Libya in 2011, and Maidan in 2014. The purpose of such cynicism was to throw Iraq into chaos.

    Here is the reconstruction of the story:

    [Speaker of the Council of Representatives of Iraq] Halbousi attended the parliamentary session while almost none of the Sunni members did. This was because the Americans had learned that Abdul-Mehdi was planning to reveal sensitive secrets in the session and sent Halbousi to prevent this. Halbousi cut Abdul-Mehdi off at the commencement of his speech and then asked for the live airing of the session to be stopped. After this, Halbousi together with other members, sat next to Abdul-Mehdi, speaking openly with him but without it being recorded. This is what was discussed in that session that was not broadcast:

    Abdul-Mehdi spoke angrily about how the Americans had ruined the country and now refused to complete infrastructure and electricity grid projects unless they were promised 50% of oil revenues, which Abdul-Mehdi refused.

    The complete (translated) words of Abdul-Mahdi's speech to parliament:

    This is why I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead. Upon my return, Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement. When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership.

    Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me.

    I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.

    After this, when our Minister of Defense publicly stated that a third party was targeting both protestors and security personnel alike (just as Trump had threatened he would do), I received a new call from Trump threatening to kill both me and the Minister of Defense if we kept on talking about this "third party".

    Nobody imagined that the threat was to be applied to General Soleimani, but it was difficult for Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to reveal the weekslong backstory behind the terrorist attack.

    I was supposed to meet him [Soleimani] later in the morning when he was killed. He came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered to the Iranians from the Saudis.

    We can surmise, judging by Saudi Arabia's reaction , that some kind of negotiation was going on between Tehran and Riyadh:

    The Kingdom's statement regarding the events in Iraq stresses the Kingdom's view of the importance of de-escalation to save the countries of the region and their people from the risks of any escalation.

    Above all, the Saudi Royal family wanted to let people know immediately that they had not been informed of the US operation:

    The kingdom of Saudi Arabia was not consulted regarding the US strike. In light of the rapid developments, the Kingdom stresses the importance of exercising restraint to guard against all acts that may lead to escalation, with severe consequences.

    And to emphasize his reluctance for war, Mohammad bin Salman sent a delegation to the United States. Liz Sly , the Washington Post Beirut bureau chief, tweated:

    Saudi Arabia is sending a delegation to Washington to urge restraint with Iran on behalf of [Persian] Gulf states. The message will be: 'Please spare us the pain of going through another war'.

    What clearly emerges is that the success of the operation against Soleimani had nothing to do with the intelligence gathering of the US or Israel. It was known to all and sundry that Soleimani was heading to Baghdad in a diplomatic capacity that acknowledged Iraq's efforts to mediate a solution to the regional crisis with Saudi Arabia.

    It would seem that the Saudis, Iranians and Iraqis were well on the way towards averting a regional conflict involving Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Riyadh's reaction to the American strike evinced no public joy or celebration. Qatar, while not seeing eye to eye with Riyadh on many issues, also immediately expressed solidarity with Tehran, hosting a meeting at a senior government level with Mohammad Zarif Jarif, the Iranian foreign minister. Even Turkey and Egypt , when commenting on the asassination, employed moderating language.

    This could reflect a fear of being on the receiving end of Iran's retaliation. Qatar, the country from which the drone that killed Soleimani took off, is only a stone's throw away from Iran, situated on the other side of the Strait of Hormuz. Riyadh and Tel Aviv, Tehran's regional enemies, both know that a military conflict with Iran would mean the end of the Saudi royal family.

    When the words of the Iraqi prime minister are linked back to the geopolitical and energy agreements in the region, then the worrying picture starts to emerge of a desperate US lashing out at a world turning its back on a unipolar world order in favor of the emerging multipolar about which I have long written .

    The US, now considering itself a net energy exporter as a result of the shale-oil revolution (on which the jury is still out), no longer needs to import oil from the Middle East. However, this does not mean that oil can now be traded in any other currency other than the US dollar.

    The petrodollar is what ensures that the US dollar retains its status as the global reserve currency, granting the US a monopolistic position from which it derives enormous benefits from playing the role of regional hegemon.

    This privileged position of holding the global reserve currency also ensures that the US can easily fund its war machine by virtue of the fact that much of the world is obliged to buy its treasury bonds that it is simply able to conjure out of thin air. To threaten this comfortable arrangement is to threaten Washington's global power.

    Even so, the geopolitical and economic trend is inexorably towards a multipolar world order, with China increasingly playing a leading role, especially in the Middle East and South America.

    Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Qatar and Saudi Arabia together make up the overwhelming majority of oil and gas reserves in the world. The first three have an elevated relationship with Beijing and are very much in the multipolar camp, something that China and Russia are keen to further consolidate in order to ensure the future growth for the Eurasian supercontinent without war and conflict.

    Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, is pro-US but could gravitate towards the Sino-Russian camp both militarily and in terms of energy. The same process is going on with Iraq and Qatar thanks to Washington's numerous strategic errors in the region starting from Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011 and Syria and Yemen in recent years.

    The agreement between Iraq and China is a prime example of how Beijing intends to use the Iraq-Iran-Syria troika to revive the Middle East and and link it to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

    While Doha and Riyadh would be the first to suffer economically from such an agreement, Beijing's economic power is such that, with its win-win approach, there is room for everyone.

    Saudi Arabia provides China with most of its oil and Qatar, together with the Russian Federation, supply China with most of its LNG needs, which lines up with Xi Jinping's 2030 vision that aims to greatly reduce polluting emissions.

    The US is absent in this picture, with little ability to influence events or offer any appealing economic alternatives.

    Washington would like to prevent any Eurasian integration by unleashing chaos and destruction in the region, and killing Soleimani served this purpose. The US cannot contemplate the idea of the dollar losing its status as the global reserve currency. Trump is engaging in a desperate gamble that could have disastrous consequences.

    The region, in a worst-case scenario, could be engulfed in a devastating war involving multiple countries. Oil refineries could be destroyed all across the region, a quarter of the world's oil transit could be blocked, oil prices would skyrocket ($200-$300 a barrel) and dozens of countries would be plunged into a global financial crisis. The blame would be laid squarely at Trump's feet, ending his chances for re-election.

    To try and keep everyone in line, Washington is left to resort to terrorism, lies and unspecified threats of visiting destruction on friends and enemies alike.

    Trump has evidently been convinced by someone that the US can do without the Middle East, that it can do without allies in the region, and that nobody would ever dare to sell oil in any other currency than the US dollar.

    Soleimani's death is the result of a convergence of US and Israeli interests. With no other way of halting Eurasian integration, Washington can only throw the region into chaos by targeting countries like Iran, Iraq and Syria that are central to the Eurasian project. While Israel has never had the ability or audacity to carry out such an assassination itself, the importance of the Israel Lobby to Trump's electoral success would have influenced his decision, all the more so in an election year .

    Trump believed his drone attack could solve all his problems by frightening his opponents, winning the support of his voters (by equating Soleimani's assassination to Osama bin Laden's), and sending a warning to Arab countries of the dangers of deepening their ties with China.

    The assassination of Soleimani is the US lashing out at its steady loss of influence in the region. The Iraqi attempt to mediate a lasting peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia has been scuppered by the US and Israel's determination to prevent peace in the region and instead increase chaos and instability.

    Washington has not achieved its hegemonic status through a preference for diplomacy and calm dialogue, and Trump has no intention of departing from this approach.

    Washington's friends and enemies alike must acknowledge this reality and implement the countermeasures necessary to contain the madness.

    Boundless Energy , 1 minute ago link

    Very good article, straight to the point. In fact its much worse. I know is hard to swallow for my US american brother and sisters.

    But as sooner you wake up and see the reality as it is, as better chances the US has to survive with honor. Stop the wars around the globe and do not look for excuses. Isnt it already obvious what is going on with the US war machine? How many more examples some people need to wake up?

    Noob678 , 8 minutes ago link

    For those who love to connect the dots:

    Iran Situation from Someone Who Knows Something

    Not all said in video above is accurate but the recent events in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Africa are all related to prevent China from overtaking the zionist hegemonic world and to recolonize China (at least the parasite is trying to hop to China as new host).

    Trade war, Huawei, Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet ..... the concerted efforts from all zionist controlled media (ZeroHedge included) to slander, smearing, fake news against China should tell you what the Zionists agenda are :)

    ............

    Trump Threatens to Kill Iraqi PM if He Doesn't Cancel China Oil Deal - MoA

    The American President's threatened the Iraqi Prime Minister to liquidate him directly with the Minister of Defense. The Marines are the third party that sniped the demonstrators and the security men:

    Abdul Mahdi continued:

    "After my return from China, Trump called me and asked me to cancel the agreement, so I also refused, and he threatened me with massive demonstrations that would topple me. Indeed, the demonstrations started and then Trump called, threatening to escalate in the event of non-cooperation and responding to his wishes, so that the third party (Marines snipers) would target the demonstrators and security forces and kill them from the highest structures and the US embassy in an attempt to pressure me and submit to his wishes and cancel the China agreement, so I did not respond and submitted my resignation and the Americans still insist to this day on canceling the China agreement and when the defense minister said that who kills the demonstrators is a third party, Trump called me immediately and physically threatened me and defense minister in the event of talk about the third party."

    .........


    The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission found George W. Bush guilty of war crimes in absentia for the illegal invasion of Iraq. Bush, **** Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia.

    ... ... ..

    Thom Paine , 9 minutes ago link

    When Iran has nukes, what then Trump?

    I think Israel's fear is loss of regional goals if Iran becomes untouchable

    TupacShakur , 13 minutes ago link

    Empire is lashing out of desperation because we've crossed peak Empire.

    Things are going downhill and will get more volatile as we go.

    Buckle up folks because the final act will be very nasty.

    Stalking Wolf , 12 minutes ago link

    Unfortunately, this article makes a lot of sense. The US is losing influence and lashing out carelessly. I hope the rest of the world realizes how detached majority of the citizens within the states are from the federal government. The Federal government brings no good to our nation. None. From the mis management of our once tax revenues to the corrupt Congress who accepts bribes from the highest bidder, it's a rats best that is not only harmful to its own people, but the world at large. USD won't go down without a fight it seems... All empires end with a bang. Be ready

    [Feb 09, 2020] As someone born in Latin America, we never saw the US as anything but a brutal predator, whose honeyed words were belied by their deeds

    Aug 05, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    The essential facts are these. In April 1898, the United States went to war with Spain. The war's nominal purpose was to liberate Cuba from oppressive colonial rule. The war's subsequent conduct found the United States not only invading and occupying Cuba, but also seizing Puerto Rico, completing a deferred annexation of Hawaii, scarfing up various other small properties in the Pacific, and, not least of all, replacing Spain as colonial masters of the Philippine Archipelago, located across the Pacific.

    That the true theme of the war with Spain turned out to be not liberation but expansion should not come as a terrible surprise. From the very founding of the first British colonies in North America, expansion has constituted an enduring theme of the American project. Separation from the British Empire after 1776 only reinforced the urge to grow. Yet prior to 1898, that project had been a continental one. The events of that year signaled the transition from continental to extra-continental expansion. American leaders were no longer content to preside over a republic stretching from sea to shining sea.

    In that regard, the decision to annex the Philippines stands out as especially instructive. If you try hard enough -- and some politicians at the time did -- you can talk yourself into believing that U.S. actions in the Caribbean in 1898 represented something other than naked European-style imperialism with all its brute force to keep the natives in line. After all, the United States did refrain from converting Cuba into a formal colony and by 1902 had even granted Cubans a sort of ersatz independence. Moreover, both Cuba and Puerto Rico fell within "our backyard," as did various other Caribbean republics soon to undergo U.S. military occupation. Geographically, all were located within the American orbit.

    Yet the Philippines represented an altogether different case. By no stretch of the imagination did the archipelago fall within "our backyard." Furthermore, the Filipinos had no desire to trade Spanish rule for American rule and violently resisted occupation by U.S. forces. The notably dirty Philippine-American War that followed from 1899 to 1902 -- a conflict almost entirely expunged from American memory today -- resulted in something like 200,000 Filipino deaths and ended in a U.S. victory not yet memorialized on the National Mall in Washington.

    Why Do We Still Have War Booty From the Philippines? Time to Break Up With the Philippines

    So the Philippine Archipelago had become ours. In short order, however, authorities in Washington changed their mind about the wisdom of accepting responsibility for several thousand islands located nearly 7,000 miles from San Francisco.

    The sprawling American colony turned out to be the ultimate impulse purchase. And as with most impulse purchases, enthusiasm soon enough gave way to second thoughts and even regret. By 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt was privately referring to the Philippines as America's "Achilles heel." The United States had paid Spain $20 million for an acquisition that didn't turn a profit and couldn't be defended given the limited capabilities of the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy. To complicate matters further, from Tokyo's perspective, the Philippines fell within its backyard. So far as Imperial Japan was concerned, imperial America was intruding on its turf.

    Thus was the sequence of events leading to the Pacific War of 1941-1945 set in motion. I am not suggesting that Pearl Harbor was an inevitable consequence of the United States annexing the Philippines. I am suggesting that it put two rival imperial powers on a collision course.

    One can, of course, find in the ensuing sequence of events matters worth celebrating -- great military victories at places like Midway, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa, culminating after 1945 in a period of American dominion. But the legacy of our flirtation with empire in the Western Pacific also includes much that is lamentable -- the wars in Korea and Vietnam, for example, and now an intensifying rivalry with China destined to lead we know not where.

    If history could be reduced to a balance sheet, the U.S. purchase of the Philippines would rate as a pretty bad bargain. That first $20 million turned out to be only a down payment.

    Eliseo Art Silva Mark Thomason • 6 hours ago

    No. Absolutely not. We would have been much better off had the US not violently dismantled the first Republic of the Philippines.

    The canard that our greatest generation of Filipinos (Generation of 1898) was not fit to govern us was a product of US Assimilation Schools designed to rid the Philippines of Filipinos- by wiring them to automatically think anything non-Filipino will always be better (intenalized racism) and to train the primarily to leave and work abroad and blend -in as Americans (objectification) and never stand out as self-respecting Filipinos who aspire to be the best they can be propelled by the Filipino story.

    Our multiple Golden Ages only occurred prior to US invasion and colonization.

    YES, the USA owes us. We are every American's 2nd original sin.

    Eliseo Art Silva Mark Thomason • 5 hours ago
    We do not owe US anything. The USA owes us a great big deal, More than any other country on earth.

    THEY (USA) owes us:
    1) For violently dismantling the first Republic of the Philippines at the cost of over a million martyrs from the greatest generation of Filipinos.

    2) For US Assimilation Schools denying us the intensity of our golden ages prior to their invasion as our drivers for PH civilization, turning us into a country that trains its people to leave and assimilate in US culture and become workers for Americans and foreigners abroad. This results in a Philippines WITHOUT Filipinos.

    3) For US bombs turning Intramuros into dust- the centerpiece of the Paris of the East, with treasures, publications and art much older that the US- without consent from any Filipino leader. And for dismantling our train system from La Union to Bicol.

    4) For the US Rescission Act which denied Filipino veterans due recognition, dignity and honor- vets who fought THEIR war against Japan on our soil.

    5) For the canard that Aguinaldo, our 29-year old father and liberator of the Republic of the Philippines, is a villain and a traitor, even inventing the heroism of Andres Bonifacio which ultimately resulted in "Toxic Nationalism" which Rizal warned us about in the persona of Simoun in El Filibusterismo who will drive our nation to self-destruction and turn a paradise into a desert by being automatically wired to think anything non-Filipino will and always be better.

    The core of colonial mentality is the misguided belief that we cannot have been a greater country had the US not destroyed the first Republic of the Philippines- a lie that was embedded in our minds by the US discrediting Aguinaldo and the Generation of 1896/1898- the greatest generation of Filipinos.

    bob balkas • 18 hours ago
    It does seem to me that every country which was able and could afford to expand its territory did so. In Europe, exceptions to that a wish were Switzerland, Slovakia, Finland, Ireland, Norway, Slovenia, Ukraine, ?Romania and Chechia.
    So, US had company!
    Romulus • 11 hours ago
    President William McKinley defends his decision to support the annexation of the Philippines in the wake of the U.S. war in that country:

    "When I next realized that the Philippines had dropped into our laps I confess I did not know what to do with them. . . And one night late it came to me this way. . .1) That we could not give them back to Spain- that would be cowardly and dishonorable; 2) that we could not turn them over to France and Germany-our commercial rivals in the Orient-that would be bad business and discreditable; 3) that we not leave them to themselves-they are unfit for self-government-and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain's wars; and 4) that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God's grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died."

    Making Christians of a country that had its first Catholic diocese 9 years before the Spanish Armada sailed for England, with 4 dioceses in place years before the English sailed for Jamestown.

    Tommy Matic IV Romulus • 6 hours ago
    Not to mention a full fledged university older than Harvard.
    Michael Brand • 7 hours ago • edited
    Dan Carlin did an outstanding podcast on the choices America faced after acquiring the Philippines. McKinley was anti-empire, but the industrialists in his administration hungered to thwart the British, French and Dutch empires in the Pacific by establishing a colony all of our own.

    Worth a listen

    Adriana Pena • 7 hours ago
    As someone born in Latin America, we never saw the US as anything but a brutal predator, whose honeyed words were belied by their deeds. I wonder if it began with the Philippines. There was the Mexican war first, which wrested a lot of territory from Mexico. And then there was the invasion of Canada to bring the blessings of democracy to Canadians (it ended with the White House in flames). I suspect that the beliefe that you are exceptional and blessed by God can lead to want to straighten up other people "for their own good", and make a profit besides - a LOT of profit.

    [Feb 09, 2020] Following the US assassination of Soleimani, the Trump administration is leading American conduct abroad into a zone of probably unprecedented lawlessness by Patrick Lawrence

    Notable quotes:
    "... In our late-imperial phase, we seem to have reached that moment when, whatever high officials say in matters of the empire's foreign policy, we must consider whether the opposite is in fact the case. So we have it now. ..."
    "... Lawlessness begets lawlessness is the operative (and obvious) principle. In a remarkable speech at the Hoover Institution last week, Pompeo termed the Soleimani assassination "the restoration of deterrence" and appeared to promise other such operations against other nations Washington considers adversaries. Ominously enough, Pompeo singled out China and Russia. ..."
    "... Against the background of the events noted above, it is clear from this speech alone that our secretary of state is a dangerously incompetent figure when it comes to judging global events, the proper responses to them, and the probable consequences of a given response. If we are going to think about costs, the heaviest will fall on Americans in months to come. ..."
    "... Immediately after the U.S. drone that killed Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport, Mohammad Javad Zarif sent out a message whose importance should not be missed. "End of US's malign presence in West Asia has begun," Iran's foreign minister wrote. These few words, rendered in Twitterese, bear careful consideration given they come from an official whose nation had just sustained a critical blow. ..."
    "... Gradually but rather certainly now, the community of nations is losing its patience with late-phase imperial America. With exceptions such as Japan and Israel, the Baltics and Saudi Arabia, this is so across both oceans and more or less across the non–Western world. In the Middle East, the American presence will remain for the time being, but we are now in the beginning-of-the-end phase. This was Zarif's meaning. And we now know the end will come neither peaceably nor lawfully. ..."
    "... Amazing how the US government is bringing back the old days: "Slave markets" See: reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/executions-torture-and-slave-markets-persist-in-libya-u-n-idUSKBN1GX1JY "Pillage", as pointed out in this article. ..."
    "... To have such a person as the top diplomat in the USA shows how low the USA has sunk. For him to pretend to be some sort of Christian is sinister and extremely dangerous for everyone. There is NO reason for the US animosity towards Iran except subservience to Israel, which, again without real justification, claims to be terrified of Iran, which unlike Israel is NOT attacking others and has not for centuries. ..."
    "... SecStae's remarks about deterrence befit a military commander, NOT a diplomat. Paranoia, grandiosity and violence begin with potus and cascade downward and about. Congress does its part in investing in machinery of war. ..."
    "... Pompeo reminds me of the pigs in Animal Farm. He is a grotesque figure, steely-eyed, cold-blooded, fanatical, and hateful. "We lied, cheated, and stole" Pompous Maximus will get his comeuppance one of these days ..."
    "... Pillage as policy. The Empire has fully embraced gangster capitalism for its modus operandi. ..."
    "... Here is an interesting article that explains how governments have changed the rules so that they can justify killing anyone who they believe may at some point in time have the potential to be involved in a terrorist plot: viableopposition.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-new.html ..."
    "... This rather Orwellian move gives governments the justification that they to kill any of us just because they feel that we might pose a threat and that is a very, very scary prospect. It is very reminiscent of the movie Minority Report where crimes of the future are punished in the present. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    Special to Consortium News

    Of all the preposterous assertions made since the drone assassination of Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad on Jan. 3, the prize for bottomless ignorance must go to the bottomlessly ignorant Mike Pompeo.

    Speaking after the influential Iranian general's death, our frightening secretary of state declaimed on CBS's Face the Nation , "There was sound and just and legal reason for the actions the President took, and the world is safer as a result." In appearances on five news programs on the same Sunday morning, the evangelical paranoid who now runs American foreign policy was a singer with a one-note tune. "It's very clear the world's a safer place today," Pompeo said on ABC's Jan. 5 edition of This Week.

    In our late-imperial phase, we seem to have reached that moment when, whatever high officials say in matters of the empire's foreign policy, we must consider whether the opposite is in fact the case. So we have it now.

    We are not safer now that Soleimani, a revered figure across much of the Middle East, has been murdered. The planet has just become significantly more dangerous, especially but not only for Americans, and this is so for one simple reason: The Trump administration, Pompeo bearing the standard, has just tipped American conduct abroad into a zone of probably unprecedented lawlessness, Pompeo's nonsensical claim to legality notwithstanding .

    This is a very consequential line to cross.

    Hardly does it hold that Washington's foreign policy cliques customarily keep international law uppermost in their minds and that recent events are aberrations. Nothing suggests policy planners even consider legalities except when it makes useful propaganda to charge others with violating international statutes and conventions.

    Please donate to the Winter Fund Drive.

    Neither can the Soleimani assassination be understood in isolation: This was only the most reckless of numerous policy decisions recently taken in the Middle East. Since late last year, to consider merely the immediate past, the Trump administration has acted ever more flagrantly in violation of all international legal authorities and documents -- the UN Charter, the International Criminal Court, and the International Court of Justice in the Hague chief among them.

    Washington is into full-frontal lawlessness now.

    'Keeping the Oil'

    Shortly after Trump announced the withdrawal of U.S. forces from northern Syria last October, the president reversed course -- probably under Pentagon and State Department pressure -- and said some troops would remain to protect Syria's oilfields. "We want to keep the oil," Trump declared in the course of a Twitter storm. It soon emerged that the administration's true intent was to prevent the Assad government in Damascus from reasserting sovereign control over Syrian oilfields.

    The Russians had the honesty to call this for what it was. "Washington's attempt to put oilfields there under [its] control is illegal," Sergei Lavrov said at the time. "In fact, it's tantamount to robbery," the Russian foreign minister added. (John Kiriakou, writing for Consortium News, pointed out that it is a violation of the 1907 Hague Convention. It is call pillage.)

    Few outside the Trump administration, and possibly no one, has argued that Soleimani's murder was legitimate under international law. Not only was the Iranian general from a country with which the U.S. is not at war, which means the crime is murder; the drone attack was also a clear violation of Iraqi sovereignty, as has been widely reported.

    In response to Baghdad's subsequent demand that all foreign troops withdraw from Iraqi soil, Pompeo flatly refused even to discuss the matter with Iraqi officials -- yet another openly contemptuous violation of Iraqi sovereignty.

    It gets worse. In his own response to Baghdad's decision to evict foreign troops, Trump threatened sanctions -- "sanctions like they've never seen before" -- and said Iraq would have to pay the U.S. the cost of the bases the Pentagon has built there despite binding agreements that all fixed installations the U.S. has built in Iraq are Iraqi government-owned.

    At Baghdad's Throat

    Trump, who seems to have oil eternally on his mind, has been at Baghdad's throat for some time. Twice since taking office three years ago, he has tried to intimidate the Iraqis into "repaying" the U.S. for its 2003 invasion with access to Iraqi oil. "We did a lot, we did a lot over there, we spent trillions over there, and a lot of people have been talking about the oil," he said on the second of these occasions.

    Baghdad rebuffed Trump both times, but he has been at it since, according to Adil Abdul–Mahdi, Iraq's interim prime minister. Last year the U.S. administration asked Baghdad for 50 percent of the nation's oil output -- in total roughly 4.5 million barrels daily -- in exchange for various promised reconstruction projects.

    Rejecting the offer, Abdul–Mahdi signed an "oil for reconstruction" agreement with China last autumn -- whereupon Trump threatened to instigate widespread demonstrations in Baghdad if Abdul–Mahdi did not cancel the China deal. (He did not do so and, coincidentally or otherwise, civil unrest ensued.)

    U.S. Army forces operating in southern Iraq, April. 2, 2003. (U.S. Navy)

    Blueprints for Reprisal

    If American lawlessness is nothing new, the brazenly imperious character of all the events noted in this brief résumé has nonetheless pushed U.S. foreign policy beyond a tipping point.

    No American -- and certainly no American official or military personnel -- can any longer travel in the Middle East with an assurance of safety. All American diplomats, all military officers, and all embassies and bases in the region are now vulnerable to reprisals. The Associated Press reported after the Jan. 3 drone strike that Iran has developed 13 blueprints for reprisals against the U.S.

    Lawlessness begets lawlessness is the operative (and obvious) principle. In a remarkable speech at the Hoover Institution last week, Pompeo termed the Soleimani assassination "the restoration of deterrence" and appeared to promise other such operations against other nations Washington considers adversaries. Ominously enough, Pompeo singled out China and Russia.

    Here is a snippet from Pompeo's remarks:

    "In strategic terms, deterrence simply means persuading the other party that the costs of a specific behavior exceed its benefits. It requires credibility; indeed, it depends on it. Your adversary must understand not only do you have the capacity to impose costs but that you are, in fact, willing to do so . In all cases we have to do this."

    Against the background of the events noted above, it is clear from this speech alone that our secretary of state is a dangerously incompetent figure when it comes to judging global events, the proper responses to them, and the probable consequences of a given response. If we are going to think about costs, the heaviest will fall on Americans in months to come.

    Immediately after the U.S. drone that killed Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport, Mohammad Javad Zarif sent out a message whose importance should not be missed. "End of US's malign presence in West Asia has begun," Iran's foreign minister wrote. These few words, rendered in Twitterese, bear careful consideration given they come from an official whose nation had just sustained a critical blow.

    24 hrs ago, an arrogant clown -- masquerading as a diplomat -- claimed people were dancing in the cities of Iraq.

    Today, hundreds of thousands of our proud Iraqi brothers and sisters offered him their response across their soil.

    End of US malign presence in West Asia has begun. pic.twitter.com/eTDRyLN11c

    -- Javad Zarif (@JZarif) January 4, 2020

    Gradually but rather certainly now, the community of nations is losing its patience with late-phase imperial America. With exceptions such as Japan and Israel, the Baltics and Saudi Arabia, this is so across both oceans and more or less across the non–Western world. In the Middle East, the American presence will remain for the time being, but we are now in the beginning-of-the-end phase. This was Zarif's meaning. And we now know the end will come neither peaceably nor lawfully.

    Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is "Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century" (Yale). Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via his Patreon site .

    The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

    Please donate to the Winter Fund Drive.

    Jeff Harrison , January 21, 2020 at 19:38

    Well, there's two relevant bits here. Bullshit walks and money talks. Our money stopped talking $23T ago. What goes around, comes around. Whenever, however it comes down, it's gonna hurt.

    Antiwar7 , January 21, 2020 at 13:46

    Amazing how the US government is bringing back the old days: "Slave markets" See: reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/executions-torture-and-slave-markets-persist-in-libya-u-n-idUSKBN1GX1JY "Pillage", as pointed out in this article.

    rosemerry , January 21, 2020 at 13:28

    To have such a person as the top diplomat in the USA shows how low the USA has sunk. For him to pretend to be some sort of Christian is sinister and extremely dangerous for everyone. There is NO reason for the US animosity towards Iran except subservience to Israel, which, again without real justification, claims to be terrified of Iran, which unlike Israel is NOT attacking others and has not for centuries.

    Even if the USA hates Iran, it has already done inestimable damage to the Islamic Republic before this disgraceful action. Cruelty to 80 million people who have never harmed, even really threatened, the mighty USA, by tossing out a working JCPOA and installing economic "sanctions", should not be accepted by the rest of the world-giving in to blackmail encourages worse behavior, as we have already seen.

    "It requires credibility; indeed, it depends on it. " This is exactly what should be rejected by us all. These "leaders" will not change their behavior without solidarity among "allies" like the European Union, which has already caved in and blamed Iran for the changes -Iran has explained clearly why it made- to the JCPOA which the USA has left.

    Abby , January 21, 2020 at 20:15

    The only difference between Trump and Obama is that Trump doesn't hide the US naked aggression as well as Obama did. So far Trump hasn't started any new wars. By this time in Obama's tenure we had started bombing more countries and accepted one coup.

    dfnslblty , January 21, 2020 at 12:43

    SecStae's remarks about deterrence befit a military commander, NOT a diplomat. Paranoia, grandiosity and violence begin with potus and cascade downward and about. Congress does its part in investing in machinery of war.

    Cheyenne , January 21, 2020 at 11:49

    The above comment shows exactly why bellicose adventurism for oil etc. is so stupid and dangerous. If we continually prance around robbing people, they're gonna unite to slap us down.

    Hardly seems like anyone should need that pointed out but if anybody mentioned it to Trump or any other gung ho warhawk, he must not have been listening.

    Dan Kuhn , January 21, 2020 at 13:08

    Trump and Pompeo seem to have entered the Wild West stage of recent American history. I think they watch too many western movies, without understanding the underrlying plot of 100% of them. It is the bad guys take over a town, where they impose their will on the population, terrorizing everyone into obediance. They steal everything in sight and any who oppose them are summarily killed off. In the end a good guy ( In American parlance, " a good guy with a gun" shows up . The town`s people approach him and beg him to oppose the bad guys. He then proceeds to kill off the bad guys after the general population joins him in his crusade. it looks as though we are at the stage in the movie where the general population is ready to take up arms against the bad guys.

    The moral of the story the bad guys, the bullies, Pompeo and Trump, are either killed or chased out of town. But perhaps the problem is that this plot is too difficult for Trump and Pompeo to understand. So they don`t quite get the peril that there gunmen and killers are now in. They don`t see the writing on the wall.

    Caveman , January 21, 2020 at 11:30

    It seems the only US considerations in the assassination were – will it weaken Iran, will it strengthen the American position? On that perspective, the answer is probably yes on both counts. Legal considerations do not seem to have carried any weight. In the UK we recently saw a chilling interview with Brian Hook, U.S. Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. It was clear that he saw the assassination as another nail in the coffin of the Iranian regime, simply furthering a policy objective.

    Vera Gottlieb , January 21, 2020 at 11:19

    What is even sadder is the world's lack of gonads to stand up to this bully nation – that has caused so much grief and still does.

    Michael McNulty , January 21, 2020 at 11:01

    The US government became a crime syndicate. Today its bootleg liquor is oil, the boys they send round to steal it are armies and their drive-by shootings are Warthog strafings using DU ammunition. Their drug rackets in the back streets are high-grade reefer, heroin and amphetamines, with pharmaceutical-grade chemicals on Main Street. They still print banknotes just as before; but this time it's legal but still doesn't make them enough, so to make up the shortfalls they've taken armed robbery abroad.

    paul easton , January 21, 2020 at 12:55

    The US Government is running a protection racket, literally. In return for US protection of their sources of oil, the NATO countries provide international support for US war crimes. But now that the (figurative) Don is visibly out of his mind, they are likely to turn to other protectors.

    Gary Weglarz , January 21, 2020 at 10:34

    One need not step back very far in order to look at the bigger longer range picture. What immediately comes into focus is that this is simply the current moment in what is now 500 plus years of Western colonialism/neocolonialism. When has the law EVER had anything to do with any of this?

    ML , January 21, 2020 at 10:31

    Pompeo reminds me of the pigs in Animal Farm. He is a grotesque figure, steely-eyed, cold-blooded, fanatical, and hateful. "We lied, cheated, and stole" Pompous Maximus will get his comeuppance one of these days. I hope he plans more overseas trips for himself. He is a vile person, a psychopath proud of his psychopathy. He alone would make anyone considering conversion to Christianity, his brand of it, run screaming into the night. Repulsive man.

    Michael Crockett , January 21, 2020 at 09:40

    Pillage as policy. The Empire has fully embraced gangster capitalism for its modus operandi. That said, IMO, the axis of resistance has the military capability and the resolve to fight back and win. Combining China and Russia into a greater axis of resistance could further shrink the Outlaw US Empire presence in West Asia. Thank you Patrick for your keen insight and observations. The Empires days are numbered.

    Sally Snyder , January 21, 2020 at 07:28

    Here is an interesting article that explains how governments have changed the rules so that they can justify killing anyone who they believe may at some point in time have the potential to be involved in a terrorist plot: viableopposition.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-new.html

    This rather Orwellian move gives governments the justification that they to kill any of us just because they feel that we might pose a threat and that is a very, very scary prospect. It is very reminiscent of the movie Minority Report where crimes of the future are punished in the present.

    [Feb 09, 2020] US troops have stolen tens of millions in Iraq and Afghanistan

    Many of these crimes grew out of shortcomings in the military's management of the deployments that experts say are still present: a heavy dependence on cash transactions, a hasty award process for high-value contracts, loose and harried oversight within the ranks, and a regional culture of corruption that proved seductive to the Americans troops transplanted there.
    Notable quotes:
    "... "this thing going on" ..."
    "... a regional culture of corruption that proved seductive to the Americans troops transplanted there. ..."
    May 09, 2015 | slate.com

    The Fraud of War: U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have stolen tens of millions through bribery, theft, and rigged contracts.

    U.S. Army Specialist Stephanie Charboneau sat at the center of a complex trucking network in Forward Operating Base Fenty near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border that distributed daily tens of thousands of gallons of what troops called "liquid gold": the refined petroleum that fueled the international coalition's vehicles, planes, and generators.

    A prominent sign in the base read: "The Army Won't Go If The Fuel Don't Flow." But Charboneau, 31, a mother of two from Washington state, felt alienated after a supervisor's harsh rebuke. Her work was a dreary routine of recording fuel deliveries in a computer and escorting trucks past a gate. But it was soon to take a dark turn into high-value crime.

    She began an affair with a civilian, Jonathan Hightower, who worked for a Pentagon contractor that distributed fuel from Fenty, and one day in March 2010 he told her about "this thing going on" at other U.S. military bases around Afghanistan, she recalled in a recent telephone interview.

    Troops were selling the U.S. military's fuel to Afghan locals on the side, and pocketing the proceeds. When Hightower suggested they start doing the same, Charboneau said, she agreed.

    In so doing, Charboneau contributed to thefts by U.S. military personnel of at least $15 million worth of fuel since the start of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. And eventually she became one of at least 115 enlisted personnel and military officers convicted since 2005 of committing theft, bribery, and contract-rigging crimes valued at $52 million during their deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a comprehensive tally of court records by the Center for Public Integrity.

    Many of these crimes grew out of shortcomings in the military's management of the deployments that experts say are still present: a heavy dependence on cash transactions, a hasty award process for high-value contracts, loose and harried oversight within the ranks, and a regional culture of corruption that proved seductive to the Americans troops transplanted there.

    Charboneau, whose Facebook posts reveal a bright-eyed woman with a shoulder tattoo and a huge grin, snuggling with pets and celebrating the 2015 New Year with her children in Seattle Seahawks jerseys, now sits in Carswell federal prison in Fort Worth, Texas, serving a seven-year sentence for her crime.

    [Feb 09, 2020] Infamy at Sea Israel s Attack on the USS Liberty 50 Years Later by Jeffrey St. Clair

    Notable quotes:
    "... Only hours after the Liberty arrived it was spotted by the Israeli military. The IDF sent out reconnaissance planes to identify the ship. They made eight trips over a period of three hours. The Liberty was flying a large US flag and was easily recognizable as an American vessel. ..."
    "... Soon more planes came. These were Israeli Mirage III fighters, armed with rockets and machine guns. As off-duty officers sunbathed on the deck, the fighters opened fire on the defenseless ship with rockets and machine guns. ..."
    "... Attack on the Liberty ..."
    "... Attack on the Liberty ..."
    "... Dangerous Liaison, ..."
    "... In January 1968, the arms embargo on Israel was lifted and the sale of American weapons began to flow. By 1971, Israel was buying $600 million of American-made weapons a year. Two years later the purchases topped $3 billion. Almost overnight, Israel had become the largest buyer of US-made arms and aircraft. ..."
    "... Perversely, then, the IDF's strike on the Liberty served to weld the US and Israel together, in a kind of political and military embrace. Now, every time the IDF attacks defenseless villages in Gaza and the West Bank with F-16s and Apache helicopters, the Palestinians quite rightly see the bloody assaults as a joint operation, with the Pentagon as a hidden partner. ..."
    Jun 02, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org

    In early June of 1967, at the onset of the Six Day War, the Pentagon sent the USS Liberty from Spain into international waters off the coast of Gaza to monitor the progress of Israel's attack on the Arab states. The Liberty was a lightly armed surveillance ship.

    Only hours after the Liberty arrived it was spotted by the Israeli military. The IDF sent out reconnaissance planes to identify the ship. They made eight trips over a period of three hours. The Liberty was flying a large US flag and was easily recognizable as an American vessel.

    Soon more planes came. These were Israeli Mirage III fighters, armed with rockets and machine guns. As off-duty officers sunbathed on the deck, the fighters opened fire on the defenseless ship with rockets and machine guns.

    A few minutes later a second wave of planes streaked overhead, French-built Mystere jets, which not only pelted the ship with gunfire but also with napalm bomblets, coating the deck with the flaming jelly. By now, the Liberty was on fire and dozens were wounded and killed, excluding several of the ship's top officers.

    The Liberty's radio team tried to issue a distress call, but discovered the frequencies had been jammed by the Israeli planes with what one communications specialist called "a buzzsaw sound." Finally, an open channel was found and the Liberty got out a message it was under attack to the USS America, the Sixth Fleet's large aircraft carrier.

    Two F-4s left the carrier to come to the Liberty's aid. Apparently, the jets were armed only with nuclear weapons. When word reached the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara became irate and ordered the jets to return. "Tell the Sixth Fleet to get those aircraft back immediately," he barked. McNamara's injunction was reiterated in saltier terms by Admiral David L. McDonald, the chief of Naval Operations: "You get those fucking airplanes back on deck, and you get them back down." The planes turned around. And the attack on the Liberty continued.

    After the Israeli fighter jets had emptied their arsenal of rockets, three Israeli attack boats approached the Liberty. Two torpedoes were launched at the crippled ship, one tore a 40-foot wide hole in the hull, flooding the lower compartments, and killing more than a dozen American sailors.

    As the Liberty listed in the choppy seas, its deck aflame, crew members dropped life rafts into the water and prepared to scuttle the ship. Given the number of wounded, this was going to be a dangerous operation. But it soon proved impossible, as the Israeli attack boats strafed the rafts with machine gun fire. No body was going to get out alive that way.

    After more than two hours of unremitting assault, the Israelis finally halted their attack. One of the torpedo boats approached the Liberty. An officer asked in English over a bullhorn: "Do you need any help?"

    The wounded commander of the Liberty, Lt. William McGonagle, instructed the quartermaster to respond emphatically: "Fuck you."

    The Israeli boat turned and left.

    A Soviet destroyer responded before the US Navy, even though a US submarine, on a covert mission, was apparently in the area and had monitored the attack. The Soviet ship reached the Liberty six hours before the USS Davis. The captain of the Soviet ship offered his aid, but the Liberty's conning officer refused.

    Finally, 16 hours after the attack two US destroyers reached the Liberty. By that time, 34 US sailors were dead and 174 injured, many seriously. As the wounded were being evacuated, an officer with the Office of Naval Intelligence instructed the men not to talk about their ordeal with the press.

    The following morning Israel launched a surprise invasion of Syria, breaching the new cease-fire agreement and seizing control of the Golan Heights.

    Within three weeks, the Navy put out a 700-page report, exonerating the Israelis, claiming the attack had been accidental and that the Israelis had pulled back as soon as they realized their mistake. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara suggested the whole affair should be forgotten. "These errors do occur," McNamara concluded.

    ***

    In Assault on the Liberty , a harrowing first-hand account by James Ennes Jr., McNamara's version of events is proven to be as big a sham as his concurrent lies about Vietnam. Ennes's book created a media storm when it was first published by Random House in 1980, including (predictably) charges that Ennes was a liar and an anti-Semite. Still, the book sold more than 40,000 copies, but was eventually allowed to go out of print. Now Ennes has published an updated version, which incorporates much new evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate and that the US government went to extraordinary lengths to disguise the truth.

    It's a story of Israel aggression, Pentagon incompetence, official lies, and a cover-up that persists to this day. The book gains much of its power from the immediacy of Ennes's first-hand account of the attack and the lies that followed.

    Now, decades later, Ennes warns that the bloodbath on board the Liberty and its aftermath should serve as a tragic cautionary tale about the continuing ties between the US government and the government of Israel.

    The Attack on the Liberty is the kind of book that makes your blood seethe. Ennes skillfully documents the life of the average sailor on one of the more peculiar vessels in the US Navy, with an attention for detail that reminds one of Dana or O'Brien. After all, the year was 1967 and most of the men on the Liberty were certainly glad to be on a non-combat ship in the middle of the Mediterranean, rather than in the Gulf of Tonkin or Mekong Delta.

    But this isn't Two Years Before the Mast. In fact, Ennes's tour on the Liberty last only a few short weeks. He had scarcely settled into a routine before his new ship was shattered before his eyes.

    Ennes joined the Liberty in May of 1967, as an Electronics Material Officer. Serving on a "spook ship", as the Liberty was known to Navy wives, was supposed to be a sure path to career enhancement. The Liberty's normal routine was to ply the African coast, tuning in its eavesdropping equipment on the electronic traffic in the region.

    The Liberty had barely reached Africa when it received a flash message from the Joint Chiefs of Staff to sail from the Ivory Coast to the Mediterranean, where it was to re-deploy off the coast of the Sinai to monitor the Israeli attack on Egypt and the allied Arab nations.

    As the war intensified, the Liberty sent a request to the fleet headquarters requesting an escort. It was denied by Admiral William Martin. The Liberty moved alone to a position in international waters about 13 miles from the shore at El Arish, then under furious siege by the IDF.

    On June 6, the Joint Chiefs sent Admiral McCain, father of the senator from Arizona, an urgent message instructing him to move the Liberty out of the war zone to a position at least 100 miles off the Gaza Coast. McCain never forwarded the message to the ship.

    A little after seven in the morning on June 8, Ennes entered the bridge of the Liberty to take the morning watch. Ennes was told that an hour earlier a "flying boxcar" (later identified as a twin-engine Nord 2501 Noratlas) had flown over the ship at a low level.

    Ennes says he noticed that the ship's American flag had become stained with soot and ordered a new flag run up the mast. The morning was clear and calm, with a light breeze.

    At 9 am, Ennes spotted another reconnaissance plane, which circled the Liberty. An hour later two Israeli fighter jets buzzed the ship. Over the next four hours, Israeli planes flew over the Liberty five more times.

    When the first fighter jet struck, a little before two in the afternoon, Ennes was scanning the skies from the starboard side of the bridge, binoculars in his hands. A rocket hit the ship just below where Ennes was standing, the fragments shredded the men closest to him.

    After the explosion, Ennes noticed that he was the only man left standing. But he also had been hit by more than 20 shards of shrapnel and the force of the blast had shattered his left leg. As he crawled into the pilothouse, a second fighter jet streaked above them and unleashed its payload on the hobbled Liberty.

    At that point, Ennes says the crew of the Liberty had no idea who was attacking them or why. For a few moments, they suspected it might be the Soviets, after an officer mistakenly identified the fighters as MIG-15s. They knew that the Egyptian air force already had been decimated by the Israelis. The idea that the Israelis might be attacking them didn't occur to them until one of the crew spotted a Star of David on the wing of one of the French-built Mystere jets.

    Ennes was finally taken below deck to a makeshift dressing station, with other wounded men. It was hardly a safe harbor. As Ennes worried that his fractured leg might slice through his femoral artery leaving him to bleed to death, the Liberty was pummeled by rockets, machine-gun fire and an Italian-made torpedo packed with 1,000-pounds of explosive.

    After the attack ended, Ennes was approached by his friend Pat O'Malley, a junior officer, who had just sent a list of killed and wounded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel. He got an immediate message back. "They said, 'Wounded in what action? Killed in what action?'," O'Malley told Ennes. "They said it wasn't an 'action,' it was an accident. I'd like for them to come out here and see the difference between an action and an accident. Stupid bastards."

    The cover-up had begun.

    ***

    The Pentagon lied to the public about the attack on the Liberty from the very beginning. In a decision personally approved by the loathsome McNamara, the Pentagon denied to the press that the Liberty was an intelligence ship, referring to it instead as a Technical Research ship, as if it were little more than a military version of Jacques Cousteau's Calypso.

    The military press corps on the USS America, where most of the wounded sailors had been taken, were placed under extreme restrictions. All of the stories filed from the carrier were first routed through the Pentagon for security clearance, objectionable material was removed with barely a bleat of protest from the reporters or their publications.

    Predictably, Israel's first response was to blame the victim, a tactic that has served them so well in the Palestinian situation. First, the IDF alleged that it had asked the State Department and the Pentagon to identify any US ships in the area and was told that there were none. Then the Israeli government charged that the Liberty failed to fly its flag and didn't respond to calls for it to identify itself. The Israelis contended that they assumed the Liberty was an Egyptian supply ship called El Quseir, which, even though it was a rusting transport ship then docked in Alexandria, the IDF said it suspected of shelling Israeli troops from the sea. Under these circumstances, the Israeli's said they were justified in opening fire on the Liberty. The Israelis said that they halted the attack almost immediately, when they realized their mistake.

    "The Liberty contributed decisively toward its identification as an enemy ship," the IDF report concluded. This was a blatant falsehood, since the Israelis had identified the Liberty at least six hours prior to the attack on the ship.

    Even though the Pentagon knew better, it gave credence to the Israeli account by saying that perhaps the Liberty's flag had lain limp on the flagpole in a windless sea. The Pentagon also suggested that the attack might have lasted less than 20 minutes.

    After the initial battery of misinformation, the Pentagon imposed a news blackout on the Liberty disaster until after the completion of a Court of Inquiry investigation.

    The inquiry was headed by Rear Admiral Isaac C. Kidd. Kidd didn't have a free hand. He'd been instructed by Vice-Admiral McCain to limit the damage to the Pentagon and to protect the reputation of Israel.

    The Kidd interviewed the crew on June 14 and 15. The questioning was extremely circumscribed. According to Ennes, the investigators "asked nothing that might be embarrassing to Israeland testimony that tended to embarrass Israel was covered with a 'Top Secret' label, if it was accepted at all."

    Ennes notes that even testimony by the Liberty's communications officers about the jamming of the ship's radios was classified as "Top Secret." The reason? It proved that Israel knew it was attacking an American ship. "Here was strong evidence that the attack was planned in advance and that our ship's identity was known to the attackers (for it its practically impossible to jam the radio of a stranger), but this information was hushed up and no conclusions were drawn from it," Ennes writes.

    Similarly, the Court of Inquiry deep-sixed testimony and affidavits regarding the flag-Ennes had ordered a crisp new one deployed early on the morning of the attack. The investigators buried intercepts of conversations between IDF pilots identifying the ship as flying an American flag.

    It also refused to accept evidence about the IDF's use of napalm during the attacks and choose not to hear testimony regarding the duration of the attacks and the fact that the US Navy failed to send planes to defend the ship.

    "No one came to help us," said Dr. Richard F. Kiepfer, the Liberty's physician. "We were promised help, but no help came. The Russians arrived before our own ships did. We asked for an escort before we ever came to the war zone and we were turned down."

    None of this made its way into the 700-page Court of Inquiry report, which was completed within a couple of weeks and sent to Admiral McCain in London for review.

    McCain approved the report over the objections of Captain Merlin Staring, the Navy legal officer assigned to the inquiry, who found the report to be flawed, incomplete and contrary to the evidence.

    Staring sent a letter to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy disavowing himself from the report. The JAG seemed to take Staring's objections to heart. It prepared a summary for the Chief of Naval Operations that almost completely ignored the Kidd/McCain report. Instead, it concluded:

    that the Liberty was easily recognizable as an American naval vessel; that it's flag was fully deployed and flying in a moderate breeze; that Israeli planes made at least eight reconnaissance flights at close range; the ship came under a prolonged attack from Israeli fighter jets and torpedo boats.

    This succinct and largely accurate report was stamped Top Secret by Navy brass and stayed locked up for many years. But it was seen by many in the Pentagon and some in the Oval Office. But here was enough grumbling about the way the Liberty incident had been handled that LBJ summoned that old Washington fixer Clark Clifford to do damage control. It didn't take Clifford long to come up with the official line: the Israelis simply had made a tragic mistake.

    It turns out that the Admiral Kidd and Captain Ward Boston, the two investigating officers who prepared the original report for Admiral McCain, both believed that the Israeli attack was intentional and sustained. In other words, the IDF knew that they were striking an American spy ship and they wanted to sink it and kill as many sailors as possible. Why then did the Navy investigators produce a sham report that concluded it was an accident?

    Twenty-five years later we finally found out. In June of 2002, Captain Boston told the Navy Times: "Officers follow orders."

    It gets worse. There's plenty of evidence that US intelligence agencies learned on June 7 that Israel intended to attack the Liberty on the following day and that the strike had been personally ordered by Moshe Dayan.

    As the attacks were going on, conversations between Israeli pilots were overheard by US Air Force officers in an EC121 surveillance plane overhead. The spy plane was spotted by Israeli jets, which were given orders to shoot it down. The American plane narrowly avoided the IDF missiles.

    Initial reports on the incident prepared by the CIA, Office of Naval Intelligence and the National Security Agency all reached similar conclusions.

    A particularly damning report compiled by a CIA informant suggests that Israeli Defense minister Moshe Dayan personally ordered the attack and wanted it to proceed until the Liberty was sunk and all on board killed. A heavily redacted version of the report was released in 1977. It reads in part:

    "[The source] said that Dayan personally ordered the attack on the ship and that one of his generals adamantly opposed the action and said, 'This is pure murder.' One of the admirals who was present also disapproved of the action, and it was he who ordered it stopped and not Dayan."

    This amazing document generated little attention from the press and Dayan was never publicly questioned about his role in the attack.

    The analyses by the intelligence agencies are collected in a 1967 investigation by the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations. Two and half decades later that report remains classified. Why? A former committee staffer said: "So as not to embarrass Israel."

    More proof came to light from the Israeli side. A few years after Attack on the Liberty was originally published, Ennes got a call from Evan Toni, an Israeli pilot. Toni told Ennes that he had just read his book and wanted to tell him his story. Toni said that he was the pilot in the first Israeli Mirage fighter to reach the Liberty. He immediately recognized the ship to be a US Navy vessel. He radioed Israeli air command with this information and asked for instructions. Toni said he was ordered to "attack." He refused and flew back to the air base at Ashdod. When he arrived he was summarily arrested for disobeying orders.

    ***

    How tightly does the Israeli lobby control the Hill? For the first time in history, an attack on an America ship was not subjected to a public investigation by Congress. In 1980, Adlai Stevenson and Barry Goldwater planned to open a senate hearing into the Liberty affair. Then Jimmy Carter intervened by brokering a deal with Menachem Begin, where Israel agreed to pony up $6 million to pay for damages to the ship. A State Department press release announced the payment said, "The book is now closed on the USS Liberty."

    It certainly was the last chapter for Adlai Stevenson. He ran for governor of Illinois the following year, where his less than perfect record on Israel, and his unsettling questions about the Liberty affair, became an issue in the campaign. Big money flowed into the coffers of his Republican opponent, Big Jim Thompson, and Stevenson went down to a narrow defeat.

    But the book wasn't closed for the sailors either, of course. After a Newsweek story exposed the gist of what really happened on that day in the Mediterranean, an enraged Admiral McCain placed all the sailors under a gag order. When one sailor told an officer that he was having problems living with the cover-up, he was told: "Forget about it, that's an order."

    The Navy went to bizarre lengths to keep the crew of the Liberty from telling what they knew. When gag orders didn't work, they threatened sanctions. Ennes tells of the confinement and interrogation of two Liberty sailors that sounds like something right out of the CIA's MK-Ultra program.

    "In an incredible abuse of authority, military officers held two young Liberty sailors against their will in a locked and heavily guarded psychiatric ward of the base hospital," Ennes writes. "For days these men were drugged and questioned about their recollections of the attack by a 'therapist' who admitted to being untrained in either psychiatry or psychology. At one point, they avoided electroshock only by bolting from the room and demanding to see the commanding officer."

    Since coming home, the veterans who have tried to tell of their ordeal have been harassed relentlessly. They've been branded as drunks, bigots, liars and frauds. Often, it turns out, these slurs have been leaked by the Pentagon. And, oh yeah, they've also been painted as anti-Semites.

    In a recent column, Charley Reese describes just how mean-spirited and petty this campaign became. "When a small town in Wisconsin decided to name its library in honor of the USS Liberty crewmen, a campaign claiming it was anti-Semitic was launched," writes Reese. "And when the town went ahead, the U.S. government ordered no Navy personnel to attend, and sent no messages. This little library was the first, and at the time the only, memorial to the men who died on the Liberty."

    ***

    So why then did the Israelis attack the Liberty?

    A few days before the Six Days War, Israel's Foreign Minister Abba Eban visited Washington to inform LBJ about the forthcoming invasion. Johnson cautioned Eban that the US could not support such an attack.

    It's possible, then, that the IDF assumed that the Liberty was spying on the Israeli war plans. Possible, but not likely. Despite the official denials, as Andrew and Leslie Cockburn demonstrate in Dangerous Liaison, at the time of the Six Days War the US and Israel had developed a warm covert relationship. So closely were the two sides working that US intelligence aid certainly helped secure Israel's devastating and swift victory. In fact, it's possible that the Liberty had been sent to the region to spy for the IDF.

    A somewhat more likely scenario holds that Moshe Dayan wanted to keep the lid on Israel's plan to breach the new cease-fire and invade into Syria to seize the Golan.

    It has also been suggested that Dayan ordered the attack on the Liberty with the intent of pinning the blame on the Egyptians and thus swinging public and political opinion in the United States solidly behind the Israelis. Of course, for this plan to work, the Liberty had to be destroyed and its crew killed.

    There's another factor. The Liberty was positioned just off the coast from the town of El Arish. In fact, Ennes and others had used town's mosque tower to fix the location of the ship along the otherwise featureless desert shoreline. The IDF had seized El Arish and had used the airport there as a prisoner of war camp. On the very day the Liberty was attacked, the IDF was in the process of executing as many as 1,000 Palestinian and Egyptian POWs, a war crime that they surely wanted to conceal from prying eyes. According to Gabriel Bron, now an Israeli reporter, who witnessed part of the massacre as a soldier: "The Egyptian prisoners of war were ordered to dig pits and then army police shot them to death."

    The bigger question is why the US government would participate so enthusiastically in the cover-up of a war crime against its own sailors. Well, the Pentagon has never been slow to hide its own incompetence. And there's plenty of that in the Liberty affair: bungled communications, refusal to provide an escort, situating the defenseless Liberty too close to a raging battle, the inability to intervene in the attack and the inexcusably long time it took to reach the battered ship and its wounded.

    That's but par for the course. But something else was going on that would only come to light later. Through most of the 1960s, the US congress had imposed a ban on the sale of arms to both Israel and Jordan. But at the time of the Liberty attack, the Pentagon (and its allies in the White House and on the Hill) was seeking to have this proscription overturned. The top brass certainly knew that any evidence of a deliberate attack on a US Navy ship by the IDF would scuttle their plans. So they hushed it up.

    In January 1968, the arms embargo on Israel was lifted and the sale of American weapons began to flow. By 1971, Israel was buying $600 million of American-made weapons a year. Two years later the purchases topped $3 billion. Almost overnight, Israel had become the largest buyer of US-made arms and aircraft.

    Perversely, then, the IDF's strike on the Liberty served to weld the US and Israel together, in a kind of political and military embrace. Now, every time the IDF attacks defenseless villages in Gaza and the West Bank with F-16s and Apache helicopters, the Palestinians quite rightly see the bloody assaults as a joint operation, with the Pentagon as a hidden partner.

    Thus, does the legacy of Liberty live on, one raid after another.

    A version of this essay appeared in The Politics of Anti-Semitism by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair.

    [Feb 09, 2020] Bush older acted as a gangster in Kuwait war: he was determined to "seize the unipolar moment."

    Bush older was the first president from CIA. He was already a senior CIA official at the time of JFK assassination and might participate in the plot to kill JFK. At least he was in Dallas at the day of assassination. .
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 5:20 pm GMT

    That Iraq is to say the least unstable is attributable to the ill-advised U.S. invasion of 2003.

    Nothing to do with 9 years of sanctions on Iraq that killed a million Iraqis, "half of them children," and US control of Iraqi air space, after having killed Iraqi military in a turkey-shoot, for no really good reason other than George H W Bush seized the "unipolar moment" to become king of the world?

    Maybe it's just stubbornness: I think Papa Bush is responsible for the "imperial pivot," in the Persian Gulf war aka Operation Desert Storm, 29 years and 4 days ago -- January 17, 1991.

    According to Jeffrey Engel, Bush's biographer and director of the Bush library at Southern Methodist University, Gorbachev harassed Bush with phone calls, pleading with him not to go to war over Kuwait

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?310832-1/into-desert-reflections-gulf-war

    (It's worth noting that Dennis Ross was relatively new in his role on Jim Baker's staff when Baker, Brent Skowcroft, Larry Eagleburger & like minded urged Bush to take the Imperial Pivot.)

    According to Vernon Loeb, who completed the writing of King's Counsel after Jack O'Connell died, Jordan's King Hussein, in consultation with retired CIA station chief O'Connell, parlayed with Arab leaders to resolve the conflict on their own, i.e. Arab-to-Arab terms, and also pleaded with Bush to stay out, and to let the Arabs solve their own problems. Bush refused.
    https://www.c-span.org/video/?301361-6/kings-counsel

    See above: Bush was determined to "seize the unipolar moment."

    Once again insist on entering into the record: George H Bush was present at the creation of the Global War on Terror, July 4, 1979, the Jerusalem Conference hosted by Benzion and Benjamin Netanyahu and heavily populated with Trotskyites – neocons.

    International Terrorism: Challenge and Response, Benjamin Netanyahu, ed., 1981.
    (Wurmser became Netanyahu's acolyte)

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 7:05 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus

    I think Papa Bush is responsible for the "imperial pivot," in the Persian Gulf war aka Operation Desert Storm, 29 years and 4 days ago -- January 17, 1991.

    Yes I remember it well. I came back from a long trip & memorable vacation, alas I was a young man, to the television drama that was unfolding with Arthur Kent 'The Scud Stud' and others reporting from the safety of their hotel balconies filming aircaft and cruise missiles. It was surreal.
    You are correct of course.

    [Feb 09, 2020] Trump Secretly Threatened Europe With Auto Tariffs If It Didn t Declare Iran In Breach Of Nuclear Deal

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump's threats of auto tariffs to gain trade concessions with the Europeans is certainly nothing new, but using the same to dictate foreign policy is, notes WaPo's diplomatic correspondent John Hudson. ..."
    "... Interestingly, in Wednesday's joint statement the European signatories attempted to distance their drastic action away from Washington's so-called "maximum pressure" campaign. "Our three countries are not joining a campaign to implement maximum pressure against Iran," they said . ..."
    "... The statement also underscored Europe hopes to use the mechanism "to bring Iran back into full compliance with its commitments under the JCPOA" and in the words of one official quoted in The Guardian to prevent nuclear advancement to the point that the Iranians "learn something that it is not possible for them to unlearn" . ..."
    Jan 15, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    A bombshell revelation from The Washington Post a day after France, Britain and Germany took unprecedented action against Iran by formally triggering the dispute resolution mechanism regulating conformity to the deal, seen as the harshest measure taken by the European signatories thus far. The European powers officially see Iran as in breach of the deal which means UN and EU punitive sanctions are now on the table.

    But according to The Post , how things quickly escalated to this point is real story : " Days before Europeans warned Iran of nuclear deal violations, Trump secretly threatened to impose 25% tariff on European autos if they didn't," says the report.

    This came as a "shock" to all three countries, with one top European official calling it essentially "extortion" and a new level of hardball tactics from the Trump administration.

    After the US leveraged the new tariffs threat according to the report, European capitals moved quick to trigger the mechanism, which involved the individual European states formally notifying the agreement's guarantor, the European Union, that Iran is in breach of the nuclear deal.

    This followed the Jan.6 declaration of Tehran's leadership to no longer be beholden to uranium enrichment limits. And that's where things got interesting as Washington's pressure campaign dramatically turned up the heat on Europe.

    "Within days, the three countries would formally accuse Iran of violating the deal, triggering a recourse provision that could reimpose United Nations sanctions on Iran and unravel the last remaining vestiges of the Obama-era agreement," the report continues .

    However, the report notes France, the UK, and Germany were already in deep discussion on moving forward with triggering the mechanism. "We didn't want to look weak, so we agreed to keep the existence of the threat a secret," a European official cited by WaPo claims.

    Trump's threats of auto tariffs to gain trade concessions with the Europeans is certainly nothing new, but using the same to dictate foreign policy is, notes WaPo's diplomatic correspondent John Hudson.

    Interestingly, in Wednesday's joint statement the European signatories attempted to distance their drastic action away from Washington's so-called "maximum pressure" campaign. "Our three countries are not joining a campaign to implement maximum pressure against Iran," they said .

    The statement also underscored Europe hopes to use the mechanism "to bring Iran back into full compliance with its commitments under the JCPOA" and in the words of one official quoted in The Guardian to prevent nuclear advancement to the point that the Iranians "learn something that it is not possible for them to unlearn" .

    Now that the mechanism has been enacted, the clock starts on 65 days of intensive negotiations before UN sanctions would be reimposed if no resolution is reached. Specifically a blanket arms embargo would be imposed among other measures, and certainly it would mark the deal's final demise, given the Europeans are Iran's last hope for being equal partners in the deal.

    Also interesting is that in the hours before The Washington Post report was published, Iranian FM Zarif charged that the EU investigation into Iran's alleged non-compliance meant Europe is allowing itself to be bulled by the United States .

    Indeed the new revelation of the secret threats attempting to dictate Europe's course appear to confirm precisely Zarif's words to reporters earlier on Wednesday : "They say 'We are not responsible for what the United States did.' OK, but you are independent" he began. And then added a stinging rebuke: "Europe, EU, is the largest global economy. So why do you allow the United States to bully you around?"

    [Feb 09, 2020] The Oil War by Jean-Pierre Séréni

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Iraq war was about oil. Recently declassified US government documents confirm this ( 1 ), however much US president George W Bush, vice-president Dick Cheney, defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld and their ally, the British prime minister Tony Blair, denied it at the time. ..."
    Mar 06, 2013 | www.zcommunications.org

    Source: Le Monde Diplomatique

    The Iraq war was about oil. Recently declassified US government documents confirm this ( 1 ), however much US president George W Bush, vice-president Dick Cheney, defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld and their ally, the British prime minister Tony Blair, denied it at the time.

    When Bush moved into the White House in January 2001, he faced the familiar problem of the imbalance between oil supply and demand. Supply was unable to keep up with demand, which was increasing rapidly because of the growth of emerging economies such as China and India. The only possible solution lay in the Gulf, where the giant oil-producing countries of Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq, and the lesser producing states of Kuwait and Abu Dhabi, commanded 60% of the world's reserves.

    For financial or political reasons, production growth was slow. In Saudi Arabia, the ultra-rich ruling families of the Al-Saud, the Al-Sabah and the Zayed Al-Nayan were content with a comfortable level of income, given their small populations, and preferred to leave their oil underground. Iran and Iraq hold around 25% of the world's hydrocarbon reserves and could have filled the gap, but were subject to sanctions -- imposed solely by the US on Iran, internationally on Iraq -- that deprived them of essential oil equipment and services. Washington saw them as rogue states and was unwilling to end the sanctions.

    How could the US get more oil from the Gulf without endangering its supremacy in the region? Influential US neoconservatives, led by Paul Wolfowitz, who had gone over to uninhibited imperialism after the fall of the Soviet Union, thought they had found a solution. They had never understood George Bush senior's decision not to overthrow Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf war in 1991. An open letter to President Bill Clinton, inspired by the Statement of Principles of the Project for the New American Century, a non-profit organisation founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan, had called for a regime change in Iraq as early as 1998: Saddam must be ousted and big US oil companies must gain access to Iraq. Several signatories to the Statement of Principles became members of the new Republican administration in 2001.

    In 2002, one of them, Douglas Feith, a lawyer who was undersecretary of defense to Rumsfeld, supervised the work of experts planning the future of Iraq's oil industry. His first decision was to entrust its management after the expected US victory to Kellog, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of US oil giant Halliburton, of which Cheney had been chairman and CEO. Feith's plan, formulated at the start of 2003, was to keep Iraq's oil production at its current level of 2,840 mbpd (million barrels per day), to avoid a collapse that would cause chaos in the world market.

    Privatising oil

    Experts were divided on the privatisation of the Iraqi oil industry. The Iraqi government had excluded foreign companies and successfully managed the sector itself since 1972. By 2003, despite wars with Iran (1980-88) and in Kuwait (1990-91) and more than 15 years of sanctions, Iraq had managed to equal the record production levels achieved in 1979-1980.

    The experts had a choice -- bring back the concession regime that had operated before nationalisation in 1972, or sell shares in the Iraqi National Oil Company (INOC) on the Russian model, issuing transferrable vouchers to the Iraqi population. In Russia, this approach had very quickly led to the oil sector falling into the hands of a few super-rich oligarchs.

    Bush approved the plan drawn up by the Pentagon and State Department in January 2003. The much-decorated retired lieutenant general Jay Gardner, was appointed director of the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, the military administration set up to govern post-Saddam Iraq. Out of his depth, he stuck to short-term measures and avoided choosing between the options put forward by his technical advisers.

    Reassuring the oil giants

    The international oil companies were not idle. Lee Raymond, CEO of America's biggest oil company ExxonMobil, was an old friend of Dick Cheney. But where the politicians were daring, he was cautious. The project was a tempting opportunity to replenish the company's reserves, which had been stagnant for several years, but Raymond had doubts: would Bush really be able to assure conditions that would allow the company to operate safely in Iraq? Nobody at ExxonMobil was willing to die for oil. (Its well-paid engineers do not dream of life in a blockhouse in Iraq.) The company would also have to be sure of its legal position: what would contracts signed by a de facto authority be worth when it would be investing billions of dollars that would take years to recover?

    In the UK, BP was anxious to secure its own share of the spoils. As early as 2002 the company had confided in the UK Department of Trade and Industry its fears that the US might give away too much to French, Russian and Chinese oil companies in return for their governments agreeing not to use their veto at the UN Security Council ( 2 ). In February 2003 those fears were removed: France's president Jacques Chirac vetoed a resolution put forward by the US, and the third Iraq war began without UN backing. There was no longer any question of respecting the agreements Saddam had signed with Total and other companies (which had never been put into practice because of sanctions).

    To reassure the British and US oil giants, the US government appointed to the management team Gary Vogler of ExxonMobil and Philip J Carrol of Shell. They were replaced in October 2003 by Rob McKee of ConocoPhilips and Terry Adams of BP. The idea was to counter the dominance of the Pentagon, and the influential neocon approach (which faced opposition from within the administration). The neocon ideologues, still on the scene, had bizarre ideas: they wanted to build a pipeline to transport Iraq's crude oil to Israel, dismantle OPEC (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) and even use "liberated" Iraq as a guinea pig for a new oil business model to be applied to all of the Middle East. The engineers and businessmen, whose priorities were profits and results, were more down-to-earth.

    In any event, the invasion had a devastating impact on Iraq's oil production, less because of the bombing by the US air force than because of the widespread looting of government agencies, schools, universities, archives, libraries, banks, hospitals, museums and state-owned enterprises. Drilling rigs were dismantled for the copper parts they were believed to contain. The looting continued from March to May 2003. Only a third of the damage to the oil industry was caused during the invasion; the rest happened after the fighting was over, despite the presence of the RIO Task Force and the US Corps of Engineers with its 500 contractors, specially prepared and trained to protect oil installations. Saddam's supporters were prevented from blowing up the oil wells by the speed of the invasion, but the saboteurs set to work in June 2003.

    Iraq's one real asset

    The only buildings protected were the gigantic oil ministry, where 15,000 civil servants managed 22 subsidiaries of the Iraq National Oil Company. The State Oil Marketing Organisation and the infrastructure were abandoned. The occupiers regarded the oil under the ground as Iraq's one real asset. They were not interested in installations or personnel. The oil ministry was only saved at the last minute because it housed geological and seismic data on Iraq's 80 known deposits, estimated to contain 115bn barrels of crude oil. The rest could always be replaced with more modern US-made equipment and the knowhow of the international oil companies, made indispensible by the sabotage.

    Thamir Abbas Ghadban, director-general of planning at the oil ministry, turned up at the office three days after the invasion was over, and, in the absence of a minister for oil (since Iraq had no government), was appointed second in command under Micheal Mobbs, a neocon who enjoyed the confidence of the Pentagon. Paul Bremer, the US proconsul who headed Iraq's provisional government from May 2003 to June 2004, presided over the worst 12 months in the oil sector in 70 years. Production fell by 1 mbpd -- more than $13bn of lost income.

    The oil installations, watched over by 3,500 underequipped guards, suffered 140 sabotage attacks between May 2003 and September 2004, estimated to have caused $7bn of damage. "There was widespread looting," said Ghadban. "Equipment was stolen and in most cases the buildings were set on fire." The Daura refinery, near Baghdad, only received oil intermittently, because of damage to the pipeline network. "We had to let all the oil in the damaged sections of the pipeline burn before we could repair them." Yet the refinery continued to operate, no mean achievement considering that the workers were no longer being paid.

    The senior management of the national oil company also suffered. Until 1952 almost all senior managers of the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC) were foreigners, who occupied villas in gated and guarded compounds while the local workforce lived in shantytowns. In 1952 tension between Iraq and Muhammad Mossadegh's Iran led the IPC to review its relations with Baghdad, and a clause of the new treaty concerned the training of Iraqi managers. By 1972, 75% of the thousand skilled jobs were filled by Iraqis, which helped to ensure the success of the IPC's nationalisation. The new Iraq National Oil Company gained control of the oilfields and production reached unprecedented levels.

    Purge of the Ba'ath

    After the invasion, the US purged Ba'athist elements from INOC's management. Simply belonging to the Ba'ath, Iraq's single political party, which had been in power since 1968, was grounds for dismissal, compulsory retirement or worse. Seventeen of INOC's 24 directors were forced out, along with several hundred engineers, who had kept production high through wars and foreign sanctions. The founding fathers of INOC were ousted by the Deba'athification Commission, led by former exiles including Iraq's prime minister Nuri al-Maliki, who replaced them with his own supporters, as incompetent as they were partisan.

    Rob McKee, who succeeded Philip J Carrol as oil adviser to the US proconsul, observed in autumn 2003: "The people themselves are patently unqualified and are apparently being placed in the ministry for religious, political or personal reasons... the people who nursed the industry through Saddam's years and who brought it back to life after the liberation, as well as many trained professionals, are all systematically being pushed to the sidelines" ( 3 ).

    This purge opened the door to advisers, mostly from the US, who bombarded the oil ministry with notes, circulars and reports directly inspired by the practices of the international oil industry, without much concern for their applicability to Iraq.

    The drafting of Iraq's new constitution and an oil law provided an opportunity to change the rules. Washington had decided in advance to do away with the centralised state, partly because of its crimes against the Kurds under Saddam and partly because centralisation favours totalitarianism. The new federal, or even confederal, regime was decentralised to the point of being de-structured. A two-thirds majority in one of the three provinces allows opposition to veto central government decisions.

    Baghdad-Irbil rivalry

    Only Kurdistan had the means and the motivation to do so. Where oil was concerned, power was effectively divided between Baghdad and Irbil, seat of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), which imposed its own interpretation of the constitution: deposits already being exploited would remain under federal government control, but new licenses would be granted by the provincial governments. A fierce dispute arose between the two capitals, partly because the KRG granted licenses to foreign oil companies under far more favourable conditions than those offered by Baghdad.

    The quarrel related to the production sharing agreements. The usual practice is for foreign companies that provide financial backing to get a share of the oil produced, which can be very significant in the first few years. This was the formula US politicians and oil companies wanted to impose. They were unable to do so.

    Iraq's parliament, so often criticised in other matters, opposed this system; it was supported by public opinion, which had not forgotten the former IPC. Tariq Shafiq, founding father of the INOC, explained to the US Congress the technical reasons for the refusal ( 4 ). Iraq's oil deposits were known and mapped out. There was therefore little risk to foreign companies: there would be no prospecting costs and exploitation costs would be among the lowest in the world. From 2008 onwards, Baghdad started offering major oil companies far less attractive contracts -- $2/barrel for the bigger oilfields, and no rights to the deposits.

    ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Total, and Russian, Chinese, Angolan, Pakistani and Turkish oil companies nevertheless rushed to accept, hoping that things would turn to their advantage. Newsweek (24 May 2010) claimed Iraq had the potential to become "the next Saudi Arabia." But although production is up (over 3 mbpd in 2012), the oil companies are irritated by the conditions imposed on them: investment costs are high, profits are mediocre and the oil still underground is not counted as part of their reserves, which affects their share price.

    ExxonMobil and Total disregarded the federal government edict that threatened to strip rights from oil companies that signed production-sharing agreements relating to oilfields in Kurdistan. Worse, ExxonMobil sold its services contract relating to Iraq's largest oilfield, West Qurna, where it had been due to invest $50bn and double the country's current production. Baghdad is now under pressure: if it continues to refuse the conditions requested by the foreign oil companies, it will lose out to Irbil, even if Kurdistan's deposits are only a third of the size of those in the south. Meanwhile, Turkey has done nothing to improve its relations with Iraq by offering to build a direct pipeline from Kurdistan to the Mediterranean. Without the war, would the oil companies have been able to make the Iraqis and Kurds compete? One thing is certain: the US is far from achieving its goals in the oil sector, and in this sense the war was a failure.

    Alan Greenspan, who as chairman of the US Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006 was well placed to understand the importance of oil, came up with the best summary of the conflict: "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil" ( 5 ).

    [Feb 09, 2020] The Real Reason for the Iraq War

    Notable quotes:
    "... Like most lefty journalists, I assumed that George Bush and Tony Blair invaded Iraq to buy up its oil fields, cheap and at gun-point, and cart off the oil. We thought we knew the neo-cons true casus belli ..."
    "... But the truth in the Options for Iraqi Oil Industry was worse than "Blood for Oil". Much, much worse. The key was in the flow chart on page 15, Iraq Oil Regime Timeline & Scenario Analysis: "...A single state-owned company ...enhances a government's relationship with OPEC." ..."
    Feb 09, 2020 | www.vice.com

    Because it was marked "confidential" on each page, the oil industry stooge couldn't believe the US State Department had given me a complete copy of their secret plans for the oil fields of Iraq.

    Actually, the State Department had done no such thing. But my line of bullshit had been so well-practiced and the set-up on my mark had so thoroughly established my fake identity, that I almost began to believe my own lies.

    I closed in. I said I wanted to make sure she and I were working from the same State Department draft. Could she tell me the official name, date and number of pages? She did.

    Bingo! I'd just beaten the Military-Petroleum Complex in a lying contest, so I had a right to be chuffed.

    After phoning numbers from California to Kazakhstan to trick my mark, my next calls were to the State Department and Pentagon. Now that I had the specs on the scheme for Iraq's oil -- that State and Defense Department swore, in writing, did not exist -- I told them I'd appreciate their handing over a copy (no expurgations, please) or there would be a very embarrassing story on BBC Newsnight .

    Within days, our chief of investigations, Ms Badpenny, delivered to my shack in the woods outside New York a 323-page, three-volume programme for Iraq's oil crafted by George Bush's State Department and petroleum insiders meeting secretly in Houston, Texas.

    I cracked open the pile of paper -- and I was blown away.

    Like most lefty journalists, I assumed that George Bush and Tony Blair invaded Iraq to buy up its oil fields, cheap and at gun-point, and cart off the oil. We thought we knew the neo-cons true casus belli : Blood for oil.

    But the truth in the Options for Iraqi Oil Industry was worse than "Blood for Oil". Much, much worse. The key was in the flow chart on page 15, Iraq Oil Regime Timeline & Scenario Analysis: "...A single state-owned company ...enhances a government's relationship with OPEC."

    [Feb 08, 2020] Is Iraq About To Switch From US to Russia

    Highly recommended!
    Feb 08, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    likbez , February 8, 2020 8:56 pm

    NSC Russia expert freshly appointed Andrew Peek, who was walked out like Vindman, with him only freshly appointed after Fiona Hill and the Tim Morrioson resigned.

    There is a big problems with "experts" in NSC -- often they represent interests of the particular agency, or a think tank, not that of the country.

    Look at former NSC staffer Fiona Hill. She can be called "threat inflation" specialist.

    NSC tries to usurp the role of the State Department and overly militarize the USA foreign policy, while having much lower class specialists. It is a kind of CIA backdoor into defining the USA foreign policy.

    I would advocate creating "shadow NSC" by the party who is in opposition, so that it can somehow provide countervailing opinions. But with both parties being now war parties, this is no that effective.

    Cutting NSC staff to the bones, so that such second rate personalities like Fiona Hill and Vindman are automatically excluded might also help a little bit.

    The size above a dozen or two is probably excessive, as like any bureaucracy, it will try to control the President, not so much help him/her.
    ( https://docs.house.gov/meetings/FA/FA00/20160908/105276/HHRG-114-FA00-Transcript-20160908.pdf ):

    One common explanation is that the NSC mission creep results from the NSC staff growing too large and the easy solution is to limit the size of the staff. I am sympathetic to that feeling because we don't want it to
    be too large and we don't want it to be usurping things that the State Department or the Agency should do.

    [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Americans were the victims of an elaborate con job, pelted with a daily barrage of threat inflation, distortions, deceptions and lies, not about tactics or strategy or war plans, but about justifications for war. The lies were aimed not at confusing Saddam's regime, but the American people. By the start of the war, 66 per cent of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 and 79 per cent thought he was close to having a nuclear weapon. ..."
    "... This charade wouldn't have worked without a gullible or a complicit press corps. Victoria Clarke, who developed the Pentagon plan for embedded reports, put it succinctly a few weeks before the war began: "Media coverage of any future operation will to a large extent shape public perception." ..."
    "... During the Vietnam War, TV images of maimed GIs and napalmed villages suburbanized opposition to the war and helped hasten the U.S. withdrawal. The Bush gang meant to turn the Vietnam phenomenon on its head by using TV as a force to propel the U.S.A. into a war that no one really wanted. ..."
    "... When the Pentagon needed a heroic story, the press obliged. Jessica Lynch became the war's first instant celebrity. Here was a neo-gothic tale of a steely young woman wounded in a fierce battle, captured and tortured by ruthless enemies, and dramatically saved from certain death by a team of selfless rescuers, knights in camo and night-vision goggles. ..."
    "... Back in 1988, the Post felt much differently about Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. When reports trickled out about the gassing of Iranian troops, the Washington Post's editorial page shrugged off the massacres, calling the mass poisonings "a quirk of war." ..."
    "... The Bush team displayed a similar amnesia. When Iraq used chemical weapons in grisly attacks on Iran, the U.S. government not only didn't object, it encouraged Saddam. ..."
    "... Nothing sums up this unctuous approach more brazenly than MSNBC's firing of liberal talk show host Phil Donahue on the eve of the war. The network replaced the Donahue Show with a running segment called Countdown: Iraq, featuring the usual nightly coterie of retired generals, security flacks, and other cheerleaders for invasion. ..."
    Mar 20, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    The war on Iraq won't be remembered for how it was waged so much as for how it was sold. It was a propaganda war, a war of perception management, where loaded phrases, such as "weapons of mass destruction" and "rogue state" were hurled like precision weapons at the target audience: us.

    To understand the Iraq war you don't need to consult generals, but the spin doctors and PR flacks who stage-managed the countdown to war from the murky corridors of Washington where politics, corporate spin and psy-ops spooks cohabit.

    Consider the picaresque journey of Tony Blair's plagiarized dossier on Iraq, from a grad student's website to a cut-and-paste job in the prime minister's bombastic speech to the House of Commons. Blair, stubborn and verbose, paid a price for his grandiose puffery. Bush, who looted whole passages from Blair's speech for his own clumsy presentations, has skated freely through the tempest. Why?

    Unlike Blair, the Bush team never wanted to present a legal case for war. They had no interest in making any of their allegations about Iraq hold up to a standard of proof. The real effort was aimed at amping up the mood for war by using the psychology of fear.

    Facts were never important to the Bush team. They were disposable nuggets that could be discarded at will and replaced by whatever new rationale that played favorably with their polls and focus groups. The war was about weapons of mass destruction one week, al-Qaeda the next. When neither allegation could be substantiated on the ground, the fall back position became the mass graves (many from the Iran/Iraq war where the U.S.A. backed Iraq) proving that Saddam was an evil thug who deserved to be toppled. The motto of the Bush PR machine was: Move on. Don't explain. Say anything to conceal the perfidy behind the real motives for war. Never look back. Accuse the questioners of harboring unpatriotic sensibilities. Eventually, even the cagey Wolfowitz admitted that the official case for war was made mainly to make the invasion palatable, not to justify it.

    The Bush claque of neocon hawks viewed the Iraq war as a product and, just like a new pair of Nikes, it required a roll-out campaign to soften up the consumers. The same techniques (and often the same PR gurus) that have been used to hawk cigarettes, SUVs and nuclear waste dumps were deployed to retail the Iraq war. To peddle the invasion, Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell and company recruited public relations gurus into top-level jobs at the Pentagon and the State Department. These spinmeisters soon had more say over how the rationale for war on Iraq should be presented than intelligence agencies and career diplomats. If the intelligence didn't fit the script, it was shaded, retooled or junked.

    Take Charlotte Beers whom Powell picked as undersecretary of state in the post-9/11 world. Beers wasn't a diplomat. She wasn't even a politician. She was a grand diva of spin, known on the business and gossip pages as "the queen of Madison Avenue." On the strength of two advertising campaigns, one for Uncle Ben's Rice and another for Head and Shoulder's dandruff shampoo, Beers rocketed to the top of the heap in the PR world, heading two giant PR houses: Ogilvy and Mathers as well as J. Walter Thompson.

    At the State Department Beers, who had met Powell in 1995 when they both served on the board of Gulf Airstream, worked at, in Powell's words, "the branding of U.S. foreign policy." She extracted more than $500 million from Congress for her Brand America campaign, which largely focused on beaming U.S. propaganda into the Muslim world, much of it directed at teens.

    "Public diplomacy is a vital new arm in what will combat terrorism over time," said Beers. "All of a sudden we are in this position of redefining who America is, not only for ourselves, but for the outside world." Note the rapt attention Beers pays to the manipulation of perception, as opposed, say, to alterations of U.S. policy.

    Old-fashioned diplomacy involves direct communication between representatives of nations, a conversational give and take, often fraught with deception (see April Glaspie), but an exchange nonetheless. Public diplomacy, as defined by Beers, is something else entirely. It's a one-way street, a unilateral broadcast of American propaganda directly to the public, domestic and international, a kind of informational carpet-bombing.

    The themes of her campaigns were as simplistic and flimsy as a Bush press conference. The American incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq were all about bringing the balm of "freedom" to oppressed peoples. Hence, the title of the U.S. war: Operation Iraqi Freedom, where cruise missiles were depicted as instruments of liberation. Bush himself distilled the Beers equation to its bizarre essence: "This war is about peace."

    Beers quietly resigned her post a few weeks before the first volley of tomahawk missiles battered Baghdad. From her point of view, the war itself was already won, the fireworks of shock and awe were all after play.

    Over at the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld drafted Victoria "Torie" Clarke as his director of public affairs. Clarke knew the ropes inside the Beltway. Before becoming Rumsfeld's mouthpiece, she had commanded one of the world's great parlors for powerbrokers: Hill and Knowlton's D.C. office.

    Almost immediately upon taking up her new gig, Clarke convened regular meetings with a select group of Washington's top private PR specialists and lobbyists to develop a marketing plan for the Pentagon's forthcoming terror wars. The group was filled with heavy-hitters and was strikingly bipartisan in composition. She called it the Rumsfeld Group and it included PR executive Sheila Tate, columnist Rich Lowry, and Republican political consultant Rich Galen.

    The brain trust also boasted top Democratic fixer Tommy Boggs, brother of NPR's Cokie Roberts and son of the late Congressman Hale Boggs of Louisiana. At the very time Boggs was conferring with top Pentagon brass on how to frame the war on terror, he was also working feverishly for the royal family of Saudi Arabia. In 2002 alone, the Saudis paid his Qorvis PR firm $20.2 million to protect its interests in Washington. In the wake of hostile press coverage following the exposure of Saudi links to the 9/11 hijackers, the royal family needed all the well-placed help it could buy. They seem to have gotten their money's worth. Boggs' felicitous influence-peddling may help to explain why the references to Saudi funding of al-Qaeda were dropped from the recent congressional report on the investigation into intelligence failures and 9/11.

    According to the trade publication PR Week, the Rumsfeld Group sent "messaging advice" to the Pentagon. The group told Clarke and Rumsfeld that in order to get the American public to buy into the war on terrorism, they needed to suggest a link to nation states, not just nebulous groups such as al-Qaeda. In other words, there needed to be a fixed target for the military campaigns, some distant place to drop cruise missiles and cluster bombs. They suggested the notion (already embedded in Rumsfeld's mind) of playing up the notion of so-called rogue states as the real masters of terrorism. Thus was born the Axis of Evil, which, of course, wasn't an "axis" at all, since two of the states, Iran and Iraq, hated each other, and neither had anything at all to do with the third, North Korea.

    Tens of millions in federal money were poured into private public relations and media firms working to craft and broadcast the Bush dictat that Saddam had to be taken out before the Iraqi dictator blew up the world by dropping chemical and nuclear bombs from long-range drones. Many of these PR executives and image consultants were old friends of the high priests in the Bush inner sanctum. Indeed, they were veterans, like Cheney and Powell, of the previous war against Iraq, another engagement that was more spin than combat .

    At the top of the list was John Rendon, head of the D.C. firm, the Rendon Group. Rendon is one of Washington's heaviest hitters, a Beltway fixer who never let political affiliation stand in the way of an assignment. Rendon served as a media consultant for Michael Dukakis and Jimmy Carter, as well as Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Whenever the Pentagon wanted to go to war, he offered his services at a price. During Desert Storm, Rendon pulled in $100,000 a month from the Kuwaiti royal family. He followed this up with a $23 million contract from the CIA to produce anti-Saddam propaganda in the region.

    As part of this CIA project, Rendon created and named the Iraqi National Congress and tapped his friend Ahmed Chalabi, the shady financier, to head the organization.

    Shortly after 9/11, the Pentagon handed the Rendon Group another big assignment: public relations for the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan. Rendon was also deeply involved in the planning and public relations for the pre-emptive war on Iraq, though both Rendon and the Pentagon refuse to disclose the details of the group's work there.

    But it's not hard to detect the manipulative hand of Rendon behind many of the Iraq war's signature events, including the toppling of the Saddam statue (by U.S. troops and Chalabi associates) and videotape of jubilant Iraqis waving American flags as the Third Infantry rolled by them. Rendon had pulled off the same stunt in the first Gulf War, handing out American flags to Kuwaitis and herding the media to the orchestrated demonstration. "Where do you think they got those American flags?" clucked Rendon in 1991. "That was my assignment."

    The Rendon Group may also have had played a role in pushing the phony intelligence that has now come back to haunt the Bush administration. In December of 2002, Robert Dreyfuss reported that the inner circle of the Bush White House preferred the intelligence coming from Chalabi and his associates to that being proffered by analysts at the CIA.

    So Rendon and his circle represented a new kind of off-the-shelf PSYOPs , the privatization of official propaganda. "I am not a national security strategist or a military tactician," said Rendon. "I am a politician, and a person who uses communication to meet public policy or corporate policy objectives. In fact, I am an information warrior and a perception manager."

    What exactly, is perception management? The Pentagon defines it this way: "actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives and objective reasoning." In other words, lying about the intentions of the U.S. government. In a rare display of public frankness, the Pentagon actually let slip its plan (developed by Rendon) to establish a high-level den inside the Department Defense for perception management. They called it the Office of Strategic Influence and among its many missions was to plant false stories in the press.

    Nothing stirs the corporate media into outbursts of pious outrage like an official government memo bragging about how the media are manipulated for political objectives. So the New York Times and Washington Post threw indignant fits about the Office of Strategic Influence; the Pentagon shut down the operation, and the press gloated with satisfaction on its victory. Yet, Rumsfeld told the Pentagon press corps that while he was killing the office, the same devious work would continue. "You can have the corpse," said Rumsfeld. "You can have the name. But I'm going to keep doing every single thing that needs to be done. And I have."

    At a diplomatic level, despite the hired guns and the planted stories, this image war was lost. It failed to convince even America's most fervent allies and dependent client states that Iraq posed much of a threat. It failed to win the blessing of the U.N. and even NATO, a wholly owned subsidiary of Washington. At the end of the day, the vaunted coalition of the willing consisted of Britain, Spain, Italy, Australia, and a cohort of former Soviet bloc nations. Even so, the citizens of the nations that cast their lot with the U.S.A. overwhelmingly opposed the war.

    Domestically, it was a different story. A population traumatized by terror threats and shattered economy became easy prey for the saturation bombing of the Bush message that Iraq was a terrorist state linked to al-Qaeda that was only minutes away from launching attacks on America with weapons of mass destruction.

    Americans were the victims of an elaborate con job, pelted with a daily barrage of threat inflation, distortions, deceptions and lies, not about tactics or strategy or war plans, but about justifications for war. The lies were aimed not at confusing Saddam's regime, but the American people. By the start of the war, 66 per cent of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 and 79 per cent thought he was close to having a nuclear weapon.

    Of course, the closest Saddam came to possessing a nuke was a rusting gas centrifuge buried for 13 years in the garden of Mahdi Obeidi, a retired Iraqi scientist. Iraq didn't have any functional chemical or biological weapons. In fact, it didn't even possess any SCUD missiles, despite erroneous reports fed by Pentagon PR flacks alleging that it had fired SCUDs into Kuwait.

    This charade wouldn't have worked without a gullible or a complicit press corps. Victoria Clarke, who developed the Pentagon plan for embedded reports, put it succinctly a few weeks before the war began: "Media coverage of any future operation will to a large extent shape public perception."

    During the Vietnam War, TV images of maimed GIs and napalmed villages suburbanized opposition to the war and helped hasten the U.S. withdrawal. The Bush gang meant to turn the Vietnam phenomenon on its head by using TV as a force to propel the U.S.A. into a war that no one really wanted.

    What the Pentagon sought was a new kind of living room war, where instead of photos of mangled soldiers and dead Iraqi kids, they could control the images Americans viewed and to a large extent the content of the stories. By embedding reporters inside selected divisions, Clarke believed the Pentagon could count on the reporters to build relationships with the troops and to feel dependent on them for their own safety. It worked, naturally. One reporter for a national network trembled on camera that the U.S. Army functioned as "our protectors." The late David Bloom of NBC confessed on the air that he was willing to do "anything and everything they can ask of us."

    When the Pentagon needed a heroic story, the press obliged. Jessica Lynch became the war's first instant celebrity. Here was a neo-gothic tale of a steely young woman wounded in a fierce battle, captured and tortured by ruthless enemies, and dramatically saved from certain death by a team of selfless rescuers, knights in camo and night-vision goggles. Of course, nearly every detail of her heroic adventure proved to be as fictive and maudlin as any made-for-TV-movie. But the ordeal of Private Lynch, which dominated the news for more than a week, served its purpose: to distract attention from a stalled campaign that was beginning to look at lot riskier than the American public had been hoodwinked into believing.

    The Lynch story was fed to the eager press by a Pentagon operation called Combat Camera, the Army network of photographers, videographers and editors that sends 800 photos and 25 video clips a day to the media. The editors at Combat Camera carefully culled the footage to present the Pentagon's montage of the war, eliding such unsettling images as collateral damage, cluster bombs, dead children and U.S. soldiers, napalm strikes and disgruntled troops.

    "A lot of our imagery will have a big impact on world opinion," predicted Lt. Jane Larogue, director of Combat Camera in Iraq. She was right. But as the hot war turned into an even hotter occupation, the Pentagon, despite airy rhetoric from occupation supremo Paul Bremer about installing democratic institutions such as a free press, moved to tighten its monopoly on the flow images out of Iraq. First, it tried to shut down Al Jazeera, the Arab news channel. Then the Pentagon intimated that it would like to see all foreign TV news crews banished from Baghdad.

    Few newspapers fanned the hysteria about the threat posed by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction as sedulously as did the Washington Post. In the months leading up to the war, the Post's pro-war op-eds outnumbered the anti-war columns by a 3-to-1 margin.

    Back in 1988, the Post felt much differently about Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. When reports trickled out about the gassing of Iranian troops, the Washington Post's editorial page shrugged off the massacres, calling the mass poisonings "a quirk of war."

    The Bush team displayed a similar amnesia. When Iraq used chemical weapons in grisly attacks on Iran, the U.S. government not only didn't object, it encouraged Saddam. Anything to punish Iran was the message coming from the White House. Donald Rumsfeld himself was sent as President Ronald Reagan's personal envoy to Baghdad. Rumsfeld conveyed the bold message than an Iraq defeat would be viewed as a "strategic setback for the United States." This sleazy alliance was sealed with a handshake caught on videotape. When CNN reporter Jamie McIntyre replayed the footage for Rumsfeld in the spring of 2003, the secretary of defense snapped, "Where'd you get that? Iraqi television?"

    The current crop of Iraq hawks also saw Saddam much differently then. Take the writer Laura Mylroie, sometime colleague of the New York Times' Judy Miller, who persists in peddling the ludicrous conspiracy that Iraq was behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

    How times have changed! In 1987, Mylroie felt downright cuddly toward Saddam. She wrote an article for the New Republic titled "Back Iraq: Time for a U.S. Tilt in the Mideast," arguing that the U.S. should publicly embrace Saddam's secular regime as a bulwark against the Islamic fundamentalists in Iran. The co-author of this mesmerizing weave of wonkery was none other than Daniel Pipes, perhaps the nation's most bellicose Islamophobe. "The American weapons that Iraq could make good use of include remotely scatterable and anti-personnel mines and counterartillery radar," wrote Mylroie and Pipes. "The United States might also consider upgrading intelligence it is supplying Baghdad."

    In the rollout for the war, Mylroie seemed to be everywhere hawking the invasion of Iraq. She would often appear on two or three different networks in the same day. How did the reporter manage this feat? She had help in the form of Eleana Benador, the media placement guru who runs Benador Associates. Born in Peru, Benador parlayed her skills as a linguist into a lucrative career as media relations whiz for the Washington foreign policy elite. She also oversees the Middle East Forum, a fanatically pro-Zionist white paper mill. Her clients include some of the nation's most fervid hawks, including Michael Ledeen, Charles Krauthammer, Al Haig, Max Boot, Daniel Pipes, Richard Perle, and Judy Miller. During the Iraq war, Benador's assignment was to embed this squadron of pro-war zealots into the national media, on talk shows, and op-ed pages.

    Benador not only got them the gigs, she also crafted the theme and made sure they all stayed on message. "There are some things, you just have to state them in a different way, in a slightly different way," said Benador. "If not, people get scared." Scared of intentions of their own government.

    It could have been different. All of the holes in the Bush administration's gossamer case for war were right there for the mainstream press to expose. Instead, the U.S. press, just like the oil companies, sought to commercialize the Iraq war and profit from the invasions. They didn't want to deal with uncomfortable facts or present voices of dissent.

    Nothing sums up this unctuous approach more brazenly than MSNBC's firing of liberal talk show host Phil Donahue on the eve of the war. The network replaced the Donahue Show with a running segment called Countdown: Iraq, featuring the usual nightly coterie of retired generals, security flacks, and other cheerleaders for invasion. The network's executives blamed the cancellation on sagging ratings. In fact, during its run Donahue's show attracted more viewers than any other program on the network. The real reason for the pre-emptive strike on Donahue was spelled out in an internal memo from anxious executives at NBC. Donahue, the memo said, offered "a difficult face for NBC in a time of war. He seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration's motives."

    The memo warned that Donahue's show risked tarring MSNBC as an unpatriotic network, "a home for liberal anti-war agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity." So, with scarcely a second thought, the honchos at MSNBC gave Donahue the boot and hoisted the battle flag.

    It's war that sells.

    There's a helluva caveat, of course. Once you buy it, the merchants of war accept no returns.

    This essay is adapted from Grand Theft Pentagon.

    [Feb 07, 2020] Our Military is Clashing With Russians While Defending Syrian Oil. Why

    Feb 07, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Last month, American military forces physically blocked Russian troops from proceeding down a road near the town of Rmelan, Syria. U.S. troops were acting on orders of President Trump, who said back in October that Washington would be "protecting" oil fields currently under control of the anti-Assad, Kurdish Syrian Defense Forces.

    Meanwhile, the Russians are acting on behalf of Syrian president Bashar Assad, who says the state is ultimately in control of those fields. While no shots were fired in this case, the next time Moscow's forces might not go so quietly.

    U.S. officials offered few details about the January stand-off, but General Alexus Grynkewich, deputy commander of the anti-ISIS campaign, said: "We've had a number of different engagements with the Russians on the ground." Late last month the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported: "Tensions have continued to increase significantly in recent days between U.S. and Russian forces in the northeastern regions of Syria."

    Stationed in Syria illegally, with neither domestic nor international legal authority, American personnel risked life and limb to occupy another nation's territory and steal its resources. What is the Trump administration doing?

    American policy in Syria has long been stunningly foolish, dishonest, and counterproductive. When the Arab Spring erupted in 2011, Washington first defended Assad. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even called him a "reformer." Then she decided that he should be ousted and demanded that the rest of the world follow Washington's new policy.

    [Feb 07, 2020] Unless They Change The Democrats Deserve To Lose

    Notable quotes:
    "... How can they change? The owners are the warmongering monopoly capitalist ruling class. Are you imagining that any decision can ever be made by the lowly peons, the rank and file? ..."
    Feb 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Unless They Change The Democrats Deserve To Lose Trisha , Feb 6 2020 16:12 utc | 6

    The Democratic Party seems to intend to lose the 2020 elections.

    The idiotic impeachment attempt against Trump ended just as we predicted at its beginning:

    After two years of falsely accusing Trump of having colluded with Russia [the Democrats] now allege that he colludes with Ukraine. That will make it much more difficult for the Democrats to hide the dirty hands they had in creating Russiagate. Their currently preferred candidate Joe Biden will get damaged.
    ...
    Trump should be impeached for his crimes against Syria, Venezuela and Yemen.

    But the Democrats will surely not touch on those issues. They are committing themselves to political theater that will end without any result. Instead of attacking Trump's policies and proposing better legislation they will pollute the airwaves with noise about 'crimes' that do not exist.

    There is no case for impeachment. Even if the House would vote for one the Senate would never act on it. No one wants to see a President Pence.

    The Democrats are giving Trump the best campaign aid he could have wished for. Trump will again present himself as the victim of a witch hunt. He will again argue that he is the only one on the side of the people. That he alone stands with them against the bad politicians in Washington DC. Millions will believe him and support him on this. It will motivate them to vote for him.

    The Senate acquitted Trump of all the nonsense the Democrats have thrown against him.


    bigger

    Biden lost in Iowa and his poll numbers elsewhere are not much better. His meddling in Ukrainian politics will continue to be investigated.

    Iowa caucuses count was intentionally sabotaged, first through an appn created by incompetent programmers on the payroll of a Buttigieg related company , then by a manipulated manual count by the Iowa Democratic party:

    Chris Schwartz @SchwartzForIowa - 22:01 UTC · Feb 5, 2020

    The state party is now being forced to walk back their error of giving @BernieSanders delegates to @DevalPatrick who received zero votes in Black Hawk County. Press can dm me.

    We have known for over 24 hours as verified by our county party that @BernieSanders won the #iacaucuses in Black Hawk County with 2,149 votes, 155 County Delegates. #NotMeUs #IowaCaucuses


    bigger

    The whole manipulation was intended to enable Buttigieg to claim that he led in Iowa even though it is clear that Bernie Sanders won the race. It worked:

    29 U.S.C. § 157 @OrganizingPower - 4:13 UTC · Feb 6, 2020

    Post Iowa, Buttigieg has gotten a 9pt bounce in Emerson's tracking poll of NH. A bounce based on a caucus he didn't win.

    All this is clearly following a plan:

    Lee Camp [Redacted] @LeeCamp - 16:58 UTC · Feb 5, 2020

    If a progressive is about to win #IowaCaucuses:
    - remove final polls
    - use mysterious app created by former Clinton staffers
    - Funnel results thru untested app
    - Claim app fails
    - Hold results
    - Reveal only 62% to give false impression of who won
    - Refuse to reveal final results

    But the cost of such open manipulations is the loss of trust in the Democratic Party and in elections in general:

    In sum: We are 24 hours into the 2020 campaign, and Democrats have already humiliated their party on national television, alienated their least reliable progressive supporters, demoralized their most earnest activists, and handed Trump's campaign a variety of potent lines of attack.

    This so obvious that has to wonder if these outcomes are considered to be features and not bugs .

    Buttigieg is by the way a terrible candidate. His work for McKinsey, the company that destroyed the middle class , smells of work for some intelligence agency . His hiring of a Goldman Sachs executive as national policy director makes it clear what his policies will be.

    The other leading candidates are not much better. Sanders might have a progressive agenda in domestic policies, but his foreign policies are fully in line with his party. Matt Duss, Sanders' foreign policy advisor, is the son of a lifelong key front man for CIA proxy organizations. He spills out mainstream imperial blabber:

    Matt Duss @mattduss - 2:38 UTC · Feb 5, 2020

    The only thing that Trump's Venezuela regime change policy achieved is giving Russia an opportunity to screw with the US in our own hemisphere. That's what they were applauding.

    Giving a standing ovation to Trump's SOTU remarks on Venezuela were of course the Democratic "resistance" and Nancy Pelosi . That was before she theatrically ripped up her copy of Trump's speech, the show act of a 5 year old and one which she had trained for . She should be fired.

    Impeachment, the Iowa disaster and petty show acts will not win an election against Donald Trump. While they do not drive away core Democratic voters, they do make it difficult to get the additional votes that are needed to win. Many on the left and the right who dislike Trump will rather abstain or vote for a third party than for a party which is indistinguishable from the currently ruling one.

    Meanwhile Trump hauls in record amounts in donations and, with 49%, achieved his best personal approval rate ever .

    Either the Democrats change their whole course of action or they will lose in November to an extend that will be breathtaking. It would be well deserved.

    Posted by b on February 6, 2020 at 15:57 UTC | Permalink The donor class owners of the "Democratic" party have every incentive to support Trump, who has cut their taxes, hugely inflated the value of their assets, and mis-directed attention away from substantial issues that might degrade either their assets or their power, by focusing on identity politics.

    SharonM , Feb 6 2020 16:15 utc | 7

    It's obvious to me that the two war parties function as one. The Democrats have been winning since Trump took office--they get their money and they get their wars. If Trump wins, the Democrats win as billionaires flood more money into the DNC. If Trump loses, the Republicans win for the same reasons.
    Bruce , Feb 6 2020 16:36 utc | 10
    The behavior of a five year old is an appropriate reference point for most of the people working in DC, albeit engaged parents expect more of their children. This vaudeville routine is giving satisfaction to Republicans, Trump supporters, and those who have been looking for a clearer opportunity to say "I told you so" to diehard Democratic believers (who will continue to refuse to listen).
    For an American, even one who has always been somewhat cynical regarding cultural notions of democracy and the "American Way," the show has become patently and abusively vulgar and revulsive. It does not appear to be anywhere near "hitting bottom." There can be no recovery without emotional maturity, and the leaders in Washington exhibit nothing of the kind. The level of maturity and wisdom of the individuals involved is determinative of the political result, not the alleged quality of the politics they purport to sell. Right now we don't have that.
    Piero Colombo , Feb 6 2020 17:07 utc | 19
    "Unless They Change The Democrats Deserve To Lose"

    Aren't there 2 levels of "change"?

    1. How can they change? The owners are the warmongering monopoly capitalist ruling class. Are you imagining that any decision can ever be made by the lowly peons, the rank and file? If you thought anything like that, you should try to find one single instance, in all history, of this "party" ever having done anything at all out of line with the express policy of the owners of the country (the high level of people-friendly noise, intended for the voting peons, never translates into any action of that sort.)

    2. If you mean change the electoral policy to win this election, how could they conceivably manage to change this late? Like a supertanker launched at full speed trying to make a sharp turn a few seconds before hitting the shore, you mean?

    Anyway, in both cases forget what it "deserves", it should be destroyed and buried under, not only lose.

    ak74 , Feb 6 2020 17:08 utc | 21
    American democracy is Kabuki Theater and Professional Wrestling.

    It is the ultimate Reality TV show for the sheeple to think that they have a political voice.

    Remember what Frank Zappa said: "Politics is the Entertainment Division of the Military-Industrial Complex."

    jared , Feb 6 2020 17:30 utc | 26
    It would take extreme mental contortions to take U.S. "democracy" seriously at this point.
    I would like to believe that it makes some difference who is elected, but increasingly doubtful.
    How different would it really have been had Hillary been elected (much as it pains me to consider such a scenario)?
    Trump was elected (aside from interference from AIPAC) partly because he was republican candidate and for some that's all it takes but aside from that because;
    - end pointless wars
    - improve healthcare
    - control immigration
    - jobs for coal miners
    - somehow address corruption and non-performance of government
    - improve US competitiveness, bring back jobs, promote business, improve economy
    He claims having improved the economy but more likely is done juice from the FED.
    So really, what grade does he deserve?
    And yet people are rallying to his side.
    Personally I think that the entrenched interests have moulded Trump to meet their requirements and now it is inconvenient to have to start work on a new president, unless it would be one of their approved choices.
    I voted for Trump because of Hillary.
    Now I would not vote for Trump given a decent choice. Fortunately there is an excellent alternative.
    Noirette , Feb 6 2020 17:37 utc | 29
    All who count have known for a long time that Trump will have a second term. Baked in. (1)

    The Dems agitate and raucously screech and try to impeach to distract or whatever to show da base that they hate Trump and hope to slaughter! him! a rapist! mysoginist! racist! liar ! He is horrors! in touch with the malignant criminal authoritarian ex-KGB Putin! Russia Russia Russia - and remember Stormy Daniels! ( :) ! )

    The top corp. Dems prefer to lose to Trump, I have said this for years, as have many others. In rivalry of the Mafia type, it is often better to submit to have a share of the pie. Keep the plebs on board with BS etc. Victim status, underdog pretense, becomes ever more popular.

    1. Trump might fall ill / dead / take Melania's advice and wishes into account, or just quit.

    Jackrabbit , Feb 6 2020 17:47 utc | 31
    People still talk like democracy really exists in USA.

    They channel their anger toward Party and personality.

    If only the democrats would ... If only Sanders would ... If only people would see that ...

    A few understand the way things really are, but most are still hoping that somehow that the bed-time stories and entertaining kayfabe are a sort of democracy that they can live with.

    But the is just normalcy bias. A Kool-Aid hang-over. This is not democracy. It is a soft tyranny encouraged by Empire stooges, lackeys, and enabled by ignorance.

    The lies are as pervasive as they are subtle: half-truths; misdirection; omitting facts like candidate/party affiliations with the Zionist/Empire Death Cult.

    The REAL divide among people in the West is who benefits from an EMPIRE/ZIONIST FIRST orientation that has polluted our politics and our culture and the rest of us.

    Wake up. War is on the horizon. And Central Banks can't print money forever.

    /rage, rage against the dying of the light

    !!

    par4 , Feb 6 2020 17:52 utc | 34
    After watching Pelosi it reminded me that during the Geo. W. Bush era the Democrats were always claiming to be the adults in the room. It's odd that Mayo Pete's 'husband' is never seen or heard from. I wonder why? Biden's toast and Epstein didn't kill himself. AND Seth Rich leaked Hillary's emails to Wikileaks.
    Qparticle , Feb 6 2020 18:11 utc | 41
    -- --
    The Clinton-Obama administration had scores of corrupt officials and associates (the Podestas, for instance). It was necessary to create a firewall once Trump won the nomination. As so, they attacked his campaign manager, his national security adviser, his family, himself, using all the means of FISA, wire tapping done by NSA and CIA and Mi6 and probably Mossad.

    Red Ryder | Feb 6 2020 16:56 utc | 14
    -- --

    Trump is an installment of The Mossad via blackmail and media manipulation, check "Black Cube Intelligence", a Mossad front operating from City of London. It would make sense the establishment in the US would eavesdrop on him. Mossad on the other hand would wiretap the wiretapers and give feedback on Trump. The Podesta you mentioned once threatened the factions with "disclosure" possibly to keep the runaway black projects crazies in check not that I wish to play advocate of these people.

    -- --
    After they lose again in November, they will unleash their street thugs, Antifa, to terrorize the winners. Meanwhile for the purists of the Liberal Cult there will be many real suicides. So, bloodshed and death will become reality.

    Red Ryder | Feb 6 2020 16:56 utc | 14
    -- --

    Yes, what we need is just a nazi party in the US to keep communism in check, right? We are half way there with Trump already aren't we? "Black Sun" technologies (which a part off I described above) already there, leaking to anyone interested enough that would aid in the great outsourcing for the Yinon project, so why not? "Go Trump 2020"! (sarcasm)

    DannyC , Feb 6 2020 18:12 utc | 42
    For whatever reason the only thing the Dems seem to find more terrible than a loss to Trump is a win with Bernie. I'm no fan of Bernie but it's clear they're out to sabotage the one guy that would actually beat Trump in an election
    VeraK , Feb 6 2020 18:16 utc | 43
    While I have no illusions that a Sanders administration will have good foreign policy objectives, is there not something to be said for shifting money away from the military-industrial complex in the US? In general Sanders gives me the impression that he wants to reduce US intervention in foreign affairs in favor of spending more money on domestic issues. Even a slight reduction in pressure is helpful for giving other countries the ability to expand their spheres of influence and becoming more legitimate powers in opposition to the US and EU. Based on this I still see voting for Sanders as helpful even if he won't bring about any meaningful change in the US's foreign policy.
    Pft , Feb 6 2020 19:10 utc | 56
    it's not an actual Stalin quote, but often used as such
    he did say something in the same vein, though.
    it IS absolutely spot on here:

    "It's not who vote that counts, it's who counts the votes"

    congratulations, DNC, you're on a par with Joseph Stalin; the most ruthless chairman the Sovyets have ever had.
    so here is your real Russia Gate.
    oh, come and smell the Irony. In fake wrestling the producers determine the winner in advance and the wrestlers ate given their script to follow. The Dems have no intention to win this, look at the clowns they have running the show not to mention the flawed candidates . The script calls for the king of fake wrestling, Trump himself, to win yet again. Only a concerted effort by the Dems and Deep State media, along with some tech help from Bibis crew can engineer this result, but they are all on board. Dems willing to wait for 2024 when the producers will write them in for a big Win over somebody not named Trump. The world will be ready for a Green change by then, and Soros/Gates boys will have their chance to step up to the plate again.

    Enjoy the show if you wish, I'm changing the channel.

    [Feb 07, 2020] The Facts About Iran and Terrorism by Larry C Johnson

    Jan 10, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    The Facts About Iran and Terrorism

    When emotion rules the day facts do not matter. Sadly, that is the reality we confront when it comes to talking about Iran and terrorism. The U.S. Government and almost all of the media continue to declare that Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism. That is not true. That is a lie. I realize that calling this assertion a lie opens me to accusations of being an apologist for Iran. But simply look at the facts.

    Here is the most recent U.S. State Department claim about Iran and terrorism :

    Iran remains the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism. The regime has spent nearly one billion dollars per year to support terrorist groups that serve as its proxies and expand its malign influence across the globe. Tehran has funded international terrorist groups such as Hizballah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It also has engaged in its own terrorist plotting around the world, particularly in Europe. In January, German authorities investigated 10 suspected Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Qods Force operatives. In the summer, authorities in Belgium, France, and Germany thwarted an Iranian plot to bomb a political rally near Paris, France. In October, an Iranian operative was arrested for planning an assassination in Denmark, and in December, Albania expelled two Iranian officials for plotting terrorist attacks. Furthermore, Tehran continued to allow an AQ facilitation network to operate in Iran, which sends fighters and money to conflict zones in Afghanistan and Syria, and it has extended sanctuary to AQ members residing in the country.

    You notice what is absent? A list of specific attacks that caused actual casualties. Plans and plots are not the same as actions. If Iran's malevolent influence was so powerful, we should be able to point to specific attacks and specific casualties. But you will not find those facts in the U.S. State Department report because they do not exist. The statistical annex that details the attacks and the groups responsible reports the following:

    The Taliban was responsible for 8,509 deaths and 4,943 injuries, about 25 percent of the total casualties attributed to terrorism globally in 2018. With 647 terrorist attacks, ISIS was the next-most-active terrorist organization, responsible for 3,585 fatalities and 1,761 injuries. Having conducted 535 attacks, al-Shabaab was responsible for 2,062 deaths and 1,278 injuries. Boko Haram was among the top-five terrorist perpetrators, with 220 incidents, 1,311 deaths, and 927 injuries. It should be noted that local sources do not always differentiate between Boko Haram and ISIS-West Africa.

    Not a single group linked to Iran or supported by Iran is identified. Look at the this table from the statistical annex:

    Table-3.1.-Top-10-Known-Perpetrator-Groups-With-the-Most-Incidents-2018

    No Hezbollah and no Hamas. If a country is going to "sponsor" terrorism then we should expect to see terrorist attacks. The attacks that are taking place are predominantly from Sunni affiliated groups that have ties to Saudi Arabia, not Iran.

    The State Department's explanation about Iranian support for terrorism exposes what the real issue is (I am quoting the 2016 report but, if you read the 2017 or 2018 versions there is no significant difference):

    Designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984, Iran continued its terrorist-related activity in 2016, including support for Hizballah, Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza, and various groups in Syria, Iraq, and throughout the Middle East. Iran used the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps‑Qods Force (IRGC-QF) to implement foreign policy goals, provide cover for intelligence operations, and create instability in the Middle East. Iran has acknowledged the involvement of the IRGC-QF in the conflicts in Iraq and Syria and the IRGC-QF is Iran's primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad.

    In 2016, Iran supported various Iraqi Shia terrorist groups, including Kata'ib Hizballah, as part of an effort to fight ISIS in Iraq and bolster the Assad regime in Syria. Iran views the Assad regime in Syria as a crucial ally and Syria and Iraq as crucial routes to supply weapons to Hizballah, Iran's primary terrorist partner. Iran has facilitated and coerced, through financial or residency enticements, primarily Shia fighters from Afghanistan and Pakistan to participate in the Assad regime's brutal crackdown in Syria. Iranian-supported Shia militias in Iraq have committed serious human rights abuses against primarily Sunni civilians and Iranian forces have directly backed militia operations in Syria with armored vehicles, artillery, and drones.

    The United States is upset with Iran because it has thwarted the U.S. covert action in Syria. It was the United States, along with the U.K., Saudi Arabia and Turkey, that helped ignite and escalate the civil war in Syria. Why? The Saudis and the Israelis were growing increasingly concerned in 2011 about Iran's spreading influence in the region. And what enabled Iran to do that? We did. When the United States removed Saddam Hussein and destroyed the Baathist movement in Iraq, the Bush Administration thought it was a dandy idea to install Iraqi Shia in positions of leadership. Not one of the key policymakers on the U.S. side of the equation expressed any qualms about the fact that these Iraqi politicians and military personnel had longstanding relationships with Iran, which included financial support.

    Iran also had a longstanding relationship with Syria. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton decided that if we could eliminate Bashir Assad, the Syrian leader, then we would weaken Iran. This was a policy that many Republicans, most notably John McCain and Lindsey Graham, supported. But the scheme to weaken Iran backfired. Iran, along with Russia, came to the aid of the Government of Syria in full blown counter-insurgency campaign. Iran, the Russians and the Syrian Government were fighting radical Sunni islamists, many of whom were funded by the Western alliance.

    Iran's military support for the Government of Syria clearly rankles U.S. policymakers, but it is not "terrorism." It is pure counter insurgency.

    Wikipedia offers additional evidence about the true nature of international terrorism. I have reviewed the lists of incidents, which includes the description of the attacks, the perpetrators and the number of casualties for 2016-2018. I have only been able to put the 2016 incidents into a spreadsheet. Here are the actual facts.

    In 2016 there were seven terrorist attacks that caused at least 100 casualties. All were attributed to ISIL aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Not one was linked to Iran or any group receiving financial support from Iran. There were a total of 1753 terrorist attacks and at least 15,993 deaths during 2016.

    Here is the monthly breakdown for 2016:

    The U.S. State Department continues to insist that Iran is providing indirect support to Al Qaeda. That is pure nonsense. Iran is fighting and killing Al Qaeda forces inside Syria. They have no ideological affinity with Al Qaeda.

    I wish the American people would take the time to be educated about the actual nature and extent of "international terrorism." There was a time in the 1980s when Iran was very active in using terrorism as weapon to attack U.S. military and diplomatic targets. But even those attacks were focused in areas where Iran's perceived national interests were at stake. I am not excusing nor endorsing their actions. But I do think we need to understand that terrorism usually has a context. It is not the actions of a mentally ill person who is angry and lashing out at the nearest available target. Those attacks were planned and very calculated.

    The real issue that we should be focused on is whether or not we can halt the expansion of Iran's influence in the Middle East. This remains a major concern for Israel and Saudi Arabia. U.S. policymakers are betting that isolating Iran diplomatically, ratcheting up economic pressure and using some military power will somehow energize the regime opposition and lead to the overthrow of the Mullahs. We tried that same policy with Cuba. It did not work there and will not likely work now in Iran.

    Iran has options and is pursuing them aggressively. China and Russia, who are facing their own bullying from the United States, already are helping Iran tweak the the nose of the Trump Administration. In late December 2019, Iran, Russia and China carried out a joint military exercise . The Iranians were very clear about their view of this cooperation:

    "The most important achievement of these drills . . . is this message that the Islamic republic of Iran cannot be isolated," vice-admiral Gholamreza Tahani, a deputy naval commander, said. "These exercises show that relations between Iran, Russia and China have reached a new high level while this trend will continue in the coming years."

    The Trump Administration needs to stop with its infantile ranting and railing about Iran and terrorism. The actual issues surrounding Iran's growing influence in the region have little to do with terrorism. Our policies and actions towards Iran are accelerating their cooperation with China and Russia, not diminishing it. I do not think that serves the longterm interests of the United States or our allies in the Middle East.

    [Feb 07, 2020] Iraq Russia Look To Boost Military Ties While US Threatens Sanctions

    Feb 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Iraq & Russia Look To Boost Military Ties While US Threatens Sanctions by Tyler Durden Fri, 02/07/2020 - 19:45 0 SHARES In more continuing fallout over the Jan.3 assassination by drone of the IRGC's Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iraq and Russia are preparing for deepening military coordination , reports the AP .

    Iraq's Defense Ministry announced Thursday that increased "cooperation and coordination" is being discussed with Moscow amid worsened relations with Washington, which even last month included President Trump issuing brazen threats of "very big" sanctions on Baghdad if American troops are kicked out of the country.

    This week Iraqi army chief of staff Lt. Gen. Othman Al-Ghanimi and Russian Ambassador Maksim Maksimov met to discuss future military cooperation. Crucially, Gen. Ghanimi highlighted Russia's successful anti-ISIS operations over the past years , especially in Syria where the Russian military has supported Assad since being invited there in 2015.

    Iraqi helicopters file image.

    On Russia's role in Iraq, Ghanimi said Moscow had provided "our armed forces with advanced and effective equipment and weapons that had a major role in resolving many battles," according to the ministry statement.

    It's been long rumored that since late summer Baghdad and Moscow have been in talks to deliver either Russia's advanced S-400 or S-300 anti-air missile defense systems - a prospect which US officials have condemned.

    Like other areas of the Middle East, as US adventurism heightens pressure for a US withdrawal, Russia appears to be seizing the opportunity to move in. This much was affirmed in AP's reporting, via at least one anonymous senior official :

    A senior Iraqi military intelligence official told The Associated Press that Russia, among other countries, has come forward to offer military support in the wake of fraught US.-Iraq relations following Soleimani's killing .

    "Iraq still needs aerial reconnaissance planes. There are countries that have given signals to Iraq to support us or equip us with reconnaissance planes such as Russia and Iran," said the official, who requested anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information.

    Many military analysts have of late noted that the "blowback" from the incredibly risky operation which killed Soleimani will be a hastening of American forces' exit from the region.

    It could also actually serve to increase Baghdad's dependency on Iran - something which appears to be already in the works. And now we have confirmation that Moscow will seek to benefit as well from the worsened US-Iraq relations, certainly now at the lowest point since the 2003 invasion and US attempt to build a new government. Tags Politics War Conflict

    Toshie , 6 minutes ago link

    After bombing Iraq for the last 29 years, It's actually surprising that the Iraqis still let US soldiers on Iraqi soil.

    BobEore , 21 minutes ago link

    At last! After a full week of playing coy... about delivering any further bad newz from the muddled east which might further demolish the spirits of our local lovers of spirit cookin, 'death to amerika' shoutin jihadi huggin regimes

    our fearless ferret newz aggregator have delivered us something to chew on.. and spit out! What febrile gems of crude agitprop await the wondering gaze of the gallery? How bout...

    Russia, among other countries, has come forward to offer military support in the wake of fraught US.-Iraq relations following Soleimani's killing .

    as a clear example of the genre of laughable attacks upon common sense and truth in media... faculties which - when employed - direct our attention to some simple facts curious scrubbed from this whitewash with which "white hat" superhero Russkies... trundle around the globe delivering toyz that made loud noise... to downtrodden 'strongman' regimes

    as mere tokens of friendly 'solidarity fo'ever or whatever. Simple facts... such as...

    due to an unfortunate episode in fellow neo-Bolshevik statecapitalist paradise Sinostan... the neo-Bolshie paradise on the Muscovy is facing a collapse of its bread earner gas n oil sales... such that the only thing tween it and yet abother state bankruptcy... is the burgeoning Russian armaments industry! Selling guns and munitions to downtrodden strongman regimes is the last best hope it seems... for a Russia foiled at every turn by Urusalems steady burnnnn

    and with a neo-mercantilist flourish which it has clearly learned... from watching the chinks perform their 'resource extractive' shakedown ... of shaky regimes around the world.... Moscow now seeks to extract from cash poor states which need guns with which to threaten either their own citizens, or those of neighboring states..

    UUUGE concessions in the form of .... diamonds, metals, petroleum resources... or strategic real estate... in return for its deadly 'product line!' All of which is 'totally fine'... if you read tween lines...

    so that ...WHEN EVIL CHABADDY talmudic GANGSTERS living in the wester world... peddle their wares of weaponry to weirdo regimes.... THAT IS .... A BAD THANG!

    BUT butt... when evil chabbaddy talmudic oilygarch GANGTAS WITH RUSSKY PASSPORTS do the peddlin.... with the approval of the Kremlin puppet regime...

    its all GOOD!

    HE HE HEH... WHO really buys into this ******** anyhoo? Only an echo chamber o tiresome russo-talmudic trolls workin the board nite n day!

    Brazen Heist II , 29 minutes ago link

    You can tell alot from Amercuh's reaction to the Russian strategy of ringfencing the world with defensive weapons like the S-400/S-300.

    Who gets triggered like a little temper tantrum princess over defensive weapons? Offensive assholes, that's who!

    Americuh had it good for so long, but now there's competition and they are squealing like pigs.

    Don't buy Iranian oil! Don't buy Huawei! Don't build Nordstream! Hey sport...shut the **** up. Countries will trade with who ever the hell they want.

    booboo , 21 minutes ago link

    I probably wouldn't mind it so much if Hillary wasn't complicit in helping the Russians "Ringfencing the world"

    https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/429292-the-case-for-russia-collusion-against-the-democrats

    Einstein101 , 8 minutes ago link

    Who gets triggered like a little temper tantrum princess over defensive weapons? Offensive assholes, that's who!

    I think you got it all wrong. It's not about defensive or Offensive. It's about money and market share, who sells to whom what, and who's profiting.

    Brazen Heist II , 35 minutes ago link

    Its a no brainer.

    Russia and Iran actually fight ISIS.

    Meanwhile da sanctmonious west, israel and ksa support an entire cosmos of headchoppers then bitch about terryrism!

    The west is morally bankrupt in this fight. It supports terrorism to justify its occupations.

    Iraq is better off partnering with Russia. The US needs to piss off from MENA, its a goddamn cancer.

    China can provide reconstruction aid without the (((moronic strings attached)))

    Einstein101 , 7 minutes ago link

    Just remind me who killed the head of ISIS.

    El Chapo Read , 43 minutes ago link

    Do you know who should be looking to make strategic military partnerships with Russia?

    The USA.

    To contain Red China and Israel.

    Two predominantly Christian nations should look out for one another.

    Freddie , 39 minutes ago link

    The USA is not run by Christians.

    El Chapo Read , 37 minutes ago link

    Where did I say that?

    I know we have our own internal issues to deal with.

    Putin started de-zionizing from day one of his command.

    BobEore , 19 minutes ago link

    lol...

    Two predominantly Christian nations

    please provide details.

    Tom Angle , 13 minutes ago link

    America is far from a Christian nation. No nation that murders babies for body parts is a Christian nation (yes abortion funded by the government and the part being sold). America will feel the rather of God for that.

    frankthecrank , 47 minutes ago link

    Those helicopters just look like junk--total pieces of ****. I know two guys who saw them up close and personal--not even as advanced inside as US gear in the late '60s.

    LOL

    too f'n funny.

    El Chapo Read , 41 minutes ago link

    They work and can be serviced by a Russian farmboy - as designed.

    Now go back to sucking Lockeed Martin/Boeing/Raytheon's cut cocks, as well as their (((financiers))) and the whole of K Street.

    Brazen Heist II , 32 minutes ago link

    They're called flying tanks for a reason

    Too bad your state of da art militrary couldn't take down goat herders in Afghanistan after 20 years. The Russians at least pulled out after 10 years. Does that mean America is doubly stoopid?

    LOL

    Einstein101 , 21 minutes ago link

    "goat herders in Afghanistan" hiding in caves in the mountains are a challenge to any military. The Russians were there too, you know.

    Tom Angle , 12 minutes ago link

    Yes that was said about the T34.

    frankthecrank , 51 minutes ago link

    two losers in the same pea pod. How cute.

    This way, when the Russian soldiers run away crying from US soldiers in Syria, the I-Ranians can run away with them.

    Maxamillia , 59 minutes ago link

    I Love President Putin...

    I have Not Said That Lately.

    I Think He Knows it...

    Yes I Live In My Own mind...

    But as Mere Humans Do We Not All...

    They Are Your Friends If You Let Them... Just make Sure The Friendship Is Based On TRUTH.

    Hold Not Back your Faith, President Putin... These people Need Yahushua..........

    frankthecrank , 51 minutes ago link

    https://twitter.com/staceyheaver/status/649730231041847296/photo/1

    Einstein101 , 50 minutes ago link

    Just make Sure The Friendship Is Based On TRUTH.

    Don't kid yourself. Putin is smart, probably the smartest leader out there. But what motivates him are the best interests of Russia. He doesn't care much about Friendships, not with Iran, not with Syria or Israel...

    Arising , 1 hour ago link

    ...certainly now at the lowest point since the 2003 invasion and US attempt to build a new government.

    U.S meddling and regime change- nothing new.

    Besides- anyone buying Russian military equipment will get much more 'bang for their buck' compared to over-priced, failure ridden U.S (((M.I.C))) crap.

    Einstein101 , 1 hour ago link

    Baghdad and Moscow have been in talks to deliver either Russia's advanced S-400 or S-300 anti-air missile defense systems

    I don't think those systems are that advanced. Both are quite old. I'm sure US (and Israel) have the means to jam and neutralize both those system, about the same as the Israelis evade the whole Syrian air defense system.

    hoytmonger , 1 hour ago link

    The Russians have in their possession several undamaged Israeli missiles which landed in the Syrian desert.

    Including a David's Sling missile.

    I'm sure the Russians have developed electronic measures against them by now.

    Einstein101 , 1 hour ago link

    I'm sure the Russians have developed electronic measures against them by now.

    Could be... though I think the Israelis probably made the needed modifications.

    ComeOnThink , 53 minutes ago link

    Yeah, sure, because the Israelis will know what electronic measures the Russians have developed as a result of examining those missiles, right?

    How, exactly?

    Do the Russians send the Israelis the results of their studies, along with a Request For Comment?

    Honestly, you are so full of it.

    frankthecrank , 50 minutes ago link

    Yeah--that tube gear sure rocks in this day and age.

    For stereos...............

    Shue , 1 hour ago link

    "Lowest point since the 2003 invasion and US attempt to build a new government."

    There's the problem right there, the JUSA thinks "their type of Government" has to be accepted by Iraqi's. This is why amongst countless other thing Iraqi's have had it with the JUSA.

    hoytmonger , 1 hour ago link

    Israel has been getting three quarters of their oil from the Kurds in Iraq, illegally and at a discounted price.

    The US is rumored to be establishing a new "state" in the oil rich areas of Western Iraq and Eastern Syria, presumably for the Kurds.

    If this is true, the US will inevitably come under attack.

    The Syrian Army has begun to block their patrols recently.

    Einstein101 , 1 hour ago link

    The Syrian Army has begun to block their patrols recently.

    Are you kidding me? the Syrian army is a wreck . It will never confront the US military.

    hoytmonger , 1 hour ago link

    Really?

    https://southfront.org/in-video-syrian-army-confronts-u-s-patrol-in-northern-al-hasakah/

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-blocks-us-military-convoy-from-important-highway-in-hasakah/

    Einstein101 , 1 hour ago link

    Note this:

    "According to the Damascus-based Al-Watan newspaper," enough said.

    Freddie , 37 minutes ago link

    Mr. Vindman - how's your brother? Is he at temple?

    Dickweed Wang , 1 hour ago link

    Maybe if sanctions don't work in the future the US can make countries they don't like go to their room without supper.

    ThrowAwayYourTV , 1 hour ago link

    Is this what they call global trade?

    tmosley , 1 hour ago link

    If Russia can ally with Iraq, Iran, and Azerbaijan, they can bypass Turkey into Syria, at least to some extent. That would allow the US to exit.

    gino the hood , 1 hour ago link

    they can sail past or through turkey. they have treaties. russia is already in the countries you mentioned. they are just quiet about it.

    tmosley , 1 hour ago link

    Russia can't sail past or through Turkey while also being at war with them, which is what they are going to have to do if they want to stop Turkey from taking Syrian (then Iraqi, then Kuwaiti, then Saudi) oil fields, in the absence of a US presence in the region.

    Shue , 58 minutes ago link

    Turks have a weak army, remember when Sultan Erdo fired the majority of capable generals and Officers?

    sirpo , 1 hour ago link

    the 2003 invasion and US attempt to build a new government.

    build a new government.?

    Ho Ho Ho you funny man you make me laugh

    HoserF16 , 1 hour ago link

    "Blow-Back" can be a real ************...

    Hoser

    Einstein101 , 1 hour ago link

    Iraq & Russia Look To Boost Military Ties While US Threatens Sanctions

    What I think about that? I'm not quite sure, but my gut feeling is that US need not impose itself on someone that does not want us.

    Marman , 50 minutes ago link

    There is another guy that posts here with your exact name.

    He is a suspected Hasbara agent and would be screaming about Iran being behind this and therefore Israel has the right to preemptively nuke Iraq.

    Dart Vader , 1 hour ago link

    SITUATION CRITICAL: 2020 What You REALLY DO Need To Be Afraid Of. Mannarino https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sIjFRR2Iec&feature=em-uploademail

    Nov1917Sucks , 1 hour ago link

    Putin suks as much Netanyahu dik as Trump. And the dum arz Christians in Russia, much like US Christians dont give a faq!! Christians have been ignorant sheep to dictators for 2000 years!

    gino the hood , 1 hour ago link

    just because every oligarch is jewish doesnt mean christians are stupid.... hhhmmm? how many millions have been murdered by jewish invented communism?

    madashellron , 1 hour ago link

    The Joos best friend Trump just **** in his diaper after reading this article.

    Dart Vader , 1 hour ago link

    ..time for a good spanking before changing the diaper..

    hanekhw , 1 hour ago link

    ...except the Russians are not complete morons to let themselves get screwed like the US. Just ask the people of Venezuela how Russia has 'saved' their country.

    Aussiestirrer , 1 hour ago link

    Hahaha keep up the good job of creating more and more enemies chump you fool.....once a bully, always a bully and that goes for chump and the usa

    has bear r us , 1 hour ago link

    no single military in the world can beat the usa military but a coalition of many of them will kick zionazi ***. putin is building a real coalition of the willing to counter the dying zionazi empire.

    Dr. Winston O'boogie , 1 hour ago link

    Putin is Chabad Lubavitch.

    A great many awakening people continue to be in thrall to the cult of personality that's been built around Vladimir Putin. They have passively and uncritically accepted the endless barrage of Putin-worshiping propaganda put out by sellouts in the alternative media, and they have not bothered to look into things for themselves. If you are one of these people, take a moment to set down emotionally-held beliefs and open your mind.

    http://www.dutchanarchy.com/vladimir-putin-chabad-lubavitch-mobster-globalist-messiah/

    has bear r us , 1 hour ago link

    https://www.fort-russ.com/2020/01/putin-gives-respects-to-palestinian-color-guard-invites-abbas-to-victory-day/

    there is a large and powerful jewish presence in russia. do you think they would approve of this? who is controlling who?

    kanoli , 2 hours ago link

    Russia wants three things:

    1. Buyers for their weapon systems, which are admittedly superior to those made in the USA, especially air defense.

    2. Reduce the footprint of the Anglo-American Empire in the Middle East and Asia, which are their backyard.

    3. Eliminate US-Saudi-Israel-funded terrorists in Daesh/Al Queda in the ME.

    I wish them all the best in all three of those goals.

    zoo , 1 hour ago link

    Yea, but are those weapons Environmentally friendly? are they Greta approved?

    Arising , 1 hour ago link

    Answers:

    1. Russia, unlike the U.S, is building a lot of civilian industries and Putin recently asked his military factories to adjust to other civilian industries and requirements- The U.S is going in the opposite direction.

    2. This is already happening- other countries have seen how loyal Russia has been to their promises to the Assad government. The U.S turns on a dime as is convenient in any given week.

    3. To the frustration of the axis of evil (US-Saudi-Occupied Palestine) this has been Russians biggest success to date.

    Nov1917Sucks , 2 hours ago link

    I have always wondered why the world that is being sanctioned does not hack and attack the US financial system more. Maybe just a matter of time. You cant tell me that Malta, The Caymans, Panama and others are not vulnerable!

    kanoli , 1 hour ago link

    That's coming. First they had to build their own system. Destroying the Anglo-American financial system without an alternative is like cutting off your air supply while 200 feet underwater.

    J S Bach , 2 hours ago link

    Yes, indeed. Why WOULDN'T the Iraqis seek relations with ANY country outside the sphere of their destroyers to bond with? The Iraqi people, though "primitive" by our standards, are still human beings with as much right to grow, develop and live as we zombies of Zionism in the once noble West. We, of course, will be propagandized to the contrary. They will be shown as "terrorists" or "Russiaphiles" if they dare to resist the mantle of tyranny imposed on them by the Israeli/U.S. forces.

    mike_1010 , 2 hours ago link

    If USA imposes sanctions on too many countries, then USA will end up sanctioning itself.

    Iraq is now producing close to 5 million barrels of oil a day, most of which is for export. If USA sanctions this oil production and sale, then some countries will need to choose between paying sky high prices for oil, or pay for Iraqi oil in alternative currencies and ignore US sanctions.

    5 million barrels of oil a day even Saudi Arabia doesn't have the capacity to replace.

    And if alternative currencies become popular for buying and selling oil, then US ability to run trade deficits and budget deficits will be curtailed by declining US dollar and higher interest rates for borrowing in US dollars in international markets.

    Iraq is pumping record oil

    RafterManFMJ , 2 hours ago link

    The US has a one word diplomatic lexicon: Sanctions!

    Im sure it gets tiring for the rest of the planet

    Nov1917Sucks , 2 hours ago link

    Trump responded by sending Putin a photo of him suking Netanyahus dik!

    [Feb 05, 2020] Stumbling Into Catastrophe by Daniel McAdams

    Feb 04, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Daniel McAdams via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

    There is a real danger for foreign policy advisors and analysts – and especially those they serve – when they are in a bubble, an echo chamber, and all of their conclusions are based on faulty inputs. Needless to say it's even worse when they believe they can create their own reality and invent outcomes out of whole cloth.

    Things seldom go as planned in these circumstances.

    President Trump was sold a bill of goods on the assassination of Iran's revered military leader, Qassim Soleimani, likely by a cabal around Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the long-discredited neocon David Wurmser. A former Netanyahu advisor and Iraq war propagandist, Wurmser reportedly sent memos to his mentor, John Bolton, while Bolton was Trump's National Security Advisor (now, of course, he's the hero of the #resistance for having turned on his former boss) promising that killing Soleimani would be a cost-free operation that would catalyze the Iranian people against their government and bring about the long-awaited regime change in that country. The murder of Soleimani – the architect of the defeat of ISIS – would "rattle the delicate internal balance of forces and the control over them upon which the [Iranian] regime depends for stability and survival," wrote Wurmser.

    As is most often the case with neocons, he was dead wrong.

    The operation was not cost-free. On the contrary. Assassinating Soleimani on Iraqi soil resulted in the Iraqi parliament – itself the product of our "bringing democracy" to the country – voting to expel US forces even as the vote by the people's representatives was roundly rejected by the people who brought the people the people's representatives. In a manner of speaking.

    Trump's move had an effect opposite to the one promised by neocons. It did not bring Iranians out to the street to overthrow their government – it catalyzed opposition across Iraq's various political and religious factions to the continued US military presence and further tightened Iraq's relationship with Iran. And short of what would be a catastrophic war initiated by the US (with little or no support from allies), there is not a thing Trump can do about it.

    Iran's retaliatory attack on two US bases in Iraq was initially sold by President Trump as merely a pin-prick. No harm, no foul, no injuries. This despite the fact that he must have known about US personnel injured in the attack. The reason for the lie was that Trump likely understands how devastating it would be to his presidency to escalate with Iran. So the truth began to trickle out slowly – 11 US military members were injured, but it was just "like a headache." Now we know that 50 US troops were treated for traumatic brain injury after the attack. This may not be the last of it – but don't count on the mainstream media to do any reporting.

    The Iranian FARS news agency reported at the time of the attack that US personnel had been injured and the response by the US government was to completely take that media outlet off the Internet by order of the US Treasury !

    Last week the US House voted to cancel the 2002 authorization for war on Iraq and to prohibit the use of funds for war on Iran without Congressional authorization. It is a significant, if largely symbolic, move to rein in the oft-used excuse of the Iraq war authorization for blatantly unrelated actions like the assassination of Soleimani and Obama's thousands of airstrikes on Syria and Iraq .

    President Trump has argued that prohibiting funds for military action against Iran actually makes war more likely, as he would be restricted from the kinds of military-strikes-short-of-war like his attack on Syria after the alleged chemical attack in Douma in 2018 (claims which have recently fallen apart ). The logic is faulty and reflects again the danger of believing one's own propaganda. As we have seen from the Iranian military response to the Soleimani assassination, Trump's military-strikes-short-of-war are having a ratchet-like effect rather than a pressure-release or deterrent effect.

    As the financial and current events analysis site ZeroHedge put it recently:

    [S]ince last summer's "tanker wars", Trump has painted himself into a corner on Iran, jumping from escalation to escalation (to this latest "point of no return big one" in the form of the ordered Soleimani assassination) -- yet all the while hoping to avoid a major direct war. The situation reached a climax where there were "no outs" (Trump was left with two 'bad options' of either back down or go to war).

    The Iranians have little to lose at this point and America's European allies are, even if impotent, fed up with the US obsession with Saudi Arabia and Israel as a basis for its Middle East policy.

    So why open this essay with a photo of Trump celebrating his dead-on-arrival "Deal of The Century" for Israel and Palestine? Because this is once again a gullible and weak President Trump being led by the nose into the coming Middle East conflagration. Left without even a semblance of US sympathy for their plight, the Palestinians after the roll-out of this "peace" plan will again see that they have no friends outside Syria, Iran, and Lebanon. As Israel continues to flirt with the idea of simply annexing large parts of the West Bank, it is clear that the brakes are off of any Israeli reticence to push for maximum control over Palestinian territory. So what is there to lose?

    Trump believes he's advancing peace in the Middle East, while the excellent Mondoweiss website rightly observes that a main architect of the "peace plan," Trump's own son-in-law Jared Kushner, "taunts Palestinians because he wants them to reject his 'peace plan.'" Rejection of the plan is a green light to a war of annihilation on the Palestinians.

    It appears that the center may not hold, that the self-referential echo chamber that passes for Beltway "expert" analysis will again be caught off guard in the consequence-free profession that is neocon foreign policy analysis. "Gosh we didn't see that coming!" But the next day they are back on the teevee stations as great experts.

    Clouds gathering...

    Minamoto , 23 minutes ago link

    It is hard to believe that Trump has any confidence in Jared Kushner. Yet, he does enough to go public with a one-sided plan developed without Palestinian input.

    francis scott falseflag , 41 minutes ago link

    a real danger for foreign policy advisors and analysts – and especially those they serve – when they are in a bubble, an echo chamber, and all of their conclusions are based on faulty inputs.

    The same is true of the economists and financial analysts who live in the bubble of the NSYE and the echo chamber of Manhattan. All of their conclusions are based on faulty inputs.

    Ruler , 1 hour ago link

    The problem all incompetent leaders have, is seeing how their opponents see them.

    Bokkenrijder , 1 hour ago link

    If Trump continues to be 'dumb' enough to consistently hire these people and consistently listen to them, and if his supporters continue to be dumb enough to consistently believe all the lies and excuses, then Trump and his supporters are 100% involved in the neoCON.

    RafterManFMJ , 1 hour ago link

    Dude, it's 666D chess!

    The Real John Bolton

    [Feb 05, 2020] Flynn was a friend of neocon Leeden, who essentially formulated the neocon foreign policy in his famous quote "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business".

    Feb 05, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Louis N. Proyect ,

    "It does not take a poli sci major to figure out that Flynn's immediate removal from the Administration was essential to undermining Trump's entire foreign policy initiatives including no new interventionist wars, peace with Russia and US withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan."

    This is baloney, as I pointed out here: https://louisproyect.org/2017/02/19/deep-state-deep-confusion/

    I always get a chuckle out of the notion that Trump and the neocons are mortal enemies. Do you know who co-wrote Michael Flynn's "The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies"? Does the name Michael Ledeen ring a bell? A profile on Flynn in the New Yorker Magazine revealed that much of the book is practically plagiarized from Ledeen's sorry body of books and articles. Ledeen is the Freedom Scholar at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. This is about as neocon as you can get with founder Clifford D. May now serving as President, who is also a member of the Henry Jackson Society, an outfit that is infamous for supporting the war in Iraq. Here is Ledeen on the countries posing the greatest threat to the USA:

    It's no coincidence. Russia, Iran and North Korea are in active cahoots. They are pooling resources, including banking systems (the better to bust sanctions), intelligence and military technology, as part of an ongoing war against the West, of which the most melodramatic battlefields are in Syria/Iraq and Ukraine.

    To judge by their language, the leaders of the three countries think the tide of world events is flowing in their favor. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei delivered an ultimatum to the West, saying that Iran's war against "evil" would only end with the removal of America. Russian President Vladimir Putin marches on in Ukraine, blaming the West for all the trouble, and the North Koreans are similarly bellicose.

    They are singing from the same hymnal. And they aim to do us in.

    Right, they aim to do us in. So it turns out that the guy that Flynn is most closely allied to ideologically is ten times scarier than Hillary Clinton. If you still have doubts about Flynn's close ties to Ledeen, I recommend The New Yorker profile linked to above. It states:

    Flynn and Ledeen became close friends; in their shared view of the world, Ledeen supplied an intellectual and historical perspective, Flynn a tactical one. "I've spent my professional life studying evil," Ledeen told me. Flynn said, in a recent speech, "I've sat down with really, really evil people" -- he cited Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Russians, Chinese generals -- "and all I want to do is punch the guy in the nose."

    Get that, people? Flynn said he'd like to punch a Russian in the nose. People get confused over Flynn's ideological core beliefs by missing that his interest in Russia is solely based on its usefulness against ISIS. Just because he favored a united military front against ISIS, it does not mean that he has the same affinity for the Kremlin that someone like Stephen F. Cohen has. Just remember that the USA and Stalin were allied against Hitler. You know how far that went.

    lundiel ,

    Funny you should bring up Ledeen, just after I posted a comment about him, eh Louis?
    For whatever reason, Flynn decided to work with Trump and his removal, by his compatriots, is testament to his problematic policy shift. Who knows if he had a paradigm shift or thought he knew which side his bread was buttered. The thing is, as Renee says, the FBI are very much involved in internal politics.

    [Feb 05, 2020] Syrian Army Progress Leads To New Scuffle Between Turkey And Russia

    Feb 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    GMJ , Feb 3 2020 19:40 utc | 21

    Thank you for another good article. What strikes me is that so many automatically go to, or refer to, Mr Putin as the voice of reason these days and not Washington DC or any NATO country. I never thought that I will live to see the US become less trusted than our old enemy, the commies. BUT, as I say in my books, the Russia of today is not the USSR at all. Anyway, for those interested in interesting military history, I recently discovered this myself, see https://www.georgemjames.com/blog/the-fuhrers-commando-order-origins. I wanted to post on the open thread but got busy and forgot. GMJ.

    [Feb 04, 2020] Turkey openly sided with jihadists

    Feb 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Feb 3 2020 19:44 utc | 22

    @ Brendan 18

    Turkey is still in NATO, realizes his strategic importance and from time immoral has always played both sides.

    2019 Erdo got what he wanted from Russia - TurkStream. The pipeline is operational and income flows.
    There is this; when one plays both sides of the fence, one day the fence will disappear.

    Action in Saraqib.
    Top Russian, Turkish diplomats hold phone talks, says source in Turkish ministry

    The phone call comes amid deterioration in Syria

    ANKARA, February 3. /TASS/. Turkish and Russian Foreign Ministers Mevlut Cavusoglu and Sergey Lavrov have held phone talks on Monday, a source in the Turkish diplomatic agency told TASS.[.]

    Earlier, the Turkish Ministry of National Defense said that Turkish positions near the town of Saraqib in Syria's Idlib Province had been shelled, killing six soldiers and wounding nine more. Ankara claims that the Syrian army was behind the attack in spite of the fact that it was timely informed about where Turkish forces are located. Erdogan later revealed that Turkish aviation and artillery had retaliated, striking 40 targets in Idlib and "neutralizing 30-35 Syrians."[.]

    les7 , Feb 3 2020 19:52 utc | 23

    Erdogan has a serious delusion/problem with seeing himself as the head of a pan-turkik empire. The US in particular plays with fire feeding this obsession.

    Instead ofjust supporting militants to destabilize and keep clients dependent (ala gladio), the empire seems to be mobilizing to use the Turkik racial entity as a block to the Russian-Chinese OBOR connectivity in Asia.

    While the militants destabilization technique works in Africa and Arab areas, it lacks traction in central Asia -although it cannot be ignored as a potential trigger (Pakistan-India)

    For central Asia, the US is mobilizing pan-turkik feelings. Putin and Xi run a great risk mollifying (putin) or financing (Xi) such delusion.

    It all starts or ends in Syria.

    Likklemore , Feb 3 2020 19:57 utc | 24
    More from Reuters
    Turkey's Erdogan says developments in Syria's Idlib 'unmanageable'
    Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday developments in Syria's northwestern region of Idlib had become "unmanageable", after Ankara said Syrian shelling killed five of its soldiers there.

    Russia, Turkey agree to observe deal in Syria's Idlib: Ifax cites Russian foreign ministry

    The foreign ministers of Russia and Turkey on Monday agreed that a deal over Syria's Idlib region must be observed, amid rising tensions between opposing forces, the Interfax news agency cited the Russian foreign ministry as saying.[.]

    les7 , Feb 3 2020 19:58 utc | 25
    For Erdogan the Arabs are racially inferior and will be pushed aside. Kurds, unfortunately for them in Erdogans eyes, are a kind of half-breed that threatens turkik racial purity- they will be subservient or cease to exist.
    Red Ryder , Feb 3 2020 20:05 utc | 26
    @16, Casey

    Not true. Russian doesn't even have a passive "no fly" via S-400s. They don't have full coverage from the installations at Latakia and Tartus. A no fly zone requires fighter jets to maintain the clear skies. Russia has no intention of suppressing US air power over Syria (eastern sector). They use de-confliction talks daily to separate aircraft.

    Also, Assad has not asked Russia to impose a "No Fly Zone". At times, for Russian military uses, they have announced zones where all aircraft are warned to stay clear. But those are common practice and of limited duration, usually for military exercises.

    DontBelieveEitherPr. , Feb 3 2020 20:18 utc | 29
    The thing is, which even the totally Pro-Russian Southfront admits: Turkey has more (economic) leverage over Putin as the other way around.
    The Turk Stream pipeline is critical for Putin, even more with the long delays North Stream II faces.
    With the renewed US-Turkey allaince, Putin and Turkey payed lobbyists like Peskov have manuvered themselves into a pretty shitty situation. Again, as even Southfront admits, this could damage all of Russias new prestige in the middle east.
    And again, as Southfront even notes, Russia would not admit it if Turkey did strike the SAA.
    In the middle east, if you can not protect your protectorate, you are seen as impotent. SF seems to believe Turkey did indeed strike the SAA. And with SF sources in Russian military circles, i would not doubt that.
    Either Putin now gives Erdo a bloody nose, and pushes back hard, Russias standing will be severly damaged.
    And everything concerning the middle east Putin build up in the last years, will threaten to unravel.
    I sad for over a year this day would come, while many here dreamed of some mythical/esoteric alliance between Turkey and Russia. That delusion now finally comes to its predictable end.
    Good riddance.
    Bubbles , Feb 3 2020 20:21 utc | 31
    Another potential contributing factor to Erdogan's erratic behaviour is the Lira is being squeezed again similar to when the US sought to pressure him to release the US pastor and to dissuade him from purchasing the S400's. They got the pastor when the Lira hit 6.18 to the USD after a sudden mercurial rise.

    It's a hair shy of 6 per right now after another rapid devaluation. Turkey is very vulnerable in this area due to a large amount of foreign debt denominated in USD that's due in the near term. Last time this happened many experts opined the 6 per level was a watershed moment which threatens to bring down the Turk's economy if it continued for brief period. Erdogan isn't as popular nor as resilient politically as he used to be especially with inflation remaining a huge problem and interest rates that would give an American oligarch a heart attack. Pocket book issues are important everywhere.

    "It's the economy stupid."

    That said I read an article earlier about Netanyahu flying directly to Moscow after taking a victory lap with the 'Don' and instead of his usual all about Binyamin bloviating, he busied himself heaping effusive praise on Putin..who btw demurred. Deal of Century stone thrown into still waters rippling far and wide methinks. Maximum pressure on the 'Don's' good friend Recep, the Mob Boss who resides in his new Gilded quarters /Palace in Turkey.

    Lastly a worthy read. A story of hope and tragedy;

    Leila Janah, Entrepreneur Who Hired the Poor, Dies at 37

    "A child of Indian immigrants, she created digital jobs that pay a living wage to thousands in Africa and India, believing that the intellect of the poor was "the biggest untapped resource" in the world."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/business/leila-janah-dead.html?searchResultPosition=2

    Probably the only chance a significant % of the public will have to hear about her and her passion. Sadly the mobsters steal the headlines, and capture most of the attention.

    ak74 , Feb 3 2020 20:23 utc | 32
    Sultan Erdogan seems to have forgotten who saved his ass when America backed and supported a coup against him in 2016.

    If it weren't for Russia, Erdogan would likely be in a Turkish prison somewhere being subjected to America's Abu Ghraib-style "naked pyramids" or even worse.

    Turkish state terrorism in Syria must be ended.

    Gary M , Feb 3 2020 20:26 utc | 33
    @23 Pompeo said this today in his trip to Kazakhstan: "More than a million persons of Oyghour and Kazakh Muslims have been imprisoned in China's coercive camps. I demand all of countries to try for ending the China's pressures. Also we want the international community to act for providing the security of the Oyghour and Kazakh Turks, that are trying for flee from China and refuge in another country."
    He added: "Pioneering of Kazakhstan in returning the terrorists and their families from Iraq and Syria , is promising and should be considered by other countries."
    Barovsky , Feb 3 2020 20:37 utc | 34
    Likklemore @ 22
    2019 Erdo got what he wanted from Russia - TurkStream. The pipeline is operational and income flows. There is this; when one plays both sides of the fence, one day the fence will disappear.

    Or, as John le Carre said in 'Funeral in Berlin', 'if you sit on the fence, they'll run the barbed wire right through you.'

    augusto , Feb 3 2020 20:45 utc | 38
    Yes, folks what the heck the turks have to do with Idlib or syrian territory, IF it is guaranteed that neither russia nor Assad will support their enemies - the Kurds - from builing up a state in northwest syria? It is a done deal that there will be no kurd state there.

    Never trust a turk is the old saying, but who s insisting on trying make it true? They deserve a new direct treason from the empire and from europeans just to find out who is the faithful partner.

    chet380 , Feb 3 2020 21:02 utc | 39
    If the Syrian AF attacks the HTS scum in close proximity to any of the observation posts and more Turks are killed, will Turd.O.Wan bring the Turkish AF into play in Syria?
    uncle tungsten , Feb 3 2020 21:14 utc | 40
    Gary M #33
    Good to hear. Pontious will be repatriating IS and Al Qaida terrorists to California then? The guy is a lying turd just like his USA boss and his little friend Erdoghan.
    Bubbles , Feb 3 2020 21:19 utc | 41
    Pompeo did the same in Uzbekistan recently.

    Posted by: les7 | Feb 3 2020 20:41 utc | 36


    trump Regime Secretary of State Job Description; Evangelical Terrorist in Chief..

    Differs somewhat from Obama era Red Queen of the Clinton Dynasty, and the not so artful dodger long john Kerry who wasn't above alluding to the good works of Brown Noses @ Bellingcat to justify the proxy war his Country wrought upon the innocents in secular Syria by decree of King Barrack the 1st, a fully accredited member of the Court of the Betters than the rest of us .

    So much reality, so little time.

    0use4msm , Feb 3 2020 21:33 utc | 42
    SAA already entering the outskirts of Saraqib!

    The fact that Turkey has to step in itself is a sign of how just weak its Al-Qaeda proxies have become. The SAA is taking town after town with little or no resistance from HTS.

    SteveK9 , Feb 3 2020 21:35 utc | 44
    I really have a hard time understanding Turkey. In addition to the list in the article Turkey is depending on Russia for:

    1) S-400 - these deliveries are not complete
    2) Akkuyu nuclear power station - this is not 'a' reactor, it is 4 reactors and $25B financed by Russia (although they are looking for a Turkish investor)
    3) Turkstream gas pipeline - just connected amidst great fanfare ... with others leaders present (Serbia, Bulgaria, ..)
    4) The general economic trade.

    Erdogan has stated support for Syrian integrity.

    So, why not just get out of Idlib (let the headchoppers die or send them to Libya), make a deal with Syria to control the border in the East against the Kurds and be done with it?

    SteveK9 , Feb 3 2020 21:37 utc | 45
    The idea that Russia is so desperate for gas sales to Turkey or for that matter the EU is wrong. Russia wants to build good relations with as many countries as possible. But, in terms of trade, what does Russia need that they can't make for themselves or buy from the Chinese? I keep thinking that at some point Russia will simply say, 'fine, you don't want the gas, get it elsewhere, instead of putting up with all this garbage.
    Innocent Civilian , Feb 3 2020 21:41 utc | 46
    So much hate against Turkey without a proper knowledge of its recent history. People blame how Turks misbehave against the Kurds, but they do not even know Turkey had a Kurdish president and prime minister in 80s. Erdogan was actually quite warm towards Kurds at the beginning of his tenure and a lot of ethnic rights were granted to them by his government which the history of Turkey has never seen before (causing a lot of friction between his party and the nationalists). They were politically welcome into the parliament, which never happened in the history of Turkey. But this changed after US fueled up its efforts to oust Erdogan and the political and militia arm of the Kurds were the first ones to collude with US, as is the cases in Syria and Iraq. That is why they turned bitter against each other in the first half of the last decade. Both sides are no angels!

    It is easy for Putin to talk about the international law in Syria but act brazenly against it in Libya and Crimea. It is all about influence. Just as Russia holds a considerable influence and historical ties in Crimea and annexed it by holding a referendum that was illegal according to the Ukrainian constitution (which openly states that territorial changes must be approved by a national vote involving all Ukrainian citizens), Turkey's acts in Idlib region must be seen in the same direction. I am sure that if Turkey held a referendum in Idlib region, which would be illegal according to the Syrian constitution, and asked if they wanted to join Turkey in the cover of self-determination, a high majority would say yes.

    karlof1 , Feb 3 2020 21:42 utc | 47
    chet380 @39--

    Erdo has already tried to get his jets to help but the RuAF won't allow them into Syrian airspace. And SAaF have bombed next to those Turk OPs.

    Roughly an hour ago the SAA's main push began into Saraqib from the West. Again using superior night vision advantage. An additional attack axis is reported to be aimed at Sarmin, beyond which is Idlib City.

    les7 , Feb 3 2020 21:44 utc | 48
    @ 37 Walter

    "The cat might really be nuts, you know...I mean they used to say "transient schizophrenic psychoses" from the stress... And he's in a pressure cooker. Yeah, he's probably nutty."

    I once heard the statement "To do a great evil the devil requires a good man with one or two proound weaknesses. A really evil / insane man will not do, for the simple reason that he will never gain enough power to do a great evil."

    Theology aside, the point remains. Erdogan is not insane. He has a couple profound weaknesses one of which is the racially motivated pan-turkic delusion which the Americans play on.

    2nd, like many of pointed out here is his support base, which is partially religious and partially economic. The economic side is definitely crumbling.

    Putin seems to be gambling on the pressure he can apply via the economic side. That pressure is essentially a negative pressure. Once it's gone there is no control. The pressure the Americans exert is a positive, visionary pressure. It remains regardless of the economic or religious support that Erdogan can put together. It may well be the stronger of the two motivations.

    Bubbles , Feb 3 2020 21:54 utc | 49
    Posted by: SteveK9 | Feb 3 2020 21:35 utc | 44

    What Erdogan says and what the wannabe Don trump says holds about the same value. Both bullshit in the hope it will give them leverage.

    US Presidents have used bullshit and attacks against innocents to feather their political nests because stupid people are easy to fool, Erdogan's base are even dumber than dubya's base which has become trump's base. They never learn anything. Erdogan has an advantage in his hood that even trump doesn't have, he completely destroyed any media that opposed his quest to be the Dictator that rules with an iron fist. His religious base (think US Evangelical base) love that strong man stuff. Even though the US evangelicals have to be the world's worst hypocrites. Sad that, BIGLY sad.

    les7 , Feb 3 2020 21:59 utc | 50
    @46

    Hmmm .. Crimea vs Idlib

    90 + percent of the crimeans spoke Russian as a mother tongue. 90 + percent of the inhabitants of idlib spoke Arabic as her mother tongue, not Turkish.

    The Turkish Army invaded the Idlib province. Arabs were forced to flee, some of them residing here in Canada. Turks have been resettled in their place throughout the province. Of course with ethnic cleansing it's easy to get the census that agrees with you. For you to equate Idlib and Crimea is beyond laughable.

    Just what is your agenda oh innocent one?

    El Cid , Feb 3 2020 21:59 utc | 51
    Even if Turkish military supplies arrive to outposts, they will still be surrounded and unable to supply their terrorist. Turks will spend their time bored, gambling, drinking and watching porn. Their morale will sink.
    Hausmeister , Feb 3 2020 22:02 utc | 52
    les7 | Feb 3 2020 21:44 utc | 48

    "He has a couple profound weaknesses one of which is the racially motivated pan-turkic delusion which the Americans play on."

    Again - no. This is not the motivation of Erdogan, but the motivation of other players so important that he must follow them. These do not accept his Muslim Brotherhood stance. There is, if you like, a partnership between both attitudes.

    Any US-hope of using the pan-turanistic dreams against China and Russia is in vain. It may create unnecessary disturbances but will fail at the end.

    Innocent Civilian | Feb 3 2020 21:41 utc | 46

    The part dealing with the Kurds is plain political dreamstuff. They were accepted as long as they were not Kurds, but Turks from the perspective of the Kemalist nightmare. But ok, I guess it is difficult to get access to unspoilt informations where you live. This is what I assume.

    In Turkey , Feb 3 2020 22:04 utc | 53
    In Istanbul right now.

    Erdogan on Turkish TV stating Turkish F16s bombed the Syrian army in Idlib killing 70-75 Syrian soldiers.

    Putin and his Russians did not prevent the Turkish attack, which only means they collaborated in the bombing of their Syrian allies.

    SteveK9 , Feb 3 2020 22:13 utc | 54
    Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 3 2020 21:54 utc | 49

    My question was not whether Erdogan can manipulate his people (that seems to be true of every country), but what advantage does Erdogan see for himself or his country in persevering in Idlib, with the possible result of a blowup with Russia, that will be very costly indeed ... for him and Turkey, not Russia.

    SteveK9 , Feb 3 2020 22:14 utc | 55
    Posted by: In Turkey | Feb 3 2020 22:04 utc | 53

    What makes you think this is true? What I mean is not an insult, I'd like to know your reasons for believing this.

    Sid Finster , Feb 3 2020 22:15 utc | 56
    The problem with a a strategy of constantly trying to play one side off against the other is that nobody will end up trusting you.
    JohninMK , Feb 3 2020 22:19 utc | 57
    DontBelieveEitherPr. | Feb 3 2020 20:18 utc | 29

    You might be overestimating the importance to Russia of Turkstream and Nordstream2. Russia had a financial insurance policy in operation, the new gas pipeline into China that started pumping last month. Also Turkstream is not properly connected into the EU yet so Turkey is the only customer of Russia for its gas. Also, given the slowdown in Germany's economy, there would probably not been much of a net gain in gas sales even if Nordstream2 had been completed, just a re-balancing of Nordstream1 and Ukraine transit.

    Bubbles , Feb 3 2020 22:27 utc | 58
    " The pressure the Americans exert is a positive, visionary pressure. It remains regardless of the economic or religious support that Erdogan can put together. It may well be the stronger of the two motivations."

    Posted by: les7 | Feb 3 2020 21:44 utc | 48

    I would be most interested in your assertion " The pressure the Americans exert is a positive, visionary pressure."

    Could you indulge me and explain that in detail..as in a significant way?

    JohninMK , Feb 3 2020 22:27 utc | 59
    The video evidence from Libya is that Turkish APCs etc are of questionable quality. This could give the Turks in Syria the same problems.

    Another problem for the Turkish Army is that they are facing a battle hardened SAA with CAS. The Turks and their proxies are not and don't have air cover.

    Hausmeister , Feb 3 2020 22:42 utc | 60
    In Turkey | Feb 3 2020 22:04 utc | 53

    If such a claim is not 100% assured by sources that have no sympathy for the political interests of Erdogan it is just a matter of political intelligence to believe that stuff or not. The Turks are no champions in this discipline.

    @All: latest news about this Michael d'Andrea available?

    Edward , Feb 3 2020 22:48 utc | 61
    The Syrian military has probably gamed out the different possible scenarios with Turkey ahead of time. They probably have plans for responding to this Turkish activity.
    Bubbles , Feb 3 2020 22:55 utc | 62
    what advantage does Erdogan see for himself or his country in persevering in Idlib, with the possible result of a blowup with Russia, that will be very costly indeed ... for him and Turkey, not Russia.

    Posted by: SteveK9 | Feb 3 2020 22:13 utc | 54


    See my post on the rapid devaluation of the Turk Lira. The Sultan for all his bravado, survives at the pleasure of the US / UK based Money Changers.

    I repeat, "It's the economy stupid". Erdogan gained support for being a hopey changey Economic miracle worker who stroked the Turk version of the Evangelicals. He became a God like figure, then his aura began to wain and he lost elections in places like Ankara where his 'faith based' Make Turkey Great Again movement began.

    He's a nut, and nuts are dangerous. Like Netanyahu.


    I read an article some time back when Binyamin Nyet and the Erdogan were jousting, the headline was "Dictator vs. Tyrant" I thought it substantive and appropriate.

    bevin , Feb 3 2020 22:58 utc | 63
    When someone in Erdogan's position seems to being acting in an unaccountable fashion, it is best to take a look at the military. The Turkish Army is, by far the most powerful in the region. And it is traditionally allied with "the west", NATO and the US. It hosts US bases, it is linked at all levels with the Pentagon. The relationship is not unlike that in most Latin American countries where the military invariably is the US government's last resort.
    Almost invariably: in Cuba and Venezuela bringing the Generals under control was the primary aim of the revolutionaries. But it is hard to do, as a glance at Egypt reminds us.
    It could be that Erdogan is under pressure from the original deep state which has been oriented against Russia throughout its existence.
    In Turkey , Feb 3 2020 23:12 utc | 64
    @Hausmeister and Steve K9

    Erdogan is the president of Turkey and privy to all the info collected by Turkish Intelligence and the Turkish army.
    These guys have the latest technology drones and modern reconaiasance jets with sophisticated sensors.

    It would be unreasonable to suggest that the president of Turkey is lying on national TV about the number of
    Syrian soldiers killed by Turkish jets. The Russians and other western sources could easily expose Erdogan if
    he's lying. Neither the Russians nor the Syrians denied the aforementioned attacks by the Turks.

    Furthermore, the Jihadis presently have stepped up their attacks even capturing a Syrian T-90 tank.

    In Turkey , Feb 3 2020 23:22 utc | 67
    Bubbles,

    The official Syrian News Agency says they did:

    https://mobile.almasdarnews.com/article/turkish-f-16-fighter-jets-bomb-syrian-troops-inside-idlib/

    Likklemore , Feb 3 2020 23:37 utc | 72
    Turkey trying to block Syrian army advance towards Saraqib
    Earlier, the Russian center for reconciliation in Syria said Turkish military personnel had come under an attack of Syrian troops in Idlib, because Turkey had failed to notify Russia about the movements of its troops in advance

    MOSCOW, February 3. /TASS/. /TASS/. Turkey has sent a convoy of armored vehicles to Syria's Idlib Governorate in order to block the advance of the Syrian army towards the town of Saraqib, located on the intersection of Latakia-Aleppo and Damascus-Aleppo highways, the Al-Watan daily reported on Monday.

    According to the paper, Turkish military is strengthening observation posts on the approaches to Saraqib and is installing one more post on the Kfar Amim-Abu al Duhur line. Turkish armored vehicles have also been spotted in al-Mastum and west of that town. A camp of the Turkestan Islamic Party, an extremist organization made up of Uyghur mercenaries, is located there.[.]

    So what's going on with Erdo? Is it a complete falling out with Russia?

    Today Erdo held a joint presser with Ukraine's Zelensky. Both signed an agreement.
    LINK
    Turkey reiterates its support for sovereignty, territorial integrity of Ukraine, says President Recep Tayyip Erdogan [and repeated]
    "no recognition of annexation of Crimea"

    What a snake whisperer?
    A friend like Erdo, you keep him very close.

    Red Ryder , Feb 3 2020 23:40 utc | 74
    @ 67 Bubbles

    You link to a report that is from the Turks, not the official Syrian News Agency which is not listed nor quoted. It's all Turkey pronouncements.

    That it is published as news in Lebanon means nothing.

    https://www.sana.sy/en/ . This is the official news agency of Syria, SANA.

    What is important is the Russian military says no Turk planes flew over Syrian troops. I believe them not the Turks.

    No question the trapped rats of al Nusra and Uyghur terrorists are fighting the Syrians strongly. They are on the verge of being wiped off the face of the earth. Russian military came to kill them.

    And there is a report in Russian media of four FSB officers killed in IED or mortar attack in the region, their injured bodies then executed by the terrorists. Big payback will be coming if this report is fully factual. Colonel Cassad had photos of two of the fallen today.

    Kadath , Feb 3 2020 23:45 utc | 77
    I personally hope that the Syria government avoids getting drag into a outright war with Turkey due to Erdogan's latest zany scheme to slice off a part of Idleb. However, in comparing the two forces it's important to remember that Turkey's military still hasn't fully recovered from Erodogan's earlier purge after the failed coup. Erodogan fired or imprisoned something like 5000 troops and more than a dozen senior officers and replaced them with loyalists and So far their track record against the Syrian Kurds isn't something to brag about. I suspect Russian diplomacy will once again come to the rescue and arrange some face saving escape for the Turkish troops.
    arby , Feb 3 2020 23:51 utc | 81
    Saw this on Fars News on FB.


    "Fars News Agency
    10 hrs ·
    Turkish Military Hits Syrian Troops Near Strategic City in Idlib, Damascus, Moscow Reject Casualties Claimed by Ankara"

    And for evidence of " The pressure the Americans exert is a positive, visionary pressure. "
    How about the positive pressure they put on Iraq, or libya, or Afghanistan, or Haiti, or Russia, or China, or 8000 sanctions , or, or ,or and on and on.

    les7 , Feb 4 2020 0:06 utc | 84
    @ 58 Bubbles

    Erdogan definitely has a pan- turkic vision.

    In terms of the psychology of motivation, for Erdogan, this is a positive motivation. It remains regardless of the obstacles that get put in its way.It is something to build towards, the emphasis on building. Again this is from the perspective of Erdogan and other pan-turkik nationalists within Turkey. Therefore, any deals that are made to achieve this goal remain valued until it is fully realized. This potentially gives the Americans a lot of long-term leveridge.

    By contrast, the economic problems Turket faces are essentially negative obstacles to be overcome. The deals that are made to achieve that only last as long as a situation is bad. Once the economic solution is in, or an alternative is found, there is no need to keep the deal. Putin's pressure point is short term and Russias role can be replaced.

    In making this comment I am only trying to make clear the power of the motivation that the two power blocks seek to use on Erdogan

    My own views on the value, possibility or utility of a pan-turkic grouping is something quite different

    S , Feb 4 2020 0:21 utc | 86
    @In Turkey #82:
    That's how they captured Afrin, thanks to Russian acquiescence.

    Afrin was captured because the stupid, over-confident Kurds refused to let the Syrian Army come and help them. They only came to their senses and accepted the Syrian Army assistance after most of the Kurdish-held territories were already lost. Russia advised Kurds to accept the Syrian Army's help, but Kurds rejected Russia's advice.

    uncle tungsten , Feb 4 2020 0:22 utc | 87
    In Turkey #73

    A small addition to your insistence that turkey invaded Idlib etc... The full picture needs to be appreciated. Syria has been at war on numerous fronts. At the time of the attempted turkish annexation of Idlib, Syrian army was fully stretched retaking the East at Deir Ezzor and the south at Darra along the Golan border and relieving the pressure on Damascus. Given the belligerent neighbours to the south and west - Jordan and Israel - and turkey to the north and north west, they chose to secure the South first as the Northern belligerent was partly 'in the camp'.

    It is in the context of achievability and resources that Syria made that strategic decision. Plus working with Russia to have somewhere to accommodate the terrorist close to their least capable ally. Had Syria taken Idlib first and sent the terrorists South they would have been fully in the arms and support of USA and its Jordanian and Israeli vassals.

    Assad acts in order to protect the Syrian people as best he can with the limited military capability that he has. He will protect the capitol as would any sensible leader and his persistent work with the Russian 'deconflit strategy' has worked well while he maintains his military strategy of gradual liberation and minimal soldiers deaths.

    Erdoghan on the other hand is acting out a different military strategy (somewhat like the invading wehrmacht) and opening many fronts, one far from home and across vulnerable seas.

    The rout in Idlib may well happen quickly, I have no idea but if exit fever grips the jihadis in Idlib then Erdoghan may be well advised to give them all safe passage to Libya - IF he can. He is trapped by strong political challengers emerging at home, powerful turkish chauvinism that will not tolerate more land being ceded to 'foreigners from the east' let alone vicious killer refugees. And he is trapped by his Moslem Brotherhood expectation of success which he MUST achieve. Otherwise the garrote awaits him.

    He has just been conned by the USA who's only goal is to prevent his full use of the S400 in turkey. The USA will go to extremes to prevent that weapon system being installed and rendered operational anywhere. His citizens will not be entirely happy with that capitulation as it paints a picture of failure.

    IMO Erdoghan has found his Dien Bien Phu in Idlib AND Libya. It is only a matter of time before he is demised.

    Bubbles , Feb 4 2020 0:28 utc | 88
    Posted by: les7 | Feb 4 2020 0:06 utc | 84


    This is what you said;


    " The pressure the Americans exert is a positive, visionary pressure. It remains regardless of the economic or religious support that Erdogan can put together. It may well be the stronger of the two motivations."

    Posted by: les7 | Feb 3 2020 21:44 utc | 48


    This is what I asked;

    I would be most interested in your assertion " The pressure the Americans exert is a positive, visionary pressure."

    Could you indulge me and explain that in detail..as in a significant way?


    Your response doesn't even come close to answering the simple question I posed to you.


    You seem to be endorsing US foreign policy that in essence is whatever it takes to feather the nests of rich psychopaths regardless of brown folks body count? Christians too. Like,"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. "

    By proclamation of the Pigs.

    arby , Feb 4 2020 0:33 utc | 89
    I don't understand why ISIS and the rest still hang on. Surely they must see how they keep getting knocked back into less and less territory.
    Peter , Feb 4 2020 0:39 utc | 90
    Erdogan is spinning like a whirling dervish for domestic purposes. Idleb will be liberated.
    Lorna MacKay , Feb 4 2020 0:39 utc | 91
    @ Innocent Civilian 46
    I am sure that if Turkey held a referendum in Idlib region, which would be illegal according to the Syrian constitution, and asked if they wanted to join Turkey in the cover of self-determination, a high majority would say yes.

    If only Syians were allowed to vote, I doubt this would be true. If; however, all the foreign fighters and their families were given a vote, there might be a majority in favour. But it would beg the question, should foreigners be given any say in Syrian internal unity?

    I think your understanding of the Crimean situation is also simplistic. Crimea was an autonomous republic within Ukraine Oblast, and should properly have had a say in whether or not it was incorporated into Ukraine. My understanding is that they tried to declare themselves independant when the Soviet Union broke up. Regardless of what the Ukraine constitution said, the Crimean constitution gave them authority to leave Ukraine.

    In Turkey , Feb 4 2020 0:45 utc | 92
    Uncle Tungsten,

    I only said Turkish jets bombed (and most likely killed)Syrian soldiers in Idlib with
    Russian collusion simply because it could not have happened if the Russians did
    permit it. S-400s were deactivated. Why?

    Just like why are Russians building a nuclear power plant in Turkey with their own
    money (vendor financing).

    Just doesn't make sense if the Russians do not envision a long-term economic and
    military alliance with Erdogan's Turkey.

    I think it's sad and lends credence to the theory that Putin and his administration are
    compromised.

    In Turkey , Feb 4 2020 0:47 utc | 93
    did not...
    les7 , Feb 4 2020 0:59 utc | 94
    @88

    What is it about the psychology of motivation that you don't understand? If you dangle a carrot on a stick,the donkey keeps pushing forward in the vain belief he will get it.

    Whether it's the American dream, the coming of some Messiah, or World Peace; it's astounding what lengths people will go to in the hope that their dream can be fulfilled

    When Pompeo calls on Kazakhstan to interfere in China on behalf of a turkic group there, completely unrelated to the kazakhs except by turkic racial identity, he is stoking a pan-turkik dream.

    Pompeo is also indirectly threatening Erdogan by backing the Kazakh leader as a international spokesman to realize this role, a role that Erdogan had played up until recentlywhen he fell out with the Americans over the S400.

    I also have little doubt that Pompeo is also waving the red flag in front of the bull in preparation for a lance to be driven home at a suitable time


    Walter , Feb 4 2020 1:03 utc | 95
    I too see the forms of the Red Army in the battles SAA and Ru fight.

    I too think the SAA must now be in superb fighting shape.

    I note Sputnik >
    Sputnik
    @SputnikInt
    ·
    4h
    DETAILS: According to the Russian MoD, a group of 15 #WhiteHelmets members arrived in the #Idlib de-escalation zone on 1 February to prepare a chemical provocation. https://sptnkne.ws/Bp77 @mod_russia

    Which, if we are to consider the implications, means that the Turkish and their client thugs agree that the SAA and the Ru are, ah, "better at the business"...

    They always double because if they are seen to have lost....well, they have to keep Toto away from that Green Curtain.

    Paul , Feb 4 2020 1:51 utc | 99
    Do not forget Turkey is still a member of NATO. He is working with Trump to break up Iraq so that the US can set up permanent military bases in Iraqi Kurdistan. This is a revival of Joe Biden's 2007 plan to carve up Iraq. No doubt, [Neosultan] Erdoğan is planning on charging transit fees for Iraqi and Syrian oil being looted by the US/Kurds. This may well lead to a major escalation in Syria.

    Notes

    1. Biden plan for 'soft partition' of Iraq gains momentum By Helene Cooper July 30, 2007

    Link: www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/world/americas/30iht-letter.1.6894357.html

    2. Russia Obliterated Turkish Column in Idlib While Erdogan Claims Imaginary Retaliation Against Syria By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor Feb 3, 2020; Link: www.veteranstoday.com/2020/02/03/intel-drop-russia-obliterated-turkish-column-in-idlib-while-erdogan-claims-imaginary-retaliation-against-syria/

    [Feb 04, 2020] Trump Jarvanka problem in 2020 elections

    Feb 04, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Igor ,

    "With Flynn removed, Trump never regained his footing on foreign policy – which no doubt was exactly as intended; thereby opening the door for the likes of Jared Kushner to assume the role of 'trusted adviser."
    Keep in mind, that Trump's Number One daughter married the likes of Jared Kushner. Trump then brought both into the White House as Senior Advisers. Nepotism?
    Note that the Anti Trumpers never go after Trump about Jared-Ivanka and real or perceived nepotism. Hands off?

    lundiel ,

    It does not take a poli sci major to figure out that Flynn's immediate removal from the Administration was essential to undermining Trump's entire foreign policy initiatives including no new interventionist wars, peace with Russia and US withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan.

    Sometimes off-the-cuff remarks provide a true assessment of where a country stands on foreign policy.

    Michael Ledeen is freedom scholar at FDD, and is an internationally-renowned scholar on Iran, Iraq, terrorism, and international security, and a world-renowned Italianist and expert on fascism. Michael has served as a consultant to the National Security Council and the Departments of State and Defense, and as a special advisor to the Secretary of State. He's also a neocon who made the following comment that sums up American foreign policy in the middle east, whoever's the president.

    "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business".

    The FBI is merely ensuring that there is no deviation to this policy.

    [Feb 04, 2020] Democrats concluded some time ago that the only viable strategy for removing Trump requires demonization of Russia as our enemy

    Feb 04, 2020 | www.thenation.com

    Michael Robertson says: February 3, 2020 at 3:39 pm

    Democrats concluded some time ago that the only viable strategy for removing Trump requires demonization of Russia as our enemy. And Ukraine as our ally. No one questions how this came to be, or demands any real reporting about Ukraine. It's a black hole, and we are expected to simply accept the framing of the Dems. Those who question it are accused of being brainwashed by RT, or of secretly loving Mr. Trump. And they are simply befuddled by accusations of neo-McCarthyism.

    Clark Shanahan says: February 3, 2020 at 8:03 pm

    As the professor warns us, we have gone through some very backwards times:
    "Speaker Nancy Pelosi is connecting the dots -- "all roads lead to Putin," she says -- and making the argument that Trump's pressure campaign on Ukraine was not an isolated incident but part of a troubling bond with the Russian president reaching back to special counsel Robert Mueller's findings on the 2016 election.

    "This has been going on for 2 1/2 years," Pelosi said Friday.

    "This isn't about Ukraine," she explained a day earlier. "'It's about Russia. Who benefited by our withholding of that military assistance? Russia.""
    (AP Dec 6, Lisa Mascaro/Mary Clare Jalonick)
    Schiff has claimed that the Evil Vlad wakes up every morning, plotting to destroy our virginal democracy because the US makes Russia look shabby.. He happens to receive a lot of funding from the arms industry.
    Nadler equated Russian meddling to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor..

    If these three actually believe their own spin, heaven help us.
    It truly is obscene.
    The Battle of Stalingrad ended February 2, 1943.
    Listening to our Russophobes, it seems the wrong people won that war. It is so ugly.

    Clark Shanahan says: February 3, 2020 at 8:21 pm

    on topic:

    https://thegrayzone.com/2020/02/03/huffpost-uk-editor-censorship-dsma-russia-jess-brammar/

    [Feb 03, 2020] White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War

    Highly recommended!
    This book sheds some light into the story of how Administrative assistants to Present became independent heavily influenced by CIA body controlling the USA foreign policy and to a large extent controlling the President. Recent revolt of NSC (Aka Ukrainegate) shows that the servant became the master
    The books contains some interesting information about forming NSC by Truman --- the father of the US National Security State. And bureaucratic turf war the preceded it. It wwas actually Eisenhower who created forma position of a "special assistant to the president for national security affairs"
    The author also cover a little bit disastrous decision to launch a "surge" (ironically by the female chickenhawk Meghan O'Sullivan), -- which attests neocon nature of current NSC and level of indoctrination of staffers in "Full Spectrum Dominance" doctrine quite clearly. That's why a faction of NSC launched a coup d'état against Trump in t he form of Ukrainegate and probably was instrumental in Russiagate as well.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Starting in the 1960s, the NSC dethroned the State Department in providing analysis, intelligence, and even some diplomacy to the diplomat in chief. In the years after September 11th, the staff also began to take greater responsibility, especially for planning, from the military and the rest of the Pentagon. Both departments have struggled and often failed to reclaim lost ground and influence in Washington. ..."
    "... Yet war is a hard thing to try to manage from the Executive Office Building. Thousands of miles from the frontlines and far from harm, the NSC make recommendations based on what they come to know from intelligence reports, news sources, phone calls, video-teleconferences, and visits to the front. Even with advice based only on this limited and limiting view, the NSC staff has transformed how the United States fights its wars. ..."
    "... Although presidents bear the ultimate responsibilities for these decisions, the NSC staff played an essential, and increasing, role in the thinking behind each bold move. In conflict after conflict, a more powerful NSC staff has fundamentally altered the American way of war. It is now far less informed by the perspective of the military and the view from the frontlines. It is less patient for progress and more dependent on the clocks in the Executive Office Building and Washington than those in theater. It is far more combative, less able to accept defeat, and more willing to risk a change of course. ..."
    "... The NSC common law's kept the peace in Washington for years after Iran-Contra. The restrictions against outright advocacy and outsized operational responsibilities were accepted by those at the White House as well as in the agencies during Republican and Democratic administrations. Yet as many in Washington believed the world grew more interconnected and the national security stakes increased, especially after September 11th, a more powerful NSC has given staffers the opportunity to bend, and occasionally break, the common laws, as they have been expected to and allowed to take on more responsibilities for developing strategies and new r ideas from those in the bureaucracy and military. ..."
    "... ...Meanwhile, others, including the anonymous author of the infamous September 2018 New York Times opinion piece, believe government officials who comprise a "steady state" amid Trump's chaotic presidency are "unsung heroes" resisting his worst instincts and overreaches. 13 Thus, it is no surprise that more and more Americans are concerned: a 2018 poll found that 74 percent of Americans feel a group of officials arc able to control government policy without accountability. ..."
    "... it is no wonder some Americans have taken to assuming the worst of their public servants. ..."
    "... Each member of the NSC staff needs to remember that their growing, unaccountable power has helped give evidence to the worries about a deep state. Although no one in Washington gives up influence voluntarily, the staff, even its warriors, need to remember it is not just what they fight for but whether a fight is necessary at all. ..."
    "... ... Too many in Washington, including at the Executive Office Building, have forgotten that public service is a privilege that bestows on them great responsibility. Although the NSC has long justified its actions in the name of national security, the means with which its members have pursued that objective have made for a more aggressive American way of war, a more fractious Washington, and more conspiracies about government. ..."
    "... The question is for what and for whom they will fight in the years and wars ahead. ..."
    Feb 03, 2020 | www.amazon.com

    The men and women walking the hushed corridors of the Executive Office Building do not look like warriors. Most are middle-aged professionals with penchants for dark business suits and prestigious graduate degrees, who have spent their lives serving their country in windowless offices, on far-off battle-fields, or at embassies abroad. Before arriving at the NSC, many joined the military or the nation's diplomatic corps, some dedicated themselves to teaching and writing about national security, and others spent their days working for the types of politicians who become presidents. By the time they joined the staff, each had shown the pluck -- and the good fortune -- required to end up staffing a president.

    When each NSC staffer first walks up the steps to the Executive Office Building, he or she joins an institution like no other in government. Compared to the Pentagon and other bureaucracies, the staff is small, hierarchically flat with only a few titles like directors and senior directors reporting to the national security advisor and his or her deputies. Compared to all those at the agencies, even most cabinet secretaries, the staff are also given unparalleled access to the president and the discussions about the biggest decisions in national security.

    Yet despite their access, the NSC staff was created as a political, legal, and bureaucratic afterthought. The National Security Council was established both
    to better coordinate foreign policy after World War II and as part of a deal to create what became known as the Defense Department. Since the army and navy only agreed to be unified under a single department and a civilian cabinet secretary if each still had a seat at the table where decisions about war were expected to be made, establishing the National Security Council was critical to ensuring passage of the National Security Act of 1947. The law, as well as its amendments two years later, unified the armed forces while also establishing the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense, as well as the CIA.

    ... ... ...

    Fans of television's the West Wing would be forgiven for expecting that once in the Oval Office, all a staffer needs to do to change policy is to deliver a well-timed whisper in the president's car or a rousing speech in his company. It is not that such dramatic moments never occur, but real change in government requires not just speaking up but the grinding policy work required to have something new to say.

    A staffer, alone or with NSC and agency colleagues, must develop an idea until feasible and defend it from opposition driven by personal pique, bureaucratic jealousy, or substantive disagreement, and often all three.

    Granted none of these fights are over particularly new ideas, as few proposals in war are truly novel. If anything, the staffs history is a reminder of how little new there is under the guise of national security. Alter all, escalations, ultimatums, and counterinsurgency are only innovative in the context of the latest conflicts. The NSC staff is usually proposing old ideas, some as old as war itself like a surge of troops, to new circumstances and a critical moment.

    Yet even an old idea can have real power in the right hands at the right time, so it is worth considering how much more influence the NSC brings to its fights today.

    ... ... ...

    A larger staff can do even more thanks to technology. With the establishment of the Situation Room in 1961 and its subsequent upgrades, as well as the widespread adoption of email in the 1980s, the classified email system during the 2000s, and desktop video teleconferencing systems in the 2010s, White House technology upgrades have been justified because the president deserves the latest and the fastest. These same advances give each member of the staff global reach, including to war zones half a world away, from the safety of the Executive Office Building.

    The NSC has also grown more powerful along with the presidency it serves. The White House, even in the hands of an inexperienced and disorganized president like Trump, drives the government's agenda, the news media's coverage, and the American public's attention. The NSC staff can, if skilled enough, leverage the office's influence for their own ideas and purposes. Presidents have also explicitly empowered the staff in big ways -- like putting them in the middle of the policymaking process -- and small -- like granting them ranks that put them on the same level as other agency officials.

    Recent staffers have also had the president's ear nearly every day, and sometimes more often, while secretaries of state and defense rarely have that much face time in the Oval Office. Each has a department with tens of thousands (and in the Pentagon's case millions) of employees to manage. Most significantly, both also answer not just to the president but to Congress, which has oversight authority for their departments and an expectation for regular updates. There are few more consequential power differences between the NSC and the departments than to whom each must answer.

    Even more, the NSC staff get to work and fight in anonymity. Members of Congress, journalists, and historians are usually too busy keeping track of the National Security Council principals to focus on the guys and gals behind the national security advisors, who are themselves behind the president. Few in Washington, and fewer still across the country, know the names of the staff advising the president let alone what they arc saying in their memos and moments with him.

    Today, there arc too many unnamed NSC staffers for anyone's good, including their own. Even with the recent congressional limit on policy staffers, the NSC is too big to be thoroughly managed or effective. National security advisors and their deputies are so busy during their days that it is hard to keep up with all their own emails, calls, and reading, let alone ensure each member of the staff is doing their own work or doing it well. The common law and a de tacto honor system has also struggled to keep staff in check as they try to handle every issue from war to women's rights and every to-do list item from drafting talking points to doing secret diplomacy.

    Although many factors contribute to the NSC's success, history suggests they do best with the right-size job. The answer to better national security policy and process is not a bigger staff but smaller writs. The NSC should focus on fewer issues, and then only on the smaller stuff, like what the president needs for calls and meetings, and the big, what some call grand strategic, questions about the nation's interests, ambitions, and capacities that should be asked and answered before any major decision.

    ... ... ...

    Along the way, the staff has taken on greater responsibilities from agencies like the departments of state and defense as each has grown more bureaucratic and sclerotic. Starting in the 1960s, the NSC dethroned the State Department in providing analysis, intelligence, and even some diplomacy to the diplomat in chief. In the years after September 11th, the staff also began to take greater responsibility, especially for planning, from the military and the rest of the Pentagon. Both departments have struggled and often failed to reclaim lost ground and influence in Washington.

    As a result, today the NSC has, regretfully, become the strategic engine of the government's national security policymaking. The staff, along with the national security advisor, determine which issues -- large and small -- require attention, develop the plans for most of them, and try to manage day-to-day the implementation of each strategy. That is too sweeping a remit for a couple hundred unaccountable staffers sitting at the Executive Office Building thousands of miles from war zones and foreign capitals. Such immense responsibility also docs not make the best use of talent in government, leaving the military and the nation's diplomats fighting with the White House over policies while trying to execute plans they have less and less ownership over.

    ... ... ...

    Although protocol still requires members of the NSC to sit on the backbench in National Security Council meetings, the staff s voice and advice can carry as much weight as those of the principals sitting at the table, just as the staff has taken on more of each department's responsibilities, the NSC arc expected to be advisors to the president, even on military strategy. With that charge, the staff has taken to spending more time and effort developing their own policy ideas -- and fighting for them.

    Yet war is a hard thing to try to manage from the Executive Office Building. Thousands of miles from the frontlines and far from harm, the NSC make recommendations based on what they come to know from intelligence reports, news sources, phone calls, video-teleconferences, and visits to the front. Even with advice based only on this limited and limiting view, the NSC staff has transformed how the United States fights its wars.

    The American way of war, developed over decades of thinking and fighting, informs how and why the nation goes to battle. Over the course of American history and, most relevantly, since the end of World War II, the US military and other national security professionals have developed, often through great turmoil, strategic preferences and habits, like deploying the latest technology possible instead of the largest number of troops. Despite the tremendous planning that goes into these most serious of undertakings, each new conflict tests the prevailing way of war and often finds it wanting.

    Even knowing how dangerous it is to relight the last war, it is still not easy to find the right course for a new one. Government in general and national security specifically are risk-averse enterprises where it is often simpler to rely on standard operating procedures and stay on a chosen course, regardless of whether progress is slow and the sense of drift is severe. Even then, many in the military, who often react to even the mildest of suggestions and inquiries as unnecessary or even dangerous micromanagement, defend the prevailing approach with its defining doctrine and syndrome.

    As Machiavelli recommended long ago, there is a need for hard questions in government and war in particular. He wrote that a leader "ought to be a great askcr, and a patient hearer of the truth." 7 From the Executive Office Building, the NSC staff, who are more distanced from the action as well as the fog of war, have tried to fill this role for a busy and often distracted president. They are, however, not nearly as patient as Machiavelli recommended: they have proven more willing, indeed too willing at times, to ask about what is working and what is not.

    Warfighters are not alone in being frustrated by questions: everyone from architects to zookeepers believes they know how best to do their job and that with a bit more time, they will get it right. Without any of the responsibility for the doing, the NSC staff not only asks hard questions but, by avoiding implementation bias, is willing to admit, often long before those in the field, that the current plan is failing. A more technologically advanced NSC, with the ability to reach deep into the chain of command and war zones for updates, has also given the staff the intelligence to back up its impatience.

    Most times in history, the NSC staff has correctly predicted that time is running against a chosen strategy. Halperin. and others on the Nixon NSC, were accurate in their assessments of Vietnam. Dur and his Reagan NSC colleagues were right to worry that diplomacy was moving too slowly in Lebanon. Haass and Vershbow were correct when they were concerned with how windows of opportunity for action were shrinking in the Gulf and Balkans respectively, just as O'Sullivan was right that things needed to change relatively soon in Iraq.

    Yet an impatient NSC staff has a worse track record giving the president answers to what should come next. The NSC staff naturally have opinions and ideas about what can be done when events and war feel out of control, but ideas about what can be done when events and war feel out of control, but the very distance and disengagement that allow' the NSC to be so effective at measuring progress make its ideas less grounded in operational realities and more clouded by the fog of Washington. The NSC, often stridently, wants to do something more, to "go big when wc can," as one recent staffer encouraged his president, to fix a failing policy or win a w r ar, but that is not a strategy, nor does that ambition make the staff the best equipped to figure out the next steps."

    With their proposals for a new plan, deployment, or initiative, the staff has made more bad recommendations than good. The Diem coup and the Beirut mission are two examples, and particularly tragic ones at that, of NSC staff recommendations gone awry. The Iraq surge was certainly a courageous decision, but by committing so many troops to that country, the manpower w r as not available for a war in Afghanistan that was falling off track. Even the more successful NSC recommendations for changes in US strategy in the Gulf War and in Bosnia did not end up exactly as planned, in part because even good ideas in war rarely do.

    Although presidents bear the ultimate responsibilities for these decisions, the NSC staff played an essential, and increasing, role in the thinking behind each bold move. In conflict after conflict, a more powerful NSC staff has fundamentally altered the American way of war. It is now far less informed by the perspective of the military and the view from the frontlines. It is less patient for progress and more dependent on the clocks in the Executive Office Building and Washington than those in theater. It is far more combative, less able to accept defeat, and more willing to risk a change of course.

    And it is characterized by more frequent and counterproductive friction between the civilian and military leaders.

    ... ... ...

    Through it all, as the NSC's voice has grown louder in the nation's war rooms, the staff has transformed how Washington works, and more often does not work. The NSC's fights to change course have had another casualty: the ugly collapse of the common law' that has governed Washington policymaking for more than a generation. The result today is a government that trusts less, fights more, and decides much slower.

    National security policy- and decision-making was never supposed to be a fair fight. Eliot Cohen, a civil-military scholar with high-level government experience, has called the give-and-take of the interagency process an "unequal" dialogue -- one in which presidents are entitled to not just make the ultimate decision but also to ask questions, often with the NSC's help, at any time and about any topic.* Everyone else, from the secretaries of state and defense in Washington dow r n to the commanders and ambassadors abroad, has to expect and tolerate such presidential interventions and then carry out his orders.

    Even an unfair fight can have rules, however. The NSC common law's kept the peace in Washington for years after Iran-Contra. The restrictions against outright advocacy and outsized operational responsibilities were accepted by those at the White House as well as in the agencies during Republican and Democratic administrations. Yet as many in Washington believed the world grew more interconnected and the national security stakes increased, especially after September 11th, a more powerful NSC has given staffers the opportunity to bend, and occasionally break, the common laws, as they have been expected to and allowed to take on more responsibilities for developing strategies and new r ideas from those in the bureaucracy and military.

    ... ... ...

    ...Meanwhile, others, including the anonymous author of the infamous September 2018 New York Times opinion piece, believe government officials who comprise a "steady state" amid Trump's chaotic presidency are "unsung heroes" resisting his worst instincts and overreaches. 13 Thus, it is no surprise that more and more Americans are concerned: a 2018 poll found that 74 percent of Americans feel a group of officials arc able to control government policy without accountability.

    In an era when Americans can see on reality television how their fish are caught, meals arc cooked, and businesses are financed, it is strange that few have ever heard the voice of an NSC staffer. The Executive Office Building is not the only building out of reach: most of the government taxpayers' fund is hard, and getting harder, to see. With bigger security blockades, longer waits on declassification, and more severe crackdowns on leaks, it is no wonder some Americans have taken to assuming the worst of their public servants.

    The American people need to know the NSC's war stories if for no other reason than each makes clear that there is no organized deep state in Washington. If one existed, there would be little need for the NSC to fight so hard to coordinate the government's various players and parts. However, this history also makes plain that though the United States can overcome bad decisions and survive military disasters, a belief in a deep state is a threat to the NSC and so much more.

    ... ... ...

    Each member of the NSC staff needs to remember that their growing, unaccountable power has helped give evidence to the worries about a deep state. Although no one in Washington gives up influence voluntarily, the staff, even its warriors, need to remember it is not just what they fight for but whether a fight is necessary at all. Shortcuts and squabbles may make sense when every second feels like it counts, but the best public servants do what is necessary for the president even as they protect, for years to come, the health of the institutions and the very democracy in which they serve. As hard as that can be to remember when the clock in the Oval Office is ticking, doing things the right way is even more important than the latest crises, war, or meeting with the president.

    ... ... ...

    ... Too many in Washington, including at the Executive Office Building, have forgotten that public service is a privilege that bestows on them great responsibility. Although the NSC has long justified its actions in the name of national security, the means with which its members have pursued that objective have made for a more aggressive American way of war, a more fractious Washington, and more conspiracies about government.

    Centuries ago, Plato argued that civilians must hope for warriors who could be trusted to be both "gentle to their own and cruel to their enemies." At a time when many doubt government and those who serve in it, the NSC staff s history demonstrates just what White House warriors arc capable of. The question is for what and for whom they will fight in the years and wars ahead.

    ... ... ...

    The legendary British double agent Kim Philby wrote: "just because a document is a document it has a glamour which tempts the reader to give it more weight than it deserves An hour of a serious discussion with a trustworthy informant is often more valuable than any number of original documents. Of course, it is best to have both."

    Alexandra Jones , September 15, 2019

    The Untold History of the NSC

    A must-read for anyone interested in history or foreign policy. Gans pulls back the curtain on arguably the most powerful yet opaque body in foreign policy decision-making, the National Security Council. Each chapter recounts a different administration -- as told through the work of an NSC staffer. Through these beautifully-written portraits of largely unknown staffers, Gans reveals the chilling, outsized influence of this small, unelected institution on American war and peace. From this perspective, even the policy success stories seem more luck than skill -- leaving readers concerned about the NSC's continued unchecked power.

    [Feb 03, 2020] Trump, Netanyahu Dictate Terms of Palestinian Surrender to Israel

    | theintercept.com

    Flanked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but no Palestinian leader, President Donald Trump unveiled “a vision for peace” in the Middle East on Tuesday which permits Israel to annex much of the occupied West Bank immediately, offering the Palestinians only local control in isolated Bantustans surrounded by Israeli territory.

    As many Israeli political observers noted, the timing of the announcement, just hours after Netanyahu was indicted on corruption charges in Jerusalem, looked like an effort to boost the prime minister’s bid to win reelection in March, his best hope for avoiding prison.

    A US President facing impeachment and an Israeli Prime Minister indicted for corruption, leading an interim minority government, are about to announce a plan to solve the conflict with the Palestinians, without any Palestinian present. Unbelievable farce. — Anshel Pfeffer (@AnshelPfeffer) January 28, 2020

    The release of the 180-page plan — which was drafted by aides to Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and an old family friend of Netanyahu — was staged as a celebration, and acted as a dual campaign rally, with the American president and the Israeli prime minister boasting of all they had achieved for Israel to a room filled with far-right supporters of the Jewish state, including business magnate Sheldon Adelson, the Republican and Likud megadonor who spent millions of dollars to elect both leaders.

    Trump, who intervened in a previous Israeli election campaign on Netanyahu’s behalf — by recognizing Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights last year — gave the embattled prime minister a podium at the White House to detail conditions imposed on the Palestinians which sounded like terms of surrender.

    To start with, Netanyahu said, the Palestinians would be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, cede the entire Jordan Valley, disarm Hamas, and abandon hope for both the return of refugees who fled homes in what is now Israel and for a capital in Jerusalem’s Old City.

    pic.twitter.com/RmKVVWh9F2 — Benjamin Netanyahu (@netanyahu) January 28, 2020

    “Your peace plan offers the Palestinians a pathway to a future state,” Netanyahu told Trump. “I know that it may take them a very long time to reach the end of that path; it may even take them a very long time to get to the beginning of that path,” he added.

    ??????: ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ?????? ?????. ?????? ????? ?????? > https://t.co/uNITb9vblN pic.twitter.com/JR6LzrKTz8 — ?????? (@NewsChannelIL) January 28, 2020

    In fact, as Crisis Group analyst Tareq Baconi observed, “The plan sets out parameters that are impossible for Palestinians to accept, and effectively provides Israel with a blueprint to sustain the one-state reality that exists on the ground.”

    That sentiment was echoed by Hagai El-Ad, the executive director of B’Tselem, an Israeli rights group that monitors the occupation. “What the Palestinians are being ‘offered’ now is not rights or a state, but a permanent state of Apartheid. No amount of marketing can erase this disgrace or blur the facts,” El-Ad wrote. “The reality on the ground is already one of full Israeli control over the entire area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and everyone living in it. It is a reality of one, inherently undemocratic, state.”

    The plan was rejected by Palestinian rights activists in the region and abroad.

    Netanyahu logic: If Palestinians agree to land theft, annexation, no refugee return, subjugation and no means of defense, Israel will negotiate with us. — Diana Buttu (@dianabuttu) January 28, 2020

    They want to put us in permanent, high-tech cages and call it peace. #DealOfTheCentury #ApartheidDeal #Palestine #PalestinianFreedom — Noura Erakat (@4noura) January 28, 2020

    CNN interviews Palestinian human rights attorney on the Trump plan. "This is not a deal, this is a plan to consolidate Israel's colonial takings." @4noura https://t.co/dFfNuKnH08 — Mairav Zonszein ??? ??????? (@MairavZ) January 29, 2020

    The US is a colonial state trying to broker a "solution" which favors another settler-colonial state. The only message is, commit enough massacres, create enough judicial procedures, create enough diplomatic jargon, and all is allowed. #Palestine #TrumpDeal — ???? ???????? (@MariamBarghouti) January 28, 2020

    #Palestinian refugees in Lebanon's Ein El-Helweh camp who have been deprived of a homeland for years protest and say NO to the so-called #DealOfTheCentury and tell Trump: Our fate is not for you to decide. pic.twitter.com/Y7We93iIRA — We Are Not Numbers #Gaza (@WeAreNotNumbers) January 28, 2020

    “An impeached and bigoted President works in tandem with a criminally indicted and racist Prime Minister to perpetuate the reality of apartheid and subjugation,” Jamil Dakwar, a Palestinian American who was born in Haifa and now leads the ACLU’s human rights program, wrote on Twitter. “Palestinians will not be coerced to give up their human rights to live as free and equal human beings.”

    Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator for the Palestine Liberation Organization, described the plan delivered by Kushner to Trump as “100 percent the ideas I personally heard many times from Netanyahu and his negotiators. I can assure you that the American so-called peace team have only copied and pasted Netanyahu’s and the settlers’ councils plan.”

    Amid accusations that his plan was largely based on concepts and details dictated by Netanyahu, Kushner cast himself as an independent expert on the conflict in an interview with Sky News Arabia on Tuesday. “I’ve been studying this now for three years,” he told Sky News Arabia, “I’ve read 25 books on the subject.”

    At least one of those books appears to have been written by Netanyahu, however. As Dylan Williams of the liberal, pro-Israel group J Street pointed out, Kushner’s plan appeared at one point to borrow language from one of the Israeli prime minister’s books.

    On the left, an excerpt from Netanyahu’s book “A Durable Peace.”

    On the right, the Trump/Kushner “peace” proposal.

    I don’t know an academic integrity panel at any university that would let this fly. pic.twitter.com/NvgzWOsL2r — Dylan Williams (@dylanotes) January 29, 2020

    In a subsequent interview, Kushner even seemed unaware of the length of the proposal released by his team, referring to the 181-page document as “an over 80-page proposal.” He appeared to be echoing an error made by Trump during his prepared remarks the White House ceremony when he said, “our plan is 80 pages.”

    Speaking in Ramallah, at a rare gathering of leaders of the major Palestinian factions, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said that the proposal was not “the deal of the century,” as Trump and the Israelis described it, but “the slap of the century.”

    “Trump, Jerusalem is not for sale. Our rights are not for sale. Your conspiracy deal will not pass,” Abbas said, in comments reported by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

    While Trump said that Palestinians could eventually have a capital in Jerusalem, the plan suggested that this would be outside of the city, in a neighborhood close to, but not in the city, as Telegraph correspondent Raf Sanchez pointed out.

    IMPORTANT: the detail plan of the plan confirms that Palestinians will not get any part of Jerusalem inside the security barrier.

    That means they get a few far-flung eastern neighbourhoods as their capital but none of the Old City or areas where most East Jerusalemites live. pic.twitter.com/ZL6AJVJ565 — Raf Sanchez (@rafsanchez) January 28, 2020

    Within hours of the plan’s release, Netanyahu said that his government would move on Sunday to formally annex the 131 Jewish-only settlements in the occupied West Bank, all of which are illegal under international law, as well as the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea. The plan’s map of the newly expanded Greater Israel, and the fragmented Palestinian enclaves, were shared on Twitter by Trump.

    ??? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???????. pic.twitter.com/CFuYwwjSso — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2020

    In his remarks, Trump said that Netanyahu had “authorized the release of a conceptual map” showing the contours of the land to be annexed, and their two governments would soon form a joint committee “to convert the conceptual map into a more detailed and calibrated rendering so that recognition can be immediately achieved.”

    Because the Israeli settlement blocs, which are home to more than 400,000 settlers, are stitched together with a network of roads and checkpoints that restrict the freedom of movement of Palestinians, the territory Trump said his plan “allocated” for a future Palestinian state would exist only as a series of enclaves inside Israel.

    As Ben Silverstein of J Street, a liberal pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington, explained, the “conceptual map” included in the plan gave an “appearance of contiguity” that facts on the ground would make impossible.

    This map is verrrrry generously shaded to give appearance of contiguity.

    100% final map will appear closer to archipelago map on the right. pic.twitter.com/pLcaWak4R2 — Ben Silverstein (@bensilverstein) January 28, 2020

    Yousef Munayyer, who directs the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, noted on Twitter that the reality would look a lot more like what the French illustrator Julien Bousac sketched out more than a decade ago for Le Monde Diplomatique to show the impossibility of a functioning state compromised of enclaves.

    The West Bank Archipelago pic.twitter.com/FBIeOKmnUd — (((YousefMunayyer))) (@YousefMunayyer) January 28, 2020

    Daniel Seidemann, director of Terrestrial Jerusalem, pointed out that previous administrations had privately accepted the erosion of Palestinian hopes for a contiguous state.

    Perspective, for those who think this started with Trump.

    This is a slide/map, I presented to a senior official in the Obama White House. His chilling response: you’re probably right, but the sun still will rise, birds sing, and life will go on.

    Sound familiar? Look familiar? pic.twitter.com/mJ2ZQPzgef — Daniel Seidemann (@DanielSeidemann) January 28, 2020

    Shibley Telhami, a scholar of the region at the University of Maryland, pointed to another disturbing detail of the plan: a provision to further ethnically cleanse Israel by revoking the citizenship of Palestinians living in one section of the state, and forcing that region to merge with those parts of the West Bank not annexed by Israel.

    One shocking feature of Trump's "American" plan is that Israel would carve out Israeli-Arab towns in the "Triangle" region, strip them of Israeli citizenship, and place them under Palestinian jurisdiction -- something majorities oppose. Un-American Plan. https://t.co/eQNFzRLvdG pic.twitter.com/bn143hVSRr — Shibley Telhami (@ShibleyTelhami) January 28, 2020

    Trump’s plan was denounced by both Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, among the leading contenders for the Democratic nomination to challenge Trump for the presidency. While Sanders called the plan “unacceptable,” Warren went further, promising to “oppose unilateral annexation in any form — and reverse any policy that supports it.”

    Trump's "peace plan" is a rubber stamp for annexation and offers no chance for a real Palestinian state. Releasing a plan without negotiating with Palestinians isn't diplomacy, it's a sham. I will oppose unilateral annexation in any form—and reverse any policy that supports it. — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) January 28, 2020

    It must end the Israeli occupation and enable Palestinian self-determination in an independent state of their own alongside a secure Israel. Trump's so-called 'peace deal' doesn't come close, and will only perpetuate the conflict. It is unacceptable. — Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) January 28, 2020

    Former Vice President Joe Biden, a staunch defender of Netanyahu who reportedly frustrated Obama administration efforts to confront him over the occupation, did not immediately comment on the plan.

    Politico reported on Tuesday that the Democratic Majority for Israel, a pro-Israel super PAC led by the Democratic pollster Mark Mellman, plans to run an attack ad in Iowa this week “that raises concerns about Bernie Sanders’ 2019 heart attack and calls him too liberal to beat President Donald Trump.”

    As I reported earlier this year, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the conservative pro-Israel lobbying group known as AIPAC, paid for a pressure campaign on Facebook targeting Sanders, who would be the first Jewish president of the United States — one who has expressed concern for Palestinian rights and described Netanyahu as “a racist.”

    [Feb 02, 2020] The most interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story

    Highly recommended!
    Edited for clarity
    Notable quotes:
    "... Currently they can wrap themselves into constitution defenders flag and be pretty safe from any criticism. Because charges that Schiff brought to the floor are bogus, and probably were created out of thin air by NSC plotters. Senators on both sides understand this, creating a classic Kabuki theater environment. ..."
    "... In any case, it is clear that Trump is just a marionette of more powerful forces behind him, and his impeachment does not means much, if those forces are untouchable. Impeachment Kabuki theatre is an attempt of restoration of NSC (read neocons) favored foreign policy from which Trump slightly deviated. ..."
    Feb 02, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    likbez , February 2, 2020 10:40 pm

    Far more interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story.

    Potential whistleblower (actually CIA informant) was from NSC as were Fiona Hill, Alex Vindman and a couple of other major Ukrainegate players.

    In this NSC coup d'état against the President or what ? About earlier role of NSC see

    https://off-guardian.org/2020/02/01/secret-wars-forgotten-betrayals-global-tyranny-who-is-really-in-charge-of-the-u-s-military/

    As for "evil republican senators", they would be viewed as evil by electorate if and only only if actual crimes of Trump regime like Douma false flag, Suleimani assassination (actually here Trump was set up By Bolton and Pompeo) and other were discussed.

    Currently they can wrap themselves into constitution defenders flag and be pretty safe from any criticism. Because charges that Schiff brought to the floor are bogus, and probably were created out of thin air by NSC plotters. Senators on both sides understand this, creating a classic Kabuki theater environment.

    Both sides are afraid to discuss real issues, real Trump regime crimes.

    Schiff proved to be patently inept in this whole story even taking into account limitations put by Kabuki theater on him, and in case of Trump acquittal *which is "highly probable" borrowing May government terminology in Skripals case :-) to resign would be a honest thing for him to do.

    Assuming that he has some honestly left. Which is highly doubtful with statements like:

    "The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there so we don't have to fight Russia here."

    And

    "More than 15,000 Ukrainians have died fighting Russian forces and their proxies. 15,000."

    Actually it was the USA interference in Ukraine (aka Nulandgate) that killed 15K Ukrainians, mainly Donbas residents and badly trained recruits of the Ukrainian army sent to fight them, as well as volunteers of paramilitary "death squads" like Asov battalion financed by oligarch Igor Kolomyskiy

    In any case, it is clear that Trump is just a marionette of more powerful forces behind him, and his impeachment does not means much, if those forces are untouchable. Impeachment Kabuki theatre is an attempt of restoration of NSC (read neocons) favored foreign policy from which Trump slightly deviated.

    [Feb 02, 2020] This neocon snake Pompeo

    Feb 02, 2020 | newrepublic.com

    Then Trump ordered the drone strike on Soleimani, drastically escalating a simmering conflict between Iran and the United States. All of a sudden the roles were reversed, with Bolton praising the president and asserting that Soleimani's death was " the first step to regime change in Tehran ." A chorus of neocons rushed to second his praise: Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA officer and prominent Never Trumper, lauded Trump's intestinal fortitude, while Representative Liz Cheney hailed Trump's "decisive action." It was Carlson who was left sputtering about the forever wars. "Washington has wanted war with Iran for decades," Carlson said . "They still want it now. Let's hope they haven't finally gotten it."

    [Feb 02, 2020] The US calls for apartheid and ethnic cleansing in its primary ME protectorate

    Feb 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    paul , Feb 2 2020 16:56 utc | 5

    The US calls for apartheid and ethnic cleansing in its primary ME protectorate. Global powers supposedly concerned with uphholding international law smile knowingly and applaud gently. Yes it was always going to end this way. Mmmmmm. Might Makes Right. Mmmmmmm. That alone is international law. Mmmmmmm. More champagne? More vodka?

    Walter , Feb 2 2020 17:01 utc | 7

    Paul, I'm not so sure. Dynamite has a two state solution.

    Might is not a static circumstance, and neither are the interests of the numerous "voters"- those with power.

    The one thing that never stops, despite the pols' great effort, is Time.

    I try to keep in mind that world affairs is perhaps similar to a multi-body problem with an insane Alice-in Wonderland mathematics.

    [Feb 02, 2020] Kushner's "peace plan" is just another real estate scam

    Feb 02, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    "The Arab League rejected Trump's plan, saying in a communique it would not lead to a just peace deal and adding it will not cooperate with the United States to execute the plan.
    The ministers affirmed Palestinian rights to create a future state based on the land captured and occupied by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war, with East Jerusalem as capital, the final communique said.
    Israeli officials expressed hope Saturday that the League's rejection could bring the U.S. closer to green-lighting unilateral annexation of parts of the West Bank, in light of the fact that Jared Kushner opposed immediate steps toward annexation because he thought the Arab League might support the plan. " Haaretz

    ----------

    Well, pilgrims, the truth is that nobody in the States who matters gives a damn about what happens to the Palestinians and it was always thus. Kushner's "peace plan" is just another real estate scam. pl

    https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/palestinians/arab-foreign-ministers-meet-in-cairo-to-discuss-trump-s-mideast-plan-1.8475812

    Posted at 01:24 PM in Israel , Middle East , Palestine | Permalink | Comments (1) But..but...Jared said that he had read 25 books on the conflict!!!

    King Salman called Abbas to reassure him of Saudi support on the agreed upon outline drawn up long ago. MbS thinks otherwise, and he is the one who really runs Saudi policy.

    Posted by: Jane | 01 February 2020 at 02:50 PM

    [Feb 02, 2020] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/opinion/middle-east-peace-plan.html

    Feb 02, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

    Opinion Every Time Palestinians Say 'No,' They Lose Things rarely go well for those who try to live history backward.
    By Bret Stephens SimonEsposito 2 days ago ( Edited ) Functionally, this proposition makes no sense. The imbalance of power is so great that Palestinians couldn't stop any amount more of encroachment on the occupied territories. So why would the encroachment stop at this arbitrary point?

    It's absurd to think that the settler movement is going to be stopped by the proposed four-year freeze. (I view that as a booby-trap planted by Likud - and they surely must be expecting a fair chance of defeat - to make the next government quickly use up its political capital fighting media-savvy settlers.) Max21c 3 days ago If these things are decided on the basis of "might makes right" then the position of the PRC to take sea-space in the South China Sea is acceptable to Washington and its supporters? Similar per a variety of other territorial disputes around the globe? Max21c 3 days ago ( Edited ) Prior UN Resolutions hold precedent until such times as the parties themselves agree upon a mutually agreed solution.

    Modus Vivendi not Modus Dictatum! Max21c 3 days ago The United States Senate ratified the United Nations Charter on July 28, 1945. Article 6 of the Constitution of the United States maintains that "all treaties made...under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land..." The United States is a signatory to the UN Charter and it has passed the US Senate. There is no Treaty which transfers the Golan Heights to the State of Israel. There is no Treaty which transfers Palestinian lands to the State of Israel. The Constitution of the United States of America does not construct, create, convey, or confer the power or authority to the President of the United States of America to change the borders of other peoples, lands, or countries. An American President can say whatever they want as to policy. The United States is not necessarily bound by such situ per statements, proclamations, declarations, pronouncements, announcements, dictatum, et cetera. There is a well known and existing mechanism for the exchange of lands and territories between nation states via diplomacy, diplomatic negotiations, resolution of the dispute by treaty, or genuine negotiations & diplomacy and resolution in accordance with International law, et cetera. An American President holds exclusive authority over foreign policy and diplomacy with the exception of passage of a treaty by the US Senate. The existing mechanisms and ways of International Law and diplomacy are brought into American Constitutionality by way of the Supremacy Clause, thus, there exists a potential exclusive instance of an exclusion to a President's authority per differentiation between the "policy" of an Administration or pronouncements thereof and the "laws of the land." Thus one could well surmise that the United States is on an ongoing basis bound by the laws of the land rather than the pro tempore policy statements in this instance. An American President is neither a Global Sovereign nor King of the World. Border disputes generally remain the domain between the corresponding sovereigns, sovereign nations, or bordering parties. The role of the United States as a third party is generally limited to diplomacy. The United States can assist, facilitate, or provide guidance on the potential resolution of the dispute. The United States can propose solutions, fanciful or not, well meaning or not, realistic or reasonable or not, reasoned or not, genuine or not, bonne foi or not, yet it cannot impose such solutions unless the agreement of the parties be gained according to the fashion, manner, and mechanisms that are well know and existing under International law and well recognized within the realm of the community of nations and the diplomacy therein. zbarski 3 days ago ( Edited ) UN resolutions are not treaties. The former are generic opinions or recommendations, which have no legal effect, unless accepted by a sovereign.

    Treaties, unlike UN resolutions, become laws of the land once ratified by a sovereign's parliament.

    So, all your UN resolutions on Israel and fake Palestinians are pieces of toilet paper. Max21c 3 days ago It's none of Washington's business. They should let the parties themselves work out an agreement if they can. It's not up to Washingtonians to impose a solution.

    If the parties cannot come to a settlement at this time then the status quo prior borders remain. Washington should abide by the existing regimen and provisions thereof until or if the parties themselves alter such by mutual agreement. The borders can only be changed by agreement between the parties.

    There are long established, longstanding, and well know mechanisms for discussing and possibly resolving territorial disputes and those pathways and methods should be followed by both sides.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report zbarski 3 days ago ( Edited ) First, you come up with bogus definitions. Next, when I take apart those, you respond: it's none of Washington's business. LOL.

    The fact stands: UN resolutions are generic/advisory/opinions. The have no legal significance, unless accepted by a sovereign. Last time I checked, Israel has not accepted any... .

    Having said that, I agree with you that Washington should leave the issue to the parties. It is the US, which has been preventing Israel from resolving the territorial dispute. Any other country would have resolved the issue long time ago. That Israel can't or won't do it, is a crime against the Jews.

    Think of this: what would the US do, if let's say, Quebec had separated from the rest of Canada and then started launching rockets at Vermont? Hint: Quebec would have been nuked...
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Max21c 3 days ago Washington should abide by International law and respect the existing UN resolution per lands/borders until such time as the parties themselves resolve the situ.

    The US should not become a party to the dispute.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report GLA 3 days ago you are right. the United States is not a world government. Our government can make recommendations and offer support. that is it.

    The United Nations is an organization formed to promote peace among nations. It is not a world government, it is not a legislative body, and it has no lawmaking authority.
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report GLA 3 days ago Palestinian leadership should develop and present their own peace plan. That is their right. Palestinian leadership should hold town hall meetings in Gaza and the West Bank on their peace plan and give voice to every Palestinian. That is their right. Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Mike_71 2 days ago But the Palestinian leaderships of both Hamas and Fatah have never done that, as allowing the average Palestinian to participate in nominating and electing their own candidates and publicly voicing their own opinions, particularly when they contradict those of the leadership, is no more tolerated in the Palestinian Territories, than it is in the Peoples' Republic of China. The leadership of the soon to be dissolved "Palestinian Authority" will be by "President for Life" Mahmoud Abbas, now in the 16th year of the four year term to which he was elected in 2005. Likewise, Ismael Haniyeh, Yoyo Sinwar and others in Hamas, have never faced a Palestinian electorate at the ballot box.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Orville 3 days ago One thing Mr. Mackey leaves out is the US's treating the Golan Heights as Israeli territory, rather than occupied Syrian territory. Mike_71 2 days ago While International Law unequivocally condemns initiating wars of aggression for the purpose of acquiring territory, it is silent when the victim of that aggression retains land captured in a "defensive war of necessity." Thus, like the Soviet Union retaining land captured in the "Great Patriotic War" until 1991, Israel's retaining the Golan Heights, likewise captured in a "defensive war of necessity," the 1967 "Six Day War," does not violate International Law. As the victorious belligerent in a "defensive war of necessity," Israel may retain the Golan Heights until such time as possession is modified by treaty. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uti_possidetis
    (Latin: As you possess, you may possess henceforth) Note that the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula, likewise captured by Israel in the "Six Day War," was returned to Egyptian sovereignty after an agreement was negotiated and after a withdrawal period, pursuant to the terms of the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement. As in the instance of the Egyptian Sinai, the Golan Heights could be returned to Syria, were the Syrians willing to negotiate a peace agreement with Israel.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report xochtl 3 days ago

    Settler colonialism, white supremacy, and the "special relationship" between the U.S. and Israel 10 March 2015
    Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions/From our Staff and Members/Voices of JVP February 24, 2015 talk by JVP Deputy Director Cecilie Surasky at Portland State University from Environmental Destruction and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement: a panel on international resistance

    1. The 'special relationship' between Israel and the United States is rooted in our common national narratives and founding mythology. 2. Settler colonialism and white supremacy is the right, holistic frame with which to understand Israel and Palestine, as well as the U.S. -- it helps us understand what we're really struggling against, and holds us accountable to ways we may inadvertently be serving the status quo. 3. If the basis of the special relationship is a common narrative of 'manifest destiny', and the feelings of superiority over others that it engenders, then to resist we must counter that narrative. One question we often ask ourselves is why Americans so easily accept the dominant Israeli narrative without question, and I think the answer is obvious. We have literally been primed, for generations, by our own national narrative ttler colonialism, white supremacy, and the "special relationship" between the U.S. and Israel We all are well versed with language about the "special relationship" between Israel and the United States. And in fact, it is real. Over time, no other country in the world has been the recipient of more economic and military aid from the U.S., or from any other country for that matter. Furthermore, many of us hold a power analysis which says that the key to ending Israel's ongoing occupation and oppression of Palestinians is ending that unconditional special relationship -- so understanding the roots of this relationship is not idle curiosity. It's essential if we are to ever achieve a just and durable peace, for both peoples. There are many reasons for this so-called special relationship, and it has evolved over time, but I think the foundational aspects of it relate to remarkably similar national narratives which shape, in an ongoing way, how we see and understand ourselves and our actions as representatives of a collective national identity -- how we justify killing, extraction, land theft, and so on, in transcendent moral terms. We have mythical national narratives of two settler colonial peoples, who both believe that we have a divine mandate, to settle a so-called empty or savage land, and make it into a kind of heaven on earth. Ethnic cleansing, even genocide -- these are all divinely justified. Israel is to be a light unto nations. What would become the United States, a kind of heaven on earth. Both peoples believe ourselves to be somehow specially chosen by God. As Donald E. Pease, Dartmouth literary critic wrote about this land, in The New American Exceptionalism: "Virgin Land" depopulated the landscape in the imaginary register so that it might be perceived as unoccupied territory in actuality. The metaphor turned the landscape into a blank page, understood to be the ideal surface onto which to inscribe the history of the nation's Manifest Destiny". "Virgin Land narratives placed the movement of the national people across the continent in opposition to the savagery attributed to the wilderness as well as the native peoples who figured as indistinguishable from the wilderness, and, later, it fostered an understanding of the campaign of Indian removal as nature's beneficent choice of the Anglo-American settlers over the native inhabitants for its cultivation " Sounds familiar doesn't it? The Zionist version is the famous slogan -- a Land with No People for a People with No Land. And Israel's "miraculous" military victories have always been seen as signs of God the adjudicator's hand. Of course, that notion of heaven on earth, or A Light Unto Nations, is predicated on a system of racial and ethnic superiority -- who gets to be human and "civilized", and who is subhuman. Who exists, and who is invisible or must be disappeared. Who can claim the land, and who has no rights to it. And the fundamental root of all that we like to call the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is this essential fact -- it was a land with people. And specifically, the wrong people who by definition could not be part of an ethnic exclusivist state. Remember that the original violence of the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of the land of Palestinians, continues on a daily basis to this day. The process of colonization never stopped. Although today we call them "facts on the ground", and Palestinians are talked about, not as equal human beings with the same hopes aspirations and rights to freedom, but rather as a "demographic threat."

    European Colonialism and White Supremacy What makes this issue so complex and deeply challenging is that early European Zionists, who first started coming to Palestine in the late 1800s, had themselves suffered from a profoundly long history of fierce Christian European anti-Jewish oppression -- forced conversions, ghettoes, pogroms, institutional repression and discrimination and so on, which as we know, culminated in the horrific genocide during World War II, the Holocaust or Shoah. They believed the only solution to this history was for Jews to have a state of their own. But while all genocides and acts of violence have their unique features, and they must be studied and understood, I believe it is critical to situate the genocide of Jews, in a broader context -- and not as an exceptional, metaphysically unique event. Some 6 million Jews died, but another 5 million people were also targeted for annihilation because they were considered less than human, including the Roma people, gays, Poles, Ukrainians and so on, totaling 11 million. In Poland alone, Nazis murdered 3 million ethnic Poles and 3 million Polish Jews. Had they not been stopped, those numbers would have been infinitely higher in their march to the East. Further, to state the obvious, the Holocaust did not mark the sudden and inexplicable birth of the white European capacity to commit genocide. No one knows this better than the indigenous people of this continent, or the descendants of enslaved Africans. Or the people of the Congo, where 10 million died under the rule of King Leopold of Belgium. I could go on. I could also go on about U.S. Empire. In Europe, while the specifics looked different, one could be Jewish or a colonized subject and be called an insect, vermin, an animal -- subhuman. In other words, it is important that we situate what is happening in Israel and Palestine today, and the work we must do in the US for justice, as part of a lengthy historical cascade of impacts rooted in European colonialism, white racism, US Empire, anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish oppression, corporate greed and so on. I'm underscoring this because similarly, even though we understand that historic Palestine was colonized by the British, there is a tendency to also remove the story of Israel and Palestine from broader historical contexts and the sweep of history and to see it as somehow utterly unique, beyond time, and as saying something essential about Jews and the Arab world especially. The extreme and bigoted versions of this essentializing view is: -- you either believe that the only story that matters is that the world and especially Muslims hate Jews and always will, that the hatred of Jews is an essential part of humanity -- or you believe that Jews are exceptionally powerful and devious, and have managed to manipulate an otherwise beneficent and inherently just and reasonable U.S. foreign policy establishment into doing wrong by the Palestinians. Talk about divide and conquer. If we believe either of these stories, all of us who are natural allies in the struggle against corporate greed, the destruction of our world, systemic racism and settler colonialism and so on -- we remain divided from each other. We literally can't build a unified and strong movement. We create a circular firing range, and we unwittingly become the agents of that which we should be fighting against. Which is why understanding our struggles as connected -- which is what's happening on campuses throughout the U.S. and world today -- is so unbelievably powerful, and threatening. I have seen these views manifest in the movement for Palestinian liberation: sometimes people chant "2-4-6-8 Israel is a racist state", or decry the disappearance 400 Palestinian villages when Israel was created, without even a hint of irony or self-reflection that one is literally standing on land built on slavery and the (still happening) genocide of indigenous peoples. In some cases, we have seen Israeli human rights advocates try to emphasize the growth of Israeli racism by comparing it unfavorably to racism here, where presumably, they suggest we have mostly won the battle. All of that said, what is also absolutely clear is that Early Zionist leaders were simultaneously both the victims of, and willing agents of white supremacist colonialism. In fact, they made their case quite explicitly to British colonizers who they knew did not want Jews at home but who did want to maintain colonial designs on the Middle East. As the Israeli analyst Tom Segev reports in One Palestine Complete: "The Jewish state in Palestine, Theodor Herzl wrote, would be Europe's bulwark against Asia. "We can be the vanguard of culture against barbarianism." And about early Zionist leader and writer Max Nordau: "..Max Nordau believed the Jews would not lose their European culture in Palestine and adopt Asia's inferior culture, just as the British had not become Indians in America, Hottentots in Africa, or Papuans in Australia. "We will endeavor to do in the Near East what the English did in India. It is our intention to come to Palestine as the representatives of culture and to take the moral borders of Europe to the Euphrates River." Early Zionist leaders actually appealed to the anti-Jewish hatred of European colonizers, making the case that helping to create a Jewish state elsewhere was a win-win because it would help them get rid of the Jews. Theodore Herzl wrote, "the anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies" And they internalized the same white supremacist hierarchy which had been used against them. The "new Jew" was blond, blue eyed, healthy and muscular, vs. the shtetl Jew who was small, dark, hunched over, religious, an embarrassment. I want to recognize there is sensitivity about even raising this issue- but this has nothing to do with Jews specifically and everything to do with human beings. Virtually every colonized or oppressed group internalizes the eyes, in some way, of their oppressors, as Frantz Fanon wrote about so eloquently. Women can be the agents of the patriarchy, blacks can internalize white supremacy, LGBT people can internalize transphobia and homo-phobia. In a sense, we're all colonized in some way. This shouldn't be a controversial observation, it's just fact about what it means to be human. The fact remains that many early European Zionist leaders' disdain for the local Arab populations was only matched by their disdain for other Jews from the Middle East. The founder of Zionist Revisionism, precursor to Likud, Zev Jabotinsky wrote: "We Jews have nothing in common with what is called the 'Orient,' thank God. To the extent that our uneducated masses have ancient spiritual traditions and laws that call the Orient, they must be weaned away from them, and this is in fact what we are doing in every decent school, what life itself is doing with great success. We are going in Palestine, first for our national convenience, [second] to sweep out thoroughly all traces of the 'Oriental soul.' As for the [Palestinians] Arabs in Palestine, what they do is their business; but if we can do them a favor, it is to help them liberate themselves from the Orient.'" (One Palestine Complete, Tom Segev) And the effort was "successful". As Arab Jewish scholar Ella Shohat has written, "in a generation or two, millennia of rooted Oriental civilization, unified even in its diversity," had been wiped out. Jews from Arab countries were forced to choose between being either Arab or Jewish, but they could not be both. ( Ella Shohat, "Sephardim in Israel: Zionism from the Standpoint of its Jewish Victims," Social Text, No.19/20 (1988)) Of course those Jews who survived had the right to their homes after they were ripped from their homes, and their world literally obliterated -- but it wasn't Palestinians or the Arab world that owed them reparations or a homeland. It was Europe. But thanks to settler colonialism, it has been Palestinians who have been forced to pay the price ever since.
    The Manipulation of Jewish Trauma I can't underscore enough the extent to which the profound Jewish trauma over genocide and oppression has been manipulated and deliberately retriggered over and over by people and institutions who have instrumentalized Jewish suffering to justify Israeli expansionism and repression. Everyone from Abraham Foxman and the Anti-Defamation League to the Simon Wiesenthal Center perform this role effectively through a steady-drip of "the world hates us" iconography, statements, and Boy-Cries-Wolf overwrought hysteria, which of course cheapens the charge of anti-Semitism. I grew up with a tante who would literally shake with rage when she described her childhood in Poland. My father didn't talk about his family story, so as kids we didn't understand. But later we learned the horror stories, realized it was our own extended families in those pictures of pogroms and prisoner camps, and we internalized the sense of perpetual fear. After the war, Jews did not talk about the Holocaust, there was much shame. But it eventually became our central access to our identity, thanks in no small part to efforts to give the young nation of Israel a perpetual free pass. And in the process, it was given a kind of mystical exceptionalism. Rather than teaching us lessons about systems of oppression, it became the horror to end all horrors, which cast a shadow over history's other horrors. Many children would be taught to ask, not Why throughout history groups of people hated other groups? or Why do governments oppress people? We were taught to ask instead, "Why does everyone hate the Jews? " Further, from a U.S. Empire perspective, it makes sense that the Shoah is commemorated in a massive museum on the Mall in DC, while there is still no national slavery museum or indigenous genocide museum. Better to point the finger elsewhere, while shoring up our sense of collective superiority as heroic Americans. To this day, Jews and our aspirations for freedom have been unwittingly made a tool of Empire- the struggle against anti-Jewish hatred has been coopted into the effort to demonize the Arab and Muslim world in order to justify US wars and intervention- for profit. And of course, to justify Israeli expansionism. When Netanyahu encourages Danish or French Jews to mass migrate to Israel -- he's cynically exploiting real fear and trauma to push his expansionist agenda -- new immigrants will be sent to settlements, not inside 67 borders. Similarly, classic anti-Semitism itself is a tool of Empire– Jews are scapegoated as a 'secret cabal' that controls the world's finances, conveniently distracting potential resistance movements from the actual corporate, government and military sources of global economic exploitation and control. In the end, if we don't fight this, we all lose. Rather than joining together to resist power, we instead end up fighting each other over manufactured hatreds and bigotries. Narrative If the root of this special relationship is not as much AIPAC and money, as much as it is our national narrative and the feelings it engenders -- and an unquestioning belief that Israel has an infinite right to expand onto other people's land, then it is narrative that holds unconditional support in place, and our resistance must also be at the level of narrative. So let's start with ourselves. All of us in this movement have to decolonize our minds -- and it is a constant process, we stumble all the time -- because we are fighting the very air we breathe. But here is our work: We must insist that Israel does not get a free pass, and nor do I as a white Jew, or anyone else, only because of a personal or collective history of oppression. We all have to be held accountable to the power we hold when we hold it, like anyone else, like any other country. Because it is not only possible but likely that many of us will hold multiple positions at one time- marginalized in some ways and possessing power and privilege in others. We have to be mindful of Orientialism on the left: just as the left has projected on, fetishized, related transactionally to many native peoples, it happens in this movement. There is a tendency to want all Palestinians to either be helpless grandmothers waiting for a Great White Hope (heroic in the streets activists) -- or Che Guevera. Well , Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank are also sports fans, software developers, and capitalists. Freedom is freedom. The Palestinian struggle is not simply an excuse for us to reflect on how moral the Jewish or Christian or leftist or (fill in the blank) people are. It is not the surface on which we write our own story, or a mirror that interests us only because it shows us our own reflection. We have to simply be allies who love, yes love, our Palestinian friends and colleagues enough to simply say: Tell me how I can support you? Knowing, also, with humility, that in the past, present or future–we too need support in our struggles. And for those of us given a platform because we are "safe" because we are white or Jewish, for example, we have to know when to shut up, and cede the platform to our Palestinian friends. Most important, rather than framing the story of Palestinian struggle for freedom and justice in a historical and political vacuum -- as many do -- and as a unique and exceptional story, for example, about a reasonable US foreign policy hijacked by an all-powerful Jewish lobby, we should understand it as part of a much longer unfolding of Christian European Colonialism, greed, and white supremacy -- that continues to this day and operates everywhere. Narrative's power is not just about knowing facts, it is a means to exert psychological control, and to dampen the will to resist. Palestinian American scholar Steven Salaita wrote in The Holy Land in Transit, Colonialism and the Quest for Canaan: Ethnic cleansing is the removal of humans in order that narratives will disappear .a blinding of the national imagination so colonial history will be removed along with the dispossessed. It is only through ethnic cleansing that the average American can accept without nagging guilt the history of her nation, which is known to all but decontextualized from its present " The same is true for the Jewish settler, living in a home that once belonged to a Palestinian family. Salaita goes on: "It is a mistake to conceptualize ethnic cleansing simply as a physical act. It's importance lies in its psychological power." Which is why in the US, we are waging this struggle at the level of narrative. And why universities are on the very front line of this battle. As even Zev Jabotinsky wrote about years ago, this is war of attrition. Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) campaigns create a moral crisis, and replace either a conspiracy of total silence, or the monologue of the Israeli narrative masquerading as a dialogue -- and it places the Palestinian story right where it belongs -- up front. One of the beautiful elements of the BDS movement is the way that is has challenged the engineered invisibility of the Palestinian narrative and analysis -- divestment and boycott votes demand real communication, revealing that what often passes for dialogue, is monologue. We have to reprogram our neural pathways -- through social media, through BDS campaigns, through reinterpreting, re-covering and re-writing our own religious and cultural language. Campuses are the front line, but so are artists and religious practitioners and community-builders. And we must rewrite our own language. We began with a slogan -- a land with no people for a people with no land. But now I'll leave with a new slogan to help us tell a new story -- a rewriting we have embraced in my community of Jews -- all of us unwavering in our belief that never again means never again for all people, unwavering in our pursuit of justice and freedom unwavering in our belief that Jewish liberation and Palestinian liberation are not opposed, but intertwined That new slogan is: All people are chosen, All land is holy. NationalismSettler-Colonialism Jewish Voice for Peace is a national member-driven organization dedicated to a U.S. foreign policy based on peace, human rights, and respect for international law.

    Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report Wnt 3 days ago I still would like to see an actual graph: Palestinian land area as a function of time, number of Palestinians as a function of time. We should be able to extrapolate not if but when a final solution to the crisis becomes inevitable.
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report lchabin 3 days ago Stop whining. The Palestinians haven't accepted any offers of peace. They could have had their own state a long time ago. Wake up folks; a number of Arab states seem just fine with this peace proposal. Israel isn't going anywhere, and they get it.

    @Richard Pierce - so much bile and ignorance. Yes, Israel is a democracy, and Iran not a democracy. It takes a lot of hate and/or ignorance not to understand that. Seeing a few of your posts, my money is on hate. Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report zbarski 3 days ago

    It takes a lot of hate and/or ignorance not to understand that
    It also takes a few missing chromosomes.
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Richard_Pearce 3 days ago No, just takes being old enough to remember when folks used your sort of 'reasoning' to call the White State in South Africa an 'island of civilisation amongst savages', the Shah the 'beloved leader' of Iran, Saddam Hussein AND Osama bin Laden good guys, Nelson Mandela a radical terrorist, and spent a few years dealing with guys who's survival often came down to their ability to lie to others convincingly, and who's ability to look in the mirror and see something they didn't hate came down to their ability to reject reality even more fervently than supporters of the Israeli regime have to, street addicts.
    That results in a finely honed male cow patty detector, as well as robust immunity to bullying and peer pressure.

    Respect 4 Reply Share link Copy Report Richard_Pearce 4 days ago If you present the American population a choice between the 'one state solution' (one country 'between the river and the sea' with equal rights for all) and the 'two state solution' (which requires voiding the Geneva Conventions, the UN charter, close to a dozen human rights laws, barring the ICC and ICJ from exerting jurisdiction, and the rewriting of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and 2002 Rome Statute of the ICC) they're about equally split.
    Guess what happens if you tell them the truth, that the 'two state solution' is a fraud that will never be accepted and therefore is not an option.
    If you guessed that the vast majority of the American population chooses to support the same solution that the 'terrorist' Hamas and the 'genocidal' Iranian government support.

    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Mike_71 2 days ago If you prefer the "one state solution" with equal rights for all citizens living between the river and the sea, then Israel has been that "single state" since June 10, 1967, when it prevailed in a "defensive war of necessity" against Palestinian and Arab invaders. Since that time, the Palestinians have rejected all Israeli offers for negotiating for peace and a state of their own, which Palestinians rejected in 1967, 2000, 2008 and more recently. There is no "Apartheid," or "ethnic cleansing" in Israel, despite Palestinian efforts to impose them there. In an "Orwellian Inversion (war is peace, poverty is plenty and ignorance is strength)," Palestinians seek to impose a 20% minority "Arab Supremacist Apartheid Regime," over a 75 % Israeli Jewish majority population. How that would differ from the former "Apartheid South Africa," once ruled by a 10% minority "White Supremacist Apartheid Regime" over a 90% Black and Mixed Race African majority, they refuse to explain, or justify. Just as South Africans are entitled to democratic and majority rule in their nation, Israelis are entitled to those same rights in theirs.

    Have you ever studied the founding documents of both the P.L.O. and Hamas? Both call for the "ethic cleansing"of Jews from their ancestral homeland in which they were indigenous for over 3,000 years. Read them here:

    The P.L.O Charter: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/plocov.asp

    The Hamas Covenant: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

    In rejecting the two state solution, as provided under UNGAR 181 in 1947 and numerous Israeli offers since, the Palestinians have forfeited all rights to statehood, thus by default making Israel the "one state" solution, with equal rights for all Israeli citizens, Arabs, Christians, Druze and Jews. Preferring to remaining stateless to having a state of their own, Palestinians have sealed their fate. There is no "two state" solution, as Palestinians never wanted it.

    Palestinian "rejectionists" seek to accomplish by propaganda that which they are unable to achieve through war and terrorism. The Palestinians violated the 1949 Geneva Conventions during the "Second Intifada" in deliberately targeting and killing over 1,000 Israeli civilians in bus and cafe bombings in acts defined as "War Crimes, " violating the human rights of Israeli citizens. The I.C.C has no jurisdiction, as Israel was never a party to the Rome Statute creating the Court, and "Palestine" is not a "state," as required to become a signatory to the Rome Statute. Having failed in all other means, including war and terrorism, Palestinians are grasping at straws to try to achieve statehood, which they can only obtain through direct negotiation with Israel. The conflict will continue until such time as Palestinians adopt the requirements of UNSCR 242 and 338, which require:

    "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every state in the area and the right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from fear or acts of force."

    The Palestinian demand for a "one state" solution has backfired on them, making Israel the "one state" solution, while making themselves stateless, impoverished and isolated in a rapidly changing Middle-East.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Richard_Pearce 4 days ago If the propasals the US has put forward are 'peace plans', then this https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/79/278375333_dfc587574c.jpg is brain surgery. Dysnomia 4 days ago The U.S. itself is a settler-colonial state that only exists because of its genocide of Native Americans. U.S. victory over the native population, and U.S. control from the Atlantic to the Pacific, is now a fait accompli, and that's exactly what they want for Israel. Max21c 4 days ago ( Edited )

    Lebensraum. Definition: the territory that a state or nation believes is needed for its natural development. The German concept of Lebensraum comprises policies and practices of settler colonialism which proliferated in Germany from the 1890s to the 1940s.
    Strikingly ironic that they seeks lands in the East!
    Irredentism: a policy of advocating the restoration to a country of any territory formerly belonging to it.
    Both sides are wrong. Both sides yield to or harbor irredentist notions, practices, policies, factions, groups, and beliefs. Some Israelis want to practice irredentist beliefs and restore the lands of ancient Israel or its Kingdoms. Other Israelis want to harken back to their heyday when they had freshly captured Gaza and the West Bank and return to or retain some form of the status quo that prevailed from winning battles. There are various other groups that want some degree or flavor of irredentism. Some Palestinians want the Israelis gone entirely and an end to the Israeli state. Some want a return to earlier borders. The "right of return" is in itself a form of irredentism as those seeking are essentially seeking political power and control within Israel.
    Trump plan is dead. It's DOA DEAD. It's double DOA dead! Hopefully, it won't lead to too many deaths or be the cause of future warfare or wars.
    There are alternatives. There are alternate paths. Peace can be built in the region. Just not this way and likely not now. There are good and better pathways that can at some point be explored in the search for peace! mgr 4 days ago Sounds not unlike the way the neocons of the Bush admin plunged headlong and chest out into the briar patch, er, Iraq, where grateful citizens waited eagerly to throw flowers on these conquering heroes as they marched on to Iran. Castles made of sand... Toots 4 days ago OK, we know how the Palestinians will feel about this, but what cards do they hold? 4 days ago The only card the Palestinians hold is resistance.

    Maybe it's time for the PLO to withdraw from the Oslo Accords, and the PA to be dissolved. Everyone knows that the PA/Fatah is a collaborationist organization. The illusion of Palestinian sovereignty in PA-"controlled" areas is too useful to Israel. It lets them pretend they don't really exercise full control from the river to the sea and deny they're running an apartheid system. Let there be no illusions.
    Respect 4 Reply Share link Copy Report Richard_Pearce 4 days ago The same one that the Bantus held.
    It's only one card, undervalued, dismissed, at least when genuine (The forgeries, ironically, are over valued and loudly proclaimed, but their fake nature causes them to turn to dust) but durable enough to wear all the others to dust over time.

    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report REALITYCHECK 4 days ago They did the experiment on giving land back to Islamists in Gaza and Lebanon. They wont be making that mistake again. Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report TheManj 4 days ago Spare us your tired lies. Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report Krasny 4 days ago Women and homosexuals are protected in Israel...if you care about them.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report PerfunctoryUsername 4 days ago Pfft. Just yell "SQUIRREL" and save everyone some time. Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Art 4 days ago

    They did the experiment on giving land back to Islamists in Gaza and Lebanon.
    Gaza? The world's largest open-air prison?! HA! Some "give back," with thousands of innocents assassinated while peacefully protesting their captivity.

    You condone murder and assassination.
    Respect 5 Reply Share link Copy Report REALITYCHECK 4 days ago Progs and other useful idiots, you are going to have to learn to live with Islamist control of only 99.8% of the land area of the Middle East and 51 Islamic Apartheid nations. Need a hankey? Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report TheManj 4 days ago 'Hankey' is the Hebrew spelling, I suppose. Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Orville 3 days ago Fortunately, the Islamists only control Saudi Arabia, portions of Libya, chunks of Afghanistan and Pakistan, various segments of Africa, and (thanks to Syria, Iran, and Russia) a declining amount of Syria. Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report ljg500 4 days ago Disgusting. It is tragic that a nation forged under the horrific tragedy of the Holocaust, should now bow to virulent racism- obliterating its legitimacy in exchange for puerile and cynical politics. Respect 7 Reply Share link Copy Report Alex 3 days ago NOW?? LEGITIMACY??

    It's time to wake up and realize that Zionism has always been an extremely racist, supremacist, violent form of European settler-colonialism which is exactly the reason this creation never had any legitimacy at all.

    The Zionist plans for the violent colonisation and ethnical cleansing of Palestine from it's native population have been made decades before Hitler even appeared on the political stage. Actually the reason that Zionists and Nazis cooperated so well, were their common believe that members of a self-declared master race are free to steal and murder sub-humans.

    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Mike_71 2 days ago Zionism is the National Liberation Movement of the Jewish people. Like the Vietnamese National Liberation Front, it has had to fight racist, colonialist, supremacist, bigoted and Imperialist forces to win national independence. In the pre-state periods of their respective national struggles, in 1946 David Ben Gurion and Ho Chi Minh met in Paris, where the two founders of their respective nations developed an affinity, with Ho offering Ben Gurion a Jewish homeland in Vietnam. Ben Gurion declined Ho's offer, as the indigenous Jewish homeland was in the Middle-East, not Vietnam. In 1975, Vietnam finally won its national struggle and since a border clash with China in 1979, Vietnam has not engaged in war since. For Israel, however, the "armed struggle" continues!

    Don't believe this historic meeting of two revolutionary founders? Google Israeli-Vietnamese relations and learn about the Gallil (assault rifle) factory Israel built in Vietnam and negotiations for joint Israeli-Vietnamese army training and operations. You will be amazed and educated!
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report CraigPurcell 4 days ago Do I detect foreign influence (like Trump) in the campaign against Sanders ? With Facebook ads and all the rest. No doubt business would pay many to get rid of Sanders. Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report SimonEsposito 4 days ago One point that maybe isn't being brought out adequately is that this deal won't satisfy Jewish nationalists either. This is one of those situations where everything you need to assess the situation is obvious from just one wide-scale map. Nationalists will still see this as a territorial threat at the heart of Israel, and the use of settlements as an unofficial security strategy will continue.

    And, in any case, the allocated Palestinian territories are not just broken into dozens of islands, they will be subject to years of being negotiated down even further. No-one will stop the settler movement continuing to encroach in the meantime, especially because the territories shown have no stable logic or legal viability to them. (The last remotely viable territorial unit is 1967.)

    So it's actually a plan to formalize and stabilize the gains made so far in the making of one single territorial state in Palestine. Rinse and repeat.

    I like that Elizabeth Warren is emphatically supporting the legitimate status quo - for the purposes of the two-state solution - of international law and traditional US policy. It should not be for outsiders to impose the one-state solution, which is what Western far-right politicians know they are doing. This is opening Israel-Palestine up to the hazards of historic struggle, and the potential for great suffering, to decide the character of its one state. What they are unleashing is no more likely to end in ethno-religious apartheid (as some on the far right explicitly want) than it is in an inclusive constitutional democracy.

    For all practical purposes, by this plan, there will soon be two equal and coterminous sovereignties in the lands from the Jordan River to the sea (including Gaza and Golan). No involuntary shrinking of Palestinian sovereignty beyond 1967 borders has moral force, and in fact the unilateral abrogation of 1967 leaves the entire territory constitutionally up for grabs.

    Progressive politics in the US can at least start articulating the characteristics of a state that deserves a continuing security guarantee from the US, or at least continuing aid. For me it's common rights for all the inhabitants of Israel-Palestine, under a constitution built on the spirit of Israel's declaration of independence, based on a belief that the best friends the Jews and non-Jews of Palestine could ever have in the world are each other.
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report SimonEsposito 4 days ago One of the most difficult problems in a dignified constitutional settlement, where international help would be needed (for Jordan and Lebanon as well as Israel-Palestine) - and where international aid needs to be directed - is to agree on some form of negotiated-down right of return, with just compensation. The Kushner-Netanyahu plan appears to simply cancel the right altogether, unilaterally. Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Art 4 days ago

    What they are unleashing is no more likely to end in ethno-religious apartheid...
    I hate to have to break it to you but unfortunately Israel is already an Apartheid state.
    Respect 4 Reply Share link Copy Report SimonEsposito 2 days ago I guess, to be really precise about it, what it is now is "proto-apartheid". It's a piecemeal collection of segregationist measures, failures to administer existing law justly, and the perverse outcomes of repeated decisions by the US to veto efforts to uphold the 1967 "reference standard". The Kushner-Netanyahu plan is a scheme to break 1967 forever, legitimize settlements, and create a permanent apartheid structure embedded in international law.

    The only way two states can work is on the basis of 1967. And actually I don't see why a Palestine on pre-1967 borders couldn't include a large Jewish minority, in a mirror image of Israel. So when Elizabeth Warren re-affirmed the "reference standard" without equivocation, there's an subtle radicalism there. The settler movement can't finally extinguish 1967, as a theoretical option at least, unless it forms a Jewish majority in the occupied territories.

    To be generous to the administrations that used the veto, I think it was originally intended to protect the ability of the Zionist left to win the case for two states in friendship. The veto protection should really have been ended before 2000. On the other hand, it was always likely that the Israeli far right would win the political contest.

    So, however this works out, the best anyone can do is allow Israel-Palestine's future to be the result of self-determination by its inhabitants. That doesn't exclude boycotts and sanctions, though, or the suspension of various forms of aid, because that is the sovereign decision of other polities about who is "fit and proper" to deal with. (Conciliation within the South African system was still fundamentally self determined, despite the steady pressure of boycotts.)

    It remains the case that Jewish nationalists are the ones with the deep choice to make: accept the unalterable reality of 1967 for the foundation of two states, or open up a long struggle to determine the character (and level of isolation) of one state with its competing sovereignties. Respect Reply Share link Copy Report Mike_71 2 days ago But, the Palestinians seek to impose a minority dominated "Arab Supremacist Apartheid Regime," over a conquered and subjugated Jewish majority population, which would then be subjected to "ethnic cleansing." As the Palestinians have unequivocally rejected the concept of "two states for two peoples," in favor of a "single state," the question thus becomes will it become a "majority ruled" state, as 75% of the Israeli population is Jewish, or a "minority ruled" state, like the former "White Supremacist Apartheid Regime" of South Africa, as only 20% of the Israeli population is Arab. It becomes more an issue of minority rule vs majority rule, as opposed to "Apartheid vs "Non-Apartheid." Minority ruled racist regimes, such as the former "White Supremacist Apartheid Regime" of South Africa, tend to be unstable and subject to violent internal revolts, such as those led by Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress, as would a minority ruled "Arab Supremacist Apartheid Regime. Minority ruled racist "Apartheid Regimes," like that of South Africa, cannot last when subjected to repeated popular revolt!
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Art 2 days ago It's the zionist Jewish colonialists who have - or should have - no rights to the place whatsoever.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Mike_71 22 hours ago Even the United Nations, today hardly a rampant pro-Zionist organization, recognized the rights of the Jews to a significant part of their ancestral homeland in 1947, pursuant to UNGAR 181, the UN partitioned the former British Mandate into two proposed states, "one Arab and one Jewish." The Israelis accepted the proposal, while the Palestinians, joined by the Arab League member nations, rejected it by declaring war on Israel. They lost that war, as well as the subsequent 1967 "Six Day War," resulting in the capture of all West Bank land, for which the Palestinians refused to negotiate peace to obtain its return. See my discussion concerning about the difference between "wars of aggression" for the purpose of territorial expansion and territory captured in the course of "defensive wars of necessity" and the comparison of land captured by the U.S.S.R. in the "Great Patriotic War" and Israel in the 1967 "Six Day War." If the Palestinian - Israeli Conflict is strictly a "one to the exclusion of the other" proposition, and a compromise through direct negotiations is not an option, as specified in the founding documents of both the P.L.O. and Hamas, then Israel is entitled to the entirety of the land captured in the 1967 "Six Day War," a "defensive war of necessity." One does not "colonize," or "occupy" one's ancestral homeland of over 3,000 years. "From the river to the sea, Palestine will never be!"

    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Art 59 minutes ago Ardent Zionists like you will never acknowledge anything like justice for Palestinians.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report The_Wolf 4 days ago Wow, only 7 comments. Guess there are other things going on. Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Toots 4 days ago You're smart. You think just like me. Respect Reply Share link Copy Report Art 4 days ago I guess the zionists are busy on other comment boards. But don't worry, they'll come back here in a day or so.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Mona 4 days ago "How I How Israel exploits Holocaust Remembrance Day" https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/how-israel-exploits-holocaust-remembrance-day

    Surviving Auschwitz
    Esther Bejarano, now in her nineties, was sent to Auschwitz as a girl. There she played in the women's orchestra – as long as the camp commanders were happy, she and her fellow musicians avoided being murdered. She is still a performing musician today. Her parents Rudolf and Margarethe Loewy did not survive. They were murdered by the Nazis in Lithuania in 1941. After the war, Bejarano emigrated to Palestine, but eventually returned to her native Germany, disgusted at how Palestinians were being treated. She says that even she – an Auschwitz survivor – has been labeled an anti-Semite for speaking out for Palestinian rights. Yet she is not deterred. Refusing to be silent, she told The Electronic Intifada in 2018 that Israel's government is "fascist" and that she supports BDS – boycott, divestment and sanctions – if it helps challenge Israel's persecution of Palestinians. Jacques Bude, a retired professor from Belgium, survived the Nazi genocide because he was saved by farmers who hid him as a child. His parents were deported and murdered in Auschwitz. After the war, he was sent to Palestine against his will as a Zionist settler. "I really felt in exile," Bude told The Electronic Intifada in 2017. "I was destroyed by German militarism and I came to Israel and again encountered militarism." He returned home to Belgium. The Nazi ideology "led to the genocide of the Jews, the Roma, the Sinti, homosexuals and the mentally disabled," Bude said. "It is the worst dehumanization that happened until today. It was industrial and they went all the way. They dehumanized them completely, to a pile of hair and gold." "So the duty of memory is to say never more dehumanization," Bude added. "If we say 'never again,' we have to decide where we stand and condemn it." And that includes condemning Israel's crimes: "I am against ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, which is a form of dehumanization." Hajo Meyer was deported to Auschwitz in 1944. After surviving the war, he returned to the Netherlands where he had a long career as a physicist. He was also a fierce anti-Zionist and staunch supporter of Palestinian rights. That made him a target of relentless smears from Israel's supporters, even after his death in 2014. But he too was never silenced by such attacks. In his last interview, which was with The Electronic Intifada, Meyer urged Palestinians "not to give up their fight," even if that meant armed struggle. The lesson Israel wants us to take from the Holocaust is that it has the right to do whatever it wants to Palestinians with impunity in the name of protecting Jews. But the right lesson to take – and it is more urgent than ever – is that all of us must stand together against racial and religious hatred and oppression, no matter who its victims are.
    Respect 14 Reply Share link Copy Report Art 4 days ago Good excerpt.
    Respect Reply Share link Copy Report AtheistInChief 4 days ago The control over Palestinians is SO complete, that Palestinians don't have rights not only to the water under their feet, but also to the earth's magnetic field that passes through the air (lest they make electricity out of it). But you'd have to read Max Blumenthal to find that kind of stuff out, definitely not the apartheid complicit NYTimes.
    Respect 4 Reply Share link Copy Report Andrew_Nichols 4 days ago The Euros will mumble some indignation ...and then pursue business as usual...beating up on Palestinian rights like BDS , selling Irrael more weapons anmd inviting them to join NATO training. ...all to be expected from cowardly vassals. Respect 6 Reply Share link Copy Report photosymbiosis 4 days ago If anything demonstrates the sheer scale of propagandistic media control in the United States and around the world, it's the Israel story. It's just the same old tedious boilerplate narrative, from the 'left' to the 'right'. The glaring issues just are not allowed to get any air. These issues are:

    1) Israel has a 'covert' nuclear weapons program, and under the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it's a violation of the treaty to for a nuclear signatory to that treaty to assist another country with their nuclear weapons program ; the USA's NNSA (DOE division) has close relations with the Israeli nuclear weapons program. There are other treaty violations with other countries relating to the Pakistani and Indian nuclear weapons programs as well, but the silence on Israel is pretty hilarious. They've got over 100 ballistic-weapon capable boosted fission-fusion nukes with working delivery systems! Yes, they're not going to give them up, fine, but at least make them admit to it in international forums. And about that $4 billion a year in U.S. taxpayer money... why do they need that, again?

    2) Israel and Saudi Arabia, the closest US Empire allies, are not democracies. You cannot claim to be a democracy while giving special rights to one religious or ethnic group , and the only way Israel would become a real democracy is to grant the Arab Muslim population the same rights as the European Jewish population has, on immigration, land ownership, and yes, that means giving all the human beings in the West Bank and Gaza Strip voting rights in the Israeli national elections, I mean that's just common sense. Okay, you then have parity between Jews and Muslims, who cares, it's like the Protestants vs. the Catholics in medieval Europe, and ditto for the Sunnis and Shias in Saudi Arabia. Why are we involved with these backwards feudal assholes anyway? We don't need the oil, we don't need the money, we don't need the entangling relationships with dictators and crooks, just get out already.

    Even from the whole imperial perspective, I mean, the whole rationale for being involved in the region was control of the oil and the money from the oil, and since the world is getting off oil, the Middle East will soon become as economically attractive as sub-Saharan Africa, so why not just limit involvement to arms-length diplomacy and let the maniacs try to solve their own problems themselves?

    As far as all the anti-Semitism claims, how about a proposal to spend oh, $2 billion year rebuilding all the synagogues the Nazis destroyed across Europe instead, and cut off all aid to Israel? Now, that would really piss off the real anti-Semites, wouldn't it?
    Respect 13 Reply Share link Copy Report Art 4 days ago Yep, good post.
    Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report Wnt 4 days ago A cute idea, but technically rebuilding synagogues would be establishment of religion, whether inside or outside the U.S., and therefore unconstitutional. But our politicians don't seem to have any problem with not being racist against blacks while not giving them money, and they were impoverished by our version of nazis, not nazis from europe.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report The_Wolf 4 days ago ( Edited ) Establishment of religion is an American constitutional precept. Not sure about European countries in which the Nazis destroyed synagogues.

    Good points otherwise, and in fact the Nazis from Europe actually looked to the segregated American south and Jim Crow as a model for how to impose their racist ideology on the people of Germany and the countries they were to conquer in Europe.

    Bill Moyers: You begin the book with a meeting of Nazi Germany's leading lawyers on June 5, 1934, which happens, coincidentally, to be the day I was born. James Whitman: Oh boy, you were born under a dark star.

    [...snip...]

    Moyers: A stenographer was present to record a verbatim transcript of that meeting. Reading that transcript you discovered a startling fact. Whitman: Yes -- the fact is that they began by discussing American law. The minister of justice presented a memorandum on American race law that included a great deal of detailed discussion of the laws of American states. American law continued to be a principle topic throughout that meeting and beyond. It's also a startling fact that the most radical lawyers in that meeting -- the most vicious among the lawyers present -- were the most enthusiastic for the American example.

    https://billmoyers.com/story/hitler-america-nazi-race-law/

    Respect 3 Reply Share link Copy Report mgr 4 days ago ( Edited ) photo: Well put. Slightly related, I understand that Tom Perez, in addition to lobbyists, added a number of Israeli-firsters to the DNC nomination council for the 2020 election.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report Wnt 4 days ago I think the acid test of any such plan would be an airport. I mean, in theory "Palestine", the nation, can have an international airport, right? Somebody can get on board a plane in Russia, land in "Palestine", walk through Customs & Immigration, make a claim for asylum or citizenship at the courthouse, right?

    I think it would be interesting if the Palestinians would try this, just to see whether the Israelis have the courage to shoot down civilian airplanes on regular flights in the name of stopping terrorism. I have little doubt they would disappoint ... my expectations, that is.

    Any word on whether the "peace" plan explicitly would ban this?
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report zbarski 4 days ago ( Edited ) If they do, you can take all commenters above with you (take Mackey + Electronik Intifada too) and go on that flight. If the plane doesn't get shut down, you could walk through the customs and ask for polutical asylum.

    Indeed, it'll be interesting to see...
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Wnt 4 days ago With millions of their own citizens locked on the wrong side of a border for almost a century simply because they fled to avoid a war zone for a little while, I think Palestine's immigration agency, if they ever get one, is going to have quite a backlog to clear before they get around to any actual foreigners.
    Respect 1 Reply Share link Copy Report zbarski 3 days ago

    if they ever get one, is going to have quite a backlog to clear before they get around to any actual foreigners.
    Ahh. What a pity. Such a deserving crowd above.
    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report Alex 3 days ago What happened to Gaza Airport? Donor nations invested millions, it operated about 2 years under israeli control and then the Judeonazis bombed it....

    There is absolutely no reason to believe, that anything invested/built in Kushner's "Palestinian State" would meet a better fate.

    Respect 2 Reply Share link Copy Report zbarski 3 days ago Still recovering from your:

    The story that Iran shut down the Ukranian airliner is BS. Iran is perfectly capable of distinguishing between civilian and military objects.

    [Feb 02, 2020] Out of sync with the world, the US has returned to the ashes and lawlessness of 1945.

    Feb 02, 2020 | sputniknews.com

    US Vice President Mike Pence used his speech at the Holocaust memorial last week to bang a war drum at Iran. It revealed a deplorable lack of dignity and understanding of the event, despite Pence's efforts to appear solemn. But not only that. It showed too how out of touch the United States – at least its political leadership – is with the rest of the world and a growing collective concern among others to ensure international peace.

    Maybe that's why Britain's Prince Charles appeared to snub Pence, declining to shake his hand while attending the commemoration of the Holocaust and 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. Charles warmly greeted other dignitaries, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and France's Emmanuel Macron. It was curious how he blanked Pence.

    But there again, maybe not that curious. Pence and the Trump administration seem to be hellbent on starting a war with Iran. A war that would engulf the entire Middle East and possibly ignite a world conflagration.

    Washington's wanton threats of violence against Iran and its recent assassination of one of Iran's top military leaders stands as a shocking repudiation of international law and the UN Charter. It's the kind of conduct more akin to an organized crime syndicate rather than a supposedly democratic state.

    The UN Charter was created in 1945 in the aftermath of the Second World War precisely to prevent repetition of the worst conflagration in history and all its barbaric crimes, including the Nazi Holocaust. Over 5o million people died in that war, and nearly half of them belonged to the Soviet Union.

    The prevention of war is surely the most onerous responsibility of the UN Security Council. Yet the United States is the one power that routinely ignores international law and the UN Charter to unilaterally launch wars or military interventions. Washington's threats against Iran are, unfortunately, nothing new. This is standard American practice.

    Britain's Prince Charles speaks to U.S. Vice President Mike Pence during the World Holocaust Forum © REUTERS / RONEN ZVULUN Snub or No Snub? Netizens Laugh Off Prince Charles' Explanation After Not Shaking Hands With Mike Pence When world leaders addressed the Holocaust memorial held in Israel last Wednesday it was obvious – albeit implicitly – from their words that the US has become an isolated rogue state owing to its inveterate belligerence.

    Putin, Macron, Prince Charles and German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier all invoked the need for collective commitment to international law and peace. They implied that such a commitment was the best way to honour those who were killed in the Holocaust and the Second World War; the surest way to prevent the barbarity of fascist ideology and persecution ever to be repeated.

    Those speakers one after another denounced the ideology of demonizing others which fuels hatred and wars. How pertinent is that to the way Washington routinely demonizes other nations and foreign leaders?

    In sharp contrast, when the American vice president made his address, his apparent solemnity was contradicted by a blood-curdling call to arms against Iran , which he accused of being the "leading state purveyor of anti-semitism". Pence urged the whole world "to stand strong against the Islamic Republic of Iran", spoken as if he was spitting out the words like venom.

    There is little doubt that Pence was formulating a rationale for military confrontation with Iran. That has been the consistent policy of the Trump administration over the past three years.

    It was no surprise that Pence's speech was in sync with the usual bellicose rhetoric from Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu towards Iran. But what was arresting was just how out of sync Pence and the Trump administration are with the rest the world.

    US Vice President Mike Pence speaking at the fifth World Holocaust Forum, 23 January 2020. © Sputnik / Alexey Nikolsky World War II for Dummies? US Vice President Hails Liberators of Auschwitz Death Camp, 'Forgets' to Name Them It was an odious spectacle to see Pence don a somber face as he talked about the victims of the Holocaust , while his own state wages war against any foreign nation whenever and wherever Washington deems. At an event that was supposed to reflect on the horror and evil of war, Pence showed he had no understanding or self-awareness.

    That's what is perplexing about many American politicians. They seem ignorant of history (Pence gave no acknowledgement to the Soviet soldiers who liberated Auschwitz and other death camps); they are consumed by self-righteousness and arrogance like a puritan preacher without an ounce of humanity.

    Anyone who reflects on the horror of war would surely be advocating the respect of and adherence to international law, commitment to peace, and the earnest pursuit of dialogue and partnership among nations.

    Russia's Putin has repeatedly called for the members of the UN Security Council to urgently get together in order to guarantee a multilateral commitment to peace. Putin has also repeatedly appealed to the United States to get serious about negotiating renewed arms control treaties. Washington has ignored those latter calls.

    Participants in the Jewish event of Holocaust remembrance walk in the former Nazi German World War II death camp of Auschwitz shortly before the start of the annual March of the Living in which young Jews from around the world walk from Auschwitz to Birkenau in memory of the 6 million Holocaust victims, in Oswiecim, Poland, Thursday, May 2, 2019 © AP Photo / Czarek Sokolowski If One's Outraged by Words About Polish Anti-Semitism, One Should Delve Into History – Ex-Polish MP The American national myth, evolved over recent decades since 1945, views itself as "exceptional" from all other nations. That translates as the US presuming to be "superior" and "above the law that others are bound by".

    Mike Pence's menacing words and attitude at the Holocaust memorial showed a disturbing and pernicious disconnect with the need for preventing war and genocide. It was a disgraceful dishonouring of victims.

    Out of sync with the world, the US has returned to the ashes and lawlessness of 1945.

    [Feb 01, 2020] The Real John Bolton - CounterPunch.org

    Notable quotes:
    "... Washington Post, ..."
    "... Bolton targeted every arms control and disarmament agreement over the past several decades, and played a major role in abrogating two of the most significant ones. As an arms control official in the Bush administration, he lobbied successfully for the abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. As soon as he joined the Trump administration, he went after the Intermediate-Nuclear Forces Treaty, which was abrogated in 2018. He criticized the Nunn-Lugar agreement in the 1990s, which played a key role in the denuclearization of former Soviet republics, and maligned the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons as well as the Iran nuclear accord. He helped to derail the Biological Weapons Conference in Geneva in 2001. ..."
    Feb 01, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    It isn't enough for the corporate media to praise John Bolton for his timely manuscript that confirms Donald Trump's explicit linkage between military aid to Ukraine and investigations into his political foe Joe Biden. As a result, the media have made John Bolton a "man of principle," according to the Washington Post, and a fearless infighter for the "sovereignty of the United States." Writing in the Post , Kathleen Parker notes that Bolton isn't motivated by the money he will earn from his book (in the neighborhood of $2 million), but that he is far more interested in "saving his legacy." Perhaps this is a good time to examine that legacy.

    Bolton, who used student deferments and service in the Maryland National Guard to avoid serving in Vietnam, is a classic Chicken Hawk. He supported the Vietnam War and continues to support the war in Iraq. Bolton endorsed preemptive military strikes in North Korea and Iran in recent years, and lobbied for regime change in Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. When George W. Bush declared an "axis of evil" in 2002 consisting of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, Bolton added an equally bizarre axis of Cuba, Libya, and Syria.

    When Bolton occupied official positions at the Department of State and the United Nations, he regularly ignored assessments of the intelligence community in order to make false arguments regarding weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Cuba and Syria in order to promote the use of force. When serving as President Bush's Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and Disarmament, Bolton ran his own intelligence program, issuing white papers on WMD that lacked support within the intelligence community. He used his own reports to testify to congressional committees in 2002 in effort to justify the use of military force against Iraq.

    Bolton presented misinformation to the Congress on a Cuban biological weapons program. When the Central Intelligence Agency challenged the accuracy of Bolton's information in 2003, he was forced to cancel a similar briefing on Syria. In a briefing to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2005, the former chief of intelligence at the Department of State, Carl Ford, referred to Bolton as a "serial abuser" in his efforts to pressure intelligence analysts. Ford testified that he had "never seen anybody quite like Secretary Bolton in terms of the way he abuses his power and authority with little people."

    The hearings in 2005 included a statement from a whistleblower, a former contractor at the Agency for International Development, who accused Bolton of using inflammatory language and even throwing objects at her. The whistleblower told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff that Bolton made derogatory remarks about her sexual orientation and weight among other improprieties. The critical testimony against Bolton meant that the Republican-led Foreign Relations Committee couldn't confirm his appointment as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. President Bush made Bolton a recess appointment, which he later regretted.

    The United Nations, after all, was an ironic assignment for Bolton, who has been a strong critic of the UN and most international organizations throughout his career because they infringed on the "sovereignty of the United States." In 1994, he stated there was no such thing as the United Nations, but there is an international community that "can be led by the only real power left in the world," the United States. Bolton stated that the "Secretariat Building in New York has 38 stories," and that if it "lost ten stories, it wouldn't make any difference."

    Bolton said the "happiest moment" in his political career was when the United States pulled out of the International Criminal Court. Years later, he told the Federalist Society that Bush's withdrawal from the UN's Rome Statute, which created the ICC, was "one of my proudest achievements."

    Bolton targeted every arms control and disarmament agreement over the past several decades, and played a major role in abrogating two of the most significant ones. As an arms control official in the Bush administration, he lobbied successfully for the abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. As soon as he joined the Trump administration, he went after the Intermediate-Nuclear Forces Treaty, which was abrogated in 2018. He criticized the Nunn-Lugar agreement in the 1990s, which played a key role in the denuclearization of former Soviet republics, and maligned the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons as well as the Iran nuclear accord. He helped to derail the Biological Weapons Conference in Geneva in 2001.

    U.S. efforts at diplomatic reconciliation have drawn Bolton's ire. The two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian situation as well as Richard Nixon's one-China policy have been particular targets. He is also a frequent critic of the European Union, and a passionate supporter of Brexit. From 2013 to 2018, he was the chairman of the Gatestone Institute, a well-known anti-Muslim organization. He was the director of the Project for the New American Century, which led the campaign for the use of force against Iraq. The fact that he was a protege of former senator Jesse Helms should come as no surprise.

    It is useful to have Bolton's testimony at the climactic moment in the current impeachment trial, but it should't blind us to his deceit and disinformation over his thirty years of opposition to U.S. international diplomacy. As an assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration, he fought against reparations to Japanese-Americans who had been held in internment camps during World War II. Two secretaries of state, Colin Powell and Condi Rice, have accused Bolton with holding back important information on important international issues, and Bolton did his best to sabotage Powell's efforts to pursue negotiations with North Korea. Bolton had a hand in the disinformation campaign against Iraq in the run-up to the U.S. invasion of 2003. The legacy of John Bolton is well established; his manuscript will not alter this legacy. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Melvin Goodman Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins University. A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA and National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism . and A Whistleblower at the CIA . His most recent book is "American Carnage: The Wars of Donald Trump" (Opus Publishing), and he is the author of the forthcoming "The Dangerous National Security State" (2020)." Goodman is the national security columnist for counterpunch.org .

    [Feb 01, 2020] Even After the Afghanistan Papers, the Washington 'Blob' Still Embraces Staying Forever

    Feb 01, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    Even After the Afghanistan Papers, the Washington 'Blob' Still Embraces Staying Forever January 30, 2020 Written by
    Mark Perry
    Share Copy Print

    James Clad, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asia, remembers the exact moment, back in 2001, when he learned that the U.S. had invaded Afghanistan. As chance would have it, he was in a meeting with a dozen or so South Asia experts at the Council on Foreign Relations. "It was in early October of 2001," he recalls, "and word came that U.S. warplanes had attacked three Afghan cities. Well, you could have heard a pin drop. I looked around the room and everyone was studying their shoes. And I thought, 'well, this isn't going to work.' And we all knew it. All of us. This was going to be a morass."

    Clad wasn't alone in his thinking. In the wake of the December 9 publication of the Afghanistan Papers in the Washington Post, retired CIA officer Robert Grenier, who ran covert operations in support of the 2001 U.S. intervention, reflected on the papers' key finding – that U.S. officials lied about the 18-year campaign, hiding "unmistakable evidence" that the Afghan war had become unwinnable. "Frankly, it strikes me as weird that people should only be waking up to this now," he told me. "The Washington Post series doesn't convey anything which those who've been watching with even moderate attention should long since have understood."

    Which may be why the papers, comprising some 2000-plus pages of interviews with generals, diplomats, aid workers and Afghan officials conducted by SIGAR, the Pentagon's Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, landed with a thud – "a bombshell that has yet to explode," as one commenter described it . For good reason: celebrated as a second Pentagon Papers (the 1971 documents that bared the lies of the Vietnam War) the Afghanistan revelations didn't actually reveal anything that foreign policy officials, or the American people, didn't already know: that the U.S. was not winning and could not win in Afghanistan, that senior U.S. diplomats and U.S. military commanders knew this soon after the 2001 intervention, that the hundreds of billions of dollars spent to build a responsive Afghan government was squandered, misspent, diverted or stolen, and that officials consistently misled the American people about the prospects for victory in the war – promoting optimistic assessments in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

    "In news conferences and other public appearances," the Post report noted, "those in charge of the war have followed the same talking points for 18 years. No matter how the war is going – and especially when it is going badly – they emphasized how they are making progress." Among the most outspoken critics quoted by the papers is retired Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, who served as the Afghan war czar during the Bush and Obama years. "We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan – we didn't know what we were doing," Lute told SIGAR officials in an oft-quoted judgment . "What are we trying to do here? We didn't have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking."

    In truth, the big "reveal" of the Afghanistan Papers came after their release, when most of official Washington reacted to their publication with a collective shrug. Despite this, though not surprisingly, while the State Department and White House remained silent on the revelations, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley rejected the claim that officials had purposely misled the public about the war. "I know there's an assertion out there of some sort of coordinated lie over the course of 18 years," Milley told reporters . "I find that a bit of a stretch. More than a bit of a stretch, I find that a mischaracterization." Optimistic reports on the war in Afghanistan, he argued, were "honest assessments" that were "never intended to deceive the Congress or the American people." While Milley's response was unusually strident, it was not a surprise for most Pentagon reporters, many of whom knew that senior military officers and Pentagon policy makers were carefully studying proposals that would keep U.S. troops in Afghanistan for at least the next five years – if not longer.

    Among these is a paper authored by Michael O'Hanlon, the high profile Foreign Policy Director of Research at the influential Brookings Institution. Entitled "5,000 Troops for 5 Years," O'Hanlon's offering was previewed in an op-ed in The Hill in late October, presented formally by Brookings officials on the same day as the Post published the Afghanistan Papers, then circulated to a wider audience in an O'Hanlon-authored op-ed in USA Today on January 3. O'Hanlon provides a less outspoken critique of the Post story than Milley (calling it "badly misleading" and arguing that U.S. officials "have been consistently and publicly realistic about the difficulty of making progress" in the war), while acknowledging the "limits of the possible" in a "beleaguered and weak country." Even so, O'Hanlon says in taking issue with the Post report, the Afghanistan mission "has not been an abject failure" because, as he argues, the Afghan government "continues to hold all major and midsize cities" and the U.S. has "not again been attacked by a group that plotted or organized its aggression from within Afghan borders."

    O'Hanlon concedes that while these are modest accomplishments, they are sustainable "at a far lower cost in blood and treasure than before." Here then, is O'Hanlon's payoff: "The United States needs a policy that recognizes Afghanistan for what it is – a significant, but not a top-tier, U.S. strategic interest – and builds a plan accordingly. That overall strategy should still seek peace, but its modest military element should be steady and stable, and not set to a calendar. Roughly 5,000 troops for at least five years could be the crude mantra."

    O'Hanlon's proposal has gained traction among a number of senior military officers who are frustrated with a war that drains military assets and erodes readiness, but who are loathe to concede Afghanistan to the Taliban – an outcome they believe is certain to follow a full U.S. withdrawal. Then too, O'Hanlon confirms, his proposal reflects the thinking of a large swath of Washington's foreign policy community. "I think I am codifying and encapsulating and distilling the wisdom of a lot of people here, with a couple of my own twists," he told me in response to a series of questions I posed to him in an email exchange. "I think the chances of something like this [being adopted] are therefore pretty good."

    Indeed, the O'Hanlon proposal seems to have something for everyone: it foregoes the large nation building expenditures that have characterized the U.S. intervention ($7 billion to $8 billion each year – "not trivial, but only 1 percent of the defense budget"), it maintains enough military capacity to check the growth of ISIS or al-Qaeda (the U.S. would maintain "two or three major airfields and hubs of operations" in the country), it allows time for the U.S. to put in place a more effective Afghan military presence (O'Hanlon provides five specific recommendations on how this can be done), it signals the Taliban that the U.S. will not leave the country out of frustration (that they cannot simply "stall for time"), and perhaps most crucially, it gelds the controversy surrounding the conflict by taking it out of public view: "By laying out a plan designed to last for several years," O'Hanlon writes, "Washington would be avoiding the drama and the huge consumption of policy bandwidth associated with annual Afghanistan policy reviews that have typified the late Obama and early Trump years." Which is to say:

    maintaining a presence in Afghanistan at 5,000 troops ("I'd rather see 5,000 as a rough goal not a formal or legislated ceiling or floor," O'Hanlon says) over an extended period takes the war off the nation's front pages – it regularizes the U.S. deployment at an acceptable cost (that's what sustainable means) and it makes the war in Afghanistan publicly palatable.

    If any of this sounds familiar, it's because it is. "5,000 Troops for 5 Years" seemingly institutionalizes what then-Afghan commander General David Petraeus called "Afghanistan Good Enough" in August of 2010: "This isn't to say that there's any kind of objective of turning Afghanistan into Switzerland in three to five years or less," he said at the time. "Afghan good enough is good enough." At the time, any number of pundits predicted that the Petraeus statement would come back to haunt him, but his mantra has been adopted by senior military officers who cite the O'Hanlon paper as a means of, if not exactly winning the Afghanistan war, at least not losing it – if victory isn't possible, they argue, then "good enough" is next best. Or, as one senior military officer told me, the O'Hanlon proposal recasts the political calculus of Vermont Senator George Aiken on Vietnam, who said that the U.S. should "declare victory and get out." In this case, the officer said, O'Hanlon is proposing that "the U.S. declare a stalemate and stay in."

    The O'Hanlon proposal details what has been quietly talked about in military circles for the last decade, but was given credence in a monograph written by retired Army Colonel David Johnson ("Doing What You Know") published in 2017. Johnson, whose paper circulated widely in Army circles, argues that "good enough" might well be the most appropriate model for fighting counter-insurgencies – a form of warfare that has traditionally been outside of the U.S. military's "strategic culture." In these conflicts, what Johnson calls a "least bad outcome" might be all that the U.S. military should expect. In Afghanistan, this means accepting limits to success. "In Afghanistan, what is good enough is a government that can successfully protect itself and take the fight to the Taliban with minimal U.S. support," Johnson wrote. "Whether the Kabul government is corrupt or not representative is secondary to its ability to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a terrorist haven. That would be good enough."

    That this model might well be adopted in Afghanistan (and in Iraq), and in any of the other "grey zone" conflicts of the Middle East, is no longer at issue. The model is already in place, while O'Hanlon's 5000 Troops for 5 Years is fast becoming a reality. But the adoption of the program has come at a price – in Afghan lives. While the U.S. has continued to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, it has escalated its air campaign against the Taliban (U.S. aircraft dropped 7423 bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 – more than any other year), thereby embracing a strategy that allows U.S. deployments to remain in place, but without the consequent escalation in U.S. casualties. ("More U.S. troops die in training accidents than in Afghanistan so, you know, there's that," a senior military officer told me.) Meanwhile, Afghan civilian casualties have spiked, reaching unprecedented levels in the period of July to September of 2019. That trend is likely to continue.

    And so, the results of the Washington Post's publication of the Afghanistan Papers "bombshell" in December have now come sharply into focus: Afghanistan is off the nation's front pages, American casualties are "sustainable," the war continues – and, ironically, the chances for ending it are now even more remote than before the Post published its revelations.

    [Feb 01, 2020] Bolton's mustache is trying to impeach his face: Trump tweets 'game over' after Bolton, Schiff videos resurface

    Feb 01, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    Matthew Rand , 22 hours ago

    Bolton's mustache is trying to impeach his face.

    G Blizzard , 1 day ago

    Well, if his credibility is done, Michael Bolton can always go back to singing.


    Curt Stolpe     , 1 day ago

    "We can't beat him so we have to impeach him" no truer words were ever spoken. Too bad they couldn't come up with a reason. I think November will be a Democrat Slaughter.

    IJJ , 1 day ago

    Bolton & Schiff - Bozo 1 and Bozo 2 😂


    MoralHi     , 1 day ago

    That old man Bolton would sell his Gandma to sell his book !

    [Feb 01, 2020] the Houthis have imposed a massive defeat on the Saudis at Marib - 3500 Saudi forces killed, wounded or captured, along with 400 trophie

    Feb 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Yonatan , Feb 1 2020 16:29 utc | 106

    In other news, the Houthis have imposed a massive defeat on the Saudis at Marib - 3500 Saudi forces killed, wounded or captured, along with 400 trophies. It is bigger than the earlier massive defeat at Najran.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW1cRRtH9Vc

    or for those that don't want to log in:

    https://www.nsfwyoutube.com/watch?v=lW1cRRtH9Vc

    [Feb 01, 2020] U.S. envoy warns Palestinians against raising opposition to U.S. peace plan at U.N.

    Feb 01, 2020 | news.yahoo.com

    By Michelle Nichols

    UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft warned the Palestinians on Friday that bringing their displeasure with the U.S. peace plan to the world body would only "repeat the failed pattern of the last seven decades."

    Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will speak in the U.N. Security Council in the next two weeks about the plan, Palestinian U.N. envoy Riyad Mansour said on Wednesday, adding that he hoped the 15-member council would also vote on a draft resolution on the issue.

    However, the United States is certain to veto any such resolution, diplomats said. That would allow the Palestinians to take the draft text to the 193-member U.N. General Assembly, where a vote would publicly show how the Trump administration's peace plan has been received internationally.

    Craft said that while the Palestinians' initial reaction to the plan was anticipated, "why not instead take that displeasure and channel it into negotiations?"

    "Bringing that displeasure to the United Nations does nothing but repeat the failed pattern of the last seven decades. Let's avoid those traps and instead take a chance on peace," she told Reuters.

    Craft said the United States was ready to facilitate talks and that she was "happy to play any role" that contributes to the Israeli-Palestinian peace plan unveiled by U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday.

    Mansour said on Thursday: "There is not a single Palestinian official (who) will meet with American officials now after they submitted an earthquake, the essence of it the destruction of the national aspirations of the Palestinian people. This is unacceptable."

    Israel's U.N. mission signaled on Tuesday that it was preparing for the Palestinians to pursue U.N. action, saying in a statement that it was "working to thwart these efforts, and will lead a concerted diplomatic campaign with the U.S."

    [Jan 31, 2020] Tucker John Bolton has always been a snake

    Bolton was appointed by Adelson.
    Jan 27, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    Bolton's tell-all book leaks during Senate trial. #FoxNews

    Yamaha Venture , 3 days ago

    Mitt Romney is a joke.

    Michael Harvey , 2 days ago

    John Bolton wants war everywhere to line his pockets with money.

    Stephen C , 1 day ago

    The "right" gets the left, but doesn't agree with them. The "left" doesn't understand the "right".

    Citizen Se7en , 2 days ago

    "Bolton's resignation was one of the highlights of the president's first term." Truer words have never been spoken.

    Jack Albright , 2 days ago

    This story is also called "the scorpion and the frog".

    Ragnar Lothbrok , 3 days ago

    John Bolton should be given a helmet and a gun and sent to the next war. Let's see how he likes it.

    Stratchona , 1 day ago

    Trump.." I don't know John Bolton,never met him,don't know what he does."

    Jaret Glenn , 2 days ago

    Time to investigate Romney's son working for the oil company in the Ukraine.

    Regan Orr , 2 days ago

    Romney's Holy Underwear is Cutting off the Blood Supply to his Deep St Brain!

    Marjo , 2 days ago (edited)

    I never liked Bolton. I sensed he was out for himself, at anyone's expense. War monger too. He had many people fooled.

    Shara Kirkby , 3 days ago

    Bolton wants war anywhere and forever!

    David Dorrell , 1 day ago (edited)

    Frickin' Globalist peckerwoods. John Bolton and his pal, Mitt Romney.

    Olivier Bolton , 2 days ago

    Bolton wanted war so he got the boot...the fact he brings out his book now just looks like vengean$$

    Max Liftoff , 2 days ago

    2:30 Because Bolton never served in the military he truly passionately loved war :)) LMAO Tucker nailed it.

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ , 1 day ago

    The left's championing of John Bolton is further proof that TDS has made their minds turn to sludge.

    j abe , 3 days ago

    Can someone expaine to me how mit romney is still geting votes from ppl

    Mark Whitley , 2 days ago

    Bolton is a war mongering narcissist that wanted his war, didn't get it, & is now acting like a spoilt child that didn't get his way & is laying on the floor kicking & screaming!

    Tim Fronimos , 2 days ago

    Regarding John Bolton's book, is this the first book that he's colored. just curious

    newuserandhiscrew 22 , 2 days ago

    Everyone: Bolton: "take me in oh tender woman, take me in for heaven's sake"

    Brittany Ward , 1 day ago

    I can't fathom that people actually believe everything the media says!

    [Jan 31, 2020] Trump excoriates Bolton in tweets this morning

    Highly recommended!
    Trump is lying. Bolton was appointed by Adelson and Trump can't refuse Adelson protégé.
    Jan 31, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Trump excoriates Bolton in tweets this morning:
    "For a guy who couldn't get approved for the Ambassador to the U.N. years ago, couldn't get approved for anything since, 'begged' me for a non Senate approved job, which I gave him despite many saying 'Don't do it, sir,' takes the job, mistakenly says 'Libyan Model' on T.V., and ... many more mistakes of judgement [sic], gets fired because frankly, if I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now, and goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty & untrue book. All Classified National Security. Who would do this?"

    IMO, Trump is a fantastic POTUS for this day and age, but he wasn't on his A game when he brought Bolton onboard. He should have known better and, was, apparently, warned. Maybe Trump thought he could control him and use him as a threatening pit bull. Mistake. Bolton is greedy as well as vindictive.

    Posted by: Eric Newhill | 29 January 2020 at 09:30 AM

    [Jan 31, 2020] Two "nice" Americans

    Jan 31, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Norn ,

    "nice" Americans: .. Here is a sample of nice Americans who want to control our breath: Pompeo , Fri 24 Jan 2020: "You Think Americans Really Give A F**k About Ukraine?"

    Michael Richard Pompeo (57 y.o.) is the United States secretary of state. He is a former United States Army officer and was Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from January 2017 until April 2018

    Nuland , earlier than Feb 2014: "Fuck the EU."

    Victoria Jane Nuland (59 y.o) is the former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the United States Department of State. She held the rank of Career Ambassador, the highest diplomatic rank in the United States Foreign Service. She is the former CEO of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), and is also a Member of the Board of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)

    [Jan 31, 2020] A comment in unz.com that is a bad omen for Trump for 2020

    They used to support the guy in 2016
    Jan 31, 2020 | www.unz.com

    anon [837] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 31, 2020 at 12:14 pm GMT

    Fuck Trump and all his followers. They can go back to Israel where they belong.

    [Jan 31, 2020] Modern US presidents don't so much set policy as sell policies that have already been approved by our real masters

    Jan 31, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Digital Samizdat , says: Show Comment January 28, 2020 at 12:40 pm GMT

    @Nancy O'Brien Simpson Because modern US presidents don't so much set policy as sell policies that have already been approved by our real masters. In other words, modern US presidents are more like glorified salesmen than actual national rulers. The establishment's ideal president, therefore, would be someone like Barack Obama. He successfully marketed their agenda of more foreign wars and Wall Street bailouts while looking hip, slick and cool for the kiddies.

    But in that regard, Trump has come up short. In the first case, he does occasionally push back, even if only rhetorically. And furthermore, even when he does happen to be on their side–think Venezuela or Iran–he's just too clumsy about it to be effective. His zionism, for example, is so completely obsequious and over the top that no one on earth can take seriously anymore the notion that the US's Middle East policy isn't controlled by Israel. And since Trump has already been dubbed the 'new Hitler' by our own media, what does it look like to the rest of the world when he himself tries to brand some other, foreign ruler (like Khamenei or Maduro) as the next Hitler? Well, confusion results! I mean, if two Hitlers are fighting each other at once, which one are the 'antifascists' supposed to back?

    So that's the élite's real problem with Trump: he's bad optics. And that's also the main reason I am supporting him at the moment: if bad optics is the worst we can do to the establishment at this point in time, then let's do it! It's better than nothing

    [Jan 31, 2020] Hitchens gave neocons the intellectual thumbs up for unleashing hell after 9/11

    Jan 31, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Harry Stotle George Galloway accused Chritopher Hitchens of 'proselytising for the devil' after Hitchens gave neocons the intellectual thumbs up for unleashing hell after 9/11, while it is common knowledge the pro-war, liberal media had to acquire a paint factory because so many coatings were required to white-wash the lies and fabrications employed to rationalise Bush's 'war on terror' and many events leading up to it (not least the fact the US buddied up with Saddam a decade earlier in order to foment war with Iran).

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Aihr9UjvAJQ?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    By contrast counterveiling forces (such as Galloway) have almost no voice within political spheres, the academic world and certainly the MSM, and when necessary certain propaganda operations unfold to subvert meaningful investigations, such as the alleged chemical attack in Douma (where, ironically, Peter Hitchens amongst others has called bullshit)

    Of course its important to deconstruct flagrent untruths (as Kevin Ryan does in this fine article) not least because they have been used as a platform for the current reign of terror in the Middle East – but the question is, in totalitarian states like America (where authorities effectively act as judge, jury and executioner) how can this knowledge be used to shake up a system that has closed its eyes and ears to truth or reality?
    Put another way who expects the likes of Rachel Maddow or Bill Maher to ever hold authority to account?

    Now depending on your ideologial outlook the actions of the US are either a facet of the 'international rules based order' (which IMO is no more than a self-aggrandising term neocons, like Tony Blair, love to apply to themselves), or abject betrayal of the holocaust: a critical moment in history when the world vowed to learn from the terrible conseqeunces that arise when powerful, lawless states are unconstrained by public opinion or cultural watchdogs.

    One clue to answering this rhetorical question is the way whistleblowers or publishers are treated by those they accuse of wrong doing – the evidence tells us that just like Guantanamo they are likely to be tortured and subject to sham legal proceedings.

    As an aside it begs questions about the kind or people, such as prosecutors who are willing participate in this cruel process – they are the same sort of people that would have cropped up in Soviet Russia, or Nazi Germany I imagine?

    Maggie ,

    your link buffers and I can't access.

    Harry Stotle ,

    Search: 'Christopher Hitchens prosthelytized for the Devil – George Galloway' – in YouTube. that should find it.

    Patrick C ,

    Harry, I was reading along nodding in agreement and then, as the song says, you spoil it all by saying, I hate you. The Soviet Union, by equating it with Nazi Germany. As you say it's important to, "deconstruct flagrant untruths." And this is possibly the granddaddy of all untruths. But as this isn't even a comment, rather it's an answer to a comment, there simply isn't the space to fully contest that characterization. I would hope given your obvious intelligence you might make it a priority to research and understand the Cold War demonization of the USSR and before that the attempts to crush them. I am not excusing their crimes I'm saying there weren't any. Certainly not in the sense that we've been brainwashed to believe. You can dismiss me as an idealogue if you wish or you can start the hard slog towards understanding. Otherwise loved what you wrote.

    Harry Stotle ,

    Thanks, Patrick – I am not suggesting equivalence except to the extent the legal systems in Russia and Germany were co-opted to fulfil certain ideological goals (as they are in the west today given high ranking political figures are more or less exempt from any sort of meaningful judicial scrutiny).

    Talking about Russia in particular it is claimed, "According to the International Memorial, the law on rehabilitation covers 11-11.5 million people in the territory of the former USSR. The latest (2016) statistical calculations are given in the article by A. Roginsky and E. Zhemkova "Between sympathy and indifference – rehabilitation of victims of Soviet repressions".

    About 5.8 million people became victims of "administrative repressions" directed against certain groups of the population (kulaks, representatives of repressed peoples and religious denominations). From 4.7 to 5 million people were arrested on individual political charges, of which about a million were shot. These are preliminary estimates obtained as a result of many years of work by researchers with internal statistics of punitive bodies at the central and regional levels, investigative cases.

    As the "Memorial" movement, it is fundamentally important to establish the names of all the repressed. At the moment, in the consolidated database "Victims of Political Terror in the USSR", there are more than 3 million people. This base was compiled mainly on the basis of regional Books of Remembrance, in the preparation of which members of local Memorial organizations often took part. The database is currently being updated." (site contents can be translated into English)
    https://www.memo.ru/ru-ru/history-of-repressions-and-protest/chronology-stat/

    Just to add I know a reasonable amount about 9/11, know a little about the US empire (and Britain's role in it) and have also looked at historians who have questioned specifics about the holocaust (and here I mean David Irving, a brilliant but deeply flawed, and unempathic man).

    Russia however I am less sure about.

    I would just add that revolutions are always violent because no one ever relinquishes power without a fight, while reverberations from such convulsions can carry consequences long after they first occured.

    For example, Trotsky was tried and found guilty of treason and sentenced to death in absentia – as you must know he was murdered in Mexico following severe head wounds inflicted by an icepick.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    I hope that Hitchens' water-boarding didn't cause his oesophageal cancer. That would be ironic.

    Norn ,

    [Jan 31, 2020] Kushner: Palestinians Have Never Done Anything Right in Their Sad, Pathetic Lives

    Jan 31, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Mao , Jan 31 2020 13:53 utc | 178

    Kushner: Palestinians Have Never Done Anything Right in Their Sad, Pathetic Lives

    The first son-in-law has warned Palestinians not to "screw up this opportunity" at peace that he's so graciously given to them.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01/jared-kushner-peace-plan-palestinians

    [Jan 31, 2020] How Washington Liberates Free Countries by Andre Vltchek

    Notable quotes:
    "... Presently, the West is trying to overthrow governments in several independent countries, on different continents. From Bolivia (the country has been already destroyed) to Venezuela, from Iraq to Iran, to China and Russia. The more successful these countries get, the better they serve their people, the more vicious the attacks from abroad are, the tougher the embargos and sanctions imposed on them are. The happier the citizens are, the more grotesque the propaganda disseminated from the West gets. ..."
    "... In Hong Kong, some young people, out of financial interest, or out of ignorance, keep shouting: "President Trump, Please Liberate Us!" Or similar, but equally treasonous slogans. They are waving U.S., U.K. and German flags. They beat up people who try to argue with them, including their own Police Force. ..."
    "... So, let us see, how the United States really "liberates" countries, in various pockets of the world. ..."
    "... Let us visit Iran, a country which (you'd never guess it if consuming only Western mass media) is, despite the vicious embargos and sanctions, on the verge of the "highest human development index bracket" (UNDP). How is it possible? Simple. Because Iran is a socialist country (socialism with the Iranian characteristics). It is also an internationalist nation which is fighting against Western imperialism. It helps many occupied and attacked states on our planet, including Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia (before), Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq, to name just a few. ..."
    "... Washington is getting more and more aggressive, in all parts of the world. It also pays more and more for collaboration. And it is not shy to inject terrorist tactics into allied troops, organizations and non-governmental organizations. Hong Kong is no exception. ..."
    "... Thank god the US is heading, quite unmistakably now, down the same flush which swallowed the USSR! ..."
    "... Yep. America bringing "freedom and democracy" to the world one bomb and bullet at a time. Pretty soon they'll be nobody left to freedomize and democratize. ..."
    "... The Democrats deplore humanitarian reasons prior to invading a sovereign nation-state, while Republicans says militarism will keep us safe, however, in actuality the objectives of the political duopoly as reflected in the military/security/surveillance corporate state is rather consistent they're interested in usurping precious resources by acquiring hegemony over significant geostrategic territories. ..."
    "... Orwellian speech aside, everything currently boils down to genuine freedom in all its forms not just physical slavery (like in the neoliberal/neocon/zionist wars and its outcomes) but also the mental slavery that leads us to physical slavery. Unfortunately we do not live at the best of times currently, the net of complete neo- slavery is almost upon us and we only have a small window of opportunity to try to stop it. The Smart Grid/IoT system is almost on top of us. Let's fight it with sharing info; and hopefully as a very large population make the establishment listen to us through sustained, strategic non-violent civil disobedience.
    "... After 500+ years of Western colonial & now neocolonial plunder and mayhem, maybe it's time to look a bit deeper into how Western cultural narratives have shaped a way of seeing ourselves, others and the world not shared by literally most of the human family. The WEIRD research is an illuminating and interesting examination of some of these differences and how they challenge the very concept of "human nature" associated with Western societies. ..."
    "... "Closely related to the depoliticising practices of neoliberalism, the politics of social atomisation and a failed sociality is the existence of a survival of the fittest ethos that drives oppressive narratives used to define both agency and our relationship to others. Mimicking the logic of a war culture, neoliberal pedadogy creates a predatory culture in which the demand of hyper – competitiveness pits individuals against each other through a market based logic in which compassion and caring for the other is replaced by a culture of winners and losers" ..."
    "... Neo-liberalism ends in neo-feudalism, with 99.9% of humanity serfs and villeins, and a tiny ruling elite controlling EVERYTHING. The project proceeds apace, with road-kill like Corbyn and the 500,000 'antisemites' who joined Labour littering the road to Hell on Earth. ..."
    www.slate.com
    Jan 29, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    There are obviously some serious linguistic issues and disagreements between the West and the rest of the world. Essential terms like "freedom", "democracy", "liberation", even "terrorism", are all mixed up and confused; they mean something absolutely different in New York, London, Berlin, and in the rest of the world.

    Before we begin analyzing, let us recall that countries such as the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the United States, as well as other Western nations, have been spreading colonialist terror to basically all corners of the world.

    And in the process, they developed effective terminology and propaganda, which has been justifying, even glorifying acts such as looting, torture, rape and genocides. Basically, first Europe, and later North America literally "got away with everything, including mass murder".

    The native people of Americas, Africa and Asia have been massacred, their voices silenced. Slaves were imported from Africa. Great Asian nations, such as China, what is now "India" and Indonesia, got occupied, divided and thoroughly plundered.

    And all was done in the name of spreading religion, "liberating" people from themselves, as well as "civilizing them".

    Nothing has really changed.

    To date, people of great nations with thousands of years of culture, are treated like infants; humiliated, and as if they were still in kindergarten, told how to behave, and how to think.

    Sometimes if they "misbehave", they get slapped. Periodically they get slapped so hard, that it takes them decades, even centuries, to get back to their feet. It took China decades to recover from the period of "humiliation". India and Indonesia are presently trying to recuperate, from the colonial barbarity, and from, in the case of Indonesia, the 1965 U.S.-administered fascist coup.

    But if you go back to the archives in London, Brussels or Berlin, all the monstrous acts of colonialism, are justified by lofty terms. Western powers are always "fighting for justice"; they are "enlightening" and "liberating". No regrets, no shame and no second thoughts. They are always correct!

    Like now; precisely as it is these days.

    Presently, the West is trying to overthrow governments in several independent countries, on different continents. From Bolivia (the country has been already destroyed) to Venezuela, from Iraq to Iran, to China and Russia. The more successful these countries get, the better they serve their people, the more vicious the attacks from abroad are, the tougher the embargos and sanctions imposed on them are. The happier the citizens are, the more grotesque the propaganda disseminated from the West gets.

    *

    In Hong Kong, some young people, out of financial interest, or out of ignorance, keep shouting: "President Trump, Please Liberate Us!" Or similar, but equally treasonous slogans. They are waving U.S., U.K. and German flags. They beat up people who try to argue with them, including their own Police Force.

    So, let us see, how the United States really "liberates" countries, in various pockets of the world.

    Let us visit Iran, a country which (you'd never guess it if consuming only Western mass media) is, despite the vicious embargos and sanctions, on the verge of the "highest human development index bracket" (UNDP). How is it possible? Simple. Because Iran is a socialist country (socialism with the Iranian characteristics). It is also an internationalist nation which is fighting against Western imperialism. It helps many occupied and attacked states on our planet, including Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia (before), Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq, to name just a few.

    So, what is the West doing? It is trying to ruin it, by all means; ruin all good will and progress. It is starving Iran through sanctions, it finances and encourages its "opposition", as it does in China, Russia and Latin America. It is trying to destroy it.

    Then, it just bombs their convoy in neighboring Iraq, killing its brave commander, General Soleimani. And, as if it was not horrid enough, it turns the tables around, and starts threatening Teheran with more sanctions, more attacks, and even with the destruction of its cultural sites.

    Iran, under attack, confused, shot down, by mistake, a Ukrainian passenger jet. It immediately apologized, in horror, offering compensation. The U.S. straightway began digging into the wound. It started to provoke (like in Hong Kong) young people. The British ambassador, too, got involved!

    As if Iran and the rest of the world should suddenly forget that during its attack on Iraq, more than 3 decades ago, Washington actually shot down an Iranian wide-body passenger plane (Iran Air flight 655, an Airbus-300), on a routine flight from Bandar Abbas to Dubai. In an "accident", 290 people, among them 66 children, lost their lives. That was considered "war collateral".

    Iranian leaders then did not demand "regime change" in Washington. They were not paying for riots in New York or Chicago.

    As China is not doing anything of that nature, now.

    The "Liberation" of Iraq (in fact, brutal sanctions, bombing, invasion and occupation) took more than a million Iraqi lives, most of them, those of women and children. Presently, Iraq has been plundered, broken into pieces, and on its knees.

    Is this the kind of "liberation" that some of the Hong Kong youngsters really want?

    No? But if not, is there any other performed by the West, in modern history?

    *

    Washington is getting more and more aggressive, in all parts of the world. It also pays more and more for collaboration. And it is not shy to inject terrorist tactics into allied troops, organizations and non-governmental organizations. Hong Kong is no exception.

    Iran, Iraq, Syria, Russia, China, Venezuela, but also many other countries, should be carefully watching and analyzing each and every move made by the United States. The West is perfecting tactics on how to liquidate all opposition to its dictates.

    It is not called a "war", yet. But it is. People are dying. The lives of millions are being ruined.

    Rhisiart Gwilym ,

    Thank god the US is heading, quite unmistakably now, down the same flush which swallowed the USSR!

    Gall ,

    Yep. America bringing "freedom and democracy" to the world one bomb and bullet at a time. Pretty soon they'll be nobody left to freedomize and democratize.

    Hey we voted against all this BS but what does that matter in what they call "democracy" or even "republicanism" in the land of the free fire zone?

    Charlotte Russe ,

    The Democrats deplore humanitarian reasons prior to invading a sovereign nation-state, while Republicans says militarism will keep us safe, however, in actuality the objectives of the political duopoly as reflected in the military/security/surveillance corporate state is rather consistent they're interested in usurping precious resources by acquiring hegemony over significant geostrategic territories.

    Norn ,

    150 years ago, The US saw Korea as too isolationist and decided to [what else?] ' liberate ' the Koreans.

    Western Disturbance in the Shinmi 1871 year – Korea

    On 10 June 1871, about 650 American invaders landed [on korean shores] and captured several forts, killing over 200 Korean troops with a loss of only three American dead.

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Orwellian speech aside, everything currently boils down to genuine freedom in all its forms not just physical slavery (like in the neoliberal/neocon/zionist wars and its outcomes) but also the mental slavery that leads us to physical slavery. Unfortunately we do not live at the best of times currently, the net of complete neo- slavery is almost upon us and we only have a small window of opportunity to try to stop it. The Smart Grid/IoT system is almost on top of us. Let's fight it with sharing info; and hopefully as a very large population make the establishment listen to us through sustained, strategic non-violent civil disobedience.

    To make a start: are you as confused as I am/was about why too many of the general public are just not informed, not 'awake? Why they do not seem to know the reality about the lies & corruption by a small global-establishment; how our world is really run; who is running it; and what their plans and ultimate agenda is? The following video so precisely pin-points how & why; it would be a terrible shame if people did not watch it and share it. Thank you to a leader who did share it – so much appreciated!

    The Eight Veils:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/oPNI1-n_szQ?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    tonyopmoc ,

    Tallis Marsh, Great video, and I agree with a lot of it, but I think the numerology stuff is bollocks, as is the idea that "the elite" have this secret very advanced technology, and can perform "magic powers", beyond the basic principles of physics and maths.

    However, the Truth is quite horrendous. I personally felt, I had been physically kicked very hard in my guts, and to the depths of my soul, when in a moment, I became personally convinced that the Official US Government story of 9/11 was impossible, because it did not comply with the basic principles of physics and maths.

    I understood all the implications in that moment in February 2003. It was not an alien culture, that I did not understand, that did this atrocity, it was my culture, and I knew almost exactly what was going to happen.

    Most people, don't want to know, and won't even look, because they are not mentally capable of tolerating the horror. The truth will send many such people mad. They are better off not knowing, carrying on their lives as best they can. Most people are good, and not guilty of anything. It's just that they won't be able to cope with the truth, that it is our culture, our governments, our institutions, and our religions, which are so evil.

    Why isn't Tony Blair on trial for War Crimes Against Humanity?

    Its because the entire system is rotten to the core, and will eventually collapse.

    Tony

    Tallis Marsh ,

    I have a few questions (that imo are vital). How would you define magic/magick?

    What about magic/magick being the manipulation of sound and vision to influence/control others?

    Observe our industries like the publishing industry – newspapers, academic books, brands, logos, internet; tv, film internet video industry; music industry Who founded and instituted all these industries using the particular system of 'words', numerals, symbols, music and sounds – these are now all-pervasive in our world; who is using them to manipulate us and for what purposes? What are the meanings of these sounds and symbols, etc? E.g. What are the hidden meanings of words/parts of words e.g. el as in elder, elite, election, elevate ? Traditionally 'el' was Saturn.

    What is the real history of our world, country, local area (and who is in charge of academia, publishing of all kinds – are they the ones who have rewritten history in order to keep almost all of us in the dark)? How can we find out the true history of our world and know its accuracy? E.g. Why are the worshipers of El/Saturn; and all their Saturnalian symbols around us in the world? e.gs: black gowns worn by the judiciary, priests, graduates; black cubes/squares found on hats of religious leaders, graduates' hats and black cubes found as monuments in such culturally-different places around the world like Saudi Arabia, NYC, Denmark, Australia?

    Note: I do not have the answers (I'm still researching) but are these not good questions to explore because the more you look/hear, the more you see that many of the things mentioned above seem to be related; and some would call this magic/magick. To be clear, I am not superstitious and I do not believe in or practice these things myself but as far as I know, a group with immense power do seem to believe these things described.

    Tallis Marsh ,

    For symbols, a good place to start for research is geometry and alchemy. Traditionally, a major part of elite education studied/studies geometry (including 'sacred geometry') and ancient education studied alchemy/chemistry and subjects like astrology/astronomy? Part of the Seven Liberal Arts (the trivium and quadrivium combined), I think.

    For history, it is good to research the ancient places and cultures of Phoenicia, Canaan, Ur, Sumeria and Babylon (apparently all of which were brought together into a hidden eclectic culture through the elites which moved into ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome and then moved into/by Celtic/Druidic culture in Central and Northern Europe and now practised in various forms (some hidden but apparent in symbols) in major religions, the freemasons and modern royalty?

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Re: Saturnalian symbols. Forgot to mention – almost all, if not all corporate brand logos (which companies buy for extortionate prices?! Who and why gives out the ideas for brand logos?) seem to be a variation of Saturnalian symbols like the planet's rings, the colour black, cubes, hexagrams; and parts of these things like XX, swish, etc

    Tim Drayton ,

    Not confused, frankly. The ruling classses must always devote massive resources to promoting the dominant ideology that underpins their rule or else they are finished. The hight priests who pump out this ideology have always had high status – look at Rupert Murdoch.

    nottheonly1 ,

    Just remember one 'thing(k)':

    EVERYTHING you know was told to you by another human.
    Everything human believes in was made up by human to suit his needs.
    Human makes stuff up as it goes.
    God/religion/the unknown – is all evidence for 'not knowing'.

    For it is the one who sees and hears 'thinks' the way they are.
    That everything is and human has absolutely no clue as to why.

    No whatsoever clue. But lots of all kinds of stories.

    There is only one veil – the veil of delusion. To be deluded enough not
    to understand that 'The Universe' is an Organism (with all kinds of organs)
    that lives and grows.

    On Earth, this Organism has cancer. Mankind is that cancer on The Universe.
    Mankind is Earth's cancer.

    Those who have the porential to look through it all – already do.
    Those who don't have the potential to look through it all – never will.

    One day, the 'history' of mankind will also become just another story.
    With no one to listen to.

    Gary Weglarz ,

    After 500+ years of Western colonial & now neocolonial plunder and mayhem, maybe it's time to look a bit deeper into how Western cultural narratives have shaped a way of seeing ourselves, others and the world not shared by literally most of the human family. The WEIRD research is an illuminating and interesting examination of some of these differences and how they challenge the very concept of "human nature" associated with Western societies.

    https://psmag.com/social-justice/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135

    https://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/WeirdPeople.pdf

    lundiel ,

    I like it but I don't know how to achieve it.

    Dungroanin ,

    "To date, people of great nations with thousands of years of culture, are treated like infants; humiliated, and as if they were still in kindergarten, told how to behave, and how to think."

    As happenned right HERE in the UK last month at the polls – when they were offered the first REAL hope of lifting the yoke of the ancient imperialist forces for over half a century- the election of a GENUINE social democratic Labour government.

    "..the West is trying to overthrow governments in several independent countries, on different continents." confirms Vltchek.

    As the West (the ancient imperialists to be exact) DID overthrow what should be the current UK government BEFORE it could take office – a Advance Coup – avoiding all the nastiness of having actual military parking its tanks in Whitehall and having Betty supporting it as beardy gets dragged off for crucifixion.

    Achieved by the dirtiest election EVER in UK history using the combined forces of the 5+1 eyed Empire ordered into action, by Up Pompeo Caesar General, who visits his latest victorious battlefield today. Here to collect his tributes for delivering his Gauntlet to stop the Corbynite Labour government taking office – by vote rigging using the favourite DS big data Canadian company CGI and its monopoly, of the privatised postal vote system of the UK.

    Here to celebrate a brexit so long planned and also to deliver the final final solution victory for a Israeli APARTHEID state – which like a lightning rod is doomed to be struck by such forces.

    A coup. A junta. At the heart of a diseased, decrepit, shrinking Empire – doomed just like Rome.

    Morbidly persuing a 'last ditch' master plan to reverse the decline from ever deeper bunker mentality and hoping to form a Singapore on Thames to keep its ancient City home.

    Huzzah! the crowds lining the grand avenues sceam as he arrives to claim his triumph.

    In his dreams.

    UP POMPEO! UP YOURS!

    Francis Lee ,

    "As happenned right HERE in the UK last month at the polls – when they were offered the first REAL hope of lifting the yoke of the ancient imperialist forces for over half a century- the election of a GENUINE social democratic Labour government."

    Errrm the Labour party is not a genuine social-democratic formation. It is a pantomime horse consisting of the party in the country and the Parliamentary party – a parliamentary party that is thoroughly Blairite and shows no signs of becoming anything other. Moreover, there is the 'Labour Friends of Israel' a zionist-front organisation consisting of a majority in the Parliamentary party which takes its its foreign policy cue from Tel Aviv. In this respect it has accepted the IHRA definition of anti-semitism. Jewish members of the Labour have been expelled for alleged anti-semitism. Bizarre or what.

    You see the problem with the Labour party is that it wants to be thought of as being respectable, moderate, non-threatening and so forth. Therefore, it is Pro monarchy, pro-NATO, pro-Trident, pro-FTTP, pro-Remainer and consists of a Shadow cabinet key positions of inter alia, Emily Thornberry, Keir Starmer, John MacDonnell, who seems to have had a Damascene conversion. The position left vacant by the departure of Tom Watson is still unfilled. Is this the team that is going to lead us to the social democratic society. In short it is a thoroughly conservative (small c)political party and organization being pulled in several different directions at the same time. It has only gained office (I say office rather than power) by detaching itself from its radicalism and then sucking up to a new constituency of the professional and managerial middle class, which is precisely where its leadership is drawn from.

    But socialism or even social-democracy if it wants to be taken seriously as a movement which fundamentally change the landscape of British politics must cease this sucking up to the PTB and playing their game and stop being nice, cuddly and respectable. Unfortunately I do not see any sign of this happening, now or in at any time in the future.

    Dungroanin ,

    Ah Francis "Errrm the Labour party is not a genuine social-democratic formation."

    I would guess you would say the same of the 1945 Labour party too.

    You 'Marxist' tools of the bankers since the C19th have like a religious order been insistent on promoting nationalist rebellion against a social democratic world.

    Thats why you sell not just brexit but a HARD brexit while incantating Marxsist creed – for your Banker masters if two centuries.

    Enjoy your damp squib celebrations in two days – 11 pm,not midnight, because the bankers don't even control time anymore!

    As the FartAgers embarrassed us all with their willy waving union jocks the rest of the EU held hands and sang Auld lang syne to us.

    Lol.

    paul ,

    Labour is a waste of space and a waste of a man's rations. The sooner it consigns itself to oblivion the better.

    nottheonly1 ,

    There are obviously two Andre Vitschek.

    But if you go back to the archives in London, Brussels or Berlin, all the monstrous acts of colonialism, are justified by lofty terms. Western powers are always "fighting for justice"; they are "enlightening" and "liberating". No regrets, no shame and no second thoughts. They are always correct!

    It is much worse. The fascists rewrite history as we type. Everywhere. Soon, WWII was started by Russia and brave American murderers taught the Bolsheviks a lesson: Get Nukes!!!

    Here is the Holy Grail of fascism. The God of fascism. The real 'uniter'. All the lies about how bad Hitler was are Bolshevik propaganda and character defamation – against which a dead person cannot protest.

    Some say that not all humans are like that. Like those who recklessly and generously dispose off the well being of others, including their lives. Someone, however, must have told them that it is okay to perpetrate crimes against humanity when you call them 'collateral damages'. But there is truth to that.

    Humanity will experience the collateral damages of the religious freaks that are – see above – ready to follow the worst dictator ever – or others – into ruins. Based on the story that there is an 'Afterlife'. People who seriously believe in someone standing there at a gate in the sky dtermining if you are allowed to eternally be with virgins, or do whatever is now worthless, because there are no one-sided situations in a world of action and reaction.

    Homo Sapiens is dead. He was replaced by Homo Consumos, Homo Gullibilitens, Homo Terroristicus, Homo Greediensis, Homo Friocorazoniens and Homo Networkiens Isolatiens et insane al.

    This is not working. Because close to eight billion people are helpless, because it would take one billion to remove the one million that have hijacked the evolution of Homo Sapiens into a being that better goes extinct before it can further spread.

    That's the little fact that goes a very long way.

    Samsara, so to speak.

    Gall ,

    All ya gotta do is read Mein Kampt to realize that uncle 'Dolf was nuttier than a fruit cake and a total loony tune and that he should have been transferred from Landsberg to the nearest sanitarium but then they took him seriously and as they say the rest is history

    Gezzah Potts ,

    Millions upon millions of fellow human beings dead due to the direct consequences of imperialism, neo colonialism, sanctions and rampant neoliberal economic policies that destroy people's lives and the notions of solidarity and compassion.

    Today, one of my mag customers said to me: "people have become disposable and forgotten about now, especially those struggling to survive". I couldn't have said it better myself. It's all like a dog eat dog race to the bottom for most of us. So many human beings just disposable and thrown on the scrap heap to die while the billionaires gorge themselves from the rank exploitation and deaths of so many people.

    How many of them would have shares in the merchants of death like Raytheon or Lockheed Martin or the Big Banks? Such dizzying levels of vast wealth and opulence next to grinding poverty, despair and chasms of inequality.

    Here's a quote from an article called 'Depoliticization Is A Deadly Weapon of Neoliberal Fascism' by Henry Giroux:

    "Closely related to the depoliticising practices of neoliberalism, the politics of social atomisation and a failed sociality is the existence of a survival of the fittest ethos that drives oppressive narratives used to define both agency and our relationship to others. Mimicking the logic of a war culture, neoliberal pedadogy creates a predatory culture in which the demand of hyper – competitiveness pits individuals against each other through a market based logic in which compassion and caring for the other is replaced by a culture of winners and losers"

    And meanwhile, most of us stare, trance like, at our digital screens or we shop shop shop till we drop, or sadly, the more sensitive souls fully lose themselves in drugs or gambling or alcohol to deaden the gnawing pain of living in a dystopic, cruel, neoliberal society.

    Or as Thatcher said: 'there is no such thing as society'. Bitch. And things are only going to get worse. I really really get your anger and frustration Andre.

    nottheonly1 ,

    Or as Thatcher said: 'there is no such thing as society'. Bitch.

    There is a song (electronic music) by Haldolium that uses a Thatcher impersonator to repeat throughout the song:

    "Yes, I am with You all the way – to the end of the government."

    We are witnessing the transfer of governance into private hands. The hands of the owner class. Let's see how they see the problems of the many, the masses. Oh? They're not even looking?

    Yes, this is a Dead End.

    lundiel ,

    Don't rely on music. Stormsy & Co won't liberate you. They are supporting the establishment. I who love R&B, the music of struggle, know corporate bursaries to enter the class system when I see them.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    N probably already told you, but there's a huge site called Neoliberalism Softpanorama with many hundreds of linked articles (if you have lots and lots of spare time!). Every subject imaginable related to this warped cancer, espec the role of the media presstitutes.

    Will check out that song later. Music helps keep me sane, as well as venting my spleen here and elsewhere! Bands such as Hammock, Whale Fall, Maiak, Hiva Oa, Yndi Halda. Six Organs Of Admittance to name just a handful in my collection. Highly contemplative and soothing. Especially knowing how things are and what's coming, what most of us see.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Neo-liberalism ends in neo-feudalism, with 99.9% of humanity serfs and villeins, and a tiny ruling elite controlling EVERYTHING. The project proceeds apace, with road-kill like Corbyn and the 500,000 'antisemites' who joined Labour littering the road to Hell on Earth.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    Yes it does. You see where all this is heading. I see where all this is heading (tho can be a bit naive at times) and except for our pet trolls who visit here, nearly everyone else at OffG can see where all this is heading.

    It's bloody frustrating that the large majority refuse to open their eyes, even when you explain what is happening, and direct them to sites like here or The Saker or The Grayzone, etc.

    Things are going to get really ugly and brutal, tho they already are for the tens of millions just discarded like a bit of flotsam, all the homeless, and those living in grinding poverty, those one or two paychecks away from losing their homes . Society has become very callous and judgemental and atomised. Just how the 0.01% planned it.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    It's like the Protocols. Whether a 'forgery' by the Russians, or created as a pre-emptive fabrication by certain Jewish figures (in order for the truth to be distorted and denied)it describes behaviour that we do see. Just as all the 'antisemitic conspiracy theories' that are denounced, concerning the attempts by Jewish and Zionist elites to control the West, are attested by evidence that is impossible to deny. Except it MUST be denied. It is like the JFK, RFK hits, the 9/11 fiasco and countless other examples. The truth is out there, and it does NOT come anywhere near the Official Version. Meanwhile the Sabbat Goy Trump, and the Zionist terrorist thug, simply eviscerate International Law in Occupied Palestinians, and NOT ONE Western MSM presstitute scum-bag dares to say so. That is power.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    Yes, the much heralded, deal of the century, Peace Plan, another stinking pile of lies and garbage to further (if that's possible) screw the Palestinians into the dirt and rob them of everything.
    With scores more dead kiddies blown up or shot in the head or burned alive by the settler fascists, and the World's most moral army. Kiddie killers.
    I'll have a look at Mondoweiss and Electronic Intifada shortly.
    This outrage, decade after decade, is another main reason I boycott the whore filth masquerading as . 'journalists'.

    paul ,

    People talk about the Protocols either as a genuine document or a forgery.
    I think it is more likely to have been something of a dystopian piece of writing, like Orwell's 1984.
    – This is what lies in store for you if you don't watch out, etc.

    Looking at the Zionist stranglehold over the world today, the author would probably say, "You can't say I didn't warn you."

    Fair dinkum ,

    Andre, Chris and Mr Fish are on the same page here>>
    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-disaster-of-utopian-engineering/

    lundiel ,

    Seriously, how do we get the "woke" generation to stop dicking around with identity and "social media influencers" and see just what they've bought into? It's not like it's even hard to understand, there seems to be a miasma over Britain with the old seeking solace in social conservatism and the young resigned to neoliberalism, debt, multiple careers, impossible targets, performance evaluation, micromanagement, Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic and Time specified goals (SMART) for your "stakeholders and customers". It's all so Disney. No wonder people are going mad.

    Fair dinkum ,

    Just when I thought business jargon couldn't get any slimier.
    'SMART' sounds like an MBA having a wet dream.

    Harry Stotle ,

    When working men and women were sent off to die in the trenches during WWI most, I suspect, would have known virtually nothing about the geopolitics driving the conflict.

    Now we have boundless information streams yet the public is more outraged by some dickhead sounding off on Twitter than they are about cruelty and trauma arising from brutal regime change wars.
    Surely it is glaringly obvious that this kind of carnage is orchestrated by amoral politicians acting at the behest of rapacious corporations and a crazed military?

    What has gone wrong: unlike earlier generations they do not have the excuse of saying we didn't know what has happening?
    They do, or should know, for example, that around 3 million Vietnamese were killed because of a childish theory (the domino theory), yet to them Twitter etiquette seems the more pressing issue.

    Gall ,

    Twatter's useless. Jack and his team of imperial censors shadowban anything that might upset the comfortable applecart of consumerism. This is why you don't see anything relevant other than the latest football, basket ball and baseball scores. If I was into sports betting I'd be on twatter otherwise it's a waste of time.

    nottheonly1 ,

    You should stop dicking around with identity.

    Fair dinkum ,

    The history of (mainly) white men and their religions, whether they be Christian or Mammon, is a history of exploitation, human and ecological.
    As a white western male I am ashamed.
    Extinction will be too good for us.

    Jasper ,

    As a brown western male, I can say that you should not be ashamed. You are also one of the exploited, the 'cannon fodder' during the wars contained high proportions of white western males and we can see the contempt with which white working class communities are treated in the west today.

    Gall ,

    True what they call "white trash" are beat up multiculturally as well as by the self righteous white limousine liberal elitists. I'd say they are the most oppressed group in the country right now.

    Some of their trailer parks have worse poverty than Pine Ridge and that's saying something. Many of them go to the city looking for gainful employment end up living on the streets or in their cars even when they have job because the cost of living exceeds their income.

    San Francisco is a perfect example.

    Peter Charles ,

    Not "The history of (mainly) white men "

    People only think that because that is the modern (edited at that) history we are familiar with. Look a little deeper and we can see it is the history of Man, period, throughout our existence. Man, black, white, yellow or anything in-between is and always has been greedy, acquisitive, violent and jealous, it is our innate nature, likely the exact reason we are the most successful animal species on the planet. Probably because we developed our intelligence during the drastic changes that drove our predecessors from the trees to the plains and then out of Africa. Civilisation and a satisfactory quality of life somewhat tempers these natural urges but as soon as things get difficult we revert.

    At the same time we have a small proportion of people that make these characteristics the bedrock of their lives and for the majority of people they are the pack alphas they all too willingly look up to and follow.

    Fair dinkum ,

    Most successful?
    Reckon the cockroach family might prove that wrong.

    Peter Charles ,

    Hence the reason I included 'animal' in the phrase, or do you maintain that there has been another animal more successful than Man?

    Fair dinkum ,

    Point taken Peter.

    Rhisiart Gwilym ,

    "Successful", Peter? "Man"? Really?

    anonymous bosch ,

    "Throughout our existence, Man, black, white, yellow or anything in-between is and always has been greedy, acquisitive, violent and jealous, it is our innate nature, likely the exact reason we are the most successful animal species on the planet."

    Firstly, so that is our 'innate nature' ? I wonder how many would agree with that assertion ? Secondly, in respect of "we are the most successful animal species on the planet", I must question the use of the word "successful" here – for what have "succeeded" in doing right up until now has actually brought us to the brink of extinction – are you suggesting that our "innate nature" is to bring an end to everything ?

    Ramdan ,

    greedy, acquisitive, violent and jealous, it is our innate nature

    ,

    To be closer to truth this is just one side of the "innate nature". We are not black OR white (inside) we are BOTH. that means we are also loving, compassionate, collaborative creatures. Like in that native american tale: there are two wolves (black&white) the one you feed is the one that prevails.
    Unfortunately, humanity-from the very beggening- fed the black wolf : the rapacious predator and elevated the most egregious of all beigns to positions of leadership. They were made kings, presidents, prime ministers.
    Meanwhile, the white wolfs were given a cross and placed at an almost unreachable distance venerated with our tongue, desacrated with our actions.
    This behaviour has reached its peak and today, competition, killing, betrayal, economical success, hedonism have been elevated to the level of virtues.

    Interestingly, those characteristic you mention (greedy, acquisitive, violent and jealous) Buddha calls them: poisons of the mind, the defining symptom of a deranged mind ..but well, that was another white wolf: Buddha, a MAN not a HU-man.

    We'll do well and not wrong, if we took some time for internal exporation . To continue to postpone our internal growth means postponing humanity's survival.

    Gall ,

    Not true. Some cultures are more willing to share with others. What you're are talking about are those who have embraced the Social Darwinist "philosophy" of survival of the fittest which is dominated mainly by whites but there are also other races who embrace this twisted 'philosophy" then there are those who consider themselves the "chosen ones" 'cause the bible or torah or talmud tells them so.

    Antonym ,

    As China is not doing anything of that nature, now.

    Only if you close your eyes

    How China Is Interfering in Taiwan's Election

    Who is hiding behind bully no.1, the CIA/FED US?
    Bully no.2, Xi / CCP-China.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Coming from an apologist for the planet's Number Two bully-boy, Israel, with its hatred of others, belligerence, aggression, utter hateful contempt for International Law, dominance of industries of exploitation like arms trafficking, surveillance methodologies and equipment, 'blood diamonds', human organs trafficking,sex trafficking, pornography, 'binary options', online gambling, pay-day lending etc,that takes real CHUTZPAH.

    Antonym ,

    All that with just 6.5 million Israeli Jews in total; Compare that to 1.3 billion Chinese in China or 1.4 billions Sunnis.
    Dyscalculia much?

    Fair dinkum ,

    The Chinese do not claim to be perfect, but then they also make no claim to be the chosen.

    Antonym ,

    No, China just calls itself modestly "Zhongguo" Central or Middle Kingdom, while for Sunnis all others are infidel s.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Chinese civilization aims for harmony within society and between societies. Talmudic Judaism sees all non-Jews as inferior, barely above animals, and enemies. Chalk and cheese.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Yes, you really are busy little beavers, aren't you. With perhaps 40% of Israeli Jews actually opposed to Israeli State fascism and terror, the numbers become even more stark. But what counts is the money, the 'Binyamins' as they say in Brooklyn, and the CONTROL that they purchase.

    Antonym ,

    Sure, plenty of Jews are not happy with Netanyahu's hard line. Your number reduces the supporting Israelis to 3.9 million, even less. One big city size in the ME.

    Money / control: Ali Baba's cave with gold and treasure is not in Lower Manhattan -paper dollars + little gold- but along the Arabian West coast- real oil and gas. The Anglo American and Brit 0.1% know that, but you don't apparently.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Very poor quality hasbara. The Sauds are rich, the petro-dollar vital to US economic dominance, but compared to Jewish elite control of Western finances, of US politics, of US MSM, of the commanding heights of US Government and of the Ivy League colleges, it is PEANUTS. And, in any case, the Sauds are doenmeh.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Jewish control of the West is mediated by the number of 'Binyamins' dispensed to the political Sabbat Goyim, not the numbers of Jewish people. You know that-why dissemble? Can't help yourself, can you.

    paul ,

    Olga Guerin at the state controlled, Zionist BBC, is apparently the latest Corbyn style rabid anti-semite to be unmasked by the Board of Deputies.

    In her coverage of the Holocaust Industry's Auschwitz Jamboree, she made a very brief passing reference to Palestinians living under occupation, and apparently that is unpardonable anti Semitism.

    Capricornia Man ,

    Rich. you forgot to mention gross, systematic interference in the politics of the UK, US, Australia and who knows how many other countries.

    paul ,

    There are some grounds for optimism despite the utter undisguised barbarism of the US, Israel and their satellites.
    These vile regimes are having their last hurrah.
    The US is on the brink of imploding. It will collapse politically, financially, economically, socially, culturally, morally and spiritually.
    When it does, its many satraps and satellites in the EU, the Gulf dictatorships, Israel, will go down with it. It will be like eastern Europe in 1989.
    All it takes is for the front door to be kicked in and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down. Some sudden crisis or unforeseen event will bring this about. A sudden unwinding of the Debt and Derivatives time bombs. Another war or crisis in any one of a number of destabilised regions, Iran being an obvious favourite. There are many possibilities.
    And the blueprint for a better world already exists. In fact, it is already being implemented.
    Russia, China and Iran have survived the aggression directed against them. They have been left with few illusions about the nature of the US regime and the implacable hatred and violence they can expect from it.
    These are the key players in the Belt And Road, which provides a new template for development and mutual prosperity throughout the planet.
    China has built infrastructure and industry in Africa and elsewhere in a single generation which colonial powers neglected to provide in centuries of genocide, slaughter, slavery and rapacious exploitation. It is not surprising that these achievements have been denigrated and traduced by western regimes, who seek to ascribe and transfer their own dismal record of behaviour to China.
    The Zio Empire is lashing out like a wounded beast. It is even attacking its own most servile satellites and satraps. It just has to be fended off and left to die like a mad dog. Then a better world will emerge.

    George Cornell ,

    Taiwan has been a US vassal for a very long time and its location next to China, its history as a part of China and its lack of recognition should not be ignored. Its people are ethnically Chinese, speak Chinese and follow most Chinese customs. For you to equate this to the presence of American bases all over the world, meddling in hundreds of elections, assassinating elected leaders who won't kowtow, invading country after country and causing millions of deaths for "regime changes" is absolutely ridiculous.

    paul ,

    Taiwan is just another part of China that was brutally hacked off its body by rapacious western imperial powers. Like Hong Kong, Tsingtao and Manchuria.

    paul ,

    Or Shanghai. No self respecting nation would accept this, but China has been a model of restraint in not using force, but patient diplomacy, to rectify this imperial plunder.

    Antonym ,

    Or the Tibet, Aksai Chin, the Shaksgam Valley or the South China Sea. What's next, Siberia?

    paul ,

    Tibet was Chinese before the United Snakes or Kosherstan even existed.
    The South China Sea was recognised as Chinese until 1949, when the US puppet Chiang Kai Shek was booted out and skulked around on Taiwan.
    Then suddenly the SC Sea was no longer Chinese. Lord Neptune in Washington decreed otherwise.

    Martin Usher ,

    I remember the downing of flight 655 because it was on the evening news in the US. Literally. The Vincennes, the ship that shot down the airliner, had a news crew on board and they recorded the entire incident, the excitement of the incoming threat, the firing of a couple of Standard missiles at the threat, the cheering when the threat was neutralized followed by the "Oh, shit!" moment when they realized what they had done. This was in the pre-youTube days and the footage was only shown once to the best of my recollection so its probably long gone and buried. The lessons learned from that incident was that the crew needed better training -- they appeared to be near panic -- and you shouldn't really have those sorts of weapons near civilian airspace. Another lesson that's worth remembering is that this was 30 years ago, far enough in the past that the state of the art missile carrier has long been scrapped as obsolete (broken up in 2011). Put another way, we (the US) have effectively been in a state of war with Iran for over 40 years. Its expensive and pointless but I suppose the real goal is to keep our aerospace companies supplied with work.

    johny conspiranoid ,

    Yes, I remember that news clip as well. It was shown in the UK. There was one young 'dude' on a swivel seat working the aiming device and a bunch of people cheering him on, then "oh shit!" as you say. I also wonder if the whole thing was staged latter though, for damage limitation.

    Grafter ,

    It's all here .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onk_wI3ZVME

    Frank Speaker ,

    I remember seeing clips at the time, but this documentary is excellent, thanks for sharing. The Capt of the USS Vincennes should have been put behind bars.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    But he got a medal! The Vincennes returned to the USA to a 'heroes' welcome'. 'Warriors' one and all.

    Gall ,

    No surprise. Many of the low life cretins that were responsible for the Wounded Knee Massacre received the Congressional Medal of Honor. Ironic that many of the post humous awards and the Purple Hearts received were those wounded or killed by the 7th's own "friendly fire".

    [Jan 30, 2020] So it is a matter of change the flag in the US bases and all will be OK?

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DFC , Jan 30 2020 18:02 utc | 63

    A bit off-topic but seems that may be US will be Iraq, but who remains is NATO:

    https://middle-east-online.com/en/iraq-considers-nato-role-instead-us-led-coalition

    So it is a matter of change the flag in the US bases and all will be OK?

    [Jan 30, 2020] Brits in 1812 and Kushner plan

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    the pair , Jan 30 2020 16:04 utc | 33

    i always thought it a shame that the war of 1812 ended in a (more or less) draw. the brits had ideas for cutting up the US that would have been similar to that fake map (which was kinda amusing until i saw the "derpa derp russia" bit) and kept the settler trash from moving west and genociding everything that wasn't nailed down.

    oh well...at least it's comforting to think ahead a few decades when most of the southwest will be "little mexico".

    Walter , Jan 30 2020 16:12 utc | 35

    BM | Jan 30 2020 15:50 utc | 29 (map)

    I see Alaska and Hawaii have presumably gone back to the original owners, but it's not shown.

    I assume Alaska went to Russia (which is what a pal who fishes there expects!) (there is a plan, I am told, to run a rail tunnel under Bering Strait, Canada, America, and further South all the way as part of the OBOR project.). But that can happen if the natives wish association with Ru and Chin...

    (I'm not terribly serious about this, but Times do change and stuff does happen)

    I assume the Monarchy is re-established in Hawaii.

    In all seriousness, the DoD plans for Alaska if nukewar with USSR went against the US, was to use Gladio teams to control the natives, who were regarded as unloyal and sympathetic to the "commies"... no url, but I read this in FOIA stuff years ago.

    Jackrabbit | Jan 30 2020 17:14 utc | 55

    I assume that American Indians have already agreed to the North American Peace Plan (NAPP)so they can now go ahead and take 30% of the land that the NAPP grants them - just as with the Trump-Jared Plan to settle the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

    Will homes of White Americans that disagree be bulldozed like the Israelis do to Palestinians?

    [Jan 30, 2020] The Neocons Strike Back by Jacob Heilbrunn

    Notable quotes:
    "... A chorus of neocons rushed to second his praise: Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA officer and prominent Never Trumper, lauded Trump's intestinal fortitude, while Representative Liz Cheney hailed Trump's "decisive action." It was Carlson who was left sputtering about the forever wars. "Washington has wanted war with Iran for decades," Carlson said . "They still want it now. Let's hope they haven't finally gotten it." ..."
    "... Neoconservatism as a foreign policy ideology has been badly discredited over the last two decades, thanks to the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in the blinding flash of one drone strike, neoconservatism was easily able to reinsert itself in the national conversation. It now appears that Trump intends to make Soleimani's killing -- which has nearly drawn the U.S. into yet another conflict in the Middle East and, in typical neoconservative fashion, ended up backfiring and undercutting American goals in the region -- a central part of his 2020 reelection bid . ..."
    "... The neocons are starting to realize that Trump's presidency, at least when it comes to foreign policy, is no less vulnerable to hijacking than those of previous Republican presidents, including the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The leading hawks inside and outside the administration shaping its approach to Iran include Robert O'Brien, Bolton's disciple and successor as national security adviser; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook; Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; David Wurmser, a former adviser to Bolton; and Senators Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton. Perhaps no one better exemplifies the neocon ethos better than Cotton, a Kristol protégé who soaked up the teachings of the political philosopher Leo Strauss while studying at Harvard. Others who have been baying for conflict with Iran include Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who is now Trump's personal lawyer and partner in Ukrainian crime. In June 2018, Giuliani went to Paris to address the National Council of Resistance of Iran, whose parent organization is the Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e-Khalq, or MeK. Giuliani, who has been on the payroll of the MeK for years, demanded -- what else? -- regime change. ..."
    "... The fresh charge into battle of what Sidney Blumenthal once aptly referred to as an ideological light brigade brings to mind Hobbes's observation in Leviathan : "All men that are ambitious of military command are inclined to continue the causes of war; and to stir up trouble and sedition; for there is no honor military but by war; nor any such hope to mend an ill game, as by causing a new shuffle." The neocons, it appears, have caused a new shuffle. ..."
    "... the killing of Soleimani revealed that the neocon military-intellectual complex is very much still intact, with the ability to spring back to life from a state of suspended animation in an instant. Its hawkish tendencies remain widely prevalent not only in the Republican Party but also in the media, the think-tank universe, and in the liberal-hawk precincts of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the influence and reach of the anti-war right remains nascent; even if this contingent has popular support, it doesn't enjoy much backing in Washington beyond the mood swings of the mercurial occupant of the Oval Office. ..."
    "... The neocons supplied the patina of intellectual legitimacy for policies that might once have seemed outré. ..."
    "... But it was the neoconservatives, not the paleocons, who amassed influence in the 1990s and took over the GOP's foreign policy wing. Veteran neocons like Michael Ledeen were joined by a younger generation of journalists and policymakers that included Robert Kagan, Bill Kristol (who founded The Weekly Standard in 1994), Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas J. Feith. The neocons consistently pushed for a hard line against Iraq and Iran. In his 1996 book, Freedom Betrayed, for example, Ledeen, an expert on Italian fascism, declared that the right, rather than the left, should adhere to the revolutionary tradition of toppling dictatorships. In his 2002 book, The War Against the Terror Masters, Ledeen stated , "Creative destruction is our middle name. We tear down the old order every day." ..."
    "... Still, a number of neocons, including David Frum, Max Boot, Anne Applebaum, Jennifer Rubin, and Kristol himself, have continued to condemn Trump vociferously for his thuggish instincts at home and abroad. They are not seeking high-profile government careers in the Trump administration and so have been able to reinvent themselves as domestic regime-change advocates, something they have done quite skillfully. In fact, their writings are more pungent now that they have been liberated from the costive confines of the movement. ..."
    "... And so, urged on by Mike Pompeo, a staunch evangelical Christian, and Iraq War–era figures like David Wurmser , Trump is apparently prepared to target Iran for destruction. In a tweet, he dismissed his national security adviser, the Bolton protégé Robert O'Brien, for declaring that the strike against Soleimani would force Iran to negotiate: "Actually, I couldn't care less if they negotiate," he said . "Will be totally up to them but, no nuclear weapons and 'don't kill your protesters.'" Neocons have been quick to recognize the new, more belligerent Trump -- and the potential maneuvering room he's now created for their movement. Jonathan S. Tobin, a former editor at Commentary and a contributor to National Review , rejoiced in Haaretz that "the neo-isolationist wing of the GOP, for which Carlson is a spokesperson, is losing the struggle for control of Trump's foreign policy." Tobin, however, added an important caveat: "When it comes to Iran, Trump needs no prodding from the likes of Bolton to act like a neoconservative. Just as important, the entire notion of anyone -- be it Carlson, former White House senior advisor Steve Bannon, or any cabinet official like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo -- being able to control Trump is a myth." ..."
    "... One reason is institutional. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Hudson Institute, and AEI have all been sounding the tocsin about Iran for decades. Once upon a time, the neocons were outliers. Now they're the new establishment, exerting a kind of gravitational pull on debate, pulling politicians and a variety of news organizations into their orbit. The Hudson Institute, for example, recently held an event with former Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, who exhorted Iran's Revolutionary Guard to "peel away" from the mullahs and endorsed the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign. ..."
    "... Meanwhile, Wolfowitz, also writing in the Times , has popped up to warn Trump against trying to leave Syria: "To paraphrase Trotsky's aphorism about war, you may not be interested in the Middle East, but the Middle East is interested in you." With the "both-sides" ethos that prevails in the mainstream media, neocon ideas are just as good as any others for National Public Radio or The Washington Post, whose editorial page, incidentally, championed the Iraq War and has been imbued with a neocon, or at least liberal-hawk, tinge ever since Fred Hiatt took it over in 2000. ..."
    "... Above all, Trump hired Michael Flynn as his first national security adviser. Flynn was the co-author with Ledeen of a creepy tract called Field of Fight, in which they demanded a crusade against the Muslim world ..."
    "... At a minimum, the traditional Republican hard-line foreign policy approach has now fused with neoconservatism so that the two are virtually indistinguishable. At a maximum, neoconservatism shapes the dominant foreign policy worldview in Washington, which is why Democrats were falling over themselves to assure voters that Soleimani -- a "bad guy" -- had it coming. Any objections that his killing might boomerang back on the U.S. are met with cries from the right that Democrats are siding with the enemy. This truly is a policy of "maximum pressure" at home and abroad. ..."
    Jan 23, 2020 | newrepublic.com

    There was a time not so long ago, before President Donald Trump's surprise decision early this year to liquidate the Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani, when it appeared that America's neoconservatives were floundering. The president was itching to withdraw U.S. forces from Afghanistan. He was staging exuberant photo-ops with a beaming Kim Jong Un. He was reportedly willing to hold talks with the president of Iran, while clearly preferring trade wars to hot ones.

    Indeed, this past summer, Trump's anti-interventionist supporters in the conservative media were riding high. When he refrained from attacking Iran in June after it shot down an American drone, Fox News host Tucker Carlson declared , "Donald Trump was elected president precisely to keep us out of disaster like war with Iran." Carlson went on to condemn the hawks in Trump's Cabinet and their allies, who he claimed were egging the president on -- familiar names to anyone who has followed the decades-long neoconservative project of aggressively using military force to topple unfriendly regimes and project American power over the globe. "So how did we get so close to starting [a war]?" he asked. "One of [the hawks'] key allies is the national security adviser of the United States. John Bolton is an old friend of Bill Kristol's. Together they helped plan the Iraq War."

    By the time Trump met with Kim in late June, becoming the first sitting president to set foot on North Korean soil, Bolton was on the outs. Carlson was on the president's North Korean junket, while Trump's national security adviser was in Mongolia. "John Bolton is absolutely a hawk," Trump told NBC in June. "If it was up to him, he'd take on the whole world at one time, OK?" In September, Bolton was fired.

    The standard-bearer of the Republican Party had made clear his distaste for the neocons' belligerent approach to global affairs, much to the neocons' own entitled chagrin. As recently as December, Bolton, now outside the tent pissing in, was hammering Trump for "bluffing" through an announcement that the administration wanted North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. "The idea that we are somehow exerting maximum pressure on North Korea is just unfortunately not true," Bolton told Axios . Then Trump ordered the drone strike on Soleimani, drastically escalating a simmering conflict between Iran and the United States. All of a sudden the roles were reversed, with Bolton praising the president and asserting that Soleimani's death was " the first step to regime change in Tehran ." A chorus of neocons rushed to second his praise: Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA officer and prominent Never Trumper, lauded Trump's intestinal fortitude, while Representative Liz Cheney hailed Trump's "decisive action." It was Carlson who was left sputtering about the forever wars. "Washington has wanted war with Iran for decades," Carlson said . "They still want it now. Let's hope they haven't finally gotten it."

    Neoconservatism as a foreign policy ideology has been badly discredited over the last two decades, thanks to the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in the blinding flash of one drone strike, neoconservatism was easily able to reinsert itself in the national conversation. It now appears that Trump intends to make Soleimani's killing -- which has nearly drawn the U.S. into yet another conflict in the Middle East and, in typical neoconservative fashion, ended up backfiring and undercutting American goals in the region -- a central part of his 2020 reelection bid .

    The anti-interventionist right is freaking out. Writing in American Greatness, Matthew Boose declared , "[T]he Trump movement, which was generated out of opposition to the foreign policy blob and its endless wars, was revealed this week to have been co-opted to a great extent by neoconservatives seeking regime change." James Antle, the editor of The American Conservative, a publication founded in 2002 to oppose the Iraq War, asked , "Did Trump betray the anti-war right?"

    In the blinding flash of one drone strike, neoconservatism was easily able to reinsert itself in the national conversation.

    Their concerns are not unmerited. The neocons are starting to realize that Trump's presidency, at least when it comes to foreign policy, is no less vulnerable to hijacking than those of previous Republican presidents, including the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The leading hawks inside and outside the administration shaping its approach to Iran include Robert O'Brien, Bolton's disciple and successor as national security adviser; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook; Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; David Wurmser, a former adviser to Bolton; and Senators Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton. Perhaps no one better exemplifies the neocon ethos better than Cotton, a Kristol protégé who soaked up the teachings of the political philosopher Leo Strauss while studying at Harvard. Others who have been baying for conflict with Iran include Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who is now Trump's personal lawyer and partner in Ukrainian crime. In June 2018, Giuliani went to Paris to address the National Council of Resistance of Iran, whose parent organization is the Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e-Khalq, or MeK. Giuliani, who has been on the payroll of the MeK for years, demanded -- what else? -- regime change.

    The fresh charge into battle of what Sidney Blumenthal once aptly referred to as an ideological light brigade brings to mind Hobbes's observation in Leviathan : "All men that are ambitious of military command are inclined to continue the causes of war; and to stir up trouble and sedition; for there is no honor military but by war; nor any such hope to mend an ill game, as by causing a new shuffle." The neocons, it appears, have caused a new shuffle.

    Donald Trump has not dragged us into war with Iran (yet). But the killing of Soleimani revealed that the neocon military-intellectual complex is very much still intact, with the ability to spring back to life from a state of suspended animation in an instant. Its hawkish tendencies remain widely prevalent not only in the Republican Party but also in the media, the think-tank universe, and in the liberal-hawk precincts of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the influence and reach of the anti-war right remains nascent; even if this contingent has popular support, it doesn't enjoy much backing in Washington beyond the mood swings of the mercurial occupant of the Oval Office.

    But there was a time when the neoconservative coalition was not so entrenched -- and what has turned out to be its provisional state of exile lends some critical insight into how it managed to hang around respectable policymaking circles in recent years, and how it may continue to shape American foreign policy for the foreseeable future. When the neoconservatives came on the scene in the late 1960s, the Republican old guard viewed them as interlopers. The neocons, former Trotskyists turned liberals who broke with the Democratic Party over its perceived weakness on the Cold War, stormed the citadel of Republican ideology by emphasizing the relationship between ideas and political reality. Irving Kristol, one of the original neoconservatives, mused in 1985 that " what communists call the theoretical organs always end up through a filtering process influencing a lot of people who don't even know they're being influenced. In the end, ideas rule the world because even interests are defined by ideas."

    At pivotal moments in modern American foreign policy, the neocons supplied the patina of intellectual legitimacy for policies that might once have seemed outré. Jeane Kirkpatrick's seminal 1979 essay in Commentary, "Dictatorships and Double Standards," essentially set forth the lineaments of the Reagan doctrine. She assailed Jimmy Carter for attacking friendly authoritarian leaders such as the shah of Iran and Nicaragua's Anastasio Somoza. She contended that authoritarian regimes might molt into democracies, while totalitarian regimes would remain impregnable to outside influence, American or otherwise. Ronald Reagan read the essay and liked it. He named Kirkpatrick his ambassador to the United Nations, where she became the most influential neocon of the era for her denunciations of Arab regimes and defenses of Israel. Her tenure was also defined by the notion that it was perfectly acceptable for America to cozy up to noxious regimes, from apartheid South Africa to the shah's Iran, as part of the greater mission to oppose the red menace.

    The neocons supplied the patina of intellectual legitimacy for policies that might once have seemed outré.

    There was always tension between Reagan's affinity for authoritarian regimes and his hard-line opposition to Communist ones. His sunny persona never quite gelled with Kirkpatrick's more gelid view that communism was an immutable force, and in 1982, in a major speech to the British Parliament at Westminster emphasizing the power of democracy and free speech, he declared his intent to end the Cold War on American terms. As Reagan's second term progressed and democracy and free speech actually took hold in the waning days of the Soviet Union, many hawks declared that it was all a sham. Indeed, not a few neocons were livid, claiming that Reagan was appeasing the Soviet Union. But after the USSR collapsed, they retroactively blessed him as the anti-Communist warrior par excellence and the model for the future. The right was now a font of happy talk about the dawn of a new age of liberty based on free-market economics and American firepower.

    The fall of communism, in other words, set the stage for a new neoconservative paradigm. Francis Fukuyama's The End of History appeared a decade after Kirkpatrick's essay in Commentary and just before the Berlin Wall was breached on November 9, 1989. Here was a sharp break with the saturnine, realpolitik approach that Kirkpatrick had championed. Irving Kristol regarded it as hopelessly utopian -- "I don't believe a word of it," he wrote in a response to Fukuyama. But a younger generation of neocons, led by Irving's son, Bill Kristol, and Robert Kagan, embraced it. Fukuyama argued that Western, liberal democracy, far from being menaced, was now the destination point of the train of world history. With communism vanquished, the neocons, bearing the good word from Fukuyama, formulated a new goal: democracy promotion, by force if necessary, as a way to hasten history and secure the global order with the U.S. at its head. The first Gulf War in 1991, precipitated by Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, tested the neocons' resolve and led to a break in the GOP -- one that would presage the rise of Donald Trump. For decades, Patrick Buchanan had been regularly inveighing against what he came to call the neocon " amen corner" in and around the Washington centers of power, including A.M. Rosenthal and Charles Krauthammer, both of whom endorsed the '91 Gulf War. The neocons were frustrated by the measured approach taken by George H.W. Bush. He refused to crow about the fall of the Berlin Wall and kicked the Iraqis out of Kuwait but declined to invade Iraq and "finish the job," as his hawkish critics would later put it. Buchanan then ran for the presidency in 1992 on an America First platform, reviving a paleoconservative tradition that would partly inform Trump's dark horse run in 2016.

    But it was the neoconservatives, not the paleocons, who amassed influence in the 1990s and took over the GOP's foreign policy wing. Veteran neocons like Michael Ledeen were joined by a younger generation of journalists and policymakers that included Robert Kagan, Bill Kristol (who founded The Weekly Standard in 1994), Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas J. Feith. The neocons consistently pushed for a hard line against Iraq and Iran. In his 1996 book, Freedom Betrayed, for example, Ledeen, an expert on Italian fascism, declared that the right, rather than the left, should adhere to the revolutionary tradition of toppling dictatorships. In his 2002 book, The War Against the Terror Masters, Ledeen stated , "Creative destruction is our middle name. We tear down the old order every day."

    We all know the painful consequences of the neocons' obsession with creative destruction. In his second inaugural address, three and a half years after 9/11, George W. Bush cemented neoconservative ideology into presidential doctrine: "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." The neocons' hubris had already turned into nemesis in Iraq, paving the way for an anti-war candidate in Barack Obama.

    But it was Trump -- by virtue of running as a Republican -- who appeared to sound neoconservatism's death knell. He announced his Buchananesque policy of "America First" in a speech at Washington's Mayflower Hotel in 2016, signaling that he would not adhere to the long-standing Reaganite principles that had animated the party establishment.

    The pooh-bahs of the GOP openly declared their disdain and revulsion for Trump, leading directly to the rise of the Never Trump movement, which was dominated by neocons. The Never Trumpers ended up functioning as an informal blacklist for Trump once he became president. Elliott Abrams, for example, who was being touted for deputy secretary of state in February 2017, was rejected when Steve Bannon alerted Trump to his earlier heresies (though he later reemerged, in January 2019, as Trump's special envoy to Venezuela, where he has pushed for regime change). Not a few other members of the Republican foreign policy establishment suffered similar fates.

    Kristol's The Weekly Standard, which had held the neoconservative line through the Bush years and beyond , folded in 2018. Even the office building that used to house the American Enterprise Institute and the Standard, on the corner of 17th and M streets in Washington, has been torn down, leaving an empty, boarded-up site whose symbolism speaks for itself.

    Still, a number of neocons, including David Frum, Max Boot, Anne Applebaum, Jennifer Rubin, and Kristol himself, have continued to condemn Trump vociferously for his thuggish instincts at home and abroad. They are not seeking high-profile government careers in the Trump administration and so have been able to reinvent themselves as domestic regime-change advocates, something they have done quite skillfully. In fact, their writings are more pungent now that they have been liberated from the costive confines of the movement.

    It was Trump -- by virtue of running as a Republican -- who appeared to sound neoconservatism's death knell.

    But other neocons -- the ones who want to wield positions of influence and might -- have, more often than not, been able to hold their noses. Stephen Wertheim, writing in The New York Review of Books, has perceptively dubbed this faction the anti-globalist neocons. Led by John Bolton, they believe Trump performed a godsend by elevating the term globalism "from a marginal slur to the central foil of American foreign policy and Republican politics," Wertheim argued . The U.S. need not bother with pesky multilateral institutions or international agreements or the entire postwar order, for that matter -- it's now America's way or the highway.

    And so, urged on by Mike Pompeo, a staunch evangelical Christian, and Iraq War–era figures like David Wurmser , Trump is apparently prepared to target Iran for destruction. In a tweet, he dismissed his national security adviser, the Bolton protégé Robert O'Brien, for declaring that the strike against Soleimani would force Iran to negotiate: "Actually, I couldn't care less if they negotiate," he said . "Will be totally up to them but, no nuclear weapons and 'don't kill your protesters.'" Neocons have been quick to recognize the new, more belligerent Trump -- and the potential maneuvering room he's now created for their movement. Jonathan S. Tobin, a former editor at Commentary and a contributor to National Review , rejoiced in Haaretz that "the neo-isolationist wing of the GOP, for which Carlson is a spokesperson, is losing the struggle for control of Trump's foreign policy." Tobin, however, added an important caveat: "When it comes to Iran, Trump needs no prodding from the likes of Bolton to act like a neoconservative. Just as important, the entire notion of anyone -- be it Carlson, former White House senior advisor Steve Bannon, or any cabinet official like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo -- being able to control Trump is a myth."

    In other words, whether the neocons themselves are occupying top positions in the Trump administration is almost irrelevant. The ideology itself has reemerged to a degree that even Trump himself seems hard pressed to resist it -- if he even wants to.

    How were the neocons able to influence another Republican presidency, one that was ostensibly dedicated to curbing their sway?

    One reason is institutional. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Hudson Institute, and AEI have all been sounding the tocsin about Iran for decades. Once upon a time, the neocons were outliers. Now they're the new establishment, exerting a kind of gravitational pull on debate, pulling politicians and a variety of news organizations into their orbit. The Hudson Institute, for example, recently held an event with former Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, who exhorted Iran's Revolutionary Guard to "peel away" from the mullahs and endorsed the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign. The event was hosted by Michael Doran, a former senior director on George W. Bush's National Security Council and a senior fellow at the institute, who wrote in The New York Times on January 3, "The United States has no choice, if it seeks to stay in the Middle East, but to check Iran's military power on the ground." Then there's Jamie M. Fly, a former staffer to Senator Marco Rubio who was appointed this past August to head Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty; he previously co-authored an essay in Foreign Affairs contending that it isn't enough to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities: "If the United States seriously considers military action, it would be better to plan an operation that not only strikes the nuclear program but aims to destabilize the regime, potentially resolving the Iranian nuclear crisis once and for all."

    Meanwhile, Wolfowitz, also writing in the Times , has popped up to warn Trump against trying to leave Syria: "To paraphrase Trotsky's aphorism about war, you may not be interested in the Middle East, but the Middle East is interested in you." With the "both-sides" ethos that prevails in the mainstream media, neocon ideas are just as good as any others for National Public Radio or The Washington Post, whose editorial page, incidentally, championed the Iraq War and has been imbued with a neocon, or at least liberal-hawk, tinge ever since Fred Hiatt took it over in 2000.

    But there are plenty of institutions in Washington, and neoconservatism's seemingly inescapable influence cannot be chalked up to the swamp alone. Some etiolated form of what might be called Ledeenism lingered on before taking on new life at the outset of the Trump administration. Trump's overt animus toward Muslims, for example, meant that figures such as Frank Gaffney, who opposed arms-control treaties with Moscow as a member of the Reagan administration and resigned in protest of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, achieved a new prominence. During the Obama administration, Gaffney, the head of the Center for Security Policy, claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated the White House and National Security Agency.

    Above all, Trump hired Michael Flynn as his first national security adviser. Flynn was the co-author with Ledeen of a creepy tract called Field of Fight, in which they demanded a crusade against the Muslim world: "We're in a world war against a messianic mass movement of evil people." It was one of many signs that Trump was susceptible to ideas of a civilizational battle against "Islamo-fascism," which Norman Podhoretz and other neocons argued, in the wake of 9/11, would lead to World War III. In their millenarian ardor and inflexible support for Israel, the neocons find themselves in a position precisely cognate to evangelical Christians -- both groups of true believers trying to enact their vision through an apostate. But perhaps the neoconservatives' greatest strength lies in the realm of ideas that Irving Kristol identified more than three decades ago. The neocons remain the winners of that battle, not because their policies have made the world or the U.S. more secure, but by default -- because there are so few genuinely alternative ideas that are championed with equal zeal. The foreign policy discussion surrounding Soleimani's killing -- which accelerated Iran's nuclear weapons program, diminished America's influence in the Middle East, and entrenched Iran's theocratic regime -- has largely occurred on a spectrum of the neocons' making. It is a discussion that accepts premises of the beneficence of American military might and hegemony -- Hobbes's "ill game" -- and naturally bends the universe toward more war.

    At a minimum, the traditional Republican hard-line foreign policy approach has now fused with neoconservatism so that the two are virtually indistinguishable. At a maximum, neoconservatism shapes the dominant foreign policy worldview in Washington, which is why Democrats were falling over themselves to assure voters that Soleimani -- a "bad guy" -- had it coming. Any objections that his killing might boomerang back on the U.S. are met with cries from the right that Democrats are siding with the enemy. This truly is a policy of "maximum pressure" at home and abroad.

    As Trump takes an extreme hard line against Iran, the neoconservatives may ultimately get their long-held wish of a war with the ayatollahs. When it ends in a fresh disaster, they can always argue that it only failed because it wasn't prosecuted vigorously enough -- and the shuffle will begin again.

    Jacob Heilbrunn is the editor of The National Interest and the author of They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons. @ JacobHeilbrunn

    Read More Politics , The Soapbox , Donald Trump , Islamic Republic of Iran , Qassem Soleimani , Bill Kristol , Irving Kristol , David Frum , John Bolton , Norman Podhoretz , Doug Feith , Paul Wolfowitz , George W. Bush , George H.W. Bush , Ronald Reagan , Pat Buchanan , Mike Pompeo , Tom Cotton , Lindsey Graham , Rudy Giuliani , Gulf War , Iraq War , Cold War , Francis Fukuyama , Jeane Kirkpatrick

    [Jan 30, 2020] Trump's 'Vision' Occupation Now, Occupation Forever might diminish his chances for reelection

    What is interesting is that this issue is not so much about Israel and Palestinians, but about the USA (and Trump personnel) credibility. Which is by-and-large lost. Behaving like a gangster on international arena has its advantages, but also a huge disadvantages. As Trump recently have found with Soleimani assassination.
    There is also connected issue of Presidential election which I think Trump now will lose, because he somehow morphed into Hillary (let's call him Hillary2020) -- the person most reasonable people hate. His base will stay with him, but that's not enough to win the elections. When people start viewing a person as midrange gangster, it does not help to win the elections. Impeachment or no impeachment.
    The idea of Bantustans is an attractive solution but virtually guarantee that Syria and Egypt will remain hostile. And that the conflict between "settlers" and "natives" became more acute. Of cause, Israel will fight with Arabs till the USA stop military aid which maintains parity with neighboring states (eve superiority is certain types of weapons) . With tiny population of around 8 million against over 100 millions, so more then 1:10) maintaining parity is possible because it is fully financed by the USA. But the USA global empire is gradually crumbling, because neoliberalism is dead. In military affairs 2:1 numerical superiority is a serious matter. And the threat of using nuclear weapons is a very tricky business because it is unclear how Pakistan will react if a Muslim nations is attacked. Also major hits with conventional weapons are enough to make major cities of Israel uninhabitable and Israel state to collapse.
    The plan to use jihadists to destroy secular governed in Syria and partition the country mostly (with the exception of areas occupied by the USA tropus -- "stealing opil" according to Trump) failed and being surrounded by Syria (with its hardened by fight with Jihadists army and more or less modern weapon systems) and Egypt (which is kept neutral only by the USA money) is the permanent threat that Israel probably will never able to solve. And it can keep up only by relying of the USA help and, especially money. Citizen of both countries are adamantly anti-Israel. Especially after the story of Israel support of "pocket juhadis." So I doubt that Israel can solve its problem even by just giving back Golan heights.
    The tragedy is the Soviet Jews who emigrated to Israel hoping to find a "normal" country is not only the for many their qualification proved to be useless and they waited their lives working in third rate jobs, but also that they are now deeply entrenched into Gordian knot of "settler" vs natives conflict which can not be solved peacefully like in USA or Australia. That's probably why a large part of emigrants now supports Likud. They feel that their back is against the wall.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan physically and politically separates Palestinians by placing them within a non-contiguous homeland (Areas A and B and Gaza), and declaring them citizens of that homeland. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan grants the Palestinian homeland autonomy over civil matters like education and healthcare, while critical areas such as trade, immigration, and security will remain under Israeli control. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan is political sleight of hand: a thinly veiled attempt to claim that Israel, a state that rules over roughly the same number of Jews and Palestinians, is actually a Jewish-majority state. Also like apartheid South Africa, the Trump administration claims the homelands are a temporary solution. Once the indigenous population proves itself ready for self-governance they will one day be granted something that resembles a state. ..."
    "... The Trump plan, much like the decades-long peace process that it crowns, gives Israel cover to perpetuate what is known as the status quo: Israel as the sole sovereign controlling the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, depriving millions of stateless people of basic civil rights, restricting their movement, criminalizing speech that may harm "public order," jailing them in indefinite "administrative detention" without trial or charge, and dispossessing them of their land -- all while congressional leaders, the European Union and much of the rest of the world applaud and encourage this charade, solemnly expressing their commitment to the resumption of "meaningful negotiations." ..."
    "... Israel's defenders like to say that Israel is being singled out, and they are right. Israel is the only state perpetuating a permanent military occupation, with discriminatory laws for separate groups living in the same territory, that self-identified liberals around the world go out of their way to justify, defend and even fund. ..."
    "... there is no reason to believe that this is any thing other than another $50B gift to the Israelis. Minus what ever is skimmed off and given to the Trump and Kushner clans of course. ..."
    "... I propose that the US withhold all aid to Israel and sanction the country and its government officials (Magnitsky Act) until it demonstrates that it respects universal human rights and shows that it can behave itself as a normal country. Israel and Iran can work on this study of 'how to be a normal country' together. I would expect the Iranians to graduate long before Israel does. ..."
    "... Probably, Israelis must abandon their illegal settlements on Palestinian territory, and Palestinians must acknowledge that Israel exists. This will come through only by mutual exhaustion. Otherwise, both will perish in hatred. ..."
    "... One thing wrong is that Israel is guilty of war crimes and apartheid and while many countries are guilty of serious crimes, there is no need to single out Israel for praise and billions of dollars of aid and diplomatic support. Just treat them as yet another country with a rotten human rights record which pretends to be better than it is. Apartheid South Africa never had it so good. ..."
    "... The Bantustans of South Africa appear to be the model here. ..."
    "... The U.S.A. and Israel are far too entangled for the former to continue to play the part of a peacemaker between the latter and Palestine with any credibility. Indeed, The Donald's own family - the Kushners - are far too entangled with Israel! ..."
    Jan 30, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Sheena Anne Arackal explains very well how the Trump administration's plan formalizes a system of apartheid at the expense of the Palestinians:

    Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan physically and politically separates Palestinians by placing them within a non-contiguous homeland (Areas A and B and Gaza), and declaring them citizens of that homeland. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan grants the Palestinian homeland autonomy over civil matters like education and healthcare, while critical areas such as trade, immigration, and security will remain under Israeli control. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan is political sleight of hand: a thinly veiled attempt to claim that Israel, a state that rules over roughly the same number of Jews and Palestinians, is actually a Jewish-majority state. Also like apartheid South Africa, the Trump administration claims the homelands are a temporary solution. Once the indigenous population proves itself ready for self-governance they will one day be granted something that resembles a state.

    Trump's annexation and apartheid plan destroys any remaining illusions that a "two-state solution" is still possible, and it proposes a Palestinian "state" that possesses none of the qualities of an independent state. It mockingly carves out a separate territory that would exist to contain and control the Palestinian population while denying them their political and economic rights, and this territory would remain subjugated under Israeli rule by design. This reinforces everything outrageous and unjust under the current occupation, and it seeks to make sure that the occupation never ends. To add insult to injury, the supporters of the plan disingenuously present this as a boon to the very people that it oppresses.

    Nathan Thrall observes that the Trump plan is the awful but predictable conclusion to a U.S. policy that has consistently favored Israel to the detriment of Palestinians:

    The Trump plan, much like the decades-long peace process that it crowns, gives Israel cover to perpetuate what is known as the status quo: Israel as the sole sovereign controlling the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, depriving millions of stateless people of basic civil rights, restricting their movement, criminalizing speech that may harm "public order," jailing them in indefinite "administrative detention" without trial or charge, and dispossessing them of their land -- all while congressional leaders, the European Union and much of the rest of the world applaud and encourage this charade, solemnly expressing their commitment to the resumption of "meaningful negotiations."

    Israel's defenders like to say that Israel is being singled out, and they are right. Israel is the only state perpetuating a permanent military occupation, with discriminatory laws for separate groups living in the same territory, that self-identified liberals around the world go out of their way to justify, defend and even fund.

    The only good thing that might come from the administration's obscene plan is that it will make it impossible for a growing number of Americans to accept continued U.S. enabling of Israel's illegal annexations, war crimes, and human rights abuses.

    J Villain • a day ago

    If any one missed it trump let slip yesterday that the $50B that is supposed to go to the Palestinians under this plan will be given to Israel to disperse to that Palestinians. The Israelis however already collect taxes for the Palestinians that they don't hand over so there is no reason to believe that this is any thing other than another $50B gift to the Israelis. Minus what ever is skimmed off and given to the Trump and Kushner clans of course.
    si91 J Villain • a day ago
    Fatah and Hamas steal the aid they get anyway, so why shouldn't Israel withhold it until the Palestinians behave?
    Begemot si91 • a day ago
    I propose that the US withhold all aid to Israel and sanction the country and its government officials (Magnitsky Act) until it demonstrates that it respects universal human rights and shows that it can behave itself as a normal country. Israel and Iran can work on this study of 'how to be a normal country' together. I would expect the Iranians to graduate long before Israel does.
    si91 Begemot • a day ago
    Iran stones gay people to death and rapes women before executing them. Israel has nude beaches and gay pride parades. Israel is more "normal" than the US in some ways.
    Jeff Dickey si91 • 17 hours ago
    Found the Likudnik.
    Name si91 • 2 hours ago
    As soon as US Jews accept that the US is a Christian country, with laws forbidding Christians from selling land to Jews, we can talk about how normal Israel is
    si91 Name • an hour ago
    It is the Palestinian Authority that makes land sale to Israelis punishable by death, not the other way around.
    6stringfury Name • an hour ago
    'Laws forbidding Christians from selling land to Jews'...Not sure what you're trying to say here.. In the meantime, over there, Arabs kill their own for selling land to Jews while Jews freely sell land to Arabs.
    6stringfury Begemot • an hour ago
    Arab terrorists in Israeli jails are earning law degrees. Most Iranians I know in N America want the mullahs gone. A Jewish friend of mine in Tel Aviv had his life saved by an Israeli Arab surgeon. Get a grip on reality.
    Name si91 • 2 hours ago
    May be because it is not Israel's money to hold?
    si91 Name • an hour ago
    Would you give money to someone using it to kill you?
    Robert in Denmark • a day ago
    Israel and Palaestina are, of course, modern nations. To the Christian, divine revelation was complete with the last apostle's death (probably John, at the beginning of the 2nd century C.E.), and if there was a kind of collective guilt for unbelief on the part of the Jewish nation, it was paid once and for all by 135 C.E. (cf. Exodus 20:5-6), when said people became dispersed from the holy city and the holy land. There is no reason why modern Israelis and Palaestinians should not be able to make peace on common terms that include two states with normal borders.

    Probably, Israelis must abandon their illegal settlements on Palestinian territory, and Palestinians must acknowledge that Israel exists. This will come through only by mutual exhaustion. Otherwise, both will perish in hatred. This is no different from other leftovers from the WWI/WWII/cold war, e.g. North Korea / South Korea, China / Taiwan, the former Soviet Union (now fifteen independent nations), and Kurds in Turkey / Syria / Iraq / Iran (the statesman would prefer to get rid of the Kurds by giving them a nation, but the despot would prefer to cling on to them for all the trouble, which after all keeps him in power against his own people), Africa, et.c. Probably, the conservative strategy must be to avoid great plans, keep peace or low level war as well as possible, and let time only do the healing. Certainly, no more military adventures, neither on part of the U.S.A. or of Denmark. But go home.

    6stringfury Robert in Denmark • 38 minutes ago
    US needs to do what it can to keep troops out of the mideast. As far as Israel goes, the Israelis wish to defend themselves without an outside army. Ask any Jew on the street over there. Last time there was outside manpower help (vs the Seleucids) the results were the Roman-Jewish wars. Not good. In 135CE, Judea was renamed Palestina by Hadrian as a slap in the face to the Jewish losers.

    ffwd 1920... League of Nations - San Remo Conference establishes Jewish homeland on WHAT IS NOW ISREAL+ JORDAN. Recognized by all member nations at that time. 1922- Churchill bows to Arab pressure and lops off about 70% of above territory to form Transjordan - designated for the Arabs. There's your current 'Palestine'.

    Note: Up until the 1960s, the Arabs in the area referred to themselves as 'Arabs', not Palestinians.

    KGB created the 'Palestine Liberation Organization" around 1964. Jordan controlled the West Bank from 48-67, yet no outcry for a Palestinian state. Hmmmm.
    The Jews who lived in the area from 1920-s -to '48 considered themselves 'Palestinians'. In that time, Palestinian currency had Hebrew lettering, Jerusalem Post of today was Palestinian Post of that period, etc.

    si91 • a day ago • edited
    "Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan physically and politically separates Palestinians by placing them within a non-contiguous homeland (Areas A and B and Gaza), and declaring them citizens of that homeland."

    This is an arrangement that the Palestinians themselves accepted at the Oslo Accords.

    "depriving millions of stateless people of basic civil rights, restricting their movement, criminalizing speech that may harm "public order," jailing them in indefinite "administrative detention" without trial or charge"

    ...in response to their terrorism. Seems fair to me.

    "This reinforces everything outrageous and unjust under the current occupation, and it seeks to make sure that the occupation never ends."

    The occupation will end when the Palestinians care more about building a state than destroying the Jewish one. The ball is in their court.

    "To add insult to injury, the supporters of the plan disingenuously present this as a boon to the very people that it oppresses."

    That's because it is. If the Palestinians behave, and make meaningful democratic reforms, and make peace with Israel, they get aid and a state. What wrong with that? The outrage here would be easier to take seriously if the people who are so upset suggested a peace plan that would be more "fair" in their view.

    "Israel is the only state perpetuating a permanent military occupation, with discriminatory laws for separate groups living in the same territory, that self-identified liberals around the world go out of their way to justify, defend and even fund."

    Aside from India, Armenia, Turkey...

    Osse si91 • a day ago
    One thing wrong is that Israel is guilty of war crimes and apartheid and while many countries are guilty of serious crimes, there is no need to single out Israel for praise and billions of dollars of aid and diplomatic support. Just treat them as yet another country with a rotten human rights record which pretends to be better than it is. Apartheid South Africa never had it so good.
    si91 Osse • a day ago
    "Apartheid" Israel is actually the only apartheid free state in the region, and treats the Arabs better than any Arab state. In our conflict with the Islamic hordes, we don't have the luxury of nitpicking about Jews building houses on disputed land. In any case, while the apartheid charge is untenable against Israel, it would be instructive to remember that we allied with Apartheid South Africa against Communism and gave them diplomatic support while also supporting equality for the black Africans.
    Name si91 • 2 hours ago
    Which is why, it proposes to swap Arab Israelis to the Palestinian State? May be we can swap some US Jews to some other nation?
    6stringfury Name • an hour ago
    Agree. Swap Schiff,Nadler, Schumer, Soros(jew in name only), Stelter, JZucker, Streisand, half of the media to Greenland. A lot of us remaining silent US Jews would be relieved.
    FL_Cottonmouth si91 • 21 hours ago
    Ah yes, the fearsome Indian, Armenian, and Turkish lobbies in Washington, D.C.
    =marco01= si91 • 17 hours ago
    I wonder how you would 'behave' if the land your ancestors lived on for untold centuries was suddenly stolen from you. So rude of the Palestinians to not just give up and move out when European Zionists immigrated and declared Palestine theirs.
    si91 =marco01= • 16 hours ago • edited
    I know refugees from the Partition of India, the Expulsion of Asians from Uganda, and the Fall of Saigon personally. I've also met people who've fled Venezuela and Cuba. These are people who, unlike the Palestinians, fled very long distances, actually had an established state and national identity which was lost, had no way of avoiding war through a peace deal, and didn't have 20+ states to flee to. Not a single suicide bomber among them. The Palestinians, spoiled, petulant brats that they are, could learn a thing or two from other refugees on how to behave.
    Name si91 • 2 hours ago
    So your point is, too bad so sad, International Law is for suckers. How Tikkun Olam of you
    si91 Name • an hour ago
    My point is that the Palestinian situation is no different from that of many other groups, and they should behave accordingly. What's wrong with that?
    6stringfury =marco01= • 26 minutes ago
    Jews have been living there continuously for over 2500 years. Back around 1099, the Crusaders were murdering Jews in Jerusalem as a sideshow for warring with the Muslims there. Jews in Safed developed the Kabbalah in the 15th century. Jews and Arabs there all along. A lot of the Jews came from across the Ottoman empire, as did the Arabs. The place was a forgotten backwater. But a lot more Arabs showed up in the early 20th C as Jews were building and cultivating the land...availability of work played a part. Read my reply to the guy from Denmark.
    stephen pickard • a day ago
    Did I see the proposed map correctly, because that map looks like the reservations that we permitted the sovereign indigenous people to have here in the US. What could go wrong when the Palestinians do not have a way out except through Israeli territory.
    si91 stephen pickard • a day ago
    Lesotho has no way out except through South Africa, Vatican City and San Marino except through Italy, etc. Not really a problem.
    Sid Finster stephen pickard • 11 hours ago
    The Bantustans of South Africa appear to be the model here.
    Clyde Schechter • a day ago
    "the Trump plan grants the Palestinian homeland autonomy over civil matters like education and healthcare, while critical areas such as trade, immigration, and security will remain under Israeli control. "

    So there isn't even a pretense of an independent Palestinian homeland in this. Education and healthcare are always the purview of subordinated entities, while trade, and immigration are the perogatives of superordinate entities. Just think about the Federal government in the US vis-à-vis the states (whose sovereignty, by now, everyone agrees is a joke), or the EU vs the member states.

    Except the Israel/Palestine case there isn't even an accession of the subordinate to superordinate power by consent (as when the US and EU were formed).

    FL_Cottonmouth • 21 hours ago
    The U.S.A. and Israel are far too entangled for the former to continue to play the part of a peacemaker between the latter and Palestine with any credibility. Indeed, The Donald's own family - the Kushners - are far too entangled with Israel!
    Jens Christian • 16 hours ago
    Not uncritically against Israel and its policies against the Palestinians, the settlements on the west bank was a giant mistake by Israel., and a crime against international law... but lets be realistic, Israel are not going to forcefully remove the 300.000 jews in east Jerusalem and the 400.000 in the settlements on the west bank. But you are calling israel apartheid if they don't remove them and move back to un partition plan of 1947.

    And lets be honest. A sizable proportion of Palestinians will fight and never allow Israel rights to exist peacefully in any shape or form A view point im suspecting Daniel Larison share. If not, he would be more nuanced in his description of how Israel and the Palestinians got to this point.

    Red brick Jens Christian • 5 hours ago
    The Jews in Israel won't let what happened to the Boers in South Africa happen to them. They are not going to end their policies toward the Palestinians and they have the Nukes to tell the rest of the World to shove off.
    Fatnot • 9 hours ago
    Dead on arrival...and justifiably so.
    Dollface • 4 hours ago • edited
    Colonial scamming.

    [Jan 30, 2020] Trump as a wonderfully ignorant baby for one small country

    Great strategy. Especially if Trump thinks that association with Kushner and Netanyahu can help him to win 2020 election. God help him... I think he put the final nail into his defeat in 2020, especially if Sanders is his opponent.
    Jan 30, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Serge | 30 January 2020 at 11:56 AM

    I don't believe Trump was invited either:

    "Kushner and Greenblatt have limited the plan's distribution over the two years they have been crafting it. It has been kept secret "to ensure people approach it with an open mind" when it is released, a senior administration official said.

    "Only four people have regular access - Kushner, Greenblatt, U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman and Kushner aide Avi Berkowitz, the official said."
    What's the common denominator among these men here? The nose knows.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinian-trump/in-leaky-white-house-trump-team-keeps-middle-east-peace-plan-secret-idUSKCN1RM2GQ

    Or for the Golan decision:

    "Speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition gathering in Las Vegas, Trump said he made the snap decision during a discussion with his top Middle East peace advisers, including the U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and son-in-law Jared Kushner.

    "I said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a lot of things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie," Trump said to laughter from the Las Vegas crowd.

    "'How do you like the idea of me recognizing exactly what we're discussing?'" said Trump, recounting the conversation.

    Trump, who typically demands short sharp briefings and is known for his colorful retelling of stories, said Friedman was shocked, "like a wonderful, beautiful baby," and asked the President if he would actually do it.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-israel/trump-says-he-made-golan-heights-decision-after-a-quick-history-lesson-idUSKCN1RI0N7

    A wonderful, beautiful baby INDEED.

    [Jan 30, 2020] Trump and son-in-law Jared's vision laid bare: cloaked as "let's legitimize stollen property and steal more"

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 30 2020 14:22 utc | 19

    Trump and son-in-law Jared's vision laid bare: cloaked as "let's legitimize stollen property and steal more"

    it also allows Jerusalem to extend Israeli law to all the existing settlements, which is tantamount to annexation.
    in a closed door meeting of the usual suspects-

    Times of Israel:
    Israeli Envoy to US Says Palestinians Won't Have a State in a Long Time Under Trump's Plan

    WASHINGTON -- US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman told a gathering of American Jewish and Christian Evangelical leaders that it would take a long time for a Palestinian state to emerge under the White House's Middle East peace plan, according to sources in the room.

    Shortly after US President Donald Trump unveiled his long-awaited proposal Tuesday, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flanked by his side, Friedman met with a group of more than 20 Jewish and Evangelical leaders for an off-the-record briefing.[.]

    and Bibi smiles. ... a long time if ever.

    Kabobyak , Jan 30 2020 14:35 utc | 21

    Florin @ 3

    Thanks for your thoughtful post, and the Mondoweiss article was very good. It presents a useful comparison between ethnonationalism here in the US and in Israel. While one is condemned (by "woke" and almost all "unwoke"!), the other is accepted or ignored by many of the same folks. I will use this when discussing the issue with those with open minds; the challenge is finding the key to open minds, without moving into polarity which entrenches folks in their views.

    As to the term "anti-semitism" it is so ingrained into usage I don't see it going away any time soon. I could see the narrative shifting as more people become aware that criticizing Israel or opposing their actions is not "anti-semitic", and maybe they could also learn the points you make about who semites actually are.

    As to "Zionism", most people don't even know what it is (at least in the area where I live). They have heard the term but make little connection with it actually being Jewish ethnonationalism. I feel the term Zionism is valid for usage, but once again the challenge is shifting the narrative so that people understand what it truly entails. Years ago, the UN passed a resolution equating Zionism with Racism; of course the usual suspects voted against that.

    [Jan 30, 2020] Flash! Trump has solved the Israeli-Palestinian problem. (irony)

    Rephrasing Lenin: hate became a material force when it is shared by the large number of people
    Now the defeat of Trump in 2020 elections looks much more probable... Being considered a puppet of Kushner and being closly associated with Natuanyhu does not look like a winning strategy. He might lose Florida.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Mahmoud Abbas has stated that his side will not accept this ..."
    "... the optics look bad with one criminal supporting another. ..."
    "... IMHO the mindset and agenda behind this is as follows: ..."
    "... Offer the Palestinians something they only can refuse ..."
    "... Then say those damn Palestinians dont want peace, we tried it, they dont even want to discuss our very generous terms (sic) ..."
    "... Then the Nethanyahus and fellow imperial Zionists take this narrative to claim talking with Palestinians will never work ..."
    "... Which then will open up the road for their long term plan to totally and forever reject any rights of the Palestinians, and go full force into annexing all they can get ..."
    "... It is not some naive plan to bring peace, but to give the Likudniks what they have dreamed of for so long: To not having to give even the smallest shit about international law, to never having to be bothered with it, and just rely totally on the military force to expand their growing regional-imperial ambitions. ..."
    "... ''The proposals laid out by President Trump yesterday seemingly cement "unshakeable, unbreakable" U.S. support for Israel by offering the Israeli government unconditional American support for immediate annexation of land in the West Bank, while conditioning and constraining Palestinian self-determination to meet any and all Israeli security needs.'' ..."
    "... IMO the Israelis who are overwhelmingly a tribal and exclusionist people will never allow Palestinian prosperity. ..."
    "... Allow prosperity for the Palestinians? They view the Palestinians as little more than chattel under their feet. It's documented that the IDF's head Rabbi said so openly. And any Jew who dares to stand up against their aggression against the Palestinians, are labeled as a self-hating Jew. ..."
    "... Sheldon Adelson and prominent Zionist leaders were present for Trump Deal. But not one Palestinian. ..."
    "... William Polk has a nice article by Gershon Baskin of what the future could bring. I find it a quite plausible prediction. The legislation for confiscating Palestinian property in Jerusalem is in place. "Encountering Peace: Have We No Shame?" http://www.williampolk.com/assets/israel--yesterday%2c-today-and-tomorrow.pdf ..."
    Jan 30, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    The Palestinians are offered very little in this final reconciliation between the US and the forces of Zionisn within and without the US. If the sons and daughters of Ishmael (look it up) behave and cooperate with their Israeli guardians, they will be rewarded with development money intended to comfort them in their helotry. Trump did say to Bibi at the ceremony that Bibi would have the Palestinian money with which to influence future events, but perhaps that was merely clumsy. Trump also referred to "Israel's Holy Land." I suppose that still leaves open the possibility of "religious tourism" as the Israelis call pilgrimage?

    In Trump's plan Israel will forever control a strip of territory along the Jordanian border as sovereign to themselves. But, in return the Palestinian "state" might receive an embassy from the US, located in "eastern" Jerusalem. I suppose that would be out in that valley to the east that the mandatory British government included as being within the boundaries of Jerusalem.

    Trump seems really to think that Palestinians are like stray dogs who will lick your hand if you give them something, anything, to eat. Perhaps that is the general attitude in New York City.

    Mahmoud Abbas has stated that his side will not accept this, but at least there is peace between the US and Israel. pl

    the optics look bad with one criminal supporting another... someone said israel is like nazi germany... the analogy seems to fit..

    james | 28 January 2020 at 07:32 PM

    So Trump has elevated himself as a Muktar for Bibi as well as MBS. Hmmm...... We saw him dancing the sword dance with MBS's servants, guess we will now see him dancing the Horah for Bibi.

    This whole scenario smacks of the Keystone Cops segment, without the laugh track.

    J | 28 January 2020 at 08:32 PM
    So this is the result of three years of effort from Jarred? At least he hasn't been working on the economy. Does Trump really think the Palestinians are going to unilaterally disarm, have their borders controlled by the IDF with future cross border inspections run by the same folks doing so now, all in exchange for some nebulous funding and promises of some land swaps? It might serve as a distraction from Bibi's troubles but I can't see anyone taking this "deal" seriously.
    Fred | 28 January 2020 at 09:25 PM
    I'm much taken by the two bumps of territory along the Egypt/Israel border that stick out like sore-thumbs in Trump's let's-pretend map.

    Where will the Palestinians come from to inhabit those "industrial" and "residential" parcels of land?

    I suspect that those two bumps of land represent the two bantustans that are going to be created (out of thin-air, apparently) specifically to house "Israeli Arabs".

    If I'm right then Trump's plan is simply Apartheid on steroids.

    Yeah, Right | 28 January 2020 at 09:32 PM
    The possibility of a formal, however unreal, Palestinian state is being cast [so as not to anger those to the right of Netanyahu] as something for the future if all goes well. As for the money, it is to be geared towards tying the Palestinians even tighter into the economy of Israel than has been the case since the Oslo accords.

    No, it cannot fly and certainly not with Jordan. The King of Saudi Arabia [not MbS, I note] called Mahmoud Abbas to state that his country stands firm behind the Palestinians. Of course, the proposed "Steal of the Century" is a non-starter for Jordan. What actually is done unilaterally by Israel could actually put into jeopardy some or all of the peace agreement between Jordan and Israel.

    Netanyahu made clear that the issue of the '48 refugees is not theirs to solve. There is one far out idea being shaped by the Saudis/Israelis/the US/and some Sunni leaders in Anbar as a bonus to their plan of separating Sunni territories from the Shia dominated state, using the legal methods employed by the KRG. That is to settle any stateless Palestinians looking for a place to live to move to sparsely populated Anbar. The immediate impetus for this developing plan is a way to maintain troops in Iraq even if ordered out by the Baghdad government. Anbar abuts Sunni dominated areas of Syria the US sees as critical to its policies.

    The question now is just how vindictive Trump will be when the Palestinians say not. He has already taken away assistance, so it might be in the form of green-lighting more dramatic actions by Israel. And what will various other players in the region and around the globe do?

    As for an "embassy" in the outer areas of Jerusalem, this is, I assume, Israel's way of saying forget about any PA capital, even if it is in Abu Dis.

    Jane | 28 January 2020 at 11:41 PM
    Nice plan for a change. Definitely got potential for the long term. Once the old guard hit forgetful age the youth can look forward to a peaceful coexistence. Gaza linked to the westbank is a great idea.

    Politically this is the best possible scenario. The arab side should be aware after soliemani that trump and co.mean business. Probably same applies to Israeli leadership. Unless anyone has a better solution that does not involve war this is the deal worth supporting.

    anon | 29 January 2020 at 02:41 AM
    Only God can bring peace to that part of the world. My immediate thought after reading this post was of the last lines of Moby-Dick. It comes from the only survivor of the Pequod: "Call me Ishmael."

    I'm praying that Melville was not prescient in his assessment of our society.

    Diana Croissant | 29 January 2020 at 03:56 AM
    IMHO the mindset and agenda behind this is as follows:
    • -Offer the Palestinians something they only can refuse
    • -Then say those damn Palestinians dont want peace, we tried it, they dont even want to discuss our very generous terms (sic)
    • -Then the Nethanyahus and fellow imperial Zionists take this narrative to claim talking with Palestinians will never work
    • -Which then will open up the road for their long term plan to totally and forever reject any rights of the Palestinians, and go full force into annexing all they can get
    • -Peace process will be officially buried forever

    That is the true purpose of this charade. It is not some naive plan to bring peace, but to give the Likudniks what they have dreamed of for so long: To not having to give even the smallest shit about international law, to never having to be bothered with it, and just rely totally on the military force to expand their growing regional-imperial ambitions.

    It sadly will work as intended.

    DontBelieveEitherPr. | 29 January 2020 at 07:07 AM
    @james - Do you not know that making such a comparison is a hate crime? You are (for now) permitted to make a comparison between contemporary Israeli policy and the creation of South Africa's colonial Bantustans. However, I'm sure the Strategic Affairs Ministry are on it and will shortly arrange for this too to be denoted as hateful expression.

    I am pleased to see our visitor @anon recognize the workability of the plan. His paymasters in Tel Aviv will be happy. FYI there are many who have a better solution in mind. These groups can often be recognized by "al-Quds" somewhere in their name. All of them are perfectly happy to consider warfare as the means of implementing their plan.

    Barbara Ann | 29 January 2020 at 09:39 AM
    سال بعد در اورشلیم
    Translation here
    Per/Norway | 29 January 2020 at 11:59 AM
    @barbara - laws are written by those in power.. what else is new? it is up to people to question and challenge who is lording it over them...
    james | 29 January 2020 at 12:21 PM
    What is telling is that with the exception of Turkey and Iran against and UK for this deal. It has been absolutely crickets chirping in the international community. All that money the US poured into building Israel up has worked. Every one including the UNSC members who voted for Obama's last stop measure at the UN are ready to trade the Palestinians lives for access to the tech in Israel.

    This deal will only bring more misery on both sides.

    BraveNewWorld | 29 January 2020 at 02:12 PM
    Dear Colonel,

    The plan also promises ports, which appear unconnected from any Palestinian territory - I guess there will be a "Palestinian building" surrounded by Israeli customs on an Israeli port?

    One wonders how much whiskey (or whatever Israeli's drink) was required to come up with such an evidently lame plan (maybe it was a first year intern)? Hmm what was Jared's budget to develop it?

    Transactional Trump clearly believes that the Palestinians (are naive enough) to sell out for a promise of $$ - as if such promises are worth more than the paper of Native American treaties. Funny, thing, though, with the Fed printing $16 trillion for the Repo market since Sept., the Fed could slip an extra trillion or so into the mix allowing Trump to make a real offer (which would be hard to campaign on).

    ISL | 29 January 2020 at 04:47 PM
    So many small minds here who cant envision a Gaza strip filled with Trump casinos and towers. With the right tax structure it could be the next Monte Carlo. Perhaps a bullet train to the West Bank.

    Of course it might not work as a democracy, but a royal family could fix that. Perhaps Prince Harry, or Jared? Ivanka could make a fine queen.

    HK Leo Strauss | 29 January 2020 at 04:59 PM
    ''The proposals laid out by President Trump yesterday seemingly cement "unshakeable, unbreakable" U.S. support for Israel by offering the Israeli government unconditional American support for immediate annexation of land in the West Bank, while conditioning and constraining Palestinian self-determination to meet any and all Israeli security needs.''

    When pray tell are Americans going to find their balls and refuse to have their country used by that little outlaw country' and our treasonous Fifth Column Politicians?

    Really, to think we once threw out King George and now we are reduced to being drooling eunuchs in service to a foreign and domestic cancer.

    "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius."

    catherine | 29 January 2020 at 05:37 PM
    HK Leo Strauss

    IMO the Israelis who are overwhelmingly a tribal and exclusionist people will never allow Palestinian prosperity.

    turcopolier | 29 January 2020 at 05:49 PM
    The residential and industrial areas appear on the map to be in the Sinai Desert on the Israeli side. Originally, consideration was given to providing Gaza with land on what is now the Egyptian side of their mutual border, but the public reaction made Sisi rule it out. That original plan assumed that West Bankers would want to move there to work and live as well as Palestinian refugees from elsewhere.

    It was to be part of the grand plan by Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to "solve" the Palestinian problem through industrial development and employment.

    This new apparition would seem to imply that Israel was willing to add a couple of additional carefully guarded bantustans to the current mix. My suggestion is that if the Israelis wanted to help someone, it might be better to allow the native Bedouin who have been forcefully uprooted from their traditional grazing lands.

    Jane | 29 January 2020 at 05:51 PM
    A couple of comments about this trump farce Peace Plan.

    1- Trump keeps saying the Palestinian capital will be East Jerusalem. This is not true, the Palestinian capital that the plan specifies will be in Abu Dis, just outside East Jerusalem and in fact on the other side of the wall surrounding East Jerusalem.

    2 - The 3 little bumps of territory along the Egyptian border allocated to the Palestinian state are now heavily populated by Israeli Arabs. If this plan goes through, they will lose their Israeli citizenship and travel rights to Israel proper. This is done to reduce the Arab portion of Israeli citizens making Israel even more Jewish.

    3- The annexation of the Jordan Valley takes away the breadbasket of the Palestinians. It is far and away ther most fertile land in either Israel or the West Bank.

    4 - Israsel will still have complete security control of every part of the West Bank which means Palestinian travel between their bantustans will be subject to IDF approval.

    5 - The $50 billion in illusionary aid is supposed to be divided between Egypt, Lebanon, Syria etc. It is an open question how much will remain for the West Bank.

    jdledell | 29 January 2020 at 06:03 PM
    Allow prosperity for the Palestinians? They view the Palestinians as little more than chattel under their feet. It's documented that the IDF's head Rabbi said so openly. And any Jew who dares to stand up against their aggression against the Palestinians, are labeled as a self-hating Jew.
    J | 29 January 2020 at 06:27 PM
    Sheldon Adelson and prominent Zionist leaders were present for Trump Deal. But not one Palestinian. I don't believe that the Palestinians were invited.
    J | 29 January 2020 at 08:13 PM
    BraveNewWorld - I don't agree with you about Israeli tech being so attractive. I visit at least once a year having relatives there and am always surprised at how low tech the country actually is. My son works in that industry as well as my Wife's nephew and they are talking about stuff which is fairly out of date. Maybe they have something unseen by society but in general it is not particularly high tech at all.
    OldMicrobiologist | 30 January 2020 at 05:45 AM
    William Polk has a nice article by Gershon Baskin of what the future could bring. I find it a quite plausible prediction. The legislation for confiscating Palestinian property in Jerusalem is in place. "Encountering Peace: Have We No Shame?" http://www.williampolk.com/assets/israel--yesterday%2c-today-and-tomorrow.pdf
    Poul | 30 January 2020 at 06:04 AM
    J,

    I don't believe Trump was invited either:

    "Kushner and Greenblatt have limited the plan's distribution over the two years they have been crafting it. It has been kept secret "to ensure people approach it with an open mind" when it is released, a senior administration official said.

    "Only four people have regular access - Kushner, Greenblatt, U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman and Kushner aide Avi Berkowitz, the official said."
    What's the common denominator among these men here? The nose knows.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinian-trump/in-leaky-white-house-trump-team-keeps-middle-east-peace-plan-secret-idUSKCN1RM2GQ

    Or for the Golan decision:

    "Speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition gathering in Las Vegas, Trump said he made the snap decision during a discussion with his top Middle East peace advisers, including the U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and son-in-law Jared Kushner.

    "I said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a lot of things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie," Trump said to laughter from the Las Vegas crowd.

    "'How do you like the idea of me recognizing exactly what we're discussing?'" said Trump, recounting the conversation.

    Trump, who typically demands short sharp briefings and is known for his colorful retelling of stories, said Friedman was shocked, "like a wonderful, beautiful baby," and asked the President if he would actually do it.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-israel/trump-says-he-made-golan-heights-decision-after-a-quick-history-lesson-idUSKCN1RI0N7

    A wonderful, beautiful baby INDEED.

    [Jan 30, 2020] The foreign government that has long been most active in interfering in US politics and US elections is that of Israel by Paul R. Pillar

    Jan 30, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    The misconduct for which Donald Trump has been impeached centers on an attempt to drag a foreign government into a U.S. election campaign. That caper has increased public attention to the problem of foreign interference in U.S. politics, but the problem is more extensive than discourse about the impeachment process would suggest.

    [Jan 30, 2020] The Nazis made a primitive and unforgivable error in thinking it was the Jewish population was the "problem", when the problem resided in the Jewish/banking and intellectual elites (e.g. Rothchilds).

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Kabobyak , Jan 30 2020 14:35 utc | 21

    A P , Jan 30 2020 14:58 utc | 22

    To Florin 3, and then all who replied:

    YES, YES, YES!

    Words matter, they can be as precise as scalpels or as blunt as a sledgehammer. In skilled hands, a word-tool can be either be a scalpel or a sledgehammer.

    Jewish ethnonationalism (Zionism) was well underway from the mid-1800s, and well-supported (at least in terms of "solving the Jewish problem") in some elite circles in the early 1900s as the Balfour Declaration proves. The Nazis erred in thinking it was the Jewish population was the "problem", when the problem resided in the Jewish/banking and intellectual elites (e.g. Rothchilds).

    AIPAC etc. shows this malignant ideology continues to grow in scope and influence.

    We here at MoA should adopt Florin's more correct terms and use them here at MoA AND ANYWHERE ELSE WE POST... From and acorn of an idea, a mighty oak of understanding may grow. But it won't grow if we don't nurture it.

    Semitism refers to speakers of Semitic languages, of which Hebrew-speakers are but one part... most of the rest are Arabic speakers. The term antisemitism was hijacked in the early 1800's.

    https://www.etymonline.com/word/anti-Semitism

    "... also antisemitism, 1881, from German Antisemitismus, first used by Wilhelm Marr (1819-1904) German radical, nationalist and race-agitator, who founded the Antisemiten-Liga in 1879; see anti- + Semite.

    Not etymologically restricted to anti-Jewish theories, actions, or policies, but almost always used in this sense. Those who object to the inaccuracy of the term might try Hermann Adler's Judaeophobia (1881). Anti-Semitic (also antisemitic) and anti-Semite (also antisemite) also are from 1881, like anti-Semitism they appear first in English in an article in the "Athenaeum" of Sept. 31, in reference to German literature. Jew-hatred is attested from 1881. As an adjective, anti-Jewish is from 1817."
    ---------

    Words matter as the Israel Project's "Global Language Dictionary"(IP-GLG) demonstrates, the Jewish ethnonationalists (Zionists) use words to hide their intentions. Why not call the IP-GLD "Propaganda Language to support the theft of, and genocide in, Palestine"? It's a far more accurate description of the contents and intents... but being honest and transparent is not what the international Jew/Israel Lobby/elite is all about.
    https://www.transcend.org/tms/2014/08/global-language-dictionary/

    [Jan 30, 2020] For Israel, a rejection of this ultimatum benefits them far more than any Palestinian acceptance.

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Peter , Jan 30 2020 18:19 utc | 67

    Here a view by someone who since his stance against the Iraq war as an UN inspector I respect very much
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/479422-israel-palestine-deal-ultimatum/

    Trump and his Israeli partners are betting on Palestine's Arab friends to recognize the finality of the window of opportunity that has presented itself and prevail upon the Palestinian people to act accordingly.

    For Israel, a rejection of this ultimatum benefits them far more than any Palestinian acceptance. This fact, more than anything else, opens the door to the possibility that the Palestinians can be dissuaded from their current hardline position rejecting the deal.


    <

    [Jan 30, 2020] Kushner deal makes me think of a mobster saying Nice home you have there, be a shame if something happened to it

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bubbles , Jan 30 2020 18:37 utc | 72

    Posted by: Peter | Jan 30 2020 18:19 utc | 67

    The so called deal makes me think of a mobster saying Nice home you have there, be a shame if something happened to it.

    Watch this interview with Kushner, if you can stand it, and see what comes to mind.

    https://twitter.com/BradCabana/status/1222299392574537730

    [Jan 30, 2020] Most see this deal as cover for Israel's annexation of Occupied Palestine. The deal was made public yesterday. Bibi rushed home today for the vote on Sunday to annex the Jordan Valley and West Bank Settlements.

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 30 2020 19:30 utc | 82

    Kushner lost his hymnal. Contradicts Bibi.

    Most see this deal as cover for Israel's annexation of Occupied Palestine. The deal was made public yesterday. Bibi rushed home today for the vote on Sunday to annex the Jordan Valley and West Bank Settlements. This agreement was constructed for the occupiers and negotiations did not include proprietors of the land.
    Read on it is for the sole benefit of Israel.
    Why the rush?
    Kushner said not so soon...wait a month. but in Israel ......


    "We have been working on this for three years, hundreds of hours, to bring the best agreement in Israel," the source noted, adding that Trump's move to recognize the application of Israeli law to the Jordan Valley, the Northern Dead Sea, Judea and Samaria was "a huge thing" and an undeniable success for Israel.

    The source clarified that the US side had preferred an Israeli annexation of these territories "all at once" instead of a slice-by-slice approach, calling this a "technical problem" but emphasizing that there was "no argument about the essence" of the matter.[.]

    Well, King Donald Trump giveth. The same king who abrogates international treaties has no respect for the rights of others.

    Ok btw. Mike Bloomberg is not really running a campaign to be president. He said, "I am spending my money to get rid of Trump." Thing is whoever comes after must be approved by the landlords.

    [Jan 30, 2020] There is no shortage of great intellects in the Middle East to follow in his extraordinary footsteps

    Notable quotes:
    "... I think they were trying to start a war when they killed Soleimani, and the Iranians decided to use it against them instead. Which is smart. Neocons talk a lot but they are not smart. They are bullies and cowards. ..."
    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    uncle tungsten , Jan 30 2020 22:27 utc | 117

    Thanks b, that is a mighty good post:

    This man had a mighty wish too

    There is no shortage of great intellects in the Middle East to follow in his extraordinary footsteps.

    Bemildred , Jan 30 2020 23:27 utc | 126

    Posted by: Patroklos | Jan 30 2020 23:02 utc | 124

    I think they were trying to start a war when they killed Soleimani, and the Iranians decided to use it against them instead. Which is smart. Neocons talk a lot but they are not smart. They are bullies and cowards.

    At present what I notice is what you do, there is a lot going on, but you won't find it in the MSM. They are busy reducing their audience share with propaganda.

    They kicked the jams out when they droned Soleiman. No more "deals".

    But I expect Iran to do these things while this is going on:

    1.) Annoy Trump and his minions and USG political class as much as possible, stay in their face.
    2.) Watch, and help their "proxies" work on making life unbearable in the Middle East for us.

    The Houthis seem to have just kicked the shit out of the Saudi coalition again. Quite a few damaged ships and down aircraft reports too, not just Afghanistan.


    [Jan 30, 2020] Bush-era Iraq war authorization voted out by US House

    Jan 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 30 2020 21:45 utc | 108

    Visions and intentions in reverse. For this news, with b's blessing, any thread is appropriate: Guess this goes with the impeaching-

    Bush-era Iraq war authorization voted out by US House
    The House of Representatives has voted along party lines to repeal a 2002 law authorizing the US to wage war on Iraq. The law was used by the Trump administration to justify the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

    The House voted 236 to 166 to kill the 2002 Authorization for Military Force (AUMF) on Iraq. The law was drafted during the presidency of George W. Bush to authorize the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and has been used by subsequent administrations to continue military activity in the country – most recently to justify the US drone assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad earlier this month.[.]

    The bill was one of two pieces of legislation passed by the House on Thursday aimed at curbing Trump's warmaking powers. Prior to its passage, a bill prohibiting Trump from using federal funds for "unauthorized military force against Iran" cleared the House floor, again along party lines, with a vote of 228-175.[.]

    [Jan 29, 2020] Pompeo Iranian Proxy Mobilizing in America's Backyard

    Notable quotes:
    "... Yet the U.S. has little real insight into what happens in hostile regimes like Maduro's, and "Pompeo is probably the least reliable person in the world when it comes to information about Iran or its proxies," said Abrahms. "He has a terrible track record; he is an ideologue. He is the opposite of an impartial empiricist. I would never accept anything he says without corroborating sources." ..."
    "... According to what we know, a Hezbollah agent conducted years of surveillance on potential targets , and alleged sleeper agents within U.S. cities have so far not been activated, even in the wake of Iranian Quds force General Soleimani's death and the series of crippling sanctions the Trump administration has put on Iran. ..."
    Jan 28, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Why is Pompeo suddenly directing increasingly heated rhetoric towards Iran and its proxies in South America?

    "Anti-Iran hawks like Pompeo like to emphasize that Iran is not a defensively-minded international actor, but rather that it is offensively-minded and poses a direct threat to the United States," said Max Abrahms, associate professor of political science at Northeastern and fellow of the Quincy Institute said in an interview with The American Conservative. "And so for obvious reasons, underscoring Hezbollah's international tentacles helps to sell their argument that Iran needs to be dealt with in a military way, and that the key to dealing with Iran is through confrontation and pressure."

    Stories highlighting the role of Hezbollah in America's backyard "are almost always peddled by anti-Iran hawks," he said.

    Like Clare Lopez, vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy, who aligns with the argument that Hezbollah has been populating South America since the days of the Islamic revolution.

    "From at least the 1980s, many Lebanese fled to South America, and among that flow Hezbollah embedded themselves," she told The American Conservative in a recent interview. Their activity "really expanded throughout the continent" during the presidencies of Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.

    During that time, Lopez added, "there was a really strong relationship that developed Iranians established diplomatic facilities, enormous embassies and consulates, embedded IRGC cover positions and MOIS (intelligence services) within commercial companies and mosques and Islamic centers. This took place in Brazil in particular but Venezuela also."

    Iran and Hezbollah intensified their involvement throughout the region in technical services like tunneling, money laundering, and drug trafficking. Venezuela offered Iran an international banking work-around during the period of sanctions, said Lopez.

    Obviously security analysts like Lopez and even Pompeo, have been following this for years. But the timing here, as the Senate impeachment inquiry heats up, looks suspicious.

    Last week, just as it looks increasingly likely that former national security advisor John Bolton and Pompeo himself will be hauled before the Senate as witnesses about the foreign aid hold-up to Ukraine, Pompeo praised Colombia, Honduras, and Guatemala for designating "Iran-backed Hezbollah a terrorist organization," and slammed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro for embracing the terrorist group.

    Hezbollah "has found a home in Venezuela under Maduro. This is unacceptable," Pompeo said when he met with Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido last week.

    Asked by Bloomberg News how significant a role Hezbollah plays in the region, Pompeo responded, "too much."

    From the interview:

    Pompeo : " I mentioned it in Venezuela, but in the Tri-Border Area as well. This is again an area where Iranian influence – we talk about them as the world's largest state sponsor of terror. We do that intentionally. It's the world's largest; it's not just a Middle East phenomenon. So while – when folks think of Hezbollah, they typically think of Syria and Lebanon, but Hezbollah has now put down roots throughout the globe and in South America, and it's great to see now multiple countries now having designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. It means we can work together to stamp out the security threat in the region."

    Question: "I'm struck by this, because even hearing you – what you're saying, right, now – I mean, to take a step back, an Iranian-backed terrorist organization has found a home in America's backyard."

    Pompeo: "It's – it's something that we've been talking about for some time. When you see the scope and reach of what the Islamic Republic of Iran's regime has done, you can't forget they tried to kill someone in the United States of America. They've conducted assassination campaigns in Europe. This is a global phenomenon. When we say that Iran is the leading destabilizing force in the Middle East and throughout the world, it's because of this terror activity that they have now spread as a cancer all across the globe. "

    Pompeo has also been publicly floating increasing sanctions on Venezuela. He called the behavior of Maduro's government "cartel-like" and "terror-like," intensifying the sense that there is a real security "threat" in our hemisphere.

    Yet the U.S. has little real insight into what happens in hostile regimes like Maduro's, and "Pompeo is probably the least reliable person in the world when it comes to information about Iran or its proxies," said Abrahms. "He has a terrible track record; he is an ideologue. He is the opposite of an impartial empiricist. I would never accept anything he says without corroborating sources."

    There's no question that Hezbollah has a presence in South America, said Abrahms, "but the nature of its presence has been politicized."

    According to what we know, a Hezbollah agent conducted years of surveillance on potential targets , and alleged sleeper agents within U.S. cities have so far not been activated, even in the wake of Iranian Quds force General Soleimani's death and the series of crippling sanctions the Trump administration has put on Iran.

    "What this underscores is that Iran could pull the trigger, it could bloody the U.S., including the U.S. homeland, but tends to avoid such violence. I think the question that needs to be asked isn't just, 'where in the world could Iran commit an attack?' but whether Iran is a rational actor that can be deterred," said Abrahms. "Interestingly, this administration as well as its hawkish supporters tend to emphasize their belief that Iran can in fact be deterred," since that is the logic behind "maximum pressure" against Iran, after all. "The main causal mechanism according to advocates of maximum pressure, is that it will force Iran as a rational actor to reconsider whether it wants to irritate the U.S By applying economic pressure through sanctions, [they hope to] succeed in coaxing Iran to restructure the nuclear deal and making additional concessions to the west and reigning in its activities in the Persian Gulf and the Levant. At least on a rhetorical level, the hawks say they believe Iran can be deterred," he said.

    It would not be the first time that a president reacted to an intensifying impeachment inquiry by redirecting national focus to threats abroad. In December 1998, as the impeachment inquiry into then-President Bill Clinton heated up, Clinton launched airstrikes against Iraq. We should therefore apply some caution when we see decades-old threats amplified by administration officials.

    Barbara Boland is TAC's foreign policy and national security reporter. Previously, she worked as an editor for the Washington Examiner and for CNS News. She is the author of Patton Uncovered, a book about General George Patton in World War II, and her work has appeared on Fox News, The Hill, UK Spectator, and elsewhere. Boland is a graduate from Immaculata University in Pennsylvania. Follow her on Twitter

    [Jan 29, 2020] Pompeo about Hezbollah threat

    Jan 29, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    J Villain • 19 hours ago

    It leaves me yearning for the integrity of the Nixon foreign policy team and they were a certified pack of sociopaths.

    [Jan 29, 2020] US Halts All Weapons Deliveries To Iraq As Local Demands For Troop Exit Grow

    Notable quotes:
    "... When have contracts ever meant anything to the USA? ..."
    Jan 29, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
    Sign in to comment filter_list Viewing Options arrow_drop_down

    Gringo Viejo , 21 minutes ago link

    For those of you unaware, hundreds if not thousands Iraqis are being slaughtered.

    For our need for their oil. And of course, Israeli needs.

    hhabana2112 , 27 minutes ago link

    Stable genius, President Bone Spurs, fucked this one up. Focus on the country, you dumb ***.

    bing dang , 33 minutes ago link

    China selling air conditioner to iraq. Usa sells f16. Uhhh who is more popular in a desert?

    ThunderStruck , 1 hour ago link

    No problem, Putin will happily sell them superior fighter/bombers that can actually fly in the rain and not succumb to small arms fire from the ground. He'll also equip them with the S-400 anti-aircraft missile system that can easily knock that flying barrel of pig ****, better known as the F-35, out of the sky with one shot..

    ToSoft4Truth , 58 minutes ago link

    Later when we mention the Wounded Warrior headache issues we'll get down arrows.

    not-me---it-was-the-dog , 58 minutes ago link

    great......then iraq can sell their used f-16's to iran.

    ShakenNotStirred , 54 minutes ago link

    "Superior" like the S-400, world-famous for MIA?

    dogismycopilot , 1 hour ago link

    I think Iraq needs a potable water infrastructure more than some overpriced F-16 Falcons. Base models probably at that!

    MsCreant , 46 minutes ago link

    Wow. What a way to win friends and influence people. Help them. What a concept. Invade and erase their standard of living. Then take their oil.

    Spinifex , 17 minutes ago link

    Invade and erase their standard of living.

    Correction. Sadam was 'supported by the U.$. (so U.$ didn't really have to invade, except U.$. stabbed him in the back, and Iraqi's had MUCH higher standard of living under Sadam... until U.$. put sanctions on them and KILLED a half million Iraqi children because the 'PRICE WAS WORTH IT' (according to *** Princess Madeleine Albright)

    Aussiestirrer , 1 hour ago link

    Well done chump...keep isolating the usa...now iraq can buy russian weapons. Haha what a dumb clam....

    has bear r us , 1 hour ago link

    the trump card is not playing 6million d chess. he is playing the jewlander card of killing the top dog over and over again as just a bloody murderous act that achieves nothing. hamas is stronger than ever. trump is a stable genius among horses not humans.

    the murder of soulmani is just another jewlander directed clusterfuck move of many clusterfuck moves since shrub avenged the death threat to his father and the wmds that were found to be degraded chemical weapons sold to saddam during the war with iran.

    luffy0212 , 1 hour ago link

    2010-2020 Was the Stalingrad for the world. The decade the empire and their americunt fodder capitulated on all fronts. The decade that'd serve to fully turn the tie of history in favor of those God has deemed worthy of him. The following decade is the mass decline of the empire and its parasites till they reach the end of the precipice to feel in full the misery they've seethed onto their victims.

    Lost in translation , 1 hour ago link

    When have contracts ever meant anything to the USA?

    Savvy , 1 hour ago link

    I agree gtfo, but why scorch them again and again and again when they never harmed the US??????

    STR88 , 1 hour ago link

    They deserve to be bombed because they asked the US to leave, after destroying their country based on a lie and then occupying it for 20 years? You are a complete ******* idiot.

    Bebochek , 25 minutes ago link

    On sale now, America bombed my country into Democracy and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.

    omegaone , 1 hour ago link

    Been sayin that for years bro. With the world pretty much filled up except for the tundra, I think a good old fashioned dose of self-determination is in order. No more immigration. No more refugees. Let every country fix their own goddamned problems and let the bodies fall where they may. Period.

    Spinifex , 23 minutes ago link

    Leave a scorched earth.

    Oh yeah..? Scorched Earth??? What the **** for? Iraq never harmed the U.$. Russia never harmed the U.$. North Korea never harmed the U.$. Iran never harmed the U.$. Venezuela never harmed the U.$. Bolivia never harmed the U.$.!! Libya, Somalia, Vietnam etc etc etc... What did they ever do to the U.$. And look what the **** you are doing to them. You're a ******* hypocrite. U.$. needs a good SCORCHED EARTH Policy imposed on it. And hardly a country on the planet will shed a tear... Not even IsraHell...

    luffy0212 , 8 minutes ago link

    Where's sherman when you need him?

    P Dunne , 1 hour ago link

    This is how American Foreign Policy alienated Venezuela, Venezuela was one of the first export customers for the F16 but sbsequently GHW Bush refused to sell Venezuela spare parts unless they acquiesced to American pressure on oil royalties.

    Venezuela shifted to Russia and has spent more than $40 Billion modernizing their military, none of the weapons were purchased from the USA.

    Savvy , 1 hour ago link

    That's how the US rolls. Selling friends and buying enemies. Only Trump has been very very clear about that unlike his predecessors.

    luffy0212 , 1 hour ago link

    Trump lacks Tact. Good because it has speed up the demise of the empire.

    TBT or not TBT , 1 hour ago link

    And now Venezuela bestrides the planet like a colossus! Such an amazing strategy.

    luffy0212 , 36 minutes ago link

    Why haven't you pussies attacked it?

    Afraid Venezuela will set the example for all of Latin America on how to slap a yankee bitch.

    DEDA CVETKO , 1 hour ago link

    Funny that the locals are not happy with our gift-bearing. human pyramid-building saviors. How so utterly ungrateful. We brought them democracy, human rights and genocide, and they now want us out. Shame!

    We should immediately send them Madeleine Albright to explain to them that the deaths of 600,000 Iraqi babies was actually a good thing and "God's work". That'll do!

    you_do , 1 hour ago link

    It shows how evil the USSA is:

    They do not honour a contract from 2016 and come up with a non-existent contract about costs when they are asked to leave...

    Whopper Goldberg , 1 hour ago link

    Jews gotta ***

    Cardinal Fang , 1 hour ago link

    Stevie Wonder: Iraq, Iran, Ukraine and Chevrolet...Chevrolet...lol

    https://youtu.be/RxsBc5p-dPU

    attah-boy-Luther , 1 hour ago link

    Iraq is presently in negotiations for the S-300 and S-400 systems.

    So......a big Ouch....for MIC......

    Whopper Goldberg , 1 hour ago link

    bullies and aggressors NEVER win in the long run

    Adios, Useless Snakes!!!!!!!!!!!!

    TBT or not TBT , 58 minutes ago link

    The long run is made up of a series of short runs.

    mailll , 1 hour ago link

    Good, now the Iraqi's can get missile defense systems from Russia instead, that aren't designed to turn off when Israel ends up attacking them. But then again, they will need no missile defenses systems, since they have become closer allies to their former enemies, Iran and the Saudi's, thanks to us. Winning!

    alter , 1 hour ago link

    We should bomb the **** out of Iraq again, destroy their military equipment, raid their banks, blow up their refineries and then leave, because they want us to.

    Savvy , 1 hour ago link

    Might take a while, still looking for those WMD.

    Spinifex , 14 minutes ago link

    still looking for those WMD

    I thought they found 'some'... 200 can of fly spray bought from 7/11 in warehouse somewhere... Tony Blaire was right. WMD found.

    Shemp 4 Victory , 1 hour ago link

    We should bomb the **** out of Iraq again, destroy their military equipment, raid their banks, blow up their refineries and then leave, because they want us to.

    Microcephaly detected.

    Savvy , 1 hour ago link

    /s not.

    luffy0212 , 1 hour ago link

    You're one piece of ****. I'm glad to know nothing but fire awaits you below.

    veteranstoday.com/2020/01/28/trumps-headache-victims-and-fakers-list-now-number-50-real-tbi-wounded/

    Another 50 cunts to add to the list. At least they'll feed the planet with rotten decomposing matter.

    alter , 1 hour ago link

    Still crying about Salami, ******* muzzrat? lol

    luffy0212 , 1 hour ago link

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/01/28/middle-east-monitor-cia-chief-behind-soleimani-assassination-killed-in-downed-plane-in-afghanistan/

    Another Iranian journalist who writes for Mashregh newspaper, described as having close links to IRGC, tweeted not long after the news broke out: "We will attack them on the same level as they are attacking us."

    The world weeps a hero against you parasitic scum.

    Aussiestirrer , 1 hour ago link

    So do a complete rerun again???

    Bebochek , 21 minutes ago link

    America already tried that and it didn't work alter.

    ebworthen , 1 hour ago link

    Well uh...yeah.

    Conquer or leave.

    We decided to waste a lot of lives, **** around, not leave but leave, let Iran move in.

    roark183 , 1 hour ago link

    Good decision President Trump.

    Now you just need to follow it up with a complete troop withdrawal from Iraq. You can abandon that 100 acre military compound, disguised as an embassy.

    The Iraqi government want US troops out. The Iraqi people want US troops out of their country. Shucks, even the American people want US troops out of Iraq, so they can come home and defend our southern border.

    Let the Iraqis and Iranians sort out their own differences.

    Aussiestirrer , 58 minutes ago link

    Dont you mean the joooos?

    4Celts , 1 hour ago link

    Iraq has many more important infrastructure needs at the moment , and 1.8 Billion spent on these particular missile systems seems fishy .

    mailll , 1 hour ago link

    And China is coming to the rescue. All of our brave American soldiers that died so Iran and China can get the spoils. Winning!

    Kan , 1 hour ago link

    If you think the isrhll held companies that own those wells give a **** about china showing, your crazy, they own china, they funded the communist party out of jewyork.... Who do you think got all those oil wells in syria, iraq, libya.... Genie oil and some other inclusive board member oils companies.... They run china so they care not a bit either way, probably thank them for the good cheap labor that knows how to read and write..

    4Celts , 1 hour ago link

    The US and Israel are purposely denying Iraq And Syria from using their oil sales to rebuild both their countries, and sovereign wealth funds . Gross.

    TBT or not TBT , 59 minutes ago link

    Ha ha ha ha.

    Aussiestirrer , 56 minutes ago link

    Us soldiers did not die for victory..they died for the rich! As a well known line that often gets tossed around says...War is not meant to be won....it's meant to be continued

    logically possible , 33 minutes ago link

    It's sad American soldiers are too young, too brainwashed, too low IQ to realize this before it"s too late.

    Whopper Goldberg , 1 hour ago link

    Looks like Russia and China will have some new customers.

    TBT or not TBT , 1 hour ago link

    They're such a great credit risk after all.

    Minamoto , 1 hour ago link

    America destroyed most of Iraq's infrastructure during the invasion and its aftermath... has America compensated Iraq?

    RenegadeOutcast , 1 hour ago link

    yes, it has dutifully sold it a ton more weaponry and other stuff, and only at 150% markup.

    liberty, yeah?

    TBT or not TBT , 1 hour ago link

    Liberty is not a big thing in Islamic infected places.

    flashmansbroker , 1 hour ago link

    The West really need to cut our losses and leave.

    It is a worry about who will move in, probably china and Russia but we can't keep on a perpetual war.

    Nixon, for all his faults did get the U.S. out of Vietnam and I think Trump will have to do the same.

    Reign in Fact , 1 hour ago link

    islam is perpetually at war with us, however it's true that we should GTFO and send all islamists back to sort their affairs in the desert.

    Fair trade. We get our soldiers back, and station them along our own border instead of protecting theirs, and they get their jihadis back.

    FestusBro , 1 hour ago link

    Get their Jihadis back in plastic bags in cardboard boxes.

    TBT or not TBT , 57 minutes ago link

    Ilhan Omar is ready to ship. Tlaib too. All our imams and CAIR members. Let's do this.

    CamCam , 1 hour ago link

    No kidding, if not for anything else but we can't afford it any longer (let alone the ethical violations)

    Element , 1 hour ago link

    What ******* war? There's not even an insurgency.

    Heavenstorm , 1 hour ago link

    If US leaves anytime soon, I figure Bolton will testify against Trump this week and lies about it.

    DogeCoin , 1 hour ago link

    We will stay there so long as AIPAC, Israel, and the MIC demand that we stay there. The dumbed down US populace won't do **** all about it as we bleed our treasure, resources, and lives for American Corporate Imperialism and Greater Israel. Don't you Trumptards love your Messiah delivering the greatest Middle East Piece plan of all time?

    tmosley , 1 hour ago link

    >Trumptards

    You are ignored.

    LetThemEatRand , 1 hour ago link

    I wonder if when tmosley logs in and reads the comment section to ZH he sees like 3 comments.

    logically possible , 1 hour ago link

    All three comments are his.

    [Jan 29, 2020] Trump will be kept in play for as long as the rulers decide, the voters/rabble can shout all they want, dogs barking at the Moon. Their puppet is delivering

    Jan 29, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Jack_Garbo ,

    Trump will be kept in play for as long as the rulers decide, the voters/rabble can shout all they want, dogs barking at the Moon. Their puppet is delivering: Most bombs dropped in Afghanistan (stock prices & divs up), racism simmering nicely on southern border, the Fed rampant with QE4 driving the NASDAQ & Dow to mythic heights before the Crash, the Impeachment Show dithering along distracting even those not brain dead from the relentless thuggery of the Trump administration. The show must go on, and it will, until the producers have pocketed their profits. Relax, folks, it's not personal it's (show) business. So smile

    George Marchand ,

    Amusing if the Democrats get their way and face President Pence and Vice President Ted Cruz in the fall😱

    RobG ,

    I haven't had time to read all the comments here (usual excuse!). This recent piece by Whitney Webb, on Mint Press News, might have been linked to before. Whatever, I feel it's worth me linking to again because it gives a very good insight into what's going on in the Middle East at the moment, and the fact that we are ruled by gangster psychopaths

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/hidden-parliamentary-session-revealed-trump-motives-iraq-china-oil/264155/

    Einstein ,

    Sounds like a come-on for Tulsi Gabbard.

    Dungroanin ,

    HRC is going for some bazookas as along with a face lift?
    BIll's always been a giant tit. Maybe she could get away with just one upgrade.

    paul ,

    No. 1 Shabbos goy Trump is currently down on his hands and knees licking Netanyahu's boots, rubber stamping each and every one of the demands of the fake Jew Khazars in Occupied Palestine.

    paul ,

    The Palestinians are being offered an incredibly generous deal of a Bantustan on a few acres of scruffy desert somewhere the Jews don't want. An incredible vision of peace! The deal of the century! Tremendous! Amazing!! Terrific!!! Wonderful!!! Historic!!! A Triumph!!!!

    Hugh O'Neill ,

    The penultimate link above was an article on CIA assassinations. It somehow elided their successful jobs on JFK, MLK and RFK. Credit where it's due. Too modest. What self effacing heroes. Not to mention Dag Hammarskjold, maybe Olof Palme, and dozens of other democratically elected leaders. So they missed Fidel. You can't win them all.

    Einstein ,

    And don't forget the third-worlders, like Allende and Lumumba.
    And mass killing using the now default fanatical Muzzies backed up by "contractors", as happened in Indonesia in 1965. Several millions were murdered then, more than the Khmer Rouge atrocities and approaching the WWII Holocaust in magnitude. It continues in Papua.

    Jihadi Colin ,

    Anyone with two thinking neurons knows that 2020 Trump, unlike 2016 Trump, is completely and unequivocally a creature of the zionist lobby and the military industrial complex, and therefore guaranteed re-(s)election in November. Since he is guaranteed a second term, the duty of the Daymockratic Party is to make sure he doesn't lose by accident. This they will do by, first, making certain nobody remotely electable is put up against der Twitterführer, and, second, by making such a ludicrous spectacle of themselves that even fence sitters and those who detest Trump (not a hard thing to do) will end up voting for him out of disgust. That is all.

    csc61 ,

    Hey look, yet another low-information voter (who probably doesn't vote) regurgitating the hate his mainstream media overlords told him he must have for the president. Couldn't articulate a single thought on why he finds the president so distasteful or how the Trump presidency has effected his life in any way shape or form other than to lower his taxes. Still these useless bottom-feeders persist. "Orange man bad!" Look mom, I had an original thought oh, wait, no, never-mind.

    Antonym ,

    Even the Trump administration keeps on shielding Saudi 9/11 perp investigations : the Anglo Arab oil dollar protection pact stays paramount!

    Antonym ,

    Robert Mueller III buried any FBI case against HRC; he also buried any 9/11 FBI case against any Saudis!

    Einstein ,

    Mueller doesn't know how to wield a shovel.

    paul ,

    He couldn't find his own arse with both hands.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Come on Ant-everybody knows that it was the MOSSAD, allied to US sayanim and rogue elements of the US elite who did 9/11. The Saudis were just the patsies, Oswalds one and all.

    Antonym ,

    Did you know that even Hamas and Iran are run by the Mossad? And Xi Jinping too! Me too, you too. No more need for an Off Guardian site, all riddles solved.

    paul ,

    No, they don't run Hamas any more. They did create it and gave it money and guns. To undermine Yasser Arafat and his organisation. Standard dirty colonial gam of divide and rule.

    paul ,

    People fixate too much on Trump.
    In due course he will be replaced with another trained monkey serving the same organ grinders, and the game of musical chairs will continue.
    The organ grinders are fond of nothing if not variety. They will give us a black monkey, an orange monkey, a gay monkey, a monkey with a vagina, a foul mouthed oafish monkey or a polished well behaved monkey. Just so long as it rattles its tin cup for the organ grinder.
    At Davos he promised more tax cuts for the rich if re elected.
    He threatened 25% tariffs on the car industries of his most faithful satraps if they tried to tax Silicon Valley.
    God forbid that Amazon should have to pay a cent in tax on its $11 billion profits.
    You might think the organ grinders are being a bit hard on the Orange Man, trying to impeach him.
    After all, he has increased the military budget to $1,134 billion, (real figure), more than the rest of the world combined. You'd think that would buy him a bit of gratitude from Lockheed and Raytheon.
    And his fellow billionaires increased their wealth by 12% last year. That should stand him in good stead with Adelson, Saban and Singer.
    And the people who rule the roost should be happy with his Gives to the kosher folk. Jerusalem, Golan, West Bank, ever more billions, free weapons and unlimited political cover.
    And all that nonsense about Draining The Swamp and Building The Wall is just so much ancient history, though a few of the Deplorables probably still believe in it.
    And Obomber deported far more illegals than he has.
    So why are they so hard on poor old Donny?
    He upset the apple cart. He wasn't supposed to win. And however much grovelling he does to Israel and Wall Street, it just doesn't matter. They hate him. They will take all his Gives without any gratitude.

    Because he is a loose cannon, an unprincipled opportunist. He is not a true believer waiting for the Rapture like Pence and Pompeo. Or someone as corrupt and compromised and easily controlled as Clinton.

    Syria was supposed to have been destroyed by now. Assad was supposed to be dead. The war with Iran was scheduled for 3 years ago. But Trump screwed up their plans, and nothing he can do will ever deflect their hatred.

    So he will either be re elected in November, or replaced with some mediocrity like Creepy Joe or Pocahontas or an even more dodgy billionaire like Bloomberg.

    But it is all kabuki theatre. Nothing will change. There will still be 1,000 plus military bases all over the planet. The rich will get richer and the poor 99% will get more austerity.

    And the Magic Roundabout will keep on turning round and round and round till the inevitable collapse. Trump is just another Goldstein for the Woke and the Deluded to hate.

    csc61 ,

    That all seems rather cynical to me. But just to keep facts straight, the US currently has 900 bases in 137 countries. Close to '1000 plus' but not quite. Just thought you'd appreciate the fact checking.

    paul ,

    We live in a rather cynical world. If you count those in 50 African countries which aren't included, it's well in excess of 1,000. Though the Pentagon seems confused on the subject itself. It seems to have "lost" a lot of them, like it "lost" $21 trillion from the military budget.

    walter hewitt ,

    Meanwhile back on the Farm we're still suffering Why Trump? Why? This is not a joke or a debate. Not a possibility or a maybe. Millions of children in UK are suffering now. Millions. Families are under the cosh. We all have been for decades. You've read the headlines. Grenfall. Hillsbough etc etc. And you wanna chat about trump trump trump mr televison mr mind control meanwhile in the real world millions of children in UK are suffering now.
    Fuck off.

    [Jan 29, 2020] People are fixated on Trump way too much

    Jan 29, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    paul People fixate too much on Trump.
    In due course he will be replaced with another trained monkey serving the same organ grinders, and the game of musical chairs will continue.
    The organ grinders are fond of nothing if not variety. They will give us a black monkey, an orange monkey, a gay monkey, a monkey with a vagina, a foul mouthed oafish monkey or a polished well behaved monkey. Just so long as it rattles its tin cup for the organ grinder.
    At Davos he promised more tax cuts for the rich if re elected.
    He threatened 25% tariffs on the car industries of his most faithful satraps if they tried to tax Silicon Valley.
    God forbid that Amazon should have to pay a cent in tax on its $11 billion profits.
    You might think the organ grinders are being a bit hard on the Orange Man, trying to impeach him.
    After all, he has increased the military budget to $1,134 billion, (real figure), more than the rest of the world combined. You'd think that would buy him a bit of gratitude from Lockheed and Raytheon.
    And his fellow billionaires increased their wealth by 12% last year. That should stand him in good stead with Adelson, Saban and Singer.
    And the people who rule the roost should be happy with his Gives to the kosher folk. Jerusalem, Golan, West Bank, ever more billions, free weapons and unlimited political cover.
    And all that nonsense about Draining The Swamp and Building The Wall is just so much ancient history, though a few of the Deplorables probably still believe in it.
    And Obomber deported far more illegals than he has.
    So why are they so hard on poor old Donny?
    He upset the apple cart. He wasn't supposed to win. And however much grovelling he does to Israel and Wall Street, it just doesn't matter. They hate him. They will take all his Gives without any gratitude.
    Because he is a loose cannon, an unprincipled opportunist. He is not a true believer waiting for the Rapture like Pence and Pompeo. Or someone as corrupt and compromised and easily controlled as Clinton.
    Syria was supposed to have been destroyed by now. Assad was supposed to be dead. The war with Iran was scheduled for 3 years ago. But Trump screwed up their plans, and nothing he can do will ever deflect their hatred.
    So he will either be re elected in November, or replaced with some mediocrity like Creepy Joe or Pocahontas or an even more dodgy billionaire like Bloomberg.
    But it is all kabuki theatre. Nothing will change. There will still be 1,000 plus military bases all over the planet. The rich will get richer and the poor 99% will get more austerity.
    And the Magic Roundabout will keep on turning round and round and round till the inevitable collapse.
    Trump is just another Goldstein for the Woke and the Deluded to hate. 19 0 Reply Jan 28, 2020 4:16 AM

    csc61 ,

    That all seems rather cynical to me. But just to keep facts straight, the US currently has 900 bases in 137 countries. Close to '1000 plus' but not quite. Just thought you'd appreciate the fact checking.

    paul ,

    We live in a rather cynical world.
    If you count those in 50 African countries which aren't included, it's well in excess of 1,000. Though the Pentagon seems confused on the subject itself.
    It seems to have "lost" a lot of them, like it "lost" $21 trillion from the military budget.

    walter hewitt ,

    Charlotte Russe ,

    Trump doesn't have a thing to fear he's been a huge asset to the security state, whose Russiagate theatrics provided mainstream media news with just enough bullshit to distract the public, so that Trump could never be aggressively attacked from the Left. For the last three years, all the "resistance oxygen" was sucked up by the warmongering against Russia. Meanwhile, this enabled Trump to successfully pass a slew of reactionary legislation and fasttrack numerous lifetime appointments to the federal court without barely a whimper from the phony Dems. In fact, the Democrats unanimously voted for Trump's military budget. The same idiot they called unhinged was given the power to start WWIII.

    No matter how much liberals complain–the wealthy are happy with the status quo and the right-wing Evangelicals are as pleased as punch. However, there's quite a large number of disaffected Trump voters looking at Tulsi, but could eventually come Bernie's way. Especially, if Tulsi endorses Bernie. This discontented bunch includes the working-poor, the indebted young, and all the folks who are not doing economically well under Trump's fabulous stock market. It especially includes the military families who were promised an end to the miserable foreign interventions. Bernie, has some appeal to these folks. His platform certainly resonates with all those who can barely pay their health insurance
    premiums, and whose salary is NOT nearly considered a living wage. But Bernie could win hands-down and steal Trump's base, if he only had the courage to UNAPOLOGETICALLY speak out against US imperialism and connect all the dots explaining how the security state plundered the treasury for decades f–king over the working-class.

    [Jan 29, 2020] Speech Donald Trump Addresses the Israeli American Council Summit in Florida

    This is probably the most Pro-Israel speeches of the President. 54 min long
    20:19 is an interesting "brutal killers" quote... See also 'The Biggest Thing You Did for Israel' Was Breaking Iran Deal -- Adelson Tells Trump
    Dec 07, 2019 | www.youtube.com

    Donald Trump delivers a speech at the Isreli American Council Summit in Hollywood, Florida on December 7, 2019. Uploaded to YouTube for archival purposes by Factba.se ( https://factba.se )

    samteedum , 1 month ago (edited)

    From 20:17 very funny!!! Why he's president

    [Jan 29, 2020] How The U.S. Regime And Its Allies Enforce Their Smears And Their Other Lies by Eric Zuesse

    Notable quotes:
    "... the West's equivalent to the former Soviet Union's systematic, and equally pervasive, truth-suppression, to fool the public into thinking that the Government represents them, no matter how much it does not. ..."
    "... (The chief trick in this regard is to fool them into thinking that since there is more than one political party, one of them will be "good," even though the fact may actually be that each of the parties represents simply a different faction of a psychopathically evil aristocracy. After all: each party lied and supported invading Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011, and Syria constantly; and no party acknowledges that the 2014 regime-change in Ukraine was a U.S. coup instead of a domestic Ukrainian democratic revolution. On such important matters, they all lie, and in basically the same ways. These lies are bipartisan, even though most of the other political lies are heavily partisan.) ..."
    "... The great then-independent investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald headlined about that interview, at Salon on 18 April 2012, "Attacks on RT and Assange reveal much about the critics: Those who pretend to engage in adversarial journalism will invariably hate those who actually do it." How true that was, and unfortunately still is! And Assange himself is the best example of it. ..."
    "... Let's examine the unstated premises at work here. There is apparently a rule that says it's perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer (GE/NBC/MSNBC), or by the U.S. and British governments (BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of America), or by Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal (Wall St. Journal/Fox News), or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments (Politico), or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government ( Kaplan/The Washington Post ), or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties (National Review/TPM/countless others), but it's an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government. Where did that rule come from? ..."
    "... This is the American gospel, and it is called "capitalism." Oddly, after Russia switched to capitalism in 1991, the American gospel switched instead to pure global conquest -- über -imperialism -- and the American public didn't even blink. So: nowadays, capitalism has come to mean über-imperialism. That's today's American gospel. Adolf Hitler would be smiling, upon today's Amerika. ..."
    Jan 29, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Without enforced suppression of truth, there would be no way that the U.S. and its allied regimes could continue hiding the lies that were behind their invasions of Iraq in 2003 , and of Syria since 2012 , and their coup against Ukraine in 2014 , and also of their takeovers and attempted takeovers of other countries that had refused to be bullied by the U.S. regime into complying with its obsessive anti-Russian demands -- America's subterranean continuation of the Cold War, even after Russia had quit the Cold War in 1991 .

    All of the lies are still being propounded by the U.S. regime and remain fully enforced by suppression of the truth about these matters.

    That's being done in all news-media except a few of the non -mainstream ones.

    So: this is about an actual Western samizdat - the West's equivalent to the former Soviet Union's systematic, and equally pervasive, truth-suppression, to fool the public into thinking that the Government represents them, no matter how much it does not.

    (The chief trick in this regard is to fool them into thinking that since there is more than one political party, one of them will be "good," even though the fact may actually be that each of the parties represents simply a different faction of a psychopathically evil aristocracy. After all: each party lied and supported invading Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011, and Syria constantly; and no party acknowledges that the 2014 regime-change in Ukraine was a U.S. coup instead of a domestic Ukrainian democratic revolution. On such important matters, they all lie, and in basically the same ways. These lies are bipartisan, even though most of the other political lies are heavily partisan.)

    Right now, Julian Assange is rotting to death inside Britain's equivalent to the U.S. regime's Guantanamo Bay prison, which is Belmarsh Prison, in London. As the CIA-edited and written Wikipedia's article on Belmarsh Prison retrospectively admits, "Between 2001 and 2002, Belmarsh Prison was used to detain a number of people indefinitely without charge or trial under the provisions of the Part 4 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, leading it to be called the 'British version of Guantanamo Bay'." However, only because of the case of Julian Assange is it now publicly known that this characterization of that prison is -- at least for him -- equally true today . And Assange is, indeed, being held there "indefinitely without charge or trial," even after his having previously been held in various other forms of confinement, ever since at least 12 April 2012, when -- being then 'temporarily' under house-arrest in Norfolk England, while awaiting trial on a manufactured rape-charge against him which was reluctantly abandoned by the Government only when the alleged victim refused to testify against him -- Assange broadcast an interview for RT, Russian Television, an interview of the head of Lebanon's Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah.

    The U.S.-and-allied regimes' billionaires-owned-and-controlled 'news'-media condemned Assange for this interview, because it enabled whomever still had an open mind, amongst the Western public, to hear from one of those billionares' destruction-targets (Nasrallah), and for Assange's doing this on the TV-news network of the main country that America's billionaires are especially trying to conquer, which is (and since 26 July 1945 has consistently been ) Russia.

    The great then-independent investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald headlined about that interview, at Salon on 18 April 2012, "Attacks on RT and Assange reveal much about the critics: Those who pretend to engage in adversarial journalism will invariably hate those who actually do it." How true that was, and unfortunately still is! And Assange himself is the best example of it. Greenwald wrote:

    Let's examine the unstated premises at work here. There is apparently a rule that says it's perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer (GE/NBC/MSNBC), or by the U.S. and British governments (BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of America), or by Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal (Wall St. Journal/Fox News), or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments (Politico), or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government ( Kaplan/The Washington Post ), or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties (National Review/TPM/countless others), but it's an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government. Where did that rule come from?

    But from 'temporary' house-arrest there, Assange was allowed asylum by Ecuador's progressive President Rafael Correa on 20 June 2012 , to stay in London's Ecuadoran Embassy, so as not to be seized by the UK regime to be sent to prison and probable death-without-trial in the U.S. To Correa's shock, it turned out that Correa's successor, Vice President Lenin Moreno, was actually a U.S. agent, who promptly forced Assange out of the Embassy, into Belmarsh prison, to die there or else become extradited to die in a U.S. prison, also without trial.

    And, for what, then, is Assange being imprisoned, and perhaps murdered? He divulged government secrets that should never even have been secrets! He raised the blanket of lies, which covers over these actually dictatorial clandestine international operations. He exposed these evil imperialistic operations, which are hidden behind (and under) that blanket of imperialists' lies. For this, he is being martyred -- a martyr for democracy, where there is no actual democracy (but only those lies).

    Here is an example:

    On December 29th, I headlined "Further Proof: U.S., UK, & France Committed War-Crime on 14 April 2018" and reported highlights of the latest Wikileaks document-dumps regarding a U.S.-UK-French operation to cover-up (via their control over the OPCW) their having committed an international war-crime when they had fired 105 missiles against Syria on 14 April 2018, which was done allegedly to punish Syria for having perpetrated a gas-attack in Douma seven days before -- except that there hadn't been any such gas-attack, but the OPCW simply lied and said that there might have been one, and that the Syrian Government might have done it! That's playing the public for suckers.

    Back on 3 November 2019, Fox News bannered "Fox News Poll: Bipartisan majorities want some U.S. troops to stay in Syria" and reported that when citing ISIS as America's enemy that must be defeated, 69% of U.S. respondents wanted U.S. troops to stay in Syria. But when did ISIS ever constitute a threat to U.S. national security? And under what international law is any U.S. soldier, who is inside Syria, anything other than an invader there? The answer, to both of these questions, is obviously "never" and "none." But if you are an investor in Lockheed Martin, don't you want Americans to be suckers about both ? And, so, they are . People such as Julian Assange don't want the public anywhere to be lied-to. Anyone who is in the propaganda-business -- serving companies such as Lockheed Martin -- wants the public to be suckers.

    This is the way the free market actually works. It works by lying, and in such a country the Government serves the people who have the money, and not the people who don't. The people who don't have the money are supposed to be lied-to. And, so, they are. But this is not democracy.

    Democracy, in fact, is impossible if the public are predominantly deceived.

    If the public are predominantly deceived, then the people who do the deceiving will be the dictators there. And if a country has dictators, then it's no democracy. In a totally free market, only the people with the most money will have any freedom at all; everyone else will be merely their suckers, who are fooled by the professionals at doing that -- lying.

    The super-rich enforce their smears, and their other lies, by hiring people to do this.

    When Barack Obama said that "The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation" - so that each other nation is "dispensable" - he was merely exemplifying the view that only the most powerful is indispensable, and that therefore everyone else is dispensable. Of course, this is the way that he, and Donald Trump, both have governed in the U.S. And Americans overwhelmingly endorse this viewpoint . They're fooled by both parties, because both parties serve only their respective billionaires -- and billionaires are above the law; they are the law, in America and its allied regimes. That's the way it is.

    This is the American gospel, and it is called "capitalism." Oddly, after Russia switched to capitalism in 1991, the American gospel switched instead to pure global conquest -- über -imperialism -- and the American public didn't even blink. So: nowadays, capitalism has come to mean über-imperialism. That's today's American gospel. Adolf Hitler would be smiling, upon today's Amerika.

    And as far as whistleblowers -- such as Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning, and other champions of honesty and of democracy -- are concerned: Americans agree with the billionaires, who detest and destroy such whistleblowers. Champions of democracy are shunned here, where PR reigns and real journalism is almost non-existent.

    [Jan 29, 2020] Turkey isn't amused

    Jan 29, 2020 | twitter.com

    "Turkey: The goal of American peace is to destroy and plunder Palestine."

    "Turkish Foreign Ministry:
    The fake US plan for peace in the Middle East was born 'dead'.
    We will not allow actions to legitimize Israeli occupation and oppression."

    Yet another cord in the knot tying Turkey to the West is severed. Word is the Turkish convoy has turned around and will not be constructing another OP near Saraqib.

    This may surprise some people :

    "Denouncing Trump Plan as 'Unacceptable,' Sanders Declares It Is Time to 'End the Israeli Occupation:'

    "'Trump's so-called 'peace deal,' warned the White House hopeful, 'will only perpetuate the conflict, and undermine the security interests of Americans, Israelis, and Palestinians.'"

    But isn't that exactly what the plan's supposed to do?

    Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 28 2020 21:12 utc | 33

    Posted by: dltravers | Jan 28 2020 21:23 utc | 35 Laguerre @28--

    Here's UAE's response via tweet :

    "Ambassador Yousef Al Otaiba Statement on Peace Plan:

    "The United Arab Emirates appreciates continued US efforts to reach a Palestine-Israel peace agreement. This plan is a serious initiative that addresses many issues raised over the years. (1/3)"

    From what I've read, Egypt also favors the plan, although I've yet to read anything official from Egypt's government. But Hezbollah's correct, IMO.

    "The only way to guarantee a lasting solution is to reach an agreement between all concerned parties. The UAE believes that Palestinians and Israelis can achieve lasting peace and genuine coexistence with the support of the international community. (2/3)"

    "The plan announced today offers an important starting point for a return to negotiations within a US-led international framework. (3/3)"

    Part of Hezbollah's response :

    "This deal would not have taken place without the collusion and treason of a number of Arab regimes, both secret and public. The peoples of our nation will never forgive those rulers who forsook resistance to maintain their fragile thrones."

    Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 28 2020 21:26 utc | 36
    Oman and Bahrain join UAE :

    "Trump greenlights Netanyahu to annex at least 1/3 of the West Bank.

    "Never forget that Oman, Bahrain and the UAE were present in that room [where the speech was made]."

    I'm very surprised at Oman. This indicates to me both the Iranian and Russian collective security proposals are now dead and the situation will now escalate further.

    Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 28 2020 21:41 utc | 39
    But isn't that exactly what the plan's supposed to do?

    Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 28 2020 21:12 utc | 33

    "In the remaining weeks before the March 2 Israeli elections, and the few months left until elections in the United States, Trump's peace plan will primarily serve the goal for which it was designed: election propaganda for Israel's right-wing."

    https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/01/israel-us-palestinians-iran-donald-trump-benjamin-netanyahu.html#ixzz6CMb2xwxV

    +Bonus prize = Stay out of jail card for Netanyahu if he remains Prime Minister.


    "In the near term, the 80-page plan is most likely to stir up Israeli and American politics. Mr. Trump is sure to cite the plan's pro-Israel slant on the 2020 campaign trail to win support from conservative Jewish Americans in Florida and other key states, along with the Evangelical Christians who are some of his strongest backers and support Israeli expansion in the Holy Land."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/world/middleeast/peace-plan.html

    Let's not forget the far right Zionist money men AIPAC members who lavish millions on trump and GOP campaigns. ie Sheldon Adelson was seated in the front row when trump and netanyahu made their announcement. I would say these are the things it's intended to do.

    Posted by: Bubbles | Jan 28 2020 21:44 utc | 40

    [Jan 29, 2020] Trump's l-P 'Deal of the Century' Unveiled

    Jan 29, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    Via RT.com Jan. 27, ' Iran slams Trump's 'delusional' Middle East peace plan, calls on US to accept Tehran's proposal instead'

    Instead of a delusional "Deal of the Century" -- which will be D.O.A. -- self-described "champions of democracy" would do better to accept Iran's democratic solution proposed by Ayatollah @khamenei_ir :A referendum whereby ALL Palestinians -- Muslim, Jew or Christian -- decide their future .

    -- Javad Zarif (@JZarif) January 27, 2020

    "In anticipation of a strongly pro-Israeli plan, Palestinian leaders in Ramallah and Gaza have also condemned the upcoming deal and called for a "day of rage" on Tuesday. They urged Palestinians to boycott American goods, and remove all US symbols remaining in the West Bank."

    'Remarks by President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu of the State of Israel Upon Arrival', January 27, 2020 , whitehouse.gov (a stomach-churning read, but not as much as the joint presser in the Rose Garden above)

    The jerusalem post has some very partial transcripts:

    'Deal of Century establishes Palestinian state, Jewish control of Jerusalem; "I have to do a lot for the Palestinians or it just wouldn't be fair.", Jan 28, 202O

    "US President Donald Trump unveiled his "Deal of the Century" together with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House on Tuesday.

    The peace plan, which Trump said was already supported by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his main rival Blue and White head Benny Gantz, would give Israel full control of the settlements and its undivided capital in Jerusalem.

    "If they are genuinely prepared to make peace with the Jewish state," Netanyahu said, "Israel will be there. Israel will be prepared to negotiate peace right away."

    Trump said that the United States will recognize Israeli sovereignty over any land that "my vision provides to to be part of the State of Israel" and will require the Palestinians to recognize Israel as the Jewish state and to agree to solve the refugee problem outside of Israel.

    The plan also establishes a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem .

    As part of the plan, Trump will reveal a map delineating Israeli and Palestinian state borders. He said the map will make clear the "territorial sacrifices that Israel is willing to make for peace."

    Trump said the plan will "more than double Palestinian territory No Palestinians will be uprooted from their homes."

    Moreover, he said that although Israel will maintain control of Jerusalem, the status quo will remain on the Temple Mount and Israel will work with Jordan to ensure that all Muslims who want to pray at Al-Aqsa Mosque will be able to do so.

    The president said that if the Palestinians choose to accept the plan, some $50 billion will be infused into this new Palestinian state.

    "There are many countries that want to partake in this," he said. "The Palestinian poverty rate will be cut in half and their GDP will double and triple." He then called for "peace and prosperity for the Palestinian people."

    But Trump noted that the transition to the two-state solution will present "no incremental security risk to the State of Israel whatsoever.

    But Trump noted that the transition to the two-state solution will present "no incremental security risk to the State of Israel whatsoever.

    "Peace requires compromise, but we will never require Israel to compromise on it security," he continued.

    Netanyahu in his speech said that he has agreed to negotiate peace with the Palestinians on the basis of Trump's peace plan. The prime minister noted several key reasons, but namely that rather than "pay lip service to Israel's security," the president "recognizes that Israel must have sovereignty in places that enable Israel to defend itself by itself.

    "For too long, the heart of Israel has been outrageously branded as illegally occupied territory," Netanyahu continued . "Today, Mr. President, you are puncturing this big lie. You are recognizing Israel's sovereignty over all Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria – large and small alike."

    However, Israel agreed that it will maintain the status quo in all areas that the peace plan does not designate as Jewish for four years to allow for an opportunity for negotiation. At the same time, as per the plan, Israel will immediately apply sovereignty over the Jordan Valley and other areas that the plan does recognize as Israeli .

    'The 'Deal of the Century': What are its key points?', jpost.com, Jan. 28, 2020

    Borders: Trump's plan features a map of what Israel's new borders will be should it enact the plan fully. Israel retains 20% of the West Bank, and will lose a small amount of land in the Negev, near the Gaza-Egypt border. The Palestinians will have a pathway to a state on 80% of the West Bank. Israel will maintain control of all borders. This is the first time a US president has provided a detailed map of this kind.

    Jerusalem: The Palestinians will have a capital in Jerusalem based on northern and eastern neighborhoods that are outside the Israeli security fence – Kfar Aqab, Abu Dis and half of Shuafat.

    Settlements: Israel would retain the Jordan Valley and all Israeli settlements in the West Bank, in the broadest definition possible, meaning not the municipal borders of each settlement, but their security perimeters. This also includes 15 isolated settlements , which will be enclaves within an eventual Palestinian state, unable to expand for four years. The IDF will have access to the isolated settlements . In order for the settlement part of the plan to go into effect, Israel will have to take action to apply sovereignty to the settlements.

    Security: Israel will be in control of security from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. The IDF will not have to leave the West Bank. No change to Israel's approach to Judea and Samaria would be needed.

    Palestinian State: The plan does not include immediate recognition of a Palestinian state; rather, it expects a willingness on Israel's part to create a pathway towards Palestinian statehood based on specific territory, which is 80% of Judea and Samaria, including areas A and B and half of Area C. The state will only come into existence in four years if the Palestinians accept the plan, if the Palestinian Authority stops paying terrorists and inciting terror, and Hamas and Islamic Jihad put down its weapons . In addition, the American plan calls on the Palestinians to give up corruption, respect human rights, freedom of religion and a free press, so that they don't have a failed state. If those conditions are met, the US will recognize a Palestinian state and implement a massive economic plan to assist it.

    Refugees: A limited number of Palestinian refugees and their descendants will be allowed into the Palestinian state. None will enter Israel ."

    On the other hand, from mondoweiss.net: ' The 'Deal of the Century' is Apartheid, Sheena Anne Arackal January 28, 2020 (some outtakes)


    "With great fanfare, President Trump finally unveiled his long-anticipated Middle East peace proposal. The proposal was labeled 'The Deal of the Century' because it was supposed to offer an even-handed and just solution to one of the world's most intractable conflicts. Instead it does something very different. The 'Deal of the Century' resurrects and restores grand apartheid, a racist political system that should have been left in the dustbins of history.

    Under President Trump's newly unveiled peace plan, the Palestinians will be granted limited autonomy within a Palestinian homeland that consists of multiple non-contiguous enclaves scattered throughout the West Bank and Gaza. The government of Israel will retain security control over the Palestinian enclaves and will continue to control Palestinian borders, airspace, aquifers, maritime waters, and electromagnetic spectrum . Israel will be allowed to annex the Jordan Valley and Jewish communities in the West Bank. The Palestinians will be allowed to select the leaders of their new homeland but will have no political rights in Israel , the state that actually rules over them."

    'Trump unveils peace plan, promising more land and control for Israel', Yumna Patel, January 28, 2020 , mondowiess.net (a few snippets)

    "The room was filled with familiar faces -- Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, Jason Greenblatt, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Sara Netanyahu, and US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, Israeli Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer -- and dozens of Israel's supporters, who clapped and cheered throughout the announcement.
    ..
    "After the press conference, reports surfaced saying that Netanyahu would be announcing Israel's full annexation of the settlements in the West Bank on Sunday, and that Ambassador Friedman expressed that Israel was "free to annex settlements in the West Bank at any time "

    While Trump boasted that his plan would promise a contiguous Palestinian state, doubled in size from its current form, the "conceptual map" released by his administration shows a fragmented and dwindling territory, connected by a series of proposed bridges and tunnels."
    ..
    "We are asking the Palestinians to meet the challenges of peaceful coexistence," Trump said.

    "This includes adopting basic laws enshrining human rights, protecting against political and financial corruption ending incitement of hatred against Israel, and ending financial compensation to terrorists," he said, referring to pensions paid by the Palestinian Authority to the families of prisoners and martyrs.

    In his speech, Netanyahu demanded that Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish State , and that Israel will maintain military control of the entire Jordan Valley to establish a permanent eastern border in the area."
    ..
    "Throughout his speech, Trump repeatedly praised Israel for "wanting peace badly," and praised Netanyahu for "willing to endorse the plan as the basis for direct negotiations."

    He boasted about everything he has done for Israel, listing off the recognition of Jerusalem as its capital, moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, and recognizing Israel's sovereignty over the occupied Golan Heights."

    "Over the next 10 years, 1 million great new Palestinian jobs will be created," he said, adding that the poverty rate will be cut in half, and the Palestinian GDP will "double and triple."

    "Our vision will end the cycle of Palestinian dependency on charity and financial aid. They will do fine by themselves. They are a very capable people ," he said."

    What none of the above coverage had included was that in the video Bibi had high-fived Trump for ridding the Middle East of the greatest terrorist in the world (or close to that, meaning the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani. Bibi'd also laughed and said 'It takes someone [like Trump] who knows real estate'.

    The White House is pleased to share President @realDonaldTrump 's Vision for a comprehensive peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. https://t.co/7o3jPHpcLv

    -- The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 28, 2020

    The so-called "Vision for Peace" is simply the dream project of a bankruptcy-ridden real estate developer.

    But it is a nightmare for the region and the world

    And, hopefully, a wake-up call for all the Muslims who have been barking up the wrong tree. #LetsUniteForPalestinians pic.twitter.com/j2CJ9JaH9c

    -- Javad Zarif (@JZarif) January 28, 2020

    (cross-posted from Café Babylon ) Tags: continuing war crimes against Palestinians up 5 users have voted.

    Comments

    humphrey on Tue, 01/28/2020 - 5:57pm

    The Onion gets it.

    White House Rolls Out Middle East Peace Plan https://t.co/Cke1QOPW6d #WhatDoYouThink ? pic.twitter.com/eXWDjAmvhn

    -- The Onion (@TheOnion) January 28, 2020

    [Jan 29, 2020] Palestinian Rejection End of Oslo Peace Process and the Trump-Netanyahu Apartheid "Steal of the Century" by Juan Cole

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca
    Informed Comment 27 January 2020 Region: Middle East & North Africa , USA Theme: Law and Justice In-depth Report: PALESTINE

    The Palestinian leadership has entirely rejected what is known of the Trump plan for Israel and Palestine, and warned that they see it as destroying the Oslo Peace accords. The Trump administration did not consult the Palestinians in drawing up the plan, which gives away East Jerusalem and 30% of the Palestinian West Bank to Israel. The Palestinians may as well, Palestine foreign minister Saeb Erekat said, just withdraw from the 1995 Interim Agreement on Oslo.

    Trump appears to have decided to unveil the Israel-Palestine plan on Tuesday to take the pressure off from his Senate impeachment trial and to shore up his support from the Jewish and evangelical communities. A majority of Americans in polls say they want Trump impeached and removed from office.

    Trump's plan may also bolster beleaguered Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu , who has been indicted for corruption and is fighting for his political life as Israel's third election in a year approaches. Rushing the details of an important policy like Israel and Palestine for the sake of politics, however, could backfire big time.

    Erekat also warned that the plan virtually assures that Israel will ultimately have to absorb the Palestinians, and give them the vote inside Israel. Mr. Erekat may, however, be overly optimistic, since it is much more likely that the Palestinians will be kept in a Warsaw Ghetto type of situation and simply denied a meaningful vote entirely.

    The Future of Statehood: Israel & Palestine

    Al-Quds al-`Arabi reports that Donald Trump attempted to call Palestine president Mahmoud Abbas during the past few days and that Mr. Abbas refused to take the call.

    The plan, according to details leaked to the Israeli press, will propose a Palestinian statelet on 70% of the West Bank, to be established in four years. The hope is apparently that Mahmoud Abbas will no longer be president of Palestine in four years, and his successor will be more pliable.

    This so-called state, however, will be demilitarized and will lack control over borders and airspace, and will be denied the authority to make treaties with other states. In other words, it will be a Bantustan of the sort the racist, Apartheid South African government created to denaturalize its Black African citizens.

    Netanyahu has pledged that there will be no Palestinian state as long as he is prime minister.

    Palestinians are under Israeli military rule and are being deprived of basic human rights, including the right to have citizenship in a state. They do not have passports but only laissez-passer certificates that are rejected for travel purposes by most states. Israeli squatters continually steal their land and property and water, and Palestinians have no recourse, being without a state to protect them.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    Juan Cole is the founder and chief editor of Informed Comment. He is Richard P. Mitchell Professor of History at the University of Michigan and an adjunct professor, Gulf Studies Center, Qatar University. He is author of, among many other books, Muhammad: Prophet of Peace amid the Clash of Empires . Follow him on Twitter at @jricole or the Informed Comment Facebook Page

    The original source of this article is Informed Comment Copyright © Juan Cole , Informed Comment , 2020

    Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

    Become a Member of Global Research

    [Jan 28, 2020] The Truth the Irony Consortium News and The Continuing Tale of Chrystia Freeland's Grandfather and His and Her Nazi Scheme f

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Yves here. Hopefully readers who understand Canada's libel and defamation laws can pipe up. Presumably most of you already know about Consortium News' libel suit. From its site :

    Consortium News has sent libel notices to the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Canada's version of the U.S. National Security Agency, and to a major Canadian television network, Global News, for a report that said Consortium News was "part of a cyber-influence campaign directed by Russia."

    Consortium News promoted a story that was widely picked up and deservedly embarrassing to Chyrstia Freeland, then Canada's foreign minister, more recently its deputy prime minister. Freeland is of Ukrainian descent and is rabidly anti-Russian. She has falsely and knowingly depicted her family as victims of the Nazis who fled persecution, when her grandfather was a prominent Nazi propagandist operating out of Krakow.

    Mind you, this is all factually accurate. But Consortium News may not be on solid ground in challenging the Canadian accounts of its story.

    A Helmer describes, Consortium News may have badly undermined its position via its attribution. Helmer himself originated the story , as the Consortium News story linked to above acknowledges .but Consortium News didn't in its piece on l'affaire Freeland a month later.

    Instead, its story came from "journalist Arina Tsukanova exclusively for CN". The problem is that no such person appears to exist; it looks to be a handle created by the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow. Helmer points out that there is speculation that the Strategic Culture Foundation gets funding from the Russian Orthodox Church; the Canadian government believes the Russian government supports it. Regardless, it appears to have an explicit mission of promoting Russian nationalism.

    So Consortium News has undermined its case, perhaps fatally, by not making clear when it ran its Freeland piece that it was re-reporting Helmer's work. Helmer is in hot water with the Russian government and was even barred from entering Russia at the time the Freeland story ran. Helmer also knew Freeland from his days at the Financial Times, when she was his editor for a bit. To put it politely, he found her to be ideological and sloppy. So it would be well nigh impossible to depict Consortium News as a Russian stooge for relying on Helmer. But apparently fabricated personas created by a shadowy Russian foundation?

    I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, particularly since we were falsely smeared for being Russian stooges, apparently for sins like questioning rising inequality and other failings of our purported leaders. But if you are going to attack government officials even in a small country like Canada for misrepresentations about their backgrounds, as opposed to garden variety incompetence and mendacity, you need to have your ducks in a row. Going to court similarly requires you to be able to defend your bona fides. Consortium News looks to have set itself up to be vulnerable. I sincerely hope they prevail, but I would not bet on it.

    By John Helmer , the longest continuously serving foreign correspondent in Russia, and the only western journalist to direct his own bureau independent of single national or commercial ties. Helmer has also been a professor of political science, and an advisor to government heads in Greece, the United States, and Asia. He is the first and only member of a US presidential administration (Jimmy Carter) to establish himself in Russia. Originally published at Dances with Bears

    The truth is that Consortium News trusted a Russian entity named the Strategic Culture Foundation and a Ukrainian reporter called Arina Tsukanova for a story published on February 27, 2017, about Chrystia Freeland's grandfather Mikhail Chomiak, a propagandist and spy for the German Army who advocated and assisted in the murder of the Jews, Poles and Russians during World War II, and took his reward by stealing Jewish property – publishing company, office, apartment, antique furniture, and limousine.

    The story about Freeland and the ethnic cleansing of Ukraine on which Freeland agrees, still, with Chomiak, was the truth. It's also a truth she tries to escape by blaming the Russian state or Kremlin propaganda for repeating. Repeating doesn't turn the truth into a lie, though as Joseph Goebbels advised, repeating the lie helps.

    The point isn't that Freeland is culpable in her grandfather's sins. Her sin is hiding them, and her reason for doing so. She agrees with Chomiak on turning Ukraine into the Greater Galicia it was Adolf Hitler's objective to achieve between 1939 to 1945: that's to say, cleanse the territory of Jews, Poles and Russians by killing them all. Chomiak succeeded with the first two; he was then employed by the US Army on the third. Freeland is keeping the plan in the family; they now have the Canadian government behind them. Demonizing Russians is part of the same plan as it was in Chomiak's day.

    The irony is that the Freeland-Chomiak story was plagiarized from an American reporter who first published the details on January 19, 2017. At the time, and still, he was banned from entering Russia by the Kremlin because, according to a senior official in Moscow, "he writes bad things about our country"; no western journalist has been banned for as long – since September 27, 2010. The reporter was me.

    There's another truth wrapped in an irony. Arina Tsukanova, the byline writer of the Strategic Culture Foundation story and the Consortium News story, cannot be found; isn't known at the media of Kiev and Crimea where her published pieces claim she works; and doesn't reply to emails and Facebook communications. She is a ghost -- a byline invented by the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow.

    The Galician state plan, the genocide which went with it, and the current campaign of lies against Russia didn't start with Chomiak or end with Freeland. In Canada they have been continued by many officials; among them Lieutenant-General Paul Wynnyk, commander of the Canadian Army, then Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, 2016-2019, and now a minister in the Alberta provincial government; and Roman Waschuk, Canada's ambassador to Kiev, 2014-2019; for their details, click .

    Auschwitz-Birkenau, the site of the German death camp whose liberation by the Red Army on January 27, 1945, is celebrated last week and this , was part of the Galician territory under German occupation. It was seventy kilometres west of Chomiak's office in Cracow, within his killing range. Opponents and critics of the Galician plan, and researchers of the war crimes committed by Chomiak and others include many Canadians of Ukrainian origin, including John-Paul Himka, a professor of history now retired from the University of Alberta in Edmonton; he and they have been the target of ostracism and worse from the Ukrainian-Canadian community; read more .

    According to Himka (right) there is "a blank spot in the collective memory of the Ukrainian diaspora", and a "double standard in discussing war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by Ukrainians as opposed to those perpetrated against Ukrainians. Memoirs and eyewitness accounts, for example, are considered untrustworthy evidence for the former, but trustworthy for the latter; that is, Jewish or Polish first-hand accounts of Ukrainian war crimes are dismissed as biased, while an important Ukrainian victimization narrative, the famine of 1932-33, has relied primarily on just such eyewitness accounts."

    The lying by the promoters of the Galician plan for Ukraine has been promoted by the Canadian mass media, almost without exception. They don't respond to correction for the truth; click to follow their record .

    With the collaboration of her former employer, the Financial Times , Freeland continues to lie by omission and commission, In the past weekend's " Lunch with the FT ", Freeland was questioned by a reporter called Edward Luce. "I struggle to rustle up some professional scepticism," he admitted towards the end of listening to Freeland. "I cannot help nodding in agreement."

    Luce also couldn't help omitting the extent of the story of Freeland and Galicia. Instead, he repeated Freeland's lie that her mother had been "born to Ukrainian refugees in a US displaced person's camp in postwar Germany." In fact, they weren't refugees from Ukraine. They were Nazi war criminals on the run. The "camp" was a luxury Bavarian spa town, Bad Worishofen, which the US Army had taken over, in part to develop Ukrainian espionage and infiltration agents to run against the Soviet Union. Chomiak was an early recruit, switching his loyalty from the German Army to the US Army for money, and for the same murderous ideology.

    The US Army, OSS and CIA files on Chomiak, dating from 1945 to at least 1948, are stored at the National Archives in Washington. No researcher has opened them yet. Recovering the full story of Chomiak started with Ukrainian and Canadian researchers working through Chomiak's papers in Alberta, and with Polish police investigations in Warsaw; they were opened and reported here .

    The Russian contribution to this research and reporting has been negligible. Ditto Consortium News (CN).

    In an announcement last week, Joe Lauria, the editor of CN since founder Robert Parry died in 2018, said he had instructed Toronto lawyers to send libel notices to the Canadian signals intelligence agency, Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and to a local broadcaster called Global News. The notices asked for retractions and apologies.

    Lauria said CN had been defamed for a publication in February 27, 2017, when Chomiak's wartime record was reported for the first time. Except it wasn't for the first time and the original CN article wasn't quite what it purported to be.

    The CSE had produced a secret analysis, Global News reported, on Russian info-war against Freeland. "Cyber influence activity to cause reputational damage" was the technical Canadian spy agency term quoted. "The Grandfather Nazi narrative" was another of the terms. The secret Canadian intelligence was: "In early spring 2017 and spring 2018, sources linked to Russia popularized MFA Freeland's family history, very likely intended to cause personal reputational damage in order to discredit the Government of Canada's ongoing diplomatic and military support of Ukraine, to delegitimize Canada's decision to enact the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Offices Act, and the expulsion of several Russian diplomats." The Global News report can be read here .

    Sources linked to Russia were reportedly tracked down by CSE. "The first attack," claimed Global News, citing the CSE report, "was a February 2017 report in the 'online Consortium News' followed 'in quick succession' by pro-Russian English language and Russian-language online media, the CSE report says."

    Lauria charged last week that this was libellous. Aside, he didn't dispute Parry's claims at the time that he had been first or that Freeland's counter-attack with her Russia lie was aimed at Parry and CN. Here is Parry's original publication, bylined Arina Tsukanova, and tagged "exclusive".

    According to CN's original publication, Tsukanova "is a Russian Ukrainian journalist from Kiev currently living in Crimea. Before the Euromaidan she used to work for several Ukrainian newspapers, now closed."

    In the English language, Tsukanova's stories started to appear in mid-2016 and then stopped in April 2017 . When her story on the Freeland-Chomiak case appeared in CN, she had reported nothing on the idea, the topic, or the subject details before; there was no sequel or related report by her afterwards.

    In the Russian language Tsukanova's reporting record began on January 18, 2016, and is still current . Her two outlets are the Strategic Culture Foundation (FSK in Russian) and KM.ru, both in Moscow. The reports specialize on Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. She has reported only once on Freeland and Chomiak. The story which appeared in Russian on March 2, 2017 , is not the same story as had appeared under her byline in CN three days earlier. The Russian version of the story has 23 paragraphs. The first 11 paragraphs of the CN story, a third of the publication, weren't written by Tsukanova and do not appear in the Russian version. They were written by Parry; "I personally edited and fact-checked [it]", Parry wrote later. It was Parry's English version which was reprinted by Strategic Culture Foundation on March 2, 2017, and then Parry's lone bylined story which ran in the same place on March 12, 2017 .

    "Knowing Bob as I did," Lauria said last week, "I'm certain he would not have published the article if he knew any of it had been plagiarized. He must have not been aware of your earlier story as I wasn't as I was preparing my story this week." Lauria then compared what Tsukanova and Parry had written with two reports I had published five weeks earlier.

    Source: http://johnhelmer.net// This story was followed by this one .

    Lauria now says: "I carefully went through your two stories and compared it to Consortium News of Feb. 27, 2017. There is no doubt that it is based on your earlier story. That should have been mentioned in the Consortium article. I did not find whole sentences or paragraphs that were taken directly from your article. The fact remains that the story of Freeland's grandfather is true and that cannot be disputed. I have updated the article I wrote on Tuesday to include this line in the body of the text: The story was first reported by John Helmer a month earlier In her version, Tuskanova reported; and I put a note at the end of the story saying: This article has been updated to show that the story of Freeland's grandfather was first reported by John Helmer."

    The revised version of the CN report looks like this . Lauria is making amends.

    Parry, who can't, made a habit of lifting material without giving credit and then promoting himself as the originator. In March 2015, for example, he produced a piece on Igor Kolomoisky, the Ukrainian oligarch; the Burisma scandal involving the Biden family, and Natalie Jaresko, the State Department official who became the Ukrainian minister of finance. Here's Parry's story.

    This material started with two stories of mine which had appeared a month earlier. Parry helped himself to the topic and the material, but omitted to mention their origin. He also forgot that he had written to me to say: "John, thanks. Good piece." Here is where Parry started and also here .

    As for Parry's reporting on Jaresko, which appeared on February 19, 2015 -- -- that started with a story I had published on Jaresko on December 3, 2014 . After reworking the material and sources, Parry gave a mention of the origin in my work. He placed that at the 43 rd paragraph of his 52-paragraph piece.

    Lauria was asked to verify Parry's source, Tsukanova. He says he wrote Tsukanova by email, but she hasn't replied. Independently, checks of the Crimea and Kiev media last week reveal that she is not known to the press in either place where she claims to have worked for years. I attempted to contact her at her Facebook page; she did not reply. In the Facebook gallery of her photographs, there are none of Tsukanova on location acting as a journalist.

    Left: the header for Arina Tsukanova's story archive published by the Strategic Culture Foundation; source -- https://www.fondsk.ru/authors/ Right: the only photograph of Tsukanova found on the Russian internet. This identifies Tsukanova, not only as journalist, but also as a "publicist". Source: https://www.infox.ru/blog/168

    Arina Tsukanova, according to this Facebook page .

    On the evidence gathered to date, Tsukanova is a ghost – a byline invented by her Russian publishers for their purposes, but made to look credible for other purposes. Lauria refused to provide evidence of the original correspondence with Parry, the terms of exclusivity he reported with Tsukanova, or a record of payment for her article in 2017. He concludes: "I'm not anticipating any evidence [of her communication]."

    Lauria also says that "not being able to reach her only proves that she's not reachable I do not think there is any evidence to say she is a ghost for someone else. It seems pure speculation at this point In the end of the day, the story is true so does it really matter? A source or a sources' [sic] motives become irrelevant if the information they provide is true."

    The problem for Lauria and CN is that if Tsukanova was an invention of the Strategic Culture Foundation in 2017 when Parry picked up the Freeland-Chomiak story, and if the Moscow entity was receiving money from Russian state media agencies, then the link between Parry and the Russian side was one which is an embarrassment now for CN in its claims against CSE and Global News.

    Tsukanova may be a ghost; the Strategic Culture Foundation is not. It may be suspected in Ottawa of taking money from state organs; in Moscow it is suspected of taking money from the Russian Orthodox Church. But there is no evidence of either. What there is is a record of the foundation's registration on February 21, 2005, at a room in the Polyanka district of Moscow. The president was listed as Yury Prokofiev; the general director, Vladimir Maksimenko. The "main activity" on the registration forms is "research and development in the field of social sciences and humanities". Tax inspection is also confirmed, but no details of income or expenditures.

    Left, Yury Prokofiev, founding president of the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow; right, Vladimir Maksimenko, the general director.

    About Prokofiev, now about 81 years of age, there is a detailed history of his evolution from Communist Party apparatchik in 1990-91 to Orthodox Christian monarchist a decade later. The profile, with extensive quotes and references, was published by Valery Lebedev in March 2007; read the Russian here . Lebedev titles his story after the Russian story of the puppeteer Karabas Barabas, the villain in a Russian fairy tale. According to Lebedev's account, the Strategic Culture Foundation was designed as a platform for the promotion of Russian nationalism. He doesn't know where Prokofiev got his money to publish.

    About Maksimenko, the Russian record indicates that he studied history to doctoral level at MGIMO and was (may still be) an employee of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. His earlier academic publications were on the Maghreb (Arab North Africa); his later ones on Orthodox monarchism appear here . About both Prokofiev and Maksimenko, Lebedev says they have been shopping from one cause to another for years; he implies they have never managed to draw much money or audience.

    Maksimenko does not reply to emails at the contact address given for the Strategic Culture Foundation . The foundation has published only one article by Maksimenko under his byline in English; it is about French politics . There is no article in English by Prokofiev in the archive.

    With them Freeland shares the same combination of ethnic nationalism and God – in Freeland's case, she told the FT, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

    "I'm very patriotic," Freeland told the FT. "'Be good Ukrainians, and by being good Ukrainians, you will be even better Canadians'," Freeland recounts. 'I happen to be Ukrainian-Canadian. When I moved to Toronto I had an instant community of Canadian-Ukrainians. There's a culture there that my kids can immediately experience in Edmonton or Saskatoon She then embarks on a passionate disquisition about the robustness of Ukraine's democracy. An aide halts her to say they are late for another meeting a few blocks away.'"

    Pricking Freeland's vanity is a bigger job than the FT can handle; or Parry's vanity for Lauria. The vanity of the Canadian espionage establishment will be safe in a Toronto court. But pricked the CSE file most certainly it is. That's because the record of Canadian spying for influence over Russian journalism long precedes this affair.

    It started, in fact, with a woman called Janice Cowan, a Canadian of English origin who was the wife of the Canadian military attaché in the Moscow embassy in the early 1990s. Cowan was trained to penetrate Russian media circles and report back to Ottawa. "It was a good time to be a spy", Cowan wrote in a memoir she published called A Spy's Wife; it was issued in 2006 by a Toronto publisher called James Lorimer with a grant from the Canadian Government. "Quality Canadian books you'll want to read" is Lorimer's motto – except that without cash from Ottawa, Lorimer might have judged that no one would have wanted to read about Cowan's espionage. In Moscow she took diplomatic immunity from her husband; her spy cover was as an editor at the English language paper, The Moscow Tribune. (The competing English-language paper, The Moscow Times , had Cowan's counterparts from the CIA.) Cowan's targets for espionage included the son-in-law of Marshal Georgy Zhukov and me.

    In its review of Cowan's book, the Toronto Globe & Mail said: "Her account of her pre-assignment operational training, and of her various intelligence-gathering tours to Soviet hot spots is convincing. But what threatens to drop this otherwise charming little book into the trivia basket is Cowan's incurable and self-confessed romanticism about intelligence."

    The files of the Communications Security Establishment must include Cowan's reports; they remain classified even after she broke cover with her book. They can't be mentioned now because that would reveal the topmost secret of all – that when it comes to info-war between Russia and Canada, penetration of the media, and what the CSE calls "cyber influence activity to cause reputational damage", it was the Canadians who started against the Russians first.

    It's been catch-up, tit-for-tat, not to mention plagiarism, ever since.

    CoryP , January 28, 2020 at 3:17 am

    I'm so ashamed of this government. And the other day we welcomed the "Interim President" of Venezuela!
    Truly the 51st state.

    Clive , January 28, 2020 at 4:28 am

    No, we're (UK) the 51st state. We got here first. And these things matter. Canada is the 52nd. Well, possibly. I think Japan is actually the 52nd. Canada can be 53rd, if you like. Although Australians will need to correct me if that one's already been nabbed by them.

    dcrane , January 28, 2020 at 4:51 am

    Sixth territory is waiting to be claimed.

    The Rev Kev , January 28, 2020 at 5:01 am

    Australia? Merely a vassal state, Clive. Merely a vassal state – just like Japan.

    Carolinian , January 28, 2020 at 10:42 am

    LOL. We welcome you all to our ever expanding republic.

    As for the above

    It may be suspected in Ottawa of taking money from state organs; in Moscow it is suspected of taking money from the Russian Orthodox Church. But there is no evidence of either.

    And many past US journalists have been suspected–no wait proven–to have taken money and favors from the CIA. While Parry may have done wrong by not crediting Helmer and CN may not get the apology and retraction it seeks, surely the main point is that the story is true. If we were scoring this propaganda war over "fake news" according to truth then it's likely that stories about the west coming out of Russia–fake byline or not–probably score better on the truth meter than stories about Russia found in our MSM. As they used to say in Soviet times, everything they told us about Russia was a lie and everything they told us about America was the truth.

    CoryP , January 28, 2020 at 7:16 am

    More to the point, this is an interesting and unfortunate turn for this case. Dances with Bears is a site I forget to read regularly. It's a shame that CN might be setting themselves up for embarassment vs the Canadian establishment.

    Peter , January 28, 2020 at 5:16 am

    I read all three among many others like TruthDig, Craig Murray, Jacobin Mag, Counterpunch, Antiwar, Der Spiegel, Intercept, MoA, Grayzone Project, Asia Times etc. etc. on a regular basis, and I do not care how Strategic Culture gets its funding as long as it does not turn it into an obvious or subtle propaganda outlet.

    From what I see and read this is an aggregator – with editorials sometimes – and publishes or republishes a wide spectrum from left to right, like Zuesse, Cloughly, Lazare, Crook, Cunningham, Madsen, Bridge, Madsen, Luongo and also LaRouchians like Ehret. A fairly wide Range and therefore obviously quite balanced.

    I cannot see any evidence in this range of different contributors to what Helmer describes:

    "the Strategic Culture Foundation was designed as a platform for the promotion of Russian nationalism"

    Maybe that statement reflects more his troubles with Russian officials, also I do not know how Helmer claims on one hand he

    " At the time, and still, he was banned from entering Russia by the Kremlin The reporter was me."

    is not allowed to enter the RF but states on the top of his articles: by John Helmer, Moscow – what is it now? Who is economical with the truth?
    As to Consortium News – yes, they should have been more careful with checking their sources, but for me it is important as an expat Canadian that someone like Freeland is permitted to actually represent Canada, which just shows how pernicious the influence of right wing to Fascist Ukrainians is, especially in a province like Alberta stretching into Ottawa.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 28, 2020 at 6:40 am

    With all due respect, you are completely missing the point or choosing to misconstrue it.

    The attacks in Canada on the Consortium News report are based on its reliance on Russian sources that are alleged to be connected to the Russian government. Strategic Culture Foundation promotes Russian nationalism and is so hidden about its funding sources that that charge will likely stick. That means that the Consortium News will have difficulty in court disproving that it was amplifying a Russian campaign, particularly if Helmer's other contention is correct, that the supposed author isn't bona fide.

    I must also point out, without naming names (because I don't want to waste time and energy documenting the point) that some of the authors from Strategic Culture Foundation that you mention approvingly are ones we would never link to, and are even loath to allow links to their works in comments because they have serious and regular problems with accuracy (either actual facts or greatly overstating the implications of their findings). And accordingly, we have not linked to Strategic Culture Foundation because it features too many dodgy writers and we do not want to lead readers to view it as a reliable source.

    In addition, you promote the fiction that anyone in Russia must be an official stooge. Help me. Helmer is regularly writing pieces that embarrass the Russian government and its allies; he's been barred entry as retribution. Had Consortium News written a piece that acknowledged Helmer as the source of the account, it would have been extremely difficult to depict them as manipulated by Russian government allies.

    lyman alpha blob , January 28, 2020 at 9:36 am

    I agree that if they had simply cited Helmer in the first place they would have a lot better libel case. I also find it surprising that CN didn't even seem aware of Helmer's reporting on the subject. You'd think that the thorough fact checking of the piece prior to publication would have turned that up. Even without the citation though, it seems a quite a stretch to say that the entire CN organization is "part of a cyber-influence campaign directed by Russia." That "part of" is what will cause problems for CN I suspect. Could be another argument trying to determine what the meaning of "is" is. Perhaps CN doesn't even care of they win the case as long as the publicity lets it be more widely known that the facts of their story are accurate.

    I also picked up the same thing Peter did though. I'd always assumed Helmer was resident in Russia based on his byline and was a little surprised to find out that he was barred from the country.

    The maddening thing is the corporate media can misreport stories, and deliberately so, and continue to get away with it and they will tar and feather an alternative media outlet for a relatively minor mistake that doesn't affect the true facts of the story at all. It would be nice if Helmer and CN could let bygones be bygones and cooperate here to get the facts out before people like Freeland who do play fast and loose with the truth are allowed to squash it and rise through the ranks even higher.

    Paradan , January 28, 2020 at 7:09 am

    Ive only been reading it for a couple years, but I always felt Strategic Culture Foundation has good articles from time to time. They're anti-imperial for sure, and have an occasional weird take on history (the French Revolution was hijacked by the British Oligarchy, and that's when it got bloody), but overall it doesn't have that pure propaganda feel.

    I guess that's how they get ya, sneaky bastards.

    Carolinian , January 28, 2020 at 1:09 pm

    I check it every day. Many of the writers whose articles are picked up do indeed have secure reputations and articles that are widely republished throughout the leftysphere. And isn't that how the web works? The opposite version would be the NYT where all those Judy Millers reign but are supposed to have credibility because of their newspaper's (onetime) exalted reputation. The journalistic world has changed.

    Winston Smith , January 28, 2020 at 8:12 am

    Perhaps this is unwelcome but Chyrstia Freeland could become Canada's next prime minister

    Winston Smith , January 28, 2020 at 8:37 am

    "The point isn't that Freeland is culpable in her grandfather's sins. Her sin is hiding them, and her reason for doing so. She agrees with Chomiak on turning Ukraine into the Greater Galicia it was Adolf Hitler's objective to achieve between 1939 to 1945: that's to say, cleanse the territory of Jews, Poles and Russians by killing them all . Chomiak succeeded with the first two; he was then employed by the US Army on the third. Freeland is keeping the plan in the family; they now have the Canadian government behind them"

    So Chrystia Freeland supports ethnic cleansing?

    OIFVet , January 28, 2020 at 4:28 pm

    It appears that she does support it when perpetrated by her grandpa

    Kathleen T Smith , January 28, 2020 at 8:45 am

    Ever think that the Consortium News trusted a Russian entity named the Strategic Culture Foundation and a Ukrainian reporter called Arina Tsukanova on purpose– KNOWING that they could be discredited? NOw the narrative can be changed and Allows them to cover up the truth -- the big story is now not about Freeland knowing lying about her grandfather and his Nazi connections -- but about a fake news outlet trying to defame her? This sounds more like what is really going on here -- FYI when ever I see someone has been a Rhodes Scholar and they are in politics or media -- it can only means one thing -- they are LIARS.

    pretzelattack , January 28, 2020 at 3:29 pm

    when did parry ever do something like that? never as far as i know, and at any rate freeland's past is too well known to make this plausible, whether cn wins the libel suit or not.

    The Rev Kev , January 28, 2020 at 9:56 am

    Consortium News may come a cropper for not practicing due diligence with their sources but they might have fun embarrassing Canadian outlets in court with quoting Canadian sources. The thing that bothers me is these 'patriots' like Chyrstia Freeland who are patriotic for another country but not where they live. You see the same in America with all those Cubans in Florida who have helped warp American foreign policy to Cuba for decade after decade.

    With the Ukraine, it seems to be more intense. If you do not believe me, reflect on those Ukrainian-born people like the Vindman brothers who are at the heart of the impeachment campaign against Trump. And they are no the only ones. Think Marie Yovanovitch as another example. The Ukraine Diaspora in Canad is even more extensive and some 1,359,655 Canadians have Ukrainian ancestry. And that is how you get a Chyrstia Freeland who would literally accept a neo-nazi Ukraine with all that that implies-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Canadians

    Wukchumni , January 28, 2020 at 10:22 am

    Hard to beat the Doukhobors for interesting Russian immigrants to Canada

    They utilized nude marches when protesting, you don't see that very often~

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doukhobors

    michael hudson , January 28, 2020 at 10:13 am

    It may help explain the bewildering popularity of the loathsome Freeland to point out that Canada has two quite distinct groups of "Ukrainian" emigrants. One of the largest is Galician, not really Ukrainian. In the midwest especially (for instance, Winnipeg) there is a Galician Ukrainian church. Other Ukrainians tend to be a distinct community. I've found quite a disparity in what each group thinks of Freeland.

    Mike , January 28, 2020 at 11:04 am

    My issue with all this is the copying and reprinting without attribution to original source. It seems many of our so-called "leftist" organs and web publishers are too ego-involved to stop promoting their own "originality", the alternative being to cooperate and share sources and information while researching with their pooled abilities and assets. The infighting over bona-fides has always been detrimental to the achievement of goals which are (supposedly) shared and of common good for "the people". So, why this??

    I'm sure a well-researched and sourced piece or two, coupled with a strong demand and pressure on the National Archives to produce its information could well put both Canada and the US on a defensive to either deny access (a poor PR choice) or produce embarrassing content. This requires far less ego, it seems to me.

    mauisurfer , January 28, 2020 at 4:01 pm

    John Helmer knows more about what is going on in Russia than any other
    correspondent who writes in english. Originally from Australia, he went to grad school at Harvard and worked for the Carter White House under Brzezinski. He has lived in Moscow for over 30 years and reads/speaks Russian. He comprehends who the oligarchs and politicians are, and how their businesses and interests intersect and collide. He has lived in the mideast. He is a teller of truth, and that definitely includes MH17, the Skripals, the coup in Crimea, and the alleged gas poisonings in Syria.

    mauisurfer , January 28, 2020 at 4:16 pm

    A word about Strategic Culture.
    I read it every day in the hope that I will see an article by Alastair Crooke.
    Crooke is a former UK diplo and MI6 spy. His expertise is the mideast, and he is probably the best informed english speaking person on this planet. E.g., knows more about Hezbollah
    than any other writer. And he "tells it like it is". He is not a gossiper of FUKUS imperialism.
    I think Crooke publishes at Strategic Culture because he not welcome as contributor in "western" media. If you attempt to google his name for his latest article, you will not find it.
    I have no real idea who supports the S C site, and I do not really care.

    ChrisPacific , January 28, 2020 at 4:19 pm

    Leaving aside the bits about Helmer and attribution, this does raise an interesting point. Suppose I receive an explosive story about a high elected official from Fresno Dan, who claims to have received it directly from bare-chested Vladimir Putin via messages from the secret Kremlin antennae in his bunny slippers. But it turns out to be well-supported with evidence that is independently and easily verifiable (i.e., true).

    Do I (a) publish the story; (b) credit Fresno Dan as the source; (c ) mention bare-chested Vladimir and the bunny slippers; or (d) any or all of the above?

    It would seem rather silly not to publish if I think it's important and the story checks out. But will the bit about Putin and the bunny slippers reduce my credibility if I mention it? And if I don't, what if somebody else finds out and publishes that?

    Technically the fact that the story is true does not preclude it from being part of an influence campaign on the part of Russia. There are a great many true stories out there and media have broad discretion over which ones they choose to give air time to. What if somebody alleges that Putin ordered the story shared because he wanted attention drawn to it in Western media?

    As Yves notes, the fact that CN had a more credible source available for the story (Helmer) and chose not to cite him, which would have avoided most of these issues, would seem to be the own goal here.

    [Jan 28, 2020] Pompeo's Petty Despotism

    Pompeo proved to be impulsive bully. Like Bolton, he is yet another "wise" Trump choice that disqualifies Trump for running in 2020 elections.
    Jan 28, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Nomuka • 15 hours ago • edited
    Well, it looks like I'll need to start contributing to NPR again. They are a little too woke for my tastes, but Pompeo is a liar, and frankly beyond the pale. A perfect representative of the current administration by the way. Kudos to NPR for standing up to him.
    TomG • 10 hours ago
    One correction--instead of "by acting as if he is a petty despot" it should read "evermore blatantly showing the world the petty despot he is."
    bumbershoot • 10 hours ago
    The Secretary of State has all of the vanity and arrogance of a diva, but none of the talent.

    Hmm, that seems to remind me of someone else in this administration...

    FL_Cottonmouth • 9 hours ago
    Much like U.S. foreign policy, it seems that Mike Pompeo is going to ignore the facts and keep recklessly escalating the conflict. Surely he's aware that The Washington Post published the email correspondence between Ms. Kelley and press aide. This just makes him look like a coward.
    ZizaNiam • 9 hours ago
    From the Trump voter perspective, this journalist should feel lucky that she wasn't sent to Guantanamo Bay. All Trump voters think this way, there is no exception.
    Taras77 • 6 hours ago
    Absolutely no longer any surprises about this pathetic individual!

    [Jan 28, 2020] Our losses in Afghanistan are negligible

    Notable quotes:
    "... It would be highly ironic if these American military aircraft were shot down with the (in)famous US Stinger missiles that America gave to Afghan jihadists against the Soviet Union in the 1980s. ..."
    "... Uncle Sam has declared War on the World, thinking it is just a bunching bag. Now he is finding out that sometimes punching bags can punch back... ..."
    Jan 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    c1ue , Jan 27 2020 16:17 utc | 4

    If the $1.6 trillion cost of the US military being in Afghanistan is correct, then the loss of 4 helicopters and even the E11 won't significantly increase US overall spend there. $1.6 trillion over 18 years is a tad under $250 million per day

    Walter , Jan 27 2020 17:24 utc | 16

    ...I recall a quotation from that good man, Winston C, who wrote long ago about Afghanistan...{populated by} "poverty-stricken illiterate tribesmen possessed of the finest Martini-Henry Rifles..."

    That was over 100 years ago...

    Now, it seem, "possessed of the finest surface to air missiles."

    Well now, who'd a think...

    ak74 , Jan 27 2020 17:37 utc | 20
    It would be highly ironic if these American military aircraft were shot down with the (in)famous US Stinger missiles that America gave to Afghan jihadists against the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

    Reap what you sow.

    Trailer Trash , Jan 27 2020 17:42 utc | 23
    Uncle Sam has declared War on the World, thinking it is just a bunching bag. Now he is finding out that sometimes punching bags can punch back...

    [Jan 28, 2020] The Truth the Irony Consortium News and The Continuing Tale of Chrystia Freeland's Grandfather and His and Her Nazi Scheme f

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Yves here. Hopefully readers who understand Canada's libel and defamation laws can pipe up. Presumably most of you already know about Consortium News' libel suit. From its site :

    Consortium News has sent libel notices to the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Canada's version of the U.S. National Security Agency, and to a major Canadian television network, Global News, for a report that said Consortium News was "part of a cyber-influence campaign directed by Russia."

    Consortium News promoted a story that was widely picked up and deservedly embarrassing to Chyrstia Freeland, then Canada's foreign minister, more recently its deputy prime minister. Freeland is of Ukrainian descent and is rabidly anti-Russian. She has falsely and knowingly depicted her family as victims of the Nazis who fled persecution, when her grandfather was a prominent Nazi propagandist operating out of Krakow.

    Mind you, this is all factually accurate. But Consortium News may not be on solid ground in challenging the Canadian accounts of its story.

    A Helmer describes, Consortium News may have badly undermined its position via its attribution. Helmer himself originated the story , as the Consortium News story linked to above acknowledges .but Consortium News didn't in its piece on l'affaire Freeland a month later.

    Instead, its story came from "journalist Arina Tsukanova exclusively for CN". The problem is that no such person appears to exist; it looks to be a handle created by the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow. Helmer points out that there is speculation that the Strategic Culture Foundation gets funding from the Russian Orthodox Church; the Canadian government believes the Russian government supports it. Regardless, it appears to have an explicit mission of promoting Russian nationalism.

    So Consortium News has undermined its case, perhaps fatally, by not making clear when it ran its Freeland piece that it was re-reporting Helmer's work. Helmer is in hot water with the Russian government and was even barred from entering Russia at the time the Freeland story ran. Helmer also knew Freeland from his days at the Financial Times, when she was his editor for a bit. To put it politely, he found her to be ideological and sloppy. So it would be well nigh impossible to depict Consortium News as a Russian stooge for relying on Helmer. But apparently fabricated personas created by a shadowy Russian foundation?

    I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, particularly since we were falsely smeared for being Russian stooges, apparently for sins like questioning rising inequality and other failings of our purported leaders. But if you are going to attack government officials even in a small country like Canada for misrepresentations about their backgrounds, as opposed to garden variety incompetence and mendacity, you need to have your ducks in a row. Going to court similarly requires you to be able to defend your bona fides. Consortium News looks to have set itself up to be vulnerable. I sincerely hope they prevail, but I would not bet on it.

    By John Helmer , the longest continuously serving foreign correspondent in Russia, and the only western journalist to direct his own bureau independent of single national or commercial ties. Helmer has also been a professor of political science, and an advisor to government heads in Greece, the United States, and Asia. He is the first and only member of a US presidential administration (Jimmy Carter) to establish himself in Russia. Originally published at Dances with Bears

    The truth is that Consortium News trusted a Russian entity named the Strategic Culture Foundation and a Ukrainian reporter called Arina Tsukanova for a story published on February 27, 2017, about Chrystia Freeland's grandfather Mikhail Chomiak, a propagandist and spy for the German Army who advocated and assisted in the murder of the Jews, Poles and Russians during World War II, and took his reward by stealing Jewish property – publishing company, office, apartment, antique furniture, and limousine.

    The story about Freeland and the ethnic cleansing of Ukraine on which Freeland agrees, still, with Chomiak, was the truth. It's also a truth she tries to escape by blaming the Russian state or Kremlin propaganda for repeating. Repeating doesn't turn the truth into a lie, though as Joseph Goebbels advised, repeating the lie helps.

    The point isn't that Freeland is culpable in her grandfather's sins. Her sin is hiding them, and her reason for doing so. She agrees with Chomiak on turning Ukraine into the Greater Galicia it was Adolf Hitler's objective to achieve between 1939 to 1945: that's to say, cleanse the territory of Jews, Poles and Russians by killing them all. Chomiak succeeded with the first two; he was then employed by the US Army on the third. Freeland is keeping the plan in the family; they now have the Canadian government behind them. Demonizing Russians is part of the same plan as it was in Chomiak's day.

    The irony is that the Freeland-Chomiak story was plagiarized from an American reporter who first published the details on January 19, 2017. At the time, and still, he was banned from entering Russia by the Kremlin because, according to a senior official in Moscow, "he writes bad things about our country"; no western journalist has been banned for as long – since September 27, 2010. The reporter was me.

    There's another truth wrapped in an irony. Arina Tsukanova, the byline writer of the Strategic Culture Foundation story and the Consortium News story, cannot be found; isn't known at the media of Kiev and Crimea where her published pieces claim she works; and doesn't reply to emails and Facebook communications. She is a ghost -- a byline invented by the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow.

    The Galician state plan, the genocide which went with it, and the current campaign of lies against Russia didn't start with Chomiak or end with Freeland. In Canada they have been continued by many officials; among them Lieutenant-General Paul Wynnyk, commander of the Canadian Army, then Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, 2016-2019, and now a minister in the Alberta provincial government; and Roman Waschuk, Canada's ambassador to Kiev, 2014-2019; for their details, click .

    Auschwitz-Birkenau, the site of the German death camp whose liberation by the Red Army on January 27, 1945, is celebrated last week and this , was part of the Galician territory under German occupation. It was seventy kilometres west of Chomiak's office in Cracow, within his killing range. Opponents and critics of the Galician plan, and researchers of the war crimes committed by Chomiak and others include many Canadians of Ukrainian origin, including John-Paul Himka, a professor of history now retired from the University of Alberta in Edmonton; he and they have been the target of ostracism and worse from the Ukrainian-Canadian community; read more .

    According to Himka (right) there is "a blank spot in the collective memory of the Ukrainian diaspora", and a "double standard in discussing war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by Ukrainians as opposed to those perpetrated against Ukrainians. Memoirs and eyewitness accounts, for example, are considered untrustworthy evidence for the former, but trustworthy for the latter; that is, Jewish or Polish first-hand accounts of Ukrainian war crimes are dismissed as biased, while an important Ukrainian victimization narrative, the famine of 1932-33, has relied primarily on just such eyewitness accounts."

    The lying by the promoters of the Galician plan for Ukraine has been promoted by the Canadian mass media, almost without exception. They don't respond to correction for the truth; click to follow their record .

    With the collaboration of her former employer, the Financial Times , Freeland continues to lie by omission and commission, In the past weekend's " Lunch with the FT ", Freeland was questioned by a reporter called Edward Luce. "I struggle to rustle up some professional scepticism," he admitted towards the end of listening to Freeland. "I cannot help nodding in agreement."

    Luce also couldn't help omitting the extent of the story of Freeland and Galicia. Instead, he repeated Freeland's lie that her mother had been "born to Ukrainian refugees in a US displaced person's camp in postwar Germany." In fact, they weren't refugees from Ukraine. They were Nazi war criminals on the run. The "camp" was a luxury Bavarian spa town, Bad Worishofen, which the US Army had taken over, in part to develop Ukrainian espionage and infiltration agents to run against the Soviet Union. Chomiak was an early recruit, switching his loyalty from the German Army to the US Army for money, and for the same murderous ideology.

    The US Army, OSS and CIA files on Chomiak, dating from 1945 to at least 1948, are stored at the National Archives in Washington. No researcher has opened them yet. Recovering the full story of Chomiak started with Ukrainian and Canadian researchers working through Chomiak's papers in Alberta, and with Polish police investigations in Warsaw; they were opened and reported here .

    The Russian contribution to this research and reporting has been negligible. Ditto Consortium News (CN).

    In an announcement last week, Joe Lauria, the editor of CN since founder Robert Parry died in 2018, said he had instructed Toronto lawyers to send libel notices to the Canadian signals intelligence agency, Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and to a local broadcaster called Global News. The notices asked for retractions and apologies.

    Lauria said CN had been defamed for a publication in February 27, 2017, when Chomiak's wartime record was reported for the first time. Except it wasn't for the first time and the original CN article wasn't quite what it purported to be.

    The CSE had produced a secret analysis, Global News reported, on Russian info-war against Freeland. "Cyber influence activity to cause reputational damage" was the technical Canadian spy agency term quoted. "The Grandfather Nazi narrative" was another of the terms. The secret Canadian intelligence was: "In early spring 2017 and spring 2018, sources linked to Russia popularized MFA Freeland's family history, very likely intended to cause personal reputational damage in order to discredit the Government of Canada's ongoing diplomatic and military support of Ukraine, to delegitimize Canada's decision to enact the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Offices Act, and the expulsion of several Russian diplomats." The Global News report can be read here .

    Sources linked to Russia were reportedly tracked down by CSE. "The first attack," claimed Global News, citing the CSE report, "was a February 2017 report in the 'online Consortium News' followed 'in quick succession' by pro-Russian English language and Russian-language online media, the CSE report says."

    Lauria charged last week that this was libellous. Aside, he didn't dispute Parry's claims at the time that he had been first or that Freeland's counter-attack with her Russia lie was aimed at Parry and CN. Here is Parry's original publication, bylined Arina Tsukanova, and tagged "exclusive".

    According to CN's original publication, Tsukanova "is a Russian Ukrainian journalist from Kiev currently living in Crimea. Before the Euromaidan she used to work for several Ukrainian newspapers, now closed."

    In the English language, Tsukanova's stories started to appear in mid-2016 and then stopped in April 2017 . When her story on the Freeland-Chomiak case appeared in CN, she had reported nothing on the idea, the topic, or the subject details before; there was no sequel or related report by her afterwards.

    In the Russian language Tsukanova's reporting record began on January 18, 2016, and is still current . Her two outlets are the Strategic Culture Foundation (FSK in Russian) and KM.ru, both in Moscow. The reports specialize on Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. She has reported only once on Freeland and Chomiak. The story which appeared in Russian on March 2, 2017 , is not the same story as had appeared under her byline in CN three days earlier. The Russian version of the story has 23 paragraphs. The first 11 paragraphs of the CN story, a third of the publication, weren't written by Tsukanova and do not appear in the Russian version. They were written by Parry; "I personally edited and fact-checked [it]", Parry wrote later. It was Parry's English version which was reprinted by Strategic Culture Foundation on March 2, 2017, and then Parry's lone bylined story which ran in the same place on March 12, 2017 .

    "Knowing Bob as I did," Lauria said last week, "I'm certain he would not have published the article if he knew any of it had been plagiarized. He must have not been aware of your earlier story as I wasn't as I was preparing my story this week." Lauria then compared what Tsukanova and Parry had written with two reports I had published five weeks earlier.

    Source: http://johnhelmer.net// This story was followed by this one .

    Lauria now says: "I carefully went through your two stories and compared it to Consortium News of Feb. 27, 2017. There is no doubt that it is based on your earlier story. That should have been mentioned in the Consortium article. I did not find whole sentences or paragraphs that were taken directly from your article. The fact remains that the story of Freeland's grandfather is true and that cannot be disputed. I have updated the article I wrote on Tuesday to include this line in the body of the text: The story was first reported by John Helmer a month earlier In her version, Tuskanova reported; and I put a note at the end of the story saying: This article has been updated to show that the story of Freeland's grandfather was first reported by John Helmer."

    The revised version of the CN report looks like this . Lauria is making amends.

    Parry, who can't, made a habit of lifting material without giving credit and then promoting himself as the originator. In March 2015, for example, he produced a piece on Igor Kolomoisky, the Ukrainian oligarch; the Burisma scandal involving the Biden family, and Natalie Jaresko, the State Department official who became the Ukrainian minister of finance. Here's Parry's story.

    This material started with two stories of mine which had appeared a month earlier. Parry helped himself to the topic and the material, but omitted to mention their origin. He also forgot that he had written to me to say: "John, thanks. Good piece." Here is where Parry started and also here .

    As for Parry's reporting on Jaresko, which appeared on February 19, 2015 -- -- that started with a story I had published on Jaresko on December 3, 2014 . After reworking the material and sources, Parry gave a mention of the origin in my work. He placed that at the 43 rd paragraph of his 52-paragraph piece.

    Lauria was asked to verify Parry's source, Tsukanova. He says he wrote Tsukanova by email, but she hasn't replied. Independently, checks of the Crimea and Kiev media last week reveal that she is not known to the press in either place where she claims to have worked for years. I attempted to contact her at her Facebook page; she did not reply. In the Facebook gallery of her photographs, there are none of Tsukanova on location acting as a journalist.

    Left: the header for Arina Tsukanova's story archive published by the Strategic Culture Foundation; source -- https://www.fondsk.ru/authors/ Right: the only photograph of Tsukanova found on the Russian internet. This identifies Tsukanova, not only as journalist, but also as a "publicist". Source: https://www.infox.ru/blog/168

    Arina Tsukanova, according to this Facebook page .

    On the evidence gathered to date, Tsukanova is a ghost – a byline invented by her Russian publishers for their purposes, but made to look credible for other purposes. Lauria refused to provide evidence of the original correspondence with Parry, the terms of exclusivity he reported with Tsukanova, or a record of payment for her article in 2017. He concludes: "I'm not anticipating any evidence [of her communication]."

    Lauria also says that "not being able to reach her only proves that she's not reachable I do not think there is any evidence to say she is a ghost for someone else. It seems pure speculation at this point In the end of the day, the story is true so does it really matter? A source or a sources' [sic] motives become irrelevant if the information they provide is true."

    The problem for Lauria and CN is that if Tsukanova was an invention of the Strategic Culture Foundation in 2017 when Parry picked up the Freeland-Chomiak story, and if the Moscow entity was receiving money from Russian state media agencies, then the link between Parry and the Russian side was one which is an embarrassment now for CN in its claims against CSE and Global News.

    Tsukanova may be a ghost; the Strategic Culture Foundation is not. It may be suspected in Ottawa of taking money from state organs; in Moscow it is suspected of taking money from the Russian Orthodox Church. But there is no evidence of either. What there is is a record of the foundation's registration on February 21, 2005, at a room in the Polyanka district of Moscow. The president was listed as Yury Prokofiev; the general director, Vladimir Maksimenko. The "main activity" on the registration forms is "research and development in the field of social sciences and humanities". Tax inspection is also confirmed, but no details of income or expenditures.

    Left, Yury Prokofiev, founding president of the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow; right, Vladimir Maksimenko, the general director.

    About Prokofiev, now about 81 years of age, there is a detailed history of his evolution from Communist Party apparatchik in 1990-91 to Orthodox Christian monarchist a decade later. The profile, with extensive quotes and references, was published by Valery Lebedev in March 2007; read the Russian here . Lebedev titles his story after the Russian story of the puppeteer Karabas Barabas, the villain in a Russian fairy tale. According to Lebedev's account, the Strategic Culture Foundation was designed as a platform for the promotion of Russian nationalism. He doesn't know where Prokofiev got his money to publish.

    About Maksimenko, the Russian record indicates that he studied history to doctoral level at MGIMO and was (may still be) an employee of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. His earlier academic publications were on the Maghreb (Arab North Africa); his later ones on Orthodox monarchism appear here . About both Prokofiev and Maksimenko, Lebedev says they have been shopping from one cause to another for years; he implies they have never managed to draw much money or audience.

    Maksimenko does not reply to emails at the contact address given for the Strategic Culture Foundation . The foundation has published only one article by Maksimenko under his byline in English; it is about French politics . There is no article in English by Prokofiev in the archive.

    With them Freeland shares the same combination of ethnic nationalism and God – in Freeland's case, she told the FT, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

    "I'm very patriotic," Freeland told the FT. "'Be good Ukrainians, and by being good Ukrainians, you will be even better Canadians'," Freeland recounts. 'I happen to be Ukrainian-Canadian. When I moved to Toronto I had an instant community of Canadian-Ukrainians. There's a culture there that my kids can immediately experience in Edmonton or Saskatoon She then embarks on a passionate disquisition about the robustness of Ukraine's democracy. An aide halts her to say they are late for another meeting a few blocks away.'"

    Pricking Freeland's vanity is a bigger job than the FT can handle; or Parry's vanity for Lauria. The vanity of the Canadian espionage establishment will be safe in a Toronto court. But pricked the CSE file most certainly it is. That's because the record of Canadian spying for influence over Russian journalism long precedes this affair.

    It started, in fact, with a woman called Janice Cowan, a Canadian of English origin who was the wife of the Canadian military attaché in the Moscow embassy in the early 1990s. Cowan was trained to penetrate Russian media circles and report back to Ottawa. "It was a good time to be a spy", Cowan wrote in a memoir she published called A Spy's Wife; it was issued in 2006 by a Toronto publisher called James Lorimer with a grant from the Canadian Government. "Quality Canadian books you'll want to read" is Lorimer's motto – except that without cash from Ottawa, Lorimer might have judged that no one would have wanted to read about Cowan's espionage. In Moscow she took diplomatic immunity from her husband; her spy cover was as an editor at the English language paper, The Moscow Tribune. (The competing English-language paper, The Moscow Times , had Cowan's counterparts from the CIA.) Cowan's targets for espionage included the son-in-law of Marshal Georgy Zhukov and me.

    In its review of Cowan's book, the Toronto Globe & Mail said: "Her account of her pre-assignment operational training, and of her various intelligence-gathering tours to Soviet hot spots is convincing. But what threatens to drop this otherwise charming little book into the trivia basket is Cowan's incurable and self-confessed romanticism about intelligence."

    The files of the Communications Security Establishment must include Cowan's reports; they remain classified even after she broke cover with her book. They can't be mentioned now because that would reveal the topmost secret of all – that when it comes to info-war between Russia and Canada, penetration of the media, and what the CSE calls "cyber influence activity to cause reputational damage", it was the Canadians who started against the Russians first.

    It's been catch-up, tit-for-tat, not to mention plagiarism, ever since.

    CoryP , January 28, 2020 at 3:17 am

    I'm so ashamed of this government. And the other day we welcomed the "Interim President" of Venezuela!
    Truly the 51st state.

    Clive , January 28, 2020 at 4:28 am

    No, we're (UK) the 51st state. We got here first. And these things matter. Canada is the 52nd. Well, possibly. I think Japan is actually the 52nd. Canada can be 53rd, if you like. Although Australians will need to correct me if that one's already been nabbed by them.

    dcrane , January 28, 2020 at 4:51 am

    Sixth territory is waiting to be claimed.

    The Rev Kev , January 28, 2020 at 5:01 am

    Australia? Merely a vassal state, Clive. Merely a vassal state – just like Japan.

    Carolinian , January 28, 2020 at 10:42 am

    LOL. We welcome you all to our ever expanding republic.

    As for the above

    It may be suspected in Ottawa of taking money from state organs; in Moscow it is suspected of taking money from the Russian Orthodox Church. But there is no evidence of either.

    And many past US journalists have been suspected–no wait proven–to have taken money and favors from the CIA. While Parry may have done wrong by not crediting Helmer and CN may not get the apology and retraction it seeks, surely the main point is that the story is true. If we were scoring this propaganda war over "fake news" according to truth then it's likely that stories about the west coming out of Russia–fake byline or not–probably score better on the truth meter than stories about Russia found in our MSM. As they used to say in Soviet times, everything they told us about Russia was a lie and everything they told us about America was the truth.

    CoryP , January 28, 2020 at 7:16 am

    More to the point, this is an interesting and unfortunate turn for this case. Dances with Bears is a site I forget to read regularly. It's a shame that CN might be setting themselves up for embarassment vs the Canadian establishment.

    Peter , January 28, 2020 at 5:16 am

    I read all three among many others like TruthDig, Craig Murray, Jacobin Mag, Counterpunch, Antiwar, Der Spiegel, Intercept, MoA, Grayzone Project, Asia Times etc. etc. on a regular basis, and I do not care how Strategic Culture gets its funding as long as it does not turn it into an obvious or subtle propaganda outlet.

    From what I see and read this is an aggregator – with editorials sometimes – and publishes or republishes a wide spectrum from left to right, like Zuesse, Cloughly, Lazare, Crook, Cunningham, Madsen, Bridge, Madsen, Luongo and also LaRouchians like Ehret. A fairly wide Range and therefore obviously quite balanced.

    I cannot see any evidence in this range of different contributors to what Helmer describes:

    "the Strategic Culture Foundation was designed as a platform for the promotion of Russian nationalism"

    Maybe that statement reflects more his troubles with Russian officials, also I do not know how Helmer claims on one hand he

    " At the time, and still, he was banned from entering Russia by the Kremlin The reporter was me."

    is not allowed to enter the RF but states on the top of his articles: by John Helmer, Moscow – what is it now? Who is economical with the truth?
    As to Consortium News – yes, they should have been more careful with checking their sources, but for me it is important as an expat Canadian that someone like Freeland is permitted to actually represent Canada, which just shows how pernicious the influence of right wing to Fascist Ukrainians is, especially in a province like Alberta stretching into Ottawa.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 28, 2020 at 6:40 am

    With all due respect, you are completely missing the point or choosing to misconstrue it.

    The attacks in Canada on the Consortium News report are based on its reliance on Russian sources that are alleged to be connected to the Russian government. Strategic Culture Foundation promotes Russian nationalism and is so hidden about its funding sources that that charge will likely stick. That means that the Consortium News will have difficulty in court disproving that it was amplifying a Russian campaign, particularly if Helmer's other contention is correct, that the supposed author isn't bona fide.

    I must also point out, without naming names (because I don't want to waste time and energy documenting the point) that some of the authors from Strategic Culture Foundation that you mention approvingly are ones we would never link to, and are even loath to allow links to their works in comments because they have serious and regular problems with accuracy (either actual facts or greatly overstating the implications of their findings). And accordingly, we have not linked to Strategic Culture Foundation because it features too many dodgy writers and we do not want to lead readers to view it as a reliable source.

    In addition, you promote the fiction that anyone in Russia must be an official stooge. Help me. Helmer is regularly writing pieces that embarrass the Russian government and its allies; he's been barred entry as retribution. Had Consortium News written a piece that acknowledged Helmer as the source of the account, it would have been extremely difficult to depict them as manipulated by Russian government allies.

    lyman alpha blob , January 28, 2020 at 9:36 am

    I agree that if they had simply cited Helmer in the first place they would have a lot better libel case. I also find it surprising that CN didn't even seem aware of Helmer's reporting on the subject. You'd think that the thorough fact checking of the piece prior to publication would have turned that up. Even without the citation though, it seems a quite a stretch to say that the entire CN organization is "part of a cyber-influence campaign directed by Russia." That "part of" is what will cause problems for CN I suspect. Could be another argument trying to determine what the meaning of "is" is. Perhaps CN doesn't even care of they win the case as long as the publicity lets it be more widely known that the facts of their story are accurate.

    I also picked up the same thing Peter did though. I'd always assumed Helmer was resident in Russia based on his byline and was a little surprised to find out that he was barred from the country.

    The maddening thing is the corporate media can misreport stories, and deliberately so, and continue to get away with it and they will tar and feather an alternative media outlet for a relatively minor mistake that doesn't affect the true facts of the story at all. It would be nice if Helmer and CN could let bygones be bygones and cooperate here to get the facts out before people like Freeland who do play fast and loose with the truth are allowed to squash it and rise through the ranks even higher.

    Paradan , January 28, 2020 at 7:09 am

    Ive only been reading it for a couple years, but I always felt Strategic Culture Foundation has good articles from time to time. They're anti-imperial for sure, and have an occasional weird take on history (the French Revolution was hijacked by the British Oligarchy, and that's when it got bloody), but overall it doesn't have that pure propaganda feel.

    I guess that's how they get ya, sneaky bastards.

    Carolinian , January 28, 2020 at 1:09 pm

    I check it every day. Many of the writers whose articles are picked up do indeed have secure reputations and articles that are widely republished throughout the leftysphere. And isn't that how the web works? The opposite version would be the NYT where all those Judy Millers reign but are supposed to have credibility because of their newspaper's (onetime) exalted reputation. The journalistic world has changed.

    Winston Smith , January 28, 2020 at 8:12 am

    Perhaps this is unwelcome but Chyrstia Freeland could become Canada's next prime minister

    Winston Smith , January 28, 2020 at 8:37 am

    "The point isn't that Freeland is culpable in her grandfather's sins. Her sin is hiding them, and her reason for doing so. She agrees with Chomiak on turning Ukraine into the Greater Galicia it was Adolf Hitler's objective to achieve between 1939 to 1945: that's to say, cleanse the territory of Jews, Poles and Russians by killing them all . Chomiak succeeded with the first two; he was then employed by the US Army on the third. Freeland is keeping the plan in the family; they now have the Canadian government behind them"

    So Chrystia Freeland supports ethnic cleansing?

    OIFVet , January 28, 2020 at 4:28 pm

    It appears that she does support it when perpetrated by her grandpa

    Kathleen T Smith , January 28, 2020 at 8:45 am

    Ever think that the Consortium News trusted a Russian entity named the Strategic Culture Foundation and a Ukrainian reporter called Arina Tsukanova on purpose– KNOWING that they could be discredited? NOw the narrative can be changed and Allows them to cover up the truth -- the big story is now not about Freeland knowing lying about her grandfather and his Nazi connections -- but about a fake news outlet trying to defame her? This sounds more like what is really going on here -- FYI when ever I see someone has been a Rhodes Scholar and they are in politics or media -- it can only means one thing -- they are LIARS.

    pretzelattack , January 28, 2020 at 3:29 pm

    when did parry ever do something like that? never as far as i know, and at any rate freeland's past is too well known to make this plausible, whether cn wins the libel suit or not.

    The Rev Kev , January 28, 2020 at 9:56 am

    Consortium News may come a cropper for not practicing due diligence with their sources but they might have fun embarrassing Canadian outlets in court with quoting Canadian sources. The thing that bothers me is these 'patriots' like Chyrstia Freeland who are patriotic for another country but not where they live. You see the same in America with all those Cubans in Florida who have helped warp American foreign policy to Cuba for decade after decade.

    With the Ukraine, it seems to be more intense. If you do not believe me, reflect on those Ukrainian-born people like the Vindman brothers who are at the heart of the impeachment campaign against Trump. And they are no the only ones. Think Marie Yovanovitch as another example. The Ukraine Diaspora in Canad is even more extensive and some 1,359,655 Canadians have Ukrainian ancestry. And that is how you get a Chyrstia Freeland who would literally accept a neo-nazi Ukraine with all that that implies-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Canadians

    Wukchumni , January 28, 2020 at 10:22 am

    Hard to beat the Doukhobors for interesting Russian immigrants to Canada

    They utilized nude marches when protesting, you don't see that very often~

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doukhobors

    michael hudson , January 28, 2020 at 10:13 am

    It may help explain the bewildering popularity of the loathsome Freeland to point out that Canada has two quite distinct groups of "Ukrainian" emigrants. One of the largest is Galician, not really Ukrainian. In the midwest especially (for instance, Winnipeg) there is a Galician Ukrainian church. Other Ukrainians tend to be a distinct community. I've found quite a disparity in what each group thinks of Freeland.

    Mike , January 28, 2020 at 11:04 am

    My issue with all this is the copying and reprinting without attribution to original source. It seems many of our so-called "leftist" organs and web publishers are too ego-involved to stop promoting their own "originality", the alternative being to cooperate and share sources and information while researching with their pooled abilities and assets. The infighting over bona-fides has always been detrimental to the achievement of goals which are (supposedly) shared and of common good for "the people". So, why this??

    I'm sure a well-researched and sourced piece or two, coupled with a strong demand and pressure on the National Archives to produce its information could well put both Canada and the US on a defensive to either deny access (a poor PR choice) or produce embarrassing content. This requires far less ego, it seems to me.

    mauisurfer , January 28, 2020 at 4:01 pm

    John Helmer knows more about what is going on in Russia than any other
    correspondent who writes in english. Originally from Australia, he went to grad school at Harvard and worked for the Carter White House under Brzezinski. He has lived in Moscow for over 30 years and reads/speaks Russian. He comprehends who the oligarchs and politicians are, and how their businesses and interests intersect and collide. He has lived in the mideast. He is a teller of truth, and that definitely includes MH17, the Skripals, the coup in Crimea, and the alleged gas poisonings in Syria.

    mauisurfer , January 28, 2020 at 4:16 pm

    A word about Strategic Culture.
    I read it every day in the hope that I will see an article by Alastair Crooke.
    Crooke is a former UK diplo and MI6 spy. His expertise is the mideast, and he is probably the best informed english speaking person on this planet. E.g., knows more about Hezbollah
    than any other writer. And he "tells it like it is". He is not a gossiper of FUKUS imperialism.
    I think Crooke publishes at Strategic Culture because he not welcome as contributor in "western" media. If you attempt to google his name for his latest article, you will not find it.
    I have no real idea who supports the S C site, and I do not really care.

    ChrisPacific , January 28, 2020 at 4:19 pm

    Leaving aside the bits about Helmer and attribution, this does raise an interesting point. Suppose I receive an explosive story about a high elected official from Fresno Dan, who claims to have received it directly from bare-chested Vladimir Putin via messages from the secret Kremlin antennae in his bunny slippers. But it turns out to be well-supported with evidence that is independently and easily verifiable (i.e., true).

    Do I (a) publish the story; (b) credit Fresno Dan as the source; (c ) mention bare-chested Vladimir and the bunny slippers; or (d) any or all of the above?

    It would seem rather silly not to publish if I think it's important and the story checks out. But will the bit about Putin and the bunny slippers reduce my credibility if I mention it? And if I don't, what if somebody else finds out and publishes that?

    Technically the fact that the story is true does not preclude it from being part of an influence campaign on the part of Russia. There are a great many true stories out there and media have broad discretion over which ones they choose to give air time to. What if somebody alleges that Putin ordered the story shared because he wanted attention drawn to it in Western media?

    As Yves notes, the fact that CN had a more credible source available for the story (Helmer) and chose not to cite him, which would have avoided most of these issues, would seem to be the own goal here.

    [Jan 28, 2020] Syria Army Liberates Maarat al-Numan - U.S. Plans New Mischief

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    John Gilberts , Jan 28 2020 20:10 utc | 23

    Terrorism to Turkey means the PKK/YPG Kurds in Syria which also fight Turkish forces within Turkey and Iraq. In east Syria the Kurds are cooperating with U.S. troops who occupy the Syrian oil resources. Turkey wants Syria to at least disarm the Kurds. The Kurds though use their U.S. relations to demand autonomy and to prevent any agreement with the Syrian government.

    Neither Ankara nor Damascus seem yet ready to make peace. But both countries have economic problems and will have to come to some solution. There are still ten thousand of Jihadis in Idleb governorate that need to be cleaned out. Neither country wants to keep these people. The export of these Jihadis to Libya which Turkey initiated points to a rather unconventional solution to that problem.

    The U.S. has still not given up its efforts to overthrow the Syrian government through further economic sanctions. It also pressures Iraq to keep its troops in the country.

    After the U.S. murder of the Iranian general Soleimani and the Iraqi PMU leader al-Muhandis its position in Iraq is under severe threat . If the U.S. were forced to leave Iraq it would also have to remove its hold on Syria's oil. To prevent that the U.S. has reactivated its old plan to split Iraq into three statelets :

    At the height of the war in Iraq Joe Biden publicly supported it. The original plan failed when in 2006 Hizbullah defeated Israel's attack on Lebanon and when the Iraqi resistance overwhelmed the U.S. occupation forces.

    It is doubtful that the plan can be achieved as long as the government in Baghdad is supported by a majorities of Shia. Baghdad as well as Tehran will throw everything they have against the plan.

    After the U.S. murder of Soleimani Iran fired well aimed ballistic missiles against U.S. forces at the Ain al Assad airbase west of Ramadi in Anbar province and against the airport of Erbil in the Kurdish region. This because those are exactly the bases the U.S. wants to keep control of. The missiles demonstrated that the U.S. would have to fight a whole new war to implement and protect its plan.

    From the perspective of the resistance the new plan is just another U.S. attempt to rule the region after its many previous attempts have failed.

    Posted by b on January 28, 2020 at 16:28 UTC | Permalink

    Nine months ago, a group of Iraqi politicians and businessmen from Anbar, Salah al-Din and Nineveh provinces were invited to the private residence of the Saudi ambassador to Jordan in Amman.

    Their host was the Saudi minister for Gulf affairs, Thamer bin Sabhan al-Sabhan, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's point man for the region.

    It is not known whether Mohammed al-Halbousi, the speaker of parliament with ties to both Iran and Saudi Arabia, attended the secret Amman conference, but it is said that he was informed of the details.

    On the agenda was a plan to push for a Sunni autonomous region, akin to Iraqi Kurdistan.

    The plan is not new. But now an idea which has long been toyed with by the US, as it battles to keep Iraq within its sphere of influence, has found a new lease of life as Saudi Arabia and Iran compete for influence and dominance.

    Anbar comprises 31 percent of the Iraqi state's landmass. It has significant untapped oil, gas and mineral reserves. It borders Syria.

    If US troops were indeed to be forced by the next Iraqi government to quit the country, they would have to leave the oil fields of northern Syria as well because it is from Anbar that this operation is supplied. Anbar has four US military bases.

    The western province is largely desert, with a population of just over two million. As an autonomous region, it would need a workforce. This, the meeting was told, could come from Palestinian refugees and thus neatly fit into Donald Trump's so-called "Deal of the Century" plans to rid Israel of its Palestinian refugee problem.

    Anbar is almost wholly Sunni, but Salah al-Din and Nineveh aren't. If the idea worked in Anbar, other Sunni-dominated provinces would be next.

    At least three large meetings have already been held over the plan, the last one in the United Arab Emirates. The timing indicates that the plan was initiated when John Bolton as Trump's national security advisor.

    To split Iraq into three statelets the U.S. would control is a long standing neoconservative dream .

    Canada also has troops in the Kurdish/Erbil region. One wonders if/when Iraq will demand they go as well, since they are part of the US-led coalition and reflect US/Israeli geostrategic objectives there

    dh , Jan 28 2020 20:18 utc | 24

    @20 Strange isn't it? The statement by ISIS is most unusual. Prevailing wisdom has them allied with US/Israel against the Syrian government.
    les7 , Jan 28 2020 20:24 utc | 25
    It seems to me that in the Idlib pocket we are seeing an emerging Russian form of offensive/deterrence military strategy when up against proxies backed by the overwhelming force of empire.

    By using proxies the empire forfeits much of its military mass advantage.

    The repeated strike and ceasefire combined with continual negotiation approach negates the hybrid/media warfare of the empire which requires a period of time to mobilize public opinion. The empire cannot maintain more than three foci for that dis-information campaign due to the social engineered response it has manufactured

    By constantly maneuvering, especially in coordinating with friends like Xi, opportunities of attack open up

    Choosing moments of maximum empire distraction is also part of the process

    This is a far cry from the classic mass formation attack strategy that most present warfare strategists endlessly debate.

    Let the empire wear out it's own heart through an abuse of the hybrid/media warfare til it's own people vomit up the diet of fear

    [Jan 28, 2020] 'Mideast Peace Plan Trump Unveils His 'Deal of the Century'

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump was adamant that Palestinians would be forced to accept his plan in the end. "We have the support of the prime minister, we have the support of the other parties, and we think we will ultimately have the support of the Palestinians, but we're going to see," he said on Monday. ..."
    "... Trump has largely outsourced the creation of the plan to his adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. The initial idea was to publish it after the April 2019 election in Israel, but the uncertainty hanging over the Knesset over the past year has delayed the announcement. ..."
    Jan 28, 2020 | sputniknews.com

    The announcement comes after Trump met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his main political rival Benjamin 'Benny' Gantz. The Palestinian authorities have repeatedly objected to the plan, as its details were trickling out, and mass protests are expected in the Palestinian territories as Israel tightens security measures. US President Donald Trump has unveiled his long-anticipated Middle East plan – effectively his administration's vision for the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Trump said that under his plan Jerusalem will remain Israel's 'undivided' capital.

    Israel's West Bank settlements would be recognised by the United States.

    However, Israel would freeze the construction of new settlements on Palestinian territories for four years while Palestinian statehood is negotiated. Trump said that the US will open an embassy to Palestine in East Jerusalem.

    The US president said that his Palestine-Israel map would "more than double" the Palestinian territory.

    "I want this deal to be a great deal for the Palestinians, it has to be. Today's agreement is a historic opportunity for the Palestinians to finally achieve an independent state of their own," Trump said. "These maps will more than double Palestinian territory and provide a Palestinian capital in Eastern Jerusalem where America will proudly open its embassy."

    He added that the US and Israel would create a committee to implement the proposed peace plan.

    "My vision presents a win-win opportunity for both sides, a realistic two-state solution that resolves the risk of Palestinian statehood to Israel's security," Trump said during a press conference.

    On Monday, Donald Trump held separate meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and opposition leader Benny Gantz. Neither of the two managed to achieve a decisive victory in general elections in April or September last year, and a third vote is scheduled for March to break the impasse.

    Benny Gantz, the leader of the centre-right Blue and White alliance, praised Trump's plan following Monday's meeting in Washington and promised to put it into practice if he wins the March election. Netanyahu has not commented publicly on it yet.

    There has been some speculation in the media that Trump wants Netanyahu and Gantz to work together toward implementing the plan.

    No Palestinians at the table

    Trump had not met with any Palestinian representatives prior to the announcement; Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas had reportedly turned down several offers to discuss the proposal.

    Palestinian leaders in the West Bank and Gaza have called for mass protests against the peace plan, prompting the Israeli military to reinforce troops in the Jordan Valley.

    President Abbas reportedly greenlighted a "Day of Rage" over the Trump plan on Wednesday, paving the way for violent clashes between protesters and Israeli forces. He is currently holding an emergency meeting of the executive bodies of the Palestine Liberation Organisation and the Fatah party.

    Palestinians have also floated the possibility of quitting the Oslo accords, which created the Palestinian Authority and regulate its relations with the state of Israel.

    The Oslo accords, signed in the 1990s, officially created the Palestinian Authority as a structure tasked with exercising self-governance over the territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

    A long path behind
    Trump was adamant that Palestinians would be forced to accept his plan in the end. "We have the support of the prime minister, we have the support of the other parties, and we think we will ultimately have the support of the Palestinians, but we're going to see," he said on Monday.

    Trump has largely outsourced the creation of the plan to his adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. The initial idea was to publish it after the April 2019 election in Israel, but the uncertainty hanging over the Knesset over the past year has delayed the announcement.

    Jared Kushner unveiled the economic portion of the plan this past summer at a conference in Bahrain, but failed to shore up support from Palestinians and faced widespread condemnation instead.

    Israelis and Palestinians have been embroiled in a conflict ever since the State of Israel came into existence. Previous American administrations, in line with the United Nations's approach, had long favoured an arrangement that envisaged an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with its capital in East Jerusalem.

    The Trump administration reversed that policy and made a series of decidedly pro-Israel moves in the past three years. Those included moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognising the Golan Heights (which it annexed illegally from Syria) and Israeli settlements in the West Bank (illegal under international law) as parts of Israel.

    [Jan 28, 2020] Trump's Annexation and Apartheid Plan

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Donate

    [Jan 28, 2020] the "American" interpreter's death that triggered the Soleimani assassination was a dual US/Iraqi citizen... doesn't the US often offer citizenship to useful locals in return for betraying their home country? Sometimes treason doesn't pay.

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    A P , Jan 27 2020 21:39 utc | 64

    Unless the operatives on the US spy plane were carrying ID the Taliban can find, we'll never know who they really were. As if we could trust that either. (remember Colonel Flagg from MASH? New fake/cover ID every time he showed up) And funny how those "soldiers" with brain damage from the Iranian missile strikes have disappeared of the MSM news cycle... And the "American" interpreter's death that triggered the Soleimani assassination was a dual US/Iraqi citizen... doesn't the US often offer citizenship to useful locals in return for betraying their home country? Sometimes treason doesn't pay.

    [Jan 28, 2020] US plane crashes in Ghazni, killing scores of officers

    Jan 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    S , Jan 27 2020 16:43 utc | 7

    One of the main Taliban Twitter accounts, @Zabehulah_M33 , has posted the following tweets (machine translated):
    US invasion plane crashes in Ghazni, killing scores of officers

    Following a raid today in Sadukhel district of Dehik district of Ghazni province, a US special aircraft carrier was flying over an intelligence mission in the area.

    The aircraft was destroyed with all its crew and crew, including the major US intelligence officers (CIA).

    It is noteworthy that recently, in the provinces of Helmand, Balkh and some other parts of the country, large numbers of enemy aircraft and helicopters have fallen and fallen.

    ( source )

    # Important News:
    A Ghazni helicopter crashed in the area near Sharana, the capital of Paktika province, this evening after the Ghazni incident.
    The helicopter crew and the soldiers were all destroyed.

    ( source )

    So Taliban has not taken responsibility for the E-11A crash (although many news outlets are reporting it, including Russian ones). Meanwhile, yet another helicopter crashed after the E-11A crash, so it's two crashes in one day.

    c1ue , Jan 27 2020 16:17 utc | 4

    If the $1.6 trillion cost of the US military being in Afghanistan is correct, then the loss of 4 helicopters and even the E11 won't significantly increase US overall spend there. $1.6 trillion over 18 years is a tad under $250 million per day
    Piotr Berman , Jan 27 2020 17:15 utc | 13
    When a colonial war goes wrong, one salient question was: who sold guns to the savages?

    Among more recent examples, who explained technologically inept Iraqis how to make IEDs?

    In the case of smaller weapons, the usual suspect is responsible. NYT By C. J. Chivers Aug. 24, 2016

    ... In all, Overton found, the Pentagon provided more than 1.45 million firearms to various security forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, including more than 978,000 assault rifles, 266,000 pistols and almost 112,000 machine guns. These transfers formed a collage of firearms of mixed vintage and type: Kalashnikov assault rifles left over from the Cold War; recently manufactured NATO-standard M16s and M4s from American factories; machine guns of Russian and Western lineage; and sniper rifles, shotguns and pistols of varied provenance and caliber, including a large order of Glock semiautomatic pistols, a type of weapon also regularly offered for sale online in Iraq.

    ----

    That said, one needs something more sophisticated against helicopters and planes. I suspect that even if Iran were inclined to provide them to Taliban, it would not give them their own products, and, for sure, they cannot purchase Western missiles on regular markets. However, as valiant freedom fighters in Syria are provided with such weapons while being woefully underpaid...

    [Jan 27, 2020] The end of Trump? Trump betrayed all major promises of his 2016 election campaign. Trump needs to go...

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring the world in 4 more years. ..."
    "... besides much talk and showmastery, he has not really changed anything substantial in this regard; Nothing that could seriously change the course. ..."
    "... So he stripped himself of any true argument to vote for him, besides for ultra neocons and ultra fundamental evangelical Christians. And even they don't seem to trust in his intentions. ..."
    Jan 27, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    EveryoneIsBiased , 26 January 2020 at 04:40 PM

    Thank you Colonel; I have been waiting for your take on this. And thank you for opening the comments again. If there is a problem with my post, please point them out to me.

    And i agree. This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring the world in 4 more years.

    Still, immigration is another important issue, but besides much talk and showmastery, he has not really changed anything substantial in this regard; Nothing that could seriously change the course.

    So he stripped himself of any true argument to vote for him, besides for ultra neocons and ultra fundamental evangelical Christians. And even they don't seem to trust in his intentions.

    And China? He may have changed some small to medium problems for the better, but nothing is changed in the overall trend of the US continuing to loose while China emerges as the next global superpower.

    It may have been slowed for some years; It may even have been accelerated, now that China has been waken up to the extend of the threat posed by the US.

    North Korea? They surely will never denuclearize. Even less after how Trump showed the world how he treats international law and even allies.

    With Trump its all photo ops and showmanship. And while he senses what issues are important, it is worth a damn if he butchers the execution, or values photo ops more than substantial progress.

    Not that i would see a democratic alternative. No. But at least now everyone who wants to know can see, that he is neither one.

    4 years ago, democracy was corrupted, but at least there was someone who presented himself as an alternative to that rotten establishment.
    Now, even that small ray of light is as dark as it gets.
    And that is the saddest thing. What worth is democracy, when one does not even have a true alternative, besides Tulsi on endless wars, and Bernie for the socialist ;) ?

    I just have watched again the Ken Burns documentary of the civil war. I know it is not perfect (Though i love Shelby Foote's parts), but the sense of the divided 2 Americas there, is still the same today. Today, America seems to break apart culturally, socially and economically on the fault lines that have sucked it into the civil war over 150 years ago.

    And just like with seeing no real way out politically, i sadly can see no way to heal and unite this country, as it never was truly united after the civil war, if not ever before. As you Colonel said some weeks ago, the US were never a nation.

    And looking at other countries, only a major national crisis may change this.
    A most sad realization. But this hold true also for other western countries, including my own.

    An even worse decade seems to be ahead.

    [Jan 27, 2020] Pompeo's Revealing Meltdown

    Jan 26, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Daniel Larison We saw how Mike Pompeo made a fool of himself on Friday with his angry tirade against Mary Louise Kelly, a reporter for NPR. That outburst came after an interview that he cut short in which he was asked legitimate questions that he could not answer. His response to the report about this was to malign the reporter with bizarre lies in what could be the most unhinged statement ever sent out by an American Secretary of State:

    Official response from Pompeo about his NPR interview. Haven't seen anything like this before with a State Department seal on it: pic.twitter.com/Hi1P18ZS0A

    -- Robbie Gramer (@RobbieGramer) January 25, 2020

    Pompeo's accusatory statement confirmed the substance of what Kelly had reported, and absolutely no one believes him when he says that she lied to him. All of the available evidence supports Kelly's account, and nothing supports Pompeo's:

    On the program, Ms. Kelly said Katie Martin, an aide to Mr. Pompeo who has worked in press relations, never asked for that conversation to be kept off the record, nor would she have agreed to do that.

    Mr. Pompeo's statement did not deny Ms. Kelly's account of obscenities and shouting. NPR said Saturday that Ms. Kelly "has always conducted herself with the utmost integrity, and we stand behind this report." On Sunday, The New York Times obtained emails between Ms. Kelly and Ms. Martin that showed Ms. Kelly explicitly said the day before the interview that she would start with Iran and then ask about Ukraine. "I never agree to take anything off the table," she wrote.

    It is the new definition of chutzpah for Pompeo to accuse someone else of lying and lack of integrity, since he has been daily shredding his credibility by making things up about non-existent U.S. policy successes and telling easily refuted lies about North Korea , Iran , Yemen , and Saudi Arabia . We have good reason to believe that the recent claim that there was an "imminent attack" from Iran earlier this month was another one of those lies . For her part, Kelly has a reputation for solid and reliable reporting, and no one thinks that she would do the things he accuses her of doing. Pompeo's dig at the end is meant to imply that she misidentified Ukraine on the blank map that he had brought in to test her. No one believes that claim, either. This is another preposterous lie that tells us that his version of events can't be true. Pompeo has been waging a war on the truth for the last year and a half, and this is just the most recent assault. The Secretary's meltdown this weekend has been useful in making it impossible to ignore this any longer.

    Literally nobody thinks Mike Pompeo is telling the truth about this, or anything. He works for Donald Trump, who also lies about everything, always. https://t.co/yTzZDZl5Gw

    -- Marc Lynch (@abuaardvark) January 25, 2020

    All of this is appalling, unprofessional behavior from any government official, and in a sane administration this conduct along with his other false and misleading statements would be grounds for resignation. When Pompeo publicly attacks a journalist for doing her job and impugns her integrity to cover up for the fact that he doesn't have any, he is attacking the press and undermining public accountability. He is also undermining the department's advocacy for freedom of the press when he tries to intimidate journalists with his obnoxious outbursts. Pompeo already alienated and disgusted people in his department with his failure to come to the defense of officials that were being publicly attacked and smeared, and this latest display has further embarrassed them. We need a Secretary of State who isn't a serial liar, and right now we don't have one.

    Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter . email

    [Jan 27, 2020] The Dangers of Conflating and Inflating Interests

    Notable quotes:
    "... Taylor exaggerates what the conflict is about by saying that Ukraine is defending "the West." That's not true. Ukraine is defending itself. The U.S. does not have a vital interest in this conflict, but Taylor talks about it as if we do. He says that the relationship with Ukraine is "key" to our national security, but that is simply false. To say that it is key to our national security means that we are supposed to believe that it is crucially important to our national security. That suggests that U.S. national security would seriously compromised if that relationship weakened, but that doesn't make any sense. We usually don't even talk about our major treaty allies this way, so what justification is there for describing a relationship with a weak partner government like this? ..."
    "... The op-ed reads like a textbook case of clientitis, in which a former U.S. envoy ends up making the Ukrainian government's argument for them ..."
    "... To support Ukraine is to support a rules-based international order that enabled major powers in Europe to avoid war for seven decades. It is to support democracy over autocracy. It is to support freedom over unfreedom. Most Americans do. ..."
    "... These make for catchy slogans, but they are lousy policy arguments. This rhetoric veers awfully close to saying that you aren't on the side of freedom if you don't support a particular policy option. In my experience, advocates for more aggressive measures use rhetoric like this because the rest of their argument isn't very strong. It is possible to reject illegal military interventions of all governments without wanting to throw weapons at the problem. ..."
    "... Taylor has set up the policy argument in such a way that there seems to be no choice, but the U.S. doesn't have to support Ukraine's war effort. He oversells Ukraine's importance to the U.S. to justify U.S. support, because an accurate assessment would make the current policy of arming their government much harder to defend. Ukraine isn't really that important to U.S. security and our security doesn't require us to provide military assistance to them. Of course, our government has chosen to do it anyway, but this is just one more optional entanglement that the U.S. could have avoided without jeopardizing American or allied security. ..."
    Jan 27, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    ormer ambassador William Taylor wrote an op-ed on Ukraine in an attempt to answer Pompeo's question about whether Americans care about Ukraine. It is not very persuasive. For one thing, he starts off by exaggerating the importance of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to make it seem as if the U.S. has a major stake in the outcome:

    Here's why the answer should be yes: Ukraine is defending itself and the West against Russian attack. If Ukraine succeeds, we succeed. The relationship between the United States and Ukraine is key to our national security, and Americans should care about Ukraine.

    Taylor exaggerates what the conflict is about by saying that Ukraine is defending "the West." That's not true. Ukraine is defending itself. The U.S. does not have a vital interest in this conflict, but Taylor talks about it as if we do. He says that the relationship with Ukraine is "key" to our national security, but that is simply false. To say that it is key to our national security means that we are supposed to believe that it is crucially important to our national security. That suggests that U.S. national security would seriously compromised if that relationship weakened, but that doesn't make any sense. We usually don't even talk about our major treaty allies this way, so what justification is there for describing a relationship with a weak partner government like this?

    The op-ed reads like a textbook case of clientitis, in which a former U.S. envoy ends up making the Ukrainian government's argument for them. The danger of exaggerating U.S. interests and conflating them with Ukraine's is that we fool ourselves into thinking that we are acting out of necessity and in our own defense when we are really choosing to take sides in a conflict that does not affect our security. This is the kind of thinking that encourages people to spout nonsense about "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here." If we view Ukraine as "the front line" of a larger struggle, that will also make it more difficult to resolve the conflict. When a local conflict is turned into a proxy fight between great powers, the local people will be the ones made to suffer to serve the ambitions of the patrons. Once the U.S. insists that its own security is bound up with the outcome of this conflict, there is an incentive to be considered the "winner," but the reality is that Ukraine will always matter less to the U.S. than it does to Russia.

    If this relationship were so important to U.S. security, how is it that the U.S. managed to get along just fine for decades after the end of the Cold War when that relationship was not particularly strong? As recently as the Obama administration, our government did not consider Ukraine to be important enough to supply with weapons. Ukraine was viewed correctly as being of peripheral interest to the U.S., and nothing has changed in the years since then to make it more important.

    Taylor keeps repeating that "Ukraine is the front line" in a larger conflict between Russia and the West, but that becomes true only if Western governments choose to treat it as one. He concludes his op-ed with a series of ideological assertions:

    To support Ukraine is to support a rules-based international order that enabled major powers in Europe to avoid war for seven decades. It is to support democracy over autocracy. It is to support freedom over unfreedom. Most Americans do.

    These make for catchy slogans, but they are lousy policy arguments. This rhetoric veers awfully close to saying that you aren't on the side of freedom if you don't support a particular policy option. In my experience, advocates for more aggressive measures use rhetoric like this because the rest of their argument isn't very strong. It is possible to reject illegal military interventions of all governments without wanting to throw weapons at the problem.

    Taylor has set up the policy argument in such a way that there seems to be no choice, but the U.S. doesn't have to support Ukraine's war effort. He oversells Ukraine's importance to the U.S. to justify U.S. support, because an accurate assessment would make the current policy of arming their government much harder to defend. Ukraine isn't really that important to U.S. security and our security doesn't require us to provide military assistance to them. Of course, our government has chosen to do it anyway, but this is just one more optional entanglement that the U.S. could have avoided without jeopardizing American or allied security.

    [Jan 27, 2020] Guess Who Was In Charge Of Reviewing Bolton's Leaked Book At The NSC

    Bolton is pretty dangerous neocon scum... Now he tried to backstab Trump, so Trump gets what he deserves as only complete idiot or a fully controlled puppet would appoint Bolton to his Administration.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Breitbart News ..."
    "... Wall Street Journal ..."
    Jan 27, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
    Breitbart News , which would include the recently leaked manuscript of former National Security adviser John Bolton.

    The report describes the reviews as a "standard process that allows the NSC to review book manuscripts, op-eds, or any other material for any classified material to be eliminated before publication."

    The New York Times reported Sunday evening that Bolton's draft book manuscript, which had been submitted to the NSC for prepublication review on Dec. 30, alleged that President Trump told Bolton in August 2019 that he wanted to withhold security assistance to Ukraine until it agreed to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, among others.

    It was not clear if the Times had seen the Bolton manuscript; its sources were "multiple people" who "described Mr. Bolton's account of the Ukraine affair."

    Bolton's lawyer, Chuck Cooper, issued a statement in which he said: "It is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted ." He did not confirm or deny the Times ' reporting on the content of the manuscript. - Breitbart News

    What a coincidence! While Alexander Vindman at the NSC testifies against Trump at the House impeachment, the other brother (Yevgeny) appears to be in charge of clearing John Bolton's book for publication.

    If you believe in coincidences. https://t.co/qtpoqeGpaj

    -- Emerald Robinson ✝️ (@EmeraldRobinson) January 27, 2020

    Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman famously testified against President Trump during House impeachment hearings in November, where he admitted to violating the chain of command when he reported his concerns over a July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky.

    Nunes: Did you know that financial records show a Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma, routed more than $ 3 million to American accounts tied to Hunter Biden?

    Vindman, whose job is to handle Ukraine policy: "I'm not aware of this fact." pic.twitter.com/6yFbWkufmH

    -- Nate Madden (@NateOnTheHill) November 19, 2019

    Breitbart notes that the Vindman brothers have offices across from each other at the NSC , and that the Wall Street Journal describes Vindman as "an NSC lawyer handling ethics issues." Alexander Vindman, meanwhile, has said that his brother was the " lead ethics official " at the agency.

    Meanwhile, looks like people are already distancing themselves from Bolton's claims that President Trump explicitly linked Ukraine aid with an investigation into the Bidens.

    And now contradicted by Mick Mulvaney. https://t.co/1dhuCQ8UHZ

    -- Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 27, 2020

    hooligan2009 , 39 seconds ago link

    remember seth rich!

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/breaking-exclusive-christopher-wrays-fbi-caught-in-another-lie-and-cover-up-fbi-emails-on-seth-rich-uncovered/

    "Today, January 27, 2020, we have a stunning update ==>>

    After previously claiming no FBI records could be found related to Seth Rich, emails have been uncovered. These emails weren't just from anybody. These emails were between FBI lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two most corrupt individuals involved in the Russia Collusion Hoax.

    In a set of emails released by Judicial Watch on January 22, 2020, provided by a FOIA request on Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, two pages on emails refer to Seth Rich:"

    https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/JW-v-DOJ-Strzok-Page-Prod-16-00154.pdf

    Moneycircus , 1 minute ago link

    The Vindman brothers are being "handled" by someone.

    I wager they have political "groomers", just like Obama did.

    A Jewish photographer has been capturing Alexander Vindman and his twin for nearly 4 decades
    https://www.jta.org/2019/11/06/culture/a-jewish-photographer-has-been-capturing-alexander-vindman-and-his-twin-for-nearly-4-decades

    They were also featured in a 1985 Ken Burns documentary about immigrants.

    Crush the cube , 7 minutes ago link

    These guys are Ukrainian mob moles, sent here by their Ukie Jewish oligarchs when their positions of privilege went into decline with the collapse of communism. Because its typical for three first generation schmucks fresh off the immigrant boat to end up with two as officers both working in the white house, and the third brother back in Ukie Euro land controlling a major bank hip deep in all the scandal.

    Think any investigative agency will touch it, don't **** with the mossad.

    Attitude_Check , 7 minutes ago link

    The rats are starting to tear into each other - good.

    Moneycircus , 13 minutes ago link

    Retired Army Officer Remembers Lt. Col. Vindman as Partisan Democrat Who Ridiculed America

    https://tennesseestar.com/2019/11/05/retired-army-officer-remembers-lt-col-vindman-as-partisan-democrat-who-ridiculed-america/

    Nov 5, 2019In an eye-opening thread on Twitter last week, retired U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Jim Hickman said that he "verbally reprimanded " Vindman after he heard some of his derisive remarks for himself. " Do not let the uniform fool you," Hickman wrote. "He is a political activist in uniform."

    Harley Vet , 14 minutes ago link

    Donald Trump is the most unqualified person ever to be elected president.

    Southern_Boy , 19 minutes ago link

    So why isn't Vindman doing contracts in North Alaska or deputy attache in Namibia tonight until he gets passed over 3 times for promotion and forced to retire unless Durham can find evidence of his guilt?

    Obake158 , 26 minutes ago link

    Speaking of Vindman, an Obama holdover, White House HR head, has prohibited Vindman's removal from the NSC. He even gets a $30k raise and is permitted to serve out his term until June. You can't make this **** up:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AV9-7R5or6w

    Deep Snorkeler , 30 minutes ago link

    John Bolton Trump's Sidekick

    1. manifestly guilty of the planning, preparation, initiation and execution of the crime of aggression against Iraq
    2. promoted the US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal
    3. setting the stage for an unlawful US military intervention in Venezuela - plotting a coup against a foreign government
    4. hates the United Nations and international law
    5. protected Israel by vetoing all UN resolutions targeting Israel and supported Jerusalem as Israel's capital
    6. against the International Criminal Court

    [Jan 27, 2020] The SAA has cut the M5 highway north of Maraat al-Numan and is blockading it. This will cut off Erdogan's resupply of his pet headchoppers.

    Jan 27, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Leith , 26 January 2020 at 09:42 PM

    Off topic: the SAA has cut the M5 highway north of Maraat al-Numan and is blockading it. This will cut off Erdogan's resupply of his pet headchoppers. Will this be the beginning of the end for HTS and the TIP? Long way to go, but this is a good start.

    Sooner or later Trump is going to have to let go of his blockade of the Baghdad-Damascus highway at al-Tanf.

    [Jan 27, 2020] American Pravda Mossad Assassinations by Ron Unz

    Jan 27, 2020 | www.unz.com

    From the Peace of Westphalia to the Law of the Jungle

    The January 2nd American assassination of Gen. Qassem Soleimani of Iran was an event of enormous moment.

    Gen. Soleimani had been the highest-ranking military figure in his nation of 80 million, and with a storied career of 30 years, one of the most universally popular and highly regarded. Most analysts ranked him second in influence only to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's elderly Supreme Leader, and there were widespread reports that he was being urged to run for the presidency in the 2021 elections.

    The circumstances of his peacetime death were also quite remarkable. His vehicle was incinerated by the missile of an American Reaper drone near Iraq's Baghdad international airport just after he had arrived there on a regular commercial flight for peace negotiations originally suggested by the American government.

    Our major media hardly ignored the gravity of this sudden, unexpected killing of so high-ranking a political and military figure, and gave it enormous attention. A day or so later, the front page of my morning New York Times was almost entirely filled with coverage of the event and its implications, along with several inside pages devoted to the same topic. Later that same week, America's national newspaper of record allocated more than one-third of all the pages of its front section to the same shocking story.

    But even such copious coverage by teams of veteran journalists failed to provide the incident with its proper context and implications. Last year, the Trump Administration had declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard "a terrorist organization," drawing widespread criticism and even ridicule from national security experts appalled at the notion of classifying a major branch of Iran's armed forces as "terrorists." Gen. Soleimani was a top commander in that body, and this apparently provided the legal figleaf for his assassination in broad daylight while on a diplomatic peace mission.

    But consider that Congress has been considering legislation declaring Russia an official state sponsor of terrorism , and Stephen Cohen, the eminent Russia scholar, has argued that no foreign leader since the end of World War II has been so massively demonized by the American media as Russian President Vladimir Putin. For years, numerous agitated pundits have denounced Putin as "the new Hitler," and some prominent figures have even called for his overthrow or death. So we are now only a step or two removed from undertaking a public campaign to assassinate the leader of a country whose nuclear arsenal could quickly annihilate the bulk of the American population. Cohen has repeatedly warned that the current danger of global nuclear war may exceed that which we faced during the days of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, and can we entirely dismiss such concerns?

    Even if we focus solely upon Gen. Solemaini's killing and entirely disregard its dangerous implications, there seem few modern precedents for the official public assassination of a top-ranking political figure by the forces of another major country. In groping for past examples, the only ones that come to mind occurred almost three generations ago during World War II, when Czech agents assisted by the Allies assassinated Reinhard Heydrich in Prague in 1941 and the US military later shot down the plane of Japanese admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in 1943. But these events occurred in the heat of a brutal global war, and the Allied leadership hardly portrayed them as official government assassinations. Historian David Irving reveals that when one of Adolf Hitler's aides suggested that an attempt be made to assassinate Soviet leaders in that same conflict, the German Fuhrer immediately forbade such practices as obvious violations of the laws of war.

    The 1914 terrorist assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary, was certainly organized by fanatical elements of Serbian Intelligence, but the Serbian government fiercely denied its own complicity, and no major European power was ever directly implicated in the plot. The aftermath of the killing soon led to the outbreak of World War I, and although many millions died in the trenches over the next few years, it would have been completely unthinkable for one of the major belligerents to consider assassinating the leadership of another.

    A century earlier, the Napoleonic Wars had raged across the entire continent of Europe for most of a generation, but I don't recall reading of any governmental assassination plots during that era, let alone in the quite gentlemanly wars of the preceding 18th century when Frederick the Great and Maria Theresa disputed ownership of the wealthy province of Silesia by military means. I am hardly a specialist in modern European history, but after the 1648 Peace of Westphalia ended the Thirty Years War and regularized the rules of warfare, no assassination as high-profile as that of Gen. Soleimani comes to mind.

    The bloody Wars of Religion of previous centuries did see their share of assassination schemes. For example, I think that Philip II of Spain supposedly encouraged various plots to assassinate Queen Elizabeth I of England on grounds that she was a murderous heretic, and their repeated failure helped persuade him to launch the ill-fated Spanish Armada; but being a pious Catholic, he probably would have balked at using the ruse of peace-negotiations to lure Elizabeth to her doom. In any event, that was more than four centuries ago, so America has now placed itself in rather uncharted waters.

    Different peoples possess different political traditions, and this may play a major role in influencing the behavior of the countries they establish. Bolivia and Paraguay were created in the early 18th century as shards from the decaying Spanish Empire, and according to Wikipedia they have experienced nearly three dozen successful coups in their history, the bulk of these prior to 1950, while Mexico has had a half-dozen. By contrast, the U.S. and Canada were founded as Anglo-Saxon settler colonies, and neither history records even a failed attempt.

    During our Revolutionary War, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and our other Founding Fathers fully recognized that if their effort failed, they would all be hanged by the British as rebels. However, I have never heard that they feared falling to an assassin's blade, nor that King George III ever considered such an underhanded means of attack. During the first century and more of our nation's history, nearly all our presidents and other top political leaders traced their ancestry back to the British Isles, and political assassinations were exceptionally rare, with Abraham Lincoln's death being one of the very few that come to mind.

    At the height of the Cold War, our CIA did involve itself in various secret assassination plots against Cuba's Communist dictator Fidel Castro and other foreign leaders considered hostile to US interests. But when these facts later came out in the 1970s, they evoked such enormous outrage from the public and the media, that three consecutive American presidents -- Gerald R. Ford , Jimmy Carter , and Ronald Reagan -- issued successive Executive Orders absolutely prohibiting assassinations by the CIA or any other agent of the US government.

    Although some cynics might claim that these public declarations represented mere window-dressing, a March 2018 book review in the New York Times strongly suggests otherwise. Kenneth M. Pollack spent years as a CIA analyst and National Security Council staffer, then went on to publish a number of influential books on foreign policy and military strategy over the last two decades. He had originally joined the CIA in 1988, and opens his review by declaring:

    One of the very first things I was taught when I joined the CIA was that we do not conduct assassinations. It was drilled into new recruits over and over again.

    Yet Pollack notes with dismay that over the last quarter-century, these once solid prohibitions have been steadily eaten away, with the process rapidly accelerating after the 9/11 attacks of 2001. The laws on our books may not have changed, but

    Today, it seems that all that is left of this policy is a euphemism.

    We don't call them assassinations anymore. Now, they are "targeted killings," most often performed by drone strike, and they have become America's go-to weapon in the war on terror.

    The Bush Administration had conducted 47 of these assassinations-by-another-name, while his successor Barack Obama, a constitutional scholar and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, had raised his own total to 542. Not without justification, Pollack wonders whether assassination has become "a very effective drug, but [one that] treats only the symptom and so offers no cure."

    Thus over the last couple of decades American policy has followed a very disturbing trajectory in its use of assassination as a tool of foreign policy, first restricting its use to only the most extreme circumstances, next targeting small numbers of high-profile "terrorists" hiding in rough terrain, then escalating those same such killings to the many hundreds. And now under President Trump, the fateful step has been taken of America claiming the right to assassinate any world leader not to our liking whom we unilaterally declare worthy of death.

    Pollack had made his career as a Clinton Democrat, and is best known for his 2002 book The Threatening Storm that strongly endorsed President Bush's proposed invasion of Iraq and was enormously influential in producing bipartisan support for that ill-fated policy. I have no doubt that he is a committed supporter of Israel, and he probably falls into a category that I would loosely describe as "Left Neocon."

    But while reviewing a history of Israel's own long use of assassination as a mainstay of its national security policy, he seems deeply disturbed that America might be following along that same terrible path. Less than two years later, our sudden assassination of a top Iranian leader demonstrates that his fears may have been greatly understated.

    "Rise and Kill First" ORDER IT NOW

    The book being reviewed was Rise and Kill First by New York Times reporter Ronen Bergman, a weighty study of the Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence service, together with its sister agencies. The author devoted six years of research to the project, which was based upon a thousand personal interviews and access to some official documents previously unavailable. As suggested by the title, his primary focus was Israel's long history of assassinations, and across his 750 pages and thousand-odd source references he recounts the details of an enormous number of such incidents.

    That sort of topic is obviously fraught with controversy, but Bergman's volume carries glowing cover-blurbs from Pulitzer Prize-winning authors on espionage matters, and the official cooperation he received is indicated by similar endorsements from both a former Mossad chief and Ehud Barak, a past Prime Minister of Israel who himself had once led assassination squads. Over the last couple of decades, former CIA officer Robert Baer has become one of our most prominent authors in this same field, and he praises the book as "hands down" the best he has ever read on intelligence, Israel, or the Middle East. The reviews across our elite media were equally laudatory.

    Although I had seen some discussions of the book when it appeared, I only got around to reading it a few months ago. And while I was deeply impressed by the thorough and meticulous journalism, I found the pages rather grim and depressing reading, with their endless accounts of Israeli agents killing their real or perceived enemies, with the operations sometimes involving kidnappings and brutal torture, or resulting in considerable loss of life to innocent bystanders. Although the overwhelming majority of the attacks described took place in the various countries of the Middle East or the occupied Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza, others ranged across the world, including Europe. The narrative history began in the 1920s, decades before the actual creation of the Jewish Israel or its Mossad organization, and ranged up to the present day.

    The sheer quantity of such foreign assassinations was really quite remarkable, with the knowledgeable reviewer in the New York Times suggesting that the Israeli total over the last half-century or so seemed far greater than that of any other country. I might even go farther: if we excluded domestic killings, I wouldn't be surprised if the body-count exceeded the combined total for that of all other major countries in the world. I think all the lurid revelations of lethal CIA or KGB Cold War assassination plots that I have seen discussed in newspaper stories might fit comfortably into just a chapter or two of Bergman's extremely long book.

    [Jan 27, 2020] The ME may yet destroy Trump

    Trump outlived his shelf life. Money quote: "This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring the world in 4 more years."
    Notable quotes:
    "... Some combination of the disasters that may emerge from these ME factors might well turn Trump's base against him and this result would be entirely of his own making ..."
    "... This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring the world in 4 more years. ..."
    "... besides much talk and showmastery, he has not really changed anything substantial in this regard; Nothing that could seriously change the course. ..."
    "... So he stripped himself of any true argument to vote for him, besides for ultra neocons and ultra fundamental evangelical Christians. And even they don't seem to trust in his intentions. ..."
    "... Trump stands no chance if things get hot with Iran. He didn't win by enough to sacrifice the antiwar vote. ..."
    "... Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo have got themselves in a no-win situation. NATO cannot occupy both Syria and Iraq, illegally. There are way too few troops. The bases in these nations are sitting ducks for the next precision ballistic missile attack. Any buildup would be contested. Ground travel curtailed. A Peace Treaty and Withdrawal is the only safe way out. ..."
    "... Donald Trump is blessed with his opponents. Democrats who restarted the Cold War with Russia in 2014 are now using it to justify his Impeachment. If leaders cannot see reality clearly, they will keep making incredibly stupid mistakes. If Joe Biden is his opponent, I can't vote for either. Both spread chaos. ..."
    "... President Trump controls part of the White House -- definitely not the NSC ..."
    "... His hold elsewhere in the DC bureaucracy may be 5 - 15%. When the President decided to pull US troops out of Syria, his NSC Director flew to Egypt and Turkey to countermand the order. Facing the opposition of a united DC SWAMP, the President caved, and thereby delayed his formal impeachment by a year. ..."
    "... Going out on a limb, President Trump continues to play a very weak hand and may survive to fight another day. Fortunately for the US, his tax and regulatory policies, as well as his economic negotiations with China, Japan, Korea and Mexico seem to be on target and successful. ..."
    Jan 26, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    President Trump will easily be acquitted in the senate trial. This may occur this week and there will probably be no witnesses called. That will be an additional victory for him and will add to the effect of his trade deal victories and the general state of the US economy. These factors should point to a solid victory in November for him and the GOP in Congress.

    Ah! Not so fast the cognoscenti may cry out. Not so fast. The Middle East is a graveyard of dreams:

    1. Iraq. Street demonstrations in Iraq against a US alliance are growing more intense. There may well have been a million people in Muqtada al-Sadr's extravaganza. Shia fury over the death of Soleimani is quite real. Trump's belief that in a contest of the will he will prevail over the Iraqi Shia is a delusion, a delusion born of his narcissistic personality and his unwillingness to listen to people who do not share his delusions. A hostile Iraqi government and street mobs would make life unbearable for US forces there.

    2. Syria. The handful of American troops east and north of the Euphrates "guarding" Syrian oil from the Syrian government are in a precarious position with the Shia Iraqis at their backs across the border and a hostile array of SAA, Turks, jihadis and potentially Russians to their front and on their flanks.

    3. Palestine. The "Deal of the Century" is approaching announcement. From what is known of its contours, the deal will kill any remaining prospects for Palestinian statehood and will relegate all Palestinians (both Israeli citizens and the merely occupied) to the status of helots forever . Look it up. In return the deal will offer the helotry substantial bribes in economic aid money. Trump evidently continues to believe that Palestinians are untermenschen . He believe they will sell their freedom. The Palestinian Authority has already rejected this deal. IMO their reaction to the imposition of this regime is likely to be another intifada.

    Some combination of the disasters that may emerge from these ME factors might well turn Trump's base against him and this result would be entirely of his own making . pl

    Elora Danan , 26 January 2020 at 11:24 AM

    ...and his unwillingness to listen to people who do not share his delusions...

    That precisely is the problem, apart from explosive shouting Pompeo, it seems he has recruited this extravanza of woman as adviser into the WH...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w0kSkvusjI&feature=emb_title

    Could it be true? If that is the case, it´s more scary than Elora thought when that of Soleimani happened....This starts to look as a frenopatic...isn´t it?

    HK Leo Strauss , 26 January 2020 at 01:12 PM
    With Iran and her allies holding the figurative Trump Card on escalation, will they ramp up the pressure to topple him? They could end up with a Dem who couldn't afford to "lose" Syria or Iraq.
    JamesT , 26 January 2020 at 04:14 PM
    I submit to you, Colonel, that the biggest threat to Trump is a Bernie/Tulsi ticket. Bernie is leading in the Iowa and NH polls, and the recent spat with Warren (in my opinion) leaves Bernie with no viable choice for VP other than Tulsi.
    Barbara Ann said in reply to JamesT ... , 26 January 2020 at 05:32 PM
    JamesT

    Judging by what just happened at the embassy in Baghdad, the intentions of the Iraqi electorate would seem to be a more pressing concern.

    EveryoneIsBiased , 26 January 2020 at 04:40 PM
    Thank you Colonel; I have been waiting for your take on this. And thank you for opening the comments again. If there is a problem with my post, please point them out to me.

    And i agree. This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring the world in 4 more years.

    Still, immigration is another important issue, but besides much talk and showmastery, he has not really changed anything substantial in this regard; Nothing that could seriously change the course.

    So he stripped himself of any true argument to vote for him, besides for ultra neocons and ultra fundamental evangelical Christians. And even they don't seem to trust in his intentions.

    And China? He may have changed some small to medium problems for the better, but nothing is changed in the overall trend of the US continuing to loose while China emerges as the next global superpower.

    It may have been slowed for some years; It may even have been accelerated, now that China has been waken up to the extend of the threat posed by the US.

    North Korea? They surely will never denuclearize. Even less after how Trump showed the world how he treats international law and even allies.

    With Trump its all photo ops and showmanship. And while he senses what issues are important, it is worth a damn if he butchers the execution, or values photo ops more than substantial progress.

    Not that i would see a democratic alternative. No. But at least now everyone who wants to know can see, that he is neither one.

    4 years ago, democracy was corrupted, but at least there was someone who presented himself as an alternative to that rotten establishment.
    Now, even that small ray of light is as dark as it gets.
    And that is the saddest thing. What worth is democracy, when one does not even have a true alternative, besides Tulsi on endless wars, and Bernie for the socialist ;) ?

    I just have watched again the Ken Burns documentary of the civil war. I know it is not perfect (Though i love Shelby Foote's parts), but the sense of the divided 2 Americas there, is still the same today. Today, America seems to break apart culturally, socially and economically on the fault lines that have sucked it into the civil war over 150 years ago.

    And just like with seeing no real way out politically, i sadly can see no way to heal and unite this country, as it never was truly united after the civil war, if not ever before. As you Colonel said some weeks ago, the US were never a nation.

    And looking at other countries, only a major national crisis may change this.
    A most sad realization. But this hold true also for other western countries, including my own.

    An even worse decade seems to be ahead.

    turcopolier , 26 January 2020 at 05:15 PM
    everyoneisbiased

    The economy is actually quite good and he is NOT "a dictator." Dictators are not put on trial by the legislature. He is extremely ignorant and suffers from a life in which only money mattered.

    emboil , 26 January 2020 at 05:27 PM
    Once Bernie wins the nomination, it's going to be escalation time. Trump stands no chance if things get hot with Iran. He didn't win by enough to sacrifice the antiwar vote.
    walrus , 26 January 2020 at 06:14 PM
    I'm starting to think that Trumps weakness is believing that everyone and everything has a monetary price. I think perhaps his dealings with China may reinforce his perception, as, also, his alleged success in bullying the Europeans over Iran -- with the threat of tariffs on European car imports. His almost weekly references to Iraqi and Syrian oil, allies "not paying their way", financial threats to the Iraq Government, all suggest a fixation on finance that has served him well in business.

    The trouble is that one day President Trump is going to discover there is something money can't buy, to the detriment of America.

    VietnamVet , 26 January 2020 at 07:28 PM
    Colonel,

    Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo have got themselves in a no-win situation. NATO cannot occupy both Syria and Iraq, illegally. There are way too few troops. The bases in these nations are sitting ducks for the next precision ballistic missile attack. Any buildup would be contested. Ground travel curtailed. A Peace Treaty and Withdrawal is the only safe way out.

    Donald Trump is blessed with his opponents. Democrats who restarted the Cold War with Russia in 2014 are now using it to justify his Impeachment. If leaders cannot see reality clearly, they will keep making incredibly stupid mistakes. If Joe Biden is his opponent, I can't vote for either. Both spread chaos.

    My subconscious is again acting out. The mini-WWIII with Iran could shut off Middle Eastern oil at any time. The Fed is back to injecting digital money into the market. China has quarantined 44 million people. Global trade is fragile. Today there are four cases of Wuhan Coronavirus in the USA.

    If confirmed that the virus is contagious without symptoms and an infected person transmits the virus to 2 to 3 people and with a 3% mortality rate and a higher 15% rate for the infirmed, the resupply trip to Safeway this summer could be both futile and dangerous.

    Haralambos , 26 January 2020 at 07:48 PM
    Two Greek words: "hubris" and "nemesis" come to mind.
    Patrick Armstrong , 26 January 2020 at 08:19 PM
    It's an old story. Mr X is elected POTUS; going to do this and that; something happens in the MENA. That's all anyone remembers. Maybe time to kiss Israel goodbye, tell SA to sell in whatever currency it wants, and realise that oil producers have to sell the stuff -- it's no good to them in the ground...
    Petrel , 26 January 2020 at 08:31 PM
    President Trump controls part of the White House -- definitely not the NSC -- and much of the Department of Commerce & Treasury. His hold elsewhere in the DC bureaucracy may be 5 - 15%. When the President decided to pull US troops out of Syria, his NSC Director flew to Egypt and Turkey to countermand the order. Facing the opposition of a united DC SWAMP, the President caved, and thereby delayed his formal impeachment by a year.

    Going out on a limb, President Trump continues to play a very weak hand and may survive to fight another day. Fortunately for the US, his tax and regulatory policies, as well as his economic negotiations with China, Japan, Korea and Mexico seem to be on target and successful.

    Godfree Roberts , 26 January 2020 at 09:19 PM
    As Richard Nixon told a young Donald Rumsfeld when he asked about specializing in Latin America, "Nobody gives a shit about Latin America."

    Nobody gives a shit about the Middle East.

    Johnb , 26 January 2020 at 11:27 PM
    We may yet see John McCains Revenge in the Senate Colonel, it only requires 4 Republican votes to move into Witnesses.
    EEngineer , 26 January 2020 at 11:27 PM
    Carthage must be destroyed! I don't know if Trump is going to war with Iran willingly or with a Neocon gun to his head, but if he's impeached I expect Pence to go on a holy crusade.

    [Jan 27, 2020] MANPADS represent a large leap in the 'death by 1000 cuts' equation for the US forices in Afghanistan

    Jan 27, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Chevrus , Jan 27 2020 17:29 utc | 17

    9K38-Igla-M
    MANPADS represent a large leap in the 'death by 1000 cuts' equation.

    The stinger missile made a huge difference in the battle dynamics when the Soviets were in Afganistan. 2000 Iglas trickled into Afganistan would be a huge headache for occupying forces. No more close air support, very dangerous take-off and landings along with possible higher altitude interceptions.

    In regard to the financing of the ongoing operations, war profiteers are happy to continue that ad infinitum. The American war in Viet-Nam was a test run of sorts, how to keep things running for maximum profit and burn. Weapons in and commodities (hmmmm...)out makes for quite a killing.

    The sense I get is that the escalation cause by the various air strikes and assassinations was designed as a last ditch effort to keep things escalating lest peace and stability break out. Granted that is a distant horizon, but if Iran and the KSA found some common ground, Syria was mopped up and Lebanon was able to shake off the elements that continually throw spanners in the works USA/isreal interests would definitely be less likely to prosper. Given the pattern of provocation by the USA trying to get Iran to do something extreme in order to justify all out war, the murder of the highly prized generals seems not to have worked as intended. Rather than striking out impulsively, the Resistance appears to have engaged in a broad spectrum highly controlled campaign to do just what it has promised. Expel the USA from the MidEast.

    We live in world of countermeasures and gone are the days of total domination by the usual suspects. Anti aircraft missile defense is the current keystone to this balance. As with many things MANPADS are very much a double edged sword, so one must be judicious with sales and distribution. There is nothing stopping them from biting the manufacturer in the arse.

    Not long ago such missiles would be easier to trace, but given the amount of exports and knock-offs they could filter into the Afgan theater from anywhere. If there are in fact a quantity of them in play, then the occupiers are going to have a very bad day(s) indeed.

    Per/Norway , Jan 27 2020 17:30 utc | 18

    "4) Can't understand Yankee justification for hammering Afghanistan, unless it involved stealing sovereign wealth."

    Posted by: Ant. | Jan 27 2020 17:03 utc | 10

    It is ALL about the cia opium trade,, Afghanistan is the "poppy greenhouse" of the cia and fukus terrorist regimes..

    Per/Norway , Jan 27 2020 17:34 utc | 19
    "WHAT are the Americans actually bombing?
    Let me suggest - nothing, just an opportunity to use up the existing arsenal."

    Posted by: Alex_Gorsky | Jan 27 2020 17:14 utc | 12
    No, they are bombing homes and trying to genocide the Pashtuns that live on/over a fortune in minerals and whatnot,.-
    Try to research how many Pashtun children the united states of terrorist and nato terrorists have raped and killed, ALL just to steal Afghanistans wealth.

    A P , Jan 27 2020 18:42 utc | 33
    To Ant 10, Per/Norway 18: Afghanistan is a vast source of mineral wealth, and has valuable potential oil/gas pipeline routes. As usual, US/ZATO wants to "protect" these for their pet corporate thieves. That the CIA/Mossad runs the opium industry is just a cash-cow to pay-off the local drug kingpins/warlords.

    The Taliban had decimated the opium industry a couple times, but the CIA/Mossad always pushes back in and keeps the country in chaos.

    The Taliban are no angels, but at least they eradicate the opium industry. If the US/ZATO and CIA/Mossad got out of Afghanistan, it wouldn't take long for the locals to throw out the Taliban. The locals put up with the Taliban because they are slightly less destructive than the US/ZATO/CIA/Mossad thugs.

    Red Ryder , Jan 27 2020 18:49 utc | 34
    Ukies got Javelin anti-tank weapons. (though the US controls them or half of them would be sold off).
    Then, there was a counter-move. Not in Donbass. Elsewhere.
    Taliban have MANPADS.

    Soon, the Iraqi PMF will have MANPADS.

    It's a weapons war that the US cannot win.

    Too many people want the Hegemon out of their country.

    We see this weapons war in Africa. Russia and China are there to teach the weapons' use.

    You don't need big nukes and aircraft to win a war.

    Vietnam won with artillery, sappers and AK-47s.
    Houthis are winning with homemade missiles and drones.

    Taliban will force out the US. Russia and China will do whatever they can to see that will be the outcome.

    DFC , Jan 27 2020 19:16 utc | 39
    There must be some Iranian special Quods force operating deep inside Afghanistan using their own SAM, not giving them to the Taliban, who are their longtgerm enemies.

    The Iranians will choose how, when and where they are going to kill US soldiers and CIA opertatives with total deniability if required; probably in this plane there were some CIA dudes involved in dirty operations in the ME affecting Iran, now they have reaped what they sown

    Montreal , Jan 27 2020 19:20 utc | 40
    If I wanted to attack the US I would do it in Afghanistan. Hostile territory, hostile population, impossible lines of communication. If it isn't Taliban, then it probably someone in alliance with them. China? Shares a border with Afghanistan (even if a bit inaccessible). Pakistan? Iraq? Iran? Russia (I doubt it but you never know). There must be so much general ordnance kicking around in the Middle East, most of it supplied or sourced by the US. I'm surprised it hasn't been done before. Certainly, if whoever it is has a regular supply of surface to air missiles, Bhagram, and the US are toast.
    Mckinnon , Jan 27 2020 19:27 utc | 41
    The afghans canteach the iraqi how to bring down those planes, then the NATO would be a sitting duck in Iraq and the only option to get out alive would be a peacedeal the israeli can not refuse.
    karlof1 , Jan 27 2020 19:35 utc | 43
    Quixotic 1 @38--

    I tend to agree with that thinking. The Outlaw US Empire will need to be ousted from wherever it occupies as with 'Nam, although there's still the question of the Current Oligarchy's domestic viability and ability to retain control over the federal government. What's promising in the latter regard is the very strong pushback aimed at DNC Chair Perez's committee appointments , which is being called Trump's Re-election Campaign Committee for good reasons. However IMO, people need to look beyond Trump and the Duopoly at those pulling the strings. And the easiest way to cut the strings is to elect people without any.

    ben , Jan 27 2020 19:41 utc | 44
    This ongoing war in Afghanistan has morphed into a live fire training program for the U$ military. Totally illegal and disgusting.

    "it's just business, get over it."

    Oh, but DJT promised to end it, did he not?

    karlof1 , Jan 27 2020 19:48 utc | 45
    DFC @39--

    Hard to say just what the Iranian-Taliban relationship is at this juncture. Tehran continues to deny supplying them, but it's clear Taliban are the only force capable to defeating the Outlaw US Empire's Terrorist Foreign Legion it imported into the Afghan theatre. Iran's watched the Taliban up close and personal for 24+ years now, so I'd be very surprised if there wasn't at least a strong backchannel com between them. IIRC, Iran okayed Taliban's inclusion in the Moscow talks and has suggested they become a part of any future Afghan government.

    Likklemore , Jan 27 2020 20:14 utc | 49
    @ 38 Quixotic 1
    Guarantee you- "the Empire is not going to cede its position anywhere on the globe. It's not going to leave Syria, it's not going to leave Iraq, and it certainly is not going to leave it's foothold in the underbelly of Eurasia.
    Because to do so would mean the end of the Hegemonic project.

    I have 1st dibs on that Guarantee
    by 2025. Be ready to deliver in gold.

    Here is how. Watch KSA and that old 1973 deal to price oil in USD$; follows then ALL countries need USD to buy oil. Fast Forward. KSA wants in on their share of oil to China AND the price will be paid in Yuan. Ask Qatar.

    See the historical Timeline of currencies at link.

    The USD is losing its appeal because Uncle Sam foolishly weaponized its currency. A review of history: Bullies have a limited life as do Reserve Currencies all things end. And sanctions are wearing thin.

    The epitaph reads "US$, aka the greenback, met its demise by sanctions."

    DFC , Jan 27 2020 20:41 utc | 51
    @ karlof1 | Jan 27 2020 19:48 utc | 45

    Well may be the Iranians could supply the Taliban with weapons, or may be they supply them to the Hazara, that are much more close to them and are the real allies in Afghanistan, and it is a way to protect them un a post-US future. So may be the Hazara could become the new Houthies in Afghanistan

    DFC , Jan 27 2020 21:33 utc | 61
    @ james | Jan 27 2020 21:16 utc | 57

    Johan Galtung predicted, in the year 2000, the end of the US Empire in 2020, he also predicted, in the year 1980, the end of the Soviet Empire before the end of that decade, and he nailed.

    This is an interview in 2010, but the book with his predictions is much old:

    https://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/7/johan_galtung_on_the_fall_of

    He said:
    "It's an empire against a wall; an empire in despair; an empire, I would say, in its last phase. My prediction in the book that is here, that you mentioned, The Fall of the US Empire–And Then What?, is that it cannot last longer than 'til about 2020. In 1980, I predicted for the Soviet empire that it will crack at its weakest point, the wall of Berlin, within ten years, and it happened in November 1989, and the Soviet empire followed. So my prediction is a similar one for the US empire"

    In another interview he said that after the cracks in the Empire and the loss of the Imperial Wealth Pump:

    "The most dangerous variable is the definitive end of the American dream, due to domestic hardship. This would lead to the functional breakdown of the establishment and Treaty of the Union, which would be the political end of the North American multi-state entity. At this point, Galtung says, the empire would be split into a confederation of states, more or less powerful, that would seek an independent solution to the external and internal crisis."

    https://libya360.wordpress.com/2019/03/18/2020-and-the-end-of-the-american-empire/

    occupatio , Jan 27 2020 23:35 utc | 79
    Can someone explain to mean what 'ZATO' (as in 'US/ZATO') means on this site?

    As for China being a possible source for the anti-aircraft missiles, I doubt it is via the Xinjiang/Afghanistan border and must instead be using established smuggling routes and intermediaries groups.

    I've heard it said that the missiles fired by Houthis on the Abqaiq oil facility are based on Iran designs, some of which are in turn copies or reverse-engineered from Chinese designs. If the Afghanistan situation is like that, then the Chinese connection is mediated instead of immediate, such as via Iran. The missiles doesn't even need to be reverse-engineered --- just swap out some parts for generic ones. For various reasons, such as plausible deniability, I doubt that China would directly supply Taliban with such equipment.

    bevin , Jan 28 2020 0:08 utc | 84
    Native people were classified as militarily apt and militarily inept, and recruitment to
    colonial armies was guided by that principle. Arabs were typically classified as inept,
    unlike Gurkhas and the Sikh. Persians were not recruited, but they were known to colonial
    leaders who had education in classics."
    iotr Berman@48
    This is Raj History 101 bullshit recycled. Far from being classified as inept- Arabs, particularly Sunni
    desert Arabs were very highly regarded by the British for their military prowess. Hence the entrusting to
    the current Gulf rulers of the British protectorates handed back in the 1960s.
    The Arab Legion in 1948 came out of the war with its reputation intact.
    So far as their educational achievements are concerned: it was the Arabs who brought Europe the Renaissance.
    Anyone who really believes that Arabs are incapable of developing IEDs is likely to be
    part of that unfortunate portion of humanity that holds them to be 'sand niggers' etc. And likely to suffer
    the fate of racist fools throughout history.
    karlof1 , Jan 28 2020 0:09 utc | 85
    psychohistorian @83--

    I continue to see Twitter reports, like this one that the Prince of Darkness aka Mike de Andrea was killed in that shootdown. As with the commander at the base Iran attacked in Iraq who is now rumored to have died, the easiest refutation would be for them to appear in public.

    Piotr Berman , Jan 28 2020 0:41 utc | 89
    2) The Soviet Union never invaded Afghanistan, they were invited in in by then sovereign UN-recognised Gov of Afghan (golly wonder why)

    Posted by: Ant. | Jan 27 2020 17:03 utc | 10

    Wiki (quite accurate): Meanwhile, increasing friction between the competing factions of the PDPA -- the dominant Khalq and the more moderate Parcham -- resulted (in July–August 1979) in the dismissal of Parchami cabinet members and the arrest of Parchami military officers under the pretext of a Parchami coup.[62]

    In September 1979, President Taraki was assassinated in a coup within the PDPA orchestrated by fellow Khalq member Hafizullah Amin, who assumed the presidency. The situation in the country deteriorated under Amin and thousands of people went missing.[63] The Soviet Union was displeased with Amin's government and decided to intervene and invade the country on 27 December 1979, killing Amin that same day.[64]

    A Soviet-organized regime, led by Parcham's Babrak Karmal but inclusive of both factions (Parcham and Khalq), filled the vacuum.

    ------

    Perhaps Taraki invited Soviets just as he was beset by assassins, or Amin did it for reasons he never got a chance to explain. Honestly, left to their own devices, PDPA, the Afghan Communists, were making royal mess. In any case, the western supported anti-progress guerilla, fighting horrors like schools for girls, predated Soviet "invasion".

    necromancer , Jan 28 2020 0:58 utc | 91
    Easiest route for Afghan Taliban to obtain weapons is from Pakistani Taliban, with ISI permission.
    Remember Pakistani ISI ran Al-Qaeda back in the day.
    It is also forgotten that the Tallys prevent the muj warlords from raping the country's teenagers, of both genders, their favorite sport. Thus they are forgiven for suppressing the poppy farming.
    karlof1 , Jan 28 2020 2:16 utc | 93
    The Prince of Darkness's death seems to be as confirmed as we might get according to this and its thread :

    "The US govt seems to be actively hiding this information from the public, but the Taliban has verified this to the Iranians, who in turn passed the message to the GCC states. There is a gruesome photograph of one of the passengers who died, & he has the same profile as D'Andrea."

    And:

    "The CIA's Michael D'Andrea, who was in charge of the CIA's anti-Iran operations, was in fact killed yesterday in a plane crash in Afghanistan, which the Iranian-backed Taliban claims to have downed. He was killed alongside 4 other people, including 2 USAF pilots & 2 CIA figures."

    Not equivalent in stature to Soleimani but important nonetheless. I'll add a small caveat that this still isn't 100% confirmed.

    TEP , Jan 28 2020 2:26 utc | 94
    @ S (club) 7 and karlofi 93
    Yes I'm hearing Ayatollah Mike was one of the several CIA officers among the dead. BIG loss for US and good retaliatory strike (if true) for Iran. The Dark Prince Mike was indeed head of CIA anti-Iran operations and likely played a big part in the Soleimani assassination. We may never know for sure, but the premature departure of CIA officers is always good for the rest of humankind.
    psychedelicatessen , Jan 28 2020 2:35 utc | 95
    DFC @ 39

    Claims of high ranking CIA officers aboard. I suppose U.S. missiles would have been appropriate. Stock from Obama and Clinton's private arms dealing perhaps?

    dltravers , Jan 28 2020 2:49 utc | 98
    I have long wondered why the Russians have not paid back the US for their aid to the Afghan guerrilla in the 1980's. The US supplied stinger missiles and other anti-aircraft systems and at one point they were knocking down one Russian aircraft a day. Maybe the Russians smell Western blood on the water and have chosen this as the time to pay them back with select arms deliveries to the Taliban.

    It was this loss of aviation support that hastened their departure and it would certainly hasten a US departure. I do not think the US has it in them to ramp it up at this point...

    Let us remember...

    The Soviet War in Afghanistan, 1979 - 1989

    [Jan 27, 2020] The Emergence of Progressive Foreign Policy

    This blabbing about authoritarian Russia and China greatly diminishes the value of this article. The author is Warren foreign policy advisor. Probably she should find a better advisor.
    Compare this blabbing with Putin stance about strengthening of the role of the UN.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Fourth, the new progressive foreign policy is highly skeptical of military interventions, and opposed to democracy promotion by force. This does not mean that progressives are unwilling or would be unable to use force when it is necessary. But after 17 years of war in the Middle East, they do not share the aggressive posture that has characterized the post-Cold War era. Some are skeptical because they think interventions cannot succeed. Others emphasize the potential for backlash and making the situation worse. Still others hold that stable, sustainable democracy cannot be imposed from abroad but must emerge organically. ..."
    "... Fifth, the new progressive foreign policy seeks to reshape the military budget by both cutting the budget overall and reallocating military spending. This should not be surprising. The skepticism of intervention suggests military budgets do not need to be as big as they have been in an era when the goal was to be able to fight two regional wars simultaneously. The centrality of economics to a progressive foreign policy further explains this position; military spending should partly be reallocated to cyber and other technologies that are deeply integrated with the economy and likely to be crucial in future conflicts. ..."
    Jan 27, 2020 | warontherocks.com
    end of history " and America's " unipolar moment ." And both camps have undergone a serious reckoning after the Afghanistan, Iraq, and forever wars, as well as the global financial crisis calling into question neoliberal economic policies -- namely, deregulation, liberalization, privatization, and austerity. Prominent foreign policy advocates have quite publicly engaged in soul-searching as they confronted these changes, and debates about the future of foreign policy abound.

    The emergence of a distinctively progressive approach to foreign policy is perhaps the most interesting -- and most misunderstood -- development in these debates. In speeches and articles, politicians like Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders have outlined an approach to foreign policy that does not fall along the traditional fault-lines of realist versus idealist or neoconservative versus liberal internationalist (disclosure: I have been a longtime advisor to Sen. Warren). Their speeches come alongside an increasing number of articles exploring the contours of a progressive foreign policy. Even those who might not consider themselves progressive are sounding similar themes .

    From this body of work, it is now possible to sketch out the framework of a distinctively progressive approach to foreign policy. While its advocates, like those in other foreign policy camps, discuss a wide range of issues -- from climate change to reforming international institutions -- at the moment, five themes mark this emerging approach as a specific framework for foreign policy.

    First, progressive foreign policy breaks the silos between domestic and foreign policy and between international economic policy and foreign policy. It places far greater emphasis on how foreign policy impacts the United States at home -- and particularly on how foreign policy (including international economic policy) has impacted the domestic economy. To be sure, there have always been analysts and commentators who recognized these interrelationships. But progressive foreign policy places this at the center of its analysis rather than seeing it as peripheral. The new progressive foreign policy takes the substance of both domestic and international economic policies seriously, and its adherents will not support economic policies on foreign policy grounds if they exacerbate economic inequality at home. For example, the argument that trade deals must be ratified on national security grounds even though they have problematic distributional consequences does not carry much weight for progressives who believe that an equitable domestic economy is the foundation of national power.

    Second, progressive foreign policy holds that one of the important threats to American democracy at home is nationalist oligarchy (or, alternatively, authoritarian capitalism ) abroad. Countries like Russia and China are not simply authoritarian governments, and neither can their resurgence and assertion of power be interpreted as merely great power competition. The reason is that their economic systems integrate economic and political power. Crony/state capitalism is not a bug, it is the central feature. In a global society, economic interrelationships weaponize economic power into political power . China, for example, already uses its economic power as leverage in political disputes with other Asian countries. Its growing share of global GDP is one of the most consequential facts of the 21st century. As a result of these dynamics, progressives are also highly skeptical of a foreign policy based on the premise that the countries of the world will all become neoliberal democracies. Instead, they take seriously the risks that come from economic integration with nationalist oligarchies.

    Third, the new progressive foreign policy values America's alliances and international agreements, but not because it thinks that such alliances and rules can convert nationalist oligarchies into liberal democracies. Rather, alliances should be based on common values or common goals, and, going forward, they will be critical to balancing and countering the challenges from nationalist oligarchies. Progressives are thus far more skeptical of alliances with countries like Saudi Arabia and far more interested in reinforcing and deepening ties with allies like Japan -- and are concerned about the erosion of alliances like NATO from within.

    [Jan 27, 2020] Zionism is used as a smoke scree for Full Spectrum Dominance drive. It is effective in silencing US opponents

    Jan 27, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Jackrabbit , Jan 26 2020 23:40 utc | 57

    Phil @35:

    Wait and see? Hope for change?

    Western Democracies have fallen to the secretive Zionist Death Cult.

    We need Movement(s) to restore democracy.

    "Democracy Works!" propagandists will tell you that you only need YOUR VOTE. That is false. They ask for unilateral disarmament. We will never restore democracy by voting in rigged elections.

    Zionist Death Cult? is no exaggeration. IMO The Zionist Movement has been hijacked by those who see ANY opposition as an existential threat. Thus, they MUST smash countries in the Middle East, and they MUST rule the world, even if that means conflict with Russia and China.

    <> <> <> <> <> <>

    I see Zionism not as a bad expression.... Zion and Zionism is, in my view, only a necessary expression of an oppressed people ...

    Massaging Zionist egos with happy talk is counter-productive. (Yeah, I know you qualify your happy talk later, but still ...) THEY DON'T CARE. They are only interested in POWER and keeping it.

    Whatever it started out as, Zionism has morphed into a Movement that has brought misery to millions and threatens the extinction of humanity via WWIII. The Doomsday Clock is now 100 seconds to midnight .

    Just imagine if your culture, your tribe, was abolished and persecuted for centuries ...

    Whatever was learned from that persecution seems to have been co-opted by ruthless Zionists who don't just want a homeland but the defeat of everyone that might restrict or restain them in any way - thus, the alliance with USA Empire-builders that to rule the world (NWO).

    Just imagine if ... : your country has been subverted by a secretive Movement that bypasses Democratic process and corrupts your leaders via money and relentless organizing - including illegal blackmail operations that subvert anyone that doesn't approve of their goals and means of achieving them. At some point, they get to a point where their undermining is essentially more than paid for by grants from the government that they now control.

    =
    That the state of Israel is oppressing other people today, and is secured by the 'empire' and the holocaust emblem, is certainly a sad period of history.

    You're forgetting the Christian Zionists, MIC, and others that have a financial interest in continuing the farce.

    USA and Western political elites are virtually ALL corrupted by Zionist influence.

    =
    It inverted the role play entirely, even perverted it. There is some hope in the citizens of Israel and the Jews that live abroad to find a way to end this insanity.

    We should not rely upon that faint hope. The people in the West need to take back their democracies via MOVEMENTS.

    They we might see a quick rush by Israel embrace those "simple solutions" that you talked about and to be less like the belligerent rogue State that they are today.

    =
    [Jews are] ... a people that is suffering from finding a place to be, to find a home. Palestine is somehow their home, but it must be shared with the Arab people who also call Palestine their home. Of course there is no simple solution to that question.

    Well, the "simple solutions" that have been rejected by Zionist Death Cult.

    The Zionist Death Cult decided that if they gain political control of USA, then they don't need to agree to "simple solutions". And "Zionist" Empire-builders in USA decided that they could use Israel to control the region and increase MIC profits. And the Zionist Death Cult mentality applies not just to Middle East but the World.

    =
    We, as a global community, have to bring separated tribes together. We have no other choice. Else, there is war. Constant war. Which is of course the plan for a certain elevated upper realm that is playing the part of the bad guy.

    Yeah, well hoping for the best is not a plan.

    <> <> <> <> <> <>

    Laguerre @40:

    [Phil @35] Jews are a separate identity ... If they wish to remain a separate identity, then there are consequences.

    As I see it, the problem is not Jews but Zionists, neocons, and other warmongers.

    Too often, criticism of Israel or Zionism is wrongly translated into criticism of Jews.

    ben , Jan 27 2020 0:38 utc | 63

    Jrabbit @ 57 said;

    "As I see it, the problem is not Jews but Zionists, neocons, and other warmongers."

    "Too often, criticism of Israel or Zionism is wrongly translated into criticism of Jews."

    Absolutely!!

    [Jan 27, 2020] "...there is nothing monstrous about international law. It does not offend any conscience. To deviate from it threatens peace and therefore the lives of all of us."

    Jan 27, 2020 | www.voltairenet.org

    The above is from Thierry Meyssan's most recent essay. In it, he examines what he considers a kind of unique "problem" for Iran; the lack of a constitutional separation of religious and state powers (the one thing the US Founding Aristocrats got right).

    Upon reading one might feel (as I did) a reflexive tendency toward defensive sympathy for Iran, especially in the face of constant threat from the US and the zionist entity in Palestine.

    But the admirable thing about Meyssan is that he is consistently an advocate for peace, fairness, and above all truth. Anyways, it's a great read; highly recommended.
    Thanks for all you do for us, b; peace and Happy Lunar New Year, barflies.

    Posted by: robjira | Jan 26 2020 18:42 utc | 23 Ps.

    Quadrant is sponsored by the Australian Committee for Cultural Freedom (the Australian arm of the Congress for Cultural Freedom - a CIA-funded anti-communist group from Yankistan), who later changed their name to the Australian Association for Cultural Freedom.

    Such an independent source of information, not. They are basically a mouthpiece for the Trilateral Commission goons, and all of their apparatchiks, and are aligned with Murdoch stable neo-con/lib dogma. Sorry, but I'd rather listen to people with experience, qualifications, or "skin in the game", than right-wing propaganda.

    Posted by: Jon_in_AU | Jan 26 2020 18:50 utc | 24

    @ robjira | Jan 26 2020 18:42 utc | 23 ( Thierry Meyssan's most recent essay)

    Yes, it is a good essay. However I think his understanding of International Law is only one of several, there are at least two views as to what is the basis of Law.

    You'll have to look for it I'm afraid>

    Title: ABOVE AND BEYOND INTERNATIONAL LAW: GEORGE W. BUSH AS THE AUSTINIAN SOVEREIGN
    Professor Ali Khan
    Washburn University School of Law
    JURIST

    a fragment, you'll see that TM bases his idea on an altogether different foundation, I think.

    "For centuries, international law has been anchored in the theory of contracts. Treaties are explicit contracts among states, but even customary international law, at least in its formative stages, is founded on consent and is derived from voluntary state practices.

    All along, powerful nations have influenced international law. Yet in modern times no single state - no single sovereign - has claimed the authority to make laws for the rest of the world. International law has, since the Second World War, admittedly developed some coercive elements in its genetic structure, but it nonetheless remains, both in its essence and legitimacy, the law of partnership.

    This jurisprudence might change, however, if George Walker Bush is successful in crowning himself as the Austinian Sovereign. "

    Posted by: Walter | Jan 26 2020 22:06 utc | 43

    [Jan 27, 2020] U.S. Weakness and the Struggle for Hegemony

    Notable quotes:
    "... imperialism is an integral part of the capitalist world-economy. It is not a special phenomenon. It has always been there. It always will be there as long as we have a capitalist world economy. Two, we are experiencing at the moment a particularly aggressive and egregious form of imperialism, which is now even ready to claim that it is being imperialist. ..."
    "... We have to start in 1945, when the United States became hegemonic, really hegemonic. What does hegemony in this context mean? It means that the U.S. nation-state was so much the strongest, it had an economic capability so far ahead of anybody else in the world as of 1945, that it could undersell anyone in their own home markets. The United States had a military strength that was unparalleled. As a consequence, it had an ability to create formidable alliances, NATO, the U.S.-Japan Defense Pact, and so on. At the same time, the United States, as the hegemonic power, became culturally the center of the world. New York became the center of high culture and American popular culture went on its march throughout the world. ..."
    "... It is true that there was the Soviet Union, which posed a military difficulty for the United States. Nonetheless, the United States handled that very simply by an agreement. It is called Yalta, which encompasses more than just what happened at Yalta itself. I think the left has underestimated historically the reality and the importance of the Yalta agreement that made the Cold War a choreographed arrangement in which nothing ever really happened for forty years. That was the important thing about the Cold War. It divided up the world into the Soviet zone that was about a third of the world, and the U.S. zone that was two-thirds. It kept the zones economically separate and allowed them to shout at each other loudly in order to keep their own side in order, but never to make any truly substantial changes in the arrangement. The United States was therefore sitting on top of the world. ..."
    "... The third thing that happened is that there were people who didn't agree with Yalta. They were located in the third world and there were at least four significant defeats of imperialism that occurred in the third world. The first was China, where the Communist Party defied Stalin and marched on Kuomintang-controlled Shanghai in 1948, thus getting China out from under U.S. influence on the mainland. That was a central defeat in the U.S. attempt to control the periphery. Secondly, there was Algeria and all its implications as a role model for other colonial territories. There was Cuba, in the backyard of the United States. And finally, there was Vietnam, which both France and then the United States were incapable of defeating. It was a military defeat for the United States that has structured world geopolitics ever since. ..."
    "... How could the rulers of the United States handle the loss of hegemony? That has been the problem ever since. There were two dominant modes of handling this loss of hegemony. One is that pursued from Richard Nixon through Bill Clinton, including Ronald Reagan, including George Bush Sr. All these U.S . presidents handled it the same way, basically a variant of the velvet glove hiding the mailed fist. ..."
    "... They sought to persuade Western Europe and Japan and others that the United States could be cooperative; that the others could have an alliance of semi-equals, though with the United States exerting "leadership." That's the Trilateral Commission and the G7. And, of course, they were using all this time the unifying force of opposition to the Soviet Union. ..."
    "... Secondly, there was the so-called Washington Consensus that coalesced in the 1980s. What was the Washington Consensus about? I remind you that the 1970s was the era when the United Nations proclaimed the decade of development. Developmentalism was the name of the game from the 1950s through the 1970s. Everybody proclaimed that countries could develop. The United States proclaimed it. The Soviet Union proclaimed it, and everybody in the third world proclaimed it -- if only a state were organized properly. Of course, people disagreed about how to organize a state properly, but if only it were organized properly and did the right things, it could develop. This was the basic ideology; development was to be achieved by some kind of control over what went on within sovereign national states. ..."
    "... The second objective was to deal with the military threat. The real threat to U.S. military power, and they say it all the time, so let's believe them, is nuclear proliferation; because if every little country has nuclear weapons it becomes very tricky for the United States to engage in military action. That is what North Korea is demonstrating at this moment. North Korea only has two nuclear bombs, if what the newspapers say is correct. But that is enough to shake things up. ..."
    "... Second, there was Saddam. Saddam Hussein started the first Gulf War. He did it deliberately. He did it deliberately to challenge the United States. He could not have done that if the Soviet Union had still been an active power. They would have stopped him from doing it because it would have been too dangerous in terms of the Yalta agreement. And he got away with it. That is to say, at the end of the war, all he lost was what he had gained. He was back at the starting point. That is what has stuck in the craw for ten years. That war was a draw. It was not a victory for the United States. ..."
    "... Enter the hawks. The hawks do not see themselves as the triumphant continuation of U.S. capitalism or U.S. power or anything else. They see themselves as a group of frustrated outsiders who for fifty years did not get their way even with Reagan, even with Bush Sr., even with George Bush Jr. before 9/11. They are still worried that Bush Jr. will chicken out on them. They think that the policy that went from Nixon to Clinton to the first year of George W. Bush, of trying to handle this situation, diplomatically, multilaterally -- I call it the velvet glove -- was an utter failure. They think it just accelerated the decline of the United States and they think that had to be changed radically by engaging in an egregious, overt, imperial action -- war for the sake of war. They did not go to war on Iraq or Saddam Hussein because he was a dictator. They did not go to war on Iraq even for oil. I will not argue that point here, but they did not need the war on Iraq for oil. They needed it to show the United States could do it, and they needed that demonstration in order to intimidate two groups of people: (1) anybody in the third world who thinks that they should engage in nuclear proliferation; and (2) Europe. This was an attack on Europe, and that is why Europe responded the way it did. ..."
    "... Second, look at North East Asia. This is harder but I think China, a reunited Korea, and Japan will begin to move together politically and economically. Now, this will not be easy. The reunification of Korea will be a tremendously difficult thing to achieve. The reunification of China as well will be a difficult thing to achieve, and those countries have all sorts of reasons for hating one another and tensions with deep historical roots, but the pressure is on them. If, realistically, they are going to survive as independent forces in the world, they will move in this direction. ..."
    Nov 01, 2019 | monthlyreview.org

    Topics: Globalization , Imperialism

    Immanuel Wallerstein (1930–2019) was the director of the Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems, and Civilizations; the editor of Review ; and Senior Research Scholar at Yale University. He was the author of numerous books, including Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World-System , cowritten with Andre Gunder Frank, Giovanni Arrighi, and Samir Amin (Monthly Review Press, 1990).

    Wallerstein was also a frequent contributor to Monthly Review . " U.S. Weakness and the Struggle for Hegemony " was first published in Monthly Review 55, no. 3 (July–August 2003).

    I am going to start with two things with which I think nearly all MR readers will probably agree. One, imperialism is an integral part of the capitalist world-economy. It is not a special phenomenon. It has always been there. It always will be there as long as we have a capitalist world economy. Two, we are experiencing at the moment a particularly aggressive and egregious form of imperialism, which is now even ready to claim that it is being imperialist.

    Now, I ask you to reflect upon that anomaly. How do we explain that, at the moment, we are living through a particularly aggressive and egregious form of imperialism, which for the first time in over a hundred years has been ready to use the words imperial and imperialism ? Why should they do that? Now, the answer most people give in one word is U.S. strength . And the answer I will give in one word is U.S. weakness .

    We have to start in 1945, when the United States became hegemonic, really hegemonic. What does hegemony in this context mean? It means that the U.S. nation-state was so much the strongest, it had an economic capability so far ahead of anybody else in the world as of 1945, that it could undersell anyone in their own home markets. The United States had a military strength that was unparalleled. As a consequence, it had an ability to create formidable alliances, NATO, the U.S.-Japan Defense Pact, and so on. At the same time, the United States, as the hegemonic power, became culturally the center of the world. New York became the center of high culture and American popular culture went on its march throughout the world.

    The first time I was in the Soviet Union, in the Brezhnev era, my host took me to a nightclub in Leningrad. The one thing that startled me in the Soviet Union, the whole time I was there, was that in this nightclub one heard American popular music sung in English. And, of course, ideologically, I think we underestimate the degree to which the theme of the "free world" has had legitimacy among wide segments of the world population.

    So the United States was really on top of the world for about twenty-five years, and it got its way in whatever it wanted to do.

    It is true that there was the Soviet Union, which posed a military difficulty for the United States. Nonetheless, the United States handled that very simply by an agreement. It is called Yalta, which encompasses more than just what happened at Yalta itself. I think the left has underestimated historically the reality and the importance of the Yalta agreement that made the Cold War a choreographed arrangement in which nothing ever really happened for forty years. That was the important thing about the Cold War. It divided up the world into the Soviet zone that was about a third of the world, and the U.S. zone that was two-thirds. It kept the zones economically separate and allowed them to shout at each other loudly in order to keep their own side in order, but never to make any truly substantial changes in the arrangement. The United States was therefore sitting on top of the world.

    This lasted only about twenty-five years. The United States ran into difficulty somewhere between 1967 and 1973 because of three things. One, it lost its economic edge. Western Europe and Japan became sufficiently strong to defend their own markets. They even began to invade U.S. markets. They were then about as strong and as competitive as the United States economically and that, of course, had political implications.

    Secondly, there was the world revolution of 1968 in which many MR readers were involved, in one way or another. Think of what happened in 1968. In 1968, there were two themes that were repeated everywhere throughout the world in one version or another. One, we don't like the U.S. hegemony and dominance of the world, and we don't like Soviet collusion with it. That was a theme everywhere. That was not only the Chinese stance on the two superpowers but that of most of the rest of the world as well.

    The second thing that 1968 made clear was that the Old Left, which had come to power everywhere -- Communist parties, social-democratic parties, and national liberation movements -- had not changed the world and something had to be done about it. We were not sure we trusted them anymore. That undermined the ideological basis of the Yalta agreement, and that was very important.

    The third thing that happened is that there were people who didn't agree with Yalta. They were located in the third world and there were at least four significant defeats of imperialism that occurred in the third world. The first was China, where the Communist Party defied Stalin and marched on Kuomintang-controlled Shanghai in 1948, thus getting China out from under U.S. influence on the mainland. That was a central defeat in the U.S. attempt to control the periphery. Secondly, there was Algeria and all its implications as a role model for other colonial territories. There was Cuba, in the backyard of the United States. And finally, there was Vietnam, which both France and then the United States were incapable of defeating. It was a military defeat for the United States that has structured world geopolitics ever since.

    The threefold fact of the rise of economic rivals, the world revolution of 1968 and its impact on mentalities across the world, and Vietnam's defeat of the United States, all taken together, mark the beginning of the decline of the United States.

    How could the rulers of the United States handle the loss of hegemony? That has been the problem ever since. There were two dominant modes of handling this loss of hegemony. One is that pursued from Richard Nixon through Bill Clinton, including Ronald Reagan, including George Bush Sr. All these U.S . presidents handled it the same way, basically a variant of the velvet glove hiding the mailed fist.

    They sought to persuade Western Europe and Japan and others that the United States could be cooperative; that the others could have an alliance of semi-equals, though with the United States exerting "leadership." That's the Trilateral Commission and the G7. And, of course, they were using all this time the unifying force of opposition to the Soviet Union.

    Secondly, there was the so-called Washington Consensus that coalesced in the 1980s. What was the Washington Consensus about? I remind you that the 1970s was the era when the United Nations proclaimed the decade of development. Developmentalism was the name of the game from the 1950s through the 1970s. Everybody proclaimed that countries could develop. The United States proclaimed it. The Soviet Union proclaimed it, and everybody in the third world proclaimed it -- if only a state were organized properly. Of course, people disagreed about how to organize a state properly, but if only it were organized properly and did the right things, it could develop. This was the basic ideology; development was to be achieved by some kind of control over what went on within sovereign national states.

    Now, the Washington Consensus was the abandonment and the denigration of developmentalism, which had visibily failed by the late 1980s, and, therefore, everybody was ready to abandon. They substituted for developmentalism what they called globalization , which simply meant opening up all the frontiers, breaking down all the barriers for: (a) the movement of goods and, more importantly, (b) capital, but not (c) labor. And the United States set out to impose this on the world.

    The third thing they did along this line of "cooperation" was an ideological consensus-building process at Davos. Davos is not unimportant. Davos was an attempt to create a meeting ground of the world's elites, including elites from the third world, and constantly bring together and blend their political activity.

    At the same time, the objectives of the United States during this period took three forms. One was to launch a counteroffensive. It was a counteroffensive of neoliberalism on three levels to: (1) reduce wages worldwide; (2) reduce costs for (and end ecological constraints on) corporations, permitting the total externalization and socialization of such costs; and (3) reduce taxation, which was subsidizing social welfare (that is to say, subsidizing education, health care, and lifelong guarantees of income).

    On all these three levels they were only partially successful. None of these three succeeded totally, but they all succeeded a little. However, cost curves were not brought down to anything like the 1945 level. The cost curves had gone way up and they are down now, but they are not down below the 1945 level, and they will go up again.

    The second objective was to deal with the military threat. The real threat to U.S. military power, and they say it all the time, so let's believe them, is nuclear proliferation; because if every little country has nuclear weapons it becomes very tricky for the United States to engage in military action. That is what North Korea is demonstrating at this moment. North Korea only has two nuclear bombs, if what the newspapers say is correct. But that is enough to shake things up.

    The third objective -- and this was very crucial and they've been working at it since the 1970s -- was to stop the European Union. The United States was for the European Union in the 1950s and 1960s, when it was a means of getting France to agree to have Germany rearm. But once it became serious it was viewed as an attempt to create a European state of one variety or another, and the United States was of course strongly opposed to it.

    What happened? First, we had the collapse of the Soviet Union. That was a disaster for the United States; it removed the most important political weapon they had in relation to Western Europe and East Asia.

    Second, there was Saddam. Saddam Hussein started the first Gulf War. He did it deliberately. He did it deliberately to challenge the United States. He could not have done that if the Soviet Union had still been an active power. They would have stopped him from doing it because it would have been too dangerous in terms of the Yalta agreement. And he got away with it. That is to say, at the end of the war, all he lost was what he had gained. He was back at the starting point. That is what has stuck in the craw for ten years. That war was a draw. It was not a victory for the United States.

    Third, we saw in the 1990s, to be sure, a momentary spurt of the U.S. economy, but not of the world-economy as a whole and a spurt that is now over. But we now have a weakening of the dollar, and the dollar has been a crucial lever of the United States, enabling it to have the kind of economy it has and the dominance it has over the rest of the world. And finally, we had 9/11 that showed that the United States was vulnerable.

    Enter the hawks. The hawks do not see themselves as the triumphant continuation of U.S. capitalism or U.S. power or anything else. They see themselves as a group of frustrated outsiders who for fifty years did not get their way even with Reagan, even with Bush Sr., even with George Bush Jr. before 9/11. They are still worried that Bush Jr. will chicken out on them. They think that the policy that went from Nixon to Clinton to the first year of George W. Bush, of trying to handle this situation, diplomatically, multilaterally -- I call it the velvet glove -- was an utter failure. They think it just accelerated the decline of the United States and they think that had to be changed radically by engaging in an egregious, overt, imperial action -- war for the sake of war. They did not go to war on Iraq or Saddam Hussein because he was a dictator. They did not go to war on Iraq even for oil. I will not argue that point here, but they did not need the war on Iraq for oil. They needed it to show the United States could do it, and they needed that demonstration in order to intimidate two groups of people: (1) anybody in the third world who thinks that they should engage in nuclear proliferation; and (2) Europe. This was an attack on Europe, and that is why Europe responded the way it did.

    I wrote an article in 1980 in which I said, "It is geopolitically inevitable that over the next period, there will emerge a Paris/Berlin/Moscow alliance." I said this when the Soviet Union was still in existence and I have repeated it ever since. Now, everybody talks about it. There is actually a website now, paris-berlin-moscou.info, which reprints what people are writing in French, German, Russian, and English throughout Europe about the virtues of a Paris/Berlin/Moscow linkup.

    We must not underestimate the second Security Council nonvote in March of this year. It is the first time since the United Nations was founded that the United States, on an issue that mattered to it, could not get a majority on the Security Council. Of course, they have had to veto various resolutions in the past but on no issue that was truly crucial to them. But in March 2003 they withdrew the resolution because they could not get more than four votes for it. It was a political humiliation and it was universally regarded as such. The United States has lost legitimacy, and that is why you cannot call it hegemonic anymore. Whatever you want to call it, there is no legitimacy now and that's crucial.

    So, what should we look for in the next ten years? First, there is the question of how Europe will construct itself. It will be very difficult, but they will construct themselves and they will construct an army. Maybe not all of Europe, but the core. The United States is really worried about it, and that army will sooner or later link up with the Russian army.

    Second, look at North East Asia. This is harder but I think China, a reunited Korea, and Japan will begin to move together politically and economically. Now, this will not be easy. The reunification of Korea will be a tremendously difficult thing to achieve. The reunification of China as well will be a difficult thing to achieve, and those countries have all sorts of reasons for hating one another and tensions with deep historical roots, but the pressure is on them. If, realistically, they are going to survive as independent forces in the world, they will move in this direction.

    Thirdly, you should watch the World Social Forum. I think that is where the action is. It is the most important social movement now on the face of the earth and the only one that has a chance of playing a really significant role. It has blossomed very fast. It has a wealth of internal contradictions that we should not underestimate and it will run through all sorts of difficult periods, and it may not make it. It may not survive as a movement that is a movement of movements, that has no hierarchical center, is tolerant of all the varieties within it and yet stands for something. This is not an easy game, but it is where the best hope lies.

    Finally, I would think you ought to look at the internal contradictions among capitalists. The basic political contradiction of capitalism throughout its history has been that all capitalists have a common political interest insofar as there is a world class struggle going on. At the same time, all capitalists are rivals of all other capitalists. Now that is a fundamental contradiction of the system and it's going to be very explosive.

    I don't think we should underestimate the fact that in April 2003 Lawrence Eagleberger, the secretary of state under the first President Bush, and still a close adviser of the current president's father, said in print that if the United States were now to invade Syria, he, Eagleberger, would be for impeaching George W. Bush. Now, that is not a very light thing for a person of that sort to say. So there is a message being sent, and who is the message coming from? I think it is coming from the father for one thing. And beyond that, it is coming from an important segment of U.S. capital and of world capital. They are not all happy about the hawks. The hawks have not won the game. They have grabbed hold of the U.S. state machinery; 9/11 made that possible. And the hawks know it is now or never and they will continue to push, because if they don't push forward, they will fall back. But they have no guarantee of success, and some of their biggest enemies are other capitalists who do not like the line with Europe and Japan because they basically do believe in the unity of capital; who don't think that the way you handle these things is by smashing all opposition, but would prefer to co-opt it. They are extremely worried that this is Samson pulling down the house.

    We have entered a chaotic world. It has to do with the crisis of capitalism as a system, but I will not argue that now. What I will say is that this chaotic world situation will now go on for the next twenty or thirty years. No one controls it, least of all the U.S. government. The U.S. government is adrift in a situation that it is trying to manage all over the place and that it will be incapable of managing. This is neither good nor bad, but we should not overestimate these people nor the strength on which they rely.

    2019 , Volume 71, Issue 06 (November 2019) About Immanuel Wallerstein View all posts by Immanuel Wallerstein

    [Jan 27, 2020] An excellent interview of Elijah Magnier on a broad range of issues related to Iran, Iraq and US policy.

    Jan 27, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Nathan Mulcahy , Jan 26 2020 16:26 utc | 8

    In case you have missed this. Here is an excellent interview of Elijah Magnier on a broad range of issues related to Iran, Iraq and US policy. This link was previously posted by another commenter but I am reposting it because it is so informative. I apologize for not I remembering the name of the original poster was.

    What the US attacks on Iran and military occupation of Iraq mean for the Axis of Resistance | Moderate Rebels

    [Jan 27, 2020] On Fragile Footing in Yemen after the Soleimani Strike - War on the Rocks

    Jan 27, 2020 | warontherocks.com

    U.N. Special Envoy for Yemen Martin Griffiths sounded relieved in a briefing to the Security Council this week, noting that even after the American airstrike that killed Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, "the immediate crisis seems to be over Yemen has been kept safe."

    Griffiths may have spoken too soon.

    Yemen has been an increasingly important and tragic theater in the confrontation between Iran, the United States, and their respective clients in the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates at the head of an intervening coalition on one side and the Houthis backed by Iran on the other. What will happen in Yemen following the killing of Soleimani and the escalation in tensions between the United States and Iran? And how can Yemen's civil war be insulated from the regional fallout?

    News emerged late last week that the United States also targeted Abdul Reza Shahlai, a senior Quds commander, in Yemen. Had the strike succeeded, the Houthis or other Iranian-aligned forces in Yemen would almost certainly have had to respond, threatening an unruly escalation spiral. Instead, the operation was unsuccessful, and Iran's measured reaction was limited to Iraq. Nevertheless, the airstrike is unlikely to have put Houthi leadership in a conciliatory mood.

    Ismaeil Ghaani, who served as Soleimani's deputy for decades, was quickly named Soleimani's replacement as head of the Quds Force. Following decades of leadership of the Quds Force, Ghaani is unlikely to deviate from Iran's approach of using proxies to push against opponents in the retaliation for Soleimani's killing.

    At the same time, there is reason to hope that Yemen can avoid Iranian-backed escalation. But avoiding another round of escalation in Yemen's civil war will require the active participation of the United States and regional actors.

    Yemen's Fragile Status Quo

    One year after representatives of the Houthis and of Yemen's internationally-recognized government agreed to a limited ceasefire as part of the Stockholm Agreement, little concrete progress to implement the agreement has been made: Hodeidah, the port area at the center of the agreement, is still the most dangerous place in the country for civilians. Likewise, the Riyadh Agreement, which sought to patch a split between the official government and southern separatists supported by the United Arab Emirates, is faltering and in danger of total collapse.

    Nevertheless, just a few weeks ago there were reasons to be cautiously optimistic that, after years of failed negotiations, the Saudi-led coalition's intervention in Yemen may have been winding down. Soleimani's assassination threatens to undo this fragile and halting progress. While Iraq remains the most likely arena for Iranian retaliation against the United States and its partners, Iranian officials also see their relationship with the Houthis as a mechanism for dialing pressure on its opponents up or down while maintaining plausible deniability for any particular attack. Yemen may therefore be a site of Iranian escalation in the coming weeks and months. Indeed, the Houthis expressed support for Iran and promised to respond "promptly and swiftly" to the airstrike. Whatever its form, public retaliation risks upsetting the nascent negotiations over Yemen's forgotten war.

    What Will Happen Now in Yemen?

    Iran is well aware that it would be badly overmatched in a conventional conflict, and is therefore likely to avoid all-out war with the United States. Rather, Iran's leadership is likely to retaliate via the asymmetric resources that Tehran -- in an effort led by Soleimani and the Quds Force -- has successfully cultivated in the region.

    The Houthis have assumed greater importance in Tehran's regional strategy in recent years. Their geographic proximity to Saudi Arabia (and decades-long history of antagonistic relations) provides Iran with a convenient way to antagonize a long-time rival on its southern border and to retaliate horizontally for attacks on its partners in Syria. The relationship confers what Austin Carson calls escalation control : By maintaining plausible deniability, Tehran can signal its displeasure at American policies while giving opponents a face-saving way to avoid further reprisals, thereby dampening the risk of further escalation. Indeed, the recent strike on Saudi Aramco facilities claimed by the Houthis (but likely perpetrated by Iran) is indicative of this dynamic. The attack allowed Tehran to push back against the Trump administration's "maximum pressure" campaign while affording both sides an off-ramp.

    There are a few reasons to expect that Tehran could turn to Yemen as it formulates its response to Soleimani's assassination. While Iran's leadership signaled that its retaliation would end after the missile strikes on bases in Iraq, analysts note that Iran is likely to return to its " forward defense " strategy of working through proxies to push back against what its leadership sees as American aggression in the region.

    Ramping up Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates would allow Iran to signal its displeasure with Washington while attempting to avoid escalation that could lead to a conventional war. This would be consistent with the forward defense strategy and Tehran's past behavior in the region. Additionally, by coalescing domestic support, the American strike may empower hardliners in the Iranian regime who favor regional escalation.

    And although the Houthis certainly receive significant support from Iran in the form of material support, as well as advice and training from Hizballah operatives on the ground, they are not as strategically close to Iran as other proxies like Hizballah are thought to be. As a recent New America report notes, "there is little evidence of firm Iranian command and control. Iran's reported provision of missiles and drones shapes the conflict, but its roots are local and would not disappear were Iran to fully abandon the Houthis." Even U.S. officials have sought to draw a distinction between Iranian and Houthi leadership in recent months.

    Yet there are cautious signs that Houthi leadership could be willing to play along by following Iran's lead in this instance: Just a few days before the assassination of Soleimani, Houthi officials cautioned that targets within Saudi and Emirati territory remain on their list of potential military targets, suggesting a willingness to escalate. And, after the strike, Houthi leadership called for reprisals against the United States.

    But the region's reaction to the Aramco attack -- which saw the Emiratis pursuing quiet talks with Iran and Saudi Arabia negotiating with the Houthis -- also provides reason to hope that regional actors may work together to head off Iranian escalation in Yemen.

    First, the Houthis' relative autonomy from Iranian command-and-control gives them some leeway to resist pressure to escalate, although the failed U.S. strike in Yemen may affect this calculus. Confronted with the choice of either retaliating on Tehran's behalf, at the risk of inciting Saudi re-entry into the war, or resisting the external pressure, thereby preserving the odds of a favorable settlement, the Houthi leadership may decide to bet on the latter.

    Second, while Saudi commentators delighted in the blow to their regional opponent, the Kingdom has publicly cautioned against escalation and reportedly urged the Trump administration to exercise restraint. This signals that the Arab Gulf states may continue in the more cautiously de-escalatory approach that they have taken on Yemen over the past several months, as the United Arab Emirates and Sudan began to withdraw troops from Yemen, Saudi Arabia negotiated with the Houthis, and the tempo of Saudi airstrikes declined precipitously.

    As much as they vehemently oppose Iranian influence in the region, both Saudi and Emirati leadership want to avoid a direct confrontation with Iran, especially after the Trump administration's erratic policies have made it clear that they may not get American backing in such a confrontation. In other words, the factors that contributed to the intervening coalition's de-escalatory tendencies a few months ago are still relevant, even after the escalation in tensions between the United States and Iran.

    The United States is well-positioned to reinforce de-escalatory dynamics in Yemen and support the nascent peace process there. The recent de-escalation in Yemen has shown that pressure works: Although both the Obama and Trump administrations initially supported the Saudi-led intervention, Congressional threats to leverage arms sales and invoke the War Powers Act to end American material support for the intervention in 2019 subdued Abu Dhabi and Riyadh and opened a new juncture in the conflict. The U.S. military ended its provision of aerial refueling to the Saudi-led coalition following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in late 2018, and Secretary of Defense James Mattis reportedly pressured Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to negotiate a political settlement to the war in the lead-up to the Stockholm Agreement. While some of this de-escalatory behavior is attributable to a gradual acknowledgement that this war cannot be won, much can be attributed to U.S. pressure as well. Washington therefore can -- and should -- continue to pressure its regional partners to reach a negotiated agreement. The recent House vote invoking the War Powers Act with regards to Iran -- and supportive statements from a cross-party range of senators -- indicates that Congress is willing to maintain pressure on the administration to avoid escalation in the region, even in the midst of ongoing presidential impeachment proceedings.

    Players in the region will also continue to play a critical role in Yemen in the weeks and months ahead. Saudi and Emirati leaders are tired of the resource and reputational drain of a war that appears increasingly unwinnable, leading to their willingness to draw down the coalition's intervention. With international support, regional actors like Oman and even the Gulf Cooperation Council can act as mediators and guarantors to deter potential spoilers and help implement any agreement.

    Omani Sultan Qaboos bin Said's untimely death this past weekend is another potentially complicating factor here. Under Qaboos, Oman has played an important behind-the-scenes role in the negotiations that led to the nuclear agreement, and brokered negotiations between the Saudi Arabia and the Houthis beginning this past fall. Qaboos cut a unique figure in the region, acting as a mediator who had both the stature and credibility to broker agreements between warring parties in the region. His death and the drama around succession created some doubt about whether anyone would be able to take his place. Yet the new sultan Haitham bin Tariq, who was quickly sworn in, has pledged to continue Qaboos' diplomatic path. Leaders from across the region traveled to Muscat to pay their condolences to the new sultan, cementing the peaceful transition. This continuity is a hopeful sign that Oman can continue to play a productive role as regional mediator.

    Finally, policymakers shouldn't forget about Yemeni actors themselves. While most western analysis of the conflict in Yemen focuses on the third-party intervention, this perspective neglects the indigenous dynamics that led to the outbreak of the civil war in the first place. The focus on external intervention is not without good reason, since regional actors dramatically exacerbated the conflict and prevented an earlier resolution. Yet the civil war in Yemen began over local issues around governance and resource-sharing, and it will not end without solving these underlying issues, thus undercutting potential spoilers .

    Additionally, years of fighting has created a patchwork of splintered militia groups and local governance institutions that will prove very difficult to knit back together into a coherent, functioning polity. A resumption of local fighting could act as an invitation for external actors to intervene again, leading to a resumption of conflict. It is therefore essential for mediation efforts to take these local issues into account.

    Over the past century, Yemen has often been a site for actors in the region to play out their own conflicts. A relapse in fighting in Yemen could provide future grounds for intervention and will act as a driver of regional instability. By contrast, ending the war in Yemen will eliminate a critical source of Iranian leverage in the Gulf.

    Become a Member

    Dr. Alexandra Stark is a senior researcher at New America. She was previously a research fellow at the Middle East Initiative, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University and a USIP-Minerva Peace and Security Scholar.

    Image: Wikicommons (Photo by Fahd Sadi)

    [Jan 27, 2020] The Drone Beats of War The U.S. Vulnerability to Targeted Killings - War on the Rocks by David Barno and Nora Bensahel

    Notable quotes:
    "... But U.S. adversaries were watching closely. As advanced technologies inexorably became cheaper and more widely available, the U.S. monopoly on these capabilities started to erode. By 2016, for example, eight countries other than the United States had conducted armed drone attacks , including Iran, Pakistan, and Nigeria. By 2019, Russia and two other countries joined this exclusive club. And at least one non-state actor has already used an armed drone for a targeted killing. According to one estimate, 27 other countries currently possess armed drones while dozens of states and non-state actors have unarmed drones . These capabilities can now be used against specific individuals even in the absence of large intelligence networks, thanks to the constant streams of personal information flowing from personal phones , fitness trackers , and other devices. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | warontherocks.com
    The fiery explosions from the recent U.S. drone attack that killed Iranian general Qassem Soleimani have sent shock waves reverberating across the Middle East. Those same shocks should now be rippling through the American national security establishment too. The strike against the man widely considered the second-most powerful leader of a long-standing U.S. adversary was unprecedented, and its ultimate effects remain unknown. But regardless of what happens next, one thing is certain: The United States has now made it even more likely that American military and civilian leaders will be targeted by future U.S. foes. As a result, the United States will have to dramatically improve the ways in which it protects those leaders and rethink how it commands its forces on the battlefield.

    Over the last 20 years, the United States has been able to target and kill specific individuals almost anywhere around the world, by matching an increasingly advanced array of precision weapons with a strikingly effective intelligence system. It has employed this capability frequently , especially across the greater Middle East , as it has sought to eliminate senior leaders of the Taliban insurgency or highly placed terrorists directing jihadist cells. And it has been able to pursue this decapitation strategy with impunity, because it has held a monopoly on this bespoke use of force. Not even the most powerful states could attempt the types of complex targeted strikes that the U.S. military and CIA conducted so routinely.

    But U.S. adversaries were watching closely. As advanced technologies inexorably became cheaper and more widely available, the U.S. monopoly on these capabilities started to erode. By 2016, for example, eight countries other than the United States had conducted armed drone attacks , including Iran, Pakistan, and Nigeria. By 2019, Russia and two other countries joined this exclusive club. And at least one non-state actor has already used an armed drone for a targeted killing. According to one estimate, 27 other countries currently possess armed drones while dozens of states and non-state actors have unarmed drones . These capabilities can now be used against specific individuals even in the absence of large intelligence networks, thanks to the constant streams of personal information flowing from personal phones , fitness trackers , and other devices.

    The Soleimani strike has given potential U.S. adversaries every reason to accelerate their efforts to develop similar capabilities. Moreover, these same adversaries can now justify their own future targeted killings by invoking this U.S. precedent. Sooner or later -- and probably sooner -- senior U.S. civilian and military leaders will become vulnerable to the same types of decapitation strikes that the United States has inflicted on others. Enemies will almost certainly attempt to target and kill U.S. officials during any future major war, and such attacks will likely become a part of future irregular conflicts as well. Though such strikes would dangerously escalate any conflict, committed adversaries of the United States may still find that the advantages outweigh the costs, especially if they can plausibly deny responsibility or if the strength of their resolve makes them willing to accept any resulting consequences.

    In the face of this growing threat, what does the United States need to do in order to protect its key military and civilian leaders from a potential decapitation strike? Here are some potential first steps.

    1. Improve personal protection for senior leaders. The president and the vice president are well protected against a myriad of threats by the Secret Service, but levels of protection quickly diminish for those who work beneath them. A number of senior officials, including cabinet officials and the chiefs of the military services, have their own security details, but those focus primarily on providing traditional physical security. They typically offer little if any protection against newly emerging threats such as a targeted missile attack or swarming suicide drones. Most senior military and civilian leaders have no security at all, and they and their family members (like most other Americans) are constantly emitting electronic signals that give away their location. Improving their protection will require rethinking nearly every aspect of their daily lives, especially their extensive vulnerabilities when traveling. For example, the obtrusive motorcades and conspicuous convoys of black SUVs currently favored by many senior U.S. officials may need to be replaced with lower visibility alternatives, to include employing decoys that travel along multiple routes in high risk situations.
    2. Harden key meeting locations, headquarters, and transition points. U.S. adversaries will be particularly interested in targeting locations where numbers of senior military and civilian leaders gather. Many such locations today in the United States and overseas are not sufficiently hardened against attack. The locations of most offices and meeting spaces are either publicly available or easily found, and few are protected from any sort of aerial attack. (At a minimum, senior officials should stop having their photos taken in front of their offices where the room number is clearly visible .) And even hardened command centers usually have key vulnerabilities at entrances and exits, and at exposed transition points between different modes of transportation (such as airfield aprons). Ironically, current U.S. military security measures can unintentionally make leaders more vulnerable in other ways. Shortly after the Soleimani strike, for example, many U.S. military bases imposed stricter security measures at their entry points, including extensive identification checks and reducing the number of open gates. These reflexive measures caused long traffic backups that spilled onto local roads and highways -- which made everyone entering the bases far more vulnerable as they sat in these traffic jams. Any senior leader stuck in those lines would have become a remarkably easy target with no clear avenues of escape.
    3. Exercise wartime succession in the U.S. military chain of command. Combatant commanders and other senior military officers often use high-level wargames to validate key war plans and operational concepts. Yet most exercises and simulations deliberately avoid removing senior commanders from the battlefield, which reinforces the flawed notion that they will always be in charge. This problem also extends to the tactical level, where commanders of brigades, divisions, and corps are rarely assessed as casualties. Exercises at all levels need to regularly include scenarios where one or more senior commanders are killed or incapacitated, to test succession plans and to ensure that subordinates gain valuable leadership experience.
    4. Further decentralize battlefield command and control. The military chain of command necessarily relies upon centralized control, with commanders directing the actions of their subordinates. The U.S. military does decentralize some authority through concepts like mission command , which empower subordinates to make independent decisions about the best ways to achieve the commander's overall intent. Yet as we've written extensively elsewhere , the military's growing culture of compliance and risk aversion already undermines this critical principle, and modern command and control systems make it far too easy for senior commanders to intervene in routine tactical operations. In an environment where senior commanders can be individually targeted and killed, truly decentralized authority becomes absolutely vital -- and even efforts to reinvigorate mission command may no longer be sufficient. One recent article, for example, called for an entirely new, bottom-up approach to command and control that would build resilience and speed by reducing the reliance on a small number of increasingly vulnerable senior leaders.

    The U.S. government needs to acknowledge that its senior leaders are becoming more vulnerable to targeted attacks, and that the Soleimani attack will only accelerate the determination of U.S. adversaries to be able to conduct similar attacks themselves. Yet threats like this are too easily discounted or ignored until it is too late. The U.S. government must recognize the grave dangers of this threat before it occurs. It needs to protect its senior officials more effectively, and ensure that the military chain of command will continue to function effectively after one or more commanders are killed by a targeted strike.

    Become a Member

    Lt. Gen. David W. Barno, U.S. Army (ret.) and Dr. Nora Bensahel are visiting professors of strategic studies at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and senior fellows at the Philip Merrill Center for Strategic Studies. They are also contributing editors at War on the Rocks , where their column appears monthly. Sign up for Barno and Bensahel's Strategic Outpost newsletter to track their articles as well as their public events.

    Editor's Note: Due to an internal error, we published the near-final version of this article rather than the final version. While the differences between the two drafts are minor, we apologize for the error and have fixed our mistake. The final version of this article is now published below.

    I

    [Jan 27, 2020] How an Obscure National Security Council Staffer Changed the Balkans - War on the Rocks

    Jan 27, 2020 | warontherocks.com

    In this episode of Horns of a Dilemma, John Gans, director of communications and research at Perry World House at the University of Pennsylvania, gives a talk at the University of Texas at Austin to discusses his book, White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War . In this talk, Gans focuses on the career and the accomplishments of a single NSC staffer, who ultimately perished during his duties in Bosnia. He uses the story of Nelson Drew as a way to illustrate both the power and the process that exists within the NSC. This talk took place at the University of Texas at Austin and was sponsored by the Clements Center.

    [Jan 26, 2020] The Collapse of Neoliberalism by Ganesh Sitaraman

    Highly recommended!
    From the book The Great Democracy by Ganesh Sitaraman.
    This is a very valuable article, probably the best written in 2019 on the topic, that discusses several important aspects of neoliberalism better then its predecessors...
    Notable quotes:
    "... For some, and especially for those in the millennial generation, the Great Recession and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan started a process of reflection on what the neoliberal era had delivered. ..."
    "... neoliberal policies had already wreaked havoc around the world ..."
    "... "excessively rapid financial and capital market liberalization was probably the single most important cause of the crisis"; he also notes that after the crisis, the International Monetary Fund's policies "exacerbated the downturns." ..."
    "... In study after study, political scientists have shown that the U.S. government is highly responsive to the policy preferences of the wealthiest people, corporations, and trade associations -- and that it is largely unresponsive to the views of ordinary people. The wealthiest people, corporations, and their interest groups participate more in politics, spend more on politics, and lobby governments more. Leading political scientists have declared that the U.S. is no longer best characterized as a democracy or a republic but as an oligarchy -- a government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. ..."
    "... Neoliberalism's war on "society," by pushing toward the privatization and marketization of everything, indirectly facilitates a retreat into tribalism. ..."
    "... neoliberalism's radical individualism has increasingly raised two interlocking problems. First, when taken to an extreme, social fracturing into identity groups can be used to divide people and prevent the creation of a shared civic identity. ..."
    "... Demagogues rely on this fracturing to inflame racial, nationalist, and religious antagonism, which only further fuels the divisions within society. Neoliberalism's war on "society," by pushing toward the privatization and marketization of everything, thus indirectly facilitates a retreat into tribalism that further undermines the preconditions for a free and democratic society. ..."
    "... The second problem is that neoliberals on right and left sometimes use identity as a shield to protect neoliberal policies. As one commentator has argued, "Without the bedrock of class politics, identity politics has become an agenda of inclusionary neoliberalism in which individuals can be accommodated but addressing structural inequalities cannot." What this means is that some neoliberals hold high the banner of inclusiveness on gender and race and thus claim to be progressive reformers, but they then turn a blind eye to systemic changes in politics and the economy. ..."
    "... They thought globalization was inevitable and that ever-expanding trade liberalization was desirable even if the political system never corrected for trade's winners and losers. They were wrong. These aren't minor mistakes. ..."
    "... In spite of these failures, most policymakers did not have a new ideology or different worldview through which to comprehend the problems of this time. So, by and large, the collective response was not to abandon neoliberalism. After the Great Crash of 2008, neoliberals chafed at attempts to push forward aggressive Keynesian spending programs to spark demand. President Barack Obama's advisers shrank the size of the post-crash stimulus package for fear it would seem too large to the neoliberal consensus of the era -- and on top of that, they compromised on its content. ..."
    "... When it came to affirmative, forward-looking policy, the neoliberal framework also remained dominant. ..."
    "... It is worth emphasizing that Obamacare's central feature is a private marketplace in which people can buy their own health care, with subsidies for individuals who are near the poverty line ..."
    "... Fearful of losing their seats, centrists extracted these concessions from progressives. Little good it did them. The president's party almost always loses seats in midterm elections, and this time was no different. For their caution, centrists both lost their seats and gave Americans fewer and worse health care choices. ..."
    "... The Republican Party platform in 2012, for example, called for weaker Wall Street, environmental, and worker safety regulations; lower taxes for corporations and wealthy individuals; and further liberalization of trade. It called for abolishing federal student loans, in addition to privatizing rail, western lands, airport security, and the post office. Republicans also continued their support for cutting health care and retirement security. After 40 years moving in this direction -- and with it failing at every turn -- you might think they would change their views. But Republicans didn't, and many still haven't. ..."
    "... Although neoliberalism had little to offer, in the absence of a new ideological framework, it hung over the Obama presidency -- but now in a new form. Many on the center-left adopted what we might call the "technocratic ideology," a rebranded version of the policy minimalism of the 1990s that replaced minimalism's tactical and pragmatic foundations with scientific ones. The term itself is somewhat oxymoronic, as technocrats seem like the opposite of ideologues. ..."
    "... The technocratic ideology preserves the status quo with a variety of tactics. We might call the first the "complexity canard." ..."
    "... The most frequent uses of this tactic are in sectors that economists have come to dominate -- international trade, antitrust, and financial regulation, for example. The result of this mind-set is that bold, structural reforms are pushed aside and highly technical changes adopted instead. Financial regulation provides a particularly good case, given the 2008 crash and the Great Recession. When it came time to establish a new regulatory regime for the financial sector, there wasn't a massive restructuring, despite the biggest crash in 70 years. ..."
    "... Instead, for the most part, the Dodd-Frank Act was classically technocratic. It kept the sector basically the same, with a few tweaks here and there. There was no attempt to restructure the financial sector completely. ..."
    "... The Volcker Rule, for example, sought to ban banks from proprietary trading. But instead of doing that through a simple, clean breakup rule (like the one enacted under the old Glass-Steagall regime), the Volcker Rule was subject to a multitude of exceptions and carve-outs -- measures that federal regulators were then required to explain and implement with hundreds of pages of technical regulations ..."
    "... Dodd-Frank also illustrates a second tenet of the technocratic ideology: The failures of technocracy can be solved by more technocracy. ..."
    "... Dodd-Frank created the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a government body tasked with what is called macroprudential regulation. What this means is that government regulators are supposed to monitor the entire economy and turn the dials of regulation up and down a little bit to keep the economy from another crash. But ask yourself this: Why would we ever believe they could do such a thing? We know those very same regulators failed to identify, warn about, or act on the 2008 crisis. ..."
    "... In the first stage, neoliberalism gained traction in response to the crises of the 1970s. It is easy to think of Thatcherism and Reaganism as emerging fully formed, springing from Zeus's head like the goddess Athena. ..."
    "... Early leaders were not as ideologically bold as later mythmakers think. In the second stage, neoliberalism became normalized. It persisted beyond the founding personalities -- and, partly because of its longevity in power, grew so dominant that the other side adopted it. ..."
    "... Eventually, however, the neoliberal ideology extended its tentacles into every area of policy and even social life, and in its third stage, overextended. The result in economic policy was the Great Crash of 2008, economic stagnation, and inequality at century-high levels. In foreign policy, it was the disastrous Iraq War and ongoing chaos and uncertainty in the Middle East. ..."
    "... The fourth and final stage is collapse, irrelevance, and a wandering search for the future. With the world in crisis, neoliberalism no longer has even plausible solutions to today's problems. ..."
    "... The solutions of the neoliberal era offer no serious ideas for how to restitch the fraying social fabric, in which people are increasingly tribal, divided, and disconnected from civic community ..."
    Dec 23, 2019 | newrepublic.com
    Welcome to the Decade From Hell , our look back at an arbitrary 10-year period that began with a great outpouring of hope and ended in a cavalcade of despair. The long-dominant ideology brought us forever wars, the Great Recession, and extreme inequality. Good riddance.

    With the 2008 financial crash and the Great Recession, the ideology of neoliberalism lost its force. The approach to politics, global trade, and social philosophy that defined an era led not to never-ending prosperity but utter disaster. "Laissez-faire is finished," declared French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan admitted in testimony before Congress that his ideology was flawed. In an extraordinary statement, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd declared that the crash "called into question the prevailing neoliberal economic orthodoxy of the past 30 years -- the orthodoxy that has underpinned the national and global regulatory frameworks that have so spectacularly failed to prevent the economic mayhem which has been visited upon us."

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 25, 2020] You Think Americans Really Give A Fk About Ukraine - Pompeo Flips Out On NPR Reporter

    How tank maintenance mechanical engineer and military contractor who got into congress pretending to belong to tea party can became the Secretary of state? Only in America ;-)
    Jan 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
    "You Think Americans Really Give A F**k About Ukraine?" - Pompeo Flips Out On NPR Reporter by Tyler Durden Sat, 01/25/2020 - 15:05 0 SHARES

    Democrats' impeachment proceedings were completely overshadowed this week by the panic over the Wuhan coronavirus. Still, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is clearly tired of having his character repeatedly impugned by the Dems and the press claiming he hung one of his ambassadors out to dry after she purportedly resisted the administration's attempts to pressure Ukraine.

    That frustration came to a head this week when, during a moment of pique, Secretary Pompeo launched into a rant and swore at NPR reporter Mary Louise Kelly after she wheedled him about whether he had taken concrete steps to protect former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

    House Democrats last week released a trove of messages between Giuliani associate Lev Parnas and Connecticut Republican Congressional candidate Robert Hyde. The messages suggested that Yovanovitch might have been under surveillance before President Trump recalled her to Washington. One of the messages seems to reference a shadowy character able to "help" with Yovanovitch for "a price."

    Kelly recounted the incident to her listeners (she is the host of "All Things Considered")

    After Kelly asked Pompeo to specify exactly what he had done or said to defend Yovanovitch, whom Pompeo's boss President Trump fired last year, Pompeo simply insisted that he had "done what's right" with regard to Yovanovitch, while becoming visibly annoyed.

    Once the interview was over, Pompeo glared at Kelly for a minute, then left the room, telling an aide to bring Kelly into another room at the State Department without her recorder, so they could have more privacy.

    Once inside, Pompeo launched into what Kelly described as an "expletive-laden rant", repeatedly using the "f-word." Pompeo complained about the questions about Ukraine, arguing that the interview was supposed to be about Iran.

    "Do you think Americans give a f--k about Ukraine?" Pompeo allegedly said.

    The outburst was followed by a ridiculous stunt: one of Pompeo's staffers pulled out a blank map and asked the reporter to identify Ukraine, which she did.

    "People will hear about this," Pompeo vaguely warned.

    Ironically, Pompeo is planning to travel to Kiev this week.

    The questions came after Michael McKinley, a former senior adviser to Pompeo, told Congress that he resigned after the secretary apparently ignored his pleas for the department to show some support for Yovanovitch.

    Listen to the interview here. A transcript can be found here .

    NPR's Mary Louise Kelly says the following happened after the interview in which she asked some tough questions to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. pic.twitter.com/cRTb71fZvX

    -- Daniel Dale (@ddale8) January 24, 2020

    Last we checked, the team at NPR is waiting on Pompeo to apologize

    Mike Pompeo Does in fact owe Yovanovitch an apology https://t.co/imazFrG3Q6

    -- Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) January 25, 2020

    We suspect they might be waiting a while...

    CarteroAtómico , 5 minutes ago link

    He's right. American don't give a **** about Ukraine. But why did Clinton and Obama and now Trump and Pompeo? Why are they spending our money there instead of either taking care of problems here or paying off the national debt?

    MOLONAABE , 8 minutes ago link

    The best thing that could happen to the Ukraine is for Russia to take it back.. they would clean up that train wreck of a country... they've proven themselves as to being the scumbags they are gypsies and grifters...

    Goodsport 1945 , 11 minutes ago link

    The Bidens do, so there must be $omething very attractive over there.

    carman , 13 minutes ago link

    He's right. Nobody cares about Ukraine. NPR= National Propaganda Radio.

    CarteroAtómico , 1 minute ago link

    But why are Trump and Pompeo continuing the policy of Obama and Clinton there? Remember Trump said he would pay off the national debt in 8 years? How about stop spending our money on the War Party's foreign interventions for a starter.

    kindasketchy , 17 minutes ago link

    I wish the same level of questioning was directed at Pompeo regarding Syria and Iran. You may like his response because of the particular topic, but it doesn't change the fact that he's a psycho neo-con fucktard who should be shot for treason.

    Collectivism Killz , 21 minutes ago link

    Truth. Most Americans know nothing about Ukraine, some just know orange man bad and orange man bad for Ukr

    roach clipper , 21 minutes ago link

    I despise fkn traitor Pompus from USMA (traitor training school) but in this case he doesn't owe yovanobitch anything.

    morefunthanrum , 27 minutes ago link

    People care about a secretary of state who supports his diplomats...about a president whose not a lying conniving spoiled piece of ****

    roach clipper , 22 minutes ago link

    There are NO diplomats in the Dept. of State, otherwise we wouldn't have been at war all century.

    [Jan 25, 2020] Pompeo Crumbles Under Pressure

    Jan 25, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    U.S. Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo participates in a press conference with U.S. President Donald J. Trump during the NATO Foreign Ministerial in Brussels on July 12, 2018. (State Department photo/ Public Domain)

    January 24, 2020

    |

    9:21 pm

    Daniel Larison Mike Pompeo has proven to be a blowhard and a bully in his role as Secretary of State, and nothing seems to bother him more than challenging questions from professional journalists. All of those flaws and more were on display during and after his interview with NPR's Mary Louise Kelly today. After abruptly ending the interview when pressed on his failure to defend members of the Foreign Service, Pompeo then threw a fit and berated the reporter who asked him the questions:

    Immediately after the questions on Ukraine, the interview concluded. Pompeo stood, leaned in and silently glared at Kelly for several seconds before leaving the room.

    A few moments later, an aide asked Kelly to follow her into Pompeo's private living room at the State Department without a recorder. The aide did not say the ensuing exchange would be off the record.

    Inside the room, Pompeo shouted his displeasure at being questioned about Ukraine. He used repeated expletives, according to Kelly, and asked, "Do you think Americans care about Ukraine?" He then said, "People will hear about this."

    People are certainly hearing about it, and their unanimous judgment is that it confirms Pompeo's reputation as an obnoxious, thin-skinned excuse for a Secretary of State. Kelly's questions were all reasonable and fair, but Pompeo is not used to being pressed so hard to give real answers. We have seen his short temper and condescension before when other journalists have asked him tough questions, and he seems particularly annoyed when the journalists calling him out are women. Pompeo probably has the worst working relationship with the press of any Secretary of State in decades, and this episode will make it worse.

    When Pompeo realized he wouldn't be able to get away with his standard set of vacuous talking points and lies, he ended the conversation. The entire interview is worth reading to appreciate how poorly Pompeo performs when he is forced to explain how failing administration policies are "working." When pressed on his untrue claims that "maximum pressure" on Iran is "working," all that he could do was repeat himself robotically:

    QUESTION: My question, again: How do you stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon?

    SECRETARY POMPEO: We'll stop them.

    QUESTION: How?

    SECRETARY POMPEO: We'll stop them.

    QUESTION: Sanctions?

    SECRETARY POMPEO: We'll stop them.

    Kelly refused to accept pat, meaningless responses, and she kept insisting that Pompeo provide something, anything, to back up his assertions. This is how administration officials should always be interviewed, and it is no surprise that the Secretary of State couldn't handle being challenged to back up his claims. The questions wouldn't have been that hard to answer if Pompeo were willing to be honest or the least bit humble, but that isn't how he operates. He sees every interview as an opportunity to snow the interviewer under with nonsense and to score points with the president, and giving honest answers would get in the way of both.

    The section at the end concerned Pompeo's failure to stand up for State Department officials, especially Marie Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine. Since Pompeo's support for these officials has been abysmal, there was nothing substantive that he could say about it and tried to filibuster his way out of it. To her credit, Kelly was persistent in trying to pin him down and make him address the issue. He had every chance to explain himself, but instead he fell back on defensive denials that persuade no one:

    QUESTION: Sir, respectfully, where have you defended Marie Yovanovitch?

    SECRETARY POMPEO: I've defended every single person on this team. I've done what's right for every single person on this team.

    QUESTION: Can you point me toward your remarks where you have defended Marie Yovanovitch?

    SECRETARY POMPEO: I've said all I'm going to say today. Thank you. Thanks for the repeated opportunity to do so; I appreciate that.

    Pompeo could have defended Yovanovitch and other officials that have come under attack, but to do that would be to risk Trump's ire and it would require him to show the slightest bit of courage. In the end, his "swagger" is all talk and his rhetoric about supporting his "team" at State is meaningless. Pompeo made a fool of himself in this interview, and it is perfectly in keeping with his angry, brittle personality that he took out his frustrations by yelling at the reporter who exposed him as the vacuous blowhard that he is.

    about the author Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter . email

    Clyde Schechter • 17 hours ago
    Wow! She did a great interview there. Really a model for what all reporters should be doing.

    Thanks for bringing this to light, Mr. Larison.

    SFBay1949 • 16 hours ago • edited
    I don't suppose you'll be interviewing Pompeo any time soon Daniel. I very much appreciate your being so honest about what you see and hear.
    K squared • 14 hours ago
    Left out was the part when pompeo had one of his minions bring out a blank world map and challenged her to find the Ukraine which she immediately did - i wonder if trump could find it
    FL_Cottonmouth K squared • 7 hours ago
    That's hilarious.
    John Mann K squared • 2 hours ago
    Apparently, Pompeo has suggested Kelly had pointed to Bangladesh, not Ukraine, on the map, and commented "It is worth noting that Bangladesh is NOT Ukraine."

    I don't suppose we are ever likely to see conclusive evidence that will establish for certain where she pointed.

    It's probably just a matter of looking at their respective records of lying, cheating, and stealing, and making a guess based on that.

    stephen pickard • 5 hours ago
    My God, can he get any worse. I suppose so since his boss always falls to a lower level. There is no bottom. Just admit that everyday brings a new low. Only thing surprising is that we get surprised at their despicable behavior.
    Jeff Dickey stephen pickard • 3 hours ago
    That's the problem with Trump henchmen: they can always get worse. There is no bottom, for to have a limit below which the henchmen will not go would embarrass the Capo di Tutti Capi for blowing through it on the way down. Henchmen have bills to pay, too, you know, just like people.
    stephen pickard Jeff Dickey • an hour ago
    As I said awhile back, lies are debts that must be repaid.
    FL_Cottonmouth • 4 hours ago
    Looming over her and leering down at her? What a creep!
    Jonah • 3 hours ago
    I'm sorry, is the "conservative" in the name of this blog some kind of parody? You all sure sound like liberal democrats. Never been here before, won't be coming back.

    Oh, and you forgot about the part where Pompeo came ready to discuss one topic, which was agreed to beforehand, and the interviewer transitioned to a new topic. And the way she did so was to ask Pompeo if he owed Marie Yanokovich an apology. Yes, riveting journalism devoid of partisan bias. Lol! But it was Pompeo. Right.

    Jonah Jonah • 3 hours ago
    To the person who down voted me, I don't care. Honestly I'm glad you butthurt whiners have a place to share your hurt feelings. Maybe if you're lucky Joe Biden will be President soon and you can all rejoice that "decency" is back, or something.
    SFBay1949 Jonah • 3 hours ago
    Apparently Pompeo can only keep so many talking points in his head. One topic only. Are we to believe the Secretary of State can't expound on more than a single subject? It must be true, otherwise he wouldn't go around insisting he will only talk about one subject during an interview. I expect he won't be getting many invites for interviews outside of FOX. Just as well, he's a bag of hot air anyway.
    Sandra Jonah • 2 hours ago
    I think there are many conservatives writing and commenting on this site. But perhaps you are confusing "conservative" with "republican". There is little conservatism left in the republican party.
    Awake and Uttering a Song Jonah • an hour ago
    "...Pompeo came ready to discuss one topic, which was agreed to beforehand, and the interviewer transitioned to a new topic."

    Oh, the humanity!

    Secretary Pompous couldn't just give a little chuckle and say something like "Now, now. You know we agreed to talk only on one topic, so let's get together on another day to discuss other topics". ?

    Just another guy in power who is too full of himself.

    sglover Jonah • 20 minutes ago
    It's terrible when the citizenry goes off-script, isn't it?
    ChrisD • 2 hours ago
    Pompeo just tweeted this statement about the NPR interview::

    Personan0ngrata • an hour ago
    QUESTION: My question, again: How do you stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon?

    Italicized/bold text was excerpted from the website www.dni.gov within a US National Intelligence Estimate published in Nov2007 titled:

    Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities

    ANSWER: Key Judgements

    A. We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program; we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons. We judge with high confidence that the halt, and Tehran's announcement of its decision to suspend its declared uranium enrichment program and sign an Additional Protocol to its Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Safeguards Agreement, was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure resulting from exposure of Iran's previously undeclared nuclear work.

    https://www.dni.gov/files/d...

    Italicized/bold text was excerpted from the website fas.org a report published (updated 20Dec2019) by the Congressional Research Service titled:

    Page 53, 2nd paragraph -

    Iran's Nuclear Program: Status

    Director of National Intelligence Coats reiterated the last sentence in May 2017 testimony.330He testified in January 2019 that the U.S. intelligence community "continue[s] to assess that Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear weapons-development activities we judge necessary to produce a nuclear device." Subsequent statements from U.S. officials indicate that Iran has not resumed its nuclear weapons program. According to an August 2019 State Department report, the "U.S. Intelligence Community assesses that Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear weapons development activities judged necessary to produce a nuclear device." Any decision to produce nuclear weapons "will be made by the Supreme Leader," Clapper stated in April 2013.

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuk...

    [Jan 25, 2020] Aftermath: The Iran War After the Soleimani Assassination by Jim Kavanagh

    Notable quotes:
    "... It always goes to Iran ..."
    "... But even I was flabbergasted by what Trump did. Absolutely gobsmacked. Killing Qassem Soleimani, Iranian general, leader of the Quds forces, and the most respected military leader in the Middle East? And ..."
    "... The first thing, the thing that is so sad and so infuriating and so centrally symptomatic of everything wrong with American political culture, is that, with painfully few exceptions, Americans have no idea of what their government has done. They have no idea who Qassem Soleimani was, what he has accomplished, the web of relationships, action, and respect he has built, what his assassination means and will bring. The last person who has any clue about this, of course, is Donald Trump, who called Soleimani " a total monster ." His act of killing Soleimani is the apotheosis of the abysmal, arrogant ignorance of U.S. political culture. ..."
    "... Washington Post ..."
    "... Whatever their elected governments say, we'll will keep our army in Syria to "take the oil," and in Iraq to well, to do whatever the hell we want. ..."
    "... Sure, we make the rules and you follow our orders. ..."
    "... with nobody even noticing ..."
    "... Christian Science Monitor ..."
    "... under Trump's leadership ..."
    Jan 24, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    "Praise be to God, who made our enemies fools."

    – Ayatollah Khamenei

    The Killing

    I've been writing and speaking for months about the looming danger of war with Iran, often to considerable skepticism.

    In June, in an essay entitled " Eve of Destruction: Iran Strikes Back ," after the U.S. initiated its "maximum pressure" blockade of Iranian oil exports, I pointed out that "Iran considers that it is already at war," and that the downing of the U.S. drone was a sign that "Iran is calling the U.S. bluff on escalation dominance."

    In an October essay , I pointed out that Trump's last-minute calling off of the U.S. attack on Iran in June, his demurral again after the Houthi attack on Saudi oil facilities, and his announced withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria were seen as "catastrophic" and "a big win for Iran" by the Iran hawks in Israel and America whose efforts New York Times (NYT) detailed in an important article, " The Secret History of the Push to Strike Iran ." I said, with emphasis, " It always goes to Iran ," and underlined that Trump's restraint was particularly galling to hard-line zionist Republican Senators, and might have opened a path to impeachment. I cited the reported statement of a "veteran political consultant" that "The price of [Lindsey] Graham's support would be an eventual military strike on Iran."

    And in the middle of December, I went way out on a limb, in an essay suggesting a possible relation between preparations for war in Iran and the impeachment process. I pointed out that the strategic balance of forces between Israel and Iran had reached the point where Israel thinks it's "necessary to take Iran down now ," in "the next six months," before the Iranian-supported Axis of Resistance accrues even more power. I speculated that the need to have a more reliable and internationally-respected U.S. President fronting a conflict with Iran might be the unseen reason -- behind the flimsy Articles of Impeachment -- that explains why Pelosi and Schumer "find it so urgent to replace Trump before the election and why they think they can succeed in doing that."

    So, I was the guy chicken-littling about impending war with Iran.

    But even I was flabbergasted by what Trump did. Absolutely gobsmacked. Killing Qassem Soleimani, Iranian general, leader of the Quds forces, and the most respected military leader in the Middle East? And Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, Iraqi commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) unit, Kataib Hezbollah? Did not see that coming. Rage. Fear. Sadness. Anxiety. A few days just to register that it really happened. To see the millions of people bearing witness to it. Yes, that happened.

    Then there was the anxious anticipation about the Iranian response, which came surprisingly quickly, and with admirable military and political precision, avoiding a large-scale war in the region, for the moment.

    That was the week that was.

    But, as the man said: "It ain't over 'til it's over." And it ain't over. Recognizing the radical uncertainty of the world we now live in, and recognizing that its future will be determined by actors and actions far away from the American leftist commentariat, here's what I need to say about the war we are now in.

    The first thing, the thing that is so sad and so infuriating and so centrally symptomatic of everything wrong with American political culture, is that, with painfully few exceptions, Americans have no idea of what their government has done. They have no idea who Qassem Soleimani was, what he has accomplished, the web of relationships, action, and respect he has built, what his assassination means and will bring. The last person who has any clue about this, of course, is Donald Trump, who called Soleimani " a total monster ." His act of killing Soleimani is the apotheosis of the abysmal, arrogant ignorance of U.S. political culture.

    It's virtually impossible to explain to Americans because there is no one of comparable stature in the U.S. or in the West today. As Iran cleric Shahab Mohadi said , when talking about what a "proportional response" might be: "[W]ho should we consider to take out in the context of America? 'Think about it. Are we supposed to take out Spider-Man and SpongeBob? 'All of their heroes are cartoon characters -- they're all fictional." Trump? Lebanese Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah said what many throughout the world familiar with both of them would agree with: "the shoe of Qassem Soleimani is worth the head of Trump and all American leaders."

    To understand the respect Soleimani has earned, not only in Iran (where his popularity was around 80% ) but throughout the region and across political and sectarian lines, you have to know how he led and organized the forces that helped save Christians , Kurds , Yazidis and others from being slaughtered by ISIS, while Barack Obama and John Kerry were still " watching " ISIS advance and using it as a tool to "manage" their war against Assad.

    In an informative interview with Aaron Maté, Former Marine Intelligence Officer and weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, explains how Soleimani is honored in Iraq for organizing the resistance that saved Baghdad from being overrun by ISIS -- and the same could be said of Syria, Damascus, or Ebril:

    He's a legend in Iran, in Iraq, and in Syria. And anywhere where, frankly speaking, he's operated, the people he's worked with view him as one of the greatest leaders, thinkers, most humane men of all time. I know in America we demonize him as a terrorist but the fact is he wasn't, and neither is Mr. Mohandes.

    When ISIS [was] driving down on the city of Baghdad, the U.S. armed and trained Iraqi Army had literally thrown down their weapons and ran away, and there was nothing standing between ISIS and Baghdad

    [Soleimani] came in from Iran and led the creation of the PMF [Popular Mobilization Forces] as a viable fighting force and then motivated them to confront Isis in ferocious hand-to-hand combat in villages and towns outside of Baghdad, driving Isis back and stabilizing the situation that allowed the United States to come in and get involved in the Isis fight. But if it weren't for Qassem Soleimani and Mohandes and Kataib Hezbollah, Baghdad might have had the black flag of ISIS flying over it. So the Iraqi people haven't forgotten who stood up and defended Baghdad from the scourge of ISIS.

    So, to understand Soleimani in Western terms, you'd have to evoke someone like World War II Eisenhower (or Marshall Zhukov, but that gets another blank stare from Americans.) Think I'm exaggerating? Take it from the family of the Shah :

    Beyond his leadership of the fight against ISIS, you also have to understand Soleimani's strategic acumen in building the Axis of Resistance -- the network of armed local groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as the PMF in Iraq, that Soleimani helped organize and provide with growing military capability. Soleimani meant standing up; he helped people throughout the region stand up to the shit the Americans, Israelis, and Saudis were constantly dumping on them

    More apt than Eisenhower and De Gaulle, in world-historical terms, try something like Saladin meets Che. What a tragedy, and travesty, it is that legend-in-his-own-mind Donald Trump killed this man.

    Dressed to Kill

    But it is not just Trump, and not just the assassination of Soleimani, that we should focus on. These are actors and events within an ongoing conflict with Iran, which was ratcheted up when the U.S. renounced the nuclear deal (JCPOA – Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) and instituted a "maximum pressure" campaign of economic and financial sanctions on Iran and third countries, designed to drive Iran's oil exports to zero.

    The purpose of this blockade is to create enough social misery to force Iran into compliance, or provoke Iran into military action that would elicit a "justifiable" full-scale, regime-change -- actually state-destroying -- military attack on the country.

    From its inception, Iran has correctly understood this blockade as an act of war, and has rightfully expressed its determination to fight back. Though it does not want a wider war, and has so far carefully calibrated its actions to avoid making it necessary, Iran will fight back however it deems necessary.

    The powers-that-be in Iran and the U.S. know they are at war, and that the Soleimani assassination ratcheted that state of war up another significant notch; only Panglossian American pundits think the "w" state is yet to be avoided. Sorry, but the United States drone-bombed an Iranian state official accompanied by an Iraqi state official, in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi Prime Minister, on a conflict-resolution mission requested by Donald Trump himself. In anybody's book, that is an act of war -- and extraordinary treachery, even in wartime, the equivalent of shooting someone who came to parley under a white flag.

    Indeed, we now know that the assassination of Soleimani was only one of two known assassination attempts against senior Iranian officers that day. There was also an unsuccessful strike targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, another key commander in Iran's Quds Force who has been active in Yemen. According to the Washington Post , this marked a "departure for the Pentagon's mission in Yemen, which has sought to avoid direct involvement" or make "any publicly acknowledged attacks on Houthi or Iranian leaders in Yemen."

    Of course, because it's known as "the world's worst humanitarian crisis," the Pentagon wants to avoid "publicly" bloodying its hands in the Saudi war in Yemen. Through two presidential administrations, it has been trying to minimize attention to its indispensable support of, and presence in, Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen with drone strikes , special forces operations , refueling of aircraft, and intelligence and targeting. It's such a nasty business that even the U.S. Congress passed a bipartisan resolution to end U.S. military involvement in that war, which was vetoed by Trump.

    According to the ethic and logic of American exceptionalism, Iran is forbidden from helping the Houthis, but the U.S. is allowed to assassinate their advisors and help the Saudis bomb the crap out of them.

    So, the Trump administration is clearly engaged in an organized campaign to take out senior Iranian leaders, part of what it considers a war against Iran. In this war, the Trump administration no longer pretends to give a damn about any fig leaf of law or ethics. Nobody takes seriously the phony "imminence" excuse for killing Soleimani, which even Trump say s "doesn't matter," or the "bloody hands" justification, which could apply to any military commander. And let's not forget: Soleimani was " talking about bad stuff ."

    The U.S. is demonstrating outright contempt for any framework of respectful international relations, let alone international law. National sovereignty? Democracy? Whatever their elected governments say, we'll will keep our army in Syria to "take the oil," and in Iraq to well, to do whatever the hell we want. "Rules-based international order"? Sure, we make the rules and you follow our orders.

    The U.S.'s determination to stay in Iraq, in defiance of the explicit, unequivocal demand of the friendly democratic government that the U.S. itself supposedly invaded the country to install, is particularly significant. It draws the circle nicely. It demonstrates that the Iraq war isn't over. Because it, and the wars in Libya and Syria, and the war that's ratcheting up against Iran are all the same war that the U.S. has been waging in the Middle East since 2003. In the end is the beginning, and all that.

    We're now in the endgame of the serial offensive that Wesley Clark described in 2007, starting with Iraq and "finishing off" with Iran. Since the U.S. has attacked, weakened, divided, or destroyed every other un-coopted polity in the region (Iraq, Syria, Libya) that could pose any serious resistance to the predations of U.S. imperialism and Israel colonialism, it has fallen to Iran to be the last and best source of material and military support which allows that resistance to persist.

    And Iran has taken up the task, through the work of the Quds Force under leaders like Soleimani and Shahlai, the work of building a new Axis of Resistance with the capacity to resist the dictates of Israel and the U.S. throughout the region. It's work that is part of a war and will result in casualties among U.S. and U.S.-allied forces and damage to their "interests."

    What the U.S. (and its wards, Israel and Saudi Arabia) fears most is precisely the kind of material, technical, and combat support and training that allows the Houthis to beat back the Saudis and Americans in Yemen, and retaliate with stunningly accurate blows on crucial oil facilities in Saudi Arabia itself. The same kind of help that Soleimani gave to the armed forces of Syria and the PMF in Iraq to prevent those countries from being overrun and torn apart by the U.S. army and its sponsored jihadis, and to Hezbollah in Lebanon to deter Israel from demolishing and dividing that country at will.

    It's that one big "endless" war that's been waged by every president since 2003, which American politicians and pundits have been scratching their heads and squeezing their brains to figure out how to explain, justify (if it's their party's President in charge), denounce (if it's the other party's POTUS), or just bemoan as "senseless." But to the neocons who are driving it and their victims -- it makes perfect sense and is understood to have been largely a success. Only the befuddled U.S. media and the deliberately-deceived U.S. public think it's "senseless," and remain enmired in the cock-up theory of U.S. foreign policy, which is a blindfold we had better shed before being led to the next very big slaughter.

    The one big war makes perfect sense when one understands that the United States has thoroughly internalized Israel's interests as its own. That this conflation has been successfully driven by a particular neocon faction, and that it is excessive, unnecessary and perhaps disruptive to other effective U.S. imperial possibilities, is demonstrated precisely by the constant plaint from non-neocon, including imperialist, quarters that it's all so "senseless."

    The result is that the primary object of U.S. policy (its internalized zionist imperative) in this war is to enforce that Israel must be able, without any threat of serious retaliation, to carry out any military attack on any country in the region at any time, to seize any territory and resources (especially water) it needs, and, of course, to impose any level of colonial violence against Palestinians -- from home demolitions, to siege and sniper killings (Gaza), to de jure as well as de facto apartheid and eventual further mass expulsions, if deems necessary.

    That has required, above all, removing -- by co-option, regime change, or chaotogenic sectarian warfare and state destruction -- any strong central governments that have provided political, diplomatic, financial, material, and military support for the Palestinian resistance to Israeli colonialism. Iran is the last of those, has been growing in strength and influence, and is therefore the next mandatory target.

    For all the talk of "Iranian proxies," I'd say, if anything, that the U.S., with its internalized zionist imperative, is effectively acting as Israel's proxy.

    It's also important, I think, to clarify the role of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in this policy. KSA is absolutely a very important player in this project, which has been consistent with its interests. But its (and its oil's) influence on the U.S. is subsidiary to Israel's, and depends entirely on KSA's complicity with the Israeli agenda. The U.S. political establishment is not overwhelmingly committed to Saudi/Wahhabi policy imperatives -- as a matter, they think, of virtue -- as they are to Israeli/Zionist ones. It is inconceivable that a U.S. Vice-President would declare "I am a Wahhabi," or a U.S. President say "I would personally grab a rifle, get in a ditch, and fight and die" for Saudi Arabia -- with nobody even noticing . The U.S. will turn on a dime against KSA if Israel wants it; the reverse would never happen. We have to confront the primary driver of this policy if we are to defeat it, and too many otherwise superb analysts, like Craig Murray, are mistaken and diversionary, I think, in saying things like the assassination of Soleimani and the drive for war on Iran represent the U.S. " doubling down on its Saudi allegiance ." So, sure, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Batman and Robin.

    Iran has quite clearly seen and understood what's unfolding, and has prepared itself for the finale that is coming its way.

    The final offensive against Iran was supposed to follow the definitive destruction of the Syrian Baathist state, but that project was interrupted (though not yet abandoned) by the intervention of Syria's allies, Russia and Iran -- the latter precisely via the work of Soleimani and the Quds Force.

    Current radical actions like the two assassination strikes against Iranian Quds Force commanders signal the Trump administration jumping right to the endgame, as that neocon hawks have been " agitating for ." The idea -- borrowed, perhaps from Israel's campaign of assassinating Iranian scientists -- is that killing off the key leaders who have supplied and trained the Iranian-allied networks of resistance throughout the region will hobble any strike from those networks if/when the direct attack on Iran comes.

    Per Patrick Lawrence , the Soleimani assassination "was neither defensive nor retaliatory: It reflected the planning of the administration's Iran hawks, who were merely awaiting the right occasion to take their next, most daring step toward dragging the U.S. into war with Iran." It means that war is on and it will get worse fast.

    It is crucial to understand that Iran is not going to passively submit to any such bullying. It will not be scared off by some "bloody nose" strike, followed by chest-thumping from Trump, Netanyahu, or Hillary about how they will " obliterate " Iran. Iran knows all that. It also knows, as I've said before , how little damage -- especially in terms of casualties -- Israel and the U.S. can take. It will strike back. In ways that will be calibrated as much as possible to avoid a larger war, but it will strike back.

    Iran's strike on Ain al-Asad base in Iraq was a case in point. It was preceded by a warning through Iraq that did not specify the target but allowed U.S. personnel in the country to hunker down. It also demonstrated deadly precision and determination, hitting specific buildings where U.S. troops work, and, we now know, causing at least eleven acknowledged casualties.

    Those casualties were minor, but you can bet they would have been the excuse for a large-scale attack, if the U.S. had been entirely unafraid of the response. In fact, Trump did launch that attack over the downing of a single unmanned drone -- and Pompeo and the neocon crew, including Republican Senators, were " stunned " that he called it off in literally the last ten minutes . It's to the eternal shame of what's called the "left" in this country that we may have Tucker Carlson to thank for Trump's bouts of restraint.

    There Will Be Blood

    But this is going to get worse, Pompeo is now threatening Iran's leaders that "any attacks by them, or their proxies of any identity, that harm Americans, our allies, or our interests will be answered with a decisive U.S. response." Since Iran has ties of some kind with most armed groups in the region and the U.S. decides what "proxy" and "interests" means, that means that any act of resistance to the U.S., Israel, or other "ally" by anybody -- including, for example, the Iraqi PMF forces who are likely to retaliate against the U.S. for killing their leader -- will be an excuse for attacking Iran. Any anything. Call it an omnibus threat.

    The groundwork for a final aggressive push against Iran began back in June, 2017, when, under then-Director Pompeo, the CIA set up a stand-alone Iran Mission Center . That Center replaced a group of "Iran specialists who had no special focus on regime change in Iran," because "Trump's people wanted a much more focused and belligerent group." The purpose of this -- as of any -- Mission Center was to "elevate" the country as a target and "bring to bear the range of the agency's capabilities, including covert action" against Iran. This one is especially concerned with Iran's "increased capacity to deliver missile systems" to Hezbollah or the Houthis that could be used against Israel or Saudi Arabia, and Iran's increased strength among the Shia militia forces in Iraq. The Mission Center is headed by Michael D'Andrea, who is perceived as having an "aggressive stance toward Iran." D'Andrea, known as "the undertaker" and " Ayatollah Mike ," is himself a convert to Islam, and notorious for his "central role in the agency's torture and targeted killing programs."

    This was followed in December, 2017, by the signing of a pact with Israel "to take on Iran," which took place, according to Israeli television, at a "secret" meeting at the White House. This pact was designed to coordinate "steps on the ground" against "Tehran and its proxies." The biggest threats: "Iran's ballistic missile program and its efforts to build accurate missile systems in Syria and Lebanon," and its activity in Syria and support for Hezbollah. The Israelis considered that these secret "dramatic understandings" would have "far greater impact" on Israel than Trump's more public and notorious recognition of Jerusalem as Israeli's capital.

    The Iran Mission Center is a war room. The pact with Israel is a war pact.

    The U.S. and Israeli governments are out to "take on" Iran. Their major concerns, repeated everywhere, are Iran's growing military power, which underlies its growing political influence -- specifically its precision ballistic missile and drone capabilities, which it is sharing with its allies throughout the region, and its organization of those armed resistance allies, which is labelled "Iranian aggression."

    These developments must be stopped because they provide Iran and other actors the ability to inflict serious damage on Israel. They create the unacceptable situation where Israel cannot attack anything it wants without fear of retaliation. For some time, Israel has been reluctant to take on Hezbollah in Lebanon, having already been driven back by them once because the Israelis couldn't take the casualties in the field. Now Israel has to worry about an even more battle-hardened Hezbollah, other well-trained and supplied armed groups, and those damn precision missiles . One cannot overstress how important those are, and how adamant the U.S. and Israel are that Iran get rid of them. As another Revolutionary Guard commander says : "Iran has encircled Israel from all four sides if only one missile hits the occupied lands, Israeli airports will be filled with people trying to run away from the country."

    This campaign is overseen in the U.S. by the likes of " praying for war with Iran " Christian Zionists Mike Pompeo and Mike Pence, who together " urged " Trump to approve the killing of Soleimani. Pence, whom the Democrats are trying to make President, is associated with Christians United For Israel (CUFI), which paid for his and his wife's pilgrimage to Israel in 2014, and is run by lunatic televangelist John Hagee, whom even John McCain couldn't stomach. Pompeo, characterized as the "brainchild" of the assassination, thinks Trump was sent by God to save Israel from Iran. (Patrick Lawrence argues the not-implausible case that Pompeo and Defense Secretary Esper ordered the assassination and stuck Trump with it.) No Zionists are more fanatical than Christian Zionists. These guys are not going to stop.

    And Iran is not going to surrender. Iran is no longer afraid of the escalation dominance game. Do not be fooled by peace-loving illusions -- propagated mainly now by mealy-mouthed European and Democratic politicians -- that Iran will return to what's described as "unconditional" negotiations, which really means negotiating under the absolutely unacceptable condition of economic blockade, until the U.S. gets what it wants. Not gonna happen. Iran's absolutely correct condition for any negotiation with the U.S. is that the U.S. return to the JCPOA and lift all sanctions.

    Also not gonna happen, though any real peace-loving Democratic candidate would specifically and unequivocally commit to doing just that if elected. The phony peace-loving poodles of Britain, France, and Germany (the EU3) have already cast their lot with the aggressive American policy, triggering a dispute mechanism that will almost certainly result in a " snapback " of full UN sanctions on Iran within 65 days, and destroy the JCPOA once and for all. Because, they, too, know Iran's nuclear weapons program is a fake issue and have "always searched for ways to put more restrictions on Iran, especially on its ballistic missile program." Israel can have all the nuclear weapons it wants, but Iran must give up those conventional ballistic missiles. Cannot overstate their importance.

    Iran is not going to submit to any of this. The only way Iran is going to part with its ballistic missiles is by using them. The EU3 maneuver will not only end the JCPOA, it may drive Iran out of the Nuclear Weapons Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). As Moon of Alabama says, the EU3 gambit is "not designed to reach an agreement but to lead to a deeper conflict" and ratchet the war up yet another notch. The Trump administration and its European allies are -- as FDR did to Japan -- imposing a complete economic blockade that Iran will have to find a way to break out of. It's deliberately provocative, and makes the outbreak of a regional/world war more likely. Which is its purpose.

    This certainly marks the Trump administration as having crossed a war threshold the Obama administration avoided. Credit due to Obama for forging ahead with the JCPOA in the face of fierce resistance from Netanyahu and his Republican and Democratic acolytes, like Chuck Schumer. But that deal itself was built upon false premises and extraordinary conditions and procedures that -- as the current actions of the EU3 demonstrate -- made it a trap for Iran.

    With his Iran policy, as with Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, what Trump is doing -- and can easily demonstrate -- is taking to its logical and deadly conclusion the entire imperialist-zionist conception of the Middle East, which all major U.S. politicians and media have embraced and promulgated over decades, and cannot abandon.

    With the Soleimani assassination, Trump both allayed some of the fears of Iran war hawks in Israel and the U.S. about his "reluctance to flex U.S. military muscle" and re-stoked all their fears about his impulsiveness, unreliability, ignorance, and crassness. As the the Christian Science Monitor reports, Israel leaders are both "quick to praise" his action and "having a crisis of confidence" over Trump's ability to "manage" a conflict with Iran -- an ambivalence echoed in every U.S. politician's "Soleimani was a terrorist, but " statement.

    Trump does exactly what the narrative they all promote demands, but he makes it look and sound all thuggish and scary. They want someone whose rhetorical finesse will talk us into war on Iran as a humanitarian and liberating project. But we should be scared and repelled by it. The problem isn't the discrepancy in Trump between actions and attitudes, but the duplicity in the fundamental imperialist-zionist narrative. There is no "good" -- non-thuggish, non-repellent way -- way to do the catastrophic violence it demands. Too many people discover that only after it's done.

    Trump, in other words, has just started a war that the U.S. political elite constantly brought us to the brink of, and some now seem desperate to avoid, under Trump's leadership . But not a one will abandon the zionist and American-exceptionalist premises that make it inevitable -- about, you know, dictating what weapons which countries can "never" have. Hoisted on their own petard. As are we all.

    To be clear: Iran will try its best to avoid all-out war. The U.S. will not. This is the war that, as the NYT reports , "Hawks in Israel and America have spent more than a decade agitating for." It will start, upon some pretext, with a full-scale U.S. air attack on Iran, followed by Iranian and allied attacks on U.S. forces and allies in the region, including Israel, and then an Israeli nuclear attack on Iran -- which they think will end it. It is an incomprehensible disaster. And it's becoming almost impossible to avoid.

    The best prospect for stopping it would be for Iran and Russia to enter into a mutual defense treaty right now. But that's not going to happen. Neither Russia nor China is going to fight for Iran. Why would they? They will sit back and watch the war destroy Iran, Israel, and the United States.

    Happy New Year.

    [Jan 25, 2020] It's Time to Get Out of Iraq by Daniel Larison

    Jan 24, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    There are massive street demonstrations in Baghdad today calling for the exit of U.S. troops from the country. The demonstrations are in response to call for protests from Muqtada al-Sadr. Estimates of the crowd size vary, but it is a huge turnout of Iraqis that wants us gone:

    100's of thousands protest in Baghdad, calling for all US troops to leave Iraq, close all bases & embassies, if they don't they will be considered an occupying force. pic.twitter.com/C3CqBqpxyD

    -- Ali Arouzi (@aliarouzi) January 24, 2020

    Some more photos of the march by Sadrists today in Baghdad, the turnout is huge by any measure, perhaps the largest in #Baghdad so far, and perhaps the most noticeable aspect is the lack of violence and troubles despite the scale of it #IraqProtests #Iraq #US pic.twitter.com/2xXGk2dSVY

    -- Farhad Alaaldin (@farhad965) January 24, 2020

    Baghdad today. pic.twitter.com/RlVU5K1RnP

    -- мυнαммα∂ αℓ-ωαєℓι 🇮🇶 (@muhammadalwaeli) January 24, 2020

    The Trump administration has violated Iraqi sovereignty earlier this month by taking military action inside Iraq against both Iraqis militias and the Iranian government without Baghdad's consent, and their government wants our forces out of the country. Sadr has considerable influence in Iraqi politics, and he has wanted U.S. forces out for a long time. When opponents of our military presence can organize such huge popular demonstrations, it is time for us to go. The U.S. should have withdrawn from Iraq years ago, and it would have been better to leave on our own terms. Now the U.S. cannot stay without provoking armed opposition from Iraqis to our continued presence.

    So far the administration position has been to threaten Iraq with punishment for upholding its own sovereignty. That's a disgraceful and imperialist position to take, and it is also an untenable one. There have been enough American wars in Iraq. Trump should yield to the Iraqi government's wishes and bring these troops home before any more Americans are injured or killed as a result of his destructive Iran policy.

    Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter . email

    ZizaNiam • a day ago

    AP tried to downplay the protests, reporting only 'hundreds. There must be close to a million people out there (as reported by the Baghdad Chief of Police) and the fact that Sadr and the other Iraqi Shia militias can organize this massive demonstrations proves that the assassination of Soleimani, the protector of Syria and Iraq's Christians, did absolutely nothing to drive a wedge between the various Iraqi Shia militia groups, the vast majority of which are not Iranian sponsored but true Iraqi national patriots.
    Barlaam of Weimerica • a day ago
    There is never a bad time to leave a country that we never should have invaded and occupied. Not that I expect wisdom, common sense,or basic morality from a foreign policy establishment that formulated a strategy for the Middle East, saw that it would entail the genocide of Christians, Yezidis, and other minorities, and decided, "That's a price worth paying."

    [Jan 25, 2020] Trump opened a modern Pandora box in the Middle East

    Jan 25, 2020 | www.theatlantic.com

    In 1958, U.S. leaders stood at the threshold of an American era in the Middle East, conflicted about whether it was worth the trouble to usher in.

    ... ... ...

    More than half a century later, the future of the United States' military presence in the Middle East is once again up for discussion, as Iraq calls on the U.S. to end its roughly 5,000-strong troop presence in the country and Trump struggles to remove American forces from Syria and Afghanistan as well. U.S. politicians are now grappling with the possibility of a post-American period in the region.

    ... ... ..

    And even if Trump doesn't get his way entirely, he will undoubtedly seize on additional opportunities to reduce the American military presence in the Middle East, as fed-up Americans and progressive presidential candidates push in the same direction. When Eisenhower elected to open that "Pandora's Box" back in 1958, his justification was that it would be "disastrous" if "we don't."

    Perhaps nothing signals the coming post-American era in the Middle East more than the fact that so many U.S. leaders these days fear the disastrous consequences of leaving the box open.

    [Jan 24, 2020] Martin Indyk An Important Neoliberal Defects From the Blob

    Notable quotes:
    "... Today Israel's IDF faces a combat hardened army in Syria, a combat hardened irregular military force in Lebanon, and increasingly hardened resistance in its own backyard with Hamas. And Iranian ground forces are not pushovers. ..."
    Jan 24, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Martin Indyk: An Important Neoliberal Defects From the Blob

    Let's hope the former ambassador's heresy about withdrawing from the Middle East catches fire and spreads. Then-VP of Brookings Martin Indyk in 2017. (Sharon Farmer/sfphotoworks)

    January 22, 2020

    |

    12:01 am

    Andrew J. Bacevich Within the inner precincts of the American foreign policy establishment, last names are redundant. At a Washington cocktail party, when some half-sloshed AEI fellow whispers, "Apparently, Henry is back in Beijing to see Xi," there's no need to ask, "Which Henry?" In that world, there is only one Henry, at least only one who counts.

    Similarly, there is only one Martin. While Martin Indyk may not equal Henry Kissinger in star power, he has for several decades been a major player in U.S. policy regarding Israel and the Middle East more broadly. Founder of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, senior director on the National Security Council, twice U.S. ambassador to Israel, assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs, presidential envoy -- not a bad resume for someone who was born in London, raised in Australia, and became a U.S. citizen only in his 40s.

    Throughout his career, Martin has been deeply invested in the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" and in the proposition that the United States has a vital interest in pursuing that process to a successful conclusion. More broadly, he has subscribed to the view that the United States has vital interests at stake in the Middle East more generally, with regional stability and the well-being of the people living there dependent on the United States exercising what people in Washington call "leadership." In this context, of course, leadership tends to be a euphemism for the use or threatened use of military power.

    These are, of course, establishment notions, to which all members of the "Blob" necessarily declare their fealty. Indeed, at least until Trump came along, to dissent from such views was to become ineligible for appointment to even a mid-level post in the State Department, the Pentagon, or the White House.

    Yet Martin has now publicly recanted.

    In an extraordinary op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal (of all places), he asserts that "few vital interests of the US continue to be at stake in the Middle East." Policies centered on ensuring the free flow of Persian Gulf oil and the survival of Israel have become superfluous. "The US economy no longer relies on imported petroleum," he correctly notes. "Fracking has turned the US into a net oil and natural-gas exporter." As a consequence, Persian Gulf oil "is no longer a vital interest -- that is, one worth fighting for. Difficult as it might be to get our heads around the idea, China and India need to be protecting the sea lanes between the Gulf and their ports, not the US Navy."

    As for the Jewish State, Martin notes, again correctly, that today Israel has the capacity "to defend itself by itself." Notwithstanding the blustering threats regularly issued by Tehran, "it is today's nuclear-armed Israel that has the means to crush Iran, not the other way around."

    Furthermore, Martin has had his fill of the peace process. "A two-state solution to the Palestinian problem is a vital Israeli interest, not a vital American one," he writes, insisting that "it's time to end the farce of putting forward American peace plans only to have one or both sides reject them."

    Martin does identify one vital U.S. interest in the Middle East: averting a nuclear arms race. Yet "we should be wary of those who would rush to battle stations," he cautions. "Curbing Iran's nuclear aspirations and ambitions for regional dominance will require assiduous American diplomacy, not war."

    That last sentence captures the essence of Martin's overall conclusion: he proposes not disengaging from the Middle East but demilitarizing U.S. policy. "After the sacrifice of so many American lives, the waste of so much energy and money in quixotic efforts that ended up doing more harm than good," he writes, "it is time for the US to find a way to escape the costly, demoralising cycle of crusades and retreats."

    Now such sentiments appear regularly in the pages of The American Conservative and on the website of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft . Yet in establishment circles, a willingness to describe U.S. policy in the Middle East as quixotic is rare indeed. As for acknowledging that we have done more harm than good, such commonsense views are usually regarded as beyond the pale.

    Martin deserves our congratulations. We must hope that his heresy catches fire and spreads throughout the Blob. In the meantime, if he's in need of office space, the Quincy Institute stands ready to help.

    Welcome to the ranks of the truth tellers, comrade.

    Andrew Bacevich is TAC's writer-at-large and president of the Quincy Institute. His new book, The Age of Illusions: How America Squandered Its Cold War Victory , has just been published.

    Reply • Share › Show more replies Show more replies Show more replies − +

    Mark Thomason • 2 days ago

    "Martin has been deeply invested in the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" and in the proposition that the United States has a vital interest in pursuing that process to a successful conclusion. More broadly, he has subscribed to the view that the United States has vital interests at stake in the Middle East more generally, with regional stability and the well-being of the people living there"

    No. The only use he ever had for the peace process was as cover for what Israel was really doing.

    The only interest he ever cared about was Israel, not the stability or well-being of any other people but the hawks among Israelis.

    He perverted US policy from the inside, in pursuit of those ends of those Lobby partisans. He has never been anything else.

    Bianca Mark Thomason • 10 hours ago • edited
    And is about to pervert it AGAIN. One must be a total ignoramus not to notice American public's changing attitude towards Israel, as well as Israel's high powered lobbyists.
    Before the change turns into an outright hostility, the apologists of the Empire are defusing the nascent rage. So, HE is the one to be PRAISED for being so wise, and deserving our support?
    This leopard will keep on changing spots, but never his nature.
    He is and will remain ardent apologist of American Empire -- for as long as this Empire serves his primary interest. And that interest is clear -- interest of Israel AND all of its citizens around the globe.
    Joao Alfaiate • a day ago
    It is disheartening to read Bacevich praise Indyk-who was, after all, one of the architects of our disastrous Middle East "policy". I guess the Quincy Institute wants to hew a path closer to the mainstream narrative. What will be next? An apologia for Doug Feith and Richard Perle?
    liveload • 20 hours ago • edited
    Indyk's comments read like a neo-con who's lost favor and power. This is not a good sign. This points to the internecine warfare within the halls of conceptual power being closer to decided. With the diplomats out, it leaves the apocalypse cult as the de-facto winner.

    Expect more ludicrous demands of US vassals and more effort to attack Iran. They're not going to stop. Where the oil comes from doesn't matter, what currency is used to conduct trade does.

    Bianca liveload • 9 hours ago
    It is exactly so -- internecine warfare. But I do not see them loosing power. They are losing NARRATIVE both internationally and domestically. This is a beginning of crafting a new narrative to stem the rising hostility against Israel centric militaristic foreign policy orientation.

    Thus switching to "diplomacy", as military posturing just brings about dead ends to defend.
    He wants results, So, change the narrative, diffuse anti-Israeli tide, and become a beacon of reason and wholesomeness. Who can resist these new spots?

    foodoo • 17 hours ago
    Martin Indyk has already done maximal damage. His opportunity to actually help the situation has long past.
    He is and always was an Israeli-firster
    redsocs • 13 hours ago • edited
    There was never anything Quixotic about US foreign policy in the ME. As for Israel/Palestine, the policy, and "Martin" was central to it, was to pretend to negotiate in good faith while Israel occupied "the land from the river to the sea." In Iraq, except for Cheney's oil lust, it was to carry out the neo-con chant of "the road to Iran is through Iraq." As for Iran, it has been to barely resist Israel's, and US Israel-firster's, pressure for war, though it may still happen.
    Steve Naidamast • 4 hours ago
    You mean to say that some establishment guy finally got fed up with all the bullshit?

    In any event, Indyk is wrong to believe that Israel can defeat Iran in a conflict. Israeli nuclear weapons are really of little consequence in such a situation as the majority of them must be delivered by aircraft which Iran will simply shoot down. Those that are siloed will most likely meet the same fate. But in either case Russia will not allow any such conflict to go nuclear.

    In terms of conventional capabailities, the IDF has never been a very good military unit since it basically has only entered engagements with less than equally capable opponents. However, that has all been changing since Hezbollah's defeat of the IDF in 2006.

    Today Israel's IDF faces a combat hardened army in Syria, a combat hardened irregular military force in Lebanon, and increasingly hardened resistance in its own backyard with Hamas. And Iranian ground forces are not pushovers.

    The Israeli navy is meaningless in this situation so it is only in the air that Israel now has any claim to fame. However, instead of increasing its Air Force with modernized F15x models, Israel has opted to acquire the F35, which no amount of avionics can make the air-frame fly better. Iran still uses the F14 as a heavy fighter, which Israel also requires for her situation making the acquisition of the F35 rather odd.

    In the end, it will be Iranian missile development that places that nation in a position to deal a death blow to the Israeli state.

    [Jan 24, 2020] How Are Iran and the "Axis of the Resistance" Affected by the US Assassination of Soleimani by Elijah J. Magnier

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The US President Donald Trump assassinated the commander of the "Axis of the Resistance", the (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) IRGC – Quds Brigade Major General Qassem Soleimani at Baghdad airport with little consideration of the consequences of this targeted killing. It is not to be excluded that the US administration considered the assassination would reflect positively on its Middle Eastern policy. Or perhaps the US officials believed the killing of Sardar Soleimani would weaken the "Axis of the Resistance": once deprived of their leader, Iran's partners' capabilities in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen would be reduced. Is this assessment accurate? ..."
    Jan 22, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

    The US President Donald Trump assassinated the commander of the "Axis of the Resistance", the (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) IRGC – Quds Brigade Major General Qassem Soleimani at Baghdad airport with little consideration of the consequences of this targeted killing. It is not to be excluded that the US administration considered the assassination would reflect positively on its Middle Eastern policy. Or perhaps the US officials believed the killing of Sardar Soleimani would weaken the "Axis of the Resistance": once deprived of their leader, Iran's partners' capabilities in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen would be reduced. Is this assessment accurate?

    A high-ranking source within this "Axis of the Resistance" said " Sardar Soleimani was the direct and fast track link between the partners of Iran and the Leader of the Revolution Sayyed Ali Khamenei. However, the command on the ground belonged to the national leaders in every single separate country. These leaders have their leadership and practices, but common strategic objectives to fight against the US hegemony, stand up to the oppressors and to resist illegitimate foreign intervention in their affairs. These objectives have been in place for many years and will remain, with or without Sardar Soleimani".

    "In Lebanon, Hezbollah's Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah leads Lebanon and is the one with a direct link to the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. He supports Gaza, Syria, Iraq and Yemen and has a heavy involvement in these fronts. However, he leads a large number of advisors and officers in charge of running all military, social and relationship affairs domestically and regionally. Many Iranian IRGC officers are also present on many of these fronts to support the needs of the "Axis of the Resistance" members in logistics, training and finance," said the source.

    In Syria, IRGC officers coordinate with Russia, the Syrian Army, the Syrian political leadership and all Iran's allies fighting for the liberation of the country and for the defeat of the jihadists who flocked to Syria from all continents via Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. These officers have worked side by side with Iraqi, Lebanese, Syrian and other nationals who are part of the "Axis of the Resistance". They have offered the Syrian government the needed support to defeat the "Islamic State" (ISIS/IS/ISIL) and al-Qaeda and other jihadists or those of similar ideologies in most of the country – with the exception of north-east Syria, which is under US occupation forces. These IRGC officers have their objectives and the means to achieve a target already agreed and in place for years. The absence of Sardar Soleimani will hardly affect these forces and their plans.

    In Iraq, over 100 Iranian IRGC officers have been operating in the country at the official request of the Iraqi government, to defeat ISIS. They served jointly with the Iraqi forces and were involved in supplying the country with weapons, intelligence and training after the fall of a third of Iraq into the hands of ISIS in mid-2014. It was striking and shocking to see the Iraqi Army, armed and trained by US forces for over ten years, abandoning its positions and fleeing the northern Iraqi cities. Iranian support with its robust ideology (with one of its allies, motivating them to fight ISIS) was efficient in Syria; thus, it was necessary to transmit this to the Iraqis so they could stand, fight, and defeat ISIS.

    The Lebanese Hezbollah is present in Syria and Yemen, and also in Iraq. The Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki asked Sayyed Nasrallah to provide his country with officers to stand against ISIS. Dozens of Hezbollah officers operate in Iraq and will be ready to support the Iraqis if the US forces refuse to leave the country. They will abide by and enforce the decision of the Parliament that the US must leave by end January 2021. Hezbollah's long warfare experience has resulted in painful experiences with the US forces in Lebanon and Iraq throughout several decades and has not been forgotten.

    Sayyed Nasrallah, in his latest speech, revealed the presence in mid-2014 of Hezbollah officials in Kurdistan to support the Iraqi Kurds against ISIS. This was when the same Kurdish Leader Masoud Barzani announced that it was due to Iran that the Kurds received weapons to defend themselves when the US refused to help Iraq for many months after ISIS expanded its control in northern Iraq.

    The Hezbollah leaders did not disclose the continuous visits of Kurdish representatives to Lebanon to meet Hezbollah officials. In fact, Iraqi Sunni and Shia officials, ministers and political leaders regularly visit Lebanon to meet Hezbollah officials and its leader. Hezbollah, like Iran, plays an essential role in easing the dialogue between Iraqis when these find it difficult to overcome their differences together.

    The reason why Sayyed Nasrallah revealed the presence of his officers in Kurdistan when meeting Masoud Barzani is a clear message to the world that the "Axis of the Resistance" doesn't depend on one single person. Indeed, Sayyed Nasrallah is showing the unity which reigns among this front, with or without Sardar Soleimani. Barzani is part of Iraq, and Kurdistan expressed its readiness to abide by the decision of the Iraqi Parliament to seek the US forces' departure from the country because the Kurds are not detached from the central government but part of it.

    Prior to his assassination, Sardar Soleimani prepared the ground to be followed (if killed on the battlefield, for example) and asked Iranian officials to nominate General Ismail Qaani as his replacement. The Leader of the revolution Sayyed Ali Khamenei ordered Soleimani's wish to be fulfilled and to keep the plans and objectives already in place as they were. Sayyed Khamenei, according to the source, ordered an "increase in support for the Palestinians and, in particular, to all allies where US forces are present."

    Sardar Soleimani was looking for his death by his enemies and got what he wished for. He was aware that the "Axis of the Resistance" is highly aware of its objectives. Those among the "Axis of the Resistance" who have a robust internal front are well-established and on track. The problem was mainly in Iraq. But it seems the actions of the US have managed to bring Iraqi factions together- by assassinating the two commanders. Sardar Soleimani could have never expected a rapid achievement of this kind. Anti-US Iraqis are preparing this coming Friday to express their rejection of the US forces present in their country.

    Sayyed Ali Khamenei , in his Friday prayers last week, the first for eight years, set up a road map for the "Axis of the Resistance": push the US forces out of the Middle East and support Palestine.

    All Palestinian groups, including Hamas, were present at Sardar Soleimani's funeral in Iran and met with General Qaani who promised, "not only to continue support but to increase it according to Sayyed Khamenei's request," said the source. Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas Leader, said from Tehran: "Soleimani is the martyr of Jerusalem".

    Many Iraqi commanders were present at the meeting with General Qaani. Most of these have a long record of hostility towards US forces in Iraq during the occupation period (2003-2011). Their commander, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, was assassinated with Sardar Soleimani and they are seeking revenge. Those leaders have enough motivation to attack the US forces, who have violated the Iraq-US training, cultural and armament agreement. At no time was the US administration given a license to kill in Iraq by the government of Baghdad.

    The Iraqi Parliament has spoken: and the assassination of Sardar Soleimani has indeed fallen within the ultimate objectives of the "Axis of the Resistance". The Iraqi caretaker Prime Minister has officially informed all members of the Coalition Forces in Iraq that "their presence, including that of NATO, is now no longer required in Iraq". They have one year to leave. But that absolutely does not exclude the Iraqi need to avenge their commanders.

    Palestine constitutes the second objective, as quoted by Sayyed Khamenei. We cannot exclude a considerable boost of support for the Palestinians, much more than the actually existing one. Iran is determined to support the Sunni Palestinians in their objective to have a state of their own in Palestine. The man – Soleimani – is gone and is replaceable like any other man: but the level of commitment to goals has increased. It is hard to imagine the "Axis of the Resistance" remaining idle without engaging themselves somehow in the US Presidential campaign. So, the remainder of 2020 is expected to be hot.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    [Jan 24, 2020] Lawrence Wilkerson Lambasts 'the Beast of the National Security State' by Adam Dick

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Wilkerson provided a harsh critique of US foreign policy over the last two decades. Wilkerson states: ..."
    "... America exists today to make war. How else do we interpret 19 straight years of war and no end in sight? It's part of who we are. It's part of what the American Empire is. ..."
    "... We are going to lie, cheat and steal, as [US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo] is doing right now, as [President Donald Trump] is doing right now, as [Secretary of Defense Mark Esper] is doing right now, as [Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC)] is doing right now, as [Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR)] is doing right now, and a host of other members of my political party -- the Republicans -- are doing right now. We are going to cheat and steal to do whatever it is we have to do to continue this war complex. That's the truth of it, and that's the agony of it. ..."
    "... That base voted for Donald Trump because he promised to end these endless wars, he promised to drain the swamp. Well, as I said, an alligator from that swamp jumped out and bit him. And, when he ordered the killing of Qassim Suleimani, he was a member of the national security state in good standing, and all that state knows how to do is make war. ..."
    Jan 13, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    Lawrence Wilkerson, a College of William & Mary professor who was chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powel in the George W. Bush administration, powerfully summed up the vile nature of the US national security state in a recent interview with host Amy Goodman at Democracy Now.

    Asked by Goodman about the escalation of US conflict with Iran and how it compares with the prior run-up to the Iraq War, Wilkerson provided a harsh critique of US foreign policy over the last two decades. Wilkerson states:

    Ever since 9/11, the beast of the national security state, the beast of endless wars, the beast of the alligator that came out of the swamp, for example, and bit Donald Trump just a few days ago, is alive and well.

    America exists today to make war. How else do we interpret 19 straight years of war and no end in sight? It's part of who we are. It's part of what the American Empire is.

    We are going to lie, cheat and steal, as [US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo] is doing right now, as [President Donald Trump] is doing right now, as [Secretary of Defense Mark Esper] is doing right now, as [Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC)] is doing right now, as [Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR)] is doing right now, and a host of other members of my political party -- the Republicans -- are doing right now. We are going to cheat and steal to do whatever it is we have to do to continue this war complex. That's the truth of it, and that's the agony of it.

    What we saw President Trump do was not in President Trump's character, really. Those boys and girls who were getting on those planes at Fort Bragg to augment forces in Iraq, if you looked at their faces, and, even more importantly, if you looked at the faces of the families assembled along the line that they were traversing to get onto the airplanes, you saw a lot of Donald Trump's base. That base voted for Donald Trump because he promised to end these endless wars, he promised to drain the swamp. Well, as I said, an alligator from that swamp jumped out and bit him. And, when he ordered the killing of Qassim Suleimani, he was a member of the national security state in good standing, and all that state knows how to do is make war.

    Wilkerson, over the remainder of the two-part interview provides many more insightful comments regarding US foreign policy, including recent developments concerning Iran. Watch Wilkerson's interview here:

    Wilkerson is an Academic Board member for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

    Copyright © 2020 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
    Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute Related

    [Jan 24, 2020] It's amazing all the money in the State Department and other intelligence agencies should be attracting the best minds. Yet a bunch of us sitting here watching this from our boring office jobs realize how genuinely stupid US foreign policy has been.

    Jan 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Danny , Jan 24 2020 15:11 utc | 25

    It's amazing all the money in the State Department and other intelligence agencies should be attracting the best minds. Yet a bunch of us sitting here watching this from our boring office jobs realize how genuinely stupid US foreign policy has been.

    A separate Sunni state in West Iraq would be doomed. We need to leave these people alone, we've made enough foolish mistakes and this will get a lot of people killed. That's along with US troops being put in harms way for ridiculous reasons like stealing Syrian oil and now occupying Iraq against their parliaments wishes.

    Back in the day you told someone you were American and they wanted to shake your hand and ask you about this place or that. Now they want to spit in our faces

    [Jan 24, 2020] Trump Envoy Issues Death Threat to Soleimani Successor, Head of Iran's Quds Force

    Jan 24, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    21st Century Wire Thursday January 23, 2020
    undefined

    Just when you thought that Washington could not sink any lower in the international diplomacy game, the Trump White House compounds its previous misdeed by issuing a public death threat against the successor of assassinated Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani.

    Presidential US Special Envoy to Iran, Brian Hook, gave a statement to the Arabic language newspaper, Asharq al-Awsat , where he warned new General of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Esmail Ghaani, that he will end up like Soleimani should he be accused of killing any Americans, remarking that, "follows the same path of killing Americans then he will meet the same fate."

    Soleimani was killed by a US drone strike on January 3 , along with senior Iraqi PMU commander, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

    Hook continued saying,"We will hold the regime and its agents responsible for any attack on Americans or American interests in the region."

    Hook also went on to boast that Washington's state-sponsored assassination of Soleimani has made the Middle East a safer place because it has "create a vacuum that the Regime will not be able to fill," inferring that Ghaani will not be able to marshal "Iran's agents in the region".

    Hook also repeated the common talking point that Soleimani was the 'world's most dangerous terrorist' – a label which hardly corresponds with facts which clearly demonstrate that the Iranian military leader was leading the fight against ISIS and al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria.

    In the interview, Hook also used the opportunity to reinforce another State Department narrative which still claims that Iran somehow launched the September attack on Saudi Arabia's Aramco oil facilities – even though the likely culprit, Yemen's Houthi rebel forces, had already taken credit for the attack.

    Reprinted with permission from 21st Century Wire .

    [Jan 24, 2020] Trump adopts Biden's Iraq plan.

    Jan 24, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    US seeking to carve out Sunni state as its influence in Iraq wanes

    Backed into a corner and influence waning, the United States has in recent weeks been promoting a plan to create an autonomous Sunni region in western Iraq, officials from both countries told Middle East Eye.

    The US efforts, the officials say, come in response to Shia Iraqi parties' attempts to expel American troops from their country.

    Iraq represents a strategic land bridge between Iran and its allies in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine.

    Establishing a US-controlled Sunni buffer zone in western Iraq would deprive Iran of using land routes into Syria and prevent it from reaching the eastern shores of the Mediterranean.

    For Washington, the idea of carving out a Sunni region dates back to a 2007 proposition by Joe Biden, who is now vying to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate.

    Biden's plan was actually an attempt to ethnically cleanse Iraq into three distinct enclaves (because an integrated, multicultural Iraq is anathema to the US colonial divide and conquer strategy).

    Across racial and religious boundaries, Iraqi politicians on Saturday bemoaned Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama's choice of running mate, known in Iraq as the author of a 2006 plan to divide the country into ethnic and sectarian enclaves.

    "This choice of Biden is disappointing, because he is the creator of the idea of dividing Iraq," Salih al-Mutlaq, head of National Dialogue, one of the main Sunni Arab blocs in parliament, told Reuters.

    "We rejected his proposal when he announced it, and we still reject it. Dividing the communities and land in such a way would only lead to new fighting between people over resources and borders. Iraq cannot survive unless it is unified, and dividing it would keep the problems alive for a long time."

    For all his brazen denials about his Iraq involvement, one wonders whether, if Joe Biden hadn't been selected Obama's Vice President, he might have eventually been named Iraq Viceroy.

    Now Trump is adopting Biden's plan.

    Same as it ever was.... up 12 users have voted. --

    Tom Steyer is my favorite billionaire. Let's eat him last.

    OzoneTom on Fri, 01/24/2020 - 1:51pm

    All of Iraq was a Sunni buffer zone before the invasion /nt

    @Not Henry Kissinger

    From the link in b's post.

    US seeking to carve out Sunni state as its influence in Iraq wanes

    Backed into a corner and influence waning, the United States has in recent weeks been promoting a plan to create an autonomous Sunni region in western Iraq, officials from both countries told Middle East Eye.

    The US efforts, the officials say, come in response to Shia Iraqi parties' attempts to expel American troops from their country.

    Iraq represents a strategic land bridge between Iran and its allies in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine.

    Establishing a US-controlled Sunni buffer zone in western Iraq would deprive Iran of using land routes into Syria and prevent it from reaching the eastern shores of the Mediterranean.

    For Washington, the idea of carving out a Sunni region dates back to a 2007 proposition by Joe Biden, who is now vying to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate.

    Biden's plan was actually an attempt to ethnically cleanse Iraq into three distinct enclaves (because an integrated, multicultural Iraq is anathema to the US colonial divide and conquer strategy).

    Across racial and religious boundaries, Iraqi politicians on Saturday bemoaned Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama's choice of running mate, known in Iraq as the author of a 2006 plan to divide the country into ethnic and sectarian enclaves.

    "This choice of Biden is disappointing, because he is the creator of the idea of dividing Iraq," Salih al-Mutlaq, head of National Dialogue, one of the main Sunni Arab blocs in parliament, told Reuters.

    "We rejected his proposal when he announced it, and we still reject it. Dividing the communities and land in such a way would only lead to new fighting between people over resources and borders. Iraq cannot survive unless it is unified, and dividing it would keep the problems alive for a long time."

    For all his brazen denials about his Iraq involvement, one wonders whether, if Joe Biden hadn't been selected Obama's Vice President, he might have eventually been named Iraq Viceroy.

    Now Trump is adopting Biden's plan.

    Same as it ever was....

    [Jan 24, 2020] Trump doesn't want to be the president that lost Iraq

    Jan 24, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    Trump needs to claim victory over ISIS and get the hell out. Those one million peaceful protesters will turn into something really ugly, probably joined by parts or all of the Iraqi military. That will be far worse for him, with scenes of US diplomats being airlifted out of the embassy by helicopter. up 10 users have voted. --

    Capitalism has always been the rule by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.

    [Jan 24, 2020] Dissociated Press Sees "Hundreds" Where Pictures Show Millions. Iraqis are ready to fight and die to evict the US troups.

    Jan 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Hoarsewhisperer , Jan 24 2020 13:32 utc | 11

    Dissociated Press Sees "Hundreds" Where Pictures Show Millions

    mpn , Jan 24 2020 13:44 utc | 15

    B - AP isn't the only outlet falsely reporting the protest. Please get screen shots from the other "reports" (like Bloomberg) and add them to this post to document the media manipulation.

    Thanks for all your effort.

    b , Jan 24 2020 15:32 utc | 29
    Cultural competence (not) by the Washington Post

    Iraqi demonstrators demand withdrawal of U.S. troops

    Around Baghdad's Hurriyah Square, the streets were a sea of black, white and red, as protesters clutched Iraqi flags and wore shrouds around their shoulders to evoke the country's dead.

    White shrouds around their shoulders do not "evoke the country's dead" but a a sign of willingness for martyrdom. Those guys ( vid ) are ready to fight and die for their aim.

    Laguerre , Jan 24 2020 15:38 utc | 30
    It's a Shi'te motif, b, wearing a shroud. Ready for martyrdom, like the Shi'a Imams. They have a big thing about death.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 24 2020 15:45 utc | 32
    Cultural competence...

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-iraq/soleimani-killing-adds-dangerous-new-dimension-to-iraq-unrest-idUSKBN1ZL28K
    "It is likely to end up at the gates of the U.S. Embassy, the seat of U.S. power in Iraq..."

    A more recent article had the same wording "USembassy, seat of US power in Iraq" but it was changed a few hours ago. The article does however end with this "Outside the U.S. embassy in Baghdad's fortified Green Zone, a sign read "Warning. Do not cross this barrier, we will use pre-emptive measures against any attempt to cross"."
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-sadr/no-no-america-iraq-protesters-demand-expulsion-of-u-s-troops-idUSKBN1ZN0RI

    Virgile , Jan 24 2020 18:28 utc | 51
    A separate Sunni state in West Iraq will be an ISIS haven financed by Saudi Arabia, the US and Israel.
    Iran will never let this to happen..
    Laguerre , Jan 24 2020 18:33 utc | 52
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 24 2020 18:14 utc | 50

    Yes, I was thinking about something along those lines, and was about to write a comment. There are conservative tribal leaders, who were at one point relatively favourable to the US, and who might be susceptible to this manoeuvre, and to Saudi persuasion. I was thinking in particular of Abu Risheh. However, unfortunately, their peoples along the Euphrates got flattened by the fighting during the Surge (after the period you're citing), so I don't know how enthusiastic they're going to be. It's a conventional problem, if the US makes a deal with a chief, indeed MbS is an example, they presume that they've got the whole people. They haven't.

    psychohistorian , Jan 24 2020 18:55 utc | 53
    Below is a BBC link with an embedded Reuters picture that shows not all of Western media is misrepresenting the march in Iraq.

    Huge rally as Iraqis demand US troops pull out

    div> please, do not try to search for US policy sense in the whole ME. all the moves there are done by the Israel firsters: destroy first then invent "senses". even the first Gulf War was lacking any policy consideration. I hope one day before she dies, to listen to what US Ambassador at that time, April Gillepsie, has to say about "her" entrapment of Saddam Hussein, a sort of McNamara hour of acknowledging.

    Posted by: nietzsche1510 , Jan 24 2020 18:59 utc | 54

    please, do not try to search for US policy sense in the whole ME. all the moves there are done by the Israel firsters: destroy first then invent "senses". even the first Gulf War was lacking any policy consideration. I hope one day before she dies, to listen to what US Ambassador at that time, April Gillepsie, has to say about "her" entrapment of Saddam Hussein, a sort of McNamara hour of acknowledging.

    Posted by: nietzsche1510 | Jan 24 2020 18:59 utc | 54

    Likklemore , Jan 24 2020 19:01 utc | 55
    in the next 2 years, the U.S. will be leaving Iraq. It will not be safe to keep U.S. personnel on Iraqi soil.


    First, it was "No injuries" resulting from Iran's retaliation
    Then, it was only 11 "suffering headaches"

    Now the Pentagon Says 34 Personnel Diagnosed With Concussions After Iran Strikes on Bases in Iraq


    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - Thirty-four US service members have been diagnosed with concussions and traumatic brain injuries after Iran conducted ballistic missile strikes on two bases in Iraq with half of them still undergoing medical treatment, Department of Defence spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a press briefing on 24 January.

    "With regard to the number of recent injuries here is the latest update 34 total members have diagnosed with concussions and TBI [traumatic brain injury]", Hoffman told reporters.

    Concussions or Headaches.? When it's serious we have to lie -

    Paging Dr. Donald J. Trump

    Paging any available Dr. or resident at Mayo Clinic

    Laguerre , Jan 24 2020 19:06 utc | 56
    I wouldn't deny the US is capable of creating an Iraqi al-Tanf. The US is always capable of air-supporting isolated bases, as long as there is the determination to do so. It's been shown many times, from Vietnam to Afghanistan. More, I don't see. The Sunnis have seen the way the Syrian Kurds were abandoned, so nobody's going to be enthused. And the surge has not been forgotten.
    Kooshy , Jan 24 2020 19:15 utc | 57
    "The Shi'a can certainly get their people out - which by the way is why they have such effective militias. The Sunnis don't have similarly effective militias (though such would probably also be politically difficult)."

    Wondering why ? Because the don't want to live as minorities any more, specially where they are the majority. There is need for a collective security across the Shia community throughout the Western Asia and has nothing to do with US. Because US and UK, historically and continually have supported and inspired Sunni clients against Shia uprisings
    For equal rights, US and UK and their clients have become a common threat to Shia resistance. This resistance and sense of common security within Shia communities is so strong and imbedded that killing one leader here one commander there will not change the outcome. As an example Abbas Mussavie was assassinated by IDF in 1992 who replaced him that became more dangerous and kicked Israel out of Lebanon, one Hassan Nassrollah
    US will end up leaving like in VM No matter what she does

    Peter AU1 , Jan 24 2020 19:18 utc | 58
    Laguerre

    I was thinking along the lines of Saudi intermediaries doing deals with tribes as Mcgurk pulled off in the Raqqa meeting when he brought in a Saudi intermediary or envoy to do a deal with the tribes of Deir Ezzor. I see the tribe break down into clans, so suppose it would or may be the heads of clans that deals would have to be done with.

    What strikes me about this though is that US are looking at retreating into the area ISIS have retreated to and where they arose - the Iraq Syria border regions.

    nietzsche1510 , Jan 24 2020 19:19 utc | 59
    the battle for the Green Zone will start the liberation of Iraq, that´s why the US embassy there has a lot of rooftops.
    Willy2 , Jan 24 2020 15:47 utc | 33

    - Muqtada Al Sadr is an iraqi nationalist. As long as he can get help from Iran he will take it. But when that help is no longer needed then he will try to reduce the "influence" of the iranians as much as possible. Prehaps the words "boot them out" is a bit "over the top".
    - But the relationship will Always remain friendly. But he is "his own man".
    - In this regard this a re-run of what happened in the year 2003 & 2004. Back then the US wanted to pick their own sock puppet but the shiites out-witted the US.

    Yonatan , Jan 24 2020 19:32 utc | 61
    A photo essay of the Iraqi protests - plenty of images showing the scale and also close up images.

    https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en/https/colonelcassad.livejournal.com/5590284.html

    jayc , Jan 24 2020 19:33 utc | 62

    Interesting that the number of US troops suffering concussive injuries from the Iran retaliatory strikes has been quietly reassessed to 44 persons. That seems significant in light of the extensive threats beforehand that any injury to a US person would ignite thunderous reprisal. It seems, then, the Americans have no plan, the Soleimaini hit was not thought through, and they are not in any way prepared for a necessary readjustment of their position in the region. Trump at Davos dismissed the protests and again threatened sanctions on Iraq - the fulcrum of US power has now visibly shifted from the military to the dominance of the reserve currency in the form of economic reprisals (sanctions). Reduced to imposing or threatening economic blockades on adversary populations is not a winning long-term strategy.

    Sasha , Jan 24 2020 19:36 utc | 63

    It is not only the MSM coordinated blackout on the important events developing in Iraq, notice also the scarce half hundred comments here in this thread on the same events by the usual and otherwise prolific regulars, who preferred to comment on so used Boeing or whatever old topic instead...

    Meanwhile, those of us who wished to comment got banned, as they seemed to be some other who wanted to comment by other media, like Pepe Escobar in Facebook...

    Elijah Magnier says,

    Someone should write an article on how Main Stream Media and most reputable agencies either ignored what happened in #Baghdad #Iraq today or deliberately downplayed it because it calls for the #US to leave.

    News is strikingly manipulated s since the war in #Syria 2011.

    https://twitter.com/ejmalrai/status/1220758301266321408

    [Jan 24, 2020] Apparently this is the new US policy in Iraq: US seeking to carve out Sunni state as its influence in Iraq wanes

    Jan 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Laguerre , Jan 24 2020 11:44 utc | 1

    This seems more relevant here than on the open thread:

    Apparently this is the new US policy in Iraq.

    US seeking to carve out Sunni state as its influence in Iraq wanes

    Incredible, isn't it? A policy of parcellisation which has already failed twice, in Iraq and then again in Syria. And now Trump is going to do it again, according to reports which could well be right. They're sufficiently stupid. They're actually expecting the poor suffering Fallujans, who suffered through more than a month of being tortured by US troops, are going to stand up and fight for the US.

    It's a complete misappreciation of the situation, not unusual in the US. It is of course true that the Sunnis suffer from the unthinking policies of the Shi'a, and are treated like an occupied country. But that doesn't mean that the Sunnis think they can stand up an independent state. They don't, particularly if the US only stations a handful of troops there.

    The US could of course militarily occupy the area, but that's not Trump's plan, as it would be too politically intrusive back home.

    By the way I hear we're about to receive Trump's overall peace plan for the Middle East. Given that the first rollouts fell totally flat, I wouldn't be too optimistic about its new reception in the Middle East.

    Willy2 , Jan 24 2020 12:03 utc | 4

    - Carving out a state in North-Western Iraq is part of "The Biden plan" of 2006 (/2007 ?). The Biden plan was to divide Iraq into 3 parts: Kurdistan, "Sumnnistan" and "Shia-stan".
    - Was this the reason why the US "created" ISIS (in 2014) ??
    Laguerre , Jan 24 2020 12:28 utc | 5
    The Shi'a can certainly get their people out - which by the way is why they have such effective militias. The Sunnis don't have similarly effective militias (though such would probably also be politically difficult).

    The US certainly doesn't have much idea how to tackle such a movement. The renewal of the plan for parcellisation just shows up the bankruptcy of US policy, nothing spoke to me so strongly of the failure of US thinking. For all the number of Washington think-tanks concentrating on the ME, they can't come up with workable ideas.

    Laguerre , Jan 24 2020 12:56 utc | 7
    Posted by: Ernesto Che | Jan 24 2020 12:32 utc | 6

    Al-Sadr is indeed an Iraqi nationalist, and not particularly pro-Iranian, others are more. He more profited from Iran's safe haven, than became pro-Iranian.

    On the other hand, he's unlikely to become Prime Minister, as too extreme. The US, if it gets a say in the choice of the next PM, will veto. And he's a sort who is in permanent opposition to everything, rather than in government, much like Corbyn in Britain.

    somebody , Jan 24 2020 13:17 utc | 9
    Posted by: Laguerre | Jan 24 2020 11:44 utc | 1

    Surely, this has become obsolete with Saudi needing an agreement with Iran?

    I just checked. On January 22 this happened in Yemen :

    On January 18, Houthi rebels targeted the al Estiqbal military training camp, used by the Saudi-led coalition and forces loyal to Yemen's UN-recognised government. The strikes resulted in at least 116 deaths and dozens (if not hundreds) of injuries. Those struck had reportedly just finished praying at the base's mosque. According to Saudi media, the Houthis used a combination of ballistic missiles and drones.
    Sasha , Jan 24 2020 13:23 utc | 10
    The fake media are trying to trasvesticize these protests as antigovernment protests in the eyes of the Waestern and American population, fortunately, the images are worth thousands words:

    https://twitter.com/passenger_to/status/1220620900166520833

    Love these arabs´humor when they protest...

    bevin , Jan 24 2020 13:48 utc | 16
    During the first of the various criminal attacks on Fallujah, Sadr famously promised to deploy the Mahdi Army there to defend the largely sunni community.
    The US fears nothing more than nationalism in the middle east- all its policies are aimed at atomising communities and fostering sectarian division. It is a tactic that has worked well in the United States for centuries- preserving the absolute power of the capitalist oligarchy by setting black against white, catholic against protestant, settler against indigenous, migrant against native.
    It is difficult to conceive of a more evil policy than that of encouraging shi'ites to bully sunnis and vice versa, while dissecting society into shreds of ethnic and sectarian entities , which are then armed and trained to fight and kill one another.
    This was the basis of the surge under Petraus. Of course the British had established the practice themselves. Among other things they employed christian Assyrians as police.
    bevin , Jan 24 2020 13:52 utc | 17
    An interesting view.
    https://journal-neo.org/2020/01/24/is-iraq-between-the-hammer-and-the-anvil/
    Sasha , Jan 24 2020 14:16 utc | 18
    Al Mayadeen is reporting testimonies from all confesional sides on that this is an united clamor coming from the whole Iraqi society, who sees a clear link between occupation and corruption, in spite of their internal political differences, seeing no future while the US remains in the country corrupting and compromising Iraqi reconstruction and progress.

    They are saying that the numbers seen demonstrating today in Iraq, in the anniversary of the other historical 1920 anticolonial demonstration, equates a popular referendum on the US illegal and forced presence in the country.

    The representatives of the protesters are stating that there are being stablished diplomatic means for the US to go out, but, in case it refuses doing it by these means, the resistance will come into action. Thus a way of no return for the US is being delineated here...

    Crowd demonstration against US military presence in Iraq


    CarlD , Jan 24 2020 14:22 utc | 19
    Slightly? off subject

    Since the assassination drones cannot fly all the way from US territory to their intended targets,
    any country that harbors the drones is actually complicit to the crimes of the US of A.

    They must be made to understand that these assassinations will cost them eventually as accessories
    to these crimes.

    BM , Jan 24 2020 14:27 utc | 20
    Possibly the most potent leverage Iraq can have on the US is for the Iraqi parliament to decree that all legal previously agreed immunity for US military guilty of crimes in Iraq is null and void. All US war criminals immediately liable to be tried in Iraq under Iraq law, unless the US commit to a prompt and orderly withdrawal. Right to prosecute still reserved in case of US non-compliance with any such commitment.

    Whether or to what extent this could be made retrospective to the beginning of the current agreement (on the grounds that the agreement has been violated) I don't know. Maybe it might be possible to apply retrospectively at least to the first verifiable breech of the agreement by the US, I have no idea. Or maybe the agreement can only be deemed void with effect from a statement by the parliament, I have no idea. In any case, the US is now there illegally: any US soldier can legally be arrested and imprisoned at any time; and any US soldier from now on killing or injuring any person in Iraq is automatically a war criminal.

    If it can so some extent legally be made retrospective, the US would automatically face a terrifying situation.

    (Any prisons containing US prisoners in Iraq need full military protection though - I recall previously the US destroyed a prison with a tank where some soldiers were arrested).

    Sasha , Jan 24 2020 14:28 utc | 21
    @Posted by: Sasha | Jan 24 2020 14:16 utc | 18

    The link from Al Mayadeen includes live stream with commentary in Arabic of the crowds gathering who seem in the sizes of Arbaeen pilgrimage...or more.....since multiconfessional...

    Sasha , Jan 24 2020 14:37 utc | 22
    Lesson to be learnt...on the future of the destroyers...
    (CARTOON) The "Pax americana", in an image

    "They made a desert and called it peace"
    Tacit, in reference to "Pax Romana" after the destruction of Carthage.

    https://twitter.com/Amor_y_Rabia/status/1219921555775467520

    [Jan 24, 2020] Is Trump Offering West Bank to Bibi In His 'Deal of the Century'

    Trump pro-Israel policy looks more and more like t "How to get Adelson money and lose the re-election" Pandering to Israel Likud leadership should not be the priority task for the USA. And violating UN resolutions to please Netanyahu does not get Trump any additional voters iether.
    Jan 24, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    And he's bringing Netanyahu and Benny Gantz here on Tuesday, smack in the middle of impeachment. Benjamin Netanyahu stands near a photo showing him and US President Donald Trump shake hands as he speaks to supporters at a Likud Party campaign rally on January 21, 2020 in Jerusalem, Israel. (Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

    January 24, 2020

    |

    9:43 am

    Kelley Beaucar Vlahos In his bid to detract from his impeachment and to help out his friend Benjamin Netanyahu, who is under indictment and facing a fierce election March 2, is Trump willing to light the Middle East on fire?

    That is what the news suggests this morning. The details are vague but it appears that Trump may be planning to announce his "peace deal of the century" for Israel and the Palestinians soon, and has invited Prime Minister Netanyahu and his political rival Benny Gantz to the White House next week. He has not invited Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, who would be the other signatory if a "peace deal" would in fact be in the offing.

    More importantly, reports indicate that the so-called deal might give Israel the green light to annex the Jordan Valley and illegal settlements in the West Bank. This is what Netanyahu has promised Israelis throughout this tumultuous election drama and his own indictment on charges of fraud and bribery , for which he has yet to stand trial. He is on a razor thin tightrope, but despite claims that he was finished (even from these pages!) he has managed to stay on. Trump's gambit -- -giving him everything he asked for right before the election, may be the greatest gift Trump could give.

    And what does it do for Trump? On it's face, it's all upsides for him politically. He has not been hurt as he has made other brazen moves to put the American thumb on the scale for Israel's right wing throughout his three-and-a-half-year term -- including moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing Israel's annex of the Golan Heights, withdrawing aid from Palestinian refugees, and declaring that Jewish settlements in disputed Palestinian territories were not illegal.

    If he can bolster his Republican hawk base -- think Senators Rubio, Cotton, and Graham -- during impeachment, all the better. High profile Democrats are unlikely to make a fuss, either, as many of them are strong supporters of Israel, too. It would be no surprise to see several of them take time from the trial for an audience with Netanyahu when he is here.

    Trump was characteristically banal in his comment about the plan Thursday: "It's a great plan. It's a plan that really would work," he told reporters on Air Force One en route to a Republican Party meeting in Florida. Sure, it would work for Netanyahu and the right wing Israelis who have been praying for a U.S. president to act so boldly biased in favor of them for decades. For their part, the Palestinians under Abbas have already rejected Trump's plan in the works and have cut off all diplomatic ties with Washington, for obvious reasons. There is no "peace" in this plan, the fix was in from the start. The whole business of the deal including a huge economic plan for the Palestinians is hooey and the world knows it -- that's why Trump son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner was widely panned when he announced that piece of the proposal last year.

    For all the politics, even Israeli media sees the danger in the course, whether or not the people in Washington give a damn. From Haaretz this morning:

    Before starting the celebrations, the officials would do well to consider the possible risks. For some three years, Military Intelligence has been warning the government about the risk of violence erupting in the West Bank. Since the last, short-lived, mini-intifada faded out in the summer of 2016, the West Bank has been mostly quiet .
    But a peace deal that would be interpreted as an Israeli-American conspiracy could push the Palestinian Authority to desperate moves, like igniting a wave of protests or even, as happened after the failure of the Camp David peace conference in 2000, encourage large-scale terror acts. This would change everything.

    There is a really skewed vision of "peace" in the White House and it has very little to do with foreign policy expertise, or well-informed ideas or plans. Trump has been led by members of his team with specific ideological interests from the start . He and his surrogates were very plain about this during his 2016 campaign. His vice presidential pick, plus his hiring of Pompeo, Bolton, Kushner and appointment of David "Israel is on the side of God" Friedman as U.S. ambassador only cemented it. He has been ratified by his base all the way. God help us if this latest political calculation is the one that goes too far.

    Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC for the last decade, focusing on national security, foreign policy, civil liberties and domestic politics. She served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News in Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also worked as a beat reporter at Bridge News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger, she got her start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.

    Woland • 4 hours ago

    Nothing goes too far for Trump. Anyone opposing this so-called deal will have to face accusations of being Israel-haters and antisemites, and whatever the Palestinians do, they'll remain an ungrateful, violent people who just can't understand the wise decisions taken for them by their betters in Washington and Jerusalem.

    Not that it matters. The EU is toothless, Russia and China don't care, and Saudi Arabia will somehow find a way to make this benefit whatever scheme they're currently running. Trump wins, if only because no one knows what the game is anymore.

    scottrob • 3 hours ago
    Violence would be the dumbest move on the Palestinians part. The smartest would be to throw in the towel and demand full citizenship. Israel would have a choice: run an Apartheid state or become a totally secular society. Both losers for Israel in their eyes.
    ZizaNiam scottrob • 3 hours ago
    Agreed, there would need to be massive demonstrations but I doubt BBC, CNN, MSNBC would cover those, and would only highlight the violent reactions.
    cka2nd scottrob • 3 hours ago
    Israel is already an apartheid state, if not one quite as blatant as South Africa used to be, and becoming more of one every year. And many Israelis are not only fine with that, but would dearly love to expel all of the Arabs, from both the West Bank and Israel proper.
    hooly scottrob • 26 minutes ago
    'demand' full citizenship? You mean like all the Illegal Aliens residing in the USA? Won't some Americans object, as would some Israelis? do they have the right to say no to open borders and mass immigration?
    hooly • 30 minutes ago
    is Trump willing to light the Middle East on fire?

    Seriously? I've been hearing this for years, ... oh please, get over it! The Middle East surely can't get any worse than it is now? I mean after the Iraq invasion, Syrian Civil War, Libyan regime change, Yemen War, growing Iranian influence, endless Color Revolutions and uprisings, etc, etc, ... do you really think a little Israeli land grab (and dispossession of Palestinians) will make things that much worse??

    [Jan 24, 2020] This shows how the steady stream of propaganda impacts.....

    Jan 24, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/479795-poll-41-approve-of-trump-airst...

    A new poll shows a plurality of Americans approve of President Trump's decision to order the drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani.

    Forty-one percent of Americans agreed with the decision, according to the Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll released Friday. Thirty percent disapproved and the remaining 30 percent were indifferent.

    On Jan. 3 the U.S. killed Soleimani at the Baghdad airport. The move raised tensions in the Middle East and fears of a new war. Iran launched rocket attacks on two bases with U.S. personnel in Iraq days later.

    [Jan 24, 2020] Dennis Kucinich, Antiwar to His Core by Adam Dick

    Jan 10, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    A Thursday article by Matt Taibbi at Rolling Stone discusses Dennis Kucinich's work in politics, from Kucinich's eight terms in the United Sates House of Representatives to his two presidential campaigns to his activities since leaving political office. Taibbi, in the article focused much on Kucinich's long-term devotion to advancing the case for peace, describes Kucinich as "antiwar to his core."

    Read Taibbi's article here .

    Kucinich is an Advisory Board member for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

    Copyright © 2020 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
    Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute Related What are you supporting? When you join the
    Ron Paul Institute
    for Peace and Prosperity
    You are supporting

    News and analysis
    like you'll get nowhere else

    Brave insight on
    foreign policy and civil liberties

    A young writer's program
    and much more!

    Support Ron Paul
    Support the Institute!
    Support Peace and Prosperity! Archives

    [Jan 23, 2020] The crimes of Iraq war still are unpunished

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , Jan 23 2020 22:33 utc | 106

    "The REAL 'terrorists' –-death is not a laughing matter, murder is a crime."

    Vanessa Beeley provides a short, incomplete, list.

    I look at the pictures of today's refugees and see the faces of yesterday's. I see the conditions they inhabit, the squalor and filth, and I see the same in pictures from the past. I read the words of hatred directed at those innocents and recall the same words being said of their predecessors.

    And the source of the words and plight of the innocents both present and past come from the same portals or power--The Imperialist West and its Zionist progeny. How many millions have died to enrich their purse, to increase the size of the estates, to serve as their slaves? How many more in the future will share their fate?

    Will humans ever evolve to become peaceful animals and save themselves?

    [Jan 23, 2020] Incredible level of naivety of people who still think that a single individual, or even two, can change the direction of murderous US policies that are widely supported throughout the bureaucracy?

    Elections now serve mainly the legitimizing of the deep state rule function; election of a partuclar induvudual can change little, althouth there is some space of change due to the power of executive branch.
    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Trailer Trash , Jan 23 2020 18:30 utc | 44

    For example, Trump managed to speed up the process od destruction of the USA-centered neoliberal empire considerably. Especially by lauching the trade war with China. He also managed to discredit the USA foreign policy as no other president before him. Even Bush II.

    >This is the most critical U.S. election in our lifetime
    > Posted by: Circe | Jan 23 2020 17:46 utc | 36

    Hmmm, I've been hearing the same siren song every four years for the past fifty. How is it that people still think that a single individual, or even two, can change the direction of murderous US policies that are widely supported throughout the bureaucracy?

    Bureaucracies are reactionary and conservative by nature, so any new and more repressive policy Trumpy wants is readily adapted, as shown by the continuing barbarity of ICE and the growth of prisons and refugee concentration camps. Policies that go against the grain are easily shrugged off and ignored using time-tested passive-aggressive tactics.

    One of Trump's insurmountable problems is that he has no loyal organization behind him whose members he can appoint throughout the massive Federal bureaucracy. Any Dummycrat whose name is not "Biden" has the same problem. Without a real mass-movement political party to pressure reluctant bureaucrats, no politician of any name or stripe will ever substantially change the direction of US policy.

    But the last thing Dummycrats want is a real mass movement, because they might not be able to control it. Instead Uncle Sam will keep heading towards the cliff, which may be coming into view...

    [Jan 23, 2020] In a day like yesterday....US merits to remain in Iraq getting 50% oil revenues while contributing zero to rebuilt the country they previosuly destroyed and funding and spreading chaos, unrest and terrorism...

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Sasha , Jan 23 2020 23:09 utc | 116

    In a day like yesterday....US merits to remain in Iraq getting 50% oil revenues while contributing zero to rebuilt the country they previosuly destroyed and funding and spreading chaos, unrest and terrorism...
    On this day in 1991, the US bombed an infant formula production plant in Iraq as part of Operation Desert Storm. The US lied, calling it a biological weapons facility, but in actuality, "it was the only source of infant formula food for children one year and younger in Iraq."

    https://twitter.com/Americas_Crimes/status/1219824455712694272


    Lurker in the Dark , Jan 23 2020 23:29 utc | 119

    This is already a hot war the US is prosecuting against Iran.

    [Jan 23, 2020] If the U.S. can do it or rather, have been assassinating other countries Officials, so can others and eventually, they will retaliate.

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Beibdnn , Jan 23 2020 15:44 utc | 5

    @Likklemore No 1.

    If the U.S. can do it or rather, have been assassinating other countries Officials, so can others and eventually, they will retaliate. No U.S. official will be safe, even in the mainland U.S. An old saying applies here. You sew the wind and reap the whirlwind.
    The world is rapidly tiring of the classless thuggery of the U.S.A.

    xLemming , Jan 23 2020 16:25 utc | 15

    Posted by: Beibdnn | Jan 23 2020 15:44 utc | 5

    Excellent point... and furthermore, if Russia & others are capable of clandestine hits (as per the accusations against them, i.e. Skripal, MH17, Litvinenko) then why on earth would US invite such operations against themselves?

    I'm sure if they (Russia/Iran/others) really wanted to, unfortunate mishaps, like traceless, self-inflected, nail-gun accidents are easily possible

    Just when you think ZATO couldn't get any stupider...

    [Jan 23, 2020] The Iraqi Shia, 66% of the 40 million Iraqi population, are expressing their hatred towards US forces in particular and all foreign forces in general.

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bruce , Jan 23 2020 18:02 utc | 38

    "The Iraqi Shia, 66% of the 40 million Iraqi population, are expressing their hatred towards US forces in particular and all foreign forces in general. Iraq would like to see these forces depart for good, putting an end to US influence in Mesopotamia and West Asia. A massive protest has been organised for this Friday 24th January, led by Sayyed Moqtada al-Sadr, who is warning the US of the consequences of ignoring this Parliamentary decision. It is expected to be the most massive protest in the history of Iraq. But this protest is only the beginning."
    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/22/immediate-us-withdrawal-due-to-its-violation-of-the-agreement-and-iraq-sovereignty/

    Likklemore , Jan 23 2020 15:29 utc | 1

    The murder of Soleimani was not a one-off: it will be the policy to take out leaders and US vassals dare not speak up: Murder and Sanctions (aka "Financial Warfare" ) is what they do.


    US Warns New Quds Force Commander Could 'Meet Same Fate' as Slain Predecessor.

    [.]

    The US will assassinate Quds Force Commander Brig. Gen. Esmail Ghaani if he targets Americans, US special representative for Iran Brian Hook has warned.

    "If Ghaani follows the same path of killing Americans then he will meet the same fate," Hook said, speaking to Asharq al-Awsat, a London-based Arabic newspaper, in an interview published Thursday.

    According to the US diplomat, President Trump has made it very "clear that any attack on Americans or American interests will be met with a decisive response, which the president demonstrated on January 2".

    Hook also said he believed that "the Iranian regime" now "understands that they cannot attack America and get away with it".

    Yes and soon.

    Europe needs new instruments to be able to defend itself from licentious extraterritorial sanctions.

    The World Looks to Abandon the Dollar as US Sanctions Tighten Their Grip

    Jackrabbit , Jan 23 2020 18:36 utc | 46

    Likklemore @1

    Red line / Green light

    USA has just but a bulls-eye on every American in Iraq and Syria.

    Every anti-Iranian ideologue (starting with Netanyahu) will now start planning false-flag attacks.

    Just another dog whistle like Obama's "red-line" farce.

    PS Did any media confirm the death of the US translator that caused USA to bomb the Iraqi PMU? His name wasn't even released for a couple of week AFTER he was killed and AFAIK no one really knows who killed him.

    <> <> <> <> <> <>

    Probably little happens until UN sanctions "snap-back". That will light the fuse and the fireworks start a number of weeks later but certainly before July (somebody wrote about Russia's being able to sell arms to Iran on the 5th-year anniversary of the JCPOA on July 14th).

    Sadly, the false-flag needed to energize the masses with "war fever" (like after 9-11) is likely to require that many Americans are killed. And possibly not just military but civilians.

    Aside: The cover of the 2015 Economist comes to mind. Two arrows on the lower right contain the numbers "11.5" and "11.3". The sand behind the arrows might represent the middle east. Do the two arrows represent a date range (European-like dates) of March 11th to May 11th? FYI: Persian New Year is March 21st, UN sanctions are likely to "snap-back" by mid-March.

    The eleventh of the month has gained significance due to 9-11 and 7-11 (in England). Thus, 3-11, 4-11, and 5-11 would have symbolic value as for a "terrorist" incident.

    How could the Economist have predicted such a date range? I've said many times that I thought that the JCPOA was a delaying tactic that was needed simply because Syrian regime change was taking longer than expected. From such a point of view, it's reasonable to assume that steps are taken to end the agreement and/or prompt strikes (symbolized by the arrows on the Economist's cover) prior to the end of the agreement or important anniversary milestones (like Ruissia's being able to sell arms after 5 years).

    While some might say that such musings are irrational "conspiracy theory", I bring it up because neocons and other bad actors engage in long-term planning to achieve their goals. We are not suppose to notice such planning and then when things happen (like 9-11 and the 2008 Global Financial Crisis) it is quickly claimed that "no one could've foreseen" such things - which becomes an excuse for the bad actors to go unpunished.

    !!

    Jackrabbit , Jan 23 2020 18:36 utc | 46

    3.11.2004 Madrid Atocha train station attacks happened...allegedly AQ autorship...

    1.7.2015 Charlie Hebdo attack...IS/AQ autorship...allegedly...

    1.7.2020 Soleimani´s muder...US autorship....confirmed....

    Already exposed that IS/AQ is a byproduct of US

    @

    [Jan 23, 2020] The USA threatens with more extrajudicial killing of Iran officials

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 23 2020 15:29 utc | 1

    The murder of Soleimani was not a one-off: it will be the policy to take out leaders and US vassals dare not speak up: Murder and Sanctions (aka "Financial Warfare" ) is what they do.


    US Warns New Quds Force Commander Could 'Meet Same Fate' as Slain Predecessor.

    [.]

    The US will assassinate Quds Force Commander Brig. Gen. Esmail Ghaani if he targets Americans, US special representative for Iran Brian Hook has warned.

    "If Ghaani follows the same path of killing Americans then he will meet the same fate," Hook said, speaking to Asharq al-Awsat, a London-based Arabic newspaper, in an interview published Thursday.

    According to the US diplomat, President Trump has made it very "clear that any attack on Americans or American interests will be met with a decisive response, which the president demonstrated on January 2".

    Hook also said he believed that "the Iranian regime" now "understands that they cannot attack America and get away with it".

    Yes and soon.

    Europe needs new instruments to be able to defend itself from licentious extraterritorial sanctions.

    The World Looks to Abandon the Dollar as US Sanctions Tighten Their Grip

    [Jan 23, 2020] Trump's Katyusha Conundrum

    Jan 23, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

    by William Walter Kay Posted on January 23, 2020 January 22, 2020 Katyushas are short-range, unguided artillery rockets typically fired in salvos from truck-mounted launch-tubes. Iraq's insurgents deploy three types.

    The smallest is 107 millimeters in diameter and 1 meter long. Its 19 kilogram weight includes an 8 kg high-explosive, shrapnel-bearing warhead. The 107mm is often fired from a 12-tube launcher, however, infantry-portable single-tube tripods are common. An experienced crew with a standardized weapon can hit a 400 X 400 meter target from 8 kilometers away. During the Vietnam War the US Army considered the 107mm to be their adversaries' most formidable weapon.

    The 122mm 'Grad' Katyusha is 3 meters long and weighs 75 kg. Its warhead spans a third of its length and weighs 18 kg. It has a 20-kilometer range and a 30-meter lethal radius.

    220mm Katyushas hurl 100 kg warheads 30 kilometers.

    Katyushas have advantages over mortars. They deliver the same payload twice the distance and they fire multiple ordnance more rapidly. The globally ubiquitous BM-21 Grad fires forty 122mm rockets in three minutes. Reloading takes 10 minutes. Thus, Katyushas excel at "shoot-and-scoot" operations. As well, Katyushas' flat trajectories permit line-of-sight attacks and their 700 meter-per-second velocities provide unique anti-building potential.

    After helping suppress the ISIS-led insurgency (2014-17) US forces defaulted to their previous occupation plan. Central to this program are segregated compounds situated inside Iraqi Armed Forces bases. These installations, always near airstrips, contain mere hundreds (not thousands) of US and Coalition troops who ride herd over the Iraqi Army whilst grooming and directing Iraq's 15,000-strong Special Forces.

    Embassies and consulates are integral to the occupation. The sprawling US Embassy compound dominates Baghdad's fortified "Green Zone" which also houses Coalition partners' embassies, and the headquarters of the many NGOs insinuated throughout Iraqi society.

    The occupation facilitates local activities of American and European businesses. These require office blocks, oil-field infrastructure; and, gated communities for imported talent.

    Pre-2011 Americans relied on bases containing thousands of troops. These were remotely located and allocated substantial resources to thwart indirect (mortar and rocket) attacks through: counter-artillery, drone surveillance, and fighting patrols. Despite this, indirect fire inflicted 3,000 casualties (including 211 fatalities) on American forces; many occurring inside 'secure' bases.

    The US-led Coalition's current archipelago of military, diplomatic, intelligence, business and NGO installations are ill-equipped to defend themselves against indirect fire. Proximity to cities makes them sitting ducks.

    In September 2018 persons unknown began targeting US installations with Katyushas. This list chronicles these attacks. * (A dozen mortar attacks are not listed; Katyushas being the weapon of choice.)

    1. September 8, 2018 – four rockets (three 107mms and one 122mm) fall near the Green Zone.
    2. September 8, 2018 – two salvos of 107mms land near the US Consulate beside Basra Airport.
    3. September 28, 2018 – three 107mms are fired at the Basra Consulate; two land on site.
    4. December 27, 2018 – two 107mms are fired at Al-Asad Airbase (160 kilometers west of Baghdad) during Trump's visit.
    5. February 2, 2019 – an attack on Al-Asad Airbase is aborted. Three ready-to-launch 122mms are captured.
    6. February 12, 2019 – three 107mms hit Q-West Airfield (an off-the-books base south of Mosul).
    7. May 1, 2019 – two 107mms hit Camp Al-Taji: a 'training' institute, 40 kilometers north of Baghdad.
    8. May 19, 2019 – two rockets land near the US Embassy.
    9. June 10, 2019 – rocket attack on Camp Al-Taji.
    10. June 12, 2019 – rocket attack on a "northern air base" starts a fire.
    11. June 13, 2019 – rocket attack on Nineveh Command Headquarters (Mosul Presidential Palace).
    12. June 14, 2019 – a rocket lands near the US Embassy.
    13. June 17, 2019 – three rockets hit Camp Al-Taji.
    14. June 18, 2019 – Nineveh HQ is attacked by two 122mms; one hits, one misses.
    15. June 19, 2019 – rockets strike a gated community outside Basra (home to Exxon staff).
    16. September 23, 2019 – two rockets hit the Green Zone; one lands near the US Embassy.
    17. October 30, 2019 – two rockets hit the Green Zone, killing an Iraqi soldier.
    18. November 8, 2019 – seventeen rockets target Q-West Airfield.
    19. November 17, 2019 – rockets hit the Green Zone.
    20. November 29, 2019 – a rocket hits the Green Zone.
    21. December 3, 2019 – Al-Asad Airbase is "rocked" by five 122mms.
    22. December 5, 2019 – five 107mms hit Balad Airbase (80 kilometers north of Baghdad).
    23. December 6, 2019 – a 240mm rocket lands near Baghdad Airport (then housing a US base).
    24. December 9, 2019 – four 240mms strike Baghdad Airport killing 2, and wounding 5, Iraqi soldiers.
    25. December 11, 2019 – two 240mms land outside Baghdad Airport.
    26. December 27, 2019 – thirty-six 107mms hammer K1 Base (15 kilometers northwest of Kirkuk); killing an American translator and wounding several US troops.
    27. December 29, 2019 – four rockets hit Camp Al-Taji.
    28. December 29, 2019 – five rockets hit Al-Asad Airbase.
    29. January 4, 2020 – two rockets hit Balad Airbase.
    30. January 4, 2020 – several rockets hit the Green Zone. One lands near the US Embassy; another closes a major street.
    31. January 5, 2020 – six rockets are fired at the Green Zone; three hit the target.
    32. January 8, 2020 – two rockets hit the Green Zone.
    33. January 12, 2020 – eight rockets hit Balad Airbase, wounding several Iraqi soldiers.
    34. January 14, 2020 – a five-rocket attack on Camp Al-Taji.
    35. January 20, 2020 – three rockets hit Green Zone. They were fired from Al Zafraniya (15 kilometers away).

    Attacks are becoming more frequent and are trending toward bigger rockets and higher volume salvos.

    The insurgents' strategy is working. Katyusha attacks shuttered the US Basra Consulate in September 2018. Attacks in May and June 2019 forced Exxon to evacuate much of its foreign staff. Throughout 2019 the US State Department extracted personnel and the Defense Department consolidated bases into more secure facilities. By late 2019 US authorities were begging Iraqis for help whilst threatening retaliation.

    The last straw came December 27 when the barrage onto K1 Base killed an American translator. The US responded with airstrikes on five Kata'ib Hezbollah bases (90 casualties) and with the January 3 assassination of Iranian General Soleimani. (The decision to assassinate Soleimani – in the event of an American fatality – was made June 24, 2019 following a week of near daily Katyusha attacks.)

    While Iran and Iran's Iraqi allies are blamed for these attacks; this is dubious. Reportage following attacks invariably drops the phrase " no one claimed responsibility " – which is notable because perpetrators often boast of such achievements. Ten years ago, when Kata'ib Hezbollah targeted US facilities with "lob bombs" (improvised rockets), they posted videos of their handiwork. They deny involvement in these recent attacks as do other Iranian-linked militias.

    The reportage often describes the attacks as " mysterious " or as a " whodunit. " Authors relay US intelligence theories of Iranian involvement without evidence.

    On several occasions insurgents abandoned launchers and/or launch vehicles after the attack, often with fail-to-launch rockets inside. Investigators also possess fragments of successfully fired rockets. Tellingly, US officials, renowned for straining at gnats for evidence of Iranian complicity, do not utilize this material to incriminate Tehran.

    The launchers themselves are obviously manufactured by local artisans. Moreover, an article from Kurdistan – 24 describes the rockets as " locally made ." Even globalist-militarist instrumentalities like the Washington Institute, Long War Journal, and Center for Strategic and International Studies concede some Katyushas are manufactured in Iraq.

    Iraq has a burgeoning steel industry and, due to the calamities of the past 20 years, an enormous scrap metal industry. Katyushas' cardinal virtue is their simplicity.

    Circa 2014 twelve countries hosted non-state armed groups that deployed Katyushas. (Post-2014 Yemen's Houthis joined this list, then outdid the pack in innovation and output.)

    During the 2003-11 era Iraqi insurgents looted Katyushas from local arsenals. Other Katyushas came from Iran (officially or via the black market) and possibly from any of 32 other countries manufacturing them. Experts bemoan the difficulty of determining a rocket's origin.

    Circa 2008 Iraqi artisans manufactured a variety of launchers. A 2009 raid in Maysan Governorate discovered 107mm, 122mm and 220mm rail launchers; and 1,700 carjacks. (Jacks were affixed to the bottoms of stationary tripods to permit changes in launch angle.) Insurgents developed creative mobile launch platforms i.e. inside ice cream trucks or towed behind motorcycles etc. They debuted remote control triggers and GPS reconnaissance.

    Circa 2011 poor quality of locally acquired rockets compelled insurgents to continue to rely on imports. The insurgents were, however, manufacturing "lob bomb" rockets and anti-armor mines; although Iran stood accused of being their sole supplier.

    Post-2011 insurgents honed their craft. Remember: Hamas, operating inside Gaza with a tiny fraction of the resources of Iraq's insurgents, manufactures crude Katyushas.

    Prime suspects in the Katyusha campaign are not pro-Iranian militias; but rather the milieu around Mahdi Army successor, the Promise Day Brigades (PDB). This political tendency, nominally led by Moqtada al-Sadr, is concentrated in Iraq's densely populated central and southern regions, but boasts a militant contingent in Mosul. This milieu overlaps the Saairun Alliance which includes Iraq's far left; who carry their own legacy of armed struggle.

    The insurgency's Von Braun might be Jawad al-Tulaybani. An Iran-Iraq War veteran, al-Tulaybani possesses 40 years of combat rocketry experience. A war wound left him partially disabled. He appeared on US radar in 2008 after masterminding a barrage that wounded 15 US soldiers.

    The org-chart of the Saairun/PDB/al-Sadr movement remains obscured. Notably, on January 8, 2020 al-Sadr counseled refrain from military actions. Four Katyusha attacks happened since.

    What is clear is that this general political tendency is not particularly beholden to Iran. They appear nonsectarian, if not secularist, and they advance a left-nationalist agenda. Prior to the 2018 election (wherein Saairun emerged as the most popular bloc) Iran's Foreign Minister warned Iran would never tolerate an Iraq run by " liberals and communists " – meaning Saairun.

    Then again, Trump's thrill kill of Soleimani (and Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units' Deputy Commander) completely reshuffled the deck, creating unprecedented unity amongst hitherto rivals.

    As Katyushas veto pacification efforts, US forces return to square one. They must retreat to sprawling, remotely situated camps equipped to suppress indirect fire. This, however, means surrendering Iraq's political theater to adversaries who will marshal Iraqi Government resources against them.

    Katyushas are driving the Trump Administration's Iraq policy. Prisoners of groupthink they react by doubling-down on the Big Lie that Iraq's national liberation movement consists only of "Iranian terrorists." In reality, their most effective opponents are as indigenous and legitimate as the French Resistance.

    *Note on Sources

    Data came from scanning 1,000 articles then parsing several dozen of them. Preference went to state media: i.e. Voice of America, Al Jazeera, Xinhua et al; although Military Times and Kurdistan-24 proved germane. Rogue Rocketeers: Artillery Rockets and Armed Groups (Small Arms Survey, Geneva Switzerland, 2014) is a must-read. Data on the first 7 Katyusha attacks was lifted without corroboration from Michael Knights' Responding to Iranian Harassment of U.S. Facilities in Iraq (Washington Institute, May 21, 2019). As Knights is the only analyst to grasp the seriousness of the Katyusha attacks. His reports are a trove. Being intimately connected to US and Israeli intelligence, he slavishly relays the anti-Iran party line.

    Major attacks generate scores of reports. Lesser attacks are mentioned only in passing. Some articles tally the attacks but the numbers do not jibe. Certain attacks go unreported. Probably, 50+ mortar and Katyusha attacks hit US facilities between September 8, 2018 and January 14, 2020.

    William Walter Kay is a researcher and writer from Canada. His most recent book is From Malthus to Mifepristone: A Primer on the Population Control Movement.

    [Jan 23, 2020] Iraq's paramilitary force Hashd Shaabi said on Thursday that it opened fire at an unidentified drone flying over its bases near the border with Syria in the western province of Anbar

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Qparticle , Jan 24 2020 0:32 utc | 133

    Xinhua repoted:

    BAGHDAD, Jan. 23 (Xinhua) -- Iraq's paramilitary force Hashd Shaabi said on Thursday that it opened fire at an unidentified drone flying over its bases near the border with Syria in the western province of Anbar.

    On Dec. 29, the Hashd Shaabi's 45th and 46th brigades belonging to Kata'ib Hezbollah in Iraq were attacked by U.S. airstrikes, leaving more than 25 Hashd Shaabi members killed and 51 others injured.

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 23, 2020] Who Created the Persian Gulf Tinderbox

    Jan 23, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    Joe Biden's statement that "President Trump just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox" by assassinating Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was not inaccurate. But it skirts an all-important question: who created the tinderbox in the first place?

    The answer, of course, is the United States.

    In the long history of imperial folly and recklessness, nothing compares to U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf. Yes, the British shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan in 1838, and, yes, JFK shouldn't have backed the overthrow of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem in November 1963. If they had thought things through more carefully, one wouldn't have lost an entire army in the retreat from Kabul while the other wouldn't have stumbled into a dozen-year-long quagmire that would leave the U.S. military depleted and demoralized – not to mention killing more than a million or more Vietnamese.

    But those were momentary miscalculations compared to the slow-motion disaster in the gulf. For nearly half a century, every U.S. president – liberal, conservative, or whatever – has pumped up a regional arms race that has set the stage for ever more destructive wars. The death and destruction have been incalculable. Yet not once throughout the long sorry saga have Americans paused for even a moment to consider where it was all going.

    The process began in 1973 when Arab oil exporters quadrupled prices after Richard Nixon provided Israel with $2.2 billion in emergency aid in the midst of the nineteen-day Yom Kippur War. America considered seizing Saudi oil fields in retaliation. But once passions cooled, it opted for a pragmatic policy of mutual accommodation in which Arab oil producers and western consumers would accept Israeli victory and higher energy prices alike as faits accomplis and forge a workable settlement out of the rubble.

    The result from a U.S. point of view was a win-win situation if ever there was one. At a stroke, it acquired a powerful military ally in the Jewish state, a valuable export market in the gulf, and a much-needed conservative Muslim ally at a time when secular Arab radicalism was shooting through the roof. The big payoff came in 1989 when a US-backed Saudi-organized jihad drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan, causing the entire Soviet bloc to unravel just two years later.

    Washington was dizzy with success. "What is more important in world history," exulted Zbigniew Brzezinski, the architect of the Afghanistan plan, in 1998. "The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?" A top CIA strategist named Graham Fuller added a year later:

    "The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power and especially to counter the Chinese influence in Central Asia."

    What could go wrong? Plenty, as it turned out: the emergence of jihad as a global phenomenon, the birth of hyper-sectarian Sunni terrorists like Al Qaeda and ISIS, and a cycle of violence that has since proved unstoppable. Since Carter declared unilateral U.S. military jurisdiction over the Persian Gulf in January 1980, the region has seen no fewer than seven major wars:

    Toss in such "minor" incidents as the Saudi-UAE invasion of Bahrain in order to crush democratic protests in March 2011 or the Saudi economic blockade of Qatar in June 2017, and the list grows to nine, surely a record for American "peacekeepers."

    Yet the United States, the world's leading military exporter, has piled up the tinder ever higher by accelerating military exports to absolutist states like Saudi Arabia and Qatar that, as even Hillary Clinton has admitted , "are providing clandestine financial and logical support to ISIL [i.e. Islamic State] and other radical Sunni groups in the region."

    Never has imperialism been more nihilistic. Yet Donald Trump has dialed up the craziness even more by abrogating the 2015 Iran nuclear accord and imposing a trade embargo that has brought the Iranian economy to its knees. Not content with economic warfare, he's now advancing to physical warfare by "droning" Soleimani and threatening massive retaliation against both military and cultural targets if Iran dares raise a hand in response.

    The effect is to propel himself into the front ranks of international war criminals. But Trump could never have done it on his own if a long line of American militarists hadn't paved the way. Daniel Lazare January 8, 2020 | Security Who Created the Persian Gulf Tinderbox? Joe Biden's statement that "President Trump just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox" by assassinating Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was not inaccurate. But it skirts an all-important question: who created the tinderbox in the first place?

    The answer, of course, is the United States.

    In the long history of imperial folly and recklessness, nothing compares to U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf. Yes, the British shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan in 1838, and, yes, JFK shouldn't have backed the overthrow of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem in November 1963. If they had thought things through more carefully, one wouldn't have lost an entire army in the retreat from Kabul while the other wouldn't have stumbled into a dozen-year-long quagmire that would leave the U.S. military depleted and demoralized – not to mention killing more than a million or more Vietnamese.

    But those were momentary miscalculations compared to the slow-motion disaster in the gulf. For nearly half a century, every U.S. president – liberal, conservative, or whatever – has pumped up a regional arms race that has set the stage for ever more destructive wars. The death and destruction have been incalculable. Yet not once throughout the long sorry saga have Americans paused for even a moment to consider where it was all going.

    The process began in 1973 when Arab oil exporters quadrupled prices after Richard Nixon provided Israel with $2.2 billion in emergency aid in the midst of the nineteen-day Yom Kippur War. America considered seizing Saudi oil fields in retaliation. But once passions cooled, it opted for a pragmatic policy of mutual accommodation in which Arab oil producers and western consumers would accept Israeli victory and higher energy prices alike as faits accomplis and forge a workable settlement out of the rubble.

    The result from a U.S. point of view was a win-win situation if ever there was one. At a stroke, it acquired a powerful military ally in the Jewish state, a valuable export market in the gulf, and a much-needed conservative Muslim ally at a time when secular Arab radicalism was shooting through the roof. The big payoff came in 1989 when a US-backed Saudi-organized jihad drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan, causing the entire Soviet bloc to unravel just two years later.

    Washington was dizzy with success. "What is more important in world history," exulted Zbigniew Brzezinski, the architect of the Afghanistan plan, in 1998. "The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?" A top CIA strategist named Graham Fuller added a year later:

    "The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power and especially to counter the Chinese influence in Central Asia."

    What could go wrong? Plenty, as it turned out: the emergence of jihad as a global phenomenon, the birth of hyper-sectarian Sunni terrorists like Al Qaeda and ISIS, and a cycle of violence that has since proved unstoppable. Since Carter declared unilateral U.S. military jurisdiction over the Persian Gulf in January 1980, the region has seen no fewer than seven major wars:

    Toss in such "minor" incidents as the Saudi-UAE invasion of Bahrain in order to crush democratic protests in March 2011 or the Saudi economic blockade of Qatar in June 2017, and the list grows to nine, surely a record for American "peacekeepers."

    Yet the United States, the world's leading military exporter, has piled up the tinder ever higher by accelerating military exports to absolutist states like Saudi Arabia and Qatar that, as even Hillary Clinton has admitted , "are providing clandestine financial and logical support to ISIL [i.e. Islamic State] and other radical Sunni groups in the region."

    Never has imperialism been more nihilistic. Yet Donald Trump has dialed up the craziness even more by abrogating the 2015 Iran nuclear accord and imposing a trade embargo that has brought the Iranian economy to its knees. Not content with economic warfare, he's now advancing to physical warfare by "droning" Soleimani and threatening massive retaliation against both military and cultural targets if Iran dares raise a hand in response.

    The effect is to propel himself into the front ranks of international war criminals. But Trump could never have done it on his own if a long line of American militarists hadn't paved the way.

    © 2010 - 2020 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal www.strategic-culture.org . The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. Joe Biden's statement that "President Trump just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox" by assassinating Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was not inaccurate. But it skirts an all-important question: who created the tinderbox in the first place?

    The answer, of course, is the United States.

    In the long history of imperial folly and recklessness, nothing compares to U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf. Yes, the British shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan in 1838, and, yes, JFK shouldn't have backed the overthrow of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem in November 1963. If they had thought things through more carefully, one wouldn't have lost an entire army in the retreat from Kabul while the other wouldn't have stumbled into a dozen-year-long quagmire that would leave the U.S. military depleted and demoralized – not to mention killing more than a million or more Vietnamese.

    But those were momentary miscalculations compared to the slow-motion disaster in the gulf. For nearly half a century, every U.S. president – liberal, conservative, or whatever – has pumped up a regional arms race that has set the stage for ever more destructive wars. The death and destruction have been incalculable. Yet not once throughout the long sorry saga have Americans paused for even a moment to consider where it was all going.

    The process began in 1973 when Arab oil exporters quadrupled prices after Richard Nixon provided Israel with $2.2 billion in emergency aid in the midst of the nineteen-day Yom Kippur War. America considered seizing Saudi oil fields in retaliation. But once passions cooled, it opted for a pragmatic policy of mutual accommodation in which Arab oil producers and western consumers would accept Israeli victory and higher energy prices alike as faits accomplis and forge a workable settlement out of the rubble.

    The result from a U.S. point of view was a win-win situation if ever there was one. At a stroke, it acquired a powerful military ally in the Jewish state, a valuable export market in the gulf, and a much-needed conservative Muslim ally at a time when secular Arab radicalism was shooting through the roof. The big payoff came in 1989 when a US-backed Saudi-organized jihad drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan, causing the entire Soviet bloc to unravel just two years later.

    Washington was dizzy with success. "What is more important in world history," exulted Zbigniew Brzezinski, the architect of the Afghanistan plan, in 1998. "The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?" A top CIA strategist named Graham Fuller added a year later:

    "The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power and especially to counter the Chinese influence in Central Asia."

    What could go wrong? Plenty, as it turned out: the emergence of jihad as a global phenomenon, the birth of hyper-sectarian Sunni terrorists like Al Qaeda and ISIS, and a cycle of violence that has since proved unstoppable. Since Carter declared unilateral U.S. military jurisdiction over the Persian Gulf in January 1980, the region has seen no fewer than seven major wars:

    Toss in such "minor" incidents as the Saudi-UAE invasion of Bahrain in order to crush democratic protests in March 2011 or the Saudi economic blockade of Qatar in June 2017, and the list grows to nine, surely a record for American "peacekeepers."

    Yet the United States, the world's leading military exporter, has piled up the tinder ever higher by accelerating military exports to absolutist states like Saudi Arabia and Qatar that, as even Hillary Clinton has admitted , "are providing clandestine financial and logical support to ISIL [i.e. Islamic State] and other radical Sunni groups in the region."

    Never has imperialism been more nihilistic. Yet Donald Trump has dialed up the craziness even more by abrogating the 2015 Iran nuclear accord and imposing a trade embargo that has brought the Iranian economy to its knees. Not content with economic warfare, he's now advancing to physical warfare by "droning" Soleimani and threatening massive retaliation against both military and cultural targets if Iran dares raise a hand in response.

    The effect is to propel himself into the front ranks of international war criminals. But Trump could never have done it on his own if a long line of American militarists hadn't paved the way. The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. Tags: Afghanistan Iran Islam Middle East Terrorism United States War Print this article See also January 7, 2020 How Iran Can Checkmate Trump January 6, 2020 A Terrorist Attack Against Eurasian Integration December 13, 2019 Disconnect Over Afghanistan War Shows Dysfunction of US Politics January 9, 2018 Protecting the Belt and Road Initiative From US-Led Terrorism: Will China Send Troops to Syria? January 22, 2020 The United States: a Record-Holder in Political Assassinations January 21, 2020 Drone Strikes Leave Innocent Widows and Orphans December 19, 2019 The Afghanistan Fiasco and the Decline and Fall of the American Military January 23, 2020 An Army for Hire: Trump Wants to Make Money by Renting Out American Soldiers January 20, 2020 The End of U.S. Military Dominance: Unintended Consequences Forge a Multipolar World Order January 18, 2020 Soleimani's Only Public Interview January 16, 2020 Interview: How the Libyan Landscape Is Changing As New Players Get Boots on the Ground January 14, 2020 ISIS Applauds Trump's Killing Soleimani January 21, 2020 How Michael Bloomberg's 'Journalists' Propagandize for More U.S. Aggressions January 20, 2020 The Many Matryoska Dolls to America's Way of Imagining Iran January 19, 2020 Why Iran Should Ditch the Hopeless Nuclear Deal January 17, 2020 Trump, Iran Coordinated De-escalation for Now January 16, 2020 What's the Point of NATO If You Are Not Prepared to Use It Against Iran? January 15, 2020 Trump Steps Back From the Edge. Neocons Rage Accordingly January 15, 2020 Reading Sun Tzu in Tehran January 11, 2020 General Soleimani's Network of Revenge January 9, 2020 America the Repugnant. Assassinating Foreign Leaders Is an Act of War December 31, 2019 Washington's Iraq Catastrophe December 17, 2019 Never Trust a Failing Empire December 6, 2019 NATO Splits Reveal Alliance is Redundant January 16, 2020 Did Soleimani Kill 600 Americans? -- Questions For Corbett January 23, 2020 Things are Getting Harder for the US's Global Military December 26, 2019 The Afghanistan Papers Are Establishment Whitewash BS December 17, 2019 Endless Wars and Endless Lies Also by this author Daniel Lazare Daniel Lazare is an American freelance journalist, publicist and blogger. Bernie Sanders Walks Straight Into the Russiagate Trap Impeachment: Does Anyone Even Care? American Collapse One and a Half Cheers for Tulsi Gabbard You Can't Fool All the People All the Time Sign up for the Strategic Culture Foundation Newsletter Subscribe See also

    [Jan 22, 2020] Trump is Right Afghanistan is a 'Loser War'

    Notable quotes:
    "... Washington Post ..."
    "... A Very Stable Genius: Donald J. Trump's Testing of America ..."
    "... But it was and is true. Indeed, when I visited Afghanistan back when U.S. troop levels were near their highest, "off camera," so to speak, military folks were quite skeptical of the war. So were Afghans, who had little good to say about their Washington-created and -supported government unless they were collecting a paycheck from it. An incoming president could be forgiven for suspecting that his predecessor had poured more troops into the conflict only to put off its failure until after he'd left office. ..."
    "... Accounts like that from Rucker and Leonnig are beloved by the Blob. America's role is to dominate the globe, irrespective of cost. Those officials pursuing this objective, no matter how poorly, are lauded. Any politician challenging Washington's global mission is derided. ..."
    "... President Trump has done much wrong. However, he deserves credit for challenging a failed foreign policy that's been paid for by so many while benefiting so few. It is "crazy" and "stupid," as he reportedly said. Why should Americans keep dying for causes that their leaders cannot adequately explain, let alone justify? Let us hope that one day Americans elect a president who will act and not just talk. ..."
    Jan 22, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    fter three years of the Trump presidency, the Washington Post is breathlessly reporting that Donald Trump is a boor who insults everyone, including generals used to respect and even veneration. He's had the impertinence to ask critical questions of his military briefers. For shame!

    President Trump's limitations have been long evident. The Post 's discussion, adapted by Carol D. Leonnig and Philip Rucker from their upcoming book, A Very Stable Genius: Donald J. Trump's Testing of America , adds color, not substance, to this concern. It seems that in the summer of 2017, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and others were concerned about the president's international ignorance and organized a briefing at the Pentagon to enlighten him.

    Was that a worthwhile mission? Sure. Everyone in the policy world marvels at the president's lack of curiosity, absent knowledge, bizarre assumptions, and perverse conclusions. He doesn't get trade, bizarrely celebrates dictatorship, fixates on Iran, doesn't understand agreements, acts on impulse, and exudes absolute certainty. Yet he also captures the essence of issues and shares a set of inchoate beliefs held by millions of Americans, especially those who feel ignored, insulted, disparaged, and dismissed. Most important, he was elected with a mandate to move policy away from the bipartisan globalist conventional wisdom.

    The latter was evidently the main concern of these briefers. The presentation as described by the article exuded condescension. That attitude very likely was evident to Trump. The briefing was intended to inform, but even more so to establish his aides' control over him. While they bridled at Trump's manners, they were even more opposed to his substantive opinions. And that made the briefing sound like a carefully choreographed attack on his worldview.

    For instance, Mattis used charts with lots of dollar signs "to impress upon [the president] the value of U.S. investments abroad. [Mattis] sought to explain why U.S. troops were deployed in so many regions and why America's safety hinged on a complex web of trade deals, alliances, and bases across the globe." Notably, Mattis "then gave a 20-minute briefing on the power of the NATO alliance to stabilize Europe and keep the United States safe."

    No doubt Secretary Mattis sincerely believed all that. However, it was an argument more appropriately made in 1950 or 1960. The world has since changed dramatically.

    Of course, this is also the position of the Blob, Ben Rhodes' wonderful label for the Washington foreign policymaking community. What has ever been must ever be, is the Blob's informal mantra. America's lot in life, no matter how many average folks must die, is to litter the globe with bases, ships, planes, and troops to fight endless wars, some big, some small, to make the world safe for democracy, sometimes, and autocracy, otherwise. If America ever stops fulfilling what seems to be the modern equivalent of Rudyard Kipling's infamous "white man's burden," order will collapse, authoritarianism will advance, trade will disappear, conflict will multiply, countries will be conquered, friends will become enemies, allies will defect, terrorists will strike, liberal values will be discarded, all that is good and wonderful will disappear, and a new dark age will envelope the earth.

    Trump is remarkably ignorant of the facts, but he does possess a commonsensical skepticism of the utter nonsense that gets promoted as unchallengeable conventional wisdom. As a result, he understood that this weltanschauung, a word he would never use, was an absolute fantasy. And he showed it by the questions he asked.

    For instance, he challenged the defense guarantee for South Korea. "We should charge them rent," he blurted out. "We should make them pay for our soldiers." Although treating American military personnel like mercenaries is the wrong approach, he is right that there is no need to protect the Republic of Korea. The Korean War ended 67 years ago. The South has twice the population and, by the latest estimate, 54 times the economy of the North. Why is Seoul still dependent on America?

    If the Blob has its way, the U.S. will pay to defend the ROK forever. Analysts speak of the need for Americans to stick around even after reunification. It seems there is no circumstance under which they imagine Washington not garrisoning the peninsula. Why is America, born of revolution, now acting like an imperial power that must impose its military might everywhere?

    Even more forcefully, it appeared, did Trump express his hostile views of Europe and NATO. Sure, he appeared to mistakenly believe that there was an alliance budget that European governments had failed to fund. But World War II ended 70 years ago. The Europeans recovered, the Soviet Union collapsed, and Eastern Europeans joined NATO. Why is Washington expected to subsidize a continent with a larger population than, and economy equivalent to, America's, and far larger than Russia's? Mattis apparently offered the standard bromides, such as "This is what keeps us safe."

    How? Does he imagine that without Washington's European presence, Russia would roll its tanks and march to the Atlantic Ocean? And from there launch a global pincer movement to invade North America? How does adding such behemoths as Montenegro keep the U.S. "safe"? What does initiating a military confrontation with Moscow over Ukraine, historically part of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union, have to do with keeping Americans "safe"? The argument is self-evidently not just false but ridiculous.

    Justifying endless wars is even tougher. Rucker and Leonnig do not report what the president said about Syria, which apparently was part of Mattis's brief. However, Trump's skepticism is evident from his later policy gyrations. Why would any sane Washington policymaker insist that America intervene militarily in a multi-sided civil war in a country of no significant security interest to the U.S. on the side of jihadists and affiliates of al-Qaeda? And stick around illegally as the conflict wound down? To call this policy stupid is too polite.

    Even more explosive was the question of Afghanistan, to which the president did speak, apparently quite dismissively. Unsurprisingly, he asked why the U.S. had not won after 16 years -- which is longer than the Civil War, World Wars I and II, and the Korean War combined. He also termed Afghanistan a "loser war." By Rucker's and Leonnig's telling, this did not go over well: "That phrase hung in the air and disgusted not only the military men and women in uniform sitting along the back wall behind their principals. They all were sworn to obey their commander in chief's commands, and here he was calling the way they had been fighting a loser war."

    But it was and is true. Indeed, when I visited Afghanistan back when U.S. troop levels were near their highest, "off camera," so to speak, military folks were quite skeptical of the war. So were Afghans, who had little good to say about their Washington-created and -supported government unless they were collecting a paycheck from it. An incoming president could be forgiven for suspecting that his predecessor had poured more troops into the conflict only to put off its failure until after he'd left office.

    The fault does not belong to combat personnel, but to political leaders and complicit generals, who have misled if not lied in presenting a fairy tale perspective on the conflict's progress and prognosis. And for what? Central Asia is not and never will be a vital issue of American security. Afghanistan has nothing to do with terrorism other than its having hosting al-Qaeda two decades ago. Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan. In recent years, it's Yemen that's hosted the most dangerous national affiliate of al-Qaeda. So why are U.S. troops still in Afghanistan?

    Accounts like that from Rucker and Leonnig are beloved by the Blob. America's role is to dominate the globe, irrespective of cost. Those officials pursuing this objective, no matter how poorly, are lauded. Any politician challenging Washington's global mission is derided.

    President Trump has done much wrong. However, he deserves credit for challenging a failed foreign policy that's been paid for by so many while benefiting so few. It is "crazy" and "stupid," as he reportedly said. Why should Americans keep dying for causes that their leaders cannot adequately explain, let alone justify? Let us hope that one day Americans elect a president who will act and not just talk.

    Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He is a former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan and author of several books, including Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire .

    [Jan 22, 2020] Wikipedia is nothing but a tool for the concealment of truth.

    Jan 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Arch Mangle , Jan 21 2020 14:04 utc | 3

    The Wikipedia article on the Douma attack makes no mention of the recent OPCW leaks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Douma_chemical_attack

    It's clear to me that Wikipedia is nothing but a tool for the concealment of truth.

    somebody , Jan 22 2020 12:39 utc | 96

    Posted by: Walter | Jan 22 2020 12:30 utc | 95

    Of course. Intelligence services wordwide and their governments knew this as soon as they saw the image.

    But Western main stream media does not report on it.

    [Jan 22, 2020] The End Of US Military Dominance Unintended Consequences Forge A Multipolar World Order

    Notable quotes:
    "... The decision to invade Afghanistan following the events of September 11, 2001, while declaring an "axis of evil" to be confronted that included nuclear-armed North Korea and budding regional hegemon Iran, can be said to be the reason for many of the most significant strategic problems besetting the U.S.. ..."
    "... The U.S. often prefers to disguise its medium- to long-term objectives by focusing on supposedly more immediate and short-term threats. Thus, the U.S.'s withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty) and its deployment of the Aegis Combat System (both sea- and land-based) as part of the NATO missile defense system, was explained as being for the purposes of defending European allies from the threat of Iranian ballistic missiles. ..."
    "... As was immediately clear to most independent analysts as well as to President Putin , the deployment of such offensive systems are only for the purposes of nullifying the Russian Federation's nuclear-deterrence capability . Obama and Trump faithfully followed in the steps of George W. Bush in placing ABM systems on Russia's borders, including in Romania and Poland. ..."
    "... There is no defense against such Russian systems as the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle, which serves to restore the deterrence doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD), which in turn serves to ensure that nuclear weapons can never be employed so long as this "balance of terror" exists. Moscow is thus able to ensure peace through strength by showing that it is capable of inflicting a devastating second strike with regard regard for Washington's vaunted ABM systems. ..."
    "... In addition to the continued economic and military pressure placed on Iran, one of the most immediate consequences of the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, better known as the Iran nuclear deal) has been Tehran being forced to examine all options. Although the country's leaders and political figures have always claimed that they do not want to develop a nuclear weapon, stating that it is prohibited by Islamic law, I should think that their best course of action would be to follow Pyongyang's example and acquire a nuclear deterrent to protect themselves from U.S. aggression. ..."
    "... Once again, Washington has ended up shooting itself in the foot by inadvertently encouraging one of its geopolitical opponents to behave in the opposite manner intended. Instead of stopping nuclear proliferation in the region, the U.S., by scuppering of the JCPOA, has only encouraged the prospect of nuclear proliferation. ..."
    "... Trump's short-sightedness in withdrawing from the JCPOA is reminiscent of George W. Bush's withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. By triggering necessary responses from Moscow and Tehran, Washington's actions have only ended up leaving it at a disadvantage in certain critical areas relative to its competitors. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Starting from the presidency of George W. Bush to that of Trump, the U.S. has made some missteps that not only reduce its influence in strategic regions of the world but also its ability to project power and thus impose its will on those unwilling to genuflect appropriately .

    Some examples from the recent past will suffice to show how a series of strategic errors have only accelerated the U.S.'s hegemonic decline.

    ABM + INF = Hypersonic Supremacy

    The decision to invade Afghanistan following the events of September 11, 2001, while declaring an "axis of evil" to be confronted that included nuclear-armed North Korea and budding regional hegemon Iran, can be said to be the reason for many of the most significant strategic problems besetting the U.S..

    The U.S. often prefers to disguise its medium- to long-term objectives by focusing on supposedly more immediate and short-term threats. Thus, the U.S.'s withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty) and its deployment of the Aegis Combat System (both sea- and land-based) as part of the NATO missile defense system, was explained as being for the purposes of defending European allies from the threat of Iranian ballistic missiles. This argument held little water as the Iranians had neither the capability nor intent to launch such missiles.

    As was immediately clear to most independent analysts as well as to President Putin , the deployment of such offensive systems are only for the purposes of nullifying the Russian Federation's nuclear-deterrence capability . Obama and Trump faithfully followed in the steps of George W. Bush in placing ABM systems on Russia's borders, including in Romania and Poland.

    Following from Trump's momentous decision to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty), it is also likely that the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) will also be abandoned, creating more global insecurity with regard to nuclear proliferation.

    Moscow was forced to pull out all stops to develop new weapons that would restore the strategic balance, Putin revealing to the world in a speech in 2018 the introduction of hypersonic weapons and other technological breakthroughs that would serve to disabuse Washington of its first-strike fantasies.

    Even as Washington's propaganda refuses to acknowledge the tectonic shifts on the global chessboard occasioned by these technological breakthroughs, sober military assessments acknowledge that the game has fundamentally changed.

    There is no defense against such Russian systems as the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle, which serves to restore the deterrence doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD), which in turn serves to ensure that nuclear weapons can never be employed so long as this "balance of terror" exists. Moscow is thus able to ensure peace through strength by showing that it is capable of inflicting a devastating second strike with regard regard for Washington's vaunted ABM systems.

    In addition to ensuring its nuclear second-strike capability, Russia has been forced to develop the most advanced ABM system in the world to fend off Washington's aggression. This ABM system is integrated into a defensive network that includes the Pantsir, Tor, Buk, S-400 and shortly the devastating S-500 and A-235 missile systems. This combined system is designed to intercept ICBMs as well as any future U.S. hypersonic weapons

    The wars of aggression prosecuted by George W. Bush, Obama and Trump have only ended up leaving the U.S. in a position of nuclear inferiority vis-a-vis Russia and China. Moscow has obviously shared some of its technological innovations with its strategic partner, allowing Beijing to also have hypersonic weapons together with ABM systems like the Russian S-400.

    No JCPOA? Here Comes Nuclear Iran

    In addition to the continued economic and military pressure placed on Iran, one of the most immediate consequences of the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, better known as the Iran nuclear deal) has been Tehran being forced to examine all options. Although the country's leaders and political figures have always claimed that they do not want to develop a nuclear weapon, stating that it is prohibited by Islamic law, I should think that their best course of action would be to follow Pyongyang's example and acquire a nuclear deterrent to protect themselves from U.S. aggression.

    While this suggestion of mine may not correspond with the intentions of leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the protection North Korea enjoys from U.S. aggression as a result of its deterrence capacity may oblige the Iranian leadership to carefully consider the pros and cons of following suit, perhaps choosing to adopt the Israeli stance of nuclear ambiguity or nuclear opacity, where the possession of nuclear weapons is neither confirmed nor denied. While a world free of nuclear weapons would be ideal, their deterrence value cannot be denied, as North Korea's experience attests.

    While Iran does not want war, any pursuit of a nuclear arsenal may guarantee a conflagration in the Middle East. But I have long maintained that the risk of a nuclear war (once nuclear weapons have been acquired) does not exist , with them having a stabilizing rather than destabilizing effect, particularly in a multipolar environment.

    Once again, Washington has ended up shooting itself in the foot by inadvertently encouraging one of its geopolitical opponents to behave in the opposite manner intended. Instead of stopping nuclear proliferation in the region, the U.S., by scuppering of the JCPOA, has only encouraged the prospect of nuclear proliferation.

    Trump's short-sightedness in withdrawing from the JCPOA is reminiscent of George W. Bush's withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. By triggering necessary responses from Moscow and Tehran, Washington's actions have only ended up leaving it at a disadvantage in certain critical areas relative to its competitors.

    The death of Soleimani punctures the myth of the U.S. invincibility

    I wrote a couple of articles in the wake of General Soleimani's death that examined the incident and then considered the profound ramifications of the event in the region.

    What seems evident is that Washington appears incapable of appreciating the consequences of its reckless actions. Killing Soleimani was bound to invite an Iranian response; and even if we assume that Trump was not looking for war (I explained why some months ago), it was obvious to any observer that there would be a response from Iran to the U.S.'s terrorist actions.

    The response came a few nights later where, for the first time since the Second World War, a U.S. military base was subjected to a rain of missiles (22 missiles each with a 700kg payload). Tehran thereby showed that it possessed the necessary technical, operational and strategic means to obliterate thousands of U.S. and allied personnel within the space of a few minutes if it so wished, with the U.S. would be powerless to stop it.

    U.S. Patriot air-defense systems yet again failed to do their job, reprising their failure to defend Saudi oil and gas facilities against a missile attack conducted by Houthis a few months ago.

    We thus have confirmation, within the space of a few months, of the inability of the U.S. to protect its troops or allies from Houthi, Hezbollah and Iranian missiles. Trump and his generals would have been reluctant to respond to the Iranian missile attack knowing that any Iranian response would bring about uncontrollable regional conflagration that would devastate U.S. bases as well as oil infrastructure and such cities of U.S. allies as Tel Aviv, Haifa and Dubai.

    After demonstrating to the world that U.S. allies in the region are defenseless against missile attacks from even the likes of the Houthis, Iran drove home the point by conducting surgical strikes on two U.S. bases that only highlights the disconnect between the perception of U.S. military invincibility and the reality that would come in the form of a multilayered missile conflict.

    Conclusion

    Washington's diplomatic and military decisions in recent years have only brought about a world world that is more hostile to Washington and less inclined to accept its diktats, often being driven instead to acquire the military means to counter Washington's bullying. Even as the U.S. remains the paramount military power, its ineptitude has resulted in Russia and China surpassing it in some critical areas, such that the U.S. has no chance of defending itself against a nuclear second strike, with even Iran having the means to successfully retaliate against the U.S. in the region.

    As I continue to say, Washington's power largely rests on perception management helped by the make-believe world of Hollywood. The recent missile attacks by Houthis on Saudi Arabia's oil facilities and the Iranian missile attack a few days ago on U.S. military bases in Iraq (none of which were intercepted) are like Toto drawing back the curtain to reveal Washington's military vulnerability. No amount of entreaties by Washington to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain will help.

    The more aggressive the U.S. becomes, the more it reveals its tactical, operational and strategic limits, which in turn only serves to accelerate its loss of hegemony.

    If the U.S. could deliver a nuclear first strike without having to worry about a retaliatory second strike thanks to its ABM systems, then its quest for perpetual unipolarity could possibly be realistic. But Washington's peer competitors have shown that they have the means to defend themselves against a nuclear first strike by being able to deliver an unstoppable second strike, thereby communicating that the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) is here to stay. With that, Washington's efforts to maintain its status as uncontested global hegemon are futile.

    In a region vital to U.S. interests , Washington does not have the operational capacity to stand in the way of Syria's liberation. When it has attempted to directly impose its will militarily, it has seen as many as 80% of its cruise missiles knocked down or deflected , once again highlighting the divergence between Washington's Hollywood propaganda and the harsh military reality.

    The actions of George W. Bush, Obama and Trump have only served to inadvertently accelerate the world's transition away from a unipolar world to a multipolar one. As Trump follows in the steps of his predecessors by being aggressive towards Iran, he only serves to weaken the U.S. global position and strengthen that of his opponents.

    Big Sky Country , 1 hour ago link

    Up to the election of our current President, I agree that we were bullying for the personal gain of a few and our military was being used as a mercenary force. The current administration is working on getting us out of long term conflicts. What do you think "drain the swamp" means? It is a huge undertaking and need to understand what the "deep state" is all about and their goals.

    The death of Soleimani was needed and made the world a safer place. Dr. Janda / Freedom Operation has had several very intriguing presentations on this issue. It is my firm belief that there is a worldwide coalition to make the world a better and safer place. If you want to know about the "deep state" try watching: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cYZ8dUgPuU

    Roacheforque , 2 hours ago link

    All mostly true, but the constant drone of this type of article gets old, as the comments below attest. We really don't need more forensic analysis by the SCF, what we need is an answer to America's dollar Imperialism problem. But we'll never get it, just as England never got an answer to it's pound Imperialism problem.

    I like Tulsi Gabbard, but she can never truly reveal the magnitude of the dollar Imperialism behind her "stop these endless wars" sloganism. Besides, she doesn't have the billions required to mount any real successful campaign. Only billionaires like Bloomberg need apply these days.

    The Truth is that NO ONE will stand up to Wall Street and it's system of global dollar corporatism (from which Bloomberg acquired his billions, and to which the USG is bound). It's suicide to speak the truth to the masses. The dollar must die of its own disease.

    Trump is America's Chemo. The cure nearly as bad as the cancer, but the makers of it have a vested interest in its acceptance.

    messystateofaffairs , 3 hours ago link

    General Bonespur murders a genuine military man from the comfort of his golf course. America is still dangerous, Pinky might be tired but the (((Brain))) is working feverishly on solutions for the jaded .

    msamour , 2 hours ago link

    There has been a perception in the last 25 years that the US could win a nuclear war. This perception is extremely dangerous as it invites the US armed forces to commit atrocities and think they can get away with it (they are for now). The world opinion has turned, but the citizens of the United States of America are not listening.

    If the US keeps going down the path they are currently on, they are ensuring that war will eventually reach its coast.

    Jazzman , 4 hours ago link

    To challenge the US Empire the new Multipolar World is focused on a two-pronged strategy:

    1. Nullifying the US nuclear first strike (at will) as part of the current US military doctrine - accomplished (for a decade maybe).
    2. Outmaneuvering the US petrodollar in trade, the tool to control the global fossil fuel resources on the planet - in progress.

    What makes 2.) decisive is that the petrodollar as reserve currency is the key to recycle the US federal budget deficit via foreign investment in U.S. Treasury Bonds (IOUs) by the central banks, thus enabling the global military presence and power projection of the US military empire.

    rtb61 , 4 hours ago link

    All their little plots and schemes failed, as corrupt arsehole after corrupt arsehole stole the funding from those plots and schemes to fill their own pockets. They also put the most corrupt individuals they could find into power, so as much as possible could be stolen and voila, everywhere they went, everything collapsed, every single time.

    Totally and utterly ludicrous decades, of not punishing failure after failure has resulted in nothing but more failure, like, surprise, surprise, surprise.

    Routine failures have forced other nation to go multipolar or just rush straight to global economic collapse as a result of out of control US corruption. Russia and China did not outsmart the USA, the USA did it entirely to itself by not prosecuting corruption at high levels, even when it failed time and time again, focusing more on how much they could steal, then on bringing what ever plot or scheme to a successful conclusion.

    Falcon49 , 4 hours ago link

    The use of the terms "Unintended Consequences", shortsightedness, mistakes, stupidity, or ignorance provides the avenue to transfer or divert the blame. It excuses it away as bad decisions so that the truth and those responsible are never really exposed and held accountable. The fact is, these actions were not mistakes or acts of shortsightedness...they were deliberate and planned and the so-called "unintended consequences" were actually intended and part of their plan. Looking back and linking the elites favorite process to drive change (problem, reaction, solution)...one can quickly make the connection to many of the so-called "unintended consequences" as they are very predictable results their actions. It becomes very clear that much of what has occurred over the last few decades has been deliberate with planned/intended outcomes.

    mike_1010 , 6 hours ago link

    I think the biggest advantage USA used to have was that they claimed to stand for Freedom and Democracy. And for a time, many people believed them. That's partly why the USSR fell apart, and for a time USA had a lot of goodwill among ordinary Russians.

    But US political leaders squandered this goodwill when they used NATO to attack Yugoslavia against Russia's objections and expanded NATO towards Russia's borders. This has been long forgotten in USA. But many ordinary Russians still seethe about these events. This was the turning point for them that motivated them to support Putin and his rebuilding of Russia's military.

    When you have goodwill among your potential competitors, then they don't have much motivation to increase their capabilities against you. This was the situation USA was in after the USSR fell apart. But USA squandered all of this goodwill and motivated the Russians to do what they did.

    And now, USA under Trump has done something like this with China. USA used to have a lot of goodwill among the ordinary Chinese. But now this is gone as a result of US tariffs, sanctions, and its support for separatism in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Now, the Chinese will be as motivated as the Russians to do their best at promoting their interests at the expense of USA. And together with Russia, they have enough people and enough natural resources to do more than well against USA and its allies.

    I think USA could've maintained a lot more influence around the world through goodwill with ordinary people, than through sanctions, threats, and military attacks. If USA had left Iraq under Saddam Hussein alone, then Iran wouldn't have had much influence in there. And if USA had left Iran alone, then the young people there might've already rebelled against their strict Islamic rule and made their government more friendly with USA.

    Doing nothing, except business and trade, would've left USA in a much better position, than the one USA is in now.

    Now USA is bankrupting itself with unsustainable military spending and still falling behind its competitors. USA might still have the biggest economy in the world in US Dollar terms. But this doesn't take into account the cost of living and purchasing parity. With purchasing parity taken into account, China now has a bigger economy than that of USA. Because internally, they can manufacture and buy a lot more for the same amount of money than USA can. A lot of US military spending is on salaries, pensions, and healthcare of its personnel. While such costs in Russia and China are comparatively small. They are spending most of their money on improving and building their military technology. That's why in the long run, USA will probably fall behind even more.

    abodasho , 4 hours ago link

    The Anglos in the U.S. are not from there and are imposters who are claiming characteristics and a culture that doesn't belong to them. They're using it as a way to hide from scrutiny, so you blame "Americans", when its really them. That's why there's such a huge disconnect between stated values and actions. The values belong to another group of people, TRUE Americans, while the actions belong to Anglos, who have a history of aggressive and forced, irrational violence upon innocents.

    mike_1010 , 3 hours ago link

    It's true that ordinary people are often different from their government, including in Russia, in China, in Iran, in USA, and even in Nazi Germany in the past.

    But the people in such a situation are usually powerless and unable to influence their government. So, their difference is irrelevant in the way their government behaves and alienates people around the world.

    USA is nominally a democracy, where the government is controlled by the people. But in reality, the people are only a ceremonial figurehead, and the real power is a small minority of rich companies and individuals, who fund election campaigns of politicians.

    That's why for example most Americans want to have universal healthcare, just like all other developed countries have. But most elected politicians from both major parties won't even consider this idea, because their financial donors are against it. And if the people are powerless even within their own country, then outside with foreigners, they have even less influence.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/most-americans-now-support-medicare-for-all-and-free-college-tuition.html

    MalteseFalcon , 2 hours ago link

    The USA completely squandered their "soft" power.

    nuerocaster , 7 hours ago link

    Anyone interested in the real story?

    1. Nation Building? It worked with Germany and Japan, rinse and repeat. So what if it's comparing apples to antimatter?

    2. US won the Cold War? So make the same types of moves made during Reagan adm? The real reason the Soviet Empire collapsed was because it was a money losing empire while the US was a money making empire. Just review the money pits they invested in.

    3. Corruption? That was your grandfather's time. The US has been restructured. Crime Syndicate and Feudal templates are the closest. Stagnation and decline economically and technologically are inevitable.

    4. Evaluating the competition is problematic. However perhaps the most backward and regressive elements in this society are branding themselves as progressive and getting away with it. That can't work.

    [Jan 22, 2020] How Our Economic Warfare Brings the World to Heel

    Jan 22, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    How Our Economic Warfare Brings the World to Heel

    Unprecedented hubris is drawing a global blowback that will leave America in a very dangerous place. Sorin Alb/Shutterstock

    January 2, 2020

    |

    12:01 am

    Doug Bandow Economic sanctions are an important foreign policy tool going back to America's founding. President Thomas Jefferson banned trade with Great Britain and France, which left U.S. seamen unemployed while failing to prevent military conflict with both.

    Economic warfare tends to be equally ineffective today. The Trump administration made Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, and North Korea special sanctions targets. So this strategy has failed in every case. In fact, "maximum pressure" on both Iran, which has become more threatening, and North Korea, which appears to be preparing a tougher military response, has dramatically backfired.

    The big difference between then and now is Washington's shift from primary to secondary sanctions. Trade embargoes, such as first applied to Cuba in 1960, once only prevented Americans from dealing with the target state. Today Washington attempts to conscript the entire world to fight its economic wars.

    This shift was heralded by the 1996 Helms-Burton Act, which extended Cuban penalties to foreign companies, a highly controversial move at the time. Sudan was another early target of secondary sanctions, which barred anyone who used the U.S. financial system from dealing with Khartoum. Europeans and others grumbled about Washington's arrogance, but were not willing to confront the globe's unipower over such minor markets.

    However, sanctions have become much bigger business in Washington. One form is a mix of legislative and executive initiatives applied against governments in disfavor. There were five countries under sanction when George W. Bush took office in 2001. The Office of Foreign Assets Control currently lists penalties against the Balkans, Belarus, Burundi, Central African Republic, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Nicaragua, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine-Russia, Venezuela, Yemen, and Zimbabwe. In addition are special programs: countering America's adversaries, counter-narcotics, counter-terrorism, cyber warfare, foreign election interference, Global Magnitsky, Magnitsky, proliferation, diamond trade, and transnational crime.

    Among today's more notable targets are Cuba for being communist, Venezuela for being crazy communist, Iran for having once sought nuclear weapons and currently challenging Saudi and U.S. regional hegemony, Russia for beating up on Ukraine and meddling in America's 2016 election, Syria for opposing Israel and brutally suppressing U.S.-supported insurgents, and North Korea for developing nuclear weapons. Once on Washington's naughty list, countries rarely get off.

    The second penalty tier affects agencies, companies, and people who have offended someone in Washington for doing something considered evil, inappropriate, or simply inconvenient. Individual miscreants often are easy to dislike. Penalizing a few dubious characters or enterprises creates less opposition than sanctioning a country.

    However, some targets merely offended congressional priorities. For instance, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act Congress authorized sanctions against Western companies, most notably the Swiss-Dutch pipe-laying venture Allseas Group, involved in the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project. GOP Senators Ted Cruz and Ron Johnson threatened Allseas: "continuing to do the work -- for even a single day after the president signs the sanctions legislation -- would expose your company to crushing and potentially fatal legal and economic sanctions."

    Penalizing what OFAC calls "Specially Designated Nationals" and "blocked persons" has become Washington sport. Their number hit 8000 last year. The Economist noted that the Trump administration alone added 3100 names during its first three years, almost as many as George W. Bush included in eight years. Today's target list runs an incredible 1358 pages.

    The process has run wildly out of control. Policymakers' first response to a person, organization, or government doing something of which they disapprove now seems to be to impose sanctions -- on anyone or anything on earth dealing with the target. Unfortunately, reliance on economic warfare, and sanctions traditionally are treated as an act of war, has greatly inflated U.S. officials' geopolitical ambitions. Once they accepted that the world was a messy, imperfect place. Today they intervene in the slightest foreign controversy. Even allies and friends, most notably Europe, Japan, South Korea, and India, are threatened with economic warfare unless they accept Washington's self-serving priorities and mind-numbing fantasies.

    At the same time the utility of sanctions is falling. Unilateral penalties usually fail, which enrages advocates, who respond by escalating sanctions, again without success. Of course, embargoes and bans often inflict substantial economic pain, which sometimes lead proponents to claim victory. However, the cost is supposed to be the means to another end. Yet the Trump administration has failed everywhere: Cuba maintains communist party rule, Iran has grown more truculent, North Korea has refused to disarm, Russia has not given back Crimea, and Venezuela has not defenestrated Nicolas Maduro.

    Much the same goes for penalties applied to individuals, firms, and other entities. Those targeted often are hurt, and most of them deserve to be hurt. But they usually persist in their behavior or others replace them. What dictator has been deposed, policy has been changed, threat has been countered, or wrong has been righted as a result of economic warfare? There is little evidence that U.S. sanctions achieve much of anything, other than encourage sanctimonious moral preening.

    Noted the Economist , "If they do not change behavior, sanctions risk becoming less a tool of coercion than an expensive and rather arbitrary extraterritorial form of punishment." One that some day might be turned against Americans.

    Contra apparent assumptions in Washington, it is not easy to turn countries into America's image. Raw nationalism usually triumphs. Americans should reflect on how they would react if the situation was reversed. No one wants to comply with unpopular foreign dictates.

    In fact, economic warfare often exacerbates underlying conflicts. Rather than negotiate with Washington from a position of weakness, Iran has threatened maritime traffic in the Persian Gulf, shut down Saudi oil exports, and loosed affiliates and irregulars on American and allied forces. Russia has challenged against multiple Washington policy priorities. Cuba has shifted power to the post-revolutionary generation and extended its authority private businesses as the Trump administration's policies have stymied growth and undermined entrepreneurs.

    The almost endless expansion of sanctions also punishes American firms and foreign companies active in America. Compliance is costly. Violating one rule, even inadvertently, is even more so. Chary companies preemptively forego legal business in a process called "de-risking."

    Even humanitarian traffic suffers: Who wants to risk an expensive mistake in handling relatively low value transactions? Such effects might not bother smug U.S. policymakers, but should weigh heavily on the rest of us.

    Perhaps most important, Washington's overreliance on secondary sanctions is building resistance to American financial dominance. Warned Treasury Secretary Jack Lew in 2016: "The more we condition use of the dollar and our financial system on adherence to U.S. foreign policy, the more the risk of migration to other currencies and other financial systems in the medium-term grows."

    Overthrowing the almighty dollar will be no mean feat. Nevertheless, arrogant U.S. attempts to regulate the globe have united much of the world, including Europe, Russia, and China, against American extraterritoriality. Noted attorney Bruce Zagaris, Washington is "inadvertently mobilizing a club of countries and international organizations, including U.S. allies, to develop ways to circumvent U.S. sanctions."

    Merchant ships and oil tankers turn off transponders. Vessels transfer cargoes at sea. Firms arrange cash and barter deals. Major powers such as China aid and abet violations and dare Washington to wreck much larger bilateral economic relationships. The European Union passed "Blocking Legislation" to allow recovery of damages from U.S. sanctions and limit Europeans' compliance with such rules. The EU also developed a barter facility, known as Instex, to allow trade with Iran without reliance on U.S. financial institution.

    Russia has pushed to de-dollarize international payments and worked with China to settle bilateral trade in rubles and renminbi. Foreign central banks have increased their purchases of gold. At the recent Islamic summit Malaysia proposed using gold and barter for trade to thwart future sanctions. Venezuela has been selling gold for euros. These measures do not as yet threaten America's predominant financial role but foreshadow likely future changes.

    Indeed, Washington's attack on plans by Germany to import natural gas from Russia might ignite something much greater. Berlin is not just an incidental victim of U.S. policy. Rather, Germany is the target. Complained Foreign Minister Heiko Maas "European energy policy is decided in Europe, not in the U.S." Alas, Congress thinks differently.

    However, Europeans are ever less willing to accept this kind of indignity. Washington is penalizing even close allies for no obvious purpose other than demonstrating its power. In Nord Stream 2's case, Gazprom likely will complete the project if necessary. Germany's Deputy Foreign Minister Niels Annen argued that "Europe needs new instruments to be able to defend itself from licentious extraterritorial sanctions."

    Commercial penalties have a role to play in foreign policy, but economic warfare is warfare. It can trigger real conflicts -- consider Imperial Japan's response to the Roosevelt administration's cut-off of oil exports. And economic warfare can kill innocents. When UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright was asked about the deaths of a half million Iraqi babies from U.S. sanctions, her response was chilling: "We think the price is worth it." Yet most of the time economic war fails, especially if a unilateral effort by one power applied against the rest of the world.

    Washington policymakers need to relearn the meaning of humility. Incompetent and arrogant sanctions policies hurt Americans as well as others. Unfortunately, the resulting blowback will only increase.

    Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire.

    Fran Macadam • 21 days ago

    Under the official Full Spectrum Dominance policy of national security, the goal is that all other nations will be satrapies under U.S. jurisdiction. There are both punishments for using the U.S. dollar, and punishments for not using it.
    Cesar Jeopardy MattMusson • 20 days ago
    I'm afraid it will be the U.S. that suffers. Other countries will no longer subordinate their interests to those of the U.S. I think the U.S. will have to fight all future wars, and accept all blow-back, on her own.
    Gary Sellars • 21 days ago
    It's a waste of time trying to appeal to the commonsense of the Washington Elites. They are too arrogant and sociopathic to care, and lack anything that remotely resembles a moral compass.
    Markus • 21 days ago
    Sanctions are ineffective because the effects don't fall on those making decisions that are adverse to the US. After fifty years of sanctions, Fidel died in bed in great comfort. Sanctions on top of the crazy Juche policies make life hard for the ordinary North Korean, but Kim doesn't appear to have lost any weight. Our officials pat themselves on the back for their militancy without checking for effectiveness.
    Disqus10021 • 20 days ago
    Would it be correct to say that the US embargo on oil exports to Japan in August 1941 led to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor a few months later (Dec. 7)? Was FDR trying to provoke a war with Japan at the time?
    Comment-1 Disqus10021 • 20 days ago
    Discuss 10021. Yes. I used to study East Asia and even reading standard collections of articles, on the article announcing the embargo of steel and oil, and from British controlled territories in East Asia, one's reaction would be, "This means war." (In like, Pres. Carter said if Saudi Arabia refused to sell oil to the US we would invade and take over oil fields.) Se our reaction was similar to that of Japan, though we would blame them and us doing the same would be good. The US military assessment was, I have forgotten exactly, but that Japan would be without heat, power, lighting, factories closed (no oil or steel) and they would be on the point of starvation within, I have forgotten, 9 months to 1 1/2 years. So they "had to do something".. Their war plan was not to invade the US but start a surprise war and strike quickly hoping to get forward bases in the Pacific and we would need to negotiate and turn on the spigot. Japanese assessment was if they did not achieve this by the end of 1942 they were finished. Interestingly, Hitler's assessment of Germany's war was if they had not defeated USSR and gone after United Kingdom by the end of 1942, they, also, were finished. If I recall the report, Eleanor Roosevelt had told on US writer the day the attack occurred, something like, "We thought they were going to attack, but we thought it would be in the Philippines, not Hawaii."
    ask zippy Comment-1 • 19 days ago
    So the sanctions had nothing to do with the invasion of French Indo-China? Who taught the class, Noam Chomsky
    Robert Levine • 20 days ago
    Sanctions are now a form of virtue-signaling for both the right and the left.
    BillSamuel • 18 days ago
    The hubris is overwhelming. All empires fall, and the USA certainly seems headed for a fall. However, we still have a choice. We could reject empire, stop all our illegal foreign wars, close all our foreign military bases, drastically reduce our military budget (it is NOT a "defense" budget; it is an offense military budget), end our campaigns of economic sanctions, and stop being the Big Bully of the world. The result would be to free enormous resources for our own country which ranks behind almost all other affluent nations - and sometimes many not-so-affluent nations - in almost all indicators of ecnomic and social well being. Replacing the military sector of our economy with civilian alternatives would be a big boon. Weapons are notable for not continuing in the economic cycle as civilian products do. There are many more jobs per dollars spent in the civilian sector than the military sector. Empire is killing our country even as it is killing other countries.
    Gary Sellars BillSamuel • 17 days ago • edited
    Agreed, but the elites make BILLIONS from Empire & the associated militarism. Psychopaths don't care about the damage they inflict on others, even their own countrymen, and they won't willingly surrender the machinery that generates their wealth and privilege.

    [Jan 21, 2020] Maybe we should put sanctions on Pompeo

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Old and grumpy , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 3:48 pm GMT

    Maybe we should put sanctions on Pompeo. He could use the diet. Maybe raiding his pantry would feed Iraqi for a couple months. He is truly perfect spokesman American empire. Sadistic, bloated, and corrupt.
    Just passing through , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 4:20 pm GMT
    @Old and grumpy Trump also needs to have food sanctions placed on him. His body is being oppressed and is crying out for (diet) regime change.

    [Jan 21, 2020] The Revelations of WikiLeaks: No. 6 -- US Diplomatic Cables Spark 'Arab Spring,' Expose Spying at UN Elsewhere

    Notable quotes:
    "... Today we resume our series ..."
    "... with little more than a month before the extradition hearing for imprisoned ..."
    "... publisher Julian Assange begins. This is the sixth in a series that is looking back on the major works of the publication that has altered the world since its founding in 2006. The series is an effort to counter mainstream media coverage, which is ignoring ..."
    "... work, and is instead focusing on Julian Assange's personality. It is ..."
    "... uncovering of governments' crimes and corruption that set the U.S. after Assange, ultimately leading to his arrest on April 11 last year and indictment under the U.S. Espionage Act. ..."
    "... Special to Consortium News ..."
    "... Der Spiegel ..."
    "... to the Winter Fund Drive. ..."
    "... World Socialist Website ..."
    "... Foreign Policy ..."
    "... The Guardian ..."
    "... The New York Times ..."
    "... The Green Left ..."
    "... The Green Left Weekly ..."
    "... The Guardian ..."
    "... CORRECTION: CableDrum is an independent Twitter feed and is not associated with ..."
    "... as was incorrectly reported here. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    January 14, 2020 • 7 Comments

    WikiLeaks ' publication of "Cablegate" in late 2010 dwarfed previous releases in both size and impact and helped cause what one news outlet called a political meltdown for United States foreign policy.

    Today we resume our series The Revelations of WikiLeaks with little more than a month before the extradition hearing for imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange begins. This is the sixth in a series that is looking back on the major works of the publication that has altered the world since its founding in 2006. The series is an effort to counter mainstream media coverage, which is ignoring WikiLeaks' work, and is instead focusing on Julian Assange's personality. It is WikiLeaks' uncovering of governments' crimes and corruption that set the U.S. after Assange, ultimately leading to his arrest on April 11 last year and indictment under the U.S. Espionage Act.

    'A Political Meltdown for US Foreign Policy'

    By Elizabeth Vos
    Special to Consortium News

    O f all WikiLeaks' releases, probably the most globally significant have been the more than a quarter of a million U.S. State Department diplomatic cables leaked in 2010, the publication of which helped spark a revolt in Tunisia that spread into the so-called Arab Spring, revealed Saudi intentions towards Iran and exposed spying on the UN secretary general and other diplomats.

    The releases were surrounded by a significant controversy (to be covered in a separate installment of this series) alleging that WikiLeaks purposely endangered U.S. informants by deliberately revealing their names. That allegation formed a major part of the U.S. indictment on May 23 of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange under the Espionage Act, though revealing informants' names is not a crime, nor is there evidence that any of them were ever harmed.

    WikiLeaks ' publication of "Cablegate," beginning on Nov. 28, 2010, dwarfed previous WikiLeaks releases, in both size and impact. The publication amounted to 251,287 leaked American diplomatic cables that, at the time of publication, Der Spiegel described as"no less than a political meltdown for United States foreign policy."

    Cablegate revealed a previously unknown history of diplomatic relations between the United States and the rest of the world, and in doing so, exposed U.S. views of both allies and adversaries. As a result of such revelations, Cablegate's release was widely condemned by the U.S. political class and especially by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    The Twitter handle Cable Drum, called it,

    " The largest set of confidential documents ever to be released into the public domain. The documents will give people around the world an unprecedented insight into U.S. Government foreign activities. The cables, which date from 1966 up until the end of February 2010, contain confidential communications between 274 embassies in countries throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC. 15,652 of the cables are classified Secret."

    Among the historic documents that were grouped with Cablegate in WikiLeaks ' Public Library of U.S. Diplomacy are 1.7 million that involve Henry Kissinger, national security adviser and secretary of state under President Richard Nixon; and 1.4 million related to the Jimmy Carter administration.

    Der Spiegel reported that the majority were "composed by ambassadors, consuls or their staff. Most contain assessments of the political situation in the individual countries, interview protocols and background information about personnel decisions and events. In many cases, they also provide political and personal profiles of individual politicians and leaders."

    Cablegate rounded out WikiLeaks' output in 2010, which had seen the explosive publication of previous leaks also from Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning including " Collateral Murder ," the " Afghan War Diaries " and " Iraq War Logs ," the subject of earlier installments in this series. As in the case of the two prior releases, WikiLeaks published Cablegate in partnerships with establishment media outlets.

    The "Cablegate" archive was later integrated with the WikiLeaks Public Library of U.S. Diplomacy , which contains over 10 million documents.

    Global U.S. Empire Revealed

    The impact of "Cablegate" is impossible to fully encapsulate, and should be the subject of historical study for decades to come. In September 2015 Verso published " The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to U.S. Empire ," with a foreword by Assange. It is a compendium of chapters written by various regional experts and historians giving a broader and more in-depth geopolitical analysis of U.S. foreign policy as revealed by the cables.

    "The internal communications of the US Department of State are the logistical by-product of its activities: their publication is the vivisection of a living empire, showing what substance flowed from which state organ and when. Only by approaching this corpus holistically – over and above the documentation of each individual abuse, each localized atrocity – does the true human cost of empire heave into view," Assange wrote in the foreword.

    ' WikiLeaks Revolt' in Tunisia

    The release of "Cablegate" provided the spark that many argue heralded the Arab Spring, earning the late-November publication the moniker of the " WikiLeaks Winter ."

    Eventually, many would also credit WikiLeaks' publication of the diplomatic cables with initiating a chain-reaction that spread from the Middle East ( specifically from Egypt) to the global Occupy Wall Street movement by late 2011.

    The first of the Arab uprisings was Tunisia's 28-day so-called Jasmine Revolution, stretching from Dec. 17, 2010, to Jan. 14, 2011, described as the "first WikiLeaks revolution."

    Cables published by WikiLeaks revealed the extent of the Tunisian ruling family's corruption, and were widely accessible in Tunisia thanks to the advent of social media platforms like Twitter. Then-President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali had been in power for over two decades at the time of the cables' publication.

    Please Donate to the Winter Fund Drive.

    One State Department cable, labeled Secret , said:

    "President Ben Ali's extended family is often cited as the nexus of Tunisian corruption. Often referred to as a quasi-mafia, an oblique mention of 'the Family' is enough to indicate which family you mean. Seemingly half of the Tunisian business community can claim a Ben Ali connection through marriage, and many of these relations are reported to have made the most of their lineage."

    A June 2008 cable said: "Whether it's cash, services, land, property, or yes, even your yacht, President [Zine el Abidine] Ben Ali's family is rumored to covet it and reportedly gets what it wants."

    Symbolic middle finger gesture representing the Tunisian Revolution and its influences in the Arab world. From left to right, fingers are painted as flags of Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Sudan and Algeria. (Khalid from Doha, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)

    The cables revealed that Ben Ali's extended family controlled nearly the entire Tunisian economy, from banking to media to property development, while 30 percent of Tunisians were unemployed. They showed that state-owned property was expropriated to be passed on to private ownership by family members.

    "Lax oversight makes the banking sector an excellent target of opportunity, with multiple stories of 'First Family' schemes," one cable read. ""With real estate development booming and land prices on the rise, owning property or land in the right location can either be a windfall or a one-way ticket to expropriation," said another.

    The revolt was facilitated once the U.S. abandoned Ali. Counterpunch reported that: "The U.S. campaign of unwavering public support for President Ali led to a widespread belief among the Tunisian people that it would be very difficult to dislodge the autocratic regime from power. This view was shattered when leaked cables exposed the U.S. government's private assessment: that the U.S. would not support the regime in the event of a popular uprising."

    The internet and large social media platforms played a crucial role in the spread of public awareness of the cables and their content amongst the Tunisian public. "Thousands of home-made videos of police repression and popular resistance have been posted on the web. The Tunisian people have used Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites to organize and direct the mobilizations against the regime," the World Socialist Website wrote.

    Foreign Policy magazine reported:

    "WikiLeaks acted as a catalyst: both a trigger and a tool for political outcry. Which is probably the best compliment one could give the whistle-blower site." The magazine added: "The people of Tunisia shouldn't have had to wait for Wikileaks to learn that the U.S. saw their country just as they did. It's time that the gulf between what American diplomats know and what they say got smaller."

    The Guardian published an account in January 2011 by a young Tunisian, Sami Ben Hassine, who wrote: "The internet is blocked, and censored pages are referred to as pages "not found" – as if they had never existed. And then, WikiLeaks reveals what everyone was whispering. And then, a young man [Mohamed Bouazizi] immolates himself. And then, 20 Tunisians are killed in one day. And for the first time, we see the opportunity to rebel, to take revenge on the 'royal' family who has taken everything, to overturn the established order that has accompanied our youth."

    Protester in Tunis, Jan. 14, 2011, holding sign. Translation from French: "Ben Ali out." (Skotch 79, CC0, Wikimedia Commons)

    On the first day of Chelsea Manning's pretrial in December 2011, Daniel Ellsberg told Democracy Now:

    "The combination of the WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning exposures in Tunis and the exemplification of that by Mohamed Bouazizi led to the protests, the nonviolent protests, that drove Ben Ali out of power, our ally there who we supported up 'til that moment, and in turn sparked the uprising in Egypt, in Tahrir Square occupation, which immediately stimulated the Occupy Wall Street and the other occupations in the Middle East and elsewhere. I hope [Manning and Assange] will have the effect in liberating us from the lawlessness that we have seen and the corruption -- the corruption -- that we have seen in this country in the last 10 years and more, which has been no less than that of Tunis and Egypt."

    Clinton Told US Diplomats to Spy at UN

    The cables' revelation that the U.S. State Department under then-Secretary-of-State Clinton had demanded officials act as spies on officials at the United Nations -- including the Secretary General -- was particularly embarrassing for the United States.

    El Pais summarized the bombshell: "The State Department sent officials of 38 embassies and diplomatic missions a detailed account of the personal and other information they must obtain about the United Nations, including its secretary general, and especially about officials and representatives linked to Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iran and North Korea.

    El Pais continued: "Several dispatches, signed 'Clinton' and probably made by the office of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, contain precise instructions about the myriad of inquiries to be developed in conflict zones, in the world of deserters and asylum seekers, in the engine room of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or about the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China to know their plans regarding the nuclear threat in Tehran."

    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton & UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon in 2012. (Foreign and Commonwealth Office/Flickr)

    CNN described the information diplomats were ordered to gather: "In the July 2009 document, Clinton directs her envoys at the United Nations and embassies around the world to collect information ranging from basic biographical data on foreign diplomats to their frequent flyer and credit card numbers and even 'biometric information on ranking North Korean diplomats.' Typical biometric information can include fingerprints, signatures and iris recognition data."

    Der Spiegel reported that Clinton justified the espionage orders by emphasizing that "a large share of the information that the US intelligence agencies works with comes from the reports put together by State Department staff around the world."

    Der Spiegel added: "The US State Department also wanted to obtain information on the plans and intentions of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his secretariat relating to issues like Iran, according to the detailed wish list in the directive. The instructions were sent to 30 US embassies around the world, including the one in Berlin."

    Philip J. Crowley as assistant secretary of state for public affairs in 2010. (State Department)

    The State Department responded to the revelations, with then- State-Department-spokesman P.J. Crowley reportedly disputing that American diplomats had assumed a new role overseas.

    "Our diplomats are just that, diplomats," he said. "They represent our country around the world and engage openly and transparently with representatives of foreign governments and civil society. Through this process, they collect information that shapes our policies and actions. This is what diplomats, from our country and other countries, have done for hundreds of years."

    In December 2010, just after the cables' publication, Assange told Time : "She should resign if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations, in violation of the international covenants to which the U.S. has signed up."

    Saudis & Iran

    A diplomatic cable dated April 20, 2008, made clear Saudi Arabia's pressure on the United States to take action against its enemy Iran, including not ruling out military action against Teheran:

    "[Then Saudi ambassador to the US Abbdel] Al-Jubeir recalled the King's frequent exhortations to the US to attack Iran and so put an end to its nuclear weapons program. 'He told you to cut off the head of the snake,' he recalled to the Charge', adding that working with the US to roll back Iranian influence in Iraq is a strategic priority for the King and his government. 11. (S) The Foreign Minister, on the other hand, called instead for much more severe US and international sanctions on Iran, including a travel ban and further restrictions on bank lending. Prince Muqrin echoed these views, emphasizing that some sanctions could be implemented without UN approval. The Foreign Minister also stated that the use of military pressure against Iran should not be ruled out."

    Dyncorp & the 'Dancing Boys' of Afghanistan

    The cables indicate that Afghan authorities asked the United States government to quash U.S. reporting on a scandal stemming from the actions of Dyncorp employees in Afghanistan in 2009.

    Employees of Dyncorp, a paramilitary group with an infamous track-record of alleged involvement in sex trafficking and other human rights abuses in multiple countries, were revealed by Cablegate to have been involved with illegal drug use and hiring the services of a "bacha bazi," or underage dancing boy.

    A 2009 cable published by WikiLeaks described an event where Dyncorp had purchased the service of a "bacha bazi." The writer of the cable does not specify what happened during the event, describing it only as "purchasing a service from a child," and he tries to convince a journalist not to cover the story in order to not "risk lives."

    Although Dyncorp was no stranger to controversy by the time of the cables' publication, the revelation of the mercenary force's continued involvement in bacha bazi provoked further questions as to why the company continued to receive tax-payer funded contracts from the United States.

    Sexual abuse allegations were not the only issue haunting Dyncorp. The State Department admitted in 2017 that it "could not account for" more than $1 billion paid to the company, as reported by Foreign Policy .

    The New York Times later reported that U.S. soldiers had been told to turn a blind eye to the abuse of minors by those in positions of power: "Soldiers and Marines have been increasingly troubled that instead of weeding out pedophiles, the American military was arming them in some cases and placing them as the commanders of villages -- and doing little when they began abusing children."

    Australia Lied About Troop Withdrawal

    Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of Australia, left, with U.S. President Barack Obama, in the Oval Office, Nov. 30, 2009, to discuss a range of issues including Afghanistan and climate change. (White House/Pete Souza)

    The Green Left related that the cables exposed Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's double talk about withdrawing troops. "Despite government spin about withdrawing all 'combat forces,' the cables said some of these forces could be deployed in combat roles. One cable said, "[d]espite the withdrawal of combat forces, Rudd agreed to allow Australian forces embedded or seconded to units of other countries including the U.S. to deploy to Iraq in combat and combat support roles with those units."

    US Meddling in Latin America

    Cables revealed that U.S. ambassadors to Ecuador had opposed the presidential candidacy of Raphael Correa despite their pretense of neutrality, as observed by The Green Left Weekly .

    Additional cables revealed the Vatican attempted to increase its influence in Latin America with the aid of the U.S. Further cables illustrated the history of Pope Francis while he was a cardinal in Argentina, with the U.S. appearing to have a positive outlook on the future pontiff.

    Illegal Dealings Between US & Sweden

    WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange wrote in his affidavit :

    "Through the diplomatic cables I also learned of secret, informal arrangements between Sweden and the United States. The cables revealed that Swedish intelligence services have a pattern of lawless conduct where US interests are concerned. The US diplomatic cables revealed that the Swedish Justice Department had deliberately hidden particular intelligence information exchanges with the United States from the Parliament of Sweden because the exchanges were likely unlawful."

    Military Reaction

    On Nov. 30, 2010, the State Department declared it would remove the diplomatic cables from its secure network in order to prevent additional leaks. Antiwar.com added: "The cables had previously been accessible through SIPRNet, an ostensibly secure network which is accessible by millions of officials and soldiers. It is presumably through this network that the cables were obtained and leaked to WikiLeaks ."

    The Guardian described SIPRNet as a "worldwide US military internet system, kept separate from the ordinary civilian internet and run by the Defence Department in Washington."

    Political Fury

    On Nov. 29, 2010, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said of the "Cablegate" release:

    "This disclosure is not just an attack on America's foreign policy; it is an attack on the international community, the alliances and partnerships, the conventions and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity."

    The next day, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee called for Chelsea Manning's execution, according to Politico .

    Some political figures did express support for Assange, including U.K. Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn, who wrote via Twitter days after Cablegate was published: "USA and others don't like any scrutiny via wikileaks and they are leaning on everybody to pillory Assange. What happened to free speech?"

    Other notable revelations from the diplomatic cables included multiple instances of U.S. meddling in Latin America, the demand by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that diplomatic staff act as spies , the documentation of misconduct by U.S. paramilitary forces, the fallout of the 2008 financial crisis in Iceland, the deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons in Germany and other European countries, that the Vatican attempted to increase its influence in Latin America with the aid of the U.S. , that U.S. diplomats had essentially spied on German Chancellor Angele Merkel, and much more.

    Der Spiegel reported on Hillary Clinton's demand that U.S. diplomats act as spies:

    "As justification for the espionage orders, Clinton emphasized that a large share of the information that the U.S. intelligence agencies works with comes from the reports put together by State Department staff around the world. The information to be collected included personal credit card information, frequent flyer customer numbers, as well as e-mail and telephone accounts. In many cases the State Department also requested 'biometric information,' 'passwords' and 'personal encryption keys.' "

    Der Spiegel added: "The U.S. State Department also wanted to obtain information on the plans and intentions of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his secretariat relating to issues like Iran, according to the detailed wish list in the directive. The instructions were sent to 30 U.S. embassies around the world, including the one in Berlin."

    Elizabeth Vos is a freelance reporter and co-host of CN Live.

    CORRECTION: CableDrum is an independent Twitter feed and is not associated with WikiLeaks as was incorrectly reported here.

    jmg , January 15, 2020 at 09:53

    A truly great series, thank you.

    The Revelations of WikiLeaks -- Consortium News Series

    1. The Video that Put Assange in US Crosshairs -- April 23, 2019
    2. The Leak That 'Exposed the True Afghan War' -- May 9, 2019
    3. The Most Extensive Classified Leak in History -- May 16, 2019
    4. The Haunting Case of a Belgian Child Killer and How WikiLeaks Helped Crack It -- July 11, 2019
    5. Busting the Myth WikiLeaks Never Published Damaging Material on Russia -- September 23, 2019
    6. US Diplomatic Cables Spark 'Arab Spring,' Expose Spying at UN & Elsewhere -- January 14, 2020

    For an updated list with links to the articles, a Google search is:

    "The Revelations of WikiLeaks" site:consortiumnews.com For an updated list with links to the articles, a Google search is:

    "The Revelations of WikiLeaks" site:consortiumnews.com

    – – –

    Consortium News wrote:
    > Today we resume our series The Revelations of WikiLeaks with little more than a month before the extradition hearing for imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange begins.

    Yes and, shockingly, Julian has been allowed only 2 hours with his lawyers in the last month, crucial to prepare the extradition hearings. See:

    Summary from Assange hearing at Westminster Magistrates Court this morning -- Tareq Haddad -- Thread Reader -- Jan 13th 2020

    [Jan 21, 2020] How a Hidden Parliamentary Session Revealed Trump's True Motives in Iraq by Whitney Webb

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Americans are the ones who destroyed the country and wreaked havoc on it. They have refused to finish building the electrical system and infrastructure projects. They have bargained for the reconstruction of Iraq in exchange for Iraq giving up 50% of oil imports. So, I refused and decided to go to China and concluded an important and strategic agreement with it. Today, Trump is trying to cancel this important agreement. ..."
    "... After my return from China, Trump called me and asked me to cancel the agreement, so I also refused, and he threatened [that there would be] massive demonstrations to topple me. Indeed, the demonstrations started and then Trump called, threatening to escalate in the event of non-cooperation and responding to his wishes, whereby a third party [presumed to be mercenaries or U.S. soldiers] would target both the demonstrators and security forces and kill them from atop the highest buildings and the US embassy in an attempt to pressure me and submit to his wishes and cancel the China agreement." ..."
    "... It could also explain why President Trump is so concerned about China's growing foothold in Iraq, since it risks causing not only the end of the U.S. military hegemony in the country but could also lead to major trouble for the petrodollar system and the U.S.' position as a global financial power. Trump's policy aimed at stopping China and Iraq's growing ties is clearly having the opposite effect, showing that this administration's "gangster diplomacy" only serves to make the alternatives offered by countries like China and Russia all the more attractive. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    ... ... ...

    After the feed was cut, MPs who were present wrote down Abdul-Mahdi's remarks, which were then given to the Arabic news outlet Ida'at . Per that transcript , Abdul-Mahdi stated that:

    The Americans are the ones who destroyed the country and wreaked havoc on it. They have refused to finish building the electrical system and infrastructure projects. They have bargained for the reconstruction of Iraq in exchange for Iraq giving up 50% of oil imports. So, I refused and decided to go to China and concluded an important and strategic agreement with it. Today, Trump is trying to cancel this important agreement. "

    Abdul-Mahdi continued his remarks, noting that pressure from the Trump administration over his negotiations and subsequent dealings with China grew substantially over time, even resulting in death threats to himself and his defense minister:

    After my return from China, Trump called me and asked me to cancel the agreement, so I also refused, and he threatened [that there would be] massive demonstrations to topple me. Indeed, the demonstrations started and then Trump called, threatening to escalate in the event of non-cooperation and responding to his wishes, whereby a third party [presumed to be mercenaries or U.S. soldiers] would target both the demonstrators and security forces and kill them from atop the highest buildings and the US embassy in an attempt to pressure me and submit to his wishes and cancel the China agreement."

    "I did not respond and submitted my resignation and the Americans still insist to this day on canceling the China agreement. When the defense minister said that those killing the demonstrators was a third party, Trump called me immediately and physically threatened myself and the defense minister in the event that there was more talk about this third party."

    Very few English language outlets reported on Abdul-Mahdi's comments. Tom Luongo, a Florida-based Independent Analyst and publisher of The Gold Goats 'n Guns Newsletter, told MintPress that the likely reasons for the "surprising" media silence over Abdul-Mahdi's claims were because "It never really made it out into official channels " due to the cutting of the video feed during Iraq's Parliamentary session and due to the fact that "it's very inconvenient and the media -- since Trump is doing what they want him to do, be belligerent with Iran, protected Israel's interests there."

    "They aren't going to contradict him on that if he's playing ball," Luongo added, before continuing that the media would nonetheless "hold onto it for future reference .If this comes out for real, they'll use it against him later if he tries to leave Iraq." "Everything in Washington is used as leverage," he added.

    Given the lack of media coverage and the cutting of the video feed of Abdul-Mahdi's full remarks, it is worth pointing out that the narrative he laid out in his censored speech not only fits with the timeline of recent events he discusses but also the tactics known to have been employed behind closed doors by the Trump administration, particularly after Mike Pompeo left the CIA to become Secretary of State.

    For instance, Abdul-Mahdi's delegation to China ended on September 24, with the protests against his government that Trump reportedly threatened to start on October 1. Reports of a "third side" firing on Iraqi protesters were picked up by major media outlets at the time, such as in this BBC report which stated:

    Reports say the security forces opened fire, but another account says unknown gunmen were responsible .a source in Karbala told the BBC that one of the dead was a guard at a nearby Shia shrine who happened to be passing by. The source also said the origin of the gunfire was unknown and it had targeted both the protesters and security forces . (emphasis added)"

    U.S.-backed protests in other countries, such as in Ukraine in 2014, also saw evidence of a " third side " shooting both protesters and security forces alike.

    After six weeks of intense protests , Abdul-Mahdi submitted his resignation on November 29, just a few days after Iraq's Foreign Minister praised the new deals, including the "oil for reconstruction" deal, that had been signed with China. Abdul-Mahdi has since stayed on as Prime Minister in a caretaker role until Parliament decides on his replacement.

    Abdul-Mahdi's claims of the covert pressure by the Trump administration are buttressed by the use of similar tactics against Ecuador, where, in July 2018, a U.S. delegation at the United Nations threatened the nation with punitive trade measures and the withdrawal of military aid if Ecuador moved forward with the introduction of a UN resolution to "protect, promote and support breastfeeding."

    The New York Times reported at the time that the U.S. delegation was seeking to promote the interests of infant formula manufacturers. If the U.S. delegation is willing to use such pressure on nations for promoting breastfeeding over infant formula, it goes without saying that such behind-closed-doors pressure would be significantly more intense if a much more lucrative resource, e.g. oil, were involved.

    Regarding Abdul-Mahdi's claims, Luongo told MintPress that it is also worth considering that it could have been anyone in the Trump administration making threats to Abdul-Mahdi, not necessarily Trump himself. "What I won't say directly is that I don't know it was Trump at the other end of the phone calls. Mahdi, it is to his best advantage politically to blame everything on Trump. It could have been Mike Pompeo or Gina Haspel talking to Abdul-Mahdi It could have been anyone, it most likely would be someone with plausible deniability .This [Mahdi's claims] sounds credible I firmly believe Trump is capable of making these threats but I don't think Trump would make those threats directly like that, but it would absolutely be consistent with U.S. policy."

    Luongo also argued that the current tensions between U.S. and Iraqi leadership preceded the oil deal between Iraq and China by several weeks, "All of this starts with Prime Minister Mahdi starting the process of opening up the Iraq-Syria border crossing and that was announced in August. Then, the Israeli air attacks happened in September to try and stop that from happening, attacks on PMU forces on the border crossing along with the ammo dump attacks near Baghdad This drew the Iraqis' ire Mahdi then tried to close the air space over Iraq, but how much of that he can enforce is a big question."

    As to why it would be to Mahdi's advantage to blame Trump, Luongo stated that Mahdi "can make edicts all day long, but, in reality, how much can he actually restrain the U.S. or the Israelis from doing anything? Except for shame, diplomatic shame To me, it [Mahdi's claims] seems perfectly credible because, during all of this, Trump is probably or someone else is shaking him [Mahdi] down for the reconstruction of the oil fields [in Iraq] Trump has explicitly stated "we want the oil."'

    As Luongo noted, Trump's interest in the U.S. obtaining a significant share of Iraqi oil revenue is hardly a secret. Just last March, Trump asked Abdul-Mahdi "How about the oil?" at the end of a meeting at the White House, prompting Abdul-Mahdi to ask "What do you mean?" To which Trump responded "Well, we did a lot, we did a lot over there, we spent trillions over there, and a lot of people have been talking about the oil," which was widely interpreted as Trump asking for part of Iraq's oil revenue in exchange for the steep costs of the U.S.' continuing its now unwelcome military presence in Iraq.

    With Abdul-Mahdi having rejected Trump's "oil for reconstruction" proposal in favor of China's, it seems likely that the Trump administration would default to so-called "gangster diplomacy" tactics to pressure Iraq's government into accepting Trump's deal, especially given the fact that China's deal was a much better offer. While Trump demanded half of Iraq's oil revenue in exchange for completing reconstruction projects (according to Abdul-Mahdi), the deal that was signed between Iraq and China would see around 20 percen t of Iraq's oil revenue go to China in exchange for reconstruction. Aside from the potential loss in Iraq's oil revenue, there are many reasons for the Trump administration to feel threatened by China's recent dealings in Iraq.

    The Iraq-China oil deal – a prelude to something more?

    When Abdul-Mahdi's delegation traveled to Beijing last September, the "oil for reconstruction" deal was only one of eight total agreements that were established. These agreements cover a range of areas, including financial, commercial, security, reconstruction, communication, culture, education and foreign affairs in addition to oil. Yet, the oil deal is by far the most significant.

    Per the agreement, Chinese firms will work on various reconstruction projects in exchange for roughly 20 percent of Iraq's oil exports, approximately 100,00 barrels per day, for a period of 20 years. According to Al-Monitor , Abdul-Mahdi had the following to say about the deal: "We agreed [with Beijing] to set up a joint investment fund, which the oil money will finance," adding that the agreement prohibits China from monopolizing projects inside Iraq, forcing Bejing to work in cooperation with international firms.

    The agreement is similar to one negotiated between Iraq and China in 2015 when Abdul-Mahdi was serving as Iraq's oil minister. That year, Iraq joined China's Belt and Road Initiative in a deal that also involved exchanging oil for investment, development and construction projects and saw China awarded several projects as a result. In a notable similarity to recent events, that deal was put on hold due to "political and security tensions" caused by unrest and the surge of ISIS in Iraq, that is until Abdul-Mahdi saw Iraq rejoin the initiative again late last year through the agreements his government signed with China last September.

    Chinese President Xi Jinping, center left, meet with Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, center right, in Beijing, Sept. 23, 2019. Lintao Zhang | AP

    Notably, after recent tensions between the U.S. and Iraq over the assassination of Soleimani and the U.S.' subsequent refusal to remove its troops from Iraq despite parliament's demands, Iraq quietly announced that it would dramatically increase its oil exports to China to triple the amount established in the deal signed in September. Given Abdul-Mahdi's recent claims about the true forces behind Iraq's recent protests and Trump's threats against him being directly related to his dealings with China, the move appears to be a not-so-veiled signal from Abdul-Mahdi to Washington that he plans to deepen Iraq's partnership with China, at least for as long as he remains in his caretaker role.

    Iraq's decision to dramatically increase its oil exports to China came just one day after the U.S. government threatened to cut off Iraq's access to its central bank account, currently held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, an account that currently holds $35 billion in Iraqi oil revenue. The account was set up after the U.S. invaded and began occupying Iraq in 2003 and Iraq currently removes between $1-2 billion per month to cover essential government expenses. Losing access to its oil revenue stored in that account would lead to the " collapse " of Iraq's government, according to Iraqi government officials who spoke to AFP .

    Though Trump publicly promised to rebuke Iraq for the expulsion of U.S. troops via sanctions, the threat to cut off Iraq's access to its account at the NY Federal Reserve Bank was delivered privately and directly to the Prime Minister, adding further credibility to Abdul-Mahdi's claims that Trump's most aggressive attempts at pressuring Iraq's government are made in private and directed towards the country's Prime Minister.

    Though Trump's push this time was about preventing the expulsion of U.S. troops from Iraq, his reasons for doing so may also be related to concerns about China's growing foothold in the region. Indeed, while Trump has now lost his desired share of Iraqi oil revenue (50 percent) to China's counteroffer of 20 percent, the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq may see American troops replaced with their Chinese counterparts as well, according to Tom Luongo.

    "All of this is about the U.S. maintaining the fiction that it needs to stay in Iraq So, China moving in there is the moment where they get their toe hold for the Belt and Road [Initiative]," Luongo argued. "That helps to strengthen the economic relationship between Iraq, Iran and China and obviating the need for the Americans to stay there. At some point, China will have assets on the ground that they are going to want to defend militarily in the event of any major crisis. This brings us to the next thing we know, that Mahdi and the Chinese ambassador discussed that very thing in the wake of the Soleimani killing."

    Indeed, according to news reports, Zhang Yao -- China's ambassador to Iraq -- " conveyed Beijing's readiness to provide military assistance" should Iraq's government request it soon after Soleimani's assassination. Yao made the offer a day after Iraq's parliament voted to expel American troops from the country. Though it is currently unknown how Abdul-Mahdi responded to the offer, the timing likely caused no shortage of concern among the Trump administration about its rapidly waning influence in Iraq. "You can see what's coming here," Luongo told MintPress of the recent Chinese offer to Iraq, "China, Russia and Iran are trying to cleave Iraq away from the United States and the U.S. is feeling very threatened by this."

    Russia is also playing a role in the current scenario as Iraq initiated talks with Moscow regarding the possible purchase of one of its air defense systems last September, the same month that Iraq signed eight deals, including the oil deal with China. Then, in the wake of Soleimani's death, Russia again offered the air defense systems to Iraq to allow them to better defend their air space. In the past, the U.S. has threatened allied countries with sanctions and other measures if they purchase Russian air defense systems as opposed to those manufactured by U.S. companies.

    The U.S.' efforts to curb China's growing influence and presence in Iraq amid these new strategic partnerships and agreements are limited, however, as the U.S. is increasingly relying on China as part of its Iran policy, specifically in its goal of reducing Iranian oil export to zero. China remains Iran's main crude oil and condensate importer, even after it reduced its imports of Iranian oil significantly following U.S. pressure last year. Yet, the U.S. is now attempting to pressure China to stop buying Iranian oil completely or face sanctions while also attempting to privately sabotage the China-Iraq oil deal. It is highly unlikely China will concede to the U.S. on both, if any, of those fronts, meaning the U.S. may be forced to choose which policy front (Iran "containment" vs. Iraq's oil dealings with China) it values more in the coming weeks and months.

    Furthermore, the recent signing of the "phase one" trade deal with China revealed another potential facet of the U.S.' increasingly complicated relationship with Iraq's oil sector given that the trade deal involves selling U.S. oil and gas to China at very low cost , suggesting that the Trump administration may also see the Iraq-China oil deal result in Iraq emerging as a potential competitor for the U.S. in selling cheap oil to China, the world's top oil importer.

    The Petrodollar and the Phantom of the Petroyuan

    In his televised statements last week following Iran's military response to the U.S. assassination of General Soleimani, Trump insisted that the U.S.' Middle East policy is no longer being directed by America's vast oil requirements. He stated specifically that:

    Over the last three years, under my leadership, our economy is stronger than ever before and America has achieved energy independence. These historic accomplishments changed our strategic priorities. These are accomplishments that nobody thought were possible. And options in the Middle East became available. We are now the number-one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world. We are independent, and we do not need Middle East oil . (emphasis added)"

    Yet, given the centrality of the recent Iraq-China oil deal in guiding some of the Trump administration's recent Middle East policy moves, this appears not to be the case. The distinction may lie in the fact that, while the U.S. may now be less dependent on oil imports from the Middle East, it still very much needs to continue to dominate how oil is traded and sold on international markets in order to maintain its status as both a global military and financial superpower.

    Indeed, even if the U.S. is importing less Middle Eastern oil, the petrodollar system -- first forged in the 1970s -- requires that the U.S. maintains enough control over the global oil trade so that the world's largest oil exporters, Iraq among them, continue to sell their oil in dollars. Were Iraq to sell oil in another currency, or trade oil for services, as it plans to do with China per the recently inked deal, a significant portion of Iraqi oil would cease to generate a demand for dollars, violating the key tenet of the petrodollar system.

    Chinese representatives speak to defense personnel during a weapons expo organized by the Iraqi defense ministry in Baghdad, March, 2017. Karim Kadim | AP

    As Kei Pritsker and Cale Holmes noted in an article last year for MintPress :

    The takeaway from the petrodollar phenomenon is that as long as countries need oil, they will need the dollar. As long as countries demand dollars, the U.S. can continue to go into massive amounts of debt to fund its network of global military bases, Wall Street bailouts, nuclear missiles, and tax cuts for the rich."

    Thus, the use of the petrodollar has created a system whereby U.S. control of oil sales of the largest oil exporters is necessary, not just to buttress the dollar, but also to support its global military presence. Therefore, it is unsurprising that the issue of the U.S. troop presence in Iraq and the issue of Iraq's push for oil independence against U.S. wishes have become intertwined. Notably, one of the architects of the petrodollar system and the man who infamously described U.S. soldiers as "dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy", former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, has been advising Trump and informing his China policy since 2016.

    This take was also expressed by economist Michael Hudson, who recently noted that U.S. access to oil, dollarization and U.S. military strategy are intricately interwoven and that Trump's recent Iraq policy is intended "to escalate America's presence in Iraq to keep control of the region's oil reserves," and, as Hudson says, "to back Saudi Arabia's Wahabi troops (ISIS, Al Qaeda in Iraq, Al Nusra and other divisions of what are actually America's foreign legion) to support U.S. control of Near Eastern oil as a buttress of the U.S. dollar."

    Hudson further asserts that it was Qassem Soleimani's efforts to promote Iraq's oil independence at the expense of U.S. imperial ambitions that served one of the key motives behind his assassination.

    America opposed General Suleimani above all because he was fighting against ISIS and other U.S.-backed terrorists in their attempt to break up Syria and replace Assad's regime with a set of U.S.-compliant local leaders – the old British "divide and conquer" ploy. On occasion, Suleimani had cooperated with U.S. troops in fighting ISIS groups that got "out of line" meaning the U.S. party line. But every indication is that he was in Iraq to work with that government seeking to regain control of the oil fields that President Trump has bragged so loudly about grabbing. (emphasis added)"

    Hudson adds that " U.S. neocons feared Suleimani's plan to help Iraq assert control of its oil and withstand the terrorist attacks supported by U.S. and Saudi's on Iraq. That is what made his assassination an immediate drive."

    While other factors -- such as pressure from U.S. allies such as Israel -- also played a factor in the decision to kill Soleimani, the decision to assassinate him on Iraqi soil just hours before he was set to meet with Abdul-Mahdi in a diplomatic role suggests that the underlying tensions caused by Iraq's push for oil independence and its oil deal with China did play a factor in the timing of his assassination. It also served as a threat to Abdul-Mahdi, who has claimed that the U.S. threatened to kill both him and his defense minister just weeks prior over tensions directly related to the push for independence of Iraq's oil sector from the U.S.

    It appears that the ever-present role of the petrodollar in guiding U.S. policy in the Middle East remains unchanged. The petrodollar has long been a driving factor behind the U.S.' policy towards Iraq specifically, as one of the key triggers for the 2003 invasion of Iraq was Saddam Hussein's decision to sell Iraqi oil in Euros opposed to dollars beginning in the year 2000. Just weeks before the invasion began, Hussein boasted that Iraq's Euro-based oil revenue account was earning a higher interest rate than it would have been if it had continued to sell its oil in dollars, an apparent signal to other oil exporters that the petrodollar system was only really benefiting the United States at their own expense.

    Beyond current efforts to stave off Iraq's oil independence and keep its oil trade aligned with the U.S., the fact that the U.S. is now seeking to limit China's ever-growing role in Iraq's oil sector is also directly related to China's publicly known efforts to create its own direct competitor to the petrodollar, the petroyuan.

    Since 2017, China has made its plans for the petroyuan -- a direct competitor to the petrodollar -- no secret, particularly after China eclipsed the U.S. as the world's largest importer of oil.

    As CNBC noted at the time:

    The new strategy is to enlist the energy markets' help: Beijing may introduce a new way to price oil in coming months -- but unlike the contracts based on the U.S. dollar that currently dominate global markets, this benchmark would use China's own currency. If there's widespread adoption, as the Chinese hope, then that will mark a step toward challenging the greenback's status as the world's most powerful currency .The plan is to price oil in yuan using a gold-backed futures contract in Shanghai, but the road will be long and arduous."

    If the U.S. continues on its current path and pushes Iraq further into the arms of China and other U.S. rival states, it goes without saying that Iraq -- now a part of China's Belt and Road Initiative -- may soon favor a petroyuan system over a petrodollar system, particularly as the current U.S. administration threatens to hold Iraq's central bank account hostage for pursuing policies Washington finds unfavorable.

    It could also explain why President Trump is so concerned about China's growing foothold in Iraq, since it risks causing not only the end of the U.S. military hegemony in the country but could also lead to major trouble for the petrodollar system and the U.S.' position as a global financial power. Trump's policy aimed at stopping China and Iraq's growing ties is clearly having the opposite effect, showing that this administration's "gangster diplomacy" only serves to make the alternatives offered by countries like China and Russia all the more attractive.

    anonymous [331] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 18, 2020 at 5:54 am GMT

    One can see how all these recent wars and military actions have a financial motive at their core. Yet the mass of gullible Americans actually believe the reasons given, to "spread democracy" and other wonderful things. Only a small number can see things for what they really are. It's very frustrating to deal with the stupidity of the average person on a daily basis.

    This is not Trump's policy, it is American policy and the variation is in how he implements it. Any other person would have fallen in line with it as well. US policy has it's own inner momentum that can't change course. The US depends upon continuation of the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Were that to be lost the US likely would descend into chaos without end. When the USSR came apart it was eventually able to downsize into the Russian state. We don't have that here; there is no core ethnicity with it's own territory left anymore, it's just a jumble. For the US it's a matter of survival.

    John Chuckman , says: Website Show Comment January 18, 2020 at 3:04 pm GMT
    Yes, but we also have this

    It is reported this morning (CNN) that Trump bragged about the killing to a crowd at a big fundraising dinner.

    Just sick, official state murder for campaign donations.

    That's what America is reduced to.

    [Jan 21, 2020] Neocon foreign policy based on Full spectrum Dominance doctrine does not proceed well. Americans have been deceived by this militaristic doctrine, gangsterism in forign policy is not going to work

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    UncommonGround , says: Show Comment January 19, 2020 at 12:54 pm GMT

    There were brutal sanctions against Iraq in the 90s. After that the country was devastated by the invasion of 2003. Hostility against Iran has been continuous. It's no suprise that things are not going well in the region and that American politics failed. But this was to be expected.

    Good relations with Iran were possible. Even recently Iran thought that the nuclear agreement could lead to better relations with the West. Iran should be our best ally in the region because the middle classes there feel close to the West and are very friendly with Westerners who visit the country. We could have had better results if we had tryed a more reasonable politics. But it seems that there were other forces that wanted conflict with Iran and the destruction of Iraq independently of the interests of the US which would have gained from a more reasonable position. We can say the same about Russia.

    After wars and sanctions the only way to hold everything together is through military means. There was as doctrine which promoted unbridled militarism and the use of force (wasn't there a saying that "Americans are from Mars, Europeans from Venus"?). Everybody who didn't submit to our rules and interests was viewed as an enemy, military force was seen as the solution to everything.

    This is not functioning well. Americans have been decieved by this militaristic doctrine, this is not going to work. Russia has challenged this, a part of Europe isn't very happy, in South America you can only run the system ressorting to radical politicians like Bolsonaro who destroy the environment and create more poverty, in other places this politics created instability and enemies. I think it should be the time for the American elites to discuss seriously the ways that the country has been following simply because there are better ways to have better results.

    Franklin Ryckaert , says: Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 7:10 am GMT
    @anonymous Yes, for the American Empire to exist (and expand) it needs the Petro-dollar, because only if it is widely used in the world can its collapse be prevented. But why is the dollar so shaky? Because it is no real money, based on real value, but created out of thin air as debt and it can only function in an ever expanding pyramid scheme.

    The origin of this fraud is the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913. And yes that was mainly a Jewish creation. Nobody, not even Ron Paul, dares to mention that.

    Miro23 , says: Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 8:11 am GMT

    Iraq's decision to dramatically increase its oil exports to China came just one day after the U.S. government threatened to cut off Iraq's access to its central bank account, currently held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, an account that currently holds $35 billion in Iraqi oil revenue. The account was set up after the U.S. invaded and began occupying Iraq in 2003 and Iraq currently removes between $1-2 billion per month to cover essential government expenses. Losing access to its oil revenue stored in that account would lead to the "collapse" of Iraq's government, according to Iraqi government officials who spoke to AFP.

    A very revealing article.

    It doesn't make sense for any country to hold reserves in the US. The Zio-Glob CIA gangsters are ready to defraud or smash up any country that challenges their petrodollar system. Witness Iraq, Libya, Venezuela, Iran and their hostility to Russia and China.

    Truth Jihad , says: Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT
    Iraqi officials say around $35 billion of the country's oil revenues are held at the US Federal Reserve, which means Washington's threat to restrict access could be a major problem
    https://www.afp.com/en/news/15/iraq-warns-collapse-if-trump-blocks-oil-cash-doc-1nn3l14
    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 1:55 pm GMT
    Hidden? Revealed?

    You don't need to twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out why Trump whacked –the Mafia term–Soleimani.
    Jared the Snake's Tel Aviv masters told him they wanted Zion Don to pull the trigger and their will was done.

    I voted for a President Trump and instead, got President Shecky, beholden to Jew and Israeli interests who has bent over backwards to please the Israeli terrorists, but who will now go back to his old shtick; pretending to be MAGA or KAG until he gets re-elected, then it will be gloves off and most likely, another War for Israel and Wall Street in 2021.

    Having an Israeli-Firster in the WH isn't unusual, but when you have a vain simpleton who doesn't understand foreign policy or is so damned lazy, he lets a slumlord take care of it is a prescription for a major disaster.

    [Jan 21, 2020] Trump Tries Real Hard to Start a War for Israel. He Should be Impeached Because He is a War Criminal by Kurt Nimmo

    Notable quotes:
    "... In my last post, I said it was time to close down this blog, mostly due to its ineffectiveness, short reach, and choir preaching. I wrote that I might as well pound sand for all the good it did. ..."
    "... The US began targeting Iran following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This included "freezing" -- polite-speak for theft -- around $12 billion in Iranian assets, including gold, property, and bank holdings. After Obama agreed to return this filched property and money as part of the nuke deal (minus any real nukes), neocons said he gave away US taxpayer money to international terrorists. This warped lie became part of the narrative, yet another state-orchestrated fake news "alternative fact." ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

    In my last post, I said it was time to close down this blog, mostly due to its ineffectiveness, short reach, and choir preaching. I wrote that I might as well pound sand for all the good it did.

    A few days later, Trump killed a high level Iranian military leader and I have decided a post is in order, never mind that a round of tiddlywinks will have about the same influence as a post here. The wars just keep on coming, no matter what we do.

    Let's turn to social media where dimwits, neocon partisans, and clueless Democrats are running wild after corporate Mafia boss and numero uno Israeli cheerleader Donald Trump ordered a hit on Gen. Qasem Soleimani and others near Baghdad's international airport on Thursday.

    Let's begin with this teleprompter reader and "presenter" from Al Jazeera:

    "This is what happens when you put a narcissistic, megalomaniacal, former reality TV star with a thin skin and a very large temper in charge of the world's most powerful military You know who else attacks cultural sites? ISIS. The Taliban." – me on Trump/Iran on MSNBC today: pic.twitter.com/YCRARB2anv

    -- Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) January 5, 2020

    It is interesting how the memory of such people only goes back to the election of Donald Trump.

    The US began targeting Iran following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This included "freezing" -- polite-speak for theft -- around $12 billion in Iranian assets, including gold, property, and bank holdings. After Obama agreed to return this filched property and money as part of the nuke deal (minus any real nukes), neocons said he gave away US taxpayer money to international terrorists. This warped lie became part of the narrative, yet another state-orchestrated fake news "alternative fact."

    Here's another idiot. He was the boss of the DNC for a while and unsuccessfully ran for president.

    Nice job trump and Pompeo you dimwits. You've completed the neocon move to have Iraq become a satellite of Iran. You have to be the dumbest people ever to run the US government. You can add that to being the most corrupt. Get these guys out of here. https://t.co/gQHhHSeiJQ

    -- Howard Dean (@GovHowardDean) January 5, 2020

    Once again, history is lost in a tangle of lies and omission. Centuries before John Dean thought it might be a good idea to run for president, Persians and Shias in what is now Iraq and Iran were crossing the border -- later drawn up by invading Brits and French -- in pilgrimages to the shrines of Imam Husayn and Abbas in Karbala. We can't expect an arrogant sociopath like Mr. Dean to know about Ashura, Shia pilgrimages, the Remembrance of Muharram, and events dating back to 680 AD.

    Shias from Iran pilgrimage to other Iraqi cities as well, including An-Najaf, Samarra, Mashhad, and Baghdad (although the latter is more important to Sunnis).

    Corporate fake news teleprompter reader Stephanopoulos said the Geneva Conventions (including United Nations Security Council Resolution 2347) outlaw the targeting of cultural sites, which Trump said he will bomb.

    Trump said there are 52 different sites; the number is not arbitrary, it is based on the 52 hostages, many of them CIA officers, taken hostage during Iran's revolution against the US-installed Shah and his brutal secret police sadists.

    Pompeo said Trump won't destroy Iran's cultural and heritage sites. Pompeo, as a dedicated Zionist operative, knows damn well the US will destroy EVERYTHING of value in Iran, same as it did in Iraq and later Libya and Syria. This includes not only cultural sites, but civilian infrastructure -- hospitals, schools, roads, bridges, and mosques.

    STEPHANOPOULOS: The Geneva Conventions outlaws attacks on cultural objects & places of worship. Why is Trump threatening Iran w/ war crimes?

    POMPEO: We'll behave lawfully

    S: So to be clear, Trump's threat wasn't accurate?

    P: Every target that we strike will be a lawful target pic.twitter.com/zOGTpfYmba

    Invoking the United Nations' Historic "Uniting for Peace" Resolution 377 Before Trump Embroils Us in War with Iran

    -- Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 5, 2020

    Although I believe Jill Stein is living in a Marxian fantasy world, I agree with her tweet in regard to the Zionist hit on Soleimani:

    Now THIS is grounds for #impeachment – treachery unleashing the unthinkable for Americans & people the world over: Trump asked Iraqi prime minister to mediate with #Iran then assassinated Soleimani – on a mediation mission. https://t.co/f0F9FEMALD

    -- Dr. Jill Stein 🌻 (@DrJillStein) January 5, 2020

    Trump should be impeached -- tried and imprisoned -- not in response to some dreamed-up and ludicrous Russian plot or even concern about the opportunist Hunter Biden using his father's position to make millions in uber-corrupt Ukraine, but because he is a war criminal responsible for killing women and children.

    As for the planned forever military occupation of Iraq, USA Today reports:

    Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi told lawmakers that a timetable for the withdrawal of all foreign troops, including U.S. ones, was required "for the sake of our national sovereignty." About 5,000 American troops are in various parts of Iraq.

    The latest:
    -- Iraqi lawmakers voted to oust U.S. troops
    -- U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIS has paused operations
    -- Hundreds of thousands mourned General Suleimani in Iran
    -- President Trump said the U.S. has 52 possible targets in Iran in case of retaliation https://t.co/pmUuAQdKlc

    -- The New York Times (@nytimes) January 5, 2020

    No way in hell will Sec. State Pompeo and his Zionist neocon handlers allow this to happen without a fight. However, it shouldn't be too difficult for the Iraqis to expel 5,000 brainwashed American soldiers from the country, bombed to smithereens almost twenty years ago by Bush the Neocon Idiot Savant.

    Never mind Schumer's pretend concern about another war. This friend of Israel from New York didn't go on national television and excoriate Obama and his cutthroat Sec. of State Hillary Clinton for killing 30,000 Libyans.

    I'm concerned President Trump's impulsive foreign policy is dragging America into another endless war in the Middle East that will make us less safe.

    Congress must assert itself.

    President Trump does not have authority for war with Iran. pic.twitter.com/tra71uY9Ao

    -- Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) January 5, 2020

    Meanwhile, it looks like social media is burning the midnight oil in order to prevent their platforms being used to argue against Trump's latest Zionist-directed insanity.

    It is absolutely crazy that Twitter is auto-locking the accounts of anyone who posts this "No war on Iran" image, and forcing them to delete the anti-war tweet in order to unlock their account.

    Will @TwitterSupport say what's going on? Very screwed up https://t.co/zGTvVfNNqt

    -- Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 5, 2020

    More lies from The Washington Post, the CIA's crown jewel of propaganda:

    Trump faces Iran crisis with fewer experienced advisers and strained relations with traditional allies https://t.co/Xi3vKw9Bw9

    -- Steven Ginsberg (@stevenjay) January 5, 2020

    This is complete and utter bullshit, but I'm sure the American people will gobble it down without question. Trump's advisers are neocons and they are seriously experienced in the art of promoting and engineering assassination, cyber-attacks, invasions, and mass murder.

    Newsmax scribbler John Cardillo thinks he has it all figure out.

    "In mid-October Soleimani instructed his top ally in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and other powerful militia leaders to step up attacks on U.S. targets in the country using sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran "

    That's why we hit him https://t.co/56XKm9Kqwe

    -- John Cardillo (@johncardillo) January 5, 2020

    Imagine this, however improbable and ludicrous: Iran invades America and assassinates General Hyten or General McConville, both top members of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. Now imagine the response by the "exceptional nation."

    We can't leave out the Christian Zionist from Indiana, Mike Pence. Mike wants you to believe Iran was responsible for 9/11, thus stirring up the appropriate animosity and consensus for mass murder.

    Neither Iran nor Soleimani were linked to the terror attack in the "9/11 Commission Report." Pence didn't even get the number of hijackers right. https://t.co/QtQZm2Yyh9

    -- HuffPost Politics (@HuffPostPol) January 5, 2020

    Finally, here is the crown jewel of propaganda -- in part responsible for the death of well over a million Iraqis -- The New York Times showing off its rampant hypocrisy.

    In Opinion

    The editorial board writes, "It is crucial that influential Republican senators like Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and Mitch McConnell remind President Trump of his promise to keep America out of foreign quagmires" https://t.co/2swusvBWbg

    -- The New York Times (@nytimes) January 5, 2020

    Never mind Judith Miller, the Queen of NYT pro-war propaganda back in the day, spreading neocon fabricated lies about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction. America -- or rather the United States (the government) -- is addicted to quagmires and never-ending war. This is simply more anti-Trump bullshit by the NYT editorial board. The newspaper loves war waged in the name of Israel, but only if jumpstarted by Democrats.

    Trump the fool, the fact-free reality TV president will eventually unleash the dogs of war against Iran, much to the satisfaction of Israel, its racist Zionists, Israel-first neocons in America, and the chattering pro-war class of "journalists," and "foreign policy experts" (most former Pentagon employees).

    Expect more nonsense like that dispensed by the robot Mike Pence, the former tank commander now serving as Sec. of State, and any number of neocon fellow travelers, many with coveted blue checkmarks on Twitter while the truth-tellers are expelled from the conversation and exiled to the political wilderness.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    Kurt Nimmo writes on his blog, Another Day in the Empire, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

    [Jan 21, 2020] The first term of the Trump administration has revealed that the US war empire is run by the military-intelligence apparatus, not by President administration. Trump is simply a puppet.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda? ..."
    "... Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    Originally from: Opinion - The Angry Arab US Violated Unspoken Rule of Engagement with Iran

    As'ad AbuKhalil analyzes the Trump administration's decision

    to escalate hostilities with Iran and its regional allies.

    By As`ad AbuKhalil

    January 21, 2020 " Information Clearing House " - S omething big and unprecedented has happened in the Middle East after the assassination of one of Iran's top commanders, Qasim Suleimani.

    The U.S. has long assumed that assassinations of major figures in the Iranian "resistance-axis" in the Middle East would bring risk to the U.S. military-intelligence presence in the Middle East. Western and Arab media reported that the U.S. had prevented Israel in the past from killing Suleimani. But with the top commander's death, the Trump administration seems to think a key barrier to U.S. military operations in the Middle East has been removed.

    The U.S. and Israel had noticed that Hizbullah and Iran did not retaliate against previous assassinations by Israel (or the U.S.) that took place in Syria (of Imad Mughniyyah, Jihad Mughniyyah, Samir Quntar); or for other attacks on Palestinian and Lebanese commanders in Syria.

    The U.S. thus assumed that this assassination would not bring repercussions or harm to U.S. interests. Iranian reluctance to retaliate has only increased the willingness of Israel and the U.S. to violate the unspoken rules of engagement with Iran in the Arab East.

    For many years Israel did perpetrate various assassinations against Iranian scientists and officers in Syria during the on-going war. But Israel and the U.S. avoided targeting leaders or commanders of Iran. During the U.S. occupation of Iraq, the U.S. and Iran collided directly and indirectly, but avoided engaging in assassinations for fear that this would unleash a series of tit-for-tat.

    But the Trump administration has become known for not playing by the book, and for operating often according to the whims and impulses of President Donald Trump.

    Different Level of Escalation

    The decision to strike at Baghdad airport, however, was a different level of escalation. In addition to killing Suleimani it also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a key leader of Hashd forces in Iraq. Like Suleimani, al-Muhandis was known for waging the long fight against ISIS. (Despite this, the U.S. media only give credit to the U.S. and its clients who barely lifted a finger in the fight against ISIS.)

    On the surface of it, the strike was uncharacteristic of Trump. Here is a man who pledged to pull the U.S. out of the Middle East turmoil -- turmoil for which the U.S and Israel bear the primary responsibility. And yet he seems willing to order a strike that will guarantee intensification of the conflict in the region, and even the deployment of more U.S. forces.

    Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?

    Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

    The first term of the Trump administration has revealed the extent to which the U.S. war empire is run by the military-intelligence apparatus. There is not much a president -- even a popular president like Barack Obama in his second term -- can do to change the course of empire. It is not that Obama wanted to end U.S. wars in the region, but Trump has tried to retreat from Middle East conflicts and yet he has been unable due to pressures not only from the military-intelligence apparatus but also from their war advocates in the U.S. Congress and Western media, D.C. think tanks and the human-rights industry. The pressures to preserve the war agenda is too powerful on a U.S. president for it to cease in the foreseeable future. But Trump has managed to start fewer new wars than his predecessors -- until this strike.

    Trump's Obama Obsession

    Trump in his foreign policy is obsessed with the legacy and image of Obama. He decided to violate the Iran nuclear agreement (which carried the weight of international law after its adoption by the UN Security Council) largely because he wanted to prove that he is tougher than Obama, and also because he wanted an international agreement that carries his imprint. Just as Trump relishes putting his name on buildings, hotels, and casinos he wants to put his name on international agreements. His decision, to strike at a convoy carrying perhaps the second most important person in Iran was presumably attached to an intelligence assessment that calculated that Iran is too weakened and too fatigued to strike back directly at the U.S.

    Iran faced difficult choices in response to the assassination of Suleimani. On the one hand, Iran would appear weak and vulnerable if it did not retaliate and that would only invite more direct U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iranian targets.

    On the other hand, the decision to respond in a large-scale attack on U.S. military or diplomatic targets in the Middle East would invite an immediate massive U.S. strike inside Iran. Such an attack has been on the books; the U.S military (and Israel, of course) have been waiting for the right moment for the U.S. to destroy key strategic sites inside Iran.

    Furthermore, there is no question that the cruel U.S.-imposed sanctions on Iran have made life difficult for the Iranian people and have limited the choices of the government, and weakened its political legitimacy, especially in the face of vast Gulf-Western attempts to exploit internal dissent and divisions inside Iran. (Not that dissent inside Iran is not real, and not that repression by the regime is not real).

    Nonetheless, if the Iranian regime were to open an all-out war against the U.S., this would certainly cause great harm and damage to U.S. and Israeli interests.

    Iran Sending Messages

    In the last year, however, Iran successfully sent messages to Gulf regimes (through attacks on oil shipping in the Gulf, for which Iran did not claim responsibility, nor did it take responsibility for the pin-point attack on ARAMCO oil installations) that any future conflict would not spare their territories.

    That quickly reversed the policy orientations of both Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which suddenly became weary of confrontation with Iran, and both are now negotiating (openly and secretively) with the Iranian government. Ironically, both the UAE and Saudi regimes -- which constituted a lobby for war against Iran in Western capitals -- are also eager to distance themselves from U.S. military action against Iran . And Kuwait quickly denied that the U.S. used its territory in the U.S. attack on Baghdad airport, while Qatar dispatched its foreign minister to Iran (officially to offer condolences over the death of Suleimani, but presumably also to distance itself and its territory from the U.S. attack).

    The Iranian response was very measured and very specific. It was purposefully intended to avoid causing U.S. casualties; it was intended more as a message of Iranian missile capabilities and their pin point accuracy. And that message was not lost on Israel.

    Hasan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbullah, sent a more strident message. He basically implied that it would be left to Iran's allies to engineer military responses. He also declared a war on the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, although he was at pains to stress that U.S. civilians are to be spared in any attack or retaliation.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/6yyC897UliI

    Supporters of the Iran resistance axis have been quite angry in the wake of the assassination. The status of Suleimani in his camp is similar to the status of Nasrallah although Nasrallah -- due to his charisma and to his performance and the performance of his party in the July 2006 war -- may have attained a higher status.

    It would be easy for the Trump administration to ignite a Middle East war by provoking Iran once again, and wrongly assuming that there are no limits to Iranian caution and self-restraint. But if the U.S. (and Israel with it or behind it) were to start a Middle East war, it will spread far wider and last far longer than the last war in Iraq, which the U.S. is yet to complete.

    As'ad AbuKhalil is a Lebanese-American professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus. He is the author of the "Historical Dictionary of Lebanon" (1998), "Bin Laden, Islam and America's New War on Terrorism (2002), and "The Battle for Saudi Arabia" (2004). He tweets as @asadabukhal

    This article was originally published by " Consortium News " -

    [Jan 21, 2020] Lavrov expressed his condolences over the killing," the statement said. "The ministers stressed that such actions by the United States grossly violate the norms of international law

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Jen , Jan 20 2020 22:07 utc | 45

    BJD @ 39:

    Russia's Lavrov, Iran's Zarif discuss Soleimani killing: statement

    MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke with his Iranian counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif over the phone on Friday to discuss the killing of Iran's military chief Qassem Soleimani, the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement.

    "Lavrov expressed his condolences over the killing," the statement said. "The ministers stressed that such actions by the United States grossly violate the norms of international law."

    Likklemore , Jan 20 2020 21:41 utc | 36

    Well, today Moscow Warns Iran Against Reckless Steps as Tehran Threatens to Quit Non-Proliferation Treaty
    Earlier, Iranian Foreign Ministry's spokesman Seyyed Abbas Mousavi said that Tehran continues to adhere to the 2015 nuclear deal, adding that the European powers' claims about Iran violating the deal were unfounded.

    Moscow warns Tehran against making 'reckless steps' to quit the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Russia's deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov said. He added that Russia urges Iran to comply with its obligations to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, giving those who oppose the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) further reasons for escalation is "counterproductive".

    Is there a friend anywhere? Kim or Khan of Pakistan to ship one in.
    Alternative, Moscow could declare its nuclear capabilities are extended to Iran. Just can't leave Iran hanging on a twig.

    Bubbles , Jan 20 2020 22:29 utc | 53

    Posted by: Likklemore | Jan 20 2020 21:41 utc | 36

    Maybe it's because trump has a history with Russian mobsters and money laundering?


    Or maybe it's just smart to say that? What's to be gained by setting off man child trump and spurring yet another temper tantrum via twitter?

    trump did lotsa bidnezz with the International cabal that plundered Russia after the disillusion of the USSR. They stole from the Russian people, and laundered their ill begotten gains with chumps, like trump.

    [Jan 21, 2020] Moving embassy to Jerusalem and reneging on Obama's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal) were Trump's campaign promises which he delivered

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    utu , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 12:35 pm GMT

    @Chepo

    At the time, there was minimal Zionist influence over the Trump campaign

    You did not pay attention. Moving embassy to Jerusalem and reneging on Obama's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal) were Trump's campaign promises which he delivered but many Trump supporters did not hear them as they were gobbling up the MAGA stuff.

    Realist , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 1:12 pm GMT
    @Chepo

    It is evident that Trump will win re-election and go to war with Iran afterwards.

    Agreed.

    Michael888 , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 8:25 pm GMT
    @utu Moving the American embassy to Jerusalem happened by Law in 1995, adopted by the Senate (93–5), and the House (374–37); Clinton, Bush and Obama (and Trump initially) played a game of "waivers" to avoid going through with the move. "On June 5, 2017, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution commemorating the 50th anniversary of reunification of Jerusalem by 90-0. The resolution reaffirmed the Jerusalem Embassy Act and called upon the President and all United States officials to abide by its provisions. On December 6, 2017, Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital" [from wiki].
    Obama's (and John Kerry's) Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal) was dead on arrival no matter who became President in the 2016 Election. The worst part of the JCPOA was indirect, as Joe Luria reported at Consortium News; Obama bought off Saudi objections by agreeing to support the genocide in Yemen (Obama had already passed a National Emergency (SANCTIONS) against Yemen in 2012; and droned American citizens, the al-Awlaki family (including a 16 year old and an 8 year old) in multiple attacks between 2011-2017.)
    Trump has prosecuted the Forever wars from Bush II and Obama viciously, but he is being played by the neocons who run DC and America. Wars no longer end. Too much money is being made.

    [Jan 21, 2020] A New Definition of Warfare by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Supporters of Donald Trump often make the point that he has not started any new wars. One might observe that it has not been for lack of trying, as his cruise missile attacks on Syria based on fabricated evidence and his recent assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani have been indisputably acts of war. Trump also has enhanced troop levels both in the Middle East and in Afghanistan while also increasing the frequency and lethality of armed drone attacks worldwide.

    Congress has been somewhat unseriously toying around with a tightening of the war powers act of 1973 to make it more difficult for a president to carry out acts of war without any deliberation by or authorization from the legislature. But perhaps the definition of war itself should be expanded. The one area where Trump and his team of narcissistic sociopaths have been most active has been in the imposition of sanctions with lethal intent. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been explicit in his explanations that the assertion of "extreme pressure" on countries like Iran and Venezuela is intended to make the people suffer to such an extent that they rise up against their governments and bring about "regime change." In Pompeo's twisted reckoning that is how places that Washington disapproves of will again become "normal countries."

    The sanctions can kill. Those imposed by the United States are backed up by the U.S. Treasury which is able to block cash transfers going through the dollar denominated international banking system. Banks that do not comply with America's imposed rules can themselves be sanctioned, meaning that U.S. sanctions are de facto globally applicable, even if foreign banks and governments do not agree with the policies that drive them. It is well documented how sanctions that have an impact on the importation of medicines have killed thousands of Iranians. In Venezuela, the effect of sanctions has been starvation as food imports have been blocked, forcing a large part of the population to flee the country just to survive.

    The latest exercise of United States economic warfare has been directed against Iraq. In the space of one week from December 29 th to January 3 rd , the American military, which operates out of two major bases in Iraq, killed 25 Iraqi militiamen who were part of the Popular Mobilization Units of the Iraqi Army. The militiamen had most recently been engaged in the successful fight against ISIS. It followed up on that attack by killing Soleimani, Iraqi militia general Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and eight other Iraqis in a drone strike near Baghdad International Airport. As the attacks were not approved in any way by the Iraqi government, it was no surprise that rioting followed and the Iraqi Parliament voted to remove all foreign troops from its soil. The decree was signed off on by Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, based on the fact that the U.S. military was in Iraq at the invitation of the country's government and that invitation had just been revoked by parliament.

    That Iraq is to say the least unstable is attributable to the ill-advised U.S. invasion of 2003. The persistence of U.S. forces in the country is ostensibly to aid in the fight against ISIS, but the real reason is to serve as a check on Iranian influence in Iraq, which is a strategic demand made by Israel and not responsive to any actual American interest. Indeed, the Iraqi government is probably closer politically to Tehran than to Washington, though the neocon line that the country is dominated by the Iranians is far from true.

    Washington's response to the legitimate Iraqi demand that its troops should be removed consisted of threats. When Prime Minister Mahdi spoke with Pompeo on the phone and asked for discussions and a time table to create a "withdrawal mechanism" the Secretary of State made it clear that there would be no negotiations. A State Department written response entitled "The U.S. Continued Partnership with Iraq" asserted that American troops are in Iraq to serve as a "force for good" in the Middle East and that it is "our right" to maintain "appropriate force posture" in the region.

    The Iraqi position also immediately produced presidential threats and tweets about "sanctions like they have never seen," with the implication that the U.S. was more than willing to wreck the Iraqi economy if it did not get its way. The latest threat to emerge involves blocking Iraq access to its New York federal reserve bank account, where international oil sale revenue is kept, creating a devastating cash crunch in Iraq's financial system that might indeed destroy the Iraqi economy. If taking steps to ruin a country economically is not considered warfare by other means it is difficult to discern what might fit that description.

    After dealing with Iraq, the Trump Administration turned its guns on one of its oldest and closest allies. Great Britain, like most of the other European signatories to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been reluctant to withdraw from the agreement over concern that Iran will as a result decide to develop nuclear weapons. According to the Guardian , a United States representative from the National Security Council named Richard Goldberg, had visited London recently to make clear to the British government that if it does not follow the American lead and withdraw from the JCPOA and reapply sanctions it just might be difficult to work out a trade agreement with Washington post-Brexit. It is a significant threat as part of the pro-Brexit vote clearly was derived from a Trump pledge to make up for some of the anticipated decline in European trade by increasing U.K. access to the U.S. market. Now the quid pro quo is clear: Britain, which normally does in fact follow the Washington lead in foreign policy, will now be expected to be completely on board all of the time and everywhere, particularly in the Middle East.

    During his visit, Goldberg told the BBC: "The question for prime minister Johnson is: 'As you are moving towards Brexit what are you going to do post-31 January as you come to Washington to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the United States?' It's absolutely in [your] interests and the people of Great Britain's interests to join with President Trump, with the United States, to realign your foreign policy away from Brussels, and to join the maximum pressure campaign to keep all of us safe."

    And there is an interesting back story on Richard Goldberg, a John Bolton protégé anti-Iran hardliner, who threatened the British on behalf of Trump. James Carden, writing at The Nation , posits "Consider the following scenario: A Washington, DC–based, tax-exempt organization that bills itself as a think tank dedicated to the enhancement of a foreign country's reputation within the United States, funded by billionaires closely aligned with said foreign country, has one of its high-ranking operatives (often referred to as 'fellows') embedded within the White House national security staff in order to further the oft-stated agenda of his home organization, which, as it happens, is also paying his salary during his year-long stint there. As it happens, this is exactly what the pro-Israel think tank the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) reportedly achieved in an arrangement brokered by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton."

    The FDD senior adviser in question, who was placed on the National Security Council, was Richard Goldberg. FDD is largely funded by Jewish American billionaires including vulture fund capitalist Paul Singer and Home Depot partner Bernard Marcus. Its officers meet regularly with Israeli government officials and the organization is best known for its unrelenting effort to bring about war with Iran. It has relentlessly pushed for a recklessly militaristic U.S. policy directed against Iran and also more generally in the Middle East. It is a reliable mouthpiece for Israel and, inevitably, it has never been required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.

    To be sure, Trump also has other neocons advising him on Iran, including David Wurmser, another Bolton associate, who has the president's ear and is a consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser has recently submitted a series of memos to the White House advocating a policy of "regime disruption" with the Islamic Republic that will destabilize it and eventually lead to a change of government. He may have played a key role in giving the green light to the assassination of Soleimani.

    The good news, if there is any, is that Goldberg resigned on January 3rd, allegedly because the war against Iran was not developing fast enough to suit him and FDD, but he is symptomatic of the many neoconservative hawks who have infiltrated the Trump Administration at secondary and tertiary levels, where much of the development and implementation of policy actually takes place. It also explains that when it comes to Iran and the irrational continuation of a significant U.S. military presence in the Middle East, it is Israel and its Lobby that are steering the ship of state.

    Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

    TG , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 12:53 am GMT

    Blockades are traditionally considered to be acts of war. Surely a trade embargo of sufficient degree should be considered the same thing.
    onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 1:18 am GMT
    This " just" in:

    1] "war is the health of the state" Randolph Bourne https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Randolph_Bourne

    2] "Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be "reformed"or "improved",simply because of their innate criminal nature." onebornfree http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/

    Therefor, if you have [always criminal] governments in the first place, then, as night follows day, you must have [always criminal] government-made wars .

    Regards, onebornfree

    Reality Check , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 2:16 am GMT
    US President Donald Trump chose as the deputy chairwoman [also appointed by Trump, the current chairman is Steve Feinberg] of the intelligence advisory board a Jewish national security expert who is well known in the pro-Israel national security community.

    Ravich, a former deputy national security adviser to vice president Dick Cheney, is a senior adviser to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an influential hawkish pro-Israel think tank. She is also a senior adviser to the Chertoff Group, founded by Michael Chertoff, a homeland security secretary in the George W. Bush administration, and has worked with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

    She has also worked with the pro-Israel community helping to raise money for Israel Bonds.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-names-jewish-security-expert-to-senior-intelligence-post/

    Chepo , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 3:31 am GMT
    It is evident that Trump will win re-election and go to war with Iran afterwards. All this Impeachment mania is simply theatre created by Jews from both sides of the political spectrum in order to prepare Trump for the Zionist vs. Iran war.

    The Greater Israel Project has always been the main objective of American foreign policy. Now, Israel hacked the 2016 election and selected Trump as he attains the required personality, theatre and following in order to deepen the control towards the masses.

    Chepo , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 3:36 am GMT
    @Reality Check Trump destroyed the Republican contenders in the 2016 Primaries, easily. At the time, there was minimal Zionist influence over the Trump campaign – the Jewish factor was heavily focused on the other Republican rivals. Trump won the Primaries in a generic and motivational fashion. Afterwards, the Zionists took over Trump and related entities. The real MAGA Trump factor ended once the Primaries were won – enter the Zionists.

    Israel rigged the election by fixing the actual voting numbers.
    Robert Mercer and Zuckerberg rigged the election by compromising the masses on Facebook.

    Tony Hall , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 5:49 am GMT
    For the government of one country to designate another country's armed forces as a "terrorist organization" is essentially a declaration of war. When in April of 2019 Netanyahu claimed credit for Trump's designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization, he created the pseudo-law framework which became part of the justification for the Israeli-US war crime of 2 Jan. 2020.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-says-trump-designated-iran-guards-a-terror-group-at-his-request/

    Now the pressure is being placed squarely on the NATO countries, but especially Canada, to follow the Netanyahu-Trump lead by designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization. The Canadian branch of the ADL has even gone as far as giving an ultimatum to Justin Trudeau, an ultimatum to make the designation within a month or else. Is the agenda to get NATO ensnared in a US war against Iran to serve Israel?

    https://ahtribune.com/world/americas/canada/3826-act-of-war-to-designate-irgc-a-terrorist-organization.html

    Ever since the misrepresentation of the events of 9/11 we have been engulfed in a massive propaganda campaign aimed at giving the appearance of legitimacy to pseudo-laws founded in major war crimes extending from Sept. of 2001 until today. The continuing reign of the ongoing lies and crimes of 9/11 has brought us to this point where the Axis of Deception, whose mascot of human degradation is Jeffrey Epstein, stands against the Axis of Resistance. In recent days a guiding spirit of the Axis of Resistance has become the martyred holy warrior, Qassem Soleimani.

    mikemikev , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 10:38 am GMT
    Coincidentally the FDD just produced an article agreeing that sanctions are a form of war.
    https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2020/1/20/war-by-other-means
    Naturally they're only concerned about Israel.
    peter mcloughlin , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 11:31 am GMT
    Sanctions can kill and cause great human suffering. Sanctions are presented as a humane alternative to war, cheaper and means to avoid military action with uncertain consequences. But history warns that sanctions aimed at bringing about capitulation or regime change lead to full-scale conflict. If they are too effective or ineffective one side must escalate.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
    World War Jew , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 1:42 pm GMT
    Right TG, traditionally, as you said up there first, and legally too, under the supreme law of the land. Economic sanctions are subject to the same UNSC supervision as forcible coercion.

    UN Charter Article 41: "The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

    https://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/index.html

    US "sanctions" require UNSC authorization. Unilateral sanctions are nothing but illegal coercive intervention, as the non-intervention principle is customary international law, which is US federal common law.

    The G-192, that is, the entire world, has affirmed this law. That's why the US is trying to defund UNCTAD as redundant with the WTO (UNCTAD is the G-192's primary forum.) In any case, now that the SCO is in a position to enforce this law at gunpoint with its overwhelmingly superior missile technology, the US is going to get stomped and tased until it complies and stops resisting.

    almondflake , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT
    Sanctions are the modern day equivalent of laying a siege on the enemy's castle. Such tactic has been an integral part of warfare ever since the first castles were built by man.

    This 21st century crusade against the muslim world is fast approaching its final climax. Everything is going as planned by the ruler-wannabes and the whole of middle earth seems destined to be theirs for once and for all.

    We are all contemporary witnesses to the war campaign of the MILLENNIUM that was prescribed by the bible and the tora and few recognize the historic significance.

    Will we get to see which of the New Testament and the Tora prevails, not that we want to, but because we have no choice but to see? Or will there be a rarest of rare black swan event that will produce an unanticipated course of history?

    JUSA , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 2:41 pm GMT
    Protocol #1:
    The Basic Doctrine: "Right Lies in Might"

    Protocol #2:
    Economic War and Disorganization Lead to International Government

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 3:04 pm GMT
    The war on Iran is in the formative stage with sanctions and the murder of Soleimani who was helping defeat the AL CIADA aka ISIS terrorists who were created and funded and armed by the US and Israel and Britain and NATO and for that reason he was murdered...
    anastasia , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 3:46 pm GMT
    Terrific article, but I would not use the word "infiltrate" when speaking of theneocons in the Trump administration. They are there by open invitation by the biggest neo-con of them all – Trump.
    If you review newspaper articles concerning Iran from 2003 onward, you see very clearly the slow escalation to war and that that war with Iran is inevitable no matter who is in office. In my opinion, that is why Trump is in office. Maybe they thought there would be too much lag time with theother Republican or Democrat candidates when he was running in 2016, but if he gets re-elected, we will see war with Iran. That is thepurpose of the sanctions. To provoke not only thepeople to war against the gov't, but to provoke the government to war. We did it to the Japanese, we did it to Iraq during Saddam Hussein's time, and we are doing it now.

    It is pretty obvious that they wish to keep the mid east in a state of complete and utter chaos,. That is what Israel wants, and that is exactly what they are going to get. Israel has been trying to help themselves to the land of other countries for many years. You cannot do that with a vialbe and unified country. You have to break it all up first – turn it tribal.

    But when it is all over, and the Shia Muslims who hate us now, hate us more after their countries have been all bombedto smithereens, and when China and Russia, who are biding their time, are strong enough, we will eventually get a taste our just desserts.

    I doubt I will be here for that last course.

    Sir Launcelot Canning , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 5:08 pm GMT
    I hope that if any Iranian or English people are reading this, that they know that none of this was the idea of the average American. That we have actually lost our nation and have no control over it anymore. And that the only Americans left supporting this foreign "policy" are Evangelical holy rollers from the South and Midwest, dinosaur Baby Boomers who still think it is civil defense, dupes and suckers who buy into the "support the troops" cult of military, and the slowly decreasing number of misinformed and brainwashed Americans who get their "news" from the (((corporate media))).
    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 21, 2020 at 6:55 pm GMT
    @anastasia Agree that "It is pretty obvious that they wish to keep the mid east in a state of complete and utter chaos ." In "Greater Israel and the Balkanization of the Middle East : Oded Yinon's Strategy for
    Israel " globalresearch.ca , Adeyinke Makinde argues that balkanization has always formed a part of the rationalization of political Zionism stating "After the establishment of Israel in 1948 , a national policy of weakening Arab and Muslim states , balkanising them, or keeping them under a neo-colonial state of affairs has persisted . The prevailing logic was and always has been that any stable , nationalist government in the Arab world poses an existential threat to Israel ."

    [Jan 21, 2020] US Officials Admit Covert Tech Program Is Fueling Iran Protests

    Notable quotes:
    "... Image source: Zuma Press/DW.com ..."
    "... Financial Times ..."
    "... "We work with technological companies to help free flow of information and provide circumvention tools that helped in [last week's] protest ," ..."
    "... they were actively assisting in organizing recent protests ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    US Officials Admit Covert Tech Program Is Fueling Iran Protests by Tyler Durden Mon, 01/20/2020 - 21:55 0 SHARES

    After major protests hit multiple cities across Iran in November following a drastic government slash in gasoline subsidies which quickly turned anti-regime, broad internet outages were reported -- some lasting as long as a week or more nationwide -- following Tehran authorities ordering the blockage of external access.

    And during smaller January protests over downed Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752, more widespread internet outages were reported recently, likely as Iranian security services fear protest "crackdown" videos would fuel outrage in western media , and after months ago Mike Pompeo expressly urged Iranians in the streets to send the State Department damning videos that would implicate Tehran's leaders and police.

    But now Washington appears to have initiated the "Syria option" inside Iran: covertly fueling and driving "popular protests " to eventually create conditions for large-scale confrontation on the ground geared toward regime change.

    Image source: Zuma Press/DW.com

    Financial Times reports Washington's 'covert' efforts are now increasing, and are more out in the open :

    US government-funded technology companies have recorded an increase in the use of circumvention software in Iran in recent weeks after boosting efforts to help Iranian anti-regime protesters thwart internet censorship and use secure mobile messaging .

    The outreach is part of a US government program dedicated to internet freedom that supports dissident pressure inside Iran and complements America's policy of "maximum pressure" over the regime. A US state department official told the Financial Times that since protests in Iran in 2018 -- at the time the largest in almost a decade -- Washington had accelerated efforts to provide Iranians more options on how they communicate with each other and the outside world .

    Similar efforts had long been in place with anti-Assad groups prior to the outbreak of conflict in Syria in 2011, WikiLeaks cables previously revealed.

    The US State Department is now openly boasting it's enacted this program for Iran , which includes "providing apps, servers and other technology to help people communicate, visit banned websites, install anti-tracking software and navigate data shutdowns," according to FT .

    Confirmed: Drop in internet connectivity registered at #Sharif University, Tehran from 11:50 UTC where students are protesting for colleagues and alumni killed on flight #PS752 ; national connectivity remains stable despite sporadic disruptions on third day of #Iran protests📉 pic.twitter.com/LjaNNd4Ut2

    -- NetBlocks.org (@netblocks) January 13, 2020

    And dangerously, many Iranians may not even realize they could be in some instances relying on such US-funded countermeasures to circumvent domestic internet blockages:

    "Many Iranians rely on virtual private networks (VPNs) that receive US funding or are beamed in with US support , not knowing they are relying on Washington-backed tools."

    Iran is on occasion known to round of citizen-journalists and accuse them of being CIA assets -- thus the State Department's open boasting about its program, which is further connected to a broader $65.5 million "Internet Freedom program" in troubled spots throughout the world -- could only serve to increase this trend.

    "We work with technological companies to help free flow of information and provide circumvention tools that helped in [last week's] protest ," one US state department official told the FT. "We are able to sponsor VPNs -- and that allows Iranians to use the internet."

    So there it is: US officials explicitly admitting they were actively assisting in organizing recent protests which followed Soleimani's killing and the Ukrainian airliner shoot down.

    I have asked the Iranian protestors to send us their videos, photos, and information documenting the regime's crackdown on protestors. The U.S. will expose and sanction the abuses. https://t.co/korr5p0woA

    -- Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) November 21, 2019

    At least one circumvention software is actually identified in the report as being produced by Canada-based Psiphon, which receives American government funds. Of course the company sees its role more as facilitating "free flow of information" and less as essentially a willing asset in pursuing covert regime change in Tehran.

    Interestingly, the revelation comes just as other US-funded propaganda campaigns related to Iran are coming to light:

    One of the most viral videos about Iran last week -- and a reason #IraniansDetestSoleimani was trending -- was made by a lobbyist who had worked for a militia group in Libya https://t.co/fN7v6Vztyo

    -- BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) January 17, 2020

    All of this suggests neocons in Washington could be a big step closer to fulfilling their long-term dream of seeing US-sponsored regime change come to Iran -- a policy plan which goes back to at least the 1990's and was given greater impetus and urgency under the Bush administration.

    VodkaInKrakow , 6 hours ago link

    "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" - Wm. Casey, former Director of the CIA under President (and Iranian arms dealer) Ronald Reagan(R).

    So, when does Trump send ISIS to Iran? Oh, MEK is already there.

    I remember when Trump supporters pointed out how Hillary supported a coup in Honduras. Well, Trump has Bolivia.

    Then Obama created ISIS. Well, ISIS has been around since about 2000. And Trump signed NDAA's that sent money to "freedom fighters" in Syria.. .guess who...

    Obama is a loser in Afghanistan and so are the Generals. Well, there was Bush. And now? Trump... going on 4 years of losing in Afghanistan with his own Generals.

    Hillary and Libya. Trump and Libya.

    Obama and NK? Trump and NK.

    Obama and Venezuela? Trump and Venezuela. And what threat does Venezuela pose to The US? No one can answer that question.

    Trump says "no more wars", is engaged in wars and trying to start one with Iran.

    THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME.

    The Program is complete...

    QABubba , 9 hours ago link

    And are the protesters in Iran getting a paycheck too?
    Those in the Ukraine did. Those in Libya did. Those in Syria did.

    Put's the lie to indigenous protest.

    Son of Captain Nemo , 10 hours ago link

    "The outreach is part of a US government program dedicated to internet freedom that supports dissident pressure inside Iran and complements America's policy of "maximum pressure" over the regime. A US state department official told the Financial Times that since protests in Iran in 2018 -- at the time the largest in almost a decade -- Washington had accelerated efforts to provide Iranians more options on how they communicate with each other and the outside world ."...

    VOA LIVE$...

    Sure wish somebody in our government could have alerted Bobby McIIlvaine ( https://www.ae911truth.org/get-involved/bobby-mcilvaine-act ) with "emergency" internet services to his phone nearly 18 1/2 years ago to what his own government was about to do to him before he went into the office that day along with the other 2,976 victims?!!!

    One thing I'll say for the American government since the banker bailouts, they "don't hide what they are doing" when it comes to subverting governments for looting purposes ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL_GShyGv3o )!... At least the Iranian leadership knows what is coming before it happens these days!...

    Davidduke2000 , 15 hours ago link

    The Iranian people are not stupid to commit suicide , they have seen the us handy work in 1953 when Iran had the first democracy in the middle east to be bamboozled by the cia who removed their elected prime minister and installed the shah.

    of course some university students want a sexual revolution like in the us are revolting but they are a handful and they are being subdued .

    mark1955 , 13 hours ago link

    Agree 100%!

    The Iranian people lived through CIA/MOSSAD style "Democracy" from 1953-1980 and will fight "Tooth and nail" not to return to those Horrific days of the Shah!

    MARDUKTA , 15 hours ago link

    BEHIND IT ALL:

    https://truthernews.wordpress.com/2015/03/31/10-reasons-why-switzerland-is-home-to-the-cia-central-intelligence-agency/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    Thinking123 , 18 hours ago link

    Yes, this is what US government has been doing all over the world "Wars and Regime Changes".. Bowing down to Israel to accomplish "The Greater Israel Project". : https://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

    STR88 , 18 hours ago link

    How naive do you have to be to think the US is just giving out free internet for the sake of the Iranian people? even after they've done the same thing all throughout the middle east to cause mass riots and civil unrest.

    The last thing you will ever get from the US government is the truth.

    [Jan 21, 2020] Iran, Trump, and the neoliberal/neoconservative compact by Bill Martin

    Notable quotes:
    "... In the larger global picture, if the U.S. is to find its own balance in the contemporary world, Friedman argues that the seemingly-endless instability in the Middle East is the first and foremost problem that must be solved. Iran is a major problem here, but so is Israel, and Friedman argues that the US must find the path toward "quietly distanc[ing] itself from Israel" (p.6). ..."
    "... This course of action regarding Iran and Israel (and other actors in the Muslim world, including Pakistan and Turkey) is, in Friedman's geopolitical perspective, not so much a matter of supporting U.S. global hegemony as it is recognizing the larger course that the U.S. will be compelled to take. ..."
    "... So, it's back to Plan A for the Democrats and the "Left" that would be laughably absurd if it wasn't so reactionary, to get the neoliberal/ neoconservative endless-war agenda back on track, so that the march toward Iran can continue sooner rather than later. For now, the more spectacular the failure of this impeachment nonsense, the better! ..."
    Jan 19, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Let's be clear, there is a difference between substituting geopolitical power calculations for a universal perspective on the good of humanity, and, on the other hand, recognizing that the existing layout of the world has to be taken into account in attempts to open up a true politics. (My larger perspective on the problem of "opening" is presented in the long essay, "The Fourth Hypothesis," at counterpunch.org.)

    Personally, I find the geopolitical analyses of George Friedman very much worthwhile to consider, especially when he is looking at things long-range, as in his books The Next 100 Years and The Next Decade. The latter was published at the beginning of 2012, and so we are coming to the close of the ten-year period that Friedman discusses.

    One of the major arguments that Friedman makes in The Next Decade is that the United States will have to reach some sort of accommodation with Iran and its regional ambitions. The key to this, Friedman argues, is to bring about some kind of balance of power again, such as existed before Iraq was torn apart.

    This is the key in general to continued U.S. hegemony in the world, in Friedman's view -- regional balances that keep regional powers tied up and unable to rise on the world stage. (An especially interesting example here is that Friedman says that Poland will be built up as a bulwark between Russia and Germany.)

    In the larger global picture, if the U.S. is to find its own balance in the contemporary world, Friedman argues that the seemingly-endless instability in the Middle East is the first and foremost problem that must be solved. Iran is a major problem here, but so is Israel, and Friedman argues that the US must find the path toward "quietly distanc[ing] itself from Israel" (p.6).

    This course of action regarding Iran and Israel (and other actors in the Muslim world, including Pakistan and Turkey) is, in Friedman's geopolitical perspective, not so much a matter of supporting U.S. global hegemony as it is recognizing the larger course that the U.S. will be compelled to take.

    (As the founder, CEO, and "Chief Intelligence Officer" of Stratfor, Friedman aimed to provide "non-ideological" strategic intelligence. My understanding of "non-ideological" is that the analysis was not formulated to suit the agendas of the two mainstream political parties in the U.S. However, my sense is that Friedman does believe that U.S. global hegemony is on the whole good for the world.)

    In his book that came out before The Next Decade (2011), The Next 100 Years (2009), Friedman makes the case that the U.S. will not be seriously challenged globally for decades to come -- in fact, all the way until about 2080!

    Just to give a different spin to something I said earlier, and that I've tried to emphasize in my articles since March 2016: questions of mere power are not questions of politics. Geopolitics is not politics, either -- in my terminology, it is "anti-politics."

    For my part, I am not interested in supporting U.S. hegemony, not in the present and not in the future, and for the most part not in the past, either.

    For the moment, let us simply say that the historical periods of the U.S. that are more supportable -- because they make some contribution, however flawed, to the greater, universal, human project -- are either from before the U.S. entered the road of seeking to compete with other "great powers" on the world stage, or quite apart from this road.

    In my view, the end of U.S. global hegemony and, for that matter, the end of any "great nation-state" global hegemony, is a condition sine qua non of a human future that is just and sustainable. So, again, the brilliance that George Friedman often brings to geopolitical analysis is to be understood in terms of a coldly-realistic perspective, not a warmly-normative one.)

    Of course, this continued U.S. hegemony depends on certain "wise" courses of action being taken by U.S. leaders (Friedman doesn't really get into the question of what might be behind these leaders), including a "subtle" approach to the aforementioned questions of Israel and Iran.

    Obviously, anything associated with Donald Trump is not going to be overly subtle! On the other hand, here we are almost at the end of Friedman's decade, so perhaps the time for subtlety has passed, and the U.S. is compelled to be a bit heavy-handed if there is to be any chance of extricating itself from the endless quagmire.

    However, there's a certain fly, a rather large one, in the ointment that seems to have eluded Friedman's calculations: "the rise of China."

    It isn't that Friedman avoids the China question, not at all; Friedman argues, however, that by 2020 China will not only not be contending with the United States to have the largest economy in the world, but instead that China will fragment, perhaps even devolve into civil war, because of deep inequalities between the relatively prosperous coastal urban areas, and the rural interior.

    Certainly I know from study, and many conversations with people in China, this was a real concern going into the 2010s and in the first half of the decade.

    The chapter dealing with all this in The Next 100 Years (Ch. 5) is titled, "China 2020: Paper Tiger," the latter term being one that Chairman Mao used regarding U.S. imperialism. Friedman writes of another "figure like Mao emerg[ing] to close the country off from the outside, [to] equalize the wealth -- or poverty " (p.7).

    Being an anti-necessitarian in philosophy, I certainly believe anything can happen in social matters, but it seems as though President Xi Jinping and the current leadership of the Communist Party of China have, at least for the time being, managed to head off fragmentation at the pass, so to speak.

    Friedman argued that the "pass" that China especially had to deal with is unsustainable growth rates; but it appears that China has accomplished this, by purposely slowing its economy down.

    One of the things that Friedman is especially helpful with, in his larger geopolitical analysis, is understanding the role that naval power plays in sustaining U.S. hegemony. (In global terms, such power is what keeps the neoliberal "free market" running, and this power is far from free.)

    *

    ... ... ...

    Two of the best supporters of Trump's stated agenda are Tucker Carlson and Steve Hilton. Neither of them pull any punches on this issue when it comes to Republicans, and both of them go some distance beyond Trump in stating an explicitly anti-war agenda.

    They perhaps do not entirely fit the mold of leftist anti-imperialism as it existed from the 1890s through the Sixties (as in the political decade, perhaps 1964-1974 or so) and 1970s, but they do in fact fit this mold vastly better than almost any major figure of the Democratic Party, with the possible exceptions of Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Andrew Yang. (But none of them has gone as far as Trump on this question!)

    Certainly Elizabeth Warren is no exception, and at the moment of this writing she has made the crucial turn toward sticking the knife back into Bernie's back. That is her job, in my view, and part of it is to seem close to Bernie's positions (whatever their defects, which I'll discuss elsewhere), at least the ones that are more directly "economic," while winking at the ruling class.

    There are a few things Carlson and Hilton say on the Iran situation and the Middle East in general that I don't agree with. But in the main I think both are right on where these issues are concerned.

    As I've quoted Carlson a number of times previously, and as I also want to put forward Hilton as an important voice for a politics subservient to neither the liberal nor the conservative establishments, here let me quote what Hilton said in the midst of the Iran crisis, on January 5, 2020:

    The best thing America can do to put the Middle East on a path that leads to more democracy, less terrorism, human rights and economic growth is to get the hell out of there while showing an absolute crystal clear determination to defend American interests with force whenever they are threatened.

    That doesn't mean not doing anything, it means intervening only in ways that help America.

    It means responding only to attacks on Americans disproportionately as a deterrent, just as we saw this week and it means finally accepting that it's not our job to fix the Middle East from afar.

    The only part of this I take exception to is the "intervening only in ways that help America"-bit -- that opens the door to exactly the kinds of problems that Hilton wants the U.S. to avoid, besides the (to me, more important) fact that it is just morally wrong to think it is acceptable to intervene if it is in one's "interests."

    My guess is that Hilton thinks that there is some built-in utilitarian or pragmatic calculus that means the morally-problematic interventions will not occur. I do not see where this has ever worked, but more importantly, this is where philosophy is important, theoretical work and abstract thinking are important.

    It used to be that the Left was pretty good at this sort of thing, and there were some thoughtful conservatives who weren't bad, either. (A decent number of the latter, significantly, come from the Catholic intellectual tradition.) Now there are still a few of the latter, and there are ordinary people who are "thoughtful conservatives" in their "unschooled way" -- which is often better! -- but the Left has sold its intellectual soul along with its political soul.

    That's a story for elsewhere (I have told parts of it in previous articles in this series); the point here is that the utilitarianism and "pragmatism" of merely calculating interests is not nearly going to cut it. (I have partly gone into this here because Hilton also advocates "pragmatism" in his very worthwhile book, Positive Populism -- it is the "affirmative" other side to Tucker Carlson's critical, "negative" expose, Ship of Fools.)

    The wonderful philosophical pragmatism of William James is another matter; this is important because James, along with his friend Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), were leading figures of the Anti-Imperialist League back in the 1890s, when the U.S. establishment was beating the drums loudly to get into the race with Europeans for colonies.

    They were for never getting "in" -- and of course they were not successful, which is why "get the hell out" is as important as anything people can say today.

    What an insane world when the U.S. president says this and the political establishment opposes him, and "progressives" and "the Left" join in with the denunciations!

    It has often been argued that the major utilitarian philosophers, from Bentham and Mill to Peter Singer, have implicit principles that go beyond the utilitarian calculus; I agree with this, and I think this is true of Steve Hilton as well.

    In this light, allow me to quote a little more from the important statement he made on his Fox News Channel program, "The Next Revolution," on January 5; all of this is stuff I entirely agree with, and that expresses some very good principles:

    The West's involvement in the Middle East has been a disaster from the start and finally, with President Trump, America is in a position to bring it to an end. We don't need their oil and we don't need their problems.

    Finally, we have a U.S. president who gets that and wants to get out. There are no prospects for Middle East peace as long as we are there.

    We're never going to defeat the ideology of Islamist terror as long as these countries are basket cases and one of the reasons they are basket cases is that our preposterous foreign policy establishment with monumental arrogance have treated the middle east like some chess game played out in the board rooms in Washington and London.

    – [foxnews.com, transcribed by Yael Halon]

    So then there is the usual tittering about this and that regarding Carlson and Hilton from liberal and progressive Democrats and leftists who support the Democrats, and it seems to me that there is one major reason why there is this foolish tittering: It is because these liberals and leftists really don't care about, for example, the destruction of Libya, or the murder of Berta Caceres.

    Or, maybe they do care, but they have convinced themselves that these things have to swept under the rug in the name of defeating the pure evil of Trump. What this amounts to, in the "nationalist" discourse, is that Trump is some kind of nationalist (as he has said numerous times), perhaps of an "isolationist" sort, while the Democrats are in fact what can be called "nationalists of the neoliberal/neoconservative compact."

    My liberal and leftist friends (some of them Maoists and post-Maoists and Trotskyists or some other kinds of Marxists or purported radicals -- feminists or antifa or whatever) just cannot see, it simply appears to be completely beyond the realm of their imaginations, that the latter kind of nationalism is much worse and qualitatively worse than what Trump represents, and it completely lacks the substantial good elements of Trump's agenda.

    But hey, don't worry my liberal and leftist friends, it is hard to imagine that Joe Biden's "return to normalcy" won't happen at some point -- it will take not only an immense movement to even have a chance of things working out otherwise, but a movement that likes of which is beyond everyone's imagination at this point -- a movement of a revolutionary politics that remains to be invented, as all real politics are, by the masses.

    Liberals and leftists have little to worry about here, they're okay with a Deep State society with a bullshit-democratic veneer and a neoliberal world order; this set-up doesn't really affect them all that much, not negatively at any rate, and the deplorables can just go to hell.

    *

    The Left I grew up with was the Sixties Left, and they used to be a great source of historical memory, and of anti-imperialism, civil rights, and ordinary working-people empowerment.

    The current Left, and whatever array of Democratic-Party supporters, have received their marching orders, finally, from commander Pelosi (in reality, something more like a lieutenant), so the two weeks or so of "immense concern" about Iran has given way again to the extraordinarily-important and solemn work of impeachment.

    But then, impeachment is about derailing the three main aspects of Trump's agenda, so you see how that works. Indeed, perhaps the way this is working is that Trump did in fact head off, whatever one thinks of the methods, a war with Iran (at this time! – and I do think this is but a temporary respite), or more accurately, a war between Iran and Israel that the U.S. would almost certainly be sucked into immediately.

    So, it's back to Plan A for the Democrats and the "Left" that would be laughably absurd if it wasn't so reactionary, to get the neoliberal/ neoconservative endless-war agenda back on track, so that the march toward Iran can continue sooner rather than later. For now, the more spectacular the failure of this impeachment nonsense, the better!

    Bill Martin is a philosopher and musician, retired from DePaul University. He is completing a book with the title, "The Trump Clarification: Disruption at the Edge of the System (toward a theory)." His most recent albums are "Raga Chaturanga" (Bill Martin + Zugzwang; Avant-Bass 3) and "Emptiness, Garden: String Quartets nos. 1 and 2 (Ryokucha Bass Guitar Quartet; Avant-Bass 4). He lives in Salina, Kansas, and plays bass guitar with The Radicles.

    Dungroanin ,

    I have read through finally. And comments too.

    My opinion is Bill Martin is on the ball except for one personage- Hilton. If he is Camerons Hilton and architect of the Brexit referendum – for which he is rewarded with a 'seat at the table' of the crumbling Empire. The Strafor man too is just as complicit in the Empires wickedness.

    But I'll let Bill off with that because he mentioned the Anti-Imperialist Mark Twain – always a joy to be reminded of Americas Dickens.

    On Trump – he didn't use the Nuclear codes 10 minutes after getting them as warned by EVERYONE. Nor start a war with RocketMan, or Russia in Syria, or in Ukraine or with the Chinese using the proxy Uighars, or push through with attempted Bay of Pigs in Venezuela or just now Hong Kong. The Wall is not built and the ineffectual ripoff Obamacare version of a NHS is still there.
    Judge by deeds not words.

    Soleimani aside – He may have stopped the drive for war. Trumps direct contact with fellow world leaders HAS largely bypassed the war mongering State Department and also the Trillion dollar tax free Foundations set up last century to deliver the world Empire, that has so abused the American peoples and environment. He probably wasn't able to stop Bolivia.
    The appointments of various players were not necessarily in his hands as Assad identified- the modern potus is merely a CEO/Chair of a board of directors who are put into place by the special interests who pour billions, 10's of billions into getting their politicians elected. They determine 'National Interests'. All he can do is accept their appointment and give them enough rope to hang themselves – which most have done!
    These are that fight clubs rules.

    On the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation – after 20 full years of working towards cohesion- they have succeeded. Iran is due to become a full member – once it is free of UN sanctions, which is why Trump was forced into pulling the treaty with them, so that technicality could stop that membership. China is not having it nor is Russia – Putins clear statement re the 'international rules' not being mandatory for them dovetails with the US position of Exceptionality. Checkmate.

    As for the Old Robber Baron Banker Pirates idea that they should be allowed a Maritime Empire as consolation- ha ha ha, pull the other one.

    The ancient sea trading routes from Africa to China were active for thousands of years before the Europeans turned up and used unequal power to disrupt and pillage at their hearts content.

    What made that possible was of course explained in the brilliant Guns, Germs and Steel.

    These ancients have ALL these and are equal or advanced in all else including Space, Comms and AI. A navy is not so vital when even nuclear subs are visible from low orbit satellites except in the deepest trenches – not a safe place to hide for months and also pretty crowded with all the other subs trying to hide there. As for Aircraft carrier groups – just build an island! Diego Garcia has a rival.

    Double Checkmate.

    The Empire is Dead. Long live the Empire.

    Dungroanin ,

    And this is hilarious about potus turning the tables on the brass who tried to drag him into the 'tank'.

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/the-betrayal-of-trump-by-larry-c-johnson.html

    'Grab the damn fainting couch. Trump told the assembled military leaders who had presided over a military stalemate in Afghanistan and the rise of ISIS as "losers." Not a one of them had the balls to stand up, tell him to his face he was wrong and offer their resignation. Nope. They preferred to endure such abuse in order to keep their jobs. Pathetic.

    This excerpt in the Washington Post tells the reader more about the corruption of the Deep State and their mindset than it does about Trump's so-called mental state. Trump acted no differently in front of these senior officers and diplomats than he did on the campaign trail. He was honest. That is something the liars in Washington cannot stomach. '

    Rhys Jaggar ,

    I am not an expert on US Constitutional Law, but is there any legal mechanism for a US President to hold a Referendum in the way that the UK held a 'Brexit Referendum' and Scotland held an 'Independence Referendum'?

    How would a US Referendum in 'Getting the hell out of the Middle East, bringing our boys and girls home before the year is out' play out, I wonder?

    That takes the argument away from arch hawks like Bolton et al and puts it firmly in the ambit of Joe Schmo of Main Street, Oshkosh

    wardropper ,

    Great idea.
    Main problem is that most Americans are brought up to think their government is separate from themselves, and should not be seriously criticized.
    By "criticized", I mean, taken to task in a way which actually puts them on a playing field where they are confronted by real people.
    Shouting insults at the government from the rooftops is simply greeted with indulgent smiles from the guilty elite.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    George Friedman is a bog standard Zionist, therefore, out of fear, a virulent Sinophobe, because the Zionists will never control China as they do the Western slave regimes. China surpassed the USA as the world' s largest economy in 2014, on the PPP calculus that the CIA,IMF and just about everyone uses. It' s growing three times as fast as the USA, too. The chance of China fragmenting by 2020 is minuscule, certainly far less than that of the USA. The Chinese have almost totally eliminated poverty, and will raise the living standard of all to a ' middle income' by 2049. It is, however, the genocidal policy of the USA, on which it expend billions EVERY year, to do its diabolical worst to attempt to foment and foster such a hideous fate inside China, by supporting vermin like the Hong Kong fascist thugs, the Uighur salafist terrorist butchers, the medieval theocrats of the Dalai clique and separatist movements in Inner Mongolia, ' Manchuria', Taiwan, even Guandong and Guangxi. It takes a real Western thug to look forward to the ghastly suffering that these villainous ambitions would unleash.

    Antonym ,

    In RlS's nut shell: China can annex area but Israel: no way!

    Dungroanin ,

    Which area is China looking to annex?

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Ant is a pathological Zionist liar, but you can see his loyalty to ' Eretz Yisrael' , ' ..from the Nile to the Euphrates', and ' cleansed' of non-Jews, can' t you.

    alsdkjf ,

    I'm surprised that this author can even remember the counter culture of the 60s given his Trump love.

    Yet more Trumpism from Off Guardian. One doesn't have to buy into the politics of post DLC corporate owned DNC to know Trump for what he is. A fascist.

    It's just amazing this Trump "left". Pathetic.

    Antonym ,

    Trump .. better than HRC but the guy is totally hypnotized by the level of the New York stock exchanges: even his foreign policy is improvised around that. He simply thinks higher is a proof of better forgetting that 90% of Americans don't own serious quantity of stock and that levels are manipulated by big players and the FED. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/business/economy/stocks-economy.html

    Look at his dealing with China: tough as much as the US stock market stays benign in the short term. Same for Iran etc.

    Sure, he is crippled by Pelosi & the FBI / CIA, but he is also by his own stock dependent mind. Might be the reason he is still alive ???

    alsdkjf ,

    Trump crippled by the CIA? Trump?

    I mean the fascist jerk appointed ex CIA torture loving Pompeo to replace swamp creature oil tycoon as Secretary of State, no?

    He appointed torture queen within the CIA to become CIA Director, no?

    He went to the CIA headquarters on day one of his Administration to lavish praise, no?

    He took on ex CIA Director Woolsey as advisor on foreign policy during his campaign, no?

    I tell ya that Trump is a real adversary of the CIA!

    Gall ,

    Roger that. Trump appoints a dominatrix as DCI. Only a masochist or a sadist would Dream of Gina..you know the head of the torture squad under Bush. Otherwise nice girl. PompAss is a total clown but a dangerous one who even makes John Bolton look sane. Now that's scary!

    This guy is Hilary Clinton in drag. The only thing missing is the evil triumphalist cackle after whacking Soleimani. Maybe it wasn't recorded.

    So much for "draining the swamp". The Whitehouse has become an even bigger swamp.

    Antonym ,

    Forgot about John Brennan ex- CIA head or James Clapper ex-DNI honcho?
    John Brennan On 'All Roads With Trump Lead To Putin' | The Last Word | MSNBC
    They practically too Trump hostage in his first year.

    one ,

    my take from this article:
    There are, among the murderers and assassins in Washington, a couple of characters who appear to have 2% of human DNA.
    They author may confirm.

    two ,

    "israel is right in the cen "
    sorry, the muderous regime israel has repeatedly proven, it's never never right . please avoid this usage.

    three ,

    There are 53 or 54 'I's in the article, including his partner's Is. The author may confirm.

    Dungroanin ,

    Phew!

    That is a lot of words mate. Fingers must be sore. I won't comment more until trying to re-read again except quote this:

    "Being an anti-necessitarian in philosophy,.."

    I must say i had a wtf moment at that point see ya later.

    paul ,

    The idea that Trump's recent actions in the Middle East were part of some incredibly cunning plan to avoid war with Iran, strikes me as somewhat implausible, to put it (very) charitably.

    Even Hitler didn't want war. He wanted to achieve his objectives without fighting. When that didn't work, war was Plan B. Trump probably has very little actual control over foreign policy. He is surrounded by people who have been plotting and scheming against him from long before he was elected. He heads a chaotic and dysfunctional administration of billionaires, chancers, grifters, conmen, superannuated generals, religious nut jobs, swamp creatures, halfwits and outright criminals, lurching from one crisis and one fiasco to the next. Some of these people like Bolton were foisted upon him by Adelson and various other backers and wire pullers, but that is not to absolve Trump of personal responsibility.

    Competing agencies which are a law unto themselves have been free to pursue their own turf wars at the expense of anything remotely resembling a rational and coherent strategy. So have quite low level bureaucrats, formulating and implementing their own policies with little regard for the White House. In Syria, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the State Department went their own way, each supporting competing and mutually antagonistic factions and terrorist groups. Agreements that were reached with Russia over Syria, for example, were deliberately sabotaged by Ashton Carter in 24 hours. Likewise, Bolton did everything he could to wreck Trump's delicate negotiations with N. Korea.

    paul ,

    Seen in this light, US policy (or the absence of any coherent policy) is more understandable. What passes for US leadership is the worst in its history, even given a very low bar. Arrogant, venal, corrupt, delusional, irredeemably ignorant, and ideologically driven. The only positive thing that can be said is that the alternative (Clinton) would probably have been even worse, if that is possible.

    That may also be the key to understanding the current situation. For all his pandering to Israel, Trump is more of a self serving unprincipled opportunist than a true Neocon/ Zionist believer in the mould of Pence, Bolton and Pompeo. For that reason he is not trusted by the Zionist Power Elite. He is too much of a loose cannon. They will take all his Gives, like Jerusalem and the JCPOA, but without any gratitude.

    It has taken them a century of plotting, scheming and manoeuvring to achieve their political, financial, and media stranglehold over the US. but America is a wasting asset and they are under time pressure. It is visibly declining and losing its influence. And the parasite will find it difficult to find a similar host. Who else is going to give Israel billions a year in tribute, unlimited free weaponry and diplomatic cover? Russia? Are Chinese troops "happy to die for Israel" asUS ones are (according to their general)?

    paul ,

    And they are way behind schedule. Assad was supposed to be dead by now, and Syria another defenceless failed state, broken up into feuding little cantons, with Israel expanding into the south of the country. The main event, the war with Iran, should have started lond ago.

    That is the reason for the impeachment circus. This is not intended to be resolved one way or the other. It is intended to drag on indefinitely, for months and years, to distract and weaken Trump and make it possible to extract what they want. One of the reasons Trump agreed to the murder of Soleimani and his Iraqi opposite number was to appease some Republican senators like Graham whose support is essential to survive impeachment. They were the ones who wanted it, along with Bolton and Netanyahu.

    paul ,

    It is instructive that all the main players in the impeachment circus are Jews, under Sanhedrin Chief Priests Schiff and Nadler, apart from a few token goys thrown in to make up the numbers. That even goes for those defending Trump.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Don' t forget that Lebanon up to the Litani is the patrimony of the Jewish tribes of Asher and Naphtali, and, as Smotrich, Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, said on Israeli TV a few years ago, ' Damascus belongs to the Jews'.

    bevin ,

    " China will fragment, perhaps even devolve into civil war, because of deep inequalities between the relatively prosperous coastal urban areas, and the rural interior."

    This is not Bill, but Bill's mate the Stratcor geopolitical theorist for hire.

    What is happening in the world is that the only empire the globe, as a whole, has ever seen- the pirate kingdom that the Dutch, then the British and finally the US, leveraged out of the plunder and conquest of America -the maritime empire, of sea routes and navies is under challenge by a revival of the Eurasian proto-empires that preceded it and drove its merchants and princes on the Atlantic coast, to sea.

    We know who the neo-liberals are the current iteration of the gloomy philosophies of the Scots Enlightenment, (Cobbett's 'Scotch Feelosophy') utilitarianism in its crudest form and the principles of necessary inequalities, from the Austrian School back to the various crude racisms which became characteristic of the C19th.
    The neo-cons are the latest expression of the maritime powers' fear of Eurasia and its interior lines of communication. Besides which the importance of navies and of maritime agility crumble.
    Bill mentions that China has not got much of a navy. I'm not so sure about that, but isn't it becoming clear that navies-except to shipyards, prostitutes and arms contractors- are no longer of sovereign importance? There must be missile commanders in China drooling over the prospect of catching a US Fleet in all its glory within 500 miles of the mainland. Not to mention on the east coast of the Persian Gulf.
    The neo-cons are the last in a long line of strategists, ideologists and, for the most part, mercenary publicists defying the logic of Halford Mackinder's geo-strategy for a lot more than a penny a line. And what they urge, is all that they can without crossing the line from deceitfulness to complete dishonesty: chaos and destabilisation within Eurasia, surrounding Russia, subverting Sinkiang and Tibet, employing sectarian guerrillas, fabricating nationalists and nationalisms.. recreate the land piracy, the raiding and the ethnic explosions that drove trade from the land to the sea and crippled the Qing empire.
    The clash is between war, necessary to the Maritime Empire and Peace, vital to the consolidation and flowering of Eurasia.

    As to Israel, and perhaps we can go into this later: it looms much larger in the US imagination (and the imaginations the 'west' borrows from the US) than anywhere else. It is a tiny sliver of a country. Far from being an elephant in any room, it is simply a highly perfumed lapdog which also serves as its master's ventriloquist's dummy. Its danger lies in the fact that after decades of neglect by its idiotic self indulgent masters, it has become an openly fascist regime, which was definitely not meant to happen, and, misled by its own exotic theories of race, has come to believe that it can do what it wants. It can't-and this is one reason why Bill misjudges the reasoning behind the Soleimani killing- but it likes to act, or rather threaten to act, as if it could.

    (By the way-note to morons across the web-Bill's partner quotes Adorno and writes about him too: cue rants about Cultural Marxism.)

    Hugh O'Neill ,

    Thanks, Bevin. The article was so long, I had quite forgotten that he laid too much emphasis on the Stratcor Unspeakable. Clever he may be, but not much use without a moral compass. Talking of geo-strategists, you will doubtless be aware of the work of A.T. Mahan whose blueprint for acquisition of inspired Teddy Roosevelt and leaders throughout Europe, Russia, Japan.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Friedman is a snake oil peddler. He tells the ruling psychopaths what they want to hear, like ' China crumbling', their favourite wet-dream.

    bevin ,

    I agree about Mahan's importance. He understood what lay behind the Empire on which the sun never set but he had enough brains to have been able to realise that current conditions make those fleets obsolete. In fact the Germans in the last War realised that too- their strategy was Eurasian, it broke down over the small matter of devouring the USSR. The expiry date on the tin of Empire has been obvious for a long time- there is simply too much money to be made by ignoring it.
    Russia has always been the problem, either real (very occasionally) or latent for the Dutch/British/US Empire because it is just so clear that the quickest and most efficient communications between Shanghai and Lisbon do not go through the Straits of Malacca, the Suez Canal, or round the cape . Russia never had to do a thing to earn the enmity of the Empire, simply existing was a challenge. And that remains the case- for centuries the Empire denounced the Russians because of the Autocracy, then it was the anarchism of the Bolsheviks, then it was the autocracy again, this time featuring Stalin, then it was the chaos of the oligarchs and now we are back with the Tsar/Stalin Putin.

    Hugh O'Neill ,

    Phenomenal diagnosis, Bevin. However, one suspects that there is still too much profit to be made by the MIC in pursuing useless strategies. I imagine Mahan turning in his grave in his final geo-strategic twist.

    Richard Le Sarc ,

    Yes-Zionist hubris will get Israel into a whole world of sorrow.

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    More USA Deep State conspiracy theorizing which makes the author American paternalism posing as authorship that is revenue neutral when it ain't.

    Any article with mention of mother-'Tucker' Carlson is one that is pure propagandistic tripe in the extreme. Off-G is a UK blog yet this Americanism & worn out aged propaganda still prevails in the minds of US centric myopics writ large across all states in the disunity equally divided from cities to rural towns all.

    MOU

    johny conspiranoid ,

    "More USA Deep State conspiracy theorizing which makes the author American paternalism posing as authorship that is revenue neutral when it ain'"
    Is this even a sentence?

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    It was a sentence when I was smoking marijuana yesterday, Johnny C. Today it is still a sentence IMHO, but you transcribed it incorrectly, and forgot the end of the sentence.

    NOTE: When I smoke marijuana I am allowed to write uncoordinated sentences. These are the rules in CANADA. If you don't like it write to your local politician and complain bitterly.

    MOU

    Charlotte Russe ,

    Bush, Obama, and Clinton are despicable. In fact, they're particularly disgusting, inasmuch, as they were much more "cognizant" than Trump of how their actions would lead to very specific insidious consequences. In addition, they were more able to cleverly conceal their malevolent deeds from the public. And that's why Trump is now sitting in the Oval Office–he won because of public disgust for lying politicians.

    However, Trump is "dangerous" because he's a "misinformed idiot," and as such is extremely malleable. Of course, ignorance is no excuse when the future of humanity is on the line

    In any event, Trump is often not aware of the outcome of his actions. And when you're surrounded and misinformed by warmongering neoconservative nutcases, especially ones who donated to your campaign chances are you'll do stupid things. And that's what they're counting on.

    alsdkfj ,

    Trump is some virtuous example of a truth teller? Trump?

    The biggest liar to every occupy the White House and that is saying a lot.

    Swamp Monster fascist Trump. So much to love, right?

    He could murder one of your friends and you'd still apologize for him, is my guess.

    Hugh O'Neill ,

    It was a long read, but I got there. In essence, I agreed with 99%, but I hesitate to share too much praise for Trump's qualities as a Human Being – though he may be marginally more Human than the entire US body politic. I was walking our new puppy yesterday when he did his usual attempt to leap all over other walkers. I pleaded their forgiveness and explained that his big heart was in inverse proportion to his small brain. It occurred to me later that the opposite would be pure evil i.e. a small heart but big brain. Capitalism as is now infects the Human Experiment, has reduced both brains and hearts: propagandists believe their own lies, and too few trust their own instincts and innate compassion, ground down by the relentless distractions of lies and 'entertainment' (at least the Romas gave you free bread!).
    I get the impression that Trump's world view hasn't altered much since he was about 11 years old. I do not intend to insult all eleven-year-olds, but his naivety is not a redeeming feature of his spoilt brat bully personality. He has swallowed hook, line and sinker every John Wayne cowboy movie and thinks the world can be divided into good guys and bad guys depending on what colour hat they wear. In the days of Black & White TV, it was either black or white. The world seemed so much simpler aged 11 .(1966).

    Dungroanin ,

    Yet I have yet to see one photo of Trump with a gun or in uniform.

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    The Duck learned to dress appropriately for business, I'll give him that. As a New York Real Estate scion you will never see him dress otherwise. Protocol in business is a contemporary business suit. No other manner of dress is allowed for the executive class in North America or UK.

    [Jan 21, 2020] The Middle East Strategic "Balance" Shredded -- Strategic Culture

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    The U.S. was having some success with turning protest messaging against Iran – until, that is – its killing and wounding of so many Iraqi security force members last week (Ketaib Hizbullah is a part of Iraq's armed forces).

    Escalation of maximum-pressure was one thing (Iran was confident of weathering that); but assassinating such a senior official on his state duties, was quite something else. We have not observed a state assassinating a most senior official of another state before.

    And the manner of its doing, was unprecedented too. Soleimani was officially visiting Iraq. He arrived openly as a VIP guest from Syria, and was met on the tarmac by an equally senior Iraqi official, Al-Muhandis, who was assassinated also, (together with seven others). It was all open. General Soleimani regularly used his mobile phone as he argued that as a senior state official, if he were to be assassinated by another state, it would only be as an act of war.

    This act, performed at the international airport of Baghdad, constitutes not just the sundering of red lines, but a humiliation inflicted on Iraq – its government and people. It will upend Iraq's strategic positioning. The erstwhile Iraqi attempt at balancing between Washington and Iran will be swept away by Trump's hubristic trampling on the country's sovereignty. It may well mark the beginning of the end of the U.S. presence in Iraq (and therefore Syria, too), and ultimately, of America's footprint in the Middle East.

    Trump may earn easy plaudits now for his "We're America, Bitch!", as one senior White House official defined the Trump foreign policy doctrine; but the doubts – and unforeseen consequences soon may come home to roost.

    Why did he do it? If no one really wanted 'war', why did Trump escalate and smash up all the crockery? He has had an easy run (so far) towards re-election, so why play the always unpredictable 'wild card' of a yet another Mid-East conflict?

    Was it that he wanted to show 'no Benghazi'; no U.S. embassy siege 'on my watch' – unlike Obama's handling of that situation? Was he persuaded that these assassinations would play well to his constituency (Israeli and Evangelical)? Or was he offered this option baldly by the Netanyahu faction in Washington? Maybe.

    Some in Israel are worried about a three or four front war reaching Israel. Senior Israeli officials recently have been speculating about the likelihood of regional conflict occurring within the coming months. Israel's PM however, is fighting for his political life, and has requested immunity from prosecution on three indictments – pleading that this was his legal right, and that it was needed for him to "continue to lead Israel" for the sake of its future. Effectively, Netanyahu has nothing to lose from escalating tensions with Iran -- but much to gain.

    Opposition Israeli political and military leaders have warned that the PM needs 'war' with Iran -- effectively to underscore the country's 'need' for his continued leadership. And for technical reasons in the Israeli parliament, his plea is unlikely to be settled before the March general elections. Netanyahu thus may still have some time to wind up the case for his continued tenure of the premiership.

    One prime factor in the Israeli caution towards Iran rests not so much on the waywardness of Netanyahu, but on the inconstancy of President Trump: Can it be guaranteed that the U.S. will back Israel unreservedly -- were it to again to become enmeshed in a Mid-East war? The Israeli and Gulf answer seemingly is 'no'. The import of this assessment is significant. Trump now is seen by some in Israel – and by some insiders in Washington – as a threat to Israel's future security vis à vis Iran. Was Trump aware of this? Was this act a gamble to guarantee no slippage in that vital constituency in the lead up to the U.S. elections? We do not know.

    So we arrive at three final questions: How far will Iran absorb this new escalation? Will Iran confine its retaliation to within Iraq? Or will the U.S. cross another 'red line' by striking inside Iran itself, in any subsequent tit for tat?

    Is it deliberate (or is it political autism) that makes Secretary Pompeo term all the Iraqi Hash'd a-Sha'abi forces – whether or not part of official Iraqi forces – as "Iran-led"? The term seems to be used as a laissez-passer to attack all the many Hash'd a-Sha'abi units on the grounds that, being "Iran-linked", they therefore count as 'terrorist forces'. This formulation gives rise to the false sequitur that all other Iraqis would somehow approve of the killings. This would be laughable, if it were not so serious. The Hash'd forces led the war against ISIS and are esteemed by the vast majority of Iraqis. And Soleimani was on the ground at the front line, with those Iraqi forces.

    These forces are not Iranian 'proxies'. They are Iraqi nationalists who share a common Shi'a identity with their co-religionists in Iran, and across the region. They share a common zeitgeist, they see politics similarly, but they are no puppets (we write from direct experience).

    But what this formulation does do is to invite a widening conflict: Many Iraqis will be outraged by the U.S. attacks on fellow Iraqis and will revenge them. Pompeo (falsely) will then blame Iran. Is that Pompeo's purpose: casus belli?

    But where is the off-ramp? Iran will respond Is this affair simply set to escalate from limited military exchanges and from thence, to escalate until what? We understand that this was not addressed in Washington before the President's decision was made. There are no real U.S. channels of communication (other than low level) with Iran; nor is there a plan for the next days. Nor an obvious exit. Is Trump relying on gut instinct again?

    [Jan 21, 2020] The Many Matryoska Dolls to America's Way of Imagining Iran -- Strategic Culture

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Open Society and its Enemies ..."
    "... "Since President Donald Trump ordered the drone strike that killed [Soleimani – justified in terms of deterrence, and allegedly halting an attack] a handful of Trump's advisers, however, [espied another] strategic benefit to killing Soleimani: Call it regime disruption ..."
    "... "The case for disruption is outlined in a series of unclassified memos sent to [John Bolton]in May and June 2019 their author, David Wurmser, is a longtime adviser to Bolton who then served as a consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser argues that Iran is in the midst of a legitimacy crisis. Its leadership, he writes, is divided between camps that seek an apocalyptic return of the Hidden Imam, and those that favour of the preservation of the Islamic Republic. All the while, many Iranians have grown disgusted with the regime's incompetence and corruption. ..."
    "... "Wurmser's crucial insight [is that] – were unexpected, rule-changing actions taken against Iran, it would confuse the regime. It would need to scramble," he writes. Such a U.S. attack would "rattle the delicate internal balance of forces and the control over them upon which the regime depends for stability and survival." Such a moment of confusion, Wurmser writes, will create momentary paralysis -- and the perception among the Iranian public that its leaders are weak. ..."
    "... "Wurmser's memos show that the Trump administration has been debating the blow against Soleimani since the current crisis began, some seven months ago After Iran downed a U.S. drone [in June], Wurmser advised Bolton that the U.S. response should be overt and designed to send a message that the U.S. holds the Iranian regime, not the Iranian people, responsible. "This could even involve something as a targeted strike on someone like Soleimani or his top deputies," Wurmser wrote in a June 22 memo. ..."
    "... In these memos, Wurmser is careful to counsel against a ground invasion of Iran. He says the U.S. response "does not need to be boots on the ground (in fact, it should not be)." Rather, he stresses that the U.S. response should be calibrated to exacerbate the regime's domestic legitimacy crisis. ..."
    "... Coping with Crumbling States ..."
    "... Clean Break ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    lastair Crooke January 20, 2020 © Photo: Flickr / DonkeyHotey On the 17 September 1656, Oliver Cromwell, a Protestant Puritan, who had won a civil war, and had the English king beheaded in public, railed against England's enemies. There was, he told Parliament that day, an axis of evil abroad in the world. And this axis – led by Catholic Spain – was, at root, the problem of a people that had placed themselves at the service of 'evil'. This 'evil', and the servitude that it beget, was the evil of a religion – Catholicism – that refused the English peoples' desire for simple liberties: " [an evil] that put men under restraint under which there was no freedom and under which, there could be 'no liberty of individual consciousness'".

    That was how the English protestant leader saw Catholic Spain in 1656. And it is very close to how key orientations in the U.S. sees Iran today : The evil of religion – of Shi'ism – subjecting (they believe) Iranians to repression, and to serfdom. In Europe, this ideological struggle against the 'evil' of an imposed religious community (the Holy 'Roman' Axis, then) brought Europe to 'near-Armageddon', with the worst affected parts of Europe seeing their population decimated by up to 60% during the conflict.

    Is this faction in the U.S. now intent on invoking a new, near-Armageddon – on this occasion, in the Middle East – in order, like Cromwell, to destroy the religious 'community known' as the Shi'a Resistance Axis, seen to stretch across the region, in order to preserve the Jewish "peoples' desire for simple liberties"?

    Of course, today's leaders of this ideological faction are no longer Puritan Protestants (though the Christian Evangelicals are at one with Cromwell's 'Old Testament' literalism and prophesy). No, its lead ideologues are the neo-conservatives, who have leveraged Karl Popper's hugely influential The Open Society and its Enemies – a seminal treatise, which to a large extent, has shaped how many Americans imagine their 'world'. Popper's was history understood as a series of attempts, by the forces of reaction, to smother an open society with the weapons of traditional religion and traditional culture:

    Marx and Russia were cast as the archetypal reactionary threat to open societies. This construct was taken up by Reagan, and re-connected to the Christian apocalyptic tradition (hence the neo-conservative coalition with Evangelists yearning for Redemption , and with liberal interventionists, yearning for a secular millenarianism). All concur that Iran is reactionary, and furthermore, the posit, poses a grave threat to Israel's self-proclaimed 'open society'.

    The point here is that there is little point in arguing with these people that Iran poses no threat to the U.S. (which is obvious) – for the 'project' is ideological through and through. It has to be understood by these lights. Popper's purpose was to propose that only liberal globalism would bring about a "growing measure of humane and enlightened life" and a free and open society – period.

    All this is but the outer Matryoshka – a suitable public rhetoric, a painted image – that can be used to encase the secret, inner dolls. Eli Lake, writing in Bloomberg , however, gives away the next doll:

    "Since President Donald Trump ordered the drone strike that killed [Soleimani – justified in terms of deterrence, and allegedly halting an attack] a handful of Trump's advisers, however, [espied another] strategic benefit to killing Soleimani: Call it regime disruption

    "The case for disruption is outlined in a series of unclassified memos sent to [John Bolton]in May and June 2019 their author, David Wurmser, is a longtime adviser to Bolton who then served as a consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser argues that Iran is in the midst of a legitimacy crisis. Its leadership, he writes, is divided between camps that seek an apocalyptic return of the Hidden Imam, and those that favour of the preservation of the Islamic Republic. All the while, many Iranians have grown disgusted with the regime's incompetence and corruption.

    "Wurmser's crucial insight [is that] – were unexpected, rule-changing actions taken against Iran, it would confuse the regime. It would need to scramble," he writes. Such a U.S. attack would "rattle the delicate internal balance of forces and the control over them upon which the regime depends for stability and survival." Such a moment of confusion, Wurmser writes, will create momentary paralysis -- and the perception among the Iranian public that its leaders are weak.

    "Wurmser's memos show that the Trump administration has been debating the blow against Soleimani since the current crisis began, some seven months ago After Iran downed a U.S. drone [in June], Wurmser advised Bolton that the U.S. response should be overt and designed to send a message that the U.S. holds the Iranian regime, not the Iranian people, responsible. "This could even involve something as a targeted strike on someone like Soleimani or his top deputies," Wurmser wrote in a June 22 memo.

    In these memos, Wurmser is careful to counsel against a ground invasion of Iran. He says the U.S. response "does not need to be boots on the ground (in fact, it should not be)." Rather, he stresses that the U.S. response should be calibrated to exacerbate the regime's domestic legitimacy crisis.

    So there it is – David Wurmser is the 'doll' within: no military invasion, but just a strategy to blow apart the Iranian Republic. Wurmser, Eli Lake reveals, has quietly been advising Bolton and the Trump Administration all along. This was the neo-con, who in 1996, compiled Coping with Crumbling States (which flowed on from the infamous Clean Break policy strategy paper, written for Netanyahu, as a blueprint for destructing Israel's enemies). Both these papers advocated the overthrow of the Secular-Arab nationalist states – excoriated both as "crumbling relics of the 'evil' USSR" (using Popperian language, of course) – and inherently hostile to Israel (the real message).

    Well ( big surprise ), Wurmser has now been at work as the author of how to 'implode' and destroy Iran. And his insight? "A targeted strike on someone like Soleimani"; split the Iranian leadership into warring factions; cut an open wound into the flesh of Iran's domestic legitimacy; put a finger into that open wound, and twist it; disrupt – and pretend that the U.S. sides with the Iranian people, against its government.

    Eli Lake seems, in his Bloomberg piece, to think that the Wurmser strategy has worked. Really? The problem here is that narratives in Washington are so far apart from the reality that exists on the ground – they simply do not touch at any point. Millions attended Soleimani's cortege. His killing gave a renewed cohesion to Iran. Little more than a dribble have protested.

    Now let us unpack the next 'doll': Trump bought into Wurmser's 'play', albeit, with Trump subsequently admitting that he did the assassination under intense pressure from Republican Senators. Maybe he believed the patently absurd narrative that Iranians would 'be dancing in the street' at Soleimani's killing. In any event, Trump is not known, exactly, for admitting his mistakes. Rather, when something is portrayed as his error, the President adopts the full 'salesman' persona: trying to convince his base that the murder was no error, but a great strategic success – "They like us", Trump claimed of protestors in Iran.

    Tom Luongo has observed : "Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate begins next week, and it's clear that this will not be a walk in the park for the President. Anyone dismissing this because the Republicans hold the Senate, simply do not understand why this impeachment exists in the first place. It is [occurring because it offers] the ultimate form of leverage over a President whose desire to end the wars in the Middle East is anathema to the entrenched powers in the D.C. Swamp." Ah, so here we arrive at another inner Matryoshka.

    This is Luongo's point: Impeachment was the leverage to drive open a wedge between Republican neo-conservatives in the Senate – and Trump. And now the Pelosi pressure on Republican Senators is escalating . The Establishment threw cold water over Trump's assertion of imminent attack, as justification for murdering Soleimani, and Trump responds by painting himself further into a corner on Iran – by going the full salesman 'monte'.

    On the campaign trail, the President goes way over-the-top, calling Soleimani a "son of a b -- -", who killed 'thousands' and furthermore was responsible for every U.S. veteran who lost a limb in Iraq. And he then conjures up a fantasy picture of protesters pouring onto the streets of Tehran, tearing down images of Soleimani, and screaming abuse at the Iranian leadership.

    It is nonsense. There are no mass protests (there have been a few hundred students protesting at one main Tehran University). But Trump has dived in pretty deep, now threatening the Euro-Three signatories to the JCPOA, that unless they brand Iran as having defaulted on JCPOA at the UNSC disputes mechanism, he will slap an eye-watering 25% tariff on their automobiles.

    So, how will Trump avoid plunging in even deeper to conflict if – and when – Americans die in Iraq or Syria at the hands of militia – and when Pompeo or Lindsay Graham will claim, baldly, 'Iran's proxies did it'? Sending emollient faxes to the Swiss to pass to Tehran will not do. Tehran will not read them, or believe them, even if they did.

    It all reeks of stage-management; a set up: a very clever stage-management, designed to end with the U.S. crossing Iran's 'red line', by striking at a target within Iranian territory. Here, finally, we arrive at the innermost doll.

    Cui bono ? Some Senators who never liked Trump, and would prefer Pence as President; the Democrats, who would prefer to run their candidate against Pence in November, rather than Trump. But also, as someone who once worked with Wurmser observed tartly: when you hear that name (Wurmser), immediately you think Netanyahu, his intimate associate.

    Matryoshka herself?

    [Jan 21, 2020] At the start of a new decade, Merkel seems to be on the wrong side of history

    Neoliberals are mostly neocons and neocons are mostly neoliberals. They can't understand the importance of Brexit and the first real crack in neoliberal globalization facade.
    She really was on the wrong side of history: a tragedy for a politician. EU crumles with the end of her political career which was devoted to straightening EU and neoliberalism, as well as serving as the USA vassal. While she was sucessful in extracting benefits for Germany multinationals she increased Germany dependency (and subservience) on the USA. She also will be remembered for her handing of Greece crisis.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The UK's departure will continue to hang over Brussels and Berlin -- the countdown for a trade deal will coincide with Germany's presidency of the EU in the second half of this year. ..."
    "... Brexit is a "wake-up call" for the EU. Europe must, she says, respond by upping its game, becoming "attractive, innovative, creative, a good place for research and education . . . Competition can then be very productive." This is why the EU must continue to reform, completing the digital single market, progressing with banking union -- a plan to centralise the supervision and crisis management of European banks -- and advancing capital markets union to integrate Europe's fragmented equity and debt markets. ..."
    "... its defence budget has increased by 40 per cent since 2015, which is "a huge step from Germany's perspective". ..."
    "... Ms Merkel will doubtless be remembered for two bold moves that changed Germany -- ordering the closure of its nuclear power stations after the Fukushima disaster of 2011, and keeping the country's borders open at the height of the 2015 refugee crisis. That decision was her most controversial, and there are some in Germany who still won't forgive her for it. But officials say Germany survived the influx, and has integrated the more than 1m migrants who arrived in 2015-16. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | www.ft.com

    It's a grim winter's day in Berlin, and the political climate matches the weather. Everywhere Angela Merkel looks there are storm clouds, as the values she has upheld all her career come under sustained attack. At the start of a new decade, Europe's premier stateswoman suddenly seems to be on the wrong side of history.Shortly, the UK will leave the EU. A volatile US president is snubbing allies and going it alone in the Middle East. Vladimir Putin is changing the Russian constitution and meddling in Libya and sub-Saharan Africa. Trade tensions continue, threatening the open borders and globalised value chains that are the cornerstones of Germany's prosperity.

    Ms Merkel, a former physicist renowned for her imperturbable, rational manner is a politician programmed for compromise. But today she faces an uncompromising world where liberal principles have been shoved aside by the law of the jungle.

    Her solution is to double down on Europe, Germany's anchor. "I see the European Union as our life insurance," she says. "Germany is far too small to exert geopolitical influence on its own, and that's why we need to make use of all the benefits of the single market."

    Speaking in the chancellery's Small Cabinet Room, an imposing wood-panelled hall overlooking Berlin's Tiergarten park, Ms Merkel does not come across as under pressure. She is calm, if somewhat cagey, weighing every word and seldom displaying emotion.

    But the message she conveys in a rare interview is nonetheless urgent. In the twilight of her career -- her fourth and final term ends in 2021 -- Ms Merkel is determined to preserve and defend multilateralism, a concept that in the age of Trump, Brexit and a resurgent Russia has never seemed so embattled. This is the "firm conviction" that guides her: the pursuit of "the best win-win situations . . . when partnerships of benefit to both sides are put into practice worldwide". She admits that this idea is coming "under increasing pressure". The system of supranational institutions like the EU and United Nations were, she says, "essentially a lesson learnt from the second world war, and the preceding decades". Now, with so few witnesses of the war still alive, the importance of that lesson is fading.

    Of course President Donald Trump is right that bodies like the World Trade Organization and the UN require reform. "There is no doubt whatsoever about any of that," she says. "But I do not call the world's multilateral structure into question. "Germany has been the great beneficiary of Nato, an enlarged EU and globalisation. Free trade has opened up vast new markets for its world-class cars, machines and chemicals. Sheltered under the US nuclear umbrella, Germany has barely spared a thought for its own security. But the rise of "Me First" nationalism threatens to leave it economically and politically unmoored. In this sense, Europe is existential for German interests, as well as its identity.

    Ms Merkel therefore wants to strengthen the EU -- an institution that she, perhaps more than any other living politician, has come to personify. She steered Europe through the eurozone debt crisis, albeit somewhat tardily: she held Europe together as it imposed sanctions on Russia over the annexation of Crimea; she maintained unity in response to the trauma of Brexit.

    The UK's departure will continue to hang over Brussels and Berlin -- the countdown for a trade deal will coincide with Germany's presidency of the EU in the second half of this year. Berlin worries a post-Brexit UK that reserves the right to diverge from EU rules on goods, workers' rights, taxes and environmental standards could create a serious economic competitor on its doorstep. But Ms Merkel remains a cautious optimist. Brexit is a "wake-up call" for the EU. Europe must, she says, respond by upping its game, becoming "attractive, innovative, creative, a good place for research and education . . . Competition can then be very productive." This is why the EU must continue to reform, completing the digital single market, progressing with banking union -- a plan to centralise the supervision and crisis management of European banks -- and advancing capital markets union to integrate Europe's fragmented equity and debt markets.

    In what sounds like a new European industrial policy, Ms Merkel also says the EU should identify the technological capabilities it lacks and move fast to fill in the gaps. "I believe that chips should be manufactured in the European Union, that Europe should have its own hyperscalers and that it should be possible to produce battery cells," she says. It must also have the confidence to set the new global digital standards. She cites the example of the General Data Protection Regulation, which supporters see as a gold standard for privacy and proof that the EU can become a rulemaker, rather than a rule taker, when it comes to the digital economy. Europe can offer an alternative to the US and Chinese approach to data. "I firmly believe that personal data does not belong to the state or to companies," she says. "It must be ensured that the individual has sovereignty over their own data and can decide with whom and for what purpose they share it."

    The continent's scale and diversity also make it hard to reach a consensus on reform. Europe is deeply split: the migration crisis of 2015 opened up a chasm between the liberal west and countries like Viktor Orban's Hungary which has not healed. Even close allies like Germany and France have occasionally locked horns: Berlin's cool response to Emmanuel Macron's reform initiatives back in 2017 triggered anger in Paris, while the French president's unilateral overture to Mr Putin last year provoked irritation in Berlin. And when it comes to reform of the eurozone, divisions still exist between fiscally challenged southern Europeans and the fiscally orthodox new Hanseatic League of northern countries.

    Ms Merkel remains to a degree hostage to German public opinion. Germany, she admits, is still "slightly hesitant" on banking union, "because our principle is that everyone first needs to reduce the risks in their own country today before we can mutualise the risks". And capital markets union might require member states to seek closer alignment on things like insolvency law. These divisions pale in comparison to the gulf between Europe and the US under president Donald Trump. Germany has become the administration's favourite punching bag, lambasted for its relatively low defence spending, big current account surplus and imports of Russian gas. German business dreads Mr Trump making good on his threat to impose tariffs on European cars.

    It is painful for Ms Merkel, whose career took off after unification. In an interview last year she described how, while coming of age in communist East Germany, she yearned to make a classic American road trip: "See the Rocky Mountains, drive around and listen to Bruce Springsteen -- that was my dream," she told Der Spiegel.

    The poor chemistry between Ms Merkel and Mr Trump has been widely reported. But are the latest tensions in the German-US relationship just personal -- or is there more to it? "I think it has structural causes," she says. For years now, Europe and Germany have been slipping down the US's list of priorities.

    "There's been a shift," she says. "President Obama already spoke about the Asian century, as seen from the US perspective. This also means that Europe is no longer, so to say, at the centre of world events."She adds: "The United States' focus on Europe is declining -- that will be the case under any president."The answer? "We in Europe, and especially in Germany, need to take on more responsibility."

    Germany has vowed to meet the Nato target of spending 2 per cent of GDP on defence by the start of the 2030s. Ms Merkel admits that for those alliance members which have already reached the 2 per cent goal, "naturally this is not enough". But there's no denying Germany has made substantial progress on the issue: its defence budget has increased by 40 per cent since 2015, which is "a huge step from Germany's perspective".

    Ms Merkel insists the transatlantic relationship "remains crucial for me, particularly as regards fundamental questions concerning values and interests in the world". Yet Europe should also develop its own military capability. There may be regions outside Nato's primary focus where "Europe must -- if necessary -- be prepared to get involved. I see Africa as one example," she says.

    Defence is hardly the sole bone of contention with the US. Trade is a constant irritation. Berlin watched with alarm as the US and China descended into a bitter trade war in 2018: it still fears becoming collateral damage.

    "Can the European Union come under pressure between America and China? That can happen, but we can also try to prevent it. "Germany has few illusions about China. German officials and businesspeople are just as incensed as their US counterparts by China's theft of intellectual property, its unfair investment practices, state-sponsored cyber-hacking and human rights abuses in regions like Xinjiang.

    Once seen as a strategic partner, China is increasingly viewed in Berlin as a systemic rival. But Berlin has no intention of emulating the US policy of "decoupling" -- cutting its diplomatic, commercial and financial ties with China. Instead, Ms Merkel has staunchly defended Berlin's close relationship with Beijing. She says she would "advise against regarding China as a threat simply because it is economically successful".

    "As was the case in Germany, [China's] rise is largely based on hard work, creativity and technical skills," she says. Of course there is a need to "ensure that trade relations are fair". China's economic strength and geopolitical ambitions mean it is a rival to the US and Europe. But the question is: "Do we in Germany and Europe want to dismantle all interconnected global supply chains . . . because of this economic competition?" She adds: "In my opinion, complete isolation from China cannot be the answer."Her plea for dialogue and co-operation has set her on a collision course with some in her own party.

    China hawks in her Christian Democratic Union share US mistrust of Huawei, the Chinese telecoms equipment group, fearing it could be used by Beijing to conduct cyber espionage or sabotage. Ms Merkel has pursued a more conciliatory line. Germany should tighten its security requirements towards all telecoms providers and diversify suppliers "so that we never make ourselves dependent on one firm" in 5G. But "I think it is wrong to simply exclude someone per se," she says.

    The rise of China has triggered concern over Germany's future competitiveness. And that economic "angst" finds echoes in the febrile politics of Ms Merkel's fourth term. Her "grand coalition" with the Social Democrats is wracked by squabbling. The populist Alternative for Germany is now established in all 16 of the country's regional parliaments. A battle has broken out for the post-Merkel succession, with a crop of CDU heavy-hitters auditioning for the top job.

    Many in the political elite worry about waning international influence in the final months of the Merkel era.While she remains one of the country's most popular politicians, Germans are asking what her legacy will be. For many of her predecessors, that question is easy to answer: Konrad Adenauer anchored postwar Germany in the west; Willy Brandt ushered in detente with the Soviet Union; Helmut Kohl was the architect of German reunification. So how will Ms Merkel be remembered?

    Vladimir Putin: liberalism has 'outlived its purpose'

    She brushes away the question. "I don't think about my role in history -- I do my job." But what about critics who say the Merkel era was mere durchwurschteln -- muddling through? That word, she says, in a rare flash of irritation, "isn't part of my vocabulary". Despite her reputation for gradualism and caution, Ms Merkel will doubtless be remembered for two bold moves that changed Germany -- ordering the closure of its nuclear power stations after the Fukushima disaster of 2011, and keeping the country's borders open at the height of the 2015 refugee crisis. That decision was her most controversial, and there are some in Germany who still won't forgive her for it. But officials say Germany survived the influx, and has integrated the more than 1m migrants who arrived in 2015-16.

    She prefers to single out less visible changes. Germany is much more engaged in the world: just look, she says, at the Bundeswehr missions in Africa and Afghanistan. During the Kohl era, even the idea of dispatching a ship to the Adriatic to observe the war in Yugoslavia was controversial. She also mentions efforts to end the war in Ukraine, its role in the Iran nuclear deal, its assumption of ever more "diplomatic, and increasingly also military responsibility". "It may become more in future, but we are certainly on the right path," she says.

    The Merkel era has been defined by crisis but thanks to her stewardship most Germans have rarely had it so good. The problem is the world expects even more of a powerful, prosperous Germany and its next chancellor.Letter in response to this article:At last, I understand Brexit's real purpose / From John Beadsmoore, Great Wilbraham, Cambs, UK

    [Jan 21, 2020] Henry Kissinger chilling statement that American soldiers are " dumb , stupid animals to be used as pawns in the conduct of [ American ] policy."

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 1:53 pm GMT

    What a chilling statement attributed to Henry Kissinger that American soldiers are " dumb , stupid animals to be used as pawns in the conduct of [ American ] policy." Martin Luther King recognized that our soldiers were "pawns " and in his "searing" anti-war speech on April4, 1968
    he advised ministers and boys facing the draft to register for conscientious objector status . This speech is said to have help seal his death warrant and exactly a year later he was assassinated . See :
    "When MLK turned on Vietnam , even 'liberal' allies turned on him " cnn.com
    "The verdict was harsh .By one count 168 newspapers condemned his speech . King became 'persona non grata' in the Johnson Whitehouse."
    The MIC/deep state does not take kindly to anti-war/peacemakers .

    [Jan 21, 2020] Goldstein 2.0 ISIS has a new big bad leader

    Notable quotes:
    "... For starters, don't be surprised if his "fortification" of ISIS means Donald Trump can't pull out of Syria after all. Or maybe if ISIS attacks on Iraqi civilians/militias result in the Iraqi parliament revoking their request for the US to remove their troops from Iraqi soil. ..."
    "... There's the possibility that ISIS will start a resurgence in Libya, meaning that NATO has to get in there and sort things out. Maybe some furious ISIS fighters will be the ones who assassinate Iranian generals in future. It's much less messy that way. ..."
    Jan 21, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    For starters, don't be surprised if his "fortification" of ISIS means Donald Trump can't pull out of Syria after all. Or maybe if ISIS attacks on Iraqi civilians/militias result in the Iraqi parliament revoking their request for the US to remove their troops from Iraqi soil.

    There's the possibility that ISIS will start a resurgence in Libya, meaning that NATO has to get in there and sort things out. Maybe some furious ISIS fighters will be the ones who assassinate Iranian generals in future. It's much less messy that way.

    Or, hell, maybe we'll return to the hits of the 90s and early 2000s, and Islamic jihadists will get back to work in Chechnya.

    Whatever happens, ISIS are back baby. And that means that some way, somehow, Mr al-Salbi is about to make the foreign policy goals of the United States much easier.

    That's what Goldsteins are for.

    harry law ,

    .... The US have used Islamic state against both Syria and Iraq, [the enemy of my enemy is my friend].

    There can be no doubt that the US are going to use Islamic state to disrupt Iraq, just as they had no qualms about watching [from satellites and spotter aircraft] Islamic state travel 100's of kilometres from Syria to Northern Iraq [Mosul] across the desert, whipping up tons of dust in their Toyota jeeps to put pressure on the Iraqi government. Also as they watched on with equanimity when the Islamic state transported thousands of tanker loads of oil from Syria to Turkey, that is until the Russians bombed those convoys, the US must think everyone is as stupid as they are. If the Iraqis don't drive the US out using all means including violence, they deserve to be slaves.

    "Sergey Lavrov earlier called the US-led coalition's refusal to combat al-Nusra "absolutely unacceptable."

    "Iraqi security expert Kazim al-Haaj said "US Army troops are preparing and training the ISIL militants in al-Qadaf and Wadi al-Houran regions of Al-Anbar province with the aim of carrying out terrorist attacks and restarting insecurity in Iraq." https://stephenlendman.org/2020/01/trump-regime-shifting-isis-terrorists-from-syria-to-iraq/

    [Jan 21, 2020] Iran Counters EU Threat Of Snapback Sanctions

    Jan 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Peter AU1 , Jan 20 2020 19:06 utc | 3

    U.S. President Donald Trump wants to destroy the nuclear agreement with Iran. He has threatened the EU-3 poodles in Germany, Britain and France with a 25% tariff on their car exports to the U.S. unless they end their role in the JCPOA deal.

    In their usual gutlessness the Europeans gave in to the blackmail. They triggered the Dispute Resolution Mechanism of the deal. The mechanism foresees two 15 day periods of negotiations and a five day decision period after which any of the involved countries can escalate the issues to the UN Security Council. The reference to the UNSC would then lead to an automatic reactivation or "snapback" of those UN sanction against Iran that existed before the nuclear deal was signed.

    Iran is now countering the European move. Its Foreign Minister Javad Zarif announced that Iran may leave the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) if any of the European countries escalates the issue to the UNSC:

    Zarif said that Iran is following up the late decision by European states to trigger the Dispute Resolution Mechanism in the context of the JCPOA, adding that Tehran officially started the discussion on the mechanism on May 8, 2018 when the US withdrew from the deal.

    He underlined that Iran sent three letters dated May 10, August 26 and November 2018 to the then EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, announcing in the latter that Iran had officially triggered and ended the dispute resolution mechanism and thus would begin reducing its commitments to the JCPOA.

    However, Iran gave a seven-month opportunity to the European Union before it began reducing its commitments in May 8, 2019 which had operational effects two months later, according to Zarif.

    Iran's top diplomat said that the country's five steps in compliance reduction would have no similar follow-ups, but Europeans' measure to refer the case to the United Nations Security Council may be followed by Tehran's decision to leave NPT as stated in President Hassan Rouhani's May 2018 letter to other parties to the deal.

    He stressed that all the steps are reversible if the European parties to the JCPOA restore their obligations under the deal.

    The Europeans certainly do not want Iran to leave the NPT. But as they are cowards and likely to continue to submit themselves to Trump's blackmail that is what they will end up with. Britain is the most likely country to move the issue to the UNSC as it is in urgent need of a trade deal with the U.S. after leaving the EU. Cooke has piece at Strategic Culture on Wurmser who may be the strategist behind Trump admin moves on Iran. Adds to this piece by b.

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/01/20/many-matryoska-dolls-america-way-imagining-iran/
    "Well (big surprise), Wurmser has now been at work as the author of how to 'implode' and destroy Iran. And his insight? "A targeted strike on someone like Soleimani"; split the Iranian leadership into warring factions; cut an open wound into the flesh of Iran's domestic legitimacy; put a finger into that open wound, and twist it; disrupt – and pretend that the U.S. sides with the Iranian people, against its government."

    Overall, the strategy looks to be aimed at weakening and disrupting Iran and removing its allies in the region from the game before US strikes begin.

    The downing of the Uki plane and Trump Pompeo immediately saying they were with the Iranian people would fit very well into this strategy though it is not mentioned by Crooke.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 20 2020 19:14 utc | 4

    And in Syria, US territory is becoming more defined. US intends to keep control of both Dier Ezzor and Hasakah oilfields along the Iraq border. Iraq Kurdistan is a secure base for the US and as well as being on Iran's border gives access through Hasakah province to the Syrian oilfields.
    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/us-forces-block-syrian-russian-troops-from-access-to-key-highway-photos/
    vk , Jan 20 2020 19:17 utc | 5
    The Europeans certainly do not want Iran to leave the NPT. But as they are cowards and likely to continue to submit themselves to Trump's blackmail that is what they will end up with. Britain is the most likely country to move the issue to the UNSC as it is in urgent need of a trade deal with the U.S. after leaving the EU.

    We shouldn't humanize entire nations when analyzing geopolitics.

    The Europeans are simply aware of the objective fact they are de facto occupied countries thanks to the many de facto American bases scattered around Western and Central Europe (Germany being the country with the most American bases in the world). They obey the USA for the simple fact they are occupied by the USA.

    That's why some neocarolingians/European nationalists mainly from Germany, France and the Benelux (e.g. Macron, Juncker) avidly defend the creation of an European Army. You don't need to be a geopolitics genius to infer the grave consequences such move would have to the European peoples' welfare.

    As long as NATO exists, Western Europe will remain firmly in American hands.

    Besides, there's also the ideological factor.

    Many Europeans still see today the USA as their "most illustrious child", their continuation as the Western Civilization's center. New York is the new Paris+London. They see themselves as the dwarf countries they really are and rationalize that, ultimately, it is better to live under the hegemony of another Western nation than under the hegemony of the "yellows" (i.e. Chinese) or the "slavics" (i.e. Russia). They really see themselves as a true North Atlantic family, which share the same race and the same cultural values.

    These Atlanticists are specially numerous in the UK, which is not surprising, given its geographic location and the fact that it was indeed the country that founded the USA.

    Walter , Jan 20 2020 19:17 utc | 6
    Of course Iran and what happens in Iraq are joined at the hip...

    Professor Maranadi>

    "Seyed Mohammad Marandi
    @s_m_marandi
    ·
    10m
    Many believe an economic crisis lies ahead of the US & the timing of the crash will determine the fate of Trump's re-election bid. However, another threat looms. If the US fails to swiftly comply with Iraqi demands to end the occupation, the resistance will become very violent."

    and in Germany?

    USA warnen: "Unmittelbar bevorstehender Angriff auf US-Militärs in Deutschland". RT/D

    "Pulling back" may suit the Clowns, but agreement requires more than that if there's to be no child.

    The Clowns are not contract capable. The only "deal" is for the imperial forces to leave the ME... the only deal is action....Of one sort or another. The clowns imagine a glorious victory over smoking ruins.

    Careful what ya' wish fer, fellas...

    erik , Jan 20 2020 19:21 utc | 7
    Fatwa or not, Iran must have the bomb, for the same reason NoKo had to build it. It's the only way to lance the boil and move on from under the incessant threats from the United States. We won't let up, even if it takes 100 years, and they have to know this. They do have the engineering know how to do it; now they must, but they will have to be discrete and stockpile enough 90% U235, then fiddle around with the details involved in assembling a staged device with enough yield so it's understood by all. I expect this whole process will now move forward.
    bjd , Jan 20 2020 19:21 utc | 8
    Iran should finally make haste with:
    a. developing nukes
    b. the asymmetric warfare as we move into election season


    tucenz , Jan 20 2020 19:25 utc | 9
    So, what does Iran actually gain by leaving the NPT?
    Guy THORNTON , Jan 20 2020 19:28 utc | 10
    One is reminded of Austria-Hungary's ultimatum to Serbia in 1914: "As the German ambassador to Vienna reported to his government on July 14, the [note] to Serbia is being composed so that the possibility of its being accepted is practically excluded." As Churchill wrote at the time: "it seemed absolutely impossible that any State in the world could accept it, or that any acceptance, however abject, would satisfy the aggressor."

    Uncle Sam is fooling nobody.

    SteveK9 , Jan 20 2020 19:31 utc | 11
    Many people refer to the European countries as 'occupied' (vk) and that is the reason they submit to American policy. I don't believe that is the case. The number of troops is far too small to 'occupy' a country that was resisting an occupation. Those troops were there as a 'trigger' to initiate a conflict with the Soviet Union if it invaded Europe. These days they are just there as some kind of vestigial legacy, and don't really mean anything. The US exercises its control over the EU and elsewhere through its control of international finance and trade. This system benefits the elite of those countries that are part of the 'empire', so has substantial support from influential people inside those countries. Unless and until there is some groundswell of support among the peoples of those countries to change that system, they will continue to be an obedient part of the US empire.

    It's not even clear that resistance isn't futile. Those countries that want to maintain independence like Russia, China, Iran, Turkey (?), India (?) also have a strong internal attraction to Western 'culture'. As much as some denigrate that culture as shallow, materialistic, and worthless, it seems to have a very universal attraction around the World, particularly among the young. There are a lot of people everywhere that would like to be a part of a global empire, with a hedonistic Western-style culture. Sad, but true.

    Abe , Jan 20 2020 19:32 utc | 12
    I tend to agree with comments here saying Iran needs to make bomb.

    North Korea proved that truth 100%. No amount of agreements or "guarantees" with usual lying suspects will provide security to Iran - only hard cold nuclear deterrence will.

    This time, now, Iran has enough conventional & asymmetrical firepower to deter its enemies long enough for it to develop nukes (few years?).

    It already has proven means to deliver warheads, now it needs them.

    time2wakeup , Jan 20 2020 19:50 utc | 13
    I strongly concur with several other commentators here. Iran should immediately commence enriching uranium to weapons grade levels and assemble at least 10-20 nuclear warheads ASAP if they ever hope to remain an intact, non-US/Israeli dominated country.

    The US understands ONLY raw power and who it perceives has it (Israel, North Korea..etc.), and who doesn't (Libya, Syria, Iraq..etc.).

    The NPT "Treaty" is nothing more than a cabal of nuclear armed countries attempting to cartel who's allowed to posses a nuclear weapons arsenal and all the rest of the world countries that's ultimately at their mercy.

    Cornelius von Hamb , Jan 20 2020 19:59 utc | 14
    "So, what does Iran actually gain by leaving the NPT?"

    For one thing, it means they won't have to violate that treaty and international law if they decide to take steps that wouldn't be allowed under the NPT terms. It's easy to look at the lawless rogue US regime and forget this, but: some countries actually do try to have some semblance of abiding by and respecting treaties and the rule of law.

    Nemesiscalling , Jan 20 2020 20:01 utc | 15
    @2 Nemo

    I am always taken aback when people compare unsavory characters to members of the primate family. Please do not engage in "zoomorphism." And I am dead fucking serious. Animals do not deserve to be denigrated in such a way. Keep your insults grounded in the human sphere.

    lgfocus , Jan 20 2020 20:02 utc | 16
    PIERACCINI has a very good article on Strategic Culture on what is happening to The Evil Empires dominance
    The End of U.S. Military Dominance: Unintended Consequences Forge a Multipolar World Order
    lysias , Jan 20 2020 20:03 utc | 17
    The U.S. has already used that tactic of insisting on concessions known to be unacceptable to the other side with the intention of causing war at least twice: to Japan in 1941 and to Yugoslavia before the Kosovo War.
    goldhoarder , Jan 20 2020 20:08 utc | 18
    Does Iran really need a nuke? They have proven they can hit a US base and Saudi oil infrastructure. It is believed they already have.... or at least have the capability of mining the Strait of Hormuz. If the global financial elite can't get oil out of the gulf... what happens to the global economy? My guess is it would implode. Isn't this the real and only reason the US hasn't bombed Iran back to the stone age yet? They already have deterrence. The US claims about restoring deterrence was just the projection of sociopaths and psychopaths.
    tucenz , Jan 20 2020 20:12 utc | 19
    re:Cornelius von Hamb | Jan 20 2020 19:59 utc | 14
    "For one thing, it means they won't have to violate that treaty and international law if they decide to take steps that wouldn't be allowed under the NPT terms."

    Iran says it won't develop nuclear weapons (anti Islamic), so what steps could they possibly be not wanting to rule out?

    Virgile , Jan 20 2020 20:17 utc | 20
    The state of the JCPOA today bears a lot on Trump's negotiations with North Korea.
    Kim Un Jung has be spooked by Bolton comparing North Korea's fate to Libya and by the ease with which US withdrew from the JCPOA. Negotiations have halted.
    Trump needs to show that he is serious with deals that he guaranties will be binding the partners more seriously than the flawed JCPOA.
    Iran has only one choice: Press Europe to take a stand against the USA, (which will probably not happen) then pull out officially from the JCPOA that has become a liability with no advantages and calls for re-negotiation. Trump will certainly jump in and will try to get the best deal possible by squeezing Iran on its regional role. Yet he can't have too excessive demands as he wants to make a similar deal with North Korea.
    Iran could ask for withholding sanctions during negotiations. It could take years to finalize the deal. In the meantime the regional situation could change greatly
    That seems to be the only path for Iran.
    Laguerre , Jan 20 2020 20:27 utc | 21
    According to what is said here, the US is still afraid of attacking Iran, and is going for internal disruption, and sanctions. So what's new? It's been the same policy for forty years. The fact that Trump doesn't like long-term wars, and will only go for a big bang without consequences, is neither here nor there.

    Rouhani and his team, including Zarif, seem to me pretty bright, and capable of coping with the politics. Relighting nuclear refinement is essentially a political move.

    jared , Jan 20 2020 20:30 utc | 22
    Again, find it hard to believe that they are in fact such quisling sycophants to the US.
    Suspect they rely on Trump to provide cover for the fact that they (like him) are beholden to higher powers.
    winston2 , Jan 20 2020 20:35 utc | 23
    The USE of WMDs is haram.
    Words mean things B, much as the PC police have twisted their meanings,and even fatwas can be reversed.
    The frantic efforts to corral the USSRs nukes were never anything like 100% effective,500+ warheads and tonnes of
    plutonium were NEVER accounted for from the KNOWN inventory,who knows what the unknown inventory was ?
    Generals of Rocket Forces had to eat,and there were willing buyers for their only wares.
    A CIA assessment I was made privy to,the old boys network for an opinion from outside, claimed the Iranians did not have the ability to keep those warheads in working order,which begs a question,how many ?
    I told my old schoolmate they were wrong in their assessment, they've had the capability since the Shahs nuclear program.I know Iran very well,worked and lived there ,during the Shah times.

    [Jan 20, 2020] The Iraqis want American out, and one day American will leave.

    Jan 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Ko , says: Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 7:23 pm GMT

    American interests are to protect oil companies, and fight the inevtible douche (british definition) American's will feel once the dollar is deflated. In a lesser way, wars and interventions are indeed to protect americans – from a massive, sudden, econimic depression of the likes the world has never seen. China and the rest of the world no American empire is going to retract. I only hope we have a sensible leader who can parlay Ameria's role in the world to become a partner in the BRI – ion some way.

    The Asia Pivot was never destined to be anything but bluster. Asia is lost, the Asian nations will satellite around China. Southeast Asia is even more lost, Cambodia mioght as well fly the Chinese flag, Thailand will pretend, as it always has, to never have been colonized. Well, Thailand was/is a dog of a nation that's laid down on its back for every nation advancing on it's border.

    Myanmar just signed on to the BRI and has given China its derired dams. It's already full of Chinese. The only thing holding China back in Myanmar is the amount of money it has to give spoon to the military, generals, cronies,etc. China already owns almost all of Manadaly and thousands of square milies surrounding Mandalay. It has gas and oil fields in a warm water where those pesky Bengali Jihadis once tried to dominate.
    https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/burma/myanmar-china-sign-dozens-deals-bri-projects-cooperation-xis-visit.html

    Indial too has bought into Myanmar.
    https://www.irrawaddy.com/opinion/guest-column/india-many-reasons-engage-myanmar.html

    So, it's no wonder Iraq is the last stop of the retreat from the Middle East. The Chinese are moving forward with only the Saudis standing in the way. And who the hell really likes the House of Saud? They're doomed soon, and good riddence. The Iraqis want American out, and one day American will leave.

    [Jan 20, 2020] Some people, in the US, still do not understand why Iranian people do not "love" America...If you had around 100.000 casualties by nerve gas that was sold by the US and his poodles (forget other western countries, you know who is "the boss" in the game) full aligned with Iraq,

    Jan 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DFC , Jan 20 2020 20:36 utc | 25

    b said:

    "During the Iran-Iraq war Iraq's Saddam Hussein ordered the use of chemical weapons against Iranian front lines and cities. Ten thousand Iranians died of those and many more were wounded by them"

    Nope, in fact the estimate body count is much higher:

    "According to a 2002 article in the Star-Ledger, 20,000 Iranian combatants and combat medics were killed on the spot by nerve gas." (this was only a part, there were also many civilians killed)

    "In a declassified 1991 report, the CIA estimated that Iran had suffered more than 50,000 casualties from Iraq's use of several chemical weapons,[10] though current estimates are more than 100,000"

    "Reporter Michael Dobbs of the Washington Post stated that Reagan's administration was well aware that the materials sold to Iraq would be used to manufacture chemical weapons for use in the war against Iran"
    "According to Reagan's foreign policy, every attempt to save Iraq was necessary and legal.[4]"

    All of this is in the wikipedia, hardly a "hardcore iranian trolls" web:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_chemical_attacks_against_Iran

    Some people, in the US, still do not understand why Iranian people do not "love" America...If you had around 100.000 casualties by nerve gas that was sold by the US and his poodles (forget other western countries, you know who is "the boss" in the game) full aligned with Iraq, and then you attack Iran with sanctions and threats again and again, and at the peak of hypocrisy in 2003 USA invaded Iraq "to counter the threat of WMD" (sold by the US)...What do you think of the US if you are an Iranian were living all your live under the "Damocles sword" of the threats and sactions of the Empire?

    DFC , Jan 20 2020 22:27 utc | 52

    @ Posted by: Laguerre | Jan 20 2020 21:48 utc | 38

    Let me see if I understand your point:

    First US give permissions in September 1980 (if not encouraged) to Saddam to invade Iran, to finish the new Islamic regime that was seen as an enemy by Washington; and then when Iranians, at a huge costs, retaliates and turn the tide, then the US thought it was justified to supply Iraq with the chemicals (the "dual-use" technology) to make huge amounts of nerve gases and support the use against Iranian soldiers (with some unavoidable thousands of "collateral damages"), and also helping them with intelligence, satellite imagery and etc...Is that your point?

    Do you think US would have permitted Iraq attacks Iran if the Shah was governing Iran? Do you think all the US did is justified? Do you think the people of Iran has no reasons for not "loving" America?

    [Jan 20, 2020] The American Evil Empire is the threat. The Eurotrash nations are irrelevant. They are America-appeasing shits, who only provide a "multilateral" skirt for the United States to hide behind

    Jan 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    ak74 , Jan 20 2020 22:32 utc | 54

    The American Evil Empire is the threat.

    The Eurotrash nations are irrelevant. They are America-appeasing shits, who only provide a "multilateral" skirt for the United States to hide behind.

    Neutralize the America Menace--and you won't have to give a damn what the Euro poodles think, do, or believe.

    [Jan 20, 2020] The US has turned into such a fake bullshit nation that nothing the people say who run the place can be trusted.

    Jan 20, 2020 | www.unz.com

    zard , says: Show Comment January 20, 2020 at 6:29 pm GMT

    The US has turned into such a fake bullshit nation that nothing the people say who run the place can be trusted. It is totally a Masonic land where money is God and the decent people are exploited and oppressed. Free speech and democracy are only kosher if the issue is something like Pooper-Scooper Enforcement Officer with no real money or power involved, unless of course there is an impressive uniform which goes with the position.

    The brainwashed masses are presently transfixed to their TV's watching the theatre of the fake-impeachment pageant unfold, dutifully believing it is all real. All the performers strut about keeping to their carefully-scripted lines. Like the establishment-hatched fake Russia-bashing campaign, it is all theater. With the impeachment drama intended the polarize the entire nation, the people are once-again being caresully herded into their red and blue stalls in ensure nothing really populist, and not controlled by the establishment cabal running things, gets off of the ground. the entire performance will be so carefully choreographed, on a pro and anti Trump basis that it will also ensure that whomever the ruling cabal anoints will be chosen for the top puppet job.

    Like in the US midterm elections in 2018, issues involving US foreign policy were mum. In the coming presidential election, Americans will see no real difference in the leading contenders' position regarding foreign affairs, which most Americans in any case now believe should be left to the military and the agencies who know best how to protect and advance their interests. Once again, any real discussion or debate on foreign policy during the coming election campaign will be taboo, and with the careful censorship of the alternate media, and with no real protest from the American people, who in fact become willing accomplices to any further unjust wars and atrocities their so-called "free" nation commits.

    Americans are brought up on Hollywood imagery, life-styles and fantasy. The corporate media and entertainment industry is so pervasive that most of the people cannot discern the difference between fantasy and reality, and as result of their constantly-fed addiction, they now demand more and more theatre and even wars to satisfy their cravings. A false-flag attack, 9/11, on their own people coming from their diabolical "owners", results in being no more than a thrilling performance to make life seem more real. If there was any reality to the people they would long ago have arrested the thousands of insider perps involved, (especially deep-state ones in and out of the US), and long ago they would hung everyone of them.

    [Jan 20, 2020] Trump s erraticness is a strong signal he fits to a pattern the Russians have used to depict the US: not agreement capable

    Jan 14, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    January 14, 2020 at 12:31 pm

    I would put it a bit differently. Trump's erraticness is a strong signal he fits to a pattern the Russians have used to depict the US: "not agreement capable". That's what I meant by he selects for weak partners. His negotiating style signals that he is a bad faith actor. Who would put up with that unless you had to, or you could somehow build that into your price?

    Yves Smith Post author, January 15, 2020 at 12:16 am

    I have no idea who your mythical Russians are. I know two people who did business in Russia before things got stupid and they never had problems with getting paid. Did you also miss that "Russians" have bought so much real estate in London that they mainly don't live in that you could drop a neutron bomb in the better parts of Chelsea and South Kensington and not kill anyone?

    Pray tell, how could they acquire high end property if they are such cheats?

    Boomka, January 15, 2020 at 6:38 am

    somebody was eating too much US propaganda? how about this for starters:

    https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/26-years-on-russia-set-to-repay-all-soviet-unions-foreign-debt

    "It is politically important: Russia has paid off the USSR's debt to a country that no longer exists," said Mr Yuri Yudenkov, a professor at the Russian University of Economics and Public Administration. "This is very important in terms of reputation: the ability to repay on time, the responsibility," he told AFP.

    It would have been very easy for Russia to say it cannot be held responsible for USSR's debts, especially in this case where debt is to a non-existent entity.

    drumlin woodchuckles, January 14, 2020 at 7:09 pm

    In Syria, the Department of Defense was supporting one group of pet jihadis. The CIA was supporting a different group of pet jihadis.

    At times the two groups of pet jihadis were actively fighting each other. I am not sure how the DoD and CIA felt about their respective pet jihadis fighting each other. However they felt, they kept right on arming and supporting their respective groups ...

    [Jan 19, 2020] Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany s behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally

    Highly recommended!
    Looks like Trump engaged his chances for reelection by killing Soleimani: he lost part of military votes and all anti-war-republican votes in one broad stroke. The core voters will remain but the question is whether there are enough of them. Please remember that part of sunders supports also voted for Trump. This will never happen again. Add to this desgrunted famers and Trump chances are considerably lower then in 2016, when his victory was a big surprise.
    Due to impeachment his chances will increase, as impeachment definitely mobilize his base and he might even manage to get back some anti-war republican s and independents, but still his situation is rather complex. The impartment charged produced by the Schiff-Pelosi gang are fake and people understand that. The real impeachment ground -- killing high level Iran military officer on diplomatic mission as well as Douma false flag bombing of Syrian objects -- exists, but Dems are too complicit to use it.
    Impeachment and Trump 2020 Will it destroy or boost re-election chances
    Notable quotes:
    "... Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany's behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally. ..."
    "... The argument is correct. (Although the mafia label bespeaks a limited frame of reference and it's inappropriate in any event -- crime families do not have the reach or power of state assassination squads.) ..."
    "... The truth of it is Trump murdered General Soleimani because the general was very effective in defeating ISIS - the U.S. created and funded - terrorists in Syria and Iraq. The neocons were none too pleased. ..."
    "... In short, President Trump was engaged in months of what can best be described as gangsternomics in directing the course of Iraq's future economic and political development.[/] ..."
    "... Iraq's importance goes much farther than just protecting the petrodollar to the U.S. It is the fulcrum now on which the entire U.S. defense against Eurasian integration rests. The entire region is slipping out of the grasp of the U.S. ..."
    "... Trump's crude gangster tactics in Iraq, Venezuela, Bolivia and to a lesser extent in Syria cannot be hidden behind the false veil of moral preening and virtue signaling about bringing democracy to these benighted places.[/] ..."
    "... Gangsternomics seems a good term for Trump's vision of US world power. Trump is pragmatic or realist in that he knows there is no court or authority to hold the US to account. ..."
    "... This demonstrates that US attacks in Iraq over the last 30-40 years was mostly about the control (including transportation routes) and than profiting from its oil and gas reserves. ..."
    "... A secondary reason is to put troop on the border with Iran to further destabilize it via state terrorism to overthrow the government and then take its oil and gas too. ..."
    "... The Kurdish President of Iraq has stated that "Out of an eagerness to spare blood and preserve civil peace, I apologize for not naming Edani prime minister," the letter continued. "I am ready to submit my resignation to parliament." ..."
    "... "Iraqi Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr demanded that Iraqis stage a "million-man march" against the continued US military presence in the country" ..."
    "... I believe Trump needs to be thought of as a CEO brought in to pull a company back from the edge of bankruptcy. I think that is the way he sees himself, and as I have put in previous comments, there are no rules. ..."
    "... Basically, the value of the dollar that is low enough to re-industrialize America is far below the tipping point that would trigger a global sell-off of dollars. How could that mass sell-off be prevented? Threatening to nuke any country whose central bank sells their dollar reserves? ..."
    "... the Gangsternomics have been going on for some time as chronicled in 'Shock Doctrine' and 'Confessions of an Economic Hitman'. ..."
    "... the assassination plans and techniques by the exceptionalists... just ask the Cuban aides of Fidel Castro. Most of them alive today. They have a a helluva expertise on this business having foiled them for over 45 years. Against all odds cause at 90 miles from the enemy, the logistics were vastly against the cubans. ..."
    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Dick , Jan 18 2020 23:25 utc | 44

    Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany's behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally. Is it just me, or have other's noted the similarity of Pompeo to Herman Goering in looks and behaviour?

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 0:10 utc | 49

    I recall RT reported on December 31. 19 Trump warned

    LINK

    "This is not a Warning, it is a Threat," Trump declared in a tweet on Tuesday afternoon, adding that Iran will "pay a very BIG PRICE" for the embassy siege earlier in the day."

    They sure did. So who is next? Yesterday Trump warned the supreme leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khameni:

    'Be very careful with your words': Trump warns Iran's Khamenei after ayatollah delivers fiery sermon slamming 'American clowns'

    US President Donald Trump has warned the supreme leader of Iran to watch his language, following a heated sermon in which Ayatollah Ali Khamenei slammed American leaders as "clowns."

    Leading a prayer in Tehran on Friday, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei boasted that Iran had the "spirit to slap an arrogant, aggressive global power" in its retaliation to the assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, which he said struck a "serious blow" to Washington's "dignity" – triggering a response from the US president.

    "The so-called 'Supreme Leader' of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe," Trump tweeted. "Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words!"

    In his sermon, Khamenei blasted "American clowns," who he said "lie in utter viciousness that they stand with the Iranian people," referring to recent comments by Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo

    How dare he?

    Pft , Jan 19 2020 0:28 utc | 50
    Lets face it, assassinations are not a new thing. It became more organized with Lord Palmerstons gangs of thugs in the mid 19th century (one of which took out Lincoln) . Since the end of WWII the global mafia jumped across the pond and assassinations have been covert actions arranged by the CIA , with operations having a high degree of plausible deniability. But most higher ups had a pretty good idea who was behind it . Trumps just continued this but like Bush and Obama have made clear its their right to do so against terrorists . Of course the definition of terrorist has become rather broad. Trump recently said he authorized the hit because he said bad things about America. Maybe saying bad things about Trump can get you labelled the same. Watch out for those drones barflies.

    So basically the main change is they no longer care about plausible deniability . They are proud to admit it. And nobody seems to care enough to express any outrage. Name any countries leader who has except in muted terms. Europe, Russia, China, etc everyone quiet as a mouse. China so outraged they signed a trade deal giving them nothing. UN? Might as well move it to Cuba , Iran or Venezuela for all the clout it has.

    So you know, maybe the deterrence is working. Terrorism works both ways. The world seems terrorized and hardly anyone in the US dares criticize Trumps action without saying the general was evil and deserved it. Its not just drones they fear as financial terrorism (sanctions, denied access to USD) works quite well also (except in Irans case).

    ChasMark , Jan 19 2020 0:30 utc | 51
    james | Jan 18 2020 20:28 utc | 17

    The argument is correct. (Although the mafia label bespeaks a limited frame of reference and it's inappropriate in any event -- crime families do not have the reach or power of state assassination squads.)

    Ferencz does not have the moral standing to make the argument. It's like granting Ted Bundy credibility for criticizing police brutality.

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 0:44 utc | 56

    The truth of it is Trump murdered General Soleimani because the general was very effective in defeating ISIS - the U.S. created and funded - terrorists in Syria and Iraq. The neocons were none too pleased.

    Release Jan.18 2020 21st centurywire audio Interview with Dr. Mohammad Marandi, Tehran University

    America's Miscalculation with Iran

    LINK

    @ ChasMark 7 - not an ounce of integrity! Trump or Ferencz?

    How is it I posted days ago that link to Ferencz's letter to New York Times and not a pips. Are you defending Trump's war crimes as against bringing the Nazis to justice?

    How about the U.S. waterboarding and torturing Muslims at Gitmo? 19 years on with NO TRIALS!!! That's OK, right?

    karlof1 , Jan 19 2020 0:58 utc | 57
    As far as b's premise goes, he's proven it IMO. Looks like the CIA made the next move in Lebanon. IMO, Asia plus Russia & Belarus hold the geoeconomic and geopolitical deterrence cards. The Financial Parasite continues hollowing out what remains of US industry and retail helped along by Trump's Trade War. I presented the fundamental economic info and arguments on the prior threads, so I don't have anything to add.
    pretzelattack , Jan 19 2020 1:08 utc | 58
    the price of fake freedom is remaining ever vigilant to prevent peace breaking out. trump's as much a warmonger as any of them (which is to say impeachment won't make a bit of difference).
    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 1:27 utc | 59
    F. William Engdahl asks,

    Unintended Consequences: Did Trump just give the Middle East to China and Russia?

    [Before] the US assassination of Soleimani, there were numerous back-channel efforts for détente in the costly wars that have raged across the region since the US-instigated Arab Spring between Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran and Iraq. Russia and China have both in different ways been playing a key role in changing the geopolitical tensions. At this juncture the credibility of Washington as any honest partner is effectively zero if not minus.

    [.] The US president just tweeted his support for renewed anti-government Iran protests, in Farsi. We are clearly in for some very nasty trouble in the Middle East as Washington tries to deal with the unintended consequences of its recent Middle East actions.[.]

    Run home as fast as you can. In this election year, an observation; 10% of companies are losing money but thanks to the Feds, the Markets are making ATH ...all time highs. On main street Joe and Jane are in a well of hurt "it's the economy, stupid."

    Copeland , Jan 19 2020 1:28 utc | 60
    There is nothing ambiguous about Pompeo's statement. It is evidence of a profound psychotic break. It is a megalomaniac delusion of godlike power, a deterance not attainable on a human scale. "In all cases, we have to do this."

    The masters of the universe will kill those who do not comply. The projection of their psychic power to intimidate the world goes well beyond Iraq and Iran, brushing aside all the little insubstantial nations that are constantly underfoot. Russia and China are to take heed now, it is they too who must sleep with one eye open. The deterrence necessary to keep us all safe means to go ahead and challenge those islands China built in the South China Sea.

    The smiling villains do not accept that Crimea is part of Russia. Pompeo compares Soleimani to bin Laden. There are so many departures from reality in the speech amidst all the levity that it seems like someone has opened the doors of the Asylum.

    ak74 , Jan 19 2020 2:13 utc | 62
    In the Orwellian value system of America, Mike Pompeo's idea of "deterrence" is really NewSpeak for America's brazen war crimes, wars of aggression, and shredding of international law.

    America is a mafia nation masquerading as a democracy.

    And Donald Trump is a two-bit New York mafioso don in charge of this America Mafia state.

    Circe , Jan 19 2020 3:03 utc | 67
    Trump recounts minute by minute details of Soleimani assassination at a fundraiser held at his Florida resort. Cause that's what normal people do; brag about murdering someone. I'll bet his fat cat Zionist friends emptied their coffers. SICK.

    trump-brags-killed-2-for-price-of-1

    Jackrabbit , Jan 19 2020 3:09 utc | 68
    ak74 @62: Mike Pompeo's idea of "deterrence" is really NewSpeak ...

    Exactly. And we might add:

    "America First" means America is the Empire's Fist;

    "Stand with the people of " is 'New World Order' psyop;

    "Economic sanctions" is the economic part of hybrid warfare;

    "War on terror" is the war on ALL enemies of the empire via terrorist destabilization;

    "Russiagate" is McCarthyist war on dissent;

    "Trump" is the latest dear leader whose flaws are blessings and whose 'gut instinct' is God's will. We know this because his fake enemies (like the Democrats, "fake news", and ISIS) always fail when they confront him.


    !!
    tjfxh , Jan 19 2020 3:54 utc | 76 Why does anyone gives either the president or US officials credence regarding what they say, especially Secretary Pompeo, not to mention POTUS? Taking Pompeo at this word and responding to it strikes me as a waste of time. These people are never going to say publicly what they are up to, which is world domination. Nor is it their own ideal. This has been the policy of the US elite at least since WWII, which was simply a transfer of the seat of power from London to Washington as the British Empire morphed into the Anglo-American Empire. Global domination through sea power was British policy for centuries and the US just recently joining the game, especially when the game expanded to air power as well. Arguably, this goes back to the end of WWI, if not the Spanish-American war that embarked the US on empire.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 19 2020 4:39 utc | 78
    Deterrence, I guess is the politically correct term for what Trump is doing. He sees that the Dollar hegemonic empire was crumbling same as most who don't rely on MSM for their news. Trump believes US can hold its position in the world through pure military power, or the threat of military power.

    He wants to regain what he calls importance from early 90s when US was sole undisputed superpower. Iran though, he believes is a blot on USA's past that needs erasing. Throughout the election campaign, Trump's big thing was rebuilding US military. He believes this will restore US power in the world. Ruling through the world fear rather than soft power and blackmail.

    ak74 , Jan 19 2020 5:09 utc | 81
    The basis of the American Empire and its parasitic economy and Way of Life(TM) itself are premised on what should be called America's Dollar Dictatorship.

    Because of the US Dollar, America is able to wage economic siege warfare (aka economic sanctions) on multiple nations around the planet--all in order to impose the Land of the Free's imperial dictates on them.

    This is American global gangsterism in everything but name--and disguised behind the founding American deceptions of "Freedom and Democracy."

    The vast majority Americans--including some fake "alternative media" shills--will attempt to spindoctor this issue by avoiding such blunt description of this system.

    Instead, they prefer to employ Orwellian euphemisms about the "US PetroDollar" or the "US Dollar Reserve Currency" or how America's superpower status is dependent on this dollar syistem.

    But former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accurately calls out this system for what it is: America's global dictatorship of the Dollar.

    This is another reason why America has such hatred for Iran:

    Dollar dictatorship the foundation of American empire - Iran's Ahmadinejad
    https://www.rt.com/business/435310-dollar-us-empire-reorder-ahmadinejad/

    America Escalates its "Democratic" Oil War in the Near East
    https://michael-hudson.com/2020/01/america-escalates-its-democratic-oil-war-in-the-near-east/

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 5:20 utc | 83
    @ Peter AU1 78

    Tom Luongo, who frequently cites b, has coined a new word for Trump's and his minions tactics. Tom asks:

    Does Gangsternomics Meet its End in the Iraqi Desert?

    In the aftermath of the killing of Iranian IRGC General Qassem Soleimani a lot of questions hung in the air. The big one was, in my mind, "Why now?"

    There are a lot of angles to answer that question. Many of them were supplied by caretaker Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi who tried to let the world know through official (and unofficial) channels of the extent of the pressure he was under by the U.S.

    In short, President Trump was engaged in months of what can best be described as gangsternomics in directing the course of Iraq's future economic and political development.[/]

    Iraq's importance goes much farther than just protecting the petrodollar to the U.S. It is the fulcrum now on which the entire U.S. defense against Eurasian integration rests. The entire region is slipping out of the grasp of the U.S.

    And this started with Russia moving into Syria in 2015 successfully. We are downstream of this as it has blown open the playbook and revealed it for how ugly it is.

    Trump's crude gangster tactics in Iraq, Venezuela, Bolivia and to a lesser extent in Syria cannot be hidden behind the false veil of moral preening and virtue signaling about bringing democracy to these benighted places.[/]

    What began in Syria with Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and China standing up together and saying, "No," continues today in Iraq. To this point Iran has been the major actor. Tomorrow it will be Russia, China and India.

    And that is what is ultimately at stake here, the ability of the U.S. to employ gangsternomics in the Middle East and make it stick.[.]

    By the time Trump is done threatening people over S-400's and pipelines the entire world will be happy to trade in yuan and/or rubles rather than dollars.[.]

    full article here

    Peter AU1 , Jan 19 2020 6:05 utc | 88
    Likklemore 83

    Thanks. Gangsternomics seems a good term for Trump's vision of US world power. Trump is pragmatic or realist in that he knows there is no court or authority to hold the US to account.

    As to US holding power purely through military power, that can only happen long term if he gets hold of a good chunk of the worlds energy reserves (as in Persian gulf and Venezuela oil). If he doesn't achieve that, then the US goes down. Iran needs to ensure it stays under Russia's nuclear umbrella as there are no rules.

    krollchem , Jan 19 2020 6:27 utc | 90
    Sickening series of Trump interviews and speeches demanding that Iraq pay America and its allies over a trillion dollars for liberating Iraq (time stamp 8:20 to 12:00).

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWZfDJerI0o

    This demonstrates that US attacks in Iraq over the last 30-40 years was mostly about the control (including transportation routes) and than profiting from its oil and gas reserves.

    A secondary reason is to put troop on the border with Iran to further destabilize it via state terrorism to overthrow the government and then take its oil and gas too.

    It will get interesting when a pro Iranian new Prime minister takes office and China offers Iraq a line of credit equivalent to the funds that would be frozen in Western bank accounts if Iraq actually demands the troops to leave.

    "The Iran-linked Binaa parliamentary voting bloc has nominated Asaad al-Edani, a former minister and governor of oil-rich Basra province. Binaa's bloc is mostly made up of the Fatah party led by militia leader turned politician Hadi al-Ameri, who is close to Tehran."

    The Kurdish President of Iraq has stated that "Out of an eagerness to spare blood and preserve civil peace, I apologize for not naming Edani prime minister," the letter continued. "I am ready to submit my resignation to parliament."

    https://time.com/5755588/iraq-president-resignation/

    Currently, the rival Sairoon bloc, headed by populist Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, said it would not participate in the process of nominating a new premier."

    https://www.ft.com/content/50f09fe4-27f4-11ea-9a4f-963f0ec7e134

    However, "Iraqi Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr demanded that Iraqis stage a "million-man march" against the continued US military presence in the country"

    https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13981025000319

    I close with a visionary French rock opera Starmania "story of an alternate reality where a fascist millionaire (read Trump) famous for building skyscrapers is running for president on an anti-immigration policy, and where the poor are getting more and more desperate for their voices to be heard."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78LytR-6Xmk

    Patroklos , Jan 19 2020 6:39 utc | 91
    @hopehely | Jan 19 2020 6:00 utc | 85

    ... ... ...

    2. Lebensraum was indeed a specific war aim of Hitler;
    3. Under the Shah Anglo-American (not mention Dutch, French and other) interests skimmed all Iranian energy resources, kept the USSR under pressure on the southern coast of the Caspian Sea and provided a key friendly power in the most important region of central Asia. Petro-dollar supremacy could not have been established without control of the Persian Gulf. The Persian elite were given wonderful opportunities while the rest... well we know what the rest get.

    hopehely , Jan 19 2020 7:08 utc | 93

    ... ... ...

    The Persian elite were given wonderful opportunities while the rest... well we know what the rest get.

    Not just the elite. Persian middle class was pretty well off too. Spending vacation in Europe was easy, quite affordable. Not any more. I know I know, those dang sanctions... well that is what you get when you piss off the big dawg.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 19 2020 9:32 utc | 99
    psychedelicatessen "Thinking he's successfully rebuilt the U.S. military could be the single most critical failure of his presidency."

    I would be in agreement on the overall gist of your reply, but on Trump thinking he's successfully rebuilt the US military, I'm not so sure. He is a pragmatic gangster when it comes to world affairs which is why his Nuclear Posture Review lowered the threshold of first use of nukes. b's previous post on 'How Trump rebelled against the generals' also fits in with this line of thought.

    I believe Trump needs to be thought of as a CEO brought in to pull a company back from the edge of bankruptcy. I think that is the way he sees himself, and as I have put in previous comments, there are no rules.

    I had thought Trump may be adverse to pure terrorism but depending on what comes of the Ukie airliner shootdown in Iran, there may be absolutely no rules as far as Trump is concerned.

    ralphieboy , Jan 19 2020 12:59 utc | 111
    The attack on Solemani had little or nothing to do with policy, it was an attempt to distract from the other scandals coming to light with the opening of his Senate trial by provoking hostilities with Iran.
    William Gruff , Jan 19 2020 13:00 utc | 112
    Peter AU1 @103: "Monetary collapse as in low US$ but not US economic collapse"

    I wonder how that could be arranged? There are far more US$ sitting in bank vaults as reserves and investment hedges than there are in circulation. If the dollar goes low enough to bring manufacturing home then it will also be low enough to no longer be a sound or wise investment in and of itself. Wise bankers and investors will attempt to realign their portfolios if the dollar shows signs of dropping like that.

    Basically, the value of the dollar that is low enough to re-industrialize America is far below the tipping point that would trigger a global sell-off of dollars. How could that mass sell-off be prevented? Threatening to nuke any country whose central bank sells their dollar reserves?

    As I see it, the dollar's value stays high or it tanks totally. I don't see how there could be a moderate balance point in between these extremes. There are just too many dollars in the world.

    financial matters , Jan 19 2020 13:51 utc | 121
    Likklemore @ 83. thanks for the great article by Tom Luongo.

    Of course the Gangsternomics have been going on for some time as chronicled in 'Shock Doctrine' and 'Confessions of an Economic Hitman'.

    But as Trump has often done, probably mostly by mistake, he has brought these actions more clearly into the public eye. This in combination with the new power dominance of Russia, China and Iran is definitely leading to a new reality.
    ---------

    I like this quote from Perkins' 'Confessions of an Economic Hitman'

    ""Nearly every culture I know prophesies that in the late 1990s we entered a period of remarkable transition. At monasteries in the Himalayas, ceremonial sites in Indonesia, and the indigenous reservations in North America, from the depths of the Amazon to the peaks of the Andes and into the ancient Mayan cities of Central America, I have heard that ours is a special moment in human history, and that each of us was born at this time because we have a mission to accomplish.

    The titles and words of the prophecies differ slightly. They tell variously of a New Age, the Third Millennium, the Age of Aquarius, the Beginning of the Fifth Sun, or the end of old calendars and the commencement of new ones. Despite the varying terminologies, however; they have a great deal in common, and "The Prophecy of the Condor and Eagle" is typical. It states that back in the mists of history; human societies divided and took two different paths: that of the condor (representing the heart, intuitive and mystical) and that of the eagle (representing the brain, rational and material). In the 1490s, the prophecy said, the two paths would converge and the eagle would drive the condor to the verge of extinction. Then, five hundred years later, in the 1990s, a new epoch would begin, one in which the condor and the eagle will have the opportunity to reunite and fly together in the same sky, along the same path. If the condor and eagle accept this opportunity, they will create a most remarkable offspring, unlike any ever seen before.

    "The Prophecy of the Condor and Eagle" can be taken at many levels - the standard interpretation is that it foretells the sharing of indigenous knowledge with the technologies of science, the balancing of yin and yang, and the bridging of northern and southern cultures. However, most powerful is the message if offers about consciousness; it says that we have entered a time when we can benefit from the many diverse ways of seeing ourselves and the world, and that we can use these as a springboard to higher levels of awareness. As human beings, we can truly wake up and evolve into a more conscious species.

    The condor people of the Amazon make it seem so obvious that if we are to address questions about the nature of what it is to be human in this new millennium, and about our commitment to evaluating our intentions for the next several decades, then we need to open our eyes and see the consequences of our actions - the actions of the eagle - in places like Iraq and Ecuador. We must shake ourselves awake. We who live in the most powerful nation history has ever known must stop worrying so much about the outcome of soap operas, quarterly balance sheets, and the daily Dow Jones average, and must instead reevaluate who we are and where we want our children to end up. The alternative to stopping to ask ourselves the important questions is simply too dangerous.""

    ---------------------

    Now that Trump has, probably inadvertently, helped open our eyes I see Tulsi Gabbard as the best person to help us fit in to a more multipolar world in a more responsible manner.

    augusto , Jan 19 2020 14:07 utc | 122
    Damascene, as to the assassination plans and techniques by the exceptionalists... just ask the Cuban aides of Fidel Castro. Most of them alive today. They have a a helluva expertise on this business having foiled them for over 45 years. Against all odds cause at 90 miles from the enemy, the logistics were vastly against the cubans.

    As to the purposeful intent of bringing more pressure to foes in the future... just recall what happened to Muammar Khadafi. After the attempt to blow up his family tent in the desert he fairly but surely managed to build up FRIENDSHIP with the bosses of France, Italy and UK.

    To no avail, since the rest if history. The lesson has been learned.

    Sasha , Jan 19 2020 14:08 utc | 123
    Why was US so mad with General #Soleimani?

    https://twitter.com/PressTV/status/1218882845902626816

    Condoleeza Rice on the 2006 War on Lebanon ( quoted by Qassem Soleimani in the interview posted above..): "These are the "birth pangs" of the Middle East"....

    Sasha , Jan 19 2020 14:27 utc | 124
    You can agree...may be in part...or not....Uncertainty is the plate of the day...I hope the ME players will change this forecast to their benefit...

    2020 Forecast: Revealing the Future of the #MiddleEast by María and Shehab Makahleh for Russian Council ...

    [Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

    Highly recommended!
    Trump has been a kind of part deranged, part clever political monkey wrench thrown into the works of the USA military machine
    Notable quotes:
    "... I begin with the premise that the United States is a longstanding cultural catastrophe, and is far along the way in the process of destroying itself, after having destroyed or damaged the prospects of much of the planet. ..."
    "... Within the context of the attack on Indochina, on the ground and taking place within the spaces left alive after the B52 bombers et al, there was the 'Phoenix Program'. euphemism for the CIA's ambitious program of technocratic torture, assassination, bribery, corruption, and so on, with tens of thousands of murdered victims. And the military destroyed uncounted villages, a la My Lai. ..."
    "... Note then that Trump has almost patented the 'fake news' meme. The idea that the msm is lying about and hiding the truth, non-stop propaganda, is an idea that Trump has pushed repeatedly. Most people on the MofA etc are well aware of that. But for many 'normies', that's not quite as obvious. ..."
    "... And yes, he himself could be described as the liar in chief. But doesn't deflect from the great collapse in the status of the msm propaganda machine. And that propaganda machine has been very much associated with the CIA via operation Mockingbird and its generations long progeny. ..."
    "... So the attack on the media via fake news is a direct attack on the basic indispensable control mechanism of the deep state, and CIA. ..."
    "... Note too that after three Years of Trump, the long standing criminality and corruption of the FBI has never looked as obvious. Again, we don't have to give Trump credit. But it happened on his 'watch'. ..."
    "... We're not talking miracle cures here. But Trump has been a kind of part deranged, part clever political monkey wrench thrown into the works. As to whether his disruptive arrival has provided openings for more sensible political and cultural innovations remains to be seen. ..."
    "... Many of the internal difficulties that the US faces are distinct from militarism, but related to militarism in the sense that a police state keeping control via surveillance and bs, etc, and spending its money on empire, is not going to prioritize clear honest discourse. In the end, one overarching question for the US like the rest of us is: can we achieve honesty and common sense? ..."
    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Robert Snefjella , Jan 17 2020 23:50 utc | 64
    Previously, most discussions of the Trump presidency reflexively proceeded to either visceral disgust etc or accolades of some species. Trumps words and manners dominated. As things developed, and actual results were recorded, a body of more sober second thought developed. And a variation on these more experience/reality based assessments is what b has delivered above.

    Some of my points that follow are repeats, some are new. On the whole I see Trump as a helpful and positive-result really bad President.

    I begin with the premise that the United States is a longstanding cultural catastrophe, and is far along the way in the process of destroying itself, after having destroyed or damaged the prospects of much of the planet.

    As one aspect of this cultural catastrophe, let's refer back to the United States attack on Indochina, which accomplished millions of dead and millions of wounded people, and birth defects still in uncounted numbers as a legacy of dioxin etc laden chemical warfare. The millions of dead included some tens of thousands of American soldiers, and even more wounded physically, and even more wounded 'mentally'.

    Within the context of the attack on Indochina, on the ground and taking place within the spaces left alive after the B52 bombers et al, there was the 'Phoenix Program'. euphemism for the CIA's ambitious program of technocratic torture, assassination, bribery, corruption, and so on, with tens of thousands of murdered victims. And the military destroyed uncounted villages, a la My Lai.

    When asked what it was all about, Kissinger lied in an inadvertently illuminating way: "basically nothing" was how he put it, if memory serves.

    During and after the attack on Indochina, the US trained, aided, financed, etc active death squads in Central and South America, demonstrating that the United States was an equal opportunity death dealer.

    Now this was a bit of a meander away from the Trump topic, but note that Trump came to power within the above cultural context and much more pathology besides, talking about ending the warfare state. Again, this is not an attempt to portray Trump as either sincere or insincere in that policy. In terms of ideas, it was roughly speaking a good idea.

    Another main part of the Trump message was 'let's rebuild America'. And along with the de-militarization and national program of rejuvenation there was the 'drain the swamp' meme, which again resonated. And once again, I am not arguing that Trump was sincere, or for that matter insincere. That's irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make: which could essentially by reduced to: what will be the actual meaning and potential impact of Trump?

    Note then that Trump has almost patented the 'fake news' meme. The idea that the msm is lying about and hiding the truth, non-stop propaganda, is an idea that Trump has pushed repeatedly. Most people on the MofA etc are well aware of that. But for many 'normies', that's not quite as obvious.

    And yes, he himself could be described as the liar in chief. But doesn't deflect from the great collapse in the status of the msm propaganda machine. And that propaganda machine has been very much associated with the CIA via operation Mockingbird and its generations long progeny.

    So the attack on the media via fake news is a direct attack on the basic indispensable control mechanism of the deep state, and CIA.

    Note too that after three Years of Trump, the long standing criminality and corruption of the FBI has never looked as obvious. Again, we don't have to give Trump credit. But it happened on his 'watch'.

    Now the deep cultural, including political, pathology in the United States, in its many manifestations remain. We're not talking miracle cures here. But Trump has been a kind of part deranged, part clever political monkey wrench thrown into the works. As to whether his disruptive arrival has provided openings for more sensible political and cultural innovations remains to be seen.

    The frantic attempt to deflect attention from and give mainly derisive media coverage to Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

    Many of the internal difficulties that the US faces are distinct from militarism, but related to militarism in the sense that a police state keeping control via surveillance and bs, etc, and spending its money on empire, is not going to prioritize clear honest discourse. In the end, one overarching question for the US like the rest of us is: can we achieve honesty and common sense?

    [Jan 19, 2020] Syrian Jihadists Filmed Jet-Setting To Next Proxy War On Commercial Plane

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    J S Bach , 7 minutes ago link

    10,000 virgins anxiously await the downing of this jet of jihadists.

    Vernon_Dent , 9 minutes ago link

    Join ISIS and see the world. The few, the proud.

    dogismycopilot , 37 minutes ago link

    For our frequent fliers who are members of our "Chopping Heads and Eating Livers of Infidels" Afriqiyah Airways is a code share flight with Turkish Airlines. Also, remember your points can be used in Paradise to rent hotel rooms for you and your 72 virgins.

    Turkish Airlines. The airline of choice for Jihadis.

    (satire)

    [Jan 19, 2020] Friedman s Hapless Fear-mongering

    Notable quotes:
    "... They have promoted dishonest claims about the JCPOA and made unfounded claims about Iran's so-called "nuclear ambitions" in order to make it seem as if the Iranian government is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. They have done this to justify their hard-line policies and to lay the groundwork for pursuing regime change and war. Every time that someone repeats false claims about a non-existent "nuclear weapons program" in Iran, it creates unnecessary fear and plays into the administration's hands. ..."
    "... The administration is already working overtime to propagandize the public and scare Americans into supporting aggressive and destructive policies against Iran, and no one should be giving them extra help. ..."
    "... "Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue." ..."
    "... Friedman isn't usually thought of as a devotee of Truth, and the chance of him correcting even the most egregious falsehoods you point out is approximately zero. At heart he's a propaganda guy, not a fact-based analyst. ..."
    "... Friedman does it for Israel. It is their line, their constant foreign policy push. The NYT lets him, seems to encourage it, due to its own complex ties to Israel. ..."
    "... The Israel Lobby is behind vast wars, killing, and waste. It has become an endless evil. ..."
    "... Friedman seems to forget that Iran is a signatory of the NPT and inspectors come and monitor activities, all outside JPCOA. But hey, Iraq had WMD at the time the international inspectors were saying that it didn't and their message and activities were obstructed and blocked by the US. Same as with the alleged gas attacks in Syria and the OPCW "mishandling" the reporting... US has learned since Iraq and wanted compliance from these types of organizations. ..."
    theamericanconservative.com

    Friedman's latest column obviously wasn't fact-checked before it was published:

    And then, a few weeks later, Trump ordered the killing of Suleimani, an action that required him to shift more troops into the region and tell Iraqis that we're not leaving their territory, even though their Parliament voted to evict us. It also prompted Iran to restart its nuclear weapons program [bold mine-DL], which could well necessitate U.S. military action. And then, a few weeks later, Trump ordered the killing of Suleimani, an action that required him to shift more troops into the region and tell Iraqis that we're not leaving their territory, even though their Parliament voted to evict us. It also prompted Iran to restart its nuclear weapons program [bold mine-DL], which could well necessitate U.S. military action.
    Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue. Iran has no nuclear weapons program, and it hasn't had anything like that for more than sixteen years. The Iranian government took another step in reducing its compliance with the JCPOA in the days following the assassination, but contrary to other misleading headlines their government did not abandon the nuclear deal. Iran has not repudiated its commitment to keep its nuclear program peaceful, and it doesn't help in reducing tensions to suggest that they have. Trump's recent actions are reckless and dangerous, but it is wrong to say that those actions have caused Iran to start up a nuclear weapons program. That isn't the case, and engaging in more threat inflation when tensions are already so high is foolish.

    Friedman is not the only one to make this blunder, but it is the sort of sloppy mistake we expect from him. If this were just another error from Friedman, it would be annoying but it wouldn't matter very much. This has to do with the nature of our debate over Iran policy and the nuclear issue in particular. This matters because there is a great deal of confusion in this country about Iran's nuclear program that the Trump administration has deliberately encouraged. They have promoted dishonest claims about the JCPOA and made unfounded claims about Iran's so-called "nuclear ambitions" in order to make it seem as if the Iranian government is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. They have done this to justify their hard-line policies and to lay the groundwork for pursuing regime change and war. Every time that someone repeats false claims about a non-existent "nuclear weapons program" in Iran, it creates unnecessary fear and plays into the administration's hands.

    The administration is already working overtime to propagandize the public and scare Americans into supporting aggressive and destructive policies against Iran, and no one should be giving them extra help. The second part of Friedman's sentence is also quite dangerous, because it encourages his readers to think that the U.S. would somehow be justified in attacking Iran in the unlikely event that they started developing a nuclear weapon. He suggests that an Iranian nuclear weapons program might "necessitate" military action, but any attack on Iran under those circumstances would be illegal and a war of choice just like the invasion of Iraq that Friedman supported almost 17 years ago. Even when Friedman seems to be skeptical of something that the government has done, he can't help but indulge in threat inflation and lend support to the idea of preventive war.

    Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue. Iran has no nuclear weapons program, and it hasn't had anything like that for more than sixteen years. The Iranian government took another step in reducing its compliance with the JCPOA in the days following the assassination, but contrary to other misleading headlines their government did not abandon the nuclear deal. Iran has not repudiated its commitment to keep its nuclear program peaceful, and it doesn't help in reducing tensions to suggest that they have. Trump's recent actions are reckless and dangerous, but it is wrong to say that those actions have caused Iran to start up a nuclear weapons program. That isn't the case, and engaging in more threat inflation when tensions are already so high is foolish.

    ... ... ...

    He suggests that an Iranian nuclear weapons program might "necessitate" military action, but any attack on Iran under those circumstances would be illegal and a war of choice just like the invasion of Iraq that Friedman supported almost 17 years ago. Even when Friedman seems to be skeptical of something that the government has done, he can't help but indulge in threat inflation and lend support to the idea of preventive war. The second part of Friedman's sentence is also quite dangerous, because it encourages his readers to think that the U.S. would somehow be justified in attacking Iran in the unlikely event that they started developing a nuclear weapon. He suggests that an Iranian nuclear weapons program might "necessitate" military action, but any attack on Iran under those circumstances would be illegal and a war of choice just like the invasion of Iraq that Friedman supported almost 17 years ago. Even when Friedman seems to be skeptical of something that the government has done, he can't help but indulge in threat inflation and lend support to the idea of preventive war.

    Gospel Free • 3 days ago

    "Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue."

    Friedman isn't usually thought of as a devotee of Truth, and the chance of him correcting even the most egregious falsehoods you point out is approximately zero. At heart he's a propaganda guy, not a fact-based analyst.

    Mark Thomason • 2 days ago
    Friedman does it for Israel. It is their line, their constant foreign policy push. The NYT lets him, seems to encourage it, due to its own complex ties to Israel.

    The Israel Lobby is behind vast wars, killing, and waste. It has become an endless evil.

    Donna • 2 days ago
    Friedman's readers are the choir, and he's just singing to them. People who have seen through his fabrications stopped reading him years ago. Friedman will always have his little clique of deluded pseudo-intellectuals, but truly intelligent people don't waste their time with him.
    blimbax • 2 days ago
    I think the picture of Friedman that accompanies this article tells a big part of the story. His furrowed brow, the intensity of his studied gaze, his penetrating and knowing look into the the complexities that only someone of his intelligence can unravel. It is really the picture of a stuffed shirt.

    Friedman represents something really wrong with our society and culture: The incompetent, the ignorant, and the arrogant ones are given positions of power and influence, and the wise and knowledgeable are marginalized.

    Taras77 • 2 days ago
    It is difficult to name a more odious shill for Israel war mongering than friedman but than he does have competition in the NYT staff. NYT is a bugle for Israel.
    FL_Cottonmouth • 2 days ago • edited
    Mr. Friedman recently called Gen. Soleimani "the dumbest man in Iran" for sponsoring terrorist forces in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen backing paramilitary forces fighting terrorism in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen.

    Mr. Friedman is one of the dumbest pundits in the media class and almost certainly the dumbest ever to work for The New York Times. He just can't help himself...

    kouroi • a day ago
    Friedman seems to forget that Iran is a signatory of the NPT and inspectors come and monitor activities, all outside JPCOA. But hey, Iraq had WMD at the time the international inspectors were saying that it didn't and their message and activities were obstructed and blocked by the US. Same as with the alleged gas attacks in Syria and the OPCW "mishandling" the reporting... US has learned since Iraq and wanted compliance from these types of organizations.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Jihadi exodus from Syria to Libya is underway

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.voltairenet.org

    In accordance with the agreement closed between the Tunisian and Turkish presidents, Kaïs Saïed and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, on Christmas Day, the migration of jihadists from Syria via Tunisia to Libya has begun. [ 1 ]

    The pendulum has swung back, when considering that the Free Syrian Army was created by the jihadists of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), who had joined the ranks of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, then served as NATO's footsoldiers in Libya. [ 2 ]

    According to Middle East Eye , the Sultan Murad Division, the Suqour al-Sham Brigades (Hawks of the Levant) and especially the Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant) (photo) are already on the move. [ 3 ] The SOHR, a British association linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, has confirmed the arrival in Tripoli of the first 300 combatants.

    The Sultan Murad division is made up of Syrian Turkmen. The Hawks of the Levant comprise numerous French fighters and the Legion of the Levant is an imposing army of at least 4,000 men. The latter group is directly affiliated with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

    Turkey has urged several other jihadist groups to follow suit and to flee ahead of the liberation of the Idlib governorate by the Syrian Arab Army.

    The jihadists sent to Libya are expected to balance out the forces present in the country by supporting the government installed by the UN, while elements of Sudan's Rapid Support Forces and the Russian mercenaries have lined up with the Bengazi-based government.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Greece ready to intervene against Turkey in Libya

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.voltairenet.org

    In 22 December 2019, Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs, Conservative lawyer Nikos Dendias, travelled to Benghazi to meet the ministers designated by the Tobruk House of Representatives and their military leader, Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar. He then moved on to Cairo and Cyprus.

    Simultaneously, during a ceremony at the Gölcük Naval shipyard, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced the decision to expedite Turkey's submarine construction program. The 6 New Type 214 submarines which Turkey is building with German Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW) should be near completion.

    Under the agreement signed with the Government of National Accord (GNA) headed by Fayez Al-Sarraj, in addition to military ports in occupied Cyprus, Turkey could have access to a home port in Libya, from where it could extend its influence over the entire eastern Mediterranean.

    After the delivery of Turkish military equipment to Tripoli flown in by a civilian Boeing 747-412, Field Marshal Haftar proclaimed that he would not hesitate to shoot down any civilian aircraft carrying weapons for the GNA.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Turkey negotiating mass transfer of jihadists towards Libya

    Dec 27, 2019 | www.voltairenet.org

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has entered into a military alliance with the Libyan "government of national accord" (GNA), chaired by Fayez Al-Sarraj, based in Tripoli and backed by the United Nations. Erdoğan has already arranged for the delivery of armored vehicles and drones, but has yet to deploy regular troops.

    In Ankara, the Grand National Assembly is expected imminently to authorize the Turkish army to send regular soldiers to Libya.

    At the same time, however, the Turkish army is keeping out of Idlib (Syria) where the jihadists are under attack by the Syrian Arab army, in coordination with the Russian air force, and where two Turkish observation posts have been hemmed in by the Syrian Arab army. Tens of thousands of jihadists have been moving into Turkey.

    On 25 December 2019, President Erdoğan paid a spur-of-the-moment visit to Tunisia. He was notably flanked by Hakan Fidan, the head of Turkey's national intelligence (Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı), as well as by his Foreign Affairs and Defense Ministers. The delegation was received by Tunisia's President Kaïs Saïed, a jurist, who is supported by the Muslim Brotherhood. He gave his Turkish counterpart the green light to use the airport and the port of Djerba for the mass transfer of jihadists to Tripoli and Misrata.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Crisis in Iran will drive wedge between Europe and Washington

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.politico.eu

    Ellie Geranmayeh is a senior policy fellow and deputy head of the Middle East and North Africa program at the European Council on Foreign Relations. She specializes in European foreign policy in relation to Iran, particularly on the nuclear and regional dossiers and sanctions policy.

    ... ... ...

    The response from Tehran could be immediate or more long term, ranging from military action in the region to cyber attacks inside the U.S. and heavy political pushback. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has repeatedly warned that there would not be war with the U.S. and Iran has so far acted in a calculated and rational fashion to Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign. If this position holds, Tehran will attempt to manage the risk of direct conflict, continuing to deploy asymmetric tactics to undermine U.S. interests, albeit with the red lines now redrawn.

    The gravity and scale of Iranian compliance will be influenced by the recent escalation with the U.S.

    The extensive U.S. military presence in the Middle East and Afghanistan means the U.S. is likely to bear the brunt of retaliation. Iran has deep ties to both state and non-state actors across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Yemen that can be utilized to inflict pain on America. Soleimani's death has already triggered a new decline in the Trump administration's relations with Baghdad that may extend to Kabul, and is also likely to heat up the long debate inside Tehran over how far to push U.S. military forces out of neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan.

    ... ... ...

    If Tehran takes drastic steps on the nuclear file, it could mark the total collapse of the agreement.

    ... ... ...

    In the space of six months, the U.S. and Iran have gone from targeting drones, oil installations and bases, to killing personnel. It is still unclear how and when Iran will choose to respond to Soleimani's assassination. But the new commander of the Quds Force -- appointed within 12 hours of Soleimani's death -- will no doubt be eager to demonstrate his willingness to exact revenge against America.

    When that happens, neither the Middle East nor Europe will be isolated from the blowback.

    [Jan 19, 2020] The murder of Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis will resonate hugely throughout Iraq

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    uncle tungsten , Jan 19 2020 10:57 utc | 104

    The murder of Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis will resonate hugely throughout Iraq. Trump in so many ways represents the bad ruler Gilgamesh who is poorly advised in his conquest by Enkidu (Pompeo) and they brutally slay the guardian of the forest to steal the precious timber. Then they murder the sacred bull of heaven (Soleimani and al-Muhandis) for prowess and nothing more. This slaughter of the sacred bull enrages the gods and they slay Enkidu which breaks Gilgamesh heart. etc etc. (drastically simplified and likely contested).

    This tale is deeply known throughout the lands of the Middle East in all manner of old and modern iterations.

    Trump is so unwise and devoid of subtlety that he has ended any chance of salvation in that land and has started every chance of retribution on a scale he could not conceive. His assault on all culture and sacred leaders is bonded to the deepest sense of existential being that any further aggression will simply escalate the payback. The USA urgently needs some cooler heads to intervene but they are not yet impacting on him. Indeed Trump is so eager to pat himself on the back with his adrenalin rush of murdering other leaders that it is disgusting.

    [Jan 19, 2020] ISIS had become a proxy army of the CIA; that's likely why Soleimani had to be killed.

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    michael888 , Jan 19 2020 13:19 utc | 114

    Almost all of the "terrorism" affecting the West has been Wahabbi Salafist Sunni driven. Iran, despite their religious head, is a more modern sectarian nation than Saudi Arabia. ISIS had become a proxy army of the CIA; that's likely why Soleimani had to be killed. It is time to align with Iran and the Shia for a change. They also have oil! Would send a nice message to our "allies" Israel and Saudi Arabia as well.

    Sasha , Jan 19 2020 13:23 utc | 115

    Trump has given signals of opposition to the wisdom of the use of jihadi proxies,

    @Posted by: BM | Jan 19 2020 11:09 utc | 107

    Really?

    Revealed: US moves IS leaders to Al-Anbar, Iraq

    After only a week or so after this heinous crime, we are assisting already to a new campaign on whitewashing Trump at each of the US military blogs...SST at the head...as always...but following the rest...be it a editorial level, be it at commentariat level...

    What part of Trump admitting he personally ordered the murder you have not understood?

    What part of Soleimani and Al Muhandis being the main strategic heads of real anti-IS front have you not understood?

    [Jan 19, 2020] They are trying to couch their violent threatening behavior aimed at Iraqi leaders to keep them out of the China-Iran orbit, as part of "The Patriotic Duty of Team America World Police". It is like a mafioso saying to the police about their protection racket: "I'm doing you'se a favor by keeping everyone in the neighborhood safe from criminals."

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Joshua , Jan 18 2020 20:22 utc | 14

    What manner of nation does these things? What manner of man? Why are these criminals not facing arrest and trial at this very moment? Is it because they all had their magical 'I'm a special guy' hats on? Justice will come to us all.

    Kali , Jan 18 2020 20:22 utc | 15

    I don't think what Pompeo was saying is vague, it is really just a way to con the US media into believing that what they did was anything other than what it really was. They are trying to couch their violent threatening behavior aimed at Iraqi leaders to keep them out of the China-Iran orbit, as part of "The Patriotic Duty of Team America World Police". It is like a mafioso saying to the police about their protection racket: "I'm doing you'se a favor by keeping everyone in the neighborhood safe from criminals."

    "It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name."

    Jay , Jan 18 2020 20:28 utc | 18
    It's odd to see Reuters get the name of the Hoover Institution wrong, and also be wrong about the Institution's association with Stanford University. The Institution is on the Stanford campus but has a separate board of directors.

    Okay, Reuters is making typically sloppy errors about the name and the amount of control Stanford has over the rightwing "Institute" on its campus. Stanford, the university, has plenty of US military intelligence (and actual black world) ties, but almost no one working at Stanford would think killing Soleimani a good idea. Though plenty of the "thinkers" at The Hoover Institution would.


    Right, Pompeo is delusional. Murdering Soleimani will deter no one. Nor of course do the Iranian missile strikes on US bases in Iraq mean the end of Iran's response to the act of war.

    Trailer Trash , Jan 18 2020 20:37 utc | 20
    I am surprised at how many establishment media have actually labelled this murder as "assassination" instead of the usual euphemisms. I think nearly everyone in the world understands that bragging about international murder completely changes international relations. Except for Pompous and Trumpet, of course.

    Everyone will be filing their hair-triggers. There seems to be a general world-wide mobilization but no one is calling it that. It is all "war games" and such. At some point before the 2003 Iraq invasion it was clear to me that the decision for open war had been made. It is now clear to me that there will be an invasion of Iran, starting with Iraq. I think the B-52s sent to the area are for killing Iraqis, since they have no air defense.

    At the same time, the US asset bubbles are nearly "priced to perfection". That means they have no where to go except down. Debts that can't be paid won't be paid. All it takes is a break in the chain of payments and the next financial panic is ON! Can Uncle Sam greatly expand his War on the World in the middle of financial chaos? I think he will probably try.

    I speculate that Uncle Sam believes Iran and Iraq will simply cower and wait for the next blow. I predict they will not. Soleimani's assassination and the subsequent Iranian attack have not substantially changed the strategic situation, except to tie down the boiler relief valve and turn up the heat. God, if there is one, help us all. We're sure gonna need it.

    Ian2 , Jan 18 2020 20:46 utc | 21
    Does this idiot Pompeo not realize the door swing both ways? Unless he plans to live his remaining days bunkered in NORAD, he's just as vulnerable as the rest.
    psychohistorian , Jan 18 2020 21:22 utc | 25
    Pompeo is the spokesman for the rules based Western empire mafia don, Trump.

    The event is now being turned into a US media event (real time movie making here) by Trump letting out text versions of the backroom chatter around the murder. This will not sit well with the ME, IMO.

    What late empire keeps pushing for is some event that can be blown into global support for war escalation....but it hasn't happened, yet

    And all this over public/private global control of value sharing in the social human contract....what a way to run a railroad/species......

    ptb , Jan 18 2020 21:58 utc | 33
    Not only will it not deter anyone, it is loudly signaling that third rate neocons are the only decision makers left in the room.

    You're likely to see more provocations, since it's now such an easy button to push. i.e. for any regional or global powers who need US forces to be diverted for a while. Any bullshit they manage to sell to the young Bolton's in the bureaucracy will do.

    While not exactly unprecedented, the change is how much the mask is off now.

    Robert Snefjella , Jan 18 2020 22:00 utc | 34
    The part of Pompeo's speech quoted by b above is American to the core: every sentence or short paragraph contains at minimum one outright lie; the entire quote selected is also both palpably delusional and stupid.

    But having said that, there is something uniquely refreshing about the Trump/Pompeo tag team's capacity for blurting out lies and inanities, and furthermore, they do it with gusto. Guile is not Pompeo's strong suit.

    One might say that the criminality of the 'new deterrence' is as American as apple pie, except that apple pie in my experience is innocent of all that, unless I suppose it contains a deadly poison, and is fed to a political or ideological foe.

    What is new about the 'new deterrence' that will surely make life far more dangerous for Americans, is that it publicly declares itself as a policy with no bounds, no ethical, or logical, or legal constraints. So what the Americans have been doing for generations, often but not by any means always with 'plausible denial', and sometimes quite brazenly, is now explicitly underlined policy.

    Previously, the fight was 'against communism', or 'for democracy', or for 'national security'.

    So for example, when Nicaragua during the "Reagan Revolution' was sanctioned, attacked, vilified, subjected to uncounted atrocities, because those dastardly Nicaraguans had replaced their loathsome monster dictator with a government trying to do the right thing for the people, the war against that country was under the rubric of protecting American 'national security', with bits of domino theory and communist hordes concerns thrown in.

    So what is the difference between deploying tens of thousands of maniacal murderous 'contras' as 'deterrence' against a small country's attempts at making a decent life for its people, and a drone attack on Soleimani and his companions?

    I think one main difference is that the 'world has changed' around the perpetrators, but they are still living the delusions of brainwashed childhood, the wild west, white hat un-self conscious monstrosities riding into town, gonna clean the place up. Pathetic and extremely dangerous.

    vk , Jan 18 2020 22:01 utc | 37
    There's another logical flaw in Pompeo's argument.

    The USA is a nuclear power. If you claim to assassinate other countries' generals as a deterrent, then that signals America's true enemies - Russia and China - that it will vacilate in using its own nuclear deterrent if an American target is to be neutralized. That would bring more, not less, instability to the world order.

    But maybe that's the American aim with this: to shake the already existing international order with the objective to try to destroy Eurasia with its massive war machine and, therefore, initiate another cycle of accumulation of American capitalism.

    Another potential unintended blowback of Soleimani's assassination lies in the fact that the USA is not officially at war with Iran. Iran was being sanctioned by the UN. That poses a threat in the corners of the American Empire, since it sends a message that the USA doesn't need to be at war with a nation in order to gratuitously attack it; it also sends the message that it is not enough to play by the rules and accept the UN's sanctions - you could still do all of that and submit yourself and still be attacked by the Americans.

    The endgame of this is that there's a clear message to the American "allies" (i.e. vassals, provinces): stay in line and obey without questioning, even if that goes directly against your national interests. This will leave the Empire even more unstable at its frontier because, inevitably, there'll come a time where the USA will directly command its vassals/provinces to literally hurt their own economies just to keep the American one afloat (or not sinking too fast). Gramsci's "Law of Hegemony" states that, the more coercion and the less consensus, the more unstable is one's hegemony.

    Trailer Trash , Jan 18 2020 22:03 utc | 38
    >Tottering as it appears to be, the U.S. looks to be
    > ready to burn the world; its "adversaries" aren't yet
    > strong enough to avoid the flamethrower.
    > Posted by: Zee | Jan 18 2020 21:30 utc | 27

    Indeed. But the longer Iran can delay the inevitable, the stronger and better prepared it becomes, while Uncle Sam is busy burning the furniture and getting financially more precarious. US planners seem to think that one can build an economy around poor people giving each other haircuts while rich people keep trading the exact same assets back and forth while steady driving asset prices higher.

    Somewhere in the economic cycle someone has to actually make stuff and grow food. But planners have allowed the manufacturing (and associated engineering, etc.) to leave while driving farmers into bankruptcy. They are mortgaged to the hilt. When land prices quit rising, there is no additional collateral and no new credit. With no additional credit, no one will sell them seeds and equipment. So they are out of business. It's scary to think how few people actually grow all the food to feed millions and millions.

    Asset bubbles have real consequences, such as millions can not afford rent anymore while millions of housing units remain empty because their value still goes up even without rental income. Scenes from Soylent Green come to mind, thinking about how more and more people are crammed into fewer living quarters.

    Our brain-dead leaders have created a situation where they must continue to inflate bubbles to keep increasing collateral to back more debt. But the bubbles impoverish the rest of us. And bubbles always pop. Always.

    I'm not sure how much the next financial crisis will affect the US killing machine, but I doubt it would make the war machine stronger.

    Trailer Trash , Jan 18 2020 22:08 utc | 39
    >The GOP criticized Obama for Libya but only because they
    > wanted to be able to say they were the tough guys. The
    > media was oh-so-happy to harp on the Iraq after Bush's
    > destruction of Iraq but very quiet on the aftermath of Libya.
    > Posted by: Curtis | Jan 18 2020 21:37 utc | 29

    Yes to this. There is no disagreement in DC on the goals, just fussing over the tactics and who takes credit. Two right wings on the war bird. Maybe that is why it is on a downward spiral.

    ~~~ , Jan 18 2020 22:08 utc | 40
    Via ZH :

    Describing that the drone strike took out "two for the price of one" -- in reference to slain Iraqi Shia paramilitary commander Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, who had been at the airport to greet Soleimani, Trump gave a more detailed accounting than ever before of proceedings in the 'situation room' (which had been set up at Mar-a-Lago) that night.

    He went on to recount listening to military officials as they watched the strike from "cameras that are miles in the sky."

    "They're together sir," Trump recalled the military officials saying. "Sir, they have two minutes and 11 seconds. No emotion. '2 minutes and 11 seconds to live, sir. They're in the car, they're in an armored vehicle. Sir, they have approximately one minute to live, sir. 30 seconds. 10, 9, 8 ...' "

    "Then all of a sudden, boom," he went on. "'They're gone, sir. Cutting off.' "

    "I said, where is this guy?" Trump continued. "That was the last I heard from him."

    E Mo Scel , Jan 18 2020 22:19 utc | 42
    "We put together a campaign of diplomatic isolation, economic pressure, and military deterrence."

    "diplomatic isolation" - when I read this I thought of the Ukrainian plane and the demand for an "investigation according to international guidelines" (well, Syria got that investigation according to international guidelines with the OPCW and we know how that went) - it may lead to diplomatic isolation. Watch it. As such, Pompeo might have laid out a motive for a potential US involvement.

    "economic pressure" - while the E3 did not sanction Iran, with their lack of action in regards to find working mechanisms and their depending on the US, that goal has been achieved.

    "military deterrence" - Pompeo thinks in CIA terms which can be seen as a covert weapons trafficking organization (Timber Sycamore) and something like a secret military organization. The murder of Suleimani is a war crime and as such a criminal act; it can hardly be considered a military deterrence - although the murder was carried out by the US military (maybe by CIA embedded in base?).

    I don't know. It's a lot of speculation. Iran may have a reason to not state their systems got hacked. But in the current context it may be advisable to do so, turn a potential cyberattack back to its place of origin.

    dorje , Jan 18 2020 23:18 utc | 43
    Pompeo and Trump have no concept of personal honour as they come from a sub-culture that has none.

    In the rest of the world, honour-integrity is very important. Throughout MENA to Pakistan, the US was viewed as treacherous for using Sadaam to fight Iran then turning on him in service of Israel's goals. Bush 2 contributed, through his blatant financial criminality (much of this remains unknown to average Americans), to the perception that the US is incapable of honouring ANY agreement (re:oil and other sub-rosa deals the US made).
    The decimation of Syria, Iraq and Libya was not enough; criminal elites in the US have now completely exposed themselves to the Muslim world. I am firmly convinced that the Arab 'street' has concluded the US and Israel are inseparable in their policy of murder and mayhem. I am betting the elites view reconciliation within the Arab and Islamic world as the way forward with input from Russia, China when and if needed. Turning away from US-Israeli meddling and treachery will be a primary concern for the 20's.
    I don't believe Pompeo or Trump have the foresight to understand killing Soleimani has sealed how the US is perceived: Indonesia, Malaysia, Muslim India (all 250+million), Afghanistan and Pakistan will accelarate the turning away.
    This 'decision' to murder Soleimani will be cited by future non_court historians as seminal. The US murdered the 2nd most important person in Iranian politics. This has to be one of THE STUPIDEST DECISIONS I have seen come out of the Washington, D.C--Tel Aviv--London axis. I really cannot think of any other official action by the US that compares in stupidity. Unofficially, 911 was the stupidest act of the last 2 decades but as for official I believe this takes the cakes.
    In essence, screaming to the world that you are a gangster is not a very graceful way to wind down an Empire. Pompeo-Trump-BoBo should have looked at a map. I see a hemisphere that is geographically isolated that has to make a case for why anyone should interact with it. Currently, all they have is the petrodollar system that supports 1, 000 military bases. Problem: they have just given many of the (often unwilling) participants in that system a big reason to leave it. I believe this is referred to as 'suicide'?
    Correct me if I'm wrong. I would be happy to be.

    Dick , Jan 18 2020 23:25 utc | 44
    Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany's behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally. Is it just me, or have other's noted the similarity of Pompeo to Herman Goering in looks and behaviour?

    [Jan 19, 2020] The leadership in the US need to stop thinking that they are impervious to revenge

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Old Microbiologist , Jan 18 2020 11:21 utc | 120

    The leadership in the US need to stop thinking that they are impervious to revenge. Very small drones can fly autonomously and each can carry 2 Kg of cargo which can be explosives, chemical or bioweapons or a combination. They are cheap, easy to build and can operate autonomously. With only using relatively simple algorithms they can be made to fly in groups and track using already extant facial recognition software. I can envision a scenario where drones are flown to the top of a semi-trailer somewhere south to hitch a ride north on I-95 until they get into DC near Fort Belvoir or Andrews AFB. They could then lift off and loiter perched on transmission lines where they can easily recharge using rf energy and wait. Once a target arrives, say a President on the golf course or perhaps Air Force 1 taxiing on the runway or even perhaps perch outside a window, they can then lift off and conduct an attack either directly or as limpet mines. With swarming you can send a mass of drones all flying autonomously with varied patterns. It would be impossible to stop them. Because they are autonomous jamming won't work. They would be impossible to trace back to their origin and most could be 3D printed and use off the shelf parts. If I can think this way, I am certain others are as well. Snake drones would be particularly difficult to stop.

    Old Microbiologist , Jan 18 2020 18:23 utc | 155

    Old hippe @128.yes, but these were being guided remotely from a US Navy aircraft and somewhat controllable from remote which is what happened. I think inside the US they don't think that far ahead and jamming would interfere with wifi etc. so not palatable. I Ave in mind they would be sitting in the grass or on a nearby telephone pole waiting for the target and travel less than 100 meters to hit. Autonomous means flying without any external controls and would be committed once set out. One perched on a window with 2kg of C4 waiting for whatever executive to sit down next to it would be another scenario. A snake drone could navigate in the sewers up to an executive toilet. The possibilities are endless. It is just a matter of time.

    [Jan 19, 2020] The Murder Of Qassem Soleimani Will Deter No One

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    The Murder Of Qassem Soleimani Will Deter No One

    The Trump administration sees the U.S. assassination of Qassem Soleimani as a form of deterrence not only with regards to Iran but also towards Russia, China and others. That view is wrong.

    The claim that the murder of Soleimani was necessary because of an 'imminent threat' has been debunked by Trump himself when he tweeted that 'it doesn't really matter' if there was such a threat or not.

    In a speech at the Hoover Institute Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the assassination was part of a new deterrence strategy. As Reuters reported:

    U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday said Qassem Soleimani was killed as part of a broader strategy of deterring challenges by U.S. foes that also applies to China and Russia, further diluting the assertion that the top Iranian general was struck because he was plotting imminent attacks on U.S. targets.

    In his speech at Stanford University's Hoover Institute, Pompeo made no mention of the threat of imminent attacks planned by Soleimani.

    The speech itself, headlined The Restoration of Deterrence: The Iranian Example , makes that less explicit as Reuters lets it appear:

    On the 3rd of this month, we took one of the world's deadliest terrorists off the battlefield for good.
    ...
    But I want to lay this out in context of what we've been trying to do. There is a bigger strategy to this.

    President Trump and those of us in his national security team are re-establishing deterrence – real deterrence ‒ against the Islamic Republic. In strategic terms, deterrence simply means persuading the other party that the costs of a specific behavior exceed its benefits. It requires credibility; indeed, it depends on it. Your adversary must understand not only do you have the capacity to impose costs but that you are, in fact, willing to do so.
    ...
    And let's be honest. For decades, U.S. administrations of both political parties never did enough against Iran to get the deterrence that is necessary to keep us all safe.
    ...
    So what did we do? We put together a campaign of diplomatic isolation, economic pressure, and military deterrence.
    ...
    Qasem Soleimani discovered our resolve to defend American lives.
    ...
    We have re-established deterrence, but we know it's not everlasting, that risk remains. We are determined not to lose that deterrence. In all cases, we have to do this.
    ...
    We saw, not just in Iran, but in other places, too, where American deterrence was weak. We watched Russia's 2014 occupation of the Crimea and support for aggression against Ukraine because deterrence had been undermined. We have resumed lethal support to the Ukrainian military.

    China's island building, too, in the South China Sea, and its brazen attempts to coerce American allies undermined deterrence. The Trump administration has ramped up naval exercises in the South China Sea, alongside our allies and friends and partners throughout the region.

    You saw, too, Russia ignored a treaty. We withdrew from the INF with the unanimous support of our NATO allies because there was only one party complying with a two-party agreement. We think this, again, restores credibility and deterrence to protect America.

    This understanding of 'deterrence' seems to be vague and incomplete. A longer piece I am working on will further delve deeper into that issue. But an important point is that deterrence works in both directions.

    Iran responded with a missile strike on U.S. bases in Iraq. The missiles hit the targets they were aimed at . This was a warning that any further U.S. action would cause serious U.S. casualties. That strike, which was only the first part of Iran's response to the murdering of Soleimani, deterred the U.S. from further action. Iran also declared that it will expel the U.S. from the Middle East. How is Iran deterred when it openly declares that it will take on such a project?

    Reuters makes it seem that the U.S. would not even shy away from killing a Russian or Chinese high officer on a visit in a third country. That is, for now, still out of bounds as China and Russia deter the U.S. from such acts with their own might.

    Russia and China already had no doubts that the U.S. is immoral and willing to commit war crimes. And while 'western' media avoid that characterization for the assassination of Soleimani there is no doubt that it was one.

    In a letter to the New York Times the now 100 years old chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg trials, Benjamin B. Ferencz, warned of the larger effects of such deeds when he writes :

    The administration recently announced that, on orders of the president, the United States had "taken out" (which really means "murdered") an important military leader of a country with which we were not at war. As a Harvard Law School graduate who has written extensively on the subject, I view such immoral action as a clear violation of national and international law.

    The public is entitled to know the truth. The United Nations Charter, the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice in The Hague are all being bypassed. In this cyberspace world, young people everywhere are in mortal danger unless we change the hearts and minds of those who seem to prefer war to law.

    The killing of a Soleimani will also only have a short term effect when it comes to general deterrence. It was a onetime shot to which others will react. Groups and people who work against 'U.S. interests' will now do so less publicly. Countries will seek asymmetric advantages to prevent such U.S. action against themselves. By committing the crime the U.S. and Trump made the global situation for themselves more complicated.

    Posted by b on January 18, 2020 at 19:28 UTC | Permalink

    james , Jan 18 2020 19:52 utc | 1

    next page " "And let's be honest." anyone who starts off with those words - run the other way when they say that.. pomparse is a real embarrassment to the usa on the world stage at this point... there is no international law that the usa will not completely bypass / lie / or obfuscate to push its uni-polar exceptional agenda at this point.. anyone paying any attention can see this clearly.
    Soleimani's Ghost , Jan 18 2020 19:53 utc | 2
    In terms of deterrence re Iran, these people don't seem to know much about the role of martyrdom in Shi'ism
    lysias , Jan 18 2020 19:59 utc | 3
    Pompeo speaks as though he wants to provoke an assassination attempt on himself.
    chet380 , Jan 18 2020 19:59 utc | 4
    If push comes to shove, the Iranians are well aware that the US would, by its bombing and missiles that the Iranians cannot completely withstand, cause many deaths and massive destruction to its cities and infrastructure ... BUT the Americans are very much aware that the Iranian response would be devastating -- all US ME military assets would come under massive fire resulting in many deaths; all Gulf State oil infrastructure would be destroyed; Tel Aviv and Riyadh would be attacked; the Strait of Hormuz would be blocked, and on and on.

    It seems highly unlikely that the US would take such a risk -- let us call it Mutual Assured Destructiveness

    exiled off mainstree , Jan 18 2020 20:00 utc | 5
    It is interesting that the commentary closes with a letter by Benjamin Ferencz, perhaps the last surviving Nuremberg prosecutor. As he indicates, the assassination is a war crime, and, in my view, even the threat of such an assassination is a serious breach of international law. Regimes following such a policy have gone rogue, and cabinet ministers making such a pronouncement that the assassination was carried out as a deterrent are, in effect, confessing to war crimes. In future the reach of the offending regime may be much less than it is now, and, if that occurs, the rogue minister better be careful if he travels outside of his home country.
    1 , Jan 18 2020 20:02 utc | 6
    Thanks B, for your continued articles that are never mentioned elsewhere. I completely agree with your assessment. War used to have rules. Any american army brass or higher ups in USA, Britain, Israel and allies will have to keep looking over their shoulder when they leave their own country. Israel already cancelled trips to Saudi Arabia over security concerns. The gloves are off and targeted assignation will hit allies of USA. The president family are fair game, People who sponsor the the orange prophet of misery, Pompous Pompeoo, Esper or any general will have a very paranoid time knowing that the rules of war that once protected them from targeted assignation no longer apply. After all if america can do this, what's stopping their adversaries from doing the same.
    ChasMark , Jan 18 2020 20:05 utc | 7
    Benjamin B. Ferencz, his touted Harvard Law School pedigree Nuremberg Trial experience have precisely ZERO persuasive value.

    Ferencz was one of the most vicious and manipulative of the Nuremberg prosecutors. In a BBC interview he stated boldly that he threatened to kill detainees or their families unless they confessed:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=48&v=jmFg_ZkKo8M

    Interviewer: "In previous interviews you've described how in gathering testimonies you did resort to duress, for instance, lining up villagers and threatening to shoot them if they lied. Such methods now would amount to witness harassment of the most extreme order.

    Ferencz: Perhaps it would. but it's only because the people who make allegations don't understand what war is about -- bring a room of 20 people together -- this is an actual case -- and say I want you all to write out what happened, what your role was, what others did. Anybody who lies will be shot.
    "Oh, how can you do a thing like that!" You're threatening them, it's torture! What am I going to tell 'em? That you won't get your patty-cake tonight? ' Please be honest, please confess that you're a murderer. Please do that, I don't want to have to ____ you of anything.'
    What are you talking about? There's a war going on! They will kill you if they could. They were killing some of their buddies before. So what am I going to do? I didn't shoot them. But I threatened to , and that's the only weapon I had. And if that be torture, then call me a torturer."

    Moreover, Rabbi Stephen Wise, one of the key instigators of World War II and US involvement in it, recorded a Personal Letter he sent to his wife / daughter (probably) shortly after Germany's surrender. The Rabbi wrote that he and Nahum Goldmann had lunch with Justice Robert Jackson, and that

    "Justice [Robert] Jackson. . . .has grand and spacious ideas on the Nuremberg trials in mid-October, with Weizmann, Goldmann or S.S.W. [Stephen S. Wise] as Jewish witnesses to present the Jewish Case –not permitted as Amicus Curiae!

    In itself it becomes the greatest trial in history, with what Jackson calls its broad departure from Anglo-Saxon legal tradition.
    Retroactively "aggressive war-making" becomes criminally punishable–with membership in the Gestapo prima facie proof of criminal participation."

    If Ferencz has an ounce of integrity, he will condemn as "aggressive war-making" every person who voted for an illegal war against Iraq, and every person involved in imposing sanctions on Iran -- themselves acts of "aggressive war."

    But he won't because he doesn't.

    Piotr Berman , Jan 18 2020 20:06 utc | 8
    "By committing the crime the U.S. and Trump made the global situation for themselves more complicate."

    USA is not exactly the sole economic superpower, but as long as the allies, EU, NATO, major allies in Asia and Latin America, behave like poodles, USA pretty much controls what is "normal". After Obama campaigns of murder by drone, now Trump raises it to a higher level, and Europe, the most critical link in the web of alliances, applauds (UK) or accepts and cooperates. That can be a useful clarification for US establishment.

    So the bottom line is that while it is hard to show constructive goals achieved by raising murder policies to a more brazen level, nothing changes for the worse. Allies tolerate irrationality, cruelty etc. and to some extend, join the fun.

    William Gruff , Jan 18 2020 20:07 utc | 9
    Pompeo: "In all cases, we have to do this."

    In all cases they have to murder? That is psycho killer talk. Notice how comfortable the American public is with that.

    America disconnected from reality years ago. I rather doubt they could even find their way back if they were to somehow return to their senses.

    Kooshy , Jan 18 2020 20:13 utc | 10
    IMO, from what I understand of Shia mentality, after immoral assassination of general Soleimani the only thing can prevent a violent revenge against US military or political staff would be a Fatwa by a grand ayatollah to nullify a fatwa by any junior Ayatollah authorizing (sanctioning) specific action. It was an incalculably caster F* mistake that can last for a generation at least.
    John Dowser , Jan 18 2020 20:16 utc | 11
    "t̶h̶e̶ U̶.̶S̶.̶ Israel and Trump made the global situation for themselves more complicate"

    Not if the purpose was more pressure by complication. The goal then to create a pretext: a pressure cooker which will cause military exchange or, especially after some limited violent exchange, increasing internal strife inside Iran which can't afford more war.

    The conditions for this tactic would be clear: containing all the likely fall-out of the above unraveling, namely:

    - contain China with the trade war no one can win but will make it near impossible for China to deal with Iran, Iraq and Syria.
    - increased containment Palestine and Lebanon by Israel. Make very move there seem way too expensive for especially Hezbollah.
    - prevent any kind of weapon transport or technology transfer to Lebanon which could break above containment.
    - vastly improved border security and travel limitations
    - increasing War on T̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶ Blow Back related powers for Homeland Security, NSA etc.

    Russia is seen as less of a problem as any potential military support would be simply too costly and too little gain for Putin.

    And make no mistake, Trump is fully ready to display nuclear might the moment Iran would demonstrate their own remarkable advances. And he would make it very clear that the US is willing. The new policy of deterrence is very simple and yet horrible: examples have to be made to demonstrate that "all options are still on the table". If he wants to keep declining America great but not have expensive wars and yet force others to still follow American lead: there's only one cold logical solution to that.

    Joshua , Jan 18 2020 20:19 utc | 12
    The glaring fact of the matter is that the us president and his accomplices useld false allegations as an excuse to murder these men. They also did so in a cowardly manner, under a false invitation to negotiate (and, Yes I do believe that).
    In my country, when a person orders someone to murder someone else in exchange for compensation (in this case salaries), the police call it murder for hire.
    Paul Damascene , Jan 18 2020 20:20 utc | 13
    Deterrence and decapitation strikes ...

    Idle speculation on my part, but I am not alone in wondering if the Soleimani assassination accelerated Putin's restructuring agenda. (I'm not suggesting it was generated or even influenced in substance by the strike, just that the timing may have been.) Given the power of the President in Russia, as the CIA itself very well understands, there is perhaps no more tempting target for an overt military assassination strike than President Putin.

    Of course, deterrence of rational actors is precisely what would prevent this, but I imagine Russian strategic thinkers have wondered whether or for how long the US remains a rational actor. Moreover, this would be the sort of thing that a fanatical faction could pull off. In some Strangelovean bunker somewhere, there may be those who would actually welcome a last gasp of large-scale warfare before the Eurasian Heartland is lost and the Petrodollar-fueled global finance empire, nominally sheltered in the US, dies away.

    Creative destruction ... a last chance to shuffle the cards, and perhaps reset a losing game to zero.

    Joshua , Jan 18 2020 20:22 utc | 14
    What manner of nation does these things? What manner of man? Why are these criminals not facing arrest and trial at this very moment? Is it because they all had their magical 'I'm a special guy' hats on? Justice will come to us all.
    Kali , Jan 18 2020 20:22 utc | 15
    I don't think what Pompeo was saying is vague, it is really just a way to con the US media into believing that what they did was anything other than what it really was. They are trying to couch their violent threatening behavior aimed at Iraqi leaders to keep them out of the China-Iran orbit, as part of "The Patriotic Duty of Team America World Police". It is like a mafioso saying to the police about their protection racket: "I'm doing you'se a favor by keeping everyone in the neighborhood safe from criminals."

    "It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name."

    Kali , Jan 18 2020 20:25 utc | 16
    "This second Beast worked magical signs, dazzling people by making fire come down from Heaven. It used the magic it got from the Beast to dupe earth dwellers, getting them to make an image of the Beast that received the deathblow and lived. It was able to animate the image of the Beast so that it talked, and then arrange that anyone not worshiping the Beast would be killed. It forced all people, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to have a mark on the right hand or forehead. Without the mark of the name of the Beast or the number of its name, it was impossible to buy or sell anything."
    james , Jan 18 2020 20:28 utc | 17
    yeah - mafia tactics as offered by trump /pompeo and etc is exactly what it is... and when Benjamin B. Ferencz calls it what it is, apologists show up to can ferencz @ 7.. so what will persuade you chasmark?? do i need to send a hit man over to your place?
    Jay , Jan 18 2020 20:28 utc | 18
    It's odd to see Reuters get the name of the Hoover Institution wrong, and also be wrong about the Institution's association with Stanford University. The Institution is on the Stanford campus but has a separate board of directors.

    Okay, Reuters is making typically sloppy errors about the name and the amount of control Stanford has over the rightwing "Institute" on its campus. Stanford, the university, has plenty of US military intelligence (and actual black world) ties, but almost no one working at Stanford would think killing Soleimani a good idea. Though plenty of the "thinkers" at The Hoover Institution would.


    Right, Pompeo is delusional. Murdering Soleimani will deter no one. Nor of course do the Iranian missile strikes on US bases in Iraq mean the end of Iran's response to the act of war.

    nietzsche1510 , Jan 18 2020 20:29 utc | 19
    all this rhetoric says the obvious: the USA wants to destroy physically the Near East (Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, etc). either he destroys the whole region or he cannot be reelected or better he gets impeached in the Senate.
    Trailer Trash , Jan 18 2020 20:37 utc | 20
    I am surprised at how many establishment media have actually labelled this murder as "assassination" instead of the usual euphemisms. I think nearly everyone in the world understands that bragging about international murder completely changes international relations. Except for Pompous and Trumpet, of course.

    Everyone will be filing their hair-triggers. There seems to be a general world-wide mobilization but no one is calling it that. It is all "war games" and such. At some point before the 2003 Iraq invasion it was clear to me that the decision for open war had been made. It is now clear to me that there will be an invasion of Iran, starting with Iraq. I think the B-52s sent to the area are for killing Iraqis, since they have no air defense.

    At the same time, the US asset bubbles are nearly "priced to perfection". That means they have no where to go except down. Debts that can't be paid won't be paid. All it takes is a break in the chain of payments and the next financial panic is ON! Can Uncle Sam greatly expand his War on the World in the middle of financial chaos? I think he will probably try.

    I speculate that Uncle Sam believes Iran and Iraq will simply cower and wait for the next blow. I predict they will not. Soleimani's assassination and the subsequent Iranian attack have not substantially changed the strategic situation, except to tie down the boiler relief valve and turn up the heat. God, if there is one, help us all. We're sure gonna need it.

    Ian2 , Jan 18 2020 20:46 utc | 21
    Does this idiot Pompeo not realize the door swing both ways? Unless he plans to live his remaining days bunkered in NORAD, he's just as vulnerable as the rest.
    Kooshy , Jan 18 2020 20:49 utc | 22

    Should have add to my earlier comment (10) , the missile attack on American bases on Iraq was Iran's military/ government response for killing General Soleimani, by no means was the Shia' response since that would need a Fatwa and not necessary by an Iranian cleric or even by Iranian Shia. Is now a religious matter for all believers.
    El Cid , Jan 18 2020 20:51 utc | 23
    Sooner or later, Saudi Arabia will make peace with Iran. It will improve relations with Russia and China, and will reduce ties with Israel. Soon, Turkey will be completely out of Syria, and Idlib will be entirely liberated. The US, in Iraq, will slowly be drained of vitality with a death of a thousand cuts. Medium range missile production in conjunction with Russian S-300 air defense will will spread throughout the Middle East, and Israel's air force will be neutralized. Then the pipeline from Iran to Syria will be completed.
    Willy2 , Jan 18 2020 21:17 utc | 24
    - I think that EVERYONE who is involved in the Middle East will think twice before one makes a (provocative) move. Tensions will remain high. But some people may (and will) do (deliberately) something (provocative) that will ratchet up tensions even more. With the intent of ratcheting tensions higher.
    - There was someone who said that in 2020 World War III would start. For a long time I thought this person was nuts. But now I am not so sure anymore that this person was nuts.
    - There were also people who said that we were "sleepwalking" into WW III, something along the lines of what happened before WW I. These persons were talking about a war between the US (+ NATO) and Russia. But now I think that if a war would break out that then not only Russia but also China and Iran are going to be part of that war. No, I am not sure anymore that this going to end well.

    - I also think that everyone haas become (more) cautious. And that an act of A-symmetric warfare has become (more) unlikely.

    psychohistorian , Jan 18 2020 21:22 utc | 25
    Pompeo is the spokesman for the rules based Western empire mafia don, Trump.

    The event is now being turned into a US media event (real time movie making here) by Trump letting out text versions of the backroom chatter around the murder. This will not sit well with the ME, IMO.

    What late empire keeps pushing for is some event that can be blown into global support for war escalation....but it hasn't happened, yet

    And all this over public/private global control of value sharing in the social human contract....what a way to run a railroad/species......

    cirsium , Jan 18 2020 21:26 utc | 26
    @William Gruff, 9
    "In all cases they have to murder? That is psycho killer talk. Notice how comfortable the American public is with that."

    Maybe that's because
    "The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer." D H Lawrence

    Zee , Jan 18 2020 21:30 utc | 27
    The most depressing thing about the assassination's aftermath is that Western Europe's leaders are as bad as America's - "It's the economy, stupid!" So, a threat to their auto manufacturers is a threat to jobs, and one has to consider the next election. They were already controlled thanks to the NSA's eavesdropping on their cell phones, a threat to individual politicians - no need for them to worry about physical elimination, then; Trump threatened via economics their parties' chances of reelection, meaning they have support for knuckling under. China, Russia and Iran are on their own - China was still working on its economic might, Russia was still working on building a strong political foundation, and Iran already has its hands full with internal and external threats. The fence-sitters (India, smaller Asian and African countries) will sit on the sidelines, working to improve their own economies and waiting to see who looks more powerful before joining one side or the other to break down or uphold the international norms and laws it took centuries to build. Tottering as it appears to be, the U.S. looks to be ready to burn the world; its "adversaries" aren't yet strong enough to avoid the flamethrower.
    cdvision , Jan 18 2020 21:33 utc | 28
    Be careful what you wish for Mr Pompeo, the sword has 2 edges. I don't think turning the other cheek is in the Shia lexicon.
    Curtis , Jan 18 2020 21:37 utc | 29
    Trailer Trash 20
    The only reason I wouldn't be surprised at big media calling Soleimani's murder an "assassination" is how the media politics is played by party. Since the media tends to lean left, they want to be thorns in Trump's side. Neither party is against war; they want to be the instigators to get the glory (while shifting/limiting blame). Amid the media's stories on this were the talking points of Trump going too far by DEMs in congress.
    Recall Libya. The GOP criticized Obama for Libya but only because they wanted to be able to say they were the tough guys. The media was oh-so-happy to harp on the Iraq after Bush's destruction of Iraq but very quiet on the aftermath of Libya.
    blues , Jan 18 2020 21:39 utc | 30
    Maybe I stupidly posted this in the wrong thread?

    Trump is simply a third-rate Godfather type gangster, with a touch of the charm and a lot of the baggage. I think his murder of General Qassem Soleimani was not something he would have done if he had any choice. It was a very stupid move, and Trump is just not that stupid. I really think this was demanded by the 'churnitalists'. These churnitalists are probably the psychos of the predatory arm of the CIA, and their billionaire allies.

    See, it all works like this:

    These churnitalists (who supposedly provide us with 'protection', or 'security') are the real rulers (because everybody who defies them ends up dead). Now just ask your self: How does rulership actually really work? It's really kind of simple. The only actual way to establish rulership over other people is to prove, again and again, that you can force them to do stupid things, for absolutely no reason. This is called 'people-churning', and all you have to do is just keep churning out low-class 'history' by constantly forcing the weaker ones to do stupid things. Again and again. This happens constantly in a churnitalist gangster society. Even in schools and legislatures, and so on. Haven't you noticed it yet?

    Ron , Jan 18 2020 21:41 utc | 31
    Kali 15

    Ten reasons why the US is the Beast of Revelation

    james , Jan 18 2020 21:44 utc | 32
    @ 24 willy2... i have been talking about war in 2020 for some time based off the astrology..i have mentioned it in passing here at moa a few times in the past couple of years.. see my comments in this skyscript link from june 2015..
    ptb , Jan 18 2020 21:58 utc | 33
    Not only will it not deter anyone, it is loudly signaling that third rate neocons are the only decision makers left in the room.

    You're likely to see more provocations, since it's now such an easy button to push. i.e. for any regional or global powers who need US forces to be diverted for a while. Any bullshit they manage to sell to the young Bolton's in the bureaucracy will do.

    While not exactly unprecedented, the change is how much the mask is off now.

    Robert Snefjella , Jan 18 2020 22:00 utc | 34
    The part of Pompeo's speech quoted by b above is American to the core: every sentence or short paragraph contains at minimum one outright lie; the entire quote selected is also both palpably delusional and stupid.

    But having said that, there is something uniquely refreshing about the Trump/Pompeo tag team's capacity for blurting out lies and inanities, and furthermore, they do it with gusto. Guile is not Pompeo's strong suit.

    One might say that the criminality of the 'new deterrence' is as American as apple pie, except that apple pie in my experience is innocent of all that, unless I suppose it contains a deadly poison, and is fed to a political or ideological foe.

    What is new about the 'new deterrence' that will surely make life far more dangerous for Americans, is that it publicly declares itself as a policy with no bounds, no ethical, or logical, or legal constraints. So what the Americans have been doing for generations, often but not by any means always with 'plausible denial', and sometimes quite brazenly, is now explicitly underlined policy.

    Previously, the fight was 'against communism', or 'for democracy', or for 'national security'.

    So for example, when Nicaragua during the "Reagan Revolution' was sanctioned, attacked, vilified, subjected to uncounted atrocities, because those dastardly Nicaraguans had replaced their loathsome monster dictator with a government trying to do the right thing for the people, the war against that country was under the rubric of protecting American 'national security', with bits of domino theory and communist hordes concerns thrown in.

    So what is the difference between deploying tens of thousands of maniacal murderous 'contras' as 'deterrence' against a small country's attempts at making a decent life for its people, and a drone attack on Soleimani and his companions?

    I think one main difference is that the 'world has changed' around the perpetrators, but they are still living the delusions of brainwashed childhood, the wild west, white hat un-self conscious monstrosities riding into town, gonna clean the place up. Pathetic and extremely dangerous.

    Kali , Jan 18 2020 22:00 utc | 35
    @31 Ron

    There are 2 beasts, the first is either America or NATO, or basically "The Empire" or The Neocon Oligarchy--all work well but America is a bit too broad since there are many good people in America. The second beast whose number is 666, is Trump. Search: Trump 666 and be amazed.

    And of course The Pièce de résistance

    les7 , Jan 18 2020 22:01 utc | 36
    Gruff @ 9

    So sadly but profoundly true

    vk , Jan 18 2020 22:01 utc | 37
    There's another logical flaw in Pompeo's argument.

    The USA is a nuclear power. If you claim to assassinate other countries' generals as a deterrent, then that signals America's true enemies - Russia and China - that it will vacilate in using its own nuclear deterrent if an American target is to be neutralized. That would bring more, not less, instability to the world order.

    But maybe that's the American aim with this: to shake the already existing international order with the objective to try to destroy Eurasia with its massive war machine and, therefore, initiate another cycle of accumulation of American capitalism.

    Another potential unintended blowback of Soleimani's assassination lies in the fact that the USA is not officially at war with Iran. Iran was being sanctioned by the UN. That poses a threat in the corners of the American Empire, since it sends a message that the USA doesn't need to be at war with a nation in order to gratuitously attack it; it also sends the message that it is not enough to play by the rules and accept the UN's sanctions - you could still do all of that and submit yourself and still be attacked by the Americans.

    The endgame of this is that there's a clear message to the American "allies" (i.e. vassals, provinces): stay in line and obey without questioning, even if that goes directly against your national interests. This will leave the Empire even more unstable at its frontier because, inevitably, there'll come a time where the USA will directly command its vassals/provinces to literally hurt their own economies just to keep the American one afloat (or not sinking too fast). Gramsci's "Law of Hegemony" states that, the more coercion and the less consensus, the more unstable is one's hegemony.

    Trailer Trash , Jan 18 2020 22:03 utc | 38
    >Tottering as it appears to be, the U.S. looks to be
    > ready to burn the world; its "adversaries" aren't yet
    > strong enough to avoid the flamethrower.
    > Posted by: Zee | Jan 18 2020 21:30 utc | 27

    Indeed. But the longer Iran can delay the inevitable, the stronger and better prepared it becomes, while Uncle Sam is busy burning the furniture and getting financially more precarious. US planners seem to think that one can build an economy around poor people giving each other haircuts while rich people keep trading the exact same assets back and forth while steady driving asset prices higher.

    Somewhere in the economic cycle someone has to actually make stuff and grow food. But planners have allowed the manufacturing (and associated engineering, etc.) to leave while driving farmers into bankruptcy. They are mortgaged to the hilt. When land prices quit rising, there is no additional collateral and no new credit. With no additional credit, no one will sell them seeds and equipment. So they are out of business. It's scary to think how few people actually grow all the food to feed millions and millions.

    Asset bubbles have real consequences, such as millions can not afford rent anymore while millions of housing units remain empty because their value still goes up even without rental income. Scenes from Soylent Green come to mind, thinking about how more and more people are crammed into fewer living quarters.

    Our brain-dead leaders have created a situation where they must continue to inflate bubbles to keep increasing collateral to back more debt. But the bubbles impoverish the rest of us. And bubbles always pop. Always.

    I'm not sure how much the next financial crisis will affect the US killing machine, but I doubt it would make the war machine stronger.

    Trailer Trash , Jan 18 2020 22:08 utc | 39
    >The GOP criticized Obama for Libya but only because they
    > wanted to be able to say they were the tough guys. The
    > media was oh-so-happy to harp on the Iraq after Bush's
    > destruction of Iraq but very quiet on the aftermath of Libya.
    > Posted by: Curtis | Jan 18 2020 21:37 utc | 29

    Yes to this. There is no disagreement in DC on the goals, just fussing over the tactics and who takes credit. Two right wings on the war bird. Maybe that is why it is on a downward spiral.

    ~~~ , Jan 18 2020 22:08 utc | 40
    Via ZH :

    Describing that the drone strike took out "two for the price of one" -- in reference to slain Iraqi Shia paramilitary commander Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, who had been at the airport to greet Soleimani, Trump gave a more detailed accounting than ever before of proceedings in the 'situation room' (which had been set up at Mar-a-Lago) that night.

    He went on to recount listening to military officials as they watched the strike from "cameras that are miles in the sky."

    "They're together sir," Trump recalled the military officials saying. "Sir, they have two minutes and 11 seconds. No emotion. '2 minutes and 11 seconds to live, sir. They're in the car, they're in an armored vehicle. Sir, they have approximately one minute to live, sir. 30 seconds. 10, 9, 8 ...' "

    "Then all of a sudden, boom," he went on. "'They're gone, sir. Cutting off.' "

    "I said, where is this guy?" Trump continued. "That was the last I heard from him."

    Lurker in the Dark , Jan 18 2020 22:09 utc | 41
    b: Usage or typo alert - about 2/3 of the way through your piece.
    Reuters makes it seem that the U.S. would not even shy away from killing a Russian or Chinese high officer on a visit in a third country. That is, for now, still out of bounce as China and Russia deter the U.S. from such acts with their own might...

    The English language expression is "out of bounds" as in, of course, outside the bounding lines defining a field of play.

    E Mo Scel , Jan 18 2020 22:19 utc | 42
    "We put together a campaign of diplomatic isolation, economic pressure, and military deterrence."

    "diplomatic isolation" - when I read this I thought of the Ukrainian plane and the demand for an "investigation according to international guidelines" (well, Syria got that investigation according to international guidelines with the OPCW and we know how that went) - it may lead to diplomatic isolation. Watch it. As such, Pompeo might have laid out a motive for a potential US involvement.

    "economic pressure" - while the E3 did not sanction Iran, with their lack of action in regards to find working mechanisms and their depending on the US, that goal has been achieved.

    "military deterrence" - Pompeo thinks in CIA terms which can be seen as a covert weapons trafficking organization (Timber Sycamore) and something like a secret military organization. The murder of Suleimani is a war crime and as such a criminal act; it can hardly be considered a military deterrence - although the murder was carried out by the US military (maybe by CIA embedded in base?).

    I don't know. It's a lot of speculation. Iran may have a reason to not state their systems got hacked. But in the current context it may be advisable to do so, turn a potential cyberattack back to its place of origin.

    dorje , Jan 18 2020 23:18 utc | 43
    Pompeo and Trump have no concept of personal honour as they come from a sub-culture that has none.

    In the rest of the world, honour-integrity is very important. Throughout MENA to Pakistan, the US was viewed as treacherous for using Sadaam to fight Iran then turning on him in service of Israel's goals. Bush 2 contributed, through his blatant financial criminality (much of this remains unknown to average Americans), to the perception that the US is incapable of honouring ANY agreement (re:oil and other sub-rosa deals the US made).
    The decimation of Syria, Iraq and Libya was not enough; criminal elites in the US have now completely exposed themselves to the Muslim world. I am firmly convinced that the Arab 'street' has concluded the US and Israel are inseparable in their policy of murder and mayhem. I am betting the elites view reconciliation within the Arab and Islamic world as the way forward with input from Russia, China when and if needed. Turning away from US-Israeli meddling and treachery will be a primary concern for the 20's.
    I don't believe Pompeo or Trump have the foresight to understand killing Soleimani has sealed how the US is perceived: Indonesia, Malaysia, Muslim India (all 250+million), Afghanistan and Pakistan will accelarate the turning away.
    This 'decision' to murder Soleimani will be cited by future non_court historians as seminal. The US murdered the 2nd most important person in Iranian politics. This has to be one of THE STUPIDEST DECISIONS I have seen come out of the Washington, D.C--Tel Aviv--London axis. I really cannot think of any other official action by the US that compares in stupidity. Unofficially, 911 was the stupidest act of the last 2 decades but as for official I believe this takes the cakes.
    In essence, screaming to the world that you are a gangster is not a very graceful way to wind down an Empire. Pompeo-Trump-BoBo should have looked at a map. I see a hemisphere that is geographically isolated that has to make a case for why anyone should interact with it. Currently, all they have is the petrodollar system that supports 1, 000 military bases. Problem: they have just given many of the (often unwilling) participants in that system a big reason to leave it. I believe this is referred to as 'suicide'?
    Correct me if I'm wrong. I would be happy to be.

    Dick , Jan 18 2020 23:25 utc | 44
    Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany's behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally. Is it just me, or have other's noted the similarity of Pompeo to Herman Goering in looks and behaviour?
    Clueless Joe , Jan 18 2020 23:28 utc | 45
    That's one of the good aspect of Trump administration, in the long run. With these psychos openly plagiarizing Grand Moff Tarkin ("Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station."), it will be pretty had for any sane and sensible observer not to come to the conclusion that, deep down, the USA *is* an Evil Empire that has to be fought and brought down - and thankfully, this time, one saner Obama-like presidency, if it ever happens after Trump, won't be enough to change that perception.
    Sunny Runny Burger , Jan 18 2020 23:47 utc | 46
    I can only guess what Toynbee would think of the US now, it certainly looks like suicide to me and if the US actually had any friends left they would be busy trying to talk the US out of it. From this point of view the relative silence speaks loudly and says something quite different than at least some people think.

    US NATO "allies" haven't exactly been enthusiastic. Maybe I'm wrong in thinking the UK came closest with Johnson's "not crying" remark, everything else seems to be tortured statements walking on eggshells. 2nd biggest NATO member Turkey cooperates with Iran and plenty of others in NATO have wanted and worked towards normal relations despite differences, some more publicly than others. It might not have amounted to anything but that's my impression at least.

    Any support for war against Iran is microscopic. Against Russia? Except for the rarest of the worst of fools not a chance. Against China? People would have trouble comprehending the question itself due to how absurd the notion is.

    ChasMark , Jan 18 2020 23:56 utc | 47
    Dick | Jan 18 2020 23:25 utc | 44

    "Is it just me" who makes the argument reductio ad Hitlerum?

    No, it's you and every other moron who gets his history from teevee and Hollywood.

    If the compulsion to resort to WWII analogies is too compelling to overcome, flip the script:

    US and Britain 'won' the war in Germany by deliberately firebombing civilian targets, over and over and over and over again.
    United States Dept. of Interior records in detail how Standard Oil engineers, USAF, Jewish architects, and Jewish Hollywood studio set designers constructed and practiced creating firestorms with the stated goal of killing working class German civilians, including "infants in cribs."

    In a discussion of his book, The Fire, Jörg Friedrich emphasized that Allied bombers dropped leaflets telling the Germans they were about to kill that their only recourse was to overthrow their government -- to topple or kill Hitler: the "greatest generation" killed civilians as "deterrents" to Wehrmacht's defensive actions against Allied invasion.

    Since at least 1995 US tactics against Iran have been similar: Ed Royce spelled them out: US will sanction Iranian citizens in an effort to make life so miserable for them that they will riot and overthrow their government.

    So yes, it IS "just like the Nazis" -- US-zionists are running a similar playbook as that used to prostrate Germany.
    And Iraq.
    And Libya.
    And Syria.

    Notice that wrt Syria, having reduced that ancient place to rubble, much like Allies reduced Germany's cultural heritage to rubble, US 'diplomats' are steadfastly refusing to allow Syria access to resources with which to finance its reconstruction, and are also blocking any other country's attempt to aid Syria in reconstruction: Destroying Syria was 'hi-tech eminent domain,' and now USA intends to be the only entity to finance and rebuild Syria -- or else US will continue the destruction of Syria.

    Most Americans think Marshall plan was an act more generous than Jesus Christ on the cross, but in fact it was a cynical strategy to completely dominate Germany in saecula saeculorum. (US LOANED the money, and far more-- about 2.5 X more-- was committed to England -- relatively undamaged -- than to Germany, where 70% of infrastructure was rubble.)
    You won't learn that from the Hollywood version of WWII.

    Roberto , Jan 18 2020 23:58 utc | 48
    the Nuremberg trials:

    Was Nuremebrg trial a fair trial? Not, it was not. It was very unfair.

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 0:10 utc | 49
    I recall RT reported on December 31. 19 Trump warned

    LINK

    "This is not a Warning, it is a Threat," Trump declared in a tweet on Tuesday afternoon, adding that Iran will "pay a very BIG PRICE" for the embassy siege earlier in the day."

    They sure did. So who is next?

    Yesterday Trump warned the supreme leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khameni:

    'Be very careful with your words': Trump warns Iran's Khamenei after ayatollah delivers fiery sermon slamming 'American clowns'

    US President Donald Trump has warned the supreme leader of Iran to watch his language, following a heated sermon in which Ayatollah Ali Khamenei slammed American leaders as "clowns."
    Leading a prayer in Tehran on Friday, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei boasted that Iran had the "spirit to slap an arrogant, aggressive global power" in its retaliation to the assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, which he said struck a "serious blow" to Washington's "dignity" – triggering a response from the US president.

    "The so-called 'Supreme Leader' of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe," Trump tweeted. "Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words!"

    In his sermon, Khamenei blasted "American clowns," who he said "lie in utter viciousness that they stand with the Iranian people," referring to recent comments by Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo

    How dare he?


    Pft , Jan 19 2020 0:28 utc | 50
    Lets face it, assassinations are not a new thing. It became more organized with Lord Palmerstons gangs of thugs in the mid 19th century (one of which took out Lincoln) . Since the end of WWII the global mafia jumped across the pond and assassinations have been covert actions arranged by the CIA , with operations having a high degree of plausible deniability. But most higher ups had a pretty good idea who was behind it . Trumps just continued this but like Bush and Obama have made clear its their right to do so against terrorists . Of course the definition of terrorist has become rather broad. Trump recently said he authorized the hit because he said bad things about America. Maybe saying bad things about Trump can get you labelled the same. Watch out for those drones barflies.

    So basically the main change is they no longer care about plausible deniability . They are proud to admit it. And nobody seems to care enough to express any outrage. Name any countries leader who has except in muted terms. Europe, Russia, China, etc everyone quiet as a mouse. China so outraged they signed a trade deal giving them nothing. UN? Might as well move it to Cuba , Iran or Venezuela for all the clout it has.

    So you know, maybe the deterrence is working. Terrorism works both ways. The world seems terrorized and hardly anyone in the US dares criticize Trumps action without saying the general was evil and deserved it. Its not just drones they fear as financial terrorism (sanctions, denied access to USD) works quite well also (except in Irans case).

    ChasMark , Jan 19 2020 0:30 utc | 51
    james | Jan 18 2020 20:28 utc | 17

    The argument is correct.
    (Although the mafia label bespeaks a limited frame of reference and it's inappropriate in any event -- crime families do not have the reach or power of state assassination squads.)

    Ferencz does not have the moral standing to make the argument.
    It's like granting Ted Bundy credibility for criticizing police brutality.

    mcohen , Jan 19 2020 0:30 utc | 52
    What a story.
    Per/Norway , Jan 19 2020 0:32 utc | 53
    Posted by: Kali | Jan 18 2020 22:00 utc | 35

    The beast rises from the bottomless pit, it is written in the book you quoted!
    How do you suggest a mere mortal and retard like trump does that?
    The murcanized xtianity eschatology you have been reading is stupid and in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM Orthodox(Orthodox=Christian)

    "ORTHODOXESCHATOLOGYdotBLOGSPOTdotCOM"
    "orthodoxinfoDOTcom"
    "preteristarchiveDOTcom"
    You will find info that is not xtian but Christian @ those blogs..
    The last one is a library with ancient and old texts about Christianity!
    If you search "THEOSIS THE TRUE PURPOSE OF HUMAN LIFE" on orthodoxinfo you will also find a book WELL worth reading if you are/want to be Christian.

    Per
    Russian Orthodox
    Norway

    "And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them."

    Per/Norway , Jan 19 2020 0:36 utc | 54
    Kali @35
    i messed up and hit post b4 i pasted this..
    "'The beast that thou didst see: it was, and it is not; and it is about to come up out of the abyss, and to go away to destruction, and wonder shall those dwelling upon the earth, whose names have not been written upon the scroll of the life from the foundation of the world, beholding the beast that was, and is not, although it is."
    Per
    Russian Orthodox
    Norway
    BLP , Jan 19 2020 0:40 utc | 55

    several additions if i may:

    first speculation. however it happened, "deep state" power or factions now have a jacket
    on Trump. he can't disown what happened. Brennan and Stephen Schwarzman are safe.
    the Money and the MIC get what they want. Trump's agenda of converting the common good
    to corporate profit is acceptable. they can use Trump to defeat Sanders.

    it's quite possible American power is unimpressed by the Russia-China alliance which has
    just revealed it's limitations. i think this link has already run on this site:
    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/05/fragmentation-in-the-axis-of-resistance-led-to-soleimanis-death/.

    here's a welcome dose of realism from the Holy Russia Neverland to substantiate this view:
    https://thesaker.is/battle-of-the-ages-to-stop-eurasian-integration/
    3 comments from India by Anaam esp this one: Anaam on January 17, 2020 · at 10:32 am EST/EDT

    and lastly this outlier from ibm.com. a new, more powerful battery made from sea water.
    charges in 5 min. in California this means electricity off your roof for everything including
    your car plus a surplus for export. how soon? doesn't say. oil dependent economies
    want to know. and we won't need the "petro" for the petrodollar.
    https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2019/12/heavy-metal-free-battery/

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 0:44 utc | 56
    The truth of it is Trump murdered General Soleimani because the general was very effective in defeating ISIS - the U.S. created and funded - terrorists in Syria and Iraq. The neocons were none too pleased.

    Release Jan.18 2020 21st centurywire audio Interview with Dr. Mohammad Marandi, Tehran University

    America's Miscalculation with Iran

    LINK

    @ ChasMark 7 - not an ounce of integrity! Trump or Ferencz?

    How is it I posted days ago that link to Ferencz's letter to New York Times and not a pips. Are you defending Trump's war crimes as against bringing the Nazis to justice?

    How about the U.S. waterboarding and torturing Muslims at Gitmo? 19 years on with NO TRIALS!!! That's OK, right?

    karlof1 , Jan 19 2020 0:58 utc | 57
    As far as b's premise goes, he's proven it IMO. Looks like the CIA made the next move in Lebanon. IMO, Asia plus Russia & Belarus hold the geoeconomic and geopolitical deterrence cards. The Financial Parasite continues hollowing out what remains of US industry and retail helped along by Trump's Trade War. I presented the fundamental economic info and arguments on the prior threads, so I don't have anything to add.
    pretzelattack , Jan 19 2020 1:08 utc | 58
    the price of fake freedom is remaining ever vigilant to prevent peace breaking out. trump's as much a warmonger as any of them (which is to say impeachment won't make a bit of difference).
    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 1:27 utc | 59
    F. William Engdahl asks,

    Unintended Consequences: Did Trump just give the Middle East to China and Russia?

    [Before] the US assassination of Soleimani, there were numerous back-channel efforts for détente in the costly wars that have raged across the region since the US-instigated Arab Spring between Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran and Iraq. Russia and China have both in different ways been playing a key role in changing the geopolitical tensions. At this juncture the credibility of Washington as any honest partner is effectively zero if not minus.

    [.] The US president just tweeted his support for renewed anti-government Iran protests, in Farsi. We are clearly in for some very nasty trouble in the Middle East as Washington tries to deal with the unintended consequences of its recent Middle East actions.[.]

    Run home as fast as you can. In this election year, an observation; 10% of companies are losing money but thanks to the Feds, the Markets are making ATH ...all time highs. On main street Joe and Jane are in a well of hurt "it's the economy, stupid."

    Copeland , Jan 19 2020 1:28 utc | 60
    There is nothing ambiguous about Pompeo's statement. It is evidence of a profound psychotic break. It is a megalomaniac delusion of godlike power, a deterance not attainable on a human scale. "In all cases, we have to do this."

    The masters of the universe will kill those who do not comply. The projection of their psychic power to intimidate the world goes well beyond Iraq and Iran, brushing aside all the little insubstantial nations that are constantly underfoot. Russia and China are to take heed now, it is they too who must sleep with one eye open. The deterrence necessary to keep us all safe means to go ahead and challenge those islands China built in the South China Sea.

    The smiling villains do not accept that Crimea is part of Russia. Pompeo compares Soleimani to bin Laden. There are so many departures from reality in the speech amidst all the levity that it seems like someone has opened the doors of the Asylum.

    ChasMark , Jan 19 2020 1:50 utc | 61
    Likklemore | Jan 19 2020 0:44 utc | 56

    Your retorts don't make sense relative to anything I've posted.

    "not an ounce of integrity! Trump or Ferencz?"
    Neither.

    "How is it I posted days ago that link to Ferencz's letter to New York Times and not a pips."

    U can't fool all of the people all of the time. I wasn't fooled by Ferencz's claim to righteousness based on Harvard when his Nuremberg activities were outrageous and the Nuremberg set-up itself was that of a kangaroo court.

    "Are you defending Trump's war crimes as against bringing the Nazis to justice?"

    Trump's war crimes are indefensible; the Nuremberg trials were not about "bringing Nazis to justice," they involved, as Rabbi Wise said, a largely Jewish exercise in revenge. If Nuremberg were about "justice," Wise himself would have been in the dock along with FDR (post mortem), Churchill, Stalin, and Truman + + +
    If Congress were just, it would be impeaching Trump, Pompeo, Pence etc. for war crimes.

    But that does not make the Nuremberg trials the model of justice: they were not: as Rabbi Stephen Wise wrote to his family, months before the trials began, they were set up by FDR's man Robert Jackson as a

    " broad departure from Anglo-Saxon legal tradition. [in which]
    Retroactively "aggressive war-making" becomes criminally punishable–with membership in the Gestapo prima facie proof of criminal participation."

    Ferencz's co-ethnics participated in the creation of the kangaroo court that Ferencz himself utilized more to vent his spleen than to establish international models of justice.

    That is why the so-called Nuremberg principles have not and cannot be properly applied to the war crimes committed by Bush (I and II), by Clinton (Bill & Hill), Obama, Trump -- not to mention FDR, Truman & Churchill.

    Further, as Ferencz surely realizes, "The United Nations Charter, the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice in The Hague" are toothless: if they were effective bodies for meting justice, even the sanctions on Iran would be subject to judgment under United Nations Charter, along with Victoria Kagan Nuland's subversion of Ukraine and every other 'color revolution' US has engaged in: the UN Charter proscribes interference in the internal affairs of member states.

    ak74 , Jan 19 2020 2:13 utc | 62
    In the Orwellian value system of America, Mike Pompeo's idea of "deterrence" is really NewSpeak for America's brazen war crimes, wars of aggression, and shredding of international law.

    America is a mafia nation masquerading as a democracy.

    And Donald Trump is a two-bit New York mafioso don in charge of this America Mafia state.

    JC , Jan 19 2020 2:29 utc | 63
    @El Cid 23

    Hey you missed out Israel - "will be completely out of Palestine and return Golan Height to Syria"

    Wishfool thinking !

    james , Jan 19 2020 2:31 utc | 64
    @51 chasmark.... thanks.. got it.. i don't much much of anything about the man..
    Dr. George W Oprisko , Jan 19 2020 2:46 utc | 65
    To ChasMark........

    You are a CIA/NSA TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You condone pre-meditated MURDER!!!

    So.........

    You won't mind............ will you.............

    IF someone chooses to put a hellfire missile up your ASS!!

    INDY

    Idland , Jan 19 2020 3:01 utc | 66
    Just monitor any of Pompeo's HD presentations. Look for blink rate and eye micro movements, (saccades).Real evidence of lizard brain psycopathy.
    Circe , Jan 19 2020 3:03 utc | 67
    Trump recounts minute by minute details of Soleimani assassination at a fundraiser held at his Florida resort. Cause that's what normal people do; brag about murdering someone. I'll bet his fat cat Zionist friends emptied their coffers. SICK.

    trump-brags-killed-2-for-price-of-1

    Jackrabbit , Jan 19 2020 3:09 utc | 68
    ak74 @62: Mike Pompeo's idea of "deterrence" is really NewSpeak ...

    Exactly. And we might add:

    "America First" means America is the Empire's Fist;

    "Stand with the people of " is 'New World Order' psyop;

    "Economic sanctions" is the economic part of hybrid warfare;

    "War on terror" is the war on ALL enemies of the empire via terrorist destabilization;

    "Russiagate" is McCarthyist war on dissent;

    "Trump" is the latest dear leader whose flaws are blessings and whose 'gut instinct' is God's will. We know this because his fake enemies (like the Democrats, "fake news", and ISIS) always fail when they confront him.


    !!
    V , Jan 19 2020 3:12 utc | 69 Dr. George W Oprisko | Jan 19 2020 2:46 utc | 65
    You are a CIA/NSA TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You condone pre-meditated MURDER!!!

    Are you sure you actually read Chasmark @ 61?
    Nowhere does he; You condone pre-meditated MURDER!!!
    What Chasmark did, was to post the truth of the Nuremberg Trials.
    They were an out and out sham...
    You definitely need to up your reading comprehension and or, your knowledge of history...

    ben , Jan 19 2020 3:22 utc | 70
    And the other countries of the world whine, but do nothing. I'm afraid they've become as shallow and self-absorbed as most Americans, afraid to confront the world's bully.

    Torches and pitchforks are needed, and we get marches. I'm afraid the depravity has to get worse before direct action is taken.

    I only hope to live long enough to see the debacle that is inevitable, even if takes me with it.

    Justice and truth demand a reckoning..

    Sounds dark, I know, but these are very dark days.

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 3:26 utc | 71
    @ ChasMark 61 in reply to mine @ 56

    Among some of very good points you made, I take issue:

    "Your retorts don't make sense relative to anything I've posted."

    Perhaps you should re-read my comment vs what you posited. Look to Gitmo; is it any different to your critique of Nuremberg where there was a trial, albeit with deficiencies, vs holding and torturing prisoners over 18 years without a trial? that was my point.

    You continue to offer up Rabbi Wise who proffered the Nuremberg trials were [.] "a largely Jewish exercise in revenge"

    I may add, they are also continuing to take out their revenge on Palestinians who had nothing to do with events in Germany. The once oppressed have become oppressors.

    If Congress were just, it would be impeaching Trump, Pompeo, Pence etc. for war crimes.

    Don't expect justice from Congress they are all too busy at the money trough to recognize war crimes.
    War crimes are prosecuted by the ICC which the US and Israel do not recognize. US is not a state party; have threatened, denied visas and barred entry to ICC investigators of war crimes

    Further, as Ferencz surely realizes, "The United Nations Charter, the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice in The Hague" are toothless:

    Toothless! Perhaps but
    Don't tell that to Africans or Slobodan Milosevic while ELITES residing on that sliver of the "occupied lands of Palestine" continue to roam free. Oh wait, they are the chosen ones who rule the world!

    ben , Jan 19 2020 3:31 utc | 72
    @71 said in part; "The once oppressed have become oppressors."

    A succinct description of the Israelis..

    fundas , Jan 19 2020 3:39 utc | 73
    Pompeo's speech may just be an attempt to reduce the cost of a future false flag assassination that could be blamed on one of the enemies. If the enemy does what we do, no need for an all out war. There will be a range of response options including just firing a few missiles. Cost of war with the chosen enemy may be too high or the timing just not right.
    snake , Jan 19 2020 3:41 utc | 74
    William Gruff @ 9 Expressions of <=reality-disconnected human behavior=> describes victim response to rules, enforcement behaviors and media products that bathe the differentiation space that allows to produce human automatons. An examination of the forces at work inside of the nation state container (differentiation space) will likely reveal private and external forces that produce in these public containers, reality-disconnected human responders (human behavior is a function of its environment; all learning is a result of personal experience). No one can learn from another, but everyone can learn from the behaviors of that other.

    The physical environment is nature's doing, but the non physical environment is man's doing. We can organize content as a product of the physical environment ( we build a home) or as a product of the virtual environment (we produce a movie).

    Conscious physical man is a highly differentiated product of both environments. A person growing up in the jungles of Belize, will not learn to operate a sled designed to operate in snow, and a person in the cold north will not learn to survive in the topical jungles of the Amazon. Experience is the only teacher, human expression is the experience modified product of sets of expressed genes. Experience in both the physical environment and the virtual environment contribute to the human response to the challenges of life. The virtual environment is about knowledge, habit, privilege, opportunity and a host of other non physical components. see Law, Moral attitudes, and behavioral change, p. 243 ref and to be clear behavior has three components. ref 7

    What is this virtual space (environment) that allows differentiated humans to be manufactured from genetic material in to adult automatons. How are these automatons programmed? Since is it rarely possible to modify the physical space; most human differentiation occurs in virtual space. How many such digital spaces are there? virtual content means<= the verbal and non verbal (ref.12) discourse that engages interactively with the mind (conscious and unconsciousness). Environments can be natural or manufactured. Environment then is the container space. The contents of the manufactured environment are psycho-econo-socio-metically designed, media engineered, sets of media products. Each nation state supports a different set of contents within its container space. The order, arrangement and time of environments presented controls the mental behaviors of the media connected humans who reside within the container space environment.

    The content of each nation state in the system is a set of environment variables operative in each human container. Two hundred and six different container spaces (the global nation state system=NSS) divides and separates the 8 billion humans in the world. Human differentiation is a product of the 206 different container environments. Your observation that "Pompeo is a psycho"; expresses the real problem for humanity; its leaders are the products of the physical and virtual content of the host nation state within the system of nation states. Each nation state is led by a few. I say to solve this always war condition it is necessary to control the humans that occupy the positions in the nation states or to eliminate the nation state system, and find some better way to address human need for governance.


    1. VR empathy
    2. self regulation in response to?
    3. developing ideas into simulated experiences
    4. regulated behavior
    5. modify behavior
    6. understanding conditions where regulation succeeds or fails to change underlying attitudes.
    7. behavior has three components
    8. drivers of behavior
    9. basic-behavior-components/
    10. learning to respond appropriately
    11. genetic variables impacting responsive behavior
    12. Communication is actually a constant flow of nonverbal and verbal details

    The container space supports 24/7 digital presentations. humans animate the human containers, and the human containers constitution the nation states.

    Pompeo is a victim of nation state programming, the question is, which nation state programmed him?

    Jackrabbit , Jan 19 2020 3:45 utc | 75
    That strike, which was only the first part of Iran's response to the murdering of Soleimani, deterred the U.S. from further action.

    Is USA really 'deterred' or just didn't want war at this time? USA is 'deterred' if the Iranian response actually stopped them in some way.

    But they took Iran's 'slap' and RESPONDED (though not militarily) with more sanctions and even tried to turn the attack to their advantage by saying (initially) that Iran missed on purpose ( as I explained here ) and conducting Electronic Warfare/Info War that may have contributed to Iran's mistaken downing of a commercial airliner.

    And, as bar patrons know only too well, Pompeo has refused to negotiate a USA exit from Iraq, saying that "USA is a force for good in the Middle East".

    IMO USA wants to put on UN sanctions (now in progress) and, when war comes, USA will portray it as entirely Iran's fault. The claim will be that Iran is "lashing out" due to "sanctions imposed by the world community" .

    !!

    tjfxh , Jan 19 2020 3:54 utc | 76
    Why does anyone gives either the president or US officials credence regarding what they say, especially Secretary Pompeo, not to mention POTUS? Taking Pompeo at this word and responding to it strikes me as a waste of time. These people are never going to say publicly what they are up to, which is world domination. Nor is it their own ideal. This has been the policy of the US elite at least since WWII, which was simply a transfer of the seat of power from London to Washington as the British Empire morphed into the Anglo-American Empire. Global domination through sea power was British policy for centuries and the US just recently joining the game, especially when the game expanded to air power as well. Arguably, this goes back to the end of WWI, if not the Spanish-American war that embarked the US on empire.
    Idland , Jan 19 2020 4:00 utc | 77
    Anybody know what's up with Andrew Peek getting sacked from the NSC Russia desk tonight?
    Peter AU1 , Jan 19 2020 4:39 utc | 78
    Deterrence, I guess is the politically correct term for what Trump is doing.
    He sees that the Dollar hegemonic empire was crumbling same as most who don't rely on MSM for their news.
    Trump believes US can hold its position in the world through pure military power, or the threat of military power.
    He wants to regain what he calls importance from early 90s when US was sole undisputed superpower.
    Iran though, he believes is a blot on USA's past that needs erasing.
    Throughout the election campaign, Trump's big thing was rebuilding US military. He believes this will restore US power in the world. Ruling through the world fear rather than soft power and blackmail.
    juliania , Jan 19 2020 4:54 utc | 79
    Well said, dorje @ 43. That is how it is.

    Today is Theophany in the Orthodox Christian Church, the baptism of Christ in the River Jordan:

    Today Thou hast appeared to the universe
    and Thy light, O Lord, hast shone on us,
    who with understanding praise Thee:
    Thou hast come and revealed Thyself
    O Light Unapproachable!

    Biloximarxkelly , Jan 19 2020 5:03 utc | 80
    The 2000 page report about Afganistan sums up USA's criminal insanity. Further, Trump says the response attack from Iran did not harm troops nor do anything of significant damage. Indeed Iran's missiles are far superior than the USA's and the counter attack for the General's assassination. I have mused, that, perhaps the USA was/is set up in this scenario via Iran, Et Al.
    ak74 , Jan 19 2020 5:09 utc | 81
    The basis of the American Empire and its parasitic economy and Way of Life(TM) itself are premised on what should be called America's Dollar Dictatorship.

    Because of the US Dollar, America is able to wage economic siege warfare (aka economic sanctions) on multiple nations around the planet--all in order to impose the Land of the Free's imperial dictates on them.

    This is American global gangsterism in everything but name--and disguised behind the founding American deceptions of "Freedom and Democracy."

    The vast majority Americans--including some fake "alternative media" shills--will attempt to spindoctor this issue by avoiding such blunt description of this system.

    Instead, they prefer to employ Orwellian euphemisms about the "US PetroDollar" or the "US Dollar Reserve Currency" or how America's superpower status is dependent on this dollar syistem.

    But former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accurately calls out this system for what it is: America's global dictatorship of the Dollar.

    This is another reason why America has such hatred for Iran:

    Dollar dictatorship the foundation of American empire - Iran's Ahmadinejad
    https://www.rt.com/business/435310-dollar-us-empire-reorder-ahmadinejad/

    America Escalates its "Democratic" Oil War in the Near East
    https://michael-hudson.com/2020/01/america-escalates-its-democratic-oil-war-in-the-near-east/

    Mike Javaras , Jan 19 2020 5:13 utc | 82
    Best explanation I've seen yet of the 752 jet takedown. It was a false flag attack by the US or its allies intended to frame Iran. The Iranian missile hit second after the plane had already been hit by the Stinger and was several seconds from crashing anyway. The rich kids of Tehran were in the housing complex at 6 AM to film the Stinger shootdown by their terrorist buddies. They have properly been arrested. There have been other arrests too. I wonder what they will come up with.

    This makes more sense than any other theory I have seen.

    https://beyondhighbrow.com/2020/01/18/false-flag-flight-752-in-iran-was-shot-down-by-us-allies-with-a-stinger-missile-not-by-an-iranian-missile/

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 5:20 utc | 83
    @ Peter AU1 78

    Tom Luongo, who frequently cites b, has coined a new word for Trump's and his minions tactics. Tom asks:

    Does Gangsternomics Meet its End in the Iraqi Desert?

    In the aftermath of the killing of Iranian IRGC General Qassem Soleimani a lot of questions hung in the air. The big one was, in my mind, "Why now?"

    There are a lot of angles to answer that question. Many of them were supplied by caretaker Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi who tried to let the world know through official (and unofficial) channels of the extent of the pressure he was under by the U.S.

    In short, President Trump was engaged in months of what can best be described as gangsternomics in directing the course of Iraq's future economic and political development.[/]

    Iraq's importance goes much farther than just protecting the petrodollar to the U.S. It is the fulcrum now on which the entire U.S. defense against Eurasian integration rests. The entire region is slipping out of the grasp of the U.S.


    And this started with Russia moving into Syria in 2015 successfully. We are downstream of this as it has blown open the playbook and revealed it for how ugly it is.

    Trump's crude gangster tactics in Iraq, Venezuela, Bolivia and to a lesser extent in Syria cannot be hidden behind the false veil of moral preening and virtue signaling about bringing democracy to these benighted places.[/]

    What began in Syria with Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and China standing up together and saying, "No," continues today in Iraq. To this point Iran has been the major actor. Tomorrow it will be Russia, China and India.

    And that is what is ultimately at stake here, the ability of the U.S. to employ gangsternomics in the Middle East and make it stick.[.]

    By the time Trump is done threatening people over S-400's and pipelines the entire world will be happy to trade in yuan and/or rubles rather than dollars.[.]


    full article here

    Patroklos , Jan 19 2020 5:40 utc | 84
    "...deterrence to protect America."

    Pompeo omitted a crucial part of this sentence: "deterrence to protect [the financial and energy hegemony of] America".

    While this might be obvious to us, the narrative that US foreign policy is about protecting citizens, values and apple pie from 'bad guys' -- and indeed that the militaries of all Western countries are benign police forces preventing ISIS from burning your old Eagles albums and other violations of 'freedom' -- is such a regular part of the MSM/cinema diet masticated by the general public that we have completely forgotten that the basic function of the armed forces is the pursuit of vested interests through superior violence. It always seemed strange to me that the post-ww2 cinematic template for war-movies, and by extension the basic plot of all reporting of western military activity in the media, always represented the enemy as evil precisely because they use militaries in an instrumental way (i.e for the purpose they were designed). The Germans, or for that matter the Persians in 300 , or any baddies in war films, seek to extend and protect their interests (real or imagined) by deploying armed forces. The good guys are always identifiable through this idea of 'deterrence': "hey man, all we want is just to live and let live, but you pushed us so we pushed back." Then one stirs in a little 'preemptive deterrence': you looked like you were going to push so we acted. If we 'accidentally' go too far, it's because there is a deranged C-in-C: Hitler, or Xerxes, or some other naughty boy who can be the fall-guy, scapegoat, etc. To get serious we need to go back a very long way, to, say, the Iliad , which, like all Greek (and Roman) literature, assumes as a premise (and it's tragedy) that the warrior's basic function is to kill, pillage, rape and occasionally protect others from the same. But mostly take by force . No qualms or BS 'deterrence', armies are for taking other people's stuff by force (land-grabs, etc). I would respect Pompeo a whole lot more (but not much more...) if he just once came out and said: "Iran is run by people who don't want us to take their stuff; we want to undermine them and replace them with paid yes-men who will let us take Iran's stuff. We will use violence and armed force to make this happen. But we have no intention of distributing this loot evenly among our citizens. Instead it will be paid as dividends to select shareholders and spent retooling the military for next poor bastards who stand up to us."

    Just once.

    hopehely , Jan 19 2020 6:00 utc | 85
    Patroklos 84
    Xerxes wanted water from Spartans, Hitler wanted land from "subhumans", but I don't see what kind of stuff Americans want from Iranians. When they had Iran under control during Pahlavi rule, what stuff did they take from Iran? They were giving Iran lots of money - didn't give them USD printing press machine too?
    Jackrabbit , Jan 19 2020 6:00 utc | 86
    Mike Javaras @82: The Iranian missile hit second after the plane had already been hit by the Stinger ...

    MANPADs like Stingers are heat-seeking. They go after ENGINES. On a big plane like PS732, a MANPADs is unlikely to have stopped the transponder and communications.

    Philip Giraldi points a finger at US/Israeli Electronic Warfare:

    Who Targeted Ukraine Airlines Flight 752?
    Iran Shot It Down But There May Be More to the Story

    Giraldi thinks the transponder was hacked. But the article he cites also talks about a device on board that would've allowed for EW. And he notes that Israel probably ALSO has the capability to have been responsible for the EW and/or device on board.

    !!

    Biloximarxkelly , Jan 19 2020 6:01 utc | 87
    All sentinent beings are working on the evolution of our planet & humanity. Problem is the very worst of our species are incurably criminally insane.

    Love your blog MOA

    Peter AU1 , Jan 19 2020 6:05 utc | 88
    Likklemore 83

    Thanks. Gangsternomics seems a good term for Trump's vision of US world power. Trump is pragmatic or realist in that he knows there is no court or authority to hold the US to account.
    As to US holding power purely through military power, that can only happen long term if he gets hold of a good chunk of the worlds energy reserves (as in Persian gulf and Venezuela oil). If he doesn't achieve that, then the US goes down. Iran needs to ensure it stays under Russia's nuclear umbrella as there are no rules.

    V , Jan 19 2020 6:21 utc | 89
    MOSCOW – Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated there is unverified information that at least six American F-35 jets were in the Iranian border area at the time when Tehran accidentally downed Ukraine International Airlines flight PS752 last week.

    www.fortruss.com

    krollchem , Jan 19 2020 6:27 utc | 90
    Sickening series of Trump interviews and speeches demanding that Iraq pay America and its allies over a trillion dollars for liberating Iraq (time stamp 8:20 to 12:00).
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWZfDJerI0o

    This demonstrates that US attacks in Iraq over the last 30-40 years was mostly about the control (including transportation routes) and than profiting from its oil and gas reserves.

    A secondary reason is to put troop on the border with Iran to further destabilize it via state terrorism to overthrow the government and then take its oil and gas too.

    It will get interesting when a pro Iranian new Prime minister takes office and China offers Iraq a line of credit equivalent to the funds that would be frozen in Western bank accounts if Iraq actually demands the troops to leave.

    "The Iran-linked Binaa parliamentary voting bloc has nominated Asaad al-Edani, a former minister and governor of oil-rich Basra province. Binaa's bloc is mostly made up of the Fatah party led by militia leader turned politician Hadi al-Ameri, who is close to Tehran."

    The Kurdish President of Iraq has stated that "Out of an eagerness to spare blood and preserve civil peace, I apologize for not naming Edani prime minister," the letter continued. "I am ready to submit my resignation to parliament."
    https://time.com/5755588/iraq-president-resignation/

    Currently, the rival Sairoon bloc, headed by populist Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, said it would not participate in the process of nominating a new premier."
    https://www.ft.com/content/50f09fe4-27f4-11ea-9a4f-963f0ec7e134

    However, "Iraqi Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr demanded that Iraqis stage a "million-man march" against the continued US military presence in the country"
    https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13981025000319

    I close with a visionary French rock opera Starmania "story of an alternate reality where a fascist millionaire (read Trump) famous for building skyscrapers is running for president on an anti-immigration policy, and where the poor are getting more and more desperate for their voices to be heard."
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78LytR-6Xmk


    Patroklos , Jan 19 2020 6:39 utc | 91
    @hopehely | Jan 19 2020 6:00 utc | 85

    Xerxes wanted water from Spartans, Hitler wanted land from "subhumans", but I don't see what kind of stuff Americans want from Iranians. When they had Iran under control during Pahlavi rule, what stuff did they take from Iran? They were giving Iran lots of money - didn't give them USD printing press machine too?

    Assuming that your post was serious...

    1. Water from the Spartans? That makes absolutely no sense as a glance at any historical map of the Achaemenid Empire will show;
    2. Lebensraum was indeed a specific war aim of Hitler;
    3. Under the Shah Anglo-American (not mention Dutch, French and other) interests skimmed all Iranian energy resources, kept the USSR under pressure on the southern coast of the Caspian Sea and provided a key friendly power in the most important region of central Asia. Petro-dollar supremacy could not have been established without control of the Persian Gulf. The Persian elite were given wonderful opportunities while the rest... well we know what the rest get.

    psychohistorian , Jan 19 2020 6:47 utc | 92
    @ krollchem #90 with the Starmania link that is not working

    I get the following error from Oregon, USA
    "
    Video unavailable
    This video contains content from WMG, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
    "

    Thanks for the rest of the comment and agree with the sickness of demanding Iraq pay for being invaded.

    When will all this idiocy end? Soon I hope.

    hopehely , Jan 19 2020 7:08 utc | 93
    Posted by: Patroklos | Jan 19 2020 6:39 utc | 91

    1. Water from the Spartans? That makes absolutely no sense as a glance at any historical map of the Achaemenid Empire will show;

    That was in the movie 300. I guess you did not watch it. :-)

    The Persian elite were given wonderful opportunities while the rest... well we know what the rest get.

    Not just the elite. Persian middle class was pretty well off too. Spending vacation in Europe was easy, quite affordable. Not any more. I know I know, those dang sanctions... well that is what you get when you piss off the big dawg.

    uncle tungsten , Jan 19 2020 7:20 utc | 94
    Idland #77
    Anybody know what's up with Andrew Peek getting sacked from the NSC Russia desk tonight?

    Odd that, and he seemed like such a trustworthy chap as indicated in his twitter feed.
    Perhaps he has some Ciaramella connections that would make Trump uncomfortable. Or Trump is taking absolutely no more chances with any insider he has no control over when attending high level meetings.

    Patroklos , Jan 19 2020 7:34 utc | 95
    @ hopehely 93

    Are you talking about 'earth and water' ? The symbolic gesture of submission to the Great King? That's a very different thing altogether. You make it sound like 'water rights'... I did indeed watch the film I'm sad to say, but Xerxes was not after water.

    I'd like to know what proportion of the pre-1979 population of Iran qualified as 'middle-class' and what that meant in real terms. Outside of Tehran, Shiraz, etc there probably weren't a lot of Iranians skiing in St Moritz.

    Richard , Jan 19 2020 7:35 utc | 96
    There are certain signs that nations exhibit when they slide into becoming 'regimes'...targeted, illegal assassinations of opponents is one of these; America's recent political trajectory has been from oligarchy to kakistocracy and now, it seems, to regime - banana republic next, perhaps?...

    https://richardhennerley.com/2020/01/14/welcome-to-the-american-regime/

    arata , Jan 19 2020 8:22 utc | 97
    Soleimani had delivered an speech on 2 August 2018 in Hamadan, in his speech he read 5 verses poems from Rumi the famous Persian poet lived on 13 century. You can watch and listen minute 35:45 of the film , if you know Farsi. He said let enemy pay attention to these poems.

    He has selected 5 verses from two locations from Book3 of Masnavi.

    How the lover, impelled by love, said "I don't care" to the person who counseled and scolded him.

    Verse 3833 : Do not thou threaten me with being killed // For I thirst lamentably for mine own blood.

    V-3838 : If that One of friendly countenance shed my blood, // dancing (in triumph) I will strew (lavish) my soul (life) upon Him.

    Story of those who ate the young elephant from greed and because they neglected the advice of the sincere counselor.

    V-96 : Men dance and whirl on the battle-field // They dance in their own blood.

    V-97 : They clap a hand when they are freed from the hand of ego // They make a dance when they jump out from their own imperfection,

    V-98: The inner musicians strike the tambourine // The Oceans burst into foam from their ecstasy

    I think Soleimani selected last 3 verses from this story of baby elephant killer, and revenge of the mother elephant, without intending the content of story. But the coincidence is striking.

    psychedelicatessen , Jan 19 2020 9:14 utc | 98
    Peter AU1 @78

    No fault in your reasoning, particularly when expressing this from Trump's point of view. I'd go a bit further and suggest he understands Iran, North Korea and Cuba are the only remaining nations without a Rothschild central bank. Thinking he's successfully rebuilt the U.S. military could be the single most critical failure of his presidency. Upgrading hardware with a tactical nuclear weapon preference, isn't synonymous with rebuilding. What's neglected are the people operating any apparatus. As an example, there is no timely military action to counter mining of the Strait of Hormuz as illustrated by Death and Neglect in the 7th Fleet . A firsthand account from a U.S. Naval officer is eye opening (emphasis mine).

    He'd seen his ship, one of the Navy's fleet of 11 minesweepers, sidelined by repairs and maintenance for more than 20 months. Once the ship, based in Japan, returned to action, its crew was only able to conduct its most essential training -- how to identify and defuse underwater mines -- for fewer than 10 days the entire next year . During those training missions, the officer said, the crew found it hard to trust the ship's faulty navigation system: It ran on Windows 2000.

    Sonar which identifies dishwashers, crab traps and cars as possible mines, can hardly be considered a rebuilt military. The Navy's eleven minesweepers built more than 25 years ago, have had their decommissioning continually delayed because no replacement plan was implemented. I'll await the deeper understanding of 'deterrence' from b, even as I consider willingness to commit and brag about war crimes as beyond the point of no return.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 19 2020 9:32 utc | 99
    psychedelicatessen "Thinking he's successfully rebuilt the U.S. military could be the single most critical failure of his presidency."

    I would be in agreement on the overall gist of your reply, but on Trump thinking he's successfully rebuilt the US military, I'm not so sure. He is a pragmatic gangster when it comes to world affairs which is why his Nuclear Posture Review lowered the threshold of first use of nukes. b's previous post on 'How Trump rebelled against the generals' also fits in with this line of thought.
    I believe Trump needs to be thought of as a CEO brought in to pull a company back from the edge of bankruptcy. I think that is the way he sees himself, and as I have put in previous comments, there are no rules. I had thought Trump may be adverse to pure terrorism but depending on what comes of the Ukie airliner shootdown in Iran, there may be absolutely no rules as far as Trump is concerned.

    ADKC , Jan 19 2020 9:33 utc | 100
    Jackrabbit @86

    The article linked by Mike Jarvis @86 makes observational comments about the behavior of the first missile strike in PS752 and that it must have been a stinger/manpad (and not a Tor). The same article also concludes that EW must also have been involved. Everything I have read indicates that the first missile strike behaved like a stinger/manpad - until this can be disproved it must remain a valid theory.

    [Jan 19, 2020] The anti-China conservative faction which Trump represents is screwing up the Pax Americana and petrodollar recycling into Treasury Bonds, by destroying the monetary scam they set up to control the world

    Notable quotes:
    "... The "movement conservatives" leader was Barry Goldwater who Trump's dad was a big supporter of, and Trump was raised in and among AND represents that faction of elite power. ..."
    "... The LIEO or Rules Based Order is based on being closely allied with European elites against Russia to contain the Middle East and Central Asia (Iran and Afghanistan) based on Zbigniew Brzezinski's Grand Chessboard theory. ..."
    "... The 1950's triangle of power was superseded by the oligarch's counter revolution that led to supranational trade institutions. Democracies were relegated to a secondary status and run by technocrats for the benefit of oligarchs until Donald Trump. He is a nationalist plutocrat; admittedly a lower level one, a NY casino owner who went bankrupt. Mike Bloomberg represents the other side, a globalist billionaire. Elizabeth Warren is a top level technocrat but no politician. ..."
    "... The endless wars are fought to make a profit for the plutocracy and destabilize nations to make foreign corporate exploitation possible. That was why Hunter Biden was in Ukraine. The conflicts are not meant to be won. ..."
    "... He makes stupid mistakes. Through the barrage of propaganda, reports of shell shocked troops, destroyed buildings and 11 concussion causalities from Iran's missile attack made it into the news. The military must be pissed. The aura of invincibility is gone. ..."
    "... Donald Trump should be removed by the 25th amendment before he mistakenly triggers the Apocalypse. Except the 1% politician VP, Mike Pence, believes that the End of Time is God's Will and necessary for his Ascension. ..."
    "... The power triangle theory is less in line with the facts than a simple duality: Wall Street & the MIC, you have to advance interests of both or you're out. ..."
    "... Second, the 'meeting in the Tank' sounds like complete b.s. designed to sell books ..."
    "... And the 'rules-based international order' rings very false as something that would be said with a straight face by real MIC insiders, which those generals are. ..."
    "... Not only sick of wars, his mobster approach to foreign policy and allies is an embarrassment to RINO and Independents. ..."
    "... Humanity is in a civilization war about public/private finance being fought by proxies and character actors like Trump. Maybe after this war is over, and if we survive, we can all communicate about the social contract directly instead of through proxy fronts. Do you want to live in a sharing/caring world or a selfish/competitive one?....socialism or barbarism? ..."
    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Kali , Jan 17 2020 19:26 utc | 7

    That Power Elite theory which was written in the 50s by C.W. Mills is incomplete for today because in the 60s there was a split among the power elite between the new "movement conservatives" and the old eastern bank establishment. The conservatives were more focused on the pacific region and containing China, and the liberal establishment were more focused on Europe and containing Russia.

    The "movement conservatives" leader was Barry Goldwater who Trump's dad was a big supporter of, and Trump was raised in and among AND represents that faction of elite power. In fact he is the 1st president from that faction of the elites to hold the oval office, many people thought Reagan was, but he was brought under the control of George Bush and the liberal elites after taking office after he was injured by a Bush related person. The different agendas of the the two factions are out in the open today with one being focused on anti-Russia and the other being focused on anti-China. It has been like that since the 1960s.

    The anti-China conservative faction which Trump represents (and which unleashed the VietNam War) is screwing up the "rules based order" aka "Liberal International Economic Order" aka Pax Americana which was set up after WWII at Bretton Woods and then altered in the 1970s with the creation of the petrodollar and petrodollar recycling into Treasury Bonds, by destroying the monetary scam they set up to control the world

    It needed the cooperation of the elites of Europe and elsewhere, which Trump and his faction doesn't care about -- they only care about short term profits on Wall St.

    The LIEO or Rules Based Order is based on being closely allied with European elites against Russia to contain the Middle East and Central Asia (Iran and Afghanistan) based on Zbigniew Brzezinski's Grand Chessboard theory. China trade is important for them, Russia is their main enemy. ( War of the Worlds: The New Class ). Trump and his movement conservative faction is ruining their world order for their own short term gain on Wall St.

    VietnamVet , Jan 17 2020 22:34 utc | 44
    The 1950's triangle of power was superseded by the oligarch's counter revolution that led to supranational trade institutions. Democracies were relegated to a secondary status and run by technocrats for the benefit of oligarchs until Donald Trump. He is a nationalist plutocrat; admittedly a lower level one, a NY casino owner who went bankrupt. Mike Bloomberg represents the other side, a globalist billionaire. Elizabeth Warren is a top level technocrat but no politician.

    The endless wars are fought to make a profit for the plutocracy and destabilize nations to make foreign corporate exploitation possible. That was why Hunter Biden was in Ukraine. The conflicts are not meant to be won.

    Donald Trump is way for over his head and getting old. His competent staff are in jail or fired. Apparently no one told him about the thousands of ballistic missiles that can destroy the Gulf States' oil facilities at will and make the buildup for the invasion of Iran impossible. He makes stupid mistakes. Through the barrage of propaganda, reports of shell shocked troops, destroyed buildings and 11 concussion causalities from Iran's missile attack made it into the news. The military must be pissed. The aura of invincibility is gone.

    Donald Trump should be removed by the 25th amendment before he mistakenly triggers the Apocalypse. Except the 1% politician VP, Mike Pence, believes that the End of Time is God's Will and necessary for his Ascension.

    fairleft , Jan 18 2020 1:21 utc | 81
    The power triangle theory is less in line with the facts than a simple duality: Wall Street & the MIC, you have to advance interests of both or you're out.

    Second, the 'meeting in the Tank' sounds like complete b.s. designed to sell books, with an obvious sales strategy, as b said, of pleasuring both the pro/anti Trump sides of the book-buying bourgeoisie.

    And the 'rules-based international order' rings very false as something that would be said with a straight face by real MIC insiders, which those generals are.

    Finally, whether Trump ridiculed the generals or not, that's a sideshow to entertain the rubes. Trump's always been on side with the big picture Neocon approach essential to the MIC. Their global dominance or chaos approach is essential to keeping military budgets gigantic until 'forever'. True that Trump whined about endless wars as a 2016 campaign strategy, but he was either b.s.-ing or at the time didn't get that they are part of the overall Neocon approach he backs.

    Passer by , Jan 17 2020 22:04 utc | 35

    Not a very good analysis by b because this does not explain why 90 % of US corporate media is hostile to Trump. This does not happen without significant elite support.

    That Trump is backed by the military faction is something i have been saying often. But there are forces within the government faction that dislike him, for example the CIA.

    As for the corporate faction, it is not true that free money made them supportive of Trump. Rather the faction is divided - between the globalist corporate faction, relying on globalisation, including most tech companies, and US nationalist faction, such as local US businesses, big oil, shale gas, etc.

    Another point - jews have large influence within the US, and 80 % voted against Trump regardless of his Israeli support. They again voted 80 % Dem in 2018. Having 80 % of US jews against you means encountering significant resistance.

    Demographically speaking, most women, jews, muslims, latinos, asians, afroamericans, lgbt people, young people, etc. are strongly against him so i think that he will lose. Unless for some reason they do not vote.

    Even if he somehow wins again, this will lead to civil war like situation and extreme polarisation in the US.

    A P , Jan 17 2020 19:33 utc | 9

    The US military, the various factions within the Deep State, political and corporate cabals has the attitude of a spoiled 3-year-old: If I can't have it, I'll break it so it is of little use to others.

    Unfortunately, breaking other countries is just fine for the MIC... arms sales all around and chaos to impede non-military commerce with other major power centers like Russia or China.

    Trump is the product of a dysfunctional family, a "greed is good" trust-fund social circle and a sociopathic US bully/gun culture.

    The fact "bone spurs" Trump weaseled out of the draft will also not play well with the generals, let alone the grunts who suffer most from endless POTUS idiocy (not limited to Trump, see Prince Bush/Bandar the 2nd)

    All the more proof that most Western "democracies" would be better served with a lottery to choose their Congressional and POTUS chair-warmers. Joe Sixpack could do a better job. A 200-lb sack of flour would do better than any POTUS since Kennedy.

    Walter , Jan 17 2020 23:25 utc | 56

    @ wagelaborer | Jan 17 2020 19:04 utc | 3

    your: "Trump can't start a war without ruling class backing any more than he can end the wars if the rulers veto it."

    May be, I think is, true in one sense. But Trump is far from the sole agent capable of starting a war. War, as opposed to simple murder, involve 2 or more parties. Whatever the intentions, the recent murders by drone in Baghdad hav,e it seems, brought Iran to consider war exists now...and they have a nifty MAGA policy. On Press TV today they hosted an expert who called for the execution of several exceptional American leaders...sounds like war to me.

    (Make America Go Away)

    The system is so screwy and peopled by such uneducated and delusional people that it's quite simple that they would do some stupid that that caused a war. Looks like war to me. I await the horrors.

    Decaying empires usually start wars that bring about their rapid ruin. Does it matter how they do this?

    ............

    The thesis of the triangle of elite factions is fascinating.

    Walter recalls that JFK got the reports from Vietnam that said we were winning, while at the same time Johnson got the true story. And also what happened then with the "correction" of 1963 (their words) and the immediate change of war policy. Can't help an old guy from remembering old folly. And noting that history repeats as farce.

    The Iran affair is liable to coordinate with NATO. Lavrov spoke to the NATO preparations today @ TASS...

    Some say Trumpie screwed up the schedule, which goes hot in April as a showdown with the Roooskies. I take that with a grain of salt. But I think the sources I've seen might be right. They say that if Barbarossa had not been delayed, the nazis woulda won in Russia. Screwups can be very important.

    I can't see any way the US won't use atomic bangers. But maybe...

    Likklemore , Jan 17 2020 21:50 utc | 29

    @ wagelaborer 3

    Good points. I endorse. However the USD have been weaponized, is being sidelined and will be shunned U.S. dollar: Russia, China, EU are motivated to shift from

    @ juiliana 22

    I posted an article by Shedlock essentially saying all it will take is 3 states to flip and Trump loses: Trump will be easily defeated in 2020 perhaps by a landslide.

    Not only sick of wars, his mobster approach to foreign policy and allies is an embarrassment to RINO and Independents.

    psychohistorian , Jan 17 2020 19:52 utc | 11

    I agree with wagelaborer in comment #3 and worth a repeat of most of it

    "Trump can't start a war without ruling class backing any more than he can end the wars if the rulers veto it.

    US foreign policy is not run by White House puppets.

    The US trash-talked Saddam Hussein and starved Iraqis for 14 years, but didn't actually invade until he started trading oil in Euros.

    The US trash-talked Ghaddafi for decades, and even launched missiles which killed his child in the 80s, but didn't destroy Libya until Ghaddafi decided to sell oil in dinars.

    The US has trash-talked and sanctioned Iran for decades, but it was the threat of Iran and Saudi Arabia making peace that pushed them to assassinate General Soleimani, as he arrived at the airport on that diplomatic mission.

    If Iran and Saudi Arabia make peace, and the Saudis drop the petro-dollar, the US Empire crumbles. It doesn't matter at all who is in the White House at the time, the Empire will never allow that."

    Humanity is in a civilization war about public/private finance being fought by proxies and character actors like Trump. Maybe after this war is over, and if we survive, we can all communicate about the social contract directly instead of through proxy fronts. Do you want to live in a sharing/caring world or a selfish/competitive one?....socialism or barbarism?

    [Jan 19, 2020] Pompeo idea of deterence means "deterrence to protect [the financial and energy hegemony of] America".

    Notable quotes:
    "... Pompeo omitted a crucial part of this sentence: "deterrence to protect [the financial and energy hegemony of] America". ..."
    "... a regular part of the MSM/cinema diet masticated by the general public that we have completely forgotten that the basic function of the armed forces is the pursuit of vested interests through superior violence. ..."
    "... No qualms or BS 'deterrence', armies are for taking other people's stuff by force (land-grabs, etc). I would respect Pompeo a whole lot more (but not much more...) if he just once came out and said: "Iran is run by people who don't want us to take their stuff; we want to undermine them and replace them with paid yes-men who will let us take Iran's stuff. We will use violence and armed force to make this happen. ..."
    "... But we have no intention of distributing this loot evenly among our citizens. Instead it will be paid as dividends to select shareholders and spent retooling the military for next poor bastards who stand up to us." ..."
    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Patroklos , Jan 19 2020 5:40 utc | 84

    "...deterrence to protect America."

    Pompeo omitted a crucial part of this sentence: "deterrence to protect [the financial and energy hegemony of] America".

    While this might be obvious to us, the narrative that US foreign policy is about protecting citizens, values and apple pie from 'bad guys' -- and indeed that the militaries of all Western countries are benign police forces preventing ISIS from burning your old Eagles albums and other violations of 'freedom' -- is such a regular part of the MSM/cinema diet masticated by the general public that we have completely forgotten that the basic function of the armed forces is the pursuit of vested interests through superior violence.

    It always seemed strange to me that the post-ww2 cinematic template for war-movies, and by extension the basic plot of all reporting of western military activity in the media, always represented the enemy as evil precisely because they use militaries in an instrumental way (i.e for the purpose they were designed). The Germans, or for that matter the Persians in 300 , or any baddies in war films, seek to extend and protect their interests (real or imagined) by deploying armed forces.

    The good guys are always identifiable through this idea of 'deterrence': "hey man, all we want is just to live and let live, but you pushed us so we pushed back." Then one stirs in a little 'preemptive deterrence': you looked like you were going to push so we acted. If we 'accidentally' go too far, it's because there is a deranged C-in-C: Hitler, or Xerxes, or some other naughty boy who can be the fall-guy, scapegoat, etc.

    To get serious we need to go back a very long way, to, say, the Iliad , which, like all Greek (and Roman) literature, assumes as a premise (and it's tragedy) that the warrior's basic function is to kill, pillage, rape and occasionally protect others from the same. But mostly take by force .

    No qualms or BS 'deterrence', armies are for taking other people's stuff by force (land-grabs, etc). I would respect Pompeo a whole lot more (but not much more...) if he just once came out and said: "Iran is run by people who don't want us to take their stuff; we want to undermine them and replace them with paid yes-men who will let us take Iran's stuff. We will use violence and armed force to make this happen.

    But we have no intention of distributing this loot evenly among our citizens. Instead it will be paid as dividends to select shareholders and spent retooling the military for next poor bastards who stand up to us."

    Just once.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Warmonger Cotton Accuses Antiwar Think Tank of Anti-Semitism by Sheldon Richman

    Notable quotes:
    "... Coming to Palestine ..."
    Jan 17, 2020 | original.antiwar.com
    If you wonder what the post-Trump Republican Party will look like, take a glimpse at Tom Cotton, one of the US senators from Arkansas (where I live). Cotton has waged a relentless campaign for war against Iran and has supported every horror produced by the US foreign-policy establishment for the last 20 years. He makes other American hawks look like pacifists. Cotton once said that his only criticism of the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where people are held indefinitely without charge or trial, is that too many beds are empty.

    Typical of take-no-prisoners warmongers, Cotton savages critics of the pro-war policy that has characterized US foreign policy in the 21st century. No baseless charge is beneath him. He recently attacked the Quincy Institute in the course of remarks about anti-Semitism. (You can see what's coming.) According to Jewish Insider , Cotton said that anti-Semitism "festers in Washington think tanks like the Quincy Institute, an isolationist blame America first money pit for so-called 'scholars' who've written that American foreign policy could be fixed if only it were rid of the malign influence of Jewish money."

    This is worse than a series of malicious lies – every word is false. In fact, it's an attempt to incite hostility toward and even disruption of one of the bright spots on the mostly desolate foreign-policy-analysis landscape.

    The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft (QI) started last year with money from, among others, the Charles Koch Foundation and George Soros's Open Society Foundations. Its officers and staff include respected and sober foreign-policy analysts and journalists such as Andrew Bacevich, Trita Parsi, Jim Lobe, and Eli Clifton. Also associated with the institute are the well-credentialed foreign-policy authorities John Mearsheimer, Paul Pillar, Gary Sick, Stephen Walt, and Lawrence Wilkerson. This is indeed a distinguished team of foreign-policy "realists" who are heroically resisting America's endless-war-as-first-resort policy.

    Named for John Quincy Adams – who as secretary of state famously declared that "America "goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy" – QI "promotes ideas that move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace." The QI website goes on to state:

    The US military exists to defend the people and territory of the United States, not to act as a global police force. The United States should reject preventive wars and military intervention to overthrow regimes that do not threaten the United States. Wars of these kinds not only are counterproductive; they are wrong in principle.

    It then goes on to indict the current foreign-policy establishment:

    The foreign policy of the United States has become detached from any defensible conception of US interests and from a decent respect for the rights and dignity of humankind. Political leaders have increasingly deployed the military in a costly, counterproductive, and indiscriminate manner, normalizing war and treating armed dominance as an end in itself.

    Moreover, much of the foreign policy community in Washington has succumbed to intellectual lethargy and dysfunction. It suppresses or avoids serious debate and fails to hold policymakers and commentators accountable for disastrous policies. It has forfeited the confidence of the American public. The result is a foreign policy that undermines American interests and tramples on American values while sacrificing the stores of influence that the United States had earned.

    This may not be pure libertarian foreign policy ("US interests" is too slippery a term for my taste), but compared to what passes for foreign-policy thinking these days, it's pretty damn good.

    So why is Tom Cotton so upset? It should be obvious. QI opposes the easy-war policy of the last 20 years. Of course Cotton is upset. Take away war, and he's got nothing in his toolbox. He certainly doesn't want to see the public turn antiwar before he's had a shot at high office, say, secretary of state, secretary of defense, CIA director, or even the presidency.

    Cotton's charges against QI are wrong on every count.

    QI is not isolationist as long as it supports trade with the world and diplomacy as the preferred method of resolving conflicts.

    It's not a blame-America-first outfit because the object of its critique is not America or Americans, but the imperial war-loving elite of the American political establishment. Cotton is part of that elite, but that does not entitle him to identify the mass of Americans with his lethal policy preferences.

    It's not a money pit. As you can see, QI boasts an eminent lineup thinkers and writers. So the money is obviously well-spent on badly needed analysis. QI should have been set up long ago. Cotton shows his pettiness by putting the word scholars in sarcasm quotes. He should aspire to such scholarship as Bacevich, Parsi, et al. have produced.

    But where Cotton really shows his agenda is his absurd claim that anti-Semitism "festers" in QI (and other think tanks – which ones?).

    Cotton here is performing that worn-out trick that, alas, still has some life in it: conflating criticism of Israel and its American lobby with people who are Jewish (and who may well oppose how the Israeli state mistreats the Palestinians). I'm sure he knows better: this is demagogy and not ignorance.

    On its face, the proposition that virtually anyone who criticizes Israel's conduct toward the Palestinians and its Arab and Iranian neighbors probably hates Jews as Jews is patently ridiculous. Any clear-thinking person dismisses that claim out of hand.

    Undoubtedly Cotton has in mind primarily Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of The Israel Lobby and Foreign Policy , published in 2008. (It began as an essay in The London Review of Books .) In that work, Walt and Mearsheimer reasonably attribute the lion's share of influence on US policy in the Middle East to the Israel lobby, "a loose coalition of individuals and organizations that actively works to move US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction." They add, "[I]t is certainly not a cabal or conspiracy that 'controls' US foreign policy. It is simply a powerful interest group, made up of both Jews and gentiles, whose acknowledged purpose is to press Israel's case within the United States and influence American foreign policy in ways that its members believe will benefit the Jewish state."

    This is hardly controversial stuff, although reasonable people can disagree over whether the lobby was decisive in any given case.

    But does anyone doubt that American champions of Israel work overtime and spend a lot of money to advance what they see as Israel's interests? If so, see this and my book Coming to Palestine . (Many non-Zionist Jews disagree with them about those interests.) Organizations like AIPAC often boast about their influence. That they sincerely believe Israel's interests coincide with America's interests is beside the point. (I won't address that dubious contention here.) That influence, which supports massive annual military aid to Israel, has helped to facilitate the oppression of the Palestinians, wars against Lebanon, and attacks on Syria, Iraq, and Iran. It has also provoked hostility to America and vengeful terrorism against Americans. (For example, the 9/11 attacks as acknowledged by the government's commission .) Pro-Israel American political and military officials acknowledge this.

    Cotton need not wonder why the lobby has succeeded so often since he himself is using the anti-Semitism canard to inhibit Israel's critics. No one wants to be condemned as anti-Semite (or as any other kind of bigot), so we can easily imagine prominent people in the past withholding criticism of Israel for fear of being thought anti-Jewish. (It's Israel and its champions, not Israel's critics, who insist that Israel is the state of all Jews, no matter where else they may be citizens.) Thankfully, despite the efforts of Cotton, Kenneth Marcus, Bari Weiss , Bret Stephens, and others, the invidious conflation has lost much of its force. More than ever, people understand that to oppose the entangling alliance with Israel and to express solidarity with the long-suffering Palestinians do not constitute bigotry against Jews.

    Can Cotton produce any evidence that anyone at QI believes that pro-Israel Jewish Americans should be barred from lobbying and making political donations or that such an obvious violation of liberty would fix American foreign policy? Of course not. There is no evidence. Moreover, I'm sure the QI realists understand that other interests also propel the pro-war US foreign policy, including glory-seeking politicians and generals and the profit-craving military-industrial complex.

    Those who reflexively and slanderously tar Israel's critics as anti-Semites seem not to realize that the worthy effort to eliminate real anti-Semitism is undermined by their efforts to immunize Israel and its American champions from good-faith criticism.

    Sheldon Richman is the executive editor of The Libertarian Institute , senior fellow and chair of the trustees of the Center for a Stateless Society , and a contributing editor at Antiwar.com . He is the former senior editor at the Cato Institute and Institute for Humane Studies, former editor of The Freeman, published by the Foundation for Economic Education , and former vice president at the Future of Freedom Foundation . His latest book is Coming to Palestine . Reposted from The Libertarian Institute .

    [Jan 19, 2020] The CIA and Uyghur Jihadists

    Dec 16, 2019 | www.voltairenet.org

    Munich, 16 February 2018 : World Uyghur Congress president, Dolkun Isa, and Turkey Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım.

    The "Xinjiang papers", released on 16 November 2019 by the New York Times , have been spinned by the Western media as a plan to suppress Uyghur culture in China [ 1 ]. Written in Chinese, their interpretation may not be easily accessible to the Western world. In reality, China protects Uyghur culture, tolerates Muslim religion, while trying to stymie terrorist attacks and the separatist push coming from the World Uyghur Congress (WUC).

    China has already published numerous studies [ 2 ] clarifying its policy.

    The documents published by the New York Times attest to the determination of the Chinese government to use any means necessary to maintain civil peace. President Xi has called on the police to show "absolutely no mercy" towards terrorists. Indeed, the Chinese leader is up against a powerful organization, i.e. the World Uyghur Congress, which was created by the CIA during the Cold War, and which the US daily disingeniously portrays as being totally peaceful.

    However, the World Uyghur Congress, based in Munich (Germany), has directly claimed responsibility for many deadly attacks in China. In addition, thousands of Uyghur combatants were sent to be trained in Syria with Turkey's assistance. [ 3 ] More than 18,000 Uyghur jihadists are currently occupying the city of al-Zanbaki (Idlib governorate) where German and French NGOs provide them with food and health services.

    Uyghur jihadists have garnered many supporters in Europe. Thus, lobbyists gathered in Brussels behind closed doors for a three-day seminar (7-9 December 2019), followed on 10 December by a conference in the European Parliament co-chaired by French MEP, Raphaël Glucksmann, and WUC president Dolkun Isa.

    [ 1 ] "'Absolutely No Mercy': Leaked Files Expose How China Organized Mass Detentions of Muslims", Austin Ramzy and Chris Buckley, The New York Times , November 16, 2019

    [ 2 ] " Human Rights in Xinjiang - Development and Progress ", 1 June 2017; " Cultural Protection and Development in Xinjiang ", 13 December 2018; " The Fight against Terrorism and Extremism and Human Rights Protection in Xinjiang ", Voltaire Network , 18 March 2019.

    [ 3 ] " The CIA is using Turkey to pressure China ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network , 19 February 2019. Article licensed under Creative Commons

    The articles on Voltaire Network may be freely reproduced provided the source is cited, their integrity is respected and they are not used for commercial purposes (license CC BY-NC-ND ).

    Source : "The CIA and Uyghur Jihadists", Voltaire Network , 16 December 2019, www.voltairenet.org/article208556.html

    [Jan 19, 2020] Russia offers deal to Syria and Turkey

    Jan 15, 2020 | www.voltairenet.org

    On 8 January 2020, in Ankara, Russian President Vladimir Putin struck a deal with his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, for a ceasefire in Syria's Idlib province. It was made public before being approved by the Syrian side.

    With the United States also having secretly agreed to the ceasefire, China and Russia went along with the vote on 10 January at the Security Council of a resolution [ 1 ] renewing the list of crossing points for the delivery of humanitarian aid inside Syria, which were not those initially proposed.

    In addition, the Russian delegation convened another Security Council meeting to discuss the report of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons on the alleged chemical attack in Douma, issued on 7 April 2018, and currently put into question. [ 2 ]

    Following these developments, the heads of the Syrian and Turkish secret services, Ali Mamlouk (national security) [photo] and Hakan Fidan (Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı), held talks during a Syro-Russian-Turkish summit in Moscow on 13 January 2020. It was the first time that the two countries had an official contact since the outset of the conflict in 2011.

    Talks focused on the liberation of the Idlib governorate, where a large number of Al Qaeda fighters, possibly hundreds of thousands, are harbored. On this subjet, the Sochi de-escalation memorandum (2018) [ 3 ], which Turkey has not complied with, provided for:

    - the withdrawal of heavy weapons, while Turkey continues to support the jihadists. However, it has started to move them out of Idlib to Djerba (Tunisia), and onwards to Tripoli (Libya), where the United States wishes to rekindle the war.

    - the reopening of the Aleppo-Latakia (M4) and Aleppo-Hama (M5) highways.

    Also on the agenda was the fight against the Kurdish terrorists of the PKK/YPG. On this point, Turkey requested the revision of the Adana Secret Agreement (1998) [ 4 ], which was hammered out during the Cold War, when the Kurdish organizations identified themselves as Marxist-Leninist and were turned towards the Soviet Union. They are now anarchists and work with NATO. The Agreement recognized Turkey's right to guarantee its security, granting it access to a strip of Syrian territory corresponding to the range of the artillery in possession of the Kurdish armed groups at the time. Article licensed under Creative Commons

    The articles on Voltaire Network may be freely reproduced provided the source is cited, their integrity is respected and they are not used for commercial purposes (license CC BY-NC-ND ).

    Source : "Russia offers deal to Syria and Turkey", Voltaire Network , 15 January 2020, www.voltairenet.org/article208911.html

    [Jan 19, 2020] Erdogan moves Syrian juhadist to Libya to fight against general Haftar forces

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    fleur de lis , 26 minutes ago link

    Langley employees gone wild.

    There is only one cure.

    Dragon HAwk , 27 minutes ago link

    So what did the stewardesses look like Inquiring Minds want to Know?

    Einstein101 , 36 minutes ago link

    The guys that Erdogan supports in Libya are extremist Muslims that set the dark Islam's Sharia laws as the base of their judicial system. Same as other extreme Muslim regimes like Iran and Saudi Arabia.

    Iranian women & girls as young as 9 who don't wear hijab face jail

    dogismycopilot , 37 minutes ago link

    For our frequent fliers who are members of our "Chopping Heads and Eating Livers of Infidels" Afriqiyah Airways is a code share flight with Turkish Airlines. Also, remember your points can be used in Paradise to rent hotel rooms for you and your 72 virgins.

    Turkish Airlines. The airline of choice for Jihadis.

    (satire)

    Ajax_USB_Port_Repair_Service_ , 38 minutes ago link

    If there were flight attendants (male or female), I bet they were groped.

    ImTalkinfullCs , 39 minutes ago link

    I'm sure the CIA has sponsored this campaign to lock down oil fields for Israel on the American taxpayers dime.

    Joe Plane , 43 minutes ago link

    Those are anything but rebels. Simply head choppers and Erdogan's cannon fodder.

    Blankone , 49 minutes ago link

    A little is being left out:

    " Libyan Islamists backed by the West toppled Gaddafi and destroyed much of the country in the 2011 war. "

    1 They were not Libyan's they were insurgents, for the most part.

    2 They were not just backed. Libya was toppled due to the US/France declaring a no fly zone over Libya. At least it was no fly for Libya's military.

    3 The US/France and others bombed the Libyan military.

    4 The US did not just support them. The organized them, supplied them, mobilized them into Libya and so on.

    petroglyph , 20 minutes ago link

    Remember the insurgents paused the killing long enough to start up a central bank, in the middle of a war! If that doesn't make the general public curious about who is doing all the *******, they are to incurious to save.

    Where did Gadaffi's gold go? 86 tons didn't leave in a Toyota Hilux.

    NeitherStirredNorShaken , 50 minutes ago link

    Erdogen hasn't been hiding anything even as far back as his ISIS caravans to Syria for oil for gold scam he was running. He's threatened to take over the nuclear weapons as Incirlik at least twice. He's playing Putin because it gives him leverage against NATO. He's criminally in Syria and now Libya and nobody's calling him on it. Putin is actually capitulating and coddling Erdogan. Erdogan's at least as much of an international war criminal, terrorist, mass murdered as the last five Presidents so why is he still in office let alone still alive?

    Wahooo , 58 minutes ago link

    Prince is jealous and pissed.

    monty42 , 58 minutes ago link

    Oddly, like in Syria, the US set up Libya, and the Russians and Turks are claiming to resolve what chaos was created by the empire. Looks stage produced. In the Syrian case, Turkey was aiding and abetting "ISIS" and then the script flipped to Russian ally, and they invaded Syria and still occupy their territory. The empire achieves their goals, another crushed and dependent nation, resources stolen, their defenses exhausted, while assigning political rebuilding to their Russian and NATO partners.

    Who gets victimized out of all involved? The Libyans and the Syrians.

    wetwipe , 1 hour ago link

    In the end.... no matter what side they fight on..... they always seem to aid and abet Israel in the long run..... Funny that.

    -WetWipe

    gay troll , 1 hour ago link

    Jihadis are freedom fighters and militias are terrorists. Got it?

    Einstein101 , 1 hour ago link

    And yet look who's sending actual jihadists into the already war-ravaged country on comfortable commercial jets

    The Sultan Erdogan is playing with fire and he will get burned, I'm quite sure about it.

    monty42 , 1 hour ago link

    More NATO shenanigans. Look back to when the US regime/zionist empire attacked Libya, sending in the airforce while their Al-CIA-da provided the ground force, and after they sodomized, tortured, and murdered the 70 year old Gaddafi, as well as his son's family, including grandchildren, they reported it openly that those mercenaries were being sent to Syria. When the average person is too mentally damaged by propaganda to realize what they're looking at, the rulers probably enjoy putting it out in the open. I bet they get tingles every time they fool people.

    Operations in Syria wrapping up, so now back to Libya. It's like sequels in one of their hollywood productions.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Gangsternomics in directing the course of Iraq's future economic and political development

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 19 2020 5:20 utc | 83

    @ Peter AU1 78

    Tom Luongo, who frequently cites b, has coined a new word for Trump's and his minions tactics. Tom asks:

    Does Gangsternomics Meet its End in the Iraqi Desert?

    In the aftermath of the killing of Iranian IRGC General Qassem Soleimani a lot of questions hung in the air. The big one was, in my mind, "Why now?"

    There are a lot of angles to answer that question. Many of them were supplied by caretaker Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi who tried to let the world know through official (and unofficial) channels of the extent of the pressure he was under by the U.S.

    In short, President Trump was engaged in months of what can best be described as gangsternomics in directing the course of Iraq's future economic and political development.[/]

    Iraq's importance goes much farther than just protecting the petrodollar to the U.S. It is the fulcrum now on which the entire U.S. defense against Eurasian integration rests. The entire region is slipping out of the grasp of the U.S.

    And this started with Russia moving into Syria in 2015 successfully. We are downstream of this as it has blown open the playbook and revealed it for how ugly it is.

    Trump's crude gangster tactics in Iraq, Venezuela, Bolivia and to a lesser extent in Syria cannot be hidden behind the false veil of moral preening and virtue signaling about bringing democracy to these benighted places.[/]

    What began in Syria with Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and China standing up together and saying, "No," continues today in Iraq. To this point Iran has been the major actor. Tomorrow it will be Russia, China and India.

    And that is what is ultimately at stake here, the ability of the U.S. to employ gangsternomics in the Middle East and make it stick.[.]

    By the time Trump is done threatening people over S-400's and pipelines the entire world will be happy to trade in yuan and/or rubles rather than dollars.[.]

    full article here

    [Jan 19, 2020] The USA is in the middle east and is fighting a war with Iran due to three factors: Full Spectrum Dominance, oil, and Isreal

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    TheSnark • a day ago

    The general gist of this article is on target, but I feel some of the details are off.

    First off, Iran does want to be a region hegemon, they have wanted that for 5,000 years. But they only succeeded, and then only temporarily, when the opposition was weak. Today they are opposed by Israel, which is far stronger them Iran militarily, and by the Saudis, who are far richer. Those two can contain Iran by themselves with little US support.

    Secondly, Iran getting nuclear weapons is a problem. If they do, next will be the Turks and Saudis, then the Egyptians and then who know who else. Having several nuclear powers in an unstable part of the world is a bad thing in general, and when (not if, but when) one of those state collapses like Iran did in 1979 or the USSR did in 1989, the risk of loose nukes floating around is far too real. Better nobody has them (I am not a particular friend or foe of Israel, but I trust them more than the Arab states on this score).

    But our aggressive policy and troop deployments give the Iranians every incentive to build nukes. Their previous incentive was to counter Saddam Hussien's Iraq, but we graciously eliminated threat. But then we provided them with our own incentive to nuclearize. Very dumb.

    Clyde Schechter TheSnark • a day ago
    I don't fully agree that Iran having nuclear weapons would be a problem for us. To the extent that any country's having them is a problem, sure. But Iran lacks the means to deliver such a weapon to US territory, and their regime, which has, for better or for worse, been rather stable over 40 years, has, notwithstanding aggressive rhetoric, been pragmatic: they know the awful consequences that would come from unleashing a nuclear attack on us. They wouldn't even think of it. Even attacking Israel, something within their capabilities, would certainly unleash nuclear retaliation and mutually assured destruction. The mullahs are not into that.

    I think that nuclear non-proliferation became a dead letter when Pakistan and India acquired nuclear weapons and the world shrugged. Pakistan has one of the least stable governments around, having frequent coups, an intelligence service brimming with religious and ideological fanatics, and a history of repeated wars with neighboring India. If ever a red line should have been drawn, that was it. But nothing was done, barely anything was even said. From that point on, nobody really has any basis to complain if Iran (or any of the other countries you mention) goes nuclear.

    Worse, US foreign policy is almost perfectly designed to maximize nuclear proliferation around the world. We have clearly and repeatedly sent the message to all nations that nuclear weapons are the only deterrent to US aggression, and that giving up your nuclear weapons (or agreeing not to make them, as Iran did) is suicidal. The world already knows that the US is a lawless, rogue nation, and that its treaty promises are not worth the paper they are written on. You really have to question the sanity of any government that has the resources to develop nukes and isn't doing that.

    Tom Riddle Clyde Schechter • 16 hours ago

    to the extent that any country's having them is a problem, sure.

    This is a pretty big "but", though? Nuclear proliferation is a huge danger and it's why a country like Germany without a huge middle east presence or danger of getting attacked with Iranian nuclear weapons would so forcefully back the JCPOA.

    The existence and success of the JCPOA should be indictivative of the correct method to fight proliferation and the importance of doing so. To the degree that the US should be involved with the affairs of the Middle East, it should be done through the State Department (or what's left of it when the Republicans are finished with it).

    As for Pakistan's nukes means "nobody really has any basis to complain if Iran (or any of the other countries you mention) goes nuclear." IR doesn't run on moral consitency. We should complain about countries that start up nuclear programs, but we should also complain about how the US's action have made nuclear proliferation more likely and not less. I'd rather not the US give up on non-proliferation just because Pakistan has the bomb. We just need to pretending our military can find solutions to political problems.

    AlexanderHistory X Clyde Schechter • 8 hours ago
    It's not relevant that they can't strike America. They have the means to deliver a nuclear warhead to Israel, which is all that matters to the people in charge of this country.
    Steve Naidamast AlexanderHistory X • 7 hours ago
    And Iran does not even need nuclear weapons to completely destroy the Israeli state. They have more than enough conventional missiles to do the job. And such anti-missile defense systems such as the Patriot and Iron Dome implementations have both been shown to be completely

    inadequate against the type of missile onslaught Iran could deliver against Israel...

    Clyde Schechter AlexanderHistory X • 4 hours ago
    Yes, Iran could strike Israel with a nuke. Or, as Steve Naidamast has pointed out in his response to you, they could obliterate Israel with conventional ballistics as well. In 40 years, they haven't done that. And they know that Israel would respond in kind, or with nuclear weapons, and they would be destroyed. So they will not do that.

    In any case, while it is true that the people running the country view the defense of Israel as our responsibility, even as a top priority. In my opinion, and I think many readers here agree, that is precisely the problem. There is no reason we should commit to the defense of Israel: its existence and well being is not relevant to the defense of the United States. In fact, our unconditional support of everything Israel does, no matter how blatantly wrong it may be, is one of the things that fuels anti-American hatred around the world and motivates terrorists. Pulling away from our connection to Israel would be one of the best things we could do to enhance our national security.

    Steve Naidamast • a day ago
    The US is in the Mid East for Israel's interests and Israel's interests only. This article completely ignores this reality and tries to obfuscate it with a lot of air over how another analyst views the situation there.

    Had the US not recognized partition in 1947/1948 and then the subsequent state of Israel, much of the violence in the Mid East would have never occurred in the first place. This combined with assassination of the Iranian head of state in 1953 (over the move to nationalize Iranian oil and thus pushing out the British and Dutch oil industry) by Eisenhower only served to seriously complicate the matters in this region.

    Iran would have most likely never had felt the need to develop nuclear weapons if the United States had simply just left well enough alone.

    Unfortunately, the United States with few exception has never had anything but dim light bulbs in the presidency. Even Truman's senior military leaders, Mid East Foreign Service policy experts, and Secretary of State Marshall all warned him of the consequences of recognizing an Israel state and they were all correct...

    AlexanderHistory X Steve Naidamast • 8 hours ago
    You are correct. All of this nonsense makes me question how much of a conspiracy theory ZOG is.
    kouroi • 16 hours ago
    Mr Larison,

    You know it, I know it, and pretty much everyone lurking around knows it: The US is in the ME for very basic things that insure its primacy:
    - the control of the oil flow;
    - the control of the way that oil is being transaction-ed, must be US dollars. The flow of dollars, especially the excess dollars needs to be controlled and be returned back to fund US deficit - which of course US has no intention of repaying (external creditors only), and the Feds, which are private bodies of financiers which benefit tremendously from controlling the world's reserve currency, understand this;
    - Oiled ME countries must be run by autocracies in fear of revolutions so they need US support;
    - Nationalist movements and republicanism are to be killed and persecuted;
    - While a nuclear Iran might pose a threat to Israel, like India/Pakistan, US/Russia, it would be all MAD, so not much to worry about.

    US will stay in the ME as long as it will take to insure its primacy. And they will kill any external or internal threats to this primacy.

    Furthermore, there is a stirred appetite in the US and what its elites stand for. Look at TPP, at the proposed treaty on services, etc. The intention is to privatize everything in the world and have it in the hands of some, few. Thus State Owned Enterprises are to be shunned and ultimately appropriated. This is all what TPP was about, this is all what the trade war with China is about, and this is all the upset with Russia and Putin is about.

    It is a very simple equation, that had the US population (military/intelligence) harnessed to be the slave drivers of the rest of the world, while they themselves think they are free, and liberators. This is the content of the red pill.

    Not much different than the story told in the "Against the Grain A Deep History of Earlier States" by James C. Scott
    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lse...

    Alex (the one that likes Ike) • 9 hours ago • edited
    And how can it be the other way if there are only two parties making decisions, and both of them are committed as hell to staying bogged down in the Middle East whatever the cost even to American troops and America's own economy , not to even mention the poor peoples of that region? Just the latest example: Democrats received a totally free and unprovoked electoral gift from Trump in the form of his administration committing an unmitigated idiocy regarding Iran (which, probably, resulted in dead American soldiers, not only wounded ones, given that even those wounded were concealed in the beginning). A real, not clownish cause for an impeachment investigation, against which Republican senators would have a very hard time looking honest and non-partisan in defending the president. A dream for any half-literate opposition political strategist in an election year. Their actions? They didn't think even for a minute that maybe - just maybe - they should not squander that gift. Instead they threw it - a real (and their last) opportunity to look solid in trying to impeach Trump - down the drain, industriously flushed the closet and kept on digging some clownish personalities from Ukraine, who are not even Ukrainian residents due to living in the US for years. You know how it looks like? The Democratic Party's neolib bosses (also known as the Republican Party's neocon bosses) called the DNC and said: keep on playing in your political sandbox, babies, but don't even dare to pester the POTUS on those issues that further our policies.

    To say that I'm eager to read a reply from that miserable partisan hack which shall have a cheek to claim that either of the American institutional parties is not controlled by neocons/neolibs after all this is to say nothing.

    AlexanderHistory X • 8 hours ago
    There are too many Jews and Christian Zionists involved with America's foreign policy, who are happy to sacrifice America's well being for the sake of israel.
    Until that changes, which I can't see how it will while America exists in its current form, we are doomed to continue wasting blood and treasure in the region. It's tragic really, that this nations elite doesn't care much for America, but only what America can do to further their interests abroad.
    ZOG is considered to be a conspiracy theory. These days, I'm not so sure it is.
    Disqus10021 AlexanderHistory X • 6 hours ago
    At least part of the blame should go to the religious conservatives on the US Supreme Court which, with its Citizens United decision in 2010, opened the floodgates for large scale campaign contributions in Federal elections. The five Catholic conservatives voted in favor of Citizens United. The three Jewish members of the court along with the sole liberal Catholic (a woman) voted against it.

    If you happened to watch candidate Trump's address to the 2016 AIPAC convention on TV (which I did), you might recall that he promised to be the best president that Israel ever had. It reminds me of that old Chinese proverb "Be careful what you wish for." Trump appears to be more popular in Israel than in the US.

    Being on the Supreme Court means that you never have to say that you are sorry.

    Osse • 4 hours ago
    I couldn't read the article because I don't subscribe to the WSJ, but I was wondering what he meant by solving the Israel- Palestine conflict. I don't think we should " solve" it by supplying the Israelis with weapons and almost unlimited support. We have been pretending to be an honest broker for decades and we aren't. I doubt we could be. A President Sanders might try, but I doubt he would succeed. He would have enough battles to fight on both domestic policy and ( hopefully) pulling back from our endless interventions to put too much effort into the I- P conflict. Most of the other possible Presidents would probably just be Israel's lapdog, as usual.

    I think the US government should pull back from Israel. Have relations, but don't treat them like they are the 51st state. In theory I wish we could be an honest broker, but it hasn't happened so far.

    Steve Naidamast • 3 hours ago
    I have to say that the style of comments being posted as they regard Israel demonstrate that a tide may be changing. I have noticed a slow but increasing negative response by serious commenters on several sites not only toward the US commitment to Israel also to Israeli policies and military capabilities as not being what everyone has promoted them to being.

    This could be indicative of a sea change in US opinion, isolating most US politicians...

    [Jan 19, 2020] Back in the day when Iran was a pariah state in 1988 (under full embargo from USA and the USSR), they almost sunk the frigate Samuel B Roberts with a very old WWI mine

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DFC , Jan 19 2020 11:40 utc | 110

    @ Posted by: psychedelicatessen | Jan 19 2020 9:14 utc | 98

    You are right one of the pillars of the Iranian asymmetric strategy to counter the USN is using thousands of mines in the Strait of Hormuz and beyond, and probably also around the US bases inside the Persian Gulf.

    Back in the day when Iran was a pariah state in 1988 (under full embargo from USA and the USSR), they almost sunk the frigate Samuel B Roberts with a very old WWI mine:

    https://news.usni.org/2015/05/22/the-day-frigate-samuel-b-roberts-was-mined

    But forget it, they have now thousands of modern mines of Russian, Chinese, north Koreans origin and inverse engineered Iranian mines, even better than those.

    To try to clear the mines with wooden minesweepers in the Strait of Hormuz is a joke; to clear the mines they have to move sloooowly and they will be sitting ducks to the Iranian coastal defenses in this narrow pass; good luck using slow moving helicopters also, and using hi-tech subs drones taking one by one will take months or years to clear them, if not detected and destroyed before.

    As in the case of the missiles threat, USN has no good solutions to the massive minelaying in the Strait of Hormuz, and without massive resupply of the troops inside the Persian Gulf by sea (of weapons, men, spare parts, evacuate wounded, etc...) they do not have a good prospect to continue the war after few weeks; remember that the Iranians missiles have the capacity to destroy all the airstrips of the US air bases in ME and cut dry the use of them for bombing Iran and re-supply (trying to re-suppy a complete army only with helicopters is not an option)

    The iranians even do not need high-tech supersonic anti-ship missiles to close the Strait of Hormuz, but they need them to maintain the US air carriers far enough from the iranians eastern shores that their air wings will sit iddle inside the carriers (the operational range of the F15, F16, F18 is around 700-800 Km), so they cannot support the troops in the opposite side of the Persian Gulf, and even the SCG cannot use their cruise missiles (range 1700 Km) against the western part of Iran where their missile force is allocated pounding the US bases all around the Gulf

    For US the only remained option would be to use long range bombers and cruise missiles from subs, but they do not have enough of them to stop the rain of missiles and really destroy the command and control centers, especially if they have not destroyed the huge multilayered aerial defense Iran has (that seems to be much better than the american one)

    The US then could think to use nukes, and then call a draft, but I do not recommend it, it is better to ask for a truce

    [Jan 19, 2020] Now BoneSpurs Opened the Pandora's Box of Open State Level Assassinations Not Ethical - Inhumane and Imbecilic, really. That's why I am voting for Gabbard this Time. A 2nd Gen Navy Vet. Been to War Zones in the Gulf.

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    IronForge , Jan 18 2020 3:03 utc | 93

    The MIC were running about without leashes.

    Once they delved into "Conquest and Exploitation", the Military were OverScoped and Few People thought of rebuilding/modernizing Civil Infrastructure and Economy of the Conquered.

    Also, IMHO, every Govt-Job that affect the Military and Veterans' Lives should be held by Veterans. Need them to be where the Rubber Meets the Road before sending others into harm's way. I'd go as far to require WH, Congress, Supremes to be Previously Assigned to Combat Units/Hot Zones (FatBoy Pompeo Fails here) - and have Combat Eligible Family be in Active Duty or Drilling Reserves - ready to be sent to the Front Lines should they call for War while running the Republic-turned-Hegemon.

    That would include BoneShards' Adult Children and Spouses.

    WH have been on a PetroUSD/MIC/PNAC7/AIPAC Bandwagon - which drive down Non-Yielding Nation-States with Sanctions.

    Now BoneShards Opened the Pandora's Box of Open State Level Assassinations using Diplomatic Peace Missions as Venues. Worse? Against a Nation-State which can Respond in Kind - AND Develop+Deploy Nuclear WMDs. Not Ethical - Inhumane and Imbecilic, really. That's why I am voting for Gabbard this Time. A 2nd Gen Navy Vet. Been to War Zones in the Gulf.

    lysias , Jan 18 2020 3:24 utc | 97

    This retired Lieutenant Commander of the U.S. Navy has also been donating to Gabbard.

    [Jan 19, 2020] The Empire strikes back. Netanyahu, Trump and the Neocons by Dimitris Konstantakopoulos

    Nov 01, 2020 | www.defenddemocracy.press

    For the time being it seems we avoided the global disaster of an all-out confrontation between US, Israel and their allies on the one hand, Iran and its allies. Going to the edge of the precipice and then backpedaling has become a quite usual pattern as far as the Iranian question is concerned, since 2006, the first time the Neocon Party of War pushed hard for an attack on Iran, most probably with "tactical" nuclear arms .

    Is this sui generis truce the end of the story? No, it is not. As experience proved time and again, the forces promoting this war are very strong to accept defeat, as for the deep underlying causes pushing to such a confrontation remain very much at work. This is what makes a near certainty the return, sooner or later, in one form or another, of the war scenario. And it is hard to imagine that this situation of oscillation between a pseudo-peace and an open war can last forever. Only very deep and very radical changes in the world system can ban for good the war perspective.

    The article that follows was written just before the recent Iranian missile attack to the US bases in Iraq. But we believe everything said here is still valid and maybe more valid after the attacks.

    A world in chock

    "Cry 'Havoc!' And let's slip the dogs of war". It is Marcus Antonius who says that in front of the assassinated Ceasar (Act 3, Scene 1, line 273 of William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar). And it is Richard Haas, president of the CFR, the most prestigious, bipartisan US think tank on foreign policy, who is using this phrase to begin his article in the Financial Times . Haas grasps well the dramatic nature of the moment. He also warns the scope of the conflict is the whole world. But then, his analysis degenerates, and could not be otherwise, into a rather deplorable attempt to discuss a legal basis justifying General Soleimani's assassination in Baghdad and a not-so-convincing search for a place for diplomacy after a murder which probably took place exactly to wipe out any such place. The article is absolutely indicative of the embarrassment, despair and shock of a large part of the international establishment.

    Die Zeit , perhaps the most serious newspaper in Germany, compares General Soleimani's murder with that of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo, back in 1914, by which WWI was launched. The same analogy is adopted by Mediapart, one of the few remaining media outlets in France with some element of credibility and seriousness.

    In the meantime, the Israeli PM Netanyahu has used a supposed "tongue lapsus" to remind that Israel is a "nuclear power" .

    We urge our readers to study very carefully New York Times ' shocking reportage on Israeli and American extremists' decades-long effort to wage war on Iran, the fierce conflict over this issue for years, between Obama and Netanyahu, and the equally fierce battle inside Israel, between Netanyahu on the one hand, Israeli army and services on the other. You must read it if you want to know what is happening in the Middle East and what can happen to you tomorrow .

    The war with Iran has come much closer, but it will not be conventional, says Soraya Lennie of London's SOAS University, Britain's "colonial school".

    First but also the Second World War

    The unprecedented shock of the international system is also reflected in the astonishing lack of any serious reaction of the "international community" to one of the most serious and dangerous crises humanity is facing. They speak saying nothing or they put on the same footage the offender and the victim of the offense.

    But shocks you suffer only if you have made very wrong assessments of the situation and of the the forces in action, or if you take your wishes as realities.

    Unfortunately, there is no analogy only with the outbreak of World War I. It can also be established with the situation prevailing during the period preceding World War II in Europe, between 1933 and 1939-41. Then, as it happens now, the world was in front of the emergence of an extremist core in the center of the Western system, but it sharply underestimated its dynamics and its potential. European capitals believed they can handle the situation by maneuvering, appeasing, compromising. Some, who understood nothing of the force they were facing and of its project, were even believing it is possible to cooperate or even ally with it. We know too well where all that has finally led.

    Anyway, the analogy with WWI seems to have crossed simultaneously a lot of minds after Soleimani's assassination. Many former senior US intelligence officials, now critical of the policy of their government, adopted also this analogy, in a memorandum addressed to President Trump with the plea not to double the Iraqi "madness" in Iran .

    The memorandum is signed, among others, by Graham Fuller, former vice president of the National Intelligence Council, Daniel Ellsberg, known in particular for his Pentagon Papers , the former technical director of the NSA Edward Loomis, the senior CIA analyst Ray McGovern, daily briefer on USSR of five US Presidents. Our readers can watch a debate of this writer with Ray McGovern on Iran and Trump, three years ago, just after Trump's election.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/t9ppwjpC8vY

    In the memorandum, the intelligence veterans criticize the President and his son in law Kushner for pursuing blindly Netanyahu's policy on Iran, as Bush and Cheney followed blindly Ariel Sharon's policy by invading Iraq. They also recall Netanyahu's own confession of the way he fooled President Clinton to make him believe he was working on implementing the Oslo agreements with the Palestinians, while he was working to destroy them.

    The period ahead is very critical, not only for the factors we know but also because of the possibility of the War camp launching a second provocation as the first, Soleimani's murder, did not suffice for the launching of an all-out war.

    Read more at https://uwidata.com/7039-the-empire-strikes-back-netanyahu-trump-and-the-neocons/

    [Jan 19, 2020] Why Neocons Hate Russia Even More Than They Hate Any Other Nation

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    Eric Zuesse July 27, 2018 © Photo: Public domain

    Neoconservatism started in 1953 with Henry "Scoop" Jackson, the Democratic Party US Senator from the state of Washington (1953-1983), who became known as a 'defense' hawk, and as "the Senator from Boeing," because Boeing practically owned him. The UK's Henry Jackson Society was founded in 2005 in order to carry forward Senator Jackson's unwavering and passionate endorsement of growing the American empire so that the US-UK alliance will control the entire world (and US weapons-makers will dominate in every market).

    Later, during the 1990s, neoconservatism became taken over by the Mossad and the lobbyists for Israel and came to be publicly identified as a 'Jewish' ideology, despite its having -- and having long had -- many champions who were 'anti-communist' or 'pro-democracy' or simply even anti-Russian, but who were neither Jewish nor even focused at all on the Middle East. Republicans Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and John McCain; and the Democrat, CIA Director James Woolsey -- the latter of whom was one of the patrons of Britain's Henry Jackson Society -- were especially prominent neoconservatives, who came to prominence even before neocons became called "neoconservatives." What all neocons have always shared in common has been a visceral hatred of Russians. That comes above anything else -- and even above NATO (the main neocon organization).

    During recent decades, neocons have been hating Iranians and more generally Shiites -- such as in Syria and in Lebanon, and now also in Yemen -- and not only hating Russians.

    When the Israel lobby during the 1990s and after, pumped massive resources into getting the US Government to invade first Iraq and then Iran, neoconservatism got its name, but the ideology itself did not change. However, there are a few neoconservatives today who are too ignorant to know, in any coherent way, what their own underlying beliefs are, or why, and so who are anti-Russians (that's basic for any neocon) who either don't know or else don't particularly care that Iran and Shia Muslims generally, are allied with Russia. Neoconservatives such as this, are simply confused neocons, people whose underlying ideology is self-contradictory, because they've not carefully thought things through.

    An example is Vox's Alex Ward, who built his career as an anti-Russia propagandist , and whose recent ten-point tirade against Russia I then exposed as being false on each one of its ten points , each of those points having been based upon mere allegations by US neocons against Russia without any solid evidence whatsoever. Indictments, and other forms of accusations, are not evidence for anything. But a stupid 'journalist' accepts them as if they were evidence, if those accusations come from 'the right side' -- but not if they come from 'the wrong side'. They don't understand even such a simple distinction as that between an indictment, and a conviction. A conviction is at least a verdict (though maybe based on false 'evidence' and thus false itself), but all that an accusation is an accusation -- and all accusations (in the American legal system) are supposed to be disbelieved, unless and until there is at least a verdict that gives the accusation legal force. (This is called "innocent unless proven guilty.")

    Earlier, Mr. Ward had headlined as if he were an anti -neocon, when he posted his "America is fueling the war in Yemen. Congress is finally pushing back." What can account for that seemingly incongruous article?

    Mr. Ward is a Democrat -- an heir to Senator Jackson's allegedly anti-communist though actually anti-Russian ideology -- but, since Ward isn't as intelligent as the ideology's founder was, Ward becomes anti -neocon when a Republican-led Administration is doing things (such as Ward there criticizes) that are even more-neocon than today's Democratic Party itself is. In other words: 'journalists' (actually, propagandists) such as he, are more partisan in favor of support of Democratic Party billionaires against Republican Party billionaires, than in support of conquering Russia as opposed to cooperating with Russia (and with all other countries). They're unaware that all American billionaires support expansion of the US empire -- including over Yemen (to bring Yemen in, too -- which invasion Ward incongruously opposes). But politicians (unlike their financial backers) need to pretend not to be so bloodthirsty or so beholden to the military-industrial complex. Thus, an American doesn't need to be intelligent in order to build his or her career in 'journalism', on the basis of having previously served as a propagandist writing for non-profits that are mere fronts for NATO and for Israel, and which are fronts actually for America's weapons-manufacturing firms, who need those wars in order to grow their profits. Such PR for front-organizations for US firms such as Lockheed Martin, is excellent preparation for a successful career in American 'journalism'. If a person is stupid, then it's still necessary to be stupid in the right way, in order to succeed; and Ward is, and does.

    This, for example, is how it makes sense that Ward had previously been employed at the War on the Rocks website that organized the Republican neoconservative campaign against Donald Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries : the mega-donors to both US Parties are united in favor of America conquering Russia. And that's why War on the Rocks had organized Republican neocons to oppose Trump: it was done in order to increase the chances for Trump's rabidly anti-Russia and pro-Israel competitors such as Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio to win that nomination instead, which would then have produced the billionaires' dream contest, between Hillary Clinton versus an equally neoconservative Republican nominee. A bipartisan neoconservatism controls both of the American political Parties. A 'journalist' who displays that sort of bipartisanship can't fail in America, no matter how incompetent at real journalism he or she might be. (However, they do have to be literate . Stupid, maybe; but literate, definitely.)

    The core of America's form of capitalism has come to be the US aristocracy's bipartisan, liberal and conservative, Democratic and Republican, form of capitalism, which isn't merely fascist (which includes privatizing everything that can be privatized) but which is also imperialist (which means favoring the country's perpetration of invasions and coups in order to expand that nation's empire). The United States is now a globe-spanning empire, controlling not merely the aristocracies in a few banana republics such as Guatemala and Honduras, but also the aristocracies in richer countries such as France, Germany and UK, so as to extract from virtually the entire world -- by means mainly of deception but also sometimes public threats and clearly coercive -- unfair advantages for corporations that are within its borders, and against corporations that are headquartered in foreign countries. America's billionaires -- both the Democratic ones and the Republican ones -- are 100% in favor of America's conquering the world: this ideology is entirely bipartisan, in the United States. Though the billionaires succeeded, during the first Cold War -- the one that was nominally against communism -- at fooling the public to think they were aiming ultimately to conquer communism, George Herbert Walker Bush made clear, on the night of 24 February 1990, privately to the leaders of the US aristocracy's foreign allies, that the actual goal was world-conquest, and so the Cold War would now secretly continue on the US side , even after ending on the USS.R. side. When GHW Bush did that, the heritage of US Senator Jackson became no longer the formerly claimed one, of 'anti-communism', but was, clearly now and henceforth, anti-Russian. And that's what it is today -- not only in the Democratic Party, and not only in the Republican Party, and not only in the United States, but throughout the entire US alliance .

    And this is what we are seeing today, in all of the US-and-allied propaganda-media. America is always 'the injured party' against 'the aggressors'; and, so, one after another, such as in Iraq, and in Libya, and in Syria, and in Iran, and in Yemen, and in China, all allies (or even merely friends) of Russia are 'the aggressors' and are 'dictatorships' and are 'threats to America', and only the US side represents 'democracy' . It's actually an aristocracy , which has deeply deceived its public, to think it's a democracy. Just as every aristocracy is based on lies and on coercion, this one is, too -- it is no exception; it's only that this particular empire is on a historically unprecedentedly large scale, dominating all continents. Support that, and you're welcomed into the major (i.e., billionaire-backed) 'news' media in America, and in its allied countries. This is America's 'democracy' . (Of course, an article such as this one is not 'journalism' in America and its allied countries; it's merely "blogging." So, it won't be found there though it's being submitted everywhere. It will be accepted and published at only the honest news-sites. A reader may Web-search the headline here in order to find out which ones those are. Not many 'news'media report the institutionalized corruptness of the 'news'media; they just criticize one-another, in the way that the politicians do, which is bipartisan -- the bipartisan dictatorship. But the rot that's actually throughout the 'news'media, is prohibited to be reported about and published, in and by any of them. It is totally suppressed reality. Only the few honest news-sites will publish this information and its documentation, the links here.)

    However, actually, the first time that the term either "neoconservatism" or "neo-conservatism" is known to have been used, was in the British magazine, The Contemporary Review , January 1883, by Henry Dunkley, in his "The Conservative Dilemma" where "neo-conservative" appeared 8 times, and was contrasted to traditional "conservatism" because, whereas the traditional type "Toryism" was pro-aristocratic, anti-democratic, and overtly elitist; the new type was pro-democratic, anti-aristocratic, and overtly populist (which no form of conservatism honestly is -- they're all elitist): "What is this new creed of yours? That there must be no class influence in politics? That any half-dozen hinds on my estate are as good as so many dukes? That the will of the people is the supreme political tribunal? That if a majority at the polls bid us abolish the Church and toss the Crown into the gutter we are forthwith to be their most obedient servants?" "No: from whatever point of view we consider the question, it is plain that the attempt to reconstruct the Tory party on a Democratic basis cannot succeed." "The Tories have always been adepts at conservation, but the things they have been most willing to conserve were not our liberties but the restrictions put upon our liberties." "The practical policy of Conservatism would not alter, and could not be altered much, but its pretensions would have to be pitched in a lower key." "Here we seem to get within the smell of soup, the bustle of evening receptions, and the smiles of dowagers. The cares which weigh upon this couple of patriot souls cannot be described as august. It is hardly among such petty anxieties that the upholders of the Empire and the pilots of the State are bred." "The solemn abjuration which is now proposed in the name of Neo-conservatism resembles a charge of dynamite." He viewed neo-conservatives as being let's-pretend populists, whose pretense at being democrats will jeopardize the Empire, not strengthen it. Empire, and its rightness, were so deeply rooted in the rulers' psyche, it went unchallenged. In fact, at that very time, in the 1880s, Sir Cecil Rhodes was busy creating the foundation for the UK-US empire that now controls most of the world .

    The modern pro-Israel neoconservatism arose in the 1960s when formerly Marxist Jewish intellectuals in New York City and Washington DC, who were even more anti-communist than anti-nazi, became impassioned with the US empire being extended to the entire world by spreading 'democracy' (and protection of Israel) as if this Israel-protecting empire were a holy crusade not only against the Soviet Union, which was demonized by them, but against Islam, which also was demonized by them (since they were ethnocentric Jews and the people whose land the 'Israelis' had stolen were overwhelmingly Muslims -- and now were very second-class citizens in their own long-ancestral and also birth-land). This was how they distinguished themselves from "paleoconservatism" which wasn't nearly so Messianic, but which was more overtly ethnocentric, though ethnic Christian, instead of ethnic Jewish. The "paleoconservatives" were isolationists, not imperialists. They originated from the opponents of America's entry into WW II against the imperialists of that time, who were the fascists. Those American "isolationists" would have given us a world controlled by Hitler and his Axis allies. All conservatism is absurd, but there are many forms of it, none of which makes intelligent sense.

    The roots of neoconservatism are 100% imperialistic, colonialist, supremacist, and blatantly evil. They hate Russia because they still crave to conquer it , and don't know how, short of nuclear annihilation, which would be extremely dangerous, even for themselves. So, they endanger everyone.

    [Jan 19, 2020] American hubris and bully-ism in the international arena has steadily grown since the end of the Cold War, since they somehow believe their system won. With Trump, the mask is off. "I'm taking the oil".

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Josh , Jan 17 2020 22:32 utc | 41

    Totally agree with Daniel: "Trump is president and commander in chief. The buck stops with him. If he is too weak or stupid to prevent himself from getting manipulated by his creepy cadaverous son-in-law and the bunch of fanatics he hired and surrounds himself with he is unfit for the job. But given his many transgressions and war mongering ways, it's more likely he's just another fraud like every other POTUS."
    American hubris and bully-ism in the international arena has steadily grown since the end of the Cold War, since they somehow believe their system won. With Trump, the mask is off. "I'm taking the oil". In fact, he's taking the oil even though he can't do much with it (can't develop it, limited selling options, etc). Pure child-like "it's mine, i'd rather break it than give it back".
    I have decreasing confidence that there will not be a nuclear war. It seems to be increasingly likely that an overstretched American army will, at some point somewhere, be so outmaneuvered that they will hit the panic button. The world is currently counting on the Russians, Iranians, Chinese to be the sober ones, the cooler heads, the ones who hurriedly clear the roads for the drunk adolescent American roaming the streets.

    [Jan 19, 2020] The US has been relying on the thing that Dr. Pauwels describes as the "warfare economy"

    Jan 19, 2020 | journal-neo.org

    Back in 2003, an alternative media site based in Belgium – Indy Media, published a rather clever article titled "Why America Needs War" drafted by a renowned political scientist, Jacques R. Pauwels. Due to the fact that this article has recently been republished by a well-known and respected alternative media site Global Research, a lot of attention has been drawn to the topic of Washington's never-ending wars. In the above-mentioned article it was stated that wars are a terrible waste of lives and resources, and for that reason most people are in principle opposed to wars. However, with the US being locked in a state of perpetual conflict with other international players, it's only natural to wonder what is wrong with American politicians? Are they all suffering from some mental disease?

    The reason the events we're observing on the global stage are actually taking place is the fact that the US has been relying on the thing that Dr. Pauwels describes as the "warfare economy" that the US has been relying on for over a century now. This economy allows wealthy individuals and corporations to profit from violence and bloodshed, which makes them prone to advocating wars instead of peaceful conflict resolution. Yet, the article states that without warm or cold wars, however, this system can no longer produce the expected result in the form of the ever-higher profits the moneyed and powerful of America consider as their birthright. It's clear that the US couldn't escape the cold grip of the Great Depression without entering WWII, however, as it's been stated in the above-mentioned article:

    During the Second World War, the wealthy owners and top managers of the big corporations learned a very important lesson: during a war there is money to be made, lots of money. In other words, the arduous task of maximizing profits -- the key activity within the capitalist American economy -- can be absolved much more efficiently through war than through peace; however, the benevolent cooperation of the state is required.

    Yet, the people of the United States didn't notice this change as they were mesmerized by the rapidly growing wages and booming corporations that needed an ever increasing number of new employees. That's why there's been no real opposition to America's warmongering inside the US, which means that Washington will be looking for new enemies even when it has none. This results in the states like Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela, that were willing at one point or another to discuss their differences with the US, being antagonized and getting designated as a threat to the US and its national security.

    That's why the military expenditures in the US keep going through the roof, with research and development programs for the US military getting unprecedented funding. However, what is being presented as a race towards greater security represents a shameless siphoning of the money paid by American taxpayer into the pockets of the major defence contractors. It would be only logical if the US legal system, instead of investigating dubious reports of Russia's alleged meddling in the US election, would take a closer look at the way blood money is shaping the world of US politics.

    Will Baghdad Defy Washington? Iraqi Parliament Contemplates Buying Russia's S-400 Missile Defense System

    Let us recall that the US military budget for 2020 has for the first time reached the mind-numbing sum of 750 billion dollars! Over the past few decades, the United States has invested some 30 billion dollars in various weapons programs, all of which have to one degree or another failed, according to The National Interest.

    There's no shortage of media reports showing the complete failure of modern American weapons, which, in spite of the massive sums wasted on their development, cannot protect either the United States or its allies.

    For instance, The National Interest has recently taken the effort to draw a comparison between the Russian Su-35 jet-fighter and a total of four American competitors: F-15s, F-16s, F-22s, and F-35s. The publication came to a disappointing conclusion that in spite of the massive advertisement campaign that accompanied the development of F-35, it cannot stand its ground against its Russian counterpart.

    The ill-fated F-35 has recently been included in the list of the worst weapons ever produced by the US Army due to its unbelievably high cost and reliability issues, says the Business Insider. Therefore, it is not surprising that on top of Turkey's President Tayyip Erdogan announcing his intention of buying Russian Su-35 and Su-57 fighters instead of siding with the US, Germany has also made it clear that it has no intentions of acquiring this overpriced winged catastrophe from the United States. To add insult to injury, the American portal We Are The Mighty has recently listed a total of three Russian fighters in the Top 5 list of the fastest jets in the history of military aviation.

    At sea, the situation is no better. In the event of a hypothetical military conflict between the United States and Russia, even in the Black Sea, American aircraft carrier groups would get obliterated rather quickly by Russian diesel submarines, land mobile missile systems and small but dangerous missile boats. That's even before land-based aviation units armed with hypersonic anti-ship missiles dubbed the Dagger would have something to say about it, says The National Interest. Another publication emphasizes that Russian missile corvettes, that go at a price of 30 million dollars a pop have four times the missile range of the latest US destroyers and cruisers that come with a price tag of 2 billion dollars.

    But it was the American missile defense systems, especially the Patriot, that have recently covered themselves with scandalous shame. A year ago, US President Donald Trump announced that among the new priorities of the Pentagon the sale of US missile defense systems to its allies ranked really high. To achieve this goal, Washington tried to force those states that chose a far more effective solutions – Russia's S-300 and S-400 to rethink their decision. These attempts resulted in Washington introducing sanctions against some of its closest allies, such as Turkey, India and Morocco.

    Meanwhile, The National Interest admits that the new Russian S-500 is by far the most effective air defense system in existence, while The Hill acknowledges that Russia's hypersonic weapons have rendered such US missile defense systems as Patriot and THAAD meaningless.

    A year ago, the United States announced that a network of ground and surface missile interceptors, radars and communications lines at a price tag of 180 billion dollars could protect the country from a limited attack launched by the DPRK or Iran. However, shortly after this statement was made, US-produced air defense systems failed to repel a surprise drone attack on Saudi oil refineries, thus demonstrating their low efficiency. At the same time, it will not be out of place to recall that a grand total of 88 Patriot launchers cover the northern border of Saudi Arabia, with three more US NAVY destroyers armed with the Aegis system being stationed off shore in the same area. None of these systems responded to the attack.

    Yet again, during a retaliatory strike launched by Iran, American air defense systems were powerless to shoot down a single missile launched against two US bases in Iraq.

    That is why a number of Western military clients have recently taken steps to acquire Russian alternatives. This was the result of serious flaws in US-produced air defense systems, such as the Patriot, the repeated failures of which have recently become apparent in Israel, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. The last of these clients was South Korea, which has long shown strong interest in Russian military jets and air defense systems, but was unable to acquire them due to the pressure being applied on it from Washington.

    Those facts show that the military vehicles and aircraft advertised by Western media are only good as scrap metal. Actually, this became clear to everyone, when Washington decided to show its rusty armored vehicles on the parade assembled in celebration of last year's Independence Day.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    Vladimir Platov , an expert on the Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook ".

    [Jan 19, 2020] The Face of the Modern US Army

    Jan 19, 2020 | journal-neo.org

    Starting from 2001, the US has been spending $32 million per hour on war .

    The United States has spent about $6 trillion on combat operations over the past 20 years, according to Brown University studies . If the warfare ends by 2023, researchers estimate the total cost will be $6.7 trillion at least, not counting the interest on debt.

    In total, almost half a million people have died as a result of the wars.

    The cost of 87 major programs for the purchase of weapons and military equipment conducted by the US Department of Defense exceeded $2 trillion in 2018, according to the Pentagon's Selected Acquisition Reports (SAR), which detail the implementation of major defense purchases. The combined cost of all procurement programs was determined by the Pentagon to be over $2 trillion. This is equivalent to almost 10% of the annual gross domestic product of the United States ($21.3 trillion).

    Trying to justify such exorbitant spending on the army, the US military and political elites actively promote their interests, advertising the national armed forces as the main fighting force. Recently, Joseph F. Dunford, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that 'there are no forces today capable of resisting an attack by the US Army.' Unsurprisingly, the Department of Defense (DoD) desires even more money, although there is no logical explanation as to why the most powerful army on the planet is in need of improvement when everyone else is clearly lagging behind.

    But what is the real face of the US Army today and how does the public feel about it?

    Global Research correctly remarked that, despite the largest military budget in the world (five times greater than in six other countries), the highest number of military bases in the world (over 180) and the most expensive military-industrial complex, the United States has failed to win a single war in the 21 st century.

    Every year, Pew Research Center publishes hundreds of studies on a wide range of topics. Concerning the current problems of the US military, Pew studies note that most American veterans and the majority of the general US public believe that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not worth fighting. Over 60% of the American public is convinced that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not paid off, when the costs and benefits are weighed. Responding to questions about the US military campaign in Syria, 55% of veterans and 58% of the American public said that this campaign failed to pay off as well.

    Frustration with the country's military policy has now become a big problem among active US servicemen, veterans, and even among young soldiers who haven't participated in real combat.

    The incautious question 'How has serving impacted you?' posted by the Pentagon's official Twitter account, has revealed the deep chasm of the US military's problems. So deep, in fact, that the Pentagon had to urgently close and remove a huge number of subsequent replies, most of which turned out to be very depressing in nature. US Army soldiers and officers shared the shocking consequences of their service, including drug addiction, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders and nightmares – some admitting they had repeatedly wanted to commit suicide.

    Currently there are up to 19 million retired veterans 'in the most belligerent democratic country in the world.' Every day, about 20 of them commit suicide. The causes of suicide cited by experts are diverse, the main ones being depressions, nervous breakdowns, spiritual and psychological devastation coupled with guilt for killing innocent people, post-traumatic stress disorder, increased military operations, medical abuse, and personal financial problems. Social media are full of horrific stories about how injured soldiers weren't provided necessary medical attention during military operations, which drove them to shooting themselves in the head. Meanwhile junior army members state that they are basically expendable for their commanders, and all of them combined present an endless means of earning money for the highest elite.

    Suicides are rampant among all the branches of US troops, and their rate is increasing. US officials deliberately hide the horrific statistics of suicides among military personnel, seriously concerned about the increase in their number since they negatively affect the future of the 'most powerful armed forces in the world.' To date, suicide is the second leading cause of death among members of the US military.

    Another extremely troubling statistic was revealed by experts from the American publishing house McClatchy. They studied the health of the US servicemen who had taken part in combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 -- 2015. They have been literally mowed down by cancer, which is confirmed by the sudden increase in the number of cancer patients in military hospitals in Virginia. As it turned out, a significant cause of the disease is toxic rocket fuel, which was used to massively burn garbage and waste near military bases. In addition, it turned out that the fire foam used to extinguish these fires also causes cancer. It was quite often that US soldiers had to dispose of garbage and waste in war zones, including human corpses and animal carcasses. The Pentagon has not yet commented on the finding and is in no hurry to grant applications for disability benefits; out of 11,000 applications only 2000 have been 'lucky' so far.

    The Heritage Foundation analysts published a report which shows that the US Army is at its limits. One curious fact is significant: the conclusion about the decline of efficiency and combat capability of the US Army came not from Russian or Chinese sources, but from American analysts, which is further proof of the systemic problems in the Pentagon. The Heritage Foundation analysts agree that right now, considering the current state of the US Army, simultaneous participation in several wars is leading to its noticeable overexertion.

    Taking this into account, Washington can only be advised to tread more carefully on the international arena, avoid provoking armed conflicts that can lead to severe military defeats for the US Army and result in sizable human losses, both among current servicemen and veterans.

    In the words of the Spanish newspaper El Pais , "The Americans pose a much greater danger to themselves than the Islamists, North Koreans, Russians, Houthis and all those who comprise the US-declared 'axis of evil' do."

    Vladimir Platov, an expert on the Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine " New Eastern Outlook ".

    [Jan 19, 2020] Trump Can Learn From Morgenthau's 6 Principles of Political Realism by Nathan A. Sears

    The author is rabid neocon. He ignores mechanism of collective security like UN.
    Jan 19, 2020 | nationalinterest.org
    six principles of political realism , found in his seminal work Politics Among Nations . The second, fourth and fifth principles are of particular relevance to the current administration. Morgenthau's second principle states that "the main signpost that helps political realism to find its way through the landscape of international politics is the concept of interest defined as power." Morgenthau believed that international politics is fundamentally a struggle for power (understood in terms of the mutual relations of political control between nation-states), and that peace is often tenuous in a world lacking a sovereign authority that can protect the interests and survival of individual states (an insight that has been codified in the neorealist conception of "international anarchy"). As a result, the "national interest" is primarily concerned with the resources (especially military and economic capabilities) and limitations (primarily the balance of power) that determine the national power of the state in international politics.

    The fourth principle states that "political realism is aware of the moral significance of political action, but maintains that moral principles cannot be applied to the actions of states in their abstract universal formulation." Morgenthau did not reject ethical considerations in foreign policy (as is clear from his criticisms of the Vietnam War), but believed that political prudence (i.e., the practical consideration of the consequences of foreign policy) requires that moral principles be "filtered" through the "concrete circumstances" of power politics. Moral ends should be pursued to the extent that they are within the limits of national power and are consistent with national interests. The fifth principle takes this one step further by stating that "political realism refuses to identify the moral aspirations of a particular nation with the moral laws that govern the universe." Morgenthau cautioned against the dangers of national "exceptionalism," which can lead to "political folly," such as the fighting of wars that do nothing to advance or protect the national interest, and can cause unnecessary human suffering through "moral excess." Thus, "moderation in policies cannot fail to reflect the moderation of moral judgment."

    President Trump criticized the Obama administration for getting outplayed and outsmarted by Russian president Vladimir Putin, and yet he seems to be falling into the same trap as Obama by thinking that he can do better vis-à-vis Russia through diplomatic rapprochement. The problem is to see U.S. foreign-policy challenges with respect to Russia in terms of misunderstandings between political leaders and administrations, rather than the fundamental differences between United States and Russian national interests. Russia seeks to increase its power and sphere of influence while the United States aims to maintain hegemony. If the current administration seeks rapprochement by making concessions to Russia (e.g., by rolling back sanctions), then foreign-policy analysts will soon be writing about another failed "reset." On China, Trump broke with diplomatic precedent by accepting a phone call from Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen, which called into question the United States' commitment to a "One China" policy. The problem here is for foreign policy to extend beyond power, since the military balance within the first island chain -- and specifically in a Taiwan war -- is rapidly shifting in China's favor. While realism suggests that geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States is inevitable, interest as power would suggest that picking a fight with China over Taiwan is not a prudent course for U.S. foreign policy.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Former Kamikaze Pilots Address Japanese Youth New Eastern Outlook

    Jan 19, 2020 | journal-neo.org

    ... ... ...

    Two brothers are warning Japan not to succumb to this temptation, who were in one of the Imperial Japanese Navy's kamikaze groups during the final stage of the war on Pacific, but the war ended before they had the chance to fulfil their sacrificial military duty. Both elderly veterans (97 and 99 years old) felt they needed to tell students and teachers at Waseda University -- one of Japan's most prestigious institutions -- "what [to] do to ensure that we don't repeat an event like the war."

    They asked students to consider their speech and answers to questions as their "last message" to the youth of today in Japan. They did not choose these words at random. Kamikaze soldiers would write a "last message" to their closest relatives before flying or sailing out on a mission which they would obviously not return from (these brothers were suicide vessel pilots, so they did not fly).

    The kamikaze tactic is a centuries-old, very specifically Japanese cultural and military phenomenon. When other cultures try to copy the Japanese it turns into a parody or a meaningless act of gang violence. One of these parodies was an attempt made by the German Luftwaffe to do "something similar" to the Japanese kamikaze soldiers in the last days of the Second World War.

    Then there are today's Islamist terrorists (pumped up with drugs) who do not value their own lives or anyone else's, and their acts have nothing in common with this concept.

    Kamikaze volunteers were mainly undergraduates, which is reflected in the content and style of their "last messages". The two brothers who gave their lecture at Waseda University were both students when they voluntarily joined the Imperial Japanese Navy's kamikaze unit. This is probably one reason why they chose to address students with the "last message" they have now written.

    Of course, we must take into account that the young sailors from 75 years ago and the elderly people who speak today are ultimately different people. Japan has experienced a lot since the war ended, as has the world in general, and the two brothers. All this experience has undoubtedly affected how the former kamikaze soldiers think about what happened "then" and what their "last message" should be, which they have now passed on. Apart from that, they will leave this world in a very different way than the kamikaze soldiers did 75 years ago.

    The first thing the audience at Waseda University were interested in hearing about were the "last messages" written by kamikaze fighters, which make for extremely moving reading, even to this day . They were not dictated what to write, but the authors knew that their letters would be read by "the relevant authorities." This is, by the way, what happens to messages sent by servicemen from all different countries during times of war.

    According to one of the brothers, not one of the kamikaze soldiers he knew really wanted to die, and even then it was clear that the war was meaninglessness: "Do not follow my example," said the author in his message after 75 years had passed. "That's what I want to leave with the young people today."

    In this author's opinion, the main sentiment in the "last message" given by the two former kamikaze fighters, namely that "war is hell", has a great measure of "the wisdom of hindsight." That does not take away from this wisdom whatsoever, it is not something to be consigned to the history books in today's Japan. It is very relevant considering the persistent attempts the country's leadership has been making to "revise" Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution outlawing war, which would go directly against the prevailing sentiment in Japanese society.

    Japan and its former Axis ally Germany have managed to climb to the top of the world's political and economic hierarchy without firing a single shot and without any bloodshed. Without harming any enemies or allies. In today's rapidly changing world, Japan and Germany will only strengthen their positions on the world stage if they can resist temptation and do not get trapped in the same vicious circle they got caught up in a century ago.

    Moreover, it would be a perfect time for them to reignite and lead the (mistakenly forgotten) "world peace movement". It could not be more relevant in the current critical stage of the "Grand Global Game".

    Something similar seems to have been implied in the "last message" passed on by the two former kamikaze soldiers.

    Vladimir Terekhov, expert on the issues of the Asia-Pacific region, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook" .

    [Jan 19, 2020] Are Americans sick of forign wars for the US-centered neoliberal empire?

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    V , Jan 18 2020 6:03 utc | 103

    Americans are sick of war. War anywhere.

    I do not believe that for a second.
    US initiated wars have been going on for decades, but I see no indication that US americans have any issues with it. The political parties are totally aligned on foreign wars, there are no people protesting in US cities.
    Posted by: Norwegian | Jan 17 2020 21:46 utc | 27

    I do not believe it either!

    Since a good many Usians are morally bankrupt; they spend words like cheap cash.

    Why not? It keeps them from having to actually do anything.

    It's all out there; the lies, theft, murders, kidnapping, torture, and a corrupt educational system.

    ...and the band played on...

    aye, myself & me , Jan 18 2020 6:35 utc | 107

    @ V # 103
    'It's all out there; the lies, theft, murders, kidnapping, torture, and a corrupt educational system.
    ...and the band played on..."

    The band plays on folks, because of that corrupt educational system. Every school kid in america is brainwashed from nursery school, kindergarten, even before the formal waste of time. Then if they decide on college, unless their parents are one percenters, or hollywood insiders the kids are in hock to the tune of six figures when they grab that diploma. No one has time to protest anymore. 'They' have 'em by the balls and they're in a vice bein' squeezed daily. Most have to pull two, or even three jobs, just to get by. No one has the time to realize all of america's boogeymen are cia assets.

    Besides, one's protesting against one of the most powerful militaries in the world and the police state is ever tightening here. Protesting is pretty much a fool's errand anymore, if it's against the government in general it's not covered by the msm, so only the protesters and their friends are aware of it.

    Life if rough for many americans struggling to get by. They don't have time to protest, however, if the dollar were to lose it's world currency and our financial systems collapses there could be a revolt with all the guns here, but i wouldn't count on it looking anything like america's first revolution.

    uncle tungsten , Jan 18 2020 7:06 utc | 111
    V #103

    Thank you, my thoughts exactly. The USians are propagandised from cradle to grave every state has at least one Fort xyz and every stadium has military spectacles to ogle at. No football game without a military parade.

    It will take a Herculean effort to turn that propaganda around and thankfully there are two candidates dedicated to that effort. More strength to their arm.

    On the impeachment issue my take is like this:

    Trump really cant afford to lose too many of them especially if the first motion to dismiss the impeachment case is to succeed. He can only be removed from office if there is a two thirds senate majority on the proposal to remove.

    But a simple majority is what he has to hold to succeed at defeating all other forms of censure motions and getting the witnesses he wants dragged before the Senate.

    The numbers are:

    Democrazies 45

    Independent 2

    Repugnants 53

    So three repugnant defectors would give a tied vote (assuming the independents vote with the democrazies).

    Not a comfortable position and certainly not now after assassinating Souleimani, Afghanistan war report looking ugly and who knows what else. The 'permanent state' gangsters can do much damage to his brittle ego by getting four repugnants to defect.

    So if Trump is damaged goods going into the election cycle he could well be defeated by Bernie Sanders IF he can overcome the jackals in the democazie party machine. Hope is all I have.

    V , Jan 18 2020 9:49 utc | 118
    Life is rough for many americans struggling to get by. They don't have time to protest, however, if the dollar were to lose it's world currency and our financial systems collapses there could be a revolt with all the guns here, but i wouldn't count on it looking anything like america's first revolution.
    Posted by: aye, myself & me | Jan 18 2020 6:35 utc | 107

    Yea, I know. I have a sister living in Oregon. She's still working @ 70yo.
    Revolution almost never has a good ending; in the U.S., at this time; it would be the worst, IMO.

    Carciofi , Jan 18 2020 13:11 utc | 133
    "Americans are sick of war"

    Probably a sizeable chunk of the people. But not the ruling class.

    "Most of this carnage by the United States is done in the name of dishonest and non-existent defense of country, of "spreading democracy" or of forced regime change based on the lie of protecting by force the people of other lands. The truth of all these politically motivated lies is that the brutality of U.S. aggression is purposeful slaughter for political and geo-political gain, all at the expense of innocent populations around the globe."
    DFC , Jan 18 2020 17:59 utc | 154
    So Trump said:

    "I want to win," he said. "We don't win any wars anymore . . . We spend $7 trillion, everybody else got the oil and we're not winning anymore."..."I wouldn't go to war with you people,"..."You're a bunch of dopes and babies."

    If this is true, it means that Trump does not consider those ME wars useless or unwinnables, but only the people who manage them are not clever or resolute enough, which is quite scary, because imply that instead of "dupes and babies" if he put in charge "winners" and "real men" may be they can "go to Theran", or "win a land war in Asia" (Montgomery recommend not to start any never).

    This language about "winners" and "losers" is so....American, it means that you do not "win" or "lose" as a matter of life, NO, but you are inherently a "winner" (always win)or a f**king "loser", it is the predestinationist (calvinistic) roots of the American culture and you can see it clearly in almost all the Hollywood movies with the "good gay" ("winner") overcoming an incredible number of obstacles, and at the end he kills all the "bad gays" ("losers"). It is all about is the Good against the Evil, the Winners (The Justs) against the Losers (The Doomed)

    May be now the "winners" start to learn (again) how to lose (as in Vietnam), and this cultural roots make very dangerous for the US to lose a war, because it crumbles all this narrative of the Manifest Destiny, the Chosen People, and all that BS. The blow back could be devastating.

    I think The American people love wars, they love to see in the CNN Tomahawks flying inside the Revolucionary Guard buildings and blowing them, US helicopters piercing with missiles the Iraqi APAC's packed with soldiers, the Abrams tanks blowing-up the Iraqi T72 with DU rounds, the videos US planes crushing the hangars, the command centers, the A10 straffing with their guns the "Highway of Death" and the bodies of Saddam soldiers scorched black inside the destroyed buses...They like it, especially if you carefully hide the busted bodies of woman and children from the cameras, or conceal the dead and injures GI's. They like the new tech weapons and how they "work" against the "bad guys"

    American people love wars, what they hate is losing wars...and Trump represents, as someone said, what a good percentage of American people want to be, it is the archetype of "The Winner", a populists "Caesar", the last chance of a crumbling Empire

    [Jan 19, 2020] In Bullying Iraq, America is Starting to Look Like the New Evil Empire

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    The U.S. has occasionally exerted pressure on democratic allies, but never treated them like servile pawns. Until now. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (C) and his wife Susan (R) wait to board a helicopter to the US embassy at the terminal at Baghdad International Airport on January 9, 2019.(ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)

    January 17, 2020

    |

    12:01 am

    Ted Galen Carpenter A policy statement that the State Department issued on January 10 asserts that "America is a force for good in the Middle East." It adds, "We want to be a friend and partner to a sovereign, prosperous, and stable Iraq." Yet the Trump administration's recent conduct toward Iraq indicates a very different (and much uglier) policy. Washington is behaving like an impatient, imperial power that has concluded that an obstreperous colony requires a dose of corrective discipline.

    Washington's late December airstrikes on Iraqi militia targets, in retaliation for the killing of an American civilian contractor working at a base in northern Iraq, greatly provoked the Iraqi government and population. Massive anti-American demonstrations erupted in several cities, and an assault on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad forced diplomats to take refuge in a special " safe room ."

    The drone strike on Iranian General Qassem Soleimani outside Baghdad a few days later was an even more brazen violation of Iraq's sovereignty. Carrying out the assassination on Iraqi territory when Soleimani was there at the invitation of Prime Minister Adel Abdull Mahdi to discuss a new peace feeler from Saudi Arabia was especially clumsy and arrogant. It created suspicions that the United States was deliberately seeking to maintain turmoil in the Middle East to justify its continued military presence there. The killing of Soleimani (as well as two influential Iraqi militia leaders) led Iraq's government to pass a resolution calling on Mahdi to expel U.S. forces stationed in the country, and he promptly began to prepare legislation to implement that goal.

    Trump's initial reaction to the prospect that Baghdad might order U.S. troops to leave was akin to a foreign policy temper tantrum. He threatened America's democratic ally with harsh economic sanctions if it dared to take that step. As Trump put it, "we will charge them sanctions like they've never seen before, ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame."

    Over the following days, it became apparent that the sanctions threat was not just a spontaneous, intemperate outburst on the part of President Trump. Compelling Iraq to continue hosting U.S. forces was official administration policy. Senior officials from the Treasury Department and other agencies began drafting specific sanctions that could be imposed. Washington explicitly warned the Iraqi government that it could lose access to its account held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Such a freeze would amount to financial strangulation of the country's already fragile economy.

    U.S. arrogance towards Baghdad seems almost boundless. When Mahdi asked the administration to " prepare a mechanism " for the exit of American forces and commence negotiations towards that transition, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo flatly refused . Indeed, the State Department's January 10 statement made it clear that there would be no such discussions: "At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership -- not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East."

    Throughout the Cold War, U.S. leaders proudly proclaimed that NATO and other American-led alliances were voluntary associations of free nations. Conversely, the Warsaw Pact alliance of Eastern European countries formed in response to NATO was a blatantly imperial enterprise of puppet regimes under the Kremlin's total domination. Moscow's brutal suppression of even modest political deviations within its satellite empire helped confirm the difference. Soviet tanks rolled into East Germany in 1953, Hungary in 1956, and Czechoslovakia in 1968 to crush reform factions and solidify a Soviet military occupation. Even when the USSR did not resort to such heavy-handed measures, it was clear that the "allies" were on a very short leash.

    Although the United States has occasionally exerted pressure on its allies when they've opposed its objectives, it has not attempted to treat democratic partners as servile pawns. That is why the Trump administration's current behavior towards Iraq is so troubling and exhibits such unprecedented levels of crudeness. America is in danger of becoming the geopolitical equivalent of a middle school bully.

    If Washington refuses to withdraw its forces from Iraq, defying the Baghdad government's calls to leave, those troops will no longer be guests or allies. They would constitute a hostile army of occupation, however elaborate the rhetorical facade.

    At that point, America would no longer be a moral "force for good" in the Middle East or anywhere else. The United States would be behaving as an amoral imperial power imposing its authority on weaker democratic countries that dare adopt measures contrary to Washington's policy preferences. America might not yet have replaced the Soviet Union as (in Ronald Reagan's words) the "evil empire," but it will be disturbingly far along the path to that status.

    Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at The American Conservative , is the author of 12 books and more than 850 articles on international affairs.

    me • 2 days ago

    "America is in danger of becoming the geopolitical equivalent of a middle school bully"?

    Its not a mere prospect, its history. The US has been a bully for many years, at least for the last 20 years, if not more.

    It is 100% irrelevant what American think of their "moral standing" in the world. In terms of foreign policy, it only matter what OTHER countries think, right or wrong. The rest of the world already think the US govt is a bully. The fact that Trump, became president is simply the icing on the big reveal cake. Yes, foreign powers helped Trump win the election, but that was simply an effect on the margin. The majority of Trump supporters do not need Russian interference to be swayed by him. Trump action embodies that which his supports wanted for many many years.

    What Trump has done is give foreign allies something tangible, indisputable proof to point to, every time the US come knocking on their door ask for help on "this", "that" and the "other thing". From now on, they will make sure the get favorable terms in writing, rather than verbal agreements.

    Gary Sellars me • a day ago
    Upvoted, even though you repeat the BS allegations of Russian "interference". Social media traffic mining by a privately-owned clickbait operation and an email leak to Wikileaks from the DNC by a disgruntled insider is not "Russian interference". A handful of FB ads taken out both before and after the elections, and slamming BOTH trump and Shrillary is likewise evidence of nothing.

    "Russiagate" is a hoax, a monumental LIE foisted onto the US public by a vengeful Democrat party, their political-appointees within government agencies, the corporate media and the Deep State reptiles who need eternal hostility to Russia to justify the $1T per annum gravy train that so enriches them.

    John Mann Gary Sellars • a day ago
    Upvoted, even though your choice of description for the idiotic allegations of Russian interference is not appropriate for genteel society.
    Aker John Mann • 20 hours ago • edited
    Russiagate and other forms of Anti-Russian yapping are but an effort for a risingly dysfunctional society to blame outsiders for failure and dysfunction.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Iran has long been viewed as central for securing US hegemony over Eurasia

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Paul , Jan 18 2020 0:29 utc | 74

    Iran has long been viewed as central for securing US hegemony over Eurasia and the US/UK have not recovered from the 1979 Islamic revolution. Iran has: 1) large reserves of oil and natural gas, 2) key Geo-strategic position- near the convergence of three continents, straddling the Middle East and Central Asia, and abutting the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman, a strategic "choke point" through which circa 25% of the world's energy transits. As summarized by Dan Glazebrook- "The reason for this obsession with destroying Iran – shared by all factions of the Western ruling class, despite their differences over means – is obvious: Iran's very existence as an independent state threatens imperial control of the region – which in turn underpins both US military power and the global role of the dollar."
    During the 2016 campaign, then candidate Trump constantly railed against the JCPOA ('Iran nuclear deal'), as the 'worst' treaty the US ever signed. After becoming President, Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 and immediately imposed crippling economic sanctions on Iran, vowing to reduce energy exports to zero, effectively declaring economic war on Iran. I suspect Trump represents a faction in the US ruling establishment committed to regime change in Iran. Trump may have believed that Iran would buckle under the weight of US economic sanctions and capitulate to US demands. These include instillation of a US- friendly government that will: 1) stop supporting Hezbollah, Bashar Assad in Syria and the Houthi-Ansarullah movement in Yemen, and 2) allow US energy firms to loot Iran's energy reserves. As this approach has not worked, Trump is now aggressively pursuing the military arm of this policy.
    The New Year started with a proverbial 'bang' with Trump giving the go ahead for the targeted assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi General Abu Madhi al-Muhandis, which had been long in planning. As pointed out by Pepe Escobar- 'It does not matter where the green light for the assassination.... came from....This is an act of war. Unilateral, unprovoked and illegal.' Not surprisingly, Trump's actions have been generally well received by Congress and corporate media. We are now seeing US vassals- UK, France and Germany line up behind Trump to enact the dispute resolution mechanism (DRM) and sanctions snapback provision, resulting in the re-imposition of UN sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Apparently, this action was prodded by Trump's threats to apply 25% tariffs to EU auto exports to the US.
    It appears Pentagon war plans for Iran are being put in place. As per a recent piece by William Arkin in Newsweek- prior to Trump's inauguration, the US military carried out an exercise "Global Thunder 17", simulating a nuclear response against Iran in retaliation for the sinking of an American aircraft carrier and use of chemical weapons against US troops. This war scenario was chosen because it "allowed the greatest integration of nuclear weapons, conventional military, missile defense, cyber, and space into what nuclear strategists call '21st Century deterrence.'" The Pentagon now has a 'low yield' nuclear warhead- W76–2, apparently developed for an Iran-type of scenario. These weapons are deliverable by submarine-launched Trident II missiles.
    So where do we stand?
    It is doubtful that Trump will be convicted by the Republican- controlled Senate. This will only embolden him more. US vassals- UK, France and Germany are lining up behind Trump to enact the dispute resolution mechanism (DRM) and sanctions snapback provision, resulting in the re-imposition of UN sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Apparently, this action was prodded by Trump's threats to apply 25% tariffs to EU auto exports to the US. Canada, Australia and New Zealand have also expressed support for Trump's position. France is deploying her only aircraft carrier to the ME to 'fight ISIS'.
    Corporate media is largely on board with Trump's plan.
    Over the last two decades, the US has expended (squandered) astronomical sums of taxpayer money (>$6 Trillion) and lives of thousands of troops on ME wars. After committing such large amounts of financial and human capital, the Pentagon has no intention of admitting their mistakes or changing their behavior. Doing so is an acknowledgement of failure and by extension military weakness. Further, the strength and stability of the dollar and more broadly US global power, is contingent on maintaining control of ME energy reserves. The financial elite/directors of US foreign policy are well aware of continuing US economic decline and looming strategic debacles confronting the Pentagon in Afghanistan (longest war in US history), Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen. Logic dictates that the US cannot 'win' a war with Iran, but this assumes one is dealing with rational thinking. By exiting the JCPOA, Trump put the US on a collision course with Iran. Alea iacta est (l. 'The die is cast'). Links of potential interest follow.
    Notes
    1. With a New Weapon in Donald Trump's Hands, the Iran Crisis Risks Going NuclearBy William Arkin Jan 13, 2020; Link: www.newsweek.com/trump-iran-new-nuclear-weapon-increases-risk-crisis-nuclear-1481752
    2. Washington continues war buildup against Iran By Bill Van Auken Jan 17, 2020; Link: www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/01/17/iran-j17.html

    [Jan 19, 2020] Jim Webb The Iran crisis isn't a failure of the executive branch alone

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.washingtonpost.com

    Jim Webb: The Iran crisis isn't a failure of the executive branch alone - When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren't even at war with?

    Visitors walk around the stairs inside of the Rotunda to the top of the Capitol dome last month in Washington. (Samuel Corum/AFP/Getty Images) By Jim Webb January 9

    Jim Webb, a Democrat from Virginia, served in the U.S. Senate from 2007 to 2013 and was secretary of the Navy under President Ronald Reagan from 1987 to 1988.

    Strongly held views are unlikely to change regarding the morality and tactical wisdom of President Trump's decision to kill Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani as he traveled on a road outside the Baghdad airport after having arrived on a commercial flight . But the debate regarding the long-term impact of this act on America's place in the world, and the potential vulnerability of U.S. government officials to similar reprisals, has just begun.

    How did it become acceptable to assassinate one of the top military officers of a country with whom we are not formally at war during a public visit to a third country that had no opposition to his presence? And what precedent has this assassination established on the acceptable conduct of nation-states toward military leaders of countries with which we might have strong disagreement short of actual war -- or for their future actions toward our own people?

    With respect to Iran, unfortunately, this is hardly a new issue.

    In 2007, the Senate passed a non-binding resolution calling on the George W. Bush administration to categorize Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as an international terrorist organization. I opposed this proposal based on the irrefutable fact that the organization was an inseparable arm of the Iranian government. The Revolutionary Guards are not independent actors like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. They are part of the Iranian government's formal military structure, with an estimated strength of more than 150,000 members . It is legally and logically impossible to define one part of a national government as an international terrorist organization without applying the term to that entire government.

    Definitions define conduct. If terrorist organizations are actively involved against us, we attack them. But a terrorist organization is by definition a nongovernmental entity that operates along the creases of national sovereignties and international law. The Revolutionary Guards are a part of the Iranian government. If they are attacking us, they are not a terrorist organization. They're an attacking army.

    The 2007 proposal did not succeed. But last April the State Department unilaterally designated the Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist entity. Although more than 60 organizations are listed in this category, this is the only time our government has ever identified an element of a nation-state as a terrorist organization. And the designation was by many accounts made despite the opposition of the CIA and the Defense Department.

    Which leads us to Soleimani.

    The assassination of the most well-known military commander of a country with which we are not formally at war during his visit to a third country that had not opposed his presence invites a lax moral justification for a plethora of retaliatory measures -- and not only from Iran. It also holds the possibility of more deeply entrenching the U.S. military in a region that most Americans would very much prefer to deal with from a more maneuverable distance.

    No thinking American would support Soleimani's conduct. But it is also indisputable that his activities were carried out as part of his military duties. His harm to American military units was through his role as an enabler and adviser to third-country forces. This, frankly, is a reality of war.

    I fought as a Marine in Vietnam. We had similar problems throughout the Vietnam War because of Vietnam's propinquity to China, which along with the Soviet Union provided continuous support to the North Vietnamese, including most of the weapons used against us on the battlefield. China was then a rogue state with nuclear weapons. Its leaders continually spouted anti-U.S. rhetoric. Yet we did not assassinate its military leaders for rendering tactical advice or logistical assistance. We fought the war that was in front of us, and we created the conditions in which we engaged China aggressively through diplomatic, economic and other means.

    Now, despite Trump's previous assertions that he wants to dramatically reduce the United States' footprint in the Middle East, it seems clear that he has been seduced into making unwise announcements similar to the rhetoric used by his immediate predecessors of both parties. Their blunders -- in Iraq, Libya and Syria -- destabilized the region and distracted the United States from its greatest long-term challenge: China's military and economic expansion throughout the world.

    At a time when our political debates have come to resemble Kardashian-like ego squabbles, the United States desperately needs common-sense leadership in its foreign policy. This is not a failure of the executive branch alone; it is the result of a breakdown in our entire foreign policy establishment, from the executive branch to the legislative branch and even to many of our once-revered think tanks. If partisanship in foreign policy should end at the water's edge, then such policies should be forged through respectful, bipartisan debate.

    The first such debate should focus on the administration's unilateral decision to label an entire element of a foreign government an international terrorist organization. If Congress wishes to hold Iran to such a standard, it should then formally authorize the use of force against Iran's government. The failure of congressional leadership to make these kinds of decisions is an example of why our foreign policy has become so militarized, and of how weak and even irrelevant Congress has allowed itself to become in the eyes of our citizens.

    Read more:

    [Jan 19, 2020] The Suleimani assassination, imperialist strategy and the crisis of the Iranian regime by Keith Jones

    16 January 2020
    Notable quotes:
    "... In diplomatic terms, the US drive to force Iran into neo-colonial subjugation is expressed in Trump and Pompeo's demand that Tehran negotiate a replacement to the "flawed" Iran nuclear deal -- a "Trump deal" that would severely limit Iran's military, "roll back" its influence across the Middle East, and permanently bar it from a civil nuclear program. ..."
    "... it is animated by the calculation that a "grand bargain" more favorable to US imperialism can be extorted from the crisis-ridden and deeply divided Iranian bourgeoisie, under conditions where it is facing not only ever-escalating external pressure, but also massive social opposition, above all from the working class. ..."
    "... The Iranian regime was shaken by an explosion of popular anger against austerity and social inequality at the beginning of 2018. Last November, when massive gas price hikes sparked demonstrations in more than 100 cities, some of them violent, the Iranian government again responded with brutal repression, reportedly killing scores of protesters ..."
    "... The assassination of Suleimani was itself clearly targeted at more than "just" threatening and destabilizing the Islamic Republic. It was aimed at shifting the internal dynamics of the Iranian regime. ..."
    "... Washington Post ..."
    Jan 19, 2020 | www.wsws.org

    As with any sudden turn in world geopolitics, the true purpose and full implications of Washington's criminal assassination of Iranian Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Suleimani are emerging only with the passage of time.

    The Trump administration's claims that the assassination was in response to an imminent threat to American lives have been exposed as blatant lies. Suleimani's murder was months in the planning and long advocated by key figures in the US military-foreign policy establishment, including CIA head Gina Haspel, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Trump National Security Adviser John Bolton.

    The killing of the military leader, who was widely viewed as second only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei in Iran's power structure, constitutes a dramatic escalation of the Trump administration's campaign of "maximum pressure" on Iran. This campaign combines unrelenting diplomatic and military pressure with devastating economic sanctions -- that are themselves tantamount to an act of war -- cyber-warfare and other "special ops."

    It is aimed at "turning" Iran and bringing to power -- whether through the reconfiguration or outright overthrow of Iran's Shia clergy-led bourgeois nationalist regime -- a government in Tehran, akin to the Shah's bloody quarter-century-long dictatorship, that will be at American imperialism's beck and call.

    Iran has long been viewed by US imperialist strategists as central to its drive to secure hegemony over all Eurasia. This is because of its vast oil wealth and its geo-strategic position, near the convergence of three continents and straddling the Middle East and Central Asia, the world's two most important oil exporting regions.

    In diplomatic terms, the US drive to force Iran into neo-colonial subjugation is expressed in Trump and Pompeo's demand that Tehran negotiate a replacement to the "flawed" Iran nuclear deal -- a "Trump deal" that would severely limit Iran's military, "roll back" its influence across the Middle East, and permanently bar it from a civil nuclear program.

    Washington's maximum pressure campaign against Iran is predicated on the "credible" threat of all-out war, and is intimately bound up with its preparations for "strategic conflict" with Russia and China. It could rapidly cascade into a catastrophic war with Iran that would engulf the entire Mideast and draw in the other great powers.

    But it is animated by the calculation that a "grand bargain" more favorable to US imperialism can be extorted from the crisis-ridden and deeply divided Iranian bourgeoisie, under conditions where it is facing not only ever-escalating external pressure, but also massive social opposition, above all from the working class.

    The Iranian regime was shaken by an explosion of popular anger against austerity and social inequality at the beginning of 2018. Last November, when massive gas price hikes sparked demonstrations in more than 100 cities, some of them violent, the Iranian government again responded with brutal repression, reportedly killing scores of protesters .

    The assassination of Suleimani was itself clearly targeted at more than "just" threatening and destabilizing the Islamic Republic. It was aimed at shifting the internal dynamics of the Iranian regime. It removed the military leader responsible for overseeing Iran's attempts to counteract US pressure through a network of foreign militia groups, most of them based on Shia populism. Suleimani, moreover, was a leader, as the subsequent mass demonstrations protesting his murder and the US war threats attested, who had a broad base of popular support.

    Given the manner in which Suleimani died, including his evident lack of security, it is legitimate to ask whether factional opponents within the Iranian state facilitated his murder.

    What is incontrovertible is that in the wake of his assassination and the tumultuous events it precipitated, the factional warfare has intensified, culminating in last week's inadvertent downing of a Ukrainian International Airlines plane by an Iranian Revolutionary Guard missile, its cover-up, and the outbreak of student demonstrations denouncing government negligence and repression.

    Yesterday, President Hassan Rouhani, who spearheaded the push for the rapprochement with the European imperialist powers and Washington that resulted in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal, denounced the military for failing to "apologize" for the downing of the passenger jet. He also criticized the recent decision of the Guardian Council to exclude many sitting parliamentarians from standing in the coming elections. He called for "national reconciliation" -- a slogan long raised by supporters of the Greens, a movement based in dissident sections of the bourgeoisie and upper-middle class, which, with imperialist backing, disputed the outcome of the 2009 presidential election.

    Meanwhile, on a visit to New Delhi in which he met with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Iranian Foreign Minister Javed Zarif declared that the Indian government, a key US ally, could play an important "role in de-escalating tensions in the Gulf."

    A major element in the Trump administration's drive to leverage the crisis of the Iranian regime and the longstanding cleavages within it has been the effort to cajole the European imperialist powers -- Germany, France and Britain -- into joining Washington in repudiating the Iran nuclear accord.

    On Tuesday, the so-called E-3 took a giant step in this direction by initiating the accord's disputes resolution mechanism, thereby placing themselves on a fast track to join Washington in imposing and policing the sanctions that are strangling Iran's economy.

    It is Washington that trashed the nuclear accord and is pursuing "maximum aggression" against Iran. Through its dominance of the world financial system, it has successfully shut down the world's trade with Iran, thereby making the quid pro quo underlying the nuclear accord -- the removal of sanctions in exchange for the dismantling of much of Iran's civil nuclear program -- null and void.

    Yet, in what could only be music to Trump and Pompeo's ears, France, Germany and Britain are blaming Iran for violating the agreement, cynically citing Tehran's attempts to gain leverage by exceeding various JCPOA stipulations and accusing it of seeking nuclear weapons.

    The European imperialist powers have been rattled by provocative and unilateral US actions that cut across their interests. Suleimani's assassination was just the latest rude shock.

    Britain and the EU powers fear Washington's ever-escalating aggression against Iran will spark an all-out war that will redound against their own imperialist interests, even if it doesn't immediately draw in Russia and China. A war would send oil prices soaring, roil the European economy, spark another massive refugee crisis and further radicalize a growing working class counter-offensive.

    No doubt Pompeo and others have told the Europeans that if they want to restrain Trump, avert a major conflagration and retain influence in the Middle East, they must rally behind Washington and its maximum pressure campaign.

    To these dubious incentives, the Trump administration added a trade war threat, according to a report published yesterday by the Washington Post under the title, "Days before Europeans warned Iran of nuclear deal violations, Trump secretly threatened to impose 25 percent tariff on European autos if they didn't."

    That said, as in the case of Washington, a key factor in the Europeans' calculations is the character of Iran's bourgeois regime and its manifest crisis.

    The European imperialist powers have clearly been emboldened by the Iranian regime's response to Suleimani's assassination, which was limited to missile strikes of which the Pentagon was given advance warning and which resulted in no casualties, and by its ham-fisted attempt to cover up its responsibility for the downing of Ukraine Air Flight 752.

    For all its anti-American bluster, the Iranian regime is a bourgeois national regime. In so far as it has come into conflict with Washington, it has always been from the standpoint of increasing its own possibilities for exploiting the working class and boosting its regional influence.

    The growing opposition from the working class impels Iran to intensify what has been a decades-long attempt to effect a rapprochement with every US administration, dating back at least to that of George H.W. Bush.

    If it can, the Islamic Republic's elite, or sections of it, will strike a deal with imperialism at the expense of the masses. Even before Rouhani came to power in 2014 on a program that coupled overtures toward Washington and Europe with further privatizations, subsidy cuts and other anti-working class measures, the Iranian regime was involved in behind-the-scenes talks with the Obama administration on removing the sanctions.

    Similar talks could happen in the future or even be underway though back channels now. Trump has shown in his dealings with North Korea that he is capable of pursuing such a two-track policy.

    As for the so-called Iranian "hardliners," they are no less hostile to the working class than their factional opponents, as evidenced by the implementation of neo-liberal "reform" measures by every Iranian government since the late 1980s, and their readiness to unite with their factional opponents to suppress any challenge from below.

    Ultimately, the "hardliners" supported the nuclear deal and the pursuit of closer relations with the US and the EU. Even more importantly, their strategy for opposing Washington--based on seeking close military-strategic ties with Russia and China and the use of Shia populism and religious sectarianism to rally support across the Middle East--is a blind alley that risks plunging the region and the world into a conflagration.

    ... ... ...

    Keith Jones

    [Jan 19, 2020] The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters

    Jan 19, 2020 | jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com

    "The Marxist political parties, including the Social Democrats and their followers, had fourteen years to prove their abilities. The result is a heap of ruins. All around us are symptoms portending this breakdown. With an unparalleled effort of will and of brute force the Communist method of madness is trying as a last resort to poison and undermine an inwardly shaken and uprooted nation.

    In fourteen years the November parties have ruined the German farmer. In fourteen years they created an army of millions of unemployed. The National Government will carry out the following plan with iron resolution and dogged perseverance. Within four years the German farmer must be saved from pauperism. Within four years unemployment must be completely overcome.

    Our concern to provide daily bread will be equally a concern for the fulfillment of the responsibilities of society to those who are old and sick. The best safeguard against any experiment which might endanger the currency lies in economical administration, the promotion of work, and the preservation of agriculture, as well as in the use of individual initiative."

    Adolf Hitler, Radio Appeal to the German People, February 1, 1933

    "Both religion and socialism thus glorify weakness and need. Both recoil from the world as it is: tough, unequal, harsh. Both flee to an imaginary future realm where they can feel safe. Both say to you. Be a nice boy. Be a good little girl. Share. Feel sorry for the little people. And both desperately seek someone to look after them -- whether it be God or the State.

    A thriving upper class accepts with a good conscience the sacrifice of untold human beings, who, for its sake, must be reduced and lowered to incomplete human beings,to slaves, to instruments... One cannot fail to see in all these noble races the beast of prey, the splendid blond beast, prowling about avidly in search of spoil and victory; this hidden core needs to erupt from time to time, the animal has to get out again and go back to the wilderness."

    Friedrich Nietzsche

    "At a certain point in their historical cycles, social classes become detached from their traditional parties. In other words, the traditional parties, in their particular organisational bias, with the particular men who constitute, represent and lead them, are no longer recognised by their class as their own, and representing their interests. When such crises occur, the immediate situation becomes delicate and dangerous, because the field is open for violent solutions, for the activities of unknown forces, represented by charismatic 'men of destiny' [demagogues].

    The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters."

    Antonio Gramsci, Prison Notebooks, 1930-35

    "Be human in this most inhuman of ages; guard the image of man for it is the image of God. You agree? Good. Then go with my blessing. But I warn you, do not expect to make many friends. One of the awful facts of our age is the evidence that it is stricken indeed, stricken to the very core of its being by the presence of the Unspeakable."

    Thomas Merton, Raids on the Unspeakable

    "The more power a government has the more it can act arbitrarily according to the whims and desires of the elite, and the more it will make war on others and murder its foreign and domestic subjects."

    R. J. Rummel, Death by Government: A History of Mass Murder and Genocide Since 1900

    "This is as old as Babylon, and evil as sin. It is the power of the darkness of the world, and of spiritual wickedness in high places. The only difference is that it is not happening in the past, or in a book, or in some vaguely frightening prophecy -- it is happening here and now."

    Jesse

    "The wealth of another region excites their greed; and if it is weak, their lust for power as well. Nothing from the rising to the setting of the sun is enough for them. Among all others only they are compelled to attack the poor as well as the rich. Plunder, rape, and murder they falsely call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace."

    Tacitus

    "Thus did a handful of rapacious citizens come to control all that was worth controlling in America. Thus was the savage and stupid and entirely inappropriate and unnecessary and humorless American class system created. Honest, industrious, peaceful citizens were classed as bloodsuckers, if they asked to be paid a living wage.

    And they saw that praise was reserved henceforth for those who devised means of getting paid enormously for committing crimes against which no laws had been passed. Thus the American dream turned belly up, turned green, bobbed to the scummy surface of cupidity unlimited, filled with gas, went bang in the noonday sun."

    Kurt Vonnegut, God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater

    "Day by day the money-masters of America become more aware of their danger, they draw together, they grow more class-conscious, more aggressive. The [first world] war has taught them the possibilities of propaganda; it has accustomed them to the idea of enormous campaigns which sway the minds of millions and make them pliable to any purpose.

    American political corruption was the buying up of legislatures and assemblies to keep them from doing the people's will and protecting the people's interests; it was the exploiter entrenching himself in power, it was financial autocracy undermining and destroying political democracy. By the blindness and greed of ruling classes the people have been plunged into infinite misery."

    Upton Sinclair, The Brass Check

    "Greed is a bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction."

    Erich Fromm

    "We must alter our lives in order to alter our hearts, for it is impossible to live one way and pray another.

    If you have not chosen the kingdom of God first, it will in the end make no difference what you have chosen instead."

    William Law

    [Jan 19, 2020] The Little-Known Loophole in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty The National Interest

    Jan 19, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    North Korea's cavalier rejection of its NPT membership in 2003 is a prime example , but many saw it as a case not applicable to most member states. However, more recently, Saudi Arabia , and Turkey and Iran (which, after the killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, is looking for new ways to upset Washington), have gone so far as ti layout terms under which they would leave the treaty and even obtain nuclear weapons, statements without precedent in the treaty's history.

    A number of otherwise respectable member countries, such as South Korea , also have political parties in their legislatures that advocate treaty withdrawal and acquisition of nuclear weapons.

    We have to take seriously the possibility that -- without international action to arrest this tendency -- the already frayed bonds that tie countries to the NPT and the pledge not to acquire nuclear weapons may not hold. This would presage a world with many more nuclear states and a vastly increased risk of nuclear use.

    Victor Gilinsky is program advisor for the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC) in Arlington, Virginia. He served on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under Presidents Ford, Carter, and Reagan. Henry Sokolski is executive director of NPEC and the author of Underestimated: Our Not So Peaceful Nuclear Future (second edition 2019). He served as deputy for nonproliferation policy in the office of the U.S. secretary of defense in the Cheney Pentagon.

    [Jan 19, 2020] Did Washington played on oil price hike threat to achive Genramny, France and GB compliance

    Jan 19, 2020 | www.wsws.org

    Britain and the EU powers fear Washington's ever-escalating aggression against Iran will spark an all-out war that will redound against their own imperialist interests, even if it doesn't immediately draw in Russia and China. A war would send oil prices soaring, roil the European economy, spark another massive refugee crisis and further radicalize a growing working class counter-offensive.

    No doubt Pompeo and others have told the Europeans that if they want to restrain Trump, avert a major conflagration and retain influence in the Middle East, they must rally behind Washington and its maximum pressure campaign.

    To these dubious incentives, the Trump administration added a trade war threat, according to a report published yesterday by the Washington Post under the title, "Days before Europeans warned Iran of nuclear deal violations, Trump secretly threatened to impose 25 percent tariff on European autos if they didn't."

    [Jan 19, 2020] Iran The EU-three Trigger Dispute Mechanism in Iran Nuclear Deal New Eastern Outlook

    Jan 19, 2020 | journal-neo.org

    Why, after so many assurances to the contrary, have the three European Iran's Nuclear Deal Partner's – Germany, France, the UK – decided to go after Iran, to follow the US dictate again?

    The short answer is because the cowards. They have zero backbone to stand up against the US hegemony, because they are afraid to be sanctioned – as Trump indicated if they were to honor the" Nuclear Deal". Iran is absolutely in their right to progressively increase uranium enrichment, especially since the US dropped out unilaterally, without any specific reasons, other than on Netanyahu's orders – of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also called Iran's Nuclear Deal.

    Just a few days ago Ms. Angela Merkel met with President Putin in Moscow, and BOTH pledged in front of a huge press crowd that the Nuclear Deal must stay, must be maintained and validated.

    And now, because of Trump's Barbarian threats, trade threats on Europe – an increase of up to 25% import taxes on European cars – and wanting a new deal with Iran, whatever that means, they, the Europeans – the three Nuclear Deal partners, back down. Why not call Trump's bluff? As China did. This Barbarian Kingpin is lashing around his deathbed with tariffs and sanctions, it is only a sign of weakness, a sign of slowly but surely disappearing in the – hopefully – bottomless abyss.

    This threesome is a bunch of shameless and hopeless cowards. They have not realized yet that the west, starting with the US empire, is passé. It's a sinking ship. It's high time for Iran to orient herself towards the east. Iran is already a Middle-Eastern key hub for the Chinese Belt and Road initiative (BRI), or the New Silk road. Iran can do without Europe; and the US needs Europe more than vice-versa. But the 'chickens' haven't noticed that yet.

    On the behest of Washington, the Trump clown, they, Germany, France and the UK, want to start an official dispute process, bringing Iran back to where it was before the Nuclear Deal, and reinstating all the UN sanctions of before the signature of the deal in July 2015. And this despite the fact that Iran has adhered to their part of the deal by 100%, as several times attested to by the Atomic Energy Commission in Vienna. Can you imagine what these abhorrent Europeans are about to do?

    This reminds of how Europe pilfered, robbed and raped Africa and the rest of the now called developing world, for hundreds of years. No ethics, no qualms, just sheer egocentricity and cowardice. The European Barbarians and those on the other side of the Atlantic deserve each other. And they deserve disappearing in the same bottomless pit.

    Iran may consider three ideas:

    1) Call the European bluff. Let them start the dispute process – and let them drive it all the way to the UN Security Council. Their spineless British Brother in Crime, BoJo, also called the British Prime-Minister, Boris Johnson, will do the job for them, bringing the case "Iran Nuclear Deal – and Sanctions" to the UN Security Council – where it will fail, because Russia and China will not approve the motion.

    2) Much more important, Dear Friends in Iran – do not trust the Europeans for even one iota ! – They have proven time and again that they are not trustworthy. They buckle under every time Trump is breaking wind – and

    3) Dedollarize your economy even faster – move as far as possible away from the west – join the Eastern economy, that controls at least one third of the world's GDP. You are doing already a lot in this direction – but faster. Join the SCO – the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, comprising half of Mother Earth's population; ditch the dollar and the SWIFT payment system, join instead the Chinese Interbank Payment System (CIPS) – and be free of the sanction-prone western monetary system. Eastern monetary transactions are blocking out western dollar-based sanctions. Already your hydrocarbon trades with China, Russia, India and others are not carried out in US dollars, but in local currencies, Chinese yuans, Russian rubles and Indian rupees.

    True – Iran will have to confront Iran-internally the western (NATO) and CIA trained, funded and bought Atlantists, the Fifth Columnists. They are the ones that create constant virulently violent unrest in the cities of Iran; they are trained – and paid for – to bring about Regime Change. That's what Russia and China and Venezuela and Cuba are also confronted with. They, the Fifth Columnists have to be eradicated. It's a challenge, but it should be doable.

    Follow the Ayatollah's route. He is on the right track – looking East.

    Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. After working for over 30 years with the World Bank he penned Implosion , an economic thriller, based on his first-hand experience. Exclusively for the online magazine " New Eastern Outlook. "

    [Jan 18, 2020] The joke is on us: Without the USSR the USA oligarchy resorted to cannibalism and devour the American people

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 18, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

    In another sense, however, the passing of the cold war could not have been more disorienting. In 1987, Georgi Arbatov, a senior adviser to the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev , had warned: "We are going to do a terrible thing to you – we are going to deprive you of an enemy."

    ...Winning the cold war brought Americans face-to-face with a predicament comparable to that confronting the lucky person who wins the lottery: hidden within a windfall is the potential for monumental disaster.

    [Jan 18, 2020] Diaspora in the USA has an outsized influence on how their host country thinks of its interests in their regions of birth

    Jan 18, 2020 | www.unz.com

    wedish Family , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:10 pm GMT

    @AP

    1. The interests of these countries may be aligned.

    2. Even if the immigrant may be mistaken, if his belief is sincere he may still provide valuable contact, intelligence, etc.

    This is a very naive idea of how perceived "national interests" form. In real life, highly-motivated groups of immigrants will have an outsized influence on how their host country thinks of its interests in their regions of birth. This is basically a geopolitical example of Nassim Taleb's minority rule .

    United States is especially vulnerable to such subversion since much of its conception of itself and its place in the world centers on elastic and easily abused ideas like freedom and human rights .

    [Jan 18, 2020] While the US assassination of Qassem Soleimani was an act of international barbarity, emblematic of the thuggish nature of US foreign policy, it was neither the only de facto act of war the United States has undertaken against Iran, nor the most harmful

    Yankistan most potent weapon isn't military, it's economic, and through it the US government controls the world. That weapon is the US Dollar and ever since Nixon took it off the gold standard it has been used to further the Empire's imperial hold on the global economy.
    Jan 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    arby , Jan 16 2020 19:16 utc | 19
    Stephen Gowans' latest'

    https://gowans.blog/


    "While the US assassination of Qassem Soleimani was an act of international barbarity, emblematic of the thuggish nature of US foreign policy, it was neither the only de facto act of war the United States has undertaken against Iran, nor the most harmful. Indeed, against the total embargo Washington has imposed on Iran with the intention of starving Iranians into submission or inducing them to overthrow their government, the killing of Soleimani is a act of little consequence, even if its significance in provoking widespread outrage and galvanizing opposition to US aggression is undoubted."

    [Jan 18, 2020] events appear to have escalated from the 25 December killing of five PMF guys on the Syria-Iraq border by an unattributed drone or missile strike. Neoliberal MSM try to hide or obscure this fact.

    Jan 18, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Swedish Family , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:28 pm GMT

    @Oscar Peterson

    Significantly, events appear to have escalated from the 25 December killing of five PMF guys on the Syria-Iraq border by an unattributed drone or missile strike. Our media is doing its best to obscure this event as the probable starting point. Two days later on 27 December, the rocket fire near Kirkuk killed the US contractor. Then came the strike on KH troops back out in the West and now the assassination of Soleimani et al.

    [ ]

    So the trigger was the 25 December attack, and all the timing flows from that, not from any great real estate developer savvy. Frankly, in my view, you give Trump way to much credit for systematic thought. I don't think he really does that at all.

    This is also the view of the Middle-East veterans over at Patrick Lang's blog:

    Last weekend, in response to a rocket attack on a base outside Kirkuk that left one US contractor dead and four US servicemen wounded, we launched drone strikes on five Iraqi PMU outposts in Iraq and Syria near Abukamal killing 25 members and wounding scores more of the Kata'ib Hezbollah brigades of the PMU.

    We blamed Iran and the Kata'ib Hezbollah for the rocket attack near Kirkuk. That may be true, but the Kata'ib Hezbollah is not some rogue militia controlled out of Teheran. It is an integral part of the PMU, its 46th and 47th brigades and has been for years. The PMU is an integral part of the Iraqi military and has been for years. The PMU played a major role in defeating IS in both Iraq and Syria. Our attack on the Kata'ib Hezbollah outposts was an attack on the Iraqi military and government. We informed PM Abdul-Mahdi of our intended attacks. Abdul-Mahadi warned us not to do it, but, of course, we conducted the attacks despite his warning. We were proud of the attacks. The Pentagon even released footage of the attacks. It was supposed to be a clear message to Teheran.

    Unfortunately for us, the message was also heard by Iraqis. After the funerals of many of the victims of our attacks on the PMU outposts, a large crowd of protestors headed for the US Embassy in the Green Zone. For weeks prior to this, Iraqi security forces kept protestors from entering the Green Zone and approaching the US Embassy. Not this time. The crowds, including mourners fresh from the funerals of their family members and many PMU soldiers, unarmed but in uniform, poured into the Green Zone right to the gates of the Embassy itself. A reception area was entered and burned. Iraqi security forces of the PrimeMinister's Counter Terrorism Command were among the protestors. I surmise that PM Abdul-Mahdi was sending his own message back to the US.

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/our-embassy-in-baghdad-ttg.html

    The protests at the American embassy, then, were over Iraqi servicemen murdered in American drone strikes

    Qasem Soleimani was an Iranian soldier. He lived by the sword and died by the sword. He met a soldier's destiny. It is being said that he was a BAD MAN. Absurd! To say that he was a BAD MAN because he fought us as well as the Sunni jihadis is simply infantile. Were all those who fought the US BAD MEN? How about Gentleman Johhny Burgoyne? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Sitting Bull? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Aguinaldo? Another BAD MAN? Let us not be juvenile.

    The Iraqi PMU commander who died with Soleimani was Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. He was a member of a Shia militia that had been integrated into the Iraqi armed forces. IOW, we killed an Iraqi general. We killed him without the authorization of the supposedly sovereign state of Iraq.

    We created the present government of Iraq through the farcical "purple thumb" elections. That government holds a seat in the UN General Assembly and is a sovereign entity in international law in spite of Trump's tweet today that said among other things that we have "paid" Iraq billions of US dollars. To the Arabs, this statement that brands them as hirelings of the US is close to the ultimate in insult.

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/will-trump-welcome-the-ejection-of-the-us-from-iraq-he-should.html

    and now the Americans went one better and murdered an Iraqi general.

    [Jan 18, 2020] I mostly found Dimka to be that rarity in Russian politics a western-leaner with obvious admiration for western ways and the western lifestyle, but who genuinely loved Russia and wanted to do the best by it.

    Jan 18, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Mark Chapman January 15, 2020 at 7:10 pm

    "The evening network news shows described the change as a naked grab for power so typical of Putin."

    Well, they would, because if he were a western leader that's what it would be; since they don't really understand anything about Russia and view it as an enemy which nonetheless governs itself more or less by western rules, they are consistently wrong. Never seems to teach them anything, though, and they're always leaning into their next opportunity to be wrong again.

    I mostly found Dimka to be that rarity in Russian politics – a western-leaner with obvious admiration for western ways and the western lifestyle, but who genuinely loved Russia and wanted to do the best by it. He couldn't really hold the highest office because he was still too easily seduced by the west, which had only to frame something as a tremendous gift to Russia to have him eagerly grab at it, but I don't think any of his decisions were ever meant to hurt the country. Some suggest Putin kept him on to make him serve out a sentence in which western bait would be constantly dangled in front of him, but he didn't have enough power to snatch it, but I don't think so and his service was mostly commendable as long as he was not allowed to make any decisions involving the west himself. I don't know anything about the new guy beyond what others have posted here, but you can be sure he is already the focus of intense western interest.

    The bottom line is that whatever they were hoping, Putin is not going to disappear from politics and the very next day, Washington finally gets its man in charge. The succession will be carefully managed to ensure there are no regime-change loopholes.

    Mark Chapman January 15, 2020 at 8:07 pm
    Yes, that's all true, which is why western regime-changers would be more likely to put their money on a politically-savvy oligarch like Prokhorov, who I am only using as an example. Such a person follows national politics closely and would be much more likely to know the insider information the western influencers would like to know, but do not.

    Mind you, that kind of meddling was always a risk, including under the previous system. And it didn't work very well then. Then, though, Khodorkovsky did not seem to have Putin fooled for one second. It remains to be seen if that perspicacity will survive him.

    [Jan 18, 2020] As Lavrov frequently points out, the "rules-based order" is the US attempt to overthrow established international law, and replace it with "rules" invented by the US and changed to suit US goals, i.e. total spectrum dominance

    Notable quotes:
    "... The full spectrum support for the murder shows that the Establishment is firmly on board with it, which proves that it was not simply a whim of Trump's, or an action taken because a few neo-cons talked him into ordering it. Again, he can order military actions all he wants, (like the withdrawal of troops from Syria), but he isn't allowed to do anything that our rulers don't want done. ..."
    "... There is no major FUNCTIONAL difference between the Rep/Dem when it comes to military/covert activities. So whether Trump or any of the Dem puppets fill the Oval Office. ..."
    "... The "differences" are purely for domestic consumption, no foreign politician or diplomat with two functioning neurons is fooled by the quadrennial, prearranged "election" BS. ..."
    Jan 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    wagelaborer , Jan 17 2020 19:04 utc | 3

    Trump can't start a war without ruling class backing any more than he can end the wars if the rulers veto it.
    US foreign policy is not run by White House puppets.

    The US trash-talked Saddam Hussein and starved Iraqis for 14 years, but didn't actually invade until he started trading oil in Euros.

    The US trash-talked Ghaddafi for decades, and even launched missiles which killed his child in the 80s, but didn't destroy Libya until Ghaddafi decided to sell oil in dinars.

    The US has trash-talked and sanctioned Iran for decades, but it was the threat of Iran and Saudi Arabia making peace that pushed them to assassinate General Soleimani, as he arrived at the airport on that diplomatic mission.

    If Iran and Saudi Arabia make peace, and the Saudis drop the petro-dollar, the US Empire crumbles.

    It doesn't matter at all who is in the White House at the time, the Empire will never allow that.

    The elections are a farce, by the way. We have no way to know how people vote, because they put in electronic voting machines after the 2000 election was stolen by the Supreme Court. We no longer have any idea how people voted, the talking heads on the TV just give us the name of the selected on, on Election Night.

    wagelaborer , Jan 17 2020 19:56 utc | 12

    As Lavrov frequently points out, the "rules-based order" is the US attempt to overthrow established international law, and replace it with "rules" invented by the US and changed to suit US goals, i.e. total spectrum dominance.

    Note that although Trump has been attacked by the Deep State, the Democrats and the media 24/7 since 2016, the only complaint they have about his blatantly illegal assassination of Soleimani is that "he didn't tell us first". There is NO mention of international or national laws which outlaw such assassinations.

    The full spectrum support for the murder shows that the Establishment is firmly on board with it, which proves that it was not simply a whim of Trump's, or an action taken because a few neo-cons talked him into ordering it. Again, he can order military actions all he wants, (like the withdrawal of troops from Syria), but he isn't allowed to do anything that our rulers don't want done.

    A P , Jan 17 2020 21:22 utc | 25
    @juliania: There is no major FUNCTIONAL difference between the Rep/Dem when it comes to military/covert activities. So whether Trump or any of the Dem puppets fill the Oval Office.

    The "differences" are purely for domestic consumption, no foreign politician or diplomat with two functioning neurons is fooled by the quadrennial, prearranged "election" BS.

    Americans may be sick of the US' forever war policy, but not as sick of it as the rest of the world is. And USicans aren't sick enough of it to turf out both parties and start again...

    [Jan 18, 2020] The US is already and has been for the longest time at war with Iran

    Jan 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Seer , Jan 18 2020 14:13 utc | 137

    Lysander @ 30

    Got it right, IMO.

    Trump doesn't give a crap about wars killing people. He's about the bottom line. The business of the US is business. Further consider the Belt And Road Initiative (karlof1 briefly mentioned this). There's an underlying strategy of the empire. Only thing is a difference in how to make sure that it achieves it's goal: domination of world currency and business. The strategy is how to break the Russia-China coalition. Some believe that making friends with Russia could have caused them to detach from China (with the target being to tamp down China [again, think Belt and Road Initiative]). I cannot say for sure, but I do kind of think that this was the position that Trump had/has. This suspicion has legs if you consider the Russia-gate crap. And, the wars in the ME that Trump has vocalized against don't necessarily line up with being on the strategy path of using Russia to smack down China. Others believe it's better to go directly against China (and allow Russia to just kind of be isolated). The ME wars are, essentially, taking out the Road in Belt and Road. Having the area in a perpetual war makes business really difficult. This go-after-China-directly approach is seen in the Uyghur and Hong Kong battle fronts. Iran is made common to both strategy paths because, well, because of Israel (its overarching influence over US policies).

    It's a left wing or a right wing of the same bird. The mechanism (bird) isn't the issue, it's the strategy (which wing). Chomsky really spells this out:

    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/noam-chomsky-america-has-built-a-global-dystopia

    Perhaps the US doesn't want China to perfect the same authoritarian system the US is looking to achieve? The attempt to block Huawei from international markets is about who controls information (information flow).

    Dave , Jan 18 2020 14:19 utc | 138

    "I want to win," he said. "We don't win any wars anymore . . . We spend $7 trillion, everybody else got the oil and we're not winning anymore."

    These wars where never intended to be won. If you win a war you have to go home. It's pretty difficult to exploit natural resources and threaten other countries geopolitically without military and covert agency bases all over the region.

    I'm not sure Trump even understands this strategy. As disgusting as it may be, the thought of someone actually believing we entered these wars for any other reason than to cripple and control them for the interest of our (not so)leader elite class is astonishing.

    But, at the same time we are left with few alternatives due to the coup de 'etat perpetrated by the elite who stack the slate we vote from and use the legacy media to propagandize as many as possible into supporting this sociopathic/psychopathic foreign policy agenda.

    All we are ever offered is slight changes in tactics while maintaining the original goal of world domination and total control of everyone in order to keep those on top, on top.

    Nothing will change until the enforcers begin to fight back against the people showering them with unlimited budgets and propagandize adoration to the point of military/police worship.

    Walter , Jan 18 2020 14:50 utc | 139
    Sabine | Jan 18 2020 5:03 utc | 101

    "the US is already and has been for the longest time at war with Iran. "

    Add to that the fact that in 1946 (or maybe '47?) Truman specifically threatened the Red Army in Northern Iran with the atom bomb. They withdrew. But the point is that Iran was the first defined target after Japan nuked in a display of "Overwhelming Power" (Stimson) deliberately to bring USSR to obey the US, or at least to intimidate Stalin.

    Threatening Russians is just plain stupid. Threats are almost always stupid, unless you're trying to force an opponent into an attack-trap. Which "attack-trap" is what the Imperial Wizards are doing. The assumption, a chauvinist and incorrect assumption, is that the opponent is stupider than the attacker. Don't bet on that...it's a sucker bet.

    [Jan 18, 2020] Washington is certainly it's impossible to make an agreement with it and, if you should think you have done so, it will break it. A dangerous, uncontrollable madman, staggering around blowing everything up

    Jan 18, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    For some years Washington, an implacable enemy of Moscow, has been getting less and less predictable. Lavrov and Kerry spend hours locked up negotiating a deal in Syria ; within a week the US military attacks a Syrian Army unit; "by mistake" . Who's in charge? Now with the murder of Soleimani, possibly on a Washington-approved peace mission, Washington has moved to another level of lawlessness and is exploring the next depth as it defies Baghdad's order to get out. A pirate power. The outside problems for Moscow aren't getting smaller, are they? Washington is certainly недоговороспособны – it's impossible to make an agreement with it and, if you should think you have done so, it will break it. A dangerous, uncontrollable madman, staggering around blowing everything up – is any foreign leader now to be assumed to be on Washington's murder list? Surviving its decay is a big job indeed. The problems are getting bigger in the Final Days of the Imperium Americanum.

    [Jan 18, 2020] In the European Parliament Russia is accused of distorting the history of the Second World War

    Jan 18, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Moscow Exile January 16, 2020 at 12:48 am

    В ЕП обвинили Россию в "искажении" истории Второй мировой войны
    Короткая ссылка     09:18

    In the European Parliament Russia is accused of distorting the history of the Second World War

    "We in the European People's Party cannot accept Putin's attempts to rewrite history. Although the Soviet Union suffered huge losses during the war, and its soldiers showed heroism, there is no denying that the Molotov -- Ribbentrop Pact led to the outbreak of the Second World War".

    Putin's attempts?

    His own, personal, maniacal attempts??

    The European People's Party -- leader, Donald Tusk.

    "There is no denying " -- an appeal to ignorance.

    Everybody knows this to be true!

    In Poland there were the following Nazi extermination camps [ Vernichtungslager ]: Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Majdanek.

    Why?

    Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

    After all, there's no denying that Poles are at heart anti-Semites, in that they are all devout Roman Catholics.

    Mark Chapman January 16, 2020 at 10:20 am
    If the west – and especially the Poles – could get the Russian Federation to apologize for the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, their lives would be complete. For maybe five minutes, before they moved on to the next deep grievance. It's all about getting the former Soviet Union to admit guilt, and the west can never get enough of that.
    Moscow Exile January 16, 2020 at 5:43 am

    Countries appearing with a deeper shade of green are ranked as more peaceful, countries appearing more red are ranked as more violent.

    So now you know, courtesy of Global Peace Index , that Russia is far, far more belligerent than the USA.

    Stands to reason, don't it?

    Moscow Exile January 16, 2020 at 5:52 am
    Russia is ranked as 10th most violent in the world at position 154 out of 163 and the USA is at position 128.
    cartman January 16, 2020 at 6:36 am
    Whoever invented this "index" really earned their crust from Master.
    Moscow Exile January 16, 2020 at 9:19 am
    I wonder if those who draw up this index ever consider that the perceived violence of a country be considered as a function of the deaths caused by the foreign policies of that country?
    Jen January 16, 2020 at 2:24 pm
    The index was developed by the Institute for Economics and Peace which is based in Sydney. Its partners include The Economist Intelligence Unit and the World Bank.
    http://economicsandpeace.org/about/affiliations-and-partners/

    Colombia a bit more peaceful than Venezuela and Mexico more peaceful than either? Brazil more peaceful than all three? Doesn't sound right to me.

    Mark Chapman January 16, 2020 at 10:49 am
    There certainly are advantages to stirring up shit abroad, setting up an opposition and then sending your soldiers haring off thereward to support it in an effort to overthrow the government. For one, you get labeled a super-peaceful country by some jag-off index you probably funded yourself. The USA does not fight in the USA. And until fairly recently, it got all its military adventures rubber-stamped by the UN as 'peacekeeping'. That, alas, proved too time-consuming, and so R2P doctrine was devised by that legendary peacekeeper, Sammy "Genocide" Power to expedite American military adventuring while still remaining loosely under the 'last resort, but we have to act' rubric.

    [Jan 18, 2020] Once private ownership is banned people stop caring. Motivation to work hard is gone If you are deprived of the possibility to make money and own private property.

    Jan 18, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    karl1haushofer January 15, 2020 at 11:17 am

    Yalensis, earlier you said that Russia should restore communism to remove poverty.

    How did that work the last time in 1917-1991? The Soviet Union collapsed and historical Russia was split into many different parts.

    I expect that if Russia would experiment communism the second time the outcome would be another split of Russia. This time it would be the North Caucasus, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan and possible Siberia and the Far East breaking away from Moscow.

    And why is that? Because communism doesn't work, period. It has been tried several times in many different parts of the world, and it has always failed.

    The basics are simple. Once private ownership is banned people stop caring. Motivation to work hard is gone If you are deprived of the possibility to make money and own private property.

    Say what you want about America but there is a good reason why basically all the greatest companies in the world are American, or at least from countries that have practiced capitalism for centuries: Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Shell, Amazon, Intel, Ford, Mercedez Benz, Toyota, Samsung etc.

    You can compare how a middle class American and a middle class Soviet citizen lived in the 1980s. While a typical middle class American lived in a big house in a suburb with two cars in the household, a typical Soviet middle class citizen lived in a "kommunalka" apartment where many families had to share the same bathroom and kitchen and a Soviet citizen had to work a certain amount of years before being allowed a right to own his or her own car, usually a Soviet made Lada. Most of the Soviet citizens never had a chance to get their own car but instead of to rely on public transport.

    I know you are going to say that China is a good example that communism can work. But there is one problem: China is not really a communist country anymore. Actually the rise of China began at the same moment when Deng Xiaoping allowed private property and private enterprise. The horrendous communist policies of Mao Tse Tung killed tens of millions of Chinese people before that. Allowing people to work for their own well being was that made China what it is today (China is still a poor country compared to the West, but at least hundreds of millions of people are not starving anymore as was the case during Mao's rule).

    If Russia ever restored communism again it would be the end of Russia.

    Moscow Exile January 15, 2020 at 11:40 am
    a typical Soviet middle class citizen lived in a "kommunalka" apartment

    Really?

    I lived in a modern, built in the 1970s block in Voronezh in 1989.: 3 large rooms, largish kitchen, bathroom and toilet, 2 balconies , 11th floor.

    I live in a similar flat now, but on the 3rd floor, built 1976, central Administrative District, Taganskiy precinct, Moskva.

    The only thing communal about those 2 dwellings is the central heating, which is turned on in October and turned off in May.

    In England, during my childhood I lived in a slum street built in the 1850s: no central heating, no hot water, no bathroom, no toilet. The toilet was in the yard at the back. The dewelling had 2 downstairs rooms and 2 upstairs room, a so-called "two-up, two-down". I lived there until 1960.


    Wilson St. in my home town, 1969

    My hometown is situated in the first capitalist country in the world.

    James lake January 15, 2020 at 12:04 pm
    God that picture brings back memories – we lived in similar property in Birmingham until 1978. My family came over from Ireland in the 1960s and these type of houses were common place for working class families.

    You can still find them in the midlands and the north, although they have been modernised to include bathrooms.

    Northern Star January 15, 2020 at 12:49 pm
    Capitalism and economic Nirvana are known to be one in the same in the minds of morons.

    "Indications of this failure of capitalism are everywhere. Stagnation of investment punctuated by bubbles of financial expansion, which then inevitably burst, now characterizes the so-called free market.4 Soaring inequality in income and wealth has its counterpart in the declining material circumstances of a majority of the population. Real wages for most workers in the United States have barely budged in forty years despite steadily rising productivity.5 Work intensity has increased, while work and safety protections on the job have been systematically jettisoned. Unemployment data has become more and more meaningless due to a new institutionalized underemployment in the form of contract labor in the gig economy.6 Unions have been reduced to mere shadows of their former glory as capitalism has asserted totalitarian control over workplaces. With the demise of Soviet-type societies, social democracy in Europe has perished in the new atmosphere of "liberated capitalism."7

    The capture of the surplus value produced by overexploited populations in the poorest regions of the world, via the global labor arbitrage instituted by multinational corporations, is leading to an unprecedented amassing of financial wealth at the center of the world economy and relative poverty in the periphery.8 Around $21 trillion of offshore funds are currently lodged in tax havens on islands mostly in the Caribbean, constituting "the fortified refuge of Big Finance."9 Technologically driven monopolies resulting from the global-communications revolution, together with the rise to dominance of Wall Street-based financial capital geared to speculative asset creation, have further contributed to the riches of today's "1 percent." Forty-two billionaires now enjoy as much wealth as half the world's population, while the three richest men in the United States -- Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett -- have more wealth than half the U.S. population.10 In every region of the world, inequality has increased sharply in recent decades.11 The gap in per capita income and wealth between the richest and poorest nations, which has been the dominant trend for centuries, is rapidly widening once again.12 More than 60 percent of the world's employed population, some two billion people, now work in the impoverished informal sector, forming a massive global proletariat. The global reserve army of labor is some 70 percent larger than the active labor army of formally employed workers.

    Adequate health care, housing, education, and clean water and air are increasingly out of reach for large sections of the population, even in wealthy countries in North America and Europe, while transportation is becoming more difficult in the United States and many other countries due to irrationally high levels of dependency on the automobile and disinvestment in public transportation. Urban structures are more and more characterized by gentrification and segregation, with cities becoming the playthings of the well-to-do while marginalized populations are shunted aside. About half a million people, most of them children, are homeless on any given night in the United States.14 New York City is experiencing a major rat infestation, attributed to warming temperatures, mirroring trends around the world."

    Like Like

    Patient Observer January 15, 2020 at 5:14 pm
    Comrade Karl, the vast majority of poverty in this world is in capitalist countries. Latin America and Africa will toss your silly assertions in the trash bin of history.

    And saying China is not communist is equivalent to saying the US is not capitalist. I leave it to your to figure out what the foregoing means.

    [Jan 17, 2020] Ukraine is a deeply sick patient. The destiny of ordinary Ukrainians is deeply tragic. Diaspora is greedy and want a piece of cake immediately

    Highly recommended!
    Edited for clarity
    Notable quotes:
    "... The infrastructure they inherited from the USSR mostly is now fully amortized. For example railway park in in complete ruin. Central heating pipeline communications in cities like Kiev are in ruins too. In the USSR they tried to reuse the heat from electric stations and have elaborate hot water delivery networks from each, which provided heat to a large city blocks. Now pipes are completely rusted (which in 30 years is no surprise) and are in the state of constant repair. ..."
    "... But when the standard of living dropped to such extent as it dropped after 2014 sentiments toward even slightly different ethnic groups turn hostile too. This is the case in Ukraine. In this sense you are wrong. There is no more unity now then existed before 2014. I would say there is less unity now. ..."
    "... Sentiments turned against both Donbass dwellers and Ukrainians from Western Ukraine. In Kiev the derogatory term for both categories is "ponaekhali" ("come to overcrowd the place and displace us", or something along those lines; it's difficult to translate, but the term carries strong derogatory meaning) ..."
    "... The nationalistic hysteria of 2014-2017 now mostly changed into deep depression: how a tiny group of far right nationalist and football hooligan gangs managed to get to power against the will of the majority of the country and destroy its economy. That's why Zelensky was elected and most far right parliamentarians lost their seats. Most of Western Ukraine voted for him, which is telling you something. ..."
    "... The problem for Ukraine is that with the cut of economic ties with Russia the natural path for economics is probably down. De-industrialization, Baltic style, is raining supreme. Many enterprises survived the period from 1991 to 2014 only due to orders from Russia. Especially remnants of military industrial complex and manufacturing industry. Now what? Selling land (like Zelensky is trying to do) ? ..."
    Jan 17, 2020 | www.unz.com

    likbez says:January 17, 2020 at 8:35 am GMT • 1,500 Words @AP AP,

    I agree with JPM:

    I feel like robber barons in Kyiv have harmed you more through their looting of the country than impoverished Eastern Ukrainians, who were the biggest losers in the post-Soviet deindustrilization, have harmed you by existing and dying of diseases of poverty and despair.

    It reminds me of how coastal shit-libs in America talk about "fly-over" country and want all the poor whites in Appalachia to die. I'm living in a country whose soul is totally poisoned. A country that is dying. While all this is happening, whites have split themselves into little factions focused on political point scoring.

    I doubt people like Zelensky, Kolomoisky, Poroshenko and all the rest are going to turn Ukraine into an earthly paradise. They're more likely to be Neros playing harps, while Ukraine burns.

    Looks like your understanding of Ukraine is mostly based of a short trip to Lvov and reading neoliberal MSM and forums. That's not enough, unless you want to be the next Max Boot.

    Ukraine is a deeply sick patient, which surprisingly still stands despite all hardships (Ukrainians demonstrated amazing, superhuman resilience in the crisis that hit them, which greatly surprised all experts).

    The infrastructure they inherited from the USSR mostly is now fully amortized. For example railway park in in complete ruin. Central heating pipeline communications in cities like Kiev are in ruins too. In the USSR they tried to reuse the heat from electric stations and have elaborate hot water delivery networks from each, which provided heat to a large city blocks. Now pipes are completely rusted (which in 30 years is no surprise) and are in the state of constant repair.

    And, what is really tragic Ukraine now it is a debt state. Usually the latter is the capital sentence for the county. Few managed to escape even in more favorable conditions (South Korea is one.) So chances of economic recovery are slim: with such level of parasitic rent to the West the natural path is down and down. Don't cry for me Argentina.

    And there is no money to replace already destroyed due to bad maintenance infrastructure, but surprisingly large parts of Soviets era infrastructure still somehow hold. For example, electrical networks, subway cars. But other part are already crumbling.

    For example, in Kiev that means in some buildings you have winter without central heating, you have elevators in 16-storey buildings that work one or two weeks in month, you have no hot water, sometimes you have no water at all for a week or more, etc). Pensioners have problem with paying heating bills, so some of them are forced to live in non-heated apartments.

    And that's in Kiev/Kyiv (Western Ukrainians love to change established names, much like communists) . In provincial cities it is a real horror show when even electricity supply became a problem. The countryside dwellers at least has its own food, but the situation for them is also very very difficult.

    Other big problem -- few jobs and almost no well paid job, unless you are young, know English and have a university education (and are lucky). Before 2014 approximately 70% of Ukrainian labor migrants (in total a couple of million) came from the western part of the country, in which migration had become a widespread method of coping with poverty, the absence of jobs and low salaries.

    Now this practice spread to the whole county. That destroyed many families.

    The USA plays its usual games selling vassals crap at inflated prices (arms, uranium rods, coal, locomotives, cars, etc) , which Ukrainians can't refuse. Trump is simply a typical gangster in this respect, running a protection racket.

    The rate of emigration and shrinking population is another fundamental problem. Mass emigration ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine ) is continuing even after Zelensky election. Looting by the West also continues unabated. This is disaster capitalism in action.

    Add to those problems inflated military expenses to fight the civil war in Donbass which deprives other sectors of necessary funds (with the main affect of completely alienating Russia) and "Huston, we have a problem."

    May be this is a natural path for xUSSR countries after the dissolution of the USSR, I don't know.

    But the destiny of ordinary Ukrainians is deeply tragic: they wanted better life and got a really harsh one. Especially pensioners (typical pension is something like $60-$70) a month in Kiev, much less outside of Kiev. How they physically survive I do not fully understand.

    There are still pro-Russian areas but being free of Crimea and Donbass means Ukraine can no longer be characterized as "split."

    I agree that there is a substantial growth of anti-Russian sentiments. It is really noticeable. As well as growth of the usage of the Ukrainian language (previously Kiev, unlike Lvov was completely Russian-language city).

    And in Western Ukraine Russiphobia was actually always a part of "national identity". The negative definition of national identity, if you wish. See popular slogan "Hto ne skache toi moskal" ("those who do not jump are Moskal" -- where Moskal is the derogatory name for a Russian). Here is this slogan in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6rfqr9afMc ;-)

    But when the standard of living dropped to such extent as it dropped after 2014 sentiments toward even slightly different ethnic groups turn hostile too. This is the case in Ukraine. In this sense you are wrong. There is no more unity now then existed before 2014. I would say there is less unity now.

    Sentiments turned against both Donbass dwellers and Ukrainians from Western Ukraine. In Kiev the derogatory term for both categories is "ponaekhali" ("come to overcrowd the place and displace us", or something along those lines; it's difficult to translate, but the term carries strong derogatory meaning) .

    "Donetskie" (former Donbass dwellers, often displaced by the war) are generally strongly resented and luxury cars, villas, etc and other excesses of neoliberal elite are attributed mostly to them (Donbass neoliberal elite did moved to Kiev, not Moscow) , while "zapadentsi" are also, albeit less strongly, resented because they often use clan politics within institutions, and often do not put enough effort (or are outright incompetent), as they rely on its own clan ties for survival.

    This sentiment is stronger to the south of Kiev where the resentment is directed mainly against Western Ukrainians, not against "Donetskie" like in Kiev. And I am talking not only about Odessa. Western Ukrainians are now strongly associated with corrupt ways of getting lucrative positions (via family, clan or political connections), being incompetent and doing nothing useful.

    What surprise me is that this resentment against "zapadentsi" and "Poloshenko clan" is shared by many people from Western Ukraine. The target is often slightly more narrow, for example Hutsuls in Lviv ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutsuls )

    The nationalistic hysteria of 2014-2017 now mostly changed into deep depression: how a tiny group of far right nationalist and football hooligan gangs managed to get to power against the will of the majority of the country and destroy its economy. That's why Zelensky was elected and most far right parliamentarians lost their seats. Most of Western Ukraine voted for him, which is telling you something.

    The problem for Ukraine is that with the cut of economic ties with Russia the natural path for economics is probably down. De-industrialization, Baltic style, is raining supreme. Many enterprises survived the period from 1991 to 2014 only due to orders from Russia. Especially remnants of military industrial complex and manufacturing industry. Now what? Selling land (like Zelensky is trying to do) ?

    Ukraine will probably eventually lose a large part of its chemical industry because without subsidies for gas it just can't complete even taking into account low labor costs. And manufacturing because without Russian market it is difficult to find a place for their production in already established markets, competing only in price and suffering in quality (I remember something about Iraq returning Ukrainians all ordered armored carriers due to defect is the the armor https://sputniknews.com/military/201705221053859853-armored-vehicles-defects-extent /). Although at least for the Ukrainian arm industry there is place on the market in countries which are used to old Soviet armaments, because those are rehashed Soviet products.

    Add to this corrupt and greedy diaspora (all those Jaresko, Chalupas, Freelands, Vindmans, etc ) from the USA and Canada (and not only diaspora -- look at Biden, Kerry, etc) who want their piece of the pie after 2014 "Revolution of dignity" (what a sad joke) and you will see the problems more clearly. Not that much changed from the period 1991-2014 where Ukraine was also royally fleeced by own oligarchs allied with Western banksers, simply now this leads to quicker deterioration of the standard of living.

    None of Eastern European countries benefited from a color revolution staged by the USA. This is about opening the country not only to multinationals (while they loot the county they at least behave within a certain legal bounds, demonstrating at least decency of gangsters like in Godfather), but to petty foreign criminals from diaspora and outside of it who allies with the local oligarchs and smaller nouveau riche and are siphoning all the county wealth to western banks as soon as possible. Greed of the disapora is simply unbounded. https://neweasterneurope.eu/2016/08/26/the-ukrainian-diaspora-as-a-recipient-of-oligarchic-cash/

    Of course, Ukrainian diaspora is not uniform. Still, outside well-know types from the tiny Mid-Eastern country, the most dangerous people for Ukraine are probably Ukrainians from diaspora with dual citizenship

    [Jan 17, 2020] Trump Threatened Euro-Poodles With 25% Car Tarrifs If They Didn't Blow Up the Iran Nuclear Treaty by John Hudson

    Jan 17, 2020 | www.anti-empire.com


    1 day ago
    CHUCKMAN • 7 hours ago ,

    What an absolutely chaotic man, using trade measures like military weapons.

    Mychal Arnold • 7 hours ago ,

    Mafia!

    [Jan 17, 2020] German Parliament Office Reports No Russian Invasion of Eastern Ukraine, Rejects Media and Government Propaganda

    Jan 17, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Takes a look and finds no reliable information to support the claim John Helmer 1 day ago 1064 2

    A report by a research unit of the German Bundestag, just released in Berlin, has defied the narrative of the European Union, NATO and the US, with the conclusion that since the Ukraine civil war began in early 2014, there has been no reliable evidence of Russian troop invasion or intervention by regular Russian military forces in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine.

    After a review of the press, official public releases and reports, as well as European court rulings, the Bundestag's experts have described the outcome with the German phrase, ohne belastbares Faktenmaterial – "without reliable fact material."

    The Bundestag report, which runs to 17 pages and was completed on December 9, has been noted in the German-language media. To date, however, it has been ignored by the Anglo-American press, including the alt-media.

    The new German report is entitled "Intervention in civil war zones: The role of Russia during the east Ukraine conflict". It was prepared by the foreign, international law and defence department (WD-2) of the Scientific Services Bureau of the Bundestag.

    In a preface to the report, the authors say they "support the members of the German Bundestag with mandate-related activity. Their works do not express the view of the German Bundestag, its individual organs, or the management of the Bundestag." Responsibility for the research reporting is "the technical responsibility of the authors as well as the department management." No authors have been identified by name.

    The full German report can be read at the official website link. No official English translation is available.

    For five years Ukrainian armed forces and pro-Russian separatists have been fighting against each other in the Donbass/Donets Basin," the report says. " The territorial conflict shows classical identifiers of a non-international (internal) armed conflict. About the extent, quality and magnitude of the military involvement of Russia during the Ukraine conflict, there are few reliable facts and analyses aside from the numerous speculations, part-contradictory reports and press announcements, and denials from different sources. Altogether, however, the picture of the situation is not unequivocal."

    "Also, the Federal [German] Government holds no reliable knowledge, according to its own information apparently, on how much influence today Russia actually exercises on the separatists in the East Ukraine that can be described as credible."

    The report summarizes western media reports, social media posts, as well as NATO press releases in order to cast doubt on their veracity. "Reliable information about the parts of the region of the Ukrainian-Russian border not controlled by Kiev is rare." The German researchers are also sceptical of claims published by the monitoring mission of the area from the Organization for Security and Economic Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) which "has, in spite of its comprehensive mandate, only limited access to this area."

    For background details of the anti-Russian leadership of the OSCE's special monitoring mission (SMM) in Ukraine, read this .

    "The question of whether pro-Russian separatists in the Donbass region are currently under control and directed from Moscow, or whether regular Russian troops still remain on Ukrainian territory cannot be answered without reliable factual material, in particular without the appropriate and reliable secret service intelligence."

    Source: Dances With Bears

    Mychal Arnold • a day ago The West are liars! 3 • Reply • Share › − Avatar CHUCKMAN • a day ago Well, it's a small good thing, but where were they for all these years?

    Four years of Poroshenko's destructive nonsense went unchallenged.

    And why is Germany still supporting American sanctions against Russia?

    I might add, too, wouldn't it be a sound idea to investigate first before supporting any hostile policies of America abroad, as in Syria or Iran?

    Is it really too much to expect that one understands the facts before supporting hostilities?

    But that's dreaming in Technicolor.

    It's just not the world America has constructed for us all, by brute force.

    [Jan 17, 2020] Putin plan will make US control of the positions of Russian President and Russian PM more difficult. It takes time, effort and money to build up a lobbying presence in a large parliament

    Jan 17, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Jen January 15, 2020 at 7:55 pm

    I should think that the transfer of powers from the Presidency to the position of Prime Minister, and the holders of executive power being chosen by holders of legislative power, will make US control of the positions of Russian President and Russian PM more difficult. It takes time, effort and money to build up a lobbying presence in a large parliament; for one thing, the West needs to know who are the most significant organizations and agencies in Russia to penetrate and infiltrate, and then influence. Then these people need to know which politicians and which parties in the Federal Assembly to target. A parliamentary system where the holders of executive power are not chosen directly by the public but by political peers is likely to be more resistant to foreign infiltration if only because there are more people to target. The Russian language and alphabet, and current political culture are also likely to be barriers to penetration.

    It was much easier in the Yeltsin period when Yeltsin appropriated powers that should have belonged to the Federal Assembly, for the US to control the Presidency; Yeltsin was moving the country's political structure to a centralized one that to some extent the Americans could relate to, because then it began to resemble the structures they knew and had experience with.

    Like Like

    [Jan 17, 2020] Well, we're not quite as fond of Israel as is the USA it's not yet the acid test of a political candidate in Canada to learn his/her position on Israel, as if he/she were running for election there, although the lobby groups do try to develop the same level of fervor.

    Jan 17, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Mark Chapman January 16, 2020 at 10:00 am

    Well, we're not quite as fond of Israel as is the USA – it's not yet the acid test of a political candidate in Canada to learn his/her position on Israel, as if he/she were running for election there, although the lobby groups do try to develop the same level of fervor. But I could buy being ensconced in Uncle Sam; our trade is so inextricably linked that the two nationalities are barely distinguishable. Many Canadian companies are actually owned by Americans, and vice-versa. At one time, as I used to be fond of pointing out illustratively, the CEO of American Airlines was a Canadian, while the CFO of Air Canada was American.

    There was just an article in the local paper the other day, though, which of course I cannot find now, which reported local sales of BC agricultural products broke however-many millions for the first time in 2019, so consumers do go out of their way to not buy American agricultural products if an alternative is available. And when Canadian fruit and vegetables are out of season, I notice now that a considerable amount of what is offered in the markets is from Mexico, so I buy that. Sometimes, though, there is no alternative to California produce. Onions, for instance – all last year, all the onions sold by Thrifty Foods, where I usually buy groceries, were from California. I inquired about it a couple of times, and never received a satisfactory answer. I would have to go to a farm market to buy Canadian onions, which I found astounding. Pork, too, often originated in the USA; my mom kept buying it for us because it was so cheap.

    [Jan 16, 2020] "Ruptured" Pompeo delivers: we just entered a new and far more dangerous era

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    V , Jan 15 2020 1:32 utc | 104

    Some rather alarming news this morning (here); Pompeo now says the assassination of Soleimani was deterrence.

    Not stopping there, he went on to say that U.S. deterrence also applies to Russia and China!

    I'd say the gauntlet has been thrown down; just how far behind can war be now?

    The U.S. has been pushing the limits of international crime for decades; and I think they're so used to being not challenged, that they forget (or stupidly think they're invincible) Russia and China will fight rather than cow tow to any U.S. coercion...

    IMO, we just entered a new and far more dangerous era...

    [Jan 16, 2020] Americans are in a vicious circle/Infinite Loop

    Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Trond January 15, 2020 at 7:40 am

    Americans are in a vicious circle/Infinite Loop

    I think they are using an old version of BASIC from the cold war era, called BASIC Russia Hate.

    10 Print "Russia bad!"
    20 Goto 10
    Run
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!
    Russia bad!

    BREAK IN 10
    READY.

    10 Print "Russia good!"
    20 Goto 10
    Run
    SYNTAX ERROR!!!!!!!

    [Jan 16, 2020] The US strategy is to control your economy in order to force you to sell your most profitable industrial sectors to US investors, to force you to invest in your industry only by borrowing from the United States.

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Daniel , Jan 16 2020 21:18 utc | 36

    There is a lot of talk here and in comment sections at forums about how the American Empire is going to collapse soon due to its blunders and Russia and China gaining military superiority over it. This kind of talk is a type of magical thinking and has no basis in reality. The United States' most potent weapon isn't military, it's economic, and through it the US government controls the world. That weapon is the US Dollar and ever since Nixon took it off the gold standard it has been used to further the Empire's imperial hold on the global economy. The economist Michael Hudson in an article called A Note To China (link at bottom) explains how this works:
    The U.S. strategy is to control your economy in order to force you to sell your most profitable industrial sectors to US investors, to force you to invest in your industry only by borrowing from the United States.

    So the question is, how do China, Russia, Iran and other countries break free of this U.S. dollarization strategy?

    There are a lot of articles on alt.media sites about how China and Russia are de-dollarizing their economies in order to resist, and eventually end, the US domination of the global economy that is preventing them from maintaining independent economic policies that benefit their citizens rather than global elites and US central bankers.

    Russia managed to put a stop to overt US economic imperialism after the looting spree in the post-Soviet 1990s decimated Russia's ability to provide for its citizens and degraded the country's ability to maintain economic independence. But it still ultimately got caught in the neoliberal trap. Hudson again:

    Yet Russia did not have enough foreign exchange to pay domestic ruble-wages or to pay for domestic goods and services. But neoliberal advisors convinced Russia to back all Ruble money or domestic currency credit it created by backing it with U.S. dollars. Obtaining these dollars involved paying enormous interest to the United States for this needless backing. There was no need for such backing. At the end of this road the United States convinced Russia to sell off its raw materials, its nickel mines, its electric utilities, its oil reserves, and ultimately tried to pry Crimea away from Russia.

    China, Hudson argues, by accepting the advice of American and IMF/World Bank economic "experts" and through Chinese students schooled in American universities in American neoliberal theory is in great danger of falling into the same trap.

    The U.S. has discovered that it does not have to militarily invade China. It does not have to conquer China. It does not have to use military weapons, because it has the intellectual weapon of financialization, convincing you that you need to do this in order to have a balanced economy. So, when China sends its students to the United States, especially when it sends central bankers and planners to the United States to study (and be recruited), they are told by the U.S. "Do as we say, not as we have done."

    He concludes that:

    The neoliberal plan is not to make you independent, and not to help you grow except to the extent that your growth will be paid to US investors or used to finance U.S. military spending around the world to encircle you and trying to destabilize you in Sichuan to try to pry China apart.

    Look at what the United States has done in Russia, and at what the International Monetary Fund in Europe has done to Greece, Latvia and the Baltic states. It is a dress rehearsal for what U.S. diplomacy would like to do to you, if it can convince you to follow the neoliberal US economic policy of financialization and privatization.

    De-dollarization is the alternative to privatization and financialization.

    Loosening the Empire's hold on economic and geopolitical affairs and moving to a multipolar world order is a tough slog and the Empire will use everything it can to stop this from happening. But at the moment even countries under American sanctions and surrounded by its armies, with the possible exception of Iran, aren't really fighting back. That's a bitter pill for many to swallow but wishful thinking isn't going to change the world. After all, the new world has to be imagined before it can appear and right now it's still global capitalism all the way down.

    Link to article: https://michael-hudson.com/2020/01/note-to-china/

    The article in full, and Hudson's work generally, is well worth reading. He is one of only a few genuinely anti-imperialist economists and he is able to explain in layman's terms exactly how the US-centric global economy is a massive scam designed to benefit US empire at the rest of the world's expense.


    Ian2 , Jan 16 2020 22:03 utc | 39

    I was thinking about winston2's comment in the previous thread. A good way for China and Russia to respond is to go after those in the MIC; the CEO, lobbyists, financiers, etc... If they follow the money and take them out, I suspect we all would see a dramatic turn of events. No need to publicize their early retirement. Make it messy and public but not to the point of taking out innocents.
    Patroklos , Jan 16 2020 22:20 utc | 40
    @ Daniel | Jan 16 2020 21:18 utc | 36

    Yes, Michael Hudson is excellent, mostly because he's rare economist, that is, one who begins from the premise that the 'economy' is a set of historically-situated and specific modes of exchange and forms of human relations. Aristotle located what we call the economy in ethics and politics; we follow the fairytales of neo-classical economics and global capital by imagining that it has some scientific autonomy from human social relations. Marx was right in following Aristotle's insight by critiquing the very idea of an autonomous economy, which the chief ideological fiction of late capitalism. Sam Chambers and Ellen Meiksens-Wood are also excellent critics of this obstacle to reimagining a viable alternative to the economy as it is propagated by the US neoliberal global apparatus.

    Inkan1969 , Jan 16 2020 22:34 utc | 42 S , Jan 16 2020 22:37 utc | 43
    @Daniel #36:
    The United States' most potent weapon isn't military, it's economic, and through it the US government controls the world. That weapon is the US Dollar and ever since Nixon took it off the gold standard it has been used to further the Empire's imperial hold on the global economy.

    But at the moment even countries under American sanctions and surrounded by its armies, with the possible exception of Iran, aren't really fighting back.

    The dynamics of Russian reserves composition tell us that Russia is fighting back:

                        % Reserves
Date       Dollar  Euro  Yuan Other  Gold
30.06.2017   46.3  25.1   0.1  12.4  16.1
30.09.2017   46.2  23.9   1.0  12.2  16.7
31.12.2017   45.8  21.7   2.8  12.5  17.2
31.03.2018   43.7  22.2   5.0  11.9  17.2
30.06.2018   21.8  32.0  14.7  14.7  16.8
30.09.2018   22.6  32.1  14.4  14.3  16.6
31.12.2018   22.7  31.7  14.2  13.3  18.1
31.03.2019   23.6  30.3  14.2  13.7  18.2
30.06.2019   24.2  30.6  13.2  12.9  19.1
    vk , Jan 16 2020 22:50 utc | 44
    @ Posted by: Daniel | Jan 16 2020 21:18 utc | 36

    Exclude me from this squad. I's always from the opinion that the USA would collapse slowly, i.e. degenerate/decay. I won't repeat my arguments again here so as to spare people who already know me the repetition.

    However, consider this: when 2008 broke out, some people thought the USA would finally collapse. It didn't - in great part, because the USG also thought it could collapse, so it acted quickly and decisively. But it cost a lot: the USA fell from its "sole superpower" status, and, for the first time since 1929, the American people had to fell in the flesh the side effects of capitalism. It marked the end of the End of History, and the realization - mainly by Russia and China - that the Americans were not invincible and immortals. It may have marked the beginning of the multipolar era.

    --//--

    The world (bar China) never recovered from 2008. Indeed, world debt has grown to another record high:

    Global debt hits a record high in 2019 at 322% of GDP, or $267trn

    The world governments - specially the governments from the USA, Japan and Europe - absorbed private debt (through purchase of rotten papers and through QE) so the system could be saved. But this debt didn't disappear, instead, it became public debt. What's worse: private debt has already spiked up, and already is higher than pre-2008 levels. The Too Big To Fail philosophy of the central banks only bought them time.

    --//--

    Extending my previous link (from the previous Open Thread) about money laundering:

    No tax and chill: Netflix's offshore network

    The global TV subscription streaming company, Netflix made $1.2bn in profits in 2018, of which $430m was shifted into tax havens, reports Tax Watch UK.

    The estimated revenue from UK subscribers was about $860m, but most of this was booked offshore in a tax haven Dutch subsidiary. Netflix claims its UK parent company got only $48m in revenue. When the costs of Netflix UK productions were put against this, Netflix was able to avoid paying any tax at all to the UK government. Indeed, it received tax reliefs for productions in the UK from the government.

    Ghost Ship , Jan 16 2020 23:10 utc | 45
    Why nobody should go to Moscow fuck with Russia.

    A simple question requires a simple answer. Russia's defence expenditure in PPP terms is probably in excess of $180 billion per year which buys a shedload of "capable military equipment".

    Bob , Jan 16 2020 23:26 utc | 46
    8 On can only hope that the "Gharles De Gaulle" get destroyed and that the french military at least take some initiative to get rid of Macron.
    karlof1 , Jan 16 2020 23:40 utc | 47
    It should be noted that the point Hudson's trying to make in his "Note to China" is to warn China of what if faces by using historical examples. As S points out @43, Russia's Ruble is very sound and its dollar and T-Bill holdings are extremely low. The message to China and the entire SCO community is to cease supporting the Outlaw US Empire's military by supporting its balance of payments by buying T-Bills. The sooner the SCO community, or just the core nations, can produce a new currency for use in trade, the sooner a crisis can be created within the Outlaw US Empire--essentially by turning the "intellectual weapon of financialization" against the global rogue nation foe.

    [Jan 16, 2020] https://iadllaw.org/2020/01/iadl-condemns-us-assassination-of-gen-qassem-soleimani-as-an-illegal-act-of-aggression/

    Jan 16, 2020 | iadllaw.org

    In this sense Soleimani assassination opened such a huge can of worms that the results can be judged only in several years.

    It exposes Trump and his cronies as one trick ponies who does not think strategically or are manipulated (for all practical purposes the hypothesis that Trump is a puppet is stronger that then the hypothesis that he is an independent player)

    In some way It might well be that Trump put the final nail into the global, led by the USA,neoliberal empire and legitimized the existence of two competing economic blocks. That's a huge change, if true (the fact that China folded contracts that)

    He also implicitly acknowledged that the USA no longer can attack on Iran military without the danger of suffering large losses and profound negative consequences itself. Including Russia and China support for Iran in such a war, which would make it the second Vietnam. That's another huge change -- the end of "Full Spectrum Dominance" doctrine as we know it. .

    Now we known that Trump bullied EU threating auto-tariff to support him. That a clear return to the Wild West in international relations and it another nail into the empire coffin. Esper recently blabbed that the US has the right under Article II of its Constitution to attack Iranian territory in response to offensive action by Iranian-backed militia in Iraq. So UN does not matter, right ? The UN Charter was created to stop WWIII. Under Trump, it again became a real possibility with the USA taking the central the role in creating the conditions for unleashing it.

    Here is an interesting quote from yesterday (Jan 15, 2020) article by Pepe Escobar in Asia Times (

    https://www.asiatimes.com/2020/01/article/battle-of-the-ages-to-stop-eurasian-integration/

    Retired US Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's chief of staff from 2001 to 2005, cuts to the chase: "America exists today to make war. How else do we interpret 19 straight years of war and no end in sight? It's part of who we are. It's part of what the American Empire is. We are going to lie, cheat and steal, as Pompeo is doing right now, as Trump is doing right now, as Esper is doing right now and a host of other members of my political party, the Republicans, are doing right now. We are going to lie, cheat and steal to do whatever it is we have to do to continue this war complex. That's the truth of it. And that's the agony of it."

    Moscow, Beijing and Tehran are fully aware of the stakes. Diplomats and analysts are working on the trend, for the trio, to evolve a concerted effort to protect one another from all forms of hybrid war – sanctions included – launched against each of them.

    For the US, this is indeed an existential battle – against the whole Eurasia integration process, the New Silk Roads, the Russia-China strategic partnership, those Russian hypersonic weapons mixed with supple diplomacy, the profound disgust and revolt against US policies all across the Global South, the nearly inevitable collapse of the US dollar. What's certain is that the Empire won't go quietly into the night. We should all be ready for the battle of the ages.

    .P.S. To me it looks that Trump lost all antiwar republicans and independents , as well as a part of military who voted for him in 2016 (and who now are Tulsi supporters)

    The Senate trial, if it materializes, now can become the leverage point to drive a wedge between moderate Republicans and Trump via his Iran policies.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Impeachment, Soleimani and the Pull of the Swamp

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 15 2020 17:53 utc | 172

    @ Carciofi 158

    Observe how the West dances with Kim?

    Pakistan should slip one across the border in a rail car of elephants.

    We now shift the focus unto the Impeachment Trial. Shifty Schiff leads the prosecution. Should be interesting spectator sport. Never be too certain of the outcome. Some are positing Trump could be removed. Many Republicans are uneasy. The guy is unfit to have the nuclear codes, displays impaired emotion - schizophrenia. Others, Independent and Republican turncoats consider Trump embarrassing. Over the last days Trump's Sec. of Defense, Esper threw him under the bus.


    This opinion piece should not be dismissed.

    Impeachment, Soleimani and the Pull of the Swamp

    [Because] Trump is going to be taken out.

    The events of the past twelve days since Trump murdered IRGC General Qassem Soleimani prove this beyond any doubt. Impeachment was the leverage point to drive open a wedge between Republicans and Trump through Iran.

    Pelosi slow-walking the articles of impeachment to the Senate was all part of the pantomime, folks. She gets what she wants: Congress asserting more power and the Democrats shoring up their base by taking out an eyesore in Trump.

    She waits just long enough for Trump to do something questionable and for it to be made known publicly.[.]

    The Swamp Strikes Back and puts Trump in a no-win situation.

    The Wall St. Journal article from this weekend which intimated that Trump made the decision to kill Soleimani was motivated by shoring up his support in the Israeli Occupied Senate is further proof.

    "Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said," the newspaper reported.[.]

    kooshy , Jan 15 2020 18:22 utc | 173

    @Lysander | Jan 15 2020 2:04 utc | 111

    "That is why Trump's presidency is a blessing for Iran. "
    It's real blessing to the entire world, otherwise how else the world would have come to see the real ugly face of Americans

    @Rd | Jan 15 2020 1:01 utc | 98
    This is now beyond government and oligarchy , and laws, this is now about a national/religious demand for revenge, on killing a true national shia muslim hero away from any political or difference in opinion.
    IMO, the demand for revenge can not be even controlled by military and it's leaders, the order for revenge can even be sanctioned by a relative unknown cleric in a shia village.

    @moon | Jan 15 2020 7:52 utc | 136
    Thanks, PL banned me over a year ago , for calling US military (yeman) a mercenary force, Now Trump is proud he sold 3000 US trops to Bone saw for 1 billion.
    I also believe that Iranian military has understood for some time now, that US (Military) is not willing to enter a war with Iran at this time, which makes me believe that a low intensity, long, covert attritional war across the western Asia will finally make US to leave. IMO pre announced without casualty attack on AalA US base by Iran Military was to allow any future covert low intensity attack by Iranian regional allies on US forces as non-sanctioned or related by Iranian government or military.
    Which makes it hard to fight directly.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Angry Bear " Further Followup On The Soleimani Assassination

    Jan 16, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    Further Followup On The Soleimani Assassination

    Barkley Rosser | January 15, 2020 6:13 am

    Journalism Politics Further Followup On The Soleimani Assassination I wish to point out some matters not getting a lot of attention in the US media.

    An important one of those was reported two days ago by Juan Cole . It is that apparently it has not been determined for certain that the initial attack that set off this current round of deaths when a militia in Iraq attacked an Iraqi military base in Kirkuk in which an American contractor was killed, almost certainly a matter of collateral damage although not recognized as such, was actually done by Kata'b Hezbollah, the group reported to have done it. That group was commanded by al-Mushani, who was also assassinated with Soleimani, with whom he was allied. But it is not certain that they did it. As it is, the Kirkuk base is dominated by Kurdish Pesh Merga, with whom it is not at all obvious the pro-Iranian militias like the Kat'b Hezbollah have hostile differences. This may have been cooked up to create an excuse for assassinating Soleimani.

    Indeed, it has now been reported that seven months ago Trump had approved killing Soleimani essentially at the first instance there would be a good excuse for doing so. In fact it is now reported that although Trump had not heard of Soleimani during th 2016 election, within five minutes of his inauguration he suggested killing Soleimani. SecState Pompeo been encouraging and pushing this action, but it has been something Trump has been hot to do for some time. Going up for an impeachment trial looks like a really good time.

    We have now seen quite a dance around reasons to justify this. We must keep clear that it is a matter of both US and international law that this sort of killing of a foreign national official such as General Soleimani is that there be an "imminent threat." I shall not drag through the various versions of what was supposedly the imminent threat was here, but it has finally become clear that there was none. And as of today both Pompeo and AG Barr have now pivoted to saying that it was done for "deterrence," but that leaves this assassination as illegal, with US troops in Iraq now declared to be"terrorists."

    Now indeed the further followup has become quite a mess, although hopefully the escalation has stopped and war will not happen, despite getting very close to the brink. So Iran made its strike on two bases with US troops in Iraq. While it initially looked like the Iranians were going out of their way to avoid killing any Americans, local US commanders now say that it appears that the strikes were in fact aimed at killing some Americans, and some were in fact injured. I do not know if this is true or not, but it is disturbing and shows how close we have gotten to heightened war.

    Then we had this disaster of the Iranians themselves shooting down a commercial Ukrainian airplane (oh, the irony), killing 176 civilians, mostly Iranians, Canadians, and Ukrainians, plus some others. With the admission by the regime, anti-government demonstrations have broken out at universities especially in Tehran where many of the Iranians on the plane were from, and many of the university students heading to Canada. Those demos have gone on for three days bringing forth a harsh put down from the government, but with news people quitting their jobs out of disgust. The government has now arrested some supposedly responsible for the erroneous shootdown under heightened alert status, which would not have come to pass without the illegal assassination. It is unclear if these arrests will bring an end to the demonstrations, but it should be kept in mind that these involve much smaller numbers of people than turned out in the aftermath of Soleimani's assassination.

    Underlying this most recent uprising is the fact that Iran is suffering serious econoimic problems. Much of this is due to the Trump sanctions, but they also reflect entrenched corruption and spending on foreign adventures, such as support for foreign militias. These are difficult times, and let us hope that all sides step back and reduce the heightened tensions.

    Barkley

    1. run75441 , January 15, 2020 12:23 pm

      Barkley:

      Good post and thanks for the follow-up.

      Normally when something happens in the Middle East, I head over to Informed Comment to see what Juan is saying about the situation. You have added information I was not aware of as I had not been over to Juan Cole's Informed Comment in several days. Also from a January 11th column of his:

      "Lest the Trumpies imply that only Obama de facto allied with Soleimani and his Iraqi Shiite militias, it should be pointed out that they played an important role in the defeat of ISIL at Mosul during Trump's presidency. Although they did not fight their way into the city, they fanned out to the west and north to prevent ISIL terrorists from escaping to Raqqa in Syria. That was why Kata'ib Hizbullah had a base at Qa'im, a checkpoint between Iraq and Syria, where they were preventing ISIL agents from going back and forth. Trump kicked off the current crisis by bombing his allies at Qa'im, killing some 26 militiamen. And then he droned his sometime ally Soleimani to death at Baghdad airport as Soleimani was about to begin covert peace talks with Saudi Arabia."

      All the Times the US allied with Gen. Soleimani against Common Enemies, giving him Air Support at Tikrit

    Barkley Rosser , January 15, 2020 8:12 pm

    I must walk back one speculation I made in this post. It is not the case that the base attacked near Kirkuk held Kurdish Pesh Merga. It indeed houses US and Iraqi national troops dedicated to fighting ISIS/ISIL/Daesh. Four US service people were injured along with two national Iraqi troops. The US citizwn killed was naturalized and born in Iraq.

    It remains possible that it was IAIA/ISIL/Daesh carried out the attack as they are active in that area. However, most think it was Kata'b Hezbollah, enocuraged and suppliled by Soleimani.

    run75441 , January 15, 2020 8:21 pm

    Barkley:

    Ok, so you missed some detail. The drone attack on Soleimani and others did not have to occur. Furthermore, it appears this was planned months earlier and just never carried through. To me, it is just another Trump distraction away from his impeachment.

    [Jan 16, 2020] The problem is that Trump appears to be morphing from the mad negotiator into someone who really is mad. I think he knows he screwed up with Soleimani and there's no taking it back, only doubling down

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Carolinian , , January 14, 2020 at 10:08 am

    Thanks for the shrewd analysis. The problem is that Trump appears to be morphing from the mad negotiator into someone who really is mad. I think he knows he screwed up with Soleimani and there's no taking it back, only doubling down . You can't talk your way out of some mistakes. Trump is shrewd, but not very smart and like most bullies he's also weak. He gets by being such an obvious bluffer and blowhard but when you start assassinating people and expect to be praised for it it's no longer a game.

    Carolinian , , January 14, 2020 at 4:59 pm

    I'd say the solution is to give Trump the heave ho this November and not play his game of me me me. Indeed the Iranians seem to be biding their time to see what happens.

    Trump was always only tolerable as long as he spent his time shooting off his mouth rather than playing the imperial chess master. This reality show has gone on long enough.

    MyLessThanPrimeBeef , , January 14, 2020 at 5:10 pm

    And to give Trump the heave-ho, we have to know how to play the man. (Then, Iran doesn't have to.)

    But if we don't fully know -- if he is unpredictable in how he starts out at the beginning -- it makes the venture harder (but not impossible).

    OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL , , January 14, 2020 at 7:39 pm

    Not sure he "screwed up" with Suleimani. He now has something to point to when Adelson and the Israel Firsters ring up. He has red meat for his base ("look what a tough guy I am"). He can tell the Saudis they now owe him one.

    He added slightly to the fund of hatred for America in the hearts of Sunnis but that fund is already pretty full. If they respond with a terror attack Trump wins because people will rally around the national leader and partisan differences will be put aside. Notice how fast de-escalation happened, certainly feels alot like pre-orchestrated kayfabe.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Russia has risen in the ranking of the best countries in the world.

    Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Moscow Exile

    January 15, 2020 at 4:45 am
    Жить стало легче: Россия поднялась в рейтинге лучших стран мира
    Россия поднялась в рейтинге лучших стран мира на одну строчку
    15.01.2020, 14:10

    Life has become easier: Russia has risen in the ranking of the best countries in the world.
    Russia has moved up one point in the ranking of the best countries in the world.

    Russia has moved up one place in the ranking of the best countries in the world according to the American magazine US News & World Report, occupying a position in the third ten best ranked. At the same time, the authors of the list stressed that amongst the most powerful of world powers, our country was in second place, behind only the USA. Tourists, according to the study, have begun to go more willingly to Russia, and the growth rate of the Russian economy only appears below 11 countries in the world.

    According to the 2019 results, Russia is still second amongst the world's strongest powers. The US News & World Report reports that Russia is second only to the US in terms of power, overtaking China.

    Amongst the best countries in the world there are 73 states. The rating is compiled every year by the publication on the basis of a variety of criteria.

    The magazine's main rating is "The Best Countries in the World". First place, according to the American edition, was taken by Switzerland, second by Canada, third by Japan. A year ago, Japan was second.

    The first five "best countries" also included Germany and Australia. Russia is in 23rd place. Our country has risen one place.

    So its true!!!!!

    Rasha weeeeeaaaak!!!!!!

    Amerika stronk!!!!!

    Of all the countries that are "better" and "stronker" than "Rasha", I wonder how many of them have had sanctions hurled against them by "stronk Amerika" and its lickspittle vassals?

    And how many of them lost more than 22 million citizens in WWII?

    And how many of them had to endure an 80-year-old experiment whose aim was to create socialism?

    Cue you-know-who .

    [Jan 16, 2020] Seems like the Yeltsin/USA constitution is being s-canned for something that gives more power to the Duma. We can expect less cooperation with the West.

    Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Patient Observer January 15, 2020 at 7:55 am

    https://sputniknews.com/russia/202001151078046470-russian-government-101-how-did-it-work-and-whats-about-to-change/

    How does the Russian government work?

    According to the current Constitution, adopted in 1993, the government exercises executive power; it drafts and implements the federal budget and carries out the national policy in the sphere of finance, foreign policy, education, healthcare, culture, science, and so on.

    The government may submit its resignation to the President who also has the power to dissolve it. Another way to dissolve the government is for the Duma, the lower house of parliament, to pass a motion of no confidence, which can be vetoed by the President.

    The President appoints the Prime Minister with the Duma's consent; Vladimir Putin appointed Dmitry Medvedev as prime minister twice, in 2012 and in 2018, after winning presidential elections.

    The President also appoints the deputy heads of government (there are 10 of them in the current cabinet) and the federal ministers at the Prime Minister's suggestion. It is in the President's power to dismiss both the Prime Minister and cabinet ministers.
    What is to change?

    In a move that looks set to significantly boost the power of parliament, Vladimir Putin called for changes to the Constitution that would enable the Duma to select the Prime Minister and cabinet ministers instead of the President.

    Having announced the redistribution of power, Putin has stressed that Russia still needs to remain a "strong presidential republic". According to Russian law, Putin now has two weeks to appoint a new Prime Minister.

    Lawmakers have already started drafting the legislation to put Putin's proposals into practice.

    Seems like the Yeltsin/USA constitution is being s-canned for something that gives more power to the Duma. We can expect less cooperation with the West. Also, it will undoubtedly be reported in the West, that Putin is trying to handcuff his successor by giving more power to the Duma.

    All in all, it would seem to bode well for greater Russian independence as Putin will be less hampered by the Western-leaning faction.

    James lake January 15, 2020 at 8:25 am
    It will depend on who is in the Duma – if they elect people with good qualities it will be positive.

    (Although looking at the parliament here in the Uk. In my lifetime I have see a real sharp decline in the quality of people who become Members of parliament. I'm not sure why

    Patient Observer January 15, 2020 at 8:30 am
    The US has the same problem. Some of our congresspeople are devoid of common sense, intelligence or relevant knowledge on important issues. I think that Russians are too pragmatic to elect similar buffoons.
    Mark Chapman January 15, 2020 at 2:26 pm
    Voters only have the choice of those who stand for office. If the field consists of Clowns A through D, the winner is bound to be a Clown. The quality, altruism and dedication of the candidate pool has indeed receded, and that is throughout the western democracies.
    Moscow Exile January 15, 2020 at 10:32 am
    He's already chosen a replacement for Dimka:

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has invited the head of the Federal Tax Service (FTS), Mikhail Mishustin, to become the new prime minister, TASS reports citing the Kremlin's press service.

    source: Путин выбрал нового премьер-министра
    19:12, 15 января 2020

    Putin has chosen a new prime minister

    Moscow Exile January 15, 2020 at 11:10 am
    For Woden's sake! Kudrin is now spouting at the Gaidar Forum being held at RANEPA (The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation, the largest federal state-funded institution of higher professional education located in Moscow, and where my elder daughter, Yelena Denisovna is now studying and who is going to be the first Madam President of Russia), as is Dimka, another Western wannabe -- always was and still is.

    Ye gods, I wouldn't be seen dead at a meeting that has Gaidar's name attached to it!

    And that other '90s prick Chubais was spouting today, saying what they did wrong in the '90s.

    I tell you what they did wrong, arsehole: they didn't put you in prison!

    Mark Chapman January 15, 2020 at 3:40 pm
    Refreshing, at least, even bracing to hear someone who was in the liberal vanguard in the 90's actually say that things were done wrong in the 90's, if that's actually what he said. Normally the liberal elite of Russia affect to believe the only thing that went wrong in the 90's was that Russian weakness caused her to falter without seeing the golden time through to its capitalist conclusion. Some would not have made it to the celebration party, of course, but that's reality, innit? You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Russia's new proposed PM Mikhail Mishustin.

    Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    yalensis January 15, 2020 at 3:55 pm

    Russia's new (proposed) PM Mikhail Mishustin. Never heard of him before, but did quickie research. According to VZGLIAD reporters Andrei Rezchikov and Natalia Makarova:

    This guy totally reformed the Russian tax system and implemented electronic automated system (woo hoo!), also implemented electronic signatures and other high-tech bling-blang.
    A 100% pure-blooded technocat (yay! my kinda guy!)

    Born 3 March 1966 in Moscow. Graduated from super-duper tech school in 1989. With certification as "Engineer – System Technician."
    In 2003 successfully defended his dissertation on the topic of "The mechanics of governmental tax administration in Russia." Almost won a Pulitzer for that.

    Continued on as geeky tax specialist. In 2008-2010 entered the realm of private investment business, with UFG Capital Partners and UFG Asset Management.

    Hobbies: Mishustin enjoys playing hockey, as does President Putin. One speculates they may have encountered one another on the ice.
    Religious views: Very religious, and was awarded the Order of Serafim Sarovsky.
    That was the nice Russian saint who lived with a bear. I wrote about him on my blog – little plug there, sorry

    Jen January 15, 2020 at 4:58 pm
    Checked his bio on Wikipedia: Mishustin did indeed attend a technological university and graduated with an engineering degree. This suggests he had no exposure to competing political and economic ideologies in his youth apart from what was required of him as a student living in Soviet times.

    Not quite as dramatic as living in a cave as a teenager, then digging ditches and later picking up a chemical engineering degree.
    https://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/projects/xi-jinping-cave/

    Patient Observer January 15, 2020 at 5:18 pm
    I thought only in America could the humble ever reach the top. My my, what a world we live in.
    Patient Observer January 15, 2020 at 7:03 pm

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/SAYuR2jlzp0?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    Seems like a can-do technocrat. Still good.

    Patient Observer January 15, 2020 at 5:45 pm
    Definitely not an Atlanticist – all good so far.
    Moscow Exile January 15, 2020 at 9:43 pm
    And Dimka's gone! That's good enough for me!
    Moscow Exile January 15, 2020 at 9:47 pm
    re. the pingback below:

    I didn't expect any of it. Neither did anyone else, whatever the so-called experts outgassing on the US Garbage Media may be pretending.

    Yeah, Kremlin-Watchers, Kremlin Experts, Kremlinologists -- call them what you will -- they know sweet FA!!!!

    I remember when the SU "fell" and none of these "experts" had any idea.

    Of course, they al knew it was going to happen in hindsight.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Trump's fits the pattern the Russians have used to depict the USA: "not agreement capable".

    One of the strongest predictive sign that you have a sociopathic boss is that he/she is not agreement capable.
    The maintenance of fear, chaos and blowback are exACTLY the desired result. Deliberately and on purpose.
    Notable quotes:
    "... I would put it a bit differently. Trump's erraticness is a strong signal he fits to a pattern the Russians have used to depict the US: "not agreement capable". ..."
    Jan 16, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Yves Smith Post author , , January 14, 2020 at 12:31 pm

    I would put it a bit differently. Trump's erraticness is a strong signal he fits to a pattern the Russians have used to depict the US: "not agreement capable". That's what I meant by he selects for weak partners. His negotiating style signals that he is a bad faith actor. Who would put up with that unless you had to, or you could somehow build that into your price?

    barnaby33 , , January 14, 2020 at 11:53 pm

    Considering I doubt the Russians have ever honored a single deal they made, that's maybe not a good example!

    Yves Smith Post author , , January 15, 2020 at 12:16 am

    I have no idea who your mythical Russians are. I know two people who did business in Russia before things got stupid and they never had problems with getting paid. Did you also miss that "Russians" have bought so much real estate in London that they mainly don't live in that you could drop a neutron bomb in the better parts of Chelsea and South Kensington and not kill anyone?

    Pray tell, how could they acquire high end property if they are such cheats?

    Boomka , , January 15, 2020 at 6:38 am

    somebody was eating too much US propaganda? how about this for starters:
    https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/26-years-on-russia-set-to-repay-all-soviet-unions-foreign-debt

    "It is politically important: Russia has paid off the USSR's debt to a country that no longer exists," said Mr Yuri Yudenkov, a professor at the Russian University of Economics and Public Administration. "This is very important in terms of reputation: the ability to repay on time, the responsibility," he told AFP.

    It would have been very easy for Russia to say it cannot be held responsible for USSR's debts, especially in this case where debt is to a non-existent entity.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Tulsi: Truth scares those who traffic in lies

    Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Northern Star

    January 14, 2020 at 5:03 pm

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/BG5sG2Ou-vY?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    [Jan 16, 2020] Trump is working hand in hand with Netanyahu, Adelson and the rest of the far far right weirdos, he's their bum boy.

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bubbles , Jan 15 2020 20:35 utc | 182

    Bedrock of American Conservative ideology The National Review recently expressed concerns regarding trump's behaviour, and were not inclined to praise Caesar. Choosing to speak to his state of mind instead.

    "And there's the larger fact that since America's withdrawal from the Iran deal, the nation's policy toward Iran seems to be one of drifting toward war lazily and thoughtlessly. Making unreasonable demands, imposing sanctions, and then watching Iranian provocations roll in.

    But most important, we don't live in a vacuum. And perhaps you've noticed that since the news of this assassination broke,

    the president has sounded out of his mind.

    He has returned to his idea of vandalism, blasphemy, and outrage as strategy. Contradicting his own secretary of state, Trump promised that the United States would respond to further Iranian provocation by deliberately bombing cultural sites in Iran. "They're allowed to kill our people. They're allowed to torture and maim our people. They're allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we're not allowed to touch their cultural sites," he said. "It doesn't work that way."

    This disgusting threat is in many ways worse than his promises of "fire and fury" in North Korea. The punishment would fall not on the government, or on the military that tortures and maims, but on the whole Iranian people -- and really all of humanity that has an interest in the preservation of great treasures of antiquity, of which there are many in Iran. These are jewels of ancient civilization that ought to outlast Iran's current government, and that deserve a better custodian than the mullahs. That aside, the threat carries zero strategic value for us while offering infinite propaganda value for the Iranian regime."

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/qasem-soleimani-killing-trump-rhetoric-dangerous-unproductive/

    Again, from the above: "the president has sounded out of his mind."

    However, to trump's base his actions may not appear to be those of a madman, and I sincerely doubt the National Review is on their reading list. If they read at all that is. Case in point, why go to all the effort to attend his weird rallies just to hear the same lies they could have read at multiple sources from the comfort of their homes?

    Oui , Jan 15 2020 20:37 utc | 183

    Threat has been hanging over relations with Europe for over a year. What's changed? Brexit, GE2019 and new ally Boris Johnson.

    Trump has threatened to impose the 25% car tariffs by invoking "Section 232" national security tariffs under 1962 Cold War trade law.

    Russ , Jan 15 2020 20:38 utc | 184
    Posted by: b | Jan 15 2020 19:40 utc | 175

    "WaPo: Days before Europeans warned Iran of nuclear deal violations, Trump secretly threatened to impose 25% tariff on European autos if they didn't...The U.S. effort to coerce European foreign policy through tariffs, a move one European official equated to "extortion," represents a new level of hardball tactics with the United States' oldest allies...
    U.S. officials conveyed the threat directly to officials in London, Berlin and Paris rather than through their embassies in Washington, said a senior European official."

    Good! Couldn't happen to a more deserving mob of bootlicks. Their compliance proves they want and deserve it.

    I agree with those who say, This is exactly the kind of thing I hoped for from Trump.

    On the other hand this is exactly why the likes of the WaPo hate him - although not a fascist, he's too directly thuggish for the neoliberal formula. Too much stick, not enough (poisoned) carrot.

    Russ , Jan 15 2020 20:45 utc | 185
    Posted by: Bubbles | Jan 15 2020 20:35 utc | 182

    "He has returned to his idea of vandalism, blasphemy, and outrage as strategy. Contradicting his own secretary of state, Trump promised that the United States would respond to further Iranian provocation by deliberately bombing cultural sites in Iran...

    This disgusting threat is in many ways worse than his promises of "fire and fury" in North Korea. The punishment would fall not on the government, or on the military that tortures and maims, but on the whole Iranian people -- and really all of humanity that has an interest in the preservation of great treasures of antiquity, of which there are many in Iran."

    Here too Trump is only the most openly thuggish face and voice of relentless general practice.

    I'll make a rare link to my own blog since this was the subject of my most recent post.

    https://attempter.wordpress.com/2020/01/11/cultural-genocide-is-as-american-as-poison-apple-pie/

    In modern times the destruction has become less overtly religious, more secularized, mundane, assembly-line and industrial. Therefore it is vastly more comprehensive and horrific.

    Capitalism, productionism, "Progress", the economic civilization devour and eradicate vastly more historic sites and sacred lands, by many orders of magnitude, than all the religious and nationalistic hatreds thruout history put together...

    In these ways, as always, Trump is nothing but the more openly scabrous and brutish incarnation of the essence of the US and especially of all US economic and political activity. He is by far the most typical and characteristic of all US presidents. He is the most logical production of the US to date.

    Looking at a president Americans look at themselves in a mirror. With the likes of Obama, the Clintons, George Bush, plus scammers like Sanders, they see skillfully idealized, romanticized, flattering fake reflections of themselves...

    james , Jan 15 2020 20:55 utc | 186
    @ 182 bubbles... that quote you highlight show you just how sick trump and the usa is at present to try to pass off that type of lie to the public to be broadcast wide and far..

    "They're allowed to kill our people. They're allowed to torture and maim our people. They're allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we're not allowed to touch their cultural sites."

    no - usa invaded iraq and some of ''your'' people were killed actively invading another country. blame it on yourselves, but don't try to pass off this shit on the public.. it is the worst form of propaganda you can generate...

    i am speaking generally here to the usa public.. obviously the americans here are aware of this, but i am not following who in the usa has challenged this outrageous propaganda...

    and, i agree with others here - trump - for just how ugly he is, is really highlighting just how bad things in the usa has gotten.. and it will get worse if they can't figure out a way to get their shit together too..

    dh , Jan 15 2020 20:59 utc | 187
    @182 "Case in point, why go to all the effort to attend his weird rallies just to hear the same lies they could have read at multiple sources from the comfort of their homes?"

    That's easy. They go to the rallies because they like the solidarity. It is comforting to hear their leader speaking surrounded by thousands of like-minded people. Plus it's a great opportunity to wear their MAGA hats and wave flags.

    james , Jan 15 2020 20:59 utc | 188
    @185 russ.. i went to the article you posted and read it.. - keep on speaking out and get your message out far and wide russ... i agree with your viewpoint expressed...
    DFC , Jan 15 2020 21:19 utc | 189
    Posted by: kooshy | Jan 15 2020 18:22 utc | 173

    Yes, in fact one of the big "advantages" of the Trump presidency is that everyone for sure knows that US is an Empire, so every Storm Trooper knows that they are not fighting "to defend" nothing, they are pawns, cannon fodder of an Empire fighting in other lands to grab resources and impose "tax" (in a subtle way through the financial system) fot he global "Wealth Pump" from all the world to send it to the center of the Empire in exchange of "protection" (Vito Corleone) and to spread "freedom", "democracy", "human rights", "prosperity", and all that vacuous BS.

    Now the Storm Troopers fully know they are in Syria and Iraq to "protect our oil" (from the Iraqis) and to fight those who oppose the grabbing (Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians, etc...).
    But they will have a hard time in the future, this will not be Desert Storm 2.0 or Iraqi Freedom 2.0, this will be like Lebanon 2006 but against a kind of Hezbollah x100 more powerful and they are so far far far away from home...

    Bubbles , Jan 15 2020 21:23 utc | 190
    Posted by: Russ | Jan 15 2020 20:45 utc | 185

    Dehumanizing. By order of the Overlords, who of course know better than all those folks they view as inferior. Messianic is one applicable term.

    George Soros once subtly agreed he had Messianic tendencies in an interview that used to be available on utube.

    Benjamin Netanyahu has been accused of having the same flaw by some learned persons. He of course follows the 'admit nothing' doctrine. But his actions speak for themselves. Including his 'alleged' criminal activities.

    The United States doesn't have a culture, unless by some queer assessment consumerism could be called a culture. That is the basis for it's disrespect.

    Clearly you're a thinker but I don't follow your opinion on Sanders. He seems a decent sort to me. Thanks for you reply btw and I will go to your site and explore your thoughts.


    Bubbles , Jan 15 2020 21:49 utc | 191
    That's easy. They go to the rallies because they like the solidarity. It is comforting to hear their leader speaking surrounded by thousands of like-minded people. Plus it's a great opportunity to wear their MAGA hats and wave flags.

    Posted by: dh | Jan 15 2020 20:59 utc | 187


    Some decades ago, there were other's who posed as Nationalists, and they caused a world of hurt.

    Descendant's of those people who were sent off to defend Democracy understand the sacrifice. What some don't understand, is that sacrifice being grossly abused and has the enemy they were sent to defeat actually been defeated? Or were they simply pawns in a rich mans contest, where the rich men threw trinkets their way after the War was won?

    Who was the enemy then? Who is the enemy now? Are they the same?

    Was there a man dismay'd?
    Not tho' the soldier knew
    Some one had blunder'd:
    Theirs not to make reply,
    Theirs not to reason why


    dh , Jan 15 2020 22:13 utc | 192
    @191 I get what your saying but I think comparing Trump with Hitler is a bit of a stretch. Circe will vehemently disagree but I think Trump is smart enough to know that his supporters don't like being called Nazis. They are the 'good guys'. They really want to 'make America great again' whatever that means.
    Bubbles , Jan 15 2020 22:47 utc | 193
    @191 I get what your saying but I think comparing Trump with Hitler is a bit of a stretch.

    True, Hitler was smarter. And even more insane than trump. But, let's look at some clear differences.. Hitler wasn't a pampered boy whose father worked all the angles of corruption to make a lot of money.

    Hitler was a combat veteran. A veteran of the trench wars of WW1. A Veteran of the horrors of that ugly war of attrition.

    Trump sought 5 deferments to avoid serving in ANY capacity in America's war in Vietnam. FIVE DEFERMENTS.


    His father faced inquiries about his abusive behaviour related to war profiteering and he proudly defended his right to use levers afforded to him to use local officials so he could profit on the backs of WW2 Veterans and their families.

    Little wonder he maintained his father's relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu.

    james , Jan 15 2020 23:04 utc | 194
    hell of a guy that trump.. has the ancestry to go with it too..
    dh , Jan 15 2020 23:12 utc | 195
    @193 Hitler was evil. That seems to be generally agreed. But he won elections. He was popular with ordinary people in pre-war Germany. Obviously the Versailles Treaty was a big factor.

    I can see a few similarities. Trump was elected on a nationalist platform too. How far can Trump push it? The Wall hasn't been a huge success so far. ICE has started rounding up illegal immigrants. Trumpists approve of that. Would people feel OK if he started gassing them? That would be the logical outcome of MAGA. But I like to think it would be step too far for most Americans. He's on fairly safe ground beating up on furriners though.

    Bubbles , Jan 15 2020 23:59 utc | 196
    195 "I can see a few similarities. "

    Read this, think Treaty of Versailles.

    " "First, Iran must declare to the IAEA a full account of the prior military dimensions of its nuclear program, and permanently and verifiably abandon such work in perpetuity."
    "Second, Iran must stop uranium enrichment and never pursue plutonium reprocessing. This includes closing its heavy water reactor."
    "Third, Iran must also provide the IAEA with unqualified access to all sites throughout the entire country."
    "Iran must end its proliferation of ballistic missiles and halt further launching or development of nuclear-capable missile systems."
    "Iran must release all U.S. citizens, as well as citizens of our partners and allies, each of them detained on spurious charges."
    "Iran must end support to Middle East terrorist groups, including Lebanese Hizballah [Hezbollah], Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."
    "Iran must respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi Government and permit the disarming, demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias."
    "Iran must also end its military support for the Houthi militia and work towards a peaceful political settlement in Yemen."
    "Iran must withdraw all forces under Iranian command throughout the entirety of Syria."
    "Iran, too, must end support for the Taliban and other terrorists in Afghanistan and the region, and cease harboring senior Al Qaida leaders."
    "Iran, too, must end the IRG [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] Qods Force's [Quds Force's] support for terrorists and militant partners around the world."
    "And too, Iran must end its threatening behavior against its neighbors – many of whom are U.S. allies. This certainly includes its threats to destroy Israel, and its firing of missiles into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. It also includes threats to international shipping and destructive – and destructive cyberattacks."

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20989/pompeos-12-demands-for-iran-read-more-like-a-declaration-of-war-than-a-path-to-peace

    The trump Regime, who clearly covet AIPAC $ and hope to take away the dems primary spot, dance to the Nethanyahu / far right tune. It's as obvious as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west.

    dh , Jan 16 2020 0:11 utc | 197
    @196 The Allied Powers were dictating terms to a defeated Germany in Versailles. Trump is dictating terms to an undefeated Iran on behalf of Israel. The act of dictation is certainly similar. Are we arguing about something?
    Bubbles , Jan 16 2020 0:28 utc | 198
    Are we arguing about something?

    Posted by: dh | Jan 16 2020 0:11 utc | 197

    No we aren't, you got the point.

    Trump is dictating terms as if his adversary was already vanquished. Clearly it ain't over, but the bloviator in Chief and his Lobbyist appointed advisors would very much like people to believe their goading Iran will result in capitulation, Versailles style. But who in their right mind would believe the foreign affairs neophyte and tabloid princeling, donald trump?

    trump is working hand in hand with Netanyahu, Adelson and the rest of the far far right weirdos, he's their bum boy. Their agenda is clear, provoke Iran to retaliate to US and Israeli provocations so the Cabal can howl at the top of their lungs and demand Vengance. On American tax payers dime, not Israeli taxpayers dime. Heck, when did they ever pay for all those aggression's dating back to Desert Storm?

    dh , Jan 16 2020 0:47 utc | 199
    @198 Yes all of that about Trump and Netanyahu, Adelson, provoking Ira etc. is well known here at MOA. I was more interested in the similarities between Trump and Hitler. I find it hard to imagine the US slipping into full blown Nazism. Maybe some kind of happy-face fascism is a possibility.
    bevin , Jan 16 2020 0:55 utc | 200
    "Hitler was evil. That seems to be generally agreed. But he won elections."
    dh195
    No he didn't. The only elections that he won were after he had taken power and put his opponents in jail. Then he campaigned, using the Storm Troopers and the police forces of the various states-Prussia most notably where Goering was Minister-President and controlled the police- to intimidate any opposition.
    It is an old Conservative talking point and a prime argument of enemies of democracy to insist that Hitler won elections. In fact he lost lots of them. It was this unpopularity that gave the militarist/industrialist coterie surrounding Hindenburg confidence that they could control the Bohemian corporal they despised.

    [Jan 16, 2020] US Attack on Soleimani is a Signal to Russia-Iran-China Triumvirate to Cease Cooperation by Ekaterina Blinova

    Jan 07, 2020 | sputniknews.com

    The US is trying to stop Eurasia's economic and political integration in order to delay its own demise, say international observers, explaining what message the US sent to the Russia-China-Iran "triumvirate" by killing Quds Commander Qasem Soleimani. The assassination of Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian major general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and commander of the Quds Force, in a targeted US air strike on 3 January came on the heels of joint naval exercise launched by Russia, Iran and China in the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Oman.

    The "growing Russia-China-Iran trilateral convergence", as The Diplomat dubbed it in late December, is seemingly hitting a raw nerve in Washington : speaking to Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) on 2 January, Rear Admiral Khanzadi, the Iranian navy commander, said that Washington and its allies had held an emergency meeting aimed at disrupting the drills.

    US Opposes Rapprochement of Russia, China and Iran Amid Policy of 'Maximum Pressure'
    "Recent violent US attacks against Iranian allies in Iraq and Syria, culminating in the killing of Iran's Major General Qasem Soleimani, are, in the wider geopolitical sense, meant to send signals to the building Eurasian triumvirate to cease their collaborative activities, let alone longer-term strategic and Belt and Road Initiative-linked designs," says Pye Ian, an American economic analyst and private equity executive.

    According to Ian, the US decision to step up pressure on Tehran might be stemming from Washington's apparent belief that Iran is "the 'weakest link' in the strengthening Eurasian alliance".

    However, "Russia, China and Iran cannot be attacked overtly, let alone invaded, occupied or 'regime changed'," the economic analyst highlights.

    Christopher C. Black, a Toronto-based international criminal lawyer with 20 years of experience in war crimes and international relations, echoes the American economist.

    "It is in response to the close relationship between Russia, Iran and China and it is no coincidence that this murder took place just as the joint naval exercises in the Persian Gulf came to an end," he said. "Further, it is a threat to Russian strategic interests in Syria and to Syria itself."

    Apart from this, the move indicates that "one of the reasons for US pressure on Iran is to control the oil supply to China in order to cripple China's development," Black suggests.

    Russia and its military successes in the region have become yet another irritant for Washington, according to Max Parry, an independent American journalist and geopolitical analyst.

    "The US likely feels the need to re-assert itself as a hegemonic power in the region, considering it is Moscow that emerged as the new honest peace broker in the Middle East with the Syrian conflict," Parry notes. "Russia completely outmanoeuvred Washington and by the end of the war, Turkey was practically in Moscow's camp. Trump has reset US foreign policy with the withdrawal from Syria and the targeting of Iran."

    By killing Soleimani, the US "has completely overplayed its hand and this could be the beginning of the end for Washington because a war with Iran would be no cakewalk", he emphasises.

    © AFP 2019 / ALY SONG / POOL Russian President Vladimir Putin (L), Chinese President Xi Jinping (C) and Iran's President Hassan Rouhani attend the Expo Center before the opening ceremony at the Expo Center at the fourth Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA) summit in Shanghai on May 21, 2014 Eurasian 'Triumvirate' is Moving Away From the US Dollar

    According to Ian, in addition to being a thorn in Washington's flesh, Moscow, Beijing and Tehran have something else in common: the three nations have increasingly been drifting away from the US dollar.

    The trend followed the Trump administration's:

    · unilateral withdrawal from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Actions (JCPOA) in May 2018;

    · trade war waged against the People's Republic of China by Washington since March 2018;

    · series of anti-Russian sanctions imposed against Moscow under the pretext of the latter's interference in the US 2016 presidential elections, something that Russia resolutely denies.

    The economic analyst explains that "the dollar's universal confidence trick requires uniform adherence, by natural adoption or by force". While the US allies remain obedient to the dollar- dominated system, those who resisted it such as Iraq under Saddam, Libya under Gaddafi and Venezuela under Chavez "triggered some Atlanticist force, either overtly or clandestinely, in order to try and put those nations back on a compliant page."

    However, "the current state of dollar printing by the US Fed ad infinitum cannot last forever," Ian stresses.

    "The global East and South are already ahead of Transatlantic banking, in a sense, by shifting further out of the dollar and Treasury securities into their own, or bilateral, currency exchanges, gold, and/or domestic or collaborative cryptocurrency endeavours," he says.

    Russia, China, Iran, as well as India and some other Eurasian nations are switching to trading in local currencies and continuing to amass gold at a steady pace . Thus, for instance, Russia produced over 185.1 tonnes of gold in the first six months of 2019; the country's bullion reserves reached 72.7 million troy ounces (2,261 tonnes) as of 1 December 2019. For its part, the People's Bank of China (PBoC) has accumulated 1,948.3 tonnes of the precious metal as of December 2019, according to World Gold Council.

    Ian foresees that if the world's nations continue to shift out of US Treasury obligations and choose alternative currencies for energy pricing, trading and reserves recycling, it may "cause US interest rates to fly higher, cratering consumer, institutional and public debt obligations and re-importing an obscene level of inflation back into the US".

    The views and opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Isn't America (i.e., America the nation-state, which most Americans still believe they live in) militarily occupying much of the planet, making a mockery of international law, bombing and invading other countries, and assassinating heads of state and military officers with complete impunity.

    Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Northern Star, January 14, 2020 at 4:11 pm

    "World War III is not going to happen because World War III already happened and the global capitalist empire won. [Where is the "capitalism"?] Take a look at these NATO maps (make sure to explore all the various missions). Then take a look at this Smithsonian map of where the U.S. military is "combating terrorism." And there are plenty of other maps you can google. What you will be looking at is the global capitalist empire. Not the American empire, the global capitalist empire.

    If that sounds like a distinction without a difference well, it kind of is, and it kind of isn't. What I mean by that is that it isn't America (i.e., America the nation-state, which most Americans still believe they live in) that is militarily occupying much of the planet, making a mockery of international law, bombing and invading other countries, and assassinating heads of state and military officers with complete impunity.

    Or, rather, sure, it is America but America is not America."

    BINGO!!!!!

    https://www.anti-empire.com/ww3-flickers-out-after-terroristy-terrorists-inflict-mass-non-casualties/

    [Jan 16, 2020] Does the United States's withdrawal from the JCPOA constitute non-compliance, or not? If so, does their non-compliance constitute breach of contract

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Joshua , Jan 15 2020 2:39 utc | 115

    Does the United States's withdrawal from the JCPOA constitute non-compliance, or not? If so, does their non-compliance constitute breach of contract, or not?

    [Jan 16, 2020] The US extorted their own "allies" to get them to betray Iran and destroy their own reputations

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    b , Jan 15 2020 19:40 utc | 175

    woah

    WaPo: Days before Europeans warned Iran of nuclear deal violations, Trump secretly threatened to impose 25% tariff on European autos if they didn't

    The U.S. effort to coerce European foreign policy through tariffs, a move one European official equated to "extortion," represents a new level of hardball tactics with the United States' oldest allies, underscoring the extraordinary tumult in the transatlantic relationship.
    ...
    U.S. officials conveyed the threat directly to officials in London, Berlin and Paris rather than through their embassies in Washington, said a senior European official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations.

    Kadath , Jan 15 2020 20:05 utc | 179

    Yes the US extorted their own "allies" to get them to betray Iran and destroy their own reputations. I must say the one thing i begrudgingly like about Trump is his honest upfront thuggist actions. After the backroom betrayals of Obama bush clinton merkel and the rest its almost refreshingly honest. Also i can think of no quicker way of destroying the US empire than by threatening your own allies the MIC must be desperate to start a new never ending war, although perhaps they should be careful of what they wish for

    [Jan 16, 2020] Bulling EU: Trumps calculations were (obviously) right. EU would have never risked a massive economic crisis because of a breakdown in US-EU trade by siding with Iran.

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DontBelieveEitherPr. , Jan 15 2020 2:14 utc | 113

    Trumps calculations were (obviously) right. EU would have never risked a massive economic crisis because of a breakdown in US-EU trade by siding with Iran.
    Sadly, they are doing what every other country would do in this position to protect their own self percieved national interests.

    Like China,India and Russia too now more and more totally abiding by sanctions and in case of China winding down oil trade even more.

    In this time of lurking economic crisis, US sanctions could cripple Europe from one day to the next. With our countries also being on the edge of social unrest, and mass conflict between elites and people, a massive economic crisis would bring everything tumbling down.

    This is the sad reality. Risking the sure economic meltdown to save an already lost Iran deal would trade the social and economic welbeing of their voters for Iran. The deal has been lost ever since Trump annouced his opposition. This is the reality. Triggering a crisis on the back of its own voters without a real chance to save that deal would have been an empty gesture anyway.

    Realpolitik.

    Good thing is Merkel seems to have had a great day with Putin. EU will silently learn from this and warm ties with Russia. If not for its people, for its business.

    The deal was a good idea, but it always was destined to end like this. Iran will go nuclear, and the US and Isreal will have "no alternative" for shooting war. If they dare now.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 15 2020 2:30 utc | 114

    Paragragh 14 of the UNSC resolution is worth thinking about.

    "14. Affirms that the application of the provisions of previous resolutions pursuant to paragraph 12 do not apply with retroactive effect to contracts signed between any party and Iran or Iranian individuals and entities prior to the date of application, provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with the JCPOA, this resolution and the previous resolutions;"

    To date, only Russia and China are holding up their ends of the deal. Iran, sticking to the deal is on the losing side as it has no trade with the EU yet it still must stay within the provisions of the deal. I believe there were clauses on what Iran could do if other parties were not upholding their end.
    The nuke deal is dead and Iran knows it. Under Paragragh 14, Russia China can sign up to all deals allowed under the resolution and when snapback provisions occur, Iran Russia china can still operate contracts it has signed before sanctions reinstated. This way, Iran gets the benefits of trade and investment with China and Russia that could not have occurred before the nuke deal, but at the same time, Iran will no longer be bound by the deal.
    China signed up a huge oil deal with Iran not long back. Russia have also been signing a good number of contracts. None of these will be effected by UNSC sanction.

    Overall, the nuke deal was a win for Iran. Pity the US and Euro's have reneged, but still, a win for Iran.

    Joshua , Jan 15 2020 2:39 utc | 115
    Does the United States's withdrawal from the JCPOA constitute non-compliance, or not? If so, does their non-compliance constitute breach of contract, or not?
    karlof1 , Jan 15 2020 2:43 utc | 116
    Peter AU 1 @114--

    Now Peter, do you really think the Outlaw US Empire or its poodles will abide by contract law in general and the JCPOA contract law specifically?

    IMO, the JCPOA's outcome is becoming similar to the outcome of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in that it bought time and showed who's the true aggressor. I recall writing the Eurasians need to behave as if they're at war with the EU-3 and their master--and that includes the Eurasian nations who so far aren't too much affected by the fallout from the JCPOA's failure.

    What has me curious is the nature of the talks between Iran and Qatar.

    Piotr Berman , Jan 15 2020 3:11 utc | 119 Jackrabbit , Jan 15 2020 3:12 utc | 120
    Peter AU1 @114

    =
    Under Paragragh 14, Russia China can sign up to all deals allowed under the resolution and when snapback provisions occur, Iran Russia china can still operate contracts it has signed before sanctions reinstated.

    Not sure about that. Paragraph 14 has this constraining language:

    ... provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with the JCPOA, this resolution and the previous resolutions.
    My reading of this phrase is that he word "and" implies that the contracts must satisfy provisions of ALL of these.

    Put another way: When the snap back occurs, then contracts signed are exempt except that they must comply with the provisions that are snapped back (AND) the JCPOA, AND this resolution!?!?

    Yes, it seems nonsensical. But how else can one interpret the "and"?

    =
    Overall, the nuke deal was a win for Iran.

    It was a 'win' for both sides.

    I've always believed that USA entered into the JCPOA to buy time because Syrian "regime change" was taking longer than expected. I've read many times that neocons and/or neocon sympathizers believed that "Damascus is on the road" to Tehran."

    USA-Israel want to fight Iran before it gets a bomb. Iran bought time to prepare for that fight.

    !!

    snake , Jan 15 2020 3:42 utc | 121
    The EU cannot lead in anything - it is a completely owned and operated US tool. It is a big zero in providing humanity any help with the big problem of our time: the 'indispensable and exceptional' supremacist US. by: AriusArmenian @ 15

    evilempire @ 74 <= I agree the Iranians probably did not shoot down the 737.. I posted to MOA a link to a presstv article, headlined no missile hit the passenger liner, and the link even said --its official.. within a short few minutes after tha, the pressTV link disappeared and PressTV replaced it with a new story , Iranians admit they had mistakenly shot down the PS752 taking off from Tehran. This suggest either a military coup in Iran, or Iraq double crossed Iran. killed in Iraq by Trump were the leaders of the Shia religious arm (IRCG leaders )

    The unusually harsh words and expression in anger by Khomeini, said he would severely punish those 8 persons responsible for the mistake, <= non characteristic of Khomeini , suggesting a trusted friend let him down; the two arms of the Military may be at war with each other and Trump was helping the Iranian Military (eliminate the upper leadership of the Revolutionary guard)? Today's JCOPA by the European powers issue suggest insiders have been at work all weekend. Russia and China silence all fit betrayal. Have the two separate branches of Iran military been at odds with each?
    Imagine the White house wiping out Qaseum Soleimani and other IRCG members drawn on false pretense into Iraq.?

    here is Bs report on the matter
    The Iranian Armed Forces General Staff just admitted (in Farsi, English translation) that its air defenses inadvertently shot down the Ukrainian flight PS 752 shortly after it took off on January 8 in Tehran :

    2- In early hours after the missile attack [on US' Ain al-Assad base in Iraq], the military flights of the US' terrorist forces had increased around the country. The Iranian defence units received news of witnessing flying targets moving towards Iran's strategic centres, and then several targets were observed in some [Iranian] radars, which incited further sensitivity at the Air Defence units.
    3- Under such sensitive and critical circumstances, the Ukrainian airline's Flight PS752 took off from Imam Khomeini Airport, and when turning around, it approached a sensitive military site of the IRGC, taking the shape and altitude of a hostile target. In such conditions, due to human error and in an unintentional move, the airplane was hit [by the Air Defence], which caused the martyrdom of a number of our compatriots and the deaths of several foreign nationals.

    4- The General Staff of the Armed Forces offers condolences and expresses sympathy with the bereaved families of the Iranian and foreign victims, and apologizes for the human error. It also gives full assurances that it will make major revision in the operational procedures of its armed forces in order to make impossible the recurrence of such errors. It will also immediately hand over the culprits to the Judicial Organization of the Armed Forces for prosecution.

    The Pentagon had claimed that Iran shot down the airliner but the evidence it presented was flimsy and not sufficient as the U.S. tends to spread disinformation about Iran.

    The Associated Press errs when it says that the move was "stoked by the American drone strike on Jan. 3 that killed top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani". The move was stoked five days earlier when the U.S. killed 31 Iraqi security forces near the Syrian border despite the demands by the Iraqi prime minister and president not to do so. It was further stoked when the U.S. assassinated Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, the deputy commander of the Popular Militia Forces and a national hero in Iraq.b at 19:09 UTC | Comments (150)

    The State Department issued a rather aggressive response to Abdul-Mahdi's request:b at 19:09 UTC | Comments (150)
    Very interesting post. something is up Thanks.

    Mao , Jan 15 2020 3:51 utc | 122
    This picture

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images5/europeanpoodles.jpg

    in many ways resembles another picture:

    https://i.redd.it/ahft7ubghjt31.jpg

    Mao , Jan 15 2020 4:19 utc | 124
    Posted by: V | Jan 15 2020 4:04 utc | 123

    Current Europe is a selling girl of imperialism.

    moon , Jan 15 2020 4:58 utc | 125
    Posted by: DontBelieveEitherPr. | Jan 15 2020 2:14 utc | 113

    thanks, yes, the US economic power directly and indirectly via economic laws or extra-territorial sanctions. A company simply cannot make a deal with Iran if it doesn't want to be ruined by US legal means. Sad, but true.

    Iranian frozen assets in international accounts are calculated to be worth between $100 billion[1][2] and $120 billion.[3][4] Almost $1.973 billion of Iran's assets are frozen in the United States.[5] According to the Congressional Research Service, in addition to the money locked up in foreign bank accounts, Iran's frozen assets include real estate and other property. The estimated value of Iran's real estate in the U.S. and their accumulated rent is $50 million.[1] Besides the assets frozen in the U.S., some parts of Iran's assets are frozen around the world by the United Nations.[1]

    ***********

    Now I will have to cry myself to sleep. Trump, such a poor man...

    Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jan 15 2020 3:11 utc | 119

    Yes, I am getting tired of that meme too. The poor helpless king of the world, if only he could do what he wants ... if only he could "drain the swamp"

    He promised to abolish the JCPOA, he suggested he would deal with the increase of Iran's power in the region and he promised to restore US and military power to it's old (lost) world domination. A world domination Russia and China would need to deal with too:

    He already promised he would abolish JCPOA during his 2016 election campaign. And he promised to not only make both the American economy and military strong again. So America can exert at least as much power as it did under the great Ronald Reagan.

    Secondly, we have to rebuild our military and our economy. The Russians and Chinese have rapidly expanded their military capability, but look at what's happened to us. Our nuclear weapons arsenal, our ultimate deterrent, has been allowed to atrophy and is desperately in need of modernization and renewal. And it has to happen immediately. Our active duty armed forces have shrunk from 2 million in 1991 to about 1.3 million today. The Navy has shrunk from over 500 ships to 272 ships during this same period of time. The Air Force is about one-third smaller than 1991. Pilots flying B-52s in combat missions today. These planes are older than virtually everybody in this room.

    And what are we doing about this? President Obama has proposed a 2017 defense budget that in real dollars, cuts nearly 25 percent from what we were spending in 2011. Our military is depleted and we're asking our generals and military leaders to worry about global warming.

    We will spend what we need to rebuild our military. It is the cheapest, single investment we can make. We will develop, build and purchase the best equipment known to mankind. Our military dominance must be unquestioned, and I mean unquestioned, by anybody and everybody.

    V , Jan 15 2020 5:02 utc | 126
    Mao | Jan 15 2020 4:19 utc | 124
    Current Europe is a selling girl of imperialism.

    Indeed! The western band of galoots are captives of their white skin color...
    Very unbecoming to the rest of the non-white world = majority.
    Fortunately, many of us see past our skin colors, whatever that may be...

    V , Jan 15 2020 5:15 utc | 127
    We will spend what we need to rebuild our military. It is the cheapest, single investment we can make. We will develop, build and purchase the best equipment known to mankind. Our military dominance must be unquestioned, and I mean unquestioned, by anybody and everybody.

    Posted by: moon | Jan 15 2020 4:58 utc | 125

    Oh, we'll spend the money alright; for more of the inferior, junk, weaponry already in our arsenals.
    Planes that can't fly in the rain, aircraft carriers that can't be commisioned, and battle rifles (that's a misnomer; the M-14 was the last U.S. battle rifle) (M-4 & M-16) that are unreliable in intense combat situations. The M-16 should have been replaced during the Viet Nam war...
    But there it still is; almost 60 years later...

    Lurker of the Dark , Jan 15 2020 5:41 utc | 128
    steven t. jonhson @5

    Personally I thought the cartoon was pretty good. The artist even thought that the detail of the dogs' ass holes was important enough to include. Notably none of them have any external genitalia, hence "bitches" also being accurate. I bet if we could see the rendition from the other side, Israel's face would be hideous despite the appealing rear view!

    Cyrus , Jan 15 2020 6:50 utc | 131
    This is a repeat of the EU3 negotiations with Iran that ended with a EU3 deal offered to Iran that experts called "a lot of pretty wrappig around an empty box" because as it turned out, the EU3 had been promising the US that they would not recognize Iran's right to enrichment contrary to what they were telling the Iranians as part of the EU3's effort to drag out Iran's suspension of enrichment.
    The result was that Khatami was embarrassed and Ahmadinejad was elected, as Jack Straw said later: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/us-scuppered-deal-with-iran-in-2005-says-then-british-foreign-minister/

    So again the Eu is playing the good cop to the US bad cop, and they keep goalposts moving
    This has been a consistent pattern going back years.
    All along Iran has been making better compromise offers than the JCPOA only to see the goalposts moved because this conflict was never really about nukes just as the invasion of Iraq was not about WMDs, all that is just a pretext for a policy of imposed regime-change.

    NOTE That the Obama administration itself said that the JCPOA is "non-binding" funny how Iran is accused of "breaching" or "violating" it yet Trump is only said to have "abandoned" or even "withdrawn" from the deal

    Richard , Jan 15 2020 6:50 utc | 132
    Sad news. European leaders are pathetic, craven cowards, hostages to the evil American Regime...

    https://richardhennerley.com/2020/01/14/welcome-to-the-american-regime/

    Australian lady , Jan 15 2020 6:51 utc | 133
    "President Rohani represent's the interests of the bourgeoisie in Tehran and Esfahan, merchants oriented toward international trade and hard hit by US sanctions. Sheikh Rohani is a long time friend of the US deep state: he was the first Iranian contact between the Reagan administration and Israel during the Iran-contra affair in 1985. It was he who introduced Hashem Rafsanjani to Oliver North's men, allowing him to buy arms, to become commander-in-chief of the armies and incidentally the richest man in the country, and the president of the Islamic Republic."
    Thierry Meyssan. Voltairenet. org.
    Wednesday morning, my first read before b's M. O. A. is Thierry. Really folks, it is indespensible. One can support the I. R. I.,but still reserve criticism of the domestic politics of Iran.
    Steve , Jan 15 2020 6:56 utc | 134
    Outside the West, people don't see any difference between Europe and the USA. So it is known that which ever direction the US takes, Europe will follow. Both the USA and Europe are Israeli colonies. So unless Israel objects whatever the US does would always be the Eurooean policy.
    powerandpeople , Jan 15 2020 8:41 utc | 138
    Annex B, paragraph 5 allows Iran to purchase weapons from Russia (for example...) after 5 years from signing of the Agreement in 2015.

    So 2020 for weapons.

    This is why Russia is so insistent the agreement holds together for the 5 years, at least. If it doesn't, due to this action by Germany etc, then they can't sell to Iran as all old sanctions will 'snap back'.

    (Other restrictions are lifted on longer time frames, 8 and 10 years. Also, other matters remain open forever until security council agrees the nuclear proliferation issue in Iran is dead and buried.)

    V , Jan 15 2020 9:05 utc | 142 Russ , Jan 15 2020 11:08 utc | 143
    powerandpeople 138 says:

    Annex B, paragraph 5 allows Iran to purchase weapons from Russia (for example...) after 5 years from signing of the Agreement in 2015.

    So 2020 for weapons.

    This is why Russia is so insistent the agreement holds together for the 5 years, at least. If it doesn't, due to this action by Germany etc, then they can't sell to Iran as all old sanctions will 'snap back'.

    There's an example of how appeasement and idiot-legality are way past their expiration date. It's clear the UN itself, like all other existing international bodies, has been fully weaponized with Russia the ultimate target.

    In the process of "first they came for Irak, then they came for Libya [with the full consent of Russia and China]...now they're coming for Irak again and for Iran....", well obviously Russia is the one they'll ultimately be coming for.

    It really is time to hang together or hang separately. Although Russia should remain cautious about direct military stand-offs, it's definitely way past time to start openly challenging and flouting war-by-sanctions, and to start constructing international bodies alternative to the UN and other imperial weapons.

    As for fighting within the UN, someone earlier said Russia and China wouldn't be able to prevent the "snap-back" of UN sanctions on Iran. Why not? I'm not asking for a technical-legalistic answer, but a power-based answer. Self-evidently the "legality" ship has sunk, and anyone who still makes a fetish of it is fighting with one hand tied behind one's back.

    I don't say gratuitously flout legality; certainly there's great propaganda value in seeming to adhere to international law in the face of the open lawlessness of the US. But where it comes to critical battles like getting Iran out from under the sanctions, in the process dealing a blow to the alleged impregnability of the sanctions weapon, the most important thing is the real result.

    Carciofi , Jan 15 2020 11:14 utc | 144
    Trump has in fact done more to ensure that Iran will have a nuclear weapon than any other president through his abrupt withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) and his assassination of Soleimani..

    Trump and Congress Double Down on Demonizing Iran

    And this is why you'll never see Philip Giraldi on CNN, Fox News, or any other US broadcast network.

    Carciofi , Jan 15 2020 11:14 utc | 144
    Trump has in fact done more to ensure that Iran will have a nuclear weapon than any other president through his abrupt withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) and his assassination of Soleimani..

    Trump and Congress Double Down on Demonizing Iran

    And this is why you'll never see Philip Giraldi on CNN, Fox News, or any other US broadcast network.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 15 2020 11:23 utc | 145
    Russ
    Russia and I think China are working towards a multi-polar world order based on international law.
    Russia is pushing this vision and to pull other countries in, it has to walk the talk.
    PR information warfare play a big part in state decisions. As we have seen from the Uki plane shootdown Euro's beginning the process to trigger snapback, A small anti Iran block sprang to life (UK, Canada, Ukraine, Afghanistan and Sweden) that will be great PR for the US in its anti Iran crusade.
    As I put in another comment, everyone likes a winner
    Bemildred , Jan 15 2020 13:30 utc | 148
    Alistair Crooke:

    Reading Sun Tzu in Tehran

    I also recommend the short piece by Patrick Armstrong posted by moon up there.

    I've been of the opinion from the beginning of this that the main reason Russia & China have not leapt to the aid of Iran is that Iran does not need or want them to, yet at least. Crooke's mention of the attack on the Saudi oil facilities is a connection that needs to be made, that was not a fluke.

    But it's a very "asymmetric" situation, as Crooke points out. Interesting times.

    Bemildred , Jan 15 2020 13:30 utc | 148 peter mcloughlin , Jan 15 2020 13:50 utc | 149
    And each consequence leads to yet another consequence. But world leaders do not recognize where this path is leading humanity. If they did they might be able to stop – or perhaps not. They delude themselves to the real destination of the journey.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/


    Formerly T-Bear , Jan 15 2020 13:57 utc | 150
    @ V | Jan 15 2020 1:32 utc | 104

    Does this new 'Policy of Deterrence' apply only to Iran? Could become interesting if it doesn't. Good example of 'be careful of what you wish for'.

    Likklemore , Jan 15 2020 14:07 utc | 153
    b wrote

    "But those promises [of the EU] were empty"

    Indeed they were, and now we know it was just a charade. Triggering the Dispute Resolution Mechanism on basis intel supplied by Bibi is a ruse to replace the JCPOA. Where have we heard this before?
    Oh, Iran is less than a year from getting the nuclear bomb.

    Iran Rejects 'Trump Deal' Proposed by UK PM Johnson as a Replacement for JCPOA


    On Tuesday, Britain, France and Germany launched the 2015 Iran nuclear deal's dispute resolution mechanism, which they said was partly prompted by concerns that Tehran might be less than a year away from developing a nuclear weapon.
    Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has rejected a proposal for a new "Trump deal" to resolve a nuclear spat as a "strange" offer, pointing the finger at the US President over his failure to deliver on promises.


    "This Mr. Prime Minister in London, I don't know how he thinks. He says let's put aside the nuclear deal and put the Trump plan in action. If you take the wrong step, it will be to your detriment. Pick the right path. The right path is to return to the nuclear deal", Rouhani said on Wednesday.

    On Tuesday, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged Trump to replace the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal with his own new pact to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. The US president responded by tweeting that he agreed with Johnson on a "Trump deal".

    Zarif Says 'It Depends on Europe' if JCPOA Remains After Dispute Resolution Mechanism Activation. [.]


    wendy davis , Jan 15 2020 14:20 utc | 154
    my apologies if anyone's brought this already, but the plot now thickens. a commenter at the site at which i cross-post brought this to my attention on my 'iran makes arrests over accidental downing of Ukrainian airliner'.

    it's a tweet leading to new york times coverage of a 'Exclusive: Security camera footage verified by the New York Times confirms that 2 missiles, fired 30 seconds apart from an Iranian military site, hit the Ukrainian plane'

    i'd used a free click to pull text, including:

    "The new video was uploaded to YouTube by an Iranian user around 2 a.m. on Tuesday.
    The date visible on the footage is "2019-10-17," not Jan. 8, the day the plane was downed. We believe this is because the camera system is using a Persian calendar, not a Gregorian one. Jan. 8 converts to the 18th of Dey, the 10th month in the Persian calendar. Digitally that would display as 2019-10-18 in the video. One theory is that the discrepancy of one day can be explained by a difference between Persian and Gregorian leap years or months." "

    but it's everywhere already, set in stone, the WSJ news coverage included:

    "The video was verified by Storyful, a social-media-intelligence company owned by News Corp, parent of Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones. It raises new questions about how forthcoming Iranian authorities were when, after three days of denial, they admitted they had mistakenly struck the Ukraine International Airlines flight without mentioning a second missile."

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1217160457385103360

    the video obviously bring up a dozen more questions, including what it shows, where, when, etc., but corporate coverage assures us that 'iran has lied about the airliner thrice now: evil iran'.

    wait for even more sanctions, more assassinations.

    snake , Jan 15 2020 14:26 utc | 155
    What bothers me about this entire thread is no one can see either a way to end the suppression every player on the field has been subjected to by the private mobsters. . War whether by WMDs or Sanctions. produces the same, millions will die and nothing will alter the possession of power, and the abuse of the masses, by the few.

    The thesis "the nation state system is the structure that allows the mobsters (private bankers, private corporations, and privateers) to control sufficient authority to rule the world". Without strength from deadly force, and authority from engineered consent, ruling the world is difficult.

    No one has found a way to pin the maker of wrongdoing chaos button, or convicted criminal button on the private mobsters. As the private mobsters dance, and side step their positions between the 206 or so nation states, they avoid being boxed up, and they install their puppets in every place they land. It is the puppets who deliver to the international arenas the voting power that allow the private mobsters to control conflict outcomes; and puppets in-service-to the private mobsters oversee and manage the regional and local political and economic domains. In such a situation, the law becomes progressively more suppressive; it produces a hierarchy of relative power and the hierarchy allows to order the nation states relative to their power in the hierarchy. The world might even be safer without any government at all than to allow itself to be victimized by the private mobster use of the nation state system. Clearly the mightier the actor in the system, the less the system can or will hold the mighty actor to conform to the rule of law. So the rule of law suppresses the little guy and enhances the big guy.. If there were no nation state system, there would not be any push button suppression.

    There has to be an answer.. that is not war or decimation of more humanity.

    chb , Jan 15 2020 14:37 utc | 156
    The only goal of Europe in sticking to the JPCoA when Trump walks out is to keep Tehran from developping its nuke while excruciating sanctions hinder all normal life. Regime change is still the goal, be it at the expense of european trade.
    Think of NorthStream, or of the two-state fiction in Palestine where " there's no one to broke peace with ".
    Robert Snefjella , Jan 15 2020 14:58 utc | 157
    There has to be an answer.. that is not war or decimation of more humanity.
    Posted by: snake | Jan 15 2020 14:26 utc | 155

    One lesson from history is that it is important that those big shots just beneath the ultimate societal power be held to the strictest standards: The law applies to you too, big shot. Clovis effectively adhered to this principle many centuries ago. Putin by reining in the worst of the oligarchs operated in tune with this principle.

    The prevailing principle in the West is that oligarchs, the mighty, etc are above the law, while in the US for example swat teams kill pets that bark at their door-smashing arrival at the homes of the little people, and those who invest in private prisons feast financially on slave labor by millions of plebeians 'plea bargained' into servitude.

    Carciofi , Jan 15 2020 15:04 utc | 158
    Likklemore | Jan 15 2020 14:07 utc | 153
    Oh, Iran is less than a year from getting the nuclear bomb.

    Since Bibi, Trump and the rest of Iran's enemies and their indoctrinated populations have been saying this for years it's time for Iran to just get on with it and pull out all stops in putting several together to be used as an option of last resort. But they should make no public confirmation, like Israel. If the warmongering US wants a war they and their allies (and their populations would then be aware of the consequences and would force them to re-assess the situation. IMO this is the only way Iran will survive. If Trump wins another term I can almost guarantee he will forge ahead with attempting another regime change. Iran is already a pariah state in their eyes so really nothing much more for Iran to lose.

    A P , Jan 15 2020 15:04 utc | 159
    Tim Horton's has been foreign-owned (now Brazil) since 2014, but the rot started to set in as expansion, particularly into the US, became a major goal. Once a reasonable quality purveyor of coffee and made-from-scratch in-store donuts, now just another hawker of industrialized brown swill and partly-cooked/frozen-then-shipped and finish-baked chemical-laced products.

    I only patronize a Timmie's if I don't know of a decent quality local bakery/restaurant in that particular area. The devil you know...

    bevin , Jan 15 2020 15:15 utc | 160
    bemildred draws attention to this article at Strategic Culture:
    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/01/15/reading-sun-tzu-in-tehran/

    Another interesting article is this one, which tends to suggest a real softening in Canada's following of the US line.
    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/01/trudeau-plane-victims-alive-iran-tensions-200114043724127.html

    A P , Jan 15 2020 15:17 utc | 161
    To William Gruff: Absolutely, Canada is a vassal state of the US.

    Example 1: Cretien managed to keep Cdn troops out of Iraq, but dithering Paul Martin got forced by the US to send non-combat troops into Afghanistan, then bribery-cash-in-brown-envelopes Harper turned it into combat roles that persist to this day.

    Ex 2, Diefenbaker scrapped the nearly-complete AVRO Arrow project on direct orders from the US that the total-crap BOMARC missile system was to be implemented instead.

    Trudeau sorta confronted the US by legalizing pot, but other than that... the foreign policy leash is very visible on the Canadian lapdog.

    Anmie , Jan 15 2020 15:40 utc | 162
    Iran doesn't react like the US psychopaths do..
    They follow the letter of the law, as they have done with JCPOA.
    But in my opinion, Iran should get its nuke capabilities up to par asap. Why continue to want to look as though you're following the law of JCPOA by allowing the IAEA in who reports to the EU/US to continue intrusive inspections when they all plan war against you leaving you nuke defenseless while Israel and Saudis have or are getting nukes?
    If Iran has nukes the US will back off. Nuff said.
    LuBa , Jan 15 2020 15:41 utc | 163
    Mike-SMO

    "Israel has done some nasty stuff"

    In 70 years of illegal and violent occupation of Palestine through deportation,eradication and no respect for human lives adding what zionist army and services have done through these years and this is "some nasty stuff"..no israel it's the cancer of middle-east..just it!

    xLemming , Jan 15 2020 15:43 utc | 164
    Posted by: A P | Jan 15 2020 15:17 utc | 161

    Thanks AP

    The AVRO Arrow fiasco was criminal... "scrapping" doesn't even begin to tell the story... utter destruction was more like it, with welding torches, right down to the last bolt. That plane, with it's mach 2 Iroquois engine was en route to completely embarrassing the US MIC

    As well, few people know the AVRO Jetliner story, which preceded the Arrow - the first North American passenger jet aircraft - years ahead of anything the US produced

    Jackrabbit , Jan 15 2020 15:48 utc | 165
    powerandpeople @138:
    Annex B, paragraph 5 allows Iran to purchase weapons ... after 5 years

    Thanks for making us aware of this, powerandpeople.

    !!

    Krollchem , Jan 15 2020 15:59 utc | 166
    snake@155

    This panel discussion explains how Congress is bought by the military industrial (mostly oil) complex. Then again Eisenhower included Congress in the Cabal several years after he overthrew the democratic leader of Iran. The dialogue of these panel members links all Mideast invasions back to the initial destruction of Iranian government in 1953. Apparently, we cannot have democracy in the Mideast as it is bad for the mafia business.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-W9b-_K_Xo&feature=youtu.be

    Trailer Trash , Jan 15 2020 16:00 utc | 167
    I recently heard a story on CBC radio about the Arrow. Not only did they destroy the prototype and all parts, they even destroyed all the drawings, except for one set which was smuggled out by a draftsman, who kept them secret for decades. But now they are on display at the "Diefenbaker Canada Centre at the University of Saskatchewan until April 2020" (from Wiki)

    It's interesting to learn that Uncle Sam wanted the program stopped. Why didn't some US company just buy Avro instead? Buying out the competition is standard operating procedure for US corporate parasites.

    Carciofi , Jan 15 2020 16:02 utc | 168
    What has Iran gotten by being "nice" and playing by the rules all these decades?

    Nice guys finish last!

    h , Jan 15 2020 17:29 utc | 169
    wendy davis @154 Rouhani's tweet when accepting responsibility for the downing of the plane stated:

    Hassan Rouhani
    @HassanRouhani
    ·
    Jan 10
    Armed Forces' internal investigation has concluded that regrettably missiles fired due to human error caused the horrific crash of the Ukrainian plane & death of 176 innocent people.
    Investigations continue to identify & prosecute this great tragedy & unforgivable mistake. #PS752

    As you can see, Rouhani stated 'missiles' as in plural.

    Hope this helps.

    [Jan 16, 2020] By signing on to the JCPOA Iran demonstrated a number of things. Iran keeps her word. The US never does. Europe's role is to smile while preparing to stab you in the back

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Lysander , Jan 15 2020 2:04 utc | 111

    #39 Kooshy!!

    Great to run into you again. Indeed by signing on to the JCPOA Iran demonstrated a number of things. 1) Iran keeps her word. 2) The US never does. 3) Europe's role is to smile while preparing to stab you in the back. 4) The US will sacrifice her own interests for Israel's everytime.

    I think all of us could have predicted all that. But what I could never have predicted was the complete in your face nature of American imperialism. It is one thing for there to be overwhelming evidence against a suspect. It's quite another for him to openly brag about his crimes and then promise to commit even more. That is why Trump's presidency is a blessing for Iran. If you happen to be in Iran, please share with us any information about the national mood and how people are coping in difficult circumstances.

    [Jan 16, 2020] Another reason Merkel qualifies as a cowardly poodle. It's also clear, IMO, that Merkel lied to Putin and the press about her position on the JCPOA

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 15 2020 1:42 utc | 107

    karlof1 , Jan 15 2020 1:45 utc | 108

    Passer by @61--

    Didn't know that about Merkel; yet another reason she qualifies as a cowardly poodle. It's also clear, IMO, that Merkel lied to Putin and the press about her position on the JCPOA at their post-talks presser :

    Putin: "We certainly could not ignore another issue which is vitally important not only for the region but also for the whole world – the issue of preserving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Iran's nuclear programme. After the United States withdrew from this fundamental agreement, the Iranian side declared that they suspended some of their voluntary commitments under the JCPOA. Let me underscore this – they only suspended their voluntary commitments while they stress their readiness to go back to full compliance with the nuclear deal.

    "Russia and Germany resolutely stand for the continued implementation of the Joint Plan. The Iranians are entitled to a support from European nations, which promised to set up a special financial vehicle separate from the US dollar to be used in trade settlements with Iran. The Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX) must finally begin working."

    Merkel, statement: "Of course, we also discussed Iran. We agree that everything necessary must be done to preserve the JCPOA. Germany believes that there should be no nuclear weapons in Iran, and therefore we will use all the available diplomatic means to preserve this agreement, even though it is not perfect, but it includes obligations of all the sides."

    Merkel answering a question: " I have mentioned an issue on which we do not see eye to eye with the Americans (JCPOA), even though they are our allies with whom we are working together on many matters. But when it comes to German and European opinions, we are acting above all in our own interests, while Russia is upholding its own interests, so we should look for common interests in this process.

    "Despite certain obstacles, we have found common interests in our bilateral relations regarding the JCPOA with Iran. We have common opinions and different views, but a visit such as this one is the best thing. It is better to talk with each other rather than about one another, because it helps one to understand the other side's arguments."

    It's very clear from Russia's reaction that the EU-3's action was a complete surprise. I doubt Merkel will be invited to Moscow again. For Russians and the rest of humanity, there's no trusting the West. IMO, it must always be treated as hostile regardless the smiles.
    "

    jared , Jan 15 2020 1:52 utc | 109
    @ karlof1

    Much like Trump - says one thing then immediately does something else. Only makes sense if in fact is outside thier control.

    [Jan 16, 2020] While it might work in domestic politics, this mad man negotiating tactic erodes trust in international affairs and it will take decades for the US to recover from the harm done by Trump's school yard bully approach.

    Jan 16, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Thuto , , January 14, 2020 at 11:48 am

    While it might work in domestic politics, this mad man negotiating tactic erodes trust in international affairs and it will take decades for the US to recover from the harm done by Trump's school yard bully approach.

    Even the docile Europeans are beginning to tire of this and once they get their balls stitched back on after being castrated for so long, America will have its work cut out crossing the chasm from unreliable and untrustworthy partner to being seen as dependable and worthy of entering into agreements with.

    [Jan 15, 2020] The Strange Case of Chrystia Freeland and the Failure of the 'Super Elite' by Matthew Ehret

    May 11, 2019 | canadianpatriot.org

    Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland has become a bit of a living parody of everything wrong with the detached technocratic neo-liberal order which has driven the world through 50 years of post-industrial decay. Now, two years into the Trump presidency, and five years into the growth of a new system shaped by the Russia-China alliance, the world has become a very different place from the one which Freeland and her controllers wish it to be.

    Having been set up as a counterpart to the steely Hillary Clinton who was supposed to win the 2016 election, Freeland and her ilk have demonstrated their outdated thinking in everything they have set out to achieve since the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Certainly before that, everything seemed to be going smoothly enough for End of History disciples promoting a script that was supposed to culminate in a long-sought for "New World Order".

    The Script up until Now

    Things were going especially well since the collapse of the Soviet system in the early 1990s. The collapse ushered in a unipolar world order with the European Union and NAFTA, followed soon thereafter by the World Trade Organization and the 1999 destruction of Glass-Steagall (1). The trans-Atlantic at last was converted into a cage of "post-sovereign nations" that no longer had actual control of their own powers of credit generation. Under NATO, even national militaries were subject to technocratic control. This cage was perfect for the governing elite "scientifically managing" from above while the little people bickered over their diminishing employment and standards of living from below.

    Even though the former Soviet bloc nations were in tatters by 1992, their sovereign powers could only be undone by applying the liberalization process which took 30 years in the west in a short space of only a decade. This was done under the direction of such monetarist "reformers" such as Anatoly Chubais and Yegor Gaidar under Yeltsin. Similar privatization and liberalization reforms were applied viciously to Ukraine and other Warsaw pact countries during the same period. Those pirates that became the "nouveau riche" of the west were joined by such contemporary modern oligarchs such as Oleg Deripaska, Boris Berezovksy, Mikhail Fridman, Roman Abramovich in Russia, alongside Petro Poroshenko, Rinat Akhmetov, Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Viktor Pinchuk of Ukraine (to name a few). Not to forget their spiritual roots, many of these oligarchs soon purchased houses in the swank upmarket sections of London which has come to be known as "Moscow on Thames." (2)

    By the end of the 1990s a new phase of this de-nationalization was unleashed with the unveiling of the Blair doctrine explicitly calling for a "post-Westphalia" world order which unleashed a wave of hellish regime change wars in the Arab World beginning with 9-11, and with a long term intention to target Libya, Syria, Iran, and Lebanon while expanding NATO's hegemony against the potential re-emergence of Russia and China.

    The Economic Meltdown Was Always the Intention

    Let's be clear: the whole point of the post-1971 world was directed with the intention of destroying the moral-political and economic foundations for western society. The belief in scientific progress and industrial growth was the cause of all true progress from the 15 th century Golden Renaissance to the assassinations of the 1960s. The intended consequences of this post-1971 (zero growth) policy were:

    1) The destruction of the productive forces of labor vis a vis outsourcing to "cheap labour markets" driven by shareholder profit.

    2) The consolidation of wealth into an ever smaller array of private multi-billionaire owners under a logic of Darwinian survival of the fittest.

    3) The creation of a vast speculative bubble supported by ever greater rates of unpayable debt and totally detached from the physically productive forces of reality.

    Just like 1929, after years of speculation known as the roaring twenties, the "plug could be pulled" on the bubble in order to impose a bit of shock therapy onto a sleeping population who would beg for fascism as a solution if only it would put bread on their tables. Though this plan failed 80 years ago due to the American rejection of fascism under President Roosevelt, the belief that the formula could succeed in the 21 st century was adhered to most closely as long as America was brought firmly under control of the City of London and their Wall Street lackies (3).

    The destruction of the industrial mode of existence with the 1971 floating of the US dollar unleashed a new system of scarcity within a fixed closed system upon the west. Above: Alexander King and the Limits to Growth Model justifying depopulation once the system hits an inevitable crisis

    Although the fascist "solution" to their manufactured crisis was put down during WWII, this new attempt was premised upon the policy that a new system of Global Government managed by draconian regulation would be imposed under a "Green New Deal" framework whereby the instruments of banking regulation, state directed capital and centralized government (not evils unto themselves), would be directed only to green, low energy flux density forms of energy which inherently lower the population of the earth. This is very different from the protectionism, bank regulation, state credit and central authority exerted by America during the 1930s New Deal (or Eurasian New Silk Road policy today). The difference is that one system empowers sovereign nations, and increases the productive powers of labor and energy flux density of humanity while increasing quality of life, the other "Green" agenda has the opposite effect whereby monetary incentives are tied to decreasing the "carbon footprint" of the earth. The image of a drug addict getting paid heroine as an incentive to bleed himself to death is useful here.

    With the slow collapse of first world economies after the assassination of nationalist leaders in the 1960s, the plan for depopulation and global government seemed to be unfolding without serious opposition.

    The Role of Chrystia Freeland

    Freeland's bizarre role in this whole affair was to do what every good Rhodes Scholar is conditioned to do upon their completion of their indoctrination at Oxford: facilitate the tough transition of the "pre-collapse" world economy into a new operating system that was meant to be the "green post-collapse" world economy. It wasn't going to be easy to tell a new "pirate class" of billionaires that they would have to accept losing much of their wealth (less population equals less money), and operate under a strict new global operating system of regulation necessary to contract the society. The Rhodes Scholarship program begun in 1902 to advance a re-organized British Empire and had worked alongside the Fabian Society for over a century producing more than 7000 scholars who have permeated across all fields of society (media, education, government, military and corporate).

    Cecil Rhodes

    In his 1877 will, Cecil Rhodes said this group should be "a society which should have its members in every part of the British Empire working with one object and one idea we should have its members placed at our universities and our schools and should watch the English youth passing through their hands just one perhaps in every thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an object, he should be tried in every way, he should be tested whether he is endurant, possessed of eloquence, disregardful of the petty details of life, and if found to be such, then elected and bound by oath to serve for the rest of his life in his Country. He should then be supported if without means by the Society and sent to that part of the Empire where it was felt he was needed."

    After leaving Oxford in 1993, Chrystia Freeland learned the ropes of "perception management" by working for the London Economist, Washington Post, Financial times and Globe and Mail and Reuters. After serving a stint as editor-at-large of Reuters, the time had come for her to play the role of Valery Jarrett to the "Barack Obama" of Canada then being prepped for Prime Ministership of Justin Trudeau.

    She was perfect.

    As an asset of the global propaganda system, Freeland had made high level contacts with those Ukrainian, Russian, and Western oligarchs mentioned above including Viktor Pinchuk and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Larry Summers, George Soros and Al Gore, were just a few players in the west whom she considered her "close friends" and whom she was happy to bring into Canada during the period of re-organization of the Liberal Party (2011-2014) as it prepared to take power under the banner of the Canada 2020 think tank . What made Freeland even more special was that she was bred from a zealous family of Ukrainian nationalists under the patriarchy of her Nazi grandfather Michael Chomiak . This network was brought to Canada after WWII by Anglo-American intelligence and cultivated as a force with ties to pro-Nazi Ukrainian counterparts ever since.

    Freeland's admission into politics was managed by another Rhodes Scholar named Bob Rae who served as interim controller of the Liberal Party during several of the Harper years and was a major player in Canada 2020. Rae, who had been the NDP Premier of Ontario from 1990-1995 was happy to abdicate his seat to Freeland ensuring her entry into Trudeau's inner circle and thus becoming his official handler (4).

    Freeland Promotes the New Global Elite

    Freeland has made it clear that she understands well that there is a fundamental difference in cultural identities of the "new rich" relative to the older oligarchic families which she serves. In the 2011 Rise of the New Global Elite , she describes it as follows:

    To grasp the difference between today's plutocrats and the hereditary elite, who "grow rich in their sleep" one need merely glance at the events that now fill high-end social calendars."

    Freeland then breaks down the categories of "new plutocrats" into two subcategories: the good, technocratic friendly plutocrats who are ideologically compatible with the New World Order of depopulation, such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, et al and the "bad" plutocrats who tend not to conform to the British Empire's program of global governance and depopulation under the green agenda. In Freeland's world "good oligarchs" are those who adhere to this agenda, while "bad oligarchs" are those who do not. Trump is a terrible Plutocrat, and – Viktor Yanukovych was a good plutocrat until he decided to not sacrifice Ukraine on the altar of the collapsing European Union and chose to throw Ukraine's destiny into the Eurasian Economic Union in October 2013.

    In the same paper, Freeland wrote:

    if the plutocrats' opposition to increases in their taxes and tighter regulation of their economic activities is understandable, it is also a mistake. The real threat facing the super-elite, at home and abroad, isn't modestly higher taxes, but rather the possibility that inchoate public rage could cohere into a more concrete populist agenda– that, for instance, middle-class Americans could conclude that the world economy isn't working for them and decide that protectionism is preferable to incremental measures." Quoting billionaire Mohamed El-Erian, the CEO of Pimco she wrote: "one of the big surprises of 2010 is that the protectionist dog didn't bark."

    Freeland ended her article with this message:

    The lesson of history is that, in the long run, super-elites have two ways to survive: by suppressing dissent or by sharing their wealth Let us hope the plutocrats aren't already too isolated to recognize this".

    But what does Freeland really think of the technocratic management under a plutocratic governance of society? In Plutocrats vs. Populists (Nov. 2013), Freeland lets her pro-plutocratic worldview out of the bag when she gushes:

    At its best, this form of plutocratic political power offers the tantalizing possibility of policy practiced at the highest professional level with none of the messiness and deal making and venality of traditional politics a technocratic, data-based, objective search for solutions to our problems"

    Since a technocratic managerial class committed to a common ideology must be solidified for this system to work, Freeland goes on to make the case to recruit young people to the imperial civil service:

    Smart, publicly minded technocrats go to work for plutocrats whose values they share. The technocrats get to focus full time on the policy issues they love, without the tedium of building, rallying– and serving– a permanent mass membership. They can be pretty well paid to boot."

    The End of a Delusion?

    Now that Russia and China's new operating system shaped by the Belt and Road Initiative has created a force of opposition to this British-run Deep State design, nothing which those would-be gods of Olympus have attempted to achieve has succeeded. Syria stands strong and the Arab nations are increasingly joining China's Belt and Road Initiative . Venezuela has failed to fall the way so many regimes have done before 2014 and NAFTA has been seriously challenged by a nationalistic president in the USA who has also totally rejected the Malthusian agenda with the killing of COP21 and the Green New Deal. Trudeau's usefulness has withered away quicker than you can say "SNC Lavalin " and now the decision appears to be seriously humored whether Freeland will take the reins of Canada after Trudeau is eliminated in order to "preserve the dying British Empire" and the dream of Cecil Rhodes. While the universe may be organized by a principle of reason, no one can say the same applies to the mind of an oligarchic. May 11, 2019

    *Originally published on the Strategic Culture Foundation. Notes

    (1) The separation of speculative from commercial banking was the bedrock of financial regulation since its implementation in 1933. Its destruction as Clinton's last act in office resulted in the creation of the largest bubble in history amounting to a $700 trillion derivatives time bomb now ready to explode.

    (2) When Putin began exiling many of these unrepentant oligarchs, they quickly made their way to London where many became disposable playthings of the British Empire.

    (3) The self-professed "Fabian Society of Canada" was set up in the height of the Depression by five Rhodes Scholars in order to create a Canadian fascist regime in 1932. This organization known as the League of Social Reconstruction, set up a political party called the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) which later changed its name to the New Democratic Party (NDP) in 1961. While good people have found themselves members of the NDP and Liberals over the years, it is useful to keep in mind that this rotten core tied to the highest echelons of the British oligarchy are real.

    (4) It is a useful point to make here that as Premier of Ontario Bob Rae brought in Maurice Strong as President of Ontario Hydro from 1992-1994 during which time Canada's nuclear sector was nearly shut down and a prototype for a "green New Deal" was applied. Strong had famously described a "fiction book he wished to write someday saying: "What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group's conclusion is 'no'. The rich countries won't do it. They won't change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?"

    [Jan 15, 2020] Democracy in action: voters choice in 2016 was limited to the choice between brain cancer and leprosy

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Trailer Trash , Jan 8 2020 16:32 utc | 105

    Trump is such a douchebag. He claims there were no lives lost due to their "early warning system" -- no mention that the "early warning system" was a phone call!

    Now he's once again justifying assassination, etc.

    pretzelattack , Jan 8 2020 16:39 utc | 110

    there was no "better choice" between trump and clinton. i still think clinton represented a greater danger than trump of getting into a war with russia, but they are both warmongers first class. for our next election, we may have a choice between ebola and flesh eating bacteria, or brain cancer and leprosy. if the game is rigged there's no winning it playing by the game's "rules".

    [Jan 15, 2020] Just Trust Us, Says the Most Dishonest Administration Ever

    Notable quotes:
    "... On Sunday, the Washington Post, citing a senior U.S official, reported that "Pompeo first spoke with Trump about killing Suleimani months ago but neither the president nor Pentagon officials were willing to countenance such an operation." On Thursday, CNN's Nicole Gaouette and Jamie Gangel reported that "Pompeo was a driving force behind President Donald Trump's decision to kill" the Iranian general. The CNN story said that Pompeo, who was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under Trump before he moved to the State Department, viewed Suleimani as the mastermind of myriad operations targeting Americans and U.S interests. It also quoted an unnamed source close to Pompeo, who recalled the Secretary of State telling friends, "I will not retire from public service until Suleimani is off the battlefield." ..."
    theamericanconservative.com
    One of the new bogus explanations that the administration has been offering up is that there was a threat to one or more U.S. embassies that led to the assassination. Rep. Justin Amash notes this morning that they have presented no evidence to Congress to back up any of this or their original claim of an "imminent" attack:
    The administration didn't present evidence to Congress regarding even one embassy. The four embassies claim seems to be totally made up. And they have never presented evidence of imminence -- a necessary condition to act without congressional approval -- with respect to any of this. The administration didn't present evidence to Congress regarding even one embassy. The four embassies claim seems to be totally made up. And they have never presented evidence of imminence -- a necessary condition to act without congressional approval -- with respect to any of this. https://t.co/Eg0vaCnqFd -- Justin Amash (@justinamash) -- Justin Amash (@justinamash) -- Justin Amash (@justinamash) January 12, 2020
    The administration's story keeps changing, because they are just making up unconvincing justifications for what they did. The president invents new excuses for the illegal assassination, and his subordinates feel obliged to follow his lead because they are implicated in his decision. The strange thing is that this administration still expects to be believed on something as important as this despite their constant lying to Congress and the public about everything else. The president and Secretary of State have trashed their credibility long ago, so there is no chance that we would give them the benefit of the doubt now. As a result, there is much more healthy and appropriate skepticism about the administration's claims since January 2nd than there usually is. We are still piecing together what happened at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by determined hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing this. John Cassidy The administration's story keeps changing, because they are just making up unconvincing justifications for what they did. The president invents new excuses for the illegal assassination, and his subordinates feel obliged to follow his lead because they are implicated in his decision. The strange thing is that this administration still expects to be believed on something as important as this despite their constant lying to Congress and the public about everything else. The president and Secretary of State have trashed their credibility long ago, so there is no chance that we would give them the benefit of the doubt now. As a result, there is much more healthy and appropriate skepticism about the administration's claims since January 2nd than there usually is. We are still piecing together what happened at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by determined hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing this. John Cassidy We are still piecing together what happened at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by determined hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing this. John Cassidy We are still piecing together what happened at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by determined hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing this. John Cassidy reports :
    On Sunday, the Washington Post, citing a senior U.S official, reported that "Pompeo first spoke with Trump about killing Suleimani months ago but neither the president nor Pentagon officials were willing to countenance such an operation." On Thursday, CNN's Nicole Gaouette and Jamie Gangel reported that "Pompeo was a driving force behind President Donald Trump's decision to kill" the Iranian general. The CNN story said that Pompeo, who was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under Trump before he moved to the State Department, viewed Suleimani as the mastermind of myriad operations targeting Americans and U.S interests. It also quoted an unnamed source close to Pompeo, who recalled the Secretary of State telling friends, "I will not retire from public service until Suleimani is off the battlefield."
    Pompeo has Pompeo has lied constantly about Iran and the nuclear deal before and after he became Secretary of State, so it is not surprising that he has been the administration's public face as they lie to Congress and the public about this illegal assassination. No wonder he doesn't want to appear before Congress to testify.

    kouroi • 32 minutes ago

    Add to this the concomitant attempt made in Yemen, where there is no American presence other than the bombs dropping from the sky, against an Iranian operative, and it shows the push of the administration to go for the kill as the main factor. The US is becoming more and more like Israel: kill first, no excuses, we are the chosen ones - The "revenge" of Dinah's brothers, Genesis 34:25. This is The US of A's diplomacy nowadays. The world has really been put on notice. And the world will be reacting, see the visit of Chancellor Merkel to Moscow immediately after that.

    The question is what the American citizens are going to do? What are they going to vote for?

    JSC2397 • 18 minutes ago • edited
    Why shouldn't Trump and his Administration's creatures "expect to be believed"? He and his toadies have misstated, misled, BS-ed and outright lied to the public for three years now; and - despite a "credibility gap" of Vallis Marineris proportions - have gotten no appreciable pushback from the media.
    The right-wing media simply cheerlead him, as usual: and everybody else just sort of nods, grunts, and moves on.

    [Jan 15, 2020] Trump Officials Stumble and Bumble Over 'Imminent Threats'

    Jan 15, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    s the debate over presidential war powers intensifies in Congress, a coterie of key Trump officials hit the Sunday talk shows last weekend to ratchet up the rhetoric on the "imminence" of the attack Iranian General Qassem Soleimani had allegedly planned.

    The debate took on added significance after an intelligence briefing provided to House and Senate officials laying out the justification for Soleimani's killing was blasted by members on both sides of the aisle as "insulting," "demeaning," " dismissive " of Congress, and " disdainful ."

    "It was this attitude that we don't have to tell Congress, we don't have to include Congress," said Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia. He added that after various scenarios were presented by senators, the administration refused to provide any "commitment to ever come to Congress" no matter what the circumstances.

    The president cannot take military action against another nation without Congress's approval, unless it is to defend against an imminent threat to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens.​

    The U.S. is not officially at war with Iran. Yet the Trump administration took the unprecedented step of openly ordering the killing of an Iranian senior state official of a country, without an authorization of military force against that country and without briefing Congress.

    On Friday, Pompeo said the attacks were justified because there was "a series of imminent attacks that were being plotted by Qasem Soleimaini, we don't know precisely when and we don't precisely where."

    Members of Congress and the media seized upon the quote, charging that it does not sound like the definition of "imminent."

    President Trump himself seemed to grasp the importance of stressing that the attack was "imminent" when he added details Friday on Fox News, asserting that Soleimani was plotting attacks on four U.S. embassies.

    "I think it would have been four embassies," Trump said. "Could have been military bases, could have been a lot of other things too. But it was imminent."

    "We did it because they were looking to blow up our embassy," Trump added. "He was looking very seriously at our embassies, and not just the embassy in Baghdad. I can reveal that I believe it would have been four embassies."

    But members of Congress say they were not told that four embassies had been targeted. And when Trump officials were asked Sunday whether that claim was true, one by one they were left sputtering.

    Pentagon Chief Mark Esper conceded he "didn't see" intelligence indicating that on CBS's Face the Nation .

    "I didn't see one with regard to four embassies," Esper said . "What I'm saying is I share the president's view."

    "What the president said was he believed there probably and could've been attacks against additional embassies. I shared that view," said Esper.

    National Security adviser Robert O'Brien seemed to imply that members of Congress were at fault for not extracting that information from their intelligence briefing.

    "It does seem to be a contradiction. [Trump is] telling Laura Ingraham [about imminent attacks], but in a 75-minute classified briefing, your top national security people never mentioned this to members of Congress. Why not?" Chris Wallace asked O'Brien on Fox News Sunday .

    "I wasn't at the briefing," O'Brien answered, "and I don't know how the Q&A went back and forth. Sometimes it depends on the questions that were asked or how they were phrased."

    On Meet the Press , O'Brien asserted that "exquisite" intelligence he was privy to showed that "the threat was imminent."

    When pressed by Chuck Todd about what the U.S. did to protect the other three embassies under alleged imminent threat, O'Brien declined to give details.

    "Is 'imminent' months, not weeks? Are people misinterpreting that word?" asked Todd.

    "I think imminent, generally, means soon, quickly, you know, in process. So you know, I think those threats were imminent. And I don't want to get into the definition further than that," said O'Brien.

    Pompeo's claim that an attack could be "imminent" even though the U.S. did not "know where or when" it would come is "pretty inconsistent," Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, replied Sunday on Meet the Press.

    "To me there's a bigger question too. This is what really infuriated me about the briefing [Trump officials] maintain both in private and in public that a vote by Congress in 2003 or 2002 to go after Saddam Hussein was a vote that now allows them to still be in Iraq and do whatever they want, including killing a foreign general from Iran," said Paul. "And I don't think that's what Congress meant in 2002. We really need to have a debate about whether we should still be in Iraq or in Afghanistan. There needs to be authorization from Congress."

    Paul argued that presidents from both parties have, for decades, usurped Congress's war powers, and that it is time for Congress to claw them back.

    Said Paul, the founders "wanted to make it difficult to go to war, and I think we've been drifting away from that for a long time, but that's why I'm willing to stand up, not because I distrust President Trump -- actually think he has shown remarkable restraint -- but I'm willing to stand up even against a president of my party because we need to stand up and take back the power."

    While the debate over war powers continues, Trump supporters have counter-attacked by questioning the patriotism of those who don't fall in line with their narrative.

    Former White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee-Sanders "can't think of anything dumber" than Congress deciding matters of war and peace. Nikki Haley accused Democrats of "mourning" General Soleimani. Congressman Doug Collins said Democrats are " in love with terrorists ." And Lindsey Graham said senators like Lee and Paul are "empowering the enemy" by trying to rein in Trump's war powers.

    On Monday, Trump added on Twitter: "The Fake News Media and their Democrat Partners are working hard to determine whether or not the future attack by terrorist Soleimani was 'imminent' or not, & was my team in agreement. The answer to both is a strong YES., but it doesn't really matter because of his horrible past!" If Trump's team was really in agreement, they sure had a good way of hiding it. about the author Barbara Boland is TAC's foreign policy and national security reporter. Previously, she worked as an editor for the Washington Examiner and for CNS News. She is the author of Patton Uncovered , a book about General George Patton in World War II, and her work has appeared on Fox News, The Hill , UK Spectator , and elsewhere. Boland is a graduate from Immaculata University in Pennsylvania. Follow her on Twitter @BBatDC .

    =marco01= • 4 hours ago

    Trump supporters literally do not care if the Trump admin lies to them.

    They trust Trump 100%, he can lie to them as much as he wants.

    [Jan 15, 2020] Trump and the Mad Negotiator Approach

    Notable quotes:
    "... Another aspect of Trump's erraticness is making sudden shifts, or what we have called gaslighting. He'll suddenly and radically change his rhetoric, even praise someone he demonized. That if nothing else again is a power play, to try to maintain his position as driving the pacing and content of the negotiations, which again is meant to position his counterparty as in a weaker position, of having to react to his moves, even if that amounts to identifying them as noise. It is a watered-down form of a cult strategy called love bombing (remember that Trump has been described as often being very charming in first meetings, only to cut down the person he met in a matter of days). ..."
    "... I would disagree with the "selecting staff" part. I can't really think of any of his appointees to any office while he is president that was a good pick. One worse than the other basically. Maybe in his private dealings he did better, but in public office it's a continuous horror show. Examples like Pence, Haley, "Mad Dog", Bolton, DeVos, his son in law, Pompeo. The list goes on. ..."
    "... For me as a foreigner who detests the forever wars and most of the US foreign policy, this is a good thing: the more heavy handed, the more brutal, the more cruel, the more stupid the US policy is, the less is the chance for our euro governments to follow the US in today's war or other policy. ..."
    "... They are not inept and incompetent at what they are trying to achieve. The GOP has long sought to privatize government to help the rich get richer and harm anyone who isn't rich by cutting services and making them harder to get. Trumps picks are carrying out that agenda very well. ..."
    "... Trump is just a huge crude extension of the usual "exceptional" leaders, much more transparent by not pretending he is any sort of representative of democratic and cooperative values claimed by his predecessors. ..."
    "... But what I think is noticeable is that his worst high profile staff picks, while horrible people, are generally those who are under his thumb and so he has control of. ..."
    "... He got elected over the dead bodies of just about everyone who counts in the Republican Party. He pretty much did a hostile takeover of the GOP. So his ability to draw on seasoned hands was nil. And on top of that, he is temperamentally not the type to seek the counsel of perceived wise men in and hanging around the party. The people he has kept around are cronies like Wilbur Ross and Steve Mnuchin. ..."
    "... The one notably competent person he has attracted and retained is Robert Lightizer, the US Trade Representative ..."
    "... oderint, dum metuant ..."
    "... Führerprinzip ..."
    "... Hitler ran the Third Reich by a system of parallel competition among bureaucratic empire builders of all stripes. Anyone who showed servile loyalty and mouthed his yahoo ideology got all the resources they liked, for any purpose they proposed. But the moment he encountered any form of independence or pushback, he changed horses at once. He left the old group in place, but gave all their resources to a burgeoning new bureaucracy that did things his way. If a State body resisted his will, he had a Party body do it instead. He was continually reaching down 2-3 levels in the org charts, to find some ambitious firecracker willing to suck up to him, and leapfrog to the top. ..."
    "... This left behind a complete chaos of rival, duplicated functions, under mainly unfit leaders. And fortunately for the world, how well any of these organizations actually did their jobs was an entirely secondary consideration. Loyalty was all. ..."
    "... Hitler sat at the center of all the resource grabbers and played referee. This made everyone dependent on his nod and ensured his continued power. The message was: there are no superiors in the Reich. There is only der Führer, and his favor trumps everything ..."
    "... The few over-confident generals he picked, except for Flynn, finally caved when they realized staying was an affront to the honor code they swore to back in OCS or their academy. ..."
    "... I don't know how they selected staff in the Reagan years, but lately the POTUS seems to appoint based on who the plutocrats want. As has been noted Bary O took his marching orders from Citigroup if I remember right. I doubt if Trump had even heard of most of the people he appointed prior to becoming president. So at least some of Trump's turnover is due to him firing recommendations from others who didn't turn out how he'd like. That's one reason I didn't get all that upset over the Bolton hiring – I didn't think he'd last a year before Trump canned him. ..."
    "... I would say that Trump, not acting in an intelligent way is doing very clever things according to his interests. My opinion is that his actions/negotiations with foreign countries are 100% directed for domestic consumptiom. He does not care at all about international relationships, just his populist "make America great again" and he almost certainly play closest attention to the impact of his actions in US opinion. ..."
    "... Classic predatory behaviors: culling the herd and eating the weak. ..."
    "... I think Trump understands that one of the basic tactics of negotiation (though forgotten by the Left(tm)) is to set out a maximalist position before the negotiation starts, so that you have room to make compromises later. ..."
    "... But in domestic politics, there's no doubt that publicly announcing extreme negotiating positions is a winning tactic. You force the media and other political actors to comment and make counter-proposals, thus dragging the argument more in your direction from the very start. Trump remembers something that his opponents have willfully forgotten: compromise is something you finish with not something you start from . In itself, any given compromise has no particular virtue or value. ..."
    "... Today's Democrats want to destroy those social programs you cite. They have wanted to destroy those social programs ever since President Clinton wanted to conspire with "Prime Minister" Gingrich to privatize Social Security. Luckily Monica Lewinsky saved us from that fate. ..."
    "... A nominee Sanders would run on keeping Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid in existence. And he would mean it. A nominee Biden might pretend to say it. But he would conspire with the Republicans to destroy them all. ..."
    "... The maintenance of fear, chaos and blowback are exACTLY the desired result. Deliberately and on purpose. ..."
    "... It also helps him do some things quietly in the background ..."
    Jan 15, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Trump and the Mad Negotiator Approach Posted on January 14, 2020 by Yves Smith Trump's numerous character flaws, such as his grandiosity, his lack of interest in the truth, his impulsiveness, his habitual lashing out at critics, have elicited boatloads of disapproving commentary. It's disturbing to see someone so emotional and undisciplined in charge of anything, let alone the United States.

    Rather than offer yet more armchair analysis, it might be productive to ask a different question: why hasn't Trump been an abject failure? There are plenty of rich heirs who blow their inheritance or run the family business into the ground pretty quickly and have to knuckle down to a much more modest lifestyle.

    Trump's lack of discipline has arguably cost him. The noise regularly made about his business bankruptcies is wildly exaggerated. Most of Trump's bankruptcies were of casinos , and most of those took place in the nasty 1991-1992 recession. He was one of only two major New York City developers not to have to give meaningful equity in some of their properties in that downturn. He even managed to keep Mar-a-Lago and persuaded his lenders to let him keep enough cash to preserve a pretty flashy lifestyle because he was able to persuade them that preserving his brand name was key to the performance of Trump-branded assets.

    The idea that Trump couldn't borrow after his early 1990s casino bankruptcies is also false. As Francine McKenna pointed out in 2017 in Donald Trump has had no trouble getting big loans at competitive rates:

    The MarketWatch analysis shows a variety of lenders, all big banks or listed specialized finance companies like Ladder Capital, that have provided lots of money to Trump over the years in the forms of short-, medium- and long-term loans and at competitive rates, whether fixed or variable.

    "The Treasury yield that matches the term of the loan is the closest starting benchmark for Trump-sized commercial real estate loans," said Robert Thesman, a certified public accountant in Washington state who specializes in real estate tax issues. The 10-year Treasury swap rate is also used and tracks the bonds closely, according to one expert.

    Trump's outstanding loans were granted at rates between 2 points over and under the matching Treasury-yield benchmark at inception. That's despite the well-documented record of bankruptcy filings that dot Trump's history of casino investment.

    The flip side is that it's not hard to make the case that Trump's self-indulgent style has cost him in monetary terms. His contemporary Steve Ross of The Related Companies who started out in real estate as a tax lawyer putting together Section 8 housing deals, didn't have a big stake like Trump did to start his empire. Ross did have industrialist and philanthropist Max Fisher as his uncle and role model, but there is no evidence that Fisher staked Ross beyond paying for his education . Ross has an estimated net worth of $7.6 billion versus Trump's $3.1 billion.

    Despite Trump's heat-seeking-missile affinity for the limelight, we only get snippets of how he has managed his business, like his litigiousness and breaking of labor laws. Yet he's kept his team together and is pretty underleveraged for a real estate owner.

    The area where we have a better view of how Trump operates is via his negotiating, where is astonishingly transgressive. He goes out of his way to be inconsistent, unpredictable, and will even trash prior commitments, which is usually toxic, since it telegraphs bad faith. How does this make any sense?

    One way to think of it is that Trump is effectively screening for weak negotiating counterparties. Think of his approach as analogous to the Nigerian scam letters and the many variants you get in your inbox. They are so patently fake that one wonders why the fraudsters bother sending them.

    But investigators figured that mystery out. From the Atlantic in 2012 :

    Everyone knows that Nigerian scam e-mails, with their exaggerated stories of moneys tied up in foreign accounts and collapsed national economies, sound totally absurd, but according to research from Microsoft, that's on purpose .

    As a savvy Internet user you probably think you'd never fall for the obvious trickery, but that's the point. Savvy users are not the scammers' target audience, [Cormac] Herley notes. Rather, the creators of these e-mails are targeting people who would believe the sort of tales these scams involve .:

    Our analysis suggests that is an advantage to the attacker, not a disadvantage. Since his attack has a low density of victims the Nigerian scammer has an over-riding need to reduce false positives. By sending an email that repels all but the most gullible the scammer gets the most promising marks to self-select, and tilts the true to false positive ratio in his favor.

    Who would want to get in a business relationship with a guy who makes clear early on that he might pull the rug out from under you? Most people would steer clear. So Trump's style, even if he adopted it out of deep-seated emotional needs, has the effect of pre-selecting for weak, desperate counterparties. It can also pull in people who think they can out-smart Trump and shysters who identify with him, as well as those who are prepared to deal with the headaches (for instance, the the business relationship is circumscribed and a decent contract will limit the downside).

    Mind you, it is more common than you think for businesses to seek out needy business "partners". For instance, back in the day when General Electric was a significant player in venture capital, it would draw out its investment commitment process. The point was to ascertain if the entrepreneurs had any other prospects; they wouldn't tolerate GE's leisurely process if they did. By the time GE was sure it was the only game in town, it would cram down the principals on price and other terms. There are many variants of this playbook, such as how Walmart treats suppliers.

    Trump has become so habituated to this mode of operating that he often launches into negotiations determined to establish that he had the dominant position when that is far from clear, witness the ongoing China trade row. Trump did in theory hold a powerful weapon in his ability to impose tariffs on China. But they are a blunt weapon, with significant blowback to the US. Even though China had a glass jaw in terms of damage to its economy (there were signs of stress, such as companies greatly stretching out when they paid their bills), Trump could not tolerate much of a stock market downdraft, nor could he play a long-term game.

    Another aspect of Trump's erraticness is making sudden shifts, or what we have called gaslighting. He'll suddenly and radically change his rhetoric, even praise someone he demonized. That if nothing else again is a power play, to try to maintain his position as driving the pacing and content of the negotiations, which again is meant to position his counterparty as in a weaker position, of having to react to his moves, even if that amounts to identifying them as noise. It is a watered-down form of a cult strategy called love bombing (remember that Trump has been described as often being very charming in first meetings, only to cut down the person he met in a matter of days).

    Voters have seen another face of Trump's imperative to find or create weakness: that of his uncanny ability to hit opponents' weak spots in ways that get them off balance, such as the way he was able to rope a dope Warren over her Cherokee ancestry claims.

    The foregoing isn't to suggest that Trump's approach is optimal. Far from it. But it does "work" in the sense of achieving certain results that are important to Trump, of having him appear to be in charge of the action, getting his business counterparts on the back foot. That means Trump is implicitly seeing these encounters primarily in win-lose terms, rather than win-win. No wonder he has little appetite for international organizations. You have to give in order to get.

    PlutoniumKun , January 14, 2020 at 7:08 am

    I think this is pretty astute, thanks Yves. One reason I think Trump has been so successful for his limited range of skills is precisely that 'smart' people underestimate him so much. He knows one thing well – how power works. Sometimes that's enough. I've known quite a few intellectually limited people who have built very successful careers based on a very simple set of principles (e.g. 'never disagree with anyone more senior than me').

    Anecdotally, I've often had the conversation with people about 'taking Trump seriously', as in, trying to assess what he really wants and how he has been so successful. In my experience, the 'smarter' and more educated the person I'm talking to is, the less willing they are to have that conversation. The random guy in the bar will be happy to talk and have insights. The high paid professional will just mutter about stupid people and racism.

    I would also add one more reason for his success – he does appear to be quite good at selecting staff, and knowing who to delegate to.

    timotheus , January 14, 2020 at 8:30 am

    There is another figure from recent history who displayed similar astuteness about power while manifesting generally low intelligence: Chile's Pinochet. He had near failing grades in school but knew how to consolidate power, dominate the other members of the junta, and weed out the slightest hint of dissidence within the army.

    Off The Street , January 14, 2020 at 9:17 am

    To the average viewer, Trump's branding extends to the negative brands that he assigns to opponents. Witness Lyin' Ted , Pocahontas and similar sticky names that make their way into coverage. He induces free coverage from Fake News as if they can't resist gawking at a car wreck, even when one of the vehicles is their own. Manipulation has worked quite a lot on people with different world views, especially when they don't conceive of any different approaches.

    drumlin woodchuckles , January 14, 2020 at 6:52 pm

    Scott Adams touted that as one of Trump's hidden persuasionological weapons . . . that ability to craft a fine head-shot nickname for every opponent.

    If Sanders were to be nominated, I suppose Trump would keep saying Crazy Bernie. Sanders will just have to respond in his own true-to-himself way. Maybe he could risk saying something like . . .

    " so Trashy Trump is Trashy. This isn't new."

    If certain key bunches of voters still have fond memories for Crazy Eddie, perhaps Sanders could have some operatives subtly remind people of that.

    Some images of Crazy Eddie, for those who wish to stumble up Nostalgia Alley . . .

    https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0geKYkLVB5emoUAN6RXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyNm03Y25mBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDQTA2MTVfMQRzZWMDc2M-?p=crazy+eddie&fr=sfp

    curious euro , January 14, 2020 at 9:23 am

    I would disagree with the "selecting staff" part. I can't really think of any of his appointees to any office while he is president that was a good pick. One worse than the other basically. Maybe in his private dealings he did better, but in public office it's a continuous horror show. Examples like Pence, Haley, "Mad Dog", Bolton, DeVos, his son in law, Pompeo. The list goes on.

    Another indication how bad his delegation skills are is how short his picks stay at their job before they are fired again. Is there any POTUS which had higher staff turnover?

    NotTimothyGeithner , January 14, 2020 at 9:45 am

    Its a horror show because you don't agree with their values. After the last few Presidents, too much movement to the right would catastrophic, so there isn't much to do. His farm bill is a disaster. The new NAFTA is window dressing. He slashed taxes. He's found a way to make our brutal immigration system even more nefarious. His staff seems to be working out despite it not having many members of the Bush crime family.

    Even if these people were as beloved by the press as John McCain, they would still be monsters.

    curious euro , January 14, 2020 at 10:43 am

    It's not their values that make them a horror show, it's their plain inaptitude and incompetency. E.g. someone like that Exxon CEO is at least somewhat capable, which is why I didn't mention him. Though he was quite ineffective as long as he lasted and probably quite corrupt. Pompeo in the same office on the other hand is simply a moron elevated way beyond his station. Words fail and the Peter principle cannot explain.

    The US can paper over this due to their heavy handed application of power for now, but every day he stays in office, friends are abhorred while trying not to show it, and foes rejoice at the utter stupidity of the US how it helps their schemes.

    For me as a foreigner who detests the forever wars and most of the US foreign policy, this is a good thing: the more heavy handed, the more brutal, the more cruel, the more stupid the US policy is, the less is the chance for our euro governments to follow the US in today's war or other policy. So while I am sort of happy about the outcome, I don't see the current monsters at the helm worse than the monsters 4 years ago under Obama. In fact I detested them much more since they had the power to drag my governments into their evil schemes.

    Evil and clearly despicable is always better than evil and sort of charismatic.

    tegnost , January 14, 2020 at 11:29 am

    For me as a foreigner who detests the forever wars and most of the US foreign policy, this is a good thing: the more heavy handed, the more brutal, the more cruel, the more stupid the US policy is, the less is the chance for our euro governments to follow the US in today's war or other policy.

    Indeed, if you look at the trendline from the '80's to now, trump is, in some ways, the less effective evil.

    James O'Keefe , January 14, 2020 at 1:17 pm

    They are not inept and incompetent at what they are trying to achieve. The GOP has long sought to privatize government to help the rich get richer and harm anyone who isn't rich by cutting services and making them harder to get. Trumps picks are carrying out that agenda very well.

    That he still hasn't filled 170 appointed positions is icing on the cake. See stats at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/

    rosemerry , January 14, 2020 at 4:47 pm

    I feel exactly the same. Trump is just a huge crude extension of the usual "exceptional" leaders, much more transparent by not pretending he is any sort of representative of democratic and cooperative values claimed by his predecessors.

    PlutoniumKun , January 14, 2020 at 10:05 am

    But what I think is noticeable is that his worst high profile staff picks, while horrible people, are generally those who are under his thumb and so he has control of. But in the behind the scenes activities, they've been very effective – as an obvious example, witness how he's put so many conservative Republicans into the judiciary, in contrast with Obamas haplessness.

    curious euro , January 14, 2020 at 10:51 am

    That is not a Trump thing, getting more judges is a 100% rep party thing and only rep party thing. Sure, he is the one putting his rubber stamp on it, but the picking and everything else is a party thing. They stopped the placement for years under Obama before Trump was ever thought about, and now are filling it as fast as they can. Aren't they having complicit democrats helping them or how can they get their picks beyond congress? Or am I getting something wrong and Obama could have picked his judges but didn't?

    The people he chooses to run his administration however are all horrible. Not just horrible people but horrible picks as in incompetent buffoons without a clue. Can you show a evil, horrible or not but actually competent pick of his in his administration?

    The only one I can think of is maybe the new FAA chief Dickson. Who is a crisis manager, after the FAA is in its worst crisis ever right now. So right now someone competent must have this post. All the others seem to be chickenhawk blowhards with the IQ of a fruitfly but the bluster of a texan.

    fajensen , January 14, 2020 at 11:13 am

    Gina Haspel? She is probably equally good with a handgun, an ice pick and a pair of pliers.

    curious euro , January 14, 2020 at 11:49 am

    Is she effective? What has she done to make her a spy mastermind? She is obviously a torturer, but is that a qualification in any way useful to be a intelligence agency boss?

    I have the suspicion Haspel was elevated to their office by threatening "I know where all the bodies are buried (literally) and if you don't make me boss, I will tell". Blackmail can helping a career lots if successful.

    Thuto , January 14, 2020 at 11:18 am

    The outcomes of incompetence and malicious intent are sometimes indistinguishable from one another. With the people Trump has surrounded himself with, horrible, nasty outcomes are par for the course because these guys are both incompetent and chock full of malicious intent. Instead of draining the swamp, he's gone and filled it with psychotic sociopaths.

    drumlin woodchuckles , January 14, 2020 at 7:04 pm

    Some time ago I heard Mulvaney answer the criticism about the Trump budget of the day cutting so much money from EPA that EPA would have to fire half of its relevant scientists. He replied that " this is how we drain the swamp".

    Citing "corruption" was misdirection. Trump let his supporters believe that the corruption was The Swamp. What the Trump Group ACTually means by "The Swamp" is all the career scientists and researchers and etc. who take seriously the analyzing and restraining of Upper Class Looter misbehavior.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 14, 2020 at 12:28 pm

    I limited the post to his negotiating approach. One would think someone so erratic would have trouble attracting people. However, Wall Street and a lot of private businesses are full of high maintenance prima donnas at the top. Some of those operations live with a lot of churn in the senior ranks. For others, one way to get them to stay is what amounts to a combat pay premium, they get paid more than they would in other jobs to put up with a difficult boss. I have no idea how much turnover there is in the Trump Organization or how good his key lieutenants are so I can't opine either way on that part.

    Regarding his time as POTUS, Trump has a lot of things working against him on top of his difficult personality and his inability to pay civil servants a hardship premium:

    1. He got elected over the dead bodies of just about everyone who counts in the Republican Party. He pretty much did a hostile takeover of the GOP. So his ability to draw on seasoned hands was nil. And on top of that, he is temperamentally not the type to seek the counsel of perceived wise men in and hanging around the party. The people he has kept around are cronies like Wilbur Ross and Steve Mnuchin.

    The one notably competent person he has attracted and retained is Robert Lightizer, the US Trade Representative

    2. Another thing that undermines Trump's effectiveness in running a big bureaucracy is his hatred for its structure. He likes very lean organizations with few layers. He can't impose that on his administration. It's trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

    cocomaan , January 14, 2020 at 1:56 pm

    I have no idea how much turnover there is in the Trump Organization or how good his key lieutenants are so I can't opine either way on that part.

    Is it just me or does nobody know? Does it seem to anyone else like there has been virtually no investigation of his organization or how it was run?

    Maybe it's buried in the endless screeds against Trump, but any investigations of his organizations always seem colored by his presidency. I'd love to see one that's strictly historical.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 14, 2020 at 2:10 pm

    I am simply saying that I have not bothered investigating that issue. There was a NY Times Magazine piece on the Trump Organization before his election. That was where I recall the bit about him hating having a lot of people around him, he regards them as leeches. That piece probably had some info on how long his top people had worked for him.

    ObjectiveFunction , January 15, 2020 at 2:30 am

    Congratulations Yves, on another fine piece, one of your best. I might recommend you append this comment to it as an update, or else pen a sequel.

    While Trump has more in common stylistically with a Borgia prince out of Machiavelli, or a Roman Emperor ( oderint, dum metuant ) than with a Hitler or a Stalin, your note still puts me in mind of an insightful comment I pulled off a history board a while ago, regarding the reductionist essence of Führerprinzip , mass movement or no mass movement. It's mostly out of Shirer:

    Hitler ran the Third Reich by a system of parallel competition among bureaucratic empire builders of all stripes. Anyone who showed servile loyalty and mouthed his yahoo ideology got all the resources they liked, for any purpose they proposed. But the moment he encountered any form of independence or pushback, he changed horses at once. He left the old group in place, but gave all their resources to a burgeoning new bureaucracy that did things his way. If a State body resisted his will, he had a Party body do it instead. He was continually reaching down 2-3 levels in the org charts, to find some ambitious firecracker willing to suck up to him, and leapfrog to the top.

    This left behind a complete chaos of rival, duplicated functions, under mainly unfit leaders. And fortunately for the world, how well any of these organizations actually did their jobs was an entirely secondary consideration. Loyalty was all.

    Hitler sat at the center of all the resource grabbers and played referee. This made everyone dependent on his nod and ensured his continued power. The message was: there are no superiors in the Reich. There is only der Führer, and his favor trumps everything .

    As you note, some of these tools (fortunately) aren't available to Cheeto 45 .

    I hope this particular invocation of Godwin's avenger is trenchant, and not OT. Although Godwin himself blessed the #Trump=Hitler comparison some time ago, thereby shark-jumping his own meme.

    Tomonthebeach , January 14, 2020 at 12:53 pm

    It might be as simple as birds of a feather (blackbirds of course) flocking together. Trump seems to have radar for corrupt cronies as we have seen his swamp draining into the federal prison system. The few over-confident generals he picked, except for Flynn, finally caved when they realized staying was an affront to the honor code they swore to back in OCS or their academy.

    lyman alpha blob , January 14, 2020 at 2:16 pm

    The crooks in the Reagan administration were getting bounced seemingly every other day. Just found this from Brookings (blecchh) which if accurate says Trump has recently surpassed Reagan – https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/

    I don't know how they selected staff in the Reagan years, but lately the POTUS seems to appoint based on who the plutocrats want. As has been noted Bary O took his marching orders from Citigroup if I remember right. I doubt if Trump had even heard of most of the people he appointed prior to becoming president. So at least some of Trump's turnover is due to him firing recommendations from others who didn't turn out how he'd like. That's one reason I didn't get all that upset over the Bolton hiring – I didn't think he'd last a year before Trump canned him.

    My recollection of the Reagan years was that he had a lot of staff who left to "spend more time with their families"; in other words they got caught being crooked and we're told to go lest they besmirch the sterling reputation of St. Ronnie.

    drumlin woodchuckles , January 14, 2020 at 6:57 pm

    He early-on adopted the concept of "dismantle the Administrative State". Some of his appointees are designed to do that from within. He appoints termites to the Department of Lumber Integrity because he wants to leave the lumber all destroyed after he leaves the White House.

    His farm bill is only a disaster to those who support Good Farm Bill Governance. His mission is to destroy as much of the knowledge and programs within the USDA as possible. So his farm bill is designed to achieve the destruction he wants to achieve. If it works, it was a good farm bill from his viewpoint. For example.

    Ignacio , January 15, 2020 at 5:38 am

    I would say that Trump, not acting in an intelligent way is doing very clever things according to his interests. My opinion is that his actions/negotiations with foreign countries are 100% directed for domestic consumptiom. He does not care at all about international relationships, just his populist "make America great again" and he almost certainly play closest attention to the impact of his actions in US opinion.

    He calculates the risks and takes measures that show he is a strong man defending US interests (in a very symplistic and populist way) no matter if someone or many are offended, abused or even killed as we have recently seen. Then if it is appreciated that a limit has been reached, and the limit is not set by international reactions but perceived domestic reactions, he may do a setback showing how sensibly magnanimous can a strongman like him be. In the domestic front, IMO, he does not give a damn on centrists of all kinds. Particularly, smart centrists are strictly following Trumps playbook focusing on actions that by no means debilitate his positioning as strongman in foreign issues and divert attention from the real things that would worry Trump. The impeachment is exactly that. Trump must be 100% confident that he would win any contest with any "smart" centrist. Of course he also loves all the noises he generates with, for instance, the Soleimani killing or Huawei banning that distract from his giveaways to the oligarchs and further debilitation of remaining welfare programs and environmental programs. This measures don't pass totally unnoticed but Hate Inc . and public opinions/debates are not paying the attention his domestic measures deserve. Trump's populism feeds on oligarch support and despair and his policies are designed to keep and increase both. Polls on Democrats distract from the most important polls on public opinion about Trum "surprise" actions.

    Trump will go for a third term.

    Seamus Padraig , January 14, 2020 at 7:18 am

    Trump has the rare gift of being able to drive his enemies insane – just witness what's become of the Democrats, a once proud American political party.

    Eureka Springs , January 14, 2020 at 9:39 am

    Democrats have long been (what, 50 plus yrs. – Phil Ochs – Love Me I'm A Liberal) exuding false pride of not appearing to be or sounding insane. Their place, being the concern troll of the duopoly. All are mad. If the Obama years didn't prove it, the Dems during Bush Cheney certainly did.

    curious euro , January 14, 2020 at 10:53 am

    Yes, 50 years. Nixon played mad to get his Vietnam politics through, Reagan was certifiable "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever." "We begin bombing in five minutes." live on air. Etc.

    vlade , January 14, 2020 at 7:38 am

    I suspect only half of the post was posted? The last para seems to get cut in mid sentence.

    I'd add one more thing (which may be in the second half, assuming there's one). Trump's massively insane demands are a good anchoring strategy. Even semi-rational player will not make out-of-this-earth demands – they would be seen as either undermining their rationality, or clearly meant to only anchor so less effective (but surprisingly, even when we know it's only an anchor it apparently works, at least a bit). With irrational Trump, one just doesn't know.

    GramSci , January 14, 2020 at 7:41 am

    Classic predatory behaviors: culling the herd and eating the weak.

    David , January 14, 2020 at 8:21 am

    I think Trump understands that one of the basic tactics of negotiation (though forgotten by the Left(tm)) is to set out a maximalist position before the negotiation starts, so that you have room to make compromises later.

    Sometimes this works better than others – I don't know how far you can do it with the Chinese, for example. But then Trump may have inadvertently played, in that case, into the tradition of scripted public utterances combined with behind-the-scenes real negotiation that tends to characterize bargaining in Asia.

    But in domestic politics, there's no doubt that publicly announcing extreme negotiating positions is a winning tactic. You force the media and other political actors to comment and make counter-proposals, thus dragging the argument more in your direction from the very start. Trump remembers something that his opponents have willfully forgotten: compromise is something you finish with not something you start from . In itself, any given compromise has no particular virtue or value.

    Michael Fiorillo , January 14, 2020 at 8:59 am

    Yes, Trump does seem to be very good at getting to people to "negotiate against themselves."

    chuck roast , January 14, 2020 at 9:52 am

    and that is why Trump will eat Biden's lunch.

    The Rev Kev , January 14, 2020 at 9:09 am

    There is actually two parts to a negotiation I should mention. There is negotiating a deal. And then there is carrying it out. Not only Trump but the US has shown itself incapable of upholding deals but they will break them when they see an advantage or an opportunity. Worse, one part of the government may be fighting another part of the government and will sabotage that deal in sometimes spectacular fashion.
    So what is the point of having all these weird and wonderful negotiating strategies if any partners that you have on the international stage have learned that Trump's word is merely a negotiating tactic? And this includes after a deal is signed when he applies some more pressure to change something in an agreement that he just signed off on? If you can't keep a deal, then ultimately negotiating a deal is useless.

    curious euro , January 14, 2020 at 9:28 am

    The incapability of the US to keep their treaties has been a founding principle of the country. Ask any Indian.

    Putin or the russian foreign ministry called the US treaty incapable a few years before Trump, and they were not wrong. Trump didn't help being erratic as he is, but he didn't cancel any treaty on his own: JCPOA, INF, etc. He had pretty broad support for all of these. Only maybe NAFTA was his own idea.

    timbers , January 14, 2020 at 9:47 am

    I'm just not impressed by Trump in any way.

    He owes the fact he's President not to any skill he has, but to Democrats being so bad. Many non establishment types could have beaten Hillary.

    And Trump owes the fact that he's not DOA in 2020 re-election again because Democrats are so bad. There are a handful of extremely popular social programs Democrats could champion that would win over millions of voters and doom Trump's re-election. But instead, they double down on issues that energize Trump's base, are not off-limits to there donors while ignoring what the broad non corporate/rich majority support. For example impeaching him for being the first recent President not to start a major new war for profit and killing millions and then saying it's really because something he did in Ukraine that 95% of Americans couldn't care less about and won't even bother to understand even if they could.

    That leaves the fact he is rather rich and must have done something to become that. I don't know enough about him to evaluate that. But I would never what to know him or have a friend that acts like him. I've avoided people like that in my life.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 14, 2020 at 12:36 pm

    Did you read the post as positive? Please read again. Saying that Trump's strategy works only to the extent that he winds up selecting for weak partners is not praise. First, it is clinical, and second, it says his strategy has considerable costs.

    rd , January 14, 2020 at 6:54 pm

    I find it interesting that the primary foreign entity who has played Trump like a violin is Kim in North Korea. He has gotten everything he wanted, except sanctions relief over the past couple of years.

    However, Trump's style of negotiating with Iran has made it clear to Kim that North Korea would be idiots to give up their nuclear weapons and missiles. Meanwhile, Iran has watched Trump's attitude towards Kim since Kim blew up his first bomb and Trump is forcing them to develop nuclear weapons to be able to negotiate with Trump and the West.

    ObjectiveFunction , January 15, 2020 at 1:36 am

    But other than the minor matter of US 8th Army (cadre) sitting in the line of fire, the bulk of any risks posed by Li'l Kim are borne by South Korea, Japan and China. So for Trump, it's still down the list a ways, until the Norks can nuke tip a missile and hit Honolulu. So what coup has Kim achieved at Trump's expense, again?

    drumlin woodchuckles , January 14, 2020 at 7:13 pm

    Today's Democrats want to destroy those social programs you cite. They have wanted to destroy those social programs ever since President Clinton wanted to conspire with "Prime Minister" Gingrich to privatize Social Security. Luckily Monica Lewinsky saved us from that fate.

    A nominee Sanders would run on keeping Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid in existence. And he would mean it. A nominee Biden might pretend to say it. But he would conspire with the Republicans to destroy them all.

    The ClintoBama Pelosicrats have no standing on which to pretend to support some very popular social programs and hope to be believed any longer. Maybe that is why they feel there is no point in even pretending any more.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 14, 2020 at 6:42 pm

    Mind you, there's no reason to think that this negotiation approach wasn't an adaptation to Trump's emotional volatility, as in finding a way to make what should have been a weakness a plus. And that he's less able to make that adaptation work well as he's over his head, has less control than as a private businessman, and generally under way more pressure.

    HH , January 14, 2020 at 11:43 am

    I recall reading that Trump's empire would have collapsed during the casino fiasco were it not for lending from his father when credit was not available elsewhere. NYT investigative reporters have turned up evidence of massive financial support from Trump father to son to the tune of hundreds of millions throughout the son's career. So much for the great businessman argument.

    carbpow , January 14, 2020 at 11:45 am

    Trump is nothing more or less than a reflection of the mind set of the US people. The left wing resorts to the same tactics that Trump uses to gain their ends. Rational thought and reasonable discussion seems to be absent. Everyone is looking for a cause for the country's failing infrastructure, declining life expectancy, and loss of opportunity for their children to have a better life than they were able to achieve.

    They each blame the other side. But there are more than two sides to most folks experience. If ever the USA citizens abolish or just gets fed up with the two party system maybe things will change. In reality most people know there is little difference between the two parties so why even vote?

    Jeremy Grimm , January 14, 2020 at 12:11 pm

    This analysis of Trump reminded me of a story I heard from the founders of a small rural radio station. Both had been in broadcasting for years at a large station in a major market, one as a program director and the other in sales. They competed for a broadcasting license that became available and they won.

    With the license in-hand they needed to obtain investments to get the station on-air within a year or they would lose the license. Even with their combined savings and as much money as they could obtain from other members of their families and from friends -- they were short what they needed by several hundred thousand dollars.

    Their collateral was tapped out and banks wouldn't loan on the broadcast license alone without further backing. They had to find private investors. They located and presented to several but their project could find no backers. In many cases prospects told them their project was too small -- needed too little money -- to be of interest. As the deadline for going on-air loomed they were put in touch with a wealthy local farmer.

    After a long evening presenting their business case to this farmer in ever greater detail, he sat back and told them he would give them the money they needed to get their station on-air -- but he wanted a larger interest in the business than what they offered him. He wanted a 51% interest -- a controlling interest -- or he would not give them the money, and they both had to agree to work for the new radio station for a year after it went on-air.

    The two holders of the soon to be lost broadcast license looked at each other and told the farmer he could keep his money and left. The next day the farmer called on the phone and gave them the names and contact information for a few investors, any one of whom should be able and interested in investing the amounts they needed on their terms. He also told them that had they accepted his offer he would have driven them out of the new station before the end of the year it went on-air. He said he wanted to see whether they were 'serious' before putting them in touch with serious investors.

    juliania , January 14, 2020 at 12:22 pm

    Sorry, assassination doesn't fit into this scenario. That is a bridge too far. Trump has lost his effectiveness by boasting about this. It isn't just unpredictability. It is dangerous unpredictability.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 15, 2020 at 5:52 am

    I never once said that Trump was studied in how he operates, in fact, I repeatedly pointed out that he's highly emotional and undisciplined. I'm simply describing some implications.

    meadows , January 14, 2020 at 12:28 pm

    If our corrupt Congress had not ceded their "co-equal" branch of gov't authority over the last 40 years thereby gradually creating the Imperial Presidency that we have now, we might comfortably mitigate much of the mad king antics.

    Didn't the Founding Fathers try desperately to escape the terrible wars of Europe brought on by the whims and grievances of inbred kings, generation after generation? Now on a whim w/out so much as a peep to Congress, presidential murder is committed and the CongressCritters bleat fruitlessly for crumbs of info about it.

    I see no signs of this top-heavy imperialism diminishing. Every decision will vanish into a black hole marked "classified."

    I am profoundly discouraged at 68 who at 18 years old became a conscientious objector, that the same undeclared BS wars and BS lies are used to justify continuous conflct almost nonstop these last 50 years as if engaging in such violence can ever be sucessful in achieving peaceful ends? Unless the maintenance of fear, chaos and blowback are the actual desired result.

    Trump's negotiating style is chaos-inducing deliberately, then eventually a "Big Daddy" Trump can fix the mess, spin the mess and those of us still in the thrall of big-daddyism can feel assuaged. It's the relief of the famiy abuser who after the emotional violence establishes a temporary calm and family members briefly experience respite, yet remain wary and afraid.

    drumlin woodchuckles , January 14, 2020 at 7:34 pm

    Bingo!

    The maintenance of fear, chaos and blowback are exACTLY the desired result. Deliberately and on purpose.

    Jeff Wells of Rigorous Intuition wrote a post about that years ago, in a different context. Here it is.

    https://rigint.blogspot.com/2006/07/violent-bear-it-away.html

    xkeyscored , January 15, 2020 at 5:42 am

    It also helps him do some things quietly in the background
    I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

    KFritz , January 14, 2020 at 10:17 pm

    Kim Jong Un uses similar tactics, strategy, perhaps even style. Clinically and intellectually, it's interesting to watch their interaction. Emotionally, given their weaponry, it's terrifying.

    Jason , January 15, 2020 at 9:15 am

    Great post! The part about selecting for desperate business partners is very insightful, it makes his cozying up to dictators and pariah states much more understandable. He probably thinks/feels that these leaders are so desperate for approval from a country like the US that, when he needs something from them, he will have more leverage and be able to impose what he wants.

    [Jan 15, 2020] Is the US Now at War Against Iraq AND Iran – OffGuardian

    Jan 15, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Search Jan 12, 2020 40 Is the US Now at War Against Iraq AND Iran? Editor Eric Zuesse

    Iraqi Parliament – recently voted unanimously to expel US troops from their country.

    On January 9th, Iraq's Prime Minister and Parliament again ordered all American troops out , but on January 10th the AP headlined "US dismisses Iraq request to work on a troop withdrawal plan" and reported that the U.S. State Department "bluntly rejected the request, saying the two sides should instead talk about how to 'recommit' to their partnership."

    It was not a "request" from Iraq; it was a command from them; and the U.S. and Iraq relate as conqueror and conquered, not as "partners." Consequently: the U.S. Government, now that it has been so unequivocally ordered to leave, is back again, unequivocally, to its invader-occupier role in Iraq.

    The AP report went on to say that, "The request from Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi pointed to his determination to push ahead with demands for U.S. troops to leave Iraq."

    Again there was that false word "request."

    The AP report said that U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo asserted, in reply:

    "Our mission set there is very clear. We've been there to perform a training mission to help the Iraqi security forces be successful and to continue the campaign against ISIS, to continue the counter-Daesh campaign."

    Though that's the invader-occupier's excuse, the reality is that the US needs Iraq in order to invade Iran, which is the US Government's objective, though not overtly stated.

    Already, America's assassination in Iraq of Iran's top general Qasem Soleimani on January 3rd is an enormous act of war against Iran.

    It is intended to obliterate Iran's main strategist, and this successful attack against Iran inside Iraq is a devastating first strike, by the U.S. Government against Iran.

    So: now, the U.S. is at war against both Iraq and Iran.

    Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest WhatsApp vKontakte Email Filed under: conflict zones , Iran , Iraq , latest Tagged with: Eric Zuesse , Iran , Iraq , Middle East , Qassem Soleimani , united states can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

    OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

    Connect with Connect with Subscribe newest oldest most voted Notify of

    Harry Stotle ,

    I see Tony is inconsolable after the death of a dictator who failed to hold an election for 50 years?

    Britains foremost war criminal said, "I heard the news about His Majesty Sultan Qaboos bin Said of Oman with great sadness. He was a leader of vision and purpose who took over the leadership of his country at a difficult time and raised it to an entirely new level of development and prosperity. He was a man of culture, humanity and deep conviction who strove to make his nation and the world better and more peaceful. He was kind, thoughtful and with a big heart. He had great wisdom and insight from which I benefited often as did so many others. My deepest sympathy, prayers and condolences are with the people of Oman. He will be sorely missed. – Tony Blair.
    https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1215920898966020096

    Yes, I'm sure you did 'benefit', Tony – blood money I think they call it, you amoral scumbag.

    Frank Speaker ,

    I'm really disappointed to read yet another article on OffG about Iran. It's getting really boring and those backward desert dwellers deserve all they get anyway. Let's get it over and done with and takeover their oilfields and make lots of money. What I really want to see here instead are lots of articles about Meghan and Harry.

    (note to non-British readers, it's called irony)

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    The ever cowardly United States of America is officially at war with everyone in the world except the uneducated dolts & imbeciles that support the Imbecile-in-Chief narcissist whackjob nutbar effin' retard run amok.

    Fuck America & the Republican Party that lives on forever war with everyone in the world including American taxpayers.

    Screw the imbecile-in-Chief to a wall of his making.

    Death to America!

    MOU

    Harry Stotle ,

    Oh, you are a wag, Eric – is the US killing machine that just incinerated the Quds foremost military strategist 'now at War Against Iraq AND Iran' – well its hardly an act of peace, is it?

    By the way, has anyone been listening to Raab pontificate about 'international law' – apparently the minister for Tory lies appears to be oblivious to the fact that Soleimani's execution was almost certainly illegal, and was only possible because Britain and American actions are always placed above the law.

    Lets just remind Raab, and murder apologists like him that, "Outside of an on-going armed conflict, the first use of military force is regulated under the jus ad bellum. The first principle of the jus ad bellum is the prohibition on the use of force, a peremptory norm codified in United Nations Charter Article 2(4). The only possible exception to the prohibition applicable in this case is self-defense. The exception is narrow. Some restrictions are provided in UN Charter Article 51; others in the general principles of international law. Article 51 permits the use of military force in such as the Hellfire missiles carried by Reaper drones, if "an armed attack occurs". The International Court of Justice has emphasized that the attack must be "grave".
    https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-killing-of-soleimani-and-international-law/

    Neocons want to start killing Iranians (which they already are doing via economic sanctions) – time for the west to grasp this inescapable reality.

    nottheonly1 ,

    What do these countries have in common?

    U.S. IR UK FR AUS DE CAN NZ PL UK ES BR COL SA UAR NL SW NOR ET AL?

    They are all

    M O ☐ H ☐ R ☐ A R ☐ H ☐ ☐ C K ☐ R ☐

    Yes, you may buy an 'F'.

    That includes its populations, that do it by default. They are programmed and conditioned from early on to be in harmony with the Pompeos, the Busches, Obamas, Trumps and whatever their names are that have this planet in stranglehold.

    U.S. MUST PAY for all damages it inflicted over the last ~213 years. The ticket is endless – and with the indiscrininate use of weapons of mass destruction, very expensive.

    In a world of justice, the rich people would be given the shittiest places in these countries and the rest be divided among the victim Nations of these pathetically religiously fascist psychopaths.

    Is the use of the term 'religiously fascist psychopath' now reason for a drone strike?

    Well, what are you waiting for? You are okay with the above fascist nations to do pre-emptive murders, but hesitate to do the same?

    What an epic Upfuckery.

    Because – in other words – nobody capable to do the one act that is excempt from Karmic retribution? Rather than doing that, saner beings are actually leaning back in the most fatalistic way. What is it good for, if the sane let the insane do whatever they please – or their mental illness dictates them to do?

    Hitler was a good example. He was not mandated to undergo a psychological evaluation. And I don't care where you set the red line. Being part of genocide is plenty enough at any given day. And there can be no more limitations of terms.

    Maybe the prevailing opinion about all this is for it to be a joke. But that only appears to be so, because the populations of the above listed nations et al, are murdering innocent women and children (future population reduction) in the Nations on the receiving fascist shit end of the stick.

    On a side note and only marginally related:

    Listening to the early Beatles and their 'depressing' songs, the mind drifted to 'The Man in Black' (that I adore) and his song about why he is wearing black and likely to do so into his grave, which he did. The song I have on mind changes the lyrics a bit, but stays true, or emphasizes the new expression.

    Well, you wonder why I'm always using 'fuck'.
    Why you'll never hear me leaving out the muck.
    And why my words have such a somber tone.
    Well, there's a reason for the things I'm bringing on.

    Oh, and yes, for what its worth: invest yourself in aeroponics. Learn everything about it and start your own food production – using very little, very clean water and clean air, delivering healthy greens. It will work in an apartment as well as in a large greenhouse. The REAL Foodevolution.

    Dungroanin ,

    Yes the US has been at war in the ME for a very very long time Eric.

    Their advance was halted and is now in retreat, bar a few 'battles of Bulges' false hopes – they are heading back to their bunkers and throwing the kiddy corps into the front lines to take on hardened campaigners. They have even resorted to assassination of the Generals and leaders – opening the way and hoping for equal retaliation, to sway the public perception.

    The Iraqis want the US out – and are threatened with economic sanctions and freezing of their US$ accounts!

    Just like Venezuela and Iran and Libya and Yemen ..,

    The Iraqis are proceeding with their closer ties with the winners – the Eurasian conglomerate, the Belt & Road investments; the superior Russian weapons systems and no doubt the disengagement from the petrodollar, ball and chain of a slave.

    Like an abused woman who wants to remove the 'ex boyfriend' who moved in a decade ago – has never paid any bills, doesn't do housework or maintenance and brings round his mates to wreck the place

    Iraq has served a legal order to remove the abusive bastard !

    Get the fuck out – or the bailiffs will be called to do it – and that will mean MORE cost you bully!

    If that is MORE war then retreating Empire will see a REAL war on all fronts including for the first time ever in their own country – the bodybags will be required domestically – just like the poor civilians have been dying in theit tens of thousands at the proxy US forces hands for decades.

    The people of the US need to get past their daily diet of super sugared Hollywood superiority and understand THEY are the EVIL EMPIRE and THEY are LOSING as the downtrodden ewoks of the many countried are fighting back!

    GEOFF ,

    After the USS Vincennes in 1988 had shot down Iran Air Flight 655 and killed 290 people, including many children, the U.S. government denied any culpability. George H. W. Bush, the vice president of the United States at the time, commented: "I will never apologize for the United States – I don't care what the facts are I'm not an apologize-for-America kind of guy." Despite its "error" the crew was given medals and the captain was even awarded a Legion of Merit "for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service as commanding officer

    GEOFF ,

    The above is from moon of Alabama I forgot to mention

    Yarkob ,

    Have a listen to Whitney Webb on QTR podcast giving her take: https://youtu.be/dmaypBvuNzs?t=376

    George Mc ,

    Example an American "request":

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/SeldwfOwuL8?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    Antonym ,

    That's the CIA today; not the USA.

    George Mc ,

    Granted that it's not the whole of the USA – but it's not just the CIA and it's certainly not merely "today". Incidentally, Brando said his attraction towards playing the Godfather is that he thought it was a prefect demonstration of how the American political system really works.

    Protect ,

    From Zero Hedge / The Strategic Culture Foundation:
    "Abdul-Mehdi [The Iraqi prime minister] spoke angrily about how the Americans had ruined the country and now refused to complete infrastructure and electricity grid projects unless they were promised 50% of oil revenues, which Abdul-Mehdi refused.
    The complete (translated) words of Abdul-Mahdi's speech to parliament:
    "This is why I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead. Upon my return, Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement. When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership.
    "Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me.
    "I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.
    "After this, when our Minister of Defense publicly stated that a third party was targeting both protestors and security personnel alike (just as Trump had threatened he would do), I received a new call from Trump threatening to kill both me and the Minister of Defense if we kept on talking about this "third party"."
    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/deeper-story-behind-assassination-soleimani
    and there is this:
    "I was supposed to meet him [Soleimani] later in the morning when he was killed. He came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered to the Iranians from the Saudis."

    lundiel ,

    Here's your answer from the state department, it appears to be both yes and no (depending on financial incentives).

    America is a force for good in the Middle East. Our military presence in Iraq is to continue the fight against ISIS and as the Secretary has said, we are committed to protecting Americans, Iraqis, and our coalition partners. We have been unambiguous regarding how crucial our D-ISIS mission is in Iraq. At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership -- not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East. Today, a NATO delegation is at the State Department to discuss increasing NATO's role in Iraq, in line with the President's desire for burden sharing in all of our collective defense efforts. There
    does, however, need to be a conversation between the U.S. and Iraqi governments not just regarding security, but about our financial, economic, and diplomatic partnership. We want to be a friend and partner to a sovereign, prosperous, and stable Iraq.

    Gall ,

    Typical imperialistic boiler plate. America being a "force for good in the Middle East" or anywhere else is a lie. Remember Vietnam? As for "continu(ing) the fight against ISIS" the SOS really means to continue to finance and supply ISIS while pretending to "fight against" them. There whole statement is a Stygian Stable full of total BS.

    The Iraqis should tell them again to get the f-k outta Dodge or they'll go Wyatt Earp on their sorry lying asses.

    Frances ,

    Pardonnez-moi, but why do Canada and Australia also UK (Boris) take their 'cue' on foreign policy from the USA? Sending defence forces to fight Washington's wars and banker's wars for resources?

    austrian peter ,

    I answer to your question, Frances, take out an hour of your day to find out:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/np_ylvc8Zj8?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    Andy ,

    This edition of Crosstalk seems to encapsulate perfectly US arrogance and stupidity/disingenuity.

    https://youtu.be/Rlkeyl4adJ0

    Brian Harry ,

    That assertion by Mike("We lied we cheated we stole" ..)Pompeo is a total lie. The USA invaded Iraq under a complete pack of lies, about Saddam Hussein's "Weapons of Mass Destruction" back in 2003 and are still there after having murdered Hussein and now occupy Iraq.
    The Elected Leader of Syria has also told the USA to "Get out of Syria", but the USA has not done so.
    The USA(and it's 'owners" Israel, are the problem in the Middle East, NOT IRAN or Iraq.
    Israel's anaesthetised donkey, The USA, is completely controlled by Israel .It's pathetic. but it's true.

    austrian peter ,

    In the sixties we all knew that "NO" meant "YES" and these guys are from that era.

    Brian Harry ,

    I think that the World has grown sick and tired of the LIES, spewing out of the Military Industrial Complex ..In the highest levels of the USA Government, "if their lips are moving, they're LYING .

    austrian peter ,

    Yep, with you 100% and the bulk of the 99% are getting the message too.

    Yarkob ,

    "the bulk of the 99% are getting the message too."

    Don't kid yourself, Peter. I'd love to agree with you, but there is little evidence of that on those sites that allow comment on this. the masses have drunk the kool aid long and deep. Yes, there's some pearl-clutching going on but he was "still a trrst" so it's all ok. Back to sleep.

    Look! Harry and Meghan!!

    austrian peter ,

    Take your point Yarkob, thank you. I was trying to be optimistic – in my world my network is gradually becoming more aware – I hope that my book, due to publish this quarter, will ride the wave; fingers crossed!
    :-))))

    Admin ,

    Where are you seeing this BTL? Bear in mind that comments in most corporate media sites are heavily censored these days, and replete with sock puppets manipulating debate & seeding talking points.

    George Mc ,

    As I have often said, the MSM not only lies but gives a false image of public opinion. Granted that it is not easy – or even possible – to really know what the population is tending towards in their opinion, I think we can safely say that the MSM always bullshits about it. I love it especially when they not only bullshit about what "everyone thinks" abut also about what everyone "WILL" think e.g. the blathering about what party is "electable".

    I am not, by any stretch, a subscriber to David Icke but he did come up with one wonderful expression when he described what the MSM pump out as "the movie". That is exactly what it is. And I'd like to believe that less and less people believe it. Of course the big problem is that even if you reject it, you have to put up with the fact that, obviously as far as the "mainstream" goes, it's the only show in town. And a lot of people still regurgitate what they hear. So e.g. a lot of people go along with the manufactured outrage over Corbyn "refusing to apologise" while these same people have no idea what he is apologising for – other than a vague notion that he must be some kind of Hitler guy. It all comes down to vibrations set up in the MSM. If you shit enough and often enough then eventually many will swallow it.

    falcemartello ,

    Since when has pax-americana not been at war. The only administration since ww2 that has not been at war was the Peanut farmer from Georgia The Carter administration and it was his secretary of state Brezinski that created the Takfiri army to disrupt Afghanistan in 1979.
    Post Scriptum: The Iranian missile strike in western Iraq and Erbil was a historical event.
    It is the second time in Us military history that pax-americana had not responded to a direct attack on a military barracks , the first time was in 1982 in Beirut where a suicide bomber killed over 200 people.
    Docius in Fondem:Wesley Clarke statement from when he was alluded to the Likudniks plan & countries in 5 years Iran was last on the list.
    US have declared war on both Iraq and Iran with the assassination of the IRGC General and the PMU General. Simple facts tend to allude we the exceptional civilized west

    austrian peter ,

    love the Latin:
    Caesar ad sum iam forte
    Pompei ad erat
    Caesar sic in omnibus
    Pompei sic in hat

    Brian Harry ,

    "Don't talk to me about the bloody Romans, what have they ever done for us"?
    Try as I may, I cant get Google to translate that .what does it mean, please?

    Brian Harry ,

    .although, when I read it 'phonetically', it sounds like a "big night out, and lots of vomit sprayed around but, I'm Australian, and we don't do things like that .much

    austrian peter ,

    :-)))))
    Use DuckDuckGo:
    Non me loqui Romani sanguinis quid unquam fecit u

    Brian Harry ,

    I'll take your word for it Thanks for the laugh ..!

    austrian peter ,

    :-))))) "Laughing is the best policy and is generally better than getting hit by a taxi!" – Spike Milligan – another comic messiah.

    austrian peter ,

    No worries, cobber, have a smiley day and always remember: " If you see a man without a smile, give him one of yours".

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/SJUhlRoBL8M?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    austrian peter ,

    This should help, Brian:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y7tvauOJMHo?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

    Brian Harry ,

    Monty Python the Greatest .There weren't many Romans in Australia 2000 years ago. Too busy invading and really irritating Europeans and British people, but, somehow, it all worked out ok Always look on the bright side of life, huh ?

    austrian peter ,

    Yep, and you Brian are in the right place to see the sunny side. We here in old Blighty are suffering the gloom, doom and damp. I lived in Cape Town for ten years (same latitude as Sydney and similar climate) and miss it dreadfully – the climate that is – the rest is isht; power cuts (load shedding they call it), water shortage (drought they call it), pollution and infrastructure failure all round, Nuff said! Go well cobber.

    Mike Ellwood ,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_Latin

    Not quite the same thing but interesting:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer_is_icumen_in

    Especially the parodies towards the end.

    There are some good pastiche French rhymes / songs around as well. Don't have any links to hand ..aha, found what I was thinking of:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mots_d%27Heures

    Gall ,

    Actually Jimbo the Peanut Farmer was involved in a covert war in Angola and also covertly arming the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Not to mention operation Eagle Claw that failed against the Iranians.

    GEOFF ,

    In 240 years since its inception warmongering yanky land has been at war in the last 224 years with someone, 50 in the last 10 years, not a bad record.

    [Jan 14, 2020] DiGenova Calls Out Soros' Control Over State Department and FBI

    Nov 19, 2019 | canadianpatriot.org
    The Open Society and Anti-Defamation League have gone ballistic last week demanding for the unprecedented eternal banning of Joe diGenova from Fox News or else.

    DiGenova (former Federal Attorney for the District of Columbia) committed a grievous crime indeed, calling out the unspeakable "philanthropist" George Soros on Fox News' Lou Dobbs Show on Nov. 14 as a force controlling a major portion of the American State Department and FBI. To be specific, DiGenova stated: "no doubt that George Soros controls a very large part of the career foreign service of the United States State Department. He also controls the activities of FBI agents overseas who work for NGOs -- work with NGOs. That was very evident in Ukraine. And Kent was part of that. He was a very big protector of Soros." DiGenova was here referencing State Department head George Kent who's testimony is being used to advance President Trump's impeachment.

    Open Society Foundation President Patrick Gaspard denounced Fox ironically calling them "McCarthyite" before demanding the network impose total censorship on all condemnation of Soros. Writing to Fox News' CEO, Gaspard stated: "I have written to you in the past about the pattern of false information regarding George Soros that is routinely blasted over your network. But even by Fox's standards, last night's episode of Lou Dobbs tonight hit a new low This is beyond rhetorical ugliness, beyond fiction, beyond ludicrous."

    Of course, the ADL and Gaspard won't let anyone forget that any attack on George Soros is an attack on Jews the world over, and so it goes that the ADL President Jonathan Greenblatt jumped into the mud saying "Invoking Soros as controlling the State Dept, FBI, and Ukraine is trafficking in some of the worst anti-Semitic tropes." He followed that up by demanding Fox ban DiGenova saying: "If Mr. DiGenova insists on spreading anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, there is absolutely no reason for Fox News to give him an open mic to do so. Mainstream news networks should never give a platform to those who spread hate."

    Even though the MSM including the Washington Post, NY Times and other rags, not to mention countless Soros-affiliated groups have come out on the attack, DiGenova's statements cannot be put back in the bottle, and their attacks just provoke more people to dig more deeply into the dark dealings of Soros and the geopolitical masterclass that use this a-moral, former Nazi speculator as their anti-nation state mercenary.

    A Little Background on Soros

    As has been extensively documented in many locations , ever since young Soros' talents were identified as a young boy working for the Nazis during WWII (a time he describes as the best and most formative of his life), this young sociopath was recruited to the managerial class of the empire becoming a disciple of the "Open Society" post-nation state theories of Karl Popper while a student in London. He latter became one of the first hedge fund managers with startup capital provided by Evelyn Rothschild in 1968 and rose in prominence as a pirate of globalization, assigned at various times to unleash speculative attacks on nations resisting the world government agenda pushed by his masters (in some cases even attacking the center of power- London itself in 1992 which provided an excuse for the London oligarchs to stay out of the very euro trap that they orchestrated for other European nations to walk into).

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/SGWizajL7tA?feature=oembed

    After the Y2K bubble, Soros began devoting larger parts of his resources to international drug legalization, euthanasia lobbying, color revolutions and other regime change programs under the guise of "Human Rights" organizations which have done a remarkable job destroying the sovereignty of Sudan, Libya, Iraq, and Syria to name a few. Since the economic crisis of 2008-09 (which his speculation helped create through unbounded currency and derivatives speculation), Soros has begun to advocate a new world governance system centred on what has recently been called the "Green New Deal" which has less to do with saving nature, and everything to do with depopulation.

    So when the ADL, and Open Society attacks someone for being anti-semitic, you know that whomever they are attacking are probably doing something useful.

    [Jan 14, 2020] Freeland's New Role as Deputy Prime Minister Puts her 2nd in Command (of the Titanic?)

    Notable quotes:
    "... "positions her as one of the top candidates to take over the liberal party after Trudeau" ..."
    "... Government Operations Committee ..."
    "... "All liberal democracies in the world today are facing huge challenges, and for me the conclusion that pushed me to is; there are only 37 million Canadians. Hugely challenging world threats posed to the rules-based international order, greater threats since the 2nd World War. We have to be united in how we confront those challenges." ..."
    "... Ever since her appointment to the role of Cabinet Minister in 2015, Freeland played the role assigned to her as a high level Rhodes Scholar and priestess of neo-liberalism. Springing from a Nazi-connected Ukrainian family based out of Alberta, Freeland made her mark working as lead editor in British Intelligence-controlled news agencies the London Economist, Thompson-Reuters, Financial Times and later Canada's Globe and Mail. Through these positions as "perception manager" of the super elite, she became friends with some of the most vicious Russian, Ukrainian and other eastern European oligarchs who rose to power under Perestroika and the liberalization of the east-bloc. ..."
    "... The author is the founder of the Canadian Patriot Review and Director of the Rising Tide Foundation of Canada. He has authored 3 volumes of the series "The Untold History of Canada" and can be reached at [email protected] ..."
    Jan 14, 2020 | canadianpatriot.org

    editor / November 27, 2019 An interesting victory has been won for forces in Canada who have wished to clean up the mess made by the two disastrous years Chrystia Freeland has spent occupying the position of Foreign Minister of Canada. This victory has taken the form of a Freeland's removal from the position which she has used to destroy diplomatic relations with China, Russia and other nations targeted for regime change by her London-based controllers. Taking over the helm as Minister of Global Affairs is Francois-Philippe Champagne, former Minister of Infrastructure and ally of "old guard" Liberal elder Jean Chretien- both of whom have advocated positive diplomatic and business relations with China in opposition to Freeland for years.

    As positive of a development as this is, the danger which Freeland represents to world peace and Canada's role in the New Emerging system led by the Eurasian Alliance should not be ignored, since she has now been given the role of Deputy Prime Minister, putting her into a position to easily take over the Party and the nation as 2 nd in command.

    Already the Canadian press machine on all sides of the aisle are raising the prospect of Freeland's takeover of the Liberal Party as it "positions her as one of the top candidates to take over the liberal party after Trudeau" as one Globe and Mail reporter stated.

    The Strange Case of Deputy Prime Ministers

    The very role of Deputy Prime Minister is a strange one which has had many pundits scratching their heads, since the Privy Council position is highly under-defined, and was only created by Justin's father Pierre in 1977 as part of his "cybernetics revolution" which empowered the Privy Council Office and Prime Minister's Office under "scientific management" of a technocratic elite. Although it is technically the position of 2nd in Command, it is not like the position of Vice-President whose function has much greater constitutional clarity.

    In some cases, the position has been ceremonial, and in others, like the case of Brian Mulroney's Dep. PM Don Mazankowski (1986-1993) who chaired the Government Operations Committee and led in imposing the nation-stripping NAFTA, the position was very powerful indeed. Some Prime Ministers have chosen not even to have a Deputy PM, and the last one (Anne McLellan) ended with the downfall of Paul Martin in 2006. McLellan and another former Deputy Prime Minister John Manley were both leading figures behind the creation of the think tank Canada2020 in 2003 that soon brought Justin and Obamaton behaviorists into a re-structuring of the Liberal Party of Canada during the Harper years, shedding it of its pro-China, pro-Russia, anti-NATO influences that had been represented by less technocratically-minded statesmen like Jean Chretien years earlier.

    Personally, as a Canadian-based journalist who has done a fair bit of homework on Canadian history, and the structures of Canada's government, I honestly don't think the question of Freeland's becoming Prime Minister matters nearly as much as many believe for the simple reason that Justin is a well-known cardboard cut-out who simply doesn't know how to do anything terribly important without a teleprompter and experienced handlers. This is not a secret to other world leaders, and anyone familiar with the mountains of video footage taken from G7 events featuring the pathetic scene of little Justin chronically ignored by his peers goes far enough to demonstrate the point.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/JQwNIYB2Z6s?feature=oembed

    Freeland's role in Canada has never had much to do with Canada, as much as it has with Canada's role as a geopolitical chess piece in a turbulent and changing world and her current role as Deputy Prime Minister as well as Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs can only be understood in those global terms.

    Unity for the Sake of Greater Division

    For Canada to play a useful role in obstructing the Eurasian-led New Silk Road paradigm sweeping across the globe in recent years, it requires the fragmenting American monarchy be kept in line.

    The problem for the British Empire in this regard, is that the recent elections have demonstrated how divided Canada is with the Liberal Party suffering total losses across the Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Quebec due to the technocratic adherence to the Green New Deal agenda and resistance to actual industrial development initiatives. The collapse of living standards, and the lack of any policies for rebuilding the industrial base that 30 years of NAFTA have destroyed, has resulted not only in the rejection of the Liberal Party but has also awoken a renewed demand for separation in all three provinces.

    Referring implicitly to the crisis of such "authoritarian regimes" as China, Russia, Iran and Trump's USA, as well as the need to decarbonize the world, Freeland put the problem she is assigned to fix in the following terms : "All liberal democracies in the world today are facing huge challenges, and for me the conclusion that pushed me to is; there are only 37 million Canadians. Hugely challenging world threats posed to the rules-based international order, greater threats since the 2nd World War. We have to be united in how we confront those challenges."

    To put it simply, if centralized control were to break down at a time when the Belt and Road Initiative ( and its Polar Silk Road extension ) is redefining the world system OUTSIDE of the control of the western oligarchy, then it is clearly understood that the Green Agenda will fail, but the dynamics of the BRI will become hegemonic as Canada realizes (like the Greeks and Italians currently) that the only viable policies for growing the real economy is coming from China.

    Some final words on Freeland, Neo-liberal High Priestess

    Ever since her appointment to the role of Cabinet Minister in 2015, Freeland played the role assigned to her as a high level Rhodes Scholar and priestess of neo-liberalism. Springing from a Nazi-connected Ukrainian family based out of Alberta, Freeland made her mark working as lead editor in British Intelligence-controlled news agencies the London Economist, Thompson-Reuters, Financial Times and later Canada's Globe and Mail. Through these positions as "perception manager" of the super elite, she became friends with some of the most vicious Russian, Ukrainian and other eastern European oligarchs who rose to power under Perestroika and the liberalization of the east-bloc. She also became close friends with such golems as George Soros, Larry Summers and Al Gore embedding their institutions ever more deeply into Canada since she was brought into Canada2020 (her move to politics was facilitated by fellow Rhodes Scholar/Canada2020 leader Bob Rae abdicating his position as MP for Ontario in 2013).

    When Foreign Minister Stephane Dion committed the crime of attempting to heal relations with China and called for a Russia-Canada Summit to deal mutually with Arctic development, counter-terrorism and space cooperation , he had to go. After an abrupt firing, Freeland was given his portfolio and immediately went to work in turning China and Russia into public enemies #1 and #2, passing the Magnintsky Act in 2017 allowing for the sanctioning of nations for human rights (easily falsified when Soros' White Helmets and other CIA/MI6-affiliated NGOs are seen as "on-the-ground" authorities documenting said abuse).

    Her role as champion of NAFTA which Trump rightly threatened to scrap in order to re-introduce protective tariffs elevated her to a technocratic David fighting some orange Goliath, and her advocacy of the Green New Deal has been behind some of the most extreme energy/arctic anti-development legislation passed in Canada's history.

    Whether it is though individual provinces claiming their rights to form independent treaties with Eurasian powers around cooperation on the BRI, or whether Canada can be returned to a pro-nation state orientation under the "Chretien faction" in the federal government, the current future of Canada is as under-defined as the role of "deputy minister". Either way the nation chooses navigate through the storm, it is certain that any commitment to staying on board the deck of the Titanic known as the "western neoliberal order" has only one cold and tragic outcome which Freeland and her ilk will drown before admitting to.

    The author is the founder of the Canadian Patriot Review and Director of the Rising Tide Foundation of Canada. He has authored 3 volumes of the series "The Untold History of Canada" and can be reached at [email protected]

    Facebook Twitter WordPress Print Kindle It November 27, 2019 in Miscellaneous . Tags: deep state , freeland , rhodes scholar , world government Related posts Unravelling the Mystery of the 'Annexation Movement of 1849' The 'Greta Effect': Are We Really This Time, for Certain Certain, Heading for the End Times? Living Under the Spectre of Hyperinflation: 1923 Weimar and Today Filters Video Player

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/7QByzhXiF1U?controls=0&rel=0&disablekb=1&showinfo=0&modestbranding=0&html5=1&iv_load_policy=3&autoplay=0&end=0&loop=0&playsinline=0&start=0&nocookie=false&enablejsapi=1&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fcanadianpatriot.org&widgetid=1 00:00 16:37 © 2020 The Canadian Patriot

    [Jan 14, 2020] A Sea Change for Canada Foreign Policy as Freeland Is Replaced by a Pro-Chinese Politico by Matthew Ehret

    Jan 14, 2020 | canadianpatriot.org

    December 1, 2019

    In Chrystia Freeland's 2012 book Plutocrats, Canada's leading Rhodes Scholar laid out a surprisingly clear analysis of the two camps of elites who she explained would, by their very nature, battle for control of the newly emerging system as the old paradigm collapsed.

    In her book and article series, she described the "practical populist politician" which has tended to be adherent to business interests and personal gain during past decades vs the new breed of "technocrat" which has an enlightened non-practical (ie: Malthusian) worldview, willing to make monetary sacrifices for the "greater good".

    She further defined the "good Plutocrats" vs "bad Plutocrats". Good Plutocrats included the likes of George Soros, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos who made their billions under the free-for-all epoch of globalization, but who were willing to adapt to the new rules of the post-globalization game. This was a game which she defined in an absurd 2013 TED Talk as a "green New Deal" of global regulation under a de-carbonized (and depopulated) green economy. For those "bad plutocrats" unwilling to play by the new rules (ie: the Trumps, Putins or any industrialist who refused to commit seppuku on the altar of Gaia), they would simply go extinct. This threat was re-packaged by Canada's "other" globalist puppet Mark Carney, who recently said "If some companies and industries fail to adjust to this new world, they will fail to exist."

    Of course, when Freeland formulated these threats in 2011, China's Belt and Road had not yet existed, nor had the Russia-China alliance which together are now challenging the regime-change driven world order in remarkably successful strides. The thought that nationalism could possibly make a comeback in the west was as unthinkable as the failure of free trade deals like NAFTA or the TPP.

    As of November 18, 2019, Freeland has found herself cut down a notch by the "plutocrats" that she has worked so assiduously to destroy since becoming Canada's Foreign Minister in 2017 when she ousted a Foreign Minister (Stephane Dion) who had called for a renewed cooperation with Russia on space, counter-terrorism and arctic development with Sergei Lavrov. Freeland's unrepentant support for Ukrainian Nazis and NATO encirclement of Russia resulted in a total alienation of Russia. Her alienation of China was so successful that the Chinese government removed their ambassador in the summer of 2019. Freeland's work in organizing the failed coup in Venezuela and supporting the MI6-Soros White Helmets in Syria became so well known that she became known as the Canadian queen of regime change.

    Other pro-Chinese "bad plutocratic" companies which have been targeted for destruction under Freeland's watch have included the beleaguered construction giant Aecon Inc. who's board voted in favor of being sold to China in March 2018 in order to play a role in Belt and Road Projects ( a decision vetoed by the Federal Government in May 2018 ), as well as Quebec-based SNC Lavalin which has had major deals with both Russia and China on nuclear power and major infrastructure projects and which now faces being shut down in Canada for having bribed politicians in Libya when it built Qadaffi's Great Manmade River (destroyed by NATO in 2011).

    Former Liberal Minister of Infrastructure from Shawinigan Quebec, Francois-Philippe Champagne has taken over Freeland's portfolio and with him it appears a new pro-Eurasian policy may be emerging in Canada much more conducive to the long term survival (and strategic relevance) of Canada. This shift has already been noted by China which has responded by sending a new Ambassador to Ottawa, while a new Canadian Ambassador with a long history of working towards positive Chinese relations in the private sector (Dominic Barton) has just begun working in Beijing. Barton was the first Ambassador to China since "old guard" politician John McCallum was fired in January 2019 for defending Huawei's Meng Wanzhou to a group of Chinese journalists.

    In opposition to the cacophonic voice of Freeland, Champagne had spoken positively of China in 2017 saying "In a world of uncertainty, of unpredictability, of questioning about the rules that have been established to govern our trading relationship, Canada, and I would say China, stand out as [a] beacon of stability, predictability, a rule-based system, a very inclusive society."

    Champagne is a long-standing protégé of former Prime Minister Jean Chretien and world travelled businessman who has worked in the European nuclear sector and has promoted industrial development with China for years. Jean Chretien, who campaigned for Champagne's recent re-election, represents everything Freeland hates: A "practical" old school politician who recognizes that World War III and alienating Eurasian nations who are shaping the future is bad for business. In 2014, Chretien was given the "Friend of Russia" award and has played a major role in the private sector working with Quebec-based Power Corporation which runs the Canada-China Business Council (CCBC) and has brokered major contracts throughout China since ending his term as PM in 2003. Chretien is also the father in-law of current CCBC chair Paul Desmarais Jr. who is the heir to the PowerCorp dynasty. While these are not groups that in any way exemplify morality, they are practical industrialists who know depopulation and world war are bad for business and would prefer to adapt to a China-led BRI system over a "green technocratic dictatorship".

    Since December 2018, Chretien has attacked Freeland's decision to support Meng Wanzhou's extradiction to the USA, and has volunteered to lead a delegation to China in order to smooth tensions.

    So while the "bad plutocrats" appear to have taken an important step forward though the debris of the recent near failure of the Liberal Party which narrowly kept a minority government after the October 21 Federal Elections, the ideologically driven technocrats led by Queen Freeland shouldn't be discounted, as her new position as Deputy Prime Minister puts her in a position to possibly take control of Canada as 2 nd in command of a highly fragmented nation which is now hearing renewed calls for separation in Alberta, and Quebec.

    Strategic Culture

    [Jan 14, 2020] VICTIM OR AGGRESSOR CHRYSTIA FREELAND'S FAMILY RECORD FOR NAZI WAR PROFITEERING, AND MURDER OF THE CRACOW JEWS

    Jan 14, 2020 | johnhelmer.net

    By John Helmer, Moscow

    Chrystia Freeland (lead image), appointed last week to be the new Canadian Foreign Minister, claims that her maternal family were the Ukrainian victims of Russian persecution, who fled their home in 1939, after Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin agreed on a non-aggression pact and the division of Poland between Germany and the Soviet Union. She claims her mother was born in a camp for refugees before finding safe haven in Alberta, Canada. Freeland is lying.

    The records now being opened by the Polish government in Warsaw reveal that Freeland's maternal grandfather Michael (Mikhailo) Chomiak was a Nazi collaborator from the beginning to the end of the war. He was given a powerful post, money, home and car by the German Army in Cracow, then the capital of the German administration of the Galician region. His principal job was editor in chief and publisher of a newspaper the Nazis created. His printing plant and other assets had been stolen from a Jewish newspaper publisher, who was then sent to die in the Belzec concentration camp. During the German Army's winning phase of the war, Chomiak celebrated in print the Wehrmacht's "success" at killing thousands of US Army troops. As the German Army was forced into retreat by the Soviet counter-offensive, Chomiak was taken by the Germans to Vienna, where he continued to publish his Nazi propaganda, at the same time informing for the Germans on other Ukrainians. They included fellow Galician Stepan Bandera, whose racism against Russians Freeland has celebrated in print, and whom the current regime in Kiev has turned into a national hero.

    Just before Vienna fell to the Soviet forces in March 1945, Chomiak evacuated with the German Army into Germany, ending up near Munich at Bad Worishofen. On September 2, 1946, when Freeland says her mother was born in a refugee camp, she was actually in a well-known spa resort for wealthy Bavarians. The US Army then controlled that part of Germany; they operated an Army hospital at Bad Worishofen and accommodated Chomiak at a spa hotel. US Army records have yet to reveal what the Americans learned about Chomiak's war record, and how he was employed by US Army Intelligence, after he had switched from the Wehrmacht. It took Chomiak another two years before the government in Ottawa allowed the family to enter Canada.

    The reason the Polish Government is now investigating Freeland is that Chomiak's wartime record not only victimized Galician Jews, but also the Polish citizens of Cracow. In a salute to Freeland as a "great friend of Poland" by the Polish Embassy in Ottawa last week, Warsaw officials now believe a mistake was made.

    Last July, Freeland, then trade minister, was in a large delegation of Canadians accompanying Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on a visit to the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp in southern Poland. Freeland is not included in the press photographs; Trudeau wept. A statement issued by one of the Canadian Jewish organizations in the delegation said: "Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's visit to Auschwitz-Birkenau signifies the importance of remembering the six million Jews and countless others who died at hands of the Nazi regime. The Holocaust will forever stand as the ultimate expression of human hatred. That is why every Canadian should use this as an opportunity to reflect upon their personal role in combating the forces of antisemitism, racism and bigotry wherever they are found."

    Trudeau (above) and his staff, as well as Foreign Minister at the time Stephane Dion, and the Jewish representatives appear not to have known this was familiar territory for Freeland and her family. Michael Chomiak and his wife Alexandra, parents to Freeland's mother Halyna, spent the war from 1939 to 1945 working and living just 68 kilometres away in Cracow.

    According to the autobiographical details Freeland has provided herself to the Canadian media, Freeland's family were victims of war. "My maternal grandparents," she wrote in May 2015, "fled western Ukraine after Hitler and Stalin signed their non-aggression pact in 1939 they saw themselves as political exiles with a responsibility to keep alive the idea of an independent Ukraine." In November 2015 Freeland told the Toronto Star: "Michael Chomiak was a lawyer and journalist before the Second World War, but they knew the Soviets would invade western Ukraine (and) fled and, like a lot of Ukrainians, ended up after the war in a displaced persons camp in Germany where my mother was born."


    Centre: Michael Chomiak and wife Alexandra, with their children in Canada in 1952. Freeland's mother Halyna is second from left. Source: https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2015/11/29/how-chrystia-freeland-became-justin-trudeaus-first-star.html

    According to Freeland, "they were also committed to the idea, like most in the (Ukrainian) diaspora, that Ukraine would one day be independent and that the community had a responsibility to the country they had been forced to flee to keep that flame alive."

    The Edmonton, Alberta, newspaper obituary for Halyna Chomiak Freeland says she had been "born on September 2, 1946 in Bad Worishofen, Germany in a displaced person's camp." The Alberta provincial government library reports it holds Michael Chomiak's papers. He is described as having "graduated from Lviv University with master's degree in law and political science. In 1928, as a journalist, he started work in the Ukrainian daily Dilo, and from 1934 to 1939 he served on the editorial staff. During the Nazi occupation, he was the editor of Krakivski Visti, published first in Cracow and then in Vienna."

    There is much more to the story which Freeland has not revealed. The details can be found in Polish and Ukrainian sources; from the archived files of Krakivski Visti ("Cracow News"); and from the evidence of Jewish Holocaust museums around the world. Chomiak was editor in chief of the newspaper after a Jewish editor was removed. The newspaper itself was set up in January 1940, publishing three times weekly in Cracow, until October 8, 1944. It was then published in Vienna from October 16, 1944, until March 29, 1945. The precision of the dates is important. They coincide with the movement of the German Army into Cracow, and then out of the city and into Vienna. The newspaper itself was established by the German Army; and supervised by German intelligence. Chomiak was employed by an officer named Emil Gassner (above). His title in German indicates he was the German administrator in charge of press in the region. When Gassner moved from Cracow to Vienna, he took Chomiak with him.

    Chomiak's publication was an official one of the German administration in Galicia, known at the time as the General Gouvernement. The printing press, offices and other assets which provided Chomiak with his work, salary, and benefits had been confiscated by the Germans from a Jewish publisher, Moshe Kafner . Kafner was a native of the region; he and his family were well educated and well known until the Germans arrived, and replaced Kanfer with Chomiak. Kanfer was forced to flee Cracow for Lviv. From there he was taken by the Germans to the Belzec concentration, where he was murdered some time in 1942. From Chomiak's office to Belzec the distance was 300 kilometres.


    Left: SS guards at Belzec; right: Ukrainian guards about to kill a Belzec inmate

    Krakivsti Visti was "the most important newspaper to appear in the Ukrainian language under the German occupation during World War II," according to this history from the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, published in 1998. Chomiak -- reports the Harvard history by John-Paul Hinka from a contemporary source -- "had the ability to sense what could be written and how in the severe German reality, and he gained some trust among the German officials, without which the work would have been impossible."

    In print, according to this archive of Krakivsti Visti, when Chomiak was in charge, there were reports of the "success" of the German Navy in killing 13,000 US Army soldiers, when their transports were torpedoed and sunk in the Atlantic enroute to England. Chomiak editorialized: "this last German attack [was] a smashing blow to the solar plexus of the alliance."

    Chomiak also reported the US "colonization" of Australia and Canada . "Americans who are now living in Australia believe that the economic possibilities of Australia are even much better than those of the USA, and many US soldiers are thinking about staying in Australia after the war as they feel much better there than in their own Fatherland There are such close relations between the USA and Canada and Australia that there will be a special trade and tax [agreement] between these countries after the war. In other words, the United States does not hide the intention of the US to begin full economic penetration of Canada and Australia."

    By the standard of Trudeau at Auschwitz, Freeland's grandfather also produced race hatred to Nazi order, including antisemitism and racism against several other nationalities, including Americans, Poles and Russians.

    Chomiak not only justified the death camps surrounding Cracow. He attempted to foster Ukrainian sentiment against the Poles in the region. The German objective was to support the Ukrainian takeover of Galicia and cleanse it of its Jewish and Polish populations. For this reason Chomiak and his newspaper were given special favour by the German administration; Chomiak himself was reportedly held in high esteem by the Nazis. In the Harvard history it is reported "there can be no doubt that Krakivs'ki visti enjoyed more autonomy than any other legal Ukrainian-language publication under the German occupation."

    Himka, a Ukrainian-Canadian academic, composed his history of Krakivtsi Visti from Chomiak's personal papers in Alberta. He mentions the newspaper's backing for ethnic cleansing of Poles. He omits to mention Jews. Chomiak's antisemitic record can be found in the files of the Los Angeles Museum of the Holocaust. For details, read this .

    Chomiak didn't flee from the Ukraine in 1939, as Freeland claims. Five years were to elapse before he left Cracow; that was when the German Army pulled out in defeat, as the Soviet Army advanced from the east to liberate the city. Gassner was moving the media operation to his home town, Vienna.

    Chomiak closed down Krakivsti Visti in Vienna in March of 1945 for the same reason. The Soviet Army was days away, and a new Austrian government replaced the Third Reich in April of that year. With the retreating Wehrmacht Chomiak then moved westwards into Germany. But a full year is missing from the official records available publicly. That's between March of 1945 and April of 1946, when the displaced persons camp was opened in the Bavarian town of Bad Worishofen, where Freeland says her mother was born.

    As the name indicates, Bad Worishofen was (still is) a thermal waters resort for wealthy Bavarians and day-trippers from Munich. Freeland claims her mother was born as a victim in a refugee camp. In fact, she was born in a hospital administered by the US Army, while her parents were living in a spa hotel managed by a US Army intelligence unit.


    A US Army parade in Bad Worishofen after the US took the town on April 27, 1945; http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/mindelheim/Der-Tag-an-dem-der-Frieden-kam-id33776287.html

    During the war there had been a Luftwaffe training aerodrome at Bad Worishofen. But it was so insignificant operationally, it wasn't bombed by the allies . More or less intact, along with the spa hotels, the town welcomed new paying guests from the US Army when they arrived in April of 1945.

    According to US records, a US Army Intelligence "training unit" was established, as well as a US Army hospital. The trainees weren't Americans; they were East Europeans, including Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Poles and others who had been fighting on the German side.

    On June 28, 1945, the 2 nd Hospitalization Unit of the 30th Field Hospital left a forward position at Ebsenee, Austria, where it had been caring for the survivors of the Ebensee-Matthausen concentration camp.

    The war in Europe now over, the hospitalization unit regrouped in the rear at Bad Wörishofen, where its role was to support the 80th Infantry Division. The unit history says : "As usual, living quarters proved excellent (buildings), with many conveniences added to make living conditions very comfortable." Among the people the American Army doctors now cared for were Mr and Mrs Chomiak.

    The camp for displaced persons or refugees at Bad Worishofen was not formally established for another year, until April 1946. Ukrainians who were there at the time say the camp housed mostly Lithuanians, and also 490 Ukrainians. The term camp is a misnomer. The records show that many of the Ukrainians were living in spa hotels when they were subject to the administration of the camp. Although the subsequent records of the Ukrainians are voluble on what happened there between 1946 and 1948, including testimony from Ukrainians who moved on to the US and Australia, there is no reference to the Chomiak family at all.

    "All the camps in Bad Worishofen were liquidated in May 1948 due to consolidation of the various camps by IRO (International Relief Organization)," remembers this Ukrainian.

    It is not (yet) known when Chomiak presented himself to US Army Intelligence, offering the same services he had been performing for Gassner and the Wehrmacht. Journalism, however, wasn't what the US occupation authorities wanted from him. In return, Chomiak received accommodation; living expenses; and the hospitalization which produced Freeland's mother in September of 1946.

    Two years were to elapse before Chomiak left Bad Worishofen for Canada, arriving there in October 1948. He already had a sister in Canada, but no job of a professional kind to which his university education and experience qualified him. In Alberta Chomiak worked as a manual labourer. Why the Americans didn't offer him intelligence and propaganda employment in the US may be revealed in the Chomiak files in Washington. The Canadian government file on his admission in 1948 is likely to include some of the details Chomiak revealed about his work with the Americans. Unless he kept that secret.

    Last week the Polish Embassy in Ottawa issued this tweet in celebration of Freeland's promotion:

    This week Polish political analyst and journalist Stanislas Balcerac has opened the dossier on Freeland and Chomiak. The Polish Foreign Minister, Witold Waszczykowski, has been asked to investigate, and to decide if, according to Balcerac, "the circumstances and family loyalties of Mrs Freeland may affect the support that Canada provides the pro-Bandera Government of Ukraine, so they can have a direct impact on Polish interests."

    Regarding Bandera (right), the record of Chomiak's involvement with him when they were under German, then US supervision, Freeland did not reveal in the Financial Times when she reported Bandera as one of the Ukraine's all-time heroes. "Yaroslav the Wise, the 11th-century prince of Kievan Rus, was named the winner in a last-minute surge, edging out western Ukrainian partisan leader Stepan Bandera, who led a guerrilla war against the Nazis and the Soviets and was poisoned on orders from Moscow in 1959 .The Soviet portrayal of Bandera as a traitor still lingers. That would be a mistake."

    Freeland was asked directly to clarify her own claims about Grandfather Chomiak's war record. Her press spokesman, Chantal Gagnon, asked for more time, but then the two of them refused to answer.

    "The sins of the grandfather can hardly be attributed to the granddaughter," says Polish investigator Balcerac, " -- except for two, race hatred and lying. Chomiak made a lucrative war selling hatred of Jews, Poles and Russians. Freeland is doing the same preaching race hatred of Russians. To mask what she's doing, she has lied about the Nazi record of her family. The Chomiaks weren't victims; they were aggressors."

    A Washington source adds: "Chomiak was recruited by US intelligence to wage war in the Ukraine against the Russians. Let's see what the US Army and intelligence files reveal about his role, and let's compare that to the one Freeland is now playing in Canada."

    https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnhelmer.net&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnhelmer.net%2Fvictim-or-aggressor-chrystia-freelands-family-record-for-nazi-war-profiteering-and-murder-of-the-cracow-jews%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.sMn3oj1Y3cA.O%2Fam%3DwQc%2Fd%3D1%2Fct%3Dzgms%2Frs%3DAGLTcCN2dfVUHs4zuTf0kWyDefSg5_jNrA%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh%2Conload&id=I0_1578888998229&_gfid=I0_1578888998229&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnhelmer.net&pfname=&rpctoken=23238021

    by Editor - Thursday, January 19th, 2017

    [Jan 14, 2020] Leonid Bershidsky: Chrystia Freeland's dismissal of her family's Nazi connection is only helping Russia's propagandists

    Jan 14, 2020 | nationalpost.com

    The minister's dismissive attitude about her grandfather's past will inevitably be taken as evidence that she, too, would have worked with the Nazis

    Last week, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland opened a can of worms by dismissing references to her family's World War II history as Russian disinformation. That wasn't entirely true, and in the current climate, history is politics.

    Freeland was banned from entering Russia for her fiercely pro-Ukraine stand. When she became foreign minister in January, Moscow refused to lift the ban. Soon, the story of her maternal grandfather, Michael (Mykhailo) Chomiak, was circulating on pro-Russian websites.

    Broadly, the story is true. The known facts were laid out by the independent U.S. investigative site Consortium News at the end of February. During World War II, Chomiak, a Ukrainian nationalist, edited a newspaper called Krakivski Visti -- first in the Nazi-held Polish city of Krakow, then in Vienna -- that ran articles praising Hitler and his appointees in occupied Eastern Europe and denouncing Jews. According to family lore, Chomiak helped anti-Nazi resistance forces by helping their fighters get German papers. When the war ended, Chomiak was in Germany; it took him some time to move his family to Canada.

    Asked about Chomiak last week, Freeland batted away the question, saying "I don't think it's a secret. American officials have publicly said, and even Angela Merkel has publicly said, that there were efforts on the Russian side to destabilize Western democracies, and I think it shouldn't come as a surprise if these same efforts were used against Canada."

    The awkward dodge elicited a spectrum of responses from the Canadian media. "So much for Russian disinformation," David Pugliese wrote for the Ottawa Citizen after reviewing the evidence. "No coherent allotment of blame and absolution is possible," Paul Wells argued in the Toronto Star, adding that the survival history of Freeland's family did not detract from her "important work" to prevent history from repeating itself.

    The underlying issue, however, is more fundamental than the nature of Russian propaganda (which can only be effective if it's grounded, to some extent, in truth) or the moral murk of the terrain Timothy Snyder, a historian sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause, called the Bloodlands. For the Kremlin -- and for many Russians -- the current conflict with Ukraine is, in a way, an extension of that war. It's more than a propaganda argument: Russia's claim of a moral right to interfere depends on this interpretation.

    Any sign of historic betrayal is fair game. Long before Freeland's grandfather got their attention, pro-Russian sites alleged that the father of Oleksandr Turchynov, Ukraine's acting president after the 2014 "Revolution of Dignity," served as a private in a German army unit. Stories of the annual torchlit marches in Kiev to commemorate Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist who collaborated with the Nazis for a period, play big in the Russian press.

    So do stories featuring the Azov Regiment of the Ukrainian National Guard, staffed with ultranationalists and using a Nazi symbol on its emblem. Like Poland, Russia has noted a Ukrainian law bestowing hero status on the 1940s nationalist organizations that worked closely with the Nazis and are known to have unleashed genocide on Poles and Jews.

    [Jan 14, 2020] Neocons and globalists regrouping to battle Russia and Trump by Wayne Madsen

    Jan 19, 2017 | futurefastforward.com

    The parasitic nature of neo-conservatives and their globalist kin has prompted them to regroup to fight against both Russia and the incoming Russia-friendly and anti-globalist administration of Donald Trump. With the departure of arch-neocons Victoria Nuland from her perch in the State Department, Samantha Power from the U.S. mission to the United Nations, and Susan Rice from the National Security Council, the neocon and globalist establishments, which have in common their Atlanticist views, have settled on Canada as the ideal place from which to wage their wars of subterfuge and propaganda.

    Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau fired his foreign minister Stephane Dion to make way for a virtual replacement for Nuland, Power, and Rice on the world stage: Chrystia Freeland, his trade minister. Dion's policy of seeking to engage with Russia is what ultimately cost him his job as Ottawa prepares to host every anti-Trump instability operation it can manage to draw to the Canadian capital.

    Freeland became a darling of the globalists after she hammered out a free trade agreement with the European Union last year. Freeland leaned heavily on the one holdout to the deal, the regional government of Wallonia in Belgium. After the threats from the French-speaking Walloons were neutered, Freeland reveled in the signing of the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. Freeland also oversaw the signing of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement with the neo-fascist govenrment in Kiev.

    With the appointment of Freeland as foreign minister and Somali-born Ahmed Hussen as Immigration Minister, Trudeau has drawn a red line against both President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on issues of globalization and open immigration. Ottawa will soon become a nest for anti-Trump operations that will almost certainly involve the billionaire global troublemaker George Soros.

    Like Power, Freeland is a former journalist who traded in her journalistic credentials to become a shill for globalization's new world order. A Rhodes scholar, graduate of Harvard, and alum of the Brookings Institution, she represented the Financial Times in Washington, New York, and Moscow.

    Freeland is also of Ukrainian descent and her anti-Russian stance, including her support for sanctions against Russia over Ukraine and Crimea, earned her a visa ban by Russia. Having reported from Moscow for the FT from the mid-1990s to late 2000, Freeland became a major critic of Putin and later accused him of creating a dictatorship in Russia. Freeland's bias against Russia was present in her reporting, especially on Chechnya, long before the Ukrainian civil war and the retrocession of Crimea to Russia. In one of her first statements as foreign minister, Freeland vowed that Canadian sanctions will not be lifted against Russia. Freeland also indicated in a speech last week in Ottawa that Canada will serve as a front against rising global "trade protectionism and xenophobia." In December 2016, Canada hosted a meeting of the United Nations High Commission on Refugees and Soros's Open Society Foundations that seeks to expand the movement of refugees from the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia to the industrialized nations of the West. There is little doubt that Russophobes Freeland and Soros are cooperating on several fronts against Russia, Trump, and anti-Soros leaders like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and French National Front presidential candidate Marine Le Pen.

    aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
    Anti-globalists and anti-neocons have a new "Nuland" to contend with: Freeland.

    From Ottawa, Freeland will lead the neocon and globalist charge against any attempt by Trump to tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). She will almost certainly try to salvage the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which includes Canada and which Trump has vowed to scrap. Freeland will also likely open up Canada's Arctic to a military presence by anti-Russian NATO countries like Norway, Denmark, and Germany, as well as pro-NATO Sweden and Finland. An increased NATO presence, without U.S. forces, in the Canadian Arctic will not only militarize the region but send a warning to Russia about Canadian control over emerging Arctic sea lanes that are increasingly navigable due to

    Trudeau has signaled the world that opposition to the Trump administration on everything from Russia and NATO to free trade and open borders will be fought from Ottawa, which is just 61 miles from the U.S. border crossing at Ogdensburg, New York. It will be incumbent upon the Trump administration to pay special attention to anti-U.S. political activities staged from Ottawa and Trump should think seriously about severing all signals intelligence and human intelligence links with Canadian intelligence agencies. These agencies, including the Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) and the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) will soon pose a threat to U.S. national security. CSEC and CSIS will likely be tasked with spying on the Trump administration and be required to pass the intelligence to their German, French, Dutch, Belgian, and Japanese counterparts.

    Freeland is already banned from visiting Russia, a travel ban that the Russian embassy in Ottawa says will continue. Perhaps that ban on Freeland should be expanded by the Trump administration to include the United States, with a sole exemption for traveling to and from United Nations headquarters in New York. Freeland is currently indistinguishable from the throngs of Hillary Clinton's desperate supporters who are planning to engage in every form of disruption and resistance with the financial support of Soros.

    [Jan 14, 2020] Patrick Henningsen on Twitter I see we have reached peak hypocrisy now. Resign Mike. You are an embarrassment to the people

    Jan 14, 2020 | twitter.com

    Patrick Henningsen ‏ 1:47 AM - 13 Jan 2020

    I see we have reached peak hypocrisy now. Resign Mike. You are an embarrassment to the people of the United States who you claim to be serving. Every day you read the same script, and it's a bevy of lies, every time.

    btowngoatsnbirds ‏ 1:57 AM - 13 Jan 2020

    Shhh....the grownups have a country to run

    Patrick Henningsen ‏ 2:46 AM - 13 Jan 2020

    Yes, I heard that one too.

    Cheryl Sanchez ‏ 1:50 PM - 13 Jan 2020

    Indeed.

    [Jan 14, 2020] The EU is a hopeless vassal of the US. It doesn't matter if the EU is agreement capable or not. They have no sovereignty to begin with.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Deal finishes October 2020 if I remember correctly. All sanctions will be lifted so long as Iran is in compliance at that time. This is a move to prevent this. ..."
    "... Obviously, Merkel doesn't have the political strength to nix Nordstream 2. Until she's replaced by someone with greater vision, EU and German policy won't change toward Iran. IMO, the trio don't amount to the level of poodles as they're known to have courage. The Trio proudly display the fact that they're 100% Cowards. ..."
    "... The EU cannot lead in anything - it is a completely owned and operated US tool. It is a big zero in providing humanity any help with the big problem of our time: the 'indispensable and exceptional' supremacist US. ..."
    Jan 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Nemo , Jan 14 2020 19:35 utc | 1

    Be fair. It doesn't matter if the EU is agreement capable or not. They have no sovereignty to begin with. It is known.

    powerandpeople , Jan 14 2020 19:37 utc | 2

    Deal finishes October 2020 if I remember correctly. All sanctions will be lifted so long as Iran is in compliance at that time. This is a move to prevent this.
    BraveNewWorld , Jan 14 2020 19:41 utc | 3
    I always learn some thing here. For example imagine my surprise to learn the EU had a reputation worth protecting. All you need to know about the EU is bitches will do what bitches are told. This is just one more step on the road to war with China, is that really what the citizens of the EU want? Are the people of the EU ready to die for the Trump and the Republican party?
    Ghost Ship , Jan 14 2020 19:42 utc | 4
    Nemo @ 1

    You forget that on the day the UK leaves the EU it recovers full sovereignty. Well at least Boris Johnson claimed it would.

    Realist , Jan 14 2020 19:49 utc | 6
    Think tanks, think tanks, think tanks. In 2009, the Brookings Institute's paper Which Path to Persia, proposed offering Iran a very good deal and then sabotaging it. Good cop, Obama, bad cop, Trump. Mission accomplished.
    winston2 , Jan 14 2020 19:50 utc | 7
    Only a matter of when and how. The warmongers have Trumps balls in a vice, he can't even resign without making it worse by letting Pence take over. The art of the squeal, very high pitched is whats happening in DC.
    Heath , Jan 14 2020 19:51 utc | 8
    1st of all The UK was always going to side with DC over Iran. 2ndly for France and Germany they probably aren't ready to put themselves plus their EU partners in the US doghouse for Iran. When they break it will be a time of their own choosing.
    Likklemore , Jan 14 2020 19:52 utc | 9
    Thanks b, for this detailed coverage of the 3 wimps' efforts to kill JCPOA. You did not disappoint. Love the image showing mother residing in "occupied Palestine" .. (term coined by MoA barfly)

    I commented in the previous post, Russia warned of unintended consequences LINK

    Moscow is calling on the European parties to the Iran nuclear deal not to escalate tensions and to abandon their decision to trigger the treaty's Dispute Resolution Mechanism, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Tuesday.

    "We strongly urge the Eurotroika [of parties to the JCPOA] not to inflame tensions and to abandon any steps which call the prospects of the nuclear deal's future into question. Despite all the challenges it has faced, the JCPOA has not lost its relevance," the ministry said in a statement.

    OTH
    Trumps impeachment trial begins next Tuesday

    so the focus shifts BUT

    what do we make of this?

    Court in Ukraine orders investigation of Poroshenko, Obama administration members

    Ex-US vice-president, Joseph Biden is also suspected of corruption, according to a member of the Ukrainian parliament

    KIEV, January 14. /TASS/. Ukraine's Supreme Anti-Corruption Court has obliged the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) to launch a probe into seizure of government power and corruption suspicions. The cases mention the names of the United States' 44th president, Barack Obama, former Ukrainian president, Pyotr Poroshenko and ex-US vice-president, Joseph Biden, a member of the Ukrainian parliament from the Opposition Platform - For Life party, Renat Kuzmin, said[.]

    "investigate the suspicions over the seizure of government power in Ukraine and of the embezzlement of state budget money and international financial assistance by members of the Obama administration"

    that's what the man said.

    Russ , Jan 14 2020 19:53 utc | 10
    If it ever was possible to sign a treaty with the US and expect them to abide by it, it hasn't been possible for a long time. Here as everywhere else, Trump merely openly proclaims the systemic lawlessness he shares with the rest of the US political class. (His contemptuous withdrawal from the JCPOA never has been one of the things the establishment and media criticize him for.)

    For as long as US imperial power lasts, anyone who doesn't want to be a poodle (or to get regime-changed because they foolishly attempt to sit the fence) has to accept that there can be no legitimate agreements with the US or its poodles. If you sign a treaty with them, you have to view it exactly the same way you know they do, as nothing but propaganda, otherwise not worth the paper it's written on. No doubt North Korea, if they were in any doubt before, registered how Trump and the US media immediately proceeded to systematically lie about the agreement they'd supposedly just concluded, before the ink was even dry.

    Here's hoping that if Iran was in any doubt before, they too are getting the message: As far as the US and Europe are concerned, the only purpose of the JCPOA is to serve as a weapon against them.

    Pnyx , Jan 14 2020 19:53 utc | 11
    Face it B, there will be blood. It's a matter of time. It's unavoidable. The empire will force its own destruction - and perhaps the rest of humanity's. The demons of nihilism will prevail. (Sounds like I have been hearing death metal. I swear I did not. And I not under the influence either.)
    les7 , Jan 14 2020 19:53 utc | 12
    The Oct 2020 deadline is important for more than one reason- Irans application to the SCO is being held up because of it. The SCO membership would obligate support from countries like India in response to politically motivated sanctions.
    karlof1 , Jan 14 2020 19:54 utc | 13
    Surprised at Germany since Merkel just met with Putin. When I read of this earlier this morning, that it's based on lies was 100% clear, that the trio are feckless and deserve all the social instability that will soon come their way. Why did I mention social instability:

    Breaking :

    "US, Japan, EU seek new global rules limiting subsidies."

    Thus begging this question : "Does that include all the free money printing from central banks and repo market interventions?"

    And why would the Fed need to do this at a time of the greatest Bull Market of all time:

    "The Fed is considering a plan to allow them to lend cash DIRECTLY TO HEDGE FUNDS in order to ease the REPO Crisis. [Emphasis original]

    "Where is 'bailing out private investment funds' in their alleged 'dual mandate'?"

    Which gets us back to the reason Iran's targeted: Because it lies outside the dollar economy, refuses to engage in petrodollar recycling, and has a quasi-socialist economy with no private banking. Plus, we now see that Iraq will pursue evicting NATO and Outlaw US Empire forces and likely join the Arc of Resistance's/Iran's policies which are what the Outlaw US Empire went to war over to begin with.

    Obviously, Merkel doesn't have the political strength to nix Nordstream 2. Until she's replaced by someone with greater vision, EU and German policy won't change toward Iran. IMO, the trio don't amount to the level of poodles as they're known to have courage. The Trio proudly display the fact that they're 100% Cowards.

    Heath , Jan 14 2020 19:57 utc | 14
    @ realist 6. basically it boils down to giving Barry a foreign policy award like getting the Nobel gong.

    AriusArmenian , Jan 14 2020 19:58 utc | 15

    The EU is a hopeless craven vassal of the US. The US dropping out of the JCPOA was the acid test which the EU has spectacularly failed. We are in a historical pivot with the rise of the coalescing multifarious East which is forcing the EU to make a decision: stay under the US wing, go it alone, or ally with the East. The EU seems to know it at least should get more distance between itself and the US but every time there is a major geopolitical event it starts to talk like it is going independent but then always drops back into the US hand. How many times does this have to happen for us to admit what the EU is about?

    The EU cannot lead in anything - it is a completely owned and operated US tool. It is a big zero in providing humanity any help with the big problem of our time: the 'indispensable and exceptional' supremacist US.

    Posted by: AriusArmenian | Jan 14 2020 19:58 utc | 15

    Brad , Jan 14 2020 20:00 utc | 16
    If we accept that EU nations lack sovereignty and go further to suggest that such nations are more simulations than real, what would an analysis of such events as the fallout from the demise of the JCPOA look like? How should one talk about international events when corporate sovereignty and oligarchical decision making are the real? How would we describe this exact context based not on the simulation but on the real workings of power?
    Nemo , Jan 14 2020 20:04 utc | 17
    Yes indeed! At least blighty knows the score! The leash is no place for the British bulldog. When brexit is complete they will be free to crawl straight up muricas bum! Lol!
    alaff , Jan 14 2020 20:07 utc | 18
    Haha, great drawing. This pile on the left is incomparable. But the picture is incomplete - there is not enough proudly walking in front of the masters of a small Polish poodle with a bone in his teeth.

    Agree with Nemo, #1. This is a matter of sovereignty. At the moment, European countries are not sovereign, and, btw, this is a kind of double non-sovereignty: the submission of a separate European country to the Americans, plus the submission of the same country to a Brussels bureaucracy called the EU leadership. What independent, bold decisions can we talk about? None.

    The once great Europe...

    [Jan 14, 2020] The Long Planned U.S. Assassinations In Iraq Will Increase Its Political Chaos

    Jan 14, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Moon of Alabama Brecht quote " The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-03 | Main January 13, 2020 The Long Planned U.S. Assassinations In Iraq Will Increase Its Political Chaos

    The Trump administration has given various justification for its assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani and commander Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. It claimed that there was an 'imminent threat' of an incident, even while not knowing what, where or when it would happen, that made the assassination necessary. Trump later said the thread was a planned bombing of four U.S. embassies. His defense secretary denied that.

    Soleimani and Muhandis during a battle against ISIS

    That has raised the suspicion that the decision to kill Soleimani had little to do with current events but was a long planned operation. NBC News now reports that this is exactly the case:

    President Donald Trump authorized the killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani seven months ago if Iran's increased aggression resulted in the death of an American, according to five current and former senior administration officials.

    The presidential directive in June came with the condition that Trump would have final signoff on any specific operation to kill Soleimani, officials said.

    The idea to kill Soleimani, a regular General in an army with which the U.S. is not war, came like many other bad ideas from John Bolton.

    After Iran shot down a U.S. drone in June, John Bolton, Trump's national security adviser at the time, urged Trump to retaliate by signing off on an operation to kill Soleimani, officials said. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also wanted Trump to authorize the assassination, officials said.

    But Trump rejected the idea, saying he'd take that step only if Iran crossed his red line: killing an American. The president's message was "that's only on the table if they hit Americans," according to a person briefed on the discussion.

    Then unknown forces fired 30 short range missiles into a U.S. base near Kirkuk. The salvo was not intended to kill or wound anyone:

    The rockets landed in a place and at a time when American and Iraqi personnel normally were not there and it was only by unlucky chance that Mr. Hamid was killed, American officials said.

    Without presenting any evidence the U.S. accused Katib Hizbullah, an Iraqi Popular Militia Unit, of having launched the missiles. It launched airstrikes against a number of Katib Hizbullah positions near the Syrian border, hundreds of miles away from Kirkuk, and killed over 30 Iraqi security forces.

    This led to demonstrations in Baghdad during which a crowd breached the outer wall of the U.S. embassy but soon retreated. Trump, who had attacked Hillary Clinton over the raid on the consulate/CIA station in Benghazi, did not want to get embarrassed with a full embassy breach.

    The media claim that it was the embassy breach that the led to the activation of an operation that had already been planned for a year before Trump signed off on it seven month ago. As the New York Times describes it :

    For the past 18 months, officials said, there had been discussions about whether to target General Suleimani. Figuring that it would be too difficult to hit him in Iran, officials contemplated going after him during one of his frequent visits to Syria or Iraq and focused on developing agents in seven different entities to report on his movements -- the Syrian Army, the Quds Force in Damascus, Hezbollah in Damascus, the Damascus and Baghdad airports and the Kataib Hezbollah and Popular Mobilization forces in Iraq.

    It was the embassy breach and a war-industry lobbyist who convinced Trump to finally pull the symbolical trigger :

    Defense Secretary Mark Esper presented a series of response options to the president two weeks ago, including killing Soleimani. Esper presented the pros and cons of such an operation but made it clear that he was in favor of taking out Soleimani, officials said.

    Trump signed off and it further developed from there.

    There was no intelligence of any 'imminent threat' or anything like that.

    This was an operation that had been worked on for 18 month. Trump signed off on it more than half a year ago. Those who had planned it just waited for a chance to execute it.

    We can not even be sure that the embassy bombing had caused Trump to give the final go. It might have been that the CIA and Pentagon were just waiting for a chance to kill Soleimani and Muhandis, the leader of Katib Hizbullah, at the same time. Their meeting at Baghdad airport was not secret and provided the convenient opportunity they had been waiting for.

    Together Soleimani and Muhandis were the glue that kept the many Shia factions in Iraq together. The armed ones as well as the political ones. Soleimani's replacement as Quds brigade leader, Brigadier General Ismail Qaani, is certainly a capable man. But his previous field of work was mainly east of Iran in Afghanistan and Pakistan and it will be difficult for him to fill Soleimani's role in Iraq :

    After Soleimani's death, Ayatollah Khamenei appointed Soleimani's deputy Ismail Qaani to succeed him. Qaani does not speak Arabic, does not have an in-depth knowledge of Iraq, nor the insight of Soleimani and his ability to balance the different positions of Iraq's factions with the opinions of Ayatollah Khamenei and the religious authorities in Najaf.

    The question is how the successor of Soleimani will manage his new responsibility including the thorny issues in Iraq. The escalation of the Iranian-American conflict is, according to many, an escalation towards war and the destabilization of the region in which the rules of engagement have changed. The question remains how, and not whether all of this will impact the situation in Iraq.

    Today the Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who has his on militia, and Iraqi PMU leaders met in Qom , Iran, to discuss how the foreign troops can be expelled from Iraq. Gen. Qaani will likely be there to give them advice.

    Yesterday Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the Lebanese Hizbullah, gave another speech . In it he called on the Kurds in Iraq to pay back their debt to Soleimani and Hizbullah, which is owned for their fight against ISIS, and to help to evict the foreign soldiers from Iraq:

    85-Nasrallah: Now, the rest of the path. 1) Iraq: Iraq is the first country concerned w/responding to this crime, because it happened in Iraq, and because it targeted Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a great Iraqi commander, and because Soleimani defended Iraq.

    86-Nasrallah: I ask Masoud Barazani to thank Soleimani for his efforts in defending Erbil and Kurdistan Region, because Soleimani was the only one to respond to your call. Soleimani and with him men from Hezbollah went to Erbil.

    87-Nasrallah: Barazani was shaking from fear, but Soleimani and the brothers from Hezbollah helped you repulse this unprecedented threat; and now you must repay this good by being part of the effort to expel the Americans from Iraq and the region.

    The Barzani family, which governs the Kurdish part of Iraq, has since long sold out to the Zionists and the United States. It will certainly not support the resistance effort. But Nasrallah's request is highly embarrassing to the clan and to Masoud Barzani personally.

    So far I only found this rather confusing response from him:

    Nihad N. Arafat @NihadArafat - 7:44 UTC · Jan 13, 2020

    The Kurdistan Regional Government's response to the immoral speech uttered by Hassan Nasrallah through the anti-terror apparatus is a clear message from the regional government to those terrorists that the response to the terrorists must be through the anti-terror apparatus.

    As military leader both Soleimani and Muhandis are certainly replaceable. The militia groups they created and led will continue to function.

    But both men also played important political roles in Iraq and it will take some time to find adequate people to replace them in that. That makes it likely that the already simmering political situation in Iraq will soon boil over as the Shia factions will start to fight each other over the selection of a new Prime Minister and government.

    The U.S. will welcome that as it will try do install a candidate that will reject the Iraqi parliament decision to remove the foreign forces from Iraqi grounds.

    Posted by b on January 13, 2020 at 17:32 UTC | Permalink

    Zanon , Jan 13 2020 17:43 utc | 1

    next page " As expected, war against Iran is the focus for west.

    Ukraine, Canada, Germany, Sweden seeks to punish Iran, call iranian claims of what happend "nonsense"
    https://sputniknews.com/world/202001131078024553-london-talks-on-plane-downing-to-include-possible-action-against-iran---ukraine-foreign-minister/

    Maracatu , Jan 13 2020 17:48 utc | 2
    The United States has truly become a rogue state. John Helmer pointed out that when Putin visited Damascus recently to meet with Assad, he did so at a Russian military facility as a safety precaution because you can no longer put it by the USA that it won't target people of such hierarchy.
    juliania , Jan 13 2020 17:57 utc | 3
    Was there not anyone in all of those previous discussions and planning sessions objecting and explaining the importance of Qassem Suleiman in the Iran hierachy of government????

    Was there not anyone in all of those previous discussions and planning sessions objecting and explaining the illegality of assassinating such a leader when he was traveling openly to discuss matters of defense on a mission of diplomacy???????????

    Was there not anyone in all of those previous discussions and planning sessions objecting and resigning or going public to attempt to stop this infamy????????????

    A P , Jan 13 2020 18:00 utc | 4
    So were the Saudis genuine in their "peace attempt" or were they simply working with CIA/Mossad to lure Soleimani and Muhandis into a situation where they could be droned?

    If the Saudis were genuine, they would be much more vocal in their opposition to these murders, which completely derail any potential Iraq-brokered peace process.

    Norumbega , Jan 13 2020 18:01 utc | 5
    To the best of my recollection, Elijah Magnier, on a recent appearance with Joanne Leon on the Around the Empire Podcast, says it is erroneous to identify Muhandis as the leader of Katib Hizbullah. Actually, he was the highest military official of the PMU (excepting only its nominal head, a civilian), the umbrella organization of the (mainly) Shia militia which are part of the Iraqi military.
    Noirette , Jan 13 2020 18:01 utc | 6
    US biz persons in NY RE, in Florida, (etc.) as well as tv 'moguls' - do transactional power-play interactions, not Int'l diplomacy. (Whatever that is, pretty worthless actually, but = other topic.)

    Obviously, Trump's order to murder Soleimani was partly due to impeachment pressure, as he has said himself.

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/01/report-trump-cited-impeachment-pressure-to-kill-soleimani.html

    Plus, Soleimani insulted him gravely. From tabloids and women's mags, which I read on occasion.

    NK (Kim + spokespersons) called Trump a heedless and erratic old man. Also a dotard iirc, but all this was in an exchange of insults which could be taken as mimicking that between equals, Trump calling Kim Rocket Man, etc. (Everyone knew nothing would happen.) There was also that kerfuffle when Trudeau (sleazy hypocrite) and others were caught open-mick gossiping about Trump taking too long for his pressers or whatever. No doubt others and Dem public insults are politically calibrated in a known landscape and Trump of course initiates and has no problem with riposte.

    2018. Soleimani speech. The Sun: vid. eng subs.

    Very demeaning: gambler - bartender - casino manager that hits hard.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10668165/donald-trump-iran-general-death-warrant/

    When much is hung on 'identity politics' and 'personalia' - ppls identity, character, beliefs, personal interaction with others, etc. take up too much air (like in Hollywood movies), institutional or other long-worked out arrangements (like Int'l law based on upholding the existence of Wilsonian Nation-States..) are simply scuttered.

    psychohistorian , Jan 13 2020 18:05 utc | 7
    Thanks for the reporting b and I am not surprised about the background behind the assassination of Soleimani and Muhandis

    I would also not be surprised to read that my country was complicit to some degree in the Ukraine plane shoot down by Iran.

    The West is a very sick world run by the dictators that own global private finance. Those dictators have managed to even brainwash the public into not understanding their illness and believing it is a good force in our world.

    I am glad to read less of the belief that Trump is being played by the system and not an active actor within it. I continue to hope that other groups of our species continue to stand up to the anti-humanistic social contract of the West and end its centuries old reign of terror.

    Igor Bundy , Jan 13 2020 18:08 utc | 8
    Before Putin left for Damascus he already mentioned something about he wont be so easily removed without any consequence.. most likely meaning Russia would probably neutralize all US bases in close proximity and get on the stick to fire strategic nukes for any US response.. But we know the US has hit a lot of Russian assets without seeing any Russian response. So who knows..
    Pandora , Jan 13 2020 18:10 utc | 9
    The idea to kill Soleimani, a regular General in an army with which the U.S. is not war ...

    The US has been at war with Iran for 40 yrs ...(hybrid war)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8NHawXaOPc (Christopher Black)

    War without limits: using all domains (pol, fin, econ, media, com, legal inst) to subvert and destroy an enemy, where the objective is to obliterate the state itself as a political entity
    Aside from genocide, what greater crime can there be than the complete annihilation of the state itself, as we saw happening in the NATO-attack on Libya and the state's total destruction and re-invention in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the NATO-attack against Yugoslavia and now Ukraine and Syria.

    .. a complete negation of the concept of state sovereignty and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the UN-Charta. It is a form of aggression of the worst kind and the type of total war that the Nazis waged against the SU. (obliterate state, people, social & econ system and culture).

    ...So the term HW first appears in American military literature and as practised by NATO means the commission of multiple war-crimes against the people of the targeted state. In Libya we saw conventional military style ops by NATO (massive bombing over many months) simultaneous with unconventional operations (local and imported proxy forces, subversion, assassinations, terrorism against civilians, use of social and mass-media to distribute false information about the regime, criminal actions, cyberattacks to shut down communication and the use of quasi legal bodies (ICC) to criminalize the leadersip, to accuse Gadhafi of being a war-criminal; use of mercenaries, destruction of infrastructure to break the will of the people to resist.

    The subject is one of immediate concern because the Americans have begun using the term hybrid warfare in their propaganda accusing Russia of engaging in it in Ukraine and now raising the alarm that (they believe) Russia will engage in HW in the Baltic. Therefore the Americans argue, they have to react to prepare for this eventuality which they claim to be inevitable. And that indicates to me where we can expect the next operations against Russia to take place (and it may explain the exercises NATO has been running all summer, landing of airborne troops, combined sea-operations, etc.)

    But the American claim of Russia using HW is in fact a mirror of their own image as we see these methods being used by them as a matter of routine.

    (... used in the Indian wars, in 19th century, starvation, prop and other techniques to destroy their cultures, in Mexico, Philipines, Korea and Vietnam, in Central America (i.e. Nicaragua) and in Ruanda....

    All the accusations against Iran ("greatest sponsor of terrorism", aligning Iran with AQ, etc.) are a projection of their own crimes ..


    Piotr Berman , Jan 13 2020 18:27 utc | 10
    It was explained by Craig Murray in his blog (replicated in a few websites) that the usage of "imminent" adjective is created by a certain lawyer who first worked for Netanyahu, then for Blair etc. The usage does not convey ANY information about the nature of a "danger", but the attitude, judgement if you will, of the institution that commissioned the opinion.

    And "immanent" or "eminent" (Trumpian tweet) would fit equally well, but legalistically, the confusion raised by "imminent" is more useful.

    juliania , Jan 13 2020 18:29 utc | 11
    Noirette @ 6, it is my belief that an irrational US president, under the constant pressure of attack from the Russiagate and Ukraingate instigators (you know who you are) from the instant he became president and took on those responsibilities, volatile and insecure as he was from the getgo, has finally cracked and is now very much in need of retirement from the highpressure stage of politics in a time of potential war. It would be in the interests of everyone in the world for his family to ask him, for his doctors to require of him, that he resign. Certainly the alternatives to his remaining in office are grim, but not as grim as having a president who is mentally incapacitated.

    It would seem that an entire warmaking apparatus of government is similarly dysfunctional. I don't know how that can be remedied, but it must.

    Piotr Berman , Jan 13 2020 18:34 utc | 12
    Muqtada al-Sadr, who has his on militia

    whose militia is "on", active, rather than "off"? In any case, separating this guy from microphones would require an Amored Personal Carrier or something heavier.

    bevin , Jan 13 2020 18:35 utc | 13
    juliania@3
    The answer to your questions lies in the reality that for years a sure means of not being promoted or even being fired from a government job in the US is to know anything about the Arab or Islamic world. Or to act as if knowing anything about such inferior beings is necessary for making judgements.
    This idea, that ignorance is bliss, has spread from Israel, not because the Israelis practise it-they don't- but because they want DC to be entirely reliant on them for intelligence and direction in the Middle East.
    pretzelattack , Jan 13 2020 18:42 utc | 14
    consistent from trump, he appointed bolton, this is all very characteristic.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 18:46 utc | 15
    Although only one battle in what will be a longer war, Trump has won that round. More confusion and disarray in Iraq, bad PR for Iran after the Uki plane shootdown. Bad PR allows western vassals to move closer to the US side of the fence, and also provides fuel for US regime change operations within Iran.
    The two generals that were assassinated - there will be others that can plan military strategy, but a big part, perhaps more important than strategy, is the personality to be able to hold disparate groups together so they act as one and all tactics by separate groups fit into a larger strategy.
    juliania , Jan 13 2020 18:47 utc | 16
    Thank you, bevin. That is a sad explanation, though to me it doesn't obviate what should be inherent in any normal human person, as I myself know very little about the Middle East, relying indeed upon b's excellent and nearly objective (as objective as any human can be) reporting on the facts and his interpretation of them. That which ought to be inherent is the human desire not to inflict pain on another human if that can be avoided. Those who are in government service ought to have that moral incentive front and center. We see it in the great leaders, and surely in this country there are some among the elite who haven't lost this natural instinct? It is very problematic if that has been thoroughly weeded out in those now occupying powerful positions.

    This country has been fortunate in the past to select persons of high moral compass as our heroes. We the people still want to do that, I am convinced. Perhaps there is still time, and we can re-order our own hierarchy now that what has been done is this terrible, an enormous reductio ad absurdum, front and center.

    This is not going away.

    wendy davis , Jan 13 2020 18:48 utc | 17
    @ Piotr Berman #10

    yes, the Bethlehem Doctrine made this reTweet from john steppling even more outrageous a psyop:

    'Israelis: Soleimani Intercept Sparked Drone Strike; US Reinforces Region', jan. 3, 2020, breaking defense

    "TEL AVIV: Five days ago, an undisclosed intelligence agency intercepted a telephone call made by the head of Iran's Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, in which he was heard ordering his proxies in Iraq to attack the US embassy in Baghdad, as well as other Israeli and American targets, with the aim of taking hostages, Israeli sources say.

    It's unclear whether this was a lapse in tradecraft on the part of the usually savvy Soleimani or whether the notorious Iranian military leader's phone calls were being routinely intercepted. Nor is it clear whether it was the US or another foe of Iran that made the intercept. Regardless, the intelligence seems to have led directly to Soleimani's killing yesterday, which has thrown the Mideast into uproar."

    https://breakingdefense.com/2020/01/israelis-soleimani-intercept-sparked-drone-strike-us-reinforces-region/?_ga=2.263021516.1146847899.1578081532-904925514.1578081532


    karlof1 , Jan 13 2020 18:48 utc | 18
    psychohistorian @7--

    In the chain of cause & effect, the Outlaw US Empire is definitely responsible for the airliner shootdown; that must be seen as 100% irrefutable. The Outlaw US Empire has executed numerous high ranking political and military people beginning with Yamamoto in 1943, although I'll admit he was a legitimate target; yet, the seed was planted then. I recall Diem being killed with the approval of JFK just weeks prior to his own execution. As I wrote at Escobar's Facebook over the weekend, the Great Evil in the world resides within the Outlaw US Empire and must be expunged even if Nukes must be used. Yes, that conclusion was painful to arrive at and write, but the horrors have lasted for 3,000+ years now. The crop of Current Oligarchs are the most aggressive ever and won't stop their rampage until they Own Everything . In the overall scheme of things, getting Imperial forces ousted from Southwest Asia will be a good thing but only a small portion of what must occur.

    Jase , Jan 13 2020 18:53 utc | 19
    What does a single word of Nihad N. Arafat's response even mean? How is Nasrallah's speech immoral by any stretch of the imagination? Do the Kurd's have no gratitude for Hezbollah and Qud's laying down their lives to save them from mass rape and genocide? What is the "anti-terror apparatus", does he mean fighting terrorism in Iraq and Syria must be done only by US supported forces like the SDF? The Kurds siding with the US occupiers and Israel is one of the most disgusting developments in recent history, its no wonder these people have been so distrusted and abused for so long, their power hungry leadership betrays their allies like snakes.
    juliania , Jan 13 2020 18:57 utc | 20
    Apologies, karlof1; you know I value your input. But that is one very crazy post.
    Red Ryder , Jan 13 2020 18:58 utc | 21
    @8, Igor Bundy

    Russia takes its vengeance cold, often with no flair or notoriety. They often take in multiples for their losses.

    In Syria, a Russian missile into a mountain cave where US, Israeli, Saudi and AQ Intel leaders were meeting cost over 50 high value lives. It was Russian payback for when some Colonels and a General were hit by Coalition air strikes. Auslander, on the Saker blog, has written about this. 2016, as I recall.

    In Donbass, there have been many paybacks by Russia for Ukie and NATO acts. Some even taken inside Russia.
    A number of the culprits who killed over a hundred people and set fire to the Trade Union building in Odessa have met Russian justice. Same with some of the criminal SBU who tortured Berkut who came from Crimea. And others have been liquidated for murders done by Ukies in Mariupol.

    People who know and need to know are aware that Russia always more than evens the score.

    They just recently eliminated the head Turkmen who was responsible for shooting the pilot of the jet the Turks shot down as he parachuted. It wasn't enough that when they rescued the co-pilot navigator of the jet (rescue led by General Soleimani), the Aerospace forces bombed the hell out of the area the Turkmen populated. They got the names and tracked for years the commander.

    Never assume because you don't know, it hasn't happened. And if it hasn't yet, it will.

    DM , Jan 13 2020 19:06 utc | 22
    Dear juliania,
    Perhaps there is still time, and we can re-order our own hierarchy

    Seems highly unlikely.

    Laguerre , Jan 13 2020 19:06 utc | 23
    I don't like to say it but b's article doesn't support his headline. And I don't like to repeat myself, but I've already commented this subject earlier today @ open thread 55 , but he doesn't seem to have taken it into account. We should not expect a powerful Iraqi reaction to the events.
    Firstly remember that Abd ul-Mahdi is a weak leader, only there because the US agreed to him. The US has made sure that the Iraqi leadership is not strong. Secondly, there was always going to be a time necessary for a new militia leader to emerge. Instant reaction was just about impossible.

    However in the long term, the prospects are good. The Shi'a are in power in Iraq without question. The Sunnis are out of it, the Kurds no longer intervene outside KRG. All the cr*p about civil war is nonsense. The Shi'a factions all have basically the same interest, and conflict is only between different leaders of the same grouping. Things could turn around in an instant.

    The anti-US movement is popular sentiment, not govt led. The more the US offends that sentiment, as will inevitably happen, the stronger the movement will be. We already have seen the way things will go. US bases are being sprayed with rockets. That will make life difficult for the US. The more they punish the culprits, the more resentment there will be. There's no way things can work out well for the US.

    b has been reading the instant reaction, breast-beating, woe-is-me, articles like Salhy in Middle East Eye, without looking further.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 19:10 utc | 24
    juliania 20

    US aggression is at the stage of Nazi Germany and imperial Japan around the start of WWII.
    Rather than seeing that their unipolar world is ending, the US is prepared to use military power to hold its position in the world.
    The exceptionalist mindset is not just one small faction in the US hierarchy, it is the mindset of the hierarchy plus a good proportion of the population.
    Throughout history, countries or nations like that always end up destroyed as they fight for their position until the very end rather than step down.

    Piotr Berman , Jan 13 2020 19:24 utc | 25
    What does a single word of Nihad N. Arafat's response even mean?

    Posted by: Jase | Jan 13 2020 18:53 utc | 19

    Upon quick inspection, N.N. Arafat is not a real person. For few months he (it?) only retweeted, mostly a pro-Kurdish US senator, and now produced a test of his (its?) own. The text is weird, which may corroborate the purported education -- radiologist who graduated in Dohuk (the capital of one of the three provinces of Kurdistan autonomous area in Iraq). Actual on-line Kurdish publication have a rather sketchy English, although not as bad.

    james , Jan 13 2020 19:27 utc | 26
    dang, i was too long and my comment is in moderation... oh well..
    Passer by , Jan 13 2020 19:30 utc | 27
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 13 2020 18:46 utc | 15

    >>Although only one battle in what will be a longer war, Trump has won that round. More confusion and disarray in Iraq, bad PR for Iran after the Uki plane shootdown. Bad PR allows western vassals to move closer to the US side of the fence, and also provides fuel for US regime change operations within Iran.
    The two generals that were assassinated - there will be others that can plan military strategy, but a big part, perhaps more important than strategy, is the personality to be able to hold disparate groups together so they act as one and all tactics by separate groups fit into a larger strategy.

    Yup. Some people like to underestimate the US Empire, because it is easier to wear rose coloured glasses, rather than face unpleasant reality.

    Even b changed from US will leave Iraq to there will be chaos in Iraq and the US will try to stay.

    Although personally i think that the US will be kicked out because most of the Shia leaders would like to be killed by a US drone for whatever. Especially Sadr, who has the biggest political block, and whose Mahdi Army killed plenty of americans back then. He knows that he is a potential target too, so he will work to make this expulsion happen.

    There was also an assasination attempt against iranian official in Yemen. This is all part of a Cold War, a hybrid war against Iran. To break it. There is no isolationism. No one will leave Iran or Syria unless they are actually kicked out.

    And yes, Trump is a willing imperialist. He likes it. He can't do much on the domestic front but he is allowed to show his violent tendencies on the foreign front. As a zionist and a military puppet.

    Trump loves the sanction weapons and financial-banking weapons the US possesses. He's all in on using every coercion to strangle, starve and screw everyone, friend, foe, ally, adversary. A power-hungry guy who has all the power to dominate the globe, yet not his own country, break sovereignties, ignore laws and trample opponents to get his way.

    And he likes it.

    Trump has taken on the personification of the Hegemon. It is a form of Wizard of Oz syndrome. If the Deep State and MIC allows him, he is "powerful". This suits his dysfunctionality as a man. He has big inadequacies. They manifest in his need to be big, wealthy, #1, first, triumphant in all deals.

    In the Oval Office, he is powerless to get the wall built, infrastructure legislation passed, health reform, or even announce he will consider pardons for all those entrapped by Comey and the Russiagate hoax. He's being impeached.

    But as the Hegemon, when the handlers around him allow it (advise him), he gets to kill people. This is heady stuff that captivates him.

    I would predict that Assad is on the top of Trump's hit list too.

    snake , Jan 13 2020 19:41 utc | 28
    sponsor of terrorism", aligning Iran with AQ, etc.) are a projection of their own crimes ..by: Pandora @9..<=many Domestic Americans may be at risk for elimination ..If I were an aspiring Democrat I would wear my anti-drone outfit ?

    Americans used to pride themselves that their government promised those accused of wrongdoing to be treated as "innocent" until guilt was established by a due process procedure known as a fair open trial. These trials were a source of information that allowed the governed to keep somewhat honest those who were running the government. many Americans chose to become American Citizens in order to gain access to the due process procedures. Humanity in the world has a problem it needs to define and solve because death by drone is not an acceptable line item in the statistics.

    Red , Jan 13 2020 19:48 utc | 29
    I gleaned this off the saker, https://twitter.com/Azof313/status/1216717472780505093?fbclid=IwAR1pJTv4a5BxI9Ov7IQKUYo5FuhkzluCBUCC7ocsduuATQL4UxRQG5JLLAM .I don't read the language but commenter speaks of cyber attack on the uki plane.
    Laguerre , Jan 13 2020 19:50 utc | 30
    Actually, I don't think the Shi'a militias are that divided at all. Sistani's call was classic and unifying.
    I was quite interested by the remarks of Ayatullah Sistani last Friday, I think it was, criticising Iran and the US equally for illegal attacks on Iraqi soil.

    The context is of course that Sistani is Iranian, but has never taken a pro-Iranian position. He is aged now, and his view is expressed by his aides, so it can be taken that this is the view of the Sistani organisation, not so necessarily of the man himself. It is quite nationalistic, and not subservient to Iran, as everybody is currently claiming. Iraqi Shi'a independence from Iran has always been the policy, and its being reaffirmed. Iran remains an ally, naturally.

    That doesn't mean that the Iraqi state is strong and can dictate to the US. The US ensures that doesn't happen. But the positions of Sistani, Muqtada al-Sadr and the others are all pretty similar, and concentrate on Iraqi nationalism, which equals opposition to the US, and non-dependence on Iran.

    Of course Shi'a Iraqi nationalism is a little bit particular, as no concessions are made to the Sunnis. It's as though they don't exist. For the moment that doesn't matter, as the Sunnis are thoroughly defeated, and if they have rebels, they join Da'ish, who are discredited. The Kurds have had their fingers burned, and won't venture outside KRG again. If the US wants to stir them up, it won't work.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 19:51 utc | 31
    Passer by

    I agree with all of that, though on Trump as trying to make up for inadequacies I would differ.
    More a very aggressive, competitive mindset and very self confidant in his abilities.
    He had held no political positions in the past, runs for president of the US and wins.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 19:55 utc | 32
    Laguerre 30

    It looks as though much rides on whether the Shia groups can put aside domestic differences for the duration and agree on and stick to a common strategy to oust the US.

    powerandpeople , Jan 13 2020 19:58 utc | 33
    https://twitter.com/SecPompeo/status/1216466497901596675

    This tweet by Mike Pompeo has triggered a large response condemning USA hypocrisy.

    But the murder of the Iranian General does highlight the difficulty of the militias throughout the Middle East.

    Middle East is tribal, militias, as far as I understand, can be paid by Sheiks, by local religous leaders, by some arm of the relevant government, by foreign governments. And by foreign governments, I mean Turkey, USA, Iran, UK and so on.
    Or a mix of all the above.

    So Pompeo has a point - the sooner Middle East governments bring militias fully into the armed forces, the clearer the applicable law will be.

    What caused this mess?

    Lack of a robust governmental process.

    Whose problem is it? At base, the national government in question.

    If clear lines of control and command and full integration can't happen due to political divisions and corruption, poor popular control of politicians, then the country (and others around the region) are doomed to endless trouble, from home, from abroad.

    Sad fact, IMO.

    Sovereignty starts with responsive, effective, reliable, accountable, transparent, and widely accepted, clear, principles-based governance.


    psychohistorian , Jan 13 2020 20:02 utc | 34
    @ Posted by: Passer by | Jan 13 2020 19:30 utc | 27
    with the comment about Trump with which I agree...thanks

    Trump is a very hurt human being that is not recognized as such because of a skewed view of what mental health is.....aggression, bullying, and murder have all been normalized to be acceptable mental health in top/down world that is never discussed as being the source of the Trump type of mentality.

    I agree with your call out:
    "
    I would predict that Assad is on the top of Trump's hit list too.
    "
    and want to add that I expect there are active hit list plans for all world leaders that conflict with the dictatorship of global private finance.

    juliania , Jan 13 2020 20:02 utc | 35
    b's last comment is:


    "...The U.S. will welcome that [the Shia factions will start to fight each other over the selection of a new Prime Minister and government] as it will try do install a candidate that will reject the Iraqi parliament decision to remove the foreign forces from Iraqi grounds."

    If the US hopes this will happen to deflect Iraqis from their shock at US assassination on their soil of their military leader as well as Iran's, surely they are as mistaken as they were in perpetrating the atrocity. That's not what happens - we saw it first in Russia. There will be unity against a common enemy, would be my take. As has been happening all along with less important 'sanctions' than this. They always backfire.

    Passer by , Jan 13 2020 20:06 utc | 36
    My view is that the iraqi shia will work towards expulsion of the US and will make it happen. They will also buy capable anti-air defense from Russia, no matter the threats. Because having US drones over your head is simply unacceptable, and many leaders, including Sadr, know that they are a potential target for "misbehaving" or past grievances. This lurking theat is simply too much. That's not to mention the israeli strikes in Iraq. They also do not want Iraq to turn into US-Iran battlefield. Which will inevitably lead to killings of Shia leaders and groups.

    But there will be lots of bullying coming from Trump and some US companies could get large deals as a price for the withdrawal, maybe some expensive military equipment will be sold too.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 20:12 utc | 37
    The middle east, particularly the Arab world have always been susceptible to divide and conquer.
    Clans, Tribes, Religions, Ethic groups and nations - all fault lines that the imperial countries have and still do, easily drive wedges into and turn one against another.
    Mao , Jan 13 2020 20:15 utc | 38
    Putin jokes Assad should invite Trump to visit Damascus. The leaders were referring to the Straight Street, which leads to Mariamite Cathedral of Damascus, & to Apostle Paul whose life was transformed after a vision he had as he walked on that road.


    https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1216797057639337984

    Tuyzentfloot , Jan 13 2020 20:15 utc | 39
    Since the attack on Suleimani, Al Muhandis and that officer in Yemen, Reza Shahlai, were the result of long planning the question is what else is part of the plan, and its possible opportunistic addons. Trump was very fast in following up with new sanctions. The current demonstrations in Iran were probably(my guess) planned. I don't understand how they can get traction so close to the funeral.
    Also I wonder to what extent the US/Israel are strenghtening IS near the Syrian border.
    lex talionis , Jan 13 2020 20:15 utc | 40
    @21 Red Ryder - I am going to put something on the open thread to you. My question doesn't pertain to this ghastly Iraq/Iran business.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 20:18 utc | 41
    Passer by "They also do not want Iraq to turn into US-Iran battlefield."

    This is the part that annoys me about the Iraqi's. Trump stated bluntly that US is in Iraq and will be staying in Iraq to watch Iran. That was at the time of the Syrian pullback and oilfield grab.

    US is using Iraq to attack Iran. It killed and Iran military officer and diplomat on Iraqi soil. It is constantly striking Iraqi militia groups on Iraqi soil.
    By stating Iran violated Iraqi sovereignty with its strike on the US base, Iraq is giving sanctuary to the US.

    Passer by , Jan 13 2020 20:21 utc | 42
    Posted by: Tuyzentfloot | Jan 13 2020 20:15 utc | 39

    >>the question is what else is part of the plan

    The plan seems to be israeli one, and it will be about what will benefit Netanyahoo.

    This means a continuous near war situation between the US and Iran, but without the actual large scale war. A covert war involving killings, sabotage, everything other than a large scale war. The US will be the meat-shield for Israel. Untill the elections. Then we will see.

    Passer by , Jan 13 2020 20:26 utc | 43
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 13 2020 20:18 utc | 41

    I think no one believed that the US will start killing senior iraqis and iranians. Soleimani was even seen together with US troops in Iraq, and was visiting often. Iran certainly did not believe that either. But now things changed.

    Likklemore , Jan 13 2020 20:26 utc | 44
    @ Passer by 24; ph 34

    Trump is one sick pup. He now defends that it does not matter if there was an imminent threat [his] .... "killing of Soleimani regardless of 'imminent' threat, says he had a 'horrible past'

    Mike Bloomberg Says He's Spending 'All' His Money 'to Get Rid of Trump'

    May need to invoke the 25th Amendment. 11 months is a very long time and we may not all be here. In the previous post I linked to a Tass report Iran has declared their revenge is not over. More to come.

    Guy THORNTON , Jan 13 2020 20:34 utc | 45
    "Several troops CNN spoke to said the event (al-Assad base) had shifted their view of warcraft: the US military is rarely on the receiving end of sophisticated weaponry, despite launching the most advanced attacks in the world.
    "You looked around at each other and you think: Where are we going to run? How are you going to get away from that?" said Ferguson.
    "I don't wish anyone to have that level of fear," he said. "No one in the world should ever have to feel something like that.""

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/13/middleeast/iran-strike-al-asad-base-iraq-exclusive-intl/index.html

    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ....and Iran is even 5th Division compared with Russia.

    Laguerre , Jan 13 2020 20:37 utc | 46
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 13 2020 19:55 utc | 32

    Yeah, the way I see things going, I wouldn't call it a strategy, is that the Iraqi parliament continues to vote against any proposal the US makes, while at the same time random militias continue to fire off Katyushas against US bases, making life difficult.

    US pressure on Abd ul-Mahdi can't disarm the militias, as he doesn't have the power to do so. There's no scenario where the US could agree to the appointment of a strong PM, who might master the militias, and be accepted by the parliament, and yet guarantee to stop militia attacks. The different elements are contradictory.

    DontBelieveEitherPr. , Jan 13 2020 20:39 utc | 47
    Yeah, Peter AU1 is right. Iran lost that round.
    With the plane shot down, they fucked it totally up. Trump can (somewhat with a basis in reality) point to Iran, the "evil Regime" that prefers to shoot down 100+ civilians instead of closing airspace for "a strategic gain" (Bernards words defending this).
    A PR nightmare for Iran. And sadly a deserved one in this case of not closing the airspace.

    Had this catastrophe not happend, it would have been a brilliant operation, which would have turned the US standing upside down militarily.
    But with shooting themselves in the foot, they managed to paint themselves as the paraiah regime that cares not about human life, as Trump and the NeoCons have painted them all along.

    Now i understand why Trump did not respond that night and happily went to bed tweeting that all is well. The US knew Iran shot it down in that night, and they knew that Iran would have hurt itself more then they hurt the US from a PR and propaganda standpoint.

    And with Soleimani gone, and a replacement that does not even speak Arabic (WTF?!), how can they even dream of rallying all the tribes in Syria and Iraq behind their game plan??
    Personality is key in politics. And when such a person can not even speak the language of the people he should unite, then this looks futile IMHO.

    All in all, a very telling development. Telling about both the US and Iran, but also about Alt Media and us readers+commenters.

    Laguerre , Jan 13 2020 20:51 utc | 48
    Posted by: DontBelieveEitherPr. | Jan 13 2020 20:39 utc | 47

    What does that have to do with Iraq?

    ben , Jan 13 2020 21:01 utc | 49
    IMO, the sad truth is, that the new 4th Reich owns the globe, because of their grasp of the reserve currency system, and NO nation, at this point in time, can reverse that fact.

    I've been reading people talking about the demise of the empire for years now. Until the reserve currency issue is changed,
    NO NATION on earth can challenge the monstrosity of the new 4th Reich.

    The empire will continue to control the world with economic and military terrorism.

    To coin an old saying, "It's just business, get over it"....

    Laguerre , Jan 13 2020 21:11 utc | 50
    Suppose that the US wants to stay in Iraq, as they've said. What strategy could they follow to make it possible? I'm at a bit of a loss there. Full military occupation, with 100,000 US troops? Unacceptable in the US. Change the Iraqi PM? Would someone else be better? Another PM would still be subject to parliament votes. Impose a dictator? Dictators aren't in fact absolute rulers, but still depend on public acquiescence.

    Anyone else have a better idea?

    nemo , Jan 13 2020 21:13 utc | 51
    "Now i understand why Trump did not respond that night and happily went to bed tweeting that all is well. The US knew Iran shot it down in that night, and they knew that Iran would have hurt itself more then they hurt the US from a PR and propaganda standpoint."

    Except Trump's stupid tweet came 4 hours BEFORE the plane was downed. Seriously delusional stuff you are spouting.

    Alpi , Jan 13 2020 21:13 utc | 52
    We have been talking for about 7 days venting our anger and frustration with US empire and its puppets. Also, talking about the why's and The Who's and How's.

    I think it is time to concentrate on the " now what" question. What can be done to get the US out of West Asia and keep them away?

    The key to all of this and the future of West Asia's peace, IMHO, is Saudi Arabia. Iran and its allies have to concentrate and preempt in changing the Saudi regime. Time is ripe for this and they are on the defensive as well. Taking out the Saudis will:

    1. Finish the Wahabi- Saud axis and weaken it tremendously (weaken ISIS, AlQueda, etc if not end them)
    2. It will cut off the financial source of much of evil going on in West Asia and beyond
    3. No oil, no Americans in the region and a gradual end of petrodollar and hopefully the empire(of course, easier said than done but it has to start somewhere)
    4. That will also have a chain reaction in the gulf monarchies with the majority non-Sunni population. So it goes for the other West Asian fiefdoms.
    5. The end of ERETZ ISRAEL
    6. Realignment of North African alliances and shift away from US and the west, especially Egypt.
    7. Bring OPEC under a more democratic control
    8. Facilitating Belt and Road and possibly more prosperity for the region as a whole although China and Russia should be watched and dealt with very carefully. They are not the angels that they have been made to be in these forums. They are just the lesser evils, comparatively. Much less.
    9. A gradual growth away fanaticism and more toward secularism. Maybe even Iran can restart the first true democracy in the region, if such a thing exists outside of books and novels.

    I'm sure others can add to this list. It sounds like fantasy but like i said before it has to start somewhere and Iran is in a position to make this happen and it should be sooner than later. Once Saudis have been dealt with, comes next, Israel. 1967 lines or get the hell out of West Asia. No ifs or buts. No negotiations.

    It is a nice dream anyway. I truly believe it is the only hope for the region, otherwise we are looking at 50 more years of this shit if a global war hasn't happened in between.

    ted01 , Jan 13 2020 21:31 utc | 53
    karlof1 @ 18

    "...the Great Evil in the world resides within the Outlaw US Empire and must be expunged even if Nukes must be used. Yes, that conclusion was painful to arrive at and write, but the horrors have lasted for 3,000+ years now."

    Is this the real karlof1? Or his alter ego Major karlof1 Kong riding the bomb.

    When you say "...Nukes must be used." Would it be correct to assume you mean on yourselves? or some innocent third party in the Middle East?


    I thought I despised you Americans, but there is a lot of self loathing here.

    Guy THORNTON @45 - should be mandatory viewing. The American needs to feel abject fear, helplessness and loss before anything can even begin to change.


    karlof1 , Jan 13 2020 21:34 utc | 54
    juliania @20--

    Sorry to confound you with my 18! Cause & Effect in this case began in 1953. If 1953 hadn't occurred and nothing similar in-between, then the dead would be alive. Peter AU 1's 24 explained the middle portion well enough. The 3,000+ years refers to the amount of time an oligarchy consisting of landed rich, rentiers and such have subjugated humanity in the West as seen by the numerous proofs offered in the numerous publications by the team Hudson assembled at the Peabody Museum at the same time the Berlin Wall was falling, which Hudson's trying to make more accessible via a series beginning with and forgive them their debts... which I very much encourage you--and everyone reading this comment--to read as it really is that important. The bits and pieces provided in the related essays at Hudson's website are not a sufficient substitute for the series of books, although they ought to be enough to motivate.

    b4real , Jan 13 2020 21:38 utc | 55
    @50 Laguerre

    " What strategy could they follow to make it possible?"

    The same strategy they use in Korea, Japan, Germany, Afghanistan, ......etc... Bribery, threats and violence.

    @52 Alpi

    "What can be done to get the US out of West Asia and keep them away? "

    Kill a couple of few hundred American troops in a very rapid fashion or close the straits and collapse the economies.


    b4real


    Really?? , Jan 13 2020 21:41 utc | 56
    Juliania 16
    "This country has been fortunate in the past to select persons of high moral compass as our heroes."

    Really?
    Who?
    Can you be more specific?
    I am sure there are a few genuine heroes, but I am curious as to whom you mean specifically?
    Anyone in the Oval Office?

    Josh , Jan 13 2020 21:43 utc | 57
    Finally a top Canadian businessman who points the finger for this tragedy to Trump: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51095769. Of course there's not a single politician who has the guts to speak this truth out loud. Trump, the narcissist cum laude, demonstrates how the whole world has to count on others having more common sense than the crazy Americans who bully whoever they don't like, damn the consequences. Let's not forget that it is this ongoing verbal adolescent barrage and unnecessary hyping that almost got us into a nuclear holocaust twice (1963 and 1983) - and both times we were saved by the sound and sober Russians. What if the Russian then would have been the Iranian now?
    Likklemore , Jan 13 2020 21:54 utc | 58
    @ ben 49

    I've been reading people talking about the demise of the empire for years now. Until the reserve currency issue is changed,
    NO NATION on earth can challenge the monstrosity of the new 4th Reich.


    The USD$ will follow all the others that went before.

    just a little more faith ben. The collapse is not one event like an explosion, "boom" it's a process over time. U.S'. 'perceived prosperity' is built on debt or by another name, printing fiat which is unsustainable.

    Watch the new QE repo fail, also derivatives and prepare.
    U.S. Fed is working hard to save the financial system that is leaking like a sieve. One Fed governor said it [the Repo] was a plumbing exercise. How apt. In 2006 global debt was $125 trillion now stands at $260 trillion.

    I mentioned watch derivatives. These banks with the biggest derivative positions - DB, JPM, Citigroup and GS - list their official position a tad below $200 trillion. When it blows? could be another 6 years but collapse it will.

    Actually, imo we are in the collapse. Why are interest rates in negative territory? It is a theft of pensioners' savings to keep the casino standing. I suspect the warmongering is a distraction.

    When all else fails, they take us to war.


    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 21:56 utc | 59
    DontBelieveEitherPr. 47 "A PR nightmare for Iran. And sadly a deserved one in this case of not closing the airspace."

    It is not deserved. Decisions are easy to ridicule in hindsight, very difficult to make make at the time. War is all about deception. Did Iran know US had the ability to spoof what they were seeing on their radar screens. There is a good chance the US have made some deliberately failed attempts in the past to set them up for something like this. Iran is in a fight with an exceptionally dirty fighter that knows all the tricks. They will take more hits before this is over.
    not understanding that and disparaging Iran when it does take hits is part of US calculations. That is human character. Everyone likes a winner type mindset. Part of human character.

    xLemming , Jan 13 2020 21:58 utc | 60
    Posted by: Josh | Jan 13 2020 21:43 utc | 57

    Thanks Josh for that
    Unfortunately your link doesn't work (due to the period included at the end)

    Canada business chief lashes Trump over Iran plane crash

    james , Jan 13 2020 22:02 utc | 61
    "pr nightmare." the west can win the pr war, but the actual war is different.. the 2 aren't connected as some might like to think..
    Canthama , Jan 13 2020 22:03 utc | 62
    Thanks b, Elijah's newest article touches on this very subject, the situation will get hot in Iraq should the Us occupiers do not leave the country. The situation will aggravate, maybe slowly, then speed up, the US will most likely retaliate with sanctions and other usual crimes.
    I do see China and Russia stepping up in Iraq and Iran, there is a clear alignment forming, backstage talks must be very busy at the moment, many countries aligning such as Qatar and Turkey, while the traditional allies of Israel and US continue to drag on their knees, such as UAE and KSA.
    I do expect the war of aggression in Yemen to get hotter, since KSA is kicking the can down the road instead of true commitment to a peace deal, while in eastern Syria we may see US mercenaries being most likely killed by Syrian insurgency, lots of mercenaries there vs US soldiers.
    dh , Jan 13 2020 22:06 utc | 63
    @61 Here is a good example of the pr war. As you can see the US army is a real nice bunch of guys and gals doing a tough job fighting ISIS.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-51100129/inside-a-us-air-base-attacked-by-iranian-missiles

    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 22:10 utc | 64
    james

    Trump US has had problems getting vassals on board for war against Iran. With the recent incident, more have moved to Trumps side. Winning the PR war means puppet leaders are free to do as US tells them as even puppet leaders are keeping an eye on re-election and public opinion and so forth.
    Trumps war on Iran will not be well publicised build up to Iraq shock and awe. It will be Trident missiles with no warning.

    foolisholdman , Jan 13 2020 22:11 utc | 65
    Piotr Berman | Jan 13 2020 18:34 utc | 12

    I thought "his on militia" was a typo for "his own militia".

    karlof1 , Jan 13 2020 22:13 utc | 66
    Canthama @62--

    I just read your comment at SyrPers:

    "Something very odd is happening in the past 24 hours and today:

    "The Qatari Emir was in Tehran yesterday, long talks with Iranian leadership.

    "Also yesterday, basically all top Syrian Gov leaders (except President Assad apparently), went to Iran as well, a very rare and could say rather risky move of a large group from the Syrian leadership."

    Do you have anything to add or further speculation about those events? And thanks for all your efforts!!

    Peter AU1 , Jan 13 2020 22:18 utc | 67
    karlof1

    Almasdarnews had a piece on the Syrian delegation vist.

    ""Today, a high-level government delegation headed by Prime Minister Imad Khamis, began a trip to the Iranian capital, Tehran, during which they will discuss with senior officials there the current bilateral relations between the two countries and work to strengthen them at all levels, as well as accelerating developments in the regional and international arenas," Al-Watan reported, quoting a diplomatic source.

    The Al-Watan source said that consultation and coordination between the two countries at this stage is necessary because after the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, the two allies need to strengthen their alliance.

    The newspaper added that the delegation will include in the foreign and defense ministers."
    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/high-level-syrian-govt-delegation-heads-to-iran-for-important-meeting/

    Alpi , Jan 13 2020 22:22 utc | 68
    @ 45

    I think this is the first time the American military has tasted a pushback like this. A clear feeling of defeat and demoralization among those interviewed. It is good for them to be at the receiving end and feel helpless and to know what they have been wreaking on the region for the past 16 years. Maybe they will start questioning their role in these atrocities and pass on the word to new recruits: " Don't join in".

    Bubbles , Jan 13 2020 22:27 utc | 69
    Meanwhile, the US Pivot to Asia grand plan seems to be in a state of hiatus. Skirmishes and a potential uprising in the Provinces have disrupted the once all important thrust to confront China and curb it's expansion on all fronts.

    OBOR strategy continues undeterred, drawing more and more interest and solidifying influence as the months pass. China quietly gives support to the Empire's targets on 2 continents and expands largely unopposed in a 3rd. The Empire's debts to finance it's interests and militarism grows at a never b4 seen rate. It's own military industrial complex robbing it's treasury almost at will, while it's foes grow in size and number.

    Looking at it all in Grand Chess Board sort of way, it brings to mind Muhammed Ali's 'Rope a dope' strategy. Let the big dope punch himself out before taking him down was the essence of it.

    Another of his most memorable quotes, "No Vietcong ever called me n****r".

    No Chinese ever called people in the Provinces hadji either. But hey why go to all that bother of wining hearts and minds and investing in local economies when bribery, corruption and killing dissenters has worked so well in achieving your goals?

    'We have the right to stay as a force of good.' Buffalo Wings Mike Pompeo

    Oui , Jan 13 2020 22:39 utc | 70
    Explanation #99 and counting from the US NSC:

    Disclosure Mike Pompeo: Bigger Strategy of Real Deterrence

    Not an imminent threat

    blues , Jan 13 2020 22:51 utc | 71
    In my very most humble opinion, I think this whole 'episode' (starting with the USSA droning of the very high profile military officers in Iraq) must be all just theater. A very large crowd of the most knowledgeable experts in (real) economics are quite certain that the USSA is on the brink of total collapse. So the population is in dire need of distractions. I also am pretty sure that if the USSA were to attack Iran the result would be 'instant' collapse, so that won't happen unless 'they' are slightly stupider that I suspect them to be. I think the 'world' is simply death-watching the USSA. All they have to really do is to avoid being crushed when the Big Dummy goes full Humpty Dumpty.
    james , Jan 13 2020 23:04 utc | 72
    @ 63 dh.. thanks.. i guess that is similar to the link @ 45 guy thornton shared? bbc verses cnn... they are all tied at the hip..

    quote from one of the men at the site - ""I don't wish anyone to have that level of fear," he said. "No one in the world should ever have to feel something like that." well holy fuck... welcome to the reality you have been putting on all of the people in middle east in what seems like forever!! maybe you want to think that thru??

    @64 peter au... you're right... this war porn for the kiddies back home is all used for the same purpose.. keeping all the folks back home as braindead as possible.. and yes - when the shit hits the fan, it will be without warning.. great place to be in.. thanks trump, usa, neo con warmongering group.. great place to be here in 2020..

    Cynica , Jan 13 2020 23:09 utc | 73
    @nemo #51

    Trump's "stupid tweet" coincided with UIA Flight 752 crashing.

    brian , Jan 13 2020 23:18 utc | 74
    Tehran Plans to Take Trump to International Court for Soleimani's Assassination – Iran's Top Judge
    Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp's Quds Force, died in Baghdad on January 3 when the vehicle he was traveling in was struck by a missile launched by a US drone. Soleimani's death brought relations between Iran and the US to a new low.

    The Iranian government will seek to prosecute US President Donald Trump for the assassination of Maj. Gen. Soleimani, Iranian Chief Justice Ebrahim Raisi has said
    etc

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202001131078026671-tehran-plans-to-take-trump-to-international-court-for-soleimanis-assassination--irans-top-judge/?fbclid=IwAR3PQWAd9LWPKyULZUP15oo_FlGjBvTYPaXyPTsGXnCJr0ZC9BmN4f-0B_E

    ted01 , Jan 13 2020 23:24 utc | 75
    karlof1 @ 54

    juliania - you poor confused women.
    Classic gaslighting.

    You should know that there are things you are not allowed say, no matter how polite you are.
    Criticism will not be tolerated.

    That explanation makes Masoud Barzani sound coherent.

    Now we shall never talk of this again.

    dh , Jan 13 2020 23:24 utc | 76
    @72 To be fair james the average US servicemen/women are probably pretty decent guys. They genuinely don't know why anyone would try to kill them. It never occurs to them that they are being manipulated.
    brian , Jan 13 2020 23:25 utc | 77
    Assad Awarded Qassem Soleimani, the Highest Medal in Syria (Photo + Video)

    5 hours ago News 809 visits

    Assad awarded Qassem Soleimani, the highest honor in Syria (photo + video)

    Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad granted the highest honor in the Republic to the commander of the "Quds Force" Qassem Soleimani, who was assassinated in an air strike carried out by the American forces, on January 3, 2020, in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

    On Monday, Syrian Prime Minister, Imad Khamis, said that President al-Assad granted the commander of the "Quds Force" of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Qassem Soleimani, the highest honor in Syria.

    He added, during his meeting with the first vice-president of the Iranian President, Ishaq Jahangiri, in Tehran, that "the award of the medal reveals the deep affection of Assad for Soleimani and his brothers in Iran," according to the agency "Tasnim".
    https://shaamtimes.net/218591/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%B3%D8%AF-%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%86%D8%AD-%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%85-%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D8%A3%D8%B1%D9%81%D8%B9-%D9%88%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%85-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B3%D9%88/

    RT video
    https://youtu.be/ZnRo-JkKtRE

    Likklemore , Jan 13 2020 23:33 utc | 78
    @ Josh 57

    Minds are a changing.

    Trudeau endorses Maple Leaf Foods CEO who flays the U.S on the Ukraine plane crash.

    OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Monday that the victims of the Ukrainian airliner shot down in Iran would still be alive if the recent escalation of tensions in the region had not happened, according to a transcript of an interview with Global News TV.

    "I think if there were no tensions, if there was no escalation recently in the region, those Canadians would be right now home with their families," Trudeau said in the interview.

    Trudeau said Canada did not receive a heads up before the United States killed Soleimani, and that he "obviously" would have preferred one.

    "The U.S. makes its determinations. We attempt to work as an international community on big issues. But sometimes countries take actions without informing their allies," he said


    james , Jan 13 2020 23:36 utc | 79
    @76 dh.. i agree with you and i think the same applies to the average westerner, whether american, canuck or etc. etc.. people are manipulated without much awareness of it.. however, thinking something thru would be a good exercise for many, especially those cheering for the west in it's war on iran.. that is the part i have a hard time comprehending, absent the constant pr sell... thus the pr becomes a pivotal piece in the war movement.. they have to sell it to the public.. from reading the cbc comments on the maple leaf foods ceo, it is not apparent to me that the pr act is working fully here.. in fact, some people seem to be waking up to where this is all headed and don't like what it looks like..
    dh , Jan 13 2020 23:38 utc | 80
    @78 Poor Justin. He has to be so careful what he says. He doesn't want the Canadian economy to get trashed.
    james , Jan 13 2020 23:38 utc | 81
    @ 78 likklemore.. thanks for that.. the maple leaf ceo is getting a lot of airplay, but that bit from trudeau is a departure from his usual acceptance of the official agenda here. thanks..
    imo , Jan 13 2020 23:49 utc | 82
    @ blues | Jan 13 2020 22:51 utc | 71

    "A very large crowd of the most knowledgeable experts in (real) economics are quite certain that the USSA is on the brink of total collapse. So the population is in dire need of distractions. ..."

    This crowd of 'economists' and their like have been sprouting this scenario for decades. Why believe any of these characters? The whole basic premise of std economics is now dated and largely BS. Obviously, they have not updated on "modern monetary theory"?

    There is no market economy in 'equilibrium' run on rational basis. That ideology's shell cracked with Nixon and completely broke with blow-job Willy Clinton when he had time not playing with the kids on Epstein's Express (and Island).

    It is a political economy now. Hegemony first, second and third. Vassal states (plantations) and Colony-economic all the way with LBJ (& the Fed) etc. The only place 'normal' economics applies is at the margins for the working class -- like your credit card and the local hardware store.

    However, your general sentiment is on the mark if you change the key phrase from "brink of total collapse" to " brink of major reset."

    Sasha , Jan 13 2020 23:50 utc | 83
    It has already started...The Mahdi is coming! En marche!

    Soleimani´s Curse....

    Floods cause millionaire damage to Israeli fighter jets in their hangars

    Sasha , Jan 13 2020 23:59 utc | 84
    Damage count...

    'Pence secretly visits Ain Al-Asad base, attacked by Iran'

    He is probably in the hope that someone would retaliate by killing him so as to he becomes an American hero....but to no avail...in his insignificance...

    The current state of affairs in the US and for extension in the resto fo the world is a byprosuct of at least three men in the WH who feel so littel that they think they need to produce so much noise to be noticed...

    b4real , Jan 14 2020 0:07 utc | 85
    CNN interview American troops who survived attack

    b4real

    Rd , Jan 14 2020 0:16 utc | 86
    Do you have anything to add or further speculation about those events? And thanks for all your efforts!!

    Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 13 2020 22:13 utc | 66


    RT is now reporting on the reason for the assassination. Iran and KSA were about to settle differences. the empire was not too happy about that. these meeting may well be related to regional settlements among the regional countries.

    Dennis , Jan 14 2020 0:17 utc | 87
    @ karlof1 (18)

    JFK did not order the Diem assassinaton. The "cables" that purport to show that were long ago revealed to have been forged by the infamous EH Hunt. Kennedy's Ambassador Lodge (a Republican) conspired with CIA station chief Lucien Conein and a small group of administation officials in Washington to remove Diem when JFK was away on a weekend. I believe Lodge was on his way back to US where JFK was going to fire him to his face over this when he was himself assassinated.

    jayc , Jan 14 2020 0:17 utc | 88
    Apparently one of the issues for Iraq is that its oil revenue gets directed to an account at the Federal Reserve Bank in New York, and access to that account would be the first order of any prospective retaliatory sanctions by the U.S., and it was likely that account that Trump referred to when warning of crippling sanctions if Iraq should attempt to remove US / NATO forces.

    https://news.yahoo.com/u-could-reportedly-bar-iraq-174900741.html

    Carson , Jan 14 2020 0:30 utc | 89
    @85, remarkable video. Damage is more extensive than I expected. Grateful none of our troops was killed or physically injured (if that report is correct). However, those soldiers certainly experienced trauma and will likely endure long-lasting mental and emotional effects.

    It all makes me angry that our President so cavalierly put our young men and women in harms way. They should be home with family.

    Likklemore , Jan 14 2020 0:30 utc | 90
    @ james 81

    Quite the turn. On Saturday Trudeau wanted "clarity" asked Iran " if it [the downing of the plane] was a mistake?"
    I suspect Trudeau received a lot of emails from Quebec..Trudeau's party lost out to BQ; understand a majority of Quebecois are not enamoured or impressed by the brain dead D.C. leadership.

    Carson , Jan 14 2020 0:33 utc | 91
    I hope that Iran can get the protests under control peacefully. ISTM that the Iranian protesters and the Venezuelan protesters both appear to be upper class. I don't see peasants protesting; I see a privileged class that probably stand to gain in the event there is a regime change.
    Theophrastus , Jan 14 2020 0:35 utc | 92
    Soraya Sepahpour and Finian Cunningham has a very interesting take on this. Their hypothesis fits remarkably well, in regard to motive, means, and opportunity.

    https://sputniknews.com/columnists/202001131078026961-iran-jet-disaster-setup/

    Jen , Jan 14 2020 0:40 utc | 93
    Really @ 56:

    You're not the only one looking for genuine heroes of high moral compass.

    Iran Cleric: We Have No Good Revenge Targets, Only US Heroes Are SpongeBob and Spider-Man

    The learned mullah laments:

    "Are we supposed to take out Spider-Man and SpongeBob? ... All of their heroes are cartoon characters."
    b4real , Jan 14 2020 0:41 utc | 94
    @89 Carson


    Thanks but props go to Canthama, vid purloined from his twitter feed. Recommend bookmarking his twitter, Link to Canthama's twitter feed he is one of those extraordinary persons. No twitter account necessary.

    b4real

    karlof1 , Jan 14 2020 0:48 utc | 95
    Rd @86--

    Do you have a link to that info? I found nada on RT or on its Twitter, nor is there anything at Sputnik.

    Dennis @87--

    Outlaw US Empire assassination policy isn't 100% governed by POTUS as you show.

    james , Jan 14 2020 0:49 utc | 96
    @90 likklemore... i think its true what you say about quebec.. ask lozion, lol! either way i commend him for putting some space in our position from the usas!
    Peter AU1 , Jan 14 2020 1:01 utc | 97
    Jen
    Not all are cartoon characters. Would be well worth Iran taking a look at who receives medals and awards in the US. Captain of a certain ship comes to mind. But forget the heroes. Pompeo would make a good 'eye for an eye'. Secretary of state and a nasty one at that. His job is somewhat similar to Soleimani's.
    Virgile , Jan 14 2020 1:05 utc | 98
    If Trump is not reelected, I don't give much of his head. Thousands are ready to make him pay for his crimes. He and his advisors will remain the targets of revenge for years to come
    Liklemore , Jan 14 2020 1:40 utc | 99
    @ Karlof1 95

    I read it as well, ready to make nice - linked in this article sourced to

    The Independent.co.uk


    Writer Kim Sengupta from The Independent explains this incredible twist in the story:

    Iraq's prime minister revealed that he was due to be meeting the Iranian commander to discuss moves being made to ease the confrontation between Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia – the crux of so much of strife in the Middle East and beyond.

    Adil Abdul-Mahdi was quite clear: "I was supposed to meet him in the morning the day he was killed, he came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered from the Saudis to Iran."

    The prime minister also disclosed that Donald Trump had called him to ask him to mediate following the attack on the US embassy in Baghdad. According to Iraqi officials contact was made with a number of militias as well as figures in Tehran. The siege of the embassy was lifted and the US president personally thanked Abdul-Mahdi for his help.

    There was nothing to suggest to the Iraqis that it was unsafe for Soleimani to travel to Baghdad – quite the contrary. This suggests that Trump helped lure the Iranian commander to a place where he could be killed.

    Lurker in the Dark , Jan 14 2020 1:44 utc | 100
    Red @ 29 -

    I posted what I believe might be a translated version of the document you linked to above, but I as well do not speak the language.

    This may be a related Twitter stream on the Iranians ruling out human error and pointing the finger at U.S. electronic warfare malfeasance being used to trick the Iranians or their systems into making the shoot down.

    https://twitter.com/khoosh_/status/1216782662968455168?s=20

    University of Tehran Cyperspace Research Lab:

    On the matter of the Ukrainian plane accident in Iran, the role of human error has been ruled out [as it has been discovered that] deception operations were carried out on the air control & command system.

    , This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted. Working... Your comment could not be posted. Error type: Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

    The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

    As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

    Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

    Working...

    Post a comment Name:

    Email:

    URL:
    Allowed HTML Tags:

    < B>Text</B> → Text
    <I>Text</I> → Text
    < U>Text</U> → Text
    <BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
    < A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

    Working... " The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-03 | Main

    next page "

    Verify your Comment Previewing your Comment

    [Jan 14, 2020] Trump's Killing of Soleimani New "Worst Mistake in US History" by Kevin Barrett

    Jan 14, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Kevin Barrett January 12, 2020 2,000 Words 135 Comments Reply Email This Page to Someone
    Remember My Information


    => List of Bookmarks
    ◄ ► Bookmark ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Toggle All ToC ▲ ▼ Add to Library Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

    Donald Trump occasionally utters unspeakable truths. In March 2018 he called Bush Jr.'s decision to invade Iraq "the worst single mistake in US history." Earlier, Trump had said that Bush should have been impeached for launching that disastrous war.

    Yet on January 2 2020 Trump made a much bigger mistake: He launched all-out war with Iran -- a war that will be joined by millions of anti-US non-Iranians, including Iraqis -- by murdering Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the legendary hero who defeated ISIS, alongside the popular Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. Gen. Soleimani was by far the most popular figure in Iran, where he polled over 80% popularity, and throughout much of the Middle East. He was also adored by millions even outside that region, non-Muslims as well as Muslims. Many Christians throughout the world loved Gen. Soleimani, whose campaign against ISIS saved the lives of thousands of their co-religionists. Even Sunni Muslims (the people, not the billionaire playboy sheikhs) generally loved and admired the Shia Muslim Gen. Soleimani, a saintly warrior-monk who was uncommonly spiritual, morally impeccable, and the most accomplished military genius of this young century.

    The strategic stupidity of Trump's order to murder Soleimani cannot be exaggerated. This shocking, dastardly murder, committed while Soleimani was on an American-encouraged peace mission, has unleashed a "Pearl Harbor effect" that will galvanize not just the nation of Iran, but other forces in the region and around the world. Just as the shock effect of Pearl Harbor helped the American war party overcome domestic political divisions and unite the nation in its resolve for vengeance, so has the Soleimani murder galvanized regional groups, led by Islamic Iran and Iraq, in their dedication to obliterate every last trace of any US-Israeli presence in the region, no matter how long it takes, by any means necessary.

    Most Americans still don't understand the towering stature of Soleimani. Perhaps some comparisons will be helpful.

    To understand the effect on Iran and the region, imagine that Stalin had succeeded in murdering George Patton, Dwight Eisenhower, and Douglas MacArthur, all on the same day, in 1946. These US generals, like Soleimani, were very popular, in part because they had just won a huge war against an enemy viewed as an embodiment of pure evil. How would Americans have reacted to such a crime? They would have united to destroy Stalin and the Soviet Union, no matter how long it took, no matter what sacrifices were necessary. That is how hundreds of millions of people will react to the martyrdom of Gen. Soleimani.

    But even that comparison does not do justice to the situation. Patton, Eisenhower, and MacArthur were secular figures in an increasingly secular culture. Had Stalin murdered them, their deaths would not have risen to the level of religious martyrdom. Americans' motivation to avenge their deaths would not have been as deep and long-lasting, nor as charged with the avid desire to sacrifice everything in pursuit of the goal, in comparison with the millions of future avengers of the death of Gen. Soleimani.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/4nKSlbFCJwo?feature=oembed

    The tragedy, from the US point of view, is that this didn't need to happen. Iran, a medium-sized player in a tough neighborhood, is a natural ally of the United States. As Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in The Grand Chessboard , "Iran provides stabilizing support for the new political diversity of Central Asia. Its independence acts as a barrier to any long-term Russian threat to American interests in the Persian Gulf region." (p. 47) Obama, guided by Brzezinski and his acolytes, set the US on a sensible path toward cordial relations with Iran -- only to see his foreign policy triumph sabotaged by the pro-Zionist Deep State and finally shredded by Netanyahu's puppets Trump and Pompeo. Iran, dominated by principled anti-Zionists, is a thorn in the side of Israel, so the unstable Iranophobe Trump was inserted into the presidency to undo Obama's handiwork and reassert total Israeli control over US policy -- the same total control initially cemented by the 9/11 false flag.

    If the murder of Soleimani bears comparison to Pearl Harbor, it also echoes the October 1914 killing of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo, the first domino in a series that ended in a world war. The dominos are lined up the same way today, though it may take longer for all of them to fall. Due to the enormity of its psychological effect, the Soleimani assassination irreversibly sets the US at permanent war with Iran and the rest of the Axis of Resistance. That war can end in only two ways: The destruction of Islamic Iran, or the complete elimination of the US military presence in the region. The first alternative is unacceptable not only to Iran, its regional friends, and the conscience of the world, but also to Russia and China, who would be next in line for destruction if Iran is annihilated. The second alternative is probably unacceptable to the permanent National Security State that governs the US no matter who is in office, and to Israel and its global network (and its agents in the "US" National Security State). So the irresistible force will soon be meeting the immovable object. It is difficult to see how this could possibly end well.

    Ironically, given Trump's well-justified scorn for Bush's invasion of Iraq, the first front of the world war unleashed by Soleimani's killing will be in that long-suffering nation, whose government has just ordered US troops to depart posthaste. If Trump wants to keep US forces in Iraq he is going to have to re-invade that nation, attack and destroy its government and military, fight a long-term counterinsurgency (this time against the vast majority of the population) and take far more casualties than Bush Jr. did.

    Trump's decision to martyr the great Iranian general and the celebrated Iraqi commander was perfectly timed to unite Iraq against the American occupation. Prior to the murder, Iraq was in the midst of color-revolution chaos, as demonstrators protested against not just the US and Israel, the real culprits in the destruction of their country, but also Iran, Iraqi politicians, and other targets. Those demonstrations, and the murders that marred them, were orchestrated by Gladio style covert US forces. As Iraqi Prime Minster Abdul Mahdi explained :

    " I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead (of an American company). Upon my return, Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement. When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership.

    "Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me. I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.

    "After this, when our Minister of Defense publicly stated that a third party was targeting both protestors and security personnel alike (just as Trump had threatened, he would do), I received a new call from Trump threatening to kill both me and the Minister of Defense if we kept on talking about this 'third party'.

    "I was supposed to meet him [Soleimani] later in the morning when he was killed. He came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered to the Iranians from the Saudis (as part of a peace initiative)."

    So Trump lured Soleimani to Tehran with a peace initiative, then ambushed him. That's why Soleimani was traveling openly on a commercial flight to Baghdad International Airport. He thought he was under US protection.

    Abdul Mahdi's explanation rings true. It reflects the views of most Iraqis, who will be galvanized by Trump's atrocious actions to resume their insurgency against US occupation.

    As Iraqis continue to attack the hated US presence in their country, Trump will undoubtedly blame Iran, whatever its actual role. So this time the Iranians will have no motivation to avoid helping the Iraqi liberation struggle -- they would be blamed even if they didn't. Though Soleimani was a relatively America-friendly stabilizing force after the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan -- the claim that he was behind IEDs that killed US troops is a ridiculous lie -- in the wake of his death Iran will respond positively to Iraqi requests for help in its national liberation struggle against the hated US occupier.

    A rekindled anti-US insurgency in Iraq, and various forms of ambiguous/deniable retaliation for the murder of Gen. Soleimani throughout the region and the world, will force Trump up the escalation ladder. Iran, and the larger eject-the-US-from-the-Mideast project, will not back down, though they may occasionally stage tactical retreats for appearance's sake. The only way Trump could "win" would be by completely destroying Iran. Even if Russia and China allowed that, an unlikely prospect, Trump or any US president who "won" that kind of war would be remembered as the worst war criminal in world history, and the US would lose all its soft power and with it its empire.

    Russia now faces the same kind of decision it had to make when the Zionist-dominated US tried to destroy Syria: stand by and let Tehran be annihilated, with Moscow next in line; or use its considerable military power to save its ally. Putin will have no choice but to support Iran, just as he supported Syria. China, too, will need to ensure that the USA loses its Zionist-driven war on Iran. Otherwise Beijing would risk facing the same fate as Tehran.

    Even if the only help it gets from Russia and China is covert, Iran is in a strong position to wage asymmetric war against the US presence in the Middle East. Almost two decades ago, the $250 million war game Millennium Challenge 2002 blew up in the neocons' faces, as Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper commanded Iranian forces against the US and steered them to victory. Though some technological developments since then may favor the US, as Dr. Alan Sabrosky recently pointed out on my radio show , others favor Iran, which now has missiles of sufficient quality and quantity to rain down hell on US bases, annihilate much of if not all of Israel, and send every US ship anywhere near the Persian Gulf to the bottom of the ocean. (Anti-ship missiles have far outstripped naval defenses, and Iran has concealed immense reserves of them deep in the Zagros Mountains overlooking the Persian Gulf.)

    So Trump or whoever follows him will eventually face a choice: Accept defeat and withdraw all American bases and forces in the region; or continue up an escalation ladder that inexorably leads to World War III. The higher up the ladder he goes, the harder it will be to jump off.

    The apocalyptic scenario may not be accidental. Mike Pompeo, who is widely believed to have duped Trump into ordering the killing of Gen. Soleimani, may have done so not only on behalf of the extremist Netanyahu faction in Israel, but also in service to an apocalyptic Christian Zionist program that yearns for planetary nuclear destruction . Pompeo is ardently awaiting "the rapture," the culmination of Christian Zionist history, when a global nuclear war begins at Megiddo Hill in Occupied Palestine and consumes the planet, sending everyone to hell except the Christian Zionists themselves, who are "beamed up" Star Trek fashion by none other than Jesus himself.

    Whether it goes down in radioactive flames or in a kinder and gentler way, the US empire, as unstable as its leaders, is nearing the final stages of collapse. "Very stable genius" Trump and Armageddonite Pompeo may have hastened the inevitable when they ordered the fateful killing of Gen. Soleimani.

    [Jan 14, 2020] Trump First OK'd Killing Soleimani 7 Months Ago If Americans Killed

    Jan 14, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    me name=

    Skip to main content

    https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4777 Trump First OK'd Killing Soleimani 7 Months Ago "If Americans Killed" by Tyler Durden Mon, 01/13/2020 - 13:05 0 SHARES

    There's been a number of theories to emerge surrounding President Trump's incredibly risky decision to assassinate IRGC Guds Force chief Qasem Soleimani, including that it was all the brainchild of hawkish Secretary of State and former CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

    But an emerging reporting consensus does indicate that the public justification for the strike -- that Soleimani posed an "imminent" threat as he was orchestrating an attack against American troops and sites in the region -- was manufactured based on flimsy intelligence. The evolving and contradictory statements within the administration itself demonstrates at least this much.

    And now according to the latest NBC bombshell it's becoming clear that the top IRGC general's killing was actually months in the works :

    President Donald Trump authorized the killing of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani seven months ago if Iran's increased aggression resulted in the death of an American, according to five current and former senior administration officials.

    2018 file photo, Getty images.

    Apparently the "option" to take him out was already on the "menu" of Pentagon contingencies long before Soleimani's fateful Jan.3 early morning passage through Baghdad International Airport.

    Reports NBC based on multiple officials , "The presidential directive in June came with the condition that Trump would have final signoff on any specific operation to kill Soleimani, officials said."

    The Dec.27 Kataeb Hezbollah rocket attack on a US base in Kirkuk then became a core element of the official rationale, given it killed an American contractor later identified as 33-year old Sacramento resident Nawres Waleed Hamid, who had been assisting the Army as a linguist.

    The new report confirms further that it was both National Security Advisor at the time John Bolton as well as Mike Pompeo that had Trump's ear on the subject .

    "There have been a number of options presented to the president over the course of time" related to bold steps to curtail Iranian aggression, a senior administration official told NBC, which reports further:

    The president's message was "that's only on the table if they hit Americans," according to a person briefed on the discussion.

    The origins of the plan to assassinate the top IRGC elite force general and popular "national hero" inside Iran actually evolved initially out of 2017 discussions involving Trump's national security adviser at the time, retired Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster.

    Burning convoy near Baghdad International Airport, via Iraq government/EPA.

    The report explains :

    The idea of killing Soleimani came up in discussions in 2017 that Trump's national security adviser at the time, retired Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, was having with other administration officials about the president's broader national security strategy, officials said. But it was just one of a host of possible elements of Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran and "was not something that was thought of as a first move," said a former senior administration official involved in the discussions.

    The idea did become more serious after McMaster was replaced in April 2018 by Bolton , a longtime Iran hawk and advocate for regime change in Tehran. Bolton left the White House in September -- he said he resigned, while Trump said he fired him -- following policy disagreements on Iran and other issues.

    So there it is: Bolton's ultra-hawkish influence is still in effect at the White House.

    Congratulations to all involved in eliminating Qassem Soleimani. Long in the making, this was a decisive blow against Iran's malign Quds Force activities worldwide. Hope this is the first step to regime change in Tehran.

    -- John Bolton (@AmbJohnBolton) January 3, 2020

    And the torch is being carried further by Mike Pompeo.

    But again while none of this should come as a surprise, it's yet further proof on top of a growing body of evidence that Washington is yet again telling bald-faced lies to the public about a major event that could lead America straight back into another disastrous Middle East quagmire. Tags Politics

    https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4879&num_ads=18&cf=1258.5.zerohedge%20190919 Show 281 Comments Login

    ZeroHedge Search Today's Top Stories Loading... Contact Information Tips: [email protected]

    General: [email protected]

    Legal: [email protected]

    Advertising: Click here

    Abuse/Complaints: [email protected] Suggested Reading Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide

    It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer , our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure . Here's our Cookie Policy .

    How to report offensive comments

    Notice on Racial Discrimination .

    Copyright ©2009-2020 ZeroHedge.com/ABC Media, LTD Want more of the news you won't get anywhere else? Thank you for subscribing! Something went wrong. Please refresh and try again. Sign up now and get a curated daily recap of the most popular and important stories delivered right to your inbox. Please enter a valid email

    [Jan 14, 2020] Craig Murray

    Jan 14, 2020 | www.unz.com

    January 4, 2020 2,300 Words 73 Comments Reply Email This Page to Someone
    Remember My Information


    => List of Bookmarks ◄ ► ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Bookmark Toggle All ToC ▲ ▼ Add to Library Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

    In one of the series of blatant lies the USA has told to justify the assassination of Soleimani, Mike Pompeo said that Soleimani was killed because he was planning "Imminent attacks" on US citizens. It is a careful choice of word. Pompeo is specifically referring to the Bethlehem Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Self Defence .

    Developed by Daniel Bethlehem when Legal Adviser to first Netanyahu's government and then Blair's, the Bethlehem Doctrine is that states have a right of "pre-emptive self-defence" against "imminent" attack. That is something most people, and most international law experts and judges, would accept. Including me.

    What very few people, and almost no international lawyers, accept is the key to the Bethlehem Doctrine – that here "Imminent" – the word used so carefully by Pompeo – does not need to have its normal meanings of either "soon" or "about to happen". An attack may be deemed "imminent", according to the Bethlehem Doctrine, even if you know no details of it or when it might occur. So you may be assassinated by a drone or bomb strike – and the doctrine was specifically developed to justify such strikes – because of "intelligence" you are engaged in a plot, when that intelligence neither says what the plot is nor when it might occur. Or even more tenuous, because there is intelligence you have engaged in a plot before, so it is reasonable to kill you in case you do so again.

    I am not inventing the Bethlehem Doctrine. It has been the formal legal justification for drone strikes and targeted assassinations by the Israeli, US and UK governments for a decade. Here it is in academic paper form, published by Bethlehem after he left government service (the form in which it is adopted by the US, UK and Israeli Governments is classified information ).

    So when Pompeo says attacks by Soleimani were "imminent" he is not using the word in the normal sense in the English language. It is no use asking him what, where or when these "imminent" attacks were planned to be. He is referencing the Bethlehem Doctrine under which you can kill people on the basis of a feeling that they may have been about to do something.

    The idea that killing an individual who you have received information is going to attack you, but you do not know when, where or how, can be justified as self-defence, has not gained widespread acceptance – or indeed virtually any acceptance – in legal circles outside the ranks of the most extreme devoted neo-conservatives and zionists. Daniel Bethlehem became the FCO's Chief Legal Adviser, brought in by Jack Straw, precisely because every single one of the FCO's existing Legal Advisers believed the Iraq War to be illegal. In 2004, when the House of Commons was considering the legality of the war on Iraq, Bethlehem produced a remarkable paper for consideration which said that it was legal because the courts and existing law were wrong , a defence which has seldom succeeded in court.

    (b) following this line, I am also of the view that the wider principles of the law on self-defence also require closer scrutiny. I am not persuaded that the approach of doctrinal purity reflected in the Judgments of the International Court of Justice in this area provide a helpful edifice on which a coherent legal regime, able to address the exigencies of contemporary international life and discourage resort to unilateral action, is easily crafted;

    The key was that the concept of "imminent" was to change:

    The concept of what constitutes an "imminent" armed attack will develop to meet new circumstances and new threats

    In the absence of a respectable international lawyer willing to argue this kind of tosh, Blair brought in Bethlehem as Chief Legal Adviser, the man who advised Netanyahu on Israel's security wall and who was willing to say that attacking Iraq was legal on the basis of Saddam's "imminent threat" to the UK, which proved to be non-existent. It says everything about Bethlehem's eagerness for killing that the formulation of the Bethlehem Doctrine on extrajudicial execution by drone came after the Iraq War, and he still gave not one second's thought to the fact that the intelligence on the "imminent threat" can be wrong. Assassinating people on the basis of faulty intelligence is not addressed by Bethlehem in setting out his doctrine. The bloodlust is strong in this one.

    There are literally scores of academic articles, in every respected journal of international law, taking down the Bethlehem Doctrine for its obvious absurdities and revolting special pleading. My favourite is this one by Bethlehem's predecessor as the FCO Chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood and his ex-Deputy Elizabeth Wilmshurst.

    I addressed the Bethlehem Doctrine as part of my contribution to a book reflecting on Chomsky 's essay "On the Responsibility of Intellectuals"

    In the UK recently, the Attorney General gave a speech in defence of the UK's drone policy, the assassination of people – including British nationals – abroad. This execution without a hearing is based on several criteria, he reassured us. His speech was repeated slavishly in the British media. In fact, the Guardian newspaper simply republished the government press release absolutely verbatim, and stuck a reporter's byline at the top.

    The media have no interest in a critical appraisal of the process by which the British government regularly executes without trial. Yet in fact it is extremely interesting. The genesis of the policy lay in the appointment of Daniel Bethlehem as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's Chief Legal Adviser. Jack Straw made the appointment, and for the first time ever it was external, and not from the Foreign Office's own large team of world-renowned international lawyers. The reason for that is not in dispute. Every single one of the FCO's legal advisers had advised that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, and Straw wished to find a new head of the department more in tune with the neo-conservative world view. Straw went to extremes. He appointed Daniel Bethlehem, the legal 'expert' who provided the legal advice to Benjamin Netanyahu on the 'legality' of building the great wall hemming in the Palestinians away from their land and water resources. Bethlehem was an enthusiastic proponent of the invasion of Iraq. He was also the most enthusiastic proponent in the world of drone strikes.

    Bethlehem provided an opinion on the legality of drone strikes which is, to say the least, controversial. To give one example, Bethlehem accepts that established principles of international law dictate that lethal force may be used only to prevent an attack which is 'imminent'. Bethlehem argues that for an attack to be 'imminent' does not require it to be 'soon'. Indeed you can kill to avert an 'imminent attack' even if you have no information on when and where it will be. You can instead rely on your target's 'pattern of behaviour'; that is, if he has attacked before, it is reasonable to assume he will attack again and that such an attack is 'imminent'.

    There is a much deeper problem: that the evidence against the target is often extremely dubious. Yet even allowing the evidence to be perfect, it is beyond me that the state can kill in such circumstances without it being considered a death penalty imposed without trial for past crimes, rather than to frustrate another 'imminent' one. You would think that background would make an interesting story. Yet the entire 'serious' British media published the government line, without a single journalist, not one, writing about the fact that Bethlehem's proposed definition of 'imminent' has been widely rejected by the international law community. The public knows none of this. They just 'know' that drone strikes are keeping us safe from deadly attack by terrorists, because the government says so, and nobody has attempted to give them other information

    Remember, this is not just academic argument, the Bethlehem Doctrine is the formal policy position on assassination of Israel, the US and UK governments. So that is lie one. When Pompeo says Soleimani was planning "imminent" attacks, he is using the Bethlehem definition under which "imminent" is a "concept" which means neither "soon" nor "definitely going to happen". To twist a word that far from its normal English usage is to lie. To do so to justify killing people is obscene. That is why, if I finish up in the bottom-most pit of hell, the worst thing about the experience will be the company of Daniel Bethlehem.

    Let us now move on to the next lie, which is being widely repeated, this time originated by Donald Trump, that Soleimani was responsible for the "deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans". This lie has been parroted by everybody, Republicans and Democrats alike.

    Really? Who were they? When and where? While the Bethlehem Doctrine allows you to kill somebody because they might be going to attack someone, sometime, but you don't know who or when, there is a reasonable expectation that if you are claiming people have already been killed you should be able to say who and when.

    The truth of the matter is that if you take every American killed including and since 9/11, in the resultant Middle East related wars, conflicts and terrorist acts, well over 90% of them have been killed by Sunni Muslims financed and supported out of Saudi Arabia and its gulf satellites, and less than 10% of those Americans have been killed by Shia Muslims tied to Iran.

    This is a horribly inconvenient fact for US administrations which, regardless of party, are beholden to Saudi Arabia and its money. It is, the USA affirms, the Sunnis who are the allies and the Shias who are the enemy. Yet every journalist or aid worker hostage who has been horribly beheaded or otherwise executed has been murdered by a Sunni, every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11, has been exclusively Sunni, the Benghazi attack was by Sunnis, Isil are Sunni, Al Nusra are Sunni, the Taliban are Sunni and the vast majority of US troops killed in the region are killed by Sunnis.

    Precisely which are these hundreds of deaths for which the Shia forces of Soleimani were responsible? Is there a list? It is of course a simple lie. Its tenuous connection with truth relates to the Pentagon's estimate – suspiciously upped repeatedly since Iran became the designated enemy – that back during the invasion of Iraq itself , 83% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Sunni resistance and 17% of of US troop deaths were at the hands of Shia resistance, that is 603 troops. All the latter are now lain at the door of Soleimani, remarkably.

    Those were US troops killed in combat during an invasion. The Iraqi Shia militias – whether Iran backed or not – had every legal right to fight the US invasion. The idea that the killing of invading American troops was somehow illegal or illegitimate is risible. Plainly the US propaganda that Soleimani was "responsible for hundreds of American deaths" is intended, as part of the justification for his murder, to give the impression he was involved in terrorism, not legitimate combat against invading forces. The idea that the US has the right to execute those who fight it when it invades is an absolutely stinking abnegation of the laws of war.

    As I understand it, there is very little evidence that Soleimani had active operational command of Shia militias during the invasion, and in any case to credit him personally with every American soldier killed is plainly a nonsense. But even if Soleimani had personally supervised every combat success, these were legitimate acts of war. You cannot simply assassinate opposing generals who fought you, years after you invade.

    The final, and perhaps silliest lie, is Vice President Mike Pence's attempt to link Soleimani to 9/11. There is absolutely no link between Soleimani and 9/11, and the most strenuous efforts by the Bush regime to find evidence that would link either Iran or Iraq to 9/11 (and thus take the heat off their pals the al-Saud who were actually responsible) failed. Yes, it is true that some of the hijackers at one point transited Iran to Afghanistan. But there is zero evidence, as the 9/11 report specifically stated, that the Iranians knew what they were planning, or that Soleimani personally was involved. This is total bullshit. 9/11 was Sunni and Saudi led, nothing to do with Iran.

    Soleimani actually was involved in intelligence and logistical cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan post 9/11 (the Taliban were his enemies too, the shia Tajiks being a key part of the US aligned Northern Alliance). He was in Iraq to fight ISIL.

    The final aggravating factor in the Soleimani murder is that he was an accredited combatant general of a foreign state which the world – including the USA – recognises. The Bethlehem Doctrine specifically applies to "non-state actors". Unlike all of the foregoing, this next is speculation, but I suspect that the legal argument in the Pentagon ran that Soleimani is a non-state actor when in Iraq, where the Shia militias have a semi-official status.

    But that does not wash. Soleimani is a high official in Iran who was present in Iraq as a guest of the Iraqi government, to which the US government is allied. This greatly exacerbates the illegality of his assassination still further.

    Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. (Republished from CraigMurray.org by permission of author or representative)

    utu , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 6:16 am GMT

    Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel's Targeted Assassinations by Ronen Bergman

    The book's title is inspired by a statement in the Talmud: "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first".

    And there is another dictum in Talmud: Tob Shebbe Goyim Harog ("Kill the Best Gentiles").

    Igor Bundy , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:16 am GMT
    We know Israel does this all the time but to non state actors. I dont think in recent history anyone has openly target a state actor in such a criminal fashion because it is an act of war and not only that but considered barbaric. To ask for mediation and then to assassinate the messengers is an act that not even the mongols took part in and they considered it enough to wipe out any such parties..
    Parfois1 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:25 am GMT
    Good expose about the creative criminal minds twisting language and decency to justify murder and war crimes...

    A new legal doctrine to justify crimes in an industrial scale for the good of UK-USrael.

    However they might be right in claiming that Gen. Soleimani had killed or was about to kill many "Americans" – not strictly US citizens – but the honorary American terrorist foot soldiers fighting American wars in the Middle East.

    Ghali , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:56 am GMT
    Do terrorists act legally? The U.S. is a terrorist organisation. It is misleading to call the US a nation or a country. Soleimani is widely-acknowledged as the architect of the successful campaign to defeat the U.S.-Israel sponsored terrorists (ISIS and al-Qaeda) in Syria and Iraq. The sad irony is that Iran was a major U.S. "ally" during the U.S. aggression against Afghanistan and more importantly against Iraq. Without Iran (the Eastern front) the U.S. would not have invaded Iraq. Iran played a major military role helping the U.S. against the Iraqi Resistance.
    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 8:18 am GMT
    Hollywood creatures are the vilest scum.

    Hollywood's fake history vs. actual history on Israel's role in the Iraq war.

    Hollywood's fake history vs. actual history on Israel's role in the Iraq war. for more https://t.co/lTonBw8VGF pic.twitter.com/1pxVcmIqhq

    -- Adam Green (@Know_More_News) January 12, 2020

    Dube , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:12 am GMT
    While Ahmadinejad never actually said that Israel would be driven into the sea, that statement was imminent, therefore it was legitimate to quote it.
    Zumbuddi , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:41 am GMT
    How hideous that this is named Bethlehem, "The place of healing; place of birth of the Prince of Peace.'

    More appropriate to call it the ESTHER doctrine, or PURIM doctrine.

    The Hebrew text provides no solid evidence that Haman sought to kill Jews: the notion is based on Mordecha the Spy and self-serving Snitch.

    Netanyahu has made public statements linking today's Iran to the Purim doctrine that Jews celebrate to this day.

    In other words, Jews demonstrate a clear patter of "imminent threat" to kill those who resist Zionist – Anglo dominence.

    Under this Purim (Bethlehem) doctrine, therefore, it is not only legitimate, it is necessary -- a Constitutional obligation -- that the American government Kill Jews who pose an Imminent Threat to the American -- and Iranian -- people.

    tim hardacre , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:47 am GMT
    As a retired international lawyer I am of the opinion Mr. Murray sets out fact and law impressively . He says everything that is needed to be said

    Good for the FCO legal team in resisting the invasion of Iraq. I do know at least one British regiment sought independent legal advice before accepting orders.

    Just passing through , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:50 am GMT
    Great article Mr. Murray, very needed in these times of almost universal deceit.

    Mr. Bethlehem displays the famous Jewish quality of chutzpah – the quality of a bit who has killed his parents in cold blood but begs the judge for mercy because he is an orphan – when he decided to simply change the law.

    I wish I had some of that Jewish privilege, that way I too could go around robbing and killing and then simply change the law to get away Scot free.

    Gallum , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:52 am GMT
    Iran's President Hassan Rouhani attended Glasgow Caledonian University in Scotland, graduating in 1995 with an M.Phil. degree in Law. Rouhani is close to Jack Straw and Straw is very close to Lord Levy. And Lord Levy is very close to Lord Rothschild. Jack Straw says "in Hassan Rouhani's Iran, you can feel the winds change." "Winds changing" is an understatement. They are gust winds blowing at high velocity directly from the City of London and from Israel's direction. All very high level British intrigue going on here in Iran. It was Jack Straw who appointed Daniel Bethlehem who developed the "Bethlehem Doctrine" used in justifying the assassination of General Soleinami under false pretenses Pompeo probably knew about when he informed President Trump. From 1979 to 2013, Rouhani held a number of important positions in the Velayat-e Faqih's key institutions, as "the man in power but in the shadows." Hassan Rouhani's job it appears considering his education and position is through Shia law is to continue to perpetuate the spread of the "revolution." The "revolution" is designed to keep confrontation in place. Why not gradually move from "revolutionary Shia" to a more conciliatory peaceful religious position? Iran's Mohammad Javad Zarif who is now an Iranian career diplomat, spent 20 years from the age of 17 studying in the United States. Kind of makes us look harder at John Kerry and whether or not his connections to Mohammad Javad Zarif have anything to do with all that is unfolding here?
    Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 10:41 am GMT
    They all have fake names. Netanyahu is really Mileikowski. Ben Gurion was really Gruen. But for a British Jew to grab the name Bethlehem is a real attack on Christianity.
    Parfois1 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 10:43 am GMT
    @Ghali

    The sad irony is that Iran was a major U.S. "ally" during the U.S. aggression against Afghanistan and more importantly against Iraq. Without Iran (the Eastern front) the U.S. would not have invaded Iraq. Iran played a major military role helping the U.S. against the Iraqi Resistance.

    Well, what can one say? First, there is the official narrative; then there are the alternative narratives in their many fashions and narrations; and then there is the oddball narrative that defies logic and reason. Iran allied with Usrael?

    It may look (and is) an exorbitant stretch of imagination to come to such a view. But it is not unique; it is not much different from the often-heard impossible claim here at UR that Nazi Germany was allied with the Soviet Union in 1939!

    anonymous [382] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 10:51 am GMT
    @RouterAl

    Can I be the only person to think that from the moment Hitler transported his first shipment of Haavara Agreement Jews to Palestine there has not been a moments piece in that corner of the globe.

    Can you be the only person . . .?

    Possibly.

    "There has not been a moment's piece [sic] in that corner of the globe" since Herzl began attempting to co-opt the Ottoman Empire in ~1895.

    Balfour ramped it up a notch in 1917; at the urging of Louis Brandeis, Woodrow Wilson endorsed Balfour's plan.

    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 11:01 am GMT
    @Wally Note here that Wally fails to condemn Trump's illegal act of war on a national of a nation which Congress has not declared war upon.

    Yes Wally, Obama was a war criminal who deserves to hang for his crimes, but if you are to retain any credibility with which to continue your mission to expose the Holohoax, you should also acknowledge that Trump is a war criminal too who, based on precedent, also deserves to hang. Your loyalty is clearly misplaced.

    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 11:09 am GMT
    @Dube I believe that what he actually said was that, "Israel would disappear from the pages of history". The usual liars reported this as "Iran would wipe Israel off the map".

    If the West is to fight back and survive then the first battle should surely be against the lying media organs that bear so much responsibility for the shit-storm that is on the way.

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 11:29 am GMT
    @Parfois1 Hillary Mann Leverett negotiated with Iranian counterparts at United Nations and gained Iranian assistance in finding partners to defeat Taliban
    March 31, 2015

    ~15 min:

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?325094-3/washington-journal-hillary-mann-leverett-mark-dubowitz-iran-nuclear-negotiations

    Leverett:

    "Unlike Mr. Dubowitz and many in Washington, I have actually negotiated with current Iranian officials, and it was an effective negotiation. [it resulted] in a state enormously not only overthrow the Taliban, but set up a proper government in Afghanistan. There is just no evidence whatsoever that continuing to bludgeon them and pressure them is going to do anything to give us concessions."

    Leverett participated in a 'round-table discussion' with Mark Dubowitz of Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD).

    Dubowitz's spiel was boilerplate: "Saddam killed 200,000 of his own people, he is pursuing nuclear weapons," blah blah blah.

    On Jan 12 2020 on C Span, https://www.c-span.org/event/?467915/washington-journal-01122020 first Ilan Goldenberg of Center for New American Security (George Soros, major funder), then Michael Rubin of American Enterprise Institute * recited the same talking points: only the names were changed, a tacit acknowledgement that the original, Iraqi-based set of names were dead.

    *AEI Board of Trustees:
    AEI is governed by a Board of Trustees, composed of leading business and financial executives.
    Daniel A. D'Aniello, Chairman
    Cofounder and Chairman
    The Carlyle Group

    Clifford S. Asness
    Managing and Founding Principal
    AQR Capital Management, LLC

    The Honorable Richard B. Cheney

    Peter H. Coors
    Vice Chairman of the Board
    Molson Coors Brewing Company

    Harlan Crow
    Chairman
    Crow Holdings

    Ravenel B. Curry III
    Chief Investment Officer
    Eagle Capital Management, LLC

    -- also interesting comments from the audience @ 11 min

    Leverett has also repeated, on numerous occasions, that sanctions –" a weapon of war" -- are counterproductive and, in the case of Iraq, "killed a million Iraqis, half of them children."

    Biff , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 11:31 am GMT
    @NoseytheDuke

    I believe that what he actually said was that, "Israel would disappear from the pages of history".

    More precisely the quote says "The Israel regime would disappear .." meaning the Israel government – not the country and its' people.

    dimples , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 11:34 am GMT
    @Dube Indeed, the Jews cunningly arranged for the Arab states to look like they might attack them in 1967. Then they swooped like a prescient eagle and blew up all the Egyptian planes on the ground before this attack, which might not have happened otherwise, actually happened. Its definitely a winning philosophy, but only if you are sure you are going to win in the first place.
    Art , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 11:45 am GMT
    Leave it to a Jew and his Bethlehem Doctrine, to crush the four centuries old Treaty of Westphalia where the principle of national sovereignty was instituted. Killing the leaders of a sovereign nation breaks the treaty.

    Assassination is a Jew tool. Killing is the Jew way.

    Stop the Jew – Think Peace

    YetAnotherAnon , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 12:02 pm GMT
    @RouterAl "Jew Jack Straw was everything you would expect from Jew"

    I seem to recall a piece in an Israeli paper saying he wasn't Jewish. It was quite witty, saying IIRC that although he looked like a shul trustee and his career trajectory (student politics then law then media) was classically Jewish, he has (as wiki says) only one Jewish great-grandparent.

    From wiki

    "In 2013, at a round table event of the Global Diplomatic Forum at the UK's House of Commons, Straw (who has Jewish heritage) was quoted by Israeli politician Einat Wilf, one of the panelists at the forum, as having said that among the main obstacles to peace was the amount of money available to Jewish organizations in the US, which controlled US foreign policy, and also Germany's "obsession" with defending Israel."

    YetAnotherAnon , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 12:12 pm GMT
    @dimples "Its definitely a winning philosophy, but only if you are sure you are going to win in the first place."

    Yes, it didn't do the losers much good at Nuremberg, although Germany had explained the attack of June 22 as a pre-emptive strike – " Therefore Russia has broken its treaties and is about to attack Germany. I have ordered the German armed forces to oppose this threat with all their strength ".

    Cowboy , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 12:18 pm GMT

    "The Bethlehem Doctrine is that states have a right of "pre-emptive self-defence" against "imminent" attack. That is something most people, and most international law experts and judges, would accept."

    So Operation Barbarossa was legal. But we knew that already because not only Germany, but Romania, Finland, Italy, Hungary, Slovakia and Croatia ( wiki doesn't mention the Spanish Azul division) all attacked due to the "imminent threat" of Stalin, who certainly had a long history of war crimes, the most recent being his invasions of Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Romania and even Finland.

    Additionally, 400,000 of the Waffen SS were non-Germanic, yet wiki prefaces its description of Barbarossa as "The operation put into action Nazi Germany's ideological goal of conquering the western Soviet Union so as to repopulate it with Germans." .

    The more things change, the more the lies stay the same. Like Hitler, Soleimani was a "bad, hateful terrorist" who they smear by claiming "he deserved to die". In the end this is really about the mother of all modern jewish lies, the "holocaust".

    John Chuckman , says: Website Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 12:58 pm GMT
    "The Bethlehem Doctrine"

    Just one additional bit of evidence for the sick, corrupting influence of empire on law and human affairs.

    This what what happens when you have an empire instead of a country.

    Jake , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 12:59 pm GMT
    #1 – "When Pompeo says Soleimani was planning "imminent" attacks, he is using the Bethlehem definition under which "imminent" is a "concept" which means neither "soon" nor "definitely going to happen". To twist a word that far from its normal English usage is to lie. To do so to justify killing people is obscene. That is why, if I finish up in the bottom-most pit of hell, the worst thing about the experience will be the company of Daniel Bethlehem."

    #2 – [1] Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? [2] And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. [4] And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. [5] For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.

    What do we get when we add #1 and #2?

    #3 – The CIA, the Mossad, and the Saudi General Intelligence Presidency are all offshoots from, are all in origin product of, Brit WASP secret service.

    When we add the answer to the above question to #3, what then is the sum?

    Jake , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:06 pm GMT
    @Biff It is 100% true.

    Offhand, I think 19 of the 21 highjackers were Saudi born and raised. All 21 were Arab Sunnis.

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:06 pm GMT
    @Biff Agree that 9/11 had " nothing to do with Iran" but to say that "9/11 was Sunni and Saudi led " is disinformation . Is Craig Murray , a former British Diplomat , a 9/11 gatekeeper? Murray has written
    "I do not believe that the US government or any of its agencies were responsible for 9/11." Like Noam Chomsky , Murray fails the 9/11 "litmus test ".
    Trump is continuing the state terrorism by drone as carried out by Bush and Obama : "Why is Obama still killing children [by drome] ?" cato.org :
    .".. thousands of civilians , including hundreds of children , have fallen victim to his preemptive drone strikes over the last seven years 'America's actions are legal ', Obama said ,'we were attacked on 9/11′"
    So Obama had the chutzpah to blame his murder of civilians on 9/11. The Democratic and Republican parties are truly wings which belong to the same bird of prey .
    Fuerchtegott , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT
    A very feministy Doctrine.
    peter mcloughlin , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:10 pm GMT
    Historically, nations act in what serves their interests. Western involvement in the Middle East has been primarily about energy security and commerce. They seek to justify it through different means, including legalistic sophistry. The real danger of the US-Iran confrontation is consequences that lead to no alternative but escalation. One scenario, a Tehran 79 type hostage stand-off in Baghdad where President Trump (in an election year) could find himself with no choice but up the ante. The spector of humiliation and defeat convincing him the only hope is to persevere. But that could be an illusion, moving deeper into a sequence of events leading unstoppably to the real danger in the Middle East – confrontation with Russia. Many say it couldn't happen. History suggests otherwise. Living by the law might be the future: learning from history the way to create that future.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
    Johnny Walker Read , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:15 pm GMT
    It's all about interpretation . As Bill Clinton taught us about words and their meaning:
    "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is"

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/j4XT-l-_3y0?feature=oembed

    anonymous [582] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:23 pm GMT
    Sunni this, Sunni that !@# You, Craig Murray, you whitrash piece of shit!!

    If this scum was a career diplomat of that pissant island, which has never been up to any good, then he must fundamentally be an evil scumbag, working for the pleasure of that old thieving witch.

    Just various masks of controlled opposition. Mofers all!!

    Been_there_done_that , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:40 pm GMT
    Yet another mixed bag. Invoking an official government lie, thus poisoning the well.

    " Yes, it is true that some of the hijackers at one point transited Iran to Afghanistan. "

    " The hijackers "?
    I suppose this is an inserted reference to the alleged "hijackers" that were not even on the airline flight manifests yet became central to the phony 9/11 story that no serious person believes.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 1:48 pm GMT
    Israel and its colony the ZUS are the most dangerous countries in the world because of their total disregard of international law as evidenced by their joint attack on the WTC on 911 and their using this as the excuse to destroy the middle east for Israel, which has killed millions and kept America at war for Israel for decades!

    The ZUS and Israel are in the same league as Stalin and Hitler and are a blight on humanity!

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 2:50 pm GMT
    @Desert Fox

    The ZUS and Israel are in the same league as Stalin and Hitler and are a blight on humanity!

    What is your criterion for comparison, Desert Fox?

    I don't know much about Stalin, so can't deal with that.

    Hitler was defending Germany: he told Herbert Hoover that his three " idees fixes " were:

    "to unify Germany from its fragmentation by the Treaty of Versailles;

    to expand its physical resources by moving into Russia or the Balkan States . . .[to prevent a recurrence of] the famine;

    to destroy the Russian Communist government . . .[consequent to] the brutalities of the Communist uprisings in German cities during the Armistice period." ( Freedom Betrayed, by Herbert Hoover).

    ZUS and Israel are aggressing, invading, occupying, displacing and ethnically cleansing forces; they are not acting defensively, as NSDAP was, by any application of logic.

    Mulegino1 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:02 pm GMT

    This is total bullshit. 9/11 was Sunni and Saudi led, nothing to do with Iran.

    The Saudis may have enabled the creation of the legends of the hijackers, but had little or nothing to do with the execution of the operation. 9/11 certainly was carried out preponderantly by Israeli operatives for the economic benefit of Zionist Jews and their criminal co-conspirators in the world of finance and the councils of government.

    The sentence ought to be reordered thus:

    '9/11 was Sunni and Saudi led. ' That is total bullshit. In any case, it had nothing to do with Iran.

    Number 2 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT
    Sean promptly serves up the CIA line, more slogans for people who are not too bright. Today it's a little pun to muddle up the law and give CIA a desperately-sought loophole for the crime of aggression, for which there is no justification. Sean is thinking fast as he can to try and distract you from the necessity and proportionality tests which accompany any use of force and govern the status of the act as countermeasure, internationally wrongful act, or crime. Sean's indoctrination has protected his stationary hamster-wheel mind from the black letter law of Chapter VII, including Articles 47 and 51, which place self-defense forces at the disposal of the UNSC under direction of the Military Staff Committee. Sean also seizes up with Orwellian CIA CRIMESTOP when he hears anything about the case law governing use of force, such as the minimal indicative examples below.

    https://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-vii/
    https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/70/summaries
    https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/90/summaries

    CIA has been running from the law for 85 years now, but despite their wholesale corruption of the Secretariat, they're losing control of the UN charter bodies and treaty bodies. Some SIS scapegoats are going to be faking palsy in the dock to get a break. Brennan first.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:22 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus Recommend you do the research, Hitler was put into power by the zionist banking kabal, the same kabal that rules the ZUS, read the book Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, and they wanted Hitler and Stalin to destroy each other, that was the zionist plan and they used the ZUS and Britain to do it, just as they have destroyed the mideast for Israels greater Israel agenda.

    The ZUS is just like Hitler invading and destroying the mideast for Israel using the attack on WTC as an excuse, which was a joint attack on the WTC on 911 by traitors in the ZUS and Israel, the whole deal is a zionist driven holocaust on the people of the middle east.

    By the way Israel is perpetrating a holocaust of the people of Palestine and this holocaust is backed by the ZUS, which is Israels military arm ie a subsidiary of the IDF.

    Recommend the archives section on henrymakow.com on Hitler and Stalin.

    Harry

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
    @Jake There were no hijackers , there were no planes , they were likely CGI's in videos produced in a "Holywood production" prior to 9/11 , see septemberclues. info "The central role of the news media on 9/11" .
    Truth3 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:35 pm GMT
    @Biff 9/11 was a Jewish operation from Day One.

    PNAC, anyone?

    Silverstein?

    c matt , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:46 pm GMT
    @Wally I am sure, if asked, he would condemn Obama's war crimes as well (and Bush I, Bush II, Clinton, etc. probably going back to Lincoln at least). But the subject was about Soleimani's assassination, which, as much as I am sure you would like to do, cannot be pinned on Obama.
    Wally , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:55 pm GMT
    @NoseytheDuke LOL

    – There hasn't been a US declaration of war since WWII, and there have been countless US military actions.
    Your Pelosi talking point refuted.

    – Your double standard is on parade. Again, no mention of "war criminal" Obama.

    – You clearly prefer to ignore my many posts critical of Trump.

    – And of course you cannot refute anything I have posted about the fake & impossible "holocaust".

    Ah.

    Rev. Spooner , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:56 pm GMT
    @Igor Bundy Right. The Mongols rolled the murderers of their emissaries or ambassadors in carpets and had them trampled to death by horses. This was followed by razing the city/state. I'm told Nuttyyahoo of Israel provided the info and encouraged it.
    Really No Shit , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 3:58 pm GMT
    My two cents worth:

    1) Elizabeth Warren has lied about her ethnicity and has benefited from it thus lying can be natural for her she would most likely give a lap dance to Bibi if demanded to get elected,

    2) Arabs are being absolved of 9/11 by their Ashkenazi cousins who mistakenly believe that they are semites despite having overwhelmingly slavic blood there must be trace amounts of meshuggah genes mixed up with the Indo-European and thus the hatred of Iranians,

    3) Jesus came once before, therefore it must reason that he is coming back the second time and now the arrival is imminent so Daniel Bethlehem must become Christian now or go to hell

    Rev. Spooner , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT
    @Priss Factor Adam Green is a true American patriot.
    Buck Ransom , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 4:20 pm GMT
    @Biff " every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11, has been exclusively Sunni ,"
    LOL.
    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 4:37 pm GMT
    @Jake 20 Hijackers. One, a black Moroccan Muslim, chickened out and is in jail somewhere in the USA. The leader, Atta, was from Egypt. The lead guy to the flight that only had four hijackers because of the Moroccan, which crashed in PA, was from Lebanon and could pass for an American/Jew. Two were from the United Arab Emirates and the rest, 15 , were Saudis.
    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 4:46 pm GMT
    Mafia-style assassination of Soleimani was undoubtedly an act of state terrorism. What's more, it was an act of war against Iran. It was a crime committed by the US military on orders of Trump, who publicly confessed that he gave that criminal order.

    Limited Iranian response just shows that Iran government is sane, in sharp contrast to the US government.

    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus

    "to unify Germany from its fragmentation by the Treaty of Versailles;
    to expand its physical resources by moving into Russia or the Balkan States . . .[to prevent a recurrence of] the famine;
    to destroy the Russian Communist government . . .[consequent to] the brutalities of the Communist uprisings in German cities during the Armistice period." (Freedom Betrayed, by Herbert Hoover).

    Your #2 and #3 are naked aggression. Exactly as Soleimani murder.

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 5:13 pm GMT
    May 8, 2019 Afghanistan, the Forgotten Proxy War. The Role of Osama bin Laden and Zbigniew Brzezinski

    The original "moderate rebel"

    One of the key players in the anti-Soviet, U.S.-led regime change project against Afghanistan was Osama bin Laden, a Saudi-born millionaire who came from a wealthy, powerful family that owns a Saudi construction company and has had close ties to the Saudi royal family.

    https://llco.org/afghanistan-the-forgotten-proxy-war/

    June 6, 2018 Why the US shouldn't build more foreign bases

    The United States maintains almost 800 military bases in over 70 countries, which far exceeds our modern day security requirements.

    https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/06/why-the-us-shouldnt-build-more-foreign-bases/

    Mar 28, 2014 VICE on HBO Debrief: Children of the Drones

    Suroosh Alvi went to Pakistan and found out that American drones there are doing more harm than good.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/wFQwbxFPVfo?feature=oembed

    GeeBee , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 5:19 pm GMT
    @Been_there_done_that While I am sure that the official story of the September 11th 2001 'attack' is false, I frequently wonder why the 'truthers' seem never to be able to get all their ducks in a row. Many claim that the film footage of the aircraft strikes were pre-manufactured CGIs, issued to the media in order to mask the real culprits which they allege were cruise missiles. But a cruise missile doesn't have a flight manifest. Either those four flights that the official story says were hijacked took off that day, or they did not. The CGI theory rests, of course, on there being no such flights. Yet you claim that 'the hijackers' were not on flight manifests for those flights. This is surely the craziest interpretion: either the flights were fictional (as in the CGI theory) and thus there were no manifests, or they really did take place, and therefore had manifests, and were hijacked. If, as you claim, the flights actually took place, but no hijackers boarded them, how on earth did they fly into the twin towers? It makes no sense at all I fear.
    CanSpeccy , says: Website Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 5:27 pm GMT

    every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11

    Generally interesting comment. But why distract from the issue of the Soleimani assassination with such a ridiculous comment ab0ut 9/11?

    nsa , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 5:28 pm GMT
    Americans are now as gods. asserting their inherent right to kill anyone, anytime, anywhere, for any reason.
    "Did we just kill a kid?" In 2012 a USAF drone operator named Bryant reported he was "flying" drones out of New Mexico and painted a 6000 mile away Afghan shack with his laser, and with permission released a Hellfire missile. During the time the missile took to arrive, he saw on his screen a child toddle from behind the shack. Mesmerized, in slow motion, he saw the shack explode and the child disappear. Having killed hundreds remotely, he still wasn't ready for this and asked his copilot: "Did we just kill a kid?". The operator answered: "I guess so". Suddenly on the screen appeared the words of some unknown anonymous supervisor: "No, it was a dog". Bryant responded: "A dog on two legs?"
    Even the resident boomer Nam hero, Rich, might have trouble justifying this kind of activity .but then again in a jewed out society ..maybe not.
    GeeBee , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 5:28 pm GMT
    @Desert Fox 'The ZUS and Israel are in the same league as Stalin and Hitler and are a blight on humanity!'

    Ah. I see that you are still drinking the Kool Aid regarding Herr Hitler. I used to believe it all too. You'll learn in time, as will enough people. Only then will the gigantic criminal enterprise fomented by 'the International Race' that we call World War II be seen for the monstrous crime against humanity that it was. Perhaps – just perhaps – that same sick and depraved race will then finally be so deservedly called to account for its foul deeds.

    Make no mistake: understanding just who and what Adolf Hitler really was, and especially his role in saving at least part of the West from Communism, is absolutely central to an appreciation of this awful world in which we now live.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 5:54 pm GMT
    @GeeBee I am under no illusions about Hitler or Stalin as both were funded by the international zionist banking kabal, read the book Hitlers Secret Bankers by Sidney Warburg and Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler and Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution,by Anthony Sutton, zionists were behind the whole deal.

    Recommend henrymakow.com and his archive section on Hitler and Stalin.

    Paul , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 6:41 pm GMT
    Noam Chomsky has pointed out that if the United States is truly against terrorism, it should stop engaging in it.
    Art , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:09 pm GMT
    @AnonFromTN Limited Iranian response just shows that Iran government is sane, in sharp contrast to the US government.

    There is great tension in the world, tension toward a breaking point, and men are unhappy and confused. At such a time it seems natural and good to me to ask myself these questions. What do I believe in? What must I fight for and what must I fight against?"
    ― John Steinbeck, East of Eden

    This is one of those times.

    Lol , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:25 pm GMT
    What's ironic is that Pompeo and his fellow Americans would cry like the little girls they are if the rest of the world starting assassinating Americans based on the same grounds. Lol
    anonymous [283] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:31 pm GMT
    There is no such thing as international law or legality. Might makes right as shown by the US doing as it pleases and thumbing it's nose at everyone. Some person with legal credentials gets trotted out to declare whatever has been done is legal, just rubber-stamping it. It's too bad but that's the reality.
    2stateshmustate , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:42 pm GMT
    @Z-man With all due respect which is 0. How pray tell did the those "hijackers" manage to plant the explosives in the 3 World Trade towers buildings with which to imploded them? Of course they didn't. Israel and Jews have their fingerprints all over the 911 attack.

    911 was an Israeli/ Jew false flag attack that resulted in the murder of 3000 innocent goyim before noon that day. It's purpose was to create hatred towards Arabs, Muslims and Persians so that stupid Americans would send their children to die for the squatter colony of Israel.

    Folks the Jew controlled US government is saying that those 3 sky-scrapers collapsed into their own footprint at free fall speed due to one cause: office furniture fires. Not the impact of the "plane" and not the fuel carried by the "planes". This has never happened before or since in the history of the world. It is complete bullshit. The JewSA's story is totally impossible and defies the laws of physics. Namely the Law of the conservation of energy.

    As anyone who observers the fall of all 3 towers can see those building fall at free fall speed. For this to happen it means that the underlying structure is offering NO resistance to the above falling structure. How can this be? The many floors below the impact zone were in no way effected by the fire. Yet we see them vaporized into dust as the buildings collapse into their own footprint.

    No folks this is impossible. Therefore the entire government's story is suspect and I would suggest total bullshit.
    I'll admit that in the heat of the moment I fell for this lie. But what really got my attention was when I found out about the collapse of Building 7. A 57 story that was not hit by any "plane". And yet it followed the same script as the Twin Towers. Use critical thinking Americans.

    I realize for many the truth about 911 is going to blow up their entire world view regarding the exceptionalness of the US and our good buddy Israel. But it is vital for the survival of our nation that the real criminals behind 911 be held accountable.

    Israel did 911 and they are our number one enemy.

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 7:42 pm GMT
    @AnonFromTN If so, AnonFromTn, while begging pardon for a Whataboutery argument, How does #2 differ from the activities of Israelis, that are supported by American taxpayers; and how does #3 differ from the activities of Americans toward Iran, whose government US / Israel has been seeking to topple and re-form to "western" preferences, since at least 1979? *

    Moreover, Desert Fox is partly (but only minimally-partly) correct in that zionist Jews and Allies set-up or duped or manipulated or otherwise used Germany to attempt to destroy Bolshevism in Russia, similar to the way that US used Saddam against Iran, then killed Saddam; used Soleimani against ISIS in Iraq, then killed Soleimani.

    So are the actions of USA / ZUSA excusable, unaccountable, but those of Germany were demonstrably not?

    Or should the American people remain warily alert for the next shoe to drop, when that "arc of justice" bends inexorably their way?

    * I still, perhaps stubbornly, maintain that Germany had far more justification for its actions in seeking to vanquish a political regime that was observably committing mass murder with the "imminent" danger of carrying out the same against the German people -- as, in fact, was done; and that seeking to protect its people from starvation, of which 800,000 people had died within the present memory of surviving Germans, is an obligation of the state, a far more compelling obligation than that of "protecting American interests" 7000 miles from the homeland, when the homeland has more than adequate capacity to provide for its people, and when the interests being protected are those of a very few very rich individuals or corporations.
    Competing and trading fairly is far less costly than waging war, and not nearly so ignoble.

    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 8:18 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus I am not trying to whitewash the Empire. Many of its actions are clearly criminal, including bombing of Serbia, the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, assisting murderous Saudis in Yemen, etc. Assassination of Soleimani is yet another similarly criminal action, not the first and likely not the last.

    However, the criminality of the Empire does not justify Hitler in any way. His troops behaved in a totally barbaric manner in the former Soviet Union. I know that not from propaganda, but from the accounts of real people who lived through German occupation in 1941-44.

    The Empire being a criminal enterprise does not make the Third Reich any less criminal. FYI, bandits often clash with each other, and both sides in those clashes remain bandits.

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 8:20 pm GMT
    Jan 13, 2020 Assassination-gate! Trump Officials Say No 'Imminent Threat.' With Guest Phil Giraldi

    Trump officials – including Trump himself today – have been steadily pulling back from initial claims after the January 3rd assassination of Iranian top general Soleimani that he was killed because of "imminent threats" of attack led by the Iranian.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/WjtMSaOBaiU?feature=oembed

    JamesinNM , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 8:47 pm GMT
    Pray for Christ's return and the destruction of all evil.
    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 8:47 pm GMT
    @Paul "Noam Chomsky and the gatekeepers of the left " is a chapter in Barrie Zwicker's book "Towers of Deception ", this chapter is available in pdf format at 9/11conspiracy.tv .
    Zwicker argues that Chomsky " In supporting the official story is at one with the right-wing gatekeepers such as Judith Miller of the New York Times Chomsky's function is identical to Miller's: support the official story Chomsky systematically engages in deceptive discourse on certain key topics such as 9/11 , the Kennedy assassination and with regard to the CIA . ..A study of Chomsky's stands show him to be a de facto defender of the status quo's most egregious outrages and their covert agency engines To the New World Order he is worth 50 armored divisions ."
    As filmmaker Roy Harvey has stated " the single greatest obstacle to the spread of 9/11 truth is the Left media ."
    JamesinNM , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 8:52 pm GMT
    @Sean Make that plea as justification to Christ at the final judgement when your eternal destiny is being determined.
    Zumbuddi , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:30 pm GMT
    @JamesinNM Years ago I was given the book, Prayers, by Michel Quoist.
    IIRC, the first page said, "Prayer is political action."
    Been_there_done_that , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:35 pm GMT
    @GeeBee

    "If, as you claim, the flights actually took place, but no hijackers boarded them, how on earth did they fly into the twin towers?"

    Remote control – a proven and trusted technology.

    It could have been possible that some of the airline planes were electronically "switched" in mid-air, remotely flown with their beacons turned off, to simply disappear into the South Atlantic Ocean once their fuel ran out, while replaced by a fuel tanker in one case, to create a bigger fireball upon impact in Manhattan, or a much smaller plane to penetrate into the Pentagon.

    The public ought to demand a thorough investigation resulting in concrete answers and prosecutions.

    Some of the alleged hijackers were actually alive after the event and outraged to have had their identities stolen and misused.

    Herald , says: Show Comment January 13, 2020 at 9:42 pm GMT
    @Biff Great article, but Craig is taking the easy way out on 9/11. Of course, the Arabs were Sunnis, but were bit players only, and no way was 9/11 Saudi led.

    [Jan 14, 2020] VICTIM OR AGGRESSOR CHRYSTIA FREELAND'S FAMILY RECORD FOR NAZI WAR PROFITEERING, AND MURDER OF THE CRACOW JEWS

    Jan 14, 2020 | johnhelmer.net

    By John Helmer, Moscow

    Chrystia Freeland (lead image), appointed last week to be the new Canadian Foreign Minister, claims that her maternal family were the Ukrainian victims of Russian persecution, who fled their home in 1939, after Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin agreed on a non-aggression pact and the division of Poland between Germany and the Soviet Union. She claims her mother was born in a camp for refugees before finding safe haven in Alberta, Canada. Freeland is lying.

    The records now being opened by the Polish government in Warsaw reveal that Freeland's maternal grandfather Michael (Mikhailo) Chomiak was a Nazi collaborator from the beginning to the end of the war. He was given a powerful post, money, home and car by the German Army in Cracow, then the capital of the German administration of the Galician region. His principal job was editor in chief and publisher of a newspaper the Nazis created. His printing plant and other assets had been stolen from a Jewish newspaper publisher, who was then sent to die in the Belzec concentration camp. During the German Army's winning phase of the war, Chomiak celebrated in print the Wehrmacht's "success" at killing thousands of US Army troops. As the German Army was forced into retreat by the Soviet counter-offensive, Chomiak was taken by the Germans to Vienna, where he continued to publish his Nazi propaganda, at the same time informing for the Germans on other Ukrainians. They included fellow Galician Stepan Bandera, whose racism against Russians Freeland has celebrated in print, and whom the current regime in Kiev has turned into a national hero.

    Just before Vienna fell to the Soviet forces in March 1945, Chomiak evacuated with the German Army into Germany, ending up near Munich at Bad Worishofen. On September 2, 1946, when Freeland says her mother was born in a refugee camp, she was actually in a well-known spa resort for wealthy Bavarians. The US Army then controlled that part of Germany; they operated an Army hospital at Bad Worishofen and accommodated Chomiak at a spa hotel. US Army records have yet to reveal what the Americans learned about Chomiak's war record, and how he was employed by US Army Intelligence, after he had switched from the Wehrmacht. It took Chomiak another two years before the government in Ottawa allowed the family to enter Canada.

    The reason the Polish Government is now investigating Freeland is that Chomiak's wartime record not only victimized Galician Jews, but also the Polish citizens of Cracow. In a salute to Freeland as a "great friend of Poland" by the Polish Embassy in Ottawa last week, Warsaw officials now believe a mistake was made.

    Last July, Freeland, then trade minister, was in a large delegation of Canadians accompanying Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on a visit to the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp in southern Poland. Freeland is not included in the press photographs; Trudeau wept. A statement issued by one of the Canadian Jewish organizations in the delegation said: "Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's visit to Auschwitz-Birkenau signifies the importance of remembering the six million Jews and countless others who died at hands of the Nazi regime. The Holocaust will forever stand as the ultimate expression of human hatred. That is why every Canadian should use this as an opportunity to reflect upon their personal role in combating the forces of antisemitism, racism and bigotry wherever they are found."

    Trudeau (above) and his staff, as well as Foreign Minister at the time Stephane Dion, and the Jewish representatives appear not to have known this was familiar territory for Freeland and her family. Michael Chomiak and his wife Alexandra, parents to Freeland's mother Halyna, spent the war from 1939 to 1945 working and living just 68 kilometres away in Cracow.

    According to the autobiographical details Freeland has provided herself to the Canadian media, Freeland's family were victims of war. "My maternal grandparents," she wrote in May 2015, "fled western Ukraine after Hitler and Stalin signed their non-aggression pact in 1939 they saw themselves as political exiles with a responsibility to keep alive the idea of an independent Ukraine." In November 2015 Freeland told the Toronto Star: "Michael Chomiak was a lawyer and journalist before the Second World War, but they knew the Soviets would invade western Ukraine (and) fled and, like a lot of Ukrainians, ended up after the war in a displaced persons camp in Germany where my mother was born."


    Centre: Michael Chomiak and wife Alexandra, with their children in Canada in 1952. Freeland's mother Halyna is second from left. Source: https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2015/11/29/how-chrystia-freeland-became-justin-trudeaus-first-star.html

    According to Freeland, "they were also committed to the idea, like most in the (Ukrainian) diaspora, that Ukraine would one day be independent and that the community had a responsibility to the country they had been forced to flee to keep that flame alive."

    The Edmonton, Alberta, newspaper obituary for Halyna Chomiak Freeland says she had been "born on September 2, 1946 in Bad Worishofen, Germany in a displaced person's camp." The Alberta provincial government library reports it holds Michael Chomiak's papers. He is described as having "graduated from Lviv University with master's degree in law and political science. In 1928, as a journalist, he started work in the Ukrainian daily Dilo, and from 1934 to 1939 he served on the editorial staff. During the Nazi occupation, he was the editor of Krakivski Visti, published first in Cracow and then in Vienna."

    There is much more to the story which Freeland has not revealed. The details can be found in Polish and Ukrainian sources; from the archived files of Krakivski Visti ("Cracow News"); and from the evidence of Jewish Holocaust museums around the world. Chomiak was editor in chief of the newspaper after a Jewish editor was removed. The newspaper itself was set up in January 1940, publishing three times weekly in Cracow, until October 8, 1944. It was then published in Vienna from October 16, 1944, until March 29, 1945. The precision of the dates is important. They coincide with the movement of the German Army into Cracow, and then out of the city and into Vienna. The newspaper itself was established by the German Army; and supervised by German intelligence. Chomiak was employed by an officer named Emil Gassner (above). His title in German indicates he was the German administrator in charge of press in the region. When Gassner moved from Cracow to Vienna, he took Chomiak with him.

    Chomiak's publication was an official one of the German administration in Galicia, known at the time as the General Gouvernement. The printing press, offices and other assets which provided Chomiak with his work, salary, and benefits had been confiscated by the Germans from a Jewish publisher, Moshe Kafner . Kafner was a native of the region; he and his family were well educated and well known until the Germans arrived, and replaced Kanfer with Chomiak. Kanfer was forced to flee Cracow for Lviv. From there he was taken by the Germans to the Belzec concentration, where he was murdered some time in 1942. From Chomiak's office to Belzec the distance was 300 kilometres.


    Left: SS guards at Belzec; right: Ukrainian guards about to kill a Belzec inmate

    Krakivsti Visti was "the most important newspaper to appear in the Ukrainian language under the German occupation during World War II," according to this history from the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, published in 1998. Chomiak -- reports the Harvard history by John-Paul Hinka from a contemporary source -- "had the ability to sense what could be written and how in the severe German reality, and he gained some trust among the German officials, without which the work would have been impossible."

    In print, according to this archive of Krakivsti Visti, when Chomiak was in charge, there were reports of the "success" of the German Navy in killing 13,000 US Army soldiers, when their transports were torpedoed and sunk in the Atlantic enroute to England. Chomiak editorialized: "this last German attack [was] a smashing blow to the solar plexus of the alliance."

    Chomiak also reported the US "colonization" of Australia and Canada . "Americans who are now living in Australia believe that the economic possibilities of Australia are even much better than those of the USA, and many US soldiers are thinking about staying in Australia after the war as they feel much better there than in their own Fatherland There are such close relations between the USA and Canada and Australia that there will be a special trade and tax [agreement] between these countries after the war. In other words, the United States does not hide the intention of the US to begin full economic penetration of Canada and Australia."

    By the standard of Trudeau at Auschwitz, Freeland's grandfather also produced race hatred to Nazi order, including antisemitism and racism against several other nationalities, including Americans, Poles and Russians.

    Chomiak not only justified the death camps surrounding Cracow. He attempted to foster Ukrainian sentiment against the Poles in the region. The German objective was to support the Ukrainian takeover of Galicia and cleanse it of its Jewish and Polish populations. For this reason Chomiak and his newspaper were given special favour by the German administration; Chomiak himself was reportedly held in high esteem by the Nazis. In the Harvard history it is reported "there can be no doubt that Krakivs'ki visti enjoyed more autonomy than any other legal Ukrainian-language publication under the German occupation."

    Himka, a Ukrainian-Canadian academic, composed his history of Krakivtsi Visti from Chomiak's personal papers in Alberta. He mentions the newspaper's backing for ethnic cleansing of Poles. He omits to mention Jews. Chomiak's antisemitic record can be found in the files of the Los Angeles Museum of the Holocaust. For details, read this .

    Chomiak didn't flee from the Ukraine in 1939, as Freeland claims. Five years were to elapse before he left Cracow; that was when the German Army pulled out in defeat, as the Soviet Army advanced from the east to liberate the city. Gassner was moving the media operation to his home town, Vienna.

    Chomiak closed down Krakivsti Visti in Vienna in March of 1945 for the same reason. The Soviet Army was days away, and a new Austrian government replaced the Third Reich in April of that year. With the retreating Wehrmacht Chomiak then moved westwards into Germany. But a full year is missing from the official records available publicly. That's between March of 1945 and April of 1946, when the displaced persons camp was opened in the Bavarian town of Bad Worishofen, where Freeland says her mother was born.

    As the name indicates, Bad Worishofen was (still is) a thermal waters resort for wealthy Bavarians and day-trippers from Munich. Freeland claims her mother was born as a victim in a refugee camp. In fact, she was born in a hospital administered by the US Army, while her parents were living in a spa hotel managed by a US Army intelligence unit.


    A US Army parade in Bad Worishofen after the US took the town on April 27, 1945; http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/mindelheim/Der-Tag-an-dem-der-Frieden-kam-id33776287.html

    During the war there had been a Luftwaffe training aerodrome at Bad Worishofen. But it was so insignificant operationally, it wasn't bombed by the allies . More or less intact, along with the spa hotels, the town welcomed new paying guests from the US Army when they arrived in April of 1945.

    According to US records, a US Army Intelligence "training unit" was established, as well as a US Army hospital. The trainees weren't Americans; they were East Europeans, including Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Poles and others who had been fighting on the German side.

    On June 28, 1945, the 2 nd Hospitalization Unit of the 30th Field Hospital left a forward position at Ebsenee, Austria, where it had been caring for the survivors of the Ebensee-Matthausen concentration camp.

    The war in Europe now over, the hospitalization unit regrouped in the rear at Bad Wörishofen, where its role was to support the 80th Infantry Division. The unit history says : "As usual, living quarters proved excellent (buildings), with many conveniences added to make living conditions very comfortable." Among the people the American Army doctors now cared for were Mr and Mrs Chomiak.

    The camp for displaced persons or refugees at Bad Worishofen was not formally established for another year, until April 1946. Ukrainians who were there at the time say the camp housed mostly Lithuanians, and also 490 Ukrainians. The term camp is a misnomer. The records show that many of the Ukrainians were living in spa hotels when they were subject to the administration of the camp. Although the subsequent records of the Ukrainians are voluble on what happened there between 1946 and 1948, including testimony from Ukrainians who moved on to the US and Australia, there is no reference to the Chomiak family at all.

    "All the camps in Bad Worishofen were liquidated in May 1948 due to consolidation of the various camps by IRO (International Relief Organization)," remembers this Ukrainian.

    It is not (yet) known when Chomiak presented himself to US Army Intelligence, offering the same services he had been performing for Gassner and the Wehrmacht. Journalism, however, wasn't what the US occupation authorities wanted from him. In return, Chomiak received accommodation; living expenses; and the hospitalization which produced Freeland's mother in September of 1946.

    Two years were to elapse before Chomiak left Bad Worishofen for Canada, arriving there in October 1948. He already had a sister in Canada, but no job of a professional kind to which his university education and experience qualified him. In Alberta Chomiak worked as a manual labourer. Why the Americans didn't offer him intelligence and propaganda employment in the US may be revealed in the Chomiak files in Washington. The Canadian government file on his admission in 1948 is likely to include some of the details Chomiak revealed about his work with the Americans. Unless he kept that secret.

    Last week the Polish Embassy in Ottawa issued this tweet in celebration of Freeland's promotion:

    This week Polish political analyst and journalist Stanislas Balcerac has opened the dossier on Freeland and Chomiak. The Polish Foreign Minister, Witold Waszczykowski, has been asked to investigate, and to decide if, according to Balcerac, "the circumstances and family loyalties of Mrs Freeland may affect the support that Canada provides the pro-Bandera Government of Ukraine, so they can have a direct impact on Polish interests."

    Regarding Bandera (right), the record of Chomiak's involvement with him when they were under German, then US supervision, Freeland did not reveal in the Financial Times when she reported Bandera as one of the Ukraine's all-time heroes. "Yaroslav the Wise, the 11th-century prince of Kievan Rus, was named the winner in a last-minute surge, edging out western Ukrainian partisan leader Stepan Bandera, who led a guerrilla war against the Nazis and the Soviets and was poisoned on orders from Moscow in 1959 .The Soviet portrayal of Bandera as a traitor still lingers. That would be a mistake."

    Freeland was asked directly to clarify her own claims about Grandfather Chomiak's war record. Her press spokesman, Chantal Gagnon, asked for more time, but then the two of them refused to answer.

    "The sins of the grandfather can hardly be attributed to the granddaughter," says Polish investigator Balcerac, " -- except for two, race hatred and lying. Chomiak made a lucrative war selling hatred of Jews, Poles and Russians. Freeland is doing the same preaching race hatred of Russians. To mask what she's doing, she has lied about the Nazi record of her family. The Chomiaks weren't victims; they were aggressors."

    A Washington source adds: "Chomiak was recruited by US intelligence to wage war in the Ukraine against the Russians. Let's see what the US Army and intelligence files reveal about his role, and let's compare that to the one Freeland is now playing in Canada."

    https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnhelmer.net&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnhelmer.net%2Fvictim-or-aggressor-chrystia-freelands-family-record-for-nazi-war-profiteering-and-murder-of-the-cracow-jews%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.sMn3oj1Y3cA.O%2Fam%3DwQc%2Fd%3D1%2Fct%3Dzgms%2Frs%3DAGLTcCN2dfVUHs4zuTf0kWyDefSg5_jNrA%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh%2Conload&id=I0_1578888998229&_gfid=I0_1578888998229&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnhelmer.net&pfname=&rpctoken=23238021

    by Editor - Thursday, January 19th, 2017

    [Jan 14, 2020] Freeland's New Role as Deputy Prime Minister Puts her 2nd in Command (of the Titanic?)

    Notable quotes:
    "... "positions her as one of the top candidates to take over the liberal party after Trudeau" ..."
    "... Government Operations Committee ..."
    "... "All liberal democracies in the world today are facing huge challenges, and for me the conclusion that pushed me to is; there are only 37 million Canadians. Hugely challenging world threats posed to the rules-based international order, greater threats since the 2nd World War. We have to be united in how we confront those challenges." ..."
    "... Ever since her appointment to the role of Cabinet Minister in 2015, Freeland played the role assigned to her as a high level Rhodes Scholar and priestess of neo-liberalism. Springing from a Nazi-connected Ukrainian family based out of Alberta, Freeland made her mark working as lead editor in British Intelligence-controlled news agencies the London Economist, Thompson-Reuters, Financial Times and later Canada's Globe and Mail. Through these positions as "perception manager" of the super elite, she became friends with some of the most vicious Russian, Ukrainian and other eastern European oligarchs who rose to power under Perestroika and the liberalization of the east-bloc. ..."
    "... The author is the founder of the Canadian Patriot Review and Director of the Rising Tide Foundation of Canada. He has authored 3 volumes of the series "The Untold History of Canada" and can be reached at [email protected] ..."
    Jan 14, 2020 | canadianpatriot.org

    editor / November 27, 2019 An interesting victory has been won for forces in Canada who have wished to clean up the mess made by the two disastrous years Chrystia Freeland has spent occupying the position of Foreign Minister of Canada. This victory has taken the form of a Freeland's removal from the position which she has used to destroy diplomatic relations with China, Russia and other nations targeted for regime change by her London-based controllers. Taking over the helm as Minister of Global Affairs is Francois-Philippe Champagne, former Minister of Infrastructure and ally of "old guard" Liberal elder Jean Chretien- both of whom have advocated positive diplomatic and business relations with China in opposition to Freeland for years.

    As positive of a development as this is, the danger which Freeland represents to world peace and Canada's role in the New Emerging system led by the Eurasian Alliance should not be ignored, since she has now been given the role of Deputy Prime Minister, putting her into a position to easily take over the Party and the nation as 2 nd in command.

    Already the Canadian press machine on all sides of the aisle are raising the prospect of Freeland's takeover of the Liberal Party as it "positions her as one of the top candidates to take over the liberal party after Trudeau" as one Globe and Mail reporter stated.

    The Strange Case of Deputy Prime Ministers

    The very role of Deputy Prime Minister is a strange one which has had many pundits scratching their heads, since the Privy Council position is highly under-defined, and was only created by Justin's father Pierre in 1977 as part of his "cybernetics revolution" which empowered the Privy Council Office and Prime Minister's Office under "scientific management" of a technocratic elite. Although it is technically the position of 2nd in Command, it is not like the position of Vice-President whose function has much greater constitutional clarity.

    In some cases, the position has been ceremonial, and in others, like the case of Brian Mulroney's Dep. PM Don Mazankowski (1986-1993) who chaired the Government Operations Committee and led in imposing the nation-stripping NAFTA, the position was very powerful indeed. Some Prime Ministers have chosen not even to have a Deputy PM, and the last one (Anne McLellan) ended with the downfall of Paul Martin in 2006. McLellan and another former Deputy Prime Minister John Manley were both leading figures behind the creation of the think tank Canada2020 in 2003 that soon brought Justin and Obamaton behaviorists into a re-structuring of the Liberal Party of Canada during the Harper years, shedding it of its pro-China, pro-Russia, anti-NATO influences that had been represented by less technocratically-minded statesmen like Jean Chretien years earlier.

    Personally, as a Canadian-based journalist who has done a fair bit of homework on Canadian history, and the structures of Canada's government, I honestly don't think the question of Freeland's becoming Prime Minister matters nearly as much as many believe for the simple reason that Justin is a well-known cardboard cut-out who simply doesn't know how to do anything terribly important without a teleprompter and experienced handlers. This is not a secret to other world leaders, and anyone familiar with the mountains of video footage taken from G7 events featuring the pathetic scene of little Justin chronically ignored by his peers goes far enough to demonstrate the point.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/JQwNIYB2Z6s?feature=oembed

    Freeland's role in Canada has never had much to do with Canada, as much as it has with Canada's role as a geopolitical chess piece in a turbulent and changing world and her current role as Deputy Prime Minister as well as Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs can only be understood in those global terms.

    Unity for the Sake of Greater Division

    For Canada to play a useful role in obstructing the Eurasian-led New Silk Road paradigm sweeping across the globe in recent years, it requires the fragmenting American monarchy be kept in line.

    The problem for the British Empire in this regard, is that the recent elections have demonstrated how divided Canada is with the Liberal Party suffering total losses across the Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Quebec due to the technocratic adherence to the Green New Deal agenda and resistance to actual industrial development initiatives. The collapse of living standards, and the lack of any policies for rebuilding the industrial base that 30 years of NAFTA have destroyed, has resulted not only in the rejection of the Liberal Party but has also awoken a renewed demand for separation in all three provinces.

    Referring implicitly to the crisis of such "authoritarian regimes" as China, Russia, Iran and Trump's USA, as well as the need to decarbonize the world, Freeland put the problem she is assigned to fix in the following terms : "All liberal democracies in the world today are facing huge challenges, and for me the conclusion that pushed me to is; there are only 37 million Canadians. Hugely challenging world threats posed to the rules-based international order, greater threats since the 2nd World War. We have to be united in how we confront those challenges."

    To put it simply, if centralized control were to break down at a time when the Belt and Road Initiative ( and its Polar Silk Road extension ) is redefining the world system OUTSIDE of the control of the western oligarchy, then it is clearly understood that the Green Agenda will fail, but the dynamics of the BRI will become hegemonic as Canada realizes (like the Greeks and Italians currently) that the only viable policies for growing the real economy is coming from China.

    Some final words on Freeland, Neo-liberal High Priestess

    Ever since her appointment to the role of Cabinet Minister in 2015, Freeland played the role assigned to her as a high level Rhodes Scholar and priestess of neo-liberalism. Springing from a Nazi-connected Ukrainian family based out of Alberta, Freeland made her mark working as lead editor in British Intelligence-controlled news agencies the London Economist, Thompson-Reuters, Financial Times and later Canada's Globe and Mail. Through these positions as "perception manager" of the super elite, she became friends with some of the most vicious Russian, Ukrainian and other eastern European oligarchs who rose to power under Perestroika and the liberalization of the east-bloc. She also became close friends with such golems as George Soros, Larry Summers and Al Gore embedding their institutions ever more deeply into Canada since she was brought into Canada2020 (her move to politics was facilitated by fellow Rhodes Scholar/Canada2020 leader Bob Rae abdicating his position as MP for Ontario in 2013).

    When Foreign Minister Stephane Dion committed the crime of attempting to heal relations with China and called for a Russia-Canada Summit to deal mutually with Arctic development, counter-terrorism and space cooperation , he had to go. After an abrupt firing, Freeland was given his portfolio and immediately went to work in turning China and Russia into public enemies #1 and #2, passing the Magnintsky Act in 2017 allowing for the sanctioning of nations for human rights (easily falsified when Soros' White Helmets and other CIA/MI6-affiliated NGOs are seen as "on-the-ground" authorities documenting said abuse).

    Her role as champion of NAFTA which Trump rightly threatened to scrap in order to re-introduce protective tariffs elevated her to a technocratic David fighting some orange Goliath, and her advocacy of the Green New Deal has been behind some of the most extreme energy/arctic anti-development legislation passed in Canada's history.

    Whether it is though individual provinces claiming their rights to form independent treaties with Eurasian powers around cooperation on the BRI, or whether Canada can be returned to a pro-nation state orientation under the "Chretien faction" in the federal government, the current future of Canada is as under-defined as the role of "deputy minister". Either way the nation chooses navigate through the storm, it is certain that any commitment to staying on board the deck of the Titanic known as the "western neoliberal order" has only one cold and tragic outcome which Freeland and her ilk will drown before admitting to.

    The author is the founder of the Canadian Patriot Review and Director of the Rising Tide Foundation of Canada. He has authored 3 volumes of the series "The Untold History of Canada" and can be reached at [email protected]

    Facebook Twitter WordPress Print Kindle It November 27, 2019 in Miscellaneous . Tags: deep state , freeland , rhodes scholar , world government Related posts Unravelling the Mystery of the 'Annexation Movement of 1849' The 'Greta Effect': Are We Really This Time, for Certain Certain, Heading for the End Times? Living Under the Spectre of Hyperinflation: 1923 Weimar and Today Filters Video Player

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/7QByzhXiF1U?controls=0&rel=0&disablekb=1&showinfo=0&modestbranding=0&html5=1&iv_load_policy=3&autoplay=0&end=0&loop=0&playsinline=0&start=0&nocookie=false&enablejsapi=1&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fcanadianpatriot.org&widgetid=1 00:00 16:37 © 2020 The Canadian Patriot

    [Jan 12, 2020] MIC along with Wall Street controls the government and the country

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 12, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    1. likbez , January 12, 2020 5:30 pm

      Everyone keeps dancing around it: Iraqi PM Abdul-Mahdi has reported that Soleimani was on the way to see him with a reply to a Saudi peace proposal. Who profits from Peace? Who does not?

      The killing of Soleimani, while a tragic even with far reaching consequences, is just an illustration of the general rule: MIC does not profit from peace. And MIC dominates any national security state, into which the USA was transformed by the technological revolution on computers and communications, as well as the events of 9/11.

      The USA government can be viewed as just a public relations center for MIC. That's why Trump/Pompeo/Esper/Pence gang position themselves as rabid neocons, which means MIC lobbyists in order to hold their respective positions. There is no way out of this situation. This is a classic Catch 22 trap.

      The fact that a couple of them are also "Rapture" obsessed religious bigots means that the principle of separation of church and state does no matter when MIC interests are involved.

      The health of MIC requires maintaining an inflated defense budget at all costs. Which, in turn, drives foreign wars and the drive to capture other nations' resources to compensate for MIC appetite. The drive which is of course closely allied with Wall Street interests (disaster capitalism.)

      In such conditions fake "imminent threat" assassinations necessarily start happening. Although the personality of Pompeo and the fact that he is a big friend of the current head of Mossad probably played some role.

      It's really funny that Trump (probably with the help of his "reference group," which includes Adelson and Kushner), managed to appoint as the top US diplomat a person who was trained as a mechanic engineer and specialized as a tank repair mechanic. And who was a long-time military contractor. So it is quite natural that he represents interests of MIC.

      IMHO under Trump/Pompeo/Esper trio some kind of additional skirmishes with Iran are a real possibility: they are necessary to maintain the current inflated level of defense spending.

      State of the US infrastructure, the actual level of unemployment (U6 is ~7% which some neolibs call full employment ;-), and the level of poverty of the bottom 33% of the USA population be damned. Essentially the bottom 33% is the third world country within the USA.

      "If you make more than $15,000 (roughly the annual salary of a minimum-wage employee working 40 hours per week), you earn more than 32.2% of Americans

      The 894 people that earn more than $20 million make more than 99.99989% of Americans, and are compensated a cumulative $37,009,979,568 per year. "

      ( https://www.huffpost.com/entry/income-inequality-crisis_n_4221012 )

    [Jan 12, 2020] US has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying.

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Over $7 trillion spent while homelessness is rampant. Healthcare is unaffordable for the 99% of the population. ..."
    Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Likklemore , Jan 11 2020 17:48 utc | 201

    At 2016, here is the long bombing list of the 32 countries by the late William Blum. Did I mention sanctions is an Act of War?

    Little u.s. has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying. Albright thought the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children were worth it. !!! it was worth killings and maiming.

    Over $7 trillion spent while homelessness is rampant. Healthcare is unaffordable for the 99% of the population.

    The u.s. will leave Iraq and Syria aka Saigon 1975 or horizontal. It's over.

    2020: u.s. Stands Alone.

    Searching for friends. Now, after Russiagate here is little pompous: "we want to be friends with Russia." Sanctions much excepting we need RD180 engines, seizure of diplomatic properties. Who are you kidding?

    "we seek a constructive and productive relationship with the Russian Federation".

    What a bunch of hypocrites? How dare you criticize commenters who see little u.s. in the light of day, not a shining beacon on the hill..

    [Jan 12, 2020] Luongo Fears "An Abyss Of Losses" As Iraq Becomes MidEast Battleground

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 12, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, 'n Guns blog,

    The future of the U.S.'s involvement in the Middle East is in Iraq. The exchange of hostilities between the U.S. and Iran occurred wholly on Iraqi soil and it has become the site on which that war will continue.

    Israel continues to up the ante on Iran, following President Trump's lead by bombing Shia militias stationed near the Al Bukumai border crossing between Syria and Iraq.

    The U.S. and Israel are determined this border crossing remains closed and have demonstrated just how far they are willing to go to prevent the free flow of goods and people across this border.

    The regional allies of Iran are to be kept weak, divided and constantly under harassment.

    Iraq is the battleground because the U.S. lost in Syria. Despite the presence of U.S. troops squatting on Syrian oil fields in Deir Ezzor province or the troops sitting in the desert protecting the Syrian border with Jordan, the Russians, Hezbollah and the Iranian Quds forces continue to reclaim territory previously lost to the Syrian government.

    Now with Turkey redeploying its pet Salafist head-choppers from Idlib to Libya to fight General Haftar's forces there to legitimize its claim to eastern Mediterannean gas deposits, the restoration of Syria's territorial integrity west of the Euphrates River is nearly complete.

    The defenders of Syria can soon transition into the rebuilders thereof, if allowed. And they didn't do this alone, they had a silent partner in China the entire time.

    And, if I look at this situation honestly, it was China stepping out from behind the shadows into the light that is your inciting incident for this chapter in Iraq's story.

    China moving in to sign a $10.1 billion deal with the Iraqi government to begin the reconstruction of its ruined oil and gas industry in exchange for oil is of vital importance.

    It doubles China's investment in Iraq while denying the U.S. that money and influence.

    This happened after a massive $53 billion deal between Exxon-Mobil and Petrochina was put on hold after the incident involving Iran shooting down a U.S. Global Hawk drone in June.

    With the U.S balking over the Exxon/Petrochina big deal, Iraqi Prime Minster Adel Abdul Mahdi signed the new one with China in October. Mahdi brought up the circumstances surrounding that in Iraqi parliaments during the session in which it passed the resolution recommending removal of all foreign forces from Iraq.

    Did Trump openly threaten Mahdi over this deal as I covered in my podcast on this? Did the U.S. gin up protests in Baghdad, amplifying unrest over growing Iranian influence in the country?

    And, if not, were these threats simply implied or carried by a minion (Pompeo, Esper, a diplomat)? Because the U.S.'s history of regime change operations is well documented. Well understood color revolution tactics used successfully in places like Ukraine , where snipers were deployed to shoot protesters and police alike to foment violence between them at the opportune time were on display in Baghdad.

    Mahdi openly accused Trump of threatening him, but that sounds more like Mahdi using the current impeachment script to invoke the sinister side of Trump and sell his case.

    It's not that I don't think Trump capable of that kind of threat, I just don't think he's stupid enough to voice it on an open call. Donald Trump is capable of many impulsive things, openly threatening to remove an elected Prime Minister on a recorded line is not one of them.

    Mahdi has been under the U.S.'s fire since he came to power in late 2018. He was the man who refused Trump during Trump's impromptu Christmas visit to Iraq in 2018 , refusing to be summoned to a clandestine meeting at the U.S. embassy rather than Trump visit him as a head of state, an equal.

    He was the man who declared the Iraqi air space closed after Israeli air attacks on Popular Mobilization Force (PMF) positions in September.

    And he's the person, at the same time, being asked by Trump to act as a mediator between Saudi Arabia and Iran in peace talks for Yemen.

    So, the more we look at this situation the more it is clear that Abdul Madhi, the first Iraqi prime minister since the 2003 U.S. invasion push for more Iraqi sovereignty, is emerging as the pivotal figure in what led up to the attack on General Soleimani and what comes after Iran's subsequent retaliation.

    It's clear that Trump doesn't want to fight a war with Iran in Iran. He wants them to acquiesce to his unreasonable demands and begin negotiating a new nuclear deal which definitively stops the possibility of Iran developing a nuclear weapon, and as P atrick Henningsen at 21st Century Wire thinks ,

    Trump now wants a new deal which features a prohibition on Iran's medium range missiles , and after events this week, it's obvious why. Wednesday's missile strike by Iran demonstrates that the US can no longer operate in the region so long as Iran has the ability to extend its own deterrence envelope westwards to Syria, Israel, and southwards to the Arabian Peninsula, and that includes all US military installations located within that radius.

    Iraq doesn't want to be that battlefield. And Iran sent the message with those two missile strikes that the U.S. presence in Iraq is unsustainable and that any thought of retreating to the autonomous Kurdish region around the air base at Erbil is also a non-starter.

    The big question, after this attack, is whether U.S. air defenses around the Ain al Assad airbase west of Ramadi were active or not. If they were then Trump's standing down after the air strikes signals what Patrick suggests, a new Middle East in the making.

    If they were not turned on then the next question is why? To allow Iran to save face after Trump screwed up murdering Soleimani?

    I'm not capable of believing such Q-tard drivel at this point. It's far more likely that the spectre of Russian electronics warfare and radar evasion is lurking in the subtext of this story and the U.S. truly now finds itself after a second example of Iranian missile technology in a nascent 360 degree war in the region.

    It means that Iran's threats against the cities of Haifa and Dubai were real.

    In short, it means the future of the U.S. presence in Iraq now measures in months not years.

    Because both China and Russia stand to gain ground with a newly-united Shi'ite Iraqi population. Mahdi is now courting Russia to sell him S-300 missile defense systems to allow him to enforce his demands about Iraqi airspace.

    Moqtada al-Sadr is mobilizing his Madhi Army to oust the U.S. from Iraq. Iraq is key to the U.S. presence in the region. Without Iraq the U.S. position in Syria is unsustainable.

    If the U.S. tries to retreat to Kurdish territory and push again for Masoud Barzani and his Peshmerga forces to declare independence Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will go ballistic.

    And you can expect him to make good on his threat to close the Incerlik airbase, another critical logistical juncture for U.S. force projection in the region.

    But it all starts with Mahdi's and Iraq's moves in the coming weeks. But, with Trump rightly backing down from escalating things further and not following through on his outlandish threats against Iran, it may be we're nearing the end of this intractable standoff.

    Back in June I told you that Iran had the ability to fight asymmetrically against the U.S., not through direct military confrontation but through the after-effects of a brief, yet violent period of war in which all U.S., Israeli and Arab assets in the Middle East come under fire from all directions.

    It sent this same message then that by attacking oil tankers it could make the transport of oil untenable and not insurable. We got a taste of it back then and Trump, then, backed down.

    And the resultant upheaval in the financial markets creating an abyss of losses, cross-asset defaults, bank failures and government collapses.

    Trump has no real option now but to negotiate while Iraq puts domestic pressure on him to leave and Russia/China come in to provide critical economic and military support to assist Mahdi rally his country back towards some semblance of sovereignty

    * * *

    Join My Patreon if you want help making sense of this insane world. Install the Brave Browser if you want to build an internet free to allow us to do so.

    MalteseFalcon , 3 minutes ago link

    OK kids,

    Play time is over.

    China needs Iraqi oil to build the BRI.

    Last one into Africom is a rotten egg!!!!

    daveeemc2 , 14 minutes ago link

    This is the most delicious of irony

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

    The american imperial style of intervention is dead.

    China debt trap model of belt and road is the path forward.

    They will win hearts and minds, and not a single shot fired.

    USA gets debt from paying war machine and killed and maimed soldiers whose personal psychiatry will haunt them for an entire lifetime.

    In the end, Americans get nothing but debt and risk their own soverignty as a population ages and infrastructure crumbles....kinda like now.

    MalteseFalcon , 1 minute ago link

    The last 30 years of American foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster.

    yerfej , 26 minutes ago link

    How about "what is the goal?" There is none of course. The assholes in the Washington/MIC just need war to keep them relevant. What if the US were to closed down all those wars and foreign bases? THEN the taxpayer could demand some accounting for the trillions that are wasted on complete CRAP. There are too many old leftovers from the cold war who seem to think there is benefit to fighting wars in shithole places just because those wars are the only ones going on right now. The stupidity of the ****** in the US military/MIC/Washington is beyond belief. JUST LEAVE you ******* idiots.

    Rusticus2.0 , 22 minutes ago link

    Your comment should have been directed at Trump, the commander in chief.

    I guess that's still a bridge too far, but sooner than later you're going to have to cross it.

    BobEore , 29 minutes ago link

    Excellent Smithers, excellent:

    Sometimes, in treading thru the opaque, sandstorm o ******** swept wastes of the ' desert of the really real '...

    one must rely upon a marking... some kind of guidepost, however tenuous, to show you to be still... on the trail, not lost in the vast haunted reaches of post-reality. And you know, Tommy is that sort of guide; the sort of guy who you take to the fairgrounds, set him up with the 'THROW THE BALL THRU THE HOOP... GUARANTEED PRIZE TO SCOOP' kiosk...

    and he misses every time. Just by watching Tom run through his paces here... zeroing in on the exact WRONG interpretation of events ... every dawg gone time... one resets their compass to tru course and relaxes into the flow agin! Thanks Tom! Let's break down ... the Schlitzy shopping list of sloppy errors:

    Israel continues to up the ante on Iran, f ollowing President Trump's lead by bombing Shia militias stationed near the Al Bukumai border crossing between Syria and Iraq. Urusalem.. and its pathetically obedient dogsbody USSA ... are busy setting up RIMFISTAN Tom.. you really need to start expanding your reading list; On both sides of that border you mention .. they will be running - and guarding - pipeline running to the mothership. Shia miitias and that project just don't mix. Nobody gives a frying fluck bout your imaginary 'land bridge to the Med'... except you and the gomers. And you and they aren't ANYWHERES near to here.

    • Abdul Madhi, the first Iraqi prime minister since the 2003 U.S. invasion push for more Iraqi sovereignty, is emerging as the pivotal figure in what led up to the attack on General Soleimani and what comes after Iran's subsequent retaliation.
    • Ok... this is getting completely embarrassing. The man is a 'caretaker' Tom... that's similar to a 'janitor' - he's on the way out. If you really think thats' being pivotal... I'm gonna suggest that you've 'pivoted' on one of your goats too many times.

    Look, Tom... I did sincerely undertake to hold your arm, and guide you through this to a happier place. But you... are underwater my man. And that's quite an accomplishment, since we be traveling through the deserts of the really real. You've enumerated a list of things which has helped me to understand just how completely distorted is the picture of the situation here in mudded east.. is... in the minds of the myriad victims of your alt-media madness. And I thank you for that. But its time we part company.

    These whirring klaidescope glasses I put on, in order to help me see how you see things, have given me a bit of a headache. Time to return to seeing the world... as it really works!

    simpson seers , 14 minutes ago link

    says the yankee chicken ******......

    Fireman , 32 minutes ago link

    Like Ukraine, everything the anglozionazi empire of **** smear$...turns to ****.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVMbCTWRcSs

    https://theduran.com/ukranian-whistleblower-reveals-mh-17-tragedy-was-orchestrated-by-poroshenko-and-british-secret-service/

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=wR1NFI6TBH0

    BGO , 39 minutes ago link

    The whole *target and destroy* Iran (and Iraq) clusterfuck has always been about creating new profit scenarios, profit theaters, for the MIC.

    If the US govt was suddenly forced to stop making and selling **** designed to kill people... if the govt were forced to stopping selling **** to other people so they can kill people... if the govt were forced to stop stockpiling **** designed to kill people just so other people would stop building and stockpiling **** designed to kill people... first the US then the world would collapse... everyone would finally see... the US is a nation of people that allows itself to be propped up by the worst sort of people... an infinitesimally small group of gangsters who legally make insane amounts of money... by creating in perpetuity... forever new scenarios that allow them to kill other people.

    Jesus ******* Christ ZeroHedge software ******* sucks.

    Fireman , 40 minutes ago link

    Understanding why Agent Orange is a meat puppet.

    The following has been known to cure T.D.S.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/NJF06yjvdErM/

    Wantoknow , 44 minutes ago link

    Why has Trump no real option? What do you believe are the limits of Trump's options that assure he must negotiate? Perhaps all out war is not yet possible politically in the US, but public sentiment has been manipulated before. Why not now?

    One must not yet reject the idea that the road to Moscow and Beijing does not run through Iran. Throwing the US out of the Middle East would be a grievous failure for the deep state which has demonstrated itself to be absolutely ruthless. It is hard to believe the US will leave without a much more serious war forcing the issue.

    So far Trump has appeared artless and that may continue but that artlessness may well bring a day when Trump will not back down.

    Fireman , 39 minutes ago link

    Why has Trump no real option?

    Ask the towel girls at Maralago and Jeffrey Pedovore.

    Rusticus2.0 , 49 minutes ago link

    The motivation behind Trump pulling out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action wasn't because, after careful analytical study of the plan, he decided it was a bad deal. It was because Israel demanded it as it didn't fit into their best interests and, as with the refreezing of relationships with Cuba, it was a easier way to undo Obama policy rather than tackling Obamacare. Hardly sound judgement.

    The war will continue in Iraq as the Shia majority mobilize against an occupying force that has been asked to leave, but refuse. What will quickly become apparent is that this war is about to become far more multifaceted with Iraqi and Iranian proxies targeting American interests across numerous fronts.

    Trump is the head of a business empire; Downsizing is not a strategy that he's ever employed; His business history is a case study in go big or go bust.

    not-me---it-was-the-dog , 32 minutes ago link

    so it will work like this....

    trump's zionist overlords have demanded he destroy iran.

    as a simple lackey, he agreed, but he does need political cover to do so.

    thus the equating of any attack or threat of attack by any group of any political persuasion as originating from iran.

    any resistance by the shia in iraq will be considered as being directed from iran, thus an attack on iran is warranted.

    any resistance by the currect governement of iraq will be considered as being directed from iran, thus an attack on iran is warranted.

    any resistance by the sunni in iraq will be considered subversion by iran, or a false flag by iran, thus an attack on iran is warranted.

    trump's refusal to follow the SOFA agreement, and heed the call of the democratic government we claim to have gone in to install, is specifically designed to lead to more violence, which in turn can be blamed on iran's "malign" influence, which gives the entity lackeys cover to spread more democracy.

    MIGA!

    Brazen Heist II , 55 minutes ago link

    America is a nation of imbeciles. They have meddled in Iraq since the 1980s and still can't subdue the place to their content.

    Dey hate us for our freedumbs!

    Ghost who Walks , 54 minutes ago link

    I'm more positive that Iraq can resolve its issues without starting a Global War.

    The information shared by the Iraqi Prime Minister goes part way to awakening the population as to what is happening and why.

    Once more information starts to leak out (and it will from those individuals who want to avoid extinction) the broad mass of the global population can take action to protect themselves from the psychopaths.

    new game , 1 hour ago link

    This is what empires in decline do. Hubris...

    meanwhile China rises with Strategic economic investment.

    And the econ hitmen aren't done yet...

    moar war...

    Arising , 1 hour ago link

    China moving in to sign a $10.1 billion deal with the Iraqi government to begin the reconstruction of its ruined oil and gas industry in exchange for oil is of vital importance.

    Come on Tom, you should know better than that: the U.S will destroy any agreements between China and the people of Iraq.

    The oil will continue to be stolen and sent to Occupied Palestine to administer and the people of Iraq will be in constant revolt, protest mode and subjugation- but they will never know they are being manipulated by the thieving zionists in D.C and Tel aviv.

    Ms No , 1 hour ago link

    Agreed. It will take nothing short of a miracle to stop this. Time isnt on their side though so they better get on it. They will do something big to get it going.

    RoyalDraco , 14 minutes ago link

    This isn't "humanity." Few people are psychopathic killers. It is being run by a small cliche of Satanists who are well on their way to enslaving humanity in a dystopia even George Orwell could not imagine. They control most of the levers of power and influence and have done so for centuries.

    Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

    - Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring's testimony before the Nuremberg tribunal on crimes against humanity

    [Jan 12, 2020] Canadian neocon Chrystia Freeland ready to betray Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Video)

    Jan 12, 2020 | theduran.com

    Chrystia Freeland, the Ukrainian-Canadian who is Foreign Minister of Canada, was at a loss for words at the outcome of the Ukrainian presidential election on Sunday. Instead, she re-tweeted Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's statement.

    "Canada and Ukraine are united by a strong relationship, rooted in close people-to-people ties," Trudeau declared, referring to the western Ukrainians – now numbering three million, ten percent of Canada's population. They had sided with Adolph Hitler and the German Army in World War II; after their defeat they were accepted by Canada as refugees. Freeland's maternal grandfather, Michael Chomiak from a village near Lviv, had served in the German Army as a spy and as press editor and propagandist for the administration of Galicia, which then included both Ukrainian and Polish territory, headed by Governor-General Hans Frank (lead image, left).

    "We are unwavering in our support of Ukraine's sovereignty and our enduring commitment to the rules-based international order," Trudeau announced, and Freeland re-tweeted in a formula broad enough to accept terms with Russia to end the five-year war in the east of Ukraine. "I look forward to working with President-elect Zelenskiy to deepen our relationship and build a more secure, more prosperous future for people in both our countries."

    The only region of Ukraine in which the majority did not vote for Vladimir Zelensky was Lviv region and adjoining areas of old Galicia. There, if Freeland, who has tried but failed to challenge Trudeau for the Canadian prime ministry, were to run for election, she would be the favourite to be President of Galicia.

    Countrywide, Zelensky defeated the incumbent president Petro Poroshenko by 73% to 24%, with a turnout averaging 62%. The only exception was the city of Lviv and the Lviv region, where Poroshenko scored 63% to Zelensky's 34%, with turnout of more than 67%.

    In the east of the country, Zelensky won with more than 80% of the votes – 87% in Donestk, 89% in Lugansk, and 87% in Odessa. The New York Times reported this geographic distribution as Zelensky's "triumph in every region, except for the area around the city of Lviv, a center of Ukrainian culture and nationalism in the west of the country."

    [Jan 12, 2020] Dangerous Neocon Soros Puppet Chrystia Freeland Replaced as Canada's Foreign Minister SOTN Alternative News, Analysis Co

    Jan 12, 2020 | stateofthenation.co

    Dangerous Neocon & Soros Puppet Chrystia Freeland Replaced as Canada's Foreign Minister Posted on December 2, 2019 by State of the Nation A Sea Change for Canada Foreign Policy as Freeland Is Replaced by a Pro-Chinese Politico

    Matthew Ehret
    Strategic Culture Foundation

    In Chrystia Freeland's 2012 book Plutocrats, Canada's leading Rhodes Scholar laid out a surprisingly clear analysis of the two camps of elites who she explained would, by their very nature, battle for control of the newly emerging system as the old paradigm collapsed.

    In her book and article series, she described the "practical populist politician" which has tended to be adherent to business interests and personal gain during past decades vs the new breed of "technocrat" which has an enlightened non-practical (ie: Malthusian) worldview, willing to make monetary sacrifices for the "greater good".

    She further defined the "good Plutocrats" vs "bad Plutocrats". Good Plutocrats included the likes of George Soros, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos who made their billions under the free-for-all epoch of globalization, but who were willing to adapt to the new rules of the post-globalization game. This was a game which she defined in an absurd 2013 TED Talk as a "green New Deal" of global regulation under a de-carbonized (and depopulated) green economy. For those "bad plutocrats" unwilling to play by the new rules (ie: the Trumps, Putins or any industrialist who refused to commit seppuku on the altar of Gaia), they would simply go extinct. This threat was re-packaged by Canada's "other" globalist puppet Mark Carney, who recently said "If some companies and industries fail to adjust to this new world, they will fail to exist."

    Of course, when Freeland formulated these threats in 2011, China's Belt and Road had not yet existed, nor had the Russia-China alliance which together are now challenging the regime-change driven world order in remarkably successful strides. The thought that nationalism could possibly make a comeback in the west was as unthinkable as the failure of free trade deals like NAFTA or the TPP.

    As of November 18, 2019, Freeland has found herself cut down a notch by the "plutocrats" that she has worked so assiduously to destroy since becoming Canada's Foreign Minister in 2017 when she ousted a Foreign Minister (Stephane Dion) who had called for a renewed cooperation with Russia on space, counter-terrorism and arctic development with Sergei Lavrov. Freeland's unrepentant support for Ukrainian Nazis and NATO encirclement of Russia resulted in a total alienation of Russia. Her alienation of China was so successful that the Chinese government removed their ambassador in the summer of 2019. Freeland's work in organizing the failed coup in Venezuela and supporting the MI6-Soros White Helmets in Syria became so well known that she became known as the Canadian queen of regime change.

    Other pro-Chinese "bad plutocratic" companies which have been targeted for destruction under Freeland's watch have included the beleaguered construction giant Aecon Inc. who's board voted in favor of being sold to China in March 2018 in order to play a role in Belt and Road Projects ( a decision vetoed by the Federal Government in May 2018 ), as well as Quebec-based SNC Lavalin which has had major deals with both Russia and China on nuclear power and major infrastructure projects and which now faces being shut down in Canada for having bribed politicians in Libya when it built Qadaffi's Great Manmade River (destroyed by NATO in 2011).

    Former Liberal Minister of Infrastructure from Shawinigan Quebec, Francois-Philippe Champagne has taken over Freeland's portfolio and with him it appears a new pro-Eurasian policy may be emerging in Canada much more conducive to the long term survival (and strategic relevance) of Canada. This shift has already been noted by China which has responded by sending a new Ambassador to Ottawa, while a new Canadian Ambassador with a long history of working towards positive Chinese relations in the private sector (Dominic Barton) has just begun working in Beijing. Barton was the first Ambassador to China since "old guard" politician John McCallum was fired in January 2019 for defending Huawei's Meng Wanzhou to a group of Chinese journalists.

    In opposition to the cacophonic voice of Freeland, Champagne had spoken positively of China in 2017 saying "In a world of uncertainty, of unpredictability, of questioning about the rules that have been established to govern our trading relationship, Canada, and I would say China, stand out as [a] beacon of stability, predictability, a rule-based system, a very inclusive society."

    Champagne is a long-standing protégé of former Prime Minister Jean Chretien and world travelled businessman who has worked in the European nuclear sector and has promoted industrial development with China for years. Jean Chretien, who campaigned for Champagne's recent re-election, represents everything Freeland hates: A "practical" old school politician who recognizes that World War III and alienating Eurasian nations who are shaping the future is bad for business. In 2014, Chretien was given the "Friend of Russia" award and has played a major role in the private sector working with Quebec-based Power Corporation which runs the Canada-China Business Council (CCBC) and has brokered major contracts throughout China since ending his term as PM in 2003. Chretien is also the father in-law of current CCBC chair Paul Desmarais Jr. who is the heir to the PowerCorp dynasty. While these are not groups that in any way exemplify morality, they are practical industrialists who know depopulation and world war are bad for business and would prefer to adapt to a China-led BRI system over a "green technocratic dictatorship".

    Since December 2018, Chretien has attacked Freeland's decision to support Meng Wanzhou's extradiction to the USA, and has volunteered to lead a delegation to China in order to smooth tensions.

    So while the "bad plutocrats" appear to have taken an important step forward though the debris of the recent near failure of the Liberal Party which narrowly kept a minority government after the October 21 Federal Elections, the ideologically driven technocrats led by Queen Freeland shouldn't be discounted, as her new position as Deputy Prime Minister puts her in a position to possibly take control of Canada as 2 nd in command of a highly fragmented nation which is now hearing renewed calls for separation in Alberta, and Quebec.

    ___
    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/11/30/sea-change-canada-foreign-policy-as-freeland-is-replaced-by-pro-chinese-politico/

    [Jan 12, 2020] Lament for Canada -- Strategic Culture

    Jan 12, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    Lament for Canada Michael Jabara Carley January 29, 2018 © Photo: Public domain

    I immigrated to Canada in 1967, not quite fifty-one years ago. At the time I was young, naïve and did not know much. Well, I knew a little since I was caught up in 1960s America, then roiled with opposition to segregation and Jim Crow and to the US war of aggression in Southeast Asia. Americans did not call it that of course; for them it was the "Vietnam War". I walked on the last day of the march from Selma to Montgomery , Alabama in 1965. We travelled in a train from Washington, DC to Montgomery and back, with the shades drawn, so crackers would not have good targets to shoot at. It was the year after Ku Klux Klansmen murdered Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner in Mississippi. It was dangerous to be black in America, and it still is. It was dangerous too for naïve young whites to stick their nose into business that did not concern them. But of course when you are young, you don't see the danger, or think that it could come looking for you. Death was still a rather abstract thing. Then we "graduated", so to speak, to opposition to "the Vietnam War". That was more personal because you had to decide whether -- and I put this politely -- you were going to fight in a war in which you did not believe.

    It was the year after Ku Klux Klansmen murdered Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner in Mississippi

    I headed to Canada. At the time it was a pretty quiet place compared to the United States. Sure, there was Expo '67, and there were demonstrations and campus sit-ins for this and against that. Many Canadians opposed the US war of aggression in Southeast Asia, and I remember there was an underground railway to help deserters and "resisters", or "draft dodgers" (if you did not like them), get into Canada.

    Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau

    Anyway, I went to graduate school, adapted to being in Canada, assimilated, eventually swore allegiance to the Queen. The way I spoke English changed. I started to pronounce "out and about" and other words like an English Canadian from the Empire Loyalist parts of eastern Canada. "Eh" crept into the sing-song of my spoken English. I emphasise English because I also speak French, though a few of my students at the Université de Montréal object to my "Parisian" accent. I don't mind..

    A year after I got to Canada, Pierre Elliot Trudeau became Liberal prime minister. He was an interesting man and politician. Eccentric, intellectual, a man of his times, different in some ways from your average Canadian politician. People liked, or loved him, or didn't. One thing he had which most North American politicians do not have, was a backbone. You could like it or not, but he had it. He stood up to Québec separatists in 1970, who hated him for it. "Well, just watch me", he famously replied to journalists, when asked what he would do to deal with " the October crisis " in Québec.

    Toward the United States, he had to take a softer line. What could a Canadian prime minister do in face of the Yankee Hegemon? Sleeping next to an elephant used to be the nice way to put it. Maybe we should have paid more attention to how Finland managed to remain independent next to its giant neighbour. Trudeau tried unsuccessfully to establish an independent Canadian energy policy but succeeded in keeping some distance from the United States on Vietnam. In fact, it was his government which effectively opened the doors to American deserters and resisters. Believe it or not, they were a good source of new immigrants, or so the Canadian government used to say.

    During the 1960s, English Canadian intellectuals worried about Canada's loss of independence vis-à-vis the United States. In 1965 Canadian philosopher George Grant wrote Lament for a Nation where he criticised the Liberals for caving in to Washington on defence policy. Previous Liberal governments developed a bad reputation for failing to control US investment and the takeover of Canadian industries and natural resources. If you don't pay attention to these essentials, and diversify trade and investment, you will lose your political independence. This is what happened to Canada. You learn these things in university, if you have good professors, but it is hard to go up against entrenched, powerful economic interests, who don't care a pin about Canadian independence.

    Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien

    Pretty soon, the Conservatives became as negligent as the Liberals (I make an exception for Trudeau) in protecting Canadian independence. Under Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, Canada opted for free trade with the United States. If you didn't care so much about independence, free trade would open markets, create jobs, so the argument went: it was the only way.

    "Canada Let's not Trade it Away," became the political slogan of the Council of Canadians, an organisation of English Canadian intellectuals, founded by the late Mel Hurtig . Québec "nationalists" were asleep at the wheel on this issue. Their idea was to embrace the United States to get clear of English Canada. That was a really bad idea; it was jumping from the frying pan into the fire. By that time, I had become more catholic than the pope, or more Canadian, say, than Sir John A. , and I supported the campaign against free trade. We lost that fight.

    Is there anything left now of Canadian independence? The Liberal Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, kept Canada out of the US-British war of aggression against Iraq in 2003. About that war, I call a spade, a spade. Chrétien maintained tolerable relations with the Russian Federation, though that was before the present wave of anti-Russian hysteria. Russian diplomats look back to the Chrétien period as the good ol' days. They are long gone.

    No thanks to the far right Conservatives led by Stephen Harper, a crude right-wing politician, and wannabe American, who dreamed of leading a Canadian-style "Reagan Revolution" in Canada. He was an American Trojan horse, uncritically following US foreign policy and damaging Canadian relations with the Russian Federation. For any Canadian with a sense of pride, myself included, it was painful to watch the conduct of the Harper government. His minister for external affairs, John Baird, reminded me of a clown, backing US policies, inter alia, in favour of Apartheid Israel and the fascist coup d'état in Kiev, and against Iran and the Russian Federation. The Russian ambassador in Ottawa could not get a meeting with top Canadian diplomats, let alone with the minister. "Check with Washington," was Harper's foreign policy.

    Stéphane Dion, Canadian Minister for External Affairs was sacked in 2017

    Then came a brief glimmer of hope at least for me. Justin Trudeau, the son of Pierre Elliot, became prime minister in late 2015, defeating the by then widely hated Mr. Harper. The Liberals campaigned amongst other items on better relations with the Russian Federation. Stéphane Dion, a sensible intellectual, former leader of the Liberal party and former professor of political science at the Université de Montréal, became minister for external affairs. He indicated his intention to improve relations with Russia, but nothing came of it, and he was sacked in January 2017.

    Chrystia Freeland, a Ukrainian-Canadian and former journalist with a long list of anti-Russian articles under her by-line, succeeded Dion. Freeland's grandfather was a mid-level Nazi collaborator in German occupied Poland, whose life Freeland celebrates. Sins of the fathers, or grandfathers, should not of course be visited upon their descendants, unless they want to boast of them. Ms. Freeland's Ukrainian "nationalism" leads her to turn a blind-eye to her grandfather's Nazi collaboration, and to the fascist torchlight parades in putschist Kiev. I sarcastically referred to her as the Ukraine's minister of foreign affairs in Ottawa .

    Freeland's Russophobia makes her persona non grata in the Russian Federation. Trudeau appointed her to External Affairs, surely knowing of her background and her hatred of Russia and its president Vladimir Putin. One can only conclude that Trudeau decided to abandon his campaign promise to improve relations with Russia, and to revert to Harper's foreign policy.

    In October 2017 the Canadian Parliament, mimicking the United States, passed a so-called Magnitsky bill which allows the Canadian government to sanction Russian or other citizens for so-called "human rights violations". Everyone knows or should know that the United States uses "human rights" or R2P (responsibility to protect) as a pretext for military intervention anywhere it chooses, against governments it does not like. What section of international law gives Washington that right? The Magnitsky narrative, used as a pretext for the original US law, is built upon bogus allegations disseminated by one William Browder, an apparently slippery businessman. He claimed that his lawyer Sergei Magnitsky was the victim of Russian abuse in the cover-up of embezzlement and massive tax fraud of which Browder in fact, and Magnitsky, his accountant, appear to have been the perpetrators. Monsieur Dion opposed a Magnitsky-type bill because it would pointlessly provoke the Russian government. It demonstrates how anti-Russian hysteria has spread from the United States to Canada.

    Trudeau fils is certainly not a chip off the old block

    I voted for the Liberal candidate in my riding at the last election, but I am not going to vote in the next federal election. What's the point? Vote for tweedle dee and get tweedle dum, or vice versa. Foolishly, I actually hoped Trudeau fils might be a chip off the old block. He is nothing of the sort . He likes to appear in gay parades and to tout identity politics to show how "progressive" he is, but it's just showboating. Canada has voted against anti-Nazism resolutions in the UN , along with the United States and the Ukraine. What a trio. Trudeau fils backs US policy in the Ukraine and has Canadian military "advisors" there training "nationalist" militias for war against the Donbass resistance.

    On January 16 Freeland and Rex Tillerson held a one-day conference of most of the participants of the last war against North Korea

    Even more dangerous, the Trudeau government apes US policy on North Korea (DPRK), flirting with the idea of a maritime blockade, which would be an act of war, in a US-led war of aggression against a sovereign state with every right to defend itself. Canadians may have forgotten the Korean War, but people in the DPRK have not forgotten US atrocities accounting for the deaths of an estimated 20% of the civilian population . On 16 January in Vancouver Freeland and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson held a one-day conference of most of the participants of the last war against North Korea. The Russian Federation and China, which have borders on the DPRK, were not invited. Obviously, the United States, with Canadian complicity, is alluding to a new alliance of the old alliance partners to launch a new Korean war even as North and South Koreans were talking about reducing tensions. It is a tacit threat of war against the DPRK. The Canadian chief of staff says the Canadian navy is ready, if asked, for blockade duty. If who asks? The UN has not authorised the use of force against the DPRK. Nor will it, China and the Russian Federation would veto such a resolution in the UN Security Council. Is the Canadian navy prepared to commit acts of war against China or Russia by stopping their ships on the high seas? China has warned the United States not to launch a "pre-emptive" war against the DPRK. Did anyone in Ottawa read the Chinese statement? Washington affects not to notice the Chinese position, but Canada should notice before it is too late.

    The Trudeau government will claim to have won US concessions to make it possible to "save" NAFTA, because Canada has no choice but to capitulate

    Admittedly, young Mr. Trudeau is in a tight spot. The United States has forced Canada and Mexico into a renegotiation of the North American free trade agreement (NAFTA). 75% of Canadian trade goes to the United States, but not the other way around, so that Washington has the Canadian government by the throat. Freeland is the chief negotiator. She says upcoming negotiations "are going to be fun and I hope really useful and productive." If you were Canadian, would you have confidence in Freeland? Already there are stories in the Mainstream Media about the possible negative effects of the US abrogation of NAFTA on the Canadian loonie (the dollar) and the perennially anaemic Toronto Stock Exchange. You can see where this is leading. The Trudeau government will claim to have won US concessions to make it possible to "save" NAFTA, because Canada has no choice but to capitulate. Trudeau went to Davos, Switzerland last week to meet various American notables to explain why it is in US interests to stay in NAFTA. Isn't the American elite, the celebrated 1%, capable of understanding and defending its own interests? Next week Trudeau is going to tour the United States without seeing US President Donald Trump "in an effort to 'further strengthen the deep bonds that unite Canada and the United States'." That is a sure sign of weakness. Is it really in Canadian national interests to have "deeper bonds" with Hegemon?

    I used to be fiercely proud of being Canadian. I have travelled to all the provinces from Victoria, British Columbia to St. John's, Newfoundland. I have hiked in the Fraser River Country and watched from the foothills of the Rocky Mountains as a thunder storm moved across the prairies below me. I have marvelled at the clear waters of Lake Superior and smelled the salt air of the sea on the Canadian east coast. Now, however, I am not so proud, watching one Canadian government after another go to its knees before Hegemon. It does not matter what political party holds power, even the so-called "left" New Democratic Party pursues the same servile policies toward the United States. What options do critically minded Canadians now have?

    The US Secretary of War, General "Mad Dog" Mattis, gave a recent speech where he said basically it's our way or the highway. "To those who would threaten America's experiment in democracy: if you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day." You have to wonder what dystopian, upside down world General Mattis lives in, and what "democracy" he is talking about when US electoral choices are between tweedle dee and tweedle dum who fund their campaigns with tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Abroad. the United States has supported and continues to support dictators in Latin America and absolutist kings and princes in the Middle East, fascists in the Ukraine, and Islamist terrorists of every stripe and description in the Middle East and Central Asia, not to mention Apartheid Israel. It has overthrown democratically elected governments in Syria, Iran, Guatemala, Brazil, Ecuador, Indonesia, Greece and Chile, to mention only a few examples, but the list is endless. The CIA was involved in the hunting down and murder of Congo leader Patrice Lumumba. It tried to overthrow the Cuban government and assassinate its late leader Fidel Castro, more than six hundred times by some estimates, and it is attempting to topple the popular Venezuelan leader, Nicolás Maduro. Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen are amongst other victims. Is the US government capable of dealing with other countries without brandishing a gun in their faces? Work with our diplomats or deal with our military, "Mad Dog" said in effect.

    The US Secretary of War, General "Mad Dog" Mattis, gave a recent speech where he said basically it's our way or the highway

    So what does a Canadian do faced with the uninspiring conduct of the Harpers and the young Mr. Trudeau? I don't know. There seems to be no satisfactory answer. One can only imagine with pleasure how Trudeau père, if he were still with us, might berate his son for craven, fatuous behaviour. Pierre Elliot is long gone, however, and we are on our own. The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. Tags: Canada Chrystia Freeland

    [Jan 12, 2020] Comment on Sen. Tom Cotton lauding the murder of Suleimani

    Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Piotr Berman , Jan 12 2020 5:02 utc | 373

    NYT posted editorial by Sen. Tom Cotton (nincompoop, Arkansas) lauding the murder of Suleimani. This is one of the readers' comments:

    Bill
    Nova ScotiaJan. 10
    Times Pick
    I don't understand how the USA can kill a military leader of a country we are not at war with in a third country no less and claim it was legal. The resulting high-pressure in the aftermath has left 63 Canadian citizens dead. Yes, at the hands of an Iranian missile - but many of those dead were dual Iranian Canadians. The blood is not just on Iran's hands, it is on the USA and on trump.

    [Jan 12, 2020] The United States has murdered one of Iran's top personalities who was officially visiting a friendly country on a diplomatic mission

    Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Sasha , Jan 11 2020 22:39 utc | 298

    ... ... ...

    Killing a General

    The United States has murdered one of Iran's top personalities who was officially visiting a friendly country on a diplomatic mission.

    The message of the assassination of Gasem Soleimani is the persistence of Washington in the effort to keep the world's first energy region revolt and prevent any distension between Iran and Saudi Arabia...

    (...)Soleimani was a great strategist who achieved three notable victories in the last seventeen years: He was one of the organizers of the armed resistance to the American occupier in Iraq after the 2003 invasion, played a great role in the expulsion of the Islamic State from Iraq and defeated then the jihadist conglomerate in Syria (Islamic State, Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, etc.) financed and supported by the CIA and the Gulf oil monarchies. It was Soleimani who in 2015 convinced Vladimir Putin of the advisability of helping the Syrian government militarily, which has ended up restoring its control of the country by thwarting a new regime change operation that has resulted in another huge slaughter.

    (...)Since Friday, January 3, all commentators announced an Iranian response to this "declaration of war" by Trump, or his generals, does not matter. It is forgotten that this war has been a fact for many years. Historically it began with the coup d'etat against Mossadeq, the Iranian prime minister who nationalized oil, and continued with the reaction to the Khomeinist Revolution of 1979, which induced the West to provoke the bloody war between Iraq and Iran in the 1980s with hundreds of thousands of dead.

    (...)The unilateral withdrawal of the United States, in May 2018, from the nuclear agreement reached with Iran, as well as the sanctions suffered by that country, the murders of Iranian scientists and the attacks, sanctions and the financial and oil blockade that suffocates the Iranian economy, form Part of that war. For 19 months, Iranian oil exports, which in 2017 were 2.5 million barrels per day, have fallen to a few hundred thousand as a result of Trump's sanctions.

    (...)And in the meantime in Europe ...

    On Sunday, January 5, 48 hours after the murder in Baghdad, the leaders of the three main European powers, Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron and Boris Johson, released their joint statement. In it the murder of Soleimani is not even mentioned. "We have denounced the recent attacks on coalition troops in Iraq and are deeply concerned about the negative role played by Iran in the region, especially through the guards of the revolution and of the al-Quds unit under the command of General Soleimani", says the statement. "We especially call on Iran to refrain from more violence", it continues. In other personal statements Johnson told Trump that Soleimani "posed a threat to all our interests" and that "we do not regret his death". Macron expressed concern about the destabilizing role of the forces led by the assassinated general and German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas stated that the General "had left a trail of devastation and blood in the Middle East" and that "the European Union had good reasons to have him on its list of terrorists". This statement prompted Tehran to summon the German ambassador and censor him for his support of the "terrorist attack by the United States". For its part, the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has held Iran alone responsible for escalating tensions in the Middle East and has justified the murder as a reaction to the provocations suffered by the Americans in Iraq. Once again the "European foreign policy" is portrayed.

    It is in Germany, at the base of Ramstein, where the command and control point of drone attacks by US forces is located. An anonymous German citizen has filed a complaint in the town of Zweibrücken to be elucidated if the murder was piloted from Ramstein. Such action being a violation of international law and German law, it has filed a complaint "against all suspects of such crime in Germany and the United States." Those who still believe in the European "rule of law" for international purposes, can hold on to this symbolic gesture without the slightest future.

    [Jan 12, 2020] It is worse than a crime, it is a mistake: Soleimani was crucial to the victory over ISIS/ISIL/Daesh in Iraq

    Jan 10, 2020 | angrybearblog.com
    ... He was viewed as crucial to the victory over ISIS/ISIL/Daesh in Iraq, much feared by Iranians. Shia take martyrdom seriously, and he is viewed as a martyr. It appears that even Trump took notice of the massive outpouring of mourning and praise for Soleimani there up to the point of people dying in a stampede in a mourning crowd in his hometown. But, hey, obviously these people simply do not understand that he was The World's Number One Terrorist! Heck, I saw one commenter on Marginal Revolution claiming Soleimani was responsible killing "hundreds of thousands." Yes, this sort of claim is floating around out there.

    A basic problem here is that while indeed Soleimani commanded the IGRC al Quds force that supported and supplied various Shia militias in several Middle Eastern nations, these all were (and are) ultimately independent. Soleimani may have advised them, but he was never in a position to order any of them to do anything. Al Quds itself has never carried out any of the various attacks outside of Iran that Soleimani is supposedly personally responsible for.

    Let us consider the specific case that gets pushed most emphatically, the 603 Americans dead in Iraq, without doubt a hot button item here in the US. First of all, even if Soleimani really was personally responsible for their deaths, there is the technical matter that their deaths cannot be labeled "terrorism." That is about killing non-combatant civilians, not military personnel involved in combat. I do not support the killing of those American soldiers, most of whom were done in by IEDs, which also horribly injured many more. But indeed this awful stuff happened. But in fact this was all done by Iraqi -based Shia militias. Yes, they were supported by Soleimani, but while some have charged al Quds suppplied the IEDs, this turns out not to be the case. These were apparently made in Iraq by these local militias. Soleimani's al Quds are not totally innocent in all this, reportedly providing some training and some inputs. But the IEDs were made by the militias themselves and planted by them.

    It is also the case that when the militias and Americans were working together against ISIS/IISIL/Daesh, none of this happened, and indeed that was still the case up until this most recent set of events, with the death setting off all this an American civilian contractor caught on a base where several Iraqis were killed by a rocket from the Kat'b Hezbollah Iraqi group. Of course with Trump having Soleimani assassinated, this cooperation has ceased, with the US military no longer either fighting ISIS/ISIL/Daesh nor training the Iraqi military. Indeed, the Iraqi parliament has demanded that US troops leave entirely, although Trump threatened Iraq with economic sanctions if that is followed through on.

    As it is, the US dating back to the Obama administration has been supplying Saudi Arabia with both arms and intelligence that has been used to kill thousands of Yemeni civilians. Frankly, US leaders look more like terrorists than Soleimani.

    I shall close by noting the major changes in opinion in both Iran and Iraq regarding the US as a result of this assassination. In Iran as many have noted there were major demonstrations against the regime going on, protesting bad economic conditions, even as those substantially were the result of the illegal US economic sanctions imposed after the US withdrew from the JCPOA nuclear deal, to which Iran was adhering. Now those demonstrations have stopped and been replaced by the mass demonstrations against the US over Soleimani's assassination. And we also have Iran further withdrawing from that deal and moving to more highly enrich uranium.

    In Iraq, there had been major anti-Iran demonstrations going on, with these supported to some degree by the highest religious authority in the nation, Ayatollah Ali Sistani. However, when Soleimani's body was being transferred to Iran, Sistani's son accompanied his body. It really is hard to see anything that justifies this assassination.

    Barkley Rosser

    1. JDM , January 10, 2020 12:32 pm

      I think this quote is apropos in this situation: "It was worse than wrong. It was a mistake."

    Bert Schlitz , January 10, 2020 3:46 pm

    They had a handshake agreement, which was why Solemiani wasn't under protection. The Solemiani killed Americans stuff cracks me up. He was a military advisor for the Shia militia's who were attacked by US forces during a unsanctioned war in 2003 .uh derp derp. There have been many other generals that have committed "death of american" crimes that the Trump Admin seems to love.

    As my father used to say "homosexuals make great commie fighters"(homosexuals like Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin agree lol). The zionists so badly want this war in the Trump administration, but Trump doesn't have the guts to just invade like Iraq.

    rjs , January 10, 2020 5:26 pm

    it appears i had a comment on this same post removed from Naked Capitalism

    i asked "was his assassination due to the impeachment proceedings, and should the Democrats in Congress be held responsible for the deaths on Ukrainian flight 752?"

    sure, that's off the wall, but i still think it addresses a legitimate question i don't think one can separate the personal situation a megalomaniac president like Trump finds himself in from his behavior .i was a news junky back during the Iraq war era, & what i remember most about the runup was that the big story in all the news mags the week before the war started was that Neil Bush, George's son, had lost millions of depositor's money playing poker in the back offices of Silverado Savings and Loan in Denver, and that you then could't find a word about that story anywhere the next week cause George & Saddam had all the coverage .so i have always felt that Bush might have pushed that war forward to take the media heat off his kid

    run75441 , January 10, 2020 5:38 pm

    No surprise, when I preempt their article on healthcare with commentary; my comments disappear. Get used to it when you can say more than they can.

    rjs , January 11, 2020 11:03 am

    well, here you go, Trump actually admitting to what i've been banned for suggesting via Jonathan Chait:

    Report: Trump Cited Impeachment Pressure to Kill Soleimani – Deep inside a long, detailed Wall Street Journal report about President Trump's foreign policy advisers is an explosive nugget: "Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said." This is a slightly stronger iteration of a fact the New York Times reported three days ago, to wit, "pointed out to one person who spoke to him on the phone last week that he had been pressured to take a harder line on Iran by some Republican senators whose support he needs now more than ever amid an impeachment battle."This would not mean Trump ordered the strike entirely, or even primarily, in order to placate Senate Republicans. But it does constitute an admission that domestic political considerations influenced his decision. That would, of course, constitute a grave dereliction of duty. Trump is so cynical he wouldn't even recognize that making foreign policy decisions influenced by impeachment is the kind of thing he shouldn't say out loud. Of course, using his foreign policy authority for domestic political gain is the offense Trump is being impeached for. It would be characteristically Trumpian to compound the offense as part of his efforts to avoid accountability for it. What kind of pressure could Trump have in mind? It seems highly doubtful that he is worried 20 Republican senators would vote to remove him from office. He could be concerned that one or two of them would defect, denying him the chance to present impeachment as totally partisan (as he did following the House vote.) More plausibly, Trump might be worried a handful of Republicans would join Democrats to allow testimony from witnesses, like John Bolton, Trump has managed to block.

    likbez , January 11, 2020 10:24 pm

    @JDM, January 10, 2020 12:32 pm

    I think this quote is apropos in this situation: "It was worse than wrong. It was a mistake."

    This is a very deep observation. Thank you. BTW the original quote is attributed to Talleyrand and is more biting:

    C'est pire qu'un crime, c'est une faute.

    It is worse than a crime, it is a mistake.

    Reaction to the 1804 drumhead trial and execution of Louis Antoine de Bourbon, Duke of Enghien, on orders of Napoleon. Actually said by either Antoine Boulay de la Meurthe, legislative deputy from Meurthe (according to the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations) or Joseph Fouché, Napoleon's chief of police (according to John Bartlett, Familiar Quotations, 10th ed. (1919), http://www.bartleby.com/100/758.1.html ).

    Rephrasing Kissinger: " Assassination is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one".

    [Jan 12, 2020] Dangerous Neocon Soros Puppet Chrystia Freeland Replaced as Canada's Foreign Minister SOTN Alternative News, Analysis Co

    Jan 12, 2020 | stateofthenation.co

    Dangerous Neocon & Soros Puppet Chrystia Freeland Replaced as Canada's Foreign Minister Posted on December 2, 2019 by State of the Nation A Sea Change for Canada Foreign Policy as Freeland Is Replaced by a Pro-Chinese Politico

    Matthew Ehret
    Strategic Culture Foundation

    In Chrystia Freeland's 2012 book Plutocrats, Canada's leading Rhodes Scholar laid out a surprisingly clear analysis of the two camps of elites who she explained would, by their very nature, battle for control of the newly emerging system as the old paradigm collapsed.

    In her book and article series, she described the "practical populist politician" which has tended to be adherent to business interests and personal gain during past decades vs the new breed of "technocrat" which has an enlightened non-practical (ie: Malthusian) worldview, willing to make monetary sacrifices for the "greater good".

    She further defined the "good Plutocrats" vs "bad Plutocrats". Good Plutocrats included the likes of George Soros, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos who made their billions under the free-for-all epoch of globalization, but who were willing to adapt to the new rules of the post-globalization game. This was a game which she defined in an absurd 2013 TED Talk as a "green New Deal" of global regulation under a de-carbonized (and depopulated) green economy. For those "bad plutocrats" unwilling to play by the new rules (ie: the Trumps, Putins or any industrialist who refused to commit seppuku on the altar of Gaia), they would simply go extinct. This threat was re-packaged by Canada's "other" globalist puppet Mark Carney, who recently said "If some companies and industries fail to adjust to this new world, they will fail to exist."

    Of course, when Freeland formulated these threats in 2011, China's Belt and Road had not yet existed, nor had the Russia-China alliance which together are now challenging the regime-change driven world order in remarkably successful strides. The thought that nationalism could possibly make a comeback in the west was as unthinkable as the failure of free trade deals like NAFTA or the TPP.

    As of November 18, 2019, Freeland has found herself cut down a notch by the "plutocrats" that she has worked so assiduously to destroy since becoming Canada's Foreign Minister in 2017 when she ousted a Foreign Minister (Stephane Dion) who had called for a renewed cooperation with Russia on space, counter-terrorism and arctic development with Sergei Lavrov. Freeland's unrepentant support for Ukrainian Nazis and NATO encirclement of Russia resulted in a total alienation of Russia. Her alienation of China was so successful that the Chinese government removed their ambassador in the summer of 2019. Freeland's work in organizing the failed coup in Venezuela and supporting the MI6-Soros White Helmets in Syria became so well known that she became known as the Canadian queen of regime change.

    Other pro-Chinese "bad plutocratic" companies which have been targeted for destruction under Freeland's watch have included the beleaguered construction giant Aecon Inc. who's board voted in favor of being sold to China in March 2018 in order to play a role in Belt and Road Projects ( a decision vetoed by the Federal Government in May 2018 ), as well as Quebec-based SNC Lavalin which has had major deals with both Russia and China on nuclear power and major infrastructure projects and which now faces being shut down in Canada for having bribed politicians in Libya when it built Qadaffi's Great Manmade River (destroyed by NATO in 2011).

    Former Liberal Minister of Infrastructure from Shawinigan Quebec, Francois-Philippe Champagne has taken over Freeland's portfolio and with him it appears a new pro-Eurasian policy may be emerging in Canada much more conducive to the long term survival (and strategic relevance) of Canada. This shift has already been noted by China which has responded by sending a new Ambassador to Ottawa, while a new Canadian Ambassador with a long history of working towards positive Chinese relations in the private sector (Dominic Barton) has just begun working in Beijing. Barton was the first Ambassador to China since "old guard" politician John McCallum was fired in January 2019 for defending Huawei's Meng Wanzhou to a group of Chinese journalists.

    In opposition to the cacophonic voice of Freeland, Champagne had spoken positively of China in 2017 saying "In a world of uncertainty, of unpredictability, of questioning about the rules that have been established to govern our trading relationship, Canada, and I would say China, stand out as [a] beacon of stability, predictability, a rule-based system, a very inclusive society."

    Champagne is a long-standing protégé of former Prime Minister Jean Chretien and world travelled businessman who has worked in the European nuclear sector and has promoted industrial development with China for years. Jean Chretien, who campaigned for Champagne's recent re-election, represents everything Freeland hates: A "practical" old school politician who recognizes that World War III and alienating Eurasian nations who are shaping the future is bad for business. In 2014, Chretien was given the "Friend of Russia" award and has played a major role in the private sector working with Quebec-based Power Corporation which runs the Canada-China Business Council (CCBC) and has brokered major contracts throughout China since ending his term as PM in 2003. Chretien is also the father in-law of current CCBC chair Paul Desmarais Jr. who is the heir to the PowerCorp dynasty. While these are not groups that in any way exemplify morality, they are practical industrialists who know depopulation and world war are bad for business and would prefer to adapt to a China-led BRI system over a "green technocratic dictatorship".

    Since December 2018, Chretien has attacked Freeland's decision to support Meng Wanzhou's extradiction to the USA, and has volunteered to lead a delegation to China in order to smooth tensions.

    So while the "bad plutocrats" appear to have taken an important step forward though the debris of the recent near failure of the Liberal Party which narrowly kept a minority government after the October 21 Federal Elections, the ideologically driven technocrats led by Queen Freeland shouldn't be discounted, as her new position as Deputy Prime Minister puts her in a position to possibly take control of Canada as 2 nd in command of a highly fragmented nation which is now hearing renewed calls for separation in Alberta, and Quebec.

    ___
    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/11/30/sea-change-canada-foreign-policy-as-freeland-is-replaced-by-pro-chinese-politico/

    [Jan 12, 2020] The Politics Behind Banning Russia From the Olympics -- Strategic Culture

    Jan 12, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

    Michael Averko January 11, 2020 © Photo: Government.ru There've been ongoing propaganda pieces that skirt over some inconvenient realities, for those seeking to unfairly admonish Russia in the Olympic movement. One case in point is the January 2 Reuters article " Use 1992 Yugoslavia Precedent for Russians in Tokyo – Historian ". With a stated " some Russians ", that article suggestively under-represents the actual number of 2018 Russian Winter Olympians at Pyeongchang, while supporting a hypocritically flawed aspect, having to do with Yugoslavia in 1992.

    The downplaying of Russian participation at Pyeongchang, is seemingly done to spin the image of many Russian cheats being kept out. At the suggestion of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the International Olympic Committee (IOC) closely vetted Russians for competition at the 2018 Winter Olympics. In actuality, the 2018 Russian Winter Olympic participation wasn't so off the mark, when compared to past Winter Olympiads – something which (among other things) puts a dent into the faulty notion that Russia should be especially singled out for sports doping.

    At the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics, Russia had its largest ever Winter Olympic contingent of 232 , on account of the host nation being allowed a greater number of participants. The 168 Russian Winter Olympians at Pyeongchang is 9 less than the Russians who competed at the 2010 Winter Olympics. Going back further, Russian Winter Olympic participation in 2006 was at 190 , with its 2002 contingent at 151 , 1998 having 122 and 1994 (Russia's first formal Winter Olympic appearance as Russia) 113 .

    The aforementioned Reuters piece references a " historian ", Bill Mallon, who is keen on using the 1992 Summer Olympic banning of Yugoslavia (then consisting of Serbia and Montenegro) as a legitimate basis to ban Russia from the upcoming Summer Olympics. In this instance, Alan Dershowitz's periodic reference to the " if the shoe is on the other foot " test is quite applicable . Regarding Mallon, " historian " is put in quotes because his historically premised advocacy is very much incomplete and overly propagandistic.

    For consistency sake and contrary to Mallon, Yugoslavia should've formally participated at the 1992 Summer Olympics. The Olympic banning of Yugoslavia was bogus, given that the IOC and the IOC affiliated sports federations didn't ban the US and USSR for their respective role in wars, which caused a greater number of deaths than what happened in 1990s Bosnia. The Reuters article at issue references a United Nations resolution for sanctions against Yugoslavia, without any second guessing, in support of the preference (at least by some) to keep politics out of sports as much as possible.

    Mallon casually notes that Yugoslav team sports were banned from the 1992 Summer Olympics, unlike individual Yugoslav athletes, who participated as independents. At least two of the banned Yugoslav teams were predicted to be lead medal contenders.

    Croatia was allowed to compete at the 1992 Summer Olympics, despite that nation's military involvement in the Bosnian Civil War. During the 1992 Summer and Winter Olympics, the former USSR participated in individual and team sports as the Unified Team (with the exception of the three former Soviet Baltic republics, who competed under their respective nation). With all this in mind, the ban on team sports from Yugoslavia at the 1992 Summer Olympics, under a neutral name, appears to be hypocritical and ethically challenged.

    BS aside, the reality is that geopolitical clout (in the form of might making right), is what compels the banning of Yugoslavia, unlike superpowers engaged in behavior which isn't less egregious. Although a major world power, contemporary Russia lacks the overall geopolitical influence of the USSR. Historian Stephen Cohen and some others, have noted that post-Soviet Russia doesn't get the same (for lack of a better word) respect accorded to the USSR. This aspect underscores how becoming freer, less militaristic and more market oriented doesn't (by default) bring added goodwill from a good number of Western establishment politicos and the organizations which are greatly influenced by them.

    On the subject of banning Russia from the Olympics, Canadian sports legal politico Dick Pound, continues to rehash an inaccurate likening with no critical follow-up. ( An exception being yours truly .) Between 2016 and 2019 , Pound references the Olympic banning of South Africa, as a basis for excluding Russia. South Africa was banned when it had apartheid policies, which prevented that country's Black majority from competing in organized sports. Russia has a vast multiethnic participation in sports and other sectors.

    As previously noted , the factual premise to formally ban Russia from the Olympics remains suspect. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is set to review Russia's appeal to have the recommended WADA ban against Russia overturned, as Western mass media at large and sports politicos like Pound continue to push for a CAS decision against Russia.

    [Jan 12, 2020] Iran's accidental downing of a Ukrainian plane is already being used to smear MH-17 skeptics by Max Parry

    Notable quotes:
    "... What no one is mentioning is: the US airstrikes on Iraqi military bases, and Soleimani's murder contributed greatly to the hair trigger response of Iran's air defense forces. If Washington did not turn the heat up on both Iraq and Iran there would have been no need for Iran's retaliation, and thus the level of Iran's domestic defense forces would not have been so nervous as to pull the trigger downing the airliner. ..."
    "... Former CIA high-ranking official accidentally reveals the type of the false flag operation that the US imperialists will orchestrate to start a war with Iran https://failedevolution.blogspot.com/2020/01/former-cia-high-ranking-official.html ..."
    "... It reminds me too much of MH-17, which was not hit with a BUK but with bullets. Iran should have closed its airspace because such tricks are to be expected, irrespective of the cause of the current accident. ..."
    Jan 11, 2020 | www.unz.com

    When the Pentagon confirmed the assassination of Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani, U.S. President Donald Trump took to social media to post a single image of the American flag to the adulation of his followers. Unfortunately, most Americans are ignorant of the other flag synonymous with U.S. foreign policy, that of the 'false flag' utilized to deceive the public and stir up support for endless war abroad. While the chicken hawk defenders of Trump's reckless decision to murder one of the biggest contributors in the defeat of ISIS salivated over possible war with Iran, their appetite was spoiled by Tehran's retaliatory precision strikes of two U.S. bases in Iraq that deliberately avoided casualties while in accordance with the Islamic Republic's right to self defense under Article 51 of the United Nations charter. The reprisal successfully deescalated the crisis but sent a clear message Iran was willing to stand up to the U.S. with the backing of Russia and China, while Washington underestimated Tehran which forewarned the Iraqi government of its impending counterattack so U.S. personnel could evacuate.

    In the hours following the ballistic missile strikes, reports came in that a Boeing 737 international passenger flight scheduled from Tehran to Kiev, Ukraine had crashed shortly after takeoff from Imam Khomeini International Airport, killing all 176 passengers and flight crew on board. Initial video of the crash of Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 (PS752) showed that the aircraft was already in flames while descending to the ground, leading to speculation it was shot down amid the heightened political crisis between Iran and Washington. In the days following, a second obscure video surfaced which only increased this suspicion. Meanwhile, Western governments quickly concluded that an anti-aircraft surface-to-air missile brought PS752 down and were eager to point the finger at Iran before any formal investigation. Many people, including this author, were admittedly skeptical as to how a plane taking off from Tehran could have been mistaken five hours after the strikes in Iraq.

    Nevertheless, those with reservations turned out to be wrong when days later the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) came clean that its aerospace forces made a "human error" and accidentally shot the passenger plane down after mistaking it for a incoming cruise missile when it flew close to a military base during a heightened state of alert in anticipation of U.S. attack. Many have noted that Iran's honorable decision to take responsibility for the catastrophe is in sharp contrast with Washington's response in 1988 when the U.S. Navy shot down Iran Air Flight 655 scheduled from Tehran to Dubai over the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, killing all 290 occupants, after failing to cover it up. Just a month later, Vice President George H.W. Bush would notoriously state he would " never apologize for the United States of America. Ever. I don't care what the facts are ." Although he was not directly referring to the incident, one can only imagine what the reaction would be if Iranian President Hassan Rouhani were to say the same weeks after shooting down the Ukrainian plane, let alone an American one. Predictably, Tehran's transparency has gone mostly unappreciated while the Trump administration is already trying to use the disaster to further demonize Iran.

    Oddly enough, Ukrainian International Airlines is partly owned by the infamous Ukrainian-Israeli oligarch, politician and energy tycoon Igor Kolomoisky, who was notably one of the biggest financiers of the anti-Russian, pro-EU coup d'etat which overthrew the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. Kolomoisky is also a principal backer of current Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky whose dubious phone call with Trump resulted in the 45th U.S. president's impeachment last month. In another astounding coincidence, Kolomoisky's Privat Group is believed to control Burisma Holdings, the Cypress-based company whose executive board 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden's son Hunter was appointed to following the Maidan junta. The former Vice President admitted that he bribed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor who was looking into his son's corruption by threatening to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees.

    Kolomoisky, AKA "the Chameleon", is one of the wealthiest people in the ex-Soviet country and was formerly appointed as governor of an administrative region bordering Donbass in eastern Ukraine following the 2014 putsch. He has also funded a battalion of volunteer neo-Nazi mercenaries fighting alongside the Ukrainian army in the War in Donbass against Russian-speaking separatists which the military aid temporarily withheld by the Trump administration that was disputably contingent upon an investigation of Biden and his son goes to. In 2014, another infamous plane shootdown made international headlines when Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) scheduled from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was shot down over the breakaway Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) in eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 passengers and crew.

    From the get-go, the Obama administration was adamant that the missile which shot down the Boeing 777 came from separatist rebel territory. However, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad denounced the charges brought against the Russian and Ukrainian nationals indicted in the NATO-led investigation, dismissing the entire probe as a politically motivated effort predetermined to scapegoat Moscow and exclude Malaysian participation in the inquiry from the very beginning. Mohamad is featured in the excellent documentary MH17: Call for Justice made by a team of independent journalists which contests the NATO-scripted narrative and reveals that the Buk missile was more likely launched from Ukrainian Army-controlled territory than the DPR. One of Kolomoisky's hired guns could also have been responsible.

    Shamefully, Iran's admission of guilt in the PS752 downing is already being used by establishment propagandists to discredit skeptics and conflated with similar contested past events like MH17 in order to intimidate dissenting voices from speaking up in the future. The Bellingcat 'investigative journalism' collective which made its name incriminating Moscow for the MH17 tragedy are the principle offenders. Bellingcat bills itself as an 'independent' citizen journalism group even though its founder Eliot Higgins is employed by the Atlantic Council think tank which receives funding from NATO, the U.S. State Department, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), George Soros' Open Society Foundation NGO, and numerous other regime change factories. Despite its enormous conflict of interest, Bellingcat remains highly cited by corporate media as a supposedly reputable source. At the outset, nearly everything about the PS752 tragedy gave one déjà vu of the MH17 disaster, including the rush to judgement by Western governments, so it was only natural for many to distrust the official narrative until more facts came out.

    None of this changes that the use of commercial passenger jets as false flag targets for U.S. national security subterfuge is a verifiable historical fact, not a 'conspiracy theory.' In 1997, the U.S. National Archives declassified a 1962 memo proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Department of Defense for then-Secretary of State Robert McNamara entitled " Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba ." The document outlined a series of 'false flag' terrorist attacks, codenamed Operation Northwoods, to be carried out on a range of targets and blamed on the Cuban government to give grounds for an invasion of Havana in order to depose Fidel Castro. These scenarios included targets within the U.S., in particular Miami, Florida, which had become a haven of right-wing émigrés and defectors following the Cuban Revolution. In addition to the sinking of a Cuban refugee boat, one Northwoods plan included the staging of attacks on a civilian jet airliner and a U.S. Air Force plane to be pinned on Castro's government:

    "8. It is possible to create and incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

    9. It is possible to create an incident which will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack."

    Although Operation Northwoods was rejected by then-U.S. President John F. Kennedy which many believe was a factor in his subsequent assassination, Cuban exiles with the support of U.S. intelligence would later be implicated in such an attack the following decade with the bombing of Cubana Airlines Flight 455 in 1976 which killed all 73 passengers and crew on board. In 2005, documents released by the National Security Archive showed that the CIA under then-director George H.W. Bush had advanced knowledge of the plans of a Dominican Republic-based Cuban exile terrorist organization, the Coordination of United Revolutionary Organizations (CORU), at the direction of former CIA operative Luis Posada Carriles to blow up the airliner. The U.S. later refused to extradite Carriles to Cuba to face charges and although he never admitted to masterminding the bombing of the jet, he publicly confessed to other attacks on tourist hotels in Cuba during the 1990s and was later arrested in 2000 for attempting to blow up an auditorium in Panama trying to assassinate Castro.

    In 1962, the planners of Operation Northwoods concluded that such deceptive operations would shift U.S. public opinion unanimously against Cuba.

    "World opinion and the United Nations forum should be favorably affected by developing the international image of Cuban government as rash and irresponsible, and as an alarming and unpredictable threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere."

    The same talking points are used by the U.S. government to demonize Iran today. Initially, some Western intelligence sources also concluded that it was a malfunction or overheated engine that brought PS752 down in corroboration with the Iranian government's original explanation until the narrative abruptly shifted the following day. That they were so quick to hold Iran accountable without any investigation gave the apparent likelihood that PS752 could have fallen prey to a Northwoods-style false flag operation designed to further isolate Iran and defame its leaders after they took precautions to avoid U.S. casualties in their retaliatory strikes for the killing of Soleimani. Maintaining the image of Iran as a nefarious regime is crucial in justifying hawkish U.S. policies toward the country and Iran's noted restraint in its retaliation put a dent in that impression, so many were suspicious and rightly so.

    It was also entirely plausible that U.S. special operations planners could have consulted the Northwoods playbook replacing Cuba with Iran and the right-wing gusanos who were to assist the staged attacks in Miami with the Iranian opposition group known as Mujahedin e-Khalq (MEK/People's Mujahedin of Iran) to do the same in Tehran. In July of last year, Trump's personal lawyer and former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani gave a paid speech at the cult-like group's compound in Albania where he not only referred to the group as Iran's "government-in-exile" but stated the U.S's explicit intentions to use them for regime change in Iran. The MEK enjoys high level contacts in the Trump administration and the group was elated at his decision to murder Soleimani in Baghdad.

    From 1997 until 2012, the MEK was on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations until it was removed by the Obama administration after its expulsion from Iraq in order to relocate the group to fortified bases in Albania and the NATO protectorate of Kosovo. The latter disputed territory is a perfect fit for the rebranded group having been founded by another deregistered foreign terrorist organization, the al-Qaeda linked Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), whose leader, Hashim Thaçi, presides over the partially-recognized state. The MEK are no longer designated as such despite the State Department's own account of its bloody history:

    "During the 1970s, the MEK staged terrorist attacks inside Iran to destabilize and embarrass the Shah's regime; the group killed several US military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran. The group also supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran. In April 1992 the MEK carried out attacks on Iranian embassies in 13 different countries, demonstrating the group's ability to mount large-scale operations overseas."

    Declassified documents revealing the sinister plans in Operation Northwoods which shockingly made it all the way to the desk of the president of the United States and the foreknowledge of Cubana Airlines Flight 455 are just two examples of solid proof that false flag attacks against civilian passenger planes are a part of the Pentagon's modus operandi as disclosed in its own archives and there is no reason to believe that such practices have been discontinued. That the U.S. is still cozy with "former" terror groups like MEK seeking to repatriate is good reason to believe its use of militant exiles for covert operations like those from Havana has not been retired. If there were jumps to conclusions that proven serial liars could be looking for an excuse to stage an attack to lay the blame on Iran, it is only because the distinct probability was overwhelming. Even so, a stopped clock strikes the right time twice per day and that is all Iran's acknowledgment of its liability proves -- that even the world's most unreliable and criminal sources in Washington and Langley can be accurate sometimes

    the grand wazoo , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 2:34 am GMT

    What no one is mentioning is: the US airstrikes on Iraqi military bases, and Soleimani's murder contributed greatly to the hair trigger response of Iran's air defense forces. If Washington did not turn the heat up on both Iraq and Iran there would have been no need for Iran's retaliation, and thus the level of Iran's domestic defense forces would not have been so nervous as to pull the trigger downing the airliner.
    But, if's a huge word.
    Flint Clint , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 5:41 am GMT
    I disagree.

    https://m.jpost.com/Defense/WikiLeaks-Russia-gave-Israel-Iranian-codes

    Israel has had control of Iran's Russian middle systems for years. Russia gave them the codes.

    I think Israel blew up the aircraft. I can't find a link but I heard a huge number of Soleimani loyalists were arrested in Iran. Someone should have a link to that from Twitter or somewhere.

    I think that there was some kind of collaboration between Khamenei, Israel and the US to remove Soleimani who had designs on a coup.

    I don't know if this is a good or bad thing.

    I also don't know who was on that plane. So it's unclear if it was good or bad it was destroyed. Who knows who those 176 dual Iranian Nationals were.

    I just know that if Israel had control of those missile units and it would embarrass Iran for that to be revealed it makes sense for Iran to claim the lesser of two deep shames.

    Particularly if there has been some kind of tacit acceptance of a status as a vassal state to either the US or Israel behind the scenes to preserve the regime.

    Perhaps the MEK or a different vassal ruler who is really crypto Jewish will be appointed in Solemeinis place, and Iran will hence offer a symbolic enemy to justify the continuation of the military industrial complex in both Israel and the US.

    Just one feasible theory.

    Ilya G Poimandres , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 6:46 am GMT
    Even a blind squirrel, even a broken clock twice a day.. The Empire's statements and blind accusations could have been for any tragedy in a country they were psyopsing, only a matter of chance for them to be right at some time. In any case, it wasn't intentional on Iran's part.
    nmb , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 7:27 am GMT
    Former CIA high-ranking official accidentally reveals the type of the false flag operation that the US imperialists will orchestrate to start a war with Iran
    https://failedevolution.blogspot.com/2020/01/former-cia-high-ranking-official.html
    Lol just lol , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 8:09 am GMT
    "Accidental" lol

    Only if accidental means a joint Russian/Iranian hit on a Ukrainian plane carrying fleeing cia/mossad agents.

    This whole situation has once again displayed how easy it is for the zio-media to control what we see and hear and believe. Disturbingly, that means that things like metoo and "believe all women" are operations too.

    We are f*cked no matter what.

    Crazy Horse , says: Website Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 8:56 am GMT
    @the grand wazoo I wouldn't be surprised it the FDR shows that the plane strayed off its registered Flightpath and was involved in a covert recon mission that went bad.
    Antares , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 9:15 am GMT
    It reminds me too much of MH-17, which was not hit with a BUK but with bullets. Iran should have closed its airspace because such tricks are to be expected, irrespective of the cause of the current accident. There is no immediate reason for Iranians to fly to Ukraine, or anywhere else. It may sound silly but flying is still a special and dangerous thing and should not be taken for granted.

    For someone who doesn't watch television or read Iranian newspapers it was only reported on Twitter and then repeated by PressTV and others on internet. Which parts of the story are real?

    Alfred , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 9:30 am GMT
    Of course, it was a huge and most regrettable mistake. Doubtless, the Iranians will compensate the victims for what that is worth. Most of the passengers were Iranians. I suspect that many of the "Canadians" Trudeau is on about are of Iranian descent. They would certainly be considered to be Iranians in Iran.

    The series of coincidences highlighted in this article are remarkable. It has synchronicity splashed all over it.

    I worked at Tehran airport for some years prior to the Revolution. After the Revolution, I volunteered to return on behalf of Raytheon (of all companies) to get some money owing. No one else was prepared to go there. Iran Air personnel were delighted to meet me again and they promptly paid the bill. I took a holiday to the Caspian with my ex-girlfriend.

    A further piece of synchronicity is that I am currently visiting Kiev. The world is a truly incestuous place.

    ... ... ...

    Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
    @the grand wazoo "What no one is mentioning ."??? Really? That's almost exactly what some Iranian spokesmen have been saying.
    Wizard of Oz , says: Show Comment January 12, 2020 at 10:29 am GMT
    Set aside the beatup of two operations that neither the CIA or any American agency carried out the author has apparently failed to see the obvious. That is that the Iranians had no possibility of covering up the missile strike. Or did he imagine that everyone who might tell the truth could be kept permanently separated from plane parts and bodies which would have shown unmistakeable and undeniable evidences of the strike.

    [Jan 12, 2020] Our Orwellian surveillance state the term imminent has been redefined ala doublespeak to mean at any time possible.

    Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    UserFriendly , Jan 12 2020 0:53 utc | 338

    Can there be any "imminent threat" when one does not know the "who, what, when, where" of the threat?

    Ahh you made the common mistake of thinking words have meaning. Just like our Orwellian surveillance state the term imminent has been redefined ala doublespeak to mean at any time possible.
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/lies-the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-the-illegal-murder-of-soleimani/

    [Jan 12, 2020] Iran Has Effective Military Advantage Over US, Allies in Mideast, New Report Claims

    Notable quotes:
    "... The 16-month study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) called Iran's Networks of Influence claims that the networks, including Shia militias fighting in what it says is a "grey zone", for instance, are something Iran heavily relies on, even to a greater extent than conventional military forces. ..."
    "... Although the report concedes that overall military balance is still in favor of the US and allies, the balance of effective forces has shifted towards Iran and is currently in the Islamic Republic's favour. The study goes on to claim that "Iran is fighting and winning wars 'fought amongst the people', not wars between states". ..."
    "... The study has also come up with a number of calculations: the extraterritorial al-Quds force and various militias reportedly amount to 200,000 fighters. Meanwhile, the total cost of Iran's activities in Iraq and Yemen was $16 billion, and Lebanon's Hezbollah reportedly receives $700 million in grants from the Islamic Republic. ..."
    Jan 12, 2020 | sputniknews.com

    A fresh in-depth study of Iran's military capabilities and balance of power in the embattled Middle East has assumed that regional wars are being waged on two layers - between states and in a so-called "grey zone", where no conventional force can counterbalance Iran's sovereign dominance. As one of the most detailed assessments of Iran's military strategy suggests, the Islamic Republic's "third party capability" has becomes Tehran's most prominent weapon of choice.

    The 16-month study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) called Iran's Networks of Influence claims that the networks, including Shia militias fighting in what it says is a "grey zone", for instance, are something Iran heavily relies on, even to a greater extent than conventional military forces.

    The network is said to be operating differently in most countries, having been designed by Tehran as a key means of countering regional instability and international pressure alike, with the policy "having consistently delivered Iran advantage without the cost or risk of direct confrontation with adversaries".

    Although the report concedes that overall military balance is still in favor of the US and allies, the balance of effective forces has shifted towards Iran and is currently in the Islamic Republic's favour. The study goes on to claim that "Iran is fighting and winning wars 'fought amongst the people', not wars between states".

    The report details at length the balance of power in the region painting it as "complex and congested battle spaces involving no rule of law or accountability, low visibility and multiple players who represent a mosaic of local and regional interests".

    The study has also come up with a number of calculations: the extraterritorial al-Quds force and various militias reportedly amount to 200,000 fighters. Meanwhile, the total cost of Iran's activities in Iraq and Yemen was $16 billion, and Lebanon's Hezbollah reportedly receives $700 million in grants from the Islamic Republic.

    The report comes as Iran continues to battle US-imposed economic sanctions, which closely followed Washington's unilateral withdrawal from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in May 2018.

    On 8 May, the first anniversary of the move, Tehran announced that it would start scrapping its nuclear obligations stipulated by the JCPOA every 60 days unless European signatories did their best to save the agreement, safeguarding Iran's interests amid Washington's re-imposed sanctions.

    [Jan 12, 2020] Nobody, not even Russia and china, can afford to stay in the sidelines in a nuclear war in the 2020s.

    Notable quotes:
    "... What i find truly amazing is that American Zionists still believe crushing Iran is easy enough. Israel, with 8 million jews stuffed in a small country, is nothing more than a carrier battle group marooned on land ..."
    Jan 12, 2020 | smoothiex12.blogspot.com

    Axiosromano • 2 days ago

    The tramp & nutNyahoo machismo show continues to be fun to watch. Both show off their penis worms as they arrogantly claim they can crush iran. Both the usa and israel keep banging on the doors and walls of their pissed-off neighbors' houses. That eventually gets you murdered whether in baltimore or baghdad.

    A crushable iran is true if and only if they can mount a full-on nuclear war on Iran. But such horrendous cheating means all bets are off, and iran's allies will provide the nukes required to melt down the American homeland too. Nobody, not even Russia and china, can afford to stay in the sidelines in a nuclear war in the 2020s.

    What i find truly amazing is that American Zionists still believe crushing Iran is easy enough. Israel, with 8 million jews stuffed in a small country, is nothing more than a carrier battle group marooned on land. Sitting ducks, with nice armor, nukes and all, are ... still sitting ducks. nutNyahoo should ask his technical crew just how few megatons are needed, or just a few thousand modern missiles are required to transform sitting ducks into nicely roasted peking ducks.

    So a conventional war it is. The usa and israel has exactly zero, zilch and nada chances of winning a war with iran. The usa keeps forgetting that it is a dying empire with dying funding value and mental resources. Just like israel which oddly thinks dozens of f-35s will give it immunity through air superiority. Proof of this fact that iran will win comes from simply asking american and israeli war experts to go on cnn or the washington post on how they intend to win a war with iran.

    Im sure these expert bloviators will say that it is as easy as winning a naval war against china, which is capable of launching only 3 new warships in a week. Or an even easier time against russia, which can launch only a few thousand hypersonic nuke missiles because its GDP is no bigger than that of texas.

    Rob Naardin • 2 days ago

    The Pentagon is super slow to adapt and learn. If you understand that bureaucracy is an ancient organizational structure and that the organizational culture of the Pentagon is pathologically dysfunctional you could have predicted the moral and financial bankruptcy of America 15-20 years ago. The "Why?", finally made sense when I discovered what a sociopath was.

    It's about time the US practices what it preachs and start behaving like a normal country instead of a spoiled narcissistic brat. see more

    tic_Fox Rob Naardin • 2 days ago • edited

    US military & strategic thought became lazy during the late days of the Cold War. It mirrored the decline & fall of the foundations of its opponent, USSR. Post-Cold War, US military & strategic thinking flushed into the sewer. It was all about maintaining the military as some sort of a social policy jobs program, operating legacy tech as the mission. And then came the "world-improvers" -- beginning w the Clinton Admin -- who worked to turn the world into a global "urban renewal" project; meaning to mirror the success US Big Govt showed in the slums of American cities from sea to sea. The past 30 yrs of US strategic thinking and related governance truly disgusts me. see more

    Vasya Pypkin Arctic_Fox • 2 days ago

    Soviet union fall had very different reasons and Soviet military thought was doing quite well then along with military. Current russian military wonders is completion of what was started then and not finished earlier because of the disintegration of the Soviet state.
    The soviet fall however is extremely regrettable because there was a new way how things can be done that Soviet union was showing to the world. USA fall long term is a very good thing because USA is a paragon of how things should be done the old way and basically a huge parasite. Many negative trends that are afflicting the world were started by USA. Unlimited individualism and consumerism would be a couple of those. see more

    Drapetomania Vasya Pypkin • 17 hours ago
    Why does almost every person on Earth feel the need to force others to bend the knee to their beliefs?

    Religious beliefs are what one thinks should be done to promote survival in an afterlife, political beliefs are what one thinks should be done to promote survival in this world.

    The world would be a far better, more civilized, of world if such beliefs were only shared on a voluntary basis.

    As for individualism, I would rather be free than live in a modern day egalitarian hunter-gatherer tribe run by modern day psychopathic alpha-males.

    That is certainly not a recipe for success. see more

    AriusArmenian Arctic_Fox • 2 days ago

    It also mirrors the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. It was Emperor Augustus that decided the costs to further expand the Empire were too great after losing one (or two?) legions against the Germanic tribes.

    The US has reached its greatest extent. We are living through it. The US didn't go forward into war with Iran twice. The odds of humanity surviving this immense turn of history is looking better. see more

    Vasya Pypkin AriusArmenian • 2 days ago • edited

    Frankly, nothing in common. I read this comparison all the time. Yes, Augustus decided not to continue along with expansion into Germany after losing 3 Varus legions due to ambush.

    But he famously noted that it does not worth to go fishing with golden hook. Basically speaking, Germany was not worth fighting for. Poor and remote it had nothing to offer. Just a drain on resources. As long as conquest was moving smoothly it was ok, but after losses were inflicted Augustus decided it was not worth it.

    Roman expansion under augustus was carried mostly to consolidate previous conquests and create strategical debth along core and strategical provinces also creating linkage.

    When enemy far stronger than germans posed resources which made the whole conquest worthy no amount of resistance saved Dacians and Parthia also almost died under Trajan attack.

    Roman policies were adequate and wise. Treaties were respected, allies supported and benefited. Empire was build around Mediterranean creating good communication and routes considering obviously limits of that day technology.

    Rome did not behave like crazy and did not deliver threats that she could not follow through. When war was decided upon thorough preparations were taken. Political goals were achieved. Wars were won. When Adrian considered that empire was overextended in Parthis, he simply abandoned all conquered territories. Just like that.

    Logical calm thinking USA,is not capable of. Rome truly based upon superior military and diplomacy dominance lasted many centuries. USA few decades. One hit wonder, lucky fool I would call it. see more

    Arctic_Fox Vasya Pypkin • 17 hours ago

    Interesting account of Roman strategic concept of forward presence, versus administering the internal lines of communication... see more

    WHAT • 2 days ago

    They left equipment in the open on that base and ran away. No AA fire whatsoever. This is how much they are ready to take a punch. see more

    smoothieX12 . Mod WHAT • 2 days ago

    Yes, this is somewhat puzzling. As I said, let's wait and see where it all develops to, but as Twisted Genius succinctly observed -- Iran now controls tempo because she has conventional superiority. Anyone who has precision-guided, stand off weaponry in good numbers will be on top. see more

    Arctic_Fox smoothieX12 . • 2 days ago

    The old submarine saying is, "There are two kinds of ships; submarines, and targets."
    .
    The new version for land ops is, "There are two kinds of land-based military assets; precision-guided missiles, and targets." (And per the photos, those Iranian missiles were quite precise; bulls-eyes.)
    .
    Iran and its missiles demonstrated that the entire strategic foundation for US mil presence in the Middle East is now obsolete. Everything the US would ever want to do there is now subject to Iran's version of "steel rain." Every runway, hangar, aircraft parking area; every supply depot or warehouse; every loading pier, fuel site, naval pier. Everything... is a target. And really... there's no amount of US "airpower" and "tech" than can mitigate the Iran missile threat.
    .
    Meanwhile, related thinking... Iran's true strategic interest is NOT fighting a near-term war w/ USA. Iran wants US to exit Middle East; and Iran wants to be able to pursue its nuclear program. Soleimani or no, Iran appears to have its eyeballs fixed on the long-term goals. see more

    smoothieX12 . Mod Arctic_Fox • 2 days ago • edited
    The new version for land ops is, "There are two kinds of land-based military assets; precision-guided missiles, and targets."

    Exactly, and Iran has long-range TLAMs in who knows what numbers, That, in its turn, brings about the next issue of range for Iranian indigenous anti-ship missiles. Not, of course, to mention the fact of only select people knowing if Russia transferred P-800 Onyx to Iran She certainly did it for Syria. If that weapon is there--the Persian Gulf and Hormuz Strait will be shut completely closed and will push out CBGs far into the Indian Ocean. see more

    Vasya Pypkin smoothieX12 . • a day ago

    It is simply pathetic after decades of talking non stop about developments of anti missiles and huge amounts wasted and nobody is responsible. This is the way capitalism works.profits is everything and outcomes secondary. Thankfully russia has got soviet foundation and things so far are working well. I come to think that in our times no serious industrial processes should be allowed to stay in private hands. Only services and so.e other simpler stuff under heavy state control to ensure quality. Otherwise profit orientation will eventually destroy everything like with Boeing.

    Drapetomania Vasya Pypkin • 16 hours ago observerBG smoothieX12 . • 2 days ago • edited

    I know, i already wrote a full scale war scenario in one of the comments. Iran can destroy all US bases in 2000 km range. But this does not mean that it can not be bombed back to the stone age, if the US really wishes so. The problem for the US is the high cost as well as the high debt levels, but it does have the technical capability to do that after 2 - 3 years of bombing.

    Also low yield tactical nukes are designed to lower the treshold of the use of nukes in otherwise conventional war, producing less international outrage than the megaton city buster bombs. Why do you think the US is developing them again? Because they would want to use them in conventional conflicts.

    Here btw is Yurasumy, he also says that the US can technically bomb Iran back to the stone age, but the cost will be too high.

    Play Hide

    https://cdn.embedly.com/

    smoothieX12 . Mod observerBG • 2 days ago • edited
    if the US really wishes so.

    Again--what's the plan and what's the price? Iran HAS Russia's ISR on her side in case of such SEAD.

    Does the United States want to risk lives of thousands of its personnel (not to speak of expensive equipment) in Qatar, KSA, Iraq. Does Israel want to "get it"?

    There are numbers which describe such an operation (it was. most likely, already planned as contingency). Immediate question: when was the last time USAF operated in REAL dense ECM and ECCM environment? I do not count some brushes with minimal EW in Syria.

    Russia there uses only minimally required option, for now. Iran has a truck load EW systems, including some funny Russian toys which allowed Iran to take control of US UAVs, as an example. As I say, this is not Iraq and by a gigantic margin. see more

    observerBG smoothieX12 . • 2 days ago • edited

    I already said that debt levels do not allow it and the price would be too high, but yes, the US does have the military capability to destroy Iran. By conventional means. It is another question that it is not in good fiscal shape. Anyway, US ballistic missiles (non nuclear armed) will be hard to stop by EW. Even if Iran gets rid of 50 % of incoming TLAMs, the US will keep sending more and more until most infrastructure, bridges, oil refineries, power plants, factories, ports etc. are destroyed. This is why i said it would take 2 - 3 years. see more

    smoothieX12 . Mod observerBG • 2 days ago
    but yes, the US does have the military capability to destroy Iran. By conventional means

    That is the whole point: NO, it doesn't. Unless US goes into full mobilization mode and addresses ALL (plus a million more not listed) requirements for such a war which I listed in the post. Well, that or nukes. see more

    observerBG smoothieX12 . • 2 days ago

    Yurasumy is a pretty good analist and he thinks that they can. I do not see it for the US being too hard to produce more TLAMS, ICBMs and IRBMs (conventional) to sustain the effort for 2 years, by that time most iranian infrastructure will be destroyed. If the fiscal situation allowes it. see more

    smoothieX12 . Mod observerBG • 2 days ago

    I don't know who Yarasumy is and what is his background, but unlike him I actually write books, including on modern warfare. This is not to show off, but I am sure I can make basic calculations. This is not to mention the fact that even Sivkov agrees with my points and Sivkov, unlike Yarsumy, graduated Popov's VVMURE, served at subs, then graduated Kuznetsov Academy, then Academy of the General Staff and served in Main Operational Directorate (GOU) until retiring in the rank of Captain 1st Rank from the billet of Combat Planning group. So, I would rather stick to my opinion. see more

    observerBG smoothieX12 . • 2 days ago

    Why do you think that the US can not destroy Iran with IRBMs? Actually this is their strategy vs China. If they think its viable vs China, then it should be viable vs Iran too. see more

    smoothieX12 . Mod observerBG • 2 days ago • edited

    Because unlike the US, Russia's Air Defenses have a rather very impressive history of shifting the balance in wars in favor of those who have them, when used properly. But then I can quote for you a high ranking intelligence officer:

    A friend of mine who has expertise in these matters wrote me:

    Any air defense engineer with a securityclearance that isn't lying through his teeth will admit that Russia'sair defense technology surpassed us in the 1950's and we've never been able to catch up. The systems thy have in place surrounding Moscow make our Patriot 3's look like fucking nerf guns.

    Read the whole thing here:

    https://turcopolier.typepad...

    Mathematics is NOT there for the United States for a real combined operations war of scale with Iran. Unless US political class really wants to see people with pitch-forks. see more

    Arctic_Fox smoothieX12 . • 17 hours ago

    "Mathematics is not there..."
    .
    Neither is the industrial base, including supply lines. Not the mines, mills, factories to produce any significant levels of warfighting materiel such as we're talking about here. Not the workforce, either. Meanwhile, where are the basic designs for these weps? The years of lab work, bench tests, pilot specimens & prototypes, the development pipeline? The contractors to build them? the Tier 2, 3, 4 suppliers? Where are the universities that train such people as are needed? Where is the political will? Where is the government coordination? Where is the money? Indeed, every Democrat and probably half the Republicans who run for office campaign on controlling military spending; not that USA gets all that much benefit from the current $800 billion per year. see more

    observerBG smoothieX12 . • 2 days ago • edited

    That would require S-500 - ballistic missile defense. Maybe 15 - 20 S-500 in Iran will be needed. And it is not yet in the army. see more

    smoothieX12 . Mod observerBG • 2 days ago

    You see, here is the difference--I can calculate approximate required force for that but I don't want to. It is Friday. You can get some basic intro into operational theory (and even into Salvo Equations) in my latest book. Granted, my publisher fought me tooth and nail to remove as much match as possible. But I'll give you a hint--appearance of S-500 on any theater of operations effectively closes it off effectively for any missile or aircraft operations when deployed in echeloned (multi-layer) AD. see more

    [Jan 12, 2020] The petrodollar is the way in which the US gets the rest of the world to fund its wars

    Notable quotes:
    "... Economic growth is more about financialising goods and services that were previously free or are/were social goods. There is no real growth; just taxing the living. ..."
    "... So, in my view, the only restraint on destroying Iran is capability, is the cost and the risk of retaliation (not just from Iran) - not the destruction of Iran's capital - better for Iran's capital to be destroyed than for Iran to be independent or a competitor. ..."
    Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    ADKC , Jan 12 2020 2:10 utc | 359

    vk @334

    My comment @342 should have read: "The petrodollar is the way in which the US gets the rest of the world to fund its wars,"

    ---------

    Your comment about capitalist accumulation doesn't hold (as a motivator for the US) when we have a capitalist monopolist situation. Rate of profit is not about growth (of real goods); it is about reducing competition and scarcity. When you are the monopolist you can charge what you like but profit becomes meaningless - the monopolist power comes from the control of resources - the monopolistic capitalist becomes a ruler/monarch. You no longer need ever-increasing customers so you can dispense with them if you so chose (by reducing the population). One bottle of water is far more valuable and a lot less trouble to produce that 100 millions bottles of water. There is no point in AI to provide for the needs of "the many"; AI becomes a means to dispense with "the many" altogether.

    Economic growth is more about financialising goods and services that were previously free or are/were social goods. There is no real growth; just taxing the living.

    So, in my view, the only restraint on destroying Iran is capability, is the cost and the risk of retaliation (not just from Iran) - not the destruction of Iran's capital - better for Iran's capital to be destroyed than for Iran to be independent or a competitor.

    [Jan 12, 2020] Reflecting on 20 years of anti-war failures by PaulR

    www.nytimes.com

    16 Comments

    Back in Autumn 1999, the International Journal published what was either my first or my second academic article (I produced another in the same year and can't remember which came first). It's title was '"Ready to Kill but not to Die": NATO Strategy in Kosovo'. As you might gather from the title, it wasn't altogether sympathetic to what NATO did during its 1999 bombing campaign against Yugoslavia. The Kosovo war was, you might say, my 'red pill' moment, when I went from being the loyal military officer of my youth into someone who realized that his own countries weren't above a bit of military aggression allied to a hefty dose of falsehood and propaganda.

    Since then I have repeatedly argued firmly against war (or 'military intervention', 'peace enforcement', or whatever other term people prefer to use to make it look like it's not war) whenever it's been proposed. I have argued in favour of substantial cuts in defence spending in the countries in which I have lived and of which I am a citizen (the UK and Canada). I published academic articles and chapters in scholarly books laying out the case against 'humanitarian intervention', the 'responsibility to protect', the 'obligation to rebuild', and so on. I even wrote a short book ( Doing Less with Less ), arguing that the UK would not only save money but would also be much more secure if it spent less on defence and was less involved in trying to set the world to rights through the use of military power. I repeated this argument again several years later in a couple of works for a British think tank, the Institute of Economic Affairs.

    At the same time, exploiting my position as a 'public intellectual', I moved into the world of op-eds and political writing in an effort to influence public opinion outside of academia. In December 2002, for instance, I wrote a piece for The Spectator denouncing the impending invasion of Iraq and pouring scorn on the idea that Iraq was knee-deep in weapons of mass destruction, if only the UN inspectors could find them. And later, in pieces for the Ottawa Citizen and other outlets, I expressed scepticism about NATO's military and humanitarian operations in Afghanistan, the likelihood of military success in Iraq, the bombing campaign against Libya, and the desire to topple Bashar al-Assad in Syria, among other things.

    I never expected that any of this would have an immediate impact on public policy. But I felt that someone had to say something, and hoped that my writings might in some small way contribute to a gradual change in the intellectual climate. If nothing else, they would put ideas on the table which could be picked up by others at some later point in time when external circumstances altered to such an extent that it became clear that a change in direction was needed. 'Surely', I thought to myself, 'those in charge will eventually realize what a mess their policies have created and will want to find an alternative. So, we need to prepare the ground now.'

    Looking back at it all, I don't see that I got anything seriously wrong about the immoral and counterproductive nature of the military policies pursued by Western states in the past 20 years. But I was completely wrong on that last point – the idea that those in charge would one day wake up to the folly of their policies. These have been two decades of total failure, not only for me but also for everyone else who has been arguing the counter-interventionist case. It is not just that our governments continue to invest vast amounts of money into pointless military endeavours. More broadly, there has been absolutely no accountability for the multiple failures which have accompanied those endeavours. The op-ed pages of major media outlets, for instance, remain dominated by the same rhetoric, and in many cases even the same people, as brought us the war in Iraq, the quagmire in Afghanistan, and the chaos of contemporary Libya. The belief that Western powers represent 'good' in the world, and have a moral right, even a duty, to use military power against those who represent 'evil', seems to be as entrenched as ever. The post-Cold War alliance forged between hard-line hawks on the right and liberal human rights interventionists on the left has a seemingly iron grip on public policy.

    How has this come about? How is that even the catastrophic mess which the United States and its allies (most notably the Brits) have made of Iraq hasn't allowed us to make even a dent in public policy, to such an extent that we have found ourselves this week seriously contemplating the prospect of a war between the USA and Iran? Twenty years of thinking about the causes of war provide me with the following possible explanations, in no particular order:

    It's a heady mixture, and it leads me to something of a revolutionary conclusion. For 20 years, I've taken the view that we can argue our way out of the mania for military intervention; that we can logically persuade our leaders to change course. In the midst of this week's war scare, I'm no longer so sure. The problem goes much deeper than political reason. The multiple wars of the last two decades are rooted in structural deficits in our domestic political systems, in the dominant political ideology, in the system of media ownership and control, and in the broader international system. If we really want to bring these wars to an end, we need to move beyond pointing out how futile and counterproductive they are, and begin to address these wider structural issues. It will not be an easy task.

    [Jan 11, 2020] Sheldon Adelson the casino mogul driving Trump's Middle East policy by Chris McGreal

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The Las Vegas billionaire gave Republicans $82m for the 2016 elections and his views, notably staunch support for Netanyahu's Israel, are now the official US line ..."
    "... Adelson's considerable support for Republicans is in no small part motivated by what he regards as their more reliable support for the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu , which appear intent on preventing the creation of an independent Palestinian state. ..."
    "... Adelson gave $82m toward Trump's and other Republican campaigns during the 2016 election cycle – more than three times the next largest individual donor, according to Open Secrets . ..."
    "... That commitment bought him an attentive hearing from the new administration as he pushed for the appointment of Bolton as national security adviser knowing that he would be an important ally in getting the White House to kill the Iran nuclear deal. The New York Times reported that Adelson is a member of a " shadow National Security Council " advising Bolton. ..."
    "... The day after Trump announced that the US was pulling out of the Iran agreement, Adelson was reported to have held a private meeting at the White House with the president, Bolton and Vice-President Mike Pence. ..."
    "... Adelson was so enthusiastic about the move that he offered to pay for some of the costs and provided a jet to fly Guatemala's official delegation to Israel for the ceremony. (The Central American country has also announced plans to follow Trump and move its own embassy .) ..."
    "... "Adelson is a linchpin in bringing together the radical extremists on the Israeli right and this group of hardliners on Israel and neoconservatives," said Levy, who is now president of the US-based Middle East Project. ..."
    "... He paid for a new headquarters for the most powerful pro-Israel lobby group in Washington (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), spent $100m to fund "birthright" trips for young Jewish Americans to Israel, and funds a group opposing criticism of the Jewish state at US universities. ..."
    "... In 2015 he secretly bought the Las Vegas newspaper, the Review-Journal , which had led the way in critical coverage of the billionaire's business dealings. Several reporters subsequently left the paper complaining of editorial interference and curbs on reporting of the gambling industry. ..."
    "... Right now, Adelson is concentrated on ensuring the Republicans remain in control of Congress, and is pouring $30m into funding the GOP's midterm elections campaign. ..."
    "... Adelson is no less active in Israel where he owns the country's largest newspaper, a publication so closely linked with Netanyahu's administration it has been dubbed the "Bibipaper" after the prime minister's nickname. ..."
    "... In 2014, he told a conference during a discussion about the implications for democracy of perpetual occupation or annexation of parts of the West Bank without giving Palestinians the right to vote in Israeli elections: "Israel isn't going to be a democratic state. So what?" ..."
    Jun 08, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

    The Las Vegas billionaire gave Republicans $82m for the 2016 elections and his views, notably staunch support for Netanyahu's Israel, are now the official US line

    Sheldon Adelson has spent millions on backing Israel and attacking supporters of Palestinian rights in the US. Photograph: Kin Cheung/AP In 2015, the billionaire casino owner and Republican party funder Sheldon Adelson spent days in a Las Vegas courtroom watching his reputation torn apart and wondering if his gambling empire was facing ruin.

    An official from Nevada's gaming control board sat at the back of the court listening to mounting evidence that Adelson bribed Chinese officials and worked with organised crime at his casinos in Macau – allegations that could have seen the magnate's Las Vegas casinos stripped of their licenses.

    The case, a civil suit by a former manager of the Macau gaming operations who said he was fired for curbing corrupt practices, was another blow in a bad run for Adelson.

    He had thrown $150m into a futile effort to unseat the "socialist" and "anti-Israel" Barack Obama in the 2012 election. His credibility as a political player was not enhanced by his backing of Newt Gingrich for president.

    But three years on from the court case, Adelson's influence has never been greater.

    The imprint of the 84-year-old's political passions is seen in an array of Donald Trump's more controversial decisions, including violating the Iran nuclear deal , moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem , and appointing the ultra-hawkish John Bolton as national security adviser .

    "Adelson's established himself as an influential figure in American politics with the amount of money that he has contributed," said Logan Bayroff of the liberal pro-Israel group, J Street. "There's no doubt that he has very strong, very far-right dangerous positions and that – at very least – those positions are really being heard and thought about at the highest levels of government."

    As the 2015 court hearing unfolded, the billionaire swallowed his considerable pride and paid millions of dollars to settle the lawsuit, heading off the danger of the graft allegations being tested at a full trial.

    The casinos stayed in business and continued to contribute to a vast wealth that made Adelson the 14th richest person in America last year with a net worth of $35bn, according to Forbes.

    Adelson has put some of that money toward pushing an array of political interests ranging from protecting his business from online gambling to opposition to marijuana legalisation.

    But nothing aligns more closely with his world view than the intertwining of the Republican party and Israel .

    Adelson's considerable support for Republicans is in no small part motivated by what he regards as their more reliable support for the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu , which appear intent on preventing the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

    Adelson gave $82m toward Trump's and other Republican campaigns during the 2016 election cycle – more than three times the next largest individual donor, according to Open Secrets .

    That commitment bought him an attentive hearing from the new administration as he pushed for the appointment of Bolton as national security adviser knowing that he would be an important ally in getting the White House to kill the Iran nuclear deal. The New York Times reported that Adelson is a member of a " shadow National Security Council " advising Bolton.

    The day after Trump announced that the US was pulling out of the Iran agreement, Adelson was reported to have held a private meeting at the White House with the president, Bolton and Vice-President Mike Pence.

    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Sheldon Adelson attends the opening ceremony of the new US embassy in Jerusalem in May. Photograph: Sebastian Scheiner/AP

    The casino magnate also pushed hard to see the US embassy moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – an action previous presidents had shied away from because of the diplomatic ramifications.

    Adelson was so enthusiastic about the move that he offered to pay for some of the costs and provided a jet to fly Guatemala's official delegation to Israel for the ceremony. (The Central American country has also announced plans to follow Trump and move its own embassy .)

    Daniel Levy, a former member of Israeli negotiating teams with the Palestinians and policy adviser to the then Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak, said that Adelson's money had helped resurface neoconservative policies which had been discredited after the US invasion of Iraq.

    "Adelson is a linchpin in bringing together the radical extremists on the Israeli right and this group of hardliners on Israel and neoconservatives," said Levy, who is now president of the US-based Middle East Project.

    The billionaire is also deeply committed to protecting Israel within the US.

    An example of an anti-BDS poster funded by Sheldon Adelson. Photograph: Courtesy of Robert Gardner

    He paid for a new headquarters for the most powerful pro-Israel lobby group in Washington (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), spent $100m to fund "birthright" trips for young Jewish Americans to Israel, and funds a group opposing criticism of the Jewish state at US universities.

    The Israeli newspaper Haaretz recently revealed that Adelson funded an investigation by an Israeli firm with ties to the country's police and military into the American activist Linda Sarsour, a co-chair of the Women's March movement who campaigns for Palestinian rights and supports a boycott of the Jewish state.

    Adelson also funds Rabbi Shmuley Boteach and his World Values Network which published a full-page personal attack in the New York Times on the actor Natalie Portman for refusing an award from Israel because of its government's policies.

    For his part, the casino magnate does not take criticism well.

    In 2015 he secretly bought the Las Vegas newspaper, the Review-Journal , which had led the way in critical coverage of the billionaire's business dealings. Several reporters subsequently left the paper complaining of editorial interference and curbs on reporting of the gambling industry.

    Right now, Adelson is concentrated on ensuring the Republicans remain in control of Congress, and is pouring $30m into funding the GOP's midterm elections campaign.

    Adelson is no less active in Israel where he owns the country's largest newspaper, a publication so closely linked with Netanyahu's administration it has been dubbed the "Bibipaper" after the prime minister's nickname.

    Personal relations with Netanyahu have soured but Adelson remains committed to the prime minister's broader "Greater Israel" political agenda and to strengthening ties between the Republicans' evangelical base and Israel.

    It's not always a welcome involvement by a man who is not an Israeli citizen – not least because Adelson's vision for the Jewish state does not represent how many of its people see their country.

    In 2014, he told a conference during a discussion about the implications for democracy of perpetual occupation or annexation of parts of the West Bank without giving Palestinians the right to vote in Israeli elections: "Israel isn't going to be a democratic state. So what?"

    [Jan 11, 2020] 'Brought to Jesus' the evangelical grip on the Trump administration US news The Guardian

    Jan 11, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

    'Brought to Jesus': the evangelical grip on the Trump administration The influence of evangelical Christianity is likely to become an important question as Trump finds himself dependent on them for political survival

    Julian Borger in Washington

    Fri 11 Jan 2019 02.00 EST Last modified on Fri 18 Jan 2019 16.51 EST Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email Donald Trump at the Republican national convention in Cleveland, Ohio, on 18 July 2016. Photograph: Mike Segar/Reuters I n setting out the Trump administration's Middle East policy, one of the first things Mike Pompeo made clear to his audience in Cairo is that he had come to the region as "as an evangelical Christian".

    In his speech at the American University in Cairo, Pompeo said that in his state department office: "I keep a Bible open on my desk to remind me of God and his word, and the truth."

    The secretary of state's primary message in Cairo was that the US was ready once more to embrace conservative Middle Eastern regimes, no matter how repressive, if they made common cause against Iran.

    His second message was religious. In his visit to Egypt, he came across as much as a preacher as a diplomat. He talked about "America's innate goodness" and marveled at a newly built cathedral as "a stunning testament to the Lord's hand".

    ss="rich-link"> 'Toxic Christianity': the evangelicals creating champions for Trump Read more

    The desire to erase Barack Obama's legacy, Donald Trump's instinctive embrace of autocrats, and the private interests of the Trump Organisation have all been analysed as driving forces behind the administration's foreign policy.

    The gravitational pull of white evangelicals has been less visible. But it could have far-reaching policy consequences. Vice President Mike Pence and Pompeo both cite evangelical theology as a powerful motivating force.

    Just as he did in Cairo, Pompeo called on the congregation of a Kansan megachurch three years ago to join a fight of good against evil.

    "We will continue to fight these battles," the then congressman said at the Summit church in Wichita. "It is a never-ending struggle until the rapture. Be part of it. Be in the fight."

    For Pompeo's audience, the rapture invoked an apocalyptical Christian vision of the future, a final battle between good and evil, and the second coming of Jesus Christ, when the faithful will ascend to heaven and the rest will go to hell.

    For many US evangelical Christians, one of the key preconditions for such a moment is the gathering of the world's Jews in a greater Israel between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. It is a belief, known as premillenial dispensationalism or Christian Zionism – and it has very real potential consequences for US foreign policy .

    It directly colours views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and indirectly, attitudes towards Iran, broader Middle East geopolitics and the primacy of protecting Christian minorities. In his Cairo visit, Pompeo heaped praise on Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, for building the new cathedral, but made no reference to the 60,000 political prisoners the regime is thought to be holding, or its routine use of torture.

    Pompeo is an evangelical Presbyterian, who says he was "brought to Jesus" by other cadets at the West Point military academy in the 1980s.

    https://www.theguardian.com/email/form/plaintone/4300

    "He knows best how his faith interacts with his political beliefs and the duties he undertakes as secretary of state," said Stan van den Berg, senior pastor of Pompeo's church in Wichita in an email. "Suffice to say, he is a faithful man, he has integrity, he has a compassionate heart, a humble disposition and a mind for wisdom."

    As Donald Trump finds himself ever more dependent on them for his political survival, the influence of Pence, Pompeo and the ultra-conservative white Evangelicals who stand behind them is likely to grow.

    "Many of them relish the second coming because for them it means eternal life in heaven," Andrew Chesnut, professor of religious studies at Virginia Commonwealth University said. "There is a palpable danger that people in high position who subscribe to these beliefs will be readier to take us into a conflict that brings on Armageddon."

    Chesnut argues that Christian Zionism has become the "majority theology" among white US Evangelicals, who represent about a quarter of the adult population . In a 2015 poll , 73% of evangelical Christians said events in Israel are prophesied in the Book of Revelation. Respondents were not asked specifically whether their believed developments in Israel would actually bring forth the apocalypse.

    The relationship between evangelicals and the president himself is complicated.

    Trump himself embodies the very opposite of a pious Christian ideal. Trump is not churchgoer. He is profane, twice divorced, who has boasted of sexually assaulting women. But white evangelicals have embraced him.

    Eighty per cent of white evangelicals voted for him in 2016, and his popularity among them is remains in the 70s. While other white voters have flaked away in the first two years of his presidency, white evangelicals have become his last solid bastion.

    Some leading evangelicals see Trump as a latterday King Cyrus, the sixth-century BC Persian emperor who liberated the Jews from Babylonian captivity.

    The comparison is made explicitly in The Trump Prophecy , a religious film screened in 1,200 cinemas around the country in October, depicting a retired firefighter who claims to have heard God's voice, saying: "I've chosen this man, Donald Trump, for such a time as this."

    Lance Wallnau , a self-proclaimed prophet who features in the film, has called Trump "God's Chaos Candidate" and a "modern Cyrus".

    "Cyrus is the model for a nonbeliever appointed by God as a vessel for the purposes of the faithful," said Katherine Stewart , who writes extensively about the Christian right.

    She added that they welcome his readiness to break democratic norms to combat perceived threats to their values and way of life.

    "The Christian nationalist movement is characterized by feelings of persecution and, to some degree, paranoia – a clear example is the idea that there is somehow a 'war on Christmas'," Stewart said. "People in those positions will often go for authoritarian leaders who will do whatever is necessary to fight for their cause."

    Trump was raised as a Presbyterian, but leaned increasingly towards evangelical preachers as he began contemplating a run for the presidency.

    Trump's choice of Pence as a running mate was a gesture of his commitment, and four of the six preachers at his inauguration were evangelicals, including White and Franklin Graham, the eldest son of the preacher Billy Graham, who defended Trump through his many sex scandals, pointing out: "We are all sinners."

    Having lost control of the House of Representatives in November, and under ever closer scrutiny for his campaign's links to the Kremlin, Trump's instinct has been to cleave ever closer to his most loyal supporters.

    Almost alone among major demographic groups, white evangelicals are overwhelmingly in favour of Trump's border wall, which some preachers equate with fortifications in the Bible.

    Evangelical links have also helped shape US alliances in the Trump presidency. As secretary of state, Pompeo has been instrumental in forging link with other evangelical leaders in the hemisphere, including Guatemala's Jimmy Morales and the new Brazilian president, Jair Bolsonaro . Both have undertaken to follow the US lead in moving their embassies in Israel to Jerusalem .

    Trump's order to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv – over the objections of his foreign policy and national security team – is a striking example of evangelical clout.

    ss="rich-link"> Sheldon Adelson: the casino mogul driving Trump's Middle East policy Read more

    The move was also pushed by Las Vegas billionaire and Republican mega-donor, Sheldon Adelson, but the orchestration of the embassy opening ceremony last May, reflected the audience Trump was trying hardest to appease.

    The two pastors given the prime speaking slots were both ardent Christian Zionists: Robert Jeffress, a Dallas pastor on record as saying Jews, like Muslims and Mormons, are bound for hell ; and John Hagee, a televangelist and founder of Christians United for Israel (Cufi), who once said that Hitler and the Holocaust were part of God's plan to get Jews back to Israel , to pave the way for the Rapture.

    For many evangelicals, the move cemented Trump's status as the new Cyrus, who oversaw the Jews return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple.

    The tightening of the evangelical grip on the administration has also been reflected in a growing hostility to the UN, often portrayed as a sinister and godless organisation.

    Since the US ambassador, Nikki Haley, announced her departure in October and Pompeo took more direct control, the US mission has become increasingly combative, blocking references to gender and reproductive health in UN documents.

    Some theologians also see an increasingly evangelical tinge to the administration's broader Middle East policies, in particular its fierce embrace of Binyamin Netanyahu's government, the lack of balancing sympathy for the Palestinians – and the insistent demonisation of the Iranian government.

    ss="rich-link"> US will expel every last Iranian boot from Syria, says Mike Pompeo Read more

    Evangelicals, Chesnut said, "now see the United States locked into a holy war against the forces of evil who they see as embodied by Iran".

    In a speech at the end of a regional tour on Thursday, Pompeo reprised the theme, describing Iran as a "cancerous influence".

    This zeal for a defining struggle has thus far found common cause with more secular hawks such as the national security adviser, John Bolton, and Trump's own drive to eliminate the legacy of Barack Obama, whose signature foreign policy achievement was the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, which Trump abrogated last May.

    In conversations with European leaders such as Emmanuel Macron and Theresa May, Trump has reportedly insisted he has no intention of going to war with Iran. His desire to extricate US troops from Syria marks a break with hawks, religious and secular, who want to contain Iranian influence there.

    But the logic of his policy of ever-increasing pressure, coupled with unstinting support for Israel and Saudi Arabia, makes confrontation with Iran ever more likely.

    One of the most momentous foreign policy questions of 2019 is whether Trump can veer away from the collision course he has helped set in motion – perhaps conjuring up a last minute deal, as he did with North Korea – or instead welcome conflict as a distraction from his domestic woes, and sell it to the faithful as a crusade.

    Topics Donald Trump Evangelical Christianity Trump administration US foreign policy Religion US politics Christianity features

    [Jan 11, 2020] Can The US Assassination Of Qassem Soleimani Be Justified by Barkley Rosser

    Notable quotes:
    "... We know from various Congressional folks that briefers of Congress have failed to produce any evidence of "imminent" plans to kill Americans Soleimani was involved with that would have made this a legal killing rather than an illegal assassination. ..."
    "... As Sergey Lavrov and President Putin have stated for a long time (and long before President Trump came along), the USA is 'agreement incapable'. However, now you have to wonder if any country really trusts any agreement they will make with the USA. Without trust on any level, cooperation/trade treaties and so on on are impossible or eminently disposable, i.e., not worth the paper upon which they are written. ..."
    "... 603 Americans killed in Iraq, he says Trump supporters claim, but we had millions of Iraqi's, Syrians, Libyans and others killed or their lives uprooted by Bush and Obama and company – yet they were not assassinated. ..."
    "... NO. Shockingly bad decision; you can just manage to glimpse around the edges of the war propaganda the embarrassment and backpedaling for having willingly stepped into such a gigantic steaming pile of excrement. The parade of smooth-faced liars on the MSM asserting that the US is now safer (the "war is peace" crowd) is sickening. Some even have the gall to assert that the enormous crowds in Iran are forced to attend by the repressive regime. Of course, there's no evidence of a provocation and they'll never produce any. ..."
    "... I find it interesting that Pompeo was "disappointed" – what did he think would happen? For a Secretary of State, he's obviously extremely out of touch with the rest of the world if he didn't have some realistic idea of how this would go down. ..."
    "... One other glaring omission from the article – the only reason there was a US military contractor in Iraq available to be killed in the first place is due to the illegal war based on false premises launched almost two decades ago by the US, which continues to occupy the country to this day. ..."
    "... Pretty clear who the terrorists are on this case. ..."
    "... Fascinating developments on this issue today. Pompeo admits that nothing was "imminent." Given the very specific definitions of Imminence that draw red lines between what is or is not legal in international law, this could get big very quickly. ..."
    "... War hawks dressed in red or blue can become mercenaries and create Go Fund Me drives to protect their investments and any particular country which they have a personal affinity or citizenship. ..."
    "... Lest we forget: "War is a racket." ..."
    "... How does this meet the internationally recognized legal requirement of "imminent" danger to human life required to kill a political or military leader outside of a declared war? All public statements by the U.S. political and military leadership point to a retaliatory killing, at best, with a vague overlay of preemptive action. ..."
    "... If you agree that the "Bethlehem Doctrine" has never been recognized by the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, or the legislatures of the three rogue states who have adopted it, the assassination of Suleimani appears to have been a murder. ..."
    "... "I cross-checked a Pentagon casualty database with obituaries and not 1 of the 9 American servicemen killed fighting in Iraq since 2011 died at the hands of militias backed by Suleimani. His assassination was about revenge and provocation, not self-defense." ..."
    "... The unsuccessful operation may indicate that the Trump administration's killing of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani last week was part of a broader operation than previously explained, raising questions about whether the mission was designed to cripple the leadership of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or solely to prevent an imminent attack on Americans as originally stated. ..."
    "... For some "exceptional" reason we don't recognize international law! We are the terrorists not them. ..."
    Jan 11, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Can The US Assassination Of Qassem Soleimani Be Justified? Posted on January 10, 2020 by Yves Smith Yves here. Even though the angst over "what next" with the US/Iran confrontation has fallen a bit, there is still a depressingly significant amount of mis- and dis-information about the Soleimani assassination. This post is a nice high level treatment that might be a good candidate for circulating among friends and colleagues who've gotten a hefty dose of MSM oversimplifications and social media sloganeering.

    Update 6:50 AM: Due to the hour, I neglected to add a quibble, and readers jumped on the issue in comments. First, it has not been established who launched the attack that killed a the US contractor. The US quickly asserted it was Kat'ib Hezbollah, but there were plenty of groups in the area that had arguably better motives, plus Kat'ib Hezbollah has denied it made the strike. Second, Kat'ib Hezbollah is an Iraqi military unit.

    By Barkley Rosser, Professor of Economics at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. Originally published at EconoSpeak

    We know from various Congressional folks that briefers of Congress have failed to produce any evidence of "imminent" plans to kill Americans Soleimani was involved with that would have made this a legal killing rather than an illegal assassination. The public statements by administration figures have cited such things as the 1979 hostage crisis, the already dead contractor, and, oh, the need to "reestablish deterrence" after Trump did not follow through on previous threats he made. None of this looks remotely like "imminent plans," not to mention that the Iraqi PM Abdul-Mahdi has reported that Soleimani was on the way to see him with a reply to a Saudi peace proposal. What a threatening imminent plan!

    As it is, despite the apparent lack of "imminent plans" to kill Americans, much of the supporting rhetoric for this assassination coming out of Trump supporters (with bragging about it having reportedly been put up on Trump's reelection funding website) involves charges that Soleimani was "the world's Number One terrorist" and was personally responsible for killing 603 Americans in Iraq. Even as many commentators have noted the lack of any "imminent plans," pretty much all American ones have prefaced these questions with assertions that Soleimani was unquestionable "evil" and "bad" and a generally no good guy who deserved to be offed, if not right at this time and in this way. He was the central mastermind and boss of a massive international terror network that obeyed his orders and key to Iran's reputed position as "the Number One state supporter of terrorism," with Soleimani the key to all of that.

    Of course, in Iran it turns out that Soleimani was highly respected, even as many oppose the hawkish policies he was part of. He was viewed as crucial to the victory over ISIS/ISIL/Daesh in Iraq, much feared by Iranians. Shia take martyrdom seriously, and he is viewed as a martyr. It appears that even Trump took notice of the massive outpouring of mourning and praise for Soleimani there up to the point of people dying in a stampede in a mourning crowd in his hometown. But, hey, obviously these people simply do not understand that he was The World's Number One Terrorist! Heck, I saw one commenter on Marginal Revolution claiming Soleimani was responsible killing "hundreds of thousands." Yes, this sort of claim is floating around out there.

    A basic problem here is that while indeed Soleimani commanded the IGRC al Quds force that supported and supplied various Shia militias in several Middle Eastern nations, these all were (and are) ultimately independent. Soleimani may have advised them, but he was never in a position to order any of them to do anything. Al Quds itself has never carried out any of the various attacks outside of Iran that Soleimani is supposedly personally responsible for.

    Let us consider the specific case that gets pushed most emphatically, the 603 Americans dead in Iraq, without doubt a hot button item here in the US. First of all, even if Soleimani really was personally responsible for their deaths, there is the technical matter that their deaths cannot be labeled "terrorism." That is about killing non-combatant civilians, not military personnel involved in combat. I do not support the killing of those American soldiers, most of whom were done in by IEDs, which also horribly injured many more. But indeed this awful stuff happened. But in fact this was all done by Iraqi -based Shia militias. Yes, they were supported by Soleimani, but while some have charged al Quds suppplied the IEDs, this turns out not to be the case. These were apparently made in Iraq by these local militias. Soleimani's al Quds are not totally innocent in all this, reportedly providing some training and some inputs. But the IEDs were made by the militias themselves and planted by them.

    It is also the case that when the militias and Americans were working together against ISIS/IISIL/Daesh, none of this happened, and indeed that was still the case up until this most recent set of events, with the death setting off all this an American civilian contractor caught on a base where several Iraqis were killed by a rocket from the Kat'b Hezbollah Iraqi group. Of course with Trump having Soleimani assassinated, this cooperation has ceased, with the US military no longer either fighting ISIS/ISIL/Daesh nor training the Iraqi military. Indeed, the Iraqi parliament has demanded that US troops leave entirely, although Trump threatened Iraq with economic sanctions if that is followed through on.

    As it is, the US datinrg back to the Obama administration has been supplying Saudi Arabia with both arms and intelligence that has been used to kill thousands of Yemeni civilians. Frankly, US leaders look more like terrorists than Soleimani.

    I shall close by noting the major changes in opinion in both Iran and Iraq regarding the US as a result of this assassination. In Iran as many have noted there were major demonstrations against the regime going on, protesting bad economic conditions, even as those substantially were the result of the illegal US economic sanctions imposed after the US withdrew from the JCPOA nuclear deal, to which Iran was adhering. Now those demonstrations have stopped and been replaced by the mass demonstrations against the US over Soleimani's assassination. And we also have Iran further withdrawing from that deal and moving to more highly enrich uranium.

    In Iraq, there had been major anti-Iran demonstrations going on, with these supported to some degree by the highest religious authority in the nation, Ayatollah Ali Sistani. However, when Soleimani's body was being transferred to Iran, Sistani's son accompanied his body. It really is hard to see anything that justifies this assassination.

    I guess I should note for the record that I am not a fan of the Iranian regime, much less the IGRC and its former and new commander. It is theocratic and repressive, with many political prisoners and a record of killing protestors. However, frankly, it is not clearly all that much worse than quite a few of its neighboring regimes. While Supreme Jurisprudent Khamenei was not popularly elected, its president, Rouhani, was, who obeyed popular opinion in negotiating the JCPOA that led to the relaxation of economic sanctions, with his power reduced when Trump withdrew from the agreement. Its rival Saudi Arabia has no democracy at all, and is also a religiously reactionary and repressive regime that uses bone saws on opponents and is slaughtering civilians in a neighboring nation.

    xkeyscored , January 10, 2020 at 6:12 am

    with the death setting off all this an American civilian contractor caught on a base where several Iraqis were killed by a rocket from the Kat'b Hezbollah Iraqi group.
    Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding this, but it appears to be presented here as a fact.
    Kat'b Hezbollah have denied responsibility for that rocket attack. To the best of my knowledge, no proof whatsoever has been presented that it was not an attack by jihadis in the area, whom Khat'b Hezbollah were fighting, or by others with an interest in stirring the pot.

    Cat Burglar , January 10, 2020 at 12:37 pm

    They are having a hard time coming up with public evidence to support any justification, aren't they?

    The latest was Pence's "keeping it secret to protect sources and methods" meme. Purely speculating here, but I immediately thought, "Oh, Israeli intelligence." Gotta protect allies in the region.

    xkeyscored , January 10, 2020 at 1:38 pm

    Debka, run by supposedly-former Israeli military intelligence, was enthusing about upcoming joint operations against Iran and its allies a month or two ago. In contrast, they've been uncharacteristically quiet, though supportive of the US, regarding recent developments.

    Trump and Netanyahu confirm US-Israel military coordination against threatened Iranian attack

    A US-Iran military front is fast shaping up on the Syrian-Iraqi border – with a role for the IDF

    Dwight , January 10, 2020 at 6:32 am

    Secretary of State Pompeo claimed that Soleimani was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in Syria. Basically blaming Iran for all deaths in the Syrian war.

    Donald , January 10, 2020 at 8:35 am

    People more commonly do this with Assad. A complicated war with multiple factions fighting each other, armed by outside sources including the US, most with horrific human rights records, but almost every pundit and politician in the US talks as though Assad killed everyone personally.

    Once in a while you get a little bit of honesty seeping in, but it never changes the narrative. Caitlin Johnstone said something about that, not specifically about Syria. The idea was that you can sometimes find facts reported in the mainstream press that contradict the narrative put out by pundits and politicians and for that matter most news stories, but these contradictory facts never seem to change the prevailing narrative.

    ChrisFromGeorgia , January 10, 2020 at 9:15 am

    That sounds suspiciously like sour grapes and another possible motive for the killing – revenge.

    Soleimani led a number of militias that were successful in defeating the Saudi (and CIA) sponsored Sunni jihadis who failed to implement the empire's "regime change" playbook in Syria.

    No doubt a lot of guys like Pompeo wanted him dead for that reason alone.

    Thuto , January 10, 2020 at 6:36 am

    The simple answer NO, killing a sitting army general of a sovereign state on a diplomatic mission resides in the realm of the truly absurd. Twisting the meaning of the word "imminent" far beyond its ordinary use to justify the murder is even more absurd. And the floating subtext to all this talk about lost American lives is that the US can invade and occupy foreign lands, engage in the sanctimonious slaughter of locals and whoever else gets in the way of feeding the bloodlust of Pompeo and his ilk (to say nothing of feeding the outsized ego of a lunatic like Trump), and yet expect to suffer no combat casualties from those defending their lands. It's the most warped form of "exceptional" thinking.

    As an aside, I wonder if the msm faithfully pushing the talk about Iran downing that Ukrainian commercial jet is designed to take the heat off a beleaguered Boeing. The investigation hasn't even begun but already we have the smoking gun, Iran did it.

    Olga , January 10, 2020 at 8:27 am

    Even the question is wrong. The killing was cowardly, outside all international norms (this from a country that dares to invoke "international order" whenever it is suitable), a colossal mistake, a strategic blunder, and plain destructive.
    The more one learns about QS' activities, the more it seems that he was "disposed of" precisely because of his unique talent and abilities to bring together the various local factions (particularly, in Iraq), so that then – unified – they could fight against the common enemy (guess who?). He was not guilty of killing amrikans – nor was he planning to – his "sin" was to try and unite locals to push the us out of ME. It was always going to be an uphill battle, but in death he may – in time – achieve his wish.

    Susan the other , January 10, 2020 at 11:49 am

    I'm in this camp too. But with a twist. Pure speculation here – and I'm sure it would never be exposed, but is there even any proof we did it? Was it an apache helicopter or a drone; whom have we supplied with these things? Who is this bold? Since our military has been dead-set-against assassinating Soleimani or any other leader it seems highly unlikely they proposed this to Trump. Mattis flatly refused to even consider such a thing. So I keep wondering if the usual suspect might be the right one – the Israelis. They have the proper expertise. And the confusion that followed? If we had done it we'd have had our PSAs ready to print. Instead we proffered an unsigned letter and other "rough drafts" of the incident and then retracted them like idiots. As if we were frantic to step in and prevent the Rapture. We could have taken the blame just to prevent a greater war. Really, that's what it looks like to me.

    bold'un , January 10, 2020 at 5:19 pm

    Surely the whole point of the strike is that it was illegal: that is to say that it was a message to the Iraqis that they are NOT allowed to help Iran evade sanctions, NOT allowed to do oil-for-infrastructure deals with China and NOT allowed to invite senior Iranians around for talks: i.e. Iraq is not yet sovereign and it is the US that makes the rules around there; any disobedience will summarily be punished by the de facto rulers even if that violates agreements and laws applicable in Iraq.

    If you disagree, then what should the US do if Iraq does not toe the Western line?

    makedonamend , January 11, 2020 at 4:29 am

    Hiya Olga & t'Others,

    " The killing was cowardly, outside all international norms (this from a country that dares to invoke "international order" whenever it is suitable), a colossal mistake, a strategic blunder, and plain destructive "

    I think the immediate impact which has long terms implications for how other countries view USA foreign policy is simply that any high ranking individual from any other country on earth has got to be aware that essentially no international norms now exist. It's one thing to 'whack' a bin Laden or dispose of a Gaddafi but another whole kettle of fish to assassinate a high ranking official going about their business who's no immediate security threat to the USA and when no state of war exists.

    For example, might a EU general now acquiesce to demands about NATO? Not saying this is going to happen by a long shot, but still a niggling thought might linger. Surely the individual will be resentful at the very least. I'm also reminded of a story about John Bolton allegedly telling a negotiator (UN or European?) that Bolton knew where the negotiator's family resided. These things add up.

    As Sergey Lavrov and President Putin have stated for a long time (and long before President Trump came along), the USA is 'agreement incapable'. However, now you have to wonder if any country really trusts any agreement they will make with the USA. Without trust on any level, cooperation/trade treaties and so on on are impossible or eminently disposable, i.e., not worth the paper upon which they are written.

    This is where the middle term ramifications start to kick-in. We know that Russia and China are making some tentative steps towards superficial integration in limited areas beyond just cooperation. Will they find more common ground? Will European countries (and by extension the EU) really start to deliver on an alternative financial clearing system? How will India and Japan react? Does nationalism of the imperial variety re-emerge as a world force – for good or bad?

    Will regional powers such as Russia, China, India, France or Iran quietly find more common ground also? But alliances are problematic and sometimes impose limitations that are exploitable. So, might a different form of cooperation emerge?

    Long term its all about advantage and trust. Trust is a busted flush now. (My 2 cents, and properly priced.)

    vlade , January 10, 2020 at 6:40 am

    As Thuto above says, the simple answer is "No". IF S was guilty of all those things ascribed to him, he'd have been judged and sentenced (yes, I do realise Iran would never extradite him etc. etc. – but there would have been a process and after the process, well, some things would be more justifiable). But we have the process because it's important to have a process – otherwise, anyone can find themselves on a hit list for any reason whatsoever.

    If the US doesn't want to follow and process, then it can't be suprised if others won't. Ignoring the process works for the strongest, while they are the strongest. And then it doesn't.

    timbers , January 10, 2020 at 6:53 am

    603 Americans killed in Iraq, he says Trump supporters claim, but we had millions of Iraqi's, Syrians, Libyans and others killed or their lives uprooted by Bush and Obama and company – yet they were not assassinated.

    I think – just a guess – the reason Soleimani was killed can be summed up in one word:

    Netanyahu.

    That, and on a broader, bird's eye view level in broad strokes – Michael Hudson's recent article outlining U.S. policy of preserving USD hegemony at all costs, that has existed since at least the 1950's, which depicts Soleimani's assassination as not a Trump qwerk but a logical application of that policy.

    You might say the swamp drainers came to drain the swamp and ended filling it up instead.

    Darius , January 10, 2020 at 8:04 am

    The mostest terriblest guy in the history of this or any other universe, but the average Joe never heard of until they announced they killed him. His epochal terribleness really flew under the radar.

    Wukchumni , January 10, 2020 at 8:14 am

    A joke I heard on the slopes yesterday: Nobody had ever heard of Soleimani, and then he blew up overnight, so now everybody knows who he is.

    Philo Beddoh , January 10, 2020 at 8:13 am

    The swamp drainers are so busy guzzling as much as they can quaff, without drowning; writhing each others' dead-eyed, bloated feeding frenzy; that obscene media distractions need to escalate in sadistic, off-hand terror. But, it's so ingrained into our governance, we just call it democracy?

    Susan the other , January 10, 2020 at 12:05 pm

    Hudson's take on USD hegemony is reasonable, but I don't think we'd assassinate Soleimani in anticipation of losing it. We have dealt with all the sects in the middle east for a long time and we have come to terms with them, until now. In a time that requires the shutting down of oil and gas production. I think (Carney, Keen, Murphy, etc.) oil is the basis for our economy, for productivity, for the world, that's a no brainer. But my second thoughts go more along the lines that oil and natural gas will be government monopolies directly – no need to use those resources to make the dollar or other currencies monopolies. Sovereign currency will still be a sovereign monopoly regardless of the oil industry. That also explains why we want hands-on control of this resource. And with that in mind, it would seem Soleimani might have been more of an asset for us.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 10, 2020 at 8:48 pm

    I hate to tell you but as much as we are fans of Hudson, he's all wet on this one. The dollar is the reserve currency because the US is willing to run sustained trade deficits, which is tantamount to exporting jobs. Perhaps more important, my connected economists say they know of no one who has the ear of the military-intel state who believes this either. This may indeed have been a line of thought 50 years ago but it isn't now.

    rusti , January 10, 2020 at 7:18 am

    much of the supporting rhetoric for this assassination coming out of Trump supporters (with bragging about it having reportedly been put up on Trump's reelection funding website)

    I thought I had a pretty strong stomach for this stuff, but it's been really nauseating for me to see the displays of joy and flag waving over the assassination of someone the overwhelming majority of people were wholly unaware of prior to his death. My guess is that it's mostly just a sort of schadenfreude at the squirming of Democrats as they (with few exceptions) fail to articulate any coherent response.

    The response should be clear without any caveats, "Trump is a coward who would never gamble with his life, but will happily gamble with the lives of your kids in uniform." This should resonate with most people, I don't believe that neocons really have any grassroots support.

    carl , January 10, 2020 at 7:27 am

    NO. Shockingly bad decision; you can just manage to glimpse around the edges of the war propaganda the embarrassment and backpedaling for having willingly stepped into such a gigantic steaming pile of excrement. The parade of smooth-faced liars on the MSM asserting that the US is now safer (the "war is peace" crowd) is sickening. Some even have the gall to assert that the enormous crowds in Iran are forced to attend by the repressive regime. Of course, there's no evidence of a provocation and they'll never produce any.

    PlutoniumKun , January 10, 2020 at 7:49 am

    Politico Europe is reporting that behind Europes seemingly supine response, officials and politicians are 'seething' over the attack. Its clearly seen around the world as not just illegal, but an appalling precedent.

    So far, American efforts to convince Europeans of the bright side of Soleimani's killing have been met with dropped jaws .

    The Historian , January 10, 2020 at 10:30 am

    The silence from other countries on this event has been deafening. And that should tell Trump and Pompeo something, but I doubt if they are smart enough to figure it out.

    I find it interesting that Pompeo was "disappointed" – what did he think would happen? For a Secretary of State, he's obviously extremely out of touch with the rest of the world if he didn't have some realistic idea of how this would go down.

    Eclair , January 10, 2020 at 11:17 am

    One wonders it this will be recalled as the episode in which the US finally jumped the shark.

    MyLessThanPrimeBeef , January 10, 2020 at 2:56 pm

    On one hand, the life of each and every victim of head-separation and droning is as precious as that of one Soleimani.

    On the other, the general's is more precious and thus, the behind the scene seething by Europe's politicians and officials. (They and many others are all potential targets now, versus previously droning wedding guests – time to seethe).

    Which is it? More precious or equally precious?

    Harry , January 10, 2020 at 7:57 am

    The more I think about it, the more it seemed like the Administration and its allies were probing to see how far they could go. They bombed PMUs and appeared to get away with it. So then they upped the ante when the Iraqis complained and finally got some moderate push-back. Not taking American lives in the missile strike seems to prove they Iranians didn't want to escalate. Still, I dont know about the Pentagon, but I was impressed with the accuracy.

    Procopius , January 10, 2020 at 7:01 pm

    I was impressed with the accuracy.

    Yes. From the picture at Vineyard of the Saker, they hit specific buildings. There were comments after the drone attack on Abqaiq and Khurais oil fields in KSA that they showed surprising accuracy, but perhaps this time surprised the intelligence agencies. Perhaps that was why Trump declared victory instead of further escalating. This is speculation, of course.

    The Rev Kev , January 10, 2020 at 7:23 pm

    There is also a good article giving more detail of these attacks and underlining the fact that not a single solitary missile was intercepted. What percentage did the Syrians/Russians manage to intercept of the US/UK/French missiles attack back in 2018? Wasn't it about seventy percent?

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/the-strike-ttg.html

    Yves Smith Post author , January 10, 2020 at 8:51 pm

    The Iranians are not done retaliating. They have a history of disproportionate retaliation, but when the right opportunity presents itself, and that routinely takes years. The limited strike was out of character and appears to have been the result of the amount of upset internally over the killing.

    Darius , January 10, 2020 at 8:12 am

    I have more a lot more respect for the strategic acumen of the Iranian regime than I do for that of the American regime. Now it's led by a collection of fragile male egos and superstitious rapture ready religious fanatics. Before them the regime was led by cowardly corporate suck ups. They all take their cues from the same military intelligence complex.

    lyman alpha blob , January 10, 2020 at 8:18 am

    One other glaring omission from the article – the only reason there was a US military contractor in Iraq available to be killed in the first place is due to the illegal war based on false premises launched almost two decades ago by the US, which continues to occupy the country to this day.

    Pretty clear who the terrorists are on this case.

    Amfortas the hippie , January 10, 2020 at 8:55 am

    Aye! This!
    assume a ladder on a windy day, with a hammer irresponsibly left perched on the edge of the top rung.
    if i blithely walk under that ladder just as the wind gusts and get bonked in the head by the falling hammer whose fault is it?
    we shouldn't be there in the first damned place.

    and as soon as the enabling lies were exposed, we should have left, post haste .leaving all kinds of money and apologies in our wake.
    to still be hanging around, unwanted by the locals, all these years later is arrogant and stupid.

    during the Bush Darkness, i was accused to my face(even strangled, once!) of being an american-hating traitor for being against the war, the Bush Cabal, and the very idea of American Empire.

    almost 20 years later, I'm still absolutely opposed to those things not least out of a care for the Troops(tm) .and a fervent wish that for once in my 50 years i could be proud to be an American.

    what a gigantic misallocation of resources, in service of rapine and hegemony, while my fellow americans suffer and wither and scratch around for crumbs.

    Mikel , January 10, 2020 at 8:32 am

    Another of many questions that remain involve the warped interpretation of "imminent" of the Bethlehem Doctrine. What institution will put a full stop to that doctrine of terror?
    It is a global hazard to continue to let that be adopted as any kind of standard.

    Susan the other , January 10, 2020 at 12:15 pm

    Under the Bethlehem Doctrine the entire political class in the USA, and possibly a few other countries, could be assassinated. What is legal or justified for one is justified for all.

    David , January 10, 2020 at 8:33 am

    Rosser is an economist rather than a philosopher or. jurist, and so he doesn't appear to realize that "justification" in the abstract is meaningless. An act can only be justified or not according to some ethical or legal principle, and you need to say what that principle is at the beginning before you start your argument. He doesn't do that, so his argument has no more validity than that of someone you get into a discussion with in a bar or over coffee at work.
    Legally, of course, there is no justification, because there was no state of armed conflict between the US and Iran, so the act was an act of state murder. It doesn't matter who the person was or what we was alleged to have done or be going to do. There's been a dangerous tendency developing in recent years to claim some kind of right to pre-emptive attacks. There is no such legal doctrine, and the ultimate source of the misrepresentation – Art 51 of the UN Charter – simply recognizes that nothing in the Charter stops a state resisting aggression until help arrives. That's it.
    Oh, and of course if this act were "justified" then any similar act in a similar situation would be justified as well, which might not work out necessarily to America's advantage.

    Carolinian , January 10, 2020 at 8:36 am

    Via ZH site this article is an interesting take on the situation

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/2020/01/donald-trump-has-just-blown-up-his-goal-of-isolating-iran/

    General Jonathan Shaw, former commander of UK forces in Iraq, put it well: Iran's objectives are political, not military. Their aim is not to destroy any American air base, but to drive a wedge between the US and its Arab allies -- and the Soleimani assassination has achieved more to this end than anything that could have been cooked up in Tehran. The Sunnis are standing down and the US and Israel now once again face being without real friends in the region. When push came to shove, all Kushner's efforts amounted to nothing. How elated the Iranians must be, even in the midst of such a setback.

    Which if true means that instead of divide and conquer Trump and Pompeo may instead be practicing unite and be conquered when it comes to US meddling in the Middle East.

    The Rev Kev , January 10, 2020 at 10:07 am

    I think that I see a danger for Israel here with a very tight pucker factor. I had assumed that if there was a war between Israel and Hezbollah, that Hezbollah would let loose their older rockets first to use up the Israeli anti-missile ordinance that they have. After that would come their modern accurate missiles.

    But part of that Iranian attack on those US bases was the use of older missiles that had been retro-fitted with gear for accurate targeting which obviously worked out spectacularly. Israel could assume that Iran would have given Hezbollah the same technology and the implication here is that any first wave of older Hezbollah missiles would just be as accurate as the following barrages of newer missiles.

    Susan the other , January 10, 2020 at 12:36 pm

    I wonder if it is remotely possible that all countries, say at the UN, could design acceptable language to make oil and natural gas a universal resource with a mandated conservation – agreed to by all. Those countries which have had oil economies and have become rich might agree to it because the use of oil and gas will be so restricted in future that they will not have those profits. But it would at least provide them with some steady income. It would prevent the oil wars we will otherwise have in our rush to monopolize the industry for profit; it would conserve the use of oil/gas and extend it farther out into the future so we can build a sustainable worldwide civilization and mitigate much of the damage we have done to the planet, etc. How can we all come together and make energy, oil and natgas access a universal human right (for the correct use)?

    The Rev Kev , January 10, 2020 at 8:38 am

    Actually Soleimani was guilty of the deaths of tens of thousands of people. Tens of thousands of ISIS fighters that is. Do they count? The Saudis, Gulf States and the CIA may shed a tear for them but nobody else will. When Soleimani arrived in Baghdad, he was traveling in a diplomatic capacity to help try to ease off tensions between the Saudis and the Iranians. And this was the imminent danger that Trump was talking about. Not an imminent danger to US troops but a danger that the Saudis and Iranians might negotiate an accommodation. Michael Hudson has said similar in a recent article.

    I think that what became apparent from that attack last year on the Saudi oil installations was that they were now a hostage. In other words, if the US attacks Iran, then Iran will take out the entirety of Saudi oil production and perhaps the Saudi Royal family themselves. There is no scenario in an Iran-US war where the Kingdom come out intact. So it seems that they have been putting out feelers with the Iranians about coming to an accommodation. This would explain why when Soleimani was murdered, there was radio silence on behalf of the Saudis.

    Maybe Trump has worked out that all of the Saudi oil facilities becoming toast would be bad for America too but, more importantly, to himself personally. After all, what is the point of having the Saudis only sell their oil in US dollars if there is no oil to sell? What would such a development do to the standing of the US dollar internationally? The financial crisis would sink his chances for a win this November and that is something that he will never allow. And I bet that he did not Tucker Carlson to tell him that.

    nippersdad , January 10, 2020 at 10:17 am

    Fascinating developments on this issue today. Pompeo admits that nothing was "imminent." Given the very specific definitions of Imminence that draw red lines between what is or is not legal in international law, this could get big very quickly.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/477664-pompeo-says-we-dont-know-when-we-dont-know-where-soleimani-had

    And the Iraqi's are not backing down.

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/policy-strategy/477651-iraqi-prime-minister-tells-pompeo-to-prepare-a-mechanism-for

    Without a SOFA in place that leaves us open to charges of war crimes; prolly not something that Trump wants to see during an election year.

    JTMcPhee , January 10, 2020 at 11:36 am

    What percent of the presumed Trump base, and imperial Big Business and Banksters, not to mention the sloshing mass of other parts of the electorate subject to "spinning" in the Bernays Tilt-a-Whirl, would give a rat's aff about "war crimes" charges? Drone murders to date, the whole stupid of profitable (to a few, externalities ignored) GWOT, all the sh!t the CIA and CENTCOM and Very Special Ops have done with impunity against brown people and even people here at home, not anything more than squeaks from a small fraction of us.

    And Trump is the Decider, yes, who signed off (as far as we know) on killing Soleimani that was lined up by the Borg, but really, how personalized to him would any repentance and disgust or even scapegoat targeting by the Blob really be, in the kayfabe that passes for "democracy in America?"

    I always though de Tocqueville titled his oeuvre on the political economy he limned way back when as a neat bit of Gallic irony

    xkeyscored , January 10, 2020 at 11:54 am

    I don't know. Might Trump benefit from charges of war crimes, spinning them as further proof that the United Nations, International Criminal Court, etc. are controlled by commies and muslims out to get the USA?
    As for the imminence of the hypothetical attacks, "There is no doubt that there were a series of imminent attacks being plotted by Qassem Soleimani," Pompeo told the Fox News host. "We don't know precisely when and we don't know precisely where, but it was real."
    Remember that imminent=possible at some time in the near or distant future, and
    Vice President Dick Cheney articulated shortly after 9/11: in Mr. Suskind's words, "if there was even a 1 percent chance of terrorists getting a weapon of mass destruction -- and there has been a small probability of such an occurrence for some time -- the United States must now act as if it were a certainty." That doctrine didn't prevent Bush's re-election.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/20/books/20kaku.html

    shinola , January 10, 2020 at 10:19 am

    The assassination was carried out by the Good Ol' USA – ipso facto it was justified.

    Shiloh1 , January 10, 2020 at 12:10 pm

    Declare victory and bring them all home. Leave behind W's Mission Accomplished banner and pallets of newly printed $100s with Obama's picture.

    Along the lines of Bismarck, not worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier. Not my 20 year old, not anybody else's in my name, either, especially since this began before they were born.

    And to whom will they sell their oil and natural gas? Who cares – its a fungible commodity of perhaps only of concern to our "allies" in Western Europe. Not my problem and great plan to mitigate carbon emissions!

    War hawks dressed in red or blue can become mercenaries and create Go Fund Me drives to protect their investments and any particular country which they have a personal affinity or citizenship.

    Synoia , January 10, 2020 at 12:13 pm

    It is US election year, and much money is to be had by pandering to various piles of money.

    Wacking an effective Iranian General is good news to some pile of money, and would encourage the pile of money to the Wacking party.

    I see this incident as no more that the behaviors of criminal gangs.

    The real question is Quo Bono. The answer appears to be the Israel Supporters giving $ to Trump.

    JTMcPhee , January 10, 2020 at 12:47 pm

    Lest we forget: "War is a racket."

    Monty , January 10, 2020 at 2:36 pm

    The whole episode reminds me of a Martin Scorsese plot line. A disagreement among "Made Men". The unfortunate symbolism and 'disrespect' of the embassy protest demanded a response, especially after all the fuss Trump made about Benghazi. Some things cannot be allowed. The Iranians, Russians and Americans probably decided between themselves what would be sufficient symbolism to prevent a war, and so Soleimani was sacrificed to die as a hero/martyr. A small price to prevent things spiraling out of control. The Iranian response seems to add weight to this hypothesis.

    Rosario , January 10, 2020 at 12:54 pm

    Forgive me for taking this a little more in the direction of theory, but can the rest of the world justify the assassination of CIA/Pentagon/CENTCOM officials in a similar manner given the opportunity? Are these organizations not an analog to Quds? That seems to be more in line with the type of questions we need to be asking ourselves as US citizens in a multi-polar world. This article, despite its best intentions, still hints at an American exceptionalism that no longer exists in the international mind. The US could barely get away with its BS in the 90s, it definitely can't in 2020.

    The US no longer has the monopoly on the narrative ("Big Lie") rationalizing its actions, not to say the other countries have the correct narrative, just that, there are a whole bunch of narratives ("Lies") out there being told to the world by various powers that are not the US, and the US is having a difficult time holding on to the mic. The sensible route would be to figure out how to assert cultural and political values/power in this world without the mafiosi methods. Maybe some old fashioned (if not icky, cynical) diplomacy. It is better than spilled blood, or nuclear war.

    The US military/intelligence wonks overplayed their hand with Soleimani. I think the Neo-Cons gave Trump a death warrant for Soleimani, and Trump was too self-involved (stupid) to know or care who he was offing. His reaction to the blow back betrays that.

    Now he is f*****, along with the chicken-hawks, and they all know it. They just have to sit back and watch Iran bomb US bases because the alternative is a potential big war, possibly involving China and Russia, that can't be fought by our Islamist foreign legions. It'll demand the involvement of US troops on the ground and the US electorate won't tolerate it.

    Ashburn , January 10, 2020 at 12:57 pm

    Anyone who has worked in the counter-terrorism field knows that when a credible and imminent threat is received the first act is to devise a response to counter the threat. It may involve raising security measures at an airline security checkpoint, it may involve arrests, if possible, of the would-be terrorist(s). It may involve evacuating a building and conducting a search for a bomb. It may involve changing a scheduled appearance or route of travel of a VIP.

    The point is to stop the operators behind the threat from completing their terrorist act. What it certainly does NOT involve is assassinating someone who may have given the order but is definitely not involved in carrying out the act. Such an assassination would not only be ineffective in countering the threat but would likely be seen as increasing the motivation behind the attack. Such was the assassination of Soleimani, even if one believes in the alleged imminent threat. This was simply a revenge killing due to Soleimani's success at organizing the opposition to US occupation.

    David in Santa Cruz , January 10, 2020 at 1:08 pm

    We don't know precisely when and we don't know precisely where, but it was real.

    How does this meet the internationally recognized legal requirement of "imminent" danger to human life required to kill a political or military leader outside of a declared war? All public statements by the U.S. political and military leadership point to a retaliatory killing, at best, with a vague overlay of preemptive action.

    If you agree that the "Bethlehem Doctrine" has never been recognized by the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, or the legislatures of the three rogue states who have adopted it, the assassination of Suleimani appears to have been a murder.

    This is absolutely chilling. These "End Times/Armageddon" lunatics want to destroy the world. Who would Jesus have murdered? They stand the lessons of his state-sanctioned murder on their heads

    xkeyscored , January 10, 2020 at 1:13 pm

    Mintpress has an interesting article: Study Finds Bots and MAGA Supporters Pushing #IraniansDetestSoleimani Hashtag

    A social media disinformation expert studied 60,000 tweets from nearly 10,000 accounts using the hashtag #IraniansDetestSoleimani and found that the most common phrases in those users' biographies were "Make America Great Again" and "Trump."
    https://www.mintpressnews.com/study-bots-maga-supporters-iraniansdetestsoleimani-hashtag/264024/

    Monty , January 10, 2020 at 2:37 pm

    Shocking! /s

    Tom Bradford , January 10, 2020 at 1:56 pm

    My two-pennyworth? The US press and the circles surrounding Trump are already crowing that he 'won' the exchange. If, as speculated, he went against military advice in ordering this assassination, his 'victory' will only confirm his illusions that he is a military genius, which makes him even more dangerous. There are some rather nasty parallels with the rise of Hitler appearing here.

    mauisurfer , January 10, 2020 at 2:03 pm

    The claim that Soleimani had killed hundreds of Americans was repeated, word for word, in many articles in the papers of record (e.g., New York Times, 1/7/20; Washington Post, 1/3/20, 1/3/20) as well as across the media (e.g., Boston Globe, 1/3/20; Fox News, 1/6/20; The Hill, 1/7/20).

    These "hundreds of Americans" were US forces killed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) during the Iraq War, supposedly made in Iran and planted by Iranian-backed Shia militias. As professor Stephen Zunes pointed out in the Progressive (1/7/20), the Pentagon provided no evidence that Iran made the IEDs, other than the far-fetched claim that they were too sophisticated to be made in Iraq -- even though the US invasion had been justified by claims that Iraq had an incredibly threatening WMD program. The made-in-Iran claim, in turn, was the main basis for pinning responsibility for IED attacks on Shia militias -- which were, in any case, sanctioned by the Iraqi government, making Baghdad more answerable for their actions than anyone in Tehran. Last year, Gareth Porter reported in Truthout, (7/9/19) that the claim that Iran was behind the deaths of US troops was part of Vice President Dick Cheney's plan to build a case for yet another war.

    J7915 , January 10, 2020 at 8:47 pm

    IIRC the "sophistication claim" was made years ago. Apparently the basic technology is applied in oilfields to pierce oil well lining tubes at the oil layer. So the Iraqis knew all about the basic technique, only needed some more information.

    Bill Carson , January 10, 2020 at 2:21 pm

    About those "603 American deaths" that Soleimani is posthumously being charged with .

    "I cross-checked a Pentagon casualty database with obituaries and not 1 of the 9 American servicemen killed fighting in Iraq since 2011 died at the hands of militias backed by Suleimani. His assassination was about revenge and provocation, not self-defense."

    Robert Mackey on Twitter

    mauisurfer , January 10, 2020 at 2:24 pm

    Larry Johnson:

    "The U.S. Government and almost all of the media continue to declare that Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism. That is not true. That is a lie. I realize that calling this assertion a lie opens me to accusations of being an apologist for Iran. But simply look at the facts."
    "The Trump Administration needs to stop with its infantile ranting and railing about Iran and terrorism. The actual issues surrounding Iran's growing influence in the region have little to do with terrorism. Our policies and actions towards Iran are accelerating their cooperation with China and Russia, not diminishing it. I do not think that serves the longterm interests of the United States or our allies in the Middle East"

    read whole story here:

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/the-facts-about-iran-and-terrorism-by-larry-c-johnson.html

    Bill Carson , January 10, 2020 at 2:24 pm

    Also this -- -

    "On the night the US killed Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, it tried to kill another senior Iranian military official in Yemen, two sources say"

    CNN Breaking News on Twitter

    Somebody's got some 'splainin' to do.

    xkeyscored , January 10, 2020 at 4:00 pm

    Thank you, Bill.

    The strike targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, a financier and key commander of Iran's elite Quds Force who has been active in Yemen, did not result in his death, according to four U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

    The unsuccessful operation may indicate that the Trump administration's killing of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani last week was part of a broader operation than previously explained, raising questions about whether the mission was designed to cripple the leadership of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or solely to prevent an imminent attack on Americans as originally stated.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/on-the-day-us-forces-killed-soleimani-they-launched-another-secret-operation-targeting-a-senior-iranian-official-in-yemen/2020/01/10/60f86dbc-3245-11ea-898f-eb846b7e9feb_story.html

    sierra7 , January 10, 2020 at 2:29 pm

    "Justification"????? You're kidding right? "They", those who we firstly "embrace" for our own interests are "for us" until we decide we are "against them"! What a farce our foreign policies are!

    For some "exceptional" reason we don't recognize international law! We are the terrorists not them.

    rjs , January 10, 2020 at 7:09 pm

    NB: the comment i had removed from this post is now posted on a copy of the same post at Angry Bear

    oaf , January 10, 2020 at 7:23 pm

    the more that is at stake, the less one should listen to advisers

    Jack Parsons , January 10, 2020 at 8:25 pm

    Prediction for this stupidest of all worlds: Iraq really does boot us out, T-bone siezes on this for its obvious popularity among his base, and uses "He Kept Us Out Of War" for re-election.

    Shiloh1 , January 11, 2020 at 10:37 am

    Feature, not bug.

    Where is my peace dividend after fall of Berlin Wall and Soviet Union?

    Poppy and MIC wouldn't have it, hence April Galaspie's "no instructions" response to Saddam's initial inquiry over the Iraq / Kuwait surveying and mineral rights dispute on Kuwait's drilling at the border 30 years ago.

    [Jan 11, 2020] How Trump made the decision to kill Soleimani Daylight Reporters

    Jan 11, 2020 | daylightreporters.com

    Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Defence Secretary Mark Esper, and General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had gone to Palm Beach, Florida, to brief Trump on airstrikes the Pentagon had just carried out in Iraq and Syria against Iranian-sponsored Shiite militia groups.

    Read full story at https://daylightreporters.com/2020/01/04/how-trump-made-the-decision-to-kill-soleimani/

    [Jan 11, 2020] How Pompeo convinced Trump to kill Soleimani and fulfilled a decade-long goal - KRDO

    Notable quotes:
    "... Pompeo has forged "very close relationships" with Haspel and Esper, alliances that bolstered his ability to make the case to Trump. "They all work together very, very closely," said the former Republican national security official. ..."
    Jan 11, 2020 | krdo.com

    ... ... ...

    As planning got underway, Pompeo worked with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Army Gen. Mark Milley and the commander of CENTCOM Marine Gen. Kenneth McKenzie to assess the profile of troops in the field. Multiple sources also say that hawkish Republican Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, were kept in the loop and also pushed Trump to respond.

    Trump was not at all reluctant to target Soleimani, multiple sources said, adding that the President's other senior advisers -- Esper, Milley, CIA Director Gina Haspel and national security adviser Robert O'Brien -- "were all on board."

    Pompeo has forged "very close relationships" with Haspel and Esper, alliances that bolstered his ability to make the case to Trump. "They all work together very, very closely," said the former Republican national security official.

    That said, the former official expressed concern about the lack of deep expertise in Trump's national security team. Several analysts pointed to this as one factor in Pompeo's outsized influence within the administration.

    The government is so compromised by Trump and by all the vacancies and lack of experience, this former official said, that "everything is being done by a handful of principles -- Pompeo, Esper, Milley. There are a lot of things being left on the floor."

    'Such a low bar'

    Pompeo is arguably the most experienced of the national security Cabinet, the former national security official said, "but it's such a low bar."

    "It's such a small group and there's so much that needs to be done," the former official said. "Everyone in this administration is a level and a half higher than they would be in a normal administration. They have no bench," they said.

    The Trump administration has been handicapped by the President's refusal to hire Republicans who criticize him. Other Republicans won't work for the administration, for fear of being "tainted" or summarily fired, the former official said.

    As layers of experience have been peeled away at the White House, some analysts say safeguards have been removed as well. CNN's Peter Bergen has written in his new book, "Trump and his Generals," that former Defense Secretary James Mattis told his aides not to present the President with options for confronting Iran militarily.

    Randa Slim, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, argues that since the departure of Mattis, former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and former White House chief of staff and retired Marine Gen. John Kelly, there are very few voices at the White House to offer "deeply considered advice."

    "We don't have those people who have that experience and could look Trump in the eye and who have his respect and who could say, 'Hey, hey, hey -- wait!'," Slim said.

    [Jan 11, 2020] Pompeo and Pence reportedly pushed Trump to kill Soleimani. Pentagon leaders were 'stunned' Trump agreed.

    Jan 11, 2020 | theweek.com

    For years, "Pompeo has tried to stake out a maximalist position on Iran that has made him popular among two critical pro-Israel constituencies in Republican politics: conservative Jewish donors and Christian evangelicals," the Post explains . "Since his time as CIA director, Pompeo has forged a friendship with Yossi Cohen, the director of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad," and "at the State Department, he is a voracious consumer of diplomatic notes and reporting on Iran, and he places the country far above other geopolitical and economic hot spots in the world." Read more at The Washington Post . Peter Weber

    [Jan 11, 2020] "When They Kill One Sureimani, A Thousand More Are Born": spectacular betrail by Trump of his voters

    Notable quotes:
    "... Peter Certo is the editorial manager of the Institute for Policy Studies and editor of Foreign Policy In Focus. ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | fpif.org

    Originally published in OtherWords .

    Trump's Iran Aggression Deserves Full-Throated Opposition - FPIF By Peter Certo

    Trump is betraying his voters and threatening millions of lives.

    In a full-blown U.S. war with Iran, up to a million people could die initially.

    Hundreds of thousands more could die in the vacuum to follow. Millions would be made refugees. That's the conclusion of experts surveyed by Vox reporter Alex Ward . "The worst-case scenarios here are quite serious," Middle East scholar Michael Hanna warned.

    With the brazen assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani in Iraq, President Trump has brought us leaps and bounds closer to that conflagration -- a decision Trump appears to have made while golfing at Mar-a-Lago .

    Lawmakers need to move before it's too late.

    The Iranians may respond cautiously , perhaps forestalling a full-blown conflict. But there can be no doubt the White House has been driving in that direction from day one.

    In a few short years, Trump has blown up the Iran nuclear deal, put a horrific economic stranglehold on the country, and sent a stunning 14,000 new troops to the Middle East since just last spring. Some 3,500 more are now on their way.

    "Hope this is the first step to regime change in Tehran," John Bolton tweeted about the assassination . Bolton may have left the White House, but clearly his spirit lives on.

    What next? Get ready to hear a lot about what a " bad guy " Soleimani was, and how Iran is a "state sponsor" of terrorism.

    No doubt, Soleimani had blood on his hands -- he was a general. Yet after two decades of U.S. wars in the Middle East, that's the pot calling the kettle black. It was the U.S. who invaded Iraq, started a civil war, and paved the way for a literal terrorist state, ISIS, to occupy the country afterward (a force Soleimani himself was instrumental in dismantling).

    That senseless war caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, exploded the terrorist threat, and is destabilizing the region to this day. Yet somehow, war hawks like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo can go on TV and -- with a straight face -- predict ordinary Iranians will essentially thank the U.S. for murdering their general.

    "People not only in Iraq but in Iran will view the American action last night as giving them freedom," Pompeo said the morning after the assassination. You couldn't caricature a better callback to Dick Cheney's infamous prediction that Iraqis would "greet us as liberators" if you tried.

    This war-mongering should be as toxic politically as it is morally . Trump rode into office promising to end America's wars, winning him crucial votes in swing states with large military and veteran populations. Huge bipartisan majorities, including 58 percent of Republicans, say they want U.S. troops out of the Middle East.

    Trump is betraying them spectacularly.

    Yet too many Democrats are merely objecting to Trump's failure to consult them. Speaker Nancy Pelosi complained the strike "was taken without the consultation of the Congress." South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg offered colorlessly that "there are serious questions about how this decision was made." Others complained about the apparent lack of a "strategy."

    It's illegal for a president to unilaterally launch a war -- that's important. But these complaints make it sound like if you want to kill a million people for no reason, you just have to go to the DMV first. As if Trump's base doesn't love it when he cuts the line in Washington.

    Senator Bernie Sanders, who warned that "Trump's dangerous escalation brings us closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East that could cost countless lives and trillions more dollars," came closer to communicating the real threat.

    Millions of lives are at stake. Trump's aggression demands -- and voters will more likely reward -- real opposition. Call him on it before it's too late.

    Peter Certo is the editorial manager of the Institute for Policy Studies and editor of Foreign Policy In Focus.

    [Jan 11, 2020] Ex-Trump official calls BS on Pompeo's claim that Suleimani killing makes the world 'safer' Raw Story

    Jan 11, 2020 | www.rawstory.com

    me name=

    Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday claimed that the killing of Iranian military leader Qassim Suleimani had made the world "safer" -- even though the actions of Pompeo's own State Department directly contradict his words.

    David Lapan, who served as the spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security under President Donald Trump , shredded Pompeo for his rosy assessment of the Suleimani killing even as the State Department frantically works to evacuate Americans from Iraq in anticipation of expected retaliation from Iran.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    "The State Dept alert sends a much different message than this one from the leader of the State Dept, Secretary Pompeo: 'The world is a much safer place today. I can assure you that Americans in the region are much safer,'" he writes on Twitter. "Which is it? (Answer: more dangerous, not less)."

    The State Department on Friday advised Americans in Iraq to depart the country immediately, and even went so far as to suggest they travel to neighboring countries by land if they could not secure passage out of Iraq through airlines. The State Department also advised Americans in the country to not approach the American embassy in Iraq.

    The State Dept alert below sends a much different message than this one from the leader of the State Dept, Secretary Pompeo: "The world is a much safer place today. I can assure you that Americans in the region are much safer."

    Which is it? (Answer: more dangerous, not less) https://t.co/bw7Py2y5WH

    -- David Lapan (@DaveLapanDC) January 3, 2020

    [Jan 11, 2020] The War Pigs Are Finally Revealing Themselves - And This Is Just The Beginning

    Jan 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Yes the war pigs like Esper, Miller, and Pompous deliberately tried to drag Trump into war with Iran! But noticed how it turned out!

    by Tyler Durden Fri, 01/10/2020 - 23:45 0 SHARES

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    In 2016 during the election campaign of Donald Trump one of the primary factors of his popularity among conservatives was that he was one of the first candidates since Ron Paul to argue for bringing US troops home and ending American involvement in the various elitist fabricated wars in the Middle East . From Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Syria and Yemen and beyond, the Neo-Cons and Neo-Libs at the behest of their globalist masters had been waging war oversees unabated for over 15 years. The time was ripe for a change and people felt certain that if Hillary Clinton entered the White House, another 4-8 years of war were guaranteed.

    There was nothing to be gained from these wars. They were only dragging the US down socially and economically , and even the idea of "getting the oil" had turned into a farce as the majority of Iraqi oil has been going to China, not the US. General estimates on the costs of the wars stand at $5 trillion US tax dollars and over 4500 American dead along with around 40,000 wounded. The only people that were benefiting from the situation were globalists and banking elites, who had been clamoring to destabilize the Middle East since the day they launched their "Project For A New American Century" (PNAC). Truly, all wars are banker wars.

    The Obama Administration's attempts to lure Americans into supporting open war with the Assad regime in Syria had failed. Consistent attempts by George W. Bush and Obama to increase tensions with Iran had fizzled. Americans were showing signs of fatigue, FINALLY fed up with the lies being constructed to trick them into being complicit in the banker wars. Trump was a breath of fresh air...but of course, like all other puppets of the globalists, his promises were empty.

    In my article 'Clinton vs. Trump And The Co-Option Of The Liberty Movement' , published before the 2016 election, I warned that Trump's rhetoric might be a grand show , and that it could be scripted by the establishment to bring conservatives back into the Republican/Neo-Con fold. At the time, leftist media outlet Bloomberg openly reveled in the idea that Trump might absorb and destroy the "Tea Party" and liberty movement and turn them into something far more manageable. The question was whether or not the liberty movement would buy into Trump completely, or remain skeptical.

    Initially, I do not think the movement held onto its objectivity at all. Far too many people bought into Trump blindly and immediately based on misguided hopes and a desire to "win" against the leftists. The insane cultism of the political left didn't help matters much, either.

    When Trump started saturating his cabinet with banking elites and globalists from the CFR the moment he entered office, I knew without any doubt that he was a fraud. Close associations with establishment swamp creatures was something he had consistently criticized Clinton and other politicians for during the campaign, but Trump was no better or different than Clinton; he was just an errand boy for the elites. The singular difference was that his rhetoric was designed to appeal directly to liberty minded conservatives.

    This meant that it was only a matter of time before Trump broke most of his campaign promises, including his assertions that he would bring US troops home. Eventually, the mask had to come off if Trump was going to continue carrying out the agenda of his masters.

    Today, the mask has indeed come off. For the past three years Trump has made announcements of an imminent pull back of troops in the Middle East, including the recent claim that troops would be leaving Syria. All of the announcements were followed by an INCREASE in US troop presence in the region. Consistent attempts have been made to foment renewed strife with Iran. The build-up to war has been obvious, but some people on the Trump train still didn't get it.

    The most common argument I heard when pointing out all the inconsistencies in Trump's claims as well as his direct links to globalists was that "He hadn't started any wars, so how could he be a globalist puppet...?" My response has always been "Give it a little time, and he will."

    One of my readers noted recently that "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (TDS) actually goes both ways. Leftists double down on their hatred of Trump at every opportunity, but Trump cultists double down on their support for Trump regardless of how many promises he breaks. This has always been my biggest concern – That conservatives in the liberty movement would ultimately abandon their principles of limited government, the end to banking elites in the White House and ending illegal wars because they had invested themselves so completely in the Trump farce that they would be too embarrassed to admit they had been conned.

    Another concern is that the liberty movement would be infected by an influx of people who are neo-conservative statists at their core. These people pretend to be liberty minded conservatives, but when the veil is lifted they show their true colors as the War Pigs they really are. A distinction has to be made between Bush era Neo-Con control freaks and constitutional conservatives; there are few if any similarities between the two groups, but the establishment hopes that the former will devour the latter.

    I've noticed that the War Pigs are out in force this past week, beating their chests a calling for more blood. The US government has assassinated Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, retaliations against US targets have begun, and now the Iraqi government has demanded that US troops be removed from the region, to which Trump has said "no" and demanded payment instead. A new troop surge has been initiated and this WILL end in all out war. The tit-for-tat has just begun.

    How do Trump cultists respond? "Kill those terrorists!"

    Yes, many of the same people that applauded Trump's supposed opposition to the wars three years ago are now fanatically cheering for the beginning of perhaps the most destructive war of all. The rationalizations for this abound. Soleimani was planning attacks on US targets in Iraq, they say. And, this might be true, though no hard proof has yet been presented.

    I'm reminded of the Bush era claims of Iraqi "Weapons of Mass Destruction", the weapons that were never found and no proof was found that they ever existed. The only weapons Iraq had were the weapons the US sold to them decades ago. Any government can fabricate an excuse for assassination or war for public consumption; the Trump Administration is no different.

    That said, I think the most important factor in this debate has fallen by the wayside. The bottom line is, US troops and US bases should NOT be in Iraq in the first place. Trump himself stated this time and time again . Even if Soleimani was behind the attacks and riots in Iraq, US assets cannot be attacked in the region if they are REMOVED from the region as Trump said he would do.

    There is only one reason to keep US assets in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria at this time, and that is to create ongoing tensions in the area which can be used by the establishment to trigger a new war, specifically with Iran.

    The War Pigs always have reasons and rationales, though.

    They say the Muslim world is a threat to our way of life, and I agree that their ideology is completely incompatible with Western values. That said, the solution is not sending young Americans to die overseas in wars based on lies. Again, these wars only benefit the bankers and globalists; they do not make us safer as a people. The only moral solution is to make sure the fascist elements of Muslim extremism are not imported to our shores.

    The War Pigs say that we deserve payment for our "services rendered" in the region before we leave, echoing the sentiments of Donald Trump. I ask, what services? Payment for what? The invasion the Iraqi's didn't want, based on fallacies that have been publicly exposed? The US bases that should not be there in the first place? The hundreds of thousands dead from a war that had no purpose except to deliberately destabilize the region?

    We will never get "payment" from the Iraqis as compensation for these mad endeavors, and the War Pigs know this. They want war. They want it to go on forever. They want to attach their egos to the event. They want to claim glory for themselves vicariously when we win, and they want to claim victimhood for themselves vicariously when our soldiers or citizens get killed. They are losers that can only be winners through the sacrifices of others.

    The War Pigs defend the notion that the president should be allowed to make war unilaterally without support from congress. They say that this type of action is legal, and technically they are right. It is "legal" because the checks and balances of war were removed under the Bush and Obama Administrations. The passage of the AUMF (Authorization For Use Of Military Force) in 2001 gave the Executive Branch dictatorial powers to initiate war on a whim without oversight. Just because it is "legal" does not mean it is constitutional, or right.

    In the end, the Trump bandwagon is meant to accomplish many things for the globalists; the main goal though is that it is designed to change liberty conservatives into rabid statists. It is designed to make anti-war pro-constitution activists into war mongers and supporters of big government, as long as it is big government under "our control". But it's not under our control. Trump is NOT our guy. He is an agent of the establishment and always has been.

    For now, the saber rattling is aggressive but the actions have been limited, but this will not be the case for long. Some may ask why the establishment has not simply launched all out war now? Why start out small? Firstly, they need conservatives psychologically invested in the idea. This may require a false flag event or attack on American civilians. Secondly, they need to execute an extensive troop build-up, which could take a few months. Declarations of a "need for peace" are always used to stall for time while the elites position for war.

    War with Iran is pointless, and frankly, unwinnable, and the elites know this. It's not just a war with Iran, it is a war with Iran, their allies, and every other nation that reacts negatively to our actions. And, these nations do not have to react militarily, they can react economically by dumping US treasuries and the dollar as world reserve.

    The establishment wants the US embroiled in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc. until we are so hollowed out from conflict that we collapse.

    They also need a considerable distraction to hide their responsibility for the implosion of the Everything Bubble and the economic pain that will come with it. The end game for the establishment is for America to self destruct, so that it can be rebuilt into something unrecognizable and eternally monstrous. They want every vestige of our original principles to be erased, and to do that, they need us to be complicit in our own destruction.

    They need us to participate. Don't participate, and refuse to support new banker wars. Don't be a War Pig.

    * * *

    If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch . Learn more about it HERE .

    LEEPERMAX , 17 minutes ago link

    ELIMINATING QASEM SOLEIMANI WAS DONALD TRUMP'S MIDDLE EAST FAREWELL LETTER

    "The elimination of Soleimani was not a prelude to deeper US involvement in the Middle East. It was a farewell letter"

    Sanity Bear , 20 minutes ago link

    Brandon's prescription needs a refill... fast.

    freeculture , 36 minutes ago link

    Trumpino is MIGA all the way to the bank.

    VZ58 , 31 minutes ago link

    Like all before him in the last seventy odd years...some Americans are finally beginning to understand this...

    Helg Saracen , 55 minutes ago link

    The main problem of the United States in the existing political and economic system, which began to be intensively created by the American banking layer since 1885 and was fixed in 1913. This became possible only thanks to the Civil War of 1861-1865. I will explain. Before the Civil War, each state had its own banking structure, its own banknotes (there were not so many states, there were still territories that did not become states yet). Before the American Civil War, there was no single banking system. Abraham Linkol was a protege of the banking houses of the cities of New York and Chicago, they rigged the election (bought the election). It may sound rude to the Americans, but Lincoln was a rogue in the eyes of some US citizens of that time. And this became the main reason for the desire of some states (not only southern, and some northern) to withdraw from the United States. Another good reason for the exit was the persistent attempts of bankers in New York and Chicago to take control of the banking system of the South. These are two main reasons, as old as the World, the struggle for control and money. The war (unfortunately) began the South. Under a federal treaty, South and North were supposed to jointly contain US forts for protection. The fighting began on April 12, 1861 with an attack by southerners on such a fort Sumter in Charleston Bay. These are the beginnings of war.

    This is important - I advise everyone to read the memoirs of generals, and especially the memoirs of Ulysses Grant, the future president of the United States. The war was with varying success, but the emissaries of the banks of New York and Chicago always followed the army of the North, who, taking advantage of the disastrous situation in the battlefields, bought up real estate, land and other assets. They were called the "Carpetbagger". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpetbagger They were engaged in the purchase throughout the war and up to 1885.

    To make it clear to you, in the history of the USA, the period from 1865 to 1885 is called the "Great American Depression" (this is the very first great depression and lasted 20 years). During this time, the bankers of New York and Chicago completely subjugated the US banking system to themselves and their interests, trampled the South (robbed), after which the submission of the US as a state directly to the banking mafia began. At present (since 1913) in the USA there is not capitalism, but an evil parody of capitalism.

    I can call it this: American clan-corporate oligarchic "capitalism" (with the suppression of free markets, with unfair competition and the creation of barriers to the dissemination of reliable information). Since such "capitalism" cannot work (like socialism or utopian communism), constant wars are needed that bring profit to the bankers, owners of the military-industrial complex, political "service staff", make oligarchs richer, and ordinary Americans poorer. We are now observing this, since this system has come to its end and everything has become obvious.

    For example, in the early 80s, the middle class of the United States was approximately 70% of the population employed in production and trade, now it is no more than 15%.

    The gap between the oligarchs and ordinary Americans widened. My essay is how I see what is happening in the USA and why I do not like it. It's my personal opinion. In the end, my favorite phrase is that Americans are suckers and boobies (but we still love them). Good luck everyone.

    rbianco3 , 1 hour ago link

    No longer a concern, a reality

    Another concern is that the liberty movement would be infected by an influx of people who are neo-conservative statists at their core. These people pretend to be liberty minded conservatives, but when the veil is lifted they show their true colors as the War Pigs they really are.

    ExposeThem511 , 56 minutes ago link

    Trotskyites.

    The Vineyard 21 - 33-43 , 1 hour ago link

    Prophetically speaking, Trump is a sign that the end game of the grand plan of the current age is swiftly coming to an end.

    Benito_Camela , 1 hour ago link

    What does Frank the Skank (ostensibly an American taxpayer, but more likely an Israeli dual "loyalty" traitor) have to say about this?

    We will never get "payment" from the Iraqis as compensation for these mad endeavors, and the War Pigs know this. They want war. They want it to go on forever. They want to attach their egos to the event. They want to claim glory for themselves vicariously when we win, and they want to claim victimhood for themselves vicariously when our soldiers or citizens get killed. They are losers that can only be winners through the sacrifices of others.

    The War Pigs defend the notion that the president should be allowed to make war unilaterally without support from congress. They say that this type of action is legal, and technically they are right. It is "legal" because the checks and balances of war were removed under the Bush and Obama Administrations. The passage of the AUMF (Authorization For Use Of Military Force) in 2001 gave the Executive Branch dictatorial powers to initiate war on a whim without oversight. Just because it is "legal" does not mean it is constitutional, or right.

    [Jan 11, 2020] The Trump administration is doing its best to keep Syria dismembered and near death by Edward Hunt

    Jan 07, 2020 | fpif.org

    The Syrian civil war, which has been raging since 2011, is one of the worst tragedies of the early twenty-first century. Approximately half a million people have died, about six million people have fled the country, and another six million people remain internally displaced. Much of the country lies in ruins, perhaps never again to recover.

    The war is also far from over. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has been gaining momentum, but his regime has failed to recapture many parts of the country. Multiple foreign powers remain active in Syria, including Iran, Russia, Turkey, Israel, and the United States. In the northwest, Idlib Province is dominated by tens of thousands of Islamist militants, many of whom are active in al-Qaeda-style terrorist organizations.

    "It's a kind of conflict where the kindling is sufficient for it to burn for decade after decade and continue to be an engine of jihadism and instability for the entire region and beyond," a senior State Department official said early last year.

    The leaders of the United States have called for a political settlement, but they have played a central role in fueling the conflict. As they have tried to oust Assad, they have settled on a strategy of stalemate , keeping the war going as a means of pressuring the Syrian leader into relinquishing power.

    The Obama administration, which designed the strategy, spent years providing Islamist militants with just enough support to keep them fighting the Assad regime but not enough support for them to overthrow the government.

    "What we're trying to do is to make sure the moderate opposition continues to stay strong, puts the pressure on the regime," CIA Director John Brennan explained during the administration's final year in office. "We don't want the Syrian government to collapse. That's the last thing we want to do."

    Administration officials feared that if the rebels overthrew the government, the country would implode, making it into a center of Islamist extremism and terrorism. They wanted Assad gone, but they did not want the country to become another Libya , which had devolved into a bitter civil war after the ouster of Muammar Qaddafi in 2011.

    "We have huge interests because of the stability of the region, because of the need to fight against extremism, the need to prevent the country from breaking up and having a negative impact on all of the neighborhood," then-Secretary of State John Kerry said .

    Sharing these concerns, the Trump administration ended support to the rebels but turned to other forms of leverage. For the most part, the Trump administration has been exploiting the areas outside of the Assad regime's control, trying to prevent the regime from reclaiming those areas and reestablishing its authority.

    "Bashar al-Assad can think he's won the war, but right now he holds on to approximately half the territory of Syria," James Jeffrey, the administration's special envoy for Syria, remarked in 2018. "He's sitting on a cadaver state."

    This "cadaver state," as Jeffrey described it, provides the guiding vision for the Trump administration's strategy in Syria. To keep pressure on Assad, the Trump administration is trying to preserve the cadaver state, keeping Syria dead and dismembered until Assad steps down from power. Implementing its own version of the stalemate strategy, the Trump administration wants to achieve something morticians might call the embalming of Syria.

    Keeping Syria Dismembered

    The civil war has divided Syria into several areas of control . Although the Assad regime controls much of central Syria and the capital in Damascus, other groups control large areas in the northwest, northeast, and south.

    In the northwest, the opposition controls Idlib Province, its last and largest stronghold. Since 2015, an al-Qaeda offshoot called Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) has dominated the area, using it to organize resistance to the Assad government. Early last year, HTS took administrative control of the region.

    Some U.S. officials say the province is now home to one of the largest concentrations of terrorists in the world. They are particularly concerned about an al-Qaeda branch called Hurras al-Din , which could be plotting attacks against the West. Perhaps the strongest symbol of what has happened to the area is that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State, was found hiding there during the U.S. raid that resulted in his death last year.

    "There is no dispute that Idlib has become a hornet's nest of multiple terrorist organizations," Defense Department official Robert Karem told Congress in 2018.

    Although the Assad regime has been working with Russia in an ongoing military campaign to retake control of the terrorist stronghold, the Trump administration has been trying to slow the attack. Administration officials argue that a major offensive will create a humanitarian catastrophe . More than three million people live in the province, and many of them are refugees from other parts of Syria.

    The bigger fear in Washington is that Assad's military campaign will succeed in destroying the terrorist groups. Although U.S. forces have taken several actions of their own against them, U.S. officials want the militants to keep pressure on Assad. When the Syrian government attempted to retake control of the area in 2018, Jeffrey warned that a Syrian victory "would have meant essentially the end of the armed resistance to the Syrian Government."

    As the Trump administration has sought to prevent the Syrian government from retaking Idlib, it has been pursuing a similar objective in Rojava, the Kurdish-led area in the northeast. Since the war began, Kurdish militias have controlled the northeastern part of the country, benefiting from Assad's decision early in the war to withdraw forces and send them elsewhere.

    After Assad's forces left, the Kurds faced a major challenge from the Islamic State, which began conquering large parts of central Syria. Once the Islamic State began moving into Kurdish areas, the Kurds put up effective resistance, notably in Kobani from late 2014 to early 2015.

    Impressed by the Kurdish resistance, the Obama administration began partnering with the Kurds, helping them fight the Islamic State. With U.S. support, the Kurds defeated the Islamic State and secured control of the northeast. Leading a major social revolution , they started creating an autonomous confederation of cantons outside of the control of the Syrian government.

    Officials in Washington, who repeatedly praised the Kurds for their bravery against the Islamic State, came to value them even more for their control over northeastern Syria. In their view, the Kurds had acquired significant leverage over Assad.

    "This area accounts for roughly one-third of the country east of the Euphrates River and is the United States' greatest single point of leverage in Syria," a 2019 report by the congressionally mandated Syria Study Group (SSG) stated.

    Although Trump seemingly abandoned this leverage when he began withdrawing U.S. forces from the area in October, administration officials persuaded him to keep nearly a thousand U.S. troops inside the country. The soldiers may not be able to regain control of the bases they lost to Turkish, Russian, and Syrian forces, but they continue to control strategically important oil fields.

    U.S. control provides " a good negotiating leverage point ," according to Gen. Joseph Votel, a former commander of U.S. Central Command.

    In the meantime, the Trump administration has been maintaining another significant leverage point in the southern part of Syria, where it keeps about a hundred U.S. soldiers stationed at the al-Tanf military base. "I think U.S. officials and other officials around the region consider the U.S. presence at Al-Tanf to be of strategic importance," SSG co-chair Michael Singh told Congress last year. It is useful "for maintaining a kind of presence in that kind of swath of Syria."

    Keeping Syria Dead

    As the Trump administration has kept Syria divided and broken, it has made a major effort to prevent the Assad regime from reviving the areas it does control. Using a mix of economic and military power, the Trump administration has made it impossible for the country to recover under Assad's leadership.

    For years, U.S. sanctions have kept Syria weakened and isolated. By maintaining the comprehensive set of sanctions that previous administrations had already imposed on Syria, the Trump administration has kept the country under what is essentially a full economic embargo.

    According to the Treasury Department, the U.S. sanctions regime is " one of the most comprehensive sanctions programs " administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, which implements and enforces U.S. sanctions.

    Adding to the economic pressure, the Trump administration has also been blocking reconstruction aid to Syria. Despite the fact that the war has left countless people homeless, administration officials actively discourage the international community from directing any kind of reconstruction assistance to areas under Assad's control.

    The withholding of funds is one of the Trump administration's "potent levers" over Assad, State Department official David Satterfield told Congress in 2018.

    Administration officials even acknowledge that they are trying to prevent the country from recovering. Destroyed parts of the country are "going to stay part of rubble in a graveyard until the international community sees some kind of movement towards our list of issues and answers and policies," a senior State Department official said in November.

    Taking more direct action, the United States and its allies have also been carrying out airstrikes against Syrian infrastructure. Once in April 2017 and again in April 2018 , the Trump administration launched missile attacks against Syria, insisting that they were a necessary response to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime.

    At one point, Trump even considered assassinating Assad, saying " Let's fucking kill him! " Then-Secretary of Defense James Mattis told the president that he would look into it, but Trump's national security team decided against it, arguing for airstrikes instead.

    Also favoring airstrikes, the Israeli government has carried out hundreds of attacks inside Syria. Its targets have included weapons convoys, Syrian infrastructure, Iranian forces, and Iranian infrastructure. Both Assad and the Iranians "have Israel to contend with in basically a silent war in the skies and on the ground in Syria," Jeffrey told Congress last year.

    The Future of a Failed Strategy

    From one perspective, the Trump administration appears to be achieving its goals in Syria. By keeping the country permanently weakened, it has prevented Assad from winning the war.

    From another perspective, however, the Trump administration has failed. Not only has it been unable to pressure Assad into leaving office, but it has made no progress in convincing Assad to hold meaningful negotiations with the rebels. The only thing the Trump administration has done is prolonged the war, causing more death, destruction, and misery.

    "We failed, and the failure continues," former U.S. official Anthony Blinken said in 2018.

    During a congressional hearing last September, Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) said that "it's time for us to admit that our policy in Syria, over the course of two administrations, has been a failure."

    Regardless, the Trump administration has continued implementing its own version of the stalemate strategy. When it was facing widespread criticism last year over its decision to betray the Kurds, Jeffrey reassured Congress that the United States maintains significant leverage over Assad.

    "We had the leverage of a totally broken state, which is what we still have today," Jeffrey said. The war is "stalemated" and the country remains "basically a pile of rubble," he added. "I think that it's open to question whether Assad personally is going to lead that country indefinitely."

    Indeed, the morticians in the Trump administration remain convinced that they can oust Assad. All they need to do, they believe, is keep the war stalemated, keep the country a pile of rubble, and keep Syria dead and dismembered, no matter the costs to the Syrian people. Share this:

    Edward Hunt writes about war and empire. He has a PhD in American Studies from the College of William & Mary.

    [Jan 11, 2020] Big Money in Politics Doesn't Just Drive Inequality. It Drives War. - FPIF

    Notable quotes:
    "... Citizens United ..."
    Jan 11, 2020 | fpif.org

    Big Money in Politics Doesn't Just Drive Inequality. It Drives War.

    Military contractors have shelled out over $1 million to the 2016 presidential candidates -- including over $200,000 to Hillary Clinton alone.

    By Rebecca Green , April 27, 2016 . Originally published in OtherWords .

    Print Friendly, PDF & EmailPrint Military-Industrial Diagnosis

    Khalil Bendib / OtherWords.org

    The 2016 presidential elections are proving historic, and not just because of the surprising success of self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders, the lively debate among feminists over whether to support Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump's unorthodox candidacy.

    The elections are also groundbreaking because they're revealing more dramatically than ever the corrosive effect of big money on our decaying democracy.

    Following the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision and related rulings, corporations and the wealthiest Americans gained the legal right to raise and spend as much money as they want on political candidates.

    The 2012 elections were consequently the most expensive in U.S. history. And this year's races are predicted to cost even more. With the general election still six months away, donors have already sunk $1 billion into the presidential race -- with $619 million raised by candidates and another $412 million by super PACs.

    Big money in politics drives grave inequality in our country. It also drives war.

    After all, war is a profitable industry. While millions of people all over the world are being killed and traumatized by violence, a small few make a killing from the never-ending war machine.

    During the Iraq War, for example, weapons manufacturers and a cadre of other corporations made billions on federal contracts.

    Most notoriously this included Halliburton, a military contractor previously led by Dick Cheney. The company made huge profits from George W. Bush's decision to wage a costly, unjustified, and illegal war while Cheney served as his vice president.

    Military-industrial corporations spend heavily on political campaigns. They've given over $1 million to this year's presidential candidates so far -- over $200,000 of which went to Hillary Clinton, who leads the pack in industry backing.

    These corporations target House and Senate members who sit on the Armed Forces and Appropriations Committees, who control the purse strings for key defense line items. And cleverly, they've planted factories in most congressional districts. Even if they provide just a few dozen constituent jobs per district, that helps curry favor with each member of Congress.

    Thanks to aggressive lobbying efforts, weapons manufacturers have secured the five largest contracts made by the federal government over the last seven years. In 2014, the U.S. government awarded over $90 billion worth of contracts to Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman.

    Military spending has been one of the top three biggest federal programs every year since 2000, and it's far and away the largest discretionary portion. Year after year, elected officials spend several times more on the military than on education, energy, and the environment combined.

    Lockheed Martin's problematic F-35 jet illustrates this disturbingly disproportionate use of funds. The same $1.5 trillion Washington will spend on the jet, journalist Tom Cahill calculates , could have provided tuition-free public higher education for every student in the U.S. for the next 23 years. Instead, the Pentagon ordered a fighter plane that can't even fire its own gun yet.

    Given all of this, how can anyone justify war spending?

    Some folks will say it's to make us safer . Yet the aggressive U.S. military response following the 9/11 attacks -- the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, the NATO bombing of Libya, and drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen -- has only destabilized the region. "Regime change" foreign policies have collapsed governments and opened the doors to Islamist terrorist groups like ISIS.

    Others may say they support a robust Pentagon budget because of the jobs the military creates . But dollar for dollar, education spending creates nearly three times more jobs than military spending.

    We need to stop letting politicians and corporations treat violence and death as "business opportunities." Until politics become about people instead of profits, we'll remain crushed in the death grip of the war machine.

    And that is the real national security threat facing the United States today. Share this:

    [Jan 11, 2020] Meet the CEOs Raking It in from Trump's Aggression Toward Iran - FPIF

    Notable quotes:
    "... Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies and co-edits the IPS publication Inequality.org. Follow her at @SarahDAnderson1. ..."
    Jan 11, 2020 | fpif.org

    Meet the CEOs Raking It in from Trump's Aggression Toward Iran

    Major military contractors saw a stock surge from the U.S. assassination of an Iranian general. For CEOs, that means payday comes early.

    By Sarah Anderson , January 6, 2020 . Originally published in Inequality.org .

    Print Friendly, PDF & EmailPrint military-industrial-complex-arms-contractors

    Chris Devers / Flickr

    CEOs of major U.S. military contractors stand to reap huge windfalls from the escalation of conflict with Iran. This was evident in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. assassination of a top Iranian military official last week. As soon as the news reached financial markets, these companies' share prices spiked, inflating the value of their executives' stock-based pay.

    I took a look at how the CEOs at the top five Pentagon contractors were affected by this surge, using the most recent SEC information on their stock holdings.

    Northrop Grumman executives saw the biggest increase in the value of their stocks after the U.S. airstrike that killed Qasem Suleimani on January 2. Shares in the B-2 bomber maker rose 5.43 percent by the end of trading the following day.

    Wesley Bush, who turned Northrop Grumman's reins over to Kathy Warden last year, held 251,947 shares of company stock in various trusts as of his final SEC Form 4 filing in May 2019. (Companies must submit these reports when top executives and directors buy and sell company stock.) Assuming Bush is still sitting on that stockpile, he saw the value grow by $4.9 million to a total of $94.5 million last Friday.

    New Northrop Grumman CEO Warden saw the 92,894 shares she'd accumulated as the firm's COO expand in value by more than $2.7 million in just one day of post-assassination trading.

    Lockheed Martin, whose Hellfire missiles were reportedly used in the attack at the Baghdad airport, saw a 3.6 percent increase in price per share on January 3. Marillyn Hewson, CEO of the world's largest weapon maker, may be kicking herself for selling off a considerable chunk of stock last year when it was trading at around $307. Nevertheless, by the time Lockheed shares reached $413 at the closing bell, her remaining stash had increased in value by about $646,000.

    What about the manufacturer of the MQ-9 Reaper that carried the Hellfire missiles? That would be General Atomics. Despite raking in $2.8 billion in taxpayer-funded contracts in 2018, the drone maker is not required to disclose executive compensation information because it is a privately held corporation.

    We do know General Atomics CEO Neal Blue is worth an estimated $4.1 billion -- and he's a major investor in oil production, a sector that also stands to profit from conflict with a major oil-producing country like Iran.

    *Resigned 12/22/19. **Resigned 1/1/19 while staying on as chairman until 7/19. New CEO Kathy Warden accumulated 92,894 shares in her previous position as Northrop Grumman COO.

    Suleimani's killing also inflated the value of General Dynamics CEO Phebe Novakovic's fortune. As the weapon maker's share price rose about 1 percentage point on January 3, the former CIA official saw her stock holdings increase by more than $1.2 million.

    Raytheon CEO Thomas Kennedy saw a single-day increase in his stock of more than half a million dollars, as the missile and bomb manufacturer's share price increased nearly 1.5 percent. Boeing stock remained flat on Friday. But Dennis Muilenberg, recently ousted as CEO over the 737 aircraft scandal, appears to be well-positioned to benefit from any continued upward drift of the defense sector.

    As of his final Form 4 report, Muilenburg was sitting on stock worth about $47.7 million. In his yet to be finalized exit package, the disgraced former executive could also pocket huge sums of currently unvested stock grants.

    Hopefully sanity will soon prevail and the terrifyingly high tensions between the Trump administration and Iran will de-escalate. But even if the military stock surge of this past Friday turns out to be a market blip, it's a sobering reminder of who stands to gain the most from a war that could put millions of lives at risk.

    We can put an end to dangerous war profiteering by denying federal contracts to corporations that pay their top executives excessively. In 2008, John McCain, then a Republican presidential candidate, proposed capping CEO pay at companies receiving taxpayer bailouts at no more than $400,000 (the salary of the U.S. president). That notion should be extended to companies that receive massive taxpayer-funded contracts.

    Sen. Bernie Sanders, for instance, has a plan to deny federal contracts to companies that pay CEOs more than 150 times what their typical worker makes.

    As long as we allow the top executives of our privatized war economy to reap unlimited rewards, the profit motive for war in Iran -- or anywhere -- will persist. Share this:

    Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies and co-edits the IPS publication Inequality.org. Follow her at @SarahDAnderson1.

    [Jan 11, 2020] The main problem of the United States in the existing political and economic system, which began to be intensively created by the American banking layer since 1885 and was fixed in 1913.

    Jan 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Helg Saracen , 55 minutes ago link

    The main problem of the United States in the existing political and economic system, which began to be intensively created by the American banking layer since 1885 and was fixed in 1913. This became possible only thanks to the Civil War of 1861-1865. I will explain. Before the Civil War, each state had its own banking structure, its own banknotes (there were not so many states, there were still territories that did not become states yet). Before the American Civil War, there was no single banking system. Abraham Linkol was a protege of the banking houses of the cities of New York and Chicago, they rigged the election (bought the election). It may sound rude to the Americans, but Lincoln was a rogue in the eyes of some US citizens of that time. And this became the main reason for the desire of some states (not only southern, and some northern) to withdraw from the United States. Another good reason for the exit was the persistent attempts of bankers in New York and Chicago to take control of the banking system of the South. These are two main reasons, as old as the World, the struggle for control and money. The war (unfortunately) began the South. Under a federal treaty, South and North were supposed to jointly contain US forts for protection. The fighting began on April 12, 1861 with an attack by southerners on such a fort Sumter in Charleston Bay. These are the beginnings of war.

    This is important - I advise everyone to read the memoirs of generals, and especially the memoirs of Ulysses Grant, the future president of the United States. The war was with varying success, but the emissaries of the banks of New York and Chicago always followed the army of the North, who, taking advantage of the disastrous situation in the battlefields, bought up real estate, land and other assets. They were called the "Carpetbagger". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpetbagger They were engaged in the purchase throughout the war and up to 1885.

    To make it clear to you, in the history of the USA, the period from 1865 to 1885 is called the "Great American Depression" (this is the very first great depression and lasted 20 years). During this time, the bankers of New York and Chicago completely subjugated the US banking system to themselves and their interests, trampled the South (robbed), after which the submission of the US as a state directly to the banking mafia began. At present (since 1913) in the USA there is not capitalism, but an evil parody of capitalism.

    I can call it this: American clan-corporate oligarchic "capitalism" (with the suppression of free markets, with unfair competition and the creation of barriers to the dissemination of reliable information). Since such "capitalism" cannot work (like socialism or utopian communism), constant wars are needed that bring profit to the bankers, owners of the military-industrial complex, political "service staff", make oligarchs richer, and ordinary Americans poorer. We are now observing this, since this system has come to its end and everything has become obvious.

    For example, in the early 80s, the middle class of the United States was approximately 70% of the population employed in production and trade, now it is no more than 15%.

    The gap between the oligarchs and ordinary Americans widened. My essay is how I see what is happening in the USA and why I do not like it. It's my personal opinion. In the end, my favorite phrase is that Americans are suckers and boobies (but we still love them). Good luck everyone.

    [Jan 11, 2020] We Need a Strong Anti-War Movement -- Yesterday - FPIF

    Jan 11, 2020 | fpif.org

    We Need a Strong Anti-War Movement -- Yesterday

    As we spiral toward a confrontation between the U.S. and Iran, it's worth reflecting on the failures to rein in U.S. aggression along the way.

    By Khury Petersen-Smith , January 8, 2020 .

    Print Friendly, PDF & EmailPrint iran-iraq-war-protest

    Antiwar protesters rally in Seattle (Shutterstock)

    This commentary is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and InTheseTimes.com .

    The new year opened with the United States committing an extrajudicial assassination in a foreign country by drone.

    I'm not talking about the January 3, 2020 rocket attack that killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani. I'm talking about the January 1, 2019 drone strike that killed Jamal Al Badawi, an alleged Al Qaeda plotter, in Yemen.

    The U.S. carrying out assassinations from above -- without trial, without warning -- is nothing new. What was different about the killing of Al Badawi was that the U.S. military was public about it, announcing the killing via Twitter on January 6.

    For years, activists, journalists, scholars, and others have been calling for transparency regarding the notoriously clandestine Defense Department and CIA-run drone programs. How one ends up on the lists of people targeted, to whom one appeals to get off of such a list, where the drones are based, and even when they strike are matters that were shrouded in secrecy during the Bush and Obama administrations.

    That's largely remained true under Trump -- in fact, it's even more difficult to get information about civilian casualties now. But here was an example of an assassination by drone being done in the open.

    Presumably, the reason to have more information about the drone war is so the people running it can be held accountable for their actions. And yet, given the opportunity to ask questions about the New Year's Day attack, precious few were asked by Congress or the mainstream media.

    Today, as we spiral perilously toward direct military confrontation between the U.S. and Iran, it is worth reflecting on the failures to rein in Trump's aggression along the way. Given the obvious signs that Trump has been keen to escalate the United States' many wars -- and begin new ones -- the complicity of other institutions in Trump's belligerence, particularly Congress, is stunning.

    Crickets from Congress

    Trump's unilateral withdrawal from -- and efforts to destroy -- the nuclear deal sparked a predictable trajectory of escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran. Many have pointed that out, most recently former National Security Adviser Susan Rice . What we need to examine more deeply are the decisions between then and now that enabled Trump to pursue such a path.

    At several key junctures, lawmakers simply failed to challenge acts of U.S. aggression carried out without even a pretense of accountability, as when Amnesty International documented the fact that the U.S. killed civilians in its escalating air war in Somalia, in a report that received too little attention. Or when journalists reported that the U.S.-led siege against ISIS in the Syrian city of Raqqa was devastating for civilians of that city -- whom the U.S. then abandoned , after saying it would help rebuild.

    Other times, lawmakers and other officials did raise their voices in opposition to Trump's foreign policy moves -- by saying that he wasn't committed enough to pursuing U.S. wars. Such was the response when Trump announced that he was withdrawing troops from the Turkish border with Syria. Critics advocated maintaining the open-ended military presence throughout Syria.

    But we don't even have to look back that far.

    On December 9 -- barely a month ago -- the Washington Post began publishing a series of articles known as the Afghanistan Papers , which documented years of lies by U.S. officials and catastrophes caused by U.S. actions in its 18-year occupation of that country. Two weeks later, the New York Times released documents and video, principally testimony from U.S. Navy SEALs, that confirmed the unmistakable war crimes committed by Navy SEAL chief Eddie Gallagher, who had been recently acquitted of the most serious charges -- and pardoned by the president.

    Here were the major newspapers of record running front-page coverage of serious abuses people should be called to account for. Yet where were the congressional hearings?

    Instead of taking steps toward that accountability, Congress did the opposite: It passed a new $738 billion military spending bill, effectively approving and fueling the wars. Despite vocal condemnation of the bill from California Democrats Ro Khanna and Barbara Lee, just 41 House Democrats voted against it, compared to 188 who joined Republicans in passing it.

    Among the provisions that Khanna called attention to for being stripped away from the legislation that passed: an amendment he sponsored that denied the president authority to wage war on Iran .

    Movements matter iraq-protests-baghdad-corruption

    Antigovernment protests in Baghdad, November 2019 (Shutterstock)

    In a national address today, Trump threatened even more sanctions against Iran. As his rhetoric becomes more belligerent -- and as he deploys even more troops to the Middle East to set the stage for attacks on Iran -- members of Congress' calls to bring the president into compliance with the War Powers Act are certainly welcome. But the questions that lawmakers are raising now, after the U.S. has already committed an act of war in assassinating Soleimani in Iraq, run contrary to their actions up to this point.

    Going into the new year, Congress had already sent the message that Trump and the Pentagon could do whatever they please. And whatever misgivings members of Congress have about military attacks on Iran, the body has supported the sanctions imposed on that country by the United States -- which have been disastrous for the Iranian population , and which act as precursors to war.

    The so-called War on Terror is completely out of control. What is needed is for the widespread opposition in the U.S. to the wars waged in our names -- including attacking Iran -- to be turned into a fighting resistance.

    We have seen mass protest under Trump -- even in its brief moments -- have significant impacts. The Women's Marches may not have ended sexual violence, but they, along with the #MeToo and #TimesUp campaigns, opened the most wide reaching and serious conversations about gender-based abuse in recent memory, and some high profile abusers have been made to account for their actions. (Even a UN convention was passed , though the U.S. hasn't ratified it.) The spontaneous, mass mobilizations to airports against Trump's Muslim Ban set back those plans for a time as well.

    We need to extend that resistance to a U.S. military machine that's moving like a runaway train, undeterred by the human costs of its destruction, or even the apparent lack of a strategy from a military perspective.

    Popular power matters. There was, in fact, a moment where there was a conversation in Congress about ending U.S. support for Saudi Arabia's cataclysmic war in Yemen -- a war that has only been made possible with U.S. weapons, intelligence, and other forms of support. Despite votes in both houses to stop that assistance, Trump was able to veto the legislation , and the moment passed.

    What if there had been mass actions in the streets? Could that effort have been pushed over the line?

    We need to ask these questions, and imagine the answers. In doing so, we will be joining in solidarity with various efforts in the Middle East to challenge governments and the foreign powers -- particularly the United States -- backing them.

    After all, the news that dominated headlines out of Iraq for the months prior to the U.S. assassination of Soleimani was that Iraqis were mobilizing en masse against a government whose origins lie in the 2003 U.S. invasion and subsequent occupation, and whose forces are armed and trained by billions of dollars in U.S. aid. (There were Iraqi protests that also targeted Iranian influence in the country.)

    In fact, focusing on the movements of people throughout the Middle East, Africa, and Central Asia who find themselves in the crosshairs of the War on Terror must be essential to a movement here that challenges U.S. wars. Imagine the power, for example, of massive U.S. rallies coinciding with the movement inside Iraq to remove U.S. troops from the country. Imagine if more members of the U.S. Congress were compelled to follow Iraq's parliament in calling for those soldiers to come home.

    Behind every Baghdadi

    For the few conversations that do take place about our wars, it's distressingly typical for the people having them forget about the people bearing the brunt of those wars.

    After the October 26 killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, for example, Defense Department officials held a press conference at the Pentagon. You can read the transcript . Journalists in the room asked two questions about the storied dog who assisted in the killing operation, and several more about the prospect of U.S. personnel securing Syrian oil fields.

    The reporters in the room didn't ask a single question about whether others besides Al Baghdadi, including civilians, were wounded or killed in the mission.

    Thankfully, other journalists did ask. NPR reporters learned that in the same raid where Baghdadi was killed, the Syrian farmer Barakat Ahmad Barakat saw his two friends killed by U.S. rockets -- and his own hand severed from his body -- as they were caught up in the attack while driving in van.

    The three farmers were unarmed. Aside from the trauma of being maimed and seeing his friends killed, Barakat's work is impossible without his hand. His life as he knew it ended.

    Behind every "bad guy" like Baghdadi are masses of ordinary people suffering the endless grind of war -- a grind that this country has made ever more brutal, with ever fewer constraints or accountability from the U.S. political system.

    It is crucial that we are all talking about Iran now, as we stand on the verge of a new chapter of catastrophes -- and work to prevent it. But the killing and destruction of the War on Terror is happening around the world, every day. The lack of attention to it is part of what keeps it going, and sets the stage for the current situation involving Iran, Iraq, and the United States.

    The truth is, these wars are criminal, and any conversation about them that doesn't center the people most impacted is unacceptable. That conversation won't start in the U.S. government. Instead, it must be raised by those of us outraged by wars that have devastated generations, and who believe that people from Somalia to Afghanistan, and now to Iran -- indeed, all of us -- deserve a better world.

    Khury Petersen-Smith is the Michael Ratner Middle East Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.

    [Jan 11, 2020] In Iraq The U.S. Is Again An Occupation Force As It Rejects To Leave As Demanded

    Jan 11, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    In Iraq The U.S. Is Again An Occupation Force As It Rejects To Leave As Demanded

    Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi is following Iraq's Parliament decision to remove all foreign forces from Iraq. But his request for talks with the U.S. about the U.S. withdrawal process was answered with a big "F*** You":

    Iraq's caretaker prime minister asked Washington to start working out a road map for an American troop withdrawal, but the U.S. State Department on Friday bluntly rejected the request, saying the two sides should instead talk about how to "recommit" to their partnership.

    Thousands of anti-government protesters gathered in the capital and southern Iraq, many calling on both Iran and America to leave Iraq, reflecting anger and frustration over the two rivals -- both Baghdad's allies -- trading blows on Iraqi soil.

    The request from Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi pointed to his determination to push ahead with demands for U.S. troops to leave Iraq, stoked by the American drone strike on Jan. 3 that killed top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani. In a phone call Thursday night, he told U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that recent U.S. strikes in Iraq were an unacceptable breach of Iraqi sovereignty and a violation of their security agreements, his office said.

    He asked Pompeo to "send delegates to Iraq to prepare a mechanism" to carry out the Iraqi Parliament's resolution on withdrawing foreign troops, according to the statement.

    "The prime minister said American forces had entered Iraq and drones are flying in its airspace without permission from Iraqi authorities, and this was a violation of the bilateral agreements," the statement added.

    The Associated Press errs when it says that the move was "stoked by the American drone strike on Jan. 3 that killed top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani". The move was stoked five days earlier when the U.S. killed 31 Iraqi security forces near the Syrian border despite the demands by the Iraqi prime minister and president not to do so. It was further stoked when the U.S. assassinated Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes , the deputy commander of the Popular Militia Forces and a national hero in Iraq.

    The State Department issued a rather aggressive response to Abdul-Mahdi's request:

    Cont. reading: In Iraq The U.S. Is Again An Occupation Force As It Rejects To Leave As Demanded

    [Jan 11, 2020] U.S. slaps fresh sanctions against Iran after missile attacks

    By killing Soleimani the USA formally declared war of Iran. So sactions is jus secondary effect of this decition.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Since its unilateral exit from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, Washington has been mounting pressure on Tehran through a series of sanctions. Iran has maintained a tough stance and scaled back its nuclear commitments in response. ..."
    Jan 11, 2020 | www.xinhuanet.com

    The latest move included sanctions on metal manufacturing and other sectors of the Iranian economy, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin told reporters at a White House press briefing, noting that the sanctions are both primary and secondary.

    Mnuchin also said the Treasury had designated eight senior Iranian officials, including Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Mohammad Reza Ashtiani, deputy chief of staff of Iranian armed force, and others.

    "The United States is targeting senior Iranian officials for their involvement and complicity in Tuesday's ballistic missile strikes," Mnuchin claimed in a statement issued by the Treasury.

    Also on Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump said in a White House statement that the punishing measures aimed at denying Iran's revenue that "may be used to fund and support its nuclear program, missile development, terrorism and terrorist proxy networks, and malign regional influence."

    The Pentagon confirmed that Iran had launched 16 ballistic missiles against two military bases housing U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq earlier this week.

    Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) had claimed responsibility for the missile attacks, saying that they were meant to retaliate the U.S. killing of Qassem Soleimani, former commander of the Quds Force of the IRGC.

    Trump said Wednesday in an address to the nation that "the United States will immediately impose additional punishing economic sanctions on the Iranian regime. These powerful sanctions will remain until Iran changes its behavior."

    Since its unilateral exit from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, Washington has been mounting pressure on Tehran through a series of sanctions. Iran has maintained a tough stance and scaled back its nuclear commitments in response.

    [Jan 11, 2020] America's Other Dark Legacy In Iraq by Joy Gordon

    Mar 25, 2013 | fpif.org
    coalition-provisional-authority-cpa-iraq-oil-looting-contracts-corruptWhen the United States, the United Kingdom, and the "coalition of the willing" attacked Iraq in March 2003, millions protested around the world. But the war of "shock and awe" was just the beginning. The subsequent occupation of Iraq by the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority bankrupted the country and left its infrastructure in shambles.

    It's not just a question of security. Although the breathtaking violence that attended Iraq's descent into sectarian nightmare has been well documented in many retrospectives on the 10-year-old war, what's often overlooked is that by far more mundane standards, the United States did a spectacularly poor job of governing Iraq.

    It's not that Iraq was flourishing before the occupation. From 1990 to 2003, the UN Security Council imposed economic sanctions on Iraq that were the harshest in the history of global governance. But along with the sanctions, at least, came an elaborate system of oversight and accountability that drew in the Security Council, nine UN agencies, and General Secretary himself.

    The system was certainly imperfect, and the effects of the sanctions on the Iraqi people were devastating. But when the United States arrived, all semblance of international oversight vanished.

    Under enormous pressure from Washington, in May 2003 the Security Council formally recognized the occupation of Iraq by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Resolution 1483. Among other things, this resolution gave the CPA complete control over all of Iraq's assets.

    At the same time, the Council removed all the forms of monitoring and accountability that had been in place: there would be no reports on the humanitarian situation by UN agencies, and there would be no committee of the Security Council charged with monitoring the occupation. There would be a limited audit of funds, after they were spent, but no one from the UN would directly oversee oil sales. And no humanitarian agencies would ensure that Iraqi funds were being spent in ways that benefitted the country.

    Humanitarian concerns

    In January 2003, the UN prepared a working plan anticipating the impact of a possible war. Even with only "medium impact" from the invasion, the UN expected that humanitarian conditions would be severely compromised.

    Because the Iraqi population was so heavily reliant on the government's food distribution system (a consequence of international sanctions), the UN anticipated that overthrowing the Iraqi regime would also undermine food security. And because the population already suffered from extensive malnutrition, this disruption would be quite lethal, putting 30 percent of Iraqi children under five at risk of death. The UN noted that if water and sewage treatment plants were damaged in the war, or if the electrical system could not operate, Iraqis would lose access to potable water, which would likely precipitate epidemics of water-borne diseases. And if electricity, transportation, and medical equipment were compromised, then the medical system would be unable to respond effectively to these epidemics.

    During the occupation, much of this came to pass. A June 2003 UN report noted that the postwar water and sewage systems for Baghdad and other central and southern governorates were "in crisis." In Baghdad alone, the report estimated that 40 percent of the city's water distribution network was damaged, leading to a loss of up to half of the city's potable water through leaks and breaks in the system. And direr still, the UN reported that neither of Baghdad's two sewage treatment plants was functional, leading to a massive discharge of raw sewage into the Tigris River.

    The food situation was similar. The UN found that farming had collapsed due to "widespread insecurity and looting, the complete collapse of ministries and state agencies -- the sole providers of essential farming inputs and services -- together with significant damages to power supplies."

    Likewise, the health system deteriorated dramatically. Less than 50 percent of the Iraqi population had access to medical care, due in part to the dangers associated with travel. Additionally, the report estimated that 75 percent of all health-care institutions were affected by the looting and chaos that occurred in the aftermath of the war. As of June 2003, the health system as a whole was functioning at 30-50 percent of its pre-war capacity. The impact was immediate. By early summer, acute malnutrition rates had doubled, dysentery was widespread, and little medical care was available. In August, when a power outage blacked out New York, the joke going around Baghdad was "I hope they're not waiting for the Americans to fix it."

    The CPA gave responsibility for humanitarian relief to the U.S. military -- not to agencies with experience in humanitarian crises -- and marginalized the UN's humanitarian relief agencies. Over the 14-month course of the CPA's administration, the humanitarian crisis worsened. Preventable diseases like dysentery and typhoid ran rampant. Malnutrition worsened, claiming the lives of ever more infants, mothers, and young children. All told, there was an estimated 100,000 "excess deaths" during the invasion and occupation -- well above and beyond the mortality rate under Saddam Hussein, even under international sanctions.

    The CPA's priorities were clear. After the invasion, during the widespread looting and robbery, occupation authorities did little to protect water and sewage treatment plants, or even pediatric hospitals. By contrast, they provided immediate protection for the oil ministry offices, hired a U.S. company to put out oil field fires, and immediately provided protection for the oil fields as well.

    Corruption

    In addition, the U.S.-led CPA was deeply corrupt. Much of Iraq's revenues, from oil sales or other sources, went to contracts with U.S. companies. Of contracts for more than $5 million, 74 percent went to U.S. companies, with most of the remainder going to U.S. allies. Only 2 percent went to Iraqi companies.

    Over the course of the occupation, huge amounts of money simply disappeared. Kellogg, Brown, and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton, received over 60 percent of all contracts paid for with Iraqi funds, although it was repeatedly criticized by auditors for issues of honesty and competence. In the last six weeks of the occupation, the United States shipped $5 billion of Iraqi funds, in cash, into the country, to be spent before the Iraqi-led government took over. Auditor reports indicated that Iraqi funds were systematically looted by the CPA officials: "One contractor received a $2 million payment in a duffel bag stuffed with shrink-wrapped bundles of currency," read one report . "One official was given $6.75 million in cash, and was ordered to spend it one week before the interim Iraqi government took control of Iraqi funds."

    U.S. officials were apparently unconcerned about the gross abuses of the funds with which they were entrusted. In one instance, the CPA transferred some $8.8 billion of Iraqi money without any documentation as to how the funds were spent. When questioned about how the money was spent, Admiral David Oliver, the principal deputy for financial matters in the CPA, replied that he had "no idea" and didn't think it was particularly important. "Billions of dollars of their money?" he asked his interlocutor. "What difference does it make?"

    In the end, none of this should be terribly surprising -- the corruption, the indifference to human needs, the singular concern with controlling Iraq's oil wealth. It was obvious from the moment that the Security Council, under enormous pressure from the United State, passed Resolution 1483.

    By systematically removing nearly every form of oversight from their self-imposed administration of Iraq, the United States and its allies laid the foundation for the looting of an entire nation's wealth, abetted by their own wanton indifference to the needs and rights of Iraqis. Ten years after the start of the war, the CPA's disastrous governance of Iraq stands alongside the country's horrifying descent into violence as a dark legacy in its own right.

    [Jan 10, 2020] Mike Pompeo played loose with the facts and should step down as secretary of state: there were no eminent threat

    He's played fast and loose with the facts, undermining his credibility on the world stage.
    Democrats insist the move was hasty and claim there wasn't adequate intelligence to justify killing Soleimani. Essetually he was murged because Pompeo wanted to show the strength of the USA in view of the attack on the USA embassy (which did not have any victims)
    Pompeo collected more campaign donations from the Kochs and their employees than any candidate in the country
    Notable quotes:
    "... In fact, military analysts say Soleimani's assassination by the US is tantamount to a declaration of war against regional superpower Iran. What is certain is that his death marks the beginning of a terrifying new and unpredictable era in an already turbulent region. ..."
    "... Indeed, in retrospect it seems nothing short of astonishing that just a day earlier the ayatollah himself had mocked Trump about the violence outside the US embassy in Iraq, which Washington claimed was orchestrated by Iran. 'You can't do anything,' Khamenei said, in what will surely go down in history as one of the most ill-advised tweets ever posted by a country's leader. ..."
    "... While most people in the West will not have known much, if anything, about Soleimani before the announcement of his death yesterday, in Iran he was the most revered military leader since the country's 1979 revolution. ..."
    Jan 10, 2020 | dailymail.co.uk

    Consequences: Donald Trump appears to have no strategy for dealing with the fall-out

    In fact, military analysts say Soleimani's assassination by the US is tantamount to a declaration of war against regional superpower Iran. What is certain is that his death marks the beginning of a terrifying new and unpredictable era in an already turbulent region.

    Unsurprisingly, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei warned that 'severe consequences' await the killers of Soleimani, while the country's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, denounced the assassination as an 'act of international terrorism'.

    Meanwhile in the US, a number of major cities have increased security to protect prominent landmarks and civilians from possible revenge terrorist attacks.

    Whether or not that US reaction is justified, it would be difficult to overstate just how big a loss Soleimani's death is for the Iranian regime, how seriously we should take its vows of revenge – or, just as crucially, how humiliatingly off-guard Iran's leaders were when Trump gave his kill order.

    Indeed, in retrospect it seems nothing short of astonishing that just a day earlier the ayatollah himself had mocked Trump about the violence outside the US embassy in Iraq, which Washington claimed was orchestrated by Iran. 'You can't do anything,' Khamenei said, in what will surely go down in history as one of the most ill-advised tweets ever posted by a country's leader.

    Meanwhile, so apparently unconcerned was Soleimani about his own safety that the general – famed for constantly outsmarting his enemies on the battlefield – did not bother to keep his travel plans secret.

    While most people in the West will not have known much, if anything, about Soleimani before the announcement of his death yesterday, in Iran he was the most revered military leader since the country's 1979 revolution.

    [Jan 10, 2020] Mike Pompeo Fed the Rats in the President* s Brain to Get What He Wanted by Charles P. Pierce

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.esquire.com
    America's top diplomat does not seem to think his job is to prevent war.

    The Washington Post dives deeply into what is laughingly called the administration*'s "process" leading up to the decision to kill Qasem Soleimani with fire last week. In short, all the "imminent threat" palaver was pure moonshine. According to the Post, this particular catastrophe was brewed up for a while amid the stalactites in the mind of Mike Pompeo, a Secretary of State who makes Henry Kissinger look like Gandhi.

    The secretary also spoke to President Trump multiple times every day last week, culminating in Trump's decision to approve the killing of Iran's top military commander, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, at the urging of Pompeo and Vice President Pence, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

    Pompeo had lost a similar high-stakes deliberation last summer when Trump declined to retaliate militarily against Iran after it downed a U.S. surveillance drone, an outcome that left Pompeo "morose," according to one U.S. official. But recent changes to Trump's national security team and the whims of a president anxious about being viewed as hesitant in the face of Iranian aggression created an opening for Pompeo to press for the kind of action he had been advocating.

    Poor Mike was morose. So, in an effort to bring himself out of the dumps, Mike decided to keep feeding the rats in the president*'s head.

    Trump, too, sought to draw down from the Middle East as he promised from the opening days of his presidential campaign. But that mind-set shifted on Dec. 27 when 30 rockets hit a joint U.S.-Iraqi base outside Kirkuk, killing an American civilian contractor and injuring service members. On Dec. 29, Pompeo, Esper and Milley traveled to the president's private club in Florida, where the two defense officials presented possible responses to Iranian aggression, including the option of killing Soleimani, senior U.S. officials said.
    The whole squad got involved on this one.
    Alex Wong Getty Images
    Trump's decision to target Soleimani came as a surprise and a shock to some officials briefed on his decision, given the Pentagon's long-standing concerns about escalation and the president's aversion to using military force against Iran. One significant factor was the "lockstep" coordination for the operation between Pompeo and Esper, both graduates in the same class at the U.S. Military Academy, who deliberated ahead of the briefing with Trump, senior U.S. officials said. Pence also endorsed the decision, but he did not attend the meeting in Florida.

    First-in-His-Class Mike Pompeo knows his audience. There's no question that he knows how to get what he wants from a guy who doesn't know anything about anything, and who may have gone, as George V. Higgins once put it, as soft as church music. This, I guess, is a skill. Of course, Pompeo's job is easier because the president* is still a raving maniac on the electric Twitter machine. A handy compilation:

    Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader who had just killed an American, & badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including recently hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking our Embassy, and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!
    They attacked us, & we hit back. If they attack again, which I would strongly advise them not to do, we will hit them harder than they have ever been hit before!
    The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!

    And, this, perhaps my favorite piece of presidentin" yet.

    These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!

    You have been informed, Congress. You have been informed, Iran.

    No, really. It's down there below the cat videos.

    Trump Dished Some Bullsh*t on Iran

    Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page here .

    Charles P. Pierce Charles P Pierce is the author of four books, most recently Idiot America, and has been a working journalist since 1976.

    [Jan 10, 2020] The Saker interviews Michael Hudson

    Highly recommended!
    Looks like Iran is Catch22 for the USA: it can destroy it, but only at the cost of losing empire and dollar hegemony...
    Notable quotes:
    "... The United States is now turning on the screws demanding that other countries sacrifice their growth in order to finance the U.S. unipolar empire. In effect, foreign countries are beginning to respond to the United States what the ten tribes of Israel said when they withdrew from the southern kingdom of Judah, whose king Rehoboam refused to lighten his demands (1 Kings 12). They echoed the cry of Sheba son of Bikri a generation earlier: "Look after your own house, O David!" The message is: What do other countries have to gain by remaining in the US unipolar neoliberalized world, as compared to using their own wealth to build up their own economies? It's an age-old problem. ..."
    "... The dollar will still play a role in US trade and investment, but it will be as just another currency, held at arms length until it finally gives up its domineering attempt to strip other countries' wealth for itself. However, its demise may not be a pretty sight. ..."
    "... Conflict in the ME has traditionally almost always been about oil [and of course Israel]. This situation is different. It is only partially about oil and Israel, but OVERWHHEMINGLY it is about the BRI. ..."
    "... The salient factor as I see it is the Oil for Technology initiative that Iraq signed with China shortly before it slid into this current mess. ..."
    "... This was a mechanism whereby China would buy Iraq oil and these funds would be used directly to fund infrastructure and self-sufficiency initiatives and technologies that would help to drag Iraq out of the complete disaster that the US war had created in this country. A key part of this would be that China would also make extra loans available at the same time to speed up this development. ..."
    "... "Iraq's Finance Ministry that the country had started exporting 100,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil to China in October as part of the 20-year oil-for-infrastructure deal agreed between the two countries." ..."
    "... "For Iraq and Iran, China's plans are particularly far-reaching, OilPrice.com has been told by a senior oil industry figure who works closely with Iran's Petroleum Ministry and Iraq's Oil Ministry. China will begin with the oil and gas sector and work outwards from that central point. In addition to being granted huge reductions on buying Iranian oil and gas, China is to be given the opportunity to build factories in both Iran and Iraq – and build-out infrastructure, such as railways – overseen by its own management staff from Chinese companies. These are to have the same operational structure and assembly lines as those in China, so that they fit seamlessly into various Chinese companies' assembly lines' process for whatever product a particular company is manufacturing, whilst also being able to use the still-cheap labour available in both Iraq and Iraq." ..."
    "... Hudson is so good. He's massively superior to most so called military analysts and alternative bloggers on the net. He can clearly see the over arching picture and how the military is used to protect and project it. The idea that the US is going to leave the middle east until they are forced to is so blind as to be ridiculous. ..."
    "... I'd never thought of that "stationary aircraft carrier" comparison between Israel and the British, very apt. ..."
    "... Trump et al assassinated someone who was on a diplomatic mission. This action was so far removed from acceptable behavior that it must have been considered to be "by any means and at all costs". ..."
    "... This article, published by Strategic Culture, features a translation of Mahdi's speech to the Iraqi parliament in which he states that Trump threatened him with assassination and the US admitted to killing hundreds of demonstrators using Navy SEAL snipers. ..."
    "... This description provided by Mr Hudson is no Moore than the financial basis behind the Cebrowski doctrine instituted on 9/11. https://www.voltairenet.org/article ..."
    "... "The leading country breaking up US hegemony obviously is the United States itself. That is Trump's major contribution The United States is now turning on the screws demanding that other countries sacrifice their growth in order to finance the U.S. unipolar empire." ..."
    "... The US govt. have long since paid off most every European politician. Thusly, Europe, as separate nations that should be remain still under the yolk of the US Financial/Political/Military power. ..."
    "... In any event, it is the same today. Energy underlies, not only the military but, all of world civilization. Oil and gas are overwhelmingly the source of energy for the modern world. Without it, civilization collapses. Thus, he who controls oil (and gas) controls the world. ..."
    "... the link between the US $$$ and Saudi Oil, is the absolute means of the American Dollar to reign complete. This payment system FEEDS both the US Military, but WALL STREET, hedge funds, the US/EU oligarchs – to name just a few entities. ..."
    Jan 09, 2020 | thesaker.is

    [this interview was made for the Unz Review ]

    Introduction: After posting Michael Hudson's article " America Escalates its "Democratic" Oil War in the Near East " on the blog, I decided to ask Michael to reply to a few follow-up questions. Michael very kindly agreed. Please see our exchange below.

    The Saker

    -- -- -

    The Saker: Trump has been accused of not thinking forward, of not having a long-term strategy regarding the consequences of assassinating General Suleimani. Does the United States in fact have a strategy in the Near East, or is it only ad hoc?

    Michael Hudson: Of course American strategists will deny that the recent actions do not reflect a deliberate strategy, because their long-term strategy is so aggressive and exploitative that it would even strike the American public as being immoral and offensive if they came right out and said it.

    President Trump is just the taxicab driver, taking the passengers he has accepted – Pompeo, Bolton and the Iran-derangement syndrome neocons – wherever they tell him they want to be driven. They want to pull a heist, and he's being used as the getaway driver (fully accepting his role). Their plan is to hold onto the main source of their international revenue: Saudi Arabia and the surrounding Near Eastern oil-export surpluses and money. They see the US losing its ability to exploit Russia and China, and look to keep Europe under its control by monopolizing key sectors so that it has the power to use sanctions to squeeze countries that resist turning over control of their economies and natural rentier monopolies to US buyers. In short, US strategists would like to do to Europe and the Near East just what they did to Russia under Yeltsin: turn over public infrastructure, natural resources and the banking system to U.S. owners, relying on US dollar credit to fund their domestic government spending and private investment.

    This is basically a resource grab. Suleimani was in the same position as Chile's Allende, Libya's Qaddafi, Iraq's Saddam. The motto is that of Stalin: "No person, no problem."

    The Saker: Your answer raises a question about Israel: In your recent article you only mention Israel twice, and these are only passing comments. Furthermore, you also clearly say the US Oil lobby as much more crucial than the Israel Lobby, so here is my follow-up question to you: On what basis have you come to this conclusion and how powerful do you believe the Israel Lobby to be compared to, say, the Oil lobby or the US Military-Industrial Complex? To what degree do their interests coincide and to what degree to they differ?

    Michael Hudson: I wrote my article to explain the most basic concerns of U.S. international diplomacy: the balance of payments (dollarizing the global economy, basing foreign central bank savings on loans to the U.S. Treasury to finance the military spending mainly responsible for the international and domestic budget deficit), oil (and the enormous revenue produced by the international oil trade), and recruitment of foreign fighters (given the impossibility of drafting domestic U.S. soldiers in sufficient numbers). From the time these concerns became critical to today, Israel was viewed as a U.S. military base and supporter, but the U.S. policy was formulated independently of Israel.

    I remember one day in 1973 or '74 I was traveling with my Hudson Institute colleague Uzi Arad (later a head of Mossad and advisor to Netanyahu) to Asia, stopping off in San Francisco. At a quasi-party, a U.S. general came up to Uzi and clapped him on the shoulder and said, "You're our landed aircraft carrier in the Near East," and expressed his friendship.

    Uzi was rather embarrassed. But that's how the U.S. military thought of Israel back then. By that time the three planks of U.S. foreign policy strategy that I outlined were already firmly in place.

    Of course Netanyahu has applauded U.S. moves to break up Syria, and Trump's assassination choice. But the move is a U.S. move, and it's the U.S. that is acting on behalf of the dollar standard, oil power and mobilizing Saudi Arabia's Wahabi army.

    Israel fits into the U.S.-structured global diplomacy much like Turkey does. They and other countries act opportunistically within the context set by U.S. diplomacy to pursue their own policies. Obviously Israel wants to secure the Golan Heights; hence its opposition to Syria, and also its fight with Lebanon; hence, its opposition to Iran as the backer of Assad and Hezbollah. This dovetails with US policy.

    But when it comes to the global and U.S. domestic response, it's the United States that is the determining active force. And its concern rests above all with protecting its cash cow of Saudi Arabia, as well as working with the Saudi jihadis to destabilize governments whose foreign policy is independent of U.S. direction – from Syria to Russia (Wahabis in Chechnya) to China (Wahabis in the western Uighur region). The Saudis provide the underpinning for U.S. dollarization (by recycling their oil revenues into U.S. financial investments and arms purchases), and also by providing and organizing the ISIS terrorists and coordinating their destruction with U.S. objectives. Both the Oil lobby and the Military-Industrial Complex obtain huge economic benefits from the Saudis.

    Therefore, to focus one-sidedly on Israel is a distraction away from what the US-centered international order really is all about.

    The Saker: In your recent article you wrote: " The assassination was intended to escalate America's presence in Iraq to keep control the region's oil reserves ." Others believe that the goal was precisely the opposite, to get a pretext to remove the US forces from both Iraq and Syria. What are your grounds to believe that your hypothesis is the most likely one?

    Michael Hudson: Why would killing Suleimani help remove the U.S. presence? He was the leader of the fight against ISIS, especially in Syria. US policy was to continue using ISIS to permanently destabilize Syria and Iraq so as to prevent a Shi'ite crescent reaching from Iran to Lebanon – which incidentally would serve as part of China's Belt and Road initiative. So it killed Suleimani to prevent the peace negotiation. He was killed because he had been invited by Iraq's government to help mediate a rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia. That was what the United States feared most of all, because it effectively would prevent its control of the region and Trump's drive to seize Iraqi and Syrian oil.

    So using the usual Orwellian doublethink, Suleimani was accused of being a terrorist, and assassinated under the U.S. 2002 military Authorization Bill giving the President to move without Congressional approval against Al Qaeda. Trump used it to protect Al Qaeda's terrorist ISIS offshoots.

    Given my three planks of U.S. diplomacy described above, the United States must remain in the Near East to hold onto Saudi Arabia and try to make Iraq and Syria client states equally subservient to U.S. balance-of-payments and oil policy.

    Certainly the Saudis must realize that as the buttress of U.S. aggression and terrorism in the Near East, their country (and oil reserves) are the most obvious target to speed the parting guest. I suspect that this is why they are seeking a rapprochement with Iran. And I think it is destined to come about, at least to provide breathing room and remove the threat. The Iranian missiles to Iraq were a demonstration of how easy it would be to aim them at Saudi oil fields. What then would be Aramco's stock market valuation?

    The Saker: In your article you wrote: " The major deficit in the U.S. balance of payments has long been military spending abroad. The entire payments deficit, beginning with the Korean War in 1950-51 and extending through the Vietnam War of the 1960s, was responsible for forcing the dollar off gold in 1971. The problem facing America's military strategists was how to continue supporting the 800 U.S. military bases around the world and allied troop support without losing America's financial leverage. " I want to ask a basic, really primitive question in this regard: how cares about the balance of payments as long as 1) the US continues to print money 2) most of the world will still want dollars. Does that not give the US an essentially "infinite" budget? What is the flaw in this logic?

    Michael Hudson: The U.S. Treasury can create dollars to spend at home, and the Fed can increase the banking system's ability to create dollar credit and pay debts denominated in US dollars. But they cannot create foreign currency to pay other countries, unless they willingly accept dollars ad infinitum – and that entails bearing the costs of financing the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit, getting only IOUs in exchange for real resources that they sell to U.S. buyers.

    This is the situation that arose half a century ago. The United States could print dollars in 1971, but it could not print gold.

    In the 1920s, Germany's Reichsbank could print deutsche marks – trillions of them. When it came to pay Germany's foreign reparations debt, all it could do was to throw these D-marks onto the foreign exchange market. That crashed the currency's exchange rate, forcing up the price of imports proportionally and causing the German hyperinflation.

    The question is, how many surplus dollars do foreign governments want to hold. Supporting the dollar standard ends up supporting U.S. foreign diplomacy and military policy. For the first time since World War II, the most rapidly growing parts of the world are seeking to de-dollarize their economies by reducing reliance on U.S. exports, U.S. investment, and U.S. bank loans. This move is creating an alternative to the dollar, likely to replace it with groups of other currencies and assets in national financial reserves.

    The Saker: In the same article you also write: " So maintaining the dollar as the world's reserve currency became a mainstay of U.S. military spending. " We often hear people say that the dollar is about to tank and that as soon as that happens, then the US economy (and, according to some, the EU economy too) will collapse. In the intelligence community there is something called tracking the "indicators and warnings". My question to you is: what are the economic "indicators and warnings" of a possible (probable?) collapse of the US dollar followed by a collapse of the financial markets most tied to the Dollar? What shall people like myself (I am an economic ignoramus) keep an eye on and look for?

    Michael Hudson: What is most likely is a slow decline, largely from debt deflation and cutbacks in social spending, in the Eurozone and US economies. Of course, the decline will force the more highly debt-leveraged companies to miss their bond payments and drive them into insolvency. That is the fate of Thatcherized economies. But it will be long and painfully drawn out, largely because there is little left-wing socialist alternative to neoliberalism at present.

    Trump's protectionist policies and sanctions are forcing other countries to become self-reliant and independent of US suppliers, from farm crops to airplanes and military arms, against the US threat of a cutoff or sanctions against repairs, spare parts and servicing. Sanctioning Russian agriculture has helped it become a major crop exporter, and to become much more independent in vegetables, dairy and cheese products. The US has little to offer industrially, especially given the fact that its IT communications are stuffed with US spyware.

    Europe therefore is facing increasing pressure from its business sector to choose the non-US economic alliance that is growing more rapidly and offers a more profitable investment market and more secure trade supplier. Countries will turn as much as possible (diplomatically as well as financially and economically) to non-US suppliers because the United States is not reliable, and because it is being shrunk by the neoliberal policies supported by Trump and the Democrats alike. A byproduct probably will be a continued move toward gold as an alternative do the dollar in settling balance-of-payments deficits.

    The Saker: Finally, my last question: which country out there do you see as the most capable foe of the current US-imposed international political and economic world order? whom do you believe that US Deep State and the Neocons fear most? China? Russia? Iran? some other country? How would you compare them and on the basis of what criteria?

    Michael Hudson: The leading country breaking up US hegemony obviously is the United States itself. That is Trump's major contribution. He is uniting the world in a move toward multi-centrism much more than any ostensibly anti-American could have done. And he is doing it all in the name of American patriotism and nationalism – the ultimate Orwellian rhetorical wrapping!

    Trump has driven Russia and China together with the other members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), including Iran as observer. His demand that NATO join in US oil grabs and its supportive terrorism in the Near East and military confrontation with Russia in Ukraine and elsewhere probably will lead to European "Ami go home" demonstrations against NATO and America's threat of World War III.

    No single country can counter the U.S. unipolar world order. It takes a critical mass of countries. This already is taking place among the countries that you list above. They are simply acting in their own common interest, using their own mutual currencies for trade and investment. The effect is an alternative multilateral currency and trading area.

    The United States is now turning on the screws demanding that other countries sacrifice their growth in order to finance the U.S. unipolar empire. In effect, foreign countries are beginning to respond to the United States what the ten tribes of Israel said when they withdrew from the southern kingdom of Judah, whose king Rehoboam refused to lighten his demands (1 Kings 12). They echoed the cry of Sheba son of Bikri a generation earlier: "Look after your own house, O David!" The message is: What do other countries have to gain by remaining in the US unipolar neoliberalized world, as compared to using their own wealth to build up their own economies? It's an age-old problem.

    The dollar will still play a role in US trade and investment, but it will be as just another currency, held at arms length until it finally gives up its domineering attempt to strip other countries' wealth for itself. However, its demise may not be a pretty sight.

    The Saker: I thank you very much for your time and answers! ­

    Col...'the farmer from NZ' on January 09, 2020 , · at 5:19 pm EST/EDT

    What a truly superb interview!

    Another one that absolutely stands for me out is the below link to a recent interview of Hussein Askary.

    As I wrote a few days ago IMO this too is a wonderful insight into the utterly complicated dynamics of the tinderbox that the situation in Iran and Iraq has become.

    Conflict in the ME has traditionally almost always been about oil [and of course Israel]. This situation is different. It is only partially about oil and Israel, but OVERWHHEMINGLY it is about the BRI.

    The salient factor as I see it is the Oil for Technology initiative that Iraq signed with China shortly before it slid into this current mess.

    This was a mechanism whereby China would buy Iraq oil and these funds would be used directly to fund infrastructure and self-sufficiency initiatives and technologies that would help to drag Iraq out of the complete disaster that the US war had created in this country. A key part of this would be that China would also make extra loans available at the same time to speed up this development.

    In essence, this would enable the direct and efficient linking of Iraq into the BRI project. Going forward the economic gains and the political stability that could come out of this would be a completely new paradigm in the recovery of Iraq both economically and politically. Iraq is essential for a major part of the dynamics of the BRI because of its strategic location and the fact that it could form a major hub in the overall network.

    It absolutely goes without saying that the AAA would do everything the could to wreck this plan. This is their playbook and is exactly what they have done. The moronic and extraordinarily impulsive Trump subsequently was easily duped into being a willing and idiotic accomplice in this plan.

    The positive in all of this is that this whole scheme will backfire spectacularly for the perpetrators and will more than likely now speed up the whole process in getting Iraq back on track and working towards stability and prosperity.

    Please don't anyone try to claim that Trump is part of any grand plan nothing could be further from the truth he is nothing more than a bludgeoning imbecile foundering around, lashing out impulsively indiscriminately. He is completely oblivious and ignorant as to the real picture.

    I urge everyone involved in this Saker site to put aside an hour and to listen very carefully to Askary's insights. This is extremely important and could bring more clarity to understanding the situation than just about everything else you have read put together. There is hope, and Askary highlights the huge stakes that both Russia and China have in the region.

    This is a no brainer. This is the time for both Russia and China to act and to decisively. They must cooperate in assisting both Iraq and Iran to extract themselves from the current quagmire the one that the vicious Hegemon so cruelly and thoughtlessly tossed them into.

    Cheers from the south seas
    Col

    And the link to the Askary interview: . https://youtu.be/UD1hWq6KD44

    Col...'the farmer from NZ' on January 09, 2020 , · at 8:22 pm EST/EDT
    Also interesting is what Simon Watkins reports in his recent article entitled "Is Iraq About To Become A Chinese Client State?"

    To quote from the article:

    "Iraq's Finance Ministry that the country had started exporting 100,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil to China in October as part of the 20-year oil-for-infrastructure deal agreed between the two countries."

    and

    "For Iraq and Iran, China's plans are particularly far-reaching, OilPrice.com has been told by a senior oil industry figure who works closely with Iran's Petroleum Ministry and Iraq's Oil Ministry. China will begin with the oil and gas sector and work outwards from that central point. In addition to being granted huge reductions on buying Iranian oil and gas, China is to be given the opportunity to build factories in both Iran and Iraq – and build-out infrastructure, such as railways – overseen by its own management staff from Chinese companies. These are to have the same operational structure and assembly lines as those in China, so that they fit seamlessly into various Chinese companies' assembly lines' process for whatever product a particular company is manufacturing, whilst also being able to use the still-cheap labour available in both Iraq and Iraq."

    and

    "The second key announcement in this vein made last week from Iraq was that the Oil Ministry has completed the pre-qualifying process for companies interested in participating in the Iraqi-Jordanian oil pipeline project. The U$5 billion pipeline is aimed at carrying oil produced from the Rumaila oilfield in Iraq's Basra Governorate to the Jordanian port of Aqaba, with the first phase of the project comprising the installation of a 700-kilometre-long pipeline with a capacity of 2.25 million bpd within the Iraqi territories (Rumaila-Haditha). The second phase includes installing a 900-kilometre pipeline in Jordan between Haditha and Aqaba with a capacity of 1 million bpd. Iraq's Oil Minister – for the time being, at least – Thamir Ghadhban added that the Ministry has formed a team to prepare legal contracts, address financial issues and oversee technical standards for implementing the project, and that May will be the final month in which offers for the project from the qualified companies will be accepted and that the winners will be announced before the end of this year. Around 150,000 barrels of the oil from Iraq would be used for Jordan's domestic needs, whilst the remainder would be exported through Aqaba to various destinations, generating about US$3 billion a year in revenues to Jordan, with the rest going to Iraq. Given that the contractors will be expected to front-load all of the financing for the projects associated with this pipeline, Baghdad expects that such tender offers will be dominated by Chinese and Russian companies, according to the Iran and Iraq source."

    Cheers
    Col

    And the link https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Is-Iraq-About-To-Become-A-Chinese-Client-State.html#

    Anonymouse on January 09, 2020 , · at 5:20 pm EST/EDT
    Hudson is so good. He's massively superior to most so called military analysts and alternative bloggers on the net. He can clearly see the over arching picture and how the military is used to protect and project it. The idea that the US is going to leave the middle east until they are forced to is so blind as to be ridiculous.

    They will not sacrifice the (free) oil until booted out by a coalition of Arab countries threatening to over run them and that is why the dollar hegemonys death will be slow, long and drawn out and they will do anything, any dirty trick in the book, to prevent Arab/Persian unity. Unlike many peoples obsession with Israel and how important they feel themselves to be I think Hudson is correct again. They are the middle eastern version of the British – a stationary aircraft carrier who will allow themselves to be used and abused whilst living under the illusion they are major players. They aren't. They're bit part players in decline, subservient to the great dollar and oil pyramid scheme that keeps America afloat. If you want to beat America you have to understand the big scheme, that and the utter insanity that backs it up. It is that insanity of the leites, the inability to allow themselves to be 'beaten' that will keep nuclear exchange as a real possibility over the next 10 to 15 years. Unification is the only thing that can stop it and trying to unite so many disparate countries (as the Russians are trying to do despite multiple provocations) is where the future lies and why it will take so long. It is truly breath taking in such a horrific way, as Hudson mentions, that to allow the world to see its 'masters of the universe' pogram to be revealed:

    "Of course American strategists will deny that the recent actions do not reflect a deliberate strategy, because their long-term strategy is so aggressive and exploitative that it would even strike the American public as being immoral and offensive if they came right out and said it."

    Would be to allow it to be undermined at home and abroad. God help us all.

    Little Black Duck on January 09, 2020 , · at 7:01 pm EST/EDT
    They're bit part players in decline, subservient to the great dollar and oil pyramid scheme that keeps America afloat.

    So who owns the dollar? And who owns the oil companies?

    Osori on January 09, 2020 , · at 8:06 pm EST/EDT
    I'd never thought of that "stationary aircraft carrier" comparison between Israel and the British, very apt.
    Zachary Smith on January 09, 2020 , · at 9:53 pm EST/EDT
    Clever would be a better word. Looking at my world globe, I see Italy, Greece, and Turkey on that end of the Mediterranean. Turkey has been in NATO since 1952. Crete and Cyprus are also right there. Doesn't Hudson own a globe or regional map?

    That a US Admiral would be gushing about the Apartheid state 7 years after the attempted destruction of the USS Liberty is painful to consider. I'd like to disbelieve the story, but it's quite likely there were a number of high-ranking ***holes in a Naval Uniform.

    44360 on January 09, 2020 , · at 5:34 pm EST/EDT
    The world situation reminds us of the timeless fable by Aesop of The North Wind and the Sun.

    Trump et al assassinated someone who was on a diplomatic mission. This action was so far removed from acceptable behavior that it must have been considered to be "by any means and at all costs".

    Perhaps the most potent weapon Iran or anyone else has at this critical juncture, is not missiles, but diplomacy.

    Ahmed on January 09, 2020 , · at 5:37 pm EST/EDT
    "Therefore, to focus one-sidedly on Israel is a distraction away from what the US-centered international order really is all about."

    Thank you for saying this sir. In the US and around the world many people become obsessively fixated in seeing a "jew" or zionist behind every bush. Now the Zionists are certinly an evil, blood thirsty bunch, and certainly deserve the scorn of the world, but i feel its a cop out sometimes. A person from the US has a hard time stomaching the actions of their country, so they just hoist all the unpleasentries on to the zionists. They put it all on zionisim, and completly fail to mention imperialism. I always switced back and forth on the topic my self. But i cant see how a beachead like the zionist state, a stationary carrier, can be bigger than the empire itself. Just look at the major leaders in the resistance groups, the US was always seen as the ultimate obstruction, while israel was seen as a regional obstruction. Like sayyed hassan nasrallah said in his recent speech about the martyrs, that if the US is kicked out, the Israelis might just run away with out even fighting. I hate it when people say "we are in the middle east for israel" when it can easily be said that "israel is still in the mid east because of the US." If the US seized to exist today, israel would fall rather quickly. If israel fell today the US would still continue being an imperalist, bloodthirsty entity.

    Azorka1861 on January 09, 2020 , · at 5:57 pm EST/EDT
    The Deeper Story behind the Assassination of Soleimani

    This article, published by Strategic Culture, features a translation of Mahdi's speech to the Iraqi parliament in which he states that Trump threatened him with assassination and the US admitted to killing hundreds of demonstrators using Navy SEAL snipers.

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/01/08/vital-the-deeper-story-behind-the-assassination-of-soleimani/

    ..

    Nils on January 09, 2020 , · at 6:05 pm EST/EDT
    This description provided by Mr Hudson is no Moore than the financial basis behind the Cebrowski doctrine instituted on 9/11. https://www.voltairenet.org/article

    I wish the Saker had asked Mr Hudson about some crucial recent events to get his opinion with regards to US foreign policy. Specifically, how does the emergence of cryptocurrency relate to dollar finance and the US grand strategy? A helpful tool for the hegemon or the emergence of a new currency that prevents unlimited currency printing? Finally, what is global warming and the associated carbon credit system? The next planned model of continuing global domination and balance of payments? Or true organic attempt at fair energy production and management?

    Much thanks for this interview, Saker

    Col...'the farmer from NZ' on January 09, 2020 , · at 6:26 pm EST/EDT
    With all due respect, these are huge questions in themselves and perhaps could to be addressed in separate interviews. IMO it doesn't always work that well to try to cover too much ground in just one giant leap.

    Regards
    Col

    Mike from Jersey on January 09, 2020 , · at 7:26 pm EST/EDT
    I have never understood the Cebrowski doctrine. How does the destruction of Middle Eastern state structures allow the US to control Middle East Oil? The level of chaos generated by such an act would seem to prevent anyone from controlled the oil.
    Outlaw Historian on January 09, 2020 , · at 7:48 pm EST/EDT
    Dr. Hudson often appears on RT's "Keiser Report" where he covers many contemporary topics with its host Max Keiser. Many of the shows transcripts are available at Hudson's website . Indeed, after the two Saker items, you'll find three programs on the first page. Using the search function at his site, you'll find the two articles he's written that deal with bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, although I think he's been more specific in the TV interviews.

    As for this Q&A, its an A+. Hudson's 100% correct to playdown the Zionist influence given the longstanding nature of the Outlaw US Empire's methods that began well before the rise of the Zionist Lobby, which in reality is a recycling of aid dollars back to Congress in the form of bribes.

    RR on January 09, 2020 , · at 7:59 pm EST/EDT
    Nils: Good Article. The spirit of Nihilism.
    Quote from Neocon Michael Ladeen.

    "Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace. Seeing America undo traditional societies, they fear us, for they do not wish to be undone. They cannot feel secure so long as we are there, for our very existence -- our existence, not our politics -- threatens their legitimacy. They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission."

    Frank on January 09, 2020 , · at 10:27 pm EST/EDT
    @NILS As far as crypto currency goes it is a brilliant idea in concept. But since during the Bush years we have been shown multiple times, who actually owns [and therefore controls] the internet. Many times now we have also been informed that through the monitoring capability's of our defense agency's, they are recording every key stroke. IMO, with the flip of a switch, we can shut down the internet. At the very least, that would stop us from being able to trade in crypto, but they have e-files on each of us. They know our passwords, or can easily access them. That does not give me confidence in e=currency during a teotwawki situation.
    Anonymous on January 09, 2020 , · at 6:34 pm EST/EDT
    A truly superb interview, thanks Michael Hudson.
    David on January 09, 2020 , · at 6:39 pm EST/EDT
    One thing that troubles me about the petrodollar thesis is that ANNUAL trade in oil is about 2 trillion DAILY trade in $US is 4 trillion. I can well believe the US thinks oil is the bedrock if dollar hegemony but is it? I see no alternative to US dollar hegemony.
    Mike from Jersey on January 09, 2020 , · at 7:17 pm EST/EDT
    Excellent article.

    The lines that really got my attention were these:

    "The leading country breaking up US hegemony obviously is the United States itself. That is Trump's major contribution The United States is now turning on the screws demanding that other countries sacrifice their growth in order to finance the U.S. unipolar empire."

    That is so completely true. I have wondered why – to date – there had not been more movement by Europe away from the United States. But while reading the article the following occurred to me. Maybe Europe is awaiting the next U.S. election. Maybe they hope that a new president (someone like Biden) might allow Europe to keep more of the "spoils."

    If that is true, then a re-election of Trump will probably send Europe fleeing for the exits. The Europeans will be cutting deals with Russia and China like the store is on fire.

    Rubicon on January 09, 2020 , · at 10:22 pm EST/EDT
    The critical player in forming the EU WAS/IS the US financial Elites. Yes, they had many ultra powerful Europeans, especially Germany, but it was the US who initiated the EU.

    Purpose? For the US Financial Powerhouses & US politicians to "take Europe captive." Notice the similarities: the EU has its Central Bank who communicates with the private Banksters of the FED. Much austerity has ensued, especially in Southern nations: Greece, Italy, etc. Purpose: to smash unions, worker's pay, eliminate unions, and basically allowing US/EU Financial capital to buy out Italy, most of Greece, and a goodly section of Spain and Portugal.

    The US govt. have long since paid off most every European politician. Thusly, Europe, as separate nations that should be remain still under the yolk of the US Financial/Political/Military power.

    Craig Mouldey on January 09, 2020 , · at 8:19 pm EST/EDT
    I have a hard time wrapping my head around this but it sounds like he is saying that the U.S. has a payment deficit problem which is solved by stealing the world's oil supplies. To do this they must have a powerful, expensive military. But it is primarily this military which is the main cause of the balance deficit. So it is an eternally fuelled problem and solution. If I understand this, what it actually means is that we all live on a plantation as slaves and everything that is happening is for the benefit of the few wealthy billionaires. And they intend to turn the entire world into their plantation of slaves. They may even let you live for a while longer.
    Mike from Jersey on January 09, 2020 , · at 9:25 pm EST/EDT
    Actually, oil underlies everything.

    I didn't know this until I read a history of World War I.

    As you know, World War One was irresolvable, murderous, bloody trench warfare. People would charge out of the trenches trying to overrun enemy positions only to be cutdown by the super weapon of the day – the machine gun. It was an unending bloody stalemate until the development of the tank. Tanks were immune to machine gun fire coming from the trenches and could overrun enemy positions. In the aftermath of that war, it became apparently that mechanization had become crucial to military supremacy. In turn, fuel was crucial to mechanization. Accordingly, in the Sykes Picot agreement France and Britain divided a large amount of Middle Eastern oil between themselves in order to assure military dominance. (The United States had plenty of their own oil at that time.)

    In any event, it is the same today. Energy underlies, not only the military but, all of world civilization. Oil and gas are overwhelmingly the source of energy for the modern world. Without it, civilization collapses. Thus, he who controls oil (and gas) controls the world.

    That is one third of the story. The second third is this.

    Up till 1971, the United States dollar was the most trusted currency in the world. The dollar was backed by gold and lots and lots of it. Dollars were in fact redeemable in gold. However, due to Vietnam War, the United States started running huge balance of payments deficits. Other countries – most notably France under De Gaulle – started cashing in dollars in exchange for that gold. Gold started flooding out of the United States. At that point Nixon took the United States off of the gold standard. Basically stating that the dollar was no longer backed by gold and dollars could not be redeemed for gold. That caused an international payments problem. People would no longer accept dollars as payment since the dollar was not backed up by anything. The American economy was in big trouble since they were running deficits and people would no longer take dollars on faith.

    To fix the problem, Henry Kissinger convinced the Saudis to agree to only accept dollars in payment for oil – no matter who was the buyer. That meant that nations throughout the world now needed dollars in order to pay for their energy needs. Due to this, the dollars was once again the most important currency in the world since – as noted above – energy underlies everything in modern industrial cultures. Additionally, since dollars were now needed throughout the world, it became common to make all trades for any product in highly valued dollars. Everyone needed dollars for every thing, oil or not.

    At that point, the United States could go on printing dollars and spending them since a growing world economy needed more and more dollars to buy oil as well as to trade everything else.

    That leads to the third part of the story. In order to convince the Saudis to accept only dollars in payments for oil (and to have the Saudis strong arm other oil producers to do the same) Kissinger promised to protect the brutal Saudi regime's hold on power against a restive citizenry and also to protect the Saudi's against other nations. Additionally, Kissinger made an implicit threat that if the Saudi's did not agree, the US would come in and just take their oil. The Saudis agreed.

    Thus, the three keys to dominance in the modern world are thus: oil, dollars and the military.

    Thus, Hudson ties in the three threads in his interview above. Oil, Dollars, Military. That is what holds the empire together.

    Rubicon on January 09, 2020 , · at 10:26 pm EST/EDT
    Thank you for thinking through this. Yes, the link between the US $$$ and Saudi Oil, is the absolute means of the American Dollar to reign complete. This payment system FEEDS both the US Military, but WALL STREET, hedge funds, the US/EU oligarchs – to name just a few entities.
    Stanislaw Janowicz on January 09, 2020 , · at 8:58 pm EST/EDT
    I should make one note only to this. That "no man, no problem" was Stalin's motto is a myth. He never said that. It was invented by a writer Alexei Rybnikov and inserted in his book "The Children of Arbat".
    Greg Horrall on January 09, 2020 , · at 9:42 pm EST/EDT
    Wow! Absolutely beautiful summation of the ultimate causes that got us where we are and, if left intact, will get us to where we're going!

    So, the dreamer says: If only we could throw-off our us-vs-them BS political-economic ideology & religious doctrine-faith issues, put them into live-and-let-live mode, and see that we are all just humans fighting over this oil resource to which our modern economy (way of life) is addicted, then we might be able to hammer out some new rules for interacting, for running an earth-resource sustainable and fair global economy We do at least have the technology to leave behind our oil addiction, but the political-economic will still is lacking. How much more of the current insanity must we have before we get that will? Will we get it before it's too late?

    Only if we, a sufficient majority from the lowest economic classes to the top elites and throughout all nations, are able to psychologically-spiritually internalize the two principles of Common Humanity and Spaceship Earth soon enough, will we stop our current slide off the cliff into modern economic collapse and avert all the pain and suffering that's already now with us and that will intensify.

    The realist says we're not going to stop that slide and it's the only way we're going to learn, if we are indeed ever going to learn.

    Ann Watson on January 09, 2020 , · at 10:42 pm EST/EDT
    So now we know why Michael Hudson avoids the Israel involvment – Like Pepe.
    Лишний Человек on January 09, 2020 , · at 11:02 pm EST/EDT
    Thank you for this excellent interview. You ask the kind of questions that we would all like to ask. It's regrettable that Chalmers Johnson isn't still alive. I believe that you and he would have a lot in common.

    Naxos has produced an incredible, unabridged cd audiobook of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. One of Gibbon's observations really resonates today: "Assassination is the last resource of cowards". Thanks again.

    [Jan 10, 2020] Trump decided to play the role of Benjamin Netanyahu Santa Claus again

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    DFC , Jan 8 2020 19:20 utc | 198

    Probably in the medium term the situation for the US in ME will be worse, but in the short term (in an electoral year) the people I talked, with some knowledge of the recent history of the ME, and me, we think:

    a) Trump dares to do what at least 3 former administration did not dare to do: kill the first "terrorist" on the list (as ex-admiral William J. Fallon has said, Suleimani was the Nº 1 in his list for 12 years), so for the American people is the more resolute and brave POTUS of at least 10 administration (somebody says from Lincoln times). Obama was a coward.

    b) The fact that Suleimani was a national hero for a nation of 82 million people and also for 150 million of shia around the world, mourned by millions in the streets, make a bigger Trump "victory" over the Iranian "regime", and it is a powerful advice to the others leaders and commanders in the world that try to fight or oppose to USA.

    c) People say that after killing Al-Bagdadi, Suleimani, Muhandis, the next in the list is Nasralah (pure wishful thinking but right now, why not thinking that?)

    d) The USA did no use their AA system to shut-down the incoming missiles to not give a clue to the Iranians of their real effectiveness in combat situation and because the Russians have many SIGINT platforms following the events to capture the signals, methods, tactics and technology of the US anti-ballistic missiles systems. So now the Iranians are blind of the real effectiveness of their missiles in a real combat situation and the Russians do not have a clue also. For sure USA can take down at least some modified SCUD C missiles, simply it was not worth to do.

    e) The fact that Trump did not retaliate is not a symptom of weakness, simply no American was hurt after killing Suleimani (an act of war), only some holes in the sand.

    f) In the speech of today Trump is defiant with the killing of Suleimani and with more economic sanctions to Iran, that will be more crippling than now. He does not want to escalate (more). There will be a deal in the future, but much less good for the Iranians than the Obama's JCPOA (it was an electoral promise).

    g) The retaliation of the PMU, they say, "will be similar than that of Iran", translating it : "lob some katyusha rockets in the backyard of few US bases giving advice to the Americans do not go out". No risks at all, the se-escalation is complete.

    h) Trump is defiant about not leaving Iraq, I think at the end they will go but after they have a very good deal. Of course it is all about the Iraqi oil, in exchange for the American blood and money wasted in Iraq. Iraq has the biggest oil reserves in the world and USA want a good chunk of them, they never ever leave "giving" all of them to the Chinese or Iranians or anybody else. Trump does not want US soldiers in Iraq, but he wants the oil above anything else (it is condition "sine qua non" to maintain the Empire)

    i) Trump has now the full enthusiastic support of the AIPAC and all the others powerful Israeli lobby he will have more money than required for the election. He has demonstrated he is the best possible POTUS for Israel

    j) In the short term USA will leave Syria and in the medium term Iraq, OK, but they never ever leave "all the region", they need to be there to maintain the "American Way of Live" (US $ as reserve currency)

    If nothing dramatically change, I expect a crushing victory of Trump in the coming US election, he has all the cards now in his hand, and he will not waste them.

    Petri Krohn , Jan 8 2020 19:22 utc | 199

    The 5 lightweight hangars at the Ain al-Asad airbase that were destroyed in the Iranian bullseye hit housed US drones. Possibly the very one used to assassinate General Qassem Soleimani.

    See this tweet by Babak Taghvaee from yesterday with photos:

    #BREAKING: It is now confirmed that the #IRGC backed Kataib Hezbollah (45th Brigade of #PMU) launched 40 unguided rockets at Ain Al Asad Air Base where the #USArmy's MQ-1Cs are based. At-least one of them participated in the operation for elimination of #Soleimani in #Baghdad!

    arby , Jan 8 2020 19:22 utc | 200
    The US contractor that was killed worked for Valiant Integrated Services.

    https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article239053173.html

    valiant

    [Jan 10, 2020] Pompous killer

    Notable quotes:
    "... Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been revealed to be the puppet master behind POTUS Trump's motion to liquidate a top Iranian commander, CNN reported citing sources inside and around the White House, with the revelation indicating Pompeo's influential status in the Trump administration. ..."
    "... The sources suggested that the Iranian general was Pompeo's fixation, so that he even sought to get a visa to Iran in 2016 when he represented Kansas in Congress, before assuming the role of CIA director and then his current one. ..."
    "... Despite winning the moniker of "Trump whisperer" over the ties he has developed with POTUS, Pompeo's ability to sell an aggressive Iran strategy to Trump, who has commonly opposed any military confrontation, has caused a certain sway, the sources implied. ..."
    "... "He's the one leading the way", according to the source in Pompeo's inner circle, discussing the showdown with Iran. "It's the president's policy, but Pompeo has been the leading voice in helping the president craft this policy. There is no doubt Mike is the one leading it in the Cabinet". ..."
    "... While bragging about Washington's "big and accurate" missiles as well as US achievements during his tenure, he separately praised the "new powerful economic sanctions" aimed at Iran, promising that they would be in place until Tehran "changes its behaviour". Also, he invited NATO to get more deeply involved in what is going on in the Middle East, with the Transatlantic bloc reacting favorably to the suggestion. ..."
    Jan 10, 2020 | sputniknews.com

    Mike Pompeo has reportedly long cherished plans to take the Iranian general off the Middle East battlefield, as he is said to have for quite a while seen late Commander Soleimani as the one behind the spiralling tensions with Tehran. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been revealed to be the puppet master behind POTUS Trump's motion to liquidate a top Iranian commander, CNN reported citing sources inside and around the White House, with the revelation indicating Pompeo's influential status in the Trump administration.

    According to several sources, taking Iranian General Qasem Soleimani – the leader of the elite Quds Force, a powerful military group with vast leverage in the region - "off the battlefield" has been Pompeo's goal for a decade.

    Pompeo "was the one who made the case to take out Soleimani, it was him absolutely", a source said, adding he apparently floated the idea when debating the US Embassy raid over New Year with Trump.

    According to a number of sources close to Pompeo, the secretary of state has at all times believed that Iran is the root cause of the woes in the Middle East, and Soleimani in particular - the mastermind of terrorism raging across the region. This point of view is notably in tune with how Pompeo commented on the commander's assassination:

    "We took a bad guy off the battlefield", Pompeo told CNN on 5 January. "We made the right decision". The same day, Pompeo told ABC that killing Soleimani was important "because this was a fella who was the glue, who was conducting active plotting against the United States of America, putting American lives at risk".

    The sources suggested that the Iranian general was Pompeo's fixation, so that he even sought to get a visa to Iran in 2016 when he represented Kansas in Congress, before assuming the role of CIA director and then his current one.

    Despite winning the moniker of "Trump whisperer" over the ties he has developed with POTUS, Pompeo's ability to sell an aggressive Iran strategy to Trump, who has commonly opposed any military confrontation, has caused a certain sway, the sources implied.

    "He's the one leading the way", according to the source in Pompeo's inner circle, discussing the showdown with Iran. "It's the president's policy, but Pompeo has been the leading voice in helping the president craft this policy. There is no doubt Mike is the one leading it in the Cabinet".

    Regardless of who inspired the drone attack that killed Soleimani, the two countries are indeed going through a stint of severe tensions, but no direct military confrontation. After Tehran's retaliatory attack, Trump announced a slew of more stringent economic limitations to be slapped on Iran.

    While bragging about Washington's "big and accurate" missiles as well as US achievements during his tenure, he separately praised the "new powerful economic sanctions" aimed at Iran, promising that they would be in place until Tehran "changes its behaviour". Also, he invited NATO to get more deeply involved in what is going on in the Middle East, with the Transatlantic bloc reacting favorably to the suggestion.

    [Jan 10, 2020] It is highly doubtful that people reassert their power against National Security state and elect Sanders (as flowed as he is) in 2020?

    When people thought in 2016 that they are winning against the National Security state, they were deceived by the candidate who sounded rational during election campaign, but then became Hillary II in three months after inauguration and brought Bush II neocons into his Administration.
    So voters were deceived with Clinton, deceived with Bush II, deceived with Obama, deceived with Trump. You now see the tendency...
    Jan 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    HarryOrd , Jan 9 2020 19:06 utc | 37
    Hi first time commenter on here.

    With all that is happening in the U.S right now I can't help but think that it's past time for the people to reassert their power over the National security state, as unrealistic as that might sound.

    The Anti war movement is ideologically divided between progressives and libertarian/paleoconservatives, so a political party would not likely be the answer.

    Instead perhaps we should consider a grassroots movement to amend the constitution to guarantee U.S neutrality in world affairs (banning both the arming or financing of foreign belligerents) and to ban the Federal government from having a standing military force except in times of actual war. I don't know what chance either would have of actually being passed, but it might at least force a debate on these issues in a way that might resonate better with the average American. Just thought I'd throw that out there. Peace and Solidarity

    [Jan 10, 2020] America Has a Samson Problem by Andrew J. Bacevich

    Jan 10, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Critics of the Soleimani assassination point out that it was an action devoid of strategic purpose. They are correct to do so. Yet let's not blame Donald Trump and his ever-changing cast of senior advisers for having strayed off the path of good sense. The United States lost its way decades ago when members of the policy elite succumbed to an infatuation with military power and thereby lost their strategic bearings.

    The current crisis with Iran brings into focus something that ought to have long ago attracted attention: t his country has a Samson problem. The United States has become a 21st-century equivalent of the tragic figure from the Book of Judges in the Hebrew Bible: strong, vain, and doomed (although we must hope our nation does not share Samson's ultimate fate).

    Most people are familiar with at least the outlines of the biblical Samson story: a mighty warrior who slays the enemies of the Israelites in great numbers using the jawbone of an ass among other weapons. Sadly, after the captivating Delilah seduces Samson into revealing the secret of his extraordinary strength -- his unshorn hair -- he ends up blind, in chains, and held captive in the temple of the Philistines. Samson asks the Lord to restore his strength. The King James Bible explains what happens next: "And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life." It was a huge bloodletting, and among the victims was the hero himself.

    It's a dramatic story, made for the movies. The 1949 Technicolor version, directed by Cecil B. DeMille and starring Victor Mature and Hedy Lamarr, remains a camp classic of the sandal-and-togas genre. But whether in the original text or on celluloid, the denouement does not qualify as a happy one. Samson was a fool and his own worst enemy. Something of the same can be said of the United States in recent decades.

    As the recently concluded war scare with Iran was unfolding, for example, President Trump took it upon himself to assure his nervous fellow citizens as to the matchless strength of America's armed forces. "So far, so good!" he tweeted, more than slightly prematurely. "We have the most powerful and well-equipped military anywhere in the world, by far!"

    I confess that it's those exclamation points that leave me most uneasy. They suggest a manic personality oblivious to the seriousness of the moment. Can you imagine Kennedy in the midst of the Cuban Missile Crisis releasing a comparable statement?

    Although not without his faults, Kennedy understood how quickly a position of apparent strength can dissipate. Our current commander-in-chief possesses no such appreciation. Trump's confidence in the U.S. military, expressed with his trademark bluster and bravado, seemingly knows no bounds. And although on this occasion the president and his counterparts in Tehran found a way to avoid pulling down the temple on all of us, his performance did not inspire confidence. We must hope that in the future he's confronted with few comparable crises. There's no saying when his luck (and ours) might run out.

    Yet we should not lose sight of the fact that the assassination of General Soleimani was only the most recent in a long series of actions in which confidence in America's military has underwritten rash decisions devoid of strategic common sense. Post-Cold War Washington specializes in rashness. Indeed, in comparison with George W. Bush, who ordered the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and Barack Obama, who greenlighted the overthrow of Libya's Moammar Gaddafi in 2011, Trump comes across as a small-stakes gambler.

    The larger problem to which Trump calls our attention is the militarism that pervades the American political class -- the conviction that accumulating and putting to use military power expresses the essence of so-called American global leadership. That notion is dead wrong and has been the source of endless mischief.

    Congress is considering measures that will constrain Trump from any further use of force targeting Iran, hoping thereby to avoid an all-out war. This is all to the good. But the larger requirement is for our political establishment generally to wean itself off of its infatuation with military power. Only then can we restore a measure of self-restraint to America's national security policy.

    Andrew Bacevich is president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. His new book, The Age of Illusions: How America Squandered Its Cold War Victory , is just out.

    JLF • 8 hours ago

    We start in a considerable hole. Last year (September 12) Forbes reported a survey of 60,000 Europeans in 14 countries and found only 4% trust Trump. "Our polling confirms that Trump is toxic in Europe, and that this is feeding into distrust of the U.S. Security Guarantee," https://www.forbes.com/site...

    Apparently they aren't so impressed by our massive military might . . . or at least they are not impressed by those who wield our massive military might.

    Palichamp • 8 hours ago
    The US military isn't solving world problems, it's CAUSING world problems, primarily for Israel's Balkanizing Oded Yinon Plan and for the neoconJew's PNAC global agenda.
    Fran Macadam • 7 hours ago
    The Full Spectrum Dominance policy posits that America can never be secure until all potential rivals are made subservient. What is the character of a nation that demands submission from the entire world, that all are to be vassals and satrapies?
    MPC • 7 hours ago
    If Trump really did think that there was some Art of the Deal logic in this, kill Soleimani, let Iran have a symbolic retaliation, then back down and deal, I can respect that, but I want to see a deal. Obama got a deal, not a perfect one, but respectable considering we don't have long term interests in the Middle East anyways. Without a deal he just furthered the risk of neocons getting to push the fire button and commit us unprofitably once more, and pushed Iran further into the arms of China.

    On the other hand his threatening to attack Iranian cultural sites was inappropriate and unwise and creating long term problems with no short term gain. It rhymes with some of his domestic issues too - tribalizing people does not make for a deal-making environment.

    JohnnLisa Broom • 6 hours ago
    Shades of the 1993 Essay in Parameters "The Origins of the Military Coup of 2012. When the only tool in in your kitbag that works at all is a hammer, every problem is a nail. That might be okay if we had a small tack hammer, but for some reason all we have is a 700 Billion Dollar 20 lb sledge. https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=586
    Frank Natoli • 4 hours ago
    the assassination of General Soleimani was only the most recent in a long series of actions in which confidence in America's military has underwritten rash decisions devoid of strategic common sense
    Ah, strategic common sense.
    So Bacevich doesn't need to bother with tactical common sense.
    Got it.
    Christopher Rice Frank Natoli • 3 hours ago
    As a respected authority on both strategy and tactics once suggested: "strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat." Strategy is fundamentally more important than tactics. Perhaps we could be a bit less dismissive?
    MPC Frank Natoli • 3 hours ago
    The US has had a lot of tactical common sense in Afghanistan.
    Gutbomb • 3 hours ago
    "Congress is considering measures that will constrain Trump from any further use of force targeting Iran, hoping thereby to avoid an all-out war."

    I'm always baffled when I hear about new attempts by Congress to limit the president's unilateral use of force, as if they have chosen to ignore that the Constitution itself already explicitly forbids it.

    Donna • 3 hours ago • edited
    Is "national security" really the goal of the US military, or is "multinational corporation security" the real reason the US has thousands of military bases around the world? The US taxpayer foots the security bill for the same corporations that buy all of our national elections. But you have to admit, it's a well-played scam: the CIA stirs up internal chaos in a country, and the US military then completes the destabilization program by bombing it into submission or terminal chaos.
    Donna • 2 hours ago
    Which begs the question, "Why is it, that the Terrorists always live on the resources that the Corporations covet?"

    [Jan 10, 2020] In Iraq The U.S. Is Again An Occupation Force As It Rejects To Leave As Demanded

    Notable quotes:
    "... Shorter Pompeo: "Our troops will stay and you better do what we say." A foreign force that is asked to leave a country and does not do so is an occupation force. It must and will be opposed. ..."
    "... The murder of the 31 security forces and the assassination of al-Mahandes have still not been avenged. The PMU will do their moral duty and fight the foreign occupation forces until they leave. ..."
    "... After my return from China, Trump called me and asked me to cancel the agreement, so I still refused, and he threatened me with massive demonstrations that would topple me. Indeed, the demonstrations started and then Trump called, threatening to escalate in the event I did not cooperate and do as he asked ..."
    "... Iraq is again negotiating with Russia to acquire S-300 air defense systems. It will need them as the U.S. will have to leave and leave it will. The only choice for its soldiers is between leaving horizontally or vertically, dead or alive. ..."
    "... In 2006 US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice famously celebrated Israel's assault on Lebanon as "the birth pangs of a new Middle East." The child she dreamed of was never born. Israel lost that war against Hizbullah and the Resistance Axis has been winning ever since while the U.S. has lost again and again. It is time for the U.S. to end that useless engagement and to withdraw from the Middle East. ..."
    Jan 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi is following Iraq's Parliament decision to remove all foreign forces from Iraq. But his request for talks with the U.S. about the U.S. withdrawal process was answered with a big "F*** You":

    Iraq's caretaker prime minister asked Washington to start working out a road map for an American troop withdrawal, but the U.S. State Department on Friday bluntly rejected the request, saying the two sides should instead talk about how to "recommit" to their partnership.

    Thousands of anti-government protesters gathered in the capital and southern Iraq, many calling on both Iran and America to leave Iraq, reflecting anger and frustration over the two rivals -- both Baghdad's allies -- trading blows on Iraqi soil.

    The request from Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi pointed to his determination to push ahead with demands for U.S. troops to leave Iraq, stoked by the American drone strike on Jan. 3 that killed top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani. In a phone call Thursday night, he told U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that recent U.S. strikes in Iraq were an unacceptable breach of Iraqi sovereignty and a violation of their security agreements, his office said.

    He asked Pompeo to "send delegates to Iraq to prepare a mechanism" to carry out the Iraqi Parliament's resolution on withdrawing foreign troops, according to the statement.

    "The prime minister said American forces had entered Iraq and drones are flying in its airspace without permission from Iraqi authorities, and this was a violation of the bilateral agreements," the statement added.

    The Associated Press errs when it says that the move was "stoked by the American drone strike on Jan. 3 that killed top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani". The move was stoked five days earlier when the U.S. killed 31 Iraqi security forces near the Syrian border despite the demands by the Iraqi prime minister and president not to do so. It was further stoked when the U.S. assassinated Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes , the deputy commander of the Popular Militia Forces and a national hero in Iraq.

    The State Department issued a rather aggressive response to Abdul-Mahdi's request:

    America is a force for good in the Middle East. Our military presence in Iraq is to continue the fight against ISIS and as the Secretary has said, we are committed to protecting Americans, Iraqis, and our coalition partners. We have been unambiguous regarding how crucial our D-ISIS mission is in Iraq. At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership -- not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East. Today, a NATO delegation is at the State Department to discuss increasing NATO's role in Iraq, in line with the President's desire for burden sharing in all of our collective defense efforts. There does, however, need to be a conversation between the U.S. and Iraqi governments not just regarding security, but about our financial, economic, and diplomatic partnership. We want to be a friend and partner to a sovereign, prosperous, and stable Iraq.

    Shorter Pompeo: "Our troops will stay and you better do what we say." A foreign force that is asked to leave a country and does not do so is an occupation force. It must and will be opposed.

    The murder of the 31 security forces and the assassination of al-Mahandes have still not been avenged. The PMU will do their moral duty and fight the foreign occupation forces until they leave.

    The demonstrators in Baghdad will not be able to prevent that from happening. It is interesting, by the way, that the Washington Post bureau chief in Baghdad thought she knew what they would demand even before they came together:

    Louisa Loveluck @leloveluck - 9:48 UTC · Jan 10, 2020
    Activists have called for fresh rallies in Baghdad's Tahrir Square today, and crowds expected to build after midday prayers. The demonstrators are rejecting parliament's decision to oppose a US troop presence, fearing repercussions that might follow.

    A few hours later Loveluck had to admit that she was, as usual, wrong:

    Louisa Loveluck @leloveluck - 11:13 UTC · Jan 10, 2020
    "No to Iran, no to America" say signs and chants in Baghdad's Tahrir Square as crowds start to swell. Protesters say they are fed up of their country being someone else's battlefield. "We deserve to live in peace," says 21 year old Zahraa.
    ...
    Rejecting a narrow parliamentary vote backed by Shiite political elites is not the same as openly supporting the US. Chants in Tahrir today reject both the US and Iran.

    The U.S. will need to pay better Iraqi 'activists' if it wants them to demand what Donald Trump wishes.

    As the Iraqi Prime Minister explained (also here ):

    After my return from China, Trump called me and asked me to cancel the agreement, so I still refused, and he threatened me with massive demonstrations that would topple me. Indeed, the demonstrations started and then Trump called, threatening to escalate in the event I did not cooperate and do as he asked

    Iraq is again negotiating with Russia to acquire S-300 air defense systems. It will need them as the U.S. will have to leave and leave it will. The only choice for its soldiers is between leaving horizontally or vertically, dead or alive.

    As Elijah Magnier say in his summarization of the last week's events: A New Middle East "made in Iran" is about to be born

    The US President – who promised to end the " endless wars " – killed the Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes and the Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani believing he could win control of Iraq and achieve regime change in Iran. On the brink of triggering a major war, Trump has spectacularly lost Iran and is about to lose Iraq.

    " Beautiful military equipment doesn't rule the world, people rule the world, and the people want the US out of the region", said Iran Foreign Minister Jawad Zarif. President Trump doesn't have many people in the Middle East on his side, not even among his allies, whose leaders have been repeatedly insulted . Iran could not have dreamt of a better President to rejuvenate its position domestically and regionally. All Iran's allies are jubilant, standing behind the "Islamic Republic" that fulfilled its promise to bomb the US. A "New Middle East" is about to be born; it will not be "Made in the USA" but "Made in Iran". Let us hope warmongers' era is over. The time has come to recognise and rely on intelligent diplomacy in world affairs.

    In 2006 US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice famously celebrated Israel's assault on Lebanon as "the birth pangs of a new Middle East." The child she dreamed of was never born. Israel lost that war against Hizbullah and the Resistance Axis has been winning ever since while the U.S. has lost again and again. It is time for the U.S. to end that useless engagement and to withdraw from the Middle East.

    Posted by b on January 10, 2020 at 19:09 UTC | Permalink

    Jen , Jan 10 2020 19:30 utc | 1

    The sheer arrogance and wilful blindness expressed in the US State Department press statement and WaPo staffer Louisa Loveluck's tweets are astounding beyond belief. It's as if the entire capital city of the US has become a mental asylum / Hotel California, where one can enter but never leave spiritually and morally, though one can take many physical trips in and out of the madhouse.

    Iraq definitely does need the S-300 missile defence systems. The most pressing issue though is whether the Iraqis will suffer the delays Syria suffered in acquiring those systems even after paying for them. Time now is of the essence. Iraqi operators need to be trained in those systems. Syria may be able to supply some training but at the risk of letting down its guard in sending some of its operators to Baghdad and exposing them to US drone attacks.

    Likklemore , Jan 10 2020 19:39 utc | 2
    Thanks b, for your continuing coverage and insights.

    the u.s'. leadership believes it can do the same thing over, and over, and over with different results. They will need a very long ladder with the upcoming repeat of Saigon 1975.

    They have always underestimated the will and cultures of people they would make subservient.

    How is this working for the Iran Puppet Master: Pompous one?

    Here is the big mighty with world's powerful military; on their bended knees -

    We want to discuss Return to Strategic Partnership With Iraq Instead of Troop Withdrawal

    [.]The press release further noted that Washington seeks to be "a friend and partner to a sovereign, prosperous, and stable Iraq", while stating that the US military presence in the country will persist in order to fight Daesh* and protect Americans, Iraqis, and US-led coalition partners.[.]

    Yes, some friend and partner eh? Insults and thuggery. Exiting will be horizontal.
    Go pound sand.


    In other news, tomorrow Iran will announce cause of UAI plane crash.

    Bubbles , Jan 10 2020 19:43 utc | 3
    From the US State Dept's 'aggressive response' link,

    "not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East. Today, a NATO delegation is at the State Department to discuss increasing NATO's role in Iraq, in line with the President's desire for burden sharing in all of our collective defense efforts. "

    "BUT OUR RIGHT" ??

    ...


    "President's desire for burden sharing in all of our collective defense efforts."

    https://www.state.gov/the-u-s-continued-partnership-with-iraq/


    Seems like just yesterday that man trump was jabbering on about how the US should get out of NATO and leave those 'losers' to defend themselves.

    Geopolitics in the Shining City of the Hill has come to this?

    Grabs roll of tinfoil..are the Globalists using this buffoon to makes people yearn for some normalcy only they can provide?

    Likklemore , Jan 10 2020 19:50 utc | 4
    And with such liars who needs a stick. Narrative changes depending the hour.

    Last night: Pompeo told Foxnews-

    Pompeo Says US Had No Information on Date, Place of Possible Attack Allegedly Planned by Soleimani
    LINK

    US President Donald Trump earlier claimed that Washington had eliminated the top Iranian military commander to halt Tehran's plans to blow up the US Embassy in Baghdad.
    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on a national broadcast that the United States possessed no information about the date and place of an alleged attack planned by assassinated General Qasem Soleimani.[.]

    "We don't know precisely when - and we don't know precisely where. But it was real ...

    Today
    Trump Claims Soleimani Was Planning Attacks on 4 US Embassies


    US President Donald Trump in an interview with Fox News said that top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani was plotting attacks on four American embassies in the Middle East region before being assassinated by US forces.
    "I can reveal that I believe it probably would've been four embassies," Trump said when asked whether large-scale attacks were planned against other embassies.

    The House of Fools. Something is out of focus if they have to keep making justifications for the killing.


    psychohistorian , Jan 10 2020 19:51 utc | 5
    Thanks for focus on the Iran front of the civilization war humanity is in. I find the Ukraine plane crash to be distracting from the bigger picture.

    The piece from the US State Department is quite the lie. Bottom line is that Iran is currently sovereign but would cease to be so is they became the "normal" country that private finance empire wants. Iran would then live under the dictatorship of global private finance like the rest of us that mythically believe we are sovereign nations and individuals.

    I am pleased to see that humanity is at this juncture in spite of the threat of extinction. Our species is crippled by the cult that owns global private finance in the West and even if this process seems quite indirect to me, at least the socialism/barbarism war is being fought.

    Jackrabbit , Jan 10 2020 19:52 utc | 6
    USA stays - as predicted by MoA commenters.

    b foresees an eventual win by Iraq and Iran but that is uncertain and years away.

    USA is not leaving. They believe UN 2249 gives them the right to stay in Syria and Iraq - despite USA claim that ISIS is defeated.

    We will likely see a rebranding of USA troops to NATO, an " ISIS resergence", and a civil war in Iraq.

    !!

    dadoronron , Jan 10 2020 19:55 utc | 7
    A few days ago I saw a tweet that Russia was going to sell S-400s to Iran. Has anyone seen confirmation?
    Abe , Jan 10 2020 20:00 utc | 8
    Good. Iran will star escalating (via proxy force, or maybe even directly if they are feeling bold and determined) and US will start to have casualties. Being nice to bully never works.
    nemo , Jan 10 2020 20:04 utc | 9
    "A force for good!!??" How Orwellian can you get? If you are truly a force for good, then get out as you have been asked to do!
    Sammy , Jan 10 2020 20:09 utc | 10
    The sooner Tehran is glass, the sooner the US can pull out of the ME.
    Zanon , Jan 10 2020 20:13 utc | 11
    Iraq, every parliament party, could start themselves showing they want the americans to leave. They have not done this,
    and this is the reason US give not to leave:

    US is not willing to withdraw troops from Iraq, says Pompeo

    The US argues that the Iraqi parliamentary vote was non-binding, and that its legitimacy was undermined by neither Iraqi Kurds or Sunnis participating.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/10/us-not-willing-to-withdraw-troops-from-iraq-mike-pompeo

    At the same time, that will never occur since kurds and sunnis support the americans.
    Quid pro quo.

    pretzelattack , Jan 10 2020 20:16 utc | 12
    why do sunnis support the americans? i can see it with kurds, who have been playing this game for a long time.
    pretzelattack , Jan 10 2020 20:17 utc | 13
    lofl at "a force for good". same old shit, same old bottle.
    Bubbles , Jan 10 2020 20:17 utc | 14
    New Rome suffers the same maladies as the first. Uprisings in the Provinces.

    Lest we forget, Rome's demands;


    " "First, Iran must declare to the IAEA a full account of the prior military dimensions of its nuclear program, and permanently and verifiably abandon such work in perpetuity."

    "Second, Iran must stop uranium enrichment and never pursue plutonium reprocessing. This includes closing its heavy water reactor."

    "Third, Iran must also provide the IAEA with unqualified access to all sites throughout the entire country."

    "Iran must end its proliferation of ballistic missiles and halt further launching or development of nuclear-capable missile systems."

    "Iran must release all U.S. citizens, as well as citizens of our partners and allies, each of them detained on spurious charges."

    "Iran must end support to Middle East terrorist groups, including Lebanese Hizballah [Hezbollah], Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."

    "Iran must respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi Government and permit the disarming, demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias."

    "Iran must also end its military support for the Houthi militia and work towards a peaceful political settlement in Yemen."

    "Iran must withdraw all forces under Iranian command throughout the entirety of Syria."

    "Iran, too, must end support for the Taliban and other terrorists in Afghanistan and the region, and cease harboring senior Al Qaida leaders."

    "Iran, too, must end the IRG [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] Qods Force's [Quds Force's] support for terrorists and militant partners around the world."

    "And too, Iran must end its threatening behavior against its neighbors – many of whom are U.S. allies. This certainly includes its threats to destroy Israel, and its firing of missiles into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. It also includes threats to international shipping and destructive – and destructive cyberattacks."

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20989/pompeos-12-demands-for-iran-read-more-like-a-declaration-of-war-than-a-path-to-peace


    Saudi millions/ billions for spreading Wahhabi 7th Century violent ideology around the world is A OK though.

    What? It's all about MAGA, right?

    james , Jan 10 2020 20:17 utc | 15
    thanks b... i share jens view on how outrageous usa official words on this are...

    "At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership -- not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East." they just don't give a fuck... everyone here knew that already... as a few of us have been saying - there is no way the usa is going to leave.. they are intent up the same agenda they have been intent on for what seems like forever...

    @ 4 Likklemore quote - "Something is out of focus if they have to keep making justifications for the killing." the liar in command saying he was going to cause trouble at 4 embassies.. jesus what a liar and retard trump is if he thinks anyone who has a brain would believe that b.s.

    @ 10 sammy... the sooner washington d.c. is glass the sooner americans can wake the fuck up..

    Fernando Martinez , Jan 10 2020 20:19 utc | 16
    The Iraquis voted on a non-binding resolution. So by being wishy washy, they won't force the USA to leave anywhere.
    Linda Jean Doucett , Jan 10 2020 20:25 utc | 17
    Who dares to stop them?
    Surely no sane country wants to stand against JUSA.

    Israel is shaking in its boots so its American poodle must stay to protect them. The sooner the world gets rid of the Jewish infestation from their governments the safer the world will be.

    Bubbles , Jan 10 2020 20:29 utc | 18
    Fernando 16

    "The Iraquis voted on a non-binding resolution. So by being wishy washy, they won't force the USA to leave anywhere."


    You should walk a mile in their shoes.

    Then opine.

    powerandpeople , Jan 10 2020 20:30 utc | 19
    As always with the USA President, this is about 2 aspects:
    1. Cutting costs to USA
    2. Making money for USA

    This is the 'leverage' (blackmail, if you prefer)to obtain 'good deals' on the way out the door.

    China (Russia to a limited extent) is providing up-front funding for repair to 'war' damaged infrastructure done by the USA.

    In return, China gets hydrocarbons.

    These are big, expensive projects that China excels at, cutting out the corruption to officials standing in the middle.

    Revamping and extending rail infrastructure in Iraq connecting to Iran and also towards Central Asia and beyond.

    Big oil pipeline projects taking Iraqi oil to Jordan. Later projects taking hydrocarbons through Syria to the Med, and into Turkey as well.

    https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Is-Iraq-About-To-Become-A-Chinese-Client-State.html

    That's why Pres. Trump is jockeying for a small bite of the pie. He has a good chance of getting it. But small.

    Evelyn , Jan 10 2020 20:42 utc | 20
    #10
    Turning Tehran [ substitute : North Korea/Iraq/other designated U.S. enemy] "to glass" in some quarters seems popular.

    Facile, reckless, terrorism run amok.

    Probably the same gene pool spouting "They hate us for our freedoms."

    Lurk , Jan 10 2020 20:43 utc | 21
    @ Jackrabbit | Jan 10 2020 19:52 utc | 6
    We will likely see a rebranding of USA troops to NATO

    Some of their NATO vassals still care about the rule of law and international law. Mikey and Donny might discover that these backward states are "not very helpful" to their cause of rules based order.

    USA runs a serious risk of overplaying its hand and alienating some of their european allies. Likely not all, but almost certainly some. That would create a rift in NATO and possibly the EU and compromise USA control over these organizations and their members.

    PavewayIV , Jan 10 2020 20:45 utc | 22
    Fernando Martinez@16 - You're misunderstanding the situation. The Iraqi parliament did get the majority they needed to pass the resolution as specified in their constitution. They will turn it over to the existing or new PM for implementation. Nothing wishy-washy about it. It's a done deal despite the terrified Kurds and Sunnis not voting to save their own butts from reprisal - either by Iraqi Shia or by the US. I would have done the same thing.

    It is the US that is claiming the resolution is nonbinding (in their 'legal' opinion) because the vote wasn't sufficiently representative (in the mind of the US dual-citizen chickenhawk neocons) - despite the fact that two-thirds of Iraqis are Shia and there was more than enough votes to pass the resolution despite the Sunni and Kurd representatives' absence. The US is pouting and will hold its breath until the Iraqis defy their constitution and obey the will of their American masters. In the meantime, the US has refused to recognize the vote and will oppose any efforts for implementation by the Iraqi PM. Trump or Pompeo or one of those idiots stated that clearly and unambiguously - the US has no plans to leave no matter what.

    I guess we'll see. Plan B for the US is probably to agitate for the original plan of uprisings to partition Iraq into Kurd, Sunni and Shia statelets. The obedient Kurd and Shia leaders will allow eternal US presence and as many bases as the US wants. It will be enough territory to block the feared 'Shia Crescent' - the US will insist the Kurd and Sunni statelets extend from Turkey down the Syrian border to Jordan, blocking any attempts to connect the Shia statelet to Syria. That's the US plan B for this problem if they can't use 'other means' to stay in present-day Iraq for 'anti-ISIS' operations.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 10 2020 20:45 utc | 23
    US was hitting Iraqi militias even back when ISIS still held territory and the militias where driving ISIS back.
    Then the recent strike on the militia's formally incorporated into Iraqi military and the strike that killed the Iraqi and Iranian.... but then the Iraqi's declare Iran's strike on the US base a breach of sovereignty. Iraqi's that should be allied with Iran for the purpose of driving the US out. US will be in Iraq and the Syrian oilfields for quite some time.
    There was the same talk about militia's and whatever hitting US in Syria but that hasn't eventuated and I doubt any thing serious against US will happen in Iraq either. US will have proxies out and about - using its bases as fire support bases with air and artillery to back up its proxies.
    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 20:56 utc | 24
    a narrow parliamentary vote...

    The vote count I saw was unanimous. Clearly, the Evil Outlaw US Empire is throwing as much bullshit at everything in the hopes that some sticks and clogs peoples's minds. The 737 crash is similar in pointing over there instead of looking at what's just occurred at your feet. Now Trump says four embassies were going to be attacked as he further demonstrates he's losing his mind. Lies and Bluster are the hallmarks of a Paper Tiger.

    Meanwhile, what stands for genuine Progressives and the Left are clearly gaining ground as numerous Anti-war rallies took place yesterday and an article appeared in my local rag saying the D-Party Establishment is afraid of a Sanders nomination--2016 in play all over again except no HRC and we know more about the DNC's evilness in not at all being responsive to the public or voting results. IMO, the Political Fight required for genuine change has finally begun and will escalate.

    Globally, the current battles are a new phase of a 3 millennial-long war between the Current Oligarchy and the 99% as to who will be the Sovereign--the people collectively or those who've stolen their wealth. Class War--You Bet! We now have definitive proof of how it works and how long it's been ongoing. What we've yet to see is if the 99% have enough brains and solidarity to undo 3,000+ years of Tyranny.

    Within this article is a photo of Iranian general Ali Amir Hajizadeh standing at a podium in front of a phalanx of 9 flags belonging to the Axis of Resistance. We need to add our own flags to that Alliance for the enemies of Iran are the enemies of all Earth's people and employ the likes of sammy and other Terrorists to do their bidding.

    Kali , Jan 10 2020 20:58 utc | 25
    The Iranians attacked by the US in this episode was always about Iraq being seen as moving out of the American-Euro orbit and into the China-Iran-Russia orbit. So of course they will not voluntarily leave, instead they will either be forced out by attacks or more likely they will force either a change in leadership of Iraq or threaten the leadership or bribe the leadership into accepting permanent occupation for "their safety" ala a Mob Protection Racket. This is exposed here Pax Americana: Between Iraq and A Hard Place
    ben , Jan 10 2020 21:04 utc | 26
    Well, I'm shocked, just shocked, that the U$A won't be leaving as per Iraq's request...NOT!

    Did any serious person believe they would?

    Empire uber alles...

    And still, many will support this regime of cretinous grifters..

    Stonebird , Jan 10 2020 21:08 utc | 27
    Couple of small points;
    1) 32-35 soldiers (4-5 commanders and their command posts - US dixit) were killed in the earlier US attacks, which were heavier in Syria and against the Herzbollah, than those against Iraqian forces on the Syria-Iraqi border. The command posts were eliminated very accurately. This is possibly because they had previously collectively stated that they wanted to eliminate the terrorists in the Anbar desert. (Thought; those "terrorists" may have included embedded "special forces" or mercenaries which the US wanted to protect.)
    2) I believe that Iraq was trying to get the S400, (The one that can "see" F35's) rather than the S300.

    3) OT? Just who gets the profits from the Oil stolen from Syria, and would have a kickback from the oil that was demanded from Iraq (Al-Mahdi statement)? Conventionally we attribute the money going to the "Pentagon" or "CIA". But I seem to remember that the complete Erdogan family was benefitting before they were kicked out. Is it possible that the Syrian oil is now going straight into a slush fund for some Generals or members of the administration? Is that really why the US doesn't want leave? Profits not geo-politics?

    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 21:09 utc | 28
    PavewayIV @22 & Peter AU 1 @23--

    Well, we shall soon see what the Iraqis are made of and where their will lies. I expect we'll begin getting that answer this weekend. It does appear Iraqi Patriots will need to drag their fellows along with them, but IMO none will get a better future unless the Outlaw US Empire is driven from Southwest Asia.

    Das Kommentariat , Jan 10 2020 21:12 utc | 29
    @Lurk | Jan 10 2020 20:43 utc | 21

    I expect some spineless eastern European countries (Romania, Poland, etc.) will lend themselves for this. The other members will tacitly accept the NATO branding ...

    uncle tungsten , Jan 10 2020 21:14 utc | 30
    The last Make America Go Away event was in Ho Chi Minh city.

    It was decisive, the only non binding aspect was the ability of the USA to win.

    What is it about GO AWAY that the USA elite dont understand? I guess, like Joe Biden a fist full of oil makes it comprehensible. Neandertals.

    Likklemore , Jan 10 2020 21:15 utc | 31
    @10 sammy

    Very telling, but you will envy the dead.

    The sooner Iran No. more likely

    the sooner Israhell, stripped to its 1948 boundaries, is glass we will have peace on planet earth. Fighting Israhell's wars have daily cost in blood and treasure. In $ 7 trillions and counting.

    Hmm. Why? running scared.

    Reuters: but Russia denies.
    Russian navy ship 'aggressively approached' U.S. destroyer in Arabian Sea: U.S. Navy
    "DUBAI (Reuters) - A Russian navy ship "aggressively approached" a U.S. Navy destroyer in the North Arabian Sea on Thursday, the U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet said in a statement on Friday.
    [.]
    "The Russian ship initially refused but ultimately altered course and the two ships opened distance from one another," the statement said."

    JB , Jan 10 2020 21:19 utc | 32
    There will be blood.

    No one should cheer this. The people of the Middle East have been bleeding way too long.
    The million dollar question is: how tostop a serial killer on the loose, operating in plain sight, when everyone else is either afraid, in a deal or trying to avoid blowing up the whole place (world).

    It's tough because the serial killer, (together with his partners in crime EU/NATO), have dismantled the existing world order, however fragile it was. The law is no more.

    You would expect that in a situation like this the nations of the world, through the UN, would say - now you must leave Iraq because the Iraqi parliament has spoken. That's the only way the weaker can enforce their decisions agains the stronger peacefully, with the support of the global community. But that doesn't happen because the worst offenders, the serial killers, are members of the UN Security Council. And, the UN General Assembly almost never meets to discuss events crucial for world peace, justice, fairness and equality, such as these.

    When all hinges on force, chaos and blood are in store. It is absolutely immoral, unjust and heinous that the people of Iraq, Iran Syria, Lebanon and others should again fight to their death to set themselves free from the deadly claws of parasitic states that are veto-holding members of the UN body entrusted with maintaining world peace, law and order!!! This entire theatre of the absurd is unbearable and should be a call to action for every single decent human being on this beautiful planet.

    Here's a rarely excellent, succinct piece:' Why the War never Ends" :
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52828.htm

    ben , Jan 10 2020 21:19 utc | 33
    Stonebird @ 27 asked; "Is that really why the US doesn't want leave? Profits not geo-politics?"


    IMO, in this new age of corporate ascendancy, profits drive Geo-Politics

    Peter AU1 , Jan 10 2020 21:22 utc | 34
    karlof1

    Magnier has a few comments on the Iraqi divides at his twitter thread and is exactly what I have thought for the last month or so. Those Iraqi groups that are solidly allied with Iran in the fight against ISIS and US are a small minority and US and Israel have been hitting them with impunity for several years now. Most Iraqi's including Shia seem tied up in small time domestic disputes. No Nasrallah's or Kharmenei's in Iraq. Only Muqtada al-Sadr types. Perhaps Sistani may do something but he also seems very much small time domestic - not interested or not capable in the big picture.

    ben , Jan 10 2020 21:27 utc | 35
    JB @ 32; Kudos JB, an absolutely on target rant. Thanks for the link...
    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 21:28 utc | 36
    JB @32--

    Yes, you're quite correct, there will be blood, just as there's been blood flowing for the last 3,000 years. That's why I wrote our flags must join those of the Axis of Resistance--this War isn't theirs alone; it's every Earthling's War whether they realize it or not.

    james , Jan 10 2020 21:29 utc | 37
    @31 likklemore.. in the videos clearly the usa ship is in the wrong...

    https://www.rt.com/news/477976-us-russian-ships-aggressive-approach/

    Eudoxia , Jan 10 2020 21:30 utc | 38
    What if the government of Iraq asks Russia to assist it in safeguarding its airspace from unauthorized entry? The Russians will bring the equipment and the operators & they are already just across in Syria.
    PJB , Jan 10 2020 21:31 utc | 39
    Totally Orwellian.

    Empire of Chaos, Lies and Deceit.

    "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." George Orwell in '1984'.

    Could any statement better sum up the world we now live in?

    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 21:37 utc | 40
    Peter AU 1 @34--

    Thanks for your reply! The rhetorical counter to the non-Patriot Iraqis will be that the Evil Outlaw US Empire intends to treat them just like the Zionists treat their Palestinian slaves and have demonstrated so already. There are essentially three choices: Fight, help others to fight, pack up and move to another nation as you're no longer an Iraqi.

    William Gruff , Jan 10 2020 21:39 utc | 41
    I have often stated that the United States is suffering from mass insanity and violent psychosis.

    This is not hyperbole. This is a simple factual statement.

    You cannot reason with a rabid dog, and that is what America is right now.

    Bubbles , Jan 10 2020 21:39 utc | 42
    27

    "Just who gets the profits from the Oil stolen from Syria, "

    Best estimates I've seen say the oil fields trump is so bent on denying the Assad government from accessing are so damaged they produce 31,000 bpd at best. Whatever discount price comes from that after it's trucked to some market in Turkey or maybe Iraq, it would be less profitable than trump's Taj mahal casino venture.

    But hey, he's the greatest business man ever. Just ask him?

    It's not about profit, it's about making a dollar here and there to give to the Kurds and keep their America is our friend dreams alive and denying Assad that oil.

    It would cost a great deal of money to return the fields east of the Euphrates to their previous production levels.

    The Netanyahu plan is to deny the Syrian gov't and it's people the revenue from those wells they used to access to pay for their needs. Only the needs of trump and his people matter.

    Joshua , Jan 10 2020 21:43 utc | 43
    The current regime in the United States seems to believe that people are only able to believe what the regime tells them to believe. This is not the case. Even the American people want the US military to withdraw from Iraq, from Syria, from the Middle East.
    Joshua , Jan 10 2020 21:46 utc | 44
    This has been illustrated repeatedly. But, after every 'election', and after every 'poll', the regime chews on the results and rolls it over until they come up with a 'storyline' that says they can do whatever the hell they feel like anyway. More and more people are catching on to this.
    Annie , Jan 10 2020 21:48 utc | 45
    Elijah Magnier in a Tweet today seemed to imply that Al Mahdi didn't stand up to the US forcefully enough and that there is a split between shia and Sunni as to US presence. Some want the US to stay. He also said Iraq needs a stronger PM that will implement US kicking out of Iraq. He also mentioned that Al Mahdi did not give the ok for PMU forces to go up against US in Iraq.
    We will have to see. But if the Iraqi people are demanding US is kicked out then Al Mahdi may be forced to act.
    Jackrabbit , Jan 10 2020 21:50 utc | 46
    PavewayIV @22

    Yeah, that's right.

    As in virtual every representative democracy, the Iraqi government carries out the will of the people as expressed through their representatives. So the vote by the Iraqi Parliament is binding on the Iraqi government, not a foreign government .. duh!

    AFAIK USA is in Iraq at invitation of the Iraqi government but there's no formal agreement (aka SOFA). So the Iraqi government can ask USA to leave at any time.

    Iraq was being nice and diplomatic to invite USA to provide input that helps the Iraqi government determine the timetable for USA to leave. Since USA has refused, we should expect the Iraqi government to demand that USA leave immediately.

    Of course, USA has already stated their reasons for remaining despite any lawful demand that they do so.

    !!

    Cortes , Jan 10 2020 21:51 utc | 47
    ben @33

    Corporate ascendancy's was accurately described in perhaps the greatest novel of the pomp of the USA:


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Space_Merchants

    Pohl's sequel takes it to a terrestrial conclusion.

    Likklemore , Jan 10 2020 21:52 utc | 48
    @ james 37

    Thanks james. Give the u.s. uniformed boys and girls some slack. They are running scared, having to look over their shoulders knowing they are targets and that now things have changed - U.S. stands alone without friends. It's vassal states waiver. after Soleimani killing suddenly, except for IL, the U.S. is alone . article from earlier comment posting is a good read.

    Manny , Jan 10 2020 21:55 utc | 49
    This site is a mountain of bs.
    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 21:56 utc | 50
    james @37--

    Here's b's Tweet on the matter:

    "'Power-driven vessel A approaches the port side of power-driven vessel B. Vessel A is considered the give-way vessel. As the give-way vessel, A must take EARLY and SUBSTANTIAL action to keep clear and avoid crossing the stand-on vessel B.'
    Farragut (A) should have passed behind B."

    As b notes, this is almost an exact repeat of what happened last year. The idiots commenting on the USN's twitter thread are pathetic and clearly don't know squat.

    And speaking of the Russian Navy, Putin's business today began with "a meeting with the Defence Ministry leadership and the Russian Navy commanders to discuss the key areas of short- and long-term development of the Navy. The meeting was held while the Supreme Commander-in-Chief was visiting the Nakhimov Black Sea Naval Academy" after observing/participating in the previous day's naval exercises on the Black Sea. Currently, the USN is rated as "weak and marginal" by the Heritage Institute, a patriotic think tank, which is outwardly displayed by the lack of navigation skills.

    Jackrabbit , Jan 10 2020 21:58 utc | 51
    Annie !45: He also said Iraq needs a stronger PM ...

    I don't think Mahdi's being a caretaker' PM should matter.

    Any democratic government is supposed to carry out the wishes of the people as express by Parliament.

    USA is trying to muddy the waters and throw up BS because they fundamentally WILL NOT LEAVE.

    !!

    Joshua , Jan 10 2020 22:02 utc | 52
    And another thing...
    Did anybody notice how the 'goodguy badguy show' (impeachment dog & pony show) got shoved to the back burner all of a sudden? Now I guess they are going to wait and see how this 'breakout' aggression move is going to pan out for them.
    Ben Zanotto , Jan 10 2020 22:04 utc | 53
    "America is a force for good in the Middle East."

    Recall that the phrase "for good" also has the second meaning of "permanently, forever, or perpetually."

    Surely this was unintentional phrase selection on part of the Imperial spokesman.

    jayc , Jan 10 2020 22:18 utc | 54
    ISIS was the means - the Trojan horse - to justify the permanent garrisoning of NATO in Iraq and Syria. Before Russia's intervention, NATO and politicians from NATO countries were uniform in proclaiming the "fight" against ISIS would be a "generational struggle" which would take at least 20-30 years to achieve victory. Even after major fighting has reduced the organization to almost nothing, this rationale lives on in the guise of a "continuing threat" represented by ISIS' ideology or aspirations. Permanent NATO garrisons in Iraq and Syria remains the extant policy (ISIS always just the pretext). If the European NATO members balk at the Iraq civil war which the US will quietly propose in the interest of supporting this policy, then it is likely the Kurd regions will suffice as a breakaway NATO protectorate.
    ChasMark , Jan 10 2020 22:21 utc | 55
    This information was in a comment on Unz.com
    Can anyone verify?

    ("Iris" = the prequel; the Erebus comment tells a story totally different from what Pompeo, congressmen, MSM etc. are reporting.)

    Killing Inside Iraq to Punish Iran
    Trump-Pompeo foreign policy is not only incoherent, it is insane
    PHILIP GIRALDI • JANUARY 7, 2020 •

    Iris says:
    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/killing-inside-iraq-to-punish-iran/#comment-3650417

    January 8, 2020 at 1:37 pm GMT •
    Iris responded to:

    Now Trump will be able to deescalate and Iran will save its face by claiming 80 or so American soldiers dead

    with:

    "It is good to gather facts, information and try to cross-check it before making educated assumptions on subjects ordinary citizens are not privy to.
    Countless insightful American commenters propose very well-supported cases, but come to opposite conclusions with regard to President Trump's real intentions. How could we then know Iran's strategic roadmap?
    The Iranian reaction was long coming. The writing was on the wall when Hassan Nasrallah, following one too many Israeli strike on Syria, detailed in his Sept 2019 address that the "Resistance Axis" had the capability to hit strategic Israeli targets that he named.
    It is not normal that US sources have not communicated any detail of the consequences of the strikes, so many hours after they took place. The Danes have stated there were "no casualties amongst them", which hints there were casualties amongst other Western nationalities.
    Your cynicism is justified by how real-politik is actually conducted. However, it is also very possible that we are living a cornerstone moment in ME's History, a reverse moment of the 2003 invasion of Iraq."

    • Replies: @Erebus

    Erebus says:
    January 9, 2020 at 10:20 am GMT •
    @Iris

    "Some of what's come out suggests the US has gone full Mafia in response to the last few years' developments in the M.E. There's no geo-political strategy. There's only (bad) gangsterism.
    Countless insightful American commenters propose very well-supported cases, but come to opposite conclusions with regard to President Trump's real intentions.

    Russia's textbook demonstration of how to combine diplomatic acumen and military efficiency in sorting problems has given impetus to a Russian authored, Chinese backed regional security and development proposal that's been making the rounds through the region's capitals since late summer (at least). Promoted by Iran (mostly via Oman) as a new paradigm in M.E. affairs, it's been well received everywhere except Saudi Arabia who've apparently cited their inability to throw off the American yoke as the primary impediment to their overt support. Notwithstanding, the Saudis have been talking quietly with all parties and have reportedly even sent emissaries to Tehran for "informal" talks on the hush-hush. Soleimani was a significant player in these talks, which were being mediated by Iraq.

    In his speech to the Iraqi parliament subsequent to Soleimani's murder, Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi revealed an astonishing tale of the sort of strongarming tactics America has employed in response. His speech was to be carried live on Iraqi TV, but the feed was cut immediately after he started by the Speaker.

    Nevertheless, his words have leaked to the public. In it he told that Trump had demanded 50% of Iraq's oil revenues, or the US wouldn't go ahead with promised infrastructure rebuilding of the country they destroyed. Mahdi refused that proposal and headed to China where he promptly made a deal to rebuild the country. When the US learned of it, Trump called him to demand that the deal be rescinded and when Mahdi refused Trump threatened to unleash violent protests against Mahdi's rule.

    Sure enough, violent protests began shortly thereafter. Again Trump called and when Mahdi again refused to rescind the China deal, Trump threatened him with Maidan-style snipers. Again Mahdi refused, and Iraq's Minister of Defence spoke publicly of "third party" provocateurs killing both protestors and police, threatening to drive the country back into civil war.
    Again Trump called, and Mahdi reports that this time he threatened Mahdi and the Defence Minister with assassination if they didn't shut up about "third party" provocateurs. Meanwhile, Mahdi continued to mediate Iranian-Saudi talks and Soleimani was carrying Iran's response to the latest Saudi message. He was to meet Mahdi later the morning of his assassination.

    The upshot of all that is that the intent behind Soleimani's gangland slaying was to send the US' message to Mahdi specifically, but also to Iran, the Saudis, and anyone else contemplating M.E. rapprochement that murder awaited them if they continued to work towards peace in the region.
    It is not normal that US sources have not communicated any detail of the consequences of the strikes, so many hours after they took place.

    Details are emerging re the Al Assad Air Base attack, and if you're an American strategist they ain't pretty. The lack of casualties notwithstanding, satellite photos show that the Iranian salvo hit targets with a very high level of combat efficiency. Any damage assessment will reveal that technically, Iran can hit whatever it wants to hit.

    Qiam missiles were used. They're a cheap 'n cheerful derivative of the Soviet SCUD, and Iran has 1,000s of them. Hezbollah likely has 1,000s as well, so the picture is even less pretty if you're an Israeli strategist. Furthermore
    Iran informed the Swiss Embassy in Tehran (who represent American interests in Iran) an hour or more before the attack. More than enough time to get personnel out of harm's way. FARS' reports of 80 killed and ~200 injured, frankly look to be a narrative for domestic consumption. It's hard to believe that with the hour+ warning that that many people were hanging around in the line of fire.

    My guess about the delay is that the US is simply stunned.

    However, it is also very possible that we are living a cornerstone moment in ME's History, a reverse moment of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

    I believe that's true regardless of what got hit and the number of casualties. This was a message sending exercise. As unimaginative as it may appear, the salvo sent an unmistakeable signal that went through the region's capitals and beyond. Here's why they're all paying attention

    1. Iran struck American assets directly, in a brazenly overt manner. No plausible deniability, proxies or non-state actors involved. It was a State attack on another State's assets. If there is any doubt that the hit on Suleimani was an act of war, there can be no doubt about Iran's response. The bully got punched in the nose in front of his entourage and they're now waiting to see what he'll do. However

    2. The IRGC's very high level of confidence in its missiles & missile corps is obviously warranted. If the US and its satraps expected amateur hour, they got the diametric opposite – the equivalent of getting your knife shot out of your hand – and that puts the US in a bad spot.

    3. The Qiam salvo was no Kalibrs-from-the-Caspian demonstration of technical prowess, but so far as I can currently tell, more than half of the missiles targetting Al Assad hit bull's eyes and American AD failed to intercept any of them. This stands in stark contrast to Syria's success at knocking down Tomahawks. The Americans claim that the Al Assad airbase had no missile defence systems installed, which seems incredible, but with the silence of the Patriot batteries of Abqaiq looming in the background, all of the USM's regional assets have been exposed as ducks in a barrel. The US simply can't defend them.

    It is clear that with its S300 systems and indigenous air defence in place, Iran can destroy American assets while minimizing its own losses. What's more, Iran's S300s have reportedly been networked into Russia's regional air defence systems, and that installing S400s is being actively considered. With either development, Iran's air space is effectively closed. Iran's status as the pre-eminent regional power has been cemented into place, and with the Kremlin's backing there is no way to dislodge it. Every capital must now run its calculus and begin re-thinking its role in the region, or its relationship with it.
    Without high efficiency air defence, CENTCOM can't defend even itself, never mind the region's oil infrastructure and perverse allied monarchies. That is now plain as day. Remaining perceptions of its ability to provide security guarantees to its satraps are now gone, and so the US' options have been reduced to a choice between escalation, or going home. There's no there there, and everybody now knows it. The message couldn't be clearer.

    Iran has opened the exit door and we're all waiting to see what heads prevail in Washington as the facts settle into them. To keep the Americans focussed, one can expect to see the Iraqi militias begin ratcheting up attacks on American assets in Iraq, and in collaboration with domestic militia's in Syria as well.

    The question now revolves around whether the US needs a thousand cuts to absorb the message that its dominance of the M.E. is over.


    ADKC , Jan 10 2020 22:25 utc | 56
    If the US withdraws from the Middle East the Petrodollar will come to an end and the whole US and the Western financial system collapses. The US and West are trapped by their stupidity in abusing the financial system to fund their wars and build up a level of debt that can never and will never be paid. How can the US leave even if they wanted to?
    Pft , Jan 10 2020 22:25 utc | 57
    Well, the sun rose in the East again today, so why would anyone be surprised the US wont leave Iraq and all that black gold. Heck, we never left Germany, Japan and South Korea and they got nothing but location going for them (as does Iraq)

    As for losing. Wars are not fought with an ending as the principle goal, at least not since WWII. Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace. Welcome to Orwells 1984, sans the boot in Oceania (thus far). Cold War followed by GWOT. When the GWOT began to fizzle a mini Cold War with Russia was started by Obama and AQ was replaced with ISIS. Those are fizzling so Trumps pulled Iran from Obamas dust bin.

    Empires need enemies to hold them together so they can keep feed the MIC beast and keep it from devouring the hand that feeds them. If an enemy does not exist one is created.

    It helps that the majority can be made to believe anything. Ignorance and effective propaganda, the elimination of a free press, and control of education and entertainment make that possible. Nothing can reverse this. Sure, a few might break out of the matrix but they are of no consequence unless they become too visible.

    winston2 , Jan 10 2020 22:34 utc | 58
    27
    The S300 can see F35s just fine.Its not at a fixed model,the appellation is a generic, and denotes a class of missile with a range of 300km.Radars and c&c systems are updated constantly.
    They are not your daddys S300s that Greece never updated, you're in for a rude surprise if you think so.
    Really?? , Jan 10 2020 22:47 utc | 59
    Jen @ 1
    "The sheer arrogance and wilful blindness expressed in the US State Department press statement and WaPo staffer Louisa Loveluck's tweets are astounding beyond belief. "
    +++++++

    One is left gobsmacked and speechless.
    An interloper is told to get the hell out of your house and he retorts: "No, we are here to stay and renew our marriage vows with you!"
    This is insane.
    Surely the world can see that Pompeo and others at State are deranged, out of touch with reality.

    Honestly, one is at a loss for words.

    As ever, more thanks to b for keeping up with all of this.

    chet380 , Jan 10 2020 22:51 utc | 60
    @ Sammy 10

    The sooner Tel Aviv is glass, the sooner the US WILL pull out of the ME.

    Formerly T-Bear , Jan 10 2020 22:57 utc | 61
    @ karlof1 | Jan 10 2020 20:56 utc | 24

    Referring your observations here concerning DNC may be problematic, instead it might have better standing to fact if DLC (Democratic Leadership Committee) is used as it is a construct of the Clintons in their takeover of the D-party for the 1992 election. It is highly unlikely Hillary replaced that organisation for her attempts at high office. It is also highly unlikely Obama had the interest or motive to replace the Clinton organisation in his Presidency, he hardly replaced Bush 43's administration at the end of eight years. All too much of this information has gone down memory holes and no longer carries sufficient significance to matter for the public but should definitely matter to those interested in modern historical developments. Verification may likely be found by analysing the membership of the D-party's financial committee (membership should be matter of public record) and determine their political allegiances
    YMMV

    Really?? , Jan 10 2020 22:59 utc | 62
    "Iraqi's declare Iran's strike on the US base a breach of sovereignty. Iraqi's that should be allied with Iran for the purpose of driving the US out."

    One Iraqi. Two Iraqis .

    No apostrophe for plural.

    Just for possessive, e.g., "Iran's."

    Is that so hard?

    No, it is not hard.

    Abe , Jan 10 2020 22:59 utc | 63
    On completely unrelated note, b, you are aware that your website, as set as it is, gives us government technical ability to identify each and every one of posters here? Regardless where you host your website.

    You website imports contents from ajax.googleapis.com. It is spyware used for tracking users across whole internet, every site that uses google api is voluntarily enabling google to track people so they can build surfing history/profile for everyone.

    google shares that info with us government.

    government compares timestamps of posts here, and can identify people.

    HTTPS website doesn't protects anyone here in this regard.

    Just for posters to know there is technical possibility.

    bjd , Jan 10 2020 23:12 utc | 64
    Subvert, Sabotage, Eliminate.
    bjd , Jan 10 2020 23:19 utc | 65
    Iraq has Trump by the short hairs.
    In a few months the election circus will really get underway. If they're smart and patriottic, the PMF will slowly start hitting US targets, forcing Trump's hand. An increased campaign of pressure.
    Like Tet '68. The Bagdad Olympics.
    Really?? , Jan 10 2020 23:26 utc | 66
    karlof1 @50
    ""'Power-driven vessel A approaches the port side of power-driven vessel B. Vessel A is considered the give-way vessel. As the give-way vessel, A must take EARLY and SUBSTANTIAL action to keep clear and avoid crossing the stand-on vessel B.'
    Farragut (A) should have passed behind B."

    Video was taken on the US ship, right (voice? Looks to me like the Russian ship (top left) was crossing the US ship's bow from port to starboard of US (closer) ship. I.e., from the port side. Not "approaching the port side." So, as far as I can see, the US vessel had the right of way; the Russian ship should have given way/changed course.

    Cf. "1. If another vessel is approaching you from the port -- or left -- side of your boat, you have the right of way and should maintain your speed and direction."

    J-Dogg , Jan 10 2020 23:32 utc | 67
    I am going to go out on a limb and say the reason for all the western obfuscation is that Boeing is already in trouble due to the 737MAX issues. Boeing being a major component in USA economy needs to be protected from the fact they just lost another plane to mechanical/design error.
    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 23:35 utc | 68
    ChasMark @55--

    There's lots of info to verify in those comments. For the most part, they're all correct. The exception comes to Iranian air defences, their indigenous designed S-400 equivalent, overall radar net, EW capabilities, and independent internet communications. The overall conclusion is Iran is far better prepared and equipped than Outlaw US Empire/NATO knew. It should also be reiterated that Iran's under Russia's nuclear aegis, which was publicly stated by Putin and an adjutant and clearly repeated to Pompeo and Trump by both Lavrov and Putin. Furthermore as publicly stated, China has Iran's back fiscally. In other words, Iran and its allies have more oomph collectively than the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals, many of the latter actually desire better relations with the CRI troika.

    Perhaps the key point made is the supposed inability of Saudi to free itself from the Empire's shackles, which actually does make sense when one thinks long term. The logic of Iran's HOPE Proposal is impeccable and is the only genuine route out of the current dilemma. Clearly, it's been determined the Outlaw US Empire is the sole impediment to implementing HOPE and thus must be ousted from its ability to impede. I wrote back in September when HOPE was introduced at the UNGA that Trump would be a fool not to embrace it instead of oppose it as he could then call the Empire a partner in the project. Clearly, he was advised not to do so.

    james , Jan 10 2020 23:40 utc | 69
    @ likklemore and karlof1.. i liked the comment on moa twitter feed - "This was an american driving school marked with a very big "L" means "learner". Please drive carefully with max. consideration."

    @ 66 really? the other video is better then the one shown in b's twitter feed clip.. check it out in the first video of 2 shown on the rt link.. cheers..

    Tony , Jan 10 2020 23:41 utc | 70
    The sooner that fat, lying, smirking terrorist thug Pompeo is sacked or killed, the better. He is a huge liability to our world.
    karlof1 , Jan 10 2020 23:48 utc | 71
    Really?? @66--

    That's the impression you'd get when the USN is crossing the oncoming RuN path. I run into those sorts of helmsmen all the time on the ocean outside of Newport, Oregon. Additionally, with all the incidents of terrible navigation abilities seen over the past 3+ years and the lies made to cover them, the USN has zero credibility just like its parent organization the Outlaw US Empire.

    Figleaf23 , Jan 10 2020 23:53 utc | 72
    It occurs to me that a host country that is no in conflict with an over-staying force can make their life very challenging without having to actually fight them.

    Outlaw any commerce between occupying forces and local businesses. Cut the roads to and from the bases. Fly unarmed drones in the path of their aircraft. Delay, deny, defy any requests for cooperation. Divert streams to flood their bases. Get really creative and make their life hell.

    William Gruff , Jan 11 2020 0:01 utc | 73
    The US Navy never backs down from any challenge! [ video ]
    karlof1 , Jan 11 2020 0:07 utc | 74
    Formerly T-Bear @61--

    Thanks for your reply! From what I observe, there's a lot of political angst within the Empire that Trump's actions and subsequent BigLies have enhanced and brought to the surface. The Act of War was the biggest domestic political error he could have committed, which shows he has zero sense. Sanders is now the #1 D-Party candidate, and he and Gabbard with a genuinely Progressive & Anti-war platform ought to win handily if allowed to.

    You may have seen these one two links I've previously posted dealing with the beginnings of the 2020 election season. The first is the initial episode of a series in which I've seen the second, which is here . The second of the three is very entertaining, and all are just shy of 30 min.

    Hope you're doing well in post-Brexit Ireland!

    ebolax , Jan 11 2020 0:13 utc | 75
    Sadly and unfortunately, the US will only withdrawal after it has suffered another catastrophic loss, similar to what befell the soldiers in Lebanon. This is a criminal enterprise sitting atop the US Military. You would figure people putting their ass on the line would try and understand what they're really fighting for, but alas, most do not find out until after they come home.
    DFC , Jan 11 2020 0:18 utc | 76
    The US has started the chess game in a very poor position, with the pawns and horses deployed too forward in the chessboard (only 5.200 soldiers in Iraq and 10.000 in Kuwait), and the USA military leadership are in a very bad situation, if they try to send massive troops and equipment reinforcement Iran will not be iddle waiting how US is preparing to destroy them as the stupid Saddam did in 1991 and again in 2003, no, Iran will start the war with any pretext before new troops & equipment is deployed in significant amounts.

    On the other hand, if Iran escalate, the CENTCOM cannot support the "lost" garrison in Iraq and Kuwait, they do not have enough forces deployed in the theater, and an airlift operation of this magnitude under fire is very dangerous and a ride through hundreds of miles through hostile terrain under harassment from Iranians and PMU troops "Hezbollah style" (as IDF suffer in 2006), and without heavy armor scort and close air support will be almost suicidal.

    Iranian have been preparing for a war with USA from 1979, but now the situation is better than ever, I do not give a cent on USA now if they do not retreat quickly from Syria and Iraq (if Trump is enough intelligent it will order soon, but I am afraid he wants to play poker once more), and stop to make threats and provocations.
    But they "cannot" retreat, you know, is an electoral year and Trump want to be re-elected above all.

    Checkmate!

    div> Those oil deals Iraq made with China in exchange for Iraqi electrical infrastructure projects are something Trump will not allow and has threatened Iraq with the terrors of the earth. As Karloff1 suggests the Iraqis have few choices, Trumps State department have been blunt... you are vassals and you will do as you are told or you will be punished. That's plain and we can all be thankful for Trumps honesty. The ball is now in the Iraqi court, either refuse to be vassals and fight for your sovereignty or bow your heads and vacate the field.

    Posted by: Harry law , Jan 11 2020 0:30 utc | 77

    Those oil deals Iraq made with China in exchange for Iraqi electrical infrastructure projects are something Trump will not allow and has threatened Iraq with the terrors of the earth. As Karloff1 suggests the Iraqis have few choices, Trumps State department have been blunt... you are vassals and you will do as you are told or you will be punished. That's plain and we can all be thankful for Trumps honesty. The ball is now in the Iraqi court, either refuse to be vassals and fight for your sovereignty or bow your heads and vacate the field.

    Posted by: Harry law | Jan 11 2020 0:30 utc | 77

    juliania , Jan 11 2020 0:33 utc | 78
    I am seeing the position of Iraq against Iran as being very similar to the position of Ukraine vis a vis Russia -- as 'younger' to 'elder brother'. Not as lesser to greater, but as family, the ones nearby. Crimea grabbed onto that lifeline - as well they might!

    Now a new element of the multipolar world is at early stages of being born. And this was put in effect, if we go back and look, immediately up the invasion of Iraq by Bush Jr. But, clearly, Iraq went through more horror, more destabilization than did Ukraine. The latter had a governmental coup resulting in internal strife; Iraq had a military invasion. So, hopefully the Resistance will be patient with it - like Syria, it is in great need of aid, comfort, and reassurance that no further hegemony will be visited upon it. Sovereignty is the issue and rightfully so.

    There are lessons to be learned, after we finish mourning the murders of men who were apparently engaged in the diplomatic efforts to establish this new multipolarity, or at least lay some groundwork for future talks along that line. You don't murder diplomats. Case closed; invaders out! And that is more difficult, more delicate, if up till now you have only yourself survived as a nation by clinging to the skirts of the American empire. Difficult but inevitable.

    Iraq now can look toward Ukraine. Has that country done well taking the unipolar path? Hardly. Did South Vietnam? Hardly. But as spring approaches, how are each changing course? The dust is settling; you can see better. Travel with Pepe over the great mountains following real trading routes, of the centuries past. Bring your own unique assets to the fore and let friends visit and see what it is that makes you you. Another name for the Axis of Resistance is Peace and Prosperity. Mutual benefit. It's coming.

    In this country, the US, long ago there was a mighty empire, the empire of the Anasazis, in the center of the Southwest. They caused to be built mighty edifices and they suborned the surrounding farming peoples because they had power to predict the seasonal changes and supposedly command rain to fall. Everyone believed it and everyone obeyed. For a time. There was no alternative. Until it didn't rain, and it didn't rain. So, the people left, they went where there were rivers, they abandoned the great Anasazi centre. It is in ruins today. But the people have survived.

    We are suddenly in another pivotal moment. And it will be difficult for those of us who willingly or not have benefited from empire. But many of us say with you - invaders out! Peace and blessings to all!

    Walter , Jan 11 2020 0:36 utc | 79
    : Likklemore | Jan 10 2020 21:15 utc | 31

    The COLREGS do not apply to the exceptionals...

    US destroyer blatantly violated international rules for preventing collisions at sea by making a manoeuvre to cross the Russian ship's course in the North Arabian Sea - @MoD_Russia🇷🇺

    ben , Jan 11 2020 0:44 utc | 80
    Cortes @ 47; Thanks for the link. Interesting Si-Fi. Maybe not that far fetched after all..

    Manny @ 49; Welcome. Keep reading, and once you get through middle-school, maybe you'll change your mind.

    Pft @ 57; Good read, thanks!

    Walter , Jan 11 2020 0:58 utc | 81
    Bearing in mind that Pravda ain't what it used to be this policy, described bluntly in article title : "If NATO strikes Kaliningrad, Russia will seize Baltic in 48 hours" if real, would probably extend to the prevention of similar build-up in the matter of the Iraqi and Iranian "MAGA" programs now developing.

    Quote from Pravda> "As soon as we can see the concentration of American aircraft on airfields in Europe - they cannot reach us in any other way - we will simply destroy those airfields by launching our medium-range ballistic missiles at those targets. Afterwards, our troops will go on offensive in the Baltic direction and take control of the entire Baltic territory within 48 hours. NATO won't even have time to come to its senses - they will see a very powerful military buildup on the borders with Poland. Then they will have to think whether they should continue the war. As a result, all this will end with NATO losing the Baltic States," Mikhail Alexandrov told Pravda.Ru describing one of the scenarios for a possible development of events in case of Russia's response to NATO aggression.
    Another variant for the breakthrough of the missile defense system in Kaliningrad provides for a massive cruise missile attack on the Russian territory. According to the expert, Russia has cruise and ballistic missiles that it can launch on the territory of the United States.
    "If the Americans launch a missile attack on Kaliningrad, then we will strike, say, Seattle, where largest US aircraft factories are located. Having destroyed those factories we will deprive the Americans of the possibility to build their aircraft. They will no longer be able to build up their fleet of military aircraft," said Mikhail Alexandrov.
    Russia has efficient air defense systems to intercept cruise missiles. If it goes about a ballistic missile strike, the expert reminded that Russia has a missile defense area in Moscow that can intercept at least 100 missiles and maybe even more, since there are no restrictions associated with the ABM Treaty.


    One might assume the same policy would apply for all Ru, and Iran too, as Iran is critical to the survival of Ru.

    Paul Damascene , Jan 11 2020 1:01 utc | 82
    On the topic of Iran not waiting for a military build up as a precursor to a US assault on Iran...

    I wonder if an intermediate step for Iran might be, in cooperation with the PMU, to threaten to attack any new forces coming into Iraq, taking this to be escalation prior to an invasion, and therefore a threat that must countered before it worsens.

    Medusa - Perseus , Jan 11 2020 1:14 utc | 83
    Posted by: powerandpeople | Jan 10 2020 20:30 utc | 19

    you might be interestted in Gordon Hahn's take:

    https://gordonhahn.com/2020/01/07/russia-the-eurasian-triangle-and-the-soleiman-assassination/

    January 7, 2020
    Russia, the Eurasian Triangle, and the Soleiman Assassination

    ***********************

    Likklemore , Jan 11 2020 1:14 utc | 84
    @ Walter 79

    but there is this query: what are the consequences of taunting? A review of the past year saw the u.s. losing stature and, since 2014, its dollar as world reserve currency being shunned.

    Once that goes. Hmmm, and in the Gulf:

    2015: Reuters Qatar launches first Chinese yuan clearing hub in Middle East

    2017: China will 'compel' Saudi Arabia to trade oil in yuan and that will affect the dollar

    FF
    2019: Abqaig - After the Houthis take down of KSA oil facilities, and failure of US defenses does KSA still feel secure?

    Working closely with Russia, Soleimani was instrumental in the battles for Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.
    Trump, the braggart, stunned the world. Even their special relationship Brits!
    It is reported when Boris was told of Soleimani's murder he said, O, F**K.

    January 3, 2020 everything changed and they know not what they have done on behalf of Israel.

    jiri , Jan 11 2020 1:18 utc | 85
    The attack on al Assad airbase was the US's Suez Moment.

    What remains now is to decide how to dismantle the Empire.

    Harry law , Jan 11 2020 1:20 utc | 86
    An exit from Iraq would make the occupation and theft of oil from Syria untenable,and the land route from Iran to Syria and Lebanon less hazardous. This would be fatal for Israel and will insist the US stay in Iraq. Unfortunately for the US 5,000 will not cut the mustard, how many US troops could Trump put into Iraq to quell an uprising in election year? US bases in the Gulf are extremely vulnerable especially the largest base Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar who many regard as being located in enemy territory. Trump is gambling and many shrinks think he's nuts, I agree..... Psychiatrists: Urgent action must be taken against Trump for creating Iran crisis
    https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/10/615852/Trump-is-%E2%80%98dangerous-and-incapacitated%E2%80%99-Psychiatrists
    Really?? , Jan 11 2020 1:24 utc | 87
    James @ 69

    The two videos don't look like the same situation.
    The first appears to have been shot from the Farragut's port side; the second, from her starboard side.

    And in the first the Russian ship appears to be bearing down on the Farragut off the Farragut's port bow. In the second the Russian ship appears to be overtaking the Farragut, coming up from the starboard side. I don't see how the videos can have been taken at the same time. The rule that seems to apply to the situ in video 1 is:

    "Crossing Situation.

    When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel."

    Since the Russian vessel appears to have the Farragut on her starboard side, the Russian vessel should change course and presumably deflect to starboard. (Once the two vessels were as close as they were, both should have deflected to starboard.) But instead it looks as though the Russian vessel at the last minute deflected to port.

    However, video 2 looks like a totally different situ. So to me it remains unclear what the actual disposition of the vessels was. The videos must have been taken at two different points in the encounter.

    diveshopingoa , Jan 11 2020 1:26 utc | 88
    Thank you b for these great articles and allowing comments.

    I want to nod out to ChasMark | Jan 10 2020 22:21 utc | 55 for a great comment.

    For decades the US has controlled the world through petro dollars and counterinsurgency warfare. They lost every time at this but its more about the money spent and keeping fluidity within economic circles.

    With Iran's missile attack being an eye opener I hope the US is smart enough to know they have lost. MIC spokes person when asked why the base did not protect itself. He said they did not have the hardware to do it. No Patriots because they owned the sky up to that point. What is a Patriot to counterinsurgency. They had a M-901 (TEL) which they got rid of years ago supposedly. It is loaded with six TOW missiles and would generally be used to disable bomb laden vehicles approaching the gate. Counterinsurgency again.

    Those days are over. It is the day of the missile and belt and road economic plans. No longer can air craft carriers hang off the coast to control the skies. How will the stunned US MIC bring in additional troops and equipment. Planes or ships are small targets but highly valuable ones. It is not always easy to know how things happen. Like the ships struck this past year in the gulf or KSA oil infrastructure hit, who did it and how is hard to determine.

    I imagine the MIC is burning the mid-night oil with the realization that they are now in a war they are totally unprepared to fight. They have 15,000 soldiers strung out in Iraq unprotected from missile attack and no way to protect them. They will talk all BS but it is empty and they know it. They do have two things. One is fear and the other nukes.

    There is much talk of weak knees among the Iraqi people and government. That is with good reason. The destruction of city after city. Some they find through the birth of deformed children that some of their cities are radioactive. Of course they are afraid the USA killed a million of them and turned 24 million into refugees. As time goes on they will realize that the bully is not what it was and every new strike by Iran will build the confidence to push the Americans out.

    I wonder if the day of the nuke is coming to an end as well. Temper tantrum Trump decides to nuke either Iran or Iraq the world will speak up. Perhaps strike back as the Russians have said. If the point is the oil and gas in the area and the control of it then nukes will destroy that value.

    If there was a time that America wet itself it is now. If the 9 flags stand together then move as one their cries will drive the heathen from their home. I also believe that if it happens then the USA is done. Played out.

    Richard Steven Hackr , Jan 11 2020 1:27 utc | 89
    "Iran could not have dreamt of a better President to rejuvenate its position domestically and regionally."

    The problem is that Israel could not have dreamt of a better President to get a war with Launched. In fact, Ayelet Shaked, the Israeli Minister of Justice (some irony there), once said as much explicitly, albeit over the issue of the West Bank, not Iran.

    Ayelet Shaked urges Israel to take advantage of Trump and annex West Bank
    https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/aylet-shaked-urges-israel-take-advantage-trump-presidency-annex-west-bank

    Quote:

    In a tweet following a Jerusalem Post conference in New York on Sunday, Ayelet Shaked said it was time for Israel to "establish facts on the ground".
    "There is no better time than now," Shaked, who earlier this month was sacked by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as justice minister, wrote on Twitter.
    "Do not miss Trump's reign - that's what I just said at the Jerusalem Post in New York."

    End Wuote

    This is because Trump is devoted to Israel and devoted to an antipathy to Iran. The more Iran gains ground in the Middle East, the more Israel will push Trump (and any successor to Trump) to attack Iran. And he will do it - either deliberately or out of incompetence - and the difference doesn't matter.

    Really?? , Jan 11 2020 1:31 utc | 90
    It occurs to me that a host country that is no in conflict with an over-staying force can make their life very challenging without having to actually fight them.

    . . .

    Posted by: Figleaf23 | Jan 10 2020 23:53 utc | 72

    ++++++++++++++
    Change all the road and street signs! OK, there are fewer signs in Iraq than there were in Czechoslovakia, but it would still be worth a shot.

    William H Warrick , Jan 11 2020 1:40 utc | 91
    Condo, Dubya's "House Negro", got a Stillborn baby instead.
    Really?? , Jan 11 2020 1:42 utc | 92
    That's the impression you'd get when the USN is crossing the oncoming RuN path. . . .

    Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 10 2020 23:48 utc | 71
    ++++++++++

    Well, when two ships are approaching each other at an angle, they are both crossing each other's path. What counts is, who is going faster and thus will cross the other's bow sooner. It sure looks to me like when they got close the Ru vessel had the Farragut on her (Ru's) starboard side. If the two vessels were going opposite directions but on parallel tracks, they would pass same side to same side (i.e., port to port; starboard to starboard). If they are approaching at an angle, the relative relationship of the two sides will change with the speed of the vessels. You must visualize the situ from each vessel, not one, and gauge speed and relationship when the two courses cross. However, both vessels in proximity have the obligation to take action to avoid a collision. In that situ I believe the default is for both to deflect to starboard.

    Wait to see who says uncle first at sea is a stupid game of chicken. Basically IMO both captains broke the rule of avoiding collisions and endangered their crews and their vessels.

    Lurk , Jan 11 2020 1:45 utc | 93
    Abe | Jan 10 2020 22:59 utc | 63

    The "decentraleyes" addon for firefox mitigates some of these data leaks. Apple IOS users are probably fucked any which way.

    Jen , Jan 11 2020 1:51 utc | 94
    Really @ 66, 87:

    In the video where the Russian ship is in the top left-hand corner, the USS Farragut is moving away from the Russian ship. In that video, the Russian ship is travelling behind the US ship and crosses from the

    Harry law , Jan 11 2020 1:53 utc | 95
    Here is a wonderful and witty must read article by Gary Brecher [the War Nerd] which puts the US predicament in the Gulf into perspective
    "Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack."
    That's right: no defense at all. The truth is that they have very feeble defenses against any attack with anything more modern than cannon. I've argued before no carrier group would survive a saturation attack by huge numbers of low-value attackers, whether they're Persians in Cessnas and cigar boats or mass-produced Chinese cruise missiles. But at least you could look at the missile tubes and Phalanx gatlings and pretend that you were safe. But there is no defense, none at all, against something as obvious as a ballistic missile.
    http://exiledonline.com/the-war-nerd-this-is-how-the-carriers-will-die/all/1/
    Jen , Jan 11 2020 1:55 utc | 96
    Sorry, accidentally posted too early @ 94 after being interrupted. I meant to say that the Russian ship, travelling behind the Farragut, crossed from that ship's starboard side to its portside. This suggests that the Farragut did not give way in the first video when the Russian ship first approached but steamed on ahead and went in front of the Russian ship.
    ben , Jan 11 2020 1:56 utc | 97
    Medusa-Perseus @ 83: Thanks for the link. Despite the authors speaking, in the first paragraph, about Iran's "provocations", it's an informative and well written piece.

    An excerpt;

    "Again, it is high time that Washington get off its high horse and begin to negotiate a new world order with globe's major powers. The prospects for this, however, appear less likely than ever. Unfortunately, when there was still an opportunity to use American power to reshape rather than destabilize the world, the Obama administration chose the latter. With the opportunity to shift course in a mode more imposed by, rather than imposed on the U.S. virtually dissipated, the Trump administration is continuing in the Obama mode of destabilization while falling back on the one-sidedness of the military option–with all the predictable consequences."

    imo , Jan 11 2020 2:14 utc | 98
    For what it is worth...

    An American (a professor at that, but not of culture) once asked back around 2011 the following: "Why do people in the Middle East talk so frequently about humiliation and dignity? Other countries were colonized or lost wars, yet they do not speak about humiliation and dignity. I assume that an answer to this question will help me understand Middle Eastern culture."

    The differences between shame and guilt based cultures are interesting.
    The terminology was popularized by Ruth Benedict in The Chrysanthemum and the Sword , who described American culture as a "guilt culture" and Japanese culture as a "shame culture." The Islamic Middle East is generally a shame based culture.

    In east-west interactions these two distinct worldviews and values systems operate -- i.e. guilt vs shame. For example:

    "Loyalty: All Arabs belong to a group or tribe. Loyalty to the family tribe is considered paramount to maintaining honor. One does not question the correctness of the elders or tribes in front of outsiders. It is paramount that the tribe sticks together in order to survive. Once again, Arab history and folklore are full of stories of heroes who were loyal to the end."

    http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Honour-and-Shame-in-Islam.htm

    In the Eastern view (well Islamic anyway), there is a stronger sense that one has 'it' (honor) by birth and then risks losing it through various shameful actions etc. As distinct from a work ethic stance where working towards something is the goal.

    The main issue at play in the recent Iran-US-Iraqi dynamic from this point of view is not the surface level simpleton MSM narrative of who was the good & bad guys etc. Leave that for the childish unsophisticated 'super hero' mentalities raised on comics.

    Rather, in this case, it is the fact/perception that the Arab Iraqi 'host' failed to uphold the accepted ancient honor codes of protecting an invited guest (well at least for three days). Only barbarians do not understand and play by this value system.

    So, the USA, as the said culturally ignorant actors, is actually not really the core issue in this case. That is just an inconvenient fact of history.

    What is more real and politically charged is the fact that the Iraqi Arab nation (leadership) invited an Iranian (Persian) guest -- allegedly to talk peace deals with the Wahhabi gang -- and failed to uphold/honor the ancient host-guest codes. Even if there was no duplicity involved, the fact remains scratched into the historical record that they failed -- ergo, shame must now be dealt with.

    Therefore, the future events will more than likely unfold one way or another according to the honor-shame etiquette process.

    Now, of course some in the US hierarchy may well know and understand this dynamic and apply it -- and Gregory Bateson used the term "Schismogenesis" in the 1930s and played his part in WW2 within the (then) Office of Strategic Services (OSS), an institutional precursor to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), against Japanese held territories in the Pacific. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schismogenesis )

    Likklemore , Jan 11 2020 2:19 utc | 99
    They went for two:

    AP reports: US tried to take out another Iranian leader, but failed

    LINK
    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. military tried, but failed, to take out another senior Iranian commander on the same day that an American airstrike killed the Revolutionary Guard's top general, U.S. officials said Friday.

    The officials said a military airstrike by special operations forces targeted Abdul Reza Shahlai, a high-ranking commander in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps but the mission was not successful. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss a classified mission.[.]

    Officials said both Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani and Shahlai were on approved military targeting lists, which indicates a deliberate effort by the U.S. to cripple the leadership of Iran's Quds force, which has been designated a terror organization by the U.S. Officials would not say how the mission failed.[.]

    Shocked I am. NOT.

    Parisian Guy , Jan 11 2020 2:20 utc | 100
    There has been a similar incident between US and Russian navies a few months ago.

    Same claims from the USN against the Russians.
    Guess what? The video clearly showed the Russians on the starboard side of the USN ship.

    , This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted. Working... Your comment could not be posted. Error type: Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

    The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

    As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

    Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

    Working...

    Post a comment Name:

    Email:

    URL:
    Allowed HTML Tags:

    < B>Text</B> → Text
    <I>Text</I> → Text
    < U>Text</U> → Text
    <BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
    < A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

    Working... " Update On The Ukrainian Plane Incident Near Tehran | Main

    next page "

    Verify your Comment Previewing your Comment

    [Jan 10, 2020] "Moqtada al-Sadr advices to prepare for the battle by closing all Hashd al-Shaabi offices to avoid offering easy targets to the #US when the decision of armed resistance is decided and if the US refuses to withdraw from Iraq."

    Notable quotes:
    "... Hopefully you are right on the Kurds and Sunnis, but the US ability to enlist proxies has always surprised me. ..."
    "... Newspeak: IRAN APPEARS TO BE STANDING DOWN. Imperial words when attacked directly. ..."
    "... Iran has been patiently demonstrating its capabilities. The following terms came into the vernacular and are associated with those capabilities: Stena Impero/Adryan Darya, Khurais and Abqaiq, RQ-4A Global Hawk, PMU/PMF and many others, and now, Ain al-Asad. ..."
    "... US cannot afford to fight a war with Iran directly. If so, it would have to fight from Hindu Kush to the Mediterranean, so, just be ready for skirmishes here and there. I see RSH is posting here now. He has been predicting a war between the two nations by the end of 2010, end of 2011, end of 2012, and on and on, on other sites. Haven't read enough of his comments to see if it's now by the end of 2020? ..."
    "... But I think both Iran and North Korea will keep the pressure on the US high throughout this election year, entirely intentional of course. ..."
    "... Damn, I'm late to the party again. It's probably been said already, but Iran's response is pure genius. Early warning to try to avoid casualties, speaks volumes about the differences between the evil empire and the Iranians. ..."
    "... Unless one entertains the belief that Iran's missile attacks all misfired and missed their human targets-which appears to be the view that the friends of Israel and those who believe in the indefatigability of the US military, hold- then what Iran has just provided is spectacular confirmation that, short of a nuclear attack, there is nothing that the US can do, but go. ..."
    "... Clearly its bases cannot be defended, that is what the craters and smashed buildings are telling them. If the Secretary of Defense wants to wait for a written request to leave the country that is his privilege-he's lucky not to be living there- but there is no way that the US forces can stay there. They have become unwelcome guests. ..."
    "... People voted for Trump primarily for two reasons: Obama and the D-Party had stabbed them in the back allowing millions to lose their homes while the fraudulent banksters got away scot-free and with $Trillions too-boot, and they knew Clinton was a deranged warmonger while Trump talked reasonably about the Outlaw US Empire's many Imperial Follies. In short, Trump was seen by many as the lesser of two evils. No, I voted Green. ..."
    "... It sounds as though Abdel Mahdi is being forced into the popular opinion. The US is being reduced into its best defended bases. Where from there, when those bases are isolated? ..."
    "... The US did not escalate today. Trump's speech was all bluster and falsehood, directed almost exclusively to American audience in the interest of domestic politics. ..."
    "... It is also possible that what Pompeo and Esper and Netanyahoo are seeking to accomplish is to maintain the highest level of tension possible without precipitating actual war. This is because all parties recognize that actual war with Iran would entail the destruction of much of Israel's infrastructure and many thousands of Israeli casualties, and these are prices too high to pay for the overthrowing of even the "evil" Iranian "regime". ..."
    "... The Iranians have just displayed that they can and will attack targets with precision. No message? Seriously? You've missed the bigger picture. Iran have scored one on the Strategic level. What you're also missing is that Iraq is moving even closer to Iranian and Chinese-Russian orbit. ..."
    "... Iran communicated its intent to strike US targets in Iraq directly to the Iraqi Prime Minister a full two hours prior to the missiles being launched; Iraq then shared this information with US military commanders, who were able to ensure all US troops were in hardened shelters at the time of the attack. ..."
    Jan 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Clueless Joe , Jan 8 2020 21:43 utc | 296

    psychohistorian , Jan 8 2020 21:43 utc | 297
    About whether any died in the Iran attack

    Iran told the US they were going to attack and what areas.

    Of course the US military is not going to abandon its radar installation is it? Maybe there were a few others stationed where survival was iffy. If they die then not surprising that their deaths were covered up because they were told those areas would be hit.

    That is the reason we had the Trump presser today that was projection of, we got the message, don't do any more...stand down.

    If the latest about bombs in the Baghdad Green Zone are accurate then either more Iran or some other factor wanting to trigger US response or ???

    We are all still alive so China/Russia is backstopping Iran from nuclear attack seems clear

    karlof1 , Jan 8 2020 21:44 utc | 298
    Events continue

    Bubbles , Jan 8 2020 20:18 utc | 231

    With those poor disenfranchised American folks putting all their hope in trump and his agenda, are they realizing the benefits of their support yet? I've read 71% of young Americans can't afford to buy a home now the money men have inflated prices to the extreme. Trump's people, the money men.

    Did they vote for him as a show of support for his granting every wish Netanyahu ever had?

    Did they vote for him to support Netanyahu's aggression against his chosen foe, which clearly was an effort to cast the spear of fear into the hearts of Israeli's?

    Demagogues and wannabes set about to rule by making the population afraid.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 8 2020 20:25 utc | 233
    Walter
    Thanks for the explanation.In layman terms and I would guess many professions and trades, speed and velocity are interchangeable.

    Laguerre. Hopefully you are right on the Kurds and Sunnis, but the US ability to enlist proxies has always surprised me. There always seem to be corruptible people anywhere, plus others interested in using the US for their small time ends. But Iraq has changed with the killing of Soleimani. Anti US may end up trumping local grievances for the majority.

    Sakineh Bagoom , Jan 8 2020 20:26 utc | 235
    Newspeak: IRAN APPEARS TO BE STANDING DOWN. Imperial words when attacked directly.

    What is lost in all this debate whether this was Kabuki or not is that Iran went toe to toe with the empire -- directly. Pissed on the red lines set by the empire a day earlier. No need for proxies. No need for false flag from the enemies. Iran has justified legality under article 51 as Zarif pointed out.

    Terror needed re-balancing, and for now, balance of terror has been established.

    Iran has been patiently demonstrating its capabilities. The following terms came into the vernacular and are associated with those capabilities: Stena Impero/Adryan Darya, Khurais and Abqaiq, RQ-4A Global Hawk, PMU/PMF and many others, and now, Ain al-Asad.

    US cannot afford to fight a war with Iran directly. If so, it would have to fight from Hindu Kush to the Mediterranean, so, just be ready for skirmishes here and there. I see RSH is posting here now. He has been predicting a war between the two nations by the end of 2010, end of 2011, end of 2012, and on and on, on other sites. Haven't read enough of his comments to see if it's now by the end of 2020?

    Alexander P , Jan 8 2020 20:28 utc | 236
    Posted by: oldhippie | Jan 8 2020 19:26 utc | 204

    The stage rigging is on plain display here. This was arranged and calculated well in advance. Arranged by someone with power to compel obedience, who would expect perfect compliance to a scheme with many moving parts. So may parts of this might have gone wrong, with WW3 as the consequence of a mistake.

    I completely agree, I think this entire thing is a precursor to something much worse, such as a massive false-flag that will let this conflict turn hot. Last night was but a small taste or using Iranian wording 'mosquito bite'. People are quick to dismiss that war would never be a viable option for the powers that be. When really they have been setting the stage for global calamity for quite some time. The Iran/US/Israel theater is just the first of a number of dominoes that have been carefully set up (NK-US; India-Pakistan; Russia-NATO) to name but a few. Tensions are intentionally being ratcheted up for a major cascading explosion that will ripple around the globe. The ponzi economy bubble-game they have created during the last 20 years is part of that plan to trigger even worse panic among the populace. Having said all of this, it seems to me that they want Trump to still be re-elected before things really turn sour, so there seems to be some time left, which is why the current de-escalation.

    But I think both Iran and North Korea will keep the pressure on the US high throughout this election year, entirely intentional of course.

    Mao , Jan 8 2020 20:28 utc | 237 ben , Jan 8 2020 20:30 utc | 238
    Damn, I'm late to the party again. It's probably been said already, but Iran's response is pure genius. Early warning to try to avoid casualties, speaks volumes about the differences between the evil empire and the Iranians.

    Thanks b, and all. So much better coming here, as opposed to the MSM..

    Mao , Jan 8 2020 20:30 utc | 239 WJ , Jan 8 2020 20:31 utc | 240
    It all depends now on Trump's reelection strategy: Will he run on bringing the troops home or will he run on another Middle East war.

    Posted by: somebody | Jan 8 2020 16:34 utc | 108

    Were I a zionist advisor/donor to Trump, I would advise/blackmail him to do the following: Run a 2020 campaign premised on bringing the troops home, and indeed bring enough of them home (or to Germany) to make that plausible. Then, after you win the election, stage some action or invent some pretext (we control the media and can help you do both) that requires you do go to war against Iran. It will be unpopular and many of your citizens will die. But you are in your second term, we have given you lots of $$$$, and we still have that video tape from the late 1990s of you and the 14-year old eastern european girl.

    bevin , Jan 8 2020 20:34 utc | 243
    Unless one entertains the belief that Iran's missile attacks all misfired and missed their human targets-which appears to be the view that the friends of Israel and those who believe in the indefatigability of the US military, hold- then what Iran has just provided is spectacular confirmation that, short of a nuclear attack, there is nothing that the US can do, but go.

    Clearly its bases cannot be defended, that is what the craters and smashed buildings are telling them. If the Secretary of Defense wants to wait for a written request to leave the country that is his privilege-he's lucky not to be living there- but there is no way that the US forces can stay there. They have become unwelcome guests.

    Of course there are still those who tell us that Iraqi public opinion is divided and that the sunni and the Kurds will be willing agents of the imperialists: I don't think so. What the US has done is to unite Iraqis around nationalist objects and to close the carefully opened divide between the sects. They have come full circle since 2003 and now even the Iraqi members of ISIS (who are a small minority in the Foreign Legion of Uighurs, Bosnians, Albanians, Chechens and wahhabis) will not serve as a wedge to keep Iraqis fighting each other.

    Or Iran: it has taken trillions of dollars and decades for Washington to knock it into the densest politicians' heads but now everyone understands:

    "The US is our enemy, it sees us as untermenschen to be exterminated like vermin. In order to survive and to rebuild our lives and communities we must expel them. We have no choice.

    First we will ask the Swiss Embassy to tell them to leave, then we will pass resolutions in Parliament, and put on fireworks displays at their bases. And they will leave."

    And next will come the matter of Palestine, and the al quds Soleimani's brigade was named for. Israel is beginning to look very lonely now in the Levant- a very abusive, violent and noisy neighbour given to trespassing and larceny.

    Zanon , Jan 8 2020 20:35 utc | 244
    Jackrabbit
    That's all he got. Sanctions?

    Sanctions are act of war. Trump has Conducted a War against Iran for many months with sanctions https://twitter.com/jricole/status/1214912785999650816

    Mina , Jan 8 2020 20:37 utc | 245
    #219
    As in "sanctions vs the EU doing business with"
    Peter AU1 , Jan 8 2020 20:38 utc | 246
    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/08/iranian-messages-behind-attacking-us-bases-in-iraq-and-the-consequences/

    "Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi -- according to well-informed sources in Baghdad -- answered that "this act may carry devastating results on the Middle East: Iraq refuses to become the theatre for a US-Iran war".

    The Iranian official replied: "Those who began this cycle of violence are the US, not Iran; the decision has been taken."

    Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi informed the US forces of the Iranian decision. US declared a state of emergency and alerted all US bases in Iraq and the region in advance of the attack.

    Iran bombed the most significant US military base in Iraq, Ayn al-Assad, where just in the last two days, the US command had gathered the largest number of forces. Many US bases, particularly in Shia controlled areas and around Baghdad, were evacuated in the last days for security reason towards Ayn al-Assad, a base that holds anti-nuclear shelters."

    Peter AU1 , Jan 8 2020 20:44 utc | 250
    Easy to see why the US approved of Mahdi as president. A pissweak appeaser how can do no more than write letters to the UN. If he doesn't want a US Iran war in Iraq then he should be booting the yanks out as the Yanks are based there purely on Iran's account. What Mahdi is doing amounts to providing sanctuary to the US on Iran's border.
    Lone Wolf , Jan 8 2020 20:47 utc | 254
    I stand corrected, Magnier has just posted, now b has a source to copy and paste.
    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/08/iranian-messages-behind-attacking-us-bases-in-iraq-and-the-consequences/

    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 8 2020 20:38 utc | 246

    Thank you, Peter AU1!

    Lone Wolf

    james , Jan 8 2020 20:47 utc | 255
    @ lone wolf... bye, bye... why would anyone bother to get worked up about your post? lol..
    Cynica , Jan 8 2020 20:48 utc | 256
    @Lone Wolf #248

    Some of us are indeed quite skeptical that there were no casualties reported whatsoever - by "Western" media outlets. This commenter previously noted that it would be in the US establishment's interest to downplay the impact of the attack as much as possible. Furthermore, to those who are wondering how true casualty figures could be prevented from being leaked, all the US government has to do is declare such information classified, at which point it becomes a serious felony (think Snowden or Manning) to leak it.

    Passer by , Jan 8 2020 20:48 utc | 257
    Posted by: DFC | Jan 8 2020 19:20 utc | 198

    >>b) The fact that Suleimani was a national hero for a nation of 82 million people and also for 150 million of shia around the world, mourned by millions in the streets, make a bigger Trump "victory" over the Iranian "regime", and it is a powerful advice to the others leaders and commanders in the world that try to fight or oppose to USA.

    This is not a gain, the US will be hated and sabotaged by the many shia groups across the world (a young and growing demographic with combat experience), and there will be many covert activities against it all over the place. An american dying here and there, a US company sabotaged here and there. The US will be very busy fighting shia groups undercover just as it needs to compete with Russia and China, not to mention the security costs. They will probaly give tacit support to some sunni groups already fighting the US. Taliban getting manpads and targeting info of US presence in Afghainstan? No, this is not good news for the US. It means having more and more enemies everywhere and dividing resources into many fronts. Taking on Russia, China and Iran/Iraq/Shia Crescent will to be too much. The debt clock is ticking.

    >>g) The retaliation of the PMU lob some katyusha rockets in the backyard of few US bases

    No, they will simply make it impossible for any american to get out outside of the Embassy in Iraq. Workers, companies etc. will be driven out by harrassment.

    >>h) Trump is defiant about not leaving Iraq, I think at the end they will go but after they have a very good deal. Of course it is all about the Iraqi oil, in exchange for the American blood and money wasted in Iraq. Iraq has the biggest oil reserves in the world and USA want a good chunk of them, they never ever leave "giving" all of them to the Chinese or Iranians or anybody else. Trump does not want US soldiers in Iraq, but he wants the oil above anything else (it is condition "sine qua non" to maintain the Empire)

    You don't know much about Iraq then. Iraq (including elites) does not want the US there. It does not want to be a battlefield and it does not want to have Shia leaders attacked in their own country. This is a Red Line for iraqis. Muqtada Al Sadr, the most influential person in Iraq, who kicked the arse of the US occupation in 2004-2007 wants the US and even the Embassy out, embargo on US products, etc. Iraqi shia are not intimidated by the US, far from it, they have seen far worse in the past and that only angered them even more. Iraq will move into China-Russia-Iran orbit, this is a done deal. A chinese delegation just arrived in Iraq to provide security solutions for the country.

    >> Trump has now the full enthusiastic support of the AIPAC and all the others powerful Israeli lobby he will have more money than required for the election. He has demonstrated he is the best possible POTUS for Israel.

    This is debatable, considering that 80 % of US jews voted against Trump. Israel is not the only issue for US jews. They do not like loud mouthed white racists. US media is an expression of US jews and US media continues to be highly hostile to Trump. If they really wanted him, media would be supportive.

    j) In the short term USA will leave Syria and in the medium term Iraq, OK, but they never ever leave "all the region", they need to be there to maintain the "American Way of Live" (US $ as reserve currency)

    There will be less US presence in the Middle East and it won't be just Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan drawdowns. US debt levels point to unsustainable military spending. That is, in 2025 - 2030 the US will be forced to cut military spending significantly. Even now the US is cutting the number of ships due to lack of money. So in general, there will be less US presence everywhere, including in the Middle East. Too much debt.

    As for Iraq, the US HQ for Iraq was just evacuated to Kuwait, US forces stopped operations and are confinded to their bases (defacto house arrest), and US workers are fleeing the country.

    >>If nothing dramatically change, I expect a crushing victory of Trump in the coming US election, he has all the cards now in his hand, and he will not waste them.

    And i see people in the US and all over the world deeply disturbed by his behavior. People want calm, not never ending drama, threats, sexism, racism, vulgarity and warmongering. Women (majority of voters) do not like such behavior. Women and minorites are very hostile to Trump due to this. Republicans lost the House and it looks like someone did not get the message. Even if Trump somehow wins, this will lead to civil war like situation in the US due to the changing demographics. Minorities DO NOT want Trump and their numbers will only be increasing far into the future. This means growing division and infighting within the US.

    You look at this through the eyes of an American, that is why you see it as 'kabuki' and 'face saving' weakness, because as an American your answer is wholesale slaughter. Body count is your metric of success.

    Zanon , Jan 8 2020 20:59 utc | 262
    Two Rockets Fall in Green Zone in Iraqi Capital of Baghdad
    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202001081077983534-two-blasts-sirens-heard-in-iraqi-capital-of-baghdad-reports/

    If this is Iran. This is getting ridiculous and wont be appreciated by Iraq.

    Nemo , Jan 8 2020 21:01 utc | 264
    America cant retaliate because they know the next blow will bleed. They were unable to intercept the incoming missiles because US point defenses are mediocre. Once a projectile gets past the patriots, not a difficult task, they will only face some rail mounted stingers and 20 mm cannon. Has to be scarry for the dumb grunts.
    albagen , Jan 8 2020 21:02 utc | 265
    @ lone wolf

    I won't attack you or your post, but it is no good manners to enter somebody's house and speak shit. If your family didn't teach you this, and your education didn't manage to polish the animal in you, then you are a lost case, no need to deal with you. You'll live on mother earth and then die without having any good impact whatsoever.

    good riddance

    karlof1 , Jan 8 2020 21:03 utc | 266
    Bubbles @231--

    People voted for Trump primarily for two reasons: Obama and the D-Party had stabbed them in the back allowing millions to lose their homes while the fraudulent banksters got away scot-free and with $Trillions too-boot, and they knew Clinton was a deranged warmonger while Trump talked reasonably about the Outlaw US Empire's many Imperial Follies. In short, Trump was seen by many as the lesser of two evils. No, I voted Green.

    If you read Dr. Hudson's analysis and the transcript from this show , you'll be informed about a great many facts about the Outlaw US Empire that the vast majority of its citizens are unaware of thanks to BigLie Media. And I could direct you to dozens of additional examples that provide even more facts about the situation, the core of the problem and potential solutions.

    Many good academics and others have tried to inform the USA's citizenry about the why of their dilemma and provided suggestions for action, but their voices are drowned out by what's known as the Establishment Narrative parroted by BigLie Media. IMO, Sanders would have waxed Trump in 2016, but he was clearly the target of a conspiracy to prevent him from gaining the D-Party nomination. IMO, the only reason he endorsed Clinton was he knew of the sort of domestic mayhem Trump and the R-Party would wreck upon his supporters. Please, before denigrating the masses within the Evil Outlaw US Empire, try to discover why they behave as they do. Lumping them all together and calling them dumb fuck-wits won't get you anywhere and only serves to exacerbate things.

    Laguerre , Jan 8 2020 21:03 utc | 267
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 8 2020 20:38 utc | 246

    It sounds as though Abdel Mahdi is being forced into the popular opinion. The US is being reduced into its best defended bases. Where from there, when those bases are isolated?

    I am reposting this.

    The Iranians care, they sent some of the best gifts, and they're rightly proud of them. A Hallmark kinna time, the Holidays n all that.

    Brother, I have read about the problems involved, I took some calculus long ago, but the engineering behind what Iran has demonstrated in very complex. They put the clown on the back foot.

    There is a realignment of strategy in the Celestial Heaven of DC... Not a change in goal, just "whaddwe do now, how r we gunna smash 'em"...

    jayc , Jan 8 2020 21:06 utc | 270
    The US did not escalate today. Trump's speech was all bluster and falsehood, directed almost exclusively to American audience in the interest of domestic politics. If anything, the call for NATO to step up was an indication the Americans planned to step back. The Turks will not be pouring troops into Iraq. Trump was referring to the Europeans. The US corporate media continues to report with subdued tone, with ultra hawkish Fox News continuing to describe the struck airbases as "Iraqi facilities".
    WJ , Jan 8 2020 21:10 utc | 273
    Cynica @256,

    "This commenter previously noted that it would be in the US establishment's interest to downplay the impact of the attack as much as possible."

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is true only on the assumption that the "US establishment" is united in seeking to de-escalate with Iran. But evidence suggests that at least two members of that establishment--Pompeo and Esper--are clearly not interested in de-escalation (notwithstanding Pompeo's directive to the embassies). For them, the death of dozens of American soldiers could only be a good thing, as it would easily be manipulated in the press to motivate the US populace's desire for retribution.

    It is also possible that what Pompeo and Esper and Netanyahoo are seeking to accomplish is to maintain the highest level of tension possible without precipitating actual war. This is because all parties recognize that actual war with Iran would entail the destruction of much of Israel's infrastructure and many thousands of Israeli casualties, and these are prices too high to pay for the overthrowing of even the "evil" Iranian "regime".

    De-escalation with Iran hurts Netanyahoo; actual war with Iran hurts Netanyahoo. What helps Netanyahoo is the constant threat of war with Iran along with the public perception that only he, of all Israeli politicians, has the sufficient resolve to face down the Persian menace. Because I am of the view that Israel is not just an outpost of the US empire but in many cases the tail that wags the dog of this empire, I fully expect that the US will continue to seek to ride the escalation-de-escalation wave with Iran until Netanyahoo either stabilizes his domestic position in Israel or loses it altogether.

    Passer by , Jan 8 2020 21:13 utc | 275
    Posted by: Zanon | Jan 8 2020 19:25 utc | 203

    Actually the Hashd Al Shaabi militia, which is part of the Iraqi military, wanted to take over the US Embassy and Mehdi threatened to resign over that, not over the protests in general or the harrassment of the US Embassy. This is why iraqi troops stayed out as the Embassy was besieged. He chose China over the US for reconstruction of Iraq and made very compromising remarks about Trump (how he threatened to put snipers killing people in Iraq, how Soleimani was there for diplomatic mission as peace envoy, etc.)

    Mehdi is an expression of the majority Shia sentiment in Iraq - it is him who came to Parliament to demand a resolution for US withdrawal from the country. As for Iraqi Shia sentiment, numerically speaking, 80 % of Shia MPs and the PM demanded a US withdrawal from the country.

    David G , Jan 8 2020 21:14 utc | 276
    What is the source for the account that the Swiss embassy received advance warning of the missile strike?

    I haven't seen it elsewhere. I'm not saying that to knock it, but since b doesn't mention or link to a source, and I don't see it discussed in comments, I'd like to know where he got that report from.

    CNN.com says Iran reached out through various channels, "including through Switzerland and other countries", but after the strike, to make known there was nothing else on the way.

    Walter , Jan 8 2020 21:19 utc | 279
    WJ | Jan 8 2020 21:10 utc | 273

    If Iran succeeds in forcing the Empire out, then obviously the zionists would be unable to remain more than briefly. But without zionists Jews and Arabs have always got along reasonably well... So we may imagine "Israel" going through a "phase change" when Empire departs...because then the decent people can have a say in things, then justice may prevail - something all Abrahamic Creeds respect and call for as a basic foundation. Of course there's nothing pretty about a civil war in Israel, or as it is at present "forward operating base zion"

    Zanon , Jan 8 2020 21:28 utc | 283
    Passer By

    Actually what they said about foreign troops:

    "The Iraqi government must work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason."

    Mahdi have tried hard to disband PMU. https://thedefensepost.com/2019/07/03/iraq-mahdi-orders-popular-mobilization-units-integration/ That is the PMU that US, Israel have been bombing for months.

    Ian2 , Jan 8 2020 21:34 utc | 288
    Ian Dobbs | Jan 8 2020 19:52 utc | 223:
    This entire episode has been an absolute disaster for the Iranians. They sent no message to the US.

    Disaster? How so? The Iranians have just displayed that they can and will attack targets with precision. No message? Seriously? You've missed the bigger picture. Iran have scored one on the Strategic level. What you're also missing is that Iraq is moving even closer to Iranian and Chinese-Russian orbit.

    The missile strikes is also a message to Iranian regional competitors. I can guarantee you Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have taken notice.

    I'm expecting more small level attacks on US assets in Iraq and it'll likely spread to other neighboring countries. Death by a thousand cuts. In the end, the US will have no choice but to leave Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.

    David G , Jan 8 2020 21:38 utc | 291
    Further from mine @276:

    Scott Ritter also says there was advance warning, though via the Iraqi government, not mentioning the Swiss embassy in Tehran:

    Iran communicated its intent to strike US targets in Iraq directly to the Iraqi Prime Minister a full two hours prior to the missiles being launched; Iraq then shared this information with US military commanders, who were able to ensure all US troops were in hardened shelters at the time of the attack.
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/477759-iran-missiles-subdued-us-strike/

    Ritter doesn't give his sourcing either. Of course the significant thing is that such advance warning was given at all. I'd just like to know how solid the factual basis is, and to what extent it is officially confirmed by any of the relevant governments.

    Clueless Joe , Jan 8 2020 21:43 utc | 296

    If US soldiers were killed by the attack, this can't be hidden forever; sooner or later, coffins will go back home and families will be informed. Specially if it's as high as 80. Though for the moment, the Pentagon can stay quiet, and won't publicly acknowledge it, the bodies will have to come back to the US and be buried - as far as I know, they're not janissaries but US military, most have relatives, friends and family and can't be disappeared just like that.

    The USS Liberty is a different situation: the US didn't hide for decades that people were lost in the bombing, it didn't acknowledge that it was a deliberate attack. Pretty much the opposite case to the present one.

    [Jan 10, 2020] This reckless act by Trump administion was the last gasp of "Full spectrum dominance" doctime and probably means end of Pompeo career as the Secretary of state and Trump as the President

    See also With his imminent attack fake Mike Pompeo Is a Dollar Store Kissinger
    Notable quotes:
    "... This is not just about how to de-escalate – it's about recognizing that America fundamentally needs to change its disastrous course. Even if de-escalation of the acute tensions is possible, the risks will remain as long as the United States pursues a reckless policy. ..."
    Jan 10, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

    This crisis was sparked by Donald Trump. Trump withdrew from the deal that had stopped Iran's nuclear weapons program, leading Iran to restart its nuclear program. Trump ramped up economic pressure and sent more US troops to the region, and tensions grew. Then the US killed Gen Qassem Suleimani , signaling a significant escalation, to which Iran responded with an attack on Iraqi bases where US and Iraqi troops are stationed.

    ass="inline-garnett-quote inline-icon ">

    ass="inline-garnett-quote inline-icon ">

    America is far worse off today towards Iran and in the Middle East than it was when Trump took office

    It is up to Congress and the American people to force Trump to adopt a more pragmatic path. For too long Congress has ceded to the executive branch its authority to determine when America goes to war, and the current crisis with Iran is exactly the kind of moment that requires intense coordination between the legislative and executive branches. The president cannot start a war without congressional authorization, and with the erratic Trump in office, Congress must make that clear by cutting off the use of funds for war with Iran.

    This is not just about how to de-escalate – it's about recognizing that America fundamentally needs to change its disastrous course. Even if de-escalation of the acute tensions is possible, the risks will remain as long as the United States pursues a reckless policy. America is far worse off today towards Iran and in the Middle East than it was when Trump took office – even worse off than we were on 1 January 2020. Today, Iran is advancing its nuclear program, America has suspended its anti-Isis campaign, Iraq's parliament has voted to evict US troops from the country, and we are in a dangerous military standoff with Iran.

    Digging out of this hole will be difficult and this administration is not capable of it. Over the long run, future administrations will need to reorient America's goals and policies. America needs to re-enter the nuclear deal and begin negotiations to strengthen it; work with partners like Iraq – without a large US troop presence – in countering potential threats like a resurgence of Isis; and adopt a broader regional policy that focuses on protecting US interests and standing up for human rights and democracy rather than picking sides in a regional civil war between dictatorships like Iran and Saudi Arabia.

    Achieving US goals in the region will not be possible with a mere de-escalation of tensions – we need to find a new path towards Iran and the Middle East.

    [Jan 10, 2020] Pompeo Goes Full Neocon The National Interest

    Jan 10, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    November 18, 2019 Topic: Security Region: Americas Tags: Mike Pompeo Donald Trump Foreign Policy Iran Sanctions Pompeo Goes Full Neocon

    Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pivots back from America First.

    by Matthew Petti Follow Matthew Petti on Twitter L ,

    https://lockerdome.com/lad/12130885885741670?pubid=ld-12130885885741670-935&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fnationalinterest.org&rid=duckduckgo.com&width=896

    [Jan 10, 2020] Mike Pompeo Fed the Rats in the President* s Brain to Get What He Wanted by Charles P. Pierce

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.esquire.com
    America's top diplomat does not seem to think his job is to prevent war.

    The Washington Post dives deeply into what is laughingly called the administration*'s "process" leading up to the decision to kill Qasem Soleimani with fire last week. In short, all the "imminent threat" palaver was pure moonshine. According to the Post, this particular catastrophe was brewed up for a while amid the stalactites in the mind of Mike Pompeo, a Secretary of State who makes Henry Kissinger look like Gandhi.

    The secretary also spoke to President Trump multiple times every day last week, culminating in Trump's decision to approve the killing of Iran's top military commander, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, at the urging of Pompeo and Vice President Pence, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

    Pompeo had lost a similar high-stakes deliberation last summer when Trump declined to retaliate militarily against Iran after it downed a U.S. surveillance drone, an outcome that left Pompeo "morose," according to one U.S. official. But recent changes to Trump's national security team and the whims of a president anxious about being viewed as hesitant in the face of Iranian aggression created an opening for Pompeo to press for the kind of action he had been advocating.

    Poor Mike was morose. So, in an effort to bring himself out of the dumps, Mike decided to keep feeding the rats in the president*'s head.

    Trump, too, sought to draw down from the Middle East as he promised from the opening days of his presidential campaign. But that mind-set shifted on Dec. 27 when 30 rockets hit a joint U.S.-Iraqi base outside Kirkuk, killing an American civilian contractor and injuring service members. On Dec. 29, Pompeo, Esper and Milley traveled to the president's private club in Florida, where the two defense officials presented possible responses to Iranian aggression, including the option of killing Soleimani, senior U.S. officials said.
    The whole squad got involved on this one.
    Alex Wong Getty Images
    Trump's decision to target Soleimani came as a surprise and a shock to some officials briefed on his decision, given the Pentagon's long-standing concerns about escalation and the president's aversion to using military force against Iran. One significant factor was the "lockstep" coordination for the operation between Pompeo and Esper, both graduates in the same class at the U.S. Military Academy, who deliberated ahead of the briefing with Trump, senior U.S. officials said. Pence also endorsed the decision, but he did not attend the meeting in Florida.

    First-in-His-Class Mike Pompeo knows his audience. There's no question that he knows how to get what he wants from a guy who doesn't know anything about anything, and who may have gone, as George V. Higgins once put it, as soft as church music. This, I guess, is a skill. Of course, Pompeo's job is easier because the president* is still a raving maniac on the electric Twitter machine. A handy compilation:

    Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader who had just killed an American, & badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including recently hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking our Embassy, and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!
    They attacked us, & we hit back. If they attack again, which I would strongly advise them not to do, we will hit them harder than they have ever been hit before!
    The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!

    And, this, perhaps my favorite piece of presidentin" yet.

    These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!

    You have been informed, Congress. You have been informed, Iran.

    No, really. It's down there below the cat videos.

    Trump Dished Some Bullsh*t on Iran

    Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page here .

    Charles P. Pierce Charles P Pierce is the author of four books, most recently Idiot America, and has been a working journalist since 1976.

    [Jan 09, 2020] Opposing War With Iran: Three Reasons by Anthony DiMaggio

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... War will allow Trump to claim the mantle of "national" wartime leader, while diverting attention away from his impeachment trial. And in light of the intensification of belligerent rhetoric from this administration, war appears to be increasingly likely. ..."
    "... The American people have a moral responsibility to question not only Trump's motives, but to consider the humanitarian disaster that inevitably accompanies war. ..."
    "... is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Lehigh University. He holds a PhD in political communication, and is the author of the newly released: The Politics of Persuasion: Economic Policy and Media Bias in the Modern Era (Paperback, 2018), and Selling War, Selling Hope: Presidential Rhetoric, the News Media , and U.S. Foreign Policy After 9/11 (Paperback: 2016). He can be reached at: [email protected] ..."
    Jan 09, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    The U.S. stands at the precipice of war. President Trump's rhetorical efforts to sell himself as the "anti-war" president have been exposed as a fraud via his assault on Iran. Most Orwellian of all is Trump's claim that the assassination of Iranian General Qassam Soleimani was necessary to avert war, following the New Year's Eve attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. In reality the U.S. hit on Soleimani represents a criminal escalation of the conflict between these two countries. The general's assassination was rightly seen as an act of war , so the claim that the strike is a step toward peace is absurd on its face. We should be perfectly clear about the fundamental threat to peace posed by the Trump administration. Iran has already promised "harsh retaliation" following the assassination, and announced it is pulling out of the 2015 multi-national agreement prohibiting the nation from developing nuclear weapons. Trump's escalation has dramatically increased the threat of all-out war. Recognizing this threat, I sketch out an argument here based on my initial thoughts of this conflict, providing three reasons for why Americans need to oppose war.

    #1: No Agreement about an Iranian Threat

    Soleimani was the head of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – the Quds Force – a clandestine military intelligence organization that specializes in paramilitary-style operations throughout the Middle East, and which is described as seeking to further Iranian political influence throughout the region. Trump celebrated the assassination as necessary to bringing Soleimani's "reign of terror" to an end. The strike, he claimed, was vital after the U.S. caught Iran "in the act" of planning "imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel."

    But Trump's justification for war comes from a country with a long history of distorting and fabricating evidence of an Iranian threat. American leaders have disingenuously and propagandistically portrayed Iran as on the brink of developing nuclear weapons for decades. Presidents Bush and Obama were both rebuked, however, by domestic intelligence and international weapons inspectors , which failed to uncover evidence that Iran was developing these weapons, or that it was a threat to the U.S.

    Outside of previous exaggerations, evidence is emerging that the Trump administration and the intelligence community are not of one mind regarding Iran's alleged threat. Shortly after Soleimani's assassination, the Department of Homeland Security declared there was "no specific, credible threat" from Iran within U.S. borders. And U.S. military officials disagree regarding Trump's military escalation. As the New York Times reports :

    "In the chaotic days leading to the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran's most powerful commander, top American military officials put the option of killing him -- which they viewed as the most extreme response to recent Iranian-led violence in Iraq -- on the menu they presented to President Trump. They didn't think he would take it. In the wars waged since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable."

    "Top pentagon officials," the Times reports , "were stunned" by the President's order. Furthermore, the paper reported that "the intelligence" supposedly confirming Iranian plans to attack U.S. diplomats was "thin," in the words of at least one U.S. military official who was privy to the administration's deliberations. According to that source , there is no evidence of an "imminent" attack in the foreseeable future against American targets outside U.S. borders.

    U.S. leaders have always obscured facts, distorted intelligence, and fabricated information to stoke public fears and build support for war. So it should come as no surprise that this president is politicizing intelligence. He certainly has reason to – in order to draw attention away from his Senate impeachment trial, and considering Trump's increasingly desperate efforts to demonstrate that he is a serious President, not a tin-pot authoritarian who ignores the rule of law, while shamelessly coercing and extorting foreign leaders in pursuit of domestic electoral advantage.

    Independent of the corruption charges against Trump, it is unwise for Americans to take the President at his word, considering the blatant lies employed in the post-9/11 era to justify war in the Middle East. Not so long ago the American public was sold a bill of goods regarding Iraq's alleged WMDs and ties to terrorism. Neither of those claims was remotely true, and Americans were left footing the bill for a war that cost trillions , based on the lies of an opportunistic president who was dead-set on exploiting public fears of terrorism in a time of crisis. The Bush administration sold war based on intelligence they knew was fraudulent, manipulating the nation into on a decade-long war that led to the murder of more than 1 million Iraqis and more than 5,000 American servicemen, resulting in a failed Iraqi state, and paving the way for the rise of ISIS. All of this is to say that the risks of beginning another war in the Middle East are incredibly high, and Americans would do well to seriously consider the consequences of entering a war based (yet again) on questionable intelligence.

    #2: The "War on Terrorism" as a Red Herring

    U.S. leaders have long used the rhetoric of terrorism to justify war. But this strategy represents a serious distortion of reality, via the conflation of terrorism – understood as premeditated acts of violence to intimidate civilians – with acts of war. Trump fed into this misrepresentation when he described Soleimani's "reign of terror" as encompassing not only the alleged targeting of U.S. diplomats, but attacks on "U.S. military personnel." The effort to link the deaths of U.S. soldiers in wartime to terrorism echoes the State Department's 2019 statement , which designated Iran's Quds Force a "terrorist" organization, citing its responsibility "for the deaths of at least 603 American service members in Iraq" from "2003 to 2011" via its support for Iraqi militias that were engaging in attacks on U.S. forces.

    As propaganda goes, the attempt to link these acts of war to "terrorism" is quite perverse. U.S. military personnel killed in Iraq were participating in a criminal, illegal occupation, which was widely condemned by the international community. The U.S. war in Iraq was a crime of aggression under the Nuremberg Charter, and it violated the United Nations Charter's prohibition on the use of force, which is only allowed via Security Council authorization (which the U.S. did not have), or in the case of military acts undertaken in self-defense against an ongoing attack (Iraq was not at war with the U.S. prior to the 2003 invasion). Contrary to Trump's and the State Department's propaganda, there are no grounds to classify the deaths of military personnel in an illegal war as terrorism. Instead, one could argue that domestic Iraqi political actors (of which Iraqi militias are included, regardless of their ties to Iran) were within their legal rights under international law to engage in acts of self-defense against American troops acting on behalf of a belligerent foreign power, which was conducting an illegal occupation.

    #3: More War = Further Destabilization of the Middle East

    The largest takeaway from recent events should be to recognize the tremendous danger that escalation of war poses to the U.S. and the region. The legacy of U.S. militarism in the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia, is one of death, destruction, and instability. Every major war involving the U.S. has produced humanitarian devastation and mass destruction, while fueling instability and terrorism. With the 1979 Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, U.S. support for Mujahedeen radicals led to the breakdown of social order, and the rise of the radical Taliban regime, which housed al Qaeda fundamentalists in the years prior to the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. The 2001 U.S. invasion of Afghanistan contributed to the further deterioration of Afghan society, and was accompanied by the return of the Taliban, ensuing in a civil war that has persisted over the last two decades.

    With Iraq, the U.S. invasion produced a massive security vacuum following the collapse of the Iraqi government, which made possible the rise of al Qaeda in Iraq. The U.S. fueled numerous civil wars, in Iraq during the 2000s and Syria in the 2010s, creating mass instability, and giving rise to ISIS, which became a mini-state of its own operating across both countries. And then there was the 2011 U.S.-NATO supported rebellion against Muammar Gaddafi, which not only resulted in the dictator's overthrow, but in the rise of another ISIS affiliate within Libya's border. Even Obama, the biggest cheerleader for the war, subsequently admitted the intervention was his "worst mistake," due to the civil war that emerged after Gaddafi's overthrow, which opened the door for the rise of ISIS.

    All of these conflicts have one thing in common. They brought tremendous devastation to the countries under assault, via scorched-earth military campaigns, which left death, misery, and destruction in their wake. The U.S. is adept at destroying countries, but shows little interest in, or ability to reconstruct them. These wars provided fertile ground for Islamist radicals, who took advantage of the resulting chaos and instability.

    The primary lesson of the "War on Terror" should be clear to rationally minded observers: U.S. wars breed not only instability, but desperation, as the people victimized by war become increasingly tolerant of domestic extremist movements. Repressive states are widely reviled by the people they subjugate. But the only thing worse than a dictatorship is no order at all, when societies collapse into civil war, anarchy, and genocide. The story of ISIS's rise is one of citizens suffering under war and instability, and becoming increasingly tolerant of extremist political actors, so long as they are able to provide order in times of crisis. This point is consistently neglected in U.S. political and media discourse – a sign of how propagandistic "debates" over war have become, nearly 20 years into the U.S. "War on Terrorism."

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    Trump followed up the Soleimani assassination with a Twitter announcement that the U.S. has "targeted" 52 additional "Iranian sites," which will be attacked "if Iran strikes any Americans or American assets." There's no reason in light of recent events to chalk this announcement up to typical Trump-Twitter bluster. This President is desperate to begin a war with Iran, as Trump has courted confrontation with the Islamic republic since the early days of his presidency.

    War will allow Trump to claim the mantle of "national" wartime leader, while diverting attention away from his impeachment trial. And in light of the intensification of belligerent rhetoric from this administration, war appears to be increasingly likely.

    The American people have a moral responsibility to question not only Trump's motives, but to consider the humanitarian disaster that inevitably accompanies war. War with Iran will only make the Middle East more unstable, further fueling anti-American radicalism, and increasing the terror threat to the U.S. This conclusion isn't based on speculation, but on two decades of experience with a "War on Terror" that's done little but destroy nations and increase terror threats. The American people can reduce the dangers of war by protesting Trump's latest provocation, and by pressuring Congress to pass legislation condemning any future attack on Iran as a violation of national and international law.

    To contact your Representative or Senator, use the following links:

    Join the debate on Facebook

    More articles by: Anthony DiMaggio

    Anthony DiMaggio is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Lehigh University. He holds a PhD in political communication, and is the author of the newly released: The Politics of Persuasion: Economic Policy and Media Bias in the Modern Era (Paperback, 2018), and Selling War, Selling Hope: Presidential Rhetoric, the News Media , and U.S. Foreign Policy After 9/11 (Paperback: 2016). He can be reached at: [email protected]

    [Jan 09, 2020] Mike Pompeo is officially the Secretary of State. Apparently, he is also unofficially the Secretary of Defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the very model of a modern major bureaucrat by Charles P. Pierce

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.esquire.com

    Mike Pompeo is officially the Secretary of State. Apparently, he is also unofficially the Secretary of Defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the very model of a modern major bureaucrat. He's running things on war and peace these days because the president* sure as hell isn't. He's a Dollar Store Kissinger with nobody to restrain him. And he has no compunction whatsoever about lying in public -- about Barack Obama, and about the definition of the word "imminent," which, to Pompeo, seems to extend back in time to the Persian Empire and forward into the second term of the Malia Obama administration.

    Pompeo met the press on Tuesday and everything he said was completely worthless. For example, did you know that the Iran nuclear deal hastened the development of Iran's nuclear capacity, but that pulling out of it, and frying the second-highest official of their government, slowed it down? Mike Pompeo knows that.

    President Trump could not be more clear. On our watch, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon and, when we came into office, Iran was on a pathway that had been provided by the nuclear deal, which clearly gave them the opportunity to get those nuclear weapons. We won't let that happen...It's not political. The previous administration made a different choice. They chose to underwrite and appease. We have chose to confront and contain.

    But that's not political, you appeasing, underwriting wimps who worked for 11 years to get a deal with these people. And that goes for all you appeasing, underwriting European bastards as well, who don't think this president* knows anything about anything. And, as to the whole imminence thing, well, everything is imminent sometime, and it's five o'clock somewhere.

    "We know what happened at the end of last year in December ultimately leading to the death of an American. If you're looking for imminence, you needn't look no further than the days that led up to the strike that was taken against Soleimani. Then you had in addition to that what we could clearly see was continuing efforts on behalf of this terrorist to build out a network of campaign activities that were going to lead potentially to the death of many more Americans. It was the right decision, we got it right."

    Yeah, they got nothing -- except the power, of course. The last time we had a terrible Republican president determined to lie us into a war in the Middle East, he and his people at least did not do so by employing utter and transparent gibberish. Times change.

    [Jan 09, 2020] Mike Pompeo is officially the Secretary of State. Apparently, he is also unofficially the Secretary of Defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the very model of a modern major bureaucrat by Charles P. Pierce

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.esquire.com

    Mike Pompeo is officially the Secretary of State. Apparently, he is also unofficially the Secretary of Defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the very model of a modern major bureaucrat. He's running things on war and peace these days because the president* sure as hell isn't. He's a Dollar Store Kissinger with nobody to restrain him. And he has no compunction whatsoever about lying in public -- about Barack Obama, and about the definition of the word "imminent," which, to Pompeo, seems to extend back in time to the Persian Empire and forward into the second term of the Malia Obama administration.

    Pompeo met the press on Tuesday and everything he said was completely worthless. For example, did you know that the Iran nuclear deal hastened the development of Iran's nuclear capacity, but that pulling out of it, and frying the second-highest official of their government, slowed it down? Mike Pompeo knows that.

    President Trump could not be more clear. On our watch, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon and, when we came into office, Iran was on a pathway that had been provided by the nuclear deal, which clearly gave them the opportunity to get those nuclear weapons. We won't let that happen...It's not political. The previous administration made a different choice. They chose to underwrite and appease. We have chose to confront and contain.

    But that's not political, you appeasing, underwriting wimps who worked for 11 years to get a deal with these people. And that goes for all you appeasing, underwriting European bastards as well, who don't think this president* knows anything about anything. And, as to the whole imminence thing, well, everything is imminent sometime, and it's five o'clock somewhere.

    "We know what happened at the end of last year in December ultimately leading to the death of an American. If you're looking for imminence, you needn't look no further than the days that led up to the strike that was taken against Soleimani. Then you had in addition to that what we could clearly see was continuing efforts on behalf of this terrorist to build out a network of campaign activities that were going to lead potentially to the death of many more Americans. It was the right decision, we got it right."

    Yeah, they got nothing -- except the power, of course. The last time we had a terrible Republican president determined to lie us into a war in the Middle East, he and his people at least did not do so by employing utter and transparent gibberish. Times change.

    [Jan 09, 2020] AGAINST THE BLITZ WOLF -- RUSSIAN REINFORCEMENTS FOR IRAN'S DEFENCE

    Notable quotes:
    "... National Defence, ..."
    "... National Defence ..."
    Jun 25, 2019 | johnhelmer.net

    The Russian General Staff has reinforced the air defences for Russians at the Iranian nuclear reactor complex at Bushehr, on the Persian Gulf, according to sources in Moscow. At the same time, Iran has allowed filming of the movement of several of its mobile S-300 air-defence missile batteries to the south, covering the Iranian coastline of the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. More secretly, elements of Russian military intelligence, electronic warfare, and command and control advisers for Iran's air defence systems have been mobilized to support Iran against US and allied attacks.

    The range of the new surveillance extends well beyond the S-300 strike distance of 200 kilometres, and covers US drone and aircraft bases on the Arabian peninsula, as well as US warships in (and under) the Persian Gulf and off the Gulf of Oman. Early warning of US air and naval-launched attacks has now been cut below the old 4 to 6-minute Iranian threshold. Counter-firing by the Iranian armed forces has been automated from attack warning and target location.

    This means that if the US is detected launching a swarm of missiles aimed at Iran's air-defence sites, uranium mines, reactors, and military operations bunkers, Iran will launch its own swarm of missiles at the US firing platforms, as well as at Saudi and other oil production sites, refineries, and pipelines, as well tankers in ports and under way in the Gulf.

    "The armed forces of Iran," said a Russian military source requesting anonymity, "have air defence systems capable of hitting air targets at those heights at which drones of the Global Hawk series can fly; this is about 19,000 to 20,000 metres. Iran's means of air defence are both foreign-purchased systems and systems of Iran's own design; among them, in particular, the old Soviet system S-75 and the new Russian S-300. Recently, Iran transported some S-300's to the south, but that happened after the drone was shot down [June 20]. Russian specialists are working at Bushehr now and this means that the S-300's are also for protection of Bushehr."


    Flight distance between Bushehr and Bandar Abbas is about 570 kms. From Bandar Abbas southeast to Kuhmobarak, the site of the Iranian missile firing against the US drone, is another 200 kms.

    Last Thursday, June 20, just after midnight, a US Global Hawk drone was tracked by Iran from its launch at an airbase in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), south of Dubai. The take-off and initial flight route appear to have been more than 300 kms from Iranian tracking radars. Four hours later, the aircraft was destroyed by an Iranian missile at a point at sea off Kuhmobarak. Follow the route tracking data published by the Iranian Foreign Minister, Javad Zarif here .


    KEY: blue line=drone flight path; yellow line=Iranian Flight Information Region (FIR); red line=Iranian territorial waters; green line=Iranian internal waters; yellow dots=Iran radio warnings sent; red square=point of impact. Source: Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif: https://twitter.com/ The US claims the point of impact was outside the red line.

    Additional tracking data on the US drone operation have been published in a simulation by the Iranian state news agency, Fars. The news agency claims the successful strike was by the Iran-made Khordad missile, an S-300 copy; the altitude has not been reported (design ceiling for the aircraft is 18,000 metres). The Russian military source says there is now active coordination between Russian and Iranian military staffs. "About coordination, of course there is participation of Russia in intelligence-sharing because of Bushehr and ISIS. We have a long and successful partnership with Iran, especially in terms of fighting against international terrorism." Two days after the drone incident, Russian specialist media published Iranian video footage of the movement of S-300's on trailer trucks. This report claims that although the S-300's are wheeled and motorized for rapid position changes, the use of highway transporters was intended to minimize road fatigue on the weapons.

    Iranian military sources have told western reporters they have established "a joint operations room to inform all its allies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan of every step it is adopting in confronting the US in case of all-out war in the Middle East."

    Maps published to date in open Russian military sources show the four main anti-air missile defence groups (PVO) on Iranian territory, and the strike range of their missiles. The 3 rd and 4 th PVOs are now being reinforced to oppose US reinforcements at sea and on Saudi and Emirati territory.


    Key: yellow=units of the main air-defence (PVO) groups; split blue circles=military bases; blue diamond=nuclear industry sites; red rings=kill range for missiles; solid red=command-and-control operations centres. Source: Anatoly Gavrilov, "Before the storm", National Defence, April 2019

    The weaknesses and vulnerabilities of Iranian defences against US air attack are, naturally, state secrets. The open-source discussion by Russian air-defence expert Anatoly Gavrilov can be followed here . According to Gavrilov writing in March, the expected plan of US attack will be the use of precision missiles and bombs at "primary targets plants for the production and processing of nuclear fuel, uranium mines, production for its enrichment, refineries, other industrial centers. But initially [the objective] will be to suppress (completely destroy) the air defense system. The mass use of cruise missiles for various purposes and guided aircraft bombs will disable the control system of Iran's troops and suppress the system of reconnaissance and anti-aircraft missile fire. In this case, the task of the attacking side will be the destruction in the first two or three days of 70% to 80% of the radar, and after that, up to 90% manned aircraft will begin to bomb only after the complete suppression of the air defense system. The West protects its professional pilots, and it does not matter that the civilian population of Iran will also suffer."

    The main Iranian vulnerability facing American attack, reports Gavrilov, is less the range, volume and density of firepower with which the Iranians can respond than the relatively slow time they have shown to date for processing incoming attack data, fixing targets, and directing counter-fire. "In today's conditions of organization and conduct of rapid air combat, a high degree of automation of the processes of collection, processing, transmission and exchange of radar information, development of solutions for repelling strikes, and conducting anti-aircraft missile fire is extremely necessary."

    RANGE AND ALTITUDE OF MAIN IRANIAN AIR DEFENCE WEAPONS


    CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
    Horizontal axis, range in kilometres for each identified weapon; vertical axis, altitude of interception. Source: Anatoly Gavrilov, National Defence , April 2019

    Gavrilov does not estimate how far the Iranians have been able to solve by themselves, and with Russian help, the problems of automation and coordination of fire. To offset whatever weakness may remain, he recommends specific technical contributions the Russians can make. These include the technology of electronic countermeasures (ECM) to jam or deflect US targeting signals and ordnance guidance systems.

    While Gavrilov believes the Iranian military have already achieved high enough density of fire against incoming weapons, he isn't sure the range and altitude of Iranian radars will be good enough to match the attack risks. To neutralize those, he recommends "Russian-made electronic warfare systems. The complex of EW systems is able to significantly reduce the ability of attack aircraft to search for, detect and defeat ground targets; disrupt the onboard equipment of cruise missiles in the GPS satellite navigation system; distort the readings of radio altimeters of attack aircraft, cruise missiles and UAV's [unmanned aerial vehicle, drone] "

    In briefings for sympathetic western reporters, Iranian commanders are emphasizing the Armageddon option; that is, however weak or strong their defences may prove to be under prolonged US attack, the Iranian strategy is not to wait. Their plan, they say, is to counter-attack against Arab as well as American targets as soon as a US missile attack commences; that's to say, at launch, not inflight nor at impact.


    Left: Kremlin photograph of the Security Council meeting at the Kremlin on the afternoon of June 21. Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/ Right: Major General Mohammad Baqeri, Iran's armed forces chief of staff.

    The day following the US attack and Iranian success, President Vladimir Putin chaired a meeting of his regular Security Council members in Moscow. The military were represented by the Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu. The US attack on Iran was the main issue on the table. "The participants," reported the Kremlin communiqué, "discussed, in particular, the developments in the Persian Gulf. They expressed serious concern over the rising tension and urged the countries involved to show restraint, because unwise actions could have unpredictable consequences in terms of regional and global stability."

    Unpredictable consequences in Russian is being translated in Farsi to mean the cessation of the oil trade in the Persian Gulf. "As oil and commodities of other countries are passing through the Strait of Hormuz, ours are also moving through it," Major General Mohammad Baqeri, the Iranian chief of staff, said on April 28. "If our crude is not to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, others' [crude] will not pass either."

    [Jan 09, 2020] Iraq Reopens Negotiations For Purchase Of Russian S-300 Air Defense Systems Zero Hedge

    Jan 09, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    by Tyler Durden Thu, 01/09/2020 - 12:55 0 SHARES

    With Iraq's airspace being frequently violated by American and even Israeli bombing raids against the country's paramilitary units backed by Iran of late, Iraq has for the last several months considered purchasing Russian air defense and missile systems, including both the S-300 and more advanced S-400, however, it has been met with fierce pressure from the US.

    And now Russian media is reporting authorities in Baghdad have formally resumed talks to possibly acquire the S-300 systems. Head of the Iraqi Parliament's Security and Defense Committee, Mohammad Reza, has indicated negotiations were renewed following the latest attacks initiated nearly two weeks ago on Shiite Popular Mobilization Forces .

    "The issue was supposed to be solved several months ago after attacks on Shiite militia al-Ḥashd ash-Sha'bi [Popular Mobilization Forces, PMF] bases in Baghdad and other provinces created the need for such air defenses", the lawmaker was quoted in Russia's Sputnik as saying.

    Russian S-300 anti-air systems file.

    It was first revealed in September that Baghdad was mulling the purchase of the S-300. This after a summer in which Israel brazenly launched multiple drone and aerial attacks on PMF bases which at first had 'mysterious' origins , but was later confirmed to have the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) behind them.

    According to Iraqi official sources, those initial purchase talks were quashed when Washington vehemently objected , also at a moment parliament officials and the public were increasingly angered over unilateral US bombing raids against PMF sites conducted without the knowledge or approval of Iraq's government and military.

    At the point when talks were initiated with Russia in September, international reports counted nine strikes in total on Iraq's paramilitary forces -- in some cases while they were allegedly operating just across the country's western border with Syria.

    Prior alleged Israeli airstrike on a military base southwest of Baghdad which took place in August. Image source: AP.

    This had also fueled speculation that the Trump administration had greenlighted stepped up Israeli attacks on Iranian proxies in the region as an alternative to direct war with Iran.

    However, this simultaneously bolstered the ongoing political movement in Iraqi parliament to have US troops expelled once in for all, especially over charges they had invited in and cooperated with a foreign power to attack sovereign Iraqi soil.

    [Jan 09, 2020] Protecting the Dollar Standard is the main national security objective of the USA

    Jan 09, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    vk , Jan 9 2020 19:35 utc | 43

    @ Posted by: Cynica | Jan 9 2020 19:20 utc | 38

    I agree that, today, protecting the Dollar Standard is the main national security objective of the USA. That is so because issuing the universal fiat currency is a conditio sine qua non of keeping the financial superpower status.

    I also agree that the Petrodollar is the base that sustains the Dollar Standard.

    But I disagree with the rest:

    1) the Cold War didn't begin in 1945, but in 1917 - right after the October Revolution. There's overwhelming documental evidence of that and, in fact, the years of 1943-1945 was the only break it had. Until Stalingrad, the Western allies were still waiting to see if the USSR and the Third Reich could still mutually anihilate themselves (yes, it is a myth the Allies were really allies from 1939, but that's not a very simple demonstration);

    2) in the aftermath of WWII, the USA emerged as both the industrial and financial superpower in the capitalist world (i.e. the West). But this was an accidental - and very unlikely - alignment of events. The USA always had imperial ambitions from its foundation (the Manifest Destiny), but there's no evidence it was scheming to dominate the world before 1945. The American ascension was more a fruit of the European imperial superpowers destroying themselves than by any American (or Jewish, as the far-right likes to speculate) design;

    3) the USSR had nothing to do with Bretton Woods. BW was a strictly capitalist affair. And it could not be any difference: the USSR was a socialist country, therefore, it didn't have money-capital (money in the capitalist system has three functions: reserve of value, means of exchange and means of payment). The only way it had to trade with the capitalist half of the world was to exchange essential commodities (oil) for hard currency, with which it bought what it needed for its own development (mainly, high technological machines which it could copy and later develop on). So, the USSR didn't "balk" at BW - it was literally impossible for it to pertain to the agreement.

    Cynica , Jan 9 2020 19:20 utc | 39

    @Kali #22

    Michael Hudson is not the only one who's come to understand that maintaining the reserve-currency status of the US dollar (the "dollar hegemony") is the primary goal of US foreign policy. Indeed, it's been the primary goal of US foreign policy since the end of World War II, when the Bretton Woods agreement was put into effect. Notably, the Soviets ended up balking at that agreement, and the Cold War did not start until afterwards. This means that even the Cold War was not really about ideology - it was about money.

    It's also important to note that the point of the "petrodollar" is to ensure that petroleum - one of the most globally traded commodities and a commodity that's fundamental to the global economy - is traded primarily, if not exclusively, in terms of the US dollar. Ensuring that as much global/international trade happens in US dollars helps ensure that the US dollar keeps its reserve-currency status, because it raises the foreign demand for US dollars.

    vk , Jan 9 2020 19:35 utc | 43
    @ Posted by: Cynica | Jan 9 2020 19:20 utc | 38

    I agree that, today, protecting the Dollar Standard is the main national security objective of the USA. That is so because issuing the universal fiat currency is a conditio sine qua non of keeping the financial superpower status.

    I also agree that the Petrodollar is the base that sustains the Dollar Standard.

    But I disagree with the rest:

    1) the Cold War didn't begin in 1945, but in 1917 - right after the October Revolution. There's overwhelming documental evidence of that and, in fact, the years of 1943-1945 was the only break it had. Until Stalingrad, the Western allies were still waiting to see if the USSR and the Third Reich could still mutually anihilate themselves (yes, it is a myth the Allies were really allies from 1939, but that's not a very simple demonstration);

    2) in the aftermath of WWII, the USA emerged as both the industrial and financial superpower in the capitalist world (i.e. the West). But this was an accidental - and very unlikely - alignment of events. The USA always had imperial ambitions from its foundation (the Manifest Destiny), but there's no evidence it was scheming to dominate the world before 1945. The American ascension was more a fruit of the European imperial superpowers destroying themselves than by any American (or Jewish, as the far-right likes to speculate) design;

    3) the USSR had nothing to do with Bretton Woods. BW was a strictly capitalist affair. And it could not be any difference: the USSR was a socialist country, therefore, it didn't have money-capital (money in the capitalist system has three functions: reserve of value, means of exchange and means of payment). The only way it had to trade with the capitalist half of the world was to exchange essential commodities (oil) for hard currency, with which it bought what it needed for its own development (mainly, high technological machines which it could copy and later develop on). So, the USSR didn't "balk" at BW - it was literally impossible for it to pertain to the agreement.

    vk , Jan 9 2020 19:40 utc | 45
    @ Posted by: vk | Jan 9 2020 19:35 utc | 42

    Correction: the three functions of money in capitalism are reserve/store of value, means of exchange and unit of account . I basically wrote "means of exchange" twice in the original comment.

    karlof1 , Jan 9 2020 19:45 utc | 47
    Cynica @38--

    Hello! Michael Hudson first set forth the methodology of the Outlaw US Empire's financial control of the world via his book Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire in 1972. In 2003, he issued an updated edition which you can download for free here .

    If you're interested, here's an interview he gave while in China that's autobiographical . And here's his most recent Resume/CV/Bibliography , although it doesn't go into as much detail about his recent work as he does in and forgive them their debts: Lending, Foreclosure, and Redemption From Bronze Age Finance to the Jubilee Year , which for me is fascinating.

    His most recent TV appearances are here and here .

    karlof1 , Jan 9 2020 19:55 utc | 48
    Walter @39--

    Bingo! You're the first person here to make that connection aside from myself. You'll note from Hudson's assessment of Soleimani's killing he sees the Outlaw US Empire as using the Climate Crisis as a weapon:

    "America's attempt to maintain this buttress explains U.S. opposition to any foreign government steps to reverse global warming and the extreme weather caused by the world's U.S.-sponsored dependence on oil. Any such moves by Europe and other countries would reduce dependence on U.S. oil sales, and hence on the U.S's ability to control the global oil spigot as a means of control and coercion. These are viewed as hostile acts.

    "Oil also explains U.S. opposition to Russian oil exports via Nordstream. U.S. strategists want to treat energy as a U.S. national monopoly. Other countries can benefit in the way that Saudi Arabia has done – by sending their surpluses to the U.S. economy – but not to support their own economic growth and diplomacy. Control of oil thus implies support for continued global warming as an inherent part of U.S. strategy....

    "This strategy will continue, until foreign countries reject it. If Europe and other regions fail to do so, they will suffer the consequences of this U.S. strategy in the form of a rising U.S.-sponsored war via terrorism, the flow of refugees, and accelerated global warming (and extreme weather)."

    c1ue , Jan 9 2020 19:58 utc | 49
    @Cynica #38
    Financially, the US dollar as reserve currency is enormously beneficial to the US government's ability to spend.
    And oil has historically been both a tactical and a strategic necessity; when the US was importing half its oil, this is a lot of money. 8 million bpd @ $50/barrel = $146B. Add in secondary value add like transport, refining, downstream industries, etc and it likely triples the impact or more - but this is only tactical.
    Worldwide, the impact is 10X = $1.5 trillion annually. Sure, this is a bit under 10% of the $17.7T in world trade in 2017, but it serves as an "anchor tenant" to the idea of world reserve currency. A second anchor is the overall role of US trade, which was $3.6T in 2016 (imports only).
    If we treat central bank reserves as a proxy for currency used in trade, this means 60%+ of the $17.7T in trade is USD. $3.6T is direct, but the $7 trillion in trade that doesn't impact the US is the freebie. To put this in perspective, the entire monetary float of the USD domestically is about $3.6T.
    USD as world reserve currency literally doubles (at least) the float - from which the US government can issue debt (money) to fund its activities. In reality, it is likely a lot more since foreigners using USD to fund trade means at least some USD in Central Banks, plus the actual USD in the transaction, plus corporate/individual USD reserves/float.
    Again, nothing above is formally linked - I just wanted to convey an idea of just how advantageous the petrodollar/USD as world trade reserve currency really is.

    [Jan 09, 2020] Duck Soup Donald Trump, Dancing to the Tune of the Military Industrial Empire

    Notable quotes:
    "... The 1933 Marx brothers film Duck Soup was meant to be a satirical look at Benito Mussolini, ruler of Italy. In the film the mythical country of Freedonia , ruled by the effervescent Rufus T. Firefly ( played by Groucho), due to an insult by the ambassador of rival nation Sylvania, declares war. Laughs abound. Well, in our own nation of ' Free markets', ' Free enterprise' and ' Free use of war' whenever it pleases us, we are led by another Firefly, who is as comedic as he is dangerous to peace. ..."
    "... Philip A Farruggio is a contributing editor for The Greanville Post. He is also frequently posted on Global Research, Nation of Change, World News Trust and Off Guardian sites. He is the son and grandson of Brooklyn NYC longshoremen and a graduate of Brooklyn College, class of 1974. Since the 2000 election debacle Philip has written over 300 columns on the Military Industrial Empire and other facets of life in an upside down America. He is also host of the ' It's the Empire Stupid ' radio show, co produced by Chuck Gregory. Philip can be reached at [email protected] ..."
    Jan 09, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

    The 1933 Marx brothers film Duck Soup was meant to be a satirical look at Benito Mussolini, ruler of Italy. In the film the mythical country of Freedonia , ruled by the effervescent Rufus T. Firefly ( played by Groucho), due to an insult by the ambassador of rival nation Sylvania, declares war. Laughs abound. Well, in our own nation of ' Free markets', ' Free enterprise' and ' Free use of war' whenever it pleases us, we are led by another Firefly, who is as comedic as he is dangerous to peace.

    Of course, the major difference with movie's Freedonia and our own is like night and day. In the film the leader, Firefly, had full control of every decision needed to be made. In our Freemerika , Mr. Trump, regardless of the image he portrays as an absolute ruler, has to dance to the tune of the Military Industrial Empire, just like ALL our previous presidents. Folks, sorry to say, but presidents are not so much harnessed by our Constitution or Congress ( or even the Supreme Court) but by the wizards who the empire picks to advise him. They decide the ' when and if' of such dramatic actions like the other day's drone missile murder in Iraq of the Iranian general. Unlike when Groucho decides he was insulted by Trentino, the Sylvanian ambassador, and declares ' This means war!', Mr. Trump gave the order for the assassination but ONLY after those behind the curtain advised him.

    Violence Is as Violence Does. All in the Name of "Restoring Democracy"

    To believe that our presidents have carte blanche to do the heinous deeds is foolish at best . LBJ's use of the Gulf of Tonkin phony incident to gung ho in Vietnam was not just one man making that call.

    Or Nixon's Christmas carpet bombing of Hanoi, Bush Sr.'s attack on Iraq in 1991 , his son's ditto against Iraq in 2003, Obama's use of NATO to destroy Libya in 2011, or this latest arrogance by Trump, were all machinations by this empire's wizards who advised them. When the late Senator Robert Byrd stood before a near empty Senate chamber in 2003 to warn of this craziness, that told it all! We are not led by Rufus T. Firefly, rather a Cabal that most in this government do not even realize who in the hell these people are!

    Of course, the embedded mainstream media does the usual job of demonizing who the empire chooses to be our enemies. As with this recent illegal act by our government of crossing into another nation's sovereignty to do the deed, now they all tell us how deadly this Iranian general was. Yet, how many of the news outlets ever mentioned this guy for what they now tell us he was, for all these years? Well, here is the kicker. I do not know what this man was responsible for , regarding acts of insurgency against US forces in Iraq. Maybe he did aid in the attacks on US personnel. Maybe he also was there to neutralize the fanatical ISIS terrorists who were killing US and Iraqi personnel in Iraq and Syria. What I do know is that, in the first place, we had no business ever invading and occupying Iraq period! Thus, the rest of this Duck Soup becomes postscript.

    Philip A Farruggio is a contributing editor for The Greanville Post. He is also frequently posted on Global Research, Nation of Change, World News Trust and Off Guardian sites. He is the son and grandson of Brooklyn NYC longshoremen and a graduate of Brooklyn College, class of 1974. Since the 2000 election debacle Philip has written over 300 columns on the Military Industrial Empire and other facets of life in an upside down America. He is also host of the ' It's the Empire Stupid ' radio show, co produced by Chuck Gregory. Philip can be reached at [email protected]

    [Jan 09, 2020] GOP's Mike Lee Blasts Intel Briefers For Telling Senators They Can't Debate War Authorization

    Jan 09, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Jason Ditz via AntiWar.com,

    After the Trump Administration's 75-minute briefing to the US Senate on the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) was deeply critical , calling it the worst briefing he'd gotten in his nine years in the Senate.

    Saying the administration's briefers offered little on the legal or practical justification for the attack, Sen. Lee particularly took umbrage at them warning the Senators that they must not debate the War Powers authorization for a war with Iran .

    Republican Senator Mike Lee with Sen. Rand Paul. Image via ABC/Reuters

    Those giving the briefing objected to the very idea of the Senate discussing the matter publicly, saying it would "embolden Iran." Sen. Lee noted that this is a power Constitutionally reserved explicitly for the legislature.

    "For them to tell us ... for us to debate and discuss these things on the Senate floor would somehow weaken the American cause and embolden Iran in any other actions, I find very insulting ," Lee said, who did not specify to reporters on Capitol Hill which briefer made the assertion.

    "It is not acceptable for officials within the executive branch of government -- I don't care if they're with the CIA, the Department of Defense or otherwise -- to come in and tell us that we can't debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran, " Lee added. -- ABC

    Not only did Lee express annoyance that there was no pushback from any of the briefers on telling the Senate not to debate something legally in their purview, but he said that while he'd had problems with the language of Sen. Tim Kaine's (D-VA) resolution, he has now decided that he will support the resolution, on condition of some amendments.

    *

    Boogity , 11 minutes ago link

    Senator Lee just got cut off from Uncle Shlomo's slush fund.

    IUDAEA_DELENDA_EST , 12 minutes ago link

    The CIA works hard.

    But for whom?

    It is most certainly not The Republic.

    SpeechFreedom , 33 minutes ago link

    Trump The Zionist Whore!

    "Trump is too stupid, or willfully ignorant to know that Soleimani was at the forefront of the US led coalition to eradicate ISIS from Northern Iraq in March 2015.

    Soleimani also, as a commander of the Iranian Quds Force, was part of the American-led coalition under US General Tommy Franks fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan in the October 2001 Battle of Herat .

    Moreover, Soleimani worked to protect Eastern Christians against ISIS in both Syria and Iraq, and empowered them to defend themselves as best they could.

    As for the flunkie at State, Pompeo put up a clip of a few Iraqis celebrating the death of Soleimani while parroting Trump's own lies that Iranians "hated and feared him."

    However, Pompass didn't show the millions mourning Soleimani in Iran, Iraq, and Syria, including the minorities in Sunni states such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

    That's not "hate and fear," that's "honor and respect."

    Most Americans never heard of Soleimani -- a soft-spoken man of high refinement -- until his murder last week. Now they're clamoring as if Trump had slain the devil himself."

    When World?

    Have you not had enough of the *** monstrosity Yet?

    Scipio Africanuz , 1 hour ago link

    Seems the dam has burst, the [Trump] personality cult is crumbling, and the purveyors of unprovoked aggression are reeling..

    So where are the Americans to back up the courageous and retake their congress from the grip of blackmailers and threat issuers?

    Perhaps they are gearing up...

    [Jan 09, 2020] West Point teaches people they have the right to drop bombs on civilians and torture them in Guantanamo. Of course these folks think of themselves as the smartest people who ever lived.

    Jan 09, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Steve Gilbert , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 7:29 pm GMT

    @Authenticjazzman The US could afford lots of things if we cut the military budget by 99%, as we should have done after WWII.
    The military works for the plutocrats, stealing money from the taxpayers. The ruling class turned Vietnam from an agricultural nation into a low paid factory nation which took thousands of textile jobs from Americans – i.e winning the Vietnam war. The problem lies in the taxpayers not understanding what winning means. Manufacturing havens with super low wages and homeless veterans begging at every intersection. West Point teaches people they have the right to drop bombs on civilians and torture them in Guantanamo. Of course these folks think of themselves as the smartest people who ever lived.

    [Jan 09, 2020] The USA Has Been Bombing Iraq For 29 Years

    Jan 09, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    The USA Has Been Bombing Iraq For 29 Years by Tyler Durden Wed, 01/08/2020 - 21:05 0 SHARES

    Over the past days while little real debate over the Iran crisis has happened in Washington or Congress (instead it's merely the default drones and "bombs away" as usual), the American public has been busy online and in living rooms debating the merits or lack thereof of escalation and potential war with Iran.

    However, like with many other instances of US foreign policy adventurism, this is typically a "debate" lacking in necessary recent historical context or appreciation for how the domino effect of disasters now facing American security were often brought on by prior US action in the first place. As a case in point, it's not recognized often enough in public discourse that it was the United States under the neocon Bush administration which handed Iraq over to "Iranian influence" and the Shia clerics in the first place .

    It must be remembered that Saddam Hussein was a secular Sunni dictator presiding over a Shia majority population, and he was enemy #1 of Iran. Team USA's short-sighted and criminal 2003 invasion and overthrow of Saddam based on WMD lies had the immediate benefit to Tehran of handing the Ayatollah the greatest gift that Iran waged a nearly decade-long war to accomplish, but couldn't (the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War).

    U.S. bombing of Baghdad in 2003.

    And the neocons within the bowels of the national security state have ever since been attempting to salvage their failed legacy in Iraq by the futile effort of trying to contain Iran and roll back Shia dominance in Baghdad, as Seymour Hersh detailed in his famous 2006 New Yorker piece The Redirection , which accurately predicted the 'long war' against the Hezbollah-Damascus-Baghdad-Tehran axis which would unfold, and did indeed unfold, especially in Syria of the past eight years.

    To "situate" the past week's dramatic events, it's also crucial to understand, as The Libertarian Institute's Scott Horton has pointed out , that "The U.S.A. has been bombing Iraq for 29 years. And it looks like it's not over yet."

    Below is an essential timeline compiled by Horton of that nearly three decade long history where Iraq has been consistently subject to American bombs and intervention -- yet ironically (and some might say predictably) the situation is still getting worse, more unstable, and more dangerous.

    * * *

    The U.S.A. has been bombing Iraq for 29 years. And it looks like it's not over yet:

    Iraq War I : January -- February 1991 (aka The Gulf War, Operation Desert Storm, liberation of Kuwait)

    Iraq War I 1/2 : February 1991 -- March 2003 (The rest of Bush I, Bill Clinton years, economic blockade and no-fly zone bombings)

    Iraq War II : March 2003 -- December 2011 (aka Operation Iraqi Freedom, W. Bush's invasion and war for the Shi'ite side)

    Iraq War III : August 2014 -- December 2017 (aka Operation Inherent Resolve, the war against the Islamic State, which America had helped to build up in Syria but then launched this war to destroy, on behalf of the Shi'ite government in Baghdad, after ISIS had seized the predominately Sunni west of the country in the early summer of 2014 and declared the Islamic State "Caliphate")

    Iraq War III 1/2 : December 2017 -- January 2020 (The "mopping-up" war against the remnants of ISIS which has had the U.S. still allied with the very same Shi'ite militias they fought Iraq War II and III for, but are now attacking)

    Iraq War IV : Now -- ?

    NEW from me: We asked folks to identify Iran on an unlabeled map.

    28% of them got it right. Here's where they guessed. https://t.co/XhP5OU9s2n pic.twitter.com/IQ8HYFDKxE

    -- Joanna Piacenza (@jpiacenza) January 8, 2020

    As Scott Horton suggests, the roots of the current crisis lie all the way back in the mid-20th century :

    In 1953, the American CIA overthrew the elected prime minister of Iran in favor of the Shah Reza Pahlavi who ruled a dictatorship there for 26 years until in 1979 a popular revolution overthrew his government and installed the Shi'ite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in power.

    So in 1980, President Jimmy Carter's government gave Iraq's Saddam Hussein the green light to invade Iran, a war which the U.S. continued to support throughout the Ronald Reagan years, though they also sold weapons to the Iranian side at times.

    But then in 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait in a dispute over debts from the recent war with Iran, with some encouragement by the U.S. government, leading to America's Iraq War I, aka the first Gulf War or Operation Desert Storm at the beginning of 1991.

    And that was merely the very beginning.

    Read the rest of the story and the excellent brief history of how we got here over at The Libertarian Institute .

    Wahooo , 1 minute ago link

    I think by now that you understand the US exists to kill people overseas or you are simply mindless and stupid.

    Wahooo , 1 minute ago link

    I think by now that you understand the US exists to kill people overseas or you are simply mindless and stupid.

    J S Bach , 3 minutes ago link

    "The USA Has Been Bombing Iraq For 29 Years"

    Yep. And the initial excuse (WMDs) was proven absolutely to have been a contrived hoax. Yet, all of the people of that decimated country and surrounding nations who have a vendetta against us are labeled "terrorists". I guess the English language has evolved beyond my comprehension since the usurpation by the tribe of our media and government.

    By the definition of "terrorist" - terrorist | ˈterərəst | noun a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims: - I see only the United States of Israel as befitting this word.

    [Jan 08, 2020] I can't quite understand how gratuitous US piracy and adventurism in places on the globe beyond the knowledge and reach of most Americans could possibly be compared to Iranian actions securing their immediate regional borders and interests.

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Patroklos , Jan 6 2020 22:30 utc | 104

    @Ian Dobbs and Dan

    I can't quite understand how gratuitous US piracy and adventurism in places on the globe beyond the knowledge and reach of most Americans could possibly be compared to Iranian actions securing their immediate regional borders and interests. You can at least understand (even if you critique) a US preoccupation with Cuba over the years, or drug cartels in central America, or economic refugees in Mexico because they are close by and have a more less direct effect on the stability of the US. But they have no authority beyond that other than the ability to project violence and force. That's just simple imperialism. But now the US have whacked a made guy without any real reason (i.e. looking at you the wrong way is not a reason). Any mafia hood knows that, especially a New Yorker like Trump. So the climax of The Godfather comes to mind. It is staggeringly naive and frankly moronic to think that this is about good and evil. I bet Soleimani was no angel, but he wasn't whacked because he was a bad guy, but because he was extraordinarily effective military organizer. Star Wars has a lot to answer for in stunting the historical sensibilities of entire generations, but its underlying narrative is the only MSM playbook now. Even more staggering is the stupendous arrogance of the US belief in its 'rights' (based on thuggery and avarice), as though it were the only power in the world capable of establishing a moral order. The lesson in humility to come will be both long-awaited and go unheeded. Even the mob understand there has to be rules.

    Alpi , Jan 6 2020 22:32 utc | 105

    After reading Crooke and Federicci's articles, there is only one way to stop this madness blowing into a global conflict. Russia and China need to get involved whether they like it or not. Diplomacy and sideline analysis has run its course. This is their time to stamp their influence in the region and finish off the empire once and for all. Maybe that way, The Europeans will grow some minerals and become sovereign again.

    Otherwise, China can kiss its Belt and Road goodbye and go into a recession with the loss of their investments up to this point and become slaves to the Americans again.

    And Russia, the enemy du jour of Europe and US will be next and be crushed under economic sanctions and isolation.

    This is the moment that stars are aligned . Russia and China should park their battle carriers off the Gulf and gives direct warning to Israel and US that any nuclear threat , tactical or otherwise, against anyone in the region is a non-starter.

    I read so much about these two countries and that they will get involved. I have recited those lines myself. But after these events and how things are escalating, I cannot see how they cannot be involved. US is its most vulnerable and weakest with respect to economic, diplomatic and military conditions.

    The time of condemnations, letters of objection to the UN and veto votes in UNSC is over. There is only one way to deal with a rogue nation and that is by force.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Soleimani and Al-Muhandis are being mourned in Aleppo churches

    Jan 08, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    StSarkiscathedraltehran2016

    (Tehran Armenian Cathedral)

    Mike Pompeo was on the TeeVee today scoffing at those who do not agree with him and the Ziocon inspired "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran. It must be a terrible thing for intelligence analysts of integrity and actual Middle East knowledge and experience to have to try to brief him and Trump, people who KNOW, KNOW from some superior source of knowledge that Iran is the worst threat to the world since Nazi Germany, or was it Saddam's Iraq that was the worst threat since "beautiful Adolf?"

    The "maximum pressure" campaign is born of Zionist terrors, terrors deeply felt. It is the same kind of campaign that has been waged by the Israelis against the Palestinians and all other enemies great and small. This approach does not seem to have done much for Israel. The terrors are still there.

    Someone sent me the news tape linked below from Aleppo in NW Syria. I have watched it a number of times. You need some ability in Arabic to understand it. The tape was filmed in several Christian churches in Aleppo where these two men (Soleimani and al-Muhandis) are described from the pulpit and in the street as "heroic martyr victims of criminal American state terrorism." Pompeo likes to describe Soleimani as the instigator of "massacre" and "genocide" in Syria. Strangely (irony) the Syriac, Armenian Uniate and Presbyterian ministers of the Gospel in this tape do not see him and al-Muhandis that way. They see them as men who helped to defend Aleppo and its minority populations from the wrath of Sunni jihadi Salafists like ISIS and the AQ affiliates in Syria. They see them and Lebanese Hizbullah as having helped save these Christians by fighting alongside the Syrian Army, Russia and other allies like the Druze and Christian militias.

    It should be remembered that the US was intent on and may still be intent on replacing the multi-confessional government of Syria with the forces of medieval tyranny. Everyone who really knows anything about the Syrian Civil War knows that the essential character of the New Syrian Army, so beloved by McCain, Graham and the other Ziocons was always jihadi and it was always fully supported by Wahhabi Saudi Arabia as a project in establishing Sunni triumphalism. They and the self proclaimed jihadis of HTS (AQ) are still supported in Idlib and western Aleppo provinces both by the Saudis and the present Islamist and neo-Ottoman government of Turkey.

    Well pilgrims, there are Christmas trees in the newly re-built Christian churches of Aleppo and these, my brothers and sisters in Christ remember who stood by them in "the last ditch."

    "Currently there are at least 600 churches and 500,000–1,000,000 Christians in Iran." wiki below. Are they dhimmis? Yes, but they are there. There are no churches in Saudi Arabia, not a single one and Christianity is a banned religion. These are our allies?

    Mr. Jefferson wrote that "he feared for his country when he remembered that God is just." He meant Virginia but I fear in the same way for the United States. pl

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1214223383635857409

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Iran

    Posted at 02:13 PM in As The Borg Turns , Borg Wars , Current Affairs , Iran , Iraq , Israel , Middle East , Pakistan , Religion , Saudi Arabia , Syria , Yemen | Permalink

    [Jan 08, 2020] As long as Neocons and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT

    Yes, as long as Neoco hens and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.
    BTW, Mike Pompeo or as I affectionately call him; Lard face, Plump'eo, crazed CZ-zealot fat boy, etc., is now a legitimate target of the Iranians. May Allah provide justice to the family of Soleimani. (Grin) And look, I'm wishing 'ill will' on a zealot 'goy' (gentile) instead of a typical Neo-cohen snake, how ironic. (Another grin)
    A positve spin:
    With the 'incorrect' memo leaked by the Pentagon about an orderly exit from Iraq this can be the silver lining in all this mess. This assassination might actually accelerate the exiting of US forces from Iraq and the surrounding quagmires. Who knows, Trump might be a genius.
    Again, NO MORE WARS FOR ZION, BDS NOW, ONE STATE SOLUTION-PALESTINE.
    And to really stick it to Neo cohens (My apologies to Prof. Steven Cohen ), Trump-Putin Axis Da!! Destroy the Deep State and the CABAL .

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iraqi Journalist: Killing Soleimani "Ended An Era In Which Iran And The United States Coexisted In Iraq" by Tim Hains

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Now, he told "Democracy Now!", it will be hard for the Iraqi public to see the bases as anything but "a force that is driving them into a war between Iran and the United States." ..."
    "... "Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. I mean, remember, Qassem Soleimani arrived in Baghdad airport, where half of it is an American base. Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. He took selfies. People took his pictures. That didn't happen in secret. Qassem Soleimani was not Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hiding in a cave or moving stealthily through the country. He stayed in the Green Zone. So, all this happened because there was an understanding between the Americans and the Iranians. So, if the Americans wanted to keep their bases in Iraq, the Iranians would have the freedom to move. And with the killing of Soleimani, the rules of the game have totally changed," he said. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.realclearpolitics.com

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/TKvE-nIsj1Y?enablejsapi=1&origin=https:%2F%2Fwww.realclearpolitics.com

    "The Guardian" journalist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad says that before the attack on Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad last week "there was an understanding between the Americans and the Iranians" that allowed officials from Iran and the U.S. to move freely within Iraq and maintained relative goodwill toward American bases.

    "The killing of Qassem Soleimani ended an era in which both Iran and the United States coexisted in Iraq," he said.

    Now, he told "Democracy Now!", it will be hard for the Iraqi public to see the bases as anything but "a force that is driving them into a war between Iran and the United States."

    "Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. I mean, remember, Qassem Soleimani arrived in Baghdad airport, where half of it is an American base. Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. He took selfies. People took his pictures. That didn't happen in secret. Qassem Soleimani was not Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hiding in a cave or moving stealthily through the country. He stayed in the Green Zone. So, all this happened because there was an understanding between the Americans and the Iranians. So, if the Americans wanted to keep their bases in Iraq, the Iranians would have the freedom to move. And with the killing of Soleimani, the rules of the game have totally changed," he said.

    AMY GOODMAN: Ghaith, can you comment on this new information that's come to light about the timing of Soleimani's assassination Friday morning? Iraq's caretaker Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi has revealed he had plans to meet with Soleimani on the day he was killed to discuss a Saudi proposal to defuse tension in the region. Mahdi said, quote, "He came to deliver me a message from Iran responding to the message we delivered from Saudi Arabia to Iran" -- Saudi Arabia, obviously, a well-known enemy of Iran. Was he set up? Talk about the significance of this.

    GHAITH ABDUL-AHAD: Well, it is very significant if it's actually General Qassem Soleimani came to Iraq to deliver this message, if it was actually there was a process of negotiations in the region. We know that Abdul-Mahdi and the Iraqi government, in general, over the last year had been trying to position Iraq as this middle power, as this power where both -- you know, as a country that has a relationship with both Iran and the United States. In that awkward place Iraq found itself in, Iraq has tried to maximize on this. So they started back in summer and fall, when there was an escalation between Iran and the United States, when Iran shot down an American drone. We've seen Adel Abdul-Mahdi fly to Iran, try to mediate. We've seen Adel Abdul-Mahdi open channels of communications with the Gulf, with Saudi Arabia.

    So, if it actually, the killing of General Soleimani, ended that peace initiative, it will be kind of disastrous in the region, because, as Narges was saying earlier, it is -- you know, Pompeo is speaking about Iran being this ultimate evil in the region, as this crescent of Shias, as if they just arrived in the past 10 years in the region. The fact if we see Iran's reactions, it's always a reaction to an American provocation. You've seen the occupation of Iraq in 2003. You've seen Iran declared as an "axis of evil." So, if you see it from an Iranian perspective, it's always this existential threat coming from the United States. And I don't think there is a more existential threat than in past year. So, yes, I know -- I mean, I think Adel Abdul-Mahdi and the Iraqi government were trying to find this middle ground, which I think is totally lost, because even Adel Abdul-Mahdi, the person who was trying to find this middle ground, was the person who proposed this law yesterday in the Parliament to expel all American troops from the country.

    And I would like to add like another thing. The killing of Qassem Soleimani ended an era in which both Iran and the United States coexisted in Iraq. So, from 2013, '14, we, as journalists, we've seen on the frontlines how the proxies of each power have been helping each other. So we've seen Iranian advisers helping the American-trained Iraqi Army unit or counterterrorism unit in the fight against ISIS. In the same sense, we've seen American airstrikes on threats to these -- kind of to ISIS when it was threatening these militias. That coexistence, it didn't only come from both having a -- sharing an enemy, which is ISIS, or Daesh, but also these were the rules of the game. These were the rules in which Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. I mean, remember, Qassem Soleimani arrived in Baghdad airport, where half of it is an American base. Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. He took selfies. People took his pictures. That didn't happen in secret. Qassem Soleimani was not Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hiding in a cave or moving stealthily through the country. He stayed in the Green Zone. So, all this happened because there was an understanding between the Americans and the Iranians. So, if the Americans wanted to keep their bases in Iraq, the Iranians would have the freedom to move. And with the killing of Soleimani, I think the rules of the game have totally changed.

    So now I think the first victim of the assassination will be the American bases in Iraq. I don't see any way where the Americans can keep their presence as they did before the assassination of Soleimani. And even the people in the streets, even the people who opposes Iran, who opposes the presence of Iranian militias in power and politics, the corruption of these pro-Iranian parties, even those people would look at these American bases now as not as a force that came to help them in the fight against ISIS, but a force that's dragging them into a war between Iran and the United States.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Do you really want to be a one term president? Pompeo can talk big now and then go back to Kansas to run for senator. Where will you be able to take refuge?

    Highly recommended!
    Iran has incentives to increase the chance of a Democrat administration, bearing in mind the great deal they got from the last one and the lack of anything they can expect from Trump Term Two.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Reflection, self criticism or self restraint are not exactly the big strengths of Trump. He prefers solo acts (Emergency! Emergency!) and dislikes advice (especially if longer than 4 pages) and the advice of the sort " You're sure? If you do that the the shit will fly in your face in an hour, Sir ". ..."
    "... Trump can order attacks and I don't expect much protest from Mark Esper and it depends on the military (which likely will obey). ..."
    "... These so called grownups have been replaced by (then still) happy Bolton (likely, even after being fired, still war happy) and applauders like Pompeo and his buddy Esper. ..."
    "... As a thank you to Trump calling the Israel occupied Golan a part of Israel Netanyahu called an (iirc also illegal) new Golan settlement "Ramat Trump" ..."
    "... I disagree. Trump maybe the only person who could sell a war with Iran. What he has cultivated is a rabid base that consists of sycophants on one extreme end and desperate nationalists on the other. His base must stick with him...who else do they have? ..."
    "... The Left is indifferent to another war. Further depleting the quality stock of our military will aid there agenda of international integration. A weaker US military will force us to collaborate with the world community and not lead it is their thinking. ..."
    "... Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ..."
    "... Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. ..."
    "... We have been so thoroughly indoctrinated with the idea that Iran and Russia are intrinsically and immutable evil and hostile that the thought of actual two sided diplomacy does not occur. IMO neither of these countries are what we collectively think them. So, we could actually give it a try rather than trying to beggar them and destroy their economies. If all fails than we have to be prepared to defend our forces. DOL ..."
    Sep 18, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Do you really want to be a one term president? Pompeo can talk big now and then go back to Kansas to run for senator. Where will you be able to take refuge? Don't let the neocons like Pompeo sell you on war.

    Make the intelligence people show you the evidence in detail. Make your own judgments. pl

    Vegetius , 17 September 2019 at 08:37 PM

    Whatever else he knows, Trump knows that he can't sell a war to the American people.
    confusedponderer -> Vegetius... , 18 September 2019 at 03:51 AM
    Vegetius,

    re " Trump knows that he can't sell a war to the American people "

    Are you sure? I am not.

    Reflection, self criticism or self restraint are not exactly the big strengths of Trump. He prefers solo acts (Emergency! Emergency!) and dislikes advice (especially if longer than 4 pages) and the advice of the sort " You're sure? If you do that the the shit will fly in your face in an hour, Sir ".

    A good number of the so called grownups who gave such advice were (gameshow style) fired, sometimes by twitter.

    Trump can order attacks and I don't expect much protest from Mark Esper and it depends on the military (which likely will obey).

    These so called grownups have been replaced by (then still) happy Bolton (likely, even after being fired, still war happy) and applauders like Pompeo and his buddy Esper.

    Israel could, if politically just a tad more insane, bomb Iran and thus invite the inevitable retaliation. When that happens they'll cry for US aid, weapons and money because they alone ~~~

    (a) cannot defeat Iran (short of going nuclear) and ...
    (b) Holocaust! We want weapons and money from Germany, too! ...
    (c) they know that ...
    (d) which does not lead in any way to Netanyahu showing signgs of self restraint or reason.

    Netanyahu just - it is (tight) election time - announced, in his sldedge hammer style subtlety, that (he) Israel will annect the palestinian west jordan territory, making the Plaestines an object in his election campaign.

    IMO that idea is simply insane and invites more "troubles". But then, I didn't hear anything like, say, Trump gvt protests against that (and why expect that from the dudes who moved the US embassy to Jerusalem).

    confusedponderer -> Vegetius... , 18 September 2019 at 07:28 AM
    Vegetius,

    as for Trump and Netanyahu ... policy debate ... I had that here in mind, which pretty speaks for itself. And I thought Trumo is just running for office in the US. Alas, it is a Netanyaho campaign poster from the current election:

    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/a6e60efd3bde0befbcb8b0a95a42bf4c2624e017/57_296_5123_3074/master/5123.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=1958b9e7cf24d7a3a7b024845de08f7e

    As a thank you to Trump calling the Israel occupied Golan a part of Israel Netanyahu called an (iirc also illegal) new Golan settlement "Ramat Trump"

    https://cdn.mdr.de/nachrichten/mdraktuell-golan-hoehen-trump-hights-100-resimage_v-variantSmall24x9_w-704.jpg?version=0964

    I generously assume that things like that only happen because of the hard and hard ly work of Kushner on his somewhat elusive but of course GIGANTIC and INCREDIBLE Middle East peace plan.

    Kushner is probably getting hard and hard ly supported by Ivanka who just said that she inherited her moral compass from her father. Well ... congatulations ... I assume.

    Stueeeeeeee said in reply to Vegetius... , 18 September 2019 at 08:31 AM
    I disagree. Trump maybe the only person who could sell a war with Iran. What he has cultivated is a rabid base that consists of sycophants on one extreme end and desperate nationalists on the other. His base must stick with him...who else do they have?

    The Left is indifferent to another war. Further depleting the quality stock of our military will aid there agenda of international integration. A weaker US military will force us to collaborate with the world community and not lead it is their thinking.

    The rest of the nation will follow.

    prawnik said in reply to Vegetius... , 18 September 2019 at 10:36 AM
    Need I trot out Goering's statement regarding selling a war once more?

    Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

    Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

    Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

    turcopolier , 17 September 2019 at 09:31 PM
    jonst

    We have been so thoroughly indoctrinated with the idea that Iran and Russia are intrinsically and immutable evil and hostile that the thought of actual two sided diplomacy does not occur. IMO neither of these countries are what we collectively think them. So, we could actually give it a try rather than trying to beggar them and destroy their economies. If all fails than we have to be prepared to defend our forces. DOL

    Matt said in reply to turcopolier ... , 18 September 2019 at 12:54 AM
    I agree with your reply 100%

    these phobias are so entrenched now they're a huge obstacle to overcome,

    Mark Twain: "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

    William Casey: "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false"

    Christian Chuba , 18 September 2019 at 05:22 AM
    The 'ivestigations are a formality. The Saudis (with U.S. backing) are already saying that the missiles were Iranian made and according to them, this proves that Iran fired them. The Saudis are using the more judicious phrase 'behind the attack' but Pompeo is running with the fired from Iran narrative.

    How can we tell the difference between an actual Iranian manufactured missile vs one that was manufactured in Yemen based on Iranian designs? We only have a few pictures Iranian missiles unlike us, the Iranians don't toss them all over the place so we don't have any physical pieces to compare them to.

    Perhaps honest investigators could make a determination but even if they do exist they will keep quiet while the bible thumping Pompeo brays and shamelessly lies as he is prone to do.

    PRC90 said in reply to Christian Chuba... , 18 September 2019 at 10:36 AM
    These kinds of munition will leave hundreds of bits scattered all over their targets. I'm waiting for the press conference with the best bits laid out on the tables.
    I doubt that there will be any stencils saying 'Product of Iran', unless the paint smells fresh.
    Nuff Sed , 18 September 2019 at 07:22 AM
    1. I am still waiting to read some informed discussion concerning the *accuracy* of the projectiles hitting their targets with uncanny precision from hundreds of miles away. What does this say about the achievement of those pesky Eye-rainians? https://www.moonofalabama.org/images9/saudihit2.jpg

    2. "The US Navy has many ships in the Gulf and the Arabian Sea. The Iranian Navy and the IRGC Navy will attack our naval vessels until the Iranian forces are utterly destroyed.: Ahem, Which forces are utterly destroyed? With respect colonel, you are not thinking straight. An army with supersonic land to sea missiles that are highly accurate will make minced meat of any fool's ship that dare attack it. The lesson of the last few months is that Iran is deadly serious about its position that if they cannot sell their oil, no one else will be able to either. And if the likes of the relatively broadminded colonel have not yet learned that lesson, then this can only mean that the escalation ladder will continue to be climbed, rung by rung. Next rung: deep sea port of Yanbu, or, less likely, Ra's Tanura. That's when the price of oil will really go through the roof and the Chinese (and possibly one or two of the Europoodles) will start crying Uncle Scam. Nuff Sed.

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 08:07 AM
    nuff Sed

    It sounds like you are getting a little "help" with this. You statement about the result of a naval confrontation in the Gulf reflects the 19th Century conception that "ships can't fight forts." that has been many times exploded. You have never seen the amount of firepower that would be unleashed on Iran from the air and sea. Would the US take casualties? Yes, but you will be destroyed.

    Nuff Sed -> turcopolier ... , 18 September 2019 at 08:18 AM
    We will have to agree to disagree. But unless I am quite mistaken, the majority view if not the consensus of informed up to date opinion holds that the surest sign that the US is getting ready to attack Iran is that it is withdrawing all of its naval power out of the Persian Gulf, where they would be sitting ducks.

    Besides, I don't think it will ever come to that. Not to repeat myself, but taking out either deep sea ports of Ra's Tanura and/ or Yanbu (on the Red Sea side) will render Saudi oil exports null and void for the next six months. The havoc that will play with the price of oil and consequently on oil futures and derivatives will be enough for any president and army to have to worry about. But if the US would still be foolhardy enough to continue to want to wage war (i.e. continue its strangulation of Iran, which it has been doing more or less for the past 40 years), then the Yemeni siege would be broken and there would be a two-pronged attack from the south and the north, whereby al-Qatif, the Shi'a region of Saudi Arabia where all the oil and gas is located, will be liberated from their barbaric treatment at the hands of the takfiri Saudi scum, which of course is completely enabled and only made possible by the War Criminal Uncle Sam.

    Go ahead, make my day: roll the dice.

    scott s. said in reply to Nuff Sed ... , 18 September 2019 at 11:32 AM
    AFAIK the only "US naval power" currently is the Abraham Lincoln CSG and I haven't seen any public info that it was in the Persian Gulf. Aside from the actual straits, I'm not sure of your "sitting ducks" assertion. First they wouldn't be sitting, and second you have the problem of a large volume of grey shipping that would complicate the targeting problem. Of course with a reduced time-of-flight, that also reduces target position uncertainty.
    CK said in reply to turcopolier ... , 18 September 2019 at 09:55 AM
    Forts are stationary.
    Nothing I have read implies that Iran has a lot of investment in stationary forts.
    Millennium Challenge 2002, only the game cannot be restarted once the enemy does not behave as one hopes. Unlike in scripted war simulations, Opfor can win.
    I remember the amount of devastation that was unleashed on another "backwards nation" Linebackers 1 - 20, battleship salvos chemical defoliants, the Phoenix program, napalm for dessert.
    And not to put to fine a point on it, but that benighted nation was oriental; Iran is a Caucasian nation full of Caucasian type peoples.
    Nothing about this situation is of any benefit to the USA.
    We do not need Saudi oil, we do not need Israel to come to the defense of the USA here in North America, we do not need to stick our dick into the hornet's nest and then wonder why they sting and it hurts. How many times does Dumb have to win?
    Nuff Sed , 18 September 2019 at 08:07 AM
    3. Also, I can't imagine this event as being a very welcome one for Israeli military observers, the significance of which is not lost on them, unlike their US counterparts. If Yemen/ Iran can put the Abqaiq processing plant out of commission for a few weeks, then obviusly Hezbollah can do the same for the giant petrochemical complex at Haifa, as well as Dimona, and the control tower at Ben Gurion Airport.
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/239251

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/haifa-municipal-workers-block-refinery-access-for-2nd-day/

    These are the kinds of issues which are germane: the game has changed. What are the implications?

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 08:08 AM
    nuff sed

    I have said repeatedly that Hizbullah can destroy Israel. Nothing about that has changed.

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 08:17 AM
    Yeah, right

    It was late at night when I wrote this. Yeah, Right. the Iranians could send their massive ground force into Syria where it would be chewed up by US and Israeli air. Alternatively they could invade Saudi arabia.

    Yeah, Right said in reply to turcopolier ... , 18 September 2019 at 08:38 AM
    Thank you for the reply but actually I was thinking that an invasion of Afghanistan would be the more sensible ploy.

    To my mind if the Iranian Army sits on its backside then the USAF and IAF will ignore it to roam the length and breadth of Iran destroying whatever ground targets are on their long-planned target-list.

    Or that Iranian Army can launch itself into Afghanistan, at which point all of the USA plans for a methodical aerial pummelling of Iran's infrastructure goes out the window as the USAF scrambles to save the American forces in Afghanistan from being overrun.

    Isn't that correct?

    So what incentive is there for that Iranian Army to sit around doing nothing?

    Iran will do what the USAF isn't expecting it to do, if for no other reason that it upsets the USA's own game-plan.

    johnf , 18 September 2019 at 08:41 AM
    There seems to be a bit of a hiatus in proceedings - not in these columns but on the ground in the ME.

    Everyone seems to be waiting for something.

    Could this "something" be the decisive word fron our commander in chief Binyamin Netanyahu?

    The thing is he has just pretty much lost an election. Likud might form part of the next government of Israel but most likely not with him at its head.

    Does anyone have any ideas on what the future policy of Israel is likely to be under Gantz or whoever? Will it be the same, worse or better?

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 08:51 AM
    Yeah Right

    The correct US move would be to ignore an Iranian invasion of Afghanistan and continue leaving the place. The Iranian Shia can then fight the Sunni jihadi tribesmen.

    Yeah, Right said in reply to turcopolier ... , 18 September 2019 at 09:29 AM
    Oh, I completely agree that if the Iranians launch an invasion of Afghanistan then the only sensible strategy would be for the US troops to pack up and get out as fast as possible.

    But that is "cut and run", which many in Washington would view as a humiliation.

    Do you really see the beltway warriors agreeing to that?

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 08:53 AM
    Stueee

    A flaw in your otherwise sound argument is that the US military has not been seriously engaged for several years and has been reconstituting itself with the money Trump has given them.

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 08:57 AM
    Nuff Sed

    Re-positioning of forces does not indicate that a presidential decision for war has been made. The navy will not want to fight you in the narrow, shallow waters of the Gulf.

    Lars , 18 September 2019 at 09:53 AM
    I would think that Mr. Trump would have a hard time sell a war with Iran over an attack on Saudi Arabia. The good question about how would that war end will soon be raised and I doubt there are many good answers.

    The US should have gotten out of that part of the world a long time ago, just as they should have paid more attention to the warnings in President Eisenhower's farewell address.

    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 10:12 AM
    CK

    The point was about shore based firepower, not forts. don't be so literal.

    CK said in reply to turcopolier ... , 18 September 2019 at 10:34 AM
    The Perfumed Fops in the DOD restarted Millennium Challenge 2002,because Gen Van Riper had used 19th and early 20th century tactics and shore based firepower to sink the Blue Teams carrier forces. There was a script, Van Riper did some adlibbing. Does the US DOD think that Iran will follow the US script? In a unipolar world maybe the USA could enforce a script, that world was severely wounded in 1975, took a sucking chest wound during operation Cakewalk in 2003 and died in Syria in 2015. Too many poles too many powers not enough diplomacy. It will not end well.
    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 10:16 AM
    lars

    We would crush Iran at some cost to ourselves but the political cost to the anti-globalist coalition would catastrophic. BTW Trump's "base" isn't big enough to elect him so he cannot afford to alienate independents.

    prawnik , 18 September 2019 at 10:32 AM
    Even if Rouhani and the Iranian Parliament personally designed, assembled, targeted and launched the missiles (scarier sounding version of "drones"), then they should be congratulated, for the Saudi tyrant deserves every bad thing that he gets.
    turcopolier , 18 September 2019 at 10:49 AM
    prawnik (Sid) in this particular situation goering's glittering generalization does not apply. Trump needs a lot of doubting suburbanites to win and a war will not incline them to vote for him.
    Bill Wade , 18 September 2019 at 10:53 AM
    Looks like President Trump is walking it back, tweet: I have just instructed the Secretary of the Treasury to substantially increase Sanctions on the country of Iran!
    PRC90 , 18 September 2019 at 11:34 AM
    I doubt there will be armed conflict of any kind.
    Everything Trump does from now (including sacking the Bolton millstone) will be directed at winning 2020, and that will not be aided by entering into some inconclusive low intensity attrition war.
    Iran, on the other hand, will be doing everything it can to increase the chance of a Democrat administration, bearing in mind the great deal they got from the last one and the lack of anything they can expect from Trump Term Two.
    This may be a useful tool for determining their next move, but the limit of their actions would be when some Democrats begin making the electorally damaging mistake of critising Trump for not retaliating against Iranian provocations.
    Terence Gore , 18 September 2019 at 11:35 AM
    Pros and cons of many options considered against Iran

    https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_iran_strategy.pdf

    [Jan 08, 2020] If we assume that Pompeo persuaded Trump to order to kill a diplomatic envoy, Trump is now a dead man walking as after Iran responce Pelosi impeachment gambit now have legs

    Highly recommended!
    This is truly shocking: Trump assassinates diplomatic envoy he himself arranged for. . If the U.S. lured Soleimani to Iraq with a promise of negotiations with the Iraqis as mediators and then proceeded to kill him, surely that would be an impeachable offense. Particularly in view of the failure to brief Congress. If it was Saudi tricked Soleimani by getting Iraq to "mediate" (Iraq's prime minister was expecting a message by him on the mediation when he was assassinated), Saudi will get targeted.
    The US changed the rules of engagement. They had decided to assassinate Soleimani when he was in Syria, having just returned from a short journey to Lebanon, before boarding a commercial flight from Damascus airport to Baghdad. The US killing machine was waiting for him to land in Baghdad and monitored his movements when he was picked up at the foot of the plane. The US hit the two cars, carrying Soleimani and the al-Muhandes protection team, when they were still inside the airport perimeter and were slowing down at the first check-point.
    US forces will no longer be safe in Iraq outside protected areas inside the military bases where they are deployed. A potential danger or hit-man could be lurking at every corner; this will limit the free movement of US soldiers. Iran would be delighted were the Iraqi groups to decide to hit the American forces and hunt them wherever they are. This would rekindle memories of the first clashes between Jaish al-Mahdi and US forces in Najaf in 2004-2005.
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Tom , Jan 5 2020 15:55 utc | 16
    Impeachment with GOP support could be just around the corner. And who lost Iraq??? He would be a dead man walking in that case. I can't see the evangelical crowd saving him. President Pence. Might have to get use to that.

    Here is a link to a twitter account with a good video of massive crowds on the streets of Mashhad awaiting the arrival of Qassem Suleimani. Very powerful.

    https://twitter.com/sonofnariman/status/1213792565075550208

    Piotr Berman , Jan 5 2020 16:02 utc | 17

    There will be no draining of any swamps. Trump-Kushner just another Bibi lackey.

    Posted by: Jerry | Jan 5 2020 15:48 utc | 13

    1. Draining swamps was a marker of progress in the past. >>Wiki:But in the late 1960s and early 1970s, researchers found that marshes and swamps "were worth billions annually in wildlife production, groundwater recharge, and for flood, pollution, and erosion control." This motivated the passage of the 1972 federal Water Pollution Control Act.<<

    2. To recognize this vital role, parties should adopt more acquatic symbols. Caymans are a bit too similar to alligators, but, say, Alligators vs Snapping Turtles?

    Sasha , Jan 5 2020 16:02 utc | 18
    A video which says it all...
    Gen. #Soleimani, enemy of Daesh and Trump!

    Trump has threatened #Iran with destroying its cultural sites but that is not his only similarity with Daesh, they both hated General Soleimani.

    https://twitter.com/PressTV/status/1213804505537679362


    Bemildred , Jan 5 2020 16:02 utc | 19
    Posted by: Tom | Jan 5 2020 15:55 utc | 16

    Yes, it might just be that this debacle provides the extra impulse to get him removed. Can't say I can even imagine what that would look like, but there would seem to be a good argument now that he must be restrained somehow. Somebody needs to tell Pompeous to stop digging the hole deeper (shutup) too.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Big, bad Putin attacked by slimy rat Browder.

    Jan 08, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Is there a chorus of politicians singing in there about how lazy they are, and how they never bothered to verify Browder' story? The story is indeed remarkable, but not in the way that first appears.

    Stephen Fry / @stephenfry

    You may or may not know the remarkable story of @Billbrowder and the #MagnitskyAct - find out the startling truth by listening to
    #MagnitskytheMusical by the wondrous @JohnnyFlynnHQ & @roberthudson - @BBCRadio3 7.30 Sun 12th Jan

    Magnitsky the Musical

    Book and lyrics by Robert Hudson
    Music and lyrics by Johnny Flynn

    12 January 2020
    О 1 hour, 34 minutes

    Johnny Flynn and Robert Hudson bring us a musical based on the
    incredible story of an American venture capitalist, a Russian tax
    advisor, a crazy heist, the Trump Tower meeting and the very rule of
    law.

    Blending music and satire, the story explores the truths and fictions
    surrounding the origins and aftershocks of the Magnitsky Act; global
    legislation which allows governments to sanction those who they see
    as offenders of human rights.

    It tells the story of a tax adviser's struggle to uncover a huge tax
    fraud, his imprisonment by the very authorities he is investigating,
    and the American financier's crusade for justice.

    Johnny Flynn, Paul Chahidi and members of the cast perform songs in
    a epic story that explores democracy, corruption, and how we
    undervalue the law at our peril.

    Bill Paul Chahidi Sergei Johnny Flynn Jamie Fenella Woolgar Natalia Ellie Kendrick Kuznetsov Gus Brown Guard Clive Hayward Silchenko Ian Conningham Jared Will Kirk Fisherman Neil McCaul Judge Jessica Turner

    Additional singing by Sinead Maclnnes, Laura Christy, Scarlett
    Courtney and Lucy Reynolds.

    The cellist is Joe Zeitlin. Sound is by Peter Ringrose. Directed by Sasha Yevtushenko.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Three major Trump accomplishments

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bubbles , Jan 8 2020 16:29 utc | 103

    arby @90

    Trump has accomplished 3 things in 3 years.

    1. Being Santa Claus to Netanyahu, the far right and the very rich (Generous donors)
    2. Doing the impossible, making Hillary look like the better of 2 terrible choices
    3. Proving 42% of the American public aren't too swift.


    [Jan 08, 2020] Iran, Soleimani, oil and dollar status as the world reserve currency

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    After the September 11, 2001 attacks, instead of using the opportunity to widen the circle of U.S. allies or at least non-enemies in the Middle East, the Bush administration declared war on "all terrorism of global reach," not just on the Sunni terrorists responsible. That meant not seeking some sort of détente with Shiite Iran -- despite its assistance in overturning the Taliban in Afghanistan and forming a replacement government -- but putting Tehran in an "Axis of Evil" with North Korea and Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

    Some members of the Bush administration went further. John Bolton, then an undersecretary of state nominally tasked with arms control (he mostly did the reverse), said that Iran should "take a number," implying it would be the next to experience regime change after Iraq. Neoconservatives worried about Iran and its expanding stockpile of low-enriched uranium, as well as its long opposition to Israel, said that "real men go to Tehran," not Baghdad.

    The Bush administration also went back on a promise to trade leaders of the Mujaheddin-e Khalq -- a militant Iranian group nurtured by Saddam that fought on Iraq's side during the Iran-Iraq war -- for members of al-Qaeda detained in Iran. Instead the U.S. gave the group protection and Bolton among others argued that the MEK could be deployed against Iran.

    As a result, the U.S. helped turn the Quds Force -- the elite overseas branch of Iran's Revolutionary Guards -- into a full-fledged enemy even as its removal of Saddam's Baathist regime opened Iraq fully to Iran-backed militants, many of whom were trained in Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. Starting with the Badr Brigade, Iran has since helped shape other Iraqi militias, among them Kataib Hezbollah, whose targeting of Americans in Iraq touched off the latest escalatory spiral.

    Of course, the Trump administration's decision in 2018 to quit the Iran nuclear deal and a year later to impose an oil embargo on Iran has been the major cause of the mayhem in the region over the past nine months.

    Now, by assassinating Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani, the Trump administration has likely foreclosed any possibility of U.S.-Iran diplomacy and sharply increased the likelihood of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Iran announced on Sunday that it would no longer observe the limits set in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and would resume its nuclear program. That will incentivize Saudi Arabia to get nukes of its own.

    It is said that George W. Bush, when he decided to invade Iraq, did not understand the difference between Sunnis and Shias. Donald Trump seems to dislike all Muslims, except those who buy American arms or host Trump properties.


    In killing Soleimani, Trump has shown his ignorance of the power of martyrdom in Shia theology. To Iranians and many Arab Shia -- including those who would like to get Iran out of their countries' affairs -- Soleimani was a bulwark against al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, defending the interests of a religious minority in the Middle East. Pictures of Soleimani being embraced by the Imam Hussein -- the revered Shia figure martyred in the year 680 in Karbala, Iraq, by the forces of the Sunni tyrant Yazid -- are circulating widely on social media. The U.S., by implication, has become Yazid.

    Kathleen King • 12 hours ago

    It is not 'Shia' vs. 'Sunni' when referencing the perspective of the U.S. : Middle East relationship. It is the petro dollar. And every so often we have someone writing from a 'thinktank', i.e., The Atlantic Council, that never touches upon the scenario of the 'petro' dollar and how it governs U.S. foreign policy in that region. Instead they frame their gripes with partisan politics. Bush, Obama, and Trump have to kiss the Saudi ass in order to pay for the enormous 'warfare' and 'welfare' state of Washington D.C. The Petro Dollar ensures that the printing presses in Washington continue to print those dollars that will support a larger budget for the Pentagon, and Medicare, and in the very near future if Trump loses the White House: Medicare for All {including undocumented immigrants}, Reparations, free college for all, etc. You can add the United State's incredible generosity with tax payer money that pretty much pays for an 'ungrateful' Western Europe security.

    And Trump did not do this to America. But he has to continue it in order to keep those printing presses rolling at the Treasury: in other words keep the American Dollar the 'top dog' currency of the world which allows for this $20 trillion + deficit and at the same time 'fantasy island' welfare state promises from the politicians. And politicians have no problem with this policy - they can just exploit it for partisan politics and at the same time promise an pseudo 'sustainable' increase in the welfare state to win elections.

    That said, the Saudis are Sunnis. They want to increase their power. And in order to keep them happy {so they will not change currency exchanges for their oil to the 'gold-backed' yuan}, then the United States must fight messy and horrible wars in Yemen; start wars in Syria [General Mattis was and is a big time supporter of this] - supporting terrorist groups who love killing Christians with U.S. weapons, and ultimately regime change in Iran. Why do you think George W. Bush, etal have to look the other way on 9/11 - shield the Saudis {oh, and Obama is included on this list also}. All U.S. presidents face this problem. But especially the Democrats since their big welfare state costs way more to sustain than the Pentagon.

    In conclusion - Obama, a Democrat, oversaw the CIA that supported and aided MBS onto the throne in Saudi Arabia because, unlike his myriad of family members, he will continue to exchange oil {along with the Gulf 'Sunni' dominated states' using the Dollar. It is all the presidents of all political parties beginning with the Nixon administration.

    polistra24 • 9 hours ago
    Russia and China are ALREADY seen as more sane and rational powers than USA. That's why we couldn't let Soleimani negotiate peace between Persia and Saudi. Killing him won't stop the negotiations; more likely it will speed up Saudi's divorce from US/Israel craziness.
    Sid Finster • 7 hours ago
    Putin and Xi are more honest and useful brokers than the United States.

    That is not a major accomplishment. The United States has demonstrated time and again that it acts not even in its own interests, but in the interests of its Saudi owners and Israeli masters.

    Dr. Rieux Sid Finster • 6 hours ago • edited
    The message underlying the Book of Daniel: Better than sitting on the throne is to be the power behind it.
    TheSnark • 7 hours ago • edited
    In theory, the US could be a powerful stabilizing force in the Middle East. We have the resources and the military might to provide very effective carrots and sticks.

    However, over the past decades we have proven that we are so ignorant of the local cultures and politics, so blinded by our own preconceptions and ideologies, and so unwilling to learn, that we keep punishing people with carrots and rewarding them with sticks. Time to admit we can't get it right and go home.

    Sid Finster TheSnark • 7 hours ago
    Even worse, we have chosen two particular countries in the region, the Israelis and the Saudis, as Our Special Friends and we use the carrots and sticks almost entirely in their interests.
    TISO_AX2 TheSnark • 6 hours ago
    The biggest impediment to that is the frequent change of administrations and their policies. But since we weren't designed to be doing that sort of thing in the first place it's only natural that we aren't very good at it. We should get out of foreign entanglements but Congress (and its lobbyists) fights it tooth and nail, across administrations. They've even developed a nasty word for it... isolationism .

    [Jan 08, 2020] Pompeo and his lies got us into this mess with Iran caucus99percent

    Pompeo was and is despicable liar: If the threat was 'imminent', wouldn't that already be known?
    Notable quotes:
    "... @Not Henry Kissinger ..."
    "... @Not Henry Kissinger ..."
    Jan 08, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    gjohnsit on Mon, 01/06/2020 - 6:14pm Just a few days ago SoS Mike Pompeo said that we assassinated General Soleimani to stop an 'imminent attack' on Americans.
    No evidence was presented to back up this claim. We are just supposed to believe it.

    It turns out that Pompeo and VP Pence had pushed Trump hard to do this assassination.

    gjohnsit on Mon, 01/06/2020 - 6:28pm
    Netanyahu was obviously involved

    @Not Henry Kissinger
    But I can understand his efforts to distance himself.
    It shows more smarts than what Trump has been doing.

    The patient way the Iranians are preparing to respond is scaring them.

    Not Henry Kissinger on Mon, 01/06/2020 - 6:37pm
    Netanyahu should be scared.

    @gjohnsit

    Bibi for Soleimani is looking more and more like the appropriate 'proportional' response for all concerned.

    gjohnsit on Mon, 01/06/2020 - 7:02pm
    Meanwhile in Kenya/Somalia

    @gjohnsit
    normally this would be big news

    "Seven aircraft and three military vehicles were destroyed in the attack," said the statement, which included photos of aircraft ablaze and an al Shabaab militant standing nearby. In a tweet, the US Africa Command confirmed an attack on the Manda Bay Airfield had occurred.

    3 americans killed

    One US military service member and two contractors were killed in an Islamist attack on a military base in Kenya.

    Islamist militant group al-Shabab attacked the base, used by Kenyan and US forces, in the popular coastal region of Lamu on Sunday.
    The US military said in a statement that two others from the Department of Defense were wounded.

    "The wounded Americans are currently in stable condition and being evacuated," the US military's Africa Command said.

    Raggedy Ann on Mon, 01/06/2020 - 6:34pm
    Hilarious!

    @Not Henry Kissinger
    Here we go - a pissing contest about to begin!

    But the response of Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , was particularly striking, as he has been one of Trump's staunchest supporters on the world stage.

    He told a meeting of his security cabinet on Monday: "The assassination of Suleimani isn't an Israeli event but an American event. We were not involved and should not be dragged into it."

    Uh huh.

    

    [Jan 08, 2020] Fragmentation In 'The Axis Of Resistance' Led To Soleimani's Death by Elijah Magnier

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Elijah Magnier via EJMagnier.com,

    It was not the US decision to fire missiles against the IRGC commander Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani that killed the Iranian officer and his companions in Baghdad. Yes, of course, the order that was given to launch missiles from the two drones (which destroyed the two cars carrying Sardar Soleimani and his companion the Iraqi commander in al-Hashd al-Shaabi Jamal Jaafar Al-Tamimi aka Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes and burned their bodies in the vehicle) came from US command and control.

    However, the reason President Donald Trump made this decision derives from the weakness of the "axis of resistance", which has completely retreated from the level of performance that Iran believed it was capable of after decades of work to strengthen this "axis".

    A close companion of Major General Qassim Soleimani, to whom he spoke hours before boarding the plane that took him from Damascus to Baghdad, told me:

    "The nobleman died. Palestine above all has lost Hajj Qassem (Soleimani). He was the "King" of the Axis of the Resistance and its leader. He was assassinated and this is exactly what he was hoping to reach in this life (Martyrdom). However, this axis will live and will not die. No doubt, the Axis of the Resistance needs to review its policy and regenerate itself to correct its path. This was what Hajj Qassim was complaining about and planning to work on and strategizing about in his last hours."

    The US struck Iran at the heart of its pride by killing Major General Soleimani. But the "axis of the Resistance" killed him before that. This is how:

    When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assassinated the deputy head of the Military Council (the highest authority in the Lebanese Hezbollah, which is headed by its Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah), Hajj Imad Mughniyah in Damascus, Syria, Hezbollah could not avenge him until today.

    When Trump gave Netanyahu Jerusalem as the "capital of Israel", the "Axis of the Resistance" did not move except by holding television symposia and conferences verbally rejecting the decision.

    When President Trump offered the occupied Syrian Golan Heights to Israel and the "Axis of Resistance" did not react, the US President Donald Trump and his team understood that they were opposed by no effective deterrent. The inaction of the Resistance axis emboldened Trump to do what he wants.

    And when Israel bombed hundreds of Syrian and Iranian targets in Syria , the "Axis of the Resistance" justified its lack of retaliation by the typical sentence: "We do not want to be dragged along by the timing of the engagement imposed by the enemy," as a senior official in this axis told me.

    In Iraq shortly before his death, Major General Soleimani was complaining about the weakening of the Iraqi ranks within this "Axis of the Resistance", represented by the Al-Bina' (Construction) Alliance and other groups close to this alliance like Al-Hikma of Ammar al-Hakim and Haidar al-Abadi, formerly close to Iran, that have gone over to the US side.

    In Iraq, Major General Soleimani was very patient and never lost his temper. He was trying to reconcile the Iraqis, both his allies and those who had chosen the US camp and disagreed with him. He used to hug those who shouted at him to lower tensions and continue dialogue to avoid spoiling the meeting. Anyone who raised his voice during discussions soon found that it was Soleimani who calmed everyone down.

    Hajj Qassem Soleimani was unable to reach a consensus on the new Prime Minister's name among those he deemed to be allies in the same coalition. He asked Iraqi leaders to select the names and went through all of these asking questions about the acceptability of these names to the political groups, to the Marjaiya, to protestors in the street and whether the suggested names were not provocative or challenging to the US. Notwithstanding the animosity between Iran and the US, Soleimani encouraged the selection of a personality that would not be boycotted by the US. Soleimani believed the US capable of damaging Iraq and understood the importance of maintaining a good relationship with the US for the stability of the country.

    Soleimani was shocked by the dissension among Iraqi Shia and believed that the "axis of resistance" needed a new vision as it was faltering. In the final hours before his death, Major General Soleimani was ruminating on the profound antagonisms between Iraqis of the same camp.

    When the Iraqi street began to move against the government, the line rejecting American hegemony was fragmented because it was part of the authority that ruled and governed Iraq. To make matters worse, Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr directed his arrows against his partners in government, as though the street demonstrations did not target him, the politician controlling the largest number of Iraqi deputies, ministers and state officials, who had participated in the government for more than ten years.

    Major General Soleimani admonished Moqtada Al-Sadr for his stances, which contributed to undermining the Iraqi ranks because the Sadrist leader did not offer an alternative solution or practical project other than the chaos. Moqtada has his own men, the feared Saraya al-Salam, present in the street.

    When US Defense Secretary Mark Esper called Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi on December 28 and informed him of America's intentions of hitting Iraqi security targets inside Iraq, including the PMU, Soleimani was very disappointed by Abdul-Mahdi's failure to effectively oppose Esper. Abdul-Mahdi merely told Esper that the proposed US action was dangerous. Soleimani knew that the US would not have hit Iraqi targets had Abdul-Mahdi dared to oppose the US decision. The targeted areas were a common Iranian-Iraqi operational stage to monitor and control ISIS movements on the borders with Syria and Iraq. The US would have reversed its decision had the Iraqi Prime Minister threatened the US with retaliation in the event that Iraqi forces were bombed and killed. After all, the US had no legal right to attack any objective in Iraq without the agreement of the Iraqi government. This decision was the moment when Iraq has lost its sovereignty and the US took control of the country.

    This effective US control is another reason why President Trump gave the green light to kill Major General Soleimani. The Iraqi front had demonstrated its weakness and also, it was necessary to select a strong Iraqi leader with the guts to stand to the US arrogance and unlawful actions.

    Iran has never controlled Iraq, as most analysts mistakenly believe and speculate. For years, the US has worked hard in the corridors of the Iraqi political leadership lobby for its own interests. The most energetic of its agents was US Presidential envoy Brett McGurk, who clearly realised the difficulties of navigating inside Iraqi leaders' corridors during the search for a prime minister of Iraq before the appointment of Adel Abdel Mahdi, the selection of President Barham Saleh and other governments in the past. Major General Soleimani and McGurk shared an understanding of these difficulties. Both understood the nature of the Iraqi political quagmire.

    Soleimani did not give orders to fire missiles at US bases or attack the US Embassy. If it was in his hands to destroy them with accurate missiles and to remove the entire embassy from its place without repercussions, he would not have hesitated. But the Iraqis have their own opinions, methods, modus operandi and selection of targets and missile calibres; they never relied on Soleimani for such decisions.

    Iranian involvement in Iraqi affairs was never welcomed by the Marjaiya in Najaf, even if it agreed to receive Soleimani on a few occasions. They clashed over the reelection of Nuri al-Maliki, Soleimani's preferred candidate, to the point that the Marjaiya wrote a letter making its refusal of al-Maliki explicit. This led to the selection of Abadi as prime minister.

    Soleimani's views contradicted the perception of the Marjaiya, that had to write a clear message, firstly, to reject the re-election of Nori al-Maliki to a third session, despite Soleimani's insistence.

    All of the above is related to the stage that followed the 2011 departure of US forces from Iraq under President Obama. Prior to that, Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis was the link between the Iraqis and Iran: he had the decision-making power, the vision, the support of various groups, and effectively served as the representative of Soleimani, who did not interfere in the details. These Iraqi groups met with Soleimani often in Iran; Soleimani rarely travelled to Iraq during the period of heavy US military presence.

    Soleimani, although he was the leader of the "Axis of the Resistance", was sometimes called "the king" in some circles because his name evokes Solomon. According to sources within the "Axis of the Resistance", he "never dictated his own policy but left a margin of movement and decision to all leaders of the axis without exception. Therefore, he was considered the link between this axis and the supreme leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei. Soleimani was able to contact Sayyed Khamenei at any time and directly without mediation. The Leader of the revolution considered Soleimani as his son.

    According to sources, in Syria, Soleimani "never hesitated to jump inside a truck, ride an ordinary car, take the first helicopter, or travel on a transport or cargo plane as needed. He did not take any security precautions but used his phone (which he called a companion spy) freely because he believed that when the decision came to assassinate him, he would follow his destiny. He looked forward to becoming a martyr because he had already lived long."

    Was the leader of the "resistance axis" managing and running it?

    Sayyed Ali Khamenei told Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: "You are an Arab and the Arabs accept you more than they accept Iran". Sayyed Nasrallah directed and managed the axis of Lebanon, Syria and Yemen and had an important role in Iraq. Hajj Soleimani was the liaison between the axis of the resistance and Iran and he was the financial and logistical officer. According to my source, "He was a friend of all leaders and officials of all ranks. He was humble and looked after everyone he had to deal with".

    The "Axis of Resistance" indirectly allowed the killing of Qassem Soleimani. If Israel and the US could know Sayyed Nasrallah's whereabouts, they would not hesitate a moment to assassinate him. They may be aware: the reaction may be limited to burning flags and holding conferences and manifesting in front of an embassy. Of course, this kind of reaction does not deter President Trump who wants to be re-elected with the support of Israel and US public opinion. He wants to present himself as a warrior and determined leader who loves battle and killing.

    Iran invested 40 years building the "Axis of the Resistance". It cannot remain idle, faced with the assassination of the Leader of this axis. Would a suitable price be the US exit from Iraq and condemnation in the Security Council? Would that, together with withdrawal from the nuclear deal, be enough for Iran to avenge its General? Will the ensuing battle be confined to the Iraqi stage? Will it be used for the victory of certain Iraqi political players?

    The assassination of its leader represents the supreme test for the Axis of Resistance. All sides, friend and foe, are awaiting its response.

    Arising , 4 hours ago link

    And when Israel bombed hundreds of Syrian and Iranian targets in Syria , the "Axis of the Resistance" justified its lack of retaliation by the typical sentence: "We do not want to be dragged along by the timing of the engagement imposed by the enemy," as a senior official in this axis told me.

    If the 'source' in this article was so close to Soleimani, then he would also have mentioned that Russia was dictating terms in Syria.

    Soleimani knew this and could not afford to lose Russia as an ally, this would definitely have happened if another 'player' was brought into the war just because Soleimani decided to retaliate to Zionist bombing.

    Putin, Assad and Soleimani had a long term view of winning in Syria, not making things worse because of a quick retaliatory strike.

    Joe A , 5 hours ago link

    So far his death has led to the Iraqi parliament giving the boot to foreign troops. His death is winning for the axis of resistance.

    hoffstetter , 3 hours ago link

    Non-binding resolution asking the prime minister to rescind Iraq's invitation...

    The current government is unlikely to push this through. After a new PM is chosen, it would still take a year or more to move the US troops out by the agreements under which they set up their base. All of this has to be viewed under the context that the US was asked to send troops by the Iraqi president.

    hoffstetter , 3 hours ago link

    https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/08/world/middleeast/us-to-send-1500-more-troops-to-iraq.html

    https://www.google.com/search?q=iraqi+president+requests+US+troops&client=firefox-b-1-d&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1%2F1%2F2005%2Ccd_max%3A1%2F1%2F2018&tbm=

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/28/495808708/the-u-s-is-sending-600-more-troops-to-iraq

    You may not like it, you may claim the US forced the government to "request" troops, but they did request them.

    HowdyDoody , 32 minutes ago link

    In response to the US unleashing ISIS on the Iraqis? 'Nice country you got there'.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Chaos Pentagon Denies Poorly Worded Iraq Withdrawal Letter, Esper Says No Decision To Leave Iraq, Period

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Yesterday, Iraqi lawmakers voted to expel foreign troops from the country during an emergency parliamentary session. Interim Iraqi prime minister, Adil Abdul Mahdi, stressed during the session, that while the US government notified the Iraqi military of the planned strike on Soleimani, his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation.

    In a meeting Monday, Mahdi, a caretaker prime minister who said in November he would resign, told US Ambassador Matthew H. Tueller that the US and Iraq needed to cooperate "to implement the withdrawal of foreign forces in accordance with the decision of the Iraqi parliament," according to a statement from the PM's office that was cited by the Washington Post .

    Though the Iraq war 'officially' ended in 2011, thousands of coalition troops stuck around. Their numbers increased following the rise of ISIS in the region.

    Ending the US troop presence in Iraq has been a longtime goal of non-interventionists like Ron Paul and his son, Rand.

    That said, even without troops in Iraq, the US will still have plenty of capacity to bully Iran, and other other regional powers.

    LA_Goldbug , 37 minutes ago link

    Looking back at some of the old articles about Suleimani really makes you think. The only reason to kill him is to Start a War.

    The myth behind Iran's military mastermind is getting out of control

    Armin Rosen

    Mar 16, 2015, 10:01 PM

    https://www.businessinsider.com/why-irans-qassem-suleimaini-is-everywhere-2015-3?r=US&IR=T

    CIA director: Iran is becoming part of the problem in Iraq

    Associated Press

    Mar 22, 2015, 6:06 PM

    AP WASHINGTON (AP) -- Having the leader of Iran's elite Quds Force direct Iraqi forces battling the Islamic State group is complicating the U.S. mission against terrorism and contributing to destabilization in Iraq, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency said Sunday.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/cia-director-iran-is-becoming-part-of-the-problem-in-iraq-2015-3?r=US&IR=T

    [Jan 08, 2020] The Donald's Assassination Of General Soleimani -- As Stupid As It Gets by David Stockman

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.unz.com

    During more than a half-century of Washington watching we have seen stupidity rise from one height to yet another. But nothing -- just plain nothing -- compares to the the blithering stupidity of the Donald's Iran "policy", culminating in the mindless assassination of its top military leader and hero of the so-called Islamic Revolution, Major General Qassem Soleimani.

    To be sure, we don't give a flying f*ck about the dead man himself. Like most generals of whatever army (including the US army), he was a cold-blooded, professional killer.

    And in this day and age of urban and irregular warfare and drone-based annihilation delivered by remote joy-stick, generals tend to kill more civilians than combatants. The dead civilian victims in their millions of U.S. generals reaching back to the 1960s surely attest to that.

    Then again, even the outright belligerents Soleimani did battle with over the decades were not exactly alms-bearing devotees of Mother Theresa, either. In sequential order, they were the lethally armed combatants mustered by Saddam Hussein, George W. Bush, the Sunni jihadists of ISIS and the Israeli and Saudi air forces, which at this very moment are raining high tech bombs and missiles on Iranian allies and proxies in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

    The only reason these years of combat are described in the mainstream media as evidence of Iranian terrorism propagated by its Quds forces is that the neocons have declared it so. That is, by Washington's lights Iran is not allowed to have a foreign policy and its alliances with mainly Shiite co-religionists in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen are alleged per se to be schemes of aggression and terror, warranting any and all retaliations including assassination of its highest officials.

    But that's just colossal nonsense and imperialistic arrogance. The Assad government in Syria, the largest political party in Lebanon (Hezbollah), the dominant population of northern Yemen (Houthis) and a significant portion of the Iraqi armed forces represented by the Shiite militias (the PMF or Popular Mobilization Forces) are no less civilized and no more prone to sectarian violence than anybody else in this woebegone region. And the real head-choppers of ISIS and its imitators and rivals have all been Sunni jihadist insurrectionists, not Shiite-based governments and political parties.

    The truth is, America has no dog in the Shiite versus Sunni hunt, which has been going on for 1300 years in the region. And when it comes to spillover of those benighted forces into Europe or America, recent history is absolutely clear: 100% of all Islamic terrorist incidents in the US since they began in the 1990s were perpetrated or inspired by Sunni jihadists, not Iran or its Shiite allies and proxies in the region.

    So we needs be direct. The aggression in the Persian Gulf region during the last three decades has originated in the Washington DC nest of neocon vipers and among Bibi Netanyahu's proxies, collaborators and assigns who rule the roost in the Imperial City and among both political parties. And the motivating force has all along been the malicious quest for regime change -- first in Iraq and then in Syria and Iran.

    Needless to say, Washington instigated "regime change" tends to provoke a determined self-defense and a usually violent counter-reaction among the changees. So the truth is, the so-called Shiite crescent is not an alliance of terrorists inflicting wanton violence on the region; it's a league of regime-change resisters and armed combatants who have elected to say "no" to Washington's imperial schemes for remaking the middle eastern maps.

    So in taking out Soleimani, the usually befuddled and increasingly belligerent occupant of the Oval Office was not striking a blow against "terrorism". He was just dramatically escalating Washington's long-standing regime-change aggression in the region, thereby risking an outbreak of even greater violence and possibly a catastrophic conflagration in the Persian Gulf where one-fifth of the world's oil traverses daily.

    And most certainly, the Donald has now crushed his own oft-repeated intent to withdraw American forces from the middle east and get out of the regime change business -- the very platform upon which he campaigned in 2016. There are now upwards of 50,000 US military personnel in the immediate Persian Gulf region and tens of thousands of more contractors, proxies and mercenaries. After Friday's reckless maneuver, that number can now only go up -- and possibly dramatically.

    In joy-sticking Soleimani while lounging in his plush digs at Mar-a-Lago, the Donald was also not avenging the innocent casualties of Iranian aggression -- Americans or otherwise. He was just jamming another regime-change stick in the hornets nest of anti-Americanism in the region that Washington's bloody interventions have spawned over the decades, and which will now intensify by orders of magnitude.

    Sometimes a picture does tell a thousand words, and this one from the funeral procession in Tehran yesterday surely makes a mockery of Secretary Pompeo's idiotic claim that the middle east is now safer than before. If there was ever a case that this neocon knucklehead should be immediately dispatched to his hog and corn farm back in Kansas, this is surely it.

    Iranians carried the coffins of top general Qassem Soleimani and his allies in Kerman, Iran

    The larger point here is that Imperial Washington and its mainstream media megaphones have so egregiously and relentlessly vilified Iran and falsified the middle east narrative that the Iranian side of the story has been completely lost -- literally airbrushed right off the pages of contemporary history in Stalineseque fashion.

    Not that the benighted, mullah-controlled Iranian regime is comprised of anything which resembles white hats. One of the great misfortunes of the last four decades is that the long-suffering people of Iran have not been able to throw-off the cultural and religious shackles imposed by this theocratic regime or escape the economic backwardness and incompetence of what is essentially rule by authoritarian clerics.

    But that's exactly the crime of Washington's neocon-inspired hostility and threats to the Iranian regime. It merely rekindles Iranian nationalism and causes the public to rally to the support of the regime, as is so evident at the current moment.

    Worse still, the underlying patriotic foundation of this pro-regime sentiment is completely lost on Imperial Washington owing to its false narrative about post-1979 history. Yet the fact is, in the eyes of the Iranian people the Quds forces and Soleimani have plausible claims to having been valiant defenders of the nation.

    In the original instance, of course, Soleimani earned his chops on the battlefield contending with the chemical weapons-dropping air force of Saddam Hussein during the 1980s. And Saddam was the invader whose chemical bombs achieved especially deadly accuracy against often barely armed teenage Iranian soldiers owing to spotting and targeting assistance rendered by the U.S. air force -- a Washington assisted depredation that a whole generation of Iranians know all about, even if present day Washington feints ignorance.

    Then after Bush the Younger visited uninvited and unrequested Shock & Awe upon Baghdad and much of the Iraqi countryside, it transpired that the nation's majority Shiite population didn't cotton much to being "liberated" by Washington. Indeed, the more radical elements of the Iraqi Shiite community in Sadr City and other towns of central and south Iraq took up arms during 2003-2011 against what they perceived to be the American "occupiers" because, well, it was their country.

    Needless to say, their Shiite kinsman in Iran were more than ready to give aid and comfort to the Iraqi Shiite in their struggle against what by then was perceived as Iran's own mortal enemy. After all, a full year before Bush the Younger launched the utterly folly of the second gulf war in March 2003, his demented neocon advisors and speechwriters, led by the insufferable David Frum, had concocted a bogeyman called the Axis of Evil, which included Iran and marked it as next in line for Shock & Awe.

    But the idea that the Iraqi people and especially its majority Shiite population would have been dancing in the streets to welcome the US military save for the insidious interference of Iran is just baseless War Party propaganda.

    Stated differently, Washington sent 158,000 lethally armed fighters into a country that had never threatened America's homeland security or harbored its enemies, and had no capacity to do so in any event. But contrary to the glib assurances of Rumsfeld, Cheney and the rest of the neocon jackals around Bush, these U.S. fighters soon came to be widely viewed as "invaders", not liberators, and met resistance from a wide variety of Iraqi elements including remnants of Saddam's government and military, radicalized Sunni jihadists and a motley array of Shiite politicians, clerics and militias.

    Foremost among these was the Sadr clan which emerged as the tribune of the the dispossessed Shiite communities in the south and Baghdad. They rose to prominence after Bush the Elder urged the Shiite to rise up against Saddam after the 1991 Gulf War, and then left them dangling in the wind.

    No U.S. support materialized as the regime's indiscriminate crackdown on the population systematically arrested and killed tens of thousands of Shiites and destroyed Shiite shrines, centers of learning, towns and villages. According to eyewitness accounts, Baathist tanks were painted with messages like "No Shiites after today," people were hanged from electric poles, and tanks ran over women and children and towed bodies through the streets.

    From this horror and brutality emerged Mohammad Mohammad Sadeq al-Sadr, the founder of the Sadrist movement that today, under the leadership of his son Muqtada, constitutes Iraq's most powerful political movement. After the collapse of the Baathist regime in 2003, the Sadrist movement formally established its own militia, known as the Jaysh al-Mahdi, or the Mahdi Army .

    The vast Shiite underclass needed protection, social services and leadership, and the Sadrist movement stepped into these gaps by reactivating Sadeq al-Sadr's network. In the course of U.S. occupation, the Mahdi Army's ranks of supporters, members and fighters swelled, particularly as sectarian conflict intensified and discontent towards the occupation grew out of frustration with the lack of security and basis services.At one point the Mahdi Army numbered more than 60,000 fighters, and especially as Iraq degenerated into total sectarian chaos after 2005, it became a deadly thorn in the side of U.S. forces occupying a country where they were distinctly unwelcome.

    But the Mahdi Army was homegrown; it was Arab, not Persian, and it was fighting for its own homes and communities, not the Iranians, the Quds or Soleimani. In fact, the Sadrists strongly opposed the Iranian influence among other Shiite dissident groups including the brutal Badr Brigade and the Iran-aligned Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution (SCIRI). As the above study further noted,

    I raqis today refer to the Sadrist Movement's Peace Brigades as the "rebellious" militias, because of their refusal to submit not only to Iran , but also to the federal government and religious establishment. Muqtada al-Sadr has oriented his organization around Iraqi nationalistic sentiments and derided the Iran-aligned militias . In line with the true political outlook of his father and his followers, Muqtada's supporters chanted anti-Iranian slogans and stormed the offices of the Dawa Party, ISCI and the Badr Brigade when they protested against the government in May 2016.

    As it happened, the overwhelming share of the 603 US servicemen the Pentagon claims to have been killed by Iranian proxies were actually victims of the Mahdi Army uprisings during 2003-2007. These attacks were led by the above mentioned Iraqi nationalist firebrand and son of the movements founder, Muqtada al-Sadr.

    In fact, however, the surge in U.S. deaths at that time was the direct result of subsequently disgraced General David Petraeus' infamous "surge" campaign. Among others, it targeted al-Sadr's Mahdi Army in the hope of weakening it. Beginning in late April 2007, the U.S. launched dozens of military operations aimed solely at capturing or killing Mahdi Army officers, causing the Mahdi Army to strongly resist those raids and impose mounting casualties on U.S. troops.

    So amidst the fog of two decades of DOD and neocon propaganda, how did Iran and Soleimani get tagged over and over with the "killing Americans" charge, as if they were attacking innocent bystanders in lower Manhattan on 9/11?

    It's just the hoary old canard that Iran was the source of the powerful roadside bombs called Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFPs) that were being used by many of the Shiite militias, as well as the Sunni jihadists in Anbar province and the west. Yet that claim was debunked more than a decade ago by evidence that the Mahdi Army and other Shiite militias were getting their weapons not just from the Iranians but from wherever they could, as well as manufacturing their own.

    As the estimable Iran export, Gareth Porter, recently noted:

    The command's effort to push its line about Iran and EFPs encountered one embarrassing revelation after another. In February 2007 a US command briefing asserted that the EFPs had "characteristics unique to being manufactured in Iran." However, after NBC correspondent Jane Arraf confronted the deputy commander of coalition troops, Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, with the fact that a senior military official had acknowledged to her that US troops had been discovering many sites manufacturing EFPs in Iraq, Odierno was forced to admit that it was true.

    Then in late February 2007, US troops found another cache of parts and explosives for EFPs near Baghdad, which included shipments of PVC tubes for the canisters that contradicted its claims . They had come not from factories in Iran, but from factories in the UAE and other Arab countries, including Iraq itself. That evidence clearly suggested that the Shiites were procuring EFP parts on the commercial market rather than getting them from Iran.

    Although the military briefing by the command in February 2007 pointed to cross-border weapons smuggling, it actually confirmed in one of its slides that it was being handled by "Iraqi extremist group members" rather than by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). And as Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, the US commander for southern Iraq, admitted in a July 6 press briefing , his troops had not "captured anybody that we can directly tie back to Iran."

    On the other hand, what the Iranian Quds forces have actually accomplished in Iraq and Syria has been virtually expunged from the mainstream narrative. To wit, they have been the veritable tip of the spear in the eradication of the Islamic State.

    Indeed, in Iraq it was the wobbly Iraqi national army that Washington stood up at a cost of billions, which turned tail and ran when ISIS emerged in Anbar province in 2014. So doing, they left behind thousands of US armored vehicles, mobile artillery and even tanks, as well as massive troves of guns and ammo, which enabled the Islamic State to briefly thrive and subjugate several million people across the Euphrates Valley.

    It was also Washington that trained, equipped, armed and funded the so-called anti-Assad rebels in Syria, which so weakened and distracted Damascus that that the Islamic State was briefly able to fill the power vacuum and impose its barbaric rule on the citizens of Raqqa and its environs. And again, it did so in large part with weaponry captured from or sold to ISIS by the so-called moderate rebels.

    To the contrary, the panic and unraveling in Iraq during 2014-2015 was stopped and reversed when the Iranians at the invitation of Baghdad's Shiite government helped organize and mobilize the Iraqi Shiite militias, which eventually chased ISIS out of Mosul and Anbar.

    Likewise, outside of the northern border areas liberated by the Syrian Kurds, it was the Shiite alliance of Assad, Hezbollah and the Iranian Quds forces that rid Syria of the ISIS plague.

    Yes, the U.S. air force literally incinerated two great cities temporarily occupied by the Islamic State -- Mosul and Raqqa. But it was the Shiite fighters who were literally fighting for their lives, homes and hearth who cleared that land of a barbaric infestation that had been spawned and enabled by the very Washington neocons who are now dripping red in tooth and claw.

    So we revert to the Donald's act of utter stupidity. On the one hand, it is now evident that the reason Soleimani was in Baghdad was to deliver an official response from Tehran to a recent Saudi de-escalation offer. And that's by the word of the very prime minister that Washington has stood up in the rump state of Iraq and who has now joined a majority of the Iraqi parliament in demanding that Iraq's putative liberators -- after expending trillions in treasure and blood -- leave the country forthwith:

    Before the vote Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi told the parliament that he was scheduled to meet with Soleimani a day after his arrival to receive a letter from Iran to Iraq in response to a de-escalation offer Saudi Arabia had made. The U.S. assassinated Soleimani before the letter could be delivered by him. Abdul-Mahdi also said that Trump had asked him to mediate between the U.S. and Iran. Did he do that to trap Soleimani? It is no wonder then that Abdul-Mahdi is fuming.

    At the same time, the positive trends that were in motion in the region just days ago -- -ISIS gone, Syria closing in on the remaining jihadists, Saudi Arabia and Iran tentatively exploring a more peaceful modus vivendi, the Yemen genocide winding to a close -- may now literally go up in smoke. As the always sagacious Pat Buchanan observed today,

    What a difference a presidential decision can make.

    Two months ago, crowds were in the streets of Iraq protesting Iran's dominance of their politics. Crowds were in the streets of Iran cursing that regime for squandering the nation's resources on imperial adventures in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen. Things were going America's way.

    Now it is the Americans who are the targets of protests.

    Over three days, crowds numbering in the hundreds of thousands and even millions have packed Iraqi and Iranian streets and squares to pay tribute to Soleimani and to curse the Americans who killed him.

    We have long believed that there is nothing stupider in Washington than the neocon policy mafia that has wrecked such unspeakable havoc on the middle east as well as upon American

    Sasha , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:41 am GMT

    "Not that the benighted, mullah-controlled Iranian regime is comprised of anything which resembles white hats. One of the great misfortunes of the last four decades is that the long-suffering people of Iran have not been able to throw-off the cultural and religious shackles imposed by this theocratic regime or escape the economic backwardness and incompetence of what is essentially rule by authoritarian clerics."

    I get it that maybe Iranians don't have a Walmart in every town, and may not have the privilege of mortgaging their lives on a Visa or MC – but that's not what I call backwardness, rather progress. If times are tough, is it the backwardness of their system, or might crippling sanctions play a small role in that? What "cultural and religious shackles" might these be? Please be more specific, or I might think you mean that they don't have instant access to Hollywood blockbusters or something. The horror! Finally – if you want to use the term "regime", please apply it with a broad brush, maybe even broad enough to touch on the oh-so-democratic West. Let's just call them "governments", OK?

    Carlton Meyer , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:21 am GMT
    Nice to see the great David Stockman appear at Unz. Watch him teach Fox Business News blabbers economics and political realities. Then he stuns them by saying the Pentagon's budget must be cut:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/_-fUmMrzzJc?feature=oembed

    Haxo Angmark , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:26 am GMT
    well said by Stockman, though it's all water under the bridge now.

    Drumpf, a life-long Zion-stooge, and the (((neo-conz))) and their cucks

    have got their War of Choice. Depending how the Greater MidEast War goes,

    it may help solve all sorts of outstanding problems, there

    and here. Right now it's just after dawn in Tehran .let's see how far

    Drumpf et al. up the bloody ante today.

    Justsaying , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:30 am GMT
    @Sasha Well and truly spoken. American pop and consumerist culture along with pop drinks and endless fads, crude music and fast foods are being peddled as markers of serious culture. They are shoved down the throats of unsuspecting minds in asymmetric commerce as part of an aggressive campaign to turn the planet into a consumerist backyard for American junk and to consolidate American hegemony.
    Justsaying , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:41 am GMT

    The larger point here is that Imperial Washington and its mainstream media megaphones have so egregiously and relentlessly vilified Iran and falsified the middle east narrative that the Iranian side of the story has been completely lost --

    Iran's foreign minister Zarif has been denied entry into the United States to attend a UN meeting. Speaking of idiocy in denying Iranians their side of the story. That has been the imperial modus operandi in appropriating narratives with the complicity of our poor excuse for journalism, the servile MSM.

    JUSA , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:55 am GMT
    @Sasha I agree. If Iranians are really that disgusted by the "cultural and religious shackles imposed by this theocratic regime or the economic backwardness and incompetence of what is essentially rule by authoritarian clerics", those clerics wouldn't still be in power. All they have to do is look at the degeneration of the West from drugs, alcohol, money, power, coarsening pop culture, pornography, all manners of sexual perversion and they know they are wise to take a different path.

    Culturally, economically, politically, even technologically, the US is on a downward spiral, courtesy of the Jews. This warmongering perpetuated by the same tribe will eventually finish us off. China, Russia and Iran have existed for thousands of years. They will have the last laugh.

    A123 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:05 am GMT

    Before the vote Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi told the parliament that he was scheduled to meet with Soleimani a day after his arrival to receive a letter from Iran to Iraq in response to a de-escalation offer Saudi Arabia had made. The U.S. assassinated Soleimani before the letter could be delivered by him.

    So, Iranian de-escalation was based on a sneak attack against the U.S. Embassy? No. Simple logic shows that Mahdi is lying. Iran *escalated* by attacking the embassy.

    -- What does Stockman suggest as a response to the Iranian sneak attack on the U.S. Embassy?
    -- Why are the voices that are always screaming about 'International Law' not outraged by Iran's violations?

    Given the history of such actions from the Carter era, a strong response was necessary and inevitable. Iran offered war. And, Trump responded prudently and proportionally.
    ________

    Based on tonight's news, Khameni made a 'show' reprisal that had little impact on U.S. Forces. (1)

    Iran fired more than a dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops, but preliminary reports suggest there are no U.S. casualties yet, two sources with direct knowledge of actions on the ground told Military Times Tuesday night.

    Khameni's attack on the embassy was a failure that backfired badly. He is now desperately trying to back down, because he knows that Iran has no effective defense against U.S. Military options.

    PEACE

    ______

    (1) https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/08/no-us-casualties-in-iran-missile-strike-preliminary-reports-say/

    Mark James , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:09 am GMT
    Stockman knew Reagan's first budget was a joke. He wrote it: telling the late Bill Greider –in real time– that it was a 'Trojan Horse.'

    Now he's telling Pompeo to go back to the pig farm but word is the Sec.State is now not running for a Senate seat. But I tend to believe Pompeo is not directing things it's coming from Trump's inner circle. Kushner strikes me as more of a neocon and he's obviously down with what they want in Tel Aviv. Which I think is an attack on Iran Nuclear capabilities before the end of the summer.

    I heard Andrea Mitchell praising Stephen Hadley (Bush Neocon) as a "wise man" who called this an opportunity for negotiation. That's g one Andrea: it went out when Trump got rid of the deal Iran was adhering to, which the neocons and Israel didn't want.

    freedom-cat , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:14 am GMT
    I was reading earlier today that American Military Contractor company's stock began soaring right after the assassination; Ratheon, Northrup Grumman, Lockheed, Boeing, etc etc

    Now Asian market defense contracting company stocks are soaring because Iran has fired missiles at a couple US bases in Iraq.

    Insanity. Hitting your head over and over on a brick wall, while thinking you'll start feeling better.

    I'm sorry to say I voted for this moron; and all because I hated the alternative and he was flapping his jaws about ending the warring in M.E. I had my doubts from the beginning but I was willing to give him a chance. Won't be voting in this fall's election. There is not one candidate worth voting for; none.

    Geez, by November we might be in full blown WW3 & elections suspended. who the hell knows at this point.

    gotmituns , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:16 am GMT
    As stupid as it gets
    -- -- -- -- -- -- –
    Well, the Iranians really loused up now. Now Trump and his Israeli loving friends can finally kick their butts really good. Very bad idea attacking us.
    Biff , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:31 am GMT
    After the latest round of shit-slinging, Washington stinks, Tehran stinks, but Israel is still smelling like a rose even though they are the instigator of the whole affair.
    How do they keep getting away with it each and every time?
    Mr. Allen , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:38 am GMT
    This is absurd. Don't lump all generals in together as the same. You might as well say Nazi generals and Russian generals and British generals and American generals and Japanese generals are all the same – all equally culpable of equal war crimes in WWII.

    Unless you truly believe there is no good and bad sides in all these Middle Eastern wars this can't be true.

    The Americans are aggressors and invaders in the Middle East. For the Iraqis to turn on the Americans it must mean something.

    We get closer to the truth when we see Soleimani as a freedom fighter and Americans as terrorists.

    To lump Soleimani with the American lot is devoid of morals and common sense

    Lockean Proviso , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:59 am GMT
    @JUSA

    All they have to do is look at the degeneration of the West from drugs, alcohol, money, power, coarsening pop culture, pornography, all manners of sexual perversion and they know they are wise to take a different path.

    Yes, although it is interesting to note that the Iran has been one of the top nations for sex-change surgeries because the regime would rather change tomboys and sissies into "boys" and "girls" rather than allow homosexuality or even atypical gender affect. They do avoid having a pernicious and culturally radicalizing gay lobby though.

    Anyway, it's none of our business and if we really had to choose sides in the Saudi vs Iran conflict then Iran would be the rational choice. Maybe neocon stupidity will help bring that conflict to a truce as they unite against the USA.

    Passer by , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 7:22 am GMT
    Pretty bad news for the US:

    Signed:

    YOUR ENEMY MOQTADA AL-SADR #Iraq #US #USA_غادروا_العراق pic.twitter.com/CcSmNOHqUu

    -- Elijah J. Magnier (@ejmalrai) January 6, 2020

    Moqtada al-Sadr, the most influential person in Iraq, is now calling the US an enemy and threatening Trump personally. If Mahdi Army joins the other Shia groups around the world, big damage will be done to the US via many means and no american will be able to stay in Iraq. Embassy could be gone too. US companies working on oil and gas will be kicked out. The country will move strongly towards Russia and China. All US investment in the Iraq adventure will be totally lost.

    Angering iraqi shia is very stupid US move. They are an ascending force, with young combat ready population and young and expanding demographics. Last time the US angered the iraqi shia (2004), it lost the war in Iraq even before it knew it.

    This is the result of a declining power not recognizing its decline and making enemies everywhere.

    The 2020s will be a turbulent period of power transition where the US and Europe decline and the rest of the world rises, the end of the superpower moment and the beginning of a multipolar world.

    JackOH , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 8:16 am GMT
    That David Stockman? Kudos, Ron.
    CBTerry , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 8:16 am GMT
    Excellent article by a man so principled that as a representative from Michigan he voted against the Chrysler bail-out.
    So please forgive me for pointing out this error:

    From the interweb:

    A feint (noun) is primarily a deceptive move, such as in fencing or military maneuvering. It can also mean presenting a feigned appearance. Feint can also be a verb, but in that case it simply means to execute a feint.
    To feign (verb) is to deceive; either by acting as if you're something or someone you're not, or lying.
    There is some overlap between particular meanings of the two words (For example, his ignorance was a feint, he was feigning ignorance), but mostly they are separate.
    Both words come from the French feindre, which means to "pretend, represent, imitate, shirk".

    Hans Vogel , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 9:03 am GMT
    Thanks for this well-written, passionate but nevertheless lucid analysis.

    Yet I feel mention should always be made of US corporate and imperial greed as a main motive for intervention anywhere in the world. It is about the oil and the profits and it is highly illuminating to turn to works by non-US authors. A good starting point would be Pino Solanas classic masterpiece La hora de los hornos (The Hour of the Furnaces) from 1968.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/jQOXKoMHOE0?feature=oembed

    Also read Alfons Goldschmidt's eloquent and committed Die dritte Eroberung Amerikas (1929). And the recent magnificent overview by Matthieu Auzanneau, Or noir. La grande histoire du pétrole (2015).

    Here is the best short analysis of the crime that was the invasion and conquest of Iraq:

    eah , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 9:04 am GMT

    The Trump presidency has been nothing but neoliberalism and Zionism on steroids and shouldn't be renewed for a second season. Feel free to convince me otherwise

    -- EMPEROR WHITEPILL (@CptBlackPill) January 8, 2020

    Hans Vogel , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 9:04 am GMT
    @Justsaying Spot on!
    swamped , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 9:08 am GMT
    "In the original instance, of course, Soleimani earned his chops on the battlefield contending with the chemical weapons-dropping air force of Saddam Hussein during the 1980s. And Saddam was the invader whose chemical bombs achieved especially deadly accuracy against often barely armed teenage Iranian soldiers owing to spotting and targeting assistance rendered by the U.S. air force -- a Washington assisted depredation that a whole generation of Iranians know all about, even if present day Washington feints (sic) ignorance" and a whole generation (and more) know that this Washington-assisted depredation was carried out by the U.S. Administration in which Mr.Stockman served, whether or not he prefers now to "feint" ignorance of that, too. An Administration which also gave us the Nicaraguan Contra terrorists, the infamous Iran-Contra deal, Central American death squads, Israel's invasion of Lebanon & much more. Funny how Mr. Stockman was mum on such matters at the time. Maybe, like Jimmy Carter, he's found his moral compass since leaving government but wish he had found it a whole lot sooner. Hate to see a good Harvard Divinity School education go to waste. No matter, the article makes perfect sense even if it comes a little late.
    GeeBee , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 9:23 am GMT
    'The dead civilian victims in their millions of U.S. generals reaching back to the 1960s 1944 surely attest to that.'

    There, fixed it for you.

    Sabretache , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 10:15 am GMT
    Whenever I see the kind of absurd foul language employed here by Stockman, I simply stop reading. What on earth is a "flying f ** ck' anyway, other than a supposed macho signal of just how big and angry a 'BSD' (to use another swaggering obscenity prevalent on his home turf) he thinks he is. Perhaps he'd care to explain.
    Ronnie , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 10:40 am GMT
    The recent and nearly simultaneous crash of the newish Ukranian 737 in Tehran (with the 15 missiles launched from Iran) may be quite significant – indirect way to hurt the US (Boeing) again and Israel too – owned by Ukraine's most notorious billionaire Kolomoisky – and the guy who selected the new comedian President – and amazingly no US or Israeli passengers on board. Was it an accident or an exquisite punishment?
    Vaterland , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:11 am GMT

    And when it comes to spillover of those benighted forces into Europe or America, recent history is absolutely clear: 100% of all Islamic terrorist incidents in the US since they began in the 1990s were perpetrated or inspired by Sunni jihadists, not Iran or its Shiite allies and proxies in the region.

    It is especially hard to overlook that the terrorists and self-radicalized (mass-)murders who killed hundreds of Europeans, including my own countrymen, were adherents to the wahhabist ideology, created, funded and often staffed by the very countries which are the closest allies of the USA and Israel. And whom they sell hundreds of billions of weapons to as they wage their so called "war on terror" which is mostly the war to take out Israel's and Saudi-Arabias enemies.

    David Stockman may be at the center of the intelligentsia which built the empire that many in the world looked up to and admired, and which crude figures like Pompeo, Bolton, Shapiro, Perle and Nuland are tearing down. But the problems and outright evilness of the empire now are inherent to its system and not merely a question of sophistication versus brutishness.

    It's past time to close Rammstein.

    ben sampson , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:15 am GMT
    @Sabretache Stockman is just guilty and fake thats all..why he uses such language.

    there is not a sincere word in all that he wrote above there, save that there is somethng important in there that Stockman is losing or wants..and is trying to set up to get

    Ipostle , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:21 am GMT
    @Sasha You can't fault David Stockman for calling Islam a shackle. Unless you want to agree with Bush that Islam is peaceful.
    Biff , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:28 am GMT
    @A123

    Iran *escalated* by attacking the embassy.

    And you have proof of this where?

    Amon , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:33 am GMT
    @A123 So this is what a paid shill looks like.
    Proud_Srbin , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:49 am GMT
    Mass murderer and Assassin in Chief is SIMPLY continuing to execute blood lusty and genocidal policies established by alliance of TERROR which calls itself 5 eyes but Sovereign, FREEDOM loving people call 5 headed BEAST.
    God Bless Axis of Resistance!
    Resist Slavery, TERROR and neoNazis!
    Hans Vogel , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:53 am GMT
    @Mr. Allen

    This is absurd. Don't lump all generals in together as the same. You might as well say Nazi generals and Russian generals and British generals and American generals and Japanese generals are all the same – all equally culpable of equal war crimes in WWII.

    Yes indeed, all generals are fundamentally the same. War crimes are not the exclusive realm of any one nationality or political or religious category.

    Hollywood says otherwise, but what Hollywood says is little to do with historical fact and accuracy.

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 11:54 am GMT
    David Stockman blames "neocon stupidity", but Trump's foreign policy has nothing to do with stupidity it's planned and it's all about Israel ,"endless wars" , arms manufacturing and sales , and ensuring that the "war on terror" continues . We live in a Pathocracy and are governed by psychopaths and narcissists who have no compunction about the killing of civilians (collateral damage ) ,murder by drone , the destruction of cultural sites, the killing of 500,000 Iraqui children by sanctions (it was worth it – Madeleine Albright) and the murder of populist leaders such as Allende .
    barr , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 12:09 pm GMT
    @Sasha How does the mind develop? A boy grows up loving baseball ,because he grew up watching it since age 3 or 10 . If he watched soccer or Tennis, that would have been his favorite game . A blank page is ready for description of murder or love in English or Iranian language .
    It is same about religion ,participation in civic rituals ,enjoying certain shows or music or theaters, food,consumption,and giving into outside demands rather than to self restraint self reflection and self observation and self evaluation of the imposed needs .
    Mind learns to praise hollow words and illegal amoral immoral activities . Because we don't appreciate the converse and don't reward the opposite. Gradually society eliminates those thinkers Very soon we have one sort of thinking everywhere . Very soon adult bullying is copied by kids from TV and from watching the praise heaped on psychopaths.
    This also means IQ gets distorted . Capacity to analyze gets impaired .
    ,American mind is manufactured mind by outside . BUt the process never stops. It doesn't get that chance to take internal control at any stage . In childhood and adolescence, when the time is right to inculcate this habit and enforce this angle or build this trait ,it is not done at all. Other nations try and other cultures do. Here is the difference between self assured content mind and nervous expectant mind always on a shopping outing . Most of our problems in society come from this situation,
    anonymous [245] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 12:29 pm GMT
    @JackOH Hmm.

    I enjoyed reading someone with a Washington resume' tearing into the current crew, too. And it was a relief to see addressed the accusation about the Iranian official being not only killed for, but set up by feigned US interest in, peace. Those with a public voice -- especially "journalists" -- who won't even mention this are either inept or corrupt.

    But note the condescension towards the people of the Middle East and their "regimes" noted above, starting with comment #1. Read the column carefully, and you'll see that the criticism from Mr. Stockman is tactical, not principled. That's because he puts himself above all of those people over there, including the group shown relative sympathy, who "are no less civilized and no more prone to sectarian violence than anybody else in this woebegone region." Ask yourself the writer's purpose of those last four words, and in his use of "sectarian." Would a more concise "are no less civilized and no more prone to violence than anybody else" be a little too truthful?

    I wonder whether this columnist is being brought in to buttress and/or replace the discredited one who he describes as "the always sagacious Pat Buchanan." (Those who haven't should read Mr. Paleoconservative's latest "If Baghdad Wants Us Out, Let's Go!" and the overwhelmingly negative comments it has drawn.) Heretical to their extents, but both remain devout Exceptionalians.

    unit472 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 12:34 pm GMT
    After more than a decades worth of failed economic prognostications ( that cost anyone who listened to him dearly) Stockman is now going to give us foreign policy advice? Remember this guys only official role was as an OMB appointee in the first term of Ronald Reagan.
    Just passing through , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 12:35 pm GMT
    @Ronnie Interestingly the plane just happened to be Ukrainian. Could this be the casus belli the West needs to go ham on Iran? More strikes on Iran justified by this plane crash and perhaps even sanctions on Russa as no doubt they will try an pin it on them as well?
    Realist , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 12:35 pm GMT
    @Sasha Stockman is notorious for defending cultures and countries (Russia, China, Iran, Islam) by belittling them. Paraphrasing: It is wrong for the US to confront Russia, because they have a third rate economy. or it is wrong for the US to confront China because China can't project power across the world. . He always takes the elitist position the US should not attack lessers like Russia, China, etc'. It seems he is trying to cover his ass against the dreaded charge that he is taking 'the enemy's side'.
    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 12:38 pm GMT
    @Justsaying Blast from the past:

    "What you want to do is just beam in Melrose Place and 90250 into Tehran because that is subversive stuff. The young kids watch this, they want to have nice clothes, nice things . . and these internal forces of dissension beamed into Iran which is, paradoxically, the most open society, a lot more open than Iraq . . . therefore you have more ability to foment this dynamic against Iran. The question now is, Choose: beam Melrose Place -- it will take a long time (ha ha).
    On the other hand if you take out Saddam I guarantee you it will have ENORMOUS positive reverberations that people sitting right next door, young people, in Iran, and many others will say, The time of such despots is gone, it's a new age."

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/wHmhf_wrcrM?feature=oembed

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/fpQdg4D78Jc?feature=oembed
    "A nuclear armed Saddam will place the entire world at risk"

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4501196/user-clip-netanyahu-iran-regime-change

    PS C Span broadcast a PSA of Peggy Orenstein who will discuss her book about value of easy access to porn and discussion of masturbation.

    anon [876] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:10 pm GMT
    How could a plane crash and several mega sky scapers not implode in seconds? Luchy Siverstein had another proctologist appointment?
    DanFromCT , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:15 pm GMT
    @Haxo Angmark What a trap DJT fell into! The president has proved himself more of a neocon patsy, as he was as much set up as the Iranian general, whose name will be forgotten by week's end in America. The neocons feeding the President a straight diet of cooked intel and their "never Trump" flunkies in the Senate have killed two birds with one stone inasmuch as the President's boasting he'd take out Iran's main cultural landmarks will be cast as a threat of genocide, which the Dems will now use to tar DJT as an intemperate megalomaniac in the minds of independents, probably ending his chances of winning reelection later this year.
    Sean , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:15 pm GMT

    The truth is, America has no dog in the Shiite versus Sunni hunt, which has been going on for 1300 years in the region. [ ] Needless to say, their Shiite kinsman in Iran were more than ready to give aid and comfort to the Iraqi Shiite in their struggle against what by then was perceived as Iran's own mortal enemy

    The Sunni regime in Riyadh ceaselessly complain about the treatment of the Arab minority in Iran even though these are Shia Arabs, The Shia in Iraq are likewise Arabs. Iran is almost as big as Egypt or Turkey. Being a country of 80 million Shia Persians Iran could not possibly be conquered by the US without a massive effort, even if the deep state and joint chiefs wanted to, which they do not. The only time Iran runs into trouble is when it tries to act abroad as a power independent of both the US and Russia.

    After the Iranian revolution the US was regarded as an all powerful enemy that would stage a coup, and so the Embassy staff, thought to be spies, were taken hostage. America was totally paralyzed and humiliated. Its raid to rescue the hostages was pathetic and exposed a total lack of special forces capability. the Islamic republic repudiated the Shah's role as America's cop on the beat, but it wanted to remain the most dominant power in the region nonetheless. Already worried by the arms given to Iran under the Shah who also supplied the Kurds fighting in Iraq, the 1974-75 Shatt al-Arab clashes between the Shah and Saddam's forces that led to led to 1000 KIAs, Saddam was faced with a radical Shia Iran appealing to his own oppressed Shia majority. After a series of border clashes with the aggressive Revolutionary Guards, Saddam predictably decided on an all out attack on Iran. The US backed Saddam and there was massive support for Iraq from the Soviet Union in the final phase of the war.

    The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran made use of suicide squads of schoolboys to clear minefields and in human wave attacks and by the end the front lines were well within Iraqi territory and Saddam had to settle for merely surviving. Iran had linked up with Assad's minority Alawite regime ruling a Sunni majority, and his Shia allies in Lebanon. Israeli defence minister and former general Ariel Sharon moved Israeli forces into West beirut then allowed Phalange gunmen let into palestinian refugee camps (PLO fighters had already left the city) where they slaughtered thousands of non combatants.

    Under the influence of Iranian clerics' interpretations from the war with Saddam justifying suicide if the enemy was killed in the act, Assad's cat's paw Lebanese Shia suicide bombed the US marines out of Beirut. Then Palestinians learnt how suicide bombing was a powerful weapon and in the aftermath of the failure of Camp David 2000 embarked a vicious series of suicide massacres that destroyed Ehud barak and brought Sharon to power. Iran has gained influence in the region but ti is difficult to see what the Palestinians have got ot out of the patronage of Iran, which is first and mainly concerned with itself.

    Due entirely to side effects of actions the US took against Saddam's Iraq taken to protect the current regime in Saudi Arabia Iran has went from strength to strength and they seem to think that run of luck will continue. Unfortunately for Iran, they are now a very real threat to Saudi Arabia, and the US knows it cannot put an army in Saudi Arabia to guard it with outraging Islamic nationalist opinion in that country

    Instead of poking its nose into Arab affairs why does Iran, which managed to impoverish its own middle class in the last three decades and recently had to cut fuel subsidies, not concentrate on its own business? It seems to be calculating that Trump cannot afford to the bad publicity of starting a war too close to an election, and so they can make hay while the sun shines. Or perhaps they are pressing their luck like any good gambler on a roll. The assassination of Soleimani was intended to be taken a sign that Dame Fortune in the shape of America has grown tired of their insouciance. I think Iran should cut their losses although such is not human nature. The dictates of realism according to Mearsheimer mandate endless offence to gain even the slightest advantage, but he also says a good state must know its limitations.

    RichardTaylor , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT
    @Justsaying America's problems don't have anything to do with soda pop or fast food. Nor is "consumerism" a serious problem that the world needs to worry about. I like having new smartphones, fast internet, and the convenience of getting things quickly.
    Miro23 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:26 pm GMT
    A very good summary by David Stockman of the bad place that the US finds itself in.

    With an old and confused Presidential tweeter surrounded by Zionist gangsters.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:32 pm GMT
    Trump is insane as is the ZUS government and its dual citizens who are calling the shots. Trump is the reincarnation of the Roman emperor Caligula.

    All of this was brought on by the joint attack by Israel and traitors in the ZUS government on the WTC on 911, blamed on the muslims to give the ZUS the excuse to destroy the middle east for zionist Israel and their greater Israel agenda.

    Anon [398] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 1:47 pm GMT
    Isn't Stockman the guy pumping a large investment newsletter scam? Is Unz getting a % of the scam to promote him? And how about these dumbo boomers who support him. Lmao
    Chris Mallory , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:03 pm GMT

    Like most generals of whatever army (including the US army), he was a cold-blooded, professional killer.

    Modern US Army generals are more likely to be lying, azz kissing politiicans than cold blooded killers.

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:04 pm GMT
    @Carlton Meyer

    Nice to see the great David Stockman appear at Unz. Watch him teach Fox Business News blabbers economics and political realities. Then he stuns them by saying the Pentagon's budget must be cut:

    Yes, I was slightly surprised and gratified by his views.
    'Maria' Bartiromo is/was married to a Joo . 'Nuff said.
    That other one, the shrill Daegen McDowell, is also married to a Jew but is even more Zionist than your average 'Likudnik'. She was a regular on 'Imus in the Morning' but then had a falling out with Imus and was never back. I hope he haunts her until her demise. (Purple grinning Satan here)

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:08 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus Netanyahoo should be taken out with extreme prejudice .
    Twodees Partain , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:11 pm GMT
    @freedom-cat – Hitting your head over and over on a brick wall, while thinking you'll start feeling better.-

    More aptly: Hitting yourself on the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you stop.

    Carlton Meyer , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:12 pm GMT
    @Mr. Allen

    This is absurd. Don't lump all generals in together as the same. You might as well say Nazi generals and Russian generals and British generals and American generals and Japanese generals are all the same – all equally culpable of equal war crimes in WWII.

    American censorship ensures that Americans only hear of the greatness of American Generals. American Generals killed far more civilians with weaponry than opposing Generals in World War II, in Korea, and in Vietnam. Few know about mass slaughters they were responsible for, like:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/XVee6taH0iw?feature=oembed

    Just passing through , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:30 pm GMT
    @Z-man Taking him out would be boring, if we are talking about hypotheticals, then better to start isolating Israel and sanctioning them. It will be funny watching them kvetch
    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:34 pm GMT
    @barr "A blank page"

    Hmmm, not keeping up with the times in mind Research, are we? Start here:

    https://read.amazon.com/kp/card?preview=inline&linkCode=kpd&ref_=k4w_oembed_mmOnQFKZcLfUYP&asin=B000QCTNIM&tag=kpembed-20

    Hail , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:37 pm GMT
    @freedom-cat

    I'm sorry to say I voted for this moron

    I remember 2016. I remember many saying they were voting (or had voted) for Trump to get out of the endless/pointless Forever Wars, and as often as not they would mention Iran (the need to not go to war with).

    During the slow death of Nationalist-MAGA in 2017 and 2018 , many holdouts continued to say "At least we didn't elected Hillary, or we'd for sure be at war with Iran!"

    _______

    Steve Sailer's six-word summary of US guiding policy from ca. the 1990s to 2010s (and 2020s, so far), " Invade the World, Invite the World (to resettle in the US)," was the core of DJT's campaign (opposition to them, of course); his core supporter base was motivated by both, some more one than the other, others strongly by both together.

    I'd propose the core Trump base in 2016 was:

    – 20%: primarily against "Invade the World" (soft, or neutral, or otherwise on "Invite")
    – 40%: primary against "Invite the World" (soft, neutral, or even supportive of "Invade")
    – 40%: against both Invade and Invite, seeing them as a package deal

    I count myself in the third category.

    (The proprietor of the Unz Review himself has written that he was for Trump primarily because of foreign policy, putting him in the first category.)

    This Jan. 2020 assassination affair, we are told over the death of an Iraqi 'contractor' named Nawres Hamid who had recently handed that debased-currency known as a US passport , shows in dramatic form how much Trump has failed at both Invade and Invite. (Nawres Hamid as personification of Invade-Invite; he and three family members were sponsored to resettle in Sacramento some time in the 2010s.)

    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:41 pm GMT
    @freedom-cat "he was flapping his jaws about ending the warring in M.E. I had my doubts from the beginning but I was willing to give him a chance."

    To be fair, he was explicit about getting tough with Iran. That's basically the only foreign pledge he has kept. All the dialing down of hostilities was a lie.

    He has at least killed fewer people in drone strikes than Obama and Bush.

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:46 pm GMT
    @Sean Sean, your propaganda is old and tired and boring.

    You're still shopping at F W Woolworth.

    After the Iranian revolution the US was regarded as an all powerful enemy that would stage a coup, and so the Embassy staff, thought to be spies, were taken hostage.

    One major precipitant was the information revealed about how US embassy had been spying on Iran, when Iranian weavers re-assembled massed of documents that embassy staff had shredded.

    the rest of your screed = hasbara boilerplate. skewing information

    Larry Johnson posted this more balanced overview of The Whole Offense:

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/there-will-be-blood-by-larry-c-johnson.html

    Key sentence in the middle of the essay:

    Since the terrorist attacks of 9-11, the United States has done a lot of killing of terrorists, real and imagined. Yet, the threat of terrorism has not been erased.

    I submit that " the threat of terrorism has not been erased " because the wrong terrorists were being killed.
    The real terrorists hive in TelAviv and Washington, DC.

    George F. Held , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:48 pm GMT
    @Mr. Allen BS. The Nazi generals were trying to save the western world and civilization from the jews; the other generals, whether they knew it or not, were working for the jews to destroy both. The jews won and have largely obtained their desired end. Just look at Europe today
    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
    @Vaterland Do it. Complete Nordstream2. Withdraw from NATO. It was 1907 that Britain turned Russia from focusing on Asia to Europe and kicked off the new 30-years war. German organization and Russian spirit and resources would be a fearsome combination.

    Putin speaks German, doesn't he?

    barr , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
    @TomSchmidt Is it less than 1oo pages ,?then I am try.
    Cross Product of Spider-Man , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
    If you live in a GOLDen cage, eventually you may develop Stockman syndrome.

    This Trump Iran policy seems like pure genius to me. He may be able to obliterate Israel, Hezbollah and Iran, by goading them with one check-mark on the Obama er um Trump Disposition Matrix.

    When I was a young teen I used to like that song, "Storm the Embassy", by the Stray Cats, before they had any fame in the states. Decades later the Offspring scored a hit called "The Kid's Aren't Alright", written in a similar key and chord progression. Groovy

    Derp , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:50 pm GMT
    This is the all-encompassing delusion, the stickiest residual brainwashing of old big shots. The Biggest Big Lie. And you old timers play along with it. Every time.

    Stupidity. Stupid my ass.

    Wartorn countries are ideal arms-trade entrepots. All the unauditable trillions of stuff that falls off DoD trucks, it's flooding into Syria and Iraq. CIA sells it. And most of it sits in safe caches until the next war. Then CIA sells it again. This is CIA's second biggest profit center, after drugs. And you know this is CIA's war, Right? Right? This is dumb jarheads dumped in there to hold the bag for TIMBER SYCAMORE. Trump has less workplace discretion than a McDonald's fry cook. He's CIA's puppet ruler. Puppets are not stupid, they're inert.

    If you're CIA and you've got impunity in municipal law, this is not stupid, this is smart. This is brilliant. Steal arms from the troops, start a war, sell em to wogs, steal em from the wogs, sell to other wogs. Repeat. This is the policy and vital interest of the CIA criminal enterprise that runs your country.

    You know it. Say what you actually think ffs. What are they gonna do, send you to Vietnam?

    Sick of Orcs , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 2:55 pm GMT
    The Orange Fugazi's autonomy is limited to golf and tweets about closely monitoring situations.

    It's a lowdown dirty shame.

    DanFromCT , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
    @Anon If I'm not mistaken, Stockman has been forecasting a market collapse since 2010 or so. I just checked and in 2013 he recommended selling stocks with end-of-the-world fear mongering. At some point he and the libertarians' advice will coincide with a major adjustment or collapse and the scam perpetuates itself. I'm no expert in market timing myself, but my conclusion is that these guys are basically shills for gold and silver trading interests, using political scare tactics to drive sales, and in the process shamelessly costing naive investors to miss the market time and again since it's low in late 2008.
    follyofwar , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:05 pm GMT
    @Carlton Meyer God, if there is one, please save us from such shrill, hysterical female defenders of the military-industrial-complex as Maria Bartiromo and Degan McDowell. I wonder how screechy-voiced Maria could say with a straight face that we were, prior to Trump, "starving the military." Such women, and let's include the women of The View, make good advertisements for why the 19th Amendment should never have been passed.

    David Stockman, though I oppose his libertarianism, is worthy of much credit for going into the den with such venomous vipers.

    Mike P , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:06 pm GMT
    @Hans Vogel

    Yes indeed, all generals are fundamentally the same. War crimes are not the exclusive realm of any one nationality or political or religious category.

    Still, America leads the world when it comes to killing civilians, POWs, and other war crimes.

    I am with Mr. Allen – we shouldn't lump them all together. American generals, and the prostitute "statesmen" that give their orders, deserve a special place in hell – with a guest room, of course, for the likes of Winston Churchill and Bomber Harris.

    Sick of Orcs , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT
    @Hail The earliest sign we were betrayed was when post-election, pre-Inauguration Trump said he wouldn't go after Cankles. Most people didn't even notice, or still believed he was playing 32-dimensional underwater quantum chess.
    Just passing through , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:14 pm GMT
    @Vaterland Germany still under American (see Jewish) occupation huh? I still here Americans tell me that those European countries are begging for American defence. This is an American trait of arrogance, they think Europeans actually want Americans occupying us and that they are doing us a favour.

    I bet they would hit our countries with sanctions and other punishment if we threatened to kick them out just like is the case with Trump demanding billions from Iraq to pay for an air force base that Yankeed built to launch terror raids against Iraqis.

    I bet most Germans do not even know about the terrorist occupation of Deutschland by America where they staved and raped with impunity. Americans are truly sickening and nobody would care if they got nuked save for a few Anglos

    Alistair , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:18 pm GMT
    Regardless of our opinion about General Qassem Soleimani, Trump targeted killing him was for his own personal grudge against Soleimani -- that was independent of the official US policy toward Iran.

    Over the last couple of years, in the heat of twitter exchanges between Trump and President Rouhani, Trump was using his usual colorful language – street mob style – he was insulting Rouhani on twitter while president Rouhani kept his cool – restraining himself to engage at the street level exchange with Trump -- meanwhile, Gen. Soleimani seized on the occasion and replied to Trump's insults; he taunted Trump, called him "Bartender, Casino manager, Mobster" etc. and threatened to go after his properties worldwide -- you can check Online history of Soleimani's tweets about Donald Trump. Here is a sample that New York Post had published;

    https://nypost.com/2020/01/04/iranian-general-qassem-soleimani-once-taunted-trump-in-fiery-speech/

    As we all know Donald Trump does not appreciate threats, and if he gets the chance he punch back harder, and that's what has really happened; Donald Trump's personal grudge against Soleimani had led to his assassination; just the way Street Mobs eliminate their opponents; surely, that seems trivial, but these days, the world is governed by fake leaders who won't hesitate to use the power of their office to boost their own ego -- even at their own nation's expense.

    Regardless of our opinion; General Soleimani was a brave soldier, a principled man who has dedicated his life to his nation, and that deserves respect -- just as Ernesto "Che" Guevara and Neilson Manddala did.

    follyofwar , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:20 pm GMT
    @Miro23 To perhaps soon be replaced by an even older, and definitely more confused successor come next January. The only saving grace would be if Biden doesn't know how to tweet. But he's every much the Zionist as is Trump, and has said so in the past. With a non-working brain, which is where Trump's lost brain is heading, Biden will believe whatever bullshit his neoliberal advisors feed him. Who is there to save us?
    JackOH , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:23 pm GMT
    @anonymous a#245, thanks for your reply.

    You bet, I'm happy to see a Washington name on these pages, because I've been convinced for years a lot of the stuff we talk about here is pretty much mainstream or mainstreamable thought that's been shoved aside by high-motivation rent-seekers of all sorts.

    " . . . [N]ote the condescension towards the people of the Middle East . . .". Yes, I did. I don't know squat about foreign policy, but people who sense they're being looked down on or feel they're being used will sometimes want to get back at those who've patronized them when the opportunity arises. I wish our leaders would take that platitude to heart.

    America1st , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:26 pm GMT
    Foolish elitists like Stockman advocate for the failed policies of the past.

    From 1979 to 2020, 41 years most of our politically astute appeased Iran. In the early 80's Reagan sunk half of Iran's navy and they quieted down fora few years.

    Since 1988 foolish political elites who thought they new better began appeasing again.

    Seems only Reagan learned from History how appeasement helped Hitler.

    Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama all used appeasement. Iran grew stronger and more influential.

    Obama foolishly tried to buy peace by releasing $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, Iran spent it on Missle, Nuclear technologies and funded terrorism.

    President Trump is reverting back to the lessons of Historyand trying to clean up Obama's mess.

    I pray we reelect him in 2020 and give him 4 more years to save America from the deluded academics.

    America1st , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:28 pm GMT
    @Haxo Angmark How foolish Liberals are.
    Hail , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:39 pm GMT
    @America1st

    From 1979 to 2020, 41 years most of our politically astute appeased Iran. In the early 80's Reagan sunk half of Iran's navy and they quieted down fora few years.

    Since 1988 foolish political elites who thought they new better began appeasing again.

    Why not just save time and write Iran Delenda Est , maybe in all-caps, a few times?

    Vaterland , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:39 pm GMT
    @TomSchmidt Yes he does. He was married to a German teacher and was stationed in Dresden. He touched on many of the issues of trust and fear in this speech to the Bundestag. Years before Merkel took office. Different times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NZQZQLV7tE
    Derp , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:43 pm GMT
    The other mandatory ritual incantation of US public Juche is to vilify the official enemy. Even pseudo-gonzo mavericks like Taibbi find they must do this. Stockman's new tweak of the government-issue boilerplate is admirable for its subtlety, by comparison with Taibbi's abject obeisance to the war line.

    "Not that the benighted, mullah-controlled Iranian regime is comprised of anything which resembles white hats. One of the great misfortunes of the last four decades is that the long-suffering people of Iran have not been able to throw-off the cultural and religious shackles imposed by this theocratic regime or escape the economic backwardness and incompetence of what is essentially rule by authoritarian clerics."

    As a founding member of the G-77 Iran brought together 80 per cent of the world's population. When the US took to manifest aggression after the WTC fell down, who did the G-77 choose to lead it? Iran. Iran brokered the Tehran Consensus, which unites more countries and people than NATO and doesn't blow shit up. The Non-Aligned Movement made Iran their nuclear/chemical disarmament envoy for peaceful coexistence. Half the world's people and two-thirds of its countries have made Iran a leader of the world. Why? Because they defend the UN Charter. They actually know what's in Article 2(4) and Article 39 and Article 41. Do you?

    In objective human rights terms, Iran sucks about as much as the US in terms of three of the highest-level human rights indicators, outperforms the US in terms of openness to external human rights scrutiny, and falls short of US in terms of reporting compliance (although the US got graded very leniently on its delinquent CAT reporting while it ran its worldwide torture gulag.) So you don't have to do new vocal stylings on BAD BAD DOUBLEPLUSBAD ENEMY BAD. You can actually consult the facts. Imagine that.

    https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx

    Vaterland , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:51 pm GMT
    @Just passing through I have very ambivalent feelings towards the USA, in the past and present. Complex topic. Simple analogy: George C. Marshall looks like the twin-brother of my grandfather who served in the Wehrmacht. Sons of Europe, at war with Europe; now increasingly no longer European and a threat to Europe as their empire degrades. I see no reason to hate the American people as a whole, there's millions of good hearted, compassionate and reasonable people living in America today. Just look at Tulsi Gabbard's events. But they, too, are held hostage of this evil Empire. Separate peoples and governments; Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn too lived under the Soviet regime.

    I do hate Mike Pompeo though. And I'm not ashamed of it.

    A123 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:58 pm GMT
    @America1st

    President Trump is reverting back to the lessons of Historyand trying to clean up Obama's mess.

    You are correct. Trump inherited problems from the prior Obama and Bush administrations. Fortunately, Trump is winning.

    Khameni's "retaliation" caused no damage. The high visibility launch covered live by FARS was a PR stunt to placate his domestic audience. (1)

    "Optically Quite Dramatic" But Officials Confirm No US Casualties From Iranian Missile Strike

    [Iran launched] missiles and purposely miss their intended targets.

    Iran has superior missile technology that can hit whatever they want – this could be in an attempt to save face as a public relations event for its citizens while attempting to de-escalate the situation and avoid war.

    PEACE
    _______

    (1) https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/no-us-casualties-iranian-missile-strike

    aandrews , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 3:58 pm GMT
    If War is to Begin, You're Going to Want to Not Commit Sedition

    Andrew Anglin
    Daily Stormer
    January 8, 2020


    At time of writing, it is unclear if we're headed to open war with Iran, though it is seeming more and more likely by the hour.

    So, I feel the need to remind everyone that they need to be careful not to commit sedition.

    In wartime, sedition can be a very serious crime.

    Largely, we have not had people in the United States going to jail for anti-war protests since the World Wars, but a war with Iran will be the biggest war the US has been involved in since World War Two, and there is going to be a lot of opposition to it, so it is probable that there will be actions done to chill speech by making examples of people who protest the war too hard.

    [ ]

    Nobody Really Knows , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:11 pm GMT
    Stockman is a curious gloom and doomer. He reliably rants about the permanent war economy and the biggest defense budget in the world but that's as far as he goes. Like Paul Craig Roberts, his propaganda delivering contemporary, he offers a childish oversimplification of how things work.

    When things fall apart the cops and the troops will shoot the citizens and protect the rich. Meanwhile, before things fall completely apart, propaganda specialists like Stockman shoot the unsuspecting citizens with propaganda to protect the rich.

    The rich learned long ago to divide the lower classes into the obedient subservient voters who love them and the rest of the poor who don't matter because their brothers and sisters protect the rich. What better time to divide, conquer and stage more international tensions than right now?

    Paul , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:23 pm GMT
    @Carlton Meyer Bloated "defense" spending is socialism-for-the-rich and military Keynesianism. ISIS does not even have a rowboat.
    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:30 pm GMT
    @A123 Another fine example of American exceptionalism.
    There is zero evidence that the American contractor killed, was killed by Kata'ib Hezbollah. It fits the classic Israeli false flag.
    The US "retaliates" by killing Iraqis who are the Kata'ib Hezbollah.
    It is inconceivable to you that Iraqis may be upset that the country who invaded Iraq in 2003, completely destroyed the infrastructure, built a massive fortified Embassy, and sold off its assets to Jewish interests, primarily, just might be upset that that same country has just massacred the Iraqis who saved the country from ISIS. It had to be Iran behind it, because all Iraqis are grateful for the 2003 US invasion and all of the benefits of occupation that flowed from that. The million Iraqis that died are irrelevant.

    Even Stockman doesn't get the Baathists. They don't care about your religious beliefs. They care that your religious beliefs become politicized. Sure Saddam and Assad were minorities, but one was a Sunni, the other a Shi'ite, but both Ba'athists. Both kept the lid on extremists irrespective of religious beliefs. Stockman's reference to Bush 41 incitement and the subsequent backlash is held up as some sort of proof of bad Sunnis. If the Pope successfully goaded German Roman Catholics to take up arms against Protestants, do you think that it just may be, that a Protestant backlash might be severe in places where Protestants were the majority? Nope, it's got to be Hitler's fault, or maybe even Iran's.

    Sean , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:37 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus The assassination of was Soleimani was a deliberately stupid and counterproductive act by America because that is the way to send a message that you are a force to be reckoned with and mean what you say. Costly signalling is honest signalling. In this case the US is signalling they are beyond the rhetoric of the last thirty years and willing to get kinetic .

    Iran and their theology of suicide martyrs is the greatest thing that ever happened to the Israeli right, influenced by Shia suicide bombing driving the US marines out of Lebanon the Palestinian massacres of Israeli civilians non combatants got a wall built pening them up, took Sharon to the premiership, and made Israelis turn their back on Ehud Barak. No Israeli leader would now dream of offering what Barak did while he was PM.

    Iran is to big to be occupied and that is a fact. What can they be so worried about except ceasing to play independent great power in the Arab mainly Sunni Middle East. Well they are not that powerful. I think the leadership of Iran is taking the free ride they have been getting getting for granted. They did not overthrow Saddam, America did and Iran gained got a windfall.

    Saddam was overthrown because the threat he represented to Saudi Arabia had to be neutralised so the US army could be withdrawn from Saudi Arabia, where its infidel presence was causing outrage and resentment. John Bolton got sacked, and a few days later, Iran gets the bright idea to not just threaten Saudi Arabia, but launch–or at least not forbid their Houthie protégés to launch–blatant drone attacks on vital Saudi oil facilities (Sept 2019) thus forcing Trump to send more and more troops there. Iran was sending a message: we can and we will.

    My reading of the American government is that their killing of Soleimani was a sign that for them Iran has entered the danger zone where something more that rhetoric and sanctions will be used. Iran can still turn back and be forgiven, but if they choose to go on and take the consequences of ignoring the costly (and therefore sincere) signal that the US has sent, so be it.

    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:41 pm GMT
    This was as stupid as it gets so far. Confidently expect even stupider actions of the Empire in its impotent rage, now that it is losing its grip. Ever since Iraq invasion, the Empire was undermining itself more efficiently than its worst enemies could have hoped for.
    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:42 pm GMT
    @barr Longer. But try the audiobook while you're doing time-wasting activities like driving. It's how I finally read War and Peace.
    TKK , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:44 pm GMT
    Hmmm . the best way to prevent more American soldiers being killed is to keep alive the man who has been killing so many of them for 20 years?
    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:45 pm GMT
    @America1st When is appeasement the right policy?
    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:47 pm GMT
    Since it's apparent that Israel is making our MENA foreign policy and that the foaming at the mouth Zionists want to start a hot shooting war with Iran, using their American mercs, which US city should be sacrificed to Moloch, the G-d of Israel, to start this war?

    New York is the safest bet, since there are tens of thousands loyal Jew sayanim living there who would gladly give all to start a war against Iran. Using the time-tested technique of staging a false flag.

    Hail , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:48 pm GMT
    @Curmudgeon

    There is zero evidence that the American contractor killed, was killed by Kata'ib Hezbollah.

    And that so-called American was actually a 33-year-old Iraqi named Nawres Hamid .

    Hamid was only recently (2017) handed a (cheap) US-citizenship for services rendered to the empire, along with a free pass to settle his family in the US (Sacramento).

    War-nut, dump-refugees-on-Middle-America-advocate, and empire-pusher John McCain is, I am sure, saluting the flag of Empire in his grave, a tear in his eye at the perfect alignment of every aspect of this saga of Nawres Hamid.

    Tom Walsh , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:48 pm GMT
    @Mr. Allen What about the RAF generals and 8th airforce generals who killed millions of German women and children in WW2? Were they more civilized than Soleimani?
    Paul , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:50 pm GMT
    A war between the United States and Iran is wanted by the Israel First people.
    Rich , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:51 pm GMT
    @Alistair One thing you got right is that the dead Iranian general belongs with murderers and terrorists like Mandela and Che. He was as much a piece of garbage as them.
    TomSchmidt , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:51 pm GMT
    @America1st Was the Iraq war in 2003 a success or a failure, by the way? Just so we have a reference point on success or failure with you.
    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:52 pm GMT
    June 6, 2018 Why the US shouldn't build more foreign bases

    The United States maintains almost 800 military bases in over 70 countries, which far exceeds our modern day security requirements.

    https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/06/why-the-us-shouldnt-build-more-foreign-bases/

    Jun 18, 2019 4 Times the US Threatened to Stage an Attack and Blame it on Iran

    The US has threatened to stage an attack and blame it on Iran over and over in the last few years. Don't let a war based on false pretenses happen again.

    Mar 27, 2019 The MIC and Wall Street Rule The World: Period!

    SteveK9 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT
    To dismiss Suleimani as yet another thug, then praise the Shiite militia for driving ISIS from Iraq without acknowledging that it was Soleimani that organized and led that battle (from the front) is a little unfair.
    JUSA , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT
    @A123 Says the warmonger. The US needs to get the hell out of the Mideast, period. We are fighting (((someone else's))) war.

    @Mark James

    Kushner strikes me as more of a neocon and he's obviously down with what they want in Tel Aviv. Which I think is an attack on Iran Nuclear capabilities before the end of the summer.

    Ya think? The Kushner family from father to son have publicly declared themselves Israel's most loyal sons. They couldn't have found a better man to be president, a stupid puppet goy as part of the family so they can continue to pull the puppet strings in the background. It's the way (((these people))) operate, for thousands of years. Never the front man, always directing things from the shadow.

    Hans Vogel , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:55 pm GMT
    @Mike P This stance is very understandable but I believe common sense should tell us otherwise. There can be little doubt that since its colonial war in the Philippines, the US has led the pack in terms of numbers of people killed in what used to be called the Third World.

    However, I am quite certain the way many people look at the US today (based on all those millions of poor devils killed in the colonies), wishing their leaders a special place in hell, is no different from how one could look at the English a little over a century ago (Sepoy Mutiny, Sudan, Opium War, etc.). Or, for that matter, how the inhabitants of the Italian states might look at the French during the late 1400s and early 1500s. And what about the German Order in the Baltic, the Byzantines, the Romans etc. etc.?

    In other words the US can point to a venerable but sad number of precedents to their own criminal operations abroad. It is impossible to define the worst offender among all those included in the long list of evildoers.

    Anyone who enters another country, carrying arms and without the permission of the local inhabitants, deserves to be killed. It is that simple. Unfortunately, because since times immemorial most who do that somehow escape their just fate, one sees the same thing happening again and again.

    TKK , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 4:57 pm GMT
    As usual, this has been turned into an Israel and Jew demonizing circle jerk, save a few sane commenters.

    Let's examine the imbecility of this site:

    A Jewish, gay, open borders advocate multimillionaire selects "chosen ones", the gold star commenters who are posting wily nilly to dominate the discourse –

    who all happen to be Muslim, Latino, foreign born or rabidly Anti- American?

    As commenters rage about the take over of the world by Jews, who flood America with -- –

    Muslims, Latinos, and foreign borns, and shove the Alphabet Mafia down our throats.

    You couldn't sell this as a straight to DVD screenplay. It's that absurd.

    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:00 pm GMT
    @Sean

    Instead of poking its nose into Arab affairs why does Iran, which managed to impoverish its own middle class in the last three decades and recently had to cut fuel subsidies, not concentrate on its own business?

    Have you been living under a rock?
    The US froze (stole) billions in Iranian assets post revolution. The complaints about Obama "paying" Iran for the JCPOA, were nothing but a partial return of Iranian assets. So, the Iranians were short billions for 30 years, which could have been used to rebuild. It's kind of like building a house and finding out a big chunk of the cash in your bank account has been frozen, illegally, by the bank. It's there, but you have no access to, or benefit of, it.
    Of course all of the sanctions have nothing to do with Iran's problems. In particular, any country that bought oil from Iran would also be sanctioned, causing a massive drop in revenue, plays no part in the economic difficulties. Additionally, Iran exercising its rights under an international treaty – the NPT, which the US repudiates in Iran's case, thereby removing another large source of revenue, is not a factor either. At least, not to you.

    CyrusTheGreat , says: Website Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:11 pm GMT
    @Realist You have done the greatest description of Stockman.
    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:21 pm GMT
    @TKK

    The best way to prevent more American soldiers being killed is to keep alive the man who has been killing so many of them for 20 years? [irony]

    That's exactly what is being done -- men most responsible for American soldiers being killed are being kept alive:

    David Petraeus -- still alive
    Robert Kagan -- -still alive
    Benjamin Netanyahu -- still alive
    George Bush -- – still alive

    A year or so ago Mike Morrell commented that "US needs to send maps and crayons to Iran, to demonstrate to them where their borders are: 'Iran HERE, Iran, NOT there.' "

    I couldn't get over the irony: USA circles Iran, 7000 miles from continental USA, and somehow Iran is trespassing outside its borders?

    Morrell:

    "Have the Iranians and the Russians pay a little price. . . . They were supplying weapons that killed Americans . . . kill them covertly . . . I want to scare Assad . . . I want to bomb his offices in the middle of the night, I want to destroy his presidential aircraft . . . I want to destroy his helicopter. . . . I am not advocating assassinating him – I'm not advocating that: I'm advocating going after what he thinks is his power base . . ."

    One question: BY WHAT RIGHT?

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:26 pm GMT
    @SteveK9 AL CIADA aka ISIS is a creation of the CIA and the Mossad and MI6 and NATO aka the ZUS and Israel and Britain.

    This war in the mideast was brought on by the JOINT Israeli and ZUS attack on the WTC on 911, which was blamed on the muslims to give the ZUS the excuse to destroy the mideast for Israel.

    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:32 pm GMT
    @Alistair

    just as Ernesto "Che" Guevara and Neilson Manddala did.

    Would that be the same "Che" Guevara that thought Negroes were inferior, and Nelson Mandela who was convicted of attempting to blow up a power station that would have killed dozens of innocent people?

    Soleimani rarely targeted civilians. For those who would point to the suicide bombings in Israel, I would remind you that all Israelis over the age of 18 will be, or have been, in the armed forces, and are subject to call up even after discharge.

    Bitindawg , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:37 pm GMT
    It's all about Israel. Netanyahu has been plotting scheming and demanding that we, that the U.S. bomb Iran back to the stone ages for nigh onto twenty years. He has even issued coded and veiled threats to nuke Iran himself.

    Trump is a Zionist collaborator and he is Netanyahu's shabbos goy. He has willingly co-operated in turning over the U.S. military to be Israel's running dog.

    America is a Christian majority country, and Bret Stephens is absolutely correct. The Jews are an intellectually superior people. Us mere Goyim, are by comparison, utterly stupid.

    America does not genuinely and honestly support Israel. America has been hornswoggled by the superior intelligence and guile of the Jewish people to support the Jew state.

    When the Jews decided to set up their own country at the turn of the twentieth century, they knew that they would need the support of Christendom. To that end they initiated a psy-op, a psychological operation tasked with rewriting Christian theology.

    Up until the turn of the twentieth century Christian theology had held that the coming of Jesus Christ had negated all of God's covenants with the Jews. This was known as, replacement theology. That, in essence, Christians had become God's chosen people.

    As a consequence, down through the ages, Christians and Jews had been at odds. Christ killer was a common epithet and there were many pogroms.

    Jews would have been aware that there was an obscure Christian theology that held, that God had not revoked his covenants with the Jews. That God's covenants with the Jews remained intact and were still in force.

    This obscure theology was being preached by a ne'er do well preacher named Cyrus Scofield. What the Jews did, and surely this was, what is known as, "Jew genius", they financed Cyrus on two trips to Europe.

    What the Jews did, was to take this obscure dispensationalist christian theology and write it into the King James version of the bible as study notes. When Scofield returned from Europe, he had the manuscript of the Scofield study bible. It is presumed that Rabbi's and yeshiva students produced it.

    It was published, produced and distributed by the very Jewish Oxford University Press, which still holds the patent on it, and periodically updates it to keep up with changing times in the Middle East.

    There is an ample historical trail that validates this thesis.

    There is also an historical trail that reveals that today's Jews, Ashkenazim Jews, are not descendants of the biblical era Jews, that they are Jewish converts from the land of Khazar.

    More, that the circumstances of their conversion to Judaism was a process that selected for intelligence and drive and that is why today's Jews are an intellectually superior, driven and successful, albeit, artificial people.

    Artificial, as they are not a people that occurred naturally, over time and in a land of their own.

    Liberty Mike , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT
    @follyofwar What specific libertarianism of Stockman do you oppose?
    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:38 pm GMT
    @JackOH

    " . . . [N]ote the condescension towards the people of the Middle East . . .". Yes, I did. I don't know squat about foreign policy, but people who sense they're being looked down on or feel they're being used will sometimes want to get back at those who've patronized them when the opportunity arises. I wish our leaders would take that platitude to heart.

    This is a product of American exceptionalism, and it is not confined to the Middle East. The overwhelming majority of Americans refuse to accept that others may be just fine with their own form of government, economic system, and culture.

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:39 pm GMT
    Jan 7, 2020 Qassem Soleimani, short biography from South Front

    Short biography of the Iranian General, murdered by the Trump regime on 3 January 2020.

    Liberty Mike , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:42 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus Note that it has been the white man, not the jew, not the nigger, and not the tranny, who has been the principle architect of such death and destruction.
    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:42 pm GMT
    @SolontoCroesus You are all over it Croesus!

    Aug 8, 2016 "I want to scare Assad" Mike Morell on Charlie Rose

    Mike Morell, former deputy director of the CIA, discusses the need to put pressure on Syria and Russia. The full conversation airs on PBS on August 8th, 2016.

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:43 pm GMT
    @Rich In the super-liberal town where I live, garbage gets separated: plastics here, paper there, banana peels there.

    If Solemeini is "as much a piece of garbage as Mandela, Che," then what category of garbage were Churchill and Stallin?
    FDR -- same piece of garbage as Churchill – Stalin, or more like Solemeini?

    How about Arthur "Bomber" Harris -- same garbage, or different?

    When Solemeini is coordinating military engagements with US military leaders, is he "as much a piece of garbage as Mandela, Che" or is he more like Kagan and Lady Lindsey?

    Rev. Spooner , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:45 pm GMT
    @9/11 Inside job You are right, stupidity has nothing to do with it, its well thought out and dictated by Israel. The 'tail actually wags the dog.' Americans (most) will never get it as they are trapped in a bubble while the rest of the world has realized it. In Europe the common folks have while the politicians still have to pretend.
    When the hour of awakening arrives, I will have no sympathy for the common Jews as they remain silent today. And Jeffery Epstein didn't kill himself.
    Ilyana_Rozumova , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 5:50 pm GMT
    It all started with elimination of Mosadeh so US is guilty!
    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:02 pm GMT
    @Sasha

    What "cultural and religious shackles" might these be? Please be more specific, or I might think you mean that they don't have instant access to Hollywood blockbusters or something. The horror!

    The Shah was notorious for encouraging young women to emulate the West and wear miniskirts and such.

    At first glance, it seemed like a positive change for the better. (who approves of burkas, for instance). But as we all know by now, the ((cultural elites)) of the West, are feverishly using liberalism to transform the societies they dominate into moral and spiritual sewers.

    [insert here photo of Madonna or Miley or some other gutter skank as role model for little girls)

    In a well-known case, the 'brutal' rapist of a ten year old Austrian boy, at a public swimming pool, had his conviction set aside by the high court, because not enough sympathy was shown to the rapist's cultural proclivities. This is a society that is spiritually dead. Contrast that with Iran's equally well-known treatment of men who rape boys, by hanging them by their necks from cranes, for all to witness.

    Iran, clearly has a lot to teach the dying ((murdered)) West.

    If headscarves are the price of female dignity and honor, then I suppose it really isn't all that big of a deal, especially when you consider the alternative in the West.

    [I'm not posting a photo of Kardashian or some other skank, because you all know what I mean]

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:05 pm GMT
    @Sean bbs.chinadaily.com .cn :"Beirut marine [barracks]bombing was Mossad false flag operation "
    'I reported that Marines had been sent there to become the focus of a major incident . The Mossad is to arrange for a number of our Marines to be killed in an accident to be blamed on the Arabs! This will be used to inflame American public opinion to help lead us into war ' Dr. Beter, a Pentagon analyst .
    Talha , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:12 pm GMT
    Not possibly as stupid as declaring openly that you want to deliberately commit war crimes on public record.

    Of course, when you have guys cheer leading you that couldn't find Iran on a map if their life depended on it, you might not notice:

    Fox host defends America committing war crimes: "I don't care about Iranian cultural sites and I'll tell you why. If they could they would destroy every single one of our cultural sites and build a mosque on top of it" pic.twitter.com/AJolDVtzJR

    -- Andrew Lawrence (@ndrew_lawrence) January 6, 2020

    For everyone who wants a refresher on how this is defined as a war crime, the Red Cross has a great section on the evolution of these particular protocols in history. I would highly recommend the section titled:
    "Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property"

    Which starts:
    "Article 1 of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property defines cultural property, for the purposes of the Convention, irrespective of origin or ownership, as:
    (a) movable or immovable property of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people, such as monuments of architecture, art or history, whether religious or secular; archaeological sites; groups of buildings which, as a whole, are of historical or artistic interest; works of art; manuscripts, books and other objects of artistic, historical or archaeological interest; as well as scientific collections and important collections of books or archives or of reproductions of the property defined above "
    https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule38

    Note that both Iran and we (the US) are signatories:
    http://www.unesco.org/eri/la/convention.asp?KO=13637&language=E&order=alpha

    Note also that the US did not sign until 2009. The reasons given are outlined here – main one being*:
    "The objections raised by DoD at the time were based on the perceived inability to meet the Convention's obligations in the event of nuclear warfare. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, DoD removed its objection to ratification."
    http://usicomos.org/hague-convention-and-usicomos/

    Peace.

    *Note: This is actually a great starting point for those of us who want to prevent preemptive use of nuclear weapons by our government. The DoD is fully aware that nuclear strikes against population centers will be in violation of the very treaties that they have signed onto in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    Mr. Allen , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:13 pm GMT
    @Tom Walsh

    What about the RAF generals and 8th airforce generals who killed millions of German women and children in WW2? Were they more civilized than Soleimani?

    I guess I opened a can of worms I didn't mean to I am an American and understand that Americans are not as innocent or as magnanimous as our history books may make it.

    But I had also assumed most people would agree that in general, American generals (and Russian generals) would be seen as on the "right side of history" and hence morally infinitely better as compared to Japanese or Nazi generals.

    To the extent that is true, we shouldn't be lumping them morally together as the author here is trying to lump American and Iranian generals together.

    In my world view, Americans are aggressors in the Middle East today, Iranians are not. So lumping them together is to refuse to see right and wrong .

    Back to WWII: most people in the world today are probably happy they are not under Japanese or German rule. So I assume my statements about Nazis and ally generals were correct.

    As for whether most people in the world today would be happy from American / Western imperial rule, I would say yes to that. BUT does that REALLY make WWII just another evil war where evil won and where Nazi generals and American and RAF and Russian generals are the same as Japanese and Nazi generals???

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:17 pm GMT
    @Sean bbs.chinadaily.com .cn:" Beirut Marine[barracks]bombing was a Mossad false flag operation"
    " I reported that Marines had been sent there to become the focus of a major incident . The Mossad is to arrange for a number of our Marines to be killed in an incident to be blamed on Arabs! This will be used to inflame American public opinion to help us lead into war " Dr. Beter , a Pentagon analyst
    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:17 pm GMT
    Looks like the Empire decided not to escalate further the war it started with Iran. Optimists would say that Trump at least shows some wisdom after utter stupidity of engaging in terrorism. Pessimists would say that the Empire is simply afraid. I am on the fence.
    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:22 pm GMT
    streetwisereports.com : "Israel made the [false flag] attack on the Saudi Oil fields " Special Opinion Piece by Bob Moriarty
    MLK , says: Show Comment January 8, 2020 at 6:27 pm GMT
    @A123 Thanks for doing your part to introduce some sanity here.

    Rather obviously, Iran needs to get it together. I get that it's unhappy that Trump was elected, and wasn't removed from office as the Democrats promised them, so they could get back to the Obama giveaway.

    But, hands down, Iran wins the competition for the worst handling of relations with the United States since Trump took the oath.

    Now, the ayatollah's train wreck has resulted in the death of his beloved Soleimani.

    [Jan 08, 2020] It's very interesting to learn that Soleimani worked alongside US generals. So far none of them have resigned their commissions; that tells me they have no balls and are fine with following orders to go over the cliff with Trump, Pompous, and the rest of the DC Dunces.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Trailer Trash , Jan 6 2020 20:35 utc | 37

    It's very interesting to learn that Soleimani worked alongside US generals. So far none of them have resigned their commissions; that tells me they have no balls and are fine with following orders to go over the cliff with Trump, Pompous, and the rest of the DC Dunces.

    The Axis of Resistance will be shouting "MAGA!" as they drive out US killers:
    Make
    America
    Go
    Away

    I think Trump read the first few chapters of "Dune" and decided he wanted to play Emperor. Too bad he didn't read to the end where the Emperor's landing party is captured and the Empire gets kicked hard.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Russian Military Pays Respects to Iran's General Soleiman Assassinated by the US

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.anti-empire.com

    The commander of the Russian Group of Forces in Syria led a delegation to Iran's Syria embassy mourning ceremony Yuri Lyamin 6 Jan 20 8 Jan 20 Politics 17382 8

    A military delegation from a group of Russian troops in Syria visited the Iranian embassy to pay tribute and express condolences to the Iranians in connection with the death of General Suleymani, commander of the Kods IRGC Iran, as a result of the American strike. Wreaths were laid from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and directly from our group of forces in Syria.

    In the photo from the Iranian embassy as part of the delegation, the commander of the group of forces (forces) of the Armed forces of the Russian Federation in the Syrian Arab Republic, General Alexander Chayko.

    Source: Yuri Lyamin

    [Jan 08, 2020] For the public version of the CIA reasoning, David Petraeus discusses the situation in Foreign Policy

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Patroklos , Jan 6 2020 22:48 utc | 113

    For the public version of the CIA reasoning, David Petraeus discusses the situation in Foreign Policy .

    Patroklos , Jan 6 2020 23:19 utc | 121

    Summary from David Petraeus (DP):

    Foreign Policy (FP): What will Iran do to retaliate?

    DP: Right now they are probably doing what anyone does in this situation: considering the menu of options. There could be actions in the gulf, in the Strait of Hormuz by proxies in the regional countries, and in other continents where the Quds Force have activities. There's a very considerable number of potential responses by Iran, and then there's any number of potential U.S. responses to those actions

    Given the state of their economy, I think they have to be very leery, very concerned that that could actually result in the first real challenge to the regime certainly since the Iran-Iraq War.

    FP: Will the Iraqi government kick the U.S. military out of Iraq?

    DP: The prime minister has said that he would put forward legislation to do that, although I don't think that the majority of Iraqi leaders want to see that given that ISIS is still a significant threat. They are keenly aware that it was not the Iranian supported militias that defeated the Islamic State, it was U.S.-enabled Iraqi armed forces and special forces that really fought the decisive battles.

    How credible is this line that Iran has a tottering economy and that the 'regime' is clinging to power by a thread and so therefore cannot risk the further instability of a war?

    Jackrabbit , Jan 6 2020 23:21 utc | 123
    Continuing from @116

    Seymour Hirsh wrote about Israel, Saudi Arabia, and USA conspiracy against Iran and Syria in 2007: The Redirection .

    Sasha , Jan 6 2020 23:35 utc | 130
    @Posted by: WJ | Jan 6 2020 23:23 utc | 125

    Well, David Petraeus does not seem the most reliable person in this world.
    If you take into account that he supported all the lies of his admnistration to unlseashed Iraqi invasion and alleged WOT when what it was the remodelation of rge ME and looting of its resources. And I fear he made his fortune vand caree in Iraq...by looting and lying...

    [Jan 08, 2020] Twitter vid of Orthodox service for Soleimani

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , Jan 7 2020 0:32 utc | 138

    Twitter vid of Orthodox service for Soleimani correlates his Mission with that Of Jesus's Mission. An amazing and truthful one minute thank you from the Christians of Syria for his efforts:

    "'All what Qassem Soleimani did was stand up for Christians against ISIS and Al Qaeda'

    "A mass was held in the evangelical church of Aleppo, Syria to honor the martyrdom of General Soleimani who had an essential role in the liberation battle of Aleppo against US-backed Jihadists."

    Compared to Soleimani, Trump is the town drunk lying in the gutter awaiting the police van to take him to the drunk tank.

    Several barflies have said it's beyond time for China and Russia to arise and collectively put a stop to this madness. As reported today, China will likely delay the implementation of the first phase of the Trade Deal and a high level delegation met with Iraq's president and council today to discuss arms and economic assistance. Russia's already involved with Iraq through the regional anti-terrorist command post in Baghdad. Putin's been very quiet; not even the usual notice of condolences sent to Iran was noted or published by the Kremlin. Tomorrow's Orthodox Christmas, so perhaps in Putin's message to Russia he'll say something further. But you can be sure that behind the scenes much is happening.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Is Soleimani murder 'beginning of the end' of US imperialism

    Jan 08, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    ...no coherent plan was behind the Trump administration's cold-blooded murder of Qassem Soleimani.

    It was an act of pure stupid. A dumb 'miscalculation'. Another example of the ignorant hubris in the US State Department that almost brought them into direct conflict with Russia in February 2014, when they failed to comprehend the strategic and cultural significance of Crimea and tried to migrate the Kiev 'Maidan' coup to Sevastopol.

    I can pretty much guarantee none of those who advised Trump to assassinate Qassem Suleimani saw this coming. Suleimani has been elevated in status to a martyr on the level of Hussein. https://t.co/xUl7Q5x4BG

    -- Scott Ritter (@RealScottRitter) January 4, 2020

    This one, while posing a less imminent risk of superpower confrontation, is potentially disastrous for US interests in the region, and risks monumental loss of life in any resultant conflict between Iranian and US military forces.

    It seems many people are not yet grasping the seismic shifts going on, and are still thinking in terms of this being the prelude to another imperial regime-change operation like those in Iraq, Libya and the failed attempt in Syria.

    It isn't. Not even slightly. It is a whole new and unknown situation, and where it ends is currently anyone's guess.

    Threats from the ever bombastic fool Trump, like these towards Iran's culture

    .targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!

    -- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 4, 2020

    and towards Iraq , might bolster the impression that the empire has the initiative and many cards to play, but does it?

    What actually can it do against a military far more well-funded and well-supported than anything it has confronted in recent years? Especially now in a situation where almost the entire Shia Middle East has become united in wanting US forces out of the region.

    Far from this being imperial business as usual, the Saker , often an insightful analyst, is predicting this crisis will result in nothing less than the end of the empire :

    Folks, this is the beginning of the end for the Empire. Yes, I know, this sounds incredible, yet this is exactly what we are seeing happening before our eyes. The very best which the US can hope for now is a quick and complete withdrawal from the Middle-East.

    This is pretty extreme, and I'm not entirely convinced he's correct here, but he shows his reasoning, and it's fairly compelling, and I urge you to read this linked article and others in his recent output for a point of view that goes beyond the less than adequate "bloody Americans doing it again" narrative we are getting from some sources.

    Iran must retaliate for this outrage perpetrated against them. The US is compelled by its own rhetoric and self-perception as invincible to respond to this retaliation with disproportionate force.

    Conflict of some kind seems inevitable, and, as the Saker sees it, this will be a conflict the US can't ultimately win:

    So what next? A major war against Iran and against the entire "Shia crescent"? Not a good option either. Not only will the US lose, but it would lose both politically and militarily. Limited strikes? Not good either, since we know that Iran will retaliate massively. A behind-the-scenes major concession to appease Iran? Nope, ain't gonna happen either since if the Iranians let the murder of Soleimani go unpunished, then Hassan Nasrallah, Bashar al-Assad and even Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be the next ones to be murdered. A massive air campaign? Most likely, and initially this will feel good (lots of flagwaving in the USA), but soon this will turn into a massive disaster.

    Over at RT, in an article titled Iran holds all the cards in coming Middle East conflict with US – unless Trump is ready to drop a tactical NUKE , ex-US Marine intelligence officer, Scott Ritter offers a similar scenario. Like the Saker, he thinks, beyond the bluster and Trump's rather foolish willy-waving tweets, US military options are limited (our emphasis):

    Trump's threat, however, rings hollow. First, his tweet constitutes de facto evidence of a war crime (Section 5.16.2 of the US Department of Defense Law of War Manual prohibits threats to destroy cultural objects for the express purpose of deterring enemy operations), and as such would likely not be implemented by US military commanders for whom niceties such as the law of war, which forbids the execution of an unlawful order, are serious business.

    Of more relevance, however, is the fact that Trump has been down this road before, when he threatened massive military retaliation against Iran for shooting down an unarmed drone over the Strait of Hormuz last May. At that time, he was informed by his military commanders that the US lacked the military wherewithal to counter what was expected to be a full-spectrum response by Iran if the US were to attack targets inside Iran.

    In short, Iran was able to inflict massive harm on US and allied targets in the Middle East region, and there was nothing the US could do to prevent this outcome.

    Ritter thinks the recent announcement by Iran that it is committed to ending all restrictions on uranium enrichment might give the US a pretext to attack using the one clear advantage it has – nuclear weapons.

    Trump has hinted that any future war with Iran would not be a drawn-out affair. And while the law of war might curtail his commanders from executing any retaliation that includes cultural sites, it does not prohibit the US from using a nuclear weapon against a known nuclear facility deemed to pose a threat to national security.
    This is the worst-case scenario of any tit-for-tat retaliation between Iran and the US, and it is not as far-fetched as one might believe.

    The Saker also considers it quite possible the US or Israel would resort to nuclear weapons, but thinks this also would be ultimately self-defeating:

    US/Israeli nukes: yes, unlike Iran, they have nukes. But what they lack are good targets. Oh sure, then can (and will) strike at some symbolic, high-visibility, targets and they can nuke cities. But "can" does not mean that this is a smart thing to do. The truth is that Iran does not offer any good targets to hit with nukes so using nukes against Iran will only make the determination of Iranians (and they allies) go from "formidable" to "infinite". Not smart.

    Whether or not we agree this is the beginning of the end of empire, a messy open-ended conflict seems highly probable as things currently stand. Corporate war profiteers might rub their hands at this, but if the chaos spreads will even they be able to reap real benefits? Will this be the cue for them to up sticks from the foundering Exceptional Nation and re-locate elsewhere in the unending quest for exploitation?

    After all it can be argued the British Empire, like the Nazis, didn't die, but just had to move – somewhere a little further west. Maybe, if we're cynical, the same thing is about to happen again. Maybe China is about to inherit the earth with the help of some ex-pat neocons.

    But that's speculation for another day.

    Another perspective worth reading is that of the Veterans Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, whose open 'Memorandum for the President' is published over at Consortium News.

    Signed by numerous distinguished intelligence professionals, including Philip Giraldi and Daniel Ellsberg, it urges the Trump admin to "avoid doubling down on catastrophe".

    The drone assassination in Iraq of Iranian Quds Force commander General Qassem Soleimani evokes memory of the assassination of Austrian Archduke Ferdinand in June 1914, which led to World War I. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quick to warn of "severe revenge." That Iran will retaliate at a time and place of its choosing is a near certainty. And escalation into World War III is no longer just a remote possibility, particularly given the multitude of vulnerable targets offered by our large military footprint in the region and in nearby waters.

    What your advisers may have avoided telling you is that Iran has not been isolated. Quite the contrary. One short week ago, for example, Iran launched its first joint naval exercises with Russia and China in the Gulf of Oman, in an unprecedented challenge to the U.S. in the region.

    Interestingly the corporate media seem currently far from united, or even coherent, in their response to this latest crisis. Threaded through the usual knee jerk demonising of the monster du jour , are unusual elements of skepticism toward the pro-war narrative.

    This, for example, on CNN yesterday, in a piece titled Skepticism mounts over evidence of 'imminent' threat that Trump says justified Soleimani killing (our emphasis)

    Washington (CNN) – Top US national security officials

    [Jan 08, 2020] The murder of Qassem Suleimani and assassination as state policy

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.wsws.org

    With its drone missile assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Suleimani and seven others at Baghdad's international airport in the early morning hours of Friday, the Trump administration has carried out a criminal act of state terrorism that has stunned the world.

    Washington's cold-blooded murder of a general in the Iranian army and a man widely described as the second most powerful figure in Tehran is unquestionably both a war crime and a direct act of war against Iran.

    President Donald Trump delivers remarks on Iran, at his Mar-a-Lago property, Friday, Jan. 3, 2020, in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)

    It may take some time before Iran responds to the killing. There is no question that Tehran will, in fact, react, especially in the face of public outrage over the murder of a figure who had a mass following.

    But Iran will no doubt devote far more consideration to its response than Washington gave to its criminal action. The country's National Security Council met on Friday, and in all probability Iranian officials will discuss the murder of Suleimani with Moscow, Beijing and, more likely than not, Europe. US officials and the corporate media seem almost to desire immediate retaliation for their own purposes, but the Iranians have many options.

    It is a political fact that the killing of Soleimani has effectively initiated a war by the US against Iran, a country four times the size and with more than double the population of Iraq. Such a war would threaten to spread armed conflict across the region and, indeed, the entire world, with incalculable consequences.

    This crime, driven by increasing US desperation over its position in the Middle East and the mounting internal crisis within the Trump administration, is staggering in its degree of recklessness and lawlessness. The resort by the United States to such a heinous act testifies to the fact that it has failed to achieve any of the strategic objectives that led to the invasions of Iraq in 1991 and 2003.

    The murder of Soleimani is the culmination of a protracted process of the criminalization of American foreign policy. "Targeted killings," a term introduced into the lexicon of world imperialist politics by Israel, have been employed by US imperialism against alleged terrorists in countries stretching from South Asia to the Middle East and Africa over the course of nearly two decades. It is unprecedented, however, for the president of the United States to order and then publicly claim responsibility for the killing of a senior government official who was legally and openly visiting a third country.

    Soleimani, the leader of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps's Quds Force, was not an Osama bin Laden or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. On the contrary, he played a pivotal role in defeating the forces of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which those two figures, both assassinated by US special operations death squads, had led.

    Hundreds of thousands of people filled the streets of Tehran and cities across Iran on Friday in mourning and protest over the slaying of Soleimani, who was seen as an icon of Iranian nationalism and resistance to US imperialism's decades-long attacks on the country.

    In Iraq, the US drone strike has been roundly condemned as a violation of the country's sovereignty and international law. Its victims included not only Soleimani, but also Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), the 100,000-strong coalition of Shia militias that is considered part of the country's armed forces.

    This response makes a mockery of the ignorant and thuggish statements of Trump and his advisors. The US president, speaking from his vacation resort of Mar-a-Lago in Florida, boasted of having "killed the number one terrorist anywhere in the world." He went on to claim that "Soleimani was plotting imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel, but we caught him in the act and terminated him."

    Trump charged that the Iranian general "has been perpetrating acts of terror to destabilize the Middle East for the last 20 years." He declared, "What the United States did yesterday should have been done long ago. A lot of lives would have been saved."

    Who does the US president think he is fooling with his Mafia rhetoric? The last 20 years have seen the Middle East devastated by a series of US imperialist interventions. The illegal 2003 US invasion of Iraq, based on lies about "weapons of mass destruction," claimed the lives of over a million people, while decimating what had been among the most advanced societies in the Arab world. Together with Washington's eighteen-year-long war in Afghanistan and the regime-change wars launched in Libya and Syria, US imperialism has unleashed a regionwide crisis that has killed millions and forced tens of millions to flee their homes.

    Soleimani, whom Trump accused of having "made the death of innocent people his sick passion" -- an apt self-description -- rose to the leadership of the Iranian military during the eight-year-long Iran-Iraq war, which claimed the lives of some one million Iranians.

    He became known to the US military, intelligence and diplomatic apparatus in 2001, when Tehran provided intelligence to Washington to assist its invasion of Afghanistan. Over the course of the US war in Iraq, American officials conducted back-channel negotiations with Soleimani even as his Quds Force was providing aid to Shia militias resisting the American occupation. He played a central role in picking the Iraqi Shia politicians who led the regimes installed under the US occupation.

    Soleimani went on to play a leading role in organizing the defeat of the Al Qaeda-linked militias that were unleashed against the government of Bashar al-Assad in the CIA-orchestrated war for regime change in Syria, and subsequently in rallying Shia militias to defeat Al Qaeda's offspring, ISIS, after it had overrun roughly one-third of Iraq, routing US-trained security forces.

    To describe such a figure as a "terrorist" only means that any state official or military commander anywhere in the world who cuts across the interests of Washington and US banks and corporations can be labeled as such and targeted for murder. The attack at the Baghdad airport signals that the rules of engagement have changed. All "red lines" have been crossed. In the future, the target could be a general or even president in Russia, China or, indeed, any of the capitals of Washington's erstwhile allies.

    After this publicly celebrated assassination -- openly claimed by a US president without even a pretense of deniability -- is there any head of state or prominent military figure in the world who can meet with US officials without having in the back of his mind that if things do not go well, he too might be murdered?

    The killing of General Soleimani in Baghdad was compared by Die Zeit , one of Germany's newspapers of record, to the 1914 assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. As in the prior case, it stated, "the whole world is holding its breath and anxiously waiting for what may come."

    This criminal act carries with it the threat of both world war and dictatorial repression within the borders of the United States. There is no reason to believe that a government that has adopted murder as an instrument of foreign policy will refrain from using the same methods against its domestic enemies.

    The assassination of Soleimani is an expression of the extreme crisis and desperation of a capitalist system that threatens to hurl humanity into the abyss.

    The answer to this danger lies in the international growth of the class struggle. The beginning of the third decade of the 21st century is witnessing not only the drive to war, but also the upsurge of millions of workers across the Middle East, Europe, the United States, Latin America, Asia and every corner of the globe in struggle against social inequality and the attacks on basic social and democratic rights.

    This is the only social force upon which a genuine opposition to the war drive of the capitalist ruling elites can be based. The necessary response to the imperialist war danger is to unify these growing struggles of the working class through the construction of a united, international and socialist antiwar movement.

    Bill Van Auken

    [Jan 08, 2020] To the silly trolls on this thread, no Iran is not the number one terrorist supporter in the world. That would be Saudi Arabia, closely followed by Qatar.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    nemo , Jan 6 2020 22:43 utc | 109

    To the silly trolls on this thread, no Iran is not the number one terrorist supporter in the world. That would be Saudi Arabia, closely followed by Qatar. You know them don't you? Murica's main regional allies. The same countries that have armed and funded terrorists to over throw the Syrian state. The same terrorist groups given support by the murican intelligence community and propaganda outlets like the White helmets. The US is not a knight in shining armor. It is a vulgar, grasping, dying empire that will use any means at it's disposal to harm perceived rivals. The US establishment has a long history of using terrorists to further its goals, like in Afghanistan during the 80's, or in Chechnya...and of course in Syria. The list is not exhaustive... You know, in fact, Iran should look to execute the cult leader of the Mek. There is another bizzaro terrorist outfit beloved by fat ass Pompeo. That would be an outstanding shatter point that the US couldn't even respond to. Let him "suicide" himself like Le Mesurier...lol!

    [Jan 08, 2020] Disruptive Assassinations Killing Qassem Soleimani – OffGuardian

    Jan 08, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Search Jan 7, 2020 64 Disruptive Assassinations: Killing Qassem Soleimani Editor Binoy Kampmark

    On the surface, it made not one iota of sense. The murder of a foreign military leader on his way from Baghdad airport, his diplomatic status assured by the local authorities, evidently deemed a target of irresistible richness.

    "General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region."

    The words from the Pentagon seemed to resemble the resentment shown by the Romans to barbarian chiefs who dared resist them.

    "This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans. The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world."

    The killing of Major General Qassem Soleimani of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-Quds Force in a drone strike on January 3, along with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of Iraq's Popular Mobilisation Forces, or Hash a-Shaabi and PMF Kata'ib Hezbollah, was packaged and ribboned as a matter of military necessity.

    Soleimani had been, according to the Pentagon, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more." He was behind a series of attacks on coalition forces in Iraq over the last several months including attacks on the US embassy in Baghdad on December 31, 2019.

    US President Donald J. Trump had thrown caution to the wind, suggesting in a briefing at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida that an option on the table would be the killing of Soleimani. The Iran hawks seemed to have his ear; others were caught off guard, preferring to keep matters more general.

    A common thread running through the narrative was the certainty – unshakable, it would seem – that Soleimani was on the warpath against US interests.

    The increased danger posed by the Quds Force commander were merely presumed, and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was happy to do so despite not being able to "talk too much about the nature of the threats. But the American people should know that the President's decision to remove Soleimani from the battlefield saved American lives."

    (Pompeo goes on to insist that there was "active plotting" to "take big action" that would have endangered "hundreds of lives".) How broadly one defines the battlefield becomes relevant; the US imperium has decided that diplomatic niceties and sovereign protections for officials do not count. The battlefield is everywhere.

    Trump was far from convincing in reiterating the arguments , insisting that the general had been responsible for killing or badly wounding "thousands of Americans over an extended period of time, and was plotting to kill may more but got caught!" From his resort in Palm Beach, Florida, he claimed that the attack was executed "to stop a war. We did not take action to start a war."

    Whatever the views of US officialdom, seismic shifts in the Middle East were being promised.

    Iraq's prime minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi demanded an emergency parliamentary session with the aim of taking "legislative steps and necessary provisions to safeguard Iraq's dignity, security and sovereignty."

    On Sunday, the parliament did something which, ironically enough, has been a cornerstone of Iran's policy in Iraq: the removal of US troops from Iraq. While being a non-binding resolution, the parliament urged the prime minister to rescind the invitation extended to US forces when it was attacked by Islamic State forces in 2014.

    Iranian Armed Forces' spokesman Brigadier General Abolfazl Shekarchi promised setting "up a plan, patiently, to respond to this terrorist act in a crushing and powerful manner" .

    He also reiterated that it was the US, not Iran, who had "occupied Iraq in violation of all international rules and regulations without any coordination with the Iraqi government and without the Iraqi people's demands."

    While the appeals to international law can seem feeble, the observation from the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Agnès Callamard was hard to impeach.

    "The targeted killings of Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Humandis are most [likely] unlawful and violate international human rights law: Outside the context of active hostilities, the use of drones or other means for targeted killing is almost never likely to be legal."

    To be deemed lawful , such targeting with lethal effect "can only be used where strictly necessary to protect against an imminent threat to life."

    The balance sheet for this action, then, is not a good one.

    As US presidential candidate Marianne Williamson observed with crisp accuracy, the attack on Soleimani and his companions had little to do with "whether [he] was a 'good man' any more than it was about whether Saddam was a good man. It's about smart versus stupid use of military power."

    An intelligent use of military power is not in the offing, with Trump promising the targeting of 52 Iranian sites, each one representing an American hostage held in Iran at the US embassy in Tehran during November 1979.

    But Twitter sprays and promises of this sort tend to lack substance and Trump is again proving to be the master of disruptive distraction rather than tangible action.

    Even Israeli outlets such as Haaretz , while doffing the cap off to the idea of Soleimani as a shadowy, dangerous figure behind the slayings of Israelis "in terrorist attacks, and untold thousands of Syrians, Iraqis, Lebanese and others dispatched by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Quds Force," showed concern.

    Daniel B. Shapiro even went so far as to express admiration for the operation, an "impressive" feat of logistics but found nothing of an evident strategy. Trump's own security advisers were caught off guard. A certain bloodlust had taken hold.

    Within Congress, the scent of a strategy did not seem to come through, despite some ghoulish cheers from the GOP. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and chairman of the House Intelligence panel, failed to notice "some broad strategy at work".

    Michigan Democrat Rep. Elissa Slotkin, previously acting assistant secretary of defence and CIA analyst, explained why neither Democratic or Republic presidents had ventured onto the treacherous terrain of targeting Soleimani. "Was the strike worth the likely retaliation, and the potential to pull us into protracted conflict?" The answer was always a resounding no.

    By killing such a high ranking official of a sovereign power, the US has signalled a redrawing of accepted, and acceptable lines of engagement.

    The justification was spurious, suggesting that assassination and killing in combat are not distinctions with any difference. But perhaps most significantly of all, the killing of Soleimani will usher in the very same attacks that this decision was meant to avert even as it assists Iranian policy in expelling any vestige of US influence in Iraq and the broader Middle East.

    It also signalled to Iran that abiding by agreements of any sort, including the international nuclear deal of 2015 which the US has repudiated, will be paper tigers worth shredding without sorrow.

    Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: [email protected] Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest WhatsApp vKontakte Email Filed under: empire watch , Iran , latest , United States Tagged with: Binoy Kampmark , Donald trump , Iran , Iraq , Israel , Middle East , Qassem Soleimani , USA can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

    OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

    Connect with Connect with Subscribe newest oldest most voted Notify of

    wardropper ,

    Today's Washington doesn't even have a grasp of common English usage:
    "This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans"
    You don't deter plans. You deter people from making plans.
    A deterrent is something which persuades people not to do something.
    I know that "corporations are people today", but only in the sense that they are run by a bunch of people, so you can't deter a corporation either, although you can deter its CEO from doing something.
    It's always a question of deterring people from , and not deterring things.
    Washington should know better, but I don't know why I'm even addressing this issue concerning a rabid US government of ignorant basket cases. It must be because I'm a teacher, and some sort of alternative to chaos seems necessary

    Brian Steere ,

    "General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region."

    Allegedly. But with no substance provided. Less than with Iraqi WMDs.
    But this article takes Pompeo's bait and runs with it.

    I have read that Soleimani was invited to a meeting seeking resolution of hostilities in Yemen – and perhaps other things. If that is true it could be that the war is being protected under cover story of averting war. That would make sense in the backwards mind of today's narrative identity. (Doublethink).

    If that invitation was set up with the Trump administration – then that casts a darker light on the USa's willingness to openly deceive and openly assassinate – with apparent impunity. But there are always consequences.

    However, Once such an act is executed, it would be very rare to not receive open support from the US establishment – whatever any private misgivings. And so it leaves me wondering what and who is involved in oversight and accountability. I don't have a sense of a real government – so much as a captured and corrupted or neutered shell of a government. Perhaps the act was a fait accompli by a coterie who wanted to provoke open war – and are willing to risk everything on getting one.

    The 'globalist' idea uses the US as it uses everything. Does it 'use' Israel – and the International Jewish lobby? Or vice verse? Israeli policy is typical in pre-emptive de-personing and execution – and this pattern is spreading through the body politic

    I don't know – but a lot of apparently 'national' interest is anything but – excepting for corporate cartels of mutual interest that effectively call the shots in a progressive (sic) deconstruction of the World order to an idea of global possession and control.

    Insider dealing applies also to politics. We are not privy to decisions made that are then 'delivered' by all kinds of manipulative appearance.

    When Trump threatened disproportionate retaliation – linking to the Iran hostage situation – the Iranians could counter with disclosure as the the weapons deal struck by Reagan camp to delay release until after Carter left office – and lost it in no small part to the failure to get the hostages home.

    But it just isn't done. Governing politicians as a rule do not bring out such dirty washing.
    People might lose faith in them

    Charlotte Russe ,

    Washington denied Zarif a visa to attend a scheduled meeting of the United Nations Security
    Council and Mike Pompeo mocked Zarif's statement that Suleimani had gone to Baghdad on a diplomatic mission: "Is there any history that would indicate it was remotely possible that this kind gentleman, this diplomat of great order, Qassem Suleimani, traveled to Baghdad for the idea of conducting a peace mission?" he said."

    Pompeo, the United States Secretary of State, conducts foreign policy by humiliating, censoring, and promoting lies about sovereign leaders. What's the purpose of the United Nations if leaders of nation-states are prohibited from speaking and stating their case. If the public is only permitted to hear "one" side of an issue, isn't that the definition of propaganda. Of course, Pompeo would deny that Suleimani was on a diplomatic mission, inasmuch, to admit otherwise would reveal the assassination of Suleimani as an especially despicable war crime.

    It's unfortunate, that if a nation-state challenges US imperialism they're characterized as not a sovereign state but as a terrorist regime. And if military leaders from these nation-states ensure the stability of their country by destroying ISIS and Al-Qaeda these generals are deemed terrorists. We live in a world where reality has been turned on its end, and is upside down.

    So far, the US is extremely lucky that Iran's retaliation for the murder of Sulaimani has been limited. Javad Zarif, Iran's Foreign Minister stated:
    "Iran took and concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens & senior officials were launched Tuesday. We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression."

    Now the ball is the Buffoon's court of neoconservative screwballs–let's see if these warmongers can refrain from escalating this crisis, or will they continue to lead the US down the road to another military debacle. One that makes the Iraq War look like child's play.

    Below is a link citing the anti-war demonstrations organized and held by Codepink On Thursday, January 9, at 5 p.m.
    https://www.codepink.org/01

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Some people have touched on this subject in other articles/website forums, but can I ask a 'controversial' question? How many dual-passport military bigwigs occupy intelligence/foreign-policy/military positions in the USA/UK/France etc as well as Iran, Iraq etc? Is it anti-semitic now to ask these questions? It is okay to ask about 'Russians' so-called infiltration and subversion but not Israelis?

    People here may have heard of Victor Ostrovsky and his books, By Way of Deception and The Other side of Deception – where he details on many aspects of subversion, co-option etc e.g.how the sayanim network that aids mossad infiltrates top powerful positions in Embassies, intelligence agencies, military policy-maker dept and even medicine/charity orgs etc?

    David Macilwain ,

    I think we may just be playing the Americans' game by discussing the legality of the assassination of the hero of the Resistance; it's like discussing whether water-boarding is a legitimate interrogation technique on a six-year old girl.
    The point of the killing was nothing to do with what Soleimani had done or was about to do, but evidently the one thing that Israel and the US knew Iran must respond to, so as to provide a pretext for an attack on Iranian territory – and of course it now has launched such an attack, before another state does it for them.
    We might imagine that the US and other forces illegally occupying bases in Iraq, and everywhere else in the region, will now feel unable to operate without threat of attack from multiple unidentified sources. The mere fact that the missiles actually hit the Ain al Asaad base could be a wake-up call, particularly if there is evidence US forces were hit.

    But of course the killing of Soleimani was neither justifiable nor legitimate, so Iran's designation of the US army as a terrorist organisation is, and it is now open season.

    https://resistancenews.org/2020/01/08/iran-strikes-us-bases-in-iraq-to-avenge-martyr-soleimani-threatens-to-target-israel-and-us-bases-in-the-region-al-manar/

    nottheonly1 ,

    Leaving religious, organized delusions aside – to which I count all major religions, especially Hypochristianity – Iran has excelled in reason and resolve.

    Do not fuck around with Iran any longer.

    Donald Trump and his sub-cogniscent advisers on the other hand need to go and fuck themselves. Using the same methods on each other they have used to destroy a free and independent Iran since the great People of Iran kicked the fascist western regimes out of Iran.

    Like Lybia, Syria, Bolivia and Venezuela, the government is FOR the People, not against them. Anybody, or anyone with better ideas than those Iran has utilized since 1979? Anybody? I thought so. Because there are assholes – among them corrupt, rich Iranian maggots that prefer the Trump model – who complain about how the revolution took away the freedom to exploit and to corrupt, while it is them that have Julain Assange locked away like a Chimpanzee in a Nazi laboratory.

    No, what happened – oddly though in conjunction with a prophecy by Edgar Casey – is, that the whole sane world can see that America has become a drug addicted cheap whore who will do anything to get her fix.

    America needs mandatory psychoanalysis and not the reciting of the pledge of allegiance. In Teheran, millions – not one, or two, like in a 'Love Parade' – no, five million real Iranian People filling the streets. What a shame in the face of the fucking Trump regime assholes. Fuck them all. Impeach the entire heap of shit and bring them before a court of justice. In Teheran.

    Iran – as the descendant of one of the greatest Empires ever to rule the region – proved itself worthy of its great history. It shlashed the Gordian knot today. The terroristic murder of Lt. General Soleimani has indeed changed everything. Everything. It is now out in the open that ISIS/Daesh was created and funded by wetsern fascist regimes under the lead of the U.S., Israel, SA et al. The people that killed innocent civilians, cut heads off before cameras, putting women and children in cages, destroying important cultural sites in the region were and still are paid for by the U.S. tax payer and that makes every U.S. et al citizen an accomplice in the 'WAR OF TERROR'. You paid for the murder of the one person that defeated the US TERROR GROUPS. He helped Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon to fend off the terroristic assault of the fascist western regimes.

    ISIS'R'US.

    So, leaving the general religious thing aside, Iran has torn down the wall of hypocrisy the west is surrounding itself with. Alliances will now be made and others will crumble and vanish. Saudi Arabia is looking at its last days. The Palestiniancaust and genocide in Yemen will not continue.

    Iran has shown that it is capable of defending the truth against the fascist western regimes.

    To those who do not want to stop killing innocent women, mothers and children, the elderly and defenseless:

    Cease and desist your murderous activities in order not to get killed.

    Long live Iran.

    Bless its People who have shown the pathetic public in the west what UNITY really means. (Not to discredit the work of countless groups to change things to the better.) But the equivalent would be 300 million Americans weeping in the streets over the loss of their most beloved General.

    Go Humanity! Now or never!

    Frank Speaker ,

    You touch on some valid points, but you ignore there's a huge difference between most Iranians and the fundamentalist nutjobs who rule over them. Similar to the USA in many respects.

    andyoldlabour ,

    The thing is Frank, I know only too well (from my relatives in Iran) how a lot of ordinary Iranians still feel about the Shah, about UK/US/French imperialism. They and Iraq have been attacked quite a few times over the past hundred years by US/UK (along with Russia). There is still raw evixdence of chemical weapons victims from the Iran Iraq war.
    They area very proud people, 98% Shia, and will come together as one if attacked, just as they did back in 1980, when Saddam Hussein backed by the USA attacked them.

    nottheonly1 ,

    While I am certainly not a friend of any organized religion, to call them 'fundamental nutjobs' gives away the brainwashing program that has achieved this result.

    Pence, Pompeo et evangelical al are the real 'fundamental nutjobs'. They kill Muslims by the thousands. And have no regard at all for anybody that does not match their christojudeo-fascist world view.

    TFS ,

    SpartUSA and its friends in low places, Saudi Arabia, Israel and its Western Allies love giving names to things when they 'Export Democracy ' around the World, like Operation Enduring Freedom.

    Cannot the alternative Blogosphere come up with a similar banner as a push back to the Rogue State of SpartUSA?

    How About:

    1. Operation Jog On!

    Harry Stotle ,

    One of the avenues Iran could pursue is the legality of the assassination.

    The likes of Agnes Callamard (UN rapporteur on extra judicial killings) says "activate Article 99 of the U.N. charter and establish an impartial inquiry into [the] lawfulness of Soleimani's killing and events leading up to it."
    https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/UN-Expert-Demands-Official-Investigation-on-Soleimani-Killing-20200107-0008.html?fbclid=IwAR2jw0hmHo8-d3WXvWOQIFTMZusqWtpd0p4Iu4biWqz-kiIQs-MYdIgFEEk

    It is high time the question of whether or not the US is above international law was finally confronted.
    The extra-judicial murder of General Soleimani brings this issue to the heart of international affairs: if there is no legal redress for Iran then it more or less makes a mockery of the idea that justice is possible in a world dominated by terror states.

    andyoldlabour ,

    Whilst I agree with the core message of your post Harry, I would have to draw the conclusion that the US has put themselves above and out of the reach of international law.
    Drone attacks and civilian deaths all over the World, 80 years of coups, assassinations and wars, shooting down civilian airliners (USS Vincennes and IranAir flight 655), torture.
    Then you only have to Google "Hague Invasion Act"

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-becomes-law

    Frank Speaker ,

    Andy you're right, but it now needs to be legally formally addressed at the UN and other courts every time the US violates international law. Time and again. Over years it might make an impact, at least to isolate the them.

    andyoldlabour ,

    Frank, unfortunately I believe that the UN is merely a New York based vassal of the US. How many sanctions have ever been placed on the US or it's little friend Israel for their obvious war crimes?
    I have been saying for many years that the HQ of the UN should not be in the US.

    BigB ,

    It's a war crime, Harry! I notice Binoy, the UN Rapporteur Agnes Callamard, and you refrain from calling it out. Pre-crime violates every judicial principle known. There has to be a crime for a verdict – let alone an execution. This is the enactment of "Minority Report" Phildickian criminal injustice thinking.

    Pre-emptive Justice has been American foreign policy since at least Bush the Lesser Evil. Along with R2P – which defecated on Westphalia Peace Treaty principles – this violated the London Agreement (Nuremberg Principles) which are supposedly the foundation of modern IHL.

    So, let's take our pick for pre-emptive murder war crime, crime against the peace, or crime against humanity?

    So Trump gets a rap from the Rapporteur: where do we try this most obvious of crimes? The ICC, ICJ, or a kangaroo UN Tribunal where precisely no American will ever show up because they are legally exempt and immune. Agnes' rap is not worth waiting for, I'm sorry to say. The UN is complicit and as toothless as the old imperialist League of Nations that carved up the Middle East to cause these problems.

    On the rare occasion the UN has produced a truthful report – ie calling Israel an apartheid state – that report has been recalled and shredded before you can say "Try Netanyahu!". You know the score.

    Iran has exacted the only Justice it can in this lawless Wild West Justice of the Gun international anti-diplomacy "free"market-power world. I'd love to share your sentiment, but that world was eclipsed when America turned its back on the ICC circa Nicaragua. If Agnes can pull it back, I'm with her all the way. Also, I'm not holding my breath!

    Everything the Nazis did is now neoliberal foreign policy.

    Guy ,

    I hear you and I agree with the gist of what you are saying but let me suggest that even though the UN is toothless and the rogue US establishment continue with their cowboy rampage over any nation that does not kneel to it's demands ,it is especially important that the criminal actions of this out of control regime be documented for historical purposes . Lets face it it ,right now the United Nations is the best and only body of an international politic that we have to do so. This is what they are so scared about .The truth .

    TFS ,

    I see two options:

    1. Make the relevant International Organisations do their job, although the UN, OPCW, ICC and the like are soemwhat neutered. And if not, stop paying for them, they are a PR exercise.

    2. Act like a Democracy, where the people hold those in account to power. Boycott SpartUSA would be my choice.

    As a Brexiteer, I partially understand why people jumped ship from Jeremy Corbyn, but Brexit was never about Brexit, it was about killing Jeremy. The EU feared Jeremy more than anything, and when we lost him, the country lost a counter to the Imperial machinations of SpartUSA, the EU and NATO and their friends in low places in the MiddleEast.

    I would suggest a third option, Operation Patriot Resolve.

    In it, the alternative blogosphere works with ex members of the UK Armed Forces, and forces the UK government to release all the supporting evidence of Article V (I think), which supported the invasion of Afghanistan. We can ask Lord Robertson for his substantial input into the evidence he held. It must be voluminous, given the Offical Report into 9/11; Offical Conspiracy Theory is so highly regarded.

    TFS ,

    There is a term for different legal treatment based on status, called Affluenza.

    Maybe a new term needs to be used for the West selective interpreations of various laws. Maybe Rogue State/Regime will suffice.

    noseBag ,

    Harry, whilst wholeheartedly agreeing with your sentiment, I fear the definition of being under threat of 'imminent' attack is so broad and vague that the Yanks will be able to claim legality. However, The Saker makes for some very interesting reading regarding likely/possible fallout from this action, none of which looks good for the Yanks, or for that matter, anyone allied to them.

    Harry Stotle ,

    In answer to my own question, I think Iran has about as much chance of receiving justice for the murder of Qasem Soleimani as Julian Assange does for revealing war crimes.

    In answer to BB – apologies for not being clear – yes, I think this is a war crime.
    I was just alluding to the fact terror inflicted by Britain and the USA is never defined as such (in a court of law) – quite the opposite, many of the architects, such as Tony Blair grew rich on the back of the misery they authored.

    This profound legal failing is one of the reasons the neocons keep getting away with it.
    In theory Iran has a strong case, one that has been already backed up by the UN rapporteur on extra-judicial killings, but it will be hard for them to escape a sense of futility that pervades any attempt to investigate the machinations of the US deep state.

    For example, and as most of us on Off-G already know, the American authorities have steadfastly refused to properly investigate what happened on 9/11, presumably because a meaningful investigation would reveal a long list of uncomfortable truths?

    While in Britain we had the long-winded and expensive charade of Chilcot – many knew from the outset that it was a waste of time and money, and that no actor would have be held to account for the bloodbath that ensued in Iraq, even though the whole thing was built on a pack of lies and led to the mysterious death of Britains foremost weapons inspector.

    GEOFF ,

    And these dumbfucks in this country can't wait to be part of the evil empire, I would never knowingly buy anything from warmongering evil America, or Israel, I see hairy arse Johnson is making it illegal for councils to boycott the other evil country, Israel , I only wish I was younger , I would get out of this shithole tomorrow.

    Francis Lee ,

    The real dumbfucks are the Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Romanians, Estonians who are pro-US and EU fanatics. Oh and I forgot about another neoliberal EU basket case, Sweden. The US calls the shots in the EU, primarily through corralling in the Petainist riff-raff into NATO.

    Dungroanin ,

    And by the way ss we move into a hot war where exactly is our LauraKoftheCIA?
    Not a peep since her splurge on 19th December topped of with:

    'Right then twitter, that's it from me til next year – Happy Christmas one and all see you on the other side (follow
    @BBCPolitics
    and
    @BBCNews
    if you want to keep up, or sit on your sofa and eat Quality Street and come back in 2020)
    Laura Kuenssberg
    ·
    19 Dec 2019
    Hard time of year for a lot of folks. Suicide Hotline 116 123 (Samaritans) A simple copy and paste might save someone's life.

    Would 3 Twitter friends please copy this text and post under their own name? Pass it on

    Laura Kuenssberg
    ·19 Dec 2019
    -- -- -- -
    My guess is at the same site as bozo as they were briefed on the next phase.
    Their role for the Pathocracy and getting their stories rehearsed – I expect her to move into Downing Street as the official press officer!
    Presumably they will have been getting their inoculation flu jab which has just been unleashed as zillions of chinese take to the air for their new year intermingling with the zillions of westerners sun seeking crisscrossing the planet.

    This world war will not be fought with the outdated nuclear weapons – they have better plans to get rid of us pesky revolters, and shiny multicoloured tellytubby suits as demo'd in Salisbury to clear away the dead and take all our possessions.

    How long before the internet shutdown?

    Dungroanin ,

    For these dumb yankee doodle yahoos and Brit donkeys who still don't understand the significance – imagine if General Washington had been assassinated by King George for having won in the revolution, how would the proto yanks have taken that then and still now 200 years later.

    Also how great was the irani General?
    – Off-G might want to publish this photo of Soleimani having a walkabout amongs US troops and tanks
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/01/06/censored-photo-shocker-general-soleimani-with-american-troops-in-iraq/

    US can't claim they couldn't have got to him without using drones.
    .
    A Ukrainian Boeing Jet appears to have dropped out of the sky on fire after leaving Tehran
    .
    A new flu type seems to have kicked off in China just as zillions are traveling for newyear.
    -- --

    As a large percentage of middleclass westerners travel to sunny paradises of SE Asia and Caribbean at this time of year they may not be traveling back!

    TFS ,

    People need to be hit the general public with the OPCW chemical evidence whilst this is playing out as another example of the West lying to bomb another soveriegn country, and make sure people know that the impartiality of the OPCW and the UN has been neutered.

    Of course, the next stage, a step on from awareness is to hit SpartUSA where it hurts them the most. They are kinda of attached to The Benjamins, and are fond of Sanctions, ask Madeliene Albright.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iFYaeoE3n4

    Boycott SpartUSA

    Tutisicecream ,

    The people of Amerika need to remember that when they vote in the up-and-coming Presidential election they are voting for democracy! Not the kind of democracy that other countries have, such as Iraq who just voted for Amerika to leave their country. But the kind of democracy that has to be created by force. The type of none representative democracy which furthers economic exploitation. It comes as no surprise that Amerika has allies in waiting otherwise known as vassals. Just ask the Eaton Mess and his Galfriend – as Old Blighty soon to be renamed Cor-Blimey is about to be forced to nationalise the railways (shurely a socialist concept ed?). Also ask Macron as a national strike grips France. "No", you will hear the media shills shrill, "It's the international rules based democratic order".

    MichaelK ,

    I heard a journalist stating with some 'authority' that the US attack couldn't be defined as 'terrorism', because it was carried out by a democratic state. Apparently, the actions and leaders of 'democratic states' cannot be guilty of carrying out 'terrorism.'

    Normally, after 'real terrorist' attacks occur, that is, violence directed against us and our interests and allies, if members of the public raise their fists and express joy and enthusiastic support for the 'evil terrorists', such feelings and utterances land them in extremly hot water with the authorities as vocal support for terrorist outrages is illegal and can easily lead to them being prosecuted under anti-terrorism legislation.

    But things are different when 'we' are the ones using 'terrorism' against our enemies, then, suddenly, the laws are applied, or not applied, in a radicaly different way.

    Dungroanin ,

    Iran is a democratic state as much as any.

    We have seen how our democracy is a sham with the postal vote rigging of the election and the referendum.

    It stopped Corbyn by direct self admitted foreign government gauntlet and is delivering the hard brexit that ONLY benefits the ancient City and it's masters.

    They are on the retreat and like the confederacy they are burning Atlanta

    David Macilwain ,

    While this is certainly true, it's difficult to think of a case where forces allied to the Resistance have actually been responsible for a terrorist attack. One might need to return to the time of the Palestinian Intifada, where suicide bombers certainly terrorised Israelis – even for a just cause. Any suggestions? Not only does the "war on terror" appear to be contrived and concocted, but its evident acts seem always to be false flags, and always serving the interests of those that the attacks are supposed to be against.

    Guy ,

    War on terror is an oxymoron. War is terror David as I am sure you already know . Leave it to the CIA and or neocons to come up with such a stupid slogan .
    Cheers.

    Guy ,

    The Western media pundits are using mental contortions to rationalize the impossible and looking extremely foolish for doing so.It's kind of like digging your own grave .

    richard le sarc ,

    An awful lot of Judeofascists and other Zionist and Talmudic psychopaths seem very happy about this cowardly murder. But they are, after all, the world champions of cowardly murders of any who dare 'get in our way'. It is a religious observance, a mitzvah, after all.

    George Mc ,

    "Judeofascists"? Surely "Zionazis" is more appropriate?

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    Macroeconomic decoupling is occurring and Trump's gambit for irrational war management via threats & intimidation on an international/geopolitical level is not only an outright act of war but it is testament to the desperation that Trump finds himself in pre-election. Trump has already indicated that he will do anything to keep the DOW inflated irrationally at ever increasing nosebleed levels he can push it to even if it means meddling in Federal Reserve independence and undermining confidence in the central bank authority.

    Trump is a one man central banking Military Industrial Complex war machine set on autopilot without vision outside of controlling everything from the interest rate benchmark set by central banks to the G7 trade deals and Russian Federation gas deals, and everything in between.

    Trump has to be the center of attention every single day of the week & twice on Sundays. He twitterbombed Greta the climate teen to appropriate her limelight as the Davos elite rolled her out onstage.

    Trump bombed strategically for the presidential plaudits that never materialized because he leapt to an erroneous conclusion & misperceived that everyone else in the world is not viewing it from an oval office desk like he is. Immediately following the outrage the rationalizations came forth from the White House that their target was for the good of the nation when in fact everyone knows it was for Trump's impression management.

    Trump likely made the decision unilaterally and the world is just not being made aware of that. Fortunately, the Democrats see his departure from protocol as a war crime also. Trump is not experienced enough to stay the course any longer given that he must have acted unilaterally to cause the bombing assassination without due diligence from his advisers taking place. When the Democrats press the issue with Congress it will become an issue that Trump used the state to murder for purposes of leveraged deal making.

    MOU

    Francis Lee ,

    "Trump is a one man central banking Military Industrial Complex war machine set on autopilot."

    Pretty good! I like it.

    Martin Usher ,

    Its interesting to speculate about why these people were murdered. Pompero's explanations have a distinct yellowcake feel to them -- "We know what we're doing, trust us" sort of thing. The Administration has zero credibility except among the faithful here in the US. I suspect the real reason could be a combination of two factors. One is that whenever there's any danger of peace breaking out in the Middle East it gets spoiled and invariably there something or someone Israeli at the bottom of it. The leaders killed were particularly dangerous precisely because they're not hot heads, they develop policies in a rational manner and are instrumental in keeping wayward elements under control. This is the kind of ME leader that is feared by Israel -- they need a disorganized rabble without the gates (one that's preferably fighting among itself) so that they can keep their internal politics under control. The other factor is Trump is susceptible to anything that appeals to his vanity, especially if its one-up against Obama. There's already been the claim that this was a proper response, unlike Benghazi. (..and apparently ISIS is an Obama creation .) So I could see a situation where a back channel suggestion is whispered into an ear, orders are given, people are killed and we have to deal with the consequences.

    I just hope that the Isranians and Iraqis are sophisticated enough to provide a measured response. I thought the Iraqi lawmakers' response was perfect -- the US has breached the terms of the agreement by which its supposed to be in that country so it should leave. (Trump's response is more typical of his responses -- bluster about sanctions and threaten the Iraqis with a bill for an airbase.)

    lundiel ,

    Strictly speaking, ISIS is a CIA creation under the Obama administration. I draw your attention to the shiploads of Libyan weapons delivered to international jihadists in Syria by way of Turkey. Along with John McCain's close association with Prince Bandar of KSA (Before he was chopped-up because Saudi finance became common knowledge and the beast got out of control). It's interesting to note that Obama, a democrat, used McCain, a neocon hawk as his middle east special envoy. Not that Trump has changed much, he can't, he's not in control.

    Antonym ,

    Correction: Strictly speaking, ISIS was a CIA creation under their Obama fig leaf

    Guy ,

    You gotta hand it to Trump for coming up with such stupid shit as ,we will not leave until you pay us for the costs of building a base in your country. LOL I almost busted a gut laughing at the stupidity of the guy saying this .
    Consider that I break into your house and make a mess of things , help myself to the food in the fridge , not to mention your wife and daughters if I took a liking to them , leave all the dirty laundry lying around after a week or so and will not leave .In order to accept leaving the premises , you must pay me .Pay me whatever I ask .
    This is how stupid and absurd this charade no minds is descending into .
    Somebody stop the world ,I want to get off.

    Antonym ,

    Even JFK's assassination didn't upset the Anglo military – industrial complex's apple cart, and he was a good guy. QS wasn't and his death won't change much. Donald Trump's might turn out to be more disrupting

    Perp all the same: T-Rex CIA, NOT the mossad mosquito however much Zionphobes wish it to.

    richard le sarc ,

    'QS' was a saint compared to the psychopathic butchers who run Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Israeli colony known as the USA.

    andyoldlabour ,

    How many deaths were Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Bush x 2, Clinton, Obama and Trump responsible for compared to QS?

    Gezzah Potts ,

    Multiple United States targets hit by missiles in Iraq, including Ayn Asad Airbase and Al Taji coalition base north of Baghdad.
    No news on casualties yet. This response was expected, but the $64 million dollar question is how hard will the nutters in Washington respond? And what of the 6 B-52 bombers that have just been sent to Diego Garcia?
    And news just in of a second wave of missiles directed at US targets.
    Trump, Pompeo, Esper . You are reaping what You sowed. Total wackjobs.
    This is deeply disturbing .

    richard le sarc ,

    Nothing would work better than closing Hormuz, and destroying Saudi oil installations. That would be a seismic shock to US economic hegemony.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    Very unconfirmed reports there may have been up to 80 United States personnel killed in the missile attacks on Ayn Assad Airbase today.
    This could be fake news tho?
    That's appeared on Vanessa Beeley's Facebook page as well as a guy called Laith Marouf, and Press TV has just been reported as 'breaking news' that "there were casualties".
    Tellingly, no other independent sites have been reporting this (so far)
    And Trumpf is tweeting 'all is well'.
    Don't expect the truth from Team USA, or the retarded presstitutes.
    Duh What a dumb thing to say. Of course not.
    I still believe United States will respond to the Iranian missile strikes. Can you imagine Pompeo or Esper going 'okay, all good, we're all even now' after today.
    I can't.
    If things do take off, closing the Straits Of Hormuz would be one of the very first options for Iran. And then watch the panic in the 'civilised, democratic, freedom loving' West when the economy starts imploding.

    RobG ,

    The psychopaths who rule us will now try to close down the internet.

    The attacks carried out by the Iranians today are peanuts compared to what's coming in the following days, most of which you won't be told about.

    The biggest laugh is how they will try to excuse Donald Trump, who's the biggest joke there's ever been as an American President.

    [Jan 08, 2020] 'Jesus, Do We Have To Explain Why We Do These Things'

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    This was the first question of the day, mind you. When asked about specific threats, they won't say, other to claim the threats were against "American diplomats, American military personnel, and American – facilities that house Americans" in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria. When asked if allies had been notified of these attacks, or what is meant by "imminent threats," officials said they couldn't elaborate because that would be revealing "sources and methods." When asked why there had been no information about the dead American contractor in the Dec.27 militia strike on the Iraqi base that touched this all off, one of the three state department officials said, "I haven't asked, and I don't know."

    Their real imperiousness comes when a reporter presses officials to explain their repeated suggestions that the Jan. 3 strike against Soleimani was at once well-deserved after Iran's "violent and expansionist foreign policy," a response to the breach of the U.S. embassy last week, and a preemptive action to stop Soleimani's planned attacks, for which we still have no detailed information.

    QUESTION: The decision to take him out wasn't necessarily a way of removing this – [Senior State Department Official One], the threat that you were talking about in these different countries and these different facilities – but it's a way to mitigate it in the future? I'm just --

    SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL THREE: It slows it down. It makes it less --

    QUESTION: Since we don't know what the threat is – okay, that's what I was --

    SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL THREE: It slows it down. It makes it less likely. It's shooting down Yamamoto in 1942. Jesus, do we have to explain why we do these things? (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: Ouch.

    SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL THREE: Go look that up.

    QUESTION: Yes, you do.

    Most tellingly, the officials pushed back hard not only against the suggestion that this was an "assassination" of a government official, but that Iran is a legitimate country at all, protected by any international norms or laws:

    We are, again, denying them the fiction that this is some Westphalian country that has, like, a conventional defense ministry and a standard president and a foreign minister. It's a regime with clerical and revolutionary oversight that seeks to dominate the Middle East and beyond. You've heard me say this is a kleptocratic theocracy. And you look at the people of Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon, are all rejecting the Iranian model at the same time.

    So if the U.S. does not recognize your form of government -- does this include the Communist Party of China? -- you are fair game?

    In its reporting this weekend, The Daily Beast found that the President was talking about a "big" response to events on the ground in Iraq with his inner circle at Mar-a-Lago five days before Soleimani's killing.

    Those Mar-a-Lago guests received more warning about Thursday's attack than Senate staff did, and about as much clarity. A classified briefing on Friday, the first the administration gave to the Hill, featured broad claims about what the Iranians were planning and little evidence of planning to bring about the "de-escalation" the administration says it wants.

    According to three sources either in the room or told about the discussion, briefers from the State Department, Pentagon, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence claimed that killing Soleimani was designed to block Iranian plans to kill "hundreds" or even thousands of Americans in the Mideast. That would be a massive escalation from the recent attack patterns of Iran and its regional proxies, who tend to kill Americans in small numbers at a time.

    After this display, it is clear that the "trust us" argument is going to prevail until lawmakers start demanding more, including legal justification for the strikes. There was no hint of an answer, of course, in the state department briefing:

    QUESTION: The Secretary talked about this as being wholly legal. I wonder if you can just explain the legal justification of the killing.

    SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: You're going to have to talk to the lawyers.

    No one expects satisfaction from these briefings but getting slapped around as the rest of the country is wondering if we are on the brink of war is the height of audacity, even for a government that has proven over the last 18 years that it cares nothing about whether the American people believe them or not.

    kouroi • 3 days ago

    So, Iran government is illegitimate, same as the Chinese government which is ruled by CCP. They would all be legitimate targets. Russian government is rather just nationalist and probably that is bad too.

    It is likely that no direct attacks are carried against Chinese or Russian leaders because of retaliation. It is good that the new hyper-sonic Russian missiles can strike US in less than 30 minutes with great accuracy, being able to hit particular individuals. Let us hope that those missiles and Russian defense systems will start flooding the market... Will then US start using nukes?

    Fran Macadam kouroi • 2 days ago
    Maybe as soon as deployed in Ukraine where they can strike Moscow with only six minutes' warning, leaving no alternative but a retaliating revenge strike of "launch on warning."
    cka2nd kouroi • 2 days ago
    That's the only reason the North Korean government is still in place, because they can punch back. The Kim family learned that lesson from Iraq and Libya, and Syria has just reinforced it.

    I wonder how many Europeans now realize the folly, the sheer stupidity, of supporting or just passively accepting US and NATO military intervention in the Middle East and North Africa, and that whatever refugee crisis has hit Europe originates from those wars of aggression? Probably the same proportion of Americans who realize that American policies in Latin America help "push" millions of Latin Americans to migrate to the U.S. illegally: too damn few.

    Awake and Uttering a Song • 3 days ago
    "'Jesus, Do We Have To Explain Why We Do These Things?'"

    Jesus: "Why, yes. Yes, you do. If not now, you'll be explaining them later."

    In the presence of Truth, we are not plaintiffs -- we are defendants.

    Barry_D Awake and Uttering a Song • 2 days ago
    Brad DeLong had the greatest and shortest comment about the Catholic scandals (and the same for all other churches): "Don't these people believe in God?".
    WellRedMan • 3 days ago
    If the media wish to question the transparency and accountability of government, then they need to be consistent in their efforts regardless of which party is in power. While certainly, media political bias has always underlain its motivations and guided its efforts, never has it so openly dominated their entire focus in the relentless pursuit of one overarching objective. This, in turn, has led it to be viewed as simply an organ of political propaganda for one particular political party and it is thereby no longer able to muster the public support required to demand that government, particularly the federal bureaucracy, be responsive to inquiries into policy development and implementation. It should then come as no surprise that the mainstream media has become a tool of manipulation and obfuscation for the government's continued campaign to dominate and figuratively disenfranchise the will of the People. The only outlier here is the Trump Administration and its failure to play the game. Once we have gotten past that, one way or another, it will be back to business as usual.
    tz WellRedMan • 3 days ago
    I strongly suspect that you need to diversify your assortment of media sources.
    If you don't recognize that If Trump had his way, all media everywhere would kiss his butt and lie for him and sing his praises. That is what he demands of his associates and the GOP, and they do. Just look objectively at Lindsay Graham's conduct in the perspective of the past 20 years.
    As a commenter on National Review posted yesterday. Be good to Trump, and he will be good too you. Please remind Michael Cohen, Manafort and the other convects who were good to Trump, and Trump was not so good to them in return.
    cka2nd WellRedMan • 2 days ago
    The mainstream media has been pro-intervention under Democratic and Republican presidents, and parrots the lies of the State Departments, no matter the party in the White House (see Venezuela under Bush, Obama and Trump, Honduras under Obama, and Bolivia under Trump).

    In economic policy, the mainstream media is relentlessly pro-establishment, liberal pundits often as much or more so than conservative ones, from teachers unions (until rank-and-file teachers fought back, and forced a change in the narrative) to privatization and deregulation.

    Social policy is the only area where the mainstream media is truly liberal, because that hits many journalists where they live, so to speak. And even there, at least until recently, they usually preach moderation and going slow, as veterans of the civil rights, feminist and LGBT movements could recount from the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's (and probably later, too, but I am less in tune with the modern movements).

    The Trump ADMINISTRATION plays the game. The fact that its leader is so...Trumpian is the only reason his administration is an outlier.

    Null • 3 days ago
    The Yamamoto thing is funny, since he was actually against war with the US (he thought, correctly, that they couldn't win) and only plotted the Pearl Harbor attack when forced to by his superiors.
    b2020 Null • 3 days ago
    The Yamamoto thing is funny, since the US was actually in a declared state of war at the time of his "targeted killing". What is not funny is a US "press corpse" constitutionally - sic - unable to ask that simple question right away:

    QUESTION: Are you saying the US is officially at war with Iran at this time?
    SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL THREE: No.
    QUESTION: You said: 'It's shooting down Yamamoto in 1942'. Is that just bullshit?

    Fran Macadam • 3 days ago
    What's overriding is the huge profits to be made through expanding wars, along with the policies being crafted for the United States in a highly influential Mideast country with collusion by Americans whose loyalties are not primarily American.
    Fran Macadam • 3 days ago
    Our leaders, across the board, are all almost exclusively become madmen, whether in matters of war or social policy.
    sglover Fran Macadam • 2 days ago
    What rubbish. It wasn't "our leaders" who launched this assassination -- it was *your* hero in the endless War Against The Deep State. Before that he trashed the JCPOA, which very much *was* the creation of some of "our leaders", and was a serious, adult attempt to steer away from the disaster that we're looking at now.
    But it's no fun to look at actual history, actual events. It's much more satisfying to dabble in sweeping, vacuous claims, eh?
    Fran Macadam sglover • 2 days ago
    The reality, outside your TDS bubble, is that war with Iran is very much a bipartisan project. You have to realize that the Deep State's neocons largely defected to the Democrats last election when Trump was the only one who dared criticize the endless unwinnable wars. There isn't a President since 1988 who didn't start or expand never ending wars and who didn't lie knowingly about it. There is a small Mideast nation with outsized influence over policy in this country, with political leaders here who have dual loyalties or even primary loyalties to it, along with major billionaire donors to both parties. Both parties removed any restraint on action against Iran in the recent monster military bill they passed. All are beholden to the war industries which make unimaginable enormous profits from never ending warfare. So it appears that whatever war is chosen this year to be the "good war," as with Obama and Hillary about Libya, Syria and Afghanistan, and which the "bad", that the trajectory of war profits must increase. It was our leader Obama who extended the use of drones to execution from afar, "extrajudicial killing," creating the assassination by drone policy no longer considered controversial or immoral, with his "Kill Tuesday" sessions. Nor did he actually end torture or close Guantanamo.
    kid_charlemagne2 • 3 days ago
    Nothing conservative about war. Conservatives have lost every war. Big time. Not just politically but culturally. There were all sorts of stories about women becoming tramps during WWII. And look how it was used to advance feminism. We would not be in this degenerate state if not for US involvement in WWII.
    Wallstreet Panic kid_charlemagne2 • 2 days ago
    "All sorts of stories about women becoming tramps during WWII." I would like to hear some of these stories.
    Jack • 3 days ago
    It appears that Pompeo's pomposity has rubbed off on senior State Department officials.
    Sid Finster Jack • 2 days ago
    Personnel is policy.
    tz • 3 days ago
    War mongers seem to universally believe that they know how the war that they instigate will unfold. They are in fact delusional. Starting a war is rolling the dice in profoundly dangerous and wicked ways. The Iraq invasion and occupation is a great example.
    Bob K. tz • 2 days ago • edited
    George Bush made the 1st roll of the dice at the neo-cons instigation (Only Buchanan demurred) and then Barack Obama took his turn at the Middle East table. Now President Trump has the dice.

    After him? Who knows?

    Sid Finster • 2 days ago
    The irony is that Trump is profoundly weak, a pathetic weakling.
    Martin Ranger • 2 days ago
    The legitimate government argument is one that the Trump administration should maybe not make. After all, it could be argued that he has not been elected in a democratic way, that he, his family and associates as well as parts of his cabinet have financially profited from being in power. Moreover, one could very well claim that the US are seeking to dominate the Middle East.
    Joseph Waters Martin Ranger • 2 days ago
    "The legitimate government argument is one that the Trump administration should maybe not make. After all, it could be argued that he has not been elected in a democratic way..."

    Is the line of argumentation here to be that the election of a president into office by the electoral college, without having won the popular vote, should be deemed "not democratic?" Or, is it to be some allegation that the electoral college itself is "not democratic," and that only direct consultation of the electorate can be considered "truly" democratic?

    anaisanesse • 2 days ago
    The poor vulnerable US forces are not in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya or anywhere else to help the populations, and are now targets for any Iranian or Iraqi retaliation.
    deliaruhe • 16 hours ago • edited
    Seventeen intelligence agencies and these guys can't come up with even one shred of credible evidence in support of these "threats." Gawd help America.
    H.P. Loathecraft • 3 hours ago
    We are, again, denying them the fiction that this is some Westphalian country that has, like, a conventional defense ministry and a standard president and a foreign minister. It's a regime with clerical and revolutionary oversight that seeks to dominate the Middle East and beyond. You've heard me say this is a kleptocratic theocracy.

    Ah, of course, you mean like Saudis and Israel, right?

    [Jan 08, 2020] Russian reaction

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    grr , Jan 7 2020 0:43 utc | 141

    Re PCR's latest linked article (post 133.
    What PCR is insisting Putin do ("The easiest and cleanest way for Putin to do this is to announce that Iran is under Russia's protection.")Putin has already done so in a landmark speech last year when he unveiled five or six game-changing weapons, or was it 2018.
    He declared back then to the evil empire that a nuclear attack on an ally would be considered an attack upon Russia. He made this crystal clear. Of course it wouldn't hurt for him to 'gently' remind them of this.

    bjd , Jan 7 2020 0:47 utc | 142

    You can read Lavrov's Press Releases here: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation .
    bjd , Jan 7 2020 0:58 utc | 147

    I do have to say, the silence from the Russians is odd. Even when you read the Russian Foreign Ministry's news releases.

    For instance, there's this on January 4th:
    " On January 4, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had a telephone conversation with Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran Mohammad Javad Zarif, at the latter's initiative. " (italics mine).

    So Lavrov talked to an Iranian official only on January 4th, and the call came from Iran (Zarif), not the other way around. This is odd, and even the explicit
    mentioning of Zarif initiating the call --to me-- seems odd.
    Hmm...

    Sasha , Jan 7 2020 1:39 utc | 155
    Why waiting for Putin?

    Gerasimov almost never defrauds..

    Ya vienen los Reyes Magos.... con el aguinaldo...

    Russian high general repudiates US terrorism against Soleimani

    [Jan 08, 2020] The lady doth protest too much

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Robert Dolan , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 5:31 am GMT

    Zion Don is not just a fuckup ..he's a DANGEROUS fuckup.
    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 5:59 am GMT
    The lady doth protest too much:

    On Monday, as the meeting ended, several ministers transmitted Netanyahu's declaration distancing Israel from the Soleimani hit.

    "The assassination of Soleimani isn't an Israeli event but an American event. We were not involved and should not be dragged into it," he said, according to Israeli news outlets.

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/netanyahu-distances-from-soleimani-slaying-says-israel-shouldnt-be-dragged-into-it-report

    Daniel Rich , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 7:43 am GMT

    Netanyahu backs away from Soleimani assassination, warns ministers to ' stay out' of purely 'American event

    .'
    Does the word 'backpedaling' ring a bell, Bibi?

    You'll reap what you sow, oh grand Master of Conception. I sincerely hope it'll be an abundant and infinite harvest. And, of course, mazel tov, ol' boy. You're gonna need it by the bushel

    [Jan 08, 2020] A huge amount of Iran's nuclear waste from the years of enriching uranium has been used to create depleted uranium warheads such as the U.S. uses on its Hellfire and other missiles. These are typically one-ton warheads, about 99% uranium, and ignite on contact (uranium is pyrophoric -- it burns) and burn at up to 6,000 C. They can penetrate a good thirty meters of prestressed concrete in less than a second and incinerate everything in the vicinity.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    RJPJR , Jan 6 2020 23:29 utc | 127

    On the previous thread, jared | Jan 6 2020 12:32 utc | 230, posted:
    "Iran is already proclaiming it will proceed with unconstrained uranium enrichment - a act which is both pointless and counter productive."

    A huge amount of Iran's nuclear waste from the years of enriching uranium has been used to create depleted uranium warheads such as the U.S. uses on its Hellfire and other missiles. These are typically one-ton warheads, about 99% uranium, and ignite on contact (uranium is pyrophoric -- it burns) and burn at up to 6,000°C. They can penetrate a good thirty meters of prestressed concrete in less than a second and incinerate everything in the vicinity.

    The (depleted) uranium anti-tank rounds used in the 1991 war against Iraq were five kilograms (11 pounds) and could zip through two or three tanks. When the Americans went inside the tanks later on, they found the Iraqis' bodies turned to black dust. Occasionally, the bodies were intact, in position, but they crumbled to dust when touched. The American troops called them "crispy critters".

    ALL the American military who entered those tanks or worked on them afterward became sick with all sorts of horrible illnesses triggered by radiation poisoning.

    The one ton of uranium in a bunker buster results in one ton of powder, much of it microscopic. Inhaled, a single microscopic particle of 2.5 microns deposited in an alveol cavity of the lung contains come 210 billion uranium atoms. Uranium spits out alpha particles, which don't travel far (an inch at most, usually), but they are the most powerful force in our universe. That single particle irradiates, permanently, a sphere of up to 350 lung cells.

    The military in Iraq were inhaling millions (billions!) of those particles. Those who haven't died yet are deathly ill.

    Israel's anti-missile defenses are not what they are claimed to be. Just a few of those bunker busters delivered into Tel Aviv or West Jerusalem would contaminate it permanently.

    Israel cannot afford the loss of such territory. (In the United States, the Jefferson Proving Ground where most of the testing was done, was offered to the National Park Service as a wild-life refuge to be off limits in order to protect its biodiversity. The offer was turned down. The site is now off limits, designated a national sacrifice zone...) And Iran has the missiles with the accuracy necessary to make such hits.

    Thus, every suspected Iranian missile storage location must be hit simultaneously. Israel does not have the means to do that, hence the need to involve in United States in an all-out colossal attack. This was openly discussed under the George Walker Bush administration until the National Intelligence Estimate of December 2007 pulled the rung out from under the warmongers by openly declaring that Iran had no nuclear program.

    Israel used such missiles on south Lebanon in August 2006, so, they know all about this. The bombing of south Lebanon stopped the day that the south-north wind reversed direction. The United Nations Environment Program that investigated the missile craters in south Lebanon found low enriched uranium, the result of mixing the depleted uranium with the enriched uranium from decommissioned Soviet missiles removed from Ukraine, in a failed attempt to restore the original isotopic ratio and make it pass for "natural" uranium that, if discovered, could then be claimed to have been in the ground and turned up by the bombing.

    The entire assault on mountains and caves of Tora Bora in southeast Afghanistan in 2001-2002 was a bunker buster testing program. Canadian researchers found uranium-induced radioactivity all over, but they were silenced by death threats and some roughing up.

    So, Iran does not need a nuclear arsenal, for it has developed an equally good deterrent on the cheap. Israel knows this, the various intelligence services know this, some people in the corporate media know this, but if one mentions it, one is immediately told that there is "no proof".

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iran is warning that if there is retaliation for the two waves of attacks they launched their 3rd wave will destroy Dubai and Haifa

    Jan 08, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    Interesting if true

    "Iran is warning that if there is retaliation for the two waves of attacks they launched their 3rd wave will destroy Dubai and Haifa," tweeted NBC News Tehran Bureau chief. https://t.co/ydzIAfEpzk

    -- Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) January 8, 2020

    [Jan 08, 2020] The missiles last night is not the promised retribution, Iran is keeping focused on the primary goal to get the usa out

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    james , Jan 8 2020 17:32 utc | 136

    thanks b.. it is really unfortunate about the loss of those on the plane.. it is a strange coincidence of timing and a tie in with ukraine is also rather odd...

    here is how i look at this.. usa-israel hasn't faked its squeeze on iran which has been going on for what feels like forever.. usa-israel didn't fake taking out qassem s... the sanctions on iran continue.. this war on iran will continue.. how could it stop after all this time? what has changed? nothing has changed in the minds of these sick neo cons..

    i share @ James j's comment which i quote here - "The missiles last night is not the promised retribution ...rather, Iran is keeping focused on the primary goal ...to get the usa out..." i don't see that it is going to work though...

    It seems to me Iran works quite differently then US-Israel... they have provided a warning so that action last night looked fake and trumps response 'all is well' was fake as he knew they had been issued an advance warming... but the message is clear.. 'get the fuck out'..

    i also share @ cynica's position in her earlier posts.. the shit here is real.. the world needs to find a way out of this mess and it won't come from western countries cowtowing to usa-israels warmonger agenda either...

    i don't know what the doofus in command has said today.. it doesn't matter what he says... usa-israel will not back down.. they want war.. iran responded very diplomatically... i just don't believe usa-israel are interested in diplomacy, as opposed to war and prep for war.. as someone said last night - all that money to be made off prep for war, the MIC and etc. etc.. i wish this would end, but i can't see it..

    [Jan 08, 2020] While symbolic and the USA were waned inadvance, Iran attacks means the end fo full spectrum dominance doctrine used bu the USA since 1991

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Taffyboy , Jan 7 2020 17:55 utc | 1

    The blowback from Trump's assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani and PMU leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis is increasing. A scandal is developing as one consequence of Trump's evil deed after Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi revealed the gangster methods U.S. President Trump used in his attempts to steal Iraq's oil. ...and a very good essay by Michael Hudson as appeared on the Saker blog, a fine compliment to this work being done here by B.

    http://thesaker.is/america-escalates-its-democratic-oil-war-in-the-near-east/

    Likklemore , Jan 8 2020 13:47 utc | 31

    As usual b, you excel.
    Last evening the Iran Missile launch was an aperitif taunt. Just the first wave of the menu.

    Iraqi Militia Leader Says Their Response to US Will Not be Lesser Than Iranian Retaliation - Reports

    "The initial Iranian response to the assassination of the martyred commander Soleimani has happened. Now it is time for the initial response to the assassination of the martyred commander Muhandis. And because Iraqis are brave and zealous, their response will not be any less than that of Iran's. That is a promise", al-Khazali was quoted as saying.

    I endorse this view from Shedlock:
    Trump is caught bluffing again-Fortunately. Iran's measured response puts Trump in a no win Scenario

    LINK

    somebody , Jan 8 2020 13:54 utc | 36
    Posted by: Dave | Jan 8 2020 13:24 utc | 23

    It is difficult to do perception management in a globalized world. Neither the US nor Iran want full out war, but politically they have to convince their people that they "win", to justify the cost (and unite, though Trump seems to be incapable of this). Actually, Iran has an advantage here, because martyrdom or victory, psychologically they can win either way. They have demonstrated this by the huge - unifying - funerals. They also don't have this stupid Hollywood good guy bad guy thing or if you want to go into protestant religious psychology that god will make the good guys win in this world. It is a huge problem as the reverse perception is that if someone is successful he must be good.
    Fact is that Iran has been the first country since WWII to challenge the US directly and not via proxy. They were rational to do it in a way that leaves the US an off ramp. By warning beforehand and not killing anybody (officially, I have my doubts about this Ukrainian plane), they also have the moral high ground.
    They managed to make the US stop the escalation. It is quite impressive.

    There will be a lot of diplomacy now.

    Walter , Jan 8 2020 13:55 utc | 37
    Interesting "tweet" Elijah J. Magnier Retweeted
    Misión Verdad
    ‏ @Mision_Verdad
    9m

    La base de los Estados Unidos en Ayn al-Assad en Irak, bombardeada anoche por Irán, es la base donde despegaron los drones que asesinaron a Qassem Soleimani y Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. Así lo informó el corresponsal de guerra

    MT> The US base at Ayn al-Assad in Iraq, bombed last night by Iran, is the base where the drones that killed Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al Muhandis took off. This was reported by the war correspondent

    Likklemore , Jan 8 2020 14:07 utc | 40
    I caution Netiyahoo not to crow. His prison time is on the horizon.

    China's Global Times has a piece noting Israel gave assistance.
    And this editorial:
    Has the US lost direction in Middle East?

    "US national power is on the wane [;/]now considers China as its primary rival and wants to use its resources from Europe and the Middle East to contain China. If it is so, its presence in the Middle East will be surely diminished."[./]

    After a US drone strike killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani in Iraq, it was expected that Iran would retaliate. But the way it fought back - launching missiles against US bases in Iraq - was unexpected. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps carried out the mission.

    Since Iran did not target US soil, the move cannot be viewed as a declaration of war. Iran did aim at US troops, but the troops are stationed in Iraq. This showed Tehran is well aware how far it should go and has left some ground. Iran doesn't want a fierce clash or a war with the US. As Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif claimed on Wednesday morning after the attack, the country was taking measures in self-defense. "We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression," he said. [.]

    How should the US react, the White House must be deliberating, because what it does next may directly determine whether Washington and Tehran would reduce tensions or storm into a war. Currently, it is the lull before the storm.
    US military killed Iran's most powerful military commander on Iraq's soil, which is an act of state terrorism although the US itself does not think so. [.]
    https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1176167.shtml

    The U.S. collapse is not one event. It is a slow, slow process and then the $250 trillion debt pile goes out with a bang.

    moon , Jan 8 2020 14:08 utc | 41
    "where Bannon found" correction: when Bannon founded his ...

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/01/07/how-iran-can-checkmate-trump/
    Eric Zuesse to or via b.

    take care ... LeaNder

    /div> The reason the Qiam rocket, a derivation of the nazi A4, is built is that it is cheap and has the capability to be modified such that the "pay-load" comes in very fast and within 10 meters of zero-zero-zero. It's not an old rocket. But I assume the Persians used the oldest first. Inventory managements is vital to logistics and ammunition reliability. The cheap version is 500 meter accurate at range, but the range was not exteem, so probably < 500

    Posted by: Walter , Jan 8 2020 14:31 utc | 45

    The reason the Qiam rocket, a derivation of the nazi A4, is built is that it is cheap and has the capability to be modified such that the "pay-load" comes in very fast and within 10 meters of zero-zero-zero. It's not an old rocket. But I assume the Persians used the oldest first. Inventory managements is vital to logistics and ammunition reliability. The cheap version is 500 meter accurate at range, but the range was not exteem, so probably < 500

    Posted by: Walter | Jan 8 2020 14:31 utc | 45

    Annie , Jan 8 2020 14:35 utc | 46
    B, great article. You and Elijah Marnier and a few others are my first go to's for information as to what is going on on the middle east.
    One of my favorite reporters out of Syria said the US abandoned Deir Ezzor oil fields yesterday leaving the SDF there alone and totally open for Russian and Syrian forces to go in and to secure. If so this attack would have been well worth it. Obviously, I can't verify it but do trust the source.

    Hezbollah is also well within reach of Israhell and can launch ballistic missiles upon it should the US attack Iran. People tend to forget that this was not just about Soleimani, but an entire resistance. His death has just made that resistance much stronger and unified.
    The US will have to leave. And soon.

    gadzooks , Jan 8 2020 15:29 utc | 69
    walter@45,ghost_ship@47 believe Iran is using "old stocks".

    I respectfully disagree. This is Iran's debut in showing off their technical prowess - they are trying to scare off the US from escalating the conflict.

    IMHO they would make sure the US got the message that they pulled their punches and could have caused *much* more damage if they wanted to. Using older stock would make sense, but only after you establish your cred - otherwise, you are sending exactly the wrong message, the US could read the hit as "gosh, 500m is the best you can do?"

    Cynica , Jan 8 2020 15:56 utc | 85
    Following up on the end of #78, the point is that it seems very unlikely that the air defenses would be shut down even if the bases were evacuated. In that case, the success of the attack (however limited its objectives) shows Iran's ability to penetrate US air defenses and disable or destroy US air-supremacy infrastructure.

    @PavewayIV #75

    The US will ALWAYS try to spin this against Iran no matter what. Even if we hear the captain screaming that he can see the engine is tearing itself apart.

    Indeed! If there's one thing the US does all the time, it's spin. But especially with last night's attack, they're starting to resemble the Talosians of Star Trek, whose seemingly incredible powers were all, well, illusory.

    somebody , Jan 8 2020 16:34 utc | 108
    Posted by: TheBAG | Jan 8 2020 16:20 utc | 98

    Of course.

    Ayatollah Khamenei: Iran's retaliation against US only 'a slap'

    Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says Iran's early Wednesday missile attack on US bases in Iraq following the American assassination of a top general was just "a slap".

    "The talk of revenge and such debates are a different issue. For now, a slap was delivered on their face last night," Ayatollah Khamenei said in remarks broadcast live on national television Wednesday.

    "What is important about confrontation is that the military action as such is not sufficient. What is important is that the seditious American presence in the region must end," he said to chants of "Death to America" by an audience in Tehran.

    The threats on how to answer on new US attacks have been issued without a date of expiry.

    It all depends now on Trump's reelection strategy: Will he run on bringing the troups home or will he run on another Middle East war.

    omid , Jan 8 2020 17:33 utc | 138
    „The Qiam missiles Iran launched are a derivative of the Soviet Scud type. They are liquid fueled with a warhead of about 700 kilogram. They have a range of some 800 kilometer. Iran has more capable and precise solid fueled missiles it could have used."

    According to Fars news agency 2 of the missiles were of type Fateh313 (solid fueled – 500km range) the rest were a modified version of Ghiyam (multiple warheads - 800km range).

    „No U.S. air or missile defense against the incoming projectiles was observed."

    In spite of public and unofficial announcement by Iran about the attack even short time ahead, Yankee was not able to repel and defend their modern and costy military base. According to Fars news agency radar jamming technology were used in this attack.
    The attack is over, Trump's reaction is published, but still no one is allowed to enter the military base.

    Erlindur , Jan 8 2020 17:35 utc | 141
    @ Fog of War | Jan 8 2020 17:12 utc | 127

    You are missing the point. An airbase is a huge target with mostly empty space. The fact that the Iranians were able to target and hit specific buildings in it, is a truly nightmarish scenario. They actually told US that they have the capability to hit whatever they want. USA can send a drone and kill a general but US has generals too. It is easy to find where a general's house in Qatar base is for example and hit it with the same accuracy. How does that general sleeps at night from now on? How can you plan the typical US bombing campaign, when your enemy has the ability to strike back at you where it hurts?

    Peter AU1 , Jan 8 2020 17:42 utc | 144
    Magnier..
    "#Iran informed #Iraq Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi of its intention to bomb #US military bases in #Anbar and #Kurdistan before the attack.

    Abdel Mahdi warned the Americans who took their precautions before the attack."

    If this is true then there really is no hope for the Iraqi's. This is the clown that writes letters to the US saying US has been naughty and resigned when Trump puts some pressure on him, leaving Iraq gov parylized..

    A P , Jan 8 2020 17:43 utc | 146
    Iran was proving the reach and accuracy of their armaments, and the inadequacy of the US Patriot etc. anti-air-attack systems. Trumps Tomahawks fired at Syria either went wrong guidance-wise, were hacked or were shot down by Russian-made defenses. No comparison, Iran wins the "rockets that don't kill anyone" competition. Iran also has Russian-made air defense systems. Cheaper too... LOL!

    I expect that the Iraqi gov't administration will quietly try to back-pedal from the Parliamentary vote to evict the US. Then the various militias will band together (maybe even Shia/Sunni alliances, the enemy of my enemy style) and keep US/ZATO troops mostly bottled up in their bases until the US actually withdraws. The Iraq administration will be forced to bend to the Parliament's and Iraqi peoples' will that the US/ZATO leaves. Pompeo and Trumpty Dumbdy won't be able to tap dance around this scenario, even in front of the US/ZATO public. Iran may not have to lift a finger in Iraq, but will find other ways to hurt the US AND ZATO that don't meet the threshold for US military retaliation.

    The US/ZATO deserves to suffer millions of cuts, hopefully one cut for each person murdered by the US since 9/11.

    MAGA Make America Go Away

    omid , Jan 8 2020 18:01 utc | 154 Piotr Berman , Jan 8 2020 18:01 utc | 155
    "Iran misjudged Trump's response/speech, Trump talked about peace and not escalation (he is lying of course), if Iran keep attacking US from now on, Iran will be framed as the threat and that Trump have the right to retaliate.

    Aslong as no one was killed on the american side apparently Trump see no reason to use military means, meanwhile Iran is left with no kills which could make them more desperate."

    Posted by: Zanon | Jan 8 2020 17:12 utc | 125

    I typical post that misses the point. The goal is to remove all the NATO trash from Syria and Iraq. That has to be done by Iraqis, of which the bold ones are clobbered with air strikes and the timid are intimidated. It is utterly pointless how Americans perceive the situation, and even less germane what is the opinion of the vassals. The audience that matters is in Iraq.

    So what USA did? Dissed Iraqis quite serially, including the murder at the main airport with no warning to the legal authorities of the place. Iran tries to be as un-American as possible, so duly notifies Iraqi PM about the strike, an hour in advance, and perhaps follows the suggestion to warn Americans directly. Giving the proper recognition of the rights of the allies takes precedence over expedience, even in the moment of extreme pain and grief. Mind you that Saudi, American or whoever has stooges in Iraq that villify it as a dominator taking advantage etc., and that was a major theme in recent riots. It seems that one block of rouble-risers is reconverted to anti-American solidarity, but those people have to be humored, not taken for granted.

    Taking opinions of others seriously even if there is no perfect agreement, especially if the other party is not Israel, is the profound lack of Americans, and the rest of the West to to a lesser degree.

    The other aspect is how Shia view religious leaders and how those leaders view themselves. There are rather high standards. This is not an operation under a local commander. Supreme Leader is personally engaged. Taking proper account of host country prerogatives is also good regard for Grand Ayatollah Sistani and other Iraqi marjah etc. Contrast with untrustworthy, arrogant and cowardly infidels has to be maintained.

    Zanon , Jan 8 2020 18:10 utc | 162
    Piotr Berman

    US have not been asked to leave by the iraqis so how are they supposed to leave? Especially since they are not going to leave by themselves?

    Esper: Iraqi government has not asked US troops to leave

    Iraq's government has made no formal request that American forces leave its country, despite a nonbinding vote Sunday to expel U.S. and other troops after the Pentagon killed a top Iranian commander in Baghdad, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Tuesday.

    https://www.stripes.com/news/us/esper-iraqi-government-has-not-asked-us-troops-to-leave-1.613859

    Same for Syria, you cant just tell americans to leave, you have to make them.


    Margie , Jan 8 2020 18:13 utc | 165
    Regarding warning the Swiss embassy of the attack. Also very strategic move. If there were loss of American life due to no warning, it would have been near impossible for Trump to not counter attack.

    Furthermore, the US now thinks their enemy is weak or afraid. I feel kind of disappointed by you guys who also think that, honestly? Did you see the reaction of the millions who came to honor Souleimani? Do you really think the Iranian/Iraqi military and population are wimps?
    c'mon! take heart guys!

    [Jan 08, 2020] As Michael Flynn relates in his interview with Mehdi Hassan, once kicked out, the Obama Administration took steps that they knew would lead to the creation of ISIS in the region, and fired him as the head of the DIA after he had written them a memo warning them about this.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    masoud , Jan 7 2020 0:50 utc | 143

    @Dan

    Iran was definitely involved in organizing, supplying, and even to some extent arming(with small arms) various Iraqi militias. But the best way we know that it wasn't directly involved in attacking US patrols, was that so few soldiers died. Iran has no need to improvise explosive devices, it manufactures landmines on a mass scale which are much more reliable and orders of magnitude more deadly, and operationally easier to use.

    Most of the resistance to the US occupation in the Shia regions of Iraq were in the form of non violent demonstrations spearheaded by Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani(who btw is also Iranian).

    The nonviolent demonstrators were routinely massacred for their trouble, by both the takfiri resistance and the occupation troops, but eventually succeeded in their demands for a democratic vote wherein they elected a government that demanded the US leave.

    And as Michael Flynn relates in his interview with Mehdi Hassan, once kicked out, the Obama Administration took steps that they knew would lead to the creation of ISIS in the region, and fired him as the head of the DIA after he had written them a memo warning them about this.

    Michael Flynn, who btw is rabidly anti Iranian, then became the first victim of the Russiagaters when Trump was elected into office.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iran has vowed "harsh retaliation": that would be stupid

    Resumption of uranium enrichment is already an adequate retaliation.
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

    A war with Iran would see it use its Chinese-supplied anti-ship missiles, mines and coastal artillery to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, which is the corridor for 20% of the world's oil supply. Oil prices would double, perhaps triple, devastating the global economy. The retaliatory strikes by Iran on Israel, as well as on American military installations in Iraq, would leave hundreds, maybe thousands, of dead. The Shiites in the region, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, would see an attack on Iran as a religious war against Shiism.

    The 2 million Shiites in Saudi Arabia, concentrated in the oil-rich Eastern province, the Shiite majority in Iraq and the Shiite communities in Bahrain, Pakistan and Turkey would turn in fury on us and our dwindling allies.

    There would be an increase in terrorist attacks, including on American soil, and widespread sabotage of oil production in the Persian Gulf. Hezbollah in southern Lebanon would renew attacks on northern Israel. War with Iran would trigger a long and widening regional conflict that, by the time it was done, would terminate the American Empire and leave in its wake mounds of corpses and smoldering ruins. Let us hope for a miracle to pull us back from this Dr. Strangelove self-immolation.

    Iran, which has vowed "harsh retaliation," is already reeling under the crippling economic sanctions imposed by the Trump administration when it unilaterally withdrew in 2018 from the Iranian nuclear arms deal. Tensions in Iraq between the U.S. and the Shiite majority, at the same time, have been escalating. On Dec. 27 Katyusha rockets were fired at a military base in Kirkuk where U.S. forces are stationed. An American civilian contractor was killed and several U.S. military personnel were wounded.

    The U.S. responded on Dec. 29 by bombing sites belonging to the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah militia. Two days later Iranian-backed militias attacked the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, vandalizing and destroying parts of the building and causing its closure. But this attack will soon look like child's play.

    Iraq after our 2003 invasion and occupation has been destroyed as a unified country. Its once-modern infrastructure is in ruins. Electrical and water services are, at best, erratic. There is high unemployment and discontent over widespread government corruption that has led to bloody street protests. Warring militias and ethnic factions have carved out competing and antagonistic enclaves. At the same time, the war in Afghanistan is lost, as the Afghanistan Papers published by The Washington Post detail. Libya is a failed state. Yemen after five years of unrelenting Saudi airstrikes and a blockade is enduring one of the world's worst humanitarian disasters. The "moderate" rebels we funded and armed in Syria at a cost of $500 million, after instigating a lawless reign of terror, have been beaten and driven out of the country. The monetary cost for this military folly, the greatest strategic blunder in American history, is between $5 trillion and $7 trillion.

    So why go to war with Iran? Why walk away from a nuclear agreement that Iran did not violate? Why demonize a government that is the mortal enemy of the Taliban, along with other jihadist groups, including al-Qaida and Islamic State? Why shatter the de facto alliance we have with Iran in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why further destabilize a region already dangerously volatile?

    The generals and politicians who launched and prosecuted these wars are not about to take the blame for the quagmires they created. They need a scapegoat. It is Iran. The hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed, including at least 200,000 civilians, and the millions driven from their homes into displacement and refugee camps cannot, they insist, be the result of our failed and misguided policies. The proliferation of radical jihadist groups and militias, many of which we initially trained and armed, along with the continued worldwide terrorist attacks, have to be someone else's fault. The generals, the CIA, the private contractors and weapons manufacturers who have grown rich off these conflicts, the politicians such as George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, along with all the "experts" and celebrity pundits who serve as cheerleaders for endless war, have convinced themselves, and want to convince us, that Iran is responsible for our catastrophe.

    The chaos and instability we unleashed in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, left Iran as the dominant country in the region. Washington empowered its nemesis. It has no idea how to reverse its mistake other than to attack Iran.

    [Jan 08, 2020] The victims of Iranian retaliation will be America's Arab proxies, be they nations such as Saudi Arabia and its allies, or military factions

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.theguardian.com


    [Jan 08, 2020] Iraq army says no Iraqi casualties as 22 missiles strike bases News Al Jazeera

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.aljazeera.com

    Iraq army says no Iraqi casualties as 22 missiles strike bases

    Military says 17 missiles hit Ain al-Asad airbase while five others fell in Erbil.

    2 hours ago
    Iraqi security forces are seen at Ain al-Asad airbase in Anbar province [File: Thaier Al-Sudani/Reuters]
    Iraqi security forces are seen at Ain al-Asad airbase in Anbar province [File: Thaier Al-Sudani/Reuters]
    more on Soleimani assassination

    A total of 22 missiles have hit two bases housing US troops in Iraq but there were no Iraqi casualties, according to Iraq's military.

    The online statement came hours after Iranian state television said Iran had launched missiles at US targets in the early hours of Wednesday in retaliation for the United States 's killing last week of top military commander Qassem Soleimani .

    More:

    "Between 1:45am and 2:15am [22:45 GMT and 23:15 GM] Iraq was hit by 22 missiles, 17 on the Ain al-Asad airbase and ... five on the city of Erbil," the Iraqi military said.

    "There were no victims among the Iraqi forces," it added, without mentioning whether or not there were casualties among foreign troops.

    Following the strikes, US President Donald Trump said on Twitter that an "assessment of casualties & damages taking place now".

    "So far, so good!" he wrote.

    https://players.brightcove.net/665003303001/BkeSH5BDb_default/index.html?videoId=6120534310001&usrPersonaAds=0

    Iran launches missile attacks on US forces in Iraq (16:15)

    More than 5,000 US troops remain in Iraq along with other foreign forces as part of a coalition that has trained and backed up Iraqi security forces in the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) armed group.

    READ MORE Where did Iran attack US forces in Iraq?

    Some 115 German soldiers are stationed in Erbil and all were fine, a spokesman for Bundeswehr operations said.

    Denmark, which has about 130 soldiers in Iraq, said no Danish soldiers were wounded or killed in the attack on Ain al-Asad, the largest airbase where US-led coalition troops are based.

    It was the first time Iran directly hit a US installation with ballistic missiles.

    Soleimani, who headed Iran's Quds Force, the overseas arm of the elite Revolutionary Guards Corps, was buried after the missile attacks, Iranian state television said.

    "His revenge was taken and now he can rest in peace," it said.

    The missiles were launched at the same time of the day that Soleimani was killed on Friday near the international airport in Iraq's capital, Baghdad. He was buried in the "martyrs section" of a cemetery in his hometown of Kerman.

    [Jan 08, 2020] At least two airbases housing US troops in Iraq have been hit by more than a dozen ballistic missiles, according to the US Department of Defence

    Brave but useless, and probably damaging action from Iran. Mullahs became way too exited about this insident.
    Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi labeled the missile strike that killed Soleimani as a "brazen violation of Iraq's sovereignty and a blatant attack on the nation's dignity".
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.bbc.com

    At least two airbases housing US troops in Iraq have been hit by more than a dozen ballistic missiles, according to the US Department of Defence.

    Iranian state TV says the attack is a retaliation after the country's top commander Qasem Soleimani was killed in a drone strike in Baghdad, on the orders of US President Donald Trump.

    The Pentagon says at least two sites were attacked, in Irbil and Al Asad.

    It is unclear if there have been any casualties.

    "We are aware of the reports of attacks on US facilities in Iraq. The president has been briefed and is monitoring the situation closely and consulting with his national security team," White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.

    Iran's Revolutionary Guard said the attack was in retaliation for the death of Soleimani on Friday.

    "We are warning all American allies, who gave their bases to its terrorist army, that any territory that is the starting point of aggressive acts against Iran will be targeted," it said via a statement carried by Iran's state-run IRNA news agency.

    Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif later issued a statement on Twitter, claiming the attack was self-defence and denied seeking to escalate the situation into war.

    Twitter post by @JZarif: Iran took & concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens & senior officials were launched.We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression. Image Copyright @JZarif @JZarif Report
    <figure> <span> <img alt="Twitter post by @JZarif: Iran took &amp; concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens &amp; senior officials were launched.We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression." src="https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/socialembed/https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953~/news/world-middle-east-51028954" width="465" height="323"> <span>Image Copyright @JZarif</span> <span aria-hidden="true">@JZarif</span> </span> <div><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/contact-us/editorial" aria-label="Report Twitter post by @JZarif">Report</a></div> </figure>

    President Trump tweeted shortly afterwards, insisting "all is well", while adding that they had not yet assessed possible casualties.

    Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump: All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning. Image Copyright @realDonaldTrump @realDonaldTrump Report
    <figure> <span> <img alt="Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump: All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties &amp; damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning." src="https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/socialembed/https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1214739853025394693~/news/world-middle-east-51028954" width="465" height="279"> <span>Image Copyright @realDonaldTrump</span> <span aria-hidden="true">@realDonaldTrump</span> </span> <div><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/contact-us/editorial" aria-label="Report Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump">Report</a></div> </figure>
    Presentational white space

    The attacks took place hours after the burial of Soleimani. The second attack occurred in Irbil shortly after the first rockets hit Al Asad, Al Mayadeen TV said.

    Map showing US military bases in Iraq
    Presentational white space

    Earlier in the day, President Trump said a US withdrawal of troops from Iraq would be the worst thing for the country.

    His comments came in the wake of a letter, which the US military said had been sent in error , to Iraq's prime minister, apparently agreeing to a request by Iraqi MPs to pull troops out.

    The US has around 5,000 troops in Iraq.

    The UK foreign office told the BBC: "We are urgently working to establish the facts on the ground. Our first priority is the security of British personnel."

    The UK has put the Royal Navy and military helicopters on standby amid rising tensions in the Middle East, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said earlier.

    How did we get here?

    The assassination of Soleimani on January 3 was a major escalation in already deteriorating relations between Iran and the US.

    The general - who controlled Iran's proxy forces across the Middle East - was regarded as a terrorist by the US government, which says he was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American troops and was plotting "imminent" attacks.

    Iran vowed "severe revenge" for his death.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iran's assault on US bases in Iraq might satisfy both sides

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

    The "severe revenge" Iran promised for the death of Qassem Suleimani was heralded on Wednesday morning by at least two waves of short-range missile attacks on bases in Iraq hosting US and coalition personnel.

    The attacks will provide an opportunity for hawks inside the Donald Trump administration to ratchet up the conflict with Iran – but also potentially a pathway out of the crisis.

    The Iranian strikes were heavy on symbolism. The missiles were launched around 1.30am in Iraq , roughly the same time as the drone strike that killed Suleimani on Friday morning. Top Iranian advisers and semi-official media outlets tweeted pictures of the country's flag during the attack, mirroring Donald Trump's tweet as the first reports of Suleimani's death were emerging. The Revolutionary Guards dubbed the operation "Martyr Suleimani". Videos of the missiles being launched were released to Iranian media outlets.

    ss="rich-link"> Iran attacks two US airbases in Iraq in wake of Suleimani killing Read more

    But in their immediate aftermath, the attacks appear to have been carefully calibrated to avoid US casualties – fired at bases that were already on high alert.

    Iran's foreign minister has said the strikes have concluded and characterised them as self-defence within the boundaries of international law – not the first shots in a war.

    Trump, in his first comments after the strikes, also sought to play them down.
    Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

    All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning.

    January 8, 2020

    If Trump's assessment of the damage holds, Wednesday's strikes might be an opportunity for both sides to de-escalate without losing face. Iran will be able to say it took violent revenge for Suleimani's death and pivot to a campaign of proxy warfare – with which it feels more comfortable, against a vastly more powerful adversary – and diplomatic pressure to eject American forces from Iraq.

    The US can also step back, shrugging off the retaliation as being of no significant consequence. That is the best-case scenario, but it rests on two risky premises: that more than a dozen missiles struck bases hosting US military personnel without substantial damage or casualties; and that the White House will resist any urge to respond.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Pretty sure Trump and Bibi are not unhappy about this since that's probably what they hoped for.

    Trump is implementing the last leg of PNAC. https://www.wanttoknow.info/020907pnacprojectnewamericancentury Iraq, Libya, Afghan, Syria, Iran, China have all been targeted.
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Pft , Jan 8 2020 1:07 utc | 151
    Not sure whats true at this point. If Iran is indeed behind the missile attacks they will pay the price. Hoped they could restrain themselves and make it harder on the US to escalate. But then again, maybe they felt it was inevitable or militant factions from within demanded a response. Anyways, lesson being if you commit an act of war don't be surprised there is retaliation. Pretty sure Trump and Bibi are not unhappy about this since that's probably what they hoped for.

    Grieved , Jan 8 2020 1:07 utc | 152

    This is a brilliant response by Iran and Iraq.

    If we're all alive by morning - and we may not be - subsequent analysis and events will show just how the US has been called out.

    We've long said that the US had a big SLAP coming to it. This is it. Because the world has changed. No more bullying.

    Walter , Jan 8 2020 1:08 utc | 153
    ben | Jan 8 2020 1:02 utc | 143

    They're Persians. They are the people that invented war. But you're right, the suits are delusional. Reality can be a real bitxh when one awakens from a delusion. That's a dangerous moment, when the suspension of disbelief goes "poof!"

    Grieved , Jan 8 2020 1:34 utc | 177
    "State media: Iranian Air Defense downs US Jet near Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf."
    https://twitter.com/Brasco_Aad/status/1214721053341233158
    Piotr Berman , Jan 8 2020 1:34 utc | 178
    Arab armies aren't very good at conducting warfare.

    Iranians aren't Arabs, they are a branch of Indo-European/Aryan, who historically have been very good at conducting warfare.
    ----------
    This ignores history. For example, in recent decades Italians were much less militarily minded than their Roman ancestors. Similarly, Danes today are not similar to folks who conquered half of England 1100 years ago and the whole of England decades later, only to loose it to Frenchified Danes afterwards.

    To provide examples from the Syrian war, 100% Arab Lebanese Hezbollah were reputed to be most effective, and getting less casualties that other units. By the way of contrast, units of Afghan volunteers assembled by Iran were so-so. And ISIS was most effective if you count their numbers, although with a lot of casualties. Syrian themselves had good elite units and many more mediocre units.

    Ric G , Jan 8 2020 1:37 utc | 180
    It is the monetary system which is the second battlefield as this carnage begins to unfold!

    Perhaps the Comex gold warehousing swindle is about to blow up and hundreds of trillions of dollars in oil derivatives will destroy the banksters.

    The Persian sword should also be aimed at the banking system!

    Circe , Jan 8 2020 1:38 utc | 182
    @163 Vasco da Gama

    could you please look deep into your Crystal Ball and tell us all here what do you see?

    I see bone-spurs Trump shitting his pants, and Netanyahoo and Lindsay peeing with glee.

    ***************************

    @159 Perimetr

    USS Abraham Lincoln is in the Arabian Sea and was kept out of Persian Gulf Strait of Hormuz not to be caught as sitting duck.

    Unfortunately, here is what the U.S. military has prepared in the area to satisfy Trump's infantile obsession.

    How U.S. prepared for the Worst

    karlof1 , Jan 8 2020 1:39 utc | 183
    Brent's already up 3.5% having broke $70.

    USA just lost its first jet :

    "State media: Iranian Air Defense downs US Jet near Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf."

    The info is coming so fast it's crazy to try and keep pace, although it appears there's a break at present.

    Piotr Berman , Jan 8 2020 1:44 utc | 185
    a tweet (so not reliable)
    #BREAKING: First video showing a Fateh-110 precision guided ballistic missile of #IRGC hitting the Ain al-Asad Air Base in #Iraq during Operation #Soleimani of #IRGCASF.#IRGC sources claim they have destroyed several #USArmy helicopters & drones & have killed 80 #US troops there!
    Sasha , Jan 8 2020 2:00 utc | 203
    Operation Inherent Resolve...

    Via Mark Sleboda Twitter...

    Hezbollah has said that if America attacks #Iran, it will attack Israel.

    Houthis in Yemen have said if America attacks, it will attack US bases.

    Some PMU units have said they will also attack US forces if the US attacks #Iran.

    https://twitter.com/SinaToossi/status/1214717549419671552

    Arioch , Jan 8 2020 2:00 utc | 205
    I like BBC headlines

    Is expecting Iran to de-escalate realistic?
    Iran has a number of possible retaliation options following the US killing of an Iranian commander.

    1h ago


    Oh, well, whad'ya think.... In just an hour after this BBC masterpiece shit hit the fan.

    --------------

    NBC Ali Arouzi claims Iran demands USA not to retaliate, quoting Haifa and Dubai for "3rd wave".
    Delicious if true. "Sand niggas" returning the "sole hyperpower" the favour. Didn't Pompeo or someone demanded "not to retaliate" just a day or two ago.
    But i am not sure we can trust NBC or any other western propaganda office about what Iran did and dis not say.

    Intel would not like loosing Haifa, they already loosing market to AMD last year....

    ---------

    Trump got himself his Pearl Harbor 2.0 and "wartime president" status. Maybe will make him re-elected.

    But also IRGC "pulled the hook". Due to American hubris they now just can not evacuate USArmy Iraqi garrisons to, say, Kuwait. And would have to infringe upon Iraq sovereignty and to be sitting ducks there. Wagging the dog.

    --------

    I still wonder about nukes.
    I hope Russia and China would prohibit long-range and medium-range vehicles, citing M.A.D. concerns and protocols, so USA would be limited to short-range nuclear-wielding weapons. Which they shouls have much less.

    I also hope Trump would get his re-election and stop short of using tactical nukes, but see no rational reasons for such a restrain for today USA.

    --------

    There was no news yet, however, about US Navy fleeing away from Iran ASMs range. So hopefully Pentagon does not see real threat of real war, not yet. And maybe it will still be contained as one more run of the mill American warlette. Hopefully...

    Daniel , Jan 8 2020 2:24 utc | 228
    Launching a ballistic missile attack against a US base in al-Anbar is smart from a 'limited escalation' perspective. It prevents the fight from expanding across the region unless the United States loses its mind completely and unleashes a full out attack on Iran. Additionally, targeting American occupation troops in Iraq plays well with ordinary Iraqis sick of American aggression on their soil and such a strike, as opposed to a targeted assassination or an attack outside of Iraq, gives Iran's enemies very little propaganda material to work with. It serves the ball back into the US court and makes Washington 100% responsible if it escalates this conflict into a regional war. Also, not waiting for weeks or months before retaliating makes it much more difficult for Israel or a US proxy to launch a false flag and try to blame it on Iran. Well played.
    librul , Jan 8 2020 2:25 utc | 229
    website is reporting (not with total confidence) that Iran says that as soon as the US strikes Iran
    Iran will strike Israel

    http://thesaker.is/according-to-the-site-colonel-cassad-the-irgc-has-declared-that-as-soon-as-the-us-strikes-iran-iran-will-strike-israel/

    Clueless Joe , Jan 8 2020 2:32 utc | 232
    Well, if it was a limited strike that was designed to look big and make some serious material damage, and not to kill a lot of US troops, then it's quite possible that Trump - assuming he doesn't go the heavy retaliation way - can soon, and definitely before elections, be able to order US to leave Iraq not because they don't want the US there but actually in a magnanimous act, "to make sure that poor country won't be bombed again by evil Iranians" - arguably with a mutual understanding with Iran that both will stick to a limited direct influence over Iraq. But that would be the best-case scenario, where Iran boots the US, the US still got hit, but no more deaths, cycle of reprisals ends, and Iraq is basically free at last.
    I'll see how bad it actually is when I wake up...
    uncle tungsten , Jan 8 2020 2:35 utc | 236
    karlof1 #218

    I am sure the morning awaits us and our chants and meditations. But the morning also brings a new sun upon the Saudis and if this process is planned as an extensive revenge (and I believe it is) then the Saudis can awake expecting it to rain stones for some time.

    If this struggle to evict the USA is serious then Iran and its Persian army will emasculate the key arab pawn over the coming weeks and the Houthis will be given reprieve to bring them to victory in Yemen. My guess is that this way will give stability and a framework for peace in the region sufficient to counter the belligerence of the occupier of Palestine lands.

    The region is subject to endless provocations and the 'gift of Golan' to Israel is just one the more recent grievous affronts that are unlikely to end unless there is a profound military rebuff to the lunacy of western private finance capital scheming.

    The illegal occupation of Syrian oilfields could collapse immediately as well if it has not already commenced.

    Each new day will tell but I will always wish for peace. Thank you your insights and may you and your wife greet the sun in peace each day.

    Grieved , Jan 8 2020 2:41 utc | 241
    But Zarif says this is all for now (my emphasis):
    Iran took & concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens & senior officials were launched.

    We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression.
    https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953

    ~~

    And so, karlof1 , we shall if the red flag comes down. Perhaps this was enough of a slap? But they must leave, that remains as an imperative that will smolder unceasingly now.

    WJ , Jan 8 2020 3:39 utc | 270
    James @265,

    If Russia has disallowed the use of nukes, then there's not much the US military can do, no matter how bloodthirsty the Zionists are. As soon as the US hits Iran, Tel Aviv goes up in smoke. That's all there is to it. It's been this way for months and months now. The Israeli and US casualties required for a direct attack on Iran are just too high for Zionists to stomach. The use of nukes was the only viable play from the beginning (and I realize this is not really "viable" to any sane person, but Pompeo and Netanyahu are not sane.) If nukes are out, then the US cannot establish dominance over the skies quickly enough to prevent thousands upon thousands of Israeli and US casualties. It seems to me that everybody must know this is true, deep down.

    [Jan 08, 2020] If Dems play their cards right Trump might well be one time president

    Two helicopters and several fixed wing aircraft destroyed in Kenia, several buildings demolished by Iran rockets. For what? For the the guy who was instumental in driving ISIS out of Syria and Iraq?
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.theguardian.com
    Democratic 2020 candidate Cory Booker just tweeted about the Capitol Hill briefing on the US-Iran crisis.
    Cory Booker (@CoryBooker)

    Just stepped out of a 75-minute briefing regarding President Trump's military actions in Iraq -- we were provided no evidence of an imminent threat. I remain deeply skeptical that he had justification for this attack.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Big, bad Putin attacked by slimy rat Browder.

    Jan 08, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Is there a chorus of politicians singing in there about how lazy they are, and how they never bothered to verify Browder' story? The story is indeed remarkable, but not in the way that first appears.

    Stephen Fry / @stephenfry

    You may or may not know the remarkable story of @Billbrowder and the #MagnitskyAct - find out the startling truth by listening to
    #MagnitskytheMusical by the wondrous @JohnnyFlynnHQ & @roberthudson - @BBCRadio3 7.30 Sun 12th Jan

    Magnitsky the Musical

    Book and lyrics by Robert Hudson
    Music and lyrics by Johnny Flynn

    12 January 2020
    О 1 hour, 34 minutes

    Johnny Flynn and Robert Hudson bring us a musical based on the
    incredible story of an American venture capitalist, a Russian tax
    advisor, a crazy heist, the Trump Tower meeting and the very rule of
    law.

    Blending music and satire, the story explores the truths and fictions
    surrounding the origins and aftershocks of the Magnitsky Act; global
    legislation which allows governments to sanction those who they see
    as offenders of human rights.

    It tells the story of a tax adviser's struggle to uncover a huge tax
    fraud, his imprisonment by the very authorities he is investigating,
    and the American financier's crusade for justice.

    Johnny Flynn, Paul Chahidi and members of the cast perform songs in
    a epic story that explores democracy, corruption, and how we
    undervalue the law at our peril.

    Bill Paul Chahidi Sergei Johnny Flynn Jamie Fenella Woolgar Natalia Ellie Kendrick Kuznetsov Gus Brown Guard Clive Hayward Silchenko Ian Conningham Jared Will Kirk Fisherman Neil McCaul Judge Jessica Turner

    Additional singing by Sinead Maclnnes, Laura Christy, Scarlett
    Courtney and Lucy Reynolds.

    The cellist is Joe Zeitlin. Sound is by Peter Ringrose. Directed by Sasha Yevtushenko.

    [Jan 08, 2020] The New Kremlin Stooge

    Jan 08, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    The United States of Amnesia, and Its Incredible Asbestos Pants

    Wink
    Uncle Volodya says, You must remember, my dear lady, the most important rule of any successful illusion: First, the people must want to believe in it"."

    Liar, liar, pants on fire

    Chidren's rhyme

    In an era of stress and anxiety, when the present seems unstable and the future unlikely, the natural response is to retreat and withdraw from reality, taking recourse either in fantasies of the future or in modified visions of a half-imagined past.

    Alan Moore, from "Watchmen"

    Unless you were catatonic this past couple of weeks, dead drunk from Sunday to Saturday, suffered a debilitating brain injury or were living in Bognor Regis where the internet cannot reach, you heard about the west slapping a four-year Olympic ban on Russia. Because it could, it did. And not really for any other reason, despite the indignation and manufactured outrage. It's a pity – now that I come to think on it – that you can't use outrage to power a vehicle, fill a sandwich or knit into socks: because the west has a bottomless supply, and it's just about as renewable a resource as you could envision.

    As I have reiterated elsewhere and often, the United States of America is the cheatingest nation on the planet where professional sports is concerned, because winning matters to Americans like nowhere else. Successful Olympic medal-winners and iconic sports figures in the USA are feted like victorious battlefield generals, because the sports arena is just another battlefield to the United States, and there's no it's-not-whether-you-win-or-lose-it's-how-you-play-the-game in wartime. Successful American sports figures foster an appreciation of American culture and lifestyle, and promote an image of America as a purposeful and powerful nation. Successful sports figures anywhere, really; not so very long ago Olympic gold medalists were merely given an appreciative parade by a grateful nation, and featured in lucrative advertising contracts if they were photogenic. More recently, some nations have simply paid athletes by the medal for winning. This includes most nations , with the notable exceptions of the UK, Norway and Sweden. So the pressure is on to win, win, win, by whatever means are necessary.

    Since Russia is in second place only to Germany for all-time medal rankings in the Olympics, and since Russia eventually made it back up to Public Enemy Number One in the USA – after a brief hiatus during which it looked like a combination of Boris Yeltsyn and teams of Harvard economists were going to make a respectful pauper of it while it became a paradise for international investors – the USA spares no effort to beat Russia at everything. On occasions where it is not particularly successful, as it was not in the 2014 Winter Olympics at Sochi, it has turned to other methods – screaming that the Russians are all dopers who benefit from a state-sponsored doping scheme, and implementing bans to prevent as many Russian athletes as possible from competing.

    And that's my principal objection. In media matters in the world of sports, just as in other political venues, the USA relies on a combination of lying and relentless repetition to drive its points home. Thus it is that the English-speaking world still believes Russia was convicted of having had a state-sponsored doping plan, found guilty and justly sentenced upon the discovery of mountains of evidence, its accusers vindicated and its dissident whistleblowers heroes to a grateful world. Huzzah!!

    Examples abound – here's a random one from the BBC:

    "Russia operated a state-sponsored doping programme for four years across the "vast majority" of summer and winter Olympic sports, claims a new report.

    It was "planned and operated" from late 2011 – including the build-up to London 2012 – and continued through the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics until August 2015."

    The BBC is Britain's state-funded broadcaster, financed by the British government, and the British government is second only to the United States in its virulent hatred of Russia and Russians. But that was back then, when the 'doping scheme' was newly 'discovered', and all the western reporters and government figures were nearly wetting their pants with excitement. What about now?

    Essentially, nothing has changed. TIME Magazine :

    "It's the latest twist in a long-running saga of investigations into widespread, state-sponsored doping by the Kremlin."

    My soul, if it isn't the USA's star witness, Doctor Grigory Rodchenkov, in AFP ;

    "Doped athletes do not work alone. There are medical doctors, coaches and managers who provided substances, advised and protected them. In Russia's state-sponsored doping scheme, there is also a state-sponsored defense of many cheaters including state officials, witnesses and apparatchiks who are lying under oath and have falsified evidence. These individuals are clearly criminals," he said.

    More about him later; for now, suffice it to say the western media still finds him a credible and compelling witness.

    The Canadian Globe & Mail :

    "In 2016, independent investigations confirmed that Russian officials had run a massive state‑sponsored doping system during the 2014 Winter Olympics and Paralympics in Sochi, which fed illicit performance-enhancing drugs to hundreds of athletes and took outlandish measures to pervert national drug-testing mechanisms.

    The evidence was incontrovertible."

    I was going to go on, listing examples in the popular press from around the world, published since the latest ban was announced, all claiming investigation had proved the Russians had a massive state-sponsored doping scheme in place which let them cheat their way to the podium. But I think you get the picture, and that last lead-in was my cue; it was just too good to pass up.

    Independent investigations confirmed. The evidence was incontrovertible.

    Well, let's take a look at that. Incontrovertible evidence ought to be able to withstand a bit of prying, what? When the evidence of something being so is both massive and incontrovertible, beyond question and the result of proof beyond a doubt, then that thing IS. Therefore, the western press is proceeding on the assumption that western investigations proved the Russians had a doping program in which all or most Russian athletes took prohibited performance-enhancing drugs, at the instruction of sports-organization officials, who were in turn directed by state officials to use such methods to permit Russian athletes to win where they would otherwise likely not have been capable of a winning performance. And there were such allegations by western figures and officials, together with assurances that there was so much evidence that well, frankly, it was embarrassing. But the western media and western sports organizations and officials apparently do not understand what 'evidence' is.

    The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), established in 1984 by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and headquartered at Lausanne, Switzerland, is recognized by all Olympic international organizations as the highest authority for sports-related legal issues. An Investigative Commission consisting of Dr. Richard McLaren (Chair), Dick Pound and Gunter Younger was appointed to look into allegations of widespread and state-supported doping of athletes of the Russian Olympic team for the 2016 Winter Olympics at Sochi, Russia. The Commission's star witness was Dr. Grigory Rodchenkov, former head of the Moscow laboratory. According to what became known as the McLaren Report, more than 1000 Russian athletes across 30 sports were involved in or benefited from "an institutional conspiracy" of doping. The Investigative Commission settled on sanctioning 35 Olympic athletes with Anti-Doping Rules Violations (ARDV), and they were banned from further international sports competitions; those who had won medals had them confiscated. Nearly all the sanctioned athletes appealed their cases to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

    Sorry to keep hopping back and forth, but I'm trying to stay with two major themes at the same time for the moment – the accusations against the Russian Olympic athletes, which were entirely based on the revelations of the 'doping mastermind' , Dr. Grigory Rodchenkov, and Dr. Rodchenkov himself. Western organizations and media were bowled over by the affable Rodchenkov, and eager to accept his jaw-dropping revelations about widespread doping in Russian sport. Sites specializing in sports doping with steroids feted him as the brilliant mind behind not only doping Russian athletes, but devising a test for common steroids which increased their detection window from only days to in excess of months. This enabled the retesting of previously-stored samples from international athletes which had already passed as clean. I suspect not a lot of followers of the Russian doping scandal are aware of that, and any such results should be viewed with the utmost suspicion in light of what a colossal fraud he turned out to be. I'd like you to just keep that in mind as we go further. Dr. Rodchenkov also claimed to be behind the brilliant – everything he does is brilliant – formulation of the now-notorious and, at the time of its alleged widespread use, top-secret "Duchess Cocktail", a steroid-stacker mixed with alcohol which made the presence of the steroids undetectable. Remember that word; undetectable, because we'll come back to it. Additionally, please keep in mind that Dr. Rodchenkov's unique testing method was the one used to re-test stored samples from the 2008 Beijing Olympics and the 2012 London Olympics.

    So, back to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. 39 Russian athletes who had been accused of doping in the McLaren Report appealed their sentences of lifetime Olympic bans and forfeiture of medals won.

    Of those 39 appeals, 28 of the appeals were completely upheld , the judgments against the athletes reversed, and any medals forfeited were reinstated. A further 11 appeals were partially upheld, but the lifetime bans were reduced to have effect only for the upcoming Olympic Games at Peyongchang, Korea. That makes 39 of 39. Not a single athlete accused was found to have participated in a state-sponsored doping program administered by Russian sports officials acting under orders of the Russian government. The appeals of a further 3 Russian athletes were not heard by the date of release of the statement, and were stayed until a later date.

    It is important to note, and was specifically addressed in the release, that the CAS did not examine the matter of whether there was or was not a state-sponsored or controlled doping program; that was not within the Court's mandate. So for evidence of evidence, I guess you might say, and for an overall feel for the credibility of the witness whose revelations underpinned the entirety of the McLaren Report, we turn to Dr. Rodchenkov's testimony before the CAS. https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/1-13.png

    As we examine his performance on that occasion, I'd like to point out that this likely represents the first time Rodchenkov was cross-examined by and on behalf of individuals who were not necessarily delighted to believe everything he said without questioning it further, as the McLaren Commission apparently was. Because his story fell apart, often in ways that would have been amusing in anything other than the serious setting which prevailed. That's Rodchenkov in the balaclava, which his handlers evidently thought necessary to conceal his appearance. Perhaps he's had extensive cosmetic surgery, because his face was all over the news before that – he is in the US Witness Protection Program, after all. In my opinion, it only lent to the overall sense of unreality, but to each his own. I'll also be jumping back and forth between what Rodchenkov or his backers confidently claimed prior to the hearing, and during testimony, when I think it is important to highlight manifest umm inconsistencies. Ready? Let's do it.

    Pre-CAS hearing: "The latest WADA report suggests that Rodchenkov helped as many as 1,000 Russian athletes get away with doping. Hundreds of those athletes were able to get away with the use of the "Duchess steroid cocktail" while avoiding detection."

    During testimony and under questioning by counsel for the defendants, Rodchenkov admitted (a) that he had never personally distributed the 'Duchess cocktail' to any Russian athlete, (b) that he had never personally seen any Russian athlete take the mixture known as the Duchess cocktail, (c) that he had never personally witnessed any Russian athlete being directed by a coach to take the Duchess cocktail, or any coach being directed by any Russian state official to distribute it to his athletes, and (d) that he had never personally seen any Russian athlete tamper with a doping sample.

    Forgive me if I jump to the conclusion that the foregoing rules out a state-sponsored doping program insofar as it was ever witnessed by the McLaren Report's star and principal witness; McLaren did not interview any other Russian officials, he claimed he didn't have time.

    But it gets better . Or worse, if you are Rodchenkov, or one of those who gleefully relied on his testimony to put those filthy Russians away forever.

    Pre-CAS hearing: "In 2016, independent investigations confirmed that Russian officials had run a massive state‑sponsored doping system during the 2014 Winter Olympics and Paralympics in Sochi, which fed illicit performance-enhancing drugs to hundreds of athletes and took outlandish measures to pervert national drug-testing mechanisms The evidence was incontrovertible."

    When examined on his statements that he had swapped samples of positive-test athletes urine after 1:00 AM, passing them through a 'mousehole' in the laboratory wall to FSB agents outside and exchanging them for clean samples, in light of the fact that his meticulously-maintained daily diary recorded him as being at home in bed by midnight, he claimed he had lied in his diary. What a clever intelligence asset, to have anticipated questioning years in advance, and added an extra layer of obfuscation! It was not specifically addressed in testimony to my knowledge, but I would like to highlight here that Dr. Rodchenkov was allegedly alone at the lab at these alleged times – except, of course, for the secret agents waiting outside the mousehole – and could have driven a gurney with a squeaky wheel loaded with conspiratorial piss samples out into the parking lot, and loaded it into the trunk of his car with nobody the wiser: why all the John le Carré espionagery through the wall? Comes to that, why would you contaminate a sample with salt, coffee granules and hilarious incompetence like accidentally getting male DNA in female samples, when the doping compound only you knew was in the samples was undetectable by anyone else, because you had specifically engineered it that way?

    McLaren claimed in his report that he had seen a method demonstrated, which he presumed was the method used by the FSB to open the sealed sample bottles and replace the sample inside with clean urine. He further claimed that scratches found on the glass bottles were proof of tampering. Other analysts suggested the scratches were probably made when the sample bottle was sealed in accordance with the instructions for its proper use, and the manufacturer claimed the bottle had never successfully been opened, once sealed, without breaking the cap, which is by design an indication of potential tampering. The alleged secret method of successfully doing it was never demonstrated by McLaren or any of his operatives for independent verification. For Rodchenkov's part, he claimed it had been done by 'magicians', and offered no clue as to the alleged method, and it seems clear to me that McLaren simply proceeded with Rodchenkov's hearsay assurances that it had been accomplished.

    The controversial and pivotal claim by McLaren that Russian Minister for Sport Vitaly Mutko, "directed, controlled and oversaw the manipulation of athlete's [ sic ] analytical results or sample swapping" was not supported by anything other than Rodchenkov's diary. You remember – the one he admitted to having embellished with lies so that stories he told years later would make sense. This is absolutely critical, because the claim to have proven the existence of a state-sponsored doping program rests only on this – Rodchenkov has admitted he never personally saw any Russian state official give orders to coaches or athletes to use performance-enhancing drugs. McLaren's bombshell allegation appears to have been extracted from the diary of a proven and admitted liar, and is supported by no other evidence. Yet the western press still maintains there was a Russian state-sponsored doping program, administered with the knowledge and facilitation of the state government, and that this was proven. Rodchenkov is still accorded the respect of a credible witness. Rodchenkov is still speaking authoritatively about the nature of cheating, and – astoundingly – describing those who have lied under oath and falsified evidence as criminals, just as if he had not done both himself. It is as if the CAS hearings which exonerated the majority of the accused Russian athletes, and sharply reduced the punishments of the rest, had never happened. For all the mainstream media coverage the event received, it might not have.

    Before the CAS hearing, WADA and the IOC regularly dangled reinstatement of the Russian anti-doping agency (RUSADA) in exchange for the Russian government openly and completely accepting the conclusions of the McLaren Report, officially admitting to having cheated on a massive scale and with the full knowledge and support of serving government officials. It never did. The Russian state acknowledged it has a doping problem, and it has – some athletes were found guilty of having taken banned substances, and there are a few every Olympic competition. But Moscow has never accepted the conclusions of the McLaren Report. And after the CAS Appeals decision, RUSADA was reinstated anyway.

    Which brings us to here; now. The entire focus of the McLaren Report and the bullying by the IOC was directed toward making Russia admit it was guilty of organized doping, with the drive for momentum seeking a ban on further competition. Since it never did, the alternative was to prove it without an admission, so that no doubt existed. Exonerating the few athletes ever charged among the thousand or so said to be guilty looks like a hell of a funny way of doing that. The McLaren Team's star and main witness fell apart on the stand and admitted he had either lied about everything or simply made it up. There is no reason at all – outside stubborn western prejudice – to imagine Russian athletes are doping any more than any other national teams.

    But then, hackers – Russians, of course, it goes without saying – calling themselves "Fancy Bear" and "Cozy Bear" (hint to Russians, do not call yourself "anything Bear" – the Bear is synonymous with Russia. Call yourself "Elon Tesla" or "Mo Money") began to publish stolen medical data revealing the scope of western athletes who had been granted permission to use banned performance-enhancing drugs by their Olympic Associations, for perceived medical reasons, through the TUE – the Therapeutic Use Exemption. The western sports industry was outraged – that information was private , God damn it – and it was just grotesque that the cheating Russians would have the gall to allege western athletes were cheaters. But after it had time to calm down, and after some revelations proved hard to defend, the industry had to grudgingly admit the TUE was a problem .

    Iconic American cyclist Lance Armstrong doped for years , but was revered by an entire generation of American kids and sports fans as the finest example of a stoic and selfless sportsman the human race could provide. Teammates and his sports doctor helped him avoid tests, and in one instance he dropped out of a race after receiving a text message from a teammate that testers were waiting for him. When he actually tested positive for corticosteroid use in the 1999 Tour de France, his doctors claimed he had received the steroid in a cream used to treat a saddle sore, and a back-dated prescription was provided.

    Retroactive TUE's sound phony right out of the gate, and consequently their use is supposed to be very rare, since the immediate perception is that the exemption was issued to protect the athlete from the fallout of a positive test; what could be simpler? Just issue them a prescription to take a banned substance, because they really, really needed it. Most of the TUE's issued to tennis world champion Serena Williams were retroactive , in some cases going back two weeks or more. A TUE issued during a period that an athlete has withdrawn from competition sounds understandable, because they cannot be using it to enhance their career or win medals. A retroactive TUE issued during competition that allows an athlete to use a stimulant which increases drive, or a painkiller which lets them power through without the limb failing, is hard to see as anything other than a cheat issued to protect a national sports asset.

    TUE's are the vehicle of choice in professional cycling, with both British cyclists who won the Tour de France – Scott Froome and Bradley Wiggins – revealed to have secured TUE's allowing them to take steroids during the competitions. They claimed to be suffering from 'sport-induced asthma', which is apparently a documented condition when you try to make your body process air faster or more efficiently than it is capable of handling. USADA head Travis Tygart, who is withering in his contempt of and hatred for Russia, loses no opportunity to defend the integrity of American athletes who are allowed to dope because they have a form that says they need to. I find it hard to believe Russian athletes who secured a TUE allowing them to take a performance-enhancer during competition would meet with such hearty approval from him. It's because Americans are inherently honest and are genetically incapable of cheating, while Russians are just natural-born cheats.

    American gymnastics champion Simone Biles quickly became the national face of ADHD by proactively defending her need for a banned substance. Tygart and American Olympics officials were maudlin in her defense, like everyone is just picking on a little girl and trying to rob her of hard-earned success. What effect does her permitted drug have? It permits an enhanced level of concentration and focus, so that no energy is lost to distractions such a a shouting crowd, bright colours and rapid movements, and she sees nothing but the target of her efforts. Is that helpful? What do you think?

    The jury seems to be out on whether corticosteroids would help Biles focus on her routines, although there seems to be a fairly well-established body of evidence that these are not anabolic steroids, and do not increase muscle mass – that's all her. But the zeal with which WADA went after meldonium – just because, apparently, eastern-European athletes used it extensively, although it has never been demonstrated to enhance performance – speaks volumes about the western bias in favour of therapeutic use of drugs by the Good Guys. They're just looking after their health. Russians are cheating. How did WADA find out about meldonium? I'm glad you asked – USADA received a 'confidential tip' that east-European athletes were using it to enhance performance. Despite expert advice that there is no evidence at all that it enhances performance , WADA banned it. Because, you know, east-European athletes might think it helps them, and if they think that, then it is.

    Just like Simone Biles and her TUE. But that's not only allowed, she's a hero for being so open about her ADHD.

    In the USA, cheating seems to be focused on Track and Field , because that's where the USA wins a lot of its medals. Hence the effort to minimize the Russian participation, and thus cut down the opposition.

    "The United States in fact has a lengthy history of doping at the Olympic Games and other international events, and of turning a blind eye to its own cheating. That's especially true in track and field, the front porch of the U.S. Olympic program because of track's ability to drive American medal supremacy.

    Nike's track-and-field training program, for example, has been dogged by doping allegations since at least the 1970s, when its top officials were allegedly aware that athletes used steroids and other performance enhancing drugs. Since the U.S. boycott of the 1980 Moscow Games, every single U.S. Summer Olympic team has included at least one sprinter who either had previously failed a drug test or would later do so. And that's to say nothing of athletes in the other disciplines.

    American drug cheats include some of the country's most notable Olympians. Carl Lewis admitted in 2003 that he had failed three drug tests prior to the 1988 Seoul Olympics, but avoided a ban with the help of the U.S. Olympic Committee and won two golds and a silver instead. Justin Gatlin won the 100-meter dash at the 2004 Athens Games before later failing a drug test. Tyson Gay, the world's fastest man entering the 2008 Beijing Games, later failed a drug test too. Gay and Gatlin nevertheless formed half of the American men's 4×100 relay team in Rio de Janeiro in 2016. "

    American athletes routinely fail drug tests, but are waved ahead to compete anyway. " Eighty-four American Olympians failed drug tests in the year prior to the 1984 Los Angeles Games but went on to compete anyway , according to author Mark Johnson . Carl Lewis claimed that "hundreds" of Americans failed tests while remaining eligible to compete, with the assistance of the U.S. Olympic Committee, in Seoul. The USOC faced allegations ahead the 2000 Sydney Games that it had withheld information on 15 positive tests from international officials; by 2003, it had been accused of covering up at least 114 positives between 1988 and 2000."

    Curiously, the latest Russia ban is attributed to allegations that Russia fiddled with the athletes database it provided to WADA, covering up positive drug tests. But it appears the United States has a well-known history of fudging and obscuring positive drug-test results, refusing to reveal them to regulatory bodies, and pushing its doper athletes into international competition. Yet the United States has a loudly self-awarded reputation as the Defender Of Clean Sport.

    Russia's position is that the ubiquitous Grigory Rodchenkov – a proven and self-confessed liar, remember, who claimed to have lied in his diary where he was supposedly only talking to himself – modified the database from abroad , after he fled to the United States and made such a Godsend of himself in America's drive to move up the medal rankings. He apparently retained administrator rights on the database, which was accessible online, even after fleeing from Russia. His lawyer's defense, curiously, is that he did not and, significantly, 'could not' access the database. To me, that sounds like he's going out a little bit on a limb – all the Russian side needs to do is prove that he could have to discredit Rodchenkov's story. It looks like it is headed back to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in the spring – the same venue which exonerated the Russian athletes after Rodchenkov's previous epic thundering-in on full afterburner. Will it happen again? We'll see. Until then the western press appears not to have noticed that Rodchenov lied his charming face off last time. And still is, through his shyster lawyer – "If WADA or any other agency needs Grigory to testify, Grigory will uphold his promise to co-operate fully to help atone for his role," Walden said. You know – the role he admitted he never played, in that he never saw any Russian athlete take the Duchess Cocktail he claimed to have devised to make doping undetectable, never heard any Russian sports official order his players to take it, and in fact could not remember exactly what was in it.

    Stay tuned – this should be interesting. Count on the Americans to press to the end for a full and lasting ban, probably for life.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Trump: The American Netanyahu by Marwan Bishara

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.aljazeera.com

    https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/trump-american-netanyahu-200107145858311.html

    On Iran and the Middle East, the Trump administration is following Israel's playbook.

    US President Donald Trump and Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu hold up a proclamation recognising Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights on March 25, 2019 [File: Reuters/Leah Millis]
    more on Soleimani assassination
    Supporters of Donald Trump think of the US president as an exceptional one-of-a-kind force of nature - a sui generis leader. His detractors like to compare him to Russian President Vladimir Putin or describe him as a Putin stooge, and since he ordered the "vengeful" or "reckless" assassination of Iranian General Qassim Solemani, some have likened him to a Middle Eastern despot. But a more pertinent comparison lies elsewhere.

    Since taking office in January 2017, Trump's dramatic positions and pronouncements on the Middle East and beyond have shocked and dismayed much of the US foreign policy establishment, especially on three main challenges facing the US in the region: security, diplomacy and democracy and human rights.

    Trump has not only undone much of his predecessor's legacy, both domestically and internationally, he also trashed Barack Obama's doctrine and policies in favour of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 's. For the past three years, he has been re-coupling US and Israeli strategies, especially towards Iran and the global "war on terror" which Obama spent eight years decoupling.

    This is not to say, Obama was not a staunch supporter of Israel and defender of its "security" or was not trigger happy with the US drone assassination programme. He certainly was. He just did not like Netanyahu and did not appreciate his deceit.

    Obama tried to pursue an independent US policy free from Israel's narrow constraints and considerations, after eight years of the Bush administration's wars and blunders in the region.

    By contrast, Trump embraced all things Netanyahu as soon as he stepped into the White House.

    It helped that the two men have far more in common than meets the eye.

    Eerie similarities

    Both men are thrice married with a history of adultery, are facing charges for misusing their office for personal gain, and have a problematic relationship with the truth.

    And yet, both Netanyahu and Trump remain all too popular with their right-wing base.

    Even religious fanatics, both in Israel and the US, consider these two secular, undevout, and morally challenged leaders as God's vessels on earth.

    Both are able showmen , who have pursued, and mastered, populist, theatrical and divisive policies that have rallied their rightist constituencies around their populist personas.

    But most importantly in this context, Trump has pursued the same ultra-nationalist securitarian, some say racist, agendas that Netanyahu has long championed in Israel and the Middle East.

    This is especially important today, as both commanders-in-chief are exploiting foreign policy to deflect attention from their domestic troubles with the law.

    Embracing Netanyahu's positions

    Trump's knowledge of the Middle East was dismal prior to taking office. He was an empty page ready to be filled, but only with the ideas which helped guide and propel his presidential campaign towards victory, such as infringements on rights of immigrants and minorities, a ban on Muslims travelling to the US, and all things anti-Obama.

    A number of Middle Eastern despots like those of Egypt and the UAE did try to fill in some of the blanks. But no one had the ability, style, record, and diligence of Netanyahu, who also enjoyed unfiltered access to the president-elect through his three ultra-Zionist lieutenants, Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and David Friedman.

    First among these ideas, was the radical departure from a quarter of a century of US policy towards Israel and Palestine , namely moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, accepting the legitimacy of the illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian lands, abandoning the two-state solution, and recognising Israel's sovereignty over the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

    It is Netanyahu's dream come true.

    Trump also embraced Netanyahu's view on the Arab world in support of friendly despots and dictators and against democracy and human rights. He aligned US policy toward the Gulf and Arab affairs with the interests of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt and embraced Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman despite his reckless policies domestically and regionally - all in the hope of paving the way for Arab normalisation of relations with "colonial" Israel.

    Another Netanyahu dream come true.

    Attacking Iran

    Nowhere was Netanyahu's influence on Trump more pronounced than on Iran.

    The Trump administration abandoned the Iran nuclear deal against the advice and urging of its NATO allies, Russia and China.

    It then pursued a punitive policy of containment through tough economic sanctions, an option unavailable to Israel, in order to strong-arm Iran into a humiliating new deal that not only bans all its nuclear activity, but also curtails its military and regional outreach.

    When maximum pressure did not produce the desired results, as Iran continued its bellicose regional policies, Trump adopted both Netanyahu's means and endgame, starting with the assassination of Soleimani, widely seen as a "declaration of war" with untold consequences for the region.

    Israel has been carrying out targeted killings and preemptive strikes against Iranian targets in Syria; in 2013, it was accused of being behind the killing of another Revolutionary Guard general, Hassan Shateri .

    To be clear, Trump did not order the assassination to avenge the killings of countless Syrians and Iraqis; he did so to deter Iran from escalating its attacks on US interests and allies.

    Although Netanyahu tried to distance himself from the targeted assassination of the Iranian general in Iraq, make no mistake, this is a third Netanyahu dream come true, in a span of three years. He is said to have been the only world leader with prior knowledge of the planned assassination.

    Regional crisis

    Nothing is more satisfying for an Israeli leader than having the US embrace Israel's strategy and fight Israel's wars in the region. And nothing is more dangerous for the rest of the world - we all know how the last conflict Tel Aviv incited ended in disaster in Iraq.

    The last thing any Israeli leader wants is for the US to withdraw from the region, leaving Israel to fend for itself in a hostile environment. Same goes for Saudi Arabia .

    That is why it is important to underline that while the Trump administration may seek to reposition its forces out of the hotspots of the Middle East, including Iraq (just as Israel redeployed out of Lebanon and Gaza) the US will still maintain formidable projection of forces throughout the region.

    The question is, will this strategy enable future US diplomacy, which also served Israel's interests during the so-called "peace process", or lead to the further escalation of violence and war?

    Alas, the ongoing bluster about imminent attacks, counter-attacks, and disproportionate responses and bombings of cultural sites do not bode well for diplomacy.

    With naval fleets, military bases and some 60,000 troops deployed around Iran and throughout the Middle East, the Trump administration could pursue an Israel-like air-land-sea strategy of drones, fighter jets, guided missiles, cyber and Special Forces attacks and targeted assassinations that exhaust its enemies and destabilises the region as a whole.

    That would be another Netanyahu dream and another Middle East nightmare come true.

    ABOUT THE AUTHOR Marwan Bishara Marwan Bishara

    Marwan Bishara is the senior political analyst at Al Jazeera.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Pompeo's Falsehood-Laden Briefing Echoed Uncritically by Media Outlets

    Jan 08, 2020 | news.antiwar.com

    Antiwar.com Regional News

    Unbacked allegations and plain contradictions drive anti-Iran narrative Jason Ditz Posted on January 7, 2020 Categories News Tags Iran , Pompeo

    As the Trump Administration continues to barrel toward a war with Iran, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave a press conference in which he once again claimed that every dubious accusation made by the administration was true, and the internally inconsistent comments among top officials are all somehow in agreement.

    Pompeo's comments, even the ones that made no sense or were obviously untrue, were echoed across US media outlets as absolute facts following the briefing. Everyone was clearly more comfortable just reporting " Pompeo says " than analyzing it.

    Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) was very critical of some of the worst claims Pompeo made , saying one would have to be brain-dead to believe them. He noted it made no sense to attack Iran to "preempt" attacks when the attack just made attacks even more likely.

    Pompeo was largely dismissive of questions about the US attack, and rejected claims that Gen. Qassem Soleimani was working on Saudi diplomacy, saying nobody believed Soleimani was engaged in diplomacy and that Iranian FM was lying about that. In reality, Iraq's PM Adel Abdul Mahdi was the one who broke the story of why Soleimani was in Iraq. Instead of evidence to the contrary, Pompeo just denied.

    On the question of the US barring Zarif from the UN in violation of the headquarters agreement, Pompeo said the US doesn't comment on why they deny people entrance, and insisted that the US always complies with the headquarters agreement, despite it flat out saying you can't block officials from speaking at the UN, and the US doing exactly that.

    The closest anyone at the briefing came to calling Pompeo on his contradictions was on the matter of the US attacking cultural sites. President Trump threatened to attack Iranian cultural sites on Saturday, Pompeo said Trump never said that on Sunday, and Trump said it again on Sunday evening. Pompeo was asked to address this.

    Pompeo said that what he said, that Trump never said there would be attacks on cultural sites, was "completely consistent with what the President has said," which repeatedly was that he intends to attack cultural sites. This was a bit too glaring, and one of the press said "No, but the President has -" before being interrupted by Pompeo.

    At this point, Pompeo went off on a tangent claiming that the ayatollah is the "real threat" to Iranian culture. When asked if that meant US attacks on cultural sites are "ruled out," despite Trump's comments, Pompeo promptly ended the briefing and left.

    Secretary of Defense Mark Esper also claimed on Tuesday that Soleimani was planning to attack Americans "within days" if the US hadn't killed him. As with Pompeo, his claim did not include any evidence, and ask with Pompeo's claims, the press is echoing it.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Assassination of Soleimani was done on false pretences much like Bush II Iraq war justification. Trump abused his power and now needs to be impeached

    The neocon cabal of Pompeo, Ester and O'bian needs to be fired immediately and investigated by FBI.
    Notable quotes:
    "... As for the war powers resolution justification provided by the administration, that legislation was not designed to alter the fundamental constitutional balance, but to restore it, Healy says. Critically, it does not give presidents a free pass to carry out military action for 60 days without congressional approval, as some have suggested. ..."
    "... The war powers resolution itself was introduced after Congress discovered Nixon's secret war in Cambodia in 1973. It was designed to allow Congress to terminate any unauthorized actions taken by the executive branch and to require transparency. If the president responds to any "imminent threat" not covered by an existing statute or law authorizing use of force, then the president must within 48 hours report to Congress what actions have been taken. ..."
    "... "With the Soleimani strike, the administration is saying they're responding to an imminent threat, but they have not publicly stated what that threat is," said Kate Kizer, policy director at Win Without War, in an interview with TAC. "From reporting, there's not a lot of evidence of an imminent attack. So they should have come to Congress first and said what they were going to do." ..."
    "... The Constitution clearly gives the power to declare war to Congress. Article II states that the president can act without Congress only when it is necessary to do so against imminent threats to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens.​ ..."
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    claims the strike was "authorized" in part by the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which provided the legal basis for the war in Iraq. ​

    "Unless Trump is using his presidential sharpie, it's not at all clear how this 17-year-old statute authorizes what seems to be a major escalation that could start a whole new war," said Gene Healy, vice president of the Cato Institute, in an interview with The American Conservative. ​

    As for the war powers resolution justification provided by the administration, that legislation was not designed to alter the fundamental constitutional balance, but to restore it, Healy says. Critically, it does not give presidents a free pass to carry out military action for 60 days without congressional approval, as some have suggested.

    The war powers resolution itself was introduced after Congress discovered Nixon's secret war in Cambodia in 1973. It was designed to allow Congress to terminate any unauthorized actions taken by the executive branch and to require transparency. If the president responds to any "imminent threat" not covered by an existing statute or law authorizing use of force, then the president must within 48 hours report to Congress what actions have been taken.

    In the case of Soleimani, "the Pentagon statement doesn't mention any imminent attacks," notes Healy . Secretary of State Mike ​ "Pompeo says Soleimani was planning an attack that could have killed hundreds of lives, but he's provided no evidence for that. I think it's hardly cynical to verify, instead of blindly trusting, given the track record of this administration and recent past administrations."

    "With the Soleimani strike, the administration is saying they're responding to an imminent threat, but they have not publicly stated what that threat is," said Kate Kizer, policy director at Win Without War, in an interview with TAC. "From reporting, there's not a lot of evidence of an imminent attack. So they should have come to Congress first and said what they were going to do."

    ​That's because there's ​simply ​ " no viable argument " that the 2002 AUMF authorizes force against Iran ​, according to ​ Brian Egan, a former legal adviser to both the State Department ​ and the NSC, and ​Tess Bridgeman, a senior fellow at NYU School of Law and former a ssociate ​c​ ounsel to the ​p​ resident. ​ ​

    The 2002 AUMF allows the president to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq " and "enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions against Iraq " ​ ( e mphasis added ).

    "Those are plainly not relevant to the situation" today, Egan and Bridgeman write.​

    The ​Trump administration also said it does not ​"​ need congressional sign off from a legal standpoint" for the Soleimani strike because ​of the president's authority​ as​ commander-in-chief under Article II of the Constitution ​, CNN reported.

    The Constitution clearly gives the power to declare war to Congress. Article II states that the president can act without Congress only when it is necessary to do so against imminent threats to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens.​

    That's why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Pentagon chief Mark Esper, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley were so emphatic Monday that the U.S. was responding to an "imminent threat."​ But so far, no evidence of that has been provided.

    ​While a 2018 Office of Legal Council (OLC) opinion offers a very liberal definition of executive authority and provides ​ " very little constraint on modern presidential uses of force," it appears to classify the Soleimani strike as an act of war, since Iran is a nation state that will likely escalate its military retaliation in response to the killing of their uniformed military member.

    Indeed, the U.S. has already said it will send 3,500 additional troops to the Middle East "after Iran vowed to exact 'severe revenge.'" ​The U.S. has warned its citizens to leave Iraq​, and Iran has already begun firing at housing for American forces in Iraq: all signs that point to escalation.

    Moreover, targeted political assassinations, like the kind used against Soleimani, have been banned by executive order since the Ford administration. Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12333, which reads: "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."

    Soleimani was "not a rogue outlaw, but a military official of a sovereign government we were not at war with, making his killing an assassination," writes Ben Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities. "His actions, however evil, served Iranian policy."

    "The idea that the president can, without going to Congress, take out a top level official of a country we're not in an authorized war with, is crossing a Rubicon," said Healy.

    So what happens now?

    Congress has several choices to make in the days ahead. It can pass empty, non-binding resolutions, that require the president's sign-off, like the kind suggested by Kaine and Pelosi. Or it can repeal the decades-old AUMFs that have been used to justify continuing U.S. escalations in the Middle East. Congress could also pass bills like those by Representative Khanna and Senator Sanders to strip funding for offensive military action against Iran from the NDAA.

    It remains to be seen if Congress will choose substantive actions, like defunding unauthorized wars, over window dressing.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Donald Trump presidency Chaos and surprises emerge as twin crises - CNNPolitics

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.cnn.com

    Washington (CNN) The increasingly chaotic aftermath of the US strike against Iran has left President Donald Trump's team scrambling to keep up with his unpredictable decisions and inflammatory pronouncements, and suggests dysfunction at the heart of the nation's critical national security process.

    Top Trump aides are making frantic efforts to justify the killing of Qasem Soleimani , one of Iran's top leaders, and are bracing for a possible reprisal attack as the Islamic Republic moves around military hardware . But they are still refusing to publicly offer Americans details of the "imminent" attacks that they said the top general was planning. A farcical episode on Monday when at one point it seemed the military had announced it was pulling back troops from Iraq -- then said it made a mistake -- painted an unflattering picture of the administration's decision-making process. And t op officials have twice had to rule out Trump's warning that he could strike at "cultural" targets in Iran if it tries to avenge Soleimani's killing. Such action could amount to war crimes. The churn in Washington and growing questions over the rationale for an escalation that some fear could lead the US and Iran closer to war is complicating Trump's hopes of presenting a clean narrative that he acted decisively to eliminate a terrorist mastermind and to save the lives of hundreds of Americans.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Is Trump that stupid and malleble? Yes, he is. Now MAGA should be read "Make the USA go away"

    Notable quotes:
    "... It is clear to me after watching that extraordinary video of Trump's ignorance and stupidity that he is the idiot piper leading the West into the abyss. There could be no better epitome of the neoliberal sociopathy that drives our collapsing phase of late-capitalism. Putin's wet dream: a narcissist half-wit driving the western bus. ..."
    "... As for trying to put the blame on Pentagon staffers, even if they chose such weird options for Trump to choose, at the end of the day, it's the President himself who chose - as another one said decades ago, "the buck stops here" and the guy in the Oval Office has to bear the full responsibility. ..."
    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    David G , Jan 6 2020 19:57 utc | 19

    b writes:
    The New York Times reported yesterday that Trump picked the 'wrong' item from a list of possible courses of action that the military had presented him. That sounded like bullshit invented to take blame away from Trump and to put it onto the military.
    To me it looks more like the opposite: the Times's Pentagon sources pinning it on loose cannon Trump's going with the extreme option that the military hadn't intended him to. But whatever. The U.S. is facing the same harsh new reality regardless.

    Patroklos , Jan 6 2020 20:03 utc | 21

    The Times in London ran with a front page "We Will Kill UK Troops, warns Iran" ( here's the Guardian summary ). Despite initial reports that the UK and EU were distancing themselves from the assassination, the MSM have clearly been given their orders to begin banging the drum for war. The scramble for a casus belli reminds me of WMD, so I think a war of some scope is strongly desired and Boris Johnson has been brought on board. France will stay out and Germany will look first at Russia's position.

    It is clear to me after watching that extraordinary video of Trump's ignorance and stupidity that he is the idiot piper leading the West into the abyss. There could be no better epitome of the neoliberal sociopathy that drives our collapsing phase of late-capitalism. Putin's wet dream: a narcissist half-wit driving the western bus.

    lgfocus , Jan 6 2020 19:40 utc | 11

    Moqtada Al-Sadr to Trump
    "We are demanders of peace if you surrender and war if you fight. Do you threaten us? How dare you"

    read from Elijah Magnier's thread on Al-Sadr's letter.

    Zanon , Jan 6 2020 19:37 utc | 7
    Trump is probably not stupid enough to launch such a war and certainly not during an election year.

    During his campaign Trump said he wanted the U.S. military out of the Middle East. Iran and its allies will help him to keep that promise.

    Hasnt Trump proved he is stupid enough by now? How much more evidence is needed to drop him? Trump start wars to get another election win, I think that is obvious? And allies keeping him back? Which allieshave even remotely criticized his threats and murder? People need to realize that there is nothing stopping Trump, he and Israel will keep bombing and unfortunately its not much Iran could do.

    Clueless Joe , Jan 6 2020 19:37 utc | 8
    Dan: The guy fought the Talibans and ISIS, and has always been opposed to them; that's good enough for me, and that's definitely more than any of the coward and treacherous Western leaders that pussy-foot instead of calling out the US for what tantamounts to a declaration of war on both Iraq and Iran.

    As for trying to put the blame on Pentagon staffers, even if they chose such weird options for Trump to choose, at the end of the day, it's the President himself who chose - as another one said decades ago, "the buck stops here" and the guy in the Oval Office has to bear the full responsibility.

    Col. Lang is once again warning that Trump trying to keep the troops in Iraq would be a terrible mistake with bad consequences, and that it's just not realistic. He probably prefers not to say it that way when stating it's a long road from Kuwait to Baghdad, but if shit hits the fan and Iraqis decide to go after the US troops, then those who can't evacuate fast enough will end up in a position similar to that of the British in Kabul, in the very first days of 1842.

    Phryne's frock , Jan 6 2020 19:37 utc | 9
    Aghast at your words, dan. I am an aging homemaker from usa midwest and I have yet to stop weeping for Qassem Soleimani, his poor widow, and the rest of his family. I feel I owe him a personal debt for fighting zionists/terrorists/imperialists, for if they are not defeated once and for all, my captive government will continue in perpetuity to serve their horridmurderousthieving agenda, enslaving my every descendent and robbing humanity of any chance for peace on this pretty garden harbor planet. May justice be done to give peace a chance.
    Paul Bogdanich , Jan 6 2020 20:25 utc | 30
    What I wonder is who is the genius in the chain of command who brought this "opportunity" to Trump's attention and who vetted the decision? Trump made a large error when he surrounded himself with neocons (Abrahams, Bolton, Pompeo, Haspel, Esper). Anyway it's a tangle and it's pretty clear he (Trump) is in over his head. When he paniks he talks tough and he's making threats. It's also no wonder he has not received any support on his decision to murder Soleimani. From anywhere. Not even Israel is publicly supporting the decision. I think that surprised him. For 350 years there has been an unwritten rule that you don't go after generals or ambassadors or visiting politicians unless they are actively engaged in a combat zone. Remember the outrage when the barbarian Libyans killed a mere station chief? How outraged we were? Well, Trump overtly and with malice of forethought broke the rule. If I were the Iranian's and I could get to any U.S. generals or high ranking officials (working or visiting overseas) that's what I would do. Create animus within his own military and cabinet departments. Get them at the supermarket, speaking engagements, on vacation, at home, wherever. Doesn't matter. Wherever you can get them. Shitty thing to do no doubt but he started it and something the American and other populations would instinctively understand. Blood for blood retribution. No need to explain it to people.
    Alpi , Jan 6 2020 20:43 utc | 41
    ......." Trump is probably not stupid enough to launch such a war and certainly not during an election year."

    b,

    you are assuming that you are dealing with someone with a full deck of cards. If He was stupid enough to kill a sovereign nation's top general, he will be stupid enough to start a war. In fact that is his biggest wish. Elections be damned. Maybe the military would put on the breaks but not this stupid sick man.

    Robert Snefjella , Jan 6 2020 21:49 utc | 75
    Few points: (1) Thanks to Trump, Pompeo and Esper every American soldier everywhere now wears a bulls eye;
    (2) Any soldier -including Americans - might find a great deal to admire in Soliemani, a guy with a humble background who accomplished an extraordinary track record, a legendary strategist';

    (3) Has the US military's 'faith' in the sanity and competence of the civilian authority been stretched near to some breaking point?

    Lurk , Jan 6 2020 22:00 utc | 89
    Trump and Pence are dumb and dumber.

    Pence claimed on twitter that Suleimani assisted the 12 9/11 hijackers, for which he was instantly ridiculed.

    Trump wants billions payback for airbases in Iraq that were already fully transferred upon American withdrawal in december 2011.

    BTW, the trolls are obvious trolls. Could be from Tel Aviv, but perhaps from London, too (Integrity Initiative) Brits must be banging their heads against the wall over orange utan dropping a monkey wrench into the gears of the imperial machine that they too depend on. You bet that they need to spin this hard.

    Antigone , Jan 6 2020 22:02 utc | 91
    "We have a very extraordinarily expensive air base that's there. It cost billions of dollars to build. Long before my time. We're not leaving unless they pay us back for it,"
    Trump said

    Paying us back?

    Just ask the Iraqis - here is a reminder of what the bitter reality of economic violence looks like:

    The Crimes of Neoliberal Rule in Occupied Iraq

    The clearest statement of intent for the future of the Iraqi economy is contained in Order 39, which permitted full foreign ownership of Iraqi state-owned assets and decreed that over 200 state-owned enterprises, including electricity, telecommunications and the pharmaceuticals industry, could be dismantled. Order 39 also permitted 100 per cent foreign ownership of Iraqi banks, mines and factories; and allowed these firms to move their profits out of Iraq. It has been argued already in the British courts that Order 39 constitutes an act of ILLEGAL OCCUPATION under the terms of the Hague and Geneva treaties : The effect of Article 55 is to outlaw privatization of a country's assets whilst it is under occupation by a hostile military power."
    The mandate of the CPA was clear: to meet the 'humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people', to meet the costs of 'reconstruction and repair of Iraq's infrastructure', to meet the costs of disarmament and the civil administration of the country and other purposes 'benefiting the people of Iraq'. The terms of UNSCR 1483 are unequivocal in this regard. It was this resolution that established the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI)
    • DFI revenue, was available to the CPA immediately, in the form of $100,000 bundles of $100 bills, shrink-wrapped in $1.6 million 'cashpaks'. Pallets of cashpaks were flown into Baghdad direct from the US Federal Reserve Bank in New York. Some of this cash was held by the CPA in the basement of its premises in Baghdad Republican Palace. It has been reported that Paul Bremer controlled a personal slush fund of $600 million (Harriman 2005). One advantage of the use of cash payments and transfers was that the CPA transactions left no paper trail and therefore they remained relatively invisible
    • The disbursal of Iraqi oil revenue by the CPA also has had profound implications for the future structure of the Iraqi economy. ..Spending (in excess of $20 billion, partly based upon projected income) had to be underwritten by US government loans .. (which) has effectively deepened the debt that was originally accumulated during the period of UN-enforced sanctions following the 1991 Gulf War (Alexander 2005).
    • The right to self-determination and sovereign decision making over economic, social and cultural development is in international law a principle of jus cogens In this regard, the CPA clearly acted beyond its remit in terms of both the spirit and the letter of the international laws of conflict. It is the anti-democratic and pre-emptive nature of Anglo-American economic restructuring that most clearly demonstrates that the CPA regime was in violation of international law.
    • Similar violations arise from the CPA's governance of Iraqi oil wealth. Article 49 of the Hague rules notes that 'money contributions' levied in the occupied territory 'shall only be for the needs of the army or of the administration of the territory in question'.
    The political strategy was characteristically neo-liberal (evasion of 'red tape' and any obstacles that might hinder or limit the reallocation of wealth to the growing armies of private enterprises). This strategy was given momentum by the granting of formal LEGAL IMMUNITY to US personnel for activities related to the reconstruction economy. On the same day that the CPA was created by UNSCR 1483, George W. Bush signed Executive Order 13303, 2 The terms of the exemption provide immunity from prosecution for the theft or embezzlement of oil revenue, or incidentally, from any safety or environmental violations that might be committed in the course of producing Iraqi oil. Executive Order 13303 is therefore a guarantee of IMMUNITY from PROSECUTION for white-collar and corporate crimes that involve Iraqi oil. Two months later, in June 2003, Paul Bremer issued CPA Order 17. Bremer's decree guaranteed that members of the coalition military forces, the CPA, foreign missions and contractors -- and their personnel -- would remain immune from the Iraqi legal process. This carte blanche provision of immunity was extended again in June 2004.

    What we are beginning to trace out here is a US government policy of suspending the normal rule of law in the US and Iraq (so much for respecting Iraqi sovereigntx...)

    https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/47/2/177/519163
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/neoliberalism-and-the-killing-for-profit-in-iraq/5699525

    [Jan 08, 2020] Trump as a destoryer of the US empire: Unless the USA reinvades and reoccupies Iraq, the USA military forces will be gone from Syria, probably just after the election in November so Trump can say he stood up to the Iraqis

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Ghost Ship , Jan 6 2020 22:48 utc | 112

    The three most important things for doing battle are logistics, logistics and logistics, and as Pat lang explains, the US forces in Syria are essentially fucked:
    We have around 5,500 people there now spread across the country in little groups engaged in logistics, intelligence and training missions. They are extremely vulnerable. There are something like 150 marines in the embassy. There are also a small number of US combat forces in Syria east and north of the Euphrates river. These include a battalion of US Army National Guard mechanized troops "guarding" Syria's oil from Syria's own army and whatever devilment the Iranians might be able to arrange.

    4. This is an untenable logistical situation. Supply and other functions require a major airfield close to Baghdad. We have Balad airbase and helicopter supply and air support from there into Baghdad is possible from there but may become hazardous. Iraq is a big country. It is a long and lonely drive from Kuwait for re-supply from there or evacuation through there. The same thing is true of the desert route to Jordan.

    Unless it reinvades and reoccupies, the United States will be gone from Syria, probably just after the election in November so Trump can say he stood up to the Iraqis.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Impeachment as a way out for the USa for create Trump Soliemani muder deadlock with Iran

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

    Hineni47 NYC area 6h ago

    "Unlike with North Korea, it's difficult to imagine any photo op or exchange of love letters defusing the crisis the president has created. " The only thing that might defuse this crisis would be the Senate convicting Trump and removing him from office. It would be a good idea if the House passes another article of impeachment accusing the president of committing an act of war without Congressional authorization.
    Sirlar Jersey City 3h ago Times Pick
    Threatening to destroy cultural sites of a country is the sign of a deranged madman. I can't believe a US president would dare say something like that. It goes against all the principles America stands for. Nothing will motivate the people of Iran to fight the US more than the threat of destruction to their cultural sites. If we go to war with Iran, this is a Republican war. They own it. When are decent Republicans going to stand up and do the right thing? If they don't, this could be very, very, bad.
    PatMurphy77 Michigan 5h ago
    The Defense department is already walking back Trump's tweet about bombing Iran culture sites. Unfortunately, it's too late because the damage to our reputation as the "shining light on the hill" has already been destroyed. I'm afraid more than now than I have ever been in my life. Who knows when or where the revenge will occur but I'm fairly certain it will happen and we'll be more isolated than ever before. It's taken centuries to build goodwill and our reputation as a beacon of democracy for the world. We gave the keys to the kingdom to a false prophet and we'll pay for his indiscretions for the rest of my lifetime. God help us all.
    stan continople brooklyn 3h ago Times Pick
    You've sure got it right with "rapture-mad", and the most frightening thing is that the religious zealotry of Pompeo, Pence, Mulvaney and Barr, inoculates them against any criticism, because they believe they are serving a "higher"power and any criticism is a testimony to their faith. In fact, by turning themselves into martyrs, they get to advance in line for the Rapture. It seems particularly ironic that Evangelicals who support Israel do so because they see God's plan unfolding there. The Jews, just happen to be sacrificial lambs in the grand scheme. so they must must be preserved until the time is ripe for their rightful annihilation, heralding the Second Coming. So, the problem of Pompeo, et al, is not Iran destroying Israel, it's just that they've determined the timing is off.
    Eric Ashland 4h ago Times Pick
    As for the "wag the dog" theory, sure, Trump sees no difference between his personal fortunes and national interests. But worse, the impeachment rests upon evidence that points to a personal criminality on an international scale, which is the landscape where we find ourselves. The president pardons convicts like Gallagher and Arpaio because they are cruel or bloodthirsty. He admires dictators and ignores the law whenever he can, both as a private individual and a president, and has obstructed a legal investigation into his corruption. Now, on the international stage, by bypassing Congress, he is ignoring the sovereignty of the American people, while incoherently threatening war crimes. Trump is fully blossoming into a man like those he admires, an unrestrained, unprincipled, heavy hitting international tyrant. I'm so disgusted with those whose job it is to check this man, and have abdicated their responsibility, because they want to be like him. Reply 230 Recommend Share
    Aaron San Francisco 4h ago Times Pick
    I was at a friend's house on election night ready to celebrate Clinton's victory. When the networks suddenly announced that Trump had won Florida, a professor of international relations who was with us ominously predicted, "we are going to war with Iran." And here we are.
    PT Melbourne, FL 4h ago Times Pick
    America has become a living nightmare. A global power perceived mostly as benevolent by the world is now a danger to all, including itself. Already having killed the Paris Agreement, and Iran Nuclear Treaty, not to mention walking away from a nuclear arms treaty with the Russians, Trump is now ready to wreak real havoc on the world - start a war. Boy will they forget about impeachment now!
    Jonathan Baron Staunton, Virginia 5h ago
    We haven't authorized the assassination of a military leader since the daring mission to kill Japanese Admiral Yamamoto in 1943. Although he'd been the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack, and we were at war with Japan, this was a departure so significant that it only proceeded after lengthy deliberation. And now, this. Your article fills in precisely how this was so very much not that. But one party is in so cult-deep into this president now that the lies won't stop. Thousands of Iranian have lost their lives in the past month trying to rid themselves of this regime. Not only were those deaths rendered in vain by the assassination of Suleimani, but the Iranian people are also even more yoked to a government they hate. And wasn't the idea of grassroots-driven change in regime a core strategy behind pulling out of the nuclear deal? And it's not okay because Suleimani is "evil." That's both subjective and never a justification for an assassination of a foreign military leader of a nation we're not at war with. As I noted, it was questionable when it was a military leader of nation we were at war with. But, most important, what did we gain from this? Following yet another disasterous military and foreign policy snap decision it only makes the importance of removing Trump from office more urgent. Come for the Constitutional crime but convict because the defendant is also manifestly unfit for the office. People are dying because of it and more will die if he stays. Reply 186 Recommend Share
    Joe Portland, ME 3h ago Times Pick
    What, then, for an effective response? Outrage is mere fuel: what is the engine? A full year seems too long. The Senate seems hopeless. What does that leave? Must we take to the streets to stop this disaster of a president? All this time spent wondering how this will end makes me feel like a victim of domestic abuse. What a waste. 1 Reply 180 Recommend Share
    AnitaSmith New Jersey 4h ago Times Pick
    The near silence of the countries frequently referred to as our allies -- before the age of Trump -- is deafening.

    [Jan 08, 2020] The Nightmare Stage of Trump's Rule Is Here by Michelle Goldberg Michelle Goldberg

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

    After three harrowing years, we've reached the point many of us feared from the moment Donald Trump was elected. His decision to kill Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran's second most important official, made at Mar-a-Lago with little discernible deliberation , has brought the United States to the brink of a devastating new conflict in the Middle East.

    We don't yet know how Iran will retaliate, or whether all-out war will be averted. But already, NATO has suspended its mission training Iraqi forces to fight ISIS . Iraq's Parliament has voted to expel American troops -- a longtime Iranian objective. (On Monday, U.S. forces sent a letter saying they were withdrawing from Iraq in response, only to then claim that it was a draft released in error .) On Sunday, Iran said it will no longer be bound by the remaining restrictions on its nuclear program in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the deal that Trump abandoned in 2018. Trump has been threatening to commit war crimes by destroying Iran's cultural sites and tried to use Twitter to notify Congress of his intention to respond to any Iranian reprisals with military escalation.

    The administration has said that the killing of Suleimani was justified by an imminent threat to American lives, but there is no reason to believe this. One skeptical American official told The New York Times that the new intelligence indicated nothing but "a normal Monday in the Middle East," and Democrats briefed on it were unconvinced by the administration's case. The Washington Post reported that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo -- who last year agreed with a Christian Broadcasting Network interviewer that God might have sent Trump to save Israel from the "Iranian menace" -- has been pushing for a hit on Suleimani for months.

    Rather than self-defense, the Suleimani killing seems like the dreadful result of several intersecting dynamics. There's the influence of rapture-mad Iran hawks like Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence. Defense officials who might have stood up to Trump have all left the administration. According to Peter Bergen's book "Trump and His Generals," James Mattis, Trump's former secretary of defense, instructed his subordinates not to provide the president with options for a military showdown with Iran. But with Mattis gone, military officials, The Times reported, presented Trump with the possibility of killing Suleimani as the "most extreme" option on a menu of choices, and were "flabbergasted" when he picked it.

    Trump likely had mixed motives. He was reportedly upset over TV images of militia supporters storming the American Embassy in Iraq. According to The Post, he also was frustrated by "negative coverage" of his decision last year to order and then call off strikes on Iran.

    Beyond that, Trump, now impeached and facing trial in the Senate, has laid out his rationale over years of tweets. The president is a master of projection, and his accusations against others are a decent guide to how he himself will behave . He told us, over and over again , that he believed Barack Obama would start a war with Iran to "save face" and because his "poll numbers are in a tailspin" and he needed to "get re-elected." To Trump, a wag-the-dog war with Iran evidently seemed like a natural move for a president in trouble.

    ... ... ...

    Even if Iran were to somehow decide not to strike back at the United States, it's still ramping up its nuclear program, and Trump has obliterated the possibility of a return to negotiations. "His maximum pressure policy has failed," Nasr said of Trump. "He has only produced a more dangerous Iran."

    ... ... ... Michelle Goldberg has been an Opinion columnist since 2017. She is the author of several books about politics, religion and women's rights, and was part of a team that won a Pulitzer Prize for public service in 2018 for reporting on workplace sexual harassment issues. @michelleinbklyn

    [Jan 08, 2020] "Isolationist" is a imperialist label put on someone against war.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    SharonM , Jan 8 2020 17:59 utc | 153

    @145 vk

    "Isolationist" is a imperialist label put on someone against war. And the U.S. has always been an imperialist nation. There's no such thing as a limited era of imperialism for the U.S.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Soleimani and Al-Muhandis are being mourned in Aleppo churches

    Jan 08, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    StSarkiscathedraltehran2016

    (Tehran Armenian Cathedral)

    Mike Pompeo was on the TeeVee today scoffing at those who do not agree with him and the Ziocon inspired "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran. It must be a terrible thing for intelligence analysts of integrity and actual Middle East knowledge and experience to have to try to brief him and Trump, people who KNOW, KNOW from some superior source of knowledge that Iran is the worst threat to the world since Nazi Germany, or was it Saddam's Iraq that was the worst threat since "beautiful Adolf?"

    The "maximum pressure" campaign is born of Zionist terrors, terrors deeply felt. It is the same kind of campaign that has been waged by the Israelis against the Palestinians and all other enemies great and small. This approach does not seem to have done much for Israel. The terrors are still there.

    Someone sent me the news tape linked below from Aleppo in NW Syria. I have watched it a number of times. You need some ability in Arabic to understand it. The tape was filmed in several Christian churches in Aleppo where these two men (Soleimani and al-Muhandis) are described from the pulpit and in the street as "heroic martyr victims of criminal American state terrorism." Pompeo likes to describe Soleimani as the instigator of "massacre" and "genocide" in Syria. Strangely (irony) the Syriac, Armenian Uniate and Presbyterian ministers of the Gospel in this tape do not see him and al-Muhandis that way. They see them as men who helped to defend Aleppo and its minority populations from the wrath of Sunni jihadi Salafists like ISIS and the AQ affiliates in Syria. They see them and Lebanese Hizbullah as having helped save these Christians by fighting alongside the Syrian Army, Russia and other allies like the Druze and Christian militias.

    It should be remembered that the US was intent on and may still be intent on replacing the multi-confessional government of Syria with the forces of medieval tyranny. Everyone who really knows anything about the Syrian Civil War knows that the essential character of the New Syrian Army, so beloved by McCain, Graham and the other Ziocons was always jihadi and it was always fully supported by Wahhabi Saudi Arabia as a project in establishing Sunni triumphalism. They and the self proclaimed jihadis of HTS (AQ) are still supported in Idlib and western Aleppo provinces both by the Saudis and the present Islamist and neo-Ottoman government of Turkey.

    Well pilgrims, there are Christmas trees in the newly re-built Christian churches of Aleppo and these, my brothers and sisters in Christ remember who stood by them in "the last ditch."

    "Currently there are at least 600 churches and 500,000–1,000,000 Christians in Iran." wiki below. Are they dhimmis? Yes, but they are there. There are no churches in Saudi Arabia, not a single one and Christianity is a banned religion. These are our allies?

    Mr. Jefferson wrote that "he feared for his country when he remembered that God is just." He meant Virginia but I fear in the same way for the United States. pl

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1214223383635857409

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Iran

    Posted at 02:13 PM in As The Borg Turns , Borg Wars , Current Affairs , Iran , Iraq , Israel , Middle East , Pakistan , Religion , Saudi Arabia , Syria , Yemen | Permalink

    [Jan 08, 2020] As long as Neocons and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT

    Yes, as long as Neoco hens and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.
    BTW, Mike Pompeo or as I affectionately call him; Lard face, Plump'eo, crazed CZ-zealot fat boy, etc., is now a legitimate target of the Iranians. May Allah provide justice to the family of Soleimani. (Grin) And look, I'm wishing 'ill will' on a zealot 'goy' (gentile) instead of a typical Neo-cohen snake, how ironic. (Another grin)
    A positve spin:
    With the 'incorrect' memo leaked by the Pentagon about an orderly exit from Iraq this can be the silver lining in all this mess. This assassination might actually accelerate the exiting of US forces from Iraq and the surrounding quagmires. Who knows, Trump might be a genius.
    Again, NO MORE WARS FOR ZION, BDS NOW, ONE STATE SOLUTION-PALESTINE.
    And to really stick it to Neo cohens (My apologies to Prof. Steven Cohen ), Trump-Putin Axis Da!! Destroy the Deep State and the CABAL .

    [Jan 08, 2020] No war with Iran

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Noirette , Jan 8 2020 17:31 utc | 135

    Trump tweet: All is Well!

    Khamenei words: There won't be any war. (link)

    Netanyahu: The killing of Soleimani is a U.S. event, not an Israeli event, and we should stay out of it.

    -- -- -- --
    If Netanyahu got cold feet, that would be very naive of him, completely out of character. No.

    My pov re. Israel is that the US-uk and Isr. are in a symbiotic dependency relationship, with the US as the controlling party.

    Pov. bashed by USA stalwarts who love to blame Israel, Zionazis, Jews, the Mossad, etc.. for "bad stuff" that the US does.

    The most powerful country in the world is controlled by some evil hateful figures in a minuscule, depressing postage-stamp outpost (not..) plus and/or by infiltrating US Gvmt./ Media (more realistic..but was allowed, etc.)

    Isr. only exists because of the support, international protection, huge stipends, offered by the Hegemon.
    -- -- -- --

    No war with Iran. I have said this for years (and hope I continue to be right) see also Petri at 21, others.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-khamenei/irans-supreme-leader-says-there-will-be-no-war-with-us-idUSKCN1SK23T

    [Jan 08, 2020] If the world would be a more secure place were Iran to have nuclear weapons

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Sasha , Jan 6 2020 22:25 utc | 101

    For the USDoS minion who has asked if the world would be a more secure place were Iran to have nuclear weapons...

    Absolutely yes, if Iran would have nuclear weapons right now, all this mamoneo would end asap. Definitely it will act as the best deterrent, but that will not happen because that is anti-Islamic and is forbidden by Ayatollah Khamenei.

    I for one do not feel safe at all with the US and Israel having nuclear weapons, all the more when both countries have currently at the helms both mafia bosses of the caliber of Trump and Netanyahu.
    On the contrary, that DPRK have nuclear weapons, as soon as I know very well that is for deterrence against US bullying, allows me to sleep a pierna suelta...the same for Russia and China..

    [Jan 08, 2020] Three major Trump accomplishments

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Bubbles , Jan 8 2020 16:29 utc | 103

    arby @90

    Trump has accomplished 3 things in 3 years.

    1. Being Santa Claus to Netanyahu, the far right and the very rich (Generous donors)
    2. Doing the impossible, making Hillary look like the better of 2 terrible choices
    3. Proving 42% of the American public aren't too swift.


    [Jan 08, 2020] "Debt Wish 2020" Did Iran strike affects dollar status as the world reserve currency, because it is a clear sign the the period of the USA absolute hegemony after the dissolution of the USSR came the end?

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , Jan 8 2020 0:02 utc | 110

    psychohistorian @88--

    What was your take on "Debt Wish 2020"?

    Jezabeel @82--

    "U.S. Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses" provides numerous methods besides simply the cessation of dollar use for international commercial transactions. Along with watching the "Debt Wish 2020" vid linked above, I also suggest reading/watching this program . And lastly, I suggest reading this analysis here , although it only tangentially deals with your question.

    [Jan 08, 2020] Either the assassination was a drive-by on the way out, or Trump's war cabinet doesn't plan on having to leave Iraq.

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

    Trump has from the beginning of his presidential campaign appealed to the worst and most fascistic elements in American political life. At a time when the US has no credible peer military rival, he added hundreds of billions of dollars to the Pentagon budget, and the pudgy old chicken hawk lionized war criminals. Up until now, however, Trump shrewdly calculated that his base was tired of wasting blood and treasure on fruitless Middle Eastern wars, and he avoided taking more than symbolic steps. He dropped a big missile on Afghanistan once, and fired some Tomahawk Cruise missiles at Syria. But he drew back from the brink of more extensive military engagements.

    Now, by murdering Qasem Soleimani , the head of the Jerusalem (Qods) Brigade of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, Trump has brought the United States to the brink of war with Iran. Mind you, Iran's leadership is too shrewd to rush to the battlements at this moment, and will be prepared to play the long game. My guess is that they will encourage their allies among Iraqi Shiites to get up a massive protest at the US embassy and at bases housing US troops.

    They will be aided in this task of mobilizing Iraqis by the simultaneous US assassination of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis , the deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Forces. Al-Muhandis is a senior military figure in the Iraqi armed forces, not just a civilian militia figure. Moreover, the Kata'ib Hizbullah that he headed is part of a strong political bloc, al-Fath, which has 48 members in parliament and forms a key coalition partner for the current, caretaker prime minister, Adil Abdulmahdi. Parliament won't easily be able to let this outrage pass.

    The US officer corps is confident that the American troops at the embassy and elsewhere in Baghdad are sufficient to fight off any militia invasion. I'm not sure they have taken into account the possibility of tens of thousands of civilian protesters invading the embassy, who can't simply be taken out and shot.

    Trump may be counting on the unpopularity among the youth protesters in downtown Baghdad, Basra, Nasiriya and other cities of Soleimani and of al-Muhandis to blunt the Iraqi reaction to the murders. The thousands of youth protesters cheered on hearing the news of their deaths, since they were accused of plotting a violent repression of the rallies demanding an end to corruption.

    Iraq, however, is a big, complex society, and there are enormous numbers of Iraqi Shiites who support the Popular Mobilization Forces and who view them as the forces that saved Iraq from the peril of the ISIL (ISIS) terrorist organization. The Shiite hard liners would not need all Iraqis to back them in confronting the American presence, only a few hundred thousand for direct crowd action.

    You also have to wonder whether Trump and his coterie aren't planning a coup in Iraq. In the absence of a coup, the Iraqi parliament will almost certainly be forced, after this violation of Iraqi national sovereignty, to vote to expel American troops. This is foreseeable. So either the assassination was a drive-by on the way out, or Trump's war cabinet doesn't plan on having to leave Iraq.

    Although Trump justified the murder of Soleimani by calling him a terrorist, that is nonsense in the terms of international law. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps is the equivalent of the US National Guard. What Trump did is the equivalent of some foreign country declaring the US military a terrorist organization (some have) and then assassinating General Joseph L. Lengyel, the 28th Chief of the National Guard Bureau (God forbid and may he have a long healthy life).

    [Jan 08, 2020] Trump: The American Netanyahu

    Jan 08, 2020 | www.aljazeera.com

    https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/trump-american-netanyahu-200107145858311.html

    https://twitter.com/Tweeterist_

    On Iran and the Middle East, the Trump administration is following Israel's playbook.

    Marwan Bishara by Marwan Bishara 11 hours ago
    US President Donald Trump and Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu hold up a proclamation recognising Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights on March 25, 2019 [File: Reuters/Leah Millis]
    US President Donald Trump and Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu hold up a proclamation recognising Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights on March 25, 2019 [File: Reuters/Leah Millis]
    more on Soleimani assassination
    Supporters of Donald Trump think of the US president as an exceptional one-of-a-kind force of nature - a sui generis leader. His detractors like to compare him to Russian President Vladimir Putin or describe him as a Putin stooge, and since he ordered the "vengeful" or "reckless" assassination of Iranian General Qassim Solemani, some have likened him to a Middle Eastern despot. But a more pertinent comparison lies elsewhere.

    Since taking office in January 2017, Trump's dramatic positions and pronouncements on the Middle East and beyond have shocked and dismayed much of the US foreign policy establishment, especially on three main challenges facing the US in the region: security, diplomacy and democracy and human rights.

    Trump has not only undone much of his predecessor's legacy, both domestically and internationally, he also trashed Barack Obama's doctrine and policies in favour of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 's. For the past three years, he has been re-coupling US and Israeli strategies, especially towards Iran and the global "war on terror" which Obama spent eight years decoupling.

    This is not to say, Obama was not a staunch supporter of Israel and defender of its "security" or was not trigger happy with the US drone assassination programme. He certainly was. He just did not like Netanyahu and did not appreciate his deceit.

    Obama tried to pursue an independent US policy free from Israel's narrow constraints and considerations, after eight years of the Bush administration's wars and blunders in the region.

    By contrast, Trump embraced all things Netanyahu as soon as he stepped into the White House.

    It helped that the two men have far more in common than meets the eye.

    Eerie similarities

    Both men are thrice married with a history of adultery, are facing charges for misusing their office for personal gain, and have a problematic relationship with the truth.

    And yet, both Netanyahu and Trump remain all too popular with their right-wing base.

    Even religious fanatics, both in Israel and the US, consider these two secular, undevout, and morally challenged leaders as God's vessels on earth.

    Both are able showmen , who have pursued, and mastered, populist, theatrical and divisive policies that have rallied their rightist constituencies around their populist personas.

    But most importantly in this context, Trump has pursued the same ultra-nationalist securitarian, some say racist, agendas that Netanyahu has long championed in Israel and the Middle East.

    This is especially important today, as both commanders-in-chief are exploiting foreign policy to deflect attention from their domestic troubles with the law.

    Embracing Netanyahu's positions

    Trump's knowledge of the Middle East was dismal prior to taking office. He was an empty page ready to be filled, but only with the ideas which helped guide and propel his presidential campaign towards victory, such as infringements on rights of immigrants and minorities, a ban on Muslims travelling to the US, and all things anti-Obama.

    A number of Middle Eastern despots like those of Egypt and the UAE did try to fill in some of the blanks. But no one had the ability, style, record, and diligence of Netanyahu, who also enjoyed unfiltered access to the president-elect through his three ultra-Zionist lieutenants, Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and David Friedman.

    First among these ideas, was the radical departure from a quarter of a century of US policy towards Israel and Palestine , namely moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, accepting the legitimacy of the illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian lands, abandoning the two-state solution, and recognising Israel's sovereignty over the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

    It is Netanyahu's dream come true.

    Trump also embraced Netanyahu's view on the Arab world in support of friendly despots and dictators and against democracy and human rights. He aligned US policy toward the Gulf and Arab affairs with the interests of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt and embraced Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman despite his reckless policies domestically and regionally - all in the hope of paving the way for Arab normalisation of relations with "colonial" Israel.

    Another Netanyahu dream come true.

    Attacking Iran

    Nowhere was Netanyahu's influence on Trump more pronounced than on Iran.

    The Trump administration abandoned the Iran nuclear deal against the advice and urging of its NATO allies, Russia and China.

    It then pursued a punitive policy of containment through tough economic sanctions, an option unavailable to Israel, in order to strong-arm Iran into a humiliating new deal that not only bans all its nuclear activity, but also curtails its military and regional outreach.

    When maximum pressure did not produce the desired results, as Iran continued its bellicose regional policies, Trump adopted both Netanyahu's means and endgame, starting with the assassination of Soleimani, widely seen as a "declaration of war" with untold consequences for the region.

    Israel has been carrying out targeted killings and preemptive strikes against Iranian targets in Syria; in 2013, it was accused of being behind the killing of another Revolutionary Guard general, Hassan Shateri .

    To be clear, Trump did not order the assassination to avenge the killings of countless Syrians and Iraqis; he did so to deter Iran from escalating its attacks on US interests and allies.

    Although Netanyahu tried to distance himself from the targeted assassination of the Iranian general in Iraq, make no mistake, this is a third Netanyahu dream come true, in a span of three years. He is said to have been the only world leader with prior knowledge of the planned assassination.

    Regional crisis

    Nothing is more satisfying for an Israeli leader than having the US embrace Israel's strategy and fight Israel's wars in the region. And nothing is more dangerous for the rest of the world - we all know how the last conflict Tel Aviv incited ended in disaster in Iraq.

    The last thing any Israeli leader wants is for the US to withdraw from the region, leaving Israel to fend for itself in a hostile environment. Same goes for Saudi Arabia .

    That is why it is important to underline that while the Trump administration may seek to reposition its forces out of the hotspots of the Middle East, including Iraq (just as Israel redeployed out of Lebanon and Gaza) the US will still maintain formidable projection of forces throughout the region.

    The question is, will this strategy enable future US diplomacy, which also served Israel's interests during the so-called "peace process", or lead to the further escalation of violence and war?

    Alas, the ongoing bluster about imminent attacks, counter-attacks, and disproportionate responses and bombings of cultural sites do not bode well for diplomacy.

    With naval fleets, military bases and some 60,000 troops deployed around Iran and throughout the Middle East, the Trump administration could pursue an Israel-like air-land-sea strategy of drones, fighter jets, guided missiles, cyber and Special Forces attacks and targeted assassinations that exhaust its enemies and destabilises the region as a whole.

    That would be another Netanyahu dream and another Middle East nightmare come true.

    ABOUT THE AUTHOR Marwan Bishara Marwan Bishara

    Marwan Bishara is the senior political analyst at Al Jazeera.

    [Jan 07, 2020] As long as Neocons and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT

    Yes, as long as Neoco hens and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.
    BTW, Mike Pompeo or as I affectionately call him; Lard face, Plump'eo, crazed CZ-zealot fat boy, etc., is now a legitimate target of the Iranians. May Allah provide justice to the family of Soleimani. (Grin) And look, I'm wishing 'ill will' on a zealot 'goy' (gentile) instead of a typical Neo-cohen snake, how ironic. (Another grin)
    A positve spin:
    With the 'incorrect' memo leaked by the Pentagon about an orderly exit from Iraq this can be the silver lining in all this mess. This assassination might actually accelerate the exiting of US forces from Iraq and the surrounding quagmires. Who knows, Trump might be a genius.
    Again, NO MORE WARS FOR ZION, BDS NOW, ONE STATE SOLUTION-PALESTINE.
    And to really stick it to Neo cohens (My apologies to Prof. Steven Cohen ), Trump-Putin Axis Da!! Destroy the Deep State and the CABAL .

    [Jan 07, 2020] Chaos Pentagon Denies Poorly Worded Iraq Withdrawal Letter, Esper Says No Decision To Leave Iraq, Period

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Yesterday, Iraqi lawmakers voted to expel foreign troops from the country during an emergency parliamentary session. Interim Iraqi prime minister, Adil Abdul Mahdi, stressed during the session, that while the US government notified the Iraqi military of the planned strike on Soleimani, his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation.

    In a meeting Monday, Mahdi, a caretaker prime minister who said in November he would resign, told US Ambassador Matthew H. Tueller that the US and Iraq needed to cooperate "to implement the withdrawal of foreign forces in accordance with the decision of the Iraqi parliament," according to a statement from the PM's office that was cited by the Washington Post .

    Though the Iraq war 'officially' ended in 2011, thousands of coalition troops stuck around. Their numbers increased following the rise of ISIS in the region.

    Ending the US troop presence in Iraq has been a longtime goal of non-interventionists like Ron Paul and his son, Rand.

    That said, even without troops in Iraq, the US will still have plenty of capacity to bully Iran, and other other regional powers.

    [Jan 07, 2020] Lisa Monaco The Soleimani killing puts us in uncharted territory. Are we prepared - The Washington Post

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.washingtonpost.com

    Finally, in a scenario such as this, chaos is the starring player across the entire region. The strike on Soleimani makes even more fraught the position of U.S. troops in Iraq, where the parliament has now voted in favor of a non-binding resolution for the eviction of U.S. forces. The loss of U.S. presence in Iraq would strengthen Iran's hand there and compound the damage to our fight against the Islamic State from our abandonment of Kurdish partners last fall. While the Islamic State has been pushed out of much of the territory it once held, it has melted back into the population and seeks to capitalize on ungoverned space with insurgent attacks. Ungoverned space was oxygen for the Islamic State's rise in 2014. Whatever else Soleimani's death means, it is sure to add to chaos within Iraq and Syria, and that benefits the Islamic State.

    [Jan 07, 2020] Fragmentation In 'The Axis Of Resistance' Led To Soleimani's Death

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    me name=

    Skip to main content

    https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4777 Fragmentation In 'The Axis Of Resistance' Led To Soleimani's Death by Tyler Durden Mon, 01/06/2020 - 20:45 0 SHARES

    Authored by Elijah Magnier via EJMagnier.com,

    It was not the US decision to fire missiles against the IRGC commander Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani that killed the Iranian officer and his companions in Baghdad. Yes, of course, the order that was given to launch missiles from the two drones (which destroyed the two cars carrying Sardar Soleimani and his companion the Iraqi commander in al-Hashd al-Shaabi Jamal Jaafar Al-Tamimi aka Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes and burned their bodies in the vehicle) came from US command and control.

    However, the reason President Donald Trump made this decision derives from the weakness of the "axis of resistance", which has completely retreated from the level of performance that Iran believed it was capable of after decades of work to strengthen this "axis".

    A close companion of Major General Qassim Soleimani, to whom he spoke hours before boarding the plane that took him from Damascus to Baghdad, told me:

    "The nobleman died. Palestine above all has lost Hajj Qassem (Soleimani). He was the "King" of the Axis of the Resistance and its leader. He was assassinated and this is exactly what he was hoping to reach in this life (Martyrdom). However, this axis will live and will not die. No doubt, the Axis of the Resistance needs to review its policy and regenerate itself to correct its path. This was what Hajj Qassim was complaining about and planning to work on and strategizing about in his last hours."

    The US struck Iran at the heart of its pride by killing Major General Soleimani. But the "axis of the Resistance" killed him before that. This is how:

    When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assassinated the deputy head of the Military Council (the highest authority in the Lebanese Hezbollah, which is headed by its Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah), Hajj Imad Mughniyah in Damascus, Syria, Hezbollah could not avenge him until today.

    When Trump gave Netanyahu Jerusalem as the "capital of Israel", the "Axis of the Resistance" did not move except by holding television symposia and conferences verbally rejecting the decision.

    When President Trump offered the occupied Syrian Golan Heights to Israel and the "Axis of Resistance" did not react, the US President Donald Trump and his team understood that they were opposed by no effective deterrent. The inaction of the Resistance axis emboldened Trump to do what he wants.

    And when Israel bombed hundreds of Syrian and Iranian targets in Syria , the "Axis of the Resistance" justified its lack of retaliation by the typical sentence: "We do not want to be dragged along by the timing of the engagement imposed by the enemy," as a senior official in this axis told me.

    In Iraq shortly before his death, Major General Soleimani was complaining about the weakening of the Iraqi ranks within this "Axis of the Resistance", represented by the Al-Bina' (Construction) Alliance and other groups close to this alliance like Al-Hikma of Ammar al-Hakim and Haidar al-Abadi, formerly close to Iran, that have gone over to the US side.

    In Iraq, Major General Soleimani was very patient and never lost his temper. He was trying to reconcile the Iraqis, both his allies and those who had chosen the US camp and disagreed with him. He used to hug those who shouted at him to lower tensions and continue dialogue to avoid spoiling the meeting. Anyone who raised his voice during discussions soon found that it was Soleimani who calmed everyone down.

    Hajj Qassem Soleimani was unable to reach a consensus on the new Prime Minister's name among those he deemed to be allies in the same coalition. He asked Iraqi leaders to select the names and went through all of these asking questions about the acceptability of these names to the political groups, to the Marjaiya, to protestors in the street and whether the suggested names were not provocative or challenging to the US. Notwithstanding the animosity between Iran and the US, Soleimani encouraged the selection of a personality that would not be boycotted by the US. Soleimani believed the US capable of damaging Iraq and understood the importance of maintaining a good relationship with the US for the stability of the country.

    Soleimani was shocked by the dissension among Iraqi Shia and believed that the "axis of resistance" needed a new vision as it was faltering. In the final hours before his death, Major General Soleimani was ruminating on the profound antagonisms between Iraqis of the same camp.

    When the Iraqi street began to move against the government, the line rejecting American hegemony was fragmented because it was part of the authority that ruled and governed Iraq. To make matters worse, Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr directed his arrows against his partners in government, as though the street demonstrations did not target him, the politician controlling the largest number of Iraqi deputies, ministers and state officials, who had participated in the government for more than ten years.

    Major General Soleimani admonished Moqtada Al-Sadr for his stances, which contributed to undermining the Iraqi ranks because the Sadrist leader did not offer an alternative solution or practical project other than the chaos. Moqtada has his own men, the feared Saraya al-Salam, present in the street.

    When US Defense Secretary Mark Esper called Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi on December 28 and informed him of America's intentions of hitting Iraqi security targets inside Iraq, including the PMU, Soleimani was very disappointed by Abdul-Mahdi's failure to effectively oppose Esper. Abdul-Mahdi merely told Esper that the proposed US action was dangerous. Soleimani knew that the US would not have hit Iraqi targets had Abdul-Mahdi dared to oppose the US decision. The targeted areas were a common Iranian-Iraqi operational stage to monitor and control ISIS movements on the borders with Syria and Iraq. The US would have reversed its decision had the Iraqi Prime Minister threatened the US with retaliation in the event that Iraqi forces were bombed and killed. After all, the US had no legal right to attack any objective in Iraq without the agreement of the Iraqi government. This decision was the moment when Iraq has lost its sovereignty and the US took control of the country.

    This effective US control is another reason why President Trump gave the green light to kill Major General Soleimani. The Iraqi front had demonstrated its weakness and also, it was necessary to select a strong Iraqi leader with the guts to stand to the US arrogance and unlawful actions.

    Iran has never controlled Iraq, as most analysts mistakenly believe and speculate. For years, the US has worked hard in the corridors of the Iraqi political leadership lobby for its own interests. The most energetic of its agents was US Presidential envoy Brett McGurk, who clearly realised the difficulties of navigating inside Iraqi leaders' corridors during the search for a prime minister of Iraq before the appointment of Adel Abdel Mahdi, the selection of President Barham Saleh and other governments in the past. Major General Soleimani and McGurk shared an understanding of these difficulties. Both understood the nature of the Iraqi political quagmire.

    Soleimani did not give orders to fire missiles at US bases or attack the US Embassy. If it was in his hands to destroy them with accurate missiles and to remove the entire embassy from its place without repercussions, he would not have hesitated. But the Iraqis have their own opinions, methods, modus operandi and selection of targets and missile calibres; they never relied on Soleimani for such decisions.

    Iranian involvement in Iraqi affairs was never welcomed by the Marjaiya in Najaf, even if it agreed to receive Soleimani on a few occasions. They clashed over the reelection of Nuri al-Maliki, Soleimani's preferred candidate, to the point that the Marjaiya wrote a letter making its refusal of al-Maliki explicit. This led to the selection of Abadi as prime minister.

    Soleimani's views contradicted the perception of the Marjaiya, that had to write a clear message, firstly, to reject the re-election of Nori al-Maliki to a third session, despite Soleimani's insistence.

    All of the above is related to the stage that followed the 2011 departure of US forces from Iraq under President Obama. Prior to that, Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis was the link between the Iraqis and Iran: he had the decision-making power, the vision, the support of various groups, and effectively served as the representative of Soleimani, who did not interfere in the details. These Iraqi groups met with Soleimani often in Iran; Soleimani rarely travelled to Iraq during the period of heavy US military presence.

    Soleimani, although he was the leader of the "Axis of the Resistance", was sometimes called "the king" in some circles because his name evokes Solomon. According to sources within the "Axis of the Resistance", he "never dictated his own policy but left a margin of movement and decision to all leaders of the axis without exception. Therefore, he was considered the link between this axis and the supreme leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei. Soleimani was able to contact Sayyed Khamenei at any time and directly without mediation. The Leader of the revolution considered Soleimani as his son.

    According to sources, in Syria, Soleimani "never hesitated to jump inside a truck, ride an ordinary car, take the first helicopter, or travel on a transport or cargo plane as needed. He did not take any security precautions but used his phone (which he called a companion spy) freely because he believed that when the decision came to assassinate him, he would follow his destiny. He looked forward to becoming a martyr because he had already lived long."

    Was the leader of the "resistance axis" managing and running it?

    Sayyed Ali Khamenei told Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: "You are an Arab and the Arabs accept you more than they accept Iran". Sayyed Nasrallah directed and managed the axis of Lebanon, Syria and Yemen and had an important role in Iraq. Hajj Soleimani was the liaison between the axis of the resistance and Iran and he was the financial and logistical officer. According to my source, "He was a friend of all leaders and officials of all ranks. He was humble and looked after everyone he had to deal with".

    The "Axis of Resistance" indirectly allowed the killing of Qassem Soleimani. If Israel and the US could know Sayyed Nasrallah's whereabouts, they would not hesitate a moment to assassinate him. They may be aware: the reaction may be limited to burning flags and holding conferences and manifesting in front of an embassy. Of course, this kind of reaction does not deter President Trump who wants to be re-elected with the support of Israel and US public opinion. He wants to present himself as a warrior and determined leader who loves battle and killing.

    Iran invested 40 years building the "Axis of the Resistance". It cannot remain idle, faced with the assassination of the Leader of this axis. Would a suitable price be the US exit from Iraq and condemnation in the Security Council? Would that, together with withdrawal from the nuclear deal, be enough for Iran to avenge its General? Will the ensuing battle be confined to the Iraqi stage? Will it be used for the victory of certain Iraqi political players?

    The assassination of its leader represents the supreme test for the Axis of Resistance. All sides, friend and foe, are awaiting its response. Tags Politics

    https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4879&num_ads=18&cf=1258.5.zerohedge%20190919 Show 200 Comments Login

    ZeroHedge Search Today's Top Stories Loading... Contact Information Tips: [email protected]

    General: [email protected]

    Legal: [email protected]

    Advertising: Click here

    Abuse/Complaints: [email protected] Suggested Reading Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide

    It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer , our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure . Here's our Cookie Policy .

    How to report offensive comments

    Notice on Racial Discrimination .

    Copyright ©2009-2020 ZeroHedge.com/ABC Media, LTD Want more of the news you won't get anywhere else? Thank you for subscribing! Something went wrong. Please refresh and try again. Sign up now and get a curated daily recap of the most popular and important stories delivered right to your inbox. Please enter a valid email

    https://s.amazon-adsystem.com/iu3?cm3ppd=1&d=dtb-pub&csif=t&dl=rbd_oath_r1u

    [Jan 07, 2020] Pompeo and his lies got us into this mess with Iran caucus99percent

    Jan 07, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

    gjohnsit on Mon, 01/06/2020 - 6:14pm Just a few days ago SoS Mike Pompeo said that we assassinated General Soleimani to stop an 'imminent attack' on Americans.
    No evidence was presented to back up this claim. We are just supposed to believe it.

    It turns out that Pompeo and VP Pence had pushed Trump hard to do this assassination.

    [Jan 07, 2020] Why Was Soleimani Assassinated - Trump's Assassination Disaster

    Jan 07, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    Is Trump yet ruing the day he lent his ear to the siren songs of the Iran-obsessed neocons? One can almost imagine the president, sitting in the makeshift situation room at Mar-a-Lago just a few days ago surrounded with the likes of Sen. Lindsey Graham, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Defense Secretary Esper, and his Pentagon advisors who breathlessly present him an "opportunity" to kick the Iranian leadership in the face and also dismantle an operation in the works to attack US military and civilian personnel in the region.

    All he had to do was sign off on the assassination of Gen. Qassim Soleimani, a man he likely had never heard of a couple of years ago but who, he was told, was "responsible for killing hundreds of Americans" in Iraq.

    "Soleimani did 9/11!" - Pence helpfully yet insanely chimed in.

    "You're not a wimp like Obama, who refused to assassinate this terrorist," he was probably told. "You're decisive, a real leader. This one blow will change the entire calculus of the Middle East," they likely told him. "If you take out Soleimani, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."

    (Actually, that last one was from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's address to Congress in 2002 where he promised the US that "If you take out Saddam, Saddam's regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region." Brilliant forecasting, Bibi.)

    As could be expected, the cover story cooked up by the neocons and signed off on by Trump started taking water the moment it was put to sea.

    Soleimani was not traveling like a man plotting a complicated, multi-country assault on US troops in the region. No false mustaches or James Bond maneuvers - he was flying commercial and openly disembarked at the terminal of Baghdad International Airport. He was publicly met and greeted by an Iraqi delegation and traveled relatively unguarded from the airport.

    Until a US drone vaporized him and his entire entourage - which included a senior Iraqi military officer.

    The furious Iraqi acting-Prime Minister Mahdi immediately condemned the attack in the strongest terms, openly calling for the expulsion of the US forces - who remain in Iraq ostensibly to fight an ISIS that has long been defeated but, de facto , to keep the beachhead clear for a US attack on Iran.

    Arguing for the expulsion of the US in a special parliamentary session held on January 5th, Mahdi spilled the truth about Soleimani's mission in Iraq: It was not to plot the killing of US troops: it was to deliver a response from Iran to a peace overture from the Saudis, the result of talks that were being facilitated by Iraq.

    And the US side knew about the mission and had, according to press reports, encouraged Iraq to facilitate the Iran/Saudi talks.

    Did the US neocons and Pentagon warhawks like Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mike Milley knowingly exploit what they anticipated would be relatively lax security for a peace mission between Iran and Saudi Arabia to assassinate Gen. Soleimani (with collateral damage being Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units)?

    And, to drill a little deeper, which US "allies" would want to blow up any chance of peace between Saudi Arabia and Iran? Factions within Saudi Arabia, where a fierce power struggle rages below the surface? No doubt. In Israel, where Netanyahu continues fighting for his political life (and freedom) with his entire political career built around mayhem and destruction? Sure. It's not like Trump has ever been able to say "no" to the endless demands of either Bibi or his Saudi counterpart in crime MBS.

    Who knows, maybe Trump knew all along and was in on it. Make war on a peace mission.

    Whatever the case, as always happens the neocons have steered things completely off the rails. The cover story is in tatters, and the Iraqi democracy - for which we've been ostensibly fighting for 16 years with a loss of US life in the thousands and of Iraqi life in the millions - voted on Sunday that US forces must leave Iraq.

    We destroyed Iraq to "give them democracy," but they had the nerve to exercise that democracy to ask us to leave!

    Iran could not believe its luck in the aftermath of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, when it soon became clear that Iraq would fall into their hands. Likewise, it appears that the longstanding fervent wish of the Iranian leadership - the end of the US occupation of Iraq (and Syria) - will soon be fulfilled thanks to Trump's listening to the always toxic advice of the neocon warmongers.

    Can Trump recover from this near-fatal mistake? It is possible. But with Trump's Twitter finger threatening Iraq with "big big" sanctions and an even bigger bill to cover the cost of our invasion and destruction of their country, it appears that his ability to learn from his mistakes is limited. A bit less time on Twitter and a lot less time with the people who hate his guts - Pompeo, Pence, Graham, etc. - might help.

    Meanwhile...will Iran avenge Soleimani's murder directly, or using asymmetrical means?

    Trump said of his decision to assassinate a top official from a country with which we are not technically at war, "We took action last night to stop a war. We did not take action to start a war." But it doesn't work that way. When you kill another country's top military leadership you have definitely started a war.

    What remains to be seen is how it will play out.

    Sincerely yours,

    Daniel McAdams
    Executive Director
    Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

    [Jan 07, 2020] Disproportionate and barbarous threat of instant retaliation is a part of "full spectrum dominance" doctrine. A significant part of masking tyranny under terror is the aggressively defended protection racket.

    Jan 07, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    I agree with the first part. Disproportionate and barbarous threat of instant retaliation is prt of terrorising and unsettling and even freezing the capacity to 'think'.
    All thinking proceeds from presumptions, and one of the ways 'power' works deceit is in the ability to set it up so that the 'controlled' or 'leveraged' believe that their thinking is free while setting the fame of their perceived self-interest.

    I just watched Corbett and Ryan Cristián of The Last American Vagabond on this issue, that touches on a little of the military political context – a key part of which is the 'Israeli' agenda – and its style of 'politics' by pre-emptive strike under aggressively defended narrative assertion.

    As for what the US(a) CAN execute as all-out war is linked to the will to do so – along with the costs or consequences of doing so. Meanwhile broad spectrum dominance operates transnationally by stealth and deceit. The US(a) is wagged by its Corporate tails.

    A significant part of masking tyranny under terror is the aggressively defended protection racket. For some this means believing the narrative they are given and for others it means they have to be seen to comply and conform to signal 'virtue' of allegiance under an enforced narrative dictate or lose their jobs, and reputation and incur penalties of social exclusion for the rest of their lives.

    The act of state-endorsed murder without trial or evidences – that also kills others in the vicinity – aimed anywhere in the world – based in classified 'intelligence' that is without any oversight, accountability or challenge – is seeking to be as 'gods over men' – indeed a 'god' jealous of any and all rival as monopoly over life on earth – such as will survive under such a parasitic and destructive deceit. 7 0 Reply

    [Jan 07, 2020] The Three Victories that Sealed Soleimani's Fate by Jefferson Morley

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    Why Kill Soleimani?

    Soleimani was not feared by U.S. (and Israeli and Saudi) policymakers because primarily he was a terrorist (though he sometimes used terror tactics) but mostly because he successful. According to journalist Yossi Mellman, Israeli intelligence assessed him as "a daring and talented commander , despite the considerable number of mistakes in his assessments and failed operations in the course of his career."

    Whether you think Soleimani was "a deadly puppet master" or an "Islamic martyr," there's no disputing he helped the Islamic Republic achieve three significant goals.

    First, Soleimani played a key role in driving U.S. occupation forces out of Iraq. As Al-Quds commander he presided over the creation of anti-American militias in 2003 that mounted deadly attacks on the U.S. forces seeking to establish a pro-American government. One Iraqi militia leader, Qais al-Khazali , who debriefed U.S. intelligence officers in 2008, said he had "a few meetings" with Soleimani and other Iranian officials of similar rank.

    According to Khazali, Soleimani did not take part in the operational activities–providing weapons, training or cash. He left those tasks to deputies or intermediaries. Under Iranian tutelage, these militias specialized in using improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to kill upwards of 600 soldiers in the U.S. occupation forces, according to general David Petraeus.

    Soleimani's attacks–along with the manifest failure of U.S. goals to reduce terrorism and spread democracy–contributed to President Obama's politically popular decision to withdraw of most U.S. troops in 2011. Forcing the U.S. out of Iraq was a priority for the government in Tehran, and Soleimani helped achieve it.

    Nemesis of ISIS

    Second, Soleimani played a key role in driving ISIS out of Iraq–a victory in which the United States ironically helped boost his reputation.

    In this battle, Soleimani took advantage of U.S. vulnerability, not hubris. When ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi proclaimed an Islamic State in western Iraq six years ago, Tehran was just as alarmed as Washington. The Sunni fundamentalists of ISIS regard the Shia Muslims of Iran and Iraq as infidels, almost as contemptible as Americans and Israelis.

    After the regular Iraqi armed forces collapsed, Iraqi Ayotollah Ali Sistani blessed the creation of Shia militias to save the country. Sistani's fatwa empowered Iran to mobilize and expanded Soleimani's militia network. The Iranian-sponsored fighters, along with the Kurdish pesh merga, proceeded to do most of the bloody street fighting that drove ISIS out of Mosul, Kirkuk and other Iraqi cities.

    As Soleimani moved about openly in Iraq, U.S. commanders did not attack him because he did not attack them. Sometimes, pro-American and pro-Iranian soldiers even fought side by side. Thanks to this tacit U.S.-Iranian cooperation that neither country cared to publicly acknowledge, ISIS was expelled from Iraq into Syria by 2017.

    In Iran, Soleimani emerged as a hero in the fight against the deadliest religious fanatics on the planet, especially after ISIS had carried out a terror attack in Tehran on June 2017 that killed 12 people.

    In Iraq, the rout of ISIS enhanced the prestige of Soleimani and the Iranian-backed militias. Some of their leaders entered politics and business, drawing complaints about–and demonstrations against -- heavy-handed Iranian influence. Many Iraqis grew unhappy about Iran's new influence, but success made Soleimani an indispensable security partner for the embattled government in Baghdad. That's why he visited Iraq last week.

    Besting the CIA

    Third, Soleimani helped defeat ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria's civil war. In 2015, President Bashar al-Assad's armed forces were losing ground to Sunni fundamentalist forces funded by the CIA and the Persian Gulf oil monarchies. The CIA wanted to overthrow Assad. Iran feared losing its ally in Damascus to a hostile anti-Shia regime controlled by al-Qaeda. Obama feared another Iraq and refused to commit U.S. forces.

    Soleimani brought in Iranian advisers and fighters from Hezbollah, the Shia militia of Lebanon which Iran has supported since the 1980s. With help from merciless Russian bombing and Syrian chemical attacks , the Iranian-trained ground forces helped Syria turn the tide on the jihadists. The CIA, under directors Leon Panetta, John Brennan and Mike Pompeo, spent $1 billion dollars to overthrow Assad. They had less influence on the outcome than Soleimani.

    The net effect of Soleimani's three victories -- abetted by U.S. crimes and blunders -- was, for better or worse, to bolster Iranian influence across the region. From Afghanistan in the east to the Mediterranean in the West, Iran gained political ground, thanks to Soleimani. He perfected the art of asymmetric warfare, using local proxies, political alliances, deniable attacks, and selective terrorism to achieve the government's political goals.

    (Soleimani, it is worth noting, had no record of attacking non-uniformed Americans. While Pompeo said that Soleimani "had inflicted so much suffering on Americans," it is a fact that not a single American civilian was killed in an Iranian-backed terror attack between 2001 to 2019.)

    Iran's cumulative successes provoked dismay Washington (and Tel Aviv and Riyadh). In the course of the 21st century, Iran overcome international isolation and to actually gain, not lose, advantage to its regional rivals. He also became a media personality in the regime using selfies from the battlefield to promote an image of an accessible general who liked to rub shoulders with his men.

    Along the way, Iran maintained a terrible record on human rights at home, persecuting journalists, bloggers, and women who spurn the hijab. Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security didn't kill Americans but it did take a number of hostages, including Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian . Across the region, Iran's ambitions stirred up widespread opposition from secular, feminist, and nationalist movements that reject the theory and practice of Iranian theocracy.

    These non-violent movements, however, never advocated that the United States attack their country. They are not welcoming Soleimani's death, and they are unlikely to support the U.S. (or Israeli) attacks in the coming conflict. Quite the contrary. The anti-Iranian demonstrations in Iran and Iraq are over for the foreseeable future. Iranians and Iraqis who publicly supported the United States and opposed the mullahs, have been silenced. In death as in life, Soleimani had diminished the U.S. influence in the Middle East.

    This article first appeared on Jefferson Morley's TheDeepStateBlog .

    [Jan 07, 2020] a popular figure

    Notable quotes:
    "... Naturally, we learned soon after from the Iraqi PM himself that Soleimani was in Iraq as part of a diplomatic effort to de-escalate tensions. In other words, he was apparently lured to Baghdad under false pretenses so he'd be a sitting duck for a U.S. strike. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. ..."
    "... As you'd expect, some of the most ridiculous propaganda came from Mike Pompeo, a man who genuinely loves deception and considers it his craft.. For example: ..."
    "... Moving on to the really big question: what does this assassination mean for the future role of the U.S. in the Middle East and American global hegemony generally? A few important things have already occurred. For starters, the Iraqi parliament passed a resolution calling for U.S. troops to leave. Even more important are the comments and actions of Muqtada al-Sadr. ..."
    "... Unmentioned in the above tweet, but extremely significant, is the fact al-Sadr has been a vocal critic of both the American and Iranian presence in Iraq. He doesn't want either country meddling in the affairs of Iraqis, but the Soleimani assassination clearly pushed him to focus on the U.S. presence. This is a very big deal and ensures Iraq will be far more dangerous for U.S. troops than it already was. ..."
    Jan 07, 2020 | twitter.com

    Before discussing what happens next and the big picture implications, it's worth pointing out the incredible number of blatant lies and overall clownishness that emerged from U.S. officials in the assassination's aftermath. It started with claims from Trump that Soleimani was plotting imminent attacks on Americans and was caught in the act. Mass media did its job and uncritically parroted this line, which was quickly exposed as a complete falsehood.

    CNN anchor uncritically repeating government lies.
    This is what mass media does to get wars going. https://t.co/QK1JET7TIj

    -- Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) January 6, 2020

    It's incredibly telling that CNN would swallow this fact-free claim with total credulity within weeks of discovering the extent of the lies told about Syrian chemical attacks and the Afghanistan war . Meanwhile, when a reporter asked a state department official for some clarification on what sorts of attacks were imminent, this is what transpired.

    When asked by a reporter for details about what kinds of imminent attacks Soleimani was planning, the State Dept. responds with:

    "Jesus, do we have to explain why we do these things?"

    Totally normal. pic.twitter.com/FDWtpfItEp

    -- Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) January 6, 2020

    Naturally, we learned soon after from the Iraqi PM himself that Soleimani was in Iraq as part of a diplomatic effort to de-escalate tensions. In other words, he was apparently lured to Baghdad under false pretenses so he'd be a sitting duck for a U.S. strike. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

    Iraqi Prime Minister AbdulMahdi accuses Trump of deceiving him in order to assassinate Suleimani. Trump, according to P.M. lied about wanting a diplomatic solution in order to get Suleimani on a plane to Baghdad in the open, where he was summarily executed. https://t.co/HKjyQqXNqP

    -- Joshua Landis (@joshua_landis) January 5, 2020

    As you'd expect, some of the most ridiculous propaganda came from Mike Pompeo, a man who genuinely loves deception and considers it his craft.. For example:

    Pompeo on CNN says US has "every expectation" that people "in Iran will view the American action last night as giving them freedom."

    -- Josh Lederman (@JoshNBCNews) January 3, 2020

    Then there's what actually happened.

    Absolutely massive crowds on the streets of Mashhad awaiting the arrival of Qassem Suleimani.

    "We are ready for war." pic.twitter.com/ZK4O8KQB17

    -- Sam (@sonofnariman) January 5, 2020

    Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Qassem Soleimani's daughter Zeinab were among the hundreds of thousands mourning Soleimani in Tehran today. Iranian state TV put the crowd size at 'millions,' though that number could not be verified. https://t.co/R6EbKh6Gow

    -- CBC News Alerts (@CBCAlerts) January 6, 2020

    Moving on to the really big question: what does this assassination mean for the future role of the U.S. in the Middle East and American global hegemony generally? A few important things have already occurred. For starters, the Iraqi parliament passed a resolution calling for U.S. troops to leave. Even more important are the comments and actions of Muqtada al-Sadr.

    WOW,

    Iraqi Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr orders the return of "Mahdi Army" in response the American strike that killed Suleimani.

    Mahdi Army fought against the US troops during the invasion in 2003. Sadr disbanded the group in 2008.

    -- Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) January 3, 2020

    Unmentioned in the above tweet, but extremely significant, is the fact al-Sadr has been a vocal critic of both the American and Iranian presence in Iraq. He doesn't want either country meddling in the affairs of Iraqis, but the Soleimani assassination clearly pushed him to focus on the U.S. presence. This is a very big deal and ensures Iraq will be far more dangerous for U.S. troops than it already was.

    Going forward, Iran's response will be influenced to a great degree by what's already transpired. There are three things worth noting. First, although many Trump supporters are cheering the assassination, Americans are certainly nowhere near united on this , with many including myself viewing it as a gigantic strategic blunder. Second, it ratcheted up anti-American sentiment in Iraq to a huge degree without Iran having to do anything, as highlighted above. Third, hardliners within Iran have been given an enormous gift. With one drone strike, the situation went from grumblings and protests on the ground to a scene where any sort of dissent in the air has been extinguished for the time being.

    Exactly right, which is why Iran will go more hardline if anything and more united.
    If China admitted to taking out Trump even Maddow wouldn't cheer. https://t.co/zqaEDIoWH1

    -- Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) January 6, 2020

    Iranian leadership will see these developments as important victories in their own right and will likely craft a response taking stock of this much improved position. This means a total focus on making the experience of American troops in the region untenable, which will be far easier to achieve now.

    If that's right, you can expect less shock and awe in the near-term, and more consolidation of the various parties that were on the fence but have since shifted to a more anti-American stance following Soleimani's death. Iran will start with the easy pickings, which consists of consolidating its stronger position in Iraq and making dissidents feel shameful at home. That said, Iran will have to publicly respond with some sort of a counterattack, but that event will be carefully considered with Iran's primary objective in mind -- getting U.S. troops out of the region.

    This means no attacks on U.S. or European soil, and no attacks targeting civilians either. Such a move would be as strategically counterproductive as Assad gassing Syrian cities after he was winning the war (which is why many of us doubted the narrative) since it would merely inflame American public opinion and give an excuse to attack Iran in Iran. There is no way Iranian leadership is that stupid, so any such attack must be treated with the utmost skepticism.

    [Jan 07, 2020] The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has offered Iraq Tuesday the option to purchase the world's most advanced missile defense system S-400 to protect its airspace

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has offered Iraq Tuesday the option to purchase the world's most advanced missile defense system to protect its airspace, reported RIA Novosti .

    According to the report, the Iraqi Armed Forces could purchase the Russian S-400 Triumf air defense system, which RIA points out, can "ensure the country's sovereignty and reliable airspace protection."

    "Iraq is a partner of Russia in the field of military-technical cooperation, and the Russian Federation can supply the necessary funds to ensure the sovereignty of the country and reliable protection of airspace, including the supply of S-400 missiles and other components of the air defense system, such as Buk-M3, Tor -M2 "and so on," said Igor Korotchenko, Russian Defense Ministry's Public Council member.

    For the last several months, Iraq has considered purchasing Russian air defense and missile systems, including the S-400, however, it has been met with fierce pressure from the US.

    But with a political crisis between the US and Iraq underway, thanks partly to the US assassination of Iran's Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Russia could profit as Iraq attempts to decouple from the US.

    Wow! I just suggested it yesterday! 😀 After Iraq kicks the US out, it would need protection from American/Israeli warplanes. And Russian S-400 can do the job https://t.co/KCz3v705l1

    -- CaliCali2000 (@CaliCali2000) January 7, 2020

    A recent U.S. intelligence assessment indicated that at least 13 countries had expressed interest in purchasing the S-400s.

    The Palmetto Cynic , 24 minutes ago link

    And therein lies the fatal flaw in the thinking of a moron like Trump and the packs of morons that still believe his ********:

    They still believe that the US can do whatever the **** it wants without retaliation or reprisal.

    The China trade war that Trump started and Xi just ended is one example.

    And now these un-warranted attacks on Iran will be a second example.

    Will the idiots learn or is a third time a charm? I have my doubts reading the comments from these dimwits daily.

    africoman , 30 minutes ago link

    Russia signaling Iraq to continue pushing out foreign troops from their territory with less fear they gonna be targeted just like exemplified Sulemani when they took out like that since Iraq can have S-400 and Russian protection if they wanted etc

    well well this pesky Russian understands protections will boast their push of the great satan?

    problem is the pm is going out

    I need to see Iran got S-400 asa

    francis scott falseflag , 37 minutes ago link

    Imagine how many batteries of S-400 are already installed and operational in Iran

    serotonindumptruck , 33 minutes ago link

    And Trump is delusional enough to claim air superiority.

    Those B52s are well within range of the Russian S400 missile system.

    Dzerzhhinsky , 26 minutes ago link

    None.

    Russia offered the S-400 but Iran opted for the S-300, and then only a couple of batteries.

    Russia was going to sell S-300's to Iran years ago, but Russia broke the deal because of US pressure.

    So China who have reverse engineered the S-300, gave/sold Iran information, and some critical parts.

    Iranian missiles went from 10 meter accuracy to 1 meter accuracy overnight.

    What Iran should have is the Russian jamming equipment that makes American missiles fall from the sky.

    BlindMonkey , 40 minutes ago link

    S-400 is sovereignty in a box. The US erred bigly.

    SickDollar , 40 minutes ago link

    Well said

    [Jan 07, 2020] The victims of Iranian retaliation will be America's Arab proxies, be they nations such as Saudi Arabia and its allies, or military factions

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.theguardian.com


    [Jan 07, 2020] Russia WON'T Intervene in Iran, the US Will LOSE a War Against Iran, This Is the Beginning of the End of the US Empire

    Jan 07, 2020 | russia-insider.com

    Will Russia intervene?

    First things first. There are NO legal/formal obligations between Russia and Iran and last time I checked, no Iranians have volunteered to die for Russia. Next, yes, Iran is an important ally for Russia. But what most folks are missing is that Iran does not need (or want) a direct Russian intervention. There are lots of reasons (including historical ones) to this. But what most folks are completely misunderstanding is that the Iranians are confident that they can win without any Russian (or other) help . I am in touch with a lot of folks from the Middle-East (including Iran) and I can tell you that their mood is one of not only total determination, but one of quiet confidence. Nobody in the region doubts that it's now over for Uncle Shmuel. I know, this sounds incredible for folks living in the West, but that is the reality in the Middle-East.

    From 'The Charge of the Light Brigade'

    Besides, you can be sure that Russia will help Iran, but behind the scenes. First and foremost with intelligence: while the Iranian have an extremely sophisticated intelligence community, it is dwarfed by the much larger Russian one which, on top of being much bigger, also has technical means which Iran can only dream about. Russia can also help with early warning and targeting. We can't know what is really going behind the scenes, but I am getting reports that the Russians are on full alert (as they were during the first Gulf war, alas – Saddam Hussein did not listen to the Russian warnings).

    6) Should Russia declare that Iran is now under Russian protection ? Absolutely not! Why? Think of what is taking place as if you were sitting in the Kremlin: the Empire is about to embark on its last war (yes, I mean that, see further below) and the Russian specialists all KNOW that the US will lose, and badly. Why in the world would you intervene when your "main foe" (KGB/SVR/FSB expression for "USA") is about to do something terminally stupid?

    Besides, this is a cultural issue too. In the West, threats are constantly used. Not only to scare the enemy, but also to feel less terrified yourself. In Asia (and Russia is far more culturally Asian than European) threats are seen as a sign of weakness and lack of resolve. In this entire career, Putin used a threat only ONCE: to convince the Urkonazis that attacking during the World Cup would have "severe consequences for the Ukrainian statehood".

    But you have to understand that from a Russian point of view, the Ukraine is militarily so weak as to be laughable as an enemy and nobody in his right mind will ever doubt the outcome of a Ukie war with Russia. This is an extreme and exceptional case. But look at the case of the Russian intervention in Syria: unlike their western counterparts, the Russians did not first spend weeks threatening ISIS or anybody else in Syria. When Putin took the decision, they simply moved in, so quietly that THE BEST military in the galaxy never detected the Russian move.

    So, IF, and I don't think that this will happen, Russia ever decided to move in to protect Iran, the US will find out about it when US servicemen will die in large numbers. Until then, Russia will not be issuing threats. Again, in the West threats are a daily occurrence. In the East, they are a sign of weakness.

    Now you know why US threats are totally ineffective.

    7) US force levels in the Middle-East. The US maintains a large network of bases all around Iran and throughout the entire planet, really. The real numbers are secret, of course, but let us assume, for argument sake, that the US has about 100'000 soldiers more or less near Iran. The actual figure does not matter (and the Iranians know it anyway). What is crucial is this: this does NOT mean that the US has 100'000 soldiers ready to attack Iran. A lot of that personnel is not really combat capable (the ratio of combat ready vs support ranges from country to country and from war to war, but let's just say that most of these 100'000 are NOT combat soldiers). Not only that, but there is a big difference between, say, many companies and battalions in a region and a real armored division. For example, the 82nd AB is an INFANTRY force, not really mechanized, not capable of engaging say, an armored brigade.

    Here is a historical sidebar: during the first Gulf war, the US also sent in the 82nd AB as the central force of the operation "Desert Shield". And here is where Saddam Hussein committed his WORST blunder of all. If he had sent in his armored divisions across the Saudi border he would have made minced meat of the 82nd. The US knew that. In fact, Cheney was once asked what the US would have done if the Iraqis has destroyed the 82nd. He replied that the first line of defense was airpower on USN aircraft carriers and cruise missiles. And if that failed, the US would have had to use tactical nukes to stop the Iraqi divisions. That would be one of those instances were using nukes WOULD make sense from a purely military point of view (nukes are great to deal with armor!), but from a political point of view it would have been a PR disaster ( vide supra ). The same is true today.

    For the US to engage in any serious ground operation it would need many months to get the force levels high enough and you can be darn sure that Iran would NEVER allow that. Should Uncle Shmuel try to send in a real, big, force into the KSA you can be sure that the Iranians will strike with everything they have!

    The bottom line is this: the US has more than enough assets in the region to strike/bomb Iran. The US has nowhere near the kind of force levels to envision a major ground operation even in Iraq, nevermind Iran!

    8) What about the Strait of Hormuz? There is no doubt in my mind that Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, all the Iranians need to do to close it is say that they reserve the right to destroy (by whatever means) any ship attempting passage. That will be enough to stop all traffic. Of course, if that happens the US will have no other option than to attack the southern cost of Iran and try to deal with that threat. And yes, I am sorry of I disappoint my Iranian friends, I do believe that the US could probably re-open the Strait of Hormuz, but that will require "boots on the ground" in southern Iran and that is something which might yield an initial success, but that will turn into a massive military disaster in the medium to long run because the Iranians will have not only have time on their side, but they will have a dream come true: finally the US GIs will be within reach, literally. So, typically, the US will prevail coming in, only to find itself in a trap.

    9) Do the Iranians seek death? This is an important one (thanks to Larchmonter 445 for suggesting this!). The short answer is no. Not at all. Iranians want to live and they do not seek death. HOWEVER, they also know that death in defense of Islam or in defense of the oppressed is an act of "witness to God", which is what the Arabic word " shahid " is (and why the Greek work μάρτυς "martis" means). What does that mean? That means that while Muslim soldiers should not seek their death, and while they ought to do everything in their power to remain alive, they are NOT afraid of death in the least. To fully understand this mindset, you need only become aware of the most famous and crucial Shia slogan " Every Day Is Ashura and Every Land Is Karbala " (see explanation here ). If I had to translate this into a Christian frame of reference I would suggest this "every day is Good/Passion Friday and every land is the Golgotha". That is to say, " no matter were you are and no matter what time it is, you have to be willing to sacrifice your life for God and for the defense of the oppressed ". So no, Iranians are a joyful people (as are Arabs), and they don't seek death. But neither do they fear it and they accept, with gratitude, the possibility of having to sacrifice their lives in defense of justice and truth. This is one more reason why threats by terminal imbeciles like Pompeo or Trump have no effect whatsoever on Muslims.

    10) So what is really happening now? Folks, this is the beginning of the end for the Empire . Yes, I know, this sounds incredible, yet this is exactly what we are seeing happening before our eyes. The very best which the US can hope for now is a quick and complete withdrawal from the Middle-East. For a long list of political reason, that does not seem a realistic scenario right now. So what next? A major war against Iran and against the entire "Shia crescent" ? Not a good option either. Not only will the US lose, but it would lose both politically and militarily. Limited strikes? Not good either, since we know that Iran will retaliate massively. A behind the scenes major concession to appease Iran? Nope, ain't gonna happen either since if the Iranians let the murder of Soleimani go unpunished, then Hassan Nasrallah, Bashar al-Assad and even Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be the next ones to be murdered. A massive air campaign? Most likely, and initially this will feel good (lots of flagwaving in the USA), but soon this will turn into a massive disaster. Use nukes? Sure, and destroy your political image forever and not only in the Middle-East but worldwide.

    As a perfect illustration, just check the latest stupid threat made by Trump : " If they do ask us to leave, if we don't do it in a very friendly basis, we will charge them sanctions like they've never seen before ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame" . Folk, this is exactly the kind of stupid language which will deeply offend any Iraqi patriot. This is the kind of language which comes out of an empire in the late stages of agony.

    Trump will go down in history as the man who thought he could scare the Iranian and Iraqi people with "tweets".

    Pathetic indeed.

    CONCLUSION

    I hope that these pointers will be useful, especially when you are going to be hit with a massive Tsunami of US flagwaving propaganda (Trump "we are THE BEST"). Simply put: this is bullshit. Modern wars are first and foremost propaganda wars, and what you see as the output of US ruling elites are just that – "information operations". Let them wave their (Chinese made) flags, let them declare "United we stand" (for what exactly they stand is never specified) and let them repeat that the US military is the MOST FORMIDABLE FORCE IN THE GALAXY. These are nothing but desperate attempts to control the narrative, nothing else.

    Oh, and one more irony: while the GOP controlled Senate is most unlikely to ever impeach Trump, is it not pathetically hilarious that Trump has now, indeed, committed acts ought to have him removed from office? Of course, in the real world, the US Neocon deep-state controls BOTH parties and BOTH parties fully support a war against Iran. Still, this is one of those ironies of history which should be mentioned.

    I will resume my work tomorrow morning.

    Until then, I wish you call a good nite/morning/day.

    [Jan 07, 2020] The neocon foreign policy brings only bankruptcy moral and financial by Ron Paul

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    President Trump and his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told us the US had to assassinate Maj. Gen. Qassim Soleimani last week because he was planning "Imminent attacks" on US citizens. I don't believe them.

    Why not? Because Trump and the neocons – like Pompeo – have been lying about Iran for the past three years in an effort to whip up enough support for a US attack. From the phony justification to get out of the Iran nuclear deal, to blaming Yemen on Iran, to blaming Iran for an attack on Saudi oil facilities, the US Administration has fed us a steady stream of lies for three years because they are obsessed with Iran.

    And before Trump's obsession with attacking Iran, the past four US Administrations lied ceaselessly to bring about wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Serbia, Somalia, and the list goes on.

    At some point, when we've been lied to constantly and consistently for decades about a "threat" that we must "take out" with a military attack, there comes a time where we must assume they are lying until they provide rock solid, irrefutable proof. Thus far they have provided nothing. So I don't believe them.

    President Trump has warned that his administration has already targeted 52 sites important to Iran and Iranian culture and the US will attack them if Iran retaliates for the assassination of Gen. Soleimani. Because Iran has no capacity to attack the United States, Iran's retaliation if it comes will likely come against US troops or US government officials stationed or visiting the Middle East. I have a very easy solution for President Trump that will save the lives of American servicemembers and other US officials: just come home. There is absolutely no reason for US troops to be stationed throughout the Middle East to face increased risk of death for nothing.

    In our Ron Paul Liberty Report program last week we observed that the US attack on a senior Iranian military officer on Iraqi soil – over the objection of the Iraq government – would serve to finally unite the Iraqi factions against the United States. And so it has: on Sunday the Iraqi parliament voted to expel US troops from Iraqi soil. It may have been a non-binding resolution, but there is no mistaking the sentiment. US troops are not wanted and they are increasingly in danger. So why not listen to the Iraqi parliament?

    Bring our troops home, close the US Embassy in Baghdad – a symbol of our aggression – and let the people of the Middle East solve their own problems. Maintain a strong defense to protect the United States, but end this neocon pipe-dream of ruling the world from the barrel of a gun. It does not work. It makes us poorer and more vulnerable to attack. It makes the elites of Washington rich while leaving working and middle class America with the bill. It engenders hatred and a desire for revenge among those who have fallen victim to US interventionist foreign policy. And it results in millions of innocents being killed overseas.

    There is no benefit to the United States to trying to run the world. Such a foreign policy brings only bankruptcy – moral and financial. Tell Congress and the Administration that for America's sake we demand the return of US troops from the Middle East! (Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)

    [Jan 07, 2020] Impeachment as a way out for the USa for create Trump Soliemani muder deadlock with Iran

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

    Hineni47 NYC area 6h ago

    "Unlike with North Korea, it's difficult to imagine any photo op or exchange of love letters defusing the crisis the president has created. " The only thing that might defuse this crisis would be the Senate convicting Trump and removing him from office. It would be a good idea if the House passes another article of impeachment accusing the president of committing an act of war without Congressional authorization.
    Sirlar Jersey City 3h ago Times Pick
    Threatening to destroy cultural sites of a country is the sign of a deranged madman. I can't believe a US president would dare say something like that. It goes against all the principles America stands for. Nothing will motivate the people of Iran to fight the US more than the threat of destruction to their cultural sites. If we go to war with Iran, this is a Republican war. They own it. When are decent Republicans going to stand up and do the right thing? If they don't, this could be very, very, bad.
    PatMurphy77 Michigan 5h ago
    The Defense department is already walking back Trump's tweet about bombing Iran culture sites. Unfortunately, it's too late because the damage to our reputation as the "shining light on the hill" has already been destroyed. I'm afraid more than now than I have ever been in my life. Who knows when or where the revenge will occur but I'm fairly certain it will happen and we'll be more isolated than ever before. It's taken centuries to build goodwill and our reputation as a beacon of democracy for the world. We gave the keys to the kingdom to a false prophet and we'll pay for his indiscretions for the rest of my lifetime. God help us all.

    [Jan 07, 2020] The Nightmare Stage of Trump's Rule Is Here by Michelle Goldberg Michelle Goldberg

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

    After three harrowing years, we've reached the point many of us feared from the moment Donald Trump was elected. His decision to kill Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran's second most important official, made at Mar-a-Lago with little discernible deliberation , has brought the United States to the brink of a devastating new conflict in the Middle East.

    We don't yet know how Iran will retaliate, or whether all-out war will be averted. But already, NATO has suspended its mission training Iraqi forces to fight ISIS . Iraq's Parliament has voted to expel American troops -- a longtime Iranian objective. (On Monday, U.S. forces sent a letter saying they were withdrawing from Iraq in response, only to then claim that it was a draft released in error .) On Sunday, Iran said it will no longer be bound by the remaining restrictions on its nuclear program in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the deal that Trump abandoned in 2018. Trump has been threatening to commit war crimes by destroying Iran's cultural sites and tried to use Twitter to notify Congress of his intention to respond to any Iranian reprisals with military escalation.

    The administration has said that the killing of Suleimani was justified by an imminent threat to American lives, but there is no reason to believe this. One skeptical American official told The New York Times that the new intelligence indicated nothing but "a normal Monday in the Middle East," and Democrats briefed on it were unconvinced by the administration's case. The Washington Post reported that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo -- who last year agreed with a Christian Broadcasting Network interviewer that God might have sent Trump to save Israel from the "Iranian menace" -- has been pushing for a hit on Suleimani for months.

    [Jan 07, 2020] Trump is the kind of child leader that will throw temper tantrums in front of the world. Id impulses are running the world here and when id impulses run the world from the White House we are certain that whatever manifests will be destructive beyond imagination for most adults in the world.

    Jan 07, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    MASTER OF UNIVE American corporations will start falling into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Q1 if the USA MIC cannot find new contracts to profit from via kinetic war. The USA's last war was Iraq post-911 and the USA MIC made good money & profit from that war. Without forever wars the USA Ponzi Corporatocracy will deflate. If the USA Ponzi Corporatocracy deflates due to recession it means the end of USA Imperialism.
    If the hawks can generate forever wars the MIC suppliers may have a chance to stay in business, but if they don't get new contracts for new forever wars they all know implicitly that that is a Zero Sum game for the entire USA population.

    BIG Chief Trump little penis has only one chance to stay in power at this juncture. He has ordered troupes to Iraq and approximately 2000 marines are on the way right now. In brief, 2000 marines were not ordered to Iraq to escort the base troupes out of Iraq safely. They were sent on a mission.

    Impeachment, DOW Share Price, and no Trade Deal with China will put Trump on the defensive and he will start threatening everyone in the world if he does not get his way.

    Trump is the kind of child leader that will throw temper tantrums in front of the world. Temper tantrums worked with his parents, and the Real Estate community in New York shitty.

    Trump is a child of roughly 6 or 7 mentally & socially. Id impulses are running the world here and when id impulses run the world from the White House we are certain that whatever manifests will be destructive beyond imagination for most adults in the world.

    Children with anger management issues & rage issues will understand Trump best.

    [Jan 07, 2020] As long as Neocons and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 7, 2020 at 1:27 pm GMT

    Yes, as long as Neoco hens and Christian Zionists run our foreign policy we're screwed.
    BTW, Mike Pompeo or as I affectionately call him; Lard face, Plump'eo, crazed CZ-zealot fat boy, etc., is now a legitimate target of the Iranians. May Allah provide justice to the family of Soleimani. (Grin) And look, I'm wishing 'ill will' on a zealot 'goy' (gentile) instead of a typical Neo-cohen snake, how ironic. (Another grin)
    A positve spin:
    With the 'incorrect' memo leaked by the Pentagon about an orderly exit from Iraq this can be the silver lining in all this mess. This assassination might actually accelerate the exiting of US forces from Iraq and the surrounding quagmires. Who knows, Trump might be a genius.
    Again, NO MORE WARS FOR ZION, BDS NOW, ONE STATE SOLUTION-PALESTINE.
    And to really stick it to Neo cohens (My apologies to Prof. Steven Cohen ), Trump-Putin Axis Da!! Destroy the Deep State and the CABAL .

    [Jan 07, 2020] The United States, like Israel, has become a pariah that shreds, violates or absents itself from international law

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

    The United States, like Israel, has become a pariah that shreds, violates or absents itself from international law. We launch preemptive wars, which under international law is defined as a "crime of aggression," based on fabricated evidence. We, as citizens, must hold our government accountable for these crimes. If we do not, we will be complicit in the codification of a new world order, one that would have terrifying consequences. It would be a world without treaties, statutes and laws. It would be a world where any nation, from a rogue nuclear state to a great imperial power, would be able to invoke its domestic laws to annul its obligations to others. Such a new order would undo five decades of international cooperation -- largely put in place by the United States -- and thrust us into a Hobbesian nightmare. Diplomacy, broad cooperation, treaties and law, all the mechanisms designed to civilize the global community, would be replaced by savagery.

    Chris Hedges, an Arabic speaker, is a former Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times. He spent seven years covering the region, including Iran.

    [Jan 07, 2020] Trump's Biggest Gamble Yet May Set the Entire Middle East Alight by Martin Jay

    It's all about the level of geopolitical control of oil-rich regions. In other words Carter doctrine.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Don't expect any American journalists to remind viewers that one of Soleimani's achievements was not only to command the entire Iraqi army's campaign against ISIS, but also to do that in cooperation with U.S. forces. ..."
    "... Trump doesn't really read. Or even take solace from history. If he did, he would know that many U.S. presidents actually lost the vote at the crucial moment, because of their bungling in the Middle East and, in particular, in Iran. President Reagan for example won the White House in November 1980 after the failed rescue mission of U.S. hostages in April of that year in Iran went spectacularly wrong which gave a "landslide" victory to the former B-movie actor from Hollywood ..."
    "... Trump's strike does ring of a president, struggling with an impeachment campaign gaining momentum, who may feel has nothing to lose other than to repeat history, which has doomed him, like Carter or Reagan (who never survived Iran-Contra). ..."
    "... But his reckless folly in the Middle East is also a test of how far relations with the U.S. and the rest of the world can go, before something breaks. The assassination of the Iranian general could drive a huge divide between the U.S. and the EU in the next term, if Trump can secure re-election as it will be Europe which pays the real price when the region boils over. ..."
    Jan 05, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org
    I personally do not think that the strike was a typically capricious move by Trump. I am more inclined to believe that it has been in the works for a long time and his advisers might well have offered it to him as a preferable retaliation option against the Iranian downing of a U.S. drone in June of last year – where Trump floundered and finally held back from launching a conventional military attack on Iranian forces, through fear of civilians being killed, or so he claims.

    What we are witnessing is unprecedented in the region. It has caught everyone off guard, even the democrats in the U.S., who can barely believe the stupidity of the move, which arguably, is a measured one. Trump believes that he can come out the winner of a pseudo war – or a proxy one – in the region, even though the Iranians have demonstrated that they easily have the capability of shutting down Saudi Arabia's oil exports with a relatively minor salvo of ordinance.

    In fact, Saudi Arabia might well, in my view, be part of this latest move. Much has been made of the petulant twitter goading of Tehran's Supreme leader to Trump directly, which may well have pushed him over a line. But in reality, there is something much deeper and nefarious at play which may well be the true basis of why the decision was taken for the assassination: to destroy any possibilities of Iran and Saudi Arabia patching up their differences and continuing in dialogue, to avoid further tensions.

    There is ample evidence to show that since the oilfield attacks carried out by Iran, Saudi crown prince Mohamed bin Salman has softened his stance on Iran and was looking at ways, through intermediaries, to build a working relation. It was early days and progress was slow.

    But the Soleimani hit will blow that idea right out of the water. In one fell swoop, the strike galvanises and polarises an anti-Iran front from Saudi Arabia and Israel, which, whilst doing wonders for U.S. arms procurement will cause more tension in the region as it places countries like Qatar, UAE, Turkey and Oman in a really awkward spot with regards to how it should continue to work with Tehran. It may well put back the Qatar blockade to its earlier position as 'rogue state' in the region, prompting it to possibly even go rogue and get more involved in the battle to take Tripoli (supporting Turkish forces, obviously, who are with the UN-recognised government).

    In fact, there is an entire gamut of consequences to the move, beyond merely Iran seeking to take revenge against America's allies in the region. It is less about a declaration of war against Iran but more a declaration of anti-peace towards the entire Arab world, which was starting to unfold in the last six months since Trump stepped back from the region and stood down from a retaliation strike against Iran in the Straits of Hormuz. Trump is gambling that he can sustain Saudi Arabia's oil being disrupted and even body bags of U.S. soldiers in Syria and Iraq in return for a fresh wave of popularity from people too ignorant to understand or wish to comprehend the nuances of the Middle East and how so many U.S. presidents use the pretext of a war, or heightened tensions, as part of their chest-beating, shallow popularity campaign.

    Don't expect any American journalists to remind viewers that one of Soleimani's achievements was not only to command the entire Iraqi army's campaign against ISIS, but also to do that in cooperation with U.S. forces.

    Trump doesn't really read. Or even take solace from history. If he did, he would know that many U.S. presidents actually lost the vote at the crucial moment, because of their bungling in the Middle East and, in particular, in Iran. President Reagan for example won the White House in November 1980 after the failed rescue mission of U.S. hostages in April of that year in Iran went spectacularly wrong which gave a "landslide" victory to the former B-movie actor from Hollywood .

    Reagan, in turn, carried on the great tradition of Middle East histrionics by his notably 'mad dog' Libya campaign, which ran concurrent to two devastating attacks on U.S. soldiers and embassy staff in Lebanon, while two different CIA teams worked against each other in trying to secure the release of U.S. hostages in Beirut – while all along he was selling illegal arms to the Iranians and using the cash to fund Contras in Nicaragua.

    Trump's strike does ring of a president, struggling with an impeachment campaign gaining momentum, who may feel has nothing to lose other than to repeat history, which has doomed him, like Carter or Reagan (who never survived Iran-Contra).

    But his reckless folly in the Middle East is also a test of how far relations with the U.S. and the rest of the world can go, before something breaks. The assassination of the Iranian general could drive a huge divide between the U.S. and the EU in the next term, if Trump can secure re-election as it will be Europe which pays the real price when the region boils over.

    Martin Jay is an award -winning freelance journalist and political commentator

    [Jan 07, 2020] Either the assassination was a drive-by on the way out, or Trump's war cabinet doesn't plan on having to leave Iraq.

    Jan 07, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

    Trump has from the beginning of his presidential campaign appealed to the worst and most fascistic elements in American political life. At a time when the US has no credible peer military rival, he added hundreds of billions of dollars to the Pentagon budget, and the pudgy old chicken hawk lionized war criminals. Up until now, however, Trump shrewdly calculated that his base was tired of wasting blood and treasure on fruitless Middle Eastern wars, and he avoided taking more than symbolic steps. He dropped a big missile on Afghanistan once, and fired some Tomahawk Cruise missiles at Syria. But he drew back from the brink of more extensive military engagements.

    Now, by murdering Qasem Soleimani , the head of the Jerusalem (Qods) Brigade of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, Trump has brought the United States to the brink of war with Iran. Mind you, Iran's leadership is too shrewd to rush to the battlements at this moment, and will be prepared to play the long game. My guess is that they will encourage their allies among Iraqi Shiites to get up a massive protest at the US embassy and at bases housing US troops.

    They will be aided in this task of mobilizing Iraqis by the simultaneous US assassination of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis , the deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Forces. Al-Muhandis is a senior military figure in the Iraqi armed forces, not just a civilian militia figure. Moreover, the Kata'ib Hizbullah that he headed is part of a strong political bloc, al-Fath, which has 48 members in parliament and forms a key coalition partner for the current, caretaker prime minister, Adil Abdulmahdi. Parliament won't easily be able to let this outrage pass.

    The US officer corps is confident that the American troops at the embassy and elsewhere in Baghdad are sufficient to fight off any militia invasion. I'm not sure they have taken into account the possibility of tens of thousands of civilian protesters invading the embassy, who can't simply be taken out and shot.

    Trump may be counting on the unpopularity among the youth protesters in downtown Baghdad, Basra, Nasiriya and other cities of Soleimani and of al-Muhandis to blunt the Iraqi reaction to the murders. The thousands of youth protesters cheered on hearing the news of their deaths, since they were accused of plotting a violent repression of the rallies demanding an end to corruption.

    Iraq, however, is a big, complex society, and there are enormous numbers of Iraqi Shiites who support the Popular Mobilization Forces and who view them as the forces that saved Iraq from the peril of the ISIL (ISIS) terrorist organization. The Shiite hard liners would not need all Iraqis to back them in confronting the American presence, only a few hundred thousand for direct crowd action.

    You also have to wonder whether Trump and his coterie aren't planning a coup in Iraq. In the absence of a coup, the Iraqi parliament will almost certainly be forced, after this violation of Iraqi national sovereignty, to vote to expel American troops. This is foreseeable. So either the assassination was a drive-by on the way out, or Trump's war cabinet doesn't plan on having to leave Iraq.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Diplomacy Trump-style. Al Capone probably would be allow himself to fall that low

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Fec , Jan 5 2020 15:23 utc | 3

    "We have learned today from #Iraq Prime Minister AdilAbdl Mahdi how @realDonaldTrump uses diplomacy:
    #US asked #Iraq to mediate with #Iran. Iraq PM asks #QassemSoleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer of his mediation, Trump &co assassinate an envoy at the airport."

    https://twitter.com/ejmalrai/status/1213833855754485762

    [Jan 06, 2020] I am tired of giving Trump a free pass, just because Hillary would have been worse. Trump needs to go.

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    TG , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:07 am GMT

    To some extent it is not relevant if Trump was lying during his campaign, or has been corrupted/coopted/fooled/pressured/played for a chump by the establishment. He said one thing and is doing another: that's the bottom line.

    However: I note that after Barack Obama got elected, he immediately fired all of his populist advisors and hired Wall Streeters even before being sworn in. Obama was clearly lying up front.

    Trump, however, initially did start moving in the direction he said he would, he kept his populist/nationalist advisors, and really did make actual moves to carry out his campaign promises. And the establishment went total nut job, he was a Russian agent, his populist advisers were targeted for legal actions, they were replaced with establishment advisors who hate him Trump was strong on stage berating a political opponent, but against establishment pressure he has turned out to be weak, caving in to "the Blob" at every turn.

    Though again, a secondary point.

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:47 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso

    Had she been elected, Hillary would already have started the neocon wet dream of a war with Iran.

    While that may be true, I am tired of giving Trump a free pass, just because Hillary would have been worse. Being relatively less evil, or a different incarnation of evil, is still evil.

    Frankly, impeachment was just a distraction to divert attention from the real play. The dagger at his throat is from far more malevolent foes who can wield both blackmail or death as the circumstances demand to get their way. The jewish mafia is far more dangerous than the Sicilian boys could ever hope to be. The latter learned from the former.

    [Jan 06, 2020] How To Avoid Swallowing War Propaganda by Nathan J. Robinson

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 05, 2020 | www.currentaffairs.org
    The Trump administration has assassinated Iran's top military leader, Qassim Suleimani, and with the possibility of a serious escalation in violent conflict, it's a good time to think about how propaganda works and train ourselves to avoid accidentally swallowing it.

    The Iraq War, the bloodiest and costliest U.S. foreign policy calamity of the 21 st century, happened in part because the population of the United States was insufficiently cynical about its government and got caught up in a wave of nationalistic fervor. The same thing happened with World War I and the Vietnam War. Since a U.S./Iran war would be a disaster, it is vital that everyone make sure they do not accidentally end up repeating the kinds of talking points that make war more likely.

    Let us bear in mind, then, some of the basic lessons about war propaganda.

    Things are not true because a government official says them.

    I do not mean to treat you as stupid by making such a basic point, but plenty of journalists and opposition party politicians do not understand this point's implications, so it needs to be said over and over. What happens in the leadup to war is that government officials make claims about the enemy, and then those claims appear in newspapers ("U.S. officials say Saddam poses an imminent threat") and then in the public consciousness, the "U.S. officials say" part disappears, so that the claim is taken for reality without ever really being scrutinized. This happens because newspapers are incredibly irresponsible and believe that so long as you attach "Experts say" or "President says" to a claim, you are off the hook when people end up believing it, because all you did was relay the fact that a person said a thing, you didn't say it was true. This is the approach the New York Times took to Bush administration allegations in the leadup to the Iraq War, and it meant that false claims could become headline news just because a high-ranking U.S. official said them. [UPDATE: here's an example from Vox, today, of a questionable government claim being magically transformed into a certain fact.]

    In the context of Iran, let us consider some things Mike Pence tweeted about Qassim Suleimani:

    "[Suleimani] assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States Soleimani was plotting imminent attacks on American diplomats and military personnel. The world is a safer place today because Soleimani is gone."

    It is possible, given these tweets, to publish the headline: "Suleimani plotting imminent attacks on American diplomats, says Pence." That headline is technically true. But you should not publish that headline unless Pence provides some supporting evidence, because what will happen in the discourse is that people will link to your news story to prove that Suleimani was plotting imminent attacks.

    To see how unsubstantiated claims get spread, let's think about the Afghanistan hijackers bit. David Harsanyi of the National Review defends Pence's claim about Suleimani helping the hijackers. Harsanyi cites the 9/11 Commission report, saying that the 9/11 commission report concluded Iran aided the hijackers. The report does indeed say that Iran allowed free travel to some of the men who went on to carry out the 9/11 attacks. (The sentence cut off at the bottom of Harsanyi's screenshot, however, rather crucially says : "We have no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack.") Harsanyi admits that the report says absolutely nothing about Suleimani. But he argues that Pence was "mostly right," pointing out that Pence did not say Iran knew these men would be the hijackers, merely that it allowed them passage.

    Let's think about what is going on here. Pence is trying to convince us that Suleimani deserved to die, that it was necessary for the U.S. to kill him, which will also mean that if Iran retaliates violently, that violence will be because Iran is an aggressive power rather than because the U.S. just committed an unprovoked atrocity against one of its leaders, dropping a bomb on a popular Iranian leader. So Pence wants to link Suleimani in your mind with 9/11, in order to get you blood boiling the same way you might have felt in 2001 as you watched the Twin Towers fall.

    There is no evidence that either Iran or Suleimani tried to help these men do 9/11. Harsanyi says that Pence does not technically allege this. But he doesn't have to! What impression are people going to get from helped the hijackers? Pence hopes you'll conflate Suleimani and Iran as one entity, then assume that if Iran ever aided these men in any way, it basically did 9/11 even if it didn't have any clue that was what they were going to do.

    This brings us to #2:

    Do not be bullied into accepting simple-minded sloganeering

    Let's say that, long before Ted Kaczynski began sending bombs through the mail, you once rented him an apartment. This was pure coincidence. Back then he was just a Berkeley professor, you did not know he would turn out to be the Unabomber. It is, however, possible, for me to say, and claim I am not technically lying, that you "housed and materially aided the Unabomber." (A friend of mine once sold his house to the guy who turned out to be the Green River Killer, so this kind of situation does happen.)

    Of course, it is incredibly dishonest of me to characterize what you did that way. You rented an apartment to a stranger, yet I'm implying that you intentionally helped the Unabomber knowing he was the Unabomber. In sane times, people would see me as the duplicitous one. But the leadup to war is often not a sane time, and these distinctions can get lost. In the Pence claim about Afghanistan, for it to have any relevance to Suleimani, it would be critical to know (assuming the 9/11 commission report is accurate) whether Iran actually could have known what the men it allowed to pass would ultimately do, and whether Suleimani was involved. But that would involve thinking, and War Fever thrives on emotion rather than thought.

    There are all kinds of ways in which you can bully people into accepting idiocy. Consider, for example, the statement "Nathan Robinson thinks it's good to help terrorists who murder civilians." There is a way in which this is actually sort of true: I think lawyers who aid those accused of terrible crimes do important work. If we are simple-minded and manipulative, we can call that "thinking it's good to help terrorists," and during periods of War Fever, that's exactly what it will be called. There is a kind of cheap sophistry that becomes ubiquitous:

    I remember all this bullshit from my high school years. Opposing the invasion of Iraq meant loving Saddam Hussein and hating America. Thinking 9/11 was the predictable consequence of U.S. actions meant believing 9/11 was justified. Of course, rational discussion can expose these as completely unfair mischaracterizations, but every time war fever whips up, rational discussion becomes almost impossible. In World War I, if you opposed the draft you were undermining your country in a time of war. During Vietnam, if you believed the North Vietnamese had the more just case, you were a Communist traitor who endorsed every atrocity committed in the name of Ho Chi Minh, and if you thought John McCain shouldn't have been bombing civilians in the first place then clearly you believed he should have been tortured and you hated America.

    "If you oppose assassinating Suleimani you must love terrorists" will be repeated on Fox News (and probably even on MSNBC). Nationalism advocate Yoram Hazony says there is something wrong with those who do not "feel shame when our country is shamed" -- presumably those who do not feel wounded pride when America is emasculated by our enemies are weak and pitiful. We should refuse to put up with these kind of cheap slurs, or even to let those who deploy them place the burden of proof on us to refute them. (In 2004, Democrats worried that they did appear unpatriotic, and so they ran a decorated war veteran, John Kerry, for president. That didn't work.)

    Scrutinize the arguments

    Here's Mike Pence again:

    "[Suleimani] provided advanced deadly explosively formed projectiles, advanced weaponry, training, and guidance to Iraqi insurgents used to conduct attacks on U.S. and coalition forces; directly responsible for the death of 603 U.S. service members, along with thousands of wounded."

    I am going to say something that is going to sound controversial if you buy into the kind of simple-minded logic we just discussed: Saying that someone was "responsible for the deaths of U.S. service members" does not, in and of itself, tell us anything about whether what they did was right or wrong. In order to believe it did, we would have to believe that the United States is automatically right, and that countries opposing the United States are automatically wrong. That is indeed the logic that many nationalists in this country follow; remember that when the U.S. shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, causing hundreds of deaths, George H.W. Bush said that he would never apologize for America, no matter what the facts were. What if America did something wrong? That was irrelevant, or rather impossible, because to Bush, a thing was right because America did it, even if that thing was the mass murder of Iranian civilians.

    One of the major justifications for murdering Suleimani is that he "caused the deaths of U.S. soldiers." He was thus an aggressor, and could/should have been killed. That is where people like Pence want you to end your inquiry. But let us remember where those soldiers were. Were they in Miami? No. They were in Iraq. Why were they in Iraq? Because we illegally invaded and seized a country. Now, we can debate whether (1) there is actually sufficient evidence of Suleimani's direct involvement and (2) whether these acts of violence can be justified, but to say that Suleimani has "American blood on his hands" is to say nothing at all without an examination of whether the United States was in the right.

    We have to think clearly in examining the arguments that are being made. Here 's the Atlantic 's George Packer on the execution:

    "There was a case for killing Major General Qassem Soleimani. For two decades, as the commander of the Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, he executed Iran's long game of strategic depth in the Middle East -- arming and guiding proxy militias in Lebanon and Iraq that became stronger than either state, giving Bashar al-Assad essential support to win the Syrian civil war at the cost of half a million lives, waging a proxy war in Yemen against the hated Saudis, and repeatedly testing America and its allies with military actions around the region for which Iran never seemed to pay a military price."

    The article goes on to discuss whether this case is outweighed by the pragmatic case against killing him. But wait. Let's dwell on this. Does this constitute a case for killing him? He assisted Bashar al-Assad. Okay, but presumably then killing Assad would have been justified too? Is the rule here that our government is allowed unilaterally to execute the officials of other governments who are responsible for many deaths? Are we the only ones who can do this? Can any government claim the right?

    He assisted Yemen in its fight against "the hated Saudis." But is Saudi Arabia being hated for good reason? It is not enough to say that someone committed violence without analyzing the underlying justice of the parties' relative claims.

    Moreover, assumptions are made that if you can prove somebody committed a heinous act, what Trump did is justified. But that doesn't follow: Unless we throw all law out the window, and extrajudicial punishment is suddenly acceptable, showing that Suleimani was a war criminal doesn't prove that you can unilaterally kill him with a drone. Henry Kissinger is a war criminal. So is George W. Bush. But they should be captured and tried in a court, not bombed from the sky. The argument that Suleimani was planning imminent attacks is relevant to whether you can stop him with violence (and requires persuasive proof), but mere allegations of murderous past acts do not show that extrajudicial killings are legitimate.

    It's very easy to come up with superficially persuasive arguments that can justify just about anything. The job of an intelligent populace is to see whether those arguments can actually withstand scrutiny.

    Keep the focus on what matters

    "The main question about the strike isn't moral or even legal -- it's strategic." -- The Atlantic

    "The real question to ask about the American drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani was not whether it was justified, but whether it was wise" -- The New York Times

    "I think that the question that we ought to focus on is why now? Why not a month ago and why not a month from now?" -- Elizabeth Warren

    They're going to try to define the debate for you. Leaving aside the moral questions, is this good strategy? And then you find yourself arguing on those terms: No, it was bad strategy, it will put "our personnel" in harms way, without noticing that you are implicitly accepting the sociopathic logic that says "America's interests" are the only ones in the world that matters. This is how debates about Vietnam went: They were rarely about whether our actions were good for Vietnamese people, but about whether they were good or bad for us , whether we were squandering U.S. resources and troops in a "fruitless" "mistake." The people of this country still do not understand the kind of carnage we inflicted on Vietnam because our debates tend to be about whether things we do are "strategically prudent" rather than whether they are just. The Atlantic calls the strike a "blunder," shifting the discussion to be about the wisdom of the killing rather than whether it is a choice our country is even permitted to make. "Blunder" essentially assumes that we are allowed to do these things and the only question is whether it's good for us.

    There will be plenty of attempts to distract you with irrelevant issues. We will spent more time talking about whether Trump followed the right process for war, whether he handled the rollout correctly, and less about whether the underlying action itself is correct. People like Ben Shapiro will say things like :

    "Barack Obama routinely droned terrorists abroad -- including American citizens -- who presented far less of a threat to Americans and American interests than Soleimani. So spare me the hysterics about 'assassination."

    In order for this to have any bearing on anything, you have to be someone who defends what Obama did. If you are, on the other hand, someone who belives that Obama, too, assassinated people without due process (which he did), then Shapiro has proved exactly nothing about whether Trump's actions were legitimate. (Note, too, the presumption that threatening "America's interests" can get you killed, a standard we would not want any other country using but are happy to use ourselves.)

    Emphasis matters

    Consider three statements:

    These are statements made by Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders, respectively. Note that each of them is consistent with believing Trump's decision was the wrong one, but their emphasis is different. Buttigieg says Suleimani was a "threat" but that there are "questions," Warren says Suleimani was a "murderer" but that this was "reckless," and Sanders says this was a "dangerous escalation." It could be that none of these three would have done the same thing themselves, but the emphasis is vastly different. Buttigieg and Warren lead with condemnation of the dead man, in ways that imply that there was nothing that unjust about what happened. Sanders does not dwell on Suleimani but instead talks about the dangers of new wars.

    We have to be clear and emphatic in our messaging, because so much effort is made to make what should be clear issues appear murky. If, for example, you gave a speech in 2002 opposing the Iraq War, but the first half was simply a discussion of what a bad and threatening person Saddam Hussein was, people might actually get the opposite of the impression you want them to get. Buttigieg and Warren, while they appear to question the president, have the effect of making his action seem reasonable. After all, they admit that he got rid of a threatening murderer! Sanders admits nothing of the kind: The only thing he says is that Trump has made the world worse. He puts the emphasis where it matters.

    I do not fully like Sanders' statement, because it still talks a bit more about what war means for our people , but it does mention destabilization and the total number of lives that can be lost. It is a far more morally clear and powerful antiwar statement. Buttigieg's is exactly what you'd expect of a Consultant President and it should give us absolutely no confidence that he would be a powerful voice against a war, should one happen. Warren confirms that she is not an effective advocate for peace. In a time when there will be pressure for a violent conflict, we need to make sure that our statements are not watery and do not make needless concessions to the hawks' propaganda.

    Imagine how everything would sound if the other side said it.

    If you're going to understand the world clearly, you have to kill your nationalistic emotions. An excellent way to do this is to try to imagine if all the facts were reversed. If Iraq had invaded the United States, and U.S. militias violently resisted, would it constitute "aggression" for those militias to kill Iraqi soldiers? If Britain funded those U.S. militias, and Iraq killed the head of the British military with a drone strike, would this constitute "stopping a terrorist"? Of course, in that situation, the Iraqi government would certainly spin it that way, because governments call everyone who opposes them terrorists. But rationality requires us not just to examine whether violence has been committed (e.g., whether Suleimani ordered attacks) but what the full historical context of that violence is, and who truly deserves the "terrorist" label.

    Is there anything Suleimani did that hasn't also been done by the CIA? Remember that we actually engineered the overthrow of the Iranian government, within living people's lifetimes . Would an Iranian have been justified in assassinating the head of the CIA? I doubt there are many Americans who think they would. I think most Americans would consider this terrorism. But this is because terrorism is a word that, by definition, cannot apply to things we do, and only applies to the things others do. When you start to actually reverse the situations in your mind, and see how things look from the other side, you start to fully grasp just how crude and irrational so much propaganda is.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/hPOy-LutJQg?feature=oembed

    Watch out for euphemisms

    Our access to much of the world is through language alone. We only see our tiny sliver of the world with our own eyes, much of the rest of it has to be described in words or shown to us through images. That means it's very easy to manipulate our perceptions. If you control the flow of information, you can completely alter someone's understanding of the things that they can't see firsthand.

    Euphemistic language is always used to cover atrocities. Even the Nazis did not say they were "mass murdering innocent civilians." They said they were defending themselves from subversive elements, guaranteeing sufficient living space for their people, purifying their culture, etc. When the United States commits murder, it does not say it is committing murder. It says it is engaging in a stabilization program and restoring democratic rule. We saw during the recent Bolivian coup how easy it is to portray the seizure of power as "democracy" and democracy as tyranny. Euphemistic language has been one of the key tools of murderous regimes. In fact, many of them probably believe their own language; their specialized vocabulary allows them to inhabit a world of their own invention where they are good people punishing evil.

    Assassination sounds bad. It sounds like something illegitimate, something that would call into question the goodness of the United States, even if the person being assassinated can be argued to have "deserved it." Thus Rothman and Bloomberg will not even admit that what the U.S. did here was an assassination, even though we literally targeted a high official from a sovereign country and dropped a bomb on him. Instead, this is " neutralization ." (Read this fascinatingly feeble attempt by the Associated Press to explain why it isn't calling an obvious assassination an assassination, just as the media declined to call torture torture when Bush did it.)

    Those of us who want to resist marches to war need to insist on calling things exactly what they are and refuse to allow the country to slide into the use of language that conceals the reality of our actions.

    Remember what people were saying five minutes ago

    Five minutes ago, hardly anybody was talking about Suleimani. Now they all speak as if he was Public Enemy #1. Remember how much you hated that guy? Remember how much damage he did? No, I do not remember, because people like Ben Shapiro only just discovered their hatred for Suleimani once they had to justify his murder.

    During the buildup to a war there is a constant effort to make you forget what things were like a few minutes ago. Before World War I, Americans lived relatively harmoniously with Germans in their midst. The same thing with Japanese people before World War II. Then, immediately, they began to hate and fear people who had recently been their neighbors.

    Let us say Iran responds to this extrajudicial murder with a colossal act of violent reprisal, after the killing unifies the country around a demand for vengeance. They kill a high-ranking American official, or wage an attack that kills our civilians. Perhaps it will attack some of the soldiers that are now being moved into the Middle East. The Trump administration will then want you to forget that it promised this assassination was to " stop a war ." It will then want you to focus solely on Iran's most recent act, to see that as the initial aggression. If the attack is particularly bad, with family members of victims crying on TV and begging for vengeance, you will be told to look into the face of Iranian evil, and those of us who are anti-war will be branded as not caring about the victims. Nobody wants you to remember the history of U.S./Iran relations, the civilians we killed of theirs or the time we destabilized their whole country and got rid of its democracy. They want you to have a two-second memory, to become a blind and unthinking patriot whose sole thought is the avenging of American blood. Resisting propaganda requires having a memory, looking back on how things were before and not accepting war as the "new normal."

    Listen to the Chomsky on your shoulder.

    "It is perfectly insane to suggest the U.S. was the aggressor here." -- Ben Shapiro

    They are going to try to convince you that you are insane for asking questions, or for not accepting what the government tells you. They will put you in topsy-turvy land, where thinking that assassinating foreign officials is "aggression" is not just wrong, but sheer madness. You will have to try your best to remember what things are, because it is not easy, when everyone says the emperor has clothes, or that Line A is longer than Line B, or that shocking people to death is fine, to have confidence in your independent judgment.

    This is why I keep a little imaginary Noam Chomsky sitting on my shoulder at all times. Chomsky helps keep me sane, by cutting through lies and euphemisms and showing things as they really are. I recommend reading his books, especially during times of war. He never swallowed Johnson's nonsense about Vietnam or Bush's nonsense about Iraq. And of course they called him insane, anti-American, terrorist-loving, anti-Semitic, blah blah blah.

    What I really mean here though is: Listen to the dissidents. They will not appear on television. They will be smeared and treated as lunatics. But you need them if you are going to be able to resist the absolute barrage of misinformation, or to hear yourself think over the pounding war drums. Times of War Fever can be wearying, because there is just so much aggression against dissent that your resistance wears down. This is why a community is so necessary. You may watch people who previously seemed reasonable develop a pathological bloodlust (mild-mannered moderate types like Thomas Friedman and Brian Williams going suck on our missiles ). Find the people who see clearly and stick close to them.

    Someday peace will prevail. If you enjoyed this article, please consider subscribing to our magnificent print edition or making a donation . Current Affairs is 100% reader-supported. Nathan J. Robinson

    [Jan 06, 2020] Neocon Pompeo pushed Trump to kill Soleimani; Looks like West Point educated military contactor mafia to which Pompeo and Esper belongs controls the President, although Trump malleability and recklessness are inexcusable

    Highly recommended!
    So Trump instead of draining the swamp brought swamp creatures like Pompeo into his Administration; now he can pay the price.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The greenlighting of the airstrike near Baghdad airport represents a bureaucratic victory for Pompeo ..."
    "... "We took a bad guy off the battlefield. We made the right decision," Pompeo told CNN. "I'm proud of the effort that President Trump undertook." ..."
    "... On Dec. 29, Pompeo, Esper and Milley traveled to the president's private club in Florida, where the two defense officials presented possible responses to Iranian aggression, including the option of killing Soleimani, senior U.S. officials said. ..."
    "... One significant factor was the "lockstep" coordination for the operation between Pompeo and Esper, both graduates in the same class at the U.S. Military Academy, who deliberated ahead of the briefing with Trump, senior U.S. officials said. Pence also endorsed the decision, but he did not attend the meeting in Florida. ..."
    "... Some defense officials said Pompeo's claims of an imminent and direct threat were overstated, and they would prefer that he make the case based on the killing of the American contractor and previous Iranian provocations. ..."
    "... On Sunday, Iran announced that it was suspending all limits of the nuclear deal, including on uranium enrichment, research and development, and enlarging its stockpile of nuclear fuel. Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia and China, were original signatories of that deal with the United States and Iran, and all opposed Trump's decision to withdraw from the pact. ..."
    "... "No one trusts what Trump will do next, so it's hard to get behind this," said the European diplomat. ..."
    "... Since his time as CIA director, Pompeo has forged a friendship with Yossi Cohen, the director of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, said a person familiar with their meetings. The men have spoken about the threat posed by Iran to both Israel and the United States. In a prescient interview in October, Cohen said Soleimani "knows perfectly well that his elimination is not impossible." ..."
    "... At every step of his government career, Pompeo has tried to stake out a maximalist position on Iran that has made him popular among two critical pro-Israel constituencies in Republican politics: conservative Jewish donors and Christian evangelicals. ..."
    "... After Trump tapped Pompeo to lead the CIA, Pompeo quickly set up an Iran Mission Center at the agency to focus intelligence-gathering efforts and operations, elevating Iran's importance as an intelligence target. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.washingtonpost.com

    The secretary also spoke to President Trump multiple times every day last week, culminating in Trump's decision to approve the killing of Iran's top military commander, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, at the urging of Pompeo and Vice President Pence, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

    Pompeo had lost a similar high-stakes deliberation last summer when Trump declined to retaliate militarily against Iran after it downed a U.S. surveillance drone, an outcome that left Pompeo "morose," according to one U.S. official. But recent changes to Trump's national security team and the whims of a president anxious about being viewed as hesitant in the face of Iranian aggression created an opening for Pompeo to press for the kind of action he had been advocating.

    The greenlighting of the airstrike near Baghdad airport represents a bureaucratic victory for Pompeo, but it also carries multiple serious risks: another protracted regional war in the Middle East; retaliatory assassinations of U.S. personnel stationed around the world; an interruption in the battle against the Islamic State; the closure of diplomatic pathways to containing Iran's nuclear program; and a major backlash in Iraq, whose parliament voted on Sunday to expel all U.S. troops from the country.

    For Pompeo, whose political ambitions are a source of constant speculation , the death of U.S. diplomats would be particularly damaging given his unyielding criticisms of former secretary of state Hillary Clinton following the killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and other American personnel in Benghazi in 2012.

    But none of those considerations stopped Pompeo from pushing for the targeted strike, U.S. officials said, underscoring a fixation on Iran that spans 10 years of government service from Congress to the CIA to the State Department.

    "We took a bad guy off the battlefield. We made the right decision," Pompeo told CNN. "I'm proud of the effort that President Trump undertook."

    Pompeo first spoke with Trump about killing Soleimani months ago, said a senior U.S. official, but neither the president nor Pentagon officials were willing to countenance such an operation.

    For more than a year, defense officials warned that the administration's campaign of economic sanctions against Iran had increased tensions with Tehran, requiring a bigger and bigger share of military resources in the Middle East when many at the Pentagon wanted to redeploy their firepower to East Asia.

    How the siege of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad unfolded On Jan. 1, the siege on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad appeared to come to an end after supporters of the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah militia retreated. (Liz Sly, Joyce Lee, Mustafa Salim/The Washington Post)

    Trump, too, sought to draw down from the Middle East as he promised from the opening days of his presidential campaign. But that mind-set shifted on Dec. 27 when 30 rockets hit a joint U.S.-Iraqi base outside Kirkuk, killing an American civilian contractor and injuring service members.

    On Dec. 29, Pompeo, Esper and Milley traveled to the president's private club in Florida, where the two defense officials presented possible responses to Iranian aggression, including the option of killing Soleimani, senior U.S. officials said.

    Trump's decision to target Soleimani came as a surprise and a shock to some officials briefed on his decision, given the Pentagon's long-standing concerns about escalation and the president's aversion to using military force against Iran.

    One significant factor was the "lockstep" coordination for the operation between Pompeo and Esper, both graduates in the same class at the U.S. Military Academy, who deliberated ahead of the briefing with Trump, senior U.S. officials said. Pence also endorsed the decision, but he did not attend the meeting in Florida.

    "Taking out Soleimani would not have happened under [former secretary of defense Jim] Mattis," said a senior administration official who argued that the Mattis Pentagon was risk-averse. "Mattis was opposed to all of this. It's not a hit on Mattis, it's just his predisposition. Milley and Esper are different. Now you've got a cohesive national security team and you've got a secretary of state and defense secretary who've known each other their whole adult lives."

    Mattis declined to comment.

    In the days since the strike, Pompeo has become the voice of the administration on the matter, speaking to allies and making the public case for the operation. Trump chose Pompeo to appear on all of the Sunday news shows because he "sticks to the line" and "never gives an inch," an administration official said.

    But critics inside and outside the administration have questioned Pompeo's justification for the strike based on his claims that "dozens if not hundreds" of American lives were at risk.

    [ Trump faces Iran crisis with fewer experienced advisers and strained relations with allies ]

    Lawmakers left classified briefings with U.S. intelligence officials on Friday saying they heard nothing to suggest that the threat posed by the proxy forces guided by Soleimani had changed substantially in recent months.

    When repeatedly pressed on Sunday about the imminent nature of the threats, whether it was days or weeks away, or whether they had been foiled by the U.S. airstrike, Pompeo dismissed the questions.

    "If you're an American in the region, days and weeks -- this is not something that's relevant," Pompeo told CNN.

    Some defense officials said Pompeo's claims of an imminent and direct threat were overstated, and they would prefer that he make the case based on the killing of the American contractor and previous Iranian provocations.

    Critics have also questioned how an imminent attack would be foiled by killing Soleimani, who would not have carried out the strike himself.

    "If the attack was going to take place when Soleimani was alive, it is difficult to comprehend why it wouldn't take place now that he is dead," said Robert Malley, the president of the International Crisis Group and a former Obama administration official.

    Following the strike, Pompeo has held back-to-back phone calls with his counterparts around the globe but has received a chilly reception from European allies, many of whom fear that the attack puts their embassies in Iran and Iraq in jeopardy and has now eliminated the chance to keep a lid on Iran's nuclear program.

    "We have woken up to a more dangerous world," said France's Europe minister, Amelie de Montchalin.

    Two European diplomats familiar with the calls said Pompeo expected European leaders to champion the U.S. strike publicly even though they were never consulted on the decision.

    "The U.S. has not helped the Iran situation, and now they want everyone to cheerlead this," one diplomat said.

    "Our position over the past few years has been about defending the JCPOA," said the diplomat, referring to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

    On Sunday, Iran announced that it was suspending all limits of the nuclear deal, including on uranium enrichment, research and development, and enlarging its stockpile of nuclear fuel. Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia and China, were original signatories of that deal with the United States and Iran, and all opposed Trump's decision to withdraw from the pact.

    "No one trusts what Trump will do next, so it's hard to get behind this," said the European diplomat.

    Pompeo has slapped back at U.S. allies, saying "the Brits, the French, the Germans all need to understand that what we did -- what the Americans did -- saved lives in Europe as well," he told Fox News.

    Israel has stood out in emphatically cheering the Soleimani operation, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praising Trump for "acting swiftly, forcefully and decisively."

    "Israel stands with the United States in its just struggle for peace, security and self-defense," he said.

    Since his time as CIA director, Pompeo has forged a friendship with Yossi Cohen, the director of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, said a person familiar with their meetings. The men have spoken about the threat posed by Iran to both Israel and the United States. In a prescient interview in October, Cohen said Soleimani "knows perfectly well that his elimination is not impossible."

    Though Democrats have greeted the strike with skepticism, Republican leaders, who have long viewed Pompeo as a reassuring voice in the administration, uniformly praised the decision as the eradication of a terrorist who directed the killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

    "Soleimani made it his life's work to take the Iranian revolutionary call for death to America and death to Israel and turn them into action," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said.

    A critical moment for Pompeo is nearing as he faces growing questions about a potential Senate run, though some GOP insiders say that decision seems to have stalled. Pompeo has kept in touch with Ward Baker, a political consultant who would probably lead the operation, and others in McConnell's orbit, about a bid. But Pompeo hasn't committed one way or the other, people familiar with the conversations said.

    Some people close to the secretary say he has mixed feelings about becoming a relatively junior senator from Kansas after leading the State Department and CIA, but there is little doubt in Pompeo's home state that he could win.

    At every step of his government career, Pompeo has tried to stake out a maximalist position on Iran that has made him popular among two critical pro-Israel constituencies in Republican politics: conservative Jewish donors and Christian evangelicals.

    After Trump tapped Pompeo to lead the CIA, Pompeo quickly set up an Iran Mission Center at the agency to focus intelligence-gathering efforts and operations, elevating Iran's importance as an intelligence target.

    At the State Department, he is a voracious consumer of diplomatic notes and reporting on Iran, and he places the country far above other geopolitical and economic hot spots in the world. "If it's about Iran, he will read it," said one diplomat, referring to the massive flow of paper that crosses Pompeo's desk. "If it's not, good luck."

    [Jan 06, 2020] The Soleimani Assassination by Philip Giraldi

    Highly recommended!
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Donald Trump rode to victory in 2016 on a promise to end the useless wars in the Middle East, but he has now demonstrated very clearly that he is a liar. Instead of seeking detente, one of his first actions was to end the JCPOA nuclear agreement and re-introduce sanctions against Iran. In a sense, Iran has from the beginning been the exception to Trump's no-new-war pledge, a position that might reasonably be directly attributed to his incestuous relationship with the American Jewish community and in particular derived from his pandering to the expressed needs of Israel's belligerent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

    Trump bears full responsibility for what comes next. The neoconservatives and Israelis are predictably cheering the result, with Mark Dubowitz of the pro-Israel Foundation for Defense of Democracies enthusing that it is "bigger than bin Laden a massive blow to the [Iranian] regime." Dubowitz, whose credentials as an "Iran expert" are dubious at best, is at least somewhat right in this case. Qassem Suleimani is, to be sure, charismatic and also very popular in Iran. He is Iran's most powerful military figure in the entire region, being the principal contact for proxies and allies in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. But what Dubowitz does not understand is that no one in a military hierarchy is irreplaceable. Suleimani's aides and high officials in the intelligence ministry are certainly more than capable of picking up his mantle and continuing his policies.

    In reality, the series of foolish attacks initiated by the United States over the past week will only hasten the departure of much of the U.S. military from the region. The Pentagon and White House have been insisting that Iran was behind an alleged Kata'ib Hezbollah attack on a U.S. installation that then triggered a strike by Washington on claimed militia targets in Syria and also inside Iraq. Even though the U.S. military presence is as a guest of the Iraqi government, Washington went ahead with its attack even after the Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi said "no."

    To justify its actions, Mark Esper, Secretary of Defense, went so far as to insist that "Iran is at war with the whole world," a clear demonstration of just how ignorant the White House team actually is. The U.S. government characteristically has not provided any evidence demonstrating either Iranian or Kata'ib involvement in recent developments, but after the counter-strike killed 26 Iraqi soldiers, the mass demonstrations against the Embassy in Baghdad became inevitable. The demonstrations were also attributed to Iran by Washington even though the people in the street were undoubtedly Iraqis.

    Now that the U.S. has also killed Suleimani and Muhandis in a drone strike at Baghdad Airport, clearly accomplished without the approval of the Iraqi government, it is inevitable that the prime minister will ask American forces to leave. That will in turn make the situation for the remaining U.S. troops in neighboring Syria untenable. And it will also force other Arab states in the region to rethink their hosting of U.S. soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen due to the law of unanticipated consequences as it is now clear that Washington has foolishly begun a war that serves no one's interests.

    The blood of the Americans, Iranians and Iraqis who will die in the next few weeks is clearly on Donald Trump's hands as this war was never inevitable and served no U.S. national interest. It will surely turn out to be a debacle, as well as devastating for all parties involved. And it might well, on top of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, be the long-awaited beginning of the end of America's imperial ambitions. Let us hope so!

    Philip M. Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer who served nineteen years overseas in Turkey, Italy, Germany, and Spain. He was the CIA Chief of Base for the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 and was one of the first Americans to enter Afghanistan in December 2001. Phil is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a Washington-based advocacy group that seeks to encourage and promote a U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East that is consistent with American values and interests

    Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 7:50 pm GMT

    The question – who benefits? – has not been raised.
    There was no benefit to Kata'ib Hezbollah or the Iranians to attack an American installation.
    There was no benefit to the Iranians to attack the US Embassy in Iraq.
    There was no benefit to anyone in Iraq or Iran in the shooting of "peaceful demonstrators" in Iraq.
    There is only one beneficiary to all of the above – Israel.

    Mr. Giraldi is quite correct in laying this at Trump's feet and referring to his incestuous relationship regarding Israel. After all, it it Trump that pulled out of the JCPOA, and ultimately gave the order to strike. A previous strike was called off, what has changed? I understand Mr. Giraldi is a never Trumper, and that is his right. Often it is not what he says, but what he doesn't say, that is problematic. In this article, two things not expanded stand out to me. The author proclaims his support for the JCPOA.
    What is never explained is that the JCPOA was a voluntary restriction, by Iran, on its rights as a signatory under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Former Reagan nuclear advisor Dr. Gordon Prather was writing about the illegality of forcing restrictions on Iran back in the days when "Bonkers" Bolton was foaming at the mouth for Bush 43 at the UN. Trump cancelling the deal was not the problem. The problem was maintaining the US's illegal position on Iran's rights under the NPT. Mr. Giraldi's opposition to the cancelling, without context, means he finds the US's illegal position on Iran's rights under an international treaty as acceptable.
    The second issue is the intelligence surrounding the "alleged Kata'ib Hezbollah attack on a U.S. installation". This is an operation straight out of the I sraeli S ecret I ntelligence S ervice manual. It was acknowledged, by the military, 20 years ago Israel had the capability to stage an attack and blame it on "Arabs". Who were those involved in providing the "intelligence to Trump? How many of those people know/knew the intelligence to be questionable or outright false, but allowed it to pass on anyway without caveat? It is unknown whether Trump "asked the right questions" about the intelligence, and if it came from military sources, I suspect none at all, of substance, were asked. Again, yes Trump will, and should, be blamed, but how much of it involves the traitors within who will continue with the internal rot?

    Philip Giraldi , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:08 pm GMT
    @Bragadocious You are one of the supreme a-holes on this site and I wish you would go somewhere else to spread your pollution. But I will answer your question: Soleimani was not near the embassy. He had flown into to town to attend the funerals of the 26 Iraqi militiamen that we Americans had killed earlier in the week!
    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:24 pm GMT
    This is a watershed moment in our enslaved country, and the net is rife with speculations as to where this will lead to.

    Personally, I don't believe that this will erupt in WW3, but the days of casual travel by high-ranking US officials is probably over in the near term. What follows will be millions of paper cuts and constant stress for our sons and daughters relegated to foreign lands in the war for Israel. Did you sign up your children to die for Israel? I didn't.

    So what can we expect? A lot of our children are going to come back in body bags in the weeks ahead. The murder of the Iranian general with no proof of his hand in the recent death of an American mercenary in Iraq, is a war crime – but who's looking? We have become imitators of our BFF, Israel. Not only have we militarized our police force under their auspices, we flout International law and civil rights without even blinking once. Sure, many Iranians (and Iraqi) innocents will die in the process, but the silver lining is that this will start the dominoes falling and lead to our Vietnam-like exit from the ME with our tail between our legs, as we repeat the helicopter exits from the roofs of our embassies.

    From all indications, the Iranian general was a revered man inside and outside Iran. He appears to have arrived in Baghdad to attend the funeral of the people killed in the airstrike by US/Israel. Killing people headed to funerals and weddings seems to have become our MO in recent years. No US president in the last few decades has had his hands clean. Out damned spot!

    Meanwhile, who was that "killed" contractor? Is there a name attached to that speculatively fictitious soul whose alleged death was the rationale for the murder? It is a sign of the times that our first reaction to anything we hear from the PTB is one of skepticism and disbelief. This does not bode well for our rulers when the slaves reject whatever claims they make.

    Sadly, the revolution will not begin in Pretoria, but in distant lands, far from the prying eyes of the sleeping citizenry of this land. As Allison Weir would say, if Americans knew what is being perpetrated in our name, they would realize that we are all Palestinians.

    Trump has been compromised. Whether you believe that he is or isn't behind this, is irrelevant. Frankly, it doesn't really matter who the president is – he is a powerless puppet. I suspect that the deep state initiated this and then informed Trump post-facto. The absence of an immediate tweets (tweet with a US flag suggests speechlessness), followed by an announcement from the Pentagon that Trump had personally ordered the attack, instead of Trump boasting about it, does not fit his usual pattern. My guess is that he knows that going against the will of the deep state would result in his being JFK'ed.

    I expect the following in the days ahead:
    – There will be outrage in Iraq and demands for us to go home – which we won't
    – Our children/cannon fodder will be targeted across the ME
    – One or more US high officials or Military leaders will be assassinated, perhaps Graham or Pompeo or Adelson
    – Israel will use the distraction to annex more Palestinian territory.
    – Every US politician will blame the victims
    – Israel and KSA will be walking around in adult diapers for the next shoe to drop

    Take heart, the end is nigh. It is the witching hour. It is a replay of history as the empire shoots itself in the foot. Remember which country invented the game of Chess – it wasn't us or our European cousins.

    TimeTraveller , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:37 pm GMT
    I read somewhere that the order for this assassination came from Trump himself. I read this as meaning that the order came from Israel and Trump's staff advised against it. I hope Iran takes this into account as they plan their retaliation.
    The other interesting dynamic is that common folk are waking up to the ZOG on the one hand, and the government/media is doing their level best to slow this awakening. I wonder how this assassination and its aftermath fit into all of it.
    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:41 pm GMT
    The one big fear I have in the near-term is that, with the expected retaliation from Iran, it is the perfect opportunity for Israel to launch a false flag somewhere and blame it on Iran, further turning up the heat.

    As always, ask: cui bono?

    [Jan 06, 2020] The threat of General Soleimani - TTG

    Highly recommended!
    Below are some idea from Below are some idea from OffGuardian that clrify TT post...
    The Saker took a look yesterday at The Soleimani murder – what could happen next . He thinks, as he has said before, that Trump is regarded as a disposable asset by his Deep State handlers and is being used as a front man for risky policy actions that he can be scapegoated for if/when they go wrong.
    war with Iran has been the auto-erotic fixation for the hardcore war nuts in Washington for years, and imminent confrontation has been predicted regularly since at least 2005
    Trump administration from the very beginning has been ramping up the tensions (Adelson money at work): Trump teared up the nuclear deal, re-imposed sanctions, making provocations, making threats. But this has all been within the familiar framework that always just stops short of actual conflict. The murder of Soleimani is orders of magnitude beyond anything they have ever risked before. the US and Israel now have carte blanche to stage as much false flag 'terrorism' as they want and blame it on Iranian 'revenge'. Whatever else happens, we can almost certainly look forward to some of that. The murder of Soleimani is orders of magnitude beyond anything they have ever risked before. the US and Israel now have carte blanche to stage as much false flag 'terrorism' as they want and blame it on Iranian 'revenge'. Whatever else happens, we can almost certainly look forward to some of that. The murder of Soleimani is orders of magnitude beyond anything they have ever risked before. the US and Israel now have carte blanche to stage as much false flag 'terrorism' as they want and blame it on Iranian 'revenge'. Whatever else happens, we can almost certainly look forward to some of that.
    The major question really though is – will this backtracking and odd claims of wanting de-escalation actually do anything to de-escalate? Will it persuade Iran not to seek retaliation, supposing this is now what Pompeo et al want?
    It's become a commonplace to describe Trump foreign policy as 'insane', and it's an apposite description. But the murder of Soleimani takes the evident insanity to new and self-defeating levels.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Eric, the embassy attack hurt little more than our pride. Yes, an entrance lobby and it's contents were burned and destroyed but no American was injured or even roughed up. It was the Iraqi government that let the demonstrators approach the embassy walls, not Soleimani. The unarmed PMU soldiers dispersed as soon as the Iraqi government said their point was made. If we are so thin skinned that rude graffiti and gestures induce us to committing assassinations, we deserve to be labeled as international pariahs. ..."
    "... Yes, I see Soleimani as a threat, but he was a threat to the jihadis and the continued US dreams of regional hegemony. ..."
    "... According to published pictures of the rockets recovered after the K-1 attack, they were the same powerful new weapons that Turkish troops recovered from a YPG ammo depot in Afrin last year: 'Iranian' 107mm rockets Manufactured 2016 Lot 570. I know matching lots isn't proof of anything, but what are the chances? ..."
    "... This "imminent" threat of Gen. Soleimani attacking US forces seems eerily reminiscent of the "mushroom cloud" imminent threat that Bush, Cheney and Blair peddled. Now we even have Pence claiming that Soleimani provided support to the Saudi 9/11 terrorists. Laughable if it wasn't so tragic. But of course at one time the talking point was Saddam orchestrated 9/11 and was in cahoots with Osama bin Laden. ..."
    "... After the Iraq WMD, Gadhaffi threat and Assad the butcher and the incorrigible terrorist loving Taliban posing such imminent threats that we must use our awesome military to bomb, invade, occupy, while spending trillions of dollars borrowed from future generations, and our soldiers on the ground serving multiple tours, and our fellow citizens buy into the latest rationale for killing an Iranian & Iraqi general, without an ounce of skepticism, says a lot! ..."
    "... IMO, Craig Murray is pointing in the right direction around the word 'immanent,' by pointing out that it is referring to the legally dubious Bethlehem Doctrine of Self Defense, the Israeli, UK and US standard for assassination, in which immanent is defined as widely as, 'we think they were thinking about it.' The USG managed to run afoul of even these overly permissive guidelines, which are meant only against non-state actors. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com
    The threat of General Soleimani - TTG W7kf87eV

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had "clear, unambiguous" intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani's plots "might still happen."

    Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters "we fully comprehend the strategic consequences" associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran's most prominent military commander.

    But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran. "Is there risk? Damn right, there's risk. But we're working to mitigate it," Milley said from his Pentagon office. (Reuters)

    -- -- -- -- --

    This is pretty much in line with Trump's pronouncement that our assassination of Soleimani along with Iraqi General Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was carried out to prevent a war not start one. Whatever information was presented to Trump painted a picture of imminent danger in his mind. What did the Pentagon see that was so imminent?

    Well first let's look at the mindset of the Pentagon concerning our presence in Iraq and Syria. These two recent quotes from Brett McGurk sums up that mindset.

    "If we leave Iraq, that will just increase further the running room for Iran and Shia militia groups and also the vacuum that will see groups like ISIS fill and we'll be right back to where we were. So that would be a disaster."

    "It's always been Soleimani's strategic game... to get us out of the Middle East. He wants to see us leave Syria, he wants to see us leave Iraq... I think if we leave Iraq after this, that would just be a real disastrous outcome..."

    McGurk played a visible role in US policy in Iraq and Syria under Bush, Obama and Trump. Now he's an NBC talking head and a lecturer at Stanford. He could be the poster boy for what many see as a neocon deep state. He's definitely not alone in thinking this way.

    So back to the question of what was the imminent threat. Reuters offers an elaborate story of a secret meeting of PMU commanders with Soleimani on a rooftop terrace on the Tigris with a grand view of the US Embassy on the far side of the river.

    -- -- -- -- --

    "In mid-October, Iranian Major-General Qassem Soleimani met with his Iraqi Shi'ite militia allies at a villa on the banks of the Tigris River, looking across at the U.S. embassy complex in Baghdad, and instructed them to step up attacks on U.S. targets in the country"

    "Two militia commanders and two security sources briefed on the gathering told Reuters that Soleimani instructed his top ally in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and other powerful militia leaders to step up attacks on US targets using sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran."

    "Soleimani's plans to attack US forces aimed to provoke a military response that would redirect Iraqis' anger towards Iran to the US, according to the sources briefed on the gathering, Iraqi Shi'ite politicians and government officials close to Iraq PM Adel Abdul Mahdi."

    "At the Baghdad villa, Soleimani told the assembled commanders to form a new militia group of low-profile paramilitaries - unknown to the United States - who could carry out rocket attacks on Americans housed at Iraqi military bases." (Reuters)

    -- -- -- -- --

    And what were those sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran? They were 1960s Chinese designed 107mm multiple rocket launcher technology. These simple but effective rocket launchers were mass produced by the Soviet Union, Iran, Turkey and Sudan in addition to China. They've been used in every conflict since then. The one captured outside of the K1 military base seems to be locally fabricated, but used Iranian manufactured rockets.

    Since when does the PMU have to form another low profile militia unit? The PMU is already composed of so many militia units it's difficult to keep track of them. There's also nothing low profile about the Kata'ib Hizbollah, the rumored perpetrators of the K1 rocket attack. They're as high profile as they come.

    Perhaps there's something to this Reuters story, but to me it sounds like another shithouse rumor. It would make a great scene in a James Bond movie, but it still sounds like a rumor.

    There's another story put out by The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Although it also sounds like a scene form a James Bond movie, I think it sounds more convincing than the Reuters story.

    -- -- -- -- --

    Delegation of Arab tribes met with "Soleimani" at the invitation of "Tehran" to carry out attacks against U.S. Forces east Euphrates

    The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights learned that a delegation of the Arab tribes met on the 26th of December 2019, with the goal of directing and uniting forces against U.S. Forces, and according to the Syrian Observatory's sources, that meeting took place with the commander of the al-Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Qassim Soleimani, who was assassinated this morning in a U.S. raid on his convoy in Iraq. the sources reported that: "the invitation came at the official invitation of Tehran, where Iran invited Faisal al-al-Aazil, one of the elders of al-Ma'amra clan, in addition to the representative of al-Bo Asi clan the commander of NDF headquarters in Qamishli Khatib al-Tieb, and the Sheikh of al-Sharayin, Nawaf al-Bashar, the Sheikh of Harb clan, Mahmoud Mansour al-Akoub, " adding that: "the meeting discussed carrying out attacks against the American forces and the Syria Democratic Forces."

    Earlier, the head of the Syrian National Security Bureau, Ali Mamlouk, met with the security committee and about 20 Arab tribal elders and Sheikhs in al-Hasakah, at Qamishli Airport Hall on the 5th of December 2019, where he demanded the Arab tribes to withdraw their sons from the ranks of the Syria Democratic Forces. (SOHR)

    -- -- -- -- --

    I certainly don't automatically give credence to anything Rami sends out of his house in Coventry. I give this story more credibility only because that is exactly what I would do if Syria east of the the Euphrates was my UWOA (unconventional warfare operational area). This is exactly how I would go about ridding the area of the "Great Satan" invaders and making Syria whole again. The story also includes a lot of named individuals. This can be checked. This morning Colonel Lang told me some tribes in that region have a Shia history. Perhaps he can elaborate on that. I've read in several places that Qassim Soleimani knew the tribes in Syria and Iraq like the back of his hand. This SOHR story makes sense. If Soleimani was working with the tribes of eastern Syria like he worked with the tribes and militias of Iraq to create the al-Ḥashd ash-Shaʿbi, it no doubt scared the bejeezus out of the Pentagon and endangered their designs for Iraq and Syria.

    So, Qassim Soleimani, the Iranian soldier, the competent and patient Iranian soldier, was a threat to the Pentagon's designs a serious threat. But he was a long term threat, not an imminent threat. And he was just one soldier.The threat is systemic and remains. The question of why, in the minds of Trump and his generals, Soleimani had to die this week is something I will leave for my next post.

    A side note on Milley: Whenever I see a photo of him, I am reminded of my old Brigade Commander in the 25th Infantry Division, Colonel Nathan Vail. They both have the countenance of a snapping turtle. One of the rehab transfers in my rifle platoon once referred to him as "that J. Edgar Hoover looking mutha fuka." I had to bite my tongue to keep from breaking out in laughter. It would have been unseemly for a second lieutenant to openly enjoy such disrespect by a PV2 and a troublemaking PV2 at that. God bless PV2 Webster, where ever you are.

    TTG

    John Merryman , 04 January 2020 at 06:33 PM

    Wondering how much more intense the security will be around Trump's campaign rallies during the election.
    The Twisted Genius , 04 January 2020 at 06:46 PM
    Eric, the embassy attack hurt little more than our pride. Yes, an entrance lobby and it's contents were burned and destroyed but no American was injured or even roughed up. It was the Iraqi government that let the demonstrators approach the embassy walls, not Soleimani. The unarmed PMU soldiers dispersed as soon as the Iraqi government said their point was made. If we are so thin skinned that rude graffiti and gestures induce us to committing assassinations, we deserve to be labeled as international pariahs.

    Yes, I see Soleimani as a threat, but he was a threat to the jihadis and the continued US dreams of regional hegemony. I was glad we went back into Iraq to take on the threat of IS and cheered our initial move into Syria to do the same. That was the Sunni-Shia war you worry about. More accurately, it was a Salafist jihadist-all others war. Unfortunately, we overstayed the need and our welcome. It's a character flaw that we cannot loosen our grasp on empire no matter how much it costs us.

    Jack -> The Twisted Genius ... , 04 January 2020 at 08:16 PM
    TTG,

    Thanks for your post. What it says I buy. We are in the Middle East and have been for a while to impose regional hegemony. What that has bought us is nebulous at best. Clearly we have spent trillions and destabilized the region. Millions have been displaced and hundreds of thousands have been killed and maimed, including thousands of our soldiers. Are we better off from our invasion of Iraq, toppling Ghaddafi, and attempting to topple Assad using jihadists? Guys like McGurk, Bolton, Pompeo will say yes. Others like me will say no.

    The oil is a canard. We produce more oil than we ever have and it is a fungible commodity. Will it impact Israel if we pull out our forces? Sure. But it may have a salutary effect that it may force them to sue for peace. Will the Al Sauds continue to fund jihadi mayhem? Likely yes, but they'll have to come to some accommodation with the Iranian Shia and recognize their regional strength.

    Our choice is straightforward. Continue down the path of more conflict sinking ever more trillions that we don't have expecting a different outcome or cut our losses and get out and let the natural forces of the region assert themselves. I know which path I'll take.

    JamesT -> The Twisted Genius ... , 04 January 2020 at 09:48 PM
    TTG,

    With all due respect, I think you are wrong. I think the protesters swarming the embassy was exactly the same kind of tactic that US backed protesters used in Ukraine (and are currently using in Hong Kong) to great effect. The Persians are unique in that they are capable of studying our methodologies and tactics and appropriating them.

    When the US backed protesters took over Maidan square and started taking over various government building in Kiev, Viktor Yanukovych had two choices - either start shooting protesters or watch while his authority collapsed. It was and is a difficult choice.

    In my humble opinion, there are few things the stewards of US hegemony fear more than the IRGC becoming the worlds number one disciple of Gene Sharp.

    PavewayIV , 04 January 2020 at 06:46 PM
    TTG - "And what were those sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran?"

    According to published pictures of the rockets recovered after the K-1 attack, they were the same powerful new weapons that Turkish troops recovered from a YPG ammo depot in Afrin last year: 'Iranian' 107mm rockets Manufactured 2016 Lot 570. I know matching lots isn't proof of anything, but what are the chances?

    If the U.S. only had a Dilyana Gaytandzhieva to bird-dog out the rat line. Wait... the MSM would have fired her by now for weaponizing journalism against the neocons [sigh].

    Factotum , 04 January 2020 at 07:21 PM
    If a goal is to get the heck out of the Middle East since it is an intractable cess pit and stat protecting our own borders and internal security, will we be better off with Soleimani out of the picture or left in place.

    Knowing of course, more just like him will sprout quickly, like dragon's teeth, in the sands of the desert.ME is a tar baby. Fracking our own tar sands is the preferable alternative.

    Real war war would be a direct attack on Israel. Then they get our full frontal assault. But this pissy stuff around the edges is an exercise in futility. 2020 was Trump's to lose.Incapacity to handle asymmetirc warfare is ours to lose.

    Jane , 04 January 2020 at 07:35 PM
    There is no necessary link between the Iranian support for the Assad regime, to include its operations in tribal areas of Syria. The Iranian-backed militias and Iranian government officials have been operating in that area for a long time, supporting the efforts of Security/Intel Ali Mamlouk. That Suleimani knew the tribes so well is a mark of his professional competence. Everyone is courting the Syrian tribes, some sides more adeptly than others. It is also worth noting that in putting together manpower for their various locally formed Syrian militias, the Iranians took on unemployed Sunnis.

    That said, there are small Ismaili communities in Syria and there are apparently a couple of villages in Deir ez Zor that did convert to Shiism, but no mass religious change. The Iranians are sensitive to the fact that they could cause a backlash if they tried hard to promote "an alien culture."

    Elora Danan , 04 January 2020 at 07:40 PM
    Well, The Donald has turned to Twitter menacing iran with wiping out all of its World Heritage Sites....which is declared intention to commit a war crime...

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1213593975732527112

    For what it seems Iran must sawllow the assasination of its beloved and highjly regarded general...or else...

    Do you really think there is any explanation for this, whatever Soleimani´s history ( he was doing his duty in his country and neighboring zone...you are...well...everywhere...) or that we can follow this way with you escalating your threats and crimes ever and that everybody must leave it at that without response or you menace coming with more ?

    That somebody or some news agency has any explanation for this is precisely the sign of our times and our disgrace. That there is a bunch of greedy people who is willing to do whatever is needed to prevail and keep being obscenely rich...

    BTW, would be interesting to know who are the main holders of shares at Reuters...

    Elora Danan , 04 January 2020 at 08:09 PM
    Board of Directors of Reuters

    The same monopolizing almost each and every MSM and news agency at every palce in the world, big bank, big pharma, big business, big capital ( insurances companies nad hedge funds ) big real state, and US think tanks...

    Elora Danan , 04 January 2020 at 08:33 PM
    In Elora´s opinion, Bret MacGurk is making revanche from Soleimani for the predictable fact that a humble and pious man bred in the region, who worked as bricklayer to help pay his father´s debt during his youth, and moreover has an innate irresistible charisma, managed to connect better with the savage tribes of the ME than such exceptionalist posh theoric bred at such an exceptionalist as well as far away country like the US.

    But...what did you expect, that MacGurk would become Lawrence of Arabia versus Soleimani in his simpleness?

    May be because of that that he deserved being dismembered by a misile...

    As Pence blamed shamefully and stonefacelly Soleimani for 9/11, MacGurk blames him too for having fallen from the heights he was...

    It seems that Pence was in the team of four who assesed Trump on this hit...along with Pompeo...

    A good response would be that someone would leak the real truth on 9/11 so as to debunk Pence´s mega-lie...

    Factotum , 04 January 2020 at 08:48 PM
    Two years ago, the public protest theme for Basel's winter carnival Fashnach was the imminent threat nuclear war as NK and US were sabre rattling, and NK was lobbing missles across Japan with sights on West Coast US cities.

    Then almost the following week, NK and US planned to meet F2F in Singapore. And we could all breathe again. In the very early spring of 2018.

    blue peacock , 04 January 2020 at 09:54 PM
    TTG

    This "imminent" threat of Gen. Soleimani attacking US forces seems eerily reminiscent of the "mushroom cloud" imminent threat that Bush, Cheney and Blair peddled. Now we even have Pence claiming that Soleimani provided support to the Saudi 9/11 terrorists. Laughable if it wasn't so tragic. But of course at one time the talking point was Saddam orchestrated 9/11 and was in cahoots with Osama bin Laden.

    I find it fascinating watching the media spin and how easily so many Americans buy into the spin du jour.

    After the Iraq WMD, Gadhaffi threat and Assad the butcher and the incorrigible terrorist loving Taliban posing such imminent threats that we must use our awesome military to bomb, invade, occupy, while spending trillions of dollars borrowed from future generations, and our soldiers on the ground serving multiple tours, and our fellow citizens buy into the latest rationale for killing an Iranian & Iraqi general, without an ounce of skepticism, says a lot!

    Yeah, it will be interesting to see how Trump's re-election will go when we are engaged in a full scale military conflagration in the Middle East? It sure will give Tulsi & Bernie an excellent environment to promote their anti-neocon message. You can see it in Trump's ambivalent tweets. On the one hand, I ordered the assassination of Soleimani to prevent a war (like we needed to burn the village to save it), while on the other hand, we have 52 sites locked & loaded if you retaliate. Hmmm!! IMO, he has seriously jeapordized his re-election by falling into the neocon Deep State trap. They never liked him. The coup by law enforcement & CIA & DNI failed. The impeachment is on its last legs. Voila! Incite him into another Middle Eastern quagmire against what he campaigned on and won an election.

    I would think that Khamanei has no choice but to retaliate. How is anyone's guess? I doubt he'll order the sinking of a naval vessel patrolling the Gulf or fire missiles into the US base in Qatar. But assassination....especially in some far off location in Europe or South America? A targeted bombing here or there? A cyber attack at a critical point. I mean not indiscriminate acts like the jihadists but highly calculated targets. All seem extremely feasible in our highly vulnerable and relatively open societies. And they have both the experience and skills to accomplish them.

    If ever you have the inclination, a speculative post on how the escalation ladder could potentially be climbed would be a fascinating read.

    Jack -> blue peacock... , 05 January 2020 at 12:01 AM
    "I find it fascinating watching the media spin and how easily so many Americans buy into the spin du jour."

    BP,

    Yes, indeed. It is a testament to our susceptibility that there is such limited scepticism by so many people on the pronouncements of our government. Especially considering the decades long continuous streams of lies and propaganda. The extent and brazenness of the lies have just gotten worse through my lifetime.

    I feel for my grand-children and great-grand children as they now live in society that has no value for honor. It's all expedience in the search for immediate personal gain.

    I am and have been in the minority for decades now. I've always opposed our military adventurism overseas from Korea to today. I never bought into the domino theory even at the heights of the Cold War. And I don't buy into the current global hegemony destiny to bring light to the savages. I've also opposed the build up of the national security surveillance state as the antithesis of our founding. I am also opposed to the increasing concentration of market power across every major market segment. It will be the destruction of our entrepreneurial economy. The partisan duopoly is well past it's sell date. But right now the majority are still caught up in rancorous battles on the side of Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.

    Something To Think About , 04 January 2020 at 10:19 PM
    A question to the committee: what is the source for the claim that Soleimani bears direct responsibility for the death of over 600 US military personnel?

    Craig Murray points to this article:
    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/04/04/iran-killed-more-us-troops-in-iraq-than-previously-known-pentagon-says/

    If that is the case (and it appears to be) then the US govt's claim is nonsense, as it clearly says " 'During Operation Iraqi Freedom, DoD assessed that at least 603 U.S. personnel deaths in Iraq were the result of Iran-backed militants,' Navy Cmdr. Sean Robertson, a Pentagon spokesman, said in an email."

    So those figures represent casualties suffered during the US-led military invasion of Iraq i.e. casualties suffered during a shooting-war.

    If Soleimani is a legitimate target for assassination because of the success of his forces on the battlefield then wouldn't that make Tommy Franks an equally-legitimate target?

    Jack , 04 January 2020 at 10:33 PM
    Pulitzer Prize winning author of Caliphate, Romanian-American, Rukmini Callimachi, on the intelligence on Soleimani "imminent threat" being razor-thin.

    https://twitter.com/rcallimachi/status/1213421769777909761?s=21

    PavewayIV said in reply to Jack... , 04 January 2020 at 11:01 PM
    You just beat me to her thread, Jack. For the Twitter shy, this is the first of a series of 17 tweets as a teaser:
    1. I've had a chance to check in with sources, including two US officials who had intelligence briefings after the strike on Suleimani. Here is what I've learned. According to them, the evidence suggesting there was to be an imminent attack on American targets is "razor thin".

    Summary: [Too shameful to type]

    Roy G , 04 January 2020 at 11:59 PM
    IMO, Craig Murray is pointing in the right direction around the word 'immanent,' by pointing out that it is referring to the legally dubious Bethlehem Doctrine of Self Defense, the Israeli, UK and US standard for assassination, in which immanent is defined as widely as, 'we think they were thinking about it.' The USG managed to run afoul of even these overly permissive guidelines, which are meant only against non-state actors.

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/lies-the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-the-illegal-murder-of-soleimani/

    [Jan 06, 2020] The most optimistic post on this thread.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com


    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:28 pm GMT

    @Cloak And Dagger

    Henry Kissinger Predicts 'In 10 Years, There Will Be No More Israel'

    That's the most optimistic post on this thread.

    [Jan 06, 2020] But they could always find an un-scorched Iranian passport in mint condition among the debris of the explosion.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Commentator Mike , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:08 pm GMT

    @Bookish1

    Not only Mossad but probably many others would like to see a suicide bomber blow himself up somewhere in the US killing alot of people. That makes it difficult to figure out who did it and maybe impossible to figure it out. It would be a mess.

    But they could always find an un-scorched Iranian passport in mint condition among the debris of the explosion.

    [Jan 06, 2020] One humble suggestion about resolving the crisis with Iran

    Jan 06, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    SW , January 5, 2020 9:12 am

    If they want revenge, in the interest of avoiding future bloodshed, I suggest that we give them Mike Pence.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Whether he is eating ice cream or not, Trump appears to be on a rampage to recreate the end of The Godfather.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:16 am GMT

    Doubling down on stupid:

    Whether he is eating ice cream or not, Trump appears to be on a rampage to recreate the end of The Godfather.

    Less than 24 hours after a US drone shockingly killed the top Iranian military leader, Qasem Soleimani, resulting in equity markets groaning around the globe in fear over Iranian reprisals (and potentially, World War III), the US has gone for round two with Reuters and various other social media sources reporting that US air strikes targeting Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units umbrella grouping of Iran-backed Shi'ite militias near camp Taji north of Baghdad, have killed six people and critically wounded three, an Iraqi army source said late on Friday.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/round-two-us-drone-airstrikes-kill-six-pro-iran-militia-commanders

    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:55 am GMT
    Now would be the perfect time for the Mossad to do its false flag shtick. They wouldn't even have to try very hard to pin it on Iran. I'll bet that when the news came out that the Iranian guy had been killed, every neocon on the planet popped a boner that will last for days. Michael Ledeen is probably mazel tov-ing his ass off.

    I don't care about the dead Muslim who got killed, since that's the only kind of "good Muslim" you're ever going to find, but I would still prefer for the U.S. to get out of the Middle East altogether. Let those two warring anti-Christ peoples kill each other to their hearts' content.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Adam Schiff Demands Public Hearings on Soleimani Strike and suggested Secretary of State Mike Pompeo misrepresented intelligence indicating that killing Soleimani saved American lives.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.breitbart.com

    "I think there should be open hearings on this subject," Schiff told the Washington Post in an interview published Monday. "The president has put us on a path where we may be at war with Iran. That requires the Congress to fully engage."

    Asked for his thoughts on President Trump warning Iran that the U.S. will hit 52 sites, including cultural sites, if Tehran retaliates the California Democrat said: "None of that could come out of the Pentagon. Absolutely no way."

    ... ... ...

    Schiff 's comments to the Post come after he suggested Secretary of State Mike Pompeo misrepresented intelligence indicating that killing Soleimani saved American lives.

    "It was a reckless decision that increased the risk to America all around the world, not decreased it. When Secretary Pompeo says that this decision to take out Qasem Soleimani saved American lives, saved European lives, he is expressing a personal opinion, not an intelligence conclusion," he told CNN State of the Union host Jake Tapper. "I think it will increase the risk to Americans around the world. I have not seen the intelligence that taking out Soleimani was going to either stop the plotting that is going on or decrease other risks to the United States."

    [Jan 06, 2020] The imminent threat was fake and was a production of the Pompeo-Ester neocon gang by Zachary Cohen

    Now we know the composition of the neocon gang that fooled malleable, jingoistic and incompetent Trump: "Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Pompeo, National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien and Milley".
    Notable quotes:
    "... The administration has failed to connect the dots in a way that provides a clear picture of an imminent threat and that argument has been obscured by inconsistent messaging from US officials. ..."
    "... Democrat Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland also told CNN that one of his representatives was at the Friday briefing and said "nothing that came out of the briefing changed my view that this was an unnecessary escalation of the situation in Iraq and Iran." ..."
    "... Van Hollen went on to say: "While I can't tell you what was said, I can tell you, I have no additional information to support the administration's claim that this was an imminent attack on Americans." ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | cnn.com

    See also

    Washington (CNN) Top US national security officials continue to defend the Trump administration's claim that it killed Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani in response to an impending threat to American lives, but the lack of evidence provided to lawmakers and the public has fueled lingering skepticism about whether the strike was justified.

    President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and top military officials have offered similar explanations for targeting Soleimani, citing an "imminent" threat from his plans to carry out what Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley called a "significant campaign of violence" against the US in the coming days, weeks or months.

    "If you're an American in the region, days and weeks, this is not something that's relevant," Pompeo told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union" Sunday, dodging a question on the imminence of such Iranian attacks. "We have to prepare, we have to be ready, and we took a bad guy off the battlefield."

    But questions have continued to swirl in recent days over the timing, whether the administration fully considered the fallout from such a strike against Soleimani, and if an appropriate legal basis was established for the presidential authorization of lethal force.

    ... ... ...

    When Trump finally gets ready to act, they added, "you can't out escalate him." CNN has previously reported that there was internal debate over the decision and work behind the scenes to develop a legal argument before the operation was carried out.

    After a meeting Sunday in Mar-a-Lago where President Donald Trump was briefed by senior members of his national security team on options regarding Iran, some officials emerged surprised the President chose to target Soleimani, according to a source familiar with the briefing.

    The officials who briefed Trump included Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Pompeo, National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien and Milley.

    The source said that some aides expected Trump to pick a less risky option, but once presented with the choice of targeting Soleimani he remained intent on going forward.

    ...The administration has failed to connect the dots in a way that provides a clear picture of an imminent threat and that argument has been obscured by inconsistent messaging from US officials.

    Democrat Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland also told CNN that one of his representatives was at the Friday briefing and said "nothing that came out of the briefing changed my view that this was an unnecessary escalation of the situation in Iraq and Iran."

    Van Hollen went on to say: "While I can't tell you what was said, I can tell you, I have no additional information to support the administration's claim that this was an imminent attack on Americans."

    [Jan 06, 2020] Russian reaction

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    grr , Jan 7 2020 0:43 utc | 141

    Re PCR's latest linked article (post 133.
    What PCR is insisting Putin do ("The easiest and cleanest way for Putin to do this is to announce that Iran is under Russia's protection.")Putin has already done so in a landmark speech last year when he unveiled five or six game-changing weapons, or was it 2018.
    He declared back then to the evil empire that a nuclear attack on an ally would be considered an attack upon Russia. He made this crystal clear. Of course it wouldn't hurt for him to 'gently' remind them of this.

    bjd , Jan 7 2020 0:47 utc | 142

    You can read Lavrov's Press Releases here: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation .
    bjd , Jan 7 2020 0:58 utc | 147

    I do have to say, the silence from the Russians is odd. Even when you read the Russian Foreign Ministry's news releases.

    For instance, there's this on January 4th:
    " On January 4, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had a telephone conversation with Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran Mohammad Javad Zarif, at the latter's initiative. " (italics mine).

    So Lavrov talked to an Iranian official only on January 4th, and the call came from Iran (Zarif), not the other way around. This is odd, and even the explicit
    mentioning of Zarif initiating the call --to me-- seems odd.
    Hmm...

    [Jan 06, 2020] Warren Questions if Soleimani Strike Linked to Impeachment -- Look at the Timing Breitbart

    Notable quotes:
    "... Follow Pam Key On Twitter @pamkeyNEN ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.breitbart.com

    On Sunday's broadcast of CNN's "State of the Union," 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) questioned if President Donald Trump's reasons for the Qasem Soleimani assassination was to distract from impeachment.

    Warren said, "I think that the question that we ought to focus on is why now? Why not a month ago, and why not a month from now? And the answer from the administration seems to be that they can't keep their story straight on this. They pointed in all different directions. And you know, the last time that we watched them do this was the summer over Ukraine. As soon as people started asking about the conversations between Donald Trump and the president of Ukraine and why aid had been held up to Ukraine, the administration did the same thing. They pointed in all directions of what was going on. And of course, what emerged then is that this is Donald Trump just trying to advance Donald Trump's own political agenda. Not the agenda of the United States of America. So what happens right now? Next week, the president of the United States could be facing an impeachment trial in the Senate. We know that he is deeply upset about that. I think that people are reasonably asking why this moment? Why does he pick now to take this highly inflammatory, highly dangerous action that moves us closer to war? We have been at war for 20 years in the Middle East, and we need to stop the war this the Middle East and not expand it."

    Tapper asked, "Are you suggesting that President Trump pulled the trigger and had Qasem Soleimani killed as a distraction from impeachment?"

    Warren said, "Look, I think that people are reasonably asking about the timing and why it is that the administration seems to have all kinds of different answers. In the first 48 hours after this attack, what did we hear? Well, we heard it was for an imminent attack, and then we heard, no, no, it is to prevent any future attack, and then we heard that it is from the vice president himself and no, it is related to 9/11, and then we heard from president reports of people in the intelligence community saying that the whole, that the threat was overblown. You know, when the administration doesn't seem to have a coherent answer for taking a step like this. They have taken a step that moves us closer to war, a step that puts everyone at risk, and step that puts the military at risk and puts the diplomats in the region at risk. And we have already paid a huge price for this war. Thousands of American lives lost, and a cost that we have paid domestically and around the world. At the same time, look at what it has done in the Middle East, millions of people who have been killed, who have been injured, who have been displaced. So this is not a moment when the president should be escalating tensions and moving us to war. The job of the president is to keep us safe, and that means move back from the edge."

    Tapper pressed, "Do you believe that President Trump pulled the trigger on this operation as a way to distract from impeachment? Is that what you think?"

    Warren said, "I think it is a reasonable question to ask, particularly when the administration immediately after having taken this decision offers a bunch of contradictory explanations for what is going on."

    She continued, "I think it is the right question to ask. We will get more information as we go forward but look at the timing on this. Look at what Donald Trump has said afterward and his administration. They have pointed in multiple directions. There is a reason that he chose this moment, not a month ago and not a month from now, not a less aggressive and less dangerous response. He had a whole range of responses that were presented to him. He didn't pick one of the other ones. He picked the most aggressive and the one that moves us closer to war. So what does everybody talk about today? Are we going to war? Are we going to have another five years, tens, ten years of war in the Middle East, and dragged in once again. Are we bringing another generation of young people into war? That is every bit of the conversation right now. Donald Trump has taken an extraordinarily reckless step, and we have seen it before, he is using foreign policy and uses whatever he can to advance the interests of Donald Trump."

    Follow Pam Key On Twitter @pamkeyNEN

    [Jan 06, 2020] Soleimani murder what could happen next by The Saker

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    https://staticxx.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=45#channel=f1bd48e619c98fc&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com https://www.unz.com/tsaker/soleimani-murder-what-could-happen-next/ The Unz Review - Mobile The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media User Settings: Max Comment Length? Version? Social Media? Read Aloud w/ Show Word Counts No Video Autoplay No Infinite Scrolling
    Save Cancel

    ← EXTREMELY Dangerous Development in the ... The US Is Now at War, de-Facto and de-J... → Blogview The Saker Archive Blogview The Saker Archive Soleimani Murder: What Could Happen Next? The Saker January 3, 2020 2,900 Words 357 Comments Reply Listen ॥ ■ ► RSS

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D45%23cb%3Df2a9166cd961e98%26domain%3Dwww.unz.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.unz.com%252Ff1bd48e619c98fc%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=100&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Ftsaker%2Fsoleimani-murder-what-could-happen-next%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&share=true&size=small&width=90

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D45%23cb%3Df8941e156f9be8%26domain%3Dwww.unz.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.unz.com%252Ff1bd48e619c98fc%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Ftsaker%2Fsoleimani-murder-what-could-happen-next%2F&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&type=button Email This Page to Someone
    Remember My Information


    => List of Bookmarks A spiritual father kisses his beloved son
    ◄ ► Bookmark ◄ ► ▲ ▼ Toggle All ToC ▲ ▼ Add to Library Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments Search Clear Cancel

    First, a quick recap of the situation

    We need to begin by quickly summarizing what just happened:

    General Soleimani was in Baghdad on an official visit to attend the funeral of the Iraqis murdered by the US on the 29th The US has now officially claimed responsibility for this murder The Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has officially declared that " However, a severe retaliation awaits the criminals who painted their corrupt hands with his and his martyred companions' blood last night "

    The US paints itself – and Iran – into a corner

    The Iranians simply had no other choice than to declare that there will be a retaliation. There are a few core problems with what happens next. Let's look at them one by one:

    First, it is quite obvious from the flagwaving claptrap in the US that Uncle Shmuel is "locked and loaded" for even more macho actions and reaction. In fact, Secretary Esper has basically painted the US into what I would call an "over-reaction corner" by declaring that " the game has changed " and that the US will take " preemptive action " whenever it feels threatened . Thus, the Iranians have to assume that the US will over-react to anything even remotely looking like an Iranian retaliation. No less alarming is that this creates the absolutely perfect conditions for a false flag à la " USS Liberty " . Right now, the Israelis have become at least as big a danger for US servicemen and facilities in the entire Middle-East as are the Iranians themselves. How? Simple! Fire a missile/torpedo/mine at any USN ship and blame Iran. We all know that if that happens the US political elites will do what they did the last time around: let US servicemen die and protect Israel at all costs (read up on the USS Liberty if you don't know about it) There is also a very real risk of "spontaneous retaliations" by other parties (not Iran or Iranian allies) . In fact, in his message, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has specifically declared that " Martyr Suleimani is an international face to the Resistance and all lovers of the Resistance share a demand in retaliation for his blood. All friends – as well as all enemies – must know the path of Fighting and Resistance will continue with double the will and the final victory is decidedly waiting for those who fight in this path. " He is right, Soleimani was loved and revered by many people all over the globe, some of whom might decided to avenge his death. This means that we might well see some kind of retaliation which, of course, will be blamed on Iran but which might not be the result of any Iranian actions at all. Finally, should the Iranians decide not to retaliate, then we can be absolutely sure that Uncle Shmuel will see that as a proof of his putative "invincibility" and take that as a license to engage in even more provocative actions. A spiritual father kisses his beloved son

    If we look at these four factors together we would have to come to the conclusion that Iran HAS to retaliate and HAS to do so publicly .

    Why?

    Because whether the Iranian do retaliate or not, they are almost guaranteed another US attack in retaliation for anything looking like a retaliation, whether Iran is involved or not .

    The dynamics of internal US politics

    Next, let's look at the internal political dynamics in the US:

    I have always claimed that Donald Trump is a "disposable President" for the Neocons . What do I mean by that? I mean that the Neocons have used Trump to do all sorts of truly fantastically dumb things (pretty much ALL his policy decisions towards Israel and/or Syria) for a very simple reason. If Trump does something extremely dumb and dangerous, he will either get away with it, in which case the Neocons will be happy, or he will either fail or the consequences of his decisions will be catastrophic, at which point the Neocons will jettison him and replace him by an even more subservient individual (say Pence or Pelosi). In other words, for the Neocons to have Trump do something both fantastically dangerous and fantastically stupid is a win-win situation !

    Right now, the Dems (still the party favored by the Neocons) seem to be dead-set into committing political suicide with that ridiculous (and treacherous!) impeachment nonsense. Now think about this from the Neocon point of view. They might be able to get the US goyim to strike Iran AND get rid of Trump. I suppose that their thinking will go something like this:

    Trump looks set to win 2020. We don't want that. However, we have been doing everything in our power to trigger a US attack on Iran since pretty much 1979. Let's have Trump do that. If he "wins" (by whatever definition – more about that further below), we win. If he loses, the Iranians will still be in a world of pain and we can always jettison him like a used condom (used to supposedly safely screw somebody with no risks to yourself). Furthermore, if the region explodes, this will help our beloved Bibi and unite US Jewry behind Israel. Finally, if Israel gets attacked, we will immediately demand (and, of course, obtain) a massive US attack on Iran, supported by the entire US political establishment and media. And, lastly, should Israel be hit hard, then we can always use our nukes and tell the goyim that "Iran wants to gas 6 million Jews and wipe the only democracy in the Middle-East off the face of the earth" or something equally insipid.

    Ever since Trump made it into the White House, we saw him brown-nose the Israel Lobby with a delectation which is extreme even by US standards. I suppose that this calculation goes something along the lines of "with the Israel Lobby behind me, I am safe in the White House". He is obviously too stupidly narcissistic to realize that he has been used all along. To his (or one of his key advisor's) credit, he did NOT allow the Neocons to start a major war against Russia, China, the DPRK, Venezuela, Yemen, Syria, etc. However, Iran is a totally different case as it is the "number one" target the Neocons and Israel wanted strike and destroy. The Neocons even had this motto " boys go to Baghdad, real men go to Tehran ". Now that Uncle Shmuel has lost all this wars of choice, now that the US armed forces have no credibility left, now is the time to restore the "macho" self-image of Uncle Shmuel and, indeed, "go to Tehran" so to speak.

    The Dems (Biden) are already saying that Trump just " tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox ", as if they cared about anything except their own, petty, political goals and power. Still, I have to admit that Biden's metaphor is correct – that is exactly what Trump (and his real bosses) have done.

    If we assume that I am correct in my evaluation that Trump is the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable President", then we also have to accept the fact that the US armed forces the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable armed forces" and that the US as a nation is also the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable nation". This is very bad news indeed, as this means that from the Neocon/Israeli point of view, there are no real risks into throwing the US into a war with Iran .

    In truth, the position of the Dems is a masterpiece of hypocrisy which can be summed up as follows: the assassination of Soleimani is a wonderful event, but Trump is a monster for making it happen .

    A winner, no?

    What would the likely outcome of a US war on Iran be?

    I have written so often about this topic that I won't go into all the possible scenarios here. All I will say is the following:

    This is a HUGE asymmetry which basically means that the US cannot win and Iran can only win.

    And, not, the Iranians don't have to defeat CENTCOM/NATO! They don't need to engage in large scale military operations. All they need to do is: remain "standing" once the dust settles down.

    ORDER IT NOW

    Ho Chi Minh once told the French " You can kill ten of my men for every one I kill of yours, but even at those odds, you will lose and I will win ". This is exactly why Iran will eventually prevail, maybe at a huge cost (Amalek must be destroyed, right?), but that will still be a victory.

    Now let's look at the two most basic types of war scenarios: outside Iran and inside Iran.

    The Iranians, including General Soleimani himself, have publicly declared many times that by trying to surround Iran and the Middle-East with numerous forces and facilities the US have given Iran a long list of lucrative targets. The most obvious battlefield for a proxy war is clearly Iraq where there are plenty of pro and anti Iranian forces to provide the conditions for a long, bloody and protracted conflict (Moqtada al-Sadr has just declared that the Mahdi Army will be remobilized). But Iraq is far from being the only place where an explosion of violence can take place: the ENTIRE MIDDLE-EAST is well within Iranian "reach", be it by direct attack or by attack by sympathetic/allied forces. Next to Iraq, there is also Afghanistan and, potentially, Pakistan. In terms of a choice of instruments, the Iranian options range from missile attacks, to special forces direct action strikes, to sabotage and many, many more options. The only limitation here is the imagination of the Iranians and, believe me, they have plenty of that!

    If such a retaliation happens, the US will have two basic options: strike at Iranian friends and allies outside Iran or, as Esper has now suggested, strike inside Iran. In the latter case, we can safely assume that any such attack will result in a massive Iranian retaliation on US forces and facilities all over the region and a closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

    Keep in mind that the Neocon motto " boys go to Baghdad, real men go to Tehran " implicitly recognizes the fact that a war against Iran would be qualitatively (and even quantitatively) different war than a war against Iraq. And, this is true, if the US seriously plans to strike inside Iran they would be faced with an explosion which would make all the wars since WWII look minor in comparison. But the temptation to prove to the world that Trump and his minions are "real men" as opposed to "boys" might be too strong, especially for a president who does not understand that he is a disposable tool in the hands of the Neocons.

    Now, let's quickly look at what will NOT happen

    Russia and/or China will not get militarily involved in this one. Neither will the US use this crisis as a pretext to attack Russia and/or China. The Pentagon clearly has no stomach for a war (conventional or nuclear) against Russia and neither does Russia have any desire for a war against the US. The same goes for China. However, it is important to remember that Russia and China have other options, political and covert ones, to really hurt the US and help Iran. There is the UNSC where Russia and China will block any US resolution condemning Iran. Yes, I know, Uncle Shmuel does not give a damn about the UN or international law, but most of the rest of the world very much does. This asymmetry is further exacerbated by Uncle Shmuel's attention span (weeks at most) with the one of Russia and China (decades). Does that matter?

    Absolutely!

    If the Iraqis officially declare that the US is an occupation force (which it is), an occupation force which engages in acts of war against Iraq (which it does) and that the Iraqi people want Uncle Shmuel and his hypocritical talking points about "democracy" to pack and leave, what can our Uncle Shmuel do? He will try to resist it, of course, but once the tiny figleaf of "nation building" is gone, replaced by yet another ugly and brutal US occupation, the political pressure on the US to get the hell out will become extremely hard to manage, both outside and even inside the US.

    In fact, Iranian state television called Trump's order to kill Soleimani " the biggest miscalculation by the U.S." since World War II. "The people of the region will no longer allow Americans to stay," it said.

    Next, both Russia and China can help Iran militarily with intelligence, weapons systems, advisors and economically, in overt and covert ways.

    Finally, both Russia and China have the means to, shall we say, "strongly suggest" to other targets on the US "country hit list" that now is the perfect time to strike at US interests (say, in Far East Asia).

    So Russia and China can and will help, but they will do so with what the CIA likes to call "plausible deniability".

    Back The Big Question: what can/will Iran do next?

    The Iranians are far most sophisticated players than the mostly clueless Americans. So the first thing I would suggest is that the Iranians are unlikely to do something the US is expecting them to do. Either they will do something totally different, or they will act much later, once the US lowers its guard (as it always does after declaring "victory").

    I asked a well-informed Iranian friend whether it was still possible to avoid war. Here is what he replied:

    Yes I do believe fullscale war can be avoided. I believe that Iran can try to use its political influence to unite Iraqi political forces to officially ask for the removal of US troops in Iraq. Kicking the US out of Iraq will mean that they can no longer occupy eastern Syria either as their troops will be in danger between two hostile states. If the Americans leave Syria and Iraq, that will be the ultimate revenge for Iran without having fired a single shot.

    I have to say that I concur with this idea: one of the most painful things Iran could do next would be to use this truly fantastically reckless event to kick the US out of Iraq first, and Syria next. That option, if it can be exercised, might also protect Iranian lives and the Iranian society from a direct US attack. Finally, such an outcome would give the murder of General Soleimani a very different and beautiful meaning: this martyr's blood liberated the Middle-East!

    Finally, if that is indeed the strategy chosen by Iran, this does not at all mean that on a tactical level the Iranians will not extract a price from US forces in the region or even elsewhere on the planet. For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one in direct retaliation for the deliberate shooting down by the USN of IranAir 655 Airbus over the Persian Gulf. I am not saying that I know for a fact that this is what really happened, only that Iran does have retaliatory options not limited to the Middle-East.

    Conclusion: we wait for Iran's next move

    The Iraqi Parliament is scheduled to debate a resolution demanding the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. I will just say that while I do not believe that the US will gentlemanly agree to any such demands, it will place the conflict in the political realm. That is – by definition – much more desirable than any form of violence, however justified it might seem. So I strongly suggest to those who want peace that they pray that the Iraqi MPs show some honor and spine and tell Uncle Shmuel what every country out there always wanted from the US: Yankees, go home!

    If that happens this will be a total victory for Iran and yet another abject defeat (self-defeat, really) by Uncle Shmuel. This is the best of all possible scenarios.

    But if that does not happen, then all bets are off and the momentum triggered by this latest act of US terrorism will result in many more deaths.

    As of right now (19:24 UTC) I still think that there is a roughly 80% chance of full scale war in the Middle-East and, again, will leave 20% of "unexpected events" (hopefully good ones).

    PS: this is a text I wrote under great time pressure and it has not be edited for typos or other mistakes. I ask the self-appointed Grammar Gestapo to take a break and not protest again. Thank you

    Harbinger , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:17 pm GMT

    I'm just waiting for the usual suspects to come on here denying it had anything to do with Israel and Judaism.
    Nicolás Palacios Navarro , says: Website Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:23 pm GMT
    Scenarios 3 and 4 look the most likely in this no-win scenario for Iran at the moment. It would probably be advantageous to Iran to let proxies retaliate, although that would further provoke the blatant US aggression of scenario 4.

    The best we can hope for, aside from Russia and China covertly assisting Iran with intelligence and materiel, is for the latter to possibly trigger a Suez Crisis-style scenario by threatening to dump its holdings of US sovereign debt. (The former country used to hold something like $160 billion in US bonds, but has since 2013 sold off all but approximately $15 billion.) However, I doubt the Chinese have the appetite for that -- they still depend vitally on the US market for their goods. And Japan, which holds about as much of that debt as China, will never follow suit. They willingly tanked their own economy to prop up the US with the Plaza Accord; and will likely continue to be a bootlick to American power to the bitter end.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:36 pm GMT
    The Iranians could not defeat the ragtag forces of Saddam Hussein, but they can defeat the United States? Preposterous. The Iranians will do nothing. Their dead general was a member of the military and a legitimate target. If they are foolish enough to attack the US, or its interests, they will suffer enormous losses. I understand that reality can sometimes conflict with a person's wishes, but the reality here is that as long as the US doesn't try to occupy Iran, they can cripple their military and destroy their infrastructure. Iran will do nothing,.
    JimDandy , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:47 pm GMT
    80%, eh?
    Anonymous [607] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:51 pm GMT
    @Rich I understand that reality can sometimes conflict with a person's wishes

    Are you really sure about that? LOL!!

    A123 , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:52 pm GMT

    I have written so often about this topic that I won't go into all the possible scenarios here. All I will say is the following:

    -- For the US, "winning" means achieving regime change or, failing that, destroying the Iranian economy.
    -- For Iran, "winning" simply means to survive the US onslaught.

    This is a HUGE asymmetry which basically means that the US cannot win and Iran can only win.

    Apparently the author has forgotten what happened a couple months ago. The economic situation is so bad in Iran, people are rioting against the corrupt Ayatollah. (1). Thousands arrested and over a hundred dead.

    All the U.S. has to do to win is hold the line. The situation is indeed assymetrical:

    -- By refusing to put boots on the ground in Iran, there are few options open to Iran that will hurt the U.S.
    -- The U.S. can freely strike against government elites like Soleimani if the Ayatollah tries to escalate.

    Attacking the embassy was clearly Khameni's desperate effort to shore up personal weakness at home. Not only did he fail to keep the embassy, he also lost a key terrorist. The weak leader just became much weaker.

    How long will the IRGC remain willing to die for a sociopathic Ayatollah?

    One has to believe at some point, elements of the IRGC will dispatch Khameni to save their own lives. Iran under military rule is unlikely to become friendly with the U.S. However, for their own personal goals they will bring troops home and suspend funding to groups like al'Hezbollah and al'Hamas. These steps would do much to improve regional stability.

    PEACE
    _______

    (1) https://iranian.com/2019/11/27/iran-arrests-7000-fuel-protesters-in-one-week/

    Ilya G Poimandres , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:53 pm GMT
    @Rich The Iranians were not trying to defeat the Iraqis, nor will they the US. They aim to survive the violent onslaught of aggressors, and damage them enough so they won't think to try again.

    Soleimani was a legitimate target if Iran and the US were in a state of declared war. They are not.

    Here, I know this is UK law, but it strikes the right tone: this action was pure terrorism.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1

    Eighthman , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:55 pm GMT
    @Rich ragtag forces in Afghanistan ( even more rag tag than Iraq) have defeated the US.

    The US must bomb and kill – apart from actually encountering another irregular war that they keep losing.

    I can think of some Iranian responses. Hostage taking by allied but deniable groups of US personnel. Build out intercontinental missiles in quantity and shield them. Buy Russian weapons like S-400 in a few months.

    TaintedCanker , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:56 pm GMT
    There's a lot of meaningful content in this article. The only problem is that it is one-sided with more of a dislike of Israel and USA individually than Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, Yemen, UAE, Qatar combined.

    Where Saker would lead us is to the same inaction of Ben Rhodes.

    The problem is that Ben Rhodes would want to collaborate with Suleimani more than Republicans and conservatives or allies such as Israel, UK, Poland.

    This leaves the Obama galaxy of superstar stateswomen and statesmen with an unrealistic vision of the world.

    This turns into Gaddafi being killed because he is easy to kill, triggering a vacuum and pulling in ISIS and Iran, as well as turning loose 1M people to run try to sneak into Europe.

    This same myopic worldview leads to pushing Russia to the breaking point by working with similar minded EU leaders to "flip" Ukraine. That turned out badly and now Obama's statesmen want to hide it.

    Don't forget that Kerry is married into Iranian diplomats at the top level.

    Paul holland , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:57 pm GMT
    Best idea would be to murder a Trump Yahoo like Sheldon Aidelson or Alan Douchewitz.

    Would humiliate trump personally but he could not react

    bruce county , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:57 pm GMT
    @Rich Wishful thinking
    Thre are many other scenarios and players to consider. America will not be allowed to arbitrarily mass forces and engage their enemy at free will.
    Ignatius , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 8:58 pm GMT
    My take is that the timing of death of General Soleimani and the fact that President Trump is pending impeachment in the US Senate is not a mere coincidence. Part of me thinks that TPTB set Trump up to be impeached and gave him an ultimatum to facilitate a military conflict with Iran or lose his presidency by way of impeachment.

    What seems more bogus, the pretense for impeachment or the pretense for war with Iran?

    Tulip , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:01 pm GMT
    There will be a war with Iran if Trump wants a war with Iran.

    But its not clear that Trump wants a full-on war. He could have had one by now if he wanted it. He is more of a business man than a warlord at heart, and lacks the insecurity of a W. He doesn't need to pose in uniform on an aircraft carrier to feel virile, he can just bang Melania.

    On the other hand, he won't allow himself to look weak, and he will retaliate. In addition, there is lots of evidence in the public record that Trump has a long-standing antipathy to Iran and its government. And Trump has many "friends" that would be thrilled by an Iran expedition.

    Iran would be crazy to provoke Trump in a way that would likely lead to war. Iraq showed the U.S. can take down a government and leave the country wrecked. Sure, the U.S. won't "win" in Iraq, but that doesn't mean Saddam won or the Iraqi people. Iran would be messier, but I lack the Saker's "optimism". The Iranian government will want to survive, not gamble. [Ho Chi Mihn didn't actively seek an American invasion.] The question is whether Iran can de-escalate while saving face (and while other forces, who would love to see the U.S. invade Iran, do everything to escalate affairs).

    Leaving aside "winning the war", it would look great on T.V. heading into the 2020 election even if it ends in disaster, and permit cheap attacks on the Democrats in the climate of jingoism sure to follow the first bombs. If Trump is any politician worth his salt, he is more interested in winning the next election than in America winning some long-term ME war.

    Not Raul , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:06 pm GMT
    Let's say the Saudis attack the USA again like they did on 9-11, Iran gets blamed (of course), and Trump responds by nuking Iran, killing half of the population within a few hours, and 95% within a year.

    How exactly does Iran "win" after that?

    JamesinNM , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:07 pm GMT
    You must understand, Israel would surreptitiously nuke the U.S. if they believed it was needed to adequately control the U.S.
    JamesinNM , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:10 pm GMT
    @Harbinger Zionism, not Judaism. Two entirely separate things. Compare Romans 2:28-29 versus Revelation 2:9 and 3:9. Research the reader survey "Defense of True Israel" to identify today's true Israel.
    journey80 , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:13 pm GMT
    It doesn't matter whether Iran decides to retaliate – Israel will retaliate for them. Netanyahu will have his president-for-life, get-out-of-jail war. This could have been an Israeli strike that Trump was forced, or manipulated, into taking credit for. Nothing would be surprising, so long as that shabby little grifter controls U.S. foreign policy.
    nokangaroos , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:19 pm GMT
    If Russia and China had any itch to go in, they would have done so in Afghanistan at next to no cost to themselves (of course this only emboldened the Empire of Evil).
    And with the exception of Mohammed Reza Shah (installed by coup in 1941 because his daddy, an old-school Kurdish brigand, was way too reasonable – something that is conveniently forgotten) Iran has always taken pains to hold both the Anglos and the Russians at arm´s length.

    That much at least is going to change.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:20 pm GMT
    Not only was the joint Israeli and ZUS attack on the USS Liberty a false flag, but even worse than that was the false flag joint Israeli and ZUS attack on the WTC on 911 , and since they have gotten away with these false flags, no doubt, they will do another to get the excuse to finish off Iran.

    The only nation standing in the way of the attack on Iran is Russia, and Russia is not going to let Iran be destroyed as Russia threw down the gauntlet in Syria and Russia's top generals ie Gerasimov and Shoygu know that Russia is next and will not stand by and let Iran go down, even if Putin is reluctant to save Iran, which I believe Putin will also know Russia is next on the list.

    Israel and the ZUS want a nuclear war with Russia and I believe they will cause a false flag to have it and they believe they can ride out a nuclear exchange in their DUMBS ie deep underground military bases which they have throughout the ZUS and ZEurope and Israel.

    Israel and the ZUS are not content with destroying the middle east, they now want to destroy the world.

    SeekerofthePresence , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:22 pm GMT
    In a land of bravado
    You can't get any dumber;
    To history and morals
    Mind and heart any number.
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:28 pm GMT
    @Rich "Their dead general was a member of the military and a legitimate target."

    -- Let's name all Israeli generals, one by one, and call them legitimate targets.

    Your puny theocratic state of Israel has been the cause of the ongoing mass slaughter in the Middle East. Each of Israeli citizens took a bath full of blood of innocent civilians of all ages, figuratively speaking.

    Iran has not attacked any country. Israel has. It was the perfidious AIPAC of Israel-firsters that has been working non-stop on promoting the wars of aggression in the name of Eretz Israel. Iraq, Syria, Libya have been destroyed in accordance with Oded Yinon subhuman plan. Iran is the next.

    The hapless Europeans and Americans are finally learning about the viciousness of Jewish sadists. Instead of "almost truthful" holobiz stories forged by Eli Wiesel and Anne Frank' dad, the schools should have been teaching the biographies of Jewish mega-criminals such as Lazar Kaganovich (Stalin's right hand and organizer of Holodomor in Ukraine), Naftali Frenkel (an inventor of "industrialized" death in the GULAG), and the despicable mass-murderess Rozalia Zalkind.

    The State of Israel has been founded by self-proclaimed terrorists and remains the nest of terrorists. Even the zionized Wikipedia admits that the Jewish State sponsors terrorism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_state-sponsored_terrorism

    In case you do not know what Baby Yar means, here a picture for you: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/rights-groups-demand-israel-stop-arming-neo-nazis-in-the-ukraine-1.6248727
    https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/babi-yar

    Ilya G Poimandres , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:31 pm GMT
    @A123

    The economic situation is so bad in Iran, people are rioting against the corrupt Ayatollah.

    The rapists strangle their victim and blame them for their lack of oxygen.

    Attacking the embassy was clearly Khameni's desperate effort to shore up personal weakness at home. Not only did he fail to keep the embassy, he also lost a key terrorist. The weak leader just became much weaker.

    All I can say is.. Wimp Lo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d696t3yALAY

    Valley Forge Warrior , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:39 pm GMT
    The Iranians won't do jack. If they try anything, Trump will exterminate the Iranians.
    Harbinger , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:39 pm GMT
    @JamesinNM Zionism is Judaism is communism.

    Judaism is a cult, not a religion. It's the self worship of Jews, hatred of non Jews (racism) and supremacist beliefs over all other peoples on this earth. In effect, Judaism is the Jewish KKK/Black Panthers. It's perfectly ok to go around saying "we're god's chosen" (blatant supremacism and racism) and yet they go crazy when some white person puts up a poster saying "it's ok to be white" ? The former is ignored and worse, accepted by many idiots while the latter is vehemently attacked. Think about that for a moment?

    Don't let the red herrings of "It's not Judaism, it's Zionism" or "it's not the real Jews, but the fake Ashkenazis" crap lead you astray from the situation. The problem IS what it always has been and always will be until people wake up and do something about it. That problem is Judaism. It's never changed.

    Alfred , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:44 pm GMT
    If the Americans leave Syria and Iraq, that will be the ultimate revenge for Iran without having fired a single shot

    Correct.

    And that is precisely the real objective of Trump. Trump is greatly underestimated. He gives the Zionists everything they want – which results in outcomes that are very much against their interests.

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:47 pm GMT
    Jan 3, 2020 Iran has the 'right to retaliate' over US 'act of war'

    Tehran University's Mohammed Marandi says the US' "murder" of a senior Iranian military commander is "definitely an act of war".

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/_GxjPvShWsY?feature=oembed

    Jul 4, 2019 Iran-Iraq-Syria rail link revived.

    As imperial forces are defeated in the region but economic war continues, economic integration between Iran, Iraq and Syria becomes even more necessary, for a decent future.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/nQIIXQ7V2Dc?feature=oembed

    Sep 11, 2011 General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned – Seven Countries In Five Years

    "This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I said, "Well, don't show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, "You remember that?" He said, "Sir, I didn't show you that memo! I didn't show it to you!"

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/9RC1Mepk_Sw?feature=oembed

    niteranger , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:53 pm GMT
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro You missed the boat .! This is about Israel and its control of Trump. Israel wants eternal war..they care not how many are killed because it will be Americans not Jews. The scenarios presented here are limited and simplistic. The real scenarios present much greater challenges for the US Intelligence Agencies. These include false flags by Israel and the Jewish controlled Congress for excuses to bomb Iran. But even a greater risk would be splinter Muslim groups around the world and especially in the US that will retaliate against Americans. The estimate of at least 20% of Muslims in the US are terrorists waiting to happen may come to fruition. Trump the idiot has just thrown a cigar into the punch bowl. Michael Scheuer former CIA put it this way:

    "The crux of my argument is simply that America is in a war with militant Islamists that it cannot avoid; one that it cannot talk or appease its way out of; one in which our irreconcilable Islamist foes will have to be killed, an act which unavoidably will lead to innocent deaths; and one that is motivated in large measure by the impact of U.S. foreign policies in the Islamic world, one of which is unqualified U.S. support for Israel."

    In his second book, Imperial Hubris, a New York Times bestseller, Scheuer writes that the Islamist threat to the United States is rooted in "how easy it is for Muslims to see, hear, experience, and hate the six U.S. policies bin Laden repeatedly refers to as anti-Muslim:

    U.S. support for apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical Muslim governments.
    U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian Peninsula.
    U.S. support for Israel that keeps Palestinians in the Israelis' thrall.
    U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low.
    U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.
    U.S. support for Russia, India, and China against their Muslim militants

    The US will experience the wrath of these people over and over again because we keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

    Trump is nothing more than figure head president under complete control of Israel. Civilization is doomed if Israel continues complete control of most the US government and most of the world. The American citizenry are nothing more than blind little animals waiting to be slaughter by Israel.

    Igor Bundy , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:56 pm GMT
    The gerbils of feeble minds are out in force to show their arrogance and illiteracy t seems. Throughout time, Iran has emboldened the oppressed to fight the imperialists. Just like the support they show the people of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and to an extent Yemen.. They wont destroy all that they have built unless the US uses some excuse to attack inside iran at which point all bets are off and so are all places in the ME with US military.. This blatant act of terrorism is the worst a civilised nation can do and the ultimate hypocrisy of calling itself run by the rule of law.. Almost all rules and laws were violated and so is the rules of war itself which is mostly non existent but even in war there are some things you do not do like taking out the leadership because the men will then have no choice but to keep fighting without anyone to order them to stand down.. Only imbeciles will do unthinkable things like this and such blatant violations of international laws in front of the entire world and then take credit for it..
    Truth3 , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:59 pm GMT
    @Rich

    Their dead general was a member of the military and a legitimate target.

    Spoken like a true hasbarite.

    anonymous [178] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 9:59 pm GMT

    Conclusion: we wait for Iran's next move

    In this statement the most potent word is "wait."

    Iran doing nothing = psychological torment.

    Badly forged Warrior wrote:
    The Iranians won't do jack. If they try anything, Trump will exterminate the Iranians.

    maybe not on your timeline, forge, but someday . . .

    Trump should maybe take Barron's college fund out of long-term investments.

    anon [399] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:00 pm GMT
    @Rich It's not the duty of Iran to rescue American from the hog nosed Zionist and from rotting cadaver ( rotting carcass) of the boar faced Adelshon .

    That's American have to get done

    nickels , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:01 pm GMT
    Its pretty clear that the dem's impeachment scam was a collaboration with the neocons to corner Trump into having to obey McConnell, Graham and the rest of the criminals.
    A few months back the great Orange King was going to pull out of Syria, right?
    It is almost patently obvious Trump was handed the option of starting war with Iran or having the senate slowly turn against him (through a well orchestrated media campaign, of course), ending up with him in prison or worse.
    Can't have that. Donny boy serves only Donny boy, and the country's arse isn't worth choosing over his own.
    Anon [399] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:02 pm GMT
    @Harbinger NPR now : Israel has been pushing America to confront Iran . But Israel doesn't want to be seen as the power behind the American aggression against Iran .
    Alfred , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:07 pm GMT
    there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one in direct retaliation for the deliberate shooting down by the USN of IranAir 655 Airbus over the Persian Gulf

    This was obviously the case. All the accusations against Libya were patently false. The Scottish court case was a scam from A to Z. All the "evidence" against Libya could have been concocted by a 12 year old. "Finding" a bit of clockwork in a field and claiming that someone bought a certain "suitcase" in Malta is a piece of cake.

    Despite the destruction of Libya and access to all their files and bureaucrats, no effort was ever made to search their records and to substantiate the accusations against Libya. Lockerbie and Pan Am 103 simply disappeared from the media.

    If Libya had been behind the explosion of Pan Am 103, they would have relished producing the evidence and a lot of Libyans would have been accused and put on trial. It would have helped their accusations that "Libya was a rogue state"

    The only facts that everyone agrees on is that the Americans shot down an Iranian airliner on 3 July 1988 with 290 people on board. And that a US airliner with 259 people was blown up on 21 December 1988. Some coincidence!

    Since PA103, no Iranian civilian aircraft of any sort has been attacked or threatened by the USA or any other country. I guess that is a strong hint as to what intelligence services believe the true story to be.

    TG , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:09 pm GMT
    The nerve of Donald Trump! I mean, who does he think he is, Hillary Clinton?
    Anonymous [422] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:10 pm GMT
    @Valley Forge Warrior "Valley Forge Warrior"

    Sounds like one of the Christ-killer handles you see over at Hasbara Central (aka, Free Republic).

    FReepers with handles like "ProudMarineMomEagleUSALibertyLoverArmyVetMAGAGalAirborneTexasFreedom" posting articles on inside baseball of Knesset politics.

    Chet Roman , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:16 pm GMT
    It's time for Iran to get insurance in the form of multiple nuclear warheads. I doubt Russia or China will sell them but Pakistan, a fellow Muslim country, or N. Korea might. All they need is a few nukes that would be include in a barrage of hundreds of missiles aimed at Tel Aviv. No Iron Dome (which is useless anyway) would stop the attack. Israel would never allow (since we know they control Congress and the President) an attack on Iran if there was even the slightest possibility of a nuke on Israel. Let's face it, the Israelis are only "brave" when they slaughter defenseless Palestinian women and children. They were driven out of Lebanon by a rag tag civilian militia.

    Forget the Fatwa, get nukes!

    Passer by , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:18 pm GMT
    You are naive and poorly educated murican from declining Amerikanistan who lives in the past. The Unipolar era is over. The Iranians have the capacity to destroy all US bases in 2000km radius (in the Middle East) with ballistic missile salvos, it and its shia allied groups in the region have plenty of attack drones and long range cruise missiles too (and US land anti-air capability is poor), all US soldiers in Iraq will be killed by shia millitias, drones and long range missiles (unless the US would try to invade Iraq again and restart the occupation with 300 000 soldiers in Iraq, for which it no longer has the money, too much debt and shaky economy), Russia can supply the country with high tech anti-air systems, Iran can supply manpads and long range missiles to the Taliban which will lead to siege of US bases in Afghanistan and bombardment/capture of americans there, (taliban are already winning there without any help). Iran can also destroy most oil and gas infrastructure in the Middle East.

    Estimation:
    all US bases in the Middle East will be leveled.
    US bases will be besieged in Afghanistan and Taliban will fully take over that country.
    The biggest US embassy in the world – in Iraq, will be captured, together with the US diplomats in it.
    Shia Millitia Proxies will attack and capture/destroy many US embassies in the region.
    Oil price will reach 150 – 200 $ leading to global economic crisis.
    Israel will be attacked by Hizbulla and many israeli cities will be damaged, keeping it busy.
    No european country will support such attack and this will lead to the EU marginalising NATO and replacing it with its own independent european military pact, moving away from the US.
    Whole world will condemn the US and will start moving away from dependency on that country, as no one wants such a war in the Gulf.
    30 000 americans (almost all in the middle east) killed and all of their objects in the Middle East destroyed.
    US companies infrastructure in the Middle East and in Iraq destroyed.
    Big uprising against the US in Iraq.
    US economy enters recession.
    US is crippled by war debt.

    For that large price to pay, the only US option will be US long range attacks via bombers, carriers and subs, who will not be very effective vs russian anti-air systems. It will take a long time for Iran to be destroyed if they have modern russian anti-air. Meanwhile the global economy will enter recession until the war is over. There will be massive anti-US protests all over the world blaming it for the resulting global economic crisis and recession.

    In the long run, the US will be able to destroy most of Iran by conventional means, but the US itself will be crippled by debt and will lose its superpower status. In other words, it will be the Suez Moment for the US.

    Ultimately though, there will be no large scale war because the US does not have the money for it. It is crippled by debt. Picture underestimates US debt by 10 % and already estimates hyperinflation by 2050 (10 % and growing annual budget deficits, which is a disaster).

    Then there is the possibility for the US to use nuclear weapons to destroy Iran but then the US will be declared a rogue state by the world and every other state will get nukes too and NPT regime will be dead, leading to the end of US influence and capacity to wage war in the world.

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:19 pm GMT
    @Paul holland That's a good suggestion but I still think they should go after Pompeo. If you really want to keep it 'tit for tat' with even less retaliation then poor Gen. Milley should be splashed. (Evil grin)
    Anon [209] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:25 pm GMT

    For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one

    Absolutely ridiculous. It was not a Libyan action. And it was not an Iranian one.

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:27 pm GMT
    @Harbinger Yes and the Jews follow the TALMUD not the Bible. The Talmud is a Jew Supremist manual.
    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:28 pm GMT
    @Alfred From your keyboard to God's ears.
    NTG , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:31 pm GMT
    @bruce county Will not be allowed? then look what they did in this very moment. They already mass their forces in iraq and surounding bases. Their are considerable more Galaxy C17 traffic in Ramstein/Germany and the whole C17 (as far as you can identify them)look like a swarm of bees on the way to the middle east.
    the grand wazoo , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:31 pm GMT
    I have one wish for 2020, and it is this: That everyone stop referring to this group of bastards claiming to great American patriots and thinkers (both a flagrant lie) as 'neocons', and call them what they are; 99% are dual citizen Israeli firsters. Fostering the acronym neocon allows them to remain hidden behind a mask of their own design, and is a great disservice and a threat to every American. These traitors with their Israel first attitude, have but one job, and it is to dream up fake threats to America's security, (i.e. Iraq's WMD's), in order to insure America's defense budget remains huge, and US soldiers all over the ME making Israel feel safe and secure; not so much America. truth is they care nothing of America and have perfected the art of subterfuge, as evidenced by this quote by self described paleo-neoconservative Norman Podhertz in his work Breaking Ranks:

    "An Israeli within the Jewish community, and an American on the public goy stage".

    anon [183] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:33 pm GMT
    Netanyahu, aka Benzion Mileikowsky is holed up in that land of his idle, "Hitler's Argentinian Patagonia"?

    or,

    Brave Sir Robin ran away.
    ("No!")
    Bravely ran away away.
    ("I didn't!")
    When danger reared it's ugly head,
    He bravely turned his tail and fled.
    ("I never!")

    Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
    And gallantly he chickened out.
    ("You're lying!")

    Swiftly taking to his feet,
    He beat a very brave retreat.
    Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!

    Songwriters: Adam Patrick Devlin / Edward Daniel Chester / Eric Idle / Graham Chapman / John Cleese / Mark James Morriss / Michael Palin / Neil Innes / Scott Edward Morriss / Terry Gilliam
    Brave Sir Robin lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

    Artist: Monty Python
    Album: The Album of the Soundtrack of the Trailer of the Film of Monty Python and the Holy Grail
    Released: 1975

    sally , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:36 pm GMT
    @Rich I think the Iranians have already won on this round ..Iran stepped back and gave notice that when you are up against a guy bigger than you are, you wait until something happens to even the odds.

    The domestic deplorable don't understand bullet in the brain diplomacy.. What is in Iraq or Iran that Americans want <=nothing. absolutely nothing that I can tell. so for whom is all of this?

    UninformedButCurious , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:36 pm GMT
    "a president who does not understand that he is a disposable tool in the hands of the Neocons."

    Can that possibly be true? I hope a lot of people who can support an opinion about that will reply.

    John Chuckman , says: Website Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:36 pm GMT
    Hard to know what Trump's thinking here is. War before an election does not seem a good idea, especially if you are a candidate who has failed so far to achieve anything of substance around past promises to reduce America's involvement in Mideast wars.

    Remember that a crucial slice of the votes that put the man into office were not from his prime political base, the "pick-up truck and Jesus" set, but from those concerned with peace and better relations with Russia.

    But prodding Iran to attack could allow Trump to play commander-in-chief defending the country. And Americans just instinctively support even the worst possible presidents at war. You might call it the George Bush Effect. The frightened puppy grabbing the nearest pantleg after a loud noise.

    Of course, now when it comes to campaign contributions from American Oligarchs whose chief political concern is what Israel wants, Trump's coffers will be overflowing.

    I suspect Iran will take its time and carefully plan a response, and that response may not be clear and unambiguous, and it might be multi-faceted and done over time.

    The men running Iran are careful men, none of them impetuous. Chess players. The United States has more than forty years of bellowing, open hostility towards the country, and we have not seen Iran's leaders act foolishly in all that time despite many provocations.

    I do not believe Iran will be driven to war – that would be playing the Israeli-American game with Israeli-American rules.

    Clandestine and hybrid efforts, that is what Iran is best at. They have serious capabilities these days, and the United States, with all its bases abroad, has great vulnerabilities.

    Of course, there's also the option of Iran's just leaving the nuclear agreement (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA) that Trump idiotically tore-up and proceeding quietly with weapons development. Iran, despite Israel's dishonest claims, never has pursued weapons development, only efficient use of nuclear power and legitimate scientific research. Perhaps it is time to reconsider that policy

    Iran has substantial deposits of uranium, and the enriched-uranium bomb is simpler to build than the plutonium bomb. Maybe there is some possibility for covert assistance from North Korea, another country treated like crap by Trump's Washington Braintrust?

    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:39 pm GMT

    4.Finally, should the Iranians decide not to retaliate, then we can be absolutely sure that Uncle Shmuel will see that as a proof of his putative "invincibility" and take that as a license to engage in even more provocative actions.

    For what it's worth, I vote for 4.

    Gandhi and MLK are household names because they used non-violent protest to bring attention to widespread injustice.

    As long as Iran responds in a non-violent way, they retain the moral high ground. The world is watching, if Iran puts out a statement to the fact that the US is using assassinations to provoke Iran into an open (obviously one-sided) war, who on the planet won't sympathize with Iran?

    We all know the ZUS is a murderous, war criminal rogue regime under occupation by Zionists. Duh.

    We all know the ((neocons)) and Zionists have demanded the destruction of Iran for what, decades now. We all know of Bibi's unhinged frothing. It's more than obvious to the entire world.

    What we don't need is bravado or chest thumping on the part of Iran. That is exactly what the fiend is hoping for. Praying for. It's hands rubbing together and hissing 'they can't ignore this one, we slaughtered their beloved general'.

    If this were all being contained by the world's media and diplomatic channels, then it might be different.

    But EVERYBODY knows the score. Everybody knows who is the aggressor and who is the victim.

    Iran should assume the posture of a victim, and allow all the world's people to watch in disgust as it's menaced by the world's super-power coward, who NEVER picks on anyone it's own size, but always attacks nations far weaker than it is.

    What an embarrassment to be an American today, in slavish obeisance to the world's most revolting den of snakes.

    God bless and save the people of Iran.

    It is with profound shame that I lament my nations depraved servility to a criminal regime.

    Please, don't escalate the conflict. That is EXACTLY what ((they)) want you to do.

    NTG , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:41 pm GMT
    Funny how even you seems to forget that Trump KNOWN that he is a "tool" and that he have to play like one. But every play he did on behalf of the Neocons did he in such a worst way that he everytime reaches the excat opposite of what the neocons wanted to reach. North Stream 2 anyone? It's done, up runnig by now.
    2% spending? how have done this yet?
    buy exclusiv or also by US MIC company's? Hmm the turks buy now Russian AA.
    India is also in shambles about the militray topic.

    NOTHING, what the neocons want from him and he allegedly did seems to work really and not because he is a moron this is ON PURPOSE.
    I strongly believe that he known what he does and that he does this exactly like he or the ones behind him wanted. Trmup isn't a neocon. He is a nationalist and plays a very dangerous doubbleplay with the Deep State and their neocons/Zionists.

    NTG , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:44 pm GMT
    @Passer by No war because of debt? what? as if the US gov has ever cared about debt.
    War is the profitables solution to debt look in history.
    the grand wazoo , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:53 pm GMT
    I still think that there is a roughly 80% chance of full scale war in the Middle-East and, again, will leave 20% of "unexpected events"

    I believe this estimate is rather correct. Personally, I believe the odds are 100% in favor of WAR. It has taken the Israelis 35 years, since the Iraq Iran war, to get America this close. They will not allow something as trivial as peace to interfer.

    lysias , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:55 pm GMT
    @Rurik Cyberattacks on U.S. infrastructure would be nonviolent.
    Sean , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:56 pm GMT
    Donald Trump is hardly a "disposable President" for Israel. The sky's the limit for Israel while Trump is in power and they will never get anyone quite like him again. The Neocons won't go against Israel.

    The death of Soleimani was not long in coming after his masterminding of the successful attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, and him making the fatal error of ordering demonstrators in Baghdad to be shot. I think the combination of threatening Saudi Arabia at its weakest point and alienating the Shiite community in Iraq is why the US decided now was the perfect time to target Soleimani.

    Kiza , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 10:58 pm GMT
    @Not Raul Hmmm, nuke Iran . I wonder how US would feel if Russia justifiably nuked the Mexican drug cartels in Tijuana. Probably take it just as a friendly and helpful gesture in the war on drugs, right? Or Russia nukes those pesky Quebec secessionists not far from DC?

    Obviously, there is no place on the planet with more cretins per head of population than US, lead by the Cretin in Chief. All itching to use those nukes just sitting there, collecting dust since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Why did cretins spend all that money on them when they cannot use them?

    One totally unrelated question. ISIS has chopped off a large number of non-Sunni Muslim heads and a few heads of Westerners. Does anyone know even one example where an Israeli's head or head of a Western Jew has been chopped off?

    USrael is like a tradesman who declares war on a screwdriver or hammer in his toolbox.

    Lang Doniger , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:00 pm GMT
    The purpose of the drone strike false flag was to coronate a new, massive trauma based mind control effort by the US Government aimed at her own domestic slaves. The CIA opinion makers are out in full force: Sjursen, Engelhardt, Bacevich, Hedges, Cole, NYT, WaPo, AI – you name it, all delivering the message of peace because they were trained for war. Quickly form all the public opinions to make sure the people are divided.

    The voting class has given us 100% of the war, 100% of the inequality, 100% of the misery that the poor suffer daily. Accordingly, the CIA has to assassinate wrong thinking in the voting class before it threatens the status quo of war, inequality and suffering.

    The only thing missing is a Pat Tillman character – a patriotic zombie athlete, tatted and geared up to kick ass for the right reasons as a hero until the sham that everyone knew all along – except for poor Pat – reveals itself.

    Thim , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:03 pm GMT
    @the grand wazoo Neocohens then.
    the grand wazoo , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:05 pm GMT
    @Ignatius I read this same theme at the VT site. Either Robert David Steel's piece or in a comment. Rather far fetched idea, but not so far out that the dual citizen cretins in DC wouldn't use.
    Monty Ahwazi , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:06 pm GMT
    Thanks Saker!
    The officials in Tehran have been and will continue to be calm, calculating, rational and making decisions collectively! The Two Fat Guys and skinny dip" have been defeated by Iran in their Cold War with Iran for 4 decades! Iranians' mail goal is to force the US to run away from the ME region w/o confronting it! They would like to achieve their goal as the Vietnamese did in 1973 if anyone remembers that! So far they have been successful and their actions in the future will show their intentions more clearly!
    With all due respect the Chinese and Russians would love to see the US humiliated so she's forced to leave and they don't mind using Iran as a front to achieve their goal without confronting the US!
    anon [260] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:07 pm GMT
    @Harbinger

    I'm just waiting for the usual suspects to come on here denying it had anything to do with Israel and Judaism.

    It's hard to make that claim when every chosenite from Benjamin Shapiro to Israeli citizen and fake "national conservative" Yoram Hazony is celebrating on Twitter.

    Example:

    To all the jerks saying Trump did this "for Israel":

    1. No American should die for Israel.

    2. If you can't feel shame when your country is shamed and want to act when your own people are killed, your problem isn't Israel. Your problem is you.

    -- Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) January 3, 2020

    Do these scum ever not lie? No American was killed by Iranians or Iranian-backed proxies before this incident, not for at least a decade. And Trump totally did this for Israel. His biggest donors have been demanding he do this for years and suddenly he does it. It's not hard to see the connection, especially amid all the Jews celebrating on Twitter today.

    Further, he goes on to beat his chest as a fake patriotic American (while being an Israeli citizen); it's clear he's just celebrating an attack on his country's enemy, but wants you to think it has something to do with America.

    You can be darned sure no in the world thinks seizing an American embassy is a genius tactical move right now. Not in Iran -- and not anywhere else.

    -- Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) January 3, 2020

    You can be damned sure no on in the world thinks this empire is anything but lawless and dangerous right now -- headed by an irrational imbecile beholden to the interests of a racist apartheid state. Not in Europe -- and not anywhere else.

    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2020/01/03/donald-trumps-neocons-laud-assassination-of-qassem-soleimani-in-iraq/

    Franklin Ryckaert , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:07 pm GMT
    @Not Raul All your premises are wrong.
    Franklin Ryckaert , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:11 pm GMT
    @journey80 Israel has no president-for-life system.
    eah , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:15 pm GMT
    Such brazen bullshit: "decisive defensive action", "aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans"

    IMMEDIATE RELEASE -- Statement by the Department of Defense -- JAN. 2, 2020

    At the direction of the President, the U.S. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel abroad by killing Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.

    General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region. General Soleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more. He had orchestrated attacks on coalition bases in Iraq over the last several months – including the attack on December 27th – culminating in the death and wounding of additional American and Iraqi personnel. General Soleimani also approved the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad that took place this week.

    This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans. The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:15 pm GMT
    @Rurik Gandhi drank his own urine and slept with prepubescent girls, MLK was a whoremonger and sodomite, you can have them both. Iran won't escalate because they tried, and lost a general. If they try anything else, they'll pay too steep a price.
    Harold Smith , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:17 pm GMT
    @nickels

    "Its pretty clear that the dem's impeachment scam was a collaboration with the neocons to corner Trump into having to obey McConnell, Graham and the rest of the criminals."

    No it's not. It's pretty clear that orange clown is enthusiastic about mass-murdering people and trying to start wars for his jewish-supremacist handlers.

    "A few months back the great Orange King was going to pull out of Syria, right?"

    No he wasn't; he was just posturing, as usual.

    "It is almost patently obvious Trump was handed the option of starting war with Iran or having the senate slowly turn against him (through a well orchestrated media campaign, of course), ending up with him in prison or worse."

    Or so you barely assert. But if that's the case why didn't "they" force Obama to start a war with Iran? For that matter why did "they" allow Obama to enter into the JCPOA agreement with Iran in the first place?

    The more likely explanation is that the impeachment scam was an effort to determine whether or not orange clown had enough support to be re-elected. Perhaps our rulers wanted to see if the peasants would rally around their embattled MAGA "hero" if they could present him as the hapless victim of the even-more-evil "democrats." (And if so, his re-election "campaign strategy" could then be crafted around his apparent "victimhood" – since he has nothing else to campaign on).

    If this is the case, then the experiment may now have come to an end, with the result that the favorite son-of-perdition would likely not be re-elected; thus he has one year to start the war on Iran, and he is wasting no time getting on with it.

    Nicolás Palacios Navarro , says: Website Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:19 pm GMT
    @Chet Roman

    Pakistan, a fellow Muslim country, or N. Korea might

    Very unlikely that this could occur. Pakistan itself is wary of incurring further unwanted attention from the US, which regularly violates its sovereignty anyway. If they indeed decided to pursue this route, the Ziofascists in Washington would simply and very happily open up a new front against Islamabad. (Although doing so would stand a better -- worse? -- chance of provoking some kind of Chinese reaction than the current US antagonizing of Tehran.)

    The DPRK's stance against Washington is purely defensive and they clearly have no wish to engage in any action that could trigger the end of the Kim regime. China would also likely not back it up in such a scenario.

    Iran is clearly the victim here, but has been cornered into an unenviable position from which it has no favorable options. Those hoping that Russia and China will somehow step in to prevent war will find themselves disappointed. The most likely best scenario is that this new war will seal the eventual financial bankruptcy of the US. However, the results of that would take years to unfold. But this new war will undoubtedly be a costly one and, in the not so long run, fiscally untenable.

    anon [179] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:20 pm GMT
    @Valley Forge Warrior

    The Iranians won't do jack. If they try anything, Trump will exterminate the Iranians.

    Lol. "Valley Forge Warrior". What an obvious Hasbara troll. He probably has only a vague knowledge of American history, so he picked something he stereotypically thinks an American patriot would call himself. Along with A123, these hacks have been clogging up the comments of every article on the subject trying to gin up the goyim for war on Iran. What "ally" does that kind of thing?

    Passer by , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:21 pm GMT
    @NTG When? When the rest of the world was destroyed and US was the only one standing, representing half the world's economy and industrial capacity? In current conditions this leads to hyperinflation and the rest of the world, which is growing faster than the US (now down to 15 % of the world economy in PPP) and is already quite self-sufficient from US industry abandoning the dollar. No one would take something that is printed in heavy amounts to liquidate 30 + trillions in debt. The end of dollar main reserve currency status, which leads to feedback loop and even greater hyperinflation in the US.
    anonymous [103] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:25 pm GMT
    Forcing the US out of the area seems to be a likely response. Perhaps they'll be able to gin up some popular riots and demonstrations throughout the Muslim world. Undermining the Saudi regime might be a real blow to the US; who really knows how stable it actually is? As opportunities present themselves the Iranians will avail themselves of them, avoiding direct confrontations and clashes. Remember, they live there so can drag this out over time.
    Johnny Walker Read , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:28 pm GMT
    I pick the action behind door number two Monty

    No less alarming is that this creates the absolutely perfect conditions for a false flag à la "USS Liberty". Right now, the Israelis have become at least as big a danger for US servicemen and facilities in the entire Middle-East as are the Iranians themselves.

    RowBuddy , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:28 pm GMT
    @Harbinger The wankers Trump and Netanyahu have been planning this invasion for some time. Actually, given the level and history of U.S. hubris, the Neocons have not quite gotten over the fact that 50 years ago, the Iranian people kicked the murderous Shah (U.S. puppet) out of the country. The U.S. will continue to invade and wage wars against sovereigns who refuse to tow the U.S. line. Please dump Trump in 2020!
    eah , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:32 pm GMT
    @eah

    The US constantly threatens to overthrow Iran's government, invades and occupies its neighboring countries, decimates it with sanctions, launches cyber-attacks on its infrastructure, and now assassinates its national leaders. But the propagandists tell you Iran is the "aggressor"

    -- Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 3, 2020

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:32 pm GMT
    @Valley Forge Warrior A Q for you and "Rich:" https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-live-trump-discusses-soleimani-killing-mar-lago
    comment section:

    How can the government on a moment's notice locate and drop a bomb on the head of a veteran military officer and yet not be able to find a measly whore (jizzlane) hiding out in Israel.

    Are you familiar with the name of a Mossad agent "Madam" Ghislaine Maxwell? What about her father R. Maxwell, a mega-embezzler, thief and Mossad agent?

    The fallen Iranian was an honest and honorable man, unlike the Jewish procuress of underage girls for wealthy pedophiles and the Jewish plunderer of pensions.

    While Mirror Group shareholders were wiped out, arguably the biggest losers were the pensioners most pensioners had to accept a 50% cut in the value of their pensions.

    No wonder Maxwell (known as "a great fraud") was feted by other prominent Jewish frauds.

    Gizmo880 , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:33 pm GMT
    It is very doubtful that Iran retaliates in any way that might lead to all out war with the U.S. unless they have assurances of total backing from either Russia or China, which I don't see happening at this time. Neither one of those countries is ready for WW III against the U.S. at the present.

    If I were Iran, though, I would use the fact that they sit on some of the largest energy reserves in the world to help me acquire as many nukes as possible. That might truly be the only deterrent to their destruction, as Israel and her surrogate the U.S. are never going to give up in there intention of destroying that country.

    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:34 pm GMT
    @lysias Yes, but it would piss off the sheople, and Iran doesn't need anymore of the American Bovinus demanding more belligerence. (for which they personally won't risk a fingernail).

    44 seconds in until 2:55

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Lcu-YzJajN8?feature=oembed

    And this was over 40 years ago.

    Since then their consolidation over the media and federal government has been consummate. The only cracks in the iron bubble being the formerly free Internet, and they're very fast sealing off those few remaining cracks.

    Now you'd have to be near brain-dead not to know that they control our foreign policy in absolute terms, and that Americans have been dying for the greater glory of their enemies in Israel for generations now.

    What we need to do is allow the American people to decide if they want to send more of their children to kill and die for their enemies in Israel.

    We all know Iran is nothing more than one more country Israel demands we destroy.

    Iran simply needs to allow the rest of the world, to rise up in condemnation with all the nations of the planet, including the millions of patriotic Americans that are sick to death of our federal government's slavish fealty to Jewish supremacist shekels.

    Don't react to the provocation. Allow all the nations and people of the world to become sympathetic to your cause. Perhaps, though some miracle even the Sunni nations of the world will side with Iran on this one.

    We all know who the bully is, and who the victim is. Just look at what the ZUS did to Iraq and Libya and Syria and so many others

    It's a global problem for so many, that we can't even count the victims of zio-criminality, from Donbas to Caracas, to Bolivia..

    We need a global outrage, and a global demand to reign in the Zionist fiend.

    By doing nothing, but speaking out, Iran's message of victimization is it's more powerful, moral weapon.

    Iris , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:42 pm GMT
    @JamesinNM

    You must understand, Israel would surreptitiously nuke the U.S. if they believed it was needed to adequately control the U.S.

    Please bear with my correcting you. Isreal has already nuked the USA: on 9/11, the WTC was brought down by underground nuclear detonations.

    renfro , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:45 pm GMT
    Israel Assassinations from 1950's to 2018
    [MORE]
    1950s

    Date Place Country Target Description Action Killer
    July 13, 1956 Gaza Strip Egypt Mustafa Hafez Egyptian Army Lieutenant-Colonel, responsible for recruiting refugees to carry out attacks in Israel. Parcel bomb[12] Israel Defense Forces operation directed by Yehoshafat Harkabi.
    July 14, 1956 Amman Jordan Salah Mustafa Egyptian Military attache
    1960s
    Date Place Country Target Description Action Killer
    September 11, 1962 Munich Germany Heinz Krug West German rocket scientist working for Egypt's missile program Abducted from his company offices on Munich's Schillerstrasse, his body was never found. Swiss police later arrested two Mossad agents for threatening the daughter of another scientist and found that they were responsible for the killing. Part of Operation Damocles. Mossad
    November 28, 1962 Heluan Egypt 5 Egyptian factory workers Workers employed at Factory 333, an Egyptian rocket factory. Letter bomb sent bearing Hamburg post mark. Another such bomb disfigured and blinded a secretary. Part of Operation Damocles.
    February 23, 1965 Montevideo Uruguay Herberts Cukurs Aviator who had been involved in the murders of Latvian Jews during the Holocaust[18] Lured to and killed in Montevideo by agents under the false pretense of starting an aviation business.

    1970s

    Date Place Country Target Description Action Killer
    July 8, 1972 Beirut Lebanon Ghassan Kanafani Palestinian writer and a leading member of the PFLP, who had claimed responsibility for the Lod Airport massacre on behalf of the PFLP.[19] Killed by car bomb. Mossad[20][21][22][19][23][24][25]
    July 25, 1972 Attempted killing of Bassam Abu Sharif Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Information Office. He held a press conference with Ghassan Kanafani during the Dawson's Field hijackings justifying the PFLP's actions. He lost four fingers, and was left deaf in one ear and blind in one eye, after a book sent to him that was implanted with a bomb exploded in his hands.
    October 16, 1972 Rome Italy Abdel Wael Zwaiter Libyan embassy employee, cousin of Yassir Arafat,[21] PLO representative, poet and multilingual translator, considered by Israel to be a terrorist for his alleged role in the Black September group and the Munich massacre,[27] though Aaron Klein states that 'uncorroborated and improperly cross-referenced intelligence information tied him to a support group' for Black September.[24] Shot 12 times by two Mossad gunmen as he waited for an elevator to his apartment near Piazza Avellino.[19][21]
    December 8, 1972 Paris France Mahmoud Hamshari PLO representative in France and coordinator of the Munich Olympic Games massacre.[28] Killed by bomb concealed in his telephone.
    January 24, 1973 Nicosia Cyprus Hussein Al Bashir a.k.a. Hussein Abu-Khair/Hussein Abad. Fatah representative in Nicosia, Cyprus and PLO liaison officer with the KGB.[24] Killed by bomb in his hotel room bed.
    April 6, 1973 Paris France Basil Al-Kubaissi PFLP member and American University of Beirut Professor of International Law Killed on a street in Paris by two Mossad agents.[21]
    April 9, 1973 Beirut Lebanon Kamal Adwan Black September commander and member of the Fatah central committee[29] Killed in his apartment in front of his children during Operation Spring of Youth, either shot 55 times or killed with a grenadeSayeret Matk al led by Ehud Barak
    Muhammad Youssef Al-Najjar Black September Operations officer and PLO official Shot dead in his apartment together with his wife during Operation Spring of Youth.[31] Sayeret Matkal together with Mossad
    Kamal Nasser Palestinian Christian poet, advocate of non-violence and PLO spokesman Shot dead in his apartment during Operation Spring of Youth. According to Palestinian sources his body was left as if hanging from a cross. A woman neighbour was shot dead when she opened her door during the operation. Sayeret Matkal
    April 11, 1973 Athens Greece Zaiad Muchasi Fatah representative to Cyprus Killed in hotel room.[21] Mossad[32][33][34]
    June 28, 1973 Paris France Mohammad Boudia Black September operations officer Killed by pressure-activated mine under his car seat.[21]
    July 21, 1973 Lillehammer Norway Attempted killing of Ali Hassan Salameh High-ranked leader in the PLO and Black September who was behind the 1972 Munich Olympic Games massacre Shmed Bouchiki, an innocent waiter believed to be Ali Hassan Salameh, killed by gunmen. Known as the Lillehammer affair.
    March 27, 1978 East Berlin East Germany Wadie Haddad PFLP commander, who masterminded several plane hijackings in the 1960s and 1970s.[36] He apparently died of cancer in an East Berlin hospital, reportedly untraced by Mossad.[37] Mossad never claimed responsibility. Aaron Klein states that Mossad passed on through a Palestinian contact a gift of chocolates laced with a slow poison, which effectively caused his death several months later.[36]
    January 22, 1979 Beirut Lebanon Ali Hassan Salameh High-ranked leader in the PLO and Black September who was behind the 1972 Munich Olympic Games massacre[35] Killed by remote-controlled car bomb,[21] along with four bodyguards and four innocent bystanders.

    1980s

    Date Place Country Target Description Action Executor
    June 13, 1980 Paris France Yehia El-Mashad Egyptian nuclear scientist, lecturer at Alexandria University Killed in his room at the Méridien Hotel in Operation Sphinx.[38][39]:23 Marie-Claude Magal, prostitute, client of El-Meshad, pushed under a car and killed in the Boulevard Saint-Germain. Mossad
    September 1981 Săo Paulo Brazil José Alberto Albano do Amarante An Air Force lieutenant colonel, assassinated by the Israeli intelligence service to prevent Brazil from becoming a nuclear nation.He was contaminated by radioactive material. Samuel Giliad or Guesten Zang, a Mossad agent, an Israeli born in Poland.
    August 21, 1983 Athens Greece Mamoun Meraish Senior PLO official Shot in his car from motorcycle. Mossad
    June 9, 1986 Khalid Nazzal Secretary of the DFLP (Democratic Front for Liberation of Palestine) Killed in Athens by Mossad agents who entered Greece with fake passports, shot Nazzal while leaving his hotel, and fled the country. Mossad
    October 21, 1986 Munther Abu Ghazaleh High-ranked leader in the PLO. Senior member of the National Palestinian Council, the Revolutionary Council of Al Fatah and the Supreme Military Council of the Revolutionary Palestinian Forces. Killed by car bomb Mossad
    April 16, 1988 Tunis Tunisia Abu Jihad Second-in-command to Yassir Arafat Shot dead in front of his family in the Tunis Raid by Israeli commandos under the direction of Ehud Barak and Moshe Ya'alon, and condemned as a political assassination by the United States State Department.[9][44] Israel Defense Forces
    July 14, 1989 Alexandria Egypt Said S. Bedair Egyptian scientist in electrical, electronic and microwave engineering and a colonel in the Egyptian army Fell to his death from the balcony of his brother's apartment in Camp Chezar, Alexandria, Egypt. His veins were found cut and a gas leak was detected in the apartment. Arabic and Egyptian sources claim that the Mossad assassinated him in a way that appears as a suicide.
    1990s

    Date Place Country Target Description Action Executor
    March 20, 1990 Brussels Belgium Gerald Bull Canadian engineer and designer of the Project Babylon "supergun" for Saddam Husseins government Shot at door to his apartment Attributed to Mossad by several sources,[45] and widely believed to be a Mossad operation by intelligence experts,[46] Gordon Thomas states it was the work of Mossad's director Nahum Admoni.[47] Israel denied involvement at the time.[46] and several other countries had interests in seeing him dead.
    February 16, 1992 Nabatieh Governorate Lebanon Abbas al-Musawi Secretary-General of Hezbollah After 3 IDF soldiers were killed by Palestinian militants of the PIJ during a training exercise at Gal'ed in Israel, Israel retaliated by killing Musawi in his car, together with his wife Sihan and 5-year-old child Hussein, with seven missiles launched from two Apache Israeli helicopters.[21] Hezbollah retaliated by the attacking Israel's embassy in Argentina.[48] Israel Defense Forces[49]
    June 8, 1992 Paris France Atef Bseiso Palestinian official involved in Munich Massacre Shot several times in the head at point-blank range by 2 gunmen, in his hotel (Aaron Klein's "Striking Back") Mossad, with French complicity, according to the PLO, but French security sources suggested the hand of Abu Nidal.[50][51]
    October 26, 1995 Sliema Malta Fathi Shaqaqi Head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad Shot and killed in front of Diplomat Hotel.[21] Mossad.[47]
    January 6, 1996 Beit Lahia Gaza Strip Yahya Ayyash "The Engineer", Hamas bomb maker Head blown off by cell phone bomb in Osama Hamad's apartment, responding to a call from his father. Osama's father, Kamal Hamad, was a known collaborator with Israel, and it was bruited in Israel that he had betrayed his son's friend for $1 million, a fake passport and a U.S. visa. Covert Israeli operation[53]
    September 25, 1997 Amman Jordan Khaled Mashaal (failed attempt) Hamas political leader Attempted poisoning. Israel provided antidote, after pressure by Clinton. Canada withdrew Ambassador. Two Mossad agents with Canadian passports arrested
    2000s
    2000, September 29-2001, April 25. According to Palestinian sources, the IDF assassinated 13 political activists in Area A under full Palestinian Authority, with 9 civilian casualties.[54]
    2003 (August) The Israeli government authorized the killing of Hamas's entire political leadership in Gaza, 'without further notice,' in a method called 'the hunting season' in order to strengthen the position of moderates and Mahmoud Abbas.
    2005 In February Israel announced a suspension of targeted killings, while reserving the right to kill allegedly 'ticking bombs'.[55]
    Date Place Location Target Description Action Executor
    November 9, 2000 Beit Sahur West Bank Hussein Mohammed Abayat (37); Abayat was a senior official of the Fatah faction Tanzim. Killed while driving his Mitsubishi by a Hellfire anti-tank missile fired from an Israeli Apache helicopter. Rahma She'ibat, (50); 'Aziza Dannoun Jobran (52), two local women, were killed by a second missile, and Nazhmi She'ibat and his wife were also injured. Accused of shooting at the Gilo settlement.[5][54][56] Israel Defense Forces[57]
    November 22, 2000 Morag Gaza Strip Jamal Abdel Raziq (39), and Awni Dhuheir (38).[58] Senior official of the Fatah faction Tanzim Killed on the Rafah-Khan Yunis western road near the junction leading to Morag settlement while in a Honda Civic with the driver, Awni Dhuheir when their car was machine-gunned from two tanks at close range. The first version, they were about to attack Morag; the second version, Raziq was targeted after firing at IDF soldiers. His uncle was later sentenced to death for collaborating in his nephew's death by furnishing Israel with details.[54] Two bystanders in a taxi behind them also killed (Sami Abu Laban, 29, baker, and Na'el Shehdeh El-Leddawi, 25, student).[58][59]
    November 23, 2000 Nablus West Bank Ibrahim 'Abd al-Karim Bani 'Odeh (34) Unknown. Had been jailed for 3 years by the PNA until two weeks before his death. Killed while driving a Subaru near Al-Salam mosque. Israeli version, he died from his own rudimentary bomb. Palestinian version: his cousin 'Allan Bani 'Oudeh confessed to collaborating with Israel in an assassination, and was convicted and shot in Jan 2001.[54] ?[57]
    December 11, 2000 Nablus West Bank Anwar Mahmoud Hamran (28) A PIJ bombing suspect. Jailed for 2 years by PNA and released 6 weeks before his death. Targeted on a campus of Al-Quds Open University while waiting for a taxi-cab. Shot 19 times by a sniper at 500 yards. IDF version shot by soldiers in self-defence. Palestinian version, he died with books in his hand.Israel Defense Forces
    December 12, 2000 al-Khader West Bank Yusef Ahmad Mahmoud Abu Sawi (28) Unknown Targeted and shot by a sniper at 200 metres, 17 bullets.[57]
    December 13, 2000 Hebron West Bank 'Abbas 'Othman El-'Oweiwi(25) Hamas activist Targeted and shot 3 times in head and chest by a sniper while standing in front of his store in Wadi Al-Tuffah Street.[54][57]
    December 14, 2000 Burin West Bank Saed Ibrahim Taha al-Kharuf (35) Targeted and shot dead.
    rowspan=2|Israel Defense Forces.[57]

    December 14, 2000     Junction of Salah el-Din near Deir al-Balah Gaza Strip Hani Hussein Abu Bakra Israeli version. Hamas activist shot as he tried to fire from a pistol. Driver of a Hyundai taxi van. Palestinian version: shot while reaching for his identity card which he was asked to produce when stopped. 4 of seven passengers wounded, one of whom, 'Abdullah 'Eissa Gannan, 40, died 10 days later.[54]
    December 17, 2000 Qalandiyya West Bank Samih Malabi Tanzim officer.[60] Mobile phone bomb.
    December 31, 2000 Tulkarem West Bank Thabat Ahmad Thabat Classed by Israel as head of Tanzim cell.[54] Dentist, lecturer on public health at Al Quds University, and Fatah Secretary-General on the West Bank.[60] Israeli Special Forces sniper shot him as he drove his car from his home in Ramin, classified as an apparent political assassination.[56] Israel Defense Forces
    February 13, 2001 Gaza City[54] Gaza Strip Mas'oud Hussein 'Ayyad (50) Lieutenant-colonel in Force 17, an aide of Yasser Arafat held responsible for a failed mortar attack on a Jewish settlement in Gaza. The IDF also alleged, without providing evidence, that he intended to form a Hezbollah cell in the Gaza Strip.[5][56][61] Killed while driving a Hyundai in Jabalia Camp by a Cobra gunship launching 3rockets.[62] Israeli Air Force
    February 19, 2001 Nablus West Bank Mahmoud Suleiman El-Madani (25) Hamas activist Shot by two men in plainclothes as he left a mosque. As they fled, according to the Palestinian version, covering fire was provided by an Israeli unit on Mount Gerizim.[54]
    April 2, 2001 Al-Barazil neighborhood of Rafah Gaza Strip Mohammed 'Attwa 'Abdel-'Aal (26) PIJ Combat helicopters fired three rockets at his Peugeot Thunder, also hitting the taxi behind, whose occupants survived. Israeli Air Force[54]
    April 5, 2001 Jenin West Bank Iyad Mohammed Hardan (26) Head of the PIJ in Jenin. IDF version. He was involved in the 1997 Mahane Yehuda Market Bombings Blown up in a public phone booth, when, reportedly, an Israeli helicopter was flying overhead.Baruch Kimmerling classifies it as an apparent political execution to provoke Palestinians.[60]
    April 25, 2001 Rafah West Bank Ramadan Ismail 'Azzam (33); Samir Sabri Zo'rob (34); Sa'di Mohammed El-Dabbas (32); Yasser Hamdan El-Dabbas (18) Popular Resistance Committees members Blown up while examining a triangular object with flashing lights that had been reported as lying near the border earlier that day. Palestinians say the object exploded as an Israeli helicopter passed overhead.[54]
    May 5, 2001 Bethlehem West Bank Ahmad Khalil 'Eissa Assad (38) PIJ activist Hit while leaving his house for work, reportedly from shots (15) fired from the Israeli military outpost at Tel Abu Zaid, 250 metres away. His niece, Ala, was also injured. Israel said the victim intended carrying out armed operations in the future inside Israel. Israel Defense Forces[63]
    May 12, 2001 Jenin West Bank Mutassam Mohammed al-Sabagh (28) Fatah activist In a car with two Palestinian intelligence officers, who managed to escape on sighting an Apache helicopter, which struck it with three missiles. The two officers were also wounded. A fourth missile struck a Palestinian police car killing Sergeant Aalam al-Raziq al-Jaloudi and injuring Lieutenant Tariq Mohammed Amin al-Haj. Two bystanders also wounded. Israeli Army accused the three of plotting attacks on nearby settlers.[63] Israeli Air Force[63]
    June 24, 2001 Nablus West Bank Osama Fatih al-Jawabra (Jawabiri) (29) al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade militant. His name was on an Israeli wanted list submitted to PNA. Bomb exploded as he picked up a phone in a public telephone booth. Two brothers, Malik Shabaro (2), and Amar Shabaro (4) injured. Alleged by PNA to be IDF,.[64] but denied by the Israeli government.[63]
    July 17, 2001 Bethlehem West Bank Omar Ahmed Sa'adeh (45) Hamas leader Killed by two wire-guided missiles fired by two Israeli helicopter gunships at his garden hut, also killing Taha Aal-Arrouj (37). His brother Izhaq Ahmed Sa'adeh (51), a peace activist, and his cousin Hamad Saleh Sa'adeh (29), were killed by a further missile as they rushed towards the rubble. A dozen people nearby were wounded. Israel maintained that it was a preventive attack on a planner of a terrorist attack at the Maccabiah Games.[63][65] Israeli Air Force
    July 23, 2001 'Anin, west of Jenin West Bank Mustafa Yusuf Hussein Yassin (26) ? Released from an Israeli prison earlier that day. According to his wife, he opened the door on hearing noises outside their home and was shot at point-blank range in front of his family. Israeli sources say he was planning to bomb Israeli targets. Israel Defense Forces[63]
    July 25, 2001 Nablus West Bank Salah Nour al-Din Khalil Darwouza (38) Hamas Car hit while driving in Nablus. He evaded two missiles from an Apache helicopter, but the car was hit by a further 4. Israel claimed he planned bombing attacks on French Hill, and Netanya. Israeli Air Force[63]
    July 31, 2001 Nablus West Bank Jamal Mansour (41); Jamal Salim Damouni (42) High-ranking official of Hamas' West Bank political wing Killed when office struck by helicopter-launched missiles[66] as Mansour was giving an interview to journalists in the Palestinian Centre for Studies and Media. 4 others killed in the room: Mohammed al-Bishawi (28); Othman Qathnani (25); Omar Mansour (28); Fahim Dawabsha, (32). Two children, aged 5 and 8, outside were also killed, and three more adults injured by shrapnel.[63] Eyal Weizman states its purpose was to derail peace talks. Israel Defense Forces[5]
    August 5, 2001 Tulkarm West Bank Amer Mansour Habiri/Aamer Mansour al-Hudairy (22) Hamas Missiles fired at the car.
    August 20, 2001 Hebron West Bank Imad Abu Sneneh Leader of Tanzim Shot and killed.[67] Israeli undercover team
    August 27, 2001 Ramallah West Bank Abu Ali Mustafa (63) Head of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and senior executive leader of the PLO. Killed by laser-guided missiles fired from Apache helicopters while talking on the phone in his office.Baruch Kimmerling classifies it as an apparent political execution to provoke Palestinians.[60] Other sources say Shin Bet convinced the Israeli Cabinet he was connected to terrorism.[68] Israeli Air Force
    September 6, 2001 Tulkarm West Bank 'Omar Mahmoud Dib Subuh (22); Mustafa 'Ahed Hassan 'Anbas (19). Unknown Targeted and killed by a helicopter missile in an attempt to assassinate 4 Palestinians, of whom 2 died. Israel Defense Forces[57]
    October 14, 2001 Qalqiliya West Bank 'Abd a-Rahman Sa'id Hamed (33) Unknown Targeted by a sniper and shot at the entrance to his house.
    October 15, 2001 Nablus West Bank Ahmad Hassan Marshud (29) Unknown Targeted killing by explosion. ?[57]
    October 18, 2001 Beit Sahur West Bank Jamal 'Abdallah 'Abayiat (35); 'Issa 'Atef Khatib 'Abayiat (28); 'Atef Ahmad 'Abayiat (25). Unknown The three, all relatives were killed while driving a Jeep. Israel Defense Forces[57]
    October 22, 2001 Nablus West Bank Ayman Halawah (26). Unknown Killed while riding in a car. ?[57]
    31 October 2001 Hebron West Bank Jamil Jadallah al-Qawasmeh (25). Unknown Killed by a helicopter missile which struck his house. Israeli Air Force[57]
    2 November 2001 Tulkarm West Bank Fahmi Abu 'Easheh (28); Yasser 'Asira (25) Unknown Killed by gunfire whole driving in a car. Israel Defense Forces[57]
    23 November 2001 Far'a West Bank Mahmoud a-Shuli (Abu Hanud) (33); Maamun 'Awaisa (22); Ayman 'Awaisa (33). Unknown all three killed while riding in a taxi by a helicopter missile.
    December 10, 2001 Hebron West Bank Burhan al-Haymuni (3); Shadi Ahmad 'Arfah (13) None Two brothers killed in a vehicle hit by a helicopter missile during a targeted killing of a person in a nearby car.
    January 14, 2002 Tulkarem West Bank Raed (Muhammad Ra'if ) Karmi (28) Head of the Tanzim in Tulkarem He had planned the murders of two Israelis in Tulkarem and was behind a failed assassination attempt on the life of an Israeli Air Force colonel. After surviving an attempt to kill him by helicopter on September 6, 2001, he was persuaded by Arafat to desist from violence but killed twenty three days after a ceasefire[69] was in place because the Shin Bet was convinced they would never have the same operational opportunity to take him out. Killed from a bomb planted in a cemetery wall, set off by a UAV circling above when he passed by it on a visit to his mistress, to create the impression he had blown himself up accidentally.[70][71] Baruch Kimmerling classifies it as an apparent political execution to provoke Palestinians.[60] Eyal Weizman states its purpose was to derail peace talks.
    January 22, 2002 Nablus West Bank Yusif Suragji West Bank head of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades. Three other Hamas members also killed. Palestinian Authority claims it was an assassination.[72] Killed in a raid on an alleged explosives factory.[72] Israeli Defence Forces
    January 24, 2002 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Adli Hamadan (Bakr Hamdan) Senior Hamas member missile attack on car.[72] Israeli Air Force
    February 4, 2002 Rafah Gaza Strip Ayman Bihdari DFLP member wanted for 25 August 2001 raid in which three Israeli soldiers were killed. missile attack on car. Four other DFLP members killed.[72]
    February 16, 2002 Jenin West Bank Nazih Mahmoud Abu a-Saba' Second ranking Hamas officer in Jenin.[73] Killed by a bomb planted in his car, in a targeted killing.[74] Israel Defense Forces
    March 5, 2002 al-Birah West Bank Mohammad(Diriyah Munir) Abu Halawa (23); Fawzi Murar (32); 'Omar Hussein Nimer Qadan (27). Wanted AMB member. Missile fired at car from helicopter, Murar and Qadan according to B'tselem were not combatants at the time.[57][75] Israeli Air Force
    March 6, 2002 Gaza City Gaza Strip Abdel Rahman Ghadal Hamas member Missile attack on his home.[21]
    March 9, 2002 Ramallah West Bank Samer Wajih Yunes 'Awis (29) Not a participant in hostilities at the time, according to B'tselem.[57] Killed by missile fired from a helicopter, which struck a car he was travelling in. Israel Defense Forces
    March 14, 2002 Anabta West Bank Mutasen Hamad (Mu'atasem Mahmoud 'Abdallah Hammad) (28); 'Atef Subhi Balbisi (Balbiti) (25). Hamad was an Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade member and bomb maker. 3 missiles fired from an Israeli attack helicopter at Hamad's car, near a chicken farm. A Palestinian source say a bystander, a chicken farmer (Maher Balbiti) was also killed. An Israeli sources identify him as a terrorist.[21][76][77] Israeli Air Force
    April 5, 2002 Tubas West Bank Qeis 'Adwan (25); Saed 'Awwad (25); Majdi Balasmeh (26); Ashraf Daraghmeh (29); Muhammad Kmeil (28); Munqez Sawafta (29) Qeis 'adwan was a Hamas activist and bomb maker to whom several suicide bomb attacks were attributed. Targeted in a combined drone, tank and special forces siege during Operation Defensive Shield. Given hospitality in his house by Munqez Sawafta. After hours of gunfire, and a refusal to surrender, a D-9 armored bulldozer crushed part of the house and the remaining 3 were shot.[57][78] Israel Defense Forces
    April 22, 2002 Hebron West Bank Marwan Zaloum (59) and Samir Abu Rajoub. Tanzim Hebron leader and Force 17 member Killed by a helicopter missile while driving a car. Zaloum was on an Israeli wanted list, and thought responsible for shootings, including that Shalhevet Pass. Israeli helicopter strike.[21][57][79] Israeli Air Force
    May 22, 2002 Balata refugee camp, Nablus West Bank Iyad Hamdan (22); 'Imad Khatib (25); Mahmoud 'Abdallah Sa'id Titi (30); Bashir Yaish (30) Unknown, the first three were targeted. All four killed by a shell shot from an Israeli tank. Yaish was not involved in hostilities at the time. Israel Defense Forces[57]
    June 24, 2002 Rafah Gaza Strip Yasir Raziq, 'Amr Kufa. Izzeddln al-Qassam Brigades leaders. Missiles fired at two taxis, killing two other passengers (reportedly also Hamas activists),[80] the two drivers and injuring 13 bystanders.[21][81] Israeli Air Force
    June 30, 2002 Nablus West Bank Muhaned Taher, Imad Draoza. Muhaned Taher, nom de guerre "Engineer 4", was a master Hamas bomber claimed by Israel to be responsible for both the Patt Junction Bus Bombing and the Dolphinarium discotheque suicide bombing. Died with a deputy in a shoot-out with Israeli raiding commandos.[21][80] Israel Defense Forces
    June 17, 2002 al-Khader West Bank Walid Sbieh| ? Shot by an Israeli sniper in a targeted killing while in his car.[57]
    July 4, 2002 Gaza City Gaza Strip Jihad Amerin/(Aqid) Jihad Amrain Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades Colonel. Killed in a car bomb.[21][82] Israel Security Forces.[83]
    July 23, 2002 Gaza City Gaza Strip Salah Shahade (Shehadeh) Leader of Hamas Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Killed by 2,205-pound explosive dropped by an F-16. The attack also killed fourteen other Palestinians including his wife and nine children. Yesh Gvul and Gush Shalom tried to have Dan Halutz indicted, but the case was dropped.[21][84][85][86] Killed on the eve of an announced unilateral cease-fire by Tanzim and Eyal Weizman states its purpose was to derail peace talks. Israeli Air Force. 27 reserve pilots undersigned a pilots' letter refusing to serve in IAF sorties over the West Bank and Gaza in protest.
    August 6, 2002 Jaba, Jenin West Bank Ali Ajuri, Murad Marshud Classified as people not known to be involved in the fighting (B'tselem). Ajuri (21) was killed by an air-to-surface missile, during an attempt to arrest him. Murad Marshud (19) killed as bystander.[74]
    August 14, 2002 Tubas West Bank Nassa Jarrar Senior member of Hamas's militant wing. Died crushed by rubble when an IDF bulldozer demolished his house. The IDF admitted it compelled at gunpoint Nidal Abu M'khisan (19) to act as a human shield and get the victim out of his house. Jarrar shot the youth, believing he was an IDF soldier. The victim was wheelchair bound. Israel suspected him of preparing a bomb an Israeli high-rise building.[87][88] Israel Defense Forces
    August 31 Tubas West Bank Bahira Daraghmeh (6); Ousamah Daraghmeh (12); Raafat Daraghmeh (29); Yazid 'Abd al-Razaq Daraghmeh (17); Sari Mahmoud Subuh (17). Five victims who did not participate in hostilities when killed during a targeted killing, from a helicopter fired missile.[57] An eyewitness account was later provided by 'Aref Daraghmeh. "The helicopter fired a third missile towards a silver Mitsubishi, which had four people in it. The missile hit the trunk, and the car spun around its axle. I saw a man escaping the car and running away. He ran about 25 meters and then fell to the ground and died. The three other passengers remained inside. I saw an arm and an upper part of a skull flying out of the car. The car went up in flames, and I could see three bodies burning inside it. Three minutes later, after the Israeli helicopters left, I went out to the street and began to shout. I saw people lying on the ground. Among them was six-year-old Bahira . . She was dead . . I also saw Bahira's cousin, Osama . . I saw Osama's mother running towards Bahira, picking her up and heading towards the a-Shifa clinic, which is about 500 meters away."
    October 13, 2002 Beit Jala West Bank Muhammad Ishteiwi 'Abayat (28) ? Killed in an explosion in a telephone booth, in a targeted killing.[57]
    October 29, 2002 Tubas West Bank Assim Sawafta Age 19 Hamas Izzedine al Qassam military leader. Killed by an undercover army unit, after failing to surrender.[21][89] Israel Defense Forces
    November 4, 2002 Nablus West Bank Hamed 'Omar a-Sader (36); Firas Abu Ghazala (27). Unknown Killed by a car-bomb. According to B'tselem, Firas Abu Ghazala was not engaged in hostilities at the time.[57]
    November 26, 2002 Jenin West Bank Alah Sabbagh (26); Imad Nasrti/'Imad Nasharteh (22); Sabbagh reportedly an Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade member, Nasrti Hamas local leader. Killed in an Israeli airstrike on a house in the Jenin refugee camp by two missiles fired into a room.[21][90] Israeli Air Force
    December 23, 2002 wadi Burqin near Jenin West Bank Shumann Hassan Subuh (29) and Mustafa Kash (26/30) Subah was a Hamas commander and bomb maker. Ambushed by IDF unit as Kash drove a tractor between Burqin and Al-Yamun.[21][57][91] Israel Defense Forces
    January 30, 2003 Burqin West Bank Faiz al-Jabber (32) ? Targeted when Israeli forces opened fire at a Fatah group. He fled, was wounded, then shot dead at close range.[57] Israeli Border Police
    March 8, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ibrahim al-Makadmeh Gaza Dentist. Second-in-Command of Hamas's Military Wing.[21] Hamas political leader. He and three of his aides killed by helicopter-fired missiles.[92] Israeli Air Force
    March 18, 2003 Baqat al-Hatab West Bank Nasser Asida Hamas commander Shot while hiding in a cave, On Israel's most wanted list as alleged mastermind of attacks on Israeli settlements in the West Bank.[93] Israel Defense Forces's Kfir Brigade[94]
    March 25, 2003 Bethlehem West Bank Mwafaq 'Abd a-Razaq Shhadeh Badawneh (40); 'Alaa Iyad (24); Nader Salameh Jawarish (25); Christine George S'adeh (11) ? Israeli Defence Forces version, agents were ambushed and shot dead 2 Palestinian gunmen, and a girl in a car that blundered into the battle, and was believed to be part of the ambush. The girl's parents and sister were wounded.[95] B'tselem reports that three of the 4 did not participate in hostilities at the time, but were killed during the targeted assassination by an undercover team of Nader Gawarish and Nader Salameh Jawarish[57]
    April 8, 2003 Zeitoun, Gaza City Gaza Strip Said al-Arabid Hamas Israeli Air Force strike on his car followed by helicopter missiles. Seven Palestinians, ranging from 6 to 75, were killed, 47 wounded, 8 critically.[21] Israeli Air Force[96]
    April 9, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Mahmoud Zatma Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine Senior Commander, Bomb Maker[21] Apache helicopter hit the car he was driving in Gaza City, 10 bystanders injured.[97]
    April 12, 2003 Tulkarm West Bank Jasser Hussein Ahmad 'Alumi (23) ? Killed by gunfire. Object of a targeted killing.[57] Israel Defense Forces
    April 10, 2003 Tulkarm West Bank Yasser Alemi Fatah, Tanzim Shot and killed as a fugitive in Tulkarm. Israel Border Police[21]
    April 29, 2003 Gaza Strip Nidal Salameh PFLP Killed when 4 helicopter missiles struck his car[21] Israeli Air Force
    May 8, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Iyad el-Bek (30) Aide of Salah Shehade, Hamas activist.[21][98] Killed by three helicopter missiles fired at a car.
    June 11, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Tito Massoud (35) and Soffil Abu Nahez (29) Massoud was a senior member of Hamas's military wing.[21] Retaliatory strike one hour after the Davidka Square bus bombing. 4 bystanders also killed[99]
    June 12, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Jihad Srour and Yasser Taha Hamas members[21] Killed by between 4 and 6 helicopter missiles while their car was caught in a traffic jam, near a cemetery where victims of the June 11 strike the day before were being buried. Collateral damage consisted of 6 other victims including Taha's wife and child. 25 others were injured by the blasts.[100]
    June 12, 2003 Jenin West Bank Fadi Taisir Jaradat (21); Saleh Suliman Jaradat (31) Saleh Suliman Jaradat was an Islamic Jihad activist Both killed at the entrance of their home, the latter being the target. Fadi Jaradat did not participate in hostilities at the time, according to B'tselem.[57] Israel Defense Forces[57]
    June 21, 2003 Hebron West Bank 'Abdallah 'Abd al-Qader Husseini al-Qawasmeh (41) Wanted by IDF Shot dead after getting out of a taxi before a mosque. Three vans approached, with a dozen Israelis disguised as Palestinian labourers, and he was shot in the leg, perhaps while fleeing to a nearby field, and then finished off.[101][102]
    August 21, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ismail Abu Shanab (48) Engineer and high-ranking Hamas military commander.[103] High-ranking Hamas official[104] Missile strike, ending a cease-fire.[105][106] Israeli Air Force[21]
    August 24, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Walid el Hams, Ahmed Rashdi Eshtwi (24), Ahmed Abu Halala, Muhammad Abu Lubda Hamas members. Eshtwi was said by the IDF to be a Hamas liaison officer with West Bank cells.[107] Twin helicopter missile strike as the five were sitting in a vacant lot near a Force 17 base. Several bystanders were injured, and a further Hamas member critically wounded.[108]
    August 26, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Khaled Massoud brother of Tito Massoud, killed 3 months earlier. Hamas Qassam rocket designer, alleged to be involved in mortar strikes. Attempted assassination of Massoud, who was with two other Hamas activists, Wa'al Akilan and Massoud Abu Sahila, in a car. Alerted to the threat, the three men managed to escape from their car as 3 missiles struck it and killed a passing 65-year-old Jabaliya donkey driver Hassan Hemlawi, who was driving his cart. Two bystanders were also wounded, including four children.[107][109]
    August 28, 2003 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Hamdi Khalaq Izzedine al Qassam 3 missiles struck hit a donkey cart Khalaq was driving. Three Gazans nearby were wounded. The IDF said he was on his way to a mortar attack on an Israeli settlement in the Gaza Strip.[110] Israel Defense Forces[21]
    August 30, 2003 On a road linking the Nusseirat and Bureij refugee camps Gaza Strip Abdullah Akel (37) and Farid Mayet (40) Hamas senior operatives, said to have fired mortar shells and Qassam rocks. Killed when 4 helicopter missiles struck their pickup truck. Seven others Palestinians were wounded by the fire.. IDF soldiers machine-gunned an 8-year-old girl Aya Fayad the same day in the Khan Yunis refugee camp, while, according to IDF reports, shooting at road-bomb militants detonating bombs on a patrol route.[111] 'Israeli strike kills two militants,'[112] Israeli Air Force[21]
    September 1, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Khader Houssre (36) Hamas member Killed when 4 helicopter missiles struck a car with 3 Hamas members, in a crowded side street. The second was critically wounded, while the other managed to flee. 25 bystanders were injured in the strike.[113]
    October 28, 2003 Tulharm Refugee Camp West Bank Ibrahim 'Aref Ibrahim a-N'anish Wanted by IDF Shot dead, unarmed, as he drove his car to the entrance of the refugee camp.[57] Israel Defense Forces
    December 25, 2003 Gaza City Gaza Strip Mustafa Sabah Senior Hamas bomb maker, thought behind explosions that blew up 3 Merkava tanks inside the Gaza Strip.[114] Killed when 3 helicopter missiles destroyed a Palestinian Authority compound where Sabah worked as a part-time guard.[114] Israeli Air Force[21]
    December 25, 2003 Gaza Strip Gaza Strip Mekled Hameid PIJ military commander. Helicopter gunship attack on car, killing its occupants, including two PIJ members. Two bystanders were also reported killed and some 25 bystanders injured.[115]
    February 2, 2004 Nablus West Bank Hashem Da'ud Ishteiwi Abu Hamdan (2); Muhammad Hasanein Mustafa Abu Hamdan (24); Nader Mahmoud 'Abd al-Hafiz Abu Leil (24); Na'el Ziad Husseini Hasanein (22). All four wanted by the IDF Killed in a car struck by a missile fired from a helicopter. Israel Defense Forces[57]
    February 7, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Aziz Mahmoud Shami Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine local field commander, claimed to be behind a 1995 double suicide bombing in Netanya. Missile strike incinerated his car while he drove down a crowded street, and a passing 12-year-old boy was killed, and 10 others wounded.[116] [21]
    February 28, 2004 Jabaliya refugee camp Gaza Strip Amin Dahduh, Mahmoud Juda, Aiyman Dahduh. PIJ military commander Missiles hit his car as it travelled from Gaza city to the refugee camp. Two passengers are also killed and eleven bystanders wounded.[117][118] Israeli helicopters.
    March 3, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Tarad Jamal, Ibrahim Dayri and Ammar Hassan.[5] Senior Hamas members Missiles from helicopter fired at their car as it drove down a coastal road.[119] Helicopter strike.[21]
    March 16, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Nidal Salfiti and Shadi Muhana Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine Israeli missile strike.[21]
    March 22, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ahmed Yassin Co-founder and leader of Hamas The purpose of the operation was to strengthen the position of Mahmoud Abbas. As Yassin left a mosque at dawn, he, 2 bodyguards, and 7 bystanders killed by Israeli Air Force AH-64 Apache-fired Hellfire missiles. 17 bystanders were wounded.[120][121] Israeli Air Force[21]
    April 17, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi Co-founder and leader of Hamas, and successor of Ahmed Yassin as leader of Hamas after his death The purpose of the operation was to strengthen the position of Mahmoud Abbas. al-Rantissi was killed by helicopter-fired missiles, along with his son and bodyguard. Several bystanders were injured.[122]
    April 22, 2004 Talluza West Bank Yasser Ahmed Abu Laimun (32) Lecturer in hospital management at the Arab-American University in Jenin, mistaken for Imad Mohammed Janajra. IDF initially reported he was a Hamas member.[123] Initially reported shot after shooting, and then running away from an Israeli attack dog, trained to seize wanted individuals. His widow testified that he was shot, while in his garden, from a distance of 200 yards by gunfire from Israeli soldiers behind an oak tree. The IDF apologized.[124][125][126] Israel Defense Forces
    May 5, 2004 Talluza West Bank Imad Mohammed Janajra (31)[21] Hamas leader Ambushed in an olive grove, after an earlier attempt, mistaking Abu Laimun for him. Said by IDF to be armed and approaching them.[126] Golani Brigade's elite Egoz unit.
    May 30, 2004 Zeitoun Gaza Strip Wael Nassar[21] Hamas mastermind behind the mine that blew up an Israeli troop carrier raiding Gaza City, on May 11, killing 6 soldier. He was killed on his motorcycle, together with his aide, by a missile strike which also wounded 7 civilians, including a woman and two children. A second following missile killed another Hamas member nearby.[127] Helicopter strike
    June 14, 2004 Nablus West Bank Khalil Mahmoud Zuhdi Marshud (24)[21][128]'Awad Hassan Ahmad Abu Zeid (24). Head of Al-Aqsa Brigades in Nablus Earlier targeted in a Nablus missile attack on a car on May 3, killing 3 Al Aqsa Brigade members. He was in a different vehicle. Killed when a missile hit a car outside the Balata refugee camp, also killing PIJ members Awad Abu Zeid e Mohammed Al Assi (Israeli version). Abu Zeid did not engage in hostilities when killed (B'tselem report).[57] Israeli Army radio said the decision to kill him followed on several failures to arrest him. The same day, an attempt to kill Zakaria Zubeidi, head of the Jenin al Aqsa Brigades, failed.[128][129] Israel Defense Forces
    June 26, 2004 Nablus West Bank Nayef Abu Sharkh (40) Jafer el-Massari Fadi Bagit Sheikh Ibrahim and the others. Respectively Tanzim Hamas Nablus officer; Islamic Jihad officer.[21] Killed by IDF paratroopers together with six other men found huddled in a secret tunnel beneath a house in the old city of Nablus, after trailing a fugitive into the house.[130] Israeli paratroopers.
    July 22, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Hazem Rahim[21] Islamic Jihad in Palestine member Helicopter gunship missile strike on a car, killing Rahim and his deputy, Rauf Abu Asi. According to Israeli sources, Rahim had been seen on video two months earlier brandishing body parts of ambushed Israeli soldiers.[131][132] Israel Defense Forces
    July 29, 2004 Near Rafah refugee camp Gaza Strip Amr Abu Suta, Zaki Abu Rakha[21] Abu al-Rish Brigades leader. In a car, together with bodyguard, incinerated by Israeli helicopter fire. Accused of involvement in the shooting of an IDF officer, and a 1992 killing in a Jewish settlement in the Gaza Strip.[133]
    August 17, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Five dead. Four Unidentified?[21] The target was a Hamas Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades leader, Ahmed al-Jabari. The five, included al-Jabari's 14-year-old son, his brother, his nephew and son-in-law, were killed in a drone missile strike on al-Jabari's home. About a dozen other Palestinians wounded. al-Jabari survived the attempt.[134][135] Israeli Air Force
    September 13, 2004 Jenin West Bank Mahmoud Ass'ad Rajab Abu Khalifah (25),[21] Amjad Husseini 'Aref Abu Hassan, Yamen Feisal 'Abd al-Wahab Ayub Al-Aqsa Brigades leader, deputy to Zakariya Zubeidi. Killed together with two aides (Israeli version) when a helicopter missile struck his car in the city centre.[136] Amjad Hassan and Yamen Feisal 'Abd al-Wahab Ayub were not, according to B'tselem, involved in the fighting.[57]
    September 20, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Khaled Abu Shamiyeh (30) Hamas rocketry mechanic.[21][137] Car hit by missile Israel Defense Forces
    September 21, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Nabil al-Saedi (34), Rabah Zaqout[21] Hamas mid-ranking operatives. Killed when their Jeep was struck by a missile. 8 bystanders including 2 children were wounded.[138]
    September 27, 2004 Damascus Syria Izz Eldine Subhi Sheik Khalil (42)[21] Hamas senior official. A Gazan deported by Israel in 1992. Blown up by a bomb hidden in his SUV when he answered a call on his mobile phone, triggering the explosion. Israel did not claim responsibility but Ariel Sharon's spokesman Raanin Gissin said:'Our longstanding policy has been that no terrorist will have any sanctuary and any immunity,' and Moshe Ya'alon commented that action should be adopted against "terror headquarters in Damascus" in the wake of the recent Beersheba bus bombings.[139]
    September 27, 2004 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Ali al-Shaeir (26)[21] Popular Resistance Committee member Killed while an Israeli helicopter gunship fired several missiles at a car in Abbassam, believed to hold their target, Muhammad Abu Nasira. The latter, with two others of the group sustained injuries, and al-Shair died.[140] Israeli helicopter strike
    October 6, 2004 al-Shati refugee camp Gaza Strip Bashir Khalil al-Dabash, (38/42) and Zarif Yousef al-'Are'ir (30)[21] Head of Islamic Jihad's military wing, al-Quds Brigades. Both killed by helicopter missile fired at their Subaru in 'Izziddin al-Qassam Street in downtown Gaza. Three passers-by were wounded. One of three operations in Operation Days of Penitence that killed 5 other Palestinian militants.[141][142] Israeli Air Force[21]
    October 21, 2004 Gaza City Gaza Strip Adnan al-Ghoul Imad al-Baas 2nd in command of Hamas, and Qassem rocket expert. Killed together with his aide Imad Abbas when their car was destroyed by a missile from an Apache helicopter. Four bystanders were wounded. .[5]
    July 15, 2005 East of Salfit West Bank Samer Abdulhadi Dawhqa, Mohammad Ahmed Salameh Mar'i (20), Mohammad Yusef 'Abd al-Fatah A'yash (22) Alleged to be 'ticking bombs'.[55] Killed in an olive grove, or, according to B'tselem, in a cave where two were hiding. The first two died immediately in a missile and gunfire strike by Apache helicopters. The third was taken to Ramallah in critical condition, but then seized by Israeli forces and taken off in a military ambulance. He died later, and neither he nor Mar'i, according to B'tselem, were involved in the fighting.[57][143] Israel Defense Forces
    July 16, 2005 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Saeed Seam (Sayid Isa Jabar Tziam) (31). Hamas commander of Izzedine al Qassam. Allegedly involved in killing two settlers in 2002 and shooting at an Israeli army outpost in 2004.[21] Shot dead by Israeli sniper in a targeted killing as he stood outside his Gaza home, as he was going to water his garden, in Khan Yunis.[144][145]
    July 16, 2005 Gaza City .[146] Gaza Strip 'Four Unidentified' (JVL)=Adel Mohammad Haniyya (29); A'asem Marwan Abu Ras (23); Saber Abu Aasi ( 24); Amjad Anwar Arafat,[147] one reportedly a nephew of Ismail Haniya.[21][148] Hamas operatives. Apache helicopter struck a van carrying the men and numerous Qassam rockets in Gaza city. Five civilians, including a child, were wounded in the attack.[144][149][150] Israeli Air Force[21][21][151][21][152][21][153][154][21][155][156][21][157]
    September 25, 2005 Gaza City Gaza Strip Sheikh Mohammed Khalil (32) PIJ Alleged to have been involved in Hatuel family's murder near the Gush Qatif settlement bloc. Killed when his Mercedes was struck by 5 missiles launched from an Israeli aircraft.[158]
    October 27, 2005 Jabalia Camp Gaza Strip Shadi Mehana/Shadi Muhana (25) PIJ Airstrike hitting car with four Palestinian militants north of Gaza City. Three civilians were also killed, including a 15-year-old boy (Rami Asef) and a 60-year-old man. One source stated 14 other Palestinians were wounded.[159][160]
    November 1, 2005 Gaza City Gaza Strip Hassan Madhoun (33); Fawzi Abu Kara[161] Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades Allegedly planning an operation to strike the Eretz Crossing. Killed when his car was hit by an Israeli Apache helicopter missile. According to documents in the Palestine Papers Israel's Shaul Mofaz had proposed to the PA that Fatah execute him.[162]
    December 7, 2005 Rafah Gaza Strip Mahmoud Arkan (29). Popular Resistance Committees field operative Airborne missile strike on a moving car in a residential area. 10 bystanders, including three children, were injured.[163][164]
    December 8, 2005 Gaza Strip Iyad Nagar Ziyad Qaddas Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades Missile striking a house. A third militant, and several Palestinians nearby, including a young girl, suffered injuries.[165]
    December 14, 2005 Gaza City Gaza Strip Four Unidentified Popular Resistance Committees Missile strike on a white sedan near the Karni crossing. Israeli sources say the car was packed with explosives. Three PRC members killed, a fourth is thought to have been an al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades member. One occupant survived, and two bystanders were injured.[166][167]
    January 2, 2006 East of Jabaliya Gaza Strip Sayid Abu-Gadian (45); Akram Gadasas (43), third unknown. PIJ All three hit by IAF rocket while in a car close to a no-go zone declared by Israel in the northern Gaza Strip. Collateral damage, two bystanders were wounded.
    February 5, 2006 Zeitoun Gaza Strip Adnan Bustan; Jihad al-Sawafiri Islamic Jihad in Palestine. Believed to have director of their engineering and manufacturing unit. Killed when 2 cars fired on by an IAF missile, the second en route to a retaliatory attack for an earlier Israeli helicopter strike that killed three people.
    February 6, 2006 North of Jabalia Camp Gaza Strip[168] Hassan 'Asfour (25); Rami Hanouna (27)[169] al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade| Hit and killed when their car was struck by three missiles from an Israeli drone. Three bystanders also wounded.[168]
    February 7, 2006 Gaza City Gaza Strip Mohammed Abu Shariya; Suheil Al Baqir Al Aqsa Brigades Their car was demolished by a missile.
    March 6, 2006 Gaza City Gaza Strip Munir Mahmed Sukhar (30); Iyad Abu Shalouf Islamic Jihad field operative. Collateral damage, 3-8 passers-by wounded, including 17-year-old Ahmed Sousi, and an 8-year-old boy (Ra'ed al-Batch), both of whom later died.[170]
    May 20, 2006 Gaza City Gaza Strip Mohammed Dahdoh PIJ Killed in car, held responsible for firing crude rockets into southern Israel. Palestinian version stated Muhanned Annen, 5; his mother, Amnah, 25; and Hannan Annen, 45, Muhanned's aunt, were collateral victims. Dahdoh was alone in the car (IDF version).
    May 25, 2006 Sidon Lebanon Mahmoud al-Majzoub (Abu Hamze), Nidal al-Majzoub Commander of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad; the brother was a member also. Critically wounded in car bombing, when he turned on the ignition of his car, parked near the Abu Bakr mosque in Sidon,. He died the next day. Islamic Jihad blamed Israel, though Israel denied it.[171] An Israeli government spokesman denied knowledge of any Israeli involvement. (alleged)
    June 5, 2006 Jabalia Camp Gaza Strip[172] Majdi Hamad (25); Imad Assaliya (27) Popular Resistance Committees Missile struck their car, targeting Hamad. Three bystanders were injured. Israeli Air Force[21][173][21][21][174][175]
    June 8, 2006 Rafah Gaza Strip Jamal Abu Samhadana and three others Founder of the Popular Resistance Committees militant group, a former Fatah and Tanzim member, and number two on Israel's list of wanted terrorists. Had survived 4 assassination attempts.[176] Eyal Weizman states its purpose was to derail peace talks, as it coincided with a referendum vote on a political initiative by Mahmoud Abbas. Killed by Israeli airstrike on a training camp, along with at least three other PRC members.[177]
    June 13, 2006 Gaza City Gaza Strip Hamoud Wadiya; Shawki Sayklia Wadiya was a PIJ rocket expert. Three militants in a van with a Grad rocket were driving down a main street when a missile struck nearby. They fled but were killed by a second missile, as people gathered. The second blast killed 11 Palestinian bystanders, including Ashraf Mughrabi (25) his son, Maher (8), and a relative Hisham (14), 4 ambulance drivers and hospital staff rushing to the incident, and three boys. Thirty-nine people were wounded.[178]
    July 4, 2006 Beit Hanoun Gaza Strip Isamail Rateb Al-Masri (30)[179][180] Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Killed by an IAF rocket.[181]
    August 9, 2006 Jenin Gaza Strip Osama Attili (24); Mohammed Atik (26) Described by Israel as leaders of PIJ Killed when (2) helicopter(s) fired missiles into their house. PIJ leader Hussam Jaradat, another target escaped the strike, while his deputy Walid Ubeidi abu al-Kassam, was lightly wounded.[182]
    October 12, 2006 'Abasan al-Kabirah neighbourhood Gaza Strip Three unidentified='Abd a-Rahman 'Abdallah Muhammad Qdeih (19); Na'el Fawzi Suliman Qdeih (22); Salah Rashad Shehdeh Qdeih (22); Hamas All three, armed, killed by a helicopter missile after one of the three fired at an IDF tank
    October 12, 2006 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Three militants of Kadiah family. Hamas Five members of Kadiah family killed, two, Adel Kadiah, 40, and his son, Sohaib, 13, being civilians
    October 12, 2006 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ashraf Ferwana Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Ashraf targeted in his home but he survived the drone missile strike which demolished his house. His brother Ayman Ferwana and a girl died, and 10 others injured.[174][183][184]
    October 14, 2006 Jabalia Camp Gaza Strip Ahmad Hassan 'Abd al-Fatah Abu al-'Anin (19); Sakher Faiz Muhammad Abu Jabal (19); Rami 'Odeh Salem Abu Rashed (22); Faiz 'Ali Fadel al-'Ur (33); Suliman Hassan Fadel al-'Ur (30); Muhammad Faiz Mustafa Shaqurah (30); Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Five killed while walking armed in the refugee camp, by a helicopter-launched missile.Awad Attatwa (18), not associated with group, also died.[175][185]
    October 14, 2006 One Unidentified Al Aqsa Brigades Died when the car he was in was hit by a missile fired in an airstrike. A local commander also critically injured, and two bystanders wounded.[185]
    November 7, 2006 Al-Yamun West Bank Salim Yousef Mahmoud Abu Al-Haija (24); Ala'a Jamil Khamaisa (24); Taher Abed Abahra (25); Mahmoud Rajah Abu Hassan (25). Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades The four militants were shot while sitting near the Al-Yamun bakery (Palestinian version), fled wounded and were killed in a local house. Aiman Suleiman Mahmoud Mustafa (31), a bakery worker came out to see what was happening and was shot dead. Salim Ahmed Awad (27), Ibrahim Mahmoud Nawahda (30), Salim Ahmed Awad (27) and Mohammed Yousef Abu Al-Haija (27) were also shot and taken prisoner.[186] Israel Defense Forces undercover squad.
    November 20, 2006 Gaza City Gaza Strip Bassel Sha'aban Ubeid (22); Abdel Qader Habib (26) Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Missile fired at a Mercedes containing both, parked outside the Ubeid family home. Collateral damage, 5 civilians, members of the Amen family, including Hanan Mohammed Amen, aged 3 months and Mo'men Hamdi Amen (2), injured by shrapnel.[186] Israeli Air Force[21]
    May 17, 2007 Gaza City Gaza Strip Imad Muhammad Ahmad Shabaneh (33) Hamas Killed while travelling in a car hit by an Israeli helicopter missile. Israeli helicopters[21][175]
    June 1, 2007 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Fawzi (Fadi) Abu Mustafa PIJ/Al Quds Brigades senior member Killed by an IAF airforce missile while riding a motor bike. Israeli Air Force[21][187][21][187][188][188][21][189][21][190][21][191][21][192][21][193][194][21][195][188][21][187][188][21][187][196]
    June 24, 2007 Gaza City Gaza Strip Hussein Khalil al-Hur=Hossam Khaled Harb (32) Hussein Harb Peugeot al-Quds Brigades local leader. Struck by a missile while driving a Peugeot through Gaza City
    October 23, 2007 Gaza City (near) Gaza Strip Mubarak al-Hassanat (35) Popular Resistance Committees head and Director of military affairs in the Hamas Interior Ministry. Israeli airstrike (IAF) on his car.
    December 17, 2007 Gaza City Gaza Strip Majed Harazin (Abu Muamen) PIJ. Senior Commander, West Bank, overseer of rocket operations. Killed together with two others in his car, reportedly packed with explosives.
    December 17, 2007 Gaza City Gaza Strip Abdelkarim Dahdouh; Iman Al-Illa; Ahmad Dahdooh, Ammar al-Said; Jihad Zahar; Mohamman Karamsi PIJ. Missile strike from an aircraft on a car, combined with IDF undercover unit, on a PIJ cell preparing to launch rockets.
    December 18, 2007 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Hani Barhoum; Mohammed A-Sharif Hamas Strike on a Hamas security position.
    January 13, 2008 Al-Shati Refugee Camp Gaza Strip Nidal Amudi; Mahir Mabhuh; third man unidentified al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades Senior operative The three were killed in a car driving through the refugee camp, struck by an IAF missile.
    January 17, 2008 Beit Lahiya Gaza Strip One unidentified[21] =Raad Abu al-Ful (43) and his wife. PIJ rocket manufacturer They were killed by an IAF airstrike which fired missiles at their car.
    January 20, 2008 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ahmad Abu Sharia Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades Commander Hit by an IAF missile as he walked in the streets. Two other Palestinians wounded.
    February 4, 2008 Gaza City Gaza Strip Abu Said Qarmout Popular Resistance Committees member Killed by an IAF missile that struck his car. Three others were wounded, two seriously.
    April 14, 2008 Gaza Strip Ibrahim Abu Olba DFLP Israeli Air Force.[21]
    April 30, 2008 Near Shabura refugee camp, Rafah Gaza Strip Nafez Mansour (40) Hamas Killed in an IAF missile strike. Reportedly involved in Gilad Shalit abduction. Collateral damage. Three bystanders, one dying of his wounds. A further bystander and young girl also hurt.[21] Israeli Air Force/Shin Bet joint operation.[197]
    June 17, 2008 al-Qararah, Rafah district Gaza Strip Mu'taz Muhammad Jum'ah Dughmosh (27); Musa Fawzi Salman al-'Adini (35); Mahmoud Muhammad Hassan a-Shanadi (25); Nidal Khaled Sa'id a-Sadudi (21)Muhammad 'Amer Muhammad 'Asaliyah (20).[175] Army of Islam Killed when their car was struck by an IAf missile. A further two people were wounded.[198] Israeli Air Force.[21]
    August 1, 2008 Tartus Syria Muhammad Suleiman Syrian General. National Security Advisor. Presidential Advisor for Arms Procurement and Strategic Weapons. Killed by sniper fire to the head and neck. Israel denied responsibility for the killing, but was widely suspected of involvement. According to an NSA intercept published by wikileaks, the NSA defined it as the 'first known instance of Israel targeting a legitimate government official." [199][200][201] The U.S. Embassy in Damascus reported that Israelis were the 'most obvious suspect (alleged).'[202]
    January 1, 2009 Jabalia Camp Gaza Strip Nizar Rayan (49) Top level Senior Hamas leader. Professor of Sharia law, Islamic University of Gaza. Among first 5 top Hamas decision makers, and field operative. Advocated suicide bombings inside Israel.[203][204] His house destroyed by an IAF bomb. along with his 4 wives and 6 of his 14 children. 30 others in the vicinity were wounded. According to Israel, secondary explosions from weapons in the building caused collateral damage. Rayan was not the target, rather, the strike aimed to destroy Hamas' central compound which included several buildings that served as storage sites for weapons. Israel further stated that phone warnings were delivered to the residents.[204][205] Israeli Air Force
    January 3, 2009 Gaza City Gaza Strip Abu Zakaria al-Jamal Senior Hamas military wing commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, and leader of Gaza City's rocket-launching squads[206] Killed in Israeli airstrike.[207]
    January 15, 2009 Jabalia Gaza Strip Said Seyam Hamas Interior Minister Killed in Israeli airstrike with his brother, his son, and Hamas general security services officer. Salah Abu Shrakh.[208] Israeli Air Force
    January 26, 2009 Bureij Refugee Camp Gaza Strip Issa Batran (failed. See 30 July 2010) Senior military commander of the Hamas military wing Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Targeted at his home. The attempt to assassinate him failed, but the shell hit the balcony of their home and killed his wife Manal Sha'rawi, and five of their children: Bilal, Izz Ad-Din, Ihsan, Islam and Eyman. Batran and his child Abdul-Hadi survived.[209][210] Israel Defense Forces
    March 4, 2009 Gaza Strip Khaled Shalan Senior Operative PIJ Killed in Israeli airstrike, together with 2/3 other militants, targeted after alleged involvement in rocket attacks on the Israeli city of Ashkelon. They jumped from their car but were critically wounded. 5 bystanders were also wounded.[211][212][213] Israeli Air Force

    2010s
    Date Place Location Target Description Action Executor
    January 11, 2010 Deir al-Balah Gaza Strip Awad Abu Nasir Islamic Jihad Senior Field Commander Had escaped several assassination attempts. Reportedly involved in attempts to harm Israeli soldiers. Killed by a missile.[214][215] Israeli Air Force[21]
    January 12, 2010 Tehran Iran Masoud Alimohammadi Iranian Physicist Killed in a car bomb. Majid Jamali Fashi reportedly confessed to an Iranian court he had been recruited by Mossad to carry out the execution, while the US State Department called the allegation "absurd". Mossad (alleged)[216]
    January 19, 2010 Dubai United Arab Emirates Mahmoud al-Mabhouh Hamas senior military commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, believed to have been involved in smuggling weapons and explosives into Gaza.[217] Widely reported to have been killed by Israeli intelligence members. Israel stated that there is no proof of its involvement, and neither confirmed nor denied the allegations of a Mossad role.[218][219] Dubai police report that Israeli agents used Australian, French, British, Irish, and Dutch passports.
    July 30, 2010 Deserted area in the Nuseirat refugee camp Gaza Strip Issa Abdul-Hadi al-Batran (40) Hamas Senior military commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades in central Gaza, who had survived 4 previous attempts on his life (26 Jan.2009). Thought to have been involved in manufacturing rockets. Killed by a missile in retaliation for earlier rocket attack on city of Ashkelon. A further 13 Palestinians were injured in the strike.[209][210] Israeli Air Force
    November 3, 2010 Gaza Strip Mohammed Nimnim Allegedly al-Qaeda affiliated, Army of Islam commander[220] Car explosion, due to either a bomb planted by Israel or an Israeli airstrike.[221] Israeli Air Force, with Egyptian intelligence.
    November 17, 2010 Gaza Strip Islam Yassin al-Qaeda affiliated, Army of Islam commander[222] Israeli airstrike on his car, killing him, his brother, and injuring four others.[223] Israeli Air Force
    January 11, 2011 Gaza Strip Mohammed A-Najar Islamic Jihad operative. Suspected of planning attacks against civilians and launching rockets at Israel[224]
    Attacked by the Israel Airforce while driving his motorcycle in the Gaza Strip.[224]

    Israeli Air Force
    April 2, 2011 Ismail Lubbad, Abdullah Lubbad, Muhammad al Dayah Hamas Allegedly aiming to kidnap Israeli tourists in Sinai over Passover. .[21]
    April 9, 2011 Gaza Strip Tayseer Abu Snima Senior Hamas military commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades Killed along with 2 of his bodyguards by the Israeli air force during a period of escalated rocket fire from Gaza. He was the most senior Hamas commander killed since 2009.[225] Israeli Air Force
    July 23, 2011 Tehran Iran Darioush Rezaeinejad Iranian electrical engineer Killed by unknown gunmen on motorcycle. Rezaeinejad was involved in development of high-voltage switches, which are used in a key component of nuclear warheads. Such switches may also have civilian scientific applications.[226] The German Newspaper Der Spiegel claimed Mossad was behind the operation. He is the third Iranian nuclear scientist killed since 2010.[227] Mossad (alleged)
    August 18, 2011 Gaza Strip Abu Oud al-Nirab; Khaled Shaath; Imad Hamed Popular Resistance Committees Commanders Killed hours after a terrorist attack killed 6 civilians and one soldier in southern Israel. 4 additional members of the group were killed in the strike.[228] Israeli Air Force, Shin Bet
    August 24, 2011 Ismael al-Asmar PIJ Allegedly weapons smuggler and militant in Egypt's Sinai, killed just before shooting a Qassam rocket. [21]
    September 6, 2011 Khaled Sahmoud Popular Resistance Committees Killed after allegedly firing 5 Qassam into Southern Israel [21]
    October 29, 2011 Ahmed al-Sheikh Khalil PIJ Munitions expert Killed in retaliation for allegedly launching rockets into Israel earlier that day. [21]
    November 12, 2011 Tehran Iran General Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam The main architect of the Iranian missile system and the founder/father of Iran's deterrent power ballistic missile forces.
    He was also the chief of the "self-sufficiency" unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Killed along with 17 other members of the Revolutionary Guards known as Bid Kaneh explosion.
    Those who died are known as the "Shahidan Ghadir".
    Iranian officials said that the blast at the missile base was an accident, and ruled out any sabotage organized by Israel.
    AGIR said that the explosion "had taken place in an arms depot when a new kind of munitions was being tested and moved".
    However, TIME magazine cited a "unnamed western intelligence source" as saying that Mossad was behind the blast.
    Israel neither confirmed nor denied its involvement.
    [229] [230] [231]

    Mossad (alleged)
    December 9, 2011 Isam Subahi Isamil Batash Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades [21]
    January 11, 2012 Tehran Iran Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan Iranian nuclear scientist The bomb that killed Ahmadi-Roshan at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, and another unidentified person was a magnetic one and the same as the ones previously used for the assassination of the scientists, and the " work of the Zionists [Israelis]," deputy Tehran governor Safarali Baratloo said.[232]
    [233][234]

    Mossad (alleged)
    March 9, 2012 Tel al-Hawa Gaza Strip Zuhir al-Qaisi; Mahmud Ahmed Hananni Qaisi was Secretary-General of the Popular Resistance Committees According to Israeli intelligence, he was planning an imminent attack in the Sinai.[235] Israeli Air Force
    August 5, 2012 Tel al-Sultan Refugee Camp.[236] Gaza Strip Nadi Okhal (19); Ahmad Said Ismail (22) Popular Resistance Committee, Two senior operatives. IDF sources say they were associated with global jihadist movement. Killed while riding a motor bike. The other passenger was badly wounded. [21]
    September 20, 2012 Gaza Strip Gaza Strip Anis Abu Mahmoud el-Anin (22); Ashraf Mahmoud Salah (38). Hamas security officers. Salah belonged to the Popular Resistance Committees Their car was shelled by aircraft overhead.[237] Israeli Air Force[21]
    October 13, 2012 Jabaliya Gaza Strip Hisham Al-Saidni (Abu al-Walid al- Maqdisi) (43/47/53);[238] Ashraf al-Sabah.[239][240] Respectively Salafi-jihadist militant leader of al-Tawhid wa al-Jihad and the Mujahedeen Shura Council, and head of Ansar Al-Sunna. Israeli and one Salafi source say they had links with Al-Qaeda.[241][242] Killed by a drone-launched rocket while riding a motor bike in company with Jazar. Several civilians, including a 12-year-old boy, were wounded.[243]
    October 13, 2012 Khan Yunis Gaza Strip Yasser Mohammad al-Atal (23) Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Rocket strike while he was riding his motor bike. A second man was critically injured.[240][244]
    October 14, 2012 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ezzedine Abu Nasira (23); Ahmad Fatayer (22)[240] Popular Resistance Committees Struck by a missile while riding in a tuk-tuk after firing rockets into Israel to avenge deaths resulting from two airstrikes the day before. Two others seriously wounded.[245] Israeli Air Force[21]
    November 14, 2012 Gaza City Gaza Strip Ahmed Jaabari Top level Commander of Hamas' military wing Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades. Number 2 to Mohammed Deif. Killed in an airstrike at the start of Operation Pillar of Cloud. Led Hamas' 2007 takeover of the Gaza Strip and, according to Israel, was responsible for most attacks on Israel originating in Gaza from about 2006 to 2012, including the capture of Gilad Shalit.[246]
    November 15–19, 2012 Gaza Strip Hab's Hassan Us Msamch
    Ahmed Abu Jalal
    Khaled Shaer
    Osama Kadi
    Muhammad Kalb
    Ramz Harb
    Yahiyah Abbayah Hab's Hassan Us Msamch, was a senior operative and Hamas Bombmaker.
    Ahmed Abu Jalal, was a Senior Hamas commander of the Hamas central military wing in Al-Muazi.
    Khaled Shaer, was a senior operative in the anti-tank operations.
    Osama Kadi, was a senior operative in anti-tank operations.
    Muhammad Kalb, was a senior operative in the aerial defense operations.
    Ramz Harb, was an Islamic Jihad senior operative in propaganda in Gaza city.
    Yahiyah Abbayah was a senior Hamas expert bomb maker and a military commander in central Gaza. All of them were killed by IAF airstrike inside their command bunker and weapon storage during Operation Pillar of Defense.
    February 12, 2013 Damascus Syria Hassan Shateri Top IRGC General. Under the pseudonym Hussam Khoshnevis, He was a Head of Iranian IRGC special reconstruction project for Hezbollah infrastructure in southern Lebanon.
    Israel air strike killed him during his traveling from Damascus to Beirut.
    [247]

    April 30, 2013 Gaza City Gaza Strip Hithem Ziad Ibrahim Masshal (24/25) and three others, one on the bike. Al Quds Brigades (Israel). Hamas security guard at Al-Shifa Hospital (Hamas version).[248] Defined by Israel as a Freelance Terror Consultant" and active in different Jihad Salafi terror organisations responsible for two rockets fired towards Eilat on 17 April, he was killed when a rocket hit him on his motorbike. The strike broke a fragile cease-fire agreement.[249]
    December 4, 2013 Beirut Lebanon Hassan al-Laqqis Senior Hezbollah Military Commander. Chief of technology officer and in charge of the Arms Procurement and Strategic Weapons for the group. Shot and Killed by gunmen in the head with a silenced gun outside his home and car.
    Israel never took responsibility, but it is widely suspected Mossad committed it.
    [231]

    Mossad
    January 22, 2014 Beit Hanoun Gaza Strip Ahmad Zaanin; Mahmoud Yousef Zaanin PFLP;PIJ The relatives were held responsible for rocket attacks into southern Israel. Only Ahmed was admitted by PIJ to be a member. His cousin and he were killed sitting in a pickup truck parked outside their home.[250] Israeli Air Force[21]
    February 9, 2014 Deir al-Balah Gaza Strip Abdullah Kharti Popular Resistance Committees member. Regarded by IDF as involved with rocket fire episodes. Hit and critically wounded, with a friend, while riding on a motorcycle.[251]
    March 3, 2014 farmland near Beit Hanoun[252] Gaza Strip Mus'ab Musa Za'aneen (21); Sharif Nasser (31) PIJ (Israeli version):Had just fired homemade rocket landing in a field south of Ashkelon (Palestinian version): It was not known if either were militants. A child and a fourth person were wounded.[253]
    June 11, 2014 Gaza Strip Mohammed Ahmed Alarur/Awar (30/33) of Beit Lahiya; Hamada Hassan, a Beit Lahia resident (25) was critically wounded.[254] Hamas policeman. Salafist cell leader (Israeli description) Described by IDF sources as a global jihad-affiliated terrorist planning attacks against Israel responsible for a rocket salvo on Sderot that interrupted the silence of a Passover holiday. Alarur was hit by a missile while riding a motorbike. A car nearby was also struck.[255] One report identifies a further victim, his 7 year old nephew, who was riding in the family care and who died of wounds on June 14, ascribing to the latter a role of 'human shield.'[256] Israel Air Force, Shin Bet.
    June 27, 2014 al-Shati refugee camp Gaza Strip Muhammad al-Fasih and; Usama al-Hassumi Two Senior operatives. Al-Nasser Salah al-Din Brigades Struck by two helicopter-launched missiles while driving a black Kia vehicle. Two other people were wounded.[257] Israeli Air Force
    July 5, 2014 Damascus Syria Mwafaq Badiyeh Samir Kuntar's right-hand man and the personal liaison officer between Samir Kuntar and Hezbollah. He was killed by an explosive device planted on his car by "Mossad agents." While driving on the main road between Quneitra and Damascus. The security source claim the assassination was a response to rockets fired from Syria to Israel in March, that the Syrian army and Hezbollah were responsible for. Mossad (alleged)
    July 8, 2014 Gaza Strip Muhammad Shaaban Muhammad Shaaban is a head of Hamas Special Forces Naval Commando Unit in Gaza He was killed along with 2 passengers when his car was hit by IAF air strike followed by attempted infiltration by 5 Hamas Naval Frogmen inside Israel Beach in Gaza border.
    [258]

    Israeli Air Force
    July 27, 2014 Gaza Strip Salah Abu Hassanein
    Hafez Mohammad Hamad
    Hussein Abd al-Qader Muheisin
    Akram Sha'ar
    Mahmoud Ziada
    Osama al-Haya
    Ahmad Sahmoud
    Abdallah Allah'ras
    Shaaban Dakhdoukh
    Mahmoud Sinwar Salah Abu Hassanein leader and spokesperson of Islamic Jihad in Gaza.
    Hafez Mohammad Hamad was Top level Hamas commander for Islamic Jihad in the Beit Hanoun (northern Gaza) area who is directly responsible for the rocket fire on Sderot during escalation leading up to Operation Protective Edge.
    Hussein Abd al-Qader Muheisin was a Hamas commander for Islamic Jihad in Sheijaya.
    Akram Sha'ar is a Hamas commander for Islamic Jihad in Khan Younis, who is directly responsible for both rocket fire and terror attacks in Israel.
    Mahmoud Ziada was a Hamas commander for Islamic Jihad in Jabaliya, responsible for upgrading Hamas rocket arsenal and directing fighting against Israel during Operation Protective Edge.
    Osama al-Hayya A Senior Hamas leader in Sheijaya, whose son is in Hamas's 'political wing' Khalil al-Hayya.
    Ahmad Sahmoud was a Top level Hamas commander in Khan Younis.
    Abdallah Allah'ras is a Senior commander in the Hamas's "military wing,""the Al-Qassam Brigades.
    Shaaban Dakhdoukh was a commander of the forces in Zeitoun, who worked on burying long-range rockets and helped to smuggle weapons for his forces.
    Mahmoud Sinwar a Hamas Military commander, who was involved in the creation of attack tunnels and the launching of rocket fire into Israeli territory and the raid in which Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was captured. All of them were killed by IAF airstrike inside of their house along with their comrades and entire family and also inside their buried Gaza tunnels.
    [258][259]

    August 3, 2014 Jabalia Camp Gaza Strip Ahmad al-Mabhouh Nephew of slain Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in charge of engineering and destruction officer in Hamas.
    Among other things, he was responsible for hiding rockets before they were launched at Israel, preparing complex explosive devices and planning armed attacks against Israeli targets. The IDF and Shin Bet attacked a building in Jabaliya on Saturday night, killing Hamas operative Ahmad al-Mabhouh, the nephew of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, who was inside.
    [260]

    Israeli Armed Forces, Shin Bet
    August 19, 2014 Gaza City Gaza Strip Mohammed Deif (failed attempt) Chief of staff and Supreme Military Commander of Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades. The main architect of Hamas's tunnel system. Several IAF missiles struck Deif's 6 storey home. His wife Widad (27), 7 month old son Ali and daughter Sarah (3) were killed in the strike. Three other residents in the building were also killed. According to Fox News, anonymous Israeli intelligence sources claimed that Deif had been killed in the strike. Hamas denied the reports that Deif, who has survived five previous Israeli attempts to assassinate him, had died in the F-16 bombing of his home. In April 2015, Israel confirmed that Deif survived the assassination attempt.[261][262][263][264][265] Israeli Air Force
    August 21, 2014 Rafah Gaza Strip Raed al Atar Rafah Division Senior commander.
    Mohammed Abu Shmallah Rafah Division Senior commander.
    Mohammed Barhoum Rafah Division Senior commander. 3 Hamas Senior Military commanders Struck by a pair of F-16 one-ton bombs guided through a window of the building where they had been located.[266][267]
    January 18, 2015 al-Amal Farms, Quneitra District Syria Jihad Mughniyah
    Mohammed Ahmed Issa
    Abu Ali Reza Al Tabatabai
    Mohammed Ali Allah Dadi
    Ismail Al Ashhab
    Abu Abbas Al Hijazi
    Mohammed Ali Hassan Abu Al Hassan
    Ghazi Ali Dhawi
    Ali Hussein Ibrahim
    Along with 6 other Iranian and Hezbollah high-ranking officers Jihad Mughniyah was a son of a slain Hezbollah supreme military commander Imad Mughniyah.
    Mohammed Ahmed Issa was Head of Security and Operations. He was also a Senior Hezbollah Military Commander in Syria.
    Ismail Al Ashhab was a Senior Hezbollah military commander and a top liaison officer with Iran in charge of training Hezbollah forces along the Golan heights frontier.
    Abu Ali Reza Al Tabatabai was a Top Iranian IRGC General.
    Mohammed Ali Allah Dadi was a Top Iranian IRGC General.
    Abu Abbas Al Hijazi was a field commander and officer of Hezbollah in Syria.
    Mohammed Ali Hassan Abu Al Hassan was also a field commander and officer of Hezbollah in Syria.
    Ghazi Ali Dhawi was also a field commander and officer of Hezbollah in Syria.
    Ali Hussein Ibrahim also a field commander and officer of Hezbollah in Syria. Struck and hit by Israel Air Force Nimrod/Hellfire missile Apache Helicopter during their reconnaissance and inspection mission along with Israeli–Syrian ceasefire line at the Golan Heights.
    According to Israel Intelligence Security, they were planning for massive mega attack, including infiltration, shooting, assassinations, suicide bombing, anti-tank attack, and missile attack with the intention of kill and kidnap Israel soldiers and civilians community along with Quneitra and Galilee border.
    And also help to establish the missile base inside Quneitra region.
    Israel neither confirmed nor denied an air strike.
    December 21, 2015 Damascus Syria Samir Kuntar
    Farhan Issam Shaalan
    Mohammed Riza Fahemi
    Mir Ahmad Ahmadi
    along with several high ranking IRGC commanders and Hezbollah members Samir Kuntar was a senior Hezbollah commander and also a convicted murderer of an Israeli family in 1979, held in Israeli prison for the next 30 years before released in a prisoner swap in 2008.

    Mohammed Riza Fahemi and Mir Ahmad Ahmadi were two Iranian senior military officers of the IRGC Intelligence division. According to the Israeli defence establishment, they were meeting in order to plan the next round of Iran-sponsored terrorist operation against Israel from the Golan Heights areas recently secured by the Syrian military. Two Israeli planes allegedly destroyed a six-story residential building in Jaramana on the outskirts of Damascus. Kuntar's death was confirmed by his brother and Hezbollah. The explosion also killed eight Syrian nationals, among them Hezbollah commanders, and injured a number of other people.[268][269]
    December 17, 2016 Sfax Tunisia Mohammed Al Zawari Mohammed Al Zawari was a Chief of Hamas drone program and an Aviation Engineer expert. He also worked on the development and production of Hezbollah drones. He was shot dead in the head 6 times by using guns equipped with silencer just in front of his house, who located in Sfax 270 km Southeast of Tunis. Hamas accused Mossad[270]
    March 24, 2017 Gaza Strip Palestine Mazen Fuqaha Mazen Fuqaha was a Senior Hamas Operative. He was also a Senior commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas Military wing. According to Hamas, he was shot dead 4 times in the head and chest by Israeli Special Forces by using silenced weapons guided by Shin Bet Agents and Gaza operatives. Israeli Special Forces/ Shin Bet[citation needed]
    April 21, 2018 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Fadi al-Batsh Batash was a Hamas-affiliated Palestinian engineer from the Gaza Strip. Shot dead by two people on a motorcycle when he was leaving a mosque after his morning prayers. Mossad is suspected.[271]

    ANZ , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:46 pm GMT
    @Rich A member of the military of a country we are not at war with is a legitimate target?

    You really must try harder next time to earn the shekels you've been promised. That simply won't pass for quality propaganda.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:53 pm GMT
    @Rich Your "most moral" nation of Epstein cannot survive without blackmailing and deceiving, and yet you are coming on the UNZ forum to lecture the readers about morals? This is ridiculous.
    Time to realize that holobiz is over.
    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:53 pm GMT
    @Rich

    Gandhi drank his own urine

    And you'd drink Bibi's, and he'd be only too happy to piss in your face, so it's one of the 'symbiotic relationships' the scientists tell us about.

    Bibi pisses in Rich's face, and Rich obliges by not missing a drop.

    You and Lindsey would make a fine team!

    (with apologies for vulgar language, but it's hard to imagine anything more indecorous than Rich's efforts here).

    Crazy Horse , says: Website Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:56 pm GMT
    @Rich Spoken like a true Hasbera Clown. The Iranians actually defeated the "ragtag forces of Saddam Hussein" that were supplied with US biological and Chemical weapons since their objective was purely defensive. Just as those "ragtag forces" in Vietnam defeated the US by continuing to exist despite the genocidal bombing campaigns.

    You should really improve your literacy level by actually reading a book instead of some Zionist Agitprop.

    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:57 pm GMT
    @A123 And the troll pops up again,with his wish list,I guess someone forgot to tell him Santa's not filling any wish's this early in the year.!!!
    Gizmo880 , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:59 pm GMT
    @RowBuddy Are you so naive as to think that dumping Trump in 2020 will change anything? Israel owns both parties equally, and it is a fact that up to this point in his administration Donald Trump has the least amount of blood on his hands when compared to each of the last three Presidents.

    If you think differently, then ask yourself how the Nobel Peace Prize winning Messiah and the Hilldebeast destroyed the #1 economic country in Africa and turned it into a total shit hole nightmare. That would be the country of Libya for those not paying attention or who worship at the feet of the equally corrupt Democrat party.

    bruce county , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 11:59 pm GMT
    @NTG Thats great then .. I havbe the popcorn ready should make for some good tv..
    Tsar Nicholas , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:06 am GMT
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    Israel has no president-for-life system.

    Netanyahoo is doing his best.

    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:10 am GMT
    @Not Raul Well lets take this to its conclusion,Trump nukes Iran it drifts over into Russia killing a few hundred or thousands,now just what do you think Russia would do,do you think that Russia would take that as an act of war against them, and let those missile's programed to impact the White House and pentagon be on there way;!!!
    plantman , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:11 am GMT
    This just in

    Richard Engel
    ‏Verified account @RichardEngel

    Iraqi security official tells @nbcnews there has been anther US airstrike, this one north of Baghdad targeting Shiite militia leaders. Reports of 6 killed.
    This right BEFORE a big Shiite protest tomorrow in Baghdad. It seems certain to provoke an escalation.

    The attack has been confirmed by other sources.
    It looks like the provocations will continue until Iran responds creating the pretext for a broader war.

    anon [276] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:12 am GMT
    @Alfred US is unique to indict people from opposite spectrums of the same crimes usually after one of the criminals are dealt with . 911 has been blamed on Iran. It has been approved by American court . Settlements have been reached without any participation of Iran . After Bin Laden was dealt with for crimes of 911, Saddam was pointed fi anger at with similar success story . Pakistan has been also accused directly and indirectly of the same crimes .

    Pan Am had checkered history The intercepts of messages that seemingly originated from Libya was manufactured and relayed by Israeli agents of worst filthy zionist mindset to draw visceral wrath of America on Libya .

    Now then Zio will be the first to blame it on Iran and who knows after that Pakistan.

    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:13 am GMT
    @annamaria

    The fallen Iranian was an honest and honorable man, unlike the Jewish procuress of underage girls for wealthy pedophiles and the Jewish plunderer of pensions.

    I'd like to send this to every US military barracks in the world.

    I'd like to see it on every soldier's locker and pasted on every Army recruitment center in America.

    Young Americans have been slaughtering honorable Muslim men, women and children, thousands of miles away, so that repulsive pigs like Epstein or Weinstein

    can rape their daughters while they're off fighting and dying.

    It's an untenable situation, and one we should all try to stop.

    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:17 am GMT
    @Valley Forge Warrior Strange how when one troll posts the other trolls all come in to agree with him/it/her.!!!
    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:26 am GMT
    @Not Raul

    Let's say the Saudis attack the USA again like they did on 9-11

    The Unz Review already has some good comedy writers. I would suggest that you start with open mic nights in bars and coffee shops until you develop some basic skills.

    nokangaroos , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:27 am GMT
    @Rurik Not to worry the maneuver is too transparent.

    1. Strategically, they accomplished zilch.
    2. They made a first-rate martyr.

    That they had no better idea can only mean:

    1. They are losing.
    2. They did it in hopes of provoking an overreaction (much like Heydrich had to die because he did more for the Czech worker than anyone before or after him).

    And over the last four decades the Iranians have grown calloused to provocation

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:27 am GMT
    @Rurik

    By doing nothing, but speaking out, Iran's message of victimization is it's more powerful, moral weapon.

    A noble sentiment, Rurik. Sadly, in the last few decades, morality has taken a back seat, and evil seems to consistently triumph. Consider the plight of the unarmed Palestinians protesting near the Israeli wall on their land. They have held the moral upper ground, while the Israelis have consistently mowed them down, women and children alike, with nary a protest from the rest of the world, least of all from their bought-and-paid-for Arab neighbors, like Egypt and Jordan (don't get me started on the KSA). Meanwhile, countries that have protested, like Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, are considered terrorists.

    I think that "turning the other cheek" was a shrewd jewish trick on christians. The only way to stop a bully is punch him in the nose.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:34 am GMT
    @annamaria In my world Epstein and his friends get the death penalty. My people have no semitic or Ashkenazi blood at all. But just because some deranged general dislikes Israel, doesn't make him a good guy. He was a leader of an army that engages in terrorism, as well as pursuing an agenda that is antithetical to freedom and basic human rights. I'm not here lecturing anyone, but if you consider the millionaire mullahs and their lackeys "heroes", I'd say you're confused, at the least.
    Nicolás Palacios Navarro , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:39 am GMT
    @Rurik I believe a not insignificant amount -- perhaps even the majority -- of pro-war Americans know this to be true: That they and their progeny are mere cannon fodder for Zionist imperialism. But they simply don't care or are even proud of dying for so "worthy" a cause. Never underestimate the persistent and deeply-rooted hysterical adulation that Israel commands -- nor the utter foolishness of your average American.
    Poco , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:47 am GMT
    @JamesinNM I fully expect Israel to set off a nuke in the US and destroy some Southern or Midwestern city where the "deplorables" live. Then indisputable evidence will be found pinning it on Iran. Kills two birds with one stone.
    They get the war they want, kill a bunch of those they hate in America. And those they hate in America clamor for the destruction of others they hate in Iran. The mother of all false flags. The one on 9/11 didn't completely get the 7 nations job done.
    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:48 am GMT
    @Rich Soleimani was fighting AL CIADA aka ISIS a creation of the ZUS and Israel and ZBritain and NATO, and so they killed him as they could not let him continue to kill the terrorists created by the CIA and MOSSAD and MI6.
    NTG , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:49 am GMT
    @Passer by i said a "Profitable", not a good one. And i didn't mean the US economy as a nation economy.
    The whole "western" system right now is driven by some very few (an NO they are NOT Jews, they are only rich, very rich). And only those will profit from it. Until someone stop them directly.
    Those people don't care about live or nation. They only care about money, their own money.
    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:50 am GMT

    And over the last four decades the Iranians have grown calloused to provocation

    I hope so. It's so bloody obvious by now.

    Like the way they've been trying to 'rope a dope' Putin into a wider war with Ukraine, but Putin's far too savvy to take the bait.

    Just let the ZUS keep frothing like a rabid dog, (h/t Ron Unz) and the world will eventually tire of its antics, and put it down, by repudiating the dollar.

    Shue Arie , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:53 am GMT
    If Iran is threatened with an all out war they could easily close the Straight of Homes and destroy the Saudi oil fields with Chemical weapons that'll render extracting Saudi oil mute. Result would be loss of Western World economy crashing big time and the USA falling into civil war cause they cannot maintain their freebies to the population. Not to mention attacking every US base in the ME. After all if Iran was facing annihilation they would have nothing to lose but to bring everyone down with them.
    RudyM , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:55 am GMT
    @sally It's ultimately for some fucking Jews. What else is new?
    Iris , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:55 am GMT
    @Rich

    Iran won't escalate because they tried, and lost a general. If they try anything else, they'll pay too steep a price.

    They might have just killed a foremost general, but the ones who have just proved to the world that they are losing are the US/Israeli Zionists.

    When engaged in a strategic survival fight against a historic, cohesive nation of 80 millions people, killing one of their generals won't make any difference. It just reveals that you have run out of more effective, long-term means and have reached a strategic dead-end.

    It is like losing a dispute over land with a powerful neighbour, and throwing a stone at one of his windows to satisfy a tantrum. It won't change anything significant.

    This is the end of the road for Zionist long-term strategy in the ME.

    Iran will not retaliate militarily, but you will soon understand the law of unintended consequences:
    – Soleimani was so popular in Iran that Iranians will rally around their government; so much for the social and economic undermining of the Islamic Republic that was Israel's best card.
    – Iraqis will also rally around their institutions; the end of the US occupation has now been put on top of their priorities.
    – Israel will have to face an even stronger and more cohesive Shia Crescent, as Iraq will join in.

    Good luck, hasbara troll.

    Poco , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:55 am GMT
    I'm not necessarily a cheerleader for Iran but, were I a leader in Iran, every time the US attacked one of mine, some Israeli bigshot would bite the dust. Every time. Dual citizens would be my preferred target. It would be a favor to the world.
    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:57 am GMT
    @Johnny Walker Read The murdered peacemaker John Lennon famously asked, "What if there was a war and nobody showed up?" Since Vietnam, any American who has joined the military is a fool. These fools have not only aided in the destruction of many non-threatening nations and the deaths of millions of innocents but they have also aided in the destruction of the USA itself, for the working American people that is.
    Haxo Angmark , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:01 am GMT
    @anon this @ Unz is nothing, compared to

    VoxDay and ZeroHedge where

    the $2.39/per comment (((hasbara)))'s are swarming like gnats.

    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:02 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger

    the Israelis have consistently mowed them down, women and children alike, with nary a protest from the rest of the world, least of all from their bought-and-paid-for Arab neighbors, like Egypt and Jordan (don't get me started on the KSA).

    yea, or the SJW in the US House or NYT. Where are 'the squad' when it comes to Palestine, or Iran, for that matter?

    Counting shekels, that's where.

    I think that "turning the other cheek" was a shrewd jewish trick on christians. The only way to stop a bully is punch him in the nose.

    I wholeheartedly agree, in a fair contest.

    But Iran is in no position to fight a war with the ZUS. It would be crushed, and the zios would be just as giddy over dead American goyim as they would dead Iranians, if not more so.

    One thing I just can't understand, is how fellow Muslims can accommodate Zionism, as it's practiced these days. Like the KSA, as you mention.

    So, yea, it's an awful situation, but I'd still counsel a non-violent protest posture, even as the fiend menaces and slaughters them. But if an Iranian or Iraqi, or God knows how many other people who've been so terribly wronged, were to strike out, and kill one or two goons in the service of zion, I know I couldn't begrudge them. Like the Afghans who occasionally kill their ZUS trainers/occupiers. It's perfectly understandable.

    Shue Arie , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:03 am GMT
    @Rich I challenge you to show just a single act of terrorism committed by General Soleimani and Iran, and I mean an act of terror not a retaliation. Iran has done nothing to the West to warrant the aggression against it. Her only problem is the vast resources it has that the West so desperately wants to control.
    anonymous [178] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:04 am GMT
    @plantman BAGHDAD -- A United States air strike targeted an Iraqi militia late on Friday on Taji road north of Baghdad, state TV said. It did not name the militia or provide further details.

    "Air strikes targeting Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces umbrella grouping of Iran-backed Shi'ite militias near camp Taji north of Baghdad have killed six people and critically wounded three, an Iraqi army source told Reuters late on Friday."
    https://torontosun.com/news/world/second-u-s-air-strike-targets-iraqi-militia-north-of-baghdad-state-tv/wcm/a24f3976-686c-4342-8102-93abfca24962

    Question #1: Do members of US military have right -- or obligation -- to refuse orders that violate international rules and conventions on military engagement, US Constitution, or basic morality?

    Question #2: Thirty -- fifty -- seventy years from now, will an Iraqi court charge with war crimes and crimes against humanity the 82nd Airborne soldiers pictured above?

    nokangaroos , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:04 am GMT
    @Passer by All correct in the medium term just a bit wishful in the here and now

    All excellent points why the US MUST hold onto the Gulf, Persian or not, with teeth and fingernails;
    losing control over oil the US don´t need means they can force no one to trade actual value for green paper, which not only means cold turkey from all those dandy little wars but also groid uprising back home.

    Sure, folding up and going home would be the best for all concerned –
    but it will never happen :/

    Crazy Horse , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:08 am GMT
    @Gizmo880 This is what the Clinton apologist with his head up his Duff "editor" over at Veterans Today thinks as well. As if O-bomb-em wasn't as bad or even worse than Cheney er I mean Bushwhacker Bush. I mean get real! These people are so deluded. If we just all close our eyes and vote Democrat and sing kumbaya we'll enter a world of hope and change.

    Yeah whatever.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:09 am GMT
    @A123 A123 is asking how long the armed forces will remain willing to die for psychopaths? Good question.
    Biff , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:12 am GMT
    @Rich

    He was a leader of an army that engages in terrorism, as well as pursuing an agenda that is antithetical to freedom and basic human rights

    Quit picking on Colin Powell

    Herald , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:12 am GMT
    @Not Raul

    Let's say the Saudis attack the USA again like they did on 9-11

    Oh deary deary me, now tell us do you still believe in fairies? Well of course you do, so silly of me to ask.

    Rurik , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:14 am GMT
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    Never underestimate the persistent and deeply-rooted hysterical adulation that Israel commands -- nor the utter foolishness of your average American.

    I'm somewhat more charitable of the Americanus Bovinus.

    I suspect that he either knows of the 'special relationship, in which case he'd be reluctant to kill and die for his enemies in Israel, or he's just another duped fool.

    Pat Tillman started off being a duped fool, but then he figured it out. They solved that 'problem' with three 5.56mm holes in a 'tight pattern' to Pat's forehead.

    Adrian , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:17 am GMT
    @Agent76 Were the neocons also inspired by Deuteronomy 7 which talks about the necessary destruction of 7 (seven!) nations?

    Deuteronomy 7 New International Version (NIV)

    Driving Out the Nations

    7 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations -- the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you -- 2 and when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally.[a] Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. 3 Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4 for they will turn your children away from following me to serve other gods, and the Lord's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. 5 This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles[b] and burn their idols in the fire. 6 For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:18 am GMT
    Trump is acting out the American Paradox. Jews have such total power that the only way to ease the Jewish attack on you is to serve them even harder. Jews have done everything to disparage and defame Trump, and what does the 'tough guy' do? To ease the agony, he sucks up to Zion even more so that 'my Jews' will push back against the 'Jews who hate me'.

    Jews are the gods of America. In the Bible, if the God clobbers you, your only hope of salvation is to serve Him with greater servitude. In America, if Jews kick your butt, your only option is to hope that they will kick you less hard by kissing their ass.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:23 am GMT
    @Rurik Dear Rurik, the tribe is in a self-destruction mode -- they cannot help it. Zionists are consumed by ethnic hatred and the hatred is blinding and destroying them.

    It is tragic that the psychopaths have murdered the great numbers of decent and innocent human beings.

    What is truly appalling is the cowardice of American brass. While politicians are the natural persons of easy morals, the dishonorable and pussy-catting American commanders are a stunning phenomenon. From Rumsfeld to Brennan to the current "boss" (what's his name which he is busy dishonoring?), the US brass has learned how to stay comfortable (and profitably) on their knees serving the zionist masters.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:25 am GMT
    So Saker suspected that it was not Libya that was responsible for Lockerbie but Iran? Keep thinking. Cui bono might help.
    Sunshine , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:30 am GMT
    @Ilya G Poimandres Absolutely, couldn't have said it better myself. None of this is legal or acceptable and for a country that's so obsessed with giving foreigners "constitutional rights", it makes us look like a bunch of hypocrites. But of course we are. And they don't do it in my name and I want no part of any of it.
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:33 am GMT
    @ivegotrythm The Jewish State has become the epitome of the Banality of Evil.
    Sunshine , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:35 am GMT
    @Poco This is a very real worry of mine. Very plausible and actually, probable. I worry that it will be a biological weapon. That scares the crap out of me! And I wouldn't put it past them one bit. They love it when we suffer and die. The Bible was right about them.
    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:38 am GMT
    Actions like this make us question past US military actions. US paints itself as the good guy fighting the bad guys, but US has provoked so many nations and forced them to react, whereupon US employed its superior firepower to kill countless people.

    Maybe the US was always evil.

    Will the progs and Democrats hit Trump hard on this? Or will their response be muted because their Jewish masters actually like this side of treacherous Trump doing the bidding of Israel and Zion?

    Jewish Power is utterly vile. Sacrifice any number of people for Zion. It's really a new form of human sacrifice. Jews make a big deal of how their religion forbade human sacrifice, but they sacrifice human lives by way of US foreign policy.

    Well, Trump became John McCain. Meet McTrump.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:40 am GMT
    @TaintedCanker The reason decent people dislike America and Israel more than Iran et al. is because America and Israel are the aggressors here. Why is that so hard to understand?
    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:40 am GMT
    @Rurik

    But Iran is in no position to fight a war with the ZUS. It would be crushed, and the zios would be just as giddy over dead American goyim as they would dead Iranians, if not more so.

    Yes, Iran would be crushed in a direct military confrontation, however, an asymmetric war is a different beast altogether. I referred in an earlier post to "death by a thousand cuts", and that is what Iran should do – directed assassinations by their allies, who are everywhere. What is good for the goose

    Start by taking down a few zios like Pompeo, Bolton, Adelson, etc., and suddenly bullying isn't so cheap.

    One thing I just can't understand, is how fellow Muslims can accommodate Zionism, as it's practiced these days. Like the KSA, as you mention.

    I don't know that they do tolerate zionists – but they have been effectively muzzled by the tyrants we prop up to control them (e.g. MBS, Sisi, et al.). Look at our cousins in Europe, who are just as muzzled and jailed for raising a single dissenting voice against jews or Israel. Forget Europe, we, ourselves are on the threshold of something similar here. Unconstitutional laws go unchallenged. Note the recent laws forbidding protests against Israel on campus. A flood is imminent.

    Where are 'the squad' when it comes to Palestine, or Iran, for that matter?

    Like damning with faint praise, the fact that the Palestinian/Iranian cause is represented by the 'squad' does more damage to their plight than if they had kept their moths shut. The squad is easy to take down and their position on this issue is easily dismissed, and they fail to gain the support of people like me because their other issues are so ludicrous. Their flawed character (e.g incest, lies, etc.) hardly makes them good lawyers for anyone, leave alone Palestinians and Iranians.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:43 am GMT
    @Valley Forge Warrior Will he use gas chambers?
    MEexpert , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:45 am GMT
    @A123 You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You take tidbits from the MSM and what the establishment says and regurgitate. You are a stooge of Natenyahu, the real sociapath. Trump is becoming one very fast as well.

    The regional stability only requires that uncle Sam come home and stop shedding American blood as well as Middle Eastern blood.

    Attacking the embassy was clearly Khameni's desperate effort to shore up personal weakness at home. Not only did he fail to keep the embassy, he also lost a key terrorist. The weak leader just became much weaker.

    Here is a very good example of your ignorance. You have typical American problem. They think they know how the Iranian mind works. They don't know a thing about how Iranians think. Iran has ten more Sulemanis waiting in line to take his place and there are ten more Al-Mohandus in Iraq.

    Does anyone remember what an American General said about ISIS? He said it will take 30 to 40 years to defeat of ISIS in Iraq. It took less three years for the Iraq militias, all volunteer group mobilzed as a result of a fatwa by Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, to defeat ISIS and ISIS was being supplied arms by the US. Al-Mohandus was one of that group.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:47 am GMT
    @Anonymous His handle should be TakingItUpTheAssForIsrael.
    Parfois1 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:53 am GMT
    @renfro Thank you for posting that list. Any just soul in this world should keep a copy of that list as a permanent reminder of the nature of the Jewish state and its sponsor/protector – insane criminals deserving the harshest of their own gods' revenge: total obliteration from the face of the earth for ever. They are the scourge of humanity; is anyone with a conscience safe in thie world?
    lavoisier , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:03 am GMT
    @anonymous

    Question #1: Do members of US military have right -- or obligation -- to refuse orders that violate international rules and conventions on military engagement, US Constitution, or basic morality?

    These guys just follow orders. They are not taught to think about the morality of their actions, but to trust the wisdom of their leaders and the justice of the cause.

    No thinking person could honestly serve in the American Military today. Their cause is not defense of any ideals or their own homeland, but to serve an unjust and evil government in thrall to Jewish supremacists.

    I want to burn the American flag.

    nsa , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:05 am GMT
    The only hope for us sane people is to hunker down and crack open another delightful $1.39 plus tax 8.1% Hurricane 25 ouncer. Americans like to think of themselves as rugged individualists, when in reality they are pathetically superstitious and naturally subservient. Half the country every Sunday actually worships a mythical jew zombie and even routinely mutilates the genitals of their male offspring to demonstrate total fealty to their cock cutter cult overlords. The other half every Sunday worships giant muscular Africans in plastic hats and tight spandex groping each other in a simulated homoerotic orgy on their flat screen living room joo boxes. Oh, and it has been proven that guzzling fully synth swill like Ice House, Steel Reserve, and Hurricane is actually healthier than counter and designers beers as brews made from actual fermented real grains all contain the magic ingredient, RoundUp ..providing your liver and brain can withstand a steady diet of 8%to 10% high octane fuel.
    Patrikios Stetsonis , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:08 am GMT
    @Harbinger I keep saying it.
    Bomb to dust these maaaa-humpers in that shithole south of Lebanon.
    The World major problems will go away with the next 10 years
    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:09 am GMT
    @Adrian I am a born again Christian and reader of the Bible but I cannot qoute chapter and versues like yourself and many more who are able. Thanks for your reply and be blessed!
    Ghan-buri-Ghan , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:15 am GMT
    @Haxo Angmark I don't think all, or even most, of them are hasbarists. They are mostly brain-addled American boomer "conservatives" who blindly believe everything the Jews spoon-feed them. And really, 80% of (((ZeroHedge))) is also Jewish propaganda these days, so why shouldn't their commenters reflect that?

    It's not so different from the moronic commentary found in the Steve Sailer section here at Unz, which seems to increasingly bleed out to the rest of the site.

    Agent76 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:18 am GMT
    January 03, 2020 There can be no justification for this act of murder

    "America's lawless arrogance has gone too far with the assassination of Iran's top military commander. The deadly airstrike against General Qasem Soleimani was carried out on the order of President Donald Trump.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52797.htm

    anon [276] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:26 am GMT
    @Rich He was a leader of an army that engages in terrorism"
    Israel is nation that survives on terrorism It was birthed by terrorism . It gets money everytime some guy makes threats to a desolate synagogue or storms on the headstones of some graveyard . The money helps the nation to survive get food water electricity and it uses the change for making bullets to hit at the eyes of the Palestinian boys.
    Anthony Aaron , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:29 am GMT
    @Rich I don't see where anyone is putting forth the idea that Iran can defeat the United States -- and they don't have to to, essentially, 'win'.

    After all, look at the end results for We The People Of The United States as a result of the (false flag known as) 9/11 -- let's see, we've got the Patriot Act to destroy our individual rights; we've got the TSA folks to do likewise; we've got the NSA to spy on anyone and everyone; we've spent Trillion$ chasing phony WMDs (thanks to the 'intelligence' shoved at US by the israelis); we've spent heaven-only-knows how much modifying the cabins of our commercial aircraft to prevent 'terrorist' attacks; we've allowed folks to capitalize on the whole Twin Towers insurance scam.

    All in all, we've been under the gun since 9/11 -- afraid of our own shadows -- bowing to the israeli bastards who know no limits to their evil -- and, thanks to President Trump, American blood will be spilled for them once again – and American freedoms will be lost for the once again.

    anon [276] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:29 am GMT
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro America needs interfaith dialogue with Islam but without including the Jewish faith . It is for the forgiveness that we hope will be showed to and bestowed on our future generations . We need to include Buddhist as well.
    Maiasta , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:32 am GMT
    @Alfred A good summation. However, it gets even darker than this.

    Journalist working at the outer limits of the mainstream (e.g. Robert Fisk) had long suspected an Iranian hand in Pan Am 103. And lawyers for the two Libyans prosecuted for the bombing identified 11 alleged members of the rather obscure Palestinian Popular Struggle Front (PPSF) as the men responsible. The Iranians did back this group, BUT numerous sources claim that the operation took place with the consent of US authorities.

    Why would the US allow such an attack upon its citizens? According to former Congressional staffer and (former) CIA asset Susan Lindauer, the attack was directed at shutting down an investigation into a CIA-run drug-trafficking ring (codenamed "Operation Khourah") operating from Beirut. In her words:

    "The Defence Intelligence Agency had gone into Lebanon and were gathering forensic evidence to prove the CIA's role in heroin trafficking.

    "They boarded Pan Am flight 103 that morning and they were flying back to Washington to deliver their report, with heroin, cash and banking records."

    The UK Guardian summarised the scenario thusly:

    //Among the Lockerbie victims was a party of US intelligence specialists, led by Major Charles McKee of the DIA, returning from an aborted hostage-rescue mission in Lebanon. A variety of sources have claimed that McKee, who was fiercely anti-drugs, got wind of the CIA's deals and was returning to Washington to blow the whistle. A few months after Lockerbie, reports emerged from Lebanon that McKee's travel plans had been leaked to the bombers. The implication was that Flight 103 was targeted, in part, because he was on board. //

    So extensive is the evidence of all this murk that even CNN has acknowledged it:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/pOmzEbRi30k?feature=oembed

    Parfois1 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:34 am GMT
    @anonymous

    Do members of US military have right -- or obligation -- to refuse orders that violate international rules and conventions on military engagement, US Constitution, or basic morality?

    Yes, it's not only a right, it's an obligation. Following orders is not a defence for anyone knowingly involved in crimes of war and against humanity.

    However, the plea of obedience to superior orders can be a mitigating circumstance and reduce the severity of punishment. A private soldier responsibility for a war crime would be the same as that of the general or commander-in-chief who made the order, but his punishment would be reduced or symbolic.

    In this case, a properly constituted court would convict Trump and all others in the chain of command, down to the operators of the drone, for the assassination of Suleimani.

    barr , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:35 am GMT
    @JamesinNM Tell that to Perle,Kristol,Kagan Kaplan Lutti Abrams Feith Wolfowitz and Haim Saban , Sheldon Adeslhon , Singer and Marcus . Use loudspeaker to make it reach the settlers occupiers and Likudniks .

    Who gives a toss to Bible ?

    Castellio , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:54 am GMT
    @renfro Thank you for this list.

    Unfortunately it is partial, as it doesn't include Iraqis individually targeted and assassinated from 2003 on. Do you have access to that list as well?

    denk , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:56 am GMT
    The Muslim league were suckered into the Bosnia war,
    Iranians and others were fighting under NATO and dying for the great satan against the Serbs.

    Let this be the final waking up call, who's your real enemy.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:01 am GMT
    @anon Okay, I get it, you don't like Israel, but does your dislike of Israel mean the Iranians are hale and hearty fellows? Most of their leadership are corrupt millionaires who use a medieval religion to justify torturing and enslaving their populace. The Iranian leadership is full of evil people who are openly hostile to the United States and its interests. Sorry.

    The fact that you, and many others on this site, are strongly hostile to Israel and feel affection for the defeated Palestinians, doesn't change the fact that Israel acts as an ally to the US in its dealings with various enemies. The argument over how much, if any, foreign aid should be given to foreign nations has nothing to do with the fact that Iran has chosen to be an enemy of the US. Had they not killed an American contractor and coordinated the attack on the US embassy in Iraq (as well as other terrorist attacks), General Soleimani, might still be alive to torture his enemies and plan terrorist attacks.

    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:10 am GMT
    'Soleimani Murder: What Could Happen Next?'

    To be brief?

    Short term: nothing good. Long-term: an end to the Zionist entity.

    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:13 am GMT
    Can't be too careful

    'U.S. Airstrike Targets Iraqi Militia North of Baghdad, State TV Reports
    Iraqi army sources say at least five killed in attack on Iran-backed militia convoy, which group says was carrying medical teams '

    -- Haaretz

    Obviously, we want to make certain Iran feels it necessary to respond.

    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:15 am GMT
    @Rich Then I guess he would fit right into Washington with their deranged people that kill wedding parties and children,would put on illegal no fly zones killing 500,000 children,now just where do you think their freedoms were .Its people like you that are sick in the head all puffed up with the empire bullshit that everything on the planet belongs to us and was just put there for our taking,your a perfect example of a neocon hiding behind patriotism.the sick kind that will destroy the world if we let it.!!
    anonymous [178] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:28 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger TruNews is amazing.

    Soleimani Assassination: Did the Pentagon Use Hypersonic Weapon?
    https://www.trunews.com/stream/soleimani-assassination-did-the-pentagon-use-hypersonic-weapon

    Their perspective on the assassination took several different angles than were presented even here on Unz. I disagree with their conclusion that Iran has only two options: all out war NOW -- Iran will be destroyed but so will Israel, and US bases will be eradicated; or sit on their hands and take the repeated hits that USPisrael intends to send. (the latter seems to be the case: another attack has already taken place).

    But Rick Wiles and Doc Burkhart reported two more bits of information:
    1. US press spokesman hinted that the PMU that was attacked by USA & lost 32 men, helped plan the attack on Suleimani; claim was Suleimani was 'going rogue' -- US is offering an "out" to Iran in that Iran Central was not directing the anti-American operation that Suleimani was planning.
    The briefer said: "Iran has only two options: Come to the table and negotiate, or endure more attacks."

    Because IRGC – Quds force had been declared a terrorist organization, killing Suleimani was hunkey-dorie.

    Realize, tho, that Adam Schiff has proposed legislation that hate crimes be prosecuted as domestic terrorism, and the Monsey incident upped the ante on that, so that domestic terrorism would be prosecuted the same way as international terrorism. Knocking over a grave marker in a Jewish cemetery could possibly be turned into an act of international terrorism. Rick Wiles or any of us anonymous keyboard warriors that Fran Taubman is so eager to doxx could be named as Terrorist, and, presumably, be droned by our own government, in our own American home, at the behest of Israeli partisans.

    2. Israeli newspapers quoted Netanyahu that he knew in advance about the assassination, likely was in on the planning (with Pompeo).
    Also, a New York Times article wrote on Jan. 2 -- before the attack:

    "What if the former commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Qassem Suleimani, visits Baghdad for a meeting and you know the address? The temptations to use hypersonic missiles will be many."

    What's a hypersonic missile? Who has them? How did NYTimes know this stuff?
    Did US use hypersonic missiles? Was the NYTimes article, and the assassination of the Quds general, warnings to other world leaders?

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:30 am GMT
    @Rich Hard to believe Iranian millionaires are worse than dual-citizen billionaires in the US in terms of corruption.
    Biff , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:40 am GMT
    @Rich

    Okay, I get it, you don't like Israel, but does your dislike of Israel mean the Iranians are hale and hearty fellows?

    Like clockwork

    https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/12/27/opposing-interventionism-in-nation-x-means-you-love-nation-xs-government/

    Every time you speak out against western imperialism in a given nation or question western propaganda narratives about that nation's government, you will inevitably be accused of loving that nation's government by anyone who argues with you.

    When I say "inevitably", I am not exaggerating. If you speak in any public forum for any length of time expressing skepticism of what we're told to believe about a nation whose government has been targeted by the US-centralized empire, you will with absolute certainty eventually run into someone who accuses you of thinking that that government is awesome and pure and good.

    Thales the Milesian , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:43 am GMT
    What the Iranians will do?

    A big fat nothing!

    As Thucydides wrote over 2300 years ago:

    "The strong will do whatever they can; the weak will suffer whatever they must."

    Putin, a president of a stronger country than Iran, accepts this fact of history and kisses American a$$.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:47 am GMT
    @Rich "Israel acts as an ally to the US in its dealings with various enemies."

    -- This is a really poor joke. Israel is the worst enemy of the US. Israel is guilty of killing and maiming the servicemen on the USS Liberty.
    Your filthy Pollard has created the worst spying episode in the history of the US (the goodies were sold by Israel to China).
    Mossad and Mossad's deputies Epstein et al have contributed a huge amount of evilness to the US and beyond.
    The ongoing mass slaughter for Eretz Israel on the US dime & limb has been the greatest achievement of sadistic Israel-firsters.
    And only God knows the details of the zonists' involvement in 9/11.

    If you want to talk about "corrupt millionaires and evil people" who "torture and enslave" and who are "openly hostile" to the United States -- and all other countries that are not totally zionized (like Russia and Iran) -- then your talk should be about zionists and the Jewish State.

    By the way, were not you among the dancing Israelis celebrating the miraculous (controlled) demolition of the towers?

    Anonymous [339] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:52 am GMT
    And why is all this happening?

    Mostly because White American Christians are generally afraid of the Jewish lobby.

    So that lobby gets its way.

    And America loses.

    We probably don't care much about our country, do we?

    redmudhooch , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:00 am GMT
    Trump has already sent a letter via the Swiss to the Iranians begging them not to retaliate in exchange for lifting sanctions and "other incentives"

    Sounds so cowardly and stoopid it must be true.

    Committing a brazen act of war is always the best prelude to a letter begging for calm https://t.co/gGkQ7aglfm

    -- Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) January 4, 2020

    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:04 am GMT
    @Colin Wright You are an optimist. You expect something good, at least long-term.
    Hippopotamusdrome , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:04 am GMT
    LOL, the (D) Joe Biden putting on the anti-war schtick when an (R) president bombs brown people in the Middle East. The did this to Bush (R) too.

    A blast from the past when Obama (D) and Hillary (D) were bombing brown people in Libya:

    Kadafi death: Joe Biden says 'NATO got it right' in Libya
    "Whether he's alive or dead, he's gone. The people of Libya have gotten rid of a dictator," Biden said at an event in New Hampshire

    "NATO got it right," he said. "In this case, America spent $2 billion and didn't lose a single life. This is more the prescription for how to deal with the world as we go forward "

    barr , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:10 am GMT
    @Maiasta Victor Ostrovsky, a Canadian former intelligence colonel with Israel's Mossad secret service and author of the bestseller By Way Of Deception (the title comes from the Mossad motto), will testify that it was Mossad commandos who set up the transmitter in Tripoli that generated a false signal about the "success" of the Berlin bomb – he has already given a detailed description of this daring operation in his second book, The Other Side Of Deception. Ostrovsky, who will testify by closed-circuit television from somewhere in North America – he fears that, if he comes to Holland, he may be "Vanunu-ed" (ie kidnapped and smuggled back to Israel) for breaking his secrets oath – will state that the Lockerbie intercept so resembles the La Belle intercept as to have probably the same provenance. This is what US lawyers call the "duck" argument: "If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles, the preponderance of evidence is that it is a duck."
    Ostrovsky's evidence would then put the onus on the Lord Advocate to prove that the Lockerbie intercept is genuine, not disinformation. Ostrovsky believes that, in both bombings, Israel implicated Libya to shield Iran, thereby encouraging Iran not to persecute its small Jewish community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/apr/17/lockerbie
    redmudhooch , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:11 am GMT
    I wouldn't be surprised if the idiots "in charge" of this country decide to do a false flag "terrorist" attack here in America, killing civilians, if this goes further. They're already putting out articles indicating this. I don't believe the Iranians would target civilians here, but we all know who would. Operation Gladio
    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:19 am GMT
    @Kiza

    Does anyone know even one example where an Israeli's head or head of a Western Jew has been chopped off?

    Daniel Pearl was Jewish. His mother was an Iraqi Jew. As it happens his father was also Jewish, but that's irrelevant.

    If you didn't know that the highest-profile beheading victim was Jewish, you haven't really been paying attention.

    The Alarmist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:23 am GMT
    @Rich

    Their dead general was a member of the military and a legitimate target.

    By that logic, every member of the US military is a legitimate target, especially since the US just drew first blood.

    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:30 am GMT
    The best thing that the Iranians could do is blurt out the truth for all the world to hear. Especially if your side is militarily weaker, truth must be the main weapon. The Iranian leader should mock and shame Donald Trump as a cuck-stooge of not only Zionism but Jewish Supremacism that rules the US. He should point out how Jewish Zionist Power has been out to destroy Trump from day one, but the orange-man coward remains most servile to the very group that has done most to undermine his presidency. [MORE]
    The current state of the world is so embarrassing. It's like goyim of all stripes are stuck in some gladiatorial ring under Jewish orchestration. Jews hate whites and Trump. Jews hate Iranians. Given that both groups have in common the rabid & virulent hostility of Jewish supremacists, the most natural thing would be for both sides to unite against the Jews. Whites and Iranians are natural allies. But what do they do? Trump the so-called 'white nationalist' sucks up to Jews and attacks Iran. And Iran feels compelled to denounce all of America when the real culprits are the freaking Jews. Goyim are the gladiators in SPARTACUS -- though slaves of Rome, they slaughter each other for the amusement of Roman elites. Though Jews are hostile to whites and Iranians, whites are willing to kill Iranians to win approval from their Jewish masters, and Iranians waste so much time denouncing all of the US. What the world needs is a Spartacus-like figure. Spartacus united the slaves and made them fight Rome than each other. Goyim need to unite to fight Jewish Supremacist Power. This is where China, Russia, and Iran are doing the right thing, but they are still loathe to Name the Jew. Current US belligerence is the direct outcome of Jewish domination.
    Iranians should throw Trump's words right back in his face. In 2016, Trump said the Iraq War was a total disaster, and that the US should get out of the Middle East. He also said the US should work for world peace by working with Russia. But since then, Jewish supremacists and its cuck-minions in the Deep State have done everything to undermine Trump, and the weary beast has succumbed to Jewish machinations. Trump is more Sparky the running dog than Spartacus. But then, much of the blame must go to white American Conservatives. Their brand of idiotic Christianity, atomizing libertarianism, and anti-intellectualism led to all the elite institutions being taken over by Jews, progs, and cucky-wucks. It could be Putin is mute about Jewish power because the Russian economy is still substantially in Jewish hands. One might hope China will be bold in stating the truth, but the Chinese way is strategic than principled. Also, China has been pulled into US market imperialism. It's the US gambit as the sole superpower with a vast market. If old European Empires suppressed economic growth in their colonies, US encourages economic growth as dependence on US markets. Thus, all the economies that grew by selling to the US are deathly afraid of losing market access. As the religion of the US is now globo-homo-shlomo-afro, they dare not speak the truth that Jewish Power is behind the current rot of globalist cultural imperialism.

    It is about time for Russia, Iran, and all nations to mock the US as a Jewish Supremacist empire, one where craven white cowards do little but crawl on their knees and pledge undying support for Jewish supremacists and Zion. Why? Because soulless US is only about one thing: Money and Idolatry. Jews got the money and idolized themselves as the supreme identity group that ALL other groups must serve. While Jewish elites rub their hands at the prospect of another Middle East War, it will be goyim , white American soldiers and countless Persians/Arabs/Muslims, who will do all the killing and dying. Jewish globalists went from Semites to Supremites, and now, so-called Anti-Semitism is Anti-Supremitism, which is more necessary than ever. And it's about time Russia addressed the J-Question. Vladimir Putin has been silent on this for too long, but it is time for truth. It is time to put down the gauntlet. No, no one one should make crazy neo-nazi talking points. They just need to speak the truth that Jews control the US, the lone superpower, and that the Jewish modus operandi is Jewish hegemony at any cost. Also, Zionism has turned into Yinon-ism based on the Yinon Plan.

    We've all been duped by Jewish Power. There was a time when Jews assured goyim, "Stick with us, and you shall have true free speech", "Struggle with us against unfettered capitalist greed", and "Support our cause to expose the Deep State and to create a more open and transparent society." But Jews weren't really against Excessive Power & Privilege. They just wanted to bring down the old Wasp elites so that they, as the new elites, would have the power to curtail free speech, rake in all the profits, and use deep state apparatus to destroy rivals and critics. Jewish Power is the main source of many woes around the world, but because of the stigma of 'antisemitism', so many people will blame anyone but the Jews. When Alex Jones got deplatformed, whom did he blame? The Chinese. Trump is pushed against the rope, so whom does he shake his fist at? Iranians. John McCain and Mitt Romney were smeared and slimed by the Jew-run mass media(despite their total cuckery to Zion) in 2008 and 2012, but whom did they rag on? Trump and his supporters. What a sorry bunch. (Granted, morons like Richard Spencer and Neo-Nazi crew deserve their share of blame by sinking the promising dissident Alt Right label with what truly amounts to white supremacism and even neo-Nazism, thereby making it more difficult for Trump to address legitimate white interests.)

    Anyway, imagine a scenario where Nazi Germany attacks Poland, France, Russia, and Great Britain but all those nations praise Hitler & Nazi Germany while taking their rage and frustration on each other. Such is the state of the world today. Jews torment and destroy so many nations and peoples, but entire nations are willing to war with one other while speaking and doing nothing about the Jewish Glob. Unless people understand the urgency of Naming the Jew, nothing will change. It's like a doctor won't cure cancer if he does EVERYTHING but name the cancer. If there's a dead rat decaying and stinking up the apartment, no amount of 'solutions' will fix the problem unless someone names the dead rat and remove it from the premises. After WWII, Jews got a grace period, well-deserved due to Shoah. But it's time to face facts about Jews of the Now. Pretending Jews are still Shoah victims is like pretending current China is still the 'Sick Man of Asia' of the 19th century. Times change, and Jews are the supreme rulers of the world, and this must be called out. But that worthless pile of shi* Trump only sucks up to Jews more even as they bugger his ass. And white Americans are truly retarded. Jewish Power is carrying out White Nakba in US, EU, Canada, and Australia -- as cuck-white elites in media, academia, and institutions are nothing but mental minions of Jewish Power, as in Jews lead, goyim follow -- , and whites are being turned into New Palestinians, but all these worthless white 'conservatives' are cheering Trump's anti-BDS law that violates the US constitution. How utterly pathetic.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:34 am GMT
    @Anonymous "White American Christians are generally afraid of the Jewish lobby."

    -- Agree. The US brass are cowards. The US government of cowards is for sale. The US media is owned by Israel-firsters who have been propagating lies upon lies. "Is this good for Jews?" has become the zionists' battle cry that scares Americans into submission.

    The scared Americans need to process the fact of holobiz being over. The Jews are not victims -- the Jews are shameless aggressors and traitors busy with frightening and corrupting the western governments to the bones because allegedly "this is good for Jews:" https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/

    Let's be clear about what we just did–we assassinated two key military and political leaders on the sovereign territory of Iraq without the permission of the Iraqi Government. There is no evidence or valid intelligence that shows Soleimani directing Iraqi Shia militias to attack and kill US troops. None. But those facts do not matter.

    Judging from the media reaction on cable news, there is a lot of whooping and celebrating the death of Soleimani as a decisive blow against terrorism. Boy we showed those Iranians who is boss. But that is not how the Iranians see it and that is not how a significant portion of the Iraqi Shia population see it. From their perspective this is the equivalent of the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor.

    The zionized cowards in the US government made American servicemen into targets for retaliation in response to American crimes in Iraq -- crimes that were committed because "this is good for Jews" who want their Eretz Israel by any means, including a mass slaughter of the innocent in the Middle East.
    Boy Jewish intelligence is terribly overrated. The zionists do believe that selecting and promoting cowards and profiteers on the positions of power in the US is "good for Jews." Idiots.

    Marshal Marlow , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:35 am GMT
    Iran will do politics while the US does war.

    Iran will explain to Iraq that the US will fight to every last drop of Iraqi blood while Iran will do its best to support their fellow Shia. The Iraqi parliament, not wanting another war inside Iraq and hating the US for starting it, will vote to expel the US or maybe to simply refuse the US any air rights.

    The US then either retreats out of Iraq or it become an occupying force. If the US retreats, it'll go down in history as a strategic defeat. If the US decides to occupy, it'll need to disband the Iraqi parliament (ie a democracy) and replace it with the inevitable transitional government who'll be fed with a steady stream of suitcases full of $100 bills. At the same time, the US will need to fight a bloody guerilla war which will ultimately end in a strategic defeat when the US population gets bored by the smart-bomb video footage.

    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:36 am GMT
    @Kratoklastes 'Daniel Pearl was Jewish. His mother was an Iraqi Jew. As it happens his father was also Jewish, but that's irrelevant.

    'If you didn't know that the highest-profile beheading victim was Jewish, you haven't really been paying attention.'

    Back when the war against ISIS was ginned up, two Western 'reporters' were beheaded. At least one of them was carrying an Israeli passport.

    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:37 am GMT
    @The Alarmist We've declared war. Morally, Iran can do whatever they please.

    within the guidelines contained within the Quran, of course.

    The Alarmist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:41 am GMT
    @NTG

    Their are considerable more Galaxy C17 traffic in Ramstein/Germany and the whole C17 (as far as you can identify them)look like a swarm of bees on the way to the middle east.

    Galaxy was the C-5; C-17 is the Globemaster. In addition to its role in Tactical and Strategic airlift, it also serves as MedEvac, often to Ramstein/Landstuhl.

    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:50 am GMT
    @Z-man

    That's a good suggestion but I still think they should go after Pompeo. If you really want to keep it 'tit for tat' with even less retaliation then poor Gen. Milley should be splashed. (Evil grin)

    Milley's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs: his 'same-store sales' equivalent would have been Hossein Salami.

    Soleimani wasn't even head of the IRGC – that's also Hossein Salami.

    If the US had "red-carded" Salami, today they would be cleaning up missile debris and human remains at US bases all over the Middle East, and "Iron Dome" would get definitive evidence that it's a joke.

    Although Soleimani had genuine clout and a high profile, he was only the head of Quds Force, which is kinda MI (plus a bit of special operations/coordination of irregulars).

    So I would guess that the appropriate tit-for-tat splash would be LtGen Scott Berrier (G2 – Intel).

    Everyone's heard of that guy, right?

    Plus, if they splashed Pompous, the resulting fatberg would burn for longer than the Springfield tyre fire. Nobody wants that.

    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:55 am GMT
    @Passer by During the lead-up to the Gulf War, I recall "experts" like you talking about how Hussein's "battle-hardened" "elite" Republican Guard was going to send those wet-behind-the-ears American soldiers running home with their tails tucked between their legs. They were all then as prescient as you are now. Spare me these countless internet military "experts" who always seem to know who can do what, and yet end up being wrong in every instance.
    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:00 am GMT
    @Colin Wright The Quran promotes a supremacist ideology for world domination. It is the Muslim equivalent of the Talmud. Neither the Muslims nor the zionists will get a moment's restful sleep until they know their place, but psychopathic anti-Christ peoples are full of the devil, making them a curse on humanity.
    renfro , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:02 am GMT
    @Castellio

    Unfortunately it is partial, as it doesn't include Iraqis individually targeted and assassinated from 2003 on. Do you have access to that list as well?

    No , but will try to find one when have the time.

    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT
    @Colin Wright I admit I stopped paying attention to beheadings after the first few.

    It seemed pretty obvious that it was the worst possible advertisement for a cause. The only people who would think " Kewl !" were people already on their side. Plus it was guaranteed to horrify moderates. It also guaranteed a full-court hostile press in Western media (SWIDT? two uses of 'press' in the same word – genius!).

    It struck me as the sort of thing that (ahem) plays into the hands of those who wanted to give pan-Arab nationalism a bad name. Almost as if that was the intention.

    They should have hired Hill and Knowlton and done their PR properly.

    .

    Also, the aesthetics were awful .

    The guys doing the beheadings had very white forearms – whiter than most Anglo military guys.

    I'm sensitive like that: I found the beheaders' pasty skin off-putting.

    The lack of struggle from the victims was also weird – evidence perhaps that they were sedated, which is good for them I guess.

    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:08 am GMT
    @John Chuckman North Koreans who are treated like crap are those in the communist-run prison camps in North Korea itself.
    Anon [207] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:08 am GMT

    For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one in direct retaliation for the deliberate shooting down by the USN of IranAir 655 Airbus over the Persian Gulf.

    – The crash of the Pan Am 103 was, according to Ari Ben-Menashe, related to a fabricated claim on 5 CIA agents running drugs via their contacts in Frankfurt under CIA's Bill Casey.

    – One less known point on the Pan Am 103 is the probable assassination by South Africa's apartheid government of United Nations Commissioner for Namibia, Bernt Carlsson (according to Patrick Hasseldine).

    – "Pik Botha and a South African delegation from Johannesburg, who was initially booked to travel to the Namibian independence ratification ceremony in New York on Pan Am Flight 103 from London. Instead, the booking was cancelled as he and six delegates took an earlier flight, thereby avoiding the fatal PAN AM 103 bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland" (wiki, Pik Botha).

    Robert Mueller's 30-year search for justice on Pan AM 103 led to nothing except the USual platitudes (unfounded accusations) on Iran and the PLO.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:14 am GMT
    @The Alarmist Well, yes, every member of every military is a legitimate target. Especially a general. If it sounds logical to you, that's because not only is it logical, it's common sense. As far as who drew first blood, that's a little more complicated. Some might argue that the Iranians drew first blood when the present group of radical medievalists overthrew the Shah and then seized the US embassy in 1979 or a whole load of other attacks by Iranians and their proxies. I really don't understand the outpouring of sympathy for a general in a foreign nation that is an outspoken enemy of the US. I get it, you guys hate Israel, but that doesn't absolve the Iranian mullahs or their henchmen. They are not your friends, they don't like you and their end game is the same end game they've had since the founding of their "religion", the violent spread of Islam throughout the world. Read the Koran first, before you throw your support behind these jihadists. If their own holy book doesn't open your eyes and you still believe the West is the "imperialist", find me Constantinople on the map.
    renfro , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:15 am GMT
    @Parfois1 Do keep a copy ..at the rate info exposing Israel's true nature is disappearing and being censored , its gotten harder and harder to find.
    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:23 am GMT
    @Thales the Milesian A wise leader conserves his military strength. Sun Tzu
    Maiasta , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:28 am GMT
    @barr Thanks for the reminder. I'm familiar with Ostrovsky, of course, and i found the book you mentioned to be quite an eye-opener, albeit still written from a basically pro-Israel point-of-view.

    re: "Israel implicated Libya to shield Iran." Yes, this is more than plausible, especially when we consider that Israel was largely responsible for arming Iran during the long war with Iraq in the 1980s. The latter may seem counter-intuitive to many, but it actually fell perfectly in line with the Oded Yinon plan for regional balkanisation. I think that as soon as the Iraqi Resistance movement was crushed back in 2008, Iran was considered no longer so useful to the Zionists, and they began the next phase of destabilisation. Obviously, all regional powers are to be taken out one-by-one, and that presents a problem when it comes to a regional alliance such as the so-called "Shia Crescent" of Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon (or Hezbollah).

    I think it likely that the Qassem assassination though, is a significant miscalculation that will cost Trump and the US dearly.

    Sol , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:41 am GMT
    @anon Haven't been paying attention to Hazony recently. Thanks for the update.
    anonymous [102] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:52 am GMT
    @Rich I agree with the notion that Persian capabilities are consistently overstated on unz.com They look more capable than Arabs. That's not much. They haven't shown the ability to develop their own weapons. The rest of their industry sucks (e.g. cars).
    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:57 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso You're comparing apples with suppositories.

    Rolling out of Kuwait across a plain is way easier than rolling up the Zagroz – especially when the other guy knows you're coming and has had 50 years to prepare, and the natives at your back want the other guy to win.

    The Zagroz aren't as daunting as trying to go up the sides on AH76 in Parwan, which is some of the most inhospitable terrain on Earth. Invading Iran via Iraq (which is the US' only option) isn't even as hard (topographially) as trying to take Zürich by invading Switzerland starting from Milan.

    Topography matters.

    Safwan to Baghdad is flat freeway (and was, even in 1991); Baghdad to Hamedan, not so much. (Hamedan's the town on the other side of the Zagroz, on the only non-impossible route to Teheran).

    For the average grunt, it would be like " Restrepo " from day 1, constantly, for the entire trip – but with no HESCO.

    It would guarantee tens of thousands of cases of PTSD.

    Armour and artillery really really really needs roads (or rail), and aerial reconnaissance is way easier on a sandy table top, than in mountains.

    Castellio , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:00 am GMT
    @renfro 1
    The killing of Iraqi Academics: A War to Erase the Future and Culture of Iraqis
    List of Iraqi academics assassinated in Iraq during the US-led occupation
    Academics assassinated: 324
    Updated: November 7, 2013
    (Last case registered: No. 125)
    Spanish Campaign against the Occupation and for the Sovereignty of Iraq
    IraqSolidaridad 2005-2013
    [MORE]
    The following list of University academics assassinated in Iraq is updated with the information delivered by the Iraqi CEOSI sources inside Iraq. It presents all the data compiled in the previous IraqSolidaridad editions. This relation has been collated and completed with that elaborate by the Belgian organization 'BRussells Tribunal' [1]. This list only refers to the academic, institutional and research fields from Iraqi Universities, so that it does not include the staff that belongs to other fields and institutions, who has been targeting since the beginning of the occupation, such as directors of primary and secondary schools, high schools or health workers [2].

    BAGHDAD
    Baghdad University
    1. Abbas al-Attar: PhD in humanities, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Humanities. Date unknown.
    2. Abdel Hussein Jabuk: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    3. Abdel Salam Saba: PhD in sociology, lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    4. Abdel Razak al-Naas: Lecturer in information and international mass media at Baghdad University's College of Information Sciences. He was a regular analyst for Arabic satellite TV channels. He was killed in his car at Baghdad University 28 January 2005. His assassination led to confrontations between students and police, and journalists went on strike.
    5. Ahmed Nassir al-Nassiri: PhD in education sciences, Baghdad University, assassinated in February 2005.
    6. Ali Abdul-Hussein Kamil: PhD in physical sciences, lecturer in the Department of Physics, Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    7. Amir al-Jazragi: PhD in medicine, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Medicine, and consultant at the Iraqi Ministry of Health, assassinated on November 17, 2005.
    2
    8. Basil al-Karji: PhD in chemistry, lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    9. Essam Sharif Mohammed: PhD in history, professor in Department of History and head of the College of Humanities, Baghdad University. Dead October 25, 2003.
    10. Faidhi al-Faidhi: PhD in education sciences, lecturer at Baghdad University and al- Munstansiriya University. He was also member of the Muslim Scientists Committee. Assassinated in 2005.
    11. Fouad Abrahim Mohammed al-Bayaty: PhD in German philology, professor and head of College of Philology, Baghdad University. Killed Abril 19, 2005.
    12. Haifa Alwan al-Hil: PhD in physics, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Science for Women. Assassinated September 7, 2003.
    13. Heikel Mohammed al-Musawi: PhD in medicine, lecturer at al-Kindi College of Medicine, Baghdad University. Assassinated November 17, 2005.
    14. Hassan Abd Ali Dawood al-Rubai: PhD in stomatology, dean of the College of Stomatology, Baghdad University. Assassinated December 20, 2005.
    15. Hazim Abdul Hadi: PhD in medicine, lecturer at the College of Medicine, Baghdad University.
    16. Husain Ali al-Jumaily: Lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Political Sciences. He was assassinated in Bagdad on 16 July. [Source: BRussells Tribunal's university Iraqi sources, January 17, 2009].
    17. Khalid Hassan Mahdi Nasrullah: Lecturer and Secretary of the Faculty of Political Sciences, Baghdad University. After four days of been kidnapped in Baghdad, his body was found with signs of torture on Mars 27, 2007. [Source: BRussells Tribunal's university Iraqi sources, January 17, 2009].
    18. Khalel Ismail Abd al-Dahri: PhD in physical education, lecturer at the College of Physical Education, Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    19. Khalil Ismail al-Hadithi: Lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Political Sciences. He was assassinated in Amman [Jordan] on April 23, 2006. [Source: BRussells Tribunal's university Iraqi sources, January 17, 2009].
    20. Kilan Mahmoud Ramez: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    21. Maha Abdel Kadira: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Humanities. Date unknown.
    22. Majed Nasser Hussein al-Maamoori: Professor of veterinary medicine at Baghdad University's College of Veterinary Medicine. Assassinated February 17, 2007.
    23. Marwan al-Raawi: PhD in engineering and lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    24. Marwan Galeb Mudhir al-Hetti: PhD in chemical engineering and lecturer at the School of Engineering, Baghdad University. Killed March 16, 2004.
    25. Majeed Hussein Ali: PhD in physical sciences and lecturer at the College of Sciences, Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    3
    26. Mehned al-Dulaimi: PhD in mechanical engineering, lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    27. Mohammed Falah al-Dulaimi: PhD in physical sciences, lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    28. Mohammed Tuki Hussein al-Talakani: PhD in physical sciences, nuclear scientist since 1984, and lecturer at Baghdad University. Assassinated September 4, 2004.
    29. Mohammed al-Kissi: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    30. Mohammed Abdallah al-Rawi: PhD in surgery, former president of Baghdad University, member of the Arab Council of Medicine and of the Iraqi Council of Medicine, president of the Iraqi Union of Doctors. Killed July 27, 2003.
    31. Mohammed al-Jazairi: PhD in medicine and plastic surgeon, College of Medicine, Baghdad University. Assassinated 15 November 2005.
    32. Mustafa al-Hity: PhD in medicine, pediatrician, College of Medicine, Baghdad University. Assassinated 14 November 2005.
    33. Mustafa al-Mashadani: PhD in religious studies, lecturer in Baghdad University's College of Humanities. Date unknown.
    34. Nafea Mahmmoud Jalaf: PhD in Arabic language, professor in Baghdad University's College of Humanities. Killed December 13, 2003.
    35. Nawfal Ahmad: PhD, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Fine Arts. She was assassinated at the front door of her house on 25 December 2005.
    36. Nazar Abdul Amir al-Ubaidy: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University. Date unknown.
    37. Raad Shlash: PhD in biological sciences, head of Department of Biology at Baghdad University's College of Sciences. He was killed at the front door of his house on November 17, 2005.
    38. Rafi Sarcisan Vancan: Bachelor of English language, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Women's Studies. Assassinated June 9, 2003.
    39. Saadi Dagher Morab: PhD in fine arts, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Fine Arts. Killed July 23, 2004.
    40. Sabri Mustafa al-Bayaty: PhD in geography, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Humanities. Killed June 13, 2004.
    41. Saad Yassin al-Ansari: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University. He was killed in al-Saydiya neighborhood, Baghdad, 17 November 2005.
    42. Wannas Abdulah al-Naddawi: PhD in education sciences, Baghdad University. Assassinated 18 February 2005.
    43. Yassim al-Isawi: PhD in religious studies, Baghdad University's College of Arts. Assassinated 21 June 2005.
    44. Zaki Jabar Laftah al-Saedi: Bachelor of veterinary medicine, lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Veterinary Medicine. Assassinated October 16, 2004.
    45. Basem al-Modarres: PhD and lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Philosophy. [Source: al-Hayat, 28 February 2006].
    46. Jasim Mohamed Achamri: Dean of College of Philosophy, Baghdad University. [Source: al-Hayat, 28 February 2006].
    47. Hisham Charif: Head of Department of History and lecturer at Baghdad University. [Source: al-Hayat, 28 February 2006].
    4
    48. Qais Hussam al-Den Jumaa: Professor and Dean of College of Agriculture, Baghdad University. Killed 27 March 2006 by US soldiers in downtown Baghdad. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source].
    49. Mohammed Yaakoub al-Abidi: Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    50. Abdelatif Attai: Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    51. Ali al-Maliki: Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    52. Nafia Aboud: Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi. Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    53. Abbas Kadem Alhachimi: Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    54. Mouloud Hasan Albardar Aturki: Lecturer in Hanafi Teology at al-Imam al-Aadam College of Theology, Baghdad University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    55. Riadh Abbas Saleh: Lecturer at Baghdad University's Centre for International Studies. Killed 11 May 2006. [Source: CEOSI university source, 17 May 2006].
    56. Abbas al-Amery: Professor and head of Department of Administration and Business, College of Administration and Economy, Baghdad University. Killed together with his son and one of his relatives at the main entrance to the College 16 May 2006. [Source: CEOSI university source, May 17, 2006].
    57. Muthana Harith Jasim: Lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Engineering. Killed near his home in al-Mansur, 13 June 2006. [Source: CEOSI university source, 13 June 2006].
    58. Hani Aref al-Dulaimy: Lecturer in the Department of Computer Engineering, Baghdad University's College of Engineering. He was killed, together with three of his students, 13 June 2006 on campus. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source, 13 June 2006].
    59. Hussain al-Sharifi: Professor of urinary surgery at Baghdad University's College of Medicine. Killed in May 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 12 June 2006].
    60. Hadi Muhammad Abub al-Obaidi: Lecturer in the Department of Surgery, Baghdad University's College of Medicine. Killed 19 June 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source, 20 June 2006].
    61. Hamza Shenian: Professor of veterinary surgery at Baghdad University's College of Veterinary Medicine. Killed by armed men in his garden in a Baghdad neighborhood 21 June 2006. This was the first known case of a professor executed in the victim's home. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 21 June 2006].
    62. Jassim Mohama al-Eesaui: Professor at College of Political Sciences, Baghdad University, and editor of al-Syada newspaper. He was 61 years old when killed in al-Shuala, 22 June 2006. [Source: UNAMI report, 1 May-30 June 2006].
    5
    63. Shukir Mahmoud As-Salam: dental surgeon at al-Yamuk Hospital, Baghdad. Killed near his home by armed men 6 September 2006. [Source: TV news, As-Sharquia channel, 7 September 2006, and CEOSI Iraqi sources].
    64. Mahdi Nuseif Jasim: Professor in the Department of Petroleum Engineering at Baghdad University. Killed 13 September 2006 near the university. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source].
    65. Adil al-Mansuri: Maxillofacial surgeon and professor at the College of Medicine, Baghdad University. Kidnapped by uniformed men near Iban al-Nafis Hospital in Baghdad. He was found dead with torture signs and mutilation in Sadr City. He was killed during a wave of assassinations in which seven medical specialists were assassinated. Date unknown: July or August 2006 [Source: Iraqi health service sources, 24 September 2006].
    66. Shukur Arsalan: Maxillofacial surgeon and professor at the College of Medicine, Baghdad University. Killed by armed men when leaving his clinic in Harziya neighborhood during a wave of assassinations in which seven specialists were assassinated. Date unknown: July or August 2006. [Source: Iraqi Health System sources, 24 September 2006].
    67. Issam al-Rawi: Professor of geology at Baghdad University, president of the Association of University Professors of Iraq. Killed 30 October 2006 during an attack carried out by a group of armed men in which two more professors were seriously injured. [Sources: CEOSI sources, and Associated Press].
    68. Yaqdan Sadun al-Dhalmi: Professor and lecturer in the College of Education, Baghdad University. Killed 16 October 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources].
    69. Jlid Ibrahim Mousa: Professor and lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Medicine. Killed by a group of armed men in September 2006. During August and September 2006, 6 professors of medicine were assassinated in Baghdad. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources].
    70. Mohammed Jassim al-Assadi: Professor and dean of the College of Administration and Economy, Baghdad University. Killed 2 November 2006 by a group of armed men when he was driving to Baghdad University. Their son was also killed in the attack. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources and Time Magazine, 2 October 2006].
    71. Jassim al-Assadi's wife (name unknown): Lecturer at College of Administration and Economy, Baghdad University [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources and Time Magazine, 2 October 2006].
    72. Mohammed Mehdi Saleh: Lecturer at Baghdad University (unknown position) and member of the Association of Muslim Scholars. Imam of Ahl al-Sufa Mosque in al-Shurta al-Jamisa neighborhood. Killed 14 November 2006 while driving in the neighborhood of al-Amal in central Baghdad. [Source: UMA, 14 November 2006].
    73. Hedaib Majhol: Lecturer at College of Physical Education, Baghdad University, president of the Football University Club and member of the Iraqi Football Association. Kidnapped in Baghdad. His body was found three later in Baghdad morgue 3 December 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 2 December 2006].
    74. Al-Hareth Abdul Hamid: Professor of psychiatric medicine and head of the Department of Psychology at Baghdad University. Former
    6
    president of the Society of Parapsychological Investigations of Iraq. A renowned scientist, Abdul Hamid was shot dead in the neighborhood of al-Mansur, Baghdad, 6 December 2006 by unknown men. [Sources: CEOSI Iraqi sources, 6 December 2006, and Reuters, 30 January 2007].
    75. Anwar Abdul Hussain: Lecturer at the College of Odontology, Baghdad University. Killed in Haifa Street in Baghdad in the third week of January 2007. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 23 January 2007].
    76. Majed Nasser Hussain: PhD and lecturer at the College of Veterinary Medicine, Baghdad University. He was killed in front of his wife and daughter while leaving home in the third week of January 2007. Nasser Hussain had been kidnapped two years before and freed after paying a ransom. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 23 January 2007].
    77. Khaled al-Hassan: Professor and deputy dean of the College of Political Sciences, Baghdad University. Killed in March 2007. [Source: Association of University Lecturers of Iraq, 7 April 2007].
    78. Ali Mohammed Hamza: Professor of Islamic Studies at Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. Killed 17 April 2007. [Sources: TV channels As-Sharquia and al-Jazeera].
    79. Abdulwahab Majed: Lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Education. Department and college unknown. Killed 2 May 2007. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 5 May 2007].
    80. Sabah al-Taei: Deputy Dean of the College of Education, Baghdad University. Killed 7 May 2007. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources. 8 May 2007].
    81. Nihad Mohammed al-Rawi: Professor of Civil Engineering and deputy president of Baghdad University. Shot dead 26 June 2007 in al-Jadria Bridge, a few meters away from the university campus, when exiting with his daughter Rana, whom he protected from the shots with his body. [Sources: BRussells Tribunal and CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 26-27 June 2007].
    82. Muhammad Kasem al-Jaboori: Lecturer at the College of Agriculture, Baghdad University. Killed, together with his son and his brother-in-law, by paramilitary forces 22 June 2007. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 27 June 2007].
    83. Samir [surname unknown]: Lecturer at Baghdad University's College of Administration and Economy. His body was found shot one day after being kidnapped in Kut where he was visiting family. Professor Samir lived in the Baghdad district of al-Sidiya. [Source: Voices of Iraq, http://www.iraqslogger.com , 29 June 2007].
    84. Amin Abdul Aziz Sarhan: Lecturer at Baghdad University. Department and college unknown. He was kidnapped from his home in Basra by unidentified armed men 13 October 2007 and found dead on the morning of 15 October. [Source: Voices of Iraq, 15 October 2007].
    85. Mohammed Kadhem al-Atabi: Head of Baghdad University's Department of Planning and Evaluation. He was kidnapped 18 October 2007 from his home in Baghdad by a group of armed men and found dead a few hours later in the area of Ur, near to Sadr City, which is under the control of Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 26 October 2007].
    7
    86. Munther Murhej Radhi: Dean of the College of Odontology, Baghdad University. He was found dead in his car 23 January 2008. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 January 2008].
    87. Mundir Marhach: Dean of Faculty of Stomatology, Baghdad University. According to information provided by the Centre for Human Rights of Baghdad, he was killed in March [exact day unknown]. [Source: al-Basrah reported 12 March 2008].
    88. Abdul Sattar Jeid al-Dulaimy, a Microbiologist and lecturer in the College of Veterinary Medicine and in other institutions in the University. He was killed in November 2003 by three gunmen in front of his wife and his four children. His three assassins were waiting the family return to Baghdad after have been visiting his parents in al-Ramadi city, west Baghdad. His wife was also sot in her head, but she survived. His 14 year old eldest child died of a heart problem a year later. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source, 11 June 2008.]
    *. Abdulkareem Shenein Mohammad: professor of Arabic Language in the College of Islamic Sciences, University of Baghdad, killed on 27 May 2010 by an assassin (an student, Baghdad police source informed) with a silencer gun in his personal office in the University. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source upon media reports, 27 May 2010.] [Subsequent reports confirm that Professor Abdulkareem Shenein Mohammad survived the attack.]
    89. Mudhafar Mahmoud: associated professor in the Geology Department in the College of Science, University of Baghdad. Dr Mahmoud was assassinated on 28 November 2010 near his house in Baghdad. [Source: Iraqi source to BRussells Tribunal on 1st December, 2010.]
    90. Ali Shalash: professor of Poultry Diseases in the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Baghdad, killed by assassins who broke into his house in Al-Khadraa area in Baghdad on 17 February, 2011. [Source: Iraqi source to CEOSI on 18 February, 2011.] 91. Ahmed Shakir was a specialist in cardio-vascular diseases and professor at the Faculty of Medicine in the University of Baghdad. According to security reports, Dr. Shakir was killed when a bomb planted in his car exploded in Zaafaraniyya, south of Baghdad, last Monday 1 July 2013. The report released by UNESCO can be read here [Source: UNESCO, July 3, 2013].
    Al-Maamoon Faculty [private college, Baghdad]
    92. Mohammed al-Miyahi: Dean of al-Maamoun Faculty in Baghdad. He was shot with a silencer-equipped gun in front of his house in al-Qadisiah district, southern Baghdad, as he stepped out of his car 14 December 2007. [Source CEOSI Iraqi source and Kuwait News Agency, reported 19 December 2007, IPS reported 19 December 2007, and al-Basrah, reported 12 March 2008].
    Al-Mustansiriya University (Baghdad)
    8
    93. Aalim Abdul Hameed: PhD in preventive medicine, specialist in depleted uranium effects in Basra, dean of the College of Medicine, al-Mustansiriya University. Date unknown.
    94. Abdul Latif al-Mayah: PhD in economics, lecturer and head of Department of Research, al-Mustansiriya University. Killed January 9, 2004.
    95. Aki Thakir Alaany: PhD and lecturer at the College of Literature, al-Mustansiriya University. Date unknown.
    96. Falah al-Dulaimi: PhD, professor and deputy dean of al-Mustansiriya University's College of Sciences. Date unknown.
    97. Falah Ali Hussein: PhD in physics, lecturer and deputy dean of the College of Sciences, al-Mustansiriya University, killed May 2005.
    98. Musa Saloum Addas: PhD, lecturer and deputy dean of the College of Educational Sciences, al-Mustansiriya University, killed 27 May 2005.
    99. Hussam al-Din Ahmad Mahmmoud: PhD in education
    sciences, lecturer and dean at College of Education Sciences, al-Mustansiriya University. Date unknown.
    100. Jasim Abdul Kareem: PhD and lecturer at the College of the Education, al-Mustansiriya University. Date unknown.
    101. Abdul As Satar Sabar al-Khazraji: PhD in history, al-Mustansiriya University, killed 19 June 2005. [A same name and surname lecturer in Engineering at the College of Computer Science Technology, al-Nahrein University was assassinated in March 2006.]
    102. Samir Yield Gerges: PhD and lecturer at the College of Administration and Economy at al-Mustansiriya University, killed 28 August 2005.
    103. Jasim al-Fahaidawi: PhD and lecturer in Arabic literature at the College of Humanities, al-Mustansiriya University. Assassinated at the university entrance. [Source: BBC News, 15 November 2005].
    104. Kadhim Talal Hussein: Deputy Dean of the College of Education, al-Mustansiriya University. Killed November 23, 2005.
    105. Mohammed Nayeb al-Qissi: PhD in geography, lecturer at Department of Research, al-Mustansiriya University. Assassinated June 20, 2003.
    106. Sabah Mahmoud al-Rubaie: PhD in geography, lecturer and dean at College of Educational Sciences, al-Mustansiriya University. Date unknown.
    107. Ali Hasan Muhawish: Dean and lecturer at the College of Engineering, al-Mustansiriya University. Killed March 12, 2006. [Source: Middle East Online, 13 March 2006].
    108. Imad Naser Alfuadi: Lecturer at the College of Political Sciences, al-Mustansiriya University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    109. Mohammed Ali Jawad Achami: President of the College of Law, al-Mustansiriya University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    110. Husam Karyakus Tomas: Lecturer at the College of Medicine, al-Mustansiriya University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    9
    111. Basem Habib Salman: Lecturer at the College of Medicine at al-Mustansiriya University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    112. Mohammed Abdul Rahman al-Ani: PhD in engineering, lecturer at the College of Law, al-Mustansiriya University. Kidnapped, together with his friend Akrem Mehdi, 26 April 2006, at his home in Palestine Street, Baghdad. Their bodies were found two days later. [CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 5 May 2006].
    113. Jasim Fiadh al-Shammari: Lecturer in psychology at the College of Arts, al-Mustansiriya Baghdad University. Killed near campus 23 May 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source, 30 May 2006].
    114. Saad Mehdi Shalash: PhD in history and lecturer in history at the College of Arts, al-Mustansiriya University, and editor of the newspaper Raya al-Arab. Shot dead at his home with his wife 26 October 2006. [Source: al-Quds al-Arabi, 27 October 2006].
    115. Kamal Nassir: Professor of history and lecturer at al-Mustansiriya and Bufa Universities. Killed at his home in Baghdad in October 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 2 November 2006].
    116. Hasseb Aref al-Obaidi: Professor in the College of Political Sciences at al-Mustansiriya University. Since he was kidnapped 22 October 2006, his whereabouts is unknown. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources].
    117. Najeeb [or Nadjat] al-Salihi: Lecturer in the College of Psychology at al-Mustansiriya University and head of the Scientific Committee of the Ministry of Higher Education of Iraq. Al-Salihi, 39 years old, was kidnapped close to campus and his body, shot dead, was found 20 days after his disappearance in Baghdad morgue. His family was able recover his body only after paying a significant amount of money, October 1, 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources].
    118. Dhia al-Deen Mahdi Hussein: Professor of international criminal law at the College of Law, al-Mustansiriya University. Missing since kidnapped from his home in the Baghdad neighborhood of Dhia in 4 November 2006 by a group of armed men driving police cars. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 5 November 2006].
    119. Muntather al-Hamdani: Deputy Dean of the College of Law, al-Mustansiriya University. He was assassinated, together with Ali Hassam, lecturer at the same college, 20 December 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 December 2006. The Iraqi police identified Ali Arnoosi as the deputy dean assassinated 21 December, and Mohammed Hamdani as another victim. It is unknown whether both [Muntather al-Hamdani and Mohammed Hamdani] are the same case or not].
    120. Ali Hassam: Lecturer at the College of Law at al-Mustansiriya University. He was killed together with Muntather al-Hamdani, deputy dean of the college, 20 December 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 December 2006. The Iraqi police identified Ali Arnoosi as the deputy dean assassinated 21 December, and Mohammed Hamdani as another victim. It is unknown whether both [Muntather al-Hamdani and Mohammed Hamdani] are the same case or not.
    121. Dhia al-Mguter: Professor of economy at the College of Administration and Economy of al-Mustansiriya University. He was killed
    10
    23 January 2007 in Baghdad while driving. He was a prominent economist and president of the Consumer's Defense Association and the Iraqi Association of Economists. A commentator at for As-Sharquia television, he participated in the Maram Committee, being responsible for investigating irregularities occurring during the elections held in January 2006. Al-Mguter was part of a family with a long anti-colonialist tradition since the British occupation. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and Az-Zaman newspaper, 24 January 2007].
    122. Ridha Abdul al-Kuraishi: Deputy dean of the University of al-Mustansiriya's College of administration and economy. He was kidnapped 28 March 2007 and found dead the next day. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers, 7 April 2007. See the letter sent to CEOSI (Arabic)].
    123. Zaid Abdulmonem Ali: professor at the Baghdad Cancer Research Center, institution associated to the Al-Mustansirya University in Baghdad. Dr. Abdulmomem Ali was killed in March 26, 2011 when an IED attached to his vehicle went off in al-Nusoor square, west of Baghdad. The explosion also left Ali's wife and two civilians others wounded. [Source: Aswat al-Iraq news agency, on March 26, 2011.]
    124. Mohmamed Al-Alwan: Dean of the College of Medicine, Al-Mustansirya University in Baghdad. Dr Al-Alwan was assassinated in his clinic in Harithiyah, Baghdad, on April 29, 2011. He had been the Dean of Medical College for over 4 years. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, March 30, 2011 from Iraqi media and International Iraqi Medical Society.] 125. Naser Husein al Shahmani, professor at al-Mustansyria University was shot by some gunmen few days ago. They killed him on the spot. [Source: Ahmad al Farji's article (in Arabic), October 28, 2013.]
    University of Technology [Baghdad]
    126. Muhannad [or Mehned] al-Dulaimi: PhD in mechanical engineering, lecturer at the Baghdad University of Technology. Date unknown.
    127. Muhey Hussein: PhD in aerodynamics, lecturer in the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the Baghdad University of Technology. Date unknown.
    128. Qahtan Kadhim Hatim: Bachelor of sciences, lecturer in the College of Engineering of the Baghdad University of Technology. Assassinated May 30, 2004.
    129. Sahira Mohammed Machhadani: Baghdad University of Technology. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers, March 2006].
    130. Ahmed Ali Husein: Lecturer at the Baghdad University of Technology, specialist in applied mechanics. He was killed by a group of armed men in downtown Baghdad 22 May 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 May 2006].
    131. Name unknown: Lecturer at Baghdad University of Technology. Killed 27 June 2006 by a group of armed men. They were driving a vehicle in the Baghdad neighborhood of al-Mansur and shot him without
    11
    stopping. Next day, students and professors staged demonstrations in all universities across the country opposing the assassination and kidnapping of professors and lecturers. [Source: al-Jazeera and Jordan Times, 27 June 2006].
    132. Ali Kadhim Ali: Professor at Baghdad University of Technology. Shot dead in November 2006 in the district of al-Yarmuk by a group of armed men. His wife, Dr Baida Obeid -- gynecologist -- was also killed in the attack. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources, 16 November 2006].
    133. Mayed Jasim al-Janabi: Lecturer in physics at Baghdad University of Technology. Killed 23 May 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, December 2006].
    134. Khalel Enjad al-Jumaily: Lecturer at University of Technology. Department and college unknown. He was killed 22 December 2006 with his son, a physician, after being kidnapped. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 December 2006].
    135. Abdul Sami al-Janabi: Deputy President of the Baghdad University of Technology. Missing after being kidnapped during the third week of January 2007. In 2004, Abdul Sami al-Janabi was dean of al-Mustansiriya University's College of Sciences in Baghdad. He resigned from this position after Shia paramilitary forces threatened to kill him. Such forces began then to occupy university centers in the capital. Transferred by the Ministry of Higher Education to a new position to preserve his security, Sami al-Janabi has almost certainly been assassinated. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 23 January 2007].
    136. Ameer Mekki al-Zihairi: Lecturer at Baghdad University of Technology. He was killed in March 2007. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers, 7 April 2007. See pdf].
    137. Saad Abd Alwahab Al-Shaaban: Former Dean of the College of Computer Engineering and Information Technology in the University of Technology. Killed on Thursday 14 October 2010 by plastic explosive implanted to his car in Adhamia district of Baghdad. Saad Abd Alwahab Al-Shaaban left Iraq in 2006 and returned back to Baghdad. He was lately working in the National Center for Computer Science, Ministry of Higher Education. (Source: [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources on Alane News Agency, , October 15, 2010.]
    138. Saad Abdul Jabar: professor at the Technological University in Bagdad. Assassinated in Al-Siyada district, Southwest Baghdad, while driving his car by murderers using silenced guns on 26 February, 2011.[Source: Asuat Al-Iraq agency, 26 February, and Yaqen agency, February 27, 2010.]
    Al-Nahrein University [Baghdad]
    139. Akel Abdel Jabar al-Bahadili: Professor and deputy dean of al-Nahrein University's College of Medicine. Head of Adhamiya Hospital in Baghdad. He was a specialist in internal medicine, killed 2 December 2005.
    140. Mohammed al-Khazairy: Lecturer at University College al-Kadhemiya Hospital, al- Nahrein University. He was a specialist in plastic surgery.
    12
    141. Laith Abdel Aziz: PhD and lecturer at the College of Sciences, al-Nahrein University. Date unknown. [Source: al-Hayat, 28 February 2006].
    142. Abdul as-Satar Sabar al-Khazraji: Lecturer in engineering at the College of Computer Science Technology, al-Nahrein University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006]. [A same name and surname PhD in history, lecturer at Al-Munstansiriya University was killed on 19 June 2005.]
    143. Uday al-Beiruti: Professor at al-Nahrein University. Kidnapped in University College al-Kadhemiya Hospital's parking lot by armed men dressed in Interior Ministry uniforms. His body was found with sigs of torture in Sadr City. Date unknown: July/August 2006. His murder took place during a wave of assassinations in which seven of his colleagues were killed. [Source: Iraqi health service sources, 24 September 2006].
    144. Khalel al-Khumaili: Professor at the College of Medicine, al-Nahrein University. He was found shot dead in December 2006 [exact date unknown] after being kidnapped at University College al-Kadhemiya Hospital, together with his son, Dr Anas al-Jomaili, lecturer at the same college. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 December 2006].
    145. Anas al-Jumaili: Lecturer at the College of Medicine, al-Nahrein University. He was found shot dead in December [exact date unknown] with his father, Dr Jalil al-Jumaili, professor of medicine, after being kidnapped at University College al-Kadhemiya Hospital. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 24 December 2006].
    146. Adnan Mohammed Saleh al-Aabid: Lecturer at the College of Law, al-Nahrein University. He was found dead 31 January 2007 after having been kidnapped from his home 28 January 2007 together with lecturers Abdul Mutaleb Abdulrazak al-Hashimi and Aamer Kasem al-Kaisy, and a student. All were found dead in Baghdad morgue. [Sources: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and al-Quds al-Arabi, 1 February 2007].
    147. Abdul Mutaleb Abdulrazak al-Hashimi: Lecturer at the College of Law, al-Nahrein University. He was found dead 31 January 2007 after having been kidnapped 28 January 2007 on his way home, together with lecturers Adnan Mohammed Saleh al-Aabid and Aamer Kasem al-Kaisy, and a student. All were found dead in Baghdad morgue. [Sources: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and al-Quds al-Arabi, 1 February 2007].
    148. Aamer Kasem al-Kaisy: Lecturer at the College of Law, al-Nahrein University. He was found dead 31 January 2007 after having been kidnapped on his way home 28 January 2007, together with a student and lecturers Abdul Mutaleb Abdulrazak al-Hashimi and Adnan Mohammed Saleh al-Aabid. All were found dead in Baghdad morgue. [Sources: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and al-Quds al-Arabi, 1 February 2007].
    149. Khaled al-Naieb: Lecturer in microbiology and deputy dean of al-Nahrein University's College of Higher Studies in Medicine. Killed 30 March 2007 at the main entrance to the college. Having been threatened by the Mahdi Army, Moqtada as-Sadr's militia, Dr al- Naieb had moved to work in Irbil. During a brief visit to his family in Baghdad, and after recently becoming a father, he was killed at the main entrance
    13
    to the college on his way to collect some documents. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 4 April 2007. Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report dated April 7, 2007. See pdf].
    150. Sami Sitrak: Professor of English and dean of al-Nahrein University's College of Law. Professor Sitrak was killed 29 March 2007. He had been appointed dean of the College after the former dean's resignation following an attempt to kill him along with three other College lecturers. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers, April 7, 2007. See pdf].
    151. Thair Ahmed Jebr: Lecturer in the Department of Physics, College of Sciences, al- Nahrein University. Jebr was killed in the attack against satellite TV channel al-Baghdadiya April 5, 2007. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers, April 7, 2007. See pdf].
    152. Iyad Hamza: PhD in chemistry, Baghdad University. He was the academic assistant of the President of al-Nahrein University. On May 4, 2008 he was killed near his home in Baghdad. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi source, May 6, 2008].
    153. Khamal Abu Muhie: Professor at the College of Medicine, al-Nahrein University. Killed on 22 November 2009 at his home in the neighborhood of Adamiya, Baghdad. [Source: Al-Sharquia TV, November 22, 2009].
    Islamic University [Baghdad]
    154. Haizem al-Azawi: Lecturer at Baghdad Islamic University. Department and college unknown. He was 35 years old and married and was killed 13 February 2006 by armed men when he arriving home in the neighborhood of Habibiya. [Source: Asia Times, March 3, 2006].
    155. Saadi Ahmad Zidaan al-Fahdawi: PhD in Islamic science, lecturer at the College of Islamic Science, Baghdad University. Killed March 26, 2006.
    156. Abdel Aziz al-Jazem: Lecturer in Islamic theology at the College of Islamic Science, Baghdad University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    157. Saad Jasim Mohammed: Lecturer at the Baghdad Islamic University. Department and college unknown. Killed, together with his brother Mohammed Jassim Mohammed, 11 May 2007 in the neighborhood of al-Mansur. The armed men who committed the crime where identified by the Association of Muslims Scholars as members of a death squad. [Sources: press release of the Association of Muslims Scholars, May 12, 2007, and CEOSI Iraqi University sources, May 13, 2007].
    158. Qais Sabah al-Jabouri: Professor at the Baghdad Islamic University. Killed 7 June 2007 by a group of armed men who shot him from a car when he was leaving the university with the lecturers Alaa Jalel Essa and Saad Jalifa al-Ani, who were killed and seriously injured respectively. [Sources Association of Muslims Scholars press release, June 7, 2007, and CEOSI Iraqi university sources, June 9, 2007].
    159. Alaa Jalel Essa: Professor at the Baghdad Islamic University. Killed 7 June 2007 by a group of armed men who shot him from a car when he was leaving the university with the lecturers Qais Sabah al-Jabouri and Saad Jalifa al-Ani, who were killed and seriously injured
    14
    respectively. [Sources: Association of Muslims Scholars press release, June 7, 2007, and CEOSI Iraqi university sources, June 9, 2007].
    Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education [Baghdad]
    Academics killed after a massive kidnapping occurred November 13, 2006:
    160. Abdul Salam Suaidan al-Mashhadani: Lecturer in political sciences and head of the Scholarship section of the Ministry of Higher Education. He was kidnapped November13, 2006, in an assault on the Ministry. His body was found with signs of torture and mutilation 24 November 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, November 26, 2006.]
    161. Abdul Hamed al-Hadizi: Professor [specialty unknown]. He was kidnapped on November 13, 2006 in an assault on the Ministry. His body was found with signs of torture and mutilation, 24 November 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, November 26, 2006].
    162. Thamer Kamel Mohamed: Head of the Department of Human Right at the Ministry of Higher Education. Shot on 22 February 2010 on his way to work in one of main Baghdad streets [al-Qanat Street]. The assassins used silencers fitted in their guns. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, February 23, 2006 and Alernet].
    Al-Mansour University [Baghdad]
    163. Amal Maamlaji: IT professor at the al-Mansour University in Baghdad. She was born in Kerbala and got involved in human rights – particularly women's rights. She was shot dead in an ambush while driving her car [160 bullets were found in her car] according to her husband, Athir Haddad, to whom France24 interviewed by telephone. [Source: France24, July 4, 2008,].
    Baghdad Institutes
    164. Izi al-Deen al-Rawi: President of the Arabic University's Institute of Petroleum, Industry and Minerals. Al-Rawi was kidnapped and found dead November 20, 2006. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, November 20, 2006].
    BABYLON Hilla University
    165. Khaled M al-Khanabi: PhD in Islamic history, lecturer in Hilla University's School of Humanities. Date unknown.
    166. Mohsin Suleiman al-Ajeely: PhD in agronomy, lecturer in the College of Agronomy, Hilla University. Killed on December 24, 2005.
    167. Fleih al-Gharbawi: Lecturer in the College of Medicine. Killed in Hilla [capital of the province of Babylon, 100 kilometers south of Baghdad] 20 November 2006 by armed men. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources, 20 November 2006].
    168. Ali al-Grari [or Garar]. Professor at Hilla University. He was shot dead November 20, 2006 by armed men in a vehicle on the freeway
    15
    between Hilla and Baghdad. [Source: Iraqi police sources cited by Reuters, November 20, 2006].
    AT-TAMIM Kirkuk University
    169. Ahmed Ithaldin Yahya: Lecturer in the College of Engineering, Kirkuk University. Killed by a car bomb in the vicinity of his home in Kirkuk, February 16, 2007. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, February 17, 2007].
    170. Hussein Qader Omar: professor and Dean of Kirkuk University's College of Education Sciences. Killed in November 20, 2006 by shots made from a vehicle in the city center. An accompanying colleague was injured. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, November 21, 2006, and Iraqi Police Sources cited by Reuters, November 20, 2006].
    171. Sabri Abdul Jabar Mohammed: Lecturer at the College of Education Sciences at Kirkuk University. Found dead November 1, 2007 in a street in Kirkuk one day after being kidnapped by a group of unidentified armed men [Source: Iraqi university sources to the BRussells Tribunal and CEOSI, November 2, 2007].
    172. Abdel Sattar Tahir Sharif: Lecturer at Kirkuk University. Department and college unknown. 75-years-old, he was assassinated March 5, 2008 by armed men in the district of Shoraw, 10 kilometers northeast of Kirkuk. [Source: Aswat al-Iraq/Voices of Iraq, 5 March 2008].
    173. Ibrahim Shaeer Jabbar Al-Jumaili: Pediatrician and professor of Medicine at Kirkuk University. Dr. Ibrahim S.J. Al-Jumaili, 55 years old, was murdered July 22, 2011, after he resisted attempts by four people to kidnap him, police said. [Source: AFP, July 22, 2011]. 174. Amer al-Doury: Dr. Amer al-Douri was the Dean of the Administration and Economic College in Kirkuk. He was first handcuffed and then executed in Hawija at protesters site, when Maliki's SWAT Security Forces raided the peaceful protesting site and killed 86, injured hundreds, and arrested more on Tuesday April 23, 2013. [Source Al Sharquiya TV News 20].
    NINEVEH
    Mosul University
    175. Abdel Jabar al-Naimi: Dean of Mosul University's College of Humanities. Date unknown.
    176. Abdul Jabar Mustafa: PhD in political sciences, dean of Mosul University's College of Political Sciences. Date unknown.
    177. Abdul Aziz El-Atrachi: PhD in Plant Protection in the College of Agronomy and Forestry, Mosul University. He was killed by a loose bullet shot by and American soldier. Date unknown.
    178. Eman Abd-Almonaom Yunis: PhD in translation, lecturer in the College of Humanities, Mosul University. Killed August 30, 2004.
    179. Khaled Faisal Hamed al-Sheekho: PhD and lecturer in the College of Physical Education, Mosul University. Killed April 11, 2003.
    180. Leila [or Lyla] Abdu Allah al-Saad: PhD in law, dean of Mosul University's College of Law. Assassinated in June 22, 2004.
    16
    181. Mahfud al-Kazzaz: PhD and lecturer at University Mosul. Department and college unknown. Killed November 20, 2004.
    182. Mohammed Yunis Thanoon: Bachelor of sciences, lecturer in the College of Physical Education, Mosul University. Killed January 27. 2004.
    183. Muneer al-Khiero: PhD in law and lecturer in the College of Law, Mosul University. Married to Dr Leila Abdu Allah al-Saad, also assassinated. Date unknown.
    184. Muwafek Yahya Hamdun: Deputy Dean and professor at the College of Agronomy, Mosul University. [Source: al-Hayat, February 28, 2006].
    185. Omar Miran: Baghdad University bachelor of law [1946]. PhD in history from Paris University [1952], professor of history at Mosul University, specialist in history of the Middle East. Killed, along with his wife and three of his sons, by armed men in February 2006 [exact date unknown].
    186. Naif Sultan Saleh: Lecturer at the Technical Institute, Mosul University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    187. Natek Sabri Hasan: Lecturer in the Department of Agricultural Mechanization and head of the College of Agronomy, Mosul University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    188. Noel Petros Shammas Matti: Lecturer at the College of Medicine, Mosul University. Married and father of two daughters, was kidnapped and found dead August 4, 2006.
    189. Noel Butrus S. Mathew: PhD, professor at the Health Institute of Mosul University. Date unknown.
    190. Ahmad Hamid al-Tai: Professor and head of Department of Medicine, Mosul University. Killed 20 November 2006 when armed men intercepted his vehicle as he was heading home. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, November 20, 2006].
    191. Kamel Abdul Hussain: Lecturer and deputy dean of the College of Law, Mosul University. Killed in January 11, 2007. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 23 January 2007].
    192. Talal Younis: Professor and dean of the College of Political Sciences. Killed on the morning of April 16, 2007 at the main entrance to the college. Within less than half an hour Professor Jaafer Hassan Sadeq of the Department of History at Mosul University was assassinated at his home. [Sources: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and al-Mosul].
    193. Jaafer Hassan Sadeq: Professor in the Department of History of Mosul University's College of Arts. Killed April 16, 2007 at home in the district of al-Kafaaat, northwest of Mosul. Within less than half an hour, Professor Talal Younis, dean of Mosul University's College of Political Sciences, was killed at the main entrance to the college. [Sources: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and al-Mosul].
    194. Ismail Taleb Ahmed: Lecturer in the College of Education, Mosul University. Killed 2 May 2007 while on his way to college. [Source: al-Mosul, May 2, 2007].
    195. Nidal al-Asadi: Professor in the Computer Sciences Department of Mosul University's College of Sciences. Shot dead by armed men in the district of al-Muhandiseen, according to police sources in Mosul.
    17
    [Sources: INA, May 2, 2007, and Iraqi sources to the BRussells Tribunal, May 3, 2007].
    196. Abdul Kader Ali Abdullah: Lecturer in the Department of Arabic, College of Education Sciences, Mosul University. Found dead 25/26 August 2007 after being kidnapped five days before by a group of armed men. [Source: Iraqi sources to the BRussells Tribunal and CEOSI August 26-27, 2007].
    197. Unknown: Lecturer at Mosul University killed in the explosion of two car bombs near campus, October 1, 2007. In this attack, six other people were injured, among them four students. [Source: KUNA, October 1, 2007].
    198. Aziz Suleiman: Lecturer at Mosul University. Department and College are unknown. Killed in Mosul January 22, 2008. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, January 24, 2008].
    199. Jalil Ibrahim Ahmed al-Naimi: Director of the Sharia Department [Islamic Law] at Mosul University. He was shot dead by armed men when he came back home [in Mosul] from University, 30 January 2008. [Sources: CEOSI and BRussells Tribunal University Iraqi sources, Heytnet and al-Quds al-Arabi, January 31, 2008].
    200. Faris Younis: Lecturer at Agriculture College, Mosul University. Dr. Younis was killed June 2, 2008 as a result of a car bomb put in his car. Different sources reported that dozens of academics and students from Mosul University were arrested by Badr militias and Kurd pershmergas. These facts occurred at the end of May, 2008, when the city was taken over by US occupation and Iraqi forces [Source: CEOSI University Iraqui sources, June 3, 2008].
    201. Walid Saad Allah al-Mouli, a university professor [Department unknown] was shot down on Sunday 15 June 2008 by unknown gunmen while he was on his way to work in Mosul's northern neighborhood of al-Hadbaa, 405 Km northern Baghdad, killing him on the spot. In the attack, two of his sons were seriously wounded and are in a critical condition. [Source: Aswat al-Iraq-Voices of Iraq-[VOI], June 16, 2008].
    202. Ahmed Murad Shehab: professor of Mosul University's Faculty of Administration and Economics. Ahmed Murad Shehab was fatally shot in the neighborhood of al-Nur, on Mosul's left bank. [Source: Press TV, 21 de abril de 2009].
    203. Unidentified female university professor: The professor of law was assassinated in front of her home in the al-Intissar district of western Mosul by unknown gunmen on Tuesday, the local police said. They declined to give her name. [Source: PressTV, April 21, 2009].
    204. Unknown: lecturer at Mosul University. On May 24, 2009, gunmen ambushed killed a university teacher near his home in Al Andalus neighborhood, Mosul. [Source: The New York Times May 24, 2009].
    205. Ibrahem Al-Kasab: professor in the College of Education, Mosul University. Dr. Al-Kasab was shot dead on 4th October, 2010. Unknown gang assassinated him in his home at the eastren part of Mosul. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources and Al-Sabah al-Yadid October 4, 2010].
    206. Amer Selbi: professor at College of Islamic Science, Mosul University. Assassinated on his way to College by murderers using
    18
    silenced guns on 6th March 2011. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 10 March, 2011].
    207. Yasser Ahmed Sheet: assistant Dean of the Fine Arts Faculty of the Mosul University. Gunmen opened fire on Yasser Ahmed Sheet in front of his house in al-Muthanna neighborhood, eastern Mosul, on April 9, 2011, a local security source told to Aswat al-Iraq news agency. [Source: Aswat al-Iraq news agency, on April 9, 2011.]
    208. Mohammed Jasem al Jabouri: professor in the Faculty of Imam al-Adham, Mosul, province of Niniveh, was killed during the night last 2 July, 2012 by gunmen who shot him to death near his house. [Sources: Association of Muslim Scholars and Safaq News, 3 July, 2012]
    QADISIYA
    Diwaniya University
    209. Hakim Malik al-Zayadi: PhD in Arabic philology, lecturer in Arabic literature at al-Qadisyia University. Dr al-Zayadi was born in Diwaniya, and was killed in Latifiya when he was traveling from Baghdad 24 July 2005].
    210. Mayid Husein: Physician and lecturer at the College of Medicine, Diwaniya University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    211. Saleh Abed Hassoun: al-Qadisiyah University's Dean of the School of Law. Salih Abed Hassoun was shot dead by a group of armed men when driving his car in downtown Baghdad on 7 July 2008. [Source:McClatchy, 8 July 2008.]
    BASRA
    Basra University
    212. Abdel al-Munim Abdel Mayad: Bachelor and lecturer at Basra University. Date unknown.
    213. Abdel Gani Assaadun: Bachelor and lecturer at Basra University. Date unknown.
    214. Abdul Alah [or Abdullah] al-Fadhel: PhD, professor and deputy dean of Basra University's College of Medicine. Killed January 1, 2006.
    215. Abdul-Hussein Nasir Jalaf: PhD in agronomy, lecturer at the College of Agronomy's Center of Research on Date Palm Trees, Basra University. Killed May 1, 2005.
    216. Alaa Daoud: PhD in sciences, professor and chairman of Basra University [also reported as a lecturer in history]. Killed 20 July 2005.
    217. Ali Ghalib Abd Ali: Bachelor of sciences, assistant professor at the School of Engineering, Basra University. Killed April 12, 2004.
    218. Asaad Salem Shrieda: PhD in engineering, professor and dean of Basra University's School of Engineering. Killed Octobre 15, 2003.
    219. Faysal al-Assadi: PhD in agronomy, professor at the College of Agronomy, Basra University. Date unknown.
    220. Ghassab Jabber Attar: Bachelor of sciences, lecturer at the School of Engineering, Basra University. Assassinated June 8, 2003.
    19
    221. Haidar al-Baaj: PhD in surgery, head of the University College Basra Hospital. Date unknown.
    222. Haidar Taher: PhD and professor at the College of Medicine, Basra University. Date unknown.
    223. Hussein Yasin: PhD in physics, lecturer in sciences at Basra University Killed 18 February 2004 at his home and in front of his family.
    224. Khaled Shrieda: PhD in engineering, dean of the School of Engineering, Basra University. Date unknown.
    225. Khamhour al-Zargani: PhD in history, head of the Department of History at the College of Education, Basra University Killed 19 August 2005.
    226. Kadim Mashut Awad: visiting professor at the Department of Soils, College of Agriculture, Basra University. Killed December 2005 [exact date unknown].
    227. Karem Hassani: PhD and lecturer at the College of Medicine, Basra University. Date unknown.
    228. Kefaia Hussein Saleh: PhD in English philology, lecturer in the College of Education Sciences, Basra University. Assassinated May 28, 2004.
    229. Mohammed al-Hakim: PhD in pharmacy, professor and dean of Basra University's College of Pharmacy. Date unknown.
    230. Mohammed Yassem Badr: PhD, professor and chairman of Basra University. Date unknown.
    231. Omar Fakhri: PhD and lecturer in biology at the College of Sciences, Basra University. Date unknown.
    232. Saad Alrubaiee: PhD and lecturer in biology at the College of Sciences, Basra University. Date unknown.
    233. Yaddab al-Hajjam: PhD in education sciences and lecturer at the College of Education Sciences, Basra University. Date unknown.
    234. Zanubia Abdel Husein: PhD in veterinary medicine, lecturer at the College of Veterinary Medicine, Basra University. Date unknown.
    235. Jalil Ibrahim Almachari: Lecturer at Basra University. Department and college unknown. Killed 20 March 2006 after criticizing in a public lecture the situation in Iraq. [Arabic Source: al-Kader].
    236. Abdullah Hamed al-Fadel: PhD in medicine, lecturer in surgery and deputy dean of the College of Medicine at Basra University. Killed in January 2006 [exact date unknown]. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources].
    237. Fuad al-Dajan: PhD in medicine, lecturer in gynecology at the College of Medicine, Basra University. Killed at the beginning of March 2006 [exact date unknown]. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources].
    238. Saad al-Shahin: PhD in medicine, lecturer in internal medicine at Basra University's College of Medicine. Killed at the beginning of March 2006 [exact date unknown]. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources].
    239. Jamhoor Karem Khammas: Lecturer at the College of Arts, Basra University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    240. Karem Mohsen: PhD and lecturer at Department of Agriculture, College of Agronomy, Basra University. Killed 10 April 2006. He worked in the field of honeybee production. Lecturers and students called for a
    20
    demonstration to protest for his assassination. [Source: al-Basrah, April 11, 2006].
    241. Waled Kamel: Lecturer at the College of Arts at Basra University. Killed 8 May 2006. Other two lecturers were injured during the attack, one of them seriously. [Source: al-Quds al-Arabi, May 9, 2006].
    242. Ahmad Abdul Kader Abdullah: Lecturer in the College of Sciences, Basra University. His body was found June 9, 2006. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, June 10, 2006].
    243. Kasem Yusuf Yakub: Head of Department of Mechanical Engineering, Basra University. Killed 13 June 2006 at the university gate. [Sources: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 14 June 2006 and al-Quds al-Arabi, June 16, 2006].
    244. Ahmad Abdul Wadir Abdullah: Professor of the College of Chemistry, Basra University. Killed 10 June 2006. [Source: UNAMI report, May1 – June 30, 2006].
    245. Kathum Mashhout: Lecturer in edaphology at the College of Agriculture, Basra University. Killed in Basra in December 2006 [exact date unknown]. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, 12 December 2006].
    246. Mohammed Aziz Alwan: Lecturer in artistic design at the College of Fine Arts, Basra University. Killed by armed men 26 May 2007 while walking in the city. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, June 1, 2007].
    247. Firas Abdul Zahra: Lecturer at the College of Physical Education, Basra University. Killed at home by armed men July18, 2007. His wife was injured in the attack. [Source: Iraqi university sources to the BRussells Tribunal, August 26, 2007].
    248. Muayad Ahmad Jalaf: Lecturer at the College of Arts, Basra University. Kidnapped 10 September 2007 by a group of armed men that was driving three cars, one of them with a government license plate. He was found dead in a city suburb the next day. [Source: Iraqi university sources to the BRussells Tribunal, September 12, 2007].
    249. Khaled Naser al-Miyahi: PhD in medicine, Professor of neurosurgery at Basra University. He was assassinated in March 2008 [exact date unknown]. His body was found after his being kidnapped by a group of armed men in the streets of Basra. There were no ransom demands, according to information provided by Baghdad's Center for Human Rights.[Source: al-Basrah, March 12, 2008].
    250. Youssef Salman: PhD engineering professor at Basra University. He was shot dead in 2006 when driving home from the University with three other colleagues, who were spared, according to the information provided by her widow to France24, in an phone interview [Source: France24, July 4, 2008].
    Technical Institute of Basra
    251. Mohammed Kasem: PhD in engineering, lecturer at the Technical Institute of Basra. Killed on January 1, 2004.
    252. Sabah Hachim Yaber: Lecturer at the Technical Institute of Basra. Date unknown.
    21
    253. Salah Abdelaziz Hashim: PhD and lecturer in fine arts at the Technical Institute of Basra. Kidnapped in 4 April 2006. He was found shot dead the next day. According to other sources, Dr Hashim was machine-gunned from a vehicle, injuring also a number of students. [Sources: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, April 6, 2006, Az-Zaman, April 6, 2006, and al-Quds al-Arabi, April 7, 2006].
    TIKRIT
    Tikrit University
    254. Basem al-Mudares: PhD in chemical sciences and lecturer in the College of Sciences, Tikrit University. His body was found mutilated in the city of Samarra 21 July 2004.
    255. Fathal Mosa Hussein Al Akili: PhD and professor at the College of Physical Education, Tikrit University. Assassinated June 27, 2004.
    256. Mahmoud Ibrahim Hussein: PhD in biological sciences and lecturer at the College of Education Sciences, Tikrit University. Killed September 3, 2004.
    257. Madloul Albazi Tikrit University. Department and college unknown. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    258. Mojbil Achaij Issa al-Jabouri: Lecturer in international law at the College of Law, Tikrit University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    259. Damin Husein al-Abidi: Lecturer in international law at College of Law, Tikrit University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    260. Harit Abdel Yabar As Samrai: PhD student at the College of Engineering, Tikrit University. [Source: Iraqi Association of University Lecturers report, March 2006].
    261. Farhan Mahmud: Lecturer at the College of Theology, Tikrit University. Disappeared after being kidnapped 24 November 2006. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, November 26, 2006].
    262. Mustafa Khudhr Qasim: Professor at Tikrit University. Department and college unknown. His body was found beheaded in al-Mulawatha, eastern Mosul, 21 November 2007. [Sources: al-Mosul, November 22, 2007, and Iraqi university sources to the BRussells Tribunal and CEOSI, November 22-25, 2007].
    263. Taha AbdulRazak al-Ani: PhD in Islamic Studies, he was professor at Tikrit University. His body was found shot dead in a car on a highway near al-Adel, a Baghdad suburb. Also, the body of Sheikh Mahmoud Talb Latif al-Jumaily, member of the Commission of Muslim Scientists, was found dead in the same car last Thursday afternoon, May 15, 2008. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi sources May 21, 2008].
    264. Aiad Ibrahem Mohamed Al-Jebory: Neurosurgeon specialist at the College of Medicine in Tikrit University. Picked up with his brother by military raid on his village in Al Haweja on the night of 6th March 2011. His body was delivered the following day to Tikrit Hospital. His brother fate is unknown. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university sources, March 10, 2011].
    DIYALAH
    22
    Baquba University
    265. Taleb Ibrahim al-Daher: PhD in physical sciences, professor and dean at the College of Sciences, Baquba University. Killed December 21, 2004.
    266. Lez Mecchan: Professor at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed 19 April 2006 with his wife and another colleague. [Sources: DPC and EFE, 19 April 2006].
    267. Mis Mecchan: Lecturer at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Wife of Professor Lez Mecchan, also assassinated. Both were killed with another colleague 19 April 2006. [Sources: DPC and EFE, 19 April 2006].
    268. Salam Ali Husein: Taught at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed 19 April 2006 with two other colleagues. [Sources: DPC and EFE, 19 April 2006].
    269. Meshhin Hardan Madhlom al-Dulaimi: Professor at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed at the end of April, according to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 10 May 2006].
    270. Abdul Salam Ali al-Mehdawi: Professor at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed at the end of April, according to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 10 May 2006].
    271. Mais Ganem Mahmoud: Lecturer at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed at the end of April, according to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 10 May 2006].
    272. Satar Jabar Akool: Lecturer at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed at the end of April, according to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 10 May 2006].
    273. Mohammed Abdual Redah al-Tamemmi: Lecturer in the Department of Arabic Language and head of the College of Education, Baquba University. Killed 19 August 2006 together with Professor Kreem Slman al-Hamed al-Sadey, 70 years old, of the same Department. A third lecturer from the same department escaped the attack carried out by a group of four armed men Students and lecturers demonstrated against his and other lecturers' deaths. [Source: World Socialist, 12 September 2006, citing the Iraqi newspaper Az-Zaman, CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 25 December 2006].
    274. Karim al-Saadi: Lecturer at Baquba University. Department and college unknown. Killed August 2006. Students and lecturers demonstrated against his and other lecturers' deaths. [Source: World Socialist, 12 September 2006, citing the Iraqi newspaper Az-Zaman].
    275. Kreem Slman al-Hamed al-Sadey: Professor in the Department of Arabic Language at the College of Education, Baquba University. He was 70 years old when killed 19 August 2006. In the attack Mohammed Abdual Redah al-Tamemmi, head of Education Department was also killed. A third lecturer from the same department escaped the attack of a group of four armed men. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 25 December 2006].
    23
    276. Hasan Ahmad: Lecturer in the College of Education, Baquba University. Killed December 8, 2006. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, December 2006].
    277. Ahmed Mehawish Hasan: Lecturer in the Department of Arabic at the College of Education, Baquba University. Killed in December [exact date unknown]. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 25 December 2006].
    278. Walhan Hamid Fares al-Rubai: Dean of the College of Physical Education, Baquba University. Al-Rubai was shot by a group of armed men in his office 1 February 2007. According to some sources his son was also killed. [Source: Reuters and Islammemo, 1-3 February 2007 respectively, and CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 2 February 2007].
    279. Abdul Ghabur al-Qasi: Lecturer in history at Baquba University. His body was found by the police 10 April 2007 in Diyalah River, which crosses the city, with 31 other bodies of kidnapped people. [Source: Az-Zaman, 11 April 2007].
    280. Jamal Mustafa: Professor and head of the History Department, College of Education Sciences, Baquba University. Kidnapped at home in the city of Baquba 29 October 2007 by a group of armed men driving in three vehicles. [Source: Iraqi university sources to the BRussells Tribunal, 30 October 2007].
    281. Ismail Khalil Al-Mahdawi: professor at Al-Assmai Faculty of Education, Diyalah University. Died after serious injuries sustained due to exposure to fire arms equipped with silencers on 4 June, 2011, while he was on his way back home in Katoun area, western Baquba (Diyalah Governorate) according to a security sources. Dr. Al-Mahdawi was released two months ago after five-year detention at the US forces in Iraq. He was rushed to Baquba General Hospital. [Sources: Baghdad TV; Aswat Al-Iraq, College of Education Al-Assmai, Al-Forat TV, on June 4 & 5, 2011.]
    282. Abbas Fadhil al-Dulaimi: Pressident of Diyalah University has been injured when targeted by a landmine near an intersection of roads and bridges in Bakoabah, Diyalah, on Tursday, January 13, 2013. The explosion killed two and wounded three of his security and body guards [Source: CEOSI's Iraqi sources]
    AL-ANBAR
    Ramadi University
    283. Abdel Karim Mejlef Saleh: PhD in philology, lecturer at the College of Education Sciences, al-Anbar University.
    284. Abdel Majed Hamed al-Karboli: Lecturer at Ramadi University. Killed December 2005 [exact date unknown].
    285. Ahmad Abdl Hadi al-Rawi: PhD in biology, professor in the School of Agronomy, al- Anbar University. Date unknown.
    286. Ahmad Abdul Alrahman Hameid al-Khbissy: PhD in Medicine, Professor of College of Medicine, al-Anbar University. Date unknown.
    287. Ahmed Abbas al-Weis: professor at Ramadi University, al-Anbar. The attackers were dressed in military outfit when they shot the professor near his home in al- Zeidan district on August 25, 2009. [Source: Khaleej Times Online, 25 August 2009].
    24
    288. Ahmed Saadi Zaidan: PhD in education sciences, Ramadi University. Killed February 2005 [exact date unknown].
    289. Hamed Faisal Antar: Lecturer in the College of Law, Ramadi University. Killed December 2005 [exact date unknown].
    290. Naser Abdel Karem Mejlef al-Dulaimi: Department of Physics, College of Education, Ramadi University. Killed December 2005 [exact date unknown].
    291. Raad Okhssin al-Binow: PhD in surgery, lecturer at the College of Medicine, al-Anbar University. Date unknown.
    292. Shakir Mahmmoud Jasim: PhD in agronomy, lecturer in the School of Agronomy, al- Anbar University. Date unknown.
    293. Nabil Hujazi: Lecturer at the College of Medicine, Ramadi University. Killed in June 2006 [exact date unknown]. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, 20 June 2006, confirmed by Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education].
    294. Nasar al-Fahdawi: Lecturer at Ramadi University. Department and college unknown. Killed 16 January 2006. [Source: CEOSI university Iraqi sources, December 2006].
    295. Khaled Jubair al-Dulaimi: Lecturer at the College of Engineering, Ramadi University. Killed 27 April 2007. [Source: Iraqi sources to the BRussells Tribunal, 3 May 2007].
    Fallujah University
    296. Saad al-Mashhadani: University professor in Fallujah [Unknown Department]. Saad al-Mashhadani was critically wounded on 26 December, 2009 in an attack that killed his brother and wounded two of his security guards. [Source: The Washington Post, December 27, 2009].
    297. Khalil Khalaf Jassim: Dean of Business and Economics College in Anbar University was assassinated in an armed attack last May 4, in al-Nazizah area, central Fallujah, according to a police source in Anbar province. Unidentified gunmen attacked his car, killing him on the spot Security forces cordoned off the crime scene and began an inspection in searching of militants, while the body was transferred to the Forensic Medicine Department. [Source, Shafaq News, May 4, 2013]
    NAJAF
    Kufa University
    298. Khawla Mohammed Taqi Zwain: PhD in medicine, lecturer at College of Medicine, Kufa University. Killed May 12, 2006.
    299. Shahlaa al-Nasrawi: Lecturer in the College of Law, Kufa University. Assassinated 22 August 2007 by members of a sectarian militia. [Source: CEOSI University Iraqi sources, 27 August 2007].
    300. Adel Abdul Hadi: Professor of philosophy, Kufa University's College of Arts. Killed by a group of armed men 28 October 2007 when returning home from university. [Source: Iraqi University sources to the BRussells Tribunal, October 30, 2007].
    SALAH AL-DEEN
    University of Salah al-Deen
    25
    301. Sabah Bahaa Al-Deen: Dr. Sabah is a faculty member at Salah Aldeen University's College of Agriculture. He was killed by a car bomb stuck on his car last Wednesday Dec 12 when he was leaving the College. (Source: Aswat Al- Iraq).
    KARBALA
    University of Karbala
    302. Kasem Mohammed Ad Dayni: Lecturer in the Department of Psychology, College of Pedagogy, Karbala University. Killed April 17, 2006. [Source: http://www.albadeeliraq.com] .
    OPEN UNIVERSITY
    303. Kareem Ahmed al-Timmi: Head of the Department of Arabic Language in the College of Education at the Open University. Killed in Baghdad, February 22, 2007.
    COMMISSION OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION
    [CTE is an academic body that belongs to the Higher Education Ministry. Its headquarters are located in al-Mansur, Baghdad neighborhood. Almost twenty Technical Superior Institutes, booth from the capital and Central and Southern provinces, are dependent on this body].
    304. Aamir Ibrahim Hamza: Bachelor in electronic engineering, lecturer at the Technical Institute. Killed August 17, 2004.
    305. Mohammed Abd al-Hussein Wahed: PhD in tourism, lecturer at the Institute of Administration. Assassinated January 9, 2004.
    306. Mohammed Saleh Mahdi: Bachelor in sciences, lecturer at the Cancer Research Centre. Killed November 2005.
    INSTITUTIONAL POSITIONS
    307. Emad Sarsam: PhD in surgery and member of the Arab Council of Medicine. Date unknown.
    308. Faiz Ghani Aziz: PhD in agronomy, director general of the Iraqi Company of Vegetable Oil. Killed September 2003.
    309. Isam Said Abd al-Halim: Geologic consultant at the Ministry of Construction. Date unknown.
    310. Kamal al-Jarrah: Degree in English philology, researcher and writer and director general at the Ministry of Education. Date unknown.
    311. Raad Abdul-Latif al-Saadi: PhD in Arabic language, consultant in higher education and scientific research at the Ministry of Education. Killed April 28, 2005.
    312. Shakier al-Khafayi: PhD in administration, head of the Department of Normalization and Quality at the Iraq Council. Date unknown.
    313. Wajeeh Mahjoub: PhD in physical education, director general of physical education at the Ministry of Education. Killed Abril 9, 2003.
    314. Wissam al-Hashimi: PhD in petrogeology, president of the Arab Union of Geologists, expert in Iraqi reservoirs, he worked for the Iraqi Ministry of Petroleum. Assassinated August 24, 2005.
    26
    UNIVERSITY AFFILIATION UNKNOWN
    315. Amir Mizhir al-Dayni: Professor of telecommunication engineering. Date unknown.
    316. Khaled Ibrahim Said: PhD in physics. Date unknown.
    317. Mohammed al-Adramli: PhD in chemical sciences. Date unknown.
    318. Mohammed Munim al-Izmerly: PhD in chemical sciences. He was tortured and killed by US troops. His body was sent to the Baghdad morgue. The cause of death was initially registered as ―brainstem compression‖. Date unknown.
    319. Nafi [or Nafia] Aboud: Professor of Arabic literature. Date unknown.
    320. Ali Zedan Al-Saigh: PhD in Medicine and lecturer on Oncological Surgery (unknown university). Ali Zedan Al-Saigh was assassinated at Al-Harthia district (Bagdad) on June 29, 2010 after returning recently to Iraq. [Source: CEOSI Iraqi university source, June 30, 2010]
    321. Adnan Meki: Specialty and University unknown. According to police sources, his corpse was found on July 13, 2010 with signals of stabbing at his home in Al-Qaddisiya neighborhood, western Baghdad. [Source: Al-Rafadan website, July14, 2010].
    322. Unknown Identity: Specialty and University unknown. On July 14, 2010, unidentified gunmen riding in a car shot a university professor dead as he was leaving his home in the University District, West Baghdad, according to the report of an official security source. [Source: AKnews, July 14, 2010].
    323. Mohamed Ali El-Din (Al-Diin) Al-Heeti: Professor in Pharmacy, unknown University. Mohamed Ali El-Din Al-Heeti was killed the afternoon of the 14th August, 2010 in the area of Al-Numaniya (north of Al-Wasat governorate) in an attack by unknown armed men. The professor came back to Iraq a few months ago to Iraq after a period of studies in George Washington University in the USA. [Source: Association of Muslim Scholars, 15 August, 2010.]
    OTHER CASES
    324. Khalel al-Zahawi [or Khalil al-Zahawi]: Born in 1946, al-Zahawi was considered the most important calligraphist in Iraq and among the most important in the Arab-Muslim world. He worked as a lecturer in calligraphy in several Arab countries during the 1990s. He was killed 19 May 2007 in Baghdad by a group of armed men. He was buried in Diyalah, where he was born. [Source: BBC News, 22 May 2007. His biography is available on Wikipedia].

    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:06 am GMT
    @Rich

    Some might argue that the Iranians drew first blood when the present group of radical medievalists overthrew the Shah and then seized the US embassy in 1979 or a whole load of other attacks by Iranians and their proxies.

    Some might argue that the overthrow of the Shah was simply the unseating of a brutal US-imposed tyrant whose regime was about as merciless as that of Pinochet, the Sauds, or any of the other despots that the US has installed and supported over the years.

    The difference between my 'some' and your 'some' is that mine would be closer to the truth.

    If the Chinese imposed a brutal and oppressive puppet regime on Australia, I would go so far as to support the whackballs from the Westboro Baptists if they were the group capable of overthrowing the puppet regime.

    If you wouldn't do the same for your own neck of the woods, I am sure that there is as perfectly good explanation.

    The US does have a puppet regime (albeit one that doesn't register on the brutality scale yet) it's not Chinese, of course.

    Not Raul , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:20 am GMT
    @Herald How much are the Saudis paying you, cuck?
    Not Raul , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:21 am GMT
    @Franklin Ryckaert How so? Do you think that the Saudis and their friends would never use terrorists to attack us?
    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:23 am GMT
    @Rich 'Well, yes, every member of every military is a legitimate target. Especially a general. If it sounds logical to you, that's because not only is it logical, it's common sense '

    That's why we were cool with Pearl Harbor. Just military personnel. No harm, no foul.

    Not Raul , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:24 am GMT
    @bluedog They used to test nukes in Nevada. Did the fallout kill millions of people thousands of miles away?
    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:24 am GMT
    So America, how does it feel to be the world's assassin? Gives the "War on Terror" a whole new meaning, doesn't it? At least you have one last true friend, a great "Haver," who will watch your back.
    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:26 am GMT
    @Rich ' Read the Koran first, before you throw your support behind these jihadists .'

    We all know perfectly well you haven't read it yourself.

    Reading snippets taken out of context on Islamophobic sites is not 'reading the Quran.'

    BeenThereDunnit , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:47 am GMT
    @Alfred This assessment of Trump's has been around for a while but how, specifically, would the US ever be made to leave Iraq and Syria? The only theoretical possibility would consist of a combined effort of the Iraqi government and people directed against the occupation force in that country. That would probably have to play out as a popular uprising against the Americans. But what if American troops, cheered on by Zionist circles back in the US, started to kill large numbers of Iraqis indiscriminately? Would the Iraqis have the stomach for that? And how could Trump declare victory and leave Iraq under such circumstances?

    At the time of this writing, we have already seen the second round of killings of high-ranking Iranian and Iraqi commanders in Iraq, all of them Shiah. If the Shiah are said to be calculating, then these Shiah commanders have not been calculating this time, serving themselves on a platter to the Americans. The remaining commanders will have to wise up to the new reality quickly and switch over to full Hezbollah mode if they do not want to be wiped out altogether.

    Aspects of the attack against the Aramco facility point to it having been an Israeli false flag at least in part. Pictures showed several dome-shaped oil tanks, all of them having a big, circular hole punched into them at zero deflection and precisely the same steep angle from precisely the same direction. This kind of damage cannot be achieved using GPS guided drones. Either the Iranians possess an unknown stealth capability, in which case the military equation in the Middle East changes drastically, or a false flag is left as the only remaining possibility. Israel would be the most likely culprit for that; the objective consists of duping Trump into war against Iran.

    So, Trump may have been led to believe that Iran carried out the attack against the Aramco facility. Then somebody suggested to him to kill the Iranian general and several other Iranians partly as an act of revenge. Several Iraqi commanders also get slaughtered. Iraqi popular unrest boils over at the same time as more American troops are poured into the country, a massacre of Iraqi Shiah ensues and Iran is forced to react. That may be the calculation behind it all. The threat of impeachment and subsequent imprisonment does the rest to gird Trump along.

    Right now, there are severe strains on the financial system with the Fed bailing out the repo market and also monetizing US debt at nearly 100%. The US is down to pure money printing; this mode of operation cannot go on for long before the whole house of card comes crashing down. The powers that be may be reckoning that the time for war against Iran is now or never.

    So, the best course of action that heartland (Iran, Russia, China) may take may be to wait it out by doing as little as possible.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:10 am GMT
    @MEexpert He knows what he is talking about. He is just not very good at it.
    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:26 am GMT
    @Tulip It is not what "Trump wants."
    Sean , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:46 am GMT
    @Maiasta It remains to be seen if America will actually suffer a level of retaliation for the assassination that will surprise them. So far I think evidence suggests the miscalculation was Soleimani's. His Sept 2019 drone attacks on the main Saudi oil facilities were deliberately not very destructive, being intended as indication of what Iran can do, but America will not permit anyone to be a threat hanging over Saudi Arabia.

    The Wikileaks cables show that US diplomats thought Soleimani was behind or at least supplying lethal assistance to attacks on US forces, and were willing to quietly negotiate with him. None of those putative hundreds of American deaths mattered all that much in the grand scheme of things. Masterminding the drone attack on Saudi oil was completely different, that was what made him a marked man.

    Passer by , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:52 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso https://www.albawaba.com/news/remembering-when-us-simulated-war-game-against-iran-1288001
    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:05 am GMT
    @Alfred Did you say there are credible rumors that Iran brought down PanAm 103 and Israel made it look like Libya in order to throw off suspicions from Iran? And, you say, the proof is that "Since PA103, no Iranian civilian aircraft of any sort has been attacked or threatened by the USA or any other country?" Are you some kind of Intelligence Analyst? This is deep. Or are you really saying there are credible rumors that Israel brought down PanAm 103 and made it look like Libya? Which, of course, is not so deep. And the proof is that
    anno nimus , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:08 am GMT
    Andrei, if as you say the Persians have imagination, why not imagine making peace with Israel? you also quoted before that politics is art of possible. well and good, peace is possible if there is realization and imagination that Israel is really not going anywhere. an eye for eye will make everyone blind. gandi?
    btw, with all the mahdi stuff going on, how much rational are the Persian leaders?
    what say the cyber warriors and armchair generals on drone warfare? is it ethical? moral? right? just? necessary? sane?
    Alfred , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:03 am GMT
    @nokangaroos Mohammed Reza Shah (installed by coup in 1941 because his daddy, an old-school Kurdish brigand

    Actually, the father, Reza Shah was not a Kurd at all. His family was Persian from Mazandaran. He was in the Persian Cossack Brigade.

    Reza Shah

    Biff , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:06 am GMT
    @Colin Wright

    We all know perfectly well you haven't read it yourself.

    Maybe we can start a go-fund-me page for Rich, and it can pay for his Koranic education, and then he can be shipped over to Tehran to tell them just how wrong they are – in his own kind of way. I'm sure they'll listen, and drop everything to worship at the holy altar of ((Rich)) . And then he can reply back with a big fat "I told you so!" .

    Commentator Mike , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:16 am GMT
    @Kratoklastes As if Afghanistan isn't inhospitable mountainous terrain? So somehow Iran's topography is worse is it? They invaded Afghanistan without even controlling any neighbouring countries. Now that they have already invaded Afghanistan and Iraq in preparation for the war on Iran, they could well roll in after a thorough aerial pounding. So if they suffer great losses so what? Did they ever care about their own soldiers or citizens that much anyway? If there's loot to be had they'll go for it.
    Robert Magill , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:18 am GMT
    This incident had one goal in mind and it was successful: Raising the price of crude by stirring up the Mid East. Raising the oil price will raise the US stock market and re-elect Trump. Expect more of the same prior to this year's elections. Same old, same old; people die, people win elections. Obama showed the way.
    Astraea , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:31 am GMT
    @Tulip Poor Melania!
    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:51 am GMT
    "Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo belong to a doomsday cult and may be trying to bring on the Apocalypse " richardawkins.net
    "Brought to Jesus the evangelical grip on the Trump administration" theguardian.com
    It's scary that a lobbyist for a major arms manufacturer and a true believer in the Apocalypse are both advising a psychopath on US military action in the Middle East .
    Robjil , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:04 pm GMT
    @Adrian Yes, Wesley Clark spilled the beans. Seven nations to destroy is how the first Israel was formed.

    Wesley said the nations that would be destroyed:

    Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Iran.

    Wesley says this is for nine eleven (false flag).

    He said it would take 5 years to do so. 5 years was a guess since within 5 years is all it took to do WWI and WWII.

    Iran is the only nation of the seven mentioned that has not been messed up by ZUS, its friends and its best friend Israel.

    Nine eleven combo is a Kabbala theme. Nine is one less and eleven is one more than the Tree of Life number ten of Yahweh. Thus, this combo represents chaos and destruction.

    The 911 number was created in 1968. WTC was being built around that time.

    Nine Eleven date in the Jewish calendar is 12.23. 5761. Notice the 12th Jewish month of Elul and the 23th day of that month. The first Zion century began with the FED on 12. 23. 1913 of the Christian Calendar. This second Zion Century began on 12.23 on the Jewish Calendar.

    12.23 in the Jewish Calendar is the date of the second dove coming back to Noah with an olive branch.

    12.25 two days later is the date of the when God (Yahweh) created the world. Six days later man was created by Yahweh. That is the day of the Jewish New Year which celebrates Yahweh's creation of man. Thus, the 6 million game comes from that. 6 represents man.

    On 12.25. 5761 ( 9.13.2001) all the planes were "allowed" to fly again in the US. It was a creation of "new" world after the end of the "flood of fear" like Yahweh did on that day in the Tanakh.

    The games that our rulers play are sick.

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:29 pm GMT
    @BeenThereDunnit Beware the false flag attack , if American servicemen or citizens get killed by "Iranians",it won't take much to get the public behind a "decisive " attack on Iran , the objective would not be to defeat them but to create another failed state for the benefit of Israel , we are good at that, just look at Syria , Yemen, Libya , Afghanistan and Iraq .
    "Israel made attack on Saudi oil fields" streetwisereports.com
    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:34 pm GMT
    @Not Raul Maybe not millions, but certainly thousands. Slowly. Don't you read the news?
    Robjil , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:50 pm GMT
    @Castellio Knowledge is power.

    ZUS empire and its master Israel are into killing off the best goyim.

    I noticed this in Donbass. Any leader with charisma is "assassinated".

    Donbass leaders or rebels have not put any figure head to show off after this.

    ZUS controlled Ukraine does the same thing to its out of box thinkers or politicians.

    In the ZUS homeland, JFK, MLK, RJK, JFK Jr., Malcolm X are some of the most famous cut down for the ZUS empire and its best buddy Israel.

    Any dissent of the ZUS empire is banished by our "free" press media such as Youtube, Amazon, Twitter and so on.

    The best of the goyim are cut down with no voice by banning or assassination.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 12:54 pm GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso Even if you are correct that Iranians do not have the capacity to defend themselves from the zionized US military (armed on the Fed Reserve banksters' money), the ongoing war in the Middle East will be more devastating for the US (and the EU) than for the natives who try to defend their families and their culture. The moral death of the US is within reach.

    Who has been guiding the US policies while using the US might? -- Banksters, MIC and zionists. American veterans of the Wars for Israel in the Middle East suicide themselves every single day. https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/docs/data-sheets/2019/2019_National_Veteran_Suicide_Prevention_Annual_Report_508.pdf

    The Jewish State has been running the famous Milgram experiment (dubbed "Nazi experiment") on Palestinians for 70 years. https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html
    Whereas the Milgram experiment was terminated (due to its ugliness) in the US, the Milgram experiment has been at the heart of Israel for 70 years. They, Israelis, have managed to create a new kind of people -- the amoral hypocrites. Or perhaps, the ongoing Milgram study in Israel has exposed the true nature of Talmudism ("is this good for Jews?" -- then everything goes).

    The Jewish Bolsheviks have been quite successful in the US. Along with the incessant and successful pushing for the wars of aggression for Eretz Israel, the zionists were successful in making the regime change in Ukraine and running the war against civilians in eastern Ukraine. The success of Ukrainian operation was achieved thanks to the tight collaboration of US/UK zionists with the local oligarchs (mostly Jewish) and with Banderites (the self-proclaimed neo-Nazi). Ukrainian neo-Nazi were armed and supported by American zionists and by the Jewish State. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/rights-groups-demand-israel-stop-arming-neo-nazis-in-the-ukraine-1.6248727
    Meanwhile, the Jewish State was also arming and protecting the terrorist groups of jihadis on the territory of sovereign Syria. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israel-just-admitted-arming-anti-assad-syrian-rebels-big-mistake-1.6894850

    The perfidy of zionists has been unnoticeable for the zionized presstitutes and the cheerleaders for more large-scale Milgram experiments in the Middle East, such as the puny "intellectual" Kenneth Pollack, who is nothing more but an amoral hypocrite of war-profiteering variety: https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-defense-policy/middle-east/the-trump-administration-is-suddenly-all-in-on-iran-in-iraq/

    If the Jewish Community at large does not arise against the war in Iran, then the Jews have deserved the fame of Leo Frank and should be called "Leo Frank people." https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-adl-in-american-society/

    Ironically, the numerous holobiz museums have become the reminder of Jewish rapacious predation and amorality.

    AZ , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:06 pm GMT
    The impeachment proceedings of Trump pushed him to satisfy the deep state by making this idiotic move. Netanyahu is also under investigation and should have been in jail. A war with IRAN is a nice way out of the impasse.
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:19 pm GMT
    @Rich " the violent spread of Islam throughout the world"

    -- Actually, there has been the violent spread of zioconism throughout the world, including the Wars for Israel in the Middle East (and the flooding of Europe with the dispossessed refugees and radicalized jihadies), the Jewish assault on the First Amendment in the US, the physical assault and imprisonment of honest researchers in WWII on behalf of zionists (zionists cannot tolerate factual information that does not agree with Elie Wiesel's inventions), the zionization of US military, the blackmailing of persons in a position of power by Mossad (see Epstein-Maxwell saga of underage prostitution), and a cherry on the top -- the casual attitude of zionist to all non-jews as subhumans (see Gaza Ghetto, the suicided American veterans of the Wars for Israel, and the murdered civilians in eastern Ukraine, courtesy the US-supported Banderites).

    Who needs reading the Quaran when the Jewish State has been arming Ukrainian neo-Nazi and arming and saving fanatical jihadi terrorists (including the murderous "white helmets") in Syria? Your quetching tribe is nothing but a rapacious amoral predator working in cahoots with the worst scum among the mega-banksters and mega-war-profiteers. At least you have already erected the numerous monuments (the Holobiz Museums) to remind the non-Jews about Jewish depravity.

    Mark of the Beast , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:23 pm GMT
    Join the Zionist Crusade!
    Join the U.S military and fight for Israel.
    Seven Islamic countries need to be destroyed for Greater Israel Project.
    1.Afghanistan- check
    2.Iraq-check
    3.Sudan-check
    4.Libya-check
    5.Somalia-check
    6.Syria-In Progress
    7.Iran-TBA

    It's coming down to the final stages!
    And how!

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 1:28 pm GMT
    @Commentator Mike "Did they ever care about their own soldiers or citizens that much anyway? If there's loot to be had they'll go for it."

    -- Agree. The dual citizen and local Cheneys et al. care not about human life and such funny thing as patriotism.

    Winter Watch , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:10 pm GMT
    The Van Riper Gambit: Iran Scores Against Expensive High-Tech US Gadgetry
    https://www.winterwatch.net/2020/01/the-van-riper-gambit-iran-scores-against-expensive-high-tech-us-gadgetry/
    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT
    @Kratoklastes Those beheadings are fake, nothing more than cheap Hollywood stunts. All of the ISIS videos come from a single source, Rita Katz/SITE, who is known to have Mossad connections.
    Realist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:39 pm GMT
    @Rich

    Some might argue that the Iranians drew first blood when the present group of radical medievalists overthrew the Shah and then seized the US embassy in 1979 or a whole load of other attacks by Iranians and their proxies.

    Of course those would be dumb bastards with no knowledge of history the CIA installed the Shah in a 1953 coup.

    KenH , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:40 pm GMT
    @Tulip Kim Jong Un just called Trump a dotard a few weeks ago is testing more nuclear missiles and is back to taunting the Trump Administration. That makes Trump look weak but because the N. Koreans have the ability to massively retaliate against U.S. forces and because they are a nuclear power Trump does nothing but tweet.

    If Iran had short range nuclear missiles that could reach Israel and Saudi Arabia they would be getting far more respect and Trump would be treading lighter like he is with N. Korea.

    Realist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:44 pm GMT
    @ivegotrythm

    A123 is asking how long the armed forces will remain willing to die for psychopaths? Good question.

    Yes, how long will the American people be willing to die for the US and Israeli governments.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:52 pm GMT
    @Maiasta The interesting thing about Ostrovsky's book (and probably the real reason it generated controversy) is that he admits that the Mossad relies on diaspora Jews for intelligence gathering, cover, etc. for running its operations abroad.
    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:57 pm GMT
    @Rich I'm too busy reading the Talmud.
    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:01 pm GMT
    @Colin Wright Anyone with even a limited knowledge of the laws of war knows that a military base is a legitimate target. That doesn't mean any nation that is attacked is going to be happy about it. For better or worse Pearl Harbor was a legitimate target and the US was negligent in its defenses there. Of course, I believe the Nips were sorry for that move in the end. Should've stuck to fighting poorly armed, divided Asian countries.
    lauris71 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:15 pm GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso On the other hand, Saddam simply sat on his fat *ss and watched how US built up fighting force of 150 000 men, planes and whatnot.
    If Iran has any strategic sense it simply does not allow this to happen. Sometimes pre-emptive strikes are the correct strategy. And then US is left only with carriers far from iranian shores and airbases in Jordan or even further away. Of course, it can still destroy most of Iran's infrastructure eventually – while simultaneously watching how his client states in Gulf will be levelled to ground. But bringing land forces to Iran without relying on friendly ports and airbases will be D-day scale operation – much, much larger than Desert Storm of Iraq Freedom.
    vot tak , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
    From saker's article:

    "Iran HAS to retaliate and HAS to do so publicly."

    That is exactly what zionazia wants Iran to do. Why does saker want the Iranians to do exactly what israel wants them to do?

    "Right now, the Dems (still the party favored by the Neocons)"

    Total nonsense. The neocons are overwhelmingly republicans, both leaders and followers. They got their real start in the republican reagan regime and have increased their influence in each republican regime since.

    "Now think about this from the Neocon point of view. They might be able to get the US goyim to strike Iran AND get rid of Trump."

    LOL, why kill the goose that lays the golden eggs? The neocon trump is 100% israel's boy. In fact, he should be considered an extension of the israeli likud political block, which is who backs and promotes neoconnery in the usa. The neocon american media such fox and the various conservative talk radio networks are neocon. They promote trump, demonize the democrats and are fanatical likud israeli loyalists.

    "For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one in direct retaliation for the deliberate shooting down by the USN of IranAir 655 Airbus over the Persian Gulf. I am not saying that I know for a fact that this is what really happened, only that Iran does have retaliatory options not limited to the Middle-East."

    Not credible, propaganda instead. The zionazis blamed Libya, Iran and Syria, depending on which served their psywar needs of the moment. One saw the same zionazi strategy used after the 9/11 wtc attack. As the zionazis attacked other countries, they justified it in their psywar as a response to that country's "involvement" in 9/11. The air liner was likely destroyed through an israeli/western security service falseflag act, like the later 9/11 falseflag.

    This article posits some useful ideas, it also reinforces some zionazi policy goals and propaganda.

    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:44 pm GMT
    @Rich 'Anyone with even a limited knowledge of the laws of war knows that a military base is a legitimate target.'

    You skip elegantly over the minor detail that we were not at war with Iran. Hey: let's bomb a military base in China!

    What the hell? And if France feels like taking out the Pentagon -- well, who are we to complain?

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:46 pm GMT
    @redmudhooch They already have ie the attack on the WTC on 911, done by Israel and the ZUS.
    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:52 pm GMT
    @Realist Somewhat sad that your poor education has misinformed you about the origins of the Shah and the Pahlavi dynasty. The Pahlavis came to power in 1925 when Reza Khan overthrew the Qajar dynasty who had ruled the region since the late 18th century. The 1953 incident you refer to is the attempted communist takeover by Mossadegh which was almost successful but prevented by the US and UK who helped keep the Pahlavis in power. Is it a coup if there's an attempt to seize control of the government by communists but the king is able to hold onto power? I don't think so. Shame the Tsar wasn't able to stop the Bolsheviks and their reign of terror.
    Wookie , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:27 pm GMT
    @Not Raul You should have said Israel's 9-11 attack on the United States .
    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:34 pm GMT
    @BeenThereDunnit Interesting speculation on the Aramco attack, but how do you explain Yemeni claims of responsibility?
    nsa , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:39 pm GMT
    @Rich "Somewhat sad your poor education blah blah blah"
    Rich is a joo goblin pretending to be an aging boomerwaffen still fighting the big one from high atop his barstool lookout down at the VFW lounge. Have another $2 double, Rich, and tell us again how you kicked ass over there in 'Nam followed by your latest prostate troubles .
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:45 pm GMT
    @Beefcake the Mighty "the Mossad relies on diaspora Jews for intelligence gathering, cover, etc. for running its operations abroad."

    -- The ongoing mass slaughter in the Middle East and the triumph of Banderites (neo-Nazis) in Ukraine are some of the glorious achievements of the Israel-firsters.

    This is not the first time when the obnoxious tribe puts a lot of effort to cut a branch on which the tribe perches. The disloyal treacherous scum of the Mega Group-Epstein-Maxwell kind has been at the ZUSA wheel for some time already. The ziocons will not stop their bloody treachery until the US citizenry at large begins taking actions against the dreamers of Eretz Israel.

    Russia and Germany are examples of what can happen to a sovereign state when the "most moral and victimized" are left to their ugly devices. The shameless AIPAC and 52 main Jewish American organizations bear the principle responsibility for the ongoing wars that are becoming more dangerous with each day.

    MLK , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT

    Iran HAS to retaliate and HAS to do so publicly.

    Is that what you thought when Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet?

    Look, I'll keep it short because this gaggle is locked into some seriously delusion thinking.

    Solemani was commanding an operation to put Trump in the position Carter was in with the hostage crisis. Do you knuckleheads really think that Trump was going to fall for it?

    Especially since it was so obvious. With the Ayatollah shouting that Trump "couldn't do a damn thing." And Senator Murphy teeing up what was soon to come by declaring the POTUS "impotent."

    That is just the latest, most desperate provocation, by Iran in coordination with the Democrats.

    So killing Soleimani, along with those in the second airstrike, was anything but an escalation. This is what Milley was signaling when he said "The ball is in Iran's court." Khamenei stupidly revealed beforehand that he had sanctioned this plot. That constitutes enormous risk not only to the Iranian regime but the Democrats colluding with them.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:55 pm GMT
    @Rich Poor "Rich," we guess that you need to make a living, but do your superiors understand that your posts make more harm to "Jewish cause" than any jihadis' activities?

    Though the Jewish State is, of course, one of the main sponsors of fanatical jihad (because this is good for Jews and bad for Syrians) and of the neo-nazi in Ukraine (because this is good for Jews and bad for Russians).
    Keep posting. The exposure of the sick logic of Israelis is educational.

    anarchyst , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 4:59 pm GMT
    @Rurik Israel's favorite "war song is "Onward Christian Soldiers"
    Assad al-islam , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:08 pm GMT
    @vot tak

    That is exactly what zionazia wants Iran to do. Why does saker want the Iranians to do exactly what israel wants them to do?

    Iranians are very shrewd and they will never start a war with USA. At appropriate time Iran will annihilate Israel and USA will be scratching their heads. What will USA do, after the annihilation of Israel? Commit suicide for the sake of annihilated Israel?

    Saker's Quote: "For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one in direct retaliation for the deliberate shooting down by the USN of IranAir 655 Airbus over the Persian Gulf. I am not saying that I know for a fact that this is what really happened, only that Iran does have retaliatory options not limited to the Middle-East."

    Saker is showing his true colors, that he only cares for mother Russia. How can he post this stuff, while he very well knows that when Iraq used chemicals, Iran refused to do so in return. Russia like USA will intentionally kill civilians to achieve their goal, but Iran will NEVER intentionally kill innocent civilians. Saker has been smoking too much lately, and forgetting that it is NOT spiritual to kill innocent civilians. No, no and no, everything is not fair in war and love ..

    Iran is ethical and has morals where as USSR and Russia seems to lack them .

    Realist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:11 pm GMT
    @Rich

    The 1953 incident you refer to is the attempted communist takeover by Mossadegh which was almost successful but prevented by the US and UK who helped keep the Pahlavis in power.

    The US and UK were after Iranian oil. The Shah was their puppet plain and simple.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:12 pm GMT
    @Rich But Rich, almost all the Communists are Jews and Mossadegh was not Jewish. How could he be a Communist? All he did was nationalize the oil industry for Iranians instead of for the British. And you call Shiism Medievalist, but isn't Judaism a stone age religion? Do you put those little boxes with magic amulets on your head?
    Anonymous [792] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:14 pm GMT
    @Rurik "Uncle Shlomo wants YOU to die for Matzovania!"
    RadicalCenter , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:24 pm GMT
    @Rich You're certainly right, Rich, that any true Muslim is obligated to spread Islam by any means necessary, including violence and intimidation -- our Quality Commenter Talha's eloquent and shrewd apologia to the contrary notwithstanding. I wouldn't trust the people running Iran or any other Muslim country, and I'd not let any Muslims settle in our lands.

    BUT the us gov does seem to be consistently lying and trying to pick a fight far from our shores. That dishonesty and belligerence is not obviated by the nature of the contrived opponent. And they do seem to be doing it at the behest of Israel and its powerful domestic lobby and media, often with no benefit to the American people, or affirmative harm to us.

    Can't we both be realistic and not naive about Islam, AND not aggress or provoke a war?

    RadicalCenter , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:29 pm GMT
    @Colin Wright That's a fair point, but there are similar conclusions drawn by long, detailed analyses of the koran by ex-Muslims who are fluent in Arabic.

    These are people who know both the Koran and the subsequent interpretive writings well. Doesn't mean they're necessarily all correct, just that the very fearful and critical view of Islam that many of us find persuasive, is NOT based only on selective or ill-informed readings of those texts.

    turtle , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:33 pm GMT
    @eah

    decisive defensive action

    Absolutely "weapons grade" pure horseshit.

    RadicalCenter , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:39 pm GMT
    @Robert Magill I don't doubt that the elites behind the us gov would cause tension, violence, even war to profit from it, through higher oil prices or otherwise.

    As for the us stock market, though, how many of the 100 biggest, 500 biggest, or 5000 biggest publicly traded companies (by capitalization) would benefit from a spike in oil and nat gas prices?

    Wouldn't modt publicly traded US companies be harmed by the higher fuel prices causing higher prices for groceries, clothes, and other goods that are shipped, flown, or trucked by vehicles burning fossil fuels?

    Consumers wouldn't be able to afford to buy as much of those companies' goods and services after shelling out exorbitant prices to fuel their cars and heat / cool their homes, paying more for non-locally sourced groceries, etc. When the average American has to pay seven bucks for a gallon of gas, he will cut back on other spending and/or borrow (charge) more to survive. That means many fewer people spending on luxuries such as vacations and dining out and entertainment. More people postponing home renovation or repair, forgoing medical or dental care, and so on.

    As for the states and localities of the USA, some might benefit on balance from higher oil and gas prices, but most definitely suffer from it. Much of Texas would benefit, including any state and local governments getting extraction taxes, but none of the nine million people in New Jersey, the 20 million people in Florida, and so on. I would wager that most US states are not net energy exporters but net energy consumers, but I'll check for stats on that.

    SeekerofthePresence , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:48 pm GMT
    @anarchyst Evangelicals can never cut their 'bilicals
    To death and killing, to which they stick like barnacles.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/-NhHUZMufLA?feature=oembed

    El Dato , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 5:50 pm GMT
    @A123

    elements of the IRGC will dispatch Khameni to save their own lives

    Stop hitting opium pipes.

    An Iranian "operation Valkyrie"?

    Too much TV.

    The Alarmist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:11 pm GMT
    @Rich US troops are only legitimate targets to the extent they are uninvited combatants in another country. Your reasoning on this is bizarre.

    My comment had nothing to do with dissing Israel or defending Iran, but since you mention both, the US is entirely too subservient to the former since its inception and has been screwing in the internal affairs of the latter for the better part of a century. When I said the US drew first blood, I wasn't talking about last week.

    pB , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 6:53 pm GMT
    @Not Raul russia monitors all usa nukes, if they see any large scale nuclear attack they can not wait to make sure its heading just south of their border or just north of it.
    any large scale nuclear launch by the usa would trigger mad.
    and im sure the nuclear armed muslim power right next door will not particularly enjoy having to deal with the country smothered in fall out and the dead bodies of 80 million muslims.
    A123 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:05 pm GMT
    @MLK You are 100% correct.

    Solemani was commanding an operation to put Trump in the position Carter was in with the hostage crisis.

    Trump's actions were proportionate and well considered. Instead of 'recapturing past glory', Khameni has another massive failure to his name. The weak leader is growing weaker as time goes by.

    The strike also impacts the thinking of Iranian military leaders. They now understand that if the Ayatollah orders an irrational & unwinnable escalation, they may suffer personal consequences.

    One thing could end this quickly and bloodlessly for all sides -- The IRGC removing the highly unpopular Khameni, thus protecting the people of Iran. This will not happen tomorrow, but Trump just took advantage of Khameni's errors to bring that day closer.
    ______

    Of course, the paid Iranian shills posting here will decry this simple and obvious truth. Fortunately, no one believes them.

    PEACE

    Iris , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:19 pm GMT
    @Beefcake the Mighty The September 2019 attacks occurred in the very special context of Aramco's Initial Public Offering (IPO). For the first time ever, Aramco, considered the largest company in the world in terms of valuation, was about to sell 1.5% of its shares on the stock market.

    The attacks on the Aramco facilities at the time caused the total valuation to drop from an initial $2 trillion estimate to only 1,7 $trillion. So the attacks were extremely convenient for some international financial institutions who wanted to buy Aramco shares on the cheap .

    The close relationship between such financial institutions and the Israeli government, who could have carried the attacks and blame it on Iran, is of course a complete coincidence. Or so we are told.

    https://fortune.com/2019/11/17/saudi-aramco-1-7-trillion-valuation-ipo-undershooting-target/

    BeenThereDunnit , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:22 pm GMT
    @Beefcake the Mighty The only explanation would be that the Israelis got wind of the impending attack. Then they used it as a cover for their own attack. They may also have put themselves on alert, waiting for an attack having taking place. Then they struck the same target in near real-time, using ready-made plans. Both possibilities would certainly be far fetched. But they would not be completely illogical because oil installations being targeted could be expected after all the prior drone attacks carried out by the Yemenis. OTOH, a quick search on the Internet shows that GPS guidance has become considerably more precise in recent years. If the Iranians are able to make use of such technology after all, then a war in the Middle East would become an interesting proposition to say the least. The Americans can switch off GPS and they can jam GLONASS and the other GPSes that exist. But that's not possible over the entire Middle East. That would be too costly both in terms of the jamming itself and the losses incurred in the wider economy. GPS is terribly important in these days. Everything depends on it from oil tankers navigating to excavators being guided along.
    Nicolás Palacios Navarro , says: Website Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:24 pm GMT
    @A123 Thank Yahweh that your average, drooling, red-white-and-duh American is always ready to believe any simple and obvious lie conjured by paid Israeli shills such as yourself.

    PEACE

    BeenThereDunnit , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:28 pm GMT
    @9/11 Inside job Yes, if the Aramco attack was not a false flag, then the time for a false flag would certainly be now.
    Iris , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:31 pm GMT
    @A123

    The weak leader is growing weaker as time goes by.

    I don't know about Khamenei, but your comments are definitely growing weaker and more grotesque by the hour. Take a break, Hasbara.

    KenH , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:35 pm GMT
    Iran is in a no-win situation. If they do nothing and bide their time then I believe the Trump admin will manufacture a casus belli for additional military action this time possibly striking targets inside Iran. Trump's window is between now and the November 2020 election and his re-election is far from a lock given the demographic changes in the electorate since 2016 which is why Iran may decide just wait things out.

    The real question is if Russia will get involved to assist Iran or just sit on the sidelines and whine and wimper about American aggression and violations of international law?

    Others saw Donald Trump as a Dr. Strangelove when he was running for president but I thought that was ridiculous since I saw Trump as more of a showman and entertainer but I now see that they were right and I was wrong.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:35 pm GMT
    @ivegotrythm I'm a Chrisrened and Confirmed Catholic and if those $99 DNA tests are accurate, I have no ashkenazi or semitic ancestors. Just Europeans and Neanderthals in my family line. Not sure what I've written that seems to trigger everyone into thinking I'm Jewish.

    I will admit that growing up I did date a couple of secular Jewish gals and I did have a few Jews among my childhood friends. That being said, I also have secular Muslim associates who are decent enough people. I try to see things as clearly as I can and also from a patriotic American point of view. Guess that offends many here who only want to live in an echo chamber where everyone has the same opinions.

    renfro , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:42 pm GMT
    @Castellio You found it ..good work!
    A123 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:57 pm GMT
    @Iris ROTFL

    The fact that you respond with insults strengthens my case. I have obviously presented facts that you cannot counter.

    Thank you for your admission.

    PEACE

    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:27 pm GMT
    "For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland"

    Wasn't it PamAm whose slogan was "Fly the friendly skies . . ."?

    I have relatives who fly a lot. I hope the skies remain friendly for American civilians . . .

    Katherine

    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:39 pm GMT
    @Anthony Aaron What if Russia started to declassify documents and info they must have in their possession on 9/11?
    That would *really* cause "dissension" in the US of A.

    Also, what if Russia put some kind of screws on Israel?

    With the two "countries'" (scare quos meant for the Jewish National State) long and somewhat troubled association, there must be something the Russkies can do to scare the Zionists.

    Actually, any 9/11 info would probably do both tricks at once.

    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:49 pm GMT
    @Biff By the same token if you criticize those who are currently attacking Trump via the impeachment charade you will be accused of being a "Trump supporter/lover/apologist/kissing Trump's sphincter (yes, this is at Moon of Alabama, no less!).

    This is the "Trump gotcha" equivalent of the MSM labeling anyone who advances a hypothesis besides the "official" narrative of events such as Dallas or 9/11 a conspiracy theory.

    Based Inquisitor , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:05 pm GMT
    @Paul holland Yes, Iran's best move would be to take out Bibi himself or one of Trump's bosses in the US, like Adelson. If Bibi himself is hit, Israel can't hide behind Trump's skirt any longer but will have to take the war to Iran itself.
    MLK , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:12 pm GMT
    @A123

    Trump's actions were proportionate and well considered. Instead of 'recapturing past glory', Khameni has another massive failure to his name. The weak leader is growing weaker as time goes by.

    Well, making himself part of the plot against Trump by shooting his mouth off ("You can't do a damn thing about it.") must be deeply unsettling within the Iranian regime about his leadership.

    I've long given the Iranians their resistance due but it's becoming clear they're overrated. The W Bush and Obama administrations were gifts to Iran. It's impossible to overstate how thoroughly they overplayed their hand with Obama on JCPOA.

    The strike also impacts the thinking of Iranian military leaders. They now understand that if the Ayatollah orders an irrational & unwinnable escalation, they may suffer personal consequences.

    We have two fairly recent related analogues -- when Turkey shot down the Russian fighter and that lame US-backed coup against Erdogan. In the first case, unsurprisingly because Putin knows what he's doing, Russia extracted geopolitical gains for itself in return for letting Erdogan climb out of the tree. In the latter, Obama acted pretty much like the 11 year old girl that he was throughout his figurehead terms. Trump is still having to deal with the problem, all because Obama wouldn't give up the CIA Islamist living in PA, an entirely reasonable demand to put a period on things.

    No doubt, the Iranians have already been told we can do this the easy way or the hard way. Trump LOVES making deals, particularly when he has the counter-party by the shorthairs.

    anastasia , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:19 pm GMT
    They are calling a celebrated General of the Iranian Army a "terrorist". It's like calling George W. Patton a terrorist.

    They say that he was planning an imminent attack on American diplomats and soldiers.

    Just how stupid do they think we are?

    anastasia , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:20 pm GMT
    If Israel asked Trump to eat dog poo-poo, I wonder if he would do it, with or without his phobia about germs.
    BeenThereDunnit , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:21 pm GMT
    The Saker forgets to mention the way this event went down. Trump walked into a room at the Mar-a-Lago where he was met by a bunch of Neocons including Kuchner. They told him of Soleimani presenting a target of opportunity and Trump ok'ed the attack. This paints a picture of Trump having lost every bit of control that might still have been in his hands. He was visibly agitated when he went on TV. Probably he had begun to realize what he has gotten himself into. The US then doubled down by striking a second time. You have to pause your breath to take in what has happened. The US have officially killed government officials of a country where they have stationed troops and that officially is an ally of the US. The US have also officially killed officials of another country that were on an official, diplomatic visit to their ally. Lots of uses of the word "official" here. But what it basically means is that all damns have broken. Total chaos is now the order of the day. The US have resorted to naked violence in their dealings with the rest of the world. Nobody is safe who cannot hold the US at gunpoint. It's the Wild West with nuclear weapons. It was true before but now the US have begun acting on it completely overtly. And the US congress is in the process of passing a bill that declares Russia a supporter of terrorism. You have to wonder what will happen once this bill has passed and some high-ranking Russian official makes his next visit to Kaliningrad via plane across the Baltic Sea.
    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:23 pm GMT
    @Rich So you're just a cuck, then?
    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:35 pm GMT
    @Kratoklastes I put as much stock in your "expertise" as I do in that of all the other military geniuses on the internet, which is to say, none at all.
    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:37 pm GMT
    @Passer by I don't click on links that are substituted for comment.
    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:39 pm GMT
    @annamaria You're telling things I already know. I don't know what in my post would have lead you to believe I need your dissertation.
    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:52 pm GMT
    @RadicalCenter It is, of course, reasonable to wish to avoid another foreign adventure in a distant land. I'm of two minds on the prospect. On the one hand, I agree that the US should turn its back on the Middle East, let them settle their own differences. On the other hand, there is a legitimate argument that the day the US backs down from these foreign entanglements, we lose the dollar as the world's reserve currency and this results in extreme economic hardship in the US (as well as much of the rest of the world).

    In the meantime, both major parties support our foreign entanglements, both firmly support Israel and no one who is anti-Israel or anti-MIC is anywhere close to being elected to any high office in the country. So, observing from that angle, the argument for withdrawal has no chance of winning, and the argument for preventing the expansion of a loudly anti-US country from increasing its influence is not without merit. If we're going to be there anyway, we might as well keep winning.

    As far as the opinion that the US is acting at the behest of Israel, I think it's more a case of sharing mutual interests at this time. Jews are a very rich and powerful ethnic group in this country, and will continue to be for quite some time. Their support for Israel is not unlike the old Anglos who twice dragged America into unnecessary wars against Germany for the benefit of merry old England. I'd rather all Americans were more concerned with the future and security of the US, but that's not the way it is.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 10:03 pm GMT
    @anastasia He would eat it and say it was the most beautiful piece of dog crap ever.
    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 10:43 pm GMT
    @anastasia That "celebrated" worthless general is only celebrated by inbred muslims.
    Christine , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 10:47 pm GMT
    What about the role Turkey might/will play? So far, it looks like a rather unprincipled loose cannon out for itself and therefore manipulable.
    Based Inquisitor , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 10:49 pm GMT
    @anonymous The US would not need hypersonic weapons when it has hundreds of armed drones constantly prowling the skies over Iraq.
    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 10:52 pm GMT
    @lauris71 Yay -- another military expert!
    Rich , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:14 pm GMT
    @Beefcake the Mighty Because I dated a Jewish girl ? I don't think you know what a cuck is. Ask that fellow who picks up your wife in the evening, then brings her home in the morning to explain the meaning of the word.
    bruce county , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:22 pm GMT
    @Passer by Two hundred and fifty million dollar exercise??? Wow and they got smoked in ten miunutes. Very telling. Suicide bombers in zodiacs crazy to think of that..

    Thanks for that.
    I want to see the one where the Toronto Maple Leafs win a Stanley Cup .My team and maybe our year.

    Harbinger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:54 pm GMT
    @Z-man Yup.
    Here's the insanity of it all. Here in Scotland and I presume the rest of the UK, there are certain branches of Christianity who go out at the weekend, going around bars, giving leaflets on Jesus and engaging in conversation with homosexuals. I've had a few debates with them, but they just make me laugh. I know their bible better than them. Last time I asked them "ever heard of the Talmud?" They looked at me goggle eyed. I told them, specifically what it stated about their Jesus and Mary and they said I was lying. They stated that Jews would never do such things.

    This is what we're dealing with. We're dealing with an utterly ignorant Christian following who truly do believe the crap about Jews, because they're utterly indoctrinated. The biggest problem isn't so much Judaism, it's the morons who wilfully follow the Jews, as God's chosen, believing they do no wrong. Utterly and completely indoctrinated fools.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:03 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso Qassem Soleimani was indeed a celebrated Iranian general. He was known as an honorable man and talented military commander.
    As for 'Gleimhart Mantooso' -- never heard of her.
    SeekerofthePresence , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:06 am GMT
    @BeenThereDunnit Important point. Trump now threatens to hit 52 major Iranian sites if there is any retaliation for the Soleimani assassination. The Russians will observe this precipitous escalation and factor it into the next standoff between Russian and American forces. Russia will have to assume that 'Murka will escalate massively, and will therefore be on a hair-trigger for the use of nuclear weapons. Massive escalation is now the order of the day, and presages nuclear war.
    Anonymous [406] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:11 am GMT
    @The Saker

    If Trump is the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable President", and their goals require him out of the way, "at which point the Neocons will jettison him and replace him by an even more subservient individual (say Pence or Pelosi)"

    Scary thought: The neocons/Israel/DeepState/MIC/media have been going all out to either control and/or get rid of Trump through Russiagate and now impeachment. Having succeeded in getting Trump to commit this huge mistake, could they now decide it's worth going further than just impeachment to get rid of him, in order to create a horrible false flag to pin on Iran, get Pence/Pelosi into power, and have the US destroy Iran for Israel with media-orchestrated US public support?

    Really wish Trump had had the sense to say no to this when they presented their murderous plan to him.

    hotrod31 , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:20 am GMT
    @Rich Rich: You imply that "Their dead general was a member of the military and a legitimate target." How on earth could any s-a-n-e person arrive at your conclusion? Are you nucking futs??
    This twisted thinking would imply that any member of a sovereign country's military, while visiting another country on a peace mission, from your perspective, is a 'legitimate target'? With people like you, it is little wonder that the world ends up with imbeciles like Trump.
    Well help me doG
    The Scalpel , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:24 am GMT
    @Rurik First comes the vote to expel the US forces, then when they don't leave, the constant pinprick attacks and , if available, taking out a high value US target and it all gets blamed on Iraq irregular forces
    nickels , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:49 am GMT
    Rethinking Trump as the antichrist.
    I just always he would be smarter, more smooth.
    Not just such a bombastic low iq idiot New Yorker
    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:07 am GMT
    @Rich

    I try to see things as clearly as I can and also from a patriotic American point of view.

    Perhaps you should consider having your eyes and hearing checked by a specialist. Also, some additional education regarding the history of the United States of America starting with the Declaration of Independence would appear to be long overdue. (Hint: The clue is in the word independence and the efforts that patriots made to achieve it)

    freedom-cat , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:14 am GMT

    No less alarming is that this creates the absolutely perfect conditions for a false flag à la "USS Liberty". Right now, the Israelis have become at least as big a danger for US servicemen and facilities in the entire Middle-East as are the Iranians themselves. How? Simple! Fire a missile/torpedo/mine at any USN ship and blame Iran. We all know that if that happens the US political elites will do what they did the last time around: let US servicemen die and protect Israel at all costs (read up on the USS Liberty if you don't know about it)

    I made a remark about the likelihood of a False Flag in another thread and was lumped in as "weak-minded" and "know-it-all Unz-ite". LOL. ( https://www.unz.com/estriker/the-line-in-the-sand/ ). My comment on how Trump is stupid and a great scapegoat was also targeted because the person said Trump is "playing a charade" and is all deep state. Well, I don't think so at all. Trump is a walking Ego stick and an excellent scapegoat if anything goes wrong.

    But seriously, how can anyone not see the immense gravity of the situation? My god, they murdered a General, which is next to killing a President. This is a clear provocation and I agree 100% with the possibilities that Saker brings up.

    I'll take it further as well. There could be a nuke used against Iran in the event a False Flag of massive proportions directed at civilians gets people onboard for a fight. They don't want to get bogged down in a long war with Iran. My guess is Israel wants them out of the picture for a long time or for good.

    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:17 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso Well, annamaria is a much respected commenter here who often adds better information to those comments lacking much of anything substantial, such as your own. Consider it a favour to you and bear in mind also that a great many people read the comments without commenting themselves so they too are the beneficiaries of her well researched contributions. Have a nice day.
    Alternate History , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:19 am GMT
    All the options presented by Saker are viable and desirable. They don't even have to be limited to either/or. The political option of hitting exclusively IsraHell with salvos of missiles would be another option. Israel is, after all, the culprit behind the scenes.
    Alternate History , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:25 am GMT
    @Rich You are a brainwashed American. I'm sorry for the redundancy.
    freedom-cat , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:34 am GMT
    @Rich Imagine Iran taking out Amikam Norkin, the Commander of Israeli Air Force!! And maybe doing a Two-fer and get Bibi on the side.
    Smith , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:46 am GMT
    Member when Iran said they will level Israel in 30 minutes if US strikes Iran?

    I wish a nigger would.

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:08 am GMT
    @Harbinger

    Last time I asked them "ever heard of the Talmud?" They looked at me goggle eyed.

    I too was ignorant of it until my later years.
    An anecdotal story: Years ago at my 'office' Christmas party the one Jew in our group shared, with his goy coworkers , that he was struggling with The Talmud . You see he was a very secular ok kind of guy who liked to hang out with the 'un-chosen'. But he was now married to a very 'orthodox' woman and he had to learn about the Talmud. He confessed that the 'manual' was not too kind to gentiles. He was at a crossroad. I noticed the struggle he was going thru. I believe he stayed with his wife, I haven't seen him in years.
    Thanks to him I became even more 'woke' to the truths of Judaism.

    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:28 am GMT
    @Commentator Mike

    As if Afghanistan isn't inhospitable mountainous terrain? So somehow Iran's topography is worse is it? They invaded Afghanistan without even controlling any neighbouring countries.

    Have you looked at where KOP is? By 2007 that was still a 'forward base'. It's only 100 miles from Kabul.

    Also, while the US didn't explicitly 'control' Uzbekistan (which is where the initial force staged), Karimov was a US ally and there is no love lost between the Uzbeks and the Pashto.

    Today, the US controls only those parts of Afghanistan that the Taliban haven't decided to take back yet. It's not clear why you would consider US strategy in Afghanistan as a good example – it's now widely-known to have been so bad that it required 17 years of official bullshit to cover its failure.

    .

    You've also missed about fifty key points of difference between Afghanistan and Iran.

    The ones that most people don't need reminding about include –

    ① Afghanistan had no organised military to speak of;

    ② it had absolutely no air defence capabilities and limited airspace monitoring;

    ③ its disorganised military was having a hard time with Dostum, Massoud and Hekmatyar;

    ④ the initial US insertion was about 6 SAD guys whose main role was to meet up with the Northern Alliance; they, and the rest of TF Dagger arrived by helo from K-K in Uzbekistan (the US had always supported Karimov) – the TF Dagger insertion is now the record for the longest helo insertion in military history ;

    ⑤ Kandahar and Kabul had already fallen before FOB Rhino was established – in other words, the Northern Alliance plus US air power had done the job before ISAF even got its shit unpacked;

    ⑥ Notwithstanding the unseating of the Taliban, The US lost . They knew in 2001 that they were losing, and lied about it for 17 years.

    On ⑥: when you're a superpower, if you fail to impose your Imperial Will on the place that is a LOSS .

    .

    Ordinarily, in these sort of situations it's left as an exercise to work out which of those points are critical in the new game (where the US tries to do the same thing in Iran).

    But since most people are imbeciles, I'll put a thumb on the scales.

    More below the fold. Read it or don't, but if you think of some counter-argument it's best to assume I've already thought of it, coz I'm good at this. (The folks at JWAC probably don't know my name any more, because the Yanks our crew helped train in the 90s have moved on since then).

    [MORE]

    In the case of Iran:

    Re ①: Iran has a well-equipped professional military with an excellent senior staff. (That said: Afghanistan didn't have much by way of formal military, but it did have millions of people with battlefield experience against a technologically superior enemy about half of whom were on the Taliban side).

    Re ⑤: Ain't gonna happen because ④ can't happen.

    ④ is made orders of magnitude harder by !{②,③} (! is the 'NOT' operator, indicating that {} is untrue in the Iranian case).

    Dealing with !③ first: there is no domestic insurgency worth talking to in Iran – certainly not one that is remotely analogous to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan in 2001, which was basically a full-fledged opponent in a civil war (which the NA won, with the aid of US air power). Whoever crosses the threshold cannot rely on divided attention of the Iranian military.

    OK, now !②. More convoluted – requires more space.

    Insertion of the whole force by rotor is really hard if the adversary has any significant air defences. (At the time that the US invaded Afghanistan, the Taliban couldn't even rely on regularly-updated satellite imagery to detect movements in US naval assets: now you can do that from your phone, and if you're a government you have drones).

    With a sophisticated enemy it's so hard to insert large numbers of boots by rotor, that it can be ruled out.

    So if you want to get boots on the ground without everyone having to traverse a mountain range (exposing flanks and supply lines), you a need to get reliable control over a big lump of land that has an airport on it capable of landing troop transports (or being converted to same).

    (The passel of land has to be on the 'enemy' side of the mountains – I put that in because some readers went to US schools and geography is not a strong point.)

    Controlling an air base would require a battalion on the ground on the bad-guy side of the hills. You sure as fuck don't want to fight your way over the hills and then try to control an airbase.

    Trying to get a battalion-sized presence in by rotorcraft would mean using MH-47s, which are slow and ( ahem ) not very stealthy (actually, they're very not stealthy) and the US would require more than a battalion on the ground.

    Airdrop? Same problem: if the incoming aircraft is detected, you know everything about manpower disposition (troop size and position) before the men hit the ground.

    Iran has the capability to see airborne things coming; it also has a range of solutions to make airborne things lose their airborne-ness.

    For mobile overwatch, Iran has AWACS – 3 old Orions and some retroftted An-140s for maritime, and a bunch of unarmed drones (they've been cranking out UAVs as fast as possible). They also have JY-14 medium-long range radar, which is handy because their range means that they can be lit up earlier than short-range AA radar.

    And if you don't think that they have an intel-sharing arrangement with Russia, you're not thinking hard enough.

    As far as making flying things stop flying, they have a fuckton of SAMs. A genuine fuckton – especially relative to what the US has faced in any engagement since Korea.

    They have a similar fuckton of MANPADs: even primitive RPGs are bad news for helos, and MANPADs are much more worser think of how badly " Hind vs Stinger " played out in the 80s, and you are on roughly the right page

    They also have a little over 1500 AA batteries (most of those will be dead on first contact, but they're still a nuisance).

    The Iranian Air Force itself – forget it, it's irrelevant.

    The first sign things are kicking off will be a bunch of TLAMs fucking up every airbase in Iran. (Plus the obligatory US/NATO SOP war crime of targeting civilian infrastructure for electricity generation, water treatment, sewage treatment, and telecommunications)

    This is why Iran has fuck-all air-superiority assets: and a little over a hundred 1980s-level offensive aircraft (about 150 of them: F14; Fulcrum; Su22, 24 and 25).

    They learned from the experience of Iraq's Air Force in 1991: it was much much larger than Iran's is now, but a shitload of it was destroyed on the ground due to the regime's appalling lack of preparedness.

    So from all that

    ⑥ is a foregone conclusion.

    Some things that play no part in the conclusion:
    ⓐ that I despise US* hypocritical bromides about freedom and 'democracy';
    ⓑ that the US military is a bloated set of boondoggles run by grifters,with the mindset of a 20-something NPC who just watched '300';
    ⓒ that the US has had its arse kicked by several sets of raggedy-ass peasants from 1968 onwards and has underperformed in every peer engagement since 1789. (inb4 WWI and WWII they were on the winning side , but others – e.g., the Soviets – did the actual winning )

    .

    " Topography matters " doesn't mean that topography is all that matters. The gap between combatants has to be extremely wide in order for technology and manpower to overcome terrain.

    In fact it's hard to know how wide the gap needs to be fortech/power to win, because all of the 'invade without properly considering terrain disadvantages " has resulted in strategic losses for the superior force at all times since WWII.

    We can say that the gap has to be wider than " Viet Cong vs US " or " Mujahedin vs USSR " or USC/SNA vs US/UNOSOM " or " Taliban vs US/ISAF ".

    .

    People who are interested in how shit works in modern warfare need to read William Lind, or John Robb or Arreguín-Toft.

    Start with the short-ish paper (which is now a book):

    Arreguín-Toft (2001) " How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict " International Security , Vol. 26, No. 1 (Summer 2001), pp. 93–128

    SeekerofthePresence , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:47 am GMT
    What a US-Iran War Might Look Like

    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:50 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso that should be
    "would have LED you to believe . . ."

    present tense: lead
    past tense: led
    present perfect: has led

    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:59 am GMT
    @Anonymous I wonder whether, as you suggest, Trump hasn't just walked into a trap.
    And has just figured out that this time, he's the patsy.

    If such is the case, his best option might be to address the American people directly as to what has gone down with this murder and sack Pompeo and Kushner. (Turn the former over to Iran???? Just kidding . . . but depriving him of security would accomplish the same thing.)

    The problem is that the vipers are within his own family: Ivanka and Jared Kushner. Stupidest thing he could have done, having those two on his "diplomatic" and "advisory" staff.

    Is Trump being hung out to dry?

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:13 am GMT
    @Rich No, because you're shamelessly whoring for Jewish interests. Thanks for confirming.
    By-tor , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:34 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso Are they treated as Julian Assange is in the UK or as Maria Butina was for a year-and-a-half in a US jail forced to plead guilty for something she was not guilty of in the first place? Or as Manning is being held in solitary confinement because he will not lie for a get-out-of-jail card? Are the Koreans subjected to execution by black murderers while in their cells? Let us know when you have some evidence.

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/inmates-escape-mississippi-penitentiary-amid-statewide-lockdown-prisoner/story?id=68069105&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com&dbr=1

    Anonymous [375] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:52 am GMT
    @the grand wazoo Also, there is a large faction within the Democratic party who will never go to war for Israel, because they simply don't like Jews. They may be fooled into hating Russia because they are white, but they'll side with an underdog Iran over a belligerent Israel every time.

    If the Democrats get control, they will effectively control the USA indefinitely, because they seem perfectly happy to import all the Democratic voters they'll require to remain in power

    The window for Jews to utilize the American state as their wrecking ball are limited. Trump might be the best chance they will ever get. America is on such shaky footing on so many levels, they may implode domestically before they can the job done.

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:05 am GMT
    @Kratoklastes

    So I would guess that the appropriate tit-for-tat splash would be LtGen Scott Berrier (G2 – Intel).
    Everyone's heard of that guy, right?

    No I didn't know him but now we all do. Ok that would be tit for tat, but I would still go for a 4 Star. (Grin)

    Plus, if they splashed Pompous, the resulting fatberg would burn for longer than the Springfield tyre fire. Nobody wants that.

    LOL!!!
    He is the most dispicable NEOCON stooge out there, even worse than 'Linda' Graham. Christian Zionists, the personification of OXY MORON .
    Ok, not Plump'eo but we gotta give the Iranians one real Neo-cohen, to scare the be-Jesus out of them (the Jooz that is). (Grin)

    animalogic , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:21 am GMT
    @Desert Fox "Israel and the ZUS want a nuclear war with Russia "
    A few years ago I would have LOL 'd at such a proposition. Today, I scratch my head.
    Is the US so completely insane as to attack a peer or (indeed) stronger nuclear power such as Russia?
    I don't think so but .
    animalogic , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:59 am GMT
    @UninformedButCurious Is Trump "disposable" ? Maybe. But unlikely.
    Given that Tel Aviv is in charge (a synonym for "neocon") , & Trump has virtually tripped over his own tongue in his haste to lick their boots (& other bodily parts) it wouldn't appear that Trump has yet lost his value.
    And in a more domestic sense -- Pence ! OMG, is there a political leader with less charisma? Pence makes Corbyn look like Ronald Reagan.(People greatly under rate charisma & other subjective leadership qualities)
    So dumping Trump would have severe political repercussions.
    animalogic , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:38 am GMT
    @John Chuckman Iran will "carefully plan a response, and that response may not be clear and unambiguous, and it might be multi-faceted and done over time."
    Agreed.
    Hopefully Iran will respond largely through proxies. And also concentrate on non-military responses.
    IE, putting maximum pressure on Iraq's parliament to force all US forces out of Iraq -- difficult, but that would be a huge win. Of course, they'll still get the blame -- but should a cat in Patagonia die in suspicious circumstances Iran would get the blame for that too .
    As for any nuclear response by Iran, that truly would be "acting foolishly". Anything along nuclear lines would be a perfect provocative to Israel /the US.
    Sean , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:55 am GMT
    @Kratoklastes I think the Iranian leadership and populace would be more convinced of the effectiveness of the Iranian military if Soleimani had managed to keep himself alive.
    BeenThereDunnit , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:13 am GMT
    @SeekerofthePresence Not only that, he has even stated that among them are sites of great cultural importance. Do they want to attack mosques? Some of those Iranian mosques are not only holy sites as such, they are marvels of architecture. Attacking them would be a crime against the heritage of all mankind. That would be truly mad but we will see, sadly. It would enrage Muslims to a degree not seen in living memory. They might "just" attack sites commemorating the fallen of the war against Iraq. That would be nearly as bad.

    Anyways, refraining from any more threats, as Trump has demanded, is a near impossibility. What is a threat and what not? Are red flags of revenge on display in Iran already a threat? The probability of war has to reckoned at near 100% now.

    The Iranians should disperse their assets urgently. Nuclear assets that can be dispersed have to be at the top of the list. They should actually try to avoid making any more threats for now. Trump has conveniently laid out his strategy to them, allowing them to have the war started by the Americans at a point of time of their choosing. After a period of restraint, they should gradually start making slight threats again, placing the ball in the American court. The dust will have settled somewhat by then, world opinion will have realized how criminally the US have behaved by killing Iraqi and Iranian officials. The later the war starts, the better for the Iranians. That explains why the US are escalating so heavily right now.

    If Iran really got hold of some Ukrainian nuclear warheads back when the Soviet Union dissolved, then the time for testing one of them would be now.

    The big question has to be how China and Russia position themselves. The Americans and Israelis seem to think that Putin and Xi are weak enough internally to allow them to go through with it all. The true battlefield will be Russian and and Chinese public opinion. If Putin and Xi can convince their peoples that Iran has to be supported, then the equation would shift. They should at least start making weapon deliveries. Russia could even claim that it has to protect the nuclear site in Busher where Russians work, deploying S-400s manned by its own personnel. China could claim that war in the Persian Gulf would be too much of a threat to its economy. Both claims would be true.

    anonymous [217] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:24 am GMT
    @anonymous

    Perhaps they'll be able to gin up some popular riots and demonstrations throughout the Muslim world.

    That should be the best strategy for Iran to invoke the common heritage of the true monotheist faith we share, of which there is much.

    On a personal level, even if I have reservations about Shi'sm, and what I see as clear deviancy, I, and I am sure many other true monotheist brothers, are still on the side of Iran, because my suspicion of Shi'sm is far less than my visceral hatred for Whitey/Joonist Imperialism. May the Almighty One's wrath befall the satanically evil pagan/godless Whitey/Joonist Imperialists, those avowed enemies of True Monotheism.

    Iran should find ways to communicate with the Arab street directly using Whitey/Zionist Imperialist tools like Twitter and Facebook, as long as it will be allowed. The irony is not lost on me.

    anonymous [217] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:50 am GMT
    @Rich I don't know much about Soleimani, except for the bile spewed by western imperialist stooges in the fake media.

    But, I know there has got to be some good and honourable in a person who fights satanic evil of Whitey & Joonist Imperialism.

    May the Almighty One forgive his sins and grant him the rewards of a true monotheist martyr.

    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:49 am GMT
    @anonymous Long Live Iran. Death to America.
    Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:52 am GMT
    @Anonymous

    Also, there is a large faction within the Democratic party who will never go to war for Israel, because they simply don't like Jews.

    They don't get to decide. The uppermost elites do. Lower-level Democrats are just rubber-stampers. They may not like Israel but must still serve it. Jewish Money and Media compel them to.

    Tsar Nicholas , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:50 am GMT
    @Nicolás Palacios Navarro

    I believe a not insignificant amount -- perhaps even the majority -- of pro-war Americans know this to be true: That they and their progeny are mere cannon fodder for Zionist imperialism. But they simply don't care or are even proud of dying for so "worthy" a cause. Never underestimate the persistent and deeply-rooted hysterical adulation that Israel commands -- nor the utter foolishness of your average American.

    This is so true. American Protestant Christianity – Evangelicalism in particular – has been warped and modified by Zionism. Whereas for 1800 years Christians believed and preached that God took on human form and that Jesus died for the sins of all humanity, the belief now seems to be that God is a real estate agent. I think that even if Evangelicals were to find out that the Talmud teaches that in the Millennium every Jew is to have 2,800 goyim as slaves, they would accept it.

    Tsar Nicholas , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:01 pm GMT
    @A123 Of course, the paid Iranian shills posting here will decry this simple and obvious truth. Fortunately, no one believes them.

    I was out of work for forty seven years (due to my issues with women, and my extreme myopia, not to mention my body odour). So I was really happy to be offered a job as a cyber warrior by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command under their blessed leader General Qasem Soleimani at what I thought was a really good rate of pay.

    Imagine my disillusion when I discovered how few pounds I could get for my Rials, thanks to the continuing US economic sanctions. So, with a heavy heart I realised that I had no alternative other than to go to work for Mossad to finance my sex offending.

    EoinW , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:23 pm GMT
    People need to realize that the dynamic has changed completely. For Iran, patience is no longer an option. Israel/USA will continue to attack. Seriously, look at Trump's 52 target tweet. It sounds like the ranting of Hitler during his last days in the bunker. Not fighting back is the worst thing Iran can now do.

    Regarding the court of public opinion: Iran had the sympathy of the majority of people in the world long before the new year. It counts for nothing when it comes to avoiding war. All that matters is the western media and the brainwashed western public. Iran can never win that PR fight. In fact, if you polled Americans and gave them the option of ending the Iran problem by nuking them that the majority would support this action. A large number of Canadians would also support this. More importantly, after such a nuclear attack and 80 million dead Iranians the main thing westerners will care about is getting back to business as usual. America will resort to a nuclear attack because it believes it can get away with it. What does Iran have to lose?

    I hope the following happens Monday:

    1) the Houthis strike and shut down all Saudi oil production.

    2) a cyber attack in the USA. Maybe take down the power grid. We know how much Americans love war when they can sit in front of their tv and cheer on the US military. How much will they love it, or the people who brought them this war, when they're stuck in their unheated homes in the middle of January?

    I also hope they are seriously considering the following:

    3) hitting every US military target in the region that could be used to bomb Iran.

    4) Hizbollah and Syria launching attacks against Israel. The Israeli's are the real provocateurs. If they pay no price they will continue to push for further aggression.

    No matter what is done by Iran or its allies the retaliation by the US will be greater than what we've seen so far. Even if nothing is done Israel/USA will create another incident for an excuse to attack again. The war has started. One sure way for Iran to lose it is to not participate.

    KindKaiser , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:49 pm GMT
    @Rich World War I – fought on behalf of ZIONISTS who influenced Jews in Woodrow Wilson's cabinet (the "brain trust", and a certain Jewish man, STEPHEN WISE, known as the 'Red Rabbi' for his affinity for Communism!). This deal was in exchange for Britain giving Palestine to the Zionist Jews (even though it wasn't even Britain's to give at the time)! Surely you have heard of the BALFOUR DECLARATION, right? Quit spinning this disingenuous pseudo-history!

    World War II – Franklin Delano Roosevelt's cabinet was ALSO chock-full of Zionists, and a certain Jewish man, now in his older years but still very influential, STEPHEN WISE yet again, was also one of his closest advisors. And Churchill, who ALSO was bought and paid for by Zionist interests, was in on this as well read Pat Buchanan's "Hitler, Churchill, and the Unnecessary War" for a pretty mainstream take on this subject. But basically World War II was ALSO fought for Zionists, and what was the result?

    Britain: LOST THEIR EMPIRE
    Zionists: CREATED THE COLONIALIST SETTLER STATE OF ISRAEL BY EVICTING PALESTINIANS THROUGH TERRORIST GROUPS LIKE THE IRGUN

    So WHO was that really done on behalf of???
    You lot really need to quit spinning this nonsense here; it's just not going to work with anyone who's educated and intelligent enough to research for themselves and it makes you and your cause look very foolish.

    KindKaiser , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:57 pm GMT
    @Rich Why don't you go to Iran and tell the millions mourning in the streets there for this man who symbolised the resistance to the evil Zionist World Order how 'wrong' they are
    Or are all of them just horribly misguided and confused? Or maybe they're just 'evil' people who ought to be destroyed? And we need to 'bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran'? How convenient!

    For the record, some of those mourning Soleimani's death the most are the ethnic Christian communities whom he so bravely defended from ISIS (who we now know were supported by Israel and the 'rebel' forces that Zionists in the West helped fund). But I am guessing your kind doesn't support the continued existence of some of the oldest Christian communities in existence that are in the Middle East, because you probably cheered when their homes got bulldozed by the Zionists in the Naqba–many of them still have the keys to their houses, by the way.

    KindKaiser , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:59 pm GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso I'm not a Muslim, nor am I inbred.
    I honour Soleimani's sacrifice because he was one of the foremost defenders of Christians from ISIS, and the ancient Christian communities in the Middle East are some of those grieving his murder the most. Do you not care about them, or are you just that ignorant?
    Hong Kong Hibernian , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:21 pm GMT
    @anonymous "That should be the best strategy for Iran to invoke the common heritage of the true monotheist faith we share, of which there is much."

    Yes! yes! This is the best strategem for the true monotheist brothers: invoke common heritage.

    repeat it to yourself true brother: common heritage. common heritage. common heritage.

    BTW, Iran can always use the cool new encrypted chat app. Do you know it? Islamachat. Very cool app.

    There's only one problem my true monotheist brother allah used up 99 usernames as soon as he signed up.

    But, you know, what can we do?

    Momus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:30 pm GMT
    @Rich Spot on.

    The Iranians have no good options.

    If they attack US assets and kill personnel by missiling a base or sinking a warship Donny will destroy their nuclear program.

    If they or their Hezbollah proxies missile Tel Aviv the Israelis will nuke them.

    Momus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:37 pm GMT
    @animalogic Part of Trump's plan is to rid Iraq of it's Iranian influence. It will be the Iranians ejected not the US.

    He has eliminated Soleimani, the leader of Iran's Iraqi proxy forces and killed, arrested or forced into hiding many other pro Iranian urgers.

    The riots in the south of the country are largely about removing Iranian influence and the artificial Sunni/Shia sectarian differences. Expect this social movement to be energised in a pro US way.

    Momus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:43 pm GMT
    @Alternate History What would hitting Israel with missile salvos achieve? Getting strategically nuked and your atomic program eliminated?
    Quartermaster , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:58 pm GMT
    More uninformed stupidity by Saker.

    There will be no all out war in the middle east. No one in the ME is any position to deal in such a fashion with the US and it would be suicidal to try. Dear leader in Iran has only bad choices and even using proxies, he places his entire regime on a chopping block. Those 52 targets were selected in a way that Iran's economy will be crushed quickly.

    So let the Imams go ahead and try to get their blood revenge. They are only digging their own graves.

    By the by, Soleimani was not murdered. He was a terrorist leader and got what he had coming to him.

    Commentator Mike , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:34 pm GMT
    @Quartermaster No, it's not up to Iran if there will be a war, it is up to USA, and it wants the war, and there is nothing Iran can do to prevent it except make the yanks and their stooges in the region pay the biggest price possible given their own resources and resourcefulness. Did you people forget Iraq? After sanctions and years of the USAF bombing targets to enforce those "no fly" zones, one set up in the south specifically to protect the Shiites they're now turning on, they still went all out and invaded Iraq without Saddam having done anything to provoke them, and in fact being most cooperative and even allowing inspectors into the country to confirm that he had no WMDs. Unless of course you think Saddam brought down WTC on 911.
    Jim Christian , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:02 pm GMT
    Hey Saker!? You in touch with Andrei Martyanov to get a take? He's big on capabilities, be curious to hear his opinion on all this foolishness..
    Rich , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:16 pm GMT
    @Beefcake the Mighty You're supporting the policies of Nadler, Schiff and Schumer but I'm the cuck? Yeah right.
    SeekerofthePresence , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:21 pm GMT
    @BeenThereDunnit Persia, Russia, and China all have a gift for long-term survival (though Russia and China are capable of immediate and devastating action). As PCR has suggested, Russia will likely counsel Iran to bide it's time; why attack a dinosaur already frothing at the mouth and collapsing under its own weight?

    And as you mention, there is much preparation Iran can do now. The battlespace has changed: Neocon Crazies (Pence, Pompeo) are now making command decisions (the Soleimani hit, decision on 52 major follow-up strikes) at the Pentagon.

    Therefore Iran must be doubly cautious before moving. As Sun Tzu would say: If a stronger enemy goads you to fight, then hold back and wait for the proper moment. Never do what the enemy wants or expects.

    Harbinger , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:22 pm GMT
    @Z-man I found out about the talmud around 12 years ago now. I have to say I was shocked with what it stated within, but that was also because I was Jew ignorant. This opened up the door to Judaism and what it was all about.
    I'm not religious. I do believe there was a man named Christ, a revolutionary and I struggle with the 'son of God' concept. The jury is out on that. However what annoyed me was the fact that this was the major teaching within Judaism and no one had ever heard about it. Were there anything remotely similar to this, about Jews or blacks, there'd be a public outcry and heads would roll, yet millions of Christians openly know about this and still support Judaism and see them as God's chosen. It just beggars belief.

    "He confessed that the 'manual' was not too kind to gentiles."

    There you go. From the very own horse's mouth. What more needs to be said? As stated, tell people to forget about the online talmuds. They've been conveniently changed to remove the 'bad parts' within. Jews doing what Jews do – deceive.

    As for your former work colleague, who knows, he may end up becoming just like this former Jew.

    turtle , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:52 pm GMT
    @Kratoklastes I take it as axiomatic that the U.S. Military could not successfully occupy Iran, and is very well aware of that reality. Nor is there, as far as I can see, any overriding political reason to do so.
    IMO, the primary objective of any U.S. attack on Iran would be:

    To destroy Iran as a modern country, and foreclose, if possible, any chance Iran could become a modern country in the foreseeable future.

    To that end, look for the destruction of civilian infrastructure and cultural monuments, as others here have postulated, and as was done in Iraq. The (unstated) aim would be to break the national will and destroy the cultural identity of the Iranian people, using the specious claim of "fighting terrorism."

    Look for the Great Mosque of Isfahan:

    to be high on the target list, along with the Iranian parliament building and countless other non-military objectives.

    Is such an attack (by air power alone) likely to succeed?
    A1. In the short term, yes.
    A2. In the longer term, success is not guaranteed.
    If experience in Europe, i.e. Germany, is any guide, I expect Iran could manage to rebuild itself in twenty years or so.

    In the meantime, the U.S. will have completed its transformation to a full-on outlaw nation, having flagrantly violated the Nuremberg prohibition, which itself established, against "waging aggressive war," and become the groveling, depraved toady of a small, and otherwise insignificant, middle eastern "state" founded upon the theft of land and resources from the indigenous population by a thugocracy of European interlopers who claim some kind of "divine right of possession," or "land title from God," based on the assertion that some members of their tribe lived in that area thousands of years ago.

    In short, the U.S is now the titular head of an Evil Empire.
    Long live the Resistance.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:28 pm GMT
    @Rich For amusement purposes, I'll ask: how am I supporting those guys?
    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:33 pm GMT
    @Harbinger I too was uninformed of my Catholic religion and that's funny because I went to Catholic administered schools from grammar school to college. (Grin)

    Were there anything remotely similar to this (The Talmud), about Jews or blacks, there'd be a public outcry and heads would roll, yet millions of Christians openly know about this and still support Judaism and see them as God's chosen. It just beggars belief.

    Vatican II had a lot to do with this 'accepting' of Jews. Christian Zionists are the biggest culprits today.

    forget about the online Talmuds. They've been conveniently changed to remove the 'bad parts' within. Jews doing what Jews do – deceive.

    I'm sure.

    I do believe there was a man named Christ, a revolutionary and I struggle with the 'son of God' concept.

    You gotta have faith . See Brother Nathaniel, a converted Jew. A bit over the top when you first see him, on the net, but a man of faith and truth.

    George , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:36 pm GMT
    @Harbinger Alternative theory: Trump, like Nixon, is a genius.

    Trump tweeted he wanted out of Syria. The military industrial complex said no. So Trump then said OK, I going to give the military industrial complex what it wants 'good and hard' to quote HL Mencken. This is kind of like how Nixon ended the US involvement in Vietnam, he forced to US military to confront North Vietnamese regular army and everybody, including the military industrial complex, involved objected to it, so the US had to leave.

    Nixon takes all the fun out of being in the USAF:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Linebacker_II

    Trump seems hell bent on getting the US tossed out of Iraq. Godspeed DJT.

    Desert Fox , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:50 pm GMT
    @Quartermaster Soleimani was fighting the terrorists who were created by the ZUS and Israel and Z-Britain and Z-NATO, these being AL CIADA aka ISIS aka ISIL aka Daesh etc..

    The middle east wars were brought on by the joint attack on the WTC by Israel and the ZUS , to be blamed on the muslims , thus giving Israel and ZUS the excuse to destroy the middle east for the zionists greater Israel project.

    Not Raul , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:05 pm GMT
    @ivegotrythm Sure; but killing people slowly through pollution, radioactive or otherwise, generally hasn't started wars.

    Nuclear fallout from the USA and Soviet Union has killed people in many countries over decades; but no country has gone to war over it.

    Gleimhart Mantooso , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:11 pm GMT
    @Assad al-islam Iranians are hardly shrewd. They ripped themselves a permanent asshole with us Americans in 1979 (and no, I don't need a lecture on the Shah, since that doesn't magically make their actions shrewd). And they have continued ever since by calling us "the great Satan" and chanting "death to America." They did themselves no favors by shooting down our drone a few months ago, and they were tempting fate last week when they arrogantly boasted "You (we Americans) can't do anything." It's like Michael Ledeen is their chief adviser. None of that is shrewd. It is damned foolish.

    And yes, I know that American foreign policy is damned foolish, too (yet another thing I don't need anyone here to lecture me about). And I know that Israel is the major cause of Middle East problems. But acknowledging all that doesn't mean that Iran is a noble, virtuous, innocent party in the entire affair. So many people have the absurd mindset that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Muslims are ever bit as supremacist as Jews are. And as long as that remains the case, people are not going to be persuaded to pressure the American government to stop reading from the Neocon script. Venerating Iran and lionizing the dead general is going to be a deal breaker for a lot of people, and a big part of that dynamic is Iran's fault.

    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:09 pm GMT
    @Not Raul Lol now I didn't know that Russia was hundreds,thousands of mile away from Iran,thank for the heads up those damnable Iranians have upped and moved their border again,tsk,tsk,tsk.!!!
    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:38 pm GMT
    @Colin Wright One think you should know is that you can't talk sense to a fool,they resent it>!!!
    bluedog , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:49 pm GMT
    @Rich For Gods sake quit posting it only makes you out the fool.Now Iran elected a leader by means that we use ourselves the ballot box,now what's wrong we that? then the democratic elected president states that Iran's oil belongs to Iran and its people,you boys are out.

    Now Churchill gets his undies in a twist whining but wait England's industry runs on CHEAP Iranian oil (25 cent a barrel oil),so he calls up the M15 tells them to join their partners in the C.I.A. and over throw that asshole who thinks that their oil belong to them,and as they say the rest is history,I trust its the real history not the revised history you spout,!!

    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:54 pm GMT
    'One think you should know is that you can't talk sense to a fool,they resent it!!!'

    He's not necessarily a fool.

    He's just attempting to defend the indefensible. That'll tend to make you sound foolish whether you are or not.

    Rich , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:12 pm GMT
    @Beefcake the Mighty They oppose the shooting of Soleimani, and so do you. If I'm a cuck because my support of killing terrorist Muslims also happens to be the same position as Bibi Netanyahu's , I guess following your logic, your support of the same position as the commie trio I named, makes you a cuck. In fact I guess you also kneel in front of AOC and that hijab wearing Ilhan Omar. Following your logic even further, you must be Al Sharpton's shoe shine boy and Maxine Waters wig washer, since they also opposed the shooting.

    Or, could it be that we just have different viewpoints on an issue, and it's only a coincidence that some others share that opinion in this case? I don't check with the Israeli embassy before I make my mind up and I'm open to changing my mind if a convincing argument is made. Do you, since your opinion is exactly the same as theirs, check with the DNC before forming an opinion?

    SeekerofthePresence , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:41 pm GMT
    Epsteinistan murders the general,
    Threatens we will pummel you with more strikes.
    Pimps himself to glories ephemeral,
    World domination the jackboot he licks.
    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:46 pm GMT
    @George Lets hope you're right but the power of The Cabal is pervasive. (And perverse)
    Passer by , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:58 pm GMT
    @Quartermaster You are naive person. The US will have to fight the whole Shia world if it attacks Iran, including Iraq. You live in the past and never realised the decline of the US in the world. You were just kicked by Iraq. Legislation was accepted forcing the US to withdraw from Iraq and cease all kind of collaboration.

    You can forget about US companies operating there too, China and Russia will move there instead. Its resources and arms market are lost to you. Americans are hated in the country and can't even leave the Embassy in safety.

    We also learned today officialy from Iraq's Prime Minister Adil Abdul al Mahdi how Donald Trump uses diplomacy:

    US asked Iraq to mediate with Iran. Iraq PM asks Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer of his mediation, Trump &co assassinate an envoy at the airport.

    No options for Iran? Let's hope "someone" doesn't provide manpads to the Taliban. You lost aganist them too, and soon will be kicked out from Afghanistan in humiliation.

    Do you know who Muqtada Al Sadr is? The most influential person in Iraq, a country with huge oil and gas reserves and young combat ready population rising fast. The man who kicked the arse of the US occupation of Iraq. Muqtada Al Sadr demands the total removal of not only US troops, but the of US embassy and all US diplomats in Iraq as well. And an Axis Of Resistance against the US by all Shia groups all around the world.

    This will cut off supply lines to your remnants in Syria and put the few US soldiers there under siege, hated by almost all sides. They won't make it in Syria for long.

    Meanwhile, you managed to make the Turks hate you too. Just keep doing that.

    Iran's FM said something interesting yeasterday: The end of Malign US Influence in West Asia has begun. The US will be gradually kicked out from the region.

    The 2020s will be a time of great power transition where the rest of the world rises and the US declines, being kicked out from many places. You made a big mistake, making more and more enemies everywhere in the world.

    Beefcake the Mighty , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 12:10 am GMT
    @Rich Wow. That was stupid even by your standards. Good job!
    Scham , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 12:28 am GMT
    Iran, Russia and China should attacked the Achilles Hell of the US which is Gold. China should sell its US$1.2 Trillion of US Treasury bonds and keep buying Gold. That will send the Gold price soaring to US$10,000 an oz. Interest rates will spike and Wall St and the US$1.5 quadrillion Derivatives market will collapse, bankrupting all major US banks.
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 2:43 am GMT
    @animalogic "Is the US so completely insane ?"

    -- The visceral ethnic hatred of the real bosses and the fabled American incompetence of the profiteers-in–charge do not have a place for any rationality.

    Smith , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 2:50 am GMT
    With the recent development. I must admit I'm a fool for having a slight hope for Trump NOT being a neocon jew shill. It's out in the open now.

    Hats off to Iran, they have won without (directly) fighting, these people have read Sun Tzu. Complete master.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:00 am GMT
    @KindKaiser Poor "Rich," it is intolerable for a zionist to face the facts of Jewish "affinity" for bolshevism: https://www.unz.com/pub/jhr__the-jewish-role-in-the-bolshevik-revolution-and-russias-early-soviet-regime/

    "Anyone who had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Cheka," wrote Jewish historian Leonard Schapiro, "stood a very good chance of finding himself confronted with, and possibly shot by, a Jewish investigator."

    In Ukraine, "Jews made up nearly 80 percent of the rank-and-file Cheka agents," reports W. Bruce Lincoln, an American professor of Russian history. Beginning as the Cheka, or Vecheka, the Soviet secret police was later known as the GPU, OGPU, NKVD, MVD and KGB. [Remember Holodomor in Ukraine? Add to the Kaganovich fame of mass murderer the fame of Nuland-Kagan, the collaborator with Ukrainian neo-nazi and promotor of the ongoing civil war in eastern Ukraine].

    In light of all this, it should not be surprising that Yakov M. Yurovksy, the leader of the Bolshevik squad that carried out the murder of the Tsar and his family, was Jewish, as was Sverdlov, the Soviet chief who co-signed Lenin's execution order.

    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:04 am GMT
    @Rich Sadly, Ron Unz has been extremely negligent in omitting the inclusion of a MORON button. I really couldn't label you a TROLL as that would in fact be complimentary towards you.
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:08 am GMT
    @Momus Tel Aviv is home to zionist cowards who hide behind the US skirt while parasitizing on the body of the US. Your attempt at presenting yourself as a brave warrior is ridiculous. After shooting the civilians (including children of all ages) on the occupied territories, Israelis have got a delusional idea of being the brave soldiers and military geniuses. Relax. Yours is an Epstein nation of Israel.
    Skeptikal , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:15 am GMT
    @BeenThereDunnit "That explains why the US are escalating so heavily right now. "

    The neocons probably want a spring war.
    For themselves, and to do Bibi the most good.
    Spring is the most convenient time for warmaking.
    Nice weather.
    If they are planning for this war, they are already well along in putting the logistics in place.
    We are probably screwed.
    I read somewhere fairly recently an analysis of why a spring war would "work" well for both the Dems and the Repugs. But I cannot recall the rationales.
    So it seems like all sides are angling and wangling to move Trump in the direction of a spring attack on Iran.

    As for ":Some of those Iranian mosques are not only holy sites as such, they are marvels of architecture. Attacking them would be a crime against the heritage of all mankind. That would be truly mad but we will see, sadly. It would enrage Muslims to a degree not seen in living memory."

    It would make a LOT of people worldwide furious. Not just Muslims.
    Bomb Isfahan? Shiraz? Tabriz? Our "leaders" are mad.

    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:46 am GMT
    @Quartermaster The gullible "Quartermaster" has sided with Nuland-Kagan and Banderites. Oops.

    The gullible "Quartermaster" has sided with "white helmets." Oops.

    The gullible "Quartermaster" has sided with Bibi. Ooops.

    The gullible "Quartermaster" has been trusting wholeheartedly the presstitutes of MSM and even became the MSM's deputy on the Unz Forum to deliver the MSM lies. What's wrong with you?

    Soleimani was extraordinarily effective when fighting the ISIS; hence the rabid hatred of Israelis and US war profiteers towards the honorable man.

    Too many Oops on your part, gullible "Quartermaster"

    Angel , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:49 am GMT
    @ Rich

    Most Jew won't admit it but their god is Lucifer. Read about the "Hidden Tyranny" below:

    https://archive.org/stream/TheHiddenTyranny-HaroldWallaceRosenthal/TheHiddenTyranny-HaroldWallaceRosenthal_djvu.txt

    Hibernian , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 3:58 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso Saddam Hussein had to station the Republican Guard in the rear to shoot deserters.
    old farta , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 4:33 am GMT
    If I thought that America was responsible for every dastardly dirty crime in the world, I would applaud the article. This article was written from the basis that America's involvement began with the death of a terrorist, where is the history propelling Trump to act?
    old farta , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 4:37 am GMT
    I smell a coward writing this article. What action would the author have recommended following the death of a American contractor, send the killers more cash?
    old farta , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 4:41 am GMT
    When Iran invaded the American embassy, did they not invade America? Are not embassies located of the soil of the occupying nation? Did any of the embassy employees attack Iran or it's citizens? Does an invasion constitute an act of war?
    Smith , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 4:44 am GMT
    @old farta Trump doesn't even act.

    Jews tell him to push a button and he did, he doesn't know who he has killed and he doesn't care because jews run the show.

    old farta , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 6:32 am GMT
    @Smith Too say the "Jews" told him to do something without naming them is suspect. Support your argument with facts, like names, how communicated, when, and how you came by this info.
    whattheduck , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 6:35 am GMT
    @animalogic The zionists hate Christians more than they hate any other religious group. If by launching a nuclear war, it is guaranteed that Christians will cease to exist, you can be sure they will start a nuclear war. It's not just me talking about, it's in their scriptures.

    Zionists hate for Russia is purely because it's predominantly white and Christian nation.

    BeenThereDunnit , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 6:57 am GMT
    @Skeptikal A spring war would give Iran plenty of time to prepare. It would also give Putin and Xi time to shore up public opinion and deploy assistance. The Russians could even send some of their super-quiet Diesel subs to the Gulf.

    If this war goes through, Putin and Xi will come out very weak. Syria on a much grander scale but without Russia and China doing anything about it.

    Momus , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 7:51 am GMT
    @annamaria Your point?
    Mike G , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 9:14 am GMT
    It's all going to be a cakewalk, the Iranians will welcome the destruction of their country with open arms. The Iranians won't dare to confront the US or we'll just turn their country into glass. lol

    What would Greta say? lol

    Nero played his fiddle while Rome burned

    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 1:30 pm GMT
    @whattheduck Good but the Jews won't want complete destruction of the European races because then, no one will protect them. Ideally they'll destroy Christianity while having a polyglot atheist white race serving them.
    As I've said many times before the Jew power structure hates Russia, and specifically Putin, because he re-established Orthodox Christianity to the Motherland which they tried to destroy in the communist revolution.

    PS. When I started reading on these sites, years ago, I found it almost amusing when people attacked Vatican II. After all, I was indoctrinated as a youth that V-II was the best thing since sliced bread, 'the Church had to become modern .' Needles to say I've become a fan of the SSPX and beyond, like the good Bishop Williamson who said before he was excommunicated, "[T]he people who hold world-wide power today over politics and the media are people who want the godless New World Order, and" "they have fabricated a hugely false version of World War Two history to go with a complete fabricated religion to replace Christianity."

    n44bbo , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 1:55 pm GMT
    @Rich " The Iranians could not defeat the ragtag forces of Saddam Hussein, but they can defeat the United States? Preposterous."

    Actually, it is the other way around !
    And .. Saddam, had the almighty USA behind him; so, I must assume that your initial paragraph and the entire comment, is pretty much a childish one.
    By the way you articulated your comment, I wonder; what the heck are you reading these articles for, if you do not have neither the knowledge or the understanding of these geopolitical themes.
    As a friendly advise, I would suggest, getting a hot water bottle, seat in your armchair and watch television.

    Mike G , says: Show Comment January 6, 2020 at 2:35 pm GMT
    Quartermaster Baiter is a funny guy

    [Jan 06, 2020] Trump's Cartoon Imperialism and War Crimes by Daniel Larrison

    Notable quotes:
    "... Such a move could be considered a war crime under international laws, but Mr. Trump said Sunday that he was undeterred. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    he Iraqi parliament approved a measure that called for an end to the U.S. military presence in Iraq. The prime minister spoke in favor of a departure of U.S. forces, and it seems very likely that U.S. forces will be required to leave the country in the near future. The president's response to this was in keeping with his cartoon imperialist attitudes about other countries:

    Trump threatens Iraq with sanctions if they expel US troops: "If they do ask us to leave, if we don't do it in a very friendly basis. We will charge them sanctions like they've never seen before ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame."

    -- Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) January 6, 2020

    Trump doesn't see other countries as genuinely sovereign, and he doesn't respect their decisions when they run counter to what he wants, so his first instinct when they choose something he dislikes is to punish them. Economic war has been his preferred method of punishment, and he has applied this in the form of tariffs or sanctions depending on the target. Iraq's government is sick of repeated U.S. violations of Iraqi sovereignty, and the U.S. strikes over the last week have strengthened the existing movement to remove U.S. forces from the country. One might think that Trump would jump at the chance to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq and Syria that the Iraqi parliament's action gives him. It would have been better to leave of our own accord before destroying the relationship with Baghdad, but it might be the only good thing to come out of this disaster. It is telling that Trump's reaction to this news is not to seize the opportunity but to threaten Iraq instead. Needless to say, there is absolutely no legitimate basis for imposing sanctions on Iraq, and if Trump did this it would be one more example of how the U.S. is flagrantly abusing its power to bully and attack smaller states.

    In another instance of the president's crude cartoon imperialism, he repeated his threat to target Iran's cultural heritage sites:

    President Trump on Sunday evening doubled down on his claim that he would target Iranian cultural sites if Iran retaliated for the targeted killing of one of its top generals, breaking with his secretary of state over the issue.

    Aboard Air Force One on his way back from his holiday trip to Florida, Mr. Trump reiterated to reporters traveling with him the spirit of a Twitter post on Saturday, when he said that the United States government had identified 52 sites for retaliation against Iran if there were a response to Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani's death. Some, he tweeted, were of "cultural" significance.

    Such a move could be considered a war crime under international laws, but Mr. Trump said Sunday that he was undeterred.

    OrthoAnabaptist • 19 hours ago

    When o when will this man leave the stage? Who oh who will stand up against him and save the world from this man? God have mercy on us all and deliver us from this anti-christ.
    Brandon Falusi • 18 hours ago
    Trump really really enjoyed telling his "Black Jack Pershing's bullets dipped in pig's blood" fairy tales during the campaign, and so did the rallygoers. He loves reveling in the amoral gutter, and his base loves him unconditionally. Ailes, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and now Trump: their aggresive, barbaric, venal leaders and spokesmen. Whaddayagonnado? They can't help it. They follow the guy who calls the opposition within his own party "human scum." Takes one to know one, right? That's right. Trump is a visceral hedonist, so yes, he likes aggression.
    Clyde Schechter • 17 hours ago
    Bravo, Mr. Larison! Well said!

    As reactions are emerging around the world, it seems pretty clear that the US will be almost completely isolated in this situation. Europe may finally be growing a spine.

    Most interesting is the reaction from the UK. Dominic Raab initially made some "balanced" remarks pointing out that Soleimani was a bad actor but counseling restraint. The next day, presumably under directions from Boris Johnson, he retracted that and said that the UK is on the same page as the US. This is a portent of things to come. I think that most people who voted for Brexit did so because they wanted to take back their sovereignty from Brussels. But this weekend is probably the first step in the UK's march towards becoming, in practical terms, a US colony. The UK's economy and other influence are simply not large enough to stand alone against those of the US, the EU, and China. They will be in something of a beggars can't be choosers position when negotiating trade deals with these larger entities. They can expect the EU to do them no favors given their chaotic dealings with them. China will probably take a pragmatic approach to them. Their best hope for favorable treatment is with the United States, and Johnson has fawned over Trump enough to have reason to believe it might happen. But it also entails that the UK will not be free to dissent from US foreign policy in the slightest way. In fact, if we end up in a conventional war with Iran, I suspect that the UK will be the only nation in the world that sends troops there with us. (The UAE, Israel and the Saudis will, of course, cheer us on, even goad us, but will not risk any of their own blood.) I wonder how Brexit supporters will feel about that. At least Brussels never dragged them into any stupid wars.

    Remember this date. It marks the date the UK began its journey from the frying pan into the fire.

    SFBay1949 • 15 hours ago
    At this point the question is, can Trump have even a vaguely normal conversation about anything? Certainly not foreign policy. Just how much of this manure can he spew before the Republican Party responds? My guess is they've gone so far past the point of normal that there's no coming back This is both sad and frightening.
    Begemot • 15 hours ago
    One common response to Trump's threat to attack Iranian cultural sites is that the military would not carry out such obviously illegal orders

    I wouldn't put any hope in the US military disobeying such orders. It's not what they are really trained for. They may pay lip service to having respect for laws of war but they won't actually pay any attention to them. Respect for culture? Remember Dresden? The crude barbarism of Sherman and Sheridan is the spirit of the US military.

    Daniel (not Larrison) • 9 hours ago
    As a conservative (not a Republican, but certainly not a Democrat) who cannot abide thinking of any of the democratic candidates as President, I would love to see impeachment. Mike Pence would be infinitely preferable as President to this little psychopathic bully.

    Seriously, the last few days should principled non-interventionists know that Trump is empjatically not one of us. He'd gladly sabotage the future of the United States on the alter of his own ego.

    K squared • 8 hours ago
    Vandal
    Fran Macadam • 7 hours ago
    "He sees war only in the crudest terms of plunder and atrocity."

    It's a blunt but true observation. We spend most of our time justifying wars as noble and moral, using euphemism to disguise the reality to ourselves and others. Two cheers for being truthful.

    I also note that destroying cultural monuments is claimed to be a war crime, while inevitable civilian deaths are just acceptable collateral damage.

    Let's not pretend that the long history of the imperial coveting of either Iraq's or Iran's resources has ever been much more than plunder, often making use of atrocity. What doesn't qualify as that, is great game imperialist jockeying for geostrategic advantage against commercial rivals.

    Of course "things" would be sacrosanct, while human lives are not, in the wholly materialist calculus of warmongering.o

    FL_Cottonmouth • 7 hours ago
    Attacking cultural-heritage sites, Pres. Trump? Like what the Taliban did to the Buddhas of Bamyan? Or what ISIS did to ancient art, architecture, and artifacts in Mosul, Palmyra, Raqqa, and more? What a barbarian!
    Fuzzy • 6 hours ago
    I think he has finally crossed the line. There really IS something wrong with him and he should be removed from office.
    kouroi • 6 hours ago
    Will Congress dare to eliminate funds for the occupation of Iraq and for attacking Iran? Will all those that would vote for continuation of funding will be removed from office through elections, in the very gerrymandered locales, in a FPTP system, with no ability to leave work early to go to vote, with so many disenfranchised? The system is fully rigged to be a dictatorship all but in name...
    Daniel (not Larrison) • 6 hours ago
    Another thing: Trump's decrying of the Iraqi war was merely a way he could rail at the other Republican candidates. If the establishment was for it, he was against it. That's how he works.

    Maybe he fools himself into thinking he's got principles. Maybe he even thinks he has a coherent foreign policy (or policy of any kind). But no, he's just narcissism and id all the way down.

    There's still no border wall. Still troops in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Planned Parenthood is still funded.

    Oh, but he waves the flag, doesn't he? That makes up for everything...right?

    [Jan 06, 2020] Was Suleimani a diplomatic envoy at the time of his killing?

    Notable quotes:
    "... How do you think Soleimani organized, sustained and coordinated his Resistance Militias in different countries turning them into a formidable military offensive resistance strategy? With strategic military and diplomatic savvy. Soleimani was sent as an envoy to Russia by Iran's Supreme Leader at a critical time in the Syrian war and also at Putin's request. If Soleimani was lured by the U.S. and Saudis on a pretext of peace to be assassinated by a U.S. drone this proves just how depraved Trump is. This strategy is right out of the Zionist dirty tricks playbook and Trump has proven in every way he is all in with Zionists and is one of them. ..."
    "... I take the Iraqi Prime Minister at his word, and reassert the need for Trump and his administration to be impeached on treasonous grounds. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Circe , Jan 5 2020 19:42 utc | 93

    @78 Jackrabbit

    Suleimani was not a diplomat... Really? I'd say he was a great military leader and just as great a diplomat to accomplish what he did.

    Soleimani unfurled the Syria Russia strategy in Moscow

    How do you think Soleimani organized, sustained and coordinated his Resistance Militias in different countries turning them into a formidable military offensive resistance strategy? With strategic military and diplomatic savvy. Soleimani was sent as an envoy to Russia by Iran's Supreme Leader at a critical time in the Syrian war and also at Putin's request. If Soleimani was lured by the U.S. and Saudis on a pretext of peace to be assassinated by a U.S. drone this proves just how depraved Trump is. This strategy is right out of the Zionist dirty tricks playbook and Trump has proven in every way he is all in with Zionists and is one of them.

    albagen , Jan 5 2020 19:43 utc | 94

    Iraqi PM said so
    juliania , Jan 5 2020 19:53 utc | 96
    As reported by krollchem @ 67 and by b in this and the following post, the involvement of Trump directly in premeditated murder cannot be absolved, and the circumstances are abhorrent to any patriotic American citizen. May God have mercy on the souls of the peace makers, for they shall be called the sons of God.

    I take the Iraqi Prime Minister at his word, and reassert the need for Trump and his administration to be impeached on treasonous grounds.

    Where that will lead in terms of the rest of the US government I cannot say but VP Pence is also impeachable here, so it is difficult to see who is least culpable in this. It may mean that there is need for a provisional government to be put in place - not party organized. If impeachment proceeds apace as it should, behind the scenes such a people's approved peaceful citizens coalition needs to be considered. This cannot stand as official US government policy. It is heinous.

    I too, as forward @ 24 has done, sent prayers for the souls of the departed Iran general as well as his friend from Iraq and their companions this morning in my home chapel. It is the Sunday before Christmas, old calendar. May the Lord bring them and so many others before them to a place where the just repose.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Anti-War Conservatives Join Protests Against Trump's Iran Confrontation by Hunter DeRensis

    Notable quotes:
    "... "I think the more people who are prepared to stand up and say it [the assassination] is completely, not only inappropriate, not only illegal, not only unjust, but an act of war to do something like this, the better," said Nicole Rousseau with the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, which has been planning anti-war protests in D.C. since 2002. ..."
    "... This is the moment, as Donald Trump embraces the neoconservative dream of war with Iran, that the Republican base must stand on their hind legs, lock arms with their progressive allies, and say no . ..."
    "... Tucker Carlson Tonight ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Now is the time for Republicans of conviction to stand together.

    t speaks to the state of American politics when for three years the continued defense of Donald Trump's record has been: "well, he hasn't started any new wars." Last week, however, that may have finally changed.

    In the most flagrant tit-for-tat since the United States initiated its economic war against Iran in the spring of 2018, the Trump administration assassinated Major General Qasem Soleimani, who for more than 20 years has led the Iranian Quds Force. The strategic mind behind Iran's operations in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and the rest of the Middle East, Soleimani's death via drone strike outside of Baghdad's airport is nothing short of a declaration of open warfare between American and Iranian-allied forces in Iraq.

    While the world waits for the Islamic Republic's inevitable response, the reaction on the home front was organized in less than 36 hours. Saturday afternoon, almost 400 people gathered on the muddy grass outside the White House in Washington, D.C., joined in solidarity by simultaneous rallies in over 70 other U.S. cities.

    The D.C. attendees and their co-demonstrators were expectedly progressive, but the organizers made clear they were happy to work across political barriers for the cause of peace.

    "I think the more people who are prepared to stand up and say it [the assassination] is completely, not only inappropriate, not only illegal, not only unjust, but an act of war to do something like this, the better," said Nicole Rousseau with the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, which has been planning anti-war protests in D.C. since 2002.

    Code Pink's Leonardo Flores, when asked what politicians he believed were on the side of the peace movement, named Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders and Republican Senator Rand Paul. "I don't think peace should be a left and right issue," he said. "I think it's an issue we can all rally around. It's very clear too much of our money is going to foreign wars that don't benefit the American people and we could be using that money in many different ways, giving it back to the American people, whether it's investing in social spending or giving direct tax cuts."

    This is the moment, as Donald Trump embraces the neoconservative dream of war with Iran, that the Republican base must stand on their hind legs, lock arms with their progressive allies, and say no .

    It's happened before. In 2013, when the Obama administration was ready for regime change in Syria, Americans, both left and right, made clear they didn't want to see their sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters die so the American government could install the likes of Abu Mohammed al-Julani in Damascus.

    Of course, it was much easier for Republicans to stand up to a Democratic president going to war. "It's been really unfortunate that so much of politics now is driven on a partisan basis," opined Eric Garris, director and co-founder of Antiwar.com, in an interview with TAC . "Whether you're for or against war and how strongly you might be against war is driven by partisan points of view."

    When Barack Obama was elected in 2008, the movement that saw millions march against George W. Bush's war in Iraq disappeared overnight (excluding a handful of stalwart organizations like Code Pink). Non-interventionist Republicans can't repeat that mistake. They have to show that if an American president wants to start an unconstitutional, immoral war, it's the principle that matters, not the R or D next to their names.

    Garris said the reason Antiwar.com was founded in 1995 was to bridge this partisan divide by putting people like Daniel Ellsberg and Pat Buchanan side by side for the same cause. "These coalitions are only effective if you try to bring in a broad coalition of people," he said. "I want to see rallies of thousands of people in Omaha, Nebraska, and things like that, where they're reaching out to middle America and to the people that are actually going to reach the unconverted."

    The right is in the best position it's been in decades to accomplish this. "I don't know if you saw Tucker Carlson Tonight , but it was quite amazing to watch that kind of antiwar sentiment on Fox News," Garris said. "You would not have seen [that] in recent history. And certainly the emergence of The American Conservative magazine has been a really strong signal and leader in terms of bringing about the values of the Old Right like non-interventionism to a conservative audience."

    This also includes the core antiwar members of Congress, all of whom are Republican , and new conservative veterans groups like Bring Our Troops Home .

    It's the anti-war right, in the Republican tradition of La Follette, Taft, Paul, and Buchanan, that has the power to stop middle America from following Trump into a conflict with Iran. But it's both sides, working together as Americans, that can finally end the endless wars.

    Hunter DeRensis is a reporter with The National Interest and a regular contributor to The American Conservative. Follow him on Twitter @HunterDeRensis .

    [Jan 06, 2020] https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/national/iraq-strategic-framework-agreement.htm

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.globalsecurity.org


    I also recommend reading the SOFA with Iraq which is a masterpiece of semantic and legalistic deception- (and they have one year to actually get out after termination of the "agreement")

    Talking about deception, James Corbett did a brilliant exposé of the "difficulties of crisis initiation" vs. Iran

    https://www.corbettreport.com/iranfalseflag/

    After watching this enlightening video, reading the transcript of the "special briefing on Iraq" by the State Dept. is like "stepping thru the looking glass" into a surreal world of self-delusion, ("believing six impossible things before breakfast"), here is an example: (SSD stands for senior state department official "One, Two or Three" (whose names apparently have to be kept secret )

    QUESTION: Thank you. Could you take us through the – so you – could you take us through the diplomatic strategy for DE-ESCALATION? I mean, after the strike, what are the main elements of our diplomatic plan to --

    SSD OFFICIAL ONE: [SSD official Three] can both talk about this.

    SSD OFFICIAL THREE: Yeah, first of all, we're stressing that we want to stay on in Iraq. We have an important mission there, the coalition. We just spoke with most of the key coalition members this morning, making that message to them. They also took the – well, you need to de-escalate. We raised the point – and [SSD official One] can talk about this is more detail – that we are ready to talk with the Iranians. We've tried to do this in the past. That's on the table.

    And again, the point I took with them, and I'll take it again here today: We cannot promise that we have BROKEN the circle of violence. What I can say from my experience with Qasem Soleimani is it is less likely that we will see this now than it was before, and if we do see an increase in violence, it probably will not be as devilishly ingenious. Other than Usama bin Ladin, he's the only guy – with Cafe Milano – a senior terrorist leader around the Middle East who has tried to seriously plot in detail a mass casualty event on American soil. Let him rest in peace.

    (!)

    https://www.state.gov/senior-state-department-officials-on-the-situation-in-iraq/

    Is there a way to find out who this "official no. 3 is?

    And finally regarding the "Big Picture" behind it all (from Vietnam to Iraq/Iran)

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-america-spreads-global-chaos/5616345

    "We did not wish to re-examine, condemn, and confront the violence in the extra-constitutional power structure that finally ascended to hegemony over our citizenry and over much of the world "

    „I have never declared the covert actions of the U.S. intelligence agencies to be incompetent. They are almost invariably and unerringly competent in murdering, individually and massively, in defense of U.S. military dominance and empire."

    (Vincent J. Salandria, author of The JFK Assassination: A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes )

    These days the murdering takes place in "overt" action a barbaric act sold to the world as "self-defense"

    A Final thought:

    Is there a more cowardly , dastardly act (by the "best military in the world") than to tear apart a renowned military commander who fought the real war "on terror" (against ruthless imperialism), with a drone??

    Posted by: Antigone | Jan 6 2020 22:12 utc | 95

    [Jan 06, 2020] Trump moves to unite the Middle East! (irony)

    Jan 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Trump-Tax-Reform-Bonuses

    Teevee coverage of the recent events in the ME has been predictable. Those who hated Trump continue to hate him, etc.

    A few observations:

    1. I had hoped that Trump's decision to kill an Iranian general engaged in a diplomatic mission (among other things) while the man was on the soil of a supposed ally of the US was something Trump pulled out of his fundament either inspired by war movies or on the recommendation of "our greatest ally" but I am informed that in fact some idiot in the DoD included this option in the list of possibilities that was briefed to the CinC in Florida. The decision process in such matters requires that when options are demanded by the CinC the JCS prepares a list supported for each option by fully formulated documentation that enables the president to approve one (or none) and then sign the required operational order. Trump himself chose the death option. I would hold General Milley (CJCS) personally responsible for not striking this option from the list before it reached the CinC.

    2. The Iranians are a subtle people. IMO they will bide their time whilst working out the "bestest" way to inflict some injury on the US and/or Israel. When the retaliation comes it will be imaginative and painful.

    3. Trump is now threatening the Iraqis with severe sanctions if they try to enforce their parliamentary decree against the future presence of foreign (US mostly) troops on their soil. IMO a refusal to leave risks a substantial Shia (at least) uprising against the US forces in Iraq. We have around 5,500 people there now spread across the country in little groups engaged in logistics, intelligence and training missions. They are extremely vulnerable. There are something like 150 marines in the embassy. There are also a small number of US combat forces in Syria east and north of the Euphrates river. These include a battalion of US Army National Guard mechanized troops "guarding" Syria's oil from Syria's own army and whatever devilment the Iranians might be able to arrange.

    4. This is an untenable logistical situation. Supply and other functions require a major airfield close to Baghdad. We have Balad airbase and helicopter supply and air support from there into Baghdad is possible from there but may become hazardous. Iraq is a big country. It is a long and lonely drive from Kuwait for re-supply from there or evacuation through there. The same thing is true of the desert route to Jordan.

    5. Trump's strategery appears to be based on the concept that the Iraqis will submit to our imperial demands. "We will see." pl

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/iran-strike-live-updates/2020/01/06/3b5451f2-3024-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?rand=4

    [Jan 06, 2020] Was assasination of Soleimani the USA attempt to derail Iran-Saudi reapproachment: what about Kushner, Netanyahu s agent in Oval Office? Or what about the siamesian creature Esper-Pompeo?

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Sasha , Jan 7 2020 1:07 utc | 149

    @Posted by: Bruce | Jan 7 2020 0:50 utc | 144

    What do you refer by FDD?

    Apart from those you mention, what about Kushner, Netanyahu´s agent in Oval Office? Or what about the siamesian creature Esper-Pompeo? It seems Pompeo was bomabrding he Donald since months ago on Soleimani...One sees the face of Pompeo when graduating and WP and you immediately feel a chill in your spine...There it is a guy who will not stop at anything so as to go up...

    Of course, I do not discard a master puppet behind him...but I would look for more in Herzliya of whatever the name is...I doubt the Rothschilds are beihn Pompeo, otherwise he would not look so ambitious, he already would show so calm and confident like Macron...

    karlof1 , Jan 7 2020 1:09 utc | 150

    Yes, it's Ben Norton and the Gray Zone providing more in-depth info about the peace mission Soleimani was conducting. Don't miss the NY Times extract provided at the linked tweet:

    "Iraq's efforts at brokering peace talks between Saudi Arabia and Iran were going very smoothly... until the US empire blew it all to pieces by murdering a top Iranian general and Iraqi commander."

    Very clearly to me at least, Iran's Hope proposal was beginning to be acted upon, and as I wrote two days ago, that couldn't be allowed to stand. Thus, how Iran responds is further complicated by the initial success of their initiative--provided the Saudi position was genuine and not a feint. Recall the HOPE proposal allowed for outside participation which back in September I wrote it would be wise for Trump to applaud and promote--IF--he genuinely desired Peace. Now the equation's been changed. The goal is now to completely oust the Evil Outlaw US Empire from the region, but that can still be accomplished through the HOPE proposal.

    Now Zarif's been barred by the usual shitheads from attending the UNSC. IMO, the UNGA must reconsider Russia's request to relocate numerous UN activities as the Evil Outlaw US Empire has effectively ceded its position within the UN and clearly doesn't belong there.

    [Jan 06, 2020] US Slams Russia, China For Blocking UN Statement On Baghdad Embassy Attack

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    US officials said the majority stood with Washington "in stark contrast to the United Nations Security Council's silence due to two permanent members – Russia and China – not allowing a statement to proceed."

    This after Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Secretary of State Mike Pompeo a day after Soleimani's death that the US had launched an "illegal power" move which should instead be based on dialogue with Tehran.

    Forbes characterized Russian objections within the context of the UN further :

    He [Lavrov] said that the actions of a UN member state to eliminate officials of another UN member state on the territory of a third sovereign state "flagrantly violate the principles of international law and deserve condemnation."

    Similarly China has stood against Washington's unilateral military action, with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi saying the US must not "abuse force" and instead pursue mutual dialogue.

    UN security council file image, via Irish Times.

    "The dangerous US military operation violates the basic norms of international relations and will aggravate regional tensions and turbulence," Wang told Javad Zarif in a phone call days ago.

    Diplomatically speaking, the US faces an uphill battle on the UN National Security Council, considering its already provoked the ire of two of its formidable members, who increasingly find themselves in close cooperation blocking US initiatives.

    dogismycopilot , 6 minutes ago link

    For ***** sake, didn't the US SEIZE two Russian Diplomatic buildings in the USA.

    **** these guys at DoS have some chutzpah! Lavrov should have called them out on this ****.

    bosoxfan1971 , 12 minutes ago link

    Here's a nice find. Soleimani and the US fought side by side in 2001!! Oh, the irony. I wonder how Hasbara trolls can explain this one.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_uprising_in_Herat

    veritas semper vinces , 15 minutes ago link

    When the Donald entered by force in Russian Consulates in Seattle and San Francisco, and expelled 60 Russian diplomats bc of

    " Skripal poisoning" was that in accordance with diplomatic rules?

    What proofs do we have that US fortress was attacked by Iran?

    Did US find an intact passport there?

    Good for Russia and China.

    They must be suffering from TDS, oy vey!

    I suffer not only from TDS, but ODS( Obama), CDS( Clinton), BDS( Bush(s)) and of an acute case of PDS ( PentagonDS).

    And I'm in the final stages of FuwtsalDS : Fed-up-with-the-system-and- lies DS.

    bosoxfan1971 , 16 minutes ago link

    Interesting. Look what Iranian General fought alongside the Americans when fighting the Taliban. More and more convinced Israel owns the US and our foreign policy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_uprising_in_Herat

    bosoxfan1971 , 13 minutes ago link

    Hey jerkoff, look who a certain Iranian General fought alongside the US when fighting the Taliban. Your projection and deception have all the hallmarks of a dirty ***.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_uprising_in_Herat

    Volkodav , 37 minutes ago link

    Article: Trump was lied to

    https://phibetaiota.net/2020/01/tehran-times-special-issue-on-assassination/

    https://phibetaiota.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Tehran-Times-Special-Issue-on-Assassination.pdf

    Robert David Steele PDF Page 11

    believe or not guest Joel Skousen told same on Alex Jones last 15 min I am told, looking now

    Trump is that weak gullible?

    Alex Jones is getting educated after several days knee jerk as is normal. I am not fan.

    Ruler , 23 minutes ago link

    48 Laws of Power.

    Mimir , 55 minutes ago link

    blocking US initiatives.

    Maybe, just maybe, China and Russia blocked the United Nations Security council statement because it accused Iran of having provoked the attack on the US embassy in Baghdad.

    Of some reason or another ZH does not tell us what the declaration said.

    enfield0916 , 58 minutes ago link

    Never realized Iraq and Iran were part of the North American continent, well we have to spread Western values of peace and democracy there for sure!

    Let's build an embassy that's larger than the Vatican and also send our troops to guard the oil fields and terrorize the locals.

    DUMBEST ******* ideas that get implemented with no end in sight and at home people keep losing their civil liberties.

    EternalAnusocracy , 1 hour ago link

    What part of "We don't have the money to fight endless wars" doesn't the MIC understand?

    Homeless people everywhere, bums outside every big box store parking lot, opiod epidemic in our towns, low wage "jobs" everywhere, schools where are children are sitting in trailers to study, tens of millions with no access to proper medication or health care, and the assholes traitors want to waste BILLIONS on useless chest thumping all over the word.

    The situation is like an drunk, impotent man walking around threatening to rape ladies up and down the street.

    Sad what has become of this one truly great nation.

    Haboob , 50 minutes ago link

    Haha kids are taught in portables

    Homeless pan handling on every cross street

    Americans working dead end jobs

    Nationwide move to legalize cannabis to escape reality

    Private and national debt soaring

    Military ever growing

    The bubble is about to burst!

    schroedingersrat , 1 hour ago link

    And the USA vetoes every Russian initiative. And know this: Russian initiatives are usually pretty good and balanced and would lead to peace.

    The USA is always just interested in keeping the world in perpetual war and chaos.

    Blanco Diablo , 1 hour ago link

    The Neocons are not rational actors in any normal sense of the word. They would destroy and/or enslave every person on this planet if they thought they could pull it off and it would be to their benefit.

    Moribundus , 1 hour ago link

    It is exactly what Saker expected

    https://www.unz.com/tsaker/soleimani-murder-what-could-happen-next/

    [Jan 06, 2020] US justification for assassinating General Soleimani

    Notable quotes:
    "... According to the Western media, General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' élite Al-Quods force, was preparing an operation intended to win back Iraqi public opinion ..."
    "... The strategy attributed to General Soleimani is in no way consistent with his well-known modus operandi , nor with that of the Iranian secret services. Quite the contrary, it is strangely reminiscent of US Ambassador John Negroponte's rationale: foment an Iraqi civil war as a means of stifling the Iraqi Resistance. ..."
    "... Other interpretations of the events are of course possible, starting with a US desire to seize on the mutual paralysis of the Iranian government forces and the Revolutionary Guards. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.voltairenet.org

    According to the Western media, General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' élite Al-Quods force, was preparing an operation intended to win back Iraqi public opinion. [ 1 ]

    In the midst of the Shiite community's escalating protests against Iranian influence over the Iraqi political class, attacks have been allegedly carried out against US interests, triggering a US response against Iraqi protesters, which in turn ignited Iraqi nationalism to the detriment of the ongoing revolt.

    It was, purportedly, in order to frustrate this plot that, on 2 January 2020, the United States assassinated Qasem Soleimani and his loyal supporter Abu Mehdi al-Mouhandis. [ 2 ] According to the US, Iran had been forewarned through a statement delivered by US Defense Secretary Mark Esper. [ 3 ]

    This narrative, even if logical, is hardly credible. The strategy attributed to General Soleimani is in no way consistent with his well-known modus operandi , nor with that of the Iranian secret services. Quite the contrary, it is strangely reminiscent of US Ambassador John Negroponte's rationale: foment an Iraqi civil war as a means of stifling the Iraqi Resistance.

    Other interpretations of the events are of course possible, starting with a US desire to seize on the mutual paralysis of the Iranian government forces and the Revolutionary Guards.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Gratitude for cooperation, Trump way

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Mischi , Jan 6 2020 19:25 utc | 3

    In their descriptions of Qassem Soleimani U.S. media fail to mention that Soleimani and the U.S. fought on the same side. In 2001 Iran supported the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. It used its good relations with the Hazara Militia and the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, which both the CIA and Iran had supplied for years, to support the U.S. operation. The Wikipedia entry for the 2001 uprising in Herat lists U.S. General Tommy Franks and General Qassem Soleimani as allied commanders.

    The collaboration ended in 2002 after George W. Bush named Iran as a member of his " Axis of Evil ".

    In 2015 the U.S. and Iran again collaborated. This time to defeat ISIS in Iraq. During the battle to liberate Tikrit the U.S. air force flew in support of General Soleimani's ground forces. Newsweek reported at that time:

    While western nations, including the U.S., were slow to react to ISIS's march across northern Iraq, Soleimani was quick to play a more public role in Tehran's efforts to tackle the terror group. For example, the commander was seen in pictures with militiamen in the northern Iraqi town of Amerli when it was recaptured from ISIS last September.
    ...
    Top U.S. general Martin Dempsey has said that the involvement of Iran in the fight against ISIS in Iraq could be a positive step, as long as the situation does not descend into sectarianism, because of fears surrounding how Shia militias may treat the remaining Sunni population of Tikrit if it is recaptured. The military chief also claimed that almost two thirds of the 30,000 offensive were Iranian-backed militiamen, meaning that without Iranian assistance and Soleimani's guidance, the offensive on Tikrit may not have been possible.

    Iran is not responsible for the U.S. casualties in Iraq. George W. Bush is. What made Soleimani "bad" in the eyes of the U.S. was his support for the resistance against the Zionist occupation of Palestine. It was Israel that wanted him 'removed'. The media explanations for Trump's decision fail to explain that point.

    Elias Magnier also reported in his latest tweet that Soleimani encouraged Muqtada El Sadr to cooperate with the Americans in order to achieve stability in Iraq. And the Americans (on the orders of the Israelis) kill him in the most violent fashion possible.

    [Jan 06, 2020] FNC's Geraldo Rivera to Brian Kilmeade Don't Cheer Iran Strike -- You 'Never Met a War You Didn't Like!' Breitbart

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.breitbart.com

    On Friday's broadcast of Fox News Channel's "Fox & Friends," network contributor Geraldo Rivera clashed with show co-host Brian Kilmeade over Quds Force Supreme Commander Qasem Soleimani being killed in an airstrike directed by President Donald Trump.

    "I fear the worst," Rivera said. "You're going to see the U.S. markets go crazy today. You're going to see the price of oil spiking today. This is a very, very big deal."

    Kilmeade said, "I don't know if you heard. This isn't about his resumé of blood and death. It is about what was next. We stopped the next attack. That's what I think you're missing."

    Rivera replied, "By what credible source can you predict what the next Iranian move would be?"

    Kilmeade said, "The Secretary of State and American intelligence provided that material."

    Rivera added, "Don't for a minute start cheering this on. What you have done, what we have done, we have unleashed -- "

    Kilmeade insisted, "I will cheer it on. I will cheer it on. I am elated."

    Rivera said, "Then you, like Lindsey Graham, have never met a war you didn't like!"

    Kilmeade said, "That is not true. And don't even say that!"

    [Jan 06, 2020] A statement broadcast on Iranian state TV said the country would no longer respect any limits laid down in the 2015 deal

    Iraq will have to ask another country to provide air support. Iran can't do it. But Russia has those capabilities. I wonder if relations b/w Iran + Russia will warm in 2020.
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.bbc.com

    Iran has declared it will no longer abide by any of the restrictions imposed by the 2015 nuclear deal.

    In a statement it said it would no longer observe limitations on its capacity for enrichment, the level of enrichment, the stock of enriched material, or research and development.

    The statement came after a meeting of the Iranian cabinet in Tehran.

    Tensions have been high over the killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani by the US in Baghdad.

    Reports from Baghdad say the US embassy compound there was targeted in an attack on Sunday evening. A source told the BBC that four rounds of "indirect fire " had been launched in the direction of the embassy. There are no reports of casualties.

    Hundreds of thousands turned out in Iran on Sunday to give Soleimani a hero's welcome ahead of his funeral on Tuesday.

    Under the 2015 accord, Iran agreed to limit its sensitive nuclear activities and allow in international inspectors in return for the lifting of crippling economic sanctions.

    US President Donald Trump abandoned it in 2018, saying he wanted to force Iran to negotiate a new deal that would place indefinite curbs on its nuclear programme and also halt its development of ballistic missiles.

    Iran refused and had since been gradually rolling back its commitments under the agreement.

    Earlier on Sunday, Iraqi MPs passed a non-binding resolution calling for foreign troops to leave the country after the killing of Soleimani in a drone strike at Baghdad airport on Friday.

    About 5,000 US soldiers are in Iraq as part of the international coalition against the Islamic State (IS) group. The coalition paused operations against IS in Iraq just before Sunday's vote.

    Mr Trump has again threatened Iran that the US will strike back in the event of retaliation for Soleimani's death, this time saying it could do so "perhaps in a disproportionate manner".

    Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump: These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless! Image Copyright @realDonaldTrump @realDonaldTrump Report
    <figure> <span> <img alt="Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump: These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly &amp; fully strike back, &amp; perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!" src="https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/socialembed/https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1213919480574812160~/news/world-middle-east-51001167" width="465" height="279"> <span>Image Copyright @realDonaldTrump</span> <span aria-hidden="true">@realDonaldTrump</span> </span> <div><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/contact-us/editorial" aria-label="Report Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump">Report</a></div> </figure>
    Presentational white space
    Presentational grey line
    Analysis box by Jonathan Marcus, defence correspondent

    The 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, on life support ever since the Trump administration abandoned it in May 2018, may now be in its final death throes.

    Donald Trump, throughout his presidential campaign and then as president, has never failed to rail against what he calls his predecessor President Barack Obama's "bad deal". But all of its other signatories - the UK, France, Russia, China, Germany and the EU - believe that it still has merit.

    The agreement, known as the JCPOA, constrained Iran's nuclear programme for a set period in a largely verifiable way but its greatest significance - even more so given the current crisis - is that it helped to avert an imminent war. Before its signature there was mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear activities and every chance that Israel (or possibly Israel and the US in tandem) might attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

    Since the US withdrawal, Iran has successively been breaching some of the key constraints of the JCPOA. Now it appears to be throwing these constraints over altogether. What matters now is precisely what it decides to do. Will it up its level of uranium enrichment, for example, to 20%? This would reduce significantly the time it would take Tehran to obtain suitable material for a bomb. Will it continue to abide by enhanced international inspection measures?

    We are now at the destination the Trump administration clearly hoped for in May 2018 but the major powers, while deeply unhappy about Iran's breaches of the deal, are also shocked at the controversial decision by Mr Trump to kill the head of Iran's Quds Force, a decision that has again brought the US and Iran to the brink of war.

    Presentational grey line
    What did Iran say?

    Iran had been expected to announce its latest stance on the nuclear agreement this weekend, before news of Soleimani's death.

    A statement broadcast on state TV said the country would no longer respect any limits laid down in the 2015 deal.

    "Iran will continue its nuclear enrichment with no limitations and based on its technical needs," the statement said.

    Enriched uranium can be used in nuclear weapons.

    The statement did not, however, say that Iran was withdrawing from the agreement and it added that Iran would continue to co-operate with the UN's nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.

    Media playback is unsupported on your device

    https://emp.bbc.com/emp/SMPj/2.29.5/iframe.html

    'Nothing off limits for US' Hezbollah warns US Exit player
    Media caption 'Nothing off limits for US' Hezbollah warns US

    The statement added that Iran was ready to return to its commitments once it enjoyed the benefits of the agreement.

    Correspondents say this is a reference to its inability to sell oil and have access to its income under US sanctions.

    Iran has always insisted that its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.

    Sanctions have caused Iran's oil exports to collapse and the value of its currency to plummet, and sent its inflation rate soaring.

    How has the international community reacted?

    The other parties to the 2015 deal - the UK, France, Germany, China and Russia - tried to keep the agreement alive after the US withdrew in 2018.

    EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has invited Iran's Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, to visit Brussels to discuss both the nuclear deal and how to defuse the crisis over the Soleimani assassination.

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel has agreed with French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to work towards de-escalation in the Middle East, a German government spokesman was quoted as saying by AFP news agency.

    Mr Johnson said "we will not lament" the death of Soleimani , describing him as "a threat to all our interests".

    [Jan 06, 2020] Pompeo's Petty Decision to Bar Zarif

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Pompeo's Petty Decision to Bar Zarif European External Action Service/Flickr

    January 6, 2020

    |

    8:43 pm

    Daniel Larison Colum Lynch and Robbie Gramer report on the Trump administration's decision to refuse a visa to Iran's foreign minister. Barring Zarif from the U.S. is a blatant violation of U.S. obligations as the host of U.N. headquarters:

    "Any foreign minister is entitled to address the Security Council at any time and the United States is obligated to provide access to the U.N. headquarters district," said Larry Johnson, a former U.N. assistant secretary-general. Under the terms of the U.S. agreement with the United Nations, "they are absolutely obligated to let him in."

    Johnson, who currently serves as an adjunct professor at Columbia University Law School, noted that the U.S. Congress, however, passed legislation in August 1947, the so-called Public Law 80-357, that granted the U.S. government the authority to bar foreign individuals invited by the United Nations to attend meetings at its New York City headquarters if they are deemed to pose a threat to U.S. national security. But Johnson said the U.S. law would require the individual be "expected to commit some act against the U.S. national security interest while here in the United States."

    Refusing to admit Zarif is another foolish mistake on the administration's part. Preventing him from coming to the U.N. not only breaches our government's agreement with the U.N., but it also closes off a possible channel of communication and demonstrates to the world that the U.S. has no interest in a diplomatic resolution of the current crisis. Far from conveying the "toughness" that Pompeo imagines he is showing, keeping Zarif out reeks of weakness and insecurity. Zarif is a capable diplomat, but is the Trump administration really so afraid of what he would say while he is here that they would ignore U.S. obligations to block him?

    By barring Zarif, the Trump administration has given him and his government another opportunity to score an easy propaganda win. They have squandered an opportunity to reduce tensions between the U.S. and Iran. The U.S. needs to find an off-ramp to avoid further conflict following the president's assassination order, but thanks to Pompeo's decision that off-ramp won't be found in New York.

    [Jan 06, 2020] US-NATO-backed Israeli think tank Don't destroy ISIS; it's a 'useful tool' against Iran, Hezbollah, Syria The Grayzone

    Notable quotes:
    "... Several days after Efraim Inbar's paper was published, David M. Weinberg, director of public affairs at the BESA Center, wrote a similarly-themed op-ed titled "Should ISIS be wiped out?" in Israel Hayom, a free and widely read right-wing newspaper funded by conservative billionaire Sheldon Adelson that strongly favors the agenda of Israel's right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu . ..."
    "... On his website, Weinberg includes BESA in a list of resources for " hasbara ," or pro-Israel propaganda. It is joined by the ostensible civil rights organization the Anti-Defamation League and other pro-Israel think tanks, such as the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). ..."
    "... In the war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the CIA and U.S. allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia armed, trained and funded Islamic fundamentalists in their fight against the Soviet Union and Afghanistan's Soviet-backed socialist government. These U.S.-backed rebels, known as the mujahideen, were the predecessors of al-Qaida and the Taliban. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

    The director of an Israeli think tank backed by the US government and NATO, BESA, wrote that ISIS "can be a useful tool in undermining" Iran, Hezbollah, Syria, and Russia and should not be defeated. By Ben Norton / Salon

    According to a US-backed think tank that does contract work for NATO and the Israeli government, the West should not destroy ISIS, the fascist Islamist extremist group that is committing genocide and ethnically cleansing minority groups in Syria and Iraq.

    Why? The so-called Islamic State "can be a useful tool in undermining" Iran, Hezbollah, Syria and Russia, argues the think tank's director.

    "The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose," wrote Efraim Inbar in "The Destruction of Islamic State Is a Strategic Mistake," a paper published on Aug. 2.

    By cooperating with Russia to fight the genocidal extremist group, the United States is committing a "strategic folly" that will "enhance the power of the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis," Inbar argued, implying that Russia, Iran and Syria are forming a strategic alliance to dominate the Middle East.

    "The West should seek the further weakening of Islamic State, but not its destruction," he added. "A weak IS is, counterintuitively, preferable to a destroyed IS."

    BESA Israeli think tank ISIS useful tool

    US government and NATO support for ISIS-whitewashing Israeli think tank

    Efraim Inbar, an influential Israeli scholar, is the director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, a think tank that says its mission is to advance "a realist, conservative, and Zionist agenda in the search for security and peace for Israel."

    The think tank, known by its acronym BESA, is affiliated with Israel's Bar Ilan University and has been supported by the U.S. embassy in Israel, the NATO Mediterranean Initiative, the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, and the Israeli government itself.

    BESA also says it "conducts specialized research on contract to the Israeli foreign affairs and defense establishment, and for NATO."

    In his paper, Inbar suggested that it would be a good idea to prolong the war in Syria, which has destroyed the country, killing hundreds of thousands of people and displacing more than half the population.

    'Stability is not a value in and of itself. It is desirable only if it serves our interests.'

    As for the argument that defeating ISIS would make the Middle East more stable, Efraim Inbar maintained: "Stability is not a value in and of itself. It is desirable only if it serves our interests."

    "Instability and crises sometimes contain portents of positive change," he added.

    Inbar stressed that the West's "main enemy" is not the self-declared Islamic State; it is Iran. He accused the Obama administration of "inflat[ing] the threat from IS in order to legitimize Iran as a 'responsible' actor that will, supposedly, fight IS in the Middle East."

    Despite Inbar's claims, Iran is a mortal enemy of ISIS, particularly because the Iranian government is founded on Shia Islam, a branch that the Sunni extremists of ISIS consider a form of apostasy. ISIS and its affiliates have massacred and ethnically cleansed Shia Muslims in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.

    Inbar noted that ISIS threatens the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. If the Syrian government survives, Inbar argued, "Many radical Islamists in the opposition forces, i.e., Al Nusra and its offshoots, might find other arenas in which to operate closer to Paris and Berlin." Jabhat al-Nusra is Syria's al-Qaida affiliate, and one of the most powerful rebel groups in the country. (It recently changed its name to Jabhat Fatah al-Sham.)

    Hezbollah, the Lebanese-based militia that receives weapons and support from Iran, is also "being seriously taxed by the fight against IS, a state of affairs that suits Western interests," Inbar wrote.

    "Allowing bad guys to kill bad guys sounds very cynical, but it is useful and even moral to do so if it keeps the bad guys busy and less able to harm the good guys," Inbar explained.

    More Israeli think tankers warn against defeating 'useful idiot' ISIS

    Several days after Efraim Inbar's paper was published, David M. Weinberg, director of public affairs at the BESA Center, wrote a similarly-themed op-ed titled "Should ISIS be wiped out?" in Israel Hayom, a free and widely read right-wing newspaper funded by conservative billionaire Sheldon Adelson that strongly favors the agenda of Israel's right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu .

    In the piece, Weinberg defended his colleague's argument and referred to ISIS as a "useful idiot." He called the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran "rotten" and argued that Iran and Russia pose a "far greater threat than the terrorist nuisance of Islamic State."

    Weinberg also described the BESA Center as "a place of intellectual ferment and policy creativity," without disclosing that he is that think tank's director of public affairs.

    After citing responses from two other associates of his think tank who disagree with their colleague, Weinberg concluded by writing: "The only certain thing is that Ayatollah Khamenei is watching this quintessentially Western open debate with amusement."

    On his website, Weinberg includes BESA in a list of resources for " hasbara ," or pro-Israel propaganda. It is joined by the ostensible civil rights organization the Anti-Defamation League and other pro-Israel think tanks, such as the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP).

    Weinberg has worked extensively with the Israeli government and served as a spokesman for Bar Ilan University. He also identifies himself on his website as a "columnist and lobbyist who is a sharp critic of Israel's detractors and of post-Zionist trends in Israel."

    'Stress the "holy war" aspect': Long history of the US and Israel supporting Islamist extremists

    Efraim Inbar boasts an array of accolades. He was a member of the political strategic committee for Israel's National Planning Council, a member of the academic committee of the Israeli military's history department and the chair of the committee for the national security curriculum at the Ministry of Education.

    He also has a prestigious academic record, having taught at Johns Hopkins and Georgetown and lectured at Harvard, MIT, Columbia, Oxford and Yale. Inbar served as a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and was appointed as a Manfred Wörner NATO fellow.

    The strategy Inbar and Weinberg have proposed, that of indirectly allowing a fascist Islamist group to continue fighting Western enemies, is not necessarily a new one in American and Israeli foreign policy circles. It is reminiscent of the U.S. Cold War policy of supporting far-right Islamist extremists in order to fight communists and left-wing nationalists.

    In the war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the CIA and U.S. allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia armed, trained and funded Islamic fundamentalists in their fight against the Soviet Union and Afghanistan's Soviet-backed socialist government. These U.S.-backed rebels, known as the mujahideen, were the predecessors of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

    In the 1980s, Israel adopted a similar policy. It supported right-wing Islamist groups like Hamas in order to undermine the Palestine Liberation Organization, or PLO, a coalition of various left-wing nationalist and communist political parties.

    "Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation," Avner Cohen, a retired Israeli official who worked in Gaza for more than 20 years, told The Wall Street Journal.

    As far back as 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower insisted to the CIA that, in order to fight leftist movements in the Middle East, "We should do everything possible to stress the 'holy war' aspect."

    Ben Norton Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with editor Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @ BenjaminNorton . bennorton.com Share Tweet Filed under: Bashar al-Assad , BESA , David M Weinberg , Efraim Inbar , hasbara , Hezbollah , Iran , ISIS , NATO , Russia , Syria

    [Jan 06, 2020] Putin's Hour Is At Hand - PaulCraigRoberts.org

    Notable quotes:
    "... Putin's Hour Is At Hand was published in the Russian press Monday morning, January 6, 2020. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.paulcraigroberts.org

    Putin's Hour Is At Hand January 4, 2020 | Categories: Articles & Columns | Tags: | Print This Article Print This Article

    Putin's Hour Is At Hand was published in the Russian press Monday morning, January 6, 2020.

    Putin's Hour Is At Hand

    Paul Craig Roberts

    Vladimir Putin is the most impressive leader on the world stage. He survived and arose from a Russia corrupted by Washington and Israel during the Yeltsin years and reestablished Russia as a world power. He dealt successfully with American/Israeli aggression against South Ossetia and against Ukraine, incorporating at Crimea's request the Russian province back into Mother Russia. He has tolerated endless insults and provocations from Washington and its empire without responding in kind. He is conciliatory and a peacemaker from a position of strength.

    He knows that the American empire based as it is on arrogance and lies is failing economically, socially, politically, and militarily. He understands that war serves no Russian interest.

    Washington's murder of Qasem Soleimani, a great Iranian leader, indeed, one of the rare leaders in world history, has dimmed Trump's leadership and placed the limelight on Putin. The stage is set for Putin and Russia to assume the leadership of the world.

    Washington's murder of Soleimani is a criminal act that could start World War 3 just as the Serbian murder of the Austrian Archduke set World War 1 in motion. Only Putin and Russia with China's help can stop this war that Washington has set in motion.

    Putin understood that the Washington/Israeli intended destabilization of Syria was aimed at Russia. Without warning Russia intervened, defeated the Washington financed and armed proxy forces, and restored stability to Syria.

    Defeated, Washington and Israel have decided to bypass Syria and take the attack on Russia directly to Iran. The destabilization of Iran serves both Washington and Israel. For Israel Iran's demise stops support for Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that has twice defeated Israel's army and prevented Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon. For Washington Iran's demise allows CIA-supported jihadists to bring instability into the Russian Federation.

    Unless Putin submits to American and Israeli will, he has no choice but to block any Washington/Israeli attack on Iran.

    The easiest and cleanest way for Putin to do this is to announce that Iran is under Russia's protection. This protection should be formalized in a mutual defense treaty between Russia, China, and Iran, with perhaps India and Turkey as members. This is hard for Putin to do, because incompetent historians have convinced Putin that alliances are the cause of war. But an alliance such as this would prevent war. Not even the insane criminal Netanyahu and the crazed American neoconservatives would, even when completely drunk or deluded, declare war on Iran, Russia, China, and if included in the alliance India and Turkey. It would mean the death of America, Israel and any European country sufficiently stupid to participate.

    If Putin is unable to free himself from the influence of incompetent historians, who in effect are serving Washington, not Russian, interests, he has other options. He can calm down Iran by giving Iran the best Russian air defense systems with Russian crews to train the Iranians and whose presence serve as a warning to Washington and Israel that an attack on Russian forces is an attack on Russia.

    This done, Putin can then, not offer, but insist on mediating. This is Putin's role as there is no other with the power, influence and objectivity to mediate.

    Putin's job is not so much to rescue Iran as to get Trump out of a losing war that would destroy Trump. Putin could set his own price. For example, Putin's price can be the revival of the INF/START treaty, the anti-ballistic missile treaty, the removal of NATO from Russian borders. In effect, Putin is positioned to demand whatever he wants.

    Iranian missiles can sink any American vessels anywhere near Iran. Chinese missiles can sink any American fleets anywhere near China. Russian missiles can sink American fleets anywhere in the world. The ability of Washington to project power in the Middle East now that everyone, Shia and Sunni and Washington's former proxies such as ISIS, hates Americans with a passion is zero. The State Department has had to order Americans out of the Middle East. How does Washingon count as a force in the Middle East when no American is safe there?

    Of course Washington is stupid in its arrogance, and Putin, China, and Iran must take this into consideration. A stupid government is capable of bringing ruin not only on itself but on others.

    So there are risks for Putin. But there are also risks for Putin failing to take charge. If Washington and Israel attack Iran, which Israel will try to provoke by some false flag event as sinking an American warship and blaming Iran, Russia will be at war anyway. Better for the initiative to be in Putin's hands. And better for the world and life on Earth for Russia to be in charge.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Trump voters will not be pleased to see the price of oil jump way over a hundred dollars a barrel.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Charles Pewitt , says: Show Comment January 3, 2020 at 7:46 pm GMT

    The oil producing states in the USA -- such as Alaska, Texas, North Dakota, New Mexico and others -- will be happy to see hostilities between the American Empire and Iran, and the Russians and Mexicans and Brazilians and Canadians and other oil producing nations will be similarly pleased to see the price of oil jump way over a hundred dollars a barrel.

    The Saudi Arabians are most likely trying to bribe the Iranians so that the Iranians don't bomb the living Hell out of Saudi Arabian oil installations but maybe the bribe won't be big enough or the Iranian strategists want to pop the price of oil before they do anything else. The Iranians might be enticed by Saudi Arabian offers of dollars or other hard currencies in large quantities and the Iranians might hold off on pulverizing the Hell out of any and all oil facility targets in Saudi Arabia. The bribery negotiations might be highly civilized with the Iranians and Saudi Arabians sitting around eating figs and caviar and mulling over bribery figures.

    Meanwhile, the greedy oil interests in the USA and globally are licking their frigging chops at the thought of oil jumping to 150 dollars a barrel and staying there. The human factor must be considered without considerations of whether or not the niceties of proper behaviour are in play. The oil money grubber people want more loot and they don't give a damn how they get it.

    The Iranians might split the difference and take half the bribe money from the Saudi Arabians and then bomb the Hell out of half the targets they originally planned to hit. The Saudi Arabians could helpfully point out some aging oil installations that were due for refurbishment anyhow and tell the Iranians they could hit them. I guess the oil business is murderous up to a point, and then the negotiations kick in.

    If the Iranians don't partially pop the Saudi Arabian oil installations, then maybe the Iranians and Saudi Arabians have a sneaky prior deal on that.

    The Iranians have to play the public relations game and the best way to do that would be to jump up the price of oil while telling the Iranian people that they will get their revenge but not just yet, and the Iranians will tell their people that the long game is the way to go.

    Don't tell me that the oil people money grubbers ain't licking their chops like ravenous wolves at the thought of the Iranians pounding all kinds of Hell out of Saudi Arabian oil installations!

    [Jan 06, 2020] Roger Stone: I'm HARDCORE Zionist and so is president Trump

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    geokat62 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:38 pm GMT

    @Cloak And Dagger

    This is out of control!

    I took Roger Stone at his word when he revealed:

    "I'm HARDCORE Zionist and so is president Trump!"

    We're all going to see just how HARDCORE Zionist Trumpstein really is!

    [Jan 06, 2020] Mike Pompeo- Killing Qasem Soleimani disrupted an imminent attack

    Looks like Pompeo a gifted liar...
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    James Shaw , 2 days ago

    THE PEOPLE OF BOTH COUNTRIES DO NOT WANT WAR...ITS THE LEADERS THAT WANT WAR, NOT THE PEOPLE

    Moses Tekper , 2 days ago

    The world is a safer place there but all American civilians should get out of the region. What a joke.

    Fi Vongphachanh , 2 days ago

    Trump screwed up that why need to move American people's.

    Sidra Irfan , 1 day ago

    Trump try to open door of third [world] war He is really sick man.

    Bhai Log , 1 day ago

    Shameless act by trump. World need peace but Donald trump doesn't want

    WADA FAKA , 2 days ago

    Now those who fought ISIS with blood and swear are systematically eliminated by the USA😎

    Manny M , 2 days ago

    Your asking the wrong people for the strikes, ask Israel 🇮🇱 you'll get little more then here!!

    delonix regia , 1 day ago

    Mike Pompeo? " We lie , cheat and steal " . That's all we have to know about this guy .

    Fix News , 2 days ago

    Done our level best under the direct guidance of the president. Oh boy.

    Aldemar Delapuy , 2 days ago

    Who wants a jeep ride with an Iranian general?

    G.E. B. , 2 days ago

    As soon as he opened his mouth he started to glorify Trump.....

    Captain1 Jones , 1 day ago

    What's different is that Trump got impeached.

    A Warrior of Christ , 2 days ago

    Puppet Pompeo, Trump's hand is behind his back and manipulating his lips!

    Green Orange , 2 days ago

    There is No justice, if there was , most of the USA politicians would be sentenced for War Crimes.

    Sherry Osinga , 2 days ago

    ... you don't understand, we don't trust you.

    Muntadher Alqrashie , 2 days ago

    Think of us the Iraqi people before you start a war. We're tired from wars.. enough

    Hadzra Hatta , 2 days ago

    Does Mike Pompeo know what he's talking about?

    Sandy Phelps , 1 day ago

    Pompeo is a traitor and a liar. We are letting liars lead us into a terrible war.

    Elizabeth Klimas , 2 days ago

    have weapon of mass destruction being found yet other than CHEMTRAILS in the USA?????

    BARTETMEDIA , 2 days ago

    Trump stuck his right foot way up his a$$ this time. Now the left foot it's coming.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Buttigieg on Soleimani strike- We need answers

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    jason thomas , 3 hours ago

    Don't trust the CIA


    Aramai Jonassi     , 9 hours ago

    We have nothing to worry about with Jared Kushner being in charge of middle East peace, amiright?🙄

    Deborah Lawson , 8 hours ago (edited)

    More people at Mara Lago knew that General Suliemeni was going to be hit than congressmen and congresswomen? That tells me trump was bragging about how much power he has. He's so insecure and feeble that he has no business holding the most power office in the land!


    light Archer     , 10 hours ago

    The main beneficiaries of Solimanies death are his arch enemies, Isis. Trump turned on both his field allies against Isis, the Kurds and Solimani's militia. Who are America's allies in the field, now?

    Idin Azadipour , 5 hours ago

    Let me tally this up for the wonderful viewers, an American backed coupe of a democratically elected prime minister who wanted to nationalize the oil fields of Iran which at time was owned by Britain. The shooting down of a plane with 290 people in it by an American Naval vessel. The backing of Saddam with chemical weapons and millions of dollars, to go to war with Iran leaving half a million dead. The installation of a dictator whose secret police force imprisoned, tortured and killed political dissidence. Learn your history.

    Katherine Diaz , 20 minutes ago (edited)

    All jokes aside but everyone this isnt a joke anymore becuase of our wreckless president making dumb distractions ive ever heard of trump is a sociopath he makes the rich richer, the poor poorer. Just remember this guy and his family are banned from having fun raisers in the state of new york becuase trump held a big fundraiser to help fight kids cancer he stole money from kids to search to find a cure for cancer. He nearly shut down the gouverment becuase Congress refused to give him the money for him to build the wall but not most of all 5 general from the us resigned becuase they didnt agree with his intensions. He doesnt care about anyone but himself and anyone with common sense can sse that and im done with the US government and this isnt the American that i grew up loving. All the hatred for eachother is disgusting and disturbing


    TheFarmanimalfriend     , 11 hours ago

    The Iranian fiasco started in 1953 when America overthrew Iran's democratically elected government, so we could get their oil. The autocrat we installed had a nasty habit of torturing and murdering any who opposed him, but he did sell us oil. In 1979 the Iranians, united by their clergy, threw him out. We keep stirring the hornets nest we created and are surprised when we get stung? Now you too can have a front row seat at this foreign policy debacle! War? We don't need no stinking war. Trump is desperate to distract the American people from seeing how incompetent and stupid he really is.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Elizabeth Warren on Qasem Soleimani killing- People are reasonably asking, why this moment

    Warren kept her ground wonderfully in this exchange. Warren suggests that people are reasonable asking about timing. Also warmongering of Trump.
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    Richie Beck , 6 hours ago (edited)

    "When everyone else is losing their heads, it is important to keep yours." - Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France and Irony.

    Bob Bart , 7 hours ago (edited)

    " What is human warfare but just this; an effort to make the laws of God and nature take sides with one party. " ~ Henry David Thoreau

    personal cooking , 4 hours ago

    China is laughing.US pay attention in middel east now.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Angry Bear " Killing Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis by Barkley Rosser

    Notable quotes:
    "... If the plan is/was to leave Syria and Iraq, it was not. In this case it was a screwed, albeit mafia-style, tactical move killing two birds with one stone. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | angrybearblog.com
    Most of the attention in this recent attack by a US drone at the Baghdad Airport has been on it killing Iranian Quds Force commander, Qasim (Qassem) Solmaini (Suleimani), supposedly plotting an “imminent” attack on Americans as he flew a commercial airliner to Iraq at the invitation of its government and passed through passport control. But much less attention has been paid to the killing in that attack of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq and reportedly an officer in the Iraqi military, as well as being, according to Juan Cole, a Yazidi Kurd, although the PMF is identified as being a Shia militia allied with Iran.

    The problem here is that supposedly US leaders approved this strike because there were no Iraqi officials in this group; it was supposedly “clean.” But there was al-Muhandis, with his PMF also allied to a political faction, the Fath, who hold 48 seats in the Iraqi parliament. The often anti-Iranian Shia leader, Moqtada al-Sadr, has now joined with Fath and other groups to demand a vote in the parliament to order a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.

    ... ... ...

    There is much more that can be said about this, but among less noticed responses I note that although Israeli PM Netanyahu made a strong statement supporting the attack, apparently he has ordered his aides not to talk about it further, and the Israelis are worried about possible escalation of this In KSA, “Bone-Saw” MbS has said nothing, although supposedly the Saudi had sought to kill Solemaini themselves.

    Oh, and of course Mike Pompeo announced that this move has made Americans “safe” in the region, even as Americans have been urged to leave Iraq immediately. So, yeah, they will be more safe by getting the heck out.

    likbez , January 6, 2020 3:22 am

    @Terry, January 5, 2020 10:37 pm

    it is not clear to me that killing Solemaini was a mistake.

    If the plan is/was to leave Syria and Iraq, it was not. In this case it was a screwed, albeit mafia-style, tactical move killing two birds with one stone.

    But a more plausible hypothesis is that it was spontaneous Trump-style overreaction on siege of the US embassy which now start backfiring in a spectacular and very dangerous way, because Iran views this as the declaration of war (and not without reasons, see below)

    "Before the vote Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi told the parliament that he was scheduled to meet with Soleimani a day after his arrival to receive a letter from Iran to Iraq in response to a de-escalation offer Saudi Arabia had made. The U.S. assassinated Soleimani before the letter could be delivered by him. Abdul-Mahdi also said that Trump had asked him to mediate between the U.S. and Iran. Did he do that to trap Soleimani? It is no wonder then that Abdul-Mahdi is fuming."

    If this is true, the most close analogy I can think of is probably Lebanon, 1983. See overview of 1983 Beirut barracks bombings at https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/01/there-will-be-blood-by-larry-c-johnson.html

    Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said the parliamentary resolution to end foreign troop presence in the country did not go far enough, calling on local and foreign militia groups to unite . I also have confirmation that the Mehdi Army is being re-mobilized .

    He called for closure of the US embassy and forming united Shia paramilitary groups to fight occupation which he named "Resistance legions"

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202001051077952584-iraqi-shiite-cleric-sadr-calls-for-international-resistance-legions-as-mps-vote-to-oust-us-troops/

    More specifically, Sadr issues a statement with demands:
    • close the US embassy
    • end security deal immediately
    • close US bases in a humiliating way
    • protection of Iraq should be handed to the Resistance militias
    • boycott of US products

    [Jan 06, 2020] Tucker Carlson is livid with anger and frustration at Trump's actions .

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    KA , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:57 pm GMT

    @Just passing through https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/04/media/fox-news-iran-soleimani/index.html

    Tucker Carlson is livid with anger and frustration at Trump's actions .

    Death to America is a rallying point for Iran to emphasize the same aspect of American status .
    They talk in future . Carlson is reminding that we are already there .

    If people woke up with anger at Iran., they would find that the dead horse isn't able to do much but only can attract a lot of attention from far .

    The reason Taliban didn't inform Mulla Omar's death was to let the rank and file continues to remain engaged without getting into internal feuding fight .
    A trues state of US won't be televised until the horse starts rotting but then that would be quite late .

    I don't recall any dissent until this assassination . Now 70 cities are witnessing protests and a few in Media are not happy at all .

    There is a big unknown if and when Iran would strike back and at who. Persian is not like khasaogi murderer or Harri kidnapper .

    [Jan 06, 2020] Wow the iraq PM office just stated that The US government had asked Iraq to invite Soleimani to iraq for face to face deescalation talks with the US then murdered in the airport.

    Notable quotes:
    "... In other blowbacks from the murder of Soleimani the Qatar leaders are fuming over the use of a Qatar based reaper drone to launch the missiles and were controlled remotely by operators at the US Air Force base in Creech, Nevada. https://www.arabnews.com/node/1608386/middle-east ..."
    "... The picture of the meeting between the Qatar FM and the Iranian FM showed the Qatar flag with the red replaced by black in respect. https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/04/01/2020/Qatar-Foreign-Minister-meets-Iranian-counterpart-in-Tehran ..."
    "... It should be noted that Qatar owes a debt of honor to Iran for supplying need food goods to survive a blockade by KSA and the UAE. Likewise, Qatar has close ties with Turkey due to the presence of a couple thousand Turkish troops that prevented a KSA invasion and has been supplying a lot of LGN fuel to Turkey. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Kadath , Jan 5 2020 17:23 utc | 60

    Wow the iraq PM office just stated that The US government had asked Iraq to invite Soleimani to iraq for face to face deescalation talks with the US then murdered in the airport. Even by outlaw empire standards this was insane they murdered a diplomat on talks they invited him to. US diplomacy has been on decline for decades but this is reckless terrorist diplomacy, with a single action the US has lost the middle east and killed the value of US assurances and diplomacy

    paul , Jan 5 2020 17:27 utc | 63

    The Soliemani assassination now looks even more abhorent. Now it looks like one of the oldest and most abhorent types of war acts: a fake parley turned into a murder zone. What the people who seem to have arranged this - presumably the US and Israel and maybe Saudi Arabia - apparently did not expect was that Soleimani was to become a martyr in the eyes of his people.

    Mercouris suggests that Soleimani expected and planned on exactly this: that he would become a martyr and a unifying symbol in the end. Presumably he did not know when it would happen exactly, or perhaps he did have a sense. Several people here suggested as much and it doesn't seem so farfetched now. I'm reminded of Martin Luther King's death, though of course Soleimani was far from being a man of peace as MLK was. MLK seemed to know that he was soon to become a martyr and he seemed to accept this as a necessary thing, even as perhaps the best way for him to continue his work. Obi Wan Kenobi lol! ,

    But there is a correlating thought I don't see anyone picking up on yet. If this was indeed an ambush, possibly, then it was preplanned. Trump's reported veiled references to people at his resort ('something huge is coming') also seem to point to this. In that case it seems even more likely that the initial rocket attack was itself a false flag operation.

    Igor Bundy , Jan 5 2020 17:31 utc | 65
    Ah the text book case from the British Empire..

    They invited all the Tibetan leaders to attend the peace conference.. As a gesture of respect, everyone removed a single shot from their rifle which left the Tibetan security guards single shot muskets defenceless when the British opened fire and ended the tibetan political power and started drawing the new borders.. After a while the communists took over when the british left and a leaderless tibetan homeland as their own.. China is one third the Tibetan empire.. It was taken without any resistance at all.. China in 5000 years was never able to conquer Tibet.. But like the US helping exterminate christians world wide.. The british helps other cultures get destroyed..

    BM , Jan 5 2020 17:33 utc | 66
    3. If Saudi tricked Suleimani by getting Iraq to "mediate" (Iraq's prime minister was expecting a message by him on the mediation when he was assassinated), Saudi will get targeted.
    Posted by: somebody | Jan 5 2020 16:52 utc | 44

    More likely, Saudi will be pissed off at Israel enough to have a serious impact on their relations! All the more reason to patch up with Iran and go for the HOPE plan.

    All the attention is focussed on how Trump has messed up so badly, which he has - but Israel has messed itself up even more badly.

    krollchem , Jan 5 2020 17:39 utc | 67
    Some background on the Iraqi vote:

    Posted by Naijaa_Man at the Saker site on January 05, 2020 · at 9:58 am EST/EDT

    "From Iraq Prime Minister's speech in Parliament, I gathered that:

    (1) Trump told the Prime Minister that he will attack Iraqi PMU Militias, The Prime Minister objected and Trump ignored him

    (2) After the US Embassy protests ended, Trump called the Prime Minister and thanked him for successfully persuading Iraqi PMU Militias to withdraw from Embassy grounds and Green Zone. Trump refused to apologize for defying the Prime Minister's request to respect Iraq Sovereignty and strike the PMU militias

    (3) Trump asked Iraq to be a mediator between USA/Saudi axis and the Iranians. The Prime Minister agreed and communicated the message to Iran. The Prime Minister asked Americans to stop conducting helicopter overflights above PMU military bases, Trump ignored him

    (4) With respect to the mediation issue, Qassem Solemani was in Iraq to deliver a personal message from Ayatollah Khamenei to the Prime Minister when the Americans assassinated him."

    This has led to, 170 Iraqi lawmakers sign draft bill to expel US military forces from country
    https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/05/615421/Iraqi-lawmakers-draft-US-forces

    Note : there is a process to be followed. The lawmakers will now seek parliamentary approval.
    http://thesaker.is/soleimani-murder-sitrep-funeral-and-vote/

    So technically, The Iraqi parliament voted to "ask" the Iraqi government to end the security agreement with the US, end the presence of foreign troops & the international coalition's mandate against ISIS, even in Iraqi air space "for whatever reason."

    There will be a lot of negotiation required before any significant withdrawal of US troops. It is noteworthy that there were only 180 US troops in Iraq 2014.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_Iraq_(2014%E2%80%93present)

    The surge in US forces only occurred following the 2014 defeat of ISIS in the battle for Latakia, Syria where the Obama Administration backed islamists (many imported from Libya) were relocated into Iraq and joined former Saddam military forces to roll back Iraqi Shia forces.
    http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS_Governance.pdf

    As discussed in the latest Grayzone 2 hour discussion it was Qassem Soleimani who was key to the defeat of the US/Israeli/KSA/UAE backed ISIS forces.

    https://thegrayzone.com/2020/01/03/us-war-iran-iraq-rania-khalek/

    For more coverage see RANIA KHALEK'S twitter site:

    https://twitter.com/RaniaKhalek?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    As reported in RT, "Iraqi parliament has voted to have foreign troops removed from the country, heeding to a call from its caretaker prime minister. The move comes after US assassination of a top Iranian general and a commander of Iraqi militia The resolution, which was passed anonymously, instructs the government to cancel a request for military assistance to the US-led coalition, which was issued in response to the rise of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS). With IS supposedly defeated, Iraq will not need foreign troops to fight the jihadists and can close its airspace to coalition aircraft."

    According to Press TV, some Western military presence may remain for training purposes. The resolution says Iraqi military leadership has to report the number of foreign instructors that are necessary for Iraqi national security At the same time, the Iraqi Foreign Ministry said that Baghdad had turned to the UN Security Council with complaints about US violations of its sovereignty The interim prime minister said after the incident that it was clear it was in the interest of both the US and Iraq to end the presence of foreign forces on Iraqi soil

    Mahdi said Soleimani was on his way to meet him when the US airstrike killed the Iranian general https://mobile.twitter.com/janearraf/status/1213823941321592834

    Influential Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr stated in a letter that Iraq should go further and shut down the US embassy."
    https://www.rt.com/news/477515-iraq-parliament-foreign-troops/

    More specifically, Sadr issues a statement saying the partial end proposal was weak anyway, with demands:
    • close the US embassy
    • end security deal immediately
    • close US bases in a humiliating way
    • protection of Iraq should be handed to the Resistance militias
    • boycott of US products

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202001051077952584-iraqi-shiite-cleric-sadr-calls-for-international-resistance-legions-as-mps-vote-to-oust-us-troops/

    Meanwhile, "Iraq's (Kurdish) President Barham Salih has threatened to step down rather than approve a candidate for prime minister put forward by Iran-linked political parties, pushing Baghdad deeper into political turmoil after nearly three months of anti-government protests."

    "Protesters have demanded that the next prime minister be someone unconnected to political parties they accuse of corruption. Yet the Iran-linked Binaa parliamentary voting bloc has nominated Asaad al-Edani, a former minister and governor of oil-rich Basra province. Binaa's bloc is mostly made up of the Fatah party led by militia leader turned politician Hadi al-Ameri, who is close to Tehran. The rival Sairoon bloc, headed by populist Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, said it would not participate in the process of nominating a new premier."
    https://www.ft.com/content/50f09fe4-27f4-11ea-9a4f-963f0ec7e134

    However, "Out of an eagerness to spare blood and preserve civil peace, I apologize for not naming Edani prime minister," the letter continued. "I am ready to submit my resignation to parliament."
    https://time.com/5755588/iraq-president-resignation/

    My take is that the best way to minimize further violence would for the US to accept Muqtada al-Sadr demands.

    In other blowbacks from the murder of Soleimani the Qatar leaders are fuming over the use of a Qatar based reaper drone to launch the missiles and were controlled remotely by operators at the US Air Force base in Creech, Nevada. https://www.arabnews.com/node/1608386/middle-east

    The picture of the meeting between the Qatar FM and the Iranian FM showed the Qatar flag with the red replaced by black in respect.
    https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/04/01/2020/Qatar-Foreign-Minister-meets-Iranian-counterpart-in-Tehran

    It should be noted that Qatar owes a debt of honor to Iran for supplying need food goods to survive a blockade by KSA and the UAE. Likewise, Qatar has close ties with Turkey due to the presence of a couple thousand Turkish troops that prevented a KSA invasion and has been supplying a lot of LGN fuel to Turkey.

    Today, the first blowback came as Al Shabab (backed by Qatar and the UAE) attacked for the first time a US base in Kenya which came a few hours after the Qatari FM visited Teheran. Link:

    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/01/05/us-aircraft-destroyed-no-troops-injured-in-jihadi-attack-on-base-in-kenya/

    It is not only Shia and some Sunni that oppose US/Israeli aggression in the Mideast but also Christians:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdZgkGI5h0A

    On a related note, Putin is scheduled to visit Turkey on January 8, 2020 to "officially" open the Turkstream pipeline. Putin had better have extra security given the many murders conducted for geopolitical gain by Western powers and their agents!

    I close with a visionary French rock opera Starmania "story of an alternate reality where a fascist millionaire famous for building skyscrapers is running for president on an anti-immigration policy, and where the poor are getting more and more desperate for their voices to be heard."
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78LytR-6Xmk

    See also Dimash's renderation of the Starmania final song S.O.S https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hTy2MqmwLk

    Pray for peace

    somebody , Jan 5 2020 17:41 utc | 68
    Posted by: BM | Jan 5 2020 17:33 utc | 65

    What you describe is fictional. Saudi continues to have a huge problem in Yemen, which is his backyard .

    Jackrabbit , Jan 5 2020 17:45 utc | 69
    Is there any confirmation of Magnier's reporting about Soleimani as a peace envoy? I haven't found any.

    Magnier previously mused that Trump offered Iran the killing of a US 4-star General to compensate for the killing of Soleimani. That is nonsense.

    !!

    Kadath , Jan 5 2020 17:46 utc | 70
    Well that didnt take too long Marco Rubio (little Marco) is already calling on the US to ignore the parliament's resolution and support a break away kurdistan in northern iraq
    oldhippie , Jan 5 2020 17:46 utc | 71
    Trump is real clear. He has a target list of 52 sites. They will be hit if Iran does anything at all. Or if Iran does nothing they will be hit. Paranoids invent slights and offenses. So the bombs will fly, soon.

    The only questions are what delivery systems, what armaments, how good are Iran's air defences? I suspect Iran's air defences are quite good and plenty gets through anyway. So is it nukes or "only" mini-nukes on the first round? Any way you look at it there will be a second round. And then the next question. Can anyone or anything put the brakes on this sequence of events?

    Trump is just a second string gangster. The gangsters who are firmly in his camp are also second string. The big boys have largely been absent, they don't much care who is US President or how the little squabbles go. Wondering here if Rockefellers and Rothschilds and the older families have good means for quickly getting a Hollywood rewrite on all these antics or if the avalanche is now unstoppable.

    As for the new information that Soleimani was lured and ambushed --- why would anyone do diplomacy with US again? Even Lavrov has to wonder if he is safe anywhere. Ordinary diplomats and functionaries at UN have to wonder if they are safe. Who would want to be so much as a consular assistant?

    Jackrabbit , Jan 5 2020 17:54 utc | 72
    Laguerre @52: Your fear is incomprehensible.

    "Incomprehensible?" LOL.

    Kadath @70:

    Well that didnt take too long Marco Rubio (little Marco) is already calling on the US to ignore the parliament's resolution and support a break away kurdistan in northern iraq

    !!
    cdvision , Jan 5 2020 18:01 utc | 73
    Forward @24. I believe yours is the correct interpretation. Israeli fingerprints are all over this. Its the only thing that makes sense. Trump may have averted all hell by claiming credit, but the truth will soon be out. And you can bet the farm that Iran already knows the truth. This has already backfired spectacularly in uniting Sunni and Shia against the US/Israel/Saudi. And we are still in the period of mourning. It hasn't begun yet.
    psychohistorian , Jan 5 2020 18:04 utc | 74
    @ oldhippie # 71 who wrote
    "
    Trump is just a second string gangster. The gangsters who are firmly in his camp are also second string. The big boys have largely been absent, they don't much care who is US President or how the little squabbles go. Wondering here if Rockefellers and Rothschilds and the older families have good means for quickly getting a Hollywood rewrite on all these antics or if the avalanche is now unstoppable.
    "

    I am of the opinion that what is going on is part of the elite script for our world and only would be proven wrong if they go nuclear. This circus we have been seeing is the throw America under the bus ploy while global private finance get to cull the heard and stay in charge of human finance.....I hope they fail but having read The Shock Doctrine, I have had this scenarion in my head for quite some time. Look at this forum and how many are of faith....If the faith leaders back the God of Mammon core then think about how hard it would be to eliminate......in spite of China's growing example.

    It doesn't slow down from here, IMO, so we should have a pretty good read of what is playing out in 6 months or so

    Cynica , Jan 5 2020 18:06 utc | 75
    Especially in times like these, people should remember what drives US foreign policy more than anything else: maintaining the reserve-currency status of the US dollar. It's no coincidence at all that the countries that the US establishment considers its biggest adversaries are those countries which are resisting the dollar hegemony the most. The US establishment may stop at nothing to maintain the dollar hegemony. Certainly it won't shy away from such underhanded tactics as those employed in the assassination of Soleimani.

    It's entirely predictable that the Iraqi parliament would order the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. And it's entirely predictable that the US will ignore that order. Likewise, it's predictable that Iran will respond in some way against US military targets in the Middle East, which will trigger US airstrikes against targets in Iran (as Trump has already promised). At that point, it's war, plain and simple. Iran will most likely declare war on the US after the airstrikes and then launch an all-out missile attack against as many US and allied targets in the Middle East as possible. What happens beyond that is more difficult to see. It may well become a case of "Apres nous, le deluge."

    Russ , Jan 5 2020 18:07 utc | 76
    "Before the vote Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi told the parliament that he was scheduled to meet with Soleimani a day after his arrival to receive a letter from Iran to Iraq in response to a de-escalation offer Saudi Arabia had made. The U.S. assassinated Soleimani before the letter could be delivered by him. "

    So if this report is correct, is there any word on whether the Saudi regime still stands by this offer, and has Mahdi received it yet by another channel?

    As for the vote, I've predicted in the last several threads that the US clearly is throwing down the mask completely, will never abide by legal demands to leave, and will resort to straight brute violence in an attempt to hold onto the country as a staging ground for war. They'll try to force regime change if they can (though now that such a coup would be directly engineered by the abominable occupier, it's hard to see what significant number of Irakis would support it and serve in a puppet government. It would be like the fake, zero-supported Mussolini retread regime the Germans installed after invading Italy in 1943.

    Failing that, the US will try to wreck the place completely, turn it into total chaos.

    DFC , Jan 5 2020 18:16 utc | 79
    Of course USA has threatened many times to nuke many contries, North Korea and China were threatened many many times from the Mc Arthur times (1950) to just recently; of course North Vietnam was repeatedly threatened with devastating nuclear attacks, and many others have been subject to the same bully tactics that never ever worked and could have medium term consequences, in the american citicens, difficult to predict.
    Any nuclear unprovoked first strike attack of the USA to another country, to put it on their kness, will be follow for a complete nuclear proliferation of nuclear weapons and delivery systems all around the world by nations and terrorist groups, and I think in few years it is nos unthinkable some nuclear devices could explode in some american cities (by unknown people).

    China and Russia will prepare themselves all their allies for that eventuality bigly

    Why do they think nuclear threats will work now with people with a martyrdom mentality like Iran if it did not work in the past? why do the american military thinks the iranians are so easy to scare? what do they think Iran and every Shia group in the world will do next in the case of a nuke attack on Iran soil?

    The world will be x1000 more dangerous for the american people.

    Even nuking failed made Japan surrender, in fact was Zhukov crushing defeat of the japanese Manchuria army and the fear that would be the Soviet Union who invades Japan and put a red flag in the emperor's palace (you know uncle Joe was less fearful of soldiers' losses than the americans counterpart).

    [Jan 06, 2020] $21 Trillion Missing U.S. Government as a Criminal Enterpris

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Tom_LX , Jan 5 2020 17:24 utc | 61

    Here is a story making the rounds which perfectly fits in the "Should I Stay or Should I Leave" US Middle East Swamp.
    How the Pentagon Was Duped by Contractors Using Shell Companies By David Voreacos and Neil Weinberg
    January 4, 2020, 2:00 PM GMT+1

    https://www.cryptogon.com/?p=57055
    $21 Trillion Missing – U.S. Government a Criminal Enterprise – Catherine Austin Fitts
    By Greg Hunter On October 1, 2017

    [Jan 06, 2020] Iran takes final JCPOA step, removing last limit on nuclear program

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    b , Jan 5 2020 18:49 utc | 83

    Iran takes final JCPOA step, removing last limit on nuclear program
    The statement by the Iranian government regarding the measure reads:


    "The Islamic Republic of Iran, in the fifth step in reducing its commitments, discards the last key component of its limitations in the JCPOA, which is the "limit on the number of centrifuges."
    As such, the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear program no longer faces any operational restrictions, including enrichment capacity, percentage of enrichment, amount of enriched material, and research and development.


    From here on, Iran's nuclear program will be developed solely based on its technical needs.


    If the sanctions are lifted and Iran benefits from its interests enshrined in the JCPOA, the Islamic Republic is ready to return to its commitments.


    Iran's cooperation with the IAEA will continue as before.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Iran is relatively isolated politically

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    abierno , Jan 5 2020 19:19 utc | 87

    With reference to Iran's defense capability, it has been noted elsewhere that Iran purchased the Russian S500 system which is currently being rolled out. Inquiring minds would predict that delivery is accelerated. Also, Iraq was considering the S 400 system and, again this could be predicted to be an unpublished immediate decision. Looks like Erdogan was right to stand his ground regarding the S400s.

    Discussions appear to assume that Iran is relatively isolated politically. Perhaps forgetting that they are allied in a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with China, are an applicant for the Shanghai Cooperative Association and a dialogue partner with the BRICS. This covers considerable ground geostratically with players who are reflective, disciplined and play a long game in attaining their goals. More probably than not engaged in dialogues which are never revealed in media voices. Retaliation and revenge will be international, ranging far beyond the middle east.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Trump now faces that possibility of an election campaign with US soldiers getting killed by Iranian proxies with a decentralized command structure?

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    somebody , Jan 5 2020 19:20 utc | 88

    Posted by: Jose Garcia | Jan 5 2020 18:56 utc | 84

    An election campaign with US soldiers getting killed by Iranian proxies with a decentralized command structure? With a big explosion in October? Considering a "surge" AGAIN?

    I think the most stupid redneck would notice.

    juliania , Jan 5 2020 19:53 utc | 96

    As reported by krollchem @ 67 and by b in this and the following post, the involvement of Trump directly in premeditated murder cannot be absolved, and the circumstances are abhorrent to any patriotic American citizen. May God have mercy on the souls of the peace makers, for they shall be called the sons of God.

    I take the Iraqi Prime Minister at his word, and reassert the need for Trump and his administration to be impeached on treasonous grounds. Where that will lead in terms of the rest of the US government I cannot say but VP Pence is also impeachable here, so it is difficult to see who is least culpable in this. It may mean that there is need for a provisional government to be put in place - not party organized. If impeachment proceeds apace as it should, behind the scenes such a people's approved peaceful citizens coalition needs to be considered. This cannot stand as official US government policy. It is heinous.

    I too, as forward @ 24 has done, sent prayers for the souls of the departed Iran general as well as his friend from Iraq and their companions this morning in my home chapel. It is the Sunday before Christmas, old calendar. May the Lord bring them and so many others before them to a place where the just repose.

    William Gruff , Jan 5 2020 20:14 utc | 100
    The empire feeling it necessary to burn its assets like our resident bunny's credibility by forcing the spin control beyond its limit is an indication of desperation (thank you bevin @89 for bringing attention to that)

    We can take pleasure from circumstances spinning out of the evil empire's control, but keep in mind that means the empire's behavior will become more desperate and irrational the further control slips from its grasp. More irrational and psychotic behavior from the empire puts all of humanity in danger. It also makes analysis of that behavior more of a challenge.

    I fear oldhippie @71 might be correct. Even if Iran does nothing, the empire's psychotic delusions are now so intense that America may lash out spastically anyway.

    [Jan 06, 2020] There Will Be Blood by Larry C Johnson

    This is an interesting post which outlines the complexity of such situation and unpredictable development of events after the initial crime
    Notable quotes:
    "... America's naive belief in the miracle of the assassination fantasy, especially when applied in the Middle East, reminds me of an Alzheimer's patient who believes in magic beans but fails to remember that the beans never sprout. We keep on planting the same seed and look anxiously for a beanstalk that never sprouts. ..."
    "... We were no longer "peacekeepers." We chose sides and were fighting against Palestinians and Shia and, indirectly, Iran. A hotbed of military activity was the Hezbollah bases in the Syrian-controlled Beqaa Valley in Lebanon. The recently deceased Soleimani, along with the members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), trained and equipped Hezbollah to battle the Christian controlled government in Beirut. ..."
    "... We justify/excuse our act because Suleimani was really, really bad. Of course, we have trouble precisely defining the line that someone must cross in order to be "really, really bad." There are many instances in our history where we embraced really, really bad people (Joseph Stalin comes to mind) in order to pursue a goal important to us. Kim Jong Un, who also is responsible for the death of at least one innocent American, is another suspected bad guy who has gotten the pass to sit with President Trump rather than take a Hell Fire up the caboose. ..."
    "... This latest strike is likely to come back to haunt us. We should not be surprised in the future if other countries, such as Russia and China, embrace our new doctrine of assassinating people we say are "imminent" threats. I used to believe that our moral authority counted for something. I no longer believe that to be true. I remain eager to be proven wrong, but if history is any guide, we have not learned the lessons we need to in order to create a better future. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com
    America's naive belief in the miracle of the assassination fantasy, especially when applied in the Middle East, reminds me of an Alzheimer's patient who believes in magic beans but fails to remember that the beans never sprout. We keep on planting the same seed and look anxiously for a beanstalk that never sprouts.

    Killing Qassem Soleimani is the latest meaningless chapter in this blood soaked narrative of revenge and retribution against a "bad" guy. Killing a "bad" guy makes us feel proud and provides the emotional equivalent of a sugar rush. But there is no compelling evidence that these killings actually advance the cause of peace or coerce the other bad guys into hiding in a cave and praying that we go away.

    Let me take you for a walk down memory lane. Let's start in Beirut in 1982--that's 38 years ago. In other words, if you are younger than 45 this is likely to be new to you. The United States during the Presidency of Ronald Reagan decided to send troops to Lebanon in late 1982 in order to help "calm" a civil war. In June 1982, the Israel Defense Forces invaded Lebanon with the intention of rooting out the PLO. The next two months witnessed furious battles in West Beirut. Despite the raging civil war, the Lebanese held a Presidential election in August 1982 and Bachir Gemayel emerged the victor. Gemayel was famous in Lebanon for leading the most powerful militia in Lebanon, which ferociously and successfully battled the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Syrian Army. But his victory was short-lived. On 14 September a bomb exploded in his Beirut Phalange headquarters, killing Gemayel along with 26 others.

    Two days later, Gemayel's party took revenge in the in the Sabra neighborhood and the adjacent Shatila refugee camp in Beirut, Lebanon, where several thousand Palestinians and Lebanese Shiites lived. That massacre left between 500 and 3500 dead. The killing took place as Israeli forces stood by and observed. The Israelis did nothing to stop the murder of women and children.

    That event created a deep thirst among both Palestinian and Shia leaders for revenge and the war in Lebanon intensified. About a week after the massacre in Sabra and Shatila, the U.S. 32nd Marine Amphibious Unit arrived in Beirut as part of a multinational "peacekeeping" force. But instead of keeping the peace, U.S. troops fought on the side of Gemayel's Phalange party.

    One of the targets for U.S. naval gunfire were Syrian backed forces fighting on behalf of Palestinians and Shias .

    Two United States Navy ships off Beirut fired dozens of shells today in support of Lebanese Army units defending the town of Suk al Gharb on a ridge overlooking Beirut. It was the first direct military support of the Lebanese Army by United States forces.

    The cruiser Virginia and the destroyer John Rodgers, both guided missile warships, moved to within nearly a mile of shore to fire five-inch shells at Syrian-backed Druse militiamen and Palestinian guerrillas who were attacking army positions.

    We were no longer "peacekeepers." We chose sides and were fighting against Palestinians and Shia and, indirectly, Iran. A hotbed of military activity was the Hezbollah bases in the Syrian-controlled Beqaa Valley in Lebanon. The recently deceased Soleimani, along with the members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), trained and equipped Hezbollah to battle the Christian controlled government in Beirut.

    Reagan's decision to fight against the Iranian supported forces had tragic consequences. In April of 1983, the U.S. Embassy in Beirut was virtually destroyed by a truck bomb.

    On April 18, 1983, a suicide bomber detonated a one-half-ton pickup truck laden with 2,000 pounds of TNT near the front of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 63 people, including 17 Americans. It was the deadliest attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission to date, and changed the way the U.S. Department of State secured its resources and executed its missions overseas.

    The Iranian backed forces were not finished. The Marines were the next victims :

    At 6:22 on Sunday morning Oct. 23, 1983, a 19-ton yellow Mercedes stake-bed truck entered a public parking lot at the heart of Beirut International Airport. The lot was adjacent to the headquarters of the U.S. 8th Marine Regiment's 1st Battalion, where some 350 American service members lay asleep in a four-story concrete aviation administration building that had been successively occupied by various combatants in the ongoing Lebanese Civil War. . . .

    Sergeant of the guard Stephen Russell was alone at his sandbag-and-plywood post at the front of the building but facing inside. Hearing a revving engine, he turned to see the Mercedes truck barreling straight toward him. He instinctively bolted through the lobby toward the building's rear entrance, repeatedly yelling, "Hit the deck! Hit the deck!" It was futile gesture, given that nearly everyone was still asleep. As Russell dashed out the rear entrance, he looked over his shoulder and saw the truck slam through his post, smash through the entrance and come to a halt in the midst of the lobby. After an ominous pause of a second or two, the truck erupted in a massive explosion -- so powerful that it lifted the building in the air, shearing off its steel-reinforced concrete support columns (each 15 feet in circumference) and collapsing the structure. Crushed to death within the resulting mountain of rubble were 241 U.S. military personnel -- 220 Marines, 18 Navy sailors and three Army soldiers. More than 100 others were injured. It was worst single-day death toll for the Marines since the World War II Battle of Iwo Jima.

    Looking back at these events with the benefit of 37 years of experience, we can see that assassinations by both sides (U.S. and Iran) did little to create an unambiguous victory or achieve peace.

    Hezbollah also employed another tactic that limited the military response of the United States--hostage taking. Between 1982 and 1992, elements of Hezbollah in direct contact with Iran's Revolutionary Guard kidnapped 104 foreign hostages . The most notable of these were the CIA Chief of Station in Beirut, William Buckley, and Marine Lt Colonel Rich Higgins (Higgins was later promoted to Colonel while in captivity). Buckley was nabbed on 16 March 1984 and Higgins on February 17, 1988, while serving as the Chief, Observer Group Lebanon and Senior Military Observer, United Nations Military Observer Group, United Nations Truce Supervision Organization. Both men were executed by their Hezbollah captors.

    None of this stopped the cycle of violence. In February 1992, Israeli forces launched a raid into southern Lebanon and "assassinated" Sayyed Abbas Mussawi, Hezbollah's secretary general, had led a commemoration marking the eighth anniversary of the assassination of Sheikh Ragheb Harb. (Nicholas Blanford. "Warriors of God." https://books.apple.com/us/book/warriors-of-god/id422547646)

    Then we have Imad Mughniyeh, the founding member of Lebanon's Islamic Jihad Organization and number two in Hezbollah's leadership. He was believed to be responsible for bombing the Marine barracks in Beirut, two US embassy bombings, and the kidnapping of dozens of foreigners in Lebanon in the 1982-1992 period. He also was indicted in Argentina for his alleged role in the 1992 Israeli embassy attack in Buenos Aires.

    In February 2008, Mughniyeh was killed on the night of the 12th by a car bomb in Damascus, Syria, which was planned in a joint operation by the CIA and Mossad.

    It is worth nothing that Hezbollah and Iran dramatically shifted after 1995 from the retaliatory terrorist strikes that were their calling card during the 1980s. As the Shias carried out fewer terrorist attacks, Sunnis, principally Osama Bin Laden, ratcheted up attacks--the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the coordinated bombings of U.S Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998 and the attack on the USS Cole in October 2000. There is controversy surrounding who to blame for the bombing of the US military based in Dharan, Saudi Arabia in 1995. The FBI concluded it was Hezbollah and blamed Mugniyeh. But other intelligence pointed to Al Qaeda.

    Since the terrorist attacks of 9-11, the United States has done a lot of killing of terrorists, real and imagined. Yet, the threat of terrorism has not been erased.

    Before we get too excited about the effectiveness of assassination, it would be useful to recall the dismal record of this method during the last 38 years. It has not made the world safer or more stable.

    The killing of Suleimani is likely to put Iran back in the business of attacking our embassies and military installations. I also believe kidnapping of Americans will be back in vogue. And these actions, as in the past, will be met with further U.S. retaliation and the cycle of violence will continue to spin furiously.

    There is another effect now that the United States has openly embraced the "Jamal Khashoggi solution." The Saudis decreed Khashoggi a "bad" man and a terrorist threat. To their way of thinking that gave them the excuse to chop him up on the sovereign soil of another country. In this case, Turkey. We have now basically done the very thing that we condemned the Saudis for. Yes, I know, Khashoggi was a journalist and Soleimani was a "terrorist." But the Saudis saw a terrorist. Consider this as a corollary to the saying, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

    We justify/excuse our act because Suleimani was really, really bad. Of course, we have trouble precisely defining the line that someone must cross in order to be "really, really bad." There are many instances in our history where we embraced really, really bad people (Joseph Stalin comes to mind) in order to pursue a goal important to us. Kim Jong Un, who also is responsible for the death of at least one innocent American, is another suspected bad guy who has gotten the pass to sit with President Trump rather than take a Hell Fire up the caboose.

    This latest strike is likely to come back to haunt us. We should not be surprised in the future if other countries, such as Russia and China, embrace our new doctrine of assassinating people we say are "imminent" threats. I used to believe that our moral authority counted for something. I no longer believe that to be true. I remain eager to be proven wrong, but if history is any guide, we have not learned the lessons we need to in order to create a better future.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Unfortunately, the sheep who comprise the bulk of the 30% Trump base, and perhaps many more on the democratic side, will always buy this lemon with their warped sense of patriotism.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Alpi , Jan 5 2020 19:27 utc | 29

    @ Cynthia 10

    The number 52 refers to the hostages in Iran at the beginning of the revolution. Trump has always used that to rally his idiotic base and sell any lemon he can think of in that context. How dare they take "Americans" as hostages, is the attitude of this moron? And in his childish brain he wants revenge for what happened 40 hears ago.

    When the Iranian students took them hostage, it was a tense and chaotic time and nobody knew who was in charge, including "the people in charge". But they kept them, they housed them and fed them in a house arrest setting. Pretty much treated them as a guests, albeit unwanted guests. Youtube is full of videos of ordinary Iranians bringing them food and books and pleading with the guards to treat them well.

    Unlike us, who we have a different take on hostages and "guests". We send them to the Caribbean, give them orange jump suits, water board them, play loud heavy metal music 16 hours a day and keep them without food., without charge and without trial.

    And in the end, these so called 52 hostages were used as a political pun by Jim Baker and his team for the election of Reagan and he made sure they were not released until Carter had been defeated and released on the day of inauguration. How convenient and coincidental.

    Unfortunately, the sheep who comprise the bulk of the 30% Trump base, and perhaps many more on the democratic side, will always buy this lemon with their warped sense of patriotism.

    Sunny Runny Burger , Jan 5 2020 20:18 utc | 39

    This summary by sputniknews (RIA novosti) of the US in Iraq since about 2011 is very concise but decent and could be perfect for anyone in the US and elsewhere who doesn't know or understand the situation.
    Sasha , Jan 5 2020 20:52 utc | 48
    The US created Daesh terror group and killed the commander who defeated Daesh in #Iraq and #Syria. (Parts 1 and 2 )

    https://twitter.com/PressTV/status/1213902578792239105

    https://twitter.com/PressTV/status/1213903753675493376


    [Jan 06, 2020] The only option for the US in war with Iran is to resort to Hermann G ring fag-tardery, i.e., trying to rely on air superiority to win a ground war.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 2:52 am GMT

    @JamesD

    So the Sunni's are going to be ticked off Trump took on Iran?

    The Sunni man-in-the-street is much more likely to set aside his differences with the Shi'a, than to takes sides with the kufar .

    Think of it this way: if China invaded the US, which side would most Canadians support?

    Also, think about close-to-theatre demographics.

    Iraq will be the US military 'boots on the ground' staging area in any conventional war against Iran. Shi'a opinion will make all the difference.

    Land warfare is significantly harder if your primary staging area is knee-deep in people who are very sympathetic to the other side.

    So consider

    2/3rds of the Iraqi Muslim population are Shi'ite . They are concentrated in the South-East of Iraq. Shi'a are a majority of the population of Baghdad, where the decent-sized airports are (ignore USAB Ayn Al Asad: landing US forces in the middle of Iraq and driving all the way to the Iranian border would be retarded).

    So Baghdad would become a very (ahem) problematic staging area – especially if Sistani and Sadr start to rile up the Shia (and Sadr has been doing that since Soleimani's assassination).

    The Sunni are split roughly 50/50 between Arabs and Kurds; the Kurds have no strong affection for the Arabs, Sunni or otherwise.

    So the only place the US has a relatively high proportion of friendlies (even assuming no fraternity-of-convenience between Iraqiyyun and Jazirani ) is in Iraqi Kurdistan.

    Iraqi Kurdistan borders Iran sounds like a plan!

    Well

    You might look at a Google Map and think – " Well, all the Kurds are in the North-East, so the US could just stage from Erbil or Kirkuk and have a straight shot to Teheran U!S!A!!U!S!A! ".

    Meanwhile there are people who have DEMs of the region (so can say things about topography), and who understand how hard it is to transport men, WATER, artillery and armour over mountains – even if you own the airspace outright (which the US won't, in any engagement with Iran).

    Think " Korengal ", but with an opponent with 21st century weapons and near-peer air defences.

    The effect of the latter on air-cav alone, should make people think really hard: helicopters are critical in infil/exfil, medevac, resupply and operational overwatch – and they are as slow as fuck and have pissweak countermeasures. 1Cav hasn't gone up against a peer opponent since Korea.

    .

    Topologically The US has one logistically (almost-)non-suicidal option for 'boots on the ground' invasion of Iran: everybody knows that.

    That is why the US will resort to Hermann Göring fag-tardery, i.e., trying to rely on air superiority to win a ground war.

    For these reasons, the US will either lose or will use nuclear weapons – which will hand Russia and China a moral victory, because it will permanently destroy US self-hagiography about freedom and so forth.

    .

    And if the US attacks Iran, how long do you think it would take for a supertanker to be sunk in the Straits?

    Trick question – the correct response is " Which Straits? Hormuz or Malacca ?"

    The US has shown it can't protect Malacca without crashing into shipping: in a recent display of historic comedic irony, the USS John McCain (named after Hanoi Songbird 's Dad), showed itself to be as incompetent as the Songbird hisself, who killed more US seamen than the Viet Cong.

    [Jan 06, 2020] On top of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, be the long-awaited beginning of the end of America's imperial ambitions

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    the grand wazoo , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:36 am GMT

    And it might well, on top of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, be the long-awaited beginning of the end of America's imperial ambitions.

    One must ask; Is the US presence in the ME really because of imperial ambition? At least if it is I can understand. I mean, it's bad but that's what nations have done for centuries. Or is America in the ME at Israel's insistence? Hers's the roll: Afghanistan in 2002 and Iraq 2003, Libya in 2011, Syria shortly after that; not one of these countries threatened America, not one. Yet we invaded these nations, and brutally murdered Qadhaffi and Hussain, and we did it all based on lies dreamed up by Jewish dual citizens who call themselves American patriots but who are really agents of Israel.

    I'm not using the term neocons any longer, as the term is a lie, a mask. They are just a large group of powerful dual citizen Jews many descended from Trotskyites that immigrated from Russia in the 1930s. They hide their real intentions. And what are those intentions? To protect Israel by scaring the American public through their propaganda organ known as the MSM, scaring us into allowing a Trillion dollar military budget, and these forever wars. And anyone who questions them is an anti-Semite. And, that's right from the mouth of Nathan Perlmutter in his essay; "The Real Anti-Semite In America"

    These parasitic dual citizen Jews and their Washington Think Tanks have to go. They are liars and cowards who will fight for Israel to the last drop of blood spills from the last American soldier. Trump knowingly, or not, is being used by these bastards. Today he's a traitor and a liar too. Iran poses no threat to America. None Zilch

    Rome was imperialist, Spain, England yes, but the US doesn't fit the definition. What does fit is 'hired gun'. Right? So, who hired the USA? And, are they paying, or are they somehow threatening us or blackmailing us?

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 06, 2020] The US unwittingly helped create Qassem Soleimani. Then they killed him. -- RT Op-ed

    Notable quotes:
    "... After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the US used the Northern Alliance to establish a foothold in Afghanistan and eventually drive the Taliban from power. Soleimani played a major role behind the scenes helping make the US-Northern Alliance partnership viable, including providing operational and intelligence support. ..."
    "... "an Axis of Evil" ..."
    "... The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 created another opportunity for Iranian-American cooperation, which the US promptly fumbled. While Iran had no desire for increased American military presence in the region, it found common cause with the US in removing its archenemy, Saddam Hussein, from power. ..."
    "... Likewise, when the Islamic State erupted on the scene in 2014, it was Soleimani, at the invitation of the Iraqi government, who helped organize and equip various Shi'a militias under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilization Force. Soleimani went on to direct the PMF in a series of bloody battles that helped turn the tide against the Islamic State well before the US became decisively engaged in the fighting. Soleimani played a defining role in shaping the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11, positioning Iran to become a major power in the region, if not the major power. ..."
    "... Soleimani's actions in accomplishing this outcome, however, were not part of a master Iranian plan for regional domination, but rather part and parcel of Iran's ability to react effectively to the mistakes made by the United States ..."
    "... "maximum pressure" ..."
    "... Murdered, Soleimani is transformed into a martyr-hero whose exploits will motivate those who seek to replicate them against an American foe void of the kind of self-constraint and wisdom born of experience. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.rt.com

    Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf's staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. The US is unprepared for the consequences of its assassination of Qassem Soleimani, if only because it knows nothing about the reality of the man it murdered, and can't gauge the impact of his death on Iran or the Middle East. Qassem Soleimani, an Iranian military commander whose paramilitary organization, known as the Quds Force, helped position Iran as a modern regional power, was assassinated on January 3, 2020, on order of the President of the United States, Donald Trump. American political leaders of both major parties have been united in their description of Soleimani as an evil man whose death should be celebrated, even while the consequences of his demise remain unknown.

    The celebration of Soleimani's death, however, is born of an ignorance regarding the events and actions that shaped the work he directed, and which defined the world in which he operated. While the US has cast Soleimani as a byproduct of Iran's malign intent in the Middle East, the reality is much starker: Soleimani is the direct result of America's irresponsibly aggressive policies. In a world defined by cause-effect relationships, the link between Soleimani and the United States is undeniable.

    ... ... ...

    While senior Iranian military leadership advocated a massive punitive expedition into western Afghanistan, Soleimani advised a more constrained response, with his Quds Force providing training and material support to the Northern Alliance, an umbrella group of forces opposed to the Taliban. Soleimani personally directed this effort, transforming the Northern Alliance into an effective fighting force.

    After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the US used the Northern Alliance to establish a foothold in Afghanistan and eventually drive the Taliban from power. Soleimani played a major role behind the scenes helping make the US-Northern Alliance partnership viable, including providing operational and intelligence support.

    The US-Iranian cooperation was short-lived; President Bush's designation of Iran as being part of "an Axis of Evil" caused Iran to terminate its cooperation with the Americans.

    Training the anti-US Iraq rebels

    The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 created another opportunity for Iranian-American cooperation, which the US promptly fumbled. While Iran had no desire for increased American military presence in the region, it found common cause with the US in removing its archenemy, Saddam Hussein, from power.

    ... ... ...

    Likewise, when the Islamic State erupted on the scene in 2014, it was Soleimani, at the invitation of the Iraqi government, who helped organize and equip various Shi'a militias under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilization Force. Soleimani went on to direct the PMF in a series of bloody battles that helped turn the tide against the Islamic State well before the US became decisively engaged in the fighting. Soleimani played a defining role in shaping the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11, positioning Iran to become a major power in the region, if not the major power.

    Soleimani's actions in accomplishing this outcome, however, were not part of a master Iranian plan for regional domination, but rather part and parcel of Iran's ability to react effectively to the mistakes made by the United States and its allies in implementing policies of aggression in the region.

    In the aftermath of the US withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Agreement in 2018, and the subsequent implementation of the so-called "maximum pressure" campaign of economic sanctions and geo-political containment undertaken by the United States, Soleimani cautioned President Trump against embarking down a path toward confrontation.

    ... ... ...

    Murdered, Soleimani is transformed into a martyr-hero whose exploits will motivate those who seek to replicate them against an American foe void of the kind of self-constraint and wisdom born of experience.

    Far from making the Middle East and the world a safer place to live and work, President Trump's precipitous assassination of Qassem Soleimani has condemned yet another generation to suffer the tragic consequences of American overreach in the post-9/11 era.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Iraqi parliament passes resolution asking government to cancel request for assistance from US-led coalition

    Notable quotes:
    "... Iraq's parliament passed a resolution, urged by its caretaker prime minister, calling for the removal of foreign troops from the country, after the US' assassination of a top Iranian general and a commander of an Iraqi militia. The non-binding resolution instructs the government to cancel a request for military assistance from the US-led coalition, which was issued in response to the rise of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS). With IS supposedly defeated, Iraq will not need foreign troops to fight the jihadists and can close its airspace to coalition aircraft. ..."
    "... Speaking at an emergency parliament session on Sunday, Iraq's caretaker PM Adil Abdul Mahdi said the American side notified the Iraqi military about the planned airstrike minutes before it was carried out. He stressed that his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation. ..."
    "... Influential Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr stated in a letter that Iraq should go further and shut down the US embassy. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.rt.com

    Iraq's parliament passed a resolution, urged by its caretaker prime minister, calling for the removal of foreign troops from the country, after the US' assassination of a top Iranian general and a commander of an Iraqi militia. The non-binding resolution instructs the government to cancel a request for military assistance from the US-led coalition, which was issued in response to the rise of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS). With IS supposedly defeated, Iraq will not need foreign troops to fight the jihadists and can close its airspace to coalition aircraft.

    The Iraqi government must work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason.

    According to Press TV, some Western military presence may remain for training purposes. The resolution says Iraqi military leadership has to report the number of foreign instructors that are necessary for Iraqi national security.

    At the same time, the Iraqi Foreign Ministry said that Baghdad had turned to the UN Security Council with complaints about US violations of its sovereignty.

    Speaking at an emergency parliament session on Sunday, Iraq's caretaker PM Adil Abdul Mahdi said the American side notified the Iraqi military about the planned airstrike minutes before it was carried out. He stressed that his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation.

    ... ... ...

    Influential Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr stated in a letter that Iraq should go further and shut down the US embassy.

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 06, 2020] Israel on the receiving end of the anger about Soleimani killing

    Some wondeer whether Isreal will exist in 25-50 year and it might be better emigrants from Ukraine to move back.
    Notable quotes:
    "... John Kashis on CNN speaking from Ohio today reminded the host Wolf Blitzer that US under Trump scuttled and undermined a potential thaw in relations between US and Iran with Japan 's Abe mediating the contacts and subsequent meeting despite initially agreeing . Not unbelievable given what was done to NK. by Bolton gang . ..."
    "... As for the murder of the late Solaimani, which I have no doubt was primarily driven by Israeli agenda, ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    anon [295] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:26 pm GMT

    @BL John Kashis on CNN speaking from Ohio today reminded the host Wolf Blitzer that US under Trump scuttled and undermined a potential thaw in relations between US and Iran with Japan 's Abe mediating the contacts and subsequent meeting despite initially agreeing . Not unbelievable given what was done to NK. by Bolton gang .

    No Trump was not serious He thought he could billow smoke and scare Iranian like he thought he could Venezuela and NK . Around this time last year this mean man bought and raised by Zionists was exactly doing same thing to NK hoping they would fold.

    Guess what Iran may not have nukes But it wont fold. Trump is psychopath a bully otherwise he would have raised hell against Israel and against the overt bribing of him by Adelshon. That is his character . He puffs and huffs . He knows sometimes those puffs might sway a reed but he doesn't know it won't break or uproot them .

    Trump is not honest even by his own standard .Patriotism or White nationalism is the cloak he wears to hide this defect.

    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:24 pm GMT
    @Iris

    As for the murder of the late Solaimani, which I have no doubt was primarily driven by Israeli agenda,

    In fact, this crime and prompt approval of it by Bibi hurt Israeli interests a lot. This was Bibi's agenda. Bibi hopes that a war with Iran would save him from a well-deserved prison sentence. I hope not. He deserves to rot in jail for the rest of his miserable life.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Add one more war crime to the pile for when the SCO pulls Gina out of the fake rock and puts her in the glass cage at Nuremberg II.

    Notable quotes:
    "... So far we have aggression by sending of armed bands and irregulars; armed attack on the civilian population; a sneak attack in breach of the Convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities; illegal war propaganda, to wit, fabricated chemical weapons attacks; and murder, a war crime in universal jurisdiction. ..."
    "... Now we have one more compounding war crime: perfidy. Using the pretext of parley for ambush. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Nukes away , says: Show Comment Next New Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:09 pm GMT

    Add one more war crime to the pile for when the SCO pulls Gina out of the fake rock and puts her in the glass cage at Nuremberg II.

    So far we have aggression by sending of armed bands and irregulars; armed attack on the civilian population; a sneak attack in breach of the Convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities; illegal war propaganda, to wit, fabricated chemical weapons attacks; and murder, a war crime in universal jurisdiction.

    Now we have one more compounding war crime: perfidy. Using the pretext of parley for ambush.

    When it's time to decapitate the CIA regime, the victors can really clean house. The US used the purported Pearl Harbor sneak attack as legal justification for nuking Japan. That's a handy precedent to have. No doubt there are some decent human beings inside the beltway, but if Russia or China turn it into a sinkhole of molten basalt, no one will complain. The USG's a cancer on the world. They've got to be put down like rabid dogs.

    [Jan 06, 2020] al-Muhandis who was kiiled with Solaimani paramilitary group is allied to a political faction, the Fath, who hold 48 seats in the Iraqi parliament.

    Jan 06, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    Most of the attention in this recent attack by a US drone at the Baghdad Airport has been on it killing Iranian Quds Force commander, Qasim (Qassem) Solmaini (Suleimani), supposedly plotting an "imminent" attack on Americans as he flew a commercial airliner to Iraq at the invitation of its government and passed through passport control.

    But much less attention has been paid to the killing in that attack of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq and reportedly an officer in the Iraqi military, as well as being, according to Juan Cole, a Yazidi Kurd, although the PMF is identified as being a Shia militia allied with Iran.

    The problem here is that supposedly US leaders approved this strike because there were no Iraqi officials in this group; it was supposedly "clean." But there was al-Muhandis, with his PMF also allied to a political faction, the Fath, who hold 48 seats in the Iraqi parliament. The often anti-Iranian Shia leader, Moqtada al-Sadr, has now joined with Fath and other groups to demand a vote in the parliament to order a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.

    It might be good for them to go, although Trump has just sent in 3,500 more Marines to protect the US embassy that came under attack and protests after an earlier US attack on pro-Iranian militias.

    [Jan 06, 2020] As an American who lives abroad, this is just a repainting of the target I've had on my back

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    The Alarmist , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 3:04 am GMT

    As an American who lives abroad, this is just a repainting of the target I've had on my back for decades, compliments of people who live behind big defence perimeters and are surrounded by teams of bodyguards.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Was Pompeo and his West point educated mafia of military contractors the driving force of Soleimani killing?

    Pompeo is trying to avoid the responsibility
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    powerandpeople , Jan 5 2020 20:33 utc | 105

    A slew of Mike Pompeo propaganda - he's actually very, very, good at it - on January 5th:

    Interview
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Margaret Brennan of CBS Face the Nation
    Michael R. Pompeo January 5, 2020

    Interview
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Chuck Todd of NBC Meet the Press
    Michael R. Pompeo January 5, 2020

    Readout
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo's Call with Qatari Deputy Prime Minister al-Thani
    January 5, 2020


    Interview
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Maria Bartiromo of Fox Sunday Morning Futures
    Michael R. Pompeo January 5, 2020

    Interview
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Jake Tapper of CNN State of the Union
    Michael R. Pompeo January 5, 2020

    Interview
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With George Stephanopoulos of ABC This Week
    Michael R. Pompeo January 5, 2020

    Interview
    Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday
    Michael R. Pompeo January 5, 2020

    All available at https://www.state.gov/press-releases/

    Many lies (of course) and disinformation, but also clear policy.

    Example: "Frankly, this war kicked off – people talk about the war. This war kicked off when the JCPOA was entered into. It told the Iranians that they had free rein to develop a Shia crescent that extended from Yemen to Iraq to Syria and into Lebanon, surrounding our ally, Israel, and threatening American lives as well."

    Pompeo refers to being at war with Iran. There has been no declaration of war by either side.

    The so-called Shia crescent is a major regional country developing regional allies, regardless of the religous makeup of the various countries referred to. The implication is that USA government will dictate the foreign policy of Middle East countries from Romes headquarters 7,000 miles away.

    It underscore that the policy is based on fear that Israel will be under military pressure once regional countries have advanced missile systems, presuming that the foreign policy of Iran is to militarily attack Israel.

    USA knows this won't happen, but the occupied territories may well be sent arms by Iran. Taking, in other words, a page from the USA government playbook, as it does exactly the same thing. Evidence exhibit #1 = arms to so-called 'opposition' and to religous criminals in Syria.

    Israel is reaching a demographic (and water) crisis. It has no choice but to obey International law and settle with the Arab population. It has been intransigent, confrontational and obstructive for years. Now, it will be forcede to negotiate by the realities of passing time.

    Israel would do well to play fair and enter a genuine negotiation on fair terms (not a one-sided diktat).

    Iran would do well to abandon its 'maximum pressure' policy on Israel, recognize its right to exist behind the Security Council agreed borders, and actively work diplomatically to arrive at a fair solution.

    Another example:
    "In October of this year, George, the JCPOA, that nuclear deal, will permit arms trade with Iran. That's crazy. That's crazy – have missiles and systems – high-end systems, from China and Russia in Iran lawfully in October."

    Pompeo is playing the definition game: 'our missiles = good. Your missiles = bad'.

    Every country has a right to defend itself, no exceptions.

    Which country has illegally invaded a sovereign country in the Middle East?

    Which country illegally bombed the most developed country of the Middle East to a state of infrastructural destitution?

    So the USA foreign policy, it seems, is to prohibit sovereign Iran from developing any means of defending itself with modern weaponry. Perhaps they will be 'allowed' to have slingshots to defend themselves against USA government aggression.

    The USA will have to change its foreign policy to accomodate new realities in the Middle East. It's so-called allies, its Middle East NATO is a big fail. No suprise.

    If it doesn't want to embrace the Iranian plan for all Gulf members to unites to police the Gulf, maybe it should join the long-standing Russian effort for a multi-sided consensus-driven Gulf peace plan.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Iran had every right not to renegotiate with US . Deal was deal.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Iran had every right not to renegotiate with US . Deal was deal. Trump could have left and followed the agreements . Instead his masters donors and his Jewish advisers made it sure that they could do through him what they all along wanted -- - ,strangling Iran through more sanctions. . ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    KA , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:06 pm GMT

    @BL Iran had every right not to renegotiate with US . Deal was deal. Trump could have left and followed the agreements . Instead his masters donors and his Jewish advisers made it sure that they could do through him what they all along wanted -- - ,strangling Iran through more sanctions. .

    Iran didn't provoke unless killing the rebels and ISIS supported by Israel US Saud are considered as acts of provocations . Unless Iran demanding implementation of JOPA was act of defiance .

    The lies about Iran killing 600 have been laid bare by Scott Horton in http://www.antiwar.com

    CNN William Cohen is saying false flag and blamed enough Iran

    [Jan 06, 2020] Democrats demand answers on Soleimani killing - This is not a game

    Most probably Pompeo was cheating and deceived Trump to get the approval of this asssasination. now with his head on the block he is trying to avoid the responsibility.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said public assurances from the Trump administration that such a threat was "imminent" were simply not enough. ..."
    "... Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on CNN's "State of the Union" that until the administration provides answers on "how this decision was reached ... then this move is questionable , to say the least." ..."
    "... "I still worry about whether this president really understands that this is not a show, this is not a game," he said. "Lives are at stake right now." ..."
    "... the administration has yet to make public its evidence that Soleimani was acting out of step in comparison with his years of similar planning as a leader in Iran's proxy wars and other covert operations, which have led to U.S. deaths . ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.nbcnews.com

    Democrats on Sunday demanded answers about the killing of top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani as tensions mounted with Iran and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo insisted that the United States had faced an imminent threat.

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on ABC's "This Week" that he worried that President Donald Trump's decision "will get us into what he calls another endless war in the Middle East ." He called for Congress to "assert" its authority and prevent Trump from "either bumbling or impulsively getting us into a major war."

    Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said public assurances from the Trump administration that such a threat was "imminent" were simply not enough.

    "I think we learned the hard way ... in the Iraq War that administrations sometimes manipulate and cherry-pick intelligence to further their political goals," he said.

    "That's what got us into the Iraq War. There was no WMD," or weapons of mass destruction, he said. "I'm saying that they have an obligation to present the evidence."

    Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on CNN's "State of the Union" that until the administration provides answers on "how this decision was reached ... then this move is questionable , to say the least."

    "I still worry about whether this president really understands that this is not a show, this is not a game," he said. "Lives are at stake right now."

    Booker: 'All Americans should be concerned right now' JAN. 5, 2020 04:18

    The fraught relationship with Iran has significantly deteriorated in the days since Soleimani's death, which came days after rioters sought to storm the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad and a U.S. contractor was killed in a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base in Kirkuk.

    The Defense Department said Soleimani, the high-profile commander of Iran's secretive Quds Force, who was accused of controlling Iranian-linked proxy militias across the Middle East, orchestrated the attacks on bases in Iraq of the U.S.-led coalition fighting the Islamic State militant group, including the strike that killed the U.S. contractor. In addition, the Defense Department said Soleimani approved attacks on the embassy compound in Baghdad.

    " We took action last night to stop a war ," Trump said Friday in a televised address, referring to the airstrike that killed Soleimani. "We did not take action to start a war."

    But the administration has yet to make public its evidence that Soleimani was acting out of step in comparison with his years of similar planning as a leader in Iran's proxy wars and other covert operations, which have led to U.S. deaths .

    Iran and its allies vowed to retaliate for the general's death, and Trump has since escalated his language in response.

    Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

    [Jan 06, 2020] Rival Shi'ite leaders in Iraq call for U.S. troop expulsion in rare show of unity

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.reuters.com

    We are about to get kicked out of Iraq again .

    Rival Shi'ite political leaders on Friday called for American troops to be expelled from Iraq after a U.S. air strike in Baghdad killed a senior Iranian general, in an unusual show of unity among factions that have squabbled for months.

    How can the neocons and chickenhawks justify results like this No, Russia nd China are not next Because they have nukes ad the means to deliver them. Trump can't even stop groveling to North Korea.

    Bullies only pick on the defenseless. --

    Sanders-Gabbard 2020 !

    [Jan 06, 2020] President Trump's ME policy is utter and complete failure.

    Notable quotes:
    "... As for the murder of the late Solaimani, which I have no doubt was primarily driven by Israeli agenda, it is creating popular unity in Iran despite all the recent socio-economic turmoil, political unity in Iraq despite the faction fractures, provides the framework for expelling US forces from Iraq, strengthens the Shia Crescent, brings together Shia and Sunni in all of the Muslim world, will provide the opportunity for some traditional US allies (Germany, France) to devise a more independent foreign policy, and the list of unintended consequences goes on. ..."
    "... Iran is not like the US, who let Israel murder its citizens in total impunity during 9/11; they will use this adverse event to re-shape the region at their advantage. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Iris , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:03 pm GMT

    @Colin Wright The way President Trump's ME policy is seen by the people of the region (as summarised by Hassan Nasrallah) is that his strategies led to utter and complete failure.

    – He repudiated the JCPOA and applied sanctions, requiring Iran to beg for negotiations; they completely ignored him.
    – Lebanon's Hezbollah has tremendously improved their military capabilities against the demented racist state North of Gaza.
    – Iraq is breaking free.
    – The US-led coalition has lost the war on Syria.
    – President Trump has recently made a political somersault and was obliged to initiate talks with the Talibans, talks he initially repudiated.
    – He just further lost credibility by abandoning the US Kurd allies to be slaughtered by Erdogan.
    – The wretched, impoverished, powerless Palestinians have superbly ignored his "Deal of the Century"; they did not even attend the meetings.

    If this is success, I wonder how failure looks like.

    As for the murder of the late Solaimani, which I have no doubt was primarily driven by Israeli agenda, it is creating popular unity in Iran despite all the recent socio-economic turmoil, political unity in Iraq despite the faction fractures, provides the framework for expelling US forces from Iraq, strengthens the Shia Crescent, brings together Shia and Sunni in all of the Muslim world, will provide the opportunity for some traditional US allies (Germany, France) to devise a more independent foreign policy, and the list of unintended consequences goes on.

    Only short-sighted Hasbara trolsl can think that the Solaimani murder is a success.

    Iran is not like the US, who let Israel murder its citizens in total impunity during 9/11; they will use this adverse event to re-shape the region at their advantage.

    Israel is a short-sighted, greedy poker player; Iran is a profound, sophisticated chess player who will win the long game.

    [Jan 06, 2020] One humble suggestion about resolving the crisis with Iran

    Jan 06, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    SW , January 5, 2020 9:12 am

    If they want revenge, in the interest of avoiding future bloodshed, I suggest that we give them Mike Pence.

    [Jan 06, 2020] But they could always find an un-scorched Iranian passport in mint condition among the debris of the explosion.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Commentator Mike , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:08 pm GMT

    @Bookish1

    Not only Mossad but probably many others would like to see a suicide bomber blow himself up somewhere in the US killing alot of people. That makes it difficult to figure out who did it and maybe impossible to figure it out. It would be a mess.

    But they could always find an un-scorched Iranian passport in mint condition among the debris of the explosion.

    [Jan 06, 2020] The most optimistic post on this thread.

    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com


    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment Next New Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:28 pm GMT

    @Cloak And Dagger

    Henry Kissinger Predicts 'In 10 Years, There Will Be No More Israel'

    That's the most optimistic post on this thread.

    [Jan 06, 2020] Now I know for sure that the US government spreads shameless lies, so you can't believe anything it says.

    Notable quotes:
    "... So, I did not see it as a war crime back then, but I do now. ..."
    Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:22 pm GMT

    @ChuckOrloski At the time I thought that it might be justified, if Al Qaida actually did 9/11. Now I know that Al Qaida was and is a CIA operation and have my doubts regarding its involvement in 9/11.

    Even if it was, that was on direct orders of its American handlers.

    What's more, now I know for sure that the US government spreads shameless lies, so you can't believe anything it says. In fact, you can safely assume that everything it says is a lie and be right 99.9% of the time.

    So, I did not see it as a war crime back then, but I do now.

    [Jan 05, 2020] The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran (UPDATED 6X) The Vineyard of the Saker

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason ..."
    "... Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said the parliamentary resolution to end foreign troop presence in the country did not go far enough, calling on local and foreign militia groups to unite . I also have confirmation that the Mehdi Army is being re-mobilized . ..."
    "... The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way…and without hesitation! ..."
    Jan 05, 2020 | thesaker.is
    The blowback has begun

    First, let’s begin by a quick summary of what has taken place (note: this info is still coming in, so there might be corrections once the official sources make their official statements).

    1. Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA .
    2. The Iraqi Parliament has now voted on a resolution requiring the government to press Washington and its allies to withdraw their troops from Iraq.
    3. Iraq’s caretaker PM Adil Abdul Mahdi said the American side notified the Iraqi military about the planned airstrike minutes before it was carried out. He stressed that his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation.
    4. The Iraqi Parliament has also demanded that the Iraqi government must “ work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason “
    5. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry said that Baghdad had turned to the UN Security Council with complaints about US violations of its sovereignty .
    6. Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said the parliamentary resolution to end foreign troop presence in the country did not go far enough, calling on local and foreign militia groups to unite . I also have confirmation that the Mehdi Army is being re-mobilized .
    7. The Pentagon brass is now laying the responsibility for this monumental disaster on Trump (see here ). The are now slowly waking up to this immense clusterbleep and don’t want to be held responsible for what is coming next.
    8. For the first time in the history of Iran, a Red Flag was hoisted over the Holy Dome Of Jamkaran Mosque , Iran. This indicates that the blood of martyrs has been spilled and that a major battle will now happen . The text in the flag say s “ Oh Hussein we ask for your help ” (u nofficial translation 1) or “ Rise up and avenge al-Husayn ” (unofficial translation 2)
    9. The US has announced the deployment of 3’000 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne to Kuwait .
    10. Finally, the Idiot-in-Chief tweeted the following message , probably to try to reassure his freaked out supporters: “ The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way…and without hesitation! “. Apparently, he still thinks that criminally overspending for 2nd rate military hardware is going to yield victory…
    Analysis

    Well, my first though when reading these bullet points is that General Qasem Soleimani has already struck out at Uncle Shmuel from beyond his grave . What we see here is an immense political disaster unfolding like a slow motion train wreck. Make no mistake, this is not just a tactical "oopsie", but a major STRATEGIC disaster . Why?

    For one thing, the US will now become an official and totally illegal military presence in Iraq. This means that whatever SOFA (Status Of Forces Agreement) the US and Iraq had until now is void.

    Second, the US now has two options:

    Fight and sink deep into a catastrophic quagmire or Withdraw from Iraq and lose any possibility to keep forces in Syria

    Both of these are very bad because whatever option Uncle Shmuel chooses, he will lost whatever tiny level of credibility he has left, even amongst his putative "allies" (like the KSA which will now be left nose to nose with a much more powerful Iran than ever before).

    The main problem with the current (and very provisional) outcome is that both the Israel Lobby and the Oil Lobby will now be absolutely outraged and will demand that the US try to use military power to regime change both Iraq and Iran.

    Needless to say, that ain't happening (only ignorant and incurable flag-wavers believe the silly claptrap about the US armed forces being "THE BEST").

    Furthermore, it is clear that by it's latest terrorist action the USA has now declared war on BOTH Iraq and Iran.

    This is so important that I need to repeat it again:

    The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure , with BOTH Iraq and Iran.

    I hasten to add that the US is also at war with most of the Muslim world (and most definitely all Shias, including Hezbollah and the Yemeni Houthis).

    Next, I want to mention the increase in US troop numbers in the Middle-East. An additional 3'000 soldiers from the 82nd AB is what would be needed to support evacuations and to provide a reserve force for the Marines already sent in. This is NOWHERE NEAR the kind of troop numbers the US would need to fight a war with either Iraq or Iran.

    Finally, there are some who think that the US will try to invade Iran. Well, with a commander in chief as narcissistically delusional as Trump, I would never say "never" but, frankly, I don't think that anybody at the Pentagon would be willing to obey such an order. So no, a ground invasion is not in the cards and, if it ever becomes an realistic option we would first see a massive increase in the US troop levels, we are talking several tens of thousands, if not more (depending on the actual plan).

    No, what the US will do if/when they attack Iran is what Israel did to Lebanon in 2006, but at a much larger scale. They will begin by a huge number of airstrikes (missiles and aircraft) to hit:

    Iranian air defenses Iranian command posts and Iranian civilian and military leaders Symbolic targets (like nuclear installations and high visibility units like the IRGC) Iranian navy and coastal defenses Crucial civilian infrastructure (power plants, bridges, hospitals, radio/TV stations, food storage, pharmaceutical installations, schools, historical monuments and, let's not forget that one, foreign embassies of countries who support Iran). The way this will be justified will be the same as what was done to Serbia: a "destruction of critical regime infrastructure" (what else is new?!)

    Then, within about 24-48 hours the US President will go on air an announce to the world that it is "mission accomplished" and that "THE BEST" military forces in the galaxy have taught a lesson to the "Mollahs". There will be dances in the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem (right until the moment the Iranian missiles will start dropping from the sky. At which point the dances will be replaced by screams about a "2nd Hitler" and the "Holocaust").

    Then all hell will break loose (I have discussed that so often in the past that I won't go into details here).

    In conclusion, I want to mention something more personal about the people of the US.

    Roughly speaking, there are two main groups which I observed during my many years of life in the USA.

    Group one : is the TV-watching imbeciles who think that the talking heads on the idiot box actually share real knowledge and expertise. As a result, their thinking goes along the following lines: " yeah, yeah, say what you want, but if the mollahs make a wrong move, we will simply nuke them; a few neutron bombs will take care of these sand niggers ". And if asked about the ethics of this stance, the usual answer is a " f**k them! they messed with the wrong guys, now they will get their asses kicked ".

    Group two : is a much quieter group. It includes both people who see themselves as liberals and conservatives. They are totally horrified and they feel a silent rage against the US political elites. Friends, there are A LOT of US Americans out there who are truly horrified by what is done in their name and who feel absolutely powerless to do anything about it. I don't know about the young soldiers who are now being sent to the Middle-East, but I know a lot of former servicemen who know the truth about war and about THE BEST military in the history of the galaxy and they are also absolutely horrified.

    I can't say which group is bigger, but my gut feeling is that Group Two is much bigger than Group One. I might be wrong.

    I am now signing off but I will try to update you here as soon as any important info comes in.

    The Saker

    UPDATE1 : according to the Russian website Colonel Cassad , Moqtada al-Sadr has officially made the following demands to the Iraqi government:

    Immediately break the cooperation agreement with the United States. Close the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. Close all U.S. military bases in Iraq. Criminalize any cooperation with the United States. To ensure the protection of Iraqi embassies. Officially boycott American products.

    Cassad (aka Boris Rozhin) also posted this excellent caricature:

    UPDATE2: RT is reporting that " One US service member, two contractors killed in Al-Shabaab attack in Kenya, two DoD personnel injured ". Which just goes to prove my point that spontaneous attacks are what we will be seeing first and that the retaliation promised by Iran will only come later.

    UPDATE3 : al-Manar reports that two rockets have landed near the US embassy in Baghdad.

    UPDATE4 : Zerohedge is reporting that Iranian state TV broadcasted an appeal made during the funeral procession in which a speaker said that each Iranian ought to send one dollar per person (total 80'000'000 dollars) as a bounty for the killing of Donald Trump. I am trying to get a confirmation from Iran about this.

    UPDATE5 : Russian sources claim that all Iranian rocket forces have been put on combat alert.

    UPDATE6 : the Russian heavy rocket cruiser "Marshal Ustinov" has cross the Bosphorus and has entered the Mediterranean.

    The Essential Saker III: Chronicling The Tragedy, Farce And Collapse of the Empire in the Era of Mr MAGA

    Order Now The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire

    Order Now Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply. Leave a Reply

    (1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

    (2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

    (3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
    <b>bold text</b> results in bold text
    <i>italic text</i> results in italic text
    (You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
    <em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
    <strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
    <q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
    <cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:
    a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
    <blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

    a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.
    and last but not least:
    <a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

    (4) No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:
    &nbsp;
    You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.
    The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

    (5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

    63 Comments

    Anonymous on January 05, 2020 , · at 2:39 pm EST/EDT

    Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA.

    If this is true, it makes America's murder of General Soleimani even more outrageous. This would be like the USA sending an American regime official to some other country for a negotiation only to have him/her drone striked in the process!

    America reveals its malign character as even more sick that even its opponents have thought possible.

    Perhaps, Iran should request that Mike Pompeo come to Baghdad for a negotiation about General Soleimani 's murder and then "bug splat" Pompeo's fat ass from a drone!

    Anonymous on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:08 pm EST/EDT
    "For one thing, the US will now become an official and totally illegal military presence in Iraq. This means that whatever SOFA (Status Of Forces Agreement) the US and Iraq had until now is void."

    -I actually read somewhere that the Iraqi government is just a caretaker government and even thought it voted to remove foreign forces, it is not actually legally binding.

    Anyone that can conform or deny?

    Lysander on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:18 pm EST/EDT
    I'm no lawyer. I don't see why that would matter. If a caretaker government is presented with a crisis, why would it not have the authority to act?

    That said, It could be the line the US government chooses to use to insist its presence is still legal. If course the MSM will repeat and repeat and make it seem real.

    Serbian girl on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:42 pm EST/EDT
    Not the entire government. Only the PM Mahdi as far as I understand. He resigned after some protests. The parliament approved his resignation on Dec 2019. He is the caretaker until they appoint another PM.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/29/iraq-pm-resign-protests-abdul-mahdi-al-sistani
    Pamela on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:59 pm EST/EDT
    Couldn't agree more. When I read that my jaw dropped and I'm sure my eyes went huge. I just couldn't believe they could be that stupid, or that immoral, that sunk in utter utter depravity. They truly are those who have not one shred of decency, and thus have no way of recognising or understanding what decency is. Pure psychopath – an inability to grasp the emotions, values, and world view of those who are normal. This truly is beyond the pale, and this above everything else will ensure the revenge the heartbroken people of Iran are seeking. May God bless them.
    Mark on January 05, 2020 , · at 2:45 pm EST/EDT
    Well, this is going to be interesting for sure. I for one cannot see any way out for the Yankees, so I expect them to do their usual doubling down .

    Assassinate some more people, airstrikes etc.

    Hans on January 05, 2020 , · at 2:51 pm EST/EDT
    The US Armed Forces do not need to be 'THE BEST". All they need is mountains of second rate ordinance to re-bury Iraq bury Iran under rubble. They can then keep their forces in tightly fortified compounds and bomb the c**p out of any one who wants to 'steal their oil', or any one who wants to 'steal the land promised by God to the Chosen People'. The U.S. has always previously been limited in their avarice for destruction by their desire to be viewed as the 'good guy'. This limitation has now been stripped away. There is now nothing to stop the AngloZionist entity except naked force in return.

    As the Saker says, 'all hell will break loose '.

    Anonymous on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:09 pm EST/EDT
    "realistic option we would first see a massive increase in the US troop levels, we are talking several tens of thousands, if not more (depending on the actual plan)."

    -There is an interesting article on colonal cassad about this, USA actually has around 100k troops in ME spread out over various bases.
    https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/5543349.html

    Yes, but these are not part of a single force, many of these are more a target than a threat. Besides, they need to be concentrated into a a few single forces to actually participate in an invasion.
    The Saker

    Anonymouse on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:15 pm EST/EDT
    To understand troop size and relevance think along these lines. For every US front line soldier there will be 5 others in support roles, logistics etc. So for every front line fighting Marine there will be 5 others who got him there and who support him in his work. 10,000 front line fighting troops means 50,000 troops shipping out to the borders of Iran. I think perhaps you would need 100,000 US front line troops for an invasion AND occupation (because we all know if they go in they aren't going to leave quickly) We're talking about half a million US troops, this simply isn't going to happen for multiple reasons, not least they need to amass at some form of base (probably Iraq – yeah right) maybe Kuwait? They'd just be a constant sitting target. Saker is correct in that if this goes down it's going to be an air campaign (will the Iranians use the S300s they have?) and possibly Navy supported. the Israelis will help out but in turn make themselves targets at home for rocket attacks. Again I can't see it happening, it would take too long to arrange plus from the moment it kicks off every US base, individual is just a target to the majority of anti US forces spread across the whole middle east. I expect back door diplomacy, probably to little effect, and a ham fisted token blitz of cruise missiles and drone bombs at Iranian infrastructure, sadly this will not work for the Americans, we will have a long running campaign on ME ground but also mass terrorist activity across the US and some of its allies. Its a best guess scenario but if that plays out whatever happens to Iran this war will be another long running death by a 1000 cuts for the US and will guarantee Trump does not get re-elected.
    Whoever sold this to Trump (Bolton via Pompeo? Bibi?) has really lit the touch paper of ruin. Yes it stinks of Netanyahoo but it also reaks of full strength neocon, Bolton style. Trump is dumb enough to fall for it and obviously did.
    Cosimo on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:38 pm EST/EDT
    1. To read the Colonel Cassad website in English or any other language, just go to https://translate.yandex.com/ and then paste in the Cassad URL, which is given above but again, it's https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/ The really nice thing is that when you click on links, Yandex Translate automatically translates those links. Two problems, though. 1. For some unknown reason, Yandex always first translates Cassad as English-to-Russian, and then you have to click on a little window near the top left, to again request Russian-to-English and then it translates everything fine. I do not experience this problem when using Yandex on any other website. 2. Unlike what Benders-Lee intended when he invented the web browser, the "back button" almost doesn't work on Yandex Translate. So always right-click to open links in a new tab.

    2. The US could probably carry out a large number of air attacks, but the Iranian response would be to destroy all the Gulf oil facilities AND everything worth bombing in Israel. This potential for offense is Iran's best defense, and, I think, the main reason why there hasn't been a war. Iran's air defense missiles are probably more effective than the lying MSM will admit, and might shoot down a large percentage of the humans and aluminum the US would throw at Iran, but it's a matter of attrition, and Iran would suffer grave damage. We can't rule out that that might be the plan since the Empire is run by psychopaths. A US Army elite training manual, from 2012 in Kansas, implied that by 2020, Europe would not be a major power. Perhaps they were thinking that Europe would go out of business from a lack of Persian Gulf oil.

    3. As for a ground war against Iran, I don't think the US or even the US with the former NATO coalition, would have any hope and they know it. A real invasion force would require at least 250,000 troops, probably 500,000, maybe more. 80 million very determined and united Iranians, many of whom who don't fear martyrdom, would make the Vietnam War look like a bad picnic with fire ants . Yes, Vietnam had jungle for guerillas to hide behind, but South Vietnamese society was divided and many supported the Americans. Iran has no such division. Even the Arab province of Khuzestan would stand united, knowing how the Shiite Arabs are mistreated in the Eastern Province and in Kuwait.

    Tom Welsh on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:31 pm EST/EDT
    "They can then keep their forces in tightly fortified compounds "

    eating and drinking what? When no Iraqi will even speak to them, let alone do anything for them.

    Greifenburg on January 05, 2020 , · at 2:52 pm EST/EDT
    Count me in as part of group two. As a former U.S. Army service member I can assure anyone reading this that this action is an historic strategic mistake. What the Saker has outlined above is very likely. There is most probably no way to walk back now. Who in the ME would negotiate with the U.S. Government? Their perfidy is well known. Many citizen in this country feel like they are held hostage by a government that doesn't represent their interests or feelings. I hope the people in the ME know this.
    The Saker on January 05, 2020 , · at 2:57 pm EST/EDT
    Since the folks in the ME know that the US is a "pretend democracy" they also realize that the people of the USA are just as oppressed by the AngloZionist regime as the people abroad. Frankly, I have traveled on a lot of countries and I have never come across anything like real hostility towards the US American people. The very same people who hate Uncle Shmuel very much enjoy US music, literature, movies, novel ideas, etc. I believe that the Empire is truly hated across the globe, but not the people of the USA.
    Kind regards
    The Saker
    Melotte 22 on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:23 pm EST/EDT
    As long as people of the USA tolerate their government criminal activities around the world, and this is happening for last 70 years, I don't agree with your comment. These crimes are commited in the name of people of the USA, who are doing nothing to prevent them. As for movies coming from US, most of them are propaganda about 'exceptional nation'. No thanks.
    Auslander on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:09 pm EST/EDT
    The United States of America is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic. That being said, the fall elections are going to be of significant interest.

    With kindest regards
    Auslander

    Nachtigall on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:18 pm EST/EDT
    Couldn't agree with you less Saker. They share the spoils of war, generation after generation. From the killing of indigenous population to neocolonial resource extraction today, they get their cut. You cannot have it both ways, enjoying the spoils of war and hiding behind invalid rationalizations, pretending you have no-thingz to do with that.
    The Saker on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:12 pm EST/EDT
    Russian TV says that there were anti-war demonstrations in 80 (!) US cities.
    I don't have the time to check whether this is true, but it sure sounds credible to me.
    The Saker
    Anonymous on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:24 pm EST/EDT
    Greetings Mr. Saker,

    This information is true. I personally took part in the march in Denver, Colorado. I would estimate we had about 500 people, which is a lot more than most anti-war protests have ever gotten in recent memory.

    Do not count out the possibility of a sudden large and massive anti-war movement suddenly springing out of nowhere.

    Unfortunately, I do not see how "peaceful" protests will accomplish anything on their own. Rioting may be necessary. The system needs to be shut down and commerce slow to a crawl so that nobody may ignore this.

    The Saker on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:32 pm EST/EDT
    Thank you for this precious confirmation!
    And keep up the good fight!
    Kind regards
    The Saker
    durlin on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:25 pm EST/EDT
    anonymous, fellow Coloradoan here, would appreciate some info on where I need to look for the next one,. I will be there
    Richard Sauder on January 05, 2020 , · at 2:55 pm EST/EDT
    Yes. I am thinking about the Deagel.com numbers again. They're starting to come into better focus.

    http://www.deagel.com/country/forecast.aspx

    I agree that there will first be a period of violent confusion, followed by -- well, what sane person even wants to think about what possible horrors lie ahead?

    The threat of one or more spectacular false flag attacks to further fan the flames would also appear to be a possibility.

    Real evil has been unleashed, that is clear. The empire has decided to fight, and to fight very dirty.

    Nikolai on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:08 pm EST/EDT
    Wasn't the Saker working in the employ of the US or NATO when they attacked Srbija without cause? Because that was my understanding.

    Actually, no. I was working at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research.
    But thanks for showing everybody how ugly, petty and clueless ad hominem using trolls can be!
    The Saker

    Marko on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:20 pm EST/EDT
    Looks like our Nikolai is a Canvas Otpor Belgrade troll.
    Serbian girl on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:46 pm EST/EDT
    Or perhaps not Serbian at all
    Flabbergasted on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:11 pm EST/EDT
    "I can't say which group is bigger, but my gut feeling is that Group Two is much bigger than Group One. I might be wrong."

    My personal observation is unfortunately the opposite. I think the population that is over 40 is probably leans 80% toward the TV-watching imbecile category with zero critical thinking abilities and exposure to four plus decades of propaganda. The population under 40 is largely too apathetic to have an opinion and unwilling to engage in research.

    History will most likely play out in disaster resulting from a corrupt ruling class, systemic institutional rot, and brain-washed public not realizing what's happened.

    Nikolai on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:23 pm EST/EDT
    I will hazard a guess and say there are far more men than women in Group 1, and many more draft-age young adults of both sexes in Group 2.

    But by and large a disturbing number of people in America regard world events as being akin to a football game, with Team A and Team B and a score to be kept. If things don't appear to be going well for their "team," they speak and behave irrationally, with crass statements like "nuke the whole place and turn it into a glass parking lot." Impressive, isn't it? Grown adults, comporting themselves like overindulged little children, always accustomed to getting their way – and displaying a terrifying willingness to set the whole house on fire when they don't.

    It is a spiritual illness which pollutes the USA. Terrible things will have to happen before the society can become well, again

    Anonymous on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:26 pm EST/EDT
    Even if only 20% of the population join us, that will be enough. Because guess what? The TV-watching imbeciles are fat, lazy, and they won't do anything to support the government either, and they definitely aren't brave enough to get in the way of an angry mob
    JJ on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:08 pm EST/EDT
    About 50% of UK people opposed the UK intervention into Iraq .1 m people held marches on London and cities ..made no difference.
    cdvision on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:39 pm EST/EDT
    Its not just the US that's braindead. This from a once reputable newspaper in the UK

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/01/05/boris-johnson-calls-de-escalation-iran-us-killing-ofgeneral/

    Its behind a paywall so you only get the first few paragraphs – frankly all you need. BUT its the comments that tell the story!

    Pamela on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:11 pm EST/EDT
    It's interesting to me, this comment of Sakers'. I have been thinking, with these revelations of the utter depravity and total lack of what was once called "honour " and treating the enemy with respect, of a few instances which seemed to show me that not all of America was like this.

    There is a scene in the much loved but short lived** TV series "Firefly" in which the rebel "outsider" spaceship Captain offers a doctor on the run a berth with them. The Doctor says "but you dont like me. You could kill me in my sleep" to which the Captain replies "Son, you dont know me yet, So let me tell you know, If i ever try to kill you, you will be awake, you will be facing me, and you will be armed"

    Exactly I thought. There is a Code of Honour by which battles used to be fought. This latest by US has shown how low it's Ruling Regime is, that is doesn't not see that. But from examples like the above, I gathered that there are people in America who still hold to it closely – and that's good to know.

    ** Short lived because it showed as it's heroes a group of people who lived outside the Ruling Tyrannical Regime, who had fought for Independence and lost, and now lived "by their wits" and not always according to law. Not surprising that the rulers of US weren't going to allow that to go to air!!

    Nikolai on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:13 pm EST/EDT
    Wasn't the Saker working in the employ of the US and NATO when they attacked and bombed Srbija without cause? Because that was my understanding.

    Thanks, now we all know how good your "understanding" is!
    The Saker :-P

    Rufus Palmer on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:32 pm EST/EDT
    Unfortunately I believe the largest group in the USA is the "nuke 'em group". All of my friends watch Fox and none have an understanding of the empire.

    Sake thank you as always for your excellent work. What do you think Iran will attack first?

    teranam13 on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:19 pm EST/EDT
    Thanks Saker for this discussion/information space you provide when nothing is very trustworthy and on what is a holiday week end for you.

    Two points:
    Never underestimate the perfidy of the Kurds. They held back on the censure/withdrawal vote in the Iraqi\
    parliament and are probably offering withdrawal airport space for US military.

    And Agreed, about most Americans being absolutely horrified and ashamed.Even Alex Jones had to put Syrian Girl on and to post her on video.banned. One of his callers demanded that Alex apologize to his listening audience on "bended knee" for his support of Trump's attack on Iran. When Alex tried to schmooze
    the irate caller -- The man started yelling -- "Who cares, Alex, who cares about Iran my neighbors have no jobs
    and are dying from drug overdoses. who cares about Israel? Let them take care of themselves."

    Trump has sealed his own fate on many levels and ours her in looneylandia. It is said that a nation gets the leadership it deserves. We are about to become a nation of the yard-sale.

    Craig Mouldey on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:27 pm EST/EDT
    Whew, this is something to chew on and try to digest. That first point jumped right off the page. General Soleimani was on an official diplomatic mission, requested by the U.S.! They set him up and were waiting for him to get in his car at the airport and go onto the road.
    The entire world will know there is no way to justify this. It is just as ugly as the public murder of JFK. They have zero credibility in all they say and do. It will be interesting to see who supports what is coming and who have gotten the message from this murder and have decided they cannot support this beast.
    Clarence on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:33 pm EST/EDT
    How many missiles does the us have in the middle east?
    How many air defense missiles does have iran?
    Does iran have the ability to destroy us airbases to prevent aircraft from attacking iranian territory? That would be my first move: destroying the ennemy s fighter jets while they are still on the ground.
    How many missiles does iran can launch ? How far can they hit?
    I think these are important questions if we want to make a good assessment of the situation
    One Tribe on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:36 pm EST/EDT
    Thank you for the continuing courageous, fact-based reporting.

    All as-yet-unenslaved-minds of the oppressed people living under the auspices of the empire share the horror of what has happened, made worse so, for I personally, learning the evil duplicity of the 'fake' diplomacy of the masters of the U.S.A. administration.
    If there had been any credibility whatsoever, left for the U.S.A. diplomatic integrity, it is now completely murdered.

    I should like to point out, yet again, the perverse obviousness of the utter subordination of the utterly testiclesless america n ' leadership ' by the affiliates, dually loyal extra-nationals, aligned to the quasi-nation of pychopathic hatred against humanity.

    In spite of, and now increasingly because of, the absurd perception management/propaganda agencies, completely controlled by this aforementioned affiliation, and their ongoing absurd efforts, people are becoming aware of the ultimate source of the hatred and agenda we re witnessing in the ME, and indeed, in ever country under the auspices of the empire.
    It is becoming impossible to cover, even for the most timid followers of the citizens of empire-controlled nation states.
    The war continues against the non-subliminated citizens, and will certainly escalate as the traction of the perception-management techniques have been pushed way over their best-before date.

    Even not wanting to know this, people are becoming aware of it.

    I urge all those self-identifying with this affiliation of secretive hatred against humanity to disavow either publicly, or privately, this collective of hatred.
    The recusement of the fifth-column will undermine these machinations.

    It is now the time to realize that no promise of superior upward mobility, in exchange for activities supporting the affiliation, is worth the stark prospect of complete destruction of the biosphere.

    Paul23 on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:38 pm EST/EDT
    Saker: what makes you think it will just be a couple of days of bombing? I would have thought they would set up a no fly zone then fly over that country permanently blowing the shit out of any military thing on the ground until the gov collapses.

    Iran doesn't have the ability to prevent this & running a country under these conditions is impossible.

    Randy Brady on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:10 pm EST/EDT
    Set up a no-fly zone over Iran? Iran is well aware of American air-power. They have a multi-layer air defense. And I wouldn't be surprised that the Iranian's are capable of taking out U.S. satellites.

    Iran knows their enemy. They have been preparing for conflict with the U.S. for 40 years. This is a sophisticated, and highly advanced nation, with brilliant leadership. They understand what their weaknesses are, and what their strengths are.

    The wild cards are threefold: Russia. China. North Korea. If one wants to think about the possible asymmetrical capabilities of those three, let alone the pure power their militaries, it boggles the mind.

    Prediction: The U.S. stands down on orders of their own military. People like John Bolton quietly pass away in their sleep.

    Kilombo Zumbi on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:02 pm EST/EDT
    The only no fly zone to be implemented will be on all american warplanes over Iran and Iraq. Do you remember the multimillion drone that went down? Multipliy it by hundreds of manned planes. God, how delusional can you be?!!!
    You have a fighting force that is a disgrace composed by little girls that start screeming once they get bullets flying over their heads. You have aircraft battle groups that are sitting ducks waitng to go to the bottom of the sea. Wake up and get your pills, man!
    Tom Welsh on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:39 pm EST/EDT
    Paul23, from where will the aircraft take off to implement your "no-fly zone"? Any air base within 2,000 km would be destroyed by a shower of cruise missiles and possibly drones.

    Any aircraft carrier within 2,000 km likewise.

    Mike from Jersey on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:45 pm EST/EDT
    File this next article under "Just when you thought that things couldn't get any crazier."

    Pompeo is slamming Europe for not being supportive of the American murders in the Middle East.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/europeans-havent-been-helpful-after-suleimani-killing-pompeo-slams-allies-not

    Nussiminen on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:48 pm EST/EDT
    It is Group 1 -- loud, reactionary, extremely vulgar, militant parasites -- which defines the US national character. Exceptional and indispensable simply mean "entitled to other peoples' natural resources and labour output". Trying to reason with these lowlives is a waste of time. Putin understands this; hence the new Russian weapons. The latter will be needed very soon.
    Mike from Jersey on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:08 pm EST/EDT
    I am an American and I am not sure that is true.

    Americans are a good people but America is one of the most heavily propagandized nations in the world. The media is corrupt. The educational systems teach a sanitized version of history. But that is only a part of it.

    Pro-Military propaganda is everywhere. Even before the Superbowl, jet bombers fly over the stadium – as if Militarism constituted a basic American value. At Airports, "Military Personnel" are given preferential boarding. At retail stores customers are asked to make donations to "military families." College football games are dedicated to "Military Appreciation Day." High Schools work in unison with Military Recruiters to steer students into the Military. Even playground facilities for children that have video displays display pro military messages. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

    Most of this propaganda is paid for out of the obscene military budget. The average citizen doesn't have a chance.

    Americans are a good people, if they really knew what was being done in their name, they would put a stop to it.

    Nussiminen on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:37 pm EST/EDT
    Militant parasites do live in a world of total lies, deception, and delusion but never at the expense of their survival instincts. US imperial coercion, mayhem, and murder globally are absolutely crucial to the American way of life, and the 99% know it. Their living standards would drop enormously without the imperial loot. Thus, they dearly yearn for all the repression, war, and chauvinism they vote for and more.
    Steki on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:53 pm EST/EDT
    One thing is telling, at least for me. Who the f in the right state of mind kills other state's official and then admits of doing it?!? The common sense sense tells me that you do something and to avoid bigger consequences you stay quet and deny everything. Just like CIA is doing. Trump just put US military personnel in grave danger. We know how they accused Manning for showing the to the world US war crimes. They put him in the jail for what Trump just did. But, I cannot believe that they are that much stupid. If US does not want war, as Trump is saying, they could have done this and then blame someone else because now it has been shown that they wanted to "talk" to Iran, as Iraqis PM said. At least, US brought new meaning to the word "talk"
    Rostislav_Velka_Morava on January 05, 2020 , · at 3:56 pm EST/EDT
    Russia will not allow this, and will put their foot down.
    Hussan Carim on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:00 pm EST/EDT
    The most damaging, no most devestating, assymetrical attack on the US would be a 'non violent' attack.

    Let me quickly explain.

    It has been well known since the exposure of the man behind the curtain during the great financial crisis of 2007-08 that all Human operations – all Human life in fact – is financialised in some way.

    Some ways being so sophisticated or 'subtle' that barely 1 person in 1000 is even aware, much less capable of understanding them, much less the financial control grid (and state / deepstate power base) which empoverishs them and enslaves them to an endless cycle of aquiring and spending 'money'.

    Look deeply and the wise will see how 'Human resources' (as opposed to Human Beings) are herded like cattle to be worked on the farm, 'fleeced', or slaughtered as appropriate to the money masters.

    We have been programmed, trained, and conditioned to call 'currency units' (dollar/euro/pound/yuan, etc) 'money', when they are actually nothing of the sort, they are state or bank issued money substitutes.

    In the middle east and north africa some leaders recognised this determined how to escape slavery and subjegation. They attempted to field this knowledge like an economic-nuke, but without the massive protection required, and they were destroyed by the empire – Sadam Hussain with his oil for Gold (and oil for Euros) program, and Col. Gadaffi of Libya with his North African 'Gold Dinar' and 'Silver Durham' Islamic money program.

    To cut a very long story short – the evil empire depends upon all nations and peoples excepting thier pieces of paper currency units as 'real' money – which the empire print / create in unlimited quantities to fund thier war machine and global progrram of domination.

    All financial markets are either denominated or settled in US Dollars (or are at least convertable).

    All Nations Central Banks (except Irans I believe) are linked via various US Dollar exchange / liquidity mechanisms, and all 'settle' in US Dollars.

    Currently all nations use US controlled electronic banking communications / exchange / tranfer systems (swift being the most well known).

    Would it therefore not make sence to go for the very beating heart of the Beast – the US financial system?

    The most powerful attack against the empire would therefore be against this power base – the global reserve currency – the US dollar – and the US ability to print any quantity of it (or create digits on a screen and call them 'Dollar Units').

    It would be pointless trying to fight an emnemy capable of printing for free enough currency to buy every resource (including peoples lives) – unless that super ability was destroyed or disrupted.

    Example of a massive nuclear equivilent attack on the beast would be an internal and major disrruption of interbank electronic communications (at all levels from cash machine operation and card payment readers up to interbank transfers and federal banking operations).

    Shut down the US banking system and you shut down the US war machine.

    Not only that you shut down the US ability to buy resources and bribe powerful leaders – which means they wont be able to recover from such a blow quickly.

    Shutting down banking and electronic payments of all kinds would cause the US people – particularly those currently enjoying bread and circus distraction and pacification – to tear appart thier own communities, and each other, as the spoiled and gready fight for the remaining resources, including food and fuel.

    The 'grid' has been studied in great depth by both Russia and China (and Israel as part of thier neo-sampson option) and we can therefore deduce that Iran has some knowledge of how it works and where the weak links are (and not just the undersea optical cables and wireless nodes).

    I, and a thousand other people have always said, the best, perhaps only way to defeat the US and end its reign of terror on this Earth is to take away its ability to create out of thin air the Worlds global reserve currency – the US Dollar.

    Reducing the US to an empoverished 3rd world state by taking its check book away would be a worthy and lasting revenge and humiliation.

    Amon Ra on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:09 pm EST/EDT
    " I, and a thousand other people have always said, the best, perhaps only way to defeat the US and end its reign of terror on this Earth is to take away its ability to create out of thin air the Worlds global reserve currency – the US Dollar. "

    No, the best way would be for each nation to ditch the intertwined, privately ( Rothschild ) controlled central banks, and to return to printing their own money. Anything, short of that will just perpetuate the same system from a different home base ( nation ), most likely China next. This virus can jump hosts and it will given a chance.

    Auslander on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:03 pm EST/EDT
    Who knows what will happen, but an actual boots on the ground invasion of Iran will not happen. Iran is not Irak and things have changed since that war.

    US does not have 6 to 12 months to gather it's forces and logistics for an invasion (remember, the election is coming), plus US no longer has the heavy lift assets to do this. Toss in the fact that Iran is now on a war footing and has allies in the general AO, hired RoRo's and other logistics and supply assets will be targets before they get anywhere near the ports or beaches to off load. Plus, you can kiss oil goodbye, Iran will close the straights a nanosecond after the first bomb is in the air.

    An air assault such as Serbia will be very expensive, Iran will fight back from the first bomb if not before, and Iran has a pretty viable air defense system and the missiles to make life miserable for any cluster of troops and logistics within roughly 300 kilometers of the borders if not longer. Look at a map. There is a long border between Iran and Irak, but as such and considering the terrain, any viable ground attack has to come from Irak territory. With millions of Iraki's seething at what Uncle Sugar just did and millions of Iranians seething at what Uncle Sugar just did, any invading troops will not be greeted with showers spring blossoms. To paraphrase a quote, 'You will be safe nowhere, our land will be your grave.'

    Toss in the fact that an invasion of Irak, if even half successful, will put American troops on a war footing perilously close to Russian territory and possibly directly on the Russian Lake, aka Caspian Sea, and sovereign territory of Russia. Won't happen, VVP will not allow it.

    Ergo, in spite of all the bluster and chest beating, at best all Foggy Bottom can do is bomb, bomb some more and bomb again. The cost in airframes and captured pilots will be a disaster and if RoRo's and other logistic heavy lift assets or bases are hit, the body bags coming back to Dover will be of numbers that can not be hidden as they are today with explanations that the dead are victims of training accidents or air accidents.

    Foggy Bottom, and Five Points with Langley, have painted themselves in to a corner and unfortunately for them, (and it's within the realm of possibility that Five Points egged Trump on for this deal regardless of their protestations of innocence and surprise) they are now in a case of put up or shut up. As a point of honor they will continue down the spiral path of open warfare and war is like a cow voiding it's watery bowels, it splatters far beyond the intended target.

    As my friend said a few years ago, damn you, damn your eyes, damn your souls, damn you back to Satan whose spawn you are. Go back to your fetid master and leave us in peace.

    Auslander
    Author http://rhauslander.com/

    Never The Last One, paper back edition. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1521849056 A deep look in to Russia, her culture and her Armed Forces, in essence a look at the emergence of Russian Federation.

    An Incident On Simonka. paperback edition. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1696160715 NATO Is Invited To Leave Sevastopol, One Way Or The Other.

    Auslander on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:19 pm EST/EDT
    "Toss in the fact that an invasion of Irak, if even half successful," should read:

    "Toss in the fact that an invasion of Iran, if even half successful,"

    It's late and this old man is tired. More tomorrow.

    Auslander

    Anonymous on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:04 pm EST/EDT
    "UPDATE2: RT is reporting that "One US service member, two contractors killed in Al-Shabaab attack in Kenya, two DoD personnel injured". Which just goes to prove my point that spontaneous attacks are what we will be seeing first and that the retaliation promised by Iran will only come later."

    -Al-Shabaab is a salafist terror group

    Observer on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:17 pm EST/EDT
    Saker, Some of us might be curious to know what your experience with the UN Institute for Disarmament Research informs you about the imminent Virginia gun bans and confiscations planned for this year and next. Can Empire afford to fight an actual shooting war on two fronts, one externally against Iraq/Iran and the second internally against its own people, some of whom will paradoxically be called away to fight on the first front? Perhaps the two conflicts could become conjoined as Uncle Shmuel mislabels every peaceful gun owner who just wants to be left alone as a foreign enemy-sympathizer and combatant by default, thereby turning brother against brother in a bloody prolonged hell in the regions immediately around Washington DC? Could the Empire *truly* be that suicidal?
    Hajduk on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:20 pm EST/EDT
    'Mr. Trump, the Gambler! Know that we are near you, in places that don't come to your mind. We are near you in places that you can't even imagine. We are a nation of martyrdom. We are the nation of Imam Hussein You are well aware of our power and capabilities in the region. You know how powerful we are in asymmetrical warfare You know that a war would mean the loss of all your capabilities. You may start the war, but we will be the ones to determine its end '
    Gen. Soleimani (2018)
    Bikkin on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:31 pm EST/EDT
    Hello Saker,
    I would like to ask you a question.
    According to the Russian nuclear doctrine "The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction against itself or its allies and also in response to large-scale aggression involving conventional weapons in situations that are critical for the national security of the Russian Federation and its allies."
    In your opinion does Russia consider Iran such an ally? Will Russia shield Iran against USAn / Israeli nuclear strikes? In case of an imminent nuclear strike on Iran is Russia (and possibly others) going to issue a nuclear ultimatum to the would-be aggressor? And in case an actual nuclear attack on Iran happens is Russia going to retaliate / deter further attacks with its own nukes?
    What is your opinion?
    One thing: please do not start explaining why the above scenario is completely unthinkable, unrealistic and why it would never ever happen. I need your opinion on the possible events if such an attack does take place or it is about to happen. I do not need reasons why it would not happen; I need your opinion what might take place if it does happen. If you cannot answer my question, have no opinion or simply do not want to answer it please let me know it.
    In case there is a formal commitment by Russia – one I know not of – when, where was it made?
    Thanks in advance.
    Nachtigall on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:27 pm EST/EDT
    2nd that, but be polite to the Saker. Ask nicely next time, like someone who is civilized.

    Thanks you for your indispensable work, dear Saker!

    Marko on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:32 pm EST/EDT
    I think USA still has nuclear option.
    They will not hesitate to use it on Iran if Israel is in danger.
    So, I think Iran shall be defeated anyway, as USA is much stronger.

    Wrong. If the US uses nukes, then this will secure the total victory of Iran.
    The Saker

    Nachtigall on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:31 pm EST/EDT
    How does this secure a total victory, dear Saker? Please help my to understand this: Nukes on every major city, industrial site, infrastructure with pos. millions dead – how is this a victory?
    robert on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:41 pm EST/EDT
    So, how many hostages for Iran are in Iraq now?
    Petro-G on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:44 pm EST/EDT
    I think that if Iran were to launch some devastating missiles into Israel, either a US ship/submarine or Israel will launch a nuclear bomb into Iran. The US knows there is nothing to be gained by a ground invasion. If we [the US] were to start launching missiles into Iran, Iran would rightfully be launching sophisticated arms back toward US ships and Israel and the US can't stand for that. We are good at dishing it out, but lousy at receiving it.

    I can only believe we assassinated Solieman [apologies] because it is the writhing of a dying petrodollar. The US is desperate. But I don't understand how going to war is supposed to help?

    Stand Easy on January 05, 2020 , · at 4:56 pm EST/EDT
    Some short comments on the strategic blunder made by US.

    Meantime, global ramifications are being felt. View from China, one of the biggest consumers of ME oil:

    https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1175782.shtml

    and some mind-reading from a HK based rag:

    "Beijing's ties with Tehran are crucial to its energy and geopolitical strategies, and with Moscow also in the mix, a broader conflagration is a real possibility"

    https://www.asiatimes.com/2020/01/article/could-china-take-irans-side-in-a-war-with-us/

    Japan had planned to send some military hardware to the ME just before the new year but Gen Soleimani's murder may change the calculus.

    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/01/03/national/japan-sdf-assassination-iran-qassem-soleimani/#.XhJYxfLmjN4

    Last but not least, Happy Nativity to all Orthodox Christians (thanks for the beautifully illustrated Orthodox calendar, The Saker.)
    Let us all pray for peace.

    Kent on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:33 pm EST/EDT
    "(thanks for the beautifully illustrated Orthodox calendar, The Saker.)"

    Credits for the calendar(s) should go to one of our in house Artists and poets Ioan.

    You obviously do not visit the Cafe' very often, do you?

    Regards
    Kent

    Wendy on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:24 pm EST/EDT
    Trump is the King of the South. Killing under a flag of parley is a rare thing these days and is the reason why Trump will end up going to war with no allies by his side just like the path mapped oit for him in Daniel.

    Analysis sans eschatology is Onism.

    Tom on January 05, 2020 , · at 5:32 pm EST/EDT
    It's not a blunder.
    Trump's goals pre-assassination:
    1) withdraw US troops from the ME ("Fortress America") and
    2) placate Israel
    This is how it is done. Not a direct "hey guys, we have to bring the boys home." Trump tried that and got smashed by the Deep State and Israel. Instead, he is going to force the Islamic world to do the talking for him by refusing to host our pariah army (that's all they have to do, not destroy a major US base or two). Then even the Deep State will admit it's a lost cause. He can say he did all he could while achieving his goals.
    As The Saker pointed out, the troops being sent now are to evacuate, not to conquer Tehran. Next time this year the US will have its troops home and Trump will be reelected

    [Jan 05, 2020] Trump is wholly responsible for his own actions, but he -- just like the Ayatollah -- is being pushed in a direction where it's impossible to back down and still "save face". Neither men can afford to do so by Andrew Korybko

    Highly recommended!
    Looks like Trump administration buried the Treaty of non-proliferation once and for all. From now on only a country with nuclear weapons can be viewed as a sovereign country.
    Notable quotes:
    "... To remind the reader once more, however, none of this would be happening had Iran not abandoned its "nuclear ambiguity" by agreeing to the 2015 Rouhani-Obama deal, with that event in hindsight being the tripwire that provoked the American military into wantonly escalating tensions with Iran ..."
    "... Because they realized that the maximum costs that the Islamic Republic could inflict on it in response to their actions could be "manageable". ..."
    "... The lesson to be learned from all of this is that the possession of nuclear weapons safeguards a country's sovereignty by enabling it to inflict "unmanageable"/"unacceptable" costs on its foes and thus deter their aggression, failing which leaders on both sides can be manipulated into a serious crisis. ..."
    Jan 05, 2020 | astutenews.com

    Astute News

    Trump is wholly responsible for his own actions, but he -- just like the Ayatollah -- is being pushed in a direction where it's impossible to back down and still "save face". Neither men can afford to do so, which makes it likely that a lot more people than just Maj. Gen. Soleimani might be about to die.

    To remind the reader once more, however, none of this would be happening had Iran not abandoned its "nuclear ambiguity" by agreeing to the 2015 Rouhani-Obama deal, with that event in hindsight being the tripwire that provoked the American military into wantonly escalating tensions with Iran (despite believing that they're doing so in "self-defense)

    Because they realized that the maximum costs that the Islamic Republic could inflict on it in response to their actions could be "manageable".

    The lesson to be learned from all of this is that the possession of nuclear weapons safeguards a country's sovereignty by enabling it to inflict "unmanageable"/"unacceptable" costs on its foes and thus deter their aggression, failing which leaders on both sides can be manipulated into a serious crisis.

    By Andrew Korybko
    Source: One World

    [Jan 05, 2020] The Donald Is Now America First s Own Assassin by Craig Murray

    Notable quotes:
    "... This switch in US foreign policy was known in the White House of 2007 as "the redirection". It meant that Sunni jihadists like Al-Qaida and later al-Nusra were able to switch back to being valued allies of the United States. It redoubled the slavish tying of US foreign policy to Saudi interests. The axis was completed once Mohammad Bin Salman took control of Saudi Arabia. His predecessors had been coy about their de facto alliance with Israel. MBS felt no shyness about openly promoting Israeli interests, under the cloak of mutual alliance against Iran, calculating quite correctly that Arab street hatred of the Shia outweighed any solidarity with the Palestinians. Common enemies were easy for the USA/Saudi/Israeli alliance to identify; Iran, the Houthi, Assad and of course the Shia Hezbollah, the only military force to have given the Israelis a bloody nose. The Palestinians themselves are predominantly Sunni and their own Hamas was left friendless and isolated. ..."
    "... Such precarious balance as there ever was in Iraq was upset this last two months when the US and Israelis transported more of their ISIL Sunni jihadists into Iraq, to escape the pincer of the Turkish, Russian and Syrian government forces. The Iranians were naturally not going to stand for this and Iranian militias were successfully destroying the ISIL remnants, which is why General Qassem Suleimani was in Iraq, why a US mercenary assisting ISIL was killed in an Iranian militia rocket attack, and why Syrian military representatives were being welcomed at Baghdad airport. ..."
    "... Nevertheless, Tel Aviv and Riyadh will also be celebrating today at the idea that their dream of the USA destroying their regional rival Iran, as Iraq and Libya were destroyed, is coming closer. The USA could do this. The impact of technology on modern warfare should not be underestimated. There is a great deal of wishful thinking that fantasizes about US military defeat, but it is simply unrealistic if the USA actually opted for full scale invasion. ..."
    "... Technology is a far greater factor in warfare than it was in the 1960s. The USA could destroy Iran, but the cost and the ramifications would be enormous, and not only the entire Middle East but much of South Asia would be destabilized, including of course Pakistan. My reading of Trump remains that he is not a crazed Clinton-type war hawk and it will not happen. We all have to pray it does not. ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

    For the United States to abandon proxy warfare and directly kill one of Iran's most senior political figures has changed international politics in a fundamental way. It is a massive error. Its ramifications are profound and complex.

    There is also a lesson to be learned here in that this morning there will be excitement and satisfaction in the palaces of Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh and Tehran. All of the political elites will see prospects for gain from the new fluidity. While for ordinary people in all those countries there is only the certainty of more conflict, death and economic loss, for the political elite, the arms manufacturers, the military and security services and allied interests, the hedge funds, speculators and oil companies, there are the sweet smells of cash and power.

    Tehran will be pleased because the USA has just definitively lost Iraq. Iraq has a Shia majority and so naturally tends to ally with Iran. The only thing preventing that was the Arab nationalism of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Socialist Party. Bush and Blair were certainly fully informed that by destroying the BA'ath system they were creating an Iranian/Iraqi nexus, but they decided that was containable. The "containment" consisted of a deliberate and profound push across the Middle East to oppose Shia influence in proxy wars everywhere.

    This is the root cause of the disastrous war in Yemen, where the Zaidi-Shia would have been victorious long ago but for the sustained brutal aerial warfare on civilians carried out by the Western powers through Saudi Arabia. This anti-Shia western policy included the unwavering support for the Sunni Bahraini autocracy in the brutal suppression of its overwhelmingly Shia population. And of course it included the sustained and disastrous attempt to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria and replace it with pro-Saudi Sunni jihadists.

    This switch in US foreign policy was known in the White House of 2007 as "the redirection". It meant that Sunni jihadists like Al-Qaida and later al-Nusra were able to switch back to being valued allies of the United States. It redoubled the slavish tying of US foreign policy to Saudi interests. The axis was completed once Mohammad Bin Salman took control of Saudi Arabia. His predecessors had been coy about their de facto alliance with Israel. MBS felt no shyness about openly promoting Israeli interests, under the cloak of mutual alliance against Iran, calculating quite correctly that Arab street hatred of the Shia outweighed any solidarity with the Palestinians. Common enemies were easy for the USA/Saudi/Israeli alliance to identify; Iran, the Houthi, Assad and of course the Shia Hezbollah, the only military force to have given the Israelis a bloody nose. The Palestinians themselves are predominantly Sunni and their own Hamas was left friendless and isolated.

    The principal difficulty of this policy for the USA of course is Iraq. Having imposed a rough democracy on Iraq, the governments were always likely to be Shia dominated and highly susceptible to Iranian influence. The USA had a continuing handle through dwindling occupying forces and through control of the process which produced the government. They also provided financial resources to partially restore the physical infrastructure the US and its allies had themselves destroyed, and of course to fund a near infinite pool of corruption.

    That US influence was balanced by strong Iranian aligned militia forces who were an alternative source of strength to the government of Baghdad, and of course by the fact that the center of Sunni tribal strength, the city of Falluja, had itself been obliterated by the United States, three times, in an act of genocide of Iraqi Sunni population.

    Through all this the Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi had until now tiptoed with great care. Pro-Iranian yet a long term American client, his government maintained a form of impartiality based on an open hand to accept massive bribes from anybody. That is now over. He is pro-Iranian now.

    Such precarious balance as there ever was in Iraq was upset this last two months when the US and Israelis transported more of their ISIL Sunni jihadists into Iraq, to escape the pincer of the Turkish, Russian and Syrian government forces. The Iranians were naturally not going to stand for this and Iranian militias were successfully destroying the ISIL remnants, which is why General Qassem Suleimani was in Iraq, why a US mercenary assisting ISIL was killed in an Iranian militia rocket attack, and why Syrian military representatives were being welcomed at Baghdad airport.

    It is five years since I was last in the Green Zone in Baghdad, but it is extraordinarily heavily fortified with military barriers and checks every hundred yards, and there is no way the crowd could have been allowed to attack the US Embassy without active Iraqi government collusion. That profound political movement will have been set in stone by the US assassination of Suleimani. Tehran will now have a grip on Iraq that could prove to be unshakable.

    Nevertheless, Tel Aviv and Riyadh will also be celebrating today at the idea that their dream of the USA destroying their regional rival Iran, as Iraq and Libya were destroyed, is coming closer. The USA could do this. The impact of technology on modern warfare should not be underestimated. There is a great deal of wishful thinking that fantasizes about US military defeat, but it is simply unrealistic if the USA actually opted for full scale invasion.

    Technology is a far greater factor in warfare than it was in the 1960s. The USA could destroy Iran, but the cost and the ramifications would be enormous, and not only the entire Middle East but much of South Asia would be destabilized, including of course Pakistan. My reading of Trump remains that he is not a crazed Clinton-type war hawk and it will not happen. We all have to pray it does not.

    There will also today be rejoicing in Washington. There is nothing like an apparently successful military attack in a US re-election campaign. The Benghazi Embassy disaster left a deep scar upon the psyche of Trump's support base in particular, and the message that Trump knows how to show the foreigners not to attack America is going down extremely well where it counts, whatever wise people on CNN may say.

    So what happens now? Consolidating power in Iraq and finishing the destruction of ISIL in Iraq will be the wise advance that Iranian statesman can practically gain from these events. But that is, of course, not enough to redeem national honor. Something quick and spectacular is required for that. It is hard not to believe there must be a very real chance of action being taken against shipping in the Straits of Hormuz, which Iran can do with little prior preparation. Missile attacks on Saudi Arabia or Israel are also well within Iran's capability, but it seems more probable that Iran will wish to strike a US target rather than a proxy. An Ambassador may be assassinated. Further missile strikes against US outposts in Iraq are also possible. All of these scenarios could very quickly lead to disastrous escalation.

    In the short term, Trump in this situation needs either to pull out troops from Iraq or massively to reinforce them. The UK does not have the latter option, having neither men nor money, and should remove its 1400 troops now. Whether the "triumph" of killing Suleimani gives Trump enough political cover for an early pullout – the wise move – I am unsure. 2020 is going to be a very dangerous year indeed.

    Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster, human rights activist, and former diplomat. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. The article is reprinted with permission from his website .

    [Jan 05, 2020] The Donald Is Now America First's Own Assassin by David Stockman

    Notable quotes:
    "... As is evident from the yellow, green, red and black circles on the map below, which circles outline each missile's striking range, the overwhelming bulk of Iran's missile force has a range of 500 miles or less. These missiles are capable of hitting targets in the immediate vicinity of the Persian Gulf, or roughly the same area which encompasses the 35 military bases designated by American flags in the graphic above. ..."
    "... Stated differently, Iran's extremely modest military capacities are not remotely about an offensive threat to the American homeland. They are overwhelmingly about defending itself in its own neighborhood, where Washington has been intervening and occupying with massive firepower and hostile intent for decades. ..."
    "... So left to its own devices, Tehran would produce 5 million barrels per day from its abundant reserves. That's barely one-tenth of its present meager output, which is owing to Washington's vicious sanctions against any and all customers for its oil and potential investors in modernizing and expanding it production capacity. ..."
    "... So if it's not ISIS or oil, exactly why does Washington maintain the circle of 35 bases displayed in the graphic above and keep thousands of US troops and other personnel in harms' way in the region? ..."
    "... The answer, of course, is that the foreign policy apparatus of the US government is controlled by anti-Iran neocons and regime changers. We are still in Syria not to fight ISIS, which is gone, but to block Iran's land route to its allies in Syria and Lebanon (Hezbollah); and we remain in Iraq solely to use it as a base for clandestine US and Israeli attacks on these allies and proxy forces. ..."
    "... Likewise, the US military-industrial complex's greed and appetite for power and pelf is so voracious that it will embrace any and all missions anywhere on the planet – no matter how stupid or futile or immoral, as per the case of 19-years in Afghanistan – that keep the budgetary loot flowing. ..."
    "... For crying out loud, Washington has been demonizing, ostracizing and economically attacking Iran for decades, and is now literally attempting to destroy its economy and society through is oil sanctions and its "maximum pressure" campaign that aims to bring the fate of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi to its top leaders in Tehran. ..."
    "... That's why Secretary of State Pompeo's statement justifying the Donald's act of naked aggression is so hideous. ..."
    "... Washington is putting the entire nation of Iran at risk in the very place where God or evolution, as the case may be, formed the peninsula on which it resides; and it is doing so without any Iranian provocation against the security of the American homeland whatsoever. ..."
    "... "I can't talk too much about the nature of the threats. But the American people should know that the President's decision to remove Soleimani from the battlefield saved American lives," Pompeo told CNN. ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

    Antiwar.com Regional News

    Posted on January 04, 2020 January 3, 2020

    By the twisted logic of Imperial Washington you could say the Iranians were asking for it. After all, they had the nerve to locate their country right in the middle of 35 U.S. military bases!

    Then again, your saner angels may ask: What in the hell is Washington doing with a massive military footprint in a region and in a string of backwater countries that have virtually no bearing on homeland security, safety and liberty?

    Djibouti? Oman? Kyrgyzstan? Uzbekistan? Afghanistan? Bahrain? Kuwait? And, yes, Iraq and Iran?

    In fact, Washington destroyed the former for no good reason and based on egregious Big Lies about Saddam's nonexistent WMDs and sheltering of al-Qaeda. That turned Iraq into a failed state hellhole pulsating with sectarian frictions and anti-American grievances – even as the rump state of Iraq centered in Baghdad fell under the control of Iran-friendly Shiite politicians and militias.

    At the same time, Iran itself is zero threat to the American homeland. It's tiny $350 billion GDP amounts to 6 days of US annual output and its $20 billion defense budget is equivalent to what the Pentagon wastes every 8 days.

    Militarily, it has no blue water navy, an air force that could double as a cold war museum and a short and medium range missile force that is self-evidently dedicated to defense and deterrence in the region, not an attack on the USA way over on the yonder side of the deep blue seas.

    Its 300 or so active aircraft, for example, include 175 US F-4, F-5, F-14 and sundry transports, helicopters and trainers purchased by the Shah during the 1970s and kept together since the revolution with bailing wire and bubble gum. It also fields 60 or so Soviet vintage MiG-29s and Sukhoi Su attack aircraft – plus a few dozen European and Chinese planes of mostly ancient design.

    Likewise, even its most advanced medium range cruise missile (Soumar) can barely get to Rome, Italy, to say nothing of Rome, Georgia.

    As is evident from the yellow, green, red and black circles on the map below, which circles outline each missile's striking range, the overwhelming bulk of Iran's missile force has a range of 500 miles or less. These missiles are capable of hitting targets in the immediate vicinity of the Persian Gulf, or roughly the same area which encompasses the 35 military bases designated by American flags in the graphic above.

    Stated differently, Iran's extremely modest military capacities are not remotely about an offensive threat to the American homeland. They are overwhelmingly about defending itself in its own neighborhood, where Washington has been intervening and occupying with massive firepower and hostile intent for decades.

    Therein, of course, lies a hint. More than 13 years after Saddam's last hurrah on a Baghdad gallows, the US still has upwards of 30,000 troops and contractors in the immediate vicinity of the Persian Gulf. But why?

    It can't be owing to ISIS. The Islamic State was never much more than a no count salient of dusty, woebegone towns and villages on the Upper Euphrates straddling Western Iraq and northeastern Syria that was destined to collapse on its own barbaric madness anyway; and which was essentially dispatched by the Russian air force, Assad's military and the Shiite militia forces organized by the dead man himself, Major General Soleimani.

    Likewise, it should be obvious by now that it's not the oil, either. At the moment the US is producing nearly 13 million barrels per day and is the world's leading oil producer – well ahead of Saudi Arabia and Russia; and is now actually a net exporter of crude for the first time in three-quarters of a century.

    Besides, the Fifth Fleet has never been the solution to oil security. The cure for high prices is high prices – as the great US shale oil and Canadian heavy oil booms so cogently demonstrate, among others.

    And the route to global oil industry stability is peaceful commerce because virtually every regime – regardless of politics and ideology – needs all the oil revenue it can muster to fund its own rule and keep its population reasonably pacified.

    Surely, there is no better case for the latter than that of Iran itself – with an economy burdened by decades of war, sanctions and mis-rule and an 80-million population that aspires to a western standard of living.

    So left to its own devices, Tehran would produce 5 million barrels per day from its abundant reserves. That's barely one-tenth of its present meager output, which is owing to Washington's vicious sanctions against any and all customers for its oil and potential investors in modernizing and expanding it production capacity.

    So if it's not ISIS or oil, exactly why does Washington maintain the circle of 35 bases displayed in the graphic above and keep thousands of US troops and other personnel in harms' way in the region?

    Or more to the moment, why has the Donald been unable to bring the forces home as he has so often proclaimed to be his policy?

    The answer, of course, is that the foreign policy apparatus of the US government is controlled by anti-Iran neocons and regime changers. We are still in Syria not to fight ISIS, which is gone, but to block Iran's land route to its allies in Syria and Lebanon (Hezbollah); and we remain in Iraq solely to use it as a base for clandestine US and Israeli attacks on these allies and proxy forces.

    These Washington instigated or conducted attacks on Iranian allies, in fact, are why there was growing pressure in the Iraqi government to demand that the US finally leave. These pressures will now become overwhelming in light of this week's US bombing of five PMF camps (Popular Mobilization Forces) which are Shiite militias that have been integrated into the Iraqi army and which are under the command of its prime minister, and last night's assassination of their Deputy Commander along with Soleimani.

    To be sure, Iran's choice of allies has nothing to do with America's homeland security: None of the sovereign governments of Lebanon (where Hezbollah is the leading political party) or Syria or even Iraq (which is an ostensible US ally) have protested these confession (i.e. Shiite) based arrangements and the aid and benefits which flow from them.

    That's because the so-called Shiite crescent is a bogeyman invented by Bibi Netanyahu and is the excuse for his hysterical anti-Iranian foreign policy. The latter is not even designed to enhance Israel's own security, but to vilify a "far enemy" that can keep his rightwing coalition glued together and himself in power.

    Likewise, the US military-industrial complex's greed and appetite for power and pelf is so voracious that it will embrace any and all missions anywhere on the planet – no matter how stupid or futile or immoral, as per the case of 19-years in Afghanistan – that keep the budgetary loot flowing.

    Accordingly, the Washington apparatus conspires to keep the 35 Mideast bases in place and to trigger actions like last night's insane assassination of Iran's foremost military leader in order to reify the threat and to periodically stoke tensions and counterattacks that keep missions alive and the forces deployed.

    Indeed, we are hard-pressed to imagine a more poignant case of the pot calling the kettle black than Washington's claim that it had to retaliate owing to actual and expected Iranian "aggression".

    For crying out loud, Washington has been demonizing, ostracizing and economically attacking Iran for decades, and is now literally attempting to destroy its economy and society through is oil sanctions and its "maximum pressure" campaign that aims to bring the fate of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi to its top leaders in Tehran.

    So do ya think a regime under a veritable existential threat might gravitate toward retaliation as an alternative to extinction?

    And we needs be clear about the matter of striking back in self defense. Washington's current sanctions campaign against Iran is so aggressive and brutal that it constitutes war by any other name.

    When you surround a sovereign nation with an armada of land, sea and air-based high-tech lethality and than declare outright economic war on it with a barely-disguised aim of regime change, it must and will fight back however it can.

    That's why Secretary of State Pompeo's statement justifying the Donald's act of naked aggression is so hideous.

    Washington is putting the entire nation of Iran at risk in the very place where God or evolution, as the case may be, formed the peninsula on which it resides; and it is doing so without any Iranian provocation against the security of the American homeland whatsoever.

    But this neocon knucklehead has the gall to insist that when it comes to the actual anti-Iranian belligerents (i.e. U.S. forces) Washington has bivouacked where they have no business being at all, that not a hair on their head should come to harm.

    That's Imperial arrogance of a kind rarely seen in a world history which is littered with exactly that.

    "I can't talk too much about the nature of the threats. But the American people should know that the President's decision to remove Soleimani from the battlefield saved American lives," Pompeo told CNN.

    The IRGC general had been "actively plotting" in the region to "take big action, as he described it, that would have put hundreds of lives at risk," according to Pompeo.

    Undoubtedly, things will now spiral out of control because the Iranian regime must and will retaliate for Soleimani's death. Indeed, by vaporizing the latter, the Donald has now also vaporized any chance of actually implementing the "America First" policy upon which he ran, and which was the principal basis for his freakish elevation to the Oval Office.

    The fact is, the only decent thing Obama did on the foreign policy front was the Iran Nuke Deal. Under the latter, Iran gave up a nuclear weapons capability it never had or wanted for the return of billions of escrowed dollars (which belong to Tehran in the first place), while putting itself in a straight-jacket of international inspections and controls that even Houdini could not have broken free from.

    But the Donald wantonly shit-canned this arrangement, not because Iran violated either the letter or spirit of the deal, but because the neocons – led by his bubble-headed son-in-law and Bibi Netanyahu errand boy, Jared Kushner – blatantly lied to him about its alleged defects.

    Indeed, the resulting Washington pivot to the current "maximum pressure" aggression against Iran is fast becoming the Empire most demented and shameful hour – even as it crystalizes like rarely before the difference between homeland defense and imperial aggression.

    Under the former, not one American serviceman, contractor or civilian official would be in harms' way because the ring of hostile bases surrounding Iran would not exist nor would Washington be waging economic warfare on what would otherwise be a prosperous 5 million barrel per day oil trade with the world.

    Only empires put their citizens needlessly in harms' way and thereby trap their leader's into a cycle of violence which feeds upon itself.

    The Donald is now yet another American president ensnared in the kind of tit-for-tat trap that is the modus operandi of Empire First.

    David Stockman was a two-term Congressman from Michigan. He was also the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. After leaving the White House, Stockman had a 20-year career on Wall Street. He's the author of three books, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed , The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America and TRUMPED! A Nation on the Brink of Ruin And How to Bring It Back . He also is founder of David Stockman's Contra Corner and David Stockman's Bubble Finance Trader .

    [Jan 05, 2020] Are "evil" and "incompetent" synonymous?

    Notable quotes:
    "... Donald Trump rode to victory in 2016 on a promise to end the useless wars in the Middle East, but he has now demonstrated very clearly that he is a liar. ..."
    "... The shmuck was elected to stop the unnecessary, and criminal, external wars for the Jews and protect the US from the internal Jewish war – through unchecked immigration – on the US citizens. ..."
    "... Iran's response will certainly include legal redress, and the honor component of the US wrongful act can be quite adequately handled in state responsibility of satisfaction for internationally wrongful acts. The last couple times CIA faced Iran in the Hague (Oil Platforms and Aerial Incident,) Iran wiped the floor with the third-rate DoS shysters. ..."
    "... Since this is so self-evidently disastrous for the US, why would the US civil/military command structure present this as an option? CIA doesn't like Trump – he tweaked them with a feint at ARCA compliance, and mocked their contempt for the national interest in a speech at Langley. ..."
    "... Trump's been more insubordinate than any presidential figurehead since Nixon. So why not let him hold the bag for a crime big as the one Nixon got stuck with? CIA made Nixon their helpless patsy for their bombing of neutral Cambodia at great risk of general nuclear war. ..."
    "... They purged him with a bill of impeachment that briefly included that crime. CIA never tries anything new, so now they'll make Trump their helpless patsy for murder at great risk of general nuclear war. The absurd existing bill of impeachment can easily incorporate murder as an inchoate crime, Trump's common plan and conspiracy for war, Nuremberg count 1. What does CIA get out of that? By personalizing aggression, CIA gets off the hook. ..."
    Jan 05, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Cloak And Dagger says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:41 pm GMT 200 Words

    Regional report from EJ Magnier:

    https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/04/what-comes-next-after-the-us-assassination-of-qassem-soleimani-the-options/

    WHAT COMES NEXT AFTER THE US ASSASSINATION OF QASSEM SOLEIMANI? THE OPTIONS.

    The US did not plan to kill the vice commander of the Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi brigade Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes when it assassinated Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani on Thursday at 11:00 PM local time at Baghdad airport. Usually, when Soleimani was arriving in Baghdad, security commander Abu Zeinab al-Lami, a deputy officer to al Muhandes, would have welcomed him. This time, al-Lami was outside Iraq and al-Muhandes replaced him. The US plan was to assassinate an Iranian General on Iraqi soil, not to kill a high-ranking Iraqi officer. By killing al-Muhandes, the US violated its treaty obligation to respect the sovereignty of Iraq and to limit its activity to training and offering intelligence to fight the "Islamic State", ISIS. It has also violated its commitment to refrain from overflying Iraq without permission of the Iraqi authorities.

    Wow! Own goal! Are "evil" and "incompetent" synonymous?

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:48 pm GMT

    @geokat62 This is one is for you, geo, reporting from Athens:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/qohYs-dVKiU?feature=oembed

    Anonymous [105] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:48 pm GMT

    Donald Trump rode to victory in 2016 on a promise to end the useless wars in the Middle East, but he has now demonstrated very clearly that he is a liar.

    True, and this mistake puts him firmly in the wastebasket where all other liar-politicians reside.

    The shmuck was elected to stop the unnecessary, and criminal, external wars for the Jews and protect the US from the internal Jewish war – through unchecked immigration – on the US citizens.

    He's a massive failure on both counts.

    Oops His Bad , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:06 pm GMT
    It's possible to overdo the focus on the personal here. سپاه has a very deep bench and it's not subject to decapitation. Soleimani's murder will have no more effect on the command structure than Pompeo's murder would: removing the primus inter pares of a corps of brilliant strategists smarts a bit; and if the US lost Pompeo, one of many delusional religious fanatics with community-college level training from a laughingstock military academy, So what?

    This murder is first and foremost an insult, of course. The CIA regime is much more of an honor culture than Iran because these days the DO is stuffed with lumpen redneck jarheads. But organizational aspects worldwide will determine the outcome.

    Iran's response will certainly include legal redress, and the honor component of the US wrongful act can be quite adequately handled in state responsibility of satisfaction for internationally wrongful acts. The last couple times CIA faced Iran in the Hague (Oil Platforms and Aerial Incident,) Iran wiped the floor with the third-rate DoS shysters.

    And for the first time the US faces Iran without their British dancing boys on the bench – Britain got kicked off the ICJ bench for arbitrary actions of its own. So that's gonna cost ya, $$$! The ICC can weigh in propria motu, and should do. Absent efficacious criminal sanctions, Iran ally China has shown that you can take international criminal law into your hands quite effectively (ask William Bennett and his wifey!) Iran's status in the SCO is an additional degree of freedom. If Russia chooses to get involved, it can use its superior missile technology to control escalation at every level. This is the perfect opportunity for its doctrine of coercion to peace.

    Since this is so self-evidently disastrous for the US, why would the US civil/military command structure present this as an option? CIA doesn't like Trump – he tweaked them with a feint at ARCA compliance, and mocked their contempt for the national interest in a speech at Langley.

    Trump's been more insubordinate than any presidential figurehead since Nixon. So why not let him hold the bag for a crime big as the one Nixon got stuck with? CIA made Nixon their helpless patsy for their bombing of neutral Cambodia at great risk of general nuclear war.

    They purged him with a bill of impeachment that briefly included that crime. CIA never tries anything new, so now they'll make Trump their helpless patsy for murder at great risk of general nuclear war. The absurd existing bill of impeachment can easily incorporate murder as an inchoate crime, Trump's common plan and conspiracy for war, Nuremberg count 1. What does CIA get out of that? By personalizing aggression, CIA gets off the hook.

    With the family jewels and inside knowledge of the JFK coup, Nixon graymailed CIA for a pardon. They won't let Trump get away like that. The current status of international criminal law requires that heads must roll. Just like Charles Taylor got put away for Israeli state crimes against peace, the equally disposable Donald Trump will hold the bag for grave CIA crimes.

    Eric135 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 9:51 pm GMT
    @Anonymous Another possibility is calling neo-cons what they really are: Israel Firsters.
    geokat62 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:48 pm GMT
    Trump: "We Will Not Rest Until Anti-Semitism Is Destroyed! "

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Mq0cFzKEtYI?feature=oembed

    Description:

    "Everyone here today stands in unwavering solidarity with our Jewish brothers and sisters.

    "We will not rest until the horrible and vile ideology of antiSemitism has been defeated and destroyed."

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:59 pm GMT
    When you kill someone, don't let them become a martyr, because then their death will be more troublesome than their life.

    https://www.instagram.com/p/B63PjLjle4M/embed/captioned/?cr=1&v=12&wp=625&rd=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com&rp=%2Fpgiraldi%2Fthe-soleimani-assassination%2F#%7B%22ci%22%3A0%2C%22os%22%3A15205.466915544198%2C%22ls%22%3A1416.0103308342982%2C%22le%22%3A1436.1921874433578%7D

    geokat62 , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 11:59 pm GMT
    To those who assured us there would be no war with Iran:

    For the First time in it's History #Iran has Raised The Red flag, IRAN has issued a terrifying warning to the US as it raised a red flag over the Holy Dome Jamkarān Mosque as a symbol of a severe battle to come. pic.twitter.com/mnWgmu2eS4

    -- marshall (@Marshall_H15) January 4, 2020

    geokat62 , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:24 am GMT
    Breaking news!

    Trump warns Iran: US has targeted '52 Iranian sites' and will 'hit very fast and very hard' if needed

    https://www.foxnews.com/world/iran-trump-warns-iran-we-have-targeted-52-iranian-sites

    Rumour has it that 52 sites were chosen so that it corresponded to the number of major Jewish-American organizations in America, lol!

    https://petras.lahaine.org/the-fifty-two-major-jewish-american/

    lavoisier , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:29 am GMT
    @geokat62

    Thanks, C&D. I'm very familiar with the two Alexes of the Duran Report. While I think they provide very objective reporting on world events, they are also very reluctant to touch the third rail, the 800 lb gorilla in the room.

    Yes, it is far too easy and fashionable to pin it all on the "deep state" without ever naming the Jew.

    Anonymous [105] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:30 am GMT
    Wow! The idiot-in-chief just threatened Iran with bombing their cultural targets.

    "Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!"

    What a sad (((golem))) he's turned out to be.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/no-more-threats-trump-warns-iran-52-targets-will-be-hit-very-fast-hard

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:34 am GMT
    @geokat62

    To those who assured us there would be no war with Iran:

    I am one of those that did – and I stand by that assertion. Technically, we just declared war on Iran, however, I expect there to be thousands of skirmishes, but nothing the equivalent of the Iraq invasion.

    At the risk of eating crow

    Dannyboy , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:09 am GMT
    If you listen to what Donald Trump said when he was campaigning, you will hear what the majority of the American people want. Improved relations with Russia, exit from pointless Middle East conflicts, greatly reduced immigration and a wall on the Southwest border, money spent on the crumbling US infrastructure etc etc

    Unfortunately, what the majority of the American people want matters very little if at all. It's pretty much the same everywhere "democracy" and "democratic principles" reign.

    It's a joke. A sick fucking game.

    I don't believe Trump is a bad man. I believe he truly loves this country and it's people. But he has surrounded himself with and trusted the wrong people from the beginning.

    It pains me to say it, but NOTHING will change in this once great nation until there is either collapse and/or revolution. The Deep State and it's (((Ruling Elite))) will then move on to another host.

    ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:46 am GMT
    @the grand wazoo And those 25 nuclear bombs are hidden in .wait for it ..Holocaust Museums! Yes, paid for by the American taxpayer.

    Who said Jews don't have a sense of humor?

    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:10 am GMT
    @Oops His Bad Your first and only comment so far and quite a debut. Is this just a hit and run or shall we be hearing more from you in the future?
    renfro , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:26 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger f'ing bastards .. who's commanding all these strikes?
    This is just like the kind of 'hit anything' strikes Israel does on Syria.
    Responder111 , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:47 am GMT
    I find it hard to believe that with the history of so many recent false flag operations that everyone is just assuming what is being presented is actually what happened. I personally think it all is a little too convenient at this point in time. Israel has wanted a war with Iran almost forever. While Netanyahu is having a bromance with Donald Trump and getting every single thing he wants to the point of changing a make America great again to make Israel great again, I find the whole thing extremely suspicious. It just seems like another War being started for the benefit of Israel, business as usual.
    MEexpert , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:49 am GMT
    @A123

    Iranian Kataib Hezbollah is present in Iraq over the objections of many Arab citizens (mostly Shia) who resent Persian interference.

    So many lies in just one sentence. As always, you spread misinformation with lot of mumbo jumbo. There is no such thing as Iranian Kataib Hezbollah. Kataib Hezbullah consist of Iraqi volunteers. They may have been trained by Iran but they are still Iraqis.

    You keep calling Khamenei a sociopath. The real sociopath is your hero Netanyahu.

    You are one of the group of Zionist agents who are just waiting with canned comments for the articles to appear. You are so predictable.

    And please take that symbol off. By posting it does not make you a peace lover. You are nothing but a war monger.

    Oops His Bad , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:02 am GMT
    Nosey 95, these poor bastards you will always have with you.
    Anon [829] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:20 am GMT
    Excellent complementary info. by Mrs. Sibel Edmonds:

    Target Iran" Operations on Pause- Here's Why

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/R2zj8Z8RNRU?feature=oembed

    War on the Horizon? Iran's Strategic Strengths & Weaknesses :

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Pc-4UtBzTx4?feature=oembed

    CIA – Al-Qaeda Operations Center in Iran's Backyard Exposed :

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/k5ZK6FbTO2w?feature=oembed

    See also

    Developing- Operation Iran: The Pentagon is Deploying Troops to Saudi Arabia
    (Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Rockwell Collins, L3 Engilitycorp mercenaries)
    By C. Sorensen:

    https://www.newsbud.com/2019/07/27/developing-operation-iran-the-pentagon-is-deploying-troops-to-saudi-arabia/

    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:26 am GMT
    @renfro

    f'ing bastards .. who's commanding all these strikes?

    Well, at least indirectly, according to Pepe Escobar, it is the usual suspects, Israel/deep state, with a compliant US.

    President Donald Trump may have issued the order. The U.S. Deep State may have ordered him to issue the order. Or the usual suspects may have ordered them all.

    According to my best Southwest Asia intel sources, " Israel gave the U.S. the coordinates for the assassination of Qassem Soleimani as they wanted to avoid the repercussions of taking the assassination upon themselves."

    https://consortiumnews.com/2020/01/03/pepe-escobar-us-kick-starts-the-raging-20s-by-declaring-war-on-iran/

    A leopard can't change its spots, and we can't resist being manipulated by Israel for 30 shekels.

    York , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:54 am GMT
    @A123 Obviously a (((Fellow American))). Remember the Liberty, Hymie. Still trying to destabilize the ME with your golem. Maybe this time Bibi bit off more than he can chew. The cost of human life and suffering is no doubt immaterial for a politician desperate to stay in power.. and out of prison. Once again the Jewish lobby is causing an uproar. Only three things are certain; death, taxes and Israel getting the US into Middle Eastern wars
    Anonymous [105] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 3:56 am GMT
    @MEexpert "A123" is on my "Hasbara shills" list. Well spotted.
    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:00 am GMT
    How does the US justify carrying out assassinations within the territory of a friendly power without even obtaining the consent of that power? Don't we at least pretend to respect Iraq's sovereignty?
    York , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:00 am GMT
    @ra And backing Trump has what purpose? Would he pay your rent if you were laid off? Then he is just a picture on your wall. Just like jock sniffers idolize apeletes, and masturbaters luvs their porn performers, political groupies actually imagine that their favorite political crush gives a shit about them. If one isn't a multimillionaire, then they matter not at all to the political class. Have to bring something to the party other than bootlicking. There are plenty of those in higher places than a broke ass
    fan. Meanwhile grow the f ** k up. Trump isn't your friend. Unless you're name is Adelson or Netanyahu anyway
    Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:04 am GMT
    Another striking aspect of all this is that while I suspect doubts about this are very widespread among the actual people, the mainstream media seem to be all but unanimous in their approval.
    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:14 am GMT
    Trump is threatening to attack 52 Iranian cultural sites. He doesn't seem to care that many of these are world heritage sites and it is a war crime to destroy them.
    Paul C. , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:21 am GMT
    @Colin Wright Not only supporting it but selling it. Because that's their job.
    Paul C. , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:23 am GMT
    @Colin Wright Does Israel give a whit about Iraq? That's the answer.
    Cloak And Dagger , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 4:37 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger

    If @realDonaldTrump hits holy sites in #Iran , no place for any American in the world will be safe. It will be an all-ou-war.
    In one day, thousands were killed in #Iraq after the destruction of Zarqawi (like Trump today) destroyed Shia Holy Shrine in Samarra.

    -- Elijah J. Magnier (@ejmalrai) January 5, 2020

    renfro , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:04 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger Perhaps if Russia gave one of these missile to Iran peace would breakout ..lol.

    Hypersonic Missiles Are a Game Changer
    No existing defenses can stop such weapons -- which is why everyone wants them.

    Last week, President Vladimir Putin of Russia announced the deployment of the Avangard, among the first in a new class of missiles capable of reaching hypersonic velocity -- something no missile can currently achieve, aside from an ICBM during reentry
    Such weapons have long been an object of desire by Russian, Chinese and American military leaders, for obvious reasons: Launched from any of these countries, they could reach any other within minutes. No existing defenses, in the United States or elsewhere, can intercept a missile that can move so fast while maneuvering unpredictably.
    Whether or not the Avangard can do what Mr. Putin says, the United States is rushing to match it. We could soon find ourselves in a new arms race as deadly as the Cold War -- and at a time when the world's arms control efforts look like relics of an inscrutable past and the effort to renew the most important of them, a new START agreement, is foundering

    https://quincyinst.org/2020/01/02/hypersonic-missiles-are-a-game-changer/

    jack daniels , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:10 am GMT
    Giraldi seldom comes up with any new facts to shed light on a situation. He just runs through the same anti-neocon boilerplate. I agree with his boilerplate, but it's not enough to justify reading his articles.
    Biff , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:16 am GMT
    @the grand wazoo

    I'm not using the term neocons any longer, as the term is a lie, a mask. They are just a large group of powerful dual citizen Jews many descended from Trotskyites that immigrated from Russia in the 1930s.

    I like it – very well put.

    Biff , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:20 am GMT
    @Colin Wright

    Don't we at least pretend to respect Iraq's sovereignty?

    Bwaah!! Like Washington pretends to respect it's own citizens sovereignty. Not!

    Monty Ahwazi , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:23 am GMT
    @A123 You're talking nonsense all the time! You know what? You should follow your name, say 1-2-3 and jump off of a high rise
    annamaria , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:33 am GMT
    @Bragadocious Hey, Israeli hasbara, why didn't you read the above article carefully?

    The blood of the Americans, Iranians and Iraqis who will die in the next few weeks is clearly on Donald Trump's hands as this war was never inevitable and served no U.S. national interest.

    One more time for you: this war [with Iran] serves no U.S. national interests. The only "benefiting" party is the Jewish State, the bloody theocracy of obnoxious supremacists known for their cowardice and deception. The Epstein nation of Israel.

    American veterans kill themselves every day, every hour. None of the dead veterans is Jewish.

    Here is how the usual schema works: First, the zionist scum finds kindred spirits among the locals; see Cheney the Traitor, greedy Clintons, and the cowardly US brass thirsty for money and comforts (exhibit one, Donny Rumsfeld). Second, the zionist scum arranges mass media by putting the eager presstitutes on key positions in the previously honorable papers and journals (exhibit one, The New Yorker). And voila, the war profiteers unite with Israel firsters and get free hands to plunder whatever country they want to plunder. On the American citizenry dime & limb.

    It does not take much effort to recognize the extraordinary difference between the piggish and thoroughly corrupt Bibi and the noble and valiant Soleimani.

    Unfortunately, the US is ruled by Bibi et al.

    FieryJason , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:34 am GMT
    @A123 Really? How stupid can one get? Sir, it would behove all of us to read and understand history. Noone likes the Ayatollahs but the only reason they are ruling Iran is because of the USA. And everyone has the right to defend themselves – including the Iranians. Just look at our behaviour and compare it to a bully. No difference at all!!
    Unfortunately, it is very well established in the world that USA has degenerated from being a good guy to a bully, assassin and a terrorist. We shall reap the whirlwind and the hurricane . unfortunately it will be the common person who suffers always.
    I'm Tyrone , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:36 am GMT
    @anon Not sure why so many commenters engage hasbara clowns like A123. Why engage people who aren't debating in good faith?
    Z-man , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:53 am GMT
    @geokat62

    Rumour has it that 52 sites were chosen so that it corresponded to the number of major Jewish-American organizations in America, lol!

    I 'second' that LOL!!!
    52 is for the fifty two embassy hostages from 1979. And he said he's going to hit cultural sites in that 52 number. So you museum curators in Tehran 'watch out!'

    On a serious note, I consider myself a patriotic American but I just can't root for my country in this regard. Honestly it makes me feel bad but following the truth does not always make you feel good. But it's the right thing to do.
    Iran has been 'set up' since Donald got out of the nuclear deal. Tucker Carlson says Iran has been the target for decades. I can just hope that the kinetic action is brief, loss of American and Iranian life small and that, as Giraldi predicts, America will finally get out of there, to the frustration of the Zionists.
    But then we have the aforementioned Zionists and their Samson option it never ends. Until Israel ends

    but an humble craftsman , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:55 am GMT
    @Eric135 Interesting line of thought.

    Please remind me again of why the US has not shot down a civilian Persian airliner in decades?

    Seems the Persians did not seek revenge back then either?

    My guess: we will not see another Persian General murdered in decades. Nor will we see any act of revenge.

    Paul C. , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 5:57 am GMT
    @jack daniels Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
    but an humble craftsman , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:07 am GMT
    @El Dato Upper Volta with nukes was Helmut Schmidt's dscription of the Soviet Union.
    TKK , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:22 am GMT
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan Having a different policy opinion or contrasting read on a political issue than yours is spam?

    Are you Alyssa Milano? Jim Carrey? Micheal Moore?

    Go post on StormFront.

    If you and your ilk don't migrate there, Unz will soon be on synonymous with MySpace ( obsolete)

    Unz himself is already considered a joke due to his blatant solidarity & sympathy with America's enemies and his "acres"of anti- Israel propaganda.

    But wait!!! He gives out gold stars to the most anti American/Israeli posters! It's hilarious.

    I get gold stars too- its called cash from working.

    renfro , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:32 am GMT
    Anti Iran war protest going on in cities , at WH, at Trump Hotels etc..
    "The American people have had enough with U.S. wars and are rising up to demand peace with Iran!" tweeted CodePink, an anti-war group that helped organize the nationwide demonstrations.

    I have found the guy to star in my assassination movie . an Iraq war vet you need to hear:

    THIS IS WORTH A VIEWING pic.twitter.com/T81Mkuap5C

    -- miguelito (@w0rldleadir) January 4, 2020

    TKK , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:36 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger

    From all indications, the Iranian general was a revered man inside and outside Iran.

    The arrogant ignorance on this site tweeters between alarming and comedic.

    The rank and file MUST gnash their teeth and wail over this terrorist's death. There are more Secret Police in Iran than the Stasi had. If they don't show grief, their family members or they will pay the price.

    Do you know any Persians? They detest living under a brutal theocracy. They don't care about Soleimani. They care about their children, jobs and being happy.

    They act the fool in the street to mourn his death because it is expected, it's a way to let off steam and it's social.

    Russ , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:36 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso

    Now would be the perfect time for the Mossad to do its false flag shtick. They wouldn't even have to try very hard to pin it on Iran. I'll bet that when the news came out that the Iranian guy had been killed, every neocon on the planet popped a boner that will last for days. Michael Ledeen is probably mazel tov-ing his ass off.

    Michael "FASTER PLEASE!" Ledeen? Yes, I don't doubt. And as regards a Mossad false flag: Giraldi writes that the Iraqi PM will inevitably "ask American forces to leave." THAT should be the greenest of green lights for Trump to withdraw them from that bottomless hellhole except who wants them there forevermore?

    I don't care about the dead Muslim who got killed, since that's the only kind of "good Muslim" you're ever going to find, but I would still prefer for the U.S. to get out of the Middle East altogether. Let those two warring anti-Christ peoples kill each other to their hearts' content.

    Verily. Alas, look for Congress now to reauthorize those thoroughly corrupt FISA courts, so that honorable American heroes and patriots such as Gums Page and Peter Strzok can thwart evil Iran terrorists before they perpetrate their dastardly acts against innocent Americans. Now, remind me of the nationalities of those who committed the 9/11/2001 atrocities again?

    All glory, praise, and honor to Our Lord Jesus Christ -- may He and St Michael ever watch over those of us redeemed by Him.

    SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:40 am GMT
    @vespasian Qaani is a Muslim name. Not likely Jewish.

    Times of Israel says Qaani was Soleimani's deputy.

    Khamenei appointed / anointed Qaani to step into Soleimani's place. Why would Khamenei do this if he wanted to eradicate Soleimani's style?

    Khamenei echoes Achmadinejad's call that "zionism will disappear from the pages of history." Not a Jewish sentiment.

    Pahlavi broke down the ghettoes and hired a lot of Jews, but there is no indication that Pahlavi was Jewish. His physiognomy is so typically Persian he's practically a caricature of the breed.

    in other words, you're full of crap.

    Leave propagandistic mimetics to the cretins who know how to do it.

    Russ , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:50 am GMT
    @the grand wazoo

    There's a rumor that part of Israel's Samson option includes nuclear bombs hidden in 25 American cities. Veterans Today has mentioned it several times. Is it true? Maybe. Maybe someone should find out.

    It would end Democrat prattle about presidential elections by popular vote in lieu of electoral college.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:50 am GMT
    @Lot Israel and A123 has a dozen Iranian responses prepared and ready to go.
    Ilyana_Rozumova , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 6:54 am GMT
    @Bragadocious No Golden rectangle for you!
    Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:06 am GMT
    @geokat62 Wow!!!
    Ilyana_Rozumova , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:11 am GMT
    Giraldi is maybe little bit somber here, so I do have to say no.
    Irani thinkers know that the affair is just a thick worm on the hook.
    They will do what they did before consolidate She_ite power in the Levant to end any cooperation of states with the great Satan there.
    Russ , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:20 am GMT
    @geokat62

    A very revealing tweet:

    The quote is from a 24 Oct 2004 article "Jews, Israel and America" in the New York Times by Thomas L. Friedman. Friedman proceeds to criticize the Bush admin for inept communications in Iraq. One wonders which will be found first: the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or the real killers of Ron and Nicole by OJ Simpson.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:25 am GMT
    @vespasian Jews, Shiites, Protestants, Communists are very hard for outsiders to tell apart and are all the same on the inside.
    anon [353] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 7:38 am GMT
    Once the US began seriously enforcing sanctions on Iranian oil exports, the US effectively declared war on Iran. Iran has done what it could, but its response has been limited.

    After you have already attempted and partially succeeded in wrecking a country's economy, what does a drone strike add to the situation?

    The incident makes very little sense for the US, which is vulnerable in Iraq. Iran is still under severe economic siege, so not much has really changed there either.

    Everyone seems to want this to be a major inflection point, but why would Iran suddenly become stupid? Maybe Trump has changed, but he has resisted number of attempts to get him to sign on to military adventures.

    MEexpert , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:08 am GMT

    News flash: Pence says Suleimani aided the 9/11 highjackers.

    Let us see what else can we accuse him of masterminding.
    1. Gulf of Tonkin incident
    2. Bombing of Laos
    3. Sabotaging the space shuttle
    4. JFK Assassination
    5. And yes, of course, starting the American Civil War.

    This guy is nuts and this is what we will get as a result of Trump's impeachment.

    anon [846] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:09 am GMT
    @GogMagoggian

    never comment again

    Hello fellow White person.

    Johnny F. Ive , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:09 am GMT
    @Bragadocious

    2) The issue of #Jerusalem seems to have been a critical point of Shamrani's anger. His second-most recent of his tweets (just before his will) was an RT of Trump's December 2017 Jerusalem speech, made sometime in the last 48 hours. pic.twitter.com/wjP7FMzZXW

    -- Rita Katz (@Rita_Katz) December 7, 2019

    It happened and it may happen again.

    Meimou , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:44 am GMT
    @Eric135

    The public is too dumb to recognize that the Jews control America, much less connect our pointless wars for Israel to that Jewish control.

    The pubic knows, it's a matter of openly expressing those views.

    We know and things are simmering.

    Willem , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:51 am GMT
    @GogMagoggian He is just pointing out possibilities. And he may be right. Didn't you notice oil prices went up after this event?

    The idea that this whole event is used as a stage to get something done is not far sought at all. Question is, what is something?

    But perhaps you have better information? – Enlighten us.

    Meimou , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 8:57 am GMT
    @Sean

    A few days after John Bolton was sacked as Trump's national security adviser, Soleimani humiliated the US by a blatantly Iranian attack on Saudi oil facilities, which Pompeo called an act of war.

    Shill better. You people say this over and over, but don't give a logical reason we should believe it, and why even give us Pompeo's opinion?

    Ludwig Watzal , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:11 am GMT
    The Israeli Mossad was the instigator, and the Zionist stooge, President Donald Trump, pulled the trigger.

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/03/after-mossad-targeted-soleimani-trump-pulled-the-trigger/
    http://between-the-lines-ludwig-watzal.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-reckless-killing-of-qasem-soleimani.html

    American blood will be spent on the most reckless regime in the Middle East: Israel. How stupid can an American President be to support such a system?

    Tom Welsh , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:17 am GMT
    @gandzakan I suspect (s)he is sitting in front of a computer waiting to be triggered into typing by any politically controversial event.

    The "first post" is a dead giveaway.

    Ghali , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:19 am GMT
    The murder of General Qasem Soleimani shows that, nothing on this scale of U.S. violence, criminality and violation of international law has been seen before, not even in Nazi Germany. The assassination of two well-known leaders is an act of Terrorism. It was a cowardice act, because the two leaders were travelling in public. What the US regime gained from this premeditated murder?

    As I stated in several articles, we live under a brutal form of Fascism that has no equivalent in human history. There are no longer the rules of law and civilised norms. It is a barbaric, lawless, rogue, terrorising and distinctly global AngloZionist Fascism.

    Sean , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:46 am GMT
    @Philip Giraldi

    " COME on, we are waiting for you. We are the real men on the scene, as far as you are concerned. You know that a war would mean the loss of all your capabilities. You may start the war, but we will be the ones to determine its end," Qassem Soleimani said in a fiery July 2018 speech directed at Trump

    Not exactly taking the heat out of the situation in which Iran is confronting the world's most powerful country. A good state has to know its limitations, as Mearsheimer says.

    He had flown into to town to attend the funerals of the 26 Iraqi militiamen that we Americans had killed earlier in the week!

    Most interesting. I wonder if those militiamen were maybe killed in the expectation that he would fly in to attend the funeral.

    Miggle , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:00 am GMT
    @FieryJason

    Really? How stupid can one get? Sir, it would behove all of us to read and understand history. Noone likes the Ayatollahs but the only reason they are ruling Iran is because of the USA. And everyone has the right to defend themselves – including the Iranians. Just look at our behaviour and compare it to a bully. No difference at all!!
    Unfortunately, it is very well established in the world that USA has degenerated from being a good guy to a bully, assassin and a terrorist. We shall reap the whirlwind and the hurricane . unfortunately it will be the common person who suffers always.

    True that the only reason the Ayatollahs are ruling Iran is because of the USA's hatred of democracy. Though the bull in the china shop grunts about democracy all the time it really hates democracy. Better to install a single dictator who will take orders, rather than having to bribe every elected member of a parliament and gamble that that will work.

    Degenerated okay. A frightful country of gangster rule, a murderous thug as President, giant levels or homelessness, giant prices of medicines, giant levels of police killings etc. etc. and the economic hit-men who caused it to fall apart, crumbled infrastructure because privatized, want to obey Israhell and pocket the worthless dollar, nothing else.

    Daniel Rich , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:16 am GMT
    @The Alarmist

    As an American who lives abroad, this is just a repainting of the target I've had on my back for decades, compliments of people who live behind big defence perimeters and are surrounded by teams of bodyguards.

    There used to be a simple escape-clause: pretend to be Canadian.

    As they've happily jumped on the War Bandwagon as well, that clause is now void.

    Damn!

    Daniel Rich , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:29 am GMT
    @Cloak And Dagger

    At the risk of eating crow

    I've heard when you steam them for a few days, they become relatively eatable :o]

    The US has 52 designated targets?

    This is what Iran can choose from:

    70,000 troops in the ME.

    Bahrain : Naval Support-Bahrain, Shaykh Isa Air Base and Khalifa Ibn Salman Port.

    Kuwait : Camp Buehring, Ali al-Salem Air Base, Camp Arifjan, Camp Patriot and Shaykh Ahmad al-Jabir Air Base.

    Oman : Port of Salalah and Port of Duqm.

    Qatar : Al Udeid Air Base and Camp As Sayliyah.

    Saudi Arabia : approximately 3,000 U.S. troops.

    Syria : bases + 800 troops [likely more].

    Turkey : Air bases in Izmir and Incirlik.

    UAE : Al Dhafra Air Base, Port of Jebel Ali and Fujairah Naval Base.

    Needless to say; these are disclosed locations.

    Might we safely assume the Iranians know a few undisclosed ones as well?

    jhon , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:31 am GMT
    @Johnny Smoggins Iran give back by the Lord's promissed land between the Eufraat & Tigris !
    Hosea5
    anon [133] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:39 am GMT
    @geokat62 Anti semitism is badge of honor . Hard working honest and aware people wear it .
    Bill Jones , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:42 am GMT
    Phillip. your "Strategic Culture" piece on
    "The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act"
    seemed insightful but

    " Respectable organizations including Human Rights Watch " made me smile. Really?

    https://consortiumnews.com/2014/05/13/the-corruption-of-human-rights-watch/

    HRW has long been a tool of the West with occasional shows of impartiaity to buy credibility.
    An all too familiar pattern.

    Bill Jones , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:44 am GMT
    @GogMagoggian "That has to be the most inane comment I have ever read. "

    Thank you for confirming that you do not read your own comments before posting them.

    anon [133] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:47 am GMT
    @Johnny F. Ive Rita Katz !! The lady who used to upload the vile movies of beheading even before the Jihadists had uploaded . How come !!!
    Israel usually knows when war would start against Libya Syria Iraq and against Iran . How come!! Israel would claim that war will be soon. What gives!

    Rita 's circle was playing same roles the cabal plays in agitating for wars .

    El Dato , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:52 am GMT
    Contra Madame Condolezza's (aka. "Condi") affirmation in 2006 that we were witnessing "the birth pangs of a New Middle East" when Israel went all Warshaw Ghetto on various pieces of Palestine, these could be the REAL birth pangs of a New Middle East.

    Iran hoists blood-red 'flag of revenge' in holy city of Qom as thousands mourn Soleimani across the region

    The flag used in the ceremony is called the 'Ya la-Tharat al-Husayn', which dates back to the late 7th century. It was first raised after the Battle of Karbala in a call to avenge the death of Imam Husayn ibn Ali, which became one of the key events that led to the split between Shia and Sunni Islam. It has been reported that the red flag has never been unfurled atop the Jamkaran (a major holy site since the early Middle Ages) until now.

    You know shit is going down when it's getting Game of Thrones out there.

    Memorandum by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity to Trump (who probably can barely comprehend this): Doubling Down Into Yet Another 'March of Folly,' This Time on Iran

    Any bets on whether The Malevolent Beluga Pompeo returns from his Kazakhstan trip in a casket?

    El Dato , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:58 am GMT
    @Meimou It's also unimportant whether some bureaucrat of the US says that this and that happening far away is an "act of war" while engaging in acts of war like sanctions, targeted assassination of lower-rung people, support of "regime change" operations laying waste to whole regions, bombing of civvies in Yemen, bombing of selected targets all over the Middle East and on and on.

    Pompeo says == Goering protesting

    Sean , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 10:59 am GMT
    @Meimou The Embassy thing might not have been ordered by Soleimani, but the coup of of hitting Saudi oil facilities would surely have to be authorised by him in his capacity as commander of all Iranian paramilitary actions abroad. Yet this humiliation of the US forces in and around Saudi Arabia came days after Trump had sacked Iran's greatest foe in the Administration, John Bolton.

    I think that if the interests of Iran was the objective paramount in Soleimani's mind, the timing of the attack on Saudi oil facilities was a truly catastrophic failure of comprehension. Michael Ledeen (Iran's biggest enemy in the US) must have been weeping tears of gratitude. And that was only one of Soleimanis great mistakes, if fame was not his real goal.

    PATRICK Cockburn noted pro Iranian militia leaders were pointing to 'the failure of Trump to retaliate after the drone attack on Saudi oil facilities earlier in September that Washington had blamed on Iran' and a sign that Trunp would avoid a war. Moreover:

    [T]here was a small demonstration in central Baghdad demanding jobs, public services and an end to corruption. The security forces and the pro-Iranian paramilitaries opened fire, killing and wounding many peaceful demonstrators. Though Qais al-Khazali later claimed that he and other Hashd leaders were trying to thwart a US-Israeli conspiracy, he had said nothing to me about it. It seemed likely that General Soleimani, wrongly suspected that the paltry demonstrations were a real threat and had ordered the pro-Iranian paramilitaries to open fire and put a plan for suppressing the demonstrations into operation disastrous for Iranian influence in Iraq. [ ]

    General Soleimani died in the wake of his greatest failure and misjudgement

    Not only did he strengthen the hand of anti Iran opinion in the White House by making Trump look stupid, Soleimani's Baghdad massacre of protesting Shiite Arabs was a wedge in the Iraqi– Iranian Shia alliance. Soleimani acted as if he was controlled by Ledeen, and yet also worked on the higher plane of US divide and rule grand strategy for the Middle East a la Kissinger.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Xetlc1wZT-U?feature=oembed

    Kolya Krassotkin , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:01 am GMT
    @Colin Wright "Don't we at least pretend to respect Iraq's sovereignty. "

    Oh, please, dude. Respecting another country's sovereignty? That is so-o-o 2015.

    niceland , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:03 am GMT
    I sense desperation from Washington.
    What has been accomplished in the middle-east since the 'war on terror' began?

    Pick any goal, real or not and evaluate the success from the beginning of the century:
    Terrorism down?
    Israel safer?
    Better access to oil and gas for U.S. companies?
    Democracy on the rise?
    Stronger strategic position in the region?
    Russia and China kept at bay?
    Trade opportunities?
    Status of the dollar?
    Relations to allies in Europe and elsewhere?

    All I see is negatives, perhaps someone can enlighten me?

    Is it getting better or worse, is time on the U.S. side in this struggle? I can't see it. If I was running this show I would be desperate too. And perhaps for the people actually running the show, the biggest problem is how to exit the stage and guard Israel at the same time.

    Abbybwood , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:15 am GMT
    @geokat62 If Israel has over 500 nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them (this according to former President Jimmy Carter), AND Israel has refused ALL inspections by the IAEA , then this is a legitimate threat to Iran.

    The world should see that Iran has a right to defend itself with nuclear weapons.

    This is grade school easy to get.

    chris , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:17 am GMT

    The Pentagon and White House have been insisting that Iran was behind an alleged Kata'ib Hezbollah attack on a U.S. installation that then triggered a strike by Washington on claimed militia targets in Syria and also inside Iraq.

    But clearly this attack was much longer in the planning because of the prisoner exchange between the US and Iran on December 12th ( https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-hopes-prisoner-exchange-will-lead-broader-discussion-iran ). Obviously, that exchange took place in order not to leave any potential hostages in Iran when the escalation was triggered. All the excuses for the assassination were later tailored to fit the story as it developed.

    Also, there is the State Department and Pompeo's own quote which purports that the attacks were not in retaliation for something but in order to forestall future attacks (as if this could ever be justifiable).

    What this indicates to me, is that, contrary to the peddled story, a major escalation was planned, which started with a prisoner exchange, the next step was adopting the Israeli strategy of using completely disproportionate responses in order to trigger some ever increasing responses from the Iranians. Stage 1: One rocket attack (probably staged by US-Israeli secret services); response: 23 soldiers killed by US. Stage 2: embassy protests, no casualties; response: Soleimani and Iraqui official killed.

    Pompeo's excuse that the assassination of Soleimani was not for previous action on the general's part but in order to prevent some great escalation which he was planning, was more likely one of the stories they sold each other, Trump, and the public, in order to create some 'plausible' deniability for the plan. What friggin' criminals!

    Daniel Rich , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:38 am GMT
    @I'm Tyrone

    Not sure why so many commenters engage hasbara clowns like A123. Why engage people who aren't debating in good faith?

    True thoughts and wise words, my friend.

    All those hasbara clowns are on my 'Commneters to Ignore' list. They can say whateva they want [freedom of speech], but I don't have to waste my time reading or commenting on it.

    That really is a great feature of UR.

    Tsar Nicholas , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:39 am GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso

    God doesn't bless muslims.

    Jesus Christ died for all men.

    Jay Fink , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:53 am GMT
    @TKK Why then are there large protests from the Persian community in Los Angeles? They don't have to worry about secret police. Personally I think he was a good man because he helped destroy ISIS.
    Carlosfg54 , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 11:56 am GMT
    The iraqi parliament will never vote to expell US troops, whats the betting their all bought and paid for?

    Anyone seen the movie snowden will know they prob have photos of them iraqi MPs with their mistresses and know where their secret bank accounts are.

    When it comes down to it personal financial interest will rule.

    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:05 pm GMT
    @jack daniels I would imagine that, given Giraldi's background and experience, he is more than qualified to offer his analysis of the circumstances, situation and possible consequences on the topic under discussion and many people value that.

    You don't have to agree at all but making empty comments like that are just a waste of your time.

    9/11 Inside job , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:14 pm GMT
    Remember the Maine and 9/11 ! The yellow press and Alex Jones are already talking about Iranian sleeper cells in the US , there will likely be a false flag attack on the "Homeland" ,with civilian casualties ,which will be blamed on Iran , as a result the public will be propaganized into supporting "decisive" action against Iran .
    NoseytheDuke , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:15 pm GMT
    @renfro Damn the guy deserves a medal! I hope he stay safe. This should be shared, now!
    chris , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:34 pm GMT
    @Bragadocious As you well know, Supercilious, Hezbollah was the military force which handed the Israelis their asses when they tried to invade Lebanon in 2006; Soleimani, being one of the organizers of that resistance.

    Subsequently, Israel used its complete control of its vassal, the US government, in order to declare them a terrorist organization in 2009. The reason they did it then is the same reason they want to destroy Iran, is in order to, among other things, have a free hand and take southern Lebanon and be able to finally keep it.

    Medieval Kingdom , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:43 pm GMT
    Wow what an impressive bit of confusion. Giraldi says a big bunch of mistakes have been made and the end result might be the US withdrawing its troops from over seas bases. In other words a massive victory for the taxpayers and the rest of the world.
    anon [332] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:51 pm GMT
    ""Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?""

    Animal House, 1978

    ChuckOrloski , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 12:59 pm GMT
    @TKK Crazy TKK lay in hay & he done obey the Israeli way & thus ge doth say: "They (Persians) act the fool in the street to mourn his death because it is expected, it's a way to let off steam and it's social."
    Momus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:04 pm GMT
    @John Chuckman @123 is spot on. Soeimani and the aye are toller have had this coming for about 2 decades. Did they really think that a full scale attack on a US embassy would go unanswered after the 2013 Benghazi atrocity?

    The 2 main protagonists have been eliminated and so have various minor Iranian minions. Many others have been arrested by US special forces and are being held.

    The Iranians are paralysed because their strategic brain has gone and they have no good retaliatory options.
    If they missile a US warship Donald will destroy their nuclear program. That is his end game. If they missile Tel Aviv the Israelis will strategically nuke them. The Iranians are shitting bricks.

    ivegotrythm , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:11 pm GMT
    @TKK What do you [plan to do with your thirty pieces of silver, hang yourself?
    Momus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:15 pm GMT
    @Daniel Rich Might we assume that the US has the coordinates of every Iranian facility cancerned with their generational nuclear and missile program and the means to destroy them.

    The US has all the good options. The very fact that Iran has done nothing a week after the base attack and days after Soleimani's removal indicates they are paralysed with fear.

    Momus , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT
    @Daniel Rich Might we assume that the US has the coordinates of every Iranian facility cancerned with their generational nuclear and missile program and the means to destroy them.

    The US has all the good options. The very fact that Iran has done nothing a week after the base attack and days after Soleimani's removal indicates they are paralysed with fear.

    anonymous [217] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:19 pm GMT
    @Gleimhart Mantooso

    God doesn't bless muslims.

    So who exactly are the blessed? The Christian/Hindoo/ whiteys/blackeys/brownies ? Those who regularly contort their minds into pretzels trying to comprehend their pagan polytheist mangods-worshipping faith?

    You whitey idiots are such a confused lot that, at a spiritual level, you seem to be splitting like the amoeba, all the time. It is hilarious, and it is pathetic.

    Is that called a blessing in your pagan/godless kind's spiritual dictionary? Lol!

    The Almighty One has blessed us true monotheists with these 4 verses, and much much more. If we get nothing else, these are enough;

    Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent." : 112

    ChuckOrloski , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:28 pm GMT
    @TKK Dummy TKK doth obey the Israeli way, and naturally, he lay down in all wet hay, & he done say: "They (Persians) act the fool in the street to mourn his (Soleimani's) death because it is expected, it's a way to let off steam and it's social."

    Hey TKK! (Zigh)

    Re, above; As you're aware, you are a low rent U.R. hasbarist.

    Haha. You stupidly figure guys like me have forgotten the mind-numbing & week long mourning pageant, extensively covered by ZUS TalmudVision,* for the ultra-Shabbos goy anti-hero, Senator John McCain, who famously cackled "Bomb, bomb Iran."

    * Credit creative geokat for spoton "TalmudVision."

    Realist , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:31 pm GMT
    @Angharad

    Jew.

    Your use of the word Jew as a pejorative is childish and simple minded. Max Blumenthal is a Jew .he very much appears to agree with the crux of Giraldi's article. Unz is a Jew, who allows Giraldi to post articles like the one you are responding to do you hold him in disdain?

    Realist , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:39 pm GMT
    @Bragadocious

    What was Qassem Soleimani doing near the U.S. Embassy?

    What possible reason could he have for being there?

    What possible reason does the US have for being in Iraq hegemony, oil .and protection of Israel.

    anonymous [217] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:41 pm GMT
    @TKK

    its called cash from working.

    Ah, the first clear confirmation from a paid hasbara troll!

    DanFromCT , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:46 pm GMT
    @anon The most vicious attack against me and my country I've witnessed came at the hands of young American Jews from NYC. I'd been back for a few years from a combat role in Vietnam and, at a party in our building where my wife and I were the only non-Jews, a bunch of Jews who'd just returned from fighting for Israel in some capacity during its '73 war went after me with a hatred that I can still feel to this day. They were saying that American soldiers suck and how much better Israelis were in the field. It ended when a woman no less yelled at me, "All we want is your money." This from supposed Americans. As they like to say, "We Jews shit on you Christians." If you haven't worked on Wall Street with them, this may seem academic. The hate is palpable.

    I cannot understand how our higher ups bow and scrape before them, except to note the baked in contradiction of American military leadership -- that those officers who're early on identified for transfer to some HQ company are so selected because they're generally order-taking martinets and the antithesis of warrior leaders, becoming in time the perfumed princes we see paraded like trained poodles before the kosher cameras on TV to sell out their country for Israel. I offer as proof their willingness to send Americans to do the dying and suffering so good Israeli boys need not. Can you imagine anything more disgusting than a putative man complying with crimes against humanity because he's afraid of neocons like Max Boot or Fiona Hill and then has the gall to call it his sworn, patriotic duty? I can't.

    anon [133] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:50 pm GMT
    It must be very visually traumatic for the Jews to come to know that his body was blown into pieces and not handed over the Jews fro Purim ritual.

    Do you think America will be asked to increase the doles and handouts? --
    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/more-holocaust-reparations-for-2020-the-gift-that-keeps-on-giving/

    All it need is getting a researchers on Fox and get him or her publish about the trauma experienced from a distance from the killing of an adversary despite the killing wanted by the Jews . Wordsmithing can follow New jargon will appear . People with those ideas will be showcased and promoted to Harvard or Yale or to the Anti semitism society of the US Cabinet ( It is not there but it exists ) . Money will be earmarked to get few extra senate vote or something like that .

    PeterMX , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 1:53 pm GMT
    @Daniel Rich I have to hold my tongue or fear putting myself at risk, but to give you an idea of what I'm thinking, I wish Iran all the luck in the world.
    Greg Bacon , says: Website Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 2:05 pm GMT
    When those transfer tubes come home, filled with our dead soldiers, killed fighting endless wars for Wall Street and Israel, will the flag draping the tube be one Made in the USA?

    And how much money did Jared K make by shorting certain stocks? He would of known of the coming murder of the Iranian general, I seriously doubt he would of let a money-making opportunity like that pass.

    [Jan 05, 2020] The report says Israel was "on the verge" of assassinating Soleimani three years ago

    Jan 05, 2020 | www.unz.com

    renfro , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:02 am GMT

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/u-s-gives-israel-green-light-to-assassinate-iran-s-general-soleimani-1.5630156

    The report says Israel was "on the verge" of assassinating Soleimani three years ago, near Damascus, but the United States warned the Iranian leadership of the plan, revealing that Israel was closely tracking the Iranian general.

    It was Obama that warned Iran because the US Iran nuclear agreement was in effect and Israel was trying everything possible to wreck it and just as they are doing now, to goad Iran into war.

    The way to stop Israel is to spill more Jewish blood than they can stand, and there may be enough Muslims and Arabs willing to die themselves to do that.

    freedom-cat , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:03 am GMT
    Very upset at this news. It is an obvious escalation by the Israeli led USA and puppet Trump. They have some excellent forms of blackmail going on Trump. He walked into this mess with his big ego; and they saw him coming and are making the best use of this stupid man.

    Our nation has already brought so much shame on itself for attacking the Middle East under Bush and Obomber. I still have a photo of a little Iraqi boy who was laying in a hospital bed with no legs or arms, just a head and torso left. He was a victim of USA Bombing (Shock & Awe) in 2003 Baghdad. He looks at the camera with a look I have never seen before.

    I wish all this will go away, but we all know it is about to get worse and all the Israelis need to get the American population onboard for a new fight is a major False Flag. So, be vigilant and careful. We have no idea where they will strike and then blame Iran.

    2stateshmustate , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 7:54 am GMT
    To this day I remember Mr. Linh Dinh's saying on Unz Review, to paraphrase; Trump is a shill, owned by the Jews/Israelis, on top of which they would never allow anyone who wouldn't grovel before them to be president. He was obviously correct.

    Be that as it may. I want war. Only a war in which the paper tiger that is the US gets itself real bloody nose is there a possibility of ending Jew supremacist's control of my county.

    ra , says: Show Comment January 4, 2020 at 8:19 pm GMT
    It is indeed a foolhardy move. I've taken a lot of grief for supporting Trump while always pointing out his ways of frustrating and stringing the neo-cons along. My one desperate and perhaps foolish hope is that being foiled in trying to extricate us from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, he has agreed to this act(whether post or pre, and I suspect post) to allow them(the neo-cons and MIC) enough rope to hang themselves. The Iraqi parliament will certainly vote to have us leave. If my desperate hope is true, we will do so. If not, at least it hastens the end of our imperial age, which I would greatly welcome, at best without nuclear war.

    [Jan 05, 2020] For the United States to abandon proxy warfare and directly kill one of Iran's most senior political figures has changed international politics in a fundamental way. It is a massive error. by Craig Murray

    Comments on ZH are mostly negative, so looks like Trump lost an additional part of independents vote. He might also lost the election, because now impeachment is the most logical way out of this situation, with Trump servings as a sacrificial lamp for the MIC and neocon (he was neocon prostitute all his term (MIGA instead of MAGA), so nothing essentially changed)
    At the same time, Iran itself is zero threat to the American homeland. It's tiny $350 billion GDP amounts to 6 days of US annual output and its $20 billion defense budget is equivalent to what the Pentagon wastes every 8 days.
    The most dangerous reaction of Iran now is is that it it can hit any US target. That would be profoundly stupid. The most dangerious reaction sis that it can quietly develop nuclear weapons.
    Jan 05, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
    Authored by Craig Murray,

    Its ramifications are profound and complex.

    The principal difficulty of this policy for the USA of course is Iraq. Having imposed a rough democracy on Iraq, the governments were always likely to be Shia dominated and highly susceptible to Iranian influence. The USA had a continuing handle through dwindling occupying forces and through control of the process which produced the government.

    They also provided financial resources to partially restore the physical infrastructure the US and its allies had themselves destroyed, and of course to fund a near infinite pool of corruption.

    * * *

    Unlike his adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, Craig's blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate. Subscriptions to keep Craig's blog going are gratefully received .

    beemasters , 3 minutes ago link

    Trump claims to have evidence of an Iran attack threat, but he won't let Congress or the American people see it. A president who has lied tens of thousands of times about things both big and small while in office is now expecting the American people to take his word for it on Iran.

    Defense Officials Say Trump Is Lying About Iran Threat

    https://www.politicususa.com/2020/01/03/defense-officials-say-trump-is-lying-about-iran-threat.html

    Pollygotacracker , 43 seconds ago link

    It's OK to lie to the goyim. Just sayin'.

    He–Mene Mox Mox , 19 minutes ago link

    Although Trump has said he has 52 more targets, its really doubtful he knows what to do beyond that, if the Iranians retaliate. Then, there is the big problem of the Russian and the Chinese navies in the region of the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. The U.S. is not in any winnable situation, anyway you look at it. They will be forced to deploy more troops and materials to the Middle East, and the money for all of that will come out of your Social Security checks, and by reducing other entitlements, like Medicare, they will have to print more money----meaning, the money you have in hand will be worth less. We had this very same situation back in 1968-1969 with Vietnam, when the U.S. ran out of money to support the war there, and we entered into an inflationary period in the early 1970's. We eventually lost that war, if any one of you recall, and America was far better off then than what it is now. Simply put, America is in no position to be going to war.

    porco rosso , 19 minutes ago link

    The orange genius is a clueless ignorant moron and like wax in the hand of his hawkish advisors. With this imbecilic terrorist attack and loudmouth rhetoric afterwards he is now basically forced to attack Iran whenever something looks like Iranian retaliation. Which is basically an invitation to Tel Aviv to trigger the war at their discretion. Make Israel great again!

    Arising , 28 minutes ago link

    ..why a US mercenary assisting ISIL was killed in an Iranian militia rocket attack...

    This is the fundamental question that no lemming is asking, and it should be asked as this is the catalyst that started the recent events.

    Does anyone know anything about this mercenary..ahem: 'contractor'? -His role, his employer, his name, did he really exist?

    beemasters , 23 minutes ago link

    All I know is Trump assassinated the guy that had been preventing ISIS from spreading.

    Helg Saracen , 16 minutes ago link

    Saddam Husein was a friend of the United States, fought against Iran, was part of the Bush family. But when he decided to sell oil not only in dollars but also in euros, his country was destroyed, and he himself was hanged for dubious reasons. It is dangerous to be an enemy of the United States, but even more dangerous to be a friend of the United States. The USA is a colony, since lobbying is not prohibited in the USA, and the fittest mass of lobbyists has Israeli citizenship. They determine US foreign policy. So you are absolutely right, this is not a country, it is a cancerous tumor. And she looks disgusting even in comparison with the Saudis, they at least do not hypocritical in their atrocities.

    beemasters , 32 minutes ago link

    RED ALERT Iran vows to hit 35 US targets and unfurls red flag of WAR as America says it expects retaliation 'within weeks'

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10670210/iran-unfurls-red-flag-ready-for-war/

    beemasters , 26 minutes ago link

    So much for Trump's claim that the assassination was about stopping a war.

    lloll , 33 minutes ago link

    "When we did 9/11 we figured we'd blame the Saudis

    so we can better wag them through the US to support our agenda vs Iran."

    - Satanyahoo of APARTHEID Israhell

    http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2020/01/04/trump-the-assassin/

    schroedingersrat , 40 minutes ago link

    Hillary would have been better than Trump. Thats how low Trump sunk!

    Fireman , 45 minutes ago link

    Will a new bout of slaughter by the not so Great Satan and its vile little Satan be enough to stop the inevitable civil war reloaded in Slumville when the Wall St Ponzi shitter finally erupts and blows Trumptard's beautiful Washing town sewer with it?

    Iran knows well, like China and Russia, that time is on their side. USSA is the most bankrupt deadbeat in human history and its Saudi albatross and their collective fiat filth IOU petroscrip toilet paper dollah can no longer be saved despite the wanton murder, genocide and ravings of the Pentacon mobsters and their Agent Orange juice.

    The so called Green Zone will be burned like Benghazi before it and it will happen when USSA is least expecting it. Looking at Agent Orange's Soleimani gambit last week simply shows how frightened the anglozionazi regime has in fact become in light of what these terrorists call "the facts on the ground" i.e. the ongoing anglozionist war against the ruling Shia majority inside Iraq. All the "boots on the ground" that USSA can now muster in the region will only guarantee all the more bodybags that will be needed to ferry their remians back to Slumville in the coming collap$e of all things USSAN.

    In case any resident of Slumville still imagines that hired killer Agent Orange was not ensnared in his best buddy Jeffrey Pedovore's Maralago Mossad kiddy **** show then why are Pentacon hired killers from Slumville protecting Soleimani in this photo?

    https://twitter.com/Partisangirl/status/1213181166439714816

    https://thesaker.is/soleimani-murder-sitrep-funeral-and-vote/

    ken , 47 minutes ago link

    Russia, Russia, Russia, you know Putin's not a stupid. He's sounding very logical and sane. Perhaps Iran could be the same. Sober sanity is a good thing for people and the world.

    07564111 , 53 minutes ago link

    War with Iran brings ..

    Israel Destroyed.
    The House Of Saud Destroyed.
    No Oil Leaves The ME.
    Petro$$ Dead.

    researchfix , 48 minutes ago link

    Explain that to morons, who only think 2 hours ahead.

    lloll , 59 minutes ago link

    Why the doubling down?

    "Israel will not last 10 years." - Kissinger in 2012

    Tick-tock.

    http://cufpa.wordpress.com/2018/05/04/us-preparing-for-a-post-israel-middle-east/

    Cloud9.5 , 1 hour ago link

    We the people have no control over this. Cheering team A over team B is the preoccupation of the peanut gallery. The deed has been done. What follows are the consequences. There are muslim cultural centers all over the United States. We don't know if they are Shia or Sunni. What we do know is that they have a mutual hatred of Christians. Expect the attacks on Christians to escalate. Look to your people, their provisions and their security.

    SnatchnGrab , 1 hour ago link

    Quick take:

    This is 40 years plus in the making. When the USA abandoned the Shah (not a nice guy) during the Carter administration, two significant events occurred.

    One, Iran went from a quasi-secular, pro-western nation, to one that in spite of, or despite the wishes of its population, a vehemently anti-Western, and anti-USA nation, with heavy religious leanings.

    (And make no mistake, Iran has been interfering with, killing, and attacking the USA in various ways for quite some time)

    Two, because we (USA) needed a "player" in the middle east, we turned to the Saudis. Well Saudi's (Arabs) are not Iranians (Persians), and we learned that, or should have, when a much younger OBL issued his first "manifesto". (Which had nothing to do with Jews, but everything to do with the stationing of US troops in the same country as Mecca and Medina)

    Iran has a long history of being interfered by western powers (Most notably Britain. Ohhh Britain). This leads to a duality: one, they can claim (at least until 1953 or so) that they were being kept down financially by: {INSERT COUNTRY HERE}. There is some truth to that (again - Britain). However, while claiming they are being kept weak, they can't get out of their own way when it comes to running their own country. (Ostensibly, pre-1978 the mercantile class, versus the people, versus the ruling class)

    The United States has, in the past 40 years, handled Iran with kid gloves. You may not like that statement, but when we are warning people to exit Oil platforms to minimize casualties, I'm not lying. What happens next, militarily? I can't say. But unfortunately, it will be the Iranian people who will suffer the most.

    [Jan 05, 2020] PEPE ESCOBAR US Kick Starts Raging '20s Declaring War on Iran Consortiumnews

    Jan 05, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    S Cassidy , January 5, 2020 at 02:03

    No matter who we get in the White House, they are always won over by the so-called "Intelligence" services and the Pentagon. A little bit of kow-towing to them by staff and others and they forget who they are and why they ran in the first place. In the case of Trump, Netanyahu is an old friend. So did we ever expect any thing else? The Israelis think they own us, and Netanyahu has aid so, so did Sharon. As for the end-of-timers, they think they will be gathered in a cloud and watch while we all suffer nuclear war. With people like this, who needs enemies?

    Kiwikris , January 4, 2020 at 23:38

    Pepe, while I respect your work hugely I must disagree with your assertion that Trump is trapped by Impeachment. The "impeachment", until it's delivered to the Senate is a big fat nothing. Even if it ever does make it to the Senate, I doubt VERY much if it will come to anything & I believe Trump is not worried in the slightest. Donations to his re-election campaign have skyrocketed, Zogbys latest poll (for what they are worth) shows his support up across the board. And the Republicans control the Senate, not withstanding the potential turncoat RINOs

    Ron Johnson , January 4, 2020 at 18:26

    Casey, swing voters will decide everything in 2020. Trump very well might keep his base, but he could also lose the swing voters who believed him when he said he wanted peace. They knew Hillary was a war monger, and they hoped for better with Trump. Now Trump has proven himself to be just as blood thirsty, so that opens the door to anyone who can convincingly argue that they are for peace, or at least for more restraint.

    Robert Emmett , January 4, 2020 at 11:35

    A little doggerel for some of those sharp toothed cats out there.

    "Yeah, that was that cat alright."

    ass faced men (pomp-a-don)

    ass ass i' the-nation
    passpass yer quid-
    pro-quo-tay-shun
    murderer had it comin'
    screw turns harder
    ain't no time
    to bicker or to barter
    just out of sight
    in the dead of night
    another screw turns loose
    more money gets thrown
    off the back of the caboose
    run around town with open pockets
    while men in hoods pull eyes out they sockets
    best keep peepers & peeps at home
    seal their names in a golden tome
    help those in need act on yer own
    ass-faced men are on the loose

    Michael , January 4, 2020 at 20:58

    "This the way the Roaring, Raging Twenties begin: not with a bang, but with the release of whimpering dogs of war."

    This is very poetic and deeply moving. I hope it will be remembered for the ages.

    John Drake , January 4, 2020 at 11:05

    Probably not a good time to be an American in the Mideast. I remember during Vietnam when quite a few American tourists wore Canadian lapel pins abroad.
    Trump is so stupid. With over 700 military bases abroad and dependency on Mideast oil he doesn't understand how incredibly vulnerable US assets are.
    This will probably further alienate US' so called allies (vassal states); as their leaders will realize this is creating a lose-lose scenario. Except Britain which has almost equally, mentally challenged leadership.
    Looking on the bright side, another nail in the coffin of US hegemony is being forged.
    And when is Israel going to haul Bibi away in cuffs?

    paul , January 4, 2020 at 10:40

    Let's see how fond of these murderous antics the Exceptional and Indispensable Folk feel when the body bags start coming home and the $6 trillion already thrown down the rabbit hole starts looking like chump change.

    Moi , January 4, 2020 at 02:26

    What makes the US the enemy of mankind is that, in their foreign policy, they are never the architects of their own misfortune. Blowback on Americans is always someone else's fault no matter how ham-fisted their machinations in the lead-up to an event.

    Until the exceptionalists can say "mea culpa" of themselves the innocents of this world will end up paying the price.

    Ben Novick , January 4, 2020 at 00:29

    Don't underestimate the US. We can annihilate half the world's population in the next hour, if required.

    Zhu , January 4, 2020 at 07:12

    What good would that do?

    Cornelius Pipe , January 4, 2020 at 07:32

    Nope. All you can annihilate is yourselves. Should the US choose to use a nuclear bomb in a world where nuclear weapons proliferate the US will find out why people in glass houses should not throw stones. i.e. the US should think long and hard before it swaps Washington for Tehran.

    caseyf5 , January 4, 2020 at 07:36

    Hello Ben Novick,
    And will in the future!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Anthony Shaker , January 4, 2020 at 09:51

    I don't know what this inane comment is meant to convey, but perhaps you should ponder what you just wrote. What is your religion, exactly? There is an intolerable element of evil in your words. What you are saying also is that, in the end, the US, which is no longer an island in today's world, is being led by a death wish. Is that the apocalypse that the howling lunatics of the pseudo-religious Church of Wealth presently unfurling itself on the Evangelical crowd in America (and now Latin America) are waiting for? Everything the US does another can do and do with growing efficiency.

    Truth first , January 4, 2020 at 11:55

    Sheeee!!

    Apparently Ben does not realize that the US CANNOT annihilate "half the world's population" without annihilating half of the US population.

    Like a US patriot he is perfectly prepared to kill billions "if required". Only a psychopath would ever consider killing billions of innocents "if required"

    SERGIO GONCALVES BASTOS , January 4, 2020 at 12:56

    E depois fariam o que ! virariam zumbis 'sobre os escombros .como filmes de mad max.

    kgw , January 4, 2020 at 13:51

    We? Define "We,", Mr. Novick. I am a native of the U.S., and the only "We" that would act in such a way are not aware of being human.

    Mrs. Debra L. Carr de Legorreta , January 4, 2020 at 14:07

    Ben Novick we cannot eliminate half the world's population without eliminating all of it.
    That's the problem. We have no sense of proportionality.
    They kill one "contractor" we kill 25 militia members.
    They trash one embassy, hurting no one; we murder their top general, murder several other top officials, and we drone the heck out of a new group of protesters getting on their way to the same embassy. Totally disproportionate.
    Like you, these neocons are overly impressed with their toys and their self-righteousness. They couldn't stomach brown people desecrating their pretty billion-dollar embassy in Baghdad.
    YOUR way of thinking IS the problem.
    Your comments remind me of Hillary Clinton cackling on getting the news that Gaddafi had been sodomized and murdered.
    You proud? Is that what being a "patriot" means to you, that you can murder anyone you want?

    LJ , January 4, 2020 at 17:33

    Hey Ben, Learn something. Look up Bomb Carbon. It is going to disappear in a few years so government funded Scientists are doing a lot of testing and engaging in various kinds of research trying to make good use of it while the fun lasts. . Bomb Carbon is short for a radioactive by product of the nuclear explosions that were ended by the early 60's after the ban on Testing of Nuclear weapons above ground like at Bikini Atoll, Area 51, etc. Now I guess you think there's a good reason to create a whole lot more bomb carbon. It will be great . Good for research? We got to keep those guys gainfully employed? We've got to keep ahead of them damn Ruskies and the Chinese too , the ones that aren't already employed at MIT, Lawrence Livermore Lab and elsewhere here in the Brigand Nation that assassinates with impunity without regard to International Law or Borders then lies about it on TV. Well, since we can't do it to American Indians anymore we got to find new victims?
    This was a historic mistake. 650 million Shiites will not ever forget This. This man was a hero and definitely expected assasination and martyrdom. Read about Twelvers. The Shia Branch of Islam. Their religion is based on and centers around revering the 11 already martyred Imans that were assassinated/murdered by unjust powers. I don't make this stuff up. This plays right into what they believe. No Shiite could side with the USA on this. Not possible . There are hundreds of millions of them.
    This was a stupid decision by stupid men and unless the Democrats are just as stupid they are going to resist this, come out against a Trump War and Trump is going to lose the election in a landslide. Americans want No More War despite what the News Media and the Pentagon and yes the Deep State say.
    Trump- LOSER.

    geeyp , January 3, 2020 at 23:27

    At least where Pepe reports from, he has access to great food for our Last Supper, as some portray this stupid action from President Trump and the all too eager Pentagon, who is the only group to generously gain from this. Netanyahu may now think he does and we wouldn't want him or expect him to think any other way.

    Mark Stanley , January 3, 2020 at 19:35

    Excellent Pepe, but disturbing
    The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. Happy New Year? Will Americans really swallow this treble hook whole again?
    I keep wondering how much insider or opportunistic trading goes on. Any one who knew about this 10 minutes beforehand could simply go long oil, or gold. Quite predictable. The markets are so volatile nowadays, over reacting to news events. Much of this is due to AI trading systems that are programmed to react to news, and they get the feeds before anyone else and react instantly–buy/sell. Deep state creeps certainly made a killing in the markets today. No brainer there. It would be interesting to check out the volume on various options and commodities contracts prior to the assassination. The term "elephant tracks" has been used to identify massive buy/sell orders by unidentified players.
    As an old hippy guy, I really thought our world would be a better place by now. Au contrere. No matter what political system, the sociopaths continue to rise to the top like toxic scum.

    Jeff Harrison , January 3, 2020 at 18:12

    I imagine that the Iranians will be able to demonstrate that the the US isn't the only nation that can assassinate at a distance and I also suspect that Israel will discover a few dead bodies of their own. I expect that the Iraqis will kick the US out of their country. They certainly don't want to be the battle field for an Iran/US war either. The real question will be – what will Russia's and China's response to this be?

    Clark M Shanahan , January 3, 2020 at 22:13

    I wish that calm heads shall prevail.
    BTW: the Saudi's can expect payback, too.

    rosemerry , January 4, 2020 at 13:17

    There is an agreement between the USA and Iraq about US troops inside Iraq,and this act has clearly broken it, and if the Iraqis do not kick all the US troops out they will get no support from anyone. There is NO excuse to treat the government of an "allied, sovereign" country in such a way, involving Iraqi government forces and militias as well, of course, as Gen. Suleimani.

    karlof1 , January 3, 2020 at 17:54

    Wonder what the odds are on Pompeo, Trump, or Esper dying non-violently at some point in the near future? IMO, Trump also killed his reelection. My other initial and subsequent comments were made at Moon of Alabama and don't need repeating here. I will post this there along with a few quotes from Pepe, whose Facebook is also jammed.

    caseyf5 , January 4, 2020 at 07:41

    Hello karlof1,
    I vehemently disagree in your belief that the tRump will lose the 2020 election. His cult followers think that war with Iran is a great thing!

    Tom Kath , January 3, 2020 at 17:53

    There can be no clearer DECLARATION OF WAR. Choose your sides and prepare to die regardless which side you choose.

    [Jan 05, 2020] After Mossad Targeted Soleimani, Trump Pulled the Trigger

    Jan 05, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    by Jefferson Morley

    Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini and Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, right (Credit: Wikimedia Commons).

    Last October Yossi Cohen, head of Israel's Mossad, spoke openly about assassinating Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, the head of the elite Quds Force in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

    "He knows very well that his assassination is not impossible," Cohen said in an interview. Soleimani had boasted that the Israel's tried to assassinate him in 2006 and failed.

    "With all due respect to his bluster," Cohen said, "he hasn't necessarily committed the mistake yet that would place him on the prestigious list of Mossad's assassination targets."

    "Is Israel Targeting Iran's Top General for Assassination?" I asked on October 24. On Thursday, Soleimani was killed in an air strike ordered by President Trump.

    Soleimani's convoy was struck by U.S. missiles as he left a meeting at Baghdad's airport amid anti-Iranian and anti-American demonstrations in Iraq. Supporters of an Iranian-backed militia had agreed to withdraw from the U.S. diplomatic compound in return for a promise that the government would allow a parliamentary vote on expelling 5,000 U.S. troops from the country.

    The Pentagon confirmed the military operation, which came "at the direction of the president" and was "aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans." The Pentagon claimed in a statement that Gen. Soleimani was "actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region."

    Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, under indictment for criminal charges, was the first and only national leader to support Trump's action, while claiming that that Trump acted entirely on his own.

    "Just as Israel has the right to self-defense, the United States has exactly the same right," Netanyahu told reporters in Greece. "Qassem Soleimani is responsible for the deaths of American citizens and other innocents, and he was planning more attacks."

    Iranian President Hassan Rouhani vowed retaliation for the general's death, tweeting that "Iran will take revenge for this heinous crime."

    Capable Foe

    Soleimani was the most capable foe of the United States and Israel in the region. As chief of the Al-Quds force, Soleimani was a master of Iran's asymmetric warfare strategy, using proxy forces to bleed Iran's enemies, while preserving the government's ability to plausibly deny involvement.

    After the U.S. invasions of Iraq, he funded and trained anti-American militias that launched low-level attacks on U.S. occupation forces, killing upward of 600 U.S. servicemen and generating pressure for U.S. withdrawal.

    In recent years, Soleimani led two successful Iranian military operations: the campaign to drive ISIS out of western Iraq in 2015 and the campaign to crush the jihadist forces opposed to Syria's Bashar al-Assad. The United States and Israel denounced Iran's role in both operations but could not prevent Iran from claiming victory.

    Soleimani had assumed a leading role in Iraqi politics in the past year. The anti-ISIS campaign relied on Iraqi militias, which the Iranians supported with money, weapons, and training. After ISIS was defeated, these militia maintained a prominent role in Iraq that many resented, leading to demonstrations and rioting. Soleimani was seeking to stabilize the government and channel the protests against the United States when he was killed.

    In the same period, Israel pursued its program of targeted assassination. In the past decade Mossad assassinated at least five Iranian nuclear scientists, according to Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman, in an effort to thwart Iran's nuclear program. Yossi Melman, another Israeli journalist, says that Mossad has assassinated 60-70 enemies outside of its borders since its founding in 1947, though none as prominent as Soleimani.

    Israel also began striking at the Iranian-backed militias in Iraq last year. The United States did the same on December 29, killing 19 fighters and prompting anti-American demonstrations as big as the anti-Iranian demonstrations of a month ago.

    Now the killing of Soleimani promises more unrest, if not open war. The idea that it will deter Iranian attacks is foolish.

    "This doesn't mean war," wrote former Defense Department official Andrew Exum, "It will not lead to war, and it doesn't risk war. None of that. It is war. "​

    The Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Jarida reported a year ago that Washington had given Israel the green light to assassinate Soleimani . Al-Jarida, which in recent years has broken exclusive stories from Israel, quoted a source in Jerusalem as saying that "there is an American-Israeli agreement" that Soleimani is a "threat to the two countries' interests in the region." It is generally assumed in the Arab world that the paper is used as an Israeli platform for conveying messages to other countries in the Middle East.

    Trump has now fulfilled the wishes of Mossad. After proclaiming his intention to end America's " stupid endless wars," the president has effectively declared war on the largest country in the region in solidarity with Israel, the most unpopular country in the Middle East.

    This article first appeared on Jefferson Morley's TheDeepStateBlog .

    Jefferson Morley , author of The Ghost: The Secret Life of CIA Spymaster James Jesus Angleton , is the editor of The Deep State blog. He is a member of the Truth & Reconciliation Committee , founded to reopen the investigations of the assassination of JFK, MLK, RFK, and Malcolm X.

    [Jan 05, 2020] Mark Esper on Iran in Iraq, by Mark T. Esper

    Jan 02, 2020 | www.voltairenet.org

    ast Friday, the Iranian-backed militia Kata'ib Hizbollah or KH launched yet another attack against American forces in Iraq, resulting in the death of one American civilian, and injuries to four American service members, as well as two of our partners in the Iraqi Security Forces. This continues a string of attacks against bases with U.S. forces and Iraqi Security Forces. KH has a strong linkage to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Quds Force and has received lethal aid, support, and direction from Iran.

    Over the last couple of months Iranian-backed Shia militias have repeatedly attacked bases hosting American forces in Iraq. These attacks have injured our partners in the Iraqi Security Forces, but fortunately Americans were not casualties of these attacks until last week. On November 9th, Iranian-backed Shia militias fired rockets at Q-West Air Base located in North-West Iraq. On December 3rd, they conducted a rocket attack against Al Asad Air Base, and on December 5th, they launched rockets against Balad Air Base. Finally, on December 9th, these same militia groups fired rockets at the Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center located on the Baghdad International Airport. It is clear that these attacks are being directed by the Iranian regime, specifically IRGC leadership.

    In response, U.S. leaders have repeatedly warned the Iranians and their Shia militia proxies against further provocative actions. At the same time, we have urged the Iraqi government to take all necessary steps to protect American forces in their country. I personally have spoken to Iraqi leadership multiple times over recent months, urging them to do more.

    After the attack last Friday, at the direction of the President, U.S. forces launched defensive strikes against KH forces in Iraq and Syria. These attacks were aimed at reducing KH's ability to launch additional attacks against U.S. personnel and to make it clear to Iran and Iranian-backed militias that the United States will not hesitate to defend our forces in the region.

    On Tuesday, December 31st, at the instigation of Shia militias, violent rallies of members of these militias outside the American embassy in Baghdad resulted in damage to exterior entry facilities and buildings at the embassy compound. We know it was Iranian-backed Shia militias because key leaders were spotted in the crowd and some militia members showed up wearing their uniforms and carried the flags of their militia, including KH. We continue to urge the Iraqi government to prevent further escalation. Leaders of the Iraqi government have condemned the attack on the U.S. embassy, including the Iraqi president, prime minister, foreign minister, and speaker of the parliament. Additionally, regional and international partners have condemned the attacks on U.S. facilities, including Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Bahrain in the region, and the E.U., Germany, France, and others around the globe.

    On Tuesday, to ensure the security of the Americans at the embassy in Baghdad, we immediately deployed Marines from Kuwait who arrived at the embassy in a matter of hours. We also deployed a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division to ensure that we can provide additional defensive support to the embassy in Baghdad or elsewhere in the region as needed.

    Let me speak directly to Iran and to our partners and allies. To Iran and its proxy militias: we will not accept continued attacks against our personnel and forces in the region. Attacks against us will be met with responses in the time, manner, and place of our choosing. We urge the Iranian regime to end their malign activities.

    To our partners and allies: we must stand together against the malign and destabilizing actions of Iran. The 81 nations and member organizations of the Defeat ISIS Coalition are in Iraq and Syria, and cooperating around the globe to defeat ISIS. We have worked closely with our partners in the Iraqi Security Forces and Syrian Democratic Forces to roll-back the so-called ISIS caliphate in Iraq and Syria and liberated millions of Iraqis and Syrians. NATO nations are also in Iraq to assist with building the capabilities of the Iraqi Security Forces. Unlike the Iranians who continue to meddle in Iraq's internal affairs and seek to use corruption to further Tehran's malign influence, the United States and our allies are committed to an independent, stable, secure, and sovereign democratic Iraq that addresses the aspirations and needs of the Iraqi people, who we see protesting for these very things and objecting to Iran's malign influence. We call on our friends and allies to continue to work together to reduce Iran's destabilizing influence so Iraq is governed by Iraqis without this interference in its internal affairs. Mark T. Esper

    [Jan 05, 2020] The Christmas Truce of 1914 Why There Is Still No Peace On Earth

    Jan 05, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

    Antiwar.com Regional News

    by David Stockman Posted on December 25, 2019 December 24, 2019

    After the Berlin Wall fell in November 1989 and the death of the Soviet Union was confirmed two years later when Boris Yeltsin courageously stood down the Red Army tanks in front of Moscow's White House, a dark era in human history came to an end.

    The world had descended into a 77-Year War, incepting with the mobilization of the armies of old Europe in August 1914. If you want to count bodies, 150 million were killed by all the depredations that germinated in the Great War, its foolish aftermath at Versailles, and the march of history into World War II and the Cold War that followed inexorably thereupon.

    Upwards of 8% of the human race was wiped out during that span. The toll encompassed the madness of trench warfare during 1914-1918; the murderous regimes of Soviet and Nazi totalitarianism that rose from the ashes of the Great War and Versailles; and then the carnage of WWII and all the lesser (unnecessary) wars and invasions of the Cold War including Korea and Vietnam.

    At the end of the Cold War, therefore, the last embers of the fiery madness that had incepted with the guns of August 1914 had finally burned out. Peace was at hand. Yet 28 years later there is still no peace because Imperial Washington confounds it.

    In fact, the War Party entrenched in the nation's capital is dedicated to economic interests and ideological perversions that guarantee perpetual war. These forces ensure endless waste on armaments; they cause the inestimable death and human suffering that stems from 21st-century high-tech warfare; and they inherently generate terrorist blowback from those upon whom the War Party inflicts its violent hegemony.

    Worse still, Washington's great war machine and teeming national security industry is its own agent of self-perpetuation. When it is not invading, occupying and regime changing, its vast apparatus of internal policy bureaus and outside contractors, lobbies, think tanks and NGOs is busy generating reasons for new imperial ventures.

    So there was a virulent threat to peace still lurking on the Potomac after the 77-Year War ended. The great general and President, Dwight Eisenhower, had called it the "military-industrial complex" in his farewell address. But that memorable phrase had been abbreviated by his speechwriters, who deleted the word "congressional" in a gesture of comity to the legislative branch.

    So restore Ike's deleted reference to the pork barrels and Sunday-afternoon warriors of Capitol Hill and toss in the legions of Beltway busybodies who constituted the civilian branches of the Cold War armada (CIA, State, AID, NED and the rest) and the circle would have been complete. It constituted the most awesome machine of warfare and imperial hegemony since the Roman legions bestrode most of the civilized world.

    In a word, the real threat to peace circa 1991 was that the American Imperium would not go away quietly into the good night.

    In fact, during the past 28 years Imperial Washington has lost all memory that peace was ever possible at the end of the Cold War. Today it is as feckless, misguided and bloodthirsty as were Berlin, Paris, St. Petersburg, Vienna and London in August 1914.

    A few months after that horrendous slaughter had been unleashed 105 years ago, however, soldiers along the western front broke into spontaneous truces of Christmas celebration, song and even exchange of gifts . For a brief moment they wondered why they were juxtaposed in lethal combat along the jaws of hell.

    As Will Griggs once described it ,

    A sudden cold snap had left the battlefield frozen, which was actually a relief for troops wallowing in sodden mire. Along the Front, troops extracted themselves from their trenches and dugouts, approaching each other warily, and then eagerly, across No Man's Land. Greetings and handshakes were exchanged, as were gifts scavenged from care packages sent from home. German souvenirs that ordinarily would have been obtained only through bloodshed – such as spiked pickelhaube helmets, or Gott mit uns belt buckles – were bartered for similar British trinkets. Carols were sung in German, English, and French. A few photographs were taken of British and German officers standing alongside each other, unarmed, in No Man's Land.

    Near the Ypres salient, Germans and Scotsmen chased after wild hares that, once caught, served as an unexpected Christmas feast. Perhaps the sudden exertion of chasing wild hares prompted some of the soldiers to think of having a football match. Then again, little prompting would have been necessary to inspire young, competitive men – many of whom were English youth recruited off soccer fields – to stage a match. In any case, numerous accounts in letters and journals attest to the fact that on Christmas 1914, German and English soldiers played soccer on the frozen turf of No Man's Land.

    British Field Artillery Lieutenant John Wedderburn-Maxwell described the event as "probably the most extraordinary event of the whole war – a soldier's truce without any higher sanction by officers and generals ."

    The truth is, there was no good reason for the Great War. The world had stumbled into war based on false narratives and the institutional imperatives of military mobilization plans, alliances and treaties arrayed into a doomsday machine and petty short-term diplomatic maneuvers and political calculus. Yet it took more than three-quarters of a century for all the consequential impacts and evils to be purged from the life of the planet.

    The peace that was lost last time has not been regained this time, however, and for the same reasons. Historians can readily name the culprits from 105 years ago.

    These include the German general staff's plan for a lightning mobilization and strike on the western front called the Schlieffen Plan; the incompetence and intrigue in the court at St. Petersburg; French President Poincare's anti-German irredentism owing to the 1871 loss of his home province, Alsace-Lorraine; and the bloodthirsty cabal around Winston Churchill who forced England into an unnecessary war, among countless others.

    Since these casus belli of 1914 were criminally trivial in light of all that metastasized thereafter, it might do well to name the institutions and false narratives that block the return of peace today. The fact is, these impediments are even more contemptible than the forces that crushed the Christmas truces one century ago.

    IMPERIAL WASHINGTON – THE NEW GLOBAL MENACE

    There is no peace on earth today for reasons mainly rooted in Imperial Washington – not Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, Damascus, Mosul or the rubble of Raqqa. Imperial Washington has become a global menace owing to what didn't happen in 1991.

    At that crucial inflection point, Bush the Elder should have declared "mission accomplished" and parachuted into the great Ramstein air base in Germany to begin the demobilization of the America's war machine.

    So doing, he could have slashed the Pentagon budget from $600 billion to $250 billion (2015 $); demobilized the military-industrial complex by putting a moratorium on all new weapons development, procurement and export sales; dissolved NATO and dismantled the far-flung network of U.S. military bases; reduced the United States' standing armed forces from 1.5 million to a few hundred thousand; and organized and led a world-disarmament and peace campaign, as did his Republican predecessors during the 1920s.

    Unfortunately, George H. W. Bush was not a man of peace, vision or even middling intelligence.

    He was the malleable tool of the War Party, and it was he who single-handedly blew the peace when, in the very year the 77-Year War ended with the demise of the Soviet Union, he plunged America into a petty argument between the impetuous dictator of Iraq and the gluttonous emir of Kuwait. But that argument was none of George Bush's or America's business.

    By contrast, even though liberal historians have reviled Warren G. Harding as some kind of dummkopf politician, he well understood that the Great War had been for naught, and that to ensure it never happened again the nations of the world needed to rid themselves of their huge navies and standing armies.

    To that end, he achieved the largest global-disarmament agreement ever during the Washington Naval Conference of 1921, which halted the construction of new battleships for more than a decade. And even then, the moratorium ended only because the vengeful victors at Versailles never ceased exacting their revenge on Germany.

    And while he was at it, President Harding also pardoned Eugene Debs. In so doing, he gave witness to the truth that the intrepid socialist candidate for president and vehement antiwar protester, who Wilson had thrown in prison for exercising his First Amendment right to speak against US entry into a pointless European war, had been right all along.

    In short, Warren G. Harding knew the war was over and the folly of Wilson's 1917 plunge into Europe's bloodbath should not be repeated, at all hazards.

    But not George H. W. Bush. The man should never be forgiven for enabling the likes of Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Gates and their neocon pack of jackals to come to power – even if he eventually denounced them in his doddering old age.

    Alas, upon his death, Bush the Elder was deified, not vilified, by the mainstream press and the bipartisan duopoly. And that tells you all you need to know about why Washington is ensnared in its Forever Wars and is the very reason why there is still no peace on earth.

    Even more to the point, by opting not for peace but for war and oil in the Persian Gulf in 1991 Washington opened the gates to an unnecessary confrontation with Islam and nurtured the rise of jihadist terrorism that would not haunt the world today save for forces unleashed by George H. W. Bush's petulant quarrel with Saddam Hussein.

    We will momentarily get to the 45-year-old error that holds the Persian Gulf is an American lake and that the answer to high oil prices and energy security is the Fifth Fleet.

    Suffice it to say here that the answer to high oil prices everywhere and always is high oil prices – a truth driven home in spades by the oil busts of 2009 and 2015 and the fact the real price of oil today (2019 $) is lower than it was on the eve of the great oil embargo of 1973.

    But first it is well to remember that in 1991 there was no plausible threat anywhere on the planet to the safety and security of the citizens of Springfield, MA, Lincoln, NE or Spokane, WA when the Cold War ended.

    The Warsaw Pact had dissolved into more than a dozen woebegone sovereign statelets; the Soviet Union was now unscrambled into 15 independent and far-flung republics from Belarus to Tajikistan; and the Russian motherland would soon plunge into an economic depression that would leave it with a GDP about the size of the Philadelphia MSA.

    Likewise, China's GDP was even smaller and more primitive than Russia's. Even as Mr. Deng was discovering the People's Bank of China's printing press, which would enable it to become a great mercantilist exporter, an incipient Chinese threat to national security was never in the cards.

    After all, it was the 4,000 Wal-Marts in America upon which the prosperity of the new Red Capitalism inextricably depended and upon which the rule of the Communist oligarchs in Beijing was ultimately anchored. Even the hardliners among them could see that in swapping militarism for mercantilism and invading America with tennis shoes, neckties and home textiles – that the door had been closed to any other kind of invasion thereafter.

    NO ISLAMIC TERRORISTS OR JIHADI THREAT CIRCA 1991

    Likewise, in 1991 there was no global Islamic threat or jihadi terrorist menace at all. What existed under those headings were sundry fragments and deposits of Middle Eastern religious, ethnic and tribal histories that were of moment in their immediate region, but no threat to America's homeland security whatsoever.

    The Shiite/Sunni divide had coexisted since A.D. 671, but its episodic eruptions into battles and wars over the centuries had rarely extended beyond the region, and certainly had no reason to fester into open conflict in 1991.

    Inside the artificial state of Iraq, which had been drawn on a map by historically ignorant European diplomats in 1916, for instance, the Shiite and Sunni got along tolerably. That's because the nation was ruled by Saddam Hussein's Baathist brand of secular Arab nationalism, flavored by a muscular propensity for violent repression of internal dissent.

    Hussein championed law and order, state-driven economic development and politically apportioned distributions from the spoils of the extensive government-controlled oil sector. To be sure, Baathist socialism didn't bring much prosperity to the well-endowed lands of Mesopotamia, but Hussein did have a Christian foreign minister and no sympathy for religious extremism or violent pursuit of sectarian causes.

    As it happened, the bloody Shiite/Sunni strife that plagues Iraq, Syria and the greater middle east today and which functioned as a hatchery for angry young jihadi terrorists in their thousands was initially unleashed only after Hussein had been driven from Kuwait in 1991 and the CIA had instigated an armed uprising in the Shiite heartland around Basra..

    That revolt was brutally suppressed by Hussein's republican guards, but it left an undertow of resentment and revenge boiling below the surface. That was one of many of George H. W. Bush's fetid legacies in the region.

    Needless to say, when it came their turn, Bush the Younger and his cabal of neocon warmongers could not leave well enough alone.

    When they foolishly destroyed Saddam Hussein and his entire regime in the pursuit of nonexistent WMDs and alleged ties with al-Qaeda, they literally opened the gates of hell, leaving Iraq as a lawless failed state where both recent and ancient religious and tribal animosities were given unlimited violent vent.

    WHY THE WAR PARTY NEEDED TO DEMONIZE IRAN

    Also circa 1990, the Shiite theocracy ensconced in Tehran was no threat to America's safety and security – even if it was an unfortunate albatross on the Persian people.

    The very idea that Tehran is an expansionist power bent on exporting terrorism to the rest of the world is a giant fiction and tissue of lies invented by the Washington War Party and its Bibi Netanyahu branch in order to win political support for their confrontationist policies.

    Indeed, the three-decade-long demonization of Iran has served one overarching purpose. Namely, it has enabled both branches of the War Party to conjure up a fearsome enemy, thereby justifying aggressive policies that call for a constant state of war and military mobilization.

    Indeed, Iran has not been demonized by happenstance. When the Cold War officially ended in 1991, the Cheney/neocon cabal feared the kind of drastic demobilization of the US military-industrial complex that was warranted by the suddenly more pacific strategic environment.

    In response, they developed an anti-Iranian doctrine that was explicitly described as a way of keeping defense spending at high Cold War levels. If the fearsome Soviet Union was gone, a vastly inflated threat emanating from Iran's minuscule GDP of $350 billion and tiny defense budget of $15 billion would needs be invented and hyperbolized.

    And the narrative they developed to this end is one of the more egregious Big Lies ever to come out of the Beltway. It puts you in mind of the young boy who killed his parents, and then threw himself on the mercy of the courts on the grounds that he was an orphan!

    To wit, during the 1980s the neocons in the Reagan Administration issued their own fatwa against the Islamic Republic of Iran based on its rhetorical hostility to America. Yet that enmity was grounded in Washington's 25-year support for the tyrannical and illegitimate regime of the Shah, and constituted a founding narrative of the Islamic Republic that was not much different than America's revolutionary castigation of King George.

    That the Iranians had a case is beyond doubt. The open US archives now prove that the CIA overthrew Iran's democratically elected government in 1953 and put the utterly unsuited and megalomaniacal Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi on the Peacock Throne to rule as a puppet on behalf of US security and oil interests.

    During the subsequent decades the Shah not only massively and baldly plundered the wealth of the Persian nation; with the help of the CIA and US military, he also created a brutal secret police force known as SAVAK. The latter made the East German Stasi look civilized by comparison.

    All elements of Iranian society including universities, labor unions, businesses, civic organizations, peasant farmers and many more were subjected to intense surveillance by the SAVAK agents and paid informants. As one critic described it:

    Over the years, Savak became a law unto itself, having legal authority to arrest, detain, brutally interrogate and torture suspected people indefinitely. Savak operated its own prisons in Tehran, such as Qezel-Qalaeh and Evin facilities and many suspected places throughout the country as well. Many of those activities were carried out without any institutional checks.

    Ironically, among his many grandiose follies, the Shah had embarked on a massive civilian nuclear-power campaign in the 1970s, which envisioned literally paving the Iranian landscape with dozens of nuclear power plants.

    He would use Iran's surging oil revenues after 1973 to buy all the equipment required from Western companies – and also fuel-cycle support services such as uranium enrichment – in order to provide his kingdom with cheap power for centuries.

    At the time of the revolution, the first of these plants at Bushehr was nearly complete, but the whole grandiose project was put on hold amidst the turmoil of the new regime and the onset of Saddam Hussein's war against Iran in September 1980. As a consequence, a $2 billion deposit languished at the French nuclear agency that had originally obtained it from the Shah to fund a ramp-up of its enrichment capacity to supply his planned battery of reactors.

    Indeed, in this very context the new Iranian regime proved quite dramatically that it was not hell-bent on obtaining nuclear bombs or any other weapons of mass destruction. In the midst of Iraq's unprovoked invasion of Iran in the early 1980s, Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against biological and chemical weapons.

    Yet at that very time, Saddam was dropping these horrific weapons on Iranian battle forces – some of them barely armed teenage boys – with the spotting help of CIA tracking satellites and the concurrence of Washington. So from the very beginning, the Iranian posture was wholly contrary to the War Party's endless blizzard of false charges about its quest for nukes.

    However benighted and medieval its religious views, the theocracy that ruled Iran did not consist of demented warmongers. In the heat of battle they were willing to sacrifice their own forces rather than violate their religious scruples to counter Saddam's WMDs.

    HOW WASHINGTON INSPIRED THE MYTH OF IRAN'S SECRET NUCLEAR-WEAPONS PROGRAM

    Then in 1983 the new Iranian regime decided to complete the Bushehr power plant and some additional elements of the Shah's grand plan. But when they attempted to reactivate the French enrichment-services contract and buy necessary power plant equipment from the original German suppliers they were stopped cold by Washington. And when they tried to get their $2 billion deposit back, they were curtly denied that, too.

    To make a long story short, the entire subsequent history of off-again, on-again efforts by the Iranians to purchase dual-use equipment and components on the international market, often from black market sources like Pakistan, was in response to Washington's relentless efforts to block its legitimate rights as a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to complete some parts of the Shah's civilian nuclear project.

    Needless to say, it did not take much effort by the neocon "regime change" fanatics that inhabited Washington's national-security machinery, especially after the 2000 election, to spin every attempt by Iran to purchase even a lowly pump or pipe fitting as evidence of a secret campaign to get "the bomb".

    The exaggerations, lies, distortions and fear mongering that came out of this neocon campaign are truly deplorable. Yet they incepted way back in the early 1990s when George H. W. Bush actually did reach out to the newly elected government of Hashemi Rafsanjani to bury the hatchet after it had cooperated in obtaining the release of American prisoners being held in Lebanon in 1989.

    Rafsanjani was self-evidently a pragmatist who did not want conflict with the United States and the West; and after the devastation of the eight-year war with Iraq, he was wholly focused on economic reconstruction and even free market reforms of Iran's faltering economy.

    It is one of the great tragedies of history that the neocons managed to squelch even Bush the Elder's better instincts with respect to rapprochement with Tehran.

    So the prisoner-release opening was short-lived – especially after the top post at the CIA was assumed in 1991 by the despicable Robert Gates.

    He was one of the very worst of the unreconstructed Cold War apparatchiks who looked peace in the eye, and elected, instead, to pervert John Quincy Adams' wise maxim. That is, Gates spent the rest of his career searching the globe for monsters to fabricate.

    In this case the motivation was especially loathsome. Gates had been Bill Casey's right-hand man during the latter's rogue tenure at the CIA in the Reagan Administration. Among the many untoward projects that Gates shepherded was the Iran-Contra affair that nearly destroyed his career when it blew up, and for which he blamed the Iranians for its public disclosure.

    From his post as deputy national-security director in 1989 (and then as CIA head shortly thereafter), Gates pulled out all the stops to get even. Almost single-handedly he killed off the White House goodwill from the prisoner release, and launched the blatant myth that Iran was both sponsoring terrorism and seeking to obtain nuclear weapons.

    Indeed, it was Gates who was the architect of the demonization of Iran that became a staple of War Party propaganda after 1991. In time that morphed into the utterly false claim that Iran is an aggressive would-be hegemon and a fount of terrorism dedicated to the destruction of the state of Israel, among other treacherous purposes.

    The latter giant lie was almost single-handedly fashioned by the neocons and Bibi Netanyahu's coterie of power-hungry henchman after the mid-1990s. Indeed, the false claim that Iran posed an "existential threat" to Israel is a product of the pure red meat domestic Israeli politics that kept Bibi in power for much of the last two decades – a plague on mankind that hopefully is finally ending.

    But the truth is Iran has only a tiny fraction of Israel's conventional military capability. And compared to the latter's 200-odd nukes, Iran never even had a nuclear weaponization program after a small-scale research program was abandoned in 2003.

    And that is not our opinion. It was the sober assessment of the nation's top 17 intelligence agencies in the official National Intelligence Estimates for 2007 , and has been confirmed ever since.

    It's the reason that the neocon plan to bomb Iran at the end of George W. Bush's term didn't happen. As Dubya confessed in his autobiography, even he couldn't figure out how he could explain to the American public why he was bombing facilities that all his intelligence agencies had said did not exist. That is, he would have been impaled on WMD 2.0 on his way out of the White House.

    Moreover, now via a further study arising from the 2015 international nuclear accord – which would have straitjacketed even Iran's civilian program and eliminated most of its enriched-uranium stockpiles and spinning capacity had not the Donald foolishly shit-canned it – the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has also confirmed that Iran had no secret nuclear-weapons program after 2003.

    The whole scary bedtime story was false War Party propaganda manufactured from whole cloth.

    MORE WAR PARTY LIES – DEMONIZATION OF THE SHIITE CRESCENT

    In this context, the War Party's bloviating about Iran's leadership of the so-called Shiite Crescent is another component of Imperial Washington's 28-year-long roadblock to peace. Iran wasn't a threat to American security in 1991, and since then it has never organized a hostile coalition of terrorists that requires Washington's intervention.

    Start with Iran's long-standing support of Bashir Assad's government in Syria. That alliance goes back to his father's era and is rooted in the historic confessional politics of the Islamic world.

    The Assad regime is Alawite, a branch of the Shiites, and despite the regime's brutality, it has been a bulwark of protection for all of Syria's minority sects, including Christians, against a majority-Sunni ethnic cleansing. The latter would surely occur if US and Saudi-supported rebels, led by the Nusra Front and ISIS, had been permitted to take full power.

    Likewise, the fact that the Baghdad government of the broken state of Iraq – that is, the artificial 1916 concoction of two striped-pants European diplomats (Messrs. Sykes and Picot of the British and French foreign offices, respectively) – is now aligned with Iran is also a result of confessional politics and geo-economic propinquity.

    For all practical purposes, Iraq has been partitioned. The Kurds of the Northeast have declared their independence and have been collecting their own oil revenue for the past few years and operating their own security forces.

    And the western Sunni lands of the upper Euphrates, of course, were first conquered by ISIS with American weapons dropped in place by the hapless $25 billion Iraqi army minted by Washington's departing proconsuls; and then obliterated during Obama's vicious bombing and droning campaign designed to uproot the terrorist evil that Washington itself had spawned.

    Accordingly, what is left of the rump state of Iraq is a population that is overwhelmingly Shiite and nurses bitter resentments after two decades of violent conflict with the Sunni forces. Why in the world, therefore, wouldn't they ally with their Shiite neighbor?

    Likewise, the claim that Iran is now trying to annex Yemen, thereby justifying the sheer genocide wreaked upon it by the Saudi air war, is pure claptrap. The ancient territory of Yemen had been racked by civil war off and on since the early 1970s. And a major driving force of that conflict has been confessional differences between the Sunni South and the Shiite North.

    In more recent times, Washington's blatant drone war inside Yemen against alleged terrorists and its domination and financing of Yemen's government eventually produced the same old outcome – that is, another failed state and an illegitimate government that fled at the 11th hour, leaving another vast cache of American arms and equipment behind.

    Accordingly, the Houthis forces now in control of substantial parts of the country are not some kind of advanced guard sent in by Tehran. They are indigenous partisans who share a confessional tie with Iran, but who have actually been armed, if inadvertently, by Washington.

    Finally, there is the fourth element of the purported Iranian axis – the Hezbollah-controlled Shiite communities of southern Lebanon and the Beqaa Valley in the northeast. Like everything else in the Middle East, Hezbollah is a product of historical European imperialism, Islamic confessional politics and the frequently misguided and counterproductive security policies of Israel.

    In the first place, Lebanon was not any more a real country than Iraq was when Sykes and Picot laid their straight-edged rulers on a map. The result was a stew of religious and ethnic divisions – Maronite Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Copts, Druse, Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, Kurds, Armenians, Jews and countless more – that made the fashioning of a viable state virtually impossible.

    At length, an alliance of Christians and Sunnis gained control of the country, leaving the 40% Shiite population disenfranchised and economically disadvantaged, as well. But it was the inflow of Palestinian refugees in the 1960s and 1970s that eventually upset the balance of sectarian forces and triggered a civil war that essentially lasted from 1975 until the turn of the century.

    It also triggered a catastrophically wrong-headed Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon in 1982, and a subsequent repressive occupation of mostly Shiite territories for the next 18 years. The alleged purpose of this invasion was to chase the PLO and Yasser Arafat out of the enclave in southern Lebanon that they had established after being driven out of Jordan in 1970.

    Eventually Israel succeeded in sending Arafat packing to North Africa, but in the process created a militant, Shiite-based resistance movement that did not even exist in 1982 and that in due course became the strongest single force in Lebanon's fractured domestic political arrangements.

    After Israel withdrew in 2000, the then-Christian president of the country made abundantly clear that Hezbollah had become a legitimate and respected force within the Lebanese polity, not merely some subversive agent of Tehran:

    "For us Lebanese, and I can tell you the majority of Lebanese, Hezbollah is a national resistance movement. If it wasn't for them, we couldn't have liberated our land. And because of that, we have big esteem for the Hezbollah movement."

    So, yes, Hezbollah is an integral component of the so-called Shiite Crescent, and its confessional and political alignment with Tehran is entirely plausible. But that arrangement – however uncomfortable for Israel – does not represent unprovoked Iranian aggression on Israel's northern border.

    Instead, it's actually the blowback from the stubborn refusal of Israeli governments – especially the right-wing Likud governments of modern times – to deal constructively with the Palestinian question.

    In lieu of a two-state solution in the territory of Palestine, therefore, Israeli policy has produced a chronic state of confrontation and war with the huge share of the Lebanese population represented by Hezbollah.

    The latter is surely no agency of peaceful governance and has committed its share of atrocities. But the point at hand is that given the last 35 years of history and Israeli policy, Hezbollah would exist as a menacing force on its northern border even if the Iranian theocracy didn't exist and the shah or his heir was still on the Peacock Throne.

    In short, there is no alliance of terrorism in the Shiite Crescent that threatens American security. That proposition is simply one of the big lies that was promulgated by the War Party after 1991 and that has been happily embraced by Imperial Washington since then in order to keep the military-industrial-security complex alive, and justify its self-appointed role as policeman of the world.

    WASHINGTON'S ERRONEOUS VIEW THAT THE PERSIAN GULF IS AN AMERICAN LAKE – THE ROOT OF SUNNI JIHADISM

    The actual terrorist threat has arisen from the Sunni, not the Shiite, side of the Islamic divide. But that, in turn, is largely of Washington's own making; and it is being nurtured by endless US meddling in the region's politics and by the bombing and droning campaigns against Washington's self-created enemies.

    At the root of Sunni-based terrorism is the long-standing Washington error that America's security and economic well-being depend upon keeping an armada in the Persian Gulf in order to protect the surrounding oil fields and the flow of tankers through the straits of Hormuz.

    That doctrine has been wrong from the day it was officially enunciated by one of America's great economic ignoramuses, Henry Kissinger, at the time of the original oil crisis in 1973. The 46 years since then have proven in spades that it doesn't matter who controls the oil fields, and that the only effective cure for high oil prices is the free market.

    Every tin pot dictatorship from Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, to Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, to Saddam Hussein, to the bloody-minded chieftains of Nigeria, to the purportedly medieval mullahs and fanatical revolutionary guards of Iran has produced oil – and all they could because they desperately needed the revenue.

    For crying out loud, even while the barbaric thugs of ISIS were briefly in power in eastern Syria, they milked every possible drop of petroleum from the tiny, wheezing oil fields scattered around their backwater domain. So there is no economic case whatsoever for Imperial Washington's massive military presence in the Middle East.

    The truth is, there is no such thing as an OPEC cartel – virtually every member produces all they can and cheats whenever possible. The only thing that resembles production control in the global oil market is the fact that the Saudi princes treat their oil reserves not much differently than Exxon.

    That is, they attempt to maximize the present value of their 270 billion barrels of reserves, but ultimately are no more clairvoyant at calibrating the best oil price to accomplish that than are the economists at Exxon or the International Energy Agency.

    During the last decade, for example, the Saudis have repeatedly underestimated how rapidly and extensively the $100-per-barrel marker reached in early 2008 and again in 2014 would trigger a flow of investment, technology and cheap debt into the US shale patch, the Canadian tar sands, the tired petroleum provinces of Russia, the deep waters offshore Brazil and the like. And that's to say nothing of solar, wind and all the other government-subsidized alternative sources of BTUs.

    Way back when Jimmy Carter was telling us to turn down the thermostats and put on our cardigan sweaters, those of us in Congress on the free market side of the so-called energy-shortage debate said that high oil prices would bring about their own cure. Now we know.

    So the Fifth Fleet and its overt and covert auxiliaries should never have been there – going all the way back to the CIA's coup against Iranian democracy in 1953.

    But having turned Iran into an enemy, Imperial Washington was just getting started when 1990 rolled around. Once again in the name of "oil security" it plunged the American war machine into the politics and religious fissures of the Persian Gulf, and did so on account of the above referenced small-potatoes conflict that had no bearing whatsoever on the safety and security of American citizens.

    As US Ambassador Glaspie rightly told Saddam Hussein on the eve of Hussein's Kuwait invasion, America had no dog in that hunt.

    Kuwait wasn't even a country; it was a bank account sitting on a swath of oil fields surrounding an ancient trading city that had been abandoned by Ibn Saud in the early 20th century. That's because Saud didn't know what oil was or that it was there; and in any event, it had been made a separate protectorate by the British in 1913 for reasons that are lost in the fog of diplomatic history.

    Likewise, Iraq's contentious dispute with Kuwait had been over its claim that the emir of Kuwait was "slant drilling" across his border into Iraq's Rumaila field. Yet it was a wholly elastic boundary of no significance whatsoever.

    In fact, the dispute over the Rumaila field started in 1960 when an Arab League declaration arbitrarily marked the Iraq – Kuwait border two miles north of the southernmost tip of the Rumaila field.

    And that newly defined boundary, in turn, had come only 44 years after a pair of English and French diplomats had carved up their winnings from the Ottoman Empire's demise by laying a straight-edged ruler on the map. In so doing, they thereby confected the artificial country of "Iraq" from the historically independent and hostile Mesopotamian provinces of the Shiites in the South, the Sunnis in the West and the Kurds in the North.

    In short, it did not matter who controlled the southern tip of the Rumaila field – the brutal dictator of Baghdad or the opulent emir of Kuwait. Neither the price of oil, nor the peace of America, nor the security of Europe nor the future of Asia depended upon it.

    THE FIRST GULF WAR – A CATASTROPHIC ERROR

    But once again Bush the Elder got persuaded to take the path of war. This time it was by Henry Kissinger's economically illiterate protégés at the National Security Council and Bush's Texas oilman secretary of state. They falsely claimed that the will-o'-the-wisp of "oil security" was at stake, and that 500,000 American troops needed to be planted in the sands of Arabia.

    That was a catastrophic error, and not only because the presence of "crusader" boots on the purportedly sacred soil of Arabia offended the CIA-trained mujahedeen of Afghanistan, who had become unemployed when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    The 1991 CNN-glorified war games in the Gulf also further empowered another group of unemployed crusaders. Namely, the neocon national-security fanatics who had misled Ronald Reagan into a massive military buildup to thwart what they claimed to be an ascendant Soviet Union bent on nuclear-war-winning capabilities and global conquest.

    All things being equal, the sight of Boris Yeltsin, vodka flask in hand, facing down the Red Army a few months later should have sent the neocons into the permanent disrepute and obscurity they so richly deserved. But Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz managed to extract from Washington's Pyrrhic victory in Kuwait a whole new lease on life for Imperial Washington.

    Right then and there came the second erroneous predicate – to wit, that "regime change" among the assorted tyrannies of the Middle East was in America's national interest.

    More fatally, the neocons now insisted that the first Gulf War proved it could be achieved through a sweeping interventionist menu of coalition diplomacy, security assistance, arms shipments, covert action and open military attack and occupation.

    What the neocon doctrine of regime change actually did, of course, was to foster the Frankenstein that ultimately became ISIS. In fact, the only real terrorists in the world who threaten normal civilian life in the West are the rogue offspring of Imperial Washington's post-1990 machinations in the Middle East.

    The CIA-trained and CIA-armed mujahedeen mutated into al-Qaeda not because bin Laden suddenly had a religious epiphany that his Washington benefactors were actually the Great Satan owing to America's freedom and liberty.

    His murderous crusade was inspired by the Wahhabi fundamentalism loose in Saudi Arabia. This benighted religious fanaticism became agitated to a fever pitch by Imperial Washington's violent plunge into Persian Gulf political and religious quarrels, the stationing of troops in Saudi Arabia, and the decade-long barrage of sanctions, embargoes, no-fly zones, covert actions and open hostility against the Sunni regime in Baghdad after 1991.

    Yes, bin Laden would have amputated Saddam's secularist head if Washington hadn't done it first, but that's just the point. The attempt at regime change in March 2003 was one of the most foolish acts of state in American history.

    Bush the Younger's neocon advisers had no clue about the sectarian animosities and historical grievances that Hussein had bottled up by parsing the oil loot and wielding the sword under the banner of Baathist nationalism. But shock and awe blew the lid and the de-Baathification campaign unleashed the furies.

    Indeed, no sooner had George Bush pranced around on the deck of the Abraham Lincoln declaring "mission accomplished" than Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a CIA recruit to the Afghan war a decade earlier and smalltime specialist in hostage taking and poisons, fled his no-count redoubt in Kurdistan to emerge as a flamboyant agitator in the now-dispossessed Sunni heartland.

    The founder of ISIS succeeded in Fallujah and Anbar province just like the long list of other terrorist leaders Washington claims to have exterminated. That is, Zarqawi gained his following and notoriety among the region's population of deprived, brutalized and humiliated young men by dint of being more brutal than their occupiers.

    Indeed, even as Washington was crowing about the demise of Zarqawi, the remnants of the Baathist regime and the hundreds of thousands of demobilized republican guards were coalescing into al-Qaeda in Iraq, and their future leaders were being incubated in a monstrous nearby detention center called Camp Bucca that contained more than 26,000 prisoners.

    As one former U.S. Army officer, Mitchell Gray, later described it,

    "You never see hatred like you saw on the faces of these detainees," Gray remembers of his 2008 tour. "When I say they hated us, I mean they looked like they would have killed us in a heartbeat if given the chance. I turned to the warrant officer I was with and I said, 'If they could, they would rip our heads off and drink our blood.

    What Gray didn't know – but might have expected – was that he was not merely looking at the United States' former enemies, but its future ones as well. According to intelligence experts and Department of Defense records, the vast majority of the leadership of what is today known as ISIS, including its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, did time at Camp Bucca.

    And not only did the US feed, clothe and house these jihadists, it also played a vital, if unwitting, role in facilitating their transformation into the most formidable terrorist force in modern history.

    Early in Bucca's existence, the most extreme inmates were congregated in Compound 6. There were not enough Americans guards to safely enter the compound – and, in any event, the guards didn't speak Arabic. So the detainees were left alone to preach to one another and share deadly vocational advice . . .

    Bucca also housed Haji Bakr, a former colonel in Saddam Hussein's air-defense force. Bakr was no religious zealot. He was just a guy who lost his job when the Coalition Provisional Authority disbanded the Iraqi military and instituted de-Baathification, a policy of banning Saddam's past supporters from government work.

    According to documents recently obtained by German newspaper Der Spiegel, Bakr was the real mastermind behind ISIS's organizational structure and also mapped out the strategies that fueled its early successes. Bakr, who died in fighting in 2014, was incarcerated at Bucca from 2006-' 08, along with a dozen or more of ISIS's top lieutenants."

    The point is, regime change and nation building can never be accomplished by the lethal violence of 21st-century armed forces; and they were an especially preposterous assignment in the context of a land rent with 13-century-old religious fissures and animosities.

    In fact, the wobbly, synthetic state of Iraq was doomed the minute Cheney and his bloody gang decided to liberate it from the brutal but serviceable and secular tyranny of Saddam's Baathist regime. That's because the process of elections and majority rule necessarily imposed by Washington was guaranteed to elect a government beholden to the Shiite majority .

    After decades of mistreatment and Saddam's brutal suppression of their 1991 uprising, did the latter have revenge on their minds and in their communal DNA? Did the Kurds have dreams of an independent Kurdistan spilling into Turkey and Syria that had been denied their 30-million-strong tribe way back at Versailles and ever since?

    Yes, they did. So the $25 billion spent on training and equipping the putative armed forces of post-liberation Iraq was bound to end up in the hands of sectarian militias, not a national army.

    In fact, when the Shiite commanders fled Sunni-dominated Mosul in June 2014 they transformed the ISIS uprising against the government in Baghdad into a vicious fledgling state in one fell swoop. But it wasn't by beheadings and fiery jihadist sermons that it quickly enslaved dozens of towns and several million people in western Iraq and the Euphrates Valley of Syria.

    THE ISLAMIC STATE WAS WASHINGTON'S VERY OWN FRANKENSTEIN

    To the contrary, its instruments of terror and occupation were the best weapons that the American taxpayers could buy. That included 2,300 Humvees and tens of thousands of automatic weapons, as well as vast stores of ammunition, trucks, rockets, artillery pieces and even tanks and helicopters.

    And that wasn't the half of it. The Islamic State also filled the power vacuum in Syria created by its so-called civil war. But in truth that was another exercise in Washington-inspired and Washington-financed regime change undertaken in connivance with Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

    The princes of the petro-states were surely not interested in expelling the tyranny next door. Instead, the rebellion was about removing Iran's Alawite/Shiite ally from power in Damascus and laying the gas pipelines to Europe – which Assad had vetoed – across the upper Euphrates Valley.

    In any event, due to Washington's regime change policy in Syria, ISIS soon had even more troves of American weapons. Some of them were supplied to Sunni radicals by way of Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

    More came up the so-called ratline from Gaddafi's former arsenals in Benghazi through Turkey. And still more came through Jordan from the "moderate" opposition trained there by the CIA, which more often than not sold them or defected to the other side.

    So, that the Islamic State was Washington's Frankenstein monster became evident from the moment it rushed upon the scene in mid 2014. But even then the Washington War Party could not resist adding fuel to the fire, whooping up another round of Islamophobia among the American public and forcing the Obama White House into a futile bombing campaign for the third time in a quarter century.

    But the short-lived Islamic State was never a real threat to America's homeland security.

    The dusty, broken, impoverished towns and villages along the margins of the Euphrates River and in the bombed-out precincts of Anbar province did not attract thousands of wannabe jihadists from the failed states of the Middle East and the alienated Muslim townships of Europe because the caliphate offered prosperity, salvation or any future at all.

    What recruited them was outrage at the bombs and drones dropped on Sunni communities by the US Air Force and by the cruise missiles launched from the bowels of the Mediterranean that ripped apart homes, shops, offices and mosques which mostly contained as many innocent civilians as ISIS terrorists.

    The truth is, the Islamic State was destined for a short half-life anyway. It had been contained by the Kurds in the North and East and by Turkey with NATO's second-largest army and air force in the Northwest. And it was further surrounded by the Shiite Crescent in the populated, economically viable regions of lower Syria and Iraq.

    Absent Washington's misbegotten campaign to unseat Assad in Damascus and demonize his confession-based Iranian ally, there would have been nowhere for the murderous fanatics who had pitched a makeshift capital in Raqqa to go. They would have run out of money, recruits, momentum and public acquiescence in their horrific rule in any event.

    But with the US Air Force functioning as their recruiting arm and France's anti-Assad foreign policy helping to foment a final spasm of anarchy in Syria, the gates of hell had been opened wide, unnecessarily.

    What has been puked out was not an organized war on Western civilization as former French president Hollande so hysterically proclaimed in response to one of the predictable terrorist episodes of mayhem in Paris.

    It was just blowback carried out by that infinitesimally small contingent of mentally deformed young men who can be persuaded to strap on a suicide belt.

    In any event, bombing did not defeat ISIS; it just temporarily made more of them.

    Ironically, what did extinguish the Islamic State was the Assad government, the Russian air force invited into Syria by its official government and the ground forces of its Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard allies. It was they who settled an ancient quarrel that had never been any of America's business anyway.

    But Imperial Washington was so caught up in its myths, lies and hegemonic stupidity that it could not see the obvious. Accordingly, 28 years after the Cold War ended and several years after Syria and friends extinguished the Islamic State, Washington has learned no lessons. The American Imperium still stalks the planet for new monsters to destroy.

    And that's why there is still no peace on earth 28 years after it should have broken out, as did the Christmas Truce of 1914.

    David Stockman was a two-term Congressman from Michigan. He was also the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. After leaving the White House, Stockman had a 20-year career on Wall Street. He's the author of three books, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed , The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America and TRUMPED! A Nation on the Brink of Ruin And How to Bring It Back . He also is founder of David Stockman's Contra Corner and David Stockman's Bubble Finance Trader .

    [Jan 05, 2020] It appears that 2020 has got off to a hot start with Golf Cart Goofy been played by neocons again

    Jan 05, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Antonym ,

    BTL the usual misdirection pointing just to Israel; never are the Sunni Arab oil sheiks in the picture:
    blinded by anti Zionism. The Gulf rulers love this aspect best.

    Israel has little to offer to the US military-industrial complex except being an unsinkable aircraft carrier.

    The Sunni Arab oil sheiks on the other hand have massive amount of cash and oil reserves, just what the US dollar needs to keep on floating against financial gravity.

    With the Shia Iranian power exports as bogey these few individuals are also great clients for the Anglo protection racket. Iran is more about mass movements, hard to be a wise guy for.

    Brianeg ,

    I am as perplexed as anybody over the assassination of Soleimani, seeing no tactical advantage and in fact serious disadvantages and dangers.

    I can add little to the excellent article and excellent comments except to say that last year, I saw a documentary about Soleimani and I felt at the time, he was perhaps the only person that might bring peace to the whole of the Middle East and it may be for that reason somebody thought he was dangerous and had to go.

    At the very least, the Iraqi Government have now been given the chance to kick America and NATO out of Iraq and maybe Syria as well. With that in mind, I am sure that MSM will then say that this is all a Russian plot. I am sure that Pompeo's flight to Kazakstan is perhaps to prepare an air base if a rapid Vietnam style evacuation needs to occur.

    The options left open for America, NATO and Israel are fairly limited to remote offshore missile attacks as any form of close engagement against battle hardened troops when your own forces have only experience against unarmed civilians and forces only armed with small arms would be fraught with danger. I am sure that Trump's advisers and their experience of playing war games on their computers might think differently.

    As for a major missile strike like that after Douma when only a handful of rockets hit their targets especially as Syria did not have the latest anti missile systems, there is a likelihood that not one might reach its target.

    2020 is shaping up to become a very interesting year and by its end destined to become a very changed world.

    Trump's actions appear to be that of a very poor gambler trying to take desperate measures to improve his luck. I believe Hitler had great faith in his astrologer, does Trump use one?

    richard le sarc ,

    I rather see Israel, ie Bibi behind this. It is a diversion from his corruption crisis, it is pure Talmudism, with its murder of Israel's 'enemies', and it brings forward the prospect of 'obliterating' 'Persia' in a New Purim that would cement Bibi's place as a 'King of Israel' for all time ie a few more years. I really think that assuming that the architects of this action are rational and sane, when they are mad, bad, dangerous to know and infinitely blood-thirsty, is mistaken.

    adlskfj ,

    Ah, didn't take long to see Off Guardian's never ending commitment to the most vile President in US history, and that's saying a lot. The Deep State made him do it!!!!!!!!!!!!

    So did the Deep State direct this fascist, racist, misogynist, jerk of epic proportions Trump to pimp for war against Iran during his campaign? Can't see from this jerk's body language that he sees himself as a "tough guy". Did the Deep State force him to take on super neocon ex CIA director Woolsey as a foreign policy advisor during his campaign, or force him to suck up to the State of Israel in an AIPAC speech outdoing Clinton's, or suck up to the House of Saud bragging about arms sales with an effing poster, or force him to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, or force him to increase military operations in the ME including new rules of engagement making it easier for US troops to slaughter civilians, or force him to attack the Syrian regime, or force him to commit to "take the oil", or force him to name torture queen Haspel to direct the CIA, or force him to nominate an oil tycoon as Secretary of State then replace him with torture advocate ex CIA director Pompeo, or force him to re-initiate and increase military hardware from war zones going to police departments, and the sorry list goes on that OG and other compromised "leftists" regard poor Trump being forced to do by the Deep State.

    But the Deep State made him do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    OG just loves their Trump, but likely not as much as the Deep State.

    paul ,

    I think like many people you are partly blinded by an understandable hatred of Trump.
    I hold no brief for him, except to say Clinton would have been even worse.

    But people trying to make sense of the latest ill starred US foreign policy adventure only need to understand two things.
    1. The complete Zionist stranglehold over US politics and media.
    2. The character of the political leadership in the US (and its satellites.)

    1. From a Zionist point of view, Iraq, Libya and Syria (to a lesser extent) are all a rip roaring success. The first two are failed states that have been bombed back to the Stone Age. Syria is only slightly better off. Iran is unfinished business, the last major target on the Zionist hit list. All of this achieved by the US and its satellites providing all the money and the muscle.

    2. US and western leadership in general is abysmal, the worst in its history. Arrogant, venal, corrupt, irredeemably ignorant, delusional, and ideologically driven, buying in to its own exceptionalist propaganda.

    You cannot expect policies or programmes adopted to be in any way rational or coherent. What passes for an administration in the Trump Circus consists largely of competing, mutually antagonistic factions and fiefdoms, each pursuing their own objectives and generally fighting like rats in a sack. Trump is far from a dictator. He is more like a bewildered bystander presiding over what is at best a chaotic turf war.

    This is not to absolve Trump of responsibility -- if he is incapable of asserting his authority, he simply shouldn't be there. But people like Bolton and others were foisted upon him at the behest of Adelson and Zionist interests. Bolton was openly trying to undermine him in North Korea and elsewhere. There are many other similar examples. Seditious and mutinous spooks and dirty cops were conspiring to unseat him even before he was elected.

    In Syria, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the State Department were all following their own competing agendas, sponsoring different terrorist groups, following different objectives. Mid level bureaucrats like Vindman and Ioanovitch in all three organisations felt perfectly entitled to formulate and implement their own preferred policies, without any reference to the White House.

    I don't see much to admire in Trump. But apart from some coarse and bumptious behaviour, how does he differ from Obomber or Dubya? It's a mistake to go down the MSM rabbit hole of seeing everything in terms of personalities.

    Martin Usher ,

    Trump hasn't shown much interest in geography unless its somewhere he can put a casino so I doubt if he really understood the implications of what he's been encouraged to do. This action isn't Trump's, it most likely Pompero (who I find amusing in his 'who me' type innocence when he complains that the world isn't lining up behind the US, its just the usual roll of toadies).

    The "Deep State" isn't really a thing, its all of us, its the way that we've been trained from birth to think in terms of American exceptionalism and Cold War rivalry. Its thousands of people doing their jobs to the best of their ability and as Hannah Arendt pointed out in her essay on the Banality of Evil these people are able to be the very best or very worst depending on how they're led and used. To that end the article in the Guardian proper is very telling and points to something that needs significant investigation .

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/04/cambridge-analytica-data-leak-global-election-manipulation

    RobG ,

    "clever geopolitical chess"

    I would say that it's something much lower down the evolutionary chain than that: these people are all criminal psychopaths -- or if you want a more polite term: batshit crazies.

    [Jan 05, 2020] Soleimani murder developing narrative OffGuardian

    Notable quotes:
    "... 1. Increasing tensions serves the interests of the military-industrial complex – US military spending has increased enormously, and without enough tensions, there may be a "danger" that military spending will be cut in the future. Of course, this increased military spending is only in the interest of a small minority – but it is a very influential minority that spends a lot of money on politicians. ..."
    "... It sounds as if his enemies in the Pentagon and the Intelligence Agencies have tricked Trump perhaps by not telling him who the target was going to be? ..."
    "... You are being sidetracked by personalities. "If only we had Obama/ Reagan/ Whoever back, everything would be fine." It wouldn't. Whoever is occupying the Oval Office, whether it's Trump/ Creepy Joe Biden/ Buttplug/ Pocahontas or some other cretin, it's just another monkey dancing to the tune of the same organ grinder. ..."
    "... No capitalist regime, particularly the neo-liberal type, can ever even remotely resemble a 'democracy' of any type. ..."
    Jan 05, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Admin Catte Black

    Mourners surround a car carrying the coffins of Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi paramilitary chief Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, killed in a US air strike. (Photo by SABAH ARAR / AFP)

    The dust is settling somewhat over the latest and strangest act of imperial hubris in the Middle East, and a few things are becoming clearer – though no less strange.

    Trump held a slightly bizarre presser at his vacation resort in Florida, wherein he tried to assure the media he had no wish to provoke either war with or regime change in Iran, saying

    We took action last night to stop a war. We do not take action to start a war."

    Even the slavering warhound, Pompeo was taking a more conciliatory tone, and the word 'de-escalation' began featuring prominently in his Twitter feed.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and I discussed the decisive defensive action @realDonaldTrump employed in Baghdad to protect American lives. I emphasized that de-escalation is the United States' principal goal.

    -- Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 3, 2020

    In my conversation today with @masrour_barzani , we discussed yesterday's defensive action and our commitment to de-escalation. I thanked him for his steadfast partnership. We agreed on the need for continued, close cooperation.

    -- Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 3, 2020

    UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab , is also urging "all parties de-escalate" – for what that's worth.

    At the same time early claims by the Iraqi Popular Mobilisation Force (PMF) that the US had launched another air strike against them north of Baghdad were later retracted. According to RT:

    The Iraqi Army, however, later denied that an airstrike took place there. In a statement quoted by local media, the military urged everyone to be "careful" about spreading unverified information and "rumors" in the future.

    Some of this implies an attempt on both sides (Iraq and the US at least) to pull back. But while this may be welcome it does nothing to explain why the US administration escalated in the first place, in what still looks like a suicidally self-defeating move.

    What is the empire up to at this point? Does it have a plan? is it coherent? is it even sane?

    The Saker took a look yesterday at The Soleimani murder – what could happen next . He thinks, as he has said before, that Trump is regarded as a disposable asset by his Deep State handlers and is being used as a front man for risky policy actions that he can be scapegoated for if/when they go wrong:

    I have always claimed that Donald Trump is a "disposable President" for the Neocons. What do I mean by that? I mean that the Neocons have used Trump to do all sorts of truly fantastically dumb things (pretty much ALL his policy decisions towards Israel and/or Syria) for a very simple reason. If Trump does something extremely dumb and dangerous, he will either get away with it, in which case the Neocons will be happy, or he will either fail or the consequences of his decisions will be catastrophic, at which point the Neocons will jettison him and replace him by an even more subservient individual (say Pence or Pelosi). In other words, for the Neocons to have Trump do something both fantastically dangerous and fantastically stupid is a win-win situation!

    I tend to agree with this. When Clinton was dumped last minute as POTUS (too crazy, too weird), and the Deep State pivoted to Trump, it was clear from very early on he – the unwanted outsider – was going to be used just as Saker says, as a handy scapegoat; and it's interesting to note in this regard that he is indeed being blamed in many places today (Spiked , the Guardian etc), as the sole architect of the Soleimani murder.

    That he is in any way solely, or even directly, responsible is of course vanishingly improbable. US presidents don't, in real terms, have that kind of power now, if they ever did. It's far more likely Trump just rubber stamped an action urged by Pompeo and his war-crazed backers, or even that he only knew about it after it was done.

    But that's just detail. The fact Trump is being scapegoated implies that – at least for now – those really responsible are backtracking and thinking better of the venture.

    But what was the venture? What the desired outcome? No one seems to have a very satisfactory answer to that right now.

    As we said yesterday, war with Iran has been the auto-erotic fixation for the hardcore war nuts in Washington for years, and imminent confrontation has been predicted regularly since at least 2005.

    But it's never become a reality because the non-crazies in Washington know the risks outweigh the benefits for US interests.

    Sure, we know in recent times the Trump administration has been ramping up the tensions again. Tearing up the nuclear deal, re-imposing sanctions, sabre-rattling, making threats. But this has all been within the familiar framework that always just stops short of actual conflict.

    The murder of Soleimani is orders of magnitude beyond anything they have ever risked before. Good analysts like the Saker and Moon of Alabama have pointed out that the US has basically defeated its own aims, all but destroyed itself in the region. In MoA's words:

    The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come. From now on its position in the Middle East will be severely constrained. Others will move in to take its place.

    Even if this turns out too dire and sweeping a prediction, the truth still is clear that the US have apparently gained nothing from this venture and lost a great deal.

    Of course both the US and Israel now have carte blanche to stage as much false flag 'terrorism' as they want and blame it on Iranian 'revenge'. Whatever else happens, we can almost certainly look forward to some of that.

    And, there is the bonus of being able to drive the US homeland even further toward fascism in the guise of 'preparing' for new waves of terror attacks. The Mayor of New York is already doing his own narrative preparation for this, claiming, per the Jerusalem Post that

    We have to assume this action puts us in a de facto state of war

    But all this seems small gains for massive losses. The question 'what were you thinking?' hangs there, currently unanswered. If this was clever geopolitical chess it's currently so deep as to defeat all analysis.

    Claims that the US is just doing Israel's bidding don't even cut it. If the US loses its hold on the ME as a result of an ill-judged war with Iran, how will this benefit Israel? Does it believe it can inherit the imperial mantle? If so, it's deluded. Without US protection Israel would not last long in its current form.

    Some have suggested it's a 'clever' plot to hike up oil prices. But really? There are much lower risk ways of doing that than launching a war and forcing Iran to close the Straits of Hormuz.

    The QAnon crowd have even suggested it's an ultra smart way of getting the US out of Iraq. Well, we have to admit that could be the result. But does anyone really believe that was the plan?

    No one has yet, to my knowledge, put out the US simply goofed and are now desperately trying to cover themselves – but that is at least as likely as some of the above.

    The major question really though is – will this backtracking and odd claims of wanting de-escalation actually do anything to de-escalate? Will it persuade Iran not to seek retaliation, supposing this is now what Pompeo et al want?

    Currently the answer to that looks like a 'no.' In fact Iran has just now issued a list of potential retaliation targets related to the US. Even if this is mostly posturing, it's hard to see how Iran can avoid some form of response to this heinous act of frank terrorism. Even if the US administration's 'de-escalation' stance is genuine, it may well be pointless.

    And how long will the US remain in a 'de-escalation' mindset anyhow? It's become a commonplace to describe US foreign policy as 'insane', and it's an apposite description. But the murder of Soleimani takes the evident insanity to new and self-defeating levels.

    Who can say what the empire's next moves will be in the coming days or weeks? More utterly lunatic 'defensive' missile strikes are entirely possible.

    And at that point all bets will be off.

    Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest WhatsApp vKontakte Email Filed under: featured , Iran , latest , terrorism , United States Tagged with: Catte Black , Dominic Raab , Donald trump , Mike Pompeo , Moon of Alabama , The Saker

    Tutisicecream ,

    A developing narrative indeed Catte.

    It appears that 2020 has got off to a shit hot start with Golf Cart Goofy been slipped the Turd Doctrine engineered by Bolt-on brain, the deranged psychopath of Washington. From sleepy hollow the message went out to shoot first and let the policy slide along afterwards. How are the people of the land of the free going to swallow this piece of fascist wrangling?

    Meanwhile in old Blighty Johnson has not even had chance to sober up from the New Year bash with his Russian friend and patron, Евгений Лебедев – bringing a whole new meaning to the phrase going down the swanee. Who said Russians don't interfere in elections? Well those with British golden passports at any rate

    Antonym ,

    BTL the usual misdirection pointing just to Israel; never are the Sunni Arab oil sheiks in the picture:
    blinded by anti Zionism. The Gulf rulers love this aspect best.
    Israel has little to offer to the US military-industrial complex except being an unsinkable aircraft carrier. The Sunni Arab oil sheiks on the other hand have massive amount of cash and oil reserves, just what the US dollar needs to keep on floating against financial gravity. With the Shia Iranian power exports as bogey these few individuals are also great clients for the Anglo protection racket. Iran is more about mass movements, hard to be a wise guy for.

    Jo ,

    Thanks for this. I've dodged all news since I first heard about the assassination but my initial thoughts concerned the unspeakable Pompeo and Israel. Like the author I found it absurd that Trump had personally engineered this.

    On the idea that Pompeo now wants to row back, I'm not convinced. Sorry to provide a Guardian link but I saw this earlier and it seems he's scolding mainland Europe and the UK for not being more "supportive" of his insanity.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/04/mike-pompeo-european-response-to-suleimani-killing

    Brianeg ,

    I am as perplexed as anybody over the assassination of Soleimani, seeing no tactical advantage and in fact serious disadvantages and dangers.

    I can add little to the excellent article and excellent comments except to say that last year, I saw a documentary about Soleimani and I felt at the time, he was perhaps the only person that might bring peace to the whole of the Middle East and it may be for that reason somebody thought he was dangerous and had to go.

    At the very least, the Iraqi Government have now been given the chance to kick America and NATO out of Iraq and maybe Syria as well. With that in mind, I am sure that MSM will then say that this is all a Russian plot. I am sure that Pompeo's flight to Kazakstan is perhaps to prepare an air base if a rapid Vietnam style evacuation needs to occur.

    The options left open for America, NATO and Israel are fairly limited to remote offshore missile attacks as any form of close engagement against battle hardened troops when your own forces have only experience against unarmed civilians and forces only armed with small arms would be fraught with danger. I am sure that Trump's advisers and their experience of playing war games on their computers might think differently.

    As for a major missile strike like that after Douma when only a handful of rockets hit their targets especially as Syria did not have the latest anti missile systems, there is a likelihood that not one might reach its target.

    2020 is shaping up to become a very interesting year and by its end destined to become a very changed world.

    Trump's actions appear to be that of a very poor gambler trying to take desperate measures to improve his luck. I believe Hitler had great faith in his astrologer, does Trump use one?

    David Macilwain ,

    I'm less optimistic Catte – the claims to want deescalation come from those who just escalated, in a calculated and well planned act of war, in which I believe the UK and Australia were already well briefed. I would also venture, as suggested in "Official Secrets and Lies" – that Pompeo's demand that Corbyn would not be PM was making sure that there would be no anti-war PM in the UK in the new year, when the launching of the next decade of the war of terror would take place – so timely on 01.02.2020. Do we not remember that the attack on Iraq was planned months in advance, and launched – allegedly – at 20.30 on 20.03.2003?

    And surely also, the faked killing of Baghdadi was part of this planning, as he had to be out of the way, specially nowhere near AL Qaim/Baghouz, for the killing of Soleimani to be possible. Truly it is the evil empire, with all that this includes, and Trump like a pimple waiting to burst sitting on top of the rotten pile.

    Estaugh ,

    Found this informative,. https://www.anti-empire.com/podcast-scott-horton-on-trumps-assassination-of-soleimani/

    Harry Stotle ,

    According to our Emily WMDs and the blood bath that followed in Iraq was all just a 'mistake'.

    Sickening pontificating from her in the Guardian about how it is bad to murder people (without just cause) apparently oblivious to the fact her own party committed Britan to an illegal war without a shred of evidence that Saddam Hussein was a threat to our national security.

    I held my nose and read her article – not a single word about Tony Blair, or the fact that the quagmire in the Middle East (as she describes it) was largely a result of NuLabour's love in with US neonazis.

    People like Thornberry seem to be utterly devoid of even the most primitive form of decency.

    She finishes her turdburger by saying 'Whoever becomes Labour's new leader, they need to have the strength, experience and knowledge to lead parliament in fighting back against Britain becoming embroiled in this disastrous drift to war.'
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/04/i-have-no-confidence-boris-johnson-will-keep-us-out-of-quagmire-in-iran

    Oh, the fucking irony.

    Dungroanin ,

    O/T Ha ha – Integrity Initiative codswallop has landed with added rusty iron on Cambridge Analytica election meddling ! Guess what it only seems to be about Trump 2016 and Trump 2020!

    Ah needed that laugh back to Armeggedon Now watch.

    richard le sarc ,

    I rather see Israel, ie Bibi behind this. It is a diversion from his corruption crisis, it is pure Talmudism, with its murder of Israel's 'enemies', and it brings forward the prospect of 'obliterating' 'Persia' in a New Purim that would cement Bibi's place as a 'King of Israel' for all time ie a few more years. I really think that assuming that the architects of this action are rational and sane, when they are mad, bad, dangerous to know and infinitely blood-thirsty, is mistaken.

    RobG ,

    Also:

    Iraqi air base housing US troops comes under rocket fire north of Baghdad

    If true, these reports are to be expected, because it wasn't just Qassem Suleimani who was assassinated by the American psychopaths, but also the Iraqi militia leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

    If the reports are true, it's quite expected, yet it has nothing to do with Iranian retaliation.

    Iranian retaliation will be coming sometime in the future; and you might need to hold your hats when that happens.

    I haven't looked at the bookmakers with regard to all this. It will be interesting to see what odds they are now giving on Trump being re-elected.

    RobG ,

    Rockets land close to US Embassy in Baghdad, no known casualties – military

    I've no idea of the veracity of this report. There was a similar report on Friday that turned out to be untrue.

    adlskfj ,

    Ah, didn't take long to see Off Guardian's never ending commitment to the most vile President in US history, and that's saying a lot. The Deep State made him do it!!!!!!!!!!!!

    So did the Deep State direct this fascist, racist, misogynist, jerk of epic proportions Trump to pimp for war against Iran during his campaign? Can't see from this jerk's body language that he sees himself as a "tough guy". Did the Deep State force him to take on super neocon ex CIA director Woolsey as a foreign policy advisor during his campaign, or force him to suck up to the State of Israel in an AIPAC speech outdoing Clinton's, or suck up to the House of Saud bragging about arms sales with an effing poster, or force him to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, or force him to increase military operations in the ME including new rules of engagement making it easier for US troops to slaughter civilians, or force him to attack the Syrian regime, or force him to commit to "take the oil", or force him to name torture queen Haspel to direct the CIA, or force him to nominate an oil tycoon as Secretary of State then replace him with torture advocate ex CIA director Pompeo, or force him to re-initiate and increase military hardware from war zones going to police departments, and the sorry list goes on that OG and other compromised "leftists" regard poor Trump being forced to do by the Deep State.

    But the Deep State made him do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    OG just loves their Trump, but likely not as much as the Deep State.

    paul ,

    I think like many people you are partly blinded by an understandable hatred of Trump.
    I hold no brief for him, except to say Clinton would have been even worse.

    But people trying to make sense of the latest ill starred US foreign policy adventure only need to understand two things.
    1. The complete Zionist stranglehold over US politics and media.
    2. The character of the political leadership in the US (and its satellites.)

    1. From a Zionist point of view, Iraq, Libya and Syria (to a lesser extent) are all a rip roaring success. The first two are failed states that have been bombed back to the Stone Age. Syria is only slightly better off. Iran is unfinished business, the last major target on the Zionist hit list. All of this achieved by the US and its satellites providing all the money and the muscle.

    2. US and western leadership in general is abysmal, the worst in its history. Arrogant, venal, corrupt, irredeemably ignorant, delusional, and ideologically driven, buying in to its own exceptionalist propaganda.

    You cannot expect policies or programmes adopted to be in any way rational or coherent. What passes for an administration in the Trump Circus consists largely of competing, mutually antagonistic factions and fiefdoms, each pursuing their own objectives and generally fighting like rats in a sack. Trump is far from a dictator. He is more like a bewildered bystander presiding over what is at best a chaotic turf war.

    This is not to absolve Trump of responsibility – if he is incapable of asserting his authority, he simply shouldn't be there. But people like Bolton and others were foisted upon him at the behest of Adelson and Zionist interests. Bolton was openly trying to undermine him in North Korea and elsewhere. There are many other similar examples. Seditious and mutinous spooks and dirty cops were conspiring to unseat him even before he was elected.

    In Syria, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the State Department were all following their own competing agendas, sponsoring different terrorist groups, following different objectives. Mid level bureaucrats like Vindman and Ioanovitch in all three organisations felt perfectly entitled to formulate and implement their own preferred policies, without any reference to the White House.

    I don't see much to admire in Trump. But apart from some coarse and bumptious behaviour, how does he differ from Obomber or Dubya? It's a mistake to go down the MSM rabbit hole of seeing everything in terms of personalities.

    Martin Usher ,

    Trump hasn't shown much interest in geography unless its somewhere he can put a casino so I doubt if he really understood the implications of what he's been encouraged to do. This action isn't Trump's, it most likely Pompero (who I find amusing in his 'who me' type innocence when he complains that the world isn't lining up behind the US, its just the usual roll of toadies).

    The "Deep State" isn't really a thing, its all of us, its the way that we've been trained from birth to think in terms of American exceptionalism and Cold War rivalry. Its thousands of people doing their jobs to the best of their ability and as Hannah Arendt pointed out in her essay on the Banality of Evil these people are able to be the very best or very worst depending on how they're led and used. To that end the article in the Guardian proper is very telling and points to something that needs significant investigation .

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/04/cambridge-analytica-data-leak-global-election-manipulation

    RobG ,

    "clever geopolitical chess"

    I would say that it's something much lower down the evolutionary chain than that: these people are all criminal psychopaths – or if you want a more polite term: batshit crazies.

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    The Social Psychology determinant of Deindividuation allows people to immerse themselves psychologically into the in-group in order to oppose out-groups whether it be along lines of ethnicity against minority ethnic groups or otherwise some other negatively viewed determinant like gender, or age.

    Fascists typically join likeminded individuals to fulfill the process of deindividuation into in-groups they perceive to be socially beneficial for reasons of political opposition.

    Deindividuation allows the elite to internalize their own social-psychological perspectives to in-group bias of entitlement et cetera. Out-group members are viewed as inferior, and dispossessed of perspective of what it is like to be rich & wealthy in in-group perspective.

    Bikers deindividuate into biker gangs of likeminded in-group collective thinking. Out-group is anyone that is not aligned with the in-group binary of identity with the group.
    I suspect that human beings somehow imprint on group membership much like Conrad Lorenz found with ducklings & geese whilst studying learning processes.

    MOU

    jay ,

    'merica has been 'attacking' Iran for the last 10 years. It is all smoke and mirrors. Once upon a time there was a CIA fommented coup to overthrow a popular and decent government, placing the Shah in power. Then we had the Islamic Revolution led by the Ayatolah The Ayatolah had been sojourning in Paris presumably enjoying the folies bergere and some tasty charcuterie. Then right on time, He was flown business class by Air France back to Iran.

    The NWO and Radical Islam go together like ram-a-lam-ding-dong

    The car Soleimani was killed in appears to have been 'exploded' into a block with very little damage to the surrounding area or scorching. A car set on fire by neds in Glasgow makes more mess.

    However in a change from the ubiquitous 'mysteriously' appearing passport, we have a deluxe ring that 'identified' Him.
    The ring appears to change from one image to another

    tonyopmoc ,

    jay,

    There is other evidence to support this view, admittedly from around 10+ years ago. The Iranians in a Big Blow-Up boat (don't mock our Lifeboat service uses them too to save lives in some of the most hazardous seas – and most of them are unpaid volunteers), stopped a British metal warship, who they claimed had infiltrated Iranian Waters. The Iranians arrested several members of The Royal Navy. The Iranians also arrested the BBC Cameraman, and his Soundman, and took them into the blow-up boat too, and they carried on filming, whilst they took them to jail in Iran.

    I p1ssed myself laughing almost immediately, and I don't normally watch TV.

    After a few days, The Iranians, let them all go. The Royal Navy said sorry, we won't do it again.

    That just had to be a pre-planned set-up between the British and the Iranians.

    I suspect neither told the Americans, cos they would f'ck it all up and try to start a war.

    Tony

    tonyopmoc ,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Iranian_arrest_of_Royal_Navy_personnel

    paul ,

    The premise of this article is somewhat dubious. The Deep State never "pivoted to Trump." It wanted Clinton, regardless of how crazy and corrupt she was. They have never accepted Trump's presidency.

    The spooks and the dirty cops worked tirelessly to undermine his campaign to prevent him being elected. Having failed in this, it did everything possible to sabotage his administration subsequently. It has perpetrated various subversive and treasonous hoaxes, fantasies and conspiracy theories, culminating in the current impeachment circus.

    They never tried to make the best of a bad job, from their point of view, to "manage Trump." This has remained constant, no matter how much pandering he does to Zionist interests, or how many trillions he gifts to the military industrial complex. They don't accept him, and never will. They hate him, and they want him dead, or at least in jail, stripped of his businesses and money, and his relatives as well.

    Why is this? After all, he's gifted Nuttyyahoo Jerusalem, occupied Syria and the West Bank. The current military budget (true figure) is $1,134 billion. You might think that would cut him a bit of slack.

    It's because he upset the apple cart for the Zionist interests who rule the roost in Washington.
    Clinton was supposed to take over and implement their programme.
    Syria was supposed to have been destroyed now, and Assad dead.
    The war with Iran was supposed to have been begun long ago.
    But Trump failed to deliver.
    The tentative peace feelers being put out to Russia (because he was more concerned about China) enraged that same dual national constituency with their visceral hatred of Russia.

    And this is so much more the case because those same interests realise they are working under time pressure. This may be their last chance. America is declining rapidly. The Zionist stranglehold that has taken a century to achieve is a declining asset. And the parasite may find it difficult to find another host.
    Is Russia going to give Israel billions of dollars and unlimited free weaponry every year? Will Chinese troops be "happy to die for Israel" as US ones are (at least according to their general?

    Trump may have been dragged along on the coat tails of the dual nationals and their goy stooges, rabid religious nut jobs like Pence and Pompeo. But if Trump is hoping to row things back, he is likely to be disappointed. Iran has to respond decisively, or else give a green light to endless similar (and worse) provocations by the Boltons and the Netanyahus, like Israel in Syria. It cannot afford to show any weakness. And when the retaliation comes, Trump will not get away with bombing some empty airfield.

    Gall ,

    The problem is not just the AIPAC and JINSA which long since should have been labeled Foreign Agents under FARA but the Christian Zionist nutballs who are banking on Armageddon so that they can be raptured off to heaven while all of us are turned into radioactive toast.

    paul ,

    Yes, that includes Pence, Pompeo, Hagee, and (according to some claims) 40 million of the Exceptional and Indispensable Folk.

    richard le sarc ,

    The USA these days is like one of those zombie ants, infected with a toxic fungus, Ziophilia prostatens, that takes over its brain, and makes it climb up a branch, so that, when the fungus explodes from its dead body, its spores can drift further away. Or, even better, the toxic protozoon, Toxoplasma gondii, that, when it infects rats, makes them suicidally unafraid of cats, they get eaten, and the protozoon goes forth, distributed through the cat's faeces. I suppose we could call the infection controlling the minds of the Washington detritus and making them genocidal as well as suicidal a 'protozion', for easy identification.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    You nail it. Israel provided co ordinates for Soleimani's whereabouts, Trump, in his sheer stupidity, did the deed.
    And now payback is coming. And it's likely to escalate into a massive war.
    Ridiculous ABC doing their little bit for Empire and the 'fight for freedom' .
    More airstrikes on a PMU base on the Iraq-Syria border earlier today, another 5 killed.
    One guess who was responsible. Fecken insanity.

    Adrian E. ,

    I think the following two explanations are most plausible:

    1. Increasing tensions serves the interests of the military-industrial complex – US military spending has increased enormously, and without enough tensions, there may be a "danger" that military spending will be cut in the future. Of course, this increased military spending is only in the interest of a small minority – but it is a very influential minority that spends a lot of money on politicians.

    2. The goal may be sowing chaos and violence because this increases the role of the military in international relations, and in military matters, the US in its current state is (or thinks it is – they probably want to avoid a war against a strong army that would let them find out better) more competitive than in economic matters. As far as economic matters are concerned, we can more or less predict that the "Western world" (US and EU/NATO) will almost certainly be dwarfed by China (and to some degree other East Asian countries and emerging economies). Of course, some time in the future, when urbanization will be completed to a large degree, Chinese growth will slow, but it is unlikely that this won't still mean that the US and EU economies will be tiny compared to it. If the US manages to decrease the role of economics and increase the role of the military, it may be able to slow down the decline in its significance somehow, and what it needs for that is violence, chaos, and instability.
    Of course, one may say that all these instances of sowing chaos are counterproductive for the US empire. In many concrete instances, one can show that this is the case, e.g. Iran was strengthened by the US aggression against Iraq. But on the whole, is the US empire really weaker than it would have been without all these aggressions? The US economy probably is, but if we specifically talk about US empire – the US has military bases around the world in a way no empire has ever had, and without enough violence, chaos, and tensions in order to justify them, it might be difficult to keep them long-term. It is also important to attempt to analyze counterfactual scenarios. If the US has just been relieved after the end of the Cold War, reaped a huge peace dividend and if it had not committed an aggression every few years, it would probably be more prosperous, but it would hardly be an empire. Probably, NATO would not exist any more (the aggression against Yugoslavia and later stoking up historical hatred in Eastern EU member countries played an important role). The US would probably be more respected than it is now, but its international significance would probably have decreased more than it has in our current reality where the US has increased the role of the military by sowing chaos.

    Brian Steere ,

    The idea of Empire may not fit the modern world of broad spectrum globalism. Expecting such a world to make sense may buy into being manipulated further by an ever consolidating pattern of possession and control – that works a kind of narrative or mind capture alongside globally set regulatory structures to protect the lie at any cost and by any and all means.

    Yarkob ,

    that was supposed to be a link, admins i even used the code button

    https://twitter.com/AWAKEALERT/status/1144134909415448576

    Paul ,

    It sounds as if his enemies in the Pentagon and the Intelligence Agencies have tricked Trump perhaps by not telling him who the target was going to be? Now he owns the policy and the chances of getting rid of him rise especially if the retaliation is serious and he fails to start throwing nukes around.

    As with JFK over the Bay of Pigs it puts him in a very hard place. Working with Pence would probably suit the Military Complex. Ideas of withdrawing from conflict in the ME and Afghanistan are as crazy to them as Kennedy's plans to disarm.

    alskdjf ,

    Paul you just love your Trump. The epic corrupt capitalist globalist fascist epic jerk I'm sure would regard you with much love if he knew you existed or cared.

    paul ,

    You are being sidetracked by personalities. "If only we had Obama/ Reagan/ Whoever back, everything would be fine." It wouldn't. Whoever is occupying the Oval Office, whether it's Trump/ Creepy Joe Biden/ Buttplug/ Pocahontas or some other cretin, it's just another monkey dancing to the tune of the same organ grinder.

    TFS ,

    Is it me, or does the definition of what constitutes a Democracy, seem out of date?

    Surely, where country such as Blighty likes to refer to iself as a Democracy, then it should hold true that its people are past masters of holding its rulers to account?

    If we are a Democracy and we don't, as has been the case for the past 50yrs of my life, aren't we guilty of some sort of crime?

    Are we (adults) all non persons, a person called 'Collateral Damage' for when Karma comes a calling?

    Will we cry foul and bemoan the injustice of it not being our fault as our leaders rape the planet?

    I dunno, calling Blighty a Democracy seems to be quite Arrogant and Offensive.

    richard le sarc ,

    No capitalist regime, particularly the neo-liberal type, can ever even remotely resemble a 'democracy' of any type.

    Robyn ,

    An fundamental of democracy is a free press so that citizens can cast an informed vote. There is no longer a free press (to the extent that there ever was) and, with increasing censorship of ethical journalism, the ideal of democracy becomes more remote each day.

    [Jan 04, 2020] American Meddling in the Ukraine by Publius Tacitus

    Highly recommended!
    Ukraine is now a pawn in a big geopolitical game against Russia. Which somehow survived 90th when everybody including myself has written it off.
    That's why the USA, EU (Germany) and Russia pulling the country in different directions. But the victory of Ukrainian nationalists is not surprising and is not solely based on the US interferences (although the USA did lot in this direction) pursuit its geopolitical game against Russia. Distancing themselves from Russa is a universal trend in Post-Soviet space. And it often takes ugly forms.
    So Ukraine in not an exception here. It is part of the "rule". Essentially the dissolution of the USSR revised the result on WWII. And while the author correctly calls Ukrainian leader US stooges, they moved in this direction because they feel that it is necessary for maintaining the independence. In other words anti-Russian stance is considered by the Ukrainian elite as a a pre-condition for mainlining independence. Otherwise people like Parubiy would be in jail very soon. They are tolerated and even promoted because they are useful.
    It repeats the story of Baltic Republics, albeit with a significant time delay. There should be some social group that secure independence of the country and Ukrainian nationalists happen to be such a group. That's why Yanukovich supported them and Svoboda party (with predictable results).
    Notable quotes:
    "... The ideological fissures that are growing in the United States are beginning to resemble the warring camps that characterize the Ukrainian political world. The divide in Ukraine pits groups who are described as "right wing" and many are ideological descendants of real Nazis and Nazi sympathizers against groups with a strong affinity to Russia. This kind of gap cannot be bridged through conventional negotiations. ..."
    "... Jump ahead now to the April 2014 "uprising" of anti-Russian forces in the Ukraine (Maidan 2). The US was firmly on the side of the protesters, who ultimately succeeded in ousting the elected President. And who were helping lead this effort? ..."
    "... The US support, both overt and covert, for Ukrainian politicians is grounded in an anti-Soviet (now anti-Russian) ideology. We have convinced ourselves that Russia is hell bent on world domination. Therefore we must do whatever is necessary to stop Russia, which includes uncritical, blind support for elements in Ukraine that also detest the Russians. But in doing so we have closed our eyes to the filthy underbelly of the virulent anti-Semitism that lurks in western Ukraine. ..."
    "... US meddling in the Ukraine is astonishing in its breadth. It ranges from the fact that the wife of former President Viktor Yuschenko was an American citizen and former senior official in the US State Department. Do you think there would be no complaints if Melania Trump was born in Russia and had served in the Russian Foreign Ministry? Yet, most Americans are happily ignorant of such facts. ..."
    "... US interference was not confined to serendipitous relationships, such as the Yushchenko marriage. It also included the open and active funding of certain political groups and media outlets. The US State Department sent money through a variety of outlets. One of these was the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening aka CEPPS. ..."
    "... This is : ..."
    "... Count me as one of the people who is outraged by the hypocrisy and stupidity now on display in the United States. I am not talking about Trump. I am referring to the Republicans and Democrats and pundits and media mouthpieces who are fuming about Russian citizens writing on Facebook as one of the worst catastrophes since Pearl Harbor or 9-11. ..."
    "... There clearly is meddling going on in America's political landscape. But it isn't the Russian Government. No. There are foreign and domestic forces aligned who are keen on portraying Russia as a threat to world order that must be opposed by more defense spending and tougher sanctions. That is the propaganda that dominates the media in the United States these days. And that is truly dangerous to our nation's safety and freedom. ..."
    "... A CIA guy recently said the US only interferes to 'promote democracy' - tell that to Australia, Vietnam, Mexico, Chile, Congo, Russia, Ukraine...it's a long long list. ..."
    "... An independent Ukraine was also a project of German foreign policy after the Brest-Litowsk Treaty (the equivalent of the Versailles Treaty, only aimed at Russia) SO I have o wonder how much of the enthusiasm for Vicky Nuland's Israel friendly Nazi state-let (oh what irony!) is a product of Germany wanting to reassert itself in the east, using NATO solidarity as a fig leaf. Maybe they will make Ukraine import a lot o Africans "refugees" so that Soros' project of creating a brown Europe will be advanced in the Slavic sphere as well as the west. ..."
    "... The liberal party - who provides the prime-minister - EU leader Hans van Baalen and Belgian ex-prime minister Guy Verhostad held a controversial speech on the Maidan square in support of the protesters that the EU will support them. ..."
    "... I wouldn't put to much stress on Bandera having been a bad guy. His enemies were no better. They just won the war and the victors write history. The deeper problem of Ukraine is the fact that in the East of the country (and maybe even the majority of the country) Bandera is indeed regarded as a villain. But in the West he is a hero to this day. Even in Soviet times people from Western Ukraine were regarded as "fascists" by much of the rest of the country. No wonder as there were anti soviet partisans until late in the fifties. ..."
    "... "Prorussian" Kutshma turned into a Ukrainian "patriot" (such is the logic of statehood) and the same thing happened with Yanukovich. People forget that he would have signed an association agreement with Europe had Europe not refused because he was insufficiently "democratic". ..."
    "... But the West wanted it all. They wanted Ukraine firmly in the "Western" camp. Thereby they ripped the country apart. As a good friend of mine who has studied in Kiev in Soviet times remarked: to ask Ukraine to choose between East and West is like asking a child in divorce proceedings who it liked more: daddy or mummy? ..."
    "... A very interesting conversation between Victoria Nulland and ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, caught at picking the future rulers of liberated Ukraine : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QxZ8t3V_bk This is not meddling. This is a defensive (preemptive?) action against Russian agression. ..."
    "... I've never seen such an intense barrage of propaganda before in my life. America is fracturing apart like Ukraine. This is no coincidence. In both countries, oligarchs have seized power, the rule of law abandoned and there is a rush of corruption. ..."
    "... What we did to Ukraine is shameful in every way. A remember a video of a pallet of money being unloaded from a USG place at Kiev during Maidan 2. That's in addition to Nuland's bag of cookies. I always thought that one of the objectives of our meddling in Ukraine was to make Sevastopol into a NATO naval base. ..."
    "... Our leaders are the biggest hypocrites on the planet. The Ukraine was almost evenly divided between pro-Western and pro-Russian sides. Our government, rather than waiting for an election, assisted an armed rebellion against the elected pro-Russian government. Among the groups our government allied with in this endeavor were out and out Nazis. ..."
    Feb 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    The ideological fissures that are growing in the United States are beginning to resemble the warring camps that characterize the Ukrainian political world. The divide in Ukraine pits groups who are described as "right wing" and many are ideological descendants of real Nazis and Nazi sympathizers against groups with a strong affinity to Russia. This kind of gap cannot be bridged through conventional negotiations.

    Who is the United States government and media supporting? The Nazis . You think I'm joking. Here are the facts, but we must go back to World War II :

    When World War II began a large part of western Ukraine welcomed the German soldiers as liberators from the recently enforced Soviet rule and openly collaborated with the Germans. The Soviet leader, Stalin, imposed policies that caused the deaths of almost 7 million Ukrainians in the 1930s--an era known as the Holomodor).

    Ukrainian divisions, regiments and battalions were formed, such as SS Galizien, Nachtigal and Roland, and served under German leadership. In the first few weeks of the war, more than 80 thousand people from the Galizien region volunteered for the SS Galizien, which later known for its extreme cruelty towards Polish, Jewish and Russian people on the territory of Ukraine.

    Members of these military groups came mostly from the organization of Ukrainian nationalists aka the OUN, which was founded in 1929. It's leader was Stepan Bandera, known then and today for his extreme anti-semitic and anti-communist views.

    CIA documents just recently declassified show strong ties between US intelligence and Ukrainian nationalists since 1946.

    Jump ahead now to the April 2014 "uprising" of anti-Russian forces in the Ukraine (Maidan 2). The US was firmly on the side of the protesters, who ultimately succeeded in ousting the elected President. And who were helping lead this effort?

    Secretary of the Ukrainian National Security and Defence Council is Andriy Parubiy. Parubiy was the founder of the Social National Party of Ukraine, a fascist party styled on Hitler's Nazis, with membership restricted to ethnic Ukrainians.

    The Social National Party would go on to become Svoboda, the far-right nationalist party whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok was one of the three most high profile leaders of the Euromaidan protests. . . .

    Overseeing the armed forces alongside Parubiy as the Deputy Secretary of National Security is Dmytro Yarosh , the leader of the Right Sector – a group of hardline nationalist streetfighters, who previously boasted they were ready for armed struggle to free Ukraine.

    The US support, both overt and covert, for Ukrainian politicians is grounded in an anti-Soviet (now anti-Russian) ideology. We have convinced ourselves that Russia is hell bent on world domination. Therefore we must do whatever is necessary to stop Russia, which includes uncritical, blind support for elements in Ukraine that also detest the Russians. But in doing so we have closed our eyes to the filthy underbelly of the virulent anti-Semitism that lurks in western Ukraine.

    US meddling in the Ukraine is astonishing in its breadth. It ranges from the fact that the wife of former President Viktor Yuschenko was an American citizen and former senior official in the US State Department. Do you think there would be no complaints if Melania Trump was born in Russia and had served in the Russian Foreign Ministry? Yet, most Americans are happily ignorant of such facts.

    But Viktor Yushchenko is not an American who speaks a foreign language. He is very much a Ukrainian nationalist and steeped in the anti-Semitism that dominates the ideology of western Ukraine. During the final months of his Presidency, Yushchenko made the following declaration:

    In conclusion I would like to say something that is long awaited by the Ukrainian patriots for many years I have signed a decree for the unbroken spirit and standing for the idea of fighting for independent Ukraine. I declare Stepan Bandera a national hero of Ukraine.

    Without hesitation or shame, Yushchenko endorsed the legacy of Bandera, who had happily aligned with the Nazis in pursuit of his own nationalist goals. Those goals, however, did not include Jews. And here is the ultimate irony--Bandera was born in Austria, not the Ukraine. So much for ideological consistency.

    US interference was not confined to serendipitous relationships, such as the Yushchenko marriage. It also included the open and active funding of certain political groups and media outlets. The US State Department sent money through a variety of outlets. One of these was the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening aka CEPPS.

    This is : a USAID program with other National Endowment for Democracy-affiliated groups: the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, the International Republican Institute and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems. In 2010, the reported disbursement for CEPPS in Ukraine was nearly $5 million.

    The program's efforts are described on the USAID website as providing "training for political party activists and locally elected officials to improve communication with civic groups and citizens, and the development of NGO-led advocacy campaigns on electoral and political process issues."

    Anyone prepared to argue that it would be okay for Russia, through its Foreign Ministry, to contribute several million dollars for training party activists in the United States?

    What we do not know is how much money was being spent on covert activities directed and managed by the CIA. During the political upheaval in April 2014 (Maidan 2), there was this news item:

    Over the weekend, CIA director John Brennan travelled to Kiev, nobody knows exactly why, but some speculate that he intends to open US intelligence resources to Ukrainian leaders about real-time Russian military maneuvers. The US has, thus far, refrained from sharing such knowledge because Moscow is believed to have penetrated much of Ukraine's communications systems – and Washington isn't about to hand over its surveillance secrets to the Russians.

    Do you think Americans would be outraged if the head of Russia's version of the CIA, the SVR or FSB, traveled quietly to the United States to meet with Donald Trump prior to his election? I think that would qualify as meddling.

    Count me as one of the people who is outraged by the hypocrisy and stupidity now on display in the United States. I am not talking about Trump. I am referring to the Republicans and Democrats and pundits and media mouthpieces who are fuming about Russian citizens writing on Facebook as one of the worst catastrophes since Pearl Harbor or 9-11.

    There clearly is meddling going on in America's political landscape. But it isn't the Russian Government. No. There are foreign and domestic forces aligned who are keen on portraying Russia as a threat to world order that must be opposed by more defense spending and tougher sanctions. That is the propaganda that dominates the media in the United States these days. And that is truly dangerous to our nation's safety and freedom.

    Posted at 01:24 PM in Publius Tacitus , Russiagate | Permalink

    james , 23 February 2018 at 02:11 PM

    Good post pt.. thanks... i never knew ''the wife of former President Viktor Yushchenko was an American citizen and former senior official in the US State Department.'' That is informative.. i recall following this closely back in 2014.. the hypocrisy on display in the usa at present is truly amazing and frightening at the same time.. it appears that the public can be cowed very easily..
    Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg , 23 February 2018 at 02:29 PM
    good points well made.

    On the twitters, you would be accused of "whatabouttism" - which is the crime of excusing Putin's diabolism by pointing out American interference with the internal politics an elections of other nations. A CIA guy recently said the US only interferes to 'promote democracy' - tell that to Australia, Vietnam, Mexico, Chile, Congo, Russia, Ukraine...it's a long long list.

    An independent Ukraine was also a project of German foreign policy after the Brest-Litowsk Treaty (the equivalent of the Versailles Treaty, only aimed at Russia) SO I have o wonder how much of the enthusiasm for Vicky Nuland's Israel friendly Nazi state-let (oh what irony!) is a product of Germany wanting to reassert itself in the east, using NATO solidarity as a fig leaf. Maybe they will make Ukraine import a lot o Africans "refugees" so that Soros' project of creating a brown Europe will be advanced in the Slavic sphere as well as the west.

    Adrestia , 23 February 2018 at 02:39 PM
    It's not only the US. The EU borg are also meddling. In my country we had a referendum about Ukraine. The population voted "Against" on the question: "Are you for or against the Approval Act of the Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine?"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Ukraine%E2%80%93European_Union_Association_Agreement_referendum,_2016

    This was the only referendum that was done since it was implemented in 2015. A second one is being organized on the Intelligence and Security Services which has controversial parts with regard to access to internet traffic.

    This referendum will take place on March 21, 2018 and will probably be voted against because of the controversial elements (in part because there is still living memory of our Eastern neighbors in the second world war)

    https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet_op_de_inlichtingen-_en_veiligheidsdiensten_2017

    These 2 will probably be the last. Our house of representatives have voted yesterday to end the referendum law (with a majority vote of 76 out of 150 representatives!)

    So much for democracy. The reason stated that the referendum was controversial (probably because they voted against the EU borg). Interesting is that the proposal was done by the party that wanted the referendum as a principal point. This will almost certainly ensure that the little respect left for traditional parties is gone and they will not be able to get a majority next elections.

    The liberal party - who provides the prime-minister - EU leader Hans van Baalen and Belgian ex-prime minister Guy Verhostad held a controversial speech on the Maidan square in support of the protesters that the EU will support them.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIL1FWCIlu8

    Tom , 23 February 2018 at 03:22 PM

    I wouldn't put to much stress on Bandera having been a bad guy. His enemies were no better. They just won the war and the victors write history. The deeper problem of Ukraine is the fact that in the East of the country (and maybe even the majority of the country) Bandera is indeed regarded as a villain. But in the West he is a hero to this day. Even in Soviet times people from Western Ukraine were regarded as "fascists" by much of the rest of the country. No wonder as there were anti soviet partisans until late in the fifties.

    Even in the nineties anybody who travelled in Ukraine could feel the tension between East and West. The Russians were certainly aware of it and mindful not to rip the country apart they cut the Ukrainians an enormous amount of slack. Of course they supported "their" candidates and shoveled money into their insatiable throats. Only to be disappointed time and again. "Prorussian" Kutshma turned into a Ukrainian "patriot" (such is the logic of statehood) and the same thing happened with Yanukovich. People forget that he would have signed an association agreement with Europe had Europe not refused because he was insufficiently "democratic". Really the West should have been content with things as they were.

    But the West wanted it all. They wanted Ukraine firmly in the "Western" camp. Thereby they ripped the country apart. As a good friend of mine who has studied in Kiev in Soviet times remarked: to ask Ukraine to choose between East and West is like asking a child in divorce proceedings who it liked more: daddy or mummy?

    Really the West (not only the US -the Eu is also guilty) is to blame. It is long past time to get down from the high horse and stop spreading chaos and mayhem in the name of democracy,

    Jony Kanuck , 23 February 2018 at 03:27 PM
    Publius,

    An informative column. The coup & later developments soured me on the MSMedia. I'm an initiate into modern Russian history: NATO in the Ukraine = WW3!

    Some additional history:

    A Ukrainian nation did not exist until after WW1; one piece was Russian, another Polish and another Austrian. The Holodomor is exaggerated for political purposes; the actual number dead from famine appears to be 'only' 2M. It wasn't Soviet bloody mindedness, it was Soviet agricultural mismanagement; collectivizing agriculture drops production.

    They did this right before the great drought of the 1930s - remember the dustbowl. There was a famine in Kazakestan at the same time; 1.5M died.

    The Nazis raised 5 SS divisions out of the Ukraine. As the Germans were pushed back they ran night drops of ordnance into the Ukraine as long as they could. The Soviets had to carry on divisional level counter insurgency until 1956. After the war, Gehlen, Nazi intelligence czar, kept himself out of jail by turning over his files, routes & agents to the US. He also stoked anti Soviet paranoia.

    The Brits ended up with a whole Ukr SS division that they didn't want, so they gave it to Canada. Which is why Canada has such cranky policy around the Ukraine!

    bluetonga , 23 February 2018 at 03:28 PM
    A very interesting conversation between Victoria Nulland and ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, caught at picking the future rulers of liberated Ukraine : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QxZ8t3V_bk This is not meddling. This is a defensive (preemptive?) action against Russian agression.
    Publius Tacitus -> Tom... , 23 February 2018 at 03:31 PM
    Tom,

    I'm sure you'd like us to ignore Bandera. I bet he liked children and dogs. Just like Hitler. Bandera was a genuine bad guy. There is no rehabilitating that scourge on society. Nice try though.

    Publius Tacitus -> bluetonga... , 23 February 2018 at 03:36 PM
    I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that your final comment is sarcasm. When you have two senior US Government officials who will and will not constitute a foreign government, you have gone beyond meddling. It is worse.
    VietnamVet , 23 February 2018 at 03:57 PM
    PT

    The media is hysterical. Today, Putin's Facebook Bot Collaborator contacted the Kremlin before his mercenaries attacked Americans in Syria.

    I've never seen such an intense barrage of propaganda before in my life. America is fracturing apart like Ukraine. This is no coincidence. In both countries, oligarchs have seized power, the rule of law abandoned and there is a rush of corruption.

    A World War is near. The realists are gone. The Moguls are pushing Donald Trump pull the trigger. Either in Syria with an assault to destroy Hezbollah (Iran) for good or American trainers going over the top of trenches in Donbass in a centennial attack of the dead.

    The Twisted Genius , 23 February 2018 at 03:59 PM
    Publius Tacitus,

    Hallelujah and jubilation! We're in full agreement on this subject. What we did to Ukraine is shameful in every way. A remember a video of a pallet of money being unloaded from a USG place at Kiev during Maidan 2. That's in addition to Nuland's bag of cookies. I always thought that one of the objectives of our meddling in Ukraine was to make Sevastopol into a NATO naval base.

    I would definitely want to see a full account of what support we provided to the nazi thugs of Svoboda and Pravy Sektor. We have a long history of meddling, at least twice as long as the Soviet Union/Russia. But that does not mean we should stop investigating the Russian interference in our 2016 election. Just stop hyperventilating over it. It no more deserves risking a war than our continuing mutual espionage.

    TimmyB , 23 February 2018 at 04:08 PM
    Our leaders are the biggest hypocrites on the planet. The Ukraine was almost evenly divided between pro-Western and pro-Russian sides. Our government, rather than waiting for an election, assisted an armed rebellion against the elected pro-Russian government. Among the groups our government allied with in this endeavor were out and out Nazis.

    As a result of this rebellion, the Russian majority in Crimea overwhelming voted to leave the Ukraine and rejoin Russia, which they had been part of for over 150-years. While our government continues to provide military aid to Israel, which used force of arms take over the West Bank, it imposed sanctions against Russia when the people of Crimea voted to join their former countrymen. Mind boggling.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Trump Is Doing the Bidding of Washington's Most Vile Cabal

    Highly recommended!
    Now we understand that it was Adelson money talking for Trump, when he campaigned in 2016 on the platform of hostility of Iran and abandonment of the nuclear deal.
    While derail who and how ordered the assassination, one thing it clear: Trump no longer deserve re-election. He is yet another Hillary now. Any of Dem opponents excluding Biden, who is dead fish in any case, are better then Trump.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump campaigned on belligerence toward Iran and trashing the Obama-led Iran nuclear deal, and he has followed through on those threats, filling his administration with the most vile, hawkish figures in the U.S. national security establishment. After appointing notorious warmonger John Bolton as national security adviser, Trump fired him last September. But despite reports that Trump had soured on Bolton because of his interventionist posture toward Iran, Bolton's firing merely opened the door for the equally belligerent Mike Pompeo to take over the administration's Iran policy at the State Department. ..."
    "... Now Pompeo is the public face of the Suleimani assassination, while for his part, the fired Bolton didn't want to be left out of the gruesome victory lap: ..."
    "... Trump, who had no idea who Qassim Suleimani was until it was explained to him live on the radio by conservative journalist Hugh Hewitt in 2015, didn't seem to need many details to know that he wanted to crush the Iranian state. ..."
    "... Much as the neoconservatives came to power in 2001 after the election of George W. Bush with the goal of regime change in Iraq, Trump in his bumbling way assembled a team of extremists who viewed him as their best chance of wiping the Islamic Republic of Iran off the map. ..."
    "... Assassination has been a central component of U.S. policy for many decades, though it has been whitewashed and normalized throughout history, most recently with Obama's favored term, "targeted killings." ..."
    "... While many Democratic politicians are offering their concerns about the consequences of Suleimani's assassination, they are prefacing it with remarks about how atrocious Suleimani was. Framing his assassination that way ultimately benefits the extremist cabal of foreign policy hawks who agitated for this very moment to arrive. There's no justification for assassinating foreign officials, including Suleimani. This is an aggressive act of war, an offensive act committed by the U.S. on the sovereign territory of a third country, Iraq. This assassination and the potential for a war it raises are, unfortunately, consistent with more than half a century of U.S. aggression against Iran and Iraq. ..."
    "... Five months ago, California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna offered an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have prohibited this very type of action, but it was removed from the final bill. "Any member who voted for the NDAA -- a blank check -- can't now express dismay that Trump may have launched another war in the Middle East," Khanna wrote on Twitter after Suleimani's assassination. "My Amendment, which was stripped, would have cut off $$ for any offensive attack against Iran including against officials like Soleimani." ..."
    "... Trump is responsible for whatever comes next. But time and again, the worst foreign policy atrocities of his presidency have been enabled by the very politicians who claim to want him removed from office ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | theintercept.com

    While the media focus for three years of the Trump presidency has centered around "Russia collusion" and impeachment, the most dangerous collusion of all was happening right out in the open -- the Trump/Saudi/Israel/UAE drive to war with Iran .

    On August 3, 2016 -- just three months before Donald Trump would win the Electoral College vote and ascend to power -- Blackwater founder Erik Prince arranged a meeting at Trump Tower. For decades, Prince had been agitating for a war with Iran and, as early as 2010, had developed a fantastical proposal for using mercenaries to wage it.

    At this meeting was George Nader, an American citizen who had a long history of being a quiet emissary for the United States in the Middle East. Nader, who had also worked for Blackwater and Prince, was a convicted pedophile in the Czech Republic and is facing similar allegations in the United States. Nader worked as an adviser for the Emirati royals and has close ties to Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi crown prince. Join Our Newsletter Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you. I'm in There was also an Israeli at the Trump Tower meeting: Joel Zamel. He was there supposedly pitching a multimillion-dollar social media manipulation campaign to the Trump team. Zamel's company, Psy-Group, boasts of employing former Israeli intelligence operatives. Nader and Zamel were joined by Donald Trump Jr. According to the New York Times, the purpose of the meeting was "primarily to offer help to the Trump team, and it forged relationships between the men and Trump insiders that would develop over the coming months, past the election and well into President Trump's first year in office."

    One major common goal ran through the agendas of all the participants in this Trump Tower meeting: regime change in Iran. Trump campaigned on belligerence toward Iran and trashing the Obama-led Iran nuclear deal, and he has followed through on those threats, filling his administration with the most vile, hawkish figures in the U.S. national security establishment. After appointing notorious warmonger John Bolton as national security adviser, Trump fired him last September. But despite reports that Trump had soured on Bolton because of his interventionist posture toward Iran, Bolton's firing merely opened the door for the equally belligerent Mike Pompeo to take over the administration's Iran policy at the State Department.

    Now Pompeo is the public face of the Suleimani assassination, while for his part, the fired Bolton didn't want to be left out of the gruesome victory lap:

    Congratulations to all involved in eliminating Qassem Soleimani. Long in the making, this was a decisive blow against Iran's malign Quds Force activities worldwide. Hope this is the first step to regime change in Tehran.

    -- John Bolton (@AmbJohnBolton) January 3, 2020
    Trump, who had no idea who Qassim Suleimani was until it was explained to him live on the radio by conservative journalist Hugh Hewitt in 2015, didn't seem to need many details to know that he wanted to crush the Iranian state.

    Much as the neoconservatives came to power in 2001 after the election of George W. Bush with the goal of regime change in Iraq, Trump in his bumbling way assembled a team of extremists who viewed him as their best chance of wiping the Islamic Republic of Iran off the map.

    While Barack Obama provided crucial military and intelligence support for Saudi Arabia's scorched earth campaign in Yemen, which killed untold numbers of civilians, Trump escalated that mass murder in a blatant effort to draw Iran militarily into a conflict. That was the agenda of the gulf monarchies and Israel, and it coincided neatly with the neoconservative dreams of overthrowing the Iranian government. As the U.S. and Saudi Arabia intensified their military attacks in Yemen, Iran began to insert itself more and more forcefully into Yemeni affairs, though Tehran was careful not to be tricked into offering this Trump/Saudi/UAE/Israel coalition a justification for wider war.

    Protesters shout slogans against the United States and Israel as they hold posters with the image of top Iranian commander Qassim Suleimani, who was killed in a U.S. airstrike in Iraq, and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani during a demonstration in the Kashmiri town of Magam on Jan. 3, 2020.

    Photo: Tauseef Mustafa/AFP/Getty Images The assassination of Suleimani -- a popular figure in Iran who is viewed as one of the major drivers of ISIS's defeat in Iraq -- was one of only a handful of actions that the U.S. could have taken that would almost certainly lead to a war with Iran. This assassination, reportedly ordered directly by Trump, was advocated by the most dangerous and extreme players in the U.S. foreign policy establishment with that exact intent.

    Assassination has been a central component of U.S. policy for many decades, though it has been whitewashed and normalized throughout history, most recently with Obama's favored term, "targeted killings." The U.S. Congress has intentionally never legislated the issue of assassination. Lawmakers have avoided even defining the word "assassination." While every president since Gerald Ford has upheld an executive order banning assassinations by U.S. personnel, they have each carried out assassinations with little to no congressional outcry. Read Our Complete Coverage The Iran Cables In 1976, following Church Committee recommendations regarding allegations of assassination plots carried out by U.S. intelligence agencies, Ford signed an executive order banning "political assassination." Jimmy Carter subsequently issued a new order strengthening the prohibition by dropping the word "political" and extending it to include persons "employed by or acting on behalf of the United States." In 1981, Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12333, which remains in effect today. The language seems clear enough: "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."

    As I wrote in August 2017, reflecting on our Drone Papers series from two years earlier, "The Obama administration, by institutionalizing a policy of drone-based killings of individuals judged to pose a threat to national security -- without indictment or trial, through secret processes -- bequeathed to our political culture, and thus to Donald Trump, a policy of assassination, in direct violation of Executive Order 12333 and, moreover, the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. To date, at least seven U.S. citizens are known to have been killed under this policy, including a 16-year-old boy. Only one American, the radical preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, was said to have been the 'intended target' of a strike."

    There's no justification for assassinating foreign officials, including Suleimani.
    While many Democratic politicians are offering their concerns about the consequences of Suleimani's assassination, they are prefacing it with remarks about how atrocious Suleimani was. Framing his assassination that way ultimately benefits the extremist cabal of foreign policy hawks who agitated for this very moment to arrive. There's no justification for assassinating foreign officials, including Suleimani. This is an aggressive act of war, an offensive act committed by the U.S. on the sovereign territory of a third country, Iraq. This assassination and the potential for a war it raises are, unfortunately, consistent with more than half a century of U.S. aggression against Iran and Iraq.

    For three years, many Democrats have told the country that Trump is the gravest threat to a democratic system we have faced. And yet many leading Democrats have voted consistently to give Trump unprecedented military budgets and surveillance powers.

    Five months ago, California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna offered an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have prohibited this very type of action, but it was removed from the final bill. "Any member who voted for the NDAA -- a blank check -- can't now express dismay that Trump may have launched another war in the Middle East," Khanna wrote on Twitter after Suleimani's assassination. "My Amendment, which was stripped, would have cut off $$ for any offensive attack against Iran including against officials like Soleimani."

    Trump is responsible for whatever comes next. But time and again, the worst foreign policy atrocities of his presidency have been enabled by the very politicians who claim to want him removed from office . Wait! Before you go on about your day, ask yourself: How likely is it that the story you just read would have been produced by a different news outlet if The Intercept hadn't done it? Consider what the world of media would look like without The Intercept. Who would hold party elites accountable to the values they proclaim to have? How many covert wars, miscarriages of justice, and dystopian technologies would remain hidden if our reporters weren't on the beat? The kind of reporting we do is essential to democracy, but it is not easy, cheap, or profitable. The Intercept is an independent nonprofit news outlet. We don't have ads, so we depend on our members -- 35,000 and counting -- to help us hold the powerful to account. Joining is simple and doesn't need to cost a lot: You can become a sustaining member for as little as $3 or $5 a month. That's all it takes to support the journalism you rely on.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Will Trump welcome the ejection of the US from Iraq - He should by Colonel Lang

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Somehow the Ziocons around Trump have forgotten that the present state of Iraq refused to yield to Obama's demands for a SOFA and in effect expelled the US from the country. ..."
    "... The Iraqi parliament is going to vote in emergency session over the issue of the death of al-Muhandis. Will they vote to expel the US from their country? ..."
    "... What a lot of commentators seem to overlook is that America has basically declared war on Iraq, while our soldiers are hosted on joint bases with Iraqi soldiers. ..."
    "... "We need to get out of Iraq and Syria now. That is the only way that we're going to prevent ourselves from being dragged into this quagmire, deeper and deeper into a war with Iran." Tulsi Gabbard. ..."
    "... Assassination of generals, one from an allied country, one from a country with which we have no declared war, and both assassinations performed on the territory of an allied, sovereign country without permission? This is piracy. Why should anyone trust the word of a country which does not honor the most basic of international law? ..."
    "... Will we go if they vote that way? I'll go with no. The Neocons desperately want us in Iraq to protect Israel and stick it to Iran as much as possible. They have a laundry list of prepared arguments and we have the dumbest, most compliant, state media in recorded history. We also have a President who believes that intnl law is for weaklings and loves saying 'take the oil'. ..."
    "... Take a look at this interview to David Petraeus by FP on yesterday´s summary executions...What you make of this? https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03 He sounds as if he were the brain behind this operation on summary executions..along some other think tankers.. ..."
    "... Whoever is President we will have war. The President is just a feckless puppet controlled by the Zionist. I'll never vote again. It's a waste of time and a farce. Hillary or Donald no different just a matter of timing. Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. Bush II the simpleton and his fairy tale WMD lie. I've lost all respect for whatever "the republic" is suppose to be. On top of that the masses are too stupid for democracy to work. ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Qasem Soleimani was an Iranian soldier. He lived by the sword and died by the sword. He met a soldier's destiny. It is being said that he was a BAD MAN. Absurd! To say that he was a BAD MAN because he fought us as well as the Sunni jihadis is simply infantile. Were all those who fought the US BAD MEN? How about Gentleman Johhny Burgoyne? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Sitting Bull? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Aguinaldo? Another BAD MAN? Let us not be juvenile.

    The Iraqi PMU commander who died with Soleimani was Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. He was a member of a Shia militia that had been integrated into the Iraqi armed forces. IOW, we killed an Iraqi general. We killed him without the authorization of the supposedly sovereign state of Iraq.

    We created the present government of Iraq through the farcical "purple thumb" elections. That government holds a seat in the UN General Assembly and is a sovereign entity in international law in spite of Trump's tweet today that said among other things that we have "paid" Iraq billions of US dollars. To the Arabs, this statement that brands them as hirelings of the US is close to the ultimate in insult.

    Somehow the Ziocons around Trump have forgotten that the present state of Iraq refused to yield to Obama's demands for a SOFA and in effect expelled the US from the country.

    The Iraqi parliament is going to vote in emergency session over the issue of the death of al-Muhandis. Will they vote to expel the US from their country?

    Will we go if they vote that way? We should. If we do not, then we will be exposed as imperialist hypocrites.

    Trump should welcome such a vote. He wants to get out of the ME? What greater opportunity could we have to do so?

    Let us leave if invited to go. Let the oh, so clever locals deal with their own hatreds and rivalries. pl

    phodges , 03 January 2020 at 02:20 PM

    What a lot of commentators seem to overlook is that America has basically declared war on Iraq, while our soldiers are hosted on joint bases with Iraqi soldiers.
    Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 02:39 PM
    Thank you, Pat!

    But...Elora guesses you are being rhetorical here...because... if he would have died by the sword...would not have he had the opportunity to defend himself against his enemy/opponent?
    Instead...he was caught on surprise...unarmed...and hit by an overwhelming force...he was going to some funerals...

    Cameron Kelley , 03 January 2020 at 02:56 PM
    Thank you, Colonel. We don't know, we don't care, but we can kill - that's not a recipe for success.
    Jack , 03 January 2020 at 04:09 PM
    "We need to get out of Iraq and Syria now. That is the only way that we're going to prevent ourselves from being dragged into this quagmire, deeper and deeper into a war with Iran." Tulsi Gabbard.

    https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/1213168223127949313?s=21

    Would we get out if Iraq asks us to do so? I don't think so. There will be a hue & cry about appeasement of terror!

    ex PFC Chuck -> Jack... , 03 January 2020 at 05:25 PM
    It took Tulsi about 18 hours to get that brief statement out. Can't help but wonder what that delay was all about.
    Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 04:14 PM
    Some impressive images worth thousands words...just to remember everybody that this man was an appreciated human being...doing his duty....for his motherland...and his God....
    Elora Danan said in reply to Elora Danan... , 03 January 2020 at 05:07 PM
    To better understand the pain of that elderly yazidi woman in the video, some testimony by Rania Khalek on the role of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis ( the other militia commander killed who is being as well slandered as terrorist along Soleimani ...) in stopping yazidi genocide in Iraq when nobody else was giving a damn, less any help, for this people...

    https://twitter.com/RaniaKhalek/status/1213198497668833280

    divadab , 03 January 2020 at 04:17 PM
    Assassination of generals, one from an allied country, one from a country with which we have no declared war, and both assassinations performed on the territory of an allied, sovereign country without permission? This is piracy. Why should anyone trust the word of a country which does not honor the most basic of international law?

    And am I alone to be disgusted to see the senior members of our government lie blatantly and constantly, when they're not fellating the nearest likudnik....

    Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 04:20 PM
    Tulsi...may be our last hope...

    https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1213168223127949313

    Tulsi for president!

    ISL , 03 January 2020 at 04:27 PM
    Dear Colonel, seems you find yourself in Tulsi's (good) company.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=kToUJaOVgTA&feature=emb_logo

    prawnik , 03 January 2020 at 04:32 PM
    Trump should, but he won't. Might as well quote Bible verses to a robber.
    turcopolier , 03 January 2020 at 04:38 PM
    ISL

    I have been giving her money every month.

    Factotum , 03 January 2020 at 04:57 PM
    We go where we are wanted and appreciated. We have no skin in Iraq. Build the Wall and protect our own borders. Concentrate our resources on cyber-security.
    A. Pols , 03 January 2020 at 05:48 PM
    Tulsi makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately that disqualifies her for the presidency, not because she couldn't execute the functions of the presidency, but because neither the party apparatchiks nor the voters would give her the chance. These days either nationalistic claptrap or promises of more freebies are what carry the day. Quelle domage, eh?

    As for the Iraqi parliament voting to expel U.S. forces? That's an interesting question. If they did, they'd better vote to expel the "den of spies" at the embassy and insist on our having a normal sized legation (as all countries would be well advised to do). But if they do, would we leave? I personally doubt it even though it would be best if we did and let the Iraqis do what they will, which would probably be reverting back to some sort of strongman govt, of a type more suited to their cultural traditions and inclinations. It's high time we afforded the rest of the world the type of cultural and political autonomy we claim to revere so much.

    So, we leave? A good thing for us and for them and the world at large.

    Or, we don't? Then we expose the truth the rest of the world already knows, but we at least expose the truth to our own people who have been fed a steady diet of mendacious BS about what we've been doing over there all these years.

    That attack on the "airport limo" vehicles leaving Baghdad airport sure took some nerve on our part to think that we could sell something like that...

    And, did Trump actually order it, or did someone else in the MIC order it first and Trump laid claim to it afterwards? Uncle Joe, if he had ordered it, would have afterwards announced the execution of a fall guy and denied any complicity! If Trump didn't order it, he should throw whoever did under the bus instead of crowing and wrapping himself in the flag. I wonder about what actually happened in planning this hit job on prominent military people on their way to a funeral for 31 people who may or may not have had anything whatsoever to do with the death of a single American mercenary in Iraq in an attack by persons unknown on a small outpost.

    J , 03 January 2020 at 06:01 PM
    It's times like this I wish I was a fly on the wall, listening to what the Russian General Staff conversations regarding this assassination are at this moment.

    Trump IMHO would do well to seek Putin's counsel on how to exit the corner that Trump has backed US into. While this spells problems for our US, it also creates additional problems for Russia in the ways that could cause them MAJOR problem as well as in a full blown Mideast War with many players in the mix. Not a good mix either.

    Israel can't handle a full blown Mideast War, no matter how much their narcissistic national psyche thinks they can. Israel is a mere postage stamp in a sea of rage, which tsunami waves could very easily consume them. Sheldon Adelson and his Likud/NEOCON blowhards have no concept of what is on the short horizon, that can go one way or the other.

    I'm glad I'm retired in this instance. My glass of bourbon is more palatable than the grains of Mideast sand that fixing to get stirred up.

    God help us all.

    Pat, why does the US military always get left with the shit-storms to clean up after? Why?

    Christian J Chuba , 03 January 2020 at 06:32 PM
    Will we go if they vote that way? I'll go with no. The Neocons desperately want us in Iraq to protect Israel and stick it to Iran as much as possible. They have a laundry list of prepared arguments and we have the dumbest, most compliant, state media in recorded history. We also have a President who believes that intnl law is for weaklings and loves saying 'take the oil'.

    I can hear the talking points already ...
    1. 'Obama made the same mistake and it created ISIS.'
    2. 'Iran has taken over Iraq, it's not a legitimate request' (look at how we selectively recognize govts in South America and no one blinks).
    3. 'Iran will use Iraq as a base to attack us' (yeah, its about 100 miles closer).

    I can't stand what we have become, the jackals have taken over and the MSM attacks the very few who are not jackals.

    turcopolier , 03 January 2020 at 07:05 PM
    A Pols

    OK. Who do you think would have had the power to order the strike? Not the CIA, the military would not accept such an order. Not the chairman of the JCS, he is not in the chain of command. That leaves Esper, SECDEF. Really? He looks like a putschist to you? You are ignorant of the American government.

    Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 07:18 PM
    Take a look at this interview to David Petraeus by FP on yesterday´s summary executions...What you make of this? https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03 He sounds as if he were the brain behind this operation on summary executions..along some other think tankers..
    Harlan Easley , 03 January 2020 at 07:20 PM
    Whoever is President we will have war. The President is just a feckless puppet controlled by the Zionist. I'll never vote again. It's a waste of time and a farce. Hillary or Donald no different just a matter of timing. Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. Bush II the simpleton and his fairy tale WMD lie. I've lost all respect for whatever "the republic" is suppose to be. On top of that the masses are too stupid for democracy to work.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Talking about revenge is stupid and juvenile: Iran needs to pull back and focus on making themselves stronger in economy and technology and for strong ties with other responsible players

    Highly recommended!
    Iran should probably be very careful not to overplay his hand. The time in working it its favor.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Lavrov said in June 2019 "Those who rely on inciting tension between Arabs and Persians, Arabs and Kurds, and inside the Arab world – between the Sunnis and the Shiites, are not guided by the interests of the peoples of the region, but by their own narrow geopolitical motives." ..."
    "... USA has not legally declared war on Iran. This is murder. Murder of an Iranian Government employee. He may also have been covered by a diplomatic passport. If he is (I don't know) this has major repercussions for Diplomatic immunity. ..."
    "... The USA 'new' unilateral principle is that any official in any country may now be murdered by the USA government at the whim of the President of the day. ..."
    "... The United States launched a war of aggression, the supreme crime, upon Iraq in 2003, based on blatant lies, and are still there. Prior to that, they helped foment the war between Iraq and Iran, then attacked Iraq in 1991, and on top of the overt warfare there was the economic sanctions warfare. ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    powerandpeople , Jan 4 2020 18:43 utc | 27

    The subject is 'revenge' and what Iranian authorities may or may not do.

    The 'big picture' is re-building the security (and well-being) of ordinary Iranian, Syrian, Iraqi, Yemeni people - and all other decent people of the Middle East and beyond.

    Tribal reaction is deep and strong. We all know and experience that. But to achieve 'the big picture' the first instinctive hind-brain reaction must be set aside - or at least, allowed to 'recede'. Of course there must be re-balancing, which carries with it a feeling of vindication, if not revenge.

    Lavrov said in June 2019 "Those who rely on inciting tension between Arabs and Persians, Arabs and Kurds, and inside the Arab world – between the Sunnis and the Shiites, are not guided by the interests of the peoples of the region, but by their own narrow geopolitical motives."

    Well the USA Government is guilty must apologise publicly and humbly. Compensation must be paid.

    Dialogue started.

    USA has not legally declared war on Iran. This is murder. Murder of an Iranian Government employee. He may also have been covered by a diplomatic passport. If he is (I don't know) this has major repercussions for Diplomatic immunity.

    The USA 'new' unilateral principle is that any official in any country may now be murdered by the USA government at the whim of the President of the day.

    Clearly, decent people in USA need to campaign to limit Presidential powers. Revenge creates a spiral of escalation which becomes a vortex of destruction, perhaps global. How does that improve peoples daily lives?

    The duty of government is ensuring the security of its people. Does 'revenge' achieve this in the years ahead? It is the instinctive option, yes, but is it the BEST long term option?

    In the end, parties must meet, compensation paid, and the hard slow work of building acceptable inter-state relations based on rule of law and the UN Charter re-commenced.

    In my view, there is no other option that meets the long term need of ordinary people.

    But building this requires special people. Not wreckers and haters.

    Will the urgency of the situation see them emerge?

    jared , Jan 4 2020 23:05 utc | 94

    @ Posted by: psychohistorian | Jan 4 2020 22:18 utc | 84

    Thank you. Someone making sense. Most are talking about this like it's halftime in a sporting match - completely juvenile.

    Iran needs to pull back and focus on making themselves stronger in economy and technology and for strong ties with other responsible players. They have opportunities with many countries which are increasingly disenchanted with the west. And the west is headed for an economic beating - which explains the desperate behavior.

    Even if Iran is very careful in their behavior Irael is going to continue to press for war - the psychotic fears most those that he has attacked.

    But maybe with careful behavior and planning and efforts to repair and maintain ties the Iraninans could be ready for that eventuality.

    max , Jan 4 2020 23:27 utc | 104
    Espen and Trump have made it clear that they will hold Iran responsible for whatever may happen in the region and that they will strike in response or preemptively. Essentially, that makes the real Iranian reaction largely irrelevant. And Israel could create a false flag incident #a la USS Liberty. Or some rogue groups that Iran cannot control might attack US troops or installations. Whether by design or accident, there will be a pretext to base another military strike against Iran on. And then another, until a full blown US-Iran war erupts which Bibi, Lieberman & co so desperately want.
    Years of relentless demonization of Iran in the US and the UK have brainwashed large swaths of the population. They will accept a war against Iran, albeit reluctantly, as long as not too many Americans get killed in its wake.

    I don't believe for a second that the US would "accept" a limited retaliation. They will jump at any opportunity. Lindsey Graham stands between Trump and impeachment and that warmonger is on record for seeking to bomb Iran's oil refineries. Incidentally, he was the only senator who Trump consulted prior to the murder. Could well be that Graham is right now the real P0TUS , at least until the senate has voted on impeachment. Conveniently, pelosi has put the impeachment on hold, thereby prolonging that situation. Coincidence? I don't think so.

    Maybe the Israelis/neocons fear that Trump might lose in November and want to start the war while Bibi's favorite lapdog is still P0TUS. Not, that the Democrats are peacelovers (except for Sanders and Gabbard). But they might be more afraid of a negative reaction by the electorate.
    Murdering Suleimani NOW was not some hasty decision without a plan. I am afraid, it was done to get THE ultimate war in the middle east going, no matter if and how much restraint Iran will show.

    I do think, btw that Trump blew his reelection by killing Suleimani. Another warmonger will assuredly take his place.

    tspoon , Jan 4 2020 23:45 utc | 110
    After reading what Magnier has to say, a reasonable guess is that although emotions are running high currently, Irans leadership will likely concentrate omn the work that must be done during such a period, which is to (attempt to) influence the Iraqi parliamentry vote on the continued presence of United States forces. As some have pointed out, this may lead to a US retreat to the Kurdish areas, but even that can only be considered a victory, with consequent practically free movement of Iranian military supplies to their allies in Syria and Lebanon. With this development hopefully secured there is then plenty of time to precisely calibrate any further responce to a level where dignity is preserved, without necessarily bringing the wider ME area into further strife. Any waiting period is also useful in further building up capability where needed, specifically in the case where US aggression continues as it has done so far. US leaders seem not to appreciate that their showy applications of force don't win them friends locally, and could eventually succeed in unifying Iraq in a way Iran never could on its own.
    juliania , Jan 5 2020 0:05 utc | 115
    This may have been referenced before, and b's previous post begins with a description of the importance of Soleimani, but here is a further link for those who are still in doubt as to his significance for everyone in the region:

    qasem-soleimani-was-an-absolute-hero-and-his-death-is-both-a-travesty-and-a-tragedy/

    I will also add from a post by Active Patriot at the Saker site: "...if Iran is a friend and ally to Iraq and Syria they would not craft a response which drags either of those 2 countries deeper into more war and hardship."

    Really?? , Jan 5 2020 0:19 utc | 119
    Circe #72

    Solameini's martyrdom is surely recognized as such by all in the ME who have suffered and are suffering the century-long occupation/meddling/manipulating/lying that Western powers have inflicted on the whole ME since before the Great War---now with the USA in the lead. (One of Churchill's war aims in WW1 was to destroy the Ottoman Empire and grab as much of it as Britain could grab. Then of course there was the Balfour Declaration crime.)

    What is the "purpose" of martyrdom if it is not to galvanize action of some kind? To galvanize a dramatic quantum leap in consciousness of the meaning of the martyr's sacrifice---of his martyrdom. Surely Solameini will be seen to have died *for* something. For what?

    Perhaps to inspire a new setting aside of existing local conflicts to form an effective front to *eject* the foreign virus from the body of the whole ME? To create a new coalition among all citizens of all faiths in all of the besieged ME countries to oust the "crusaders"? Didn't Nasser aspire to take charge of his region via the United *Arab* Republics? What about United Sovereign Nations from the Levant to the Hindu Kush. And, make things uncomfortable for Erdogan if he continues to host American Air Force?

    Just wondering.

    Also, what is Kurdish reaction to this murder? Kurds seem to be an element standing in the way of unity of purpose in the ME.

    Dr Wellington Yueh , Jan 5 2020 0:22 utc | 120
    OT but I think timely:

    1) Get a list of your favorite sites, then do a DNS lookup on their names, and put those IP addresses in a HOSTS file . If a site appears to go offline, try the IP address. If that doesn't work either, well...

    2) I have an old laptop that has wifi and an ethernet port, and it runs an older version of Linux Mint. I wish I had an older version, and I may start looking. The more recent the operating system (any!), the more likely it will have backdoors or some other 'critter' running about and working against you.

    3) If you have the hardware and some friends nearby, start an out-of-band neighborhood network. This, as I envision it (with limited oracular ability, mind you), can be like the Little Free Library - just an accumulation of stuff each person has saved over the years, or whatever can be obtained, and scanned if necessary. Wifi can work for this short-term, but plan to bury multiple cables eventually. DO NOT EVER (knowingly) CONNECT THIS NETWORK TO THE INTERNET!!!

    4) Start planning for long-term storage of important books. Niven's novel Lucifer's Hammer describes one character's efforts in this direction - he sunk a huge library of important 'civilization cranking' books in a cesspool on a neighbor's property.

    There's more, but we've a broad spectrum of things to consider at the moment, so I'll not hog the thread.


    As a matter of standing up and showing some jackasses in this thread that US citizens aren't all Rambo...

    I, Thomas James Kenney, hereby publicly state that it is my opinion the only way out of this mess (and the only chance to save some semblance of a country) is to very publicly try and imprison these vermin for high treason. They have committed an act that runs counter to every attempted description of civilized behavior ever written.

    It is also my considered opinion that it is not necessary for Iran to do anything at all. Simply stay the course. We are almost bled out in this disintegrating 'republic', and people around me are conversing about ways to disconnect from some of the toxic facets of this society. There is not much support for a war, despite what the 'required 20%' continue to scream.

    Robert Snefjella , Jan 5 2020 0:22 utc | 121
    The United States launched a war of aggression, the supreme crime, upon Iraq in 2003, based on blatant lies, and are still there. Prior to that, they helped foment the war between Iraq and Iran, then attacked Iraq in 1991, and on top of the overt warfare there was the economic sanctions warfare.

    The death and maiming and poisoning of millions of Iraqis has been the American contribution to Iraq, over the last several decades. What for? How has this helped the United States? Or Europe? The main advocates for this supreme criminality has been the Israel lobby, Israel, and the supporters of Israel.

    The American Apache helicopters are still buzzing around over Baghdad, dealing out terror and intimidation and death. The murder by the United States of yet more Iraqi soldiers and officials recently has been largely absent from the propaganda narratives. But could those be 'the final straw'?

    As far as Trump's 52 target threat, this comes after the apparent please don't escalate and we'll make a deal - good cop-bad cop routine.

    The 52 number was used to remind mind-controlled Americans that the evil Iranians outrageously took 52 Americans hostage. American's don't just take people hostage; they give them orange suits and torture them, unless they kill them. Apart from murdering and maiming by the millions, they even stage fictional killings, like Osama bin laden, to entertain the zombies, and stick out their chests, hand out medals and the like.

    Really?? , Jan 5 2020 0:28 utc | 124
    Juliania #95

    Just a reminder: Iran is not an Arabic country.
    And many non-Arabs and non-Muslims live in ME countries (I am not counting Is as an ME country in this context).
    Which is why I express hope of perhaps a broader regional coalition.

    Inkan1969 , Jan 5 2020 0:35 utc | 131

    The shooting down of flight 655 was a criminal act of manslaughter that should've brought charges against the people responsible. But does b really consider destroying another plane of civilians a justified retribution?

    I wonder if Putin will force Trump to stop the escalation and show remorse to Iran before any revenge happens.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Oh, I thought last night's peace-loving strike was supposed to prevent additional warfare

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    https://t.co/Z2S3WQaz7L

    -- Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 3, 2020

    Crush the cube , 3 minutes ago link

    This will end great, a fucked up circus called congress who hasn't had the balls to do their job and legally declare war for nearly three decades, and a president who can't even defend himself from a gang of thugs staging a direct coup against him in his own government. What could possibly go wrong?

    me or you , 3 minutes ago link

    Weird from a guy who dodged military service.

    NubianSundance , 9 minutes ago link

    Yep, Trumpt got into office by weaving a web of lies to a naive public, but the us remains the pre eminent military power and can do what it likes.

    [Jan 04, 2020] On Thucydides quote "the strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must

    Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Andrei Martyanov (aka SmoothieX12) -> Ishmael Zechariah... ,03 January 2020 at 11:20 PM

    The second are the immortal words of Thucydides: "the strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must."

    Yeah, I heard Thucydides had some issues with resolution of uncertainties for targeting, especially for stand-off precision guided weapons. Plus there were some issues with long range air-defense systems in Greece in times of Plato and Socrates. You know, GLONASS wasn't fully operational, plus EW was a little bit scratchy.

    So, surely, it all fully applies today, especially in choke points. Plus those Athenians they were not exactly good with RPGs and anti-Armour operations. Other than that, Thucydides nailed it.

    Something To Think About -> Ishmael Zechariah... , 04 January 2020 at 01:11 AM
    Ah, yes, the Melian Dialogue.

    Interesting to note that it was the party professing those words - Athens - who started the Peloponnesian War, driven in large part by that haughty attitude. It was Athens that also ended that war, of course. They did so when they surrendered to the Spartans.

    [Jan 04, 2020] The USA only choice is a Sunni sandwich with Kurdish Bread and Shia Mayo

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Peeps like Sen Graham saying "the Iraqi's need to choose between us or Iran."

    (That choice is a Sunni sandwich with Kurdish Bread and Shia Mayo)

    [Jan 04, 2020] Good point Afghanistan. The newly appointed General Ghaani was active in Afghanistan. As he is famimiar with the place, that may well be where he decides to retaliate.

    Jan 04, 2020 | thesaker.is

    Serbian girl on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:00 pm EST/EDT

    Good point Afghanistan. The newly appointed General Ghaani was active in Afghanistan. As he is famimiar with the place, that may well be where he decides to retaliate.

    In case the link does not work, Elijah magnier's and Roberto Neccia's tweet.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/neccia1/status/1213045008204533760

    Str8arrow62 on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:18 pm EST/EDT
    The introduction of manpads would be no less significant an impact on the occupying force as it was when the Soviet's were there when the SEE EYE AYE showered the Afghani's with Stingers. It completely changed the modus of the Soviet army once they were introduced. Helicopters became dangerous to be in and could no longer fly near the ground. Good observations though, the assassination of Assad could prove to be magnitudes greater a spark than any of us could imagine. I hope for the sake of, among the many, the Christians he's been protecting from the foreign merc's. that he stays safe. He must keep a low profile and let's hope the S400's will take care of any Predator drones that try to fly the Damascus airspace. ­
    C. Khosta y Alzamendi on January 03, 2020 , · at 6:43 pm EST/EDT
    It seems US (or perhaps Israel) didn't give you time enough to think about what could be the next move (breaking news from Sputinik, 23:30 GMT): vehicle convoy carrying Iraqi PMF leaders hit by airstrike, 6 dead at least.

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202001041077936776-two-car-convoy-north-of-baghdad-under-aerial-attack -- reports/

    Chad on January 03, 2020 , · at 3:34 pm EST/EDT
    Thanks for posting this. I wonder if Soleimani consciously ( on many human and beyond human levels) wanted to offer the Yanks a "target" (a type of sacrifice, namely himself) that was just too big to ignore, knowing that the stupid enemy would take the bait, and having a secure knowledge that his death would set in motion a chain of events that will (underline will) result in the final terrible fall of the US, and Israel. Stupid American "leaders", right now, they are dancing in idiotic joy, saying foolish words for which we will pay, also knowing what the future holds: the death of countless people, throughout not only the Middle East, but here in the US as well. Yes, I do hate them for what they have unleashed.

    Rest In Peace, Soleimani. You very well may achieve far more in death that you attained in your eventful life.

    What do we know about Esmail Ghaani?

    [Jan 04, 2020] Retaliation needs to be carefully thought out, in order to avoid an exchange mounting in tension leading to outright war (certainly part of the US plan).

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 9:29 utc | 4

    Oh, it was certainly a grave miscalculation by the US. The NeoCons must have been pushing for it for years, and it wasn't the first assassination attempt. But I don't think the reprisal will be immediate. Retaliation needs to be carefully thought out, in order to avoid an exchange mounting in tension leading to outright war (certainly part of the US plan).

    [Jan 04, 2020] I believe is most depressing is how dumb people are

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    oldhippie , Jan 4 2020 18:11 utc | 13

    Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked.
    Glass parking lot is the desired end.

    This sentiment is bottom to top in America. Measured response? No way can Iran 'measure' a response.

    More generally the sentiment is that a little war in Iran, a few nukes, is not even a big thing. Football scores more important.

    Isabella , Jan 4 2020 18:22 utc | 16

    "Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked.
    Glass parking lot is the desired end."

    That's pretty much the picture i get from reading responses in UK MSM, not only from English, but many giving American addresses. They are all pretty much thoroughly brainwashed, believing as gospel the lies they've told, and still think that they are the "White hatted, good guys, who do good things for the places they bomb and invade".

    it seems they will be supportive of an attack on Iran, and if their maniac "leaders", the basement crazies who got out of the basement, realise this, it increases substantially the chances of a "hot" war. In that case, should it escalate out of control, your Chicago coffee deadheads will get the Glass parking lot they want. It just wont be in the ME. Or Russia. They can have their very own, in their own back yard.

    Zanon , Jan 4 2020 21:09 utc | 76
    Information_Agent

    Yes I also noticed this, what I believe is most depressing is how dumb people are. Trump/White house tell alot of lies which then become the truth for alot of his supporters and he also manage to get MSM where he wants, because MSM do not seems to care either, they are on-board when it comes to war.
    And yes additional to that, a clear psychological operation going on to get the propaganda out.
    I try to counter it on social media, I hope everyone here also do the same.

    Pft , Jan 4 2020 21:48 utc | 79
    Patroklos @77

    Its about conditioning people that its the new normal. Anything goes, "do as thou wilt". So long as it serves the interests of our masters. With no fear that MSM or alt media can or will provide sustained or effective criticism, and the corruption of religious or secular morals among the population thanks to hollywoods cultural marxism/propaganda and corruption of christianity , they can get support among the people for just about anything. People can be made to believe anything. The past 100 years has proven that beyond all doubt. With all doubt now removed they can show their true colors and this will be accepted as the new normal.

    Dick , Jan 4 2020 22:13 utc | 83
    The problem with the US is most everyone in the US military, US citizenry, and US government believe their own Exceptionalism propaganda and act accordingly. Attacking the PMU units of the Iraqi army was certainly an unwise decision, but killing Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis is an act of complete moronic insanity!
    Robert Snefjella , Jan 5 2020 0:22 utc | 121
    The United States launched a war of aggression, the supreme crime, upon Iraq in 2003, based on blatant lies, and are still there. Prior to that, they helped foment the war between Iraq and Iran, then attacked Iraq in 1991, and on top of the overt warfare there was the economic sanctions warfare. The death and maiming and poisoning of millions of Iraqis has been the American contribution to Iraq, over the last several decades. What for? How has this helped the United States? Or Europe? The main advocates for this supreme criminality has been the Israel lobby, Israel, and the supporters of Israel.

    The American Apache helicopters are still buzzing around over Baghdad, dealing out terror and intimidation and death. The murder by the United States of yet more Iraqi soldiers and officials recently has been largely absent from the propaganda narratives. But could those be 'the final straw'?

    As far as Trump's 52 target threat, this comes after the apparent please don't escalate and we'll make a deal - good cop-bad cop routine.

    The 52 number was used to remind mind-controlled Americans that the evil Iranians outrageously took 52 Americans hostage. American's don't just take people hostage; they give them orange suits and torture them, unless they kill them. Apart from murdering and maiming by the millions, they even stage fictional killings, like Osama bin laden, to entertain the zombies, and stick out their chests, hand out medals and the like.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Clapper's Credibility by Ray McGovern

    Notable quotes:
    "... What Clapper chokes on -- and avoids saying -- is that U.S. intelligence had no evidence of WMD either. Indeed, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had put him in charge of the agency responsible for analyzing imagery of all kinds -- photographic, radar, infrared, and multispectral -- precisely so that the absence of evidence from our multi-billion-dollar intelligence collection satellites could be hidden, in order not to impede the planned attack on Iraq. That's why, as Clapper now admits, he had to find "what wasn't really there." ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    Former DNI James Clapper had his own words read back to him by Ray McGovern, exposing his role in justifying the Iraq invasion based on fraudulent intelligence.

    ... ... ...

    Clapper was appointed Director of National Intelligence by President Barack Obama in June 2010, almost certainly at the prompting of Obama's intelligence confidant and Clapper friend John Brennan, later director of the CIA. Despite Clapper's performance on Iraq, he was confirmed unanimously by the Senate. Obama even allowed Clapper to keep his job for three and a half more years after he admitted that he had lied under oath to that same Senate about the extent of eavesdropping on Americans by the National Security Agency (NSA). He is now a security analyst for CNN.

    In his book, Clapper finally places the blame for the consequential fraud (he calls it "the failure") to find the (non-existent) WMD "where it belongs -- squarely on the shoulders of the administration members who were pushing a narrative of a rogue WMD program in Iraq and on the intelligence officers, including me, who were so eager to help that we found what wasn't really there." ( emphasis added ) .

    So at the event on Tuesday I stood up and asked him about that. It was easy, given the background Clapper himself provides in his book, such as:

    "The White House aimed to justify why an invasion of and regime change in Iraq were necessary, with a public narrative that condemned its continued development of weapons of mass destruction [and] its support to al-Qaida (for which the Intelligence Community had no evidence)."

    What Clapper chokes on -- and avoids saying -- is that U.S. intelligence had no evidence of WMD either. Indeed, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had put him in charge of the agency responsible for analyzing imagery of all kinds -- photographic, radar, infrared, and multispectral -- precisely so that the absence of evidence from our multi-billion-dollar intelligence collection satellites could be hidden, in order not to impede the planned attack on Iraq. That's why, as Clapper now admits, he had to find "what wasn't really there."

    Members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) who have employed Clapper under contract, or otherwise known his work, caution that he is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. So, to be fair, there is an outside chance that Rumsfeld persuaded him to be guided by the (in)famous Rumsfeld dictum: "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

    But the consequences are the same: a war of aggression with millions dead and wounded; continuing bedlam in the area; and no one -- high or low -- held accountable. Hold your breath and add Joe Biden awarding the "Liberty Medal" to George W. Bush on Veteran's Day.

    ' Shocked'

    Protection Racquet , November 17, 2018 at 02:46

    When did this perjurer before Congress have any credibility? The guys a professional liar.

    Mild -ly Facetious , November 18, 2018 at 17:27

    The guy is a professional liar,and

    a member of The Establishment

    "The Anglo-American Establishment"

    Copyright 1981/ Books in Focus, Inc,

    Vallejo D , November 19, 2018 at 21:15

    No shit. I saw the video of Clapper perjuring himself to the US Congress on national television, bald-face lying about the NSA clocking our emails.

    I wouldn't believe Clapper if he the sky is blue and grass is green. EPIC liar.

    PS: Erstwhile national security state "friend" actually had the nerve to claim that "Clapper lied to protect you." As if. My bet is that ONLY people on the planet who didn't know about the NSA's grotesque criminal were the American taxpayers.

    Mild -ly Facetious , November 20, 2018 at 12:38

    RECALL THIS EXTRAORDINARY STATEMENT -- from the GW Bush administration

    There was, however, one valuable insight. In a soon-to-be-infamous passage, the writer, Ron Suskind, recounted a conversation between himself and an unnamed senior adviser to the president:

    The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernable reality."

    I nodded and murmured something about Enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off.

    "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create reality. And while you are studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we'll act again creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

    Anonymot , November 16, 2018 at 20:56

    Mild -ly - Facetious , November 18, 2018 at 19:33

    Anonymot , Yes!

    Here Is A Sequence of books for those who reside in chosen darkness:

    "The Lessons of History" by Will & Edith Durant – c. 1968

    "The Anglo-American Establishment" by Carroll Quigley – c. 1981

    "Understanding Special Operations" by David T. Ratcliffe – c. 1989 / 99

    " The Secret War Against The Jews" by John Loftus and Mark Aarons c. 1994

    Douglas Baker , November 16, 2018 at 19:42

    Thanks Ray. The clap merry-go-round in Washington, D.C., with V.D. assaulting brain integrity has been long playing there with James Clapper another hand in, in favor of the continuation of those that direct the United States' war on world from Afghanistan to Syria, staying the course of firing up the world as though Northern California's Camp fire sooting up much of the state with air borne particulate matter and leaving death and destruction in its wake.

    JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:29

    All this is fine, except it dares not touch the still taboo subject among these "professionals" of how all of this started getting justified in the first place when America attacked itself on September 11, 2001 in New York City and Washington in the most sophisticated and flawed false flag attack in history, murdering thousands of its own citizens Operation Northwoods style, blaming it on 19 Saudi hijackers with box cutters, the most grandiose of all conspiracy theory, the official 911 story.
    The incriminating evidence of what happened that day in 2001 is now absolutely overwhelming, but still too incredible and controversial for even these esteemed folks to come to grips with. If we're going to take a shower and clean all this excrement off ourselves, let's do it thoroughly.

    JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:46

    In fact, wait! Let's ask the really important question of Clapper.
    What was he doing and where was he on 9/11, the "New Pearl Harbor," and what was his role in the coverup and transformation of the CIA in the ensuing years?
    Why doesn't Ray ask him about that?

    GKJames , November 16, 2018 at 06:46

    (1) One needn't be a Clapper fan to say that he was merely a cog in a body politic that (a) lives and breathes using military force to "solve" geopolitical problems; and (b) has always been driven by the national myth of American exceptionalism and the American love of war. The only issue ever is the story Americans tell themselves as to why a particular assault on some benighted country that can't meaningfully shoot back is justified. But for that, there are countless clever people in the corridors of power and the Infotainment Complex always eager to spread mendacity for fun and profit. Sure, hang Clapper, but if justice is what you're after, you'd quickly run out of rope and wood.

    (2) What doesn't compute: Clapper is quoted as saying that he and cohort "were so eager to help that [they] found what wasn't really there". That's followed by: "Rumsfeld put him in charge so that the absence of evidence could be hidden . Clapper now admits [that] he had to find 'what wasn't really there'". While Rumsfeld's intent was exactly that, i.e., to prevent a narrative that he and Cheney had contrived, that's not the same as Rumsfeld's explicitly instructing Clapper et al to do that. Further, it mischaracterizes Clapper's admission. He doesn't admit that "he had to find" what wasn't there (which would suggest prior intent). What he does admit is that the eagerness to please the chain of command resulted in "finding" what didn't exist. One is fraud, the other group-think; two very different propositions. The latter, of course, has been the hallmark of US foreign policy for decades, though the polite (but accurate) word for it is "consensus". Everybody's in on it: the public, Congress, the press, and even the judiciary. By and large, it's who Americans are.

    (3) Does this really equate the WMD fiasco with the alleged "desperate [attempt] to blame Trump's victory on Russian interference"? Yes, Clapper was present in 2003 and 2016. But that's a thin reed. First, no reasonable person says that Russian interference was the only reason that Clinton lost. Second, to focus on what was said in January 2017 ignores the US government's notifying various state officials DURING THE CAMPAIGN in 2016, of Russian hacking attempts. If, as is commonly said, the Administration was convinced that Clinton would win, how could hacking alerts to the states have been part of an effort to explain away an election defeat that hadn't happened yet, and which wasn't ever expected to happen? And, third, as with WMDs, Clapper wasn't out there on his own. While there were, unsurprisingly, different views among intelligence officials as to the extent of the Russian role, there was broad agreement that there had been one. Once again, fraud vs. group-think.

    Skip Scott , November 16, 2018 at 13:46

    I think there is a big difference between "group think" and inventing and cherry picking intelligence to fit policy objectives. I believe there is ample evidence of fraud. The "dodgy dossier" and the yellow cake uranium that led to Plame being exposed as a CIA operative are two examples that come immediately to mind. "Sexed up" intelligence is beyond groupthink. It is the promoting of lies and the deliberate elimination of any counter narrative in order to justify an unjust war.

    The same could be said of the "all 17 intelligence agencies" statement about RussiaGate that was completely debunked but remained the propaganda line. It was way more than "groupthink". It was a lie. It is part of "full spectrum dominance".

    I do agree that "Clapper wasn't out there on his own". He is part of a team with an agenda, and in a just world they'd all be in prison.
    It wasn't "mistaken" intelligence, or "groupthink". You are trying to put lipstick on a pig.

    GKJames , November 17, 2018 at 07:21

    Fraud is easy to allege, hard to prove. In the case of Iraq, it's important to accept that virtually everyone -- the Administration, the press, the public, security agencies in multiple countries, and even UN inspectors (before the inspections, obviously) -- ASSUMED that Saddam had WMDs. That assumption wasn't irrational; it was based on Saddam's prior behavior. No question, the Administration wanted to invade Iraq and the presumed-to-exist WMDs were the rationale. It was only when evidence appeared that the case for it wasn't rock-solid that Cheney et al went to work. (The open question is whether they began to have their own doubts or whether it never occurred to them, given their obsession.) But there is zero evidence that anyone was asked to conclude that Saddam had WMDs even though the Americans KNEW that there weren't any. That's where the group-think and weak-kneed obeisance to political brawlers like Cheney come in. All he had to do was bark, and everyone fell in line, not because they knew there were no WMDs, but because they weren't sure but the boss certainly was.

    In that environment, what we saw from Clapper and his analysts wasn't fraud but weakness of character, not to mention poor-quality analysis. And maybe that gets to the bigger question to which there appears to be an allergy: Shouting Fraud! effectively shuts down the conversation. After all, once you've done that, there's not much else to say; these guys all lied and death and destruction followed. But what if the answer is just as likely that the national security state created by Truman has grown into something uncontrollable, beyond legitimate oversight by the people it's supposed to serve? What if the people in that business aren't all that clever, let alone principled? After all, the CIA is headed by a torture aficionada and we haven't heard peep from the employee base, let alone the Congress that confirmed her. That entire ecosystem has been permitted to flourish without adult supervision for decades. Whenever someone asks, "that's classified". What do you do when Americans as a whole are perfectly fine with that?

    Sam F , November 18, 2018 at 08:17

    But fraud from the top was shown very well by Bamford in his book Pretext For War. Where discredited evidence was retained by intel agencies, as in the Iraq War II case, traitors like the zionist Wolfowitz simply installed known zionist warmongers Perl, Feith, and Wurmser into "stovepipe" offices at CIA, DIA, NSA to send the known-bad "evidence" to Rumsfeld & Cheney.

    Skip Scott , November 18, 2018 at 09:27

    They seem to conveniently classify anything that could prove illegality such as fraud, or in the case of the JFK assassination, something much worse. They use tools such as redaction and classification not only to protect "national security", but to cover up their crimes.

    "But what if the answer is just as likely that the national security state created by Truman has grown into something uncontrollable, beyond legitimate oversight by the people it's supposed to serve?"

    I believe this is very much the case, but that doesn't preclude fraud as part of their toolkit. The people at the top of the illegalities are clever enough to use those less sharp (like Clapper) for their evil purposes, and if necessary, to play the fall guy. And although the Intelligence Agencies are supposed to serve "We the People", they are actually serving unfettered Global Capitalism and the .1% that are trying to rule the world. This has been the case from its onset.

    Furthermore, I am an American, and I am definitely NOT FINE with the misuse of classification and redaction to cover up crimes. The way to fix the "entire ecosystem" is to start to demand it by prosecuting known liars like James Clapper, and to break up the MSM monopoly so people get REAL news again, and wake people up until they refuse to support the two party system.

    GKJames , November 19, 2018 at 10:20

    (1) Assuming you could find a DOJ willing to prosecute and a specific statute on which to bring charges, the chance of conviction is zero because the required fraudulent intent can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt. All the defendant would have to say is, We thought WMDs were there but it turned out we were wrong. Besides, the lawyers said it's all legal. And if you went after Clapper only, he'd argue (successfully) that it was a highly selective prosecution. (2) If you're going to create a whole new category of criminal liability for incompetence and/or toadyism and careerism, Langley corridors would quickly empty. It's certainly one way to reduce the federal workforce. (3) The intelligence agencies ARE serving "We the People". There isn't anything they do that doesn't have the blessing of duly elected representatives in Congress. (4) That you, yourself, are "NOT FINE" overlooks the reality that your perspective gets routinely outvoted, though not because of "evil" or "fraud". A Clapper behind bars would do zero to change that. Why? Because most Americans ARE fine with the status quo. That's not a function of news (fake or real); Americans are drowning in information. Like all good service providers, the media are giving their customers exactly what they want to hear.

    Skip Scott , November 19, 2018 at 11:25

    GK-

    (1) It is you who is "assuming" that fraud could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. What if evidence was presented that showed that they didn't really think there were WMD's, but were consciously lying to justify an invasion. I agree that it would be nearly impossible to find a DOJ willing to prosecute within our corrupted government, but if we could get a 3rd party president to sign on to the ICC, we could ship a bunch of evil warmongers off to the Hague. (2) As already discussed, I don't buy the representation of their actions as mere "toadyism". (3) As shown by many studies, our duly elected representatives serve lobbyists and the .1%, not "We the People". Here's one from Princeton: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig (4) From your earlier post: "What do you do when Americans as a whole are perfectly fine with that?" Since I am part of the "whole", your statement is obviously false. And Americans are drowning in MISinformation from our MSM, and that is a big part of the problem. And please provide evidence that most Americans are fine with the status quo. Stating that I get routinely outvoted when many Americans see their choice as between a lesser of two evils, and our MSM keeps exposure of third party viewpoints to a minimum, is an obvious obfuscation.

    Sam F , November 16, 2018 at 21:01

    I will second Skip on that.
    The groupthink of careerists is not "who Americans are."
    "Broad agreement" on an obvious fraud is a group lie.

    Tom Hall , November 17, 2018 at 10:49

    What Clapper did was fraud. What went on in his head was group-think. The two are by no means incompatible. The man admits to outright fabrication-
    "my team also produced computer-generated images of trucks fitted out as 'mobile production facilities used to make biological agents.' Those images, possibly more than any other substantiation he presented, carried the day with the international community and Americans alike."
    He knew exactly what he was doing.

    wootendw , November 15, 2018 at 22:41

    "Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James Clapper, head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, said vehicle traffic photographed by U.S. spy satellites indicated that material and documents related to the arms programs were shipped to Syria "

    Syria and Iraq became bitter enemies in 1982 when Syria backed Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. Syria even sent troops to fight AGAINST Saddam during the first Iraq War. Syria and Iraq did not restore diplomatic relations until after Saddam was captured. The idea that Saddam would send WMDs (if he had them) to Syria is ludicrous.

    Zhu , November 15, 2018 at 20:54

    Cheney wanted to steal the oil. Bush wanted to fulfill prophecy & make Jesus Rapture him away from his problems. Neither plan worked.

    Zhu , November 15, 2018 at 20:50

    Our big shots never suffer for their crimes against humanity. Occasionally a Lt. Calley will get a year in jail for a massacre, but that's it.

    bostonblackie , November 16, 2018 at 13:54

    Calley was placed under house arrest at Fort Benning, where he served three and a half years.

    JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:16

    That's like less than 2.5 days served per each defenseless My Lai villager slaughtered, massacred, in cold blood.
    What kind of justice is that? Who gets away with murder that way?

    Helen Marshall , November 15, 2018 at 17:41

    While serving in an embassy in 2003, the junior officer in my office was chatting with the long-time local employee, after viewing the Powell Shuck and Jive. One said to the other, "the US calls North Korea part of the 'Axis of Evil' but doesn't attack it because there is clear evidence that it has WMD including nukes." And the other said "yes, and that's why the US is going to invade Iraq because we know they don't." QED

    John Flanagan , November 16, 2018 at 22:25

    Love this comment!

    Taras 77 , November 15, 2018 at 16:36

    Thanks, Ray, for an excellent article!

    You are one of few who are calling out these treasonous bastards. I am still .waiting for at least some of them to do the perp walk, maybe in the presence of war widows, their children, and maimed war veterans.

    Chris Fogarty , November 15, 2018 at 12:27

    Clapper played the central role in deceiving America into abandoning the republic and becoming the genocidal empire now terrorizing Planet Earth. If it is too late; if the criminals have permanent control of our government, there won't be a cleansing Nuremberg Tribunal, and our once-great USA will continue along its course of death and destruction until it destroys itself.

    Where are our patriots? If any exist, now is the time for a new Nuremberg.

    Zhu , November 15, 2018 at 20:56

    The genocidal empire goes back to 1950 the Korean War.

    bostonblackie , November 16, 2018 at 13:58

    How about 1945 and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

    JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:08

    Keep going. Further back than that.
    How about the Spanish American War, justified by the false flag blowing up of the Maine in Havana Harbor, which led to the four-year genocidal war against Filipino rebels and the war against the Cubans?
    How about the 19th Century genocide of Native Americans? What was that justified by, except for lust for conquest of territory and racism?
    How about America's role with other western colonial powers in the 1900 Boxer Rebellion in China.
    The list of American violations of international law is too long to restate here, in the hundreds.
    The only way out of this moral dilemma is to turn a new page in history in a new administration, hold our war criminals in the dock, and make amends under international law, and keep them, somehow without sacrificing national jurisdiction or security. America has to be reformed as an honest broker of peace instead of the world's leading pariah terrorist state.

    bostonblackie , November 17, 2018 at 16:29

    How about slavery? America was founded on genocide and slavery!

    Skip Scott , November 15, 2018 at 09:44

    I think Ray is being a little overly optimistic about Clapper being travel restricted. Universal Jurisdiction is for the small fry. Even with Bush and Rumsfeld, their changing travel plans was probably more about possible "bad press" than actual prosecution. Maybe down the road, when the USA collapse is more obvious to our "vassals" and they start to go their own way, such a thing could happen. Even then, we've got tons of armaments, and a notoriously itchy trigger finger.

    My hope is that the two party system collapses and a Green Party candidate gets elected president. He or she could then sign us on to the ICC, and let the prosecutions begin. I know it's delusional, but a guy's gotta dream.

    Robert Emmett , November 15, 2018 at 08:52

    It occurs to me that even given Cheney's infamous 1% doctrine, these no-goodniks couldn't even scratch together enough of a true story to pass that low bar. So they invented, to put it mildly, plausible scenarios, cranked-up the catapults of propaganda and flung them in our faces via the self-absorbed, self-induced, money grubbing fake patriots of mass media.

    But, geez, Ray, it's not as if we didn't already know about fixing facts around the policy, resignations of career operatives because of politicizing intelligence, reports of Scott Ritter, plus the smarmy lying faces & voices of all the main actors in the Cheney-Rumsfeld generated mass hysteria. I doubt these types of reveals, though appreciatively confirming what we already know, will change very many minds now. After all, the most effective war this cabal has managed to wage has been against their own people.

    Perhaps when these highfalutin traitors, treasonous to their oaths to protect the founding principles they swore to preserve, at last shuffle off their mortal coils, future generations will gain the necessary perspective to dismiss these infamous liars with the contempt they deserve. But that's just wishful thinking because by then the incidents that cranked-up this never-ending war likely will be the least of their worries.

    In the meantime, the fact that this boiled egghead continues to spew his Claptrap on a major media channel tells you all you need to know about how deeply the poison of the Bush-Cheney era has seeped into the body politic and continues to eat away at what remains of the foundations while the military-media-government-corporate complex metastasizes.

    Sam F , November 15, 2018 at 21:03

    Ray knows that the well-informed know much of the story, and likely writes to bring us the Clapper memoir confession and summarize for the less informed.

    JOHN CHUCKMAN , November 15, 2018 at 07:11

    I am always glad to see confirmation in such matters, however, for people who work to inform themselves and think critically, there are no real surprises to be discovered about the invasion of Iraq.

    It could be clearly seen as a fraud at the time because there were a number of experts, experts not working for the American government, who in effect told us then that it was a fraud.

    What the whole experience with Iraq reveals is a couple of profound truths about imperial America, truths that are quite unpleasant and yet seem to remain lost to the general public.

    One, lying and manipulation are virtually work-a-day activities in Washington. They go on at all levels of the government, from the President through all of the various experts and agency heads who in theory hold their jobs to inform the President and others of the truth in making decisions.

    Indeed, these experts and agency heads actually work more like party members from George Orwell's Oceania in 1984, party members whose job it is to constantly rewrite history, making adjustments in the words and pictures of old periodicals and books to conform with the Big Brother's latest pronouncements and turns in policy.

    America has an entire industry devoted to manufacturing truth, something the rather feeble term "fake news" weakly tries to capture.

    The public's reaction to officials and agencies in Washington ought to be quite different than it generally is. It should be a presumption that they are not telling the truth, that they are tailoring a story to fit a policy. It sounds extreme to say so, but it truly is not in view of recent history.

    We are all watching actors in a costly play used to support already-determined destructive policies.

    Two, the press lies, and it lies almost constantly in support of government's decided policies. You simply cannot trust the American press on such matters, and the biggest names in the press – the New York Times or Washington Post or CBS or NBC – are the biggest liars because they put the weight of their general prestige into the balance to tip it.

    Their fortunes and interests are too closely bound to government to be in the least trusted for objective journalism. Journalism just does not exist in America on the big stuff.

    This support is not just done on special occasions like the run-up to the illegal invasion of Iraq but consistently in the affairs of state. We see it today in everything from "Russia-gate" to the Western-induced horrors of Syria. Russia-gate is almost laughable, although few Americans laugh, but a matter like Syria, with more than half a million dead and terrible privations, isn't laughable, yet no effort is made to explain the truth and bring this monstrous project – the work equally of Republicans and Democrats – to an end.

    Three, while virtually all informed people know that Israel's influence in Washington is inordinate and inappropriate, many still do not realize that the entire horror of Iraq, just like the horror today of Syria, reflects the interests and demands of Israel.

    George Bush made a rarely-noticed, when Ariel Sharon was lobbying him to attack other Middle Eastern countries following the Iraq invasion, along the lines of, "Geez, what does the guy want? I invaded Iraq for him, didn't I?"

    Well, today, pretty much all of the countries that Sharon thought should be attacked have indeed been attacked by the United States and its associates in one fashion or another – covertly, as in Syria, or overtly, as in Libya. And we are all witnessing the ground being prepared for Iran.

    It has been a genuinely terrifying period, the last decade and a half or so. War after war with huge numbers of innocents killed, vast damages inflicted, and armies of unfortunate refugees created. All of it completely unnecessary. All of it devoid of ethics or principles beyond the principle of "might makes right."

    It simply cannot be distinguished, except by order of magnitude, from the grisly work of Europe's fascist governments of the 1930s and '40s.

    All the discussions we read or see from America about truth in journalism, about truth in government, and about founding principles are pretty much distraction and noise, meaningless noise. The realities of what America is doing in the world make it so.

    Sam F , November 15, 2018 at 20:56

    Very true.

    tpmco , November 16, 2018 at 02:48

    Great comment.

    john Wilson , November 15, 2018 at 04:47

    It seems to me that showing up the blatant lies of the Iraq affair, while laudable, doesn't really get us anywhere. The guilty are never and will never be brought to account for their heinous crimes and some of the past villains are still lying, scheming, and brining about war, terror and horror today.

    If the white helmets in Syria, the lies about Libya, the West engineered coupé in The Ukraine, Yemen, etc, aren't all tactics from the same play book used by the criminal cabals of the Iraq time, then we are blind. These days, the liars in the deep state, an expression which encapsulates everything from Intel to think tanks, don't even try to tell plausible lies, they just say anything and MSM cheers them on. Anyone challenging the MSM/government/deep state etc are just ridiculed and called conspiracy theorists, no matter how obvious and ludicrous the lies are.

    Sam F , November 15, 2018 at 06:26

    In fact "showing up the blatant lies of the Iraq affair" informs others, to whom the MSM can no longer cheer on liars, nor ridicule truth. Truth telling, like contemplation, is essential before the point of action.

    Randal , November 15, 2018 at 02:38

    I remember a woman reporter saying the reason we invaded Iraq was because Sadam Husien had put a bounty on the Bush family for running him out of qwait. This was a personal revenge to take out Husien before he had a chance at the Bush's. Any way the reporter was silenced very quickly. I personally believe the allegation.

    Gary Weglarz , November 15, 2018 at 01:54

    You have my complete and total respect Mr. McGovern. That was beautiful! Thank you.

    F. G. Sanford , November 15, 2018 at 01:33

    "We drew on all of NIMA's skill sets and it was all wrong."

    Every time I hear the term, "skill sets", I recall a military colleague who observed, "We say skill sets so we don't have to say morons." They used to say, "The military doesn't pay you to think." Now they say, "We have skill sets." It's a euphemism for robotized automatons who perform specific standardized tasks based on idealized training requirements which evolve from whatever the latest abstract military doctrine happens to be. And, they come up with new ones all the time.

    "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." This is a phrase Rumsfeld borrowed directly – and I'm not making this up – from the UFO community. It was apparently first uttered by Carl Sagan, and then co-opted by people like Stanton Friedman. He's the guy who claims we recovered alien bodies from flying saucers at Roswell, New Mexico. The scientific antidote to the "absence of evidence" argument is, of course, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." Simply put, absence of evidence really just means "no evidence". A hypothesis based on "no evidence" constitutes magical thinking.

    It's probably worth going to Youtube and looking up a clip called "Stephen Gets a Straight Answer Out of Donald Rumsfeld". He admits to Colbert that, "If it was true, we wouldn't call it intelligence." Frankly, Clapper's gravest sin is heading up a science-based agency like NIMA, but failing to come to the same conclusion as General Albert Stubblebine. People who analyze reconnaissance imagery are supposed to be able to distinguish explosive ordnance damage from other factors. But, I guess Newtonian Physics is "old school" to this new generation of magical thinkers and avant-garde intelligence analysts.

    Sam F , November 16, 2018 at 10:44

    Part of the problem of "intelligence" is its reliance upon images that show a lot of detail but without any definite meaning, and upon guesses to keep managers and politicians happy. So "expert assessments" that milk trucks in aerial photos might be WMD labs became agency "confidence" and then politician certainties, never verified.

    When suspect evidence was retained by intel agencies, as in the Iraq War II case, traitors like the zionist Wolfowitz simply installed known zionist warmongers Perl, Feith, and Wurmser into "stovepipe" offices at CIA, DIA, NSA to send the non-evidence to Rumsfeld. See Bamford's Pretext For War.

    Gen Dau , November 14, 2018 at 22:20

    Thank you, Ray, for a very good article that treats Clapper objectively and not as a demi-god, as most of the MSM and the Democratic establishment does. It is totally unacceptable for a government official, current or former, to answer "I don't know." That is the hideout of irresponsible scoundrels. Questioners should be allowed to ask follow-up questions such as, "If you didn't know, did you try to think about why the President's opinion on this very important question was different from yours? Is simply not knowing acceptable for an intel officer, especially one in a leadership position?" I look forward to your further reports and analyses.

    Thanks also to the editors for returning at least the main text to a readable font. But why not go whole hog and make reading everything a pleasure again? Putting the headlines in a hard-to-read and distracting font is especially unfortunate, since some casual visitors to Consortium News may be turned off by the headlines and skip reading the very important articles attached to the headlines.

    Daniel , November 15, 2018 at 03:13

    You are right, my friend.

    Mark A Goldman , November 14, 2018 at 22:17

    According to my calculations (admittedly simplistic), the world has past the point of peak oil and in aggregate cannot produce enogh oil to meet present and future demand and that may very well be why the US is doing its best to destroy or damage as many economies in the world as it can even if it has to go to war to do it. Once it becomes well established that we are past peak oil no telling what our financial markets will look like. Would appreciate hearing from someone who has more expertise than I have. https://www.gpln.com

    anon4d2s , November 14, 2018 at 22:23

    Why are you trying to change the subject? Please desist.

    Mark A. Goldman , November 15, 2018 at 13:01

    I'm offering you the, or a, motive of why the deep state is pursuing the agendas we see unfolding, which is to say, the crimes, the lies, the treason that the likes of Clapper, Bush, Obama, Clinton and others are pursuing to cover up their reaction to their own fears. Of course 9/11, the false flag coup and smoking gun that proves my point is still the big elephant in the room and will eventually bring us down if the truth is never released from its chains.

    Mark A. Goldman , November 15, 2018 at 14:43

    I didn't change the subject. I'm offering you an answer as to the motive of why so many officials are willing to trash the Constitution in order to accomplish their insane agendas. It's all about money and power and the terrified Deep State fear of facing the blowback from the lies that have been propagated by the government and media regarding just about everything. Here's another place you might want to look in addition to my website: https://youtu.be/CDpE-30ilBY It's not just about oil. But this is where the rubber's going to meet the road. This is about what's going to hit the fan at any moment and in the absence of the Truth, we are all going to face this unprepared. 9/11 is still the smoking gun. It not just a few liars and cheats we're talking about.

    Mark A. Goldman , November 15, 2018 at 23:58

    I didn't change the subject. The purpose of the search for WMD was to misdirect the public's attention away from the real purpose of the invasion which was to gain control of Iraq's oil reserves primarily. Misdirection is primary skill used by those in power and very effectively.

    Mark A Goldman , November 14, 2018 at 23:23

    On my website you might want to review what I wrote here: "Why the Economy Can't Recover" https://www.gpln.com/audacityofhope.htm

    Skip Edwards , November 14, 2018 at 22:10

    Thanks, as always, go out to Ray for his continued bravery in speaking truth to power. I remember years ago when David McMichaels, Ex-CIA, gave a talk at Ft Lewis College in Durango, CO, about Ronnie Reagan's corruption in what the US was doing to the elected government in Nicaragua. Thanks to both of these men for trying to inform us all about the corruption so rampant in our government. This is further proof that Trump is only a small pimple on top of the infectous boil that is our government.

    Sam F , November 14, 2018 at 21:52

    Hurray for Ray McGovern! A beautiful and superbly-planned confrontation. We are lucky that Clapper admitted these things in his memoir, but we needed you to bring that out in public with full and well-selected information. You are truly a gem, whom I hope someday to meet.

    Sam F , November 14, 2018 at 22:19

    An astounding revelation of systematic delusion in secret agencies.

    But until now my best source on the Iraq fake WMD has been Bamford's Pretext For War, in which he establishes that zionist DefSec Wolfowitz appointed three known zionist operatives Perl, Wurmser, and Feith to "stovepipe" known-bad info to Rumsfeld et al. Does the memoir shed any light there, and does your information agree?

    mike k , November 14, 2018 at 19:58

    Spies lie constantly, they have no respect for the truth. To trust a spy is a sign of dangerous gullibility. Spies are simply criminals for hire.

    Gen Dau , November 14, 2018 at 22:30

    Yes, I also hope our replies will be in a more civil and less reader-hostile font. The same font as the article text would be fine.

    dfnslblty , November 15, 2018 at 09:59

    I would offer that spies do not lie ~ they gather information.
    Spy masters do lie ~ they prevaricate to fit the needs of their masters.

    Tomonthebeach , November 15, 2018 at 23:48

    To paraphrase in a way that emphasizes the deja vu. Trump lies constantly, he has no respect for the truth. To trust Trump is a sign of dangerous gullibility. Trump is simply a crook for hire, and it would seem that Putin writes the checks.

    anon4d2s , November 16, 2018 at 10:48

    Gosh, you fooled everyone so easily with standard Dem zionist drivel!
    Why not admit that every US politician is bought, including Dems?
    Don't forget to supply your unique evidence of Russian tampering.

    Mild-ly - Facetious , November 18, 2018 at 16:44

    "Clapper's Credibility Collapses"

    as does Colin Powell's U.N.BULL Spit Yellow Cake propaganda/

    all that's required is a Sales Pitch to everyday striving citizens into

    how a brutal strain of aristocrat have come to rule america

    and how you must delve into the Back-Stories of, for example,

    GHW Bush CIA connection and his presents in Dallas, 1963

    credibility collapses abound under weight of 'what really happened'

    after Chaney convened summit of oil executives just PRIOR to 9/11?

    [Jan 04, 2020] The US shows some symptom of an empire on the brink of collapse: an irreconcilably divided and decaying citizenry, racial and cultural incoherence, a totally detached oligarchy, no overarching mission or narrative, and an over reliance on international mercenaries to fight its wars

    Notable quotes:
    "... Add in the war-profiteers, wide open borders, collapsing infrastructure and history-making wealth inequality, and an entire generation of healthy young white men destroyed by drugs and suicides, a despair engineered by Jews, who unlike Iranians, mock us as they do it. Let's see tranquility on the home front survive skyrocketing food and gas prices. ..."
    "... We must prepare our own populist anti-war protest movement to bring the war home. We must remain steadfast in the face of a coming era of political repression nobody has seen in generations. ..."
    "... "The U.S. did not only murder Qassem Soleimani. On December 29 it also killed 31 Iraqi government forces. Five days later it killed Soleimani and the Deputy Commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF/PMU/Hashed al-Shabi) and leader of Kata'ib Hizbollah Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. There were also four IRGC and four Kata'ib Hizbollah men who were killed while accompanying their leaders. The PMU are under direct command of the Iraqi Prime Minister. They are official Iraqi defense forces who defeated ISIS after a bloody war. Their murder demands that their government acts against the perpetrators." ..."
    "... "Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked. Glass parking lot is the desired end." ..."
    "... That's pretty much the picture i get from reading responses in UK MSM, not only from English, but many giving American addresses. They are all pretty much thoroughly brainwashed, believing as gospel the lies they've told, and still think that they are the "White hatted, good guys, who do good things for the places they bomb and invade". ..."
    "... US murder of another nation's leader has no frigging importance in moral or consequential terms. Such is the general IQ status of the west today. Really, it takes someone intelligent and inquisitive enough for years and years to really get aghast and appreciative enough to ponder what the murder of Soleimani in Trump's hand in the manner it was executed would mean to world peace. MSM counts on this stupidity and thrives in lies and false-flag propaganda. ..."
    "... The idiots at the helm of the Evil Outlaw US Empire really have absolutely no clue as their short term thinking has destroyed what mental capacities they once had and has reduced them to imbeciles. ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Adam , Jan 4 2020 19:18 utc | 43

    The US shows every symptom of an empire on the brink of collapse: an irreconcilably divided and decaying citizenry, racial and cultural incoherence, a totally detached oligarchy, no overarching mission or narrative, and an over reliance on international mercenaries to fight its wars. By 2009, soldiers of fortune outnumbered US military personnel 3-1 in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Add in the war-profiteers, wide open borders, collapsing infrastructure and history-making wealth inequality, and an entire generation of healthy young white men destroyed by drugs and suicides, a despair engineered by Jews, who unlike Iranians, mock us as they do it. Let's see tranquility on the home front survive skyrocketing food and gas prices.

    A war with Iran is our line in the sand as well. All white men must boycott the military, which is run by people who despise us more than any supposed international enemy ever will. The last 3 years of having our rights and civil liberties whittled away show that it is white Americans who will always be the US plutocracy's first and last enemy. If you are currently serving, you can get honorably discharged by declaring yourself a worshipper of Asatru and anonymously emailing your superior officers pretending to be a deeply concerned member of Antifa. Even if open war doesn't break out, the recent massive troop buildups in the Middle East guarantee you will be a target. Let Zion send its anarchist neo-liberal foot soldiers in your place!

    We must prepare our own populist anti-war protest movement to bring the war home. We must remain steadfast in the face of a coming era of political repression nobody has seen in generations.

    The people of Iran are not our enemy. They share the same abominable foe and deserve our solidarity. They must know that the citizens of America are ignorant of who rules them, and that decisions made using our flag are not made by us.

    In the name of the existence of our people and the future of our children, and even broader in the name of humanity, we must ensure that this will be Judah's last war.

    Only then can we all be free.

    https://national-justice.com/op-ed-line-sand

    james , Jan 4 2020 19:29 utc | 47

    thank you b... i see you articulated a paragraph that is out of grasp of the american msm crowd, so i am going to repeat it.. it is worth repeating...see bottom of post... my main thought is that no matter what happens everything will be blamed on iran - false flag, and etc. etc. you name it... all bad is on iran and all good is on usa-israel.. that is the constant meme that the msm provides 24-7 and that us politicians and the state dept run with 24-7 as well. it is so transparent it is beyond despicable..

    @ 13 old hippie.. that about sums up my impression.. thanks

    @ 22 BM.. thanks.. i share your perspective, but am not as articulate..

    here is the quote from b..

    "The U.S. did not only murder Qassem Soleimani. On December 29 it also killed 31 Iraqi government forces. Five days later it killed Soleimani and the Deputy Commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF/PMU/Hashed al-Shabi) and leader of Kata'ib Hizbollah Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. There were also four IRGC and four Kata'ib Hizbollah men who were killed while accompanying their leaders. The PMU are under direct command of the Iraqi Prime Minister. They are official Iraqi defense forces who defeated ISIS after a bloody war. Their murder demands that their government acts against the perpetrators."

    oldhippie , Jan 4 2020 18:11 utc | 13
    Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked.
    Glass parking lot is the desired end.

    This sentiment is bottom to top in America. Measured response? No way can Iran 'measure' a response.

    More generally the sentiment is that a little war in Iran, a few nukes, is not even a big thing. Football scores more important.

    Isabella , Jan 4 2020 18:22 utc | 16
    "Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked.
    Glass parking lot is the desired end."

    That's pretty much the picture i get from reading responses in UK MSM, not only from English, but many giving American addresses. They are all pretty much thoroughly brainwashed, believing as gospel the lies they've told, and still think that they are the "White hatted, good guys, who do good things for the places they bomb and invade".

    it seems they will be supportive of an attack on Iran, and if their maniac "leaders", the basement crazies who got out of the basement, realise this, it increases substantially the chances of a "hot" war. In that case, should it escalate out of control, your Chicago coffee deadheads will get the Glass parking lot they want. It just wont be in the ME. Or Russia. They can have their very own, in their own back yard.

    Oriental Voice , Jan 4 2020 19:40 utc | 52

    @13 oldhippie; @16 Isabella:

    You guys are right on money! I'm a retiree in my seventy's. My social circles are old school college graduates in late fifties to late seventies, supposedly the segment of population wise enough to decipher world affairs.

    But no, they care more about who's gonna win today between Titans and patriots or whether Tiger Wood will win another major in 2020.

    US murder of another nation's leader has no frigging importance in moral or consequential terms. Such is the general IQ status of the west today. Really, it takes someone intelligent and inquisitive enough for years and years to really get aghast and appreciative enough to ponder what the murder of Soleimani in Trump's hand in the manner it was executed would mean to world peace. MSM counts on this stupidity and thrives in lies and false-flag propaganda.

    ... ... ...

    karlof1 , Jan 5 2020 0:03 utc | 114
    Two min twitter vid :

    "Mourners in Karbala welcome the bodies of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and Qassem Suleimani this evening."

    Many thousands; very impressive and moving!

    Vid of Baghdad protests :

    "Hundreds of thousands of #Iraqis attend the #martyrs last farewell in #Baghdad and protest against the US military presence in #Iraq."

    And here's Zarif's tweet and photo montage :

    "24 hrs ago, an arrogant clown -- masquerading as a diplomat -- claimed people were dancing in the cities of Iraq. Today, hundreds of thousands of our proud Iraqi brothers and sisters offered him their response across their soil. End of US malign presence in West Asia has begun."

    The idiots at the helm of the Evil Outlaw US Empire really have absolutely no clue as their short term thinking has destroyed what mental capacities they once had and has reduced them to imbeciles.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Soleimani is the equivalent of Iran killing a top American regional commander, veteran government figure, and war hero all rolled into one. This is big

    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    MPC • 21 hours ago

    Soleimani is the equivalent of Iran killing a top American regional commander, veteran government figure, and war hero all rolled into one. This is big.

    It feels like an escalation far out of proportion to the events that preceded it. If Washington thinks it'll make Iran fold or beg they're crazy. If they think it'll force Iran into events leading to war, they're evil and have learned nothing.

    Meanwhile China laughs.

    grumpy MPC • 9 hours ago
    if you are making an argument for proportionate, then you ignore history...this is a confrontation that cannot be avoided and hiding under our desks will not save us...we do not have to invade, only use the options we possess without restraint and fight total war...we would have peace for a hundred years...
    Sid Finster grumpy • 3 hours ago • edited
    I believe that your attitude was most succinctly put by the WWII-era Nazi leadership.

    That didn't work out so well for them, once they met the Soviet Union.

    Sid Finster MPC • 9 hours ago
    I don't think China is too thrilled to see oil prices jump, but otherwise, you are accurate.
    Charles Cosimano • 20 hours ago
    No President ever lost an election by getting into a way. The destruction of Iran would not annoy the electorate one little bit.
    Sid Finster Charles Cosimano • 9 hours ago
    So Obama didn't get elected over McCain?
    Dr. Rieux Sid Finster • 4 hours ago • edited
    Dude, it was John McCain. Frau Rodham-Clinton could have beat John McCain.

    (Hillary, if you're reading this, never forget that if Barack Obama hadn't seized the Democrat nomination from you, you would have been President.)

    JonF311 Charles Cosimano • 9 hours ago
    Bush did not lose a presidential election, but the GOP suffered huge losses in the 2006 midterms mainly over public frustration with the Iraq fiasco.
    MPC Charles Cosimano • 7 hours ago
    For a year or so, sure. But people will be quick to start asking why once American kids start coming home in body bags.

    The media was sycophantic with Iraq for a time. With Iran there will be no such grace period.

    paradoctor • 20 hours ago
    I'm surprised it took him this long to make a war. Next he'll call for everyone to rally behind him. Those who don't he'll call traitors. It's the oldest trick of authoritarianism.
    grumpy paradoctor • 9 hours ago
    your response is silly as trump has shown more respect for constitutional limits and the rule of law than any of his predecessors...
    KeithS grumpy • 4 hours ago
    Sarcasm, right?
    Sid Finster grumpy • 3 hours ago
    Please provide concrete and specific examples comparing Trump's alleged "respect for constitutional limits and the rule of law" and how his predecessors violated the same limits and the rule of law.
    Sid Finster paradoctor • 5 hours ago
    View Hide
    engineerscotty paradoctor • 5 hours ago
    He's been busy calling the political opposition "traitors" for his entire administration.

    Of course, it's not the Democrats whose standard bearer is openly proclaimed to be a puppet of a rival power on that power's state television, and has been bankrolled by that power's organized crime syndicates for a while.

    Georgia Tech • 20 hours ago
    I voted for the president, but I don't get this at all. For what? I hope he comes to his senses, but it's probably already too late to prevent some bad consequences.
    Butler Reynolds Georgia Tech • 9 hours ago
    The man is a compulsive liar. A man who is unashamedly unfaithful to his wife is not going to be faithful about anything he has ever said to you. Every MAGA hat wearing devotee knew this before the election. I still can't figure out what kind of self deception led so many of them to believe that he would act differently once in office?
    Sid Finster Georgia Tech • 9 hours ago
    For eight years, Obama cultists made excuse after excuse for the man, even as he betrayed them over and over again.

    Don't be like them.

    RightVote • 19 hours ago
    The words missing from the article....the Muslims want to kill (more of) the infadels!
    Awake and Uttering a Song RightVote • 9 hours ago • edited
    Who are these "infadels" you speak of?
    Baltimore II • 18 hours ago
    It is deeply upsetting to witness the hijacking of our government by foreign interests. We know from their many public statements on the subject that Israel and Saudi Arabia have at least one shared, longstanding goal, which is to get the US to fight a war against Iran. Trump has now bowed to their demands. It has made Americans less safe and will inevitably result in wasting even more American money and blood on the Middle East.
    grumpy Baltimore II • 9 hours ago
    trump responded to an attack first upon an american citizen and then to our embassy...
    Sid Finster grumpy • 3 hours ago • edited
    There would be no such attacks if the United States had not attacked Iraq in the first place.

    The embassy attacks were a direct response to Trump's attacks on the PMU militias last week.

    EliteCommInc. • 16 hours ago
    "Trump was elected to guard American borders."

    I am looking forward to the start of that process. And he should avoid signing that farm measure that legalizes workers here illegally.

    JEinCA • 15 hours ago
    I am baffled. I someone who supported Trump and voted for Trump can now only think of him as a complete moron and a dangerous quisling for Israel. I can see the end of our nation now. It's in plain sight for anyone with eyes to see. Once it falls there will be no putting humpty dumpty back together. I have nothing but loathing for the Woke Democrats and the Neocon Establishment Republicans. Now Trump will top Dubya Bush as the Biggest Prostitute for Israel of the 21st Century. So much for America First. So much for making America Great Again. Watch it all fall apart before our very eyes under the leadership of this silver spoon raised reality tv star. America is finished. It's over. You can put a fork in it. It's done. The Deep State won. It doesn't matter if Trump wins or loses in 2020. The Deep State will get what they want either way. Then it will all come tumbling down. Watch the real players behind the scenes move quickly to consolidate wealth and power in the Former USA (as happened after the collapse of the USSR) in the aftermath of our coming collapse. For American Nationalists lik me Trump is more than a disappointment after this caper. He is an outright disaster. There is no hope for Washington. It is beyond repair. Our nation's Grave Stone may well read, "The United States of America, 1776-2020".
    Connecticut Farmer JEinCA • 10 hours ago
    My real fear is that this may turn out to be a replay of 1914 Sarajevo...and we know how THAT ended.
    Dr. Rieux Connecticut Farmer • 4 hours ago
    You mean the end of the imperial United States? Thanks for proving that every gray cloud has a silver lining.
    dbriz JEinCA • 10 hours ago • edited
    My initial feeling was as yours. A few deep breaths and some sleep and I find it difficult not to agree still. There are of course, always events left to play out and seldom do predictions happen in purely linear equation.

    Iran is limited in how it may respond. This makes the situation more not less, dangerous. The JCS surely understand that a ground war with Iran would require unacceptable numbers of forces and result in a postwar quagmire that would make Iraq look like a cakewalk.

    Trump, like Obama and Bush before him should be impeached for this action but we all should be aware by now that a cowardly Congress has abdicated its war making responsibilities to the President and military.

    The only possible reason for any optimism is that Trump, after events like this, tends to feel he can use it as a negotiating tactic for future use. Unfortunately as Larison has pointed out elsewhere, events like this inspire little trust and engender more blowback elsewhere. We have no solutions for the region and even the loudest neocon cheerleaders have no desire to send themselves or their children to risk death there.

    "Oh what a terrible tangled web we weave..."

    Sid Finster dbriz • 6 hours ago
    Look up the results of the Millennium Challenge 2002 wargames.

    They were not pretty. Then compare with America's track record in recent wars. Also, not pretty.

    words JEinCA • 10 hours ago
    "I someone who supported Trump and voted for Trump can now only think of
    him as a complete moron and a dangerous quisling for Israel."

    Me too. I increasingly wonder whether the America in which I grew up even exists anymore. It seems to be dying, taken over and strangled by foreign interests. It started under Clinton, accelerated under the younger Bush and Obama, and under Trump it has become almost absurdly overt, with people like Sheldon Adelson openly giving elected officials millions of dollars to advance specific Israeli foreign policy goals.

    Sid Finster words • 6 hours ago
    Sheldon Adelson may have some odious designs, but, AFAIK, he is a US citizen.
    Sid Finster JEinCA • 10 hours ago
    I don't mean to sound snarky, but there is nothing baffling about it. Trump is weak, stupid, reckless and easily manipulated. This has been abundantly obvious for a long time now.

    No, I did not vote for HRC.

    grumpy JEinCA • 9 hours ago
    your response is silly son, as the iranian general was a world class terrorist...maybe just maybe this makes it clear to the iranian mullahs that they will be held accountable...
    MPC grumpy • 4 hours ago
    Pretty much anyone who fights asymmetrical warfare is easily classified as a terrorist by his opponent. He no doubt has some immoral things to his name but if it were Trump in the middle of 5th avenue it would be a virtue.
    Butler Reynolds JEinCA • 9 hours ago
    Did you honestly think before the election that the man had any character or was capable of anything besides delivering zingers? I ask this honestly. From the very start the man came across as a BS artist. I have never been able to figure out what people saw in him.
    Daniel Enous • 15 hours ago
    As i am writing this, the US has targeted and killed Major-General Qassem Soleimani, head of the elite Iranian Quds Force SOC.

    If there was ever a doubt by any American that US soldiers will leave Iraq and Syria and/or the ME in general, let that doubt be cast aside now.

    Rest assured, Iran will see to it to extract this price in American blood and treasure. In other words, because of the headline-seeker-in-chief, he just signed the death warrants of Americans and signed a cheque for 1 Billion+ dollars.

    For those not familiar with a billion, it is $1,000,000,000+

    TheSnark Daniel Enous • 10 hours ago
    he just signed the death warrants of Americans and signed a cheque for 1 Billion+ dollars.

    But it's not his money, it's the taxpayers (actually, it's borrowed from China). And it's not a death warrant for his kids, it's somebody else's.

    BTW, the cost is going to be north of a trillion dollars, not a mere billion.

    BlackpilledBob TheSnark • 9 hours ago
    Yeah, we have spent $6.3 trillion on mideast wars since 2001.

    If we go into a full scale regime change war with Iran, we are looking at $2 trillion at a minimum.

    Daniel Enous TheSnark • 6 hours ago
    i agree in all things
    Dr. Rieux TheSnark • 4 hours ago
    IOW X > $1,000,000,000,000; where X is the cost of another foreign misadventure for our "best friend" in the whole wide world.

    (Folks, write one trillion like this: $1,000,000,000,000. Make your fellow citizens see how large $1,000,000,000,000 is.)

    Awake and Uttering a Song Daniel Enous • 9 hours ago
    "Iran will see to it to extract this price in American blood and treasure."

    And, if Iran won't be provoked into an attack, the warmongers will gladly make sure there is a big one that will be blamed on Iran. They've been salivating for a war with Iran and want it sooner rather than later. They are doing what they can to get Trump re-elected, but they want their war soon, just in case. They've been laying the groundwork for months ("Iran-backed" this and "Iran-backed" that).

    Doom Incarnate • 11 hours ago
    And away we go!

    BOOM!

    Barry_D • 11 hours ago
    "Candidate Donald Trump understood that Iraq was a grievous -- "big, fat" -- mistake. "We've destabilized the Middle
    East and it's a mess," he said in 2015. It "may have been the worst decision" in U.S. history. "It started ISIS, it started Libya, it started Syria," Trump said as George W. Bush's brother looked on. "Everything that's happening started with us stupidly going into the war in Iraq . and people talk about me with the button. I'm the one thatdoesn't want to do this, okay?""

    Trump supported the war:

    https://www.snopes.com/fact...

    https://www.politifact.com/...

    Barry_D • 11 hours ago
    BTW, one of the things which surprised me about TAC, as a liberal, was a large number of anti-war right-wingers.

    I had never encountered people like at, and have secretly suspected that it was a hang-over from opposing President Obama.

    I will now see if I was right or wrong.

    Sid Finster Barry_D • 10 hours ago
    I opposed Bush's wars, Obama's wars and Trump's wars.

    Satisfied?

    Awake and Uttering a Song Sid Finster • 3 hours ago
    "I opposed Bush's wars, Obama's wars and Trump's wars."

    Ditto.

    Tcaalaw Barry_D • 9 hours ago
    TAC was expressly launched to oppose interventionism in the George W. Bush administration, so I'm not sure why you thought its antiwar position was for the sake of opposing Obama.
    Clyde Schechter Barry_D • 7 hours ago • edited
    Anti-war factions exist on both the right and left, unfortunately as small minorities in both camps. The recently signed defense authorization bill originally contained provisions that blocked the use of any funds for military action against Iran without explicit Congressional authorization, but that provision was taken out of the bill at the last minute by the Democratic leadership. Max Boot and Rachel Maddow are now BFF. Neoconservative ideology dominates both parties and prevails widely among non-partisan liberals and conservatives alike.

    You might be interested in looking into the newly formed Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. It is dedicated to developing a cadre of foreign policy positions (and expertise to staff foreign policy in some future administration) supporting the use of diplomacy and reserving the use of force to only those situations where it is the only reasonable way to defend the actual United States. It is anti-war and anti-empire. And it has received funding from both the Koch brothers and George Soros.

    TISO_AX2 • 10 hours ago
    Don't be silly. Iran is not going to get into a hot war with the US.
    Sid Finster TISO_AX2 • 10 hours ago
    Don't be silly. The United States will start that hot war on its own.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Sanders and Warren Vow to Block War With Iran, Biden and Buttigieg Offer Better-Run Wars

    Jan 04, 2020 | theintercept.com

    Sen. Bernie Sanders addressed the threat of war with Iran at a campaign rally in Anamosa, Iowa on Friday. Photo: Patrick Semansky/AP Sen. Bernie Sanders addressed the threat of war with Iran at a campaign rally in Anamosa, Iowa on Friday. Photo: Patrick Semansky/AP The legacy of the Iraq war, and the prospect of a bloody sequel sparked by Donald Trump's assassination of a senior Iranian official in Baghdad this week, has the potential to transform the Democratic primary, offering voters radically different visions of how the next commander-in-chief proposes to deal with the ongoing chaos caused by the 2003 invasion.

    Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren described the drone strike ordered by Trump as a dangerous escalation and promised to end American wars in the Middle East. Joe Biden, the former vice president, and Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, offered more muted criticism, suggesting that the killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani might have been justified if a more responsible commander-in-chief was in charge.

    "We must do more than just stop war with Iran," Sanders tweeted on Friday. "We must firmly commit to ending U.S. military presence in the Middle East in an orderly manner. We must end our involvement in the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen. We must bring our troops home from Afghanistan."

    We must do more than just stop war with Iran.

    We must firmly commit to ending U.S. military presence in the Middle East in an orderly manner.

    We must end our involvement in the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Now we have a self-described "West Point Mafia" class of 1986 and a JCS Chairman far more politically motivated than Dunford and Dempsey take over Pentagon

    Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Harper , 03 January 2020 at 01:06 PM

    It has been pointed out to me that until his retirement in October 2019, JCS Chairman Joe Dunford was a factor in tempering neocon fervor for war. The same was true for his predecessor Martin Dempsey. Now we have a self-described "West Point Mafia" class of 1986 and a JCS Chairman far more politically motivated than Dunford and Dempsey. This looks to be to be more dangerous than when Bolton the chicken hawk was running around the West Wing. This is a recent Politico profile of the new Defense team, including Pompeo, Esper and other key national security advisors to Trump.

    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2019/11/17/west-point-alumni-pompeo-esper-state-department-071212

    Jack , 03 January 2020 at 12:51 PM
    Rand Paul opposing the nomination of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State, March 2018: "I'm perplexed by the nomination of people who love the Iraq War so much that they would advocate for a war with Iran next. It goes against most of the things President Trump campaigned on."
    Fred -> Harper... , 03 January 2020 at 06:19 PM
    Harper,

    Thanks for the link. The Trump triumvirate of class of '86 advisors did the minimum time on active duty and left service for greener pastures. The move to politics is reminiscent of the neocons decameron mentioned on the prior thread. It looks like the move to war which only the neocons want is coming on in full force.

    robt willmann , 03 January 2020 at 03:07 PM
    After around 25 people were killed by a U.S. attack over the weekend, and subsequently the damage was being done to the "embassy" in Iraq, it looked like a real problem was developing. But it seemed as if Iraqi security people had let the demonstrators and attackers into the area where the U.S. embassy is, and then the following day were not letting them in, and so the embassy cleanup would begin. At that time I felt better about the situation. In other words, the Iraqi government, such that it is, allowed the protest and damage at the embassy to occur, and then was stopping it after making the point of a protest.

    However, that defusing of the situation by the Iraqi government by shutting down the embassy protest was for naught when the ignorant people in the U.S. government carried out the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and several others inside Iraq itself. Now there is a real problem.

    [Jan 04, 2020] The rule of law has its uses and destroying the structure on which their world rests does have consequences.

    Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    John Merryman , 03 January 2020 at 06:23 PM

    Given the real masters of the universe are the very rich, would the Iranians see them as logical targets?

    Sheldon Adelson comes to mind, as he is a primary backer of both Trump and Netanyahu. As well as likely not known, or appealing to Trump's base, so avenging his death wouldn't appeal in the same way as soldiers or diplomats. Especially leading up to the election. Not only that, but if the very rich were to sense their Gulfstreams are somewhat vulnerable to someone with a Stinger at the end of the runway in quite a few tourist destinations, Davos, etc, the pressure from the People Who Really Matter might be against further conflict.

    The rule of law has its uses and destroying the structure on which their world rests does have consequences.

    [Jan 04, 2020] The US controls "Israel". Thinking that "Israel" set up a think tank to trick or manipulate Trump into declaring war on Iran confuses the situation. Iran has been a target of Western interests stretching back to the 1920s -- way before Israel was even founded. It was the US/British who toppled its gov in '53, and there are plenty of other examples of egregious interference in other MENA countries before '67

    Who control whom is probably more complex question that the author assumes taking into account Israel lobby and Adelson money
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    David , Jan 4 2020 18:03 utc | 10
    b, the US controls "Israel". Thinking that "Israel" set up a think tank to trick or manipulate Trump into declaring war on Iran confuses the situation. Iran has been a target of Western interests stretching back to the 1920s -- way before Israel was even founded. It was the US/British who toppled its gov in '53, and there are plenty of other examples of egregious interference in other MENA countries before '67.

    The US ruling class -- large banks, oil companies, mining companies, arms manufacturers -- wants a war on Iran in a vain attempt to recover the general rate of profit
    when its economy is about to default in the coming recession.

    expat , Jan 4 2020 18:06 utc | 11

    Hey Zanon,

    When on the previous thread I posted something about what Magnier had said regarding Trump trying to get Iran to temper its response, you said of this information "its fake of course".

    Now, b above has reproduced the same extract from Magnier. Care to tell us how you know that it's fake?

    Lozion , Jan 4 2020 18:07 utc | 12
    My @6 was meant for @1..

    Here is Paveway IV's post for the prior thread to complement b on the red flag symbolism:

    "The Shia Red Flag was raised on the top of the Jamkaran Mosque in the Iranian city of Qom, second largest in the Persian country, after General Qassem Soleimani, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps' (IRGC's) elite Quds Force, was assassinated in an aerial attack when his vehicle was targeted in the Baghdad International airport. The Red Flag is the flag of Imam Hussein and marks the colour of blood which, many say, symbolises revenge and an impending severe battle."

    I wonder what Sheik Imran Hosein makes of this..

    oldhippie , Jan 4 2020 18:11 utc | 13

    Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked.
    Glass parking lot is the desired end.

    This sentiment is bottom to top in America. Measured response? No way can Iran 'measure' a response.

    More generally the sentiment is that a little war in Iran, a few nukes, is not even a big thing. Football scores more important.

    Sasha , Jan 4 2020 18:21 utc | 15 Isabella , Jan 4 2020 18:22 utc | 16
    "Sitting in coffee shop in Chicago listening to Americans. The general sentiment is they had it coming and Iran should be nuked.
    Glass parking lot is the desired end."

    That's pretty much the picture i get from reading responses in UK MSM, not only from English, but many giving American addresses. They are all pretty much thoroughly brainwashed, believing as gospel the lies they've told, and still think that they are the "White hatted, good guys, who do good things for the places they bomb and invade".

    it seems they will be supportive of an attack on Iran, and if their maniac "leaders", the basement crazies who got out of the basement, realise this, it increases substantially the chances of a "hot" war. In that case, should it escalate out of control, your Chicago coffee deadheads will get the Glass parking lot they want. It just wont be in the ME. Or Russia. They can have their very own, in their own back yard.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Adelson money at work: Trump threatens to bomb 52 sites in Iran

    That's probably not Trump. That's probably Adelson money.
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Passer by , Jan 5 2020 0:36 utc | 132

    ... So what happened to the naive people who were putting their peace hopes in Trump? He just said he will strike important sites in Iran, including cultural sites.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Trump threatens to bomb 52 sites in Iran

    Notable quotes:
    "... It is time b and the others admit that they made a mistake. b has been supportive of keeping Trump in power and his reelection. This is a mistake. karlo1 also expressed some support for Trump, which is naive, and inexcusable, for such an intelligent person. ..."
    "... Let's make a bet that all of those who somehow supported Trump here will eat their words this year. ..."
    "... It is time for people to think very carefully and deeply about things. Do not be naive. Think very carefully. Get your brains working, please. ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Passer by , Jan 5 2020 0:36 utc | 132

    Trump threatens to bomb Iran.

    So what happened to the naive people who were putting their peace hopes in Trump? He just said he will strike important sites in Iran, including cultural sites.

    It is time b and the others admit that they made a mistake. b has been supportive of keeping Trump in power and his reelection. This is a mistake. karlo1 also expressed some support for Trump, which is naive, and inexcusable, for such an intelligent person.

    Let's make a bet that all of those who somehow supported Trump here will eat their words this year.

    It is time for people to think very carefully and deeply about things. Do not be naive. Think very carefully. Get your brains working, please.

    psychohistorian , Jan 5 2020 0:44 utc | 133

    Asymmetrical warfare may come from China.

    If I were China at this point, watching the schoolyard bully beating up on a fellow citizen, I might just want to take the Bully's focus off the fellow citizen and, with Russia's backing, tell the bully to pick on someone their own size.

    Given the brazenness of the threats and provoking going on to start some military conflict, maybe China needs to play the "I won't sign the trade deal and I want to cash in my US Treasuries." cards to redirect the narrative and focus.

    I like the silence of nations watching the bully trying to goad the world into military war. It speaks volumes that Trump is being the biggest bully he can to incite military warfare which they would lose if they don't go nuclear.

    I find it saddening that so many commenters here don't seem to grasp that asymmetrical warfare that is needed now is not the eye for eye type. Military warfare is the problem, not the solution.

    Really?? , Jan 5 2020 0:47 utc | 134
    "Trump: "We targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!"

    Threats! I.e., Trump to Iran: If you don't let us off the hook for what we did to you, you will be sorry!! Wouldn't this also be a war crime per . . . Geneva? Nuernberg? Destruction of cultural sites?

    The man is really a terrifying nutter who thinks nothing of destroying ancient cultures while sitting in his gauge, glitzy digs in the Trump Tower or Mar-a Lago.

    chu teh , Jan 5 2020 0:48 utc | 135
    Son of Daddy Warbucks
    Raised by liars
    Surrounded by minders
    His spark a prisoner
    Trapped.
    div> Come Monday, Iran can wait a day, a week, 10 months. Meanwhile Trump will wither away of fear.

    Posted by: bjd , Jan 5 2020 0:55 utc | 137

    Come Monday, Iran can wait a day, a week, 10 months. Meanwhile Trump will wither away of fear.

    Posted by: bjd | Jan 5 2020 0:55 utc | 137

    juliania , Jan 5 2020 0:57 utc | 138
    Thanks to Really @ 124 - Yes, I do know that Iran is not Arabic - the interview I was remembering was in Qatar in October after a meeting that Zahir had addressed concerning his HOPE initiative, and that interview had been posted on twitter - I could not find it in my search just now, but my confusion was due to, I believe, his mentioning Arabic countries at one point. Apologies for the misstatement. You are correct that the initiative is aimed more widely than that.
    PavewayIV , Jan 5 2020 1:00 utc | 139
    Lozion@62 - Re: Your Magnier quote, "The US did not plan to kill the vice commander of the Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi brigade Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes when it assassinated Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Soleiman"

    The light bulb above my chimpanzee brain just flickered (briefly). Somewhere on SST (maybe Lang?): something to the effect of 'Never underestimate US gov/mil incompetence'. Maybe it was the opposite of what Magnier thought really took place.

    Treasonous, dual-citizen chickenhawks of the US possibly targeted Hashd al-Shaabi vice-commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes . They were trying to kill him because they found out from some snitch that he just showed up at the airport for some reason. The all-seeing US didn't realize Soleimani was even there . I guess because the sneaky Soleimani flew commercial into Baghdad and probably carried his bags to the waiting SUVs. Who would have expected that ? How devious!

    This seems entirely plausible to me. Soleimani was too expensive a target - end of the State of Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and all. But whacking a vice-commander of Hashd al-Shaabi with a quarter-million dollar JAGM? Hell YEAH! We live for this kind of preventative assassination heroism in the US. Especially if accompanied by colorful graphics.

    The awkward and delayed response of the usual US mil/gov mouthpieces makes this ridiculous scenario even more believable. I have thoroughly convinced myself that this was a US screw-up of EPIC proportions. In case the US government is reading MoA, this was all Lozion's doing. I'm an innocent conspiracy primate.

    Really?? , Jan 5 2020 1:05 utc | 140
    Really?? 134
    "gauge, glitzy digs"

    Uh, that was supposed to be "gauche."

    Jackrabbit , Jan 5 2020 1:10 utc | 141
    I don't trust Magnier's reporting about an offer made by USA to Iran and his speculation that Trump "offering the life of a 4-star general" is as nonsensical as it is irresponsible.

    In the past I've found Magnier to be unreliable - like when he has lauded Israel and hinted that Iran was behind the tanker attacks. It sometimes seems to me that Magnier relishes the possibility of a war with Iran.

    Magnier's reporting is inconsistent with Trump Administration actions now and in the past. Trump was "locked and loaded" for war with Iran in September! So why would Trump offer to lift sanctions and strike a nuclear deal now EXCEPT AS A RUSE.

    We should also be mindful that the Iranians have refused to negotiate while sanctions are in place. This has been Iran's position for quite some time. Reporting about an rebuffed offer without noting this is irresponsible and a disservice to readers.

    PS Why does Magnier's site track users via graph.facebook?

    <> <> <> <> <> <>

    I find it highly doubtful that Iran brought down PanAm 103 .

    Such speculation only plays into USA's depiction of Iran as a terrorist state.

    !!

    juliania , Jan 5 2020 1:10 utc | 142
    I know we are not to feed the trolls, but this is a meme worth commenting on:

    "...So what happened to the naive people who were putting their peace hopes in Trump?..."

    Many here are emphasizing this doubtful implication (even Circe, whom I praised for a stellar observation on the subject of Iran - and it even crept into my own cut and paste of Suilimani's attributes.

    We do not know (and I'm grateful to Pepe for entering this into his recent article) how much of this is being orchestrated by Trump of his own unadulterated initiative. We agree it's a mafia operating. Is he the boss of it? That's speculation. What is important is that those (and we've seen how they operate) in 'power' are calling the shots.

    So I'm viewing with suspicion any post (including mine) that accidentally or not inserts this meme.

    Patroklos , Jan 5 2020 1:12 utc | 143
    Posted by: bevin | Jan 4 2020 23:17 utc | 97

    Bin Laden, Al Baghdadi, etc were not beloved state officials or state actors of any kind. Qaddafi, like Saddam, was toppled in actions that were designed to look like regime change from below -- but I agree to some extent that his death comes close, but was Qaddafi singled out by a precision hit in the precise fashion we are seeing here. But my point is that a bridge has been crossed here in terms of scale, brazenness, and the extent to which no attempt was made to conceal that it was a hit ordered directly by POTUS. It is an unprecedented shift in international relations where a host of other covert tactics were fully available and would have achieved the same outcome.

    A User , Jan 5 2020 1:15 utc | 144
    I guess I'm the only human round here who finds the child like refusal by so many to believe that Iran played a payback card with Lockerbie, a very small stunt that didn't require much at all in the way of participants, while they lap up lurid (& frequently white supremacist at heart) nonsense conspiracies such as that 911 was a deliberate strategy (one that would have required a cast of hundreds if not thousands, all staying schtum for evermore) - f++king ludicrous.
    The Iranians had to teach amerika that shooting down a passenger jet had major consequences. They did that while benefiting from real world politics where amerika needed to have Iran & Syria (who had assisted) onside for gulf war 1. Libya got stitched up because they were convenient mugs who lacked friends in the ME because the colonel had no time for pretty much every other ME leader - his interest had always been Africa.
    This is pretty typical of people who have a need to see everything in black or white. Don't say anything bad about Iran or Syria because they are enemies of fukasi eh. What use are nations such as Iran or Syria if they are not prepared to get their hands dirty once in a while? No use.
    The fact that Iran got just the right payback in a just way then stopped is something people should be proud of Iran for, rather than squealing "No No they wouldn't they couldn't do that."
    I can remember celebrating down the workers' club on the day news of the Lockerbie bombing came out. What had occurred was obvious, sure a few innocents died, that happens in war, the war amerika had kicked off and if that plane hadn't gone down most of the passengers would have been sitting in a coffee shop today with half a chubbie in their pants at the thought amerika had showed that 'Sullymanny' who was the boss.

    b is correct to bring up that action because it encapsulates exactly how Iran is, truth and justice are at the heart of everything Iran's leadership believes & does. It wasn't Iran who fitted up Libya - amerika & england did that. Iran had merely insisted that the entire plane saga be buried if amerika wanted any assistance with Saddam Hussein, who let's face as far as Iran was concerned deserved everything he got. George H Bush showed himself to be at least as silly as his son - neither had any comprehension of what would happen should Ba'ath be removed from power in Iraq, that Iran would be the major beneficiary.
    That I reckon is a major part of why amerikan leaders & their zionist proxies get so hot on Iran. Iran played them like a bitch and now they know it.

    arata , Jan 5 2020 1:22 utc | 145
    @130

    If Lockerbie incident substantiated with Rober Fisk stories or world powers intelligence evidences, Iran definitely would be sanctioned and would pay very high price, would be tried in international criminal court.
    Why they did not brought Gadhafy to the court? Because they did not have clear evidence.
    Look other works of Robert Fisk, how is Independent now? What color is it now?

    Passer by , Jan 5 2020 1:25 utc | 146
    Posted by: juliania | Jan 5 2020 1:10 utc | 142

    My view about Trump is based on my psychological portrait of Trump. He is a US supremacist, plus a military (see their presence around him and the large increase in mil budgets) and a zionist (see his family) puppet.

    I see him as an aggressive animal. He will start a war if he can get away with it. He also likes to grandstand, so he hates the US decline in the world. He wants to brag how great he (and by proxy the US) is. It is also known that he does not like muslims. No way for him to have good relations with Iran.

    He is a gambler. He will push and push, as long as he could get away with it. In international relations though, especially in the relations with some countries, who have strong grievances against the US, this could lead to war.

    Trump said that he could nuke Afghanistan is necessary. Sorry, but i do not see in this talk his advisors behind him, but only his own animalistic nature.

    Truth is, i was supportive of Trump in the past, but with time i changed my opinion. After careful observation. And i'm glad i did. It shows that my mind is still flexible, and will accept even the unpleasant truth, as long as it is the truth.

    If i'm calling now a person that i was relatively supportive in the past "an animal" you can imagine my disappointment.

    Patroklos , Jan 5 2020 1:27 utc | 147
    Addendum to @143
    Unless of course the lack of concealment was a deliberate provocation to incite a real war. In which case Iran must choose asymmetry. Hit KSA and close the Gulf. The world will sideline the US in a panicked scramble to quieten everything down. But I don't see evidence that the markets believe this will happen. Oil not really moving up that much. A good analysis of the financial markets' view on this would shed some light.

    Also, does anybody have an accurate summary of the current structure of the Iraqi parliament, someone who can crunch the numbers? The US would surely have been preparing well in advance to prevent a spill to evict them, but is it in the bag or is it fluid? I wonder what the bookies are offering...

    Really?? , Jan 5 2020 1:33 utc | 148
    Paveway IV 139

    An "Oh, shit" moment, big-time.

    Canthama , Jan 5 2020 1:37 utc | 149
    Too much noise from the US, as usual, threats blah blah, there are simply not enough fire power in the Gulf to go to war against Iran, just recall what took from many countries to invade Iraq, so no WWIII, no major confrontation is expected. The Orange Man is clearly agitated, his few TV appearances, are showing a very disturbed person, not the usual Trumpest we know about.
    The backstage is intense, Iran has to retaliate, the US gets that, but it is trying to reduce the impact, this is definitively what is being dealt in the Swiss, Oman and Qatar meetings in the past 24 hrs. There will be more contacts until this whole mess is done.
    Iranians and Iraqis are not afraid, they want confrontation, it will be hard for their leaders to hold them at bay, but I believe the payback is coming slowly, in pieces, not once, but in several blows, a masterpiece could be against American allies in the region, since the US will have hard time re retaliate, and the damage to the US will be done as it was with the tankers, agains KSA etc... We should also expect IEDs to kill many soldiers and US mercenaries, the later will be focused for sure, and that means in Iraq and Syria.

    Would like to share with the SyrPers visiting MoA, that until the site is not back on line, we are trying to gather at Platosgun.com, at Taxi's place, so far we managed to some Syrpers there and get out comment section back to live in a different address, at least for while. See you there SyrPers.

    chu teh , Jan 5 2020 1:41 utc | 150
    Have we missed an obvious explanation for shocking behavior?

    That control of Iran is needed to enable the Crown to do Brexit and flourish? That middle-east oil/gas and the politics of global availability are crucial to the Crown's survival as elitist Royalty.

    The US.gov has acted as the Crown's proxy for a very long time, knowingly or unknowingly.

    Look at a global map of Planet Earth. Look at England [if you can find it]. And don't confuse it with Japan, which also knows something about needing/wanting proxies...knowingly or not.

    Now, go do Brexit without guaranteed [under control] sources of energy and other plunder.

    Beibdnn , Jan 5 2020 1:49 utc | 151
    People have lost their fear of Nuclear weapons. If the U.S. use Nukes against Iran, the radioactive cloud will be blown across the Atlantic Ocean and land where?
    Quite apart from the fact that if the U.S. use Nukes without a serious retaliation, nowhere is safe. Putin has been quoted that any form of nuclear weapon used on any of it's allies will be considered as a nuclear attack on Russia itself and will be responded to by a full scale retaliatory strike.
    As the U.S. has no defense against the latest Russian weaponry, they will realize that indeed, the living will envy the dead.
    I have no idea as to what the attack strategy of Russia will be but I doubt it will be to kill millions of people. Far more effective Is to wipe out major infrastructure, transport, water and energy systems and then see what 340 million people do to survive.
    Patroklos , Jan 5 2020 1:53 utc | 152
    jadan | Jan 4 2020 23:48 utc | 112

    Well put. We in Australia have a mini-Trump for PM (an embarrassing fawning dog licking Trump's balls on his recent visit to the US) who is currently mismanaging our bushfire catastrophe due to a total lack of empathy. A former marketing manager, Scott Morrison is a sociopath who makes bullies look like Mother Teresa. The combination of self-righteous evangelism with fanatical neoliberal ideology, when wedded to a lust for power at all costs and the crushing of any dissent (usually through awful marketing-school cynicism), makes for extreme social and political toxicity. He adores Trump and actually took notes at an Ohio rally (I kid you not). As the east coast burns like never before (a region the size of Texas gone, 1500 homes, 20+ lives lost) he went on holiday to Hawaii (staying in a Trump hotel). When he returned he was greeted by visceral hostility (enormously satisfying to watch here ). His instinct was to make an ad explaining how great his leadership is(n't). His position is owed to his commitment to Australia's only three sources of wealth: selling coal and iron ore to China, real estate (ponzi scheme), banking (even bigger ponzi scheme). I would drone strike him and Trump in a New York minute

    AntiSpin , Jan 5 2020 1:56 utc | 153
    @ Helmut | Jan 4 2020 20:30 utc | 65

    "A new California law fines you $1,000 if you shower and do 1 load of laundry in the same day. And if the Gov declares a drought, the fine goes up to *$10,000*."

    That is completely and utterly false. Here is the truth:
    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/correct-information-california-water-efficiency-222625943.html?guccounter=1

    Lozion , Jan 5 2020 1:58 utc | 154
    @139 PWIV. My take here from before Magnier's post:

    Posted by: Lozion | Jan 4 2020 2:25 utc | 363

    "Killing Mohandes was not part of the plan imo. Note how he is never mentioned in Western press? The US will now have to contend with an extraordinary parliament session this Sunday and likely a vote for US troop ousting will be made. Surely that's not what the US wanted though it had to be anticipated if Mohandes got hit. Either they ignored he was present or decided it was worth the risk. Now its blowback time. Lets see what Sadr's block will vote. He will finally reveal is true colors by making or breaking the vote (53 MP's).."

    You may be right though and it is the opposite but I think IL leaked the info on Soleimani going to Baghdad for the funeral of the martyred PMU soldiers and the hit was greenlighted..

    Sasha , Jan 5 2020 1:59 utc | 155
    @Posted by: Really?? | Jan 5 2020 0:47 utc | 134

    And this way we already can test who inspired the US/Israel sponsored terrorists in Syria and Iraq to destory all the cultural heritage there...sicne The Donals just confess this was in their strategic manuals....The Syrian government should keep a capture of that Twitt for further claims on compensations at ICC...

    Obviously, nobody swallowed that was an ingenious occurence of those brutes to the eyebrows of Captagon...Someon wanted those treasure destroyed and payed to smugle those able to be so..

    Robert Snefjella , Jan 5 2020 1:59 utc | 156
    Iran has already been under attack: And much lied about:

    From Oct. 2019 Iran claims two explosions on board the Iranian Sabiti oil tanker were caused by a missile attack in the Red Sea

    Sept 2018 At least 29 people, including children, have been killed in a terrorist attack on a military parade in south-west Iran, responsibility claimed by Islamic State and a separatist group.

    Aug 2015 "Israel's defense minister hinted on Friday that the Jewish state's intelligence services were behind the rash of killings of Iranian nuclear scientists."


    And then there are the false accusations: June 2019 Hours after the U.S. released video footage that 'showed' an Iranian boat removing an unexploded mine from the side of an oil tanker, the Japanese owner of that vessel said that the ship was likely damaged by a "flying object" and dismissed claims of a mine attack as "false."

    arata , Jan 5 2020 2:09 utc | 157
    @141 Jackrabbit

    The news was distorted and interpreted, hand-to-hand differently.
    Swiss Ambassador in Tehran was summoned for Solaimani assassination, he went to Iran foreign ministry, yesterday morning ( Swiss is represent and protect USA affairs in Iran). At the same visit he delivered a letter from USA to Iran. What is the content of the letter is not known to public. The Sepah commander in his speech hinted that American ( through a country) has requested to set a limit ( or ceiling) for retaliation and Iran has reject the request. ( who was the third country? Nobody knows, many countries are trying to mediate every hour).
    In an interview Zarif explained that Swiss ambassador was summoned, he came in the morning, in the same session he delivered an indecent letter from USA. He was summoned in the afternoon, came and received our sturdy an tough written response.
    A 4 star general or like that are logical interpenetration. Why you do not look Chris Morphy's speeches?
    He ( Morphy) said equivalent to Solaimani is American secretary of defense. Would you satisfy with Morphy interpretation?

    Passer by , Jan 5 2020 2:09 utc | 158
    Posted by: Patroklos | Jan 5 2020 1:27 utc | 147

    >>Also, does anybody have an accurate summary of the current structure of the Iraqi parliament, someone who can crunch the numbers? The US would surely have been preparing well in advance to prevent a spill to evict them, but is it in the bag or is it fluid? I wonder what the bookies are offering...

    In the iraqi parliament, sunnis and kurds are against expelling the US. They are a minority though. There are also two small shia factions who are against that.

    But the expellers will have the majority if Muqtada al Sadr supports them. So by the coming vote, it will become clear who is a US agent in Iraq, and who is not.

    My bet is a 70 % probability for a vote to expell the US from Iraq.

    CogintiveDissonance , Jan 5 2020 2:14 utc | 159
    @Moon
    Fitst, as others have pointed out, it is unclear who was responsible for the downing of Pan AM 103 . Many took credit for it and ultimately it may have been the CIA itself.

    Second, Iran has always been of strategic interest to great powers even before Israel existed or oil was discovered there. To suggest that the US would have no strategic interest in controlling Iran if it were not for Israel is ridiculous. The US deep state has been trying to reclaim Iran since Carter lost it. Also, note that Israel supplied weapons to the Islamic Republic of Iran during the the Iran-Iraq war.

    If want to look to past history of what Iran will do, you only need to look back to the Iran-Iraq war. After the US wiped out all Iranian oil platforms and the Iranian navy in operation Praying Mantis, a ceasefire and peace was negotiated soon afterwords. Trump and Lindsey Graham have warned Iran that they will lose all their oil refineries if they attempt retaliation. Iran no longer has any doubts that Trump will make good on that threat. To suggest that Iran will act irrationally and retaliate regardless of US consequences is the height of racism.

    Also to think that China or Russia will somehow defend Iran against US attacks is wishful thinking,


    dltravers , Jan 5 2020 2:16 utc | 160
    Trump is the perfect man, in the perfect position, at the perfect time, to finally get their wish and attempt to smash up Iran. He is no more than a front man. Every president is backed by some interests and competing interests back various candidates.

    If he (they) think he (they) can play the "rocket man" game against the Persian he (they) are sadly mistaken. Obviously Obama took a much different tack with Iran while smashing up some of the old Arab secular countries at the same time. I would not know how to begin to think through this madness of Empire regime planning.

    psychohistorian , Jan 5 2020 2:16 utc | 161
    Below is a Reuters article, so you know it is low balling the numbers but, admitting that not ALL Americans are on board with the Iran/Iraq attack

    "
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Groups of protesters took to the streets in Washington and other U.S. cities on Saturday to condemn the air strike in Iraq ordered by President Donald Trump that killed Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani and Trump's decision to send about 3,000 more troops to the Middle East.

    "No justice, no peace. U.S. out of the Middle East," hundreds of demonstrators chanted outside the White House before marching to the Trump International Hotel a few blocks away.

    Similar protests were held in New York, Chicago and other cities. Organizers at Code Pink, a women-led anti-war group, said protests were scheduled on Saturday in numerous U.S. cities and towns.

    Protesters in Washington held signs that read "No war or sanctions on Iran!" and "U.S. troops out of Iraq!"

    Speakers at the Washington event included actress and activist Jane Fonda, who last year was arrested at a climate change protest on the steps of the U.S. Capitol.

    "The younger people here should know that all of the wars fought since you were born have been fought over oil," Fonda, 82, told the crowd, adding that "we can't anymore lose lives and kill people and ruin an environment because of oil."

    "Going to a march doesn't do a lot, but at least I can come out and say something: that I'm opposed to this stuff," said protestor Steve Lane of Bethesda, Maryland. "And maybe if enough people do the same thing, he (Trump) will listen."

    Soleimani, regarded as the second most powerful figure in Iran, was killed in the U.S. strike on his convoy at Baghdad airport on Friday in a dramatic escalation of hostilities in the Middle East between Iran and the United States and its allies.

    Public opinion polls show Americans in general have been opposed to U.S. military interventions overseas. A survey last year by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found 27% of Americans believe military interventions make the United States safer, and nearly half said they make the country less safe.
    "

    Richard Steven Hack , Jan 5 2020 2:18 utc | 162
    One point: Since Iran now knows that it will be blamed for *anything* that happens in the Middle East - witness the Houthis attack on the Saudi oil fields, it does not have much incentive to keep its retaliation "plausibly deniable." So I suspect Iran will make it clear that it is responsible for whatever retaliation it conducts. It will only keep such retaliation at a level below a direct strike against senior US officials such as Pence, Pompeo, or the Joint Chiefs.

    My guess would be a strike against a division level or regional US military officer in the region - possibly via car bomb in the UAE or even Europe. Or an equivalent strike against an Israeli officer or diplomat via Hezbollah - although that might difficult due to limited access. That will make it obvious that is was Iran, but Iran may still use a cut-out such as Hezbollah or Shia elsewhere so no Quds Force operative can be identified as being involved.

    "Military security" is an oxymoron, as SEAL Richard Marcinko demonstrated with his Red Cell team decades ago. Every US military member in the world is now at increased risk for assassination and every US base in the world is at risk for a serious attack similar to the Marine Barracks bombing.

    I'd hate to be any US official flying into any airport in the Middle East - given that an equivalent drone strike can be done by almost every militant group in the Middle East, now that the Houthis have demonstrated how.

    psychohistorian , Jan 5 2020 2:19 utc | 163
    Below is another Reuters article, this one about the lying, boot licking and obfuscating UK

    "
    LONDON (Reuters) - Britain urged all parties to show restraint on Saturday after the United States killed Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani in an air strike, but said its closest ally was entitled to defend itself against an imminent threat.

    Defence minister Ben Wallace said in a statement that he had spoken to his U.S. counterpart Mark Esper, adding: "We urge all parties to engage to de-escalate the situation.

    "Under international law the United States is entitled to defend itself against those posing an imminent threat to their citizens," he added.
    "

    Cyrus Safdari , Jan 5 2020 2:28 utc | 164
    LYSSANDER the only suspect for the bombing of Capt William Roger's wife's van was a former family friend involved in some sort of personal dispute over a divorce.

    > Grudge, not terrorism, seen in Rogers bombing
    > Joe Hughes
    > Tribune Staff Writer
    >
    > 10/02/1989
    > The San Diego Union-Tribune
    >
    > TRIBUNE; 1,2,3,4,5
    > A-1:1,2,3,4; B-1:5
    > (Copyright 1989)
    >
    >
    >
    > Federal investigators have turned away from
    > terrorism as a motive for the
    > pipe-bombing of a van driven by the wife of Navy
    > Capt. Will C. Rogers III
    > and are looking at an American believed to have a
    > grudge against Rogers,
    >

    Patroklos , Jan 5 2020 2:31 utc | 165
    @158 Passer By

    Thanks for the succinct summary. That seems to accord with the balance across the country. It's hard to tell in Iraq whether religion (Sunni v Shi'a) means more than ethnicity (Arab v Persian). Like all these artificial nations created after the collapse of the Ottoman empire the ethno-tribal, religious and class breakdown is impenetrable and mercurial. It always reminds me of Frank Herbert's masterpiece Dune. 70% eh? I like those odds.

    In passing, it reached 49 degrees celsius where I live in western Sydney yesterday (a Sydney record) and the smoke haze is now so bad from multiple fire fronts on the edges of the city that driving is dangerous and motorways are closing. With heavy water restrictions in place my garden is dead. All my capsicums burnt on the stem yesterday as the road bitumen melted outside. This is the case from Queensland to South Australia, a coastline 2000km long. Plus Australia currently has the worst air quality in the world. And this is only one month into a 3 month fire season. Very depressing.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Nothing new under the sun

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    chu teh , Jan 5 2020 0:26 utc | 123

    bevin | Jan 4 2020 23:17 utc | 97
    The only new thing about this is that the victim was a person of power and eminence."

    Ghadaffi was not person of power and eminence?

    [Jan 04, 2020] Why Iraq is Much Worse than 'Trump's Benghazi' W. James Antle III

    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    "The anti-Benghazi!" President Donald Trump replied after liberals referred to the storming of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad as his Benghazi, referencing the assault on the American consulate in Libya under the previous administration. Trump, supporters maintained, did not hesitate to repel the attack. In fact, in breaking news Wednesday night it was reported that the U.S. military, at the direction of President Trump, killed the leader of the Iranian Quds Force, General Qassem Soleimani, in an airstrike at Baghdad's international airport.

    The United States has a right to defend its embassies and military bases overseas as well as the duty to protect Americans and other personnel. But the partisan finger-pointers are overlooking the real significance of Benghazi: it was the symbol of a failed military intervention for which Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton bore greater culpability than the grisly murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his colleagues. The regime change war Washington launched left Libya teeming with terrorists, full of territory that was chaotic, violent and unsafe.

    So too the war in Iraq, which initially created a power vacuum that empowered radicals who resemble the militant forces that attacked America on 9/11. In recent years, our focus has been on fighting ISIS rather than nation-building. But the longer-term result of the Iraq misadventure was to overthrow the Sunni state that controlled Baghdad and replace it with a Shiite government that would inevitably mean greater Iranian influence. The toppled Iraqi government was Iran's main counterweight in the region.

    Candidate Donald Trump understood that Iraq was a grievous -- "big, fat" -- mistake. "We've destabilized the Middle East and it's a mess," he said in 2015. It "may have been the worst decision" in U.S. history. "It started ISIS, it started Libya, it started Syria," Trump said as George W. Bush's brother looked on. "Everything that's happening started with us stupidly going into the war in Iraq . and people talk about me with the button. I'm the one that doesn't want to do this, okay?"

    Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in his first year as president of the United States, Trump laid into the Mesopotamian mishaps. "We've spent trillions of dollars overseas, while allowing our own infrastructure to fall into total disrepair and decay. In the Middle East, we've spent as of four weeks ago, $6 trillion. Think of it," he said. "And by the way, the Middle East is in -- I mean, it's not even close, it's in much worse shape than it was 15 years ago. If our presidents would have gone to the beach for 15 years, we would be in much better shape than we are right now, that I can tell you."

    "Great nations do not fight endless wars," Trump declared in his State of the Union address just last year. "Our brave troops have now been fighting in the Middle East for almost 19 years. In Afghanistan and Iraq, nearly 7,000 American heroes have given their lives. More than 52,000 Americans have been badly wounded. We have spent more than $7 trillion in the Middle East."

    Yet Iran has always been the unprincipled exception to Trump's skepticism of regime change. In his zeal to reverse Obama's legacy, he risks repeating Obama's folly. For the 44th president also owed his election to the fact that he recognized Iraq was a "dumb war." He left office with the U.S. mired in more wars of choice than before, including interventions in Libya, Yemen and Syria that have to varying degrees kept smoldering under Trump.

    Trump's foreign policy team is replete with advisers ready to turn proxy wars with Iran inside Iraq into a wider conflict, people whose vision of "America First" is indistinguishable from the vision that gave us endless wars in the first place. So far, the president has held them off . But his present course creates a high risk of war with Iran, and a resumption of hostilities in Iraq not limited to the fight against ISIS, whether he knows it or not.

    At the very least, Trump may cede the war issue to the Democrats. "We should end the forever wars, not start new ones," tweeted Elizabeth Warren, the liberal presidential candidate who trails Trump in the battleground states and is even losing to him in Virginia, according to the latest Mason-Dixon poll, which hasn't voted for a Republican White House aspirant since 2004. Why throw her a lifeline by implementing the foreign policy of candidates he defeated in 2016?

    Trump was elected to guard American borders. Patrolling the Iran-Iraq border will not get him reelected.

    W. James Antle III is the editor of The American Conservative.

    [Jan 04, 2020] US Kick Starts Raging '20s Declaring War on Iran by PEPE ESCOBAR

    Jan 04, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    I t does not matter where the green light for the U . S . targeted assassination in Baghdad of Quds Force commander Major General Qassem Soleimani and the Hashd al-Shaabi second-in-command Abu Madhi al-Muhandis came from.

    This is an act of war. Unilateral, unprovoked and illegal.

    President Donald Trump may have issued the order. The U . S . Deep State may have ordered him to issue the order. Or the usual suspects may have ordered them all.

    According to my best Southwest Asia intel sources, "Israel gave the U . S . the coordinates for the assassination of Qassem Soleimani as they wanted to avoid the repercussions of taking the assassination upon themselves."

    It does not matter that Trump and the Deep State are at war.

    One of the very few geopolitical obsessions that unite them is non-stop confrontation with Iran – qualified by the Pentagon as one of five top threats against the U . S . , almost at the level of Russia and China.

    And there cannot be a more startling provocation against Iran -- in a long list of sanctions and provocations -- than what just happened in Baghdad. Iraq is now the preferred battleground of a proxy war against Iran that may now metastasize into hot war, with devastating consequences.

    Please Make a 25th Anniversary Winter Fund Drive Donation Today.

    We knew it was coming. There were plenty of rumbles in Israeli media by former military and Mossad officials. There were explicit threats by the Pentagon. I discussed it in detail in Umbria last week with sterling analyst Alastair Crooke – who was extremely worried. I received worried messages from Iran.

    The inevitable escalation by Washington was being discussed until late Thursday night here in Palermo, actually a few hours before the strike. (Sicily, by the way, in the terminology of U.S. generals, is AMGOT: American Government Occupied Territory.)

    Once again, the Exceptionalist hands at work show how predictable they are. Trump is cornered by impeachment. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been indicted. Nothing like an external "threat" to rally the internal troops.

    Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei knows about these complex variables as much as he knows of his responsibility as the power who issued Iran's own red lines. Not surprisingly he already announced, on the record, there will be blowback: "a forceful revenge awaits the criminals who have his blood and the blood of other martyrs last night on their hands." Expect it to be very painful.

    Qasem Soleimani (left) with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis (right) at a 2017 ceremony commemorating the father of Soleimani, in Mosalla, Tehran. (Fars News Agency, CC BY 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

    Blowback by a Thousand Cuts

    I met al-Muhandis in Baghdad two years ago -- as well as many Hashd al-Shaabi members. Here is my full report . The Deep State is absolutely terrified that Hashd al-Shaabi (Popular Mobilization Forces) , a grassroots organization, are on the way to becoming a new Hezbollah, and as powerful as Hezbollah. Grand Ayatollah Sistani, the supreme religious authority in Iraq, universally respected, fully supports them.

    So, the American strike also targets Sistani -- not to mention the fact that Hash al-Shaabi operates under guidelines issued by the Iraqi Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi. That's a major strategic blunder that can only be pulled off by amateurs.

    Major General Soleimani, of course, humiliated the whole of the Deep State over and over again -- and could eat all of them for breakfast, lunch and dinner as a military strategist. It was Soleimani who defeated ISIS/Daesh in Iraq -- not the Americans bombing Raqqa to rubble. Soleimani is a super-hero of almost mythical status for legions of young Hezbollah supporters, Houthis in Yemen, all strands of resistance fighters in both Iraq and Syria, Islamic Jihad in Palestine, and all across Global South latitudes in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

    There's absolutely no way the U.S. will be able to maintain troops in Iraq, unless the nation is re-occupied en masse via a bloodbath. And forget about "security": no imperial official or imperial military force is now safe anywhere, from the Levant to Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf.

    The only redeeming quality out of this major strategic blunder cum declaration of war may be the final nail in the coffin of the Southwest Asia chapter of the U.S. Empire of Bases. Iranian Prime Minister Javad Zarif came out with an appropriate metaphor: the "tree of resistance" will continue to grow. The empire might as well say goodbye to Southwest Asia.

    In the short term, Tehran will be extremely careful in their response. A hint of -- harrowing -- things to come: it will be blowback by a thousand cuts. As in hitting the Exceptionalist framework -- and mindset -- where it really hurts. This is the way the Roaring, Raging Twenties begin: not with a bang, but with the release of whimpering dogs of war.

    Pepe Escobar, a veteran Brazilian journalist, is the correspondent-at-large for Hong Kong-based Asia Times . His latest book is " 2030 ." Follow him on Facebook .

    [Jan 04, 2020] Still lots of silence from Russians and Chinese

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Abe , Jan 5 2020 0:24 utc | 122

    @107 karlof1

    > Still lots of silence.

    "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

    [Jan 04, 2020] VIPS MEMO Doubling Down Into Yet Another 'March of Folly,' This Time on Iran by Ray McGovern

    This was an act of war. Unilateral, unprovoked and illegal.
    Notable quotes:
    "... For the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity: ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    T he drone assassination in Iraq of Iranian Quds Force commander General Qassem Soleimani evokes memory of the assassination of Austrian Archduke Ferdinand in June 1914, which led to World War I. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quick to warn of "severe revenge." That Iran will retaliate at a time and place of its choosing is a near certainty. And escalation into World War III is no longer just a remote possibility, particularly given the multitude of vulnerable targets offered by our large military footprint in the region and in nearby waters.

    What your advisers may have avoided telling you is that Iran has not been isolated. Quite the contrary. One short week ago, for example, Iran launched its first joint naval exercises with Russia and China in the Gulf of Oman, in an unprecedented challenge to the U.S. in the region.

    Cui Bono?

    It is time to call a spade a spade. The country expecting to benefit most from hostilities between Iran and the U.S. is Israel (with Saudi Arabia in second place). As you no doubt are aware, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is fighting for his political life. He continues to await from you the kind of gift that keeps giving. Likewise, it appears that you, your son-in-law, and other myopic pro-Israel advisers are as susceptible to the influence of Israeli prime ministers as was former President George W. Bush. Some commentators are citing your taking personal responsibility for providing Iran with a casus belli as unfathomable. Looking back just a decade or so, we see a readily distinguishable pattern.

    Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon payed a huge role in getting George W. Bush to destroy Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Usually taciturn, Gen. Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to Presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, warned in August 2002 that "U.S. action against Iraq could turn the whole region into a cauldron." Bush paid no heed, prompting Scowcroft to explain in Oct. 2004 to The Financial Times that former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had George W. Bush "mesmerized"; that Sharon has him "wrapped around his little finger." (Scowcroft was promptly relieved of his duties as chair of the prestigious President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.)

    In Sept. 2002, well before the attack on Iraq, Philip Zelikow, who was Executive Secretary of the 9/11 Commission, stated publicly in a moment of unusual candor, "The 'real threat' from Iraq was not a threat to the United States. The unstated threat was the threat against Israel." Zelikow did not explain how Iraq (or Iran), with zero nuclear weapons, would not be deterred from attacking Israel, which had a couple of hundred such weapons.

    Zombie Generals

    When a docile, Peter-principle, "we-are-still-winning-in-Afghanistan" U.S. military leadership sends more troops (mostly from a poverty draft) to be wounded and killed in hostilities with Iran, Americans are likely, this time, to look beneath the equally docile media for answers as to why. Was it for Netanyahu and the oppressive regime in Israel? Many Americans will wake up, and serious backlash is likely.

    Events might bring a rise in the kind of anti-Semitism already responsible for domestic terrorist attacks. And when bodybags arrive from abroad, there may be for families and for thinking Americans, a limit to how much longer the pro-Israel mainstream media will be able to pull the wool over their eyes.

    Those who may prefer to think that Gen. Scowcroft got up on the wrong side of the bed on Oct. 13, 2004, the day he gave the interview to The Financial Times may profit from words straight from Netanyahu's mouth. On Aug. 3, 2010, in a formal VIPS Memorandum for your predecessor, we provided some "Netanyahu in his own words." We include an excerpt here for historical context:

    "Netanyahu's Calculations

    Netanyahu believes he holds the high cards, largely because of the strong support he enjoys in our Congress and our strongly pro-Israel media. He reads your [Obama's] reluctance even to mention controversial bilateral issues publicly during his recent visit as affirmation that he is in the catbird seat in the relationship.

    During election years in the U.S. (including mid-terms), Israeli leaders are particularly confident of the power they and the Likud Lobby enjoy on the American political scene.

    Netanyahu's attitude comes through in a video taped nine years ago and shown on Israeli TV, in which he bragged about how he deceived President Clinton into believing he (Netanyahu) was helping implement the Oslo accords when he was actually destroying them.

    The tape displays a contemptuous attitude toward -- and wonderment at -- an America so easily influenced by Israel. Netanyahu says:

    " America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. They won't get in our way Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It's absurd."

    Israeli columnist Gideon Levy wrote that the video shows Netanyahu to be "a con artist who thinks that Washington is in his pocket and that he can pull the wool over its eyes," adding that such behavior "does not change over the years."

    Recommendation

    We ended VIPS' first Memorandum For the President (George W. Bush) with this critique of Secretary of State Colin Powell's address at the UN earlier that day:

    "No one has a corner on the truth; nor do we harbor illusions that our analysis is "irrefutable or undeniable" [as Powell claimed his was]. But after watching Secretary Powell today, we are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic."

    We are all in a limina l moment. We write with a sense of urgency suggesting you avoid doubling down on catastrophe.

    For the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:

    William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

    Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer and Division Director, State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research (ret.)

    Graham Fuller, former Chairman, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

    Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

    Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator

    Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC Iraq; Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

    Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (ret.); ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC)

    John Kiriakou, former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

    Karen Kwiatkowski, Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003

    Edward Loomis, NSA Cryptologic Computer Scientist and Technical Director (ret.)

    Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA presidential briefer (ret.)

    Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East & CIA political analyst (ret.)

    Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)

    Scott Ritter, former MAJ., USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq

    Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

    Sarah Wilton, Commander, U.S. Naval Reserve (ret.) and Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)

    Robert Wing, former U.S. Department of State Foreign Service Officer (Associate VIPS)

    [Jan 04, 2020] Cattle, pot, black -- Note to DemoRats who condemn Trump misadventure with assassinating General Suleimani

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    themistakenpresident , Jan 4 2020 23:46 utc | 111

    NOTE TO DEMOCRATS: Obama Launched 2,800 Strikes On Iraq, Syria Without Congressional Approval
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/note-to-democrats-obama-launched-2800-strikes-on-iraq-syria-without-congressional-approval

    [Jan 04, 2020] Looks like Israel requested this hit. And iether Trump or Pentagon chief or both were stupid enough to oblige.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump's closeness to Benjamin Netanyahu also plays into this scenario. I won't fall-off my bar stool in shock and surprise should such a joint operation prove to be true. ..."
    "... "America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. They won't get in our way Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It's absurd." Benjamin Netanyahu ..."
    "... CNN is desperately pushing the trope that 'Trump and his military commanders hastily assembled a situation room at Mar-a-Lago.' No evidence, no eye witnesses, no communique with WADC, no confirmation from Trump himself. Check, and mate. ..."
    "... The Neocons did it. They really did it! Any cogent political world analysis is drawn into a cauldron and destroyed. Everything devolves to 'Trump, Russia and Iran' now. Deep State wins! ..."
    "... Maybe the Israelis/neocons fear that Trump might lose in November and want to start the war while Bibi's favorite lapdog is still P0TUS. Not, that the Democrats are peacelovers (except for Sanders and Gabbard). But they might be more afraid of a negative reaction by the electorate. Murdering Suleimani NOW was not some hasty decision without a plan. I am afraid, it was done to get THE ultimate war in the middle east going, no matter if and how much restraint Iran will show. ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    GeorgeV , Jan 4 2020 18:33 utc | 24

    When President Trump announced the assassination of General Qassim Soleimani, he said that there was "unambiguous" information that Soleimani was planning attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria. My first thought was what were the sources of that "unambiguous" information?

    I'll bet dollars to donuts that it was Israel's Mossad. The sheer precision and timing of that "hit" had all the smell and feel of a Mossad operation. While the US did the actual killing, the Israelis did the 'fingering.'

    Trump's closeness to Benjamin Netanyahu also plays into this scenario. I won't fall-off my bar stool in shock and surprise should such a joint operation prove to be true.

    joetv , Jan 4 2020 18:36 utc | 25

    "America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. They won't get in our way Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It's absurd." Benjamin Netanyahu

    This bold statement of Israeli/Jewish hubris remains as true today as it was when he said it, over 20 years ago. This fact is only understood by examining 'who' controls the media.

    Jose Garcia , Jan 4 2020 18:43 utc | 26
    Israel requested this hit. And the Americans were stupid enough to oblige.
    Joerg , Jan 4 2020 18:49 utc | 31 Paul Leibowitz , Jan 4 2020 18:51 utc | 32
    CNN is desperately pushing the trope that 'Trump and his military commanders hastily assembled a situation room at Mar-a-Lago.' No evidence, no eye witnesses, no communique with WADC, no confirmation from Trump himself. Check, and mate.

    Having 'beheaded' Trump and launched what will be enormous death and destruction, the PNAC pesharim and their Neocon noodniks are desperate to deflect responsibility onto Trump, essentially they are 'necklacing' Trump and the Republican administration using the compliant poodled MSM.

    This allows the DNC WarHogs to pretend to be the 'People's Populist Party of Peace' at their Convention in July, and bring about the final Bolshevik takeover that Brexit and Hong Kong and a 1,000,000 man Deplorable march on Milwaukee had threatened to defeat.

    The high crimes of the Biden's, Kerry's and Pelosi's in Ukraine, and the genocidal crimes against humanity of Maidan itself, are now ink-blotted out of history.

    The Neocons did it. They really did it! Any cogent political world analysis is drawn into a cauldron and destroyed. Everything devolves to 'Trump, Russia and Iran' now. Deep State wins!

    Zanon , Jan 4 2020 18:52 utc | 34
    David

    Ridiculous attempt to protect the israelis,

    Trump puts Israel first,

    Congress did not get advance notice of the assassination of Suleimani, but Israel did:
    https://twitter.com/mattdpearce/status/1213209701321719811
    Zico , Jan 4 2020 19:42 utc | 53

    The Iranians know who the real enemy is. The US(Trump) is just the dumb executioner - they'll get their response in due time. In the mean time, the 1st response will be felt in Tel Aviv.

    Since coming to office, pompous Pompeo's been tripping back-n-forth between Tel Aviv and DC, taking his mad orders from Bibi.

    One thing for sure, US presence in the ME is on borrowed time.

    Zico , Jan 4 2020 19:42 utc | 53
    The Iranians know who the real enemy is. The US(Trump) is just the dumb executioner - they'll get their response in due time. In the mean time, the 1st response will be felt in Tel Aviv.

    Since coming to office, pompous Pompeo's been tripping back-n-forth between Tel Aviv and DC, taking his mad orders from Bibi.

    One thing for sure, US presence in the ME is on borrowed time.

    Oriental Voice , Jan 4 2020 19:50 utc | 56
    Israel wanted USA to go to war with Iran even well before the Syria debacle. Consequential considerations of such an event caused the US to hesitate, especially after UK parliament voted against being a partner to such a shenanigan. Now a US-Iran War may well be at hand. Whether this would conflagrate the whole ME, and later the whole world, remain to be seen.
    RST , Jan 4 2020 20:05 utc | 58
    US soldiers ready to die for Israeli interests under Israeli command:

    "The United States and Israel enjoy a strong and enduring military-to-military partnership built on a trust that has been developed over decades of cooperation," said USAF Third Air Force commander Lt.-Gen. Richard Clark, who also serves as the commander for the deploying Joint Task Force – Israel.

    ...

    According to Clark, the US and Israeli troops will work side-by-side under each other's relevant chain of command.

    "As far as decision-making, it is a partnership," he continued, stressing nonetheless that "at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika [Haimovitch]."

    Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist Israel with missile defense in times of war and, according to Haimovitch, "I am sure once the order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment and team to defend the State of Israel."

    And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said.

    "We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel and anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility," he said.

    https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Juniper-Cobra-begins-with-US-and-IDF-troops-simulating-missile-attacks-544598

    Curtis , Jan 4 2020 20:40 utc | 70
    George V 24
    Same here. A drone/missile strike to take out a leader, claim he's responsible for many deaths ("millions" DJT), and then claim innocence at any response is a classic Israeli tactic. They did this to test Iron Dome. There had been a ceasefire with Hamas, Israel killed a Hamas leader they claimed responsible for an attack 6 months earlier, and then pointed out Hamas when the usual rockets were launched.
    arata , Jan 4 2020 20:42 utc | 71 Circe , Jan 4 2020 20:46 utc | 72
    First I want to express admiration of Iranian courage in resisting the corrupting influence of Zionist expansionism and condolences for the immense loss of a brave hero and unparalleled military leader, Soleimani, who was not a general's general, but a soldier's general admired by many.

    Iran is a bastion of resistance against Zionism and therefore the number one target and enemy of Zionists. Despite, the invasion of Iraq, Israeli assault on Lebanon, proxy invasions of Syria and Yemen, and the severest of sanctions, the Iran domino remains standing. For this reason, Zionist Trump came into power guns blazing against Iran, intent on its destruction. There was no doubt on that, and his assassination of Iran's most revered general removes all doubt on his intent. The murder of Soleimani represents a cowardly act typical of a coward like Trump not to have to face a foreign opponent and military leader like Soleimani leading the Iranian offensive against Zionism and the looming war on Iran. But mark my words, Soleimani's spirit will be there on the battlefield of any war initiated by Trump and his cabal.

    Trump, the jackass liar that he is, justifies his barbaric act as a response to an imminent threat against U.S. forces and personnel. THIS IS A BALD-FACED LIE. If the threat were imminent then the logical urgent step would have been to sabotage the ACTUAL threat mounted as Soleimani did not arrive in Iraq to carry out any attack himself. This proves Trump is lying when he bragged this lie to the crowd at yesterday's rally. The truth is really that Trump wanted a shrewd Iranian general and formidable opponent out of the way to facilitate the Zionist goal to take on Iran. Trump resorted, as usual, to his con way of fooling everyone with this fabrication. Also, Soleimani had the stature to become the next President of Iran, and this was a sobering thought feared by the Zionist Trump cabal. Imagine a man of strength and intelligence, feared by many but loved by more, ruling Iran. Gutless, crass Trump killed that potential. As I wrote previously, Trump killed the albatross and misery will follow him for it. All said, Iran did have every right to avenge the killing of numerous militia by the U.S.; the funeral of which Soleimani was to attend in Iraq, making the act perpetrated on him from a drone all the more repulsive and dishonorable. It was as if yellow-belly Trump shot Soleimani in the back robbing him of the dignity of death in battle he deserved as a warrior of his calibre, albeit not of the glory that will never be Trump's.

    IMHO, Iran should first and most importantly, ferret out TRAITORS not loyal to the cause of resistance who delivered Soleimani to the enemy. Iran needs to tighten its security and scrutinize, clean up and enhance its intelligence network especially in view of escalating momentum towards war. It must use this time of mourning to rally public sentiment both in Iran and Iraq and strengthen its alliances great and small to the cause of resistance to imperial domination and, regionally, OCCUPATION--Zionist U.S. OCCUPATION in the Middle East. Unifying, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, even Palestine to the cause of ending ZIONIST U.S. OCCUPATION and ousting America from the Middle East and derailing corrupt Zionist expansion and influence should be PRIORITY NUMBER ONE. This means decrying high and low the monumental destruction, corruption and evil that this occupation has wrought on the entire Middle East and the hardship of massive displacement suffered and being suffered by millions.

    That is the fundamental goal, however, ending the occupation in Iraq by U.S. forces first is Iran's domino to victory . As far as retaliation, in my view, the multi-pronged strategy (death by a thousand cuts) I hear and read Iran might be contemplating would be more effective than one spectacular event, because it would make clear the ubiquitous nature of Iran's reach, and make the Zionist American opponent think twice about attacking Iran with deadly tentacles that will activate and mobilize anywhere to the detriment of its enemy.

    frances , Jan 4 2020 22:22 utc | 85
    My first thought with all of this has been, why now? After reading I have a possible answer.
    Background:1. The Russians have been building up in Syria for a major assault on remaining ISIS on the Syrian/Iraq border, the Iraqi/Iran forces announced that the planned assault would begin hours before the five Iraq/Iran military bases were hit. 2. Israel just suffered a defeat when they launched six missiles at Syria and five were taken out by Syria using Russian supplied weaponry. The sixth missile fell in the desert, was recovered by Syria and given to Russia.
    These two events are key; the US/Israeli ISIS teams in Syria and on the Iraqi border were about to be wiped out and control of the border by Syria leaving the US northern Syria installations without a supply line. The Israeli failed attacked showed that the Syrian defense systems were now fulling integrated with Russia and that the upcoming attack on ISIS would probably end them as well as Israel's ability to destroy Syrian/Iranian sites in Syria.
    I think the US military and Pompeo panicked, they came up with a quick casus belli by having one of their proxies lob missiles at a US encampment with the intent of killing a US citizen. They then hit the Iraqi/Iran teams that were part of the planned Russian assault shutting down the planned Russian attack. Pompeo and the Generals immediately flew to Fla to tell Trump what they had done. Silence from Trump,why? Because he knew that this decision was a trap to damage his reelection, he saw the plot which is why he stayed in Florida.
    Then things really went sideways IMO. Israel seeing it's chance in the confusion, used it's pawn Pompeo to order a hit on the airport killing the General, you will note that Israel says it was told before the hit, my guess is no, they told Pompeo to take the hit and he did.
    Israel immediately said it had nothing to do with the decision, Pompeo immediately said Trump ordered it. Trump was forced to say it was his decision and defend it IMO.
    Yes it is possible that Trump was told of an opportunity to take out the General but the MIC/Pompeo know Trump historically pulls back from attacks, remember the Bolton fiasco with the tankers, with the drone, they couldn't get Trump to attack then, why would he now attack a Iraqi airbase when the attack on the Iraq/Iran bases was such a disaster for US Iraqi relations? Why would they bother to ask him now after having put him in a box with the first strikes?
    Now there is talk that Trump has sent a Qatar rep to Iran to cut a deal. THAT is his initiative, none of the prior events are his initiatives. Could be wrong, and for all that is not to like about Trump he is not stupid, his goal is to win a Pulitzer prize as the peace president.
    Yes he rants about Iran, the guys who finance his campaign demand that, but push come to shove, who the hell wants to be remembered as the guy who started a nuclear war...and lost??


    Veritas X- , Jan 4 2020 22:28 utc | 86
    Told you all it's Nutandyahoo who is in charge of jUSA. The Tronald is only his stooge:

    Patriot Ali
    ‏ @LogicalAnalys1s

    Viral video shows official from SaudiArabia congratulating Israel pm Netanyahu over the death of #Qasem_Suleimani . Video is spreading like wildfire in pro #Iran accounts 😡
    World OSINT
    />
    1:04
    8:44 AM - 4 Jan 2020
    https://twitter.com/LogicalAnalys1s/status/1213501484790407171

    X-

    SharonM , Jan 4 2020 22:33 utc | 87
    Superior analysis! Thank you:)
    jared , Jan 4 2020 23:05 utc | 94
    @ Posted by: psychohistorian | Jan 4 2020 22:18 utc | 84

    Thank you. Someone making sense.
    Most are talking about this like it's halftime in a sporting match - completely juvenile.
    Iran needs to pull back and focus on making themselves stronger in economy and technology and for strong ties with other responsible players. They have opportunities with many countries which are increasingly disenchanted with the west. And the west is headed for an economic beating - which explains the desperate behavior.
    Even if Iran is very careful in their behavior Irael is going to continue to press for war - the psychotic fears most those that he has attacked.
    But maybe with careful behavior and planning and efforts to repair and maintain ties the Iraninans could be ready for that eventuality.

    juliania , Jan 4 2020 23:08 utc | 95
    In all of this, and the many comments, I must praise Circe for this final one @ 72. It strikes a definitive chord:

    "...That is the fundamental goal, however, ending the occupation in Iraq by U.S. forces first is Iran's domino to victory. As far as retaliation, in my view, the multi-pronged strategy (death by a thousand cuts) I hear and read Iran might be contemplating would be more effective than one spectacular event, because it would make clear the ubiquitous nature of Iran's reach, and make the Zionist American opponent think twice about attacking Iran with deadly tentacles that will activate and mobilize anywhere to the detriment of its enemy."

    It is clear that Qasseem Soleimani was of a stature for Iran that his legacy will be part of the determination for what follows in the eyes of his dedicated compatriots. I agree with Circe here - what will immediately follow is important. It might even include the extraction from Syria of American influence, which would require the cooperation of Assad. I am remembering that Iraq's foreign minister recently gave a speech concerning the unification of Arabic countries toward a peaceful end. That now must include the departure of US troops and is the antithesis to war, something that would make a commendable legacy for both generals who have now had their funeral at an important spiritual center.

    War is not on. The fall of the black domino is. But this is not retribution; that will come. Bravo Circe; good post.

    bevin , Jan 4 2020 23:17 utc | 97
    " I cannot recall an act of this kind in the last 50 years especially in the extent to which it seems to take for granted an underlying legitimacy and thus an naive openness, almost childlike in its self-belief..."
    patroklos @77
    Doesn't Osama bin Laden count? Obama ordered and took open credit for the assassination of dozens of individuals, many of them later shown to have been totally innocent of any involvement in politics, many children etc.
    And then, of course there was one Colonel Ghadaffi publicly assassinated, after his surrender, with extreme brutality.
    The only new thing about this is that the victim was a person of power and eminence.
    Thom Prentice , Jan 4 2020 23:19 utc | 99
    Pepe Escobar: "According to my best Southwest Asia intel sources, "Israel gave the US the coordinates for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani as they wanted to avoid the repercussions of taking the assassination upon themselves."
    https://thesaker.is/us-starts-the-raging-twenties-declaring-war-on-iran/
    max , Jan 4 2020 23:27 utc | 104
    Espen and Trump have made it clear that they will hold Iran responsible for whatever may happen in the region and that they will strike in response or preemptively. Essentially, that makes the real Iranian reaction largely irrelevant. And Israel could create a false flag incident #a la USS Liberty. Or some rogue groups that Iran cannot control might attack US troops or installations. Whether by design or accident, there will be a pretext to base another military strike against Iran on. And then another, until a full blown US-Iran war erupts which Bibi, Lieberman & co so desperately want.
    Years of relentless demonization of Iran in the US and the UK have brainwashed large swaths of the population. They will accept a war against Iran, albeit reluctantly, as long as not too many Americans get killed in its wake.

    I don't believe for a second that the US would "accept" a limited retaliation. They will jump at any opportunity. Lindsey Graham stands between Trump and impeachment and that warmonger is on record for seeking to bomb Iran's oil refineries. Incidentally, he was the only senator who Trump consulted prior to the murder. Could well be that Graham is right now the real P0TUS , at least until the senate has voted on impeachment. Conveniently, pelosi has put the impeachment on hold, thereby prolonging that situation. Coincidence? I don't think so.

    Maybe the Israelis/neocons fear that Trump might lose in November and want to start the war while Bibi's favorite lapdog is still P0TUS. Not, that the Democrats are peacelovers (except for Sanders and Gabbard). But they might be more afraid of a negative reaction by the electorate.
    Murdering Suleimani NOW was not some hasty decision without a plan. I am afraid, it was done to get THE ultimate war in the middle east going, no matter if and how much restraint Iran will show.

    I do think, btw that Trump blew his reelection by killing Suleimani. Another warmonger will assuredly take his place.

    Really?? , Jan 4 2020 23:39 utc | 109
    "CNN is desperately pushing the trope that 'Trump and his military commanders hastily assembled a situation room at Mar-a-Lago.' "

    Leibowitz # 32

    Why would they do this *after* the strike?
    That sounds kind of silly. And "hastily" sounds as though they were taken unawares . . . They were surprised to hear that Solameini had been taken out?????

    PavewayIV , Jan 5 2020 1:00 utc | 139
    Lozion@62 - Re: Your Magnier quote, "The US did not plan to kill the vice commander of the Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi brigade Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes when it assassinated Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Soleiman"

    The light bulb above my chimpanzee brain just flickered (briefly). Somewhere on SST (maybe Lang?): something to the effect of 'Never underestimate US gov/mil incompetence'. Maybe it was the opposite of what Magnier thought really took place.

    Treasonous, dual-citizen chickenhawks of the US possibly targeted Hashd al-Shaabi vice-commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes . They were trying to kill him because they found out from some snitch that he just showed up at the airport for some reason. The all-seeing US didn't realize Soleimani was even there . I guess because the sneaky Soleimani flew commercial into Baghdad and probably carried his bags to the waiting SUVs. Who would have expected that ? How devious!

    This seems entirely plausible to me. Soleimani was too expensive a target - end of the State of Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and all. But whacking a vice-commander of Hashd al-Shaabi with a quarter-million dollar JAGM? Hell YEAH! We live for this kind of preventative assassination heroism in the US. Especially if accompanied by colorful graphics.

    The awkward and delayed response of the usual US mil/gov mouthpieces makes this ridiculous scenario even more believable. I have thoroughly convinced myself that this was a US screw-up of EPIC proportions. In case the US government is reading MoA, this was all Lozion's doing. I'm an innocent conspiracy primate.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Tulsi on Trump assasignation of Iran military commender in Bahdad

    Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Elora Danan ,

    Tulsi...may be our last hope...

    https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1213168223127949313

    Tulsi for president!

    ISL , 03 January 2020 at 04:27 PM
    Dear Colonel, seems you find yourself in Tulsi's (good) company.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=kToUJaOVgTA&feature=emb_logo

    A. Pols , 03 January 2020 at 05:48 PM
    Tulsi makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately that disqualifies her for the presidency, not because she couldn't execute the functions of the presidency, but because neither the party apparatchiks nor the voters would give her the chance. These days either nationalistic claptrap or promises of more freebies are what carry the day. Quelle domage, eh?

    As for the Iraqi parliament voting to expel U.S. forces? That's an interesting question. If they did, they'd better vote to expel the "den of spies" at the embassy and insist on our having a normal sized legation (as all countries would be well advised to do). But if they do, would we leave? I personally doubt it even though it would be best if we did and let the Iraqis do what they will, which would probably be reverting back to some sort of strongman govt, of a type more suited to their cultural traditions and inclinations. It's high time we afforded the rest of the world the type of cultural and political autonomy we claim to revere so much.

    So, we leave? A good thing for us and for them and the world at large.

    Or, we don't? Then we expose the truth the rest of the world already knows, but we at least expose the truth to our own people who have been fed a steady diet of mendacious BS about what we've been doing over there all these years.
    That attack on the "airport limo" vehicles leaving Baghdad airport sure took some nerve on our part to think that we could sell something like that...

    And, did Trump actually order it, or did someone else in the MIC order it first and Trump laid claim to it afterwards? Uncle Joe, if he had ordered it, would have afterwards announced the execution of a fall guy and denied any complicity! If Trump didn't order it, he should throw whoever did under the bus instead of crowing and wrapping himself in the flag. I wonder about what actually happened in planning this hit job on prominent military people on their way to a funeral for 31 people who may or may not have had anything whatsoever to do with the death of a single American mercenary in Iraq in an attack by persons unknown on a small outpost.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Bryan Hemming

    Jan 04, 2020 | bryanhemming.wordpress.com

    | Jan 3 2020 9:53 utc | 13

    "The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come. Others will move in to take its place."

    Wait for awhile on that one. Iraq will have to take some major hits if it tries moving to the Russia China sphere. And it will have to deal with the fith column which are strong. Iraq will have to go through the fire - like Donbass, Syria ect until it is distilled to a solid core and then they will get support that will drive back the yanks.

    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 3 2020 9:53 utc | 14
    To summarize b: The US doesn't gain anything, and potentially loses everything they sought out to do in Iraq (and by extension; Syria), from the killing of Soleimani.

    So why do it? Was Soleimani really the target? Who benifits by drawing the US and Iran closer war?

    I wouldn't be surprised if an article about 'bad intel received from a 3rd party' pops up in the NYT in a few months time.

    The price of crude oil has jumped over $2 USD on the world markets since the news

    I expect the US to fully resist being booted out of Iraq (which would also make it's two major positions in Syria highly untenable). who could now believe that US troops in Iraq and Syria won't come under sustained attack now, by the many allies Iran has in the area?

    Elijah gives breaking news
    https://twitter.com/ejmalrai/status/1213032002682867715

    Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani considers "the #US attack against the #BaghdadAirport is a clear violation of #Iraq sovereignty".

    That is clear support for the US withdrawal from #Iraq.

    AND

    S Sistani condemns the "attack against Iraqi (not Iranian-militia) position on the borders killing our Iraqi sons to the hateful attack on #BaghdadAirport is a violation and internationally unlawful (US) act against anti-#ISIS hero(s) leading to difficult times for #Iraq".

    Posted by: michaelj72 | Jan 3 2020 10:05 utc | 19

    Posted by: never mind | Jan 3 2020 9:54 utc | 15
    Nice one, b, thanks...

    I've been following Elijah M. and several others on twitter, as well as more mainstream sources for several hours after learning of these assassinations.

    the absolute stupidity, maliciousness and wickedness of the US Political and Military Elites is truly astonishing. They have misjudged every single thing in that part of the world since 9/11 and the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and then Iraq - and spent/wasted well over $5 trillion. not to mention the horrific loss of life everywhere from Syria to Iraq and Yemen. And we are now looking at another even more catastrophic war.
    it is unbelievable

    Posted by: michaelj72 | Jan 3 2020 9:59 utc | 18
    Kurious

    "This was not Trump`s decision. Trump had to take responsibilty to show he is in command. He will soon realize that he was played by the CIA and the Israelis."

    Dont exempt Trump
    but that Trump is getting fooled by Israel is obvious:
    Tillerson says Netanyahu skillfully 'played' Trump using misinformation
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/tillerson-says-netanyahu-skillfully-played-trump-using-misinformation/

    Posted by: Zanon | Jan 3 2020 11:21 utc | 44
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 3 2020 11:18 utc | 43

    I'd expect the Iranians to be more subtle than that. I don't think there's any advantage for the Iranians to directly attack the US position in the ME.

    Posted by: Laguerre | Jan 3 2020 11:35 utc | 49

    [Jan 04, 2020] By killing Soleimani, the US takes a dramatic step with unknown consequences

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.timesofisrael.com

    At this early stage, it is not clear how Iran's retaliation will be carried out. Due in large part to Soleimani's own efforts over the past 20 years, Tehran has many options and venues at its disposal for reprisals through its proxies in the Middle East -- Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.

    While the United States claimed direct responsibility for the airstrike, Tehran or its proxies may seek their vengeance by striking US allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel.

    Speaking to Iranian state media, IRGC spokesman Ramezan Sharif explicitly threatened the State of Israel with retaliation.

    "The fleeting happiness of the Americans and the Zionists will in no time turn into mourning," Sharif said.

    Though Iran has typically refrained from launching large-scale strikes directly from its territory for fear of direct retaliations against the country itself, preferring instead to conduct attacks from the countries in which its proxies operate -- such a strike is by no means outside the realm of possibility.

    In addition to any physical reprisals, Tehran could bring to bear its extensive offensive cyber capabilities against the United States and its allies.

    The fleeting happiness of the Americans and the Zionists will in no time turn into mourning

    Iran, which was already expected to announce a further violation of the JCPOA next week, may also decide to further step up its uranium enrichment as a response to Soleimani's assassination.

    However, nothing is inevitable or certain. Though Soleimani was undoubtedly a key figure in the region and the US killing him presents serious potential for a wider and deadlier conflict between the American and Iranian alliances, recent Middle East history contains several cases of hugely important officials being killed without earth-shattering retaliations.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Reprisals against US to come at time and place of Iran's choosing

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

    The threat to America and its allies is greatest in the Middle East, but Tehran has ample options when it comes to taking revenge

    Julian Borger in Washington

    Fri 3 Jan 2020 12.29 EST Last modified on Fri 3 Jan 2020 17.32 EST Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email The constant sense of insecurity that Americans and allies will feel will be part of the revenge. Photograph: Nazanin Tabatabaee/Wana/Reuters Iran has spent decades preparing for a moment like this , developing methods and networks around the world that give Tehran the widest possible choice when it comes to taking revenge.

    In the weeks immediately after the airstrike that killed Iran's most powerful general , the threat against Americans and their allies will be greatest in the Middle East, but the risk will balloon out across the globe over the months and years to come.

    Any US outpost in Syria and Iraq, military or diplomatic, is vulnerable to attacks, likely to come from Iranian-backed militias linked to Kata'ib Hezbollah , which has served as Tehran's most reliable fist in Iraq. In Iraq, there will be even less protection from the state, which is furious about the attack outside Baghdad airport.

    The second ring of possible reprisals could follow an already familiar path, targeting oil shipments through the Persian Gulf. The leadership in Tehran will be conscious that one avenue of revenge against Donald Trump would be strike at his chances of re-election. An oil price spike, coupled with a backdrop of global instability and US vulnerability, would certainly hurt his campaign.

    In Afghanistan, Iran has longstanding ties with Hazara militias and solid basis for operations in Herat.

    In Lebanon, Hezbollah has long been Iran's right arm, and can strike Israel and US regional interests at any time. And Hezbollah has networks much further afield where there are pockets of Lebanese Shia diaspora, for example in Latin America and West Africa.

    Iranian intelligence has carried out assassinations in Europe, and there are a string of other attacks globally in which Iran or Hezbollah is suspected but not proven to be involved.

    US intelligence certainly believes Hezbollah was behind the bombing of an Israeli-Argentinian cultural centre in Buenos Aires in 1994, and the bombing of a bus full of Israeli tourists in Burgas, Bulgaria, in 2012. The CIA was also convinced that Iran was involved in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988 , in reprisal for the accidental downing of an Iranian airliner , Iran Air 655, five months earlier.

    While Tehran has ample choices, it also has limitations. It will want to avoid triggering an all-out war with the US and its allies. It may now decide to build up a covert nuclear arsenal, no longer bound by the 2015 nuclear deal which Donald Trump walked out of. It would be harder to go down that road in the middle of a firefight. And each act of retribution could use up the political capital Iran has around the world, most importantly backing from Russia and China.

    ss="rich-link"> Iran vows revenge for US killing of top general Qassem Suleimani Read more

    But while Iran is likely to choose its targets carefully, with an eye to deniability, there is little doubt that reprisals will come at a time and place of Tehran's choosing. The constant sense of insecurity that Americans and allies will feel will be part of the revenge.

    "I frankly have never seen the Iranians not respond – tit for tat. It's just never happened," said Robert Baer, a former CIA officer. "It's so in their DNA, [as is using] a proxy, which makes it more difficult to respond to. And their options are unlimited."

    Topics Iran

    [Jan 04, 2020] Russia is unlikely to tolerate the destruction of Iraq yet again and it's descent into Libya-like chaos

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    BM , Jan 4 2020 18:31 utc | 22

    Russia is unlikely to tolerate the destruction of Iraq yet again and it's descent into Libya-like chaos - which is what could happen if the US refuses to leave. Russia is unwilling to see a repeat of Libya. My speculation is that Russia might have issued very severe warnings to the US with respect to this to deter such conduct, similar to what seems to have happened when the US threatened Venezuela. One example of such a possible threat that I see as plausible might be that if the US takes further action in Iraq likely to result in civil war, Russia will totally destroy every US base in Syria (which on the invitation of the Syrian President they are legally entitled to do at any time).

    The alleged recent movement of Russian strategic command aircraft to Syria, capable of controlling the launch of strategic ballistic missiles, might be directed either to assist Russia in controlling any escallation connected with the destruction of US bases in Syria, or it could be to control the threat of Israel launching a nuclear attack against Iran, in the event of a war against Iran and Iran's inevitable reprisals against Israel.

    Russia repeatedly emphasises that it is not the world policeman, which is why Russia is normally very restrained in responses to US aggression, and responds only in relation to threats to Russian national security; nevertheless the breakdown of Iraq due to the refusal of the US to leave would certainly pose serious threats to Russian national security, and President Putin has been signalling recently that Russia's tolerance for US lawlessness is coming to an end.

    Les7 , Jan 4 2020 19:10 utc | 40

    In traditional Arab culture, a mediator - someone with the trust of both parties, objective, and who has the stature and ability to force compliance should a possible agreement be abrogated - brokers a 'pause', consults with both parties, to convey expectations.

    If the mediator considers the parties 'reconcilable' he arranges a "sulha" - a meeting where the leaders concerned meet face to face to to haggle out the details.

    Only Putin or Xi has such stature, only Putin may be able to enforce agreement.

    Reconciliation requires a level of respect for the other. The US respects no one, not even Putin.

    Iran has zero reason to trust any US agreement (JCPOA?)

    The US brings $ to its negotiations(offer to lift sanctions) reflecting its values-$, Iran looks for justice(punishment of those who did the deed), reflecting its value of life.

    The red flag says there is no possibility of reconciliation.

    Robert Snefjella , Jan 5 2020 0:22 utc | 121
    The United States launched a war of aggression, the supreme crime, upon Iraq in 2003, based on blatant lies, and are still there. Prior to that, they helped foment the war between Iraq and Iran, then attacked Iraq in 1991, and on top of the overt warfare there was the economic sanctions warfare. The death and maiming and poisoning of millions of Iraqis has been the American contribution to Iraq, over the last several decades. What for? How has this helped the United States? Or Europe? The main advocates for this supreme criminality has been the Israel lobby, Israel, and the supporters of Israel.

    The American Apache helicopters are still buzzing around over Baghdad, dealing out terror and intimidation and death. The murder by the United States of yet more Iraqi soldiers and officials recently has been largely absent from the propaganda narratives. But could those be 'the final straw'?

    As far as Trump's 52 target threat, this comes after the apparent please don't escalate and we'll make a deal - good cop-bad cop routine.

    The 52 number was used to remind mind-controlled Americans that the evil Iranians outrageously took 52 Americans hostage. American's don't just take people hostage; they give them orange suits and torture them, unless they kill them. Apart from murdering and maiming by the millions, they even stage fictional killings, like Osama bin laden, to entertain the zombies, and stick out their chests, hand out medals and the like.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Trump is weak, reckless and easily manipulated. This has long been obvious. He does not deserve to be reelected. But who befor him was?

    Notable quotes:
    "... He fired missiles into Syria on the basis of false propaganda and while he's ostensibly ordered troops out of Syria, it's like the Pentagon is thumbing their nose at him, while he tweets ..."
    "... In many ways Trump seems like Governor William J. Le Petomane, in Blazing Saddles. ..."
    "... Bush & Cheney supported by both parties invaded Iraq and created the ascendancy of Iran. Then Obama comes along and aids & abets Al Qaeda to head-chop Christians in Syria, once again with support from both our political parties. ..."
    "... Trump comes along as the "no more wasting money in the Middle East" guy. But surrounds himself with all neocons including his daughter & son-in-law. And he has shown to be generally clueless on anything beyond one slide on a Powerpoint. He thinks he's still on the set of The Apprentice. ..."
    "... I'd like to say that the US is no longer a Constitutional Republic. We have law enforcement & intelligence who ran a coup attempt and half the country thinks that was a good thing. We have coteries that lie and propagandize us into war that has cost the American people several trillion that they've had to borrow from future generations. With the Patriot Act, FISA and all kinds of other "anti-terrorist laws", we essentially have a lawless national security surveillance state. ..."
    "... the reason for Suleimani to be in Iraq early on Friday morning: to attend the funeral of the Iraqi soldiers who died during those strikes neal al-Qaim. ..."
    Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    prawnik , 03 January 2020 at 09:53 AM

    Trump is weak, stupid, reckless and easily manipulated. This has long been obvious.

    That is not an argument in favor of Team D, the Resistance, the Deep State, the Blob or whatever (if anything it is an argument against their conspiracy theories), but Trump is what he is.

    Renae -> Jack... , 03 January 2020 at 01:49 PM
    I don't believe Trump ordered this attack. I believe that the neocons/neolibs are afraid they would lose power when the coup plot is revealed. So, this is a pre-emptive action against Trump winning re-election. It seems Nancy Pelosi was consulted by Secretary of Defense Esper first, although she denies she was briefed about the asassination. Well, we all know where to stick her denials, don't we? https://www.enmnews.com/2020/01/03/pelosi-briefed-thursday-night-after-strike-killing-soleimani/
    turcopolier -> Renae... , 03 January 2020 at 04:58 PM
    Renae

    You don't understand how the US government works. The armed forces would not accept such an order from anyone else but the CinC.

    Jack -> Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 12:40 PM
    "Trump inherited the mess. Perhaps he is trying to salvage something out of it."

    Admittedly he did inherit this mess. However, IMO, he's done nothing to salvage it. He fired missiles into Syria on the basis of false propaganda and while he's ostensibly ordered troops out of Syria, it's like the Pentagon is thumbing their nose at him, while he tweets.

    And rather than putting in place a plan and executing on getting out of the wars that have cost us trillions of dollars and destabilized the entire Middle East he's just aggravated it further by blowing up people on the Iraqi/Syrian border. And now he's escalated it further.

    The bodybags still keep coming home from Afghanistan, where we know with certainty that we'll have to exit and that it will revert back to its natural state. I'm afraid he just went along to get along with the neocon warmongers that he's ensconced in all the top places in his administration.

    In many ways Trump seems like Governor William J. Le Petomane, in Blazing Saddles.

    blue peacock said in reply to Larry Johnson ... , 03 January 2020 at 11:08 AM
    Well said Larry.

    Yours is precisely the point. Iraq was a secular country under the "tyrannical" Saddam's Baathist regime. So is Syria a secular country under Assad. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. The Saudis did. He would have been a natural counter-weight to Iran. Of course he may have kicked out the Al Sauds soon enough to hang out in London, New York and Paris after he consolidated Kuwait. That may have been a good thing in hindsight.

    Bush & Cheney supported by both parties invaded Iraq and created the ascendancy of Iran. Then Obama comes along and aids & abets Al Qaeda to head-chop Christians in Syria, once again with support from both our political parties.

    Trump comes along as the "no more wasting money in the Middle East" guy. But surrounds himself with all neocons including his daughter & son-in-law. And he has shown to be generally clueless on anything beyond one slide on a Powerpoint. He thinks he's still on the set of The Apprentice.

    I'd like to say that the US is no longer a Constitutional Republic. We have law enforcement & intelligence who ran a coup attempt and half the country thinks that was a good thing. We have coteries that lie and propagandize us into war that has cost the American people several trillion that they've had to borrow from future generations. With the Patriot Act, FISA and all kinds of other "anti-terrorist laws", we essentially have a lawless national security surveillance state.

    We are fucked because so many of our fellow citizens fall for the black & white Rambo movie plot, while their ass is being taken to the cleaners.

    Skip Molander said in reply to blue peacock... , 03 January 2020 at 01:57 PM
    Amen! Most Americans are ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL. They don't know which way is UP! They haven't a clue. They are easy prey to the progandists in the US government (dominated by Zionists/Israel-Firsters) and in the US media (also dominated by the Zionist narrative).
    The Beaver said in reply to Larry Johnson ... , 03 January 2020 at 11:10 AM
    Mr Johnson,

    In addition Eric forgot what happened on December 29th and the reason for Suleimani to be in Iraq early on Friday morning: to attend the funeral of the Iraqi soldiers who died during those strikes neal al-Qaim.

    Terry said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 11:19 AM
    Do other countries have any right to self determination? How would Americans react to foreign powers controlling our country and killing our citizens at will?

    When we instilled a democracy in Shiite majority Iraq who would get voted into power? What was the result of disbanding the Arab baathist Iraqi army?

    We handed Iraq to Iran.

    Factotum said in reply to Terry... , 03 January 2020 at 12:11 PM
    Narco-controlled foreigners now run rough shod over much of California. How does that example work for context.
    Terry said in reply to Factotum... , 03 January 2020 at 02:56 PM
    As context, nothing to do with the current topic.

    The cartels should be declared terrorists along with domestic gangs, antifa, and the muslim brotherhood.

    The border should be controlled by our government.

    ISL -> Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 11:31 AM
    There is a reason civilized nations do not do assassinations, but then you may have forgotten how WW1 started.

    I shudder at the world you plan to leave our children, but empires do not last forever (or much longer with an easily manipulated moron in charge) and you may live to see assassinations of Americans on US soil as common "geopolitics."

    Fred -> ISL... , 03 January 2020 at 12:00 PM
    ISL,

    "forgotten how WW1 started"

    So Soleimani was heir apparent to the Supreme Leader?

    JohninMK said in reply to Fred ... , 03 January 2020 at 01:12 PM
    No but he could well have gone to the top in their politics as his next career move. With a satisfaction rating over 80% he was a probable future President.
    ISL -> Fred ... , 03 January 2020 at 02:03 PM
    Unintended consequences of a high level assassination.

    No good pathway to de-escalate for any side once open hostilities start.

    Block heads running things (President f---ing moron - quote Tillerson), born again fundamentalists believing in the second coming calling the shots on one side and the Mahdi on the other.

    But if you want to focus on a title, I guess nothing to see.

    vig -> ISL... , 03 January 2020 at 02:05 PM
    EN: So you, like many here, are fine with people that organize attacks on our embassies?

    I fully agree, outrageous! Simply outragepus! Now of course I have to reflect in what ways those men could have joined Americans in celebration of the dead of their comrades.

    ISL: There is a reason civilized nations do not do assassinations

    didn't Trump suggest somewhere that the Geneva Convention is obsolete anyway? Not that it matters anyway anymore, other then to US soldiers maybe? Some of them? ... The US writes the rules for to its own convience anyway?

    prawnik said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 12:28 PM
    Evidence, please.
    Artemesia said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 12:58 PM
    Please don't laugh or pooh-pooh if I introduce Christian preacher - activist Rick Wiles' assessment of the penetration and protests at the US embassy in Baghdad: Wiles, whose colleague spent time in Iraq w/ US military, asked how it was that "Iraqi" protesters could get inside the Green Zone, apparently protected by a 10 mile perimeter, and also inside the building itself, to cause damage.

    How is it Reuters was on the scene to photograph the protests and the damage?

    How is it the protesters were so quickly called off by a word from the PM?

    US military guards the embassy, right?

    If one argued that Iraqi soldiers permitted Iraqi protesters to gain access, that could make sense: didn't Russian soldiers refuse to fire upon citizens who stormed the Czar's palace?
    But that is apparently not what happened.

    So Wiles conjectures that US military allowed the penetration and destruction of US embassy, in order to blame it on _____ . Callers to C Span Washington Journal this morning raised the issue of "Iranians took our embassy in 1979." Do tell.

    https://www.trunews.com/stream/ghislaine-maxwell-which-spy-agency-is-hiding-her
    ~ 40 min.

    Dr. George W Oprisko -> Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 02:08 PM
    Solemeni was in Iraq to attend the funeral of the PMU soldiers killed by
    the US last week.

    He was there with the full support of the Iraqi government.

    He was on a diplomatic mission.

    The US killed an Iranian Diplomat on a diplomatic mission.

    That is the way the Iranians and Iraqi people will see this.

    Also, the base attacked was an Iraqi and PMU base. 107mm rockets of the kind the US gave ISIS were used.

    This kerfluffle began over an ISIS attack for the purpose of taking advantage of Iraqi disarray to steal Iraqi oil.... likely for sale to Israel...

    INDY

    LA Sox Fan -> Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 02:22 PM
    Eric, you make many assertions, but provide no facts to support them. For example, you claim Soleimani was planning attacks on both US troops and our embassy. You also claim Iran took over our embassy. However, you provide no facts supporting those assertions and I am not aware of any. So tell us, what evidence or facts do you have proving your claims?

    Additionally, you seem to have skipped over the part where Bush agreed all US troops would withdraw from Iraq and Obama was unwilling to agree to have US troops remain if they would be subject to the Iraqi justice system. So all of them left, only for some to be allowed back when ISIS threatened.

    Obviously, when all US troops left Iran did not take over Iraq. When all US troops leave again, which Trump just about insured will happen very soon, Iran will again not take over Iraq. They will remain allies, but one will not rule the other.

    Mark -> Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 03:30 PM
    You and Trump have something in common. Ypou are both short of brains and common sense. A couple of zionist neocon puppets.
    prawnik said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 04:35 PM
    "I'm a 100% isolationist personally, but if you're not, you have to do something to keep Iran in its place. I recognize that there's a lot I don't understand about reasons to not be an isolationist and maybe there are good reasons."

    Tell me, if you are a "100% isolationist" why must Iran be kept "in its place"? Then, tell me how many countries Iran has invaded in the last 100 years? (The answer is - ZERO!)

    It's good that you recognize that there are things that you don't know or understand. Blindly following Trump will not lead you to greater understanding. Nor will making excuses for people when they betray you.

    Something To Think About -> Eric Newhill... , 03 January 2020 at 04:58 PM
    "Soleimani was in Iraq architecting attacks on the US embassy and on Americans."

    Wrong, actually, but don't let facts get in the way.

    Soleimani was in Iraq to attend the funeral of Iraqi soldiers killed by US airstrikes. That is a fact.

    So the US took the opportunity to kill him. Via airstrike. That is also a fact.

    Perhaps you should take off those blinkers for once and consider this possibility: most of what you think you understand about this has been brought to your attention by people who have made a career out of lying to you.

    Eric Newhill said in reply to Something To Think About... , 04 January 2020 at 12:48 AM
    You know all of that how exactly? Who's propaganda are you and your fellow travelers thoughtlessly consuming and spreading?
    Terry , 03 January 2020 at 10:32 AM
    When anti-Syria propaganda was running strongest, "Assad must go" I always asked "Then what? What comes next?"

    We have a big stick but we need more than running around clubbing others. We never should have abandoned the international law we helped to create.

    We can create fear, most people fear a powerful bully but they don't respect them and will work to undermine them. It is a weak form of power and sooner or later you end up isolated.

    All stick and no carrot, hard power and no soft power just isn't a vision you can build on. So, Now what? What comes next? What comes after a war with Iran?

    Artemesia said in reply to Terry... , 03 January 2020 at 01:12 PM
    O/T, perhaps: Machiavelli wrote in The Prince that the effective leader must be feared AND loved: were he only feared, the people would turn against him as quickly as an opportunity emerged.

    I donated a significant sum (all things being relative) to my local library and requested that it be used to teach the mostly-Black and impoverished young people who frequent that library, about Machiavelli: I'd just read about a very wealthy community in my state where high school students participated in an essay contest on Machiavelli. They will be the next generation's leaders. I though the poor kids in my neighborhood should have the same opportunity.

    Library administrators all the way up and down the line resisted my proposal: "Our kids are not capable of such a project."

    Instead, the library system is proliferating Drag Queen Story Hours.

    They want me to put my gift in the hands of the local librarians who introduced this program to the library system.

    "So, Now what? What comes next?"

    Drag Queen Story Hours for your 1 yr to 5th grade children and grandchildren.
    Your son - grandson dressed in high heels, chiffon, and a wig.
    Your little girl telling you she needs drugs and surgery because she "feels like a boy."

    That's what comes next.
    Weimar 2.0

    Diana C said in reply to Artemesia... , 03 January 2020 at 02:02 PM
    When I had to move out of a large house into a small apartment recently, I donated over 900 books from my personal library to the local university library. My books reflected my major and minor areas of study: Literature from all periods of English and American authors, many books on the theories and research about linguistic theory and often brain research in regard to linguistics. I also had many books from my minor in German.

    I was an avid user of libraries from the time I was quite young. My mother dropped me and my siblings off at the local library while she did the Saturday shopping and bill paying. The librarians never directed us in regard to what we should study. They helped us to find resources on each of our varied interests. My brother and two sisters had quite different interests from mine. I was then studying all I could in Greek and Roman mythology and in the Acient history of Greece and Rome.

    It's the old, You can take the horse to the water, but...." Expose children to the rewards they get from reading and studying, but let their own personal interests determine what they read.

    Our problem is not that our students now "should" be reading ......(fill in the space. Our problem is currently that our children are now totally unacquainted with reading much in depth. They want sound bites and quick Google searches.

    As for the topic of Larry's post, I'm convinced that few Americans are even aware of the event or have any idea of why it happened and no opinion about whether it should have happened.

    I hold my breath every day, hoping that we don't become involved in another big mess that will cause the life and maiming of our young people in the military and of the people on the ground in the places they are sent to.

    But I have no opinion of why or whether Trump's decision was right or wrong. All I can do is pray fervently that really God is ultimately in charge and God will control it for His purposes. I never assume that God is always on "our side." I just put my faith that it is all in God's hands, no matter what the personal price I or anyone else will have to pay for His decisions.

    I also pray that Trump will always make his deicisions based on good and sound advice and on his own sense of right and wrong. It must be hard picking and choosing from the many people who surround him and from their various ideas of what is right or what is wrong to do.

    I certainly did not want the previous Middle East War and do not want another.

    prawnik said in reply to Artemesia... , 03 January 2020 at 04:38 PM
    If it makes you feel better, the only thing that Machiavelli will do for the more clued-in sort of mostly Black poor people is put in words what they already know deep down.

    The Prince caused such an outrage because Machiavelli merely described how rulers actually behave.

    Artemesia said in reply to prawnik... , 03 January 2020 at 11:30 PM
    prawnik, In my Machiavelli proposal to the library I urged that the works of Machiavelli scholar Maurizio Viroli be offered to the young people. Viroli maintains that the key chapter in The Prince is the final chapter -- classical rhetoricians know that the most powerful theme must come last, as that is what the audience will remember. Chapter 26 is nearly a prayer (Machiavelli was deeply Christian, tho he hated the Roman Catholic papacy), a prayer for a courageous leader - redeemer, like Moses, Cyrus, Theseus, who would deliver Florence, which he loved "greater than my soul," from "barbarous cruelties and oppressions" to a life of republican self-government.
    The critical concept is his deep love for Florence.
    I hoped that the young people could be moved beyond the CliffNotes version of The Prince to an understanding that would arouse passion, pride and patriotism.
    Theymustbemorons , 03 January 2020 at 10:33 AM
    We did not ask the Iraqi government for permission and we are obligated to do so, yes? Is it possible the Iraqi government will tell us to pick up our personnel and all our stuff and leave -- and never come back?
    turcopolier -> Theymustbemorons... , 03 January 2020 at 04:59 PM
    theymustbemorons

    Yes they can, but will we go?

    Something To Think About -> turcopolier ... , 03 January 2020 at 10:25 PM
    Colonel, that is a very interesting question.

    If the USA refuses to go then... what happens next?

    I assume it is not under dispute that if those US forces refuse to go then the Iraqis have a right under international law to attempt to eject them. After all, it is their territory.

    This isn't 2003 and the US forces inside Iraq do not number in the hundreds of thousands. Something in the region of 5,000 is my understanding, with another 4,000 on standby. Is that enough?

    casey , 03 January 2020 at 11:09 AM
    Thank you, Mr. Johnson, for your always pointed and concise analysis. If I understand correctly, the US/Israel bloc believes it has Iran in checkmate. If Iran retaliates (or if some provocation is arranged that can plausibly be blamed on Iran), then the Empire launches a full-on attack. If Iran doesn't retaliate (or a provocation doesn't arise), Iran looks weak and unable to defend itself and limps to the negotiating table, where its carcass will be picked apart.

    The only way this makes sense is if the Empire is convinced it can flatten Iran and pick apart its carcass without taking significant losses. Is that delusional and, possibly, "terminally stupid?"

    Dan -> casey... , 03 January 2020 at 06:17 PM
    I wouldn't use the term checkmate but I do agree that the situation is precarious for Iran...this was a pointed provocation and they are forced to respond. But that response has got to be well-calibrated to not bite off more than it can chew in terms of escalation. They need a spectacle more than anything.
    Luther Bliss , 03 January 2020 at 11:11 AM
    When James Woolsey was Trump's spokesthingie during the 2016 election, I placed multiple bets that "Trump attacks Iran to be a 'war-time president' for 2020 election."

    I've endured mocking phonecalls as Trump wildly vacillated but his NSC choices (all 4 or 5 of them...) were all NeoCons. And if you bed with the NeoCons, you catch their disease.

    I haven't watched the news in the last 3 years but the phone-calls are starting again, but the attitude is all different.

    If thing keep going this way, I guess this hippie socialist is about his win bet with a bunch of pollyanna veterans and bubble-headed conservatives who could not face reality.

    prawnik said in reply to Luther Bliss... , 03 January 2020 at 12:29 PM
    Was it not written that "personnel is policy"?
    Nathan , 03 January 2020 at 11:35 AM
    I can't imagine a war scenario that is positive for the US, except for the neo-con fantasy that the oppressed Iranian people will rise up and overthrow the wicked mullahs when things get bad enough. I don't know anything about the internal politics of Iran, but I'm not so sure how well America holds up after gas prices triple at the pump. Of course by that time they'll be a draft and rationing. The only way to avoid that outcome would be to nuke 'em, which is something I wouldn't put pass the Israelis or Trump.

    I don't believe our leaders are thinking long-term, but acting out of a combination of financial self interest for war spending in general and contracts within Iraq in particular; and emotional self satisfaction: for powerful Boomers this kind of belligerance somehow makes them feel like worthy sucessors to their dead "Greatest Generation" parents.

    Andrei Martyanov (aka SmoothieX12) -> Nathan... , 03 January 2020 at 01:19 PM
    except for the neo-con fantasy that the oppressed Iranian people will rise up and overthrow the wicked mullahs when things get bad enough

    In the last around 20 years or so this was a foundation for operational planning in the US. This is not to mention a key fact of neocons being utterly incompetent in warfare with results of this lunacy being in the open for everyone to see.

    ISL , 03 January 2020 at 11:50 AM
    Dear Larry Johnson,

    Please add to your list the assassination of US high level personnel (diplomat or military) in Europe by sleeper cells.

    Interestingly (as in stupidly), the US also arrested the head of the Iraqiya MP who heads the largest block in the Iraqi parliament - apparently he had the audacity to appear at a protest of the US bombing without authorization Iraqi citizens. One suspects that Iran will have full Iraq support in retaliation. The big question is whether Turkey makes a play and bans flights from Incirlik. Note US carrier groups are not in the gulf or even nearby to fly support missions...

    https://worldview.stratfor.com/topic/tracking-us-naval-power

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-violence-idUSBRE9BR03120131229 - no mention largest bloc in Parliament.

    That said, I expect Russia and China will offer unlimited weapons to Iran to bog the US down long term.

    Factotum , 03 January 2020 at 12:07 PM
    If we are that vulnerable to iranian retaliation on so many levels as you just set out, best we start dealing with this extortion threat right here now. Lance the festering boil and build t a new line of defenses.

    No matter what the triggering incident, we might as well accept we needed a reality check regarding this level of global threat. Not pretty, but apparently necessary if the Iranians are as capable of global disruption as you just present.

    It did not take an assassination in Sarajevo to set of WWI, it was festering well before and was an inevitable march off the cliff regardless. If we are that vulnerable to cyber terrorism and infrastructure terrorism, does it matter what finally lights the match?

    Factotum , 03 January 2020 at 12:27 PM
    If the world powers are gunning for an all out war, it will happen regardless. Mind your narratives. They are far scarier than the facts on the ground. Was this bad guy "assassinated", or taken out by a good guy with a gun as he was poised to strike.

    Why have Democrats spent the past three years saber-rattling over Russia, Russia, Russia, as if any hint of favor or benign contact was high treason. C'mon people, what is really going on in this world today. Who has really created this current scenario of being a nation in imminent peril from nefarious foreign threachery by even the flimsiest of implications.

    Just a few days ago our entire national security was predicated on Trump delaying arms to Ukraine by a few weeks. Ukraine, fer crisssakes which few can even find on a map. Isn't that the jingoist frothing we were just asked to believe by our loyal opposition party to the point of initiating impeachment proceedings due to Trump's alleged risking of our entire nation's place of honor on this entire planet?

    We suffer from internal hyperbole, as much as outside bad actors. A world who wants war, will get it. A world who wants peace will get that too. Running off to the corner pouting and hand-wringing brings neither.

    luke8929 , 03 January 2020 at 12:38 PM
    I will take the other side of the Russians will help coin, if anything I would suggest the Russians may have even provided intel to the Americans on Qasem Soleimani location and movements, Putin was recently in the news thanking Trump for providing intel stopping a Terrorist attack in St Petersburg recently, I still think the Russians provided intel on the whereabouts of the head of the head of the Islamic state Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to the Americans and Putin did nothing about the deaths of the 20 Russian airmen or the cruise missile attacks on Syria, as bad a Ally as the USA is the Russian Federation is clearly worse, the Russians clearly can't be trusted.
    ISL -> luke8929... , 03 January 2020 at 02:08 PM
    why do you think the US could not have this intel on its own? A high level visit to a friendly nation by a top military and you have to posit Russians? You insult US Intel.
    luke8929 , 03 January 2020 at 12:47 PM
    The Russians aren't going to do anything, Putin does whats best for Russia, he is clearly not interested in confronting the Americans and if anything would probably like to see Iranian influence in Syria diminished. 20 dead airmen, cruise missile attacks in Syria and he didn't do anything. If anything my money is on the Russians providing intel to the US on Qasem Soleiman's location and movements. I still think they provided intel on the location of the Islamic state leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and last week Putin was thanking Trump for intel that stopped an attack in St Petersburg, so perhaps rolling over on Soleiman was his way of saying thanks to Trump. I don't think the Russians intentions are as pure as people think. As untrustworthy as the USA is the Russians are worse.
    Andrei Martyanov (aka SmoothieX12) -> luke8929... , 03 January 2020 at 02:22 PM
    I still think they provided intel on the location of the Islamic state leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and last week Putin was thanking Trump for intel that stopped an attack in St Petersburg,

    What a fantastically convoluted scenario. Russia and the US are cooperating on terrorism threats for years now, and the latest on St. Petersburg was not the first one issued by the US. Russia wouldn't mind some limits to Iranian influence in Syria but not at the price of surrendering a man who was to a large degree responsible for getting Russia into Syria and cooperating with her there, which was a crucial factor in success of the campaign. I also do not see problems with US "developing" own targeting on Baghdadi w/o any Russia's help.

    Jack , 03 January 2020 at 12:51 PM
    Rand Paul opposing the nomination of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State, March 2018: "I'm perplexed by the nomination of people who love the Iraq War so much that they would advocate for a war with Iran next. It goes against most of the things President Trump campaigned on."
    Jack , 03 January 2020 at 01:00 PM
    Deja whoops

    https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1213127647489863681?s=21

    History doesn't repeat...

    https://twitter.com/andreassteno/status/1213015271088242693?s=21

    Harper , 03 January 2020 at 01:06 PM
    It has been pointed out to me that until his retirement in October 2019, JCS Chairman Joe Dunford was a factor in tempering neocon fervor for war. The same was true for his predecessor Martin Dempsey. Now we have a self-described "West Point Mafia" class of 1986 and a JCS Chairman far more politically motivated than Dunford and Dempsey. This looks to be to be more dangerous than when Bolton the chicken hawk was running around the West Wing. This is a recent Politico profile of the new Defense team, including Pompeo, Esper and other key national security advisors to Trump.

    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2019/11/17/west-point-alumni-pompeo-esper-state-department-071212

    Fred -> Harper... , 03 January 2020 at 06:19 PM
    Harper,

    Thanks for the link. The Trump triumvirate of class of '86 advisors did the minimum time on active duty and left service for greener pastures. The move to politics is reminiscent of the neocons decameron mentioned on the prior thread. It looks like the move to war which only the neocons want is coming on in full force.

    Elora Danan said in reply to Fred ... , 03 January 2020 at 07:24 PM
    For not to mention that neither of them arrived at top office by own merits, but by lobbying into each other ...

    Typical arribistas ...a scourge for any nation...and the most corruptible...

    Fred -> Elora Danan... , 03 January 2020 at 07:36 PM
    Elora,


    It must be late in Spain. The trio left active duty in the early 90s; that's almost 3 decades ago and plenty of time to "earn their own merits" but not necessarily enough to earn wisdom.

    Elora Danan said in reply to Fred ... , 03 January 2020 at 08:02 PM
    It´s indeed too late in Europe...thanks, Fred, for to remind Elora she must go to bed...

    She is just exhausted...to be honest...

    G´night to all!

    robt willmann , 03 January 2020 at 03:07 PM
    After around 25 people were killed by a U.S. attack over the weekend, and subsequently the damage was being done to the "embassy" in Iraq, it looked like a real problem was developing. But it seemed as if Iraqi security people had let the demonstrators and attackers into the area where the U.S. embassy is, and then the following day were not letting them in, and so the embassy cleanup would begin. At that time I felt better about the situation. In other words, the Iraqi government, such that it is, allowed the protest and damage at the embassy to occur, and then was stopping it after making the point of a protest.

    However, that defusing of the situation by the Iraqi government by shutting down the embassy protest was for naught when the ignorant people in the U.S. government carried out the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and several others inside Iraq itself. Now there is a real problem.

    TeakWoodKite , 03 January 2020 at 03:07 PM
    I am curious LJ. Some lateral drift on my part. Been reading that much of the funding for these proxies are from coming Iran. According to the Treasury. So the following is BS from State?

    (Nov 2019)

    "The State Department's most recent Country Reports on Terrorism, released Friday, stated that Iran is still the "world's worst state sponsor of terrorism," spending nearly $1 billion per year to support terror groups including Hezbollah, Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."

    There is much nashing of proverbial teeth in our media. Peeps like Sen Graham saying "the Iraqi's need to choose between us or Iran."
    (That choice is a Sunni sandwich with Kurdish Bread and Shia Mayo)

    There critical mass in 72 hours and the straight of Hormuz will be closing soon.

    LJ are you stating that there was no Intel on emerging threats from Iran? Or the strike Saudi oil plant was not via Iran?
    Seems to me China and Russia have to much $$$ invested in Iran to see it go up in smoke.

    John Merryman , 03 January 2020 at 06:23 PM
    Given the real masters of the universe are the very rich, would the Iranians see them as logical targets?
    Sheldon Adelson comes to mind, as he is a primary backer of both Trump and Netanyahu. As well as likely not known, or appealing to Trump's base, so avenging his death wouldn't appeal in the same way as soldiers or diplomats. Especially leading up to the election. Not only that, but if the very rich were to sense their Gulfstreams are somewhat vulnerable to someone with a Stinger at the end of the runway in quite a few tourist destinations, Davos, etc, the pressure from the People Who Really Matter might be against further conflict.
    The rule of law has its uses and destroying the structure on which their world rests does have consequences.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Soleimani assassination by US 'an adventurous move' that will flare up tensions in Middle East Moscow -- RT World News

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.rt.com

    The US airstrike that killed a senior Iranian commander near Baghdad will exacerbate tensions throughout the Middle East, the Russian foreign ministry has warned. Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's Quds Force, was killed in a US operation at Baghdad International Airport on Friday morning. Moscow considers the operation "an adventurous move that will lead to an escalation of tension throughout the region," the ministry said.

    "Soleimani served devotedly the cause of defending the national interests of Iran. We express our sincere condolences to the Iranian people," the short statement said.

    Also on rt.com US killing of Iranian commander on Iraqi soil violates terms of US stationing troops in the country – Iraqi PM

    The Russian Defense Ministry slammed the US airstrike that targeted the Iranian general as "short-sighted," warning that it would lead to a "rapid escalation" of tensions in the Middle East and would be detrimental to international security in general.

    The ministry also praised Soleimani's efforts in fighting international terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq by saying that his achievements in the fight against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) in Syria are "undeniable."

    The targeted assassination has sparked anger in Iran and Iraq. Officials in Tehran pledged to avenge the death of the high-profile member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) while Iran's caretaker prime minister called it an act of aggression against his country that violates the terms under which American troops are hosted on Iraqi soil.

    Also on rt.com Killing of Quds commander is another sign of US frustration and weakness in the region – Iran's Rouhani

    Washington considers the IRGC a terrorist organization and claims Soleimani was plotting attacks on American citizens. The killing comes days after Iran-backed Iraqi militias staged a riot at the US embassy in Baghdad, a response to US retaliatory airstrikes at militia forces.

    If you like this story, share it with a friend!

    [Jan 04, 2020] US murders leading Iranian General Qassem Soleimani OffGuardian

    Military commanders are in dangerous occupation and the death is always lurking around. Loss of one, even extremely talented, general does not mean much for Iran army. Acquiring a military new technology is of higher priority then retaliation. Larger geopolitical realities should be given top considerations. Right now conflict with the USA means compete destruction of the Iran. The decision to go ahead with the construction of nuclear bomb is credible option as it will protect the country from the direct invasion and devastating air strikes.
    And while the US action violated international norms, the decision to retaliate immediately at the US forces in Iraq and elsewhere is stupid and shortsighted.
    Actually alliance of Iran with Syria and Iraq (82 million, 40 million, 17 million) would be very formidable military alliance, which is capable to protect itself from anybody but the USA, Russia and China. If they add nuclear armed Pakistan, even the USA would think twise attacking any of the country.
    See also Russia–Syria–Iran–Iraq coalition - Wikipedia and Syria’s Assad Stresses Importance of Alliance With Russia, Iran, Iraq - WSJ
    Jan 03, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    Jan 3, 2020 Admin

    The US govt has confirmed it deliberately targeted leading Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in its missile (some say drone) attack near Baghdad airport that killed 10 people, including Soleimani and leaders of the Iraqi Shia militia.

    The Pentagon has made a public statement justifying the action as a 'defensive' act aimed at protecting US servicemen from future attacks, claiming the general was behind recent attacks on the US embassy in Baghdad and adding:

    General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region

    There's no way this can be verified of course, and even if true, does not excuse what amounts to an extraordinary act of terrorism against a sovereign nation with whom no state of war existed.

    The apparent craziness here is off the charts.

    Quick recap. The most insane & deluded of the war-profiteers/sadists/mad ideologues have been begging for a move against Iran since around 2005. It's the seventh and final country in Wes Clarke's famous ' seven countries in five years ' story. But so far it has never been attacked directly by the US.

    The reason for this is the realists in the Pentagon know they could easily lose that war.

    Iran isn't Iraq. Iran isn't Syria. Iran is a wealthy, organized state, with a well-trained and fearsome military well capable of defending itself.

    The non-crazies in the Pentagon know this and know a war with these people could end up wiping the US out in the Middle East, to say nothing of escalating wildly, up to and including direct confrontation with Russia, that has its own powerful reasons for not wanting to see Iran become a chaotic US vassal.

    This is why, after fifteen years of talking the talk, no US administration has ever dared to actually walk the walk. The non-crazy generals have vetoed it, spelled out what a disaster it could become, made it clear the risks are not worth the gains.

    So it always has been for 15 years – until now.

    At the direction of the President, the U.S. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel abroad by killing Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, a US-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.

    -- The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 3, 2020

    On the face of it the murder of Soleimani and the Pentagon statement of intent appears to be some kind of coup for the lunatics. Do the war-profiteers/sadists and ideologues who seem to have grabbed the initiative really understand what they have done?

    Is Dominic Raab remotely cognizant of where his alleged rubber-stamping of Pompeo's lunacy might lead? (Dom himself hasn't verified Pompeo's bombast yet, which may or may not be signficiant).

    Discussed with @DominicRaab the recent decision to take defensive action to eliminate Qassem Soleimani. Thankful that our allies recognize the continuing aggressive threats posed by the Iranian Quds Force. The U.S. remains committed to de-escalation.

    -- Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 3, 2020

    Let's hope they are all privy to some important info we don't have that means this is not the apocalyptic suicide bid it looks like.

    Time will tell.

    Meanwhile " WW3 " is a trending hashtag on Twitter, which is a little premature perhaps, but sells the sense of horror and disbelief people are feeling. Here are some examples

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praises Donald Trump for killing top Iranian general and says US has a 'right to defend itself' https://t.co/ZJasi2GFxX

    -- ExposeTheMedia.com (@ExposeTheMedia) January 3, 2020

    this is a fucking lie pic.twitter.com/HmS32o5F3D

    -- 🌹Sean Duffy🌹 (@seanduffy_) January 3, 2020

    For all intents & purposes, any talk inside #Iran of negotiation with the US, or in choosing a more peaceful policy in the region is now over. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, has vowed vengeance for this attack, and it will be very bitter. https://t.co/lKIjvHKljC By @karimsh89

    -- AHTribune (@AHTribune) January 3, 2020

    Possibly significant and interesting take by blue tick John Simpson

    Killing #Soleimani isn't like killing bin Laden, who had masterminded the worst terrorist attack against America. Soleimani was a competitor, who was highly effective in fighting ISIS as well as American interests. Assassinating him seems like a step back to a more savage past.

    -- John Simpson (@JohnSimpsonNews) January 3, 2020

    Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party, talking a certain amount of sense:

    The US assassination of Qasem Soleimani is an extremely serious and dangerous escalation of conflict with global significance. The UK government should urge restraint on the part of both Iran and the US, and stand up to the belligerent actions and rhetoric coming from the US.

    -- Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) January 3, 2020

    Keir Starmer, potential future leader of the Labour Party, is also not convinced:

    The Government's response to Donald Trump's actions is not good enough.

    The UK Government should hold him to account for his actions and stand up for international law, not tacitly condone the attack. https://t.co/3OCyiuphRt

    -- Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) January 3, 2020

    Susan Sarandon retweeting Bernie. Did he actually oppose invasion of Iraq? But the sentiment is a good one

    NO WAR WITH IRAN https://t.co/iKFlADmS1c

    -- Susan Sarandon (@SusanSarandon) January 3, 2020

    Lindsey Graham talking idiotic smack to the surprise of no one:

    President @realDonaldTrump took decisive, preemptive action to foil a plot directed at American personnel.

    As to what happens next: It should be clear to Iran that President Trump will not sit idly by if our people and interests are threatened.

    -- Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) January 3, 2020

    The Guardian being the Guardian

    US and allies on high alert as Iran threatens retaliation https://t.co/sHoqGb9T0f

    -- Guardian news (@guardiannews) January 3, 2020

    And just, well, disturbing frankly

    ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL!

    An Iranian family celebrating the killing of #Iran 's IRGC Quds Force chief Qasem Soleimani.

    "Death to Dictator!" they are heard chanting. #FreeIran2020 pic.twitter.com/3EgOUqizat

    -- Heshmat Alavi (@HeshmatAlavi) January 3, 2020

    Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest WhatsApp vKontakte Email Filed under: featured , Iran , latest , United States Tagged with: Donald trump , Iran , Qassem Soleimani , terrorism , US can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

    OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

    Connect with Connect with Subscribe newest oldest most voted Notify of

    Antonym ,

    The Anglo's are favoring Sunni Muslims since long time:

    Yes, planning for Operation Gulmarg started way back in 1943. The British were certain Kashmir would go to Pakistan  and pulled out all the stops in advance to ensure this.

    https://conradcourier.com/how-the-british-schemed-to-give-kashmir-to-pakistan/24103.html

    richard le sarc ,

    Whereas the Zionists prefer setting all sides at each others' throats, as they did in Lebanon during the Civil War, or when they promoted Hamas to oppose the PLO, or the terrorist death-squad South Lebanese Army to attack Hezbollah etc, or al-Nusra Front, in particular, during the salafist attack on Syria. Not to forget the partition of Sudan, a long-term Zionist project.

    Antonym ,

    The Australian-born Major-General Robert "Bill" Cawthome, once a British Army officer who had later joined the Pakistan Army, remains the longest-serving Director General of the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) for over nine years from 1950 to 1959.

    https://www.thenews.com.pk/archive/print/526965-maj-gen-robert-cawthome-was-the-longest-serving-isi-chief

    Jack_Garbo ,

    I don't buy it, without real proof. The bloody hand with a similar ring isn't enough. Soleimani is a master strategist and tactician, his intelligence service is way better than the Americans'. I don't see him, with another high ranking official, in the same vehicle, exposed to attack. Too careless for a very careful man.
    So, Iranian false flag trick? Leak a fake rendez-vous, hide their VIG Soleimani for the next operation, divert Iranian public anger outward at the US, unite Iraqi and Iranian resistance against the US? Sounds more believable. Let's see

    tonyopmoc ,

    It seems to me, that no-one I know, noticed any news whatsoever today, nor showed the slightest interest, when I tried to mention it. So www 3 is extremely unlikely, cos no one gives a sh1t. So I reckon its best to ignore it. They will go back into their holes. propaganda too much – like when you couldn't stand mustang sally again 10 years ago, and for a special occasion they do it again, and you still think its a crap song, but join in cos its a party, and to be polite, but you can't stand it for a 3rd time, well past its 2nd death.

    Can our Leaders please start making sense. That is what we employ you for. To represent our best interests – not yours. You volunteered for the job, so now you have got it, do what we elected you and told you to do.

    That is Your Job. You are a Member of Parliament now.

    We elected you.

    Please Get on with it.

    Do your Job.

    Thanks.

    Tony

    Estompista ,

    Iran isn't going to do shit.

    Antonym ,

    Sorry, was Qassem Soleimani some kind of saint? Did he never organize any mass suicide bombing/ assassination of an opponent in Irak, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon or elsewhere?

    Going against Sunni Arab KSA was kind of natural for a Persian Shia, working against Israel was good for brownie points among Muslims and Western Leftovers but ultimately dumb.

    richard le sarc ,

    Compared to Netanyahu, Sharon, Shamir, Begin, Peres, Rabin etc, yes he was a veritable saint.

    tunde ,

    Trump has had years to drone Soulemani. QS' morale visits to the frontlines in Syria and Iraq were extensively documented on social media by Iranian proxies and allies. No doubt Israel noticed them as well but passed on striking at him.
    My only conclusion is to Trump's rationale is to speculate that Trump calculates Iranian backlash is limited and a double win for him; In rallying support around the flag for electoral purposes (what impeachment?) and providing a causus belli for a range of punishing strikes across a wide variety of targets across Iran. The economic toll on Iran would be crushing on top of the sanctions. Trump's khaki election gambit ?

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    When a corporation such as the United States of America falls into debt to the tune of $23 trillion USD heading into certain long term recessionary headwinds they have no alternative but to start bombing antiquated economically challenged countries that are struggling to survive. This allows the American bullies to feel empowered & respected through fear of their mass text book Psychopathology that they peddle to the populations for purposes of creating unease & fear, or terror, whatever the case may be.

    The Central Intelligence Agency has been doing this sort of regime change gig forever where they first utilize Economic Hit Men to entice leadership to acquiesce to CIA demands. If the Economic Hit Men fail the mission the jackals are sent in to assassinate. If assassination fails & Economic Hit Men fail, it falls to the generals & war planners in the bureaucracy.

    The end game superordinate goal for all Americans in the mix of state is to murder the competition even if it means destroying entire regions of the world to do it.

    And never forget the Queen of Mean stating that 'only the little people pay taxes'. Believe me when I state that Leona Helmsley would push you down a flight of stairs in a wheelchair if you were an invalid much like Richard Widmark did in The Kiss of Death.

    Warmongers ain't benevolent & Charley don't surf.

    MOU

    Gezzah Potts ,

    What the United States has done is completely insanity. And for Pompeo to be tweeting that the United States 'is committed to de-escalation' is cloud cuckoo land stuff.
    I've been following this on various other sites as well. Iran is officially in mourning, and after that is completed, they will respond
    We will soon find out what that response is.
    We now face the very strong likelihood of a cataclysmic war in the Middle East.
    This is an incredibly dangerous situation.
    My gut feeling is this is also the beginning of the end for this truly evil, parasitical Empire.
    They cannot see the consequences of what they have done with this act of terrorism.
    They are fully blinded by their sheer arrogance and hubris.

    RobG ,

    I can't back this up with any links, so all I can say is that I'm hearing murmurs that the Iranians have now told the Americans to pull all of their warships out of Middle Eastern waters by this time next week, otherwise American warships will be attacked and sunk.

    The Iranians are quite capable of doing this in the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and the Oman Gulf (which 35% of the world's tanker oil moves through). Iranian missiles can also quite easily hit Saudi oil fields. Who's going to buy shares in ARAMCO? The price of oil is already going through the roof. How much do you want to pay to fill up your vehicle? or do you believe all the MSM bullshit about twerrorists?

    Anyhows, this is still all just rumour at the moment; but if it's true it's a very smart move by the Iranians.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    I was going to reply to your other comment, but breaking news that the United States has launched more airstrikes in Iraq apparently killing 6 Shia militia leaders.
    Pompeo is a raving liar and lunatic.
    If this news is true, the bastards want war.
    More insane provocations.
    Just about to check some sources to verify this. Yes, I commented to you first before I checked
    Buckle up, things are getting very rocky.

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    Americans have wanted control over the entire Gulf of Oman since before I was born.
    The Gulf of Oman oil fields are the best in the entire world for really top grade oils. It's a massive oil field.

    Americans are corporate pirates not unlike fiction. Brig Gen Smedley Butler bragged of having more territory than Al Capone. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson owns Al Capones old gun that he purchased at auction.

    MOU

    JudyJ ,

    For information – RT News has just reported that they are receiving reports that the US have attacked another vehicle convoy just north of Baghdad. They have no more details at present.

    richard le sarc ,

    It's just Bibi and his pet goy appealing to their 'bases'. Killing is their religion, quite literally.

    JudyJ ,

    Reports now say that convoy was attacked by an airstrike at 1 a.m. local time, 6 Iranian backed Shia militia leaders killed and 5 others injured. As a US peace activist just said on RT, 'this attack is on local Iraqis who have been fighting against ISIL and are on their home territory; and such attacks are totally inexcusable'.

    Gezzah Potts ,

    Thanks Judy. Just heard that news over at The Saker and was about to check, but you confirmed this.
    The lunatics have taken over the asylum.
    And they're like a chimpanzee playing with a live grenade inside a small room.
    And the Chimps between you and the door.
    This is fecken madness.

    nottheonly1 ,

    How prophetic of myself to have foreseen the end of my online commenting for all the wrong reasons. Can't take all the shit anymore. It is indeed like the 80's Fun Boy Three hit "The lunatics have taken over the asylum" and the meds have run out a few weeks ago.

    Nobody has even the slightest idea what is unfolding now. To that end, I will state it once more:

    How long is the window of opportunity open for those who attempt a global takeover? Will they allow Russia and China to get even more advanced weaponry?

    No. It is 'now or never again' and they are going for it. Either in utter derangement, or infinite stupidity, the people behind this takeover do believe that they can win WW3 and after some cleanup enjoy their United States of Earth.

    On the other hand, what if some folks studied STUXNET and are now preparing a number of NPP in the West to shut off their cooling pumps and generators. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? This time although, it will be Karma for all the shit the West has done to the people of the Near/Middle/Far East.

    richard le sarc ,

    The USA created Daash, as they did al-Qaeda, along with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf despotisms and Israel, so they are bound to act 'kinetically' to assure that it is revitalised in Iraq, to attack Central Asia and the BRI.

    Gall ,

    I went to the tweets cited and noted that many blood thirsty war pigs were happily oinking their approval for the Imperial Death Stars latest act of terrorism ludicrously called a "defensive" action by the Terrorist and Thief who turns out to be just another lying sack of shit.

    Ian Beeby ,

    So Donald Duck has confirmed to the whole world that he ordered this act of terrorism and murder. Not only that but as it was a murder/terrorist act in another country that also makes it a war crime. So when are we going to see him and cronies including those in the UK facing the international criminal court for war crimes.

    Jack_Garbo ,

    Didn't they tell you? The US & UK do not recognize the ICC. Next

    richard le sarc ,

    They don't recognise it, but they control it, and their pet Aunty Tom, Bensouda.

    richard le sarc ,

    Well this is plainly Trump, the premier Sabbat Goy, doing his Master, Sheldon Adelson's, bidding. Killing is central to Judaism and Zionism and American Exceptionalism. Just recently Trump, as he obsequiously groveled to one of the alphabet soup of Zionist groups, the Israeli American Council, that control US politics, congratulated Jews for being ' brutal killers-not nice people at all'. The anti-Trump Zionists proclaimed that 'antisemitism', not realising it was intended as a compliment.
    Perhaps they were worried, as well, that it might be too revelatory of the lust for murder that lies at the heart of Judaism. As the highly influential 'Yesha Council of Rabbis and Torah Sages' declared in 2006, as Israel was bombing Lebanon back to the Stone Age, targeting, schools, mosques, power stations, hospitals and fleeing civilians, under Judaic Law killing civilians is not just permissible, but is considered a mitzvah, or good deed. International Humanitarian Law to the contrary was contemptuously dismissed as mere 'Christian morality'.
    The Godfather of Likudnik Zionism, Jabotinsky, bluntly stated the ideological equivalent of that doctrine-'We will kill anyone who gets in our way'. And Israeli PMs Begin, Shamir, Sharon and Rabin all had plenty of the blood of innocents on their paws. Last year a book appeared, 'Rise and Kill First' that listed the huge series of assassinations of resistance leaders, often with their families ('Down to the fourth generation' as the Talmud demands)or mere bystanders and neighbours, committed by Israel, and it was generally lauded and the author treated with mandatory sycophancy.
    The French Jewish intellectual, Bernard Lazare, noted, late in the 19th century, that Jews had experienced conflict with the local communities almost everywhere they had settled, despite the differences of social arrangements, religions, histories etc, and he, a firm opponent of Judeophobia and supporter of Dreyfuss, simply observed that 'Israel' (ie Jews) must bear at least some blame for those events. That, of course, is the very essence of really existing 'antisemitism' today-to assert that any Jew, anywhere, has ever done a bad, or wrong, or even mistaken thing. These are, after all, as Begin used to declare, 'Gods upon the Earth'. However, this time, they surely have gone too far. Both the corrupt thug Netanyahu, and the simple thug, Trump, need diversions, and they will soon get them, in spades. Pity the poor innocents who will suffer for them indulging their blood-lusts.

    Estompista ,

    "Central to Judaism." And boom: there goes your mask.

    richard le sarc ,

    Central to Talmudic, Orthodox Judaism-unarguable. Bang goes your mask. Many Jews reject the murderous xenophobia at the heart of Talmudic Judaism, hence the Reform and Liberal tendencies, (and non-religious Jews), which are NOT recognised as true Judaism in Israel, which is controlled by the Orthodox goy-haters. Learn something about your own religion before you start pontificating and smearing.

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Hi OffG, I wondered if it would be possible to get an article on the Australian fires – to get a plethora of views on the situation? Tens of thousands are being urged to evacuate the South-East now, apparently.

    Off the top of my head – a few questions to set the ball rolling if we do get an article:

    What is actually happening; how are the fires being started? Who is starting them? Why are firefighters having trouble with all of it?

    Years & years of deliberate mismanagement? Arson? Sabotage? D.E.Ws/Scalar/Smart Meters?

    Coup against current leader, Scott Morrison (maybe because he did not play ball withe the climate change people)?

    Agenda 21/2030 in motion? SDGs being rolled out etc – deliberate displacement of people (ultimately off rural & suburban areas and into cities (I think the UN name it something like City-densification)?

    People don't need to agree – just get their views, observations and hopefully some evidence. Anyway, just putting some thoughts out there

    richard le sarc ,

    It's anthropogenic climate destabilisation, as all the local fire chiefs and many of the recently retired, have declared, for some time. Predicted twenty and thirty years ago by science, and here, now, a few decades ahead of expectations.

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Interesting. I am not fully on board with the idea of human-induced climate change (anthropogenic climate change). I need much more convincing than what is available out there currently. Maybe humans cause an extremely teeny amount but not anyway near enough to change our environment? Really, is anthropogenic climate change causing all the current things like flooding, 'wildfires' landslides etc that are suddenly all happening in many different places at the frequency & level over this last decade or so ,and suddenly being plastered all over our MSM, press, tv etc ad nauseum without any differing views allowed to be aired without ridicule or slap-downs or censorship?

    Who are XR's funders, allies and founders? What are their deeper motives?

    What about the fact that the Earth's climate naturally goes through cycles; some people tend more towards the climate experts who believe we are now entering the cooling period, the Maunder Minimum? People like Piers Corbyn have been correctly predicting long-range weather and climate cycles for many years?

    Also, CO2 is important for plant/tree growth? We cannot have life without carbon in its many forms?

    All these questions and more need to be explored and debated by many different experts who have alternative views (not solely the same views espoused in the corporate media) before I can come to any firm conclusions. For now, I feel like the establishment is hammering the public with a cult-like religion of 'climate emergency' and suspect they want to use it for ulterior motives rather than help the environment & humans – probably part of the agenda to control the planet including humans?

    Tallis Marsh ,

    * Should say: " probably part of the agenda to take complete control of the planet including humans?"

    richard le sarc ,

    The 'evidence out there' is enough to convince EVERY Academy of Science and scientific society on Earth, all of whom concur with the theory. The natural weather and climate disasters are, in the main, either being caused, or made worse, by the injection of added energy into the Earth system that is caused by the increased level of heat trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. XR's backers are irrelevant to the science. The world's climate does exhibit many cycles, but they are being disturbed and exacerbated by the added energy trapped in the Earth system. There is no 'Grand Minimum' just the end of cycle 24 of sunspot activity. Piers Corbyn is NO climate expert-if you rely on him rather than the 99% of real climate scientists who agree with the theory then you are very much mistaken, in my opinion. CO2 is essential for plant growth, but it's levels need to be constant, or slowly changing, for plants to adapt, not increasing by 50% in 200 years. Moreover climate destabilisation brings high temperatures, floods, deluges and other manifestations that are very deleterious to plant growth and well-being. These facts have been debated for 200 years, and the science is 'settled'. Your proposition for further debate, as the climate rapidly destabilises, is, in my opinion, akin to 'debating' the harms of sarin gas, as the victim convulses before our eyes.

    MLS ,

    How exactly is AGW causing these fires? What is the mechanism?

    Is the climate in NSW hotter, drier than before?

    By how much if so?

    How much worse is the burning?

    Since the bush in that part of the world is 'designed' to burn periodically (many local plants need fire in order to set seed), how do you separate the alleged AGW effect from other natural causes and other non-AGW variables, such as reduction in pre-emptive burns over recent years?

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Yes, all very good questions that need answering and debating by experts with differing stances (not just cookie-cutter experts agreeing with each other with their official, scripted stance of "it's part of the 'climate crisis!").

    richard le sarc ,

    They have ALL been debated for decades by real scientists, not fossil fuel denialist industry paid disinformers. I can tell you that here in Australia, as the country burns, demanding more phony 'debate' is NOT a popular opinion

    Tallis Marsh ,

    "I believe you, trillions wouldn't!"

    This debate you speak of must have passed me by somehow! If it did happen it must have happened before my time because all I've seen/heard in the press/tv/radio/school text books was/is anthropogenic climate change-based.

    Estompista ,

    I swear, this guy: "The world is burning. Let's have another debate in case we accidentally save the plamet!"

    richard le sarc ,

    You obviously don't live in Australia where denialism controls much of the MSM. Totally in the Murdoch cancer. much of the time elsewhere, but it has no reputable scientific supporters, just a cabal of aged renegades, fossil fuel stooges and share-holders in coal mines. The 'debate' was OVER thirty years ago, and the rest has been fossil fuel propaganda and the Dunning-Krugerites ventilating their lovely combination of idiocy, malice and arrogant egotism.

    richard le sarc ,

    The drought in the east of Australia is unprecedented in the 200 years of White occupation. It is almost certainly driven, to extremes of aridity, by increased average and maximum temperatures, lack of rainfall and other depredations like widespread vegetation clearance by Rightwing 'farmers' who hate Greenies. Every single fire fighting commissioner and other leaders have openly stated that these fires are worsened by anthropogenic climate destabilisation, and requested a meeting with the PM months ago, but were ignored by our PM, a denialist religious fanatic.

    MLS ,

    Sorry but we need data not rhetoric.

    What is the measured increase in temps in the fire-hit regions?

    What is causing the drought?

    What is the source for it being unprecedented? By how much?

    Why would clearing vegetation increase fire risk?

    I have also seen it said it's the absence of clearing – due to misguided or fake 'Green' policies – that has been exacerbating the current fires.

    How can we tell which is true?

    What of the claims of politically motivated arson?

    Admin ,

    Climate change & Australian bushfires are way off topic. No more of that here please. We may well open a discussion of the latter soon.

    richard le sarc ,

    Rightio-forgive the last contribution, above.

    richard le sarc ,

    It is NOT 'rhetoric'. The facts are easily discoverable, at the BOM, CSIRO and the Climate Council, for starters. Kindly look them up yourself.

    Jen ,

    My observation among others is that most bushfires are occurring in areas that never had any before, or in recent memory anyway.

    The state of Victoria always seems to have more severe annual bushfire events than other states, even though other states are much drier and have more extreme weather. This might suggest Victorian state govt bushfire emergency response policies might be wanting, to say the least.

    I don't live in Victoria but I'd be curious to know what the state of electricity power lines in rural areas and through forests down there are like. The East Gippsland region in Victoria (which has the worst bushfire crisis at present) is, erm, very forested. Or it was.

    Our firefighters can't cope because they're underfunded, they don't have modern firefighting equipment and – this will shock overseas readers – they are not full-time paid professional firefighters, in a country that experiences major bushfire events every year.

    Tallis Marsh ,

    "they are not full-time paid professional firefighters, in a country that experiences major bushfire events every year."

    My! Yes, that is strange & shocking for somewhere like Australia! Who decided that was a good idea; along with the idea of not managing the bush like they used to do for hundreds of years. I read somewhere that the Aborigines used/use managed fires as part of their culture too to maintain and protect the Bush.

    richard le sarc ,

    The volunteers usually have to work for weeks a year on real, and controllable, local fires. This year threy have faced months, so far, of megafires. As for that favourite denialist canard, that the bush is not being properly 'managed', ALL the fire authorities have REPEATEDLY refuted that, pointing out that hazard reduction burning has increased for years, but the window for safe burning has grown smaller and smaller as the climate has rapidly destabilised, and fires break out even in winter. I hope that has cleared up that misconception for you.

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    CANADA is sending over a hundred skilled firefighters yesterday on top of the fifty we sent first off. CANUCKS will put it out, don't fret. Our outback is much more Boreal forest so we get really bad bush fires as everyone is well aware. We have tons of water bombers too and we are in the off-season for our own bush fires so our gals n' guys will be more than happy to go to Oz for the adventure.

    MOU

    richard le sarc ,

    Most of the fires are burning in areas that have burned regularly, and recently. There have, however, been places burned in recent years, like alpine heath-lands in Tasmania and sub-tropical and temperate rainforests, that have not burned for centuries. The difference this time is that anthropogenic climate change, principally through savage drought, has worsened conditions markedly.

    Doctortrinate ,

    Taken from – the weekend Australian.

    The Black Thursday conflagration of 1851 burned five million hectares and was so ­intense that ships 30km off the coast of Victoria reported coming under ember attack Those fires covered one-quarter of what is now the state of Victoria.
    In the summer of 1974-75, the worst bushfire system the ­nation had faced in 30 years the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience estimates about 15 per cent of Australia's physical landmass, about 117 million hectares, had ­extensive fire damage.
    In a review of Queensland's ­recent bushfire experience, the ­Inspector-General of Emergency Management, Iain Mackenzie, had this to say: "The office heard from associations representing bushfire managers who conveyed 'indisputable facts' about vegetated areas and their management.
    "Their points were that fires will always start, and that fire management relies on, and must be led by, managing and reducing fuel. Climate change, they said, had not influenced the past build-up of fuel; some fires are best left to burn, and response will only be effective if preparation and mitigation have been effective beforehand.''
    "People change farming practices, they change crops they plant. In urban areas people like vegetation between houses, they have bigger houses, bigger roofs.
    "These all ­reflect heat into ­vegetation that dries out and you have fuel."
    The biggest fires in terms of area burned are actually in low-population areas of the Northern Territory, Western Australia and north Queensland.
    It is when fires occur in populated areas that the explosive combination of high fuel load and proximity of homes becomes most apparent.

    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -

    then there's the money/support – Primonster Morrison et al, wouldn't want to see their budget surplus going up in ashes – no, it wants profit and more, so are limiting Government spending on many essential needs – replaced from the Peoples pocket, by charitable donations and rainy day savings etc .same old story, happy taking short on giving – and as Rural areas are already hit hardest – add just a little more heat, and with volunteer fire service numbers on the decline for many, it'll be back to the concrete jungle.

    noseBag ,

    You: What is actually happening; how are the fires being started?
    Me: Hmmmmm .dryness .heat?
    You: Who is starting them?
    Me: Hmmmm .the godamnded sun?
    You: Why are firefighters having trouble with all of it?
    Me: Hmmmm there's a fuck-ton of it?
    You: Years & years of deliberate mismanagement?
    Me: Yes, spot on, and ..and then
    You: Arson? Sabotage? D.E.Ws/Scalar/Smart Meters? .
    Me: Can we accuse the sun of arson?
    Hmmmm .I'm really not sure, maybe your wisdom could guide me?

    Fair dinkum ,

    Never fear, the US (of ignorance) can now conquer the universe >>
    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/with-space-force-congress-hands-trump-a-major-victory/

    Doctortrinate ,

    there's billions of us, all we need, is a little food and warmth – all we want, is to get on with our lives, in Freedom and in Peace. It unfortunate then, that there exists a small Cabal of International Interconnected players who employ Governments of the World/ Leaders of Men, instrumentally, to the construction of divisive entanglements . Sadly it seems, the People, generation through generation, have become so accustomed to groupthink falsity, they see themselves collectively responsibile for the ruinous designs of dictatorial maniacs as if the experience of repeatedly being delivered into a madhouse was a natural element of existence.

    I accidentally posted this comment under the "Douma narrative crumbles" thread, admin can delete it there , if they like.

    Thanks.

    Tallis Marsh ,

    Yes, I saw your comment on the other article.

    Well said and concisely said!

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    .BREAKING.NEWS.ALERT.BREAKING.NEWS.ALERT.BREAKING.NEWS.ALERT

    <<<<>>>>

    EAT.POPCORN.DRINK.COKE.EAT.POPCORN.DRINK.COKE.EAT.POPCORN

    MOU

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    The news alert message was supposed to be between the brackets but somehow it disappeared. The alert msg was supposed to say

    Chief BIG Trump little penis declares bombing assassination NOT DECLARATION OF WAR.

    MOU

    MASTER OF UNIVE ,

    And I did not upvote myself above.

    MOU

    Brian Harry ,

    I wonder if the Loonies in the CIA/MIC are currently planning to get rid of "a very important American", and then blame it on Iran, as justification for attacking Iran. I agree that a war against Iran would be a dreadful mistake by the USA, but, with Loonies like Pompeo, Mark Esper, and the likes of Bolton, still lurking in the background, they'll ALL be salivating at the thought of another War with a staggering death count(on both sides) and so will Mr Netanyahu, sitting in Israel, pulling the strings and directing the traffic.
    It's what they live and breathe for .deranged psychopaths just cannot get enough War ."Draining the Swamp" was NEVER going to happen ..

    richard le sarc ,

    Excellent speculation. To get rid of Trump, the obvious 'burnt offering', and get a casus belli for Clinton's much desired 'obliteration' of Iran, Bibi's 'New Purim'-what could be better?

    Estompista ,

    Pretty desperate stretch.

    richard le sarc ,

    Then leave yourself alone!

    Brianeg ,

    "Revenge is a dish best served cold!.

    I am sure that America is expecting a quick retaliation and which can be quickly countered. I am sure the Iranians are aware of that and will either carry out something that is deniable or just put pressure on Iraq to kick all the Americans out of their country. What can America do, bomb the whole country into the stone age?

    2020 is destined to be a very bloody and long drawn out war of attrition. Whilst the Democrats would appear to be handing Trump his second term on a plate, by his rash and badly planned move, this might be denied him.

    I do wonder if nature might intervene. You read about the build up of seismic activity in California and wonder if this might be the year of the "Big One"? If that was to happen then all bets are off and all military activity will subside.

    I am reminded of the "Tom and Jerry" cartoon when Buster taking the part of America comes to Jerry's defence when he whistles until that time Buster is carted off to the dog pound.

    As Putin's actions always catch me by surprise, can anybody guess what he might do if Iran, Iraq or Syria comes under heavy attack? I am sure in the circumstances that it would always be the right move.

    RobG ,

    "What can America do, bomb the whole country into the stone age?"

    They've already done that in Korea and Vietnam, and to a lesser extent just recently in Syria (which is why Europe has experienced a tidal wave of refugees).

    2020 doesn't have to be bloody, as long as most people can get out of the tidal wave of MSM war propaganda.

    With regard to Putin, we're fast approaching the stage where Russia and China are going to either have to stand up to America (which means war), or else they'll have to bow down and become part of a rapidly decaying empire (an empire than can't even look after its own people).

    With the assassination of Soleimani, I think we're now at this tipping point. I don't believe that Russia and China will bow down to the biggest bunch of criminals/psychopaths that this world has ever known.

    richard le sarc ,

    They don't need to bomb every village in Iran. Just take out the power stations, communications, hospitals (oops, we are SO sorry)warehouses, roads, water infrastructure (as they did in Iraq)etc and a few Holy spots to indicate the religious/fascist aspect of the assault, and sundry others (they bombed dairy farms in Iraq). Raytheon and Lockheed must be slobbering at the profit expectations, and 'religious' fascist psychopaths, like our own Pentecostal thug PM, 'Smoko' Morrison, drooling as their beloved End Times draw that much closer.

    Gaudy ,

    As the article says, Iran isn't Iraq or Syria. The Pentagon knows that better than the man in the street, why else has it not been invaded yet? If they start this war they could well fail to win it. Totally different ballgame from anything seen before in the 'war on terror'.

    richard le sarc ,

    They won't invade-just sit back and bomb.

    Loverat ,

    The other thing to mention is John Simpson while an establishment buffoon has been to Iran and wrote a book in around 1980. A not completely bad book.

    Jen ,

    FreeIran2020 seems to be attracting the Mojaheddin e Khalq cult crazies and deluded Pahlavi monarchy restorationists. That tells me the movement must be relying on the same US State Department and National Endowment for Democracy regime-change idiots, and various Washington NGOs, who support the Banderite turds in Ukraine and the Blackshirt thugs in Hong Kong, for money and marketing campaign ads and slogans.

    Estompista ,

    Blackshirt?

    [Jan 04, 2020] US killing of Iranian commander on Iraqi soil violates terms of US stationing troops in the country Iraqi PM

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.rt.com

    The interim prime minister of Iraq has condemned the US assassination of a senior Iranian commander, calling it an act of aggression against his country. Qassem Soleimani was killed at Baghdad airport.

    Soleimani, the commander of the elite Quds Force, was killed after his convoy was hit by US missiles. A deputy commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), the Iraqi militia collective backed by Iran, was killed in the same airstrike.

    In a statement on Friday, the caretaker leader of Iraq's protest-challenged government, Adil Abdul Mahdi, said the US assassination operation was a "flagrant violation of Iraqi sovereignty" and an insult to the dignity of his country.

    Also on rt.com Iran Quds Force commander killed in US strike on convoy at Baghdad airport

    He stressed that the US had violated the terms under which American troops are allowed to stay in Iraq with the purpose of training Iraqi troops and fighting the jihadist organization Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS). He added that the killing may trigger a major escalation of violence and result in "a devastating war in Iraq" that will spill out into the region.

    The Iraqi government has called on the parliament to hold an emergency session to discuss an appropriate response, Mahdi said.

    Also on rt.com Killing of Quds commander is another sign of US frustration and weakness in the region – Iran's Rouhani

    The killing of Soleimani marks a significant escalation in US confrontation with Iran. Washington considers the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), to which Quds belongs, a terrorist organization and claimed the slain commander was plotting attacks on American citizens.

    Tehran said the Quds commander was targeted for his personal contribution to defeating IS in Iraq and Syria. Soleimani drove Iran's support for militias in both countries that fought against the terrorist force.

    [Jan 04, 2020] How the US was hoist by its own petard in Iraq and the wishful thinking of its thinktanks Elijah J. Magnier

    Jan 04, 2020 | ejmagnier.com

    Posted on 02/01/2020 by Elijah J Magnier By Elijah J. Magnier: @ejmalrai

    The United States of America has fallen into the trap of its own disinformation policy, as exemplified by the work of one of its leading strategic study centres, a neocon think tank promoting war on Iran.

    During the first weeks of protests in Iraq, a dozen Iraqis burned down the Iranian consulates in Najaf, Karbalaa and Baghdad. Western analysts based their analysis on social media images and YouTube videos, particularly those clips which showed protestors chanting "Iran Barra..Barra. Baghdad Tibqa Hurrah" (Iran out, Baghdad remains free). Analysts and mainstream media -- primarily people sitting thousands of kilometres away from Iraq who have never visited the country, and never mixed with the population long enough to understand the dynamics of the country and how Iraqis really think – reflected and amplified the opinion that Iraq has become hostile to Iran.

    However, though every wish can come true, yet prevailing winds can defy our hopes and expectations. Analysts' wishful thinking overwhelmed their sense of reality, notably the possibility of realities invisible to them. They fell into the same trap of misinformation and ignorance that has shaped western opinion since the occupation of Iraq in 2003. The invasion of Iraq was justified by the presence of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" which never existed. An information war was waged against Syria with the goal of overthrowing President Bashar al-Assad. The US supported terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda for this purpose. Mainstream media coverage of the war in Syria- mainly through WhatsApp, social media, Skype, activists and jihadists- unfolded at the expense of destroying its own credibility, and that of western journalism in general.

    The shameful irresponsibility of these reporters and analysts became obvious to a large part of the public. There was no accountability for mass media deceptions: virtually all western media were in the same boat, totally lacking the necessary professionalism. Western media became a mockery of the noble and demanding profession of journalism and its mandate to report and share information without manipulation. Journalists were forced to follow newspaper editorial policies and the political views of their owner- he who pays the piper calls the tune!

    <img data-attachment-id="8190" data-permalink="https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/02/hoe-de-verenigde-staten-in-irak-in-eigen-voet-schoten-en-de-wensdromen-van-hun-think-tanks/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a/" data-orig-file="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a.jpg?fit=596%2C397&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="596,397" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a" data-image-description="" data-medium-file="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a.jpg?fit=300%2C200&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a.jpg?fit=596%2C397&amp;ssl=1" src="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a.jpg?w=1000&#038;ssl=1" alt="" srcset="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a.jpg?w=596&amp;ssl=1 596w, https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/3ff6b79c-f8fe-4e4d-b843-5efc97e43d0a.jpg?resize=300%2C200&amp;ssl=1 300w" sizes="(max-width: 596px) 100vw, 596px" data-recalc-dims="1" />

    Fortunately, the internet made it possible for people to hunt for alternative sources and analyses. For instance, to a great extent journalistic standards were upheld in Israel, the only place in the Middle East where analysts and reporters have the freedom to tell the truth about their enemies (regardless the military censure), and about the limitations on Israeli power. The Israeli media reported on the weakness of the domestic front in case of war and the huge damage their enemies could inflict on the country through the deterrence policy that Israel has faced in this century.

    The Israeli government has a "Council of Risk Evaluation", which predicts the reaction of the enemy in case of a "battle between wars", and estimates the results of Israel hitting a target or even hundreds of targets in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Yemen and Iraq. That assessment is always very close to reality, unlike that of the US.

    Prestigious Western think-tanks like Brookings, Carnegie, Hudson, the Washington Institute, the "Middle East Institute" and others promoted a belief in the protestors' anti-Iran objectives in Iraq and Lebanon. They have advocated a 'weakness of Iran in Iraq', a phenomenon based on a few street comments and a few arson-inspired fires. Most probably these institutions did not mean to distort reality as they revealed their limited understanding of the Middle East. Even after the US bombing of the Iraqi Security Forces on the Iraqi-Syrian borders, some of these analysts hinted Iran would not recover and would not be able to respond, and that "Kataeb Hezbollah" were weaker than ever. Yet the following day their sympathizers broke into the US embassy in Baghdad and mobilised thousands of people, creating panic and fear not only at the embassy but also at the Pentagon and the White House.

    There is no doubt President Donald Trump has little foreign policy knowledge and experience. He has never claimed the opposite. But his Foreign and Defence ministries seem hardly more enlightened.

    <img data-attachment-id="8191" data-permalink="https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/02/hoe-de-verenigde-staten-in-irak-in-eigen-voet-schoten-en-de-wensdromen-van-hun-think-tanks/6obco-j5-jpg-medium/" data-orig-file="https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?fit=720%2C960&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="720,960" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="6OBco-J5.jpg-medium" data-image-description="" data-medium-file="https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?fit=225%2C300&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?fit=720%2C960&amp;ssl=1" src="https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?w=1000&#038;ssl=1" alt="" srcset="https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?w=720&amp;ssl=1 720w, https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?resize=225%2C300&amp;ssl=1 225w, https://i1.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6OBco-J5.jpg-medium.jpeg?resize=600%2C800&amp;ssl=1 600w" sizes="(max-width: 720px) 100vw, 720px" data-recalc-dims="1" />

    What happened last week in Iraq?

    On 27 th December 2019, several rockets were fired from unidentified attackers against the K1 Iraqi military base in Kirkuk, north of Iraq. In this base, as in many others, Iraqi and US military are present on the same ground and within the same walls, even if they have different command and control HQs. Two Iraqi policemen and one American contractor were killed and 2 Iraqi Army officers and four US contractors were wounded.

    The following day, Defence Secretary Mark Esper called the Iraqi caretaker Prime Minister to inform him of "his decision to bomb Kataeb Hezbollah bases in Iraq". Mr Abdel Mahdi asked Esper to meet face-to-face, and told his interlocutor that this would be dangerous for Iraq: he rejected the US decision. Esper responded that he was "not calling to negotiate but to inform about a decision that has already been taken". Mr Abdel Mahdi asked Esper if the US has "proof against Kataeb Hezbollah to share so Iraq can arrest those responsible for the attack on K1". No response: Esper told Abdel Mahdi that the US was "well-informed" and that the attack would take place " in a few hours ".

    In less than half an hour, US jets bombed five Iraqi security forces' positions deployed along the Iraqi-Syrian borders, in the zone of Akashat, 538 kilometres from the K1 military base (that had been bombed by perpetrators still unknown!). The US announced the attack but omitted the fact that in these positions there were not only Kataeb Hezbollah but also Iraqi Army and Federal Police officers. Most victims of the US attack were Iraqi army and police officers. Only 9 officers of Kataeb Hezbollah – who joined the Iraqi Security Forces in 2017 – were killed. These five positions had the task of intercepting and hunting down ISIS and preventing the group's militants from crossing the borders from the Anbar desert. The closest city to these bombed positions is al-Qaem, 150 km away.

    What is the outcome of the US bombing of the Iraqi security forces?

    <img data-attachment-id="8192" data-permalink="https://ejmagnier.com/2020/01/02/hoe-de-verenigde-staten-in-irak-in-eigen-voet-schoten-en-de-wensdromen-van-hun-think-tanks/olyjr7od/" data-orig-file="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?fit=1100%2C618&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="1100,618" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="olyJR7OD" data-image-description="" data-medium-file="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?fit=300%2C169&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?fit=1000%2C562&amp;ssl=1" src="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?resize=1000%2C562&#038;ssl=1" alt="" srcset="https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?resize=1024%2C575&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?resize=300%2C169&amp;ssl=1 300w, https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?resize=768%2C431&amp;ssl=1 768w, https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?resize=600%2C337&amp;ssl=1 600w, https://i2.wp.com/ejmagnier.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/olyJR7OD.jpeg?w=1100&amp;ssl=1 1100w" sizes="(max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px" data-recalc-dims="1" />

    Iran had been struggling to achieve consensus among various Iraqi political parties. In Baghdad, it had been impossible to unite them to select a new Prime Minister following the resignation of Adel Abdel Mahdi. Political parties, above all groups representing the Shia majority, were divided amongst themselves and incapable of selecting a suitable candidate. Protestors were occupying the streets and the Hashd al-Shaabi flag was not tolerated in Baghdad square.

    The US bombing of the Iraqi security forces' positions fell as manna to Iran. Secretaries Pompeo and Esper's actions were in perfect harmony with the goals of the IRGC-Quds brigade commander Qassem Soleimani. The two US officials broke the Iraqi political stalemate and diverted the country's attention towards the US embassy and the break-in of protestors to contest the US bombing of Iraqi security forces.

    Members of Hashd al-Shaabi and other Iraqi forces units, along with families and friends of the 79 (killed and wounded) victims demonstrated outside the US embassy in the Green Zone in Baghdad. Flags of Hashd al-Shaabi were flying over the entrance of the US embassy. The withdrawal of the US forces from Iraq became the priority of the Iraqi parliament, and even of Moqtada al-Sadr.

    The US paid the price of thousands of killed and wounded and trillions of dollars to maintain a zone of influence, military bases and a friendly government in Iraq, but they have failed to achieve these objectives. Irresponsible and erroneous analysis of the situation in Iraq and its dynamics has proved that its authors are detached and isolated from that reality.

    The US may end up being pushed out of Iraq and Syria. It may move to Kurdistan. But if the parliament fails to reach an agreement over its presence in Iraq, US forces will no longer be in a friendly environment and may be targeted by various Iraqi groups, bringing back memories of 2005.

    One single rushed decision emanating from inexperienced US policymakers, evidently following the advice of think tanks, has dealt the US a setback in the region. Was the advice of neocon think-tank analysts shaped by incompetence, or simply by their agenda? They are indeed separated by a great distance from realities on the ground in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, and US policymakers are clearly not getting sound advice on the region.

    All this plays into the hands of Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani, whose only need is to capitalize on American mistakes in the Middle East. The US is making Iran stronger, demonstrating the truth of Sayyed Ali Khamenei's comment: " Thank God our enemies are imbeciles ".

    Proofread by : Maurice Brasher and C.G.B.

    [Jan 04, 2020] The USA only choice is a Sunni sandwich with Kurdish Bread and Shia Mayo

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Peeps like Sen Graham saying "the Iraqi's need to choose between us or Iran."

    (That choice is a Sunni sandwich with Kurdish Bread and Shia Mayo)

    [Jan 04, 2020] Oh, I thought last night's peace-loving strike was supposed to prevent additional warfare

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    https://t.co/Z2S3WQaz7L

    -- Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 3, 2020

    Crush the cube , 3 minutes ago link

    This will end great, a fucked up circus called congress who hasn't had the balls to do their job and legally declare war for nearly three decades, and a president who can't even defend himself from a gang of thugs staging a direct coup against him in his own government. What could possibly go wrong?

    me or you , 3 minutes ago link

    Weird from a guy who dodged military service.

    NubianSundance , 9 minutes ago link

    Yep, Trumpt got into office by weaving a web of lies to a naive public, but the us remains the pre eminent military power and can do what it likes.

    [Jan 04, 2020] On Thucydides quote "the strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must

    Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Andrei Martyanov (aka SmoothieX12) -> Ishmael Zechariah... ,03 January 2020 at 11:20 PM

    The second are the immortal words of Thucydides: "the strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must."

    Yeah, I heard Thucydides had some issues with resolution of uncertainties for targeting, especially for stand-off precision guided weapons. Plus there were some issues with long range air-defense systems in Greece in times of Plato and Socrates. You know, GLONASS wasn't fully operational, plus EW was a little bit scratchy.

    So, surely, it all fully applies today, especially in choke points. Plus those Athenians they were not exactly good with RPGs and anti-Armour operations. Other than that, Thucydides nailed it.

    Something To Think About -> Ishmael Zechariah... , 04 January 2020 at 01:11 AM
    Ah, yes, the Melian Dialogue.

    Interesting to note that it was the party professing those words - Athens - who started the Peloponnesian War, driven in large part by that haughty attitude. It was Athens that also ended that war, of course. They did so when they surrendered to the Spartans.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

    Sep 13, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    America's three principal adversaries signify the shape of the world to come: a post-Western world of coexistence. But neoliberal and neocon ideology is unable to to accept global pluralism and multipolarity, argues Patrick Lawrence.


    Special to Consortium News

    The Trump administration has brought U.S. foreign policy to the brink of crisis, if it has not already tipped into one. There is little room to argue otherwise. In Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, and in Washington's ever-fraught relations with Russia, U.S. strategy, as reviewed in my previous column , amounts to little more than spoiling the efforts of others to negotiate peaceful solutions to war and dangerous standoffs in the interests of an orderly world.

    The bitter reality is that U.S. foreign policy has no definable objective other than blocking the initiatives of others because they stand in the way of the further expansion of U.S. global interests. This impoverished strategy reflects Washington's refusal to accept the passing of its relatively brief post–Cold War moment of unipolar power.

    There is an error all too common in American public opinion. Personalizing Washington's regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding. This mistake was made during the steady attack on civil liberties after the Sept. 11 tragedies and then during the 2003 invasion of Iraq: namely that it was all George W. Bush's fault. It was not so simple then and is not now. The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.

    Let us bring some history to this question of America as spoiler. What is the origin of this undignified and isolating approach to global affairs?

    It began with that hubristic triumphalism so evident in the decade after the Cold War's end. What ensued had various names.

    There was the "end of history" thesis. American liberalism was humanity's highest achievement, and nothing would supersede it.

    There was also the "Washington consensus." The world was in agreement that free-market capitalism and unfettered financial markets would see the entire planet to prosperity. The consensus never extended far beyond the Potomac, but this sort of detail mattered little at the time.

    The neoliberal economic crusade accompanied by neoconservative politics had its intellectual ballast, and off went its true-believing warriors around the world.

    Happier days with Russia. (Eric Draper)

    Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad. Then came the "color revolutions," which resulted in the destabilization of large swathes of the former Soviet Union's borderlands. The 2008 financial crash followed.

    I was in Hong Kong at the time and recall thinking, "This is not just Lehman Brothers. An economic model is headed into Chapter 11." One would have thought a fundamental rethink in Washington might have followed these events. There has never been one.

    The orthodoxy today remains what it was when it formed in the 1990s: The neoliberal crusade must proceed. Our market-driven, "rules-based" order is still advanced as the only way out of our planet's impasses.

    A Strategic and Military Turn

    Midway through the first Obama administration, a crucial turn began. What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions. The NATO bombing campaign in Libya, ostensibly a humanitarian mission, became a regime-change operation -- despite Washington's promises otherwise. Obama's "pivot to Asia" turned out to be a neo-containment policy toward China. The "reset" with Russia, declared after Obama appointed Hillary Clinton secretary of state, flopped and turned into the virulent animosity we now live with daily. The U.S.-cultivated coup in Kiev in 2014 was a major declaration of drastic turn in policy towards Moscow. So was the decision, taken in 2012 at the latest , to back the radical jihadists who were turning civil unrest in Syria into a campaign to topple the Assad government in favor of another Islamist regime.

    Spoilage as a poor excuse for a foreign policy had made its first appearances.

    I count 2013 to 2015 as key years. At the start of this period, China began developing what it now calls its Belt and Road Initiative -- its hugely ambitious plan to stitch together the Eurasian landmass, Shanghai to Lisbon. Moscow favored this undertaking, not least because of the key role Russia had to play and because it fit well with President Vladimir Putin's Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), launched in 2014.

    Belt and Road Initiative. (Lommes / CC BY-SA 4.0)

    In 2015, the last of the three years I just noted, Russia intervened militarily and diplomatically in the Syria conflict, in part to protect its southwest from Islamist extremism and in part to pull the Middle East back from the near-anarchy then threatening it as well as Russia and the West.

    Meanwhile, Washington had cast China as an adversary and committed itself -- as it apparently remains -- to regime change in Syria. Three months prior to the treaty that established the EAEU, the Americans helped turn another case of civil unrest into a regime change -- this time backing not jihadists in Syria but the crypto-Nazi militias in Ukraine on which the government now in power still depends.

    That is how we got the U.S.-as-spoiler foreign policy we now have.

    If there is a president to blame -- and again, I see little point in this line of argument -- it would have to be Barack Obama. To a certain extent, Obama was a creature of those around him, as he acknowledged in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic toward the end of his second term. From that "Anonymous" opinion piece published in The New York Times on Sept. 5, we know Trump is too, to a greater extent than Obama may have feared in his worst moments.

    The crucial question is why. Why do U.S. policy cliques find themselves bereft of imaginative thinking in the face of an evolving world order? Why has there been not a single original policy initiative since the years I single out, with the exception of the now-abandoned 2015 accord governing Iran's nuclear programs? "Right now, our job is to create quagmires until we get what we want," an administration official told The Washington Post 's David Ignatius in August.

    Can you think of a blunter confession of intellectual bankruptcy? I can't.

    Global 'Equals' Like Us?

    There is a longstanding explanation for this paralysis. Seven decades of global hegemony, the Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension. Those planning and executing American diplomacy lost all facility for imaginative thinking because there was no need of it. This holds true, in my view, but there is more to our specific moment than mere sclerosis within the policy cliques.

    As I have argued numerous times elsewhere, parity between East and West is a 21st century imperative. From Woodrow Wilson to the post-World War II settlement, an equality among all nations was in theory what the U.S. considered essential to global order.

    Now that this is upon us, however, Washington cannot accept it. It did not count on non-Western nations achieving a measure of prosperity and influence until they were "just like us," as the once famous phrase had it. And it has not turned out that way.

    Can't we all just get along? (Carlos3653 / Wikimedia)

    Think of Russia, China, and Iran, the three nations now designated America's principal adversaries. Each one is fated to become (if it is not already) a world or regional power and a key to stability -- Russia and China on a global scale, Iran in the Middle East. But each stands resolutely -- and this is not to say with hostile intent -- outside the Western-led order. They have different histories, traditions, cultures, and political cultures. And they are determined to preserve them.

    They signify the shape of the world to come -- a post-Western world in which the Atlantic alliance must coexist with rising powers outside its orbit. Together, then, they signify precisely what the U.S. cannot countenance. And if there is one attribute of neoliberal and neoconservative ideology that stands out among all others, it is its complete inability to accept difference or deviation if it threatens its interests.

    This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability.

    Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, author, and lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century (Yale). Follow him @thefloutist. His web site is www.patricklawrence.us. Support his work via www.patreon.com/thefloutist .

    If you valued this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

    10284

    Tags: Barack Obama China Donald Trump George W. Bush Iran Neoliberlism Patrick Lawrence Russia Spoiler United States Vladimir Putin

    Post navigation ← Solving Italy's Immigration Crisis Consortium News Unveils New Logo → 78 comments for "Why the U.S. Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran"

    R Davis , September 20, 2018 at 04:21

    adversary: – one's opponent in a contest, conflict or dispute.

    & I ask this
    "Is it really thus"
    "Why must it be thus"

    How can China be an adversary of the USA when all their manufactured goods come from China.
    example:- a water distiller – manufactured in & purchased from China retails for AU$70 odd.
    The very same item manufactured in China – but purchased from the USA retails for US$260 plus.
    China should be a most welcome guest at the dinner table of the USA.

    R Davis , September 20, 2018 at 04:28

    While i'm here – where did China get all their surveillance equipment from – the place is locked down tighter than a chicken coop plagued by foxes.

    relevant article – CRAZZ FILES – Bone Chilling Footage Shows the Horrific Tyranny Google is Now Secretly Fostering in China.

    In my opinion Google is not trying to keep information out of China – BUT – preventing information from get out of China – to the world at large.
    A lockdown as severe as this – tells us that there is something seriously bad happening inside China.
    Maybe even a mass genocide

    Bob Arnold , September 16, 2018 at 09:48

    This analysis is correct as far as it goes. However, what is lacking is an analysis of the lunatic monetary ideology that has looted the physical economy of the U.S. by putting enormous fake profits of speculative instruments in the hands of our "elites." It is the post industrial, information age economy which must be transformed by very painful loss of control by these putative elites if the world is to survive their insane geopolitics. What the Chinese are doing by rapid build up of worldwide infrastructure needs to be replicated here. The only way of doing so is first by ending the Wall St./City of London derivatives nightmare and then by issuing trillions of credits needed for that very purpose.

    Lee Anderson , September 16, 2018 at 15:16

    Agreed, you speak wisely of the root of the problem. Those who create and distribute money make ALL the rules and dominate the political and media landscape.

    Freedomlover , September 17, 2018 at 15:20

    Hit the nail on the head.
    Thanks

    bevin , September 14, 2018 at 18:32

    This really is an excellent analysis. I would highlight the following point:
    "There is a longstanding explanation for this paralysis. Seven decades of global hegemony, the Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension. Those planning and executing American diplomacy lost all facility for imaginative thinking because there was no need of it. This holds true, in my view, but there is more to our specific moment than mere sclerosis within the policy cliques "

    Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington.

    Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 18:03

    You don't mention corruption and profiteering, which go hand-in-hand with American Exceptionalism and the National Security State (NSS) formed in 1947. The leader of the world which is also an NSS requires enemies, so the National Security Strategy designates enemies, a few of them in an Axis of Evil. Arming to fight them and dreaming up other reasons to go to war, including a war on terror of all things, bring the desired vast expenditures, trillions of dollars, which translate to vast profits to those involved.

    This focus on war has its roots in the Christian bible and in a sense of manifest destiny that has occupied Americans since before they were Americans, and the real Americans had to be exterminated. It certainly (as stated) can't be blamed on certain individuals, it's predominate and nearly universal. How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few.

    Homer Jay , September 14, 2018 at 22:09

    "How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few."

    Are you kidding me? Here is a list of polls of the American public regarding the Iraq War 2003-2007;

    https://www.politifact.com/iraq-war-polls/

    Even in the lead up the war when the public was force fed a diet comprised entirely of State Dept. lies about WMDs by a sycophantic media, there was still a significant 25-40 percent of the public who opposed the war. You clearly are not American or you would remember the vocal minority which filled the streets of big cities across this country. And again the consent was as Chomsky says "manufactured." And it took only 1 year of the war for the majority of the public to be against it. By 2007 60-70% of the public opposed the war.

    Judging from your name you come from a country whose government was part of that coalition of the willing. So should we assume that "very few" of your fellow country men and women were against that absolute horror show that is the Iraq war?

    Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 23:05

    You failed to address my major point, and instead picked on something you're wrong on.

    Iraq war poll –Pew Research
    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/old-assets/publications/770-1.gif

    PS: bevin made approximately the same point later (w/o the financial factor).
    "Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington."

    Homer Jay , September 17, 2018 at 14:47

    Respectfully, Your data backs up my comment/data. And to your larger point, again we must be careful when describing such attitudes as "American", a country with a wide range of attitudes/ beliefs. To suggest we are all just a war mongering mob is bigoted. You probably will say that's defensive but it's also right. And making the recklessly inaccurate claim that "very few" Americans opposed the war in Iraq, without taking into account the disinformation campaign that played into the initial consent, needs to corrected more than once.

    Sari , September 14, 2018 at 15:15

    I just encountered (via Voltairenet) "The Pentagon's New Map," a book written by Thomas Barnett, an assistant once to Admiral Arthur K. Cebrowski (now deceased). Barnett wrote an earlier article for the March 2003 Esquire entitled "Why the Pentagon Changes Its Map: And Why We'll Keep Going to War" ( https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a1546/thomas-barnett-iraq-war-primer/ ) describing their ideas which are introduced thusly:

    "Since the end of the cold war, the United States has been trying to come up with an operating theory of the world -- and a military strategy to accompany it. Now there's a leading contender. It involves identifying the problem parts of the world and aggressively shrinking them. Since September 11, 2001, the author, a professor of warfare analysis at the U.S. Naval War College, has been advising the Office of the Secretary of Defense and giving this briefing continually at the Pentagon and in the intelligence community. Now, he gives it to you."

    His basic premise: "Show me where globalization is thick with network connectivity, financial transactions, liberal media flows, and collective security, and I will show you regions featuring stable governments, rising standards of living, and more deaths by suicide than murder. These parts of the world I call the Functioning Core, or Core. But show me where globalization is thinning or just plain absent, and I will show you regions plagued by politically repressive regimes, widespread poverty and disease, routine mass murder, and -- most important -- the chronic conflicts that incubate the next generation of global terrorists. These parts of the world I call the Non-Integrating Gap, or Gap."

    One more quote gives you the "Monarch Notes" edition: "Think about it: Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are pure products of the Gap -- in effect, its most violent feedback to the Core. They tell us how we are doing in exporting security to these lawless areas (not very well) and which states they would like to take "offline" from globalization and return to some seventh-century definition of the good life (any Gap state with a sizable Muslim population, especially Saudi Arabia).

    If you take this message from Osama and combine it with our military-intervention record of the last decade, a simple security rule set emerges: A country's potential to warrant a U.S. military response is inversely related to its globalization connectivity."

    Of course, we all recognize how much prevarication currently exists in "implementing" this strategy, but I would suggest that, very likely, the Pentagon is, indeed, following this "New Map." And, yes, this "map" shows us why the U.S. has been continually at war since 9/11 and subbornly refuses to leave Syria, Iraq, and the Middle East with their apparent justification being "Might Makes Right." Thierry Mayssen (Voltairenet) aptly describes the Gap states as "reservoirs of resources" driven into perpetual war, destabilization, and chaos by a preeminently overwhelming hegemonic U.S. military.

    I had to laugh. One of Barnett's reasons in promulgating this new "map" involves the continued stability of the Core; however, what do we see today? Huge waves of immigration greatly destabilizing every aspect of Europe and chaos and destabilization flooding the U.S. via false/contrived polarization in every sphere of life. BUT! The military has "a Map!"

    Psssstt!! Who's "creating" the Gap? Who has funded and armed Al Qaeda/DAESH/ISIS in the Middle East? We'll need GPS to keep up with the Pentagon's "new map!"

    Archie1954 , September 14, 2018 at 14:39

    I have often wondered why the US was unable to accept the position of first among equals. Why does it have to rule the World? I know it believes that its economic and political systems are the best on the planet, but surely all other nations should be able to decide for themselves, what systems they will accept and live under? Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else? The US was more than willing to kill 20 million people either directly or indirectly since the end of WWII to make its will sovereign in all nations of the World!

    Bob Van Noy , September 14, 2018 at 21:54

    Archie 1954, because 911 was never adequately investigated, our government was inappropriately allowed to act in the so-called public interest in completely inappropriate ways; so that in order for the Country to set things right, those decisions which were made quietly, with little public discussion, would have to be exposed and the illegalities addressed. But, as I'm sure you know, there are myriad other big government failures also left unexamined, so where to begin?

    That is why I invariably raise JFK's Assassination as a logical starting point. If a truly independent commission would fix the blame, we could move on from there. Sam F., on this forum, has mentioned a formal legal undertaking many times on this site, but now is the time to begin the discussion for a formal Truth And Reconciliation Commission in America Let's figure out how to begin.

    So,"Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else?", certainly not The People

    Lee Anderson , September 16, 2018 at 15:28

    Jill Stein said if elected she would boycott all countries guilty of human rights abuses and she included Saudi Arabia and Israel. She also said she would form a 9/11 commission comprised of those independent people and groups currently reporting on this travesty. Meanwhile we have the self-proclaimed "progressive" talk show hosts such as Thom Hartmann, defending the PNAC NEOCONS while making Stein persona non grata and throwing real progressive candidates under the bus.

    The PNAC NEOCONS understood the importance of creating a galvanizing, catastrophic and catalyzing event but the alternative media is afraid to call a spade a spade, something about the truth being too risky to ones career, I assume.

    See much more at youtopia.guru

    Bob Van Noy , September 17, 2018 at 09:19

    Lee Anderson thank you for your response, I agree and I appreciate the link suggestion, I'm impressed and will read more

    didi , September 14, 2018 at 13:49

    It is always the unintended consequences. Hence I disagree with some of your views. A president who takes actions which trigger unintended/unexpected consequences can be held accountable for such consequences even if he/she could not avert the consequences. It is also often true that corrections are possible when such consequences begin to appear. Given our system which makes only presidents powerful to act on war, peace, and foreign relationships there is no escaping that they must be blamed only.

    Jessika , September 14, 2018 at 13:36

    A very good article. Spoiler and bully describe US foreign policy, and foreign policy is in the driver's seat while domestic policy takes the pickings, hardly anything left for the hollowed-out society where people live paycheck to paycheck, homelessness and other assorted ills of a failing society continue to rise while oligarchs and the MIC rule the neofeudal/futile system. When are we going to make that connection of the wasteful expenditure on military adventurism and the problem of poverty in the US? The Pentagon consistently calls the shots, yet we consistently hear about unaccounted expenditures by the Pentagon, losing amounts in the trillions, and never do they get audited.

    nondimenticare , September 14, 2018 at 12:18

    I certainly agree that the policy is bereft, but not for all of the same reasons. There is the positing of a turnaround as a basis for the current spoiler role: "What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions."

    To substantiate this "crucial turn," Lawrence makes the unwarranted assumption that the goal post Soviet Union was simply worldwide free-market capitalism, not global domination: "Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad"; and the later statement that the US wanted the countries it invaded to be "Just like us."

    Though he doesn't mention (ignores) US meddling in Russia after the collapse of the USSR, I presume from its absence that he attributes that, too, to the expansion of capital. Indeed, it was that, but with the more malevolent goal of control. "Just like us" is the usual "progressive" explanation for failures. "Controlled by us" was more like it, if we face the history of the country squarely.

    That is the blindness of intent that has led to the spoiler role.

    Unfettered Fire , September 14, 2018 at 11:15

    Is it really so wise to be speaking in terms of nationhood after we've undergone 50 years of Kochian/libertarian dismantlement of the nation-state in favor of bank and transnational governance? Remember the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski:

    "The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970

    "Make no mistake, what we are seeing in geopolitics today is indeed a magic show. The false East/West paradigm is as powerful if not more powerful than the false Left/Right paradigm. For some reason, the human mind is more comfortable believing in the ideas of division and chaos, and it often turns its nose up indignantly at the notion of "conspiracy." But conspiracies and conspirators can be demonstrated as a fact of history. Organization among elitists is predictable.

    Globalists themselves are drawn together by an ideology. They have no common nation, they have no common political orientation, they have no common cultural background or religion, they herald from the East just as they herald from the West. They have no true loyalty to any mainstream cause or social movement.

    What do they have in common? They seem to exhibit many of the traits of high level narcissistic sociopaths, who make up a very small percentage of the human population. These people are predators, or to be more specific, they are parasites. They see themselves as naturally superior to others, but they often work together if there is the promise of mutual benefit."

    http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3504-in-the-new-qmultipolar-worldq-the-globalists-still-control-all-the-players

    Jeff Davis , September 14, 2018 at 11:46

    Your comment is astute and valuable, and consequently deserves to be signed with your real name, so that you can be identified as someone worth listening to.

    Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 17:44

    Screen names don't matter, content does.

    OlyaPola , September 15, 2018 at 11:34

    "Screen names don't matter, content does."

    Apparently not for some where attribution is sought and the illusion of trust the source trust the content is held, leading to curveballs mirroring expectations whilst serving the purposes of others.

    JuanPZenter , September 17, 2018 at 07:31

    Why? The better to dox him with?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing

    OlyaPola , September 14, 2018 at 13:35

    ""The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970"

    The date of publication is of significance as was Mr. Paul Craig Roberts' Alienation in the Soviet economy of 1971, as was Mr. Andrei Amalrik's "Can the Soviet Union last until 1984 published in 1969.

    The period 1968 – 1973 was one significant trajectory in the half-life of "we the people hold these truths to be self-evident" which underpinned and maintained the "nation state" misrepresented/branded as the "United States of America" through a change in the assays of the amalga mutual benefit/hold these truths to be self-evident.

    The last hurrah of the "red experts" – Mr. Brezhnev and associates – despite analyses/forecasts from various agencies agreed, detente based on spheres of influence facilitating through interaction/complicity various fiats including but not restricted to fiat currency, fiat economy, fiat politics all dependent on mutations of "we the people hold these truths to be self-evident".

    This interaction also facilitated processes which accelerated the demise of the "Soviet Union" and its continuing transcendence by the Russian Federation – the choice of title being a notice of intent that some interpreted as the "End of History" whilst others interpreted as lateral opportunity facilitated by the hubris of the "End of History".

    The "red experts" were not unique in their illusions; another pertinent example is the strategy of the PLO in maintaining the illusion of the two state solution/"Oslo accords" facilitating the continuing colonial project branded as "Israel".

    Mr. Brzezinski was one of the others who interpreted the "End of History" as linear opportunity where the assay of amalga of form could be changed to maintain content/function which was/is to "still" control all the players.

    However in any interactive system neither omniscience nor sole agency/control is possible, whilst by virtue of interaction the complicity of all can be encouraged in various ways to facilitate useful outcomes in furtherance of purpose, whilst illusions of the "End of History" and the search for the holy grail of "Full Spectrum Dominance" acted as both accelerators and multipliers in the process of encouragement, whilst obscuring this process in open sight through the opponents' amalga of reliance on "plausible belief based in part on projection", "exceptionalism" and associated hubris.

    The "nation state" subsuming illusions of mutual benefit and mutual purpose has always been a function of the half-lives of components of its ideological facades and practices – sexual intercourse wasn't invented in 1963 and "The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force" wasn't initiated in 1970.

    Unfettered Fire , September 14, 2018 at 13:43

    "In our society, real power does not happen to lie in the political system, it lies in the private economy: that's where the decisions are made about what's produced, how much is produced, what's consumed, where investment takes place, who has jobs, who controls the resources, and so on and so forth. And as long as that remains the case, changes inside the political system can make some difference -- I don't want to say it's zero -- but the differences are going to be very slight." ~ Noam Chomsky

    Giants: The Global Power Elite – A talk by Peter Phillips
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np6td-wzDYQ

    The Elite World Order in Jitters
    Review of Peter Phillips' book Giants: The Global Power Elite
    https://dissidentvoice.org/2018/09/the-elite-world-order-in-jitters/

    backwardsevolution , September 14, 2018 at 17:14

    Unfettered Fire – good posts. Thank you. Peter Phillips is definitely worth listening to.

    Jon Dhoe , September 14, 2018 at 11:02

    Israel, Israel, Israel.

    When are we going to start facing facts?

    Daniel Good , September 14, 2018 at 09:59

    Yet there is a thread that leads through US foreign policy. It all started with NSC 68. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSC_68 . Already in the 1950's, leading bankers were afraid of economic depression which would follow from a "peace dividend" following the end of WWII. To avoid this, and to avoid "socialism", the only acceptable government spending was on defense. This mentality never ended. Today 50% of discretionary govenmenrt spending is on the military. http://www.unz.com/article/americas-militarized-economy/ . We live in a country of military socialism, in which military citizens have all types of benefits, on condition they join the military-industrial-complex. This being so, there is no need for real "intelligence", there is no need to "understand" what goes on is foreign countries, there no need to be right about what might happen or worry about consequences. What is important is stimulate the economy by spending on arms. From Korean war, when the US dropped more bombs than it had on Nazi Germany, through Viet Nam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc etc the US policy was a winning one not for those who got bombed (and could not fight back) but for the weapons industry and military contractors. Is the NYTimes ever going to discuss this aspect? Or any one in the MSM?

    Lee Anderson , September 16, 2018 at 15:42

    All that and we constantly have to endure the bankster/MIC-controlled media proclaiming everyone who joins the military as "heroes" defending our precious"freedoms." The media mafia is evil.

    Walter , September 14, 2018 at 09:26

    The "why" behind the US foreign policies was spoken with absolute honest clarity in the "Statement of A. Wess Mitchell
    Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs" to the Senate on August 21 this year. The transcript is at :

    https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/082118_Mitchell_Testimony.pdf

    Quoth the esteemed gentleman (inter alia)

    "It continues to be among the foremost national security interests of the United States to prevent the domination of the Eurasian landmass by hostile powers. The central aim of the administration's foreign policy is to prepare our nation to confront this challenge by systematically strengthening the military, economic and political fundamentals of American power. "

    Tellingly the "official" State Department copy is changed and omits the true spoken words

    See yourself: https://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2018/285247.htm

    This is the essence of MacKinder's Thesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History and was the underlying reason for both world wars in the 20th century.

    An essay on this observed truth https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/11/behind-the-anglo-american-war-on-russia/

    A deeper essay on the same subject https://www.silkroadstudies.org/resources/pdf/Monographs/1006Rethinking-4.pdf

    I would propose that the zionish aspect exists due to the perceived necessity of "Forward Operating Base Israel" lookit a map, Comrade The ISIS?Saudi?Zionist games divides the New Silk Road and the Eurasian land mass and exists to throttle said pathways.

    Interestingly the latter essay is attributed to Eldar Ismailov and Vladimer Papava

    Brother Comrade Putin knows the game. The US has to maintain the fiction for the public that it does not know the game, and is consequently obliged to maintain a vast public delusion, hence "fake news" and all the rest.

    OlyaPola , September 14, 2018 at 13:49

    "I would propose that the zionish aspect exists due to the perceived necessity of "Forward Operating Base Israel" lookit a map, Comrade"

    Some have an attraction to book-ends.

    Once upon a time the Eurasian book-ends were Germany and Japan, and the Western Asian book-ends Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    This "strategy" is based upon the notion that bookend-ness is a state of inertia which in any interactive system is impossible except apparently to those embedded in "we the people hold these truths to be self-evident".

    Consequently some have an attraction to book-ends.

    Walter , September 15, 2018 at 12:31

    If I understand you correctly, then yes, some imagine that a static situation can exist. This a natural but delusional way of seeing the world, of course – especially because Chin and Rus are able to liquidate any counter-forces that attempt to create or maintain "book-ends.

    The actual spoken words to the Senate of Mr. Michell are very significant, as the removal of them from the ostensibly real, but actually false, State Department "Transcript" implies. Foolish Mr. Michell! He accidentally spoke the true objective of US foreign policy and also the domestic objective – total bamboozlement of the US population "prepare the country for " (Obvious, world war against the Heartland states that fail to "cooperate" (surrender).

    People ought to read the pdf what Michell actually spoke all of it and consider the logical implications. Michell has a big mouth Good. He confirms the dark truths

    The guilty according to circumstantial evidence has confessed his guilt so to say; confirming the crime

    An Israeli-Saudi "Greater Israel" dividing Syria between Saud and zion is of course a goal that in effect would be a "book-end".

    Too late now as it is clear that Syrian skies are probably going to soon be "no-fly-zone" for foreign invaders

    Then will come the "pitch-forks", as Napoleon's retreat from Moscow illustrated

    OlyaPola , September 16, 2018 at 04:25

    "If I understand you correctly, then yes, some imagine that a static situation can exist. This a natural but delusional way of seeing the world"

    Absolutes including stasis don't exist but the belief of others in book-ends including extensive foreign bases are lands of opportunities for others facilitating pitch forking without extensive travel.

    Consequently some perceive that the opponents have hopes and wishes which they seek to represent as "strategies" and "tactics" and some opportunities of lateral challenge derived there-from.

    Some would hold that the opponents' have a greater assay of the rubbing sticks school of thermo-dynamics in "their" amalga of perception, in some regards even less perceptive than Heraclitus although Heraclitus lived in his time/interactions as the interaction below suggests.

    One of the consequences is the opponents tendency to bridge doubt by belief to attain comfort through iteration and subsequent projection, facilitating lateral opportunities for others with greater perception of fission/metamorphosis/transcendence including the "unintended consequences" -at least in the opponents' perception – without resort to Mr. Heisenberg's deliberations, leading to some of the opponents resorting to snake-oil sales techniques suggesting that their intent/purpose was always what they perceived to be the concept/construct "chaos".

    A further illustration of this and how it was/is not limited to present opponents citing trajectories during the period 1968 – 1973 and some subsequent consequences was broadcast through this portal on the 14th of September 2018 but not "published" possibly in ignorance of Mr. Bulgakov's contention that manuscripts don't burn.

    The examples used were detente on the bases of spheres of influence agreed by the Politburo despite contrary advice from many agencies, the strategy of the PLO and half-life of these beliefs in the strategies of Hamas.

    Detente on the basis of sphere of influence facilitated fiat currency, fiat politics, and fiat re-branding – "neo-liberalism" -, colonial projects in Western Asia, and how opening Pandora's box was/is only perceived as wholly a disadvantage for those seeking to deny lateral process (Stop the Empires War on Russia slogan being a useful example) and those not so immersed helped facilitate the ongoing transcendence of the "Soviet Union" by the Russian Federation – the title being a notice of intent that opponents perceived as the "End of History" as functions of their framing and projection.

    OlyaPola , September 16, 2018 at 07:51

    Some hold that New York, New York was so good they named it twice, whilst some others wonder whether they named it twice to make it easier for the inhabitants to locate.

    Following the precautionary principle I attach below a further illustration of :

    " . the opponents have hopes and wishes which they seek to represent as "strategies" and "tactics" and some opportunities of lateral challenge derived there-from ..

    "One of the consequences is the opponents tendency to bridge doubt by belief to attain comfort through iteration and subsequent projection, facilitating lateral opportunities for others with greater perception of fission/metamorphosis/transcendence including the "unintended consequences" -at least in the opponents' perception – without resort to Mr. Heisenberg's deliberations, leading to some of the opponents resorting to snake-oil sales techniques suggesting that their intent/purpose was always what they perceived to be the concept/construct "chaos".

    which was alluded to in the "unpublished" broadcast which referenced

    1. "The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970.

    2. Mr. P.C. Roberts' Alienation in the USSR (1971)

    3. Mr Andrei Amalrik's Can the Soviet Union last until 1984 (1969).

    in illustration of interactive amalga which some call Russiagate, presumably because the water had flowed but apparently not under the bridge.

    The recent US presidential election process including the "outcomes" were relatively easy to predict
    and required no encouragement from outside – doing "nothing" being a trajectory of doing for those not trapped in the can do/must do conflation.

    Some don't understand Russian very well and so instead of understanding Mr. Putin's remark that Mr. Trump was "colourful" which has connotations to some with facility in the Russian culture/language, some sought to bridge doubt by belief to attain expectation on the basis of "plausible belief".

    An increasing sum of some are no longer so immersed as illustrated in

    https://www.rt.com/shows/on-contact/438556-america-book-conversation-economy/

    whilst perceptual frames often have significant half-lives.

    exiled off mainstreet , September 14, 2018 at 00:42

    This is a great series of articles and the comments, including those having reservations, are intelligent. Since those comments appearing not to appear later seem to have appeared, mechanical difficulties of some sort seem to have been what occurred. I hope Mr. Tedesky, one of the most valued commentators writing in the comments, continues his work.

    Dennis Etler , September 13, 2018 at 21:05

    Patrick Lawrence's essay makes perfect sense only when it is applied to US foreign policy since the end of WW2. It is conventional wisdom that the US is now engaged in Cold War 2.0. In fact, Cold War 2.0 is an extension of Cold War 1.0. There was merely a 20 year interregnum between 1990 and 2010. Most analysts think that Cold War 1.0 was an ideological war between "Communism" and "Democracy". The renewal of the Cold War against both Russia and China however shows that the ideological war between East and West was really a cover for the geopolitical war between the two. Russia, China and Iran are the main geopolitical enemies of the US as they stand in the way of the global, imperialist hegemony of the US. In order to control the global periphery, i.e. the developing world and their emerging economies, the US must contain and defeat the big three. This was as true in 1948 as it is in 2018. Thus, what's happening today under Trump is no different than what occurred under Truman in 1948. Whatever differences exist are mere window dressing.

    Rob Roy , September 15, 2018 at 00:16

    Mr. Etler,
    I think you are mostly right except in the first Cold War, the Soviets and US Americans were both involved in this "war." What you call Cold War 2.0 is in the minds and policies of only the US. Russian is not in any way currently like the Soviet Union, yet the US acts in all aspects of foreign attitude and policy as though that (very unpleasant period in today's Russians' minds) still exists. It does not. You says there was "merely a 20 year interregnum" and things have picked up and continued as a Cold War. Only in the idiocy of the USA, certainly not in the minds of Russian leadership, particularly Putin's who now can be distinguished as the most logical, realistic and competent leader in the world.
    Thanks to H. Clinton being unable to become president, we have a full blown Russiagate which the MSM propaganda continues to spread. There is no Cold War 2.0. It's a fallacy to create a false flag for regime change in Russia. Ms. Clinton, the Kagan family, the MIC, etc., figure if we can take out Yanukovich and replace him with Fascists/Nazis, what could stop us from doing the same to Russia. The good news: all empires fail.

    Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 13:41

    "This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability."

    Mr. Lawrence is much too accommodating with his analysis. Imagine, linking US "foreign policy" in the same thought as "global stability", as if the two were somehow related. On the contrary, "global instability" seems to be our foreign policy goal, especially for those regions that pose a threat to US hegemony. Why? Because it is difficult to extract a region's wealth when its population is united behind a stable government that can't be bought off.

    Walter , September 13, 2018 at 13:30

    US is attempting to stop a process, to prevent Change see https://www.fort-russ.com/2017/10/v-golstein-end-of-cold-war-and/

    Conjuring up Heraclitus..Time is a River, constantly changing. And we face downstream, unable to see the Future and gazing upon the Past.

    The attempt has an effect, many effects, but it cannot stop Time.

    The Russian and the Chinese have clinched the unification of the Earth Island, "Heartland" This ended the ability to control global commerce by means of navies – the methods of the Sea Peoples over the last 500 years are now failed. The US has no way of even seeing this fact other than force and violence to restore the status quo ante .

    Thus World War, as we see

    Recollecting Heraclitus again, the universe is populated by opposites as we see, China and Russia represent a cathodic opposite to the US

    OlyaPola , September 14, 2018 at 09:38

    "Conjuring up Heraclitus "

    "And we face downstream, unable to see the Future and gazing upon the Past."

    Time is a synonym of interaction the perception of which and opportunities derived therefrom being functions of analysing interactions which require notions and analyses of upstream-perceived transition point (similar to the concept/construct zero)-downstream lateral processes, which Heraclitus perceived and practiced.

    Heraclitus lived in a previous time/interaction and the perception and uses of thermodynamics have laterally changed since Heraclitus' time.

    Omniscience can never exist in any lateral system, but time/interaction has facilitated the increase of perceptions and lateral opportunities to facilitate various futures and their encouragement through processes of fission – the process of strategy formulation, strategy implementation, strategy evaluation, and strategy modulation refers.

    Framing including attempts to deny agency to others and hence interaction thereby denying time, leads to strategic myopia, and when outcomes vary from expectations/hopes/wishes lead the myopic to attempt to bridge doubt by belief to attain comfort.

    Categorical imperatives are kant facilitating can't, best left to Kant, although apparently some are loathe to agree.

    "The US has no way of even seeing this fact other than force and violence to restore the status quo ante ."

    The temporary socio-economic arrangement misrepresented/branded as "The United States of America" has a vested interest in seeking to deny time/interaction including through "exceptionalism" and a history of flailings and consequences derived therefrom.

    "Recollecting Heraclitus again, the universe is populated by opposites as we see, China and Russia represent a cathodic opposite to the US "

    As above, Heraclitus lived in a previous time and the perception and uses of thermodynamics have laterally changed since Heraclitus' time although apparently not informing the perceptions and practices of some.

    Understandably Heraclitus sometimes relied within his framing on notions of moments of stasis/absolutes (steady states) such as opposites, where as like in all areas of thermo-dynamics a more modern framework would include the notions of amalga with varying interactive half-lives.

    It would appear that your contribution is also subject to such "paradox" as in "China and Russia represent a cathodic opposite to the US "

    Perhaps a more illuminating but more complex formulation would be found in :

    "In other parts of planet earth the assay of amalga and their varying interactive half-lives differ from those asserted to exist within the temporary socio-economic arrangements misrepresented/branded as "The United States of America" thereby facilitating opportunities to transcend coercive relationships such as those practiced by the temporary socio-economic arrangements misrepresented/branded as "The United States of America", by co-operative socio-economic relations conditioned by the half-lives of perceptions and practices derived therefrom.

    In part that contributed and continues to contribute to the lateral process of transcendence of the "Soviet Union" by the Russian Federation previously leading to a limited debate whether to nominate Mr. Brezhinsky, Mr.Clinton, Mr. Fukuyama or Mr. Wolfowitz for the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts facilitating the transcendence of the temporary socio-economic arrangements misrepresented/branded as "The United States of America".

    Jeff Harrison , September 13, 2018 at 13:29

    I guess I missed this one, Patrick. Great overview but let me put it in a slightly different context. You start with the end of the cold war but I don't. I could go all the way back to the early days of the country and our proclamation of manifest destiny. The US has long thought that it was the one ring to rule them all. But for most of that time the strength of individual members of the rest of the world constrained the US from running amok. That constraint began to be lifted after the ruling clique in Europe committed seppuku in WWI. It was completely lifted after WWII. But that was 75 years ago. This is now and most of the world has recovered from the world wide destruction of human and physical capital known as WWII. The US is going to have to learn how to live with constraints again but it will take a shock. The US is going to have to lose at something big time. Europe cancelling the sanctions? The sanctions on Russia don't mean squat to the US but it's costing Europe billions. This highlights the reality that the "Western Alliance" (read NATO) is not really an alliance of shared goals and objectives. It's an alliance of those terrified by fascism and what it can do. They all decided that they needed a "great father" to prevent their excesses again. One wonders if either the world or Europe would really like the US to come riding in like the cavalry to places like Germany, Poland, and Ukraine. Blindly following Washington's directions can be remarkably expensive for Europe and they get nothing but refugees they can't afford. Something will ultimately have to give.

    The one thing I was surprised you didn't mention was the US's financial weakness. It's been a long time since the US was a creditor nation. We've been a debtor nation since at least the 80s. The world doesn't need debtor nations and the only reason they need us is the primacy of the US dollar. And there are numerous people hammering away at that.

    Gerald Wadsworth , September 13, 2018 at 12:59

    Why are we trying to hem in China, Russia and Iran? Petro-dollar hegemony, pure and simple. From our initial deal with Saudi Arabia to buy and sell oil in dollars only, to the chaos we have inflicted globally to retain the dollar's rule and role in energy trading, we are finding ourselves threatened – actually the position of the dollar as the sole trading medium is what is threatened – and we are determined to retain that global power over oil at all costs. With China and Russia making deals to buy and sell oil in their own currencies, we have turned both those counties into our enemies du jour, inventing every excuse to blame them for every "bad thing" that has and will happen, globally. Throw in Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and a host of other countries who want to get out from under our thumb, to those who tried and paid the price. Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and more. Our failed foreign policy is dictated by controlling, as Donald Rumsfeld once opined, "our oil under their sand." Oil. Pure and simple.

    Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 14:18

    I agree, Gerald. Enforcing the petro-dollar system seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If it were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases. Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know.

    Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 15:33

    I agree, Gerald. Along with ensuring access to "our" off-shore oil fields, enforcing the petro-dollar system is equally significant, and seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If this system were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases which make the world safe for democracy? Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know.

    Anonymous Coward , September 13, 2018 at 22:40

    +1 Gerald Wadsworth. It's not necessarily "Oil pure and simple" but "Currency Pure and Simple." If the US dollar is no longer the world's currency, the US is toast. Also note that anyone trying to retain control of their currency and not letting "The Market" (private banks) totally control them is a Great Devil we need to fight, e.g. Libya and China. And note (2) that Wall Street is mostly an extension of The City; the UK still thinks it owns the entire world, and the UK has been owned by the banks ever since it went off tally sticks

    MichaelWme , September 13, 2018 at 12:18

    It's called the Thucydides trap. NATO (US/UK/France/Turkey) have said they will force regime change in Syria. Russia says it will not allow regime change in Syria. Fortunately, as a Frenchman and an Austrian explained many years ago, and NATO experts say is true today, regime change in Russia is a simple matter, about the same as Libya or Panamá. I forget the details, but I assume things worked out well for the Frenchman and the Austrian, and will work out about the same for NATO.

    Jeff Davis , September 14, 2018 at 12:53

    Very dry. Kudos.

    Anastasia , September 13, 2018 at 12:04

    Putin said years ago, and I cannot quote him, but remember most of it, that it doesn't matter who is the candidate for President, or what his campaign promises are, or how sincere he is in making them, whenever they get in office, it is always the same policy.

    Truer words were never spoken, and it is the reason why I know, at least, that Russia did not interfere in the US elections. What would be the point, from his viewpoint, and it is not only just his opinion. You cannot help but see at this point that that he said is obviously true.

    TJ , September 13, 2018 at 13:47

    What an excellent point. Why bother influencing the elections when it doesn't matter who is elected -- the same policies will continue.

    Bart Hansen , September 13, 2018 at 15:43

    Anastasia, I saved it: From Putin interview with Le Figaro:

    "I have already spoken to three US Presidents. They come and go, but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suits, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start explaining how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens with every administration."

    rosemerry , September 14, 2018 at 08:02

    Pres. Putin explained this several times when he was asked about preferring Trump to Hillary Clinton, and he carefully said that he would accept whoever the US population chose, he was used to dealing with Hillary and he knew that very little changed between Administrations. This has been conveniently cast aside by the Dems, and Obama's disgraceful expulsion of Russian diplomats started the avalanche of Russiagate.

    James , September 13, 2018 at 09:24

    Great to see Patrick Lawrence writing for Consortium News.

    He ends his article with: "This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability. "

    Speaking of consequences, how about the human toll this foreign policy has taken on so many people in this world. To me, the gravest sin of all.

    Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 08:46

    I agree with Patric Lawrence when he states "Personalizing Washington's regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding." and I also agree that 'Seven decades of global hegemony have left the State Department, Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension.' But I seriously disagree when he declares that: "The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.'' Certainly the missteps are true, but I would argue that the "personalities" are crucial to America's crisis of Foreign Policy. After all it was likely that JFK's American University address was the public declaration of his intention to lead America in the direction of better understanding of Sovereign Rights that likely got him killed. It is precisely those "personalities" that we must understand and identify before we can move on

    Skip Scott , September 13, 2018 at 09:35

    Bob-

    I see what you're saying, but I believe Patrick is also right. Many of the people involved in JFK's murder are now dead themselves, yet the "system" that demands confrontation rather than cooperation continues. These "personalities" are shills for that system, and if they are not so willingly, they are either bribed or blackmailed into compliance. Remember when "Dubya" ran on a "kinder and gentler nation" foreign policy? Obama's "hope and change" that became "more of the same"? And now Trump's views on both domestic and foreign policy seemingly also doing a 180? There are "personalities" behind this "system", and they are embedded in places like the Council on Foreign Relations. The people that run our banking system and the global corporate empire demand the whole pie, they would rather blow up the world than have to share.

    Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 14:42

    You're completely right Skip, that's what we all must recognize and ultimately react to, and against.
    Thank you.

    JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 18:46

    I would add that human beings are the key components in this system. The system is built and shaped by them. Some are greedy, lying predators and some are honest and egalitarian. Bob Parry was one of the latter, thankfully.

    JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 18:30

    Skip, very good points. For those interested further, here's an excellent talk on the bankers behind the manufacutured wars, including the role of the Council on Foreign Relations as a front organization and control mechanism.
    "The Shadows of Power; the CFR and decline of America"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6124&v=wHa1r4nIaug

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 09:42

    Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

    Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

    The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

    Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 14:51

    Many thanks Joe, I admire your persistence. Clearly Bob Woodward has been part of the problem rather than the solution. The swamp is deep and murky

    JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 18:36

    Bob and Joe, here's a solid review of Woodward's book Fear that points out his consistent service to the oligarchy, including giving Trump a pass for killing the Iran deal. Interesting background on Woodward in the comments as well.
    https://mondoweiss.net/2018/09/woodward-national-security/

    will , September 15, 2018 at 22:30

    people have been pointing out that Woodward is the exact kind of guy the CIA would recruit since shortly after Watergate.

    O Society , September 13, 2018 at 18:21

    The document Gary Cohen removed off Trump's desk – which you can read here – states an intent to end a free trade agreement with South Korea.

    "White House aides feared if Trump sent the letter, it could jeopardize a top-secret US program that can detect North Korean missile launches within seven seconds."

    Sounds like Trump wanted to play the "I am such a great deal maker, the GREATEST deal maker of all times!" game with the South Koreans. Letter doesn't say anything about withdrawing troops or missiles.

    Funny how ***TOP-SECRET US PROGRAMS*** find their way into books and newspapers these days, plentiful as acorns falling out of trees.

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 19:59

    Thanks for the clarification. Joe

    O Society , September 14, 2018 at 13:38

    You're welcome, Joe. These things get confusing. Who knows anymore what is real and what isn't?

    Trump did indeed say something about ending military exercises and pulling troops out of South Korea. His staff did indeed contradict him on this. It just wasn't in relation to the letter Cohn "misplaced," AFAIK.

    Nobody asked me, but if they did, I'd say the US interfered enough in Korean affairs by killing a whole bunch of 'em in the Korean War. Leave'em alone. Let North and South try to work it out. Tired of hearing about "regime change.'

    Republicans buck Trump on Korea troop pullout talk

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 10:17

    Bob once again my comment disappeared I hope someone retrieves it. Joe

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 12:24

    Here's what I wrote:

    Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

    Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

    The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 12:24

    Again

    Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

    Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

    The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 14:03

    Thanks for retrieving my comments sorry for the triplicating of them. Joe

    Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 12:25

    3 of my comments disappeared boy does this comment board have issues. I'm beginning to think I'm being targeted.

    Deniz , September 13, 2018 at 17:58

    Dont take it personally, I see it more of a lawnmower than a scalpel.

    rosemerry , September 14, 2018 at 08:36

    My comment has disappeared too-it was a reply to anastasia.

    Kiwiantz , September 13, 2018 at 08:20

    Spoiler Nation of America! You got that dead right! China builds infrastructure in other Countries & doesn't interfere with the citizens & their Sovereignty. Contrast that with the United Spoiler States of America, they run roughshod over overs & just bomb the hell out of Countries & leaves devastation & death wherever they go! And there is something seriously wrong & demented with the US mindset concerning, the attacks on 9/11? In Syria the US has ended up arming & supporting the very same organisation of Al QaedaTerrorists, morphed into ISIS, that hijacked planes & flew them into American targets! During 2017 & now in 2018, it defies belief how warped this US mentality is when ISIS can so easily & on demand, fake a chemical attack to suck in the stupid American Military & it's Airforce & get them to attack Syria, like lackeys taking orders from Terrorist's! The US Airforce is the airforce of Al Qaeda & ISIS! Why? Because the US can't stomach Russia, Syria & Iran winning & defeating Terrorism thus ending this Proxy War they started! Russia can't be allowed to win at any cost because the humiliation & loss of prestige that the US would suffer as a Unipolar Empire would signal the decline & end of this Hegemonic Empire so they must continue to act as a spoiler to put off that inevitable decline! America can't face reality that it's time in the sun as the last Empire, is over!

    Sally Snyder , September 13, 2018 at 07:57

    Here is what Americans really think about the rabid anti-Russia hysteria coming from Washington:

    https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/08/americans-on-russia-will-of-people.html

    Washington has completely lost touch with what Main Street America really believes.

    Waynes World , September 13, 2018 at 07:37

    Finally some words of truth about how we want our way not really democracy. A proper way to look at the world is what you said toward the end a desire to make people's lives better.

    mike k , September 13, 2018 at 07:14

    Simply put – the US is the world's biggest bully. This needs to stop. Fortunately the bully's intended victims are joining together to defeat it's crazy full spectrum dominance fantasies. Led by Russia and China, we can only hope for the success of the resistance to US aggression.

    This political, economic, military struggle is not the only problem the world is facing now, but is has some priority due to the danger of nuclear war. Global pollution, climate disaster, ecological collapse and species extinction must also be urgently dealt with if we are to have a sustainable existence on Earth.

    OlyaPola , September 13, 2018 at 04:39

    Alpha : "America's three principal adversaries signify the shape of the world to come: a post-Western world of coexistence. But neoliberal and neocon ideology is unable to to accept global pluralism and multipolarity, argues Patrick Lawrence."

    Omega: "Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability."

    Framing is always a limiter of perception.

    Among the consequences of the lateral trajectories from Alpha to Omega referenced above, is the "unintended consequence" of the increase of the principal opponents, their resolve and opportunities to facilitate the transcendence of arrangements based on coercion by arrangements based on co-operation.

    Opening Pandora's box was/is only perceived as wholly a disadvantage for those seeking to deny lateral process.

    JOHN CHUCKMAN , September 13, 2018 at 04:32

    Yes, I certainly agree with author's view.

    https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/31/john-chuckman-comment-empire-corrupts-all-the-principles-of-economics-as-well-as-principles-of-ethics-and-good-government-there-is-nothing-good-to-say-about-empire-and-the-american-one-is-no-excep/

    https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/john-chuckman-comment-how-american-politics-really-work-why-there-are-terrible-candidates-and-constant-wars-and-peoples-problems-are-ignored-why-heroes-like-julian-assange-are-persecuted-and-r/

    HomoSapiensWannaBe , September 13, 2018 at 08:23

    John Chuckman,
    Wow. Thanks! I have just begun reading your commentaries this week and I am impressed with how clearly you analyze and summarize key points about many topics.

    Thank you so much for writing what are often the equivalent of books, but condensed into easy to read and digest summaries.

    I have ordered your book and look forward to reading that.

    Cheers from Southeast USA!

    [Jan 04, 2020] Russia would obviously provide Iran with military supplies, intelligence, and diplomatic support, making any invasion attempt very costly for the US.

    Jan 04, 2020 | thesaker.is

    Nate on January 03, 2020 , · at 8:32 pm EST/EDT

    Regarding the talk of a hypothetical "Iran War", I do not think Washington will actually try invading Iran, for a couple of reasons.

    1. The US does not currently have enough troops to occupy Iran. It would require a military draft. This would cause massive opposition inside the USA (easily the biggest internal US political turmoil since the Vietnam War). And the youngest American adults that would get drafted are the least religious US generation ever (i.e. they are not Evangelical fundamentalists who want to throw their lives away for "Israel" and the "End Times").

    2. Where would Washington launch the invasion from? Iraq? The US will soon be asked to leave Iraq, and if Washington does not comply it will very quickly turn into another quagmire for the US just like it was in the 2000s. And if they tried invading from Afghanistan, Iran could always arm the Taliban. And besides, would Pakistan really allow the US military to pass through its territory to Afghanistan to invade Iran? I think not.

    3. Russia would obviously provide Iran with military supplies, intelligence, and diplomatic support, making any invasion attempt very costly for the US.

    Therefore, Washington's options are rather limited to missile strikes, CIA funded terrorist attacks, and other lesser forms of meddling.

    [Jan 04, 2020] Higher oil prices can be enough punishment for the US until Iran find more effective ways to punish for this violation of international norms and sovereignty of Iraq

    The oil market should be worried. Iran can stop all traffic through the Straight of Hormuz at will. And that would start a war. Which would keep it closed. It may be a mistake to think Iran's leadership is more sane than ours.
    Jan 04, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Iran might also seek to draw Israel into a conflict via Hezbollah in Lebanon. We can't rule out some sort of grand-scale attack, but an array of smaller-scale activity is our core bet.

    The risk that something bigger will trigger a real war, however, likely will put a premium on oil prices for the next few months, at least.

    Higher oil prices represent a tax on oil consumers and a windfall for producers. World oil consumption is about 100M barrels per day, so each five dollars on the prices is equivalent to an annualized tax of about $183B per year, or 0.1% of global GDP. The U.S., however, is both a huge oil producer and a consumer. Domestic production runs at almost 13M bpd, with consumption at 21Mbpd. That would seem to suggest that the net effect of higher prices on the U.S. would be to depress economic growth, but recent experience points in the opposite direction, because oil sector capex, in the era of shale, is acutely sensitive to prices, even in the short term. When oil prices collapsed between spring 2014 and early 2016, the ensuing plunge in capital spending in the oil sector outweighed the boost to consumers' real income from cheaper gasoline and heating oil, and overall economic growth slowed markedly. This story played out in reverse when oil prices rebounded in the three years through spring 2018, and economic growth picked up even as consumers' real incomes were hit.

    ... ... ...

    The wild card is whether turmoil in the Middle East triggers a sustained sell-off in equities, depressing business and consumer confidence to the point where labor market and inflation concerns become secondary. We'd be surprised -- the plunge in S&P futures is just the initial knee-jerk response -- but if Iran takes more drastic action than we are expecting, it will become a real risk. In that case, the Fed might have no choice but to ease, especially if credit markets seize-up too. In the meantime, expect defensive stocks to outperform, with downward pressure on Treasury yields and gains for safe-haven currencies, until Iran's response becomes clear. To repeat: Iran will respond.

    DemandSider , 24 minutes ago link

    9/11 Suspects: The Dancing Israelis

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XHm56O2NTI&t=425s

    I still can't get any logical explanation as to why this Israeli spy ring, the largest ever on U.S. soil, was in The U.S. And, why were they dancing after the first plane impact?

    Anybody?

    Karl Marxist , 25 minutes ago link

    News flash. The government in Washington is extremely unpopular as well. More unpopular in America than the Iranian government is with Iranians. I am saying this because anyone who spent any time with Impeachment; read how Barr let Epstein and all pedo elites walk away fully protected, his hideous Operation Guardian, Trump's complete destruction of 1st Amendment rights to free speech in the guise of "suppressing antisemitism" ... God, how I hate this tyranny complete with WalMarts and mulatto invaders and LGBT as "normal", the all tranny military, meaningless laws we are rounded up and shot to death for the slightest traffic infraction black, white but never Jewish. They get away with everything. Trump made them a protected class, Judaism a race and a nationality to have special protections at taxpayer expense. What a wonderful country I just can't get enough of....

    Jung , 43 minutes ago link

    No one will miss the US apart frmo the Americans themselves: the polls are clear worldwide that the world considers the Americans to be ruled by the most aggressive and psychopathic regimes. They have killed millions since WWII and the world would be a much better place without the US.

    [Jan 04, 2020] The price of crude oil has jumped over $2 USD on the world markets since the news

    Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    michaelj72 , Jan 3 2020 10:05 utc | 19

    The price of crude oil has jumped over $2 USD on the world markets since the news

    I expect the US to fully resist being booted out of Iraq (which would also make it's two major positions in Syria highly untenable). who could now believe that US troops in Iraq and Syria won't come under sustained attack now, by the many allies Iran has in the area?

    Elijah gives breaking news
    https://twitter.com/ejmalrai/status/1213032002682867715

    Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani considers "the #US attack against the #BaghdadAirport is a clear violation of #Iraq sovereignty".

    That is clear support for the US withdrawal from #Iraq.

    AND

    S Sistani condemns the "attack against Iraqi (not Iranian-militia) position on the borders killing our Iraqi sons to the hateful attack on #BaghdadAirport is a violation and internationally unlawful (US) act against anti-#ISIS hero(s) leading to difficult times for #Iraq".

    bluedotterel , Jan 3 2020 10:07 utc | 20

    Really, the ball is in Iraq's court. This is an attack on Iraqi sovereignty as much as an act of war on Iran. We will now see what the Iraqi are made of.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:07 utc | 21
    @never mind "Soleimani really the target?"

    Trump was personally responsible for having the organisation Soleimani led declared a terrorist organisation. Time to quit the "Trump is a dumbfuck led by others" Trump is around 70 and has been his own boss all his life. He is now commander in chief of the US military. He gives the orders, nobody else. He doesn't give a shit about the cold war and Europe, hence people thinking he is a peacenik. What he does care about is enemies of Israel and control of energy.

    Bjørn Holmgaard , Jan 3 2020 10:11 utc | 24
    The best revenge the Iraninans could have would be the expulsion of US troops from Iraq and Syria, which by the way was also the overarching goal of Soleimani...

    No blood but his work completed..

    Russianstyle revenge.

    never mind , Jan 3 2020 10:22 utc | 28
    @Peter AU1

    Then the US is willfully shooting itself in the foot and I have a hard time believing that.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:29 utc | 29
    Trump doesn't give a shit about soft power. He believes in hard power. Iraq has no defence against the US, and Trump intends to attack Iran. He needs a 9 11 to take the American population with him.
    Jackrabbit , Jan 3 2020 10:30 utc | 30
    Bjørn Holmgaard @24:
    The best revenge the Iraninans could have would be the expulsion of US troops from Iraq and Syria ...

    UN resolution 2249 (2015) :
    Calls upon Member States that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures, in compliance with international law, in particular with the United Nations Charter, as well as international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law, on the territory under the control of ISIL also known as Da'esh, in Syria and Iraq, to redouble and coordinate their efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL also known as Da'esh as well as ANF, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the United Nations Security Council, and as may further be agreed by the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) and endorsed by the UN Security Council, pursuant to the Statement of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) of 14 November, and to eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria;

    USA have made it very clear that they are not leaving Syria and the same thinking/excuses likely applies to Iraq.

    Some will argue that using UN2249 as justification for over-staying and virtual occupation is wrong-headed. Nevertheless, USA claims to remain to ensure against a resurgence of ISIS. Clearly they intend to stay until their goals are met or they are forced out militarily.

    !!

    Jen , Jan 3 2020 10:34 utc | 31
    I suspect I'm not the only MoA barfly who thinks the assassination of Hossein Soleymani could have been planned with Mossad or other organisations and individuals in Israeli society.
    jared , Jan 3 2020 10:35 utc | 32
    I have the impression that Israel is taking responsibility for management of Iraq/Iran situation.

    Suspect Trump is delegating and is along for ride. No dought in control in his own mind.

    It appears that president is obliged to accept intelligence and guidance of security state effectively tying his hands

    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 10:35 utc | 33
    The Iraqis are certainly capable of making life for the US very uncomfortable in Iraq and Syria, even if not force withdrawal. The present US structure and numbers depend on Iraqi acquiescence, and that's about shot, even before the assassination. If the position is to be maintained without Iraqi acquiescence, then thousands more troops would be required, and that wouldn't go down well back home in the States. That's one of the reasons why the act was a grave miscalculation.
    Kurious , Jan 3 2020 10:51 utc | 37
    This was not Trump`s decision. Trump had to take responsibilty to show he is in command. He will soon realize that he was played by the CIA and the Israelis. By then it is too late.
    The US and its vassals are speeding up confrontation with the Axis because they know that the showdown is inevitable. However, It will not happen according to the US timetable.
    Keep a good supply of popcorn on hand. The pandora box has plenty of surprises. The question remains,

    Will the state of Israel survives?

    God help us.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:55 utc | 39
    Veritas X- "He was a brilliant military strategist"

    That's why Trump hit him. And I say hit because Trump has very much a US mob or movie style mafia mentality.

    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 11:04 utc | 40
    I figure Iran will have to retaliate and thus this will likely escalate. The Saker initially thinks war is 80% certain, I think it's probably a bit higher than that.

    Posted by: TEP | Jan 3 2020 10:49 utc | 36

    The Iranians would be foolish to allow themselves to be goaded like that.

    [Jan 03, 2020] If you previously have doubts that Trump is senile warmonger, not you have a definite proof

    Bombing a civilian airport in another country in order to assassinate Iranian and Iraq leaders is a very bad diplomacy ;-)
    It might well be that today this idiot blow up his chances fro reelection because revenge is dish that should be served cold and Iran can postpone it for 11 months or so.
    What is interesting is that neoliberal MSM are glad and still talking about Zelensky and impeachment. What a country ! It looks like the decade of the twenties can be the decade of another World War. "In every war the first casualty is truth."
    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Trump think that the war with Iran will be another cake walk, like in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is a proof that he is a senile idiot.

    [Jan 03, 2020] I guess Trump decided had to make the 1914-vintage Hapsburgs look relatively competent

    Bombing a civilian airport in another country in order to assassinate Iranian and Iraq leaders is a very bad diplomacy ;-)
    It might well be that today this idiot blow up his chances fro reelection because revenge is dish that should be served cold and Iran can postpone it for 11 months or so.
    What is interesting is that neoliberal MSM are glad and still talking about Zelensky and impeachment. What a country ! It looks like the decade of the twenties can be the decade of another World War. "In every war the first casualty is truth."
    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    I guess somebody had to make the 1914-vintage Hapsburgs look relatively competent,

    Trump think that the war with Iran will be another cake walk, like in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is a proof that he is a senile idiot.

    [Jan 03, 2020] Trump assassination of General Suleimani was worse than a crime. It was a mistake

    Jan 03, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    Talleyrand remarked that Napoleon's assassination of the Duke of Enghien was worse than a crime. It was a mistake. Donald Trump's decision to target Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, for destruction brings to mind the French diplomat's lapidary verdict. Iran is likely to unleash its fearsome Shia proxy militias, wherever and whenever it can. Nor is support from Europe, which is on the frontlines of Iranian blowback, likely to be forthcoming. Quite the contrary.

    [Jan 03, 2020] Soleimani murder what could happen next The Vineyard of the Saker

    Jan 03, 2020 | thesaker.is

    ­ Soleimani murder: what could happen next? 8061 Views January 03, 2020 66 Comments Saker Analyses and Interviews The Saker First, a quick recap of the situation

    We need to begin by quickly summarizing what just happened:

    General Soleimani was in Baghdad on an official visit to attend the funeral of the Iraqis murdered by the USA on the 29th The US has now officially claimed responsibility for this murder The Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has officially declared that " However, a severe retaliation awaits the criminals who painted their corrupt hands with his and his martyred companions ' blood last night " The US paints itself – and Iran – into a corner

    The Iranians simply had no other choice than to declare that there will be a retaliation. There are a few core problems with what happens next. Let's look at them one by one:

    First, it is quite obvious from the flagwaving claptrap in the USA that Uncle Shmuel is "locked and loaded" for even more macho actions and reaction. In fact, Secretary Esper has basically painted the US into what I would call an "over-reaction corner" by declaring that " the game has changed " and that the US will take " preemptive action " whenever it feels threatened . Thus, the Iranians have to assume that the US will over-react to anything even remotely looking like an Iranian retaliation. No less alarming is that this creates the absolutely perfect conditions for a false flag à la " USS Liberty " . Right now, the Israelis have become at least as big a danger for US servicemen and facilities in the entire Middle-East as are the Iranians themselves. How? Simple! Fire a missile/torpedo/mine at any USN ship and blame Iran. We all know that if that happens the US political elites will do what they did the last time around: let US servicemen die and protect Israel at all costs (read up on the USS Liberty if you don't know about it) There is also a very real risk of "spontaneous retaliations" by other parties (not Iran or Iranian allies) . In fact, in his message, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has specifically declared that " Martyr Suleimani is an international face to the Resistance and all lovers of the Resistance share a demand in retaliation for his blood . All friends – as well as all enemies – must know the path of Fighting and Resistance will continue with double the will and the final victory is decidedly waiting for those who fight in this path. " He is right, Soleimani was loved and revered by many people all over the globe, some of whom might decided to avenge his death. This means that we might well see some kind of retaliation which, of course, will be blamed on Iran but which might not be the result of any Iranian actions at all. Finally, should the Iranians decide not to retaliate, then we can be absolutely sure that Uncle Shmuel will see that as a proof of his putative "invincibility" and take that as a license to engage in even more provocative actions.

    A spiritual father kisses his beloved son

    If we look at these four factors together we would have to come to the conclusion that Iran HAS to retaliate and HAS to do so publicly .

    Why?

    Because whether the Iranian do retaliate or not, they are almost guaranteed another US attack in retaliation for anything looking like a retaliation, whether Iran is involved or not .

    The dynamics of internal US politics

    Next, let's look at the internal political dynamics in the USA:

    I have always claimed that Donald Trump is a "disposable President" for the Neocons . What do I mean by that? I mean that the Neocons have used Trump to do all sorts of truly fantastically dumb things (pretty much ALL his policy decisions towards Israel and/or Syria) for a very simple reason. If Trump does something extremely dumb and dangerous, he will either get away with it, in which case the Neocons will be happy, or he will either fail or the consequences of his decisions will be catastrophic, at which point the Neocons will jettison him and replace him by an even more subservient individual (say Pence or Pelosi). In other words, for the Neocons to have Trump do something both fantastically dangerous and fantastically stupid is a win-win situation !

    Right now, the Dems (still the party favored by the Neocons) seem to be dead-set into committing political suicide with that ridiculous (and treacherous!) impeachment nonsense. Now think about this from the Neocon point of view. They might be able to get the US goyim to strike Iran AND get rid of Trump. I suppose that their thinking will go something like this:

    Trump looks set to win 2020. We don't want that. However, we have been doing everything in our power to trigger a US attack on Iran since pretty much 1979. Let's have Trump do that. If he "wins" (by whatever definition – more about that further below), we win. If he loses, the Iranians will still be in a world of pain and we can always jettison him like a used condom (used to supposedly safely screw somebody with no risks to yourself). Furthermore, if the region explodes, this will help our beloved Bibi and unite US Jewry behind Israel. Finally, if Israel gets attacked, we will immediately demand (and, of course, obtain) a massive US attack on Iran, supported by the entire US political establishment and media. And, lastly, should Israel be hit hard, then we can always use our nukes and tell the goyim that "Iran wants to gas 6 million Jews and wipe the only democracy in the Middle-East off the face of the earth" or something equally insipid.

    Ever since Trump made it into the White House, we saw him brown-nose the Israel Lobby with a delectation which is extreme even by US standards. I suppose that this calculation goes something along the lines of "with the Israel Lobby behind me, I am safe in the White House". He is obviously too stupidly narcissistic to realize that he has been used all along. To his (or one of his key advisor's) credit, he did NOT allow the Neocons to start a major war against Russia, China, the DPRK, Venezuela, Yemen, Syria, etc. However, Iran is a totally different case as it is the "number one" target the Neocons and Israel wanted strike and destroy. The Neocons even had this motto " boys go to Baghdad, real men go to Tehran ". Now that Uncle Shmuel has lost all this wars of choice, now that the US armed forces have no credibility left, now is the time to restore the "macho" self-image of Uncle Shmuel and, indeed, "go to Tehran" so to speak.

    Biden immediately capitalizes on these events

    The Dems (Biden) are already saying that Trump just " tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox ", as if they cared about anything except their own, petty, political goals and power. Still, I have to admit that Biden's metaphor is correct – that is exactly what Trump (and his real bosses) have done.

    If we assume that I am correct in my evaluation that Trump is the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable President", then we also have to accept the fact that the US armed forces the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable armed forces" and that the US as a nation is also the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable nation". This is very bad news indeed, as this means that from the Neocon/Israeli point of view, there are no real risks into throwing the US into a war with Iran .

    In truth, the position of the Dems is a masterpiece of hypocrisy which can be summed up as follows: the assassination of Soleimani is a wonderful event, but Trump is a monster for making it happen .

    A winner, no?

    What would the likely outcome of a US war on Iran be?

    I have written so often about this topic that I won't go into all the possible scenarios here. All I will say is the following:

    For the USA, "winning" means achieving regime change or, failing that, destroying the Iranian economy. For Iran, "winning" simply means to survive the US onslaught.

    This is a HUGE asymmetry which basically means that the US cannot win and Iran can only win.

    And, not, the Iranians don't have to defeat CENTCOM/NATO! They don't need to engage in large scale military operations. All they need to do is: remain "standing" once the dust settles down.

    Ho Chi Minh once told the French " You can kill ten of my men for every one I kill of yours, but even at those odds, you will lose and I will win ". This is exactly why Iran will eventually prevail, maybe at a huge cost (Amalek must be destroyed, right?), but that will still be a victory.

    Now let's look at the two most basic types of war scenarios: outside Iran and inside Iran.

    The Iranians, including General Soleimani himself, have publicly declared many times that by trying to surround Iran and the Middle-East with numerous forces and facilities the USA have given Iran a long list of lucrative targets. The most obvious battlefield for a proxy war is clearly Iraq where there are plenty of pro and anti Iranian forces to provide the conditions for a long, bloody and protracted conflict (Moqtada al-Sadr has just declared that the Mahdi Army will be remobilized). But Iraq is far from being the only place where an explosion of violence can take place: the ENTIRE MIDDLE-EAST is well within Iranian "reach", be it by direct attack or by attack by sympathetic/allied forces. Next to Iraq, there is also Afghanistan and, potentially, Pakistan. In terms of a choice of instruments, the Iranian options range from missile attacks, to special forces direct action strikes, to sabotage and many, many more options. The only limitation here is the imagination of the Iranians and, believe me, they have plenty of that!

    If such a retaliation happens, the US will have two basic options: strike at Iranian friends and allies outside Iran or, as Esper has now suggested, strike inside Iran. In the latter case, we can safely assume that any such attack will result in a massive Iranian retaliation on US forces and facilities all over the region and a closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

    Keep in mind that the Neocon motto " boys go to Baghdad, real men go to Tehran " implicitly recognizes the fact that a war against Iran would be qualitatively (and even quantitatively) different war than a war against Iraq. And, this is true, if the US seriously plans to strike inside Iran they would be faced with an explosion which would make all the wars since WWII look minor in comparison. But the temptation to prove to the world that Trump and his minions are "real men" as opposed to "boys" might be too strong, especially for a president who does not understand that he is a disposable tool in the hands of the Neocons.

    Now, let's quickly look at what will NOT happen

    Russia and/or China will not get militarily involved in this one. Neither will the USA use this crisis as a pretext to attack Russia and/or China. The Pentagon clearly has no stomach for a war (conventional or nuclear) against Russia and neither does Russia have any desire for a war against the USA. The same goes for China. However, it is important to remember that Russia and China have other options, political and covert ones, to really hurt the US and help Iran. There is the UNSC where Russia and China will block any US resolution condemning Iran. Yes, I know, Uncle Shmuel does not give a damn about the UN or international law, but most of the rest of the world very much does. This asymmetry is further exacerbated by Uncle Shmuel's attention span (weeks at most) with the one of Russia and China (decades). Does that matter?

    Absolutely!

    If the Iraqis officially declare that the US is an occupation force (which it is), an occupation force which engages in acts of war against Iraq (which it does) and that the Iraqi people want Uncle Shmuel and his hypocritical talking points about "democracy" to pack and leave, what can our Uncle Shmuel do? He will try to resist it, of course, but once the tiny figleaf of "nation building" is gone, replaced by yet another ugly and brutal US occupation, the political pressure on the US to get the hell out will become extremely hard to manage, both outside and even inside the USA.

    In fact, Iranian state television called Trump's order to kill Soleimani " the biggest miscalculation by the U.S." since World War II. "The people of the region will no longer allow Americans to stay," it said.

    Next, both Russia and China can help Iran militarily with intelligence, weapons systems, advisors and economically, in overt and covert ways.

    Finally, both Russia and China have the means to, shall we say, "strongly suggest" to other targets on the US "country hit list" that now is the perfect time to strike at US interests (say, in Far East Asia).

    So Russia and China can and will help, but they will do so with what the CIA likes to call "plausible deniability".

    Back The Big Question: what can/will Iran do next?

    The Iranians are far most sophisticated players than the mostly clueless US Americans. So the first thing I would suggest is that the Iranians are unlikely to do something the US is expecting them to do. Either they will do something totally different, or they will act much later, once the US lowers its guard (as it always does after declaring "victory").

    I asked a well-informed Iranian friend whether it was still possible to avoid war. Here is what he replied:

    Yes I do believe fullscale war can be avoided. I believe that Iran can try to use its political influence to unite Iraqi political forces to officially ask for the removal of US troops in Iraq. Kicking the US out of Iraq will mean that they can no longer occupy eastern Syria either as their troops will be in danger between two hostile states. If the Americans leave Syria and Iraq, that will be the ultimate revenge for Iran without having fired a single shot.

    I have to say that I concur with this idea: one of the most painful things Iran could do next would be to use this truly fantastically reckless event to kick the US out of Iraq first, and Syria next. That option, if it can be exercised, might also protect Iranian lives and the Iranian society from a direct US attack. Finally, such an outcome would give the murder of General Soleimani a very different and beautiful meaning: this martyr's blood liberated the Middle-East!

    Finally, if that is indeed the strategy chosen by Iran, this does not at all mean that on a tactical level the Iranians will not extract a price from US forces in the region or even elsewhere on the planet. For example, there are some rather credible rumors that the destruction of PanAm 103 over Scotland was not a Libyan action, but an Iranian one in direct retaliation for the deliberate shooting down by the USN of IranAir 655 Airbus over the Persian Gulf. I am not saying that I know for a fact that this is what really happened, only that Iran does have retaliatory options not limited to the Middle-East.

    Conclusion: we wait for Iran's next move

    The Iraqi Parliament is scheduled to debate a resolution demanding the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. I will just say that while I do not believe that the US will gentlemanly agree to any such demands, it will place the conflict in the political realm. That is – by definition – much more desirable than any form of violence, however justified it might seem. So I strongly suggest to those who want peace that they pray that the Iraqi MPs show some honor and spine and tell Uncle Shmuel what every country out there always wanted from the US: Yankees, go home!

    If that happens this will be a total victory for Iran and yet another abject defeat (self-defeat, really) by Uncle Shmuel. This is the best of all possible scenarios.

    But if that does not happen, then all bets are off and the momentum triggered by this latest act of US terrorism will result in many more deaths.

    As of right now (19:24 UTC) I still think that there is a roughly 80% chance of full scale war in the Middle-East and, again, will leave 20% of "unexpected events" (hopefully good ones).

    The Saker

    PS: this is a text I wrote under great time pressure and it has not be edited for typos or other mistakes. I ask the self-appointed Grammar Gestapo to take a break and not protest again. Thank you ­

    Odalrik on January 03, 2020 , · at 3:15 pm EST/EDT

    Saker, je partage votre point de vue, la pire sanction qui pourrait être infligée aux USA, serait de leur faire quitter l'Irak (et la Syrie par ricochet) Espérons que le parlement Irakien aura le courage de prendre cette décision historique, toutes les factions irakiennes sont révoltées par les actions américaines, le temps est venu pour eux d'en finir avec cette occupation mortifère.

    yandex translate mod
    Saker, I share your point of view, the worst sanction that could be imposed on the USA would be to make them leave Iraq (and Syria by ricochet) let's hope that the Iraqi parliament will have the courage to take this historic decision, all the Iraqi factions are outraged by the American actions, the time has come for them to put an end to this deadly occupation.

    Mike from Jersey on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:11 pm EST/EDT
    If the United States left Iraq it would be a win for Iraq, a win for Iran, a win for Syria and, realistically, a win for the American people.

    The only people who would lose would be neocons.

    mortimer on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:51 pm EST/EDT
    Seriously how can this happen? The USA leave? The ANZ mercenary army walk away from its spoils?

    USA formally just took control of the Oil Fields in Syria.

    USA just asked all non-military to leave Iraq, USA just sent in 3500 new soldiers to 'secure' all Oil Fields in Iraq.

    Seriously, there is only "One Outcome" and that is "Greater Israel", and its on track.

    We know that in the past almost all the stolen oil from Iraq-Syria was shipped to Israel via Turkey, where it was re-sold and Israel made an enormous profit.

    The neocons can never lose, they're siamese twins with the neo-libs, and all NEO is ANZ; All MSM, all country's on earth are administered by ANZ agents. Much of the 'war' between Soros&Adelson left-vs-right NEO is just fighting over scraps that haven't yet been stolen from the goy. NEOCON & NEOLIB are siamese twins that share a common asshole, they own the world as the ANZ, the siamese twin is the International-Kleptocrat Elite. They have their fingers in every nation on earth, including Iran & North-Korea. They have been controlling China-Russia for 100+ years, all has been planned for year the 'controlled demolition' of the USA. Most like a an engineered civil-war, followed by an ANZ re-population of a de-populated USA with a 'beautiful wall' to protects Trumps chosen people.

    The soldiers like Gabbi sent to Iraq are just mercenarys. Like Saker say's "Israel owns the USA", Israel also owns the USA-MIL, the US-GOV, and that includes Gabbi & Trump. The soliders in Syria&Iraq could very well die there, as the USA that they knew may not be around in the future, but who cares? Israel controls the oil, and most likely an AIIB-SCO deal with CHINA-ISRAEL has already been signed, with Israel as the 'Seller of Choice', China doesn't care, and it respects Israel for its ability to lead the Goy by the nose.

    The General is just one man, human life in the eye of the ANZ is worthless, the leaders of Iran all called themselves "Living Martyrs", now their real power has begun, just like in Lord of the Rings, when Gandolf was killed, he came back stronger.

    IMHO this is all much like a 'magic show', where people talk about what Gabbi says, or insinuate that USA will leave the mideast, all the while the USA-Israel secures the middle-east oil fields with USA soldiers.

    We know the USD is kaput, we know that Saudi oil is kaput, and the USA knows that in the future being the worlds largest user of 'portable energy' (oil) that they need infinite free oil.

    Killing the "General", just provides the context to re-occupy Iraq, which now means just occupying the oil-fields.

    Sun Tzu on January 03, 2020 , · at 3:21 pm EST/EDT
    "The opportunity to secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself."
    mortimer on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:19 pm EST/EDT
    For now Israel owns the USA, and the US-MIL does the killing for Israel.

    So long as they can play this game, and have the MSM ( owned by Israel ) define the good guys and bad guys this can go forever.

    But what is certain, it will not be long before the NEO-LIB & CON are murdering each other in Israel.

    Like the man used to say "In an eye for an eye world, all men will be blind"

    For now common sociopath/psychopathic killers rule our world, all we can do is keep a low profile, and hope that they wipe each other out ASAP.

    Hassan Carim on January 03, 2020 , · at 3:57 pm EST/EDT
    Quote: "Revenge is a dish best served cold".

    The brain dead 'thankyou for your service' spouting American morons and deluded American 'Christian Zionists' who put another religion before their own (whilst also forgetting about King Solomans breaking of the Covenenent made with King David they wave in everyones faces) will be expecting action by Iran before the weekend.

    If it does not come they will ignorantly and arrogantly assume 'Victory' and make threats of further death and murder (and gross hypocracy).

    The Iranians (and Russians and Chinese) do not need to act impulsively or recklessly. Thier time (and ample opportunities to humiliate the arrogant) will come in the months and years ahead.

    Once the world fully wakes up to the fact that the Dollar is the source of all US power and influence globally, and then turns against it – rejecting it as the evil toilet paper (and imaginary digits on a screen) that it is, the Satanic empire of the US will collapse under its own weight and will not be able to support (pay for and bribe) a global empire. No massive war, no nukes exploding, just the repudiation of worthless pieces of paper and digits on a screen called the US Dollar.

    A. Bear on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:17 pm EST/EDT
    Thank you, Saker; another brilliant analysis. There are no winners here; but this event was not unexpected, i.e. U.S. aggression but I am surprised Soleimani was in Iraq and unaware that something like this wouldn't happen.
    Goshawk on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:34 pm EST/EDT
    Saker, a wise article on the consequences of Soleimani's murder. However, I believe you may have the wrong 'take' on Trump only being a "disposable President." Miles Mathis wrote an article on Trump, pre-election, that is pertinent. (Since then, Mathis has been silent on this matter; he may have been 'warned off'.)

    "Looks like Donald Trump is Jewish." Synopsizing:

    " both Trump's parents died at Long Island Jewish Medical Center."

    "So let's return to Friedrich Drumpf, Donald's great-grandfather. Two of his sisters are listed as Elisabetha Freund and Syblia Schuster. Those are both Jewish surnames So at least two of Trump's great-aunts married Jewish men. This reminds us that his daughter Ivanka married a Jewish man, Jared Kushner. We are told this is an anomaly, but it isn't."

    "Trump was brought up in Jamaica Estates, Queens, which has a large Jewish population. He went to Kew-Forest School, ditto. Trump's father was on the Board of Trustees at Kew-Forest."

    "Trump allegedly went to the Wharton School of Business, a famous spook academy."

    "Ivana [Trump's former wife] is also Jewish. An early boyfriend was George Syrovatka. That is a Jewish name. Her first husband was Alfred Winklemeier. Winklemeier is a Jewish name. Ivana went to McGill University in Montreal, a spook academy we have run across many times. Geni.com lists her father's name as both Knavs and Zelnícek. I'll give you a hint: drop the second 'e'. You get Zelnick. It is Yiddish for haberdasher. Clothier. It's Jewish, too."

    "Both Trump and his father ran with top Jews in New York, including Samuel Lindenbaum and his father Abraham (Bunny), and Roy Cohn. These guys weren't just their attorneys; they were their enablers."

    If we throw-in his moving of the US Embassy to Jerusalem, his recognizing of Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, his non-censure of Israeli settlement in occupied Palestine, and his appointment of pro-Israel & anti-Iran 'advisors', a 'pattern' emerges which is consistent with Trump being both a crypto-Jew and a Zionist. This state-of-affairs dramatically changes the odds of escalation to a "US" strike on Iran. If Mathis' assertion is indeed the case, Soleimani's murder is the deliberate 'kickoff' of a series of events pre-planned to satisfy Israeli goals

    John Neal Spangler on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:49 pm EST/EDT
    A fine analysis.Trump and Co. are so busy brown nosing the Israelis they don't seem to care what anyone else thinks. I think every Iraqi not on US payroll will demand Yankee go home,. The us and its corporate media and the "interagency consensus" makes it unlikely ant rational decision making will come out of babylon on the Potomac. ­
    Woogs on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:49 pm EST/EDT
    This 'could' be contained and may yet well be. Or it could not.

    Both Iran and Iraq have been attacked. This was NOT a defensive move. Soleimani had been declared a terrorist by the US and also declared Iran a state sponsor of terrorism.

    That is the figleaf of justification the US is providing. What must be considered is that there is a bill in the US Senate that had passed committee declaring Russia to be a state sponsor of terrorism. If that comes to pass, could Russia be given the same treatment as just witnessed. Not to mention that China could also fall into that category at some point soon using the same .. errr logic.

    The point here is that should this be seen as an incident that doesn't directly affect those countries within the Resistance that weren't directly attacked, or should this be seen as the beginning of the US campaign to establish a Global Reich while there is still time?

    If the latter is true, then it would be foolish to let this play out as purely a regional event.

    Remember Martin Niemöller:

    First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out --

    Because I was not a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out --
    Because I was not a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
    Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Jason Muniz on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:54 pm EST/EDT
    The Anglo Saxons really believe there short presence will prevail against the ancient dominance the Aryans(the real ones that is the Indo-Iranians) have exercised, physically and mentally, in the region. They have no idea what they are going up against, technical knowledge will not win a war. ­
    Bikkin on January 03, 2020 , · at 4:58 pm EST/EDT
    Dear Saker,
    I agree with you that hot war is very likely now and also on the possible USAn goals in such a war. They had to learn at least a decade ago that a full-scale invasion of Iran would be so impractical that it is essentially impossible for the Empire to do.
    But they do not need that. I said I agreed with you that the USA need not invade: for them (and the true instigator of this incoming conflict: Israel) it is more than enough if Iran is devastated by naval and airstrikes.
    So, in fact this war can and will be won by both sides: Iran may survive a full-scale war but with her economy and infrastructure destroyed. That is what you called a win-win.
    However, you also say that "Russia and/or China will not get militarily involved in this one". And therein lies my problem.
    Now please enlighten me why on Earth would the USA not deploy a couple of dozens of tactical nukes in a disarming, debilitating first strike, thus decapitating both the political and the military leadership of Iran, destroying all nuclear sites and also the bulk of the Iranian infrastructure and economy (the latter one with mainly sustained conventional strikes for a couple of weeks).
    Why would they hesitate? Knowing that they need not afraid of another nuclear-armed country's interference it would be quite rational to do so. If this happens, Iran will be in no position for the coming decades to assist anyone else: no more aid for Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Palestine and Yemen. In this case it really does not matter anymore if the current theocratic democracy of Iran survives or goes away, at least from the Empire's point of view. As a matter of fact, the USA may even claim "humanitarian reasons" to employ nuclear weapons: it would be claimed as a painful but necessary surgical operation, far better than a long-standing conventional war with years of bombing campaigns, siege of large cities and full-scale assault on the ground. 'Sparing both American and Iranian lives.'
    All in all: Iran may protect herself and exact a very high price for a conventional attack but is defenseless against a nuclear one. So without Russian / Chinese guarantees against an American nuclear strike I think Iranian resistance would prove futile. In case they lack such guarantees they would rather capitulate than suffer complete destruction. Iran may only manage this situation when shielded against USAn / Israeli nuclear strikes – otherwise they better give up before it begins.
    mortimer on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:30 pm EST/EDT
    The Samson Option say's Israel will not be attacked.

    Given that Israel owns the world, why would they allow themselves to be attacked, they (NSA) didn't just create TIA for nothing ( poindexer-raygun Total Information Awareness )

    They know all, they control all. They own all.

    Back to Real Politics, Israel owns the USA, and the USA is going down. Israel needs a new cow to bleed, and that be China. China needs oil, so "Greater Israel", via US-MIL seizes all middle-east oil fields, and then Israel becomes custodian, of course this will be sold as a 'peace plan'.

    Doesn't really matter, as USA is kaput. Broke. USA soliders will do best to remain at oil-fields and sell black-market oil for Israel, to make money to send home.

    Russia will stand down, as in Reality Israel is doing the business of Russia. China needs oil, Israel needs hard-cash to control the Goy, so they can control their world-wide cattle ranch ( chattel – prostitution )

    Lives whether they be Iranian, or American, or Palestinian have no value, the only life on earth that has value is the Jewish life.

    A large percentage of China are Jewish, like Xian, at least +10M Jews exist in China, and they're in total support of the castration of the West.

    The best selling book in China is called "How Israel Controls the USA", a true story of how AIPAC took control of USA gov, and killed JFK. The Chinese don't see this book a 'shock book' they see it as a cook-book, of how to control, farm, and tax the western goy.

    dave742 on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:31 pm EST/EDT
    I would be interested in hearing an answer to this. It seems logical to me. I don't see any US wars as being a defeat, since they succeeding in destroying countries. Israel's border's have not grown yet, but I am sure that is still the goal.
    In my view, Russia got involved in Syria because they knew if Syria fell to the US, Iran would be next, followed by Russia. Russia forced a momentary setback by stopping the fall of Syria, but Usrael is proceeding on with Iran anyway. Russia, of course, then follows. Why would Russia get involved in Syria and let Iran fall, possibly by a preemptive "humanitarian" nuclear strike like you mention? All of Russia's work over the past decades will be destroyed if they watch Iran get destroyed.
    JJ on January 03, 2020 , · at 6:25 pm EST/EDT
    And was not USA planning or working on special low yield nukes to be kinder to rheir victims? Tonight on tv the film "the day after" ..synchronicity?
    Per/Norway on January 03, 2020 , · at 6:39 pm EST/EDT
    Bc if the terror regime in washington uses nuclear weapons that is a known redline for Russia and Putin have made this VERY clear. I suggest you use duckduckgo and start typing in relevant search frases, it might enlighten you.
    dave742 on January 03, 2020 , · at 8:32 pm EST/EDT
    I am sorry I am so stupid, but I still don't understand. Please explain it to me. Russia has made it clear that if nukes are used against them, they will respond with nukes. I have not seen the same message sent regarding third parties. And I tried Googling it.
    ababush on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:14 pm EST/EDT
    The zionazis had to act before the US empire crumbles with the overstreched dollar, dollar that no globalist Rothschild in the world will be able to save for much more time.
    The globalists in the City want to get rid of the dollar, but they also want to hurt Iran in order to weaken Russia (and China), and they need a still powerful USA to perform that.
    The war might therefore be a powerful transition (as were the previous ones) toward a new economical global order, while also weakening the axis of resistance .
    As for Trump, one has to wonder if he is really the one who ordered those strikes, and if he really still has any power over the Pentagon.
    Vasco da Gama on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:15 pm EST/EDT
    It's not just the US and Iran painted into a corner, Iraq, but humanity even.

    This United States claimed terrorist act of this import must only mean one thing: their own recognition the time is up, namely, dollar-as-a-reserve-currency is done for.

    Every party, not just Iran, will have to figure a way forward from this shortened horizon (a single quarter? less?) imposed by the USofA. Of course Europe doubts itself and there's no worse time for that. I do trust the Iranians, their artfulness and rationality, I am sure though, by themselves the effort won't suffice. They won't be alone.

    The answer is surely asymmetrical, but any "symmetrical" false flag must be prevented/minimized likewise.

    All hands on deck, the beast must be neutralized!

    Nick on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:16 pm EST/EDT
    You need to machine translate this:

    The content of Iran's painful message to America
    ✴️محتوای پیام دردناک ایران به آمریکا

    🔸محتوای پیام ایران به طرف آمریکایی داده به گونه‌ای بوده که مقامات آمریکایی را دچار وحشت شدیدی کرده است. هر چند هنوز از ابعاد این پیام اطلاعی ندارم اما به نظر می‌رسد آمریکایی‌ها به شکل کامل اعتماد بنفس خود را از دست داده‌اند، خبرهایی که به وسیله واسطه‌ها به سمت تهران در طول ساعت‌های گذشته به گوش رسیده بیانگر آن است که مقامات کاخ سفید پس از این اشتباه راهبردی، هر کسی که فکر می‌کنند با ایران کوچکترین ارتباطی داشته و دارد و می تواند به مقامات ایرانی دسترسی داشته باشد متوسل شدند تا پاسخی که قرار است دریافت کنند در همان ابعاد و نه بیشتر باشد!!

    🔸اما اگر قرار است ابعاد این پاسخ مشخص گردد باید رئیس ستاد مشترک، فرمانده نیروی دریایی و هوایی و بالاتر از آن شخص ترامپ که دستور این ترور را صادر کرده است کشته شوند تا با هم برابر شویم (البته که باز هم نخواهیم شد) و این چیزی است که آمریکایی‌ها خودشان بهتر می دانند. وزیر امور خارجه آمریکا در طول ساعت‌های گذشته به همراه سایر مقامات این کشور یک نبرد رسانه‌ای را شروع کردند تا به زعم خود تصمیم مقامات ایران را تحت تاثیر قرار دهند!! ولی آنچه به عنوان پیام سفارت سوئیس از طرف ایرانی‌ها برای آن‌ها فرستاد تمام برآوردهای آنها را نقش بر آب کرد.

    🔸دونالد ترامپ که در سیاست خارجی خودش به بن‌بست خورده بود و کنگره او را به جرم خیانت فراخوانده بود تا محاکمه اش کند، از سوی دیگر در آستانه انتخابات نمی دانست باید چگونه صحنه بازی را عوض کند دست یک قمار خطرناک زد، این قمار آن اندازه خطرناک بوده که در آمریکا هیچکس حاضر به پذیرش مسئولیت آن نیست و ترامپ تحت فشار سیاسیون مخالف خود ناچار شده شخصاً مسئولیت این اقدام جنون آمیز را برعهده بگیرد. ترامپ یک قمار را شروع کرده که سعی می کند با تهدید و فشار و همچنین التماس و رایزنی و‌ حتا با دادن امتیازهای مختلف از آن فرار کند. خودش بهتر می‌داند که آنچه درباره مذاکره و گفت‌وگو با ایران می‌گوید جز تحقیر بیش از پیش خودش نیست.

    🔸هنوز از متن مذاکرات وزیر خارجه آمریکا با همتای روسی خبری منتشر نشده اما او در گفتگویی با رئیس جمهور مفلوک عراق گفته که خواستار افزایش تنش نیست! و عراق نباید محلی برای تنش آفرینی باشد!! این اقدامات مقامات مختلف آمریکایی که شامل پمپئو، برایان هوک مارک اسپ و حتی سناتورهای نفتخواری مانند لیندزی گراهام می شود، در واقع تهدید ناشی از ترس را نشان می دهد. لیندزی گراهام وقتی سهمیه اش از نفت سوریه را گرفت، اینگونه طرفدار ترامپ شده است. منافعی او در چاه‌های نفت سوریه و عراق دارد که بعدها مشخص خواهد شد که چه پیمانکارانی وابسته به این جانور بی شاخ و دم هستند.

    🔸در کاخ سفید همه از وحشت احتمالی هدف قرار گرفتن یکی از پایگاه های این کشور در عراق که صدها نظامی در آن به سر می‌برند توسط موشک‌های زمین به زمین ایران خواب راحت ندارند. آنها به خوبی می دانند که اگر همزمان یکصد فروند موشک به این پایگاه‌ها اصابت کند هیچ چیزی از آن باقی نخواهد ماند و تلفاتی که به نظامیان آمریکایی وارد خواهد شد همه به پای حماقت ترامپ نوشته می شود. بنابراین بادام با گفتن این واژه که دنبال جنگ نیست و می خواسته با این اقدام جلوی جنگ را بگیرد در حقیقت دارد کلاه سر خودش می گذارد.

    K.J
    @syriankhabar

    Nick on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:42 pm EST/EDT
    Machine translated:

    Content of Iran's painful message to America

    The content of Iran's message to the US has been so intense that it has frightened American officials. Although I am not aware of the magnitude of the message yet, Americans seem to have completely lost their confidence in themselves, the news that has been heard by the intermediaries in Tehran over the past few hours indicates that White House officials have since this strategically mistake, asking anyone who has the slightest connection to Iran and can reach out to Iranian officials to ask Iran to respond their aggression in the same dimension and no more !!

    But if the magnitude of this response is to be determined, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Navy and Air Commander and even Trump who ordered the assassination must be killed in order to equalize the crime(of course it won't) and This is what Americans know better. During the past few hours, the US Secretary of State, along with other officials in the country, has launched an infowar to influence the decision of the Iranian authorities! But the message that Iran sent back via the Swiss embassy to the American government undermined all Trump gang's plot.

    Donald Trump, who had been stalled in his foreign policy and had been convicted of treason by Congress, that the Congress is trying to prosecute him, did not know how to change the game on the eve of the election and risked playing a dangerous gamble. It is so dangerous that no one in America is willing to accept responsibility, and Trump, under the pressure of his opposition, has been forced to personally take responsibility for this heinous act. Trump has started a gamble that tries to escape with threats and pressure, as well as begging and consulting, even by offering concessions. He knows that what he says about negotiating with Iran is nothing more than humiliating himself.

    The US Secretary of State's talks with his Russian counterpart have not yet been released, but he has said in an interview with the beleaguered Iraqi president that he does not want tensions to rise! And Iraq should not be a place for tension! The actions of various US officials, including Pompeo, Brian Hook Mark Spar, and even oil senators such as Lindsay Graham, actually show the extent of fear. Lindsey Graham has become a pro-Trump when he took his quota of Syrian oil. His interests in the oil fields of Syria and Iraq will later determine which contractors are connected to this hornless and tailless beast(Graham).

    In the White House, everyone is scared of the potential target bases in Iraq, where hundreds of troops are stationed. They know very well that if one hundred missiles hit these bases at the same time, nothing will be left behind, and the casualties that will be inflicted on American troops will all be attributed to Trump's stupidity. So, by saying the word that he was not seeking war and wanted to stop the war by doing so, he was actually fooling himself

    K.J.
    Telegram channel: @syriankhabar

    Bikkin on January 03, 2020 , · at 6:30 pm EST/EDT
    Surely the Empire is acting like it is terrified now: https://www.rt.com/news/477433-iraq-strike-shia-militia-killed/
    Nick on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:47 pm EST/EDT
    🔳ترس و‌ وحشت در سخنرانی ترامپ

    پیام قدرتمندانه ایران اینگونه صدای رئیس‌جمهور آمریکا را لرزش واداشت ترامپ چهار دقیقه و ۱۱ ثانیه در مورد دستور ترور سپهبد سلیمانی و سایر همراهانش صحبت کرد و در تمام طول این ۴ دقیقه نتوانست بر اعصابش مسلط باشد و صدایش نلرزد. خوب گوش کنید که چگونه پیام ایران زنگ‌ها را در کاخ سفید به صدا درآورده است. به زودی برای شما خواهم نوشت ایران چه پیامی به آمریکایی‌ها داده که اینگونه به هم ریخته اند.

    نه خبری از سر تکان دادن ترامپ است و نه خبری از شانه تکان دادن‌ و نه خبری از بستن چشمان و سر بالا گرفتن هنگام سخنرانی. ترامپ تازه فهمیده بلانسبت چه . خورده است.

    @syriankhabar@syriankhabar

    A machine translation:

    Fear and fury in Trump's speech

    Iran's powerful message shook the voice of the American president in such a way Trump spoke for four minutes and 2 seconds about the assassination of Lieutenant General Soleimani and his companions, and he could not control his nerves all this time. Listen well to how Iran's message has sounded the bells at the White House. Soon, I will write to you what kind of message Iran has given to the Americans who have messed up like this.

    There is no shaking of Trump's head, no shaking of his shoulder, no closing eyes and a high-pitched speech. Trump has just figured out what he ate.

    Telegram channel: @ syriankhabar

    Tom Welsh on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:23 pm EST/EDT
    'Secretary Esper has basically painted the US into what I would call an "over-reaction corner" by declaring that "the game has changed" and that the US will take "preemptive action" whenever it feels threatened'.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rtqrht8WPuA/VjvLK-yAHHI/AAAAAAAACYA/h0Gzh-zYWNA/s1600/21319_600.jpg

    Alexandra on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:26 pm EST/EDT
    Hello Saker,

    As I mentioned in another article, the Strait of Hormuz comes to mind. What would be the consequences of it being blocked by the Iranians is something that no one seems to consider. Any thoughts on this?

    Thank you for very interesting analysis.

    Tom Welsh on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:27 pm EST/EDT
    "To his (or one of his key advisor's) credit, he did NOT allow the Neocons to start a major war against Russia, China "

    How high an IQ is needed NOT to want to be burned to ashes? That of a mouse? A fruit fly? A nematode?

    Anonymous on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:28 pm EST/EDT
    ' we also have to accept the fact that the US armed forces the Neocon's/Israeli's "disposable armed forces" '

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2d94b8abb05cb3d29cce2505449ea992d882df7c57d7f070dc40b8caf9a1850a.jpg?w=600&h=400

    grrr on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:29 pm EST/EDT
    I tend to think that odd are opposite to what you've said about hot war. With regard to leaving ME it was presidential candidate Trump's promise. As well as declared desire of Tulsi Gabbard. So he can easily spin it as doing it on his own volition. And than (my speculation) redirect freed money into infrastructure repair and preparation for real economic competition with China and Russia. Particularly in space where (for now) we have advantage due to private enterprise..
    dh-mtl on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:31 pm EST/EDT
    Saker,

    Excellent analysis. Very much appreciated.

    Some comments:

    1. To put this into an historical context. After the failure of the Douma attacks in April, 2018, the Neocons (Globalists) were basically out of options to win the war in Syria. But this did not mean that they would give up on their quest to control the entire Middle-East, of which Syria was the stepping stone to Iran. They just needed a new plan (Plan D?, E?, F??). We now see that the new plan, painstakingly put in place since April, 2018, is to attack Iran directly.

    2. The attack on Soleimani suggests to me that the U.S. strategy is to decapitate the Iranian leadership, and then to take advantage of the anarchy that follows to install a pro-Western puppet in Tehran.

    3. I think that the Neocons (Globalists) are extremely impatient to get this done. They need to control the M-E in order to block Eurasian integration into the Russia/China sphere, via the Belt and Road initiative. And the window to launch a war, before the U.S. elections, is very narrow.

    4. Based on the above, I expect the U.S., or her 'allies' to rachet up the provocations, over the next 3 or 4 months, until they get a plausible excuse to launch a full fledged attack on Iran. I expect that such an attack would be a short, but massive, aerial campaign with the objective of taking out the Iranian government and its institutions, with the hope that in the anarchy that follows, a pro-Western puppet, that is already prepared and sitting in the wings, will be able to claim power.

    Trump is not a Neocon, but, about Iran, he shares a common interest with them. And he is likely foolish enough to go along with such a scenario. As other commenters have pointed out, the Neocons think that this is basically a win-win for the Neocons. If all goes well, they get Iran, if not, they get rid of Trump.

    North Patagonia on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:44 pm EST/EDT
    Yes, a coordinated and united front in the ME against the Zionazis would be an appropriate and proportional response a palace coup, the demise of MBS/MBZ, geopolitical realingment, grassroots protests, rapproachment those sorts of things might shake things up enough to see the warmongering US finally get kicked out of the ME.
    zolkas on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:51 pm EST/EDT
    How much an Iranian nuclear bomb blast would change the situation.
    JJ on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:52 pm EST/EDT
    Soooo its a slap in the for face for this?

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said that the United States and the European Union should either comply with the terms of the 2015 nuclear agreement with Tehran, or recognize it as nonexistent.

    Lavrov made the comments on December 30 after meeting in Moscow with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who said that the European signatories to the deal were "not taking any practical steps" to support it.

    monnalisa on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:55 pm EST/EDT
    The military budget of USA speaks loud. This means they are planning.
    Iran will not do any foolish movements and calculate any tactic extremely careful.
    China and Russia cannot allow that USA will "swallow" Iran. That's the point.

    If USA is doing something foolish in order to "secure" its hegemonic aspirations the outcome could be completely detrimental to what they had wished for.

    Anonymous on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:56 pm EST/EDT
    I'm afraid the fix is in.

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/476196-iran-israel-war-preparing/

    I also can't help but notice the amount of meetings between US officials and Israeli officials, particularly where Iran appears to be the major theme. At the time of Netanyahu's most recent warning, US General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had visited Israel to meet his Israeli counterpart, Aviv Kohavi, to discuss "operational questions and regional developments." A week prior, the US Air Force chief of staff also visited Israel to participate in the Blue Flag joint military exercise. Not long before that, the commander of the American military forces in the Middle East arrived in Israel for meetings with top IDF officials.

    That was early Dec 2019

    Naijaa_Man on January 03, 2020 , · at 5:58 pm EST/EDT
    US government is throwing everything into the propaganda fire to justify its murder of Qassem Solemani. In his desperation to connect Iran to 9/11 attacks, Mike Pence says there were 12 hijackers (forgetting they were 19 hijackers of which 15 were Saudis)

    https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/status/1213189757708189699?s=20

    Anonymous on January 03, 2020 , · at 7:02 pm EST/EDT
    Just shows how pathetic American propaganda is.

    Over 16 years ago, the Bush Regime was trying to pin some of the blame for 9-11 on Iraq to justify America's war of aggression on that nation.

    Now, years later, the Trump Regime is trying to pin the blame on Iran to justify the escalation of yet another American war.

    And Pence can't even get the number of 9-11 hijackers correct, or that the majority of these hijackers were from America's head-chopping ally of Saudi Arabia!

    Craig Mouldey on January 03, 2020 , · at 6:33 pm EST/EDT
    Very good recap. The table is set for a lot more death. Iran is damned if they do and damned if they don't and someone else does because they will simply be blamed. It fits the agenda of the beast.
    All the flag-wavers will be out shouting U.S.A., U.S.A. because this murder has left them more secure and safe. I don't know whether to vomit or weep.
    I don't believe war can be avoided because the agenda is to topple Iran as part of their new world order. If they won't surrender, war it will be.
    XSFRGR on January 03, 2020 , · at 6:39 pm EST/EDT
    This has nothing to do with anything other than the price of oil. The U$ absolutely must force the price of oil over 100 U$D per bbl. in order to profit from U$ oil reserves, and save the petro-dollar. If Iran does nothing overt, and Russia continues to pump oil, thus keeping the price of crude around $60, the U$ economy will wither. I think Iran will peck at the U$, and Iraq will most likely finally order American forces to leave, but I think Iran/Russia/China are just going to wait on the U$ economy to collapse, and then allow the global predator to eat itself. Of course the wild card is the U$ lashing out in its death throes, and just flat starting a major regional conflict or worse.
    Visitor #2 on January 03, 2020 , · at 7:41 pm EST/EDT
    Iran having access to Caspian Sea, I assume that makes priority number one for Russian.
    Rational Mechanic on January 03, 2020 , · at 8:32 pm EST/EDT
    Saker,
    Many thanks for the clear and succinct analysis.
    I for one wonder if Iran decides to go asymmetrically rather than a direct confrontation as the Iran people have shown to be strategic in their approach. In my humble opinion, I consider Iran has much (more) to lose if the confrontation path is chosen.
    Iran and its allies have reserves of oil and are located in a strategic position vis a vis shipping routes. Additionally, a part of the conversation that has cropped up is the falling value (and use of) the U$D. I think that is the weakest part of the US armour.
    I hope Iran resists direct retaliation and works along the lines of accelerated debasement and usage of the U$D.
    That is a longer term goal but may be shorter than others. By the way, any resulting damage may well be permanent.
    Nate on January 03, 2020 , · at 8:32 pm EST/EDT
    Regarding the talk of a hypothetical "Iran War", I do not think Washington will actually try invading Iran, for a couple of reasons.

    1. The US does not currently have enough troops to occupy Iran. It would require a military draft. This would cause massive opposition inside the USA (easily the biggest internal US political turmoil since the Vietnam War). And the youngest American adults that would get drafted are the least religious US generation ever (i.e. they are not Evangelical fundamentalists who want to throw their lives away for "Israel" and the "End Times").

    2. Where would Washington launch the invasion from? Iraq? The US will soon be asked to leave Iraq, and if Washington does not comply it will very quickly turn into another quagmire for the US just like it was in the 2000s. And if they tried invading from Afghanistan, Iran could always arm the Taliban. And besides, would Pakistan really allow the US military to pass through its territory to Afghanistan to invade Iran? I think not.

    3. Russia would obviously provide Iran with military supplies, intelligence, and diplomatic support, making any invasion attempt very costly for the US.

    Therefore, Washington's options are rather limited to missile strikes, CIA funded terrorist attacks, and other lesser forms of meddling.

    [Jan 03, 2020] Trump's Reckless Iran Strike Could Be A Sarajevo Moment

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Pentagon stated that Trump's move was aimed at "deterring" Iran. Senator Lindsey Graham knows better. It's time, he announced on Twitter, to prepare for a "big counterpunch," including targeting Iran's oil refineries. ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    Middle East. But why use a blowtorch to eradicate those malignant cells?

    Containment would have done the trick -- and Iran was, as it happens, contained when Trump became president in 2016. North Korea, Barack Obama warned him, would pose his most pressing threat. It still does. Yet Trump, intent in ripping up the Iran nuclear deal, ended up confecting a fresh crisis, a new road to war in the Middle East. Meanwhile, Kim Jong-un can resume testing and expanding his nuclear arsenal. Nor is this all. China and Russia can only marvel at Washington's continued capacity for self-destruction as it indulges in a fresh demonstration of the arrogance of power.

    Former national security adviser John Bolton, who was ousted over his hawkishness toward Iran and North Korea, must be rubbing his eyes in disbelief. Trump has performed a volte-face though he may not be capable of realizing it. It was Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who engineered what could be a new Sarajevo moment, cancelling his impending trip to Ukraine and helping to ensure the retaliatory strike in Iraq against Iran.

    The problem, of course, is that this sets up a fresh round of hostilities that America is ill-equipped to manage. Like Kaiser Wilhelm in World War I, Trump is likely to find that by acceding to a conflict that he is unable to conduct, he will have ceded control to a hawkish camarilla that sets his presidency on the path toward an unmitigated disaster. Make no mistake: a war with Iran can be won. But the price would make Iraq look like a cakewalk.

    On This Day 0 seconds Do You Know What Happened Today In History? Jan 3 2000

    The last original weekday Peanuts comic strip is published.

    The Pentagon stated that Trump's move was aimed at "deterring" Iran. Senator Lindsey Graham knows better. It's time, he announced on Twitter, to prepare for a "big counterpunch," including targeting Iran's oil refineries.

    Like not a few presidents, Trump will almost certainly revel in being a wartime president, at least initially. But there is no constituency for more war in America. Rather the reverse. Trump has given the Democrats a lift, perhaps most of all Senator Bernie Sanders, who has opposed America's serial confkucts abroad, though former vice president Joe Biden has also now attacked Trump for tossing "a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox." Essentially Trump has wiped the slate clean for Democrats like Biden who supported the 2003 Iraq War.

    Goodbye, Donald Trump restrainer. Hello Donald Trump, neocon.

    Jacob Heilbrunn is editor of The National Interest .

    [Jan 03, 2020] Killing Soleimani Pushes the U.S. and Iran Towards War

    Notable quotes:
    "... Soleimani is a senior Iranian military commander, and he also happens to be one of the more popular public figures inside Iran. Killing him isn't just a major escalation that guarantees reprisals and further destabilizes the region, but it also strengthens hard-liners in Iran enormously. Trump claimed not to want war with Iran, but his actions have proven that he does. No one who wants to avoid war with Iran would order the assassination of a high-ranking Iranian officer. Trump has signaled his willingness to plunge the U.S. into a new war that will be disastrous for our country, Iran, and the entire region. American soldiers, diplomats, and citizens throughout the region are all in much greater danger tonight than they were this morning, and the president is responsible for that. ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    ran hawks have been agitating for open conflict with Iran for years. Tonight, the Trump administration obliged them by assassinating the top IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and the head of Kata'ib Hezbollah in a drone strike in Baghdad:

    Hard to understate how big this is

    • Qassem Suleimani is Iran's most powerful mil figure in Region
    • He runs Iran's proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq
    • Both men designated by US as Terrorist
    • Muhandis was at US embassy attack protest, calls himself "Suleimani soldier"

    -- Joyce Karam (@Joyce_Karam) January 3, 2020

    Source in #Iran tells me:
    Senior Iranian diplomats are sharing Gen. Qasem Sulaimani's photo along w/death prayers for him. #Iraq

    -- Farnaz Fassihi (@farnazfassihi) January 3, 2020

    Confirmed officially on Iraq state TV. Both killed pic.twitter.com/toaBJyEcxe

    -- Feras Kilani فراس كيلاني (@FerasKilaniBBC) January 3, 2020

    U.S. officials tell Reuters that strikes have been carried in Baghdad on Friday out against two targets linked to Iran.

    -- Idrees Ali (@idreesali114) January 3, 2020

    Reuters reports that a spokesman for the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq also confirmed the deaths:

    Iranian Major-General Qassem Soleimani, head of the elite Quds Force, and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis were killed late on Thursday in an air strike on their convoy in Baghdad airport, an Iraqi militia spokesman told Reuters.

    Soleimani is a senior Iranian military commander, and he also happens to be one of the more popular public figures inside Iran. Killing him isn't just a major escalation that guarantees reprisals and further destabilizes the region, but it also strengthens hard-liners in Iran enormously. Trump claimed not to want war with Iran, but his actions have proven that he does. No one who wants to avoid war with Iran would order the assassination of a high-ranking Iranian officer. Trump has signaled his willingness to plunge the U.S. into a new war that will be disastrous for our country, Iran, and the entire region. American soldiers, diplomats, and citizens throughout the region are all in much greater danger tonight than they were this morning, and the president is responsible for that.

    It is hard to convey how irrational and destructive this latest action is. The U.S. and Iran have been dangerously close to war for months, but the Trump administration has made no effort to deescalate tensions. All that it would take to push the two governments over the brink into open conflict is a reckless attack that the other side cannot ignore. Now the U.S. has launched just such an attack and dared Iran to respond. The response may not come immediately, but we have to assume that it is coming. Killing Soleimani means that the IRGC will presumably consider it open season on U.S. forces all across the region. The Iran obsession has led the U.S. into a senseless new war that it could have easily avoided, and Trump and the Iran hawks own the results.

    Trump supporters have often tried to defend the president's poor foreign policy record by saying that he hadn't started any new wars. Well, now he has, and he will be responsible for the consequences to follow.

    [Jan 03, 2020] Deconstructing Yearend Trump Regime Big Lies About Iran by Stephen Lendman

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Deconstructing Yearend Trump Regime Big Lies About Iran

    by Stephen Lendman ( stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman )

    When US politicians comment about the country's adversaries, a an official narrative harangue of disinformation and Big Lies follows so often these figures likely no longer can distinguish between truth and fiction.

    Washington's hostility toward Iran has gone on with nary a letup since its 1979 revolution ended a generation of US-installed tyranny, the country regaining its sovereignty, free from vassal state status.

    On Monday, White House envoy for regime change in Iran Brian Hook stuck to the fabricated official narrative in discussing Iran at the State Department.

    He falsely called Sunday's Pentagon terror-bombing strikes on Iraqi and Syrian sites "defensive."

    They had nothing to do with "protect(ing) American forces and American citizens in Iraq" or Syria, nothing to do with "deterr(ing) Iranian aggression" that doesn't exist and never did throughout Islamic State history -- how the US and its imperial allies operate, not Iran, the region's leading proponent of peace and stability.

    Hook lied saying Iraqi Kata'ib Hezbollah paramilitaries (connected to the country's Popular Mobilization Forces) don't serve "the interests of the Iraqi people."

    That's precisely what they do, including their earlier involvement in combatting US-supported ISIS.

    Hook turned truth on its head, accusing Iran of "run(ning) an expansionist foreign policy" -- what US aggression is all about, not how Tehran operates.

    Like other Trump regime officials, he threatened Iran, a nation able to hit back hard against the US and its regional imperial partners if attacked -- why cool-headed Pentagon commanders want no part of war with the country.

    Kata'ib Hezbollah, other Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces, and the vast majority of Iraqi civilians want US occupation of their country ended.

    For decades, US direct and proxy aggression, including sanctions war, ravaged the country, killing millions of its people, causing appalling human suffering.

    Hook: "(T)he last thing the (US) is looking for is (war) in the Middle East "

    Fact: It's raging in multiple theaters, notably Syria and Yemen, once again in Iraq after last Sunday's US aggression, more of the same virtually certain ahead.

    State Department official David Schenker participated in Monday's anti-Iran propaganda exercise with Hook.

    Claiming the US wants regional de-escalation, not escalation, is polar opposite reality on the ground in all its war theaters and in other countries where it conducts subversion against their governments and people.

    The best way the US could protect its citizens worldwide is by ending aggressive wars, bringing home its troops, closing its empire of bases used as platforms for hostilities against other nations, and declaring a new era of peace and cooperative relations with other countries.

    Based on its belligerent history throughout the 19th and 20th centuries to the present day, this change of policy, if adopted, would be un-American.

    Hook: "Iran has been threatening the region for the last 40 years" -- what's true about US aggression, not how Tehran operates anywhere.

    Hook: Iran "is facing its worst financial crisis and its worst political crisis in its 40-year history."

    Fact: US war on the country by other means, economic terrorism, bears full responsibility for its economic hardships, intended to harm its people, including Trump regime efforts to block exports of food, drugs and medical equipment to Iran.

    Fact: Hostile US actions toward Iran and countless other nations are flagrant international law breaches -- the world community doing nothing to counter its hot wars and by other means.

    Fact: The Iranian "model" prioritizes peace and stability. Endless war on humanity is how the US operates globally -- at home and abroad.

    Fact: Iran isn't an "outlaw regime," the description applying to the US, its key NATO allies, Israel, the Saudis, and their rogue partners in high crimes.

    Hostile US actions are all about offense, unrelated to defense at a time when Washington's only enemies are invented as a pretext for endless wars of aggression.

    The US under both right wings of its war party poses an unparalleled threat to everyone everywhere.

    As long as its aggression goes unchallenged, the threat of humanity-destroying nuclear war exists.

    It could start anywhere -- in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, or against Russia by accident or design.

    On New Year's day 2020, I'd love to be optimistic about what lies ahead.

    As long as Republican and Dem hardliners pursue dominance over other nations by brute force and other hostile means, hugely dangerous tinderbox conditions could ignite an uncontrollable firestorm anywhere.

    VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org ( Home – Stephen Lendman ). Contact at [email protected] .

    My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

    www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Stephen Lendman

    Stephen Lendman
    Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005. In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly. Distinguished guests are featured. Listen live or archived. Major world and national issues are discussed. Lendman is a 2008 Project Censored winner and 2011 Mexican Journalists Club international journalism award recipient.

    [Jan 03, 2020] Trump assassination of General Suleimani was worse than a crime. It was a mistake

    Jan 03, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    Talleyrand remarked that Napoleon's assassination of the Duke of Enghien was worse than a crime. It was a mistake. Donald Trump's decision to target Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, for destruction brings to mind the French diplomat's lapidary verdict. Iran is likely to unleash its fearsome Shia proxy militias, wherever and whenever it can. Nor is support from Europe, which is on the frontlines of Iranian blowback, likely to be forthcoming. Quite the contrary.

    [Jan 03, 2020] I guess Trump decided had to make the 1914-vintage Hapsburgs look relatively competent

    Bombing a civilian airport in another country in order to assassinate Iranian and Iraq leaders is a very bad diplomacy ;-)
    It might well be that today this idiot blow up his chances fro reelection because revenge is dish that should be served cold and Iran can postpone it for 11 months or so.
    What is interesting is that neoliberal MSM are glad and still talking about Zelensky and impeachment. What a country ! It looks like the decade of the twenties can be the decade of another World War. "In every war the first casualty is truth."
    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    I guess somebody had to make the 1914-vintage Hapsburgs look relatively competent,

    Trump think that the war with Iran will be another cake walk, like in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is a proof that he is a senile idiot.

    [Jan 03, 2020] The Russian Foreign Ministry recently opened and published all the archives, including to so-called "secret protocols". There is nothing in that to condemn Russia, even Stalin comes out smelling like a rose.

    Jan 03, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    yalensis January 3, 2020 at 3:52 pm

    What's not to defend?
    "It contained secret protocols in which the two countries agreed to invade Poland jointly and to divide Poland and the Baltic states between them in a sharing of the spoils of aggressive war."
    Totally untrue. Northern Star is just spouting Westie propaganda.
    The Russian Foreign Ministry recently opened and published all the archives, including to so-called "secret protocols". There is nothing in that to condemn Russia, even Stalin comes out smelling like a rose.
    I covered some of this in my blog post here .
    By the time the Red Army marched throug the "corridor", there was no Polish government left to tell them no. The Poles did it to themselves, basically. They had an opportunity to ally with the Soviets against Germany. Instead they did their usual stubborn, stupid thing and brought it all upon themselves.

    Like Like

    Northern Star January 3, 2020 at 4:28 pm
    I merely posted a link that' speaks for itself.
    I don't propagate Western propaganda silly motherfucker
    Never have never will.
    Bye now!

    Like Like

    Patient Observer January 3, 2020 at 5:29 pm
    You cock sucking piece of shit! Worthless scum bag of oozing puss! A moronic failure of single cell life unable to form a thought worth uttering yet that doesn't stop you!

    Thought I would give your approach a try. Nope, not for me.

    Like Like

    Mark Chapman January 3, 2020 at 4:15 pm
    Must Putin be 'defending the Nazi-Soviet pact'? Or could he be defending the USSR's having made an agreement after it approached all its erstwhile allies to stand with it against the Nazis, and got only silence? Is he defending the substance of the pact itself, or the fact that such an agreement had to be made after every attempt to avoid it through the building of an alliance to resist the Nazis?

    Like Like

    Northern Star January 3, 2020 at 5:35 pm
    I dunno.Mark
    Why don't we look at exactly WTF-step by step-Russia did between MR.snd Barbarossa.

    Rhetoric defending VVP Is fine and well .but let's not get it It mixed up with historical FACTS

    [Jan 03, 2020] In killing General Suleimani, Mr. Trump took an action that Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama had rejected, fearing it would lead to war between the United States and Iran.

    Jan 03, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

    Iran's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, called the killing of General Suleimani an act of "international terrorism" and warned it was "extremely dangerous & a foolish escalation."

    "The US bears responsibility for all consequences of its rogue adventurism," Mr. Zarif tweeted.

    ... ... ...

    "From Iran's perspective, it is hard to imagine a more deliberately provocative act," said Robert Malley, the president and chief executive of the International Crisis Group. "And it is hard to imagine that Iran will not retaliate in a highly aggressive manner."

    "Whether President Trump intended it or not, it is, for all practical purposes, a declaration of war," added Mr. Malley, who served as White House coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa and the gulf region in the Obama administration.

    Some United States officials and Trump administration advisers offered a less dire scenario, arguing that the show of force might convince Iran that its acts of aggression against American interests and allies have grown too dangerous, and that a president the Iranians may have come to see as risk-averse is in fact willing to escalate.

    One senior administration official said the president's senior advisers had come to worry that Mr. Trump had sent too many signals -- including when he called off a planned missile strike in late June -- that he did not want a war with Iran.

    Tracking Mr. Suleimani's location at any given time had long been a priority for the American and Israeli spy services and militaries. Current and former American commanders and intelligence officials said that Thursday night's attack, specifically, drew upon a combination of highly classified information from informants, electronic intercepts, reconnaissance aircraft and other surveillance.

    The strike killed five people, including the pro-Iranian chief of an umbrella group for Iraqi militias, Iraqi television reported and militia officials confirmed. The militia chief, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was a strongly pro-Iranian figure.

    The public relations chief for the umbrella group, the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq, Mohammed Ridha Jabri, was also killed.

    American officials said that multiple missiles hit the convoy in a strike carried out by the Joint Special Operations Command.

    American military officials said they were aware of a potentially violent response from Iran and its proxies, and were taking steps they declined to specify to protect American personnel in the Middle East and elsewhere around the world.

    Two other people were killed in the strike, according to a general at the Baghdad joint command, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the news media.

    ... ... ...

    The United States and Iran have long been involved in a shadow war in battlegrounds across the Middle East -- including in Iraq, Yemen and Syria. The tactics have generally involved using proxies to carry out the fighting, providing a buffer from a direct confrontation between Washington and Tehran that could draw America into yet other ground conflict with no discernible endgame.

    The potential for a regional conflagration was a basis of the Obama administration's push for a 2015 agreement that froze Iran's nuclear program in return for sanctions relief.

    Mr. Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018, saying that Mr. Obama's agreement had emboldened Iran, giving it economic breathing room to plow hundreds of millions of dollars into a campaign of violence around the region. Mr. Trump responded with a campaign of "maximum pressure" that began with punishing new economic sanctions, which began a new era of brinkmanship and uncertainly, with neither side knowing just how far the other was willing to escalate violence and risk a wider war. In recent days, it has spilled into the military arena.

    General Suleimani once described himself to a senior Iraqi intelligence official as the "sole authority for Iranian actions in Iraq," the official later told American officials in Baghdad.

    In a speech denouncing Mr. Trump, General Suleimani was even less discreet -- and openly mocking.

    "We are near you, where you can't even imagine," he said. "We are ready. We are the man of this arena."

    [Jan 03, 2020] Sheldon Adelson the rest of neocons got their wish. Now they will face consequnces

    Jan 03, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Qasem Suleimani, Assassinated In US Airstrike By Walrus. - Sic Semper Tyrannis

    Multiple news sources are reporting the assassination, near Baghdad Airport, of Suliemani, the leader of Irans Quds force. Some commentators are saying that this is "bigger than killing Bin Laden". According to the Pentagon, the assassination was at the direct command of President Trump. I am afraid this event, allegedly taken to forestall further attacks on US forces in Iraq, may have unintended consequences.

    To me, the logic of Trump in doing this is unfathomable. Did he intend to provoke Iran and the Russians? What did he expect to achieve? Clearly the stress on the Iraqi Government is going to be extreme. How has this assassination improved the security of U.S. forces in the region? What does the Committee think?

    Posted at 02:12 AM | Permalink

    Reblog (0) Comments

    Dom , 03 January 2020 at 02:27 AM

    Well, it look that Israel will have a war with Iran.
    Garcia , 03 January 2020 at 02:31 AM
    God Bless his Soul, Trump is a coward
    blue peacock , 03 January 2020 at 02:59 AM
    Walrus

    I agree the stress on the Iraqi government will be intense. Will they force the US out? Did Trump order this expecting that to happen? Or did he order this at the behest of Bibi, MbS and the neocon contingent (Pompeo, Haspel, Esper, Kushner) he has surrounded himself with, not really thinking through the implications.

    The one scenario that I speculate that took place is the low-level "warfare" between US forces and the various Iraqi/Iranian/Syrian militias got escalated. And Trump was being "briefed" that it was all Iranian "influenced". That would have fit his generally anti-Iran mindset and then he was presented with this "target of opportunity" and given seconds to decide and he went with the flow to pull the trigger.

    My sense is that while Iran will heat up the rhetoric, they won't retaliate militarily in a direct and open manner. Instead they'll pile the pressure on the Iraqi government to expel US forces.

    MisanthropicUSA , 03 January 2020 at 03:13 AM
    The Mahdi Army is reportedly being reactivated, presumably they have some more combat experience now thanks to the ISIS war. We have some 5,000 troops in the country and God knows how many citizens there along with whatever we have in Syria. The Iranians are pissed and want their revenge. The Iraqis are pissed too as is Hezbollah I'd imagine. I fear that this is going to be bad.

    What the hell was Trump thinking...

    LondonBob , 03 January 2020 at 03:27 AM
    Who is driving US policy in the region now, who is Trump listening to?

    Once again the neocons have pulled off the seemingly impossible, imagine have the power and cunning to have a country use their own servicemen as bait and cannon fodder to serve the interests of a foreign country. Another nail in the American coffin, unfortunately.

    Amir , 03 January 2020 at 03:29 AM
    I guess all Col. Lang's effort for the past 2 decades have been undermined. There is no way that the assassination of a member of an Iranian equivalent of JCS will be tolerated. The Iranian government will consider a lack of response to be interpreted as an invitation for more adventurism by Trump admin. The whole talk about covert action is ignorant as the Iranian foreign minister has already stated that there will be consequences.
    The dice has been cast and at this point it really doesn't matter which faction within Trump's entourage managed to start a conflict: the king-of-gamblers, Sheldon Adelson & the rest of NeoConLibs, got their wish.
    Not happy about it but nothing to do to reverse course.
    jonst , 03 January 2020 at 05:08 AM
    I could it see it playing out in two general ways. Clearly, this could make things much worse, across the entire Middle East. That's a given. On the other hand.....

    It MIGHT be so that there are a lot of people in Iraq, Iran (yes, Iran) silently (for now, if they know what is good for them in the short run) celebrating this hit. A lot of Iraqis and Iranians have been killed by this guy's forces in the last few months. Alone. Who do we think the people in Iraq and Iran have been protesting against? Al Quds. And there might even be a few people in the Iranian govt who think now is the time to reduce, dramatically, the influence of Al Quds. These facts should not be dismissed out of hand. But again, on the other hand....
    it may be deemed unholy and unpatriotic to celebrate taking out this SOB...as the lament might go, 'he's an SOB but he;s our SOB!'.

    I know this...I would be tempted to evacuate our embassy. Now. Like starting yesterday.

    We'll see. But I shed no tears for this guy. Nor do I celebrate it. Because either way...it is grim. Now, if there was someone like the Col exploiting the vacuum and shock waves certain to come in the wake of this...I would see opportunities. I repeat, a lot of people in the Middle East did not like this guy or his organization...even if they don't like the US too. But that kind of thing requires a mind that plays chess. And can kill, too. And I don't see too many minds, and souls, like that in DC anymore.

    [Jan 03, 2020] U.S. Will Come To Regret Its Assassination of Qassim Soleimani

    Notable quotes:
    "... Since May 2019 the U.S. deployed at least 14,800 additional soldiers to the Middle East. Over the last three days airborne elements and special forces followed . The U.S. has clearly planned for an escalation. ..."
    Jan 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    January 03, 2020 U.S. Will Come To Regret Its Assassination of Qassim Soleimani

    Today the U.S. declared war on Iran and Iraq.

    War is what it will get.

    Earlier today a U.S. drone or helicopter killed Major General Qassim Soleimani, the famous commander of the Iranian Quds ('Jerusalem') force, while he left the airport of Baghdad where he had just arrived.

    The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Soleiman was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements outside of Iran. Hajji Qassim advised the Lebanese Hisbullah during the 2006 war against Israel. His support for Iraqi groups enabled them to kick the U.S. invaders out of Iraq. He was the man responsible for, and successful in, defeating the Islamic State in iraq and Syria. In 2015 Soleimani traveled to Moscow and convinced Russia to intervene in Syria. His support for the Houthi in Yemen enabled them to withstand the Saudi attackers.

    Soleimani had arrived in Baghdad on a normal flight from Lebanon. He did not travel in secret. He was picked up at the airport by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, the deputy commander of the al-Hashd al-Shaabi, an official Iraqi security force under the command of the Iraqi Prime Minister. The two cars they traveled in were destroyed in the U.S. attack. Both men and their drivers and guards died.

    The U.S. created two martyrs who will now become the models and idols for tens of millions of youth in the Middle East.

    The Houthi in Yemen, Hizbullah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Palestine, the paramilitary forces in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere have all benefited from Soleimani's advice and support. They will all take actions to revenge him.

    Moqtada al-Sadr, the unruly Shia cleric who commands millions of followers in Iraq, has given orders to reactivate his military branch 'Jaish al-Imam al-Mahdi'. Between 2004 and 2008 the Mahdi forces fought the U.S. occupation of Iraq. They will do so again.

    The outright assassination of a commander of Soleimani's weight demands an Iranian reaction of at least a similar size. All U.S. generals or high politicians traveling in the Middle East or elsewhere will now have to watch their back. There will be no safety for them anywhere.

    No Iraqi politician will be able to argue for keeping U.S. forces in the country. The Iraqi Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi has called for a parliament emergency meeting to ask for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops:

    "The targeted assassination of an Iraqi commander is a violation of the agreement. It can trigger a war in Iraq and the region. It is a clear violation of the conditions of the U.S. presence in Iraq. I call on the parliament to take the necessary steps."

    The National Security Council of Iran is meeting with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to "study the options of response". There are many such options. The U.S. has forces stationed in many countries around Iran. From now on none of them will be safe.

    Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a statement calling for three days of public mourning and then retaliation.

    "His departure to God does not end his path or his mission," the statement said, "but a forceful revenge awaits the criminals who have his blood and the blood of the other martyrs last night on their hands."

    Iran will tie its response to the political calender. U.S. President Donald Trump will go into his reelection campaign with U.S. troops under threat everywhere. We can expect incidents like the Beirut barracks bombing to repeat themselves when he is most vulnerable.

    Trump will learn that killing the enemy is the easy part of a war. The difficulties come after that happened.

    In 2018 Soleimani publicly responded to a tweet in which Trump had threatened Iran:

    "Mr. Trump, the gambler! [ ] You are well aware of our power and capabilities in the region. You know how powerful we are in asymmetrical warfare. Come, we are waiting for you. We are the real men on the scene, as far as you are concerned. You know that a war would mean the loss of all your capabilities. You may start the war, but we will be the ones to determine its end. "

    Since May 2019 the U.S. deployed at least 14,800 additional soldiers to the Middle East. Over the last three days airborne elements and special forces followed . The U.S. has clearly planned for an escalation.

    Soleimani will be replaced by an officer of equal stature and capability. Iran's policies and support for foreign groups will intensify. The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come. From now on its position in the Middle East will be severely constrained. Others will move in to take its place.

    Posted by b on January 3, 2020 at 9:05 UTC | Permalink

    willie , Jan 3 2020 9:18 utc | 1

    +
    Come on Iran,Iraq,bomb DC to oblivionand all fucking americans with it!
    Kali , Jan 3 2020 9:18 utc | 2
    If Iran is smart they would ask Tulsi Gabbard to come to Tehran and try to make peace with Trump. Israel and the neocons in the Trump orbit want an excuse to attack Iran. Don't give them one. Take the high road.
    Jose Garcia , Jan 3 2020 9:19 utc | 3
    A man elected by telling his followers he will stop all wars overseas and bring the soldiers home. How do you like them apples now?
    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 9:29 utc | 4
    Oh, it was certainly a grave miscalculation by the US. The NeoCons must have been pushing for it for years, and it wasn't the first assassination attempt. But I don't think the reprisal will be immediate. Retaliation needs to be carefully thought out, in order to avoid an exchange mounting in tension leading to outright war (certainly part of the US plan).
    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 9:33 utc | 5
    I was wondering, seeing as Netanyahu has suddenly dropped his Greek visit, and run back home, whether the retaliation won't be against Israel. Netanyahu certainly fears it.
    Veritas X- , Jan 3 2020 9:36 utc | 6
    Excuse Me *b'.
    I'm a bonafide *american*, with roots there from 300 years ago.
    I left the States permanently 40+ years ago.

    Fuck these zionazi scumbags.
    A pest on all of them.

    Buckle-Up People.
    WWIII courtesy of these evil phariseés, coming up soon.
    X-

    Boindub , Jan 3 2020 9:38 utc | 7
    Do not retaliate immediately to suit your enemies .
    Let the world see how a civilised Iran responds to utter provocation by an uncivilised bully.
    They used to call it Buck Braking.
    The world (except the usual arselickers) will understand that retaliation is justified and the cost of defending every USA and Israel target will be huge.
    When a threat is carried out it is weakened.
    Go to World opinion.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 9:38 utc | 8
    Hope al-Sadr has got sore balls from sitting on the fence. Small minded prick trying to use US for his small minded shenanigans. But whatever, if he mobilize his forces against the US, we might be able to cheer a few US bodybags on there way home. With no defences, Iraqi's will pay a high price, but bodybags have a major influence on US public.
    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 9:39 utc | 9
    Soleimani will be replaced by an officer of equal stature.
    I'm not sure I'd agree with that. Sulaimani was a figure of exceptional stature, and skill. But, as you say, he may yet be worth more dead than alive, as a martyr.
    ab initio , Jan 3 2020 9:40 utc | 10
    There have been all kinds of threats of retaliation for so long. Nothing materializes. Israel has been bombing targets in Syria with impunity. They've even bombed in Iraq.

    There's all kinds of strong words and rhetoric. Let's see what if anything Khamanei does? Let's see if the Iraqi parliament does anything? How are they going to force the US military to exit?

    mary-lou , Jan 3 2020 9:44 utc | 11
    thanks b, gruesome news but great article!
    Peter , Jan 3 2020 9:48 utc | 12
    The world will remember Qassim Soleimani as a pivotal figure in the struggle against US domination in the Middle East. Rest in peace Major General.

    This surely must be the single most stupid thing Trump could do entering the election year.

    How ironic that the warmongering Democrats will use the consequences of the targeted killing of an Iranian official as ammunition to kill this presidency.

    Iran is not looking for an all out war, the response will be asymmetric and appropriate.

    Straining US-Israeli relations and poisoning the political well in the US to accelerate the decline of the American Empire would be the ultimate revenge.

    Trump repaid Sheldon Adelson, but more people will pay the ultimate price.

    Bryan Hemming , Jan 3 2020 9:53 utc | 13
    Though I fully believe Trump is capable of ordering a hit one of the highest ranking generals in the Iranian military, I'm not necessarily convinced that is the case. My first thoughts on hearing news of the assassination were as follows: when the Pentagon and its corporate bullhorns make such a special point of telling us that Trump gave the order to kill such a high ranking military figure why do I harbor suspicions that might not have been the case? I don't need telling in capital letters that Trump did it, as I would assume the order would have to have come from the president without having to be told. Normally, Trump does the bragging bit himself. If it is to be done at all. That Trump ordering the hit gets such a special mention suggests that the Pentagon more often than not carries out similar operations irrespective of what the president might want. Well, my might musings may amount to what some what label a conspiracy theory but might a military coup just taken place in the US? After all, would the president have enough courage to tell the American people he had not given the order if that were the case? When we can't trust our leaders and we can't trust the media, who can we trust? And who is to be believed? Apart from that, the way the news is being released has a few unsubtle hints of dumping blame on Trump. A lot of people in the Pentagon, might either regret the operation, or were never given an inkling of what was about to happen.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 9:53 utc | 14
    "The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come. Others will move in to take its place."

    Wait for awhile on that one. Iraq will have to take some major hits if it tries moving to the Russia China sphere. And it will have to deal with the fith column which are strong. Iraq will have to go through the fire - like Donbass, Syria ect until it is distilled to a solid core and then they will get support that will drive back the yanks.

    never mind , Jan 3 2020 9:54 utc | 15
    To summarize b: The US doesn't gain anything, and potentially loses everything they sought out to do in Iraq (and by extension; Syria), from the killing of Soleimani.

    So why do it? Was Soleimani really the target? Who benifits by drawing the US and Iran closer war?

    I wouldn't be surprised if an article about 'bad intel received from a 3rd party' pops up in the NYT in a few months time.

    Gary , Jan 3 2020 9:55 utc | 16
    Iranians have to do nothing, every rocket, bullett or treeleave which falls in the vicinity of an American will be labeled a counter attack of tthe iranians. And thus striking fear, they will live their own nightmare.
    The tweet of khamenie yesterday provoked trump, ttrump did exactly as aspected when sulieman made his public trip to iraq. Maybe he is as dead as Epstein or he did underestimatte the american stupiditty.
    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 9:59 utc | 17
    Posted by: ab initio | Jan 3 2020 9:40 utc | 10
    There's all kinds of strong words and rhetoric. Let's see what if anything Khamanei does?
    You underestimate the gravity of the crisis. It's much more profound than that, not far off 9/11 level. But there won't be instant retaliation. That would be foolish.
    michaelj72 , Jan 3 2020 9:59 utc | 18
    Nice one, b, thanks...

    I've been following Elijah M. and several others on twitter, as well as more mainstream sources for several hours after learning of these assassinations.

    the absolute stupidity, maliciousness and wickedness of the US Political and Military Elites is truly astonishing. They have misjudged every single thing in that part of the world since 9/11 and the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and then Iraq - and spent/wasted well over $5 trillion. not to mention the horrific loss of life everywhere from Syria to Iraq and Yemen. And we are now looking at another even more catastrophic war.
    it is unbelievable

    michaelj72 , Jan 3 2020 10:05 utc | 19
    The price of crude oil has jumped over $2 USD on the world markets since the news

    I expect the US to fully resist being booted out of Iraq (which would also make it's two major positions in Syria highly untenable). who could now believe that US troops in Iraq and Syria won't come under sustained attack now, by the many allies Iran has in the area?

    Elijah gives breaking news
    https://twitter.com/ejmalrai/status/1213032002682867715

    Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani considers "the #US attack against the #BaghdadAirport is a clear violation of #Iraq sovereignty".

    That is clear support for the US withdrawal from #Iraq.

    AND

    S Sistani condemns the "attack against Iraqi (not Iranian-militia) position on the borders killing our Iraqi sons to the hateful attack on #BaghdadAirport is a violation and internationally unlawful (US) act against anti-#ISIS hero(s) leading to difficult times for #Iraq".

    bluedotterel , Jan 3 2020 10:07 utc | 20
    Really, the ball is in Iraq's court. This is an attack on Iraqi sovereignty as much as an act of war on Iran. We will now see what the Iraqi are made of.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:07 utc | 21
    @never mind "Soleimani really the target?"

    Trump was personally responsible for having the organisation Soleimani led declared a terrorist organisation. Time to quit the "Trump is a dumbfuck led by others" Trump is around 70 and has been his own boss all his life. He is now commander in chief of the US military. He gives the orders, nobody else. He doesn't give a shit about the cold war and Europe, hence people thinking he is a peacenik. What he does care about is enemies of Israel and control of energy.

    Jackrabbit , Jan 3 2020 10:07 utc | 22
    I am left wondering to what extent the events were pre-planned.

    Seems very possible that Trump will never actually be impeached. As a war President, his legacy will be guarded. Was impeachment ever anything but a distraction prior to a false-flag and escalation?

    IMO Trump's Presidential contract with the Deep State likely includes NO IMPEACHMENT and NO RELEASE OF HIS TAXES. Both to guard his "good name" because Trump see the the "Trump" brand as his biggest asset.

    !!

    Jackrabbit , Jan 3 2020 10:09 utc | 23
    We need to re-evaluate a few things.

    Was Erdogan's recent move to send Troops to Libya just a cover for general mobilization?

    !!

    Bjørn Holmgaard , Jan 3 2020 10:11 utc | 24
    The best revenge the Iraninans could have would be the expulsion of US troops from Iraq and Syria, which by the way was also the overarching goal of Soleimani...

    No blood but his work completed..

    Russianstyle revenge.

    laughlyn , Jan 3 2020 10:15 utc | 25
    thanks b. horrifying news indeed, a major step towards war which will galvanize iranian public opinion.
    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:17 utc | 26
    bluedotterel

    If the Iraqi politician had anything resembling balls, they would have kicked the US out the moment Trump proclaimed he had 'secured' the Syrian oil. Will have to do some research on whether Iraqi politicians can produce kids.

    Jon_in_AU , Jan 3 2020 10:20 utc | 27
    Bryan Hemming@13

    You (far more elaborately) illustrated my take.
    I personally think he gets 'strongly advised' on which course to take, and even if he disagrees goes along anyways. Maybe it's just plain selfish expediency, or one of many other reasons.

    Makes one wonder if the raids on Epstein's residences landed the deep-state some very incriminating footage.
    Perhaps they 'own' him outright now.

    I'll be surprised if the next election doesn't bring major civil unrest to the USA.
    Then 'they' will have something to really worry about, directly in their own laps, for a change.

    never mind , Jan 3 2020 10:22 utc | 28
    @Peter AU1

    Then the US is willfully shooting itself in the foot and I have a hard time believing that.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:29 utc | 29
    Trump doesn't give a shit about soft power. He believes in hard power. Iraq has no defence against the US, and Trump intends to attack Iran. He needs a 9 11 to take the American population with him.
    Jackrabbit , Jan 3 2020 10:30 utc | 30
    Bjørn Holmgaard @24:
    The best revenge the Iraninans could have would be the expulsion of US troops from Iraq and Syria ...

    UN resolution 2249 (2015) :
    Calls upon Member States that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures, in compliance with international law, in particular with the United Nations Charter, as well as international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law, on the territory under the control of ISIL also known as Da'esh, in Syria and Iraq, to redouble and coordinate their efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL also known as Da'esh as well as ANF, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the United Nations Security Council, and as may further be agreed by the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) and endorsed by the UN Security Council, pursuant to the Statement of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) of 14 November, and to eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria;

    USA have made it very clear that they are not leaving Syria and the same thinking/excuses likely applies to Iraq.

    Some will argue that using UN2249 as justification for over-staying and virtual occupation is wrong-headed. Nevertheless, USA claims to remain to ensure against a resurgence of ISIS. Clearly they intend to stay until their goals are met or they are forced out militarily.

    !!

    Jen , Jan 3 2020 10:34 utc | 31
    I suspect I'm not the only MoA barfly who thinks the assassination of Hossein Soleymani could have been planned with Mossad or other organisations and individuals in Israeli society.
    jared , Jan 3 2020 10:35 utc | 32
    I have the impression that Israel is taking responsibility for management of Iraq/Iran situation.

    Suspect Trump is delegating and is along for ride. No dought in control in his own mind.

    It appears that president is obliged to accept intelligence and guidance of security state effectively tying his hands

    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 10:35 utc | 33
    The Iraqis are certainly capable of making life for the US very uncomfortable in Iraq and Syria, even if not force withdrawal. The present US structure and numbers depend on Iraqi acquiescence, and that's about shot, even before the assassination. If the position is to be maintained without Iraqi acquiescence, then thousands more troops would be required, and that wouldn't go down well back home in the States. That's one of the reasons why the act was a grave miscalculation.
    Veritas X- , Jan 3 2020 10:38 utc | 34
    Prayers for *Qassim Soleimani* and the 'engineer' *Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes*.
    RIP.
    Amen.

    WE who respect Life & Freedom have, a huge debt, to Qassim Soleimani.
    It was Qassim Soleimani who was in Moscow many times, BEFORE the Russian Federation went 'all-in' in Syria September 2015.
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Syria+Russia+2015&t=ffcm&ia=web
    He was a brilliant military strategist, who after these meetings had convinced V.Putin & Russian Military of a....very very effective 'game plan' to free the Syrian People of the wahhabbi-terrorists & jizzreali-mercenaries.
    Yes. Brilliant Man.
    Besides this characteristic, Qassim Soleimani was a man of faith.
    Unafraid to travel openly, knowing Our God would be with him both in Life & Death.

    X-

    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:47 utc | 35
    People like Soleimani and Zahreddine had their religion, but they were also secular in their world veiw - not religious nutcases. Not good when the yanks kill them. But then there's all - to us - the unknowns the US has killed. Perhaps unknown to us, like the SAA soldiers on the hills out of Dier Ezzor killed in the US Australian and other assorted rabble strike. 100 or so SAA, unknown to us but known to family and friends. Sooner the yank frankenstein made up of assorted so called dissidents and genuine zionists is wiped off the earth the better.
    TEP , Jan 3 2020 10:49 utc | 36
    I figure Iran will have to retaliate and thus this will likely escalate. The Saker initially thinks war is 80% certain, I think it's probably a bit higher than that.
    Kurious , Jan 3 2020 10:51 utc | 37
    This was not Trump`s decision. Trump had to take responsibilty to show he is in command. He will soon realize that he was played by the CIA and the Israelis. By then it is too late.
    The US and its vassals are speeding up confrontation with the Axis because they know that the showdown is inevitable. However, It will not happen according to the US timetable.
    Keep a good supply of popcorn on hand. The pandora box has plenty of surprises. The question remains,

    Will the state of Israel survives?

    God help us.

    El Sid , Jan 3 2020 10:53 utc | 38
    Sasha in the previous thread was enquiring about what Elijah Magnier had to say about the goings on in Iraq.

    FYI, just found his excellent twitter thread on the Soleimani assassination (fresh off the press)

    The lad seems to know what he's talking about.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 10:55 utc | 39
    Veritas X- "He was a brilliant military strategist"

    That's why Trump hit him. And I say hit because Trump has very much a US mob or movie style mafia mentality.

    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 11:04 utc | 40
    I figure Iran will have to retaliate and thus this will likely escalate. The Saker initially thinks war is 80% certain, I think it's probably a bit higher than that.

    Posted by: TEP | Jan 3 2020 10:49 utc | 36

    The Iranians would be foolish to allow themselves to be goaded like that.

    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 11:05 utc | 41
    Putin has warned Trump against attacking Iran. Trump needs an excuse. I may be wrong but I doubt an Iranian response to the US killing will cut it. This will be interesting to see. Trump may have to wear the Iranian response or bear the same consequence as if he had attacked Russia.
    Kirk , Jan 3 2020 11:12 utc | 42
    War with Islam is inevitable. Or you could submit. Their plan is global sharia and return to the dark ages
    Peter AU1 , Jan 3 2020 11:18 utc | 43
    Laguerre

    Iran has a choice. It can suffer hit like this one left right and center, at least until the end of the Trump regime, or it can strike back and initiate ware. Unless Iran strikes back, which will intimate war, Trump will up the the game to where he is hitting Iran at will and Iran is taking major losses. Like Putin says, 'when a fight is inevitable, hit first'. Iran is better off kicking things off now rather than after they have taken big losses.

    Zanon , Jan 3 2020 11:21 utc | 44
    Kurious

    "This was not Trump`s decision. Trump had to take responsibilty to show he is in command. He will soon realize that he was played by the CIA and the Israelis."

    Dont exempt Trump
    but that Trump is getting fooled by Israel is obvious:
    Tillerson says Netanyahu skillfully 'played' Trump using misinformation
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/tillerson-says-netanyahu-skillfully-played-trump-using-misinformation/

    Jon_in_AU , Jan 3 2020 11:23 utc | 45
    Kirk@42

    You are an odd person. I've not seen any sharia-based empire building around here, perhaps it is all in your mind.

    I am wary of overly-religious types, but Islam is no threat to me.

    Happy-clappy, neo-conservative, rapture-ready, war-mongering psychopaths on the other hand scare the willies outta me.


    Walter , Jan 3 2020 11:24 utc | 46
    I too look to twitter. I see claims that Iran has dispersed fighter aircraft to fields near the borders. I see that "out bound heavies" are flying out of the US...calls for people to pack and bugout...signs here and there of this conflict becoming very destructive and impossible to control. The Iranian 3 day pause makes sense, but no one should assume that the aggressor will wait 3 days..is not looking like simple attack, but like a campaign. If so, then it's a red hot fight. S. Mohamad Marandi and Mark Sleboda often have interesting tweets.

    If this is a campaign, yes of course there was/is a plan. However no plan survives first contact with the enemy. Persia has been there a long time, Yankee fatboy...something the fine gentlemen perhaps may not have known, since they're barking insane and know zero history. The US history is merely the blink of history's eye, so far. Education by war is a harsh process, and expensive.

    If state a is attacked, then internal mechanism of state a tends to force leadership of a to "reply". similarly if state b attacks state a, it's because of the internal calculus of state b that this occurs. all war may be seen as domestic in origin.

    Maybe I ought to fill the car with gas... That's my internal calculus.

    William Gruff , Jan 3 2020 11:24 utc | 47
    Does anyone here follow Trump's Twitter posts (I don't)? If so, please link his tweet in which he claims responsibility. The vile narcissist that we are led to believe him to be would want to brag loud and first if he ordered the assassination, regardless of the time it happened.

    No Twitter post? Then I doubt Trump was in the loop.

    The neocons are "making history" again and Trump will have to choose to go along with it rather than fight it, but it is clear to me now that he is not even being briefed on these operations until after the fact.

    In fact, Trump being holed up in his Florida compound and not even in Washington as this war is launched suggests to me that he may have been threatened with being Kennedy-ed. "Shut up and go along or an Iranian will snuff you... and we know it will be an Iranian because we already have his passport ready to be found at the scene of the crime."

    Insanity? Yes, America has collectively gone insane, as has its population individually. It could be that Trump tried to fight it, but fighting mass insanity is like trying to hold back a hurricane. Even a President cannot do that.

    Veritas X- , Jan 3 2020 11:29 utc | 48
    Look's like the *hasbara brigade* has decided to de-rail the discussion here.

    ***WARNING***
    Don't feed-these-trolls!
    Zionism is a mental disorder.
    Please Ignore them.
    Let this post be the last 1 regarding them.

    Ignore them!
    X-

    Laguerre , Jan 3 2020 11:35 utc | 49
    Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jan 3 2020 11:18 utc | 43

    I'd expect the Iranians to be more subtle than that. I don't think there's any advantage for the Iranians to directly attack the US position in the ME.

    , This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted. Working... Your comment could not be posted. Error type: Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

    The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

    As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

    Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

    Working...

    Post a comment Name:

    Email:

    URL:
    Allowed HTML Tags:

    < B>Text</B> → Text
    <I>Text</I> → Text
    < U>Text</U> → Text
    <BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
    < A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

    Working... " What Will The Trump Administration Do When Iraq Asks U.S. Troops To Leave? | Main

    Verify your Comment Previewing your Comment

    [Jan 03, 2020] If you previously have doubts that Trump is senile warmonger, not you have a definite proof

    Bombing a civilian airport in another country in order to assassinate Iranian and Iraq leaders is a very bad diplomacy ;-)
    It might well be that today this idiot blow up his chances fro reelection because revenge is dish that should be served cold and Iran can postpone it for 11 months or so.
    What is interesting is that neoliberal MSM are glad and still talking about Zelensky and impeachment. What a country ! It looks like the decade of the twenties can be the decade of another World War. "In every war the first casualty is truth."
    Jan 03, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Trump think that the war with Iran will be another cake walk, like in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is a proof that he is a senile idiot.

    [Jan 03, 2020] If a conflict between USA led NATO and Russia goes thermonuclear,we can all kiss our asses goodbye. Two maybe three hundred million dead outright within an hour or so. What then?? Who the fuck knows.

    Jan 03, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    Northern Star

    January 2, 2020 at 5:30 pm
    "With each passing day of the impeachment crisis, the distance between the official reasons for the conflict in Washington and the real reasons grows wider.

    It has become increasingly clear that the central issue is not Trump's attempt to "solicit interference from a foreign country" by "pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the president's main domestic political rivals," as alleged in the whistleblower complaint that triggered the impeachment inquiry.
    Rather, the conflict raging within the state centers on Trump's decision to temporarily delay a massive weapons shipment to Ukraine.

    The ferocity with which the entire US national security apparatus responded to the delay raises the question: Is there a timetable for using these weapons in combat to fight a war against Russia?

    A New York Times front-page exposé published Monday, coming in at 5,000 words and bearing six bylines, makes it clear that Trump's decision to withhold military aid -- over a month before his phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky -- triggered the conflict that led to the president's impeachment.

    As the Times reports, "Mr. Trump's order to hold $391 million worth of sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, night vision goggles, medical aid and other equipment the Ukrainian military needed to fight a grinding war against Russian-backed separatists would help pave a path to the president's impeachment."

    "Despite the unforeseen and disastrous consequences of the CIA-backed coup in Ukraine, the United States is determined to continue its efforts to militarily encircle Russia, which it sees as a major obstacle to its central geopolitical aim -- control of the Eurasian landmass, which would give it a staging ground for a conflict with China."

    If a conflict between USA led NATO and Russia goes thermonuclear, we can all kiss our asses goodbye. Two maybe three hundred million dead outright within an hour or so. What then?? Who the fuck knows.

    However if the conflict remains non thermonuclear -but possibly involving tac nukes -- I can conceive of no scenario in which Russia does not stomp the living shit out of a USA/NATO aggressor. Russia and China allied and working together? Capitulation of the USA/NATO forces within a month tops.

    The problem is that we have psychopaths in D.C. and Brussels who actually believe that the peoples of the Eurasian land mass can be subjugated. As long as their insanity is tolerated ,we are all living on borrowed time.

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/31/pers-d31.html

    Northern Star January 2, 2020 at 5:34 pm
    Yup!!!
    Like I was saying:

    https://www.checkpointasia.net/with-the-demented-advice-biden-is-getting-on-russia-better-buckle-your-seatbelts-if-he-wins-2020/

    [Jan 03, 2020] Secondary sanctions are evil because they prevent minor transactions because banks don't think it is worth the severe penalties.

    Jan 03, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    cartman January 2, 2020 at 4:54 pm

    How Our Economic Warfare Brings the World to Heel

    Nothing untrue in this article. Secondary sanctions are evil because they prevent minor transactions because banks don't think it is worth the severe penalties. So Iranian cancer patients aren't allowed to buy chemotherapy medications. Trump has gone overboard because he has learned that there is no political cost to doling these out.

    I think this is how US dominance will end. No challengers will end it, although some may rise in the vacuum. The internal changes the US needs to make to come back are politically impossible. Sanctions are big government on steroids, and having the US Government sitting atop the global economy will cause it to seize up. The question is how long commerce will be able to continue under these conditions.

    [Jan 02, 2020] The Art of Doublespeak Bellingcat and Mind Control by Edward Curtin

    Notable quotes:
    "... Bellingcat is an alleged group of amateur on-line researchers who have spent years shilling for the U.S. instigated war against the Syrian government, blaming the Douma chemical attack and others on the Assad government, and for the anti-Russian propaganda connected to, among other things, the Skripal poisoning case in England, and the downing of flight MH17 plane in Ukraine. ..."
    "... The Intercept , along with its parent company First Look Media, recently hosted a workshop for pro-war, Google-funded organization Bellingcat in New York. The workshop, which cost $2,500 per person to attend and lasted five days, aimed to instruct participants in how to perform investigations using "open source" tools -- with Bellingcat's past, controversial investigations for use as case studies Thus, while The Intercept has long publicly promoted itself as an anti-interventionist and progressive media outlet, it is becoming clearer that – largely thanks to its ties to Omidyar – it is increasingly an organization that has more in common with Bellingcat, a group that launders NATO and U.S. propaganda and disguises it as "independent" and "investigative journalism." ..."
    Dec 17, 2019 | countercurrents.org

    In the 1920s, the influential American intellectual Walter Lippman argued that the average person was incapable of seeing or understanding the world clearly and needed to be guided by experts behind the social curtain. In a number of books he laid out the theoretical foundations for the practical work of Edward Bernays , who developed "public relations" (aka propaganda) to carry out this task for the ruling elites. Bernays had honed his skills while working as a propagandist for the United States during World War I, and after the war he set himself up as a public relations counselor in New York City.

    There is a fascinating exchange at the beginning of Adam Curtis's documentary, The Century of Self , where Bernays, then nearly 100 years old but still very sharp, reveals his manipulative mindset and that of so many of those who have followed in his wake. He says the reason he couldn't call his new business "propaganda" was because the Germans had given propaganda a "bad name," and so he came up with the euphemism "public relations." He then adds that "if you could use it [i.e. propaganda] for war, you certainly could use it for peace." Of course, he never used PR for peace but just to manipulate public opinion (he helped engineer the CIA coup against the democratically elected Arbenz government in Guatemala in 1954 with fake news broadcasts). He says "the Germans gave propaganda a bad name," not Bernays and the United States with their vast campaign of lies, mainly aimed at the American people to get their support for going to a war they opposed (think weapons of mass destruction). He sounds proud of his war propaganda work that resounded to his credit since it led to support for the "war to end all wars" and subsequently to a hit movie about WWI , Yankee Doodle Dandy , made in 1942 to promote another war, since the first one somehow didn't achieve its lofty goal.

    As Bernays has said in his book Propaganda ,

    The American motion picture is the greatest unconscious carrier of propaganda in the world today.

    He was a propagandist to the end. I suspect most viewers of the film are taken in by these softly spoken words of an old man sipping a glass of wine at a dinner table with a woman who is asking him questions. I have shown this film to hundreds of students and none has noticed his legerdemain. It is an example of the sort of hocus-pocus I will be getting to shortly, the sly insertion into seemingly liberal or matter-of-fact commentary of statements that imply a different story. The placement of convincing or confusing disingenuous ingredients into a truth sandwich – for Bernays knew that the bread of truth is essential to conceal untruth.

    In the following years, Bernays, Lippman, and their ilk were joined by social "scientists," psychologists, and sundry others intent on making a sham out of the idea of democracy by developing strategies and techniques for the engineering of social consensus consonant with the wishes of the ruling classes. Their techniques of propaganda developed exponentially with the development of technology, the creation of the CIA, its infiltration of all the major media, and that agency's courting of what the CIA official Cord Meyer called in the 1950s "the compatible left," having already had the right in its pocket. Today most people are, as is said, "wired," and they get their information from the electronic media that is mostly controlled by giant corporations in cahoots with government propagandists. Ask yourself: Has the power of the oligarchic, permanent warfare state with its propaganda and spy networks increased or decreased over your lifetime. The answer is obvious: the average people that Lippman and Bernays trashed are losing and the ruling elites are winning.

    This is not just because powerful propagandists are good at controlling so-called "average" people's thinking, but, perhaps more importantly, because they are also adept – probably more so – at confusing or directing the thinking of those who consider themselves above average, those who still might read a book or two or have the concentration to read multiple articles that offer different perspectives on a topic. This is what some call the professional and intellectual classes, perhaps 15-20 % of the population, most of whom are not the ruling elites but their employees and sometimes their mouthpieces. It is this segment of the population that considers itself "informed," but the information they imbibe is often sprinkled with bits of misdirection, both intentional and not, that beclouds their understanding of important public matters but leaves them with the false impression that they are in the know.

    Recently I have noticed a group of interconnected examples of how this group of the population that exerts influence incommensurate with their numbers has contributed to the blurring of lines between fact and fiction. Within this group there are opinion makers who are often journalists, writers, and cultural producers of some sort or other, and then the larger number of the intellectual or schooled class who follow their opinions. This second group then passes on their received opinions to those who look up to them.

    There is a notorious propaganda outfit called Bellingcat , started by an unemployed Englishman named Eliot Higgins, that has been funded by The Atlantic Council, a think-tank with deep ties to the U.S. government, NATO, war manufacturers, and their allies, and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), another infamous U.S. front organization heavily involved in so-called color revolution regime change operations all around the world, that has just won the International Emmy Award for best documentary. The film with the Orwellian title, Bellingcat: Truth in a Post-Truth World, received its Emmy at a recent ceremony in New York City.

    Bellingcat is an alleged group of amateur on-line researchers who have spent years shilling for the U.S. instigated war against the Syrian government, blaming the Douma chemical attack and others on the Assad government, and for the anti-Russian propaganda connected to, among other things, the Skripal poisoning case in England, and the downing of flight MH17 plane in Ukraine.

    It has been lauded by the corporate mainstream media in the west. Its support for the equally fraudulent White Helmets (also funded by the US and the UK) in Syria has also been praised by the western corporate media while being dissected as propaganda by many excellent independent journalists such as Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley, Catte Black, among others. It's had its work skewered by the likes of Seymour Hersh and MIT professor Theodore Postol, and its US government connections pointed out by many others, including Ben Norton and Max Blumenthal at The Gray Zone. And now we have the mainstream media's wall of silence on the leaks from the Organization for the Prohibition on Chemical Weapons (OPCW) concerning the Douma chemical attack and the doctoring of their report that led to the illegal U.S. bombing of Syria in the spring of 2018. Bellingcat was at the forefront of providing justification for such bombing, and now the journalists Peter Hitchens, Tareq Harrad (who recently resigned from Newsweek after accusing the publication of suppressing his revelations about the OPCW scandal) and others are fighting an uphill battle to get the truth out.

    Yet Bellingcat: Truth in a Post-Truth World won the Emmy , fulfilling Bernays' point about films being the greatest unconscious carriers of propaganda in the world today.

    Who presented the Emmy Award to the film makers, but none other than the rebel journalist Chris Hedges . Why he did so, I don't know. But that he did so clearly sends a message to those who follow his work and trust him that it's okay to give a major cultural award to a propaganda outfit. But then, perhaps he doesn't consider Bellingcat to be that.

    Nor, one presumes, does The Intercept , the billionaire Pierre Omidyar owned publication associated with Glen Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill, and also read by many progressive-minded people. The Intercept that earlier this year disbanded the small team that was tasked with reviewing and releasing more of the massive trove of documents they received from Edward Snowden six years ago, a minute number of which have ever been released or probably ever will be. As Whitney Webb pointed out , last year The Intercept hosted a workshop for Bellingcat. She wrote:

    The Intercept , along with its parent company First Look Media, recently hosted a workshop for pro-war, Google-funded organization Bellingcat in New York. The workshop, which cost $2,500 per person to attend and lasted five days, aimed to instruct participants in how to perform investigations using "open source" tools -- with Bellingcat's past, controversial investigations for use as case studies Thus, while The Intercept has long publicly promoted itself as an anti-interventionist and progressive media outlet, it is becoming clearer that – largely thanks to its ties to Omidyar – it is increasingly an organization that has more in common with Bellingcat, a group that launders NATO and U.S. propaganda and disguises it as "independent" and "investigative journalism."

    Then we have Jefferson Morley , the editor of The Deep State, former Washington Post journalist, and JFK assassination researcher, who has written a praiseworthy review of the Bellingcat film and who supports Bellingcat. "In my experience, Bellingcat is credible," he writes in an Alternet article, "Bellingcat documentary has the pace and plot of a thriller."

    Morley has also just written an article for Counterpunch – "Why the Douma Chemical Attack Wasn't a 'Managed Massacre'" – in which he disputes the claim that the April 7, 2018 attack in the Damascus suburb was a false flag operation carried out by Assad's opponents. "I do not see any evidence proving that Douma was a false flag incident," he writes in this article that is written in a style that leaves one guessing as to what exactly he is saying. It sounds convincing unless one concentrates, and then his double messages emerge. Yet it is the kind of article that certain "sophisticated" left-wing readers might read and feel is insightful. But then Morley, who has written considerably about the CIA, edits a website that advertises itself as "the thinking person's portal to the world of secret government," and recently had an exchange with former CIA Director John Brennan where "Brennan put a friendly finger on my chest," said in February 2017, less than a month after Trump was sworn in as president, that:

    With a docile Republican majority in Congress and a demoralized Democratic Party in opposition, the leaders of the Deep State are the most -- perhaps the only -- credible check in Washington on what Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) calls Trump's " wrecking ball presidency ."

    Is it any wonder that some people might be a bit confused?

    "I know what you're thinking about," said Tweedledum; "but it isn't so, nohow."

    "Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic."

    As a final case in point, there is a recent book by Stephen Kinzer , Poisoner in Chief: Sidney Gottlieb And The CIA Search For Mind Control, t he story of the chemist known as Dr. Death who ran the CIA's MK-ULTRA mind control project, using LSD, torture, electric shock therapy, hypnosis, etc.; developed sadistic methods of torture still used in black sites around the world; and invented various ingenious techniques for assassination, many of which were aimed at Fidel Castro. Gottlieb was responsible for brutal prison and hospital experiments and untold death and suffering inflicted on all sorts of innocent people. His work was depraved in the deepest sense; he worked with Nazis who experimented on Jews despite being Jewish himself.

    Kinzer writes in depth about this man who considered himself a patriot and a spiritual person – a humane torturer and killer. It is an eye-opening book for anyone who does not know about Gottlieb, who gave the CIA the essential tools they use in their "organized crime" activities around the world – in the words of Douglass Valentine, the author of The CIA as Organized Crime and The Phoenix Program . Kinzer's book is good history on Gottlieb; however, he doesn't venture into the present activities of the CIA and Gottlieb's patriotic followers, who no doubt exist and go about their business in secret.

    After recounting in detail the sordid history of Gottlieb's secret work that is nauseating to read about, Kinzer leaves the reader with these strange words:

    Gottlieb was not a sadist, but he might well have been . Above all he was an instrument of history. Understanding him is a deeply disturbing way of understanding ourselves.

    What possibly could this mean? Not a sadist? An instrument of history? Understanding ourselves? These few sentences, dropped out of nowhere, pull the rug out from under what is generally an illuminating history and what seems like a moral indictment. This language is pure mystification.

    Kinzer also concludes that because Gottlieb said so, the CIA failed in their efforts to develop methods of mind control and ended MK-ULTRA's experiments long ago. Why would he believe the word of a man who personified the agency he worked for: a secret liar? He writes,

    When Sydney Gottlieb brough MK-ULTRA to its end in the early 1960s, he told his CIA superiors that he had found no reliable way to wipe away memory, make people abandon their consciences, or commit crimes and then forget them.

    As for those who might think otherwise, Kinzer suggests they have vivid imaginations and are caught up in conspiracy thinking: "This [convincing others that the CIA had developed methods of mind control when they hadn't] is Sydney Gottlieb's most unexpected legacy," he asserts. He says this although Richard Helms, the CIA Director, destroyed all MK-Ultra records. He says that Allen Dulles, Gottlieb, and Helms themselves were caught up in a complete fantasy about mind control because they had seen too many movies and read too many books; mind control was impossible, a failure, a myth, he maintains. It is the stuff of popular culture, entertainment. In an interview with Chris Hedges, interestingly posted by Jefferson Morley at his website, The Deep State , Hedges agrees with Kinzer. Gottlieb, Dulles, et al. were all deluded. Mind control was impossible. You couldn't create a Manchurian Candidate; by implication, someone like Sirhan Sirhan could not have been programmed to be a fake Manchurian Candidate and to have no memory of what he did, as he claims. He could not have been mind-controlled by the CIA to perform his part as the seeming assassin of Senator Robert Kennedy while the real killer shot RFK from behind. People who think like this should get real.

    Furthermore, as is so common in books such as Kinzer's, he repeats the canard that JFK and RFK knew about and pressured the CIA to assassinate Fidel Castro. This is demonstrably false, as shown by the Church Committee and the Assassinations Record Review Board, among many others. That Kinzer takes the word of notorious liars like Richard Helms and the top-level CIA operative Samuel Halpern is simple incredible, something that is hard to consider a mistake. Slipped into a truth sandwich, it is devoured and passed on. But it is false. Bullshit meant to deceive.

    But this is how these games are played. If you look carefully, you will see them widely. Inform, enlighten, while throwing in doubletalk and untruths. The small number of people who read such books and articles will come away knowing some history that has no current relevance and being misinformed on other history that does. They will then be in the know, ready to pass their "wisdom" on to those who care to listen. They will not think they are average.

    But they will be mind controlled, and the killer cat will roam freely without a bell, ready to devour the unsuspecting mice.

    Edward Curtin is a writer whose work has appeared widely. He teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His website is http://edwardcurtin.com/

    [Jan 01, 2020] In one poll 18% of the USA respondents are clearly suicidal

    Jan 01, 2020 | twitter.com

    Reply 1 Retweet 2 Retweeted 2 Like 5 Liked 5 Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo Undo stefania maurizi Retweeted

    David Santoro ‏ 4:29 PM - 28 Dec 2019

    Should (and can) we re-confirm the Reagan-Gorbatchev statement that "A # nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought?" Plus say why

    [Jan 01, 2020] Has any point in time a US president ever said "My daughter has wonderful Christian babies" ??

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    whattheduck , says: December 24, 2019 at 8:49 am GMT

    @Thomasina

    the point, he gave speech in front of AIPAC. His AIPAC speech reinforced my belief that trump is nothing but a wolf in a sheep's clothing. It was at that moment trump showed who is in charge and who owns him.

    Trump doesn't believe in endless war? Why did he give jared to chalk up middle east peace plan? Why are trumps children either married to or engaged to jews? Every one of them! His pride daughter ivanka converted to judaism and he kept saying during in AIPAC speech "My daughter ivanka has three little wonderful jewish babies".

    Has any point in time a US president ever said "My daughter has wonderful Christian babies" ??

    [Jan 01, 2020] A uniformed militia fighter on the scene in Baghdad told Kurdish news service Rudaw that attacks were also planned against the U.S. consulates in Erbil and Basra, with the goal of destroying the consulates and killing everyone inside.

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.rudaw.net

    fersur 26 minutes ago remove Share link Copy Article is at best close, Clapper was in the triad as a go-a-long, Not as smart but just as Treasonus, their ( all Three ) play was the same play as my post below, just maybe differenty colluded !

    BOOM !

    Militia Leader Who Led Raid on U.S. Embassy was at White House 2011.

    Unedited !

    LUCAS NOLAN 31 Dec 2019

    Iranian militia leader Hadi al-Amiri, one of several identified as leading an attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday, reportedly visited the White House in 2011 during the presidency of Barack Obama.

    On Tuesday, a mob in Baghdad attacked the U.S. embassy in retaliation against last weekend's U.S. airstrikes against the Iran-backed Shiite militia Kataib Hezbollah (KH), responsible for killing an American civilian contractor. KH is one of a number of pro-Iran militias that make up the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF/PMU), which legally became a wing of the Iraqi military after fighting the Sunni Islamic State terrorist group.

    President Donald Trump has since accused Iran of having "orchestrated" the embassy attack and stated that the government would be "held fully responsible."

    Breitbart News reporter John Hayward described the attack on the embassy, writing:

    The mob grew into thousands of people, led by openly identified KH supporters, some of them wearing uniforms and waving militia flags. The attack began after a funeral service for the 25 KH fighters killed by the U.S. airstrikes. Demonstrators marched through the streets of Baghdad carrying photos of the slain KH members and Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who condemned the American airstrikes.

    KH vowed to seek revenge for the airstrikes on Monday. Both KH and the Iranian military unit that supports it, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), have been designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S. government. The government of Saudi Arabia also described KH as one of several "terrorist militias supported by the Iranian establishment" in remarks on Tuesday condemning the assault on the U.S. embassy.

    The attackers were able to smash open a gate and push into the embassy compound, lighting fires, smashing cameras, and painting messages such as "Closed in the name of resistance" on the walls. Gunshots were reportedly heard near the embassy, while tear gas and stun grenades were deployed by its defenders.

    A uniformed militia fighter on the scene in Baghdad told Kurdish news service Rudaw that attacks were also planned against the U.S. consulates in Erbil and Basra, with the goal of destroying the consulates and killing everyone inside.

    The Washington Post reported Tuesday that among those agitating protesters in Baghdad on Tuesday was Hadi al-Amiri, a former transportation minister with close ties to Iran who leads the Badr Corps, another PMF militia.

    In 2011, both Fox News and the Washington Times noted that then-Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki brought his transportation minister, al-Amiri, to a meeting at the White House. The Times noted that the White House did not confirm his attendance, but the official was on Iraq's listed members of its delegation.

    The al-Amiri accompanying al-Maliki, besides also being transportation minister, was identified at the time as a commander of the Badr organization, further indicating it was the same person. At the time, the outlets expressed concern that al-Amiri had ties to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which the FBI has stated played a role in a 1996 terrorist attack that killed 19 U.S. servicemen. President Donald Trump designated the IRGC a foreign terrorist organization, the first time an official arm of a foreign state received the designation.

    Fox News' Ed Henry questioned White House Press Secretary Jay Carney following the visit about the attendance of al-Amiri at the White House. Carney refused to answer and stating that he would need to investigate the issue. The full transcript from RealClearPolitics reads:

    Ed Henry, FOX News: When Prime Minister Maliki was here this week there have been reports that a former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which U.S. officials say played a role in a 1996 terrorist attack that killed 19 U.S. servicemen.

    He was here at the White House with Prime Minister Maliki because he's a transportation minister, yeah, transportation minister --

    Jay Carney, WH: Who's [sic] report is that?

    Henry: I believe the Washington Times has reported it. I think others have as well, but I think this is a Washington Times --

    Carney: I have to take that question then, I'm not aware of it.

    Henry: Can you just answer it later though, whether he was here and whether a background check had been done?

    Carney: I'll check on it for you.

    Henry: Okay, thanks.

    In 2016, Obama secured a deal with Iran which included a payment of $1.7 billion in cash. Breitbart News reporter John Hayward reported in September of 2016:

    On Tuesday, the Obama administration finally admitted something its critics had long suspected: The entire $1.7 billion tribute paid to Iran was tendered in cash -- not just the initial $400 million infamously shipped to the Iranians in a cargo plane -- at the same moment four American hostages were released.

    "Treasury Department spokeswoman Dawn Selak said in a statement the cash payments were necessary because of the 'effectiveness of U.S. and international sanctions,' which isolated Iran from the international finance system," said ABC News, relating what might be one of history's strangest humblebrags. The sanctions Obama threw away were working so well that he had to satisfy Iran's demands with cold, hard cash!

    By the way, those sanctions were not entirely related to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. As former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy pointed out at National Review last month, they date back to Iran's seizure of hostages at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, its support for "Hezbollah's killing sprees," and, most pertinently, Bill Clinton's 1995 invocation of "federal laws that deal with national emergencies caused by foreign aggression," by which he meant Iran's support for international terrorism.

    Former white house staffer during the Obama administration, Ben Rhodes, blamed President Trump's policies for the Tuesday attack on the U.S. embassy.

    Many have hit back at Rhodes for the accusations, including former CIA ops officer Bryan Dean Wright.

    No further information has been given about al-Amiri's presence at the U.S. embassy raid on Tuesday. Read more about the attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad at Breitbart News here .

    Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship.

    [Jan 01, 2020] DiGenova: Comey And Brennan Were 'Coup Leaders'

    Brennan probably will take the bullet for Obama...
    Jan 01, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4777 DiGenova: Comey And Brennan Were 'Coup Leaders' by Tyler Durden Wed, 01/01/2020 - 19:30 0 SHARES

    Former US Attorney Joe diGenova told OANN 's John Hines that former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan were "coup leaders" in an attempt to reverse the outcome of the 2016 US election.

    DiGenova says the Obama Justice Department was corrupted under Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, "with the authority and knowledge of then-president" Obama, and that a 'stupid and arrogant' Susan Rice was dumb enough to document his knowledge in a January 20th, 2017 email.

    "And you'll never forget, I'm sure, that famous Susan Rice email on inauguration day of Donald Trump, where she sends an email to the file memorializing that there had been a meeting on January 5th with the president of the United States, all senior law enforcement and intelligence officials, where they reviewed the status of Crossfire Hurricane and the president announced - President Obama - that he was sure that everything had been done by the book.

    I want to thank Susan Rice for being so stupid and so arrogant to write that email on January 20th because that's exhibit A for Barack Obama - who knew all about this from start to finish, and was more than happy to have the civil rights of a massive number of Americans violated so he could get Donald Trump." -Joe diGenova

    Moreover, diGenova says that after "all this stuff involving Trump and Page and Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn," anyone who couldn't see that the "corrupt investigative process of the FBI and DOJ was basically being used to conduct a coup d'état" is an idiot.

    "This was not hard. If you're a good prosecutor you look at the facts in the Trump case, and the Page case, the Flynn case. There's only one conclusion you can come to; none of this makes any sense. None of these people were evil. None of them. They were framed , and the whole process was playing out, and you knew it on July 5th 2016, when James Comey announced - usurping the functions of the Attorney General, that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against Hillary Clinton. That was ludicrous! She destroyed 30,000 emails that were under subpoena. If you or I did that, we would be in prison today . She got a break because she was Hillary Clinton, and James Comey was trying to kiss her fanny because he wanted something from her when she became president of the United States.

    All of these people who watched that news conference and didn't think that it was a disgrace for the FBI. And then subsequently, watched all this stuff involving Trump and Page and Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn - and couldn't see that the corrupt investigative process of the FBI and the DOJ was basically being used to conduct a coup d'état . I mean you have to be an idiot. Any first year assistant US attorney would look at all these facts and say 'there's a coup underway. There's a conspiracy.'

    But for those of us thought that, the Washington Post, the New York Times. We were 'conspiracy theorists.' You know what? Pretty damn good theory, it appears today.

    " To what extent is the CIA involved in this? " asked Hines.

    " Well there's no doubt that John Brennan was the primogenitor of the entire counterintelligence investigation, " replied diGenova. "It was John Brennan who went to James Comey and basically pummeled him into starting a counterintelligence investigation against Trump. Brennan's at the heart of this. He went around the world. He enlisted the help of foreign intelligence services. He's responsible for Joseph Mifsud and other people."

    " People do not have even the beginning of an understanding of the role that John Brennan played in this . He is a monstrously important person, and I underscore monstrously important person. He has done more damage to the Central Intelligence Agency - it's equal to what James Comey has done to the FBI. It's pretty clear that James Comey will go down in history as the single worst FBI director in history, regardless of how Mr. Durham treats him."

    gold_silver_as_money , 23 minutes ago link

    Brennan was just the puppet. The real question is who the power brokers were behind the scenes pulling strings and giving all the government officials cover. That's probably what Durham is/needs to get to the bottom of. Hillary is untouchable until those guys get the book thrown at them. My guess is the Queen is involved, probably the Vatican and Mossad as well.

    Leguran , 24 minutes ago link

    Full agreement with Joe DiGenova. In addition, I believe President Obama was an instigator of this coup d'état. It could only happen in the intelligence field with his consent. His whole persona is based on his willingness to calculate political gain and he had no qualms or ethics. He was hailed as the first "black" President. His role in this coup was made possible by all the people who thought black people were inferior and needed an opportunity to get ahead. Depending upon how you look at that, that picture is in tatters. Black folks are incredibly fortunate to have President Trump who will not blame black folks for the travesties and destruction wrought by another black man. Would a died in the wool radical like Hillary Clinton think that way?

    Schroedingers Cat , 48 minutes ago link

    The good men of the agencies should punish Comey and Brennan. They have "six ways 'til Tuesday to get even." Why not teach them a lesson from the inside? Many MANY people in the agency have been insulted by this and they deserve justice against Comey and Brennan.

    Dumpster Elite , 51 minutes ago link

    Gotta give it to the OAN network. They're not dumb. If this actually DID pan out (indictments and such, as a result of this investigative stuff, with no help whatsoever from Barr, etc.), then OAN will be the lead network covering this.

    Needless to say, it speaks VOLUMES upon VOLUMES, that Fox News isn't covering this (other than Hannity).

    Md4 , 52 minutes ago link

    "And you'll never forget, I'm sure, that famous Susan Rice email on inauguration day of Donald Trump, where she sends an email to the file memorializing that there had been a meeting on January 5th with the president of the United States, all senior law enforcement and intelligence officials, where they reviewed the status of Crossfire Hurricane and the president announced - President Obama - that he was sure that everything had been done by the book."

    Now... let's, for a moment, imagine this scene.

    We've already had a Watergate in our history, involving the spying of one party on another during a presidential campaign season.

    These people know how that turned out.

    Most of them are lawyers, and at least one is a supposed Constitutional scholar and professor of Constitutional law.

    That's Blo.

    Does Rice really expect us to believe they didn't know Crossfire Hurricane was based on Clinton Campaign-paid for ********?

    Wouldn't a law professor president wanna know the basis, and the veracity of the details, of such a risky operation before authorizing it?

    Or are we to believe he merely accepted the assembled "assurances" in this meeting?

    Were there presidential meetings about spying on Trump that occurred well before this one?

    [Jan 01, 2020] "I'm HARDCORE Zionist and so is president Trump!" Roger Stone

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    geokat62 , says: December 20, 2019 at 1:24 pm GMT

    @Thomasina

    If he gets elected again, which I think he will, we might see a different Trump. Who knows.

    "I'm HARDCORE Zionist and so is president Trump!" – Roger Stone

    What more do we need to know?

    [Jan 01, 2020] The day after Trump in inaugurated for his second term -- will Iran be in his crosshairs? We need to think very seriously about that!

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Art , says: December 19, 2019 at 10:03 pm GMT

    Trump is now essentially funded by three Jews -- Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon Adelson, together accounting for over $250 million in pro-Trump political money. In return, they want war with Iran.

    Hmm -- The day after Trump in inaugurated for his second term -- will Iran be in his crosshairs? We need to think very seriously about that!

    [Jan 01, 2020] Trump and the Republican Party puppets are nothing more than nasty politician whores for billionaires such as Seth Klarman, Paul Singer, Shelly Adelson, Les Wexner and Bernie Marcu

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    Charles Pewitt , says: December 19, 2019 at 9:04 pm GMT

    Trump and the Republican Party puppets are nothing more than nasty politician whores for billionaire Jews such as Seth Klarman and Paul Singer and Shelly Adelson and Les Wexner and Bernie Marcus and many other money-grubber Jew donors.

    The Republican Party Jew donors want to continue to flood the USA with mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration and the Jew donors want to continue to use the US military as muscle to fight unnecessary wars and endless wars on behalf of Israel.

    The Republican Party Jew donors also want to have all their shady money-grubber scams protected by the Republican Party politician whores.

    I wrote this in October of 2017 about Seth Klarman and Puerto Rican government debt:

    Puerto Rico must be allowed to go belly up. The bond owners who own Puerto Rican debt must go tits up. The US government must not bail out the investors who purchased Puerto Rican government debt, or any debt whatsoever connected to Puerto Rico. Seth Klarman has been revealed as a person who has bought Puerto Rican bonds in hopes of cashing out big.

    SETH KLARMAN must be given a salt shaker to sprinkle salt on his worthless Puerto Rican bonds before he eats them. Klarman must lose 100 cents on the dollar for his greedy purchase of Puerto Rican debt. Klarman has loads of loot, and the Puerto Rican government debt was purchased for one of his funds. I am sure his investors won't mind getting soaked by Seth for a bit of money -- it is not even a whole billion dollars, only close to it.

    David Dayen says:

    Klarman, who has been described as the Oracle of Boston, has a history of buying unpopular or distressed assets on the cheap in hopes of a payday. Baupost manages over $30 billion in assets. He is known as the top campaign contributor in New England and has been a major donor in Republican politics in Massachusetts, including largely secret support for 2016's Question 2, an ultimately unsuccessful effort to lift a state cap on charter schools.

    Klarman supported Hillary Clinton in 2016, calling Donald Trump "completely unqualified for the highest office in the land."

    Klarman's involvement in Puerto Rican debt will surely come as a surprise to activists in Massachusetts and Puerto Rico, who have never mentioned him among the "vultures" who are causing undue pain for the island's U.S. citizens.

    https://theintercept.com/2017/10/03/we-can-finally-identify-one-of-the-largest-holders-of-puerto-rican-debt/

    NO BAILOUT FOR PUERTO RICO BOND INVESTORS

    [Jan 01, 2020] Quran Chapter 30 The usury you practice, seeking thereby to multiply people's wealth, will not multiply with God

    Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    World Citizen says: December 19, 2019 at 4:37 pm GMT 400 Words

    "Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!"

    


Islam stands in their way of usury-ripping of mankind of their resources and defrauding mankind via bank thefts.

    Bring on the Shariah Law. I would much rather live under Shariah, God's Constitution than under Euoropean/Western diabolic, satanic, fraudulent monies, homosexual, thievery, false flag hoaxes, WMD's, bogus wars, Unprovoked oppression, tel-LIE-vision, Santa Claus lies, Disney hocus pocus , hollywood, illuminati, free mason, monarchy, oligarchy, millitary industrial complex, life time congressman/senators, upto the eye balls taxation, IRS thievery, Fraudulent federal reserve, Rothchild/Rockerfeller/Queens and Kings city of London satanic cabal, opec petro$$$ thievery, ISISraHELL's, al-CIA-da hoaxes, Communist, Atheist, Idol worshippers, Fear Monger's, Drugged and Drunken's oxy crystal coccaine meth psychopath, child pedeophilia, gambler's, Pathological and diabolical liars, Hypocrites, sodomites ..I can't think of any right now, because my mind is exploding with rage because of these troubling central banker's satanic hegemony!

    Quran Chapter 30

    39. The usury you practice, seeking thereby to multiply people's wealth, will not multiply with God. But what you give in charity, desiring God's approval -- these are the multipliers.
    40. God is He who created you, then provides for you, then makes you die, then brings you back to life. Can any of your idols do any of that? Glorified is He, and Exalted above what they associate.
    41. Corruption has appeared on land and sea, because of what people's hands have earned, in order to make them taste some of what they have done, so that they might return.

    Agree: Agent76

    [Jan 01, 2020] In one poll 18% of the USA respondents are clearly suicidal

    Jan 01, 2020 | twitter.com

    Reply 1 Retweet 2 Retweeted 2 Like 5 Liked 5 Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo Undo stefania maurizi Retweeted

    David Santoro ‏ 4:29 PM - 28 Dec 2019

    Should (and can) we re-confirm the Reagan-Gorbatchev statement that "A # nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought?" Plus say why

    [Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Imagine millions of government employees paid for by America's tax payer class, involved in covert operations undermining nation states for the benefit of war mongering shadow overlords counting on more never ending chaos feeding their hunger for power. ..."
    "... This isn't Orwell's 1984, this Team America on opioids. ..."
    "... Senior OPCW official had orders from US/ the Donald. Remember that the Donald bombed Syria based on this fake report , after a false flag done by Al Qaeda's artistic branch, the White Helmets. ..."
    "... Pray, do tell where are the consequences for these literal demons that engaged in war crimes? It is quite clear: as long as you are a member of the establishment, you can do whatever the f*ck you want. ..."
    "... Third rate script, third rate actors and crooked investigators. TPTB seem to have a plan worked out. Their problem now is that we, the hoi-polloi, have seen it all before, many times, and we can now recognise ******** when it's used to try to influence us. ..."
    "... If this is not lamentable enough, the OPCW – whose final report came to more than a hundred pages and which even issued an easy-to-read precis version for journalists – now slams shut its steel doors in the hope of preventing even more information reaching the press. ..."
    "... Instead of these pieces concentrating on the whistleblower how about putting a little heat on the 50 lying bastards who initiated the coverup? ..."
    "... The destruction of the countries of the Middle East for the sake of a dwarf with giant ambitions is the most stupid thing the United States has done over the past 30 years in its foreign policy. And yes, all the wars in the Middle East were grounded in lies. And the Americans paid for it all from start to finish. When Americans realize that they need to defend their national interests, and not other people's national interests, maybe something in the Middle East will change for the better. True, I am afraid that with the hight level of stupidity and shortsightedness that is common among Americans, the United States is more likely to be destroyed faster. No offense. ..."
    "... And I propose to remember the Syrian Christians who were destroyed by the Saudi Wahhabis, hired by the CIA with the money of American taxpayers and at the request of Israel. Until the Americans begin to investigate the activities of the CIA (and this activity causes the United States only harm), the responsibility for this genocide (you heard right) will be on the American nation. It turns out that in the Middle East you are primarily destroying Christians. How interesting, why such zeal. ..."
    "... According to whistleblower testimony and leaked documents, OPCW officials raised alarm about the suppression of critical findings that undermine the allegation that the Syrian government committed a chemical weapons attack in the city of Douma in April 2018. Haddad's editors at Newsweek rejected his attempts to cover the story. "If I don't find another position in journalism because of this, I'm perfectly happy to accept that consequence," Haddad says. "It's not desirable. But there is no way I could have continued in that job knowing that I couldn't report something like this." ..."
    "... New leaks continue to expose a cover-up by the OPCW – the world's top chemical weapons watchdog – over a critical event in Syria. Documents, emails, and testimony from OPCW officials have raised major doubts about the allegation that the Syrian government committed a chemical weapons attack in the city of Douma in April 2018. The leaked OPCW information has been released in pieces by Wikileaks. The latest documents contain a number of significant revelations – including that that about 20 OPCW officials voiced concerns that their scientific findings and on-the-ground evidence was suppressed and excluded. ..."
    Dec 28, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

    Senior OPCW Official Busted: Leaked Email Exposes Orders To "Delete All Traces" Of Dissent On Douma by Tyler Durden Sat, 12/28/2019 - 10:30 0 SHARES

    Via AlMasdarNews.com,

    Wikileaks has released their fourth set of leaks from the OPCW's Douma investigation, revealing new details about the alleged deletion of important information regarding the fact-finding mission.

    RELEASE: OPCW-Douma Docs 4. Four leaked documents from the OPCW reveal that toxicologists ruled out deaths from chlorine exposure and a senior official ordered the deletion of the dissenting engineering report from OPCW's internal repository of documents. https://t.co/ndK4sRikNk

    -- WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) December 27, 2019

    "One of the documents is an e-mail exchange dated 27 and 28 February between members of the fact finding mission (FFM) deployed to Douma and the senior officials of the OPCW. It includes an e-mail from Sebastien Braha, Chief of Cabinet at the OPCW , where he instructs that an engineering report from Ian Henderson should be removed from the secure registry of the organisation," WikiLeaks writes. Included in the email is the following directive:

    " Please get this document out of DRA [Documents Registry Archive] And please remove all traces, if any, of its delivery/storage/whatever in DRA.'"

    According to Wikileaks, the main finding of Henderson, who inspected the sites in Douma, was that two of the cylinders were most likely manually placed at the site, rather than dropped.

    "The main finding of Henderson, who inspected the sites in Douma and two cylinders that were found on the site of the alleged attack, was that they were more likely manually placed there than dropped from a plane or helicopter from considerable heights. His findings were omitted from the official final OPCW report on the Douma incident," the Wikileaks report said.

    It must be remembered that the U.S. launched an attack on Damascus, Syria on April 14, 2018 over alleged chemical weapons usage by pro-Assad forces at Douma.

    AP file image.

    Another document released Friday is minutes from a meeting on 6 June 2018 where four staff members of the OPCW had discussions with "three Toxicologists/Clinical pharmacologists, one bioanalytical and toxicological chemist" (all specialists in chemical weapons, according to the minutes).

    Minutes from an OPCW meeting with toxicologists specialized in chemical weapons: "the experts were conclusive in their statements that there was
    no correlation between symptoms and chlorine exposure". https://t.co/j5Jgjiz8UY pic.twitter.com/vgPaTtsdQN

    -- WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) December 27, 2019

    The purpose of this meeting was two-fold. The first objective was "to solicit expert advice on the value of exhuming suspected victims of the alleged chemical attack in Douma on 7 April 2018". According to the minutes, the OPCW team was advised by the experts that there would be little use in conducting exhumations. The second point was "To elicit expert opinions from the forensic toxicologists regarding the observed and reported symptoms of the alleged victims."

    More specifically, " whether the symptoms observed in victims were consistent with exposure to chlorine or other reactive chlorine gas."

    According to the minutes leaked Friday: "With respect to the consistency of the observed and reported symptoms of the alleged victims with possible exposure to chlorine gas or similar, the experts were conclusive in their statements that there was no correlation between symptoms and chlorine exposure ."

    The OPCW team members wrote that the key "take-away message" from the meeting was "that the symptoms observed were inconsistent with exposure to chlorine and no other obvious candidate chemical causing the symptoms could be identified".

    * * *

    See full details at Wikileaks.org

    JohnFrodo , 28 minutes ago link

    pity the human pawns at the center of this mess.

    africoman , 38 minutes ago link

    There has been a Newsweek reporter who quite over editorial block of this OPCW case here also another interview by Grayzone

    https://youtu.be/qqK8KgxuCPI

    The isisrahell have such long hand to pull the plug any stories implicating their crime in progress otherwise they can put out some bs spins as bombshell reporting about US lies in Afghanistan war on their wapo for public for those who read it was nothing important revealed except being a misdirected na

    ponyboy99 , 40 minutes ago link

    If you want to pay off that student loan you're going to print what they tell you to print. You're going to inject kids with what they tell you to inject them with. You're going to think what they tell you to think or you're going to spend your days in a Prole bar drinking Blatz.

    ponyboy99 , 47 minutes ago link

    If you go thru life assuming every single thing is a farce and a lie (Roddy Piper) these events can not only be explained, they can be predicted.

    Ace006 , 57 minutes ago link

    SOMEbody's got to ensure the intergrity of the Documents Registry Archive

    Weihan , 58 minutes ago link

    The globalist deep-state's reach is legendary.

    Nothing , 1 hour ago link

    yes, an attack was launched, 50 missiles I believe, after loud warnings that it was coming, and none of them actually hit anything significant ... this is the way the game is played .... the good news is that the missiles cost $50 million, and now they will have to be replaced, by the Pentagon, first borrowing the money through the US Treasury offerings, and then paying for them from new money printed by the Federal Reserve. capische?

    Greed is King , 36 minutes ago link

    That`s the way it`s always been, it`s the eternal war of good against evil.

    And when one evil enemy is defeated, it`s necessary to create a new evil enemy, how else can the Establishment Elite make money from war, death and destruction.

    africoman , 16 minutes ago link

    It's really very awkward & telling how ***** these bunch of western nations are looking tough on taking out poor defenceless country like Syria on ******** & at the satried to ease real kickass Russian as you described when they launch the attacks

    I kind wish the US & their Zionist clown launch such huge attacks on Iran based on false flag

    I really wanted these evil aggressive powers to taste what it is like to get bombed back even one they used to throw on multiple weaker nations freely with nothing to fear as retribution etc

    Thordoom , 1 hour ago link

    This organisations are all set up in Europe and US run by the filthiest filth on earth who still think they have God given right to imperial rule over the world.

    British elite is the worst of all.

    DCFusor , 1 hour ago link

    Your military-industrial-intelligence complex at work, creating justification for more funding, like always - and who cares if people die as a result? Like Soros said, if they didn't do it, someone else would. (do I need /sarc?).

    They don't like to be shown to be in charge, just to be in charge. And if you think this is a function of the current admin, you've been slow in the head and deaf and blind for quite some time.

    I've watched since Eisenhower, and "it's always something". Doesn't matter what color the clown in chief's tie is.

    St. TwinkleToes , 1 hour ago link

    Imagine millions of government employees paid for by America's tax payer class, involved in covert operations undermining nation states for the benefit of war mongering shadow overlords counting on more never ending chaos feeding their hunger for power.

    This isn't Orwell's 1984, this Team America on opioids.

    veritas semper vinces , 2 hours ago link

    Senior OPCW official had orders from US/ the Donald. Remember that the Donald bombed Syria based on this fake report , after a false flag done by Al Qaeda's artistic branch, the White Helmets.

    holgerdanske , 1 hour ago link

    It was May that insisted on this attack. Remember the "poison" attack and the evil Russians?

    lwilland1012 , 3 hours ago link

    Pray, do tell where are the consequences for these literal demons that engaged in war crimes? It is quite clear: as long as you are a member of the establishment, you can do whatever the f*ck you want. Why do we even follow the law, then? Given the precedent that is being set, we might as well not have any.

    ken , 1 hour ago link

    Well, they are looking forward to using all those Israeli weapons, er, uh, products, that local law enforcement has purchased...so watch out for Co-Intel Pro elicitation going forward....?

    WorkingClassMan , 3 hours ago link

    Everybody knows the Golem (USA) does Isn'treal's bidding in Syria and elsewhere in the Near East. Hopefully they keep hammering in the fact that this "gas attack" was an obvious set-up to use as a pretext (flimsy itself on the face of it) to brutalize Assad and Syria on behalf of Isn'treal.

    The whole thing is built on ******* lies. Worst part about it is, nothing will happen.

    turkey george palmer , 3 hours ago link

    Only official news is to believed. You see it and it is a lie. they tell you to believe it. A lot of people casually believe whatever is spoken on TV. They become teachers and are taught in college what is right and wrong. We only have a few years before all the brain dead are in charge and robotically following the message like zombies with no brain

    adonisdemilo , 3 hours ago link

    Third rate script, third rate actors and crooked investigators. TPTB seem to have a plan worked out. Their problem now is that we, the hoi-polloi, have seen it all before, many times, and we can now recognise ******** when it's used to try to influence us.

    johnnycanuck , 3 hours ago link

    It is difficult to underestimate the seriousness of this manipulative act by the OPCW. In a response to the conservative author Peter Hitchens, who also writes for the Mail on Sunday – he is of course the brother of the late Christopher Hitchens – the OPCW admits that its so-called technical secretariat "is conducting an internal investigation about the unauthorised [sic] release of the document".

    Then it adds: "At this time, there is no further public information on this matter and the OPCW is unable to accommodate [sic] requests for interviews". It's a tactic that until now seems to have worked: not a single news media which reported the OPCW's official conclusions has followed up the story of the report which the OPCW suppressed.

    And you bet the OPCW is not going to "accommodate" interviews. For here is an institution investigating a war crime in a conflict which has cost hundreds of thousands of lives – yet its only response to an enquiry about the engineers' "secret" assessment is to concentrate on its own witch-hunt for the source of the document it wished to keep secret from the world.

    If this is not lamentable enough, the OPCW – whose final report came to more than a hundred pages and which even issued an easy-to-read precis version for journalists – now slams shut its steel doors in the hope of preventing even more information reaching the press.

    https://johnmenadue.com/robert-fisk-the-evidence-we-were-never-meant-to-see-about-the-douma-gas-attack-counterpunch-27-may-2019/

    5fingerdiscount , 3 hours ago link

    Instead of these pieces concentrating on the whistleblower how about putting a little heat on the 50 lying bastards who initiated the coverup?

    Helg Saracen , 3 hours ago link

    The destruction of the countries of the Middle East for the sake of a dwarf with giant ambitions is the most stupid thing the United States has done over the past 30 years in its foreign policy. And yes, all the wars in the Middle East were grounded in lies. And the Americans paid for it all from start to finish. When Americans realize that they need to defend their national interests, and not other people's national interests, maybe something in the Middle East will change for the better. True, I am afraid that with the hight level of stupidity and shortsightedness that is common among Americans, the United States is more likely to be destroyed faster. No offense.

    And I propose to remember the Syrian Christians who were destroyed by the Saudi Wahhabis, hired by the CIA with the money of American taxpayers and at the request of Israel. Until the Americans begin to investigate the activities of the CIA (and this activity causes the United States only harm), the responsibility for this genocide (you heard right) will be on the American nation. It turns out that in the Middle East you are primarily destroying Christians. How interesting, why such zeal.

    carbonmutant , 4 hours ago link

    You gotta wonder how much the deep state has deleted about their interference in Trump's administration...

    dogbert8 , 4 hours ago link

    Pretty much everyone with a brain realizes this all was a lie; only the M5M and the DC swamp continue to pretend it wasn't.

    Joiningupthedots , 4 hours ago link

    Who really made the order though?

    ClickNLook , 3 hours ago link

    Sebastien Braha, Chief of Cabinet at the OPCW needs to be interrogated to find out.

    Condor_0000 , 4 hours ago link

    Newsweek Reporter Quits After Editors Block Coverage of OPCW Syria Scandal

    December 19, 2019

    Aaron Mate

    https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/19/newsweek-reporter-quits-after-editors-block-coverage-of-opcw-syria-scandal/

    According to whistleblower testimony and leaked documents, OPCW officials raised alarm about the suppression of critical findings that undermine the allegation that the Syrian government committed a chemical weapons attack in the city of Douma in April 2018. Haddad's editors at Newsweek rejected his attempts to cover the story. "If I don't find another position in journalism because of this, I'm perfectly happy to accept that consequence," Haddad says. "It's not desirable. But there is no way I could have continued in that job knowing that I couldn't report something like this."

    New leaks continue to expose a cover-up by the OPCW – the world's top chemical weapons watchdog – over a critical event in Syria. Documents, emails, and testimony from OPCW officials have raised major doubts about the allegation that the Syrian government committed a chemical weapons attack in the city of Douma in April 2018. The leaked OPCW information has been released in pieces by Wikileaks. The latest documents contain a number of significant revelations – including that that about 20 OPCW officials voiced concerns that their scientific findings and on-the-ground evidence was suppressed and excluded.

    This is, without a doubt, a major global scandal: the OPCW, under reported US pressure, suppressing vital evidence about allegations of chemical weapons. But that very fact exposes another global scandal: with the exception of small outlets like The Grayzone, the mass media has widely ignored or whitewashed this story. And this widespread censorship of the OPCW scandal has just led one journalist to resign. Up until recently, Tareq Haddad was a reporter at Newsweek. But in early December, Tareq announced that he had quit his position after Newsweek refused to publish his story about the OPCW cover up over Syria.

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

    Highly recommended!
    Dec 21, 2019 | peakoilbarrel.com

    Watcher x Ignored says: 12/13/2019 at 6:27 am

    The new US defense bill, agreed on by both parties, includes sanctions on executives of companies involved in the completion of Nordstream 2. This is companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

    This could include arrest of the executives of those companies, who might travel to the United States. One of the companies is Royal Dutch Shell, who have 80,000 employees in the United States.

    Hightrekker x Ignored says: 12/13/2019 at 12:28 pm
    So much for the "Free Market".
    Hickory x Ignored says: 12/12/2019 at 11:28 pm
    Some people believe 'the market' for crude oil is a fair and effective arbiter of the industry supply and demand. But if we step back an inch or two, we all can see it has been a severely broken mechanism during this up phase in oil. For example, there has been long lags between market signals of shortage or surplus.

    Disruptive policies and mechanisms such as tariffs, embargo's, and sanctions, trade bloc quotas, military coups and popular revolutions, socialist agendas, industry lobbying, multinational corporate McCarthyism, and massively obese debt financing, are all examples of forces that have trumped an efficient and transparent oil market.

    And yet, the problems with the oil market during this time of upslope will look placid in retrospect, as we enter the time beyond peak.
    I see no reason why it won't turn into a mad chaotic scramble.
    We had a small hint of what this can look like in the last mid-century. The USA responded to military expansionism of Japan by enacting an oil embargo against them. The response was Pearl Harbor. This is just one example of many.
    How long before Iran lashes out in response to their restricted access to the market?
    People generally don't respond very calmly to involuntary restriction on food, or energy, or access to the markets for these things.

    [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Every US military action and ultimatum to a foreign state has been aggressively pushed by the losing Democrats and particularly 'liberal' mainstream media, any dissent met with smears, censorship or worse. I would argue that today similarities with events leading up to previous global conflicts are too striking and numerous to ignore. ..."
    "... Israel and its US relationship – I think Syria is where global conflict is still likely to start. As Syria has been winning, the involvement of Turkey and Saudi Arabia appears to receding. More recently Israel have taken their place and is relentless and unyielding and has its own wider, destructive plans for the Middle East. Israeli influence in the US is now so great that the US has more or less ceded its foreign policy in the Middle East to Israel. In 1914 Austro-Hungary pursued a series of impossible demands against Serbia managing to drag its close and more powerful ally Germany (led by someone equally as obstinate and militaristic as the US leadership) into World War I. Incidentally, some readers may have noticed the similarity between the 1914 diktats and modern-day US bullying towards Venezuala and other states – and perhaps most striking, by Saudi Arabia in its dispute with Qatar not long ago ..."
    "... Ideology, paranoia and unstable leaders – history tells us that ideology, paranoia and power are not a good mix and this is in abundance in western elites and media. These establishments are rabidly hostile to Iran and Russia. ..."
    "... Media deception and propaganda – The media have been responsible for getting us to where we are today. Without them, the public would have woken up long ago. Much of the deception has been about the presentation of the narrative and the leaders. And it's been a campaign of distraction on our news where the daily genocide in Yemen gives way to sensationalised non-events and celebrity trivia. ..."
    "... Appeasement – because of its relative weakness and not wanting a war, Russia has to some extent appeased Western and Israeli aggression in Syria and beyond. To be fair, given the aggression it faces I don't think Russia has had much choice than playing for time. However at some point soon, with the West pushing more and more, something will have to give. Likewise, in the 1930s a militarily unprepared UK and France appeased Germany's expansion. The more they backed off the more Germany pushed until war was the only way. ..."
    "... False flags – for those watching events in Syria know that the majority of the 'chemical attacks' have been carried out by Western supported opposition. The timing and nature of these suggest co-ordination at the highest levels. Intelligence Services of the UK and other agencies are believed to co-ordinate these fabrications to provoke a western response aimed at the Syrian Army. On more than one occasion these incidents have nearly escalated to a direct conflict with Russia showing the dangerous game being played by those involved and those pushing the false narrative in the media ..."
    Apr 23, 2019 | off-guardian.org

    As a history student years ago I remember our teacher explaining how past events are linked to what happens in the future. He told us human behaviour always dictates that events will repeat in a similar way as before. I remember we studied 20th century history and discussed World War I and the links to World War II. At this time, we were in the middle of the Cold War and in unchartered waters and I couldn't really link past events to what was likely to happen next. Back then I guess like many I considered US presidents more as statesman. They talked tough on the Soviet Union but they talked peace too. So, the threat to humanity was very different then to now. Dangerous but perhaps a stable kind of dangerous. After the break up of the Soviet Union we then went through a phase of disorderly change in the world. In the early 1990s the war in the Former Yugoslavia erupted and spread from republic to republic. Up until the mid-to-late nineties I didn't necessarily sense that NATO and the West were the new threat to humanity. While there was a clear bias to events in Yugoslavia there was still some even-handedness or fairness. Or so I thought. This all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges and so on. But my wake-up call was the daily NATO briefings on the war. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative.

    When the peace agreement was reached, out of 300 Serbian tanks which had entered Kosovo at the start of the conflict, over 285 were counted going back into Serbia proper which was confirmation he had been lying .

    From this conflict onwards I started to see clear parallels with events of the past and some striking similarities with the lead up to previous world wars. This all hit home when observing events in Syria and more recently Venezuala. But looking around seeing people absorbed in their phones you wouldn't think the world is on the brink of war. For most of us with little time to watch world events there are distractions which have obscured the picture historians and geopolitical experts see more clearly.

    Recent and current western leaders haven't been short people in military uniform shouting. That would be far too obvious. It's still military conflict and mass murder but in smart suits with liberal sound-bites and high-fives. Then the uncool, uncouth conservative Trump came along and muddied the waters.

    Briefly it seemed there might be hope that these wars would stop. But there can be little doubt he's been put under pressure to comply with the regime change culture embedded in the Deep State. Today, through their incendiary language we see US leaders morphing into the open style dictators of the past. The only thing missing are the military uniforms and hats.

    Every US military action and ultimatum to a foreign state has been aggressively pushed by the losing Democrats and particularly 'liberal' mainstream media, any dissent met with smears, censorship or worse. I would argue that today similarities with events leading up to previous global conflicts are too striking and numerous to ignore.

    Let's look at some of these:

    1) Military build up, alliances and proxy wars – for all the chaos and mass murder pursued by the Obama Administration he did achieve limited successes in signing agreements with Iran and Cuba. But rather than reverse the endless wars as promised Trump cancels the agreements leaving the grand sum of zilch foreign policy achievements. NATO has been around for 70 years, but in the last 20 or so has become obsessed with military build up. Nowadays it has hundreds of bases around the world but keeps destablising non-aligned states, partly to isolate Russia and China. And Syria sums up the dangers of the regime change model used today. With over a dozen states involved in the proxy war there is a still high risk of conflict breaking out between US and Russia. The motives for military build up are many. First there are powerful people in the arms industry and media who benefit financially from perpetual war. The US while powerful in military terms are a declining power which will continue, new powers emerging. The only return on their money they can see is through military build up. Also there are many in government, intelligence services and media who can see that if the current order continues to crumble they are likely to be prosecuted for various crimes. All this explains the threatening language and the doubling-down on those who challenge them. In 1914, Europe had two backward thinking military alliance blocks and Sarajevo showed how one event could trigger an unstoppable escalation dragging in many states. And empires such as Austro-Hungary were crumbling from within as they are now. So a similar mentality prevails today where the powerful in these empires under threat favour conflict to peace. For these individuals it's a last throw of the dice and a gamble with all our lives.

    2) Israel and its US relationship – I think Syria is where global conflict is still likely to start. As Syria has been winning, the involvement of Turkey and Saudi Arabia appears to receding. More recently Israel have taken their place and is relentless and unyielding and has its own wider, destructive plans for the Middle East. Israeli influence in the US is now so great that the US has more or less ceded its foreign policy in the Middle East to Israel. In 1914 Austro-Hungary pursued a series of impossible demands against Serbia managing to drag its close and more powerful ally Germany (led by someone equally as obstinate and militaristic as the US leadership) into World War I. Incidentally, some readers may have noticed the similarity between the 1914 diktats and modern-day US bullying towards Venezuala and other states – and perhaps most striking, by Saudi Arabia in its dispute with Qatar not long ago .

    3) Ideology, paranoia and unstable leaders – history tells us that ideology, paranoia and power are not a good mix and this is in abundance in western elites and media. These establishments are rabidly hostile to Iran and Russia. In addition we face a situation of highly unpredictable, ideological regional leaders in Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Most worrying of all, the language, threats and actions of Trump, Pompeo and Bolton suggests there are psychopathic tendencies in play. Behind this is a Deep State and Democrat Party pushing even harder for conflict. The level of paranoia is discouraging any notion of peace. 30 years ago Russia and US would sit down at a summit and reach a consensus. Today a US leader or diplomat seen talking to a Russian official is accused of collusion. When there are limited channels to talk in a crisis, you know we are in trouble. In Germany in the 1930s, ideology, propaganda and creating enemies were key in getting the population on side for war. The leaders within the Nazi clique, Hitler, Goring and Himmler look disturbingly similar to the Trump, Pompeo, Bolton line up.

    4) Media deception and propaganda – The media have been responsible for getting us to where we are today. Without them, the public would have woken up long ago. Much of the deception has been about the presentation of the narrative and the leaders. And it's been a campaign of distraction on our news where the daily genocide in Yemen gives way to sensationalised non-events and celebrity trivia. The terms and words; regime change, mass murder and terrorist have all been substituted by the media with 'humanitarian intervention', 'limited airstrikes' and 'moderate rebels' to fool a distracted public that the victims of the aggression are the bad guys. Western funded 'fact checking' sites such as Bellingcat have appeared pushing the misdirections to a surreal new level. Obama was portayed in the media as a cool guy and a little 'soft' on foreign policy. This despite the carnage in Libya, Syria and his drones. Sentiments of equal rights and diversity fill the home affairs sections in the liberal press, while callous indifference and ethno-centrism towards the Middle East and Russia dominate foreign affairs pages. In the press generally, BREXIT, non-existent anti-Semitism and nonsense about the 'ISIS bride' continues unabated. This media circus seeks to distract from important matters, using these topics to create pointless divisions, causing hostility towards Muslims and Jews in the process. The majority of a distracted public have still not twigged largely because the propaganda is more subtle nowadays and presented under a false humanitarian cloak. A small but vocal group of experts and journalists challenging these narratives are regularly smeared as Putin or Assad "apologists" . UK journalists are regularly caught out lying and some long standing hoaxes such as Russiagate exposed. Following this and Iraq WMDs more people are starting to see a pattern here. Yet each time the media in the belief they've bamboozled enough move on to the next big lie. This a sign of a controlled media which has reached the point of being unaccountable and untouchable, deeply embedded within the establishment apparatus. In the lead up to World War II the Nazis ran an effective media propaganda campaign which indoctrinated the population. The media in Germany also reached the point their blindingly obvious lies were rarely questioned. The classic tactic was to blame others for the problems in Germany and the world and project their crimes on to their victims. There are some differences as things have evolved. The Nazis created the media and state apparatus to pursue war. Nowadays this is the opposite way around. Instead the state apparatus is already in place so whoever is leader whether they describe themself as liberal or conservative, is merely a figurehead required to continue the same pro-war policies. Put a fresh-looking president in a shiny suit and intoduce him to the Queen and you wouldn't think he's the biggest mass murderer since Hitler. Although there are some differences in the propaganda techniques, all the signs are that today's media are on a similar war-footing as Germany's was just prior to the outbreak of World War II.

    5) Appeasement – because of its relative weakness and not wanting a war, Russia has to some extent appeased Western and Israeli aggression in Syria and beyond. To be fair, given the aggression it faces I don't think Russia has had much choice than playing for time. However at some point soon, with the West pushing more and more, something will have to give. Likewise, in the 1930s a militarily unprepared UK and France appeased Germany's expansion. The more they backed off the more Germany pushed until war was the only way.

    6) False flags – for those watching events in Syria know that the majority of the 'chemical attacks' have been carried out by Western supported opposition. The timing and nature of these suggest co-ordination at the highest levels. Intelligence Services of the UK and other agencies are believed to co-ordinate these fabrications to provoke a western response aimed at the Syrian Army. On more than one occasion these incidents have nearly escalated to a direct conflict with Russia showing the dangerous game being played by those involved and those pushing the false narrative in the media. The next flashpoint in Syria is Idlib, where it's highly likely a new chemical fabrication will be attempted this Spring. In the 1930s the Nazis were believed to use false flags with increasing frequency to discredit and close down internal opposition. Summary – We now live in a society where exposing warmongering is a more serious crime than committing it. Prisons hold many people who have bravely exposed war crimes – yet most criminals continue to walk free and hold positions of power. And when the media is pushing for Julian Assange to be extradicted you know this is beyond simple envy of a man who has almost single-handedly done the job they've collectively failed to do. They are equally complicit in warmongering hence why they see Assange and others as a threat. For those not fooled by the smart suits, liberal platitudes and media distraction techniques, the parallels with Germany in the 1930s in particular are now fairly obvious. The blundering military alliances of 1914 and the pure evil of 1939 – with the ignorance, indifference and narcissism described above make for a destructive mix. Unless something changes soon our days on this planet are likely be numbered. Depressing but one encouraging thing is that the indisputable truth is now in plain sight for anyone with internet access to see and false narratives have collapsed before. It's still conceivable that something may create a whole chain of events which sweep these dangerous parasites from power. So anything can happen. In the meantime we should keep positive and continue to spread the message.

    Kevin Smith is a British citizen living and working in London. He researches and writes down his thoughts on the foreign wars promoted by Western governments and media. In the highly controlled and dumbed down UK media environment, he's keen on exploring ways of discouraging ideology and tribalism in favour of free thinking.

    comite espartaco says Apr, 24, 2019

    2- 'Israel and its US relationship'. The 'hands off' policy of the Western powers, guarantees that Syria cannot even be a trigger to any 'global conflict', supposing that a 'global conflict' was on the cards, especially when Russia is just a crumbling shadow of the USSR and China a giant with feet of clay, heavily dependent on Western oligarchic goodwill, to maintain its economy and its technological progress.

    In 1914, the Serbian crisis was just trigger of WWI and not a true cause. It is not even clear if it was Germany that dragged Austria-Hungary into the war or Russia. Although there was a possibility (only a possibility), that a swift and 'illegal' attack by Austria-Hungary (without an ultimatum), would have localised and contained the conflict.

    There is no similarity whatsoever between the 1914 'diktats' and modern US policy, as the US is the sole Superpower and its acts are not opposed by a balancing and corresponding alliance. Save in the Chinese colony of North Korea, where the US is restrained by a tacit alliance of the North Eastern Asiatic powers: China, Russia, Japan and South Korea, that oppose any military action and so promote and protect North Korean bullying. Qatar, on the other hand, is one of the most radical supporters of the Syrian opposition and terrorist groups around the muslim world, even more than Saudi Arabia and there are powerful reasons for the confrontation of the Gulf rivals.

    olavleivar says Apr, 24, 2019
    You should go back in Time and STUDY what really happened .. that means going back to the Creation of the socalled British Empire ..the Bank of England , the British East Indian Company , the Opium Wars and the Opium Trafficing , the Boer Wars for Gold and Diamonds , the US Civil War and its aftermath , the manipulations of Gold and Silver by socalled british Financial Interests , The US Spanish Wars , the Japanese Russian War , the failed Coup against Czar Russia 1905 , the Young Turk Coup against the Ottoman Empire 1908, the Armenian Genocide , the Creation of the Federal Reserve 1913 , the Multitude of Assinations and other Terror Attacks in the period from 1900 and upwards , WHO were the perpetraders ? , , WW 1 and its originators , the Bolshevik Coup 1917 , the Treaty of Versailles and the Actors in that Treaty ,the Plunder of Germany , the dissolution of Austria Hungary , the Bolshevik Coup attempts all over Europe , and then the run up to WW 2 , the Actions of Poland agianst Germans and Czechs .. Hitler , Musolini and finally WW 2 .the post war period , the Nuernberg Trials , the Holocaust Mythology , the Creation of Israel , Gladio , the Fall of the Sovjet Empire and the Warshav Pact , the Wars in the Middle East , the endless Terror Actions , the murder of Kennedy and a mass of False Flag Terrorist Attacks since then , the destruction of the Balkans and the Middle east THERE IS PLENTY of EXCELLENT LITERATURE and ANALYSIS on all subjects .
    comite espartaco says Apr, 23, 2019
    1- Military buildup, alliances and proxy wars.

    It was your Obama that 'persecuted' Mr Assange !!!

    Syria demonstrates that there has NOT been a Western strategy for regime change (specially after the 'defeats' in Iraq and Afghanistan), let alone a proxy war, but, on the contrary, an effort to keep the tyranny of Assad in power, in a weaker state, to avoid any strong, 'revolutionary' rival near Israel. Russia has been given a free hand in Syria, otherwise, if the West had properly armed the resistance groups, it would have been a catastrophe for the Russian forces, like it was in Afghanistan during the Soviet intervention.

    Trump's policy of 'equal' (proportional) contributions for all members of NATO and other allies, gives the lie to the US military return 'argument' and should be understood as part of his war on unfair competition by other powers.

    The 'military' and diplomatic alliances of 1914 were FORWARD thinking, so much so that they 'repeated' themselves during WWII, with slight changes. But it is very doubtful that the Empires, like the Austro-Hungarian o the Russian ones, would have 'crumbled' without the outbreak of WWI. They were never under threat, as their military power during the war showed. Only a World War of cataclysmic character could destroy them. A war, triggered, but not created, by the 'conflict seeking mentality' of the powerful in the small countries of the Balkans.

    Shardlake says Apr, 23, 2019
    Generally attributed to Senator Hiram Warren Johnson in 1918 that 'when war comes the first casualty is truth' is as much a truism now as it was then.

    I'm more inclined to support hauptmanngurski's proposition that the members of the armed forces, from both sides, who return from conflicts with life-changing injuries or even in flag-draped caskets defended only the freedom of multinational enterprises and conglomerates to make and continue to make vast profits for the privileged few at the population's expense.

    As Kevin Smith makes abundantly clear we are all subject to the downright lies and truth-stretching from our government aided and abetted by a compliant main stream media as exemplified in the Skripal poisoning affair, which goes far beyond the counting of Serbian tanks supposedly destroyed during the Balkans conflict. The Skripals' are now God knows where either as willing participants or as detainees and our government shows no signs of clarifying the matter, so who would believe what it put out anyway in view of its track record of misinformation ? The nation doesn't know what to believe.

    Sadly, I believe this has always been the way of things and I cannot even speculate on how long it will be before this nation will realise it is being deliberately mis-led.

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

    Highly recommended!
    In any case withdrawal from Syria was a surprising and bold move on the Part of the Trump. You can criticizes Trump for not doing more but before that he bahvaves as a typical neocon, or a typical Republican presidents (which are the same things). And he started on this path just two month after inauguration bombing Syria under false pretences. So this is something
    I think the reason of change is that Trump intuitively realized the voters are abandoning him in droves and the sizable faction of his voters who voted for him because of his promises to end foreign wars iether already defected or is ready to defect. So this is a move designed to keep them.
    Notable quotes:
    "... "America shouldn't be doing the fighting for every nation on earth, not being reimbursed in many cases at all. If they want us to do the fighting, they also have to pay a price," Trump said. ..."
    Dec 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

    President Trump's big announcement to pull US troops out of Syria and Afghanistan is now emerging less as a peace move, and more a rationalization of American military power in the Middle East. In a surprise visit to US forces in Iraq this week, Trump said he had no intention of withdrawing the troops in that country, who have been there for nearly 15 years since GW Bush invaded back in 2003.

    Hinting at private discussions with commanders in Iraq, Trump boasted that US forces would in the future launch attacks from there into Syria if and when needed. Presumably that rapid force deployment would apply to other countries in the region, including Afghanistan.

    In other words, in typical business-style transactional thinking, Trump sees the pullout from Syria and Afghanistan as a cost-cutting exercise for US imperialism. Regarding Syria, he has bragged about Turkey being assigned, purportedly, to "finish off" terror groups. That's Trump subcontracting out US interests.

    Critics and supporters of Trump are confounded. After his Syria and Afghanistan pullout call, domestic critics and NATO allies have accused him of walking from the alleged "fight against terrorism" and of ceding strategic ground to US adversaries Russia and Iran.

    'We're no longer suckers of the world!' Trump says US is respected as nation AGAIN (VIDEO)

    Meanwhile, Trump's supporters have viewed his decision in more benign light, cheering the president for "sticking it to" the deep state and military establishment, assuming he's delivering on electoral promises to end overseas wars.

    However, neither view gets what is going on. Trump is not scaling back US military power; he is rationalizing it like a cost-benefit analysis, as perhaps only a real-estate-wheeler-dealer-turned president would appreciate. Trump is not snubbing US militarism or NATO allies, nor is he letting loose an inner peace spirit. He is as committed to projecting American military as ruthlessly and as recklessly as any other past occupant of the White House. The difference is Trump wants to do it on the cheap.

    Here's what he said to reporters on Air Force One before touching down in Iraq:

    "The United States cannot continue to be the policeman of the world. It's not fair when the burden is all on us, the United States We are spread out all over the world. We are in countries most people haven't even heard about. Frankly, it's ridiculous." He added: "We're no longer the suckers, folks."

    Laughably, Trump's griping about US forces "spread all over the world" unwittingly demonstrates the insatiable, monstrous nature of American militarism. But Trump paints this vice as a virtue, which, he complains, Washington gets no thanks for from the 150-plus countries around the globe that its forces are present in.

    As US troops greeted him in Iraq, the president made explicit how the new American militarism would henceforth operate.

    "America shouldn't be doing the fighting for every nation on earth, not being reimbursed in many cases at all. If they want us to do the fighting, they also have to pay a price," Trump said.

    'We give them $4.5bn a year': Israel will still be 'good' after US withdrawal from Syria – Trump

    This reiterates a big bugbear for this president in which he views US allies and client regimes as "not pulling their weight" in terms of military deployment. Trump has been browbeating European NATO members to cough up more on military budgets, and he has berated the Saudis and other Gulf Arab regimes to pay more for American interventions.

    Notably, however, Trump has never questioned the largesse that US taxpayers fork out every year to Israel in the form of nearly $4 billion in military aid. To be sure, that money is not a gift because much of it goes back to the Pentagon from sales of fighter jets and missile systems.

    The long-held notion that the US has served as the "world's policeman" is, of course, a travesty.

    Since WWII, all presidents and the Washington establishment have constantly harped on, with self-righteousness, about America's mythical role as guarantor of global security.

    Dozens of illegal wars on almost every continent and millions of civilian deaths attest to the real, heinous conduct of American militarism as a weapon to secure US corporate capitalism.

    But with US economic power in historic decline amid a national debt now over $22 trillion, Washington can no longer afford its imperialist conduct in the traditional mode of direct US military invasions and occupations.

    Perhaps, it takes a cost-cutting, raw-toothed capitalist like Trump to best understand the historic predicament, even if only superficially.

    This gives away the real calculation behind his troop pullout from Syria and Afghanistan. Iraq is going to serve as a new regional hub for force projection on a demand-and-supply basis. In addition, more of the dirty work can be contracted out to Washington's clients like Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia, who will be buying even more US weaponry to prop the military-industrial complex.

    'With almost $22 trillion of debt, the US is in no position to attack Iran'

    This would explain why Trump made his hurried, unexpected visit to Iraq this week. Significantly, he said : "A lot of people are going to come around to my way of thinking", regarding his decision on withdrawing forces from Syria and Afghanistan.

    Since his troop pullout plan announced on December 19, there has been serious pushback from senior Pentagon figures, hawkish Republicans and Democrats, and the anti-Trump media. The atmosphere is almost seditious against the president. Trump flying off to Iraq on Christmas night was reportedly his first visit to troops in an overseas combat zone since becoming president two years ago.

    What Trump seemed to be doing was reassuring the Pentagon and corporate America that he is not going all soft and dovish. Not at all. He is letting them know that he is aiming for a leaner, meaner US military power, which can save money on the number of foreign bases by using rapid reaction forces out of places like Iraq, as well as by subcontracting operations out to regional clients.

    Thus, Trump is not coming clean out of any supposed principle when he cuts back US forces overseas. He is merely applying his knack for screwing down costs and doing things on the cheap as a capitalist tycoon overseeing US militarism.

    During past decades when American capitalism was relatively robust, US politicians and media could indulge in the fantasy of their military forces going around the world in large-scale formations to selflessly "defend freedom and democracy."

    Today, US capitalism is broke. It simply can't sustain its global military empire. Enter Donald Trump with his "business solutions."

    But in doing so, this president, with his cheap utilitarianism and transactional exploitative mindset, lets the cat out of the bag. As he says, the US cannot be the world's policeman. Countries are henceforth going to have to pay for "our protection."

    Inadvertently, Trump is showing up US power for what it really is: a global thug running a protection racket.

    It's always been the case. Except now it's in your face. Trump is no Smedley Butler, the former Marine general who in the 1930s condemned US militarism as a Mafia operation. This president is stupidly revealing the racket, while still thinking it is something virtuous.

    Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.

    dnm1136

    Once again, Cunningham has hit the nail on the head. Trump mistakenly conflates fear with respect. In reality, around the world, the US is feared but generally not respected.

    My guess is that the same was true about Trump as a businessman, i.e., he was not respected, only feared due to his willingness to pursue his "deals" by any means that "worked" for him, legal or illegal, moral or immoral, seemingly gracious or mean-spirited.

    William Smith

    Complaining how the US gets no thanks for its foreign intervention. Kind of like a rapist claiming he should be thanked for "pleasuring" his victim. Precisely the same sentiment expressed by those who believe the American Indians should thank the Whites for "civilising" them.

    Phoebe S,

    "Washington gets no thanks for from the 150-plus countries around the globe that its forces are present in."

    That might mean they don't want you there. Just saying.

    ProRussiaPole

    None of these wars are working out for the US strategically. All they do is sow chaos. They seem to not be gaining anything, and are just preventing others from gaining anything as well.

    Ernie For -> ProRussiaPole

    i am a huge Putin fan, so is big Don. Please change your source of info Jerome, Trump is one man against Billions of people and dollars in corruption. He has achieved more in the USA in 2 years than all 5 previous parasites together.

    Truthbetold69

    It could be a change for a better direction. Time will tell. 'If you do what you've always been doing, you'll get what you've always been getting.'

    [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... While I admire America's democratic society, I hate how America brought wars and chaos to the world in guise of "freedom and liberation". ..."
    "... Was it necessary to bomb civilians of Ossetia for Georgia to get rid of Russia? Was it necessary to provoke a coup d'état against fully legitimate and democratically elected government in Ukraine? Life isn't fair indeed : not only they will never enter in NATO (even less EU) and no one will protect them, but they can say farewell to the land they lost. People in Georgia and Ukraine are less and less gullible and Pro Russians sentiment is gaining ground btw. Ask yourself why ? ..."
    "... Sphere of influence, the same reason why Cuba and Venezuela will pay for their insolence against the hegemon. The world is never a fair place. ..."
    Sep 01, 2017 | nationalinterest.org

    opaw , August 30, 2017 8:29 PM

    While I admire America's democratic society, I hate how America brought wars and chaos to the world in guise of "freedom and liberation".

    I hate how America exploit the weak. president moon should offer an olive branch to fatty Kim by sending back the thaad to America and pulling out American base and troops. he should convince fatty Kim that should he really like to proliferate his nuclear missile development as deterrence, aim it only to America and America only. there is no need for Koreans to kill fellow Koreans.

    Try Harder , August 31, 2017 2:45 AM

    Very good idea, after having pushed Ukraine and Georgia to a war lost in advance, lets hope US will abandon South Korea and Japan because they were helpless in demilitarizing one of the poorest countries in the world....

    Try Harder Guest , August 31, 2017 4:16 PM

    Was it necessary to bomb civilians of Ossetia for Georgia to get rid of Russia? Was it necessary to provoke a coup d'état against fully legitimate and democratically elected government in Ukraine? Life isn't fair indeed : not only they will never enter in NATO (even less EU) and no one will protect them, but they can say farewell to the land they lost. People in Georgia and Ukraine are less and less gullible and Pro Russians sentiment is gaining ground btw. Ask yourself why ?

    Zsari Maxim Guest , August 31, 2017 11:50 AM

    Sphere of influence, the same reason why Cuba and Venezuela will pay for their insolence against the hegemon. The world is never a fair place.

    Thomas Fung , August 31, 2017 5:04 PM

    In this person's opinion, the article raises a good point with regards to US defense subsidies. However, its examples are dissimilar. Japan spends approximately 1% of its GDP on defense; South Korea spends roughly 2.5% of its GDP defense.

    In fact, it seems to this person that a better example of US Defense Welfare would be direct subsidies granted to the state of Israel.

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Barnett's main thesis in "The Pentagon's New Map" is that the world is composed of two types of states: those that are part of an integrated and connected "Core," which embrace globalization; and states of the "Gap," which are disconnected from the effects of globalization. Barnett proclaims that globalization will move the world into an era of peace and prosperity, but can only do so with the help of an indispensable United States. He writes that America is the lynchpin to the entire process and he believes that the United States should be midwife to a new world that will one day consist of peaceful democratic states and integrated economies. Barnett is proposing no less than a new grand strategy - the historical successor to the Cold War's strategy of containment. His approach to a future world defined by America's "exportation of security" is almost religious in its fervor and messianic in its language. ..."
    "... At this point in his book, Barnett also makes bold statements that America is never leaving the Gap and that we are therefore never "bringing our boys home." He believes that there is no exiting the Gap, only shrinking it. These statements have incited some of Barnett's critics to accuse him of fostering and advocating a state of perpetual war. Barnett rebuts these attacks by claiming that, "America's task is not perpetual war, nor the extension of empire. It is merely to serve as globalization's bodyguard wherever and whenever needed throughout the Gap." Barnett claims that the strategy of preemptive war is a "boundable problem," yet his earlier claim that we are never leaving the Gap and that our boys are never coming home does not square with his assertion that there will not be perpetual war. He cannot have it both ways. ..."
    "... Barnett therefore undermines his own globalization-based grand strategy by pointing out in detail at least ten things that can go wrong with globalization - the foundation upon which his theory is built. ..."
    "... Globalization is likely here to stay, though it may be slowed down or even stopped in some regions of the planet. ..."
    "... I would strongly recommend "The Pentagon's New Map" to students who are studying U.S. foreign policy. I would also recommend it to those who are studying the Bush administration as well as the Pentagon. The ideas in the book seem to be popular with the military and many of its ideas can be seen in the current thinking and policy of the Pentagon and State Department. ..."
    "... I would only caution the reader that Barnett's theories are heavily dependent upon the continued advancement of globalization, which in turn is dependent upon the continued economic ability of the U.S. to sustain military operations around the world indefinitely. Neither is guaranteed. ..."
    "... "Globalization" has turned out to be nothing but the polite PR term to disguise and avoid the truth of using the more accurate name, "Global Empire" --- and there is no doubt that Barnett is more than smart enough to see that this has inexorably happened. ..."
    "... Liberty, democracy, justice, and equality Over Violent/'Vichy' Rel 2.0 Empire, ..."
    "... We don't MERELY have; a gun/fear problem, or a 'Fiscal Cliff', 'Sequestration', and 'Debt Limit' problem, or an expanding wars problem, or a 'drone assassinations' problem, or a vast income & wealth inequality problem, or a Wall Street 'looting' problem, or a Global Warming and environmental death-spiral problem, or a domestic tyranny NDAA FISA spying problem, or, or, or, or .... ad nauseam --- we have a hidden EMPIRE cancerous tumor which is the prime CAUSE of all these 'symptom problems'. ..."
    "... "If your country is treating you like ****, and bombing abroad, look carefully --- because it may not be your country, but a Global Empire only posing as your former country." ..."
    Aug 26, 2017 | www.amazon.com

    Azblue on July 31, 2006

    Global cop

    Barnett's main thesis in "The Pentagon's New Map" is that the world is composed of two types of states: those that are part of an integrated and connected "Core," which embrace globalization; and states of the "Gap," which are disconnected from the effects of globalization. Barnett proclaims that globalization will move the world into an era of peace and prosperity, but can only do so with the help of an indispensable United States. He writes that America is the lynchpin to the entire process and he believes that the United States should be midwife to a new world that will one day consist of peaceful democratic states and integrated economies. Barnett is proposing no less than a new grand strategy - the historical successor to the Cold War's strategy of containment. His approach to a future world defined by America's "exportation of security" is almost religious in its fervor and messianic in its language.

    The foundation upon which Barnett builds his binary view of the world is heavily dependant upon the continued advancement of globalization - almost exclusively so. However, advancing globalization is not pre-ordained. Barnett himself makes the case that globalization is a fragile undertaking similar to an interconnected chain in which any broken link destroys the whole. Globalization could indeed be like the biblical statue whose feet are made of clay. Globalization, and therefore the integration of the Gap, may even stop or recede - just as the globalization of the early 20th century ended abruptly with the onset of WW I and a global depression. Moreover, Barnett's contention that the United States has an exceptional duty and moral responsibility for "remaking the world in America's image" might be seen by many as misguided and perhaps even dangerous.

    The divide between the `Functioning Core' and the `Non-Integrating Gap' differs from the gulf between rich and poor in a subtle yet direct way. State governments make a conscious decision to become connected vs. disconnected to advancing globalization. States and their leaders can provide the infrastructure and the opening of large global markets to their citizens in ways that individuals cannot. An example can serve to illustrate the point: You can be rich and disconnected in Nigeria or poor and disconnected in North Korea. In each case the country you live in has decided to be disconnected. Citizens in this case have a limited likelihood of staying rich and unlimited prospects of staying poor. But by becoming part of the functioning Core, the enlightened state allows all citizens a running start at becoming part of a worldwide economic system and thus provide prospects for a better future because global jobs and markets are opened up to them. A connected economy such as India's, for example, enables citizens who once had no prospects for a better life to find well-paying jobs, such as computer-related employment. Prospects for a better Indian life are directly the result of the Indian government's conscious decision to become connected to the world economy, a.k.a. embracing globalization.

    After placing his theory of the Core/Gap and preemptive war strategy firmly into the church of globalization, Barnett next places his theory squarely upon the alter of rule sets. Few would argue that the world is an anarchic place and Barnett tells us that rule sets are needed to define `good' and `evil' behavior of actors in this chaotic international system. An example of such a rule set is the desire of the Core to keep WMDs out of the hands of terrorist organizations. Other examples are the promulgation of human rights and the need to stop genocide. Barnett also uses rule sets to define `system' rules that govern and shape the actions, and even the psychology, of international actors. An example that Barnett gives of a system-wide rule set is the creation of the `rule' defined by the United States during the Cold War called Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). Barnett claims that this rule set effectively ended the possibility of war for all time amongst nuclear-capable great powers. Barnett states that the U.S. now should export a brand new rule set called `preemptive war,' which aims to fight actors in the lawless Gap in order to end international terrorism for all time. Barnett makes it clear that the Core's enemy is neither a religion (Islam) nor a place (Middle East), but a condition (disconnectedness).

    Next, Barnett points out that system-wide competition has moved into the economic arena and that military conflict, when it occurs, has moved away from the system-wide (Cold War), to inter-state war, ending up today with primarily state conflict vs. individuals (Core vs. bin Laden, Core vs. Kim, etc.). In other words, "we are moving progressively away from warfare against states or even blocs of states and toward a new era of warfare against individuals." Rephrased, we've moved from confrontations with evil empires, to evil states, to evil leaders. An example of this phenomenon is the fact that China dropped off the radar of many government hawks after 9/11 only to be replaced by terrorist groups and other dangerous NGOs "with global reach."

    Barnett also points out that the idea of `connectivity' is central to the success of globalization. Without it, everything else fails. Connectivity is the glue that holds states together and helps prevent war between states. For example, the US is not likely to start a war with `connected' France, but America could more likely instigate a war with `disconnected' North Korea, Syria or Iran.

    Barnett then examines the dangers associated with his definition of `disconnectedness.' He cleverly describes globalization as a condition defined by mutually assured dependence (MAD) and advises us that `Big Men', royal families, raw materials, theocracies and just bad luck can conspire to impede connectedness in the world. This is one of few places in his book that Barnett briefly discusses impediments to globalization - however, this short list looks at existing roadblocks to connectedness but not to future, system-wide dangers to globalization.

    At this point in his book, Barnett also makes bold statements that America is never leaving the Gap and that we are therefore never "bringing our boys home." He believes that there is no exiting the Gap, only shrinking it. These statements have incited some of Barnett's critics to accuse him of fostering and advocating a state of perpetual war. Barnett rebuts these attacks by claiming that, "America's task is not perpetual war, nor the extension of empire. It is merely to serve as globalization's bodyguard wherever and whenever needed throughout the Gap." Barnett claims that the strategy of preemptive war is a "boundable problem," yet his earlier claim that we are never leaving the Gap and that our boys are never coming home does not square with his assertion that there will not be perpetual war. He cannot have it both ways.

    Barnett then takes us on a pilgrimage to the Ten Commandments of globalization. Tellingly, this list is set up to be more like links in a chain than commandments. Each item in the list is connected to the next - meaning that each step is dependent upon its predecessor. If any of the links are broken or incomplete, the whole is destroyed. For example, Barnett warns us that if there is no security in the Gap, there can be no rules in the Gap. Barnett therefore undermines his own globalization-based grand strategy by pointing out in detail at least ten things that can go wrong with globalization - the foundation upon which his theory is built.

    What else could kill globalization? Barnett himself tells us: "Labor, energy, money and security all need to flow as freely as possible from those places in the world where they are plentiful to those regions where they are scarce." Here he is implying that an interruption of any or all of these basic necessities can doom globalization. Barnett states clearly: "...(these are) the four massive flows I believe are essential to protect if Globalization III is going to advance." Simply put, any combination of American isolationism or closing of borders to immigration, a global energy crisis, a global financial crisis or rampant global insecurity could adversely affect "connectedness," a.k.a. globalization. These plausible future events, unnerving as they are, leave the inexorable advancement of globalization in doubt and we haven't yet explored other problems with Barnett's reliance on globalization to make the world peaceful, free and safe for democracy.

    Barnett goes on to tell us that Operation Iraqi Freedom was an "overt attempt to create a "System Perturbation" centered in the Persian Gulf to trigger a Big Bang." His definition of a Big Bang in the Middle East is the democratization of the many totalitarian states in the region. He also claims that the Big Bang has targeted Iran's "sullen majority."

    Barnett claims that our problem with shrinking the Gap is not our "motive or our means, but our inability to describe the enemies worth killing, the battles worth winning, and the future worth creating." Managing the global campaign to democratize the world is no easy task. Barnett admits that in a worst-case scenario we may be stuck in the "mother of all intifadas" in Iraq. Critics claim this is something that we should have planned for - that the insurgency should not have been a surprise, and that it should have been part of the "peacemaking" planning. Barnett blithely states that things will get better "...when America internationalizes the occupation." Barnett should not engage in wishful thinking here, as he also does when he predicted that Iraqis would be put in charge of their own country 18 months after the fall of Baghdad. It would be more accurate if he claimed this would happen 18 months after the cessation of hostilities. Some critics claim that Iraq is an example that we are an "empire in a hurry" (Michael Ignatieff), which then results in: 1) allocating insufficient resources to non-military aspects of the project and 2) attempting economic and political transformation in an unrealistically short time frame.

    The final basic premise of Barnett's theory of the Core and the Gap is the concept of what he calls the "global transaction strategy." Barnett explains it best: "America's essential transaction with the outside world is one of our exporting security in return for the world's financing a lifestyle we could far more readily afford without all that defense spending." Barnett claims that America pays the most for global stability because we enjoy it the most. But what about the other 80 countries in the Core?

    Why is America, like Atlas, bearing the weight of the world's security and stabilization on its shoulders?

    Barnett claims that historical analogies are useless today and point us in the wrong direction. I disagree. James Madison cautioned us not to go abroad to seek monsters to destroy. We can learn from his simple and profound statement that there are simply too many state (and individual) monsters in today's world for the U.S. to destroy unilaterally or preemptively. We must also avoid overstretching our resources and power. Thucydides reminds us that the great democracy of Athens was brought to its knees by the ill-advised Sicilian expedition - which resulted in the destruction of everything the Athenians held dear. Do not ignore history as Barnett councils; heed it.

    Globalization is likely here to stay, though it may be slowed down or even stopped in some regions of the planet. Therefore, America needs to stay engaged in the affairs of the world, but Barnett has not offered conclusive evidence that the U.S. needs to become the world's single Leviathan that must extinguish all global hot wars. Barnett also has not proved that America needs to be, as he writes, "the one willing to rush in when everyone else is running away." People like Barnett in academia and leaders in government may proclaim and ordain the U.S. to be a global Leviathan, but it is a conscious choice that should be thoroughly debated by the American people. After all, it is upon the backs of the American people that such a global Leviathan must ride. Where is the debate? The American people, upon reflection, may decide upon other courses of action.

    I would strongly recommend "The Pentagon's New Map" to students who are studying U.S. foreign policy. I would also recommend it to those who are studying the Bush administration as well as the Pentagon. The ideas in the book seem to be popular with the military and many of its ideas can be seen in the current thinking and policy of the Pentagon and State Department.

    It seems to be well researched - having 35 pages of notes. Many of Barnett's citations come from the Washington Post and the New York Times, which some may see as a liberal bias, but I see the sources as simply newspapers of record.

    I would only caution the reader that Barnett's theories are heavily dependent upon the continued advancement of globalization, which in turn is dependent upon the continued economic ability of the U.S. to sustain military operations around the world indefinitely. Neither is guaranteed.

    Alan H. Macdonald on April 1, 2013
    A misused book waiting for redemption

    I don't think poorly of Thomas Barnett himself. He's very bright and, I think, good hearted, BUT his well thought-out, well argued pride and joy (and positive intellectual pursuit) is being badly distorted ---- which happens to all 'tools' that Empire gets its hands on.

    For those who like predictions, I would predict that Barnett will wind up going through an epiphany much like Francis Fukuyama (but a decade later) and for much the same reason, that his life's work gets misused and abused so greatly that he works to reverse and correct its misuse. Fukuyama, also brilliant, wrote "The End of History" in 1992 (which was misused by the neocons to engender war), and now he's working just as hard to reverse a misuse that he may feel some guilt of his work supporting, and is writing "The Future of History" as a force for good --- and I suspect (and hope) that Barnett will, in even less time, be counter-thinking and developing the strategy and book to reverse the misuse of his 2004 book before the Global Empire pulls down the curtain.

    "Globalization" has turned out to be nothing but the polite PR term to disguise and avoid the truth of using the more accurate name, "Global Empire" --- and there is no doubt that Barnett is more than smart enough to see that this has inexorably happened.

    Best luck and love to the fast expanding 'Occupy the Empire' educational and revolutionary movement against this deceitful, guileful, disguised EMPIRE, which can't so easily be identified as wearing Red Coats, Red Stars, nor funny looking Nazi helmets ---- quite yet!

    Liberty, democracy, justice, and equality Over Violent/'Vichy' Rel 2.0 Empire,
    Alan MacDonald
    Sanford, Maine

    We don't MERELY have; a gun/fear problem, or a 'Fiscal Cliff', 'Sequestration', and 'Debt Limit' problem, or an expanding wars problem, or a 'drone assassinations' problem, or a vast income & wealth inequality problem, or a Wall Street 'looting' problem, or a Global Warming and environmental death-spiral problem, or a domestic tyranny NDAA FISA spying problem, or, or, or, or .... ad nauseam --- we have a hidden EMPIRE cancerous tumor which is the prime CAUSE of all these 'symptom problems'.

    "If your country is treating you like ****, and bombing abroad, look carefully --- because it may not be your country, but a Global Empire only posing as your former country."

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski has written extensively about the purges of the patriots in the Defense Department that happened in Washington during the lead up and after the commencement of the Iraq war in 2003. ..."
    "... If anybody thinks what I have written is an exaggeration, research what the late Admiral Thomas Moorer had to say years ago about the total infiltration of the Defense Department by Israeli agents. ..."
    Aug 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

    schrub , August 25, 2017 at 7:18 pm GMT

    People who seem to think that Trump's generals will somehow go along and support his original vision are sadly mistaken.

    Since 2003, Israel has had an increasingly strong hand in the vetting who gets promoted to upper positions in the American armed forces. All of the generals Trump has at his side went through a vetting procedure which definitely involved a very close look at their opinions about Israel.

    Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski has written extensively about the purges of the patriots in the Defense Department that happened in Washington during the lead up and after the commencement of the Iraq war in 2003.

    Officers who openly oppose the dictates of the Israel Lobby will see their prospects for advancement simply vanish like a whiff of smoke.. Those who support Israel's machinations are rewarded with promotions, the more fervent the support the more rapid the promotion especially if this knowledge is made known to their congressman or senator..

    Generals who support Israel already know that this support will be heavily rewarded after their retirements by being given lucrative six figure positions on company boards of directors or positions in equally lucrative think tanks like the American Enterprise Institution or the Hoover Institute. They will receive hefty speaking fees. as well. They learned early that their retirements could be truly glorious if they only "went" along with The Lobby. They will be able to then live the good life in expensive places like Washington, New York or San Francisco, often invited to glitzy parties with unlimited amount of free prawns "the size of your hand".

    On the other hand, upper officers who somehow get then get "bad" reputations for their negative views about Israel ( like Karen U. Kwiatkowski for instance) will end up, once retired, having to depend on just their often scanty pensions This requires getting an often demeaning second jobs to get by in some place where "their dollar goes further". No bright lights in big cities for them. No speaking fees, no college jobs. Once their fate becomes known, their still active duty contemporaries suddenly decide to "go along".

    If anybody thinks what I have written is an exaggeration, research what the late Admiral Thomas Moorer had to say years ago about the total infiltration of the Defense Department by Israeli agents.

    Face it, we live in a country under occupation by a hostile power that we willingly pay large amounts monetary tribute to. Our government does whatever benefits Israel regardless of how negatively this effects the USA. We are increasing troop strength in Afghanistan because, somehow, this benefits Israel. If our presence in Afghanistan (or the Mideast in general) didn't benefit Israel, our troops would simply not be there.

    We are all Palestinians.

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The destruction of Syria and Libya created massive refugee flows which have proved that the European Union was totally unprepared to deal with such a major issue. On top of that, the latest years, we have witnessed a rapid rise of various terrorist attacks in Western soil, also as a result of the devastating wars in Syria and Libya. ..."
    "... Whenever they wanted to blame someone for some serious terrorist attacks, they had a scapegoat ready for them, even if they had evidence that Libya was not behind these attacks. When Gaddafi falsely admitted that he had weapons of mass destruction in order to gain some relief from the Western sanctions, they presented him as a responsible leader who, was ready to cooperate. Of course, his last role was to play again the 'bad guy' who had to be removed. ..."
    "... Despite the rise of Donald Trump in power, the neoliberal forces will push further for the expansion of the neoliberal doctrine in the rival field of the Sino-Russian alliance. ..."
    "... We see, however, that the Western alliances are entering a period of severe crisis. The US has failed to control the situation in Middle East and Libya. The ruthless neo-colonialists will not hesitate to confront Russia and China directly, if they see that they continue to lose control in the global geopolitical arena. The accumulation of military presence of NATO next to the Russian borders, as well as, the accumulation of military presence of the US in Asia-Pacific, show that this is an undeniable fact. ..."
    Apr 09, 2019 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

    The start of current decade revealed the most ruthless face of a global neo-colonialism. From Syria and Libya to Europe and Latin America, the old colonial powers of the West tried to rebound against an oncoming rival bloc led by Russia and China, which starts to threaten their global domination.

    Inside a multi-polar, complex terrain of geopolitical games, the big players start to abandon the old-fashioned, inefficient direct wars. They use today other, various methods like brutal proxy wars , economic wars, financial and constitutional coups, provocative operations, 'color revolutions', etc. In this highly complex and unstable situation, when even traditional allies turn against each other as the global balances change rapidly, the forces unleashed are absolutely destructive. Inevitably, the results are more than evident.

    Proxy Wars - Syria/Libya

    After the US invasion in Iraq, the gates of hell had opened in the Middle East. Obama continued the Bush legacy of US endless interventions, but he had to change tactics because a direct war would be inefficient, costly and extremely unpopular to the American people and the rest of the world.
    The result, however, appeared to be equally (if not more) devastating with the failed US invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US had lost total control of the armed groups directly linked with the ISIS terrorists, failed to topple Assad, and, moreover, instead of eliminating the Russian and Iranian influence in the region, actually managed to increase it. As a result, the US and its allies failed to secure their geopolitical interests around the various pipeline games.

    In addition, the US sees Turkey, one of its most important ally, changing direction dangerously, away from the Western bloc. Probably the strongest indication for this, is that Turkey, Iran and Russia decided very recently to proceed in an agreement on Syria without the presence of the US.

    Yet, the list of US failures does not end here. The destruction of Syria and Libya created massive refugee flows which have proved that the European Union was totally unprepared to deal with such a major issue. On top of that, the latest years, we have witnessed a rapid rise of various terrorist attacks in Western soil, also as a result of the devastating wars in Syria and Libya.

    Evidence from WikiLeaks has shown that the old colonial powers have started a new round of ruthless competition on Libya's resources. The usual story propagated by the Western media, about another tyrant who had to be removed, has now completely collapsed. They don't care neither to topple an 'authoritarian' regime, nor to spread Democracy. All they care about is to secure each country's resources for their big companies.
    The Gaddafi case is quite interesting because it shows that the Western hypocrites were using him according to their interests .

    Whenever they wanted to blame someone for some serious terrorist attacks, they had a scapegoat ready for them, even if they had evidence that Libya was not behind these attacks. When Gaddafi falsely admitted that he had weapons of mass destruction in order to gain some relief from the Western sanctions, they presented him as a responsible leader who, was ready to cooperate. Of course, his last role was to play again the 'bad guy' who had to be removed.

    Economic Wars, Financial Coups – Greece/Eurozone

    It would be unthinkable for the neo-colonialists to conduct proxy wars inside European soil, especially against countries which belong to Western institutions like NATO, EU, eurozone, etc. The wave of the US-made major economic crisis hit Greece and Europe at the start of the decade, almost simultaneously with the eruption of the Arab Spring revolutionary wave and the subsequent disaster in Middle East and Libya.

    Greece was the easy victim for the global neoliberal dictatorship to impose catastrophic measures in favor of the plutocracy. The Greek experiment enters its seventh year and the plan is to be used as a model for the whole eurozone. Greece has become also the model for the looting of public property, as happened in the past with the East Germany and the Treuhand Operation after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

    While Greece was the major victim of an economic war, Germany used its economic power and control of the European Central Bank to impose unprecedented austerity, sado-monetarism and neoliberal destruction through silent financial coups in Ireland , Italy and Cyprus . The Greek political establishment collapsed with the rise of SYRIZA in power, and the ECB was forced to proceed in an open financial coup against Greece when the current PM, Alexis Tsipras, decided to conduct a referendum on the catastrophic measures imposed by the ECB, IMF and the European Commission, through which the Greek people clearly rejected these measures, despite the propaganda of terror inside and outside Greece. Due to the direct threat from Mario Draghi and the ECB, who actually threatened to cut liquidity sinking Greece into a financial chaos, Tsipras finally forced to retreat, signing another catastrophic memorandum.

    Through similar financial and political pressure, the Brussels bureaufascists and the German sado-monetarists along with the IMF economic hitmen, imposed neoliberal disaster to other eurozone countries like Portugal, Spain etc. It is remarkable that even the second eurozone economy, France, rushed to impose anti-labor measures midst terrorist attacks, succumbing to a - pre-designed by the elites - neo-Feudalism, under the 'Socialist' François Hollande, despite the intense protests in many French cities.

    Germany would never let the United States to lead the neo-colonization in Europe, as it tries (again) to become a major power with its own sphere of influence, expanding throughout eurozone and beyond. As the situation in Europe becomes more and more critical with the ongoing economic and refugee crisis and the rise of the Far-Right and the nationalists, the economic war mostly between the US and the German big capital, creates an even more complicated situation.

    The decline of the US-German relations has been exposed initially with the NSA interceptions scandal , yet, progressively, the big picture came on surface, revealing a transatlantic economic war between banking and corporate giants. In times of huge multilevel crises, the big capital always intensifies its efforts to eliminate competitors too. As a consequence, the US has seen another key ally, Germany, trying to gain a certain degree of independence in order to form its own agenda, separate from the US interests.

    Note that, both Germany and Turkey are medium powers that, historically, always trying to expand and create their own spheres of influence, seeking independence from the traditional big powers.

    Economic Wars, Constitutional Coups, Provocative Operations – Argentina/Brazil/Venezuela

    A wave of neoliberal onslaught shakes currently Latin America. While in Argentina, Mauricio Macri allegedly took the power normally, the constitutional coup against Dilma Rousseff in Brazil, as well as, the usual actions of the Right opposition in Venezuela against Nicolás Maduro with the help of the US finger, are far more obvious.
    The special weight of these three countries in Latin America is extremely important for the US imperialism to regain ground in the global geopolitical arena. Especially the last ten to fifteen years, each of them developed increasingly autonomous policies away from the US close custody, under Leftist governments, and this was something that alarmed the US imperialism components.

    Brazil appears to be the most important among the three, not only due to its size, but also as a member of the BRICS, the team of fast growing economies who threaten the US and generally the Western global dominance. The constitutional coup against Rousseff was rather a sloppy action and reveals the anxiety of the US establishment to regain control through puppet regimes. This is a well-known situation from the past through which the establishment attempts to secure absolute dominance in the US backyard.

    The importance of Venezuela due to its oil reserves is also significant. When Maduro tried to approach Russia in order to strengthen the economic cooperation between the two countries, he must had set the alarm for the neocons in the US. Venezuela could find an alternative in Russia and BRICS, in order to breathe from the multiple economic war that was set off by the US. It is characteristic that the economic war against Russia by the US and the Saudis, by keeping the oil prices in historically low levels, had significant impact on the Venezuelan economy too. It is also known that the US organizations are funding the opposition since Chávez era, in order to proceed in provocative operations that could overthrow the Leftist governments.

    The case of Venezuela is really interesting. The US imperialists were fiercely trying to overthrow the Leftist governments since Chávez administration. They found now a weaker president, Nicolás Maduro - who certainly does not have the strength and personality of Hugo Chávez - to achieve their goal.

    The Western media mouthpieces are doing their job, which is propaganda as usual. The recipe is known. You present the half truth, with a big overdose of exaggeration. The establishment parrots are demonizing Socialism , but they won't ever tell you about the money that the US is spending, feeding the Right-Wing groups and opposition to proceed in provocative operations, in order to create instability. They won't tell you about the financial war conducted through the oil prices, manipulated by the Saudis, the close US ally.

    Regarding Argentina, former president, Cristina Kirchner, had also made some important moves towards the stronger cooperation with Russia, which was something unacceptable for Washington's hawks. Not only for geopolitical reasons, but also because Argentina could escape from the vulture funds that sucking its blood since its default. This would give the country an alternative to the neoliberal monopoly of destruction. The US big banks and corporations would never accept such a perspective because the debt-enslaved Argentina is a golden opportunity for a new round of huge profits. It's happening right now in eurozone's debt colony, Greece.

    'Color Revolutions' - Ukraine

    The events in Ukraine have shown that, the big capital has no hesitation to ally even with the neo-nazis, in order to impose the new world order. This is not something new of course. The connection of Hitler with the German economic oligarchs, but also with other major Western companies, before and during the WWII, is well known.

    The most terrifying of all however, is not that the West has silenced in front of the decrees of the new Ukrainian leadership, through which is targeting the minorities, but the fact that the West allied with the neo-nazis, while according to some information has also funded their actions as well as other extreme nationalist groups during the riots in Kiev.

    Plenty of indications show that US organizations have 'put their finger' on Ukraine. A video , for example, concerning the situation in Ukraine has been directed by Ben Moses (creator of the movie "Good Morning, Vietnam"), who is connected with American government executives and organizations like National Endowment for Democracy, funded by the US Congress. This video shows a beautiful young female Ukrainian who characterizes the government of the country as "dictatorship" and praise some protesters with the neo-nazi symbols of the fascist Ukranian party Svoboda on them.

    The same organizations are behind 'color revolutions' elsewhere, as well as, provocative operations against Leftist governments in Venezuela and other countries.

    Ukraine is the perfect place to provoke Putin and tight the noose around Russia. Of course the huge hypocrisy of the West can also be identified in the case of Crimea. While in other cases, the Western officials were 'screaming' for the right of self-determination (like Kosovo, for example), after they destroyed Yugoslavia in a bloodbath, they can't recognize the will of the majority of Crimeans to join Russia.

    The war will become wilder

    The Western neo-colonial powers are trying to counterattack against the geopolitical upgrade of Russia and the Chinese economic expansionism.

    Despite the rise of Donald Trump in power, the neoliberal forces will push further for the expansion of the neoliberal doctrine in the rival field of the Sino-Russian alliance. Besides, Trump has already shown his hostile feelings against China, despite his friendly approach to Russia and Putin.

    We see, however, that the Western alliances are entering a period of severe crisis. The US has failed to control the situation in Middle East and Libya. The ruthless neo-colonialists will not hesitate to confront Russia and China directly, if they see that they continue to lose control in the global geopolitical arena. The accumulation of military presence of NATO next to the Russian borders, as well as, the accumulation of military presence of the US in Asia-Pacific, show that this is an undeniable fact.

    [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    Highly recommended!
    The USA state of continuous war has been a bipartisan phenomenon starting with Truman in Korea and proceeding with Vietnam, Lebanon,Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and now Syria. It doesn't take a genius to realize that these limited, never ending wars are expensive was to enrich MIC and Wall Street banksters
    Feb 17, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    KC February 15, 2019 at 11:16 pm

    The one thing your accurate analysis leaves out is that the goal of US wars is never what the media spouts for its Wall Street masters. The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives, create more enemies to be fought in future wars, and to provide a rationalization for the continued primacy of the military class in US politics and culture.

    Occasionally a country may be sitting on a bunch of oil, and also be threatening to move away from the petrodollar or talking about allowing an "adversary" to build a pipeline across their land.

    Otherwise war is a racket unto itself. "Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. "
    ― George Orwell

    Also we've always been at war with Oceania .or whatever that quote said.

    [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

    Highly recommended!
    Dec 19, 2019 | angrybearblog.com

    likbez, December 19, 2019 6:58 pm

    Afghan war demonstrated that the USA got into the trap, the Catch 22 situation: it can't stop following an expensive and self-destructive positive feedback loop of threat inflation and larger and large expenditures on MIC, because there is no countervailing force for the MIC since WWII ended. Financial oligarchy is aligned with MIC.

    This is the same suicidal grip of MIC on the country that was one of the key factors in the collapse of the USSR means that in this key area the USA does not have two party system, It is a Uniparty: a singe War party with two superficially different factions.

    Feeding and care MIC is No.1 task for both. Ordinary Americans wellbeing does matter much for either party. New generation of Americans is punished with crushing debt and low paying jobs. They do not care that people over 50 who lost their jobs are essentially thrown out like a garbage.

    "41 Million people in the US suffer from hunger and lack of food security"–US Dept. of Agriculture. FDR addressed the needs of this faction of the population when he delivered his One-Third of a Nation speech for his 2nd Inaugural. About four years later, FDR expanded on that issue in his Four Freedoms speech: 1.Freedom of speech; 2.Freedom of worship; 3.Freedom from want; 4.Freedom from fear.

    Items 3 and 4 are probably unachievable under neoliberalism. And fear is artificially instilled to unite the nation against the external scapegoat much like in Orwell 1984. Currently this is Russia, later probably will be China. With regular minutes of hate replaced by Rachel Maddow show ;-)

    Derailing Tulsi had shown that in the USA any politician, who try to challenge MIC, will be instantly attacked by MIC lapdogs in MSM and neutered in no time.

    One interesting tidbit from Fiona Hill testimony is that neocons who dominate the USA foreign policy establishment make their living off threat inflation. They literally are bought by MIC, which indirectly finance Brookings institution, Atlantic Council and similar think tanks. And this isn't cheap cynicism. It is simply a fact. Rephrasing Samuel Johnson's famous quote, we can say, "MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels."

    [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Ukrainegate is preemptive political tactics. ..."
    Dec 19, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Lk , Dec 18 2019 22:19 utc | 26

    The House impeachment is driven by several factors:
    1. After Russiagate, when Trump began to investigate its fraudulent origins, the Dems feared the exposure of Obama-era corruption if not high crimes. Hence Ukrainegate is preemptive political tactics.
    2. The investigation into Russiagate led right to Ukraine, and thus to Biden. In the context of Sanders' campaign, Ukrainegate became an imperative for the factions of the capitalist class that dominates the DNC. If Biden falls on Ukraine issues, then Sanders is inevitable; an anathema to Wall Street and Big Tech DNC donors.
    3. 3. While 1 and 2 dominate DNC machinations, foreign policy is also a factor. The foreign policy establishment is absolutely against any hesitation with respect to confronting Russia as part of a regional and global strategy for primacy. Trump's limited prevarications on Russia might threaten the long established strategy to expand Nato to Ukraine and thereby to encircle Russia and maintain US dominance over Europe. So, even though Trump names great power rivalry as the name of the game today, his inclination for making nice with Putin threatens to weaken the US hold over Europe, which Trump wants to label as an economic competitor.

      It is with these points that the strategic differences become apparent: Trump is raising a realist, neo-mercantalist strategy against ALL potential competitors; the DNC and the deep state hold a strategy of liberal hegemony: globalization and US primacy through dominating regional alliances, and impregnating US hegemony INSIDE the vassal States of the empire.

    All of this, however, is bound to fail for the DNC, and down the road for Trump himself.

    The contradictions of US empire and global capitalism cannot be mitigated by either more liberal strategies or realist ones.

    [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars

    Highly recommended!
    Dec 17, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

    karlof1 , Dec 16 2019 20:51 utc | 22

    Neocons lie should properly be called "threat inflation"

    The underlying critical point-at-issue is credibility as I noted in my comment on b's 2017 article. I've since linked to tweets and other items by that trio; the one major change seems to have been the epiphany by them that they needed to go to where the action is and report it from there to regain their credibility.

    The fact remains that used car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility sans a confession as to why they feel the need to lie to sell cars.

    Their actions belie the guilt they feel for their choices, but a confession works much better at assuaging the soul while helping convince the audience that the change in heart's genuine. And that's the point as b notes--genuineness, whose first predicate is credibility.

    [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim

    Highly recommended!
    Dec 15, 2019 | www.washingtonpost.com
    The infinity war We say we're a peaceful nation. Why do our leaders always keep us at war? The infinity war We say we're a peaceful nation. Why do our leaders always keep us at war? Sam Ward (For The Washington Post) By Samuel Moyn and Stephen Wertheim December 13, 2019 Add to list On my list

    Now we know, thanks to The Afghanistan Papers published in The Washington Post this past week, that U.S. policymakers doubted almost from the start that the two-decade-long Afghanistan war could ever succeed. Officials didn't know who the enemy was and had little sense of what an achievable "victory" might look like. "We didn't have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking," said Douglas Lute, the Army three-star general who oversaw the conflict from the White House during the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

    And yet the war ground on, as if on autopilot. Obama inherited a conflict of which Bush had grown weary, and victory drew no closer after Obama's troop "surge" than when Bush pursued a small-footprint conflict. But while the Pentagon Papers, published in 1971 during the Vietnam War, led a generation to appreciate the perils of warmaking, a new generation may squander this opportunity to set things right. There is a reason the quagmire in Afghanistan, despite costing thousands of lives and $2 trillion , has failed to shock Americans into action: The United States for decades has made peace look unimaginable or unobtainable. We have normalized war.

    President Trump sometimes disrupts the pattern by vowing to end America's "endless wars." But he has extended and escalated them at every turn, offering nakedly punitive and exploitative rationales. In September, on the cusp of a peace deal with the Taliban, he discarded an agreement negotiated by his administration and pummeled Afghanistan harder than ever (now he's back to wanting to talk). In Syria, his promised military withdrawal has morphed into a grotesque redeployment to "secure" the country's oil .

    It is clearer than ever that the problem of American military intervention goes well beyond the proclivities of the current president, or the previous one, or the next. The United States has slowly slid away from any plausible claim of standing for peace in the world. The ideal of peace was one that America long promoted, enshrining it in law and institutions, and the end of the Cold War offered an unparalleled opportunity to advance the cause. But U.S. leaders from both parties chose another path. War -- from drone strikes and Special Operations raids to protracted occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan -- has come to seem inevitable and eternal, in practice and even in aspiration.

    Given World War II, Korea, Vietnam and many smaller conflicts throughout the Western Hemisphere, no one has ever mistaken the United States for Switzerland. Still, the pursuit of peace is an authentic American tradition that has shaped U.S. conduct and the international order. At its founding, the United States resolved to steer clear of the system of war in Europe and build a "new world" free of violent rivalry, as Alexander Hamilton put it .

    Indeed, Americans shrank from playing a fully global role until 1941 in part because they saw themselves as emissaries of peace (even as the United States conquered Native American land, policed its hemisphere and took Pacific colonies). U.S. leaders sought either to remake international politics along peaceful lines -- as Woodrow Wilson proposed after World War I -- or to avoid getting entangled in the squabbles of a fallen world. And when America embraced global leadership after World War II, it felt compelled to establish the United Nations to halt the "scourge of war," as the U.N. Charter says right at the start. At America's urging, the organization outlawed the use of force, except where authorized by its Security Council or used in self-defense.

    [ I owe my new life to my Marine husband's hideous death. I pay the price every day. ]

    Even when the United States dishonored that ideal in the years that followed, peace remained potent as a guiding principle. Vietnam provoked a broad-based antiwar movement. Congress passed the War Powers Resolution (WPR) to tame the imperial presidency. Such opposition to war is scarcely to be found today. (The Iraq War inspired massive protests, but they are a distant memory.) Consider that the United States has undertaken more armed interventions since the end of the Cold War than during it. According to the Congressional Research Service, more than 80 percent of all of the country's adventures abroad since 1946 came after 1989. Congress, whether under Democratic or Republican control, has allowed commanders in chief to claim the right to begin wars and continue them in perpetuity.

    Legal constraints on U.S. warmaking -- including international obligations, domestic statutes and constitutional duties -- ought to have returned to the fore after the Cold War, the rationale for America's vast mobilization in the second half of the 20th century. Instead, they have eroded to dust. At the outset of the 1990s, as President George H.W. Bush promised a "peace dividend" for Americans and a "peaceful international order" for all, the United States did rely more faithfully than before on Security Council approval for military operations. The Persian Gulf War, blessed by the United Nations to repel Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait, was legal under international law. But enthralled by its exorbitant primacy in world affairs, the United States turned away from international prohibitions on war, finding the rules too restricting.

    The next two presidents, attracted to liberal internationalist and neoconservative creeds that embraced armed force, treated international law cavalierly. Bill Clinton abused U.N. resolutions meant to control Saddam Hussein's weaponry to justify new attacks, including the bombing of Iraq in December 1998. The next year, the U.S.-led NATO operations in Kosovo suggested that America would unleash its military for ostensibly noble causes -- in this case to prevent heart-rending atrocity -- even without the pretense of legality. Despite failing to obtain U.N. approval, the Clinton administration said the intervention should not be treated as a precedent (though it became one). Others excused it as "illegal but legitimate," with self-professed moral intentions permissibly trumping law. "For the purpose of stopping genocide," commented the New Republic's Leon Wieseltier, "the use of force is not a last resort; it is a first resort."

    Once such arguments gained currency, their authors lost control of them. Conservative hawks found that a law-optional approach suited their agenda as well, and their liberal counterparts, if they disagreed at all, did so mostly as a matter of tactics, not principle. George W. Bush benefited from this permissive context when he launched the Iraq War, whose illegality was flagrant and catalytic, since it was unauthorized by the United Nations and relied on the administration's dangerous claim that "anticipatory self-defense" justifies invasion. The world took notice. Russia, in particular, seized on the new U.S. position as a spectacular excuse to make incursions of its own in Georgia in 2008 and in Ukraine in 2014.

    Obama won election in part because he ran against the Iraq War. In office, however, he cemented more than reversed America's disregard of international constraints on warmaking. While failing to end the war in Afghanistan, his administration exceeded the Security Council's authorization by working to overthrow Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi, converting a permission slip to avert atrocity into a blank check for regime change. Then, to punish the Islamic State, Obama bombed Syria on a contrived rationale -- one that allowed attacks against nations unwilling or unable to control terrorists on their territory. When he nearly struck again in response to Bashar al-Assad's use of chemical weapons, Obama laid the legal foundation for Trump to strike the Syrian government, again without a U.N. sign-off. Once highly valued, then defied only with controversy, international law now scarcely figures in U.S. decisions of war and peace.

    Like international law, U.S. domestic law enshrines an expectation of peace, setting a high bar for the resort to war. If war is to be waged, the Constitution requires Congress to declare it -- a purposeful grant of authority to the branch of government that best reflects the diverse interests of the people and therefore should be harder to rouse to conflict than one commander in chief. Yet the nation has drifted from that tradition, too. After defaulting on its constitutional obligation during the Cold War (partly on the grounds that the speed of a potential nuclear strike required a president who could respond quickly), Congress declined to reassert its authority after the Soviet threat passed.

    [ How Veterans Affairs denies care to many of the people it's supposed to serve ]

    In the 1990s, Congress might at least have kept faith with the WPR, which it passed in 1973 to rein in future presidents. The resolution calls for Congress to authorize "hostilities" within 60 days of their start; otherwise U.S. forces must withdraw. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, members of the House of Representatives brought presidents to court for taking military action in violation of the statute -- in El Salvador , the Persian Gulf War and Kosovo , for example. But advocates of the strategy all but gave up, and Congress itself increasingly deferred to presidential wars in the age of terrorism. By the time Obama intervened in Libya, the WPR lay in tatters. In a final indignity during the Libya operation, one administration lawyer explained that "hostilities" was an " ambiguous term of art " that might exclude aerial bombardment, so Congress did not need to approve a war that toppled a regime.

    This deference has proved costly, allowing Trump to pose as an antiwar candidate against the mainstream of two political parties, a somnolent Congress and inactive courts. Once in power, this wildly unpredictable chief executive finally clarified the danger of entrusting the world's mightiest military to one man's whims. Congress has begun to stir. In voting this year to end U.S. involvement in Yemen's civil war, it invoked the WPR for the first time while forces were active in battle.


    President Trump speaks to U.S. troops at Bagram air base in Afghanistan last month.
    though he has pledged to end America's "endless wars,"
    Trump, like past presidents, has instead extended them. (Tom Brenner/Reuters)

    Ultimately, elevating peace as a priority will require not merely changing legal norms but overturning the militarized concept of America's world role that permeates Washington. Somehow, despite waging near-perpetual war, the leaders of the most powerful country on Earth have convinced themselves that America is always on the brink of turning "isolationist," a peril against which every president since Ronald Reagan has warned as their terms wound down. Trump is likely to deviate from that rhetorical tradition, but the rest of the establishment carries on and doubles down. Today, it is military withdrawals, not destructive deployments, that freak out pundits and spur Cabinet members to resign, as Jim Mattis did last year over Trump's vow to pull troops from Syria. Abandoning the Kurds there this fall was Trump's " great betrayal ," lamented Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haass, who did not appear to lose sleep over our past military incursions.

    Under Trump, who applies "maximum pressure" to all foes foreign and domestic, American militarism is more perilous than ever. It is also more undeniable. That is one reason the current moment is surprisingly hopeful. The call to end "endless war" continues to rise on the flanks of both parties, even as it is flouted by leaders of each. More and more Americans insist that, whatever interests are served by endless war, their own are not. More than twice as many Americans prefer to lower than raise military spending, according to a 2019 Eurasia Group Foundation survey. Veterans support Trump's pledge to bring Middle East wars to a close: A majority of vets deem the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria not to have been worth fighting. The Afghanistan Papers ought to strengthen the consensus. Americans deserve a president who will act accordingly.

    The United States would find partners far and wide, in nations great and small, if it put peace first. It could make clear that while spreading democracy or human rights remains worthwhile, values cannot come at the point of a gun or serve as a pretext for war -- and that international peace is, in fact, a condition for human flourishing. Every time Washington searches for a monster to destroy, it shows the world's despots how to abuse the rules and hands demagogues a phantom to inflate. The alternative is not "isolationism" but something closer to the opposite: peaceful, lawful international cooperation against the major threats to humanity, including climate change, pandemic disease and widespread deprivation. Those are the enemies worth fighting, and bombs and bullets will not defeat them.

    Samuel Moyn is Henry R. Luce professor of jurisprudence and professor of history at Yale University and a fellow of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, and Stephen Wertheim is deputy director of research and policy at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He is also a research scholar at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University Follow @samuelmoyn and @stephenwertheim

    [Dec 14, 2019] Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation

    Highly recommended!
    Clapper and Brennan will be shaking in their boots after watching Barr's interview: done in "bad faith" = SEDITION !!!! Deep State operatives...ie, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Stork, Lisa, McCabe, should be held accountable. Obama should probably be impeached.
    The hard fact is, that the top of the FBI knew, in advance, that the "dossier" was just bs invented by Russian liars, for money, to be used as political lies for kilary's campaign. It Wasn't evidence and Comey knew far in advance of crossfire hurricane. I can't see less than 20 years in comey's future. That same includes barak, brennan and clapper, who were all informed, willing accomplices in this crime.
    10:30 Whoever in FBI that intentionally misled the court using the Steele dossier knowing that the dossier was "total rubbish" as Barr states, needs to be inditing immediately. Why we are continuing to investigate instead of inditimg while continuing to investigate. Until these people are held accountable I don't think our country will begin to heal and media and others apologize to the country for the damage they have done.
    7:49 - "Comey refused to sign back up for his security clearance, and therefore couldn't be questioned about classified matters." Well now, isn't that interesting. Haven't heard that one before.
    Dec 14, 2019 | www.youtube.com

    In an exclusive interview, Attorney General William Barr spoke to NBC News' Pete Williams about the findings on the Justice Department Inspector General's report on the Russia investigation and his criticisms of the FBI.

    grabir01 , 3 days ago

    It appears that none of AG Barr's answers were what Pete Williams wanted to hear.

    Gary Ellis , 2 days ago

    I sincerely hope that the Durham investigation brings people to justice for what they have done to our country.

    greg j , 2 days ago

    The man just admitted "this may be the biggest conspiracy in U.S Political History." Ouch!

    Jeremy Elice , 3 days ago

    Shame we didn't get to see Pete William's face during Barr's answer accusing "an irresponsible press of fanning the flames."

    JOHN DRUMHELLER , 2 days ago

    Here's the adult in the room. Look out children.

    Hart , 1 day ago

    This is like if Watergate was on steroids and then some. Everyone involved should be prosecuted including the person who bought the dossier

    Russell McAfee , 1 day ago (edited)

    The FBI never got the actual DNC server. Crowdstrike has it. The FBI got a 'forensic copy'

    Richard McLeod , 1 day ago

    The FBI has now been proven to be corrupt at its' highest levels.

    King Eris , 1 day ago

    I could listen to AG Barr talk for hours. He's so calm and professional.

    Noble Victory , 1 day ago

    Barr is so intelligent and just. He's smoothe like the way he plays the Bagpipes. Pretty amazing! 🇺🇸👍

    Nolan Gleason , 3 days ago

    Death to the swamp

    ctafrance , 1 day ago

    The press is hopelessly corrupt. If we didn't know it already, this interview proves it.

    Roman King , 1 day ago (edited)

    I'm So glade we have a competent attorney General pushing back on the massive disinformation narrative that comes from Giant News outlets of which are used to being unchallenged, unchecked by today's "journalistic standards"

    Clarion Call , 2 days ago

    I so respect and admire this man's brain and logical thinking. His vocabulary is great as well.

    wkcw1 , 2 days ago

    NBC realizing they need to take a bath on this whole thing. Probably a bit too late now.

    barbandrob1 , 1 day ago

    Barr just basically clarified and justified Fox news reporting over the last 2 years.. Thanks NBC

    Faris Hamarneh , 3 days ago

    I love Barr's nonchalant style. But this is real big and heads are going to roll

    Craig Bigelow , 2 days ago

    Obama spied on Trump. Obama should have known about the FISA warrant!

    Luis Santiago , 1 day ago

    so this guy really asked Bahr"why not open an investigation even with little evidence?" because is a violation of civil liberties to invade the privacy of law abiding citizens. You need compelling evidence for something so huge

    macfan128 , 1 day ago

    17:44 "Why should the Attorney General care that the FBI was spying on a presidential candidate?" LOLOLOLOL Our media is a jooooooooke.

    David , 3 days ago

    NBC did a straight up interview??? This is shocking. Who told them that they could start doing journalism again?

    Bill the Cat , 2 days ago

    Clapper and Brennan will be shaking in their boots after watching Barr's interview.

    Alan Sullivan , 1 day ago

    Horowitz should be instructed to edit or update his Report to discuss The Question of Bias and Evidence of Bias. He has clearly misguided Americans with his choice of words and has omitted important facts underpinning bias.

    MegaTrucker65 , 1 day ago

    I haven't looked into Ukraine YET.

    Gamer John3:18 , 1 day ago

    AG Barr is an outstanding role model, a man of integrity and wisdom, calm in a raging political storm. I have full confidence he will make those who fabricated evidence and hid exculpatory evidence finally face justice. AG Barr for President 2024!

    Yo Mama , 2 days ago

    Barr is a straight shooter and I love it. It sounds like we will get to the real truth eventually through Durhams investigation I just hope it doesnt take another year to get to the prosecutions.

    Direbear Coat , 1 day ago

    So, I watched the interview... The video is called, "Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation." Not once did I hear him criticize the I.G.'s report. In fact, A.G. Barr clarified that the I.G.'s report was limited in scope because of the limitations put on the I.G. He said that the report was appropriate.

    Wolverines Fight , 1 day ago

    It's scary to see how powerful the corruption of the Democratic Party has grown. It represents a serious threat to all our personal freedom. The Democratic Party has to be stopped.

    Benny .Burmeister Jørgensen , 3 days ago

    Ok after watching this interview its quite clear that Barr and Durham is going after these criminals and people are going to jail. Maybe there is hope for US yet becuase this dane consider US atm a banana republic. Spying on political candidates? Forging documents? You FBI behaving like Stalins secret police. Lets see what happen.

    Mike Dorsey , 1 day ago

    God Bless Bill Barr. I'm glad there's still some adults in government that will speak their mind intelligently, rationally and unabashedly.

    protochris , 1 day ago

    This guy is brilliant; he's clearly exposing the FBI and the barking dogs on the alphabet networks.

    Dan Kuo , 1 day ago

    Amazing for the AG to go in deep into enemy territory at the heart of the opposition media to lay out a case for the criminal activities that undermined our country prior to and after the 2016 election. The deep state is trembling at the prospect of being held accountable after all the facts are laid out to the american people that these activities cannot be brushed aside or swept under the carpet if we are to continue as a country.

    Jbyrd Texas , 2 days ago

    The corrupt media is trying to act like they have not been involved in this treasonous scam since the beginning working directly with the treasonous cabal. The media has been lying and pushing fake news for 3 years calling Trump a Russia agent and called him treasonous. I knew the whole time that they were lying there was evidence from day one that this was all lies and if I can see that from the public then they can definitely see that from the inside they are purposefully lying.

    Stephan Coutts , 1 day ago

    I dare anyone on here to research Barr's History back to his involvement in the assignation of JFK, the cover up, defending Nixon, Epstein, and many other illegal and immoral activities. After reviewing the evidence, I walked away believing that Barr is trying to cover up his tracks so he does do jail time. No need to reply. Either take my dare or not. God Bless America and ALL her people, Stephan

    Worlds Best Metal Detectorist , 2 days ago

    The public are sick of waiting . I find myself skipping through a half hour news show in 5 minutes flat looking for arrests ,whereas before I was rivited to every minute of the half hour show but it goes on and on and at the there is Nothiing .The Democrats are the masters , it's obvious . If they break the law they get off scott free . If you are republican wave bye bye , you will be in jail for years . America is not the free and fair country it is all cracked up to be . It is corrupted by the democrats who have peoiple in high places that thwart real justice.

    Right Thinking , 3 days ago

    Mifsud approached George! Who was Mifsud working for (western asset) and why did he approach George? He’s the one who offered George dirt on Hill. Then invited him to meet the fake “niece”, of Putin, in England! What about this information? Someone set George up to make this happen outside the US, because of EO 12333. It had to happen outside the US so they could go to the fisa court!

    dethtrk Jones , 3 days ago

    I dont trust Christopher Wrey. He keeps slow-walking all the FBI documents and declassifications. He also fights judicial watch and judges that rule in their favor and continue not giving over what is ordered! This last judge was ready to hold him in contempt for refusing to cooperate with court ordered documents.

    Brad Brown , 2 days ago

    Why did the FBI continue to investigate Trump after January when the case collapsed? To try and find a way to impeach Trump. Remember the Washington Post headlined article right after the inauguration "The effort to impeach President Donald John Trump is already underway." The FBI "insurance" policy was essential!

    [Dec 10, 2019] Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews: There are things more important than your tax rate by Paul Krugman

    Highly recommended!
    He is bad for Jewish programmers, nurses, etc. He is certainly good for Jewish financial oligarchs like Adelson and singer as well as Zionists like natuanuahoo.
    Notable quotes:
    "... I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm. ..."
    "... An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad ..."
    Dec 10, 2019 | www.nytimes.com

    On Saturday Donald Trump gave a speech to the Israeli American Council in which he asserted that many in his audience were "not nice people at all," but that "you have to vote for me" because Democrats would raise their taxes.

    Was he peddling an anti-Semitic stereotype, portraying Jews as money-grubbing types who care only about their wealth? Of course he was. You might possibly make excuses for his remarks if they were an isolated instance, but in fact Trump has done this sort of thing many times, for example asserting in 2015 that Jews weren't supporting him because he wasn't accepting their money and "you want to control your politicians."

    Well, it's not news that Trump's bigotry isn't restricted to blacks and immigrants. What is interesting, however, is that this particular anti-Semitic cliché -- that Jews are greedy, and that their political behavior is especially driven by their financial interests -- is empirically dead wrong. In fact, American Jews are much more liberal than you might expect given their economic situation.

    ... ... ...

    In other words, American Jews aren't the uniquely greedy, self-interested characters anti-Semites imagine them to be. But it would be foolish to make the opposite mistake and imagine that Jews are especially public-spirited; they're just people, with the same virtues and vices as everyone else. I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm.

    An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad

    MikeBoma

    MikeBoma VA 8m ago

    Excellent column to which I would add only that Trump is not pro-Israel. Rather, he is pro-Netanyahu because he identifies with individuals he identifies as apparent "strong men" and believes that making "deals" with Netanyahu and others of his ilk will be mutually and personally beneficial. Trump has no concern with national policy or the best interests of the U.S. It's all about his power and wealth and he is open to deals with others who share his principal concern with self-benefit above all else. Any action taken by Trump that may seem pro-Israel in reality is merely a means to a self-serving and perhaps corrupt end. Birds of a feather...
    esthermiriam DC 43m ago
    Surprised Paul didn't mention the main sponsor of the group that invited Trump to speak, the Israeli American Council, is Sheldon Adelson, whose politics are of the minority in the Jewish community but very close to Trump (and Bibi's). Which actually makes the speech rather even uglier, perhaps.
    NorthernVirginia Falls Church, VA 43m ago
    Difficult to appreciate why the US, or Krugman for that matter, would support a religion-based Apartheid country, much less associate with that country's chief lobbying arm. Say what you will about our founding fathers, but George Washington was absolutely prescient and correct in his farewell address when he advised against "a passionate attachment of one nation for another"; the "variety of evils" he warned of regularly manifest themselves.
    Bonku Madison 50m ago
    The question is not who is Trump bad for. The question is- who is he good for! He is not so great for his own die-hard supporters, or even his own long term interest. In fact, he sabotaged his own presidency and basically got himself into this impeachment affair. Almost everyone is suffering under this guy. Vast majority realized that as soon as he became the President. Many realized it little later. Hopefully the remaining tiny few will understand in near future.
    Mark New York 1h ago
    Dear Professor K, weaponizing religion is nothing new. What's most amazing is that people were cheering him while being marginalized as stereotypes. The God of Mamon won the evening. This is the only religion Trump adheres to. Apparently it's popular among other religions too.
    RLJ Manhattan 1h ago
    Trump is supported by the Chabad sect which is ultra-orthodox and ultra-right wing. And his go-between is Jared Kushner.
    RLJ Manhattan 1h ago
    Trump is supported by the Chabad sect which is ultra-orthodox and ultra-right wing. And his go-between is Jared Kushner.
    Sue Brooklyn 1h ago
    Please don't conflate my Judaism with support for Israel. Israel would not support me, a secular Jew. Brooklyn is my homeland. Next year in Flatbush.
    JayK CT 1h ago
    In my first 59 years, I'd never felt concern for my physical safety as a Jew in this country until this man became president. I knew exactly where this was all headed at the moment Sean Spicer took to the podium and lied to the country about the inauguration crowd size in his first official act for Trump. It made me sick to my stomach, and I couldn't believe that most people were laughing it off as no big deal. Any Jew who trust this administration is a fool, and although there a few more "precise" Yiddish words for these members of my tribe, I'll refrain from using them as I'm sure you can fill in the blanks just fine.
    Ilya Los Angeles 1h ago
    A good reference to this opinion column, which was written and probably edited by highly intelligent people- The Stupidity of Intelligence: What Happened to Common Sense? Every sentence could be easily argued and overturned based upon some simple facts.
    Bruce Rozenblit Kansas City, MO 2h ago
    Trump and his minions try to buy Jewish support by backing right wing Israelis in their goal of a greater Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. In fact, when asked if Trump is anti-Semitic, one his strongest supporters, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, gave the standard response, "Trump supports Israel". Supporting Israel is a political position. All the while, Trump has about as much use for Jews as Archie Bunker had for the Jews in his fictional law firm, Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz. Then they often mention that his son-in-law is Jewish, like he had a choice in the matter. Simultaneously, Trump derives strong support from white nationalists that would be perfectly happy to send all American Jews to Israel. Those two motivations are inexorably linked. Because of this linkage, I can't understand for one minute how American Jews can support Trump. Is the money that good? Do they think that their money can protect them? Others have made that mistake before.
    Luchino Brooklyn, New York 2h ago
    Among Trump's lies is that he is far more friendly to Israel than Obama was. Sadly, some Jews take this lie as fact and, because of this, overlook everything else Trump does or says, supporting him without wavering, no matter what.
    john connell columbia md 2h ago
    The difference is intelligence. My college psychology textbook said that Russian Jewish immigrants had the highest IQs of all identified ethnicities. Number two was all other Jews. Of course they voted for Hillary.
    Greg Cincinnati 2h ago
    The attachment the wealthy have for the Republican Party goes beyond just a lower tax rate. It is power and deference. The wealthy want an unquestioned dominance that not only protects and expands their wealth, but celebrates them not only for their wealth as symbol of personal success but of their moral superiority. Obama certainly did not threaten their wealth, and, in fact, pursued policies that protected them from the worst of the Great Recession. Yet, the masters of wealth whined endlessly about Obama not respecting them and that his language toward them was disrespectful and not sufficiently deferential. Trump's "policies" threaten long term economic health, and the wealth creation that keeps concentrating wealth at the top. His trade gyrations, his dismantling of the environmental regulatory regime to favor fossil fuels, and his reward and punishment of private corporations based on politics are doing the damage that no Democrat would ever inflict. Yet, nary a corporate executive will said a word, and far too many are happy to be props at events for Trump's endless glorification of himself. Because they, like Trump, believe themselves heroes and geniuses whose domination should never be questioned. So they and Trump wind up all being pretty comfortable with each other. The neo-liberal promise of free market economics producing rational economic actors free from political motives and protecting all of us from political abuse rings pretty hollow.
    James F Traynor Punta Gorda, FL 2h ago
    "I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm." Considering my age, and extrapolating therefrom, I think Einstein beat your friend to it. Pondering the moral weight given to Jewish thought at the time, Einstein thought political power was behind it, Jews simply had not the opportunity. As not unusual, Einstein's theory has been supported by experiment.
    Plato CT 2h ago
    Prof. Krugman, I loved this statement " An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad" Please make sure that your colleague Bret Stephens get this memo.
    Alan Kaplan Morristown, NJ 2h ago
    I loved Trump's conclusion that people who are not nice vote for him. This is almost certainly true, we need to all be nice and vote the clown out.
    Mike kelly nyc 2h ago
    The audience at the Israeli American Council cheered Trump enthusiastically through out his whole speech. They cheered when he said he learned his tricks from Sheldon Adelson. They cheered when he said that maybe he should stay for eight more years. They hardly thought he was anti-Semitic. He has done exactly what he promised his big donors starting with the embassy in Jerusalem. His shutting down of any opposition to the Netanyahu administration especially the BDS movement . He seems to know his audience very well and they were loving it.
    C. Bernard Florida 2h ago
    Trump is not just saying "look at the taxes you are saving", he's saying "look what I've done for Israel!" I don't understand why the media persists on calling him a white nationalist. His daughter and son in law are strict Jews, he recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, he's given them the Golan Heights and has listened to their advice on Iran (bad idea). He's not after Jewish votes necessarily, because there are only about 2 million Jews in the U.S . But being more "affluent on average" he's more likely after some big campaign contributions.
    Guesser San Francisco 2h ago
    Everyone in my Jewish family votes Democratic, although we have all done well financially. I remember growing up that my Dad would say that he personally would benefit financially from a Republican administration, but that it would not be good for the nation as a whole. I believe that it is not just self-interest and fear of anti-Semitism that has led Jews to favor the Democratic party, but also Jewish values, including wanting to make the world a better place.
    Watah Oakland, CA 2h ago
    Trump is our Nero for the 21st century. United States and the Republicans who support him will define the decline of our status in the world stage.
    JUHallCLU San Francisco Bay Area, CA 3h ago
    An argument can also be made that Netanyahu (extreme Right) has been excessively partisan to the degree that it has divided both Israel and diaspora Jews. Israel might be bettered by negotiating with all of its territorial stakeholders. Land is at issue. Palestinians will not vanish or evaporate. The West Bank must be addressed. The Trump rubber stamp of a Jarusalem Embassy does not solve much.
    Alan J. Shaw Bayside, NY 2h ago
    @Justice Support for Israel may mean many things, at its most basic it's a belief that Israel had and still has a right to exist among the nations of the world. If one believes that at its inception it was and continues to be nothing more than an "ethnoreligious state," that imay not be support , though Krugman distinguises between the former and criticism of the current Israeli administration. I suppose the commenter would also find theocratic states like Saudi Arabia or Iran "deeply problematic " One thing for sure is that most Jews will not suport the supposedly Zionist Trump when he says that Jews who vote Democratic are either uninformed or disloyal.
    Skip Moreland Baldwinsville 2h ago
    @Justice My own take is that american jews support having a home for jews, esp in the land they came from. But the government of Israel is conservative while most american jews are more liberal. There are many liberal jews in Israel. I support the idea of a homeland for the jews, just not how that has been accomplished. Real democracy is fragile and far too many countries are moving from democracy to more authoritarian governments.
    Eben Spinoza 5h ago
    I'm told that many Israelis who were enthusiastic about Trump got a wakeup call when he abandoned the Kurds. They now better understand that he regards everyone as disposable, and can't imagine that anyone could be motivated by something other than pure-self interest.
    edwardc San Francisco Bay Area 4h ago
    @Eben Sadly, Donald is not the first president to abandon the Kurds. In the words of Henry Kissinger, "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." Yes, this could conceivably at some time in the future be relevant to Israel. Even if not under Donald.
    Election Inspector Seattle 3h ago
    @edwardc - Kissinger, "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." Our current problem is that the "interests" being pursued are solely those of Donald Trump personally -- appeasing his secret Russian lenders; doing the bidding of "tough" guy dictators like Turkey's so he can feel tough himself and build hotels in their capitals; exercising his long held bigotry about people of color in this country. Our allies the Kurds, on the other hand, helped with an actual, important US national interest: beating ISIS and holding it back from growing again to where it can resume attacking us. But since that doesn't put money in Trump's pocket he abandons the cause.
    Concerned Citizen Anywheresville 2h ago
    @Eben : I have great empathy for the Kurdish people, but does "support for the Kurds" mean we must stay in Iraq and Afghanistan literally forever? we've already been there going on 17 years -- at the cost of trillions of dollars spent and thousands of American lives.
    Jacquie Iowa 5h ago
    "In last year's midterms, 52 percent of voters with incomes over $200,000 voted Republican, compared with only 38 percent of voters with incomes under $50,000. The rightward tilt is especially strong at the very top; although there are a few high-profile liberal billionaires, most of the extremely wealthy are also extremely right-wing." And that group will vote for Trump for re-election even if he is impeached unfortunately.
    Gone Coastal NorCal 5h ago
    Israel does not seem to understand the long term damage being done to its country. The U.S. has always been its number one defender, but there is a whole generation of Americans that think Israel is bad, that it is mistreating the Palestinians. Demographics are working against it. Israel can always look to Europe, but I don't know how that is going to work out in the long run.
    dr scott Kailua Kona 4h ago
    @Gone Coastal Trump is all about the sugar high you get from immediate gratification of the baser impulses. His influence will end soon enough, perhaps another five years but the potential destruction of the Repulican party and the reaction against Trumpism could last for decades. Its a big danger to Israel if Israel is just seen as the last gasp of European colonialism and a part of the Western white world : a European imposition on the middle east. Roosevelt tried to create institutions that would lead to peace though out the life times of the people who lived when he was president. Sadly Trump is making strides to destroy the institutions initiated by Roosevelt, leaving a world where small countries are more easily bullied by their larger neighbors.

    [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.

    Highly recommended!
    Dec 07, 2019 | www.unz.com

    Never in the history of America, probably never in the history of any country, had there been such open and direct control of governmental activities by the very rich. So long as a handful of men in Wall Street control the credit and industrial processes of the country, they will continue to control the press, the government, and, by deception, the people. They will not only compel the public to work for them in peace, but to fight for them in war. -- John Turner, 1922

    [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... A more plausible explanation is that Trump thought that by appointing such anti-Russian hard-liners he could lay to rest the Russiagate allegations that had hung over him for three years and still did: that for some secret nefarious reason he was and remained a "Kremlin puppet." Despite the largely exculpatory Mueller report, Trump's political enemies, mostly Democrats but not only, have kept the allegations alive. ..."
    "... The larger question is who should make American foreign policy: an elected president or Washington's permanent foreign policy establishment? (It is scarcely a "deep" or "secret" state, since its representatives appear on CNN and MSNBC almost daily.) Today, Democrats seem to think that it should be the foreign policy establishment, not President Trump. But having heard the cold-war views of much of that establishment, how will they feel when a Democrat occupies the White House? After all, eventually Trump will leave power, but Washington's foreign-policy "blob," as even an Obama aide termed it , will remain. ..."
    "... Listen to the podcast here ..."
    "... War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate ..."
    "... The John Batchelor Show ..."
    "... Trump's anti-Iranian fever is every bit as ludicrous as the DNC's anti-Russian fever. There is absolutely nothing to support the anti-Iranian policy argument or the anti JCPOA argument. The only thing that is missing from all of this is Iranian hookers, and that would certainly be an explosive headline! ..."
    "... You know why Rhodes called it the blob, right? Why he made it sound so formless and squishy? Ask yourself, how does a failed novelist with zilch for foreign-affairs credentials get the big job of Obama's ventriloquist? That's a CIA billet. It so happens that Rhodes' brother has a big job of his own with CBS News, the most servile of the Mockingbird media propaganda mills. ..."
    "... It's not a blob, it's a precisely-articulated hierarchy. And the top of it is CIA. So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who. For the CIA show trial run by Iran/Contra nomenklatura Bill Barr and his blackmailed flunky Durham, Trump's high crime and misdemeanor is conducting diplomacy without CIA supervision. They come out and say so, pointing to the National Security Act's mousetrap bureaucracy. ..."
    "... CIA runs your country. They've got impunity, they do what they want. We've got 400,000 academics paid to overthink it. ..."
    "... We cannot trust that the people that destroyed the country will repair it. It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths. If they were limited to just the CIA, America would be in far better shape than its in. The CIA is not capable of thinking or intelligence, so we should stop paying them. ..."
    "... Drumpf has been a tool of the Wall Street/Las Vegas Zionist billionaires for many, many years. so his selection of warmongering Zio neo-con advisors should be no surprise. ..."
    "... Perhaps part of the reason that Trump often seems to be surrounded by people who don't support his policies or values is, as Paul Craig Roberts suggested in 2016, that Trump would have real problems simply because he was an outsider. An outsider to the Washington swamp, a swamp that Clinton had been swimming in for decades. In short he didn't know who to trust, who to keep "in the tent" & who to shut out. Thus, we have had this huge churn in Secretaries & on so on downwards. ..."
    "... Sociopaths are the ones that do the worst because they lack any concern or "Empathy", like robots. So I read that the socio's are some of the brightest people who often are very successful in business etc. and can hide the fact that they would soon as kill as look at ya, but cool as ice, all they want is to get what the hell they want! They don't give a rats petoot who likes likes it or not, except as . ..."
    "... Trump hasn't fired any of the neocons, but he proved that he CAN fire defense executives. He fired the Sec of Navy for disagreeing with some ridiculous personal thing that Trump wanted to do. Since Trump hasn't fired any neocons, we have to conclude that he's fully on board. ..."
    "... There are so many security holes in the constitution of the USA including that it was ratified by those who invented it, not by a vote put to the people that would be made to suffer being governed by it. Basically the USA is useless as a defender of human rights (one of which is the right to self determination). The so called bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) are contractual promises, but like all clauses in contracts if there is no way to enforce them, then there is no use for the clause except maybe propaganda value. ..."
    "... In a normally functioning world you simply can't simultaneously argue that in one case West can bomb a country to force self-determination as in Kosovo, and also denounce exactly the same thing in Crimea. On to Catalonia and more self-determination ..."
    "... Trump, among his other occupations, used to engage with the professional wrestling circuit. In that well-staged entertainment there is always a bad guy – or a ' heel ' – who is used to stir up the crowds, the Evil Sheik or Rocky's hapless movie enemies. It makes it ' real '. The ' heel ' is sometimes allowed to win to better manage the audience. But the narrative never changes. Our rational judgments should focus on what happens, and on outcomes – not on talk, slogans, speeches, etc Based on that, Trump is a classical ' heel ' character. He might even be playing it consciously, or he has no choice. ..."
    "... To answer the question who runs ' foreign policy ', let's ignore the stadium speeches, and simply look at what happens. In a world bereft of enough profitable consumer things to do, and enough justifiable careers for unemployable geo-political security 'experts' of all kinds, having enemies and maybe even a small war occasionally is not such an irrational thing to want. Plus there are the deep ethnic hatreds and traumas going back generations that were naively imported into the heart of the Western world. (Washington warned against that 200+ years ago.) ..."
    "... or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric? ..."
    "... The fact is Trump is not an anti-neocon (Deep State) president he only talks that way. The fact that he surrounded himself with Deep State denizens gives lie to the thought that he is anti-Deep State no one can be that god damn stupid. ..."
    "... "TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE DUPED – Trump supporters are going to find out soon enough that they were duped by Donald Trump. Trump was given the script to run as the "Chaos Candidate" .He is just a pawn of the ruling elite .It is a tactic known as 'CONTROLLED OPPOSITION' ". Wasn't it FDR who said "Presidents are selected , they are not elected " ? ..."
    "... Trump selected the Neocons he is surrounded with. And he's given away all kinds of property that he has absolutely no legal authority to give. He was seeking to please American Oligarchs the likes of Adelson. That's American politics. "Money is free speech." Of course, there is another connection with foreign policy beyond the truly total corruption of American domestic politics, and that's through America's brutal empire abroad. ..."
    "... Obama or Trump, on the main matters of importance abroad – NATO, Russia, Israel/Palestine, China – there has been no difference, except Trump is more openly bellicose and given to saying really stupid things. ..."
    Dec 06, 2019 | www.unz.com
    President Trump campaigned and was elected on an anti-neocon platform: he promised to reduce direct US involvement in areas where, he believed, America had no vital strategic interest, including in Ukraine. He also promised a new détente ("cooperation") with Moscow.

    And yet, as we have learned from their recent congressional testimony, key members of his own National Security Council did not share his views and indeed were opposed to them. Certainly, this was true of Fiona Hill and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Both of them seemed prepared for a highly risky confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, though whether retroactively because of Moscow's 2014 annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.

    Similarly, Trump was slow in withdrawing Marie Yovanovitch, a career foreign service officer appointed by President Obama as ambassador to Kiev, who had made clear, despite her official position in Kiev, that she did not share the new American president's thinking about Ukraine or Russia. In short, the president was surrounded in his own administration, even in the White House, by opponents of his foreign policy and presumably not only in regard to Ukraine.

    How did this unusual and dysfunctional situation come about? One possibility is that it was the doing and legacy of the neocon John Bolton, briefly Trump's national security adviser. But this doesn't explain why the president would accept or long tolerate such appointees.

    A more plausible explanation is that Trump thought that by appointing such anti-Russian hard-liners he could lay to rest the Russiagate allegations that had hung over him for three years and still did: that for some secret nefarious reason he was and remained a "Kremlin puppet." Despite the largely exculpatory Mueller report, Trump's political enemies, mostly Democrats but not only, have kept the allegations alive.

    The larger question is who should make American foreign policy: an elected president or Washington's permanent foreign policy establishment? (It is scarcely a "deep" or "secret" state, since its representatives appear on CNN and MSNBC almost daily.) Today, Democrats seem to think that it should be the foreign policy establishment, not President Trump. But having heard the cold-war views of much of that establishment, how will they feel when a Democrat occupies the White House? After all, eventually Trump will leave power, but Washington's foreign-policy "blob," as even an Obama aide termed it , will remain.

    Listen to the podcast here . Stephen F. Cohen Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. A Nation contributing editor, his most recent book, War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate , is available in paperback and in an ebook edition. His weekly conversations with the host of The John Batchelor Show , now in their sixth year, are available at www.thenation.com .

    Curmudgeon , says: December 5, 2019 at 8:49 pm GMT

    because of Moscow's 2014 annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.

    In an otherwise decent overview, this sticks out like a sore thumb. It would be helpful to stop using the word annexation. While correct in a technical sense – that Crimea was added to the Russian Federation – the word comes with all kinds of connotations, that imply illegality and or force. Given Crimea was given special status when gifted to Ukraine for administration by the USSR, one could just as easily apply "annexation" of Crimea to Ukraine. After Ukraine voted to "leave" the USSR, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Obviously the "Ukrainian" vote did not include Crimea. Even after voting to join Ukraine, Crimea had special status within Ukraine, and was semi autonomous. If you can vote to join, you can vote to leave. Either you have the right to self determination, or you don't.

    Rebel0007 , says: December 5, 2019 at 10:38 pm GMT
    This is what is so infuriating, Stephen! These silent coups of the executive branch have been taking place for my entire life! Both parties are guilty of refusing to appoint cabinet members that the elected presidents would have chosen for themselves, because both parties are more interested in making the president of the opposing party look bad, make him ineffective, and incapable of carrying out policies that he was elected to carry out. That is the very definition of treason!

    Things are a disaster. The JCPOA is at the heart of the issue and Trump and his advisors stubborn refusal to capitulate on this issue very well may cause Trump to lose the 2020 election. Trump's anti-Iranian fever is every bit as ludicrous as the DNC's anti-Russian fever. There is absolutely nothing to support the anti-Iranian policy argument or the anti JCPOA argument. The only thing that is missing from all of this is Iranian hookers, and that would certainly be an explosive headline!

    The anti-Iranian fever has created so much havoc not only with Iran, but with every country on earth other than Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Germany announced that it is seeking to unite with Russia, not only for Gazprom, but is now considering purchasing defense systems from Russia, and Germany is dictating EU policy, by and large. Germany has said that Europe must be able to defend itself independent of America and is requesting an EU military and Italy is on board with this idea, seeking to create jobs and weapons for its economy and defense.

    The EU is fed up with the economic sanctions placed on countries that the U.S. has black-listed, particularly Russia and Iran, and China as well for Huwaei 5G.

    Nobody in their right mind could ever claim this to be the free market capitalism that Larry Kudlow espouses!

    National Institute for Study of the O... , says: December 5, 2019 at 11:00 pm GMT
    You know why Rhodes called it the blob, right? Why he made it sound so formless and squishy? Ask yourself, how does a failed novelist with zilch for foreign-affairs credentials get the big job of Obama's ventriloquist? That's a CIA billet. It so happens that Rhodes' brother has a big job of his own with CBS News, the most servile of the Mockingbird media propaganda mills.

    It's not a blob, it's a precisely-articulated hierarchy. And the top of it is CIA. So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who. For the CIA show trial run by Iran/Contra nomenklatura Bill Barr and his blackmailed flunky Durham, Trump's high crime and misdemeanor is conducting diplomacy without CIA supervision. They come out and say so, pointing to the National Security Act's mousetrap bureaucracy.

    CIA runs your country. They've got impunity, they do what they want. We've got 400,000 academics paid to overthink it.

    follyofwar , says: December 5, 2019 at 11:53 pm GMT
    @Curmudgeon Pat Buchanan also uses the word "annexation" all the time.
    Rebel0007 , says: December 6, 2019 at 4:31 am GMT
    National Institute for the study of the obvious,

    The CIA has no authority what so ever as defined by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. That would make them guilty of a coup which would be an act of treason, so if what you claim is true, why have they not been prosecuted.

    It is a political game between to competing kleptocratic cults. The DNC and RNC are whores and will do what ever their donors tell them to do. That is also treason. This country is just a total wasteland.

    Everyone has pledged allegiance to fraud.

    Too big to fail, like the Titanic and the Hindenberg.

    We cannot trust that the people that destroyed the country will repair it. It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths. If they were limited to just the CIA, America would be in far better shape than its in. The CIA is not capable of thinking or intelligence, so we should stop paying them.

    Haxo Angmark , says: Website December 6, 2019 at 6:01 am GMT
    Drumpf has been a tool of the Wall Street/Las Vegas Zionist billionaires for many, many years. so his selection of warmongering Zio neo-con advisors should be no surprise.
    Monty Ahwazi , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:03 am GMT
    What kind of stupid question is this? You mean you don't know or asking us for confirmation? If you really don't know then why are you writing an article about it? If you do know then why are you asking the UNZ readers?
    animalogic , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:21 am GMT
    Perhaps part of the reason that Trump often seems to be surrounded by people who don't support his policies or values is, as Paul Craig Roberts suggested in 2016, that Trump would have real problems simply because he was an outsider. An outsider to the Washington swamp, a swamp that Clinton had been swimming in for decades. In short he didn't know who to trust, who to keep "in the tent" & who to shut out. Thus, we have had this huge churn in Secretaries & on so on downwards.
    EdNels , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:49 am GMT
    @Rebel0007

    It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths.

    That's ok but it's a bit unfair to Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths After all most of the country is Hedonistic as hell, it sells commercials or wtf. Satanic is philosophical and way over the heads of these clowns, though if the be a Satan, then they are in the plan for sure, and right on the mark. As for psychopaths, those are criminals who are insane, but they can have remorse and be their own worst enemies, often they just go off and go psycho and bad things happen, but can be unplanned off the wall stuff, not diabolic.

    Sociopaths are the ones that do the worst because they lack any concern or "Empathy", like robots. So I read that the socio's are some of the brightest people who often are very successful in business etc. and can hide the fact that they would soon as kill as look at ya, but cool as ice, all they want is to get what the hell they want! They don't give a rats petoot who likes likes it or not, except as .

    So, once upon a time, a people got so hedonistic and they didn't watch the game and theier leaders were low quality (especially religeous/morals ) and long story short Satan unleashed the Socio's , Things seem to be heading disastrously, so will bit coin save the day? Green nudeal?

    Jon Baptist , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:54 am GMT
    The simple questions that beg to be asked are who are the accusers and what media agencies are providing the amplification to transmit these accusations?
    https://forward.com/news/national/434664/impeachment-trump-democrats-jewish/
    https://www.jta.org/2019/11/15/politics/the-tell-the-jewish-players-in-impeachment

    There is also this link courtesy of Haass' CFR – https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/russia-trump-and-2016-us-election

    While massive attention is directed towards Russia and the Ukraine, the majority of the public are shown the slight of hand and their attention is never brought near to the real perpetrators of subverting American and British foreign policy.

    https://electronicintifada.net/content/watch-film-israel-lobby-didnt-want-you-see/25876
    http://joshdlindsay.com/2019/04/the-israel-lobby-in-the-u-s-al-jazeera-documentary/
    The Truth Archive
    2K subscribers
    The Israeli Lobby in the United States of America (2017) – Full Documentary HD

    polistra , says: December 6, 2019 at 7:49 am GMT
    Doesn't matter if he's surrounded. A president CAN make foreign policy, and a president CAN fire people who disagree with his policy. Trump hasn't fired any of the neocons, but he proved that he CAN fire defense executives. He fired the Sec of Navy for disagreeing with some ridiculous personal thing that Trump wanted to do. Since Trump hasn't fired any neocons, we have to conclude that he's fully on board.
    sally , says: December 6, 2019 at 8:51 am GMT
    @Rebel0007

    The CIA has no authority what so ever as defined by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. That would make them guilty of a coup which would be an act of treason, so if what you claim is true, why have they not been prosecuted.

    --
    first off the supreme law of the land maybe the Constitution and to oppose it may be Treason, but the Law that is supreme to the Law of the land is Human rights law.. it is far superior to, and it is the TLD of all laws of the land of all of the Nation States that mankind has allowed the greedy among its masses, to impose.

    There are so many security holes in the constitution of the USA including that it was ratified by those who invented it, not by a vote put to the people that would be made to suffer being governed by it. Basically the USA is useless as a defender of human rights (one of which is the right to self determination). The so called bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) are contractual promises, but like all clauses in contracts if there is no way to enforce them, then there is no use for the clause except maybe propaganda value.

    If you note the USA constitution has seven articles..

    Article 1 is about 525 elected members of congress and their very limited powers to control
    foreign activities. Each qualified to vote member of the governed (a citizen so to speak) is allowed to
    vote for only 3 of the 525 persons. so basically there is no real national election anywhere .

    Article II grants the electoral college the power to appoint two persons full control of the assets,
    resources and manpower of America to conquer the entire world or to make peace in the entire world.
    Either way: the governed are not allowed to vote for either; the EC vote determines the P or VP.

    Article III allows the Article II person to appoint yes men to the judiciary

    Where exist the power of the governed to deny USA governors the ability to the use the powers the constitution claims the governors are to have, against the governed? <==No where I can find? Theoretically, the governed are protected from abuse for as long as it takes to conduct due process?

    One person, the Article II person, is basically the king when in comes to constitutional authority to establish, conduct, prosecute or defend USA involvement in foreign affairs.

    No where does the constitution of the USA deny its President the use of American resources or USA military power, to make and use diplomat appointments, or to use the USA to use the wealth of America and the hegemonic powers of the USA to make a private or public profit in a foreign land. <= d/n matter if the profit is personal to the President or if it assigned by appointment (like the feudal powers granted by the feudal kings to the feudal lords) to corporate feudal lords or oligarch personal interest.

    AFAICT, the president can USE the USA to conduct war, invade or otherwise infringe on, even destroy, the territory, or a private or public interest, within a foreign sovereign more or less at will. So if the President wants to command a private or secret Army like the CIA, he can as far as I can tell, obviously this president does, because he could with his pen alone shut it down.

    Seems to me the "NO" from Wilson's four points

    1. no more secret diplomacy peace settlement must not lead the way to new wars
    2. no retribution, unjust claims, and huge fines <basically indemnities paid by the losers to the winners.
    3. no more war; includes controls on armaments and arming of nations.
    4. no more Trade Barriers so the nations of the world would become more interdependent.

    have been made the essence of nation state operations world wide.

    IMO, The CIA exists at the pleasure of the President.

    Beckow , says: December 6, 2019 at 9:29 am GMT
    @Curmudgeon all of that, plus the Kosovo precedent.

    In a normally functioning world you simply can't simultaneously argue that in one case West can bomb a country to force self-determination as in Kosovo, and also denounce exactly the same thing in Crimea. On to Catalonia and more self-determination

    Beckow , says: December 6, 2019 at 9:52 am GMT
    Trump, among his other occupations, used to engage with the professional wrestling circuit. In that well-staged entertainment there is always a bad guy – or a ' heel ' – who is used to stir up the crowds, the Evil Sheik or Rocky's hapless movie enemies. It makes it ' real '. The 'heel ' is sometimes allowed to win to better manage the audience. But the narrative never changes. Our rational judgments should focus on what happens, and on outcomes – not on talk, slogans, speeches, etc Based on that, Trump is a classical ' heel ' character. He might even be playing it consciously, or he has no choice.

    To answer the question who runs ' foreign policy ', let's ignore the stadium speeches, and simply look at what happens. In a world bereft of enough profitable consumer things to do, and enough justifiable careers for unemployable geo-political security 'experts' of all kinds, having enemies and maybe even a small war occasionally is not such an irrational thing to want. Plus there are the deep ethnic hatreds and traumas going back generations that were naively imported into the heart of the Western world. (Washington warned against that 200+ years ago.)

    Anon [424] Disclaimer , says: December 6, 2019 at 10:47 am GMT
    https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/majority-germans-wants-less-reliance-us-more-engagement-russia/ri27985

    Macron said that NATO is " brain dead " :

    https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-warns-europe-nato-is-becoming-brain-dead

    The more the US sanctions so many countries around the world , the more the US generate an anti US reaction around the world .

    gotmituns , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:09 am GMT
    Who Is Making US Foreign Policy?
    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
    Could it be israel?
    DrWatson , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:20 am GMT
    Trump should have kept Steve Bannon as his advisor and should have fired instead his son-in-law. Perhaps "they" are blackmailing Trump with photos like here: https://www.pinterest.com/richarddesjarla/creepy/

    That would explain why Trump is so ineffective at making a reality anything he campaigned for.

    Marshall Lentini , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:28 am GMT
    @melpol Betas in power -- an underappreciated dimension of this morass.
    propagandist hacker , says: Website December 6, 2019 at 11:29 am GMT
    or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric?
    Realist , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:52 am GMT

    An anti-neocon president appears to have been surrounded by neocons in his own administration.

    The fact is Trump is not an anti-neocon (Deep State) president he only talks that way. The fact that he surrounded himself with Deep State denizens gives lie to the thought that he is anti-Deep State no one can be that god damn stupid.

    Realist , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:00 pm GMT
    @sally

    IMO, The CIA exists at the pleasure of the President.

    The CIA sees it differently; and they are part of the Deep State.

    Realist , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:03 pm GMT
    @propagandist hacker

    or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric?

    That is my contention.

    Sean , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:11 pm GMT
    MICHAEL CARPENTER Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia from 2015 to 2017.

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2019-11-26/oligarchs-who-lost-ukraine-and-won-washington

    Halfway around the world from Washington's halls of power, Ukraine sits along a civilizational and geopolitical fault line. To Ukraine's west are the liberal democracies of Europe, governed by rule of law and democratic principles. To its east are Russia and its client states in Eurasia, almost all of which are corrupt oligarchies. [ ] In this war on democratic movements and democratic principles, Russia's biggest prize and chief adversary has always been the United States. Until now, however, Russia has always had to contend with bipartisan resolve to counter

    No mention of China, and this is the problem with the whole foreign policy establishment not just the neocons. Russia is more of an annoyance than anything, but they are still operating assumptions on what is the Geographical Pivot of History , so they want to talk about Russia. Like an Edwardian sea cadet we are supposed to care about Russia getting (back) a water port in Crimea. Mahan's definition of sea power included a strong commercial fleet. After tearing their own environment apart like a car in a wrecking yard and heating up the planet China has taken time out from deforestation and colonising Tibet, to send huge container vessels full of cheap goods through the melting Arctic round the top of Russia all the better to get to Europe and deindustrialise it.

    Western elites have sold out to China, seen as the future, so we hear about Russia rather than the three million Uyghurs in concentration camps complete with constantly smoking crematoria, and harvesting of organs for rich foreigners.

    Who poses a greater threat to the West: China or Russia?
    By the time the West finds itself in open conflict with Beijing, we will have lost our relative advantage. Brendan Simms and K.C. Lin [ ] The concept of China being a threat is harder to comprehend. In what way? Yes, its hacking and intellectual property theft is a headache. But is it worse than what Russia is up to? And don't we need Chinese investment, so does it really matter if China builds our 5G mobile networks? In London, ministers agonise over these issues -- not knowing whether to pity China (we still send foreign aid there), beg for its money and contracts (with prime ministerial trade trips), or treat it as a potential antagonist.

    Aid ! They sent robots to the far side of the Moon

    Beijing has been the beneficiary of liberal revulsion at the Trump presidency: if the Donald is against the Chinese, who cannot be for them? As a result, Trump's efforts to address China's unfair trade practices have so far missed the mark with the domestic and international audience. As Trump declares war on free trade, China -- one of the most protectionist economies in the world -- is now celebrated at Davos as the avatar of free trade. Later this month, China's Vice-President is likely to be in attendance at Davos -- and there is even talk of him meeting with Trump. Similarly, the messiness of American politics has made China's one-party state an apparent poster boy of political stability and governability.

    9/11 Inside job , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:14 pm GMT
    911endofdays.blogspot.com : "Sackcloth&Ashes – The 16th Trump of Arcana " :

    "TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE DUPED – Trump supporters are going to find out soon enough that they were duped by Donald Trump. Trump was given the script to run as the "Chaos Candidate" .He is just a pawn of the ruling elite .It is a tactic known as 'CONTROLLED OPPOSITION' ".
    Wasn't it FDR who said "Presidents are selected , they are not elected " ?

    JOHN CHUCKMAN , says: Website December 6, 2019 at 12:25 pm GMT

    Trump selected the Neocons he is surrounded with. And he's given away all kinds of property that he has absolutely no legal authority to give. He was seeking to please American Oligarchs the likes of Adelson. That's American politics. "Money is free speech." Of course, there is another connection with foreign policy beyond the truly total corruption of American domestic politics, and that's through America's brutal empire abroad.

    The military/intelligence imperial establishment definitely see Israel as a kind of American colony in the Mideast, and they make sure that it's well provided for. That's what the Neocon Wars have been about. Paving over large parts of Israel's noisy neighborhood. And that includes matters like keeping Syria off-balance with occupation in its northeast. And constantly threatening Iran.

    Obama or Trump, on the main matters of importance abroad – NATO, Russia, Israel/Palestine, China – there has been no difference, except Trump is more openly bellicose and given to saying really stupid things.

    By the way, the last President who tried seriously to make foreign policy as the elected head of government left half of his head splattered on thec streets of Dallas.

    Sick of Orcs , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:36 pm GMT
    @propagandist hacker Or he was fooled, tricked, bribed, coerced by The HoloNose.

    Don't get me wrong, the Orange Sellout is to blame regardless.

    9/11 Inside job , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:37 pm GMT
    @Jon Baptist We have all been brainwashed by the propaganda screened by the massmedia ,whether it be FOX , MSNBC , CBS ,etc.. SeptemberClues.info has a good article entitled "The central role of the news media on 9/11 " :

    "The 9/11 psyop relied foremostly on that weakspot of ours .We all fell for the images we saw on TV at the time we can only wonder why so many never questioned the absurd TV coverage proposed by all the major networks The 9/11 TV imagery of the crucial morning events was just a computer-animated, pre-fabricated movie."

    Was "The Harley Guy" a crisis actor ?

    geokat62 , says: December 6, 2019 at 1:00 pm GMT
    @National Institute for Study of the Obvious

    So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who.

    Close. You got 4 of the correct letters, AIPAC. You were just missing the P.

    CIA runs your country.

    No, Jewish Supremacist oligarchs run America.

    Herald , says: December 6, 2019 at 1:05 pm GMT
    @follyofwar Pat inhabits a strange Hollywood type world, where the US is always the good guy. He believes that, although the US may make foreign policy mistakes, its aims and ambitions are nevertheless noble and well intentioned.

    In Pat's world it's still circa 1955, but even then, his take on US foreign policy would have been hopelessly unrealistic.

    [Dec 04, 2019] Responding to Lt. Col. Vindman about my Ukraine columns with the facts John Solomon Reports

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Fact 10 : Shokin stated in interviews with me and ABC News that he was told he was fired because Joe Biden was unhappy the Burisma investigation wasn't shut down. He made that claim anew in this sworn deposition prepared for a court in Europe. You can read that here . ..."
    "... Fact 11 : The day Shokin's firing was announced in March 2016, Burisma's legal representatives sought an immediate meeting with his temporary replacement to address the ongoing investigation. You can read the text of their emails here . ..."
    "... Fact 13 : Burisma officials eventually settled the Ukraine investigations in late 2016 and early 2017, paying a multimillion dollar fine for tax issues. You can read their lawyer's February 2017 announcement of the end of the investigations here . ..."
    "... Fact 15 : The Ukraine embassy in Washington issued a statement in April 2019 admitting that a Democratic National Committee contractor named Alexandra Chalupa solicited Ukrainian officials in spring 2016 for dirt on Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort in hopes of staging a congressional hearing close to the 2016 election that would damage Trump's election chances. You can read the embassy's statement here and here . Your colleague, Dr. Fiona Hill, confirmed this episode, testifying "Ukraine bet on the wrong horse. They bet on Hillary Clinton winning." You can read her testimony here . ..."
    "... Fact 18 : A Ukrainian district court ruled in December 2018 that the summer 2016 release of information by Ukrainian Parliamentary member Sergey Leschenko and NABU director Artem Sytnyk about an ongoing investigation of Manafort amounted to an improper interference by Ukraine's government in the 2016 U.S. election. You can read the court ruling here . Leschenko and Sytnyk deny the allegations, and have won an appeal to suspend that ruling on a jurisdictional technicality. ..."
    "... Fact 21 : In April 2016, US embassy charge d'affaires George Kent sent a letter to the Ukrainian prosecutor general's office demanding that Ukrainian prosecutors stand down a series of investigations into how Ukrainian nonprofits spent U.S. aid dollars, including the Anti-Corruption Actions Centre. You can read that letter here . Kent testified he signed the letter here . ..."
    "... Fact 22 : Then-Ukraine Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko said in a televised interview with me that Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch during a 2016 meeting provided the lists of names of Ukrainian nationals and groups she did want to see prosecuted. You can see I accurately quoted him by watching the video here . ..."
    "... Fact 27 : In May 2016, one of George Soros' top aides secured a meeting with the top Eurasia policy official in the State Department to discuss Russian bond issues. You can read the State memos on that meeting here . ..."
    "... Fact 28 : In June 2016, Soros himself secured a telephonic meeting with Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland to discuss Ukraine policy. You can read the State memos on that meeting here . ..."
    Dec 04, 2019 | johnsolomonreports.com

    honor and applaud Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman's service to his country. He's a hero. I also respect his decision to testify at the impeachment proceedings. I suspect neither his service nor his testimony was easy.

    But I also know the liberties that Lt. Col. Vindman fought on the battlefield to preserve permit for a free and honest debate in America, one that can't be muted by the color of uniform or the crushing power of the state.

    So I want to exercise my right to debate Lt. Col. Vindman about the testimony he gave about me. You see, under oath to Congress, he asserted all the factual elements in my columns at The Hill about Ukraine were false, except maybe my grammar

    Here are his exact words:

    "I think all the key elements were false," Vindman testified.

    Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y, pressed him about what he meant. "Just so I understand what you mean when you say key elements, are you referring to everything John Solomon stated or just some of it?"

    "All the elements that I just laid out for you. The criticisms of corruption were false . Were there more items in there, frankly, congressman? I don't recall. I haven't looked at the article in quite some time, but you know, his grammar might have been right."

    Such testimony has been injurious to my reputation, one earned during 30 years of impactful reporting for news organizations that included The Associated Press, The Washington Post, The Washington Times and The Daily Beast/Newsweek.

    And so Lt. Col. Vindman, here are the 28 primary factual elements in my Ukraine columns, complete with attribution and links to sourcing. Please tell me which, if any, was factually wrong.

    Lt. Col. Vindman, if you have information that contradicts any of these 28 factual elements in my columns I ask that you make it publicly available. Your testimony did not.

    If you don't have evidence these 28 facts are wrong, I ask that you correct your testimony because any effort to call factually accurate reporting false only misleads America and chills the free debate our Constitutional framers so cherished to protect.

    [Dec 04, 2019] America's War Exceptionalism Is Killing the Planet by William Astore

    Highly recommended!
    Our leaders like to say we value human rights around the world, but what they really manifest is greed. It all makes sense in a Gekko- or Machiavellian kind of way.
    Highly recommended !
    Notable quotes:
    "... Think of this as the new American exceptionalism. In Washington, war is now the predictable (and even desirable) way of life, while peace is the unpredictable (and unwise) path to follow. In this context, the U.S. must continue to be the most powerful nation in the world by a country mile in all death-dealing realms and its wars must be fought, generation after generation, even when victory is never in sight. And if that isn't an "exceptional" belief system, what is? ..."
    "... A partial list of war's many uses might go something like this: war is profitable , most notably for America's vast military-industrial complex ; war is sold as being necessary for America's safety, especially to prevent terrorist attacks; and for many Americans, war is seen as a measure of national fitness and worthiness, a reminder that "freedom isn't free." In our politics today, it's far better to be seen as strong and wrong than meek and right. ..."
    "... If America's wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen prove anything, it's that every war scars our planet -- and hardens our hearts. Every war makes us less human as well as less humane. Every war wastes resources when these are increasingly at a premium. Every war is a distraction from higher needs and a better life. ..."
    "... I think that the main reason of the current level of militarism in the USA foreign policy is that after dissolution of the USSR neo-conservatives were allowed to capture the State Department and foreign policy establishment. This process actually started under Reagan. During Bush II administration those “crazies from the basement” fully controlled the US foreign policy and paradoxically they continued to dominate in Obama administration too. ..."
    "... Which also means that the USA foreign policy is not controlled by the elected officials but by the “Deep State” (look at Vindman and Fiona Hill testimonies for the proof). So this is kind of Catch 22 in which the USA have found itself. We will be bankrupted by our neoconservative foreign establishment (which self-reproduce in each and every administration). And we can do nothing to avoid it. ..."
    "... they are not only lobbyists for MIC, but they also serve as "ideological support", trying to manipulate public opinion in favor of militarism. ..."
    "... Yes. Ideology is vital. During the Cold War it was all about containing/resisting/defeating the godless Communists. Once they were defeated, what then? We heard brief talk about a "peace dividend," but then the neocons came along, selling full-spectrum dominance and America as the sole superpower. ..."
    "... The neocons were truly unleashed by the 9/11 attacks, which they exploited to put their vision in motion. The Complex was only too happy to oblige, fed as it was by massive resources. ..."
    "... Leaving that specific incident aside, the bigger picture is that the brains behind the Deep State understand that global capitalism is running out of new resources (which includes human labor) to exploit. Why is the US so concerned with Africa right now, with spies and Special Forces operatives all over that continent? Africa is the final frontier for development/exploitation. (The US is also deeply concerned about China's setting down business roots there, and wants to counterbalance their activities.) ..."
    "... The brains in the US Ruling Class know full well that natural resources will become ever more valuable moving forward, as weather disasters make it harder to access them. Thus, the Neo-Cons (you thought I'd never get around to them, right?) came to the fore because they advocate the unbridled use of brute military force to obtain what they want from the world. Or, to use their own terminology, the US "must have the capability to project force anywhere on the planet" at a moment's notice. President Obama was fully in agreement with that concept. Beware the wolf masquerading as a peaceable sheep! ..."
    Dec 02, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    By William Astore, a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF) and history professor. His personal blog is Bracing Views . Originally published at TomDispatch

    Ever since 2007, when I first started writing for TomDispatch , I've been arguing against America's forever wars, whether in Afghanistan , Iraq , or elsewhere . Unfortunately, it's no surprise that, despite my more than 60 articles, American blood is still being spilled in war after war across the Greater Middle East and Africa, even as foreign peoples pay a far higher price in lives lost and cities ruined . And I keep asking myself: Why, in this century, is the distinctive feature of America's wars that they never end? Why do our leaders persist in such repetitive folly and the seemingly eternal disasters that go with it?

    Sadly, there isn't just one obvious reason for this generational debacle. If there were, we could focus on it, tackle it, and perhaps even fix it. But no such luck.

    So why do America's disastrous wars persist ? I can think of many reasons , some obvious and easy to understand, like the endless pursuit of profit through weapons sales for those very wars, and some more subtle but no less significant, like a deep-seated conviction in Washington that a willingness to wage war is a sign of national toughness and seriousness. Before I go on, though, here's another distinctive aspect of our forever-war moment: Have you noticed that peace is no longer even a topic in America today? The very word, once at least part of the rhetoric of Washington politicians, has essentially dropped out of use entirely. Consider the current crop of Democratic candidates for president. One, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, wants to end regime-change wars, but is otherwise a self-professed hawk on the subject of the war on terror. Another, Senator Bernie Sanders, vows to end " endless wars " but is careful to express strong support for Israel and the ultra-expensive F-35 fighter jet.

    The other dozen or so tend to make vague sounds about cutting defense spending or gradually withdrawing U.S. troops from various wars, but none of them even consider openly speaking of peace . And the Republicans? While President Trump may talk of ending wars, since his inauguration he's sent more troops to Afghanistan and into the Middle East, while greatly expanding drone and other air strikes , something about which he openly boasts .

    War, in other words, is our new normal, America's default position on global affairs, and peace, some ancient, long-faded dream. And when your default position is war, whether against the Taliban, ISIS, "terror" more generally, or possibly even Iran or Russia or China , is it any surprise that war is what you get? When you garrison the world with an unprecedented 800 or so military bases , when you configure your armed forces for what's called power projection, when you divide the globe -- the total planet -- into areas of dominance (with acronyms like CENTCOM, AFRICOM, and SOUTHCOM) commanded by four-star generals and admirals, when you spend more on your military than the next seven countries combined, when you insist on modernizing a nuclear arsenal (to the tune of perhaps $1.7 trillion ) already quite capable of ending all life on this and several other planets, what can you expect but a reality of endless war?

    Think of this as the new American exceptionalism. In Washington, war is now the predictable (and even desirable) way of life, while peace is the unpredictable (and unwise) path to follow. In this context, the U.S. must continue to be the most powerful nation in the world by a country mile in all death-dealing realms and its wars must be fought, generation after generation, even when victory is never in sight. And if that isn't an "exceptional" belief system, what is?

    If we're ever to put an end to our country's endless twenty-first-century wars, that mindset will have to be changed. But to do that, we would first have to recognize and confront war's many uses in American life and culture.

    War, Its Uses (and Abuses)

    A partial list of war's many uses might go something like this: war is profitable , most notably for America's vast military-industrial complex ; war is sold as being necessary for America's safety, especially to prevent terrorist attacks; and for many Americans, war is seen as a measure of national fitness and worthiness, a reminder that "freedom isn't free." In our politics today, it's far better to be seen as strong and wrong than meek and right.

    As the title of a book by former war reporter Chris Hedges so aptly put it , war is a force that gives us meaning. And let's face it, a significant part of America's meaning in this century has involved pride in having the toughest military on the planet, even as trillions of tax dollars went into a misguided attempt to maintain bragging rights to being the world's sole superpower.

    And keep in mind as well that, among other things, never-ending war weakens democracy while strengthening authoritarian tendencies in politics and society. In an age of gaping inequality , using up the country's resources in such profligate and destructive ways offers a striking exercise in consumption that profits the few at the expense of the many.

    In other words, for a select few, war pays dividends in ways that peace doesn't. In a nutshell, or perhaps an artillery shell, war is anti-democratic, anti-progressive, anti-intellectual, and anti-human. Yet, as we know, history makes heroes out of its participants and celebrates mass murderers like Napoleon as "great captains."

    What the United States needs today is a new strategy of containment -- not against communist expansion, as in the Cold War, but against war itself. What's stopping us from containing war? You might say that, in some sense, we've grown addicted to it , which is true enough, but here are five additional reasons for war's enduring presence in American life:

    The delusional idea that Americans are, by nature, winners and that our wars are therefore winnable: No American leader wants to be labeled a "loser." Meanwhile, such dubious conflicts -- see: the Afghan War, now in its 18th year, with several more years, or even generations , to go -- continue to be treated by the military as if they were indeed winnable, even though they visibly aren't. No president, Republican or Democrat, not even Donald J. Trump, despite his promises that American soldiers will be coming home from such fiascos, has successfully resisted the Pentagon's siren call for patience (and for yet more trillions of dollars) in the cause of ultimate victory, however poorly defined, farfetched, or far-off. American society's almost complete isolation from war's deadly effects: We're not being droned (yet). Our cities are not yet lying in ruins (though they're certainly suffering from a lack of funding, as is our most essential infrastructure , thanks in part to the cost of those overseas wars). It's nonetheless remarkable how little attention, either in the media or elsewhere, this country's never-ending war-making gets here. Unnecessary and sweeping secrecy: How can you resist what you essentially don't know about? Learning its lesson from the Vietnam War, the Pentagon now classifies (in plain speak: covers up) the worst aspects of its disastrous wars. This isn't because the enemy could exploit such details -- the enemy already knows! -- but because the American people might be roused to something like anger and action by it. Principled whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning have been imprisoned or otherwise dismissed or, in the case of Edward Snowden, pursued and indicted for sharing honest details about the calamitous Iraq War and America's invasive and intrusive surveillance state. In the process, a clear message of intimidation has been sent to other would-be truth-tellers. An unrepresentative government: Long ago, of course, Congress ceded to the presidency most of its constitutional powers when it comes to making war. Still, despite recent attempts to end America's arms-dealing role in the genocidal Saudi war in Yemen (overridden by Donald Trump's veto power), America's duly elected representatives generally don't represent the people when it comes to this country's disastrous wars. They are, to put it bluntly, largely captives of (and sometimes on leaving politics quite literally go to work for) the military-industrial complex. As long as money is speech ( thank you , Supreme Court!), the weapons makers are always likely to be able to shout louder in Congress than you and I ever will. \ America's persistent empathy gap. Despite our size, we are a remarkably insular nation and suffer from a serious empathy gap when it comes to understanding foreign cultures and peoples or what we're actually doing to them. Even our globetrotting troops, when not fighting and killing foreigners in battle, often stay on vast bases, referred to in the military as "Little Americas," complete with familiar stores, fast food, you name it. Wherever we go, there we are, eating our big burgers, driving our big trucks, wielding our big guns, and dropping our very big bombs. But what those bombs do, whom they hurt or kill, whom they displace from their homes and lives, these are things that Americans turn out to care remarkably little about.

    All this puts me sadly in mind of a song popular in my youth, a time when Cat Stevens sang of a " peace train " that was "soundin' louder" in America. Today, that peace train's been derailed and replaced by an armed and armored one eternally prepared for perpetual war -- and that train is indeed soundin' louder to the great peril of us all.

    War on Spaceship Earth

    Here's the rub, though: even the Pentagon knows that our most serious enemy is climate change , not China or Russia or terror, though in the age of Donald Trump and his administration of arsonists its officials can't express themselves on the subject as openly as they otherwise might. Assuming we don't annihilate ourselves with nuclear weapons first, that means our real enemy is the endless war we're waging against Planet Earth.

    The U.S. military is also a major consumer of fossil fuels and therefore a significant driver of climate change. Meanwhile, the Pentagon, like any enormously powerful system, only wants to grow more so, but what's welfare for the military brass isn't wellness for the planet.

    There is, unfortunately, only one Planet Earth, or Spaceship Earth, if you prefer, since we're all traveling through our galaxy on it. Thought about a certain way, we're its crewmembers, yet instead of cooperating effectively as its stewards, we seem determined to fight one another. If a house divided against itself cannot stand, as Abraham Lincoln pointed out so long ago, surely a spaceship with a disputatious and self-destructive crew is not likely to survive, no less thrive.

    In other words, in waging endless war, Americans are also, in effect, mutinying against the planet. In the process, we are spoiling the last, best hope of earth: a concerted and pacific effort to meet the shared challenges of a rapidly warming and changing planet.

    Spaceship Earth should not be allowed to remain Warship Earth as well, not when the existence of significant parts of humanity is already becoming ever more precarious. Think of us as suffering from a coolant leak, causing cabin temperatures to rise even as food and other resources dwindle . Under the circumstances, what's the best strategy for survival: killing each other while ignoring the leak or banding together to fix an increasingly compromised ship?

    Unfortunately, for America's leaders, the real "fixes" remain global military and resource domination, even as those resources continue to shrink on an ever-more fragile globe. And as we've seen recently, the resource part of that fix breeds its own madness, as in President Trump's recently stated desire to keep U.S. troops in Syria to steal that country's oil resources, though its wells are largely wrecked (thanks in significant part to American bombing) and even when repaired would produce only a miniscule percentage of the world's petroleum.

    If America's wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen prove anything, it's that every war scars our planet -- and hardens our hearts. Every war makes us less human as well as less humane. Every war wastes resources when these are increasingly at a premium. Every war is a distraction from higher needs and a better life.

    Despite all of war's uses and abuses, its allures and temptations, it's time that we Americans showed some self-mastery (as well as decency) by putting a stop to the mayhem. Few enough of us experience "our" wars firsthand and that's precisely why some idealize their purpose and idolize their practitioners. But war is a bloody, murderous mess and those practitioners, when not killed or wounded, are marred for life because war functionally makes everyone involved into a murderer.

    We need to stop idealizing war and idolizing its so-called warriors. At stake is nothing less than the future of humanity and the viability of life, as we know it, on Spaceship Earth.

    likbez December 2, 2019 at 3:17 AM

    I think that the main reason of the current level of militarism in the USA foreign policy is that after dissolution of the USSR neo-conservatives were allowed to capture the State Department and foreign policy establishment. This process actually started under Reagan. During Bush II administration those “crazies from the basement” fully controlled the US foreign policy and paradoxically they continued to dominate in Obama administration too.

    They preach “Full Spectrum Dominance” (Wolfowitz doctrine) and are not shy to unleash the wars to enhance the USA strategic position in particular region (color revolution can be used instead of war, like they in 2014 did in Ukraine). Of course, being chichenhawks, neither they nor members of their families fight in those wars.

    For some reason despite his election platform Trump also populated his administration with neoconservatives. So it might be that maintaining the USA centered global neoliberal empire is the real reason and the leitmotiv of the USA foreign policy. that’s why it does not change with the change of Administration: any government that does not play well with the neoliberal empire gets in the hairlines.

    Which also means that the USA foreign policy is not controlled by the elected officials but by the “Deep State” (look at Vindman and Fiona Hill testimonies for the proof). So this is kind of Catch 22 in which the USA have found itself. We will be bankrupted by our neoconservative foreign establishment (which self-reproduce in each and every administration). And we can do nothing to avoid it.

    wjastore says: December 2, 2019 at 8:09 AM
    Good point. But why the rise of the neocons? Why did they prosper? I'd say because of the military-industrial complex. Or you might say they feed each other, but the Complex came first. And of course the Complex is a dominant part of the Deep State. How could it not be? Add in 17 intelligence agencies, Homeland Security, the Energy Dept's nukes, and you have a dominant DoD that swallows up more than half of federal discretionary spending each year.
    likbez December 2, 2019 at 12:09 PM
    I agree, but it is a little bit more complex. You need an ideology to promote the interests of MIC. You can't just say -- let's spend more than a half of federal discretionary spending each year..

    That's where neo-conservatism comes into play. So they are not only lobbyists for MIC, but they also serve as "ideological support", trying to manipulate public opinion in favor of militarism.

    wjastore December 2, 2019 at 12:25 PM

    Yes. Ideology is vital. During the Cold War it was all about containing/resisting/defeating the godless Communists. Once they were defeated, what then? We heard brief talk about a "peace dividend," but then the neocons came along, selling full-spectrum dominance and America as the sole superpower.

    The neocons were truly unleashed by the 9/11 attacks, which they exploited to put their vision in motion. The Complex was only too happy to oblige, fed as it was by massive resources.

    Think about how no one was punished for the colossal intelligence failure of 9/11. Instead, all the intel agencies were rewarded with more money and authority via the PATRIOT Act.

    The Afghan war is an ongoing disaster, the Iraq war a huge misstep, Libya a total failure, yet the Complex has even more Teflon than Ronald Reagan. All failures slide off of it.

    greglaxer , December 2, 2019 at 4:12 PM

    There is a still bigger picture to consider in all this. I don't want to open the door to conspiracy theory–personally, I find the claim that explosives were placed inside the World Trade Center prior to the strikes by aircraft on 9/11 risible–but it certainly was convenient for the Regime Change Gang that the Saudi operatives were able to get away with what they did on that day, and in preparations leading up to it.

    Leaving that specific incident aside, the bigger picture is that the brains behind the Deep State understand that global capitalism is running out of new resources (which includes human labor) to exploit. Why is the US so concerned with Africa right now, with spies and Special Forces operatives all over that continent? Africa is the final frontier for development/exploitation. (The US is also deeply concerned about China's setting down business roots there, and wants to counterbalance their activities.)

    Once the great majority of folks in Africa have cellphones and subscriptions to Netflix whither capitalism? Trump denies the severity of the climate crisis because that is part of the ideology/theology of the GOP.

    The brains in the US Ruling Class know full well that natural resources will become ever more valuable moving forward, as weather disasters make it harder to access them. Thus, the Neo-Cons (you thought I'd never get around to them, right?) came to the fore because they advocate the unbridled use of brute military force to obtain what they want from the world. Or, to use their own terminology, the US "must have the capability to project force anywhere on the planet" at a moment's notice. President Obama was fully in agreement with that concept. Beware the wolf masquerading as a peaceable sheep!

    Continued

    Recommended Links

    Google matched content

    Softpanorama Recommended

    Top articles

    [Oct 28, 2020] Wall Street Banks, And Their Employees, Now Officially Lean Democrat Published on Oct 28, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Oct 26, 2020] Politicians books as a subtle form of corruption Published on Oct 26, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Oct 24, 2020] The USA foreign policy establishment, including Joe Biden, as vulgar bullies Published on Oct 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Oct 21, 2020] How Trump Got Played By The Military-Industrial Complex by Akbar Shahid Ahmed Published on Oct 21, 2020 | www.huffpost.com

    [Oct 21, 2020] This Is Not A Russian Hoax 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials' Published on Oct 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Oct 19, 2020] The Emails Are Russian- Will Be The Narrative, Regardless Of Facts Or Evidence by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Oct 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Oct 19, 2020] New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks Published on Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Oct 01, 2020] Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations cost him -- but he never gave up by Lev Golinkin Published on Oct 01, 2020 | www.thenation.com

    [Sep 28, 2020] No wonder Pompey and his friend Jeffries won't give up on Syria! No wonder Published on Sep 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Sep 28, 2020] Ziocon Trump is a master of deception: has not delivered on any of his promises, hired neocons, assholes, and morons Published on Sep 28, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Sep 26, 2020] What is predatory capitalism Published on Sep 26, 2020 | www.amazon.com

    [Sep 26, 2020] Galloway- Lying industry may be the only sector of Western economies still in full production TAXPAYERS pay for it Published on Sep 26, 2020 | www.rt.com

    [Sep 25, 2020] US standard "negotiating" techniques Published on Sep 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen- The Ukrainian Crisis - It s not All Putin s Fault Published on Sep 21, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen Cohen at the AJC 2017 Forum, about Russia and Terrorism Published on Jun 23, 2017 | www.youtube.com

    [Sep 20, 2020] Darren Beattie Tucker Carlson Discuss Color Revolutions The Plot To Oust President Trump Published on Sep 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    [Sep 17, 2020] Why the Blob Needs an Enemy by ARTA MOEINI Published on Sep 09, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Sep 17, 2020] Military desperados and Mattis "military messiah syndrome" by Scott Ritter Published on Sep 16, 2020 | www.rt.com

    [Sep 09, 2020] Proof of collusion at last! - IRRUSSIANALITY Published on Sep 09, 2020 | irrussianality.wordpress.com

    [Sep 01, 2020] Are We Deliberately Trying to Provoke a Military Crisis With Russia by Ted Galen Carpenter Published on Aug 28, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Aug 22, 2020] Kamala is a MIC marionette Published on Aug 22, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Aug 19, 2020] American imperialism vs. EU imperialism: Pushed into the Ukrainian adventure by the US? Rubbish. The EU and its constituent members were attempting to play their own hand and were not merely following the US lead submissively. Published on Aug 19, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Aug 16, 2020] CIA Behind Guccifer Russiagate A Plausible Scenario Published on Aug 16, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Aug 02, 2020] Russiagate, Nazis, and the CIA by ROB URIE Published on Jul 31, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Aug 01, 2020] Executed Turkish general exposed misuse of Qatari funds for Syria extremists- Report - Al Arabiya English Published on Aug 01, 2020 | english.alarabiya.net

    [Jul 31, 2020] Tucker Carlson calls Obama 'one of the sleaziest and most dishonest figures' in US political history Published on Jul 31, 2020 | www.msn.com

    [Jul 26, 2020] Former Poroshenko Ally Admits Euromaidan In 2014 Was Entirely Funded By "Organized Criminal Group" - Defend Democracy Press Published on Jul 26, 2020 | www.defenddemocracy.press

    [Jul 23, 2020] Opinion - Defund the Pentagon- The Liberal Case - POLITICO Published on Jul 23, 2020 | www.politico.com

    [Jul 23, 2020] Demorats defeat amedment ot cut Defence by 10% Published on Jul 23, 2020 | news.antiwar.com

    [Jul 23, 2020] This is a biggie: Egypt's parliament approves troop deployment to Libya Published on Jul 23, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

    [Jul 13, 2020] George Washington Tried To Warn Americans About Foreign Policy Today by Doug Bandow Published on Jul 13, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

    [Jul 07, 2020] Mutiny on the Bounties by RAY McGOVERN Published on Jul 03, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

    [Jul 06, 2020] US claim of 'Russian Bounty' plot in Afghanistan is dubious and dangerous - The Grayzone Published on Jul 06, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

    [Jul 03, 2020] I don't think we can assume that even now Trump actually has control of the FBI; it is still in hands of Obama faction Published on Jul 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jul 01, 2020] Three Glaring Problems with the Russian Taliban Bounty Story by Barbara Boland Published on Jul 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Jul 01, 2020] Control freaks that cannot even control their own criminal impulses! Published on Jul 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Jun 28, 2020] Russian position for Start talks: "We don't believe the US in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever". Published on Jun 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jun 24, 2020] Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades gas and oil; the USA converted Ukraine into a debt slave, sells Ukraine expensive weapons and cornered their energy industry; The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya. Published on Jun 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Jun 23, 2020] Identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ( soft neoliberals ) to counter the defection of trade union members from the party Published on Dec 28, 2019 | crookedtimber.org

    [Jun 21, 2020] Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace'. Published on Jun 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jun 19, 2020] The USG' s definition of Dictator Published on Jun 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Jun 14, 2020] Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 30 Years Unheeded Published on Jun 14, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    [Jun 13, 2020] Korea is just another distraction: false conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year Published on Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jun 12, 2020] Flynn Case 85 Lies, Contradictions, Oddities, Unusual Occurrences by Petr Svab Published on Jun 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable Published on Jun 26, 2019 | www.unz.com

    [Jun 03, 2020] Internet Users Who Call For Attacking Other Countries Will Now Be Enlisted In The Military Automatically Published on Jun 22, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jun 01, 2020] This is one war party -- war party, imperial party of militarism, conquest and killing of civilians Published on Jun 01, 2020 | www.antiwar.com

    [May 31, 2020] We Are Combat Vets, and We Want America to Reboot Memorial Day by Matthew Hoh and Danny Sjursen Published on May 25, 2020 | www.motherjones.com

    [May 30, 2020] More On "Obamagate!" Published on May 30, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    [May 26, 2020] News Stories Avoid Naming Israel by Philip Giraldi Published on May 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [May 24, 2020] FBI Document Reveals That Without Direct Israeli 'Intervention' Trump Would Have Lost 2016 Election Published on May 24, 2020 | christiansfortruth.com

    [May 24, 2020] Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training Published on May 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [May 22, 2020] No US president who can withdraw the USA from the Forever Wars Published on May 22, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [May 21, 2020] The 'Clean Break' Doctrine OffGuardian Published on May 21, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    [May 20, 2020] The American Mission and the Evil Empire The Crusade for a Free Russia Since 1881 by Foglesong Published on May 20, 2020 | www.amazon.com

    [May 20, 2020] Newly Revealed Texts Show Strzok, Page Altered Flynn Interview Notes Published on Apr 30, 2020 | www.newsmax.com

    [May 20, 2020] McGovern Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over by Ray McGovern Published on May 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [May 19, 2020] America: "We demand an coronavirus origin investigation, but the investigators must agree on the outcome that we specify before they begin investigating!" Published on May 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [May 19, 2020] Russophobia in the Age of Donald Trump Published on May 19, 2020 | www.oxfordscholarship.com

    [May 16, 2020] A model democrat Published on May 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    [May 13, 2020] Dramatic change of direction for Syrian envoy Published on May 13, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [May 13, 2020] From RussiaGate To ObamaGate The End Of Boomerville by Tom Luongo Published on May 13, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [May 11, 2020] Lee Zeldin Adam Schiff 'should resign today' for role in Russia investigation by Dominick Mastrangelo Published on May 11, 2020 | www.washingtonexaminer.com

    [May 11, 2020] McCarthy: It would be 'profoundly crazy if Obama wasn't in on Flynn case' Published on May 11, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    [May 10, 2020] Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security by Kevin R. Brock Published on May 10, 2020 | thehill.com

    [May 10, 2020] Does Obama now feels his potential liability for staging coup d' tat and gaslighting the whole nation? Published on May 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [May 07, 2020] Media Malpractice Is Criminalizing Better Relations With Russia by Stephen F. Cohen Published on Dec 13, 2017 | thenation.com

    [May 07, 2020] Angry Bear " "cannot remember a single International Crisis in which the United States had no global presence at all" Published on May 07, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    [May 05, 2020] UK government experince with the White Helmets and the Skripal affair definitly halps in anti-china propaganda. Published on May 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Apr 29, 2020] Trump, despite pretty slick deception during his election campaign, is an typical imperialist and rabid militarist. His administration continuredand in some areas exceeded the hostility of Obama couse against Russia Published on Apr 29, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Apr 25, 2020] Did This Virus Come From a Lab? Maybe Not But It Exposes the Threat of a Biowarfare Arms Race by Sam Husseini Published on Apr 25, 2020 | salon.com

    [Apr 24, 2020] Please Tell the Establishment That U.S. Hegemony is Over by Daniel Larison Published on Apr 23, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Apr 22, 2020] Especially as the insane neoliberal economy we live in, we are ruled by a group of kleptocrats and vicious stooges. Which make allegations against Biden deserving a closer look but that does not make them automatically credible Published on Apr 22, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Apr 11, 2020] 'Never in my country': COVID-19 and American exceptionalism by Jeanne Morefield Published on Apr 07, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    [Apr 08, 2020] Feudal Japan Edo and the US Empire by Hiroyuki Hamada Published on Apr 08, 2020 | off-guardian.org

    [Apr 05, 2020] Esper tone deafness: a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities of military industrial complex Published on Apr 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 21, 2020] When reading any article concerning current events (ie. Ukraine, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or Coronavirus) consider how the The Seven Principles of Propaganda may apply Published on Mar 22, 2020 | https://www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 13, 2020] Daffy Duck. cartoon was made in 1953 and like many Looney Tune cartoon's, they are an extreme parody of life. It dawned on me that this cartoon is an almost perfect description of US Military policy and action. Published on Mar 13, 2020 | thesaker.is

    [Mar 04, 2020] Why Are We Being Charged? Surprise Bills From Coronavirus Testing Spark Calls for Government to Cover All Costs by Jake Johnson Published on Mar 03, 2020 | www.commondreams.org

    [Mar 03, 2020] "Predatory capitalism", which clearly describes what neoliberalism is. Published on Mar 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Feb 29, 2020] A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change" Published on Feb 29, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    [Feb 29, 2020] Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who s Really In Charge Of The US Military by Cynthia Chung Published on Jan 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change Published on Feb 24, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change Published on Feb 24, 2020 | www.youtube.com

    [Feb 26, 2020] A serious US politician has to demonstrate a large capacity for betrayal. Published on Feb 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime Published on Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen Published on Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Feb 22, 2020] The Red Thread A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy by Diana West Published on Feb 22, 2020 | www.amazon.com

    [Feb 28, 2020] Russia s Relationship With China Is Growing Despite Setbacks by Lyle J. Goldstein , Published on Feb 23, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

    [Feb 14, 2020] Is Apartheid the Inevitable Outcome of Zionism? by Henry Siegman Published on Jan 22, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

    [Feb 09, 2020] The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani Published on Jan 09, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Feb 08, 2020] Is Iraq About To Switch From US to Russia Published on Feb 08, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair Published on Mar 20, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Feb 03, 2020] White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War Published on Feb 03, 2020 | www.amazon.com

    [Feb 02, 2020] The most interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story Published on Feb 02, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    [Jan 31, 2020] Trump excoriates Bolton in tweets this morning Published on Jan 31, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 27, 2020] The end of Trump? Trump betrayed all major promises of his 2016 election campaign. Trump needs to go... Published on Jan 27, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 26, 2020] The Collapse of Neoliberalism by Ganesh Sitaraman Published on Dec 23, 2019 | newrepublic.com

    [Jan 24, 2020] How Are Iran and the "Axis of the Resistance" Affected by the US Assassination of Soleimani by Elijah J. Magnier Published on Jan 22, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

    [Jan 24, 2020] Lawrence Wilkerson Lambasts 'the Beast of the National Security State' by Adam Dick Published on Jan 13, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Jan 19, 2020] Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany s behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally Published on Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project? Published on Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jan 18, 2020] The joke is on us: Without the USSR the USA oligarchy resorted to cannibalism and devour the American people Published on Jan 18, 2020 | www.theguardian.com

    [Jan 17, 2020] Ukraine is a deeply sick patient. The destiny of ordinary Ukrainians is deeply tragic. Diaspora is greedy and want a piece of cake immediately Published on Jan 17, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 12, 2020] MIC along with Wall Street controls the government and the country Published on Jan 12, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

    [Jan 12, 2020] US has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying. Published on Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jan 12, 2020] Luongo Fears "An Abyss Of Losses" As Iraq Becomes MidEast Battleground Published on Jan 12, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jan 11, 2020] Sheldon Adelson the casino mogul driving Trump's Middle East policy by Chris McGreal Published on Jun 08, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

    [Jan 10, 2020] The Saker interviews Michael Hudson Published on Jan 09, 2020 | thesaker.is

    [Jan 09, 2020] Opposing War With Iran: Three Reasons by Anthony DiMaggio Published on Jan 09, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Jan 08, 2020] I can't quite understand how gratuitous US piracy and adventurism in places on the globe beyond the knowledge and reach of most Americans could possibly be compared to Iranian actions securing their immediate regional borders and interests. Published on Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iraqi Journalist: Killing Soleimani "Ended An Era In Which Iran And The United States Coexisted In Iraq" by Tim Hains Published on Jan 06, 2020 | www.realclearpolitics.com

    [Jan 08, 2020] Do you really want to be a one term president? Pompeo can talk big now and then go back to Kansas to run for senator. Where will you be able to take refuge? Published on Sep 18, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 08, 2020] If we assume that Pompeo persuaded Trump to order to kill a diplomatic envoy, Trump is now a dead man walking as after Iran responce Pelosi impeachment gambit now have legs Published on Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jan 06, 2020] Diplomacy Trump-style. Al Capone probably would be allow himself to fall that low Published on Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jan 06, 2020] I am tired of giving Trump a free pass, just because Hillary would have been worse. Trump needs to go. Published on Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 06, 2020] How To Avoid Swallowing War Propaganda by Nathan J. Robinson Published on Jan 05, 2020 | www.currentaffairs.org

    [Jan 06, 2020] Neocon Pompeo pushed Trump to kill Soleimani; Looks like West Point educated military contactor mafia to which Pompeo and Esper belongs controls the President, although Trump malleability and recklessness are inexcusable Published on Jan 06, 2020 | www.washingtonpost.com

    [Jan 06, 2020] The Soleimani Assassination by Philip Giraldi Published on Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 06, 2020] The threat of General Soleimani - TTG Published on Jan 06, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 05, 2020] The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran (UPDATED 6X) The Vineyard of the Saker Published on Jan 05, 2020 | thesaker.is

    [Jan 05, 2020] Trump is wholly responsible for his own actions, but he -- just like the Ayatollah -- is being pushed in a direction where it's impossible to back down and still "save face". Neither men can afford to do so by Andrew Korybko Published on Jan 05, 2020 | astutenews.com

    [Jan 04, 2020] American Meddling in the Ukraine by Publius Tacitus Published on Feb 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 04, 2020] Trump Is Doing the Bidding of Washington's Most Vile Cabal Published on Jan 03, 2020 | theintercept.com

    [Jan 04, 2020] Will Trump welcome the ejection of the US from Iraq - He should by Colonel Lang Published on Jan 03, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 04, 2020] Talking about revenge is stupid and juvenile: Iran needs to pull back and focus on making themselves stronger in economy and technology and for strong ties with other responsible players Published on Jan 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma Published on Dec 28, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point. Published on Dec 21, 2019 | peakoilbarrel.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative Published on Apr 23, 2019 | off-guardian.org

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham Published on Dec 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare Published on Sep 01, 2017 | nationalinterest.org

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century Published on Aug 26, 2017 | www.amazon.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon Published on Aug 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century Published on Apr 09, 2019 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives Published on Feb 17, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels Published on Dec 19, 2019 | angrybearblog.com

    [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine Published on Dec 19, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars Published on Dec 17, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim Published on Dec 15, 2019 | www.washingtonpost.com

    [Dec 14, 2019] Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation Published on Dec 14, 2019 | www.youtube.com

    [Dec 10, 2019] Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews: There are things more important than your tax rate by Paul Krugman Published on Dec 10, 2019 | www.nytimes.com

    [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default. Published on Dec 07, 2019 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen Published on Dec 06, 2019 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 04, 2019] Responding to Lt. Col. Vindman about my Ukraine columns with the facts John Solomon Reports Published on Dec 04, 2019 | johnsolomonreports.com

    [Dec 04, 2019] America's War Exceptionalism Is Killing the Planet by William Astore Published on Dec 02, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Oldies But Goodies

  • [Dec 10, 2016] Why the US elite loves so much to demonise Russia
  • [Sep 26, 2016] War as a Business Opportunity
  • [Oct 29, 2017] Whose Bright Idea Was RussiaGate by Paul Craig Roberts
  • [Oct 29, 2017] In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War
  • [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater
  • [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies
  • [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou
  • [Dec 28, 2017] On your surmise that Putin prefers Trump to Hillary and would thus have incentive to influence the election, I beg to differ. Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections.
  • [Dec 27, 2017] Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections. Any candidate that WOULD make a difference would NEVER see the daylight of nomination, especially at the presidential level. I myself believe all the talk of Russia interfering the 2016 Election is no more than a witch hunt
  • [Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules
  • [Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker
  • [Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker
  • [Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker
  • [Dec 21, 2017] The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy by David Stockman
  • [Dec 18, 2017] The Scary Void Inside Russia-gate by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Dec 15, 2017] Rise and Decline of the Welfare State, by James Petras
  • [Dec 14, 2017] Was Peter Strzok the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director John Brennan?
  • [Dec 14, 2017] The Foundering Russia-gate 'Scandal' Consortiumnews
  • [Dec 14, 2017] The 1970's was in many ways the watershed decade for the neoliberal transformation of the American economy and society
  • [Dec 13, 2017] All the signs in the Russia probe point to Jared Kushner. Who next?
  • [Dec 12, 2017] When a weaker neoliberal state fights the dominant neoliberal state, the center of neoliberal empire, it faces economic sanctions and can t retaliate using principle eye for eye
  • [Dec 12, 2017] Bad Moon Rising, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review
  • [Dec 12, 2017] We are all just hapless passengers on the Neocon Titanic, unable to influence what is playing out on the bridge
  • [Dec 11, 2017] How Russia-gate Met the Magnitsky Myth by Robert Parry
  • [Dec 10, 2017] blamePutin continues to be the media s dominant hashtag. Vladimir Putin finally confesses his entire responsibility for everything bad that has ever happened since the beginning of time
  • [Dec 10, 2017] When Washington Cheered the Jihadists Consortiumnews
  • [Dec 10, 2017] Russia-gate s Reach into Journalism by Dennis J Bernstein
  • [Dec 09, 2017] Hyping the Russian Threat to Undermine Free Speech by Max Blumenthal
  • [Dec 03, 2017] Islamic Mindset Akin to Bolshevism by Srdja Trifkovic
  • [Nov 29, 2017] The Russian Question by Niall Ferguson
  • [Dec 02, 2017] America s Darwinian Nationalism by Robert Kaplan
  • [Dec 01, 2017] Neocon Chaos Promotion in the Mideast
  • [Dec 01, 2017] JFK The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy by L. Fletcher Prouty, Oliver Stone, Jesse Ventura
  • [Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried
  • [Nov 30, 2017] Money Imperialism by Michael Hudson
  • [Nov 28, 2017] The Duplicitous Superpower by Ted Galen Carpenter
  • [Nov 08, 2017] The Plot to Scapegoat Russia How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Putin by Dan Kovalik
  • [Nov 08, 2017] Learning to Love McCarthyism by Robert Parry
  • [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus
  • [Aug 30, 2017] Weather Underground Members Speak Out on the Media, Imperialism and Solidarity in the Age of Trump
  • [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce
  • [May 05, 2017] Jared Kushner A Suspected Gangster Within the Trump White House by Wayne MADSEN
  • [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss
  • [Nov 04, 2017] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Leads US President Trump to War with Iran by Prof. James Petras
  • [Nov 04, 2017] Who's Afraid of Corporate COINTELPRO by C. J. Hopkins
  • [Oct 31, 2017] Above All - The Junta Expands Its Claim To Power
  • [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus
  • [Oct 25, 2017] Tomorrow Belongs to the Corporatocracy by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Oct 13, 2017] Sympathy for the Corporatocracy by C. J. Hopkins
  • [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA
  • [Oct 11, 2017] Russia witch hunt is a tactic used by the ruling elite, and in particular the Democratic Party, to avoid facing a very unpleasant reality: that their unpopularity is the outcome of their policies of deindustrialization and the assault against working class
  • [Oct 09, 2017] US Missile Defense Not as Effective As We Think by Scott Ritter
  • [Oct 09, 2017] After Nine Months, Only Stale Crumbs in Russia Inquiry by Scott Ritter
  • [Oct 09, 2017] Autopilot Wars by Andrew J. Bacevich
  • [Oct 09, 2017] Dennis Kucinich We Must Challenge the Two-Party Duopoly Committed to War by Adam Dick
  • [Oct 03, 2017] The Vietnam Nightmare -- Again by Eric Margolis
  • [Oct 03, 2017] Russian Ads On Facebook A Click-Bait Campaign
  • [Sep 30, 2017] Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart. Is Skepticism Permissible Yet by Glenn Greenwald
  • [Sep 27, 2017] Come You Masters of War by Matthew Harwood
  • [Sep 26, 2017] US-Saudi Alliance Fragments the Middle East (2-2) by RANIA KHALEK
  • [Sep 26, 2017] Is Foreign Propaganda Even Effective by Leon Hadar
  • [Sep 25, 2017] I am presently reading the book JFK and the Unspeakable by James W.Douglass and it is exactly why Kennedy was assassinated by the very same group that desperately wants to see Trump gone and the rapprochement with Russia squashed
  • [Sep 24, 2017] How Sony, Obama, Seth Rogen and the CIA Secretly Planned to Force Regime Change in North Korea by Tim Shorrock
  • [Sep 24, 2017] Mark Ames When Mother Jones Was Investigated for Spreading Kremlin Disinformation by Mark Ames
  • [Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro
  • [Sep 20, 2017] The Politics of Military Ascendancy by James Petras
  • [Sep 19, 2017] The Glaring Omissions in Trumps U.N. Speech by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 19, 2017] Trump behaviour at UN and Nixon's "madman gambit" against Soviets
  • [Sep 18, 2017] How The Military Defeated Trumps Insurgency
  • [Sep 18, 2017] Looks like Trump initially has a four point platform that was anti-neoliberal in its essence: non-interventionism, no to neoliberal globalization, no to outsourcing of jobs, and no to multiculturism. All were betrayed very soon
  • [Sep 18, 2017] Its always bizarre who easily neoliberals turn into hawkish and warmongering jerks
  • [Sep 18, 2017] The NYT's Yellow Journalism on Russia by Rober Parry
  • [Sep 16, 2017] Empire of Capital by George Monbiot
  • [Sep 13, 2017] A despot in disguise: one mans mission to rip up democracy by George Monbiot
  • [Aug 27, 2017] Manipulated minorities represent a major danger for democratic states>
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon
  • [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon
  • [Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back
  • [Aug 09, 2017] Force Multipliers and 21st Century Imperial Warfare Practice and Propaganda by Maximilian C. Forte
  • [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce
  • [Jul 29, 2017] Ray McGovern The Deep State Assault on Elected Government Must Be Stopped
  • [Jul 26, 2017] US Provocation and North Korea Pretext for War with China by James Petras
  • [Jul 25, 2017] The Coup against Trump and His Military by James Petras
  • [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills
  • [Jul 13, 2017] Progressive Democrats Resist and Submit, Retreat and Surrender by James Petras
  • [Jun 26, 2017] The Soft Coup Under Way In Washington by David Stockman
  • [Jun 24, 2017] The United States and Iran Two Tracks to Establish Hegemony by James Petras
  • [Jun 24, 2017] The Saudi-Qatar spat - the reconciliation offer to be refused>. Qater will move closer to Turkey
  • [Jun 17, 2017] The Collapsing Social Contract by Gaius Publius
  • [Jun 15, 2017] Comeys Lies of Omission by Mike Whitney
  • [Jun 13, 2017] Donald has morphed. He is now part neocon and part Wall St. errand-boy.
  • [May 05, 2017] Jared Kushner A Suspected Gangster Within the Trump White House by Wayne MADSEN
  • [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss
  • [May 23, 2017] Are they really out to get Trump by Philip Girald
  • [May 21, 2017] What Obsessing About Trump Causes Us To Miss by Andrew Bacevich
  • [May 21, 2017] WhateverGate -- The Crazed Quest To Find Some Reason (Any Reason!) To Dump Trump by John Derbyshire
  • [May 21, 2017] Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff
  • [May 20, 2017] Invasion of the Putin-Nazis by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Jan 11, 2020] Atomization of workforce as a part of atomization of society under neoliberalism
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham
  • [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz
  • [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz
  • [Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives
  • [Jul 20, 2018] Doubting The Intelligence Of The Intelligence Community by Ilana Mercer
  • [Jun 09, 2018] Spooks Spooking Themselves by Daniel Lazare
  • [Jun 09, 2018] Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack by Ray McGovern
  • [May 09, 2018] Trotskyist Delusions, by Diana Johnstone
  • [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected
  • [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources
  • [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies
  • [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater
  • [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou
  • [Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker
  • [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus
  • [Aug 30, 2017] Weather Underground Members Speak Out on the Media, Imperialism and Solidarity in the Age of Trump
  • [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce
  • [May 05, 2017] Jared Kushner A Suspected Gangster Within the Trump White House by Wayne MADSEN
  • [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss
  • [Sep 26, 2016] War as a Business Opportunity
  • [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz
  • [Jul 20, 2018] Doubting The Intelligence Of The Intelligence Community by Ilana Mercer
  • [Jun 09, 2018] Spooks Spooking Themselves by Daniel Lazare
  • [Jun 09, 2018] Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack by Ray McGovern
  • [May 09, 2018] Trotskyist Delusions, by Diana Johnstone
  • [Jul 20, 2018] Doubting The Intelligence Of The Intelligence Community by Ilana Mercer
  • [Jul 03, 2018] Russia has a lot of information about Lybia that could dig a political grave for Hillary. They did not release it
  • [Jul 03, 2018] Musings II The "Intelligence Community," "Russian Interference," and Due Diligence
  • [Jun 09, 2018] Spooks Spooking Themselves by Daniel Lazare
  • [Jun 09, 2018] Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack by Ray McGovern
  • [Jun 19, 2018] How The Last Superpower Was Unchained by Tom Engelhardt
  • [Jun 17, 2018] Mattis Putin Is Trying To Undermine America s Moral Authority by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Jun 17, 2018] the dominant political forces in EU are anti-Russia
  • [Jun 12, 2018] The real reason for which 'information apocalypse' terrifies the mainstream media
  • [Jun 06, 2018] Why Foreign Policy Realism Isn't Enough by William S. Smith
  • [Jun 06, 2018] Trump Voters, Your Savior Is Betraying You by Nicholas Kristof
  • [May 31, 2018] Journalists and academics expose UK's criminal actions in the Middle East by Julie Hyland
  • [May 27, 2018] Northwestern University roundtable discusses regime change in Russia Defend Democracy Press
  • [May 24, 2018] The diversion of Russia Gate is a continuation of former diversions such as the Tea Party which was invented by the banksters to turn public anger over the big banking collapse and the resulting recession into a movement to gain more deregulation for tax breaks for the wealthy
  • [May 23, 2018] If the Trump-Russia set up began in spring 2016 or earlier, presumably it was undertaken on the assumption that HRC would win the election. (I say "presumably" because you never can tell..) If so, then the operation would have been an MI6 / Ukrainian / CIA coordinated op intended to frame Putin, not Trump
  • [May 22, 2018] Cat fight within the US elite getting more intense
  • [May 22, 2018] Can the majority of the USA be made to see that neocons will ruin the USA, and that their power must be liquidated ?
  • [May 09, 2018] Trotskyist Delusions, by Diana Johnstone
  • [May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b
  • [May 03, 2018] Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it
  • [May 03, 2018] The 'Libya model' Trump's top bloodthirsty neocon indirectly admits that N. Korea will be invaded and destroyed as soon as it gives up its nukes by system failure
  • [Apr 27, 2018] A Most Sordid Profession by Fred Reed
  • [Apr 24, 2018] America's Men Without Chests by Paul Grenier
  • [Apr 22, 2018] The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite
  • [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources
  • [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies
  • [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater
  • [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou
  • [Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker
  • [Apr 22, 2018] The Crisis Is Only In Its Beginning Stages by Paul Craig Roberts
  • [Apr 21, 2018] On the Criminal Referral of Comey, Clinton et al by Ray McGovern
  • [Apr 20, 2018] Stench of hypocrisy British 'war on terror' strategic ties with radical Islam by John Wight
  • [Apr 19, 2018] The Neocons Are Selling Koolaid Again! by W. Patrick Lang
  • [Apr 17, 2018] Poor Alex
  • [Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts
  • [Apr 11, 2018] Female neocon warmongers from Fox look like plastered brick walls – heartless and brainless.
  • [Apr 09, 2018] When Military Leaders Have Reckless Disregard for the Truth by Bruce Fein
  • [Apr 09, 2018] Trump Is He Stupid or Dangerously Crazy by Justin Raimondo
  • [Apr 05, 2018] An Interview with Retired Russian General Evgeny Buzhinsky The National Interest
  • [Apr 02, 2018] Russophobia Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy by A. Tsygankov
  • [Mar 27, 2018] Let's Investigate John Brennan, by Philip Giraldi
  • [Mar 25, 2018] A truly historical month for the future of our planet by The Saker
  • [Mar 25, 2018] Cambridge Analytica Scandal Rockets to Watergate Proportions and Beyond by Adam Garrie
  • [Mar 24, 2018] Why the UK, the EU and the US Gang-Up on Russia by James Petras
  • [Mar 23, 2018] Inglorious end of career of neocon McMaster
  • [Mar 22, 2018] If it's correct, the Brits made a very nasty error that shows the true nature of their establishment.
  • [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected
  • [Mar 21, 2018] Washington's Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen
  • [Mar 21, 2018] Whataboutism Is A Nonsensical Propaganda Term Used To Defend The Failed Status Quo by Mike Krieger
  • [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair
  • [Mar 16, 2018] Corbyn Calls for Evidence in Escalating Poison Row
  • [Mar 16, 2018] The French philosopher Alain Soral is quite right when he says that modern "journalists are either unemployed or prostitutes"
  • [Mar 16, 2018] Will the State Department Become a Subsidiary of the CIA
  • [Mar 14, 2018] UNSC holds urgent meeting over Salisbury attack
  • [Mar 12, 2018] Obama's has continued his neoliberal ways after leaving office. Obama was NOT forced into neoliberal positions by terrible Repugs like his Obamabot apologists claimed repeatedly
  • [Mar 11, 2018] Washington s Century-long War on Russia by Mike Whitney
  • [Mar 11, 2018] Reality Check: The Guardian Restarts Push for Regime Change in Russia by Kit
  • [Mar 10, 2018] Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in Obama policy and HRC campaign long before any Steele s Dossier. This was a program ofunleashing cold War II
  • [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this
  • [Mar 08, 2018] In recent years, there has been ample evidence that US policy-makers and, equally important, mainstream media commentators do not bother to read what Putin says, or at least not more than snatches from click-bait wire-service reports.
  • [Mar 08, 2018] A key piece of evidence pointing to 'Guccifer 2.0' being a fake personality created by the conspirators in their attempt to disguise the fact that the materials from the DNC published by 'WikiLeaks' were obtained by a leak rather than a hack had to do with the involvement of the former GCHQ person Matt Tait.
  • [Mar 06, 2018] The U.S. Returns to 'Great Power Competition,' With a Dangerous New Edge
  • [Mar 06, 2018] The current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. But this hysteria is concentrated at the top level of media elite and neocons. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves due to the crisis of neolineralism.
  • [Mar 04, 2018] Generals who now are running the USA foreign policy represents a great danger. These men seem incapable of rising above the Russophobia that grew in the atmosphere of the Cold War. They yearn for world hegemony for the US and to see Russia and to a lesser extent China and Iran as obstacles to that dominion for the "city on a hill
  • [Mar 02, 2018] The main reason much of the highest echelons of American power are united against Trump might be that they're terrified that -- unlike Obama -- he's a really bad salesman for the US led neoliberal empire. This threatens the continuance of their well oiled and exceedingly corrupt gravy train
  • [Feb 26, 2018] Democrat Memo Lays Egg by Publius Tacitus
  • [Feb 26, 2018] Why one war when we can heve two! by Eric Margolis
  • [Feb 20, 2018] For the life of me I cannot figure why Americans want a war/conflict with Russia
  • [Feb 20, 2018] Russophobia is a futile bid to conceal US, European demise by Finian Cunningham
  • [Feb 19, 2018] Nunes FBI and DOJ Perps Could Be Put on Trial by Ray McGovern
  • [Feb 19, 2018] The Russiagate Intelligence Wars What We Do and Don't Know
  • [Feb 19, 2018] Russian Meddling Was a Drop in an Ocean of American-made Discord by AMANDA TAUB and MAX FISHER
  • [Feb 18, 2018] This dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia is extremely lucrative for the war profiteers, the retired generals intelligence members who prostitute themselves as media pundits, the members of Congress who get $$$ from the war profiteers, and the corporate media which thrives on links to the war profiteers as well as on war reporting
  • [Feb 18, 2018] Had Hillary Won What Now by Andrew Levine
  • [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources
  • [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies
  • [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater
  • [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou
  • [Feb 16, 2018] A Dangerous Turn in U.S. Foreign Policy
  • [Feb 14, 2018] Recused Judge in Flynn Prosecution Served on FISA Court
  • [Feb 14, 2018] The FBI and the President – Mutual Manipulation by James Petras
  • [Feb 12, 2018] The Age of Lunacy: The Doomsday Machine
  • [Feb 12, 2018] Ike's Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Is Alive and Very Well by William J. Astore
  • [Feb 10, 2018] The generals are not Borgists. They are something worse ...
  • [Feb 10, 2018] More on neoliberal newspeak of US propaganda machine
  • [Feb 08, 2018] Control of narrative means that creation of the simplistic picture in which the complexities of the world are elided in favor of 'good guys' vs. 'bad guys' dichotomy
  • [Jan 30, 2018] Washington Reaches New Heights of Insanity with the "Kremlin Report" by Paul Craig Roberts
  • [Jan 30, 2018] The Unseen Wars of America the Empire The American Conservative
  • [Jan 29, 2018] It is OK for an empire to be hated and feared, it doesn t work so good when Glory slowly fades and he empire instead becomes hated and despised
  • [Jan 28, 2018] Russiagate Isn t About Trump, And It Isn t Even Ultimately About Russia by Caitlyn Johnstone
  • [Jan 27, 2018] The Rich Also Cry by Israel Shamir
  • [Jan 27, 2018] As of January 2018 Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, is starting to look like something Trump should have done sooner.
  • [Jan 26, 2018] Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme by Paul Craig Roberts
  • [Jan 25, 2018] Russiagate as Kafka 2.0
  • [Jan 24, 2018] Brazen Plot To Exonerate Hillary Clinton And Frame Trump Unraveling, Says Former Fed Prosecutor
  • [Jan 22, 2018] Pentagon Unveils Strategy for Military Confrontation With Russia and China by Bill Van Auken
  • [Jan 22, 2018] Trump s Illegal War in Syria by Daniel Larison
  • [Jan 21, 2018] America Sleepwalks Towards a Clash With the Turks in Syria by Patrick J. Buchanan
  • [Jan 19, 2018] #ReleaseTheMemo Extensive FISA abuse memo could destroy the entire Mueller Russia investigation by Alex Christoforou
  • [Jan 19, 2018] No Foreign Bases Challenging the Footprint of US Empire by Kevin B. Zeese and Margaret Flowers
  • [Jan 17, 2018] Neoconning the Trump White House by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
  • [Jan 12, 2018] The DOJ and FBI Worked With Fusion GPS on Operation Trump
  • [Jan 10, 2018] Surrounded by Neocons by Philip Giraldi
  • [Jan 06, 2018] Russia-gate Breeds Establishment McCarthyism by Robert Parry
  • [Dec 31, 2017] Maybe Trump was the deep state candidate of choice? Maybe that s why they ran Clinton against him rather than the more electable Sanders? Maybe that s why Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia in the early fall of 2016 – to swing the election to Trump (by giving the disgruntled anti-war Sanders voters a false choice between Trump or war with Russia?
  • [Jan 02, 2018] The Still-Missing Evidence of Russia-gate by Dennis J. Bernstein
  • [Jan 02, 2018] Neocon warmongers should be treated as rapists by Andrew J. Bacevich
  • [Jan 02, 2018] What We Don t Talk about When We Talk about Russian Hacking by Jackson Lears
  • [Jan 02, 2018] Jill Stein in the Cross-hairs by Mike Whitney
  • [Jan 02, 2018] Who Is the Real Enemy by Philip Giraldi
  • [Jan 02, 2018] American exceptionalism extracts a price from common citizens
  • [Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker
  • [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus
  • [Aug 30, 2017] Weather Underground Members Speak Out on the Media, Imperialism and Solidarity in the Age of Trump
  • [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce
  • [May 05, 2017] Jared Kushner A Suspected Gangster Within the Trump White House by Wayne MADSEN
  • [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss
  • [Sep 26, 2016] War as a Business Opportunity
  • [Jun 23, 2020] Identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ( soft neoliberals ) to counter the defection of trade union members from the party
  • [Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives
  • [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels
  • [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine
  • [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars
  • [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim
  • [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels
  • [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine
  • [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars
  • [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim
  • [Dec 14, 2019] Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation
  • [Dec 14, 2019] Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation
  • [Dec 10, 2019] Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews: There are things more important than your tax rate by Paul Krugman
  • [Dec 10, 2019] Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews: There are things more important than your tax rate by Paul Krugman
  • [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.
  • [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.
  • [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Dec 04, 2019] Responding to Lt. Col. Vindman about my Ukraine columns with the facts John Solomon Reports
  • [Dec 04, 2019] America's War Exceptionalism Is Killing the Planet by William Astore
  • [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Dec 04, 2019] Responding to Lt. Col. Vindman about my Ukraine columns with the facts John Solomon Reports
  • [Dec 04, 2019] America's War Exceptionalism Is Killing the Planet by William Astore
  • [Dec 02, 2019] The cost of militarism cannot be measured only in lost opportunities, lives and money. There will be a long hangover of shame
  • [Dec 02, 2019] A Think Tank Dedicated to Peace and Restraint
  • [Nov 27, 2019] Obama Admits He Would Speak Up Only To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination
  • [Nov 27, 2019] Could your county use some extra money?
  • [Nov 26, 2019] John Solomon Everything Changes In The Ukraine Scandal If Trump Releases These Documents
  • [Nov 21, 2019] The deep state is individuals INSIDE the government that do the bidding of the banksters, the military-industrial complex, the globalists and other nefarious interests
  • [Nov 09, 2019] Donald Trump s Only Crime Is Defending Himself by Daniel McCarthy
  • [Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq
  • [Nov 01, 2019] Viable Opposition The Legal Connection Between Washington and Kiev
  • [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Empire Interventionism Versus Republic Noninterventionism by Jacob Hornberger
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Trump is now proven war criminal: WikiLeaks Releases New Documents Questioning Syria Chemical Attack Narrative
  • [Oct 23, 2019] The treason of the intellectuals The Undoing of Thought by Roger Kimball
  • [Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Oct 20, 2019] How did the United States become so involved in Ukraine's torturous and famously corrupt politics? The short answer is NATO expansion
  • [Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice
  • [Oct 02, 2019] The Self-Set Impeachment Trap naked capitalism
  • [Sep 23, 2019] Giuliani Hits Bidens With New $3 Million Ukraine-Latvia-Cyprus Money Laundering Accusation
  • [Sep 23, 2019] Apparently now that the notion Russia interfered in the US presidential election to tip the vote to Trump has become an article of faith that much of the world regards as established fact
  • [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim
  • [Sep 22, 2019] It was neoliberalism that won the cold war
  • [Sep 20, 2019] Trump Whistleblower Drama Puts Biden In The Hot Seat Over Ukraine
  • [Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin
  • [Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 11, 2019] Video Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 The Bamboozle Has Captured Us
  • [Sep 10, 2019] Neoliberal Capitalism at a Dead End by Utsa Patnaik and Prabhat Patnaik
  • [Sep 10, 2019] The idea tha the USA won the Cold War is questionable
  • [Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage
  • [Aug 22, 2019] Trump Doesn t Know How to Negotiate by Daniel Larison
  • [Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson
  • [Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Aug 12, 2019] Bruce Ohr 302s by Larry C Johnson - Sic Semper Tyrannis
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Peace in Ukraine by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Michael Hudson Trump s Brilliant Strategy to Dismember US Dollar Hegemony by Michael Hudson
  • [Jul 29, 2019] The Real Reason The Propagandists Have Been Promoting Russia Hysteria by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians
  • [Jul 27, 2019] Understanding the Roots of the Obama Coup Against Trump by Larry C Johnson
  • [Jul 23, 2019] Ukraine Election - Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution
  • [Jul 17, 2019] Oil Is Driving the Iran Crisis by Michael T. Klare
  • [Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then
  • [Jul 06, 2019] In practice, the USSR behaved exactly like a brutal totalitarian theocracy
  • [Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval
  • [Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner
  • [Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas
  • [Jun 28, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard vs Bolton
  • [Jun 28, 2019] The Donald's Latest Iranian Caper Sh*t-Faced Stupidity by David Stockman
  • [Jun 27, 2019] 'The Ugly Americans' From Kermit Roosevelt to John Bolton Iran Al Jazeera
  • [Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Why a U.S.-Iran War Could End Up Being a Historic Disaster by Doug Bandow
  • [Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'
  • [Jun 20, 2019] The Trump regime wants another pointless war by Ryan Cooper
  • [Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf
  • [Jun 05, 2019] Do Spies Run the World by Israel Shamir
  • [May 31, 2019] US energy department rebrands fossil fuels as 'molecules of freedom'...and this is in The Guardian and not The Onion
  • [May 25, 2019] The Belligerence Of Empire by Kenn Orphan
  • [May 22, 2019] On War With Iran, It's Trump Versus the Founding Fathers
  • [May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries
  • [May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"
  • [May 18, 2019] Trump's purported deviation from US foreign policy orthodoxy was a propaganda scam engineered by the pro-Israel Lobby from the very beginning
  • [May 14, 2019] The Propaganda Multiplier How Global News Agencies and Western Media Report on Geopolitics
  • [May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review
  • [May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan
  • [May 13, 2019] Not Just Ukraine; Biden May Have A Serious China Problem As Schweizer Exposes Hunter s $1bn Deal
  • [May 13, 2019] US Foreign Policy as Bellicose as Ever by Serge Halimi
  • [May 12, 2019] Is rabid warmonger, neocon chickenhawk Bolton a swinger? That is a mental picture that s deeply disturbing yet funny at the same time
  • [May 12, 2019] Charting a Progressive Foreign Policy for the Trump Era and Beyond
  • [May 10, 2019] Biden is up to neck in Spygate dirt by Jeff Carlson
  • [May 10, 2019] Obama administration raced to obtain FICA warrant on Carter Page before Rogers investigation closes on them and that was definitely an obstruction of justice and interference with the ongoing investigation
  • [May 10, 2019] What was the meaning of the term "insurance policy" in Stzok messages to Lisa Page
  • [May 10, 2019] The Battle Between Rosenstein and McCabe
  • [May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson
  • [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors
  • [May 06, 2019] Trump's top three donors
  • [May 05, 2019] Did Mueller substituted Russia for Israel in his report
  • [May 03, 2019] Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions
  • [May 03, 2019] Andrew McCabe played the key role in the appointment of the special prosecutor
  • [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
  • [Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté
  • [Apr 28, 2019] The British Role in Russiagate Is About to Be Fully Exposed
  • [Apr 28, 2019] Biden has huge, exploitable weakness in relation Ukraine
  • [Apr 26, 2019] Jared Kushner, Not Maria Butina, Is America's Real Foreign Agent by Philip Giraldi
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond
  • [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
  • [Apr 17, 2019] Haspel is not the "underling". Trump is the underling. Sure, being that he is also an oligarch makes Trump's role in the show complicated, but Presidents are installed in order to serve the oligarchy, and the CIA are top level strategists/enforcers for the oligarchy.
  • [Apr 17, 2019] The media's interest in the well-being of a foreign population is directly proportional to the West's interest in toppling its government, while editorial standards are inversely proportional to its enemy status
  • [Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.
  • [Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump
  • [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.
  • [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military
  • [Apr 14, 2019] Pro-Israeli groups defining the US foreign policy: Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business
  • [Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions
  • [Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times
  • [Apr 08, 2019] Iran Designates US Military As Terrorist Organization
  • [Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES
  • [Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney
  • [Apr 04, 2019] Was John Brennan The Russia Lie Ringleader
  • [Apr 04, 2019] Who Does John Bolton Actually Work For by Willy B
  • [Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry
  • [Apr 01, 2019] Amazon.com War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate (9781510745810) Stephen F. Cohen Books
  • [Mar 31, 2019] Guaido Set To Enact Uprising Rooted In US Regime-Change Operations Manual
  • [Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?
  • [Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil
  • [Mar 30, 2019] The Real Costs of Russiagate
  • [Mar 29, 2019] I challenge anyone to find anything done by congress or Trump that was done for average Americans
  • [Mar 26, 2019] Jared Kushner accused of using WhatsApp and personal email for state business by Bob Fredericks
  • [Mar 26, 2019] Chris Christie accuses Jared Kushner of political hit job by Bob Fredericks
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Spygate The True Story of Collusion (plus Infographic) by Jeff Carlson
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Nuland role in Russiagate
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Jared Kushner Is Beating Heart of Corrupt and Deeply Evil Trump Administration, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe Says by Jason Lemon
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Another SIGINT compromise ...
  • [Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report
  • [Mar 24, 2019] "Russia Gate" investigation was a color revolution agaist Trump. But a strnge side effect was that Clintons have managed to raise a vicious, loud mouthed thug to the status of some kind of martyr.
  • [Mar 24, 2019] With RussiaGate Over Where's Hillary
  • [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts
  • [Mar 18, 2019] Journalists who are spies
  • [Mar 18, 2019] FULL CNN TOWN HALL WITH TULSI GABBARD 3-10-19
  • [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?
  • [Mar 17, 2019] Mueller uses the same old false flag scams, just different packaging of his forensics-free findings
  • [Mar 17, 2019] VIPS- Mueller's Forensics-Free Findings
  • [Mar 15, 2019] Will Democrats Go Full Hawk by Jack Hunter
  • [Mar 06, 2019] Disinformation destroys reality
  • [Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Charles Schumer and questioning the foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class
  • [Feb 17, 2019] Was Trump was a deep state man from day one, just like Obama, Bush, Clinton and all the rest?
  • [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives
  • [Feb 13, 2019] MoA - Russiagate Is Finished
  • [Feb 13, 2019] Making Globalism Great Again by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Feb 13, 2019] Stephen Cohen on War with Russia and Soviet-style Censorship in the US by Russell Mokhiber
  • [Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed
  • [Feb 08, 2019] To understand Steele and the five eyes involvement in the Russia hoax you need to go to the library
  • [Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back
  • [Jan 30, 2019] The ruling class of the US imperium will simply not tolerate any government that opposes its financial and geopolitical dominance
  • [Jan 29, 2019] Guardian became Deep State Guardian
  • [Jan 26, 2019] Can the current US neoliberal/neoconservative elite be considered suicidal?
  • [Jan 22, 2019] War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate
  • [Jan 21, 2019] Beyond BuzzFeed The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing US Media Failures On The Trump-Russia Story by Glenn Greenwald
  • [Jan 19, 2019] According to Wolin, domestic and foreign affairs goals are each important and on parallel tracks
  • [Jan 13, 2019] As FBI Ramped Up Witch Hunt When Trump Fired Comey, Strzok Admitted Collusion Investigation A Joke
  • [Jan 11, 2019] New Documents Reveal a Covert British Military-Intelligence Smear Machine Meddling In American Politics by Mark Ames
  • [Jan 11, 2019] Facts does not matter in the current propoganda environment, the narrative is everything
  • [Jan 08, 2019] Shock Files- What Role Did Integrity Initiative Play in Sergei Skripal Affair- - Sputnik International
  • [Jan 08, 2019] Skripal spin doctors- Documents link UK govt-funded Integrity Initiative to anti-Russia narrative
  • [Jan 06, 2019] British elite fantasy of again ruling the world (with American and Zionist aid) has led to a series of catastrophic blunders and overreaches in both foreign and domestic policies.
  • [Jan 04, 2019] Veteran NBC-MSNBC Journalist Blasts Network in Resignation
  • [Jan 02, 2019] Russian bots - How An Anti-Russian Lobby Creates Fake News
  • [Jan 02, 2019] The Only Meddling "Russian Bots" Were Actually Democrat-Led "Experts" by Mac Slavo
  • [Jan 02, 2019] Did Mueller Patched Together Much of His Indictment from 2015 Radio Free Europe Article ?
  • [Dec 02, 2019] The cost of militarism cannot be measured only in lost opportunities, lives and money. There will be a long hangover of shame
  • [Dec 02, 2019] A Think Tank Dedicated to Peace and Restraint
  • [Nov 27, 2019] Obama Admits He Would Speak Up Only To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination
  • [Nov 27, 2019] Could your county use some extra money?
  • [Nov 26, 2019] John Solomon Everything Changes In The Ukraine Scandal If Trump Releases These Documents
  • [Nov 21, 2019] The deep state is individuals INSIDE the government that do the bidding of the banksters, the military-industrial complex, the globalists and other nefarious interests
  • [Nov 09, 2019] Donald Trump s Only Crime Is Defending Himself by Daniel McCarthy
  • [Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq
  • [Nov 01, 2019] Viable Opposition The Legal Connection Between Washington and Kiev
  • [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Nov 01, 2019] Viable Opposition The Legal Connection Between Washington and Kiev
  • [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Empire Interventionism Versus Republic Noninterventionism by Jacob Hornberger
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Trump is now proven war criminal: WikiLeaks Releases New Documents Questioning Syria Chemical Attack Narrative
  • [Oct 23, 2019] The treason of the intellectuals The Undoing of Thought by Roger Kimball
  • [Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Oct 20, 2019] How did the United States become so involved in Ukraine's torturous and famously corrupt politics? The short answer is NATO expansion
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Empire Interventionism Versus Republic Noninterventionism by Jacob Hornberger
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang
  • [Oct 24, 2019] Trump is now proven war criminal: WikiLeaks Releases New Documents Questioning Syria Chemical Attack Narrative
  • [Oct 23, 2019] The treason of the intellectuals The Undoing of Thought by Roger Kimball
  • [Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice
  • [Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice
  • [Oct 02, 2019] The Self-Set Impeachment Trap naked capitalism
  • [Oct 02, 2019] The Self-Set Impeachment Trap naked capitalism
  • [Sep 23, 2019] Giuliani Hits Bidens With New $3 Million Ukraine-Latvia-Cyprus Money Laundering Accusation
  • [Sep 23, 2019] Apparently now that the notion Russia interfered in the US presidential election to tip the vote to Trump has become an article of faith that much of the world regards as established fact
  • [Sep 23, 2019] Giuliani Hits Bidens With New $3 Million Ukraine-Latvia-Cyprus Money Laundering Accusation
  • [Sep 23, 2019] Apparently now that the notion Russia interfered in the US presidential election to tip the vote to Trump has become an article of faith that much of the world regards as established fact
  • [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim
  • [Sep 22, 2019] Shoigu calls US belief in its superiority the major threat to Russia and other states
  • [Sep 22, 2019] It was neoliberalism that won the cold war
  • [Sep 20, 2019] Trump Whistleblower Drama Puts Biden In The Hot Seat Over Ukraine
  • [Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin
  • [Sep 15, 2019] Demythologizing the Roots of the New Cold War by Ted Snider
  • [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim
  • [Sep 22, 2019] Shoigu calls US belief in its superiority the major threat to Russia and other states
  • [Sep 22, 2019] It was neoliberalism that won the cold war
  • [Sep 20, 2019] Trump Whistleblower Drama Puts Biden In The Hot Seat Over Ukraine
  • [Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin
  • [Sep 15, 2019] Demythologizing the Roots of the New Cold War by Ted Snider
  • [Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison
  • [Sep 11, 2019] Video Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 The Bamboozle Has Captured Us
  • [Sep 11, 2019] Video Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 The Bamboozle Has Captured Us
  • [Sep 10, 2019] Neoliberal Capitalism at a Dead End by Utsa Patnaik and Prabhat Patnaik
  • [Sep 10, 2019] Neoliberal Capitalism at a Dead End by Utsa Patnaik and Prabhat Patnaik
  • [Sep 10, 2019] The idea tha the USA won the Cold War is questionable
  • [Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage
  • [Sep 10, 2019] The idea tha the USA won the Cold War is questionable
  • [Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage
  • [Aug 22, 2019] Trump Doesn t Know How to Negotiate by Daniel Larison
  • [Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson
  • [Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Aug 12, 2019] Bruce Ohr 302s by Larry C Johnson - Sic Semper Tyrannis
  • [Aug 22, 2019] Trump Doesn t Know How to Negotiate by Daniel Larison
  • [Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson
  • [Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Aug 12, 2019] Bruce Ohr 302s by Larry C Johnson - Sic Semper Tyrannis
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Peace in Ukraine by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Michael Hudson Trump s Brilliant Strategy to Dismember US Dollar Hegemony by Michael Hudson
  • [Jul 29, 2019] The Real Reason The Propagandists Have Been Promoting Russia Hysteria by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians
  • [Jul 27, 2019] Understanding the Roots of the Obama Coup Against Trump by Larry C Johnson
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Peace in Ukraine by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Michael Hudson Trump s Brilliant Strategy to Dismember US Dollar Hegemony by Michael Hudson
  • [Jul 29, 2019] The Real Reason The Propagandists Have Been Promoting Russia Hysteria by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians
  • [Jul 27, 2019] Understanding the Roots of the Obama Coup Against Trump by Larry C Johnson
  • [Jul 23, 2019] Ukraine Election - Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution
  • [Jul 17, 2019] Oil Is Driving the Iran Crisis by Michael T. Klare
  • [Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then
  • [Jul 06, 2019] In practice, the USSR behaved exactly like a brutal totalitarian theocracy
  • [Jul 23, 2019] Ukraine Election - Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution
  • [Jul 17, 2019] Oil Is Driving the Iran Crisis by Michael T. Klare
  • [Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then
  • [Jul 06, 2019] In practice, the USSR behaved exactly like a brutal totalitarian theocracy
  • [Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval
  • [Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner
  • [Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas
  • [Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval
  • [Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner
  • [Dec 02, 2019] A Think Tank Dedicated to Peace and Restraint
  • [Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas
  • [Jun 28, 2019] The Donald's Latest Iranian Caper Sh*t-Faced Stupidity by David Stockman
  • [Jun 28, 2019] The Donald's Latest Iranian Caper Sh*t-Faced Stupidity by David Stockman
  • [Jun 27, 2019] 'The Ugly Americans' From Kermit Roosevelt to John Bolton Iran Al Jazeera
  • [Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable
  • [Jun 27, 2019] 'The Ugly Americans' From Kermit Roosevelt to John Bolton Iran Al Jazeera
  • [Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Jun 26, 2019] Pompeo is a MIC lobbyist, not a diplomat
  • [Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Why The Empire Is Failing The Horrid Hubris Of The Albright Doctrine by Doug Bandow
  • [Jun 25, 2019] It is the ADELSON Administration . .... Bought and PAID FOR.
  • [Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Why a U.S.-Iran War Could End Up Being a Historic Disaster by Doug Bandow
  • [Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Why a U.S.-Iran War Could End Up Being a Historic Disaster by Doug Bandow
  • [Jun 22, 2019] Why The Empire Is Failing The Horrid Hubris Of The Albright Doctrine by Doug Bandow
  • [Jun 20, 2019] The Trump regime wants another pointless war by Ryan Cooper
  • [Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf
  • [Jun 05, 2019] Do Spies Run the World by Israel Shamir
  • [Jun 20, 2019] The Trump regime wants another pointless war by Ryan Cooper
  • [Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf
  • [Jun 05, 2019] Do Spies Run the World by Israel Shamir
  • [May 31, 2019] US energy department rebrands fossil fuels as 'molecules of freedom'...and this is in The Guardian and not The Onion
  • [May 31, 2019] US energy department rebrands fossil fuels as 'molecules of freedom'...and this is in The Guardian and not The Onion
  • [May 25, 2019] The Belligerence Of Empire by Kenn Orphan
  • [May 22, 2019] On War With Iran, It's Trump Versus the Founding Fathers
  • [May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries
  • [May 25, 2019] The Belligerence Of Empire by Kenn Orphan
  • [May 22, 2019] On War With Iran, It's Trump Versus the Founding Fathers
  • [May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries
  • [May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"
  • [May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"
  • [May 18, 2019] Trump's purported deviation from US foreign policy orthodoxy was a propaganda scam engineered by the pro-Israel Lobby from the very beginning
  • [May 14, 2019] The Propaganda Multiplier How Global News Agencies and Western Media Report on Geopolitics
  • [May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review
  • [May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan
  • [May 18, 2019] Trump's purported deviation from US foreign policy orthodoxy was a propaganda scam engineered by the pro-Israel Lobby from the very beginning
  • [May 14, 2019] The Propaganda Multiplier How Global News Agencies and Western Media Report on Geopolitics
  • [May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review
  • [May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan
  • [May 13, 2019] Not Just Ukraine; Biden May Have A Serious China Problem As Schweizer Exposes Hunter s $1bn Deal
  • [May 13, 2019] Not Just Ukraine; Biden May Have A Serious China Problem As Schweizer Exposes Hunter s $1bn Deal
  • [May 13, 2019] US Foreign Policy as Bellicose as Ever by Serge Halimi
  • [May 12, 2019] Is rabid warmonger, neocon chickenhawk Bolton a swinger? That is a mental picture that s deeply disturbing yet funny at the same time
  • [May 12, 2019] Charting a Progressive Foreign Policy for the Trump Era and Beyond
  • [May 10, 2019] Biden is up to neck in Spygate dirt by Jeff Carlson
  • [May 10, 2019] Obama administration raced to obtain FICA warrant on Carter Page before Rogers investigation closes on them and that was definitely an obstruction of justice and interference with the ongoing investigation
  • [May 10, 2019] What was the meaning of the term "insurance policy" in Stzok messages to Lisa Page
  • [May 10, 2019] The Battle Between Rosenstein and McCabe
  • [May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson
  • [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors
  • [May 06, 2019] Trump's top three donors
  • [May 05, 2019] The Left Needs to Stop Crushing on the Generals by Danny Sjursen
  • [May 05, 2019] Did Mueller substituted Russia for Israel in his report
  • [May 03, 2019] Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions
  • [May 03, 2019] Andrew McCabe played the key role in the appointment of the special prosecutor
  • [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
  • [May 13, 2019] US Foreign Policy as Bellicose as Ever by Serge Halimi
  • [May 12, 2019] Is rabid warmonger, neocon chickenhawk Bolton a swinger? That is a mental picture that s deeply disturbing yet funny at the same time
  • [May 12, 2019] Charting a Progressive Foreign Policy for the Trump Era and Beyond
  • [May 10, 2019] Biden is up to neck in Spygate dirt by Jeff Carlson
  • [May 10, 2019] Obama administration raced to obtain FICA warrant on Carter Page before Rogers investigation closes on them and that was definitely an obstruction of justice and interference with the ongoing investigation
  • [May 10, 2019] What was the meaning of the term "insurance policy" in Stzok messages to Lisa Page
  • [May 10, 2019] The Battle Between Rosenstein and McCabe
  • [May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson
  • [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors
  • [May 06, 2019] Trump's top three donors
  • [May 05, 2019] The Left Needs to Stop Crushing on the Generals by Danny Sjursen
  • [May 05, 2019] Did Mueller substituted Russia for Israel in his report
  • [May 03, 2019] Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions
  • [May 03, 2019] Andrew McCabe played the key role in the appointment of the special prosecutor
  • [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
  • [Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté
  • [Apr 28, 2019] The British Role in Russiagate Is About to Be Fully Exposed
  • [Apr 28, 2019] Biden has huge, exploitable weakness in relation Ukraine
  • [Apr 26, 2019] Jared Kushner, Not Maria Butina, Is America's Real Foreign Agent by Philip Giraldi
  • [Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté
  • [Apr 28, 2019] The British Role in Russiagate Is About to Be Fully Exposed
  • [Apr 28, 2019] Biden has huge, exploitable weakness in relation Ukraine
  • [Apr 26, 2019] Jared Kushner, Not Maria Butina, Is America's Real Foreign Agent by Philip Giraldi
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond
  • [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond
  • [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares
  • [Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
  • [Apr 17, 2019] Haspel is not the "underling". Trump is the underling. Sure, being that he is also an oligarch makes Trump's role in the show complicated, but Presidents are installed in order to serve the oligarchy, and the CIA are top level strategists/enforcers for the oligarchy.
  • [Apr 17, 2019] The media's interest in the well-being of a foreign population is directly proportional to the West's interest in toppling its government, while editorial standards are inversely proportional to its enemy status
  • [Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.
  • [Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump
  • [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.
  • [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military
  • [Apr 14, 2019] Pro-Israeli groups defining the US foreign policy: Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business
  • [Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions
  • [Apr 17, 2019] Haspel is not the "underling". Trump is the underling. Sure, being that he is also an oligarch makes Trump's role in the show complicated, but Presidents are installed in order to serve the oligarchy, and the CIA are top level strategists/enforcers for the oligarchy.
  • [Apr 17, 2019] The media's interest in the well-being of a foreign population is directly proportional to the West's interest in toppling its government, while editorial standards are inversely proportional to its enemy status
  • [Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.
  • [Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump
  • [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.
  • [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military
  • [Apr 14, 2019] Pro-Israeli groups defining the US foreign policy: Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business
  • [Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions
  • [Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times
  • [Apr 08, 2019] Iran Designates US Military As Terrorist Organization
  • [Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES
  • [Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney
  • [Apr 04, 2019] Was John Brennan The Russia Lie Ringleader
  • [Apr 04, 2019] Who Does John Bolton Actually Work For by Willy B
  • [Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry
  • [Apr 01, 2019] Amazon.com War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate (9781510745810) Stephen F. Cohen Books
  • [Mar 31, 2019] Guaido Set To Enact Uprising Rooted In US Regime-Change Operations Manual
  • [Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?
  • [Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil
  • [Mar 30, 2019] The Real Costs of Russiagate
  • [Mar 29, 2019] I challenge anyone to find anything done by congress or Trump that was done for average Americans
  • [Mar 26, 2019] Jared Kushner accused of using WhatsApp and personal email for state business by Bob Fredericks
  • [Mar 26, 2019] Chris Christie accuses Jared Kushner of political hit job by Bob Fredericks
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Spygate The True Story of Collusion (plus Infographic) by Jeff Carlson
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Nuland role in Russiagate
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Jared Kushner Is Beating Heart of Corrupt and Deeply Evil Trump Administration, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe Says by Jason Lemon
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Another SIGINT compromise ...
  • [Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report
  • [Mar 24, 2019] "Russia Gate" investigation was a color revolution agaist Trump. But a strnge side effect was that Clintons have managed to raise a vicious, loud mouthed thug to the status of some kind of martyr.
  • [Mar 24, 2019] With RussiaGate Over Where's Hillary
  • [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts
  • [Mar 18, 2019] Journalists who are spies
  • [Mar 18, 2019] FULL CNN TOWN HALL WITH TULSI GABBARD 3-10-19
  • [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?
  • [Mar 17, 2019] Mueller uses the same old false flag scams, just different packaging of his forensics-free findings
  • [Mar 17, 2019] VIPS- Mueller's Forensics-Free Findings
  • [Mar 15, 2019] Will Democrats Go Full Hawk by Jack Hunter
  • [Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century
  • [Apr 08, 2019] Iran Designates US Military As Terrorist Organization
  • [Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES
  • [Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney
  • [Apr 04, 2019] Was John Brennan The Russia Lie Ringleader
  • [Apr 04, 2019] Who Does John Bolton Actually Work For by Willy B
  • [Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry
  • [Apr 01, 2019] Amazon.com War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate (9781510745810) Stephen F. Cohen Books
  • [Mar 31, 2019] Guaido Set To Enact Uprising Rooted In US Regime-Change Operations Manual
  • [Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?
  • [Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil
  • [Mar 30, 2019] The Real Costs of Russiagate
  • [Mar 29, 2019] I challenge anyone to find anything done by congress or Trump that was done for average Americans
  • [Mar 26, 2019] Jared Kushner accused of using WhatsApp and personal email for state business by Bob Fredericks
  • [Mar 26, 2019] Chris Christie accuses Jared Kushner of political hit job by Bob Fredericks
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Spygate The True Story of Collusion (plus Infographic) by Jeff Carlson
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Nuland role in Russiagate
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Jared Kushner Is Beating Heart of Corrupt and Deeply Evil Trump Administration, Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe Says by Jason Lemon
  • [Mar 25, 2019] Another SIGINT compromise ...
  • [Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report
  • [Mar 24, 2019] "Russia Gate" investigation was a color revolution agaist Trump. But a strnge side effect was that Clintons have managed to raise a vicious, loud mouthed thug to the status of some kind of martyr.
  • [Mar 24, 2019] With RussiaGate Over Where's Hillary
  • [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts
  • [Mar 18, 2019] Journalists who are spies
  • [Mar 18, 2019] FULL CNN TOWN HALL WITH TULSI GABBARD 3-10-19
  • [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?
  • [Mar 17, 2019] Mueller uses the same old false flag scams, just different packaging of his forensics-free findings
  • [Mar 17, 2019] VIPS- Mueller's Forensics-Free Findings
  • [Mar 15, 2019] Will Democrats Go Full Hawk by Jack Hunter
  • [Mar 06, 2019] Disinformation destroys reality
  • [Mar 06, 2019] Disinformation destroys reality
  • [Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Charles Schumer and questioning the foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class
  • [Feb 17, 2019] Was Trump was a deep state man from day one, just like Obama, Bush, Clinton and all the rest?
  • [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives
  • [Feb 13, 2019] MoA - Russiagate Is Finished
  • [Feb 13, 2019] Making Globalism Great Again by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Feb 13, 2019] Stephen Cohen on War with Russia and Soviet-style Censorship in the US by Russell Mokhiber
  • [Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube
  • [Feb 19, 2019] Charles Schumer and questioning the foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class
  • [Feb 17, 2019] Was Trump was a deep state man from day one, just like Obama, Bush, Clinton and all the rest?
  • [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives
  • [Feb 13, 2019] MoA - Russiagate Is Finished
  • [Feb 13, 2019] Making Globalism Great Again by C.J. Hopkins
  • [Feb 13, 2019] Stephen Cohen on War with Russia and Soviet-style Censorship in the US by Russell Mokhiber
  • [Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed
  • [Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed
  • [Feb 08, 2019] To understand Steele and the five eyes involvement in the Russia hoax you need to go to the library
  • [Feb 08, 2019] To understand Steele and the five eyes involvement in the Russia hoax you need to go to the library
  • [Feb 05, 2019] The neocon s strategy
  • [Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back
  • [Jan 30, 2019] The ruling class of the US imperium will simply not tolerate any government that opposes its financial and geopolitical dominance
  • [Jan 29, 2019] Guardian became Deep State Guardian
  • [Jan 26, 2019] Can the current US neoliberal/neoconservative elite be considered suicidal?
  • [Jan 30, 2019] The ruling class of the US imperium will simply not tolerate any government that opposes its financial and geopolitical dominance
  • [Jul 29, 2019] Michael Hudson Trump s Brilliant Strategy to Dismember US Dollar Hegemony by Michael Hudson
  • [Jan 22, 2019] War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate
  • [Jan 21, 2019] Beyond BuzzFeed The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing US Media Failures On The Trump-Russia Story by Glenn Greenwald
  • [Jan 19, 2019] According to Wolin, domestic and foreign affairs goals are each important and on parallel tracks
  • [Jan 22, 2019] War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate
  • [Jan 19, 2019] According to Wolin, domestic and foreign affairs goals are each important and on parallel tracks
  • [Jan 13, 2019] As FBI Ramped Up Witch Hunt When Trump Fired Comey, Strzok Admitted Collusion Investigation A Joke
  • [Jan 11, 2019] New Documents Reveal a Covert British Military-Intelligence Smear Machine Meddling In American Politics by Mark Ames
  • [Jan 11, 2019] Facts does not matter in the current propoganda environment, the narrative is everything
  • [Jan 08, 2019] Shock Files- What Role Did Integrity Initiative Play in Sergei Skripal Affair- - Sputnik International
  • [Jan 08, 2019] Skripal spin doctors- Documents link UK govt-funded Integrity Initiative to anti-Russia narrative
  • [Jan 06, 2019] British elite fantasy of again ruling the world (with American and Zionist aid) has led to a series of catastrophic blunders and overreaches in both foreign and domestic policies.
  • [Jan 04, 2019] Veteran NBC-MSNBC Journalist Blasts Network in Resignation
  • [Jan 02, 2019] Russian bots - How An Anti-Russian Lobby Creates Fake News
  • [Jan 02, 2019] The Only Meddling "Russian Bots" Were Actually Democrat-Led "Experts" by Mac Slavo
  • [Jan 02, 2019] Did Mueller Patched Together Much of His Indictment from 2015 Radio Free Europe Article ?
  • [Jan 11, 2019] New Documents Reveal a Covert British Military-Intelligence Smear Machine Meddling In American Politics by Mark Ames
  • [Jan 06, 2019] British elite fantasy of again ruling the world (with American and Zionist aid) has led to a series of catastrophic blunders and overreaches in both foreign and domestic policies.
  • [Oct 28, 2020] Wall Street Banks, And Their Employees, Now Officially Lean Democrat
  • [Oct 26, 2020] Politicians books as a subtle form of corruption
  • [Oct 24, 2020] The USA foreign policy establishment, including Joe Biden, as vulgar bullies
  • [Oct 21, 2020] How Trump Got Played By The Military-Industrial Complex by Akbar Shahid Ahmed
  • [Oct 21, 2020] This Is Not A Russian Hoax 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials'
  • [Oct 19, 2020] The Emails Are Russian- Will Be The Narrative, Regardless Of Facts Or Evidence by Caitlin Johnstone
  • [Oct 19, 2020] New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks
  • [Oct 01, 2020] Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations cost him -- but he never gave up by Lev Golinkin
  • [Sep 28, 2020] No wonder Pompey and his friend Jeffries won't give up on Syria! No wonder
  • [Sep 28, 2020] Ziocon Trump is a master of deception: has not delivered on any of his promises, hired neocons, assholes, and morons
  • [Sep 26, 2020] What is predatory capitalism
  • [Sep 26, 2020] Galloway- Lying industry may be the only sector of Western economies still in full production TAXPAYERS pay for it
  • [Sep 25, 2020] US standard "negotiating" techniques
  • [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen- The Ukrainian Crisis - It s not All Putin s Fault
  • [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen Cohen at the AJC 2017 Forum, about Russia and Terrorism
  • [Sep 20, 2020] Darren Beattie Tucker Carlson Discuss Color Revolutions The Plot To Oust President Trump
  • [Sep 17, 2020] Why the Blob Needs an Enemy by ARTA MOEINI
  • [Sep 17, 2020] Military desperados and Mattis "military messiah syndrome" by Scott Ritter
  • [Sep 09, 2020] Proof of collusion at last! - IRRUSSIANALITY
  • [Sep 01, 2020] Are We Deliberately Trying to Provoke a Military Crisis With Russia by Ted Galen Carpenter
  • [Aug 22, 2020] Kamala is a MIC marionette
  • [Aug 19, 2020] American imperialism vs. EU imperialism: Pushed into the Ukrainian adventure by the US? Rubbish. The EU and its constituent members were attempting to play their own hand and were not merely following the US lead submissively.
  • [Aug 16, 2020] CIA Behind Guccifer Russiagate A Plausible Scenario
  • [Aug 02, 2020] Russiagate, Nazis, and the CIA by ROB URIE
  • [Aug 01, 2020] Executed Turkish general exposed misuse of Qatari funds for Syria extremists- Report - Al Arabiya English
  • [Jul 31, 2020] Tucker Carlson calls Obama 'one of the sleaziest and most dishonest figures' in US political history
  • [Jul 26, 2020] Former Poroshenko Ally Admits Euromaidan In 2014 Was Entirely Funded By "Organized Criminal Group" - Defend Democracy Press
  • [Jul 23, 2020] Opinion - Defund the Pentagon- The Liberal Case - POLITICO
  • [Jul 23, 2020] Demorats defeat amedment ot cut Defence by 10%
  • [Jul 23, 2020] This is a biggie: Egypt's parliament approves troop deployment to Libya
  • [Jul 13, 2020] George Washington Tried To Warn Americans About Foreign Policy Today by Doug Bandow
  • [Jul 07, 2020] Mutiny on the Bounties by RAY McGOVERN
  • [Jul 06, 2020] US claim of 'Russian Bounty' plot in Afghanistan is dubious and dangerous - The Grayzone
  • [Jul 03, 2020] I don't think we can assume that even now Trump actually has control of the FBI; it is still in hands of Obama faction
  • [Jul 01, 2020] Three Glaring Problems with the Russian Taliban Bounty Story by Barbara Boland
  • [Jul 01, 2020] Control freaks that cannot even control their own criminal impulses!
  • [Jun 28, 2020] Russian position for Start talks: "We don't believe the US in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever".
  • [Jun 24, 2020] Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades gas and oil; the USA converted Ukraine into a debt slave, sells Ukraine expensive weapons and cornered their energy industry; The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya.
  • [Jun 23, 2020] Identity politics is, first and foremost, a dirty and shrewd political strategy developed by the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ( soft neoliberals ) to counter the defection of trade union members from the party
  • [Jun 21, 2020] Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace'.
  • [Jun 19, 2020] The USG' s definition of Dictator
  • [Jun 14, 2020] Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 30 Years Unheeded
  • [Jun 13, 2020] Korea is just another distraction: false conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year
  • [Jun 12, 2020] Flynn Case 85 Lies, Contradictions, Oddities, Unusual Occurrences by Petr Svab
  • [Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable
  • [Jun 03, 2020] Internet Users Who Call For Attacking Other Countries Will Now Be Enlisted In The Military Automatically
  • [Jun 01, 2020] This is one war party -- war party, imperial party of militarism, conquest and killing of civilians
  • [May 31, 2020] We Are Combat Vets, and We Want America to Reboot Memorial Day by Matthew Hoh and Danny Sjursen
  • [May 30, 2020] More On "Obamagate!"
  • [May 26, 2020] News Stories Avoid Naming Israel by Philip Giraldi
  • [May 24, 2020] FBI Document Reveals That Without Direct Israeli 'Intervention' Trump Would Have Lost 2016 Election
  • [May 24, 2020] Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training
  • [May 22, 2020] No US president who can withdraw the USA from the Forever Wars
  • [May 21, 2020] The 'Clean Break' Doctrine OffGuardian
  • [May 20, 2020] The American Mission and the Evil Empire The Crusade for a Free Russia Since 1881 by Foglesong
  • [May 20, 2020] Newly Revealed Texts Show Strzok, Page Altered Flynn Interview Notes
  • [May 20, 2020] McGovern Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over by Ray McGovern
  • [May 19, 2020] America: "We demand an coronavirus origin investigation, but the investigators must agree on the outcome that we specify before they begin investigating!"
  • [May 19, 2020] Russophobia in the Age of Donald Trump
  • [May 16, 2020] A model democrat
  • [May 13, 2020] Dramatic change of direction for Syrian envoy
  • [May 13, 2020] From RussiaGate To ObamaGate The End Of Boomerville by Tom Luongo
  • [May 11, 2020] Lee Zeldin Adam Schiff 'should resign today' for role in Russia investigation by Dominick Mastrangelo
  • [May 11, 2020] McCarthy: It would be 'profoundly crazy if Obama wasn't in on Flynn case'
  • [May 10, 2020] Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security by Kevin R. Brock
  • [May 10, 2020] Does Obama now feels his potential liability for staging coup d' tat and gaslighting the whole nation?
  • [May 07, 2020] Media Malpractice Is Criminalizing Better Relations With Russia by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [May 07, 2020] Angry Bear " "cannot remember a single International Crisis in which the United States had no global presence at all"
  • [May 05, 2020] UK government experince with the White Helmets and the Skripal affair definitly halps in anti-china propaganda.
  • [Apr 29, 2020] Trump, despite pretty slick deception during his election campaign, is an typical imperialist and rabid militarist. His administration continuredand in some areas exceeded the hostility of Obama couse against Russia
  • [Apr 25, 2020] Did This Virus Come From a Lab? Maybe Not But It Exposes the Threat of a Biowarfare Arms Race by Sam Husseini
  • [Apr 24, 2020] Please Tell the Establishment That U.S. Hegemony is Over by Daniel Larison
  • [Apr 22, 2020] Especially as the insane neoliberal economy we live in, we are ruled by a group of kleptocrats and vicious stooges. Which make allegations against Biden deserving a closer look but that does not make them automatically credible
  • [Apr 11, 2020] 'Never in my country': COVID-19 and American exceptionalism by Jeanne Morefield
  • [Apr 08, 2020] Feudal Japan Edo and the US Empire by Hiroyuki Hamada
  • [Apr 05, 2020] Esper tone deafness: a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities of military industrial complex
  • [Mar 21, 2020] When reading any article concerning current events (ie. Ukraine, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or Coronavirus) consider how the The Seven Principles of Propaganda may apply
  • [Mar 13, 2020] Daffy Duck. cartoon was made in 1953 and like many Looney Tune cartoon's, they are an extreme parody of life. It dawned on me that this cartoon is an almost perfect description of US Military policy and action.
  • [Mar 04, 2020] Why Are We Being Charged? Surprise Bills From Coronavirus Testing Spark Calls for Government to Cover All Costs by Jake Johnson
  • [Mar 03, 2020] "Predatory capitalism", which clearly describes what neoliberalism is.
  • [Feb 29, 2020] A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change"
  • [Feb 29, 2020] Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who s Really In Charge Of The US Military by Cynthia Chung
  • [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change
  • [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change
  • [Feb 26, 2020] A serious US politician has to demonstrate a large capacity for betrayal.
  • [Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime
  • [Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen
  • [Feb 22, 2020] The Red Thread A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy by Diana West
  • [Feb 28, 2020] Russia s Relationship With China Is Growing Despite Setbacks by Lyle J. Goldstein ,
  • [Feb 14, 2020] Is Apartheid the Inevitable Outcome of Zionism? by Henry Siegman
  • [Feb 09, 2020] The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani
  • [Feb 08, 2020] Is Iraq About To Switch From US to Russia
  • [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair
  • [Feb 03, 2020] White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War
  • [Feb 02, 2020] The most interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story
  • [Jan 31, 2020] Trump excoriates Bolton in tweets this morning
  • [Jan 27, 2020] The end of Trump? Trump betrayed all major promises of his 2016 election campaign. Trump needs to go...
  • [Jan 26, 2020] The Collapse of Neoliberalism by Ganesh Sitaraman
  • [Jan 24, 2020] How Are Iran and the "Axis of the Resistance" Affected by the US Assassination of Soleimani by Elijah J. Magnier
  • [Jan 24, 2020] Lawrence Wilkerson Lambasts 'the Beast of the National Security State' by Adam Dick
  • [Jan 19, 2020] Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany s behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally
  • [Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?
  • [Jan 18, 2020] The joke is on us: Without the USSR the USA oligarchy resorted to cannibalism and devour the American people
  • [Jan 17, 2020] Ukraine is a deeply sick patient. The destiny of ordinary Ukrainians is deeply tragic. Diaspora is greedy and want a piece of cake immediately
  • [Jan 12, 2020] MIC along with Wall Street controls the government and the country
  • [Jan 12, 2020] US has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying.
  • [Jan 12, 2020] Luongo Fears "An Abyss Of Losses" As Iraq Becomes MidEast Battleground
  • [Jan 11, 2020] Sheldon Adelson the casino mogul driving Trump's Middle East policy by Chris McGreal
  • [Jan 10, 2020] The Saker interviews Michael Hudson
  • [Jan 09, 2020] Opposing War With Iran: Three Reasons by Anthony DiMaggio
  • [Jan 08, 2020] I can't quite understand how gratuitous US piracy and adventurism in places on the globe beyond the knowledge and reach of most Americans could possibly be compared to Iranian actions securing their immediate regional borders and interests.
  • [Jan 08, 2020] Iraqi Journalist: Killing Soleimani "Ended An Era In Which Iran And The United States Coexisted In Iraq" by Tim Hains
  • [Jan 08, 2020] Do you really want to be a one term president? Pompeo can talk big now and then go back to Kansas to run for senator. Where will you be able to take refuge?
  • [Jan 08, 2020] If we assume that Pompeo persuaded Trump to order to kill a diplomatic envoy, Trump is now a dead man walking as after Iran responce Pelosi impeachment gambit now have legs
  • [Jan 06, 2020] Diplomacy Trump-style. Al Capone probably would be allow himself to fall that low
  • [Jan 06, 2020] I am tired of giving Trump a free pass, just because Hillary would have been worse. Trump needs to go.
  • [Jan 06, 2020] How To Avoid Swallowing War Propaganda by Nathan J. Robinson
  • [Jan 06, 2020] Neocon Pompeo pushed Trump to kill Soleimani; Looks like West Point educated military contactor mafia to which Pompeo and Esper belongs controls the President, although Trump malleability and recklessness are inexcusable
  • [Jan 06, 2020] The Soleimani Assassination by Philip Giraldi
  • [Jan 06, 2020] The threat of General Soleimani - TTG
  • [Jan 05, 2020] The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran (UPDATED 6X) The Vineyard of the Saker
  • [Jan 05, 2020] Trump is wholly responsible for his own actions, but he -- just like the Ayatollah -- is being pushed in a direction where it's impossible to back down and still "save face". Neither men can afford to do so by Andrew Korybko
  • [Jan 04, 2020] American Meddling in the Ukraine by Publius Tacitus
  • [Jan 04, 2020] Trump Is Doing the Bidding of Washington's Most Vile Cabal
  • [Jan 04, 2020] Will Trump welcome the ejection of the US from Iraq - He should by Colonel Lang
  • [Jan 04, 2020] Talking about revenge is stupid and juvenile: Iran needs to pull back and focus on making themselves stronger in economy and technology and for strong ties with other responsible players
  • [Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham
  • [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century
  • [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives
  • [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels
  • [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine
  • [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars
  • [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim
  • [Dec 14, 2019] Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation
  • [Dec 10, 2019] Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews: There are things more important than your tax rate by Paul Krugman
  • [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.
  • [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen
  • [Dec 04, 2019] Responding to Lt. Col. Vindman about my Ukraine columns with the facts John Solomon Reports
  • [Dec 04, 2019] America's War Exceptionalism Is Killing the Planet by William Astore
  • [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen- The Ukrainian Crisis - It s not All Putin s Fault
  • [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen Cohen at the AJC 2017 Forum, about Russia and Terrorism
  • [Sep 20, 2020] Darren Beattie Tucker Carlson Discuss Color Revolutions The Plot To Oust President Trump

    • Sites

    Etc

    Society

    Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

    Quotes

    War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes :  Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce :  Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

    Bulletin:

    Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

    History:

    Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS :  Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development :  Scripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

    Classic books:

    The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month :  How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

    Most popular humor pages:

    Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

    The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D

    Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

    This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

    		 You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

    Disclaimer:

    The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

    Last modified: January, 20, 2021